| 1. Septuagint, Deuteronomy, None (th cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 90 |
| 2. Septuagint, Leviticus, None (th cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 125 |
3. Hebrew Bible, Hosea, 4.4, 14.5 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 103, 106| 4.4. "אַךְ אִישׁ אַל־יָרֵב וְאַל־יוֹכַח אִישׁ וְעַמְּךָ כִּמְרִיבֵי כֹהֵן׃", 14.5. "אֶרְפָּא מְשׁוּבָתָם אֹהֲבֵם נְדָבָה כִּי שָׁב אַפִּי מִמֶּנּוּ׃", | 4.4. "Yet let no man strive, neither let any man reprove; For thy people are as they that strive with the priest.", 14.5. "I will heal their backsliding, I will love them freely; For Mine anger is turned away from him.", |
|
4. Hebrew Bible, Jonah, 1.7 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 186| 1.7. "וַיֹּאמְרוּ אִישׁ אֶל־רֵעֵהוּ לְכוּ וְנַפִּילָה גוֹרָלוֹת וְנֵדְעָה בְּשֶׁלְּמִי הָרָעָה הַזֹּאת לָנוּ וַיַּפִּלוּ גּוֹרָלוֹת וַיִּפֹּל הַגּוֹרָל עַל־יוֹנָה׃", | 1.7. "And they said every one to his fellow: ‘Come, and let us cast lots, that we may know for whose cause this evil is upon us.’ So they cast lots, and the lot fell upon Jonah.", |
|
5. Hebrew Bible, Job, 4.12, 15.15, 19.18, 20.23, 25.5, 35.4, 40.2 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 51, 67, 101, 103, 124, 125| 4.12. "וְאֵלַי דָּבָר יְגֻנָּב וַתִּקַּח אָזְנִי שֵׁמֶץ מֶנְהוּ׃", 15.15. "הֵן בקדשו [בִּקְדֹשָׁיו] לֹא יַאֲמִין וְשָׁמַיִם לֹא־זַכּוּ בְעֵינָיו׃", 19.18. "גַּם־עֲוִילִים מָאֲסוּ בִי אָקוּמָה וַיְדַבְּרוּ־בִי׃", 20.23. "יְהִי לְמַלֵּא בִטְנוֹ יְשַׁלַּח־בּוֹ חֲרוֹן אַפּוֹ וְיַמְטֵר עָלֵימוֹ בִּלְחוּמוֹ׃", 25.5. "הֵן עַד־יָרֵחַ וְלֹא יַאֲהִיל וְכוֹכָבִים לֹא־זַכּוּ בְעֵינָיו׃", 35.4. "אֲנִי אֲשִׁיבְךָ מִלִּין וְאֶת־רֵעֶיךָ עִמָּךְ׃", 40.2. "כִּי־בוּל הָרִים יִשְׂאוּ־לוֹ וְכָל־חַיַּת הַשָּׂדֶה יְשַׂחֲקוּ־שָׁם׃", 40.2. "הֲרֹב עִם־שַׁדַּי יִסּוֹר מוֹכִיחַ אֱלוֹהַּ יַעֲנֶנָּה׃", | 4.12. "Now a word was secretly brought to me, And mine ear received a whisper thereof.", 15.15. "Behold, He putteth no trust in His holy ones; Yea, the heavens are not clean in His sight.", 19.18. "Even urchins despised me; If I arise, they speak against me.", 20.23. "It shall be for the filling of his belly; He shall cast the fierceness of His wrath upon him, And shall cause it to rain upon him into his flesh.", 25.5. "Behold, even the moon hath no brightness, And the stars are not pure in His sight;", 35.4. "I will give thee answer, And thy companions with thee.", 40.2. "Shall he that reproveth contend with the Almighty? He that argueth with God, let him answer it.", |
|
6. Hebrew Bible, Micah, 6.8 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 106| 6.8. "הִגִּיד לְךָ אָדָם מַה־טּוֹב וּמָה־יְהוָה דּוֹרֵשׁ מִמְּךָ כִּי אִם־עֲשׂוֹת מִשְׁפָּט וְאַהֲבַת חֶסֶד וְהַצְנֵעַ לֶכֶת עִם־אֱלֹהֶיךָ׃", | 6.8. "It hath been told thee, O man, what is good, And what the LORD doth require of thee: Only to do justly, and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with thy God.", |
|
7. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 2.9, 6.4, 14.18-14.20, 21.23, 21.25, 31.2, 31.13, 42.20 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical •biblical nature, see also deuteronomy, spirit of the hebrew bible Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 175; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66, 70, 103, 176, 207; Schwartz (2008), 2 Maccabees, 63| 2.9. "וַיַּצְמַח יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים מִן־הָאֲדָמָה כָּל־עֵץ נֶחְמָד לְמַרְאֶה וְטוֹב לְמַאֲכָל וְעֵץ הַחַיִּים בְּתוֹךְ הַגָּן וְעֵץ הַדַּעַת טוֹב וָרָע׃", 6.4. "הַנְּפִלִים הָיוּ בָאָרֶץ בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם וְגַם אַחֲרֵי־כֵן אֲשֶׁר יָבֹאוּ בְּנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים אֶל־בְּנוֹת הָאָדָם וְיָלְדוּ לָהֶם הֵמָּה הַגִּבֹּרִים אֲשֶׁר מֵעוֹלָם אַנְשֵׁי הַשֵּׁם׃", 14.18. "וּמַלְכִּי־צֶדֶק מֶלֶךְ שָׁלֵם הוֹצִיא לֶחֶם וָיָיִן וְהוּא כֹהֵן לְאֵל עֶלְיוֹן׃", 14.19. "וַיְבָרְכֵהוּ וַיֹּאמַר בָּרוּךְ אַבְרָם לְאֵל עֶלְיוֹן קֹנֵה שָׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ׃", 21.23. "וְעַתָּה הִשָּׁבְעָה לִּי בֵאלֹהִים הֵנָּה אִם־תִּשְׁקֹר לִי וּלְנִינִי וּלְנֶכְדִּי כַּחֶסֶד אֲשֶׁר־עָשִׂיתִי עִמְּךָ תַּעֲשֶׂה עִמָּדִי וְעִם־הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר־גַּרְתָּה בָּהּ׃", 21.25. "וְהוֹכִחַ אַבְרָהָם אֶת־אֲבִימֶלֶךְ עַל־אֹדוֹת בְּאֵר הַמַּיִם אֲשֶׁר גָּזְלוּ עַבְדֵי אֲבִימֶלֶךְ׃", 31.2. "וַיַּרְא יַעֲקֹב אֶת־פְּנֵי לָבָן וְהִנֵּה אֵינֶנּוּ עִמּוֹ כִּתְמוֹל שִׁלְשׁוֹם׃", 31.2. "וַיִּגְנֹב יַעֲקֹב אֶת־לֵב לָבָן הָאֲרַמִּי עַל־בְּלִי הִגִּיד לוֹ כִּי בֹרֵחַ הוּא׃", 31.13. "אָנֹכִי הָאֵל בֵּית־אֵל אֲשֶׁר מָשַׁחְתָּ שָּׁם מַצֵּבָה אֲשֶׁר נָדַרְתָּ לִּי שָׁם נֶדֶר עַתָּה קוּם צֵא מִן־הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת וְשׁוּב אֶל־אֶרֶץ מוֹלַדְתֶּךָ׃", | 2.9. "And out of the ground made the LORD God to grow every tree that is pleasant to the sight, and good for food; the tree of life also in the midst of the garden, and the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.", 6.4. "The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of nobles came in unto the daughters of men, and they bore children to them; the same were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown.", 14.18. "And Melchizedek king of Salem brought forth bread and wine; and he was priest of God the Most High.", 14.19. "And he blessed him, and said: ‘Blessed be Abram of God Most High, Maker of heaven and earth;", 14.20. "and blessed be God the Most High, who hath delivered thine enemies into thy hand.’ And he gave him a tenth of all.", 21.23. "Now therefore swear unto me here by God that thou wilt not deal falsely with me, nor with my son, nor with my son’s son; but according to the kindness that I have done unto thee, thou shalt do unto me, and to the land wherein thou hast sojourned.’", 21.25. "And Abraham reproved Abimelech because of the well of water, which Abimelech’s servants had violently taken away.", 31.2. "And Jacob beheld the countece of Laban, and, behold, it was not toward him as beforetime.", 31.13. "I am the God of Beth-el, where thou didst anoint a pillar, where thou didst vow a vow unto Me. Now arise, get thee out from this land, and return unto the land of thy nativity.’", 42.20. "and bring your youngest brother unto me; so shall your words be verified, and ye shall not die.’ And they did so.", |
|
8. Hebrew Bible, Exodus, 5.11, 9.4, 18.21, 21.29, 22.6, 23.7, 27.20, 30.14 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66, 67, 81, 86, 125| 5.11. "אַתֶּם לְכוּ קְחוּ לָכֶם תֶּבֶן מֵאֲשֶׁר תִּמְצָאוּ כִּי אֵין נִגְרָע מֵעֲבֹדַתְכֶם דָּבָר׃", 9.4. "וְהִפְלָה יְהוָה בֵּין מִקְנֵה יִשְׂרָאֵל וּבֵין מִקְנֵה מִצְרָיִם וְלֹא יָמוּת מִכָּל־לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל דָּבָר׃", 18.21. "וְאַתָּה תֶחֱזֶה מִכָּל־הָעָם אַנְשֵׁי־חַיִל יִרְאֵי אֱלֹהִים אַנְשֵׁי אֱמֶת שֹׂנְאֵי בָצַע וְשַׂמְתָּ עֲלֵהֶם שָׂרֵי אֲלָפִים שָׂרֵי מֵאוֹת שָׂרֵי חֲמִשִּׁים וְשָׂרֵי עֲשָׂרֹת׃", 21.29. "וְאִם שׁוֹר נַגָּח הוּא מִתְּמֹל שִׁלְשֹׁם וְהוּעַד בִּבְעָלָיו וְלֹא יִשְׁמְרֶנּוּ וְהֵמִית אִישׁ אוֹ אִשָּׁה הַשּׁוֹר יִסָּקֵל וְגַם־בְּעָלָיו יוּמָת׃", 22.6. "כִּי־יִתֵּן אִישׁ אֶל־רֵעֵהוּ כֶּסֶף אוֹ־כֵלִים לִשְׁמֹר וְגֻנַּב מִבֵּית הָאִישׁ אִם־יִמָּצֵא הַגַּנָּב יְשַׁלֵּם שְׁנָיִם׃", 23.7. "מִדְּבַר־שֶׁקֶר תִּרְחָק וְנָקִי וְצַדִּיק אַל־תַּהֲרֹג כִּי לֹא־אַצְדִּיק רָשָׁע׃", 30.14. "כֹּל הָעֹבֵר עַל־הַפְּקֻדִים מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמָעְלָה יִתֵּן תְּרוּמַת יְהוָה׃", | 5.11. "Go yourselves, get you straw where ye can find it; for nought of your work shall be diminished.’", 9.4. "And the LORD shall make a division between the cattle of Israel and the cattle of Egypt; and there shall nothing die of all that belongeth to the children of Israel.’", 18.21. "Moreover thou shalt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating unjust gain; and place such over them, to be rulers of thousands, rulers of hundreds, rulers of fifties, and rulers of tens.", 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.", 22.6. "If a man deliver unto his neighbour money or stuff to keep, and it be stolen out of the man’s house; if the thief be found, he shall pay double.", 23.7. "Keep thee far from a false matter; and the innocent and righteous slay thou not; for I will not justify the wicked.", 27.20. "And thou shalt command the children of Israel, that they bring unto thee pure olive oil beaten for the light, to cause a lamp to burn continually.", 30.14. "Every one that passeth among them that are numbered, from twenty years old and upward, shall give the offering of the LORD.", |
|
9. Hebrew Bible, Esther, 3.3, 3.7, 6.10, 9.13, 9.27 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 65, 67, 85, 101| 3.3. "וַיֹּאמְרוּ עַבְדֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ אֲשֶׁר־בְּשַׁעַר הַמֶּלֶךְ לְמָרְדֳּכָי מַדּוּעַ אַתָּה עוֹבֵר אֵת מִצְוַת הַמֶּלֶךְ׃", 3.7. "בַּחֹדֶשׁ הָרִאשׁוֹן הוּא־חֹדֶשׁ נִיסָן בִּשְׁנַת שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה לַמֶּלֶךְ אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ הִפִּיל פּוּר הוּא הַגּוֹרָל לִפְנֵי הָמָן מִיּוֹם לְיוֹם וּמֵחֹדֶשׁ לְחֹדֶשׁ שְׁנֵים־עָשָׂר הוּא־חֹדֶשׁ אֲדָר׃", 9.13. "וַתֹּאמֶר אֶסְתֵּר אִם־עַל־הַמֶּלֶךְ טוֹב יִנָּתֵן גַּם־מָחָר לַיְּהוּדִים אֲשֶׁר בְּשׁוּשָׁן לַעֲשׂוֹת כְּדָת הַיּוֹם וְאֵת עֲשֶׂרֶת בְּנֵי־הָמָן יִתְלוּ עַל־הָעֵץ׃", 9.27. "קִיְּמוּ וקבל [וְקִבְּלוּ] הַיְּהוּדִים עֲלֵיהֶם וְעַל־זַרְעָם וְעַל כָּל־הַנִּלְוִים עֲלֵיהֶם וְלֹא יַעֲבוֹר לִהְיוֹת עֹשִׂים אֵת שְׁנֵי הַיָּמִים הָאֵלֶּה כִּכְתָבָם וְכִזְמַנָּם בְּכָל־שָׁנָה וְשָׁנָה׃", | 3.3. "Then the king’s servants, that were in the king’s gate, said unto Mordecai: ‘Why transgressest thou the king’s commandment?’", 3.7. "In the first month, which is the month Nisan, in the twelfth year of king Ahasuerus, they cast pur, that is, the lot, before Haman from day to day, and from month to month, to the twelfth month, which is the month Adar.", 6.10. "Then the king said to Haman: ‘Make haste, and take the apparel and the horse, as thou hast said, and do even so to Mordecai the Jew, that sitteth at the king’s gate; let nothing fail of all that thou hast spoken.’", 9.13. "Then said Esther: ‘If it please the king, let it be granted to the Jews that are in Shushan to do to-morrow also according unto this day’s decree, and let Haman’s ten sons be hanged upon the gallows.’", 9.27. "the Jews ordained, and took upon them, and upon their seed, and upon all such as joined themselves unto them, so as it should not fail, that they would keep these two days according to the writing thereof, and according to the appointed time thereof, every year;", |
|
10. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 1.13, 1.39, 6.5, 9.27, 10.12, 10.16, 11.13, 16.18, 17.2, 17.6-17.7, 19.15-19.16, 21.23, 22.1-22.3, 22.28, 24.15, 26.13, 32.35 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 48, 52, 65, 67, 70, 71, 82, 85, 86, 90, 103, 107, 117, 124, 125, 176, 208| 1.13. "הָבוּ לָכֶם אֲנָשִׁים חֲכָמִים וּנְבֹנִים וִידֻעִים לְשִׁבְטֵיכֶם וַאֲשִׂימֵם בְּרָאשֵׁיכֶם׃", 1.39. "וְטַפְּכֶם אֲשֶׁר אֲמַרְתֶּם לָבַז יִהְיֶה וּבְנֵיכֶם אֲשֶׁר לֹא־יָדְעוּ הַיּוֹם טוֹב וָרָע הֵמָּה יָבֹאוּ שָׁמָּה וְלָהֶם אֶתְּנֶנָּה וְהֵם יִירָשׁוּהָּ׃", 6.5. "וְאָהַבְתָּ אֵת יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכָל־לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל־נַפְשְׁךָ וּבְכָל־מְאֹדֶךָ׃", 9.27. "זְכֹר לַעֲבָדֶיךָ לְאַבְרָהָם לְיִצְחָק וּלְיַעֲקֹב אַל־תֵּפֶן אֶל־קְשִׁי הָעָם הַזֶּה וְאֶל־רִשְׁעוֹ וְאֶל־חַטָּאתוֹ׃", 10.12. "וְעַתָּה יִשְׂרָאֵל מָה יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ שֹׁאֵל מֵעִמָּךְ כִּי אִם־לְיִרְאָה אֶת־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לָלֶכֶת בְּכָל־דְּרָכָיו וּלְאַהֲבָה אֹתוֹ וְלַעֲבֹד אֶת־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכָל־לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל־נַפְשֶׁךָ׃", 10.16. "וּמַלְתֶּם אֵת עָרְלַת לְבַבְכֶם וְעָרְפְּכֶם לֹא תַקְשׁוּ עוֹד׃", 11.13. "וְהָיָה אִם־שָׁמֹעַ תִּשְׁמְעוּ אֶל־מִצְוֺתַי אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוֶּה אֶתְכֶם הַיּוֹם לְאַהֲבָה אֶת־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם וּלְעָבְדוֹ בְּכָל־לְבַבְכֶם וּבְכָל־נַפְשְׁכֶם׃", 16.18. "שֹׁפְטִים וְשֹׁטְרִים תִּתֶּן־לְךָ בְּכָל־שְׁעָרֶיךָ אֲשֶׁר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לְךָ לִשְׁבָטֶיךָ וְשָׁפְטוּ אֶת־הָעָם מִשְׁפַּט־צֶדֶק׃", 17.2. "לְבִלְתִּי רוּם־לְבָבוֹ מֵאֶחָיו וּלְבִלְתִּי סוּר מִן־הַמִּצְוָה יָמִין וּשְׂמֹאול לְמַעַן יַאֲרִיךְ יָמִים עַל־מַמְלַכְתּוֹ הוּא וּבָנָיו בְּקֶרֶב יִשְׂרָאֵל׃", 17.2. "כִּי־יִמָּצֵא בְקִרְבְּךָ בְּאַחַד שְׁעָרֶיךָ אֲשֶׁר־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לָךְ אִישׁ אוֹ־אִשָּׁה אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשֶׂה אֶת־הָרַע בְּעֵינֵי יְהוָה־אֱלֹהֶיךָ לַעֲבֹר בְּרִיתוֹ׃", 17.6. "עַל־פִּי שְׁנַיִם עֵדִים אוֹ שְׁלֹשָׁה עֵדִים יוּמַת הַמֵּת לֹא יוּמַת עַל־פִּי עֵד אֶחָד׃", 17.7. "יַד הָעֵדִים תִּהְיֶה־בּוֹ בָרִאשֹׁנָה לַהֲמִיתוֹ וְיַד כָּל־הָעָם בָּאַחֲרֹנָה וּבִעַרְתָּ הָרָע מִקִּרְבֶּךָ׃", 19.15. "לֹא־יָקוּם עֵד אֶחָד בְּאִישׁ לְכָל־עָוֺן וּלְכָל־חַטָּאת בְּכָל־חֵטְא אֲשֶׁר יֶחֱטָא עַל־פִּי שְׁנֵי עֵדִים אוֹ עַל־פִּי שְׁלֹשָׁה־עֵדִים יָקוּם דָּבָר׃", 19.16. "כִּי־יָקוּם עֵד־חָמָס בְּאִישׁ לַעֲנוֹת בּוֹ סָרָה׃", 21.23. "לֹא־תָלִין נִבְלָתוֹ עַל־הָעֵץ כִּי־קָבוֹר תִּקְבְּרֶנּוּ בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא כִּי־קִלְלַת אֱלֹהִים תָּלוּי וְלֹא תְטַמֵּא אֶת־אַדְמָתְךָ אֲשֶׁר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לְךָ נַחֲלָה׃", 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־לֹא קָרוֹב אָחִיךָ אֵלֶיךָ וְלֹא יְדַעְתּוֹ וַאֲסַפְתּוֹ אֶל־תּוֹךְ בֵּיתֶךָ וְהָיָה עִמְּךָ עַד דְּרֹשׁ אָחִיךָ אֹתוֹ וַהֲשֵׁבֹתוֹ לוֹ׃", 22.2. "וְאִם־אֱמֶת הָיָה הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה לֹא־נִמְצְאוּ בְתוּלִים לנער [לַנַּעֲרָה׃]", 22.3. "וְכֵן תַּעֲשֶׂה לַחֲמֹרוֹ וְכֵן תַּעֲשֶׂה לְשִׂמְלָתוֹ וְכֵן תַּעֲשֶׂה לְכָל־אֲבֵדַת אָחִיךָ אֲשֶׁר־תֹּאבַד מִמֶּנּוּ וּמְצָאתָהּ לֹא תוּכַל לְהִתְעַלֵּם׃", 22.28. "כִּי־יִמְצָא אִישׁ נער [נַעֲרָה] בְתוּלָה אֲשֶׁר לֹא־אֹרָשָׂה וּתְפָשָׂהּ וְשָׁכַב עִמָּהּ וְנִמְצָאוּ׃", 24.15. "בְּיוֹמוֹ תִתֵּן שְׂכָרוֹ וְלֹא־תָבוֹא עָלָיו הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ כִּי עָנִי הוּא וְאֵלָיו הוּא נֹשֵׂא אֶת־נַפְשׁוֹ וְלֹא־יִקְרָא עָלֶיךָ אֶל־יְהוָה וְהָיָה בְךָ חֵטְא׃", 26.13. "וְאָמַרְתָּ לִפְנֵי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בִּעַרְתִּי הַקֹּדֶשׁ מִן־הַבַּיִת וְגַם נְתַתִּיו לַלֵּוִי וְלַגֵּר לַיָּתוֹם וְלָאַלְמָנָה כְּכָל־מִצְוָתְךָ אֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתָנִי לֹא־עָבַרְתִּי מִמִּצְוֺתֶיךָ וְלֹא שָׁכָחְתִּי׃", 32.35. "לִי נָקָם וְשִׁלֵּם לְעֵת תָּמוּט רַגְלָם כִּי קָרוֹב יוֹם אֵידָם וְחָשׁ עֲתִדֹת לָמוֹ׃", | 1.13. "Get you, from each one of your tribes, wise men, and understanding, and full of knowledge, and I will make them heads over you.’", 1.39. "Moreover your little ones, that ye said should be a prey, and your children, that this day have no knowledge of good or evil, they shall go in thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it.", 6.5. "And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.", 9.27. "Remember Thy servants, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob; look not unto the stubbornness of this people, nor to their wickedness, nor to their sin;", 10.12. "And now, Israel, what doth the LORD thy God require of thee, but to fear the LORD thy God, to walk in all His ways, and to love Him, and to serve the LORD thy God with all thy heart and with all thy soul;", 10.16. "Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked.", 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,", 16.18. "Judges and officers shalt thou make thee in all thy gates, which the LORD thy God giveth thee, tribe by tribe; and they shall judge the people with righteous judgment.", 17.2. "If there be found in the midst of thee, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that doeth that which is evil in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing His covet,", 17.6. "At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is to die be put to death; at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.", 17.7. "The hand of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterward the hand of all the people. So thou shalt put away the evil from the midst of thee.", 19.15. "One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth; at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall a matter be establishment", 19.16. "If an unrighteous witness rise up against any man to bear perverted witness against him;", 21.23. "his body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but thou shalt surely bury him the same day; for he that is hanged is a reproach unto God; that thou defile not thy land which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance.", 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.", 22.28. "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;", 24.15. "In the same day thou shalt give him his hire, neither shall the sun go down upon it; for he is poor, and setteth his heart upon it: lest he cry against thee unto the LORD and it be sin in thee.", 26.13. "then thou shalt say before the LORD thy God: ‘I have put away the hallowed things out of my house, and also have given them unto the Levite, and unto the stranger, to the fatherless, and to the widow, according to all Thy commandment which Thou hast commanded me; I have not transgressed any of Thy commandments, neither have I forgotten them.", 32.35. "Vengeance is Mine, and recompense, Against the time when their foot shall slip; For the day of their calamity is at hand, And the things that are to come upon them shall make haste.", |
|
11. Hebrew Bible, Nahum, 1.2 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 90| 1.2. "אֵל קַנּוֹא וְנֹקֵם יְהוָה נֹקֵם יְהוָה וּבַעַל חֵמָה נֹקֵם יְהוָה לְצָרָיו וְנוֹטֵר הוּא לְאֹיְבָיו׃", | 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.", |
|
12. Hebrew Bible, Leviticus, 5.1, 5.4, 5.20-5.26, 15.18, 18.19, 19.16-19.18, 25.30, 25.52 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical •hebrew language, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 70, 81, 85, 86, 90, 101, 102, 117, 125, 130, 176, 178, 186; Zawanowska and Wilk (2022), The Character of David in Judaism, Christianity and Islam: Warrior, Poet, Prophet and King, 444| 5.1. "וְנֶפֶשׁ כִּי־תֶחֱטָא וְשָׁמְעָה קוֹל אָלָה וְהוּא עֵד אוֹ רָאָה אוֹ יָדָע אִם־לוֹא יַגִּיד וְנָשָׂא עֲוֺנוֹ׃", 5.1. "וְאֶת־הַשֵּׁנִי יַעֲשֶׂה עֹלָה כַּמִּשְׁפָּט וְכִפֶּר עָלָיו הַכֹּהֵן מֵחַטָּאתוֹ אֲשֶׁר־חָטָא וְנִסְלַח לוֹ׃", 5.4. "אוֹ נֶפֶשׁ כִּי תִשָּׁבַע לְבַטֵּא בִשְׂפָתַיִם לְהָרַע אוֹ לְהֵיטִיב לְכֹל אֲשֶׁר יְבַטֵּא הָאָדָם בִּשְׁבֻעָה וְנֶעְלַם מִמֶּנּוּ וְהוּא־יָדַע וְאָשֵׁם לְאַחַת מֵאֵלֶּה׃", 5.21. "נֶפֶשׁ כִּי תֶחֱטָא וּמָעֲלָה מַעַל בַּיהוָה וְכִחֵשׁ בַּעֲמִיתוֹ בְּפִקָּדוֹן אוֹ־בִתְשׂוּמֶת יָד אוֹ בְגָזֵל אוֹ עָשַׁק אֶת־עֲמִיתוֹ׃", 5.22. "אוֹ־מָצָא אֲבֵדָה וְכִחֶשׁ בָּהּ וְנִשְׁבַּע עַל־שָׁקֶר עַל־אַחַת מִכֹּל אֲשֶׁר־יַעֲשֶׂה הָאָדָם לַחֲטֹא בָהֵנָּה׃", 5.23. "וְהָיָה כִּי־יֶחֱטָא וְאָשֵׁם וְהֵשִׁיב אֶת־הַגְּזֵלָה אֲשֶׁר גָּזָל אוֹ אֶת־הָעֹשֶׁק אֲשֶׁר עָשָׁק אוֹ אֶת־הַפִּקָּדוֹן אֲשֶׁר הָפְקַד אִתּוֹ אוֹ אֶת־הָאֲבֵדָה אֲשֶׁר מָצָא׃", 5.24. "אוֹ מִכֹּל אֲשֶׁר־יִשָּׁבַע עָלָיו לַשֶּׁקֶר וְשִׁלַּם אֹתוֹ בְּרֹאשׁוֹ וַחֲמִשִׁתָיו יֹסֵף עָלָיו לַאֲשֶׁר הוּא לוֹ יִתְּנֶנּוּ בְּיוֹם אַשְׁמָתוֹ׃", 5.25. "וְאֶת־אֲשָׁמוֹ יָבִיא לַיהוָה אַיִל תָּמִים מִן־הַצֹּאן בְּעֶרְכְּךָ לְאָשָׁם אֶל־הַכֹּהֵן׃", 5.26. "וְכִפֶּר עָלָיו הַכֹּהֵן לִפְנֵי יְהוָה וְנִסְלַח לוֹ עַל־אַחַת מִכֹּל אֲשֶׁר־יַעֲשֶׂה לְאַשְׁמָה בָהּ׃", 15.18. "וְאִשָּׁה אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁכַּב אִישׁ אֹתָהּ שִׁכְבַת־זָרַע וְרָחֲצוּ בַמַּיִם וְטָמְאוּ עַד־הָעָרֶב׃", 18.19. "וְאֶל־אִשָּׁה בְּנִדַּת טֻמְאָתָהּ לֹא תִקְרַב לְגַלּוֹת עֶרְוָתָהּ׃", 19.16. "לֹא־תֵלֵךְ רָכִיל בְּעַמֶּיךָ לֹא תַעֲמֹד עַל־דַּם רֵעֶךָ אֲנִי יְהוָה׃", 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׃", 25.52. "וְאִם־מְעַט נִשְׁאַר בַּשָּׁנִים עַד־שְׁנַת הַיֹּבֵל וְחִשַּׁב־לוֹ כְּפִי שָׁנָיו יָשִׁיב אֶת־גְּאֻלָּתוֹ׃", | 5.1. "And if any one sin, in that he heareth the voice of adjuration, he being a witness, whether he hath seen or known, if he do not utter it, then he shall bear his iniquity;", 5.4. "or if any one swear clearly with his lips to do evil, or to do good, whatsoever it be that a man shall utter clearly with an oath, and it be hid from him; and, when he knoweth of it, be guilty in one of these things;", 5.20. "And the LORD spoke unto Moses, saying:", 5.21. "If any one sin, and commit a trespass against the LORD, and deal falsely with his neighbour in a matter of deposit, or of pledge, or of robbery, or have oppressed his neighbour;", 5.22. "or have found that which was lost, and deal falsely therein, and swear to a lie; in any of all these that a man doeth, sinning therein;", 5.23. "then it shall be, if he hath sinned, and is guilty, that he shall restore that which he took by robbery, or the thing which he hath gotten by oppression, or the deposit which was deposited with him, or the lost thing which he found,", 5.24. "or any thing about which he hath sworn falsely, he shall even restore it in full, and shall add the fifth part more thereto; unto him to whom it appertaineth shall he give it, in the day of his being guilty.", 5.25. "And he shall bring his forfeit unto the LORD, a ram without blemish out of the flock, according to thy valuation, for a guilt-offering, unto the priest.", 5.26. "And the priest shall make atonement for him before the LORD, and he shall be forgiven, concerning whatsoever he doeth so as to be guilty thereby.", 15.18. "The woman also with whom a man shall lie carnally, they shall both bathe themselves in water, and be unclean until the even.", 18.19. "And thou shalt not approach unto a woman to uncover her nakedness, as long as she is impure by her uncleanness.", 19.16. "Thou shalt not go up and down as a talebearer among thy people; neither shalt thou stand idly by the blood of thy neighbour: I am the LORD.", 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.", 25.30. "And if it be not redeemed within the space of a full year, then the house that is in the walled city shall be made sure in perpetuity to him that bought it, throughout his generations; it shall not go out in the jubilee.", 25.52. "And if there remain but few years unto the year of jubilee, then he shall reckon with him; according unto his years shall he give back the price of his redemption.", |
|
13. Hebrew Bible, Numbers, 1.3, 4.3, 4.23, 4.30, 4.35, 4.39, 4.47, 5.6, 5.7, 5.8, 5.13, 5.21, 8.14, 9.15-10.34, 12.1, 12.8, 16.2, 16.15, 19.9, 19.13, 19.20, 19.21, 21.5, 21.7, 22, 23, 23.22, 24, 30.5, 30.12, 30.15, 30.16, 31.17, 31.23, 35.30 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 82| 5.13. "וְשָׁכַב אִישׁ אֹתָהּ שִׁכְבַת־זֶרַע וְנֶעְלַם מֵעֵינֵי אִישָׁהּ וְנִסְתְּרָה וְהִיא נִטְמָאָה וְעֵד אֵין בָּהּ וְהִוא לֹא נִתְפָּשָׂה׃", | 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;", |
|
14. Hebrew Bible, Proverbs, 1.14, 1.25, 9.1-9.6, 9.14-9.15, 9.17, 12.16, 13.18, 14.17, 14.29 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 52, 107, 186, 203; Zawanowska and Wilk (2022), The Character of David in Judaism, Christianity and Islam: Warrior, Poet, Prophet and King, 436| 1.14. "גּוֹרָלְךָ תַּפִּיל בְּתוֹכֵנוּ כִּיס אֶחָד יִהְיֶה לְכֻלָּנוּ׃", 1.25. "וַתִּפְרְעוּ כָל־עֲצָתִי וְתוֹכַחְתִּי לֹא אֲבִיתֶם׃", 9.1. "חָכְמוֹת בָּנְתָה בֵיתָהּ חָצְבָה עַמּוּדֶיהָ שִׁבְעָה׃", 9.1. "תְּחִלַּת חָכְמָה יִרְאַת יְהוָה וְדַעַת קְדֹשִׁים בִּינָה׃", 9.2. "טָבְחָה טִבְחָהּ מָסְכָה יֵינָהּ אַף עָרְכָה שֻׁלְחָנָהּ׃", 9.3. "שָׁלְחָה נַעֲרֹתֶיהָ תִקְרָא עַל־גַּפֵּי מְרֹמֵי קָרֶת׃", 9.4. "מִי־פֶתִי יָסֻר הֵנָּה חֲסַר־לֵב אָמְרָה לּוֹ׃", 9.5. "לְכוּ לַחֲמוּ בְלַחֲמִי וּשְׁתוּ בְּיַיִן מָסָכְתִּי׃", 9.6. "עִזְבוּ פְתָאיִם וִחְיוּ וְאִשְׁרוּ בְּדֶרֶךְ בִּינָה׃", 9.14. "וְיָשְׁבָה לְפֶתַח בֵּיתָהּ עַל־כִּסֵּא מְרֹמֵי קָרֶת׃", 9.15. "לִקְרֹא לְעֹבְרֵי־דָרֶךְ הַמְיַשְּׁרִים אֹרְחוֹתָם׃", 9.17. "מַיִם־גְּנוּבִים יִמְתָּקוּ וְלֶחֶם סְתָרִים יִנְעָם׃", 12.16. "אֱוִיל בַּיּוֹם יִוָּדַע כַּעְסוֹ וְכֹסֶה קָלוֹן עָרוּם׃", 13.18. "רֵישׁ וְקָלוֹן פּוֹרֵעַ מוּסָר וְשׁוֹמֵר תּוֹכַחַת יְכֻבָּד׃", 14.17. "קְצַר־אַפַּיִם יַעֲשֶׂה אִוֶּלֶת וְאִישׁ מְזִמּוֹת יִשָּׂנֵא׃", 14.29. "אֶרֶךְ אַפַּיִם רַב־תְּבוּנָה וּקְצַר־רוּחַ מֵרִים אִוֶּלֶת׃", | 1.14. "Cast in thy lot among us; Let us all have one purse’—", 1.25. "But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof;", 9.1. "Wisdom hath builded her house, she hath hewn out her seven pillars;", 9.2. "She hath prepared her meat, she hath mingled her wine; she hath also furnished her table.", 9.3. "She hath sent forth her maidens, she calleth, upon the highest places of the city:", 9.4. "’Whoso is thoughtless, let him turn in hither’; as for him that lacketh understanding, she saith to him:", 9.5. "'Come, eat of my bread, and drink of the wine which I have mingled.", 9.6. "Forsake all thoughtlessness, and live; and walk in the way of understanding.", 9.14. "And she sitteth at the door of her house, On a seat in the high places of the city,", 9.15. "To call to them that pass by, Who go right on their ways:", 9.17. "’Stolen waters are sweet, And bread eaten in secret is pleasant.’", 12.16. "A fool’s vexation is presently known; But a prudent man concealeth shame.", 13.18. "Poverty and shame shall be to him that refuseth instruction; But he that regardeth reproof shall be honoured.", 14.17. "He that is soon angry dealeth foolishly; And a man of wicked devices is hated.", 14.29. "He that is slow to anger is of great understanding; But he that is hasty of spirit exalteth folly.", |
|
15. Hebrew Bible, Psalms, 19.3, 19.8-19.10, 44.18, 50.20, 60.10, 74.8, 78.19, 89.3, 89.34, 89.38, 96.2, 107.42, 108.10, 109.16, 119.176 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66, 82, 101, 102, 124, 176, 178, 185| 19.3. "יוֹם לְיוֹם יַבִּיעַ אֹמֶר וְלַיְלָה לְּלַיְלָה יְחַוֶּה־דָּעַת׃", 19.8. "תּוֹרַת יְהוָה תְּמִימָה מְשִׁיבַת נָפֶשׁ עֵדוּת יְהוָה נֶאֱמָנָה מַחְכִּימַת פֶּתִי׃", 19.9. "פִּקּוּדֵי יְהוָה יְשָׁרִים מְשַׂמְּחֵי־לֵב מִצְוַת יְהוָה בָּרָה מְאִירַת עֵינָיִם׃", 44.18. "כָּל־זֹאת בָּאַתְנוּ וְלֹא שְׁכַחֲנוּךָ וְלֹא־שִׁקַּרְנוּ בִּבְרִיתֶךָ׃", 74.8. "אָמְרוּ בְלִבָּם נִינָם יָחַד שָׂרְפוּ כָל־מוֹעֲדֵי־אֵל בָּאָרֶץ׃", 78.19. "וַיְדַבְּרוּ בֵּאלֹהִים אָמְרוּ הֲיוּכַל אֵל לַעֲרֹךְ שֻׁלְחָן בַּמִּדְבָּר׃", 89.3. "כִּי־אָמַרְתִּי עוֹלָם חֶסֶד יִבָּנֶה שָׁמַיִם תָּכִן אֱמוּנָתְךָ בָהֶם׃", 89.3. "וְשַׂמְתִּי לָעַד זַרְעוֹ וְכִסְאוֹ כִּימֵי שָׁמָיִם׃", 89.34. "וְחַסְדִּי לֹא־אָפִיר מֵעִמּוֹ וְלֹא־אֲשַׁקֵּר בֶּאֱמוּנָתִי׃", 89.38. "כְּיָרֵחַ יִכּוֹן עוֹלָם וְעֵד בַּשַּׁחַק נֶאֱמָן סֶלָה׃", 96.2. "שִׁירוּ לַיהוָה בָּרֲכוּ שְׁמוֹ בַּשְּׂרוּ מִיּוֹם־לְיוֹם יְשׁוּעָתוֹ׃", 107.42. "יִרְאוּ יְשָׁרִים וְיִשְׂמָחוּ וְכָל־עַוְלָה קָפְצָה פִּיהָ׃", 109.16. "יַעַן אֲשֶׁר לֹא זָכַר עֲשׂוֹת חָסֶד וַיִּרְדֹּף אִישׁ־עָנִי וְאֶבְיוֹן וְנִכְאֵה לֵבָב לְמוֹתֵת׃", 119.176. "תָּעִיתִי כְּשֶׂה אֹבֵד בַּקֵּשׁ עַבְדֶּךָ כִּי מִצְוֺתֶיךָ לֹא שָׁכָחְתִּי׃", | 19.3. "Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night revealeth knowledge;", 19.8. "The law of the LORD is perfect, restoring the soul; the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple. .", 19.9. "The precepts of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.", 19.10. "The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring for ever; the ordices of the LORD are true, they are righteous altogether;", 44.18. "All this is come upon us; yet have we not forgotten Thee, neither have we been false to Thy covet.", 50.20. "Thou sittest and speakest against thy brother; Thou slanderest thine own mother's son.", 60.10. "Moab is my washpot; Upon Edom do I cast my shoe; Philistia, cry aloud because of me!", 74.8. "They said in their heart: 'Let us make havoc of them altogether'; They have burned up all the meeting-places of God in the land.", 78.19. "Yea, they spoke against God; They said 'Can God prepare a table in the wilderness?", 89.3. "For I have said: 'For ever is mercy built; In the very heavens Thou dost establish Thy faithfulness.", 89.34. "But My mercy will I not break off from him, Nor will I be false to My faithfulness.", 89.38. "It shall be established for ever as the moon; And be stedfast as the witness in sky.' Selah", 96.2. "Sing unto the LORD, bless His name; Proclaim His salvation from day to day.", 107.42. "The upright see it, and are glad; And all iniquity stoppeth her mouth.", 108.10. "Moab is my washpot; Upon Edom do I cast my shoe; Over Philistia do I cry aloud.", 109.16. "Because that he remembered not to do kindness, But persecuted the poor and needy man, And the broken in heart he was ready to slay.", 119.176. "I have gone astray like a lost sheep; seek Thy servant; For I have not forgotten Thy commandments.", |
|
16. Hebrew Bible, Ruth, 1.21, 4.7 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 102, 208| 1.21. "אֲנִי מְלֵאָה הָלַכְתִּי וְרֵיקָם הֱשִׁיבַנִי יְהוָה לָמָּה תִקְרֶאנָה לִי נָעֳמִי וַיהוָה עָנָה בִי וְשַׁדַּי הֵרַע לִי׃", 4.7. "וְזֹאת לְפָנִים בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל עַל־הַגְּאוּלָּה וְעַל־הַתְּמוּרָה לְקַיֵּם כָּל־דָּבָר שָׁלַף אִישׁ נַעֲלוֹ וְנָתַן לְרֵעֵהוּ וְזֹאת הַתְּעוּדָה בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל׃", | 1.21. "I went out full, and the LORD hath brought me back home empty; why call ye me Naomi, seeing the LORD hath testified against me, and the Almighty hath afflicted me?’", 4.7. "Now this was the custom in former time in Israel concerning redeeming and concerning exchanging, to confirm all things: a man drew off his shoe, and gave it to his neighbour; and this was the attestation in Israel.—", |
|
17. Hebrew Bible, Malachi, 3.22 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 71| 3.22. "זִכְרוּ תּוֹרַת מֹשֶׁה עַבְדִּי אֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתִי אוֹתוֹ בְחֹרֵב עַל־כָּל־יִשְׂרָאֵל חֻקִּים וּמִשְׁפָּטִים׃", | 3.22. "Remember ye the law of Moses My servant, which I commanded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, even statutes and ordices.", |
|
18. Hebrew Bible, Judges, 21.11 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 70| 21.11. "וְזֶה הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר תַּעֲשׂוּ כָּל־זָכָר וְכָל־אִשָּׁה יֹדַעַת מִשְׁכַּב־זָכָר תַּחֲרִימוּ׃", | 21.11. "And this is the thing that you shall do, you shall utterly destroy every male, and every woman that has lain with a man.", |
|
19. Hebrew Bible, Joshua, 8.35, 11.15, 21.43 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 67| 8.35. "לֹא־הָיָה דָבָר מִכֹּל אֲשֶׁר־צִוָּה מֹשֶׁה אֲשֶׁר לֹא־קָרָא יְהוֹשֻׁעַ נֶגֶד כָּל־קְהַל יִשְׂרָאֵל וְהַנָּשִׁים וְהַטַּף וְהַגֵּר הַהֹלֵךְ בְּקִרְבָּם׃", 11.15. "כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהוָה אֶת־מֹשֶׁה עַבְדּוֹ כֵּן־צִוָּה מֹשֶׁה אֶת־יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וְכֵן עָשָׂה יְהוֹשֻׁעַ לֹא־הֵסִיר דָּבָר מִכֹּל אֲשֶׁר־צִוָּה יְהוָה אֶת־מֹשֶׁה׃", 21.43. "וַיִּתֵּן יְהוָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת־כָּל־הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע לָתֵת לַאֲבוֹתָם וַיִּרָשׁוּהָ וַיֵּשְׁבוּ בָהּ׃", | 8.35. "There was not a word of all that Moses commanded, which Joshua read not before all the assembly of Israel, and the women, and the little ones, and the strangers that walked among them.", 11.15. "As the LORD commanded Moses His servant, so did Moses command Joshua; and so did Joshua; he left nothing undone of all that the LORD commanded Moses.", 21.43. "So the LORD gave unto Israel all the land which He swore to give unto their fathers; and they possessed it, and dwelt therein.", |
|
20. Hebrew Bible, Jeremiah, 4.4, 15.9, 25.8, 29.10, 35.16, 38.23, 42.5, 50.6, 50.24 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical •biblical nature, see also deuteronomy, spirit of the hebrew bible Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66, 70, 82, 102, 107, 124; Schwartz (2008), 2 Maccabees, 63| 4.4. "הִמֹּלוּ לַיהֹוָה וְהָסִרוּ עָרְלוֹת לְבַבְכֶם אִישׁ יְהוּדָה וְיֹשְׁבֵי יְרוּשָׁלִָם פֶּן־תֵּצֵא כָאֵשׁ חֲמָתִי וּבָעֲרָה וְאֵין מְכַבֶּה מִפְּנֵי רֹעַ מַעַלְלֵיכֶם׃", 15.9. "אֻמְלְלָה יֹלֶדֶת הַשִּׁבְעָה נָפְחָה נַפְשָׁהּ באה [בָּא] שִׁמְשָׁהּ בְּעֹד יוֹמָם בּוֹשָׁה וְחָפֵרָה וּשְׁאֵרִיתָם לַחֶרֶב אֶתֵּן לִפְנֵי אֹיְבֵיהֶם נְאֻם־יְהוָה׃", 25.8. "לָכֵן כֹּה אָמַר יְהוָה צְבָאוֹת יַעַן אֲשֶׁר לֹא־שְׁמַעְתֶּם אֶת־דְּבָרָי׃", 35.16. "כִּי הֵקִימוּ בְּנֵי יְהוֹנָדָב בֶּן־רֵכָב אֶת־מִצְוַת אֲבִיהֶם אֲשֶׁר צִוָּם וְהָעָם הַזֶּה לֹא שָׁמְעוּ אֵלָי׃", 38.23. "וְאֶת־כָּל־נָשֶׁיךָ וְאֶת־בָּנֶיךָ מוֹצִאִים אֶל־הַכַּשְׂדִּים וְאַתָּה לֹא־תִמָּלֵט מִיָּדָם כִּי בְיַד מֶלֶךְ־בָּבֶל תִּתָּפֵשׂ וְאֶת־הָעִיר הַזֹּאת תִּשְׂרֹף בָּאֵשׁ׃", 42.5. "וְהֵמָּה אָמְרוּ אֶל־יִרְמְיָהוּ יְהִי יְהוָה בָּנוּ לְעֵד אֱמֶת וְנֶאֱמָן אִם־לֹא כְּכָל־הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁלָחֲךָ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ אֵלֵינוּ כֵּן נַעֲשֶׂה׃", 50.6. "צֹאן אֹבְדוֹת היה [הָיוּ] עַמִּי רֹעֵיהֶם הִתְעוּם הָרִים שובבים [שׁוֹבְבוּם] מֵהַר אֶל־גִּבְעָה הָלָכוּ שָׁכְחוּ רִבְצָם׃", 50.24. "יָקֹשְׁתִּי לָךְ וְגַם־נִלְכַּדְתְּ בָּבֶל וְאַתְּ לֹא יָדָעַתְּ נִמְצֵאת וְגַם־נִתְפַּשְׂתְּ כִּי בַיהוָה הִתְגָּרִית׃", | 4.4. "Circumcise yourselves to the LORD, and take away the foreskins of your heart, ye men of Judah and inhabitants of Jerusalem; lest My fury go forth like fire, and burn that none can quench it, Because of the evil of your doings.", 15.9. "She that hath borne seven languisheth; Her spirit droopeth; Her sun is gone down while it was yet day, She is ashamed and confounded; And the residue of them will I deliver to the sword before their enemies, Saith the LORD.’", 25.8. "Therefore thus saith the LORD of hosts: Because ye have not heard My words,", 29.10. "For thus saith the LORD: After seventy years are accomplished for Babylon, I will remember you, and perform My good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place.", 35.16. "Because the sons of Jonadab the son of Rechab have performed the commandment of their father which he commanded them, but this people hath not hearkened unto Me;", 38.23. "And they shall bring out all thy wives and thy children to the Chaldeans; and thou shalt not escape out of their hand, but shalt be taken by the hand of the king of Babylon; and thou shalt cause this city to be burned with fire.’", 42.5. "Then they said to Jeremiah: ‘The LORD be a true and faithful witness against us, if we do not even according to all the word wherewith the LORD thy God shall send thee to us.", 50.6. "My people hath been lost sheep; Their shepherds have caused them to go astray, They have turned them away on the mountains; They have gone from mountain to hill, They have forgotten their resting-place.", 50.24. "I have laid a snare for thee, and thou art also taken, O Babylon, And thou wast not aware; Thou art found, and also caught, Because thou hast striven against the LORD.", |
|
21. Hebrew Bible, Isaiah, 7.15-7.16, 8.2, 29.21, 30.20, 40.26, 54.13, 65.11 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical •biblical nature, see also deuteronomy, spirit of the hebrew bible Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 70, 82, 87, 103, 186, 203; Schwartz (2008), 2 Maccabees, 63| 7.15. "חֶמְאָה וּדְבַשׁ יֹאכֵל לְדַעְתּוֹ מָאוֹס בָּרָע וּבָחוֹר בַּטּוֹב׃", 7.16. "כִּי בְּטֶרֶם יֵדַע הַנַּעַר מָאֹס בָּרָע וּבָחֹר בַּטּוֹב תֵּעָזֵב הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה קָץ מִפְּנֵי שְׁנֵי מְלָכֶיהָ׃", 8.2. "לְתוֹרָה וְלִתְעוּדָה אִם־לֹא יֹאמְרוּ כַּדָּבָר הַזֶּה אֲשֶׁר אֵין־לוֹ שָׁחַר׃", 8.2. "וְאָעִידָה לִּי עֵדִים נֶאֱמָנִים אֵת אוּרִיָּה הַכֹּהֵן וְאֶת־זְכַרְיָהוּ בֶּן יְבֶרֶכְיָהוּ׃", 29.21. "מַחֲטִיאֵי אָדָם בְּדָבָר וְלַמּוֹכִיחַ בַּשַּׁעַר יְקֹשׁוּן וַיַּטּוּ בַתֹּהוּ צַדִּיק׃", 40.26. "שְׂאוּ־מָרוֹם עֵינֵיכֶם וּרְאוּ מִי־בָרָא אֵלֶּה הַמּוֹצִיא בְמִסְפָּר צְבָאָם לְכֻלָּם בְּשֵׁם יִקְרָא מֵרֹב אוֹנִים וְאַמִּיץ כֹּחַ אִישׁ לֹא נֶעְדָּר׃", 54.13. "וְכָל־בָּנַיִךְ לִמּוּדֵי יְהוָה וְרַב שְׁלוֹם בָּנָיִךְ׃", 65.11. "וְאַתֶּם עֹזְבֵי יְהוָה הַשְּׁכֵחִים אֶת־הַר קָדְשִׁי הַעֹרְכִים לַגַּד שֻׁלְחָן וְהַמְמַלְאִים לַמְנִי מִמְסָךְ׃", | 7.15. "Curd and honey shall he eat, when he knoweth to refuse the evil, and choose the good.", 7.16. "Yea, before the child shall know to refuse the evil, and choose the good, the land whose two kings thou hast a horror of shall be forsaken.", 8.2. "and I will take unto Me faithful witnesses to record, Uriah the priest, and Zechariah the son of Jeberechiah.’", 29.21. "That make a man an offender by words, and lay a snare for him that reproveth in the gate, And turn aside the just with a thing of nought.", 30.20. "And though the Lord give you sparing bread and scant water, Yet shall not thy Teacher hide Himself any more, But thine eyes shall see thy Teacher;", 40.26. "Lift up your eyes on high, And see: who hath created these? He that bringeth out their host by number, He calleth them all by name; By the greatness of His might, and for that He is strong in power, Not one faileth.", 54.13. "And all thy children shall be taught of the LORD; and great shall be the peace of thy children.", 65.11. "But ye that forsake the LORD, That forget My holy mountain, That prepare a table for Fortune, And that offer mingled wine in full measure unto Destiny,", |
|
| 22. Septuagint, Isaiah, None (8th cent. BCE - 6th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 186 |
23. Hebrew Bible, 1 Samuel, 7.3-7.4, 9.3, 9.20, 15.17, 30.22 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Avery-Peck, Chilton, and Scott Green (2014), A Legacy of Learning: Essays in Honor of Jacob Neusner , 176; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 102, 124, 207| 7.3. "וַיֹּאמֶר שְׁמוּאֵל אֶל־כָּל־בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵאמֹר אִם־בְּכָל־לְבַבְכֶם אַתֶּם שָׁבִים אֶל־יְהוָה הָסִירוּ אֶת־אֱלֹהֵי הַנֵּכָר מִתּוֹכְכֶם וְהָעַשְׁתָּרוֹת וְהָכִינוּ לְבַבְכֶם אֶל־יְהוָה וְעִבְדֻהוּ לְבַדּוֹ וְיַצֵּל אֶתְכֶם מִיַּד פְּלִשְׁתִּים׃", 7.4. "וַיָּסִירוּ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת־הַבְּעָלִים וְאֶת־הָעַשְׁתָּרֹת וַיַּעַבְדוּ אֶת־יְהוָה לְבַדּוֹ׃", 9.3. "וַתֹּאבַדְנָה הָאֲתֹנוֹת לְקִישׁ אֲבִי שָׁאוּל וַיֹּאמֶר קִישׁ אֶל־שָׁאוּל בְּנוֹ קַח־נָא אִתְּךָ אֶת־אַחַד מֵהַנְּעָרִים וְקוּם לֵךְ בַּקֵּשׁ אֶת־הָאֲתֹנֹת׃", 15.17. "וַיֹּאמֶר שְׁמוּאֵל הֲלוֹא אִם־קָטֹן אַתָּה בְּעֵינֶיךָ רֹאשׁ שִׁבְטֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אָתָּה וַיִּמְשָׁחֲךָ יְהוָה לְמֶלֶךְ עַל־יִשְׂרָאֵל׃", 30.22. "וַיַּעַן כָּל־אִישׁ־רָע וּבְלִיַּעַל מֵהָאֲנָשִׁים אֲשֶׁר הָלְכוּ עִם־דָּוִד וַיֹּאמְרוּ יַעַן אֲשֶׁר לֹא־הָלְכוּ עִמִּי לֹא־נִתֵּן לָהֶם מֵהַשָּׁלָל אֲשֶׁר הִצַּלְנוּ כִּי־אִם־אִישׁ אֶת־אִשְׁתּוֹ וְאֶת־בָּנָיו וְיִנְהֲגוּ וְיֵלֵכוּ׃" | 7.3. "And Shemu᾽el spoke to all the house of Yisra᾽el, saying, If you return to the Lord with all your hearts, then put away the foreign gods and the ῾Ashtarot from among you, and direct your hearts to the Lord, and serve him only: and he will deliver you out of the hand of the Pelishtim.", 7.4. "Then the children of Yisra᾽el put away the Be῾alim and the ῾Ashtarot, and served the Lord only.", 9.3. "And the asses of Qish Sha᾽ul’s father were lost. And Qish said to Sha᾽ul his son, Take now one of the servants with thee, and arise, go seek the asses.", 9.20. "And as for thy asses that were lost three days ago, set not thy mind on them; for they are found. And on whom is all the desire of Yisra᾽el? Is it not on thee, and on all thy father’s house?", 15.17. "And Shemu᾽el said, Though thou wast little in thy own sight, wast thou not made the head of the tribes of Yisra᾽el, and the Lord anointed thee king over Yisra᾽el?", 30.22. "Then answered all the bad and worthless men among the men who went with David, and said, Because they went not with us, we will not give them of the spoil that we have recovered, save to every man his wife and his children, that they may lead them away, and depart." |
|
24. Hebrew Bible, 1 Kings, 2.3, 2.27 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 71, 87| 2.3. "וַיָּבֹא בְנָיָהוּ אֶל־אֹהֶל יְהוָה וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלָיו כֹּה־אָמַר הַמֶּלֶךְ צֵא וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא כִּי פֹה אָמוּת וַיָּשֶׁב בְּנָיָהוּ אֶת־הַמֶּלֶךְ דָּבָר לֵאמֹר כֹּה־דִבֶּר יוֹאָב וְכֹה עָנָנִי׃", 2.3. "וְשָׁמַרְתָּ אֶת־מִשְׁמֶרֶת יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לָלֶכֶת בִּדְרָכָיו לִשְׁמֹר חֻקֹּתָיו מִצְוֺתָיו וּמִשְׁפָּטָיו וְעֵדְוֺתָיו כַּכָּתוּב בְּתוֹרַת מֹשֶׁה לְמַעַן תַּשְׂכִּיל אֵת כָּל־אֲשֶׁר תַּעֲשֶׂה וְאֵת כָּל־אֲשֶׁר תִּפְנֶה שָׁם׃", 2.27. "וַיְגָרֶשׁ שְׁלֹמֹה אֶת־אֶבְיָתָר מִהְיוֹת כֹּהֵן לַיהוָה לְמַלֵּא אֶת־דְּבַר יְהוָה אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר עַל־בֵּית עֵלִי בְּשִׁלֹה׃", | 2.3. "and keep the charge of the LORD thy God, to walk in His ways, to keep His statutes, and His commandments, and His ordices, and His testimonies, according to that which is written in the law of Moses, that thou mayest prosper in all that thou doest, and whithersoever thou turnest thyself;", 2.27. "So Solomon thrust out Abiathar from being priest unto the LORD; that the word of the LORD might be fulfilled, which He spoke concerning the house of Eli in Shiloh.", |
|
25. Hebrew Bible, Amos, 5.10, 8.9 (8th cent. BCE - 6th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 103, 107| 8.9. "וְהָיָה בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא נְאֻם אֲדֹנָי יְהוִה וְהֵבֵאתִי הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ בַּצָּהֳרָיִם וְהַחֲשַׁכְתִּי לָאָרֶץ בְּיוֹם אוֹר׃", | 5.10. "They hate him that reproveth in the gate, And they abhor him that speaketh uprightly.", 8.9. "And it shall come to pass in that day, Saith the Lord GOD, That I will cause the sun to go down at noon, And I will darken the earth in the clear day.", |
|
26. Hebrew Bible, 2 Samuel, 7.12, 11.2-11.4 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical •hebrew language, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 65; Zawanowska and Wilk (2022), The Character of David in Judaism, Christianity and Islam: Warrior, Poet, Prophet and King, 436, 444| 7.12. "כִּי יִמְלְאוּ יָמֶיךָ וְשָׁכַבְתָּ אֶת־אֲבֹתֶיךָ וַהֲקִימֹתִי אֶת־זַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ אֲשֶׁר יֵצֵא מִמֵּעֶיךָ וַהֲכִינֹתִי אֶת־מַמְלַכְתּוֹ׃", 11.2. "וְהָיָה אִם־תַּעֲלֶה חֲמַת הַמֶּלֶךְ וְאָמַר לְךָ מַדּוּעַ נִגַּשְׁתֶּם אֶל־הָעִיר לְהִלָּחֵם הֲלוֹא יְדַעְתֶּם אֵת אֲשֶׁר־יֹרוּ מֵעַל הַחוֹמָה׃", 11.2. "וַיְהִי לְעֵת הָעֶרֶב וַיָּקָם דָּוִד מֵעַל מִשְׁכָּבוֹ וַיִּתְהַלֵּךְ עַל־גַּג בֵּית־הַמֶּלֶךְ וַיַּרְא אִשָּׁה רֹחֶצֶת מֵעַל הַגָּג וְהָאִשָּׁה טוֹבַת מַרְאֶה מְאֹד׃", 11.3. "וַיִּשְׁלַח דָּוִד וַיִּדְרֹשׁ לָאִשָּׁה וַיֹּאמֶר הֲלוֹא־זֹאת בַּת־שֶׁבַע בַּת־אֱלִיעָם אֵשֶׁת אוּרִיָּה הַחִתִּי׃", 11.4. "וַיִּשְׁלַח דָּוִד מַלְאָכִים וַיִּקָּחֶהָ וַתָּבוֹא אֵלָיו וַיִּשְׁכַּב עִמָּהּ וְהִיא מִתְקַדֶּשֶׁת מִטֻּמְאָתָהּ וַתָּשָׁב אֶל־בֵּיתָהּ׃", | 7.12. "And when the days are fulfilled, and thou shalt sleep with thy fathers, I will set up thy seed after thee, who shall issue from thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom.", 11.2. "And it came to pass one evening, that David arose from his bed, and walked upon the roof of the king’s house: and from the roof he saw a woman bathing; and the woman was very fair to look upon.", 11.3. "And David sent and inquired after the woman. And one said, Is not this Bat-sheva, the daughter of Eli῾am, the wife of Uriyya the Ĥittite?", 11.4. "And David sent messengers, and took her; and she came in to him, and he lay with her; for she had purified herself from her uncleanness, and then she returned to her house.", |
|
27. Hebrew Bible, 2 Kings, 6.15-6.18, 17.28, 17.32, 17.34, 17.39, 17.41, 22.1, 22.3, 23.25 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •biblical nature, see also deuteronomy, spirit of the hebrew bible •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 48, 66, 124; Schwartz (2008), 2 Maccabees, 63| 6.15. "וַיַּשְׁכֵּם מְשָׁרֵת אִישׁ הָאֱלֹהִים לָקוּם וַיֵּצֵא וְהִנֵּה־חַיִל סוֹבֵב אֶת־הָעִיר וְסוּס וָרָכֶב וַיֹּאמֶר נַעֲרוֹ אֵלָיו אֲהָהּ אֲדֹנִי אֵיכָה נַעֲשֶׂה׃", 6.16. "וַיֹּאמֶר אַל־תִּירָא כִּי רַבִּים אֲשֶׁר אִתָּנוּ מֵאֲשֶׁר אוֹתָם׃", 6.17. "וַיִּתְפַּלֵּל אֱלִישָׁע וַיֹּאמַר יְהוָה פְּקַח־נָא אֶת־עֵינָיו וְיִרְאֶה וַיִּפְקַח יְהוָה אֶת־עֵינֵי הַנַּעַר וַיַּרְא וְהִנֵּה הָהָר מָלֵא סוּסִים וְרֶכֶב אֵשׁ סְבִיבֹת אֱלִישָׁע׃", 6.18. "וַיֵּרְדוּ אֵלָיו וַיִּתְפַּלֵּל אֱלִישָׁע אֶל־יְהוָה וַיֹּאמַר הַךְ־נָא אֶת־הַגּוֹי־הַזֶּה בַּסַּנְוֵרִים וַיַּכֵּם בַּסַּנְוֵרִים כִּדְבַר אֱלִישָׁע׃", 17.28. "וַיָּבֹא אֶחָד מֵהַכֹּהֲנִים אֲשֶׁר הִגְלוּ מִשֹּׁמְרוֹן וַיֵּשֶׁב בְּבֵית־אֵל וַיְהִי מוֹרֶה אֹתָם אֵיךְ יִירְאוּ אֶת־יְהוָה׃", 17.32. "וַיִּהְיוּ יְרֵאִים אֶת־יְהוָה וַיַּעֲשׂוּ לָהֶם מִקְצוֹתָם כֹּהֲנֵי בָמוֹת וַיִּהְיוּ עֹשִׂים לָהֶם בְּבֵית הַבָּמוֹת׃", 17.34. "עַד הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה הֵם עֹשִׂים כַּמִּשְׁפָּטִים הָרִאשֹׁנִים אֵינָם יְרֵאִים אֶת־יְהוָה וְאֵינָם עֹשִׂים כְּחֻקֹּתָם וּכְמִשְׁפָּטָם וְכַתּוֹרָה וְכַמִּצְוָה אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהוָה אֶת־בְּנֵי יַעֲקֹב אֲשֶׁר־שָׂם שְׁמוֹ יִשְׂרָאֵל׃", 17.39. "כִּי אִם־אֶת־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם תִּירָאוּ וְהוּא יַצִּיל אֶתְכֶם מִיַּד כָּל־אֹיְבֵיכֶם׃", 17.41. "וַיִּהְיוּ הַגּוֹיִם הָאֵלֶּה יְרֵאִים אֶת־יְהוָה וְאֶת־פְּסִילֵיהֶם הָיוּ עֹבְדִים גַּם־בְּנֵיהֶם וּבְנֵי בְנֵיהֶם כַּאֲשֶׁר עָשׂוּ אֲבֹתָם הֵם עֹשִׂים עַד הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה׃", 22.1. "בֶּן־שְׁמֹנֶה שָׁנָה יֹאשִׁיָּהוּ בְמָלְכוֹ וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וְאַחַת שָׁנָה מָלַךְ בִּירוּשָׁלִָם וְשֵׁם אִמּוֹ יְדִידָה בַת־עֲדָיָה מִבָּצְקַת׃", 22.1. "וַיַּגֵּד שָׁפָן הַסֹּפֵר לַמֶּלֶךְ לֵאמֹר סֵפֶר נָתַן לִי חִלְקִיָּה הַכֹּהֵן וַיִּקְרָאֵהוּ שָׁפָן לִפְנֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ׃", 22.3. "וַיְהִי בִּשְׁמֹנֶה עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה לַמֶּלֶךְ יֹאשִׁיָּהוּ שָׁלַח הַמֶּלֶךְ אֶת־שָׁפָן בֶּן־אֲצַלְיָהוּ בֶן־מְשֻׁלָּם הַסֹּפֵר בֵּית יְהוָה לֵאמֹר׃", 23.25. "וְכָמֹהוּ לֹא־הָיָה לְפָנָיו מֶלֶךְ אֲשֶׁר־שָׁב אֶל־יְהוָה בְּכָל־לְבָבוֹ וּבְכָל־נַפְשׁוֹ וּבְכָל־מְאֹדוֹ כְּכֹל תּוֹרַת מֹשֶׁה וְאַחֲרָיו לֹא־קָם כָּמֹהוּ׃", | 6.15. "And when the servant of the man of God was risen early, and gone forth, behold, a host with horses and chariots was round about the city. And his servant said unto him: ‘Alas, my master! how shall we do?’", 6.16. "And he answered: ‘Fear not: for they that are with us are more than they that are with them.’", 6.17. "And Elisha prayed, and said: ‘LORD, I pray Thee, open his eyes, that he may see.’ And the LORD opened the eyes of the young man; and he saw; and, behold, the mountain was full of horses and chariots of fire round about Elisha.", 6.18. "And when they came down to him, Elisha prayed unto the LORD, and said: ‘Smite this people, I pray Thee, with blindness.’ And He smote them with blindness according to the word of Elisha.", 17.28. "So one of the priests whom they had carried away from Samaria came and dwelt in Beth-el, and taught them how they should fear the LORD.", 17.32. "So they feared the LORD, and made unto them from among themselves priests of the high places, who sacrificed for them in the houses of the high places.", 17.34. "Unto this day they do after the former manners: they fear not the LORD, neither do they after their statutes, or after their ordices, or after the law or after the commandment which the LORD commanded the children of Jacob, whom He named Israel;", 17.39. "but the LORD your God shall ye fear; and He will deliver you out of the hand of all your enemies.’", 17.41. "So these nations feared the LORD, and served their graven images; their children likewise, and their children’s children, as did their fathers, so do they unto this day.", 22.1. "Josiah was eight years old when he began to reign; and he reigned thirty and one years in Jerusalem; and his mother’s name was Jedidah the daughter of Adaiah of Bozkath.", 22.3. "And it came to pass in the eighteenth year of king Josiah, that the king sent Shaphan the son of Azaliah, the son of Meshullam, the scribe, to the house of the LORD, saying.", 23.25. "And like unto him was there no king before him, that turned to the LORD with all his heart, and with all his soul, and with all his might, according to all the law of Moses; neither after him arose there any like him.", |
