| 1. Septuagint, Deuteronomy, None (th cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 107 |
2. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 1.26, 1.43, 4.31, 6.5, 9.23, 10.16, 17.2, 19.15, 19.17, 21.14, 22.1-22.3, 22.14, 22.20, 24.15, 26.13, 32.43 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 24, 26, 135, 137, 138; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 53, 67, 99, 107, 109, 124, 176| 1.26. "וְלֹא אֲבִיתֶם לַעֲלֹת וַתַּמְרוּ אֶת־פִּי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם׃", 1.43. "וָאֲדַבֵּר אֲלֵיכֶם וְלֹא שְׁמַעְתֶּם וַתַּמְרוּ אֶת־פִּי יְהוָה וַתָּזִדוּ וַתַּעֲלוּ הָהָרָה׃", 4.31. "כִּי אֵל רַחוּם יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לֹא יַרְפְּךָ וְלֹא יַשְׁחִיתֶךָ וְלֹא יִשְׁכַּח אֶת־בְּרִית אֲבֹתֶיךָ אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע לָהֶם׃", 6.5. "וְאָהַבְתָּ אֵת יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכָל־לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל־נַפְשְׁךָ וּבְכָל־מְאֹדֶךָ׃", 9.23. "וּבִשְׁלֹחַ יְהוָה אֶתְכֶם מִקָּדֵשׁ בַּרְנֵעַ לֵאמֹר עֲלוּ וּרְשׁוּ אֶת־הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר נָתַתִּי לָכֶם וַתַּמְרוּ אֶת־פִּי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם וְלֹא הֶאֱמַנְתֶּם לוֹ וְלֹא שְׁמַעְתֶּם בְּקֹלוֹ׃", 10.16. "וּמַלְתֶּם אֵת עָרְלַת לְבַבְכֶם וְעָרְפְּכֶם לֹא תַקְשׁוּ עוֹד׃", 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׃", 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׃", 19.17. "וְעָמְדוּ שְׁנֵי־הָאֲנָשִׁים אֲשֶׁר־לָהֶם הָרִיב לִפְנֵי יְהוָה לִפְנֵי הַכֹּהֲנִים וְהַשֹּׁפְטִים אֲשֶׁר יִהְיוּ בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם׃", 21.14. "וְהָיָה אִם־לֹא חָפַצְתָּ בָּהּ וְשִׁלַּחְתָּהּ לְנַפְשָׁהּ וּמָכֹר לֹא־תִמְכְּרֶנָּה בַּכָּסֶף לֹא־תִתְעַמֵּר בָּהּ תַּחַת אֲשֶׁר עִנִּיתָהּ׃", 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׃", 22.14. "וְשָׂם לָהּ עֲלִילֹת דְּבָרִים וְהוֹצִיא עָלֶיהָ שֵׁם רָע וְאָמַר אֶת־הָאִשָּׁה הַזֹּאת לָקַחְתִּי וָאֶקְרַב אֵלֶיהָ וְלֹא־מָצָאתִי לָהּ בְּתוּלִים׃", 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׃", 32.43. "הַרְנִינוּ גוֹיִם עַמּוֹ כִּי דַם־עֲבָדָיו יִקּוֹם וְנָקָם יָשִׁיב לְצָרָיו וְכִפֶּר אַדְמָתוֹ עַמּוֹ׃", | 1.26. "Yet ye would not go up, but rebelled against the commandment of the LORD your God;", 1.43. "So I spoke unto you, and ye hearkened not; but ye rebelled against the commandment of the LORD, and were presumptuous, and went up into the hill-country.", 4.31. "for the LORD thy God is a merciful God; He will not fail thee, neither destroy thee, nor forget the covet of thy fathers which He swore unto them.", 6.5. "And thou shalt love the LORD thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might.", 9.23. "And when the LORD sent you from Kadesh-barnea, saying: ‘Go up and possess the land which I have given you’; then ye rebelled against the commandment of the LORD your God, and ye believed Him not, nor hearkened to His voice.", 10.16. "Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart, and