1. Hebrew Bible, Song of Songs, 2.4 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah/Halakhot • halakhah
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 446; Lieber (2014), A Vocabulary of Desire: The Song of Songs in the Early Synagogue, 112, 253
sup>
2.4 הֱבִיאַנִי אֶל־בֵּית הַיָּיִן וְדִגְלוֹ עָלַי אַהֲבָה׃'' None | sup>
2.4 He hath brought me to the banqueting-house, And his banner over me is love.'' None |
|
2. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 1.5, 4.2, 4.44, 5.12-5.13, 5.16, 5.28, 6.4-6.9, 6.18, 8.10, 9.10, 11.13-11.21, 13.1-13.2, 13.7, 17.8-17.12, 17.16-17.18, 18.11-18.12, 18.15-18.22, 19.17, 20.6, 22.1-22.3, 22.9-22.11, 22.22-22.29, 23.4, 23.15, 24.1, 25.9, 27.8, 28.69, 29.28, 30.12-30.14, 31.19, 31.22, 32.44, 33.10 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Dead Sea Scrolls, divine inspiration as source of halakhah • Divorce, law/halakha • Father, precedes the mother, in the Halakha • Halakha, halakhic • Halakha, in the New Testament • Halakha/halakhic • Halakhah • Halakhah, origins of • Halakhah, philosophical monotheism of • Halakhah/Halakhot • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Halakhic Letter (4QMMT) • Halakhic, character • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Miqsat Maºase ha-Torah (MMT, a.k.a. “Halakhic Letter”) • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Qumran halakha • Rabbinic Halakhah • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • Second Temple period, halakhic disputes from time of • System, halakhic ~ • ancient Halakha • betrothal, rabbinic halakha • ethics, in Avot, exceeding formal halakha • false prophets, and halakhic authority • halakha • halakha, Babylonian • halakha, Dead Sea Scrolls • halakha, Judean • halakha, Palestinian • halakha, and Scripture • halakha, rejected • halakhah • halakhah and custom • halakhah, and midrash halakhah • halakhah, as a metaphor for God's rejection of Israel • halakhah, as a metaphor for Gods rejection of Israel • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, divine versus human authority in • halakhah, genres of writing • halakhah, “old” versus “new” traditions of • halakhic literature, early tannaitic • history of Halakha, • law, Jewish (halakhah) • law, Jewish (halakhah), king and • law, Jewish (halakhah), of lost objects • midrash, halakhic • monotheism, mythic, in Aggadah, ix, Halakhah • philosophical monotheism, in Halakhah • prophecy, halakhic model of • rabbinic literature, views on human cognition in halakhic law • taxonomy, taxonomy, Halakhah’s medium of
Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 170; DeJong (2022), A Prophet like Moses (Deut 18:15, 18): The Origin, History, and Influence of the Mosaic Prophetic Succession, 65, 81, 82, 103, 122, 185, 191, 192, 196, 199, 203, 223, 263, 264; Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 161; Feldman, Goldman and Dimant (2014), Scripture and Interpretation: Qumran Texts That Rework the Bible 266, 273, 281, 282, 285, 298, 321, 354; Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 50, 72, 73, 174; Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 125; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 24, 81, 158, 159, 160, 211, 212, 213, 215, 216, 218, 219, 223, 224, 236, 267, 285, 286, 287, 288, 289, 292, 293, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 302, 303, 307, 309, 310, 323, 325, 332, 340, 341, 361, 371, 385, 406, 443, 469, 489; Hasan Rokem (2003), Tales of the Neighborhood Jewish Narrative Dialogues in Late Antiquity, 69; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 71, 503; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 48, 77, 90, 91, 143; Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 318; Kosman (2012), Gender and Dialogue in the Rabbinic Prism, 117; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 97, 98, 136, 185, 197; Neis (2012), When a Human Gives Birth to a Raven: Rabbis and the Reproduction of Species. 58; Neusner (2003), The Perfect Torah. 42; Piotrkowski (2019), Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period, 263, 437, 439; Reif (2006), Problems with Prayers: Studies in the Textual History of Early Rabbinic Liturgy, 8, 75, 122, 125; Rubenstein (2018), The Land of Truth: Talmud Tales, Timeless Teachings, 208, 230; Ruzer (2020), Early Jewish Messianism in the New Testament: Reflections in the Dim Mirror, 114; Salvesen et al. (2020), Israel in Egypt: The Land of Egypt as Concept and Reality for Jews in Antiquity and the Early Medieval Period, 604, 630, 635; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 9, 10, 11, 22, 23, 46, 49, 51, 54, 67, 75, 96, 98; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 53, 54, 58, 61, 69, 70, 73, 74, 76, 77, 79, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 88, 89, 91, 93, 94, 96, 99, 101, 119, 122, 388, 426, 449; Veltri (2006), Libraries, Translations, and 'Canonic' Texts: The Septuagint, Aquila and Ben Sira in the Jewish and Christian Traditions. 142, 157; Zawanowska and Wilk (2022), The Character of David in Judaism, Christianity and Islam: Warrior, Poet, Prophet and King, 133
sup>
1.5 בְּעֵבֶר הַיַּרְדֵּן בְּאֶרֶץ מוֹאָב הוֹאִיל מֹשֶׁה בֵּאֵר אֶת־הַתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת לֵאמֹר׃
4.2 וְאֶתְכֶם לָקַח יְהוָה וַיּוֹצִא אֶתְכֶם מִכּוּר הַבַּרְזֶל מִמִּצְרָיִם לִהְיוֹת לוֹ לְעַם נַחֲלָה כַּיּוֹם הַזֶּה׃
4.2 לֹא תֹסִפוּ עַל־הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוֶּה אֶתְכֶם וְלֹא תִגְרְעוּ מִמֶּנּוּ לִשְׁמֹר אֶת־מִצְוֺת יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוֶּה אֶתְכֶם׃
4.44 וְזֹאת הַתּוֹרָה אֲשֶׁר־שָׂם מֹשֶׁה לִפְנֵי בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל׃
5.12 שָׁמוֹר אֶת־יוֹם הַשַׁבָּת לְקַדְּשׁוֹ כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוְּךָ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ 5.13 שֵׁשֶׁת יָמִים תַּעֲבֹד וְעָשִׂיתָ כָּל־מְלַאכְתֶּךָ׃
5.16 כַּבֵּד אֶת־אָבִיךָ וְאֶת־אִמֶּךָ כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוְּךָ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לְמַעַן יַאֲרִיכֻן יָמֶיךָ וּלְמַעַן יִיטַב לָךְ עַל הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לָךְ׃
5.28 וְאַתָּה פֹּה עֲמֹד עִמָּדִי וַאֲדַבְּרָה אֵלֶיךָ אֵת כָּל־הַמִּצְוָה וְהַחֻקִּים וְהַמִּשְׁפָּטִים אֲשֶׁר תְּלַמְּדֵם וְעָשׂוּ בָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי נֹתֵן לָהֶם לְרִשְׁתָּהּ׃
6.4 שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ יְהוָה אֶחָד׃ 6.5 וְאָהַבְתָּ אֵת יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכָל־לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל־נַפְשְׁךָ וּבְכָל־מְאֹדֶךָ׃ 6.6 וְהָיוּ הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוְּךָ הַיּוֹם עַל־לְבָבֶךָ׃ 6.7 וְשִׁנַּנְתָּם לְבָנֶיךָ וְדִבַּרְתָּ בָּם בְּשִׁבְתְּךָ בְּבֵיתֶךָ וּבְלֶכְתְּךָ בַדֶּרֶךְ וּבְשָׁכְבְּךָ וּבְקוּמֶךָ׃ 6.8 וּקְשַׁרְתָּם לְאוֹת עַל־יָדֶךָ וְהָיוּ לְטֹטָפֹת בֵּין עֵינֶיךָ׃ 6.9 וּכְתַבְתָּם עַל־מְזוּזֹת בֵּיתֶךָ וּבִשְׁעָרֶיךָ׃
6.18 וְעָשִׂיתָ הַיָּשָׁר וְהַטּוֹב בְּעֵינֵי יְהוָה לְמַעַן יִיטַב לָךְ וּבָאתָ וְיָרַשְׁתָּ אֶת־הָאָרֶץ הַטֹּבָה אֲשֶׁר־נִשְׁבַּע יְהוָה לַאֲבֹתֶיךָ׃' 11.13 וְהָיָה אִם־שָׁמֹעַ תִּשְׁמְעוּ אֶל־מִצְוֺתַי אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוֶּה אֶתְכֶם הַיּוֹם לְאַהֲבָה אֶת־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם וּלְעָבְדוֹ בְּכָל־לְבַבְכֶם וּבְכָל־נַפְשְׁכֶם׃ 11.14 וְנָתַתִּי מְטַר־אַרְצְכֶם בְּעִתּוֹ יוֹרֶה וּמַלְקוֹשׁ וְאָסַפְתָּ דְגָנֶךָ וְתִירֹשְׁךָ וְיִצְהָרֶךָ׃ 11.15 וְנָתַתִּי עֵשֶׂב בְּשָׂדְךָ לִבְהֶמְתֶּךָ וְאָכַלְתָּ וְשָׂבָעְתָּ׃ 11.16 הִשָּׁמְרוּ לָכֶם פֶּן יִפְתֶּה לְבַבְכֶם וְסַרְתֶּם וַעֲבַדְתֶּם אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים וְהִשְׁתַּחֲוִיתֶם לָהֶם׃ 11.17 וְחָרָה אַף־יְהוָה בָּכֶם וְעָצַר אֶת־הַשָּׁמַיִם וְלֹא־יִהְיֶה מָטָר וְהָאֲדָמָה לֹא תִתֵּן אֶת־יְבוּלָהּ וַאֲבַדְתֶּם מְהֵרָה מֵעַל הָאָרֶץ הַטֹּבָה אֲשֶׁר יְהוָה נֹתֵן לָכֶם׃ 11.18 וְשַׂמְתֶּם אֶת־דְּבָרַי אֵלֶּה עַל־לְבַבְכֶם וְעַל־נַפְשְׁכֶם וּקְשַׁרְתֶּם אֹתָם לְאוֹת עַל־יֶדְכֶם וְהָיוּ לְטוֹטָפֹת בֵּין עֵינֵיכֶם׃ 11.19 וְלִמַּדְתֶּם אֹתָם אֶת־בְּנֵיכֶם לְדַבֵּר בָּם בְּשִׁבְתְּךָ בְּבֵיתֶךָ וּבְלֶכְתְּךָ בַדֶּרֶךְ וּבְשָׁכְבְּךָ וּבְקוּמֶךָ׃ 11.21 לְמַעַן יִרְבּוּ יְמֵיכֶם וִימֵי בְנֵיכֶם עַל הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע יְהוָה לַאֲבֹתֵיכֶם לָתֵת לָהֶם כִּימֵי הַשָּׁמַיִם עַל־הָאָרֶץ׃
13.1 אֵת כָּל־הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוֶּה אֶתְכֶם אֹתוֹ תִשְׁמְרוּ לַעֲשׂוֹת לֹא־תֹסֵף עָלָיו וְלֹא תִגְרַע מִמֶּנּוּ׃
13.1 כִּי הָרֹג תַּהַרְגֶנּוּ יָדְךָ תִּהְיֶה־בּוֹ בָרִאשׁוֹנָה לַהֲמִיתוֹ וְיַד כָּל־הָעָם בָּאַחֲרֹנָה׃ 13.2 כִּי־יָקוּם בְּקִרְבְּךָ נָבִיא אוֹ חֹלֵם חֲלוֹם וְנָתַן אֵלֶיךָ אוֹת אוֹ מוֹפֵת׃
13.7 כִּי יְסִיתְךָ אָחִיךָ בֶן־אִמֶּךָ אוֹ־בִנְךָ אוֹ־בִתְּךָ אוֹ אֵשֶׁת חֵיקֶךָ אוֹ רֵעֲךָ אֲשֶׁר כְּנַפְשְׁךָ בַּסֵּתֶר לֵאמֹר נֵלְכָה וְנַעַבְדָה אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים אֲשֶׁר לֹא יָדַעְתָּ אַתָּה וַאֲבֹתֶיךָ׃
17.8 כִּי יִפָּלֵא מִמְּךָ דָבָר לַמִּשְׁפָּט בֵּין־דָּם לְדָם בֵּין־דִּין לְדִין וּבֵין נֶגַע לָנֶגַע דִּבְרֵי רִיבֹת בִּשְׁעָרֶיךָ וְקַמְתָּ וְעָלִיתָ אֶל־הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר יִבְחַר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בּוֹ׃ 17.9 וּבָאתָ אֶל־הַכֹּהֲנִים הַלְוִיִּם וְאֶל־הַשֹּׁפֵט אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם וְדָרַשְׁתָּ וְהִגִּידוּ לְךָ אֵת דְּבַר הַמִּשְׁפָּט׃ 17.11 עַל־פִּי הַתּוֹרָה אֲשֶׁר יוֹרוּךָ וְעַל־הַמִּשְׁפָּט אֲשֶׁר־יֹאמְרוּ לְךָ תַּעֲשֶׂה לֹא תָסוּר מִן־הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר־יַגִּידוּ לְךָ יָמִין וּשְׂמֹאל׃ 17.12 וְהָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר־יַעֲשֶׂה בְזָדוֹן לְבִלְתִּי שְׁמֹעַ אֶל־הַכֹּהֵן הָעֹמֵד לְשָׁרֶת שָׁם אֶת־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ אוֹ אֶל־הַשֹּׁפֵט וּמֵת הָאִישׁ הַהוּא וּבִעַרְתָּ הָרָע מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל׃
17.16 רַק לֹא־יַרְבֶּה־לּוֹ סוּסִים וְלֹא־יָשִׁיב אֶת־הָעָם מִצְרַיְמָה לְמַעַן הַרְבּוֹת סוּס וַיהוָה אָמַר לָכֶם לֹא תֹסִפוּן לָשׁוּב בַּדֶּרֶךְ הַזֶּה עוֹד׃ 17.17 וְלֹא יַרְבֶּה־לּוֹ נָשִׁים וְלֹא יָסוּר לְבָבוֹ וְכֶסֶף וְזָהָב לֹא יַרְבֶּה־לּוֹ מְאֹד׃ 17.18 וְהָיָה כְשִׁבְתּוֹ עַל כִּסֵּא מַמְלַכְתּוֹ וְכָתַב לוֹ אֶת־מִשְׁנֵה הַתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת עַל־סֵפֶר מִלִּפְנֵי הַכֹּהֲנִים הַלְוִיִּם׃
18.11 וְחֹבֵר חָבֶר וְשֹׁאֵל אוֹב וְיִדְּעֹנִי וְדֹרֵשׁ אֶל־הַמֵּתִים׃ 18.12 כִּי־תוֹעֲבַת יְהוָה כָּל־עֹשֵׂה אֵלֶּה וּבִגְלַל הַתּוֹעֵבֹת הָאֵלֶּה יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ מוֹרִישׁ אוֹתָם מִפָּנֶיךָ׃
18.15 נָבִיא מִקִּרְבְּךָ מֵאַחֶיךָ כָּמֹנִי יָקִים לְךָ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ אֵלָיו תִּשְׁמָעוּן׃ 18.16 כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר־שָׁאַלְתָּ מֵעִם יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּחֹרֵב בְּיוֹם הַקָּהָל לֵאמֹר לֹא אֹסֵף לִשְׁמֹעַ אֶת־קוֹל יְהוָה אֱלֹהָי וְאֶת־הָאֵשׁ הַגְּדֹלָה הַזֹּאת לֹא־אֶרְאֶה עוֹד וְלֹא אָמוּת׃ 18.17 וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֵלָי הֵיטִיבוּ אֲשֶׁר דִּבֵּרוּ׃ 18.18 נָבִיא אָקִים לָהֶם מִקֶּרֶב אֲחֵיהֶם כָּמוֹךָ וְנָתַתִּי דְבָרַי בְּפִיו וְדִבֶּר אֲלֵיהֶם אֵת כָּל־אֲשֶׁר אֲצַוֶּנּוּ׃ 18.19 וְהָיָה הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר לֹא־יִשְׁמַע אֶל־דְּבָרַי אֲשֶׁר יְדַבֵּר בִּשְׁמִי אָנֹכִי אֶדְרֹשׁ מֵעִמּוֹ׃ 18.21 וְכִי תֹאמַר בִּלְבָבֶךָ אֵיכָה נֵדַע אֶת־הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר לֹא־דִבְּרוֹ יְהוָה׃ 18.22 אֲשֶׁר יְדַבֵּר הַנָּבִיא בְּשֵׁם יְהוָה וְלֹא־יִהְיֶה הַדָּבָר וְלֹא יָבוֹא הוּא הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר לֹא־דִבְּרוֹ יְהוָה בְּזָדוֹן דִּבְּרוֹ הַנָּבִיא לֹא תָגוּר מִמֶּנּוּ׃
19.17 וְעָמְדוּ שְׁנֵי־הָאֲנָשִׁים אֲשֶׁר־לָהֶם הָרִיב לִפְנֵי יְהוָה לִפְנֵי הַכֹּהֲנִים וְהַשֹּׁפְטִים אֲשֶׁר יִהְיוּ בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם׃
20.6 וּמִי־הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר־נָטַע כֶּרֶם וְלֹא חִלְּלוֹ יֵלֵךְ וְיָשֹׁב לְבֵיתוֹ פֶּן־יָמוּת בַּמִּלְחָמָה וְאִישׁ אַחֵר יְחַלְּלֶנּוּ׃
22.1 לֹא־תִרְאֶה אֶת־שׁוֹר אָחִיךָ אוֹ אֶת־שֵׂיוֹ נִדָּחִים וְהִתְעַלַּמְתָּ מֵהֶם הָשֵׁב תְּשִׁיבֵם לְאָחִיךָ׃
22.1 לֹא־תַחֲרֹשׁ בְּשׁוֹר־וּבַחֲמֹר יַחְדָּו׃ 22.2 וְאִם־אֱמֶת הָיָה הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה לֹא־נִמְצְאוּ בְתוּלִים לנער לַנַּעֲרָה׃ 22.2 וְאִם־לֹא קָרוֹב אָחִיךָ אֵלֶיךָ וְלֹא יְדַעְתּוֹ וַאֲסַפְתּוֹ אֶל־תּוֹךְ בֵּיתֶךָ וְהָיָה עִמְּךָ עַד דְּרֹשׁ אָחִיךָ אֹתוֹ וַהֲשֵׁבֹתוֹ לוֹ׃ 22.3 וְכֵן תַּעֲשֶׂה לַחֲמֹרוֹ וְכֵן תַּעֲשֶׂה לְשִׂמְלָתוֹ וְכֵן תַּעֲשֶׂה לְכָל־אֲבֵדַת אָחִיךָ אֲשֶׁר־תֹּאבַד מִמֶּנּוּ וּמְצָאתָהּ לֹא תוּכַל לְהִתְעַלֵּם׃
22.9 לֹא־תִזְרַע כַּרְמְךָ כִּלְאָיִם פֶּן־תִּקְדַּשׁ הַמְלֵאָה הַזֶּרַע אֲשֶׁר תִּזְרָע וּתְבוּאַת הַכָּרֶם׃
22.11 לֹא תִלְבַּשׁ שַׁעַטְנֵז צֶמֶר וּפִשְׁתִּים יַחְדָּו׃
22.22 כִּי־יִמָּצֵא אִישׁ שֹׁכֵב עִם־אִשָּׁה בְעֻלַת־בַּעַל וּמֵתוּ גַּם־שְׁנֵיהֶם הָאִישׁ הַשֹּׁכֵב עִם־הָאִשָּׁה וְהָאִשָּׁה וּבִעַרְתָּ הָרָע מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל׃ 22.23 כִּי יִהְיֶה נער נַעֲרָה בְתוּלָה מְאֹרָשָׂה לְאִישׁ וּמְצָאָהּ אִישׁ בָּעִיר וְשָׁכַב עִמָּהּ׃ 22.24 וְהוֹצֵאתֶם אֶת־שְׁנֵיהֶם אֶל־שַׁעַר הָעִיר הַהִוא וּסְקַלְתֶּם אֹתָם בָּאֲבָנִים וָמֵתוּ אֶת־הנער הַנַּעֲרָה עַל־דְּבַר אֲשֶׁר לֹא־צָעֲקָה בָעִיר וְאֶת־הָאִישׁ עַל־דְּבַר אֲשֶׁר־עִנָּה אֶת־אֵשֶׁת רֵעֵהוּ וּבִעַרְתָּ הָרָע מִקִּרְבֶּךָ׃ 22.25 וְאִם־בַּשָּׂדֶה יִמְצָא הָאִישׁ אֶת־הנער הַנַּעֲרָה הַמְאֹרָשָׂה וְהֶחֱזִיק־בָּהּ הָאִישׁ וְשָׁכַב עִמָּהּ וּמֵת הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר־שָׁכַב עִמָּהּ לְבַדּוֹ׃ 22.26 ולנער וְלַנַּעֲרָה לֹא־תַעֲשֶׂה דָבָר אֵין לנער לַנַּעֲרָה חֵטְא מָוֶת כִּי כַּאֲשֶׁר יָקוּם אִישׁ עַל־רֵעֵהוּ וּרְצָחוֹ נֶפֶשׁ כֵּן הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה׃ 22.27 כִּי בַשָּׂדֶה מְצָאָהּ צָעֲקָה הנער הַנַּעֲרָה הַמְאֹרָשָׂה וְאֵין מוֹשִׁיעַ לָהּ׃ 22.28 כִּי־יִמְצָא אִישׁ נער נַעֲרָה בְתוּלָה אֲשֶׁר לֹא־אֹרָשָׂה וּתְפָשָׂהּ וְשָׁכַב עִמָּהּ וְנִמְצָאוּ׃ 22.29 וְנָתַן הָאִישׁ הַשֹּׁכֵב עִמָּהּ לַאֲבִי הנער הַנַּעֲרָה חֲמִשִּׁים כָּסֶף וְלוֹ־תִהְיֶה לְאִשָּׁה תַּחַת אֲשֶׁר עִנָּהּ לֹא־יוּכַל שַׁלְּחָה כָּל־יָמָיו׃
23.4 לֹא־יָבֹא עַמּוֹנִי וּמוֹאָבִי בִּקְהַל יְהוָה גַּם דּוֹר עֲשִׂירִי לֹא־יָבֹא לָהֶם בִּקְהַל יְהוָה עַד־עוֹלָם׃
23.15 כִּי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ מִתְהַלֵּךְ בְּקֶרֶב מַחֲנֶךָ לְהַצִּילְךָ וְלָתֵת אֹיְבֶיךָ לְפָנֶיךָ וְהָיָה מַחֲנֶיךָ קָדוֹשׁ וְלֹא־יִרְאֶה בְךָ עֶרְוַת דָּבָר וְשָׁב מֵאַחֲרֶיךָ׃
24.1 כִּי־יִקַּח אִישׁ אִשָּׁה וּבְעָלָהּ וְהָיָה אִם־לֹא תִמְצָא־חֵן בְּעֵינָיו כִּי־מָצָא בָהּ עֶרְוַת דָּבָר וְכָתַב לָהּ סֵפֶר כְּרִיתֻת וְנָתַן בְּיָדָהּ וְשִׁלְּחָהּ מִבֵּיתוֹ׃
24.1 כִּי־תַשֶּׁה בְרֵעֲךָ מַשַּׁאת מְאוּמָה לֹא־תָבֹא אֶל־בֵּיתוֹ לַעֲבֹט עֲבֹטוֹ׃
25.9 וְנִגְּשָׁה יְבִמְתּוֹ אֵלָיו לְעֵינֵי הַזְּקֵנִים וְחָלְצָה נַעֲלוֹ מֵעַל רַגְלוֹ וְיָרְקָה בְּפָנָיו וְעָנְתָה וְאָמְרָה כָּכָה יֵעָשֶׂה לָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר לֹא־יִבְנֶה אֶת־בֵּית אָחִיו
27.8 וְכָתַבְתָּ עַל־הָאֲבָנִים אֶת־כָּל־דִּבְרֵי הַתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת בַּאֵר הֵיטֵב׃
28.69 אֵלֶּה דִבְרֵי הַבְּרִית אֲ\u200dשֶׁר־צִוָּה יְהוָה אֶת־מֹשֶׁה לִכְרֹת אֶת־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּאֶרֶץ מוֹאָב מִלְּבַד הַבְּרִית אֲשֶׁר־כָּרַת אִתָּם בְּחֹרֵב׃
29.28 הַנִּסְתָּרֹת לַיהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ וְהַנִּגְלֹת לָנוּ וּלְבָנֵינוּ עַד־עוֹלָם לַעֲשׂוֹת אֶת־כָּל־דִּבְרֵי הַתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת׃
30.12 לֹא בַשָּׁמַיִם הִוא לֵאמֹר מִי יַעֲלֶה־לָּנוּ הַשָּׁמַיְמָה וְיִקָּחֶהָ לָּנוּ וְיַשְׁמִעֵנוּ אֹתָהּ וְנַעֲשֶׂנָּה׃ 30.13 וְלֹא־מֵעֵבֶר לַיָּם הִוא לֵאמֹר מִי יַעֲבָר־לָנוּ אֶל־עֵבֶר הַיָּם וְיִקָּחֶהָ לָּנוּ וְיַשְׁמִעֵנוּ אֹתָהּ וְנַעֲשֶׂנָּה׃ 30.14 כִּי־קָרוֹב אֵלֶיךָ הַדָּבָר מְאֹד בְּפִיךָ וּבִלְבָבְךָ לַעֲשֹׂתוֹ׃
31.19 וְעַתָּה כִּתְבוּ לָכֶם אֶת־הַשִּׁירָה הַזֹּאת וְלַמְּדָהּ אֶת־בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל שִׂימָהּ בְּפִיהֶם לְמַעַן תִּהְיֶה־לִּי הַשִּׁירָה הַזֹּאת לְעֵד בִּבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל׃
31.22 וַיִּכְתֹּב מֹשֶׁה אֶת־הַשִּׁירָה הַזֹּאת בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא וַיְלַמְּדָהּ אֶת־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל׃
32.44 וַיָּבֹא מֹשֶׁה וַיְדַבֵּר אֶת־כָּל־דִּבְרֵי הַשִּׁירָה־הַזֹּאת בְּאָזְנֵי הָעָם הוּא וְהוֹשֵׁעַ בִּן־נוּן׃'' None | sup>
1.5 beyond the Jordan, in the land of Moab, took Moses upon him to expound this law, saying:
4.2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the LORD your God which I command you.
4.44 And this is the law which Moses set before the children of Israel;
5.12 Observe the sabbath day, to keep it holy, as the LORD thy God commanded thee. 5.13 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work;
5.16 Honour thy father and thy mother, as the LORD thy God commanded thee; that thy days may be long, and that it may go well with thee, upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
5.28 But as for thee, stand thou here by Me, and I will speak unto thee all the commandment, and the statutes, and the ordices, which thou shalt teach them, that they may do them in the land which I give them to possess it.’
6.4 HEAR, O ISRAEL: THE LORD OUR GOD, THE LORD IS ONE. 6.5 And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might. 6.6 And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be upon thy heart; 6.7 and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. 6.8 And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thy hand, and they shall be for frontlets between thine eyes. 6.9 And thou shalt write them upon the door-posts of thy house, and upon thy gates.
6.18 And thou shalt do that which is right and good in the sight of the LORD; that it may be well with thee, and that thou mayest go in and possess the good land which the LORD swore unto thy fathers,
8.10 And thou shalt eat and be satisfied, and bless the LORD thy God for the good land which He hath given thee.
9.10 And the LORD delivered unto me the two tables of stone written with the finger of God; and on them was written according to all the words, which the LORD spoke with you in the mount out of the midst of the fire in the day of the assembly.
11.13 And it shall come to pass, if ye shall hearken diligently unto My commandments which I command you this day, to love the LORD your God, and to serve Him with all your heart and with all your soul, 11.14 that I will give the rain of your land in its season, the former rain and the latter rain, that thou mayest gather in thy corn, and thy wine, and thine oil. 11.15 And I will give grass in thy fields for thy cattle, and thou shalt eat and be satisfied. 11.16 Take heed to yourselves, lest your heart be deceived, and ye turn aside, and serve other gods, and worship them; 11.17 and the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and He shut up the heaven, so that there shall be no rain, and the ground shall not yield her fruit; and ye perish quickly from off the good land which the LORD giveth you. 11.18 Therefore shall ye lay up these My words in your heart and in your soul; and ye shall bind them for a sign upon your hand, and they shall be for frontlets between your eyes. 11.19 And ye shall teach them your children, talking of them, when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. 11.20 And thou shalt write them upon the door-posts of thy house, and upon thy gates; 11.21 that your days may be multiplied, and the days of your children, upon the land which the LORD swore unto your fathers to give them, as the days of the heavens above the earth.
13.1 All this word which I command you, that shall ye observe to do; thou shalt not add thereto, nor diminish from it. 13.2 If there arise in the midst of thee a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams—and he give thee a sign or a wonder,' "
13.7 If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, that is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying: 'Let us go and serve other gods,' which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;" 17.8 If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judgment, between blood and blood, between plea and plea, and between stroke and stroke, even matters of controversy within thy gates; then shalt thou arise, and get thee up unto the place which the LORD thy God shall choose. 17.9 And thou shall come unto the priests the Levites, and unto the judge that shall be in those days; and thou shalt inquire; and they shall declare unto thee the sentence of judgment. 17.10 And thou shalt do according to the tenor of the sentence, which they shall declare unto thee from that place which the LORD shall choose; and thou shalt observe to do according to all that they shall teach thee. 17.11 According to the law which they shall teach thee, and according to the judgment which they shall tell thee, thou shalt do; thou shalt not turn aside from the sentence which they shall declare unto thee, to the right hand, nor to the left. 17.12 And the man that doeth presumptuously, in not hearkening unto the priest that standeth to minister there before the LORD thy God, or unto the judge, even that man shall die; and thou shalt exterminate the evil from Israel.
17.16 Only he shall not multiply horses to himself, nor cause the people to return to Egypt, to the end that he should multiply horses; forasmuch as the LORD hath said unto you: ‘Ye shall henceforth return no more that way.’ 17.17 Neither shall he multiply wives to himself, that his heart turn not away; neither shall he greatly multiply to himself silver and gold. 17.18 And it shall be, when he sitteth upon the throne of his kingdom, that he shall write him a copy of this law in a book, out of that which is before the priests the Levites.
18.11 or a charmer, or one that consulteth a ghost or a familiar spirit, or a necromancer. 18.12 For whosoever doeth these things is an abomination unto the LORD; and because of these abominations the LORD thy God is driving them out from before thee.
18.15 A prophet will the LORD thy God raise up unto thee, from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; 18.16 according to all that thou didst desire of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying: ‘Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.’ 18.17 And the LORD said unto me: ‘They have well said that which they have spoken. 18.18 I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee; and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. 18.19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto My words which he shall speak in My name, I will require it of him. 18.20 But the prophet, that shall speak a word presumptuously in My name, which I have not commanded him to speak, or that shall speak in the name of other gods, that same prophet shall die.’ 18.21 And if thou say in thy heart: ‘How shall we know the word which the LORD hath not spoken?’ 18.22 When a prophet speaketh in the name of the LORD, if the thing follow not, nor come to pass, that is the thing which the LORD hath not spoken; the prophet hath spoken it presumptuously, thou shalt not be afraid of him.
19.17 then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges that shall be in those days.
20.6 And what man is there that hath planted a vineyard, and hath not used the fruit thereof? let him go and return unto his house, lest he die in the battle, and another man use the fruit thereof.
22.1 Thou shalt not see thy brother’s ox or his sheep driven away, and hide thyself from them; thou shalt surely bring them back unto thy brother. 22.2 And if thy brother be not nigh unto thee, and thou know him not, then thou shalt bring it home to thy house, and it shall be with thee until thy brother require it, and thou shalt restore it to him. 22.3 And so shalt thou do with his ass; and so shalt thou do with his garment; and so shalt thou do with every lost thing of thy brother’s, which he hath lost, and thou hast found; thou mayest not hide thyself.
22.9 Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with two kinds of seed; lest the fulness of the seed which thou hast sown be forfeited together with the increase of the vineyard.
22.10 Thou shalt not plow with an ox and an ass together.
22.11 Thou shalt not wear a mingled stuff, wool and linen together. .
22.22 If a man be found lying with a woman married to a husband, then they shall both of them die, the man that lay with the woman, and the woman; so shalt thou put away the evil from Israel. 22.23 If there be a damsel that is a virgin betrothed unto a man, and a man find her in the city, and lie with her; 22.24 then ye shall bring them both out unto the gate of that city, and ye shall stone them with stones that they die: the damsel, because she cried not, being in the city; and the man, because he hath humbled his neighbour’s wife; so thou shalt put away the evil from the midst of thee. 22.25 But if the man find the damsel that is betrothed in the field, and the man take hold of her, and lie with her; then the man only that lay with her shall die. 22.26 But unto the damsel thou shalt do nothing; there is in the damsel no sin worthy of death; for as when a man riseth against his neighbour, and slayeth him, even so is this matter. 22.27 For he found her in the field; the betrothed damsel cried, and there was none to save her. 22.28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, that is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found; 22.29 then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel’s father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife, because he hath humbled her; he may not put her away all his days.
23.4 An Ammonite or a Moabite shall not enter into the assembly of the LORD; even to the tenth generation shall none of them enter into the assembly of the LORD for ever;
23.15 For the LORD thy God walketh in the midst of thy camp, to deliver thee, and to give up thine enemies before thee; therefore shall thy camp be holy; that He see no unseemly thing in thee, and turn away from thee.
24.1 When a man taketh a wife, and marrieth her, then it cometh to pass, if she find no favour in his eyes, because he hath found some unseemly thing in her, that he writeth her a bill of divorcement, and giveth it in her hand, and sendeth her out of his house,
25.9 then shall his brother’s wife draw nigh unto him in the presence of the elders, and loose his shoe from off his foot, and spit in his face; and she shall answer and say: ‘So shall it be done unto the man that doth not build up his brother’s house.’
27.8 And thou shalt write upon the stones all the words of this law very plainly.’
28.69 These are the words of the covet which the LORD commanded Moses to make with the children of Israel in the land of Moab, beside the covet which He made with them in Horeb.
29.28 The secret things belong unto the LORD our God; but the things that are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may do all the words of this law.
30.12 It is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say: ‘Who shall go up for us to heaven, and bring it unto us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?’ 30.13 Neither is it beyond the sea, that thou shouldest say: ‘Who shall go over the sea for us, and bring it unto us, and make us to hear it, that we may do it?’ 30.14 But the word is very nigh unto thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, that thou mayest do it.
31.19 Now therefore write ye this song for you, and teach thou it the children of Israel; put it in their mouths, that this song may be a witness for Me against the children of Israel.
31.22 So Moses wrote this song the same day, and taught it the children of Israel.
32.44 And Moses came and spoke all the words of this song in the ears of the people, he, and Hoshea the son of Nun.
33.10 They shall teach Jacob Thine ordices, And Israel Thy law; They shall put incense before Thee, And whole burnt-offering upon Thine altar. .' ' None |
|
3. Hebrew Bible, Exodus, 12.2-12.3, 19.10-19.11, 19.15, 20.9, 20.15, 21.16, 21.29, 34.7, 34.15, 34.27, 34.31, 35.3 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Halakha, intensification • Halakhah • Halakhah, origins of • Halakhah/Halakhot • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Rabbinic Halakhah • Second Temple period, halakhic disputes from time of • System, halakhic ~ • halakha in Diaspora • halakhah • halakhah and custom • halakhah, as modality of tradition • law and legal formulae, rabbinic (halakhah) • law, Jewish (halakhah) • law, Jewish (halakhah), king and
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 257; Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 115, 116; Feldman, Goldman and Dimant (2014), Scripture and Interpretation: Qumran Texts That Rework the Bible 298; Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 72, 147, 169; Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 126, 129; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 18, 158, 160, 215, 348, 455, 489, 490, 497, 507; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 48, 143; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 62; Reif (2006), Problems with Prayers: Studies in the Textual History of Early Rabbinic Liturgy, 75, 91; Rubenstein (2018), The Land of Truth: Talmud Tales, Timeless Teachings, 207, 209; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 96; Swartz (2018), The Mechanics of Providence: The Workings of Ancient Jewish Magic and Mysticism. 244; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 47, 62, 114, 129, 169, 430
sup>
12.2 הַחֹדֶשׁ הַזֶּה לָכֶם רֹאשׁ חֳדָשִׁים רִאשׁוֹן הוּא לָכֶם לְחָדְשֵׁי הַשָּׁנָה׃
12.2 כָּל־מַחְמֶצֶת לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ בְּכֹל מוֹשְׁבֹתֵיכֶם תֹּאכְלוּ מַצּוֹת׃ 12.3 דַּבְּרוּ אֶל־כָּל־עֲדַת יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵאמֹר בֶּעָשֹׂר לַחֹדֶשׁ הַזֶּה וְיִקְחוּ לָהֶם אִישׁ שֶׂה לְבֵית־אָבֹת שֶׂה לַבָּיִת׃' '12.3 וַיָּקָם פַּרְעֹה לַיְלָה הוּא וְכָל־עֲבָדָיו וְכָל־מִצְרַיִם וַתְּהִי צְעָקָה גְדֹלָה בְּמִצְרָיִם כִּי־אֵין בַּיִת אֲשֶׁר אֵין־שָׁם מֵת׃ 19.11 וְהָיוּ נְכֹנִים לַיּוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי כִּי בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי יֵרֵד יְהוָה לְעֵינֵי כָל־הָעָם עַל־הַר סִינָי׃
19.15 וַיֹּאמֶר אֶל־הָעָם הֱיוּ נְכֹנִים לִשְׁלֹשֶׁת יָמִים אַל־תִּגְּשׁוּ אֶל־אִשָּׁה׃
20.9 שֵׁשֶׁת יָמִים תַּעֲבֹד וְעָשִׂיתָ כָּל־מְלַאכְתֶּךָ
20.15 וְכָל־הָעָם רֹאִים אֶת־הַקּוֹלֹת וְאֶת־הַלַּפִּידִם וְאֵת קוֹל הַשֹּׁפָר וְאֶת־הָהָר עָשֵׁן וַיַּרְא הָעָם וַיָּנֻעוּ וַיַּעַמְדוּ מֵרָחֹק׃
21.16 וְגֹנֵב אִישׁ וּמְכָרוֹ וְנִמְצָא בְיָדוֹ מוֹת יוּמָת׃
21.29 וְאִם שׁוֹר נַגָּח הוּא מִתְּמֹל שִׁלְשֹׁם וְהוּעַד בִּבְעָלָיו וְלֹא יִשְׁמְרֶנּוּ וְהֵמִית אִישׁ אוֹ אִשָּׁה הַשּׁוֹר יִסָּקֵל וְגַם־בְּעָלָיו יוּמָת׃
34.7 נֹצֵר חֶסֶד לָאֲלָפִים נֹשֵׂא עָוֺן וָפֶשַׁע וְחַטָּאָה וְנַקֵּה לֹא יְנַקֶּה פֹּקֵד עֲוֺן אָבוֹת עַל־בָּנִים וְעַל־בְּנֵי בָנִים עַל־שִׁלֵּשִׁים וְעַל־רִבֵּעִים׃
34.15 פֶּן־תִּכְרֹת בְּרִית לְיוֹשֵׁב הָאָרֶץ וְזָנוּ אַחֲרֵי אֱלֹהֵיהֶם וְזָבְחוּ לֵאלֹהֵיהֶם וְקָרָא לְךָ וְאָכַלְתָּ מִזִּבְחוֹ׃
34.27 וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל־מֹשֶׁה כְּתָב־לְךָ אֶת־הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה כִּי עַל־פִּי הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה כָּרַתִּי אִתְּךָ בְּרִית וְאֶת־יִשְׂרָאֵל׃
34.31 וַיִּקְרָא אֲלֵהֶם מֹשֶׁה וַיָּשֻׁבוּ אֵלָיו אַהֲרֹן וְכָל־הַנְּשִׂאִים בָּעֵדָה וַיְדַבֵּר מֹשֶׁה אֲלֵהֶם׃
35.3 וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֶל־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל רְאוּ קָרָא יְהוָה בְּשֵׁם בְּצַלְאֵל בֶּן־אוּרִי בֶן־חוּר לְמַטֵּה יְהוּדָה׃35.3 לֹא־תְבַעֲרוּ אֵשׁ בְּכֹל מֹשְׁבֹתֵיכֶם בְּיוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת׃ ' None | sup>
12.2 ’This month shall be unto you the beginning of months; it shall be the first month of the year to you. 12.3 Speak ye unto all the congregation of Israel, saying: In the tenth day of this month they shall take to them every man a lamb, according to their fathers’houses, a lamb for a household;
19.10 And the LORD said unto Moses: ‘Go unto the people, and sanctify them to-day and to-morrow, and let them wash their garments, 19.11 and be ready against the third day; for the third day the LORD will come down in the sight of all the people upon mount Sinai.
19.15 And he said unto the people: ‘Be ready against the third day; come not near a woman.’
20.9 Six days shalt thou labour, and do all thy work;
20.15 And all the people perceived the thunderings, and the lightnings, and the voice of the horn, and the mountain smoking; and when the people saw it, they trembled, and stood afar off.
21.16 And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him, or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death.
21.29 But if the ox was wont to gore in time past, and warning hath been given to its owner, and he hath not kept it in, but it hath killed a man or a woman; the ox shall be stoned, and its owner also shall be put to death.
34.7 keeping mercy unto the thousandth generation, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin; and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and unto the fourth generation.’
34.15 lest thou make a covet with the inhabitants of the land, and they go astray after their gods, and do sacrifice unto their gods, and they call thee, and thou eat of their sacrifice;
34.27 And the LORD said unto Moses: ‘Write thou these words, for after the tenor of these words I have made a covet with thee and with Israel.’
34.31 And Moses called unto them; and Aaron and all the rulers of the congregation returned unto him; and Moses spoke to them.
35.3 Ye shall kindle no fire throughout your habitations upon the sabbath day.’' ' None |
|
4. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 1.26-1.27, 2.24, 9.1, 9.25, 17.1, 22.5 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Divorce, law/halakha • Halakha, in the New Testament • Halakhah • Peter's vision, halakhic perspectives • Qumran halakha • Sabbath, and Halakhah, did not prohibit sex on Sabbath • Sex, and Halakhah, did not prohibit sex on Sabbath • halakha, Dead Sea Scrolls • halakha, on gentiles • halakha, rabbinic • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, conflicting interpretations of • midrash halakhah • sugiah (Sugiot), Halakhic • – halakhic midrash • “priestly halakhah,” definition of
Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 56; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 48; Jassen (2014), Scripture and Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls, 13; Kattan Gribetz et al. (2016), Genesis Rabbah in Text and Context. 138; Kosman (2012), Gender and Dialogue in the Rabbinic Prism, 207; Lavee (2017), The Rabbinic Conversion of Judaism The Unique Perspective of the Bavli on Conversion and the Construction of Jewish Identity, 156; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 117; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 81; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 130; Salvesen et al. (2020), Israel in Egypt: The Land of Egypt as Concept and Reality for Jews in Antiquity and the Early Medieval Period, 603; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 108; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 84, 96, 98; Veltri (2006), Libraries, Translations, and 'Canonic' Texts: The Septuagint, Aquila and Ben Sira in the Jewish and Christian Traditions. 176
sup>
1.26 וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ וְיִרְדּוּ בִדְגַת הַיָּם וּבְעוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם וּבַבְּהֵמָה וּבְכָל־הָאָרֶץ וּבְכָל־הָרֶמֶשׂ הָרֹמֵשׂ עַל־הָאָרֶץ׃ 1.27 וַיִּבְרָא אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָאָדָם בְּצַלְמוֹ בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים בָּרָא אֹתוֹ זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה בָּרָא אֹתָם׃
2.24 עַל־כֵּן יַעֲזָב־אִישׁ אֶת־אָבִיו וְאֶת־אִמּוֹ וְדָבַק בְּאִשְׁתּוֹ וְהָיוּ לְבָשָׂר אֶחָד׃
9.1 וְאֵת כָּל־נֶפֶשׁ הַחַיָּה אֲשֶׁר אִתְּכֶם בָּעוֹף בַּבְּהֵמָה וּבְכָל־חַיַּת הָאָרֶץ אִתְּכֶם מִכֹּל יֹצְאֵי הַתֵּבָה לְכֹל חַיַּת הָאָרֶץ׃
9.1 וַיְבָרֶךְ אֱלֹהִים אֶת־נֹחַ וְאֶת־בָּנָיו וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם פְּרוּ וּרְבוּ וּמִלְאוּ אֶת־הָאָרֶץ׃
9.25 וַיֹּאמֶר אָרוּר כְּנָעַן עֶבֶד עֲבָדִים יִהְיֶה לְאֶחָיו׃
17.1 וַיְהִי אַבְרָם בֶּן־תִּשְׁעִים שָׁנָה וְתֵשַׁע שָׁנִים וַיֵּרָא יְהוָה אֶל־אַבְרָם וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלָיו אֲנִי־אֵל שַׁדַּי הִתְהַלֵּךְ לְפָנַי וֶהְיֵה תָמִים׃
17.1 זֹאת בְּרִיתִי אֲשֶׁר תִּשְׁמְרוּ בֵּינִי וּבֵינֵיכֶם וּבֵין זַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ הִמּוֹל לָכֶם כָּל־זָכָר׃
22.5 וַיֹּאמֶר אַבְרָהָם אֶל־נְעָרָיו שְׁבוּ־לָכֶם פֹּה עִם־הַחֲמוֹר וַאֲנִי וְהַנַּעַר נֵלְכָה עַד־כֹּה וְנִשְׁתַּחֲוֶה וְנָשׁוּבָה אֲלֵיכֶם׃' ' None | sup>
1.26 And God said: ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.’ 1.27 And God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them.
2.24 Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife, and they shall be one flesh.
9.1 And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them: ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth.
9.25 And he said: Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.
17.1 And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the LORD appeared to Abram, and said unto him: ‘I am God Almighty; walk before Me, and be thou wholehearted.
22.5 And Abraham said unto his young men: ‘Abide ye here with the ass, and I and the lad will go yonder; and we will worship, and come back to you.’' ' None |
|
5. Hebrew Bible, Leviticus, 6.2, 6.7, 7.11, 10.10, 11.2, 11.36, 13.46, 15.13, 15.16, 16.1, 18.6, 19.11-19.13, 19.17-19.19, 19.23-19.24, 21.21, 23.10-23.11, 23.38, 24.19-24.22, 25.4, 26.42, 26.45-26.46 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Baumgarten, Joseph,, on sectarian halakhah in rabbinic literature • Damascus Document, halakhic legal tradition expressed in • Halakha • Halakha, halakhic • Halakha, intensification • Halakha, mixing • Halakha/halakhic • Halakhah • Halakhah, cultic ritual in, as pseudo-narrative • Halakhah, origins of • Halakhah, philosophical monotheism of • Halakhah, theology of • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Israel, in Halakhic theology • Jubilees, Book of,, halakhic legal tradition expressed in • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Midrash Halakhah • Miqsat Maºase ha-Torah (MMT, a.k.a. “Halakhic Letter”) • Miqsat Maºase ha-Torah (MMT, a.k.a. “Halakhic Letter”), halakhic legal tradition expressed in • Peter's vision, halakhic perspectives • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • Sabbath, halakha • Scripture, and Halakhah • Second Temple period, halakhic disputes from time of • Sinai, a halakha to Moses from Sinai • System, halakhic ~ • Tannaic halakha • Temple Scroll, halakhic legal tradition expressed in • Torah, and halakha • ancient Halakha • halakha in Diaspora • halakha, a halakha to Moses from Sinai • halakha, and Scripture • halakhah • halakhah and custom • halakhah, Mosaic • halakhah, and midrash halakhah • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, borders between “sectarian” and “nonsectarian,” • halakhah, formation and perception of • halakhah, legal terminology of • halakhah, “old” versus “new” traditions of • law and legal formulae, rabbinic (halakhah) • law, Jewish (halakhah), of oaths and vows • midrash halakhah • midrash, halakhic • monotheism, mythic, in Aggadah, ix, Halakhah • philosophical monotheism, in Halakhah • taxonomy, taxonomy, Halakhah’s medium of • “He did not create it a waste”, as Legal term in the Halakha
Found in books: Balberg (2017), Blood for Thought: The Reinvention of Sacrifice in Early Rabbinic Literature, 209; Feldman, Goldman and Dimant (2014), Scripture and Interpretation: Qumran Texts That Rework the Bible 281; Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 72, 73; Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 125, 132; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 95, 156, 157, 161, 162, 222, 242, 351, 371; Hasan Rokem (2003), Tales of the Neighborhood Jewish Narrative Dialogues in Late Antiquity, 43; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 70; Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 137; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93, 192; Jassen (2014), Scripture and Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls, 239; Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 270; Kosman (2012), Gender and Dialogue in the Rabbinic Prism, 198; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 62, 63, 75, 81; Neis (2012), When a Human Gives Birth to a Raven: Rabbis and the Reproduction of Species. 57, 58; Neusner (2003), Rabbinic Narrative: The Precedent and the Parable in Diachronic View. 32, 33, 34, 41; Neusner (2003), The Perfect Torah. 42; Neusner Green and Avery-Peck (2022), Judaism from Moses to Muhammad: An Interpretation: Turning Points and Focal Points, 222, 228, 231; Piotrkowski (2019), Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period, 139, 263; Reif (2006), Problems with Prayers: Studies in the Textual History of Early Rabbinic Liturgy, 75; Rubenstein (2018), The Land of Truth: Talmud Tales, Timeless Teachings, 57; Ruzer (2020), Early Jewish Messianism in the New Testament: Reflections in the Dim Mirror, 114; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 9, 10, 11, 13, 18, 75, 76, 77, 79, 90, 91, 100, 101; Swartz (2018), The Mechanics of Providence: The Workings of Ancient Jewish Magic and Mysticism. 151, 164, 244, 245, 246; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 48, 50, 62, 112, 116, 119, 120, 121, 128
sup>
6.2 כֹּל אֲשֶׁר־יִגַּע בִּבְשָׂרָהּ יִקְדָּשׁ וַאֲשֶׁר יִזֶּה מִדָּמָהּ עַל־הַבֶּגֶד אֲשֶׁר יִזֶּה עָלֶיהָ תְּכַבֵּס בְּמָקוֹם קָדֹשׁ׃
6.2 צַו אֶת־אַהֲרֹן וְאֶת־בָּנָיו לֵאמֹר זֹאת תּוֹרַת הָעֹלָה הִוא הָעֹלָה עַל מוֹקְדָה עַל־הַמִּזְבֵּחַ כָּל־הַלַּיְלָה עַד־הַבֹּקֶר וְאֵשׁ הַמִּזְבֵּחַ תּוּקַד בּוֹ׃
6.7 וְזֹאת תּוֹרַת הַמִּנְחָה הַקְרֵב אֹתָהּ בְּנֵי־אַהֲרֹן לִפְנֵי יְהוָה אֶל־פְּנֵי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ׃
7.11 וְזֹאת תּוֹרַת זֶבַח הַשְּׁלָמִים אֲשֶׁר יַקְרִיב לַיהוָה׃' 11.2 דַּבְּרוּ אֶל־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵאמֹר זֹאת הַחַיָּה אֲשֶׁר תֹּאכְלוּ מִכָּל־הַבְּהֵמָה אֲשֶׁר עַל־הָאָרֶץ׃
11.2 כֹּל שֶׁרֶץ הָעוֹף הַהֹלֵךְ עַל־אַרְבַּע שֶׁקֶץ הוּא לָכֶם׃
11.36 אַךְ מַעְיָן וּבוֹר מִקְוֵה־מַיִם יִהְיֶה טָהוֹר וְנֹגֵעַ בְּנִבְלָתָם יִטְמָא׃
15.13 וְכִי־יִטְהַר הַזָּב מִזּוֹבוֹ וְסָפַר לוֹ שִׁבְעַת יָמִים לְטָהֳרָתוֹ וְכִבֶּס בְּגָדָיו וְרָחַץ בְּשָׂרוֹ בְּמַיִם חַיִּים וְטָהֵר׃
15.16 וְאִישׁ כִּי־תֵצֵא מִמֶּנּוּ שִׁכְבַת־זָרַע וְרָחַץ בַּמַּיִם אֶת־כָּל־בְּשָׂרוֹ וְטָמֵא עַד־הָעָרֶב׃
16.1 וְהַשָּׂעִיר אֲשֶׁר עָלָה עָלָיו הַגּוֹרָל לַעֲזָאזֵל יָעֳמַד־חַי לִפְנֵי יְהוָה לְכַפֵּר עָלָיו לְשַׁלַּח אֹתוֹ לַעֲזָאזֵל הַמִּדְבָּרָה׃
16.1 וַיְדַבֵּר יְהוָה אֶל־מֹשֶׁה אַחֲרֵי מוֹת שְׁנֵי בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן בְּקָרְבָתָם לִפְנֵי־יְהוָה וַיָּמֻתוּ׃
18.6 אִישׁ אִישׁ אֶל־כָּל־שְׁאֵר בְּשָׂרוֹ לֹא תִקְרְבוּ לְגַלּוֹת עֶרְוָה אֲנִי יְהוָה׃
19.11 לֹא תִּגְנֹבוּ וְלֹא־תְכַחֲשׁוּ וְלֹא־תְשַׁקְּרוּ אִישׁ בַּעֲמִיתוֹ׃ 19.12 וְלֹא־תִשָּׁבְעוּ בִשְׁמִי לַשָּׁקֶר וְחִלַּלְתָּ אֶת־שֵׁם אֱלֹהֶיךָ אֲנִי יְהוָה׃ 19.13 לֹא־תַעֲשֹׁק אֶת־רֵעֲךָ וְלֹא תִגְזֹל לֹא־תָלִין פְּעֻלַּת שָׂכִיר אִתְּךָ עַד־בֹּקֶר׃
19.17 לֹא־תִשְׂנָא אֶת־אָחִיךָ בִּלְבָבֶךָ הוֹכֵחַ תּוֹכִיחַ אֶת־עֲמִיתֶךָ וְלֹא־תִשָּׂא עָלָיו חֵטְא׃ 19.18 לֹא־תִקֹּם וְלֹא־תִטֹּר אֶת־בְּנֵי עַמֶּךָ וְאָהַבְתָּ לְרֵעֲךָ כָּמוֹךָ אֲנִי יְהוָה׃ 19.19 אֶת־חֻקֹּתַי תִּשְׁמֹרוּ בְּהֶמְתְּךָ לֹא־תַרְבִּיעַ כִּלְאַיִם שָׂדְךָ לֹא־תִזְרַע כִּלְאָיִם וּבֶגֶד כִּלְאַיִם שַׁעַטְנֵז לֹא יַעֲלֶה עָלֶיךָ׃
19.23 וְכִי־תָבֹאוּ אֶל־הָאָרֶץ וּנְטַעְתֶּם כָּל־עֵץ מַאֲכָל וַעֲרַלְתֶּם עָרְלָתוֹ אֶת־פִּרְיוֹ שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים יִהְיֶה לָכֶם עֲרֵלִים לֹא יֵאָכֵל׃ 19.24 וּבַשָּׁנָה הָרְבִיעִת יִהְיֶה כָּל־פִּרְיוֹ קֹדֶשׁ הִלּוּלִים לַיהוָה׃
21.21 כָּל־אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר־בּוֹ מוּם מִזֶּרַע אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן לֹא יִגַּשׁ לְהַקְרִיב אֶת־אִשֵּׁי יְהוָה מוּם בּוֹ אֵת לֶחֶם אֱלֹהָיו לֹא יִגַּשׁ לְהַקְרִיב׃ 23.11 וְהֵנִיף אֶת־הָעֹמֶר לִפְנֵי יְהוָה לִרְצֹנְכֶם מִמָּחֳרַת הַשַּׁבָּת יְנִיפֶנּוּ הַכֹּהֵן׃
23.38 מִלְּבַד שַׁבְּתֹת יְּהוָה וּמִלְּבַד מַתְּנוֹתֵיכֶם וּמִלְּבַד כָּל־נִדְרֵיכֶם וּמִלְּבַד כָּל־נִדְבוֹתֵיכֶם אֲשֶׁר תִּתְּנוּ לַיהוָה׃
24.19 וְאִישׁ כִּי־יִתֵּן מוּם בַּעֲמִיתוֹ כַּאֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה כֵּן יֵעָשֶׂה לּוֹ׃ 24.21 וּמַכֵּה בְהֵמָה יְשַׁלְּמֶנָּה וּמַכֵּה אָדָם יוּמָת׃ 24.22 מִשְׁפַּט אֶחָד יִהְיֶה לָכֶם כַּגֵּר כָּאֶזְרָח יִהְיֶה כִּי אֲנִי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם׃
25.4 וּבַשָּׁנָה הַשְּׁבִיעִת שַׁבַּת שַׁבָּתוֹן יִהְיֶה לָאָרֶץ שַׁבָּת לַיהוָה שָׂדְךָ לֹא תִזְרָע וְכַרְמְךָ לֹא תִזְמֹר׃
25.4 כְּשָׂכִיר כְּתוֹשָׁב יִהְיֶה עִמָּךְ עַד־שְׁנַת הַיֹּבֵל יַעֲבֹד עִמָּךְ׃
26.42 וְזָכַרְתִּי אֶת־בְּרִיתִי יַעֲקוֹב וְאַף אֶת־בְּרִיתִי יִצְחָק וְאַף אֶת־בְּרִיתִי אַבְרָהָם אֶזְכֹּר וְהָאָרֶץ אֶזְכֹּר׃
26.45 וְזָכַרְתִּי לָהֶם בְּרִית רִאשֹׁנִים אֲשֶׁר הוֹצֵאתִי־אֹתָם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם לְעֵינֵי הַגּוֹיִם לִהְיֹת לָהֶם לֵאלֹהִים אֲנִי יְהוָה׃ 26.46 אֵלֶּה הַחֻקִּים וְהַמִּשְׁפָּטִים וְהַתּוֹרֹת אֲשֶׁר נָתַן יְהוָה בֵּינוֹ וּבֵין בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּהַר סִינַי בְּיַד־מֹשֶׁה׃'' None | sup>
6.2 Command Aaron and his sons, saying: This is the law of the burnt-offering: it is that which goeth up on its firewood upon the altar all night unto the morning; and the fire of the altar shall be kept burning thereby.
6.7 And this is the law of the meal-offering: the sons of Aaron shall offer it before the LORD, in front of the altar.
7.11 And this is the law of the sacrifice of peace-offerings, which one may offer unto the LORD.
10.10 And that ye may put difference between the holy and the common, and between the unclean and the clean;
11.2 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying: These are the living things which ye may eat among all the beasts that are on the earth.
11.36 Nevertheless a fountain or a cistern wherein is a gathering of water shall be clean; but he who toucheth their carcass shall be unclean.
15.13 And when he that hath an issue is cleansed of his issue, then he shall number to himself seven days for his cleansing, and wash his clothes; and he shall bathe his flesh in running water, and shall be clean.
15.16 And if the flow of seed go out from a man, then he shall bathe all his flesh in water, and be unclean until the even.
16.1 And the LORD spoke unto Moses, after the death of the two sons of Aaron, when they drew near before the LORD, and died;
18.6 None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness. I am the LORD.
19.11 Ye shall not steal; neither shall ye deal falsely, nor lie one to another. 19.12 And ye shall not swear by My name falsely, so that thou profane the name of thy God: I am the LORD. 19.13 Thou shalt not oppress thy neighbour, nor rob him; the wages of a hired servant shall not abide with thee all night until the morning.
19.17 Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy heart; thou shalt surely rebuke thy neighbour, and not bear sin because of him. 19.18 Thou shalt not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD. 19.19 Ye shall keep My statutes. Thou shalt not let thy cattle gender with a diverse kind; thou shalt not sow thy field with two kinds of seed; neither shall there come upon thee a garment of two kinds of stuff mingled together.
19.23 And when ye shall come into the land, and shall have planted all manner of trees for food, then ye shall count the fruit thereof as forbidden; three years shall it be as forbidden unto you; it shall not be eaten. 19.24 And in the fourth year all the fruit thereof shall be holy, for giving praise unto the LORD.
21.21 no man of the seed of Aaron the priest, that hath a blemish, shall come nigh to offer the offerings of the LORD made by fire; he hath a blemish; he shall not come nigh to offer the bread of his God.
23.10 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them: When ye are come into the land which I give unto you, and shall reap the harvest thereof, then ye shall bring the sheaf of the first-fruits of your harvest unto the priest. 23.11 And he shall wave the sheaf before the LORD, to be accepted for you; on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it.
23.38 beside the sabbaths of the LORD, and beside your gifts, and beside all your vows, and beside all your freewill-offerings, which ye give unto the LORD.
24.19 And if a man maim his neighbour; as he hath done, so shall it be done to him: 24.20 breach for breach, eye for eye, tooth for tooth; as he hath maimed a man, so shall it be rendered unto him. 24.21 And he that killeth a beast shall make it good; and he that killeth a man shall be put to death. 24.22 Ye shall have one manner of law, as well for the stranger, as for the home-born; for I am the LORD your God.’
25.4 But in the seventh year shall be a sabbath of solemn rest for the land, a sabbath unto the LORD; thou shalt neither sow thy field, nor prune thy vineyard.
26.42 then will I remember My covet with Jacob, and also My covet with Isaac, and also My covet with Abraham will I remember; and I will remember the land.
26.45 But I will for their sakes remember the covet of their ancestors, whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the nations, that I might be their God: I am the LORD. 26.46 These are the statutes and ordices and laws, which the LORD made between Him and the children of Israel in mount Sinai by the hand of Moses.' ' None |
|
6. Hebrew Bible, Malachi, 3.22 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • prophecy, halakhic model of
Found in books: DeJong (2022), A Prophet like Moses (Deut 18:15, 18): The Origin, History, and Influence of the Mosaic Prophetic Succession, 196; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 213
sup>
3.22 זִכְרוּ תּוֹרַת מֹשֶׁה עַבְדִּי אֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתִי אוֹתוֹ בְחֹרֵב עַל־כָּל־יִשְׂרָאֵל חֻקִּים וּמִשְׁפָּטִים׃'' None | sup>
3.22 Remember ye the law of Moses My servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, even statutes and ordices.'' None |
|
7. Hebrew Bible, Nahum, 1.2 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • midrash halakhah
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 156, 157; Jassen (2014), Scripture and Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls, 239
sup>
1.2 אֵל קַנּוֹא וְנֹקֵם יְהוָה נֹקֵם יְהוָה וּבַעַל חֵמָה נֹקֵם יְהוָה לְצָרָיו וְנוֹטֵר הוּא לְאֹיְבָיו׃'' None | sup>
1.2 The LORD is a jealous and avenging God, The LORD avengeth and is full of wrath; The LORD taketh vengeance on His adversaries, And He reserveth wrath for His enemies.'' None |
|
8. Hebrew Bible, Numbers, 1.16, 5.13, 6.24-6.26, 19.14, 23.9, 27.2 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Divorce, law/halakha • Halakha, intensification • Halakhah • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • halakhah • halakhah and custom • halakhah, as modality of tradition
Found in books: Feldman, Goldman and Dimant (2014), Scripture and Interpretation: Qumran Texts That Rework the Bible 298; Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 72; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 213, 221, 222, 295; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 91; Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 317; Lieber (2014), A Vocabulary of Desire: The Song of Songs in the Early Synagogue, 235; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 62; Reif (2006), Problems with Prayers: Studies in the Textual History of Early Rabbinic Liturgy, 87; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 88
sup>
5.13 וְשָׁכַב אִישׁ אֹתָהּ שִׁכְבַת־זֶרַע וְנֶעְלַם מֵעֵינֵי אִישָׁהּ וְנִסְתְּרָה וְהִיא נִטְמָאָה וְעֵד אֵין בָּהּ וְהִוא לֹא נִתְפָּשָׂה׃
6.24 יְבָרֶכְךָ יְהוָה וְיִשְׁמְרֶךָ׃ 6.25 יָאֵר יְהוָה פָּנָיו אֵלֶיךָ וִיחֻנֶּךָּ׃ 6.26 יִשָּׂא יְהוָה פָּנָיו אֵלֶיךָ וְיָשֵׂם לְךָ שָׁלוֹם׃
19.14 זֹאת הַתּוֹרָה אָדָם כִּי־יָמוּת בְּאֹהֶל כָּל־הַבָּא אֶל־הָאֹהֶל וְכָל־אֲשֶׁר בָּאֹהֶל יִטְמָא שִׁבְעַת יָמִים׃
23.9 כִּי־מֵרֹאשׁ צֻרִים אֶרְאֶנּוּ וּמִגְּבָעוֹת אֲשׁוּרֶנּוּ הֶן־עָם לְבָדָד יִשְׁכֹּן וּבַגּוֹיִם לֹא יִתְחַשָּׁב׃
27.2 וְנָתַתָּה מֵהוֹדְךָ עָלָיו לְמַעַן יִשְׁמְעוּ כָּל־עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל׃
27.2 וַתַּעֲמֹדְנָה לִפְנֵי מֹשֶׁה וְלִפְנֵי אֶלְעָזָר הַכֹּהֵן וְלִפְנֵי הַנְּשִׂיאִם וְכָל־הָעֵדָה פֶּתַח אֹהֶל־מוֹעֵד לֵאמֹר׃' ' None | sup>
5.13 and a man lie with her carnally, and it be hid from the eyes of her husband, she being defiled secretly, and there be no witness against her, neither she be taken in the act;
6.24 The LORD bless thee, and keep thee; 6.25 The LORD make His face to shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee; 6.26 The LORD lift up His countece upon thee, and give thee peace.
19.14 This is the law: when a man dieth in a tent, every one that cometh into the tent, and every thing that is in the tent, shall be unclean seven days.
23.9 For from the top of the rocks I see him, And from the hills I behold him: Lo, it is a people that shall dwell alone, And shall not be reckoned among the nations.
27.2 And they stood before Moses, and before Eleazar the priest, and before the princes and all the congregation, at the door of the tent of meeting, saying:' ' None |
|
9. Hebrew Bible, Psalms, 25.14 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Dead Sea Scrolls, divine inspiration as source of halakhah • Sinai, a halakha to Moses from Sinai • halakha, a halakha to Moses from Sinai • halakhah, Mosaic • halakhah, Second Temple period • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, divine versus human authority in • halakhah, pre-exilic
Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 79; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 80; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 58, 60
sup>
25.14 סוֹד יְהוָה לִירֵאָיו וּבְרִיתוֹ לְהוֹדִיעָם׃'' None | sup>
25.14 The counsel of the LORD is with them that fear Him; And His covet, to make them know it.'' None |
|
10. None, None, nan (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah
Found in books: Feldman, Goldman and Dimant (2014), Scripture and Interpretation: Qumran Texts That Rework the Bible 273; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 152
|
11. Hebrew Bible, 2 Samuel, 7.14 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Tannaic halakha
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 290; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 591
sup>
7.14 אֲנִי אֶהְיֶה־לּוֹ לְאָב וְהוּא יִהְיֶה־לִּי לְבֵן אֲשֶׁר בְּהַעֲוֺתוֹ וְהֹכַחְתִּיו בְּשֵׁבֶט אֲנָשִׁים וּבְנִגְעֵי בְּנֵי אָדָם׃'' None | sup>
7.14 I will be his father, and he will be my son. If he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with such plagues as befall the sons of Adam:'' None |
|
12. Hebrew Bible, Isaiah, 2.3, 29.13, 40.3, 54.16 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Dead Sea Scrolls, divine inspiration as source of halakhah • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • divine origins of halakhic law • halakha, and Scripture • halakhah • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, divine versus human authority in • history of Halakha, • prophecy, halakhic model of
Found in books: DeJong (2022), A Prophet like Moses (Deut 18:15, 18): The Origin, History, and Influence of the Mosaic Prophetic Succession, 194; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 56, 150; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 66; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 48; Lieber (2014), A Vocabulary of Desire: The Song of Songs in the Early Synagogue, 253; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 42, 43, 44; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 38
sup>
2.3 וְהָלְכוּ עַמִּים רַבִּים וְאָמְרוּ לְכוּ וְנַעֲלֶה אֶל־הַר־יְהוָה אֶל־בֵּית אֱלֹהֵי יַעֲקֹב וְיֹרֵנוּ מִדְּרָכָיו וְנֵלְכָה בְּאֹרְחֹתָיו כִּי מִצִּיּוֹן תֵּצֵא תוֹרָה וּדְבַר־יְהוָה מִירוּשָׁלִָם׃
29.13 וַיֹּאמֶר אֲדֹנָי יַעַן כִּי נִגַּשׁ הָעָם הַזֶּה בְּפִיו וּבִשְׂפָתָיו כִּבְּדוּנִי וְלִבּוֹ רִחַק מִמֶּנִּי וַתְּהִי יִרְאָתָם אֹתִי מִצְוַת אֲנָשִׁים מְלֻמָּדָה׃
40.3 וְיִעֲפוּ נְעָרִים וְיִגָעוּ וּבַחוּרִים כָּשׁוֹל יִכָּשֵׁלוּ׃
40.3 קוֹל קוֹרֵא בַּמִּדְבָּר פַּנּוּ דֶּרֶךְ יְהוָה יַשְּׁרוּ בָּעֲרָבָה מְסִלָּה לֵאלֹהֵינוּ׃
54.16 הן הִנֵּה אָנֹכִי בָּרָאתִי חָרָשׁ נֹפֵחַ בְּאֵשׁ פֶּחָם וּמוֹצִיא כְלִי לְמַעֲשֵׂהוּ וְאָנֹכִי בָּרָאתִי מַשְׁחִית לְחַבֵּל׃'' None | sup>
2.3 And many peoples shall go and say: ‘Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, To the house of the God of Jacob; And He will teach us of His ways, And we will walk in His paths.’ For out of Zion shall go forth the law, And the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
29.13 And the Lord said: Forasmuch as this people draw near, and with their mouth and with their lips do honour Me, But have removed their heart far from Me, And their fear of Me is a commandment of men learned by rote;
40.3 Hark! one calleth: ‘Clear ye in the wilderness the way of the LORD, make plain in the desert a highway for our God.
54.16 Behold, I have created the smith That bloweth the fire of coals, And bringeth forth a weapon for his work; And I have created the waster to destroy.'' None |
|
13. Hebrew Bible, Jeremiah, 7.9, 15.1, 17.21-17.22 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakha, halakhic • Halakhah, Sabbath halakhah • Halakhah, origins of • Halakhah, theology of • Israel, in Halakhic theology • Scripture, and Halakhah • midrash halakhah • prophecy, halakhic model of
Found in books: DeJong (2022), A Prophet like Moses (Deut 18:15, 18): The Origin, History, and Influence of the Mosaic Prophetic Succession, 109, 110; Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 129, 135; Jassen (2014), Scripture and Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls, 251; Neusner Green and Avery-Peck (2022), Judaism from Moses to Muhammad: An Interpretation: Turning Points and Focal Points, 220; Ruzer (2020), Early Jewish Messianism in the New Testament: Reflections in the Dim Mirror, 114
sup>
7.9 הֲגָנֹב רָצֹחַ וְנָאֹף וְהִשָּׁבֵעַ לַשֶּׁקֶר וְקַטֵּר לַבָּעַל וְהָלֹךְ אַחֲרֵי אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים אֲשֶׁר לֹא־יְדַעְתֶּם׃
15.1 אוֹי־לִי אִמִּי כִּי יְלִדְתִּנִי אִישׁ רִיב וְאִישׁ מָדוֹן לְכָל־הָאָרֶץ לֹא־נָשִׁיתִי וְלֹא־נָשׁוּ־בִי כֻּלֹּה מְקַלְלַונִי׃
15.1 וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֵלַי אִם־יַעֲמֹד מֹשֶׁה וּשְׁמוּאֵל לְפָנַי אֵין נַפְשִׁי אֶל־הָעָם הַזֶּה שַׁלַּח מֵעַל־פָּנַי וְיֵצֵאוּ׃
17.21 כֹּה אָמַר יְהוָה הִשָּׁמְרוּ בְּנַפְשׁוֹתֵיכֶם וְאַל־תִּשְׂאוּ מַשָּׂא בְּיוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת וַהֲבֵאתֶם בְּשַׁעֲרֵי יְרוּשָׁלִָם׃ 17.22 וְלֹא־תוֹצִיאוּ מַשָּׂא מִבָּתֵּיכֶם בְּיוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת וְכָל־מְלָאכָה לֹא תַעֲשׂוּ וְקִדַּשְׁתֶּם אֶת־יוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתִי אֶת־אֲבוֹתֵיכֶם׃'' None | sup>
7.9 Will ye steal, murder, and commit adultery, and swear falsely, and offer unto Baal, and walk after other gods whom ye have not known,
15.1 Then said the LORD unto me: ‘Though Moses and Samuel stood before Me, yet My mind could not be toward this people; cast them out of My sight, and let them go forth.
17.21 thus saith the LORD: Take heed for the sake of your souls, and bear no burden on the sabbath day, nor bring it in by the gates of Jerusalem; 17.22 neither carry forth a burden out of your houses on the sabbath day, neither do ye any work; but hallow ye the sabbath day, as I commanded your fathers;'' None |
|
14. Hebrew Bible, Joshua, 1.8 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Second Temple period, halakhic disputes from time of
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 28, 50, 153, 213, 288; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 105
sup>
1.8 לֹא־יָמוּשׁ סֵפֶר הַתּוֹרָה הַזֶּה מִפִּיךָ וְהָגִיתָ בּוֹ יוֹמָם וָלַיְלָה לְמַעַן תִּשְׁמֹר לַעֲשׂוֹת כְּכָל־הַכָּתוּב בּוֹ כִּי־אָז תַּצְלִיחַ אֶת־דְּרָכֶךָ וְאָז תַּשְׂכִּיל׃'' None | sup>
1.8 This book of the law shall not depart out of thy mouth, but thou shalt meditate therein day and night, that thou mayest observe to do according to all that is written therein; for then thou shalt make thy ways prosperous, and then thou shalt have good success.'' None |
|
15. Hebrew Bible, Lamentations, 1.1 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah, theology of • Halakhic mashal, in Lamentations Rabbah • Israel, in Halakhic theology • Scripture, and Halakhah
Found in books: Neusner (2003), The Perfect Torah. 177; Neusner Green and Avery-Peck (2022), Judaism from Moses to Muhammad: An Interpretation: Turning Points and Focal Points, 220
sup>
1.1 אֵיכָה יָשְׁבָה בָדָד הָעִיר רַבָּתִי עָם הָיְתָה כְּאַלְמָנָה רַּבָּתִי בַגּוֹיִם שָׂרָתִי בַּמְּדִינוֹת הָיְתָה לָמַס׃"1.1 יָדוֹ פָּרַשׂ צָר עַל כָּל־מַחֲמַדֶּיהָ כִּי־רָאֲתָה גוֹיִם בָּאוּ מִקְדָּשָׁהּ אֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתָה לֹא־יָבֹאוּ בַקָּהָל לָךְ׃ ' None | sup>
1.1 O how has the city that was once so populous remained lonely! She has become like a widow! She that was great among the nations, a princess among the provinces, has become tributary."'' None |
|
16. None, None, nan (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakha/halakhic • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Halakhic Letter (4QMMT) • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 289; Piotrkowski (2019), Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period, 437
|
17. Hebrew Bible, Ezekiel, 4.6 (6th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakha/halakhic • Halakhic Letter (4QMMT) • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Peter's vision, halakhic perspectives • prophecy, halakhic model of
Found in books: DeJong (2022), A Prophet like Moses (Deut 18:15, 18): The Origin, History, and Influence of the Mosaic Prophetic Succession, 110; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 63; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 79; Piotrkowski (2019), Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period, 384
sup>
4.6 וְכִלִּיתָ אֶת־אֵלֶּה וְשָׁכַבְתָּ עַל־צִדְּךָ הימוני הַיְמָנִי שֵׁנִית וְנָשָׂאתָ אֶת־עֲוֺן בֵּית־יְהוּדָה אַרְבָּעִים יוֹם יוֹם לַשָּׁנָה יוֹם לַשָּׁנָה נְתַתִּיו לָךְ׃' ' None | sup>
4.6 And again, when thou hast accomplished these, thou shalt lie on thy right side, and shalt bear the iniquity of the house of Judah; forty days, each day for a year, have I appointed it unto thee.' ' None |
|
18. Hebrew Bible, Ecclesiastes, 7.10, 10.8, 12.12 (5th cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Dead Sea Scrolls, divine inspiration as source of halakhah • Halakhah • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Midrash halakhah • false prophets, and halakhic authority • halakhah, divine versus human authority in • law and legal formulae, rabbinic (halakhah)
Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 177; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 224; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 47; Swartz (2018), The Mechanics of Providence: The Workings of Ancient Jewish Magic and Mysticism. 77; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 633; Veltri (2006), Libraries, Translations, and 'Canonic' Texts: The Septuagint, Aquila and Ben Sira in the Jewish and Christian Traditions. 213
sup>
12.12 וְיֹתֵר מֵהֵמָּה בְּנִי הִזָּהֵר עֲשׂוֹת סְפָרִים הַרְבֵּה אֵין קֵץ וְלַהַג הַרְבֵּה יְגִעַת בָּשָׂר׃' ' None | sup>
12.12 And furthermore, my son, be admonished: of making many books there is no end; and much study is a weariness of the flesh.' ' None |
|
19. Hebrew Bible, Ezra, 7.6, 7.24, 9.2 (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Halakha, intensification • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • halakhah, ḥallah • midrash halakhah
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 20, 213; Jassen (2014), Scripture and Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls, 23; Lieber (2014), A Vocabulary of Desire: The Song of Songs in the Early Synagogue, 288; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 62; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 5
sup>
7.6 הוּא עֶזְרָא עָלָה מִבָּבֶל וְהוּא־סֹפֵר מָהִיר בְּתוֹרַת מֹשֶׁה אֲשֶׁר־נָתַן יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיִּתֶּן־לוֹ הַמֶּלֶךְ כְּיַד־יְהוָה אֱלֹהָיו עָלָיו כֹּל בַּקָּשָׁתוֹ׃
7.24 וּלְכֹם מְהוֹדְעִין דִּי כָל־כָּהֲנַיָּא וְלֵוָיֵא זַמָּרַיָּא תָרָעַיָּא נְתִינַיָּא וּפָלְחֵי בֵּית אֱלָהָא דְנָה מִנְדָּה בְלוֹ וַהֲלָךְ לָא שַׁלִּיט לְמִרְמֵא עֲלֵיהֹם׃
9.2 כִּי־נָשְׂאוּ מִבְּנֹתֵיהֶם לָהֶם וְלִבְנֵיהֶם וְהִתְעָרְבוּ זֶרַע הַקֹּדֶשׁ בְּעַמֵּי הָאֲרָצוֹת וְיַד הַשָּׂרִים וְהַסְּגָנִים הָיְתָה בַּמַּעַל הַזֶּה רִאשׁוֹנָה׃'' None | sup>
7.6 this Ezra went up from Babylon; and he was a ready scribe in the Law of Moses, which the LORD, the God of Israel, had given; and the king granted him all his request, according to the hand of the LORD his God upon him.
7.24 Also we announce to you, that touching any of the priests and Levites, the singers, porters, Nethinim, or servants of this house of God, it shall not be lawful to impose tribute, impost, or toll, upon them.