|
28. Hebrew Bible, Ezekiel, 12.12-12.13, 16.43, 17.20, 19.4, 19.8, 21.28-21.29, 22.19-22.22, 24.6, 34.4, 34.16 (6th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 82, 102, 124, 185, 186| 12.12. "וְהַנָּשִׂיא אֲשֶׁר־בְּתוֹכָם אֶל־כָּתֵף יִשָּׂא בָּעֲלָטָה וְיֵצֵא בַּקִּיר יַחְתְּרוּ לְהוֹצִיא בוֹ פָּנָיו יְכַסֶּה יַעַן אֲשֶׁר לֹא־יִרְאֶה לַעַיִן הוּא אֶת־הָאָרֶץ׃", 12.13. "וּפָרַשְׂתִּי אֶת־רִשְׁתִּי עָלָיו וְנִתְפַּשׂ בִּמְצוּדָתִי וְהֵבֵאתִי אֹתוֹ בָבֶלָה אֶרֶץ כַּשְׂדִּים וְאוֹתָהּ לֹא־יִרְאֶה וְשָׁם יָמוּת׃", 16.43. "יַעַן אֲשֶׁר לֹא־זכרתי [זָכַרְתְּ] אֶת־יְמֵי נְעוּרַיִךְ וַתִּרְגְּזִי־לִי בְּכָל־אֵלֶּה וְגַם־אֲנִי הֵא דַּרְכֵּךְ בְּרֹאשׁ נָתַתִּי נְאֻם אֲדֹנָי יְהוִה וְלֹא עשיתי [עָשִׂית] אֶת־הַזִּמָּה עַל כָּל־תּוֹעֲבֹתָיִךְ׃", 19.4. "וַיִּשְׁמְעוּ אֵלָיו גּוֹיִם בְּשַׁחְתָּם נִתְפָּשׂ וַיְבִאֻהוּ בַחַחִים אֶל־אֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם׃", 19.8. "וַיִּתְּנוּ עָלָיו גּוֹיִם סָבִיב מִמְּדִינוֹת וַיִּפְרְשׂוּ עָלָיו רִשְׁתָּם בְּשַׁחְתָּם נִתְפָּשׂ׃", 21.28. "וְהָיָה לָהֶם כקסום־[כִּקְסָם־] שָׁוְא בְּעֵינֵיהֶם שְׁבֻעֵי שְׁבֻעוֹת לָהֶם וְהוּא־מַזְכִּיר עָוֺן לְהִתָּפֵשׂ׃", 21.29. "לָכֵן כֹּה־אָמַר אֲדֹנָי יְהוִה יַעַן הַזְכַּרְכֶם עֲוֺנְכֶם בְּהִגָּלוֹת פִּשְׁעֵיכֶם לְהֵרָאוֹת חַטֹּאותֵיכֶם בְּכֹל עֲלִילוֹתֵיכֶם יַעַן הִזָּכֶרְכֶם בַּכַּף תִּתָּפֵשׂוּ׃", 22.19. "לָכֵן כֹּה אָמַר אֲדֹנָי יְהוִה יַעַן הֱיוֹת כֻּלְּכֶם לְסִגִים לָכֵן הִנְנִי קֹבֵץ אֶתְכֶם אֶל־תּוֹךְ יְרוּשָׁלִָם׃", 22.21. "וְכִנַּסְתִּי אֶתְכֶם וְנָפַחְתִּי עֲלֵיכֶם בְּאֵשׁ עֶבְרָתִי וְנִתַּכְתֶּם בְּתוֹכָהּ׃", 22.22. "כְּהִתּוּךְ כֶּסֶף בְּתוֹךְ כּוּר כֵּן תֻּתְּכוּ בְתוֹכָהּ וִידַעְתֶּם כִּי־אֲנִי יְהוָה שָׁפַכְתִּי חֲמָתִי עֲלֵיכֶם׃", 24.6. "לָכֵן כֹּה־אָמַר אֲדֹנָי יְהֹוִה אוֹי עִיר הַדָּמִים סִיר אֲשֶׁר חֶלְאָתָה בָהּ וְחֶלְאָתָהּ לֹא יָצְאָה מִמֶּנָּה לִנְתָחֶיהָ לִנְתָחֶיהָ הוֹצִיאָהּ לֹא־נָפַל עָלֶיהָ גּוֹרָל׃", 34.4. "אֶת־הַנַּחְלוֹת לֹא חִזַּקְתֶּם וְאֶת־הַחוֹלָה לֹא־רִפֵּאתֶם וְלַנִּשְׁבֶּרֶת לֹא חֲבַשְׁתֶּם וְאֶת־הַנִּדַּחַת לֹא הֲשֵׁבֹתֶם וְאֶת־הָאֹבֶדֶת לֹא בִקַּשְׁתֶּם וּבְחָזְקָה רְדִיתֶם אֹתָם וּבְפָרֶךְ׃", 34.16. "אֶת־הָאֹבֶדֶת אֲבַקֵּשׁ וְאֶת־הַנִּדַּחַת אָשִׁיב וְלַנִּשְׁבֶּרֶת אֶחֱבֹשׁ וְאֶת־הַחוֹלָה אֲחַזֵּק וְאֶת־הַשְּׁמֵנָה וְאֶת־הַחֲזָקָה אַשְׁמִיד אֶרְעֶנָּה בְמִשְׁפָּט׃", | 12.12. "And the prince that is among them shall bear upon his shoulder, and go forth in the darkness; they shall dig through the wall to carry out thereby; he shall cover his face, that he see not the ground with his eyes.", 12.13. "My net also will I spread upon him, and he shall be taken in My snare; and I will bring him to Babylon to the land of the Chaldeans; yet shall he not see it, though he shall die there.", 16.43. "Because thou hast not remembered the days of thy youth, but hast fretted Me in all these things; lo, therefore I also will bring thy way upon thy head, saith the Lord GOD; or hast thou not committed this lewdness above all thine abominations?", 17.20. "And I will spread My net upon him, and he shall be taken in My snare, and I will bring him to Babylon, and will plead with him there for his treachery that he hath committed against Me.", 19.4. "Then the nations assembled against him, He was taken in their pit; And they brought him with hooks Unto the land of Egypt.", 19.8. "Then the nations cried out against him On every side from the provinces; And they spread their net over him, He was taken in their pit.", 21.28. "And it shall be unto them as a false divination in their sight, who have weeks upon weeks! but it bringeth iniquity to remembrance, that they may be taken.", 21.29. "Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD: Because ye have made your iniquity to be remembered, in that your transgressions are uncovered, so that your sins do appear in all your doings; because that ye are come to remembrance, ye shall be taken with the hand.", 22.19. "Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD: Because ye are all become dross, therefore, behold, I will gather you into the midst of Jerusalem.", 22.20. "As they gather silver and brass and iron and lead and tin into the midst of the furnace, to blow the fire upon it, to melt it; so will I gather you in Mine anger and in My fury, and I will cast you in, and melt you.", 22.21. "Yea, I will gather you, and blow upon you with the fire of My wrath, and ye shall be melted in the midst thereof.", 22.22. "As silver is melted in the midst of the furnace, so shall ye be melted in the midst thereof; and ye shall know that I the LORD have poured out My fury upon you.’", 24.6. "Wherefore thus saith the Lord GOD: Woe to the bloody city, to the pot whose filth is therein, and whose filth is not gone out of it! bring it out piece by piece; no lot is fallen upon it.", 34.4. "The weak have ye not strengthened, neither have ye healed that which was sick, neither have ye bound up that which was broken, neither have ye brought back that which was driven away, neither have ye sought that which was lost; but with force have ye ruled over them and with rigour.", 34.16. "I will seek that which was lost, and will bring back that which was driven away, and will bind up that which was broken, and will strengthen that which was sick; and the fat and the strong I will destroy, I will feed them in justice.", |
|
| 29. Hebrew Bible, Zechariah, 13.17 (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 52 |
30. Hebrew Bible, Nehemiah, 3.1, 8.15, 10.30-10.31 (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 51, 125, 207| 3.1. "וְעַל־יָדָם הֶחֱזִיק יְדָיָה בֶן־חֲרוּמַף וְנֶגֶד בֵּיתוֹ וְעַל־יָדוֹ הֶחֱזִיק חַטּוּשׁ בֶּן־חֲשַׁבְנְיָה׃", 3.1. "וַיָּקָם אֶלְיָשִׁיב הַכֹּהֵן הַגָּדוֹל וְאֶחָיו הַכֹּהֲנִים וַיִּבְנוּ אֶת־שַׁעַר הַצֹּאן הֵמָּה קִדְּשׁוּהוּ וַיַּעֲמִידוּ דַּלְתֹתָיו וְעַד־מִגְדַּל הַמֵּאָה קִדְּשׁוּהוּ עַד מִגְדַּל חֲנַנְאֵל׃", 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׃", 10.31. "וַאֲשֶׁר לֹא־נִתֵּן בְּנֹתֵינוּ לְעַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ וְאֶת־בְּנֹתֵיהֶם לֹא נִקַּח לְבָנֵינוּ׃", | 3.1. "Then Eliashib the high priest rose up with his brethren the priests, and they builded the sheep gate; they sanctified it, and set up the doors of it; even unto the tower of Hammeah they sanctified it, unto the tower of Hael.", 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.’", 10.30. "they cleaved to their brethren, their nobles, and entered into a curse, and into an oath, to walk in God’s law, which was given by Moses the servant of God, and to observe and do all the commandments of the LORD our Lord, and His ordices and His statutes;", 10.31. "and that we would not give our daughters unto the peoples of the land, nor take their daughters for our sons;", |
|
31. Hebrew Bible, 2 Chronicles, 15.12, 24.20, 29.16, 34.1, 34.3 (5th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 48, 65, 67, 71| 15.12. "וַיָּבֹאוּ בַבְּרִית לִדְרוֹשׁ אֶת־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי אֲבוֹתֵיהֶם בְּכָל־לְבָבָם וּבְכָל־נַפְשָׁם׃", 29.16. "וַיָּבֹאוּ הַכֹּהֲנִים לִפְנִימָה בֵית־יְהוָה לְטַהֵר וַיּוֹצִיאוּ אֵת כָּל־הַטֻּמְאָה אֲשֶׁר מָצְאוּ בְּהֵיכַל יְהוָה לַחֲצַר בֵּית יְהוָה וַיְקַבְּלוּ הַלְוִיִּם לְהוֹצִיא לְנַחַל־קִדְרוֹן חוּצָה׃", 34.1. "בֶּן־שְׁמוֹנֶה שָׁנִים יֹאשִׁיָּהוּ בְמָלְכוֹ וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וְאַחַת שָׁנָה מָלַךְ בִּירוּשָׁלִָם׃", 34.1. "וַיִּתְּנוּ עַל־יַד עֹשֵׂה הַמְּלָאכָה הַמֻּפְקָדִים בְּבֵית יְהוָה וַיִּתְּנוּ אֹתוֹ עוֹשֵׂי הַמְּלָאכָה אֲשֶׁר עֹשִׂים בְּבֵית יְהוָה לִבְדּוֹק וּלְחַזֵּק הַבָּיִת׃", 34.3. "וּבִשְׁמוֹנֶה שָׁנִים לְמָלְכוֹ וְהוּא עוֹדֶנּוּ נַעַר הֵחֵל לִדְרוֹשׁ לֵאלֹהֵי דָּוִיד אָבִיו וּבִשְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה הֵחֵל לְטַהֵר אֶת־יְהוּדָה וִירוּשָׁלִַם מִן־הַבָּמוֹת וְהָאֲשֵׁרִים וְהַפְּסִלִים וְהַמַּסֵּכוֹת׃", 34.3. "וַיַּעַל הַמֶּלֶךְ בֵּית־יְהוָה וְכָל־אִישׁ יְהוּדָה וְיֹשְׁבֵי יְרוּשָׁלִַם וְהַכֹּהֲנִים וְהַלְוִיִּם וְכָל־הָעָם מִגָּדוֹל וְעַד־קָטָן וַיִּקְרָא בְאָזְנֵיהֶם אֶת־כָּל־דִּבְרֵי סֵפֶר הַבְּרִית הַנִּמְצָא בֵּית יְהוָה׃", | 15.12. "And they entered into the covet to seek the LORD, the God of their fathers, with all their heart and with all their soul;", 24.20. "And the spirit of God clothed Zechariah the son of Jehoiada the priest; and he stood above the people, and said unto them: ‘Thus saith God: Why transgress ye the commandments of the LORD, that ye cannot prosper? because ye have forsaken the LORD, He hath also forsaken you.’", 29.16. "And the priests went in unto the inner part of the house of the LORD, to cleanse it, and brought out all the uncleanness that they found in the temple of the LORD into the court of the house of the LORD. And the Levites took it, to carry it out abroad to the brook Kidron.", 34.1. "Josiah was eight years old when he began to reign; and he reigned thirty and one years in Jerusalem.", 34.3. "For in the eighth year of his reign, while he was yet young, he began to seek after the God of David his father; and in the twelfth year he began to purge Judah and Jerusalem from the high places, and the Asherim, and the graven images, and the molten images.", |
|
32. Hebrew Bible, 1 Chronicles, 16.39, 17.11, 21.11, 26.14, 27.23 (5th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 65, 67, 186, 207| 16.39. "וְאֵת צָדוֹק הַכֹּהֵן וְאֶחָיו הַכֹּהֲנִים לִפְנֵי מִשְׁכַּן יְהוָה בַּבָּמָה אֲשֶׁר בְּגִבְעוֹן׃", 17.11. "וְהָיָה כִּי־מָלְאוּ יָמֶיךָ לָלֶכֶת עִם־אֲבֹתֶיךָ וַהֲקִימוֹתִי אֶת־זַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה מִבָּנֶיךָ וַהֲכִינוֹתִי אֶת־מַלְכוּתוֹ׃", 21.11. "וַיָּבֹא גָד אֶל־דָּוִיד וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ כֹּה־אָמַר יְהוָה קַבֶּל־לָךְ׃", 26.14. "וַיִּפֹּל הַגּוֹרָל מִזְרָחָה לְשֶׁלֶמְיָהוּ וּזְכַרְיָהוּ בְנוֹ יוֹעֵץ בְּשֶׂכֶל הִפִּילוּ גּוֹרָלוֹת וַיֵּצֵא גוֹרָלוֹ צָפוֹנָה׃", 27.23. "וְלֹא־נָשָׂא דָוִיד מִסְפָּרָם לְמִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וּלְמָטָּה כִּי אָמַר יְהוָה לְהַרְבּוֹת אֶת־יִשְׂרָאֵל כְּכוֹכְבֵי הַשָּׁמָיִם׃", | 16.39. "and Zadok the priest, and his brethren the priests, before the tabernacle of the LORD in the high place that was at Gibeon,", 17.11. "And it shall come to pass, when thy days are fulfilled that thou must go to be with thy fathers, that I will set up thy seed after thee, who shall be of thy sons; and I will establish his kingdom.", 21.11. "So Gad came to David, and said unto him: ‘Thus saith the LORD: Take which thou wilt:", 26.14. "And the lot eastward fell to Shelemiah. Then for Zechariah his son, a discreet counsellor, they cast lots; and his lot came out northward.", 27.23. "But David took not the number of them from twenty years old and under; because the LORD had said He would increase Israel like to the stars of heaven.", |
|
33. Hebrew Bible, Ecclesiastes, 4.7 (5th cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 67| 4.7. "וְשַׁבְתִּי אֲנִי וָאֶרְאֶה הֶבֶל תַּחַת הַשָּׁמֶשׁ׃", | 4.7. "Then I returned and saw vanity under the sun.", |
|
34. Hebrew Bible, Ezra, 10.3 (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 102| 10.3. "וּמִבְּנֵי פַּחַת מוֹאָב עַדְנָא וּכְלָל בְּנָיָה מַעֲשֵׂיָה מַתַּנְיָה בְצַלְאֵל וּבִנּוּי וּמְנַשֶּׁה׃", 10.3. "וְעַתָּה נִכְרָת־בְּרִית לֵאלֹהֵינוּ לְהוֹצִיא כָל־נָשִׁים וְהַנּוֹלָד מֵהֶם בַּעֲצַת אֲדֹנָי וְהַחֲרֵדִים בְּמִצְוַת אֱלֹהֵינוּ וְכַתּוֹרָה יֵעָשֶׂה׃", | 10.3. "Now therefore let us make a covet with our God to put away all the wives, and such as are born of them, according to the counsel of the LORD, and of those that tremble at the commandment of our God; and let it be done according to the law.", |
|
| 35. Dead Sea Scrolls, Temple Scroll, 57.10-57.11, 66.8-66.11 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 82, 85 |
| 36. Dead Sea Scrolls, Rule of The Community, 1.6-1.19, 1.24, 1.27-1.28, 2.18, 2.22 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 30, 48, 66, 71, 106, 163, 178, 207, 208 |
| 37. Dead Sea Scrolls, Rule of The Community, 1.6-1.19, 1.24, 1.27-1.28, 2.18, 2.22 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 30, 48, 66, 71, 106, 163, 178, 207, 208 |
38. Hebrew Bible, Daniel, 9.11 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 125| 9.11. "וְכָל־יִשְׂרָאֵל עָבְרוּ אֶת־תּוֹרָתֶךָ וְסוֹר לְבִלְתִּי שְׁמוֹעַ בְּקֹלֶךָ וַתִּתַּךְ עָלֵינוּ הָאָלָה וְהַשְּׁבֻעָה אֲשֶׁר כְּתוּבָה בְּתוֹרַת מֹשֶׁה עֶבֶד־הָאֱלֹהִים כִּי חָטָאנוּ לוֹ׃", | 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.", |
|
| 39. Dead Sea Scrolls, of Discipline, 2.24, 3.1, 3.4, 3.11, 3.15, 3.25, 4.5, 4.9, 4.10, 4.11, 4.12, 4.13, 4.14, 4.22, 5.3, 5.5, 5.8, 5.10, 5.11, 5.12, 5.13, 5.14, 5.15, 5.16, 5.26, 6.4, 6.5, 6.6, 6.8, 6.9, 6.10, 6.17, 6.18, 6.21, 6.24, 6.25, 6.26, 6.27-7.2, 6.27, 7.4, 7.15, 7.16, 7.17, 7.18, 7.20, 7.22, 8.13, 8.17, 8.18, 8.22, 8.23, 8.26, 9.1, 10.1, 10.14, 10.16 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 70, 178 |
| 40. Dead Sea Scrolls, Hodayot, 4.23, 5.25, 5.30, 5.32, 7.3, 7.34 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 106, 186 |
| 41. Dead Sea Scrolls, Damascus Covenant, 5.5, 5.7, 6.20, 7.2, 7.5, 8.8, 8.16, 8.24, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6, 9.7, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.11, 9.12, 9.13, 9.14, 9.15, 9.16, 9.17, 9.18, 9.19, 9.20, 9.21, 9.22, 9.23-10.2, 9.23, 10.4, 10.5, 10.6, 10.7, 10.8, 10.9, 10.10, 11.5, 11.6, 12.10, 12.24, 13.18, 13.20, 14.3, 14.6, 14.7, 14.8, 14.9, 14.15, 14.20, 14.21, 15.1, 15.2, 15.3, 15.4, 15.5, 15.6, 15.7, 15.14, 15.15, 16.10, 16.11, 16.12, 19.32-20.1, 20.6, 20.19, 20.25 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 82 |
| 42. Dead Sea Scrolls, Community Rule, 1.6-1.19, 1.24, 1.27-1.28, 2.18, 2.22 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 30, 48, 66, 71, 106, 163, 178, 207, 208 |
| 43. Dead Sea Scrolls, Hodayot, 4.23, 5.25, 5.30, 5.32, 7.3, 7.34 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 106, 186 |
44. Septuagint, 2 Maccabees, 7.28, 10.26-10.30, 14.30 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •biblical nature, see also deuteronomy, spirit of the hebrew bible Found in books: Schwartz (2008), 2 Maccabees, 63 | 7.28. I beseech you, my child, to look at the heaven and the earth and see everything that is in them, and recognize that God did not make them out of things that existed. Thus also mankind comes into being.' 10.26. Falling upon the steps before the altar, they besought him to be gracious to them and to be an enemy to their enemies and an adversary to their adversaries, as the law declares.' 10.27. And rising from their prayer they took up their arms and advanced a considerable distance from the city; and when they came near to the enemy they halted." 10.28. Just as dawn was breaking, the two armies joined battle, the one having as pledge of success and victory not only their valor but their reliance upon the Lord, while the other made rage their leader in the fight.' 10.29. When the battle became fierce, there appeared to the enemy from heaven five resplendent men on horses with golden bridles, and they were leading the Jews.' 10.30. Surrounding Maccabeus and protecting him with their own armor and weapons, they kept him from being wounded. And they showered arrows and thunderbolts upon the enemy, so that, confused and blinded, they were thrown into disorder and cut to pieces.' 14.30. But Maccabeus, noticing that Nicanor was more austere in his dealings with him and was meeting him more rudely than had been his custom, concluded that this austerity did not spring from the best motives. So he gathered not a few of his men, and went into hiding from Nicanor.' |
|
| 45. Dead Sea Scrolls, Pesher On Habakkuk, 11.13 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 107 |
46. Septuagint, Ecclesiasticus (Siracides), 4.17, 6.8, 7.30, 11.8, 19.13, 36.21, 37.8, 50.24 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66, 107, 124, 186, 208 | 4.17. For at first she will walk with him on tortuous paths,she will bring fear and cowardice upon him,and will torment him by her discipline until she trusts him,and she will test him with her ordices. 19.13. Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it;but if he did anything, so that he may do it no more. 36.21. A woman will accept any man,but one daughter is better than another. 37.8. Be wary of a counselor,and learn first what is his interest -- for he will take thought for himself -- lest he cast the lot against you 50.24. May he entrust to us his mercy!And let him deliver us in our days! |
|
| 47. Dead Sea Scrolls, War Scroll, 2.5, 2.6, 6.13-7.3, 13.1, 15.4 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 30 |
| 48. Dead Sea Scrolls, (Cairo Damascus Covenant) Cd-A, 5.5, 5.7, 6.20, 7.2, 7.5, 8.8, 8.16, 8.24, 9.1, 9.2, 9.3, 9.4, 9.5, 9.6, 9.7, 9.8, 9.9, 9.10, 9.11, 9.12, 9.13, 9.14, 9.15, 9.16, 9.17, 9.18, 9.19, 9.20, 9.21, 9.22, 9.23, 9.23-10.2, 10.4, 10.5, 10.6, 10.7, 10.8, 10.9, 10.10, 11.5, 11.6, 12.10, 12.24, 13.18, 13.20, 14.3, 14.6, 14.7, 14.8, 14.9, 14.15, 14.20, 14.21, 15.1, 15.2, 15.3, 15.4, 15.5, 15.6, 15.7, 15.14, 15.15, 16.10, 16.11, 16.12, 19.32-20.1, 20.6, 20.19, 20.25 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 82 |
49. Mishnah, Demai, 2.2 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 82| 2.2. "הַמְקַבֵּל עָלָיו לִהְיוֹת נֶאֱמָן, מְעַשֵּׂר אֶת שֶׁהוּא אוֹכֵל, וְאֶת שֶׁהוּא מוֹכֵר, וְאֶת שֶׁהוּא לוֹקֵחַ, וְאֵינוֹ מִתְאָרֵחַ אֵצֶל עַם הָאָרֶץ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אַף הַמִּתְאָרֵחַ אֵצֶל עַם הָאָרֶץ נֶאֱמָן. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, עַל עַצְמוֹ אֵינוֹ נֶאֱמָן, כֵּיצַד יְהֵא נֶאֱמָן עַל שֶׁל אֲחֵרִים: \n", | 2.2. "One who accepts upon himself to be trustworthy (ne’eman), must tithe whatever he eats and whatever he sells and whatever he buys, and he may not be the guest of an am haaretz. Rabbi Judah says: even one who is the guest of an am haaretz can still be considered trustworthy. They said to him: He is not trustworthy in respect of himself! How can he be considered trustworthy in respect of others?", |
|
50. Mishnah, Berachot, 9.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 124| 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: \n", | 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.”", |
|
51. New Testament, Matthew, 23.6 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 208| 23.6. φιλοῦσι δὲ τὴν πρωτοκλισίαν ἐν τοῖς δείπνοις καὶ τὰς πρωτοκαθεδρίας ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς | 23.6. and love the place of honor at feasts, the best seats in the synagogues, |
|
52. New Testament, Luke, 14.7-14.11 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 208| 14.7. Ἔλεγεν δὲ πρὸς τοὺς κεκλημένους παραβολήν, ἐπέχων πῶς τὰς πρωτοκλισίας ἐξελέγοντο, 14.8. λέγων πρὸς αὐτούς Ὅταν κληθῇς ὑπό τινος εἰς γάμους, μὴ κατακλιθῇς εἰς τὴν πρωτοκλισίαν, μή ποτε ἐντιμότερός σου ᾖ κεκλημένος ὑπʼ αὐτοῦ, 14.9. καὶ ἐλθὼν ὁ σὲ καὶ αὐτὸν καλέσας ἐρεῖ σοι Δὸς τούτῳ τόπον, καὶ τότε ἄρξῃ μετὰ αἰσχύνης τὸν ἔσχατον τόπον κατέχειν. 14.10. ἀλλʼ ὅταν κληθῇς πορευθεὶς ἀνάπεσε εἰς τὸν ἔσχατον τόπον, ἵνα ὅταν ἔλθῃ ὁ κεκληκώς σε ἐρεῖ σοι Φίλε, προσανάβηθι ἀνώτερον· τότε ἔσται σοι δόξα ἐνώπιον πάντων τῶν συνανακειμένων σοι. 14.11. ὅτι πᾶς ὁ ὑψῶν ἑαυτὸν ταπεινωθήσεται καὶ ὁ ταπεινῶν ἑαυτὸν ὑψωθήσεται. | 14.7. He spoke a parable to those who were invited, when he noticed how they chose the best seats, and said to them, 14.8. "When you are invited by anyone to a marriage feast, don't sit in the best seat, since perhaps someone more honorable than you might be invited by him, 14.9. and he who invited both of you would come and tell you, 'Make room for this person.' Then you would begin, with shame, to take the lowest place. 14.10. But when you are invited, go and sit in the lowest place, so that when he who invited you comes, he may tell you, 'Friend, move up higher.' Then you will be honored in the presence of all who sit at the table with you. 14.11. For everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, and whoever humbles himself will be exalted." |
|
53. Mishnah, Bava Qamma, 9.11 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 130| 9.11. "הַגּוֹזֵל אֶת הַגֵּר וְנִשְׁבַּע לוֹ, וּמֵת, הֲרֵי זֶה מְשַׁלֵּם קֶרֶן וָחֹמֶשׁ לַכֹּהֲנִים וְאָשָׁם לַמִּזְבֵּחַ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר ה) וְאִם אֵין לָאִישׁ גֹּאֵל לְהָשִׁיב הָאָשָׁם אֵלָיו, הָאָשָׁם הַמּוּשָׁב לַה' לַכֹּהֵן, מִלְּבַד אֵיל הַכִּפֻּרִים אֲשֶׁר יְכַפֶּר בּוֹ עָלָיו. הָיָה מַעֲלֶה אֶת הַכֶּסֶף וְאֶת הָאָשָׁם, וּמֵת, הַכֶּסֶף יִנָּתֵן לְבָנָיו, וְהָאָשָׁם יִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב, וְיִמָּכֵר וְיִפְּלוּ דָמָיו לִנְדָבָה: \n", | 9.11. "If a man stole from a convert and swore [falsely] to him, and the convert died, he must repay the value and the added fifth to the priests, and the Guilt-offering to the altar, as it says: “If the man has no kinsman to whom restitution can be made, the amount which is repaid shall go to the priest in addition to the ram of atonement, whereby atonement shall be made for him” (Numbers 5:8). If he brought the money and the Guilt-offering and then died, the money shall be given to his sons, and the Guilt-offering shall be left to pasture until it suffers a blemish, when it shall be sold, and its value falls to the Temple treasury.", |
|
54. Mishnah, Avot, 1.4, 4.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 71, 124| 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: \n", 4.4. "רַבִּי לְוִיטָס אִישׁ יַבְנֶה אוֹמֵר, מְאֹד מְאֹד הֱוֵי שְׁפַל רוּחַ, שֶׁתִּקְוַת אֱנוֹשׁ רִמָּה. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָא אוֹמֵר, כָּל הַמְחַלֵּל שֵׁם שָׁמַיִם בַּסֵּתֶר, נִפְרָעִין מִמֶּנּוּ בְגָלוּי. אֶחָד שׁוֹגֵג וְאֶחָד מֵזִיד בְּחִלּוּל הַשֵּׁם: \n", | 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.", 4.4. "Rabbi Levitas a man of Yavneh said: be exceeding humble spirit, for the end of man is the worm. Rabbi Yoha ben Berokah said: whoever profanes the name of heaven in secret, he shall be punished in the open. Unwittingly or wittingly, it is all one in profaning the name.", |
|
55. New Testament, John, 6.45 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 186| 6.45. ἔστιν γεγραμμένον ἐν τοῖς προφήταις Καὶ ἔσονται πάντες. διδακτοὶ θεοῦ· πᾶς ὁ ἀκούσας παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς καὶ μαθὼν ἔρχεται πρὸς ἐμέ. | 6.45. It is written in the prophets, 'They will all be taught by God.' Therefore everyone who hears from the Father, and has learned, comes to me. |
|
56. New Testament, Romans, 12.19 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 90| 12.19. μὴ ἑαυτοὺς ἐκδικοῦντες, ἀγαπητοί, ἀλλὰ δότε τόπον τῇ ὀργῇ, γέγραπται γάρἘμοὶ ἐκδίκησις,ἐγὼἀνταποδώσω,λέγει Κύριος. | 12.19. Don't seek revenge yourselves, beloved, but give place to God's wrath. For it is written, "Vengeance belongs to me; I will repay, says the Lord." |
|
57. Josephus Flavius, Jewish War, 2.164-2.165 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •biblical nature, see also deuteronomy, spirit of the hebrew bible Found in books: Schwartz (2008), 2 Maccabees, 63 | 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. |
|
58. Mishnah, Menachot, 8.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 67| 8.5. "הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁבָּרִאשׁוֹן, אֵין לְמַעְלָה מִמֶּנּוּ. הַשֵּׁנִי שֶׁבָּרִאשׁוֹן וְהָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁבַּשֵּׁנִי, שָׁוִין. הַשְּׁלִישִׁי שֶׁבָּרִאשׁוֹן וְהַשֵּׁנִי שֶׁבַּשֵּׁנִי וְהָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁבַּשְּׁלִישִׁי, שָׁוִין. הַשְּׁלִישִׁי שֶׁבַּשֵּׁנִי וְהַשֵּׁנִי שֶׁבַּשְּׁלִישִׁי, שָׁוִין. הַשְּׁלִישִׁי שֶׁבַּשְּׁלִישִׁי, אֵין לְמַטָּה מִמֶּנּוּ. אַף הַמְּנָחוֹת הָיוּ בַדִּין שֶׁיִּטָּעֲנוּ שֶׁמֶן זַיִת זַךְ. מָה אִם הַמְּנוֹרָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ לַאֲכִילָה, טְעוּנָה שֶׁמֶן זַיִת זַךְ, הַמְּנָחוֹת, שֶׁהֵן לַאֲכִילָה, אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁיִּטָּעֲנוּ שֶׁמֶן זַיִת זַךְ. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (שמות כז), זָךְ כָּתִית לַמָּאוֹר, וְלֹא זַךְ כָּתִית לַמְּנָחוֹת: \n", | 8.5. "The first oil of the first crop, there is none better than it. The second oil of the first crop and the first oil of the second crop are equal. The third oil of the first crop, the second oil of the second crop and the first oil of the third crop are equal. The third oil of the second crop and the second oil of the third crop are equal. As to the third oil of the third crop, there is none worse than it. It would have been logical by the following argument that menahot should also require the purest olive oil: if the candlestick, whose [oil] is not for eating, requires pure olive oil, how much more should menahot, whose oil is for eating, require pure olive oil! But the text states, “Pure olive oil of beaten olives for lighting” (Exodus 27:20), but not “pure olive oil of beaten olives for menahot.”", |
|
59. New Testament, 1 Timothy, 3.11-3.12 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 70| 3.11. γυναῖκας ὡσαύτως σεμνάς, μὴ διαβόλους, νηφαλίους, πιστὰς ἐν πᾶσιν. 3.12. διάκονοι ἔστωσαν μιᾶς γυναικὸς ἄνδρες, τέκνων καλῶς προϊστάμενοι καὶ τῶν ἰδίων οἴκων· | 3.11. Their wives in the same way must be reverent, not slanderers, temperate, faithful in all things. 3.12. Let deacons be husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. |
|
60. New Testament, 1 Corinthians, 14.34-14.35 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 70| 14.34. Αἱ γυναῖκες ἐν ταῖς ἐκκλησίαις σιγάτωσαν, οὐ γὰρ ἐπιτρέπεται αὐταῖς λαλεῖν· ἀλλὰ ὑποτασσέσθωσαν, καθὼς καὶ ὁ νόμος λέγει. 14.35. εἰ δέ τι μανθάνειν θέλουσιν, ἐν οἴκῳ τοὺς ἰδίους ἄνδρας ἐπερωτάτωσαν, αἰσχρὸν γάρ ἐστιν γυναικὶ λαλεῖν ἐν ἐκκλησίᾳ. | 14.34. let your wives keepsilent in the assemblies, for it has not been permitted for them tospeak; but let them be in subjection, as the law also says. 14.35. Ifthey desire to learn anything, let them ask their own husbands at home,for it is shameful for a woman to chatter in the assembly. |
|
61. Mishnah, Yoma, 1.3, 1.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 48| 1.3. "מָסְרוּ לוֹ זְקֵנִים מִזִּקְנֵי בֵית דִּין, וְקוֹרִין לְפָנָיו בְּסֵדֶר הַיּוֹם, וְאוֹמְרִים לוֹ, אִישִׁי כֹהֵן גָּדוֹל, קְרָא אַתָּה בְּפִיךָ, שֶׁמָּא שָׁכַחְתָּ אוֹ שֶׁמָּא לֹא לָמָדְתָּ. עֶרֶב יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים שַׁחֲרִית, מַעֲמִידִין אוֹתוֹ בְּשַׁעַר מִזְרָח, וּמַעֲבִירִין לְפָנָיו פָּרִים וְאֵילִים וּכְבָשִׂים, כְּדֵי שֶׁיְּהֵא מַכִּיר וְרָגִיל בָּעֲבוֹדָה: \n", 1.5. "מְסָרוּהוּ זִקְנֵי בֵית דִּין לְזִקְנֵי כְהֻנָּה, וְהֶעֱלוּהוּ לַעֲלִיַּת בֵּית אַבְטִינָס, וְהִשְׁבִּיעוּהוּ וְנִפְטְרוּ וְהָלְכוּ לָהֶם. וְאָמְרוּ לוֹ, אִישִׁי כֹהֵן גָּדוֹל, אָנוּ שְׁלוּחֵי בֵית דִּין, וְאַתָּה שְׁלוּחֵנוּ וּשְׁלִיחַ בֵּית דִּין, מַשְׁבִּיעִין אָנוּ עָלֶיךָ בְּמִי שֶׁשִּׁכֵּן שְׁמוֹ בַבַּיִת הַזֶּה, שֶׁלֹּא תְשַׁנֶּה דָבָר מִכָּל מַה שֶּׁאָמַרְנוּ לָךְ. הוּא פוֹרֵשׁ וּבוֹכֶה, וְהֵן פּוֹרְשִׁין וּבוֹכִין: \n", | 1.3. "They delivered to him elders from the elders of the court and they read before him [throughout the seven days] from the order of the day. And they say to him, “Sir, high priest, you read it yourself with your own mouth, lest you have forgotten or lest you have never learned.” On the eve of Yom HaKippurim in the morning they place him at the eastern gate and pass before him oxen, rams and sheep, so that he may recognize and become familiar with the service.", 1.5. "The elders of the court handed him over to the elders of the priesthood and they took him up to the upper chamber of the house of Avtinas. They adjured him and then left. And they said to him [when leaving]: “Sir, high priest, we are messengers of the court and you are our messenger and the messenger of the court. We adjure you by the one that caused His name dwell in this house that you do not change anything of what we said to you.” He turned aside and wept and they turned aside and wept.", |
|
62. Mishnah, Nedarim, 10.8 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 103| 10.8. "הֲפָרַת נְדָרִים, כָּל הַיּוֹם. יֵשׁ בַּדָּבָר לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר. כֵּיצַד. נָדְרָה בְּלֵילֵי שַׁבָּת, יָפֵר בְּלֵילֵי שַׁבָּת וּבְיוֹם הַשַּׁבָּת עַד שֶׁתֶּחְשָׁךְ. נָדְרָה עִם חֲשֵׁכָה, מֵפֵר עַד שֶׁלֹּא תֶחְשַׁךְ. שֶׁאִם חָשְׁכָה וְלֹא הֵפֵר, אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְהָפֵר: \n", | 10.8. "The annulment of vows is the whole day. This may result in a stringency or in a leniency. How is this so? If she vowed on the eve of the Sabbath, he can annul on the eve of the sabbath and on the Sabbath day until nightfall. If she vowed just before nightfall, he can annul only until nightfall: for if night fell and he had not annulled it, he can no longer annul it.", |
|
63. Mishnah, Makkot, 3.15 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 185| 3.15. "כָּל חַיָּבֵי כְרֵתוֹת שֶׁלָּקוּ, נִפְטְרוּ יְדֵי כְרֵתָתָן, שֶׁנֶאֱמַר (דברים כה) וְנִקְלָה אָחִיךָ לְעֵינֶיךָ, כְּשֶׁלָּקָה הֲרֵי הוּא כְאָחִיךָ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי חֲנַנְיָא בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. אָמַר רַבִּי חֲנַנְיָא בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, מָה אִם הָעוֹבֵר עֲבֵרָה אַחַת, נוֹטֵל נַפְשׁוֹ עָלֶיהָ, הָעוֹשֶׂה מִצְוָה אַחַת, עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה שֶׁתִּנָּתֵן לוֹ נַפְשׁוֹ. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, מִמְּקוֹמוֹ הוּא לָמֵד, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יח) וְנִכְרְתוּ הַנְּפָשׁוֹת הָעֹשֹׂת וְגוֹ', וְאוֹמֵר (שם) אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשֶׂה אֹתָם הָאָדָם וָחַי בָּהֶם. הָא, כָּל הַיּוֹשֵׁב וְלֹא עָבַר עֲבֵרָה, נוֹתְנִין לוֹ שָׂכָר כְּעוֹשֶׂה מִצְוָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, הֲרֵי הוּא אוֹמֵר (דברים יב) רַק חֲזַק לְבִלְתִּי אֲכֹל הַדָּם כִּי הַדָּם הוּא הַנָּפֶשׁ וְגוֹ', וּמָה אִם הַדָּם שֶׁנַּפְשׁוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם קָצָה מִמֶּנּוּ, הַפּוֹרֵשׁ מִמֶּנּוּ מְקַבֵּל שָׂכָר, גָּזֵל וַעֲרָיוֹת שֶׁנַּפְשׁוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם מִתְאַוָּה לָהֶן וּמְחַמַּדְתָּן, הַפּוֹרֵשׁ מֵהֶן עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה שֶׁיִּזְכֶּה לוֹ וּלְדוֹרוֹתָיו וּלְדוֹרוֹת דּוֹרוֹתָיו עַד סוֹף כָּל הַדּוֹרוֹת: \n" | 3.15. "All who have incurred [the penalty of] kareth, on being flogged are exempt from their punishment of kareth, for it says, “[He may be given up to forty lashes, but not more] ... lest your brother shall be dishonored before your eyes” (Deut. 25;3) once he has been lashed he is [considered] “your brother”, the words of Rabbi Haiah ben Gamaliel. Rabbi Haiah ben Gamaliel said: “Just as one who transgresses one transgression forfeits his life, how much more does one who performs one commandment have his life granted him.” Rabbi Shimon says: “You can learn this from its own passage; as it says: “[All who do any of those abhorrent things] such persons shall be cut off from their people” (Lev. 18:29), and it says: “You shall keep my statutes and my ordices which if a man do, he shall live by them” (Lev. 18:5), which means that one who desists from transgressing is granted reward like one who performs a precept. Rabbi Shimon bar Rabbi says: Behold [the Torah] says, “But makes sure that you do not partake of the blood; for the blood is the life, and you must not consume the life with the flesh…[that it may go well with you and with your descendents to come..” (Deut. 12:23-25”-- now, if in the case of blood which a person’s soul loathes, anyone who refrains from it receives reward, how much more so in regard to robbery and sexual sin for which a person’s soul craves and longs shall one who refrains from them acquire merit for himself and for generations and generations to come, to the end of all generations!" |
|
64. Mishnah, Rosh Hashanah, 4.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 106| 4.5. "סֵדֶר בְּרָכוֹת, אוֹמֵר אָבוֹת וּגְבוּרוֹת וּקְדֻשַּׁת הַשֵּׁם, וְכוֹלֵל מַלְכוּיוֹת עִמָּהֶן, וְאֵינוֹ תוֹקֵעַ. קְדֻשַּׁת הַיּוֹם, וְתוֹקֵעַ. זִכְרוֹנוֹת, וְתוֹקֵעַ. שׁוֹפָרוֹת, וְתוֹקֵעַ. וְאוֹמֵר עֲבוֹדָה וְהוֹדָאָה וּבִרְכַּת כֹּהֲנִים, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, אִם אֵינוֹ תוֹקֵעַ לַמַּלְכוּיוֹת, לָמָּה הוּא מַזְכִּיר. אֶלָּא אוֹמֵר אָבוֹת וּגְבוּרוֹת וּקְדֻשַּׁת הַשֵּׁם, וְכוֹלֵל מַלְכוּיוֹת עִם קְדֻשַּׁת הַיּוֹם, וְתוֹקֵעַ. זִכְרוֹנוֹת, וְתוֹקֵעַ. שׁוֹפָרוֹת, וְתוֹקֵעַ. וְאוֹמֵר עֲבוֹדָה וְהוֹדָאָה וּבִרְכַּת כֹּהֲנִים: \n", | 4.5. "The order of blessings [in the Musaf Amidah of Rosh Hashanah]:He says “patriarchs”, “powers” and the “sanctification of the name” and includes the kingship verses with them and does not blow [the shofar]. The sanctification of the day and blows [the shofar], the remembrance-verses and blows [the shofar], and the shofar-verses and blows [the shofar]. Then he says the blessing of the Temple service and “thanksgiving” and the blessing of the priests, the words of Rabbi Yoha ben Nuri. Rabbi Akiva said to him: if he does not blow the shofar for the kingship-verses, why should he say them? Rather he says: “patriarchs”, “powers” and the “sanctification of the name” and includes the kingship verse with the sanctification of the day and blows the shofar, then he says the remembrance-verses and blows, and the shofar-verses and blows. Then he says the Temple service and “thanksgiving” and the blessing of the priest.", |
|
65. Mishnah, Sanhedrin, 1.4, 1.6, 3.2, 4.1, 7.6, 9.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 48, 67, 70, 86, 87| 1.4. "דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת, בְּעֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה. הָרוֹבֵעַ וְהַנִּרְבָּע, בְּעֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה, שֶׁנֶאֱמַר (ויקרא כ) וְהָרַגְתָּ אֶת הָאִשָּׁה וְאֶת הַבְּהֵמָה, וְאוֹמֵר (שם) וְאֶת הַבְּהֵמָה תַּהֲרֹגוּ. שׁוֹר הַנִּסְקָל, בְּעֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כא) הַשּׁוֹר יִסָּקֵל וְגַם בְּעָלָיו יוּמָת, כְּמִיתַת בְּעָלִים כָּךְ מִיתַת הַשּׁוֹר. הַזְּאֵב וְהָאֲרִי, הַדֹּב וְהַנָּמֵר וְהַבַּרְדְּלָס וְהַנָּחָשׁ, מִיתָתָן בְּעֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, כָּל הַקּוֹדֵם לְהָרְגָן, זָכָה. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, מִיתָתָן בְּעֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה: \n", 1.6. "סַנְהֶדְרִי גְדוֹלָה הָיְתָה שֶׁל שִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד, וּקְטַנָּה שֶׁל עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה. וּמִנַּיִן לַגְּדוֹלָה שֶׁהִיא שֶׁל שִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר יא) אֶסְפָה לִּי שִׁבְעִים אִישׁ מִזִּקְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, וּמֹשֶׁה עַל גַּבֵּיהֶן, הֲרֵי שִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, שִׁבְעִים. וּמִנַּיִן לַקְּטַנָּה שֶׁהִיא שֶׁל עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם לה) וְשָׁפְטוּ הָעֵדָה וְגוֹ' וְהִצִּילוּ הָעֵדָה, עֵדָה שׁוֹפֶטֶת וְעֵדָה מַצֶּלֶת, הֲרֵי כָאן עֶשְׂרִים. וּמִנַּיִן לָעֵדָה שֶׁהִיא עֲשָׂרָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם יד) עַד מָתַי לָעֵדָה הָרָעָה הַזֹּאת, יָצְאוּ יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וְכָלֵב. וּמִנַּיִן לְהָבִיא עוֹד שְׁלֹשָׁה, מִמַּשְׁמַע שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כג) לֹא תִהְיֶה אַחֲרֵי רַבִּים לְרָעֹת, שׁוֹמֵעַ אֲנִי שֶׁאֶהְיֶה עִמָּהֶם לְטוֹבָה, אִם כֵּן לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר (שם) אַחֲרֵי רַבִּים לְהַטֹּת, לֹא כְהַטָּיָתְךָ לְטוֹבָה הַטָּיָתְךָ לְרָעָה. הַטָּיָתְךָ לְטוֹבָה עַל פִּי אֶחָד, הַטָּיָתְךָ לְרָעָה עַל פִּי שְׁנַיִם, וְאֵין בֵּית דִּין שָׁקוּל, מוֹסִיפִין עֲלֵיהֶם עוֹד אֶחָד, הֲרֵי כָאן עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה. וְכַמָּה יְהֵא בְעִיר וּתְהֵא רְאוּיָה לְסַנְהֶדְרִין, מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים. רַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה אוֹמֵר, מָאתַיִם וּשְׁלשִׁים, כְּנֶגֶד שָׂרֵי עֲשָׂרוֹת: \n", 3.2. "אָמַר לוֹ נֶאֱמָן עָלַי אַבָּא, נֶאֱמָן עָלַי אָבִיךָ, נֶאֱמָנִין עָלַי שְׁלֹשָׁה רוֹעֵי בָקָר, רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, יָכוֹל לַחֲזֹר בּוֹ. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לַחֲזֹר בּוֹ. הָיָה חַיָּב לַחֲבֵרוֹ שְׁבוּעָה וְאָמַר לוֹ דּוֹר לִי בְחַיֵּי רֹאשְׁךָ, רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, יָכוֹל לַחֲזֹר בּוֹ. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, אֵין יָכוֹל לַחֲזֹר בּוֹ: \n", 4.1. "אֶחָד דִּינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת וְאֶחָד דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת, בִּדְרִישָׁה וּבַחֲקִירָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כד) מִשְׁפַּט אֶחָד יִהְיֶה לָכֶם. מַה בֵּין דִּינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת לְדִינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת. דִּינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה, וְדִינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת בְּעֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה. דִּינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת פּוֹתְחִין בֵּין לִזְכוּת בֵּין לְחוֹבָה, וְדִינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת פּוֹתְחִין לִזְכוּת וְאֵין פּוֹתְחִין לְחוֹבָה. דִּינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת מַטִּין עַל פִּי אֶחָד בֵּין לִזְכוּת בֵּין לְחוֹבָה, וְדִינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת מַטִּין עַל פִּי אֶחָד לִזְכוּת וְעַל פִּי שְׁנַיִם לְחוֹבָה. דִּינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת מַחֲזִירִין בֵּין לִזְכוּת בֵּין לְחוֹבָה, דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת מַחֲזִירִין לִזְכוּת וְאֵין מַחֲזִירִין לְחוֹבָה. דִּינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת הַכֹּל מְלַמְּדִין זְכוּת וְחוֹבָה, דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת הַכֹּל מְלַמְּדִין זְכוּת וְאֵין הַכֹּל מְלַמְּדִין חוֹבָה. דִּינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת הַמְלַמֵּד חוֹבָה מְלַמֵּד זְכוּת וְהַמְלַמֵּד זְכוּת מְלַמֵּד חוֹבָה, דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת הַמְלַמֵּד חוֹבָה מְלַמֵּד זְכוּת, אֲבָל הַמְלַמֵּד זְכוּת אֵין יָכוֹל לַחֲזֹר וּלְלַמֵּד חוֹבָה. דִּינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת דָּנִין בַּיּוֹם וְגוֹמְרִין בַּלַּיְלָה, דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת דָּנִין בַּיּוֹם וְגוֹמְרִין בַּיּוֹם. דִּינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת גּוֹמְרִין בּוֹ בַיּוֹם בֵּין לִזְכוּת בֵּין לְחוֹבָה, דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת גּוֹמְרִין בּוֹ בַיּוֹם לִזְכוּת וּבְיוֹם שֶׁלְּאַחֲרָיו לְחוֹבָה, לְפִיכָךְ אֵין דָּנִין לֹא בְעֶרֶב שַׁבָּת וְלֹא בְעֶרֶב יוֹם טוֹב: \n", 7.6. "הָעוֹבֵד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, אֶחָד הָעוֹבֵד, וְאֶחָד הַזּוֹבֵחַ, וְאֶחָד הַמְקַטֵּר, וְאֶחָד הַמְנַסֵּךְ, וְאֶחָד הַמִּשְׁתַּחֲוֶה, וְאֶחָד הַמְקַבְּלוֹ עָלָיו לֶאֱלוֹהַּ, וְהָאוֹמֵר לוֹ אֵלִי אָתָּה. אֲבָל הַמְגַפֵּף וְהַמְנַשֵּׁק וְהַמְכַבֵּד וְהַמְּרַבֵּץ וְהַמַּרְחִיץ, הַסָּךְ, הַמַּלְבִּישׁ וְהַמַּנְעִיל, עוֹבֵר בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה. הַנּוֹדֵר בִּשְׁמוֹ וְהַמְקַיֵּם בִּשְׁמוֹ, עוֹבֵר בְּלֹא תַעֲשֶׂה. הַפּוֹעֵר עַצְמוֹ לְבַעַל פְּעוֹר, זוֹ הִיא עֲבוֹדָתוֹ. הַזּוֹרֵק אֶבֶן לְמַרְקוּלִיס, זוֹ הִיא עֲבוֹדָתוֹ: \n", 9.5. "מִי שֶׁלָּקָה וְשָׁנָה, בֵּית דִּין מַכְנִיסִים אוֹתוֹ לְכִפָּה וּמַאֲכִילִין אוֹתוֹ שְׂעֹרִין עַד שֶׁכְּרֵסוֹ מִתְבַּקָּעַת. הַהוֹרֵג נֶפֶשׁ שֶׁלֹּא בְעֵדִים, מַכְנִיסִין אוֹתוֹ לְכִפָּה וּמַאֲכִילִין אוֹתוֹ לֶחֶם צַר וּמַיִם לָחַץ: \n", | 1.4. "Cases concerning offenses punishable by death [are decided] by twenty three. A beast that has sexual relations with a woman or with a man is [judged] by twenty three, as it says, “You shall execute the woman and the beast” (Lev. 20:16) and it says, “You shall execute the beast”. The ox that is stoned [is judged] by twenty three., as it says, “The ox shall be stoned and also its owner shall be put to death” (Exodus 21:29), as is the death of the owner, so too is the death of the ox. The wolf, the lion, the bear, the leopard, the panther, or serpent [that have killed a human being] their death is [adjudicated] by twenty three. Rabbi Eliezer says: “Anyone who kills them before they come to court merits.” But Rabbi Akiva says: “Their death must be [adjudicated] by twenty three.", 1.6. "The greater Sanhedrin was made up of seventy one and the little Sanhedrin of twenty three.From where do we learn that the greater Sanhedrin should be made up of seventy one? As it says, “Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel” (Num. 11:16), and when Moses is added to them there is seventy one. Rabbi Judah says: “Seventy.” From where do we learn that the little Sanhedrin should be made up of twenty three? As it says, “The assembly shall judge”, “The assembly shall deliver” (Num. 35:24-25), an assembly that judges and an assembly that delivers, thus we have twenty. And from where do we know that an assembly has ten? As it says, “How long shall I bear this evil congregation?” (Num. 14:27) [which refers to the twelve spies] but Joshua and Caleb were not included. And from where do we learn that we should bring three others [to the twenty]? By inference from what it says, “You shall not follow after the many to do evil” (Ex. 23:2), I conclude that I must be with them to do well. Then why does it say, “[To follow] after the many to change judgment” (Ex. 23:2). [It means that] your verdict of condemnation should not be like your verdict of acquittal, for your verdict of acquittal is reached by the decision of a majority of one, but your verdict of condemnation must be reached by the decision of a majority of two. The court must not be divisible equally, therefore they add to them one more; thus they are twenty three. And how many should there be in a city that it may be fit to have a Sanhedrin? A hundred and twenty. Rabbi Nehemiah says: “Two hundred and thirty, so that [the Sanhedrin of twenty three] should correspond with them that are chiefs of [at least] groups of ten.", 3.2. "If one litigant said to the other, “I accept my father as trustworthy”, or “I accept your father as trustworthy”, or “I accept three herdsman as trustworthy”, Rabbi Meir says, “He may retract.” But the Sages say, “He cannot retract.” If one must take an oath before his fellow, and his fellow said to him, “Vow to me by the life of your head”, Rabbi Meir says, “He may retract.” But the Sages say, “He cannot retract.”", 4.1. "Both non-capital and capital cases require examination and inquiry [of the witnesses], as it says, “You shall have one manner of law” (Lev. 24:22). How do non-capital cases differ from capital cases? Non-capital cases [are decided] by three and capital cases by twenty three. Non-capital cases may begin either with reasons for acquittal or for conviction; capital cases begin with reasons for acquittal and do not begin with reasons for conviction. In non-capital cases they may reach a verdict of either acquittal or conviction by the decision of a majority of one; in capital cases they may reach an acquittal by the majority of one but a verdict of conviction only by the decision of a majority of two. In non-capital cases they may reverse a verdict either [from conviction] to acquittal or [from acquittal] to conviction; in capital cases they may reverse a verdict [from conviction] to acquittal but not [from acquittal] to conviction. In non-capital cases all may argue either in favor of conviction or of acquittal; in capital cases all may argue in favor of acquittal but not all may argue in favor of conviction. In non-capital cases he that had argued in favor of conviction may afterward argue in favor of acquittal, or he that had argued in favor of acquittal may afterward argue in favor of conviction; in capital cases he that had argued in favor of conviction may afterward argue in favor of acquittal but he that had argued in favor of acquittal cannot afterward argue in favor of conviction. In non-capital cases they hold the trial during the daytime and the verdict may be reached during the night; in capital cases they hold the trial during the daytime and the verdict also must be reached during the daytime. In non-capital cases the verdict, whether of acquittal or of conviction, may be reached the same day; in capital cases a verdict of acquittal may be reached on the same day, but a verdict of conviction not until the following day. Therefore trials may not be held on the eve of a Sabbath or on the eve of a Festival.", 7.6. "He who engages in idol-worship [is executed]. This includes the one whoserves it, sacrifices, offers incense, makes libations, bows to it, accepts it as a god, or says to it, “You are my god.” But he who embraces, kisses it, sweeps or sprinkles the ground before it, washes it, anoints it, clothes it, or puts shoes on it, he transgresses a negative commandment [but is not executed]. He who vows or swears by its name, violates a negative commandment. He who uncovers himself before Baal-Peor [is guilty and is to be stoned for] this is how it is worshipped. He who casts a stone on Merculis [is guilty and is to be stoned for] this is how it is worshipped.", 9.5. "He who was flogged and then flogged again [for two transgressions, and then sinned again,] is placed by the court in a cell and fed with barley bread, until his stomach bursts. One who commits murder without witnesses is placed in a cell and [forcibly] fed with bread of adversity and water of affliction.", |