be no more stiffnecked.", 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,", 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", 19.17. "then both the men, between whom the controversy is, shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges that shall be in those days.", 21.14. "And it shall be, if thou have no delight in her, then thou shalt let her go whither she will; but thou shalt not sell her at all for money, thou shalt not deal with her as a slave, because thou hast humbled her.", 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.", 22.14. "and lay wanton charges against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say: ‘I took this woman, and when I came nigh to her, I found not in her the tokens of virginity’;", 22.20. "But if this thing be true, that the tokens of virginity were not found in the damsel;", 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.", 32.43. "Sing aloud, O ye nations, of His people; For He doth avenge the blood of His servants, And doth render vengeance to His adversaries, And doth make expiation for the land of His people.", |
|
3. Hebrew Bible, Numbers, 1.2-1.3, 5.6-5.8, 8.14, 12.1, 18.8, 18.19, 18.1157, 30.15 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 67, 68, 107, 124, 176, 189| 1.2. "וַיִּהְיוּ בְנֵי־רְאוּבֵן בְּכֹר יִשְׂרָאֵל תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמוֹת לְגֻלְגְּלֹתָם כָּל־זָכָר מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא׃", 1.2. "שְׂאוּ אֶת־רֹאשׁ כָּל־עֲדַת בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמוֹת כָּל־זָכָר לְגֻלְגְּלֹתָם׃", 1.3. "מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כָּל־יֹצֵא צָבָא בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל תִּפְקְדוּ אֹתָם לְצִבְאֹתָם אַתָּה וְאַהֲרֹן׃", 1.3. "לִבְנֵי זְבוּלֻן תּוֹלְדֹתָם לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָם לְבֵית אֲבֹתָם בְּמִסְפַּר שֵׁמֹת מִבֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה וָמַעְלָה כֹּל יֹצֵא צָבָא׃", 5.6. "דַּבֵּר אֶל־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אִישׁ אוֹ־אִשָּׁה כִּי יַעֲשׂוּ מִכָּל־חַטֹּאת הָאָדָם לִמְעֹל מַעַל בַּיהוָה וְאָשְׁמָה הַנֶּפֶשׁ הַהִוא׃", 5.7. "וְהִתְוַדּוּ אֶת־חַטָּאתָם אֲשֶׁר עָשׂוּ וְהֵשִׁיב אֶת־אֲשָׁמוֹ בְּרֹאשׁוֹ וַחֲמִישִׁתוֹ יֹסֵף עָלָיו וְנָתַן לַאֲשֶׁר אָשַׁם לוֹ׃", 5.8. "וְאִם־אֵין לָאִישׁ גֹּאֵל לְהָשִׁיב הָאָשָׁם אֵלָיו הָאָשָׁם הַמּוּשָׁב לַיהוָה לַכֹּהֵן מִלְּבַד אֵיל הַכִּפֻּרִים אֲשֶׁר יְכַפֶּר־בּוֹ עָלָיו׃", 8.14. "וְהִבְדַּלְתָּ אֶת־הַלְוִיִּם מִתּוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְהָיוּ לִי הַלְוִיִּם׃", 12.1. "וְהֶעָנָן סָר מֵעַל הָאֹהֶל וְהִנֵּה מִרְיָם מְצֹרַעַת כַּשָּׁלֶג וַיִּפֶן אַהֲרֹן אֶל־מִרְיָם וְהִנֵּה מְצֹרָעַת׃", 12.1. "וַתְּדַבֵּר מִרְיָם וְאַהֲרֹן בְּמֹשֶׁה עַל־אֹדוֹת הָאִשָּׁה הַכֻּשִׁית אֲשֶׁר לָקָח כִּי־אִשָּׁה כֻשִׁית לָקָח׃", 18.8. "וַיְדַבֵּר יְהוָה אֶל־אַהֲרֹן וַאֲנִי הִנֵּה נָתַתִּי לְךָ אֶת־מִשְׁמֶרֶת תְּרוּמֹתָי לְכָל־קָדְשֵׁי בְנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל לְךָ נְתַתִּים לְמָשְׁחָה וּלְבָנֶיךָ לְחָק־עוֹלָם׃", 18.19. "כֹּל תְּרוּמֹת הַקֳּדָשִׁים אֲשֶׁר יָרִימוּ בְנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל לַיהוָה נָתַתִּי לְךָ וּלְבָנֶיךָ וְלִבְנֹתֶיךָ אִתְּךָ לְחָק־עוֹלָם בְּרִית מֶלַח עוֹלָם הִוא לִפְנֵי יְהוָה לְךָ וּלְזַרְעֲךָ אִתָּךְ׃", 30.15. "וְאִם־הַחֲרֵשׁ יַחֲרִישׁ לָהּ אִישָׁהּ מִיּוֹם אֶל־יוֹם וְהֵקִים אֶת־כָּל־נְדָרֶיהָ אוֹ אֶת־כָּל־אֱסָרֶיהָ אֲשֶׁר עָלֶיהָ הֵקִים אֹתָם כִּי־הֶחֱרִשׁ לָהּ בְּיוֹם שָׁמְעוֹ׃", | 1.2. "’Take ye the sum of all the congregation of the children of Israel, by their families, by their fathers’houses, according to the number of names, every male, by their polls;", 1.3. "from twenty years old and upward, all that are able to go forth to war in Israel: ye shall number them by their hosts, even thou and Aaron.", 5.6. "Speak unto the children of Israel: When a man or woman shall commit any sin that men commit, to commit a trespass against the LORD, and that soul be guilty;", 5.7. "then they shall confess their sin which they have done; and he shall make restitution for his guilt in full, and add unto it the fifth part thereof, and give it unto him in respect of whom he hath been guilty.", 5.8. "But if the man have no kinsman to whom restitution may be made for the guilt, the restitution for guilt which is made shall be the LORD’S, even the priest’s; besides the ram of the atonement, whereby atonement shall be made for him.", 8.14. "Thus shalt thou separate the Levites from among the children of Israel; and the Levites shall be Mine.", 12.1. "And Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses because of the Cushite woman whom he had married; for he had married a Cushite woman.", 18.8. "And the LORD spoke unto Aaron: ‘And I, behold, I have given thee the charge of My heave-offerings; even of all the hallowed things of the children of Israel unto thee have I given them for a consecrated portion, and to thy sons, as a due for ever.", 18.19. "All the heave-offerings of the holy things, which the children of Israel offer unto the LORD, have I given thee, and thy sons and thy daughters with thee, as a due for ever; it is an everlasting covet of salt before the LORD unto thee and to thy seed with thee.’", 30.15. "But if her husband altogether hold his peace at her from day to day, then he causeth all her vows to stand, or all her bonds, which are upon her; he hath let them stand, because he held his peace at her in the day that he heard them.", |
|
4. Hebrew Bible, Proverbs, 1.14, 9.2, 11.13, 12.16, 15.12, 20.19 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 99, 107, 186, 189, 203| 1.14. "גּוֹרָלְךָ תַּפִּיל בְּתוֹכֵנוּ כִּיס אֶחָד יִהְיֶה לְכֻלָּנוּ׃", 9.2. "טָבְחָה טִבְחָהּ מָסְכָה יֵינָהּ אַף עָרְכָה שֻׁלְחָנָהּ׃", 11.13. "הוֹלֵךְ רָכִיל מְגַלֶּה־סּוֹד וְנֶאֱמַן־רוּחַ מְכַסֶּה דָבָר׃", 12.16. "אֱוִיל בַּיּוֹם יִוָּדַע כַּעְסוֹ וְכֹסֶה קָלוֹן עָרוּם׃", 15.12. "לֹא יֶאֱהַב־לֵץ הוֹכֵחַ לוֹ אֶל־חֲכָמִים לֹא יֵלֵךְ׃", 20.19. "גּוֹלֶה־סּוֹד