9.2 For they have taken of their daughters for themselves and for their sons; so that the holy seed have mingled themselves with the peoples of the lands; yea, the hand of the princes and rulers hath been first in this faithlessness.’'' None |
|
20. Hebrew Bible, Nehemiah, 8.8, 8.13-8.18 (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Sinai, a halakha to Moses from Sinai • halakha, a halakha to Moses from Sinai • halakha, and Scripture • midrash halakhah
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 20, 197, 213, 215, 217, 246, 306; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 70; Jassen (2014), Scripture and Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls, 23, 24
sup>
8.8 וַיִּקְרְאוּ בַסֵּפֶר בְּתוֹרַת הָאֱלֹהִים מְפֹרָשׁ וְשׂוֹם שֶׂכֶל וַיָּבִינוּ בַּמִּקְרָא׃
8.13 וּבַיּוֹם הַשֵּׁנִי נֶאֶסְפוּ רָאשֵׁי הָאָבוֹת לְכָל־הָעָם הַכֹּהֲנִים וְהַלְוִיִּם אֶל־עֶזְרָא הַסֹּפֵר וּלְהַשְׂכִּיל אֶל־דִּבְרֵי הַתּוֹרָה׃ 8.14 וַיִּמְצְאוּ כָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהוָה בְּיַד־מֹשֶׁה אֲשֶׁר יֵשְׁבוּ בְנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל בַּסֻּכּוֹת בֶּחָג בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשְּׁבִיעִי׃ 8.15 וַאֲשֶׁר יַשְׁמִיעוּ וְיַעֲבִירוּ קוֹל בְּכָל־עָרֵיהֶם וּבִירוּשָׁלִַם לֵאמֹר צְאוּ הָהָר וְהָבִיאוּ עֲלֵי־זַיִת וַעֲלֵי־עֵץ שֶׁמֶן וַעֲלֵי הֲדַס וַעֲלֵי תְמָרִים וַעֲלֵי עֵץ עָבֹת לַעֲשֹׂת סֻכֹּת כַּכָּתוּב׃ 8.16 וַיֵּצְאוּ הָעָם וַיָּבִיאוּ וַיַּעֲשׂוּ לָהֶם סֻכּוֹת אִישׁ עַל־גַּגּוֹ וּבְחַצְרֹתֵיהֶם וּבְחַצְרוֹת בֵּית הָאֱלֹהִים וּבִרְחוֹב שַׁעַר הַמַּיִם וּבִרְחוֹב שַׁעַר אֶפְרָיִם׃ 8.17 וַיַּעֲשׂוּ כָל־הַקָּהָל הַשָּׁבִים מִן־הַשְּׁבִי סֻכּוֹת וַיֵּשְׁבוּ בַסֻּכּוֹת כִּי לֹא־עָשׂוּ מִימֵי יֵשׁוּעַ בִּן־נוּן כֵּן בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל עַד הַיּוֹם הַהוּא וַתְּהִי שִׂמְחָה גְּדוֹלָה מְאֹד׃ 8.18 וַיִּקְרָא בְּסֵפֶר תּוֹרַת הָאֱלֹהִים יוֹם בְּיוֹם מִן־הַיּוֹם הָרִאשׁוֹן עַד הַיּוֹם הָאַחֲרוֹן וַיַּעֲשׂוּ־חָג שִׁבְעַת יָמִים וּבַיּוֹם הַשְּׁמִינִי עֲצֶרֶת כַּמִּשְׁפָּט׃' ' None | sup>
8.8 And they read in the book, in the Law of God, distinctly; and they gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.
8.13 And on the second day were gathered together the heads of fathers’houses of all the people, the priests, and the Levites, unto Ezra the scribe, even to give attention to the words of the Law. 8.14 And they found written in the Law, how that the LORD had commanded by Moses, that the children of Israel should dwell in booths in the feast of the seventh month; 8.15 and that they should publish and proclaim in all their cities, and in Jerusalem, saying: ‘Go forth unto the mount, and fetch olive branches, and branches of wild olive, and myrtle branches, and palm branches, and branches of thick trees, to make booths, as it is written.’ 8.16 So the people went forth, and brought them, and made themselves booths, every one upon the roof of his house, and in their courts, and in the courts of the house of God, and in the broad place of the water gate, and in the broad place of the gate of Ephraim. 8.17 And all the congregation of them that were come back out of the captivity made booths, and dwelt in the booths; for since the days of Joshua the son of Nun unto that day had not the children of Israel done so. And there was very great gladness. 8.18 Also day by day, from the first day unto the last day, he read in the book of the Law of God. And they kept the feast seven days;' ' None |
|
21. Anon., Jubilees, 1.14, 50.12 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah, origins of • Halakhah/Halakhot • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Rabbinic Halakhah • Second Temple period, halakhic disputes from time of • halakhah • midrash halakhah
Found in books: Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 116; Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 74; Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 130; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 22, 158, 259, 444; Jassen (2014), Scripture and Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls, 38, 251; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 97
| sup>
1.14 and My sabbaths, and My holy place which I have hallowed for Myself in their midst, and My tabernacle, and My sanctuary, which I have hallowed for Myself in the midst of the land, that I should set My name upon it, and that it should dwell (there).
50.12 and a holy day: and a day of the holy kingdom for all Israel is this day among their days for ever.' ' None |
|
22. Hebrew Bible, Daniel, 9.11 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah, theology of • Israel, in Halakhic theology • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Scripture, and Halakhah
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 213; Neusner Green and Avery-Peck (2022), Judaism from Moses to Muhammad: An Interpretation: Turning Points and Focal Points, 220
sup>
9.11 וְכָל־יִשְׂרָאֵל עָבְרוּ אֶת־תּוֹרָתֶךָ וְסוֹר לְבִלְתִּי שְׁמוֹעַ בְּקֹלֶךָ וַתִּתַּךְ עָלֵינוּ הָאָלָה וְהַשְּׁבֻעָה אֲשֶׁר כְּתוּבָה בְּתוֹרַת מֹשֶׁה עֶבֶד־הָאֱלֹהִים כִּי חָטָאנוּ לוֹ׃'' None | sup>
9.11 Yea, all Israel have transgressed Thy law, and have turned aside, so as not to hearken to Thy voice; and so there hath been poured out upon us the curse and the oath that is written in the Law of Moses the servant of God; for we have sinned against Him.'' None |
|
23. Septuagint, 1 Maccabees, 14.41 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • prophecy, halakhic model of
Found in books: DeJong (2022), A Prophet like Moses (Deut 18:15, 18): The Origin, History, and Influence of the Mosaic Prophetic Succession, 185, 199; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 297
| sup>
14.41 And the Jews and their priests decided that Simon should be their leader and high priest for ever, until a trustworthy prophet should arise,'' None |
|
24. None, None, nan (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Baumgarten, Joseph,, on accurate understanding of history of halakhah • Dead Sea Scrolls, divine inspiration as source of halakhah • Divorce, law/halakha • Halakha, in the New Testament • Halakhah/Halakhot • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • New Testament, as source evidence for halakhah • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Qumran halakha • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • Second Temple period, halakhic disputes from time of • Second Temple period, “old” halakhah stemming from time of • System, halakhic ~ • divine origins of halakhic law • halakhah • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, divine versus human authority in • halakhah, genres of writing • halakhah, subjects susceptible to change in • halakhah, “old” versus “new” traditions of • history of Halakha, • midrash halakhah • “priestly halakhah,” definition of
Found in books: Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 26; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 26, 43, 51, 52, 58, 63, 64, 80, 146, 147, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 156, 158, 160, 161, 163, 164, 197, 214, 229, 230, 232, 233, 235, 236, 237, 241, 246, 247, 267, 352, 373, 444; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 48; Jassen (2014), Scripture and Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls, 13, 36, 37, 38, 239, 248; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 4, 24, 41, 42, 73, 74, 80, 81, 102, 108; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 3, 46, 53, 69, 76, 84, 85, 284, 420
|
25. None, None, nan (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Damascus Document, halakhic legal tradition expressed in • Jubilees, Book of,, halakhic legal tradition expressed in • Miqsat Maºase ha-Torah (MMT, a.k.a. “Halakhic Letter”), halakhic legal tradition expressed in • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • System, halakhic ~ • Temple Scroll, halakhic legal tradition expressed in
Found in books: Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 18; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 47
|
26. None, None, nan (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Baumgarten, Joseph,, on accurate understanding of history of halakhah • Dead Sea Scrolls, divine inspiration as source of halakhah • Divorce, law/halakha • Halakha, in the New Testament • Halakhah/Halakhot • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • New Testament, as source evidence for halakhah • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Qumran halakha • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • Second Temple period, halakhic disputes from time of • Second Temple period, “old” halakhah stemming from time of • System, halakhic ~ • divine origins of halakhic law • halakhah • halakhah, divine versus human authority in • halakhah, genres of writing • halakhah, subjects susceptible to change in • halakhah, “old” versus “new” traditions of • history of Halakha, • “priestly halakhah,” definition of
Found in books: Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 26; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 26, 43, 51, 52, 58, 63, 64, 80, 146, 147, 149, 151, 152, 153, 156, 158, 160, 161, 163, 164, 197, 214, 229, 230, 233, 235, 236, 237, 241, 246, 247, 267, 352, 373, 444; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 4, 24, 41, 42, 73, 74, 80, 81, 102, 108; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 3, 46, 53, 69, 76, 84, 85, 284, 420
|
27. None, None, nan (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • halakhah • prophecy, halakhic model of
Found in books: DeJong (2022), A Prophet like Moses (Deut 18:15, 18): The Origin, History, and Influence of the Mosaic Prophetic Succession, 185; Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 6
|
28. None, None, nan (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Dead Sea Scrolls, divine inspiration as source of halakhah • Halakha/halakhic • Halakhah • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • New Testament, as source evidence for halakhah • Qumran halakha • Second Temple period, halakhic disputes from time of • divine origins of halakhic law • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, divine versus human authority in • halakhah, “old” versus “new” traditions of • midrash halakhah • prophecy, halakhic model of
Found in books: DeJong (2022), A Prophet like Moses (Deut 18:15, 18): The Origin, History, and Influence of the Mosaic Prophetic Succession, 193, 195, 199; Feldman, Goldman and Dimant (2014), Scripture and Interpretation: Qumran Texts That Rework the Bible 282, 350; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 50, 51, 56, 57, 58, 62, 63, 80, 81, 146, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154, 164, 166, 197, 214, 224, 233, 235, 237, 238, 240; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 48; Jassen (2014), Scripture and Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls, 13; Piotrkowski (2019), Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period, 5; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 44, 55, 63, 64, 73, 102, 103; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 420, 426
|
29. None, None, nan (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 166; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 449
|
30. None, None, nan (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Dead Sea Scrolls, divine inspiration as source of halakhah • Divorce, law/halakha • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • System, halakhic ~ • false prophets, and halakhic authority • halakhah • halakhah, divine versus human authority in • halakhah, genres of writing
Found in books: Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 26; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 81, 224, 292, 296, 297, 303; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 22, 48; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 53, 84
|
31. Philo of Alexandria, On The Decalogue, 158 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Halakhah/Halakhot • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 23, 444; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 136
| sup>
158 And the fourth commandment, the one about the seventh day, we must not look upon in any other light than as a summary of all the laws relating to festivals, and of all the purificatory rites enjoined to be observed on each of them. But the service appointed for them was one of holy ablutions, and prayers deserving to be heard, and perfect sacrifices. '' None |
|
32. Philo of Alexandria, On The Special Laws, 4.149 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah • Peter's vision, halakhic perspectives
Found in books: Martens (2003), One God, One Law: Philo of Alexandria on the Mosaic and Greco-Roman Law, 87; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 79
| sup>
4.149 There is also this commandment ordained which is of great common utility, that, "Thou shalt not move thy neighbours\' landmarks which the former men have set Up."{35}{deuteronomy 19:14.} And this injunction is given, as it seems, not only with respect to inheritances, and to the boundaries of the land, in order to prohibit covetousness respecting them, but also as a guard to ancient customs; for customs are unwritten laws, being the doctrines of men of old, not engraved on pillars or written on paper which may be eaten by moths, but impressed in the souls of those living under the same constitution. '' None |
|
33. Philo of Alexandria, On The Embassy To Gaius, 115 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah • Peter's vision, halakhic perspectives
Found in books: Martens (2003), One God, One Law: Philo of Alexandria on the Mosaic and Greco-Roman Law, 87; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 79
| sup>
115 for he regarded the Jews with most especial suspicion, as if they were the only persons who cherished wishes opposed to his, and who had been taught in a manner from their very swaddling-clothes by their parents, and teachers, and instructors, and even before that by their holy laws, and also by their unwritten maxims and customs, to believe that there was but one God, their Father and the Creator of the world; '' None |
|
34. Josephus Flavius, Jewish Antiquities, 3.230, 3.257, 3.277, 3.284, 4.196-4.198, 4.209, 4.212-4.213, 4.218, 4.223-4.224, 11.321-11.324, 13.66-13.67, 13.70, 13.171, 13.255, 13.288, 13.297-13.298, 15.259, 18.12-18.22 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Halakha/halakhic • Halakhah • Halakhah, origins of • Halakhah/Halakhot • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Qumran halakha • Qumran texts, Halakhic Letter (4QMMT) • Roman law,vs. rabbinic halakha • System, halakhic ~ • Tannaic halakha • Temple, law and cult integrated into halakhic system • ancient Halakha • halakha • halakha in Diaspora • halakha, vs. Roman law • halakhah • history of Halakha,
Found in books: Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 6, 71, 72; Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 140; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 23, 24, 212, 217, 218, 224, 241, 247, 286, 295, 296, 305, 341, 385, 406, 444; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 330; Iricinschi et al. (2013), Beyond the Gnostic Gospels: Studies Building on the Work of Elaine Pagels, 382, 384; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 30; Piotrkowski (2019), Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period, 72, 157, 343, 439; Rosen-Zvi (2012), The Mishnaic Sotah Ritual: Temple, Gender and Midrash, 247; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 24, 41, 42, 43, 51, 58, 65, 114, 163, 167, 540, 613
sup>
3.257 θύει δ' ὁ ἱερεὺς ἐκ τῶν ἰδίων ἀναλωμάτων, καὶ δὶς ἑκάστης ἡμέρας τοῦτο ποιεῖ, ἄλευρον ἐλαίῳ μεμαγμένον καὶ πεπηγὸς ὀπτήσει βραχείᾳ, καὶ εἷς μέν ἐστιν ἀσσάρων τοῦ ἀλεύρου, τούτου δὲ τὸ μὲν ἥμισυ τὸ πρωί̈, τὸ δ' ἕτερον δείλης ἐπιφέρει τῷ πυρί. τὸν μὲν οὖν περὶ τούτων λόγον ἀκριβέστερον αὖθις δηλώσομεν, ἱκανὰ δέ μοι δοκεῖ καὶ νῦν περὶ αὐτῶν προειρῆσθαι." "
4.196 Βούλομαι δὲ τὴν πολιτείαν πρότερον εἰπὼν τῷ τε Μωυσέος ἀξιώματι τῆς ἀρετῆς ἀναλογοῦσαν καὶ μαθεῖν παρέξων δι' αὐτῆς τοῖς ἐντευξομένοις. οἷα τὰ καθ' ἡμᾶς ἀρχῆθεν ἦν, ἐπὶ τὴν τῶν ἄλλων τραπέσθαι διήγησιν. γέγραπται δὲ πάνθ' ὡς ἐκεῖνος κατέλιπεν οὐδὲν ἡμῶν ἐπὶ καλλωπισμῷ προσθέντων οὐδ' ὅτι μὴ κατελέλοιπε Μωυσῆς." "4.197 νενεωτέρισται δ' ἡμῖν τὸ κατὰ γένος ἕκαστα τάξαι: σποράδην γὰρ ὑπ' ἐκείνου κατελείφθη γραφέντα καὶ ὡς ἕκαστόν τι παρὰ τοῦ θεοῦ πύθοιτο. τούτου χάριν ἀναγκαῖον ἡγησάμην προδιαστείλασθαι, μὴ καί τις ἡμῖν παρὰ τῶν ὁμοφύλων ἐντυχόντων τῇ γραφῇ μέμψις ὡς διημαρτηκόσι γένηται." '4.198 ἔχει δὲ οὕτως ἡ διάταξις ἡμῶν τῶν νόμων τῶν ἀνηκόντων εἰς τὴν πολιτείαν. οὓς δὲ κοινοὺς ἡμῖν καὶ πρὸς ἀλλήλους κατέλιπε τούτους ὑπερεθέμην εἰς τὴν περὶ ἐθῶν καὶ αἰτιῶν ἀπόδοσιν, ἣν συλλαμβανομένου τοῦ θεοῦ μετὰ ταύτην ἡμῖν τὴν πραγματείαν συντάξασθαι πρόκειται.' "
4.209 Συνελθόντος δὲ τοῦ πλήθους εἰς τὴν ἱερὰν πόλιν ἐπὶ ταῖς θυσίαις δι' ἐτῶν ἑπτὰ τῆς σκηνοπηγίας ἑορτῆς ἐνστάσης ὁ ἀρχιερεὺς ἐπὶ βήματος ὑψηλοῦ σταθείς, ἀφ' οὗ γένοιτο ἐξάκουστος, ἀναγινωσκέτω τοὺς νόμους ἅπασι, καὶ μήτε γυνὴ μήτε παῖδες εἰργέσθωσαν τοῦ ἀκούειν, ἀλλὰ μηδὲ οἱ δοῦλοι:" "
4.212 Δίς τε ἑκάστης ἡμέρας ἀρχομένης τε αὐτῆς καὶ ὁπότε πρὸς ὕπνον ὥρα τρέπεσθαι μαρτυρεῖν τῷ θεῷ τὰς δωρεάς, ἃς ἀπαλλαγεῖσιν αὐτοῖς ἐκ τῆς Αἰγυπτίων γῆς παρέσχε, δικαίας οὔσης φύσει τῆς εὐχαριστίας καὶ γενομένης ἐπ' ἀμοιβῇ μὲν τῶν ἤδη γεγονότων ἐπὶ δὲ προτροπῇ τῶν ἐσομένων:" '4.213 ἐπιγράφειν δὲ καὶ τοῖς θυρώμασιν αὐτῶν τὰ μέγιστα ὧν εὐεργέτησεν αὐτοὺς ὁ θεὸς ἔν τε βραχίοσιν ἕκαστον διαφαίνειν, ὅσα τε τὴν ἰσχὺν ἀποσημαίνειν δύναται τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τὴν πρὸς αὐτοὺς εὔνοιαν φέρειν ἐγγεγραμμένα ἐπὶ τῆς κεφαλῆς καὶ τοῦ βραχίονος, ὡς περίβλεπτον πανταχόθεν τὸ περὶ αὐτοὺς πρόθυμον τοῦ θεοῦ.' "
4.218 ἂν δ' οἱ δικασταὶ μὴ νοῶσι περὶ τῶν ἐπ' αὐτοὺς παρατεταγμένων ἀποφήνασθαι, συμβαίνει δὲ πολλὰ τοιαῦτα τοῖς ἀνθρώποις, ἀναπεμπέτωσαν τὴν δίκην εἰς τὴν ἱερὰν πόλιν, καὶ συνελθόντες ὅ τε ἀρχιερεὺς καὶ ὁ προφήτης καὶ ἡ γερουσία τὸ δοκοῦν ἀποφαινέσθωσαν." "
4.223 ̓Αριστοκρατία μὲν οὖν κράτιστον καὶ ὁ κατ' αὐτὴν βίος, καὶ μὴ λάβῃ πόθος ὑμᾶς ἄλλης πολιτείας, ἀλλὰ ταύτην στέργοιτε καὶ τοὺς νόμους ἔχοντες δεσπότας κατ' αὐτοὺς ἕκαστα πράττετε: ἀρκεῖ γὰρ ὁ θεὸς ἡγεμὼν εἶναι. βασιλέως δ' εἰ γένοιτο ἔρως ὑμῖν, ἔστω μὲν οὗτος ὁμόφυλος, πρόνοια δ' αὐτῷ δικαιοσύνης καὶ τῆς ἄλλης ἀρετῆς διὰ παντὸς ἔστω." "4.224 παραχωροίη δὲ οὗτος τοῖς μὲν νόμοις καὶ τῷ θεῷ τὰ πλείονα τοῦ φρονεῖν, πρασσέτω δὲ μηδὲν δίχα τοῦ ἀρχιερέως καὶ τῆς τῶν γερουσιαστῶν γνώμης γάμοις τε μὴ πολλοῖς χρώμενος μηδὲ πλῆθος διώκων χρημάτων μηδ' ἵππων, ὧν αὐτῷ παραγενομένων ὑπερήφανος ἂν τῶν νόμων ἔσοιτο. κωλυέσθω δ', εἰ τούτων τι διὰ σπουδῆς ἔχοι, γίγνεσθαι τοῦ συμφέροντος ὑμῖν δυνατώτερος." "
11.321 Νομίσας δὲ καιρὸν ἐπιτήδειον ἔχειν ὁ Σαναβαλλέτης τῆς ἐπιβολῆς Δαρείου μὲν ἀπέγνω, λαβὼν δὲ ὀκτακισχιλίους τῶν ἀρχομένων ὑπ' αὐτοῦ πρὸς ̓Αλέξανδρον ἧκεν καὶ καταλαβὼν αὐτὸν ἀρχόμενον τῆς Τύρου πολιορκίας, ὧν τε αὐτὸς ἄρχει τόπων ἔλεγεν αὐτῷ παραδιδόναι τούτους καὶ δεσπότην αὐτὸν ἡδέως ἔχειν ἀντὶ Δαρείου τοῦ βασιλέως." "11.322 ἀσμένως δ' αὐτὸν προσδεξαμένου θαρρῶν ἤδη περὶ τῶν προκειμένων ὁ Σαναβαλλέτης αὐτῷ λόγους προσέφερεν δηλῶν, ὡς γαμβρὸν μὲν ἔχοι Μανασσῆ τοῦ τῶν ̓Ιουδαίων ἀρχιερέως ̓Ιαδδοῦ ἀδελφόν, πολλοὺς δὲ καὶ ἄλλους αὐτῷ συμπαρόντας τῶν ὁμοεθνῶν θέλειν ἱερὸν ἐν τοῖς ὑπ' ἐκείνῳ τόποις ἤδη κατασκευάσαι." "11.323 τοῦτο δ' εἶναι καὶ τῷ βασιλεῖ συμφέρον εἰς δύο διῃρῆσθαι τὴν ̓Ιουδαίων δύναμιν, ἵνα μὴ ὁμογνωμονοῦν τὸ ἔθνος μηδὲ συνεστός, εἰ νεωτερίσειέν ποτε, χαλεπὸν ᾖ τοῖς βασιλεῦσιν, καθὼς καὶ πρότερον τοῖς ̓Ασσυρίων ἄρξασιν ἐγένετο." "11.324 συγχωρήσαντος δὲ ̓Αλεξάνδρου πᾶσαν εἰσενεγκάμενος σπουδὴν ᾠκοδόμησεν ὁ Σαναβαλλέτης τὸν ναὸν καὶ ἱερέα τὸν Μανασσῆ κατέστησεν, μέγιστον γέρας ἡγησάμενος τοῖς ἐκ τῆς θυγατρὸς γενησομένοις τοῦτ' ἔσεσθαι." 13.66 καὶ πλείστους εὑρὼν παρὰ τὸ καθῆκον ἔχοντας ἱερὰ καὶ διὰ τοῦτο δύσνους ἀλλήλοις, ὃ καὶ Αἰγυπτίοις συμβέβηκεν διὰ τὸ πλῆθος τῶν ἱερῶν καὶ τὸ περὶ τὰς θρησκείας οὐχ ὁμόδοξον, ἐπιτηδειότατον εὑρὼν τόπον ἐν τῷ προσαγορευομένῳ τῆς ἀγρίας Βουβάστεως ὀχυρώματι βρύοντα ποικίλης ὕλης καὶ τῶν ἱερῶν ζῴων μεστόν,' "13.67 δέομαι συγχωρῆσαί μοι τὸ ἀδέσποτον ἀνακαθάραντι ἱερὸν καὶ συμπεπτωκὸς οἰκοδομῆσαι ναὸν τῷ μεγίστῳ θεῷ καθ' ὁμοίωσιν τοῦ ἐν ̔Ιεροσολύμοις αὐτοῖς μέτροις ὑπὲρ σοῦ καὶ τῆς σῆς γυναικὸς καὶ τῶν τέκνων, ἵν' ἔχωσιν οἱ τὴν Αἴγυπτον κατοικοῦντες ̓Ιουδαῖοι εἰς αὐτὸ συνιόντες κατὰ τὴν πρὸς ἀλλήλους ὁμόνοιαν ταῖς σαῖς ἐξυπηρετεῖν χρείαις:" 13.171 Κατὰ δὲ τὸν χρόνον τοῦτον τρεῖς αἱρέσεις τῶν ̓Ιουδαίων ἦσαν, αἳ περὶ τῶν ἀνθρωπίνων πραγμάτων διαφόρως ὑπελάμβανον, ὧν ἡ μὲν Φαρισαίων ἐλέγετο, ἡ δὲ Σαδδουκαίων, ἡ τρίτη δὲ ̓Εσσηνῶν.
13.255 Μήδαβαν μὲν οὖν πολλὰ τῆς στρατιᾶς αὐτῷ ταλαιπωρηθείσης ἕκτῳ μηνὶ εἷλεν, ἔπειτα καὶ Σαμόγαν καὶ τὰ πλησίον εὐθὺς αἱρεῖ Σίκιμά τε πρὸς τούτοις καὶ Γαριζεὶν τό τε Κουθαίων γένος,' "
13.288 ̔Υρκανῷ δὲ φθόνον ἐκίνησεν παρὰ τῶν ̓Ιουδαίων ἡ εὐπραγία, μάλιστα δ' οἱ Φαρισαῖοι κακῶς πρὸς αὐτὸν εἶχον, αἵρεσις ὄντες μία τῶν ̓Ιουδαίων, ὡς καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἐπάνω δεδηλώκαμεν. τοσαύτην δὲ ἔχουσι τὴν ἰσχὺν παρὰ τῷ πλήθει, ὡς καὶ κατὰ βασιλέως τι λέγοντες καὶ κατ' ἀρχιερέως εὐθὺς πιστεύεσθαι." "
13.297 περὶ μέντοι τούτων αὖθις ἐροῦμεν. νῦν δὲ δηλῶσαι βούλομαι, ὅτι νόμιμά τινα παρέδοσαν τῷ δήμῳ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι ἐκ πατέρων διαδοχῆς, ἅπερ οὐκ ἀναγέγραπται ἐν τοῖς Μωυσέως νόμοις, καὶ διὰ τοῦτο ταῦτα τὸ Σαδδουκαίων γένος ἐκβάλλει, λέγον ἐκεῖνα δεῖν ἡγεῖσθαι νόμιμα τὰ γεγραμμένα, τὰ δ' ἐκ παραδόσεως τῶν πατέρων μὴ τηρεῖν." '13.298 καὶ περὶ τούτων ζητήσεις αὐτοῖς καὶ διαφορὰς γίνεσθαι συνέβαινεν μεγάλας, τῶν μὲν Σαδδουκαίων τοὺς εὐπόρους μόνον πειθόντων τὸ δὲ δημοτικὸν οὐχ ἑπόμενον αὐτοῖς ἐχόντων, τῶν δὲ Φαρισαίων τὸ πλῆθος σύμμαχον ἐχόντων. ἀλλὰ περὶ μὲν τούτων τῶν δύο καὶ τῶν ̓Εσσηνῶν ἐν τῇ δευτέρᾳ μου τῶν ̓Ιουδαϊκῶν ἀκριβῶς δεδήλωται.' "
15.259 Χρόνου δὲ διελθόντος ἐπισυνέβη τὴν Σαλώμην στασιάσαι πρὸς τὸν Κοστόβαρον, καὶ πέμπει μὲν εὐθὺς αὐτῷ γραμμάτιον ἀπολυομένη τὸν γάμον οὐ κατὰ τοὺς ̓Ιουδαίων νόμους: ἀνδρὶ μὲν γὰρ ἔξεστιν παρ' ἡμῖν τοῦτο ποιεῖν, γυναικὶ δὲ οὐδὲ διαχωρισθείσῃ καθ' αὑτὴν γαμηθῆναι μὴ τοῦ πρότερον ἀνδρὸς ἐφιέντος." "
18.12 Οἵ τε γὰρ Φαρισαῖοι τὴν δίαιταν ἐξευτελίζουσιν οὐδὲν ἐς τὸ μαλακώτερον ἐνδιδόντες, ὧν τε ὁ λόγος κρίνας παρέδωκεν ἀγαθῶν ἕπονται τῇ ἡγεμονίᾳ περιμάχητον ἡγούμενοι τὴν φυλακὴν ὧν ὑπαγορεύειν ἠθέλησεν. τιμῆς γε τοῖς ἡλικίᾳ προήκουσιν παραχωροῦσιν οὐδ' ἐπ' ἀντιλέξει τῶν εἰσηγηθέντων ταῦτα οἱ θράσει ἐπαιρόμενοι." 18.12 Οὐιτέλλιος δὲ παρασκευασάμενος ὡς εἰς πόλεμον τὸν πρὸς ̓Αρέταν δυσὶ τάγμασιν ὁπλιτῶν ὅσοι τε περὶ αὐτὰ ψιλοὶ καὶ ἱππεῖς συμμαχοῦντες ἐκ τῶν ὑπὸ ̔Ρωμαίοις βασιλειῶν ἀγόμενος, ἐπὶ τῆς Πέτρας ἠπείγετο καὶ ἔσχε Πτολεμαί̈δα.' "18.13 ̔Ηρώδῃ τῷ μεγάλῳ θυγατέρες ἐκ Μαριάμμης τῆς ̔Υρκανοῦ θυγατρὸς γίνονται δύο, Σαλαμψιὼ μὲν ἡ ἑτέρα, ἣ γαμεῖται Φασαήλῳ τῷ αὐτῆς ἀνεψιῷ Φασαήλου παιδὶ ὄντι τοῦ ̔Ηρώδου ἀδελφοῦ δεδωκότος τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτήν, Κύπρος δὲ ̓Αντιπάτρῳ καὶ αὐτὴ ἀνεψιῷ ̔Ηρώδου παιδὶ τῆς ἀδελφῆς Σαλώμης. 18.13 πράσσεσθαί τε εἱμαρμένῃ τὰ πάντα ἀξιοῦντες οὐδὲ τοῦ ἀνθρωπείου τὸ βουλόμενον τῆς ἐπ' αὐτοῖς ὁρμῆς ἀφαιροῦνται δοκῆσαν τῷ θεῷ κρίσιν γενέσθαι καὶ τῷ ἐκείνης βουλευτηρίῳ καὶ τῶν ἀνθρώπων τῷ ἐθελήσαντι προσχωρεῖν μετ' ἀρετῆς ἢ κακίας." '18.14 ̓Αλεξάνδρῳ δὲ Τιγράνης ὁμώνυμος τῷ ἀδελφῷ γίνεται παῖς καὶ βασιλεὺς ̓Αρμενίας ὑπὸ Νέρωνος ἐκπέμπεται υἱός τε ̓Αλέξανδρος αὐτῷ γίνεται. γαμεῖ δ' οὗτος ̓Αντιόχου τοῦ Κομμαγηνῶν βασιλέως θυγατέρα ̓Ιωτάπην, ἡσίοδός τε τῆς ἐν Κιλικίᾳ Οὐεσπασιανὸς αὐτὸν ἵσταται βασιλέα." "18.14 ἀθάνατόν τε ἰσχὺν ταῖς ψυχαῖς πίστις αὐτοῖς εἶναι καὶ ὑπὸ χθονὸς δικαιώσεις τε καὶ τιμὰς οἷς ἀρετῆς ἢ κακίας ἐπιτήδευσις ἐν τῷ βίῳ γέγονεν, καὶ ταῖς μὲν εἱργμὸν ἀίδιον προτίθεσθαι, ταῖς δὲ ῥᾳστώνην τοῦ ἀναβιοῦν.' "18.15 καὶ δι' αὐτὰ τοῖς τε δήμοις πιθανώτατοι τυγχάνουσιν καὶ ὁπόσα θεῖα εὐχῶν τε ἔχεται καὶ ἱερῶν ποιήσεως ἐξηγήσει τῇ ἐκείνων τυγχάνουσιν πρασσόμενα. εἰς τοσόνδε ἀρετῆς αὐτοῖς αἱ πόλεις ἐμαρτύρησαν ἐπιτηδεύσει τοῦ ἐπὶ πᾶσι κρείσσονος ἔν τε τῇ διαίτῃ τοῦ βίου καὶ λόγοις." "18.15 οὐ μὴν ἐπὶ πλεῖόν γε ̔Ηρώδης ἐνέμεινε τοῖς δεδογμένοις, καίτοι γε οὐδ' ὣς ἀρκοῦντα ἦν: ἐν γὰρ Τύρῳ παρὰ συνουσίαν ὑπὸ οἴνου γενομένων αὐτοῖς λοιδοριῶν, ἀνεκτὸν οὐχ ἡγησάμενος ̓Αγρίππας τοῦ ̔Ηρώδου τε ἐπονειδίσαντος εἰς ἀπορίαν καὶ τροφῆς ἀναγκαίας μετάδοσιν, ὡς Φλάκκον τὸν ὑπατικὸν εἴσεισιν φίλον ἐπὶ ̔Ρώμης τὰ μάλιστα αὐτῷ γεγονότα πρότερον: Συρίαν δὲ ἐν τῷ τότε διεῖπεν." '18.16 Σαδδουκαίοις δὲ τὰς ψυχὰς ὁ λόγος συναφανίζει τοῖς σώμασι, φυλακῇ δὲ οὐδαμῶς τινων μεταποίησις αὐτοῖς ἢ τῶν νόμων: πρὸς γὰρ τοὺς διδασκάλους σοφίας, ἣν μετίασιν, ἀμφιλογεῖν ἀρετὴν ἀριθμοῦσιν. 18.16 ἡ δὲ ὑπισχνεῖτο, καὶ ὁ ̓Αλέξανδρος πέντε τάλαντα αὐτοῖς ἐν τῇ ̓Αλεξανδρείᾳ δοὺς τὸ λοιπὸν ἐν Δικαιαρχείᾳ γενομένοις παρέξειν ἐπηγγέλλετο, δεδιὼς τοῦ ̓Αγρίππου τὸ εἰς τὰ ἀναλώματα ἕτοιμον. καὶ Κύπρος μὲν ἀπαλλάξασα τὸν ἄνδρα ἐπὶ τῆς ̓Ιταλίας πλευσούμενον αὐτὴ μετὰ τῶν τέκνων ἐπὶ ̓Ιουδαίας ἀνέζευξεν.' "18.17 εἰς ὀλίγους δὲ ἄνδρας οὗτος ὁ λόγος ἀφίκετο, τοὺς μέντοι πρώτους τοῖς ἀξιώμασι, πράσσεταί τε ἀπ' αὐτῶν οὐδὲν ὡς εἰπεῖν: ὁπότε γὰρ ἐπ' ἀρχὰς παρέλθοιεν, ἀκουσίως μὲν καὶ κατ' ἀνάγκας, προσχωροῦσι δ' οὖν οἷς ὁ Φαρισαῖος λέγει διὰ τὸ μὴ ἄλλως ἀνεκτοὺς γενέσθαι τοῖς πλήθεσιν." "18.17 οὔτε γὰρ πρεσβειῶν ὑποδοχὰς ἐκ τοῦ ὀξέος ἐποιεῖτο ἡγεμόσι τε ἢ ἐπιτρόποις ὑπ' αὐτοῦ σταλεῖσιν οὐδεμία ἦν διαδοχή, ὁπότε μὴ φθαῖεν τετελευτηκότες: ὅθεν καὶ δεσμωτῶν ἀκροάσεως ἀπερίοπτος ἦν." '18.18 ̓Εσσηνοῖς δὲ ἐπὶ μὲν θεῷ καταλείπειν φιλεῖ τὰ πάντα ὁ λόγος, ἀθανατίζουσιν δὲ τὰς ψυχὰς περιμάχητον ἡγούμενοι τοῦ δικαίου τὴν πρόσοδον. 18.18 τιμία δὲ ἦν ̓Αντωνία Τιβερίῳ εἰς τὰ πάντα συγγενείας τε ἀξιώματι, Δρούσου γὰρ ἦν ἀδελφοῦ αὐτοῦ γυνή, καὶ ἀρετῇ τοῦ σώφρονος: νέα γὰρ χηρεύειν παρέμεινεν γάμῳ τε ἀπεῖπεν τῷ πρὸς ἕτερον καίπερ τοῦ Σεβαστοῦ κελεύοντός τινι γαμεῖσθαι, καὶ λοιδοριῶν ἀπηλλαγμένον διεσώσατο αὐτῆς τὸν βίον.' "18.19 ἐπεὶ δ' ὁ Καῖσαρ περιοδεύσας τὸν ἱππόδρομον λαμβάνει τὸν ̓Αγρίππαν ἑστηκότα, “καὶ μὴν δή, φησίν, Μάκρων, τοῦτον εἶπον δεθῆναι”. τοῦ δὲ ἐπανερομένου ὅντινα, “̓Αγρίππαν γε” εἶπεν." "18.19 εἰς δὲ τὸ ἱερὸν ἀναθήματα στέλλοντες θυσίας ἐπιτελοῦσιν διαφορότητι ἁγνειῶν, ἃς νομίζοιεν, καὶ δι' αὐτὸ εἰργόμενοι τοῦ κοινοῦ τεμενίσματος ἐφ' αὑτῶν τὰς θυσίας ἐπιτελοῦσιν. βέλτιστοι δὲ ἄλλως ἄνδρες τὸν τρόπον καὶ τὸ πᾶν πονεῖν ἐπὶ γεωργίᾳ τετραμμένοι." "18.21 καὶ οὔτε γαμετὰς εἰσάγονται οὔτε δούλων ἐπιτηδεύουσιν κτῆσιν, τὸ μὲν εἰς ἀδικίαν φέρειν ὑπειληφότες, τὸ δὲ στάσεως ἐνδιδόναι ποίησιν, αὐτοὶ δ' ἐφ' ἑαυτῶν ζῶντες διακονίᾳ τῇ ἐπ' ἀλλήλοις ἐπιχρῶνται." '18.21 οὕτως ἀνεπαχθῶς ὡμίλησε τοῖς ἀνθρώποις. ἐξ ὧν μέγα ὄφελος καὶ τῷ παιδὶ αὐτοῦ παρὰ πᾶσιν κατελέλειπτο τοῖς τε ἄλλοις καὶ μάλιστα τὸ στρατιωτικὸν ἦρτο, ἀρετὴν ἀριθμοῦντες τὸ περὶ τῆς ἀρχῆς ἐκείνῳ περιγενησομένης, εἰ δεήσει, καὶ τελευτᾶν.' "18.22 ἀξιῶ δέ σε μηδὲν ἀμνημονεῖν ὁμιλήσαντα αὐτῇ μήτ' εὐνοίας τῆς ἐμῆς, ὃς εἰς τοσόνδε ἀξιώματος καθίστημι μέγεθος," 18.22 ἀποδέκτας δὲ τῶν προσόδων χειροτονοῦντες καὶ ὁπόσα ἡ γῆ φέροι ἄνδρας ἀγαθούς, ἱερεῖς δὲ ἐπὶ ποιήσει σίτου τε καὶ βρωμάτων. ζῶσι δὲ οὐδὲν παρηλλαγμένως, ἀλλ' ὅτι μάλιστα ἐμφέροντες Δακῶν τοῖς πλείστοις λεγομένοις." "" None | sup>
3.257 The high priest also, of his own charges, offered a sacrifice, and that twice every day. It was made of flour mingled with oil, and gently baked by the fire; the quantity was one tenth deal of flour; he brought the half of it to the fire in the morning, and the other half at night. The account of these sacrifices I shall give more accurately hereafter; but I think I have premised what for the present may be sufficient concerning them.
4.196 4. Accordingly, I shall now first describe this form of government which was agreeable to the dignity and virtue of Moses; and shall thereby inform those that read these Antiquities, what our original settlements were, and shall then proceed to the remaining histories. Now those settlements are all still in writing, as he left them; and we shall add nothing by way of ornament, nor any thing besides what Moses left us; 4.197 only we shall so far innovate, as to digest the several kinds of laws into a regular system; for they were by him left in writing as they were accidentally scattered in their delivery, and as he upon inquiry had learned them of God. On which account I have thought it necessary to premise this observation beforehand, lest any of my own countrymen should blame me, as having been guilty of an offense herein. 4.198 Now part of our constitution will include the laws that belong to our political state. As for those laws which Moses left concerning our common conversation and intercourse one with another, I have reserved that for a discourse concerning our manner of life, and the occasions of those laws; which I propose to myself, with God’s assistance, to write, after I have finished the work I am now upon.
4.209 12. When the multitude are assembled together unto the holy city for sacrificing every seventh year, at the feast of tabernacles, let the high priest stand upon a high desk, whence he may be heard, and let him read the laws to all the people; and let neither the women nor the children be hindered from hearing, no, nor the servants neither;
4.212 13. Let every one commemorate before God the benefits which he bestowed upon them at their deliverance out of the land of Egypt, and this twice every day, both when the day begins and when the hour of sleep comes on, gratitude being in its own nature a just thing, and serving not only by way of return for past, but also by way of invitation of future favors. 4.213 They are also to inscribe the principal blessings they have received from God upon their doors, and show the same remembrance of them upon their arms; as also they are to bear on their forehead and their arm those wonders which declare the power of God, and his good-will towards them, that God’s readiness to bless them may appear every where conspicuous about them.
4.218 But if these judges be unable to give a just sentence about the causes that come before them, (which case is not unfrequent in human affairs,) let them send the cause undetermined to the holy city, and there let the high priest, the prophet, and the sanhedrim, determine as it shall seem good to them.
4.223 17. Aristocracy, and the way of living under it, is the best constitution: and may you never have any inclination to any other form of government; and may you always love that form, and have the laws for your governors, and govern all your actions according to them; for you need no supreme governor but God. But if you shall desire a king, let him be one of your own nation; let him be always careful of justice and other virtues perpetually; 4.224 let him submit to the laws, and esteem God’s commands to be his highest wisdom; but let him do nothing without the high priest and the votes of the senators: let him not have a great number of wives, nor pursue after abundance of riches, nor a multitude of horses, whereby he may grow too proud to submit to the laws. And if he affect any such things, let him be restrained, lest he become so potent that his state be inconsistent with your welfare.
11.321 4. But Sanballat thought he had now gotten a proper opportunity to make his attempt, so he renounced Darius, and taking with him seven thousand of his own subjects, he came to Alexander; and finding him beginning the siege of Tyre, he said to him, that he delivered up to him these men, who came out of places under his dominion, and did gladly accept of him for his lord instead of Darius. 11.322 So when Alexander had received him kindly, Sanballat thereupon took courage, and spake to him about his present affair. He told him that he had a son-in-law, Manasseh, who was brother to the high priest Jaddua; and that there were many others of his own nation, now with him, that were desirous to have a temple in the places subject to him; 11.323 that it would be for the king’s advantage to have the strength of the Jews divided into two parts, lest when the nation is of one mind, and united, upon any attempt for innovation, it prove troublesome to kings, as it had formerly proved to the kings of Assyria. 11.324 Whereupon Alexander gave Sanballat leave so to do, who used the utmost diligence, and built the temple, and made Manasseh the priest, and deemed it a great reward that his daughter’s children should have that dignity;
13.66 where I found that the greatest part of your people had temples in an improper manner, and that on this account they bare ill-will one against another, which happens to the Egyptians by reason of the multitude of their temples, and the difference of opinions about divine worship. Now I found a very fit place in a castle that hath its name from the country Diana; this place is full of materials of several sorts, and replenished with sacred animals; 13.67 I desire therefore that you will grant me leave to purge this holy place, which belongs to no master, and is fallen down, and to build there a temple to Almighty God, after the pattern of that in Jerusalem, and of the same dimensions, that may be for the benefit of thyself, and thy wife and children, that those Jews which dwell in Egypt may have a place whither they may come and meet together in mutual harmony one with another, and he subservient to thy advantages;
13.171 9. At this time there were three sects among the Jews, who had different opinions concerning human actions; the one was called the sect of the Pharisees, another the sect of the Sadducees, and the other the sect of the Essenes.
13.255 However, it was not till the sixth month that he took Medaba, and that not without the greatest distress of his army. After this he took Samega, and the neighboring places; and besides these, Shechem and Gerizzim, and the nation of the Cutheans,
13.288 5. However, this prosperous state of affairs moved the Jews to envy Hyrcanus; but they that were the worst disposed to him were the Pharisees, who were one of the sects of the Jews, as we have informed you already. These have so great a power over the multitude, that when they say any thing against the king, or against the high priest, they are presently believed.
13.297 but of these matters we shall speak hereafter. What I would now explain is this, that the Pharisees have delivered to the people a great many observances by succession from their fathers, which are not written in the laws of Moses; and for that reason it is that the Sadducees reject them, and say that we are to esteem those observances to be obligatory which are in the written word, but are not to observe what are derived from the tradition of our forefathers. 13.298 And concerning these things it is that great disputes and differences have arisen among them, while the Sadducees are able to persuade none but the rich, and have not the populace obsequious to them, but the Pharisees have the multitude on their side. But about these two sects, and that of the Essenes, I have treated accurately in the second book of Jewish affairs.
15.259 10. But some time afterward, when Salome happened to quarrel with Costobarus, she sent him a bill of divorce and dissolved her marriage with him, though this was not according to the Jewish laws; for with us it is lawful for a husband to do so; but a wife; if she departs from her husband, cannot of herself be married to another, unless her former husband put her away.
18.12 3. Now, for the Pharisees, they live meanly, and despise delicacies in diet; and they follow the conduct of reason; and what that prescribes to them as good for them they do; and they think they ought earnestly to strive to observe reason’s dictates for practice. They also pay a respect to such as are in years; nor are they so bold as to contradict them in any thing which they have introduced;
18.12 3. So Vitellius prepared to make war with Aretas, having with him two legions of armed men; he also took with him all those of light armature, and of the horsemen which belonged to them, and were drawn out of those kingdoms which were under the Romans, and made haste for Petra, and came to Ptolemais. 18.13 4. Herod the Great had two daughters by Mariamne, the grand daughter of Hyrcanus; the one was Salampsio, who was married to Phasaelus, her first cousin, who was himself the son of Phasaelus, Herod’s brother, her father making the match; the other was Cypros, who was herself married also to her first cousin Antipater, the son of Salome, Herod’s sister. 18.13 and when they determine that all things are done by fate, they do not take away the freedom from men of acting as they think fit; since their notion is, that it hath pleased God to make a temperament, whereby what he wills is done, but so that the will of man can act virtuously or viciously. 18.14 Alexander had a son of the same name with his brother Tigranes, and was sent to take possession of the kingdom of Armenia by Nero; he had a son, Alexander, who married Jotape, the daughter of Antiochus, the king of Commagena; Vespasian made him king of an island in Cilicia. 18.14 They also believe that souls have an immortal rigor in them, and that under the earth there will be rewards or punishments, according as they have lived virtuously or viciously in this life; and the latter are to be detained in an everlasting prison, but that the former shall have power to revive and live again; 18.15 Yet did not Herod long continue in that resolution of supporting him, though even that support was not sufficient for him; for as once they were at a feast at Tyre, and in their cups, and reproaches were cast upon one another, Agrippa thought that was not to be borne, while Herod hit him in the teeth with his poverty, and with his owing his necessary food to him. So he went to Flaccus, one that had been consul, and had been a very great friend to him at Rome formerly, and was now president of Syria. 18.15 on account of which doctrines they are able greatly to persuade the body of the people; and whatsoever they do about divine worship, prayers, and sacrifices, they perform them according to their direction; insomuch that the cities give great attestations to them on account of their entire virtuous conduct, both in the actions of their lives and their discourses also. 18.16 4. But the doctrine of the Sadducees is this: That souls die with the bodies; nor do they regard the observation of any thing besides what the law enjoins them; for they think it an instance of virtue to dispute with those teachers of philosophy whom they frequent: 18.16 o she undertook to repay it. Accordingly, Alexander paid them five talents at Alexandria, and promised to pay them the rest of that sum at Dicearchia Puteoli; and this he did out of the fear he was in that Agrippa would soon spend it. So this Cypros set her husband free, and dismissed him to go on with his navigation to Italy, while she and her children departed for Judea. 18.17 but this doctrine is received but by a few, yet by those still of the greatest dignity. But they are able to do almost nothing of themselves; for when they become magistrates, as they are unwillingly and by force sometimes obliged to be, they addict themselves to the notions of the Pharisees, because the multitude would not otherwise bear them. 18.17 for he did not admit ambassadors quickly, and no successors were despatched away to governors or procurators of the provinces that had been formerly sent, unless they were dead; whence it was that he was so negligent in hearing the causes of prisoners; 18.18 5. The doctrine of the Essenes is this: That all things are best ascribed to God. They teach the immortality of souls, and esteem that the rewards of righteousness are to be earnestly striven for; 18.18 Now Antonia was greatly esteemed by Tiberius on all accounts, from the dignity of her relation to him, who had been his brother Drusus’s wife, and from her eminent chastity; for though she was still a young woman, she continued in her widowhood, and refused all other matches, although Augustus had enjoined her to be married to somebody else; yet did she all along preserve her reputation free from reproach. 18.19 But when Caesar had gone round the hippodrome, he found Agrippa standing: “For certain,” said he, “Macro, this is the man I meant to have bound;” and when he still asked, “Which of these is to be bound?” he said “Agrippa.” 18.19 and when they send what they have dedicated to God into the temple, they do not offer sacrifices because they have more pure lustrations of their own; on which account they are excluded from the common court of the temple, but offer their sacrifices themselves; yet is their course of life better than that of other men; and they entirely addict themselves to husbandry. 18.21 and neither marry wives, nor are desirous to keep servants; as thinking the latter tempts men to be unjust, and the former gives the handle to domestic quarrels; but as they live by themselves, they minister one to another. 18.21 that it turned greatly to the advantage of his son among all; and, among others, the soldiery were so peculiarly affected to him, that they reckoned it an eligible thing, if need were, to die themselves, if he might but attain to the government. 18.22 They also appoint certain stewards to receive the incomes of their revenues, and of the fruits of the ground; such as are good men and priests, who are to get their corn and their food ready for them. They none of them differ from others of the Essenes in their way of living, but do the most resemble those Dacae who are called Polistae dwellers in cities. 18.22 and I desire thee never to be unmindful when thou comest to it, either of my kindness to thee, who set thee in so high a dignity,' ' None |
|
35. Josephus Flavius, Jewish War, 1.32, 2.119-2.129, 2.131-2.139, 2.141-2.149, 2.151-2.166, 7.423, 7.430 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakha/halakhic • Halakhah • Halakhah, origins of • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Halakhic Letter (4QMMT) • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Peter's vision, halakhic perspectives • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Qumran halakha • Qumran texts, Halakhic Letter (4QMMT) • Rabbinic Halakhah • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • Sabbath, halakha • System, halakhic ~ • halakha in Diaspora • halakhah • history of Halakha,
Found in books: Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 148; Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 6; Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 133; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 243, 373, 400; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 330; Iricinschi et al. (2013), Beyond the Gnostic Gospels: Studies Building on the Work of Elaine Pagels, 382; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 79; Piotrkowski (2019), Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period, 162, 343, 388, 423; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 24, 42, 50, 59, 60, 65, 114, 128, 420
sup>
1.32 ̓Εφ' οἷς χαλεπήνας ̔Ηρώδης ὥρμησεν μὲν ἀμύνασθαι Μαχαιρᾶν ὡς πολέμιον, κρατήσας δὲ τῆς ὀργῆς ἤλαυνεν πρὸς ̓Αντώνιον κατηγορήσων τῆς Μαχαιρᾶ παρανομίας. ὁ δ' ἐν διαλογισμῷ τῶν ἡμαρτημένων γενόμενος ταχέως μεταδιώκει τε τὸν βασιλέα καὶ πολλὰ δεηθεὶς ἑαυτῷ διαλλάττει." 1.32 οἱ δὲ καταφυγόντες πρὸς ̓Αντίοχον ἱκέτευσαν αὐτοῖς ἡγεμόσι χρώμενον εἰς τὴν ̓Ιουδαίαν ἐμβαλεῖν. πείθεται δ' ὁ βασιλεὺς ὡρμημένος πάλαι, καὶ μετὰ πλείστης δυνάμεως αὐτὸς ὁρμήσας τήν τε πόλιν αἱρεῖ κατὰ κράτος καὶ πολὺ πλῆθος τῶν Πτολεμαίῳ προσεχόντων ἀναιρεῖ, ταῖς τε ἁρπαγαῖς ἀνέδην ἐπαφιεὶς τοὺς στρατιώτας αὐτὸς καὶ τὸν ναὸν ἐσύλησε καὶ τὸν ἐνδελεχισμὸν τῶν καθ' ἡμέραν ἐναγισμῶν ἔπαυσεν ἐπ' ἔτη τρία καὶ μῆνας ἕξ." "
2.119 Τρία γὰρ παρὰ ̓Ιουδαίοις εἴδη φιλοσοφεῖται, καὶ τοῦ μὲν αἱρετισταὶ Φαρισαῖοι, τοῦ δὲ Σαδδουκαῖοι, τρίτον δέ, ὃ δὴ καὶ δοκεῖ σεμνότητα ἀσκεῖν, ̓Εσσηνοὶ καλοῦνται, ̓Ιουδαῖοι μὲν γένος ὄντες, φιλάλληλοι δὲ καὶ τῶν ἄλλων πλέον. 2.121 τὸν μὲν γάμον καὶ τὴν ἐξ αὐτοῦ διαδοχὴν οὐκ ἀναιροῦντες, τὰς δὲ τῶν γυναικῶν ἀσελγείας φυλαττόμενοι καὶ μηδεμίαν τηρεῖν πεπεισμένοι τὴν πρὸς ἕνα πίστιν.' "2.122 Καταφρονηταὶ δὲ πλούτου, καὶ θαυμάσιον αὐτοῖς τὸ κοινωνικόν, οὐδὲ ἔστιν εὑρεῖν κτήσει τινὰ παρ' αὐτοῖς ὑπερέχοντα: νόμος γὰρ τοὺς εἰς τὴν αἵρεσιν εἰσιόντας δημεύειν τῷ τάγματι τὴν οὐσίαν, ὥστε ἐν ἅπασιν μήτε πενίας ταπεινότητα φαίνεσθαι μήθ' ὑπεροχὴν πλούτου, τῶν δ' ἑκάστου κτημάτων ἀναμεμιγμένων μίαν ὥσπερ ἀδελφοῖς ἅπασιν οὐσίαν εἶναι." "2.123 κηλῖδα δ' ὑπολαμβάνουσι τὸ ἔλαιον, κἂν ἀλειφθῇ τις ἄκων, σμήχεται τὸ σῶμα: τὸ γὰρ αὐχμεῖν ἐν καλῷ τίθενται λευχειμονεῖν τε διαπαντός. χειροτονητοὶ δ' οἱ τῶν κοινῶν ἐπιμεληταὶ καὶ ἀδιαίρετοι πρὸς ἁπάντων εἰς τὰς χρείας ἕκαστοι." "2.124 Μία δ' οὐκ ἔστιν αὐτῶν πόλις ἀλλ' ἐν ἑκάστῃ μετοικοῦσιν πολλοί. καὶ τοῖς ἑτέρωθεν ἥκουσιν αἱρετισταῖς πάντ' ἀναπέπταται τὰ παρ' αὐτοῖς ὁμοίως ὥσπερ ἴδια, καὶ πρὸς οὓς οὐ πρότερον εἶδον εἰσίασιν ὡς συνηθεστάτους:" "2.125 διὸ καὶ ποιοῦνται τὰς ἀποδημίας οὐδὲν μὲν ὅλως ἐπικομιζόμενοι, διὰ δὲ τοὺς λῃστὰς ἔνοπλοι. κηδεμὼν δ' ἐν ἑκάστῃ πόλει τοῦ τάγματος ἐξαιρέτως τῶν ξένων ἀποδείκνυται ταμιεύων ἐσθῆτα καὶ τὰ ἐπιτήδεια." '2.126 καταστολὴ δὲ καὶ σχῆμα σώματος ὅμοιον τοῖς μετὰ φόβου παιδαγωγουμένοις παισίν. οὔτε δὲ ἐσθῆτας οὔτε ὑποδήματα ἀμείβουσι πρὶν διαρραγῆναι τὸ πρότερον παντάπασιν ἢ δαπανηθῆναι τῷ χρόνῳ.' "2.127 οὐδὲν δ' ἐν ἀλλήλοις οὔτ' ἀγοράζουσιν οὔτε πωλοῦσιν, ἀλλὰ τῷ χρῄζοντι διδοὺς ἕκαστος τὰ παρ' αὐτῷ τὸ παρ' ἐκείνου χρήσιμον ἀντικομίζεται: καὶ χωρὶς δὲ τῆς ἀντιδόσεως ἀκώλυτος ἡ μετάληψις αὐτοῖς παρ' ὧν ἂν θέλωσιν." '2.128 Πρός γε μὴν τὸ θεῖον εὐσεβεῖς ἰδίως: πρὶν γὰρ ἀνασχεῖν τὸν ἥλιον οὐδὲν φθέγγονται τῶν βεβήλων, πατρίους δέ τινας εἰς αὐτὸν εὐχὰς ὥσπερ ἱκετεύοντες ἀνατεῖλαι. 2.129 καὶ μετὰ ταῦτα πρὸς ἃς ἕκαστοι τέχνας ἴσασιν ὑπὸ τῶν ἐπιμελητῶν διαφίενται, καὶ μέχρι πέμπτης ὥρας ἐργασάμενοι συντόνως πάλιν εἰς ἓν συναθροίζονται χωρίον, ζωσάμενοί τε σκεπάσμασιν λινοῖς οὕτως ἀπολούονται τὸ σῶμα ψυχροῖς ὕδασιν, καὶ μετὰ ταύτην τὴν ἁγνείαν εἰς ἴδιον οἴκημα συνίασιν, ἔνθα μηδενὶ τῶν ἑτεροδόξων ἐπιτέτραπται παρελθεῖν: αὐτοί τε καθαροὶ καθάπερ εἰς ἅγιόν τι τέμενος παραγίνονται τὸ δειπνητήριον.' "
2.131 προκατεύχεται δ' ὁ ἱερεὺς τῆς τροφῆς, καὶ γεύσασθαί τινα πρὶν τῆς εὐχῆς ἀθέμιτον: ἀριστοποιησάμενος δ' ἐπεύχεται πάλιν: ἀρχόμενοί τε καὶ παυόμενοι γεραίρουσι θεὸν ὡς χορηγὸν τῆς ζωῆς. ἔπειθ' ὡς ἱερὰς καταθέμενοι τὰς ἐσθῆτας πάλιν ἐπ' ἔργα μέχρι δείλης τρέπονται." "2.132 δειπνοῦσι δ' ὁμοίως ὑποστρέψαντες συγκαθεζομένων τῶν ξένων, εἰ τύχοιεν αὐτοῖς παρόντες. οὔτε δὲ κραυγή ποτε τὸν οἶκον οὔτε θόρυβος μιαίνει, τὰς δὲ λαλιὰς ἐν τάξει παραχωροῦσιν ἀλλήλοις." "2.133 καὶ τοῖς ἔξωθεν ὡς μυστήριόν τι φρικτὸν ἡ τῶν ἔνδον σιωπὴ καταφαίνεται, τούτου δ' αἴτιον ἡ διηνεκὴς νῆψις καὶ τὸ μετρεῖσθαι παρ' αὐτοῖς τροφὴν καὶ ποτὸν μέχρι κόρου." "2.134 Τῶν μὲν οὖν ἄλλων οὐκ ἔστιν ὅ τι μὴ τῶν ἐπιμελητῶν προσταξάντων ἐνεργοῦσι, δύο δὲ ταῦτα παρ' αὐτοῖς αὐτεξούσια, ἐπικουρία καὶ ἔλεος: βοηθεῖν τε γὰρ τοῖς ἀξίοις, ὁπόταν δέωνται, καὶ καθ' ἑαυτοὺς ἐφίεται καὶ τροφὰς ἀπορουμένοις ὀρέγειν. τὰς δὲ εἰς τοὺς συγγενεῖς μεταδόσεις οὐκ ἔξεστι ποιεῖσθαι δίχα τῶν ἐπιτρόπων." "2.135 ὀργῆς ταμίαι δίκαιοι, θυμοῦ καθεκτικοί, πίστεως προστάται, εἰρήνης ὑπουργοί. καὶ πᾶν μὲν τὸ ῥηθὲν ὑπ' αὐτῶν ἰσχυρότερον ὅρκου, τὸ δὲ ὀμνύειν αὐτοῖς περιίσταται χεῖρον τῆς ἐπιορκίας ὑπολαμβάνοντες: ἤδη γὰρ κατεγνῶσθαί φασιν τὸν ἀπιστούμενον δίχα θεοῦ." "2.136 σπουδάζουσι δ' ἐκτόπως περὶ τὰ τῶν παλαιῶν συντάγματα μάλιστα τὰ πρὸς ὠφέλειαν ψυχῆς καὶ σώματος ἐκλέγοντες: ἔνθεν αὐτοῖς πρὸς θεραπείαν παθῶν ῥίζαι τε ἀλεξητήριον καὶ λίθων ἰδιότητες ἀνερευνῶνται." "2.137 Τοῖς δὲ ζηλοῦσιν τὴν αἵρεσιν αὐτῶν οὐκ εὐθὺς ἡ πάροδος, ἀλλ' ἐπὶ ἐνιαυτὸν ἔξω μένοντι τὴν αὐτὴν ὑποτίθενται δίαιταν ἀξινάριόν τε καὶ τὸ προειρημένον περίζωμα καὶ λευκὴν ἐσθῆτα δόντες." '2.138 ἐπειδὰν δὲ τούτῳ τῷ χρόνῳ πεῖραν ἐγκρατείας δῷ, πρόσεισιν μὲν ἔγγιον τῇ διαίτῃ καὶ καθαρωτέρων τῶν πρὸς ἁγνείαν ὑδάτων μεταλαμβάνει, παραλαμβάνεται δὲ εἰς τὰς συμβιώσεις οὐδέπω. μετὰ γὰρ τὴν τῆς καρτερίας ἐπίδειξιν δυσὶν ἄλλοις ἔτεσιν τὸ ἦθος δοκιμάζεται καὶ φανεὶς ἄξιος οὕτως εἰς τὸν ὅμιλον ἐγκρίνεται.' "2.139 πρὶν δὲ τῆς κοινῆς ἅψασθαι τροφῆς ὅρκους αὐτοῖς ὄμνυσι φρικώδεις, πρῶτον μὲν εὐσεβήσειν τὸ θεῖον, ἔπειτα τὰ πρὸς ἀνθρώπους δίκαια φυλάξειν καὶ μήτε κατὰ γνώμην βλάψειν τινὰ μήτε ἐξ ἐπιτάγματος, μισήσειν δ' ἀεὶ τοὺς ἀδίκους καὶ συναγωνιεῖσθαι τοῖς δικαίοις:" "
2.141 τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἀγαπᾶν ἀεὶ καὶ τοὺς ψευδομένους προβάλλεσθαι: χεῖρας κλοπῆς καὶ ψυχὴν ἀνοσίου κέρδους καθαρὰν φυλάξειν καὶ μήτε κρύψειν τι τοὺς αἱρετιστὰς μήθ' ἑτέροις αὐτῶν τι μηνύσειν, κἂν μέχρι θανάτου τις βιάζηται." '2.142 πρὸς τούτοις ὄμνυσιν μηδενὶ μὲν μεταδοῦναι τῶν δογμάτων ἑτέρως ἢ ὡς αὐτὸς μετέλαβεν, ἀφέξεσθαι δὲ λῃστείας καὶ συντηρήσειν ὁμοίως τά τε τῆς αἱρέσεως αὐτῶν βιβλία καὶ τὰ τῶν ἀγγέλων ὀνόματα. τοιούτοις μὲν ὅρκοις τοὺς προσιόντας ἐξασφαλίζονται.' "2.143 Τοὺς δ' ἐπ' ἀξιοχρέοις ἁμαρτήμασιν ἁλόντας ἐκβάλλουσι τοῦ τάγματος. ὁ δ' ἐκκριθεὶς οἰκτίστῳ πολλάκις μόρῳ διαφθείρεται: τοῖς γὰρ ὅρκοις καὶ τοῖς ἔθεσιν ἐνδεδεμένος οὐδὲ τῆς παρὰ τοῖς ἄλλοις τροφῆς δύναται μεταλαμβάνειν, ποηφαγῶν δὲ καὶ λιμῷ τὸ σῶμα τηκόμενος διαφθείρεται." '2.144 διὸ δὴ πολλοὺς ἐλεήσαντες ἐν ταῖς ἐσχάταις ἀναπνοαῖς ἀνέλαβον, ἱκανὴν ἐπὶ τοῖς ἁμαρτήμασιν αὐτῶν τὴν μέχρι θανάτου βάσανον ἡγούμενοι.' "2.145 Περὶ δὲ τὰς κρίσεις ἀκριβέστατοι καὶ δίκαιοι, καὶ δικάζουσι μὲν οὐκ ἐλάττους τῶν ἑκατὸν συνελθόντες, τὸ δ' ὁρισθὲν ὑπ' αὐτῶν ἀκίνητον. σέβας δὲ μέγα παρ' αὐτοῖς μετὰ τὸν θεὸν τοὔνομα τοῦ νομοθέτου, κἂν βλασφημήσῃ τις εἰς τοῦτον κολάζεται θανάτῳ." '2.146 τοῖς δὲ πρεσβυτέροις ὑπακούουσιν καὶ τοῖς πλείοσιν ἐν καλῷ: δέκα γοῦν συγκαθεζομένων οὐκ ἂν λαλήσειέν τις ἀκόντων τῶν ἐννέα.' "2.147 καὶ τὸ πτύσαι δὲ εἰς μέσους ἢ τὸ δεξιὸν μέρος φυλάσσονται καὶ ταῖς ἑβδομάσιν ἔργων ἐφάπτεσθαι διαφορώτατα ̓Ιουδαίων ἁπάντων: οὐ μόνον γὰρ τροφὰς ἑαυτοῖς πρὸ μιᾶς ἡμέρας παρασκευάζουσιν, ὡς μὴ πῦρ ἐναύοιεν ἐκείνην τὴν ἡμέραν, ἀλλ' οὐδὲ σκεῦός τι μετακινῆσαι θαρροῦσιν οὐδὲ ἀποπατεῖν." "2.148 ταῖς δ' ἄλλαις ἡμέραις βόθρον ὀρύσσοντες βάθος ποδιαῖον τῇ σκαλίδι, τοιοῦτον γάρ ἐστιν τὸ διδόμενον ὑπ' αὐτῶν ἀξινίδιον τοῖς νεοσυστάτοις, καὶ περικαλύψαντες θοιμάτιον, ὡς μὴ τὰς αὐγὰς ὑβρίζοιεν τοῦ θεοῦ, θακεύουσιν εἰς αὐτόν." "2.149 ἔπειτα τὴν ἀνορυχθεῖσαν γῆν ἐφέλκουσιν εἰς τὸν βόθρον: καὶ τοῦτο ποιοῦσι τοὺς ἐρημοτέρους τόπους ἐκλεγόμενοι. καίπερ δὴ φυσικῆς οὔσης τῆς τῶν λυμάτων ἐκκρίσεως ἀπολούεσθαι μετ' αὐτὴν καθάπερ μεμιασμένοις ἔθιμον." "
2.151 καὶ μακρόβιοι μέν, ὡς τοὺς πολλοὺς ὑπὲρ ἑκατὸν παρατείνειν ἔτη, διὰ τὴν ἁπλότητα τῆς διαίτης ἔμοιγε δοκεῖν καὶ τὴν εὐταξίαν, καταφρονηταὶ δὲ τῶν δεινῶν, καὶ τὰς μὲν ἀλγηδόνας νικῶντες τοῖς φρονήμασιν, τὸν δὲ θάνατον, εἰ μετ' εὐκλείας πρόσεισι, νομίζοντες ἀθανασίας ἀμείνονα." "2.152 διήλεγξεν δὲ αὐτῶν ἐν ἅπασιν τὰς ψυχὰς ὁ πρὸς ̔Ρωμαίους πόλεμος, ἐν ᾧ στρεβλούμενοί τε καὶ λυγιζόμενοι καιόμενοί τε καὶ κλώμενοι καὶ διὰ πάντων ὁδεύοντες τῶν βασανιστηρίων ὀργάνων, ἵν' ἢ βλασφημήσωσιν τὸν νομοθέτην ἢ φάγωσίν τι τῶν ἀσυνήθων, οὐδέτερον ὑπέμειναν παθεῖν, ἀλλ' οὐδὲ κολακεῦσαί ποτε τοὺς αἰκιζομένους ἢ δακρῦσαι." '2.153 μειδιῶντες δὲ ἐν ταῖς ἀλγηδόσιν καὶ κατειρωνευόμενοι τῶν τὰς βασάνους προσφερόντων εὔθυμοι τὰς ψυχὰς ἠφίεσαν ὡς πάλιν κομιούμενοι.' "2.154 Καὶ γὰρ ἔρρωται παρ' αὐτοῖς ἥδε ἡ δόξα, φθαρτὰ μὲν εἶναι τὰ σώματα καὶ τὴν ὕλην οὐ μόνιμον αὐτῶν, τὰς δὲ ψυχὰς ἀθανάτους ἀεὶ διαμένειν, καὶ συμπλέκεσθαι μὲν ἐκ τοῦ λεπτοτάτου φοιτώσας αἰθέρος ὥσπερ εἱρκταῖς τοῖς σώμασιν ἴυγγί τινι φυσικῇ κατασπωμένας," "2.155 ἐπειδὰν δὲ ἀνεθῶσι τῶν κατὰ σάρκα δεσμῶν, οἷα δὴ μακρᾶς δουλείας ἀπηλλαγμένας τότε χαίρειν καὶ μετεώρους φέρεσθαι. καὶ ταῖς μὲν ἀγαθαῖς ὁμοδοξοῦντες παισὶν ̔Ελλήνων ἀποφαίνονται τὴν ὑπὲρ ὠκεανὸν δίαιταν ἀποκεῖσθαι καὶ χῶρον οὔτε ὄμβροις οὔτε νιφετοῖς οὔτε καύμασι βαρυνόμενον, ἀλλ' ὃν ἐξ ὠκεανοῦ πραὺ̈ς ἀεὶ ζέφυρος ἐπιπνέων ἀναψύχει: ταῖς δὲ φαύλαις ζοφώδη καὶ χειμέριον ἀφορίζονται μυχὸν γέμοντα τιμωριῶν ἀδιαλείπτων." "2.156 δοκοῦσι δέ μοι κατὰ τὴν αὐτὴν ἔννοιαν ̔́Ελληνες τοῖς τε ἀνδρείοις αὐτῶν, οὓς ἥρωας καὶ ἡμιθέους καλοῦσιν, τὰς μακάρων νήσους ἀνατεθεικέναι, ταῖς δὲ τῶν πονηρῶν ψυχαῖς καθ' ᾅδου τὸν ἀσεβῶν χῶρον, ἔνθα καὶ κολαζομένους τινὰς μυθολογοῦσιν, Σισύφους καὶ Ταντάλους ̓Ιξίονάς τε καὶ Τιτυούς, πρῶτον μὲν ἀιδίους ὑφιστάμενοι τὰς ψυχάς, ἔπειτα εἰς προτροπὴν ἀρετῆς καὶ κακίας ἀποτροπήν." '2.157 τούς τε γὰρ ἀγαθοὺς γίνεσθαι κατὰ τὸν βίον ἀμείνους ἐλπίδι τιμῆς καὶ μετὰ τὴν τελευτήν, τῶν τε κακῶν ἐμποδίζεσθαι τὰς ὁρμὰς δέει προσδοκώντων, εἰ καὶ λάθοιεν ἐν τῷ ζῆν, μετὰ τὴν διάλυσιν ἀθάνατον τιμωρίαν ὑφέξειν. 2.158 ταῦτα μὲν οὖν ̓Εσσηνοὶ περὶ ψυχῆς θεολογοῦσιν ἄφυκτον δέλεαρ τοῖς ἅπαξ γευσαμένοις τῆς σοφίας αὐτῶν καθιέντες.' "2.159 Εἰσὶν δ' ἐν αὐτοῖς οἳ καὶ τὰ μέλλοντα προγινώσκειν ὑπισχνοῦνται, βίβλοις ἱεραῖς καὶ διαφόροις ἁγνείαις καὶ προφητῶν ἀποφθέγμασιν ἐμπαιδοτριβούμενοι: σπάνιον δ' εἴ ποτε ἐν ταῖς προαγορεύσεσιν ἀστοχοῦσιν." "2.161 δοκιμάζοντες μέντοι τριετίᾳ τὰς γαμετάς, ἐπειδὰν τρὶς καθαρθῶσιν εἰς πεῖραν τοῦ δύνασθαι τίκτειν, οὕτως ἄγονται. ταῖς δ' ἐγκύμοσιν οὐχ ὁμιλοῦσιν, ἐνδεικνύμενοι τὸ μὴ δι' ἡδονὴν ἀλλὰ τέκνων χρείαν γαμεῖν. λουτρὰ δὲ ταῖς γυναιξὶν ἀμπεχομέναις ἐνδύματα, καθάπερ τοῖς ἀνδράσιν ἐν περιζώματι. τοιαῦτα μὲν ἔθη τοῦδε τοῦ τάγματος." '2.162 Δύο δὲ τῶν προτέρων Φαρισαῖοι μὲν οἱ μετὰ ἀκριβείας δοκοῦντες ἐξηγεῖσθαι τὰ νόμιμα καὶ τὴν πρώτην ἀπάγοντες αἵρεσιν εἱμαρμένῃ τε καὶ θεῷ προσάπτουσι πάντα, 2.163 καὶ τὸ μὲν πράττειν τὰ δίκαια καὶ μὴ κατὰ τὸ πλεῖστον ἐπὶ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις κεῖσθαι, βοηθεῖν δὲ εἰς ἕκαστον καὶ τὴν εἱμαρμένην: ψυχήν τε πᾶσαν μὲν ἄφθαρτον, μεταβαίνειν δὲ εἰς ἕτερον σῶμα τὴν τῶν ἀγαθῶν μόνην, τὰς δὲ τῶν φαύλων ἀιδίῳ τιμωρίᾳ κολάζεσθαι. 2.164 Σαδδουκαῖοι δέ, τὸ δεύτερον τάγμα, τὴν μὲν εἱμαρμένην παντάπασιν ἀναιροῦσιν καὶ τὸν θεὸν ἔξω τοῦ δρᾶν τι κακὸν ἢ ἐφορᾶν τίθενται:' "2.165 φασὶν δ' ἐπ' ἀνθρώπων ἐκλογῇ τό τε καλὸν καὶ τὸ κακὸν προκεῖσθαι καὶ κατὰ γνώμην ἑκάστου τούτων ἑκατέρῳ προσιέναι. ψυχῆς τε τὴν διαμονὴν καὶ τὰς καθ' ᾅδου τιμωρίας καὶ τιμὰς ἀναιροῦσιν." '2.166 καὶ Φαρισαῖοι μὲν φιλάλληλοί τε καὶ τὴν εἰς τὸ κοινὸν ὁμόνοιαν ἀσκοῦντες, Σαδδουκαίων δὲ καὶ πρὸς ἀλλήλους τὸ ἦθος ἀγριώτερον αἵ τε ἐπιμιξίαι πρὸς τοὺς ὁμοίους ἀπηνεῖς ὡς πρὸς ἀλλοτρίους. τοιαῦτα μὲν περὶ τῶν ἐν ̓Ιουδαίοις φιλοσοφούντων εἶχον εἰπεῖν.' "
7.423 ̓Ονίας Σίμωνος υἱός, εἷς τῶν ἐν ̔Ιεροσολύμοις ἀρχιερέων, φεύγων ̓Αντίοχον τὸν Συρίας βασιλέα πολεμοῦντα τοῖς ̓Ιουδαίοις ἧκεν εἰς ̓Αλεξάνδρειαν, καὶ δεξαμένου Πτολεμαίου φιλοφρόνως αὐτὸν διὰ τὴν πρὸς ̓Αντίοχον ἀπέχθειαν ἔφη σύμμαχον αὐτῷ ποιήσειν τὸ τῶν ̓Ιουδαίων ἔθνος, εἰ πεισθείη τοῖς ὑπ' αὐτοῦ λεγομένοις." " None | sup>
1.32 7. Hereupon Herod was very angry at him, and was going to fight against Macheras as his enemy; but he restrained his indignation, and marched to Antony to accuse Macheras of mal-administration. But Macheras was made sensible of his offenses, and followed after the king immediately, and earnestly begged and obtained that he would be reconciled to him.
1.32 who fled to Antiochus, and besought him to make use of them for his leaders, and to make an expedition into Judea. The king being thereto disposed beforehand, complied with them, and came upon the Jews with a great army, and took their city by force, and slew a great multitude of those that favored Ptolemy, and sent out his soldiers to plunder them without mercy. He also spoiled the temple, and put a stop to the constant practice of offering a daily sacrifice of expiation for three years and six months.