|
66. Mishnah, Sotah, 6.2, 9.15 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 70, 124| 6.2. "אָמַר עֵד אֶחָד, אֲנִי רְאִיתִיהָ שֶׁנִּטְמֵאת, לֹא הָיְתָה שׁוֹתָה. וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא אֲפִלּוּ עֶבֶד, אֲפִלּוּ שִׁפְחָה, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ נֶאֱמָנִין אַף לְפָסְלָהּ מִכְּתֻבָּתָהּ. חֲמוֹתָהּ וּבַת חֲמוֹתָהּ וְצָרָתָהּ וִיבִמְתָּהּ וּבַת בַּעְלָהּ, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ נֶאֱמָנוֹת, וְלֹא לְפָסְלָהּ מִכְּתֻבָּתָהּ, אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא תִשְׁתֶּה: \n", 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: \n", | 6.2. "If one witness said, “I saw that she was defiled”, she does not drink the water. Not only that, but even a slave, male or female, is believed even to disqualify her from receiving her ketubah. Her mother-in-law, her mother-in-law’s daughter, her rival wife, her sister-in-law, and the daughter of her husband are believed, not to disqualify her from receiving her ketubah, but that she should not drink.", 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.”", |
|
67. Mishnah, Sukkah, 4.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 101| 4.5. "מִצְוַת עֲרָבָה כֵּיצַד, מָקוֹם הָיָה לְמַטָּה מִירוּשָׁלַיִם, וְנִקְרָא מוֹצָא. יוֹרְדִין לְשָׁם וּמְלַקְּטִין מִשָּׁם מֻרְבִּיּוֹת שֶׁל עֲרָבָה, וּבָאִין וְזוֹקְפִין אוֹתָן בְּצִדֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, וְרָאשֵׁיהֶן כְּפוּפִין עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ. תָּקְעוּ וְהֵרִיעוּ וְתָקָעוּ. בְּכָל יוֹם מַקִּיפִין אֶת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ פַּעַם אַחַת, וְאוֹמְרִים, אָנָּא ה' הוֹשִׁיעָה נָּא, אָנָּא ה' הַצְלִיחָה נָּא. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אֲנִי וָהוֹ הוֹשִׁיעָה נָּא. וְאוֹתוֹ הַיּוֹם מַקִּיפִין אֶת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ שֶׁבַע פְּעָמִים. בִּשְׁעַת פְּטִירָתָן, מָה הֵן אוֹמְרִים, יֹפִי לְךָ מִזְבֵּחַ, יֹפִי לְךָ מִזְבֵּחַ. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, לְיָהּ וּלְךָ, מִזְבֵּחַ. לְיָהּ וּלְךָ, מִזְבֵּחַ: \n", | 4.5. "The mitzvah of the aravah how was it [performed]?There was a place below Jerusalem called Moza. They went down there and gathered tall branches of aravot and then they came and stood them up at the sides of the altar, and their tops were bent over the altar. They then sounded a teki’ah [long blast], a teru’ah [staccato blast] and again a teki’ah. Every day they went round the altar once, saying, “O Lord, save us, O Lord, make us prosper” (Psalms 118:. Rabbi Judah says: “Ani vaho, save us.” On that day they went round the altar seven times. When they departed, what did they say? “O altar, beauty is to you! O altar, beauty is to you!” Rabbi Eliezer said: [they would say,] “To the Lord and to you, O altar, to the Lord and to you, O altar.”", |
|
68. Mishnah, Tamid, 5.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 106| 5.1. "אָמַר לָהֶם הַמְמֻנֶּה, בָּרְכוּ בְרָכָה אֶחַת, וְהֵן בֵּרְכוּ. קָרְאוּ עֲשֶׂרֶת הַדְּבָרִים, שְׁמַע, וְהָיָה אִם שָׁמֹעַ, וַיֹּאמֶר. בֵּרְכוּ אֶת הָעָם שָׁלשׁ בְּרָכוֹת, אֱמֶת וְיַצִּיב, וַעֲבוֹדָה, וּבִרְכַּת כֹּהֲנִים. וּבְשַׁבָּת מוֹסִיפִין בְּרָכָה אַחַת לַמִּשְׁמָר הַיּוֹצֵא: \n", | 5.1. "The superintendent said to them: Bless one blessing! And they blessed. They then read the Ten Commandments, the Shema, the “And it will be if you hearken” (the second paragraph of Shema) and Vayomer (the third paragraph of Shema), and they blessed the people with three blessings: Emet veYatziv, and Avodah, and the priestly benediction. On Shabbat they added a blessing to be said by the watch which was leaving.", |
|
69. Mishnah, Yevamot, 15.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 70| 15.4. "הַכֹּל נֶאֱמָנִים לַהֲעִידָהּ, חוּץ מֵחֲמוֹתָהּ, וּבַת חֲמוֹתָהּ, וְצָרָתָהּ, וִיבִמְתָּהּ, וּבַת בַּעְלָהּ. מַה בֵּין גֵּט לְמִיתָה, שֶׁהַכְּתָב מוֹכִיחַ. עֵד אוֹמֵר מֵת, וְנִשֵּׂאת, וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָמַר לֹא מֵת, הֲרֵי זוֹ לֹא תֵצֵא. עֵד אוֹמֵר מֵת, וּשְׁנַיִם אוֹמְרִים לֹא מֵת, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּשֵּׂאת, תֵּצֵא. שְׁנַיִם אוֹמְרִים מֵת, וְעֵד אוֹמֵר לֹא מֵת, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִשֵּׂאת, תִּנָּשֵׂא: \n", | 15.4. "All are believed to testify for her [concerning her husband’s death] except for her mother-in-law, the daughter of her mother-in-law, her rival wife, her sister-in-law and her husband’s daughter. Why is [the bringing of] a letter of divorce different [from testifying regarding] death?The written document provides the proof. If one witness stated, “he is dead”, and his wife married again, and another came and stated “he is not dead”, she need not leave [her new husband]. If one witness said “he is dead” and two witnesses said “he is not dead”, even if she married again, she must leave him. If two witnesses stated, “he is dead”, and one witness stated, “he is not dead”, even if she had not married, she may do so.", |
|
70. Mishnah, Horayot, 1.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 48| 1.4. "הוֹרוּ בֵית דִּין, וְיָדַע אֶחָד מֵהֶן שֶׁטָּעוּ, וְאָמַר לָהֶן טוֹעִין אַתֶּם, אוֹ שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה מֻפְלָא שֶׁל בֵּית דִּין שָׁם, אוֹ שֶׁהָיָה אַחַד מֵהֶן גֵּר אוֹ מַמְזֵר אוֹ נָתִין אוֹ זָקֵן שֶׁלֹּא רָאָה לוֹ בָנִים, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ פְטוּרִין, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר כָּאן עֵדָה (ויקרא ד) וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן (במדבר לה) עֵדָה, מָה עֵדָה הָאֲמוּר לְהַלָּן עַד שֶׁיִּהְיוּ כֻלָּם רְאוּיִין לְהוֹרָאָה, אַף עֵדָה הָאֲמוּרָה כָאן עַד שֶׁיִּהְיוּ כֻלָּם רְאוּיִים לְהוֹרָאָה. הוֹרוּ בֵית דִּין שׁוֹגְגִים וְעָשׂוּ כָל הַקָּהָל שׁוֹגְגִין, מְבִיאִין פָּר. מְזִידִין וְעָשׂוּ שׁוֹגְגִין, מְבִיאִין כִּשְׂבָּה וּשְׂעִירָה. שׁוֹגְגִין וְעָשׂוּ מְזִידִין, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ פְטוּרִין: \n", | 1.4. "If the court ruled and one of them knew that they had erred and said to the others, “You are making a mistake”, or if the mufla of the court was not there, or if one of them was a proselyte or a mamzer or a nathin or an elder who did not have children, they are exempt, for it says here (Lev 4:13) “congregation” and it says later on (Num 35:24) “congregation”; just as the “congregation” further on must be fit to issue rulings, so too the “congregation” mentioned here must be fit to issue rulingsIf the court issued a [wrong] decision unwittingly and all the people acted unwittingly, they bring a bull. [If the court ruled wrong] intentionally and [the people] acted unwillingly, they bring a lamb or a goat. [If the court ruled] unwittingly and [the people] acted willingly accordingly, they are exempt.", |
|
71. Tosefta, Bava Qamma, 10.16 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 51| 10.16. "בן בג בג אומר לא יגנוב אדם את שלו מבית אחרים שמא יראה כגנב וכן היה בן בג בג אומר לא יגנוב אדם את שלו מבית הגנב שמא אף הוא יראה כגנב אלא משבר את שניו ומוציא את טליתו מידו. גנבים שנכנסו במחתרת ועשו תשובה כולן חייבין להחזיר עשה אחד מהן תשובה אין חייב לשלם אלא על חלקו בלבד. אם היה מוציא ונותן לפניהם חייב לשלם על הכל. טול דמי פרתך טול דמי טליתך אין שומעין לו באמת נגנבו או אבדו נותן לו דמיהן. ", | |
|
72. Tosefta, Sanhedrin, 5.2, 5.5, 7.5 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 48, 70, 87| 5.2. "משחק בקוביא זו משחק בפסיפסין אחד המשחק בפסיפסין ואחד המשחק בקליפי אגוזים ובקליפי רמונים לעולם אין יכול לחזור בו עד שישבר את פסיפסין ויחזור בו חזרה גמורה המלוה ברבית אין יכול לחזור בו עד שיקרע שטרותיו ויחזור בו חזרה גמורה מפריחי יונים זה הממרה את היונין אחד ממרה את היונין ואחד ממרה שאר בהמה חיה ועוף לעולם אין יכול לחזור בו עד שישבור את פיגמיו ויחזור בו חזרה גמורה סוחרי שביעית זה היושב ובטל בשאר שני שבוע כיון שהגיע שנת השמטה התחיל מפשיט ידיו ורגליו ונושא ונותן בפירות עבירה לעולם אין יכול לחזור בו עד שתגיע שמטה אחרת וידבק ויחזור בו חזרה גמורה רבי נחמיה אומר חזרת ממון ולא חזרת דברים כיצד אמר מאתים דינר אלו כנסתי מפירות עבירה חלקו אותן לעניים ר\"מ היה קורא אותן אוספי שביעית רבי יהודה היה קורא אותן סוחרי שביעית אר\"ש מקיים אני דבר שניהן הא כיצד עד שלא רבו האונסין היו קורין אוספי שביעית ומשרבו האונסין היו קורין אותן סוחרי שביעית ובכולן היה רבי יהודה אומר בזמן שיש להן אומנות אחרות הרי אלו פסולין חזרו בהן הרי כשרים וחכמים אומרים אף בזמן שיש להן אומנות הרי אלו פסולין בד\"א בקדוש החדש ובעיבור שנה בדיני ממונות ובדיני נפשות אבל עדות שהאשה כשרה לה הן כשרין לה.", 5.5. "הוסיפו עליהן הרועין והגזלנין החמסנין וכל החשודין על הממון עדותן פסולה לעולם.", 7.5. "בדיני ממונות אומרין נזדקק הדין בדיני נפשות אין אומרין נזדקק הדין והגדול שבדיינים אומר נזדקק הדין אין שואלין מעומד ואין משיבין מעומד לא מגבוה ולא מרחוק ולא מאחורי הזקנים אין שואלין אלא בענין ואין משיבין אלא במדע ולא ישאל השואל בענין יתיר משלש הלכות אחד שואל ואחד אומר שלא לשאול נזקקין לשואל והשואל מעשה צריך שיאמר מעשה אני שואל והשואל כענין והשואל שלא כענין משיבין את השואל כענין והשואל שלא כענין צריך שיאמר שלא כענין שאלתי דברי ר\"מ וחכ\"א א\"צ שכל התורה ענין אחד. ענין ושאינו ענין נזקקין לענין מעשה ושאינו מעשה נזקקין למעשה הלכה ומדרש נזקקין להלכה מדרש ואגדה נזקקין למדרש מדרש וק\"ו נזקקין לק\"ו ק\"ו וגזירה שוה נזקקין לק\"ו חכם ותלמיד נזקקין לחכם תלמיד ועם הארץ נזקקין לתלמיד היו שניהם חכמים ושניהם תלמידים ושניהם עמי הארץ שתי הלכות ושתי שאלות ושתי תשובות ושני מעשים הרשות ביד התורגמן מעתה כשהנשיא נכנס כל העם עומדים והן ישבו עד שאמר להם שבו כשאב ב\"ד נכנס עושים לו שתי שורות מכאן ומכאן עד שנכנס וישב במקומו חכם שנכנס אחד עומד ואחד יושב עד שנכנס וישב במקומו בני חכמים ותלמידי חכמים בזמן שהרבים צריכים להם מקפצן אפילו על ראשי העם ואע\"פ שאמרו אין שבח לתלמיד שיכנס באחרונה יצא לצורך נכנס ויושב במקומו בני חכמים תלמידי חכמים בזמן שיש בהם דעת לשמוע הופכין את פניהם כלפי אביהם אין בהם דעת לשמוע הופכין את פניהם כלפי העם ר' אלעזר בר' צדוק אומר בבית המשתה עושים אותן סניפין חכם שנכנס אין שואלין אותו עד שתתישב דעתו נכנס ומצאם כשהם עוסקים בהלכה לא יהא קופץ לתוך דבריהם עד שיודע באיזה ענין הן עוסקים ואם עשה כן על זה נאמר שבעה דברים בגולם. שבע מדות דרש הלל לפני זקני בתירה ק\"ו וגזרה שוה ובנין אב וכתוב אחד ובנין אב ושני כתובים וכלל ופרט וכלל וכיוצא בו ממקום אחר דבר הלמד מענינו אלו שבע מדות שדרש הלל הזקן לפני זקני בתירה. ", | 7.5. "...Hillel the elder expounded seven hermeneutical principles before the elders of Betheira: kal vachomer, gezeirah shavah, shnei kethuvim, kllal ufrat, kayotze bo bemakom acher (\"the same applies elsewhere\" — i.e., binyan av), davar halamed me'inyano (and davar halamed misofo)." |
|
73. Tosefta, Nedarim, 1.1, 6.1 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 103, 136| 1.1. "חומר [בנדרים מבשבועות] שהנדרים נוהגין ברשות ובמצוה משא\"כ בשבועות [חומר] בשבועות מבנדרים שהשבועות [נוהגת] בדבר שיש בו ממש ובדבר שאין בו ממש משא\"כ בנדרים בנדרים כיצד אמר קונם סוכה [שאיני] עושה לולב [שאיני] נוטל תפילין [שאיני] נותן [אסור] בנדרים [ומותר בשבועות] כיצד אמר קונם שאני ישן שאני מדבר [שאיני] מהלך [אסור] בשבועות [ומותר בנדרים]. קונם פי מדבר עמך ידי עושה עמך רגלי מהלכת עמך אסור בנדרים [ואסור בשבועות].", 1.1. "האומר ימינה הרי זו שבועה שמאלה הרי זו שבועה בשם ה\"ז שבועה לשם ה\"ז קרבן.", 6.1. "ר' יוסי בר' יהודה ור' אלעזר בר' שמעון [אומר הפרת נדרים] מעת לעת כיצד היו על אשתו חמשה נדרים או שהיו לו חמש נשים ונדרו כולן ואמר כולן מופרין מופר ליך נדר זה לא הופר אלא נדר זה [לא היפר לה אלא נדר זה] מה ראית שתדורי אי אפשי שתדורי אין זה נדר לא אמר כלום מופר מבוטל זה הרי זה בטל קיים ליך יפה עשית אף אני כמותיך אם לא נדרת [מדירך אני] אין יכול להפר.", | |
|
| 74. Tosefta, Hulin, 2.24 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66 |
75. Tosefta, Demai, 2.1-2.2 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 82| 2.1. "אורז במקומו מותר שבתחילת אנטכיא ר' אליעזר בר' יוסי אומר אורז [שבתחילת] אנטכיא מותר הוא עד בורו.", 2.1. "הבא לקבל עליו אפילו תלמיד חכם צריך לקבל עליו אבל חכם היושב בישיבה אין צריך לקבל עליו שכבר קבל עליו משעה שישב אבא שאול אומר אף ת\"ח אין צריך לקבל עליו ולא עוד אלא אף אחרים מקבלין בפניו חבורה אין בניו ועבדיו צריכין לקבל בפני חבורה אלא מקבלין בפניו חבורה ר\"ש בן גמליאל אומר אינו דומה חבר שקלקל לבן חבר שקלקל.", 2.2. "המקבל עליו ארבעה דברים מקבלין אותו להיות חבר שלא ליתן תרומות ומעשרות לעם הארץ ושלא יעשה טהרות אצל עם הארץ ושיהא אוכל חולין בטהרה.", | |
|
76. Tosefta, Berachot, 5.7 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 203| 5.7. "סדר למזיגת הכוס בתוך המזון מתחיל מן הגדול אחר המזון מתחילין מן המברך רצה לחלוק כבוד לרבו או למי שגדול ממנו הרשות בידו.", | |
|
77. Tosefta, Tevulyom, 1.3, 1.6 (2nd cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 178| 1.3. "חומר בידים מטבול יום שהידים תחלה לחטאת מטמאות אחד ופוסלות אחד בקדש ומטמאות התרומה ומטמאות את המשקין לעשותן תחלה באלו הימים וכל שאינו חיבור בטבול יום חיבור בידים. חומר באוכלין שאין במשקין ובמשקין מה שאין באוכלין. שהאוכלין יש להן ידות ואין צריכה מחשבה לאוכלין ומטמאין את המשקין לעשותן תחלה והמשקין מטמאין את האוכלים לעשותן שנים לספקן לטמא את אחרים ואין להן טהרה מטומאתן משא\"כ משקין. חומר במשקין שהמשקין לעולם ומטמא כל שהוא ויש מהן שנעשו באב הטומאה לטמא אדם ומטמא בגדים ולטמא אוכלין ומשקין וכלי מאחוריו וכלי חרס מאוירו משא\"כ באוכלין. חומר במים מה שאין במשקין ובמשקין מה שאין במים שהמים נעשין אב הטומאה לטמא אדם ולטמא בגדים ופוסלין את המקוה בשלשת לוגין ואת הגוף בשלשת לוגין משא\"כ במשקין שהמשקין אין להן טהרה מטומאתן ואין טהורין בגוף ופוסלין את המקוה בשינוי מראה משא\"כ במים.", | |
|
78. Mishna, Tevulyom, 2.2 (2nd cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 178| 2.2. "קְדֵרָה שֶׁהִיא מְלֵאָה מַשְׁקִים וְנָגַע בָּהּ טְבוּל יוֹם, אִם הָיָה מַשְׁקֵה תְרוּמָה, הַמַּשְׁקִין פְּסוּלִין וְהַקְּדֵרָה טְהוֹרָה. וְאִם הָיָה מַשְׁקֵה חֻלִּין, הַכֹּל טָהוֹר. וְאִם הָיוּ יָדָיו מְסֹאָבוֹת, הַכֹּל טָמֵא. זֶה חֹמֶר בַּיָּדַיִם מִבִּטְבוּל יוֹם. וְחֹמֶר בִּטְבוּל יוֹם מִבַּיָּדַיִם, שֶׁסְּפֵק טְבוּל יוֹם פּוֹסֵל אֶת הַתְּרוּמָה, וְהַיָּדַיִם סְפֵקָן טָהוֹר:", | 2.2. "A pot which was full of liquid and a tevul yom touched it: If it is terumah, the liquid is disqualified, but the pot is clean. But if the liquid is non-sacred [hullin] then all remains clean. If his hands were defiled [and he touched the liquids in the pot], all becomes unclean. This is a case defiled hands are treated more stringently than a tevul yom. But a greater stringency is applied to a tevul yom than to defiled hands, since a doubtful tevul yom disqualifies terumah, but doubts with regard to defiled hands are clean.", |
|
| 79. Palestinian Talmud, Ketuvot, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 87 |
| 80. Palestinian Talmud, Nedarim, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 203 |
| 81. Palestinian Talmud, Sheqalim, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 103 |
| 82. Palestinian Talmud, Peah, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 85 |
| 83. Palestinian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 48 |
| 84. Anon., Sifre Numbers, 150, 156, 7 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 82 |
| 85. Anon., Sifra, None (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 67 |
| 86. Palestinian Talmud, Niddah, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 103 |
| 87. Palestinian Talmud, Shevuot, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 87 |
| 88. Palestinian Talmud, Sotah, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66 |
| 89. Palestinian Talmud, Demai, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 103 |
90. Babylonian Talmud, Menachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 67 | 86b. strong GEMARA: /strong The Gemara asks: How can the mishna state that the second grade of the first harvest and the first grade of the second harvest are of b equal /b quality? b But didn’t you say /b that the b first /b grade of each harvest is fit b for /b kindling b the Candelabrum and the rest /b are fit only b for /b use in b meal offerings? /b It would appear then that the first grade in any harvest is actually superior to the second grade of other harvests. To resolve this, b Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: What /b does the mishna mean when it states that b they are /b of b equal /b quality? It means that b they are equal with regard to meal offerings, /b and there is no reason to choose one over the other.,§ The mishna teaches: b Also /b with regard to b all the meal offerings, it was logical /b that they should require refined olive oil. To dispel this notion, the verse states: “Refined pounded olive oil for illumination” (Leviticus 24:2). b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i with regard to the verse cited in the mishna: The word b “refined” /b means b nothing other than clean /b oil, which flows by itself from the olives without applying any pressure. b Rabbi Yehuda says /b that the word b “pounded” /b means b nothing other than /b olives b crushed /b with a mortar, but not with a millstone.,One b might /b have thought that b refined, pounded /b oil b is unfit for meal offerings, /b since the verse specifies that this oil is to be used for illumination. To dispel this notion, b the verse states /b with regard to the meal offering brought with the daily offering: b “And a tenth of fine flour, thoroughly mixed with /b a quarter of a i hin /i of b pounded oil” /b (Exodus 29:40). This indicates that pounded oil is fit to be used in meal offerings. b If so, what /b is the meaning when b the verse states /b that the refined pounded oil is b “for illumination”? Rather, /b the Torah requires the use of refined pounded oil only for the Candelabrum, b due to the sparing [ i haḥisakhon /i ] /b of money, as the highest-quality oil is very expensive.,The Gemara asks: b What /b is the reason for being b sparing? Rabbi Elazar says: /b The intention is that b the Torah spared the money of the Jewish people /b and did not require that the highest-quality oil be used for the meal offerings.,§ The Gemara discusses the Candelabrum and other aspects of the Temple. The verse states: b “Command the children of Israel, and they shall take for yourself refined pounded olive oil /b for illumination, to kindle the lamps continually” (Leviticus 24:2). b Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani says: /b God tells the Jewish people that the oil should be taken b “for yourself,” /b to indicate that it is for their benefit b and not for My /b benefit, as b I do not need its light. /b ,Similarly, with regard to the b Table /b of the shewbread, located b in the north /b of the Sanctuary, b and /b the b Candelabrum, /b located b in the south /b of the Sanctuary, b Rabbi Zerika says /b that b Rabbi Elazar says: /b God said to the Jewish people: b I do not require /b the Table b for eating, nor do I require /b the Candelabrum b for its illumination. /b In evidence of this, the Candelabrum was not positioned close to the Table, as is done by one who sets a table with food in order to eat there.,With regard the Temple built by King Solomon, the verse states: b “And he made for the House, windows narrow and broad” /b (I Kings 6:4). The Sages b taught /b in a i baraita /i : Typically, windows are constructed to widen toward the inside in order that the light from the outside would be dispersed throughout the room. For the Temple, God said: Make the windows b narrow within and broad without, /b as b I do not require its illumination. /b On the contrary, the light of the Temple is to be radiated outward.,God instructed Aaron to kindle the Candelabrum: b “Outside the Curtain of the testimony in the Tent of Meeting” /b (Leviticus 24:3). The dividing curtain is referred to here as: The Curtain of the testimony, to indicate that the illumination of the Candelabrum b is testimony to all of humanity that the Divine Presence rests among the Jewish people. /b , b And if you /b question this and b say: /b How is this testimony; perhaps the Candelabrum is lit for illumination? To this God would respond: Do b I need its light? But isn’t /b it so that for b all forty years that /b the b Jewish people walked in the wilderness /b of Sinai until they entered Eretz Yisrael, b they walked exclusively by His light, /b i.e., from the pillar of fire that guided them at night. If God provides light for others, he certainly does not need it Himself. b Rather, /b evidently, the illumination of the Candelabrum b is testimony to all of humanity that the Divine Presence rests among the Jewish people. /b , b What /b provides b its testimony? Rava says: /b The testimony b is /b provided by b the westernmost lamp /b of the Candelabrum, b in which they place /b a quantity of b oil equivalent /b to that placed in b the other /b lamps, b and /b nevertheless it continues to burn longer than any of the other lamps. It burns so long that every evening, b from it /b the priest b would kindle /b the Candelabrum, i.e., he lit that westernmost lamp first, b and /b the following morning, b with it he would conclude /b the preparation of the lamps for the following evening’s lighting, because it remained alight longer than any of the other lamps. This perpetual miracle was testimony to God’s continuous presence among His people., strong MISHNA: /strong b From where would they bring the wine /b for libations? b Keduḥim and Attulin /b are the b primary /b sources b for wine. Secondary to them /b is b Beit Rima and Beit Lavan, /b located b in the mountain, and /b the b village of Signa, /b located b in the valley. All the regions were valid /b sources for wine; b but /b it was b from here, /b i.e., the aforementioned locations, that b they would bring /b the wine., b One may not bring /b libations of wine that come b from a fertilized vineyard, or from an irrigated vineyard, or from /b a vineyard in b which /b grain b was sown between /b the vines. b But if one did bring /b a libation from such wine, it is b valid. One may not bring /b libations from b sweet wine made from sun-dried grapes [ i hilyasteyon /i ], but if one did bring /b a libation from such wine, it is b valid. One may not bring /b wine b aged /b for one year; this is b the statement of Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi, b but the Rabbis deem it valid. One may not bring /b libations from b sweet /b wine, b nor /b from wine produced from b smoked /b grapes, b nor /b libations b from boiled /b wine, b and if one did bring /b a libation from such wine, it is b not valid. And one may not bring /b wine produced from b grapes suspended /b on stakes or trees; b rather, /b one brings it b from grapes at foot /b height, i.e., that rest on the ground, which are superior-quality grapes, and from b vineyards that are cultivated, /b i.e., where one hoes beneath the vines twice a year., b And /b when producing wine for libations, b one should not collect /b the wine b into large barrels, /b as it causes the wine to spoil; b rather, /b it should be placed b in small casks. And one does not fill up /b the cask b until its mouth; /b rather, one leaves some empty space b so that its fragrance will /b collect there and b diffuse /b when the lid is opened., b One should not bring /b libations b from /b wine that rests at the b mouth of /b the cask b due to /b |
|
91. Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 70| 86b. אמר ר' יוחנן גדולה תשובה שדוחה את לא תעשה שבתורה שנאמר (ירמיהו ג, א) לאמר הן ישלח איש את אשתו והלכה מאתו והיתה לאיש אחר הישוב אליה עוד הלא חנוף תחנף הארץ ההיא ואת זנית רעים רבים ושוב אלי נאם ה',א"ר יונתן גדולה תשובה (שמקרבת) את הגאולה שנאמר (ישעיהו נט, כ) ובא לציון גואל ולשבי פשע ביעקב מה טעם ובא לציון גואל משום דשבי פשע ביעקב,אמר ריש לקיש גדולה תשובה שזדונות נעשות לו כשגגות שנאמר (הושע יד, ב) שובה ישראל עד ה' אלהיך כי כשלת בעונך הא עון מזיד הוא וקא קרי ליה מכשול איני והאמר ריש לקיש גדולה תשובה שזדונות נעשות לו כזכיות שנאמר (יחזקאל לג, יט) ובשוב רשע מרשעתו ועשה משפט וצדקה עליהם (חיה) יחיה לא קשיא כאן מאהבה כאן מיראה,אמר ר' שמואל בר נחמני אמר ר' יונתן גדולה תשובה שמארכת שנותיו של אדם שנאמר (יחזקאל יח, כז) ובשוב רשע מרשעתו (חיו) יחיה,אמר ר' יצחק אמרי במערבא משמיה דרבה בר מרי בא וראה שלא כמדת הקדוש ברוך הוא מדת בשר ודם מדת בשר ודם מקניט את חבירו בדברים ספק מתפייס הימנו ספק אין מתפייס הימנו וא"ת מתפייס הימנו ספק מתפייס בדברים ספק אין מתפייס בדברים,אבל הקב"ה אדם עובר עבירה בסתר מתפייס ממנו בדברים שנאמר (הושע יד, ג) קחו עמכם דברים ושובו אל ה' ולא עוד אלא שמחזיק לו טובה שנאמר וקח טוב ולא עוד אלא שמעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו הקריב פרים שנאמר (הושע יד, ג) ונשלמה פרים שפתינו שמא תאמר פרי חובה ת"ל (הושע יד, ה) ארפא משובתם אוהבם נדבה,תניא היה ר"מ אומר גדולה תשובה שבשביל יחיד שעשה תשובה מוחלין לכל העולם כולו שנא' ארפא משובתם אוהבם נדבה כי שב אפי ממנו מהם לא נאמר אלא ממנו,היכי דמי בעל תשובה אמר רב יהודה כגון שבאת לידו דבר עבירה פעם ראשונה ושניה וניצל הימנה מחוי רב יהודה באותה אשה באותו פרק באותו מקום,א"ר יהודה רב רמי כתיב (תהלים לב, א) אשרי נשוי פשע כסוי חטאה וכתיב (משלי כח, יג) מכסה פשעיו לא יצליח לא קשיא הא בחטא מפורסם הא בחטא שאינו מפורסם רב זוטרא בר טוביה אמר רב נחמן כאן בעבירות שבין אדם לחבירו כאן בעבירות שבין אדם למקום,תניא ר' יוסי בר יהודה אומר אדם עובר עבירה פעם ראשונה מוחלין לו שניה מוחלין לו שלישית מוחלין לו רביעית אין מוחלין לו שנאמר (עמוס ב, ו) כה אמר ה' על שלשה פשעי ישראל ועל ארבעה לא אשיבנו (ונאמר) (איוב לג, כט) הן כל אלה יפעל אל פעמים שלש עם גבר,מאי ואומר וכי תימא הני מילי בציבור אבל ביחיד לא ת"ש הן כל אלה יפעל אל פעמים שלש עם גבר מכאן ואילך אין מוחלין לו שנאמר על שלשה פשעי ישראל ועל ארבעה לא אשיבנו,ת"ר עבירות שהתודה עליהן יוה"כ זה לא יתודה עליהן יום הכפורים אחר ואם שנה בהן צריך להתודות יוה"כ אחר ואם לא שנה בהן וחזר והתודה עליהן עליו הכתוב אומר (משלי כו, יא) ככלב שב על קיאו כסיל שונה באולתו,רבי אליעזר בן יעקב אומר כ"ש שהוא משובח שנאמר (תהלים נא, ה) כי פשעי אני אדע וחטאתי נגדי תמיד אלא מה אני מקיים ככלב שב על קיאו וגו' כדרב הונא דאמר רב הונא כיון שעבר אדם עבירה ושנה בה הותרה לו הותרה לו סלקא דעתך אלא אימא נעשית לו כהיתר,וצריך לפרוט את החטא שנאמר (שמות לב, לא) אנא חטא העם הזה חטאה גדולה ויעשו להם אלהי זהב דברי ר' יהודה בן בבא רבי עקיבא אומר אשרי נשוי פשע כסוי חטאה אלא מהו שאמר משה ויעשו להם אלהי זהב כדר' ינאי דאמר ר' ינאי אמר משה לפני הקדוש ברוך הוא רבש"ע כסף וזהב שהרבית להם לישראל עד שאמרו די גרם להם שיעשו אלהי זהב,שני פרנסים טובים עמדו להם לישראל משה ודוד משה אמר יכתב סורחני שנאמר (במדבר כ, יב) יען לא האמנתם בי להקדישני דוד אמר אל יכתב סורחני שנאמר אשרי נשוי פשע כסוי חטאה,משל דמשה ודוד למה הדבר דומה לשתי נשים שלקו בבית דין אחת קלקלה ואחת אכלה פגי שביעית אמרה להן אותה שאכלה פגי שביעית בבקשה מכם הודיעו על מה היא לוקה שלא יאמרו על מה שזו לוקה זו לוקה הביאו פגי שביעית ותלו בצוארה והיו מכריזין לפניה ואומרין על עסקי שביעית היא לוקה,מפרסמין את החנפין מפני חילול השם שנאמר (יחזקאל ג, כ) ובשוב צדיק מצדקו ועשה עול ונתתי מכשול לפניו תשובת המוחלטין מעכבת הפורענות ואע"פ שנחתם עליו גזר דין של פורענות,שלות רשעים סופה תקלה והרשות מקברת את בעליה ערום נכנס לה וערום יצא ממנה ולואי שתהא יציאה כביאה רב כי הוה נפיק למידן דינא אמר הכי בצבו נפשיה לקטלא נפיק וצבו ביתיה לית הוא עביד וריקן לביתיה אזיל ולואי שתהא ביאה כיציאה,רבא כי הוה נפיק לדינא אמר הכי | 86b. § b Rabbi Yoḥa said: Great is repentance, as /b it b overrides /b even b a prohibition of the Torah. /b How so? b As it is stated /b that God said: b “…Saying: If a man sends away his wife and she goes from him and becomes another man’s, may he return to her again? Will not that land be greatly polluted? But you have committed adultery with many lovers; and would you yet return to Me, said the Lord” /b (Jeremiah 3:1). Indeed, the Torah states: “Her former husband, who sent her away, may not take her again to be his wife after she has been made impure” (Deuteronomy 24:4). The relationship between the Jewish people and the Holy One, Blessed be He, is compared to that between a husband and wife. Just as it is prohibited for an adulterous wife to return to her husband, it should be prohibited for the Jewish people to return to God from their sins, yet repentance overrides this prohibition., b Rabbi Yonatan said: Great is repentance, which hastens the redemption, as it is stated: “And a redeemer will come to Zion, and to those who repent from transgression in Jacob” /b (Isaiah 59:20). b What is the reason /b that b a redeemer will come to Zion? /b It is b because /b there are b those who repent from transgression in Jacob. /b , b Reish Lakish said: Great is repentance, as /b the penitent’s b intentional sins are counted for him as unwitting transgressions, as it is stated: “Return, Israel, to the Lord your God, for you have stumbled in your iniquity” /b (Hosea 14:2). The Gemara analyzes this: b Doesn’t “iniquity” /b mean b an intentional sin? Yet /b the prophet b calls it stumbling, /b implying that one who repents is considered as though he only stumbled accidentally in his transgression. The Gemara asks: b Is that so? Didn’t Reish Lakish /b himself b say: Great is repentance, as one’s intentional sins are counted for him as merits, as it is stated: “And when the wicked turns from his wickedness, and does that which is lawful and right, he shall live thereby” /b (Ezekiel 33:19), and all his deeds, even his transgressions, will become praiseworthy? The Gemara reconciles: This is b not difficult: Here, /b when one repents b out of love, /b his sins become like merits; b there, /b when one repents b out of fear, /b his sins are counted as unwitting transgressions., b Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said /b that b Rabbi Yonatan said: Great is repentance, which lengthens /b the b years of a person’s /b life, b as it is stated: “When the wicked man turns from his wickedness /b that he has committed, and does that which is lawful and right, b he will preserve his life” /b (Ezekiel 18:27).,§ b Rabbi Yitzḥak said: They say in the West, /b Eretz Yisrael, b in the name of Rabba bar Mari: Come and see that the attribute of flesh and blood is unlike the attribute of the Holy One, Blessed be He. /b With b flesh and blood /b people, if one b insults his friend with words, it is uncertain whether /b the victim will b be appeased by him or /b will b not be appeased by him. And if you say he will be appeased, it is /b still b uncertain whether he /b will b be appeased by words /b alone b or /b will b not be appeased by words /b alone, and one must try to appease him in other ways., b But /b with regard to b the Holy One, Blessed be He, /b if b a person commits a transgression in private, /b God b is appeased by words, as it is stated: “Take with you words and return to God” /b (Hosea 14:3). b And not only that, but /b God b considers it /b as though he has done b a favor /b for God by repenting, b as it is stated: “Accept that which is good” /b (Hosea 14:3). b And not only that, but the verse ascribes him /b credit b as though he had sacrificed bulls, as it is stated: “So we will render for bulls the offering of our lips” /b (Hosea 14:3). b Lest you say /b he is considered only like one who offers b obligatory bulls, /b therefore b the verse states: “I will heal their backsliding, I will love them freely” /b (Hosea 14:5). Repentance is considered as though it were the sacrifice of a free-will offering., b It was taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Meir would say: Great is repentance because the entire world is forgiven on account of /b one b individual who repents, as it is stated: “I will heal their backsliding, I will love them freely; for My anger has turned away from him” /b (Hosea 14:5). b It does not say: From them, /b i.e., from the sinners, b but “from him,” /b i.e., from that individual. Because he repented, everyone will be healed.,§ With regard to repentance, the Gemara asks: b What are the circumstances /b that demonstrate that one b has /b completely b repented? Rav Yehuda said: For example, the prohibited matter came to his hand a first time and a second time, and he was saved from it, /b thereby proving that he has completely repented. b Rav Yehuda demonstrated /b what he meant: If one has the opportunity to sin b with the same woman /b he sinned with previously, b at the same time /b and b the same place, /b and everything is aligned as it was that first time when he sinned, but this time he overcomes his inclination, it proves his repentance is complete, and he is forgiven., b Rav Yehuda said /b that b Rav raised a contradiction: It is written: “Fortunate is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is hidden” /b (Psalms 32:1), implying that it is inappropriate for one to reveal his sins, b and it is written: “He who hides his transgressions shall not prosper” /b (Proverbs 28:13). He resolved the contradiction as follows: This is b not difficult. Here /b it is referring to b a publicized sin; /b since his sin is public knowledge it is fitting for him to also publicize his repentance. b There, /b it is referring b to a sin that is not publicized, /b in which case it is inappropriate to publicize one’s repentance. b Rav Zutra bar Toviya /b said that b Rav Naḥman said: Here, /b it is referring b to sins a person commits against another; /b he must publicize his repentance so that those who hear him may persuade the other to forgive him. b There, /b it is referring b to sins a person commits against God, /b in which case he need not repent publicly.,§ b It was taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Yosei bar Yehuda says: /b When b a person commits a transgression /b the b first time, he is forgiven; a second /b time, b he is forgiven; a third /b time, b he is forgiven; /b but the b fourth /b time, b he is not forgiven, as it is stated: “Thus said the Lord: For three transgressions of Israel, but for four I will not reverse it” /b (Amos 2:6). b And it says: “All these things does God do twice or three times with a man” /b (Job 33:29).,The Gemara asks: b What is: And it says? /b Why did he need to bring an additional biblical proof when the first verse seems to suffice? The Gemara explains: b Lest you say /b that b this /b statement that the Holy One, Blessed be He, forgives easily the first three times b applies to a community but not to an individual, come /b and b hear /b proof from another verse that states: b “All these things does God do twice or three times with a man,” /b implying that this is so even for an individual. b From this /b point b onward, he is not forgiven, as it is stated: “For three transgressions of Israel, but for four I will not reverse it.” /b ,§ b The Sages taught /b in the i Tosefta /i : With regard to b transgressions that one confessed on this Yom Kippur, he should not confess them on another Yom Kippur, /b since he has already been forgiven. b But if he repeated those /b same transgressions during the year, b he must confess /b them again b on another Yom Kippur. And if he did not repeat them but did confess them again, about him the verse states: “As a dog that returns to its vomit, so is a fool who repeats his folly” /b (Proverbs 26:11), since it is inappropriate to go back and mention one’s earlier sins., b Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: /b If one confesses in subsequent years, b all the more so is he praiseworthy, /b as he remembers his earlier sins and is thereby humbled, b as it is stated: “For I know my transgressions; and my sin is ever before me” /b (Psalms 51:5). b But how do I establish the /b meaning of the verse: b “Like a dog that returns to its vomit”? /b It may be established b in accordance with the opinion of Rav Huna, as Rav Huna said: When a person commits a transgression and repeats it, it is permitted to him. /b The Gemara is surprised at this: b Can it enter your mind that it is permitted to him /b because he has sinned twice? b Rather, say it becomes to him as if /b it were b permitted. /b ,Furthermore, during confession, b one must detail the sin /b he committed and not suffice with a general admission of sin, b as it is stated: /b “And Moses returned to the Lord and said: b Please, this people have sinned a great sin, and have made themselves a god of gold” /b (Exodus 32:31); this is b the statement of Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava. Rabbi Akiva says /b that the verse states: b “Fortunate is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is hidden” /b (Psalms 32:1), which teaches that one need not detail his sins. b But what is /b the meaning of that b which Moses said: “And have made themselves a god of gold” /b (Exodus 32:31)? It should be understood b in accordance with /b the statement b of Rabbi Yannai, as Rabbi Yannai said: Moses said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the universe, /b it is the b silver and gold that you gave to the Jewish people in abundance, until they said: Enough, /b which b caused them to make a god of gold. /b Consequently, the phrase: “And have made themselves a god of gold,” is not a description of the sin but an explanation and justification of it.,It is said that b two good leaders arose for the Jewish people: Moses and David. Moses said: Let my disgrace be written, /b i.e., may the sin I committed be written explicitly, b as it is stated: “Because you did not believe in Me, to sanctify Me” /b (Numbers 20:12). In contrast, b David said: Let my disgrace not be written, as it is stated: “Fortunate is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is hidden” /b (Psalms 32:1).,The Gemara explains: b A parable /b with regard to b Moses and David /b shows b to what this may be compared. /b It may be compared b to two women who were flogged in court /b for their sins. b One /b of them b sinned /b by engaging in forbidden relations, b and one ate unripe figs of the Sabbatical Year /b although they are forbidden. b The woman who ate the unripe figs of the Sabbatical Year said to /b the court: b Please publicize /b the sin b for which /b I am being b flogged, so that /b people b will not say /b that b what that /b woman b is being flogged for is /b also b what this /b woman b is being flogged for. They brought unripe figs of the Sabbatical Year, and hung them around her neck, and announced before her, saying: She is receiving lashes on account of the Sabbatical Year. /b Moses requested that his sin be publicized so that people would not think that he committed the same sins as the members of his generation, i.e., the Golden Calf and the report of the spies.,Furthermore, they said: b One exposes the hypocrites due to /b the b desecration of /b God’s b name, /b so others will not think that they are truly righteous and that their deeds bear imitating, b as it is stated: “When a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits iniquity, I will lay a stumbling block before him” /b (Ezekiel 3:20). That is, when people do not know that someone is wicked to the core, he causes other people to err and this desecrates the name of God when it is revealed. b The repentance of utterly /b wicked b people prevents suffering /b from coming upon them. b And although the sentence of judgment has /b already b been signed /b against them b for suffering, /b their repentance prevents them from being punished., b The tranquility of the wicked is ultimately their destruction, /b as in their contentment they sit and think about forbidden matters. b And authority buries one who owns it. He was naked when he entered /b into power, b and he will be naked when he leaves it, and if only his exit would be like his entrance, /b without sin and added iniquity. The Gemara relates: b When Rav would leave /b his home b to /b go to court to b judge cases, he /b would b say this /b of himself: b of his own will, he goes to die, /b because a judge who misjudges a case is liable to death at the hand of Heaven; b and he does not fulfill the will of his household and he goes empty-handed to his household, /b because a judge does not receive a salary; b and if only his entrance would be like his exit, /b without sin or transgression., b When Rava would go to judge, he would say this /b of himself: |
|