הוֹלֵךְ רָכִיל וּלְפֹתֶה שְׂפָתָיו לֹא תִתְעָרָב׃", | 1.14. "Cast in thy lot among us; Let us all have one purse’—", 9.2. "She hath prepared her meat, she hath mingled her wine; she hath also furnished her table.", 11.13. "He that goeth about as a talebearer revealeth secrets; But he that is of a faithful spirit concealeth a matter.", 12.16. "A fool’s vexation is presently known; But a prudent man concealeth shame.", 15.12. "A scorner loveth not to be reproved; He will not go unto the wise.", 20.19. "He that goeth about as a talebearer revealeth secrets; therefore meddle not with him that openeth wide his lips.", |
|
5. Hebrew Bible, Psalms, 19.10, 44.18, 74.8, 89.34, 89.38, 119.176 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66, 124, 176| 44.18. "כָּל־זֹאת בָּאַתְנוּ וְלֹא שְׁכַחֲנוּךָ וְלֹא־שִׁקַּרְנוּ בִּבְרִיתֶךָ׃", 74.8. "אָמְרוּ בְלִבָּם נִינָם יָחַד שָׂרְפוּ כָל־מוֹעֲדֵי־אֵל בָּאָרֶץ׃", 89.34. "וְחַסְדִּי לֹא־אָפִיר מֵעִמּוֹ וְלֹא־אֲשַׁקֵּר בֶּאֱמוּנָתִי׃", 89.38. "כְּיָרֵחַ יִכּוֹן עוֹלָם וְעֵד בַּשַּׁחַק נֶאֱמָן סֶלָה׃", 119.176. "תָּעִיתִי כְּשֶׂה אֹבֵד בַּקֵּשׁ עַבְדֶּךָ כִּי מִצְוֺתֶיךָ לֹא שָׁכָחְתִּי׃", | 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.", 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.", 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", 119.176. "I have gone astray like a lost sheep; seek Thy servant; For I have not forgotten Thy commandments.", |
|
6. Hebrew Bible, Jonah, 1.7 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic 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.", |
|
7. Hebrew Bible, Job, 6.25, 15.15, 16.18, 20.23, 25.5, 40.14 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 141; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 50, 67, 99, 124| 6.25. "מַה־נִּמְרְצוּ אִמְרֵי־יֹשֶׁר וּמַה־יּוֹכִיחַ הוֹכֵחַ מִכֶּם׃", 15.15. "הֵן בקדשו [בִּקְדֹשָׁיו] לֹא יַאֲמִין וְשָׁמַיִם לֹא־זַכּוּ בְעֵינָיו׃", 16.18. "אֶרֶץ אַל־תְּכַסִּי דָמִי וְאַל־יְהִי מָקוֹם לְזַעֲקָתִי׃", 20.23. "יְהִי לְמַלֵּא בִטְנוֹ יְשַׁלַּח־בּוֹ חֲרוֹן אַפּוֹ וְיַמְטֵר עָלֵימוֹ בִּלְחוּמוֹ׃", 25.5. "הֵן עַד־יָרֵחַ וְלֹא יַאֲהִיל וְכוֹכָבִים לֹא־זַכּוּ בְעֵינָיו׃", 40.14. "וְגַם־אֲנִי אוֹדֶךָּ כִּי־תוֹשִׁעַ לְךָ יְמִינֶךָ׃", | 6.25. "How forcible are words of uprightness! But what doth your arguing argue?", 15.15. "Behold, He putteth no trust in His holy ones; Yea, the heavens are not clean in His sight.", 16.18. "O earth, cover not thou my blood, And let my cry have no resting-place.", 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;", 40.14. "Then will I also confess unto thee That thine own right hand can save thee.", |
|
8. Hebrew Bible, Micah, 2.2 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 17, 18, 19| 2.2. "וְחָמְדוּ שָׂדוֹת וְגָזָלוּ וּבָתִּים וְנָשָׂאוּ וְעָשְׁקוּ גֶּבֶר וּבֵיתוֹ וְאִישׁ וְנַחֲלָתוֹ׃", | 2.2. "And they covet fields, and seize them; And houses, and take them away; Thus they oppress a man and his house, Even a man and his heritage.", |
|