2.119 2. For there are three philosophical sects among the Jews. The followers of the first of which are the Pharisees; of the second, the Sadducees; and the third sect, which pretends to a severer discipline, are called Essenes. These last are Jews by birth, and seem to have a greater affection for one another than the other sects have. 2.121 They do not absolutely deny the fitness of marriage, and the succession of mankind thereby continued; but they guard against the lascivious behavior of women, and are persuaded that none of them preserve their fidelity to one man. 2.122 3. These men are despisers of riches, and so very communicative as raises our admiration. Nor is there anyone to be found among them who hath more than another; for it is a law among them, that those who come to them must let what they have be common to the whole order,—insomuch that among them all there is no appearance of poverty, or excess of riches, but every one’s possessions are intermingled with every other’s possessions; and so there is, as it were, one patrimony among all the brethren. 2.123 They think that oil is a defilement; and if anyone of them be anointed without his own approbation, it is wiped off his body; for they think to be sweaty is a good thing, as they do also to be clothed in white garments. They also have stewards appointed to take care of their common affairs, who every one of them have no separate business for any, but what is for the use of them all. 2.124 4. They have no one certain city, but many of them dwell in every city; and if any of their sect come from other places, what they have lies open for them, just as if it were their own; and they go in to such as they never knew before, as if they had been ever so long acquainted with them. 2.125 For which reason they carry nothing at all with them when they travel into remote parts, though still they take their weapons with them, for fear of thieves. Accordingly, there is, in every city where they live, one appointed particularly to take care of strangers, and to provide garments and other necessaries for them. 2.126 But the habit and management of their bodies is such as children use who are in fear of their masters. Nor do they allow of the change of garments, or of shoes, till they be first entirely torn to pieces or worn out by time. 2.127 Nor do they either buy or sell anything to one another; but every one of them gives what he hath to him that wanteth it, and receives from him again in lieu of it what may be convenient for himself; and although there be no requital made, they are fully allowed to take what they want of whomsoever they please. 2.128 5. And as for their piety towards God, it is very extraordinary; for before sunrising they speak not a word about profane matters, but put up certain prayers which they have received from their forefathers, as if they made a supplication for its rising. 2.129 After this every one of them are sent away by their curators, to exercise some of those arts wherein they are skilled, in which they labor with great diligence till the fifth hour. After which they assemble themselves together again into one place; and when they have clothed themselves in white veils, they then bathe their bodies in cold water. And after this purification is over, they every one meet together in an apartment of their own, into which it is not permitted to any of another sect to enter; while they go, after a pure manner, into the dining-room, as into a certain holy temple,
2.131 but a priest says grace before meat; and it is unlawful for anyone to taste of the food before grace be said. The same priest, when he hath dined, says grace again after meat; and when they begin, and when they end, they praise God, as he that bestows their food upon them; after which they lay aside their white garments, and betake themselves to their labors again till the evening; 2.132 then they return home to supper, after the same manner; and if there be any strangers there, they sit down with them. Nor is there ever any clamor or disturbance to pollute their house, but they give every one leave to speak in their turn; 2.133 which silence thus kept in their house appears to foreigners like some tremendous mystery; the cause of which is that perpetual sobriety they exercise, and the same settled measure of meat and drink that is allotted to them, and that such as is abundantly sufficient for them. 2.134 6. And truly, as for other things, they do nothing but according to the injunctions of their curators; only these two things are done among them at everyone’s own free will, which are to assist those that want it, and to show mercy; for they are permitted of their own accord to afford succor to such as deserve it, when they stand in need of it, and to bestow food on those that are in distress; but they cannot give any thing to their kindred without the curators. 2.135 They dispense their anger after a just manner, and restrain their passion. They are eminent for fidelity, and are the ministers of peace; whatsoever they say also is firmer than an oath; but swearing is avoided by them, and they esteem it worse than perjury for they say that he who cannot be believed without swearing by God is already condemned. 2.136 They also take great pains in studying the writings of the ancients, and choose out of them what is most for the advantage of their soul and body; and they inquire after such roots and medicinal stones as may cure their distempers. 2.137 7. But now, if anyone hath a mind to come over to their sect, he is not immediately admitted, but he is prescribed the same method of living which they use, for a year, while he continues excluded; and they give him also a small hatchet, and the fore-mentioned girdle, and the white garment. 2.138 And when he hath given evidence, during that time, that he can observe their continence, he approaches nearer to their way of living, and is made a partaker of the waters of purification; yet is he not even now admitted to live with them; for after this demonstration of his fortitude, his temper is tried two more years; and if he appear to be worthy, they then admit him into their society. 2.139 And before he is allowed to touch their common food, he is obliged to take tremendous oaths, that, in the first place, he will exercise piety towards God, and then that he will observe justice towards men, and that he will do no harm to any one, either of his own accord, or by the command of others; that he will always hate the wicked, and be assistant to the righteous;
2.141 that he will be perpetually a lover of truth, and propose to himself to reprove those that tell lies; that he will keep his hands clear from theft, and his soul from unlawful gains; and that he will neither conceal anything from those of his own sect, nor discover any of their doctrines to others, no, not though anyone should compel him so to do at the hazard of his life. 2.142 Moreover, he swears to communicate their doctrines to no one any otherwise than as he received them himself; that he will abstain from robbery, and will equally preserve the books belonging to their sect, and the names of the angels or messengers. These are the oaths by which they secure their proselytes to themselves. 2.143 8. But for those that are caught in any heinous sins, they cast them out of their society; and he who is thus separated from them does often die after a miserable manner; for as he is bound by the oath he hath taken, and by the customs he hath been engaged in, he is not at liberty to partake of that food that he meets with elsewhere, but is forced to eat grass, and to famish his body with hunger, till he perish; 2.144 for which reason they receive many of them again when they are at their last gasp, out of compassion to them, as thinking the miseries they have endured till they came to the very brink of death to be a sufficient punishment for the sins they had been guilty of. 2.145 9. But in the judgments they exercise they are most accurate and just, nor do they pass sentence by the votes of a court that is fewer than a hundred. And as to what is once determined by that number, it is unalterable. What they most of all honor, after God himself, is the name of their legislator Moses, whom, if anyone blaspheme, he is punished capitally. 2.146 They also think it a good thing to obey their elders, and the major part. Accordingly, if ten of them be sitting together, no one of them will speak while the other nine are against it. 2.147 They also avoid spitting in the midst of them, or on the right side. Moreover, they are stricter than any other of the Jews in resting from their labors on the seventh day; for they not only get their food ready the day before, that they may not be obliged to kindle a fire on that day, but they will not remove any vessel out of its place, nor go to stool thereon. 2.148 Nay, on theother days they dig a small pit, a foot deep, with a paddle (which kind of hatchet is given them when they are first admitted among them); and covering themselves round with their garment, that they may not affront the Divine rays of light, they ease themselves into that pit, 2.149 after which they put the earth that was dug out again into the pit; and even this they do only in the more lonely places, which they choose out for this purpose; and although this easement of the body be natural, yet it is a rule with them to wash themselves after it, as if it were a defilement to them.
2.151 They are long-lived also, insomuch that many of them live above a hundred years, by means of the simplicity of their diet; nay, as I think, by means of the regular course of life they observe also. They condemn the miseries of life, and are above pain, by the generosity of their mind. And as for death, if it will be for their glory, they esteem it better than living always; 2.152 and indeed our war with the Romans gave abundant evidence what great souls they had in their trials, wherein, although they were tortured and distorted, burnt and torn to pieces, and went through all kinds of instruments of torment, that they might be forced either to blaspheme their legislator, or to eat what was forbidden them, yet could they not be made to do either of them, no, nor once to flatter their tormentors, or to shed a tear; 2.153 but they smiled in their very pains, and laughed those to scorn who inflicted the torments upon them, and resigned up their souls with great alacrity, as expecting to receive them again. 2.154 11. For their doctrine is this: That bodies are corruptible, and that the matter they are made of is not permanent; but that the souls are immortal, and continue forever; and that they come out of the most subtile air, and are united to their bodies as to prisons, into which they are drawn by a certain natural enticement; 2.155 but that when they are set free from the bonds of the flesh, they then, as released from a long bondage, rejoice and mount upward. And this is like the opinions of the Greeks, that good souls have their habitations beyond the ocean, in a region that is neither oppressed with storms of rain or snow, or with intense heat, but that this place is such as is refreshed by the gentle breathing of a west wind, that is perpetually blowing from the ocean; while they allot to bad souls a dark and tempestuous den, full of never-ceasing punishments. 2.156 And indeed the Greeks seem to me to have followed the same notion, when they allot the islands of the blessed to their brave men, whom they call heroes and demigods; and to the souls of the wicked, the region of the ungodly, in Hades, where their fables relate that certain persons, such as Sisyphus, and Tantalus, and Ixion, and Tityus, are punished; which is built on this first supposition, that souls are immortal; and thence are those exhortations to virtue, and dehortations from wickedness collected; 2.157 whereby good men are bettered in the conduct of their life by the hope they have of reward after their death; and whereby the vehement inclinations of bad men to vice are restrained, by the fear and expectation they are in, that although they should lie concealed in this life, they should suffer immortal punishment after their death. 2.158 These are the Divine doctrines of the Essenes about the soul, which lay an unavoidable bait for such as have once had a taste of their philosophy. 2.159 12. There are also those among them who undertake to foretell things to come, by reading the holy books, and using several sorts of purifications, and being perpetually conversant in the discourses of the prophets; and it is but seldom that they miss in their predictions. 2.161 However, they try their spouses for three years; and if they find that they have their natural purgations thrice, as trials that they are likely to be fruitful, they then actually marry them. But they do not use to accompany with their wives when they are with child, as a demonstration that they do not marry out of regard to pleasure, but for the sake of posterity. Now the women go into the baths with some of their garments on, as the men do with somewhat girded about them. And these are the customs of this order of Essenes. 2.162 14. But then as to the two other orders at first mentioned: the Pharisees are those who are esteemed most skillful in the exact explication of their laws, and introduce the first sect. These ascribe all to fate or providence, and to God, 2.163 and yet allow, that to act what is right, or the contrary, is principally in the power of men, although fate does cooperate in every action. They say that all souls are incorruptible, but that the souls of good men only are removed into other bodies,—but that the souls of bad men are subject to eternal punishment. 2.164 But the Sadducees are those that compose the second order, and take away fate entirely, and suppose that God is not concerned in our doing or not doing what is evil; 2.165 and they say, that to act what is good, or what is evil, is at men’s own choice, and that the one or the other belongs so to every one, that they may act as they please. They also take away the belief of the immortal duration of the soul, and the punishments and rewards in Hades. 2.166 Moreover, the Pharisees are friendly to one another, and are for the exercise of concord, and regard for the public; but the behavior of the Sadducees one towards another is in some degree wild, and their conversation with those that are of their own party is as barbarous as if they were strangers to them. And this is what I had to say concerning the philosophic sects among the Jews.
7.423 Onias, the son of Simon, one of the Jewish high priests, fled from Antiochus the king of Syria, when he made war with the Jews, and came to Alexandria; and as Ptolemy received him very kindly, on account of his hatred to Antiochus, he assured him, that if he would comply with his proposal, he would bring all the Jews to his assistance;' ' None |
|
36. Josephus Flavius, Against Apion, 1.29-1.31, 1.41-1.42, 1.54, 2.164-2.165, 2.175-2.178, 2.184-2.188, 2.193-2.195 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • System, halakhic ~ • Tannaic halakha • prophecy, halakhic model of
Found in books: DeJong (2022), A Prophet like Moses (Deut 18:15, 18): The Origin, History, and Influence of the Mosaic Prophetic Succession, 223; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 24, 216, 217, 296, 341; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 43, 57, 63, 64
sup>
1.29 ἐπειδὴ συγχωροῦσιν ἅπαντες, ἐάσειν μοι δοκῶ. περὶ δὲ τῶν ἡμετέρων προγόνων ὅτι τὴν αὐτήν, ἐῶ γὰρ λέγειν εἰ καὶ πλείω τῶν εἰρημένων ἐποιήσαντο περὶ τὰς ἀναγραφὰς ἐπιμέλειαν τοῖς ἀρχιερεῦσι καὶ τοῖς προφήταις τοῦτο προστάξαντες, καὶ ὡς μέχρι τῶν καθ' ἡμᾶς χρόνων πεφύλακται μετὰ πολλῆς ἀκριβείας, εἰ δὲ δεῖ θρασύτερον εἰπεῖν καὶ φυλαχθήσεται, πειράσομαι συντόμως διδάσκειν." "
1.29 ἐπιλέξαντα δὲ τῶν ἐπισινῶν μυριάδας εἰκοσιπέντε ἐκβαλεῖν. ἡγεῖσθαι δ' αὐτῶν γραμματέας Μωσῆν τε καὶ ̓Ιώσηπον καὶ τοῦτον ἱερογραμματέα, Αἰγύπτια δ' αὐτοῖς ὀνόματα εἶναι τῷ" '1.31 θεῶν τε ναοὺς καὶ βωμούς, οἷς ἂν περιτύχωσιν, ἀνατρέπειν. συναινεσάντων δὲ τῶν ἄλλων τὰ δοχθέντα ποιοῦντας διὰ τῆς ἐρήμου πορεύεσθαι, ἱκανῶς δὲ ὀχληθέντας ἐλθεῖν εἰς τὴν οἰκουμένην χώραν καὶ τούς τε ἀνθρώπους ὑβρίζοντας καὶ τὰ ἱερὰ συλῶντας καὶ ἐμπρήσαντας ἐλθεῖν εἰς τὴν νῦν ̓Ιουδαίαν προσαγορευομένην, κτίσαντας' "1.31 τῶν ἱερέων ἄμικτον καὶ καθαρὸν διαμενεῖ προυνόησαν. δεῖ γὰρ τὸν μετέχοντα τῆς ἱερωσύνης ἐξ ὁμοεθνοῦς γυναικὸς παιδοποιεῖσθαι καὶ μὴ πρὸς χρήματα μηδὲ τὰς ἄλλας ἀποβλέπειν τιμὰς, ἀλλὰ τὸ γένος ἐξετάζειν ἐκ τῶν ἀρχαίων λαμβάνοντα τὴν διαδοχὴν
1.41 ἀπὸ δὲ ̓Αρταξέρξου μέχρι τοῦ καθ' ἡμᾶς χρόνου γέγραπται μὲν ἕκαστα, πίστεως δ' οὐχ ὁμοίας ἠξίωται τοῖς πρὸ αὐτῶν διὰ τὸ μὴ γενέσθαι τὴν τῶν προφητῶν ἀκριβῆ διαδοχήν." "1.42 δῆλον δ' ἐστὶν ἔργῳ, πῶς ἡμεῖς πρόσιμεν τοῖς ἰδίοις γράμμασι: τοσούτου γὰρ αἰῶνος ἤδη παρῳχηκότος οὔτε προσθεῖναί τις οὐδὲν οὔτε ἀφελεῖν αὐτῶν οὔτε μεταθεῖναι τετόλμηκεν, πᾶσι δὲ σύμφυτόν ἐστιν εὐθὺς ἐκ πρώτης γενέσεως ̓Ιουδαίοις τὸ νομίζειν αὐτὰ θεοῦ δόγματα καὶ τούτοις ἐμμένειν καὶ ὑπὲρ αὐτῶν, εἰ δέοι, θνήσκειν ἡδέως." 1.54 τοῖς γεγονόσιν ἢ παρὰ τῶν εἰδότων πυνθανόμενον. ὅπερ ἐγὼ μάλιστα περὶ ἀμφοτέρας νομίζω πεποιηκέναι τὰς πραγματείας: τὴν μὲν γὰρ ἀρχαιολογίαν, ὥσπερ ἔφην, ἐκ τῶν ἱερῶν γραμμάτων μεθερμήνευκα γεγονὼς ἱερεὺς ἐκ γένους καὶ μετεσχηκὼς τῆς φιλοσοφίας
2.164 οὐκοῦν ἄπειροι μὲν αἱ κατὰ μέρος τῶν ἐθῶν καὶ τῶν νόμων παρὰ τοῖς ἅπασιν ἀνθρώποις διαφοραί, * κεφαλαιωδῶς ἂν ἐπίοι τις: οἱ μὲν γὰρ μοναρχίαις, οἱ δὲ ταῖς ὀλίγων δυναστείαις, ἄλλοι δὲ' "2.165 τοῖς πλήθεσιν ἐπέτρεψαν τὴν ἐξουσίαν τῶν πολιτευμάτων. ὁ δ' ἡμέτερος νομοθέτης εἰς μὲν τούτων οὐδοτιοῦν ἀπεῖδεν, ὡς δ' ἄν τις εἴποι βιασάμενος τὸν λόγον θεοκρατίαν ἀπέδειξε τὸ πολίτευμα" "
2.175 οὐδὲ γὰρ τὴν ἀπὸ τῆς ἀγνοίας ὑποτίμησιν κατέλιπεν, ἀλλὰ καὶ κάλλιστον καὶ ἀναγκαιότατον ἀπέδειξε παίδευμα τὸν νόμον, οὐκ εἰσάπαξ ἀκροασομένοις οὐδὲ δὶς ἢ πολλάκις, ἀλλ' ἑκάστης ἑβδομάδος τῶν ἄλλων ἔργων ἀφεμένους ἐπὶ τὴν ἀκρόασιν ἐκέλευσε τοῦ νόμου συλλέγεσθαι καὶ τοῦτον ἀκριβῶς ἐκμανθάνειν: ὃ δὴ πάντες ἐοίκασιν οἱ νομοθέται παραλιπεῖν." "2.176 Καὶ τοσοῦτον οἱ πλεῖστοι τῶν ἀνθρώπων ἀπέχουσι τοῦ κατὰ τοὺς οἰκείους νόμους ζῆν, ὥστε σχεδὸν αὐτοὺς οὐδ' ἴσασιν, ἀλλ' ὅταν ἐξαμάρτωσιν, τότε παρ' ἄλλων μανθάνουσιν, ὅτι τὸν" "2.177 νόμον παραβεβήκασιν, οἵ τε τὰς μεγίστας καὶ κυριωτάτας παρ' αὐτοῖς ἀρχὰς διοικοῦντες ὁμολογοῦσι τὴν ἄγνοιαν: ἐπιστάτας γὰρ παρακαθίστανται τῆς τῶν πραγμάτων οἰκονομίας τοὺς ἐμπειρίαν ἔχειν τῶν νόμων ὑπισχνουμένους." "2.178 ἡμῶν δὲ ὁντινοῦν τις ἔροιτο τοὺς νόμους ῥᾷον ἂν εἴποι πάντας ἢ τοὔνομα τὸ ἑαυτοῦ. τοιγαροῦν ἀπὸ τῆς πρώτης εὐθὺς αἰσθήσεως αὐτοὺς ἐκμανθάνοντες ἔχομεν ἐν ταῖς ψυχαῖς ὥσπερ ἐγκεχαραγμένους, καὶ σπάνιος μὲν ὁ παραβαίνων, ἀδύνατος δ' ἡ τῆς κολάσεως παραίτησις." "
2.184 ̔Ημῖν δὲ τοῖς πεισθεῖσιν ἐξ ἀρχῆς τεθῆναι τὸν νόμον κατὰ θεοῦ βούλησιν οὐδ' εὐσεβὲς ἦν τοῦτον μὴ φυλάττειν: τί γὰρ αὐτοῦ τις ἂν μετακινήσειεν ἢ τί κάλλιον ἐξεῦρεν ἢ τί παρ' ἑτέρων ὡς ἄμεινον μετήνεγκεν; ἆρά γε τὴν ὅλην κατάστασιν τοῦ πολιτεύματος;" '2.185 καὶ τίς ἂν καλλίων ἢ δικαιοτέρα γένοιτο τῆς θεὸν μὲν ἡγεμόνα τῶν ὅλων πεποιημένης, τοῖς ἱερεῦσι δὲ κοινῇ μὲν τὰ μέγιστα διοικεῖν ἐπιτρεπούσης, τῷ δὲ πάντων ἀρχιερεῖ πάλιν αὖ πεπιστευκυίας' "2.186 τὴν τῶν ἄλλων ἱερέων ἡγεμονίαν; οὓς οὐ κατὰ πλοῦτον οὐδέ τισιν ἄλλαις προύχοντας αὐτομάτοις πλεονεξίαις τὸ πρῶτον εὐθὺς ὁ νομοθέτης ἐπὶ τὴν τιμὴν ἔταξεν, ἀλλ' ὅσοι τῶν μετ' αὐτοῦ πειθοῖ τε καὶ σωφροσύνῃ τῶν ἄλλων διέφερον, τούτοις τὴν περὶ τὸν" "2.187 θεὸν μάλιστα θεραπείαν ἐνεχείρισεν. τοῦτο δ' ἦν καὶ τοῦ νόμου καὶ τῶν ἄλλων ἐπιτηδευμάτων ἀκριβὴς ἐπιμέλεια: καὶ γὰρ ἐπόπται πάντων καὶ δικασταὶ τῶν ἀμφισβητουμένων καὶ κολασταὶ τῶν κατεγνωσμένων οἱ ἱερεῖς ἐτάχθησαν." '2.188 Τίς ἂν οὖν ἀρχὴ γένοιτο ταύτης ὁσιωτέρα; τίς δὲ τιμὴ θεῷ μᾶλλον ἁρμόζουσα, παντὸς μὲν τοῦ πλήθους κατεσκευασμένου πρὸς τὴν εὐσέβειαν, ἐξαίρετον δὲ τὴν ἐπιμέλειαν τῶν ἱερέων πεπιστευμένων, ὥσπερ δὲ τελετῆς τινος τῆς ὅλης πολιτείας οἰκονομουμένης;
2.193 Εἷς ναὸς ἑνὸς θεοῦ, φίλον γὰρ ἀεὶ παντὶ τὸ ὅμοιον, κοινὸς ἁπάντων κοινοῦ θεοῦ ἁπάντων. τοῦτον θεραπεύσουσιν μὲν διὰ παντὸς οἱ ἱερεῖς, ἡγήσεται δὲ τούτων ὁ πρῶτος ἀεὶ κατὰ γένος. 2.194 οὗτος μετὰ τῶν συνιερέων θύσει τῷ θεῷ, φυλάξει τοὺς νόμους, δικάσει περὶ τῶν ἀμφισβητουμένων, κολάσει τοὺς ἐλεγχθέντας. ὁ τούτῳ μὴ πειθόμενος ὑφέξει δίκην ὡς εἰς θεὸν αὐτὸν ἀσεβῶν.' "2.195 θύομεν τὰς θυσίας οὐκ εἰς μέθην ἑαυτοῖς, ἀβούλητον γὰρ θεῷ τόδε, ἀλλ' εἰς σωφροσύνην." " None | sup>
1.29 That Amenophis accordingly chose out two hundred and fifty thousand of those that were thus diseased, and cast them out of the country: that Moses and Joseph were scribes, and Joseph was a sacred scribe; that their names were Egyptian originally; that of Moses had been Tisithen, and that of Joseph, Peteseph:
1.29 but now, as to our forefathers, that they took no less care about writing such records (for I will not say they took greater care than the others I spoke of), and that they committed that matter to their high priests and to their prophets, and that these records have been written all along down to our own times with the utmost accuracy; nay, if it be not too bold for me to say it, our history will be so written hereafter;—I shall endeavor briefly to inform you. 1.31 for he who is partaker of the priesthood must propagate of a wife of the same nation, without having any regard to money, or any other dignities; but he is to make a scrutiny, and take his wife’s genealogy from the ancient tables, and procure many witnesses to it; 1.31 that the rest commended what he had said with one consent, and did what they had resolved on, and so travelled over the desert. But that the difficulties of the journey being over, they came to a country inhabited, and that there they abused the men, and plundered and burnt their temples, and then came into that land which is called Judea, and there they built a city, and dwelt therein,
1.41 It is true, our history hath been written since Artaxerxes very particularly, but hath not been esteemed of the like authority with the former by our forefathers, because there hath not been an exact succession of prophets since that time; 1.42 and how firmly we have given credit to those books of our own nation, is evident by what we do; for during so many ages as have already passed, no one has been so bold as either to add any thing to them, to take any thing from them, or to make any change in them; but it becomes natural to all Jews, immediately and from their very birth, to esteem those books to contain divine doctrines, and to persist in them, and, if occasion be, willingly to die for them.
1.54 Now, both these methods of knowledge I may very properly pretend to in the composition of both my works; for, as I said, I have translated the Antiquities out of our sacred books; which I easily could do, since I was a priest by my birth, and have studied that philosophy which is contained in those writings;
2.164 Now there are innumerable differences in the particular customs and laws that are among all mankind, which a man may briefly reduce under the following heads:—Some legislators have permitted their governments to be under monarchies, others put them under oligarchies, and others under a republican form; 2.165 but our legislator had no regard to any of these forms, but he ordained our government to be what, by a strained expression, may be termed a Theocracy, by ascribing the authority and the power to God,
2.175 for he did not suffer the guilt of ignorance to go on without punishment, but demonstrated the law to be the best and the most necessary instruction of all others, permitting the people to leave off their other employments, and to assemble together for the hearing of the law, and learning it exactly, and this not once or twice, or oftener, but every week; which thing all the other legislators seem to have neglected. 2.176 19. And indeed, the greatest part of mankind are so far from living according to their own laws, that they hardly know them; but when they have sinned they learn from others that they have transgressed the law. 2.177 Those also who are in the highest and principal posts of the government, confess they are not acquainted with those laws, and are obliged to take such persons for their assessors in public administrations as profess to have skill in those laws; 2.178 but for our people, if any body do but ask any one of them about our laws, he will more readily tell them all than he will tell his own name, and this in consequence of our having learned them immediately as soon as ever we became sensible of any thing, and of our having them, as it were engraven on our souls. Our transgressors of them are but few; and it is impossible, when any do offend, to escape punishment.
2.184 22. But while we are ourselves persuaded that our law was made agreeably to the will of God, it would be impious for us not to observe the same, for what is there in it that any body would change! and what can be invented that is better! or what can we take out of other people’s laws that will exceed it? Perhaps some would have the entire settlement of our government altered. 2.185 And where shall we find a better or more righteous constitution than ours, while this makes us esteem God to be the governor of the universe, and permits the priests in general to be the administrators of the principal affairs, and withal intrusts the government over the other priests to the chief high priest himself! 2.186 which priests our legislator, at their first appointment, did not advance to that dignity for their riches, or any abundance of other possessions, or any plenty they had as the gifts of fortune; but he intrusted the principal management of divine worship to those that exceeded others in an ability to persuade men, and in prudence of conduct. 2.187 These men had the main care of the law and of the other parts of the people’s conduct committed to them; for they were the priests who were ordained to be the inspectors of all, and the judges in doubtful cases, and the punishers of those that were condemned to suffer punishment. 2.188 23. What form of government then can be more holy than this! what more worthy kind of worship can be paid to God than we pay, where the entire body of the people are prepared for religion, where an extraordinary degree of care is required in the priests, and where the whole polity is so ordered as if it were a certain religious solemnity!
2.193 24. There ought also to be but one temple for one God; for likeness is the constant foundation of agreement. This temple ought to be common to all men, because he is the common God of all men. His priests are to be continually about his worship, over whom he that is the first by his birth is to be their ruler perpetually. 2.194 His business must be to offer sacrifices to God, together with those priests that are joined with him, to see that the laws be observed, to determine controversies, and to punish those that are convicted of injustice; while he that does not submit to him shall be subject to the same punishment, as if he had been guilty of impiety towards God himself. 2.195 When we offer sacrifices to him we do it not in order to surfeit ourselves, or to be drunken; for such excesses are against the will of God, and would be an occasion of injuries and of luxury: but by keeping ourselves sober, orderly, and ready for our other occupations, and being more temperate than others. ' ' None |
|
37. Mishnah, Avodah Zarah, 1.1, 1.7, 2.1, 3.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic midrash compilations, halakhic material in • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Qumran halakha • Rabbinic Halakhah • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • aggada and halakha, address same social and cultural tensions • aggada and halakha, aggada suggests alternative halakha • halakha, study of
Found in books: Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 63, 130, 143, 161, 162, 190, 191; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 358; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 561, 599, 600; Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 478; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 284, 633
sup>
1.1 לִפְנֵי אֵידֵיהֶן שֶׁל גּוֹיִם שְׁלשָׁה יָמִים אָסוּר לָשֵׂאת וְלָתֵת עִמָּהֶן, לְהַשְׁאִילָן וְלִשְׁאֹל מֵהֶן, לְהַלְוֹתָן וְלִלְוֹת מֵהֶן, לְפָרְעָן וְלִפָּרַע מֵהֶן. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, נִפְרָעִין מֵהֶן מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מֵצֵר לוֹ. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמֵּצֵר הוּא עַכְשָׁיו, שָׂמֵחַ הוּא לְאַחַר זְמָן:
2.1 אֵין מַעֲמִידִין בְּהֵמָה בְּפֻנְדְּקָאוֹת שֶׁל גּוֹיִם, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁחֲשׁוּדִין עַל הָרְבִיעָה. וְלֹא תִתְיַחֵד אִשָּׁה עִמָּהֶן, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁחֲשׁוּדִין עַל הָעֲרָיוֹת. וְלֹא יִתְיַחֵד אָדָם עִמָּהֶן, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁחֲשׁוּדִין עַל שְׁפִיכַת דָּמִים. בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא תְיַלֵּד אֶת הַנָּכְרִית, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמְּיַלֶּדֶת בֵּן לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. אֲבָל נָכְרִית מְיַלֶּדֶת בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל. בַּת יִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא תָנִיק בְּנָהּ שֶׁל נָכְרִית, אֲבָל נָכְרִית מְנִיקָה בְנָהּ שֶׁל יִשְׂרְאֵלִית בִּרְשׁוּתָהּ:
3.4 שָׁאַל פְּרוֹקְלוֹס בֶּן פִלוֹסְפוֹס אֶת רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל בְּעַכּוֹ, שֶׁהָיָה רוֹחֵץ בַּמֶּרְחָץ שֶׁל אַפְרוֹדִיטִי, אָמַר לוֹ, כָּתוּב בְּתוֹרַתְכֶם, וְלֹא יִדְבַּק בְּיָדְךָ מְאוּמָה מִן הַחֵרֶם. מִפְּנֵי מָה אַתָּה רוֹחֵץ בַּמֶּרְחָץ שֶׁל אַפְרוֹדִיטִי. אָמַר לוֹ, אֵין מְשִׁיבִין בַּמֶּרְחָץ. וּכְשֶׁיָּצָא אָמַר לוֹ, אֲנִי לֹא בָאתִי בִגְבוּלָהּ, הִיא בָאתָה בִגְבוּלִי, אֵין אוֹמְרִים, נַעֲשֶׂה מֶרְחָץ לְאַפְרוֹדִיטִי נוֹי, אֶלָּא אוֹמְרִים, נַעֲשֶׂה אַפְרוֹדִיטִי נוֹי לַמֶּרְחָץ. דָּבָר אַחֵר, אִם נוֹתְנִין לְךָ מָמוֹן הַרְבֵּה, אִי אַתָּה נִכְנָס לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה שֶׁלְּךָ עָרוֹם וּבַעַל קֶרִי וּמַשְׁתִּין בְּפָנֶיהָ, וְזוֹ עוֹמֶדֶת עַל פִּי הַבִּיב וְכָל הָעָם מַשְׁתִּינִין לְפָנֶיהָ. לֹא נֶאֱמַר אֶלָּא אֱלֹהֵיהֶם. אֶת שֶׁנּוֹהֵג בּוֹ מִשּׁוּם אֱלוֹהַּ, אָסוּר. וְאֶת שֶׁאֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג בּוֹ מִשּׁוּם אֱלוֹהַּ, מֻתָּר:' ' None | sup>
1.1 On the three days preceding the festivals of idolaters, it is forbidden to conduct business with them, to lend articles to them or borrow from them, to lend or borrow any money from them, to repay a debt, or receive repayment from them. Rabbi Judah says: we should receive repayment from them, as this can only depress them; But they the Rabbis said to him: even though it is depressing at the time, they are glad of it subsequently.
2.1 One should not place animals in inns of non-Jews, because they are suspected of bestiality. A woman should not be alone with them, because they are suspected of licentiousness; Nor should a man be alone with them, because they are suspected of shedding blood. A Jewish woman should not act as midwife to a non-Jewish woman, because she would be delivering a child for idolatry. But a non-Jewish woman may act as midwife to a Jewish woman. A Jewish woman should not suckle the child of a non-Jewish woman, But a non-Jewish woman may suckle the child of a Jewish woman in her premises.
3.4 Proclos, son of a plosphos, asked Rabban Gamaliel in Acco when the latter was bathing in the bathhouse of aphrodite. He said to him, “It is written in your torah, ‘let nothing that has been proscribed stick to your hand (Deuteronomy 13:18)’; why are you bathing in the bathhouse of Aphrodite?” He replied to him, “We do not answer questions relating to torah in a bathhouse.” When he came out, he said to him, “I did not come into her domain, she has come into mine. People do not say, ‘the bath was made as an adornment for Aphrodite’; rather they say, ‘Aphrodite was made as an adornment for the bath.’ Another reason is, even if you were given a large sum of money, you would not enter the presence of your idol while you were nude or had experienced seminal emission, nor would you urinate before it. But this statue of Aphrodite stands by a sewer and all people urinate before it. In the torah it is only stated, “their gods” (Deuteronomy 12:3) what is treated as a god is prohibited, what is not treated as a deity is permitted.' ' None |
|
38. Mishnah, Avot, 1.1-1.2, 1.4, 1.6, 1.12 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • Sinai, a halakha to Moses from Sinai • System, halakhic ~ • aggada in Mishna, establishes authority of rabbis as interpreters of halakha • halakha, a halakha to Moses from Sinai • halakha, and Scripture • halakhah, Mosaic • halakhah, Second Temple period • halakhah, as element of rabbinic curriculum • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, pre-exilic
Found in books: Alexander (2013), Gender and Timebound Commandments in Judaism. 203; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 214, 304; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 70, 516; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 48, 80; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 57, 138; Zawanowska and Wilk (2022), The Character of David in Judaism, Christianity and Islam: Warrior, Poet, Prophet and King, 200
sup>
1.1 משֶׁה קִבֵּל תּוֹרָה מִסִּינַי, וּמְסָרָהּ לִיהוֹשֻׁעַ, וִיהוֹשֻׁעַ לִזְקֵנִים, וּזְקֵנִים לִנְבִיאִים, וּנְבִיאִים מְסָרוּהָ לְאַנְשֵׁי כְנֶסֶת הַגְּדוֹלָה. הֵם אָמְרוּ שְׁלשָׁה דְבָרִים, הֱווּ מְתוּנִים בַּדִּין, וְהַעֲמִידוּ תַלְמִידִים הַרְבֵּה, וַעֲשׂוּ סְיָג לַתּוֹרָה:
1.1 שְׁמַעְיָה וְאַבְטַלְיוֹן קִבְּלוּ מֵהֶם. שְׁמַעְיָה אוֹמֵר, אֱהֹב אֶת הַמְּלָאכָה, וּשְׂנָא אֶת הָרַבָּנוּת, וְאַל תִּתְוַדַּע לָרָשׁוּת: 1.2 שִׁמְעוֹן הַצַּדִּיק הָיָה מִשְּׁיָרֵי כְנֶסֶת הַגְּדוֹלָה. הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר, עַל שְׁלשָׁה דְבָרִים הָעוֹלָם עוֹמֵד, עַל הַתּוֹרָה וְעַל הָעֲבוֹדָה וְעַל גְּמִילוּת חֲסָדִים:
1.4 יוֹסֵי בֶן יוֹעֶזֶר אִישׁ צְרֵדָה וְיוֹסֵי בֶן יוֹחָנָן אִישׁ יְרוּשָׁלַיִם קִבְּלוּ מֵהֶם. יוֹסֵי בֶן יוֹעֶזֶר אִישׁ צְרֵדָה אוֹמֵר, יְהִי בֵיתְךָ בֵית וַעַד לַחֲכָמִים, וֶהֱוֵי מִתְאַבֵּק בַּעֲפַר רַגְלֵיהֶם, וֶהֱוֵי שׁוֹתֶה בְצָמָא אֶת דִּבְרֵיהֶם:
1.6 יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן פְּרַחְיָה וְנִתַּאי הָאַרְבֵּלִי קִבְּלוּ מֵהֶם. יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן פְּרַחְיָה אוֹמֵר, עֲשֵׂה לְךָ רַב, וּקְנֵה לְךָ חָבֵר, וֶהֱוֵי דָן אֶת כָּל הָאָדָם לְכַף זְכוּת:
1.12 הִלֵּל וְשַׁמַּאי קִבְּלוּ מֵהֶם. הִלֵּל אוֹמֵר, הֱוֵי מִתַּלְמִידָיו שֶׁל אַהֲרֹן, אוֹהֵב שָׁלוֹם וְרוֹדֵף שָׁלוֹם, אוֹהֵב אֶת הַבְּרִיּוֹת וּמְקָרְבָן לַתּוֹרָה:'' None | sup>
1.1 Moses received the torah at Sinai and transmitted it to Joshua, Joshua to the elders, and the elders to the prophets, and the prophets to the Men of the Great Assembly. They said three things: Be patient in the administration of justice, raise many disciples and make a fence round the Torah. 1.2 Shimon the Righteous was one of the last of the men of the great assembly. He used to say: the world stands upon three things: the Torah, the Temple service, and the practice of acts of piety.
1.4 Yose ben Yoezer (a man) of Zeredah and Yose ben Yoha a man of Jerusalem received the oral tradition from them i.e. Shimon the Righteous and Antigonus. Yose ben Yoezer used to say: let thy house be a house of meeting for the Sages and sit in the very dust of their feet, and drink in their words with thirst.
1.6 Joshua ben Perahiah and Nittai the Arbelite received the oral tradition from them. Joshua ben Perahiah used to say: appoint for thyself a teacher, and acquire for thyself a companion and judge all men with the scale weighted in his favor.
1.12 Hillel and Shammai received the oral tradition from them. Hillel used to say: be of the disciples of Aaron, loving peace and pursuing peace, loving mankind and drawing them close to the Torah.'' None |
|
39. Mishnah, Berachot, 1.3, 3.4-3.5, 4.4, 5.1, 9.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Halakha, mixing • Halakhah, origins of • Peter's vision, halakhic perspectives • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Rabbinic Halakhah • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • Sabbath, halakha • System, halakhic ~ • Torah, and halakha • aggada and halakha, aggada suggests alternative halakha • aggada and halakha, aggada that transmits legal content • aggadic passages on legal biblical units, halakha derived from narrative biblical units • halakha in Diaspora • halakhah and custom • halakhah, as modality of tradition • law and legal formulae, rabbinic (halakhah)
Found in books: Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 142; Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 123; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 483, 490, 596; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 77; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 75; Reif (2006), Problems with Prayers: Studies in the Textual History of Early Rabbinic Liturgy, 75; Swartz (2018), The Mechanics of Providence: The Workings of Ancient Jewish Magic and Mysticism. 245; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 55, 115, 118, 127, 128, 426, 449
sup>
1.3 בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, בָּעֶרֶב כָּל אָדָם יַטּוּ וְיִקְרְאוּ, וּבַבֹּקֶר יַעַמְדוּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים ו) וּבְשָׁכְבְּךָ וּבְקוּמֶךָ. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, כָּל אָדָם קוֹרֵא כְדַרְכּוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם) וּבְלֶכְתְּךָ בַדֶּרֶךְ. אִם כֵּן, לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר וּבְשָׁכְבְּךָ וּבְקוּמֶךָ, בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁבְּנֵי אָדָם שׁוֹכְבִים, וּבְשָׁעָה שֶׁבְּנֵי אָדָם עוֹמְדִים. אָמַר רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן, אֲנִי הָיִיתִי בָא בַדֶּרֶךְ, וְהִטֵּתִי לִקְרוֹת, כְּדִבְרֵי בֵית שַׁמַּאי, וְסִכַּנְתִּי בְעַצְמִי מִפְּנֵי הַלִּסְטִים. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, כְּדַי הָיִיתָ לָחוּב בְּעַצְמְךָ, שֶׁעָבַרְתָּ עַל דִּבְרֵי בֵית הִלֵּל:
3.4 בַּעַל קֶרִי מְהַרְהֵר בְּלִבּוֹ וְאֵינוֹ מְבָרֵךְ, לֹא לְפָנֶיהָ וְלֹא לְאַחֲרֶיהָ. וְעַל הַמָּזוֹן מְבָרֵךְ לְאַחֲרָיו, וְאֵינוֹ מְבָרֵךְ לְפָנָיו. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, מְבָרֵךְ לִפְנֵיהֶם וּלְאַחֲרֵיהֶם: 3.5 הָיָה עוֹמֵד בַּתְּפִלָּה, וְנִזְכַּר שֶׁהוּא בַעַל קְרִי, לֹא יַפְסִיק, אֶלָּא יְקַצֵּר. יָרַד לִטְבֹּל, אִם יָכוֹל לַעֲלוֹת וּלְהִתְכַּסּוֹת וְלִקְרוֹת עַד שֶׁלֹּא תָנֵץ הַחַמָּה, יַעֲלֶה וְיִתְכַּסֶּה וְיִקְרָא. וְאִם לָאו, יִתְכַּסֶּה בַמַּיִם וְיִקְרָא. אֲבָל לֹא יִתְכַּסֶּה, לֹא בַמַּיִם הָרָעִים וְלֹא בְמֵי הַמִּשְׁרָה, עַד שֶׁיַּטִּיל לְתוֹכָן מָיִם. וְכַמָּה יַרְחִיק מֵהֶם וּמִן הַצּוֹאָה, אַרְבַּע אַמּוֹת:
5.1 אֵין עוֹמְדִין לְהִתְפַּלֵּל אֶלָּא מִתּוֹךְ כֹּבֶד רֹאשׁ. חֲסִידִים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים הָיוּ שׁוֹהִים שָׁעָה אַחַת וּמִתְפַּלְּלִים, כְּדֵי שֶׁיְּכַוְּנוּ אֶת לִבָּם לַמָּקוֹם. אֲפִלּוּ הַמֶּלֶךְ שׁוֹאֵל בִּשְׁלוֹמוֹ, לֹא יְשִׁיבֶנּוּ. וַאֲפִלּוּ נָחָשׁ כָּרוּךְ עַל עֲקֵבוֹ, לֹא יַפְסִיק:
9.5 חַיָּב אָדָם לְבָרֵךְ עַל הָרָעָה כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהוּא מְבָרֵךְ עַל הַטּוֹבָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים ו) וְאָהַבְתָּ אֵת יְיָ אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכָל לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל נַפְשְׁךָ וּבְכָל מְאֹדֶךָ. בְּכָל לְבָבְךָ, בִּשְׁנֵי יְצָרֶיךָ, בְּיֵצֶר טוֹב וּבְיֵצֶר רָע. וּבְכָל נַפְשְׁךָ, אֲפִלּוּ הוּא נוֹטֵל אֶת נַפְשֶׁךָ. וּבְכָל מְאֹדֶךָ, בְּכָל מָמוֹנֶךָ. דָּבָר אַחֵר בְּכָל מְאֹדֶךָ, בְּכָל מִדָּה וּמִדָּה שֶׁהוּא מוֹדֵד לְךָ הֱוֵי מוֹדֶה לוֹ בִּמְאֹד מְאֹד. לֹא יָקֵל אָדָם אֶת רֹאשׁוֹ כְּנֶגֶד שַׁעַר הַמִּזְרָח, שֶׁהוּא מְכֻוָּן כְּנֶגֶד בֵּית קָדְשֵׁי הַקָּדָשִׁים. לֹא יִכָּנֵס לְהַר הַבַּיִת בְּמַקְלוֹ, וּבְמִנְעָלוֹ, וּבְפֻנְדָּתוֹ, וּבְאָבָק שֶׁעַל רַגְלָיו, וְלֹא יַעֲשֶׂנּוּ קַפַּנְדַּרְיָא, וּרְקִיקָה מִקַּל וָחֹמֶר. כָּל חוֹתְמֵי בְרָכוֹת שֶׁהָיוּ בַמִּקְדָּשׁ, הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים מִן הָעוֹלָם. מִשֶּׁקִּלְקְלוּ הַמִּינִין, וְאָמְרוּ, אֵין עוֹלָם אֶלָּא אֶחָד, הִתְקִינוּ שֶׁיְּהוּ אוֹמְרִים, מִן הָעוֹלָם וְעַד הָעוֹלָם. וְהִתְקִינוּ, שֶׁיְּהֵא אָדָם שׁוֹאֵל אֶת שְׁלוֹם חֲבֵרוֹ בַּשֵּׁם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (רות ב) וְהִנֵּה בֹעַז בָּא מִבֵּית לֶחֶם, וַיֹּאמֶר לַקּוֹצְרִים יְיָ עִמָּכֶם, וַיֹּאמְרוּ לוֹ, יְבָרֶכְךָ יְיָ. וְאוֹמֵר (שופטים ו) יְיָ עִמְּךָ גִּבּוֹר הֶחָיִל. וְאוֹמֵר (משלי כג) אַל תָּבוּז כִּי זָקְנָה אִמֶּךָ. וְאוֹמֵר (תהלים קיט) עֵת לַעֲשׂוֹת לַייָ הֵפֵרוּ תוֹרָתֶךָ. רַבִּי נָתָן אוֹמֵר, הֵפֵרוּ תוֹרָתֶךָ עֵת לַעֲשׂוֹת לַייָ:' ' None | sup>
1.3 Bet Shammai say: in the evening every man should recline and recite the Shema, and in the morning he should stand, as it says, “And when you lie down and when you get up” (Deuteronomy 6:7). Bet Hillel say that every man should recite in his own way, as it says, “And when you walk by the way” (ibid). Why then is it said, “And when you lies down and when you get up?” At the time when people lie down and at the time when people rise up. Rabbi Tarfon said: I was once walking by the way and I reclined to recite the Shema according to the words of Bet Shammai, and I incurred danger from robbers. They said to him: you deserved to come to harm, because you acted against the words of Bet Hillel.
3.4 One who has had a seminal emission utters the words of the Shema in his heart and he doesn’t say a blessing, neither before nor after. Over food he says a blessing afterwards, but not the blessing before. Rabbi Judah says: he blesses both before them and after them. 3.5 If a man was standing saying the tefillah and he remembers that he is one who has had a seminal emission, he should not stop but he should abbreviate the blessings. If he went down to immerse, if he is able to come up and cover himself and recite the Shema before the rising of the sun, he should go up and cover himself and recite, but if not he should cover himself with the water and recite. He should not cover himself either with foul water or with steeping water until he pours fresh water into it. How far should he remove himself from it and from excrement? Four cubits.
5.1 One should not stand up to say Tefillah except in a reverent state of mind. The pious men of old used to wait an hour before praying in order that they might direct their thoughts to God. Even if a king greets him while praying he should not answer him: even if a snake is wound round his heel he should not stop.
9.5 One must bless God for the evil in the same way as one blesses for the good, as it says, “And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your might” (Deuteronomy 6:5). “With all your heart,” with your two impulses, the evil impulse as well as the good impulse. “With all your soul” even though he takes your soul life away from you. “With all your might” with all your money. Another explanation, “With all your might” whatever treatment he metes out to you. One should not show disrespect to the Eastern Gate, because it is in a direct line with the Holy of Holies. One should not enter the Temple Mount with a staff, or with shoes on, or with a wallet, or with dusty feet; nor should one make it a short cut, all the more spitting is forbidden. All the conclusions of blessings that were in the Temple they would say, “forever lit. as long as the world is.” When the sectarians perverted their ways and said that there was only one world, they decreed that they should say, “for ever and ever lit. from the end of the world to the end of the world. They also decreed that a person should greet his fellow in God’s name, as it says, “And behold Boaz came from Bethlehem and said to the reapers, ‘May the Lord be with you.’ And they answered him, “May the Lord bless you’” (Ruth 2:. And it also says, “The Lord is with your, you valiant warrior” (Judges 6:12). And it also says, “And do not despise your mother when she grows old” (Proverbs 23:22). And it also says, “It is time to act on behalf of the Lord, for they have violated Your teaching” (Psalms 119:126). Rabbi Natan says: this means “They have violated your teaching It is time to act on behalf of the Lord.”' ' None |
|
40. Mishnah, Eduyot, 1.4-1.6, 4.7, 5.7 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Dead Sea Scrolls, divine inspiration as source of halakhah • Divorce, law/halakha • Halakhah/Halakhot • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • halakha, Dead Sea Scrolls • halakha, Judean • halakha, and Scripture • halakhah, Mosaic • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, divine versus human authority in • halakhic literature, early tannaitic
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 448, 449, 483; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 69; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 75, 79, 95; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 98; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 65; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 85, 615
sup>1.5 וְלָמָּה מַזְכִּירִין דִּבְרֵי הַיָּחִיד בֵּין הַמְרֻבִּין, הוֹאִיל וְאֵין הֲלָכָה אֶלָּא כְדִבְרֵי הַמְרֻבִּין. שֶׁאִם יִרְאֶה בֵית דִּין אֶת דִּבְרֵי הַיָּחִיד וְיִסְמֹךְ עָלָיו, שֶׁאֵין בֵּית דִּין יָכוֹל לְבַטֵּל דִּבְרֵי בֵית דִּין חֲבֵרוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה גָדוֹל מִמֶּנּוּ בְחָכְמָה וּבְמִנְיָן. הָיָה גָדוֹל מִמֶּנּוּ בְחָכְמָה אֲבָל לֹא בְמִנְיָן, בְּמִנְיָן אֲבָל לֹא בְחָכְמָה, אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְבַטֵּל דְּבָרָיו, עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה גָדוֹל מִמֶּנּוּ בְחָכְמָה וּבְמִנְיָן: 1.6 אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, אִם כֵּן לָמָּה מַזְכִּירִין דִּבְרֵי הַיָּחִיד בֵּין הַמְרֻבִּין לְבַטָּלָה. שֶׁאִם יֹאמַר הָאָדָם כָּךְ אֲנִי מְקֻבָּל, יֵאָמֵר לוֹ, כְּדִבְרֵי אִישׁ פְּלוֹנִי שָׁמָעְתָּ:
4.7 הָאִשָּׁה מִתְקַדֶּשֶׁת בְּדִינָר וּבְשָׁוֶה דִינָר, כְּדִבְרֵי בֵית שַׁמָּאי. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, בִּפְרוּטָה וּבְשָׁוֶה פְרוּטָה. וְכַמָּה הִיא פְרוּטָה, אֶחָד מִשְּׁמֹנָה בְאִסָּר הָאִיטַלְקִי. בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, פּוֹטֵר הוּא אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ בְגֵט יָשָׁן, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹסְרִין. אֵיזֶהוּ גֵט יָשָׁן. כָּל שֶׁנִּתְיַחֵד עִמָּהּ אַחַר שֶׁכְּתָבוֹ לָהּ. הַמְגָרֵשׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ וְלָנָה עִמּוֹ בְפֻנְדְּקִי, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, אֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה מִמֶּנּוּ גֵט שֵׁנִי. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, צְרִיכָה מִמֶּנּוּ גֵט שֵׁנִי. אֵימָתַי, בִּזְמַן שֶׁנִּתְגָּרְשָׁה מִן הַנִּשּׂוּאִין. אֲבָל אִם נִתְגָּרְשָׁה מִן הָאֵרוּסִין, אֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה מִמֶּנּוּ גֵט שֵׁנִי, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין לִבּוֹ גַס בָּהּ:
5.7 בִּשְׁעַת מִיתָתוֹ אָמַר לִבְנוֹ, בְּנִי, חֲזֹר בְּךָ בְאַרְבָּעָה דְבָרִים שֶׁהָיִיתִי אוֹמֵר. אָמַר לוֹ, וְלָמָּה לֹא חָזַרְתָּ בָּךְ. אָמַר לוֹ, אֲנִי שָׁמַעְתִּי מִפִּי הַמְרֻבִּים, וְהֵם שָׁמְעוּ מִפִּי הַמְרֻבִּים. אֲנִי עָמַדְתִּי בִשְׁמוּעָתִי, וְהֵם עָמְדוּ בִשְׁמוּעָתָן. אֲבָל אַתָּה שָׁמַעְתָּ מִפִּי הַיָּחִיד, וּמִפִּי הַמְרֻבִּין. מוּטָב לְהַנִּיחַ דִּבְרֵי הַיָּחִיד, וְלֶאֱחֹז בְּדִבְרֵי הַמְרֻבִּין. אָמַר לוֹ, אַבָּא, פְּקֹד עָלַי לַחֲבֵרֶיךָ. אָמַר לוֹ, אֵינִי מַפְקִיד. אָמַר לוֹ, שֶׁמָּא עִילָה מָצָאתָ בִי. אָמַר לוֹ, לָאו. מַעֲשֶׂיךָ יְקָרְבוּךָ וּמַעֲשֶׂיךָ יְרַחֲקוּךָ:' ' None | sup>1.5 And why do they record the opinion of a single person among the many, when the halakhah must be according to the opinion of the many? So that if a court prefers the opinion of the single person it may depend on him. For no court may set aside the decision of another court unless it is greater than it in wisdom and in number. If it was greater than it in wisdom but not in number, in number but not in wisdom, it may not set aside its decision, unless it is greater than it in wisdom and in number. 1.6 Rabbi Judah said: “If so, why do they record the opinion of a single person among the many to set it aside? So that if a man shall say, ‘Thus have I received the tradition’, it may be said to him, ‘According to the refuted opinion of that individual did you hear it.’”
4.7 A woman is betrothed by a denar or the value of a denar, according to the opinion of Beth Shammai. But Beth Hillel says: by a perutah or the value of a perutah. And how much is a perutah? One-eighth of an Italian issar. Beth Shammai says: one may dismiss his wife with an old bill of divorcement, But Beth Hillel forbids it. What is an old bill of divorcement? Whenever he was secluded with her after he has written it for her. One who divorces his wife and she afterwards spends a night with him at the same inn: Beth Shammai says: she does not require a second bill of divorcement from him. But Beth Hillel says: she requires a second bill of divorcement from him. When does she require a second bill of divorcement? When she was divorced after marriage. But if she was divorced after betrothal she does not require from him a second bill of divorcement, since he is not yet familiar with her.
5.7 At the time of his death he said to his son, “Retract the four opinions which I used to declare.” He (the said to him, “Why did not you retract them?” He said to him, “I heard them from the mouth of the many, and they heard the contrary from the mouth of the many. I stood fast by the tradition which I heard, and they stood fast by the tradition which they heard. But you have heard my tradition from the mouth of a single individual and their tradition from the mouth of the many. It is better to leave the opinion of the single individual and to hold by the opinion of the many.” He said to him, “Father commend me to your colleagues.” He said to him, “I will not commend you.” He said to him, “Have you found in me any wrong?” He said, “No; your own deeds will cause you to be near, and your own deeds will cause you to be far.”' ' None |
|
41. Mishnah, Gittin, 8.9 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah, origins of • halakha, Dead Sea Scrolls • halakha, Judean • halakhic literature, early tannaitic
Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 126; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 98
sup>
8.9 הַמְגָרֵשׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ וְלָנָה עִמּוֹ בְּפֻנְדְּקִי, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, אֵינָהּ צְרִיכָהּ הֵימֶנּוּ גֵט שֵׁנִי. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, צְרִיכָה הֵימֶנּוּ גֵט שֵׁנִי. אֵימָתַי, בִּזְמַן שֶׁנִּתְגָּרְשָׁה מִן הַנִּשּׂוּאִין. וּמוֹדִים בְּנִתְגָּרְשָׁה מִן הָאֵרוּסִין שֶׁאֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה הֵימֶנּוּ גֵט שֵׁנִי, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין לִבּוֹ גַס בָּהּ. כְּנָסָהּ בְּגֵט קֵרֵחַ, תֵּצֵא מִזֶּה וּמִזֶּה, וְכָל הַדְּרָכִים הָאֵלּוּ בָהּ:'' None | sup>
8.9 A man divorces his wife and then stays with her over night in an inn: Bet Shammai says: she does not require from him a second get, But Beth Hillel say she does require a second get from him. When is this so? When she was divorced after marriage. And Beth Hillel agrees that if she is divorced after betrothal, she does not require a second get from him, because he would not yet take liberties with her. If a man marries a divorced woman through a “bald” get, she must leave both husbands and all the above-mentioned consequences apply to her.'' None |
|
42. Mishnah, Hagigah, 1.8, 2.1-2.2 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah, origins of • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Qumran halakha • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • Sabbath, halakha • ancient Halakha • halakha, structure of meaning and community • halakhah • halakhah, Mosaic • halakhah, Second Temple period • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, pre-exilic • law and legal formulae, rabbinic (halakhah)
Found in books: Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 169, 170; Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 125, 140; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 21; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 497; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 80, 85, 86, 93, 95, 100, 190; Swartz (2018), The Mechanics of Providence: The Workings of Ancient Jewish Magic and Mysticism. 164; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 4, 138, 517
sup>
1.8 הֶתֵּר נְדָרִים פּוֹרְחִין בָּאֲוִיר, וְאֵין לָהֶם עַל מַה שֶּׁיִּסְמֹכוּ. הִלְכוֹת שַׁבָּת, חֲגִיגוֹת וְהַמְּעִילוֹת, הֲרֵי הֵם כַּהֲרָרִים הַתְּלוּיִין בְּשַׂעֲרָה, שֶׁהֵן מִקְרָא מֻעָט וַהֲלָכוֹת מְרֻבּוֹת. הַדִּינִין וְהָעֲבוֹדוֹת, הַטָּהֳרוֹת וְהַטֻּמְאוֹת וַעֲרָיוֹת, יֵשׁ לָהֶן עַל מַה שֶּׁיִּסְמֹכוּ. הֵן הֵן גּוּפֵי תּוֹרָה:
2.1 אֵין דּוֹרְשִׁין בַּעֲרָיוֹת בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה. וְלֹא בְמַעֲשֵׂה בְרֵאשִׁית בִּשְׁנַיִם. וְלֹא בַמֶּרְכָּבָה בְּיָחִיד, אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הָיָה חָכָם וּמֵבִין מִדַּעְתּוֹ. כָּל הַמִּסְתַּכֵּל בְּאַרְבָּעָה דְּבָרִים, רָאוּי לוֹ כְּאִלּוּ לֹא בָּא לָעוֹלָם, מַה לְּמַעְלָה, מַה לְּמַטָּה, מַה לְּפָנִים, וּמַה לְּאָחוֹר. וְכָל שֶׁלֹּא חָס עַל כְּבוֹד קוֹנוֹ, רָאוּי לוֹ שֶׁלֹּא בָּא לָעוֹלָם: 2.2 יוֹסֵי בֶּן יוֹעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר שֶׁלֹּא לִסְמוֹךְ, יוֹסֵי בֶּן יוֹחָנָן אוֹמֵר לִסְמוֹךְ. יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן פְּרַחְיָה אוֹמֵר שֶׁלֹּא לִסְמוֹךְ, נִתַּאי הָאַרְבֵּלִי אוֹמֵר לִסְמוֹךְ. יְהוּדָה בֶּן טַבַּאי אוֹמֵר שֶׁלֹּא לִסְמוֹךְ, שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטָח אוֹמֵר לִסְמוֹךְ. שְׁמַעְיָה אוֹמֵר לִסְמוֹךְ. אַבְטַלְיוֹן אוֹמֵר שֶׁלֹּא לִסְמוֹךְ. הִלֵּל וּמְנַחֵם לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ. יָצָא מְנַחֵם, נִכְנַס שַׁמַּאי. שַׁמַּאי אוֹמֵר שֶׁלֹּא לִסְמוֹךְ, הִלֵּל אוֹמֵר לִסְמוֹךְ. הָרִאשׁוֹנִים הָיוּ נְשִׂיאִים, וּשְׁנִיִּים לָהֶם אַב בֵּית דִּין:'' None | sup>
1.8 The laws concerning the dissolution of vows hover in the air and have nothing to rest on. The laws concerning Shabbat, hagigot, and trespassing are as mountains hanging by a hair, for they have scant scriptural basis but many halakhot. The laws concerning civil cases and Temple worship, purity and impurity, and the forbidden relations have what to rest on, and they that are the essentials of the Torah.
2.1 They may not expound upon the subject of forbidden relations in the presence of three. Nor the work of creation in the presence of two. Nor the work of the chariot in the presence of one, unless he is a sage and understands of his own knowledge. Whoever speculates upon four things, it would have been better had he not come into the world: what is above, what is beneath, what came before, and what came after. And whoever takes no thought for the honor of his creator, it would have been better had he not come into the world. 2.2 Yose ben Yoezer says that on a festival the laying of the hands on the head of a sacrifice may not be performed. Yosef ben Joha says that it may be performed. Joshua ben Perahia says that it may not be performed. Nittai the Arbelite says that it may be performed. Judah ben Tabai says that it may not be performed. Shimon ben Shetah says that it may be performed. Shamayah says that it may be performed. Avtalyon says that it may not be performed. Hillel and Menahem did not dispute. Menahem went out, Shammai entered. Shammai says that it may not be performed. Hillel says that it may be performed. The former of each pair were patriarchs and the latter were heads of the court.'' None |
|
43. Mishnah, Hulin, 2.7 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakha, intensification • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Qumran halakha • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha
Found in books: Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 62; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 284, 592
sup>
2.7 הַשּׁוֹחֵט לְנָכְרִי, שְׁחִיטָתוֹ כְשֵׁרָה. וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר פּוֹסֵל. אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, אֲפִלּוּ שְׁחָטָהּ שֶׁיֹּאכַל הַנָּכְרִי מֵחֲצַר כָּבֵד שֶׁלָּהּ, פְּסוּלָה, שֶׁסְּתָם מַחֲשֶׁבֶת נָכְרִי לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, קַל וָחֹמֶר הַדְּבָרִים, וּמַה בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁהַמַּחֲשָׁבָה פוֹסֶלֶת, בְּמֻקְדָּשִׁין, אֵין הַכֹּל הוֹלֵךְ אֶלָּא אַחַר הָעוֹבֵד, מְקוֹם שֶׁאֵין מַחֲשָׁבָה פוֹסֶלֶת, בְּחֻלִּין, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא הַכֹּל הוֹלֵךְ אֶלָּא אַחַר הַשּׁוֹחֵט:'' None | sup>
2.7 If one slaughtered for a non-Jew, the slaughtering is valid. Rabbi Eliezer declares it invalid. Rabbi Eliezer said: even if one slaughtered a beast with the intention that a non-Jew should eat only its liver, the slaughtering is invalid, for the thoughts of a non-Jew are usually directed towards idolatry. Rabbi Yose said: is there not a kal vehomer argument? For if in the case of consecrated animals, where a wrongful intention can render invalid, it is established that everything depends solely upon the intention of him who performs the service, how much more in the case of unconsecrated animals, where a wrongful intention cannot render invalid, is it not logical that everything should depend solely upon the intention of him who slaughters!'' None |
|
44. Mishnah, Ketuvot, 1.5, 6.6, 7.1, 7.10 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Change, in custom and halakhah • Halakhah • Halakhah, origins of • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • System, halakhic ~ • halakha, Dead Sea Scrolls • halakha, Judean • halakhic literature, Palestinian • halakhic literature, early tannaitic • law, Jewish (halakhah), disgust and
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 44; Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 131; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 98, 99; Rubenstein (2018), The Land of Truth: Talmud Tales, Timeless Teachings, 136; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 25; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 31, 60
sup>
1.5 הָאוֹכֵל אֵצֶל חָמִיו בִּיהוּדָה שֶׁלֹּא בְעֵדִים, אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לִטְעֹן טַעֲנַת בְּתוּלִים, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמִּתְיַחֵד עִמָּהּ. אַחַת אַלְמְנַת יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאַחַת אַלְמְנַת כֹּהֵן, כְּתֻבָּתָן מָנֶה. בֵּית דִּין שֶׁל כֹּהֲנִים הָיוּ גוֹבִין לַבְּתוּלָה אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת זוּז, וְלֹא מִחוּ בְיָדָם חֲכָמִים:
6.6 יְתוֹמָה שֶׁהִשִּׂיאַתָּה אִמָּהּ אוֹ אַחֶיהָ מִדַּעְתָּהּ, וְכָתְבוּ לָהּ בְּמֵאָה אוֹ בַחֲמִשִּׁים זוּז, יְכוֹלָה הִיא מִשֶּׁתַּגְדִּיל לְהוֹצִיא מִיָּדָן מַה שֶּׁרָאוּי לְהִנָּתֵן לָהּ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אִם הִשִּׂיא אֶת הַבַּת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, יִנָּתֵן לַשְּׁנִיָּה כְדֶרֶךְ שֶׁנָּתַן לָרִאשׁוֹנָה. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, פְּעָמִים שֶׁאָדָם עָנִי וְהֶעֱשִׁיר אוֹ עָשִׁיר וְהֶעֱנִי, אֶלָּא שָׁמִין אֶת הַנְּכָסִים וְנוֹתְנִין לָהּ:
7.1 הַמַּדִּיר אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ מִלֵּהָנוֹת לוֹ, עַד שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם, יַעֲמִיד פַּרְנָס. יָתֵר מִכֵּן, יוֹצִיא וְיִתֵּן כְּתֻבָּה. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל, חֹדֶשׁ אֶחָד יְקַיֵּם, וּשְׁנַיִם, יוֹצִיא וְיִתֵּן כְּתֻבָּה. וּבְכֹהֶנֶת, שְׁנַיִם יְקַיֵּם, וּשְׁלֹשָׁה, יוֹצִיא וְיִתֵּן כְּתֻבָּה:
7.1 וְאֵלּוּ שֶׁכּוֹפִין אוֹתוֹ לְהוֹצִיא, מֻכֵּה שְׁחִין, וּבַעַל פּוֹלִיפּוֹס, וְהַמְקַמֵּץ, וְהַמְצָרֵף נְחֹשֶׁת, וְהַבֻּרְסִי, בֵּין שֶׁהָיוּ בָם עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִשְּׂאוּ וּבֵין מִשֶּׁנִּשְּׂאוּ נוֹלָדוּ. וְעַל כֻּלָּן אָמַר רַבִּי מֵאִיר, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִתְנָה עִמָּהּ, יְכוֹלָהּ הִיא שֶׁתֹּאמַר, סְבוּרָה הָיִיתִי שֶׁאֲנִי יְכוֹלָהּ לְקַבֵּל, וְעַכְשָׁיו אֵינִי יְכוֹלָה לְקַבֵּל. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, מְקַבֶּלֶת הִיא עַל כָּרְחָהּ, חוּץ מִמֻּכֵּה שְׁחִין, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמְּמִקָּתוֹ. מַעֲשֶׂה בְצִידוֹן בְּבֻרְסִי אֶחָד שֶׁמֵּת וְהָיָה לוֹ אָח בֻּרְסִי, אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים, יְכוֹלָה הִיא שֶׁתֹּאמַר, לְאָחִיךָ הָיִיתִי יְכוֹלָה לְקַבֵּל, וּלְךָ אֵינִי יְכוֹלָה לְקַבֵּל:' ' None | sup>
1.5 He who eats with his father-in-law in Judea without the presence of witnesses cannot raise a claim of non-virginity against his wife because he has been alone with her. It is the same whether the woman is an Israelite widow or a priestly widow her kethubah is a maneh. The court of the priests collected for a virgin four hundred zuz, and the sages did not protest.
6.6 If an orphan was given in marriage by her mother or her brothers with her consent and they gave her a dowry of a hundred, or fifty zuz, she may, when she reaches majority age, legally claim from them the amount that was due to her. Rabbi Judah says: if the father had given his first daughter in marriage, the second must receive as much as the first. The Sages say: sometimes a man is poor and becomes rich or rich and becomes poor. Rather the estate should evaluated and the appropriate amount given to her.
7.1 If a man forbade his wife by vow to have any benefit from him, for thirty days, he may appoint a provider, but if for a longer period he must divorce her and give her the ketubah. Rabbi Judah ruled: if he was an Israelite he may keep her as his wife, if the vow was for one month, but must divorce her and give her the ketubah if it was for two months. If he was a priest he may keep her as his wife, if the vow was for two months, but must divorce her and give her the ketubah if it was for three.
7.10 These are the ones who are forced to divorce their wives: one who is afflicted with boils, one who has a polypus, a gatherer of dog feces for the treatment of hides, a coppersmith or a tanner whether they were in such a condition before they married or whether they arose after they had married. And concerning all these Rabbi Meir said: although the man made a condition with her that she accept him despite these defects she may nevertheless say, “I thought I could accept him, but now I cannot accept him.” The Sages say: she must accept such a person against her will, the only exception being a man afflicted with boils, because she by her intercourse will enervate him. It once happened at Sidon that a tanner died, and he had a brother who was also a tanner. The Sages said: she may say, “I was able to accept your brother but I cannot accept you.”'' None |
|
45. Mishnah, Keritot, 3.9 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah, philosophical monotheism of • halakhah, as modality of tradition • monotheism, mythic, in Aggadah, ix, Halakhah • philosophical monotheism, in Halakhah • taxonomy, taxonomy, Halakhah’s medium of
Found in books: Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 75; Neusner (2003), The Perfect Torah. 42
sup>
3.9 וְעוֹד שְׁאָלָן רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. הַשּׁוֹחֵט חֲמִשָּׁה זְבָחִים בַּחוּץ בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, מַהוּ. חַיָּב אַחַת עַל כֻּלָּם, אוֹ אַחַת עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, לֹא שָׁמָעְנוּ. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, שָׁמַעְתִּי בְאוֹכֵל מִזֶּבַח אֶחָד בַּחֲמִשָּׁה תַמְחוּיִין בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב עַל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מִשּׁוּם מְעִילָה, וְרוֹאֶה אֲנִי שֶׁהַדְּבָרִים קַל וָחֹמֶר. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, לֹא כָךְ שְׁאָלָן רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. אֶלָּא, בְּאוֹכֵל נוֹתָר מֵחֲמִשָּׁה זְבָחִים בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, מַהוּ. חַיָּב אַחַת עַל כֻּלָּן, אוֹ אַחַת עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, לֹא שָׁמָעְנוּ. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, שָׁמַעְתִּי בְאוֹכֵל מִזֶּבַח אֶחָד בַּחֲמִשָּׁה תַמְחוּיִים בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת מִשּׁוּם מְעִילָה, וְרוֹאֶה אֲנִי שֶׁהַדְּבָרִים קַל וָחֹמֶר. אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, אִם הֲלָכָה, נְקַבֵּל. וְאִם לָדִין, יֵשׁ תְּשׁוּבָה. אָמַר לוֹ, הָשֵׁב. אָמַר לוֹ, לֹא, אִם אָמַרְתָּ בִמְעִילָה שֶׁעָשָׂה בָהּ אֶת הַמַּאֲכִיל כָּאוֹכֵל וְאֶת הַמְהַנֶּה כַּנֶּהֱנֶה, צֵרַף הַמְּעִילָה לִזְמָן מְרֻבֶּה, תֹּאמַר בְּנוֹתָר, שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ אַחַד מִכָּל אֵלּוּ:'' None | sup>
3.9 Rabbi Akiba asked again: If a man slaughtered five sacrifices outside the Temple in one spell of unawareness, what is the law? Is he liable to a separate offering for each act or only to one for them all? They replied: we have heard nothing about this. Rabbi Joshua: I have heard that if one eats an offering from five different dishes in one spell of unawareness, he is guilty of sacrilege for each of them; and it seems to me that the case in question may be inferred from this by a kal vehomer. Rabbi Shimon said: Rabbi Akiba did not ask this, but rather concerning one who ate of notar (remt) from five sacrifices in one spell of unawareness what is the law? Is he liable only to one offering for all of them, or is he liable to one for each of them? They replied: we have heard nothing about this. Rabbi Joshua: I have heard that if one eats an offering from five different dishes in one spell of unawareness, he is guilty of sacrilege for each of them; and it seems to me that the case in question may be inferred from this by a kal vehomer. Rabbi Akiba replied: if this is a received tradition we accept it; but if it is only a logical deduction, there is a rebuttal. He Rabbi Joshua said: rebut it. He replied: It is not so. For if you hold the view with regard to sacrilege, for in this case one who gives food to another is as guilty as the one who eats it himself, and the person who causes others to derive a benefit from them is as guilty as the person who himself made use of them; furthermore, small quantities are reckoned together in the case of sacrilege even after the lapse of a long period, can you say it in connection with notar (remt) where not one of these laws applies.'' None |
|
46. Mishnah, Menachot, 10.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • halakhah, priestly
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 251; Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 261
sup>
10.5 מִשֶּׁקָּרַב הָעֹמֶר, יוֹצְאִין וּמוֹצְאִין שׁוּק יְרוּשָׁלַיִם שֶׁהוּא מָלֵא קֶמַח וְקָלִי, שֶׁלֹּא בִרְצוֹן חֲכָמִים, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, בִּרְצוֹן חֲכָמִים הָיוּ עוֹשִׂים. מִשֶּׁקָּרַב הָעֹמֶר, הֻתַּר הֶחָדָשׁ מִיָּד, וְהָרְחוֹקִים מֻתָּרִים מֵחֲצוֹת הַיּוֹם וּלְהַלָּן. מִשֶּׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, הִתְקִין רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, שֶׁיְּהֵא יוֹם הָנֵף כֻּלּוֹ אָסוּר. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, וַהֲלֹא מִן הַתּוֹרָה הוּא אָסוּר, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כג), עַד עֶצֶם הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה. מִפְּנֵי מָה הָרְחוֹקִים מֻתָּרִים מֵחֲצוֹת הַיּוֹם וּלְהַלָּן, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן יוֹדְעִין שֶׁאֵין בֵּית דִּין מִתְעַצְּלִין בּוֹ:'' None | sup>
10.5 After the omer was offered they used to go out and find the market of Jerusalem already full of flour and parched grain of the new produce; This was without the approval of the rabbis, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah says: it was with the approval of the rabbis. After the omer was offered the new grain was permitted immediately, but for those that lived far off it was permitted only after midday. After the Temple was destroyed Rabbi Yoha ben Zakkai decreed that it should be forbidden throughout the day of the waving. Rabbi Judah said: is it not so forbidden by the law of the Torah, for it is said, “Until this very day?” Why was it permitted for those that lived far away from midday? Because they know that the court would not be negligent with it.'' None |
|
47. Mishnah, Nedarim, 4.3, 9.5, 9.10, 11.12 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Divorce, law/halakha • Mishna, aggada and halakha in • Qumran halakha • Sabbath, halakha • Second Temple period, halakhic disputes from time of • aggada and halakha, aggada that transmits legal content • aggadic midrash, circulating independent of halakha • ancient Halakha • halakha • halakha, Palestinian • halakha, Targum • halakhah • halakhah, as modality of tradition • study curriculum, halakha and aggada as subjects in
Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 477, 482, 546; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 187; Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 58; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 143; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 83; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 4, 88, 90, 196, 529
sup>
9.5 פּוֹתְחִין לָאָדָם בִּכְתֻבַּת אִשְׁתּוֹ. וּמַעֲשֶׂה בְאֶחָד שֶׁנָּדַר מֵאִשְׁתּוֹ הֲנָאָה וְהָיְתָה כְתֻבָּתָהּ אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת דִּינָרִין, וּבָא לִפְנֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא וְחִיְּבוֹ לִתֵּן לָהּ כְּתֻבָּתָהּ. אָמַר לוֹ, רַבִּי, שְׁמֹנֶה מֵאוֹת דִּינָרִין הִנִּיחַ אַבָּא, וְנָטַל אָחִי אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת וַאֲנִי אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת, לֹא דַיָּהּ שֶׁתִּטֹּל הִיא מָאתַיִם, וַאֲנִי מָאתָיִם. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, אֲפִלּוּ אַתָּה מוֹכֵר שְׂעַר רֹאשְׁךָ, אַתָּה נוֹתֵן לָהּ כְּתֻבָּתָהּ. אָמַר לוֹ, אִלּוּ הָיִיתִי יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁהוּא כֵן, לֹא הָיִיתִי נוֹדֵר, וְהִתִּירָהּ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא:' 11.12 בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים, שָׁלשׁ נָשִׁים יוֹצְאוֹת וְנוֹטְלוֹת כְּתֻבָּה, הָאוֹמֶרֶת טְמֵאָה אֲנִי לְךָ, שָׁמַיִם בֵּינִי לְבֵינֶךָ, נְטוּלָה אֲנִי מִן הַיְּהוּדִים. חָזְרוּ לוֹמַר, שֶׁלֹּא תְהֵא אִשָּׁה נוֹתֶנֶת עֵינֶיהָ בְאַחֵר וּמְקַלְקֶלֶת עַל בַּעְלָהּ. אֶלָּא הָאוֹמֶרֶת טְמֵאָה אֲנִי לְךָ, תָּבִיא רְאָיָה לִדְבָרֶיהָ. שָׁמַיִם בֵּינִי לְבֵינֶךָ, יַעֲשׂוּ דֶרֶךְ בַּקָּשָׁה. נְטוּלָה אֲנִי מִן הַיְּהוּדִים, יָפֵר חֶלְקוֹ, וּתְהֵא מְשַׁמַּשְׁתּוֹ, וּתְהֵא נְטוּלָה מִן הַיְּהוּדִים:'' None | sup>
9.5 They release a vow by reference to a wife’s kethubah. And it once happened that a man vowed not to benefit from his wife and her ketubah amounted to four hundred denarii. He went before Rabbi Akiva, who ordered him to pay her the ketubah in full. He said to him, “Rabbi! My father left eight hundred denarii, of which my brother took four hundred and I took four hundred. Isn’t it enough that she should receive two hundred and I two hundred?” Rabbi Akiva replied: even if you have to sell the hair of your head you must pay her her ketubah. He said to him, “Had I known that it is so, I would not have vowed.” And Rabbi Akiva released his vow.
9.10 “Konam if I marry that ugly woman,” and she turns out to be beautiful; “That black-skinned woman,” and she turns out to be light-skinned; “That short woman,” and she turns out to be tall, he is permitted to marry her, not because she was ugly, and became beautiful, or black and became light-skinned, short and grew tall, but because the vow was made in error. And thus it happened with one who vowed not to benefit from his sister’s daughter, and she was taken into Rabbi Ishmael’s house and they made her beautiful. Rabbi Ishmael said to him, “My son! Did you vow not to benefit from this one!” He said, “No,” and Rabbi Ishmael permitted her to him. In that hour Rabbi Ishmael wept and said, “The daughters of Israel are beautiful, but poverty disfigures them.” And when Rabbi Ishmael died, the daughters of Israel raised a lament, saying, “Daughters of Israel weep for Rabbi Ishmael.” And thus it is said too of Saul, “Daughters of Israel, weep for Saul” (II Samuel 1:24).
11.12 At first they would say that three women must be divorced and receive their ketubah: She who says: “I am defiled to you”; “Heaven is between me and you”; “I have been removed from the Jews.” But subsequently they changed the ruling to prevent her from setting her eye on another and spoiling herself to her husband: She who said, “I am defiled unto you” must bring proof. “Heaven is between me and you” they shall appease them by a request. “I have been removed from the Jews” he the husband must annul his portion, and she may have relations with him, and she shall be removed from other Jews.' ' None |
|
48. Mishnah, Orlah, 3.9 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • halakha, and Scripture • halakhah, as modality of tradition
Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 71; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 92, 93, 95
sup>
3.9 סְפֵק עָרְלָה, בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל אָסוּר, וּבְסוּרְיָא מֻתָּר, וּבְחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ יוֹרֵד וְלוֹקֵחַ, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יִרְאֶנּוּ לוֹקֵט. כֶּרֶם נָטוּעַ יָרָק, וְיָרָק נִמְכָּר חוּצָה לוֹ, בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׁרָאֵל אָסוּר, וּבְסוּרְיָא מֻתָּר, וּבְחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ יוֹרֵד וְלוֹקֵט, וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יִלְקֹט בַּיָּד. הֶחָדָשׁ, אָסוּר מִן הַתּוֹרָה בְּכָל מָקוֹם. וְהָעָרְלָה, הֲלָכָה. וְהַכִּלְאַיִם, מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים:'' None | sup>
3.9 Doubtful orlah: in the land of Israel is prohibited, in Syria is permitted, and outside the land one may go down and purchase from a non-Israelite as long as he has not seen him gathering it. A vineyard planted with vegetables which are kilayim, and they the vegetables are sold outside of it: in the land of Israel these are prohibited, and in Syria they are permitted; outside the land one may go down and purchase them as long as he does not gather them with one’s own hand. New produce is prohibited by the Torah in all places. And orlah is a halachah. And kilayim are an enactment of the scribes.'' None |
|
49. Mishnah, Peah, 1.1, 2.6 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah, origins of • Halakhah/Halakhot • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Second Temple period, halakhic disputes from time of • Sinai, a halakha to Moses from Sinai • halakha, a halakha to Moses from Sinai • halakha, and Scripture • halakhah, Mosaic • halakhah, Second Temple period • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, pre-exilic
Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 140; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 368; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 70; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 80, 100, 142, 190; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 99
sup>
1.1 אֵלּוּ דְבָרִים שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם שִׁעוּר. הַפֵּאָה, וְהַבִּכּוּרִים, וְהָרֵאָיוֹן, וּגְמִילוּת חֲסָדִים, וְתַלְמוּד תּוֹרָה. אֵלּוּ דְבָרִים שֶׁאָדָם אוֹכֵל פֵּרוֹתֵיהֶן בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה וְהַקֶּרֶן קַיֶּמֶת לוֹ לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא. כִּבּוּד אָב וָאֵם, וּגְמִילוּת חֲסָדִים, וַהֲבָאַת שָׁלוֹם בֵּין אָדָם לַחֲבֵרוֹ, וְתַלְמוּד תּוֹרָה כְּנֶגֶד כֻּלָּם:
2.6 מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁזָּרַע רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אִישׁ הַמִּצְפָּה לִפְנֵי רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, וְעָלוּ לְלִשְׁכַּת הַגָּזִית וְשָׁאָלוּ. אָמַר נַחוּם הַלַּבְלָר, מְקֻבָּל אֲנִי מֵרַבִּי מְיָאשָׁא, שֶׁקִּבֵּל מֵאַבָּא, שֶׁקִּבֵּל מִן הַזּוּגוֹת, שֶׁקִּבְּלוּ מִן הַנְּבִיאִים, הֲלָכָה לְמשֶׁה מִסִּינַי, בְּזוֹרֵעַ אֶת שָׂדֵהוּ שְׁנֵי מִינֵי חִטִּין, אִם עֲשָׂאָן גֹּרֶן אַחַת, נוֹתֵן פֵּאָה אַחַת. שְׁתֵּי גְרָנוֹת, נוֹתֵן שְׁתֵּי פֵאוֹת:'' None | sup>
1.1 These are the things that have no definite quantity: The corners of the field. First-fruits; The offerings brought on appearing at the Temple on the three pilgrimage festivals. The performance of righteous deeds; And the study of the torah. The following are the things for which a man enjoys the fruits in this world while the principal remains for him in the world to come: Honoring one’s father and mother; The performance of righteous deeds; And the making of peace between a person and his friend; And the study of the torah is equal to them all.