92. Babylonian Talmud, Yevamot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 70| 60b. והא אמר רבי שמעון ראויה לכהן גדול מטמא לה שאין ראויה לכהן גדול אין מטמא לה שאני התם דרבי רחמנא קרובה,א"ה מוכת עץ נמי [רבי] קרובה אחת ולא שתים ומה ראית הא אתעביד בה מעשה הא לא אתעביד בה מעשה,ורבי יוסי מדשבקיה לבר זוגיה מכלל דבמוכת עץ כרבי מאיר סבירא ליה מנא ליה מלא היתה לאיש,והא אפיקתיה חד מלא היתה וחד מלאיש,אליו לרבות הבוגרת והא אמר ר' שמעון בתולה בתולה שלימה משמע טעמא דידיה נמי התם מהכא דדריש הכי מדאליו לרבות הבוגרת מכלל דבתולה בתולה שלימה משמע,תניא ר' שמעון בן יוחי אומר גיורת פחותה מבת שלש שנים ויום אחד כשירה לכהונה שנאמר (במדבר לא, יח) וכל הטף בנשים אשר לא ידעו משכב זכר החיו לכם והרי פנחס עמהם,ורבנן לעבדים ולשפחות אי הכי בת שלש שנים ויום אחד נמי,כדרב הונא דרב הונא רמי כתיב (במדבר לא, יז) כל אשה יודעת איש למשכב זכר הרוגו הא אינה יודעת קיימו מכלל דהטף בין ידעו בין לא ידעו קיימו וכתיב (במדבר לא, יח) וכל הטף בנשים אשר לא ידעו משכב זכר החיו לכם הא ידעי הרוגו,הוי אומר בראויה ליבעל הכתוב מדבר,תניא נמי הכי וכל אשה יודעת איש בראויה ליבעל הכתוב מדבר אתה אומר בראויה ליבעל או אינו אלא נבעלה ממש כשהוא אומר וכל הטף בנשים אשר לא ידעו משכב זכר הוי אומר בראויה ליבעל הכתוב מדבר,מנא ידעי אמר רב הונא בר ביזנא אמר ר' שמעון חסידא העבירום לפני הציץ כל שפניה מוריקות בידוע שהיא ראויה ליבעל כל שאין פניה מוריקות בידוע שאינה ראויה ליבעל אמר רב נחמן סימן לעבירה הדרוקן,כיוצא בדבר אתה אומר (שופטים כא, יב) וימצאו מיושבי יבש גלעד ארבע מאות נערה בתולה אשר לא ידעו איש למשכב זכר מנא ידעי אמר רב כהנא הושיבום על פי חבית של יין בעולה ריחה נודף בתולה אין ריחה נודף,ונעברינהו לפני הציץ אמר רב כהנא בריה דרב נתן (שמות כח, לח) לרצון להם כתיב לרצון ולא לפורענות אי הכי במדין נמי אמר רב אשי להם כתיב להם לרצון ולא לפורענות ולעובדי כוכבים אפילו לפורענות,אמר רבי יעקב בר אידי אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי הלכה כרבי שמעון בן יוחאי אמר ליה רבי זירא לרבי יעקב בר אידי בפירוש שמיע לך או מכללא שמיע לך,מאי כללא דאמר ר' יהושע בן לוי עיר אחת היתה בארץ ישראל שקרא עליה ערער ושגר רבי את רבי רומנוס ובדקה ומצא בה בת גיורת פחותה מבת שלש שנים ויום אחד והכשירה רבי לכהונה אמר ליה בפירוש שמיע לי,ואי מכללא מאי דלמא שאני התם הואיל ואנסיב אנסיב דהא רב ורבי יוחנן דאמרי תרוייהו בוגרת ומוכת עץ לא ישא ואם נשא נשוי,הכי השתא בשלמא התם סופה להיות בוגרת תחתיו סופה להיות בעולה תחתיו הכא סופה להיות זונה תחתיו,רב ספרא מתני לה מכללא וקשיא ליה ומשני ליה הכי,ההוא כהנא דאנסיב גיורת פחותה מבת שלש שנים ויום אחד אמר ליה ר"נ בר יצחק מאי האי אמר ליה דאמר רבי יעקב בר אידי אמר ר' יהושע בן לוי הלכה כר"ש בן יוחאי אמר ליה זיל אפיק ואי לא מפיקנא לך ר' יעקב בר אידי מאונך,תניא וכן היה ר"ש בן יוחאי אומר | 60b. b Didn’t Rabbi Shimon say: /b If she was b fit for a High Priest, /b her brother must b become impure for her, /b and if she was b not fit for a High Priest, /b her brother b may not become impure for her? /b A divorced woman is not fit for a High Priest even if she had been only betrothed before her divorce. The Gemara answers: b It is different there, as the Merciful One includes /b her by the term: Who is b near, /b which includes any sister who is close to him, even if she is unfit for a High Priest.,The Gemara asks: b If so, a woman whose hymen was torn accidentally /b should b also /b be b included. /b The Gemara responds that the term: Who is b near, /b which is written in the singular, includes only b one /b additional case b and not two. /b The Gemara asks: b And what did you see /b to render forbidden a woman whose hymen was accidentally torn and permit a divorcée who had previously been only betrothed, and not the opposite? The Gemara answers: In b this /b case of the women whose hymen was torn, b an action has been performed /b on her body, whereas in b that /b case of the divorcée, b no action has been performed /b on her body.,The i baraita /i cites Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon as holding that a priest may not become impure for his sister who was betrothed and then divorced, and it cites only Rabbi Shimon as holding that he may not become impure for his sister who was a grown woman. Based on this, the Gemara asks: b From /b the fact b that Rabbi Yosei left his partner, /b Rabbi Shimon, b it may be inferred that with regard to a woman whose hymen was torn accidentally he holds in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Meir, /b that a priest does become impure. b From where /b does b he /b derive this i halakha /i ? The Gemara explains that he derives it b from /b the phrase: “Who b has had no man,” /b as a woman whose hymen was torn accidentally has not been with a man.,The Gemara asks: b Haven’t you /b already b derived /b the i halakha /i of a betrothed woman from that phrase? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yosei learns b one /b i halakha /i b from /b the phrase b “has had no,” /b which indicates that she has not even been betrothed, b and /b he derives b one /b i halakha /i b from /b the term b “man,” /b which indicates that only a woman who was with a man is no longer considered a virgin with regard to this i halakha /i , but not one whose hymen was torn accidentally.,It was stated previously that according to Rabbi Shimon, the term b “to him,” /b comes b to include a grown woman. /b The Gemara asks: b Didn’t Rabbi Shimon say /b with regard to a High Priest that the term b virgin indicates a complete virgin, /b which does not include a grown woman? The Gemara answers: b His reason there is also /b derived b from here, as he expounds as follows: From /b the fact b that /b the expression b “to him” /b is needed b to include a grown woman, /b it may be b inferred that /b the term b virgin /b by itself b indicates a complete virgin. /b ,§ The Gemara cites another ruling of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai, also related to the discussion of defining who is considered a virgin. b It is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says: A female convert /b who converted when she was b less than three years and one day old is permitted to /b marry into b the priesthood, as it is stated: “But all the women children that have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves” /b (Numbers 31:18). This verse indicates that these women were fit for all of the warriors, b and /b since b Pinehas /b the priest b was with them /b (see Numbers 31:6), it is clear that young converts are permitted to priests.,The Gemara asks: b And /b how do b the Rabbis, /b who disagree with Rabbi Shimon, interpret this verse? The Gemara responds: They understand the phrase “keep alive for yourselves” to mean that they could keep them b as slaves and as maidservants, /b but they could not necessarily marry them. The Gemara asks: b If so, /b if the source for Rabbi Shimon’s ruling is this verse, a girl who converted at the b age of three years and one day old /b should b also /b be permitted to a priest, as long as she has never had intercourse, as stated by the verse.,The Gemara replies: His reasoning is b as /b stated by b Rav Huna, as Rav Huna raised a contradiction: It is written /b in one verse: b “Kill every woman that has known man by lying with him” /b (Numbers 31:17), which indicates that a woman who b has not known /b a man in this way b you may keep /b alive. This proves b by inference that the /b female b children, /b who are not classified as women, b you may keep /b alive regardless of b whether they knew /b a man b or they did not know /b a man. b And it is written /b in a different verse: b “But all the women children that have not known man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves” /b (Numbers 31:18), which indicates that if b they have known /b men, b you must kill /b them. This is an apparent contradiction.,Rav Huna explains: b You must say that the verse is speaking of /b a woman who is b fit for intercourse. /b The verse does not mean to distinguish between women who have actually engaged in sexual intercourse and those who have not. Rather, it distinguishes between a girl over the age of three, with whom an act of intercourse is recognized as such, and a girl below the age of three., b This is also taught /b in a i baraita /i : b “Every woman that has known man”; the verse is speaking of /b a woman b who is fit for intercourse. /b The i baraita /i proceeds to discuss this i halakha /i : Do b you say /b it is referring b to /b one who is b fit for intercourse, /b or perhaps b it is /b referring b only /b to b one who has actually had intercourse? When /b the verse b states: “But all the women children that have not known man by lying with him, /b keep alive for yourselves,” which indicates that grown women must be killed even if they have not had intercourse with a man, b you must say that the verse is speaking of /b a woman b who is fit for intercourse. /b ,The Gemara asks a practical question with regard to the events described by the Torah: b From where did they know /b whether a particular girl was already three years old and fit for intercourse? b Rav Huna bar Bizna said that Rabbi Shimon Ḥasida said: They passed them before the frontplate /b of the High Priest. b Any /b girl b whose face /b miraculously b turned sallow, it was known that she was fit for intercourse, /b and b any /b girl b whose face did not turn sallow, it /b was thereby b known that she was not fit for intercourse. /b Similarly, b Rav Naḥman said: A sign of transgression /b in the area of sexual morality b is /b the disease b i hidrokan /i , /b which causes one’s face to turn sallow., b Similarly, you /b can b say /b with regard to the verse: b “And they found among the inhabitants of Jabesh-gilead four hundred young virgins that had not known man by lying with him” /b (Judges 21:12). b From where did they know /b that they were virgins? b Rav Kahana said: They sat them on the opening of a barrel of wine. /b If she was b a non-virgin, her breath /b would b smell /b like wine; if she was b a virgin, her breath did not smell /b like wine.,The Gemara suggests: b They should /b have b passed them before the frontplate, /b as described previously with regard to the daughters of Midian. b Rav Kahana, son of Rav Natan, said: /b The verse states with regard to the frontplate: “And it shall be upon Aaron’s forehead… b that they may be accepted /b before the Lord” (Exodus 28:38), which indicates that the frontplate is worn b for acceptance but not for calamity. /b The Gemara raises a difficulty: b If so, /b the frontplate should b also /b not have been used b with regard to /b the women of b Midian. Rav Ashi said: /b The word b “they” is written /b in the verse, indicating that b for them, /b the Jewish people, the frontplate is b for acceptance but not for calamity; but for gentiles /b it can be used b even for calamity. /b , b Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi said /b that b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: The i halakha /i is in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai. Rabbi Zeira said to Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi: /b Did b you hear /b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi say this b explicitly or /b did b you learn /b it b by inference? /b ,The Gemara asks: b What inference /b was Rabbi Zeira hinting at? The Gemara explains: b As Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: There was a certain city in Eretz Yisrael where they contested /b the lineage of a particular family. b And Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b sent Rabbi Romanus, and he examined /b the family’s lineage b and found /b that b it /b included b the daughter /b of b a convert /b who had converted when she was b less than three years and one day old, /b and she had married a priest. b And Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b permitted her to the priesthood. /b This indicates that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi ruled in accordance with Rabbi Shimon. Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi b said to him: I heard explicitly /b that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi ruled in this manner.,The Gemara asks: b And if /b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi’s opinion had been derived b by inference, what /b of it? The Gemara answers: b Perhaps it was different there, /b because b since she /b had already b married /b a priest, b she /b could remain b married /b after the fact, but it would not be permitted for her to marry a priest i ab initio /i , b as /b it is b Rav and Rabbi Yoḥa who both say: /b A High Priest b may not marry a grown woman and a woman whose hymen was torn accidentally, but if he married /b one of them b he is married /b and not required to divorce her.,The Gemara refutes this claim: b How can /b these cases b be compared? Granted, there, /b in the case of a grown woman, it is reasonable for her to be permitted after the fact, as a young woman b will eventually be a grown woman under him, /b i.e., while married to him, and b she will eventually be a non-virgin under him. /b However, b here, /b in the case of a convert, b will she eventually be a i zona /i under him? /b If she is forbidden to a priest i ab initio /i it is because she has the status of a i zona /i , in which case she should be prohibited after the fact as well. Consequently, it can be proven from the incident cited previously that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi rules in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon.,The Gemara comments: b Rav Safra taught this /b i halakha /i after deriving Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi’s ruling b by inference, /b although he had never heard this ruling explicitly. b And /b the question mentioned above was b difficult for him, and he resolved it in this /b same manner.,The Gemara relates another incident related to this i halakha /i : b A certain priest married a convert, /b who had converted when she was b less than three years and one day old. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said to him: What is this? /b Why are you violating the i halakha /i ? b He said to him: /b It is permitted for me to marry her, b as Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said /b that b the i halakha /i is in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai. He said to him: Go remove /b her, i.e., divorce her. b And if not, I will remove Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi from your ear [ i me’unekh /i ] for you. /b In other words, I will take the necessary action to ensure that you obey and divorce her, so that you can no longer follow Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi’s opinion.,§ b It is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b And similarly, Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai would say: /b |
|
93. Babylonian Talmud, Taanit, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 176| 9a. (דברים יד, כב) עשר תעשר עשר בשביל שתתעשר,אשכחיה ר' יוחנן לינוקא דריש לקיש אמר ליה אימא לי פסוקיך א"ל עשר תעשר א"ל ומאי עשר תעשר א"ל עשר בשביל שתתעשר אמר ליה מנא לך א"ל זיל נסי,אמר ליה ומי שרי לנסוייה להקב"ה והכתיב (דברים ו, טז) לא תנסו את ה' א"ל הכי אמר רבי הושעיא חוץ מזו שנאמר (מלאכי ג, י) הביאו את כל המעשר אל בית האוצר ויהי טרף בביתי ובחנוני נא בזאת אמר ה' צבאות אם לא אפתח לכם את ארובות השמים והריקותי לכם ברכה עד בלי די,מאי עד בלי די אמר רמי בר חמא אמר רב עד שיבלו שפתותיכם מלומר די א"ל אי הות מטי התם להאי פסוקא לא הוית צריכנא לך ולהושעיא רבך,ותו אשכחיה ר' יוחנן לינוקיה דריש לקיש דיתיב ואמר (משלי יט, ג) אולת אדם תסלף דרכו ועל ה' יזעף לבו,יתיב רבי יוחנן וקא מתמה אמר מי איכא מידי דכתיבי בכתובי דלא רמיזי באורייתא א"ל אטו הא מי לא רמיזי והכתיב (בראשית מב, כח) ויצא לבם ויחרדו איש אל אחיו לאמר מה זאת עשה אלהים לנו,דל עיניה וחזא ביה אתיא אימיה אפיקתיה אמרה ליה תא מקמיה דלא ליעבד לך כדעבד לאבוך,(א"ר יוחנן מטר בשביל יחיד פרנסה בשביל רבים מטר בשביל יחיד דכתיב (דברים כח, יב) יפתח ה' לך את אוצרו הטוב לתת מטר ארצך פרנסה בשביל רבים דכתיב (שמות טז, ד) הנני ממטיר לכם לחם,מיתיבי ר' יוסי בר' יהודה אומר שלשה פרנסים טובים עמדו לישראל אלו הן משה ואהרן ומרים וג' מתנות טובות ניתנו על ידם ואלו הן באר וענן ומן באר בזכות מרים עמוד ענן בזכות אהרן מן בזכות משה מתה מרים נסתלק הבאר שנאמר (במדבר כ, א) ותמת שם מרים וכתיב בתריה ולא היה מים לעדה וחזרה בזכות שניהן,מת אהרן נסתלקו ענני כבוד שנאמר (במדבר כא, א) וישמע הכנעני מלך ערד מה שמועה שמע שמע שמת אהרן ונסתלקו ענני כבוד וכסבור ניתנה לו רשות להלחם בישראל והיינו דכתיב (במדבר כ, כט) ויראו כל העדה כי גוע אהרן,אמר ר' אבהו אל תקרי ויראו אלא וייראו כדדריש ר"ל דאר"ל כי משמש בארבע לשונות אי דלמא אלא דהא,חזרו שניהם בזכות משה מת משה נסתלקו כולן שנאמר (זכריה יא, ח) ואכחיד את שלשת הרועים בירח אחד וכי בירח אחד מתו והלא מרים מתה בניסן ואהרן באב ומשה באדר אלא מלמד שנתבטלו ג' מתנות טובות שנתנו על ידן ונסתלקו כולן בירח אחד,אלמא אשכחן פרנסה בשביל יחיד שאני משה כיון דלרבים הוא בעי כרבים דמי,רב הונא בר מנוח ורב שמואל בר אידי ורב חייא מווסתניא הוו שכיחי קמיה דרבא כי נח נפשיה דרבא אתו לקמיה דרב פפא כל אימת דהוה אמר להו שמעתא ולא הוה מסתברא להו הוו מרמזי אהדדי חלש דעתיה | 9a. b “A tithe shall you tithe [ i te’aser /i ]” /b (Deuteronomy 14:22)? This phrase can be interpreted homiletically: b Take a tithe [ i asser /i ] so that you will become wealthy [ i titasher /i ], /b in the merit of the mitzva., b Rabbi Yoḥa found /b the b young son of Reish Lakish. He said to /b the boy: b Recite to me your verse, /b i.e., the verse you studied today in school. The boy b said to him: “A tithe shall you tithe.” /b The boy further b said to /b Rabbi Yoḥa: b But /b what is the meaning of this phrase: b “A tithe shall you tithe”? /b Rabbi Yoḥa b said to him: /b The verse means: b Take a tithe so that you will become wealthy. /b The boy b said to /b Rabbi Yoḥa: b From where do you /b derive that this is so? Rabbi Yoḥa b said to him: Go /b and b test /b it.,The boy b said to him: And is it permitted to test the Holy One, Blessed be He? But isn’t it written: “You shall not test the Lord your God” /b (Deuteronomy 6:16)? Rabbi Yoḥa b said to /b the boy that b Rabbi Hoshaya said as follows: /b It is prohibited to test God in any way, b except in this /b case of tithes, b as it is stated: “Bring the whole tithe into the storeroom, that there may be food in My house, and test Me now by this, said the Lord of hosts, if I will not open for you the windows of heaven, and pour out for you a blessing that there shall be more than sufficiency” /b (Malachi 3:10).,In relation to the above verse, the Gemara asks: b What /b is the meaning of the phrase: b “That there shall be more than sufficiency [ i ad beli dai /i ]”? Rami bar Ḥama said /b that b Rav said: /b It means that the abundance will be so great b that your lips will be worn out [ i yivlu /i ], /b similar to the word i beli /i , b from saying enough [ i dai /i ]. /b Returning to the above incident, the Gemara adds that the boy b said to /b Rabbi Yoḥa: Your claim appears explicitly in a verse. b If I had arrived there, /b at this verse, b I would not have needed you or Hoshaya your teacher, /b as I could have understood it on my own.,The Gemara relates another story about the precociousness of this child. b And furthermore, /b on a different occasion b Rabbi Yoḥa found /b the b young son of Reish Lakish, when he was sitting /b and studying b and /b he was b reciting /b the verse: b “The foolishness of man perverts his way, and his heart frets against the Lord” /b (Proverbs 19:3). This verse means that when someone sins and every manner of mishap befalls him, he complains and wonders why these things are happening to him., b Rabbi Yoḥa sat down and wondered /b aloud about this verse, b saying: Is there anything that is written in the Writings that is not alluded to in the Torah /b at all? I cannot think of any hint of this idea in the Torah itself. The child b said to him: Is that to say /b that b this /b idea is really b not alluded to /b in the Torah? b But isn’t it written, /b with regard to Joseph’s brothers: b “And their heart failed them and they turned trembling to one to another, saying: What is this that God has done to us?” /b (Genesis 42:28). This verse exemplifies the notion that when one sins and encounters troubles, he wonders why it is happening to him.,Impressed by the youth’s wisdom, Rabbi Yoḥa b raised his eyes and stared at the boy. /b At this point, the boy’s b mother came and took him away, saying to him: Come away from /b Rabbi Yoḥa, b so that he does not do to you as he did to your father. /b Reish Lakish, the boy’s father, died during a heated dispute with Rabbi Yoḥa over a Torah matter. The argument ended with an offended look from Rabbi Yoḥa which caused Reish Lakish’s death, and the boy’s mother was afraid that her son might suffer the same fate.,§ After this brief digression, the Gemara turns to the fifth in the series of statements by Rabbi Yoḥa concerning rain. b Rabbi Yoḥa said: Rain /b falls even b for the sake of an individual, /b in response to the petition of a single person in need of rain, whereas a blessing of b sustece /b comes only b for the sake of many. Rain /b falls even b for the sake of an individual, as it is written: “The Lord will open for you His good treasure, /b the heavens, b to give the rain of your land” /b (Deuteronomy 28:12). The fact that this verse is written in the second person singular demonstrates that rain can fall even for the sake of an individual. Rabbi Yoḥa further proves that b sustece /b comes b for the sake of many, as it is written: “Behold I will cause to rain bread from the heavens for you” /b (Exodus 16:4). Here, God is referring to the people in the plural form.,The Gemara b raises an objection /b from a i baraita /i : b Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: Three good sustainers rose up for the Jewish people /b during the exodus from Egypt, and b they are: Moses, Aaron and Miriam. And three good gifts were given /b from Heaven b through their agency, and these are they: /b The b well /b of water, the pillar of b cloud, and /b the b manna. /b He elaborates: The b well /b was given to the Jewish people b in the merit of Miriam; /b the b pillar of cloud /b was b in the merit of Aaron; /b and the b manna in the merit of Moses. /b When b Miriam died /b the b well disappeared, as it is stated: “And Miriam died there” /b (Numbers 20:1), b and it says thereafter /b in the next verse: b “And there was no water for the congregation” /b (Numbers 20:2). b But /b the well b returned in the merit of both /b Moses and Aaron.,When b Aaron died /b the b clouds of glory disappeared, as it is stated: “And the Canaanite, the king of Arad heard” /b (Numbers 33:40). b What report did he hear? He heard that Aaron had died and the clouds of glory had disappeared, and he thought that /b the Jewish people were no longer protected by Heaven and therefore b he had been given permission to go to war against the Jewish people. And this /b disappearance of the clouds b is /b the meaning of that b which is written: “And all the congregation saw that [ i ki /i ] Aaron was dead” /b (Numbers 20:29)., b Rabbi Abbahu said: Do not read /b the verse as: b “And they saw [ i va’yiru /i ]”; rather, /b read it as: b And they were seen [ i va’yera’u /i ], /b as the clouds which had concealed the Jewish people were temporarily removed. This is b as Reish Lakish taught. As Reish Lakish said: /b The term b i ki /i /b actually b has /b at least b four /b distinct b meanings: If; perhaps; but; because, /b or that. According to this interpretation, the verse would be rendered: And all the congregation was seen, because [ i ki /i ] Aaron was dead.,The i baraita /i continues: b Both /b the well and the clouds of glory b returned in the merit of Moses. /b However, when b Moses died all of them disappeared. As it is stated: “And I cut off the three shepherds in one month” /b (Zechariah 11:8). b But did /b the three shepherds really b die in one month? Didn’t Miriam die in /b the month of b Nisan, and Aaron in Av and Moses in Adar? Rather, /b this verse b teaches /b us b that /b with the death of Moses the b three good gifts that were given through their agency were annulled, and /b all three gifts b disappeared in one month, /b which made it seem as though all three leaders had died at the same time.,The Gemara explains the difficulty from this i baraita /i . b Apparently, we find /b that b sustece /b can come b for the sake of an individual, /b as the i baraita /i states that sustece in the form of manna came for the sake of Moses. The Gemara answers: b Moses is different, since he requested /b the manna b for many, /b and therefore he was considered b like many, /b not as an individual.,The Gemara relates a story concerning the aforementioned verse from Zechariah. b Rav Huna bar Manoaḥ, Rav Shmuel bar Idi, and Rav Ḥiyya from Vastanya were /b often b found before Rava, /b as they were among his most distinguished students. b When Rava died, they came before Rav Pappa /b to learn from him. However, as also they were great Sages, b whenever Rav Pappa would say a i halakha /i that did not /b sound b reasonable to them, they would gesture to each other /b that Rav Pappa was not equal in stature to Rava. Rav Pappa b was offended /b by their behavior. |
|
94. Babylonian Talmud, Shevuot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 176| 49b. מת והוא שנשבר או נשבה או נגנב או אבד נשבר והוא שמת או נשבה או נגנב או אבד נשבה והוא שמת או נשבר או נגנב או אבד נגנב והוא שמת או נשבר או נשבה או אבד אבד והוא שמת או נשבר או נשבה או נגנב משביעך אני ואמר אמן פטור,היכן שורי אמר לו איני יודע מה אתה סח והוא שמת או נשבר או נשבה או נגנב או נאבד משביעך אני ואמר אמן חייב,אמר לנושא שכר והשוכר היכן שורי א"ל מת והוא שנשבר או נשבה נשבר והוא שמת או נשבה נשבה והוא שמת או נשבר נגנב והוא שאבד אבד והוא שנגנב משביעך אני ואמר אמן פטור,מת או נשבר או נשבה והוא שנגנב או אבד משביעך אני ואמר אמן חייב אבד או נגנב והוא שמת או נשבר או נשבה משביעך אני ואמר אמן פטור,זה הכלל כל המשנה מחובה לחובה ומפטור לפטור ומפטור לחובה פטור מחובה לפטור חייב זה הכלל כל הנשבע להקל על עצמו חייב להחמיר על עצמו פטור:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big מאן תנא ארבעה שומרין אמר רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה ר' מאיר היא אמר ליה רבא לרב נחמן מי איכא תנא דלית ליה ארבעה שומרין אמר ליה הכי קאמינא לך מאן תנא דאמר שוכר כנושא שכר דמי (אמר רב נחמן) אמר רבה בר אבוה רבי מאיר היא,והא רבי מאיר איפכא שמעינן ליה דתנן שוכר כיצד משלם ר' מאיר אומר כשומר חנם ר' יהודה אומר כנושא שכר רבה בר אבוה איפכא תני,הני ארבעה הוו שלשה הוו אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק ארבעה שומרין ודיניהן שלשה:,אמר לשומר חנם כו': היכן שורי כו': אמר לאחד בשוק כו': אמר לשומר כו': היכן שורי אמר לו איני יודע מה אתה סח כו': אמר רב וכולן פטורין משבועת שומרין וחייבין משום שבועת ביטוי ושמואל אמר אף פטורין משום שבועת ביטוי,במאי קמפלגי שמואל סבר ליתא בלהבא ורב סבר איתיה בלאו והן,והא איפליגו בה חדא זימנא דאתמר שבועה שזרק פלוני צרור לים שבועה שלא זרק רב אמר חייב ושמואל אמר פטור רב אמר חייב דאיתא בלאו והן ושמואל אמר פטור דליתא בלהבא,צריכא דאי אשמעינן בהא בהא קאמר רב משום דמנפשיה קמישתבע אבל בהך דבי דינא משבעי ליה אימא מודי ליה לשמואל כדרבי אמי דאמר רבי אמי כל שבועה שהדיינים משביעין אותה אין חייבין עליה משום שבועת ביטוי,ואי איתמר בהא בהא קאמר שמואל אבל בהך אימא מודה ליה לרב צריכא,גופא אמר ר' אמי כל שבועה שהדיינין משביעין אותה אין בה משום שבועת ביטוי שנאמר (ויקרא ה, ד) או נפש כי תשבע לבטא בשפתים מעצמו כדר"ל דאמר ר"ל כי משתמש בארבע לשונות אי דלמא אלא דהא,ר"א אומר כולן פטורין משבועת שומרין וחייבין משום שבועת ביטוי חוץ מאיני יודע מה אתה סח דשואל וגניבה ואבידה דנושא שכר ושבשוכר שהוא חייב שהרי כפרו ממון:, br br big strongהדרן עלך ארבעה שומרין וסליקא לה מסכת שבועות /strong /big br br | |
|
95. Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 48| 56b. עבדך וירגל בעבדך אל אדוני המלך ואדוני המלך כמלאך האלהים ועשה הטוב בעיניך ויאמר לו המלך למה תדבר עוד דבריך אמרתי אתה וציבא תחלקו את השדה ויאמר מפיבשת אל המלך גם את הכל יקח אחרי אשר בא אדוני המלך בשלום אל ביתו אמר לו אני אמרתי מתי תבא בשלום ואתה עושה לי כך לא עליך יש לי תרעומות אלא על מי שהביאך בשלום,היינו דכתיב (דברי הימים א ח, לד) ובן יהונתן מריב בעל וכי מריב בעל שמו והלא מפיבשת שמו אלא מתוך שעשה מריבה עם בעליו יצתה בת קול ואמרה לו נצא בר נצא נצא הא דאמרן בר נצא דכתיב (שמואל א טו, ה) ויבא שאול עד עיר עמלק וירב בנחל אמר רבי מני על עסקי נחל,אמר רב יהודה אמר רב בשעה שאמר דוד למפיבשת אתה וציבא תחלקו את השדה יצתה בת קול ואמרה לו רחבעם וירבעם יחלקו את המלוכה,אמר רב יהודה אמר רב אילמלי לא. קיבל דוד לשון הרע לא נחלקה מלכות בית דוד ולא עבדו ישראל ע"ז ולא גלינו מארצנו:,אמר ר' שמואל בר נחמני א"ר יונתן כל האומר שלמה חטא אינו אלא טועה שנאמר (מלכים א יא, ד) ולא היה לבבו שלם עם ה' אלהיו כלבב דוד אביו כלבב דוד אביו הוא דלא הוה מיחטא נמי לא חטא,אלא מה אני מקיים (מלכים א יא, ד) ויהי לעת זקנת שלמה נשיו הטו את לבבו ההיא כרבי נתן דר' נתן רמי כתיב ויהי לעת זקנת שלמה נשיו הטו את לבבו והכתיב כלבב דוד אביו כלבב דוד אביו הוא דלא הוה מיחטא נמי לא חטא הכי קאמר ויהי לעת זקנת שלמה נשיו הטו את לבבו ללכת אחרי אלהים אחרים ולא הלך,והכתיב (מלכים א יא, ז) אז יבנה שלמה במה לכמוש שקוץ מואב שבקש לבנות ולא בנה,אלא מעתה (יהושע ח, ל) אז יבנה יהושע מזבח לה' שבקש לבנות ולא בנה אלא דבנה הכא נמי דבנה,אלא כדתניא רבי יוסי אומר (מלכים ב כג, יג) ואת הבמות אשר על פני ירושלים אשר מימין להר המשחה אשר בנה שלמה מלך ישראל לעשתרות שקוץ צדונים וגו',אפשר בא אסא ולא ביערם יהושפט ולא ביערם עד שבא יאשיה וביערם והלא כל ע"ז שבארץ ישראל אסא ויהושפט ביערום אלא מקיש ראשונים לאחרונים מה אחרונים לא עשו ותלה בהן לשבח אף ראשונים לא עשו ותלה בהן לגנאי,והכתיב (מלכים א יא, ו) ויעש שלמה הרע בעיני ה' אלא מפני שהיה לו למחות בנשיו ולא מיחה מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו חטא,אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל נוח לו לאותו צדיק שיהא שמש לדבר אחר ואל יכתב בו ויעש הרע בעיני ה',אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל בשעה שנשא שלמה את בת פרעה הכניסה לו אלף מיני זמר ואמרה לו כך עושין לעבודה זרה פלונית וכך עושים לע"ז פלונית ולא מיחה בה,אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל בשעה שנשא שלמה את בת פרעה ירד גבריאל ונעץ קנה בים ועלה בו שירטון ועליו נבנה כרך גדול [של רומי],במתניתא תנא אותו היום שהכניס ירבעם שני עגלי זהב אחד בבית אל ואחד בדן נבנה צריף אחד וזהו איטליאה של יון:,א"ר שמואל בר נחמני א"ר יונתן כל האומר יאשיהו חטא אינו אלא טועה שנאמר (מלכים ב כב, ב) ויעש הישר בעיני ה' וילך בכל דרך דוד אביו אלא מה אני מקיים (מלכים ב כג, כה) וכמוהו לא היה לפניו מלך אשר שב וגו',שכל דין שדן מבן שמנה עד שמנה עשרה החזירן להן שמא תאמר נטל מזה ונתן לזה תלמוד לומר בכל מאודו שנתן להם משלו,ופליגא דרב דאמר רב אין לך גדול בבעלי תשובה יותר מיאשיהו בדורו ואחד בדורנו ומנו אבא אבוה דרבי ירמיה בר אבא ואמרי לה אחא אחוה דאבא אבוה דרב ירמיה בר אבא דאמר מר רבי אבא ואחא אחי הוו,אמר רב יוסף ועוד אחד בדורנו ומנו עוקבן בר נחמיה ריש גלותא והיינו. נתן דצוציתא אמר רב יוסף הוה יתיבנא בפירקא והוה קא מנמנם וחזאי בחילמא דקא פשט ידיה וקבליה:, br br big strongהדרן עלך במה בהמה /strong /big br br | |
|
96. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 87, 88| 81b. אמר ליה אדא ברי בתרי קטלי קטלת ליה:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big מי שלקה ושנה ב"ד מכניסין אותו לכיפה ומאכילין אותו שעורין עד שכריסו מתבקעת:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big משום דלקה ושנה ב"ד כונסין אותו לכיפה אמר ר' ירמיה אמר רבי שמעון בן לקיש הכא במלקיות של כריתות עסקינן דגברא בר קטלא הוא וקרובי הוא דלא מיקרב קטליה וכיון דקא מוותר לה נפשיה מקרבינן ליה לקטליה עילויה,א"ל רבי יעקב לר' ירמיה בר תחליפא תא אסברא לך במלקיות של כרת אחת אבל של שתים ושל שלש כריתות איסורי הוא דקא טעים ולא מוותר כולי האי:,מי שלקה ושנה: שנה אע"ג דלא שילש לימא מתני' דלא כרשב"ג דאי רשב"ג הא אמר עד תלת זימני לא הויא חזקה,אמר רבינא אפילו תימא רשב"ג קסבר עבירות מחזיקות,מיתיבי עבר עבירה שיש בה מלקות פעם ראשונה ושניה מלקין אותו ושלישית כונסין אותו לכיפה אבא שאול אומר אף בשלישית מלקין אותו ברביעית כונסין אותו לכיפה מאי לאו דכולי עלמא מלקיות מחזיקות ובפלוגתא דרבי ורשב"ג קמיפלגי,לא דכולי עלמא אית להו דרשב"ג והכא בהא קא מיפלגי דמר סבר עבירות מחזיקות ומר סבר מלקיות מחזיקות,והדתניא התרו בו ושתק התרו בו והרכין ראשו פעם ראשונה ושניה מתרין בו שלישית כונסין אותו לכיפה אבא שאול אומר אף בשלישית מתרין בו ברביעית כונסין אותו לכיפה,והתם מלקות ליכא במאי קמיפלגי אמר רבינא בכיפה צריכה התראה קמיפלגי,ומאי כיפה אמר רב יהודה מלא קומתו והיכא רמיזא אמר ריש לקיש (תהלים לד, כב) תמותת רשע רעה,ואמר ריש לקיש מאי דכתיב (קהלת ט, יב) כי [גם] לא ידע האדם את עתו כדגים שנאחזים במצודה רעה מאי מצודה רעה אמר ר"ל חכה:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big ההורג נפש שלא בעדים מכניסין אותו לכיפה ומאכילין אותו (ישעיהו ל, כ) לחם צר ומים לחץ:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big מנא ידעינן אמר רב בעדות מיוחדת ושמואל אמר שלא בהתראה,ורב חסדא אמר אבימי כגון דאיתכחוש בבדיקות ולא איתכחוש בחקירות כדתנן מעשה ובדק בן זכאי בעוקצי תאנים:,ומאכילין אותו לחם צר ומים לחץ: מאי שנא הכא דקתני נותנין לו לחם צר ומים לחץ ומאי שנא התם דקתני מאכילין אותו שעורין עד שכריסו מתבקעת אמר רב ששת אידי ואידי נותנין לו לחם צר ומים לחץ עד שיוקטן מעיינו והדר מאכילין אותו שעורין עד שכריסו מתבקעת:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big הגונב את הקסוה והמקלל בקוסם והבועל ארמית קנאין פוגעין בו כהן ששמש בטומאה אין אחיו הכהנים מביאין אותו לב"ד אלא פרחי כהונה מוציאין אותו חוץ לעזרה ומפציעין את מוחו בגזירין זר ששמש במקדש רבי עקיבא אומר בחנק וחכ"א בידי שמים:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big מאי קסוה אמר רב יהודה כלי שרת וכן הוא אומר (במדבר ד, ז) ואת קשות הנסך והיכא רמיזא (במדבר ד, כ) ולא יבאו לראות כבלע את הקדש ומתו:,והמקלל בקוסם: תני רב יוסף יכה קוסם את קוסמו רבנן ואיתימא רבה בר מרי אמרי יכהו קוסם לו ולקונו ולמקנו:,והבועל ארמית: בעא מיניה רב כהנא מרב | 81b. Rava b said to him: Adda my son, /b will b you kill him with two death penalties? /b Rabbi Yosei concedes that the prohibition of engaging in intercourse with a married woman takes effect in addition to the prohibition of engaging in intercourse with his mother-in-law. If he had violated the transgression unwittingly, he would have been liable to bring two sin-offerings. But if he violated the transgression intentionally, it is impossible to execute him by strangulation after executing him by burning., strong MISHNA: /strong b One who was flogged /b for violating a prohibition b and /b then b repeated /b the violation and was flogged again assumes the status of a forewarned transgressor. The b court places him into the vaulted chamber [ i lakippa /i ] and feeds him barley /b bread b until his belly ruptures /b due to the low-quality food, and he dies., strong GEMARA: /strong b Due to /b the fact b that he was flogged and repeated /b the violation does the b court place him into the vaulted chamber /b for the duration of his life and advance his death? b Rabbi Yirmeya says /b that b Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says: Here, we are dealing with lashes /b administered for violations of prohibitions punishable b by excision from the World-to-Come [ i karet /i ]. As /b when one violates such a prohibition, b the man is /b essentially b liable to /b be punished with b death /b at the hand of Heaven, b but his death is not advanced /b by the court, as it is administered by the heavenly court. b And /b in this case, b since he surrenders his life /b through his repeated transgressions, b we advance his execution upon him /b by placing him in the vaulted chamber., b Rabbi Ya’akov said to Rabbi Yirmeya bar Taḥlifa: Come and I will explain to you /b the circumstances of this i halakha /i . It is in a case where he was flogged b with lashes for /b repeatedly violating b one /b prohibition punishable with b i karet /i /b that he is considered to have surrendered his life. b But /b if he received lashes b for /b violating b two or for /b violating b three /b different prohibitions punishable with b i karet /i , /b he is not placed in the vaulted chamber, as b he /b merely b is tasting /b the taste of b prohibition /b and wants to enjoy the different experiences, b and he is not /b thereby b surrendering /b his life b to that extent. /b ,§ The mishna teaches: b One who was flogged /b for violating a prohibition b and /b then b repeated /b the violation, the court places him into the vaulted chamber. The Gemara infers: He is placed in the vaulted chamber if b he repeated /b the violation, doing it a second time, b even if he did not /b again b repeat /b the violation, doing it b a third /b time. b Let us say /b that b the mishna is not in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, as if /b it is in accordance with the opinion of b Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, doesn’t he say: Presumptive status is not /b established b until /b the action is performed b three times? /b In his opinion, only after violating the prohibition three times would one assume the status of a forewarned transgressor., b Ravina /b rejects that proof and b says: Even /b if b you say /b that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of b Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, /b the i tanna /i b holds /b that b transgressions, /b not lashes, b establish /b the b presumptive status /b of a transgressor. Therefore, the mishna that teaches: One who was flogged for violating a prohibition and then repeated the violation and was flogged, is placed in the vaulted chamber only after he violated the prohibition a third time, is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel.,The Gemara b raises an objection /b from a i baraita /i : If b one performed a transgression that has lashes /b as its punishment, the b first and the second time, /b the court b flogs him; and /b the b third /b time, the court b places him in the vaulted chamber. Abba Shaul says: Even the third /b time the court b flogs him; /b and the b fourth /b time, the court b places him in the vaulted chamber. What, is it not that everyone /b agrees that b lashes establish /b the b presumptive status /b of a transgressor, b and /b it is b concerning the dispute of Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, /b whether presumptive status is established after two or three times, that the Rabbis and Abba Shaul b disagree? /b ,The Gemara rejects that parallel. b No, /b it can be explained that b everyone, /b the Rabbis and Abba Shaul, b agrees with /b the opinion b of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel /b that presumptive status is established after three times, b and here it is with regard to this /b matter b that they disagree: That /b one b Sage, /b the Rabbis, b holds: Transgressions establish /b the b presumptive status /b of a transgressor, and after he is flogged twice and performs the transgression a third time, the court places him in the vaulted chamber; b and /b one b Sage, Abba Shaul, holds: Lashes establish /b the b presumptive status /b of a transgressor, and it is only after he performs the third transgression and is flogged for that transgression that he assumes the status of a forewarned transgressor, and when he performs the transgression a fourth time, he is placed in the vaulted chamber.,The Gemara questions that interpretation of the dispute. b And that which is taught /b in a i baraita /i : With regard to a case where witnesses b forewarned him /b that he was about to violate a prohibition punishable by lashes b and he was silent /b and did not acknowledge that he accepted the forewarning, and likewise a case where the witnesses b forewarned him and he bowed his head /b but did not explicitly acknowledge that he accepted the forewarning, the b first and second time they forewarn him /b the court does not flog him, because he did not accept the forewarning. If this scenario occurs b a third /b time, the court b places him in the vaulted chamber. Abba Shaul says: Even the third /b time the witnesses b forewarn him /b the court does not flog him; b and the fourth /b time, the court b places him in the vaulted chamber. /b , b And there, /b in the case in the i baraita /i , b there are no lashes, /b as he did not explicitly acknowledge acceptance of the forewarning. The reference is to a case where one violated the transgression several times, and if their dispute is not with regard to the number of times required to establish presumptive status, b with regard to what /b matter b do they disagree? Ravina says: /b It is b with regard to /b whether placing an individual into b a vaulted chamber requires forewarning /b that b they disagree. /b The Rabbis hold that once he disregarded the forewarning three times, the court places him in a vaulted chamber. Abba Shaul holds that after he is forewarned three times that he will be flogged if he performs the transgression, he requires additional forewarning, before the fourth time, that he will be placed in a vaulted chamber if he performs the transgression again.,The Gemara clarifies: b And what /b is the nature of this b vaulted chamber? Rav Yehuda says: /b It is a small chamber that is b the full height of /b the transgressor, and it does not allow him to move in it. The Gemara asks: b And where /b is this punishment b intimated? Reish Lakish said /b that it is intimated in the verse: b “Evil shall kill the wicked” /b (Psalms 34:22). Ultimately, an evildoer finds his demise through his evil, and the result is this harsh form of death.,The Gemara cites a related statement. b And Reish Lakish says: What /b is the meaning of that b which is written: “For man also knows not his time, like fish snared in an evil net” /b (Ecclesiastes 9:12)? b What /b is the nature of this b evil net? Reish Lakish says: /b It is b a hook; /b although it is small and the fish is much larger, the fish cannot escape it., strong MISHNA: /strong With regard to b one who kills a person not in /b the presence of b witnesses /b and it is impossible to judge him in court, the court b places him into a vaulted chamber and feeds him sparing bread and scant water /b (see Isaiah 30:20)., strong GEMARA: /strong The Gemara asks: If there are no witnesses, b from where do we know /b that he killed a person and is liable to be punished? b Rav says: /b The i tanna /i of the mishna is speaking b about /b a case of b disjointed testimony, /b where the witnesses were not together and they witnessed the murder from different vantage points. The court cannot convict a person for committing a murder based on that type of testimony even though it is clear that the witnesses are telling the truth. b And Shmuel says: /b The i tanna /i of the mishna is speaking about a case b where /b the witnesses testified that they witnessed the murder but there was b no forewarning, /b and therefore the court cannot convict him., b And Rav Ḥisda /b says that b Avimi says: /b The i tanna /i of the mishna is speaking of a case b where /b the witnesses b contradicted /b each other b in the examinations /b that involve matters peripheral to the murder b but did not contradict /b each other b in the interrogations, /b which are integral to the murder, i.e., time and place. Therefore, it is clear to the court that the accused is guilty and consequently they place him in the vaulted chamber. b As we learned /b in a mishna (40a): There was b an incident and ben Zakkai examined /b the witnesses b with regard to the stems of figs /b on the fig tree beneath which the murder took place. Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai questioned the witnesses about the thickness of the stems in order to determine whether they would contradict each other in this peripheral detail in order to save the accused (see 41a).,The mishna teaches: b And feeds him sparing bread and scant water. /b The Gemara asks: b What is different /b in the mishna b here that /b the i tanna /i b teaches /b that the court b gives him sparing bread and scant water /b in the vaulted chamber, b and what is different /b in the previous mishna b there that /b the i tanna /i b teaches /b that the court b feeds him barley /b bread b until his belly ruptures; /b are these two different punishments? b Rav Sheshet says: /b Both b this and that /b are one punishment; first, the court b gives him sparing bread and scant water until his intestines contract /b due to his starvation diet, b and then /b the court b feeds him barley /b bread that expands in his innards b until his belly ruptures. /b , strong MISHNA: /strong With regard to b one who steals a i kasva /i , and one who curses with a sorcerer, and one who engages in intercourse with an Aramean woman, zealots strike him /b and kill him. Although the Torah does not say that one who performs one of these actions is liable to be executed, it is permitted for anyone who zealously takes the vengeance of the Lord to do so. In the case of b a priest who performed /b the Temple b service in /b a state of b ritual impurity, his priestly brethren do not bring him to court /b for judgment; b rather, the young men of the priesthood remove him from the Temple courtyard and pierce his skull with pieces of wood. /b In the case of b a non-priest who performed the service in the Temple, Rabbi Akiva says: /b His execution is b by strangulation, and the Rabbis say: /b He is not executed with a court-imposed death penalty; rather, he is liable to receive death b at the hand of Heaven. /b , strong GEMARA: /strong The Gemara asks: b What /b is the b i kasva /i /b mentioned in the mishna? b Rav Yehuda says: /b It is a term used to describe any b service vessel /b utilized in the Temple. b And likewise, it is stated: “And the jars [ i kesot /i ] with which to pour libations” /b (Numbers 4:7). The Gemara asks: b And where is it intimated /b that one who steals a service vessel is liable to be killed by zealots? The Gemara answers that it is intimated in the verse: b “But they shall not come to see the sacred items as they are being covered [ i kevala /i ], lest they die” /b (Numbers 4:20). The Gemara interprets the term i kevala /i as one who ingests, i.e., who takes (see Job 20:15), and the verse thereby teaches that one who steals a service vessel is liable to be killed.,The mishna teaches: b And one who curses with a sorcerer /b is among those liable to be killed by zealots. b Rav Yosef teaches /b that the reference is to one who says: b Let the sorcerer strike his sorcerer, /b meaning one who curses God in the name of idol worship. He does not explicitly say God’s name, but he believes that a sorcerer can curse the sorcerer who provided him with his powers, i.e., the Divine Presence. b The Rabbis, and some say /b that it was b Rabba, son of Mari, say /b that the reference is to one who says: b Let the sorcerer strike him, /b i.e., the individual with whom he is quarreling, b and his Creator and his Provider. /b Since he curses God, it is permitted for zealots to kill him.,The mishna teaches that b one who engages in intercourse with an Aramean woman /b is among those liable to be killed by zealots. b Rav Kahana asked of Rav: /b |
|