9. Hebrew Bible, Leviticus, 5.1, 5.4, 6.11, 6.15, 7.34, 10.15, 13.1-14.32, 14.7, 17.13, 19.16, 19.17, 19.18, 24.9, 25.52 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 176| 5.4. "אוֹ נֶפֶשׁ כִּי תִשָּׁבַע לְבַטֵּא בִשְׂפָתַיִם לְהָרַע אוֹ לְהֵיטִיב לְכֹל אֲשֶׁר יְבַטֵּא הָאָדָם בִּשְׁבֻעָה וְנֶעְלַם מִמֶּנּוּ וְהוּא־יָדַע וְאָשֵׁם לְאַחַת מֵאֵלֶּה׃", | 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;", |
|
10. Hebrew Bible, Exodus, 5.11, 9.4, 12.24, 18.21-18.22, 21.29, 27.20, 29.28, 30.14 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 23; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66, 67, 68, 99| 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׃", 12.24. "וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם אֶת־הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה לְחָק־לְךָ וּלְבָנֶיךָ עַד־עוֹלָם׃", 18.21. "וְאַתָּה תֶחֱזֶה מִכָּל־הָעָם אַנְשֵׁי־חַיִל יִרְאֵי אֱלֹהִים אַנְשֵׁי אֱמֶת שֹׂנְאֵי בָצַע וְשַׂמְתָּ עֲלֵהֶם שָׂרֵי אֲלָפִים שָׂרֵי מֵאוֹת שָׂרֵי חֲמִשִּׁים וְשָׂרֵי עֲשָׂרֹת׃", 18.22. "וְשָׁפְטוּ אֶת־הָעָם בְּכָל־עֵת וְהָיָה כָּל־הַדָּבָר הַגָּדֹל יָבִיאוּ אֵלֶיךָ וְכָל־הַדָּבָר הַקָּטֹן יִשְׁפְּטוּ־הֵם וְהָקֵל מֵעָלֶיךָ וְנָשְׂאוּ אִתָּךְ׃", 21.29. "וְאִם שׁוֹר נַגָּח הוּא מִתְּמֹל שִׁלְשֹׁם וְהוּעַד בִּבְעָלָיו וְלֹא יִשְׁמְרֶנּוּ וְהֵמִית אִישׁ אוֹ אִשָּׁה הַשּׁוֹר יִסָּקֵל וְגַם־בְּעָלָיו יוּמָת׃", 29.28. "וְהָיָה לְאַהֲרֹן וּלְבָנָיו לְחָק־עוֹלָם מֵאֵת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כִּי תְרוּמָה הוּא וּתְרוּמָה יִהְיֶה מֵאֵת בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל מִזִּבְחֵי שַׁלְמֵיהֶם תְּרוּמָתָם לַיהוָה׃", 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.’", 12.24. "And ye shall observe this thing for an ordice to thee and to thy sons for ever.", 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.", 18.22. "And let them judge the people at all seasons; and it shall be, that every great matter they shall bring unto thee, but every small matter they shall judge themselves; so shall they make it easier for thee and bear the burden with thee.", 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.", 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.", 29.28. "And it shall be for Aaron and his sons as a due for ever from the children of Israel; for it is a heave-offering; and it shall be a heave-offering from the children of Israel of their sacrifices of peace-offerings, even their heave-offering unto the LORD.", 30.14. "Every one that passeth among them that are numbered, from twenty years old and upward, shall give the offering of the LORD.", |
|