2.6 It happened that Rabbi Shimon of Mitzpah planted his field with two different kinds and came before Rabban Gamaliel. They both went up to the Chamber of Hewn Stone and asked about the law. Nahum the scribe said: I have a tradition from Rabbi Meyasha, who received it from Abba, who received it from the pairs of sage, who received it from the prophets, a halakhah of Moses from Sinai, that one who plants his field with two species of wheat, if he makes up of it one threshing-floor, he gives only one peah, but if two threshing-floors, he gives two peahs.'' None |
|
50. Mishnah, Rosh Hashanah, 2.9, 4.1-4.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakha, association • Halakhah, origins of • Halakhah/Halakhot • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Peter's vision, halakhic perspectives • halakhah, as modality of tradition • rulings, halakhic, acceptance of
Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 140; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 251, 437, 498; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 76; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 86; Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 188
sup>
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:
4.1 יוֹם טוֹב שֶׁל רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת, בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ הָיוּ תוֹקְעִים, אֲבָל לֹא בַמְּדִינָה. מְשֶּׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, הִתְקִין רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, שֶׁיְּהוּ תּוֹקְעִין בְּכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֶּשׁ בּוֹ בֵית דִּין. אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר, לֹא הִתְקִין רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי אֶלָּא בְיַבְנֶה בִּלְבָד. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אֶחָד יַבְנֶה וְאֶחָד כָּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֶּשׁ בּוֹ בֵית דִּין: 4.2 וְעוֹד זֹאת הָיְתָה יְרוּשָׁלַיִם יְתֵרָה עַל יַבְנֶה, שֶׁכָּל עִיר שֶׁהִיא רוֹאָה וְשׁוֹמַעַת וּקְרוֹבָה וִיכוֹלָה לָבֹא, תּוֹקְעִין. וּבְיַבְנֶה לֹא הָיוּ תוֹקְעִין אֶלָּא בְּבֵית דִּין בִּלְבָד: 4.3 בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיָה הַלּוּלָב נִטָּל בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ שִׁבְעָה, וּבַמְּדִינָה יוֹם אֶחָד. מִשֶּׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, הִתְקִין רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי שֶׁיְהֵא לוּלָב נִטָּל בַּמְּדִינָה שִׁבְעָה זֵכֶר לַמִּקְדָּשׁ, וְשֶׁיְּהֵא יוֹם הָנֵף כֻּלּוֹ אָסוּר: 4.4 בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיוּ מְקַבְּלִין עֵדוּת הַחֹדֶשׁ כָּל הַיּוֹם. פַּעַם אַחַת נִשְׁתַּהוּ הָעֵדִים מִלָּבֹא, וְנִתְקַלְקְלוּ הַלְוִיִּם בַּשִּׁיר. הִתְקִינוּ שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ מְקַבְּלִין אֶלָּא עַד הַמִּנְחָה. וְאִם בָּאוּ עֵדִים מִן הַמִּנְחָה וּלְמַעְלָה, נוֹהֲגִין אוֹתוֹ הַיּוֹם קֹדֶשׁ וּלְמָחָר קֹדֶשׁ. מִשֶּׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ הִתְקִין רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, שֶׁיְּהוּ מְקַבְּלִין עֵדוּת הַחֹדֶשׁ כָּל הַיּוֹם. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן קָרְחָה, וְעוֹד זֹאת הִתְקִין רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ רֹאשׁ בֵּית דִּין בְּכָל מָקוֹם, שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ הָעֵדִים הוֹלְכִין אֶלָּא לִמְקוֹם הַוָּעַד:'' None | sup>
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.
4.1 If Yom Tov of Rosh Hashanah fell on Shabbat, they would blow the shofar in the Temple but not in the country. After the destruction of the Temple, Rabban Yoha ben Zakai decreed that it should be blown on Shabbat in every place where there was a court. Rabbi Eliezer said: Rabban Yoha ben Zakai decreed for Yavneh only. They said to him: both Yavneh and any place where there is a court. 4.2 There was another way in which Jerusalem was greater than Yavneh, that in every city which could see Jerusalem and hear and was near and could get to Jerusalem, they used to blow on Shabbat, whereas in Yavneh they used to blow in the court only. 4.3 In earlier times the lulav was taken for seven days in the Temple, and in the provinces for one day only. When the temple was destroyed, Rabbi Yoha ben Zakkai decreed that the lulav should be taken in the provinces for seven days in memory of the Temple, He also decreed that on the whole of the day of waving it be forbidden to eat the new produce. 4.4 Originally they used to accept testimony with regard to the new moon during the whole day. On one occasion the witnesses were late in arriving, and the Levites went wrong in the daily hymn. They therefore decreed that testimony should be accepted only until the afternoon sacrifice. If witnesses came after the afternoon sacrifice that day should be kept as holy and also the next day. After the destruction of the temple Rabban Yoha ben Zakkai decreed that testimony with regard to the new moon should be received during the whole day. Rabbi Joshua ben Korha said: this further did Rabbi Yoha ben Zakkai decree, that not matter where the head of the court might be, the witnesses should have to go only to the place of the assembly.'' None |
|
51. Mishnah, Sanhedrin, 1.5, 2.1-2.3, 6.4, 10.1, 10.4, 11.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Dead Sea Scrolls, divine inspiration as source of halakhah • Halakhah • Halakhah/Halakhot • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Mishna, aggada and halakha in • Tannaic literature, halakhic vs. aggadic exegesis • halakha, rabbinic vs. biblical law • halakhah • halakhah, divine versus human authority in • law and legal formulae, rabbinic (halakhah) • law, Jewish (halakhah) • law, Jewish (halakhah), king and
Found in books: Avemarie, van Henten, and Furstenberg (2023), Jewish Martyrdom in Antiquity, 62; Feldman, Goldman and Dimant (2014), Scripture and Interpretation: Qumran Texts That Rework the Bible 285; Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 81; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 300, 301, 302, 303, 307, 313, 324, 325, 493; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 475, 476; Iricinschi et al. (2013), Beyond the Gnostic Gospels: Studies Building on the Work of Elaine Pagels, 384; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 178; Rubenstein (2018), The Land of Truth: Talmud Tales, Timeless Teachings, 207, 208, 218; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 67; Swartz (2018), The Mechanics of Providence: The Workings of Ancient Jewish Magic and Mysticism. 32; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 33, 40
sup>
1.5 אֵין דָּנִין לֹא אֶת הַשֵּׁבֶט וְלֹא אֶת נְבִיא הַשֶּׁקֶר וְלֹא אֶת כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל, אֶלָּא עַל פִּי בֵית דִּין שֶׁל שִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד. וְאֵין מוֹצִיאִין לְמִלְחֶמֶת הָרְשׁוּת, אֶלָּא עַל פִּי בֵית דִּין שֶׁל שִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד. אֵין מוֹסִיפִין עַל הָעִיר וְעַל הָעֲזָרוֹת, אֶלָּא עַל פִּי בֵית דִּין שֶׁל שִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד. אֵין עוֹשִׂין סַנְהֶדְרִיּוֹת לַשְּׁבָטִים, אֶלָּא עַל פִּי בֵית דִּין שֶׁל שִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד. אֵין עוֹשִׂין עִיר הַנִּדַּחַת, אֶלָּא עַל פִּי בֵית דִּין שֶׁל שִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד. וְאֵין עוֹשִׂין עִיר הַנִּדַּחַת בַּסְּפָר, וְלֹא שְׁלֹשָׁה, אֲבָל עוֹשִׂין אַחַת אוֹ שְׁתָּיִם:
2.1 כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל דָּן וְדָנִין אוֹתוֹ, מֵעִיד וּמְעִידִין אוֹתוֹ, חוֹלֵץ וְחוֹלְצִין לְאִשְׁתּוֹ, וּמְיַבְּמִין אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ, אֲבָל הוּא אֵינוֹ מְיַבֵּם, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא אָסוּר בָּאַלְמָנָה. מֵת לוֹ מֵת, אֵינוֹ יוֹצֵא אַחַר הַמִּטָּה, אֶלָּא הֵן נִכְסִין וְהוּא נִגְלֶה, הֵן נִגְלִין וְהוּא נִכְסֶה, וְיוֹצֵא עִמָּהֶן עַד פֶּתַח הָעִיר, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אֵינוֹ יוֹצֵא מִן הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כא) וּמִן הַמִּקְדָּשׁ לֹא יֵצֵא. וּכְשֶׁהוּא מְנַחֵם אֲחֵרִים, דֶּרֶךְ כָּל הָעָם עוֹבְרִין בָּזֶה אַחַר זֶה וְהַמְמֻנֶּה מְמַצְּעוֹ בֵּינוֹ לְבֵין הָעָם. וּכְשֶׁהוּא מִתְנַחֵם מֵאֲחֵרִים, כָּל הָעָם אוֹמְרִים לוֹ אָנוּ כַפָּרָתְךָ, וְהוּא אוֹמֵר לָהֶן תִּתְבָּרְכוּ מִן הַשָּׁמָיִם. וּכְשֶׁמַּבְרִין אוֹתוֹ, כָּל הָעָם מְסֻבִּין עַל הָאָרֶץ וְהוּא מֵסֵב עַל הַסַּפְסָל: 2.2 הַמֶּלֶךְ לֹא דָן וְלֹא דָנִין אוֹתוֹ, לֹא מֵעִיד וְלֹא מְעִידִין אוֹתוֹ, לֹא חוֹלֵץ וְלֹא חוֹלְצִין לְאִשְׁתּוֹ. לֹא מְיַבֵּם וְלֹא מְיַבְּמִין לְאִשְׁתּוֹ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אִם רָצָה לַחֲלֹץ אוֹ לְיַבֵּם, זָכוּר לָטוֹב. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לוֹ. וְאֵין נוֹשְׂאִין אַלְמָנָתוֹ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, נוֹשֵׂא הַמֶּלֶךְ אַלְמָנָתוֹ שֶׁל מֶלֶךְ, שֶׁכֵּן מָצִינוּ בְדָוִד שֶׁנָּשָׂא אַלְמָנָתוֹ שֶׁל שָׁאוּל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמואל ב יב) וָאֶתְּנָה לְךָ אֶת בֵּית אֲדֹנֶיךָ וְאֶת נְשֵׁי אֲדֹנֶיךָ בְּחֵיקֶךָ: 2.3 מֵת לוֹ מֵת, אֵינוֹ יוֹצֵא מִפֶּתַח פַּלְטְרִין שֶׁלּוֹ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אִם רוֹצֶה לָצֵאת אַחַר הַמִּטָּה, יוֹצֵא, שֶׁכֵּן מָצִינוּ בְדָוִד שֶׁיָּצָא אַחַר מִטָּתוֹ שֶׁל אַבְנֵר, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם ג) וְהַמֶּלֶךְ דָּוִד הֹלֵךְ אַחֲרֵי הַמִּטָּה. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, לֹא הָיָה הַדָּבָר אֶלָּא לְפַיֵּס אֶת הָעָם. וּכְשֶׁמַּבְרִין אוֹתוֹ, כָּל הָעָם מְסֻבִּין עַל הָאָרֶץ וְהוּא מֵסֵב עַל הַדַּרְגָּשׁ:' "
6.4 בֵּית הַסְּקִילָה הָיָה גָבוֹהַּ שְׁתֵּי קוֹמוֹת. אֶחָד מִן הָעֵדִים דּוֹחֲפוֹ עַל מָתְנָיו. נֶהְפַּךְ עַל לִבּוֹ, הוֹפְכוֹ עַל מָתְנָיו. אִם מֵת בָּהּ, יָצָא. וְאִם לָאו, הַשֵּׁנִי נוֹטֵל אֶת הָאֶבֶן וְנוֹתְנָהּ עַל לִבּוֹ. אִם מֵת בָּהּ, יָצָא. וְאִם לָאו, רְגִימָתוֹ בְכָל יִשְׂרָאֵל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יז) יַד הָעֵדִים תִּהְיֶה בּוֹ בָרִאשֹׁנָה לַהֲמִיתוֹ וְיַד כָּל הָעָם בָּאַחֲרֹנָה. כָּל הַנִּסְקָלִין נִתְלִין, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אֵינוֹ נִתְלֶה אֶלָּא הַמְגַדֵּף וְהָעוֹבֵד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. הָאִישׁ תּוֹלִין אוֹתוֹ פָּנָיו כְּלַפֵּי הָעָם, וְהָאִשָּׁה פָּנֶיהָ כְלַפֵּי הָעֵץ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, הָאִישׁ נִתְלֶה וְאֵין הָאִשָּׁה נִתְלֵית. אָמַר לָהֶן רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, וַהֲלֹא שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטָח תָּלָה נָשִׁים בְּאַשְׁקְלוֹן. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, שְׁמֹנִים נָשִׁים תָּלָה, וְאֵין דָּנִין שְׁנַיִם בְּיוֹם אֶחָד. כֵּיצַד תּוֹלִין אוֹתוֹ, מְשַׁקְּעִין אֶת הַקּוֹרָה בָאָרֶץ וְהָעֵץ יוֹצֵא מִמֶּנָּה, וּמַקִּיף שְׁתֵּי יָדָיו זוֹ עַל גַּבֵּי זוֹ וְתוֹלֶה אוֹתוֹ. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, הַקּוֹרָה מֻטָּה עַל הַכֹּתֶל, וְתוֹלֶה אוֹתוֹ כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁהַטַּבָּחִין עוֹשִׂין. וּמַתִּירִין אוֹתוֹ מִיָּד. וְאִם לָן, עוֹבֵר עָלָיו בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כא) לֹא תָלִין נִבְלָתוֹ עַל הָעֵץ כִּי קָבוֹר תִּקְבְּרֶנּוּ כִּי קִלְלַת אֱלֹהִים תָּלוּי וְגוֹ'. כְּלוֹמַר, מִפְּנֵי מָה זֶה תָלוּי, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁבֵּרַךְ אֶת הַשֵּׁם, וְנִמְצָא שֵׁם שָׁמַיִם מִתְחַלֵּל:" "
10.1 כָּל יִשְׂרָאֵל יֵשׁ לָהֶם חֵלֶק לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ישעיה ס) וְעַמֵּךְ כֻּלָּם צַדִּיקִים לְעוֹלָם יִירְשׁוּ אָרֶץ נֵצֶר מַטָּעַי מַעֲשֵׂה יָדַי לְהִתְפָּאֵר. וְאֵלּוּ שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם חֵלֶק לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא, הָאוֹמֵר אֵין תְּחִיַּת הַמֵּתִים מִן הַתּוֹרָה, וְאֵין תּוֹרָה מִן הַשָּׁמָיִם, וְאֶפִּיקוֹרֶס. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, אַף הַקּוֹרֵא בַסְּפָרִים הַחִיצוֹנִים, וְהַלּוֹחֵשׁ עַל הַמַּכָּה וְאוֹמֵר (שמות טו) כָּל הַמַּחֲלָה אֲשֶׁר שַׂמְתִּי בְמִצְרַיִם לֹא אָשִׂים עָלֶיךָ כִּי אֲנִי ה' רֹפְאֶךָ. אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר, אַף הַהוֹגֶה אֶת הַשֵּׁם בְּאוֹתִיּוֹתָיו:" 10.4 אַנְשֵׁי עִיר הַנִּדַּחַת אֵין לָהֶן חֵלֶק לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם יג) יָצְאוּ אֲנָשִׁים בְּנֵי בְלִיַּעַל מִקִּרְבֶּךָ וַיַּדִּיחוּ אֶת ישְׁבֵי עִירָם. וְאֵינָן נֶהֱרָגִים עַד שֶׁיִּהְיוּ מַדִּיחֶיהָ מֵאוֹתָהּ הָעִיר וּמֵאוֹתוֹ הַשֵּׁבֶט, וְעַד שֶׁיֻּדַּח רֻבָּהּ, וְעַד שֶׁיַּדִּיחוּם אֲנָשִׁים. הִדִּיחוּהָ נָשִׁים וּקְטַנִּים אוֹ שֶׁהֻדַּח מִעוּטָהּ אוֹ שֶׁהָיוּ מַדִּיחֶיהָ חוּצָה לָהּ, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ כִיחִידִים. וּצְרִיכִין שְׁנֵי עֵדִים וְהַתְרָאָה לְכָל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד. זֶה חֹמֶר בַּיְּחִידִים מִבַּמְּרֻבִּים, שֶׁהַיְּחִידִים בִּסְקִילָה, לְפִיכָךְ מָמוֹנָם פָּלֵט. וְהַמְּרֻבִּים בְּסַיִף, לְפִיכָךְ מָמוֹנָם אָבֵד:
11.1 אֵלּוּ הֵן הַנֶּחֱנָקִין, הַמַּכֶּה אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ, וְגוֹנֵב נֶפֶשׁ מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל, וְזָקֵן מַמְרֵא עַל פִּי בֵית דִּין, וּנְבִיא הַשֶּׁקֶר, וְהַמִּתְנַבֵּא בְּשֵׁם עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, וְהַבָּא עַל אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ, וְזוֹמְמֵי בַת כֹּהֵן וּבוֹעֲלָהּ. הַמַּכֶּה אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ אֵינוֹ חַיָּב עַד שֶׁיַּעֲשֶׂה בָהֶן חַבּוּרָה. זֶה חֹמֶר בַּמְקַלֵּל מִבַּמַּכֶּה, שֶׁהַמְקַלֵּל לְאַחַר מִיתָה חַיָּב, וְהַמַּכֶּה לְאַחַר מִיתָה פָּטוּר. הַגּוֹנֵב נֶפֶשׁ מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל אֵינוֹ חַיָּב עַד שֶׁיַּכְנִיסֶנּוּ לִרְשׁוּתוֹ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, עַד שֶׁיַּכְנִיסֶנּוּ לִרְשׁוּתוֹ וְיִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בּוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כד) וְהִתְעַמֶּר בּוֹ וּמְכָרוֹ. הַגּוֹנֵב אֶת בְּנוֹ, רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּנוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָה מְחַיֵּב, וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹטְרִין. גָּנַב מִי שֶׁחֶצְיוֹ עֶבֶד וְחֶצְיוֹ בֶן חוֹרִין, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה מְחַיֵּב, וַחֲכָמִים פּוֹטְרִין:'' None | sup>
1.5 A tribe, a false prophet, or the high priest may not be tried save by the court of seventy-one; They may not send forth the people to wage a battle of free choice save by the decision of the court of one and seventy; They may not add to the City of Jerusalem, or the Courts of the Temple save by the decision of the court of seventy-one; They may not set up sanhedrins for the several tribes save by the decision of the court of one and seventy. And they may not proclaim any city to be an Apostate City (ir ha-niddahat) (Deut. 13:13–19 save by the decision of one and seventy. No city on the frontier may be proclaimed an Apostate City, nor three together, but only one or two.
2.1 The High Priest can judge and be judged; he can testify and others can testify against him. He can perform halitzah for another’s wife and others can perform halitzah for his wife or contract levirate marriage with his widow, but he cannot contract levirate marriage since he is forbidden to marry a widow. If any of his near kin die he may not follow after the bier, rather when the bearers are not visible, he is visible, when they are visible he is not visible, and he may go out with them as far as the city gate, according to Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah says, “He may not leave the Temple, as it says, “Nor shall he go out of the Sanctuary”. And when he comforts other mourners the custom is for all of the people to pass by, the one after the other, while the appointed priest stands between him and the people. And when he receives comfort from others, all the people say to him, “Let us be your atonement”, and he says to them, “May you be blessed by Heaven.” When they feed him the funeral meal all the people sit around on the ground and he sits on a stool. 2.2 The king can neither judge nor be judged, he cannot testify and others cannot testify against him. He may not perform halitzah, nor may others perform halitzah for his wife. He may not contract levirate marriage nor may his brothers contract levirate marriage with his wife. Rabbi Judah says: “If he wished to perform halitzah or to contract levirate marriage his memory is a blessing.” They said to him: “They should not listen to him.” None may marry his widow. Rabbi Judah says: “The king may marry the widow of a king, for so have we found it with David, who married the widow of Saul, as it says, “And I gave you my master’s house and my master’s wives into your embrace” (II Samuel 12:8). 2.3 If any of his near kin die he may not go out of the door of his palace. Rabbi Judah says: “If he wishes to follow the bier he may, since we have found that David followed the bier of Avner, as it says, “And King David followed the bier” (II Samuel 3:31) They answered, “That was only to appease the people.” When they feed him the funeral meal all the people sit on the floor and he sits on a couch.' "
6.4 The place of stoning was twice a man's height. One of the witnesses pushed him by the hips, so that he was overturned on his heart. He was then turned on his back. If that caused his death, he had fulfilled his duty; but if not, the second witness took a stone and threw it on his chest. If he died thereby, he had done his duty; but if not, he the criminal was stoned by all Israel, for it is says: “The hand of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people” (Deut. 17:7). All who are stoned are afterwards hanged, according to Rabbi Eliezer. But the sages say: “Only the blasphemer and the idolater are hanged.” A man is hanged with his face towards the spectators, but a woman with her face towards the gallows, according to Rabbi Eliezer. But the sages say: a man is hanged, but not a woman. Rabbi Eliezer said to them: “But did not Shimon ben Shetah hang women at ashkelon?” They said: “On that occasion he hanged eighty women, even though two must not be tried on the same day. How is he hanged? The post is sunk into the ground with a cross- piece branching off at the top and he brings his hands together one over the other and hangs him up thereby. R. Jose said: the post is leaned against the wall, and he hangs him up the way butchers do. He is immediately let down. If he is left hanging over night, a negative command is thereby transgressed, for it says, “You shall not let his corpse remain all night upon the tree, but you must bury him the same day because a hanged body is a curse against god” (Deut. 21:23). As if to say why was he hanged? because he cursed the name of god; and so the name of Heaven God is profaned." 10.1 All Israel have a portion in the world to come, for it says, “Your people, all of them righteous, shall possess the land for ever; They are the shoot that I planted, my handiwork in which I glory” (Isaiah 60:2. And these are the ones who have no portion in the world to come: He who maintains that resurrection is not a biblical doctrine, that the torah was not divinely revealed, and an epikoros. Rabbi Akiva says: “Even one who reads non-canonical books and one who whispers a charm over a wound and says, “I will not bring upon you any of the diseases which i brought upon the Egyptians: for I the lord am you healer” (Exodus 15:26). Abba Shaul says: “Also one who pronounces the divine name as it is spelled.”
10.4 The inhabitants of a city seduced into worshipping idols have no portion in the world to come, as it says, “Certain men, wicked persons, have gone out from among you and seduced the inhabitants of their town” (Deuteronomy 13:14). They are not executed unless the seducers are of that city and that tribe, and until the majority of the city are seduced, and the seducers are men. If women or minors seduced it, or if a minority of the city were seduced, or if the seducers were from outside the city, they are treated as individuals, and therefore two witnesses and a formal warning are necessary for each offender. In this the penalty of individuals is severer than that of the multitudes, for individuals are stoned, therefore their property is saved; but the multitudes are decapitated; hence their possessions are destroyed.
11.1 The following are strangled: One who strikes his father or mother; One who kidnaps a Jew; An elder who rebels against the ruling of the court; A false prophet; One who prophesies in the name of an idol; One who commits adultery; Witnesses who testified falsely to the adultery of a priest’s daughter, and the one who has had sexual relations with her. The one who strikes his father or his mother is liable only if he wounds them. In this respect, cursing is more stringent than striking, for one who curses his/her parents after death is liable, while one who strikes them after death is not. One who kidnaps a Jew is not liable unless he brings him onto his own property. Rabbi Judah said: “Until he brings him onto his own property and puts him to service, as it says, “If a man is found to have kidnapped a fellow Israelite, enslaving him or selling him” (Deut. 24:7). If he kidnaps his own son. Rabbi Ishmael the son of Rabbi Yoha ben Beroka declares him liable, but the Sages exempt him. If he kidnapped one who was half a slave and half free, Rabbi Judah declares him liable, but the Sages exempt him.'' None |
|
52. Mishnah, Shabbat, 1.4, 3.4, 6.2, 6.4, 7.2 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Divorce, law/halakha • Halacha • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Qumran halakha • Rabbinic Halakhah • Second Temple period, halakhic disputes from time of • System, halakhic ~ • aggada in Mishna, establishes authority of rabbis as interpreters of halakha • halakha, Shammaite • halakhah • halakhah, Mosaic • halakhah, Second Temple period • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, pre-exilic • halakhic thinking • rulings, halakhic, methods
Found in books: Alexander (2013), Gender and Timebound Commandments in Judaism. 57; Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 116; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 372; Hachlili (2005), Jewish Funerary Customs, Practices And Rites In The Second Temple Period, 459; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 486; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 81, 82; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 26; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 96; Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 28, 53; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 14, 20, 53, 648
sup>
1.4 וְאֵלּוּ מִן הַהֲלָכוֹת שֶׁאָמְרוּ בַעֲלִיַּת חֲנַנְיָה בֶן חִזְקִיָּה בֶן גֻּרְיוֹן כְּשֶׁעָלוּ לְבַקְּרוֹ. נִמְנוּ וְרַבּוּ בֵּית שַׁמַּאי עַל בֵּית הִלֵּל, וּשְׁמֹנָה עָשָׂר דְּבָרִים גָּזְרוּ בוֹ בַיּוֹם:
3.4 מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁעָשׂוּ אַנְשֵׁי טְבֶרְיָא וְהֵבִיאוּ סִלּוֹן שֶׁל צוֹנֵן לְתוֹךְ אַמָּה שֶׁל חַמִּין. אָמְרוּ לָהֶן חֲכָמִים, אִם בְּשַׁבָּת, כְּחַמִּין שֶׁהוּחַמּוּ בְשַׁבָּת, אֲסוּרִין בִּרְחִיצָה וּבִשְׁתִיָּה; בְּיוֹם טוֹב, כְּחַמִּין שֶׁהוּחַמּוּ בְיוֹם טוֹב, אֲסוּרִין בִּרְחִיצָה וּמֻתָּרִין בִּשְׁתִיָּה. מוּלְיָאר הַגָּרוּף, שׁוֹתִין הֵימֶנּוּ בְשַׁבָּת. אַנְטִיכִי, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁגְּרוּפָה, אֵין שׁוֹתִין מִמֶּנָּה:
7.2 אֲבוֹת מְלָאכוֹת אַרְבָּעִים חָסֵר אֶחָת. הַזּוֹרֵעַ. וְהַחוֹרֵשׁ. וְהַקּוֹצֵר. וְהַמְעַמֵּר. הַדָּשׁ. וְהַזּוֹרֶה. הַבּוֹרֵר. הַטּוֹחֵן. וְהַמְרַקֵּד. וְהַלָּשׁ. וְהָאוֹפֶה. הַגּוֹזֵז אֶת הַצֶּמֶר. הַמְלַבְּנוֹ. וְהַמְנַפְּצוֹ. וְהַצּוֹבְעוֹ. וְהַטּוֹוֶה. וְהַמֵּסֵךְ. וְהָעוֹשֶׂה שְׁנֵי בָתֵּי נִירִין. וְהָאוֹרֵג שְׁנֵי חוּטִין. וְהַפּוֹצֵעַ שְׁנֵי חוּטִין. הַקּוֹשֵׁר. וְהַמַּתִּיר. וְהַתּוֹפֵר שְׁתֵּי תְפִירוֹת. הַקּוֹרֵעַ עַל מְנָת לִתְפֹּר שְׁתֵּי תְפִירוֹת. הַצָּד צְבִי. הַשּׁוֹחֲטוֹ. וְהַמַּפְשִׁיטוֹ. הַמּוֹלְחוֹ, וְהַמְעַבֵּד אֶת עוֹרוֹ. וְהַמּוֹחֲקוֹ. וְהַמְחַתְּכוֹ. הַכּוֹתֵב שְׁתֵּי אוֹתִיּוֹת. וְהַמּוֹחֵק עַל מְנָת לִכְתֹּב שְׁתֵּי אוֹתִיּוֹת. הַבּוֹנֶה. וְהַסּוֹתֵר. הַמְכַבֶּה. וְהַמַּבְעִיר. הַמַּכֶּה בַפַּטִּישׁ. הַמּוֹצִיא מֵרְשׁוּת לִרְשׁוּת. הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ אֲבוֹת מְלָאכוֹת אַרְבָּעִים חָסֵר אֶחָת:' ' None | sup>
1.4 And these are of halakhot which they stated in the upper chamber of Haiah ben Hezekiah ben Gurion, when they went up to visit him. They took a count, and Bet Shammai outnumbered Beth Hillel and on that day they enacted eighteen measures.
3.4 It once happened that the people of Tiberias conducted a pipe of cold water through an arm of the hot springs. The sages said to them: if this happened on the Shabbat, it is like hot water heated on the Shabbat, and is forbidden both for washing and for drinking; If on a festival, it is like water heated on a festival, which is forbidden for washing but permitted for drinking. A miliarum which is cleared of its ashes--they may drink from it on Shabbat. An antiki even if its ashes have been cleared--they may not drink from it.
7.2 The primary labors are forty less one:sowing, plowing, reaping, binding sheaves, threshing, winnowing, selecting, grinding, sifting, kneading, baking, shearing wool, bleaching, hackling, dyeing, spinning, weaving, the making of two loops, weaving two threads, dividing two threads, tying and untying, sewing two stitches, tearing in order to sew two stitches, capturing a deer, slaughtering, or flaying, or salting it, curing its hide, scraping it of its hair, cutting it up, writing two letters, erasing in order to write two letters over the erasure, building, tearing down, extinguishing, kindling, striking with a hammer, and carrying out from one domain to another, These are the forty primary labors less one.' ' None |
|
53. Mishnah, Sotah, 3.4, 5.1, 9.15 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Divorce, law/halakha • Halakha, mixing • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Peter's vision, halakhic perspectives • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Torah, and halakha • halakhah • halakhah, as modality of tradition
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 251; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 190; Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 317; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 75; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 88, 292
sup>
3.4 אֵינָהּ מַסְפֶּקֶת לִשְׁתּוֹת עַד שֶׁפָּנֶיהָ מוֹרִיקוֹת וְעֵינֶיהָ בּוֹלְטוֹת וְהִיא מִתְמַלֵּאת גִּידִין, וְהֵם אוֹמְרִים הוֹצִיאוּהָ הוֹצִיאוּהָ, שֶׁלֹּא תְטַמֵּא הָעֲזָרָה. אִם יֶשׁ לָהּ זְכוּת, הָיְתָה תוֹלָה לָהּ. יֵשׁ זְכוּת תּוֹלָה שָׁנָה אַחַת, יֵשׁ זְכוּת תּוֹלָה שְׁתֵּי שָׁנִים, יֵשׁ זְכוּת תּוֹלָה שָׁלשׁ שָׁנִים. מִכָּאן אוֹמֵר בֶּן עַזַּאי, חַיָּב אָדָם לְלַמֵּד אֶת בִּתּוֹ תוֹרָה, שֶׁאִם תִּשְׁתֶּה, תֵּדַע שֶׁהַזְּכוּת תּוֹלָה לָהּ. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, כָּל הַמְלַמֵּד אֶת בִּתּוֹ תוֹרָה, כְּאִלּוּ מְלַמְּדָהּ תִּפְלוּת. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, רוֹצָה אִשָּׁה בְקַב וְתִפְלוּת מִתִּשְׁעָה קַבִּין וּפְרִישׁוּת. הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר, חָסִיד שׁוֹטֶה, וְרָשָׁע עָרוּם, וְאִשָּׁה פְרוּשָׁה, וּמַכּוֹת פְּרוּשִׁין, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מְכַלֵּי עוֹלָם:
5.1 כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהַמַּיִם בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתָהּ, כָּךְ הַמַּיִם בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר ה) וּבָאוּ, וּבָאוּ. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאֲסוּרָה לַבַּעַל, כָּךְ אֲסוּרָה לַבּוֹעֵל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם) נִטְמְאָה, וְנִטְמָאָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, כָּךְ הָיָה דוֹרֵשׁ זְכַרְיָה בֶן הַקַּצָּב. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, שְׁנֵי פְעָמִים הָאֲמוּרִים בַּפָּרָשָׁה אִם נִטְמְאָה נִטְמָאָה, אֶחָד לַבַּעַל וְאֶחָד לַבּוֹעֵל:
9.15 מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי מֵאִיר, בָּטְלוּ מוֹשְׁלֵי מְשָׁלִים. מִשֶּׁמֵּת בֶּן עַזַּאי, בָּטְלוּ הַשַּׁקְדָּנִים. מִשֶּׁמֵּת בֶּן זוֹמָא, בָּטְלוּ הַדַּרְשָׁנִים. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, פָּסְקָה טוֹבָה מִן הָעוֹלָם. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, בָּא גוֹבַי וְרַבּוּ צָרוֹת. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, פָּסַק הָעשֶׁר מִן הַחֲכָמִים. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, בָּטַל כְּבוֹד הַתּוֹרָה. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בֶּן דּוֹסָא, בָּטְלוּ אַנְשֵׁי מַעֲשֶׂה. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי יוֹסֵי קַטְנוּתָא, פָּסְקוּ חֲסִידִים. וְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ קַטְנוּתָא, שֶׁהָיָה קַטְנוּתָן שֶׁל חֲסִידִים. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, בָּטַל זִיו הַחָכְמָה. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הַזָּקֵן, בָּטַל כְּבוֹד הַתּוֹרָה וּמֵתָה טָהֳרָה וּפְרִישׁוּת. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בֶּן פָּאבִי, בָּטַל זִיו הַכְּהֻנָּה. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי, בָּטְלָה עֲנָוָה וְיִרְאַת חֵטְא. רַבִּי פִנְחָס בֶּן יָאִיר אוֹמֵר, מִשֶּׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, בּוֹשׁוּ חֲבֵרִים וּבְנֵי חוֹרִין, וְחָפוּ רֹאשָׁם, וְנִדַּלְדְּלוּ אַנְשֵׁי מַעֲשֶׂה, וְגָבְרוּ בַעֲלֵי זְרוֹעַ וּבַעֲלֵי לָשׁוֹן, וְאֵין דּוֹרֵשׁ וְאֵין מְבַקֵּשׁ, וְאֵין שׁוֹאֵל, עַל מִי לָנוּ לְהִשָּׁעֵן, עַל אָבִינוּ שֶׁבַּשָּׁמָיִם. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר הַגָּדוֹל אוֹמֵר, מִיּוֹם שֶׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, שָׁרוּ חַכִּימַיָּא לְמֶהֱוֵי כְסָפְרַיָּא, וְסָפְרַיָּא כְּחַזָּנָא, וְחַזָּנָא כְּעַמָּא דְאַרְעָא, וְעַמָּא דְאַרְעָא אָזְלָא וְדַלְדְּלָה, וְאֵין מְבַקֵּשׁ, עַל מִי יֵשׁ לְהִשָּׁעֵן, עַל אָבִינוּ שֶׁבַּשָּׁמָיִם. בְּעִקְּבוֹת מְשִׁיחָא חֻצְפָּא יִסְגֵּא, וְיֹקֶר יַאֲמִיר, הַגֶּפֶן תִּתֵּן פִּרְיָהּ וְהַיַּיִן בְּיֹקֶר, וְהַמַּלְכוּת תֵּהָפֵךְ לְמִינוּת, וְאֵין תּוֹכֵחָה, בֵּית וַעַד יִהְיֶה לִזְנוּת, וְהַגָּלִיל יֶחֱרַב, וְהַגַּבְלָן יִשּׁוֹם, וְאַנְשֵׁי הַגְּבוּל יְסוֹבְבוּ מֵעִיר לְעִיר וְלֹא יְחוֹנָּנוּ, וְחָכְמַת סוֹפְרִים תִּסְרַח, וְיִרְאֵי חֵטְא יִמָּאֲסוּ, וְהָאֱמֶת תְּהֵא נֶעְדֶּרֶת. נְעָרִים פְּנֵי זְקֵנִים יַלְבִּינוּ, זְקֵנִים יַעַמְדוּ מִפְּנֵי קְטַנִּים. (מיכה ז) בֵּן מְנַבֵּל אָב, בַּת קָמָה בְאִמָּהּ, כַּלָּה בַּחֲמֹתָהּ, אֹיְבֵי אִישׁ אַנְשֵׁי בֵיתוֹ. פְּנֵי הַדּוֹר כִּפְנֵי הַכֶּלֶב, הַבֵּן אֵינוֹ מִתְבַּיֵּשׁ מֵאָבִיו. וְעַל מִי יֵשׁ לָנוּ לְהִשָּׁעֵן, עַל אָבִינוּ שֶׁבַּשָּׁמָיִם. רַבִּי פִנְחָס בֶּן יָאִיר אוֹמֵר, זְרִיזוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי נְקִיּוּת, וּנְקִיּוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי טָהֳרָה, וְטָהֳרָה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי פְרִישׁוּת, וּפְרִישׁוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי קְדֻשָּׁה, וּקְדֻשָּׁה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי עֲנָוָה, וַעֲנָוָה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי יִרְאַת חֵטְא, וְיִרְאַת חֵטְא מְבִיאָה לִידֵי חֲסִידוּת, וַחֲסִידוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ, וְרוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ מְבִיאָה לִידֵי תְחִיַּת הַמֵּתִים, וּתְחִיַּת הַמֵּתִים בָּא עַל יְדֵי אֵלִיָּהוּ זָכוּר לַטּוֹב, אָמֵן:'' None | sup>
3.4 She had barely finished drinking when her face turns yellow, her eyes protrude and her veins swell. And those who see her exclaim, “Remove her! Remove her, so that the temple-court should not be defiled”. If she had merit, it causes the water to suspend its effect upon her. Some merit suspends the effect for one year, some merit suspends the effects for two years, and some merit suspends the effect for three years. Hence Ben Azzai said: a person must teach his daughter Torah, so that if she has to drink the water of bitterness, she should know that the merit suspends its effect. Rabbi Eliezer says: whoever teaches his daughter Torah teaches her lasciviousness. Rabbi Joshua says: a woman prefers one kav (of food) and sexual indulgence to nine kav and sexual separation. He used to say, a foolish pietist, a cunning wicked person, a female separatist, and the blows of separatists bring destruction upon the world.
5.1 Just as the water checks her so the water checks him, as it is said, “And shall enter”, “And shall enter” (Numbers 5:22,. Just as she is prohibited to the husband so is she prohibited to the lover, as it is said, “defiled … and is defiled” (Numbers 5:27,, the words of Rabbi Akiba. Rabbi Joshua said: thus Zechariah ben Hakatzav used to expound. Rabbi says: twice in the portion, “If she is defiled…defiled”--one referring to her being prohibited to the husband and the other to the paramour.
9.15 When Rabbi Meir died, the composers of fables ceased. When Ben Azzai died, the diligent students of Torah ceased. When Ben Zoma died, the expounders ceased. When Rabbi Joshua died, goodness ceased from the world. When Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel died, locusts come and troubles multiplied. When Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah died, the sages ceased to be wealthy. When Rabbi Akiba died, the glory of the Torah ceased. When Rabbi Hanina ben Dosa died, men of wondrous deeds ceased. When Rabbi Yose Katnuta died, the pious men (hasidim) ceased and why was his name called Katnuta? Because he was the youngest of the pious men. When Rabban Yoha ben Zakkai died, the splendor of wisdom ceased. When Rabban Gamaliel the elder died, the glory of the torah ceased, and purity and separateness perished. When Rabbi Ishmael ben Fabi died, the splendor of the priesthood ceased. When Rabbi died, humility and fear of sin ceased. Rabbi Phineas ben Yair says: when Temple was destroyed, scholars and freemen were ashamed and covered their head, men of wondrous deeds were disregarded, and violent men and big talkers grew powerful. And nobody expounds, nobody seeks, and nobody asks. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. Rabbi Eliezer the Great says: from the day the Temple was destroyed, the sages began to be like scribes, scribes like synagogue-attendants, synagogue-attendants like common people, and the common people became more and more debased. And nobody seeks. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. In the footsteps of the messiah insolence (hutzpah) will increase and the cost of living will go up greatly; the vine will yield its fruit, but wine will be expensive; the government will turn to heresy, and there will be no one to rebuke; the meeting-place of scholars will be used for licentiousness; the Galilee will be destroyed, the Gablan will be desolated, and the dwellers on the frontier will go about begging from place to place without anyone to take pity on them; the wisdom of the learned will rot, fearers of sin will be despised, and the truth will be lacking; youths will put old men to shame, the old will stand up in the presence of the young, “For son spurns father, daughter rises up against mother, daughter-in-law against mother-in-law a man’s own household are his enemies” (Micah 7:6). The face of the generation will be like the face of a dog, a son will not feel ashamed before his father. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair says, “Heedfulness leads to cleanliness, cleanliness leads to purity, purity leads to separation, separation leads to holiness, holiness leads to modesty, modesty leads to fear of sin, fear of sin leads to piety, piety leads to the Holy Spirit, The Holy Spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead, and the resurrection of the dead comes from Elijah, blessed be his memory, Amen.”'' None |
|
54. Mishnah, Sukkah, 4.9 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Qumran halakha • discourse, halakhic
Found in books: Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 11; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 613
sup>
4.9 נִסּוּךְ הַמַּיִם כֵּיצַד. צְלוֹחִית שֶׁל זָהָב מַחֲזֶקֶת שְׁלשֶׁת לֻגִּים הָיָה מְמַלֵּא מִן הַשִּׁלּוֹחַ. הִגִּיעוּ לְשַׁעַר הַמַּיִם, תָּקְעוּ וְהֵרִיעוּ וְתָקָעוּ. עָלָה בַכֶּבֶשׁ וּפָנָה לִשְׂמֹאלוֹ, שְׁנֵי סְפָלִים שֶׁל כֶּסֶף הָיוּ שָׁם. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, שֶׁל סִיד הָיוּ, אֶלָּא שֶׁהָיוּ מֻשְׁחָרִין פְּנֵיהֶם מִפְּנֵי הַיָּיִן. וּמְנֻקָּבִין כְּמִין שְׁנֵי חֳטָמִין דַּקִּין, אֶחָד מְעֻבֶּה וְאֶחָד דַּק, כְּדֵי שֶׁיְּהוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם כָּלִין בְּבַת אַחַת. מַעֲרָבִי שֶׁל מַיִם, מִזְרָחִי שֶׁל יָיִן. עֵרָה שֶׁל מַיִם לְתוֹךְ שֶׁל יַיִן, וְשֶׁל יַיִן לְתוֹךְ שֶׁל מַיִם, יָצָא. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, בְּלֹג הָיָה מְנַסֵּךְ כָּל שְׁמֹנָה. וְלַמְנַסֵּךְ אוֹמְרִים לוֹ, הַגְבַּהּ יָדֶךָ, שֶׁפַּעַם אַחַת נִסֵּךְ אֶחָד עַל גַּבֵּי רַגְלָיו, וּרְגָמוּהוּ כָל הָעָם בְּאֶתְרוֹגֵיהֶן:'' None | sup>
4.9 How was the water libation performed? A golden flask holding three logs was filled from the Shiloah. When they arrived at the water gate, they sounded a teki'ah long blast, a teru'ah a staccato note and again a teki'ah. The priest then went up the ascent of the altar and turned to his left where there were two silver bowls. Rabbi Judah says: they were of plaster but they looked silver because their surfaces were darkened from the wine. They had each a hole like a slender snout, one being wide and the other narrow so that both emptied at the same time. The one on the west was for water and the one on the east for wine. If he poured the flask of water into the bowl for wine, or that of wine into that for water, he has fulfilled his obligation. Rabbi Judah says: with one log he performed the ceremony of the water-libation all eight days. To the priest who performed the libation they used to say, “Raise your hand”, for one time, a certain man poured out the water over his feet, and all the people pelted him with their etrogs."" None |
|
55. Mishnah, Toharot, 2.2, 4.7, 4.11 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Halakhah • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Tannaic halakha • halakhah, as modality of tradition
Found in books: Iricinschi et al. (2013), Beyond the Gnostic Gospels: Studies Building on the Work of Elaine Pagels, 389; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 94, 95; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 17, 124
sup>
2.2 רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, הָאוֹכֵל אֹכֶל רִאשׁוֹן, רִאשׁוֹן. אֹכֶל שֵׁנִי, שֵׁנִי. אֹכֶל שְׁלִישִׁי, שְׁלִישִׁי. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, הָאוֹכֵל אֹכֶל רִאשׁוֹן וְאֹכֶל שֵׁנִי, שֵׁנִי. שְׁלִישִׁי, שֵׁנִי לַקֹּדֶשׁ וְלֹא שֵׁנִי לַתְּרוּמָה, בְּחֻלִּין שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ לְטָהֳרַת תְּרוּמָה:
4.11 סְפֵק יָדַיִם לִטָּמֵא וּלְטַמֵּא וְלִטָּהֵר, טָהוֹר. סְפֵק רְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים, טָהוֹר. סְפֵק דִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים, אָכַל אֳכָלִים טְמֵאִים, שָׁתָה מַשְׁקִים טְמֵאִים, בָּא רֹאשׁוֹ וְרֻבּוֹ בְמַיִם שְׁאוּבִין, אוֹ שֶׁנָּפְלוּ עַל רֹאשׁוֹ וְרֻבּוֹ שְׁלשָׁה לֻגִּין מַיִם שְׁאוּבִים, סְפֵקוֹ טָהוֹר. אֲבָל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא אַב הַטֻּמְאָה וְהוּא מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים, סְפֵקוֹ טָמֵא:' ' None | sup>
2.2 Rabbi Eliezer says: he who eats food with first degree uncleanness contracts first decree uncleanness; He who eats food with second degree uncleanness contracts second degree uncleanness; With third degree uncleanness contracts third degree uncleanness. Rabbi Joshua says: he who eats food with first degree or with second degree uncleanness contracts second degree uncleanness; With third degree uncleanness, he contracts second degree uncleanness in regard to holy things but not in regard to terumah. All this applies to common food that was prepared in condition of cleanness that is appropriate for terumah.
4.11 "If there is doubt concerning the hands as to whether they have contracted uncleanness, have conveyed uncleanness or have attained cleanness, they are deemed clean.\\" \\"Any doubt that arose in a public domain is deemed clean. \\"A condition of doubt concerning an ordice of the scribes\\": For instance, he is uncertain whether he ate unclean food or drank unclean liquids, whether he immersed his head and the greater part of his body in drawn water, or whether there fell on his head and the greater part of his body three log of drawn water, such a condition of doubt is deemed clean. But if a condition of doubt arose concerning a father of uncleanness even though it was only rabbinical, it is deemed unclean.' ' None |
|
56. Mishnah, Yadayim, 4.3-4.4, 4.6-4.8 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Dead Sea Scrolls, divine inspiration as source of halakhah • Halacha • Halakha, and community • Halakhah, origins of • Halakhah/Halakhot • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • Sinai, a halakha to Moses from Sinai • System, halakhic ~ • Tannaic halakha • aggada in Mishna, establishes authority of rabbis as interpreters of halakha • authority, rabbinic constructions of,beyond halakhic • halakha, a halakha to Moses from Sinai • halakhah, Mosaic • halakhah, Second Temple period • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, divine versus human authority in • halakhah, pre-exilic • history of Halakha,
Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 140; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 74; Hachlili (2005), Jewish Funerary Customs, Practices And Rites In The Second Temple Period, 450; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 79, 509, 512; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 76, 80, 82; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 58; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 9, 25, 50, 449, 583
sup>
4.3 בּוֹ בַיּוֹם אָמְרוּ, עַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב, מַה הֵן בַּשְּׁבִיעִית. גָּזַר רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן, מַעְשַׂר עָנִי. וְגָזַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי. אָמַר רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל, אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, עָלֶיךָ רְאָיָה לְלַמֵּד, שֶׁאַתָּה מַחְמִיר, שֶׁכָּל הַמַּחְמִיר, עָלָיו רְאָיָה לְלַמֵּד. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, יִשְׁמָעֵאל אָחִי, אֲנִי לֹא שִׁנִּיתִי מִסֵּדֶר הַשָּׁנִים, טַרְפוֹן אָחִי שִׁנָּה, וְעָלָיו רְאָיָה לְלַמֵּד. הֵשִׁיב רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן, מִצְרַיִם חוּץ לָאָרֶץ, עַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב חוּץ לָאָרֶץ, מַה מִּצְרַיִם מַעְשַׂר עָנִי בַשְּׁבִיעִית, אַף עַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב מַעְשַׂר עָנִי בַשְּׁבִיעִית. הֵשִׁיב רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, בָּבֶל חוּץ לָאָרֶץ, עַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב חוּץ לָאָרֶץ, מַה בָּבֶל מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי בַשְּׁבִיעִית, אַף עַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי בַשְּׁבִיעִית. אָמַר רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן, מִצְרַיִם שֶׁהִיא קְרוֹבָה, עֲשָׂאוּהָ מַעְשַׂר עָנִי, שֶׁיִּהְיוּ עֲנִיֵּי יִשְׂרָאֵל נִסְמָכִים עָלֶיהָ בַּשְּׁבִיעִית, אַף עַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב, שֶׁהֵם קְרוֹבִים, נַעֲשִׂים מַעְשַׂר עָנִי, שֶׁיִּהְיוּ עֲנִיֵּי יִשְׂרָאֵל נִסְמָכִים עֲלֵיהֶם בַּשְּׁבִיעִית. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, הֲרֵי אַתָּה כִמְהַנָּן מָמוֹן, וְאֵין אַתָּה אֶלָּא כְמַפְסִיד נְפָשׁוֹת. קוֹבֵעַ אַתָּה אֶת הַשָּׁמַיִם מִלְּהוֹרִיד טַל וּמָטָר, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (מלאכי ג), הֲיִקְבַּע אָדָם אֱלֹהִים כִּי אַתֶּם קֹבְעִים אֹתִי וַאֲמַרְתֶּם בַּמֶּה קְבַעֲנוּךָ הַמַּעֲשֵׂר וְהַתְּרוּמָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, הֲרֵינִי כְמֵשִׁיב עַל טַרְפוֹן אָחִי, אֲבָל לֹא לְעִנְיַן דְּבָרָיו. מִצְרַיִם מַעֲשֶׂה חָדָשׁ, וּבָבֶל מַעֲשֶׂה יָשָׁן, וְהַנִּדּוֹן שֶׁלְּפָנֵינוּ מַעֲשֶׂה חָדָשׁ. יִדּוֹן מַעֲשֶׂה חָדָשׁ מִמַּעֲשֶׂה חָדָשׁ, וְאַל יִדּוֹן מַעֲשֶׂה חָדָשׁ מִמַּעֲשֶׂה יָשָׁן. מִצְרַיִם מַעֲשֵׂה זְקֵנִים, וּבָבֶל מַעֲשֵׂה נְבִיאִים, וְהַנִּדּוֹן שֶׁלְּפָנֵינוּ מַעֲשֵׂה זְקֵנִים. יִדּוֹן מַעֲשֵׂה זְקֵנִים מִמַּעֲשֵׂה זְקֵנִים, וְאַל יִדּוֹן מַעֲשֵׂה זְקֵנִים מִמַּעֲשֵׂה נְבִיאִים. נִמְנוּ וְגָמְרוּ, עַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב מְעַשְּׂרִין מַעְשַׂר עָנִי בַּשְּׁבִיעִית. וּכְשֶׁבָּא רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן דֻּרְמַסְקִית אֵצֶל רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּלוֹד, אָמַר לוֹ, מַה חִדּוּשׁ הָיָה לָכֶם בְּבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ הַיּוֹם. אָמַר לוֹ, נִמְנוּ וְגָמְרוּ, עַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב מְעַשְּׂרִים מַעְשַׂר עָנִי בַּשְּׁבִיעִית. בָּכָה רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר וְאָמַר, סוֹד ה' לִירֵאָיו וּבְרִיתוֹ לְהוֹדִיעָם (תהלים כה). צֵא וֶאֱמֹר לָהֶם, אַל תָּחֹשּׁוּ לְמִנְיַנְכֶם. מְקֻבָּל אֲנִי מֵרַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, שֶׁשָּׁמַע מֵרַבּוֹ, וְרַבּוֹ מֵרַבּוֹ עַד הֲלָכָה לְמשֶׁה מִסִּינַי, שֶׁעַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב מְעַשְּׂרִין מַעְשַׂר עָנִי בַּשְּׁבִיעִית:" "4.4 בּוֹ בַיּוֹם בָּא יְהוּדָה, גֵּר עַמּוֹנִי, וְעָמַד לִפְנֵיהֶן בְּבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ. אָמַר לָהֶם, מָה אֲנִי לָבֹא בַקָּהָל. אָמַר לוֹ רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, אָסוּר אָתָּה. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, מֻתָּר אָתָּה. אָמַר לוֹ רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, הַכָּתוּב אוֹמֵר (דברים כג), לֹא יָבֹא עַמּוֹנִי וּמוֹאָבִי בִּקְהַל ה' גַּם דּוֹר עֲשִׂירִי וְגוֹ'. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, וְכִי עַמּוֹנִים וּמוֹאָבִים בִּמְקוֹמָן הֵן. כְּבָר עָלָה סַנְחֵרִיב מֶלֶךְ אַשּׁוּר וּבִלְבֵּל אֶת כָּל הָאֻמּוֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ישעיה י), וְאָסִיר גְּבוּלֹת עַמִּים וַעֲתוּדוֹתֵיהֶם שׁוֹשֵׂתִי וְאוֹרִיד כַּאבִּיר יוֹשְׁבִים. אָמַר לוֹ רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, הַכָּתוּב אוֹמֵר (ירמיה מט), וְאַחֲרֵי כֵן אָשִׁיב אֶת שְׁבוּת בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן, וּכְבָר חָזְרוּ. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, הַכָּתוּב אוֹמֵר (עמוס ט), וְשַׁבְתִּי אֶת שְׁבוּת עַמִּי יִשְׂרָאֵל וִיהוּדָה, וַעֲדַיִן לֹא שָׁבוּ. הִתִּירוּהוּ לָבֹא בַקָּהָל:" 4.6 אוֹמְרִים צְדוֹקִים, קוֹבְלִין אָנוּ עֲלֵיכֶם, פְּרוּשִׁים, שֶׁאַתֶּם אוֹמְרִים, כִּתְבֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ מְטַמְּאִין אֶת הַיָּדַיִם, וְסִפְרֵי הוֹמֵרִיס אֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. אָמַר רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, וְכִי אֵין לָנוּ עַל הַפְּרוּשִׁים אֶלָּא זוֹ בִלְבָד. הֲרֵי הֵם אוֹמְרִים, עַצְמוֹת חֲמוֹר טְהוֹרִים וְעַצְמוֹת יוֹחָנָן כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל טְמֵאִים. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, לְפִי חִבָּתָן הִיא טֻמְאָתָן, שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם עַצְמוֹת אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ תַּרְוָדוֹת. אָמַר לָהֶם, אַף כִּתְבֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ לְפִי חִבָּתָן הִיא טֻמְאָתָן, וְסִפְרֵי הוֹמֵרִיס, שֶׁאֵינָן חֲבִיבִין, אֵינָן מְטַמְּאִין אֶת הַיָּדָיִם: 4.7 אוֹמְרִים צְדוֹקִין, קוֹבְלִין אָנוּ עֲלֵיכֶם, פְּרוּשִׁים, שֶׁאַתֶּם מְטַהֲרִים אֶת הַנִּצּוֹק. אוֹמְרִים הַפְּרוּשִׁים, קוֹבְלִין אָנוּ עֲלֵיכֶם, צְדוֹקִים, שֶׁאַתֶּם מְטַהֲרִים אֶת אַמַּת הַמַּיִם הַבָּאָה מִבֵּית הַקְּבָרוֹת. אוֹמְרִים צְדוֹקִין, קוֹבְלִין אָנוּ עֲלֵיכֶם, פְּרוּשִׁים, שֶׁאַתֶּם אוֹמְרִים, שׁוֹרִי וַחֲמוֹרִי שֶׁהִזִּיקוּ, חַיָּבִין. וְעַבְדִּי וַאֲמָתִי שֶׁהִזִּיקוּ, פְּטוּרִין. מָה אִם שׁוֹרִי וַחֲמוֹרִי, שֶׁאֵינִי חַיָּב בָּהֶם מִצְוֹת, הֲרֵי אֲנִי חַיָּב בְּנִזְקָן. עַבְדִּי וַאֲמָתִי, שֶׁאֲנִי חַיָּב בָּהֶן מִצְוֹת, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁאֱהֵא חַיָּב בְּנִזְקָן. אָמְרוּ לָהֶם, לֹא. אִם אֲמַרְתֶּם בְּשׁוֹרִי וַחֲמוֹרִי, שֶׁאֵין בָּהֶם דַּעַת, תֹּאמְרוּ בְּעַבְדִּי וּבַאֲמָתִי, שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהֶם דָּעַת. שֶׁאִם אַקְנִיטֵם, יֵלֵךְ וְיַדְלִיק גְּדִישׁוֹ שֶׁל אַחֵר וֶאֱהֵא חַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּם:' "4.8 אָמַר צְדוֹקִי גְלִילִי, קוֹבֵל אֲנִי עֲלֵיכֶם, פְּרוּשִׁים, שֶׁאַתֶּם כּוֹתְבִין אֶת הַמּוֹשֵׁל עִם משֶׁה בַּגֵּט. אוֹמְרִים פְּרוּשִׁים, קוֹבְלִין אָנוּ עָלֶיךָ, צְדוֹקִי גְלִילִי, שֶׁאַתֶּם כּוֹתְבִים אֶת הַמּוֹשֵׁל עִם הַשֵּׁם בַּדַּף, וְלֹא עוֹד, אֶלָּא שֶׁאַתֶּם כּוֹתְבִין אֶת הַמּוֹשֵׁל מִלְמַעְלָן וְאֶת הַשֵּׁם מִלְּמַטָּן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות ה) וַיֹּאמֶר פַּרְעֹה מִי ה' אֲשֶׁר אֶשְׁמַע בְּקֹלוֹ לְשַׁלַּח אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל. וּכְשֶׁלָּקָה מַהוּ אוֹמֵר (שם ט), ה' הַצַּדִּיק:"" None | sup>
4.3 On that day they said: what is the law applying to Ammon and Moab in the seventh year? Rabbi Tarfon decreed tithe for the poor. And Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah decreed second tithe. Rabbi Ishmael said: Elazar ben Azariah, you must produce your proof because you are expressing the stricter view and whoever expresses a stricter view has the burden to produce the proof. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah said to him: Ishmael, my brother, I have not deviated from the sequence of years, Tarfon, my brother, has deviated from it and the burden is upon him to produce the proof. Rabbi Tarfon answered: Egypt is outside the land of Israel, Ammon and Moab are outside the land of Israel: just as Egypt must give tithe for the poor in the seventh year, so must Ammon and Moab give tithe for the poor in the seventh year. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah answered: Babylon is outside the land of Israel, Ammon and Moab are outside the land of Israel: just as Babylon must give second tithe in the seventh year, so must Ammon and Moab give second tithe in the seventh year. Rabbi Tarfon said: on Egypt which is near, they imposed tithe for the poor so that the poor of Israel might be supported by it during the seventh year; so on Ammon and Moab which are near, we should impose tithe for the poor so that the poor of Israel may be supported by it during the seventh year. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah said to him: Behold, you are like one who would benefit them with gain, yet you are really as one who causes them to perish. Would you rob the heavens so that dew or rain should not descend? As it is said, \\"Will a man rob God? Yet you rob me. But you: How have we robbed You? In tithes and heave-offerings\\" (Malakhi 3:8). Rabbi Joshua said: Behold, I shall be as one who replies on behalf of Tarfon, my brother, but not in accordance with the substance of his arguments. The law regarding Egypt is a new act and the law regarding Babylon is an old act, and the law which is being argued before us is a new act. A new act should be argued from another new act, but a new act should not be argued from an old act. The law regarding Egypt is the act of the elders and the law regarding Babylon is the act of the prophets, and the law which is being argued before us is the act of the elders. Let one act of the elders be argued from another act of the elders, but let not an act of the elders be argued from an act of the prophets. The votes were counted and they decided that Ammon and Moab should give tithe for the poor in the seventh year. And when Rabbi Yose ben Durmaskit visited Rabbi Eliezer in Lod he said to him: what new thing did you have in the house of study today? He said to him: their votes were counted and they decided that Ammon and Moab must give tithe for the poor in the seventh year. Rabbi Eliezer wept and said: \\"The counsel of the Lord is with them that fear him: and his covet, to make them know it\\" (Psalms 25:14). Go and tell them: Don\'t worry about your voting. I received a tradition from Rabbi Yoha ben Zakkai who heard it from his teacher, and his teacher from his teacher, and so back to a halachah given to Moses from Sinai, that Ammon and Moab must give tithe for the poor in the seventh year. 4.4 On that day Judah, an Ammonite convert, came and stood before them in the house of study. He said to them: Do I have the right to enter into the assembly? Rabban Gamaliel said to him: you are forbidden. Rabbi Joshua said to him: you are permitted. Rabban Gamaliel said to him: the verse says, \\"An Ammonite or a Moabite shall not enter into the assembly of the Lord: even to the tenth generation\\" (Deuteronomy 23:4). R. Joshua said to him: But are the Ammonites and Moabites still in their own territory? Sanheriv, the king of Assyria, has long since come up and mingled all the nations, as it is said: \\"In that I have removed the bounds of the peoples, and have robbed their treasures, and have brought down as one mighty the inhabitants\\" (Isaiah 10:1. Rabban Gamaliel said to him: the verse says, \\"But afterward I will bring back the captivity of the children of Ammon,\\" (Jeremiah 49:6) they have already returned. Rabbi Joshua said to him: another verse says, \\"I will return the captivity of my people Israel and Judah\\" (Amos 9:14). Yet they have not yet returned. So they permitted him to enter the assembly.
4.6 The Sadducees say: we complain against you, Pharisees, because you say that the Holy Scriptures defile the hands, but the books of Homer do not defile the hands. Rabban Yoha ben Zakkai said: Have we nothing against the Pharisees but this? Behold they say that the bones of a donkey are clean, yet the bones of Yoha the high priest are unclean. They said to him: according to the affection for them, so is their impurity, so that nobody should make spoons out of the bones of his father or mother. He said to them: so also are the Holy Scriptures according to the affection for them, so is their uncleanness. The books of Homer which are not precious do not defile the hands.' "4.7 The Sadducees say: we complain against you, Pharisees, that you declare an uninterrupted flow of a liquid to be clean. The Pharisees say: we complain against you, Sadducees, that you declare a stream of water which flows from a burial-ground to be clean? The Sadducees say: we complain against you, Pharisees, that you say, my ox or donkey which has done injury is liable, yet my male or female slave who has done injury is not liable. Now if in the case of my ox or my donkey for which I am not responsible if they do not fulfill religious duties, yet I am responsible for their damages, in the case of my male or female slave for whom I am responsible to see that they fulfill mitzvot, how much more so that I should be responsible for their damages? They said to them: No, if you argue about my ox or my donkey which have no understanding, can you deduce from there anything concerning a male or female slave who do have understanding? So that if I were to anger either of them and they would go and burn another person's stack, should I be liable to make restitution?" '4.8 A Galilean min said: I complain against you Pharisees, that you write the name of the ruler and the name of Moses together on a divorce document. The Pharisees said: we complain against you, Galilean min, that you write the name of the ruler together with the divine name on a single page of Torah? And furthermore that you write the name of the ruler above and the divine name below? As it is said, \\"And Pharoah said, Who is the Lord that I should hearken to his voice to let Israel go?\\" (Exodus 5:2) But when he was smitten what did he say? \\"The Lord is righteous\\" (Exodus 9:27).'' None |
|
57. Mishnah, Zavim, 5.12 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Halakha, and community • Halakhah • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Tannaic halakha • halakhah, as modality of tradition • history of Halakha,
Found in books: Iricinschi et al. (2013), Beyond the Gnostic Gospels: Studies Building on the Work of Elaine Pagels, 389; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 94; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 8, 9, 10, 14, 17, 20
sup>
5.12 אֵלּוּ פוֹסְלִים אֶת הַתְּרוּמָה. הָאוֹכֵל אֹכֶל רִאשׁוֹן, וְהָאוֹכֵל אֹכֶל שֵׁנִי, וְהַשּׁוֹתֶה מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין, וְהַבָּא רֹאשׁוֹ וְרֻבּוֹ בְּמַיִם שְׁאוּבִין, וְטָהוֹר שֶׁנָּפְלוּ עַל רֹאשׁוֹ וְעַל רֻבּוֹ שְׁלשָׁה לֻגִּין מַיִם שְׁאוּבִין, וְהַסֵּפֶר, וְהַיָּדַיִם, וּטְבוּל יוֹם, וְהָאֳכָלִים וְהַכֵּלִים שֶׁנִּטְמְאוּ בְמַשְׁקִים:'' None | sup>
5.12 The following disqualify terumah:One who eats foods with first degree uncleanness; Or one who eats food with second degree uncleanness; And who drinks unclean liquids. And the one who has immersed his head and the greater part of him in drawn water; And a clean person upon whose head and greater part of him there fell three logs of drawn water; And a scroll of Holy Scriptures, And unwashed hands; And one that has had immersion that same day; And foods and vessels which have become defiled by liquids.'' None |
|
58. New Testament, 1 Corinthians, 11.23 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Divorce, law/halakha • Halakha, formulated in Greek • Halakha, in the New Testament • Halakhah • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Tannaic halakha • halakhah • history of Halakha,
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 257; Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 26; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 27, 95, 103, 399, 591, 597; Zetterholm (2003), The Formation of Christianity in Antioch: A Social-Scientific Approach to the Separation Between Judaism and Christianity. 148
sup>
11.23 ἐγὼ γὰρ παρέλαβον ἀπὸ τοῦ κυρίου, ὃ καὶ παρέδωκα ὑμῖν, ὅτι ὁ κύριος Ἰησοῦς ἐν τῇ νυκτὶ ᾗ παρεδίδετο ἔλαβεν ἄρτον καὶ εὐχαριστήσας ἔκλασεν καὶ εἶπεν' ' None | sup>
11.23 For I received from the Lord that which also I delivered toyou, that the Lord Jesus on the night in which he was betrayed tookbread.' ' None |
|
59. New Testament, Acts, 5.20, 15.5, 15.29, 21.18, 21.20, 21.23-21.26, 22.3, 26.5 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Divorce, law/halakha • Halakha • Halakha, discourse • Halakha, in the New Testament • Halakha, intensification • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Peter's vision, halakhic perspectives • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Rabbinic, halakhic discourse • System, halakhic ~ • halakha in Diaspora • halakhah • prophecy, halakhic model of
Found in books: DeJong (2022), A Prophet like Moses (Deut 18:15, 18): The Origin, History, and Influence of the Mosaic Prophetic Succession, 264; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 400; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 62, 67, 72, 74, 77; Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 156; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 39, 40, 47, 98, 103, 104, 113, 549; Zetterholm (2003), The Formation of Christianity in Antioch: A Social-Scientific Approach to the Separation Between Judaism and Christianity. 162
sup>
5.20 Πορεύεσθε καὶ σταθέντες λαλεῖτε ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ τῷ λαῷ πάντα τὰ ῥήματα τῆς ζωῆς ταύτης.
15.5 Ἐξανέστησαν δέ τινες τῶν ἀπὸ τῆς αἱρέσεως τῶν Φαρισαίων πεπιστευκότες, λέγοντες ὅτι δεῖ περιτέμνειν αὐτοὺς παραγγέλλειν τε τηρεῖν τὸν νόμον Μωυσέως.
15.29 ἐξ ὧν διατηροῦντες ἑαυτοὺς εὖ πράξετε. Ἔρρωσθε.
21.18 τῇ δὲ ἐπιούσῃ εἰσῄει ὁ Παῦλος σὺν ἡμῖν πρὸς Ἰάκωβον, πάντες τε παρεγένοντο οἱ πρεσβύτεροι.
21.20 οἱ δὲ ἀκούσαντες ἐδόξαζον τὸν θεόν, εἶπάν τε αὐτῷ Θεωρεῖς, ἀδελφέ, πόσαι μυριάδες εἰσὶν ἐν τοῖς Ἰουδαίοις τῶν πεπιστευκότων, καὶ πάντες ζηλωταὶ τοῦ νόμου ὑπάρχουσιν·
21.23 τοῦτο οὖν ποίησον ὅ σοι λέγομεν· εἰσὶν ἡμῖν ἄνδρες τέσσαρες εὐχὴν ἔχοντες ἀφʼ ἑαυτῶν. 21.24 τούτους παραλαβὼν ἁγνίσθητι σὺν αὐτοῖς καὶ δαπάνησον ἐπʼ αὐτοῖς ἵνα ξυρήσονται τὴν κεφαλήν, καὶ γνώσονται πάντες ὅτι ὧν κατήχηνται περὶ σοῦ οὐδὲν ἔστιν, ἀλλὰ στοιχεῖς καὶ αὐτὸς φυλάσσων τὸν νόμον. 21.25 περὶ δὲ τῶν πεπιστευκότων ἐθνῶν ἡμεῖς ἀπεστείλαμεν κρίναντες φυλάσσεσθαι αὐτοὺς τό τε εἰδωλόθυτον καὶ αἷμα καὶ πνικτὸν καὶ πορνείαν. 21.26 τότε ὁ Παῦλος παραλαβὼν τοὺς ἄνδρας τῇ ἐχομένῃ ἡμέρᾳ σὺν αὐτοῖς ἁγνισθεὶς εἰσῄει εἰς τὸ ἱερόν, διαγγέλλων τὴν ἐκπλήρωσιν τῶν ἡμερῶν τοῦ ἁγνισμοῦ ἕως οὗ προσηνέχθη ὑπὲρ ἑνὸς ἑκάστου αὐτῶν ἡ προσφορά.
22.3 Ἐγώ εἰμι ἀνὴρ Ἰουδαῖος, γεγεννημένος ἐν Ταρσῷ τῆς Κιλικίας, ἀνατεθραμμένος δὲ ἐν τῇ πόλει ταύτῃ παρὰ τοὺς πόδας Γαμαλιήλ, πεπαιδευμένος κατὰ ἀκρίβειαν τοῦ πατρῴου νόμου, ζηλωτὴς ὑπάρχων τοῦ θεοῦ καθὼς πάντες ὑμεῖς ἐστὲ σήμερον,
26.5 προγινώσκοντές με ἄνωθεν, ἐὰν θέλωσι μαρτυρεῖν, ὅτι κατὰ τὴν ἀκριβεστάτην αἵρεσιν τῆς ἡμετέρας θρησκείας ἔζησα Φαρισαῖος.' ' None | sup>
5.20 "Go stand and speak in the temple to the people all the words of this life."
15.5 But some of the sect of the Pharisees who believed rose up, saying, "It is necessary to circumcise them, and to charge them to keep the law of Moses."
15.29 that you abstain from things sacrificed to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality, from which if you keep yourselves, it will be well with you. Farewell."
21.18 The day following, Paul went in with us to James; and all the elders were present.
21.20 They, when they heard it, glorified God. They said to him, "You see, brother, how many thousands there are among the Jews of those who have believed, and they are all zealous for the law.
21.23 Therefore do what we tell you. We have four men who have a vow on them. 21.24 Take them, and purify yourself with them, and pay their expenses for them, that they may shave their heads. Then all will know that there is no truth in the things that they have been informed about you, but that you yourself also walk keeping the law. 21.25 But concerning the Gentiles who believe, we have written our decision that they should observe no such thing, except that they should keep themselves from food offered to idols, from blood, from strangled things, and from sexual immorality." 21.26 Then Paul took the men, and the next day, purified himself and went with them into the temple, declaring the fulfillment of the days of purification, until the offering was offered for every one of them.
22.3 "I am indeed a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city at the feet of Gamaliel, instructed according to the strict manner of the law of our fathers, being zealous for God, even as you all are this day.
26.5 having known me from the first, if they are willing to testify, that after the strictest sect of our religion I lived a Pharisee. ' ' None |
|
60. New Testament, Galatians, 1.14, 2.1-2.10, 3.28 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Divorce, law/halakha • Halakha, formulated in Greek • Halakha, in the New Testament • Peter's vision, halakhic perspectives • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • halakha, and Scripture • halakhah • history of Halakha,
Found in books: Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 6; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 67; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 81; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 27, 103, 346, 549; Zetterholm (2003), The Formation of Christianity in Antioch: A Social-Scientific Approach to the Separation Between Judaism and Christianity. 160, 162
sup>
1.14 καὶ προέκοπτον ἐν τῷ Ἰουδαϊσμῷ ὑπὲρ πολλοὺς συνηλικιώτας ἐν τῷ γένει μου, περισσοτέρως ζηλωτὴς ὑπάρχων τῶν πατρικῶν μου παραδόσεων.
2.1 Ἔπειτα διὰ δεκατεσσάρων ἐτῶν πάλιν ἀνέβην εἰς Ἰεροσόλυμα μετὰ Βαρνάβα, συνπαραλαβὼν καὶ Τίτον· ἀνέβην δὲ κατὰ ἀποκάλυψιν· 2.2 καὶ ἀνεθέμην αὐτοῖς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον ὃ κηρύσσω ἐν τοῖς ἔθνεσιν, κατʼ ἰδίαν δὲ τοῖς δοκοῦσιν, μή πως εἰς κενὸν τρέχω ἢ ἔδραμον. 2.3 ἀλλʼ οὐδὲ Τίτος ὁ σὺν ἐμοί, Ἕλλην ὤν, ἠναγκάσθη περιτμηθῆναι· 2.4 διὰ δὲ τοὺς παρεισάκτους ψευδαδέλφους, οἵτινες παρεισῆλθον κατασκοπῆσαι τὴν ἐλευθερίαν ἡμῶν ἣν ἔχομεν ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ, ἵνα ἡμᾶς καταδουλώσουσιν, 2.5 — οἷς οὐδὲ πρὸς ὥραν εἴξαμεν τῇ ὑποταγῇ, ἵνα ἡ ἀλήθεια τοῦ εὐαγγελίου διαμείνῃ πρὸς ὑμᾶς. 2.6 ἀπὸ δὲ τῶν δοκούντων εἶναί τι — ὁποῖοί ποτε ἦσαν οὐδέν μοι διαφέρει — πρόσωπον ὁ θεὸς ἀνθρώπου οὐ λαμβάνει — ἐμοὶ γὰρ οἱ δοκοῦντες οὐδὲν προσανέθεντο, 2.7 ἀλλὰ τοὐναντίον ἰδόντες ὅτι πεπίστευμαι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον τῆς ἀκροβυστίας καθὼς Πέτρος τῆς περιτομῆς, 2.8 ὁ γὰρ ἐνεργήσας Πέτρῳ εἰς ἀποστολὴν τῆς περιτομῆς ἐνήργησεν καὶ ἐμοὶ εἰς τὰ ἔθνη, 2.9 καὶ γνόντες τὴν χάριν τὴν δοθεῖσάν μοι, Ἰάκωβος καὶ Κηφᾶς καὶ Ἰωάνης, οἱ δοκοῦντες στύλοι εἶναι, δεξιὰς ἔδωκαν ἐμοὶ καὶ Βαρνάβᾳ κοινωνίας, ἵνα ἡμεῖς εἰς τὰ ἔθνη, αὐτοὶ δὲ εἰς τὴν περιτομήν·
2.10 μόνον τῶν πτωχῶν ἵνα μνημονεύωμεν, ὃ καὶ ἐσπούδασα αὐτὸ τοῦτο ποιῆσαι.
3.28 οὐκ ἔνι Ἰουδαῖος οὐδὲ Ἕλλην, οὐκ ἔνι δοῦλος οὐδὲ ἐλεύθερος, οὐκ ἔνι ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ· πάντες γὰρ ὑμεῖς εἷς ἐστὲ ἐν Χριστῷ Ἰησοῦ.'' None | sup>
1.14 I advanced inthe Jews' religion beyond many of my own age among my countrymen, beingmore exceedingly zealous for the traditions of my fathers. " 2.1 Then after a period of fourteen years I went up again toJerusalem with Barnabas, taking Titus also with me. 2.2 I went up byrevelation, and I laid before them the gospel which I preach among theGentiles, but privately before those who were respected, for fear thatI might be running, or had run, in vain. 2.3 But not even Titus, whowas with me, being a Greek, was compelled to be circumcised. 2.4 Thiswas because of the false brothers secretly brought in, who stole in tospy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they mightbring us into bondage; 2.5 to whom we gave no place in the way ofsubjection, not for an hour, that the truth of the gospel mightcontinue with you. ' "2.6 But from those who were reputed to beimportant (whatever they were, it makes no difference to me; Goddoesn't show partiality to man) -- they, I say, who were respectedimparted nothing to me, " '2.7 but to the contrary, when they saw that Ihad been entrusted with the gospel for the uncircumcision, even asPeter with the gospel for the circumcision 2.8 (for he who appointedPeter to the apostleship of the circumcision appointed me also to theGentiles); 2.9 and when they perceived the grace that was given tome, James and Cephas and John, they who were reputed to be pillars,gave to me and Barnabas the right hand of fellowship, that we should goto the Gentiles, and they to the circumcision.
2.10 They only askedus to remember the poor -- which very thing I was also zealous to do.
3.28 There is neither Jewnor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither malenor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. '" None |
|
61. New Testament, Philippians, 3.5-3.6 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakha, in the New Testament • halakha, and Scripture • halakhah
Found in books: Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 174; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 67; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 549
sup>
3.5 περιτομῇ ὀκταήμερος, ἐκ γένους Ἰσραήλ, φυλῆς Βενιαμείν, Ἐβραῖος ἐξ Ἐβραίων, κατὰ νόμον Φαρισαῖος, 3.6 κατὰ ζῆλος διώκων τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, κατὰ δικαιοσύνην τὴν ἐν νόμῳ γενόμενος ἄμεμπτος.'' None | sup>
3.5 circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; concerning the law, a Pharisee; 3.6 concerning zeal, persecuting the assembly; concerning the righteousness which is in the law, found blameless. '' None |
|
62. New Testament, Romans, 7.1-7.4, 10.12, 13.5 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Divorce, law/halakha • Halakha • Peter's vision, halakhic perspectives • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • halakhah
Found in books: Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 26, 174; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 82; Rogers (2016), God and the Idols: Representations of God in 1 Corinthians 8-10. 17, 18, 19; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 94, 95, 388, 592; Zetterholm (2003), The Formation of Christianity in Antioch: A Social-Scientific Approach to the Separation Between Judaism and Christianity. 160, 195
sup>
7.1 Ἢ ἀγνοεῖτε, ἀδελφοί, γινώσκουσιν γὰρ νόμον λαλῶ, ὅτι ὁ νόμος κυριεύει τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐφʼ ὅσον χρόνον ζῇ; 7.2 ἡ γὰρ ὕπανδρος γυνὴ τῷ ζῶντι ἀνδρὶ δέδεται νόμῳ· ἐὰν δὲ ἀποθάνῃ ὁ ἀνήρ, κατήργηται ἀπὸ τοῦ νόμου τοῦ ἀνδρός. 7.3 ἄρα οὖν ζῶντος τοῦ ἀνδρὸς μοιχαλὶς χρηματίσει ἐὰν γένηται ἀνδρὶ ἑτέρῳ· ἐὰν δὲ ἀποθάνῃ ὁ ἀνήρ, ἐλευθέρα ἐστὶν ἀπὸ τοῦ νόμου, τοῦ μὴ εἶναι αὐτὴν μοιχαλίδα γενομένην ἀνδρὶ ἑτέρῳ. 7.4 ὥστε, ἀδελφοί μου, καὶ ὑμεῖς ἐθανατώθητε τῷ νόμῳ διὰ τοῦ σώματος τοῦ χριστοῦ, εἰς τὸ γενέσθαι ὑμᾶς ἑτέρῳ, τῷ ἐκ νεκρῶν ἐγερθέντι ἵνα καρποφορήσωμεν τῷ θεῷ.