97. Babylonian Talmud, Rosh Hashanah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 176| 3a. (במדבר כא, א) וישמע הכנעני מלך ערד מה שמועה שמע שמע שמת אהרן ונסתלקו ענני כבוד וכסבור ניתנה רשות להלחם בישראל והיינו דכתיב (במדבר כ, כט) ויראו כל העדה כי גוע אהרן,וא"ר אבהו אל תקרי ויראו אלא וייראו כדריש לקיש דאמר ר"ל כי משמש בד' לשונות אי דילמא אלא דהא,מי דמי התם כנען הכא סיחון תנא הוא סיחון הוא ערד הוא כנען סיחון שדומה לסייח במדבר כנען על שם מלכותו ומה שמו ערד שמו איכא דאמרי ערד שדומה לערוד במדבר כנען על שם מלכותו ומה שמו סיחון שמו,ואימא ר"ה אייר,לא סלקא דעתך דכתיב (שמות מ, יז) ויהי בחדש הראשון בשנה השנית באחד לחדש הוקם המשכן וכתיב (במדבר י, יא) ויהי בשנה השנית בחדש השני נעלה הענן מעל משכן העדות מדקאי בניסן וקרי לה שנה שנית וקאי באייר וקרי לה שנה שני' מכלל דר"ה לאו אייר הוא,ואימא ר"ה סיון לא ס"ד דכתיב (שמות יט, א) בחדש השלישי לצאת בני ישראל מארץ מצרים ואם איתא בחדש השלישי בשנה השנית לצאת וגו' מיבעי ליה,ואימא תמוז ואימא אב ואימא אדר,אלא אמר ר"א מהכא (ב דברי הימים ג, ב) ויחל לבנות בחדש השני בשני בשנת ארבע למלכותו מאי שני לאו שני לירח שמונין בו למלכותו,מתקיף לה רבינא ואימא שני בחדש א"כ שני בחדש בהדיה הוה כתיב ביה,ואימא בשני בשבת חדא דלא אשכחן שני בשבת דכתיב ועוד מקיש שני בתרא לשני קמא מה שני קמא חדש אף שני בתרא חדש,תניא כוותיה דר' יוחנן מניין שאין מונין להם למלכים אלא מניסן שנא' (מלכים א ו, א) ויהי בשמונים שנה וארבע מאות שנה לצאת בני ישראל מארץ מצרים וגו' וכתיב (במדבר לג, לח) ויעל אהרן הכהן אל הר ההר על פי ה' וגו' [וכתיב (דברים א, ג) ויהי בארבעים שנה בעשתי עשר חדש],וכתיב (דברים א, ד) אחרי הכותו את סיחון וגו' ואומר וישמע הכנעני וגו' ואומר ויראו כל העדה כי גוע אהרן וגו' ואומר ויהי בחדש הראשון בשנה השנית וגו',ואומר ויהי בשנה השנית בחדש השני וגו' ואומר בחדש השלישי לצאת בני ישראל וגו' ואומר ויחל לבנות וגו',א"ר חסדא לא שנו אלא למלכי ישראל אבל למלכי אומות העולם מתשרי מנינן שנא' (נחמיה א, א) דברי נחמיה בן חכליה ויהי בחדש כסליו שנת עשרים וגו' וכתיב (נחמיה ב, א) ויהי בחדש ניסן שנת עשרי' לארתחשסתא וגו',מדקאי בכסליו וקרי ליה שנת עשרים וקאי בניסן וקרי ליה שנת עשרים מכלל דר"ה לאו ניסן הוא,בשלמא היאך מפרש דלארתחשסתא אלא האי ממאי דלארתחשסתא דילמא | 3a. b “And when the Canaanite, the king of Arad, /b who dwelt in the South, b heard /b tell that Israel came by the way of Atharim; and he fought against Israel” (Numbers 21:1). b What report did he hear? He heard that Aaron had died, and that the clouds of glory had withdrawn /b from the Jewish people, b and he thought /b that b he had been granted permission to wage war against the Jewish people. And this is as it is written: “And all the congregation saw that [ i ki /i ] Aaron was dead, /b and they wept for Aaron thirty days, all the house of Israel” (Numbers 20:29).,About this, b Rabbi Abbahu said: Do not read /b the verse as: b “And they saw [ i vayiru /i ]”; rather, /b read it as: b “And they were seen [ i vayeira’u /i ]” /b by others, because the cover of the clouds of glory had been removed from them. b And /b the next word, “that [ i ki /i ],” should be understood as meaning because, b in accordance with /b the statement of b Reish Lakish, as Reish Lakish said: /b The word b i ki /i is used /b in the Bible b in four senses: If, perhaps, but, and because. /b Therefore, the verse should be understood as follows: And all the congregation was seen, i.e., revealed, because Aaron had died. This shows that at the time of Aaron’s death Sihon was still alive; perforce, Moses’ oration, which was delivered after he had slain Sihon, must have occurred later.,The Gemara raises an objection against this proof: b Is it comparable? There, /b the verse is speaking of b Canaan, /b king of Arad, whereas b here, /b the verse is speaking of b Sihon. /b What proof, then, can be brought from the one with regard to the other? The Gemara explains: A Sage b taught /b in a i baraita /i : All three names are referring to the same person: b He is Sihon, /b and b he is Arad, /b and b he is /b also b Canaan. /b He was called b Sihon because he was similar /b in his wildness b to a foal [ i seyyaḥ /i ] in the desert; /b and he was called b Canaan after his kingdom, /b as he ruled over the Canaanite people; b and what was his /b real b name? Arad was his name. Some say /b an alternative explanation: He was called b Arad because he was similar to a wild ass [ i arod /i ] in the desert; /b and he was called b Canaan after his kingdom; and what was his /b real b name? Sihon was his name. /b ,The Gemara raises another question: Granted, when counting the years from the exodus from Egypt, Av and the following Shevat are both part of the same year, but it has not been established that the counting of years from the Exodus is specifically from Nisan. b Say /b that the b New Year /b for this purpose b is /b in the following month, the month of b Iyyar. /b ,The Gemara rejects this proposal: b It should not enter your mind /b to say this, b as it is written: “And it came to pass in the first month in the second year, on the first day of the month, that the Tabernacle was established” /b (Exodus 40:17), b and it is written: “And it came to pass in the second year, in the second month, /b on the twentieth day of the month, b that the cloud was taken up from over the Tabernacle of the testimony” /b (Numbers 10:11). It may be argued as follows: b From /b the fact b that when /b the Bible b speaks of Nisan, /b which is the first month, b it calls it “the second year,” and when it speaks of /b the following b Iyyar, /b which is the second month, b it /b also b calls it “the second year,” by inference, Rosh HaShana is not /b at the beginning of b Iyyar. /b Were it the case that the New Year begins in Iyyar, Nisan and the following Iyyar would not occur in the same year, as the year would have changed in Iyyar.,The Gemara asks further: b And say /b that the b New Year /b for this purpose b is /b in the third month, the month of b Sivan. /b The Gemara rejects this suggestion: b It should not enter your mind /b to say this, b as it is written: “In the third month, after the children of Israel were gone out of the land of Egypt, /b the same day they came into the wilderness of Sinai” (Exodus 19:1). b And if it is so /b that the New Year is the beginning of Sivan, the verse b should have /b said: b In the third month, in the second year after /b the children of Israel b were gone out /b of the land of Egypt, as a new year had started.,The Gemara continues: b But /b perhaps one could b say /b that the New Year for counting the Exodus is in the fourth month, the month of b Tammuz; or say /b that it is in the fifth month, the month of b Av; or say /b that it is in the twelfth month, the month of b Adar. /b There is no clear refutation that these months are not the New Year., b Rather, Rabbi Elazar said: /b It is b from here /b that it is derived that the years of a king’s rule are counted from Nisan, as it is stated: b “And he began to build in the second month, in the second, in the fourth year of his reign” /b (II Chronicles 3:2). b What is /b the meaning of the words b “the second”? Doesn’t it /b mean b second to the month from which /b Solomon’s b reign is counted? /b This is clear proof that the years of a king’s rule are counted from the first month, i.e., the month of Nisan., b Ravina strongly objects to this: /b Why not b say /b that the words “the second” are referring to b the second /b day b of the month? /b The Gemara answers: b If so, it should have explicitly stated: “On the second of the month,” /b as that is the formulation usually used in the Bible to refer to a specific day of the month.,The Gemara raises another objection: Why not b say /b that the words “the second” are referring to the second day b of the week? /b This argument is rejected for two reasons: b First, we have not found the second /b day b of the week /b ever being b written; /b nowhere does the Bible give the day of the week on which a particular event transpired. b And further, /b the verse b juxtaposes the second /b instance of the word b “second” to the first /b instance of the word b “second”: Just as the first “second” /b is referring to b a month, so too, the latter “second” /b is referring to b a month. /b ,It b is taught /b in a i baraita /i b in accordance with /b the opinion b of Rabbi Yoḥa: From where /b is it derived b that one counts /b the years of b kings’ /b reigns b only from /b the month of b Nisan? As it is stated: “And it came to pass in the four hundred and eightieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, /b in the fourth year of Solomon’s reign over Israel, in the month Ziv, which is the second month, that he began to build the house of the Lord” (I Kings 6:1). b And it is written: “And Aaron the priest went up to Mount Hor at the commandment of the Lord, /b and died there, in the fortieth year after the children of Israel were come out of the land of Egypt, in the fifth month, on the first day of the month” (Numbers 33:38). b And it is /b later b written: “And it came to pass in the fortieth year, in the eleventh month, /b on the first of the month, that Moses spoke to the children of Israel” (Deuteronomy 1:3)., b And it is written: “After he had slain Sihon, /b the king of the Amorites, who dwelt in Heshbon” (Deuteronomy 1:4). b And it says: “And when the Canaanite, /b the king of Arad, who dwelt in the South, b heard” /b (Numbers 33:40). b And it says: “And all the congregation saw that Aaron was dead, /b and they wept for Aaron thirty days” (Numbers 20:29). b And it says: “And it came to pass in the first month in the second year, /b on the first day of the month, that the Tabernacle was established” (Exodus 40:17)., b And it says: “And it came to pass in the second year, in the second month, /b on the twentieth day of the month, that the cloud was taken up from off the Tabernacle of the testimony” (Numbers 10:11). b And it says: “In the third month, after the children of Israel were gone out /b of the land of Egypt, the same day they came into the wilderness of Sinai” (Exodus 19:1). b And it says: “And he began to build /b in the second month, in the second, in the fourth year of his reign” (II Chronicles 3:2). This list of verses summarizes Rabbi Yoḥa’s explanation.,§ b Rav Ḥisda said: They taught /b that the years of a king’s rule are counted from the first of Nisan b only with regard to the /b Jewish b kings of Israel, but /b the years of b the kings of the /b gentile b nations of the world are counted from Tishrei, as it is stated: “The words of Nehemiah, son of Hachaliah. And it came to pass in the month Kislev, in the twentieth year, /b as I was in Shushan the capital” (Nehemiah 1:1). b And it is written: “And it came to pass in the month Nisan, in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes /b the king, that wine was before him, and I took up the wine, and gave it to the king” (Nehemiah 2:1)., b From /b the fact b that when /b the Bible b speaks of /b the month of b Kislev it calls it the twentieth year, and when it speaks of /b the following b Nisan it /b also b calls it the twentieth year, by inference, /b the b New Year /b for gentile kings b does not /b begin in b Nisan. /b Were it the case that the New Year did begin in Nisan, Kislev and the following Nisan would not occur in the same year.,The Gemara raises an objection: b Granted, /b in b this /b second verse b it is explicitly stated /b that the count relates to the years b of Artaxerxes. But /b as for b that /b first verse, b from where /b is it known that the count relates to the years b of Artaxerxes? Perhaps /b |
|
98. Babylonian Talmud, Qiddushin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 71| 66a. שורך נרבע והלה שותק נאמן ותנא תונא ושנעבדה בו עבירה ושהמית על פי עד אחד או ע"פ הבעלים נאמן האי ע"פ עד אחד היכי דמי אי דקא מודו בעלים היינו ע"פ הבעלים אלא לאו דשתיק,וצריכא דאי אשמעינן הך קמייתא אי לאו דקים ליה בנפשיה דעבד חולין בעזרה לא הוה מייתי,אבל נטמאו טהרותיך מימר אמרינן האי דשתיק דסבר חזי ליה בימי טומאתו,ואי אשמעינן הא משום דקא מפסיד ליה בימי טהרתו אבל שורו נרבע מימר אמר כל השוורים לאו לגבי מזבח קיימי צריכא,איבעיא להו אשתו זינתה בעד אחד ושותק מהו אמר אביי נאמן רבא אמר אינו נאמן הוי דבר שבערוה ואין דבר שבערוה פחות משנים,אמר אביי מנא אמינא לה דההוא סמיא דהוה מסדר מתנייתא קמיה דמר שמואל יומא חד נגה ליה ולא הוה קאתי שדר שליחא אבתריה אדאזיל שליח בחדא אורחא אתא איהו בחדא כי אתא שליח אמר אשתו זינתה אתא לקמיה דמר שמואל א"ל אי מהימן לך זיל אפקה ואי לא לא תפיק,מאי לאו אי מהימן עלך דלאו גזלנא הוא ורבא אי מהימן לך כבי תרי זיל אפקה ואי לא לא תפקה,ואמר אביי מנא אמינא לה דתניא מעשה בינאי המלך שהלך לכוחלית שבמדבר וכיבש שם ששים כרכים ובחזרתו היה שמח שמחה גדולה וקרא לכל חכמי ישראל אמר להם אבותינו היו אוכלים מלוחים בזמן שהיו עסוקים בבנין בית המקדש אף אנו נאכל מלוחים זכר לאבותינו והעלו מלוחים על שולחנות של זהב ואכלו,והיה שם אחד איש לץ לב רע ובליעל ואלעזר בן פועירה שמו ויאמר אלעזר בן פועירה לינאי המלך ינאי המלך לבם של פרושים עליך ומה אעשה הקם להם בציץ שבין עיניך הקים להם בציץ שבין עיניו,היה שם זקן אחד ויהודה בן גדידיה שמו ויאמר יהודה בן גדידיה לינאי המלך ינאי המלך רב לך כתר מלכות הנח כתר כהונה לזרעו של אהרן שהיו אומרים אמו נשבית במודיעים ויבוקש הדבר ולא נמצא ויבדלו חכמי ישראל בזעם,ויאמר אלעזר בן פועירה לינאי המלך ינאי המלך הדיוט שבישראל כך הוא דינו ואתה מלך וכהן גדול כך הוא דינך ומה אעשה אם אתה שומע לעצתי רומסם ותורה מה תהא עליה הרי כרוכה ומונחת בקרן זוית כל הרוצה ללמוד יבוא וילמוד,אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק מיד נזרקה בו אפיקורסות דהוה ליה למימר תינח תורה שבכתב תורה שבעל פה מאי מיד ותוצץ הרעה על ידי אלעזר בן פועירה ויהרגו כל חכמי ישראל והיה העולם משתומם עד שבא שמעון בן שטח והחזיר את התורה ליושנה,היכי דמי אילימא דבי תרי אמרי אישתבאי ובי תרי אמרי לא אישתבאי מאי חזית דסמכת אהני סמוך אהני,אלא בעד אחד וטעמא דקא מכחשי ליה בי תרי הא לאו הכי מהימן,ורבא לעולם תרי ותרי וכדאמר רב אחא בר רב מניומי בעדי הזמה הכא נמי בעדי הזמה,ואיבעית אימא כדרבי יצחק דאמר רבי יצחק שפחה הכניסו תחתיה,אמר רבא | 66a. b Your ox was used /b by a man b for an act of bestiality /b and is therefore unfit for an offering, b and the other, /b the owner of the ox, b is silent, /b the witness is b deemed credible. And the i tanna /i /b of the mishna also b taught /b ( i Bekhorot /i 41a): b And /b with regard to an animal b that was used for a transgression /b or b that killed, /b if this is attested to b by one witness or by the owner, /b he is b deemed credible. /b The Gemara clarifies this case: b What are the circumstances /b of b this /b case of the mishna, where the knowledge is established b by one witness? If the owner admits /b to the claim, b this is /b the same as: b By the owner. Rather, is it not /b referring to a case b where /b the owner remains b silent? /b ,The Gemara comments: b And /b each of these statements of Abaye is b necessary. As, had he taught us /b only b that first /b case, where the witness said someone ate forbidden fat, one might have said that he is deemed credible for the following reason: b Were it not /b for the fact b that he himself /b was b convinced that he had committed /b a transgression, b he would not /b commit the transgression of b bringing a non-sacred /b animal b to /b the Temple b courtyard /b on the basis of the testimony of one witness. Consequently, his silence is evidently an admission., b But /b if the witness said: b Your ritually pure /b foods b were rendered ritually impure, /b and the accused was silent, b we would say: /b The reason b that /b he is b silent /b and refrains from denying the claim is b that he thinks /b he is not suffering any significant loss, as the food b is fit for him /b to eat b on his days of ritual impurity, /b because he is not required to destroy ritually impure foods., b And had /b Abaye b taught us /b only the case of: Your ritually pure food was rendered ritually impure, one might have said that the reason b this /b witness is deemed credible is b that he causes him a loss on his days of ritual impurity, /b and therefore his silence is tantamount to a confession. b But /b in the case of: b His ox was used /b by a man b for an act of bestiality, /b the owner of the ox b can say /b with regard to his animal: b Not all the oxen stand /b ready to be sacrificed b as /b an offering on the b altar. /b Perhaps one would think that the owner does not bother denying the claim because he merely forfeits the possibility of sacrificing his ox as an offering, which he considers an inconsequential matter. It is only if there were two witnesses to the act that the animal is put to death, whereas here there was only one witness. It is therefore b necessary /b for Abaye to specify all these cases.,§ b A dilemma was raised before /b the Sages: If a husband is told b by one witness /b that b his wife committed adultery, and /b the husband remains b silent, what is /b the i halakha /i ? b Abaye said: /b The witness is b deemed credible. Rava said: He is not deemed credible. /b Why not? Because b it is a matter involving forbidden relations, and there is no matter /b of testimony b for forbidden sexual relations /b that can be attested to by b fewer than two /b witnesses., b Abaye said: From where do I say /b this claim of mine? It happened b that /b there was b a certain blind man who would review i mishnayot /i before Mar Shmuel. One day /b the blind man b was late for him and was not arriving. /b Mar Shmuel b sent a messenger after him /b to assist him. b While /b the b messenger was going /b to the blind man’s house b by one way, /b the blind man b arrived /b at the house of study b by a different /b route, and therefore the messenger missed him and reached his house. b When /b the b messenger came /b back, b he said /b that he had been to the blind man’s house and saw that b his wife committed adultery. /b The blind man b came before Mar Shmuel /b to inquire whether he must pay heed to this testimony. Mar Shmuel b said to him: If /b this messenger b is trusted by you, go /b and b divorce her, but if not, do not divorce /b her.,Abaye comments: b What, is it not /b correct to say that this means that b if he is trusted by you that he is not a thief /b but is a valid witness, you must rely on him? This would prove that a single witness can testify in a case of this kind. b And Rava /b explains that Mar Shmuel meant: b If /b he b is trusted by you like two /b witnesses, b go /b and b divorce her, but if not, do not divorce /b her. Consequently, Rava maintains that this episode affords no proof., b And Abaye said: From where do I say /b this claim of mine? b As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b An incident /b occurred b with King Yannai, who went to /b the region of b Koḥalit in the desert and conquered sixty cities there. And upon his return he rejoiced /b with b a great happiness /b over his victory. b And he /b subsequently b summoned all the Sages of the Jewish people /b and b said to them: Our ancestors /b in their poverty b would eat salty foods when they were busy with the building of the Temple; we too shall eat salty foods in memory of our ancestors. And they brought salty food on tables of gold, and ate. /b , b And there was one /b person b present, a scoffer, /b a man of b an evil heart and a scoundrel called Elazar ben Po’ira. And Elazar ben Po’ira said to King Yannai: King Yannai, the hearts of the Pharisees, /b the Sages, b are against you. /b In other words, they harbor secret resentment against you and do not like you. The king replied: b And what shall I do /b to clarify this matter? Elazar responded: b Have them stand by /b wearing b the frontplate between your eyes. /b Since the frontplate bears the Divine Name, they should stand in its honor. Yannai, who was a member of the priestly Hasmonean family, also served as High Priest, who wears the frontplate. b He had /b the Pharisees b stand by /b wearing b the frontplate between his eyes. /b ,Now b there was a certain elder present called Yehuda ben Gedidya, and Yehuda ben Gedidya said to King Yannai: King Yannai, the crown of the monarchy suffices for you, /b i.e., you should be satisfied that you are king. b Leave the crown of the priesthood for the descendants of Aaron. /b The Gemara explains this last comment: b As they would say /b that Yannai’s b mother was taken captive in Modi’in, /b and she was therefore disqualified from marrying into the priesthood, which meant that Yannai was a i ḥalal /i . b And the matter was investigated and was not discovered, /b i.e., they sought witnesses for that event but none were found. b And the Sages of Israel were expelled in /b the king’s b rage, /b due to this rumor., b And Elazar ben Po’ira said to King Yannai: King Yannai, such is the judgment of a common person in Israel. /b In other words, merely expelling a slanderer is appropriate if the subject of the slander is a commoner. b But you are a king and a High Priest. /b Is b this your judgment /b as well? Yannai replied: b And what should I do? /b Elazar responded: b If you listen to my advice, crush them. /b Yannai countered: b But what will become of the Torah? /b He retorted: b Behold, /b it b is wrapped and placed in the corner. Anyone who wishes to study can come and study. /b We have no need for the Sages.,The Gemara interjects: b Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak says: Immediately, heresy was injected into /b Yannai, b as he should have said /b to Elazar ben Po’ira: This b works out well /b with regard to b the Written Torah, /b as it can be studied by all on their own, but b what /b will become of b the Oral Torah? /b The Oral Torah is transmitted only by the Sages. The i baraita /i continues: b Immediately, the evil /b arose and b caught fire through Elazar ben Po’ira, and all the Sages of the Jewish people were killed. And the world was desolate /b of Torah b until Shimon ben Shataḥ came and restored the Torah to its former /b glory. This completes the i baraita /i .,Abaye asks: b What are the circumstances /b of this case? How did those who conducted the investigation refute the rumor that Yannai’s mother had been taken captive? b If we say that two /b witnesses b said /b that b she was taken captive, and two /b others b said /b that b she was not taken captive, what did you see that you rely on these /b who said that she was not taken captive? Instead, b rely on these /b who said that she was taken captive. In such a scenario, one cannot say definitively that the matter was investigated and found to be false., b Rather, /b it must be referring b to one witness /b who testified she was taken captive, and two testified that she was not taken captive. b And the reason /b that the lone witness is not deemed credible is only b that he is contradicted by the /b other b two, /b from which it may be inferred that b if not for that /b fact, b he would be deemed credible. /b This supports Abaye’s claim that an uncontested lone witness is deemed credible in a case of this kind., b And Rava /b could reply that this incident affords no proof, for the following reason: b Actually, /b one can say that there were b two /b witnesses who testified that she was captured b and two /b who testified that she was not, b and /b the case was decided b in accordance with that /b which b Rav Aḥa bar Rav Minyumi says /b in a different context, that it is referring b to conspiring witnesses. /b The second pair of witnesses did not contradict the testimony of the first pair but established them as liars by stating that the first pair were not there to witness the event. This serves to disqualify the testimony of the first pair altogether. b Here too, /b it is referring b to /b witnesses who rendered the first set b conspiring witnesses. /b , b And if you wish, say /b that this is b in accordance with /b the version of the story stated b by Rabbi Yitzḥak, as Rabbi Yitzḥak says: They replaced /b Yannai’s mother b with a maidservant. /b The first witnesses saw that Yannai’s mother was about to be taken captive, but the second pair revealed that she had actually been replaced with a maidservant, thereby negating the testimony of the first set., b Rava says: /b |
|
99. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 87| 56b. משלשין ביניהם,שלשה אחים ואחד מצטרף עמהם הרי אלו שלש עדיות והן עדות אחת להזמה: , big strongגמ׳ /strong /big מתניתין דלא כרבי עקיבא דתניא א"ר יוסי כשהלך אבא חלפתא אצל רבי יוחנן בן נורי ללמוד תורה ואמרי לה ר' יוחנן בן נורי אצל אבא חלפתא ללמוד תורה אמר לו הרי שאכלה שנה ראשונה בפני שנים שניה בפני שנים שלישית בפני שנים מהו אמר לו הרי זו חזקה,אמר לו אף אני אומר כן אלא שר"ע חולק בדבר זה שהיה ר"ע אומר (דברים יט, טו) דבר ולא חצי דבר,ורבנן האי דבר ולא חצי דבר מאי עבדי ליה אילימא למעוטי אחד אומר אחת בגבה ואחד אומר אחת בכריסה האי חצי דבר וחצי עדות היא,אלא למעוטי שנים אומרים אחת בגבה ושנים אומרים אחת בכריסה,אמר רב יהודה אחד אומר אכלה חטים ואחד אומר אכלה שעורים הרי זו חזקה מתקיף לה רב נחמן אלא מעתה אחד אומר אכלה ראשונה שלישית וחמישית ואחד אומר אכלה שניה רביעית וששית הכי נמי דהויא חזקה,א"ל רב יהודה הכי השתא התם בשתא דקא מסהיד מר לא קא מסהיד מר הכא תרוייהו בחדא שתא קא מסהדי מאי איכא למימר בין חיטי לשערי לאו אדעתייהו דאינשי:,שלשה אחין ואחד מצטרף עמהן הרי אלו שלש עדיות והן עדות אחת להזמה: | 56b. payment of the value of the field to the owner is b divided among them. /b ,If the testimony was given by b three brothers, /b each of whom testify about one year, b and another /b unrelated individual b joined with /b each of the brothers as the second witness, b these are three /b distinct b testimonies /b and they are accepted by the court. If they were to be considered one testimony, it would not be accepted, as brothers may not testify together. b But they are one testimony for /b the purpose of rendering them as b conspiring /b witnesses, and the payment is divided among them., strong GEMARA: /strong The Gemara notes: b The mishna is not in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Akiva, as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i ( i Tosefta /i , 2:10) that b Rabbi Yosei said: When Abba Ḥalafta, /b Rabbi Yosei’s father, b went to Rabbi Yoḥa ben Nuri to study Torah, and some say: /b When b Rabbi Yoḥa ben Nuri /b went b to Abba Ḥalafta to study Torah, he said to him: What is /b the i halakha /i if b there is /b one b who /b worked and b profited /b from a field b in the presence of two /b witnesses during the b first year, /b then b in the presence of two /b other witnesses during the b second /b year, and finally b in the presence of two /b other witnesses during the b third /b year? He b said to him: This is /b sufficient for establishing the b presumption /b of ownership.,The latter b said to him: I say this as well, but Rabbi Akiva disagrees with regard to this matter, as Rabbi Akiva would say /b that since the verse states: “At the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall a matter be established” (Deuteronomy 19:15), one can derive that testimony is accepted only with regard to a complete b matter, and not /b with regard to b half /b of b a matter. /b In this mishna, although presumptive ownership requires testimony that the property had been worked and profited from for three years, testimony is accepted from each pair of witnesses with regard to one year. Consequently, the ruling of the mishna does not accord with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva.,The Gemara asks: b And /b with regard to b the Rabbis, /b who accept the testimony of each of the three pairs of witnesses, b what do they do with this /b derivation of: A complete b matter, and not half /b of b a matter, /b i.e., what type of testimony is disqualified based on this derivation? b If we say /b that it serves b to exclude /b a case where two witnesses testify that a young woman has two pubic hairs and has therefore reached maturity, where b one says /b she has b one /b hair b on her back and one says /b she has b one /b hair b on her /b lower b abdomen, /b i.e., they are testifying to two different pubic hairs, and in this case the Rabbis say this testimony is not accepted, since they each testify with regard to only half of the matter, that is difficult. But b this is /b both b half /b of b a matter and half /b of b a testimony, /b as there is only one witness with regard to each pubic hair. This testimony would not be valid even without the derivation., b Rather, /b in the opinion of the Rabbis the derivation serves b to exclude /b a case where b two /b witnesses b say /b she has b one /b hair b on her back and two /b witnesses b say /b she has b one /b hair b on her /b lower b abdomen. /b In this case, each group of witnesses gives full testimony with regard to half of a matter, i.e., one pubic hair, as both hairs must be present concurrently in order for her to assume the status of an adult. By contrast, in the case of the mishna, the years are by definition not concurrent. Therefore, the Rabbis rule that testimony with regard to one year is accepted.,§ In a related matter, b Rav Yehuda says: /b If two witnesses testify that one had worked and profited from a field for three years, where b one /b witness b says he consumed wheat /b from the field, b and one says he consumed barley /b from b it, this is /b sufficient for establishing the b presumption /b of ownership. b Rav Naḥman objects to this /b ruling: b If that is so, /b then if b one /b witness b says /b he worked and b profited /b from the field during the b first, third, and fifth /b years; b and one /b witness b says he /b worked and b profited /b from b it /b during the b second, fourth, and sixth /b years, would you b also /b say b that /b this b is /b sufficient for establishing the b presumption /b of ownership? What is the difference between testifying about different crops and testifying about different years?, b Rav Yehuda said to him: How can /b these cases b be compared? There, /b i.e., in your example, b with regard to the year /b about which one b Master, /b i.e., witness, b is testifying, /b the other b Master is not testifying /b about it, while b here, both are testifying with regard to one year. What is there to say, /b that there is a contradiction in their testimonies b between wheat and barley? It does not enter people’s minds /b to note this distinction. Two witnesses did, however, testify that he worked and profited from the field for three years.,§ The mishna teaches that if the testimony was given by b three brothers, /b each of whom testified about one year, b and another, /b unrelated individual b joined with /b each of the brothers as the second witness, b these are three /b distinct b testimonies /b and they are accepted by the court. b But they are one testimony for /b the purpose of rendering them as b conspiring /b witnesses. |
|
100. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Qamma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 87| 70b. חלפתא אמר לו,הרי שאכלה שנה ראשונה בפני שנים שניה בפני שנים שלישית בפני שנים מהו,אמר לו הרי זו חזקה אמר לו אף אני אומר כן אלא שרבי עקיבא חולק בדבר שהיה רבי עקיבא אומר (דברים יט, טו) דבר ולא חצי דבר,אמר אביי אפילו תימא רבי עקיבא מי לא מודה רבי עקיבא בשנים אומרים קידש ושנים אומרים בעל,דאע"ג דעדי ביאה צריכי לעדי קדושין כיון דעדי קדושין לא צריכי לעדי ביאה דבר קרינא ביה,ה"נ אע"ג דעדי טביחה צריכי לעדי גניבה כיון דעדי גניבה לא צריכי לעדי טביחה דבר קרינא ביה,ורבנן האי דבר ולא חצי דבר למעוטי מאי למעוטי אחד אומר אחד בגבה ואחד אומר אחד בכריסה,האי חצי דבר וחצי עדות הוא,אלא למעוטי שנים אומרים אחד בגבה ושנים אומרים אחד בכריסה הני אמרי קטנה היא והני אמרי קטנה היא:,גנב ומכר בשבת [וכו']: והתניא פטור,אמר רמי בר חמא כי תניא ההיא דפטור באומר לו עקוץ (לך) תאינה מתאינתי ותיקני לי גניבותיך,אמרי וכיון דכי תבע ליה קמן בדינא לא אמרינן ליה זיל שלים דמחייב בנפשו הוא הא מכירה נמי לאו מכירה היא,אלא אמר רב פפא באומר לו זרוק גניבותיך לחצרי ותיקני לי גניבותיך,כמאן כר"ע דאמר קלוטה כמי שהונחה דמיא,דאי כרבנן כיון דמטיא לחצר ביתו קנה לענין שבת לא מחייב עד דמטיא לארעא,באומר לא תיקני לי גניבותיך עד שתנוח,רבא אמר לעולם כרמי בר חמא אתנן אסרה תורה ואפילו בא על אמו ואי תבעה ליה קמן בדינא מי אמרינן ליה קום הב לה אתנן,אלא אע"ג דכי קא תבעה ליה בדינא לא אמרינן ליה זיל הב לה כיון דכי יהיב לה הוי אתנן הכא נמי אע"ג דלענין תשלומין אי תבע בדינא קמן לא אמרינן ליה זיל שלים | 70b. b Ḥalafta, /b he b said to him /b the following in the course of their discussion of the i halakhot /i of possession.,If one has been in possession of real estate for three years, this serves as proof of his claim that he is the legal owner. One who is able to prove uninterrupted possession for the necessary period is not required to produce documentary evidence of his legal title to the property. Rabbi Yoḥa ben Nuri or father Ḥalafta asked: b If /b one harvested and b ate /b the produce of a field that he claims as his own the b first year /b of the three years required for establishing possession of the land b in the presence of two /b witnesses, and subsequently ate the produce of the b second /b year b in the presence of two /b other witnesses, and finally ate the produce of the b third /b year b in the presence of /b yet b two /b other witnesses, b what is /b the i halakha /i ? Can the three testimonies combine to establish full testimony that he ate the produce of three years, thereby confirming his ownership of the field?,Rabbi Ḥalafta b said to /b Rabbi Yoḥa ben Nuri, or vice versa: b This is /b considered to establish b presumptive ownership /b by the one who ate the produce. The other Sage b said to him: I too say /b that this is b so, but Rabbi Akiva disputes /b this b matter, as Rabbi Akiva would say: /b The Torah requires that witnesses must testify with regard to a complete b matter and not part of a matter. /b Since there must be testimony concerning consumption of the produce over three years, and each set of witnesses establishes only that it took place for one year, their separate testimonies do not combine. If so, the mishna is apparently not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva.,The Gemara rejects this assertion. b Abaye said: You /b can b even say /b that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Akiva. Doesn’t Rabbi Akiva concede /b that b in /b a case where b two /b witnesses b say: /b So-and-so b betrothed /b a certain woman, b and two /b other witnesses b say: /b Someone else subsequently b engaged in sexual intercourse /b with that same woman, this is proof that the act of intercourse was adulterous?,The reason for this is b that even though the witnesses /b testifying about the b intercourse require the witnesses /b who testify about the b betrothal, /b i.e., the testimony of the second set of witnesses is meaningless without the testimony of the first witnesses, nevertheless, b since the witnesses /b testifying about the b betrothal do not require the witnesses /b who testify about the b intercourse, /b i.e., their testimony by itself establishes a halakhic status, b we call /b the testimony of each pair a complete b matter. /b , b Here too, /b the same logic applies in the case of a thief who steals an animal and subsequently slaughters or sells it: b Even though the witnesses /b who testify about the b slaughter require the /b testimony of the b witnesses /b about the b theft /b in order for their testimony to have any halakhic significance, b since the witnesses /b testifying about the b theft do not require the /b testimony of the b witnesses /b who testify about the b slaughter, /b as their testimony alone establishes that person as a thief who is liable to pay the double payment, b we call /b the testimony of each pair a complete b matter. /b ,The Gemara asks: b And /b according to the opinion of b the Rabbis, /b who disagree with Rabbi Akiva that the Torah stipulates that testimony must be about b a matter and not half of a matter, /b the term “matter” (Deuteronomy 19:15) serves b to exclude what? /b The Gemara answers: It serves b to exclude /b a case involving testimony that a girl has reached majority, in which b one /b witness b says /b that he saw b one /b hair on b her /b lower b back, and one /b witness b says /b that he saw b one /b hair on b her /b lower b abdomen. /b A girl is considered to have reached maturity when she has two pubic hairs. In this case, two witnesses separately testify that they have each seen one hair, and therefore each testimony is halakhically meaningless on its own. The Rabbis derive from the verse that these testimonies do not combine.,The Gemara raises a difficulty: In b this /b case each testimony is obviously invalid, as it is b half a matter and /b also b half a testimony. /b Not only does each testimony refer to one hair, which is half a matter, it is submitted by one witness, which is half a testimony. Consequently, it is obvious that the girl is not considered of age in this case.,The Gemara therefore rejects this explanation. b Rather, /b the Rabbis maintain that the term “matter” serves b to exclude /b a case in which b two /b witnesses b say /b that they saw b one /b hair on a girl’s b back, and two /b other witnesses b say /b that they saw b one /b hair b on her /b lower b abdomen. /b In this case the testimony of either set of witnesses concerns only one hair, and therefore b these /b witnesses b are /b essentially b saying /b that b she is /b still b a minor and those /b witnesses b are saying /b that b she is /b still b a minor. /b Therefore, each testimony concerns only half of a matter.,§ The mishna teaches: If one b stole /b an animal b and sold /b it b on Shabbat, /b he pays the fourfold or fivefold payment. The Gemara asks: b But isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i that in this case he is b exempt /b from the fourfold or fivefold payment?, b Rami bar Ḥama said: When it is taught /b in b that /b i baraita /i b that /b he is b exempt, /b this is referring to a case b where /b the purchaser b says to /b the thief: b Pick off a fig for yourself from my fig tree /b on Shabbat, b and /b through performing this act b your stolen /b animal shall be b acquired by me. /b Since the act of acquisition of the animal involved the type of Shabbat desecration for which one is liable to receive the death penalty, the thief is exempt from the monetary obligations he would ordinarily incur from this act, i.e., the fourfold or fivefold payment to the animal’s prior owner. This is in accordance with the principle that one who commits two or more transgressions by means of a single act, both of which entail punishment, is exempt from the lesser punishment.,The Sages b say, /b questioning this explanation of the i baraita /i : b But since, if /b the purchaser b would bring a legal claim against /b the thief b before us, /b to force him to deliver the animal acquired by means of picking the fig, the court b would not say to /b the thief: b Go /b and b pay /b him the animal you owe him, b because /b the thief b is liable to /b receive the b death /b penalty for his desecration of Shabbat, this shows that b the sale is not /b a valid b sale /b at all. Therefore, the i baraita /i would not call this exchange a sale and this interpretation of the i baraita /i cannot be correct., b Rather, Rav Pappa said: /b The i baraita /i is discussing a case b where /b the purchaser b said to /b the thief: b Throw your stolen /b animal from the public domain b into my /b enclosed b courtyard, and your stolen /b animal b will /b thereby b be acquired by me. /b One can acquire an item if it is placed on his property. In this case, when the thief places the animal on the purchaser’s property he moves it from the public domain into the private domain, which is a desecration of Shabbat that entails the death penalty. Consequently, he is exempt from the fourfold or fivefold payment.,The Gemara asks: If this is the correct explanation of the i baraita /i , b in accordance with whose /b opinion is the i baraita /i taught? It is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Akiva, who says: /b An item b in /b the b airspace /b of a certain area b is considered /b as though it were b at rest /b in that area., b As, if /b the i baraita /i is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b the Rabbis, /b who hold that an item in the airspace of a certain area is not considered as though it were at rest in that area, b once /b the animal b reaches the /b airspace b of the courtyard /b of the purchaser’s b house /b he has acquired it, as one can acquire items that are in the airspace of his courtyard just like those on its ground, whereas b with regard to /b moving an item from one domain to another on b Shabbat /b the thief b is not liable /b for Shabbat desecration b until it reaches the ground. /b Since the thief’s monetary liability is not simultaneous with his incurring of the death penalty, he would not be exempt from payment.,The Gemara answers: It is possible that the i baraita /i is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis as well, as one can explain that it is speaking of a case b in /b which the purchaser b says /b to the thief: b Your stolen /b animal b shall not be acquired by me until it rests /b on the ground. In that case, the acquisition of the animal and the Shabbat desecration are simultaneous., b Rava said: Actually, /b it is possible to explain the b i baraita /i as Rami bar Ḥama /b did, that the animal was acquired through the picking of a fig on Shabbat. And the objection raised earlier, that this act should not be considered a sale at all, is incorrect. This can be demonstrated by the fact that the b Torah prohibits /b one to bring as an offering an animal given as the b payment /b to a prostitute for services rendered (Deuteronomy 23:19). b And /b this prohibition applies b even /b if the man in question b engaged in intercourse with his own mother, /b which is a capital offense. b But if she /b would bring b a legal claim before us, demanding /b the payment of the animal that was agreed upon as her fee, b would we say to him: Arise and pay her /b the animal? The court would not say this, as the monetary liability was incurred simultaneously with the commission of a capital crime., b Rather, /b one must say that b even though if she /b brings b a legal claim /b against b him demanding /b the payment of the animal that was agreed upon as her fee b we do not say to him: Go and pay her, /b nevertheless, b since if /b he does b give /b it b to her it is /b considered b payment /b to a prostitute, it cannot be used as an offering. b Here too, /b in the case of the acquisition of the animal through picking a fig, b even though with regard to payment, if /b the purchaser would bring b a legal claim before us /b against the thief, b seeking /b to force him to deliver the animal, b we would not say to him: Go pay, /b |
|
101. Babylonian Talmud, Nedarim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 103| 76a. אימא סיפא אמרו לו לר"א אם מטבילין כלי טמא ליטהר יטבילו כלי לכשיטמא ליטהר שמע מינה חיילין,אמרי רבנן לא קיימי להון בטעמיה דר"א והכי קאמרי ליה מאי סבירא לך אי סבירא לך דחיילין ובטלין תהוי כלי תיובתך אי לא סבירא לך דחיילין תהוי מקוה תיובתך,ת"ש אמר להם ר"א ומה זרעים טמאים כיון שזרען בקרקע טהורין זרועין ועומדים לא כל שכן ש"מ לא חיילין,ורבנן לא דרשי ק"ו והא תניא יכול ימכור אדם את בתו כשהיא נערה אמרת ק"ו מכורה כבר יוצאה אינה מכורה אינו דין שלא תימכר | 76a. The Gemara rejects this conclusion and refers back to the i baraita /i . b Say the latter clause /b of that i baraita /i : b They said to Rabbi Eliezer: If one immerses an impure vessel to purify /b it, b shall one immerse a vessel /b in advance so that b when it will become impure it will /b then b be purified? Learn from /b this clause of the i baraita /i that according to Rabbi Eliezer, vows nullified preemptively b take effect /b momentarily and are then immediately nullified. The Rabbis’ objection is that according to Rabbi Eliezer, prior immersion should purify an item that momentarily became impure.,The Gemara rejects this conclusion: One could b say /b that b the Rabbis could not determine the reasoning of Rabbi Eliezer, and this is what /b they b said to him: What do you hold? If you hold that /b preemptively nullified vows b take effect /b momentarily b and are /b then b nullified, /b then the example of b a vessel will be your refutation, /b i.e., will serve to refute your opinion. b If you do not hold that they take effect, /b but rather that they do not take effect at all, then the example of b a ritual bath will be your refutation. /b , b Come /b and b hear: Rabbi Eliezer said to them: And just as ritually impure seeds, once one has sown them in the ground, /b become b pure, /b then with regard to those which b are already sown /b and then come into contact with impurity, should they b not all the more so /b be pure? Similarly, vows that have been preemptively nullified should be nullified, since a husband can nullify vows after they have been taken. b Learn from /b this i baraita /i that according to Rabbi Eliezer preemptively nullified vows b do not take effect /b at all, just as seeds that were already sown do not become impure at all.,The Gemara comments: b And the Rabbis, do they not teach /b i halakhot /i based upon an b i a fortiori /i /b inference of this sort? b But isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Can a person sell his daughter /b as a maidservant b when she is a young woman? You /b can b say an i a fortiori /i /b inference to show that he cannot: A maidservant who was b already sold goes free /b upon becoming a young woman; with regard to one b who has not been sold, is it not logical that she cannot be sold /b once she already is a young woman? This i baraita /i shows that the Rabbis do utilize similar i a fortiori /i inferences. |
|
102. Babylonian Talmud, Gittin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 176| 90a. והלכתא מותרת לשניהם:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big בית שמאי אומרים לא יגרש אדם את אשתו אלא אם כן מצא בה דבר ערוה שנאמר (דברים כד, א) כי מצא בה ערות דבר,ובית הלל אומרים אפילו הקדיחה תבשילו שנאמר כי מצא בה ערות דבר,ר' עקיבא אומר אפי' מצא אחרת נאה הימנה שנאמר (דברים כד, א) והיה אם לא תמצא חן בעיניו:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big תניא אמרו בית הלל לבית שמאי והלא כבר נאמר דבר אמרו להם ב"ש והלא כבר נאמר ערות,אמרו להם ב"ה אם נאמר ערות ולא נאמר דבר הייתי אומר משום ערוה תצא משום דבר לא תצא לכך נאמר דבר ואילו נאמר דבר ולא נאמר ערות הייתי אומר משום דבר תנשא לאחר ומשום ערוה לא תנשא לאחר לכך נאמר ערות,וב"ש האי דבר מאי עבדי ליה נאמר כאן דבר ונאמר להלן דבר (דברים יט, טו) על פי שני עדים או על פי שלשה עדים יקום דבר מה להלן בשני עדים אף כאן בשני עדים,וב"ה מי כתיב ערוה בדבר וב"ש מי כתיב או ערוה או דבר,וב"ה להכי כתיב ערות דבר דמשמע הכי ומשמע הכי:,ר"ע אומר אפי' מצא אחרת: במאי קא מיפלגי בדר"ל דאמר ריש לקיש כי משמש בד' לשונות אי דלמא אלא דהא,ב"ש סברי [והיה אם לא תמצא חן בעיניו] כי מצא בה ערות דבר דהא מצא בה ערות דבר ור"ע סבר כי מצא בה ערות דבר אי נמי מצא בה ערות דבר,אמר ליה רב פפא לרבא לא מצא בה לא ערוה ולא דבר מהו,א"ל מדגלי רחמנא גבי אונס (דברים כב, יט) לא יוכל לשלחה כל ימיו כל ימיו בעמוד והחזיר קאי התם הוא דגלי רחמנא אבל הכא מאי דעבד עבד,א"ל רב משרשיא לרבא אם לבו לגרשה והיא יושבת תחתיו ומשמשתו מהו קרי עליה (משלי ג, כט) אל תחרש על רעך רעה והוא יושב לבטח אתך,תניא היה רבי מאיר אומר כשם שהדעות במאכל כך דעות בנשים יש לך אדם שזבוב נופל לתוך כוסו וזורקו ואינו שותהו וזו היא מדת פפוס בן יהודה שהיה נועל בפני אשתו ויוצא,ויש לך אדם שזבוב נופל לתוך כוסו וזורקו ושותהו וזו היא מדת כל אדם שמדברת עם אחיה וקרוביה ומניחה,ויש לך אדם שזבוב נופל לתוך תמחוי מוצצו ואוכלו זו היא מדת אדם רע שרואה את אשתו יוצאה וראשה פרוע וטווה בשוק | 90a. b And the i halakha /i /b is that b she is permitted to both of them. /b , strong MISHNA: /strong b Beit Shammai say: A man may not divorce his wife unless he finds /b out b about her /b having engaged in b a matter of forbidden sexual intercourse [ i devar erva /i ], /b i.e., she committed adultery or is suspected of doing so, b as it is stated: “Because he has found some unseemly matter [ i ervat davar /i ] in her, /b and he writes her a scroll of severance” (Deuteronomy 24:1)., b And Beit Hillel say: /b He may divorce her b even /b due to a minor issue, e.g., because b she burned /b or over-salted b his dish, as it is stated: “Because he has found some unseemly matter in her,” /b meaning that he found any type of shortcoming in her., b Rabbi Akiva says: /b He may divorce her b even /b if b he found another woman /b who is b better looking than her /b and wishes to marry her, b as it is stated /b in that verse: b “And it comes to pass, if she finds no favor in his eyes” /b (Deuteronomy 24:1)., strong GEMARA: /strong It b is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Beit Hillel said to Beit Shammai: But isn’t /b the word b “matter” already stated /b in the verse, indicating that any disadvantageous matter is a legitimate reason for divorce? b Beit Shammai said to them: But isn’t /b the word b “unseemly [ i ervat /i ]” already stated? /b , b Beit Hillel said to them: If /b the word b “unseemly” had been stated and /b the word b “matter” had not been stated, I would have said /b that a wife b should leave /b her husband b due to forbidden sexual intercourse, /b but b she should not /b have to b leave /b him b due to /b any other b matter. Therefore, /b the word b “matter” is stated. And if /b the word b “matter” had been stated and /b the word b “unseemly” had not been stated, I would have said /b that if he divorced her merely b due to /b a disadvantageous b matter she may marry another /b man, as the Torah continues: “And she departs out of his house, and goes and becomes another man’s wife” (Deuteronomy 24:2). b But /b if she was divorced b due to /b her engaging in b forbidden sexual intercourse, she may not marry another /b man, as she is prohibited from remarrying. b Therefore, /b the word b “unseemly” is stated, /b indicating that even a wife who is divorced due to adultery is permitted to remarry.,The Gemara asks: b And what do Beit Shammai do with this /b word b “matter”? /b How do they interpret it? It seems superfluous, as in their opinion the verse refers specifically to a wife who engaged in forbidden sexual intercourse. The Gemara answers: The word b “matter” is stated here, /b with regard to divorce, b and /b the word b “matter” is stated there, /b with regard to testimony: b “At the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, a matter shall be established” /b (Deuteronomy 19:15). b Just as there, /b it is stated that a matter is established only b through two witnesses, so too here, /b a matter of forbidden sexual intercourse justifies divorce only if it is established b through two witnesses. /b , b And Beit Hillel /b would respond to this analogy in the following manner: b Is it written: /b Because he has found something b unseemly in a matter [ i erva bedavar /i ], /b indicating that it was established through the testimony of two witnesses that she engaged in adultery? b And Beit Shammai /b would respond to Beit Hillel’s interpretation as follows: b Is it written: /b Because he has found b either /b something b unseemly or /b another b matter i [o erva o davar /i ], /b in accordance with Beit Hillel’s understanding?, b And Beit Hillel /b would respond that b for this /b reason the expression b “some unseemly matter [ i ervat davar /i ]” is written, as it indicates that /b interpretation, i.e., that a husband is not obligated to divorce his wife unless there are two witnesses to her having engaged in forbidden sexual intercourse, b and it /b also b indicates this /b interpretation, i.e., that he may divorce her due to any deficiency, be it adultery or any other shortcoming.,§ It is stated in the mishna that b Rabbi Akiva says: /b He may divorce her b even /b if b he found another woman /b who is better looking than her. b With regard to what do they disagree? /b They disagree b with regard to /b the application of b Reish Lakish’s /b statement, b as Reish Lakish said /b that the term b i ki /i /b actually b has /b at least b four /b distinct b meanings: If, perhaps, rather, /b and b because. /b , b Beit Shammai hold /b that the verse b “And it comes to pass, if she finds no favor in his eyes, because [ i ki /i ] he has found some unseemly matter in her” /b means that she did not find favor in his eyes b due to /b the fact that b he has found some unseemly matter in her. And Rabbi Akiva holds /b that the phrase b “because [ i ki /i ] he has found some unseemly matter in her” /b means: b Or if he has found some unseemly matter in her. /b ,§ b Rav Pappa said to Rava: /b According to Beit Hillel, if the husband b found about her neither forbidden sexual intercourse nor /b any other b matter, /b but divorced her anyway, b what is /b the i halakha /i ? Is the divorce valid?,Rava b said to him /b that the answer can be derived b from what the Merciful One reveals /b in the Torah b with regard to a rapist: “He may not send her away all his days” /b (Deuteronomy 22:29), indicating that even if he divorces the woman whom he raped and was subsequently commanded to marry, b all his days he stands /b commanded b to arise and remarry /b her as his wife. Evidently, b specifically there /b the husband is obligated to remarry his divorcée, b as the Merciful One reveals /b as much. b But here, what he did, he did. /b , b Rav Mesharshiyya said to Rava: If he intends to divorce her and she is living with him and serving him, what is /b the i halakha /i ? Rava b read /b the following verse b about /b such a person: b “Devise not evil against your neighbor, seeing he dwells securely by you” /b (Proverbs 3:29).,§ It b is taught /b in a i baraita /i ( i Tosefta /i , i Sota /i 5:9) that b Rabbi Meir would say: Just as there are /b different b attitudes with regard to food, so too, there are /b different b attitudes with regard to women. /b With regard to food, b you have a person who, /b when b a fly falls into his cup, he throws out /b the wine with the fly b and does not drink it. And this is /b comparable to b the demeanor of Pappos ben Yehuda /b with regard to his wife, b as he would lock /b the door b before his wife and leave /b so that she would not see any other man., b And you have a person who, /b when b a fly falls into his cup, he throws out /b the fly b and drinks /b the wine. b And this is /b comparable to b the demeanor of any /b common b man, whose /b wife b speaks with her siblings and relatives, and he lets her /b do so., b And you have a man who, /b when b a fly falls into /b his b serving bowl, he sucks /b the fly b and eats /b the food. b This is the demeanor of a bad man, who sees his wife going out /b into the street b with her head uncovered, and spinning in the marketplace /b immodestly, |