11. Hebrew Bible, Esther, 1.15, 2.20, 3.3-3.4, 6.10, 9.32 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 50, 67| 1.15. "כְּדָת מַה־לַּעֲשׂוֹת בַּמַּלְכָּה וַשְׁתִּי עַל אֲשֶׁר לֹא־עָשְׂתָה אֶת־מַאֲמַר הַמֶּלֶךְ אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ בְּיַד הַסָּרִיסִים׃", 3.3. "וַיֹּאמְרוּ עַבְדֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ אֲשֶׁר־בְּשַׁעַר הַמֶּלֶךְ לְמָרְדֳּכָי מַדּוּעַ אַתָּה עוֹבֵר אֵת מִצְוַת הַמֶּלֶךְ׃", 3.4. "וַיְהִי באמרם [כְּאָמְרָם] אֵלָיו יוֹם וָיוֹם וְלֹא שָׁמַע אֲלֵיהֶם וַיַּגִּידוּ לְהָמָן לִרְאוֹת הֲיַעַמְדוּ דִּבְרֵי מָרְדֳּכַי כִּי־הִגִּיד לָהֶם אֲשֶׁר־הוּא יְהוּדִי׃", 9.32. "וּמַאֲמַר אֶסְתֵּר קִיַּם דִּבְרֵי הַפֻּרִים הָאֵלֶּה וְנִכְתָּב בַּסֵּפֶר׃", | 1.15. "’What shall we do unto the queen Vashti according to law, forasmuch as she hath not done the bidding of the king Ahasuerus by the chamberlains?’", 2.20. "Esther had not yet made known her kindred nor her people; as Mordecai had charged her; for Esther did the commandment of Mordecai, like as when she was brought up with him—", 3.3. "Then the king’s servants, that were in the king’s gate, said unto Mordecai: ‘Why transgressest thou the king’s commandment?’", 3.4. "Now it came to pass, when they spoke daily unto him, and he hearkened not unto them, that they told Haman, to see whether Mordecai’s words would stand; for he had told them that he was a Jew.", 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.’", 9.32. "And the commandment of Esther confirmed these matters of Purim; and it was written in the book.", |
|
12. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 21.23, 42.20 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66, 176| 21.23. "וְעַתָּה הִשָּׁבְעָה לִּי בֵאלֹהִים הֵנָּה אִם־תִּשְׁקֹר לִי וּלְנִינִי וּלְנֶכְדִּי כַּחֶסֶד אֲשֶׁר־עָשִׂיתִי עִמְּךָ תַּעֲשֶׂה עִמָּדִי וְעִם־הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר־גַּרְתָּה בָּהּ׃", | 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.’", 42.20. "and bring your youngest brother unto me; so shall your words be verified, and ye shall not die.’ And they did so.", |
|
13. Hebrew Bible, 1 Kings, 13.21 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 53| 13.21. "וַיִּקְרָא אֶל־אִישׁ הָאֱלֹהִים אֲשֶׁר־בָּא מִיהוּדָה לֵאמֹר כֹּה אָמַר יְהוָה יַעַן כִּי מָרִיתָ פִּי יְהוָה וְלֹא שָׁמַרְתָּ אֶת־הַמִּצְוָה אֲשֶׁר צִוְּךָ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ׃", | 13.21. "And he cried unto the man of God that came from Judah, saying: ‘Thus saith the LORD: Forasmuch as thou hast rebelled against the word of the LORD, and hast not kept the commandment which the LORD thy God commanded thee,", |
|
14. Hebrew Bible, Joshua, 1.18, 8.35, 11.15, 21.43 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 53, 67| 1.18. "כָּל־אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר־יַמְרֶה אֶת־פִּיךָ וְלֹא־יִשְׁמַע אֶת־דְּבָרֶיךָ לְכֹל אֲשֶׁר־תְּצַוֶּנּוּ יוּמָת רַק חֲזַק וֶאֱמָץ׃", 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׃", | 1.18. "Whosoever he be that shall rebel against thy commandment, and shall not hearken unto thy words in all that thou commandest him, he shall be put to death; only be strong and of good courage.’", 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.", |
|