10.12 οὐ γάρ ἐστιν διαστολὴ Ἰουδαίου τε καὶ Ἕλληνος, ὁ γὰρ αὐτὸς κύριος πάντων, πλουτῶν εἰς πάντας τοὺς ἐπικαλουμένους αὐτόν·
13.5 διὸ ἀνάγκη ὑποτάσσεσθαι, οὐ μόνον διὰ τὴν ὀργὴν ἀλλὰ καὶ διὰ τὴν συνείδησιν,' ' None | sup>
7.1 Or don't you know, brothers (for I speak to men who know the law), that the law has dominion over a man for as long as he lives? " '7.2 For the woman that has a husband is bound by law to the husband while he lives, but if the husband dies, she is discharged from the law of the husband. 7.3 So then if, while the husband lives, she is joined to another man, she would be called an adulteress. But if the husband dies, she is free from the law, so that she is no adulteress, though she is joined to another man. 7.4 Therefore, my brothers, you also were made dead to the law through the body of Christ, that you would be joined to another, to him who was raised from the dead, that we might bring forth fruit to God.
10.12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, and is rich to all who call on him. ' "
13.5 Therefore you need to be in subjection, not only because of the wrath, but also for conscience' sake. " " None |
|
63. New Testament, Luke, 5.28, 7.8, 10.25-10.36 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Halakha • Halakha, halakhic • Halakhah • Peter's vision, halakhic perspectives • halakhah
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 232; Hasan Rokem (2003), Tales of the Neighborhood Jewish Narrative Dialogues in Late Antiquity, 43; Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 243; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 72; Ruzer (2020), Early Jewish Messianism in the New Testament: Reflections in the Dim Mirror, 114; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 169
sup>
5.28 καὶ καταλιπὼν πάντα ἀναστὰς ἠκολούθει αὐτῷ.
7.8 καὶ γὰρ ἐγὼ ἄνθρωπός εἰμι ὑπὸ ἐξουσίαν τασσόμενος, ἔχων ὑπʼ ἐμαυτὸν στρατιώτας, καὶ λέγω τούτῳ Πορεύθητι, καὶ πορεύεται, καὶ ἄλλῳ Ἔρχου, καὶ ἔρχεται, καὶ τῷ δούλῳ μου Ποίησον τοῦτο, καὶ ποιεῖ.
10.25 Καὶ ἰδοὺ νομικός τις ἀνέστη ἐκπειράζων αὐτὸν λέγων Διδάσκαλε, τί ποιήσας ζωὴν αἰώνιον κληρονομήσω; 10.26 ὁ δὲ εἶπεν πρὸς αὐτόν Ἐν τῷ νόμῳ τί γέγραπται; πῶς ἀναγινώσκεις; 10.27 ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν Ἀγαπήσεις Κύριον τὸν θεόν σου ἐξ ὅλης καρδίας σου καὶ ἐν ὅλη τῇ ψυχῇ σου καὶ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ ἰσχύι σου καὶ ἐν ὅλῃ τῇ διανοίᾳ σου, καὶ τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν. 10.28 εἶπεν δὲ αὐτῷ Ὀρθῶς ἀπεκρίθης· τοῦτο ποίει καὶ ζήσῃ. 10.29 Ὁ δὲ θέλων δικαιῶσαι ἑυντὸν εἶπεν πρὸς τὸν Ἰησοῦν Καὶ τίς ἐστίν μου πλησίον; 10.30 ὑπολαβὼν ὁ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν Ἄνθρωπός τις κατέβαινεν ἀπὸ Ἰερουσαλὴμ εἰς Ἰερειχὼ καὶ λῃσταῖς περιέπεσεν, οἳ καὶ ἐκδύσαντες αὐτὸν καὶ πληγὰς ἐπιθέντες ἀπῆλθον ἀφέντες ἡμιθανῆ. 10.31 κατὰ συγκυρίαν δὲ ἱερεύς τις κατέβαινεν ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ ἐκείνῃ, καὶ ἰδὼν αὐτὸν ἀντιπαρῆλθεν· 10.32 ὁμοίως δὲ καὶ Λευείτης κατὰ τὸν τόπον ἐλθὼν καὶ ἰδὼν ἀντιπαρῆλθεν. 10.33 Σαμαρείτης δέ τις ὁδεύων ἦλθεν κατʼ αὐτὸν καὶ ἰδὼν ἐσπλαγχνίσθη, 10.34 καὶ προσελθὼν κατέδησεν τὰ τραύματα αὐτοῦ ἐπιχέων ἔλαιον καὶ οἶνον, ἐπιβιβάσας δὲ αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὸ ἴδιον κτῆνος ἤγαγεν αὐτὸν εἰς πανδοχεῖον καὶ ἐπεμελήθη αὐτοῦ. 10.35 καὶ ἐπὶ τὴν αὔριον ἐκβαλὼν δύο δηνάρια ἔδωκεν τῷ πανδοχεῖ καὶ εἶπεν Ἐπιμελήθητι αὐτοῦ, καὶ ὅτι ἂν προσδαπανήσῃς ἐγὼ ἐν τῷ ἐπανέρχεσθαί με ἀποδώσω σοι. 10.36 τίς τούτων τῶν τριῶν πλησίον δοκεῖ σοι γεγονέναι τοῦ ἐμπεσόντος εἰς τοὺς λῃστάς;'' None | sup>
5.28 He left everything, and rose up and followed him.
7.8 For I also am a man placed under authority, having under myself soldiers. I tell this one, \'Go!\' and he goes; and to another, \'Come!\' and he comes; and to my servant, \'Do this,\' and he does it."
10.25 Behold, a certain lawyer stood up and tested him, saying, "Teacher, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?" 10.26 He said to him, "What is written in the law? How do you read it?" 10.27 He answered, "You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind; and your neighbor as yourself." 10.28 He said to him, "You have answered correctly. Do this, and you will live." 10.29 But he, desiring to justify himself, asked Jesus, "Who is my neighbor?" 10.30 Jesus answered, "A certain man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and he fell among robbers, who both stripped him and beat him, and departed, leaving him half dead. 10.31 By chance a certain priest was going down that way. When he saw him, he passed by on the other side. 10.32 In the same way a Levite also, when he came to the place, and saw him, passed by on the other side. 10.33 But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was. When he saw him, he was moved with compassion, 10.34 came to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. He set him on his own animal, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. ' "10.35 On the next day, when he departed, he took out two denarii, and gave them to the host, and said to him, 'Take care of him. Whatever you spend beyond that, I will repay you when I return.' " '10.36 Now which of these three do you think seemed to be a neighbor to him who fell among the robbers?"'' None |
|
64. New Testament, Mark, 1.7, 3.6, 6.3, 7.1-7.23, 9.5, 10.1-10.12, 11.21, 12.18-12.34 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Divorce, law/halakha • Halakha, discourse • Halakha, halakhic • Halakha, in the New Testament • Halakhah • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Peter's vision, halakhic perspectives • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Qumran halakha • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • Rabbinic, halakhic discourse • System, halakhic ~ • Tannaic halakha • halakha, Dead Sea Scrolls • halakha, and Scripture • halakha, rabbinic • halakha, vs. Roman law • halakhah, as a metaphor for God's rejection of Israel • halakhah, as a metaphor for Gods rejection of Israel • halakhah, as modality of tradition • inheritance, rabbinic halakha • prophecy, halakhic model of
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 246, 257; Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 170; DeJong (2022), A Prophet like Moses (Deut 18:15, 18): The Origin, History, and Influence of the Mosaic Prophetic Succession, 265; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 374, 494; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 66, 67, 68; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 48; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 80, 117; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 70, 77, 80, 81, 87, 90, 91; Ruzer (2020), Early Jewish Messianism in the New Testament: Reflections in the Dim Mirror, 114; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 17, 53, 76, 80, 96, 268, 388, 525, 526, 529, 540, 549, 555, 581, 583, 635
sup>
1.7 καὶ ἐκήρυσσεν λέγων Ἔρχεται ὁ ἰσχυρότερός μου ὀπίσω μου, οὗ οὐκ εἰμὶ ἱκανὸς κύψας λῦσαι τὸν ἱμάντα τῶν ὑποδημάτων αὐτοῦ·
3.6 Καὶ ἐξελθόντες οἱ Φαρισαῖοι εὐθὺς μετὰ τῶν Ἡρῳδιανῶν συμβούλιον ἐδίδουν κατʼ αὐτοῦ ὅπως αὐτὸν ἀπολέσωσιν.
6.3 οὐχ οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ τέκτων, ὁ υἱὸς τῆς Μαρίας καὶ ἀδελφὸς Ἰακώβου καὶ Ἰωσῆτος καὶ Ἰούδα καὶ Σίμωνος; καὶ οὐκ εἰσὶν αἱ ἀδελφαὶ αὐτοῦ ὧδε πρὸς ἡμᾶς; καὶ ἐσκανδαλίζοντο ἐν αὐτῷ.
7.1 Καὶ συνἄγονται πρὸς αὐτὸν οἱ Φαρισαῖοι καί τινες τῶν γραμματέων ἐλθόντες ἀπὸ Ἰεροσολύμων 7.2 καὶ ἰδόντες τινὰς τῶν μαθητῶν αὐτοῦ ὅτι κοιναῖς χερσίν, τοῦτʼ ἔστιν ἀνίπτοις, ἐσθίουσιν τοὺς ἄρτους. 7.3 —οἱ γὰρ Φαρισαῖοι καὶ πάντες οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι ἐὰν μὴ πυγμῇ νίψωνται τὰς χεῖρας οὐκ ἐσθίουσιν, κρατοῦντες τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν πρεσβυτέρων, 7.4 καὶ ἀπʼ ἀγορᾶς ἐὰν μὴ ῥαντίσωνται οὐκ ἐσθίουσιν, καὶ ἄλλα πολλά ἐστιν ἃ παρέλαβον κρατεῖν, βαπτισμοὺς ποτηρίων καὶ ξεστῶν καὶ χαλκίων. 7.5 —καὶ ἐπερωτῶσιν αὐτὸν οἱ Φαρισαῖοι καὶ οἱ γραμματεῖς Διὰ τί οὐ περιπατοῦσιν οἱ μαθηταί σου κατὰ τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν πρεσβυτέρων, ἀλλὰ κοιναῖς χερσὶν ἐσθίουσιν τὸν ἄρτον; 7.6 ὁ δὲ εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Καλῶς ἐπροφήτευσεν Ἠσαίας περὶ ὑμῶν τῶν ὑποκριτῶν, ὡς γέγραπται ὅτι Οὗτος ὁ λαὸς τοῖς χείλεσίν με τιμᾷ, ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπʼ ἐμοῦ· 7.7 μάτην δὲ σέβονταί με, διδάσκοντες διδασκαλίας ἐντάλματα ἀνθρώπων· 7.8 ἀφέντες τὴν ἐντολὴν τοῦ θεοῦ κρατεῖτε τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν ἀνθρώπων. 7.9 καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς Καλῶς ἀθετεῖτε τὴν ἐντολὴν τοῦ θεοῦ, ἵνα τὴν παράδοσιν ὑμῶν τηρήσητε·
7.10 Μωυσῆς γὰρ εἶπεν Τίμα τὸν πατέρα σου καὶ τὴν μητέρα σου, καί Ὁ κακολογῶν πατέρα ἢ μητερα θανάτῳ τελευτάτω·
7.11 ὑμεῖς δὲ λέγετε Ἐὰν εἴπῃ ἄνθρωπος τῷ πατρὶ ἢ τῇ μητρί Κορβάν, ὅ ἐστιν Δῶρον, ὃ ἐὰν ἐξ ἐμοῦ ὠφεληθῇς,
7.12 οὐκέτι ἀφίετε αὐτὸν οὐδὲν ποιῆσαι τῷ πατρὶ ἢ τῇ μητρί,
7.13 ἀκυροῦντες τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ τῇ παραδόσει ὑμῶν ᾗ παρεδώκατε· καὶ παρόμοια τοιαῦτα πολλὰ ποιεῖτε.
7.14 Καὶ προσκαλεσάμενος πάλιν τὸν ὄχλον ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς Ἀκούσατέ μου πάντες καὶ σύνετε.
7.15 οὐδὲν ἔστιν ἔξωθεν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου εἰσπορευόμενον εἰς αὐτὸν ὃ δύναται κοινῶσαι αὐτόν· ἀλλὰ τὰ ἐκ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐκπορευόμενά ἐστιν τὰ κοινοῦντα τὸν ἄνθρωπον.
7.16
7.17 Καὶ ὅτε εἰσῆλθεν εἰς οἶκον ἀπὸ τοῦ ὄχλου, ἐπηρώτων αὐτὸν οἱ μαθηταὶ αὐτοῦ τὴν παραβολήν.
7.18 καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς Οὕτως καὶ ὑμεῖς ἀσύνετοί ἐστε; οὐ νοεῖτε ὅτι πᾶν τὸ ἔξωθεν εἰσπορευόμενον εἰς τὸν ἄνθρωπον οὐ δύναται αὐτὸν κοινῶσαι,
7.19 ὅτι οὐκ εἰσπορεύεται αὐτοῦ εἰς τὴν καρδίαν ἀλλʼ εἰς τὴν κοιλίαν, καὶ εἰς τὸν ἀφεδρῶνα ἐκπορεύεται; —καθαρίζων πάντα τὰ βρώματα. 7.20 ἔλεγεν δὲ ὅτι Τὸ ἐκ τοῦ ἀνθρώπου ἐκπορευόμενον ἐκεῖνο κοινοῖ τὸν ἄνθρωπον· 7.21 ἔσωθεν γὰρ ἐκ τῆς καρδίας τῶν ἀνθρώπων οἱ διαλογισμοὶ οἱ κακοὶ ἐκπορεύονται, πορνεῖαι, κλοπαί, φόνοι, 7.22 μοιχεῖαι, πλεονεξίαι, πονηρίαι, δόλος, ἀσέλγεια, ὀφθαλμὸς πονηρός, βλασφημία, ὑπερηφανία, ἀφροσύνη· 7.23 πάντα ταῦτα τὰ πονηρὰ ἔσωθεν ἐκπορεύεται καὶ κοινοῖ τὸν ἄνθρωπον.
9.5 καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Πέτρος λέγει τῷ Ἰησοῦ Ῥαββεί, καλόν ἐστιν ἡμᾶς ὧδε εἶναι, καὶ ποιήσωμεν τρεῖς σκηνάς, σοὶ μίαν καὶ Μωυσεῖ μίαν καὶ Ἠλείᾳ μίαν.
10.1 Καὶ ἐκεῖθεν ἀναστὰς ἔρχεται εἰς τὰ ὅρια τῆς Ἰουδαίας καὶ πέραν τοῦ Ἰορδάνου, καὶ συνπορεύονται πάλιν ὄχλοι πρὸς αὐτόν, καὶ ὡς εἰώθει πάλιν ἐδίδασκεν αὐτούς. 10.2 Καὶ προσελθόντες Φαρισαῖοι ἐπηρώτων αὐτὸν εἰ ἔξεστιν ἀνδρὶ γυναῖκα ἀπολῦσαι, πειράζοντες αὐτόν. 10.3 ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Τί ὑμῖν ἐνετείλατο Μωυσῆς; 10.4 οἱ δὲ εἶπαν Ἐπέτρεψεν Μωυσῆς βιβλίον ἀποστασίου γράψαι καὶ ἀπολῦσαι. 10.5 ὁ δὲ Ἰησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Πρὸς τὴν σκληροκαρδίαν ὑμῶν ἔγραψεν ὑμῖν τὴν ἐντολὴν ταύτην· 10.6 ἀπὸ δὲ ἀρχῆς κτίσεως ἄρσεν καὶ θῆλυ ἐποίησεν αὐτούς· 10.7 ἕνεκεν τούτου καταλείψει ἄνθρωπος τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῦ καὶ τὴν μητέρα, 10.8 καὶ ἔσονται οἱ δύο εἰς σάρκα μίαν· ὥστε οὐκέτι εἰσὶν δύο ἀλλὰ μία σάρξ· 10.9 ὃ οὖν ὁ θεὸς συνέζευξεν ἄνθρωπος μὴ χωριζέτω.
10.10 Καὶ εἰς τὴν οἰκίαν πάλιν οἱ μαθηταὶ περὶ τούτου ἐπηρώτων αὐτόν.
10.11 καὶ λέγει αὐτοῖς Ὃς ἂν ἀπολύσῃ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ καὶ γαμήσῃ ἄλλην μοιχᾶται ἐπʼ αὐτήν,
10.12 καὶ ἐὰν αὐτὴ ἀπολύσασα τὸν ἄνδρα αὐτῆς γαμήσῃ ἄλλον μοιχᾶται.
11.21 καὶ ἀναμνησθεὶς ὁ Πέτρος λέγει αὐτῷ Ῥαββεί, ἴδε ἡ συκῆ ἣν κατηράσω ἐξήρανται.
12.18 Καὶ ἔρχονται Σαδδουκαῖοι πρὸς αὐτόν, οἵτινες λέγουσιν ἀνάστασιν μὴ εἶναι, καὶ ἐπηρώτων αὐτὸν λέγοντες 12.19 Διδάσκαλε, Μωυσῆς ἔγραψεν ἡμῖν ὅτι ἐάν τινος ἀδελφὸς ἀποθάνῃ καὶ καταλίπῃ γυναῖκα καὶ μὴ ἀφῇ τέκνον, ἵνα λάβῃ ὁ ἀδελφὸς αὐτοῦ τὴν γυναῖκα καὶ ἐξαναστήσῃ σπέρμα τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ. 12.20 ἑπτὰ ἀδελφοὶ ἦσαν· καὶ ὁ πρῶτος ἔλαβεν γυναῖκα, καὶ ἀποθνήσκων οὐκ ἀφῆκεν σπέρμα· 12.21 καὶ ὁ δεύτερος ἔλαβεν αὐτήν, καὶ ἀπέθανεν μὴ καταλιπὼν σπέρμα, καὶ ὁ τρίτος ὡσαύτως· 12.22 καὶ οἱ ἑπτὰ οὐκ ἀφῆκαν σπέρμα· ἔσχατον πάντων καὶ ἡ γυνὴ ἀπέθανεν. 12.23 ἐν τῇ ἀναστάσει τίνος αὐτῶν ἔσται γυνή; οἱ γὰρ ἑπτὰ ἔσχον αὐτὴν γυναῖκα. 12.24 ἔφη αὐτοῖς ὁ Ἰησοῦς Οὐ διὰ τοῦτο πλανᾶσθε μὴ εἰδότες τὰς γραφὰς μηδὲ τὴν δύναμιν τοῦ θεοῦ; 12.25 ὅταν γὰρ ἐκ νεκρῶν ἀναστῶσιν, οὔτε γαμοῦσιν οὔτε γαμίζονται, ἀλλʼ εἰσὶν ὡς ἄγγελοι ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς· 12.26 περὶ δὲ τῶν νεκρῶν ὅτι ἐγείρονται οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε ἐν τῇ βίβλῳ Μωυσέως ἐπὶ τοῦ βάτου πῶς εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ θεὸς λέγων Ἐγὼ ὁ θεὸς Ἀβραὰμ καὶ θεὸς Ἰσαὰκ καὶ θεὸς Ἰακώβ; 12.27 οὐκ ἔστιν θεὸς νεκρῶν ἀλλὰ ζώντων· πολὺ πλανᾶσθε. 12.28 Καὶ προσελθὼν εἷς τῶν γραμματέων ἀκούσας αὐτῶν συνζητούντων, εἰδὼς ὅτι καλῶς ἀπεκρίθη αὐτοῖς, ἐπηρώτησεν αὐτόν Ποία ἐστὶν ἐντολὴ πρώτη πάντων; 12.29 ἀπεκρίθη ὁ Ἰησοῦς ὅτι Πρώτη ἐστίν Ἄκουε, Ἰσραήλ, Κύριος ὁ θεὸς ἡμῶν κύριος εἷς ἐστίν, 12.30 καὶ ἀγαπήσεις Κύριον τὸν θεόν σου ἐξ ὅλης καρδίας σου καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς ψυχῆς σου καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς διανοίας σου καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς ἰσχύος σου. 12.31 δευτέρα αὕτη Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν. μείζων τούτων ἄλλη ἐντολὴ οὐκ ἔστιν. 12.32 Εἶπεν αὐτῷ ὁ γραμματεύς Καλῶς, διδάσκαλε, ἐπʼ ἀληθείας εἶπες ὅτι εἷς ἐστὶν καὶ οὐκ ἔστιν ἄλλος πλὴν αὐτοῦ· 12.33 καὶ τὸ ἀγαπᾷν αὐτὸν ἐξ ὅλης καρδίας καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς συνέσεως καὶ ἐξ ὅλης τῆς ἰσχύος καὶ τὸ ἀγαπᾷν τὸν πλησίον ὡς ἑαυτὸν περισσότερόν ἐστιν πάντων τῶν ὁλοκαυτωμάτων καὶ θυσιῶν. 12.34 καὶ ὁ Ἰησοῦς ἰδὼν αὐτὸν ὅτι νουνεχῶς ἀπεκρίθη εἶπεν αὐτῷ Οὐ μακρὰν εἶ ἀπὸ τῆς βασιλείας τοῦ θεοῦ. Καὶ οὐδεὶς οὐκέτι ἐτόλμα αὐτὸν ἐπερωτῆσαι.'' None | sup>
1.7 He preached, saying, "After me comes he who is mightier than I, the thong of whose sandals I am not worthy to stoop down and loosen.
3.6 The Pharisees went out, and immediately conspired with the Herodians against him, how they might destroy him.
6.3 Isn\'t this the carpenter, the son of Mary, and brother of James, Joses, Judas, and Simon? Aren\'t his sisters here with us?" They were offended at him.
7.1 Then the Pharisees, and some of the scribes gathered together to him, having come from Jerusalem. 7.2 Now when they saw some of his disciples eating bread with defiled, that is, unwashed, hands, they found fault. ' "7.3 (For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, don't eat unless they wash their hands and forearms, holding to the tradition of the elders. " "7.4 They don't eat when they come from the marketplace, unless they bathe themselves, and there are many other things, which they have received to hold to: washings of cups, pitchers, bronze vessels, and couches.) " '7.5 The Pharisees and the scribes asked him, "Why don\'t your disciples walk according to the tradition of the elders, but eat their bread with unwashed hands?" 7.6 He answered them, "Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written, \'This people honors me with their lips, But their heart is far from me. ' "7.7 But in vain do they worship me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.' " '7.8 "For you set aside the commandment of God, and hold tightly to the tradition of men -- the washing of pitchers and cups, and you do many other such things." 7.9 He said to them, "Full well do you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition. ' "
7.10 For Moses said, 'Honor your father and your mother;' and, 'He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him be put to death.' " 7.11 But you say, \'If a man tells his father or his mother, "Whatever profit you might have received from me is Corban, that is to say, given to God;"\ 7.12 then you no longer allow him to do anything for his father or his mother,
7.13 making void the word of God by your tradition, which you have handed down. You do many things like this."
7.14 He called all the multitude to himself, and said to them, "Hear me, all of you, and understand.
7.15 There is nothing from outside of the man, that going into him can defile him; but the things which proceed out of the man are those that defile the man.
7.16 If anyone has ears to hear, let him hear!"
7.17 When he had entered into a house away from the multitude, his disciples asked him about the parable.
7.18 He said to them, "Are you thus without understanding also? Don\'t you perceive that whatever goes into the man from outside can\'t defile him,
7.19 because it doesn\'t go into his heart, but into his stomach, then into the latrine, thus making all foods clean?" 7.20 He said, "That which proceeds out of the man, that defiles the man. 7.21 For from within, out of the hearts of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, sexual sins, murders, thefts, 7.22 covetings, wickedness, deceit, lustful desires, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, and foolishness. 7.23 All these evil things come from within, and defile the man."
9.5 Peter answered Jesus, "Rabbi, it is good for us to be here. Let\'s make three tents: one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah."
10.1 He arose from there and came into the borders of Judea and beyond the Jordan. Multitudes came together to him again. As he usually did, he was again teaching them. 10.2 Pharisees came to him testing him, and asked him, "Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife?" 10.3 He answered, "What did Moses command you?" 10.4 They said, "Moses allowed a certificate of divorce to be written, and to divorce her." 10.5 But Jesus said to them, "For your hardness of heart, he wrote you this commandment. ' "10.6 But from the beginning of the creation, 'God made them male and female. " '10.7 For this cause a man will leave his father and mother, and will join to his wife, ' "10.8 and the two will become one flesh,' so that they are no longer two, but one flesh. " '10.9 What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate."
10.10 In the house, his disciples asked him again about the same matter.
10.11 He said to them, "Whoever divorces his wife, and marries another, commits adultery against her.
10.12 If a woman herself divorces her husband, and marries another, she commits adultery."
11.21 Peter, remembering, said to him, "Rabbi, look! The fig tree which you cursed has withered away."
12.18 There came to him Sadducees, who say that there is no resurrection. They asked him, saying, 12.19 "Teacher, Moses wrote to us, \'If a man\'s brother dies, and leaves a wife behind him, and leaves no children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up offspring for his brother.\ '12.20 There were seven brothers. The first took a wife, and dying left no offspring. 12.21 The second took her, and died, leaving no children behind him. The third likewise; 12.22 and the seven took her and left no children. Last of all the woman also died. 12.23 In the resurrection, when they rise, whose wife will she be of them? For the seven had her as a wife." 12.24 Jesus answered them, "Isn\'t this because you are mistaken, not knowing the Scriptures, nor the power of God? 12.25 For when they will rise from the dead, they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven. ' "12.26 But about the dead, that they are raised; haven't you read in the book of Moses, about the Bush, how God spoke to him, saying, 'I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?' " '12.27 He is not the God of the dead, but of the living. You are therefore badly mistaken." 12.28 One of the scribes came, and heard them questioning together. Knowing that he had answered them well, asked him, "Which commandment is the greatest of all?" 12.29 Jesus answered, "The greatest is, \'Hear, Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one: ' "12.30 you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind, and with all your strength.' This is the first commandment. " '12.31 The second is like this, \'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.\' There is no other commandment greater than these." 12.32 The scribe said to him, "Truly, teacher, you have said well that he is one, and there is none other but he, 12.33 and to love him with all the heart, and with all the understanding, with all the soul, and with all the strength, and to love his neighbor as himself, is more important than all whole burnt offerings and sacrifices." 12.34 When Jesus saw that he answered wisely, he said to him, "You are not far from the Kingdom of God."No one dared ask him any question after that. '' None |
|
65. New Testament, Matthew, 2.13, 2.20, 5.21-5.48, 6.9-6.13, 15.1-15.20, 18.17, 22.23, 22.34, 23.2-23.33 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Divorce, law/halakha • Halakha, discourse • Halakha, halakhic • Halakha, in the New Testament • Halakha, intensification • Halakha, mixing • Halakhah • Halakhah, origins of • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Matthew (Gospel writer and Gospel), abrogation of Halakhah in • Peter's vision, halakhic perspectives • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Qumran halakha • Rabbinic, halakhic discourse • System, halakhic ~ • Tannaic halakha • Torah, and halakha • ancient Halakha • halakha, and Scripture • halakhah, conflicting interpretations of • history of Halakha,
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 286; Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 58; Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 121; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 374; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 72; Iricinschi et al. (2013), Beyond the Gnostic Gospels: Studies Building on the Work of Elaine Pagels, 384; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 62, 72, 75, 90; Ruzer (2020), Early Jewish Messianism in the New Testament: Reflections in the Dim Mirror, 114; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 17, 25, 68, 73, 76, 97, 98, 99, 101, 104, 268, 292, 293, 517, 526, 635; Zawanowska and Wilk (2022), The Character of David in Judaism, Christianity and Islam: Warrior, Poet, Prophet and King, 215
sup>
2.13 Ἀναχωρησάντων δὲ αὐτῶν ἰδοὺ ἄγγελος Κυρίου φαίνεται κατʼ ὄναρ τῷ Ἰωσὴφ λέγων Ἐγερθεὶς παράλαβε τὸ παιδίον καὶ τὴν μητέρα αὐτοῦ καὶ φεῦγε εἰς Αἴγυπτον, καὶ ἴσθι ἐκεῖ ἕως ἂν εἴπω σοι· μέλλει γὰρ Ἡρῴδης ζητεῖν τὸ παιδίον τοῦ ἀπολέσαι αὐτό.
2.20 λέγων Ἐγερθεὶς παράλαβε τὸ παιδίον καὶ τὴν μητέρα αὐτοῦ καὶ πορεύου εἰς γῆν Ἰσραήλ, τεθνήκασιν γὰρ οἱ ζητοῦντες τὴν ψυχὴν τοῦ παιδίου.
5.21 Ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη τοῖς ἀρχαίοις Οὐ φονεύσεις· ὃς δʼ ἂν φονεύσῃ, ἔνοχος ἔσται τῇ κρίσει. 5.22 Ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι πᾶς ὁ ὀργιζόμενος τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ ἔνοχος ἔσται τῇ κρίσει· ὃς δʼ ἂν εἴπῃ τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ Ῥακά, ἔνοχος ἔσται τῷ συνεδρίῳ· ὃς δʼ ἂν εἴπῃ Μωρέ, ἔνοχος ἔσται εἰς τὴν γέενναν τοῦ πυρός. 5.23 ἐὰν οὖν προσφέρῃς τὸ δῶρόν σου ἐπὶ τὸ θυσιαστήριον κἀκεῖ μνησθῇς ὅτι ὁ ἀδελφός σου ἔχει τι κατὰ σοῦ, 5.24 ἄφες ἐκεῖ τὸ δῶρόν σου ἔμπροσθεν τοῦ θυσιαστηρίου, καὶ ὕπαγε πρῶτον διαλλάγηθι τῷ ἀδελφῷ σου, καὶ τότε ἐλθὼν πρόσφερε τὸ δῶρόν σου. 5.25 ἴσθι εὐνοῶν τῷ ἀντιδίκῳ σου ταχὺ ἕως ὅτου εἶ μετʼ αὐτοῦ ἐν τῇ ὁδῷ, μή ποτέ σε παραδῷ ὁ ἀντίδικος τῷ κριτῇ, καὶ ὁ κριτὴς τῷ ὑπηρέτῃ, καὶ εἰς φυλακὴν βληθήσῃ· 5.26 ἀμὴν λέγω σοι, οὐ μὴ ἐξέλθῃς ἐκεῖθεν ἕως ἂν ἀποδῷς τὸν ἔσχατον κοδράντην. 5.27 Ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη Οὐ μοιχεύσεις. 5.28 Ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι πᾶς ὁ βλέπων γυναῖκα πρὸς τὸ ἐπιθυμῆσαι αὐτὴν ἤδη ἐμοίχευσεν αὐτὴν ἐν τῇ καρδίᾳ αὐτοῦ. 5.29 εἰ δὲ ὁ ὀφθαλμός σου ὁ δεξιὸς σκανδαλίζει σε, ἔξελε αὐτὸν καὶ βάλε ἀπὸ σοῦ, συμφέρει γάρ σοι ἵνα ἀπόληται ἓν τῶν μελῶν σου καὶ μὴ ὅλον τὸ σῶμά σου βληθῇ εἰς γέενναν· 5.30 καὶ εἰ ἡ δεξιά σου χεὶρ σκανδαλίζει σε, ἔκκοψον αὐτὴν καὶ βάλε ἀπὸ σοῦ, συμφέρει γάρ σοι ἵνα ἀπόληται ἓν τῶν μελῶν σου καὶ μὴ ὅλον τὸ σῶμά σου εἰς γέενναν ἀπέλθῃ. 5.31 Ἐρρέθη δέ Ὃς ἂν ἀπολύσῃ τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ, δότω αὐτῇ ἀποστάσιον. 5.32 Ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι πᾶς ὁ ἀπολύων τὴν γυναῖκα αὐτοῦ παρεκτὸς λόγου πορνείας ποιεῖ αὐτὴν μοιχευθῆναι, καὶ ὃς ἐὰν ἀπολελυμένην γαμήσῃ μοιχᾶται. 5.33 Πάλιν ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη τοῖς ἀρχαίοις Οὐκ ἐπιορκήσεις, ἀποδώσεις δὲ τῷ κυρίῳ τοὺς ὅρκους σου. 5.34 Ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν μν̀ ὀμόσαι ὅλως· μήτε ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, ὅτι θρόνος ἐστὶν τοῦ θεοῦ· 5.35 μήτε ἐν τῇ γῇ, ὅτι ὑποπόδιόν ἐστιν τῶν ποδῶν αὐτοῦ· μήτε εἰς Ἰεροσόλυμα, ὅτι πόλις ἐστὶν τοῦ μεγάλου βασιλέως· 5.36 μήτε ἐν τῇ κεφαλῇ σου ὀμόσῃς, ὅτι οὐ δύνασαι μίαν τρίχα λευκὴν ποιῆσαι ἢ μέλαιναν. 5.37 ἔστω δὲ ὁ λόγος ὑμῶν ναὶ ναί, οὒ οὔ· τὸ δὲ περισσὸν τούτων ἐκ τοῦ πονηροῦ ἐστίν. 5.38 Ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη Ὀφθαλμὸν ἀντὶ ὀφθαλμοῦ καὶ ὀδόντα ἀντὶ ὀδόντος. 5.39 Ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν μὴ ἀντιστῆναι τῷ πονηρῷ· ἀλλʼ ὅστις σε ῥαπίζει εἰς τὴν δεξιὰν σιαγόνα σου, στρέψον αὐτῷ καὶ τὴν ἄλλην· 5.40 καὶ τῷ θέλοντί σοι κριθῆναι καὶ τὸν χιτῶνά σου λαβεῖν, ἄφες αὐτῷ καὶ τὸ ἱμάτιον· 5.41 καὶ ὅστις σε ἀγγαρεύσει μίλιον ἕν, ὕπαγε μετʼ αὐτοῦ δύο. 5.42 τῷ αἰτοῦντί σε δός, καὶ τὸν θέλοντα ἀπὸ σοῦ δανίσασθαι μὴ ἀποστραφῇς. 5.43 Ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου καὶ μισήσεις τὸν ἐχθρόν σου. 5.44 Ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν, ἀγαπᾶτε τοὺς ἐχθροὺς ὑμῶν καὶ προσεύχεσθε ὑπὲρ τῶν διωκόντων ὑμᾶς· 5.45 ὅπως γένησθε υἱοὶ τοῦ πατρὸς ὑμῶν τοῦ ἐν οὐρανοῖς, ὅτι τὸν ἥλιον αὐτοῦ ἀνατέλλει ἐπὶ πονηροὺς καὶ ἀγαθοὺς καὶ βρέχει ἐπὶ δικαίους καὶ ἀδίκους. 5.46 ἐὰν γὰρ ἀγαπήσητε τοὺς ἀγαπῶντας ὑμᾶς, τίνα μισθὸν ἔχετε; οὐχὶ καὶ οἱ τελῶναι τὸ αὐτὸ ποιοῦσιν; 5.47 καὶ ἐὰν ἀσπάσησθε τοὺς ἀδελφοὺς ὑμῶν μόνον, τί περισσὸν ποιεῖτε; οὐχὶ καὶ οἱ ἐθνικοὶ τὸ αὐτὸ ποιοῦσιν; 5.48 Ἔσεσθε οὖν ὑμεῖς τέλειοι ὡς ὁ πατὴρ ὑμῶν ὁ οὐράνιος τέλειός ἐστιν.
6.9 Οὕτως οὖν προσεύχεσθε ὑμεῖς Πάτερ ἡμῶν ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς· Ἁγιασθήτω τὸ ὄνομά σου, 6.10 ἐλθάτω ἡ βασιλεία σου, γενηθήτω τὸ θέλημά σου, ὡς ἐν οὐρανῷ καὶ ἐπὶ γῆς· 6.11 Τὸν ἄρτον ἡμῶν τὸν ἐπιούσιον δὸς ἡμῖν σήμερον· 6.12 καὶ ἄφες ἡμῖν τὰ ὀφειλήματα ἡμῶν, ὡς καὶ ἡμεῖς ἀφήκαμεν τοῖς ὀφειλέταις ἡμῶν· 6.13 καὶ μὴ εἰσενέγκῃς ἡμᾶς εἰς πειρασμόν, ἀλλὰ ῥῦσαι ἡμᾶς ἀπὸ τοῦ πονηροῦ.
15.1 Τότε προσέρχονται τῷ Ἰησοῦ ἀπὸ Ἰεροσολύμων Φαρισαῖοι καὶ γραμματεῖς λέγοντες 15.2 Διὰ τί οἱ μαθηταί σου παραβαίνουσιν τὴν παράδοσιν τῶν πρεσβυτέρων; οὐ γὰρ νίπτονται τὰς χεῖρας ὅταν ἄρτον ἐσθίωσιν. 15.3 ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Διὰ τί καὶ ὑμεῖς παραβαίνετε τὴν ἐντολὴν τοῦ θεοῦ διὰ τὴν παράδοσιν ὑμῶν; 15.4 ὁ γὰρ θεὸς εἶπεν Τίμα τὸν πατέρα καὶ τὴν μητέρα, καί Ὁ κακολογῶν πατέρα ἢ μητέρα θανάτῳ τελευτάτω· 15.5 ὑμεῖς δὲ λέγετε Ὃς ἂν εἴπῃ τῷ πατρὶ ἢ τῇ μητρί Δῶρον ὃ ἐὰν ἐξ ἐμοῦ ὠφεληθῇς, 15.6 οὐ μὴ τιμήσει τὸν πατέρα αὐτοῦ· καὶ ἠκυρώσατε τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ διὰ τὴν παράδοσιν ὑμῶν. 15.7 ὑποκριταί, καλῶς ἐπροφήτευσεν περὶ ὑμῶν Ἠσαίας λέγων 15.8 Ὁ λαὸς οὗτος τοῖς χείλεσίν με τιμᾷ, ἡ δὲ καρδία αὐτῶν πόρρω ἀπέχει ἀπʼ ἐμοῦ· 15.9 μάτην δὲ σέβονταί με, διδάσκοντες διδασκαλίας ἐντάλματα ἀνθρώπων.
15.10 Καὶ προσκαλεσάμενος τὸν ὄχλον εἶπεν αὐτοῖς Ἀκούετε καὶ συνίετε·
15.11 οὐ τὸ εἰσερχόμενον εἰς τὸ στόμα κοινοῖ τὸν ἄνθρωπον, ἀλλὰ τὸ ἐκπορευόμενον ἐκ τοῦ στόματος τοῦτο κοινοῖ τὸν ἄνθρωπον.
15.12 Τότε προσελθόντες οἱ μαθηταὶ λέγουσιν αὐτῷ Οἶδας ὅτι οἱ Φαρισαῖοι ἀκούσαντες τὸν λόγον ἐσκανδαλίσθησαν;
15.13 ὁ δὲ ἀποκριθεὶς εἶπεν Πᾶσα φυτεία ἣν οὐκ ἐφύτευσεν ὁ πατήρ μου ὁ οὐράνιος ἐκριζωθήσεται.
15.14 ἄφετε αὐτούς· τυφλοί εἰσιν ὁδηγοί· τυφλὸς δὲ τυφλὸν ἐὰν ὁδηγῇ, ἀμφότεροι εἰς βόθυνον πεσοῦνται.
15.15 Ἀποκριθεὶς δὲ ὁ Πέτρος εἶπεν αὐτῷ Φράσον ἡμῖν τὴν παραβολήν.
15.16 ὁ δὲ εἶπεν Ἀκμὴν καὶ ὑμεῖς ἀσύνετοί ἐστε;
15.17 οὐ νοεῖτε ὅτι πᾶν τὸ εἰσπορευόμενον εἰς τὸ στόμα εἰς τὴν κοιλίαν χωρεῖ καὶ εἰς ἀφεδρῶνα ἐκβάλλεται;
15.18 τὰ δὲ ἐκπορευόμενα ἐκ τοῦ στόματος ἐκ τῆς καρδίας ἐξέρχεται, κἀκεῖνα κοινοῖ τὸν ἄνθρωπον.
15.19 ἐκ γὰρ τῆς καρδίας ἐξέρχονται διαλογισμοὶ πονηροί, φόνοι, μοιχεῖαι, πορνεῖαι, κλοπαί, ψευδομαρτυρίαι, βλασφημίαι. 15.20 ταῦτά ἐστιν τὰ κοινοῦντα τὸν ἄνθρωπον, τὸ δὲ ἀνίπτοις χερσὶν φαγεῖν οὐ κοινοῖ τὸν ἄνθρωπον.
18.17 ἐὰν δὲ παρακούσῃ αὐτῶν, εἰπὸν τῇ ἐκκλησίᾳ· ἐὰν δὲ καὶ τῆς ἐκκλησίας παρακούσῃ, ἔστω σοι ὥσπερ ὁ ἐθνικὸς καὶ ὁ τελώνης.
22.23 Ἐν ἐκείνῃ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ προσῆλθον αὐτῷ Σαδδουκαῖοι, λέγοντες μὴ εἶναι ἀνάστασιν, καὶ ἐπηρώτησαν αὐτὸν
22.34 Οἱ δὲ Φαρισαῖοι ἀκούσαντες ὅτι ἐφίμωσεν τοὺς Σαδδουκαίους συνήχθησαν ἐπὶ τὸ αὐτό.
23.2 Ἐπὶ τῆς Μωυσέως καθέδρας ἐκάθισαν οἱ γραμματεῖς καὶ οἱ Φαρισαῖοι. 23.3 πάντα οὖν ὅσα ἐὰν εἴπωσιν ὑμῖν ποιήσατε καὶ τηρεῖτε, κατὰ δὲ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν μὴ ποιεῖτε, λέγουσιν γὰρ καὶ οὐ ποιοῦσιν. 23.4 δεσμεύουσιν δὲ φορτία βαρέα καὶ ἐπιτιθέασιν ἐπὶ τοὺς ὤμους τῶν ἀνθρώπων, αὐτοὶ δὲ τῷ δακτύλῳ αὐτῶν οὐ θέλουσιν κινῆσαι αὐτά. 23.5 πάντα δὲ τὰ ἔργα αὐτῶν ποιοῦσιν πρὸς τὸ θεαθῆναι τοῖς ἀνθρώποις· πλατύνουσι γὰρ τὰ φυλακτήρια αὐτῶν καὶ μεγαλύνουσι τὰ κράσπεδα, 23.6 φιλοῦσι δὲ τὴν πρωτοκλισίαν ἐν τοῖς δείπνοις καὶ τὰς πρωτοκαθεδρίας ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς 23.7 καὶ τοὺς ἀσπασμοὺς ἐν ταῖς ἀγοραῖς καὶ καλεῖσθαι ὑπὸ τῶν ἀνθρώπων Ῥαββεί. 23.8 ὑμεῖς δὲ μὴ κληθῆτε Ῥαββεί, εἷς γάρ ἐστιν ὑμῶν ὁ διδάσκαλος, πάντες δὲ ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί ἐστε· 23.9 καὶ πατέρα μὴ καλέσητε ὑμῶν ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς, εἷς γάρ ἐστιν ὑμῶν ὁ πατὴρ ὁ οὐράνιος· 23.10 μηδὲ κληθῆτε καθηγηταί, ὅτι καθηγητὴς ὑμῶν ἐστὶν εἷς ὁ χριστός· 23.11 ὁ δὲ μείζων ὑμῶν ἔσται ὑμῶν διάκονος. 23.12 Ὅστις δὲ ὑψώσει ἑαυτὸν ταπεινωθήσεται, καὶ ὅστις ταπεινώσει ἑαυτὸν ὑψωθήσεται. 23.13 23.14 Οὐαὶ δὲ ὑμῖν, γραμματεῖς καὶ Φαρισαῖοι ὑποκριταί, ὅτι κλείετε τὴν βασιλείαν τῶν οὐρανῶν ἔμπροσθεν τῶν ἀνθρώπων· ὑμεῖς γὰρ οὐκ εἰσέρχεσθε, οὐδὲ τοὺς εἰσερχομένους ἀφίετε εἰσελθεῖν. 23.15 Οὐαὶ ὑμῖν, γραμματεῖς καὶ Φαρισαῖοι ὑποκριταί, ὅτι περιάγετε τὴν θάλασσαν καὶ τὴν ξηρὰν ποιῆσαι ἕνα προσήλυτον, καὶ ὅταν γένηται ποιεῖτε αὐτὸν υἱὸν γεέννης διπλότερον ὑμῶν. 23.16 Οὐαὶ ὑμῖν, ὁδηγοὶ τυφλοὶ οἱ λέγοντες Ὃς ἂν ὀμόσῃ ἐν τῷ ναῷ, οὐδέν ἐστιν, ὃς δʼ ἂν ὀμόσῃ ἐν τῷ χρυσῷ τοῦ ναοῦ ὀφείλει· 23.17 μωροὶ καὶ τυφλοί, τίς γὰρ μείζων ἐστίν, ὁ χρυσὸς ἢ ὁ ναὸς ὁ ἁγιάσας τὸν χρυσόν; 23.18 καί Ὃς ἂν ὀμόσῃ ἐν τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ, οὐδέν ἐστιν, ὃς δʼ ἂν ὀμόσῃ ἐν τῷ δώρῳ τῷ ἐπάνω αὐτοῦ ὀφείλει· 23.19 τυφλοί, τί γὰρ μεῖζον, τὸ δῶρον ἢ τὸ θυσιαστήριον τὸ ἁγιάζον τὸ δῶρον;
23.20 ὁ οὖν ὀμόσας ἐν τῷ θυσιαστηρίῳ ὀμνύει ἐν αὐτῷ καὶ ἐν πᾶσι τοῖς ἐπάνω αὐτοῦ·
23.21 καὶ ὁ ὀμόσας ἐν τῷ ναῷ ὀμνύει ἐν αὐτῷ καὶ ἐν τῷ κατοικοῦντι αὐτόν·
23.22 καὶ ὁ ὀμόσας ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ ὀμνύει ἐν τῷ θρόνῳ τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ ἐν τῷ καθημένῳ ἐπάνω αὐτοῦ.
23.23 Οὐαὶ ὑμῖν, γραμματεῖς καὶ Φαρισαῖοι ὑποκριταί, ὅτι ἀποδεκατοῦτε τὸ ἡδύοσμον καὶ τὸ ἄνηθον καὶ τὸ κύμινον, καὶ ἀφήκατε τὰ βαρύτερα τοῦ νόμου, τὴν κρίσιν καὶ τὸ ἔλεος καὶ τὴν πίστιν· ταῦτα δὲ ἔδει ποιῆσαι κἀκεῖνα μὴ ἀφεῖναι.
23.24 ὁδηγοὶ τυφλοί, διυλίζοντες τὸν κώνωπα τὴν δὲ κάμηλον καταπίνοντες.
23.25 Οὐαὶ ὑμῖν, γραμματεῖς καὶ Φαρισαῖοι ὑποκριταί, ὅτι καθαρίζετε τὸ ἔξωθεν τοῦ ποτηρίου καὶ τῆς παροψίδος, ἔσωθεν δὲ γέμουσιν ἐξ ἁρπαγῆς καὶ ἀκρασίας.
23.26 Φαρισαῖε τυφλέ, καθάρισον πρῶτον τὸ ἔντος τοῦ ποτηρίου καὶ τῆς παροψίδος, ἵνα γένηται καὶ τὸ ἐκτὸς αὐτοῦ καθαρόν.
23.27 Οὐαὶ ὑμῖν, γραμματεῖς καὶ Φαρισαῖοι ὑποκριταί, ὅτι παρομοιάζετε τάφοις κεκονιαμένοις, οἵτινες ἔξωθεν μὲν φαίνονται ὡραῖοι ἔσωθεν δὲ γέμουσιν ὀστέων νεκρῶν καὶ πάσης ἀκαθαρσίας·
23.28 οὕτως καὶ ὑμεῖς ἔξωθεν μὲν φαίνεσθε τοῖς ἀνθρώποις δίκαιοι, ἔσωθεν δέ ἐστε μεστοὶ ὑποκρίσεως καὶ ἀνομίας.
23.29 Οὐαὶ ὑμῖν, γραμματεῖς καὶ Φαρισαῖοι ὑποκριταί, ὅτι οἰκοδομεῖτε τοὺς τάφους τῶν προφητῶν καὶ κοσμεῖτε τὰ μνημεῖα τῶν δικαίων, 23.30 καὶ λέγετε Εἰ ἤμεθα ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις τῶν πατέρων ἡμῶν, οὐκ ἂν ἤμεθα αὐτῶν κοινωνοὶ ἐν τῷ αἵματι τῶν προφητῶν· 23.31 ὥστε μαρτυρεῖτε ἑαυτοῖς ὅτι υἱοί ἐστε τῶν φονευσάντων τοὺς προφήτας. 23.32 καὶ ὑμεῖς πληρώσατε τὸ μέτρον τῶν πατέρων ὑμῶν. 23.33 ὄφεις γεννήματα ἐχιδνῶν, πῶς φύγητε ἀπὸ τῆς κρίσεως τῆς γεέννης;' ' None | sup>
2.13 Now when they had departed, behold, an angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying, "Arise and take the young child and his mother, and flee into Egypt, and stay there until I tell you, for Herod will seek the young child to destroy him."
2.20 "Arise and take the young child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel, for those who sought the young child\'s life are dead."
5.21 "You have heard that it was said to the ancient ones, \'You shall not murder;\' and \'Whoever shall murder shall be in danger of the judgment.\ "5.22 But I tell you, that everyone who is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment; and whoever shall say to his brother, 'Raca!' shall be in danger of the council; and whoever shall say, 'You fool!' shall be in danger of the fire of Gehenna. " '5.23 "If therefore you are offering your gift at the altar, and there remember that your brother has anything against you, 5.24 leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift. 5.25 Agree with your adversary quickly, while you are with him in the way; lest perhaps the prosecutor deliver you to the judge, and the judge deliver you to the officer, and you be cast into prison. 5.26 Most assuredly I tell you, you shall by no means get out of there, until you have paid the last penny. 5.27 "You have heard that it was said, \'You shall not commit adultery;\ '5.28 but I tell you that everyone who gazes at a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart. 5.29 If your right eye causes you to stumble, pluck it out and throw it away from you. For it is profitable for you that one of your members should perish, than for your whole body to be cast into Gehenna. 5.30 If your right hand causes you to stumble, cut it off, and throw it away from you: for it is profitable for you that one of your members should perish, and not your whole body be thrown into Gehenna. 5.31 "It was also said, \'Whoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorce,\ '5.32 but I tell you that whoever who puts away his wife, except for the cause of sexual immorality, makes her an adulteress; and whoever marries her when she is put away commits adultery. 5.33 "Again you have heard that it was said to them of old time, \'You shall not make false vows, but shall perform to the Lord your vows,\ "5.34 but I tell you, don't swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is the throne of God; " '5.35 nor by the earth, for it is the footstool of his feet; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. ' "5.36 Neither shall you swear by your head, for you can't make one hair white or black. " "5.37 But let your 'Yes' be 'Yes' and your 'No' be 'no.' Whatever is more than these is of the evil one. " '5.38 "You have heard that it was said, \'An eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth.\ "5.39 But I tell you, don't resist him who is evil; but whoever strikes you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also. " '5.40 If anyone sues you to take away your coat, let him have your cloak also. 5.41 Whoever compels you to go one mile, go with him two. ' "5.42 Give to him who asks you, and don't turn away him who desires to borrow from you. " '5.43 "You have heard that it was said, \'You shall love your neighbor, and hate your enemy.\ '5.44 But I tell you, love your enemies, bless those who curse you, do good to those who hate you, and pray for those who mistreat you and persecute you, 5.45 that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the just and the unjust. ' "5.46 For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Don't even the tax collectors do the same? " "5.47 If you only greet your friends, what more do you do than others? Don't even the tax collectors do the same? " '5.48 Therefore you shall be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect. ' "
6.9 Pray like this: 'Our Father in heaven, may your name be kept holy. " '6.10 Let your kingdom come. Let your will be done, as in heaven, so on earth. 6.11 Give us today our daily bread. 6.12 Forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors. ' "6.13 Bring us not into temptation, but deliver us from the evil one. For yours is the kingdom, the power, and the glory forever. Amen.' " 15.1 Then Pharisees and scribes came to Jesus from Jerusalem, saying, 15.2 "Why do your disciples disobey the tradition of the elders? For they don\'t wash their hands when they eat bread." 15.3 He answered them, "Why do you also disobey the commandment of God because of your tradition? ' "15.4 For God commanded, 'Honor your father and your mother,' and, 'He who speaks evil of father or mother, let him be put to death.' " '15.5 But you say, \'Whoever may tell his father or his mother, "Whatever help you might otherwise have gotten from me is a gift devoted to God,"' "15.6 he shall not honor his father or mother.' You have made the commandment of God void because of your tradition. " '15.7 You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, saying, ' "15.8 'These people draw near to me with their mouth, And honor me with their lips; But their heart is far from me. " '15.9 And in vain do they worship me, Teaching as doctrine rules made by men.\'"
15.10 He summoned the multitude, and said to them, "Hear, and understand.
15.11 That which enters into the mouth doesn\'t defile the man; but that which proceeds out of the mouth, this defiles the man."
15.12 Then the disciples came, and said to him, "Do you know that the Pharisees were offended, when they heard this saying?"
15.13 But he answered, "Every plant which my heavenly Father didn\'t plant will be uprooted.
15.14 Leave them alone. They are blind guides of the blind. If the blind guide the blind, both will fall into a pit."
15.15 Peter answered him, "Explain the parable to us."
15.16 So Jesus said, "Do you also still not understand? ' "
15.17 Don't you understand that whatever goes into the mouth passes into the belly, and then out of the body? " 15.18 But the things which proceed out of the mouth come out of the heart, and they defile the man.
15.19 For out of the heart come forth evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, sexual sins, thefts, false testimony, and blasphemies. 15.20 These are the things which defile the man; but to eat with unwashed hands doesn\'t defile the man."
18.17 If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the assembly. If he refuses to hear the assembly also, let him be to you as a Gentile or a tax collector.
22.23 On that day Sadducees (those who say that there is no resurrection) came to him. They asked him,
22.34 But the Pharisees, when they heard that he had put the Sadducees to silence, gathered themselves together.
23.2 saying, "The scribes and the Pharisees sat on Moses\' seat. ' "23.3 All things therefore whatever they tell you to observe, observe and do, but don't do their works; for they say, and don't do. " "23.4 For they bind heavy burdens that are grievous to be borne, and lay them on men's shoulders; but they themselves will not lift a finger to help them. " '23.5 But all their works they do to be seen by men. They make their phylacteries broad, enlarge the fringes of their garments, 23.6 and love the place of honor at feasts, the best seats in the synagogues, ' "23.7 the salutations in the marketplaces, and to be called 'Rabbi, Rabbi' by men. " "23.8 But don't you be called 'Rabbi,' for one is your teacher, the Christ, and all of you are brothers. " '23.9 Call no man on the earth your father, for one is your Father, he who is in heaven. 23.10 Neither be called masters, for one is your master, the Christ. 23.11 But he who is greatest among you will be your servant. 23.12 Whoever will exalt himself will be humbled, and whoever will humble himself will be exalted. 23.13 "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you devour widows\' houses, and as a pretense you make long prayers. Therefore you will receive greater condemnation. 23.14 "But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! Because you shut up the Kingdom of Heaven against men; for you don\'t enter in yourselves, neither do you allow those who are entering in to enter. 23.15 Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel around by sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much of a son of Gehenna as yourselves. 23.16 "Woe to you, you blind guides, who say, \'Whoever swears by the temple, it is nothing; but whoever swears by the gold of the temple, he is obligated.\ '23.17 You blind fools! For which is greater, the gold, or the temple that sanctifies the gold? ' "23.18 'Whoever swears by the altar, it is nothing; but whoever swears by the gift that is on it, he is a obligated.' " '23.19 You blind fools! For which is greater, the gift, or the altar that sanctifies the gift?
23.20 He therefore who swears by the altar, swears by it, and by everything on it.
23.21 He who swears by the temple, swears by it, and by him who is living in it.
23.22 He who swears by heaven, swears by the throne of God, and by him who sits on it.
23.23 "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you tithe mint, dill, and cumin, and have left undone the weightier matters of the law: justice, mercy, and faith. But you ought to have done these, and not to have left the other undone.
23.24 You blind guides, who strain out a gnat, and swallow a camel!
23.25 "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and of the platter, but within they are full of extortion and unrighteousness.
23.26 You blind Pharisee, first clean the inside of the cup and of the platter, that the outside of it may become clean also.
23.27 "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you are like whitened tombs, which outwardly appear beautiful, but inwardly are full of dead men\'s bones, and of all uncleanness.
23.28 Even so you also outwardly appear righteous to men, but inwardly you are full of hypocrisy and iniquity.
23.29 "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you build the tombs of the prophets, and decorate the tombs of the righteous, ' "23.30 and say, 'If we had lived in the days of our fathers, we wouldn't have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets.' " '23.31 Therefore you testify to yourselves that you are sons of those who killed the prophets. 23.32 Fill up, then, the measure of your fathers. 23.33 You serpents, you offspring of vipers, how will you escape the judgment of Gehenna? ' ' None |
|
66. Tosefta, Eduyot, 1.1, 1.4 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah/Halakhot • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • halakhah, Mosaic • halakhah, Second Temple period • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, pre-exilic
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 446, 447, 449; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 81; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 615
sup>
1.1 חמשה דברים היה ר\\"ע דורש כמין אגדה בחמשה דברים אדם זוכה לבן וחכמים אומרים עד הפרק זכה לו מיכן ואילך הוא זוכה לעצמו אמר ר\\"ע היכן מצינו שהיו חיגרין עד הפרק וכשהגיע הפרק נתפשטו ושהיו חרשין עד הפרק וכשהגיע הפרק נתפקחו ושהיו סומין עד הפרק כשהגיע הפרק נתפתחו והיאך זוכה לו עד אותה השעה אמרו לו כי מצינו שהיו פשוטים עד הפרק וכשהגיע הפרק נתחגרו ושהיו פקחין עד הפרק וכשהגיע הפרק נתחרשו ושהיו פתוחים עד הפרק וכשהגיע הפרק נסתמו הא אין זוכה לו אלא עד אותה השעה בלבד.