|
103. Babylonian Talmud, Hagigah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 102| 10b. מלאכת מחשבת אסרה תורה ומלאכת מחשבת לא כתיבא:,חגיגות: מיכתב כתיבן לא צריכא לכדאמר ליה רב פפא לאביי ממאי דהאי וחגותם אותו חג לה' זביחה דלמא חוגו חגא קאמר רחמנא,אלא מעתה דכתיב (שמות ה, א) ויחוגו לי במדבר הכי נמי דחוגו חגא הוא וכי תימא הכי נמי והכתיב (שמות י, כה) ויאמר משה גם אתה תתן בידינו זבחים ועולות,דלמא הכי קאמר רחמנא אכלו ושתו וחוגו חגא קמאי לא סלקא דעתך דכתיב (שמות כג, יח) ולא ילין חלב חגי עד בקר ואי סלקא דעתך דחוגא הוא תרבא לחגא אית ליה,ודלמא הכי קאמר רחמנא חלב הבא בזמן חג לא ילין,אלא מעתה הבא בזמן חג הוא דלא ילין הא דכל השנה כולה ילין (ויקרא ו, ב) כל הלילה עד הבקר כתיב,דלמא אי מההוא הוה אמינא ההוא לעשה כתב רחמנא האי ללאו,ללאו כתב קרא אחרינא (דברים טז, ד) ולא ילין מן הבשר אשר תזבח בערב ביום הראשון לבקר ודלמא לעבור עליו בשני לאוין ועשה,אלא אתיא מדבר מדבר כתיב הכא ויחוגו לי במדבר וכתיב התם (עמוס ה, כה) הזבחים ומנחה הגשתם לי במדבר מה להלן זבחים אף כאן זבחים,ומאי כהררין התלויין בשערה דברי תורה מדברי קבלה לא ילפינן:,מעילות: מיכתב כתיבן אמר רמי בר חמא לא נצרכא אלא לכדתנן השליח שעשה שליחותו בעל הבית מעל לא עשה שליחותו שליח מעל,וכי עשה שליחותו אמאי מעל וכי זה חוטא וזה מתחייב היינו כהררין התלויין בשערה,אמר רבא ומאי קושיא דלמא שאני מעילה דילפא חטא חטא מתרומה מה התם שלוחו של אדם כמותו אף כאן שלוחו של אדם כמותו,אלא אמר רבא לא נצרכא אלא לכדתניא נזכר בעל הבית ולא נזכר שליח שליח מעל שליח עניא מאי קא עביד היינו כהררין התלויין בשערה,אמר רב אשי מאי קושיא דלמא מידי דהוה אמוציא מעות הקדש לחולין,אלא אמר רב אשי לא נצרכא אלא לכדתנן נטל אבן או קורה של הקדש הרי זה לא מעל נתנה לחבירו הוא מעל וחבירו לא מעל מכדי מישקל שקלה מה לי הוא ומה לי חבירו היינו כהררין התלויין בשערה,ומאי קושיא דלמא כדשמואל דאמר שמואל הכא | 10b. The Gemara answers: b The Torah prohibited /b only planned, b creative labor /b on Shabbat. An act of labor that is not intended, or whose result is unintended, or whose consequence is destructive, is not included in this category. Therefore, one who performs labor in this manner is exempt. b And /b limitation of the prohibition against b creative labor is not written /b anywhere in the Torah with regard to the laws of Shabbat. Admittedly, this principle is written in connection with the Tabernacle, and there is an established exegetical link between the building of the Tabernacle and Shabbat. Nevertheless, as this fundamental principle concerning the i halakhot /i of Shabbat does not appear explicitly, it is compared to mountains suspended by a hair.,§ The mishna taught that the i halakhot /i of b Festival peace /b -offerings are like mountains suspended by a hair. The Gemara asks: But b they are written /b in the Torah. The Gemara answers: b No, /b it is b necessary /b to say this b in accordance with that which Rav Pappa said to Abaye: From where /b is it derived b that this /b verse: b “And you shall celebrate it as a Festival [ i veḥagotem /i ] to the Lord” /b (Leviticus 23:41), is referring to b an animal offering? Perhaps the Merciful One is /b simply b saying: Celebrate a Festival. /b ,Abaye responded: b However, if that is so, /b consider b that it is written: /b “Let My people go, b that they may hold a feast [ i veyaḥogu /i ] to Me in the wilderness” /b (Exodus 5:1). b So too, /b the meaning of this verse b is that /b they will merely b celebrate a Festival, /b and not bring an offering. b And if you would say that is /b indeed b so, /b that this means that they should celebrate a Festival, b but isn’t it written: “And Moses said: You must also give into our hand sacrifices and burnt- /b offerings, that we may sacrifice to the Lord our God” (Exodus 10:25)? This shows that the command is referring to offerings.,The Gemara raises a difficulty. But b perhaps this is what the Merciful One said: /b Slaughter animals so that you can b eat, drink, and celebrate a Festival before Me, /b but no offerings are necessary. The Gemara answers: This b cannot enter your mind, as it is written: “The fat of My Festival feast [ i ḥagi /i ] shall not remain all night until the morning” /b (Exodus 23:18). b And if it enters your mind /b to say b that it is /b referring to a regular b Festival feast /b and not an offering, b does a Festival feast have /b forbidden b fats? /b ,The Gemara asks: b But perhaps this is what the Merciful One states /b in the Torah: The b fats /b of gift offerings b that are brought during a Festival may not remain all night. /b If so, the phrase “My Festival feast” is not referring to a type of offering at all, but to a particular time.,The Gemara answers: b However, if that is so, /b this verse indicates that it is only those fats b that are brought during a Festival that may not remain overnight. /b It may be inferred from here b that /b fats which are brought b throughout the year may remain all night. /b But b it is written /b about burnt-offerings: “On its firewood upon the altar b all night into the morning” /b (Leviticus 6:2). This shows that burnt-offerings must burn upon the altar all night.,The Gemara further asks: b Perhaps if /b this i halakha /i was derived b from that /b verse, b I would say that /b verse serves as the source b of a positive mitzva. /b Therefore, b the Merciful One writes this /b verse: “Shall not remain all night,” b as a prohibition /b as well.,The Gemara responds. With regard b to the prohibition /b against leaving over an offering on a Festival, b another verse was written: “Neither shall any of the flesh, which you sacrifice the first day at evening, remain all night until the morning” /b (Deuteronomy 16:4). The Gemara asks: b But perhaps /b the verse: “Shall not remain all night” comes to teach that one who does so b violates two prohibitions and a positive mitzva. /b , b Rather, /b the Gemara rejects this explanation in favor of the claim that the source for a Festival peace-offering b comes /b from a verbal analogy between the term b “wilderness” /b stated here and the term: b “wilderness” /b stated elsewhere. b It is written here: “They shall make an offering to Me in the wilderness” /b (Exodus 5:1), b and it is written there: “Did you bring to Me sacrifices and offerings /b forty years b in the wilderness, /b house of Israel?” (Amos 5:25). b Just as there /b it is referring to actual b animal offerings, so too here, /b it is referring to b animal offerings, /b not merely the celebration of a Festival.,The Gemara asks: b And /b in light of this verbal analogy, in b what /b way is this i halakha /i b like mountains suspended by a hair? /b The Gemara answers: The textual evidence is not that strong, as generally b one does not derive Torah matters from texts of the tradition, /b i.e., Prophets and Writings. Since the prophets were not permitted to introduce new i halakhot /i , as the Torah is the only authoritative source in that regard, this verbal analogy does not carry the same weight as a i halakha /i derived from the Torah itself.,§ The mishna taught that the details of the i halakhot /i of b misuse /b of consecrated property are like mountains suspended by a hair. The Gemara asks: But b they are written /b in the Torah (Leviticus 5:14–16). b Rami bar Ḥama said: /b This statement b is necessary only for that which we learned /b in a mishna ( i Me’ila /i 20a): With regard to b an agent who performs his agency, /b e.g., when a homeowner sends someone to buy an object with consecrated money and the agent does as he was instructed, b the homeowner has misused /b consecrated property and must bring an offering for the actions of the agent performed on his behalf. However, if the agent b did not perform his agency, /b but in some way acted on his own account, b the agent has misused /b consecrated property, and he is the one obligated to bring the offering.,The Gemara explains: b And when he performed his agency, why /b is the owner considered to have b misused /b consecrated property? b And is it /b possible b that this one sins and that one is rendered liable? /b Since this i halakha /i is counterintuitive, it is not apparent from the verses. b This is /b what the mishna was referring to when it said that these i halakhot /i are b like mountains suspended by a hair. /b , b Rava said: And what is /b the logical b difficulty /b with this i halakha /i ? b Perhaps /b the transgression of b misuse /b of consecrated property b is different, as it is derived /b through a verbal analogy from the parallel term b “sin” /b (Leviticus 5:6) and b “sin” /b (Numbers 18:9), b from /b the case of b i teruma /i : Just as there, /b with regard to i teruma /i , the legal status of b a person’s agent is like /b that of b himself, /b and therefore the agent may separate i teruma /i on behalf of the owner of the produce, b so too here, /b with regard to misuse of consecrated property, the legal status of b a person’s agent is like /b that of b himself, /b which means that when the agent properly performs his agency the owner is liable., b Rather, Rava said: /b The mishna’s statement with regard to mountains b is necessary only for that which is taught /b in a i baraita /i : If, after he sent an agent to use a consecrated object, b the homeowner remembered /b that it was a consecrated item b and the agent did not remember, the agent has misused /b consecrated property despite the fact that he was merely performing his agency. This is because one is liable for the misuse of consecrated property only if he acted unwittingly. In this instance, b what did the poor agent do? /b He simply performed his agency on behalf of the owner, and yet because the owner remembered about the consecrated object, the agent is liable. b This is /b what the mishna is referring to when it says that these i halakhot /i are b like mountains suspended by a hair. /b , b Rav Ashi said: /b And b what is /b the logical b difficulty /b with this i halakha /i ? b Perhaps /b this b is just as it is with /b regard to b one who spends consecrated money for non-sacred /b purposes. Although this individual did not know that the money was consecrated, he is nevertheless obligated to bring an offering. Here too, once the owner canceled the agency upon realizing the money was consecrated, the agent unwittingly misused consecrated property, and therefore he is liable., b Rather, Rav Ashi said: /b The mishna b is necessary only for that which we learned /b in a mishna ( i Me’ila /i 19b): If one b picked up a consecrated stone or beam, he has not misused /b consecrated property merely by this action. However, if he b gave it to another, he has misused /b consecrated property b and the other /b person b has not misused /b consecrated property. The Gemara analyzes this case: b Since he picked it up, what /b difference b is /b there b to me /b if b he /b keeps it, b and what /b difference b is /b there b to me /b if he gives it to b another? /b What is the basis for the distinction between the two cases? Rather, b this is /b the case the mishna is referring to when it says that these i halakhot /i are b like mountains suspended by a hair. /b ,The Gemara raises a difficulty. b What is /b the logical b difficulty /b with this i halakha /i ? b Perhaps /b it should be explained b in accordance with /b the opinion b of Shmuel, as Shmuel said: Here, /b this mishna is not referring to an ordinary person who picked up a consecrated stone for himself. |
|
104. Babylonian Talmud, Hulin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical, classic (cbh) •hebrew, biblical, late (lbh) Found in books: Noam (2018), Shifting Images of the Hasmoneans: Second Temple Legends and Their Reception in Josephus and Rabbinic Literature, 112| 137b. אמר ר' יוחנן מפי שמועה אמרה מפי חגי זכריה ומלאכי:,ר' דוסא בן הרכינס אומר וכו': וכמה כל שהן אמר רב מנה ופרס ובלבד שיהו מחומשות ושמואל אמר ששים ונותן סלע אחת לכהן,רבה בר בר חנה אמר ר' יוחנן שש לכהן חמשה ואחד לו עולא אמר ר' אלעזר כל שהן שנינו,תנן וכמה נותן לו משקל חמש סלעים ביהודה שהן עשר סלעים בגליל בשלמא לרב ורבי יוחנן ניחא אלא לשמואל ור' אלעזר קשיא,וליטעמיך ולרב מי ניחא והא רב ושמואל דאמרי תרוייהו ראשית הגז בששים,הא איתמר עלה דההיא רב ושמואל דאמרי תרוייהו בישראל שיש לו גיזין הרבה עסקינן ומבקש ליתנן לכהן ואמרי' ליה כל חד וחד לא תבצר ליה מחמשת סלעים,גופא רב ושמואל דאמרי תרוייהו ראשית הגז בששים תרומה בששים פאה בששים,תרומה בששים והא אנן תנן תרומה עין יפה אחד מארבעים דאורייתא בששים דרבנן בארבעים,דאורייתא בששים והאמר שמואל חטה אחת פוטרת את הכרי דאורייתא כדשמואל דרבנן בדאורייתא אחת מארבעים דרבנן בדרבנן בששים,פאה בששים והתנן אלו דברים שאין להן שיעור הפאה והבכורים והראיון דאורייתא אין לה שיעור דרבנן בששים,מאי קמ"ל תנינא אין פוחתין לפאה מששים אע"פ שאמרו הפאה אין לה שיעור התם בארץ הכא בחו"ל,כי סליק איסי בר היני אשכחיה לר' יוחנן דקא מתני ליה לבריה רחלים אמר ליה אתנייה רחלות א"ל כדכתיב (בראשית לב, טו) רחלים מאתים אמר ליה לשון תורה לעצמה לשון חכמים לעצמן,אמר ליה מאן ריש סדרא בבבל אמר ליה אבא אריכא אמר ליה אבא אריכא קרית ליה דכירנא כד הוה יתיבנא אחר י"ז שורן אחוריה דרב קמיה דרבי ונפקי זיקוקין דנור מפומיה דרב לפומיה דרבי ומפומיה דרבי לפומיה דרב ולית אנא ידע מה הן אמרין ואת אבא אריכא קרית ליה,אמר ליה איהו ראשית הגז בכמה אמר ליה ר' יוחנן בששים והאנן בכל שהן תנן אמר ליה אם כן מה בין לי ולך,כי אתא רב דימי אמר ראשית הגז רב אמר בששים ור' יוחנן משום ר' ינאי אמר בשש אמר ליה אביי לרב דימי אנחת לן חדא ואקשת לן חדא,בשלמא דר' יוחנן אדר' יוחנן לא קשיא הא דידיה הא דרביה,אלא דרב אדרב קשיא דהא אמר רב מנה ופרס דרב אדרב נמי לא קשיא מאי מנה דקאמר בן ארבעים סלעים דהוה ליה | 137b. b Rabbi Yoḥa says /b in response: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi accepted Rabbi Yosei’s opinion not because it was a compromise, but rather because b he said it according to a tradition /b he had b from /b the prophets b Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. /b ,§ The mishna states: b Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas says /b that the mitzva of the first sheared wool applies to five sheep, each of whose shearing weighs one hundred and fifty dinars, whereas the Rabbis say: Five sheep, each of whose shearing is any amount. The Gemara asks: b And how much /b is signified by the phrase: b Any amount? Rav says: /b It is a total weight of b one hundred dinars /b [ b i maneh /i /b ] b and half /b of one hundred dinars [ b i peras /i /b ], b provided that they are divided /b equally b between the five /b sheep. b And Shmuel says: /b It is a total weight of b sixty /b i sela /i , of which he b gives /b the weight of b one i sela /i to the priest. /b , b Rabba bar bar Ḥana /b says that b Rabbi Yoḥa says: /b It is a total weight of b six /b i sela /i , of which he gives b to the priest /b the weight of b five /b i sela /i , b and /b he leaves b one /b i sela /i b for himself. Ulla /b says that b Rabbi Elazar says: We learned /b in the mishna that according to the Rabbis the obligation of the first sheared wool applies to b any amount, /b even if the total weight is only one i sela /i ., b We learned /b in the mishna (135a): b And how much does one give to /b the priest? One gives him sheared wool of the b weight /b of b five i sela /i in Judea, which are /b the equivalent of b ten i sela /i in the Galilee. Granted, /b according b to /b the opinions of b Rav and Rabbi Yoḥa, /b the mishna b works out well, /b as their statements do not contradict the mishna. Rav does not discuss the amount one is required to give the priest, and Rabbi Yoḥa states that one gives the priest five i sela /i . b But /b according b to Shmuel and Rabbi Elazar, /b the mishna is b difficult, /b as Shmuel states that one is required to give one i sela /i , while Rabbi Elazar states that the obligation of the first sheared wool applies even for a weight of less than five i sela /i .,The Gemara responds: b And according to your reasoning, does it work out well /b according b to /b the opinion of b Rav? But Rav and Shmuel both say /b that b the first sheared wool /b given to the priest is one part b in sixty. /b Rav holds that the weight of one hundred and fifty dinars renders one obligated in the first sheared wool, and one-sixtieth of this weight is less than one i sela /i . Therefore, Rav’s opinion is also not in accordance with the mishna.,The Gemara answers: b It was stated with regard to that /b mishna that b Rav and Shmuel both say: /b The five i sela /i stated in the mishna is not referring to the total amount given from the sheared wool. Rather, in the mishna b we are dealing with a Jew who has a large /b amount of b shearing, and he wishes to give them to the priest, /b i.e., to several priests. b And we say to him: /b With regard to b each and every one /b of the priests, do b not /b give b him less than five i sela /i . /b But if one has only a small amount of shearing, he gives the priest one-sixtieth of the shearing, even if it is less than five i sela /i .,§ The Gemara mentioned a ruling of Rav and Shmuel with regard to the amount that one is required to give as the first sheared wool. The Gemara discusses b the /b matter b itself. Rav and Shmuel both say: The first sheared wool /b given to the priest is one part b of sixty. /b Likewise, the amount one is required to separate as b i teruma /i /b is one part b of sixty, /b and the amount one must leave in his field as b i pe’a /i /b is one part b of sixty. /b ,The Gemara asks: Is the amount one is required to separate as b i teruma /i /b one part b of sixty? But didn’t we learn /b in a mishna ( i Terumot /i 4:3): With regard to the measure one should separate as b i teruma /i , /b if one is of b generous disposition /b he gives b one-fortieth. /b The Gemara answers: b By Torah law, /b it is sufficient to give one part b of sixty; by rabbinic law /b the requisite amount is one part b of forty. /b ,The Gemara asks: Is the measure of i teruma /i b by Torah law /b one part b of sixty? But doesn’t Shmuel say: /b By Torah law, even b one /b grain of b wheat /b given as i teruma /i b exempts the /b entire b pile [ i keri /i ] /b of grain? The Gemara answers: b By Torah law /b the measure is b as /b stated b by Shmuel, /b that even one grain of wheat is sufficient. b By rabbinic law /b , b with regard to /b produce that is obligated in i teruma /i b by Torah law /b the measure is b one-fortieth, /b whereas b by rabbinic law /b , b with regard to /b produce obligated in i teruma /i b by rabbinic law /b the measure is one part b of sixty. /b ,Rav and Shmuel said above that the amount one is required to leave in his field as b i pe’a /i /b is one part out b of sixty. /b The Gemara raises a difficulty: b But didn’t we learn /b in a mishna ( i Pe’a /i 1:1): b These are /b the b matters, /b i.e., mitzvot, b that have no measure: i Pe’a /i , and the first fruits, and the /b burnt offering of b appearance /b sacrificed on the pilgrimage Festivals. The Gemara answers: b By Torah law, /b i pe’a /i b has no /b fixed b measure; by rabbinic law /b the measure is one part b of sixty. /b ,The Gemara asks: b What is /b the statement of Rav and Shmuel b teaching us? We /b already b learn /b in the subsequent mishna ( i Pe’a /i 1:2): One should b not give for i pe’a /i less than /b one part b of sixty, even though they said /b that b the /b mitzva of b i pe’a /i has no measure. /b The Gemara answers: The mishna b there /b is referring to the obligation to leave i pe’a /i b in Eretz /b Yisrael, whereas b here, /b the statement of Rav and Shmuel is referring to the obligation of i pe’a /i b outside of Eretz /b Yisrael.,§ b When Isi bar Hini ascended /b from Babylonia to Eretz Yisrael, b Rabbi Yoḥa found him teaching /b the mishna b to his son. /b Isi taught that the obligation of the first sheared wool applies only in the case of b sheep [ i reḥelim /i ], /b the masculine plural form of i raḥel /i , meaning a sheep. Rabbi Yoḥa b said to /b Isi: You should b teach him /b using the term b i reḥelot /i , /b the feminine plural form. Isi b said to him /b in reply: I teach the mishna in accordance with b that which is written: “Two hundred i reḥelim /i ” /b (Genesis 32:15). Rabbi Yoḥa b said to /b Isi: The b language /b of the b Torah is distinct /b and the b language /b of the b Sages is distinct, /b i.e., these are like two separate languages, and the Sages do not always use the same forms that appear in the Bible. In this case, they use i reḥelot /i rather than i reḥelim /i .,Rabbi Yoḥa b said to /b Isi: b Who is the head of the yeshiva [ i reish sidra /i ] in Babylonia? /b Isi b said to /b Rabbi Yoḥa: It is b Abba the tall, /b i.e., the i amora /i Rav. Rabbi Yoḥa b said to /b Isi: b You call him Abba the tall, /b in such a familiar manner? b I remember when I sat seventeen rows behind Rav, /b who sat b before Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi, b and fiery sparks emerged from the mouth of Rav to the mouth of Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi, b and from the mouth of Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b to the mouth of Rav, and I did not know what they said, /b due to the profundity of their discussion. b And /b yet b you call him Abba the tall? /b ,Isi b said to /b Rabbi Yoḥa: With regard to b the first sheared wool, to how much /b fleece does the mitzva apply? b Rabbi Yoḥa said to him: /b The first sheared wool applies b to /b fleece weighing b sixty /b i sela /i . Isi asked: b But didn’t we learn /b in the mishna (135a) that the first sheared wool applies b to any amount /b of fleece? Rabbi Yoḥa b said to him /b in reply: b If so, /b i.e., if the i halakha /i could be understood by a simple reading of the mishna, b what /b is the difference b between my /b knowledge b and yours? /b In fact, you know only the mishna’s statement, whereas I know the halakhic conclusion in this matter.,§ b When Rav Dimi came /b from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he b said: /b With regard to b the first sheared wool, Rav says /b that the mitzva applies b to sixty /b i sela /i , b and Rabbi Yoḥa in the name of Rabbi Yannai says /b that the mitzva applies b to six /b i sela /i . b Abaye said to Rav Dimi: You have made one /b statement b work out well for us, but you have made another /b statement b difficult for us. /b ,Abaye elaborates: b Granted, /b you have resolved a contradiction between two statements of Rabbi Yoḥa. Rabbi Yoḥa said above that the amount of fleece to which the obligation of the first sheared wool applies is six i sela /i , whereas in his answer to Isi he stated that the amount is sixty i sela /i . According to Rav Dimi, the apparent contradiction between one statement b of Rabbi Yoḥa and /b the other statement b of Rabbi Yoḥa /b is b not difficult, /b as b this /b statement b is his /b and b that /b statement b is his teacher’s. /b Rabbi Yoḥa holds that the obligation applies to sixty i sela /i , whereas his teacher Rabbi Yannai maintains that it applies to six i sela /i ., b But /b the contradiction between one statement b of Rav and /b another statement b of Rav /b poses b a difficulty, as Rav said /b that fleece weighing b one hundred dinars [ i maneh /i ] and half /b of one hundred dinars [ i maneh /i ] is obligated in the first sheared wool, whereas Rav Dimi stated that according to Rav the obligation applies to sixty i sela /i , which are 240 dinars. The Gemara answers: The apparent contradiction between the one statement b of Rav and /b the other statement b of Rav /b is b also not difficult, /b as b what /b is the b i maneh /i /b of b which /b Rav b said /b that a i maneh /i and a half are obligated? Rav was referring not to a i maneh /i of one hundred dinars but to a i maneh /i b of forty i sela /i , /b i.e., 160 dinars, a i maneh /i and a half of b which is /b |
|
105. Babylonian Talmud, Makkot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 185| 23b. (ויקרא יח, ה) אשר יעשה אותם האדם וחי בהם הא כל היושב ולא עבר עבירה נותנין לו שכר כעושה מצוה,ר"ש בר רבי אומר הרי הוא אומר (דברים יב, כג) רק חזק לבלתי אכול (את) הדם כי הדם הוא הנפש וגו' ומה אם הדם שנפשו של אדם קצה ממנו הפורש ממנו מקבל שכר גזל ועריות שנפשו של אדם מתאוה להן ומחמדתן הפורש מהן על אחת כמה וכמה שיזכה לו ולדורותיו ולדורות דורותיו עד סוף כל הדורות,ר' חנניא בן עקשיא אומר רצה הקב"ה לזכות את ישראל לפיכך הרבה להם תורה ומצות שנאמר (ישעיהו מב, כא) ה' חפץ למען צדקו יגדיל תורה ויאדיר:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big א"ר יוחנן חלוקין עליו חבריו על רבי חנניה בן גמליאל אמר רב אדא בר אהבה אמרי בי רב תנינן אין בין שבת ליום הכפורים אלא שזה זדונו בידי אדם וזה זדונו בהכרת ואם איתא אידי ואידי בידי אדם הוא,רב נחמן (בר יצחק) אומר הא מני רבי יצחק היא דאמר מלקות בחייבי כריתות ליכא דתניא רבי יצחק אומר חייבי כריתות בכלל היו ולמה יצאת כרת באחותו לדונו בכרת ולא במלקות,רב אשי אמר אפילו תימא רבנן זה עיקר זדונו בידי אדם וזה עיקר זדונו בידי שמים,אמר רב אדא בר אהבה אמר רב הלכה כר' חנניה בן גמליאל אמר רב יוסף מאן סליק לעילא ואתא ואמר אמר ליה אביי אלא הא דאמר רבי יהושע בן לוי שלשה דברים עשו ב"ד של מטה והסכימו ב"ד של מעלה על ידם מאן סליק לעילא ואתא ואמר אלא קראי קא דרשינן ה"נ קראי קא דרשינן,גופא א"ר יהושע בן לוי שלשה דברים עשו ב"ד של מטה והסכימו ב"ד של מעלה על ידם [אלו הן] מקרא מגילה ושאילת שלום [בשם] והבאת מעשר,מקרא מגילה דכתיב (אסתר ט, כז) קימו וקבלו היהודים קיימו למעלה מה שקבלו למטה,ושאילת שלום דכתיב (רות ב, ד) והנה בועז בא מבית לחם ויאמר לקוצרים ה' עמכם ואומר (שופטים ו, יב) ה' עמך גבור החיל מאי ואומר וכי תימא בועז הוא דעביד מדעתיה ומשמיא לא אסכימו על ידו ת"ש ואומר ה' עמך גבור החיל,הבאת מעשר דכתיב (מלאכי ג, י) הביאו את כל המעשר אל בית האוצר ויהי טרף בביתי ובחנוני נא בזאת אמר ה' צבאות אם לא אפתח לכם את ארובות השמים והריקותי לכם ברכה עד בלי די מאי עד בלי די אמר רמי בר רב עד שיבלו שפתותיכם מלומר די,א"ר אלעזר בג' מקומות הופיע רוח הקודש בבית דינו של שם ובבית דינו של שמואל הרמתי ובבית דינו של שלמה בבית דינו של שם דכתיב (בראשית לח, כו) ויכר יהודה ויאמר צדקה ממני מנא ידע דלמא כי היכי דאזל איהו לגבה אזל נמי אינש אחרינא [לגבה] יצאת בת קול ואמרה ממני יצאו כבושים:,בבית דינו של שמואל דכתיב (שמואל א יב, ג) הנני ענו בי נגד ה' ונגד משיחו את שור מי לקחתי ויאמרו לא עשקתנו ולא רצותנו ויאמר עד ה' ועד משיחו כי לא מצאתם בידי מאומה ויאמר עד ויאמר ויאמרו מיבעי ליה יצאת בת קול ואמרה אני עד בדבר זה,בבית דינו של שלמה דכתיב (מלכים א ג, כז) ויען המלך ויאמר תנו לה את הילד החי והמת לא תמיתוהו (כי) היא אמו מנא ידע דלמא איערומא מיערמא יצאת בת קול ואמרה היא אמו,אמר רבא ממאי דלמא יהודה כיון דחשיב ירחי ויומי ואיתרמי דחזינן מחזקינן דלא חזינן לא מחזקינן,שמואל נמי כולהו ישראל קרי להו בלשון יחידי דכתיב (ישעיהו מה, יז) ישראל נושע בה',שלמה נמי מדהא קא מרחמתא והא לא קא מרחמתא אלא גמרא:,דרש רבי שמלאי שש מאות ושלש עשרה מצות נאמרו לו למשה שלש מאות וששים וחמש לאוין כמנין ימות החמה ומאתים וארבעים ושמונה עשה כנגד איבריו של אדם אמר רב המנונא מאי קרא (דברים לג, ד) תורה צוה לנו משה מורשה תורה בגימטריא | 23b. b “That a person shall perform and live by them” /b (Leviticus 18:5). It is inferred b that /b with regard to b one who sits and did not perform a transgression, /b God b gives him a reward like /b that received by one who b performs a mitzva. /b , b Rabbi Shimon bar Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b says /b that as the verse b states: “Only be steadfast to not eat the blood, as the blood is the soul” /b (Deuteronomy 12:23), it can be derived i a fortiori /i : b And if /b with regard to b the blood, which a person’s soul loathes, one who abstains from its /b consumption b receives a reward /b for that action, as it is written in a subsequent verse: “You shall not eat it, so that it shall be good for you and for your children after you” (Deuteronomy 12:25); then concerning b robbery and /b intercourse with b forbidden relatives, which a person’s soul desires and covets, one who abstains from their /b performance and overcomes his inclination, b all the more so that he and his descendants and the descendants of his descendants until the end of all generations will merit /b a reward., b Rabbi Ḥaya ben Akashya says: The Holy One, Blessed be He, sought to confer merit upon the Jewish people; therefore, He increased for them Torah and mitzvot, /b as each mitzva increases merit, b as it is stated: “It pleased the Lord for the sake of His righteousness to make the Torah great and glorious” /b (Isaiah 42:21). God sought to make the Torah great and glorious by means of the proliferation of mitzvot., strong GEMARA: /strong b Rabbi Yoḥa says: Rabbi Ḥaya ben Gamliel’s colleagues are in disagreement with him /b and hold that lashes do not exempt the sinner from i karet /i . b Rav Adda bar Ahava said /b that this is so, as b they say /b in b the school of Rav /b that b we learned /b in a mishna ( i Megilla /i 7b): b The difference between Shabbat and Yom Kippur /b with regard to the labor prohibited on those days b is only that /b in b this /b case, Shabbat, b its intentional /b desecration is punishable b by human hands, /b as he is stoned by a court based on the testimony of witnesses who forewarned the transgressor, b and /b in b that /b case, Yom Kippur, b its intentional /b desecration is punishable at the hand of God, b with i karet /i . And if /b the statement of Rabbi Ḥaya ben Gamliel b is so, /b in both b this /b case, Shabbat, b and that /b case, Yom Kippur, the punishment would be b by human hands. /b Apparently, the i tanna /i of the mishna, the Rabbis, disagrees with Rabbi Ḥaya ben Gamliel., b Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak says: /b There is no proof from here that Rabbi Ḥaya ben Gamliel’s colleagues disagree with him, as in accordance with b whose /b opinion b is this /b mishna taught? b It is /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Yitzḥak, who says: There are no lashes in /b cases of b those liable /b to receive b i karet /i . As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Yitzḥak says: /b All b those liable /b to receive b i karet /i /b in cases of forbidden relations b were included in /b the principle: “For whoever shall commit any of these abominations, even the people who commit them shall be cut off from among their people” (Leviticus 18:29). b And why was i karet /i /b in the case of relations with b one’s sister excluded /b from this verse and mentioned independently (Leviticus 20:17)? It is b to sentence /b one who transgresses a prohibition punishable with i karet /i b to /b be punished b with i karet /i /b alone, b and not with lashes. /b Other Sages disagree with Rabbi Yitzḥak (see 13b)., b Rav Ashi said: Even /b if b you say /b that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of b the Rabbis, /b who disagree with Rabbi Yitzḥak and hold that there are lashes even in cases where there is liability for i karet /i , there is no proof that Rabbi Ḥaya ben Gamliel’s colleagues disagree with him. The mishna can be understood as follows: In b this /b case, Shabbat, the b primary /b punishment for b its intentional /b desecration is b by human hands, and /b in b that /b case, Yom Kippur, the b primary /b punishment for b its intentional /b desecration is i karet /i , which is a punishment b at the hand of Heaven. /b If he was flogged, he is exempt from i karet /i ., b Rav Adda bar Ahava says /b that b Rav says: The i halakha /i /b is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Ḥaya ben Gamliel, /b who ruled that lashes exempt the sinner from i karet /i . b Rav Yosef said: Who ascended on high and came and said /b to you that one who is flogged is exempted from i karet /i ? That is not dependent upon the decision of an earthly court. b Abaye said to /b Rav Yosef: b But /b according to your reasoning, then with regard to b that which Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: /b There are b three matters /b that the b earthly court implemented and the heavenly court agreed with them, /b the same question applies: b Who ascended on high and came and said /b to him that this is so? b Rather, /b in arriving at Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi’s conclusion b we /b homiletically b interpret verses. Here too, /b with regard to lashes and i karet /i , b we /b homiletically b interpret verses. /b ,§ With regard to b the /b matter b itself, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: /b There are b three matters /b that the b earthly court implemented and the heavenly court agreed with them, and these are they: Reading the Scroll /b of Esther on Purim, b and greeting /b another b with the name of God, and bringing /b the first b tithe /b to the Temple treasury in Jerusalem. From where is it derived that the heavenly court agreed with them?, b Reading the Scroll /b of Esther is derived from a verse, b as it is written: “The Jews confirmed, and they took upon themselves” /b (Esther 9:27). The verse could have simply said: They took upon themselves. From the formulation of the verse it is interpreted: b They confirmed above /b in Heaven that b which they took upon themselves below /b on earth., b And greeting /b another with the name of God is derived from a verse, b as it is written: “And presently Boaz came from Bethlehem and said to the harvesters: The Lord is with you, and they said to him: May the Lord bless you” /b (Ruth 2:4). b And it states: /b “And the angel of the Lord appeared to him and said to him: b The Lord is with you, mighty man of valor” /b (Judges 6:12). The Gemara asks: b What /b is the reason that the Gemara cites the additional source about Gideon, introduced with the phrase: b And it states? /b Why was the proof from Boaz’s statement to the harvesters insufficient? The Gemara explains: b And if you would say: It is Boaz who did /b so b on his own, and from Heaven they did not agree with him; come /b and b hear /b proof, b and it says: “The Lord is with you, mighty man of valor.” /b The angel greeted Gideon with the name of God, indicating that there is agreement in Heaven that this is an acceptable form of greeting.,From where is it derived that the heavenly court agreed to the b bringing /b of the first b tithe /b to the Temple treasury in Jerusalem? It is derived from a verse, b as it is written: “Bring you the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in My house, and try Me now with this, says the Lord of hosts, if I will not open for you the windows of heaven and pour you out a blessing, that there shall be more than sufficiency [ i ad beli dai /i ]” /b (Malachi 3:10). This indicates that the heavenly court agreed that the first tithe should be brought to the Temple treasury. The Gemara asks: b What /b is the meaning of b “ i ad beli dai /i ”? Rami bar Rav says: /b It means that the abundance will be so great b that your lips will be worn out [ i yivlu /i ], from saying enough [ i dai /i ]. /b ,The Gemara cites a somewhat similar statement. b Rabbi Elazar says: In three places the Divine Spirit appeared /b before all to affirm that the action taken was appropriate: b In the court of Shem, in the court of Samuel the Ramathite, and in the court of Solomon. /b The Gemara elaborates: This occurred b in the court of Shem, as it is written /b in the context of the episode of Judah and Tamar: b “And Judah acknowledged them and said: She is more righteous than I [ i mimmenni /i ]” /b (Genesis 38:26). b How did /b Judah b know /b that Tamar’s assertion that she was bearing his child was correct? b Perhaps, just as he went to her /b and hired her as a prostitute, b another person went to her /b and hired her b as well, /b and he is not the father. Rather, b a Divine Voice emerged and said: /b It is b from Me [ i mimmenni /i ] /b that these b secrets emerged. /b God affirmed that her assertion was correct and that it was His divine plan that Judah would father a child from Tamar.,Likewise, this occurred b in the court of Samuel, as it is written: “Here I am; testify against me before the Lord and before His anointed: Whose ox have I taken…And they said: You have neither defrauded us nor oppressed us…And he said to them: The Lord is witness against you, and His anointed is witness this day, that you have not found anything in my hand. And he said: He is witness” /b (I Samuel 12:3–5). Based on the context, instead of the singular: b “And he said,” /b the plural: b And they said, should have /b been written, as the verse appears to be the reply of the Jewish people to Samuel’s challenge, attesting to the truth of his statement. Rather, b a Divine Voice emerged and said: I, /b God, b am witness to this matter. /b ,This occurred b in the court of Solomon, /b when the Divine Spirit appeared in the dispute between two prostitutes over who was the mother of the surviving child, b as it is written: “And the king answered and said: Give her the living child, and do not slay him; she is his mother” /b (I Kings 3:27). b How did /b Solomon b know /b that she was the mother? b Perhaps she was devious /b and was not the mother of the surviving child at all. Rather, b a Divine Voice emerged and said: She is his mother. /b , b Rava said: From where /b do you draw these conclusions? None of these proofs is absolute. b Perhaps /b in the case of b Judah, once he calculated /b the passage of the b months and the days /b from when he engaged in intercourse with Tamar b and it happened /b to correspond with the duration of her pregcy, he realized that her assertion is correct. There is no room to suspect that another man was the father, as the principle is: Based on that b which we see, we establish presumptive status; /b based on that b which we do not see, we do not establish presumptive status. /b ,With regard to b Samuel too, /b no proof may be cited from the use of the singular, as on occasion the b entire Jewish people is referred to in the singular, as it is written, /b e.g.: b “The Jewish people is saved by the Lord” /b (Isaiah 45:17).,With regard to b Solomon too, /b perhaps he reasoned that b due to /b the fact b that this /b woman b is merciful /b and seeks to spare the baby b and this /b woman b is not merciful, /b it is evident that the former is its mother. b Rather, /b Rava concludes: There is no proof from the verses that a Divine Spirit appeared in those circumstances; rather, there is b a tradition /b that this is the case.,§ b Rabbi Simlai taught: /b There were b 613 mitzvot stated to Moses /b in the Torah, consisting of b 365 prohibitions corresponding to the number of days /b in b the solar year, and 248 positive /b mitzvot b corresponding to /b the number of b a person’s limbs. Rav Hamnuna said: What is the verse /b that alludes to this? It is written: b “Moses commanded to us the Torah, an inheritance /b of the congregation of Jacob” (Deuteronomy 33:4). The word b Torah, in /b terms of b its numerical value [ i gimatriyya /i ], /b |
|