15. Hebrew Bible, Judges, 7.2, 13.22 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 71; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 50| 7.2. "וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל־גִּדְעוֹן רַב הָעָם אֲשֶׁר אִתָּךְ מִתִּתִּי אֶת־מִדְיָן בְּיָדָם פֶּן־יִתְפָּאֵר עָלַי יִשְׂרָאֵל לֵאמֹר יָדִי הוֹשִׁיעָה לִּי׃", 7.2. "וַיִּתְקְעוּ שְׁלֹשֶׁת הָרָאשִׁים בַּשּׁוֹפָרוֹת וַיִּשְׁבְּרוּ הַכַּדִּים וַיַּחֲזִיקוּ בְיַד־שְׂמאוֹלָם בַּלַּפִּדִים וּבְיַד־יְמִינָם הַשּׁוֹפָרוֹת לִתְקוֹעַ וַיִּקְרְאוּ חֶרֶב לַיהוָה וּלְגִדְעוֹן׃", 13.22. "וַיֹּאמֶר מָנוֹחַ אֶל־אִשְׁתּוֹ מוֹת נָמוּת כִּי אֱלֹהִים רָאִינוּ׃", | 7.2. "And the Lord said to Gid῾on, The people that are with thee are too many for me to give Midyan into their hands; lest Yisra᾽el vaunt themselves against me, saying, my own hand has saved me.", 13.22. "And Manoaĥ said to his wife, We shall surely die, because we have seen God.", |
|
16. Hebrew Bible, 1 Samuel, 9.3, 9.20, 12.14, 25.26, 25.31, 25.33 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 50, 53, 124| 9.3. "וַתֹּאבַדְנָה הָאֲתֹנוֹת לְקִישׁ אֲבִי שָׁאוּל וַיֹּאמֶר קִישׁ אֶל־שָׁאוּל בְּנוֹ קַח־נָא אִתְּךָ אֶת־אַחַד מֵהַנְּעָרִים וְקוּם לֵךְ בַּקֵּשׁ אֶת־הָאֲתֹנֹת׃", 12.14. "אִם־תִּירְאוּ אֶת־יְהוָה וַעֲבַדְתֶּם אֹתוֹ וּשְׁמַעְתֶּם בְּקֹלוֹ וְלֹא תַמְרוּ אֶת־פִּי יְהוָה וִהְיִתֶם גַּם־אַתֶּם וְגַם־הַמֶּלֶךְ אֲשֶׁר מָלַךְ עֲלֵיכֶם אַחַר יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם׃", 25.26. "וְעַתָּה אֲדֹנִי חַי־יְהוָה וְחֵי־נַפְשְׁךָ אֲשֶׁר מְנָעֲךָ יְהוָה מִבּוֹא בְדָמִים וְהוֹשֵׁעַ יָדְךָ לָךְ וְעַתָּה יִהְיוּ כְנָבָל אֹיְבֶיךָ וְהַמְבַקְשִׁים אֶל־אֲדֹנִי רָעָה׃", 25.31. "וְלֹא תִהְיֶה זֹאת לְךָ לְפוּקָה וּלְמִכְשׁוֹל לֵב לַאדֹנִי וְלִשְׁפָּךְ־דָּם חִנָּם וּלְהוֹשִׁיעַ אֲדֹנִי לוֹ וְהֵיטִב יְהוָה לַאדֹנִי וְזָכַרְתָּ אֶת־אֲמָתֶךָ׃", 25.33. "וּבָרוּךְ טַעְמֵךְ וּבְרוּכָה אָתְּ אֲשֶׁר כְּלִתִנִי הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה מִבּוֹא בְדָמִים וְהֹשֵׁעַ יָדִי לִי׃", | 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?", 12.14. "If you will fear the Lord, and serve him, and obey his voice, and not rebel against the commandment of the Lord, and if both you and also the king that reigns over you will follow the Lord your God –", 25.26. "Now therefore, my lord, as the Lord lives, and as thy soul lives, seeing the Lord has prevented thee from coming to shed blood, and from avenging thyself with thy own hand, now let thy enemies, and they that seek evil to my lord, be as Naval.", 25.31. "that this shall not be a cause of stumbling to thee, nor offence of heart to my lord, that thou hast shed blood causelessly, or that my lord has avenged himself: and the Lord shall deal well with my lord, and thou shalt remember thy handmaid.", 25.33. "and blessed be thy discretion, and blessed be thou who hast kept me this day from coming to shed blood, and from avenging myself with my own hand.", |
|
17. Hebrew Bible, 2 Kings, 17.28, 17.32, 17.34, 17.39, 17.41, 23.25 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66, 124| 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׃", 23.25. "וְכָמֹהוּ לֹא־הָיָה לְפָנָיו מֶלֶךְ אֲשֶׁר־שָׁב אֶל־יְהוָה בְּכָל־לְבָבוֹ וּבְכָל־נַפְשׁוֹ וּבְכָל־מְאֹדוֹ כְּכֹל תּוֹרַת מֹשֶׁה וְאַחֲרָיו לֹא־קָם כָּמֹהוּ׃", | 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.", 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.", |