1.1 כשנכנסו חכמים לכרם ביבנה אמרו עתידה שעה שיהא אדם מבקש דבר מדברי תורה ואינו מוצא מדברי סופרים ואינו מוצא שנאמר (עמוס ח׳:י״ב) <לכן> הנה ימים באים נאם ה\' וגו\' ישוטטו לבקש את דבר ה\' ולא ימצאו דבר ה\' זו נבואה דבר ה\' זה הקץ דבר ה\' שלא יהא דבר מד\\"ת דומה לחברו אמרו נתחיל מהלל ומשמאי שמאי אומר מקב חלה הלל אומר מקבים וחכ\\"א לא כדברי זה ולא כדברי זה אלא קב ומחצה חייב בחלה שנאמר (במדבר ט״ו:כ׳) ראשית עריסותיכם כדי עיסתכם וכמה עיסתכם כדי עיסת מדבר וכמה עיסת מדבר עומר שנאמר (שמות ט״ז:ל״ו) והעומר עשירית האיפה הוא שיערו חכמים שבעה רבעים ועוד מדברית שהן חמשה רבעי צפורית שהן קב ומחצה ירושלמית.' ' None | sup>
1.1 When the Sages entered the Vineyard in Yavneh, they said, \\"In the future, there will come an hour when a person seeks a teaching from the teachings of the Torah and he will not find it, or in the teachings of the Scribes, and he will not find it.\\" As it says, \\"Behold, days are coming, says the Lord, etc. they will seek out the word of God and they will not find it (Amos 8).\\" \'The word of God\' refers to prophecy. \'The word of God\' refers to the End (of Days). \'The word of God\', so that there shall not be one word of Torah similar to its fellow. They said, \\"Let us begin from Hillel and Shammai!\\"...' ' None |
|
67. Tosefta, Sotah, 7.11 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah/Halakhot • halakhah, as modality of tradition
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 443, 448, 467; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 188
sup>
7.11 (דברים כ׳:ו׳) ומיה איש אשר נטע כרם ולא חללו ילך וישוב לביתו אחד הנוטע את הכרם ואחד חמשה אילני מאכל מחמשת המינין אפילו בחמש עיירות ה\\"ז חוזר ר\' אליעזר בן יעקב אומר אין לי במשמע אלא כרם.'' None | sup>
7.11 A person might think: \'since the Academy of Shammai declares unclean that which the Academy of Hillel declares clean, one prohibits that which the other permits, how, then, can I learn Torah?\' This is way Torah repeats: \\"words...the words...these are the words...\\" All of the words have been given by a single Shepherd, one God fashioned them, one Provider gave them, Source of all deeds, blessed be God, has spoken them. So make for yourself a heart with many rooms, and bring into it the words of the Academy of Shammai and the words of the Academy of Hillel, the words of who declare unclean and those that declare clean. '' None |
|
68. Tosefta, Sukkah, 3.1, 3.16 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Mishna, aggada and halakha in • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Qumran halakha • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • System, halakhic ~ • halakhah, Mosaic • halakhah, Second Temple period • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, pre-exilic
Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 530; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 80, 82; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 50, 51, 613
sup>
3.1 לולב דוחה את השבת בתחלתו וערבה בסופו מעשה וכבשו עליה בייתוסין אבנים גדולים מערב שבת הכירו בהם עמי הארץ ובאו וגררום והוציאום מתחת אבנים בשבת לפי שאין בייתוסין מודים שחבוט ערבה דוחה שבת.' ' None | sup>
3.1 The lulav suspends the Sabbath in the beginning of its duty, and the willow in the end of its duty. There is a story that some Boethusians once hid the willows under some great stones on the Sabbath eve; but when this had become known to the common people they came and dragged them out from under the stones on the Sabbath, for the Boethusians do not acknowledge that the beating of the willow suspends the Sabbath.' ' None |
|
69. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Halakha, intensification • halakha • halakha, rejected • halakha, study of • halakhah
Found in books: Ben-Eliyahu (2019), Identity and Territory : Jewish Perceptions of Space in Antiquity. 88; Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 478; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 180; Moxon (2017), Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective. 62; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 171; Zetterholm (2003), The Formation of Christianity in Antioch: A Social-Scientific Approach to the Separation Between Judaism and Christianity. 145
|
70. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • halakhah • halakhah, gender in • halakhah, totalizing tendency of • women, in halakhah
Found in books: Alexander (2013), Gender and Timebound Commandments in Judaism. 51, 57; Neis (2012), When a Human Gives Birth to a Raven: Rabbis and the Reproduction of Species. 169
|
71. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • aggada in Tosefta, as framing halakha • ancient Halakha • halakhah • halakhah, as modality of tradition • law and legal formulae, rabbinic (halakhah)
Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 523, 524; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 70; Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 225; Swartz (2018), The Mechanics of Providence: The Workings of Ancient Jewish Magic and Mysticism. 244; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 118, 119, 449
|
72. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Dead Sea Scrolls, divine inspiration as source of halakhah • Halakhah • Halakhah/Halakhot • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • halakhah, Mosaic • halakhah, Second Temple period • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, divine versus human authority in • halakhah, pre-exilic • history of Halakha,
Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 246; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 451, 468; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 78, 79, 81, 188; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 60; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 38
|
73. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • law and legal formulae, rabbinic (halakhah)
Found in books: Swartz (2018), The Mechanics of Providence: The Workings of Ancient Jewish Magic and Mysticism. 77; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 633
|
74. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Change, in custom and halakhah • Divorce, law/halakha • halakhah • halakhah, Mosaic • halakhah, Second Temple period • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, pre-exilic
Found in books: Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 82; Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 105; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 76; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 77
|
75. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • halakhah • halakhah, as modality of tradition
Found in books: Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 188; Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 233
|
76. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Qumran halakha • halakhah, as modality of tradition • history of Halakha,
Found in books: Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 188; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 3
|
77. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Qumran halakha • halakhah, as modality of tradition
Found in books: Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 188; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 613
|
78. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah • Halakhah/Halakhot • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Qumran halakha • Rabbinic Halakhah • halakhah, Mosaic • halakhah, Second Temple period • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, pre-exilic • history of Halakha, • midrash halakhah
Found in books: Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 202; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 218, 301, 302, 303, 306, 307, 314, 325, 332, 452; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 78, 79, 81, 188; Jassen (2014), Scripture and Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls, 24; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 3; Veltri (2006), Libraries, Translations, and 'Canonic' Texts: The Septuagint, Aquila and Ben Sira in the Jewish and Christian Traditions. 142
|
79. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Change, in custom and halakhah • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • halakhah • halakhah, gender in • halakhah, totalizing tendency of • law and legal formulae, rabbinic (halakhah) • women, in halakhah
Found in books: Alexander (2013), Gender and Timebound Commandments in Judaism. 51; Neis (2012), When a Human Gives Birth to a Raven: Rabbis and the Reproduction of Species. 168; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 52; Swartz (2018), The Mechanics of Providence: The Workings of Ancient Jewish Magic and Mysticism. 31; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 14, 138
|
80. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Divorce, law/halakha • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Qumran halakha • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • halakhah, Mosaic • halakhah, as modality of tradition • history of Halakha,
Found in books: Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 188, 192; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 3, 81
|
81. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • halakha, and Scripture • halakhah, as modality of tradition
Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 69; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 72; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 127, 592
|
82. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Qumran texts, Halakhic Letter (4QMMT) • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • System, halakhic ~ • Tannaic halakha
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 341; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 330; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 42, 48, 583
|
83. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Bavli, aggada integrated into halakhic context • Tannaic halakha • aggada in Bavli, integrated with halakhic context
Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 567, 568; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 34
|
84. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah/Halakhot • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • ethics, in Avot, exceeding formal halakha
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 316, 348, 351, 353; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 589
|
85. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Change, in custom and halakhah • Divorce, law/halakha • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha
Found in books: Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 22; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 85, 388
|
86. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Miqsat Maºase ha-Torah (MMT, a.k.a. “Halakhic Letter”), authenticity of • halakhah
Found in books: Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 81; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 153
|
87. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Divorce, law/halakha • Rabbinic Halakhah • ancient Halakha
Found in books: Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 122; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 91
|
88. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • halakhah • theology, God as actor within halakhic system
Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 501; Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 317
|
89. Anon., Genesis Rabba, 33.3, 60.12 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Amoraic midrash compilations, halakhic material in • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Halakhah/halakhic • Rabbinic Halakhah • aggadic passages on legal biblical units, halakha derived from narrative biblical units
Found in books: Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 62; Grypeou and Spurling (2009), The Exegetical Encounter between Jews and Christians in Late Antiquity, 208; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 605; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 5
sup>
33.3 טוֹב ה' לַכֹּל וְרַחֲמָיו עַל כָּל מַעֲשָׂיו (תהלים קמה, ט), אָמַר רַבִּי לֵוִי טוֹב ה' לַכֹּל, עַל הַכֹּל, שֶׁהוּא מַעֲשָׂיו. אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל טוֹב ה' לַכֹּל וְרַחֲמָיו עַל הַכֹּל שֶׁהֵן מִדּוֹתָיו הוּא מְרַחֵם. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ דְּסִכְנִין בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי לֵוִי אָמַר טוֹב ה' לַכֹּל, וּמֵרַחֲמָיו הוּא נוֹתֵן לִבְרִיּוֹתָיו. רַבִּי תַּנְחוּמָא וְרַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר אָבִין בְּשֵׁם רַב אַחָא לְמָחָר שְׁנַת בַּצֹּרֶת בָּאָה וְהַבְּרִיּוֹת מְרַחֲמִין אֵלּוּ עַל אֵלּוּ, וְהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מִתְמַלֵּא עֲלֵיהֶן רַחֲמִים. בְּיוֹמֵי דְּרַבִּי תַּנְחוּמָא הָיוּ צְרִיכִין יִשְׂרָאֵל לְתַעֲנִית, אָתוֹן לְגַבֵּיהּ אָמְרִין לֵיהּ רַבִּי גְּזָר תַּעֲנִיתָא, גָּזַר תַּעֲנִיתָא יוֹם קַדְמָאי יוֹם ב' יוֹם ג' וְלָא נְחַת מִטְרָא, עָאל וְדָרַשׁ לְהוֹן אֲמַר לְהוֹן בָּנַי הִתְמַלְּאוּ רַחֲמִים אֵלּוּ עַל אֵלּוּ וְהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מִתְמַלֵּא עֲלֵיכֶם רַחֲמִים. עַד שֶׁהֵן מְחַלְּקִין צְדָקָה לַעֲנִיֵּיהֶם רָאוּ אָדָם אֶחָד נוֹתֵן מָעוֹת לִגְרוּשָׁתוֹ, אָתוֹן לְגַבֵּיהּ וַאֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ, רַבִּי מָה אֲנַן יָתְבִין הָכָא וַעֲבֵרְתָּא הָכָא. אֲמַר לָהֶן מָה רְאִיתֶם, אָמְרוּ לוֹ רָאִינוּ אָדָם פְּלוֹנִי נוֹתֵן מָעוֹת לִגְרוּשָׁתוֹ, שְׁלַח בַּתְרֵיהוֹן וְאַיְיתִינוֹן לְגוֹ צִבּוּרָא. אָמַר לֵיהּ מָה הִיא לָךְ זוֹ, אָמַר לוֹ גְּרוּשָׁתִי הִיא. אָמַר לוֹ מִפְּנֵי מָה נָתַתָּ לָהּ מָעוֹת, אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי רָאִיתִי אוֹתָהּ בְּצָרָה וְהִתְמַלֵּאתִי עָלֶיהָ רַחֲמִים. בְּאוֹתָהּ שָׁעָה הִגְבִּיהַּ רַבִּי תַּנְחוּמָא פָּנָיו כְּלַפֵּי מַעְלָה וְאָמַר רִבּוֹן כָּל הָעוֹלָמִים מָה אִם זֶה שֶׁאֵין לָהּ עָלָיו מְזוֹנוֹת רָאָה אוֹתָהּ בְּצָרָה וְנִתְמַלֵּא עָלֶיהָ רַחֲמִים, אַתָּה שֶׁכָּתוּב בְּךָ (תהלים קמה, ח): חַנּוּן וְרַחוּם, וְאָנוּ בְּנֵי יְדִידֶיךָ בְּנֵי אַבְרָהָם יִצְחָק וְיַעֲקֹב עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה שֶׁתִּתְמַלֵּא עָלֵינוּ רַחֲמִים, מִיָּד יָרְדוּ גְּשָׁמִים וְנִתְרַוָּה הָעוֹלָם. רַבֵּנוּ הֲוָה יָתֵיב לָעֵי בְּאוֹרַיְתָא קַמֵּי כְּנִשְׁתָּא דְּבַבְלָאי בְּצִפּוֹרִין, עֲבַר חַד עֵגֶל קוֹדָמוֹי, אָזֵל לְמִתְנְכָסָה וְשָׁרֵי גָּעֵי כְּמֵימַר שֵׁיזִבְנִי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ וּמָה אֲנִי יָכוֹל לְמֶעְבַּד לָךְ לְכָךְ נוֹצַרְתָּ, וְחָשַׁשׁ רַבִּי אֶת שִׁנָּיו שְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר אָבִין כָּל אוֹתָן שְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה שֶׁהָיָה חוֹשֵׁשׁ רַבִּי אֶת שִׁנָּיו, לֹא הִפִּילָה עֻבָּרָה בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל, וְלֹא נִצְטַעֲרוּ הַיּוֹלְדוֹת, בָּתַר יוֹמִין עֲבַר חַד שֶׁרֶץ קַמֵּי בְּרַתֵּיהּ וּבְעָא לְמִקְטְלָא, אֲמַר לָהּ בְּרַתִּי שַׁבְקֵיהּ, דִּכְתִיב: וְרַחֲמָיו עַל כָּל מַעֲשָׂיו. רַבֵּנוּ הֲוָה עִנְוָתָן סַגֵּי, וַהֲוָה אֲמַר כָּל מַה דְּיֹאמַר לִי בַּר נַשׁ אֲנָא עָבֵיד חוּץ מִמַּה שֶּׁעָשׂוּ בְּנֵי בְתֵירָא לִזְקֵנִי, שֶׁיָּרְדוּ מִגְדֻלָּתָן וְהֶעֱלוּ אוֹתוֹ, וְאִין סָלֵיק רַב הוּנָא רֵישׁ גָּלוּתָא לְהָכָא, אֲנָא קָאֵים לִי מִן קֳדָמוֹהִי, לָמָּה דְּהוּא מִן יְהוּדָה וַאֲנָא מִן בִּנְיָמִין, וְהוּא מִן דִּכְרַיָא דִּיהוּדָה וַאֲנָא מִן נֻקְבְתָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי חִיָּא רַבָּה וַהֲרֵי הוּא עוֹמֵד בַּחוּץ, נִתְכַּרְכְּמוּ פָּנָיו שֶׁל רַבִּי וְכֵיוָן שֶׁרָאָה שֶׁנִּתְכַּרְכְּמוּ פָּנָיו אָמַר לוֹ אֲרוֹנוֹ הוּא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ פּוֹק חֲזֵי מַאן בָּעֵי לָךְ לְבָרָא, נָפַק וְלָא אַשְׁכַּח בַּר נָשׁ, וְיָדַע דְּהוּא נָזוּף וְאֵין נְזִיפָה פְּחוּתָה מִשְּׁלשִׁים יוֹם. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר רַבִּי אָבִין כָּל אוֹתָן שְׁלשִׁים יוֹם שֶׁהָיָה רַבִּי חִיָּא רַבָּה נָזוּף מֵרַבֵּנוּ, אַלֵּיף לְרַב בַּר אֲחָתֵיהּ כָּל כְּלָלֵי דְאוֹרַיְתָא, וְאִלֵּין אִינוּן כְּלָלַיָיא דְאוֹרַיְתָא הִלְכְתָא דְּבַבְלָאֵי. לְסוֹף תְּלָתִין יוֹמִין אָתָא אֵלִיָּהוּ זָכוּר לַטּוֹב בִּדְמוּתֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי חִיָּא רַבָּה אֵצֶל רַבֵּנוּ וִיְהַב יְדֵיהּ עַל שִׁנֵּיהּ וְאִתְּסֵי, כֵּיוָן דְּאָתָא רַבִּי חִיָּא רַבָּה לְגַבֵּי רַבֵּנוּ אֲמַר לֵיהּ מָה עֲבַדְתְּ בְּשִׁנָּךְ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ מִן עוֹנָתָא דִּיהַבְתְּ יְדָךְ עִלּוֹהִי אִתְנְשֵׁימַת, אֲמַר לֵיהּ לֵית אֲנָא הֲוָה יָדַע מָה הוּא. כֵּיוָן דְּשָׁמַע כֵּן שָׁרֵי נָהֵיג בֵּיהּ יְקָרָא, וְקָרַב תַּלְמִידִים וּמְעַיֵּיל לֵיהּ מִלְּגַאו. אָמַר רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בֶּן רַבִּי יוֹסֵי וְלִפְנִים מִמֶּנִּי, אָמַר לֵיהּ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם לֹא יֵעָשֶׂה כֵן בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל. רַבֵּנוּ הֲוָה מְתַנֵּי שִׁבְחֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי חִיָּא רַבָּה קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בֶּן רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, אָמַר לֵיהּ אָדָם גָּדוֹל, אָדָם קָדוֹשׁ. חַד זְמַן חֲמִיתֵיהּ בֵּי בָנֵי וְלָא אִתְכְּנַע מִנֵּיהּ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ הַהוּא תַּלְמִידָךְ דַּהֲוַת מִשְׁתַּבַּח בֵּיהּ חֲמִיתֵּיהּ בֵּי בָנֵי וְלָא אִתְכְּנַע מִנָּאי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ וְלָמָּה לָא אִתְכְּנָעַת מִנֵּיהּ, אָמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי חִיָּא מִסְתַּכֵּל הָיִיתִי בְּאַגָּדַת תְּהִלִּים, כֵּיוָן דְּשָׁמַע כֵּן מְסַר לֵיהּ תְּרֵין תַּלְמִידוֹי וַהֲווֹ עָיְילִין עִמֵּיהּ לַאֲשׁוּנָה, דְּלָא יִשְׁהֵי וְתִזְעַר נַפְשֵׁיהּ. דָּבָר אַחֵר, טוֹב ה' לַכֹּל וגו', וַיִּזְכֹּר אֱלֹהִים אֶת נֹחַ וגו', אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמֵנִי אוֹי לָהֶם לָרְשָׁעִים שֶׁהֵם הוֹפְכִים מִדַּת רַחֲמִים לְמִדַּת הַדִין, בְּכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ה', מִדַּת רַחֲמִים, (שמות לד, ו): ה' ה' אֵל רַחוּם וְחַנּוּן, וּכְתִיב (בראשית ו, ה): וַיַּרְא ה' כִּי רַבָּה רָעַת הָאָדָם בָּאָרֶץ, (בראשית ו, ו): וַיִּנָּחֶם ה' כִּי עָשָׂה אֶת הָאָדָם (בראשית ו, ז): וַיֹּאמֶר ה' אֶמְחֶה וגו', אַשְׁרֵיהֶם הַצַּדִּיקִים שֶׁהֵן הוֹפְכִים מִדַּת הַדִּין לְמִדַּת רַחֲמִים. בְּכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר אֱלֹהִים הוּא מִדַּת הַדִּין (שמות כב, כז): אֱלֹהִים לֹא תְקַלֵּל, (שמות כב, ח): עַד הָאֱלֹהִים יָבֹא דְּבַר שְׁנֵיהֶם, וּכְתִיב (שמות ב, כד): וַיִּשְׁמַע אֱלֹהִים אֶת נַאֲקָתָם וַיִּזְכֹּר אֱלֹהִים אֶת בְּרִיתוֹ וגו' (בראשית ל, כב): וַיִּזְכֹּר אֱלֹהִים אֶת רָחֵל וגו', וַיִּזְכֹּר אֱלֹהִים אֶת נֹחַ, מַה זְּכִירָה נִזְכַּר לוֹ שֶׁזָּן וּפִרְנֵס אוֹתָם כָּל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ בַּתֵּבָה, וַיִּזְכֹּר אֱלֹהִים אֶת נֹחַ, וְהַדִּין נוֹתֵן מִזְּכוּת הַטְּהוֹרִים שֶׁהִכְנִיס עִמּוֹ בַּתֵּבָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר לְשֵׁם קָרְבָּנוֹ נִקְרָא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית ח, כא): וַיָּרַח ה' אֶת רֵיחַ הַנִּיחֹחַ. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר חֲנִינָא לְשֵׁם נַחַת הַתֵּבָה נִקְרָא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית ח, ד): וַתָּנַח הַתֵּבָה בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשְּׁבִיעִי וגו'. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר (בראשית ח, כב): לֹא יִשְׁבֹּתוּ, מִכְּלַל שֶׁשָּׁבָתוּ. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן לֹא שִׁמְשׁוּ מַזָּלוֹת כָּל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ, אָמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן שִׁמְשׁוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹא הָיָה רִשּׁוּמָן נִכָּר." " None | sup>
33.3 " |
|
90. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • borders,, halakhic • halakha in Diaspora
Found in books: Ben-Eliyahu (2019), Identity and Territory : Jewish Perceptions of Space in Antiquity. 96, 105; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 114
|
91. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Jewish culture, halacha • Rabbinic Halakhah • halacha
Found in books: Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 135; Goldhill (2022), The Christian Invention of Time: Temporality and the Literature of Late Antiquity, 67
|
92. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Halakhah
Found in books: Salvesen et al. (2020), Israel in Egypt: The Land of Egypt as Concept and Reality for Jews in Antiquity and the Early Medieval Period, 370; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 127
|
93. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Dead Sea Scrolls, divine inspiration as source of halakhah • halakha, rabbinic vs. biblical law • halakhah, divine versus human authority in
Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 178; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 67, 68
|
94. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Dead Sea Scrolls, divine inspiration as source of halakhah • Halakhah/Halakhot • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Rabbinic Halakhah • false prophets, and halakhic authority • halakha • halakha, and Scripture • halakhah • halakhah, Mosaic • halakhah, as modality of tradition • halakhah, conflicting interpretations of • halakhah, divine versus human authority in • study curriculum, halakha and aggada as subjects in
Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 54; Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 202; Fisch, (2023), Written for Us: Paul’s Interpretation of Scripture and the History of Midrash, 71, 73; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 21, 28, 29, 56, 215, 224, 292, 310, 312, 314, 332, 347, 371, 437, 441, 442, 468, 469, 498; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 72, 73, 118, 127, 546; Jaffee (2001), Torah in the Mouth: Writing and Oral Tradition in Palestinian Judaism 200 BCE - 400 CE, 90, 91, 192; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 47
|
95. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah/Halakhot • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Rabbinic Halakhah • halakha, rabbinic • halakha, vs. Roman law • halakha,Geonic • halakhah • inheritance, rabbinic halakha
Found in books: Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 202; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 18, 483; Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 317; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 80, 142
|
96. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah, of the Messianic era • Halakhah/Halakhot • halakhah, gender in • halakhah, totalizing tendency of • law, Jewish (halakhah), authority and • women, in halakhah
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 430, 446; Kosman (2012), Gender and Dialogue in the Rabbinic Prism, 141; Neis (2012), When a Human Gives Birth to a Raven: Rabbis and the Reproduction of Species. 167, 168, 169; Rubenstein (2018), The Land of Truth: Talmud Tales, Timeless Teachings, 199
| 59b וזה הוא תנור של עכנאי מאי עכנאי אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל שהקיפו דברים כעכנא זו וטמאוהו תנא באותו היום השיב רבי אליעזר כל תשובות שבעולם ולא קיבלו הימנו,אמר להם אם הלכה כמותי חרוב זה יוכיח נעקר חרוב ממקומו מאה אמה ואמרי לה ארבע מאות אמה אמרו לו אין מביאין ראיה מן החרוב חזר ואמר להם אם הלכה כמותי אמת המים יוכיחו חזרו אמת המים לאחוריהם אמרו לו אין מביאין ראיה מאמת המים,חזר ואמר להם אם הלכה כמותי כותלי בית המדרש יוכיחו הטו כותלי בית המדרש ליפול גער בהם רבי יהושע אמר להם אם תלמידי חכמים מנצחים זה את זה בהלכה אתם מה טיבכם לא נפלו מפני כבודו של רבי יהושע ולא זקפו מפני כבודו של ר"א ועדיין מטין ועומדין,חזר ואמר להם אם הלכה כמותי מן השמים יוכיחו יצאתה בת קול ואמרה מה לכם אצל ר"א שהלכה כמותו בכ"מ,עמד רבי יהושע על רגליו ואמר (דברים ל, יב) לא בשמים היא מאי לא בשמים היא אמר רבי ירמיה שכבר נתנה תורה מהר סיני אין אנו משגיחין בבת קול שכבר כתבת בהר סיני בתורה (שמות כג, ב) אחרי רבים להטות אשכחיה רבי נתן לאליהו א"ל מאי עביד קוב"ה בההיא שעתא א"ל קא חייך ואמר נצחוני בני נצחוני בני,אמרו אותו היום הביאו כל טהרות שטיהר ר"א ושרפום באש ונמנו עליו וברכוהו ואמרו מי ילך ויודיעו אמר להם ר"ע אני אלך שמא ילך אדם שאינו הגון ויודיעו ונמצא מחריב את כל העולם כולו,מה עשה ר"ע לבש שחורים ונתעטף שחורים וישב לפניו ברחוק ארבע אמות אמר לו ר"א עקיבא מה יום מיומים אמר לו רבי כמדומה לי שחבירים בדילים ממך אף הוא קרע בגדיו וחלץ מנעליו ונשמט וישב על גבי קרקע,זלגו עיניו דמעות לקה העולם שליש בזיתים ושליש בחטים ושליש בשעורים ויש אומרים אף בצק שבידי אשה טפח תנא אך גדול היה באותו היום שבכל מקום שנתן בו עיניו ר"א נשרף,ואף ר"ג היה בא בספינה עמד עליו נחשול לטבעו אמר כמדומה לי שאין זה אלא בשביל ר"א בן הורקנוס עמד על רגליו ואמר רבונו של עולם גלוי וידוע לפניך שלא לכבודי עשיתי ולא לכבוד בית אבא עשיתי אלא לכבודך שלא ירבו מחלוקות בישראל נח הים מזעפו,אימא שלום דביתהו דר"א אחתיה דר"ג הואי מההוא מעשה ואילך לא הוה שבקה ליה לר"א למיפל על אפיה ההוא יומא ריש ירחא הוה ואיחלף לה בין מלא לחסר איכא דאמרי אתא עניא וקאי אבבא אפיקא ליה ריפתא,אשכחתיה דנפל על אנפיה אמרה ליה קום קטלית לאחי אדהכי נפק שיפורא מבית רבן גמליאל דשכיב אמר לה מנא ידעת אמרה ליה כך מקובלני מבית אבי אבא כל השערים ננעלים חוץ משערי אונאה,תנו רבנן המאנה את הגר עובר בשלשה לאוין והלוחצו עובר בשנים,מאי שנא מאנה דכתיבי שלשה לאוין (שמות כב, כ) וגר לא תונה (ויקרא יט, לג) וכי יגור אתך גר בארצכם לא תונו אותו (ויקרא כה, יז) ולא תונו איש את עמיתו וגר בכלל עמיתו הוא לוחצו נמי שלשה כתיבי (שמות כב, כ) ולא תלחצנו (שמות כג, ט) וגר לא תלחץ (שמות כב, כד) ולא תהיה לו כנושה וגר בכלל הוא אלא אחד זה ואחד זה בשלשה,תניא רבי אליעזר הגדול אומר מפני מה הזהירה תורה בל"ו מקומות ואמרי לה במ"ו מקומות בגר מפני שסורו רע,מאי דכתיב וגר לא תונה ולא תלחצנו כי גרים הייתם בארץ מצרים (תנינא) רבי נתן אומר מום שבך אל תאמר לחברך והיינו דאמרי אינשי דזקיף ליה זקיפא בדיותקיה לא נימא ליה לחבריה זקיף ביניתא:,84a כי האי מעשה לידיה פגע ביה אליהו,אמר ליה עד מתי אתה מוסר עמו של אלהינו להריגה אמר ליה מאי אעביד הרמנא דמלכא הוא אמר ליה אבוך ערק לאסיא את ערוק ללודקיא,כי הוו מקלעי ר\' ישמעאל ברבי יוסי ור\' אלעזר בר\' שמעון בהדי הדדי הוה עייל בקרא דתורי בינייהו ולא הוה נגעה בהו,אמרה להו ההיא מטרוניתא בניכם אינם שלכם אמרו לה שלהן גדול משלנו כל שכן איכא דאמרי הכי אמרו לה (שופטים ח, כא) כי כאיש גבורתו איכא דאמרי הכי אמרו לה אהבה דוחקת את הבשר,ולמה להו לאהדורי לה והא כתיב (משלי כו, ד) אל תען כסיל כאולתו שלא להוציא לעז על בניהם,א"ר יוחנן איבריה דר\' ישמעאל בר\' יוסי כחמת בת תשע קבין אמר רב פפא איבריה דרבי יוחנן כחמת בת חמשת קבין ואמרי לה בת שלשת קבין דרב פפא גופיה כי דקורי דהרפנאי,אמר רבי יוחנן אנא אישתיירי משפירי ירושלים האי מאן דבעי מחזי שופריה דרבי יוחנן נייתי כסא דכספא מבי סלקי ונמלייה פרצידיא דרומנא סומקא ונהדר ליה כלילא דוורדא סומקא לפומיה ונותביה בין שמשא לטולא ההוא זהרורי מעין שופריה דר\' יוחנן,איני והאמר מר שופריה דרב כהנא מעין שופריה דרבי אבהו שופריה דר\' אבהו מעין שופריה דיעקב אבינו שופריה דיעקב אבינו מעין שופריה דאדם הראשון ואילו ר\' יוחנן לא קא חשיב ליה שאני ר\' יוחנן דהדרת פנים לא הויא ליה,ר\' יוחנן הוה אזיל ויתיב אשערי טבילה אמר כי סלקן בנות ישראל מטבילת מצוה לפגעו בי כי היכי דלהוו להו בני שפירי כוותי גמירי אורייתא כוותי,אמרו ליה רבנן לא מסתפי מר מעינא בישא אמר להו אנא מזרעא דיוסף קאתינא דלא שלטא ביה עינא בישא דכתיב (בראשית מט, כב) בן פורת יוסף בן פורת עלי עין ואמר ר\' אבהו אל תקרי עלי עין אלא עולי עין,ר\' יוסי בר חנינא אמר מהכא (בראשית מח, טז) וידגו לרוב בקרב הארץ מה דגים שבים מים מכסים אותם ואין העין שולטת בהן אף זרעו של יוסף אין העין שולטת בהן,יומא חד הוה קא סחי ר\' יוחנן בירדנא חזייה ריש לקיש ושוור לירדנא אבתריה אמר ליה חילך לאורייתא אמר ליה שופרך לנשי א"ל אי הדרת בך יהיבנא לך אחותי דשפירא מינאי קביל עליה בעי למיהדר לאתויי מאניה ולא מצי הדר,אקרייה ואתנייה ושוייה גברא רבא יומא חד הוו מפלגי בי מדרשא הסייף והסכין והפגיון והרומח ומגל יד ומגל קציר מאימתי מקבלין טומאה משעת גמר מלאכתן,ומאימתי גמר מלאכתן רבי יוחנן אמר משיצרפם בכבשן ריש לקיש אמר משיצחצחן במים א"ל לסטאה בלסטיותיה ידע אמר ליה ומאי אהנת לי התם רבי קרו לי הכא רבי קרו לי אמר ליה אהנאי לך דאקרבינך תחת כנפי השכינה,חלש דעתיה דרבי יוחנן חלש ריש לקיש אתאי אחתיה קא בכיא אמרה ליה עשה בשביל בני אמר לה (ירמיהו מט, יא) עזבה יתומיך אני אחיה עשה בשביל אלמנותי אמר לה (ירמיהו מט, יא) ואלמנותיך עלי תבטחו,נח נפשיה דר\' שמעון בן לקיש והוה קא מצטער ר\' יוחנן בתריה טובא אמרו רבנן מאן ליזיל ליתביה לדעתיה ניזיל רבי אלעזר בן פדת דמחדדין שמעתתיה,אזל יתיב קמיה כל מילתא דהוה אמר רבי יוחנן אמר ליה תניא דמסייעא לך אמר את כבר לקישא בר לקישא כי הוה אמינא מילתא הוה מקשי לי עשרין וארבע קושייתא ומפריקנא ליה עשרין וארבעה פרוקי וממילא רווחא שמעתא ואת אמרת תניא דמסייע לך אטו לא ידענא דשפיר קאמינא,הוה קא אזיל וקרע מאניה וקא בכי ואמר היכא את בר לקישא היכא את בר לקישא והוה קא צוח עד דשף דעתיה מיניה בעו רבנן רחמי עליה ונח נפשיה ' None | 59b And this is known as the oven of akhnai. The Gemara asks: What is the relevance of akhnai, a snake, in this context? Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: It is characterized in that manner due to the fact that the Rabbis surrounded it with their statements like this snake, which often forms a coil when at rest, and deemed it impure. The Sages taught: On that day, when they discussed this matter, Rabbi Eliezer answered all possible answers in the world to support his opinion, but the Rabbis did not accept his explanations from him.,After failing to convince the Rabbis logically, Rabbi Eliezer said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, this carob tree will prove it. The carob tree was uprooted from its place one hundred cubits, and some say four hundred cubits. The Rabbis said to him: One does not cite halakhic proof from the carob tree. Rabbi Eliezer then said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, the stream will prove it. The water in the stream turned backward and began flowing in the opposite direction. They said to him: One does not cite halakhic proof from a stream.,Rabbi Eliezer then said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, the walls of the study hall will prove it. The walls of the study hall leaned inward and began to fall. Rabbi Yehoshua scolded the walls and said to them: If Torah scholars are contending with each other in matters of halakha, what is the nature of your involvement in this dispute? The Gemara relates: The walls did not fall because of the deference due Rabbi Yehoshua, but they did not straighten because of the deference due Rabbi Eliezer, and they still remain leaning.,Rabbi Eliezer then said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, Heaven will prove it. A Divine Voice emerged from Heaven and said: Why are you differing with Rabbi Eliezer, as the halakha is in accordance with his opinion in every place that he expresses an opinion?,Rabbi Yehoshua stood on his feet and said: It is written: “It is not in heaven” (Deuteronomy 30:12). The Gemara asks: What is the relevance of the phrase “It is not in heaven” in this context? Rabbi Yirmeya says: Since the Torah was already given at Mount Sinai, we do not regard a Divine Voice, as You already wrote at Mount Sinai, in the Torah: “After a majority to incline” (Exodus 23:2). Since the majority of Rabbis disagreed with Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion, the halakha is not ruled in accordance with his opinion. The Gemara relates: Years after, Rabbi Natan encountered Elijah the prophet and said to him: What did the Holy One, Blessed be He, do at that time, when Rabbi Yehoshua issued his declaration? Elijah said to him: The Holy One, Blessed be He, smiled and said: My children have triumphed over Me; My children have triumphed over Me.,The Sages said: On that day, the Sages brought all the ritually pure items deemed pure by the ruling of Rabbi Eliezer with regard to the oven and burned them in fire, and the Sages reached a consensus in his regard and ostracized him. And the Sages said: Who will go and inform him of his ostracism? Rabbi Akiva, his beloved disciple, said to them: I will go, lest an unseemly person go and inform him in a callous and offensive manner, and he would thereby destroy the entire world.,What did Rabbi Akiva do? He wore black and wrapped himself in black, as an expression of mourning and pain, and sat before Rabbi Eliezer at a distance of four cubits, which is the distance that one must maintain from an ostracized individual. Rabbi Eliezer said to him: Akiva, what is different about today from other days, that you comport yourself in this manner? Rabbi Akiva said to him: My teacher, it appears to me that your colleagues are distancing themselves from you. He employed euphemism, as actually they distanced Rabbi Eliezer from them. Rabbi Eliezer too, rent his garments and removed his shoes, as is the custom of an ostracized person, and he dropped from his seat and sat upon the ground.,The Gemara relates: His eyes shed tears, and as a result the entire world was afflicted: One-third of its olives were afflicted, and one-third of its wheat, and one-third of its barley. And some say that even dough kneaded in a woman’s hands spoiled. The Sages taught: There was great anger on that day, as any place that Rabbi Eliezer fixed his gaze was burned.,And even Rabban Gamliel, the Nasi of the Sanhedrin at Yavne, the head of the Sages who were responsible for the decision to ostracize Rabbi Eliezer, was coming on a boat at the time, and a large wave swelled over him and threatened to drown him. Rabban Gamliel said: It seems to me that this is only for the sake of Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, as God punishes those who mistreat others. Rabban Gamliel stood on his feet and said: Master of the Universe, it is revealed and known before You that neither was it for my honor that I acted when ostracizing him, nor was it for the honor of the house of my father that I acted; rather, it was for Your honor, so that disputes will not proliferate in Israel. In response, the sea calmed from its raging.,The Gemara further relates: Imma Shalom, the wife of Rabbi Eliezer, was the sister of Rabban Gamliel. From that incident forward, she would not allow Rabbi Eliezer to lower his head and recite the taḥanun prayer, which includes supplication and entreaties. She feared that were her husband to bemoan his fate and pray at that moment, her brother would be punished. A certain day was around the day of the New Moon, and she inadvertently substituted a full thirty-day month for a deficient twenty-nine-day month, i.e., she thought that it was the New Moon, when one does not lower his head in supplication, but it was not. Some say that a pauper came and stood at the door, and she took bread out to him. The result was that she left her husband momentarily unsupervised.,When she returned, she found him and saw that he had lowered his head in prayer. She said to him: Arise, you already killed my brother. Meanwhile, the sound of a shofar emerged from the house of Rabban Gamliel to announce that the Nasi had died. Rabbi Eliezer said to her: From where did you know that your brother would die? She said to him: This is the tradition that I received from the house of the father of my father: All the gates of Heaven are apt to be locked, except for the gates of prayer for victims of verbal mistreatment.,§ The Sages taught: One who verbally mistreats the convert violates three prohibitions, and one who oppresses him in other ways violates two.,The Gemara asks: What is different with regard to verbal mistreatment, that three prohibitions are written concerning it: “And you shall neither mistreat a convert” (Exodus 22:20); “And when a convert lives in your land, you shall not mistreat him” (Leviticus 19:33); “And you shall not mistreat, each man his colleague” (Leviticus 25:17), and a convert is included in the category of colleague? With regard to one who also oppresses a convert as well, three prohibitions are written: “And you shall neither mistreat a convert, nor oppress him” (Exodus 22:20); “And you shall not oppress a convert (Exodus 23:9); “And you shall not be to him like a creditor” (Exodus 22:24). This last prohibition is a general prohibition, in which converts are included. Consequently, it is not correct that one who oppresses a convert violates only two prohibitions. Rather, both this one, who verbally mistreats a convert, and that one, who oppresses him, violate three prohibitions.,It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer the Great says: For what reason did the Torah issue warnings in thirty-six places, and some say in forty-six places, with regard to causing any distress to a convert? It is due to the fact that a convert’s inclination is evil, i.e., he is prone to return to his previous way of living.,What is the meaning of that which is written: “And you shall not mistreat a convert nor oppress him, because you were strangers in the land of Egypt” (Exodus 22:20)? We learned in a baraita that Rabbi Natan says: A defect that is in you, do not mention it in another. Since the Jewish people were themselves strangers, they are not in a position to demean a convert because he is a stranger in their midst. And this explains the adage that people say: One who has a person hanged in his family bidyotkei, does not say to another member of his household: Hang a fish for me, as the mention of hanging is demeaning for that family.,One may not intermingle produce bought from one supplier with other produce, even if he intermingles new produce with other new produce and ostensibly the buyer suffers no loss from his doing so.'84a Elijah the prophet encountered him,and said to him: Until when will you inform on the nation of our God to be sentenced to execution? Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, said to Elijah: What should I do? It is the king’s edict that I must obey. Elijah said to him: Faced with this choice, your father fled to Asia. You should flee to Laodicea rather than accept this appointment.,§ With regard to these Sages, the Gemara adds: When Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, and Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, would meet each other, it was possible for a pair of oxen to enter and fit between them, under their bellies, without touching them, due to their excessive obesity.,A certain Roman noblewoman matronita once said to them: Your children are not really your own, as due to your obesity it is impossible that you engaged in intercourse with your wives. They said to her: Theirs, i.e., our wives’ bellies, are larger than ours. She said to them: All the more so you could not have had intercourse. There are those who say that this is what they said to her: “For as the man is, so is his strength” (Judges 8:21), i.e., our sexual organs are proportionate to our bellies. There are those who say that this is what they said to her: Love compresses the flesh.,The Gemara asks: And why did they respond to her audacious and foolish question? After all, it is written: “Answer not a fool according to his folly, lest you also be like him” (Proverbs 26:4). The Gemara answers: They answered her in order not to cast aspersions on the lineage of their children.,The Gemara continues discussing the bodies of these Sages: Rabbi Yoḥa said: The organ of Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, was the size of a jug of nine kav. Rav Pappa said: The organ of Rabbi Yoḥa was the size of a jug of five kav, and some say it was the size of a jug of three kav. Rav Pappa himself had a belly like the baskets dikurei made in Harpanya.,With regard to Rabbi Yoḥa’s physical features, the Gemara adds that Rabbi Yoḥa said: I alone remain of the beautiful people of Jerusalem. The Gemara continues: One who wishes to see something resembling the beauty of Rabbi Yoḥa should bring a new, shiny silver goblet from the smithy and fill it with red pomegranate seeds partzidaya and place a diadem of red roses upon the lip of the goblet, and position it between the sunlight and shade. That luster is a semblance of Rabbi Yoḥa’s beauty.,The Gemara asks: Is that so? Was Rabbi Yoḥa so beautiful? But doesn’t the Master say: The beauty of Rav Kahana is a semblance of the beauty of Rabbi Abbahu; the beauty of Rabbi Abbahu is a semblance of the beauty of Jacob, our forefather; and the beauty of Jacob, our forefather, is a semblance of the beauty of Adam the first man, who was created in the image of God. And yet Rabbi Yoḥa is not included in this list. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yoḥa is different from these other men, as he did not have a beauty of countece, i.e., he did not have a beard.,The Gemara continues to discuss Rabbi Yoḥa’s beauty. Rabbi Yoḥa would go and sit by the entrance to the ritual bath. He said to himself: When Jewish women come up from their immersion for the sake of a mitzva, after their menstruation, they should encounter me first, so that they have beautiful children like me, and sons learned in Torah like me. This is based on the idea that the image upon which a woman meditates during intercourse affects the child she conceives.,The Rabbis said to Rabbi Yoḥa: Isn’t the Master worried about being harmed by the evil eye by displaying yourself in this manner? Rabbi Yoḥa said to them: I come from the offspring of Joseph, over whom the evil eye does not have dominion, as it is written: “Joseph is a fruitful vine, a fruitful vine by a fountain alei ayin” (Genesis 49:22); and Rabbi Abbahu says: Do not read the verse as saying: “By a fountain alei ayin”; rather, read it as: Those who rise above the evil eye olei ayin. Joseph’s descendants are not susceptible to the influence of the evil eye.,Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said that this idea is derived from here: “And let them grow veyidgu into a multitude in the midst of the earth” (Genesis 48:16). Just as with regard to fish dagim in the sea, the water covers them and the evil eye therefore has no dominion over them, as they are not seen, so too, with regard to the offspring of Joseph, the evil eye has no dominion over them.,The Gemara relates: One day, Rabbi Yoḥa was bathing in the Jordan River. Reish Lakish saw him and jumped into the Jordan, pursuing him. At that time, Reish Lakish was the leader of a band of marauders. Rabbi Yoḥa said to Reish Lakish: Your strength is fit for Torah study. Reish Lakish said to him: Your beauty is fit for women. Rabbi Yoḥa said to him: If you return to the pursuit of Torah, I will give you my sister in marriage, who is more beautiful than I am. Reish Lakish accepted upon himself to study Torah. Subsequently, Reish Lakish wanted to jump back out of the river to bring back his clothes, but he was unable to return, as he had lost his physical strength as soon as he accepted the responsibility to study Torah upon himself.,Rabbi Yoḥa taught Reish Lakish Bible, and taught him Mishna, and turned him into a great man. Eventually, Reish Lakish became one of the outstanding Torah scholars of his generation. One day the Sages of the study hall were engaging in a dispute concerning the following baraita: With regard to the sword, the knife, the dagger vehapigyon, the spear, a hand sickle, and a harvest sickle, from when are they susceptible to ritual impurity? The baraita answers: It is from the time of the completion of their manufacture, which is the halakha with regard to metal vessels in general.,These Sages inquired: And when is the completion of their manufacture? Rabbi Yoḥa says: It is from when one fires these items in the furnace. Reish Lakish said: It is from when one scours them in water, after they have been fired in the furnace. Rabbi Yoḥa said to Reish Lakish: A bandit knows about his banditry, i.e., you are an expert in weaponry because you were a bandit in your youth. Reish Lakish said to Rabbi Yoḥa: What benefit did you provide me by bringing me close to Torah? There, among the bandits, they called me: Leader of the bandits, and here, too, they call me: Leader of the bandits. Rabbi Yoḥa said to him: I provided benefit to you, as I brought you close to God, under the wings of the Divine Presence.,As a result of the quarrel, Rabbi Yoḥa was offended, which in turn affected Reish Lakish, who fell ill. Rabbi Yoḥa’s sister, who was Reish Lakish’s wife, came crying to Rabbi Yoḥa, begging that he pray for Reish Lakish’s recovery. She said to him: Do this for the sake of my children, so that they should have a father. Rabbi Yoḥa said to her the verse: “Leave your fatherless children, I will rear them” (Jeremiah 49:11), i.e., I will take care of them. She said to him: Do so for the sake of my widowhood. He said to her the rest of the verse: “And let your widows trust in Me.”,Ultimately, Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, Reish Lakish, died. Rabbi Yoḥa was sorely pained over losing him. The Rabbis said: Who will go to calm Rabbi Yoḥa’s mind and comfort him over his loss? They said: Let Rabbi Elazar ben Pedat go, as his statements are sharp, i.e., he is clever and will be able to serve as a substitute for Reish Lakish.,Rabbi Elazar ben Pedat went and sat before Rabbi Yoḥa. With regard to every matter that Rabbi Yoḥa would say, Rabbi Elazar ben Pedat would say to him: There is a ruling which is taught in a baraita that supports your opinion. Rabbi Yoḥa said to him: Are you comparable to the son of Lakish? In my discussions with the son of Lakish, when I would state a matter, he would raise twenty-four difficulties against me in an attempt to disprove my claim, and I would answer him with twenty-four answers, and the halakha by itself would become broadened and clarified. And yet you say to me: There is a ruling which is taught in a baraita that supports your opinion. Do I not know that what I say is good? Being rebutted by Reish Lakish served a purpose; your bringing proof to my statements does not.,Rabbi Yoḥa went around, rending his clothing, weeping and saying: Where are you, son of Lakish? Where are you, son of Lakish? Rabbi Yoḥa screamed until his mind was taken from him, i.e., he went insane. The Rabbis prayed and requested for God to have mercy on him and take his soul, and Rabbi Yoḥa died. ' None |
|
97. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Qamma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • ethics, in Avot, exceeding formal halakha
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 349, 356; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 589
| 38a דאם כן נכתוב קרא להאי רעהו גבי מועד:,שור של ישראל שנגח שור של כנעני פטור: אמרי ממה נפשך אי רעהו דוקא דכנעני כי נגח דישראל נמי ליפטר ואי רעהו לאו דוקא אפילו דישראל כי נגח דכנעני נחייב,א"ר אבהו אמר קרא (חבקוק ג, ו) עמד וימודד ארץ ראה ויתר גוים ראה שבע מצות שקיבלו עליהם בני נח כיון שלא קיימו עמד והתיר ממונן לישראל,רבי יוחנן אמר מהכא (דברים לג, ב) הופיע מהר פארן מפארן הופיע ממונם לישראל,תניא נמי הכי שור של ישראל שנגח שור של כנעני פטור שור של כנעני שנגח שור של ישראל בין תם בין מועד משלם נזק שלם שנאמר עמד וימודד ארץ ראה ויתר גוים ואומר הופיע מהר פארן,מאי ואומר,וכי תימא האי עמד וימודד ארץ מבעי\' ליה לכדרב מתנה וכדרב יוסף ת"ש הופיע מהר פארן מפארן הופיע ממונן לישראל מאי דרב מתנה דא"ר מתנה עמד וימודד ארץ ראה וכו\' מה ראה ראה שבע מצות שנצטוו עליהן בני נח ולא קיימום עמד והגלה אותם מעל אדמתם,ומאי משמע דהאי ויתר לישנא דאגלויי הוא כתיב הכא ויתר גוים וכתיב התם (ויקרא יא, כא) לנתר בהן על הארץ ומתרגם לקפצא בהון על ארעא,מאי דרב יוסף דא"ר יוסף עמד וימודד ארץ ראה וכו\' מה ראה ראה שבע מצות שקיבלו עליהם בני נח ולא קיימום עמד והתירן להם,איתגורי אתגר א"כ מצינו חוטא נשכר אמר מר בריה דרבנא לומר שאפילו מקיימין אותן אין מקבלין עליהן שכר,ולא והתניא ר"מ אומר מנין שאפילו נכרי ועוסק בתורה שהוא ככהן גדול ת"ל (ויקרא יח, ה) אשר יעשה אותם האדם וחי בהם כהנים ולוים וישראלים לא נאמר אלא אדם הא למדת שאפילו נכרי ועוסק בתורה הרי הוא ככהן גדול,אמרי אין מקבלים עליהן שכר כמצווה ועושה אלא כמי שאינו מצווה ועושה דא"ר חנינא גדול המצווה ועושה יותר ממי שאינו מצווה ועושה:,ת"ר וכבר שלחה מלכות רומי שני סרדיוטות אצל חכמי ישראל למדונו תורתכם קראו ושנו ושלשו בשעת פטירתן אמרו להם דקדקנו בכל תורתכם ואמת הוא חוץ מדבר זה שאתם אומרים שור של ישראל שנגח שור של כנעני פטור של כנעני שנגח שור של ישראל בין תם בין מועד משלם נזק שלם,ממ"נ אי רעהו דוקא אפילו דכנעני כי נגח דישראל ליפטר ואי רעהו לאו דוקא אפילו דישראל כי נגח דכנעני לחייב ודבר זה אין אנו מודיעים אותו למלכות,רב שמואל בר יהודה שכיבא ליה ברתא אמרו ליה רבנן לעולא קום ניזל נינחמיה אמר להו מאי אית לי גבי נחמתא דבבלאי דגידופא הוא דאמרי מאי אפשר למיעבד הא אפשר למיעבד עבדי,אזל הוא לחודאי גביה א"ל (דברים ב, ב) ויאמר ה\' (אל משה) אל תצר את מואב ואל תתגר בם מלחמה וכי מה עלה על דעתו של משה לעשות מלחמה שלא ברשות אלא נשא משה ק"ו בעצמו אמר ומה מדינים שלא באו אלא לעזור את מואב אמרה תורה (במדבר כה, יז) צרור את המדינים והכיתם אותם'' None | 38a Because if so, if one whose ox gores a consecrated ox is exempt from liability, let the verse write this phrase: “of another,” with regard to the case of a forewarned ox. One could then infer that the owner is exempt from liability in the case of an innocuous ox as well, as the liability with regard to an innocuous ox is less severe than with regard to a forewarned ox. The stating of this exemption specifically in the context of an innocuous ox indicates that the exemption is only concerning the leniency stated in the verse, that if the gored ox belongs to another person, the owner of the belligerent ox is liable to pay only half the cost of the damage.,§ The mishna teaches: With regard to an ox of a Jew that gored the ox of a gentile, the owner of the belligerent ox is exempt from liability; whereas if a gentile’s ox gores a Jew’s ox, the owner is liable to pay the full cost of the damage. The Sages said: This statement is difficult whichever way you look at it. If the phrase “of another” is meant in a precise manner, and therefore the liability applies only if his ox gores the ox of another Jew, when a gentile’s ox gores that of a Jew he should also be exempt from liability. And if the phrase “of another” is not meant in a precise manner, then even when a Jew’s ox gores that of a gentile the owner of the belligerent ox should be liable.,Rabbi Abbahu said that the reason for this ruling is that the verse states: “He stood and shook the earth; He beheld, and made the nations tremble vayyatter” (Habakkuk 3:6). This is homiletically interpreted to mean that God saw the seven mitzvot that the descendants of Noah accepted upon themselves to fulfill, and since they did not fulfill them, He arose and permitted vehittir their money to the Jewish people, so that in certain cases Jews are not liable for damage caused to gentiles.,Rabbi Yoḥa said that the source for this halakha is from here: It is stated in reference to the giving of the Torah: “The Lord came from Sinai and rose from Seir unto them; He appeared from Mount Paran” (Deuteronomy 33:2), which is homiletically interpreted to mean: From the time God came from Mount Paran, when giving the Torah, the money of the gentile nations appeared, i.e., it was revealed and granted to the Jewish people.,This is also taught in a baraita: With regard to an ox of a Jew that gored the ox of a gentile, the owner of the belligerent ox is exempt from liability. By contrast, with regard to an ox of a gentile that gored the ox of a Jew, whether it was innocuous or forewarned, the owner of the belligerent ox pays the full cost of the damage, as it is stated: “He stood and shook the earth; He beheld, and made the nations tremble.” And another verse states: “He appeared from Mount Paran.”,The Gemara asks: What is the reason the baraita adds: And another verse states, indicating that the first verse is not a sufficient source?,The Gemara explains that this is how the baraita is to be understood: And if you would say that this verse: “He stood and shook the earth” is necessary to express that which Rav Mattana and Rav Yosef derived from the verse, come and hear another source: “He appeared from Mount Paran,” meaning: From Paran their money appeared to the Jewish people. What is Rav Mattana’s exposition? It is as Rav Mattana says: “He stood and shook the earth.” What did He see? He saw the seven mitzvot that the descendants of Noah were commanded but did not fulfill, and He arose and exiled them from their land on account of their transgressions.,And from where may it be inferred that this term vayyatter is a term of exile? It is written here: “And made the nations tremble vayyatter” (Habakkuk 3:6), and it is written there: “Lenatter upon the earth” (Leviticus 11:21), which is translated into Aramaic as: “To leap upon the earth.” Apparently, the root nun, tav, reish, common to both words, indicates uprooting from one place to another.,What is Rav Yosef’s exposition? It is as Rav Yosef says: “He stood and shook the earth; He beheld.” What did He see? He saw the seven mitzvot that the descendants of Noah accepted upon themselves and did not fulfill, so He arose and permitted their prohibitions to them.,The Gemara asks: Did they thereby profit, in that their prohibitions became permitted to them? If so, we have found a transgressor who is rewarded. Mar, son of Rabbana, says: This is not to say that for them to transgress their mitzvot is no longer a sin; rather, it is to say that even if they fulfill them, they do not receive reward for fulfilling them.,The Gemara asks: But do they not receive reward for fulfilling those mitzvot? But isn’t it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir says: From where is it derived that even a gentile who engages in Torah is considered like a High Priest? The verse states with regard to the mitzvot: “Which if a person does, he shall live by them” (Leviticus 18:5). It is not stated: Which if priests and Levites and Israelites do, they shall live by them, but rather: A person, indicating that all people are included. You have therefore learned that even a gentile who engages in Torah study is considered like a High Priest.,The Sages said in response: Rav Yosef meant that they do not receive the reward as does one who is commanded to perform a mitzva and performs it, but as does one who is not commanded to perform a mitzva and performs it anyway. As Rabbi Ḥanina says: One who is commanded and performs a mitzva is greater than one who is not commanded and performs it.,The Sages taught the following story in the context of the aforementioned halakha: And the Roman kingdom once sent two military officials sardeyotot to the Sages of Israel, and ordered them in the name of the king: Teach us your Torah. The officials read the Torah, and repeated it, and repeated it again, reading it for the third time. At the time of their departure, they said to the Sages: We have examined your entire Torah and it is true, except for this one matter that you state, i.e., that with regard to an ox of a Jew that gored the ox of a gentile, the owner is exempt from liability, whereas with regard to the ox of a gentile that gored the ox of a Jew, whether it was innocuous or forewarned, the owner pays the full cost of the damage.,The officials’ reasoning was that this halakha is difficult whichever way you look at it. If the phrase “of another” is meant in a precise manner, that the owners of both oxen must both be Jewish, then even when the ox of a gentile gores the ox of a Jew the owner of the ox should be exempt from liability. And if the phrase “of another” is not meant in a precise manner, and the oxen of all are included, then even when the ox of a Jew gores the ox of a gentile the owner should be liable. They added: But we will not inform this matter to the kingdom; having acknowledged that the entire Torah is true, we will not reveal this ruling, as it will displease the kingdom.,§ Incidentally, it is related that the daughter of Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda died. The Sages said to Ulla: Arise; let us go console him. Ulla said to them: What business do I have with the consolation of Babylonians, which is actually heresy? As, they say while consoling mourners: What can be done? This seems to suggest that if it were possible to do something, acting against the Almighty’s decree, they would do so, which is tantamount to heresy. Therefore, Ulla declined to accompany the Babylonian Sages.,Ulla therefore went to console Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda by himself, and said to him: The verse states: “And the Lord said to me, do not be at enmity with Moab, neither contend with them in battle” (Deuteronomy 2:9). What entered Moses’s mind, that God had to warn him not to undertake a particular action? Did it enter his mind to wage war with the Moabites without permission? Rather, Moses reasoned an a fortiori inference by himself, saying: And if with regard to the Midianites, who came only to help the Moabites harm the Jewish people (see Numbers, chapter 22), the Torah said: “Harass the Midianites and smite them” (Numbers 25:17),'' None |
|
98. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Change, in custom and halakhah • Halakhah, “four cubits of halakhah” • Rabbinic Halakhah • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • halakha in Diaspora • halakha, study of • law and legal formulae, rabbinic (halakhah) • mamzerim (halakhic bastards) • mamzerim (halakhic “bastards”) • prayer, halakhic and aggadic discussions
Found in books: Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 125, 132; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 585; Kosman (2012), Gender and Dialogue in the Rabbinic Prism, 140; Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 478; Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 89; Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 40; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 40; Swartz (2018), The Mechanics of Providence: The Workings of Ancient Jewish Magic and Mysticism. 244; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 112, 124, 127, 650
| 8a מאי דכתיב (תהלים סט, יד) ואני תפלתי לך ה\' עת רצון אימתי עת רצון בשעה שהצבור מתפללין.,ר\' יוסי ברבי חנינא אמר מהכא (ישעיהו מט, ח) כה אמר ה\' בעת רצון עניתיך,ר\' אחא ברבי חנינא אמר מהכא (איוב לו, ה) הן אל כביר ולא ימאס וכתיב (תהלים נה, יט) פדה בשלום נפשי מקרב לי כי ברבים היו עמדי,תניא נמי הכי רבי נתן אומר מנין שאין הקב"ה מואס בתפלתן של רבים שנאמר הן אל כביר ולא ימאס וכתיב פדה בשלום נפשי מקרב לי וגו\' אמר הקב"ה כל העוסק בתורה ובגמילות חסדים ומתפלל עם הצבור מעלה אני עליו כאילו פדאני לי ולבני מבין אומות העולם,אמר ר"ל כל מי שיש לו בית הכנסת בעירו ואינו נכנס שם להתפלל נקרא שכן רע שנאמר (ירמיהו יב, יד) כה אמר ה\' על כל שכני הרעים הנוגעים בנחלה אשר הנחלתי את עמי את ישראל ולא עוד אלא שגורם גלות לו ולבניו שנא\' (ירמיהו יב, יד) הנני נותשם מעל אדמתם ואת בית יהודה אתוש מתוכם.,אמרו ליה לר\' יוחנן איכא סבי בבבל תמה ואמר (דברים יא, כא) למען ירבו ימיכם וימי בניכם על האדמה כתיב אבל בחוצה לארץ לא כיון דאמרי ליה מקדמי ומחשכי לבי כנישתא אמר היינו דאהני להו,כדאמר ר\' יהושע בן לוי לבניה קדימו וחשיכו ועיילו לבי כנישתא כי היכי דתורכו חיי א"ר אחא ברבי חנינא מאי קרא (משלי ח, לד) אשרי אדם שומע לי לשקד על דלתותי יום יום לשמור מזוזת פתחי וכתיב בתריה כי מוצאי מצא חיים.,אמר רב חסדא לעולם יכנס אדם שני פתחים בבית הכנסת שני פתחים סלקא דעתך אלא אימא שיעור שני פתחים ואחר כך יתפלל:,(תהלים לב, ו) על זאת יתפלל כל חסיד אליך לעת מצא אמר ר\' חנינא לעת מצא זו אשה שנא\' (משלי יח, כב) מצא אשה מצא טוב,במערבא כי נסיב אינש אתתא אמרי ליה הכי מצא או מוצא מצא דכתיב מצא אשה מצא טוב ויפק רצון מה\' מוצא דכתיב (קהלת ז, כו) ומוצא אני מר ממות את האשה וגו\',ר\' נתן אומר לעת מצא זו תורה שנאמר (משלי ח, לה) כי מוצאי מצא חיים וגו\',רב נחמן בר יצחק אמר לעת מצא זו מיתה שנא\' (תהלים סח, כא) למות תוצאות,תניא נמי הכי תשע מאות ושלשה מיני מיתה נבראו בעולם שנאמר למות תוצאות תוצאות בגימטריא הכי הוו קשה שבכלן אסכרא ניחא שבכלן נשיקה אסכרא דמיא כחיזרא בגבבא דעמרא דלאחורי נשרא ואיכא דאמרי כפיטורי בפי ושט נשיקה דמיא כמשחל בניתא מחלבא,ר\' יוחנן אמר לעת מצא זו קבורה א"ר חנינא מאי קרא (איוב ג, כב) השמחים אלי גיל ישישו כי ימצאו קבר אמר רבה בר רב שילא היינו דאמרי אינשי ליבעי אינש רחמי אפילו עד זיבולא בתרייתא שלמא,מר זוטרא אמר לעת מצא זה בית הכסא אמרי במערבא הא דמר זוטרא עדיפא מכלהו.,אמר ליה רבא לרפרם בר פפא לימא לן מר מהני מילי מעלייתא דאמרת משמיה דרב חסדא במילי דבי כנישתא,אמר ליה הכי אמר רב חסדא מאי דכתי\' (תהלים פז, ב) אוהב ה\' שערי ציון מכל משכנות יעקב אוהב ה\' שערים המצויינים בהלכה יותר מבתי כנסיות ומבתי מדרשות,והיינו דאמר ר\' חייא בר אמי משמיה דעולא מיום שחרב בית המקדש אין לו להקב"ה בעולמו אלא ארבע אמות של הלכה בלבד.,ואמר אביי מריש הוה גריסנא בגו ביתא ומצלינא בבי כנישתא כיון דשמענא להא דאמר רבי חייא בר אמי משמיה דעולא מיום שחרב בית המקדש אין לו להקב"ה בעולמו אלא ארבע אמות של הלכה בלבד לא הוה מצלינא אלא היכא דגריסנא.,רבי אמי ורבי אסי אף על גב דהוו להו תליסר בי כנישתא בטבריא לא מצלו אלא ביני עמודי היכא דהוו גרסי:,ואמר רבי חייא בר אמי משמיה דעולא גדול הנהנה מיגיעו יותר מירא שמים דאילו גבי ירא שמים כתיב (תהלים קיב, א) אשרי איש ירא את ה\' ואילו גבי נהנה מיגיעו כתיב (תהלים קכח, ב) יגיע כפיך כי תאכל אשריך וטוב לך אשריך בעולם הזה וטוב לך לעולם הבא ולגבי ירא שמים וטוב לך לא כתיב ביה:,ואמר רבי חייא בר אמי משמיה דעולא לעולם ידור אדם במקום רבו שכל זמן ששמעי בן גרא קיים לא נשא שלמה את בת פרעה,והתניא אל ידור,לא קשיא הא דכייף ליה הא דלא כייף ליה:,אמר רב הונא בר יהודה אמר רבי מנחם אמר ר\' אמי מאי דכתי\' (ישעיהו א, כח) ועוזבי ה\' יכלו זה המניח ס"ת ויוצא,רבי אבהו נפיק בין גברא לגברא.,בעי רב פפא בין פסוקא לפסוקא מהו,תיקו,רב ששת מהדר אפיה וגריס אמר אנן בדידן ואינהו בדידהו:,אמר רב הונא בר יהודה אמר רבי אמי לעולם ישלים אדם פרשיותיו עם הצבור שנים מקרא ואחד תרגום' 22a משמשת וראתה נדה אינה צריכה טבילה אבל בעל קרי גרידא מחייב לא תימא מברך אלא מהרהר,ומי אית ליה לרבי יהודה הרהור והתניא בעל קרי שאין לו מים לטבול קורא קריאת שמע ואינו מברך לא לפניה ולא לאחריה ואוכל פתו ומברך לאחריה ואינו מברך לפניה אבל מהרהר בלבו ואינו מוציא בשפתיו דברי רבי מאיר רבי יהודה אומר בין כך ובין כך מוציא בשפתיו,אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק עשאן ר\' יהודה כהלכות דרך ארץ,דתניא (דברים ד, ט) והודעתם לבניך ולבני בניך וכתיב בתריה יום אשר עמדת לפני ה\' אלהיך בחורב מה להלן באימה וביראה וברתת ובזיע אף כאן באימה וביראה וברתת ובזיע,מכאן אמרו הזבים והמצורעים ובאין על נדות מותרים לקרות בתורה ובנביאים ובכתובים לשנות במשנה וגמרא ובהלכות ובאגדות אבל בעלי קריין אסורים,רבי יוסי אומר שונה הוא ברגיליות ובלבד שלא יציע את המשנה רבי יונתן בן יוסף אומר מציע הוא את המשנה ואינו מציע את הגמרא רבי נתן בן אבישלום אומר אף מציע את הגמרא ובלבד שלא יאמר אזכרות שבו רבי יוחנן הסנדלר תלמידו של רבי עקיבא משום ר"ע אומר לא יכנס למדרש כל עיקר ואמרי לה לא יכנס לבית המדרש כל עיקר ר\' יהודה אומר שונה הוא בהלכות דרך ארץ,מעשה ברבי יהודה שראה קרי והיה מהלך על גב הנהר אמרו לו תלמידיו רבינו שנה לנו פרק אחד בהלכות דרך ארץ ירד וטבל ושנה להם אמרו לו לא כך למדתנו רבינו שונה הוא בהלכות דרך ארץ אמר להם אע"פ שמיקל אני על אחרים מחמיר אני על עצמי:,תניא ר\' יהודה בן בתירא היה אומר אין דברי תורה מקבלין טומאה מעשה בתלמיד אחד שהיה מגמגם למעלה מרבי יהודה בן בתירא אמר ליה בני פתח פיך ויאירו דבריך שאין דברי תורה מקבלין טומאה שנאמר (ירמיהו כג, כט) הלא כה דברי כאש נאם ה\' מה אש אינו מקבל טומאה אף דברי תורה אינן מקבלין טומאה,אמר מר מציע את המשנה ואינו מציע את הגמרא מסייע ליה לרבי אלעאי דאמר רבי אלעאי אמר ר\' אחא בר יעקב משום רבינו הלכה מציע את המשנה ואינו מציע את הגמרא כתנאי מציע את המשנה ואינו מציע את הגמרא דברי רבי מאיר רבי יהודה בן גמליאל אומר משום רבי חנינא בן גמליאל זה וזה אסור ואמרי לה זה וזה מותר,מ"ד זה וזה אסור כרבי יוחנן הסנדלר מ"ד זה וזה מותר כרבי יהודה בן בתירא,אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק נהוג עלמא כהני תלת סבי כרבי אלעאי בראשית הגז כרבי יאשיה בכלאים כרבי יהודה בן בתירא בד"ת,כרבי אלעאי בראשית הגז דתניא רבי אלעאי אומר ראשית הגז אינו נוהג אלא בארץ,כרבי יאשיה בכלאים כדכתיב (דברים כב, ט) (כרמך) לא תזרע כרמך כלאים רבי יאשיה אומר לעולם אינו חייב עד שיזרע חטה ושעורה וחרצן במפולת יד,כרבי יהודה בן בתירא בדברי תורה דתניא רבי יהודה בן בתירא אומר אין דברי תורה מקבלין טומאה,כי אתא זעירי אמר בטלוה לטבילותא ואמרי לה בטלוה לנטילותא מאן דאמר בטלוה לטבילותא כרבי יהודה בן בתירא מאן דאמר בטלוה לנטילותא כי הא דרב חסדא לייט אמאן דמהדר אמיא בעידן צלותא:,תנו רבנן בעל קרי שנתנו עליו תשעה קבין מים טהור נחום איש גם זו לחשה לרבי עקיבא ורבי עקיבא לחשה לבן עזאי ובן עזאי יצא ושנאה לתלמידיו בשוק פליגי בה תרי אמוראי במערבא רבי יוסי בר אבין ורבי יוסי בר זבידא חד תני שנאה וחד תני לחשה,מאן דתני שנאה משום בטול תורה ומשום בטול פריה ורביה ומאן דתני לחשה שלא יהו תלמידי חכמים מצויים אצל נשותיהם כתרנגולים,אמר רבי ינאי שמעתי שמקילין בה ושמעתי שמחמירין בה וכל המחמיר בה על עצמו מאריכין לו ימיו ושנותיו,אמר ריב"ל מה טיבן של טובלי שחרין מה טיבן הא איהו דאמר בעל קרי אסור בדברי תורה הכי קאמר מה טיבן בארבעים סאה אפשר בתשעה קבין מה טיבן בטבילה אפשר בנתינה,אמר רבי חנינא גדר גדול גדרו בה דתניא מעשה באחד שתבע אשה לדבר עבירה אמרה לו ריקא יש לך ארבעים סאה שאתה טובל בהן מיד פירש,אמר להו רב הונא לרבנן רבותי מפני מה אתם מזלזלין בטבילה זו אי משום צינה אפשר במרחצאות,אמר ליה רב חסדא וכי יש טבילה בחמין אמר ליה רב אדא בר אהבה קאי כוותך,רבי זירא הוה יתיב באגנא דמיא בי מסותא אמר ליה לשמעיה זיל ואייתי לי תשעה קבין ושדי עלואי אמר ליה רבי חייא בר אבא למה ליה למר כולי האי והא יתיב בגווייהו אמר ליה כארבעים סאה מה ארבעים סאה בטבילה ולא בנתינה אף תשעה קבין בנתינה ולא בטבילה,רב נחמן תקן חצבא בת תשעה קבין כי אתא רב דימי אמר רבי עקיבא ורבי יהודה גלוסטרא אמרו לא שנו אלא לחולה לאונסו אבל לחולה המרגיל ארבעים סאה,אמר רב יוסף אתבר חצביה דרב נחמן כי אתא רבין אמר באושא הוה עובדא 58a אמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר נתקללה בבל נתקללו שכניה נתקללה שומרון נתברכו שכניה נתקללה בבל נתקללו שכניה דכתיב (ישעיהו יד, כג) ושמתיה למורש קפוד ואגמי מים נתקללה שומרון נתברכו שכניה דכתיב (מיכה א, ו) ושמתי שומרון לעי השדה למטעי כרם וגו\',ואמר רב המנונא הרואה אוכלוסי ישראל אומר ברוך חכם הרזים אוכלוסי עובדי כוכבים אומר (ירמיהו נ, יב) בושה אמכם וגו\',ת"ר הרואה אוכלוסי ישראל אומר ברוך חכם הרזים שאין דעתם דומה זה לזה ואין פרצופיהן דומים זה לזה בן זומא ראה אוכלוסא על גב מעלה בהר הבית אמר ברוך חכם הרזים וברוך שברא כל אלו לשמשני,הוא היה אומר כמה יגיעות יגע אדם הראשון עד שמצא פת לאכול חרש וזרע וקצר ועמר ודש וזרה וברר וטחן והרקיד ולש ואפה ואח"כ אכל ואני משכים ומוצא כל אלו מתוקנין לפני וכמה יגיעות יגע אדם הראשון עד שמצא בגד ללבוש גזז ולבן ונפץ וטוה וארג ואחר כך מצא בגד ללבוש ואני משכים ומוצא כל אלו מתוקנים לפני כל אומות שוקדות ובאות לפתח ביתי ואני משכים ומוצא כל אלו לפני,הוא היה אומר אורח טוב מהו אומר כמה טרחות טרח בעל הבית בשבילי כמה בשר הביא לפני כמה יין הביא לפני כמה גלוסקאות הביא לפני וכל מה שטרח לא טרח אלא בשבילי אבל אורח רע מהו אומר מה טורח טרח בעל הבית זה פת אחת אכלתי חתיכה אחת אכלתי כוס אחד שתיתי כל טורח שטרח בעל הבית זה לא טרח אלא בשביל אשתו ובניו,על אורח טוב מהו אומר (איוב לו, כד) זכור כי תשגיא פעלו אשר שוררו אנשים על אורח רע כתיב (איוב לז, כד) לכן יראוהו אנשים וגו\',(שמואל א יז, יב) והאיש בימי שאול זקן בא באנשים אמר רבא ואיתימא רב זביד ואיתימא רב אושעיא זה ישי אבי דוד שיצא באוכלוסא ונכנס באוכלוסא ודרש באוכלוסא אמר עולא נקיטינן אין אוכלוסא בבבל תנא אין אוכלוסא פחותה מששים רבוא,ת"ר הרואה חכמי ישראל אומר ברוך שחלק מחכמתו ליראיו חכמי עובדי כוכבים אומר ברוך שנתן מחכמתו לבריותיו הרואה מלכי ישראל אומר ברוך שחלק מכבודו ליראיו מלכי עובדי כוכבים אומר ברוך שנתן מכבודו לבריותיו,א"ר יוחנן לעולם ישתדל אדם לרוץ לקראת מלכי ישראל ולא לקראת מלכי ישראל בלבד אלא אפי\' לקראת מלכי עובדי כוכבים שאם יזכה יבחין בין מלכי ישראל למלכי עובדי כוכבים,רב ששת סגי נהור הוה הוו קאזלי כולי עלמא לקבולי אפי מלכא וקם אזל בהדייהו רב ששת אשכחיה ההוא צדוקי אמר ליה חצבי לנהרא כגני לייא אמר ליה תא חזי דידענא טפי מינך חלף גונדא קמייתא כי קא אוושא אמר ליה ההוא צדוקי אתא מלכא אמר ליה רב ששת לא קאתי חלף גונדא תניינא כי קא אוושא אמר ליה ההוא צדוקי השתא קא אתי מלכא אמר ליה רב ששת לא קא אתי מלכא חליף תליתאי כי קא שתקא אמר ליה רב ששת ודאי השתא אתי מלכא,אמר ליה ההוא צדוקי מנא לך הא אמר ליה דמלכותא דארעא כעין מלכותא דרקיעא דכתיב (מלכים א יט, יא) צא ועמדת בהר לפני ה\' והנה ה\' עובר ורוח גדולה וחזק מפרק הרים ומשבר סלעים לפני ה\' לא ברוח ה\' ואחר הרוח רעש לא ברעש ה\' ואחר הרעש אש לא באש ה\' ואחר האש קול דממה דקה,כי אתא מלכא פתח רב ששת וקא מברך ליה אמר ליה ההוא צדוקי למאן דלא חזית ליה קא מברכת ומאי הוי עליה דההוא צדוקי איכא דאמרי חברוהי כחלינהו לעיניה ואיכא דאמרי רב ששת נתן עיניו בו ונעשה גל של עצמות,ר\' שילא נגדיה לההוא גברא דבעל מצרית אזל אכל ביה קורצי בי מלכא אמר איכא חד גברא ביהודאי דקא דיין דינא בלא הרמנא דמלכא שדר עליה פריסתקא כי אתא אמרי ליה מה טעמא נגדתיה להאי אמר להו דבא על חמרתא אמרי ליה אית לך סהדי אמר להו אין אתא אליהו אדמי ליה כאיניש ואסהיד אמרי ליה אי הכי בר קטלא הוא אמר להו אנן מיומא דגלינן מארעין לית לן רשותא למקטל אתון מאי דבעיתון עבידו ביה,עד דמעייני ביה בדינא פתח ר\' שילא ואמר (דברי הימים א כט, יא) לך ה\' הגדולה והגבורה וגו\' אמרי ליה מאי קאמרת אמר להו הכי קאמינא בריך רחמנא דיהיב מלכותא בארעא כעין מלכותא דרקיעא ויהב לכו שולטנא ורחמי דינא אמרו חביבא עליה יקרא דמלכותא כולי האי יהבי ליה קולפא אמרו ליה דון דינא,כי הוה נפיק אמר ליה ההוא גברא עביד רחמנא ניסא לשקרי הכי אמר ליה רשע לאו חמרי איקרו דכתיב (יחזקאל כג, כ) אשר בשר חמורים בשרם חזייה דקאזיל למימרא להו דקרינהו חמרי אמר האי רודף הוא והתורה אמרה אם בא להרגך השכם להרגו מחייה בקולפא וקטליה,אמר הואיל ואתעביד לי ניסא בהאי קרא דרשינא ליה לך ה\' הגדולה זו מעשה בראשית וכן הוא אומר (איוב ט, י) עושה גדולות עד אין חקר והגבורה זו יציאת מצרים שנאמר (שמות יד, לא) וירא ישראל את היד הגדולה וגו\' והתפארת זו חמה ולבנה שיעמדו לו ליהושע שנאמר (יהושע י, יג) וידום השמש וירח עמד וגו\' והנצח זו מפלתה של רומי וכן הוא אומר (ישעיהו סג, ג) ויז נצחם על בגדי וגו\' וההוד זו מלחמת נחלי ארנון שנאמר (במדבר כא, יד) על כן יאמר בספר מלחמות ה\' את והב בסופה וגו\' כי כל בשמים ובארץ זו מלחמת סיסרא שנאמר (שופטים ה, כ) מן שמים נלחמו הכוכבים ממסלותם וגו\' לך ה\' הממלכה זו מלחמת עמלק וכן הוא אומר (שמות יז, טז) כי יד על כס יה והמתנשא זו מלחמת גוג ומגוג וכן הוא אומר (יחזקאל לח, ג) הנני אליך גוג נשיא ראש משך ותובל לכל לראש אמר רב חנן בר רבא אמר ר\' יוחנן אפילו ריש גרגיתא מן שמיא מנו ליה,במתניתא תנא משמיה דרבי עקיבא לך ה\' הגדולה זו קריעת ים סוף והגבורה זו מכת בכורות והתפארת זו מתן תורה והנצח זו ירושלים וההוד זו בית המקדש: ' None | 8a What is the meaning of that which is written: “But as for me, let my prayer be unto You, Lord, in a time of favor; O God, in the abundance of Your mercy, answer me with the truth of Your salvation” (Psalms 69:14)? It appears that the individual is praying that his prayers will coincide with a special time of Divine favor. When is a time of favor? It is at the time when the congregation is praying. It is beneficial to pray together with the congregation, for God does not fail to respond to the entreaties of the congregation.,Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said that the unique quality of communal prayer is derived from here: “Thus said the Lord, in a time of acceptance I have answered you and on a day of salvation I have aided you” (Isaiah 49:8).,Rabbi Aḥa, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said that it is derived from here: “Behold, God is mighty, He despises no one” (Job 36:5). He adopts an alternative reading of the verse: “Behold, God will not despise” the prayer of “the mighty,” i.e., the community. And it is written: “He has redeemed my soul in peace so that none came upon me; for there were many with me. God shall hear and answer them…” (Psalms 55:19–20). This verse teaches that the prayer was answered because there were many with me when it was offered.,That last proof was also taught in a baraita. Rabbi Natan says: From where do we know that the Holy One, Blessed be He, does not despise the prayer of the masses? As it is stated: “Behold, God does not despise the mighty,” and it is written: “He has redeemed my soul in peace so that none came upon me; for there were many with me.” Rabbi Natan interprets this not as David speaking about himself, but as God speaking to Israel. The Holy One, Blessed be He, says: Anyone who engages in Torah study, which is called peace in the verse: “All its ways are peace” (Proverbs 3:17); and in acts of kindness, and prays with the congregation, I ascribe to him credit as if he redeemed Me and My children from among the nations of the world.,Continuing to extol communal prayer, Reish Lakish said: One who has a synagogue nearby in his city but does not enter to pray there is called an evil neighbor, as it is stated: “Thus said the Lord: As for all My evil neighbors who touch My inheritance which I have caused My people Israel to inherit, behold, I will pluck them up from off their land, and will pluck the house of Judah up from among them” (Jeremiah 12:14). One who only touches, but does not enter the place of prayer, My inheritance, is considered an evil neighbor. And furthermore, he is punished in that he causes himself and his children to go into exile, as it is stated: “Behold, I will pluck them up from off their land, and will pluck the house of Judah up from among them.”,The Gemara relates that when the Sages told Rabbi Yoḥa that there are elders in Babylonia, he was confounded and said: It is written: “So that your days will be lengthened and the days of your children upon the land the Lord swore to your forefathers to give to them like the days of heaven on the earth” (Deuteronomy 11:21); lengthened in Eretz Yisrael but not outside of the Land. Why then, do the residents of Babylonia live long lives? When they told him that the people in Babylonia go early in the morning and go late in the evening to the synagogue, he said: That is what was effective for them in extending their lives.,As Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said to his sons: Go early and go late and enter the synagogue, so that your lives will be extended. And Rabbi Aḥa, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: Upon what verse is this based? As it is stated: “Happy is the man who listens to Me, watching daily at My gates, guarding at My door posts” (Proverbs 8:34). And the reward for doing so is written thereafter: “For whoso finds Me finds life and obtains the favor of the Lord” (Proverbs 8:35).,Based on this verse, Rav Ḥisda said: A person should always enter two doorways into the synagogue. This statement is unclear. Immediately, the Gemara asks: Does it enter your mind that Rav Ḥisda meant that one should enter two doorways literally? What if a synagogue only has a single doorway? Rather, emend his statement and say that Rav Ḥisda meant that one should enter a distance of two doorways into the synagogue and then pray. In entering a distance of two doorways, one fulfills the verse: Guarding at My door posts, in the plural.,Having mentioned the verse, “For whoso finds Me finds life,” the Gemara seeks to clarify its meaning. It is said, “For this, let every pious man pray to You in the time of finding, that the overflowing waters may not reach him” (Psalms 32:6). With regard to the phrase, the time of finding, Rabbi Ḥanina said: The time of finding refers to the time one must find a wife, that one should pray to find a suitable woman to marry. As it is said: “He who finds matza a wife finds matza good and obtains favor from the Lord” (Proverbs 18:22).,In Eretz Yisrael, the custom was that when a man married a woman, they would ask him: Matza or motzeh? In other words, they would ask the groom whether the appropriate passage for his wife is the above verse from Proverbs that begins with the word matza, as it is written: “He who finds a wife finds good and obtains favor from the Lord” or whether the more appropriate verse is the one beginning with the word motzeh, as it is written: “And I find motzeh the woman more bitter than death” (Ecclesiastes 7:26).,Rabbi Natan says: The time of finding refers to the time of finding Torah, as it is stated in a verse referring to Torah: “He who finds Me finds life.” The Torah is the object most sought.,Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: The time of finding refers to death. One should pray that when death comes, he will leave the world peacefully, as it is stated: “Issues totzaot of death” (Psalms 68:21). Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak’s statement is based on the etymological similarity between totzaot and matza, finding.,It was also taught in a baraita: Nine hundred and three types of death were created in the world, as it is stated: “Issues totzaot of death,” and that, 903, is the numerical value gimatriya of totzaot. The Gemara explains that the most difficult of all these types of death is croup askara, while the easiest is the kiss of death. Croup is like a thorn entangled in a wool fleece, which, when pulled out backwards, tears the wool. Some say that croup is like ropes at the entrance to the esophagus, which would be nearly impossible to insert and excruciating to remove. The kiss of death is like drawing a hair from milk. One should pray that he does not die a painful death.,Rabbi Yoḥa said: The time of finding refers to a respectful burial, for which one should pray. Supporting Rabbi Yoḥa’s interpretation, Rabbi Ḥanina said: What is the verse that teaches that the time of finding refers to burial? “Who rejoice in exultation and are glad when they can find a grave” (Job 3:22), as there are situations in which one is relieved when his body finds a grave in which to rest. Rabba bar Rav Sheila said, that is the meaning of the folk saying: A person should even pray for mercy until the final shovelful of dirt is thrown upon his grave.,Mar Zutra said: The time of finding refers to finding a lavatory. As most places did not have a sewage system, one was forced to relieve himself outside the city. Because of this unpleasantness, finding a suitable location was called by Mar Zutra, the time of finding. In the West, Eretz Yisrael, they say: This explanation of Mar Zutra is preferable to all of them, as the term motza is explicitly associated in the Bible (see II Kings 10:27) with the lavatory (Rabbi Abraham Moshe Horovitz).,Returning to the tractate’s central topic, Rava said to Rafram bar Pappa: Let the Master say to us some of those outstanding statements that you said in the name of Rav Ḥisda with regard to matters of the synagogue.,Rafram said to him, Rav Ḥisda said as follows: What is the meaning of the verse: “The Lord loves the gates of Zion Tziyyon more than all the dwellings of Jacob” (Psalms 87:2)? This means that the Lord loves the gates distinguished metzuyanim through the study of halakha as they are the gates of Zion, the outstanding gates, more than the synagogues and study halls. Although those places are the most outstanding of the dwellings of Jacob, they are not engaged in the study of halakha.,And this concept, that halakha is the most sublime pursuit, is expressed in that which Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Ami said in the name of Ulla: Since the day the Temple, where the Divine Presence rested in this world, was destroyed, the Holy One, Blessed be He, has only one place in His world where he reveals His presence exclusively; only the four cubits where the study of halakha is undertaken.,This statement has practical ramifications. Abaye said: At first I studied in the house and prayed in the synagogue. Once I heard what Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Ami said in the name of Ulla: Since the day the Temple was destroyed, the Holy One, Blessed be He, has only one place in His world, only the four cubits of halakha alone, from which I understood the significance of the four cubits of halakha, and I pray only where I study.,Similarly, the Gemara relates that Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi, despite the fact that they had thirteen synagogues in Tiberias, they would only pray between the pillars where they studied.,And Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Ami said in the name of Ulla: One who benefits from his hard labor is greater than a God-fearing person, i.e., one who is so enthralled by his fear of God that he sits idly by and does not work. As with regard to a God-fearing person, it is written: “Happy is the man who fears the Lord, who greatly desires His mitzvot” (Psalms 112:1), while with regard to one who benefits from his hard work, it is written: “By the labor of your hands you will live; you are happy and it is good for you” (Psalms 128:2). The Gemara explains this verse to mean that you are happy in this world, and it is good for you in the World-to-Come. And regarding a God-fearing person, happy is the man, is written about him but and it is good for you, is not written about him.,And Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Ami said in the name of Ulla: One should always live in the place where his teacher lives; thereby he will avoid sin. For as long as Shimi ben Gera, who according to tradition was a great Torah scholar and teacher of Solomon (see Gittin 59a), was alive, Solomon did not marry Pharaoh’s daughter. Immediately after the Bible relates the death of Shimi (I Kings, end of ch. 2), Solomon’s marriage to Pharaoh’s daughter is recorded (beginning of ch. 3).,The Gemara raises an objection: Wasn’t it taught in a baraita that one should not live where his teacher lives?,The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This, which says that one should live where his teacher lives, is referring to a case where he is acquiescent to his teacher and will heed his teaching and instruction. While this baraita, which says that one should not live where his teacher lives, is referring to a case where he is not acquiescent to him and that will lead them to quarrel.,The Gemara again returns to the topic of the synagogue. Rav Huna bar Yehuda said that Rabbi Menaḥem said that Rabbi Ami said: What is the practical halakhic meaning of that which is written: “They who forsake the Lord will perish” (Isaiah 1:28)? This verse refers to one who abandons the Torah scroll when it was taken out to be read and leaves the synagogue, as it appears that he is fleeing from God.,Practically speaking, the Gemara relates that Rabbi Abbahu would go out between one person who read the Torah and the next person who did so. Since the scroll was closed between readers, it was not considered to be a show of contempt.,Rav Pappa raised a dilemma: What is the ruling with regard to leaving between one verse and the next verse? Is one permitted to leave during a break in the Torah reading while the verse was translated into Aramaic?,An answer to this question was not found, so the dilemma stands unresolved.,The Gemara relates that Rav Sheshet would turn his face away from the Torah while it was being read and study. Explaining this practice, he said: We are engaged in ours, the study of the Oral Torah and they are engaged in theirs, listening to the Written Torah. Since Rav Sheshet was engaged in Torah study, he is not considered one who forsakes the Lord.,Rav Huna bar Yehuda said that Rabbi Ami said: A person should always complete his Torah portions with the congregation. The congregation reads a particular Torah portion every Shabbat, and during the week prior to each Shabbat, one is required to read the Bible text of the weekly portion twice and the translation once.' 22a that a woman who engaged in intercourse and saw menstrual blood is not required to immerse herself, but one who experienced a seminal emission alone, with no concurrent impurity, is required to do so? If so, we must interpret Rabbi Yehuda’s statement in the mishna that one recites a blessing both beforehand and thereafter as follows: Do not say that one recites a blessing orally, but rather he means that one contemplates those blessings in his heart.,The Gemara challenges this explanation: And does Rabbi Yehuda maintain that there is validity to contemplating in his heart? Wasn’t it taught in a baraita: One who experienced a seminal emission and who has no water to immerse and purify himself recites Shema and neither recites the blessings of Shema beforehand nor thereafter? And when he eats his bread, he recites the blessing thereafter, Grace after Meals, but does not recite the blessing: Who brings forth bread from the earth, beforehand. However, in the instances where he may not recite the blessing, he contemplates it in his heart rather than utter it with his lips, this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. However Rabbi Yehuda says: In either case, he utters all of the blessings with his lips. Rabbi Yehuda does not consider contemplating the blessings in his heart a solution and permits them to be recited.,Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: Rabbi Yehuda’s statement in the mishna should be interpreted in another way. Rabbi Yehuda rendered the blessings like Hilkhot Derekh Eretz, which according to some Sages were not considered to be in the same category as all other matters of Torah and therefore, one is permitted to engage in their study even after having experienced a seminal emission.,As it was taught in a baraita: It is written: “And you shall impart them to your children and your children’s children” (Deuteronomy 4:9), and it is written thereafter: “The day that you stood before the Lord your God at Horeb” (Deuteronomy 4:10). Just as below, the Revelation at Sinai was in reverence, fear, quaking, and trembling, so too here, in every generation, Torah must be studied with a sense of reverence, fear, quaking, and trembling.,From here the Sages stated: Zavim, lepers, and those who engaged in intercourse with menstruating women, despite their severe impurity, are permitted to read the Torah, Prophets, and Writings, and to study Mishna and Gemara and halakhot and aggada. However, those who experienced a seminal emission are prohibited from doing so. The reason for this distinction is that the cases of severe impurity are caused by ailment or other circumstances beyond his control and, as a result, they do not necessarily preclude a sense of reverence and awe as he studies Torah. This, however, is not the case with regard to impurity resulting from a seminal emission, which usually comes about due to frivolity and a lack of reverence and awe. Therefore, it is inappropriate for one who experiences a seminal emission to engage in matters of in Torah.,However, there are many opinions concerning the precise parameters of the Torah matters prohibited by this decree. Rabbi Yosei says: One who experiences a seminal emission studies mishnayot that he is accustomed to study, as long as he does not expound upon a new mishna to study it in depth. Rabbi Yonatan ben Yosef says: He expounds upon the mishna but he does not expound upon the Gemara, which is the in-depth analysis of the Torah. Rabbi Natan ben Avishalom says: He may even expound upon the Gemara, as long as he does not utter the mentions of God’s name therein. Rabbi Yoḥa the Cobbler, Rabbi Akiva’s student, says in the name of Rabbi Akiva: One who experiences a seminal emission may not enter into homiletic interpretation midrash of verses at all. Some say that he says: He may not enter the study hall beit hamidrash at all. Rabbi Yehuda says: He may study only Hilkhot Derekh Eretz. In terms of the problem raised above, apparently Rabbi Yehuda considers the legal status of the blessings to be parallel to the legal status of Hilkhot Derekh Eretz, and therefore one may utter them orally.,The Gemara relates an incident involving Rabbi Yehuda himself, who experienced a seminal emission and was walking along the riverbank with his disciples. His disciples said to him: Rabbi, teach us a chapter from Hilkhot Derekh Eretz, as he maintained that even in a state of impurity, it is permitted. He descended and immersed himself in the river and taught them Hilkhot Derekh Eretz. They said to him: Did you not teach us, our teacher, that he may study Hilkhot Derekh Eretz? He said to them: Although I am lenient with others, and allow them to study it without immersion, I am stringent with myself.,Further elaborating on the issue of Torah study while in a state of impurity, it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira would say: Matters of Torah do not become ritually impure and therefore one who is impure is permitted to engage in Torah study. He implemented this halakha in practice. The Gemara relates an incident involving a student who was reciting mishnayot and baraitot hesitantly before the study hall of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira. The student experienced a seminal emission, and when he was asked to recite he did so in a rushed, uneven manner, as he did not want to utter the words of Torah explicitly. Rabbi Yehuda said to him: My son, open your mouth and let your words illuminate, as matters of Torah do not become ritually impure, as it is stated: “Is not my word like fire, says the Lord” (Jeremiah 23:29). Just as fire does not become ritually impure, so too matters of Torah do not become ritually impure.,In this baraita the Master said that one who is impure because of a seminal emission expounds upon the mishna but does not expound upon the Gemara. The Gemara notes: This statement supports the opinion of Rabbi El’ai, as Rabbi El’ai said that Rabbi Aḥa bar Ya’akov said in the name of Rabbeinu, Rav: The halakha is that one who experienced a seminal emission may expound upon the mishna but may not expound upon the Gemara. This dispute is parallel a tannaitic dispute, as it was taught: One who experienced a seminal emission expounds upon the mishna but does not expound upon the Gemara; that is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda ben Gamliel says in the name of Rabbi Ḥanina ben Gamliel: Both this and that are prohibited. And some say that he said: Both this and that are permitted.,Comparing these opinions: The one who said that both this and that are prohibited holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥa the Cobbler; the one who said that both this and that are permitted holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira.,Summarizing the halakha, Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: The universally accepted practice is in accordance with the opinions of these three elders: In accordance with the opinion of Rabbi El’ai with regard to the halakhot of the first shearing, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoshiya with regard to the laws of prohibited diverse kinds, and in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira with regard to matters of Torah.,The Gemara elaborates: In accordance with the opinion of Rabbi El’ai with regard to the first shearing, as it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi El’ai says: The obligation to set aside the first shearing from the sheep for the priest is only practiced in Eretz Yisrael and not in the Diaspora, and that is the accepted practice.,In accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoshiya with regard to diverse kinds, as it is written: “You shall not sow your vineyard with diverse kinds” (Deuteronomy 22:9). Rabbi Yoshiya says: This means that one who sows diverse kinds is not liable by Torah law until he sows wheat and barley and a grape pit with a single hand motion, meaning that while sowing in the vineyard he violates the prohibition of diverse kinds that applies to seeds and to the vineyard simultaneously.,In accordance with Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira with regard to one who experiences a seminal emission is permitted to engage in matters of Torah, as it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: Matters of Torah do not become ritually impure.,And the Gemara relates: When Ze’iri came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he succinctly capsulated this halakha and said: They abolished ritual immersion, and some say that he said: They abolished ritual washing of the hands. The Gemara explains: The one who says that they abolished immersion holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira that one who experienced a seminal emission is not required to immerse. And the one who says that they abolished washing of the hands holds in accordance with that which Rav Ḥisda cursed one who goes out of his way to seek water at the time of prayer.,The Sages taught in a baraita: One who experienced a seminal emission who had nine kav of drawn water poured over him, that is sufficient to render him ritually pure and he need not immerse himself in a ritual bath. The Gemara relates: Naḥum of Gam Zo whispered this halakha to Rabbi Akiva, and Rabbi Akiva whispered it to his student ben Azzai, and ben Azzai went out and taught it to his students publicly in the marketplace. Two amora’im in Eretz Yisrael, Rabbi Yosei bar Avin and Rabbi Yosei bar Zevida, disagreed as to the correct version of the conclusion of the incident. One taught: Ben Azzai taught it to his students in the market. And the other taught: Ben Azzai also whispered it to his students.,The Gemara explains the rationale behind the two versions of this incident. The Sage who taught that ben Azzai taught the law openly in the market held that the leniency was due to concern that the halakhot requiring ritual immersion would promote dereliction in the study of Torah. The ruling of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira eases the way for an individual who experienced a seminal emission to study Torah. This was also due to concern that the halakhot requiring ritual immersion would promote the suspension of procreation, as one might abstain from marital relations to avoid the immersion required thereafter. And the Sage, who taught that ben Azzai only whispered this halakha to his students, held that he did so in order that Torah scholars would not be with their wives like roosters. If the purification process was that simple, Torah scholars would engage in sexual activity constantly, which would distract them from their studies.,With regard to this ritual immersion, Rabbi Yannai said: I heard that there are those who are lenient with regard to it and I have heard that there are those who are stringent with regard to it. The halakha in this matter was never conclusively established and anyone who accepts upon himself to be stringent with regard to it, they prolong for him his days and years.,The Gemara relates that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: What is the essence of those who immerse themselves in the morning? The Gemara retorts: How can one ask what is their essence? Isn’t he the one who said that one who experiences a seminal emission is prohibited from engaging in matters of Torah and is required to immerse himself in the morning? Rather, this is what he meant to say: What is the essence of immersion in a ritual bath of forty se’a of water when it is possible to purify oneself with nine kav? Furthermore, what is the essence of immersion when it is also possible to purify oneself by pouring water?,Regarding this, Rabbi Ḥanina said: They established a massive fence protecting one from sinning with their decree that one must immerse himself in forty se’a of water. As it was taught in a baraita: There was an incident involving one who solicited a woman to commit a sinful act. She said to him: Good-for-nothing. Do you have forty se’a in which to immerse and purify yourself afterwards? He immediately desisted. The obligation to immerse oneself caused individuals to refrain from transgression.,Rav Huna said to the Sages: Gentlemen, why do you disdain this immersion? If it is because it is difficult for you to immerse in the cold waters of the ritual bath, it is possible to purify oneself by immersing oneself in the heated bathhouses, which are unfit for immersion for other forms of ritual impurity but are fit for immersion in this case.,Rabbi Ḥisda said to him: Is there ritual immersion in hot water? Rav Huna said to him: Indeed, doubts with regard to the fitness of baths have been raised, and Rav Adda bar Ahava holds in accordance with your opinion. Nevertheless, I remain convinced that it is permitted.,The Gemara relates: Rabbi Zeira was sitting in a tub of water in the bathhouse. He said to his attendant: Go and get nine kav of water and pour it over me so that I may purify myself from the impurity caused by a seminal emission. Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said to him: Why does my master require all of this? Aren’t you seated in at least nine kav of water in the tub. He said to him: The law of nine kav parallels the law of forty se’a, in that their halakhot are exclusive. Just as forty se’a can only purify an individual through immersion and not through pouring, so too nine kav can only purify one who experienced a seminal emission through pouring and not through immersion.,The Gemara relates that Rav Naḥman prepared a jug with a capacity of nine kav so that his students could pour water over themselves and become pure. When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said: Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yehuda Gelostera said: The halakha that one who experienced a seminal emission can be purified by pouring nine kav was only taught for a sick person who experienced the emission involuntarily. However, a sick person who experienced a normal seminal emission in the course of marital relations, is required to immerse himself in forty se’a.,Rav Yosef said: In that case, Rav Naḥman’s jug is broken, meaning it is no longer of any use, as few people fall into the category of sick people who experienced seminal emissions. Nevertheless, when Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia he said: In Usha there was an incident 58a With regard to Babylonia, the Gemara cites what Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar said: When Babylonia was cursed, its neighbors were cursed along with it. When Samaria was cursed, its neighbors were blessed. When Babylonia was cursed its neighbors were cursed along with it, as it is written: “I will also make it a possession for the bittern, a wading bird, and pools of water” (Isaiah 14:23); not only will it be destroyed, but the site will become a habitat for destructive, environmentally harmful creatures. When Samaria was cursed, however, its neighbors were blessed, as it is written: “Therefore I will make Samaria a heap in the field, a place for the planting of vineyards” (Micah 1:6); although destroyed, it will serve a beneficial purpose.,And Rav Hamnuna said: One who sees multitudes of Israel, six hundred thousand Jews, recites: Blessed…Who knows all secrets. One who sees multitudes of gentiles recites: “Your mother shall be sore ashamed, she that bore you shall be confounded; behold, the hindermost of the nations shall be a wilderness, a dry land, and a desert” (Jeremiah 50:12).,The Sages taught in a Tosefta: One who sees multitudes of Israel recites: Blessed…Who knows all secrets. Why is this? He sees a whole nation whose minds are unlike each other and whose faces are unlike each other, and He Who knows all secrets, God, knows what is in each of their hearts. The Gemara relates: Ben Zoma once saw a multitude okhlosa of Israel while standing on a stair on the Temple Mount. He immediately recited: Blessed…Who knows all secrets and Blessed…Who created all these to serve me.,Explaining his custom, he would say: How much effort did Adam the first man exert before he found bread to eat: He plowed, sowed, reaped, sheaved, threshed, winnowed in the wind, separated the grain from the chaff, ground the grain into flour, sifted, kneaded, and baked and only thereafter he ate. And I, on the other hand, wake up and find all of these prepared for me. Human society employs a division of labor, and each individual benefits from the service of the entire world. Similarly, how much effort did Adam the first man exert before he found a garment to wear? He sheared, laundered, combed, spun and wove, and only thereafter he found a garment to wear. And I, on the other hand, wake up and find all of these prepared for me. Members of all nations, merchants and craftsmen, diligently come to the entrance of my home, and I wake up and find all of these before me.,Ben Zoma would say: A good guest, what does he say? How much effort did the host expend on my behalf, how much meat did the host bring before me. How much wine did he bring before me. How many loaves geluskaot did he bring before me. All the effort that he expended, he expended only for me. However, a bad guest, what does he say? What effort did the host expend? I ate only one piece of bread, I ate only one piece of meat and I drank only one cup of wine. All the effort that the home owner expended he only expended on behalf of his wife and children.,With regard to a good guest, what does he say? “Remember that you magnify his work, whereof men have sung” (Job 36:24); he praises and acknowledges those who helped him. With regard to a bad guest it is written: “Men do therefore fear him; he regards not any who are wise of heart” (Job 37:24).,On the topic of multitudes, the Gemara cites another verse: “And the man in the days of Saul was old, and came among men” (I Samuel 17:12). Rava, and some say Rav Zevid, and some say Rav Oshaya, said: This refers to Yishai, father of David, who always went out with multitudes, and entered with multitudes, and taught Torah with multitudes. Ulla said: We hold there is no multitude in Babylonia. The Sage taught: A multitude is no fewer than six hundred thousand people.,The Sages taught: One who sees the Sages of Israel recites: Blessed…Who has shared of His wisdom with those who revere Him. One who sees Sages of the nations of the world recites: Blessed…Who has given of His wisdom to flesh and blood. One who sees kings of Israel recites: Blessed…Who has shared of His glory with those who revere Him. One who sees kings of the other nations of the world recites: Blessed…Who has given of His glory to flesh and blood.,Rabbi Yoḥa said: One should always strive to run toward kings of Israel to greet them. And not only should he run toward kings of Israel, but also toward kings of the nations of the world, so that if he will be privileged to witnesses the glory of the Messiah (Rashi) and the World-to-Come, he will distinguish between the kings of Israel and the kings of the nations of the world.,The Gemara relates: Rav Sheshet was blind. Everyone was going to greet the king and Rav Sheshet stood up and went along with them. This heretic found him there and said to him: The intact jugs go to the river, where do the broken jugs go? Why is a blind person going to see the king? Rav Sheshet said to him: Come see that I know more than you do. The first troop passed, and when the noise grew louder, this heretic said to him: The king is coming. Rav Sheshet said to him: The king is not coming. The second troop passed, and when the noise grew louder, this heretic said to him: Now the king is coming. Rav Sheshet said to him: The king is not coming. The third troop passed, and when there was silence, Rav Sheshet said to him: Certainly now the king is coming.,This heretic said to him: How do you know this? Rav Sheshet said to him: Royalty on earth is like royalty in the heavens, as it is written with regard to God’s revelation to Elijah the Prophet on Mount Horeb: r“And He said: Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the Lord.rAnd, behold, the Lord passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and broke in pieces the rocks before the Lord;rbut the Lord was not in the wind;rand after the wind an earthquake;rbut the Lord was not in the earthquake;rand after the earthquake a fire;rbut the Lord was not in the fire;rand after the fire a still small voice.rAnd it was so, when Elijah heard it, that he wrapped his face in his mantle and went out, and stood in the entrance of the cave” (I Kings 19:11–13). God’s revelation was specifically at the moment of silence.,When the king came, Rav Sheshet began to bless him. The heretic mockingly said to him: Do you bless someone you do not see? The Gemara asks: And what ultimately happened to this heretic? Some say that his friends gouged out his eyes, and some say that Rav Sheshet fixed his gaze upon him, and the heretic became a pile of bones.,As for the connection between divine and earthly royalty, the Gemara cites another story: Rabbi Sheila ordered that a man who had relations with a gentile woman be flogged. That man went to inform the king and said: There is one man among the Jews who renders judgment without the king’s authority harmana. The king sent a messenger peristaka for Rabbi Sheila to bring him to trial. When Rabbi Sheila came, they said to him: Why did you order flogging for this man? He said to them: Because he had relations with a female donkey. According to Persian law this was an extremely heinous crime, so they said to him: Do you have witnesses that he did so? He replied: Yes, and Elijah the prophet came and appeared as a person and testified. They said to Rabbi Sheila: If so, he is liable for the death penalty; why did you not sentence him to death? He replied: Since the day we were exiled from our land we do not have the authority to execute, but you, do with him as you wish.,As they considered the sentence, Rabbi Sheila praised God for saving him from danger: “Yours, O Lord, is the greatness, power, glory, triumph, and majesty; for all that is in heaven and on earth is Yours; Yours is the kingdom, O Lord, and You are exalted as head above all” (I Chronicles 29:11). They asked him: What did you say? He told them: This is what I said: Blessed is Merciful One who grants kingdom on earth that is a microcosm of the kingdom in heaven, and granted you dominion and love of justice. They said to him: Indeed, the honor of royalty is so dear to you. They gave him a staff to symbolize his license to sit in judgment and said to him: Judge.,As he was leaving, that man said to Rabbi Sheila: Does God perform such miracles for liars? He replied: Scoundrel! Aren’t gentiles called donkeys? As it is written: “Whose flesh is as the flesh of donkeys” (Ezekiel 23:20). Rabbi Sheila saw that he was going to tell the Persian authorities that he called them donkeys. He said: This man has the legal status of a pursuer. He seeks to have me killed. And the Torah said: If one comes to kill you, kill him first. He struck him with the staff and killed him.,Rabbi Sheila said: Since a miracle was performed on my behalf with this verse that I cited, I will interpret it homiletically: Yours, O Lord, is the greatness; that is the act of creation, and so it says: “Who does great things past finding out” (Job 9:10); rAnd the power; that is the exodus from Egypt, as it is stated: “And Israel saw the great work which the Lord did to the Egyptians” (Exodus 14:31);rAnd the glory; that is the sun and the moon that stood still for Joshua, as it is stated: “And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the nation had avenged themselves of their enemies” (Joshua 10:13);rAnd the triumph; that is the downfall of Rome, and so it says describing the downfall of Edom, whom the Sages identified as the forefather of Rome: “Their lifeblood is dashed against My garments and I have stained all My raiment” (Isaiah 63:3);rAnd the majesty; this is the war of the valleys of Arnon, as it is stated: “Wherefore it is said in the book of the Wars of the Lord: Vahev in Sufa, and the valleys of Arnon” (Numbers 21:14);rFor all that is in the heaven and in the earth is Yours; this is the war of Sisera, as it is stated: “They fought from heaven, the stars in their courses fought against Sisera” (Judges 5:20).rYours is the kingdom, O Lord; this is the war of Amalek, and so it says: “And he said: The hand upon the throne of the Lord: the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation” (Exodus 17:16), as then God will sit on His throne.rAnd you are exalted; this is the war of Gog and Magog, and so it says: “I am against you, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshekh and Tubal” (Ezekiel 38:3); and:rAs head above all; Rav Ḥa bar Rava said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: All leadership and authority, even the most insignificant, the one responsible for distributing water, is appointed by heaven.,It was taught in a baraita in the name of Rabbi Akiva: rYours, O Lord, is the greatness; this is the splitting of the Red Sea;rthe power; this is the plague of the firstborn;rthe glory; this is the giving of the Torah;rthe triumph; this is Jerusalem; rand the majesty; this is the Temple. ' None |
|
99. Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Bavli, aggada integrated into halakhic context • Halakha/halakhic • Halakhah/Halakhot • Halakhah/Halakhot, and Aggadah; Law and Narrative • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • aggada in Bavli, integrated with halakhic context
Found in books: Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 360, 430, 445; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 569, 570; Piotrkowski (2019), Priests in Exile: The History of the Temple of Onias and Its Community in the Hellenistic Period, 142
| 13b ונמלך ומצאו בן עירו ואמר שמך כשמי ושם אשתך כשם אשתי פסול לגרש בו,הכי השתא התם (דברים כד, א) וכתב לה כתיב בעינן כתיבה לשמה הכא ועשה לה כתיב בעינן עשייה לשמה עשייה דידה מחיקה היא,א"ר אחא בר חנינא גלוי וידוע לפני מי שאמר והיה העולם שאין בדורו של רבי מאיר כמותו ומפני מה לא קבעו הלכה כמותו שלא יכלו חביריו לעמוד על סוף דעתו שהוא אומר על טמא טהור ומראה לו פנים על טהור טמא ומראה לו פנים,תנא לא ר"מ שמו אלא רבי נהוראי שמו ולמה נקרא שמו ר"מ שהוא מאיר עיני חכמים בהלכה ולא נהוראי שמו אלא רבי נחמיה שמו ואמרי לה רבי אלעזר בן ערך שמו ולמה נקרא שמו נהוראי שמנהיר עיני חכמים בהלכה,אמר רבי האי דמחדדנא מחבראי דחזיתיה לר\' מאיר מאחוריה ואילו חזיתיה מקמיה הוה מחדדנא טפי דכתיב (ישעיהו ל, כ) והיו עיניך רואות את מוריך,א"ר אבהו א"ר יוחנן תלמיד היה לו לר"מ וסומכוס שמו שהיה אומר על כל דבר ודבר של טומאה ארבעים ושמונה טעמי טומאה ועל כל דבר ודבר של טהרה ארבעים ושמונה טעמי טהרה,תנא תלמיד ותיק היה ביבנה שהיה מטהר את השרץ במאה וחמשים טעמים,אמר רבינא אני אדון ואטהרנו ומה נחש שממית ומרבה טומאה טהור שרץ שאין ממית ומרבה טומאה לא כ"ש,ולא היא מעשה קוץ בעלמא קעביד,א"ר אבא אמר שמואל שלש שנים נחלקו ב"ש וב"ה הללו אומרים הלכה כמותנו והללו אומרים הלכה כמותנו יצאה בת קול ואמרה אלו ואלו דברי אלהים חיים הן והלכה כב"ה,וכי מאחר שאלו ואלו דברי אלהים חיים מפני מה זכו ב"ה לקבוע הלכה כמותן מפני שנוחין ועלובין היו ושונין דבריהן ודברי ב"ש ולא עוד אלא שמקדימין דברי ב"ש לדבריהן,כאותה ששנינו מי שהיה ראשו ורובו בסוכה ושלחנו בתוך הבית בית שמאי פוסלין וב"ה מכשירין אמרו ב"ה לב"ש לא כך היה מעשה שהלכו זקני ב"ש וזקני ב"ה לבקר את ר\' יוחנן בן החורנית ומצאוהו יושב ראשו ורובו בסוכה ושלחנו בתוך הבית אמרו להן בית שמאי (אי) משם ראיה אף הן אמרו לו אם כך היית נוהג לא קיימת מצות סוכה מימיך,ללמדך שכל המשפיל עצמו הקב"ה מגביהו וכל המגביה עצמו הקב"ה משפילו כל המחזר על הגדולה גדולה בורחת ממנו וכל הבורח מן הגדולה גדולה מחזרת אחריו וכל הדוחק את השעה שעה דוחקתו וכל הנדחה מפני שעה שעה עומדת לו,ת"ר שתי שנים ומחצה נחלקו ב"ש וב"ה הללו אומרים נוח לו לאדם שלא נברא יותר משנברא והללו אומרים נוח לו לאדם שנברא יותר משלא נברא נמנו וגמרו נוח לו לאדם שלא נברא יותר משנברא עכשיו שנברא יפשפש במעשיו ואמרי לה ימשמש במעשיו,64b בעל בנכסי אשתו,רבא אמר אפילו עבד עיסקא ורווח רב פפא אמר אפי\' מצא מציאה אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק אפילו כתב בהו תפילין,ואמר רב חנין ואיתימא ר\' חנינא מאי קראה דכתיב (במדבר כא, ב) וידר ישראל נדר וגו\',אמר רמי בר אבא דרך מיל ושינה כל שהוא מפיגין את היין אמר רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה לא שנו אלא ששתה כדי רביעית אבל שתה יותר מרביעית כל שכן שדרך טורדתו ושינה משכרתו,ודרך מיל מפיגה היין והתניא מעשה בר"ג שהיה רוכב על החמור והיה מהלך מעכו לכזיב והיה רבי אילעאי מהלך אחריו מצא גלוסקין בדרך אמר לו אילעאי טול גלוסקין מן הדרך מצא נכרי אחד אמר לו מבגאי טול גלוסקין הללו מאילעאי,ניטפל לו ר\' אילעאי אמר לו מהיכן אתה אמר לו מעיירות של בורגנין ומה שמך מבגאי שמני כלום היכירך רבן גמליאל מעולם אמר לו לאו,באותה שעה למדנו שכוון רבן גמליאל ברוח הקודש ושלשה דברים למדנו באותה שעה למדנו שאין מעבירין על האוכלין,ולמדנו שהולכין אחרי רוב עוברי דרכים ולמדנו שחמצו של נכרי אחר הפסח מותר בהנאה,כיון שהגיע לכזיב בא אחד לישאל על נדרו אמר לזה שעמו כלום שתינו רביעית יין האיטלקי אמר לו הן אם כן יטייל אחרינו עד שיפיג יינינו,וטייל אחריהן ג\' מילין עד שהגיע לסולמא של צור כיון שהגיע לסולמא דצור ירד ר"ג מן החמור ונתעטף וישב והתיר לו נדרו,והרבה דברים למדנו באותה שעה למדנו שרביעית יין האיטלקי משכר ולמדנו שיכור אל יורה ולמדנו שדרך מפיגה את היין ולמדנו שאין מפירין נדרים לא רכוב ולא מהלך ולא עומד אלא יושב,קתני מיהת שלשה מילין שאני יין האיטלקי דמשכר טפי,והאמר רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה לא שנו אלא ששתה רביעית אבל שתה יותר מרביעית כל שכן דרך טורדתו ושינה משכרתו,רכוב שאני השתא דאתית להכי לרמי בר אבא נמי לא קשיא רכוב שאני,איני והאמר רב נחמן מפירין נדרים בין מהלך בין עומד ובין רכוב,תנאי היא דאיכא למאן דאמר פותחין בחרטה,ואיכא למאן דאמר אין פותחין בחרטה,דאמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יוחנן מאי פתח ליה רבן גמליאל לההוא גברא (משלי יב, יח) יש בוטה כמדקרות חרב ולשון חכמים מרפא כל הבוטה ראוי לדוקרו בחרב אלא שלשון חכמים מרפא,אמר מר ואין מעבירין על האוכלין אמר רבי יוחנן משום רבי שמעון בן יוחאי לא שנו אלא בדורות הראשונים שאין בנות ישראל פרוצות בכשפים אבל בדורות האחרונים שבנות ישראל פרוצות בכשפים מעבירין,תנא שלימין מעבירין פתיתין אין מעבירין אמר ליה רב אסי לרב אשי ואפתיתין לא עבדן והכתיב (יחזקאל יג, יט) ותחללנה אותי אל עמי בשעלי שעורים ובפתותי לחם דשקלי באגרייהו,אמר רב ששת משום רבי אלעזר בן עזריה ' None | 13b but later reconsidered and did not divorce her, and a resident of his city found him and said: Your name is the same as my name, and your wife’s name is the same as my wife’s name, and we reside in the same town; give me the bill of divorce, and I will use it to divorce my wife, then this document is invalid to divorce with it? Apparently, a man may not divorce his wife with a bill of divorce written for another woman, and the same should apply to the scroll of a sota.,The Gemara rejects this argument: How can you compare the two cases? There, with regard to a bill of divorce, it is written: “And he shall write for her” (Deuteronomy 24:1), and therefore we require writing it in her name, specifically for her; whereas here, with regard to a sota, it is written: “And he shall perform with her all this ritual” (Numbers 5:30), and therefore we require performance in her name. In her case, the performance is erasure; however, writing of the scroll need not be performed specifically for her.,On the topic of Rabbi Meir and his Torah study, the Gemara cites an additional statement. Rabbi Aḥa bar Ḥanina said: It is revealed and known before the One Who spoke and the world came into being that in the generation of Rabbi Meir there was no one of the Sages who is his equal. Why then didn’t the Sages establish the halakha in accordance with his opinion? It is because his colleagues were unable to ascertain the profundity of his opinion. He was so brilliant that he could present a cogent argument for any position, even if it was not consistent with the prevalent halakha. As he would state with regard to a ritually impure item that it is pure, and display justification for that ruling, and likewise he would state with regard to a ritually pure item that it is impure, and display justification for that ruling. The Sages were unable to distinguish between the statements that were halakha and those that were not.,It was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Meir was not his name; rather, Rabbi Nehorai was his name. And why was he called by the name Rabbi Meir? It was because he illuminates meir the eyes of the Sages in matters of the halakha. And Rabbi Nehorai was not the name of the tanna known by that name; rather, Rabbi Neḥemya was his name, and some say: Rabbi Elazar ben Arakh was his name. And why was he called by the name Rabbi Nehorai? It is because he enlightens manhir the eyes of the Sages in matters of the halakha.,The Gemara relates that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: The fact that I am more incisive than my colleagues is due to the fact that I saw Rabbi Meir from behind, i.e., I sat behind him when I was his student. Had I seen him from the front, I would be even more incisive, as it is written: “And your eyes shall see your teacher” (Isaiah 30:20). Seeing the face of one’s teacher increases one’s understanding and sharpens one’s mind.,And the Gemara stated that Rabbi Abbahu said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: Rabbi Meir had a disciple, and his name was Sumakhus, who would state with regard to each and every matter of ritual impurity forty-eight reasons in support of the ruling of impurity, and with regard to each and every matter of ritual purity forty-eight reasons in support of the ruling of purity.,It was taught in a baraita: There was a distinguished disciple at Yavne who could with his incisive intellect purify the creeping animal, explicitly deemed ritually impure by the Torah, adducing one hundred and fifty reasons in support of his argument.,Ravina said: I too will deliberate and purify it employing the following reasoning: And just as a snake that kills people and animals and thereby increases ritual impurity in the world, as a corpse imparts impurity through contact, through being carried, and by means of a tent, is ritually pure and transmits no impurity, a creeping animal that does not kill and does not increase impurity in the world, all the more so should it be pure.,The Gemara rejects this: And it is not so; that is not a valid a fortiori argument, as it can be refuted. A snake is performing a mere act of a thorn. A thorn causes injury and even death; nevertheless, it is not ritually impure. The same applies to a snake, and therefore this a fortiori argument is rejected.,Rabbi Abba said that Shmuel said: For three years Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disagreed. These said: The halakha is in accordance with our opinion, and these said: The halakha is in accordance with our opinion. Ultimately, a Divine Voice emerged and proclaimed: Both these and those are the words of the living God. However, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel.,The Gemara asks: Since both these and those are the words of the living God, why were Beit Hillel privileged to have the halakha established in accordance with their opinion? The reason is that they were agreeable and forbearing, showing restraint when affronted, and when they taught the halakha they would teach both their own statements and the statements of Beit Shammai. Moreover, when they formulated their teachings and cited a dispute, they prioritized the statements of Beit Shammai to their own statements, in deference to Beit Shammai.,As in the mishna that we learned: In the case of one whose head and most of his body were in the sukka, but his table was in the house, Beit Shammai deem this sukka invalid; and Beit Hillel deem it valid. Beit Hillel said to Beit Shammai: Wasn’t there an incident in which the Elders of Beit Shammai and the Elders of Beit Hillel went to visit Rabbi Yoḥa ben HaḤoranit, and they found him sitting with his head and most of his body in the sukka, but his table was in the house? Beit Shammai said to them: From there do you seek to adduce a proof? Those visitors, too, said to him: If that was the manner in which you were accustomed to perform the mitzva, you have never fulfilled the mitzva of sukka in all your days. It is apparent from the phrasing of the mishna that when the Sages of Beit Hillel related that the Elders of Beit Shammai and the Elders of Beit Hillel visited Rabbi Yoḥa ben HaḤoranit, they mentioned the Elders of Beit Shammai before their own Elders.,This is to teach you that anyone who humbles himself, the Holy One, Blessed be He, exalts him, and anyone who exalts himself, the Holy One, Blessed be He, humbles him. Anyone who seeks greatness, greatness flees from him, and, conversely, anyone who flees from greatness, greatness seeks him. And anyone who attempts to force the moment and expends great effort to achieve an objective precisely when he desires to do so, the moment forces him too, and he is unsuccessful. And conversely, anyone who is patient and yields to the moment, the moment stands by his side, and he will ultimately be successful.,The Sages taught the following baraita: For two and a half years, Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disagreed. These say: It would have been preferable had man not been created than to have been created. And those said: It is preferable for man to have been created than had he not been created. Ultimately, they were counted and concluded: It would have been preferable had man not been created than to have been created. However, now that he has been created, he should examine his actions that he has performed and seek to correct them. And some say: He should scrutinize his planned actions and evaluate whether or not and in what manner those actions should be performed, so that he will not sin.,The cross beam, which the Sages stated may be used to render an alleyway fit for one to carry within it, must be wide enough to receive and hold a small brick. And this small brick is half a large brick, which measures three handbreadths, i.e., a handbreadth and a half. It is sufficient that the cross beam will be a handbreadth in width, not a handbreadth and a half, enough to hold a small brick across its width.,And the cross beam must be wide enough to hold a small brick and also sturdy enough to hold a small brick and not collapse. Rabbi Yehuda says: If it is wide enough to hold the brick, even though it is not sturdy enough to actually support it, it is sufficient. Therefore, even if the cross beam is made of straw or reeds, one considers it as though it were made of metal.,If the cross beam is curved, so that a small brick cannot rest on it, one considers it as though it were straight; if it is round, one considers it as though it were square. The following principle was stated with regard to a round cross beam: Any beam with a circumference of three handbreadths is a handbreadth in width, i.e., in diameter.'64b a husband who acquired rights to his wife’s property that she had brought into the marriage as her dowry should use part of the profits for the acquisition of a Torah scroll.,Rava said: Even if he entered into a business venture and made a large profit, he should act in a similar manner. Rav Pappa said: Even if he found a lost article, he should do the same. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: He need not use the money to commission the writing of a Torah scroll, as even if he wrote a set of phylacteries with it, this, too, is a mitzva whose merit will enable him to retain the rest of the money.,Rav Ḥanin said, and some say it was Rabbi Ḥanina who said: What is the verse that alludes to this? As it is written: “And Israel vowed a vow to the Lord and said: If You will indeed deliver this people into my hand, then I will consecrate their cities” (Numbers 21:2), which shows that one who wishes to succeed should sanctify a portion of his earnings for Heaven.,The Gemara now cites additional teachings relating to the drinking of wine. Rami bar Abba said: Walking a path of a mil, and similarly, sleeping even a minimal amount, will dispel the effect of wine that one has drunk. Rav Naḥman said that Rabba bar Avuh said: They only taught this with regard to one who has drunk a quarter-log of wine, but with regard to one who has drunk more than a quarter-log, this advice is not useful. In that case, walking a path of such a distance will preoccupy and exhaust him all the more, and a small amount of sleep will further intoxicate him.,The Gemara poses a question: Does walking a path of only a mil dispel the effects of wine? Wasn’t it taught in a baraita: There was an incident involving Rabban Gamliel, who was riding a donkey and traveling from Akko to Keziv, and his student Rabbi Elai was walking behind him. Rabban Gamliel found some fine loaves of bread on the road, and he said to his student: Elai, take the loaves from the road. Further along the way, Rabban Gamliel encountered a certain gentile and said to him: Mavgai, take these loaves from Elai.,Elai joined the gentile and said to him: Where are you from? He said to him: From the nearby towns of guardsmen. He asked: And what is your name? The gentile replied: My name is Mavgai. He then inquired: Has Rabban Gamliel ever met you before, seeing as he knows your name? He said to him: No.,The Gemara interrupts the story in order to comment: At that time we learned that Rabban Gamliel divined the gentile’s name by way of divine inspiration that rested upon him. And at that time we also learned three matters of halakha from Rabban Gamliel’s behavior: We learned that one may not pass by food, i.e., if a person sees food lying on the ground, he must stop and pick it up.,We also learned that we follow the majority of travelers. Since the area was populated mostly by gentiles, Rabban Gamliel assumed that the loaf belonged to a gentile, and was consequently prohibited to be eaten by a Jew. Therefore, he ordered that it be given to a gentile. And we further learned that with regard to leavened bread belonging to a gentile, it is permitted to benefit from this food after Passover. The incident recounted above occurred not long after the festival of Passover. By giving the loaf to the gentile instead of burning it in accordance with the halakhot of leavened bread that remains after Passover, Rabban Gamliel gained a certain benefit from it in the form of the gentile’s gratitude. This benefit is regarded as having monetary value.,The Gemara resumes the narrative: When Rabban Gamliel arrived in Keziv, a person came before him to request that he dissolve his vow. Rabban Gamliel said to the one who was with him, i.e., Rabbi Elai: Did we drink a quarter-log of Italian wine earlier? He said to him: Yes. Rabban Gamliel replied: If so, let him journey after us until the effect of our wine is dispelled, after which we may consider his issue.,And that person journeyed after them for three mil, until Rabban Gamliel arrived at the Ladder of Tyre. When he arrived at the Ladder of Tyre, Rabban Gamliel alighted from his donkey and wrapped himself in his shawl in the customary manner of a judge, who wraps himself in a shawl in order to sit in awe at the time of judgment, and he sat and dissolved his vow.,The Gemara continues: At that time we learned many matters of halakha from Rabban Gamliel’s conduct. We learned that a quarter-log of Italian wine intoxicates, and we learned that one who is intoxicated may not issue a halakhic ruling, and we learned that walking on a path dispels the effect of wine, and lastly we learned that one may not annul vows when he is either mounted on an animal, or walking, or even standing, but only when he is sitting.,In any event, the baraita is teaching that Rabban Gamliel found it necessary to walk three mil in order to become sober after drinking wine. The Gemara resolves the contradiction. Italian wine is different in that it is more intoxicating, therefore more extended activity is required in order to dispel its effects.,The Gemara poses a question: But didn’t Rav Naḥman say that Rabba bar Avuh said: They taught this only with regard to one who has drunk a quarter-log of wine, but with regard to one who has drunk more than a quarter-log, walking that distance will preoccupy and exhaust him all the more, and a small amount of sleep will further intoxicate him? If Italian wine is more intoxicating than other wine, shouldn’t a quarter-log be considered like a larger quantity of other wine?,The Gemara answers: Being mounted on an animal is different from walking; since he is not on foot it is not such a tiring activity. Accordingly, riding three mil will not exhaust him; rather, it will dispel the effect of the wine. The Gemara adds: Now that you have arrived at this conclusion, according to Rami bar Abba, who says that walking one mil is sufficient, it is also not difficult, as he too can say that riding is different from walking. Since one is not on foot, the effects of the wine are not dispelled as quickly. Therefore, three mil is necessary.,The Gemara poses a question with regard to one of the details of the story: Is that so, that Rabban Gamliel was required to alight from his donkey in order to annul the vow? But didn’t Rav Naḥman say: One may annul vows walking, standing, or mounted? Why, then, did Rabban Gamliel dismount his donkey?,The Gemara answers: This is a dispute between tanna’im, as there is an authority who says that one may open the possibility for dissolution of a vow by means of regret alone. In other words, there is no need to search for a special reason in order to dissolve a person’s vow; it is enough to ascertain that he regrets making it. This can be done easily, even while walking, standing, or riding.,And there is another authority who says that one may not open the possibility for dissolution of a vow by means of regret alone. Rather, one must find an opening, i.e., a particular reason to dissolve the vow in question, which requires a thorough analysis of the circumstances of the vow. This task must be performed free of distractions, which means one must be seated (Tosafot).,As Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: With what did Rabban Gamliel open the possibility for dissolving his vow for that man, i.e., what opening did he find for him? Rabban Gamliel cited the verse: “There is one who utters like the piercings of a sword; but the tongue of the wise is health” (Proverbs 12:18) and explained it as follows: Whoever utters a vow deserves to be pierced by a sword, as he might fail to fulfill it. Therefore, one should not vow at all. Had you known that whoever vows is liable to be executed, would you have vowed? Rather, it is the tongue of the wise that heals, as when a Sage dissolves a vow, he dissolves it retroactively, and it is as though one had never taken the vow.,The Gemara continues with its analysis of the baraita. The Master said previously: One of the halakhot learned from the incident involving Rabban Gamliel was that one may not pass by food; rather, one must treat the food with respect and pick it up. Rabbi Yoḥa said in the name of Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai: They taught this ruling only in the early generations, when Jewish women were not accustomed to using witchcraft. However, in the later generations, when Jewish women are accustomed to using witchcraft, one may pass by food, as a spell might have been cast on the bread, and one must not put himself in unnecessary danger.,A Sage taught: If the loaves are whole, one may pass them by, as they might have been placed there for the purposes of witchcraft; however, if they are in pieces, one may not pass them by, because bread in pieces is not used for witchcraft. Rav Asi said to Rav Ashi: Do they not perform magic with pieces of bread? Isn’t it written in the verse that deals with witchcraft: “And you have profaned Me among My people for handfuls of barley and for pieces of bread” (Ezekiel 13:19)? The Gemara answers: The verse does not mean that they used pieces of bread in their witchcraft, but rather that they took such pieces as their wages.,Rav Sheshet said in the name of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya: ' None |
|
100. Babylonian Talmud, Gittin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • mamzerim (halakhic bastards) • mamzerim (halakhic “bastards”)
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 40; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 40
11a בשמות מובהקין,היכי דמי שמות מובהקין אמר רב פפא כגון הורמיז ואבודינא בר שיבתאי ובר קידרי ובאטי ונקים אונא,אבל שמות שאין מובהקים מאי לא אי הכי אדתני סיפא לא הוזכרו אלא בזמן שנעשו בהדיוט לפלוג וליתני בדידה בד"א בשמות מובהקין אבל שמות שאין מובהקין לא,הכי נמי קאמר בד"א בשמות מובהקין אבל בשמות שאין מובהקין נעשה כמי שנעשו בהדיוט ופסולין,ואיבעית אימא סיפא אתאן לגיטי ממון והכי קאמר לא הוזכרו גיטי ממון דפסולים אלא בזמן שנעשו בהדיוט,תניא אמר ר\' אלעזר בר\' יוסי כך אמר ר"ש לחכמים בצידן לא נחלקו ר"ע וחכמים על כל השטרות העולין בערכאות של עובדי כוכבי\' שאע"פ שחותמיהן עובדי כוכבים כשרים ואפי\' גיטי נשים ושחרורי עבדים לא נחלקו אלא בזמן שנעשו בהדיוט שר"ע מכשיר וחכמים פוסלים חוץ מגיטי נשים ושחרורי עבדים,רשב"ג אומר אף אלו כשירין במקום שאין ישראל חותמין אבל במקום שישראל חותמין לא,מקום שאין ישראל חותמין נמי ליגזור אטו מקום שישראל חותמין שמא בשמא מחליף אתרא באתרא לא מחליף,רבינא סבר לאכשורי בכנופיאתה דארמאי א"ל רפרם ערכאות תנן,אמר רבא האי שטרא פרסאה דמסריה ניהליה באפי סהדי ישראל מגבינן ביה מבני חרי,והא לא ידעי למיקרא בדידעי,והא בעינא כתב שאינו יכול לזייף וליכא בדאפיצן והא בעינא צריך שיחזיר מענינו של שטר בשיטה אחרונה וליכא בדמהדר,א"ה ממשעבדי נמי לית ליה קלא,בעא מיניה ריש לקיש מר\' יוחנן' 88b אמר רב אחא בר יעקב שמע מינה מהרה דמרי עלמא תמני מאה וחמשין ותרתי הוא:,| 11a We are dealing with unambiguous gentile names, in which case there is no need to be concerned that people might rely on these individuals as witnesses for the transfer, as it is evident that they are gentiles.,The Gemara clarifies: What are the circumstances of unambiguous gentile names? Rav Pappa said: This is referring to names such as Hurmiz, and Abbudina, bar Shibbetai, and bar Kidri, and Bati, and Nakim Una.,The Gemara infers: However, if the bill of divorce or manumission was signed by gentile witnesses with ambiguous names, what is the halakha? Is this not a valid document? If so, instead of teaching in the latter clause of the mishna: These two types of documents are mentioned only when they are prepared by a common person, not in court, let him distinguish and teach the distinction within the case of gentile courts itself, as follows: In what case is this statement, that gentile signatures are valid for a bill of divorce or manumission, said? With regard to unambiguous names. However, in a case of ambiguous names, no, gentile witnesses are not valid.,The Gemara answers: That is also what he is saying, i.e., Rabbi Shimon’s statement that these bills of divorce and bills of manumission are also valid should be understood in this very manner: In what case is this statement said? With regard to unambiguous names. However, with regard to ambiguous names, the document becomes like one that was prepared by a common person, and therefore such documents are invalid.,And if you wish, say a different answer: In the last clause of the mishna, which states: These types of documents are mentioned only when they are prepared by a common person, we are no longer discussing bills of divorce; rather, we arrive at the case of ficial documents. Furthermore, this clause of the mishna is not a continuation of Rabbi Shimon’s statement, as it returns to the opinion of the first tanna. And this is what the mishna is saying: Ficial documents were mentioned as invalid only when they were prepared by a common person, whereas if they were produced by a court they are valid.,It is taught in a baraita (Tosefta 1:4): Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Yosei, said that Rabbi Shimon said this to the Sages in the city of Tzaidan: Rabbi Akiva and the Rabbis did not disagree with regard to all documents produced in gentile courts, that even though their signatories are gentiles, these documents are valid, even in the case of bills of divorce and bills of manumission. They disagreed only when they were prepared by a common person, outside a court, as Rabbi Akiva deems a document of this kind valid, and the Rabbis deem it invalid, except for bills of divorce and bills of manumission.,Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Even these, bills of divorce and manumission, are valid in a place where Jews do not sign. In other words, the halakha that a document with gentile signatories is valid applies only in a place where Jews are not allowed to sign, as everyone knows that gentile documents are not signed by Jews. However, in a place where Jews sign, no, these documents are not valid either, as people might mistakenly think that Jews signed this bill of divorce. Therefore there is a concern that one might deliver this bill of divorce in the presence of those witnesses, who are actually gentiles, which would render the bill of divorce invalid.,The Gemara suggests: Let us also decree in a place where Jews do not sign due to a place where Jews do sign. The Gemara answers: One might confuse one name with another name. It is possible that one might think that a certain name is that of a Jew when it is actually that of a gentile. However, one is not likely to confuse one place with another place. Since everyone knows that all of the signatures in certain places belong to gentiles, they are careful not to transfer a bill of divorce in the presence of the witnesses who signed it, unless they are certain that the witnesses are Jews.,§ The Gemara relates that Ravina thought to deem valid a document that was written by a group of gentiles arma’ei. Rafram said to him that we learned: Gentile courts, in the mishna, i.e., these documents are valid only if they were produced in an important court, not by every group of gentiles.,Similarly, Rava said: With regard to this Persian document shetara parsa’a written by the Persian authorities that was transferred to the recipient in the presence of Jewish witnesses, he can collect with it non-liened property, i.e., property that is unencumbered by a mortgage. Although this is not considered a proper document by means of which one can collect from any land sold by the debtor, nevertheless, the facts in the document are considered accurate, and therefore one may at least collect non-liened property with it.,The Gemara asks: But the witnesses for the transmission of this document do not know how to read Persian, as most Jews did not read that language. If so, how can they serve as witnesses? The Gemara answers: Rava is referring to a situation where the witnesses know how to read Persian.,The Gemara questions how the court can rely upon such a document: But I require that the document be written in a manner that cannot be forged, and it is not so in this document, as the Persians were not particular about preparing their documents in this manner when writing their legal documents. The Gemara explains: Rava’s statement applies in a case where the paper of the documents was processed with gall. Consequently, it is not possible to forge the writing (see 19b). But I require that a document review the essential topic of the document in its last line, and it is not so in the case of Persian documents. The Gemara answers: Rava’s statement applies in a case where it returned to review the essential topic of the document in the final line.,The Gemara asks: If so, he should be able to collect from liened property as well, as this document is equivalent to one written by a Jew. Why doesn’t Rava say that it can be used to collect from liened property as well? The Gemara answers: The reason is that this document does not generate publicity, i.e., a legal matter that is performed in a Persian court will not become publicized among Jews. Therefore, this case is similar to a loan by oral agreement, where the transaction is not publicized. In this case the lender can collect only from non-liened property, as purchasers from the debtor would not have been aware of his debt and consequently taken sufficient measures to ensure that the money would not be claimed from their purchase.,Reish Lakish raised a dilemma before Rabbi Yoḥa:' 88b Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: Learn from this numerical value that soon mehera for the Master of the World is eight hundred and fifty-two years, as it is stated in the verse in Deuteronomy: “You will soon maher utterly perish.” Since the Jewish people dwelled in Eretz Yisrael for almost this amount of time, it is apparently considered soon.,a bill of divorce that the husband was compelled by the court to write and give his wife, if he was compelled by a Jewish court it is valid, but if he was compelled by gentiles it is invalid. But with regard to gentiles they may beat him at the request of the Jewish court and say to him: Do what the Jews are telling you, and it is a valid divorce.,Rav Naḥman says that Shmuel says: With regard to a bill of divorce that the husband was compelled by a Jewish court to give his wife, if they did so lawfully, as the halakha obligated the husband to divorce his wife, it is valid. This is referring to cases where sexual intercourse is forbidden or specific cases where the Sages instituted that the husband is obligated to divorce his wife. If they did so unlawfully, the bill of divorce is invalid, but it is not considered entirely invalid, as it disqualifies the wife from marrying a priest after her husband’s death.,And in a case where the husband was compelled by gentiles, if he was compelled lawfully, the bill of divorce is invalid, but it also disqualifies the wife from marrying a priest. But if he was compelled unlawfully it does not have even the trace of a bill of divorce, and the wife is not even disqualified from marrying a priest.,The Gemara raises an objection: With regard to the statement that if the husband was compelled by gentiles the divorce is invalid but it also disqualifies the wife from marrying a priest, whichever way you look at it, the statement is difficult. If gentiles are legally capable of compulsion, it should be rendered valid with regard to the woman’s permission to remarry as well. If they are not legally capable of compulsion, it should not disqualify her either.,Rav Mesharshiyya says: By Torah law a bill of divorce that the husband was compelled by gentiles to write and give his wife is valid, and what is the reason the Sages said that it is invalid? It is so that each and every woman will not go and depend on a gentile to compel her husband to divorce her through temptation or bribery, and thereby she will release herself from her husband unlawfully.,The Gemara asks: If that is so, that where the husband was compelled by gentiles the bill of divorce is valid by Torah law, why did Shmuel rule that if he was compelled unlawfully it does not have even the trace of a bill of divorce? Let a bill of divorce that the husband was compelled unlawfully by gentiles to give his wife be compared to a case where he was compelled unlawfully by Jews, and disqualify the wife from marrying a priest as well.,Rather, that statement of Rav Mesharshiyya, that by Torah law a bill of divorce is valid even if the husband was compelled by gentiles to write it and give it to his wife, is a mistake. In principle it does not have even the trace of a bill of divorce, even if the husband is required by law to divorce his wife.,And what is the reason that the wife is disqualified from marrying a priest in this case? It is because the case where the husband was compelled lawfully by gentiles can be confused with a case where he was compelled lawfully by Jews. If a bill of divorce that gentiles compelled the husband to write and give to his wife carries no weight, people might think that this is likewise the halakha with regard to a case where Jews compelled the husband to do so. Therefore, the Sages issued a decree that even if the husband was compelled by gentiles the wife is disqualified from marrying a priest. By contrast, the case where the husband was compelled unlawfully by gentiles cannot be confused with a case where he was compelled lawfully by Jews, as they are too dissimilar. Therefore, a bill of divorce that gentiles unlawfully compelled the husband to write and give his wife is entirely invalid.,§ Abaye found Rav Yosef sitting in court as the judge and compelling husbands to give their wives bills of divorce. He said to him: But aren’t we ordinary people, not ordained judges? And it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Tarfon would say: With regard to any place where you find gentile courts agoriot, even if their laws are like Jewish laws, you may not attend them, as it is stated: “Now these are the ordices which you shall set before them” (Exodus 21:1). It is derived from here that one may go to court only before them, i.e., Jewish judges, and not before gentiles. Alternatively, it is derived that one may go to court before them, i.e., ordained judges, and not before ordinary people. Since we are not ordained judges, how can you perform a distinctly judicial act?,Rav Yosef said to him: We see ourselves as agents of the ordained judges in Eretz Yisrael, and we are performing our task as judges on the basis of their agency, just as is the case with regard to cases of admissions and loans, which we attend to on the same basis.,The Gemara asks: If so, why is the halakha that judges living outside Eretz Yisrael do not judge in cases of robbery and personal injury? They should judge in these cases as well. The Gemara answers: When we perform our tasks as judges on the basis of their agency, it is with regard to common matters, e.g., cases that pertain to the halakhot of admissions and loans, which arise frequently between people. But with regard to uncommon matters, e.g., cases of robbery or personal injury, we do not perform our tasks as judges on the basis of their agency.,a rumor circulated in the city that an unmarried woman is betrothed, she is considered to be betrothed. Similarly, if a rumor circulated that a married woman is divorced, she is divorced, provided there is no valid alternative explanation amatla for the rumor.,What is considered a valid explanation? For example, it is a case where there is a rumor that so-and-so divorced his wife but that the bill of divorce was given to her conditionally. It is therefore possible that the condition was not fulfilled and she is not actually divorced. Similarly, if there is a rumor that a woman was betrothed but that the man threw her betrothal, i.e., the money or document of betrothal, to her, and it is uncertain whether it was closer to her and uncertain whether it was closer to him, and therefore the status of their betrothal is likewise uncertain, this is considered a valid explanation.,do we render her forbidden to her husband if she is married to a priest? But didn’t Rav Ashi say that we are not concerned about any rumor that circulates after marriage? Accordingly, a woman should not be compelled to leave her husband merely on the basis of a rumor.,The Gemara answers that this is what the mishna is saying: If a rumor circulated in the city that a woman is betrothed, she is betrothed, and she may not marry another man until she receives a bill of divorce from the man to whom she is rumored to be betrothed. If she is rumored to have been betrothed to a certain man and subsequently divorced from him, ' None | |
|
101. Babylonian Talmud, Hulin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Change, in custom and halakhah
Found in books: Rubin (2008) Time and the Life Cycle in Talmud and Midrash: Socio-Anthropological Perspectives. 82; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 31, 36, 37
| 95b מחוור רישא נפל מיניה אזל אייתי סילתא שדא אסיק תרין אמר רב עבדי נמי הכי אסרינהו ניהליה,אמרי ליה רב כהנא ורב אסי לרב דאיסורא שכיחי דהתירא לא שכיחי אמר להו דאיסורא שכיחי טפי,וכי מכללא מאי פרוותא דעובדי כוכבים הואי תדע דקאמר להו דאיסורא שכיחי טפי,אלא רב היכי אכל בשרא בשעתיה דלא עלים עיניה מיניה איבעית אימא בציירא וחתומא ואי נמי בסימנא כי הא דרבה ב"ר הונא מחתך ליה אתלת קרנתא,רב הוה קאזיל לבי רב חנן חתניה חזי מברא דקאתי לאפיה אמר מברא קאתי לאפי יומא טבא לגו,אזל קם אבבא אודיק בבזעא דדשא חזי חיותא דתליא טרף אבבא נפוק אתו כולי עלמא לאפיה אתא טבחי נמי לא עלים רב עיניה מיניה אמר להו איכו השתא ספיתו להו איסורא לבני ברת לא אכל רב מההוא בישרא,מ"ט אי משום איעלומי הא לא איעלים אלא דנחיש,והאמר רב כל נחש שאינו כאליעזר עבד אברהם וכיונתן בן שאול אינו נחש אלא סעודת הרשות הואי ורב לא מתהני מסעודת הרשות,רב בדיק במברא ושמואל בדיק בספרא רבי יוחנן בדיק בינוקא,כולהו שני דרב הוה כתב ליה רבי יוחנן לקדם רבינו שבבבל כי נח נפשיה הוה כתב לשמואל לקדם חבירינו שבבבל אמר לא ידע לי מידי דרביה אנא כתב שדר ליה עיבורא דשיתין שני אמר השתא חושבנא בעלמא ידע,כתב שדר ליה תליסר גמלי ספקי טריפתא אמר אית לי רב בבבל איזיל איחזייה א"ל לינוקא פסוק לי פסוקיך אמר ליה (שמואל א כח, ג) ושמואל מת אמר ש"מ נח נפשיה דשמואל,ולא היא לא שכיב שמואל אלא כי היכי דלא ליטרח רבי יוחנן,תניא רבי שמעון בן אלעזר אומר בית תינוק ואשה אף על פי שאין נחש יש סימן,אמר ר\' אלעזר והוא דאיתחזק תלתא זימני דכתיב (בראשית מב, לו) יוסף איננו ושמעון איננו ואת בנימין תקחו,בעא מיניה רב הונא מרב בחרוזין מהו א"ל אל תהי שוטה בחרוזין הרי זה סימן איכא דאמרי אמר רב הונא אמר רב בחרוזין הרי זה סימן,רב נחמן מנהרדעא איקלע לגבי רב כהנא לפום נהרא במעלי יומא דכפורי אתו עורבי שדו כבדי וכוליתא אמר ליה שקול ואכול האידנא דהיתרא שכיח טפי,רב חייא בר אבין איתבד ליה כרכשא (בי דינא) אתא לקמיה דרב הונא אמר ליה אית לך סימנא בגויה א"ל לא אית לך טביעות עינא בגויה אמר ליה אין אם כן זיל שקול,רב חנינא חוזאה איתבד ליה גבא דבשרא אתא לקמיה דרב נחמן אמר ליה אית לך סימנא בגויה אמר ליה לא אית לך טביעות עינא בגויה אמר ליה אין אם כן זיל שקול,רב נתן בר אביי איתבד ליה קיבורא דתכלתא אתא לקמיה דרב חסדא אמר ליה אית לך סימנא בגויה אמר ליה לא אית לך טביעות עינא בגויה אמר ליה אין אם כן זיל שקול,אמר רבא מרישא הוה אמינא סימנא עדיף מטביעות עינא דהא מהדרינן אבידתא בסימנא'' None | 95b cleaning the head of an animal in the river. The head fell from him. He went and brought a basket, cast the basket into the river, and pulled out two animal heads. Rav said to him: Does it commonly happen this way that one loses one item and finds two? Just as one of the animal heads is not the one you dropped, it is possible that neither of them is the one you dropped. Therefore, Rav rendered both of them forbidden to him.,Rav Kahana and Rav Asi said to Rav: Is forbidden meat common but permitted meat not common? Most of the meat in this general location is kosher, so why did you forbid the two animal heads? He said to them: Forbidden meat is more common. From this incident the Sages derived that according to Rav, meat that has been obscured from sight becomes forbidden due to the possibility that the meat one finds now was actually deposited by ravens, who transported it from a location where the majority of the meat is forbidden.,The Gemara asks: And what does it matter if this opinion of Rav is known by inference based on this incident, rather than by an explicit statement made by Rav? The Gemara answers: There is room to say that this incident cannot serve as a precedent for a general policy, because that location was a port of gentiles, where most of the meat was non-kosher. Know that this is the case, as Rav said to Rav Kahana and Rav Asi: Forbidden meat is more common. Consequently, it is possible that Rav would not have prohibited the meat in a location where the majority of the meat is kosher.,The Gemara asks: But how did Rav ever eat meat if he holds that meat becomes forbidden if it is unsupervised for even a short time? The Gemara answers: Rav ate meat only in its time, i.e., shortly after it was slaughtered, when it had not been obscured from his sight from the time of the slaughter until he ate it. Alternatively, if you wish, say that Rav ate meat that was tied and sealed in a way that proved it had not been swapped for non-kosher meat. Or alternatively, he ate meat that could be recognized by a distinguishing mark, like that practice of Rabba bar Rav Huna, who would cut meat into pieces with three corners, i.e., triangles, before he would send it to his family members.,The Gemara relates that Rav was going to the home of Rav Ḥa, his son-in-law. He saw that the ferry was coming toward him just when he arrived at the riverbank. He said: The ferry is coming toward me even though I did not arrange for it to come now; this is a sign that a good day, i.e., a festive meal, awaits me in the place where I am going.,After crossing the river on the ferry, Rav went and stood at the gate of Rav Ḥa’s home. He looked through a crack in the door and saw an animal that was hanging and ready to be cooked. He knocked on the gate, and everyone went out to greet him, and the butchers also came out to greet him. Rav did not remove his eyes from the meat that the butchers were preparing. He said to them: If you had eaten the meat based upon the supervision you provided now, you would have fed forbidden meat to the sons of my daughter because no one apart from me was watching the meat when you all came out to greet me. And despite the fact that he had kept the meat in his sight Rav did not eat from that meat.,The Gemara asks: What is the reason that Rav did not eat the meat? If one suggests that he was concerned because it had been obscured from sight, that cannot be the reason, as Rav kept watching it so that it was not obscured from sight. Rather, Rav did not eat because he divined, i.e., he saw the arrival of the ferry as a good omen. This is prohibited, and therefore Rav penalized himself and abstained from the meat.,The Gemara asks: But doesn’t Rav say that any divination that is not like the divination of Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, when he went to seek a bride for Isaac (see Genesis 24:14), or like the divination of Jonathan, son of Saul, who sought an omen as to whether he and his arms bearer would defeat the Philistines (see I\xa0Samuel 14:8–12), is not divination? Since Rav did not rely on the omen in his decision making, he did not violate the prohibition against divination, and there was no reason for him to penalize himself. The Gemara answers: Rather, the reason Rav did not eat the meat is that it was an optional feast, rather than a feast associated with a mitzva, and Rav would not derive pleasure from an optional feast.,Having mentioned Rav’s reaction to the ferry in the incident cited above, the Gemara states that Rav would check whether to travel based upon the ferry; if it came quickly he would take the ferry, but otherwise he would not. And Shmuel would check what would happen to him by opening a scroll and reading from wherever it was open to. Rabbi Yoḥa would check what was in store for him by asking a child to recite the verse he was learning.,The Gemara relates an incident when Rabbi Yoḥa checked his luck based on a child’s verse. During all the years when Rav lived in Babylonia, Rabbi Yoḥa, who lived in Eretz Yisrael, would write to him and begin with the greeting: To our Master who is in Babylonia. When Rav died, Rabbi Yoḥa would write to Shmuel and begin with the greeting: To our colleague who is in Babylonia. Shmuel said: Does Rabbi Yoḥa not know any matter in which I am his master? Shmuel wrote and sent to Rabbi Yoḥa the calculation of the leap years for the next sixty years. Rabbi Yoḥa was not impressed by this and said: Now he has merely demonstrated that he knows mathematics, which does not make him my master.,Shmuel then wrote and sent to Rabbi Yoḥa explications of uncertainties pertaining to tereifot that had to be transported on thirteen camels. Rabbi Yoḥa was impressed by this and said: I have a Master in Babylonia; I will go and see him. Before departing on his journey, Rabbi Yoḥa said to a child: Recite to me your verse that you studied today. The child recited the following verse to Rabbi Yoḥa: “Now Samuel was dead” (I\xa0Samuel 28:3). Rabbi Yoḥa said to himself: Learn from this that Shmuel has died. Therefore, Rabbi Yoḥa did not go to see Shmuel.,The Gemara comments: But it was not so; Shmuel had not died. Rather, the reason Rabbi Yoḥa was given this sign was so that Rabbi Yoḥa would not trouble himself to embark on the long and arduous journey from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia.,It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: With regard to one who is successful with his first business transaction after he has built a home, after the birth of a child, or after he marries a woman, even though he may not use this as a means of divination to decide upon future courses of action, it is an auspicious sign that he will continue to be successful. Conversely, if his first transaction is not successful he may take that as an inauspicious sign.,Rabbi Elazar said: But this is provided that the sign has been established by repeating itself three times. This is based on a verse, as it is written: “And Jacob their father said to them: Me you have bereaved of my children: Joseph is not, and Simeon is not, and you will take Benjamin away; upon me are all these things come” (Genesis 42:36). If calamity were to befall Benjamin, that would establish a pattern of three tragedies.,§ The Gemara returns to discuss distinguishing marks that prevent meat from being prohibited despite its having been obscured from sight. Rav Huna inquired of Rav: If pieces of meat were strung together and then were obscured from sight, what is the halakha? Rav said to him: Do not be an imbecile; of course if the meat is strung together it is considered to be a distinguishing mark, and the meat is permitted. There are those who say this halakha as follows: Rav Huna said that Rav said: If pieces of meat are strung together it is a distinguishing mark, and the meat remains permitted even if it is obscured from sight.,The Gemara relates that Rav Naḥman of Neharde’a arrived at the home of Rav Kahana in Pum Nahara on the eve of Yom Kippur, which is a day when people commonly eat meat. Ravens came and dropped livers and kidneys. Rav Kahana said to Rav Naḥman: Take these livers and kidneys and eat them, as they are not forbidden, even though they were obscured from sight. This is because at this time permitted meat is more common than forbidden meat, since Jews slaughter many animals on this day.,Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin lost a cut of meat from an animal intestine among the barrels of wine in his wine cellar. When he found it, he came before Rav Huna to ask whether the meat was now prohibited because it had been obscured from sight. Rav Huna said to him: Do you have a distinguishing mark on it so that you can identify it? Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin said to him: No. Rav Huna asked him: Do you have visual recognition of it? Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin said to him: Yes. Rav Huna said: If so, go and take it and eat it.,Rav Ḥanina Ḥoza’a lost a side of meat. When he found it, he came before Rav Naḥman and asked him whether the meat was now prohibited because it had been obscured from sight. Rav Naḥman said to him: Do you have a distinguishing mark on it so that you can identify it? Rav Ḥanina Ḥoza’a said to him: No. Rav Naḥman asked him: Do you have visual recognition of it? Rav Ḥanina Ḥoza’a said to him: Yes. Rav Naḥman said: If so, go and take it and eat it.,Rav Natan bar Abaye lost a skein of sky-blue wool prepared for use in ritual fringes. He searched for it and found it. He came before Rav Ḥisda to ask whether the wool was now prohibited because it had been obscured from sight and may have become confused with other blue wool that is not valid for ritual fringes. Rav Ḥisda said to him: Do you have a distinguishing mark in it so that you can identify it? Rav Natan bar Abaye said to him: No. Rav Ḥisda asked him: Do you have visual recognition of it? Rav Natan bar Abaye said to him: Yes. Rav Ḥisda said: If so, go and take it, and you may use it for ritual fringes.,Rava said: At first I would say that a distinguishing mark is preferable to visual recognition, because we return a lost item to its owner based on a distinguishing mark,'' None |
|
102. Babylonian Talmud, Ketuvot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Rabbinic Halakhah • Sabbath, and Halakhah, did not prohibit sex on Sabbath • Sex, and Halakhah, did not prohibit sex on Sabbath • halakha, and marriage vs. Torah study
Found in books: Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 65; Kosman (2012), Gender and Dialogue in the Rabbinic Prism, 207; Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 105, 108
| 62b אכולהו והא ששה חדשים קאמר אינו דומה מי שיש לו פת בסלו למי שאין לו פת בסלו,א"ל רבה בר רב חנן לאביי חמר ונעשה גמל מאי א"ל רוצה אשה בקב ותיפלות מעשרה קבין ופרישות:,הספנים אחת לששה חדשים דברי ר\' אליעזר: אמר רב ברונא אמר רב הלכה כר"א אמר רב אדא בר אהבה אמר רב זו דברי ר\' אליעזר אבל חכמים אומרים התלמידים יוצאין לת"ת ב\' וג\' שנים שלא ברשות אמר רבא סמכו רבנן אדרב אדא בר אהבה ועבדי עובדא בנפשייהו,כי הא דרב רחומי הוה שכיח קמיה דרבא במחוזא הוה רגיל דהוה אתי לביתיה כל מעלי יומא דכיפורי יומא חד משכתיה שמעתא הוה מסכיא דביתהו השתא אתי השתא אתי לא אתא חלש דעתה אחית דמעתא מעינה הוה יתיב באיגרא אפחית איגרא מתותיה ונח נפשיה,עונה של תלמידי חכמים אימת אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל מע"ש לע"ש (תהלים א, ג) אשר פריו יתן בעתו אמר רב יהודה ואיתימא רב הונא ואיתימא רב נחמן זה המשמש מטתו מע"ש לע"ש,יהודה בריה דר\' חייא חתניה דר\' ינאי הוה אזיל ויתיב בבי רב וכל בי שמשי הוה אתי לביתיה וכי הוה אתי הוה קא חזי קמיה עמודא דנורא יומא חד משכתיה שמעתא כיון דלא חזי ההוא סימנא אמר להו רבי ינאי כפו מטתו שאילמלי יהודה קיים לא ביטל עונתו הואי (קהלת י, ה) כשגגה שיוצא מלפני השליט ונח נפשיה,רבי איעסק ליה לבריה בי רבי חייא כי מטא למיכתב כתובה נח נפשה דרביתא אמר רבי ח"ו פסולא איכא יתיבו ועיינו במשפחות רבי אתי משפטיה בן אביטל ורבי חייא אתי משמעי אחי דוד,אזיל איעסק ליה לבריה בי ר\' יוסי בן זימרא פסקו ליה תרתי סרי שנין למיזל בבי רב אחלפוה קמיה אמר להו ניהוו שית שנין אחלפוה קמיה אמר להו איכניס והדר איזיל הוה קא מכסיף מאבוה א"ל בני דעת קונך יש בך,מעיקרא כתיב (שמות טו, יז) תביאמו ותטעמו ולבסוף כתיב (שמות כה, ח) ועשו לי מקדש ושכנתי בתוכם,אזיל יתיב תרתי סרי שני בבי רב עד דאתא איעקרא דביתהו אמר רבי היכי נעביד נגרשה יאמרו ענייה זו לשוא שימרה נינסיב איתתא אחריתי יאמרו זו אשתו וזו זונתו בעי עלה רחמי ואיתסיאת:,רבי חנניה בן חכינאי הוה קאזיל לבי רב בשילהי הלוליה דר"ש בן יוחאי א"ל איעכב לי עד דאתי בהדך לא איעכבא ליה אזל יתיב תרי סרי שני בבי רב עד דאתי אישתנו שבילי דמתא ולא ידע למיזל לביתיה,אזל יתיב אגודא דנהרא שמע לההיא רביתא דהוו קרו לה בת חכינאי בת חכינאי מלי קולתך ותא ניזיל אמר ש"מ האי רביתא דידן אזל בתרה הוה יתיבא דביתהו קא נהלה קמחא דל עינה חזיתיה סוי לבה פרח רוחה אמר לפניו רבש"ע ענייה זו זה שכרה בעא רחמי עלה וחייה,רבי חמא בר ביסא אזיל יתיב תרי סרי שני בבי מדרשא כי אתא אמר לא איעביד כדעביד בן חכינאי עייל יתיב במדרשא שלח לביתיה אתא ר\' אושעיא בריה יתיב קמיה הוה קא משאיל ליה שמעתא חזא דקא מתחדדי שמעתיה חלש דעתיה אמר אי הואי הכא הוה לי זרע כי האי,על לביתיה על בריה קם קמיה הוא סבר למשאליה שמעתתא קא בעי אמרה ליה דביתהו מי איכא אבא דקאים מקמי ברא קרי עליה רמי בר חמא (קהלת ד, יב) החוט המשולש לא במהרה ינתק זה ר\' אושעיא בנו של רבי חמא בר ביסא,ר"ע רעיא דבן כלבא שבוע הוה חזיתיה ברתיה דהוה צניע ומעלי אמרה ליה אי מקדשנא לך אזלת לבי רב אמר לה אין איקדשא ליה בצינעה ושדרתיה שמע אבוה אפקה מביתיה אדרה הנאה מנכסיה אזיל יתיב תרי סרי שנין בבי רב כי אתא אייתי בהדיה תרי סרי אלפי תלמידי שמעיה לההוא סבא דקאמר לה עד כמה' ' None | 62b the tanna taught us a halakha with regard to all of them, not only a man of leisure or a laborer. He asked him: But with regard to a sailor it said that the set interval for conjugal relations is six months; why, then, should he have to divorce her if he vowed to forbid these relations for only a week? He answered him: It is well known that one who has bread in his basket is not comparable to one who does not have bread in his basket. On a fast day, one who does not have bread available in his basket suffers more than one who does have bread available and knows that he will be able to eat later. In this case as well, when a woman knows that marital relations are forbidden to her due to a vow, her suffering from waiting for her husband to return is increased.,Rabba bar Rav Ha said to Abaye: If a donkey driver who is already married wants to become a camel driver, what is the halakha? Is he permitted to change his profession in order to earn more money from his work, even though this will mean he reduces the frequency with which he engages in conjugal relations with his wife? He answered him: A woman prefers a kav, i.e., modest means, with conjugal relations to ten kav with abstinence. Consequently, he is not allowed to change his profession without her permission.,§ The mishna stated: For sailors, the set interval for conjugal relations is once every six months. This is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. Rav Berona said that Rav said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer. Rav Adda bar Ahava said that Rav said: This is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer, but the Rabbis say: Students may leave their homes to study Torah for as long as two or three years without permission from their wives. Rava said: The Sages relied on Rabbi Adda bar Ahava’s opinion and performed an action like this themselves, but the results were sometimes fatal.,This is as it is related about Rav Reḥumi, who would commonly study before Rava in Meḥoza: He was accustomed to come back to his home every year on the eve of Yom Kippur. One day he was particularly engrossed in the halakha he was studying, and so he remained in the study hall and did not go home. His wife was expecting him that day and continually said to herself: Now he is coming, now he is coming. But in the end, he did not come. She was distressed by this and a tear fell from her eye. At that exact moment, Rav Reḥumi was sitting on the roof. The roof collapsed under him and he died. This teaches how much one must be careful, as he was punished severely for causing anguish to his wife, even inadvertently.,§ When is the ideal time for Torah scholars to fulfill their conjugal obligations? Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: The appropriate time for them is from Shabbat eve to Shabbat eve, i.e., on Friday nights. Similarly, it is stated with regard to the verse “that brings forth its fruit in its season” (Psalms 1:3): Rav Yehuda said, and some say that it was Rav Huna, and some say that it was Rav Naḥman: This is referring to one who engages in marital relations, bringing forth his fruit, from Shabbat eve to Shabbat eve.,It is related further that Yehuda, son of Rabbi Ḥiyya and son-in-law of Rabbi Yannai, would go and sit in the study hall, and every Shabbat eve at twilight he would come to his house. When he would come, Rabbi Yannai would see a pillar of fire preceding him due to his sanctity. One day he was engrossed in the halakha he was studying, and he stayed in the study hall and did not return home. When Rabbi Yannai did not see that sign preceding him, he said to the family: Turn his bed over, as one does at times of mourning, since he must have died, reasoning that if Yehuda were alive he would not have missed his set interval for conjugal relations and would certainly have come home. What he said became “like an error that proceeds from a ruler” (Ecclesiastes 10:5), and Yehuda, son of Rabbi Ḥiyya, died.,It is related further that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi arranged for his son to marry a daughter of the household of Rabbi Ḥiyya. When he came to write the marriage contract, the girl died. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: Is there, Heaven forbid, some disqualification in these families, as it appears that God prevented this match from taking place? They sat and looked into the families’ ancestry and found that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was descended from Shefatya ben Avital, the wife of David, whereas Rabbi Ḥiyya was descended from Shimi, David’s brother.,He went and arranged for his son to marry a daughter of the household of Rabbi Yosei ben Zimra. They agreed for him that they would support him for twelve years to go to study in the study hall. It was assumed that he would first go to study and afterward get married. They passed the girl in front of the groom and when he saw her he said: Let it be just six years. They passed her in front of him again and he said to them: I will marry her now and then go to study. He was then ashamed to see his father, as he thought he would reprimand him because when he saw the girl he desired her and could not wait. His father placated him and said to him: My son, you have your Maker’s perception, meaning you acted the same way that God does.,The proof for this is that initially it is written: “You bring them and plant them in the mountain of Your inheritance, the place that You, O Lord, have made for You to dwell in” (Exodus 15:17), which indicates that God’s original intention was to build a Temple for the Jewish people after they had entered Eretz Yisrael. And ultimately it is written: “And let them make Me a Sanctuary, that I may dwell among them” (Exodus 25:8), i.e., even while they were still in the desert, which indicates that due to their closeness to God, they enjoyed greater affection and He therefore advanced what would originally have come later.,After his wedding he went and sat for twelve years in the study hall. By the time he came back his wife had become infertile, as a consequence of spending many years without her husband. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: What should we do? If he will divorce her, people will say: This poor woman waited and hoped for naught. If he will marry another woman to beget children, people will say: This one, who bears him children, is his wife and that one, who lives with him, is his mistress. Therefore, her husband pleaded with God to have mercy on her and she was cured.,Rabbi Ḥaya ben Ḥakhinai went to the study hall at the end of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai’s wedding feast. Rabbi Shimon said to him: Wait for me until I can come with you, after my days of celebration are over. However, since he wanted to learn Torah, he did not wait and went and sat for twelve years in the study hall. By the time he came back, all the paths of his city had changed and he did not know how to go to his home.,He went and sat on the bank of the river and heard people calling to a certain girl: Daughter of Ḥakhinai, daughter of Ḥakhinai, fill your pitcher and come up. He said: I can conclude from this that this is our daughter, meaning his own daughter, whom he had not recognized after so many years. He followed her to his house. His wife was sitting and sifting flour. She lifted her eyes up, saw him and recognized him, and her heart fluttered with agitation and she passed away from the emotional stress. Rabbi Ḥaya said before God: Master of the universe, is this the reward of this poor woman? He pleaded for mercy for her and she lived.,Rabbi Ḥama bar Bisa went and sat for twelve years in the study hall. When he came back to his house, he said: I will not do what the son of Ḥakhinai, who came home suddenly with tragic consequences for his wife, did. He went and sat in the study hall in his hometown, and sent a message to his house that he had arrived. While he was sitting there his son Rabbi Oshaya, whom he did not recognize, came and sat before him. Rabbi Oshaya asked him questions about halakha, and Rabbi Ḥama saw that the halakhot of Rabbi Oshaya were incisive, i.e., he was very sharp. Rabbi Ḥama was distressed and said: If I had been here and had taught my son I would have had a child like this.,Rabbi Ḥama went in to his house and his son went in with him. Rabbi Ḥama then stood up before him to honor a Torah scholar, since he thought that he wanted to ask him a matter of halakha. His wife said to him: Is there a father who stands up before his son? The Gemara comments: Rami bar Ḥama read the verse about him: “A threefold cord is not quickly broken” (Ecclesiastes 4:12). This is referring to Rabbi Oshaya, son of Rabbi Ḥama bar Bisa, as he represented the third generation of Torah scholars in his family.,The Gemara further relates: Rabbi Akiva was the shepherd of ben Kalba Savua, one of the wealthy residents of Jerusalem. The daughter of Ben Kalba Savua saw that he was humble and refined. She said to him: If I betroth myself to you, will you go to the study hall to learn Torah? He said to her: Yes. She became betrothed to him privately and sent him off to study. Her father heard this and became angry. He removed her from his house and took a vow prohibiting her from benefiting from his property. Rabbi Akiva went and sat for twelve years in the study hall. When he came back to his house he brought twelve thousand students with him, and as he approached he heard an old man saying to his wife: For how long' ' None |
|
103. Babylonian Talmud, Megillah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Halacha • halakha, study of
Found in books: Hachlili (2005), Jewish Funerary Customs, Practices And Rites In The Second Temple Period, 450; Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 478