106. Babylonian Talmud, Megillah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 185| 28a. ולא ברכתי לפני כהן ולא אכלתי מבהמה שלא הורמו מתנותיה,דא"ר יצחק א"ר יוחנן אסור לאכול מבהמה שלא הורמו מתנותיה ואמר ר' יצחק כל האוכל מבהמה שלא הורמו מתנותיה כאילו אוכל טבלים ולית הלכתא כוותיה,ולא ברכתי לפני כהן,למימרא דמעליותא היא והא א"ר יוחנן כל תלמיד חכם שמברך לפניו אפילו כ"ג עם הארץ אותו ת"ח חייב מיתה שנאמר (משלי ח, לו) כל משנאי אהבו מות אל תקרי משנאי אלא משניאי,כי קאמר איהו בשוין,שאלו תלמידיו את רבי נחוניא בן הקנה במה הארכת ימים אמר להם מימי לא נתכבדתי בקלון חברי ולא עלתה על מטתי קללת חברי וותרן בממוני הייתי,לא נתכבדתי בקלון חברי כי הא דרב הונא דרי מרא אכתפיה אתא רב חנא בר חנילאי וקא דרי מיניה א"ל אי רגילת דדרית במאתיך דרי ואי לא אתייקורי אנא בזילותא דידך לא ניחא לי,ולא עלתה על מטתי קללת חברי כי הא דמר זוטרא כי הוה סליק לפורייה אמר שרי ליה לכל מאן דצערן,וותרן בממוני הייתי דאמר מר איוב וותרן בממוניה הוה שהיה מניח פרוטה לחנוני מממוניה,שאל ר"ע את רבי נחוניא הגדול (אמר לו) במה הארכת ימים אתו גווזי וקא מחו ליה סליק יתיב ארישא דדיקלא א"ל רבי אם נאמר (במדבר כח, ד) כבש למה נאמר אחד אמר להו צורבא מדרבנן הוא שבקוהו,א"ל אחד מיוחד שבעדרו,א"ל מימי לא קבלתי מתנות ולא עמדתי על מדותי וותרן בממוני הייתי,לא קבלתי מתנות כי הא דר' אלעזר כי הוו משדרי ליה מתנות מבי נשיאה לא הוה שקיל כי הוה מזמני ליה לא הוה אזיל אמר להו לא ניחא לכו דאחיה דכתיב (משלי טו, כז) שונא מתנות יחיה ר' זירא כי הוו משדרי ליה מבי נשיאה לא הוה שקיל כי הוה מזמני ליה אזיל אמר אתייקורי דמתייקרי בי,ולא עמדתי על מדותי דאמר רבא כל המעביר על מדותיו מעבירין ממנו כל פשעיו שנאמר (מיכה ז, יח) נושא עון ועובר על פשע למי נושא עון למי שעובר על פשע,שאל רבי את ר' יהושע בן קרחה במה הארכת ימים א"ל קצת בחיי אמר לו רבי תורה היא וללמוד אני צריך א"ל מימי לא נסתכלתי בדמות אדם רשע דאמר ר' יוחנן אסור לאדם להסתכל בצלם דמות אדם רשע שנאמר (מלכים ב ג, יד) לולא פני יהושפט מלך יהודה אני נושא אם אביט אליך ואם אראך,ר"א אמר עיניו כהות שנאמר (בראשית כז, א) ויהי כי זקן יצחק ותכהין עיניו מראות משום דאסתכל בעשו הרשע,והא גרמא ליה והאמר ר' יצחק לעולם אל תהי קללת הדיוט קלה בעיניך שהרי אבימלך קלל את שרה ונתקיים בזרעה שנאמר (בראשית כ, טז) הנה הוא לך כסות עינים אל תקרי כסות אלא כסיית עינים,הא והא גרמא ליה רבא אמר מהכא (משלי יח, ה) שאת פני רשע לא טוב,בשעת פטירתו א"ל [רבי] ברכני א"ל יהי רצון שתגיע לחצי ימי ולכולהו לא אמר לו הבאים אחריך בהמה ירעו,אבוה בר איהי ומנימן בר איהי חד אמר תיתי לי דלא אסתכלי בכותי וחד אמר תיתי לי דלא עבדי שותפות בהדי כותי,שאלו תלמידיו את ר' זירא במה הארכת ימים אמר להם מימי לא הקפדתי בתוך ביתי ולא צעדתי בפני מי שגדול ממני ולא הרהרתי במבואות המטונפות ולא הלכתי ד"א בלא תורה ובלא תפילין ולא ישנתי בבית המדרש לא שינת קבע ולא שינת עראי ולא ששתי בתקלת חבירי ולא קראתי לחבירי (בחניכתו) ואמרי לה (בחכינתו):, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big ועוד א"ר יהודה בית הכנסת שחרב אין מספידין בתוכו ואין מפשילין בתוכו חבלים ואין פורשין לתוכו מצודות ואין שוטחין על גגו פירות ואין עושין אותו קפנדריא,שנאמר (ויקרא כו, לא) והשמותי את מקדשכם קדושתן אף כשהן שוממין,עלו בו עשבים לא יתלוש מפני עגמת נפש:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ת"ר בתי כנסיות אין נוהגין בהן קלות ראש אין אוכלין בהן ואין שותין בהן | 28a. b And I never recited /b Grace after Meals b in the presence of a priest, /b but rather I gave him the privilege to lead. b And I never ate from an animal whose /b priestly b portions, /b i.e., the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw, b had not /b already b been set aside. /b ,Another example of Rabbi Perida’s meticulous behavior is based on that b which Rabbi Yitzḥak said /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa said: It is prohibited to eat /b meat b from an animal whose /b priestly b portions have not been set aside. And Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Anyone who eats /b meat b from an animal whose /b priestly b portions have not been set aside is /b regarded b as if he were eating untithed produce. /b The Gemara comments: b And the i halakha /i is not in accordance with his /b opinion. Rather, it is permitted to eat meat from such an animal. Nevertheless, Rabbi Perida acted stringently and did not eat from it.,The Gemara considers another of Rabbi Perida’s actions: He said: b And I never blessed /b Grace after Meals b in the presence of a priest, /b but rather I gave him the privilege to lead., b Is this to say that /b doing so b is /b especially b virtuous? But /b hasn’t b Rabbi Yoḥa said: Any Torah scholar who /b allows someone else b to bless /b Grace after Meals b in his presence, /b i.e., to lead for him, b even /b if that person is b a High Priest who is an ignoramus, /b then b that Torah scholar is liable to /b receive the b death penalty /b for belittling his own honor? This is b as it is stated: “All those who hate me, love death” /b (Proverbs 8:36). b Do not read /b it as b “those who hate Me [ i mesan’ai /i ],” rather /b read it as though it said: b Those who make Me hated [ i masni’ai /i ]. /b The honor due to a Torah scholar is representative of the honor of God in the world. Therefore, by belittling his own honor, he causes others to fail to respect God, which can ultimately develop into hate. If so, why did Rabbi Perida consider his behavior to be so deserving of praise?,The Gemara answers: b When /b Rabbi Perida b says this, /b he was speaking b of /b people of b equal /b stature. He was particular to honor the priesthood only when the priest was also a Torah scholar.,The Gemara discusses the fourth Sage who was blessed with longevity: b Rabbi Neḥunya ben HaKana was /b once b asked by his disciples: In /b the merit of b which /b virtue b were you /b blessed with b longevity? He said to them: In /b all b my days, I never attained veneration at /b the expense of b my fellow’s degradation. Nor did my fellow’s curse /b ever b go up with me upon my bed. /b If ever I offended someone, I made sure to appease him that day. Therefore, when I went to bed I knew that no one had any grievances against me. b And I was /b always b openhanded with my money. /b ,The Gemara clarifies the meaning of his statement: Rabbi Neḥunya said: b I never attained veneration at /b the expense of b my fellow’s denigration. /b This is referring to conduct b such as that of Rav Huna, who was carrying a hoe over his shoulder /b as he returned from his work. b Rav Ḥana bar Ḥanilai came and, /b out of respect for his teacher, b took the hoe from him /b to carry it for him. Rav Huna b said to him: If you are accustomed to carry /b such objects b in your own city, /b you may b carry it; but if not, /b then b for me to be venerated through your denigration is not pleasing for me. /b ,Rabbi Neḥunya also said: b Nor did /b I ever allow the resentment caused by b my fellow’s curse /b to b go up with me upon my bed. /b This is referring to conduct b such as that of Mar Zutra. When he would go to bed /b at night, b he would /b first b say: I forgive anyone who has vexed me. /b ,Lastly, Rabbi Neḥunya said: b And I was /b always b openhanded with my money. /b This is referring to conduct such as b that which the Master said: Job was openhanded with his money, as he would /b always b leave /b at least b a i peruta /i of his money with the shopkeeper. /b He never demanded the change from his transactions.,On a similar occasion, b Rabbi Akiva asked Rabbi Neḥunya the Great; he said to him: In /b the merit of b which /b virtue b were you /b blessed with b longevity? /b Rabbi Neḥunya’s b attendants [ i gavzei /i ] came and /b started b beating /b Rabbi Akiva, for they felt that he was acting disrespectfully by highlighting Rabbi Neḥunya’s old age. Rabbi Akiva ran away from them, and b he climbed up and sat upon the top of a date palm. /b From there, b he said to /b Rabbi Neḥunya: b My teacher, /b I have a question about the verse concerning the daily offering that states “one lamb” (Numbers 28:4). b If it is stated “lamb” /b in the singular, b why is it /b also b stated “one”; /b isn’t this superfluous? Upon hearing Rabbi Akiva’s scholarly question, Rabbi Neḥunya b said to /b his attendants: b He is /b clearly b a young Torah scholar, let him be. /b ,Rabbi Neḥunya then addressed Rabbi Akiva’s questions. With regard to the second question, b he said to him: /b The word b “one” /b teaches that the lamb should be b the unique one of its flock, /b i.e., only the best quality lamb should be used.,With regard to the original question, Rabbi Neḥunya b said to him: In /b all b my days I never accepted gifts. Nor was I /b ever b inflexible /b by exacting b a measure /b of retribution against those who wronged me. b And I was /b always b openhanded with my money. /b ,The Gemara explains: b I never accepted gifts; /b this is referring to conduct b such as that of Rabbi Elazar. When they would send him gifts from the house of the i Nasi /i , he would not take /b them, b and when they would invite him, he would not go /b there, as he considered hospitality to be a type of gift. b He /b would b say to them: Is it not pleasing to you that I should live, as it is written: “He that hates gifts shall live” /b (Proverbs 15:27)? In contrast, it was reported about b Rabbi Zeira /b that b when they would send him /b gifts b from the house of the i Nasi /i , he would not accept /b them, b but when they would invite him, he would go /b there. b He said: They are honored by my /b presence; therefore my visiting is not considered like I am taking a gift from them.,He also said: b Nor was I /b ever b inflexible /b in exacting b a measure /b of retribution against those who wronged me. This is referring to conduct such as that b which Rava said: Anyone who overlooks /b exacting b a measure /b of retribution against those who wronged him, b all his transgressions are removed from him, as it is stated: “He pardons iniquity and overlooks transgression” /b (Micah 7:18), which is homiletically read as saying: b For whom does He pardon iniquity? For he who overlooks transgressions /b that others have committed against him.,In a similar incident, b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi once b asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa: In /b the merit of b which /b virtue b were you /b blessed with b longevity? He said to him: /b Why do you ask me, b are you wearied of my /b long b life? /b Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi b said to him: My teacher, it is Torah and /b so b I must learn /b it. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa b said to him: In /b all b my days I never gazed at the likeness of a wicked man, as Rabbi Yoḥa said: It is prohibited for a person to gaze in the image of the likeness of a wicked man, as it is stated /b that the prophet Elisha said to Jehoram king of Israel: b “Were it not that I regard the presence of Jehoshaphat, the king of Judea, I would not look toward you, nor see you” /b (II Kings 3:14)., b Rabbi Elazar said: /b One who gazes at the likeness of an evil man, b his eyes become dim, as it is stated: “And it came to pass, that when Isaac was old, and his eyes were dim so that he could not see” /b (Genesis 27:1). This happened b because he gazed at the wicked Esau. /b ,The Gemara asks: b Did this cause /b Isaac’s blindness? b Didn’t Rabbi Yitzḥak say: A curse of an ordinary person should not be lightly regarded in your eyes, because Abimelech cursed Sarah, and /b although he was not a righteous man, his curse b was /b nevertheless b fulfilled, /b albeit b in her descendant. As it is stated /b that Abimelech said to Sarah with regard to the gift that he gave to Abraham: b “Behold, it is for you a covering of the eyes” /b (Genesis 20:16). b Do not read /b it as b “a covering [ i kesut /i ] /b of the eyes,” but b rather /b read it as: b A blindness [ i kesiat /i ] of the eyes. /b Abimelech’s words were a veiled curse for Sarah to suffer from blindness. While she herself did not suffer, the curse was apparently fulfilled in the blindness of her son, Isaac.,According to Rabbi Yitzḥak, Abimelech’s curse was the cause of Isaac’s blindness, and it was not, as Rabbi Elazar suggested, the fact he gazed at Esau. The Gemara explains: Both b this and that /b jointly b caused it. Rava said: /b The prohibition against gazing at the likeness of a wicked person is derived b from here: “It is not good to raise the face of the wicked” /b (Proverbs 18:5)., b At the time of /b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa’s b departure /b from this world, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi b said to him: My teacher, bless me. He said to him: May it be /b God’s b will that you /b live to b reach to half of my days. /b When Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi heard this, he asked in astonishment: Are you saying that b to the entirety of /b your days I should b not /b reach? Why? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa b said to him: Shall those who come after you /b just b tend cattle? /b If you live as long as me, your sons will never be able to succeed you in the position of Nasi. As such, they will never achieve greatness in Torah, and it will be as if they just tended cattle throughout their lives. It is therefore better that your life not be so prolonged, so that they have the opportunity to rise to eminence., b Avuh bar Ihi and Minyamin bar Ihi /b both spoke on this topic: b One /b of them b said: May /b a blessing b come to me for I never gazed at /b a wicked b gentile. And /b the other b one said: May /b a blessing b come to me for I never formed a partnership with /b a wicked b gentile, /b so as not to have any association with a wicked person.,The Gemara presents a similar incident: b Rabbi Zeira was /b once b asked by his disciples: In /b the merit of b which /b virtue b were you /b blessed with b longevity? He said to them: In /b all b my days, I was never angry inside my house /b with members of my household who acted against my wishes. b Nor did I /b ever b walk ahead of someone who was a greater /b Torah scholar b than me. Nor did I /b ever b meditate /b upon words of Torah b in filthy alleyways, /b as doing so is a disgrace to the Torah. b Nor did I /b ever b walk four cubits without /b meditating on words of b Torah or without /b wearing b phylacteries. Nor did I /b ever b sleep in a study hall, neither a deep sleep or a brief nap. Nor did I /b ever b rejoice when my fellow stumbled. Nor did I /b ever b call my fellow by his derogatory nickname [ i ḥanikhato /i ]. And some say /b that he said: I never called my fellow by b his nickname [ i ḥakhinato /i ], /b i.e., even one that is not derogatory., strong MISHNA: /strong b And Rabbi Yehuda said further: A synagogue that fell into ruin /b still may not be used for a mundane purpose. Therefore, b one may not eulogize in it. And nor may one stretch out /b and repair b ropes in it. /b The wide expanse of the synagogue would have been particularly suitable for this. b And nor may one spread /b animal b traps within it. And nor may one spread out produce upon its roof /b to dry. b And nor may one make it /b into b a shortcut. /b ,The i halakha /i that a synagogue in disrepair still may not be used for mundane purposes is derived from a verse, b as it is stated: “And I will bring desolation to your sanctuaries” /b (Leviticus 26:31). The fact that the word “sanctuaries” appears after the word “desolation” indicates that b their sanctity /b remains upon them b even when they are desolate. /b ,However, if b grass sprang up /b of its own accord b in /b the ruined synagogue, although it is not befitting its sanctity, b one should not pick /b it, b due to /b the b anguish /b that it will bring to those who see it. It will remind them of the disrepair of the synagogue and the need to rebuild it., strong GEMARA: /strong b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : With regard to b synagogues: One may not act inside them with frivolity. /b Therefore, b one may not eat in them; nor may one drink in them; /b |
|
107. Babylonian Talmud, Pesahim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 103| 113a. גזייתא נינהו דשמטי סוסיא ואתו דברי להו,(וא"ל) רב לרב אסי לא תדור במתא דלא צניף בה סוסיא ולא נבח בה כלבא ואל תדור בעיר דריש מתא אסיא ולא תנסיב תרתי אי נסבת תרתי נסיב תלת,א"ל רב לרב כהנא הפוך בנבילתא ולא תיפוך במילי פשוט נבילתא בשוקא ושקיל אגרא ולא תימא כהנא אנא וגברא רבא אנא וסניא בי מלתא סלקת לאיגרא שירותך בהדך מאה קרי במתא בזוזא תותי כנפיך ניהוו,א"ל רב לחייא בריה לא תשתי סמא ולא תשוור ניגרא ולא תעקר ככא ולא תקנא בחיויא ולא תקנא בארמאה,תנו רבנן ג' אין מתקנאין בהן ואלו הן נכרי קטן ונחש קטן ותלמיד קטן מ"ט דמלכותייהו אחורי אודנייהו קאי,א"ל רב לאיבו בריה טרחי בך בשמעתא ולא מסתייע מילתא תא אגמרך מילי דעלמא אדחלא אכרעיך זבינך זבין כל מילי זבין ותחרט בר מחמרא דזבין ולא תחרט,שרי כיסיך פתח שקיך קבא מארעא ולא כורא מאיגרא,תמרא בחלוזך לבית סודנא רהיט ועד כמה אמר רבא עד תלתא סאה אמר רב פפא אי לא דרמאי שכרא לא איעתרי א"ד אמר רב חסדא אי לא דרמאי שכרא לא איעתרי מאי סודנא אמר רב חסדא סוד נאה וגמילות חסדים,אמר רב פפא כל אגב גביא בעי כל אשראי ספק אתי ספק לא אתי ודאתי מעות רעות נינהו,ג' דברים א"ר יוחנן משום אנשי ירושלים כשאתה יוצא למלחמה אל תצא בראשונה אלא תצא באחרונה כדי שתכנס בראשונה ועשה שבתך חול ואל תצטרך לבריות והוי משתדל עם מי שהשעה משחקת לו,(א"ר) שלשה דברים א"ר יהושע בן לוי משום אנשי ירושלים אל תרבה בגנות משום מעשה שהיה בתך בגרה שחרר עבדך ותן לה והוי זהיר באשתך מחתנה הראשון מ"ט רב חסדא אמר משום ערוה רב כהנא אמר משום ממון הא והא איתנהו,אמר רבי יוחנן שלשה מנוחלי העוה"ב אלו הן הדר בא"י והמגדל בניו לתלמוד תורה והמבדיל על היין במוצאי שבתות מאי היא דמשייר מקידושא לאבדלתא,א"ר יוחנן שלשה מכריז עליהן הקב"ה בכל יום על רווק הדר בכרך ואינו חוטא ועל עני המחזיר אבידה לבעליה ועל עשיר המעשר פירותיו בצינעה רב ספרא רווק הדר בכרך הוה | 113a. b are /b found b on the paths [ i gazyata /i ] /b near the city, b as horses /b belonging to the demons b flee /b along those paths, b and /b the demons b come to lead them /b away. Generally, however, demons do not enter inhabited places., b And /b Rav b said to Rav Asi: Do not live in a city where horses do not neigh and where dogs do not bark, /b as these animals provide security and protection. b And do not live in a city where the mayor is a doctor, /b as he will be too busy working to govern properly. b And do not marry two /b women, as they will likely join forces against you. And b if you /b do b marry two, marry a third /b as well. If two of your wives plot against you, the third will inform you of their plans., b Rav said to Rav Kahana: /b It is better for one b to turn over a carcass than to turn over his word, /b i.e., to break his promise. Rav further said: b Skin a carcass in the market and take payment, but do not say: I am a priest, or: I am a great man, and this matter disgusts me. /b It is preferable for one to work, even in menial labor, than to be dependent on others. Rav also advised Rav Kahana: If b you ascend to the roof, /b carry b your food with you. /b One should always carry his sustece with him, even if he goes only on a short trip. If b one hundred pumpkins in the city /b cost b a i zuz /i , place /b them carefully under b the corners /b of your clothes. Treat food respectfully even if it is inexpensive., b Rav said to Ḥiyya, his son: Do not /b get into the habit of b drinking medications, /b lest you develop an addiction. b And do not leap over a ditch, /b as you might hurt yourself in the process. b And do not pull out a tooth, /b but try to heal it if possible. b And do not provoke a snake /b in your house to try to kill it or chase it away. b And do not provoke a gentile, /b as this too is dangerous.,Similarly, b the Sages taught: /b There are b three /b beings b one /b should b not provoke: A small gentile, and a small snake, and a small /b Torah b scholar. What is the reason? Because their authority stands behind their ears. /b They will eventually grow up, assume power, each in his own way, and avenge those who have harassed them., b Rav said to Ayvu, his son: I struggled /b to teach b you i halakha /i but /b my efforts b did not succeed, /b as you did not become a great scholar. b Come /b and b I will teach you /b about b mundane matters: Sell your merchandise while the dust /b from the road is still b on your feet. /b As soon you return from your travels, sell your wares, lest the prices fall in the meantime. Furthermore, it is possible that b anything you sell /b might later cause you to b regret /b the sale, b except for wine, which you /b can b sell without regret. /b Since wine might go bad and be entirely lost, its sale is always advisable.,Rav further advised his son: b Open your purse /b to accept payment, and only then b open your sack /b to deliver the goods, to ensure you will receive payment for your merchandise. It is better to earn b a i kav /i from the ground than a i kor /i from the roof. /b A i kor /i is one hundred and eighty times larger than a i kav /i . This proverb means that it is preferable to earn a small amount from a local, safe transaction than to attempt to earn more through a distant, risky venture.,Rav continued: If there are b dates in your storeroom, run to the brewery /b to sell them. If you wait, there is a good chance the dates will go bad. The Gemara asks: b And how many /b dates should one keep for himself? b Rava said: Up to three i se’a /i . Rav Pappa said: If I were not a beer manufacturer I would not have become wealthy. Some say /b that it was b Rav Ḥisda who said: If I were not a beer manufacturer I would not have become wealthy. /b The Gemara asks: b What is /b the meaning of the word b i sudana /i , /b the Aramaic term for a brewer? b Rav Ḥisda said: A pleasant secret [ i sod na’e /i ] and acts of loving kindness, /b as brewing is a good way to make money and also enables one to perform good deeds.,The Gemara continues to offer advice about mundane matters. b Rav Pappa said: Anything /b you acquire with a document b by means /b of which ownership is transferred, i.e., a bill of acquisition or obligation, b requires collection, /b despite the fact that you are the legal owner. b Any sale on credit is uncertain whether or not /b it b will come /b to fruition. b And /b even b if it /b does b come /b to fruition, b the money is bad. /b These funds are difficult to collect, and they are generally not paid on time., b Rabbi Yoḥa said three matters, citing the people of Jerusalem: When you go to war do not go out first, but go out last. /b The reason is b so that /b if your side is defeated and you need to flee for your life, b you will enter /b the refuge of the city b first. And /b it is better to b make your Shabbat /b like an ordinary b weekday and do not be beholden to /b other b beings. And exert yourself /b to join together b with one upon whom the hour smiles. /b , b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said three matters, citing the people of Jerusalem: Do not indulge in a shameful act /b in public, b because of the incident that occurred /b involving David and Bathsheba (see II Samuel 11–12). If b your daughter has grown up, /b it is better to b free your /b Canaanite b slave and give /b him b to her /b than to leave her to find a husband on her own. b And be careful with your wife with regard to her first son-in-law, /b as she is especially fond of him. b What is the reason /b for this warning? b Rav Ḥisda said: Due to /b the possibility of b licentiousness. Rav Kahana said: Due to /b the fact that she might give him all your b money /b and leave you impoverished. The Gemara comments: Since b either of these /b could b happen, /b it is best to be prudent., b Rabbi Yoḥa said: Three /b people are b among those who inherit the World-to-Come: One who lives in Eretz Yisrael; one who raises his sons to /b engage b in Torah study; and one who recites i havdala /i over wine at the conclusion of Shabbat. /b The Gemara asks: b What is /b the special importance of b that /b mitzva, to recite i havdala /i over wine? The Gemara answers: This is referring to an individual with only a small amount of wine, b who /b nevertheless b leaves some of /b his kiddush wine b for i havdala /i . /b , b Rabbi Yoḥa /b further b said: The Holy One, Blessed be He, proclaims about /b the goodness of b three /b kinds b of people every day, /b as exceptional and noteworthy individuals: b About a bachelor who lives in a city and does not sin /b with women; b about a poor person who returns a lost object to its owners /b despite his poverty; b and about a wealthy person who tithes his produce in private, /b without publicizing his behavior. The Gemara reports: b Rav Safra was a bachelor living in a city. /b |
|
108. Babylonian Talmud, Niddah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 103| 16b. big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ת"ר אע"פ שאמרו המשמש מטתו לאור הנר הרי זה מגונה בש"א צריכה שני עדים על כל תשמיש או תשמש לאור הנר ובה"א דיה בשני עדים כל הלילה,תניא אמרו להם ב"ש לב"ה לדבריכם ליחוש שמא תראה טיפת דם כחרדל בביאה ראשונה ותחפנה שכבת זרע בביאה שניה,א"ל ב"ה אף לדבריכם ליחוש עד שהרוק בתוך הפה שמא נימוק והולך לו,אמרו להם לפי שאינו דומה נימוק פעם אחת לנימוק שתי פעמים,תניא א"ר יהושע רואה אני את דברי ב"ש אמרו לו תלמידיו רבי כמה הארכת עלינו אמר להם מוטב שאאריך עליכם בעוה"ז כדי שיאריכו ימיכם לעוה"ב,אמר ר' זירא מדברי כולם נלמד בעל נפש לא יבעול וישנה,רבא אמר בועל ושונה כי תניא ההיא לטהרות,תניא נמי הכי בד"א לטהרות אבל לבעלה מותרת ובד"א שהניחה בחזקת טהרה אבל הניחה בחזקת טמאה לעולם היא בחזקתה עד שתאמר לו טהורה אני,א"ר אבא א"ר חייא בר אשי אמר רב בדקה בעד ואבד אסורה לשמש עד שתבדוק מתקיף לה ר' אילא אילו איתא מי לא משמשה ואע"ג דלא ידעה השתא נמי תשמש,א"ל רבא זו מוכיחה קיים וזו אין מוכיחה קיים,א"ר יוחנן אסור לאדם שישמש מטתו ביום אמר רב המנונא מאי קרא שנאמר (איוב ג, ג) יאבד יום אולד בו והלילה אמר הורה גבר לילה ניתן להריון ויום לא ניתן להריון ריש לקיש אמר מהכא (משלי יט, טז) בוזה דרכיו ימות,ור"ל האי קרא דר' יוחנן מאי דריש ביה מבעי ליה לכדדריש רבי חנינא בר פפא דדריש ר' חנינא בר פפא אותו מלאך הממונה על ההריון לילה שמו ונוטל טפה ומעמידה לפני הקב"ה ואומר לפניו רבש"ע טפה זו מה תהא עליה גבור או חלש חכם או טיפש עשיר או עני,ואילו רשע או צדיק לא קאמר כדר' חנינא דא"ר חנינא הכל בידי שמים חוץ מיראת שמים שנאמר (דברים י, יב) ועתה ישראל מה ה' אלהיך שואל מעמך כי אם ליראה וגו',ור' יוחנן א"כ נכתוב קרא גבר הורה מאי הורה גבר לילה ניתן להריון ויום לא ניתן להריון,ור' יוחנן האי קרא דר"ל מאי דריש ביה מבעי לי' לכדכתיב בספר בן סירא שלשה שנאתי וארבעה לא אהבתי שר הנרגל בבית המשתאות ואמרי לה שר הנרגן ואמרי לה שר הנרגז,והמושיב שבת במרומי קרת והאוחז באמה ומשתין מים והנכנס לבית חבירו פתאום אמר רבי יוחנן ואפילו לביתו,אמר רבי שמעון בן יוחאי ארבעה דברים הקב"ה שונאן ואני איני אוהבן הנכנס לביתו פתאום ואצ"ל לבית חבירו והאוחז באמה ומשתין מים | 16b. strong GEMARA: /strong The mishna teaches that according to Beit Shammai it is permitted to engage in intercourse by the light of a lamp. In this regard, b the Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Even though /b the Sages b said /b with regard to b one who engages in intercourse by the light of a lamp, /b that b this is disgraceful, Beit Shammai say: A woman is required /b to examine herself with b two cloths, /b once before and once after b each /b act of b intercourse, or /b she must b engage in intercourse by the light of a lamp. And Beit Hillel say: /b It is b sufficient /b for her to examine herself b with two cloths throughout the night, /b once before the first act of intercourse and once after the final act of intercourse.,It b is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Beit Shammai said to Beit Hillel: According to your statement /b that a woman may engage in intercourse several times in one night without an examination between each act of intercourse, b let us be concerned lest she will see, /b i.e., emit, b a drop of blood the size of a mustard /b seed b during the first /b act of b intercourse, /b and will thereby become impure, b and semen from the second /b act of b intercourse will cover it. /b Since the examination after the last act of intercourse will not reveal the drop of blood, the woman will erroneously think she is pure., b Beit Hillel said to them /b in response: b Even according to your statement, let us be concerned /b that b while the saliva /b was still b in the mouth, /b i.e., while the blood was in her vagina, b perhaps it was squashed and disappeared. /b Even if she examines herself after each act of intercourse, as mandated by Beit Shammai, it is possible that the semen of that act covered the blood, and it will not be revealed by the examination.,Beit Shammai b said to /b Beit Hillel: One cannot compare the two situations, b as a squashed /b drop of blood after the woman has engaged in intercourse b once is not similar to a squashed /b drop of blood after the woman has engaged in intercourse b twice, /b and therefore our concern is more reasonable.,It b is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Yehoshua said: I see /b as correct b the statement of Beit Shammai /b in this case. b His students said to him: /b Our b teacher, how you have weighed [ i he’erakhta /i ] us down /b with this stringent ruling. Rabbi Yehoshua b said to them: It is preferable that I weigh you down in this world, so that /b you do not sin by engaging in prohibited intercourse, i.e., so that b your days in the World-to-Come will be lengthened [ i sheya’arikhu /i ]. /b ,§ b Rabbi Zeira says: From the statements of all of them, /b i.e., both Beit Shammai, who permit engaging in intercourse a second time only after an examination, and Beit Hillel, who rule that the second examination must be performed only after the final act of intercourse of the night, b we can learn /b that their dispute relates only to that which is permitted after the fact. But b a pious person [ i ba’al nefesh /i ] should not engage in intercourse and repeat /b his act without an examination between each act., b Rava says: /b Even a pious person b may engage in intercourse and repeat /b the act without an examination in between, as b when that /b i baraita /i b is taught, /b it is referring b to /b a woman who handles b pure items. /b But with regard to intercourse with her husband, there is no cause for concern., b This /b opinion b is also taught /b in a i baraita /i : b In what /b case b is this statement said, /b i.e., that a woman must examine herself before and after every act of intercourse according to Beit Shammai, or before the first act and after the last act, according to Beit Hillel? It was said b with regard to /b a woman who handles b pure items; but /b a woman b is permitted to her husband /b even without any examination, and he is not required to ask her if she is pure. b But in what /b case b is this /b lenient b statement said? When /b her husband traveled and b left her with the presumptive status of ritual purity. But /b if he b left her with the presumptive status of ritual impurity, /b she remains b forever in her presumptive status /b of impurity b until she says to him: I am pure. /b ,§ b Rabbi Abba says /b that b Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi says /b that b Rav says: /b If a woman b examined /b herself at night b with a cloth, and /b the cloth b was /b then immediately b lost, it is prohibited for her to engage in intercourse /b again b until she examines /b herself with another cloth, as perhaps there was blood on the cloth that was lost. b Rabbi Ila objects to this: If /b this cloth b were intact, /b i.e., if it were not lost, b couldn’t /b this woman b engage in intercourse /b with her husband that night, on the basis that she will examine the cloth only the following day, b and /b isn’t this the i halakha /i b even though she does not know /b at the time of intercourse whether there is blood on the cloth? b Now too, /b although the cloth is lost, b let her engage in intercourse /b with her husband., b Rava said to him: /b There is a difference between the two cases, as when the cloth is intact, b this /b woman’s b proof exists, /b and if she discovers on the following day that she was impure they will be obligated to bring sin offerings for engaging in intercourse in a state of ritual impurity. b But /b with regard to b that /b woman who lost her cloth, b her proof does not exist, /b and therefore they will never know if they require atonement.,§ b Rabbi Yoḥa says: It is prohibited for a person to engage in intercourse by day. Rav Hamnuna says: What is the verse /b from which this is derived? b As it is stated: “Let the day perish on which I was born, and the night on which it was said: Conceived is a man-child” /b (Job 3:3). It is derived from here that b nighttime is meant for conception, but daytime is not meant for conception. Reish Lakish says /b that the proof is b from here: “But he who despises his ways shall die” /b (Proverbs 19:16). One might see something unpleasing in his wife in the daylight and come to despise her.,The Gemara asks: b And how does Reish Lakish interpret this verse /b cited b by Rabbi Yoḥa? /b The Gemara answers that b he requires /b that verse b for that which Rabbi Ḥanina bar Pappa taught. As Rabbi Ḥanina bar Pappa interpreted /b that verse in the following manner: b That angel that is appointed over conception is called: Night. And /b that angel b takes /b the b drop /b of semen from which a person will be formed b and presents it before the Holy One, Blessed be He, and says before Him: Master of the Universe, what will be of this drop? /b Will the person fashioned from it be b mighty or weak? /b Will he be b clever or stupid? /b Will he be b wealthy or poor? /b ,The Gemara notes: b But /b this angel b does not say: /b Will he be b wicked or righteous? /b This is b in accordance with /b a statement b of Rabbi Ḥanina, as Rabbi Ḥanina said: Everything is in the hand of Heaven, except for fear of Heaven. /b People have free will to serve God or not, b as it is stated: “And now, Israel, what does the Lord your God ask of you other than to fear /b the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 10:12). The fact that God asks of the Jewish people to fear Him indicates that it is a person’s choice to do so.,The Gemara explains: b And Rabbi Yoḥa /b derives two i halakhot /i from the verse “and the night on which it was said: Conceived is a man-child,” as he holds as follows: b If so, /b i.e., if it is referring only to the statement of the angel, b let the verse write: /b And the night that said: b A man-child is conceived. What /b is the meaning of: b “Conceived is a man-child”? /b It is derived from the juxtaposition of the word “night” and the word “conceived” that b nighttime is meant for conception but daytime is not meant for conception. /b ,The Gemara asks: b And Rabbi Yoḥa, how does he interpret that verse /b cited b by Reish Lakish? /b The Gemara answers that Rabbi Yoḥa b requires /b that verse: “But he who despises his ways shall die,” b to /b teach b that which is written in the book of ben Sira: Three /b people b I have hated, and a fourth I have not loved: A minister who frequents [ i hanirgal /i ] drinking houses, /b as he disgraces himself and leads himself to ruin and death; b and some say /b a different version of the text: b A minister who chats [ i hanirgan /i ] /b in drinking houses; b and some say /b a third version: b A minister who is short-tempered [ i hanirgaz /i ] /b when in drinking houses.,That is the first that he hated. b And /b the others are b one who dwells at the highest point of the city, /b where everyone sees him; b and one who holds /b his b penis and urinates. And /b the fourth, whom he has not loved, is b one who enters the house of another suddenly, /b without warning. b Rabbi Yoḥa says: And /b this includes b even /b one who comes b into his /b own b house /b without prior warning, as the members of his household might be engaged in private activities.,The Gemara cites a similar saying. b Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says: Four matters the Holy One, Blessed be He, hates, and I do not love them, /b and they are: b One who enters his house suddenly, and needless to say /b one who suddenly enters b the house of another; and one who holds /b his b penis and urinates; /b |
|
109. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 125| 28b. אתיא לאחלופי בראשון הא קא אתי רגל שלישי,ת"ר בראשונה כל מי שמצא אבידה היה מכריז עליה שלשה רגלים ואחר רגל אחרון שבעת ימים כדי שילך שלשה ויחזור שלשה ויכריז יום אחד משחרב בית המקדש שיבנה במהרה בימינו התקינו שיהו מכריזים בבתי כנסיות ובבתי מדרשות ומשרבו האנסים התקינו שיהו מודיעין לשכיניו ולמיודעיו ודיו,מאי משרבו האנסין דאמרי אבידתא למלכא רבי אמי אשכח אודייא דדינרי חזייה ההוא בר נש דקא מירתת א"ל זיל שקול לנפשך דלאו פרסאי אנן דאמרי אבידתא למלכא,ת"ר אבן טוען היתה בירושלים כל מי שאבדה לו אבידה נפנה לשם וכל מי שמוצא אבידה נפנה לשם זה עומד ומכריז וזה עומד ונותן סימנין ונוטלה וזו היא ששנינו צאו וראו אם נמחת אבן הטוען:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big אמר את האבידה ולא אמר סימניה לא יתן לו והרמאי אע"פ שאמר סימניה לא יתן לו שנאמר (דברים כב, ב) עד דרוש אחיך אותו עד שתדרוש את אחיך אם רמאי הוא אם אינו רמאי:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big אתמר רב יהודה אמר אבידתא מכריז ור"נ אמר גלימא מכריז,רב יהודה אמר אבידתא מכריז דאי אמרת גלימא מכריז חיישינן לרמאי,ר"נ אמר גלימא מכריז לרמאי לא חיישינן דא"כ אין לדבר סוף,תנן אמר את האבידה ולא אמר את סימניה ה"ז לא יתן לו אי אמרת בשלמא אבידתא מכריז הא קמ"ל אע"ג דאמר גלימא כי לא אמר סימנין לא מהדרינן ליה אלא אי אמרת גלימא מכריז אמר איהו גלימא ואמר איהו גלימא צריכא למימר כי לא אמר סימנין לא מהדרינן ליה,אמר רב ספרא לעולם גלימא מכריז אמר איהו גלימא ואמר איהו סימנין ומאי לא אמר את סימניה לא אמר סימנין מובהקין דידה:,והרמאי אע"פ שאמר את סימניה ה"ז לא יתן לו: ת"ר בראשונה כל מי שאבדה לו אבידה היה נותן סימנין ונוטלה משרבו הרמאין התקינו שיהו אומרים לו צא והבא עדים דלאו רמאי את וטול,כי הא דאבוה דרב פפא אירכס ליה חמרא ואשכחוה אתא לקמיה דרבה בר רב הונא אמר ליה זיל אייתי סהדי דלאו רמאי את וטול אזל אייתי סהדי אמר להו ידעיתון ביה דרמאי הוא אמרו ליה אין אמר להו אנא רמאה אנא אמרו ליה אנן לאו רמאי את קאמרינן אמר רבה בר רב הונא מסתברא לא מייתי איניש חובתא לנפשיה:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big כל דבר שעושה ואוכל יעשה ויאכל ודבר שאין עושה ואוכל ימכר שנאמר (דברים כב, ב) והשבותו לו ראה היאך תשיבנו לו,מה יהא בדמים ר"ט אומר ישתמש בהן לפיכך אם אבדו חייב באחריותן ר"ע אומר לא ישתמש בהן לפיכך אם אבדו אין חייב באחריותן:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ולעולם אמר רב נחמן אמר שמואל עד י"ב חדש תניא נמי הכי כל דבר שעושה ואוכל כגון פרה וחמור מטפל בהן עד י"ב חדש מכאן ואילך שם דמיהן ומניחן,עגלים וסייחין מטפל בהן שלשה חדשים מכאן ואילך שם דמיהן ומניחן אווזין ותרנגולין מטפל בהם שלשים יום מכאן ואילך שם דמיהן ומניחן,אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק תרנגולת כבהמה גסה תניא נמי הכי תרנגולת ובהמה גסה מטפל בהן שנים עשר חודש מכאן ואילך שם דמיהן ומניחן עגלים וסייחין מטפל בהן ל' יום מכאן ואילך שם דמיהן ומניחן אווזין ותרנגולין וכל דבר שטיפולו מרובה משכרו מטפל בהן שלשה ימים מכאן ואילך שם דמיהן ומניחן,קשיא עגלים וסייחין אעגלים וסייחין אווזין ותרנגולין אאווזין ותרנגולין,עגלים וסייחין אעגלים וסייחין לא קשיא הא דרעיא והא דפטומא,אווזין ותרנגולין אאווזין ותרנגולין נמי לא קשיא הא ברברבי הא בזוטרי:,ושאינו עושה ואוכל: תנו רבנן והשבותו לו ראה היאך תשיבנו לו שלא יאכיל עגל לעגלים וסיח לסייחין אווזא לאווזין ותרנגול לתרנגולין:,מה יהא בדמים רבי טרפון אומר ישתמש וכו': עד כאן לא פליגי | 28b. because perhaps one who hears him will b come to confuse /b it b with the first /b pilgrimage Festival? The Gemara answers: Confusing the second Festival with the first is not a problem, as in any case, b won’t /b the finder b come /b on the b third pilgrimage Festival, /b thereby giving the owner another opportunity to recover his lost item?,§ b The Sages taught: Initially, anyone who found a lost item would proclaim /b his find for b three pilgrimage Festivals and /b for b seven days after the last /b of the three b pilgrimage Festivals, so that /b its owner b will go to his home, /b a trip lasting up to b three /b days, b and will return /b to Jerusalem, a trip lasting up to b three /b days, b and proclaim /b his loss for b one day. /b But b from /b the time b that the Temple was destroyed, may it be rebuilt speedily in our days, /b the Sages b instituted that /b those who find lost items b shall proclaim /b their finds b in synagogues and study halls. And from /b the time b that the oppressors proliferated, /b the Sages b instituted /b an ordice b that /b one who finds a lost item b shall inform his neighbors and acquaintances, and /b that will b suffice for him. /b ,The Gemara asks: b What /b is the meaning of: b From /b the time b that the oppressors proliferated? /b The Gemara answers: It is from the time b that they say: A lost item /b belongs b to the king. /b The Sages were concerned that any public proclamation would result in confiscation of the lost item. The Gemara relates: b Rabbi Ami found a vessel /b full b of dinars. A certain Roman saw that he was wary /b and hesitant to take it. The Roman b said to him: Go, take it for yourself; as we are not Persians, who say that a lost item /b belongs b to the king. /b , b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b There was a Claimant’s Stone in Jerusalem, /b and b anyone who lost an item would be directed there and anyone who found a lost item would be directed there. This /b finder would b stand and proclaim /b his find b and that /b owner b would stand and provide /b its b distinguishing marks and take /b the item. b And that is /b the place about which b we learned /b in a mishna ( i Ta’anit /i 19a): b Go and see if the Claimant’s Stone has been obscured /b by the rising water., strong MISHNA: /strong If a claimant accurately b stated /b what type of item b the lost item /b that was found by another is, b but did not state, /b i.e., describe, b its distinguishing marks, /b the finder b shall not give /b it b to him. And /b in the case of b a swindler, even though he stated its distinguishing marks, /b the finder b shall not give /b the lost item b to him, as it is stated: /b “And if your brother be not near you, and you know him not, then you shall bring it into your house, and it shall be with you b until your brother claims [ i derosh /i ] it [ i oto /i ], /b and you shall return it to him” (Deuteronomy 22:2). Would it enter your mind that the finder would give it to him before he claims it? How can the finder return it if he does not know the identity of the owner? Rather, the verb i derosh /i is not referring to the claim of the owner; it is referring to the scrutiny performed by the finder. You shall not return the lost item b until /b you b scrutinize [ i shetidrosh /i ] your brother /b to determine b whether /b he, the claimant, b is a swindler /b or b whether he is not a swindler. /b , strong GEMARA: /strong b It was stated /b that b Rav Yehuda said: /b One who finds an item b proclaims /b that he found b a lost item /b without specifying its nature. b And Rav Naḥman said: /b He specifies the nature of the item, e.g., b he proclaims /b that he found b a cloak. /b , b Rav Yehuda said: /b One who finds an item b proclaims /b that he found b a lost item, as if you say /b that b he proclaims /b that he found b a cloak, we are concerned about /b the possibility that b a swindler /b may attempt to claim the item. Perhaps the swindler learned that another person lost that item, and he will ascertain its distinguishing marks, provide those distinguishing marks, and claim the item., b Rav Naḥman said: /b The finder b proclaims /b that he found b a cloak, and we are not concerned about /b the possibility that b a swindler /b may attempt to claim the item, b as if so, there is no end to the matter. /b Even if the finder does not specify the nature of the item, perhaps a swindler would be able to guess its nature.,The Gemara cites proof from that which b we learned /b in the mishna: If a claimant accurately b states /b what type of item b the lost item /b that was found by another is, b but did not state its distinguishing marks, /b the finder b shall not give /b it b to him. Granted, if you say /b the finder b proclaims /b that he found an unspecified b lost item, this /b mishna b teaches us /b that b even though /b the claimant indeed b stated /b that the lost item is b a cloak, as /b long as b he did not state /b its b distinguishing marks, we do not return /b it b to him. But if you say /b that the finder b proclaims /b that he found b a cloak, /b if the finder b stated /b that he found b a cloak and /b the claimant b stated /b that he lost b a cloak, /b does it b need to be said /b that b when he did not state /b its b distinguishing marks, we do not return it to him? /b , b Rav Safra said: Actually, /b one could say that the finder b proclaims /b that he found b a cloak, /b and the mishna is referring to a case where the finder b stated /b that he found b a cloak, and /b the claimant b stated /b its b distinguishing marks. And what /b is the meaning of the phrase in the mishna: If he b did not state its distinguishing marks? /b It means: If b he did not state its clear-cut distinguishing marks /b but rather stated distinguishing marks that are not exclusive to the item. Therefore, he does not prove his ownership.,§ The mishna teaches: b And /b in the case of b a swindler, even though he stated its distinguishing marks, /b the finder b shall not give /b the lost item b to him. The Sages taught: Initially, anyone who lost an item would provide /b its b distinguishing marks and take it. /b But b when the swindlers proliferated, /b the Sages b instituted /b an ordice b that /b the finders will b say to him: Go and bring witnesses /b who can testify b that you are not a swindler, and take /b your item.,The Gemara relates: This is b as /b in b that /b incident involving b the father of Rav Pappa, /b who b lost a donkey and /b others b found it. He came before Rabba bar Rav Huna /b to reclaim his donkey. Rabba bar Rav Huna b said /b to the father of Rav Pappa: b Go and bring witnesses /b who can testify b that you are not a swindler, and /b you may b take /b your donkey. The father of Rav Pappa b went and brought witnesses. /b Rabba bar Rav Huna b said to /b the witnesses: b Do you know about him /b that b he is a swindler? /b The witnesses b said: Yes. /b Rav Pappa’s father b said, /b incredulously, b to /b the witnesses: b I am a swindler? /b The witnesses b said to him: We were saying that you are not a swindler. /b They had thought the question was if he was not a swindler, and therefore responded in the affirmative. b Rabba bar Rav Huna said: /b It b is reasonable /b to conclude that the witnesses actually intended to support Rav Pappa’s father, because presumably, b a person does not bring condemnation upon himself; /b Rav Pappa’s father would not have volunteered to provide witnesses who would testify against him., strong MISHNA: /strong If one finds b any /b living b being that works and /b generates enough revenue to cover the costs of the food that it b eats, /b it b shall work and eat /b while in the finder’s possession. b And any /b living b being that does not work but /b it does b eat shall be sold, as it is stated: /b “Then you shall bring it into your house, and it shall be with you until your brother claims it, b and you shall return it to him” /b (Deuteronomy 22:2), indicating that the finder must b see how /b best b to return it to him. /b Since the owner must repay the finder for his expenditures, if feeding the animal costs more than its value, the finder’s keep-ing the animal in his possession will prevent the owner from recovering it., b What shall be /b done b with the money /b received from the sale of the animal? b Rabbi Tarfon says: /b The finder b may use it; therefore, if /b the money b is lost, /b he is b liable /b to pay b restitution /b for b it. Rabbi Akiva says: He may not use /b the money; b therefore, if it is lost, /b he is b not liable /b to pay b restitution /b for b it. /b , strong GEMARA: /strong The mishna teaches that an animal that generates enough revenue to cover the costs of the food that it eats shall work and eat while in the finder’s possession. The Gemara asks: b And /b must he care for the animal b forever? Rav Naḥman says /b that b Shmuel says: /b He cares for the animal b until twelve months /b pass. b This is also taught /b in a i baraita /i : If one finds b any /b living b being that works and /b generates enough revenue to cover the costs of the food that it b eats, e.g., a cow or a donkey, /b he b tends to them until twelve months /b pass. b From that /b point b forward, one assesses their value, /b sells them, b and places /b the money aside for the owner.,If one finds b calves and foals, /b which are young and unfit for labor, b he tends to them /b for b three months, /b as they do not earn their keep. b From that /b point b forward, one assesses their value, /b sells them, b and places /b the money aside for the owner. If one finds b geese and roosters, he tends to them /b for b thirty days. From that /b point b forward, one assesses their value, /b sells them, b and places /b the money aside for the owner., b Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak says: /b The legal status of b a chicken is like /b that of b a large domesticated animal /b in that the eggs it lays suffice to cover the cost of its food, and therefore the finder keeps it for twelve months. b This is also taught /b in a i baraita /i : If one finds b a chicken and a large domesticated animal, /b he b tends to them for twelve months. From that /b point b forward, one assesses their value, /b sells them, b and places /b the money aside for the owner. If one finds b calves and foals, he tends to them /b for b thirty days. From that /b point b forward, one assesses their value, /b sells them, b and places /b the money aside for the owner. If one finds b geese and roosters and anything that /b costs b more to tend to than /b the b revenue /b generated by b it, he tends to them /b for b three days. From that /b point b forward, one assesses their value, /b sells them, b and places /b the money aside for the owner.,The Gemara asks: It is b difficult, /b as there is a contradiction between the ruling in the first i baraita /i that the finder keeps b calves and foals /b for three months b and /b the ruling in the second i baraita /i that the finder keeps b calves and foals /b for thirty days; and there is another contradiction between the ruling in the first i baraita /i that the finder keeps b geese and roosters /b for thirty days, b and /b the ruling in the second i baraita /i that the finder keeps b geese and roosters /b for three days.,The Gemara answers: The contradiction between the ruling in the first i baraita /i with regard to b calves and foals and /b the ruling in the second i baraita /i with regard to b calves and foals /b is b not difficult. This /b ruling in the first i baraita /i that the finder keeps them for three months is referring to calves and foals b that graze /b in the pasture, b and that /b ruling in the second i baraita /i that the finder keeps them for thirty days is referring to calves and foals b that /b need to be b fattened /b and therefore require greater exertion on the part of the one who finds them.,The contradiction between the ruling in the first i baraita /i with regard to b geese and roosters and /b the ruling in the second i baraita /i with regard to b geese and roosters /b is b also not difficult. This /b ruling in the first i baraita /i that the finder keeps them for thirty days is referring b to large /b geese and roosters, which do not require great exertion, b and that /b ruling in the second i baraita /i that the finder keeps them for three days is referring b to small /b geese and roosters, which require great exertion.,The mishna teaches: b And /b any living being b that does not work but /b it does b eat /b shall be sold. b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : The verse states: b “And you shall return it to him” /b (Deuteronomy 22:2), indicating that the finder must b see how /b best b to return it to him, /b meaning b that /b one b shall not feed /b the value of b a calf to /b the lost b calves /b that he is tending, b nor /b the value of b a foal to /b the lost b foals /b that he is tending, b nor /b the value of b a goose to /b the b geese /b that he is tending, b nor /b the value of b a rooster to /b the b roosters /b that he is tending. Were the finder to do so, ultimately, the owner would receive nothing.,§ The mishna teaches: b What shall be /b done b with the money /b received from the sale of the animal? b Rabbi Tarfon says: /b The finder b may use it; /b therefore, if the money is lost, he is liable to pay restitution for its loss. Rabbi Akiva says: He may not use the money. Therefore, if it is lost, he is not liable to pay restitution. The Gemara analyzes the tannaitic dispute: Rabbi Tarfon and Rabbi Akiva b disagree /b |