29a מבטלין ת"ת להוצאת המת ולהכנסת הכלה אמרו עליו על ר\' יהודה בר\' אילעאי שהיה מבטל ת"ת להוצאת המת ולהכנסת הכלה בד"א בשאין שם כל צורכו אבל יש שם כל צורכו אין מבטלין,וכמה כל צורכו אמר רב שמואל בר איניא משמיה דרב תריסר אלפי גברי ושיתא אלפי שיפורי ואמרי לה תריסר אלפי גברי ומינייהו שיתא אלפי שיפורי עולא אמר כגון דחייצי גברי מאבולא עד סיכרא,רב ששת אמר כנתינתה כך נטילתה מה נתינתה בששים ריבוא אף נטילתה בס\' ריבוא ה"מ למאן דקרי ותני אבל למאן דמתני לית ליה שיעורא,תניא ר"ש בן יוחי אומר בוא וראה כמה חביבין ישראל לפני הקב"ה שבכל מקום שגלו שכינה עמהן גלו למצרים שכינה עמהן שנאמר (שמואל א ב, כז) הנגלה נגליתי לבית אביך בהיותם במצרים וגו\' גלו לבבל שכינה עמהן שנאמר (ישעיהו מג, יד) למענכם שלחתי בבלה ואף כשהן עתידין ליגאל שכינה עמהן שנאמר (דברים ל, ג) ושב ה\' אלהיך את שבותך והשיב לא נאמר אלא ושב מלמד שהקב"ה שב עמהן מבין הגליות,בבבל היכא אמר אביי בבי כנישתא דהוצל ובבי כנישתא דשף ויתיב בנהרדעא ולא תימא הכא והכא אלא זמנין הכא וזמנין הכא אמר אביי תיתי לי דכי מרחיקנא פרסה עיילנא ומצלינא התם אבוה דשמואל ולוי הוו יתבי בכנישתא דשף ויתיב בנהרדעא אתיא שכינה שמעו קול ריגשא קמו ונפקו,רב ששת הוה יתיב בבי כנישתא דשף ויתיב בנהרדעא אתיא שכינה ולא נפק אתו מלאכי השרת וקא מבעתו ליה אמר לפניו רבש"ע עלוב ושאינו עלוב מי נדחה מפני מי אמר להו שבקוהו,(יחזקאל יא, טז) ואהי להם למקדש מעט אמר רבי יצחק אלו בתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות שבבבל ור"א אמר זה בית רבינו שבבבל,דרש רבא מאי דכתיב (תהלים צ, א) ה\' מעון אתה היית לנו אלו בתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות אמר אביי מריש הואי גריסנא בביתא ומצלינא בבי כנשתא כיון דשמעית להא דקאמר דוד (תהלים כו, ח) ה\' אהבתי מעון ביתך הואי גריסנא בבי כנישתא,תניא ר"א הקפר אומר עתידין בתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות שבבבל שיקבעו בא"י שנאמר (ירמיהו מו, יח) כי כתבור בהרים וככרמל בים יבא והלא דברים ק"ו ומה תבור וכרמל שלא באו אלא לפי שעה ללמוד תורה נקבעים בארץ ישראל בתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות שקורין ומרביצין בהן תורה עאכ"ו,דרש בר קפרא מאי דכתיב (תהלים סח, יז) למה תרצדון הרים גבנונים יצתה בת קול ואמרה להם למה תרצו דין עם סיני כולכם בעלי מומים אתם אצל סיני כתיב הכא גבנונים וכתיב התם (ויקרא כא, כ) או גבן או דק אמר רב אשי ש"מ האי מאן דיהיר בעל מום הוא:,אין עושין אותו קפנדריא: מאי קפנדריא אמר רבא קפנדריא כשמה מאי כשמה כמאן דאמר אדמקיפנא אדרי איעול בהא,א"ר אבהו אם היה שביל מעיקרא מותר,אר"נ בר יצחק הנכנס ע"מ שלא לעשות קפנדריא מותר לעשותו קפנדריא וא"ר חלבו אמר ר"ה הנכנס לבהכ"נ להתפלל מותר לעשותו קפנדריא שנא\' (יחזקאל מו, ט) ובבא עם הארץ לפני ה\' במועדים הבא דרך שער צפון להשתחוות יצא דרך שער נגב:,עלו בו עשבים לא יתלוש מפני עגמת נפש: והתניא אינו תולש ומאכיל אבל תולש ומניח כי תנן נמי מתני\' תולש ומאכיל תנן,ת"ר בית הקברות אין נוהגין בהן קלות ראש אין מרעין בהן בהמה ואין מוליכין בהן אמת המים ואין מלקטין בהן עשבים ואם ליקט שורפן במקומן מפני כבוד מתים,אהייא אילימא אסיפא כיון ששורפן במקומן מאי כבוד מתים איכא אלא ארישא:,| 29a One interrupts his Torah study to carry out the dead for burial and to escort a bride to her wedding. They said about Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Elai, that he would interrupt his Torah study to carry out the dead for burial and to escort a bride to her wedding. The Gemara qualifies this ruling: In what case is this statement said? Only where there are not sufficient numbers of other people available to perform these mitzvot and honor the deceased or the bride appropriately. However, when there are sufficient numbers, additional people should not interrupt their Torah study to participate.,The Gemara asks: And how many people are considered sufficient? Rav Shmuel bar Inya said in the name of Rav: Twelve thousand men and another six thousand men to blow horns as a sign of mourning. And some say a different version: Twelve thousand men, among whom are six thousand men with horns. Ulla said: For example, enough to make a procession of people all the way from the town gate abbula to the place of burial.,Rav Sheshet said: As the Torah was given, so it should be taken away, i.e., the same honor that was provided when the Torah was given at Mount Sinai should be provided when the Torah is taken through the passing away of a Torah scholar. Just as the Torah was given in the presence of six hundred thousand men, so too its taking should be done in the presence of six hundred thousand men. The Gemara comments: This applies to someone who read the Bible and studied halakhot for himself. But for someone who taught others, there is no limit to the honor that should be shown to him.,§ It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says: Come and see how beloved the Jewish people are before the Holy One, Blessed be He. As every place they were exiled, the Divine Presence went with them. They were exiled to Egypt, and the Divine Presence went with them, as it is stated: “Did I reveal myself to the house of your father when they were in Egypt?” (I\xa0Samuel 2:27). They were exiled to Babylonia, and the Divine Presence went with them, as it is stated: “For your sake I have sent to Babylonia” (Isaiah 43:14). So too, when, in the future, they will be redeemed, the Divine Presence will be with them, as it is stated: “Then the Lord your God will return with your captivity” (Deuteronomy 30:3). It does not state: He will bring back, i.e., He will cause the Jewish people to return, but rather it says: “He will return,” which teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, will return together with them from among the various exiles.,The Gemara asks: Where in Babylonia does the Divine Presence reside? Abaye said: In the ancient synagogue of Huzal and in the synagogue that was destroyed and rebuilt in Neharde’a. And do not say that the Divine Presence resided here and there, i.e., in both places simultaneously. Rather, at times it resided here in Huzal and at times there in Neharde’a. Abaye said: I have a blessing coming to me, for whenever I am within a distance of a parasang from one of those synagogues, I go in and pray there, due to the special honor and sanctity attached to them. It was related that the father of Shmuel and Levi were once sitting in the synagogue that was destroyed and rebuilt in Neharde’a. The Divine Presence came and they heard a loud sound, so they arose and left.,It was further related that Rav Sheshet was once sitting in the synagogue that was destroyed and rebuilt in Neharde’a, and the Divine Presence came but he did not go out. The ministering angels came and were frightening him in order to force him to leave. Rav Sheshet turned to God and said before Him: Master of the Universe, if one is wretched and the other is not wretched, who should defer to whom? Shouldn’t the one who is not wretched give way to the one who is? Now I am blind and wretched; why then do you expect me to defer to the angels? God then turned to the angels and said to them: Leave him.,The verse states: “Yet I have been to them as a little sanctuary in the countries where they have come” (Ezekiel 11:16). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: This is referring to the synagogues and study halls in Babylonia. And Rabbi Elazar said: This is referring to the house of our master, i.e., Rav, in Babylonia, from which Torah issues forth to the entire world.,Rava interpreted a verse homiletically: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Lord, You have been our dwelling place in all generations” (Psalms 90:1)? This is referring to the synagogues and study halls. Abaye said: Initially, I used to study Torah in my home and pray in the synagogue. Once I heard and understood that which King David says: “Lord, I love the habitation of Your house” (Psalms 26:8), I would always study Torah in the synagogue, to express my love for the place in which the Divine Presence resides.,It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Elazar HaKappar says: In the future, the synagogues and the study halls in Babylonia will be transported and reestablished in Eretz Yisrael, as it is stated: “Surely, like Tabor among the mountains, and like Carmel by the sea, so shall he come” (Jeremiah 46:18). There is a tradition that these mountains came to Sinai at the giving of the Torah and demanded that the Torah should be given upon them. And are these matters not inferred through an a fortiori argument: Just as Tabor and Carmel, which came only momentarily to study Torah, were relocated and established in Eretz Yisrael in reward for their actions, all the more so should the synagogues and study halls in Babylonia, in which the Torah is read and disseminated, be relocated to Eretz Yisrael.,Bar Kappara interpreted a verse homiletically: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Why do you look askance teratzdun, O high-peaked mountains, at the mountain that God has desired for His abode” (Psalms 68:17)? A Divine Voice issued forth and said to all the mountains that came and demanded that the Torah be given upon them: Why do you seek tirtzu to enter into a legal dispute din with Mount Sinai? You are all blemished in comparison to Mount Sinai, as it is written here: “High-peaked gavnunnim” and it is written there, with regard to the blemishes that disqualify a priest: “Or crookbacked gibben or a dwarf” (Leviticus 21:20). Rav Ashi said: Learn from this that one who is arrogant is considered blemished. The other mountains arrogantly insisted that the Torah should be given upon them, and they were therefore described as blemished.,§ The mishna teaches that even if a synagogue fell into ruin, it may not be made into a kappendarya. The Gemara asks: What is meant by kappendarya? Rava said: A shortcut, as implied by its name. The Gemara clarifies: What do you mean by adding: As implied by its name? It is like one who said: Instead of going around the entire row of houses makkifna addari to get to the other side, thereby lengthening my journey, I will enter this house and walk through it to the other side. The word kappendarya sounds like a contraction of makkifna addari. This is what Rava meant by saying: As implied by its name.,Rabbi Abbahu said: If a public path had initially passed through that location, before the synagogue was built, it is permitted to continue to use it as a shortcut, for the honor due to a synagogue cannot annul the public’s right of access to the path.,Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: With regard to one who enters a synagogue without intending to make it into a shortcut, when he leaves he is permitted to make it into a shortcut for himself, by leaving through the exit on the other side of the building. And Rabbi Ḥelbo said that Rav Huna said: With regard to one who enters a synagogue to pray, he is permitted to make it into a shortcut for himself by leaving through a different exit, and it is fitting to do so, as it is stated: “And when the people of the land shall come before the Lord in the appointed seasons, he that enters by way of the north gate to bow down shall go forth by the way of the south gate” (Ezekiel 46:9). This indicates that it is a show of respect not to leave through the same entrance through which one came in; it is better to leave through the other side.,§ The mishna teaches: If grass sprang up in a ruined synagogue, although it is not befitting its sanctity, one should not pick it, due to the anguish that it will cause to those who see it. It will remind them of the disrepair of the synagogue and the need to rebuild it. The Gemara asks: But isn’t it taught in a baraita: One may not pick the grass and feed it to one’s animals, but he may pick it and leave it there? The Gemara answers: When we learned the prohibition against picking the grass in the mishna as well, we learned only that it is prohibited to pick it and feed it to one’s animals, but it is permitted to leave it there.,The Sages taught in a baraita: In a cemetery, one may not act with frivolity; one may not graze an animal on the grass growing inside it; and one may not direct a water channel to pass through it; and one may not gather grass inside it to use the grass as feed for one’s animals; and if one gathered grass for that purpose, it should be burnt on the spot, out of respect for the dead.,The Gemara clarifies: With regard to the phrase: Out of respect for the dead, to which clause of the baraita does it refer? If we say it is referring to the last clause, that if one gathered grass that it should be burnt out of respect for the dead, then one could ask: Since the grass is burnt on the spot, and not publicly, what respect for the dead is there in this act? Rather, the phrase must be referring to the first clause of the baraita, and it explains why it is prohibited to act with frivolity.,Shabbatot during and surrounding the month of Adar, a Torah portion of seasonal significance is read. When the New Moon of Adar occurs on Shabbat, the congregation reads the portion of Shekalim on that Shabbat. If the New Moon occurs during the middle of the week, they advance the reading of that portion to the previous Shabbat, and, in such a case, they interrupt the reading of the four portions on the following Shabbat, which would be the first Shabbat of the month of Adar, and no additional portion is read on it.,On the second Shabbat, the Shabbat prior to Purim, they read the portion: “Remember what Amalek did” (Deuteronomy 25:17–19), which details the mitzva to remember and destroy the nation of Amalek. On the third Shabbat, they read the portion of the Red Heifer Para (Numbers 19:1–22), which details the purification process for one who became ritually impure through contact with a corpse. On the fourth Shabbat, they read the portion: “This month haḥodesh shall be for you” (Exodus 12:1–20), which describes the offering of the Paschal lamb. On the fifth Shabbat, they resume the regular weekly order of readings and no special portion is read.,For all special days, the congregation interrupts the regular weekly order of readings, and a special portion relating to the character of the day is read. This applies on the New Moons, on Hanukkah, and on Purim, on fast days, and on the non-priestly watches, and on Yom Kippur.,We learned in a mishna there (Shekalim 1:1): On the first of Adar they make a public announcement concerning the forthcoming collection of half-shekels. The money is used for the communal offerings in the Temple in the coming year.'' None | |
|
104. Babylonian Talmud, Moed Qatan, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • mamzerim (halakhic bastards) • mamzerim (halakhic “bastards”)
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 169; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 169
| 28a אלא חיה אבל שאר נשים מניחין,ר\' אלעזר אמר אפילו שאר הנשים דכתיב (במדבר כ, א) ותמת שם מרים ותקבר שם סמוך למיתה קבורה,ואמר ר\' אלעזר אף מרים בנשיקה מתה אתיא שם שם ממשה ומפני מה לא נאמר בה על פי ה\' מפני שגנאי הדבר לאומרו,א"ר אמי למה נסמכה מיתת מרים לפרשת פרה אדומה לומר לך מה פרה אדומה מכפרת אף מיתתן של צדיקים מכפרת א"ר אלעזר למה נסמכה מיתת אהרן לבגדי כהונה מה בגדי כהונה מכפרין אף מיתתן של צדיקים מכפרת,ת"ר מת פתאום זו היא מיתה חטופה חלה יום אחד ומת זו היא מיתה דחופה ר\' חנניא בן גמליאל אומר זו היא מיתת מגפה שנאמר (יחזקאל כד, טז) בן אדם הנני לוקח ממך את מחמד עיניך במגפה וכתיב (יחזקאל כד, יח) ואדבר אל העם בבקר ותמת אשתי בערב,שני ימים ומת זו היא מיתה דחויה ג\' גערה ארבעה נזיפה חמשה זו היא מיתת כל אדם,א"ר חנין מאי קרא (דברים לא, יד) הן קרבו ימיך למות הן חד קרבו תרי ימיך תרי הא חמשה הן חד שכן בלשון יוני קורין לאחת הן,מת בחמשים שנה זו היא מיתת כרת חמשים ושתים שנה זו היא מיתתו של שמואל הרמתי ששים זו היא מיתה בידי שמים,אמר מר זוטרא מאי קרא דכתיב (איוב ה, כו) תבא בכלח אלי קבר בכלח בגימטריא שיתין הוו,שבעים שיבה שמונים גבורות דכתיב (תהלים צ, י) ימי שנותינו בהם שבעים שנה ואם בגבורות שמונים שנה אמר רבה מחמשים ועד ששים שנה זו היא מיתת כרת והאי דלא חשיב להו משום כבודו של שמואל הרמתי,רב יוסף כי הוה בר שיתין עבד להו יומא טבא לרבנן אמר נפקי לי מכרת א"ל אביי נהי דנפק ליה מר מכרת דשני מכרת דיומי מי נפיק מר א"ל נקוט לך מיהא פלגא בידך,רב הונא נח נפשיה פתאום הוו קא דייגי רבנן תנא להו זוגא דמהדייב לא שנו אלא שלא הגיע לגבורות אבל הגיע לגבורות זו היא מיתת נשיקה,אמר רבא חיי בני ומזוני לא בזכותא תליא מילתא אלא במזלא תליא מילתא דהא רבה ורב חסדא תרוייהו רבנן צדיקי הוו מר מצלי ואתי מיטרא ומר מצלי ואתי מיטרא,רב חסדא חיה תשעין ותרתין שנין רבה חיה ארבעין בי רב חסדא שיתין הלולי בי רבה שיתין תיכלי,בי רב חסדא סמידא לכלבי ולא מתבעי בי רבה נהמא דשערי לאינשי ולא משתכח,ואמר רבא הני תלת מילי בעאי קמי שמיא תרתי יהבו לי חדא לא יהבו לי חוכמתיה דרב הונא ועותריה דרב חסדא ויהבו לי ענותנותיה דרבה בר רב הונא לא יהבו לי,רב שעורים אחוה דרבא הוה יתיב קמיה דרבא חזייה דהוה קא מנמנם א"ל לימא ליה מר דלא לצערן א"ל מר לאו שושביניה הוא א"ל כיון דאימסר מזלא לא אשגח בי א"ל ליתחזי לי מר איתחזי ליה א"ל הוה ליה למר צערא א"ל כי ריבדא דכוסילתא,רבא הוה יתיב קמיה דר"נ חזייה דקא מנמנם א"ל לימא ליה מר דלא לצערן א"ל מר לאו אדם חשוב הוא א"ל מאן חשיב מאן ספין מאן רקיע,א"ל ליתחזי לי מר אתחזי ליה א"ל ה"ל למר צערא א"ל כמישחל בניתא מחלבא ואי אמר לי הקב"ה זיל בההוא עלמא כד הוית לא בעינא דנפיש בעיתותיה,רבי אלעזר הוה קאכיל תרומה איתחזי ליה א"ל תרומה קא אכילנא ולאו קודש איקרי חלפא ליה שעתא,רב ששת איתחזי ליה בשוקא אמר ליה בשוקא כבהמה איתא לגבי ביתא,רב אשי איתחזי ליה בשוקא א"ל איתרח לי תלתין יומין ואהדרי לתלמודאי דאמריתו אשרי מי שבא לכאן ותלמודו בידו ביום תלתין אתא אמר ליה מאי כולי האי קא דחקא רגליה דבר נתן ואין מלכות נוגעת בחבירתה אפילו כמלא נימא,רב חסדא לא הוה יכיל ליה דלא הוה שתיק פומיה מגירסא סליק יתיב בארזא דבי רב פקע ארזא ושתק ויכיל ליה,ר\' חייא לא הוה מצי למיקרבא ליה יומא חד אידמי ליה כעניא אתא טריף אבבא א"ל אפיק לי ריפתא אפיקו ליה א"ל ולאו קא מרחם מר אעניא אההוא גברא אמאי לא קא מרחם מר גלי ליה אחוי ליה שוטא דנורא אמצי ליה נפשיה:'' None | 28a with regard to a woman who died in childbirth, and therefore continues to bleed. But the biers of other women may be set down in the street.,Rabbi Elazar said: Even the biers of other women must not be set down in the street, as it is written: “And Miriam died there and was buried there” (Numbers 20:1), which teaches that the site of her burial was close to the place of her death. Therefore, it is preferable to bury a woman as close as possible to the place where she died.,With regard to that same verse Rabbi Elazar said further: Miriam also died by the divine kiss, just like her brother Moses. What is the source for this? This is derived through a verbal analogy between the word “there” stated with regard to Miriam and the word “there” mentioned with regard to Moses. With regard to Moses it says: “So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab by the mouth of the Lord” (Deuteronomy 34:5). For what reason was it not explicitly stated with regard to her, as it is stated with regard to Moses, that she died “by the mouth of the Lord”? It is because it would be unseemly to say such a thing, that a woman died by way of a divine kiss, and therefore it is not said explicitly.,Rabbi Ami said: Why was the Torah portion that describes the death of Miriam juxtaposed to the portion dealing with the red heifer? To tell you: Just as the red heifer atones for sin, so too, the death of the righteous atones for sin. Rabbi Elazar said: Why was the Torah portion that describes the death of Aaron juxtaposed to the portion discussing the priestly garments? This teaches that just as the priestly garments atone for sin, so too, the death of the righteous atones for sin.,§ The Sages taught the following baraita: If one dies suddenly without having been sick, this is death through snatching. If he became sick for a day and died, this is an expedited death. Rabbi Ḥaya ben Gamliel says: This is death at a stroke, as it is stated: “Son of man, behold, I am about to take away from you the delight of your eyes at a stroke” (Ezekiel 24:16). And when this prophecy is fulfilled it is written: “So I spoke to the people in the morning and at evening my wife died” (Ezekiel 24:18).,If he was sick for two days and died, this is a quickened death. If he was sick for three days and died, this is a death of rebuke. If he died after being sick for four days, this is a death of reprimand. If one died after a sickness lasting five days, this is the ordinary death of all people.,Rabbi Ḥanin said: What is the verse from which this is derived? It is stated: “Behold, your days approach that you must die” (Deuteronomy 31:14). This verse is expounded in the following manner: “Behold hen” indicates one; “approach karvu,” a plural term, indicates two; “your days yamekha,” also a plural term, indicates another two; and therefore in total this is five. How does the word hen indicate one? Because in the Greek language they call the number one hen.,The Gemara discusses the significance of death at different ages: If one dies when he is fifty years old, this is death through karet, the divine punishment of excision, meted out for the most serious transgressions. If he dies when he is fifty-two years old, this is the death of Samuel from Ramah. If he dies at the age of sixty, this is death at the hand of Heaven.,Mar Zutra said: What is the verse from which this is derived? As it is written: “You shall come to your grave in a ripe age bekhelaḥ” (Job 5:26). The word “ripe age” bekhelaḥ has the numerical value of sixty, and it is alluded to there that dying at this age involves a divine punishment.,One who dies at the age of seventy has reached old age. One who dies at the age of eighty dies in strength, as it is written: “The days of our years are seventy, or if by reason of strength, eighty years” (Psalms 90:10). Rabba said: Not only is death at the age of fifty a sign of karet, but even death from fifty to sixty years of age is death by karet. And the reason that all of these years were not counted in connection with karet is due to the honor of Samuel from Ramah, who died at the age of fifty-two.,The Gemara relates that when Rav Yosef turned sixty he made a holiday for the Sages. Explaining the cause for his celebration, he said: I have passed the age of karet. Abaye said to him: Master, even though you have passed the karet of years, have you, Master, escaped the karet of days? As previously mentioned, sudden death is also considered to be a form of karet. He said to him: Grasp at least half in your hand, for I have at least escaped one type of karet.,It was related that Rav Huna died suddenly, and the Sages were concerned that this was a bad sign. The Sage Zuga from Hadayeiv taught them the following: They taught these principles only when the deceased had not reached the age of strength, i.e., eighty. But if he had reached the age of strength and then died suddenly, this is death by way of a divine kiss.,Rava said: Length of life, children, and sustece do not depend on one’s merit, but rather they depend upon fate. As, Rabba and Rav Ḥisda were both pious Sages; one Sage would pray during a drought and rain would fall, and the other Sage would pray and rain would fall.,And nevertheless, their lives were very different. Rav Ḥisda lived for ninety-two years, whereas Rabba lived for only forty years. The house of Rav Ḥisda celebrated sixty wedding feasts, whereas the house of Rabba experienced sixty calamities. In other words, many fortuitous events took place in the house of Rav Ḥisda and the opposite occurred in the house of Rabba.,In the house of Rav Ḥisda there was bread from the finest flour semida even for the dogs, and it was not asked after, as there was so much food. In the house of Rabba, on the other hand, there was coarse barley bread even for people, and it was not found in sufficient quantities. This shows that the length of life, children, and sustece all depend not upon one’s merit, but upon fate.,Apropos Rav Ḥisda’s great wealth, the Gemara reports that Rava said: These three things I requested from Heaven, two of which were given to me, and one was not given to me: I requested the wisdom of Rav Huna and the wealth of Rav Ḥisda and they were given to me. I also requested the humility of Rabba bar Rav Huna, but it was not given to me.,The Gemara continues its discussion of the deaths of the righteous. Rav Seorim, Rava’s brother, sat before Rava, and he saw that Rava was dozing, i.e., about to die. Rava said to his brother: Master, tell him, the Angel of Death, not to torment me. Knowing that Rava was not afraid of the Angel of Death, Rav Seorim said to him: Master, are you not a friend of the Angel of Death? Rava said to him: Since my fate has been handed over to him, and it has been decreed that I shall die, the Angel of Death no longer pays heed to me. Rav Seorim said to Rava: Master, appear to me in a dream after your death. And Rava appeared to him. Rav Seorim said to Rava: Master, did you have pain in death? He said to him: Like the prick of the knife when letting blood.,It was similarly related that Rava sat before Rav Naḥman, and he saw that Rav Naḥman was dozing, i.e., slipping into death. Rav Naḥman said to Rava: Master, tell the Angel of Death not to torment me. Rava said to him: Master, are you not an important person who is respected in Heaven? Rav Naḥman said to him: In the supernal world who is important? Who is honorable? Who is complete?,Rava said to Rav Naḥman: Master, appear to me in a dream after your death. And he appeared to him. Rava said to him: Master, did you have pain in death? Rav Naḥman said to him: Like the removal of hair from milk, which is a most gentle process. But nevertheless, were the Holy One, Blessed be He, to say to me: Go back to that world, the physical world, as you were, I would not want to go, for the fear of the Angel of Death is great. And I would not want to go through such a terrifying experience a second time.,The Gemara relates that Rabbi Elazar was once eating teruma, when the Angel of Death appeared to him. He said to the Angel of Death: I am eating teruma; is it not called sacred? It would be inappropriate for me to die now and thereby defile this sacred teruma. The Angel of Death accepted his argument and left him. The moment passed, and he lived for some time afterward.,It was similarly related that the Angel of Death once appeared to Rav Sheshet in the marketplace. Rav Sheshet said to the Angel of Death: Shall I die in the market like an animal? Come to my house and kill me there like a human being.,So too, the Angel of Death appeared to Rav Ashi in the marketplace. Rav Ashi said to the Angel of Death: Give me thirty days so that I may review my studies, for you say above: Fortunate is he who comes here to Heaven with his learning in his hand. On the thirtieth day the Angel of Death came to take him. Rav Ashi said to the Angel of Death: What is all of this? Why are you in such a hurry to take me? Why can you not postpone my death? He said to him: The foot of Rav Huna bar Natan is pushing you, as he is ready to succeed you as the leader of the generation, and one sovereignty does not overlap with its counterpart, even by one hairbreadth. Therefore, you cannot live any longer.,The Angel of Death was unable to take Rav Ḥisda because his mouth was never silent from study. So the Angel of Death went and sat on the cedar column that supported the roof of the study hall of the Sages. The cedar cracked and Rav Ḥisda was silent for a moment, as he was startled by the sound. At that point the Angel of Death was able to take him.,The Angel of Death could not come near Rabbi Ḥiyya, owing to his righteousness. One day the Angel of Death appeared to him as a poor person. He came and knocked on the door. He said to Rabbi Ḥiyya: Bring out bread for me, and he took out bread for him. The Angel of Death then said to Rabbi Ḥiyya: Master, do you not have mercy on a poor person? Why, then, do you not have mercy upon that man, i.e., upon me, and give me what I want? The Angel of Death then revealed his identity to him, and showed him a fiery rod in order to confirm that he was the Angel of Death. At this point Rav Ḥiyya surrendered himself to him.'' None |
|
105. Babylonian Talmud, Nedarim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Pharisaic tradition/halakha • Rabbinic tradition/literature, halakha • halakha, on gentiles • history of Halakha,
Found in books: Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 130; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 38
| 81a גוף כולו לא כל שכן אמרי אין כביסה אלימא לר\' יוסי דאמר שמואל האי ערבוביתא דרישא מתיא לידי עוירא ערבוביתא דמאני מתיא לידי שעמומיתא ערבוביתא דגופא מתיא לידי שיחני וכיבי,שלחו מתם הזהרו בערבוביתא הזהרו בחבורה הזהרו בבני עניים שמהן תצא תורה שנאמר (במדבר כד, ז) יזל מים מדליו שמהן תצא תורה,ומפני מה אין מצויין ת"ח לצאת ת"ח מבניהן אמר רב יוסף שלא יאמרו תורה ירושה היא להם רב ששת בריה דרב אידי אומר כדי שלא יתגדרו על הצבור מר זוטרא אומר מפני שהן מתגברין על הצבור רב אשי אומר משום דקרו לאינשי חמרי,רבינא אומר שאין מברכין בתורה תחלה דאמר רב יהודה אמר רב מאי דכתיב (ירמיהו ט, יא) מי האיש החכם ויבן את זאת דבר זה נשאל לחכמים ולנביאים ולא פירשוהו,עד שפירשו הקב"ה בעצמו דכתיב (ירמיהו ט, יב) ויאמר ה\' על עזבם את תורתי וגו\' היינו לא שמעו בקולי היינו לא הלכו בה אמר רב יהודה אמר רב שאין מברכין בתורה תחלה,איסי בר יהודה לא אתא למתיבתא דר\' יוסי תלתא יומי אשכחיה ורדימוס בר\' יוסי א"ל מאי טעמא לא אתי מר לבי מדרשא דאבא הא תלתא יומין א"ל כי טעמיה דאבוך לא ידענא היכא איתאי א"ל לימא מר מאי קא"ל דלמא ידענא טעמיה א"ל הא דתניא ר\' יוסי אומר כביסתן קודמין לחיי אחרים קרא מנלן,א"ל דכתיב (במדבר לה, ג) ומגרשיהם יהיו לבהמתם וגו\' מאי חייתם אילימא חיה והלא חיה בכלל בהמה היא אלא מאי חייתם חיותא ממש פשיטא אלא לאו כביסה דהא איכא צערא דערבוביתא,א"ר יוסי אין אלו נדרי עינוי נפש איבעיא להו לר\' יוסי מהו שיפר משום דברים שבינו לבינה ת"ש א"ר יוסי אין אלו נדרי עינוי נפש אבל דברים שבינו לבינה הויין,דלמא לדידהו קאמר להו לדידי אפי\' דברים שבינו לבינה לא הויין לדידכו דאמריתו הויין נדרי עינוי נפש אודו לי דאין אלו נדרי עינוי נפש,מאי רב אדא בר אהבה אומר מפר רב הונא אומר אין מפר'' None | 81a is it not all the more so the case that if one does not bathe, which affects the entire body, Rabbi Yosei would agree that he will suffer pain? The Gemara refutes this argument: The Sages say in response: Yes, the pain of refraining from laundering one’s clothes is stronger, according to Rabbi Yosei, than the pain of not washing one’s body. As Shmuel said: Grime on one’s head leads to blindness, and grime on one’s clothes leads to madness, whereas grime on one’s body leads to boils and sores, which are less serious than madness and blindness. Based on this it may be suggested that according to Rabbi Yosei, soiled clothing presents a greater danger than an unwashed body.,§ With regard to this issue, the Gemara relates that the Sages sent the following message from there, i.e., Eretz Yisrael, to Babylonia: Be careful with regard to grime, as it can lead to disease and sickness. Be careful to learn Torah in the company of others, rather than study it alone. And be careful with regard to the education of the sons of paupers, as it is from them that the Torah will issue forth. As it is stated: “Water shall flow from his branches midalyav” (Numbers 24:7), which is expounded to mean: From the poor ones midalim among him, as it is from them that the Torah, which may be compared to water, will issue forth.,With regard to a similar matter, the Gemara inquires: And for what reason is it not common for Torah scholars to give rise to Torah scholars from among their sons? Why are Torah scholars generally born to paupers, who are not Torah scholars themselves? Rav Yosef said: This is so that they should not say the Torah is their inheritance. Therefore, it is unusual to find that all the sons of a Torah scholar are also Torah scholars. Rav Sheshet, son of Rav Idi, said: This is so that they should not be presumptuous yitgadderu toward the community, with the knowledge that they will be Torah scholars like their fathers. Mar Zutra said: Because they take advantage of their fathers’ standing to lord over the community and are punished for their conduct. Rav Ashi said: Because they call ordinary people donkeys.,Ravina says: They are punished because they do not first recite a blessing over the Torah before commencing their studies. As Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Who is the wise man that may understand this, and who is he to whom the mouth of the Lord has spoken, that he may declare it, for what the land is perished and laid waste like a wilderness, so that none passes through” (Jeremiah 9:11)? This matter, the question as to why Eretz Yisrael was destroyed, was asked of the Sages, i.e., “the wise man,” and of the prophets, “he to whom the mouth of the Lord has spoken,” but they could not explain it.,The matter remained a mystery until the Holy One, Blessed be He, Himself explained why Eretz Yisrael was laid waste, as it is written in the next verse: “And the Lord said: Because they have forsaken My Torah which I set before them, and have not obeyed My voice, nor walked therein” (Jeremiah 9:12). It would appear that “have not obeyed My voice” is the same as “nor walked therein.” Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: The expression “nor walked therein” means that they do not first recite a blessing over the Torah, and they are therefore liable to receive the severe punishments listed in the verse.,§ Returning to the issue of laundering clothes, the Gemara relates that it once happened that Isi bar Yehuda did not come to the academy of Rabbi Yosei for three straight days. Vardimus, son of Rabbi Yosei, found him and said to him: What is the reason that the Master did not come to Father’s academy these three days? He said to him: When I do not know your father’s reasoning, how can I come? Vardimus said to him: Let the Master say what he, my father, is saying to him; perhaps I know his reasoning. He said to him: With regard to that which is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yosei says that their own laundry takes precedence over the lives of others, from where do we have a verse that teaches this halakha?,Vardimus said to him: As it is written with regard to the Levite cities: “And their open land shall be for their animals and for their substance, and for all their beasts” (Numbers 35:3). What is the meaning of “their beasts”? If we say an actual beast, there is a difficulty, as isn’t a beast included in the category of animal, which has already been mentioned in the verse? Rather, what is the meaning of “their beasts ḥayyatam”? It means their actual lives ḥiyyuta. This, however, is difficult, as it is obvious that the Levites received their cities in order to live their lives there. Rather, is it not referring to laundering clothes, as there is the pain caused by the grime on one’s unwashed clothes? Since it is vitally necessary for their well-being, laundering the clothing of the city’s residents takes precedence over the lives of others.,§ With regard to the vows: If I bathe, and: If I do not bathe, and: If I adorn myself, and: If I do not adorn myself, Rabbi Yosei said in the mishna that these are not vows of affliction. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: According to Rabbi Yosei, what is the halakha as to whether the husband can nullify these vows as matters that adversely affect the relationship between him and her? The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a resolution to this question from what Rabbi Yosei said: These are not vows of affliction, which indicates, however, that they are matters that affect the relationship between him and her.,The Gemara refutes this proof: Perhaps Rabbi Yosei was speaking to the Rabbis in accordance with their own opinion, as follows: According to my opinion, they are not even matters that affect the relationship between him and her. But according to your opinion, that you say that they are vows of affliction, agree with me at least that these are not vows of affliction. In other words, one should not infer from the phrasing of Rabbi Yosei’s response to the Rabbis that he holds that these vows are concerning matters that affect the relationship between him and her, as he was merely countering the claim of the Rabbis that they are vows of affliction.,The question therefore remains: What does Rabbi Yosei maintain in this regard? Rav Adda bar Ahava says: He can nullify these vows as matters between him and her, whereas Rav Huna says: He cannot nullify them.'' None |
|
106. Babylonian Talmud, Pesahim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Tannaic halakha • Tannaic literature, halakhic vs. aggadic exegesis • halakhah
Found in books: Avemarie, van Henten, and Furstenberg (2023), Jewish Martyrdom in Antiquity, 62; Katzoff (2019), On Jews in the Roman World: Collected Studies. 101, 233; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 34, 36, 136
53b קרוב להאכיל את ישראל קדשים בחוץ מקולס אין שאין מקולס לא אמרי מקולס לא שנא אמר לא שנא לא אמר שאינו מקולס פירש אין לא פירש לא,רב אחא מתני לה להא מתני\' כר\' שמעון מתקיף לה רב ששת בשלמא למאן דתני לה כרבי יוסי ניחא אלא למאן דמתני כר\' שמעון מי ניחא,והתנן רבי שמעון פוטר שלא התנדב כדרך המתנדבים,אמר ליה רבינא לרב אשי ומאן דמתני לה כר\' יוסי מי ניחא והאמר רבא רבי שמעון בשיטת רבי יוסי אמרה דאמר אף בגמר דבריו אדם נתפס,מאי לאו מדרבי שמעון סבר לה כר\' יוסי רבי יוסי נמי סבר לה כרבי שמעון לא רבי שמעון סבר לה כר\' יוסי ולא רבי יוסי סבר לה כר\' שמעון,איבעיא להו תודוס איש רומי גברא רבה הוה או בעל אגרופין הוה,ת"ש עוד זו דרש תודוס איש רומי מה ראו חנניה מישאל ועזריה שמסרו עצמן על קדושת השם לכבשן האש,נשאו קל וחומר בעצמן מצפרדעים ומה צפרדעים שאין מצווין על קדושת השם כתיב בהו (שמות ז, כח) ובאו ועלו בביתך וגו\' ובתנוריך ובמשארותיך אימתי משארות מצויות אצל תנור הוי אומר בשעה שהתנור חם אנו שמצווין על קדושת השם על אחת כמה וכמה,רבי יוסי בר אבין אמר מטיל מלאי לכיס של תלמידי חכמים היה דאמר ר\' יוחנן כל המטיל מלאי לכיס תלמידי חכמים זוכה ויושב בישיבה של מעלה שנא\' (קהלת ז, יב) כי בצל החכמה בצל הכסף:,| 53b Doing so is akin to feeding Jews consecrated meat outside the permitted area, as due to its resemblance to the Paschal lamb it could be misleading. The Gemara analyzes this statement: A goat roasted whole, yes, it is prohibited; a goat not roasted whole, no, it is not prohibited. This contradicts Rav, who prohibited roasting even ordinary meat. The Sages say that this is the distinction: With regard to a goat roasted whole, there is no difference if one said it is for Passover, and there is no difference if one did not say it is for Passover. In either case, it looks like a sacrifice and it is prohibited. With regard to a goat not roasted whole, if one specified that it is for Passover, yes, it is prohibited because it appears that he is consecrating it as a sacrifice. However, if one did not specify that it is for Passover, no, it is not prohibited, as there is no need for concern.,Rav Aḥa teaches this baraita about Theodosius in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon. Rav Sheshet strongly objected to this: Granted, according to the one who learns it in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, it works out well. However, according to the one who teaches it in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, does it work out well? Didn’t we learn in a mishna about a dispute with regard to one who consecrated an item for a purpose for which it was unsuited, e.g., a case where one sought to bring a meal-offering of barley, although meal-offerings may be brought only from wheat? In that case, the Rabbis say he is required to bring a meal-offering of wheat because in the first part of his statement he vowed to bring a meal-offering.,Rabbi Shimon exempts him from any obligation, as in his opinion, he did not donate in the manner typical of donors. In other words, Rabbi Shimon relates to the statement: A meal-offering of barley, as a single entity. Since no meal-offering of that kind exists, one is not required to bring an offering at all. Similarly, with regard to Passover, since one can consecrate only a living animal as a sacrifice and cannot consecrate meat as a sacrifice, if one declares: This meat is for Passover, it is in no way similar to consecrating an animal, and the meat has no sanctity.,Ravina said to Rav Ashi: And according to the one who teaches it in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, does it work out well? Didn’t Rava say: With regard to a meal-offering of barley, Rabbi Shimon stated his opinion in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, who said: A person is also held accountable for the conclusion of his statement. The Sages disagreed with regard to the halakhot of consecration in a case where one consecrates an animal for two objectives in the same statement, e.g., as both a burnt-offering and a peace-offering. According to Rabbi Meir, one is held accountable for the beginning of his statement. Since he mentioned the burnt-offering first, the animal assumes the status of a burnt-offering. However, Rabbi Yosei says that one’s entire statement is significant, and that the animal is consecrated for two sacrifices. The owner must wait until the animal becomes blemished, redeem it, and use the money to purchase a burnt-offering and a peace-offering. Rabbi Shimon holds in accordance with Rabbi Yosei’s opinion concerning a barley meal-offering. He maintains that one is held accountable not only for his first expression, i.e., that it is a meal-offering, but also for his second expression, i.e., that it is of barley. In that case, the second part of his statement negates the first part.,What, is it not concluded from the fact that Rabbi Shimon holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, Rabbi Yosei also holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, that if one did not donate in the manner typical of donors, his act is meaningless? If that is the case, then any difficulty for the opinion of Rabbi Shimon would be similarly difficult for the opinion of Rabbi Yosei. The Gemara rejects this: No, although Rabbi Shimon holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, Rabbi Yosei does not hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon.,A dilemma was raised before the Sages with regard to the above incident. Was Theodosius of Rome a great man in terms of his Torah scholarship, and the Sages refrained from ostracizing him in deference to the Torah that he studied? Or, was he a violent man who could not be punished due to his local influence?,Come and hear: This was also taught by Theodosius of Rome: What did Haiah, Mishael, and Azariah see that led them to deliver themselves to the fiery furnace for sanctification of the name of God during the rule of Nebuchadnezzar rather than worship idols under duress?,They drew an a fortiori inference on their own from the plague of frogs in Egypt. With regard to frogs, which are not commanded concerning the sanctification of the name of God, it is written: “And the river shall swarm with frogs, which shall go up and come into your house, and into your bedchamber, and onto your bed, and into the houses of your servants, and upon your people, and into their ovens and kneading bowls” (Exodus 7:28). When are kneading bowls found near the oven? You must say that it is when the oven is hot. If in fulfilling the command to harass the Egyptians, the frogs entered burning ovens, all the more so, we, who are commanded concerning the sanctification of the name of God, should deliver ourselves to be killed in the fiery furnace for that purpose. Apparently, Theodosius taught Torah in public, which indicates that he was a great man.,Rabbi Yosei bar Avin said: Theodosius was one who cast the profits from merchandise into the purse of Torah scholars. He would lend them money and enter into partnership with them so they could open businesses, and that is praiseworthy, as Rabbi Yoḥa said: Anyone who casts merchandise into the purse of Torah scholars is rewarded and sits in the heavenly academy, as it is stated: “For in the shadow of wisdom, is the shadow of money” (Ecclesiastes 7:12). One who provides Torah scholars with money will merit being with them in the shadow of wisdom.,a place where people were accustomed to kindle a lamp in the house on Yom Kippur evenings, one kindles it. In a place where people were accustomed not to kindle a lamp, one does not kindle it. However, even in a place where the custom is not to kindle lamps in houses, one kindles in synagogues and study halls, in deference to these places. Similarly, lamps should be kindled in dark alleyways, so people will not be hurt, and next to the sick.,It was taught in the Tosefta: Both in a place where the Sages said to kindle and in a place where they said not to kindle, they both intended to achieve the same objective, i.e., to distance people from sin, as conjugal relations are prohibited on Yom Kippur. Those who said that one kindles a lamp believe that because people do not engage in relations while a lamp is lit, the lamp will discourage intimacy. Those who maintain the opposite believe that spouses who are unable to see each other will not be tempted to engage in conjugal relations, and therefore it is preferable not to have a lamp lit on Yom Kippur. Rav Yehoshua said that Rava taught: “Your people are all righteous, they shall inherit the land forever; the branch of My planting, the work of My hands, in which I glory” (Isaiah 60:21). Both in a place where the Sages said to kindle and in a place where they said not to kindle, they intended only to achieve the same objective, fulfilling a mitzva. Even though different places have different customs, the Jewish people all aspire to sanctity.,On the topic of kindling a lamp for Yom Kippur, the Gemara discusses a related point. Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: One should recite the blessing over fire: Who creates the lights of fire, only at the conclusion of Shabbat, since the conclusion of Shabbat is the time of its original creation. A certain Elder said to him, and some say it was Rabba bar bar Ḥana who said: That is correct; and so said Rabbi Yoḥa. The Gemara relates: Ulla was riding on a donkey and going along, and Rabbi Abba was going along on his right and Rabba bar bar Ḥana on his left. Rabbi Abba said to Ulla: Is it true that you said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥa that one recites the blessing over fire only at the conclusion of Shabbat, not at the conclusion of Yom Kippur, since the time of its original creation is the conclusion of Shabbat?,Since Ulla never transmitted that statement, he understood that it must have been Rabba bar bar Ḥana who heard it from Rabbi Yoḥa and transmitted it when he came from Eretz Yisrael. Ulla turned around and looked angrily at Rabba bar bar Ḥana for misquoting Rabbi Yoḥa. Still, Ulla said nothing. However, Rabba bar bar Ḥana understood what had happened and said to him: I did not say anything about that matter; rather, what I said was about that which the reciter of the tannaitic literature taught in a baraita before Rabbi Yoḥa in which Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: With regard to Yom Kippur that occurs on Shabbat, even in a place where they said not to kindle a lamp on Yom Kippur, one kindles in deference to Shabbat. Rabbi Yoḥa answered after him and completed the statement: And the Rabbis prohibit kindling a lamp even when Yom Kippur occurs on Shabbat. Ulla said to Rabbi Abba: Let it be that Rabbi Yoḥa indeed made this statement.,Rav Yosef read the following verse about this event: “Counsel in the heart of man is like deep water;' ' None | |
|
107. Babylonian Talmud, Qiddushin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • halakha, Shammaite • law, Jewish (halakhah)
Found in books: Rubenstein (2003), The Culture of the Babylonian Talmud. 26; Rubenstein (2018), The Land of Truth: Talmud Tales, Timeless Teachings, 22
| 31b ומביאו לחיי העולם הבא,אמר רבי אבהו כגון אבימי ברי קיים מצות כיבוד חמשה בני סמכי הוה ליה לאבימי בחיי אביו וכי הוה אתא רבי אבהו קרי אבבא רהיט ואזיל ופתח ליה ואמר אין אין עד דמטאי התם,יומא חד אמר ליה אשקיין מיא אדאייתי ליה נמנם גחין קאי עליה עד דאיתער איסתייעא מילתיה ודרש אבימי (תהלים עט, א) מזמור לאסף,אמר ליה רב יעקב בר אבוה לאביי כגון אנא דעד דאתינא מבי רב אבא מדלי לי כסא ואמא מזגה לי היכי איעביד א"ל מאמך קביל ומאבוך לא תקבל דכיון דבר תורה הוא חלשה דעתיה,רבי טרפון הוה ליה ההיא אמא דכל אימת דהות בעיא למיסק לפוריא גחין וסליק לה וכל אימת דהות נחית נחתת עלויה אתא וקא משתבח בי מדרשא אמרי ליה עדיין לא הגעת לחצי כיבוד כלום זרקה ארנקי בפניך לים ולא הכלמתה,רב יוסף כי הוה שמע קל כרעא דאמיה אמר איקום מקמי שכינה דאתיא אמר רבי יוחנן אשרי מי שלא חמאן רבי יוחנן כי עברתו אמו מת אביו ילדתו מתה אמו וכן אביי איני והאמר אביי אמרה לי אם ההיא מרבינתיה הואי,רב אסי הוה ליה ההיא אמא זקינה אמרה לי\' בעינא תכשיטין עבד לה בעינא גברא נייעין לך בעינא גברא דשפיר כותך שבקה ואזל לארעא דישראל,שמע דקא אזלה אבתריה אתא לקמיה דרבי יוחנן אמר לי\' מהו לצאת מארץ לחוצה לארץ א"ל אסור לקראת אמא מהו א"ל איני יודע אתרח פורתא הדר אתא אמר ליה אסי נתרצית לצאת המקום יחזירך לשלום,אתא לקמיה דרבי אלעזר א"ל חס ושלום דלמא מירתח רתח א"ל מאי אמר לך אמר ליה המקום יחזירך לשלום אמר ליה ואם איתא דרתח לא הוה מברך לך אדהכי והכי שמע לארונא דקאתי אמר אי ידעי לא נפקי,ת"ר מכבדו בחייו ומכבדו במותו בחייו כיצד הנשמע בדבר אביו למקום לא יאמר שלחוני בשביל עצמי מהרוני בשביל עצמי פטרוני בשביל עצמי אלא כולהו בשביל אבא,במותו כיצד היה אומר דבר שמועה מפיו לא יאמר כך אמר אבא אלא כך אמר אבא מרי הריני כפרת משכבו והני מילי תוך שנים עשר חדש מכאן ואילך אומר זכרונו לברכה לחיי העולם הבא,תנו רבנן חכם משנה שם אביו ושם רבו תורגמן אינו משנה לא שם אביו ולא שם רבו אבוה דמאן אילימא אבוה דמתורגמן אטו תורגמן לאו בר חיובא הוא,אלא אמר רבא שם אביו של חכם ושם רבו של חכם כי הא דמר בר רב אשי כי הוה דריש בפירקא איהו אמר אבא מרי ואמוריה אמר הכי אמר רב אשי,ת"ר איזהו מורא ואיזהו כיבוד מורא לא עומד במקומו ולא יושב במקומו ולא סותר את דבריו ולא מכריעו כיבוד מאכיל ומשקה מלביש ומכסה מכניס ומוציא,איבעיא להו'' None | 31b and this action brings him to the life of the World-to-Come.,Rabbi Abbahu said: One such as Avimi, my son, properly fulfilled the mitzva of honoring his parents. The Gemara relates: Avimi had five sons during his father’s lifetime who were ordained to issue halakhic rulings, and he too was ordained. And yet when Rabbi Abbahu, his father, came and called at the gate to enter, Avimi would himself run and go to open the door for him. And before he arrived there, he would already say: Yes, yes, so that his father would not think that he was being ignored.,One day Rabbi Abbahu said to Avimi his son: Give me water to drink. Before he brought him the water, Rabbi Abbahu dozed off. Avimi bent over and stood over him until his father awoke. The performance of this mitzva aided him, i.e., as a reward God helped him in his studies, and Avimi succeeded in homiletically interpreting the psalm: “A song to Asaph” (Psalms 79).,Rav Ya’akov bar Avuh said to Abaye: With regard to one such as I, so beloved by my parents that before I return from the study hall my father brings me a cup and my mother pours for me, how should I act? Is it disrespectful to accept this honor from them? Abaye said to him: Accept it from your mother, but do not accept it from your father, as, since he is a Torah scholar he will be disheartened if his son does not show him the proper level of respect.,The Gemara relates: Rabbi Tarfon had a certain manner of treating his mother, that whenever she wished to ascend into her bed he would bend over and help her to ascend, and whenever she wished to descend from the bed, she would descend onto him. He came and praised himself in the study hall for performing the mitzva of honoring one’s father and mother so thoroughly. They said to him: You still have not reached even half of the honor due to her. Has it ever happened that she threw a purse into the sea in front of you, and you did not embarrass her?,When Rav Yosef heard his mother’s footsteps, he would say: I will stand before the arriving Divine Presence. Rabbi Yoḥa said: Fortunate is one who never saw his father and mother, as it is so difficult to honor them appropriately. The Gemara relates that Rabbi Yoḥa himself never saw his parents. When his mother was pregt with him, his father died; and when she gave birth to him, his mother died. And the same is true of Abaye. The Gemara asks: Is that so, that Abaye never saw his mother? But didn’t Abaye say on many occasions: My mother told me? The Gemara answers: That mother was actually his foster mother, not his birth mother.,Rav Asi had an elderly mother. She said to him: I want jewelry, and he made jewelry for her. She said to him: I want a man whom I can marry, and he said to her: I will seek one for you. She said to him: I want a husband who is as handsome as you. At this point, he realized that she was senile, and that he would be unable to fulfill all her requests. Therefore, he left her and went to Eretz Yisrael.,Rav Asi heard that she was following him to Eretz Yisrael. He came before Rabbi Yoḥa and said to him: What is the halakha with regard to leaving Eretz Yisrael to go outside of Eretz Yisrael? Rabbi Yoḥa said to him: It is prohibited. Rav Asi further asked: If one is going to greet his mother, what is the halakha? Rabbi Yoḥa said to him: I do not know. Rav Asi waited a little while, and then came back to him. Rabbi Yoḥa said to him: Asi, you are evidently determined to leave. May the Omnipresent return you in peace, and he said no more.,Rav Asi came before Rabbi Elazar, because he did not know how to interpret Rabbi Yoḥa’s statement. He said to Rabbi Elazar: God forbid, perhaps he is angry with me that I wished to leave? Rabbi Elazar said to him: What exactly did he say to you? Rav Asi said to him: May the Omnipresent return you in peace. Rabbi Elazar said to him: If it is so that he was angry, he would not have blessed you. Rabbi Yoḥa certainly gave you permission to leave. In the meantime, while he was traveling to meet her, Rav Asi heard that her coffin was coming, i.e., his mother had died and her coffin was being brought to Eretz Yisrael. He said: Had I known I would not have left, as after his mother’s death he was not obligated to leave Eretz Yisrael to honor her.,The Sages taught: One honors his father in his life and honors him in his death. How does he honor him in his life? One who goes to a place on the command of his father should not say to the people to whom he has been sent, to hurry them along: Send me on my journey on my own behalf, or: Hurry up on my own behalf, or: Allow me to take leave of this business on my own behalf. Rather, he should say all of the above in the following manner: Act in this manner on Father’s behalf, as a mark of respect for his father.,How does he honor him in his death? If he says a matter he heard from his father’s mouth, he should not say: So said Father. Rather, he should say: So said Father, my teacher, may I be an atonement for his resting soul. And this halakha applies within twelve months of his death. From this time onward he says: May his memory be for a blessing, for the life of the World-to-Come.,The Sages taught: A Sage who lectures in public must change the name of his father, i.e., when he quotes his father he should not mention him by name. And similarly, he changes the name of his teacher. The disseminator, who explains the statements of a Sage to the audience, changes neither the name of his father nor the name of his teacher. The Gemara asks: To whose father is this referring? If we say it is referring to the father of the disseminator, whom the Sage mentioned in his lecture, is that to say that the disseminator is not obligated to observe the mitzva of honoring one’s father? How can a disseminator mention his own father by name?,Rather, Rava said: This is referring to the name of the Sage’s father and the name of the Sage’s teacher. This is like that which Mar bar Rav Ashi would do, as when he would teach Torah at his regular lecture and would mention a halakha in the name of his father, Rav Ashi, he would say: So said my father, my teacher; and his disseminator would say: So said Rav Ashi. Although a son may not mention his father’s name, the disseminator of his lecture may do so.,The Sages taught: What is fear and what is honor? Fear of one’s father includes the following: One may not stand in his father’s fixed place, and may not sit in his place, and may not contradict his statements by expressing an opinion contrary to that of his father, and he may not choose sides when his father argues with someone else. What is considered honor? He gives his father food and drink, dresses and covers him, and brings him in and takes him out for all his household needs.,A dilemma was raised before the Sages:'' None |
|
108. Babylonian Talmud, Rosh Hashanah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • halakha, study of • halakhah, priestly • halakhah, priestly, calendar conflict • priests, halakhah, priestly
Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 478; Simon-Shushan (2012), Stories of the Law: Narrative Discourse and the Construction of Authority in the Mishna, 258
24a גירי קא משדייא:,כמה היה גבוה ולאין היה נוטה כו\': תנא חדא לצפונה דבריו קיימין לדרומה לא אמר כלום והתניא איפכא לדרומה דבריו קיימין לצפונה לא אמר כלום,לא קשיא כאן בימות החמה כאן בימות הגשמים,ת"ר אחד אומר גבוה ב\' מרדעות ואחד אומר ג\' עדותן קיימת אחד אומר ג\' ואחד אומר ה\' עדותן בטילה אבל מצטרפין לעדות אחרת,ת"ר ראינוהו במים ראינוהו בעששית ראינוהו בעבים אין מעידין עליו חציו במים חציו בעבים חציו בעששית אין מעידין עליו,השתא כולו אמרת לא חציו מבעיא אלא ה"ק חציו במים חציו ברקיע חציו בעבים חציו ברקיע חציו בעששית חציו ברקיע אין מעידין,ת"ר ראינוהו ושוב לא ראינוהו אין מעידין עליו כל הכי חזו לה ואזלי,אמר אביי ה"ק ראינוהו מאלינו ושבנו לראותו מדעתנו ולא ראינוהו אין מעידין עליו מאי טעמא אימור כוביתא דעיבא בעלמא הוא דחזי:,| 24a that the sun is shooting arrows at those who deny its divinity, using the rainbow as its bow. The concave side of the rainbow always faces away from the sun, so that it does not look like a bow held by the sun.,§ The mishna taught that the examination of the witnesses included the following questions: How high was the moon over the horizon, and in which direction did it tilt? It was taught in one baraita: If the witness testifies that he saw the moon to the north of the sun, his statement is valid. However, if he says that he saw it to its south, he has not said anything of significance, as this is impossible. The Gemara asks: Isn’t the opposite taught in a different baraita: If he testifies that he saw the moon to the south of the sun, his statement is valid. However, if he says he saw it to its north, he has not said anything.,The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. Here, in the second baraita mentioned above, it is referring to the summer, when the moon is to the south of the sun; there, in the first baraita mentioned above, it is referring to the rainy season, when the moon is to the north of the sun.,The Sages taught in a baraita: If one witness says that he saw the moon two plow handles high above the horizon, and the other one says it was three plow handles high, their testimony is valid, as a small discrepancy of this kind is reasonable. However, if one says that he saw the moon three plow handles above the horizon, and the other one says it was five plow handles high, their testimony is void, as that discrepancy is unacceptable. However, this does not mean that the witnesses themselves are disqualified, as either of them may join with another testimony, i.e., he may combine his account with that of another witness who testifies likewise.,The Sages taught in another baraita that if the witnesses say: We did not actually see the moon, but we saw it reflected in the water, or we saw it reflected in a glass lantern, or we saw it through thin clouds, they may not testify about it, as only a direct sighting of the moon is acceptable. If they say: We saw half of the moon’s reflection in the water, or we saw half of it through the clouds, or we saw half of it in a lantern, they still may not testify about it.,The Gemara analyzes this baraita: Now, if when one sees the entire moon in this manner, you said that this is not valid testimony, is it necessary to teach that one may not testify when he sees only half of it? Rather, this is what the baraita is saying: If the witnesses saw half of the moon’s reflection in water and half of it directly in the sky, or half of it through the clouds and half of it in the sky, or half of it in a lantern and half of it in the sky, although they saw half of the moon directly, they may not testify about it until they see the entire moon in the sky.,The Sages taught in another baraita that if the witnesses say: One moment we saw the new moon, but we did not see it again, they may not testify about it. The Gemara asks: Must they go on watching it to such an extent, i.e., why should they have to see it for a long period of time?,Abaye said that this is what the baraita is saying: If the witnesses say: We saw the moon on our own accord, i.e., by chance, without looking for it, and then we returned to look for it on purpose, to deliver precise testimony about it, but we did not see it again, they may not testify about it. What is the reason? Because one can say that the first time it was merely a small round white cloud that they saw, which they mistook for the moon, and that is why when they looked for it again they could not find it.,the head of the court says: It is sanctified. And all the people respond after him: It is sanctified; it is sanctified. Whether the moon was seen at its anticipated time, on the thirtieth day of the previous month, or whether it was not seen at its anticipated time, in which case witnesses are not necessary to establish the following day as the New Moon, the court sanctifies it and formally proclaims the day as the New Moon.,Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says: If the new moon was not seen at its anticipated time, the court does not sanctify the New Moon on the following day, as the celestial court in Heaven has already sanctified it, precluding the need for the additional sanctification by the earthly court.,the head of the court says: It is sanctified. The Gemara asks: From where are these matters, that the court must sanctify the New Moon, derived? Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Gamda said that Rabbi Yosei ben Shaul said that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said that the verse states: “And Moses declared to the children of Israel the appointed seasons of the Lord” (Leviticus 23:44). From here it is derived that the head of the court says: It is sanctified, as it is evident from the verse that Moses, whose status was equivalent to that of the head of the Great Sanhedrin, declared the appointed times of the Festivals and New Moons in a formal manner.,§ The mishna further teaches that after the head of the court says: It is sanctified, all the people respond after him: It is sanctified; it is sanctified. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this? Rav Pappa said that the verse states: “Which you shall proclaim them otam to be sacred convocations” (Leviticus 23:2). Instead of otam, read into the verse: You atem, as though the verse stated: Which you shall proclaim, you. This superfluous word you teaches that the month must be proclaimed not only by the head of the court, but also by you, the people. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said that it is derived from the phrase: “These are hem My appointed seasons” (Leviticus 23:2). The term hem can also mean: They, which indicates that they, the people, should likewise say and announce My appointed seasons.,The Gemara further asks: Why do I need the people to declare: It is sanctified; it is sanctified, twice? The Gemara answers that the reason is that it is written: “Sacred convocations” (Leviticus 23:2) in the plural, which indicates that they must announce it twice.,§ The mishna taught that Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says: If the new moon was not seen at its anticipated time, the court does not sanctify the New Moon on the following day. The Gemara cites other opinions in this regard: It is taught in a baraita that the Sage Palaimo says: If the new moon was seen at its anticipated time, the court does not sanctify the New Moon, as the new moon appeared as expected and there is no need for any special sanctification. However, if the new moon was seen not at its anticipated time, the court must sanctify the New Moon.,The baraita continues: Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says: In either case, the court does not sanctify the New Moon formally, as it is stated: “And you shall sanctify the fiftieth year” (Leviticus 25:10), from which it is derived: You must formally sanctify years in court, but you do not have to formally sanctify months, as they are sanctified automatically by Heaven. Rather, it is enough merely to announce to the public that a certain day was established as the New Moon. Rabbi Yehuda said that Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, that if the new moon was seen at its anticipated time, the court sanctifies the new month; however, if it was not seen at its anticipated time, they do not sanctify it.,Abaye said: We, too, learn in a mishna: If the court and all of the Jewish people saw the new moon, and the witnesses were interrogated, but the court did not manage to say: Sanctified, before nightfall, the previous month is rendered a full, thirty-day month. This indicates that full, yes; i.e., in this case, it is necessary to extend the previous month. However, sanctified, no; there is no need to formally sanctify the month, as the New Moon does not occur on its anticipated date in this case.,The Gemara rejects this argument: There is no proof from here, as it was necessary for the mishna to mention that the month is rendered a full, thirty-day month. The reason is that it might enter your mind to say that since the court and the entire Jewish people saw the new moon, it has become public knowledge and therefore there is no need to render the previous month a full, thirty-day month. Consequently, the mishna teaches us that even in this case the previous month must be extended. Nevertheless, it is still possible that the New Moon must be formally sanctified on the following day.,Rabban Gamliel had a diagram of the different forms of the moon drawn on a tablet that hung on the wall of his attic, which he would show to the laymen who came to testify about the new moon but were unable to describe adequately what they had seen. And he would say to them: Did you see a form like this or like this?,And is it permitted to create these types of forms? Isn’t it written: “You shall not make with Me gods of silver, or gods of gold” (Exodus 20:19), which is interpreted as teaching: You shall not make images of My attendants, i.e., those celestial bodies that were created to serve God, including the sun and the moon?,§ Abaye said: The Torah prohibited only the images of those attendants with regard to which it is possible to reproduce an item in their likeness. Since it is impossible for anyone to reproduce the sun and the moon, the prohibition does not apply to these objects. As it is taught in a baraita: A person may not construct a house in the exact form of the Sanctuary, nor a portico in the exact form of the Entrance Hall of the Sanctuary, nor a courtyard corresponding to the Temple courtyard, nor a table corresponding to the table in the Temple, nor a candelabrum corresponding to the candelabrum in the Temple. However, one may fashion'' None | |
|
109. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian, halakha/tradition • Bavli, aggada integrated into halakhic context • Dead Sea Scrolls, divine inspiration as source of halakhah • Halakhah/Halakhot • Law, Biblical/Rabbinic—see also, Halakhah • Rabbinic Halakhah • adoption, rabbinic halakha • aggada in Bavli, integrated with halakhic context • halakha, and Scripture • halakha, rabbinic • halakhah • halakhah, divine versus human authority in • law and legal formulae, rabbinic (halakhah) • midrash halakhah
Found in books: Eliav (2023), A Jew in the Roman Bathhouse: Cultural Interaction in the Ancient Mediterranean, 177; Fraade (2011), Legal Fictions: Studies of Law and Narrative in the Discursive Worlds of Ancient Jewish Sectarians and Sages, 304, 314, 452, 454; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 128, 570, 571, 572; Jassen (2014), Scripture and Law in the Dead Sea Scrolls, 24; Kattan Gribetz et al. (2016), Genesis Rabbah in Text and Context. 48; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 81; Shemesh (2009), Halakhah in the Making: The Development of Jewish Law from Qumran to the Rabbis. 56, 60; Swartz (2018), The Mechanics of Providence: The Workings of Ancient Jewish Magic and Mysticism. 185; Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 33
| 19a ואין עשה דוחה לא תעשה ועשה אלא מן האירוסין אמאי יבא עשה וידחה לא תעשה,גזירה ביאה ראשונה אטו ביאה שניה,תניא נמי הכי אם קדמו ובעלו ביאה ראשונה קנו ואסור לקיימן בביאה שניה:,מת לו מת כו\': ת"ר (ויקרא כא, יב) ומן המקדש לא יצא לא יצא עמהן אבל יוצא הוא אחריהן כיצד הן נכסין והוא נגלה הן ניגלין והוא נכסה:,ויוצא עד פתח כו\': שפיר קאמר ר\' יהודה,אמר לך רבי מאיר אי הכי לביתו נמי לא אלא ה"ק מן המקדש לא יצא מקדושתו לא יצא וכיון דאית ליה הכירא לא אתי למינגע,ורבי יהודה אגב מרריה דילמא מקרי ואתי ונגע:,כשהוא מנחם: ת"ר כשהוא עובר בשורה לנחם את אחרים סגן ומשוח שעבר בימינו וראש בית אב ואבלים וכל העם משמאלו וכשהוא עומד בשורה ומתנחם מאחרים סגן מימינו וראש בית אב וכל העם משמאלו,אבל משוח שעבר לא אתי גביה מ"ט חלשא דעתיה סבר קא חדי בי א"ר פפא ש"מ מהא מתניתא תלת שמע מינה היינו סגן היינו ממונה ושמע מינה אבלים עומדין וכל העם עוברין ושמע מינה אבלים לשמאל המנחמין הן עומדין,ת"ר בראשונה היו אבלים עומדין וכל העם עוברין והיו ב\' משפחות בירושלים מתגרות זו בזו זאת אומרת אני עוברת תחלה וזאת אומרת אני עוברת תחלה התקינו שיהא העם עומדין ואבלים עוברין:,(חזר והלך וסיפר סימן):,אמר רמי בר אבא החזיר רבי יוסי את הדבר ליושנו בציפורי שיהיו אבלים עומדין וכל העם עוברין ואמר רמי בר אבא התקין רבי יוסי בציפורי שלא תהא אשה מהלכת בשוק ובנה אחריה משום מעשה שהיה ואמר רמי בר אבא התקין ר\' יוסי בציפורי שיהיו נשים מספרות בבית הכסא משום ייחוד,אמר רב מנשיא בר עות שאילית את רבי יאשיה רבה בבית עלמין דהוצל ואמר לי אין שורה פחותה מעשרה בני אדם ואין אבלים מן המנין בין שאבלים עומדין וכל העם עוברין בין שאבלים עוברין וכל העם עומדין:,כשהוא מתנחם כו\': איבעיא להו כי מנחם הוא אחריני היכי אמר להו ת"ש והוא אומר תתנחמו היכי דמי אילימא כי מנחמי אחריני לדידיה אמר להו איהו תתנחמו נחשא קא רמי להו אלא כי מנחם לאחריני אמר להו תתנחמו ש"מ:,מלך לא דן כו\': אמר רב יוסף לא שנו אלא מלכי ישראל אבל מלכי בית דוד דן ודנין אותן דכתיב (ירמיהו כא, יב) בית דוד כה אמר ה\' דינו לבקר משפט ואי לא דיינינן ליה אינהו היכי דייני והכתיב (צפניה ב, א) התקוששו וקושו ואמר ר"ל קשט עצמך ואחר כך קשט אחרים,אלא מלכי ישראל מ"ט לא משום מעשה שהיה דעבדיה דינאי מלכא קטל נפשא אמר להו שמעון בן שטח לחכמים תנו עיניכם בו ונדוננו שלחו ליה עבדך קטל נפשא שדריה להו שלחו לי\' תא אנת נמי להכא (שמות כא, כט) והועד בבעליו אמרה תורה יבא בעל השור ויעמוד על שורו,אתא ויתיב א"ל שמעון בן שטח ינאי המלך עמוד על רגליך ויעידו בך ולא לפנינו אתה עומד אלא לפני מי שאמר והיה העולם אתה עומד שנאמר (דברים יט, יז) ועמדו שני האנשים אשר להם הריב וגו\' אמר לו לא כשתאמר אתה אלא כמה שיאמרו חבריך' 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 21b על הייחוד ועל הפנויה,יחוד דאורייתא הוא דאמר ר\' יוחנן משום ר\' שמעון בן יהוצדק רמז לייחוד מן התורה מניין שנאמר (דברים יג, ז) כי יסיתך אחיך בן אמך וכי בן אם מסית בן אב אינו מסית אלא לומר לך בן מתייחד עם אמו ואין אחר מתייחד עם כל עריות שבתורה,אלא אימא גזרו על ייחוד דפנויה,(מלכים א א, ה) ואדניה בן חגית מתנשא לאמר אני אמלוך אמר רב יהודה אמר רב מלמד שביקש להולמו ולא הולמתו,(מלכים א א, ה) ויעש לו רכב ופרשים וחמשים איש רצים לפניו מאי רבותא אמר רב יהודה אמר רב כולן נטולי טחול וחקוקי כפות רגלים היו:,65b מתיב ר\' זירא יצאו עדים זוממין שאין בהן מעשה ואמאי הא ליתנהו בלב,אמר רבא שאני עדים זוממין הואיל וישנו בקול,וקול לרבי יוחנן לאו מעשה הוא והא איתמר חסמה בקול והנהיגה בקול רבי יוחנן אמר חייב ור"ל אמר פטור,רבי יוחנן אמר חייב עקימת פיו הוי מעשה ר"ל אמר פטור עקימת פיו לא הוי מעשה,אלא אמר רבא שאני עדים זוממין הואיל וישנן בראיה,ת"ר בעל אוב זה המדבר בין הפרקים ומבין אצילי ידיו ידעוני זה המניח עצם ידוע בפיו והוא מדבר מאליו,מיתיבי (ישעיהו כט, ד) והיה כאוב מארץ קולך מאי לאו דמשתעי כי אורחיה לא דסליק ויתיב בין הפרקים ומשתעי,תא שמע (שמואל א כח, יג) ותאמר האשה אל שאול אלהים ראיתי עולים מן הארץ מאי לאו דמשתעי כי אורחיה לא דיתיב בין הפרקים ומשתעי,ת"ר בעל אוב אחד המעלה בזכורו ואחד הנשאל בגולגולת מה בין זה לזה מעלה בזכורו אינו עולה כדרכו ואינו עולה בשבת נשאל בגולגולת עולה כדרכו ועולה בשבת,עולה להיכא סליק הא קמיה מנח אלא אימא עונה כדרכו ועונה בשבת,ואף שאלה זו שאל טורנוסרופוס את ר"ע אמר לו ומה יום מיומים אמר לו ומה גבר מגוברין א"ל דמרי צבי שבת נמי דמרי צבי,א"ל הכי קאמינא לך מי יימר דהאידנא שבתא אמר לו נהר סבטיון יוכיח בעל אוב יוכיח קברו של אביו יוכיח שאין מעלה עשן בשבת אמר לו ביזיתו ביישתו וקיללתו,שואל אוב היינו ודורש אל המתים,דורש למתים כדתניא (דברים יח, יא) ודורש אל המתים זה המרעיב עצמו והולך ולן בבה"ק כדי שתשרה עליו רוח טומאה,וכשהיה ר"ע מגיע למקרא זה היה בוכה ומה המרעיב עצמו כדי שתשרה עליו רוח טומאה שורה עליו רוח טומאה המרעיב עצמו כדי שתשרה עליו רוח טהרה על אחת כמה וכמה אבל מה אעשה שעונותינו גרמו לנו שנאמר (ישעיהו נט, ב) כי אם עונותיכם היו מבדילים ביניכם לבין אלהיכם,אמר רבא אי בעו צדיקי ברו עלמא שנאמר כי עונותיכם היו מבדילים וגו\',רבא ברא גברא שדריה לקמיה דר\' זירא הוה קא משתעי בהדיה ולא הוה קא מהדר ליה אמר ליה מן חבריא את הדר לעפריך,רב חנינא ורב אושעיא הוו יתבי כל מעלי שבתא ועסקי בספר יצירה ומיברו להו עיגלא תילתא ואכלי ליה,תנו רבנן מעונן ר\' שמעון אומר זה המעביר שבעה מיני זכור על העין וחכ"א זה האוחז את העינים ר"ע אומר זה המחשב עתים ושעות ואומר היום יפה לצאת למחר יפה ליקח לימודי ערבי שביעיות חיטין יפות עיקורי קטניות מהיות רעות,תנו רבנן מנחש זה האומר פתו נפלה מפיו מקלו נפלה מידו בנו קורא לו מאחריו עורב קורא לו צבי הפסיקו בדרך נחש מימינו ושועל משמאלו 74a רב פפא אמר במפותה ודברי הכל,אביי אמר ביכול להציל באחד מאבריו ורבי יונתן בן שאול היא דתניא רבי יונתן בן שאול אומר רודף שהיה רודף אחר חבירו להורגו ויכול להצילו באחד מאבריו ולא הציל נהרג עליו,מאי טעמא דרבי יונתן בן שאול דכתיב (שמות כא, כב) וכי ינצו אנשים (יחדו) וגו\' וא"ר אלעזר במצות שבמיתה הכתוב מדבר דכתיב (שמות כא, כג) ואם אסון יהיה ונתתה נפש תחת נפש ואפ"ה אמר רחמנא ולא יהיה אסון ענוש יענש,אי אמרת בשלמא יכול להציל באחד מאבריו לא ניתן להצילו בנפשו היינו דמשכחת לה דיענש כגון שיכול להציל באחד מאבריו,אלא אי אמרת יכול להציל באחד מאבריו נמי ניתן להצילו בנפשו היכי משכחת לה דיענש,דילמא שאני הכא דמיתה לזה ותשלומין לזה,לא שנא דאמר רבא רודף שהיה רודף אחר חבירו ושיבר את הכלים בין של נרדף ובין של כל אדם פטור מאי טעמא מתחייב בנפשו הוא,ונרדף ששיבר את הכלים של רודף פטור של כל אדם חייב של רודף פטור שלא יהא ממונו חביב עליו מגופו של כל אדם חייב שמציל עצמו בממון חבירו,ורודף שהיה רודף אחר רודף להצילו ושיבר את הכלים בין של רודף בין של נרדף בין של כל אדם פטור ולא מן הדין שאם אי אתה אומר כן נמצא אין לך כל אדם שמציל את חבירו מיד הרודף:,אבל הרודף אחר בהמה: תניא רשב"י אומר העובד עבודת כוכבים ניתן להצילו בנפשו מק"ו ומה פגם הדיוט ניתן להצילו בנפשו פגם גבוה לא כל שכן וכי עונשין מן הדין קא סבר עונשין מן הדין,תניא רבי אלעזר ברבי שמעון אומר המחלל את השבת ניתן להצילו בנפשו סבר לה כאבוה דאמר עונשין מן הדין ואתיא שבת בחילול חילול מעבודת כוכבים,א"ר יוחנן משום ר"ש בן יהוצדק נימנו וגמרו בעליית בית נתזה בלוד כל עבירות שבתורה אם אומרין לאדם עבור ואל תהרג יעבור ואל יהרג חוץ מעבודת כוכבים וגילוי עריות ושפיכות דמים,ועבודת כוכבים לא והא תניא א"ר ישמעאל מנין שאם אמרו לו לאדם עבוד עבודת כוכבים ואל תהרג מנין שיעבוד ואל יהרג ת"ל (ויקרא יח, ה) וחי בהם ולא שימות בהם,יכול אפילו בפרהסיא תלמוד לומר (ויקרא כב, לב) ולא תחללו את שם קדשי ונקדשתי,אינהו דאמור כר"א דתניא ר"א אומר (דברים ו, ה) ואהבת את ה\' אלהיך בכל לבבך ובכל נפשך ובכל מאדך אם נאמר בכל נפשך למה נאמר בכל מאדך ואם נאמר בכל מאדך למה נאמר בכל נפשך,אם יש לך אדם שגופו חביב עליו מממונו לכך נאמר בכל נפשך ואם יש לך אדם שממונו חביב עליו מגופו לכך נאמר בכל מאדך,גילוי עריות ושפיכות דמים כדרבי דתניא רבי אומר (דברים כב, כו) כי כאשר יקום איש על רעהו ורצחו נפש כן הדבר הזה וכי מה למדנו מרוצח,מעתה הרי זה בא ללמד ונמצא למד מקיש רוצח לנערה המאורסה מה נערה המאורסה ניתן להצילו בנפשו אף רוצח ניתן להצילו בנפשו,ומקיש נערה המאורסה לרוצח מה רוצח יהרג ואל יעבור אף נערה המאורסה תהרג ואל תעבור,רוצח גופיה מנא לן סברא הוא דההוא דאתא לקמיה דרבה ואמר ליה אמר לי מרי דוראי זיל קטליה לפלניא ואי לא קטלינא לך אמר ליה לקטלוך ולא תיקטול מי יימר דדמא דידך סומק טפי דילמא דמא דהוא גברא סומק טפי,כי אתא רב דימי א"ר יוחנן לא שנו אלא שלא בשעת גזרת המלכות) אבל בשעת גזרת המלכות אפי\' מצוה קלה יהרג ואל יעבור,כי אתא רבין א"ר יוחנן אפי\' שלא בשעת גזרת מלכות לא אמרו אלא בצינעא אבל בפרהסיא אפי\' מצוה קלה יהרג ואל יעבור,מאי מצוה קלה אמר רבא בר רב יצחק אמר רב ' None | 19a and there is a principle that a positive mitzva by itself does not override both a prohibition and a positive mitzva. But as for the ruling that he does not consummate levirate marriage with a widow from betrothal, why not? The positive mitzva to consummate levirate marriage should come and override the prohibition.,The Gemara answers: The first act of intercourse is prohibited by rabbinic decree due to the likelihood of a second act of intercourse. Although the first act of intercourse would fulfill the positive mitzva of consummating levirate marriage, which would override the prohibition against a High Priest’s engaging in intercourse with a widow, any further intercourse would not be in fulfillment of a mitzva, and would not override the prohibition. Therefore, due to the possibility that the High Priest and the yevama would engage in intercourse a second time, the Sages decreed that even the first act is forbidden.,The Gemara comments: This is also taught in a baraita: If the High Priest or one whose yevama is forbidden to him went ahead and engaged in a first act of intercourse with her, he acquired her as a wife, but it is prohibited to retain that woman as a wife for a second act of intercourse.,§ The mishna teaches with regard to the High Priest that if a relative of his died, he does not follow the bier carrying the corpse. The Sages taught in a baraita: The verse concerning the High Priest, which states: “And from the Temple he shall not emerge” (Leviticus 21:12), means: He shall not emerge with them as they escort the bier, but he emerges after them. How so? Once they are concealed from sight by turning onto another street, he is revealed on the street they departed, and when they are revealed, then he is concealed.,The mishna teaches Rabbi Meir’s opinion, that in the manner just described to escort the deceased, the High Priest emerges with them until the entrance of the gate of the city, which is contrasted with Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion that he does not leave the Temple at all. The Gemara comments: Rabbi Yehuda is saying well, and his statement is consistent with the straightforward meaning of the verse: “And from the Temple he shall not emerge” (Leviticus 21:12).,The Gemara responds: Rabbi Meir could have said to you: If so, that you understand the verse so narrowly, he should not go out to his house as well but should be required to stay in the Temple. Rather, this is what it is saying: “And from the Temple hamikdash he shall not emerge” means: From his sanctity mikedushato he shall not emerge by contracting ritual impurity, and since he has a distinctive indicator in that he does not walk together with those accompanying the bier, he will not come to touch the bier and contract impurity.,The Gemara asks: And how would Rabbi Yehuda respond? The Gemara explains: There is still cause for concern that on account of his bitterness due to the death of his loved one, perhaps it will happen that he comes and touches the bier. Therefore, a more restrictive regimen of separation is necessary.,The mishna teaches: And when he consoles others in their mourning when they return from burial, the way of all the people is that they pass by one after another and the mourners stand in a line and are consoled, and the appointed person stands in the middle, between him and the people. The Sages taught in a baraita (Tosefta 4:1) in a more detailed manner: When the High Priest passes by in the line to console others, the deputy High Priest and the former anointed High Priest, who had served temporarily and then stepped down, are on his right. And the head of the patrilineal family appointed over the priestly watch performing the sacrificial rites that day in the Temple; and the mourners; and all the people are on his left. And when he is standing in the line among the other mourners and is consoled by others, the deputy High Priest is on his right, and the head of the patrilineal family and all the people are on his left.,The Gemara infers: But the previously anointed one does not come before him. What is the reason? The High Priest will become distraught. He will think: He is happy about me in my bereaved state. Rav Pappa said: Learn from it, from this baraita, three matters. Learn from it that the deputy High Priest is the same as the appointed person, as the baraita is referring to the deputy High Priest in the same function described by the mishna as the appointed one. And learn from it that the way of consoling in a line is that the mourners stand and all the people pass by and console them. And learn from it that the custom is that the mourners stand to the left of the consolers.,The Sages taught in a baraita: Initially the mourners would stand, and all the people would pass by one after another and console them. And there were two families in Jerusalem who would fight with each other, as this one would say: We pass by first because we are more distinguished and important, and that one would say: We pass by first. Consequently, they decreed that the people should stand and the mourners pass by, and disputes would be avoided.,The Gemara presents a mnemonic for the following discussion: Returned; and walk; and converse.,Rami bar Abba says: Rabbi Yosei returned the matter to its former custom in Tzippori his city, that the mourners would stand and all the people would pass. And Rami bar Abba says: Rabbi Yosei instituted an ordice in Tzippori that a woman should not walk in the market and have her son following behind her; rather, he should walk in front of her, because of an incident that happened in which bandits abducted a child and assaulted the mother when she came searching for him in his place of captivity. And Rami bar Abba says: Rabbi Yosei instituted an ordice in Tzippori that women should converse in the bathroom, because of the restrictions on women being secluded with men. Since the public bathrooms there were outside the city a man might enter to take advantage of a woman, but he would be warded off by the women’s conversation.,Rav Menashya bar Ute says: I asked a question of Rabbi Yoshiya the Great in the cemetery of Huzal, and he said this halakha to me: There is no line for consoling mourners with fewer than ten people, and the mourners are not included in the count. This minimum number of consolers applies whether the mourners stand and all the people pass by, or the mourners pass by and all the people stand.,§ The mishna teaches: And when he is consoled by others in his mourning, all the people say to him: We are your atonement. And he says to them: May you be blessed from Heaven. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: When the High Priest consoles others, what should he say to them? Come and hear an answer from a baraita: And he says: May you be consoled. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances in which he says this? If we say that when others console him in his mourning he says to them: May you be consoled, this does not make sense, because he would be throwing a curse at them by saying that they too will need to be consoled. Rather, it must mean: When he consoles others, he says to them: May you be consoled. Learn from the baraita that this is what he says to console others.,§ The mishna teaches: A king does not judge and is not judged. Rav Yosef says: They taught this halakha only with regard to the kings of Israel, who were violent and disobedient of Torah laws, but with regard to the kings of the house of David, the king judges and is judged, as it is written: “O house of David, so says the Lord: Execute justice in the morning” (Jeremiah 21:12). If they do not judge him, how can he judge? But isn’t it written: “Gather yourselves together, yea, gather together hitkosheshu vakoshu” (Zephaniah 2:1), and Reish Lakish says: This verse teaches a moral principle: Adorn kashet yourself first, and then adorn others, i.e., one who is not subject to judgment may not judge others. Since it is understood from the verse in Jeremiah that kings from the Davidic dynasty can judge others, it is implicit that they can also be judged.,The Gemara asks: But what is the reason that others do not judge the kings of Israel? It is because of an incident that happened, as the slave of Yannai the king killed a person. Shimon ben Shataḥ said to the Sages: Put your eyes on him and let us judge him. They sent word to Yannai: Your slave killed a person. Yannai sent the slave to them. They sent word to Yannai: You also come here, as the verse states with regard to an ox that gored a person to death: “He should be testified against with his owner” (Exodus 21:29). The Torah stated: The owner of the ox should come and stand over his ox.,The Gemara continues to narrate the incident: Yannai came and sat down. Shimon ben Shataḥ said to him: Yannai the king, stand on your feet and witnesses will testify against you. And it is not before us that you are standing, to give us honor, but it is before the One Who spoke and the world came into being that you are standing, as it is stated: “Then both the people, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the Lord, before the priests and the judges that shall be in those days” (Deuteronomy 19:17). Yannai the king said to him: I will not stand when you alone say this to me, but according to what your colleagues say, and if the whole court tells me, I will stand.' 19b Shimon ben Shataḥ turned to his right. The judges forced their faces to the ground out of fear and said nothing. He turned to his left, and they forced their faces to the ground and said nothing. Shimon ben Shataḥ said to them: You are masters of thoughts, enjoying your private thoughts, and not speaking. May the Master of thoughts, God, come and punish you. Immediately, the angel Gabriel came and struck those judges to the ground, and they died. At that moment, when they saw that the Sanhedrin does not have power to force the king to heed its instructions, the Sages said: A king does not judge others and others do not judge him, and he does not testify and others do not testify concerning him, due to the danger of the matter.,The mishna teaches that the king does not perform ḥalitza with his brother’s widow and his brother does not perform ḥalitza with his wife, and Rabbi Yehuda says that he may do so if he wishes. The Gemara challenges Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion: Is that so? But doesn’t Rav Ashi say: Even according to the one who says that with regard to a Nasi who relinquished the honor due him, his honor is relinquished, nevertheless, with regard to a king who relinquished the honor due him, his honor is not relinquished, as it is stated: “You shall set a king over you” (Deuteronomy 17:15), meaning that his fear should be upon you. The preservation of a king’s honor is mandated by the Torah. How could Rabbi Yehuda allow him to waive it? The Gemara answers: A mitzva is different; a king is not disgraced if he relinquishes his honor to perform a mitzva.,The mishna teaches: And no one may marry 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\xa0Samuel 12:8). It is taught in a baraita: The Sages said to Rabbi Yehuda: The meaning of the verse is not that David married Saul’s widows, but that he married women appropriate for him from the house of the king. And who are they? Merab and Michal, the daughters of Saul.,The Gemara relates a discussion about David’s marriage to Merab and Michal from a baraita (Tosefta, Sota 11:9): Rabbi Yosei’s students asked him: How did David marry two sisters while they were both alive? Rabbi Yosei said to them: He married Michal only after the death of Merab, which is permitted. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa says a different explanation: His betrothal to Merab was in error and therefore void from the outset, and so Michal was permitted to him. This is as it is stated in the words of King David to Saul’s son Ish-bosheth: “Deliver me my wife Michal, whom I betrothed to me for one hundred foreskins of the Philistines” (II\xa0Samuel 3:14).,The Gemara asks: What is the biblical derivation here? How does Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa learn from this verse that King David’s betrothal to Merab was in error? Rav Pappa says: In the verse, David indicates: Michal is my wife but Merab is not my wife.,The Gemara asks: What caused the betrothal between David and Merab to be a mistaken betrothal? The Gemara responds: As it is written about Israel’s war against the Philistines and Goliath: “And it shall be that the man who kills him, the king will enrich him with great riches and will give him his daughter, and make his father’s house free in Israel” (I\xa0Samuel 17:25). David went and killed Goliath. King Saul said to him: You have a loan in my possession, as I owe you the great wealth that I promised, though David had not given him an actual monetary loan. And the halakha is that with regard to one who betroths a woman by forgiving a loan, she is not betrothed, and therefore David’s betrothal of Merab did not take effect.,Saul went and gave Merab 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, that she was given to Adriel the Meholathite as a wife” (I\xa0Samuel 18:19). Saul said to David: If you want me to give you Michal, go bring me one hundred foreskins of the Philistines (see I\xa0Samuel 18:25–27). David went and brought Saul two hundred foreskins. Saul said to him: Even though you brought the foreskins, the betrothal is not valid, as you, David, have a loan and one peruta in my 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: Saul reasoned that in the case of one who betroths a woman by forgiving a loan and giving her one peruta, his mind is focused on the loan and not on the additional peruta, and therefore the betrothal is not valid. And David reasoned that in the case of one who betroths a woman by forgiving a loan and giving her one peruta, his mind is focused on the peruta and therefore the betrothal is valid.,And if you wish, say instead: Everyone reasons that in the case of one who betroths a woman by forgiving a loan and giving her one peruta, his mind is focused on the peruta. Saul reasoned that foreskins of Philistines are not fit for any purpose and as such are worth not even one peruta, and that consequently the betrothal did not take effect. And David reasoned that they are fit for dogs and cats as food and as such are worth at least one peruta, and therefore the betrothal takes effect.,The Gemara asks: And according to Rabbi Yosei, who explains that David married Michal after the death of Merab, with regard to this verse: “Deliver me my wife Michal” (II\xa0Samuel 3:14), what does he derive from it? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yosei conforms to his standard line of reasoning, as it is taught in a baraita (Tosefta, Sota 11:8): Rabbi Yosei would derive meaning from mixed verses that seem contradictory.,The Tosefta continues. 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, daughter of Saul, whom she bore to Adriel, son of Barzillai the Meholathite” (II\xa0Samuel 21:8). But did Saul give Michal 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” (I\xa0Samuel 25:44)?,The Tosefta continues: The first verse does not mean, then, that Michal married Adriel. Rather, the verse compares Merab’s betrothal to Adriel to Michal’s betrothal to Palti: Just as Michal’s betrothal to Palti was effected in transgression, according to all opinions, since she was already married to David, so, too, Merab’s betrothal to Adriel was effected in transgression, since according to halakha she was betrothed to David.,The Gemara asks: And according to Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa as well, isn’t it written: “And the five sons of Michal, daughter of Saul, whom she bore to Adriel” (II\xa0Samuel 21:8). Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa could have said to you to understand it this way: And did Michal give birth to these children? But didn’t Merab give birth to them for Adriel? Rather, Merab gave birth to them and died, and Michal raised them in her house. Therefore, the children were called by her name, to teach you that with regard to anyone who raises an orphan in his house, the verse ascribes him credit as if he gave birth to him.,The Gemara presents a mnemonic for the following discussion: Ḥanina called; Yoḥa and his wife; Elazar and redemption; and Shmuel in my studies. Rabbi Ḥanina says: Proof for the aforementioned statement can be derived from here: “And the neighbors gave him a name, saying: There is a son born to Naomi” (Ruth 4:17). And did Naomi give birth to the son? But didn’t Ruth give birth to him? Rather, Ruth gave birth and Naomi raised him. Therefore, he was called by her name: “A son born to Naomi.”,Rabbi Yoḥa says: Proof for the aforementioned statement can be derived from here: “And his wife Hajehudijah gave birth to Jered the father of Gedor, and Heber the father of Soco, and Jekuthiel the father of Zanoah, and these are the sons of Bithiah, daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered took” (I\xa0Chronicles 4:18). Mered is Caleb, and why was his name called Mered? Because |
|