|
110. Babylonian Talmud, Bekhorot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 185| 37a. לאפוקי מדרבי יוסי שלשה מפירין את הנדר במקום שאין חכם לאפוקי מדרבי יהודה דתניא הפרת נדרים בג' ר' יהודה אומר אחד מהם חכם,במקום שאין חכם כגון מאן אמר רב נחמן כגון אנא ר' יהודה אומר אחד מהן חכם מכלל דהנך כל דהו אמר רבינא דמסתברי ליה וסבר:,רבי יוסי אומר אפילו יש שם כ"ג כו': אמר רב חננאל אמר רב אין הלכה כרבי יוסי פשיטא יחיד ורבים הלכה כרבים מהו דתימא נמוקו עמו קמ"ל,תפשוט מהא דהך קמייתא משמיה דשמואל איתמר דאי משמיה דרב תרתי למה לי,חדא מכלל דחבירתה איתמר:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big השוחט את הבכור ונודע שלא הראהו מה שאכלו אכלו ויחזיר להם הדמים ומה שלא אכלו הבשר יקבר ויחזיר את הדמים,וכן השוחט את הפרה ומכרה ונודע שהיא טרפה מה שאכלו אכלו ומה שלא אכלו הם יחזירו לו את הבשר והוא יחזיר להם את הדמים מכרוהו לעובד כוכבים או הטילוהו לכלבים ישלמו דמי טרפה:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ת"ר המוכר בשר לחבירו ונמצא בשר בכור פירות ונמצא טבלים יין ונמצא יין נסך מה שאכלו אכלו ויחזיר להם את הדמים,ר' שמעון בן אלעזר אומר דברים שהנפש קצה בהן יחזיר להן את הדמים ושאין הנפש קצה בהם ינכה להם את הדמים ואלו הן דברים שהנפש קצה בהן נבילות וטריפות שקצים ורמשים ואלו הן דברים שאין הנפש קצה בהן בכורות טבלים ויין נסך,בכור ולימא ליה מאי אפסדתך,לא צריכא כגון דזבין ליה ממקום מומא דא"ל אי לאו דאכלת הוה מחזינא ליה ושרי ניהליה כרבי יהודה,טבלים הוה מתקיננא להו ואכלנא להו יין נסך על ידי תערובת וכרשב"ג,דתנן יין נסך שנפל לבור כולו אסור בהנאה רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר ימכר כולו לעובדי כוכבים חוץ מדמי יי"נ שבו:, br br big strongהדרן עלך כל פסולי המוקדשין /strong /big br br,מתני׳ big strongעל /strong /big אלו מומין שוחטין את הבכור נפגמה אזנו מן החסחוס אבל לא העור נסדקה אעפ"י שלא חסרה ניקבה מלא כרשינה או שיבשה איזהו יבשה כל שתנקב ואינה מוציאה טיפת דם ר' יוסי בן המשולם אומר יבשה שתהא נפרכת:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big אמאי (דברים טו כא) פסח ועור כתיב,כתיב נמי (דברים טו, כא) כי יהיה בו מום ואימא כי יהיה בו מום כלל פסח או עור פרט כלל ופרט אין בכלל אלא מה שבפרט פסח ועור אין מידי אחרינא לא,(דברים טו, כא) כל מום רע חזר וכלל כלל ופרט וכלל אי אתה דן אלא כעין הפרט מה הפרט מפורש מומין שבגלוי ואינן חוזרין אף כל מומין שבגלוי ואינן חוזרין,ואימא מה הפרט מפורש מומין שבגלוי ובוטל ממלאכתו ואינו חוזר אף כל מומין שבגלוי ובוטל ממלאכתו ואינו חוזר אלמה תנן נפגמה אזנו מן החסחוס ולא מן העור,כל מום רע ריבויא הוא אי הכי מומין שבסתר נמי אלמה תנן חוטין החיצונות שנפגמו ושנגממו והפנימיות שנעקרו | 37a. is b to the exclusion of /b the opinion b of Rabbi Yosei /b in the mishna, who prohibits any number of laymen to deem a firstborn animal permitted. The ruling that a group of b three /b laymen may b dissolve a vow in a place where there is no Sage /b is b to the exclusion of /b the opinion b of Rabbi Yehuda, as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Dissolution of vows /b requires a court of b three. Rabbi Yehuda says: /b This is the i halakha /i only if at least b one of them /b is b a Sage. /b If no Sage is available, laymen may not dissolve a vow.,Rav Ḥiyya bar Amram stated above that a group of three may dissolve a vow b in a place where there is no Sage. /b This indicates that if there is a Sage, he alone may dissolve a vow. The Gemara asks: b Who, for example, /b is considered such a Sage? b Rav Naḥman said: For example, /b one such as b me. /b The i baraita /i further stated that b Rabbi Yehuda says: /b At least b one of /b the three laymen must be b a Sage. /b The Gemara asks: Should one conclude b by inference that those /b other two members can be b anyone, /b even complete ignoramuses? b Ravina said /b in explanation: Each member of the group must be one b to whom /b the i halakhot /i of vows b is explained and he /b is able to b comprehend /b them.,§ The mishna teaches that b Rabbi Yosei says: Even if there is /b a court of b twenty-three /b Sages b there, /b it may be slaughtered only on the basis of the ruling of an expert. b Rav Ḥael says /b that b Rav says: /b The b i halakha /i /b is b not in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yosei. /b The Gemara challenges: This is b obvious, /b as there is a principle that in a dispute between b an individual /b Sage b and many /b Sages, the b i halakha /i /b is b in accordance with /b the opinion of the b many /b Sages. The Gemara answers: Rav’s statement is necessary, b lest you say /b that Rabbi Yosei is an exception to the principle, as b his reasoning [ i nimmuko /i ] is with him, /b i.e., his logic is sound. Rav Ḥael therefore b teaches us /b that this is not so, and the i halakha /i does not follow his opinion.,Earlier (36b), the Gemara cited a ruling, which was issued either by Rav or Shmuel, that three regular Jews may deem a firstborn animal permitted in a place where there is no expert, in contrast to the opinion of Rabbi Yosei. The Gemara suggests: b Resolve /b that dilemma b from this /b statement in the name of Rav, that the i halakha /i is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei. It can be inferred from here b that that first, /b uncertain ruling b was stated in the name of Shmuel. As, if /b it was stated b in the name of Rav, why do I /b need b two /b identical rulings?,The Gemara answers: This is insufficient proof, as it is possible that Rav did not issue two identical rulings. Rather, b one /b ruling b was stated from the other, by inference. /b Rav issued only one of these statements explicitly; the other was reported by his students in his name based on an inference from what he had said., strong MISHNA: /strong In the case of b one who slaughters a firstborn /b animal and sells its meat, b and it was discovered that he did not /b initially b show it /b to one of the Sages, the i halakha /i is that it was actually prohibited to derive any benefit from the meat. In that case, b what /b the buyers b ate, they ate, and /b the Sages penalized the seller in that b he must return the money to them, /b which they paid for the meat that they ate. b And /b with regard to b that which they did not eat, /b that b meat must be buried, and he must return the money /b that they paid for the meat that they did not eat., b And likewise, /b in the case of b one who slaughters a cow and sells it, and it was discovered that it is a i tereifa /i , what /b the buyers b ate, they ate, and what they did not eat, they must return the meat to /b the seller, who may sell it to a gentile or feed it to the dogs, b and he must return the money to /b the buyers. If the buyers b sold it to gentiles or cast it to the dogs, they pay /b the seller b the value of a i tereifa /i , /b which is less than the value of kosher meat, and the seller refunds the balance to the buyers., strong GEMARA: /strong b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : In a case where b one sells meat to another and it was discovered /b that it is the b meat /b of b a firstborn /b animal, which was not deemed permitted for consumption by an expert, or if one sells b produce /b to another b and it was discovered /b that it is b untithed produce, /b or if one sells b wine /b to another b and it turns out /b that it is b wine /b that was used for b a libation /b in idol worship, the i halakha /i is that b what /b the purchasers b ate, they ate, and /b the seller b reimburses them /b all their b money. /b , b Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says, /b qualifying this ruling: If he sold them b items from which one is /b generally b repulsed, he must reimburse them /b all their b money, /b as they are presumed to not have derived benefit from the consumption of such items. b But /b if he sold them b items from which one is not /b generally b repulsed, he deducts for them the value /b of the benefit from those items and reimburses them the balance. b And the following are items from which one is /b generally b repulsed: Carcasses and i tereifot /i , repugt creatures, and creeping animals. And the following are items from which one is /b generally b not repulsed: Firstborn /b animals, b untithed produce, and wine /b used for b a libation /b in idol worship.,The Gemara asks: Why does the seller deduct the value of the meat of b a firstborn /b animal eaten by the purchaser and reimburse him the difference? b Let /b the purchaser b say to /b the seller: b What loss have I caused you /b by eating the meat? Had you not sold it to me, you would have had no rights to partake of it, as this is an unblemished firstborn animal from which deriving benefit is prohibited.,The Gemara answers: b No, /b this ruling is b necessary /b in a case b where he sold him /b a cut of meat b from an area /b on the animal that contained b a blemish, /b but the seller had not yet brought the animal to be examined and deemed permitted by a Sage. In b that /b instance, the seller can b say to /b the purchaser: b Had you not eaten /b the meat, b I would have shown /b the animal to a Sage b and he /b would have b deemed it permitted /b to me. The Gemara notes that this is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yehuda /b (28a), who permits a firstborn animal to be examined and deemed permitted even after it has been slaughtered.,The Gemara adds that with regard to b untithed produce, /b although one could claim that the purchaser did not cause a loss to the seller, as untithed produce is prohibited for consumption, the seller can say to the purchaser: Had you not eaten my produce, b I would have remedied it, /b i.e., separated its tithes, b and eaten it. /b Similarly, with regard to b wine /b used for b a libation /b in idol worship, which is also prohibited to be consumed, this is referring to a seller who sold it b in a mixture /b of permitted wine. In this case, had the purchaser not consumed the wine mixture, the seller could have derived benefit from it, b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. /b , b As we learned /b in a mishna ( i Avoda Zara /i 74a): In the case of b wine /b used for b a libation /b in idol worship b that fell into /b a wine b cistern, /b it is b prohibited /b to b derive benefit /b from b all /b the wine in the cistern, even if the volume of the wine used for a libation was small in comparison to the volume of the rest of the wine in the cistern. b Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: All of the /b wine in the cistern b may be sold to a gentile, /b and the money paid for it is permitted, b except for the value of the wine /b used for b a libation /b that is b in it. /b ,, strong MISHNA: /strong b For these blemishes, one may slaughter the firstborn /b animal outside the Temple: If the firstborn’s b ear was damaged /b and lacking b from the cartilage [ i haḥasḥus /i ], but not /b if b the skin /b was damaged; and likewise, if the ear b was split, although it is not lacking; /b or if the ear b was pierced /b with a hole b the size of a bitter vetch, /b which is a type of legume; b or /b if it was an ear b that /b is b desiccated. What is a desiccated /b ear that is considered a blemish? It is b any /b ear b that /b if b it is pierced it does not discharge a drop of blood. Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam says: Desiccated /b means that the ear is so dry b that it will crumble /b if one touches it., strong GEMARA: /strong With regard to the blemishes mentioned in this mishna and in the subsequent i mishnayot /i , the Gemara asks: b Why /b is it permitted to slaughter and eat a firstborn that sustained these blemishes? Only b a lame /b animal b and a blind /b animal are b written /b in the verse that discusses this i halakha /i . That verse states: “And if there be any blemish therein, lameness, or blindness, any ill blemish whatsoever, you shall not sacrifice it to the Lord your God. You shall eat it within your gates” (Deuteronomy 15:21–22).,The Gemara answers: b It is also written /b in the beginning of the verse: b “If there be any blemish therein,” /b which indicates that other blemishes are also included. The Gemara asks: b But /b why not b say /b that the phrase b “if there be any blemish therein” /b is b a generalization, /b while b “lameness, or blindness” /b is b a detail. /b According to the principles of midrashic exegesis, if b a generalization and a detail /b are mentioned, b the generalization includes only that which is /b specified b in the detail. /b Therefore, it should be concluded that in the event of b lameness and blindness, yes, /b one may slaughter the firstborn, but in the event of b another matter, /b one may b not /b slaughter it.,The Gemara answers: By subsequently stating: b “Any ill blemish,” it then generalized /b again. Consequently, it is b a generalization and a detail and a generalization, /b represented in the phrases “any blemish,” “lameness or blindness,” and “any ill blemish,” and according to the principles of midrashic exegesis, b you may deduce /b that the verse is referring b only /b to items b similar to the detail. Just as /b the items mentioned in b the detail, /b i.e., in the phrase “lameness or blindness,” are clearly b defined as blemishes that are exposed and do not regenerate, so too, all blemishes that are exposed and do not regenerate /b are considered blemishes with regard to a firstborn.,The Gemara suggests: b But say /b instead that b just as /b the items mentioned in b the detail, /b i.e., in the phrase “lameness or blindness,” are clearly b defined as blemishes that are exposed and /b that cause an animal to b desist from its /b normal b labor, and /b they are blemishes that b do not regenerate, so too, all blemishes that are exposed and /b that cause an animal to b desist from its labor and do not regenerate /b are included in this i halakha /i . If so, a blemish that does not fit these criteria would not render the firstborn permitted to be slaughtered. b Why /b then b did we learn /b in the mishna that if the firstborn’s b ear was damaged /b and lacking b from the cartilage, but not /b if it is lacking b from the skin, /b it is considered a blemish, despite the fact that this does not cause the animal to desist from its labor?,The Gemara answers: The word “any” in b “any ill blemish” is an amplification, /b and it includes even blemishes that are different from those defined by the detail. The Gemara challenges: b If so, blemishes that are hidden /b should b also /b be included. b Why /b then b did we learn /b in the mishna (39a) that animals with b external gums that were damaged /b and lacking b or that were scratched [ i veshenigmemu /i ] and /b likewise animals with b internal /b gums b that were /b entirely b extracted /b are considered blemished? |
|
111. Anon., Exodus Rabbah, 1.30 (4th cent. CE - 9th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 48 | 1.30. "And he said: Who made you a ruler and a judge over us? R. Yehudah says: Moshe was of twenty years at that time. They said to him: you are not yet worthy of being a ruler and a judge over as, for [it is said, Avot 5:21] \"at forty [one aquires] wisdom.\" R. Nehemia said: He [Moshe] was of forty years at that time. They said to him: surely you are a man [of age], only you are not worthy to be a ruler and a judge over us. The sages say: They said to him: are you indeed the son of Yocheved? Then why do they call you son of Batya?! and you presume to be a ruler and a judge over us?! We will let be known what you did to the Egyptian. \"Do you mean [Lit. say] to kill me?’ It is not written \"do you mean\", but \"do you say\". From this you learn, that [Moshe] uttered the proper name [of G-d] unto the Egyptian and killed him. When he [Moshe] heard this, his became fearful of Lashon Ha'ra [the evil toung]. And he [Moshe] said \"surely the thing is known\". R. Yehudah son of R. Shalom said in the name of Hanina the Great and our sages who [in turn] said in the name of R. Alexandri: Moshe would wonder to himself and say: \"what was Israel's sin, for which they became more enslaved than all other nation?\" When he heard his [the Hebrew who struck his fellow's] words, he [Moshe] said: \"such Lashon Harah [evil toung] is amongst them, how would they be worthy of redemption?\". And so he [Moshe] said: \"Surely the thing is known\" - now I know what is the cause of their enslavement.", |
|
112. Anon., Numbers Rabba, 16.28, 18.10 (4th cent. CE - 9th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 52, 65| 16.28. אָמַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְמשֶׁה אֲכַלֶּה אוֹתָם מִלְּפָנַי, אָמַר לְפָנָיו רִבּוֹן הָעוֹלָמִים אַתָּה מַאֲרִיךְ אַף, וְעֶבֶד אִם יִהְיוּ מַעֲשָׂיו טוֹבִים וִיהֵא שׁוֹמֵעַ לְרַבּוֹ וִיהֵא רַבּוֹ מִסְתַּכֵּל בּוֹ בְּסֵבֶר פָּנִים יָפוֹת, אֵין מַחֲזִיקִין לְרַבּוֹ טוֹבָה, וְאֵימָתַי הֵם מַחֲזִיקִין, בִּזְּמַן שֶׁהָעֶבֶד שֶׁל תַּרְבּוּת רָעָה וְרַבּוֹ מִסְתַּכֵּל בּוֹ בְּסֵבֶר פָּנִים יָפוֹת. כָּךְ אַתָּה אַל תַּבֵּט בִּקְשֵׁה עָרְפָּם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים ט, כז): אַל תֵּפֶן אֶל קְשִׁי הָעָם הַזֶּה. אָמַר לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא בִּשְׁבִילְךָ אֶסְלַח לָהֶם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר יד, כ): וַיֹּאמֶר ה' סָלַחְתִּי כִּדְבָרֶךָ. | 18.10. "10 (Numb. 16:12) Then Moses sent to summon Dathan and Abiram: They also persisted in their wickedness and did not care to answer him (ibid., cont.), “and they said, ‘We will not come up.’” Their [very] mouths tripped up [these] wicked men, for a covet is made with the lips. So they died and went down to the nethermost Sheol, after they had gone down alive to Sheol. (Numb. 16:13) “Is it so small a matter that you have brought us up [from a land flowing with milk and honey to kill us in the desert], that you must also lord it over us”: They said to him, “On what basis do you assume superiority over us? What good have you done with us? You brought us out of the land of Egypt, which was (according to Gen. 13:10) ‘like the garden of the Lord’; but you have not brought us into the land of Canaan. Rather here we are in the desert, where the plague is sent among us; (according to Numb. 16:14) ‘would you put out the eyes of these people….’” (Numb. 16:15) “Now Moses was very angry”: He was very anguished. Why? When a man argues with his companion and reasons with him; when he answers him, he has peace of mind; but if he does not answer him, then this involves anguish. (Numb. 16:15, cont.) “And he said unto the Lord, ‘Pay no attention unto their meal offering’”: Do not accept them in repentance. Scripture should have said, “Pay no attention unto their service\"? What is the meaning of “their meal offering?” This is what Moses said to the Holy One, blessed be He, “Master of the world, I know that these have a share in that meal offering that [Israel offers every day], as stated (Numb. 29:19), ‘in addition to the daily burnt offering, and its meal offering.’ And it is offered from all of Israel. [But] in as much as these have withdrawn from Your children, do not pay attention to their portion. Let the fire leave it alone and not consume it.” (Numb. 16:15, cont.) “I have not taken one donkey from them”: That which I had [a right] to take I did not take. By universal custom, one who works in the sanctuary receives wages from the sanctuary. [In my case, however,] when I went down from Midian to Egypt I had a right to take a donkey from them, since it was on behalf of their needs that I was going down [there]; but I did not take [one]. Similarly also did Samuel the righteous say (in I Sam. 12:3), “Here am I, testify against me before the Lord and before His anointed; whose ox have I taken, or whose donkey have I taken?” When I sacrificed an ox for their offerings to seek mercy for them and likewise for anointing a king over them, it belonged to me, as stated (in I Sam. 16:2), “Take a heifer with you […].” And similarly it says (in I Sam. 9:12), “because the people have a sacrifice today at the high place ( i bamah /i ).” But I took nothing from what belonged to them. Also when I sought to handle their lawsuits and their [other] needs, and when I made the circuit of the cities, as stated (in I Sam. 7:16), “And he went on a circuit year by year to Bethel, [Gilgal, and Mizpah, and he judged Israel in all those places];” [although] by universal custom litigants go to the judge, I went around from city to city and from place to place and the donkey was mine. Now even Moses said to Israel (in Exod. 18:16), “When they have a matter, it comes unto me.” But I (Samuel) did not act in this way. Instead I took the trouble to go to them. (Numb. 16:15, cont.) “And I have not harmed a single one of them,” in that I neither convicted the innocent nor acquitted the guilty. When Moses saw that they continued in their pride, then he said to them (according to Numb. 16:17,) “‘[Tomorrow] you and all your company [are to be present before the Lord].” Then Korah went about all that night and led Israel astray. Now he would say to them, “What do you suppose? That I am busy obtaining greatness for myself? I wish for greatness to go the rounds to all of us, while Moses has taken kingship for himself and has given the high priesthood to his brother Aaron.” So did he go about seducing each and every tribe as it suited them, until they joined him. It is so stated (Numb. 16:19), “And Korah gathered all the congregation against them.” When they all entered, they were speaking with him; immediately (we read in Numb. 16:20–22), “Then the Lord spoke unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying, ‘Separate yourselves from the midst of this evil congregation, [so that I may consume them in a moment].’ But they fell on their faces.”", |
|
113. Babylonian Talmud, Arakhin, None (6th cent. CE - missingth cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 48| 19a. שבזכר ושבנקבה מיבעי ליה,ומאי שנא נקבה דכי מיזקנא קיימא אתילתא ומאי שנא זכר דלא קאי אתילתא אמר חזקיה אמרי אינשי סבא בביתא פאחא בביתא סבתא בביתא סימא בביתא:, br br big strongהדרן עלך השג יד /strong /big br br,מתני׳ big strongהאומר /strong /big משקלי עלי נותן משקלו אם כסף כסף ואם זהב זהב מעשה באמה של ירמטיא שאמרה משקל בתי עלי ועלתה לירושלים ושקלה משקלה זהב,משקל ידי עלי רבי יהודה אומר ממלא חבית מים ומכניסה עד מרפיקו ושוקל מבשר חמור ועצמות וגידים ונותן לתוכה עד שתתמלא אמר ר' יוסי וכי היאך אפשר לכוין בשר כנגד בשר ועצמות כנגד עצמות אלא שמין את היד כמה היא ראויה לשקול:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big מאי אם כסף כסף אם זהב זהב אמר רב יהודה פירש כסף כסף פירש זהב זהב פשיטא הא קמ"ל טעמא דפירש הא לא פירש פטר נפשיה בכל דהו,כרחבה דאמר רחבה באתרא דתקלי כופרא פטר נפשיה אפי' בכופרא פשיטא לא צריכא דאיכא דתקל ואיכא דכייל מהו דתימא כיון דכולהו לא תקלי לא קמ"ל,אמר רב פפא באתרא דתקלי שמכי פטר נפשיה אפי' בשמכי פשיטא לא צריכא דבתר דשקלי שדו תרי תלתא מהו דתימא בטיל תורת משקל קמ"ל:,מעשה באמה של ירמטיא וכו': מעשה לסתור,חסורי מחסרא והכי קתני ואם אדם חשוב הוא אף ע"ג דלא פריש לפי כבודו אמרינן ומעשה באמה של ירמטיא שאמרה משקל בתי עלי ועלתה לירושלים ושקלוה ונתנה משקלה זהב,אמר רב יהודה האומר קומתי עלי נותן שרביט שאינו נכפף מלא קומתי עלי נותן שרביט הנכפף מיתיבי קומתי עלי מלא קומתי עלי נותן שרביט שאינו נכפף,הוא דאמר כר"ע דדייק לישנא יתירא דתנן לא את הבור ולא [את] הדות אף ע"פ שכתב עומקה ורומה וצריך ליקח לו דרך דברי ר"ע,וחכ"א אינו צריך ומודה רבי עקיבא בזמן שאמר לו חוץ מאלו שאין צריך ליקח לו דרך אלמא כיון דלא צריך וקאמר לטפויי מילתא קאתי הכא נמי כיון דלא צריך וקאמר לטפויי מילתא קאתי,איבעיא להו עומדי מהו | 19a. Rather, the i baraita /i b should have /b stated: b With regard to the male and with regard to the female, /b which are the terms the Torah uses with regard to valuations. The terms son and daughter are used in i Yotze Dofen /i .,With regard to valuations, the Gemara asks: b And what is different /b with regard to b a female, that when she ages /b past sixty years she b stands at /b a valuation of ten shekels, b one-third /b of her previous valuation of thirty shekels, b and what is different /b with regard to b a male, that /b when he ages past sixty, at which point he has a valuation of fifteen shekels, he does not b stand at /b even b one-third /b of his previous valuation of fifty shekels? b Ḥizkiya said /b that b people say /b a popular saying: If there is b an elderly man in the home, /b there is b a burden [ i paḥa /i ] in the home, /b as he does not help with anything; if there is b an elderly woman in the home, /b there is b a treasure in the home, /b as she assists with various domestic labors.,, strong MISHNA: /strong b One who says: /b It is incumbent b upon me /b to donate b my weight, gives his weight /b to the Temple treasury; b if /b he specified b silver /b he donates b silver, and if /b he specified b gold /b he donates b gold. /b There was b an incident involving the mother of Yirmatya, who said: /b It is incumbent b upon me /b to donate the b weight of my daughter, and she ascended to Jerusalem and paid her /b daughter’s b weight /b in b gold /b to the Temple treasury.,In the case of one who says: It is incumbent b upon me /b to donate the b weight of my forearm, /b how does he ascertain the weight of his forearm? b Rabbi Yehuda says: He fills a barrel /b with b water and inserts /b his arm b up to his elbow /b into the water. b And /b in order to measure the displacement, b he weighs donkey flesh, and bones, and sinews and places /b it b into /b the barrel b until it fills, /b and the water level reaches the top of the barrel. He then donates the weight of the meat and the bones to the Temple treasury. b Rabbi Yosei said: /b Displacement is according to volume not according to weight, b and how then is it possible to match /b the amount of the donkey b flesh with the flesh /b of a person b and /b the volume of the donkey’s b bones with /b his b bones? Rather, /b the court b appraises how much the forearm is likely to weigh. /b , strong GEMARA: /strong b What /b is the meaning of the mishna’s statement: b If silver, silver, /b and b if gold, gold? Rav Yehuda said: /b If b one specified /b that he vows to donate his weight in b silver /b he donates b silver, /b and if b he specified gold /b he donates b gold. /b The Gemara asks: Isn’t that b obvious? /b The Gemara answers: b This /b is what the mishna b is teaching us: The reason /b he donates silver or gold is b that he specified /b silver or gold, from which it may be inferred that if b he did not specify /b the means of payment, he may b exempt himself with any /b material.,The Gemara adds: And this is b in accordance with /b a statement of b Raḥava, as Raḥava says: In a place where /b merchants b weigh pitch /b when selling it, one who vows his weight b may exempt himself /b by donating his weight b even in pitch. /b The Gemara asks: Isn’t that b obvious? /b The Gemara answers: b No, /b the statement of Raḥava is b necessary /b in a place b where there are /b merchants b who weigh /b pitch b and there are /b others who b measure /b its volume. b Lest you say: Since not all /b merchants b weigh /b pitch one may b not /b fulfill his vow by donating his weight in pitch, Raḥava b teaches us /b that as there are merchants there who sell pitch by weight, one can fulfill his vow in that manner., b Rav Pappa says: In a place where /b merchants b weigh onions /b when selling them, one who vowed his weight b may exempt himself /b by donating his weight b even in onions. /b The Gemara again asks: Isn’t that b obvious? /b The Gemara answers: b No, /b the statement of Rav Pappa is b necessary /b in a place b where after they weigh /b the onions the merchants b throw /b in b two /b or b three /b extra onions to the buyer. b Lest you say /b that its b status /b as a place where onions are sold by b weight /b is b void /b due to the additional onions, Rav Pappa b teaches us /b that it is still considered a place where onions are sold by weight.,§ The mishna teaches: There was b an incident involving the mother of Yirmatya, /b who said: It is incumbent upon me to donate the weight of my daughter, without specifying silver or gold, and she ascended to Jerusalem and paid her daughter’s weight in gold to the Temple treasury. The Gemara asks: Was b an incident /b cited b to contradict /b the previous ruling of the mishna? The mishna had stated: If silver, silver, and if gold, gold, which indicates that if one did not specify the means of payment he may exempt himself with any material that merchants sell by weight, whereas it can be inferred from the incident that one must pay the weight in gold.,The Gemara answers: The mishna b is incomplete and this /b is what b it is teaching: And if /b the one who vowed b is a distinguished person, even though he did not specify /b silver or gold b we say /b he must fulfill his vow b in keeping with his /b socioeconomic b status. And /b likewise, there was b an incident involving the mother of Yirmatya, /b a very wealthy woman, b who said: /b It is incumbent b upon me /b to donate b the weight of my daughter, and she ascended to Jerusalem and gave her /b daughter’s b weight /b in b gold /b to the Temple treasury.,§ b Rav Yehuda says /b that b one who says: /b It is incumbent b upon me /b to donate b my height, gives /b a thick b rod that cannot be bent /b equivalent to his height. One who says: It is incumbent b upon me /b to donate b my full height, /b may b give /b even a thin b rod that /b can be b bent, /b provided it is equivalent to his height. The Gemara b raises an objection /b from a i baraita /i ( i Tosefta /i 3:1): With regard to one who says: It is incumbent b upon me /b to donate b my height, /b or: It is incumbent b upon me /b to donate b my full height, he gives /b a thick b rod that cannot be bent /b and that is equivalent to his height.,The Gemara answers: Rav Yehuda b says /b his statement b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Akiva, who /b holds that one can b draw an inference /b from b superfluous language. As we learned /b in a mishna ( i Bava Batra /i 64a): If one sold his house without specification, he has sold b neither the pit nor the cistern [ i dut /i ] /b with it, b even if he wrote /b in the document of sale: With b its depth and its height. /b This is because anything that is ancillary to the house, e.g., pits and cisterns, must be mentioned explicitly in the contract. b And /b the seller b must purchase for himself a path /b through to the pit or cistern that he kept back, as he sold his rights to the area surrounding the house along with the house, and therefore he may no longer walk through that area. This is b the statement of Rabbi Akiva. /b , b And the Rabbis say: He need not /b purchase a path, as the seller clearly did not intend to keep the pit or cistern without maintaining access to it. b And Rabbi Akiva concedes /b that b when /b the seller b states to /b the buyer in the document of sale: b Excluding these, /b the pit and the cistern, b that he need not purchase for himself a path /b through to the pit or cistern. b Evidently, /b Rabbi Akiva’s reasoning is that b since /b the seller b need not /b specify that the pit and cistern are excluded from the sale, b and /b yet b he says /b that they were excluded, b he is coming /b with this statement b to add an element /b to the agreement, i.e., the right of access. b Here too, /b when one says: It is incumbent upon me to donate my full height, b since /b it is a case where b he need not /b add the word full, b and /b yet b he says /b it, b he is coming to add an element /b to his vow, i.e., the ability to exempt himself with a thin rod., b A dilemma was raised before /b the Sages. If one says: It is incumbent upon me to donate b my stature, what is /b the i halakha /i ? |
|
| 114. Babylonian Talmud, B. Pesahim, None Tagged with subjects: •hebrew language, biblical Found in books: Zawanowska and Wilk (2022), The Character of David in Judaism, Christianity and Islam: Warrior, Poet, Prophet and King, 136 |
| 115. Anon., Tanhuma, None Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 65 |
| 116. Anon., Tanchuma (Buber), None Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 52 |
117. Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah, None Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66| 16b. ואליבא דרבי יהודה רב אשי אמר סתם ארי שבור הוא אצל מלאכה,מיתיבי כשם שאין מוכרין להן בהמה גסה כך אין מוכרין להן חיה גסה ואפילו במקום שמוכרין להן בהמה דקה חיה גסה אין מוכרין להן תיובתא דרב חנן בר רבא תיובתא,רבינא רמי מתניתין אברייתא ומשני תנן אין מוכרין להן דובין ואריות ולא כל דבר שיש בו נזק לרבים טעמא דאית ביה נזק הא לית ביה נזק מוכרין,ורמינהי כשם שאין מוכרין בהמה גסה כך אין מוכרין חיה גסה ואפילו במקום שמוכרין בהמה דקה חיה גסה אין מוכרין ומשני בארי שבור ואליבא דר' יהודה רב אשי אמר סתם ארי שבור הוא אצל מלאכה,מתקיף לה רב נחמן מאן לימא לן דארי חיה גסה היא דלמא חיה דקה היא,רב אשי דייק מתניתין ומותיב תיובתא תנן אין מוכרין להן דובים ואריות ולא כל דבר שיש בו נזק לרבים טעמא דאית ביה נזק הא לית ביה נזק מוכרין,וטעמא ארי דסתם ארי שבור הוא אצל מלאכה אבל מידי אחרינא דעביד מלאכה לא תיובתא דרב חנן בר רבא תיובתא,וחיה גסה מיהת מאי מלאכה עבדא אמר אביי אמר לי מר יהודה דבי מר יוחני טחני ריחים בערודי,א"ר זירא כי הוינן בי רב יהודה אמר לן גמירו מינאי הא מילתא דמגברא רבה שמיע לי ולא ידענא אי מרב אי משמואל חיה גסה הרי היא כבהמה דקה לפירכוס,כי אתאי לקורקוניא אשכחתיה לרב חייא בר אשי ויתיב וקאמר משמיה דשמואל חיה גסה הרי היא כבהמה דקה לפירכוס אמינא ש"מ משמיה דשמואל איתמר כי אתאי לסורא אשכחתיה לרבה בר ירמיה דיתיב וקא"ל משמיה דרב חיה גסה הרי היא כבהמה דקה לפירכוס אמינא ש"מ איתמר משמיה דרב ואיתמר משמיה דשמואל,כי סליקת להתם אשכחתיה לרב אסי דיתיב וקאמר אמר רב חמא בר גוריא משמיה דרב חיה גסה הרי היא כבהמה דקה לפירכוס אמרי ליה ולא סבר לה מר דמאן מרא דשמעתתא רבה בר ירמיה א"ל פתיא אוכמא מינאי ומינך תסתיים שמעתא,איתמר נמי א"ר זירא אמר רב אסי אמר רבה בר ירמיה אמר רב חמא בר גוריא אמר רב חיה גסה הרי היא כבהמה דקה לפירכוס:,אין בונין כו': אמר רבה בר בר חנה א"ר יוחנן ג' בסילקאות הן של מלכי עובדי כוכבים ושל מרחצאות ושל אוצרות אמר רבא ב' להיתר ואחד לאיסור וסימן (תהלים קמט, ח) לאסור מלכיהם בזיקים,ואיכא דאמרי אמר רבא כולם להיתר והתנן אין בונין עמהן בסילקי גרדום איצטדייא ובימה אימא של גרדום ושל איצטדייא ושל בימה,ת"ר כשנתפס ר"א למינות העלהו לגרדום לידון אמר לו אותו הגמון זקן שכמותך יעסוק בדברים בטלים הללו,אמר לו נאמן עלי הדיין כסבור אותו הגמון עליו הוא אומר והוא לא אמר אלא כנגד אביו שבשמים אמר לו הואיל והאמנתי עליך דימוס פטור אתה,כשבא לביתו נכנסו תלמידיו אצלו לנחמו ולא קיבל עליו תנחומין אמר לו ר"ע רבי תרשיני לומר דבר אחד ממה שלימדתני אמר לו אמור אמר לו רבי שמא מינות בא לידך | 16b. b and /b this is b in accordance with /b the opinion b of Rabbi Yehuda /b in the mishna on 14b, that it is permitted to sell to a gentile large livestock that are damaged. Yet, it is prohibited to sell large undamaged beasts, just as one may not sell large undamaged livestock. b Rav Ashi says: /b It is not necessary to explain that the mishna is referring to such a specific case. Rather, b an ordinary lion is /b considered b damaged with regard to labor, /b as lions are not generally used to perform labor. Therefore there is no concern that a lion will be used to perform prohibited labor on Shabbat.,The Gemara b raises an objection /b from a i baraita /i : b Just as one may not sell large livestock to /b gentiles, b so too one may not sell large beasts to them. And even in a place where /b the people were accustomed to b sell small livestock to /b gentiles; nevertheless, b one may not sell large beasts to /b them. The Gemara concludes: b The refutation of /b the opinion of b Rav Ḥa bar Rava /b is b a conclusive refutation. /b ,The Gemara presents a different version of this discussion. b Ravina raises a contradiction between the mishna /b here b and a i baraita /i and resolves /b the contradiction. b We learned /b in the mishna: b One may not sell bears, or lions, or any item that can cause injury to the public, to /b gentiles. Ravina analyzes the mishna: b The reason /b a beast such as a lion cannot be sold to gentiles is b that it can cause injury to the public, /b from which it may be inferred that with regard to another beast, which b does not cause injury to the public, one may sell /b it to gentiles., b And /b Ravina b raises a contradiction /b from a i baraita /i : b Just as one may not sell large livestock /b to gentiles, b so too, one may not sell large beasts /b to them. b And even in a place where /b the people were accustomed to b sell small livestock /b to gentiles, b one may not sell large beasts /b to them. The i baraita /i indicates that one may never sell large beasts to gentiles, even if it poses no danger to the public. b And /b Ravina b resolves /b the contradiction between the mishna and the i baraita /i : The ruling of the mishna is stated b with regard to a damaged lion, in accordance with /b the opinion b of Rabbi Yehuda. Rav Ashi says /b there is a different explanation: b An ordinary lion is /b considered b damaged with regard to labor. /b , b Rav Naḥman objects to /b the inference drawn from the mishna: b Who will tell us that a lion is /b considered b a large beast? Perhaps it is /b considered b a small beast, /b in which case it cannot be inferred that the mishna permits the sale of large beasts.,The Gemara explains: b Rav Ashi examined the mishna /b here carefully, b and /b from it he b raises a refutation /b of the opinion of Rav Ḥa bar Rava, who permitted the sale of large beasts. b We learned /b in the mishna: b One may not sell bears, or lions, or any item that can cause injury to the public, to /b gentiles. Rav Ashi inferred two conclusions from here. First, b the reason /b a beast such as a lion cannot be sold to gentiles is b because it can cause injury to the public, /b whereas with regard to a beast that b does not cause injury to the public, one may sell /b it to gentiles. This inference was cited in contradiction of the opinion of Rav, as explained before., b And /b Rav Ashi then inferred, in resolution of Rav’s opinion, that b the reason /b the mishna specifies that one may sell b a lion /b if it does not pose a danger to the public is b that an ordinary lion is /b considered b damaged with regard to labor. But a different /b animal b that performs labor /b may b not /b be sold. This presents a difficulty to the opinion of Rav Ḥa bar Rava. The Gemara concludes: b The refutation of /b the opinion of b Rav Ḥa bar Rava /b is b a conclusive refutation. /b ,The Gemara asks: b But in any event, what labor can a large beast perform? /b Why is it necessary to prohibit the sale of large beasts if they are not trained to perform any labor? b Abaye said: Mar Yehuda said to me /b that b in the house of Mar Yoḥani, they grind the mill with wild asses, /b which are considered large beasts.,§ b Rabbi Zeira said: When we were in the /b study b hall of Rav Yehuda, he said to us: Learn from me this matter, which I heard from a great man, but I do not know if /b I heard it b from Rav or from Shmuel: /b The status of b a large beast is like /b that of b small livestock with regard to a spasm, /b i.e., the symptoms of vitality required at the time of slaughtering.,Rabbi Zeira continued: b When I came to /b the city of b Korkoneya, I found Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi sitting and saying in the name of Shmuel: /b The status of b a large beast is like /b that of b small livestock with regard to a spasm. I said /b to myself: One can b conclude from /b here that this b was stated in the name of Shmuel. When I came to Sura, I found Rabba bar Yirmeya sitting and saying in the name of Rav: /b The status of b a large beast is like /b that of b small livestock with regard to a spasm. I said /b to myself: One can b conclude from /b here that this b was stated in the name of Rav, and /b it b was /b also b stated in the name of Shmuel. /b , b When I ascended to there, /b Eretz Yisrael, b I found Rav Asi sitting and saying /b that b Rav Ḥama bar Gurya says in the name of Rav: /b The status of b a large beast is like /b that of b small livestock with regard to a spasm. I said to him: And doesn’t the Master hold that the Master /b who is responsible for dissemination b of /b this b i halakha /i /b is b Rabba bar Yirmeya? /b Why don’t you attribute the statement to him? Rav Asi b said to me: Black pot [ i patya /i ], /b a term of endearment for a scholar who works hard studying Torah: b From me and from you /b this b i halakha /i may be concluded. /b In other words, our two statements should be combined to form one accurate attribution of the i halakha /i .,The Gemara notes that in fact this ruling b was also stated: Rabbi Zeira says /b that b Rav Asi says /b that b Rabba bar Yirmeya says /b that b Rav Ḥama bar Gurya says /b that b Rav says: /b The status of b a large beast is like /b that of b small livestock with regard to a spasm. /b ,§ The mishna teaches that b one may not build /b a basilica in conjunction with gentiles. b Rabba bar bar Ḥana says /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa says: There are three /b types of b basilicas: /b Those b of kings, and /b those b of bathhouses, and /b those b of storehouses. Rava says: Two /b of these types b are permitted, /b as they are not used for inflicting the death penalty, b and one is prohibited [ i le’isor /i ]. And a mnemonic /b device for this ruling, that the basilica of kings is prohibited, is the verse: b “To bind [ i le’esor /i ] their kings with chains” /b (Psalms 149:8)., b And there are /b those b who say /b that this is what b Rava says: All /b these types of basilica are b permitted. /b The Gemara asks: How can it be permitted to build any type of basilica; b but didn’t we learn /b in the mishna: b One may not build with them a basilica, a tribunal, a stadium, or a platform? /b The Gemara answers: b Say /b that the mishna means the following: One may not build in conjunction with gentiles a basilica b of a tribunal, or of a stadium, or of a platform. /b But it is permitted to build a basilica that is not used for sentencing and inflicting the death penalty.,§ Apropos the above discussion, the Gemara relates incidents involving Sages who were sentenced by the ruling authorities. b The Sages taught: When Rabbi Eliezer was arrested /b and charged b with heresy /b by the authorities, b they brought him up to a tribunal to be judged. A certain /b judicial b officer [ i hegemon /i ] said to him: /b Why b should an elder like you engage in these frivolous matters /b of heresy?,Rabbi Eliezer b said to him: The Judge is trusted by me /b to rule correctly. b That officer thought /b that Rabbi Eliezer b was speaking about him; but /b in fact b he said /b this b only in reference to his Father in Heaven. /b Rabbi Eliezer meant that he accepted God’s judgment, i.e., if he was charged he must have sinned to God in some manner. The officer b said to him: Since you /b put b your trust in me, /b you are b acquitted [ i dimos /i ]; you are exempt. /b , b When /b Rabbi Eliezer b came home, his students entered to console him /b for being accused of heresy, which he took as a sign of sin, b and he did not accept /b their words of b consolation. Rabbi Akiva said to him: My teacher, allow me to say one matter from /b all of b that which you taught me. /b Rabbi Eliezer b said to him: Speak. /b Rabbi Akiva b said to him: My teacher, perhaps /b some statement of b heresy came before you /b |
|
| 118. Anon., Midrash On Song of Songs, 7.9 Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 71 |
| 119. Anon., Sifre Zuta, None Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 103 |
| 120. Dead Sea Scrolls, Isaiah A, 54.13 Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 186 |
| 121. Psalms of Solomon, 2 Enoch, 2.37, 3.16 Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, biblical Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66 |
| 122. Anon., Num., None Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 207 |
| 123. Anon., Midrash Genesis Rabbah, 1.4 Tagged with subjects: •hebrew language, biblical Found in books: Zawanowska and Wilk (2022), The Character of David in Judaism, Christianity and Islam: Warrior, Poet, Prophet and King, 136 |