|
18. Hebrew Bible, 2 Samuel, 21.1-21.14 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 161| 21.1. "וַיְהִי רָעָב בִּימֵי דָוִד שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים שָׁנָה אַחֲרֵי שָׁנָה וַיְבַקֵּשׁ דָּוִד אֶת־פְּנֵי יְהוָה וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל־שָׁאוּל וְאֶל־בֵּית הַדָּמִים עַל־אֲשֶׁר־הֵמִית אֶת־הַגִּבְעֹנִים׃", 21.1. "וַתִּקַּח רִצְפָּה בַת־אַיָּה אֶת־הַשַּׂק וַתַּטֵּהוּ לָהּ אֶל־הַצּוּר מִתְּחִלַּת קָצִיר עַד נִתַּךְ־מַיִם עֲלֵיהֶם מִן־הַשָּׁמָיִם וְלֹא־נָתְנָה עוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם לָנוּחַ עֲלֵיהֶם יוֹמָם וְאֶת־חַיַּת הַשָּׂדֶה לָיְלָה׃", 21.2. "וַיִּקְרָא הַמֶּלֶךְ לַגִּבְעֹנִים וַיֹּאמֶר אֲלֵיהֶם וְהַגִּבְעֹנִים לֹא מִבְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל הֵמָּה כִּי אִם־מִיֶּתֶר הָאֱמֹרִי וּבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל נִשְׁבְּעוּ לָהֶם וַיְבַקֵּשׁ שָׁאוּל לְהַכֹּתָם בְּקַנֹּאתוֹ לִבְנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל וִיהוּדָה׃", 21.2. "וַתְּהִי־עוֹד מִלְחָמָה בְּגַת וַיְהִי אִישׁ מדין [מָדוֹן] וְאֶצְבְּעֹת יָדָיו וְאֶצְבְּעֹת רַגְלָיו שֵׁשׁ וָשֵׁשׁ עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע מִסְפָּר וְגַם־הוּא יֻלַּד לְהָרָפָה׃", 21.3. "וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד אֶל־הַגִּבְעֹנִים מָה אֶעֱשֶׂה לָכֶם וּבַמָּה אֲכַפֵּר וּבָרְכוּ אֶת־נַחֲלַת יְהוָה׃", 21.4. "וַיֹּאמְרוּ לוֹ הַגִּבְעֹנִים אֵין־לי [לָנוּ] כֶּסֶף וְזָהָב עִם־שָׁאוּל וְעִם־בֵּיתוֹ וְאֵין־לָנוּ אִישׁ לְהָמִית בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל וַיֹּאמֶר מָה־אַתֶּם אֹמְרִים אֶעֱשֶׂה לָכֶם׃", 21.5. "וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֶל־הַמֶּלֶךְ הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר כִּלָּנוּ וַאֲשֶׁר דִּמָּה־לָנוּ נִשְׁמַדְנוּ מֵהִתְיַצֵּב בְּכָל־גְּבֻל יִשְׂרָאֵל׃", 21.6. "ינתן־[יֻתַּן־] לָנוּ שִׁבְעָה אֲנָשִׁים מִבָּנָיו וְהוֹקַעֲנוּם לַיהוָה בְּגִבְעַת שָׁאוּל בְּחִיר יְהוָה וַיֹּאמֶר הַמֶּלֶךְ אֲנִי אֶתֵּן׃", 21.7. "וַיַּחְמֹל הַמֶּלֶךְ עַל־מְפִי־בֹשֶׁת בֶּן־יְהוֹנָתָן בֶּן־שָׁאוּל עַל־שְׁבֻעַת יְהוָה אֲשֶׁר בֵּינֹתָם בֵּין דָּוִד וּבֵין יְהוֹנָתָן בֶּן־שָׁאוּל׃", 21.8. "וַיִּקַּח הַמֶּלֶךְ אֶת־שְׁנֵי בְּנֵי רִצְפָּה בַת־אַיָּה אֲשֶׁר יָלְדָה לְשָׁאוּל אֶת־אַרְמֹנִי וְאֶת־מְפִבֹשֶׁת וְאֶת־חֲמֵשֶׁת בְּנֵי מִיכַל בַּת־שָׁאוּל אֲשֶׁר יָלְדָה לְעַדְרִיאֵל בֶּן־בַּרְזִלַּי הַמְּחֹלָתִי׃", 21.9. "וַיִּתְּנֵם בְּיַד הַגִּבְעֹנִים וַיֹּקִיעֻם בָּהָר לִפְנֵי יְהוָה וַיִּפְּלוּ שבעתים [שְׁבַעְתָּם] יָחַד והם [וְהֵמָּה] הֻמְתוּ בִּימֵי קָצִיר בָּרִאשֹׁנִים תחלת [בִּתְחִלַּת] קְצִיר שְׂעֹרִים׃", 21.11. "וַיֻּגַּד לְדָוִד אֵת אֲשֶׁר־עָשְׂתָה רִצְפָּה בַת־אַיָּה פִּלֶגֶשׁ שָׁאוּל׃", 21.12. "וַיֵּלֶךְ דָּוִד וַיִּקַּח אֶת־עַצְמוֹת שָׁאוּל וְאֶת־עַצְמוֹת יְהוֹנָתָן בְּנוֹ מֵאֵת בַּעֲלֵי יָבֵישׁ גִּלְעָד אֲשֶׁר גָּנְבוּ אֹתָם מֵרְחֹב בֵּית־שַׁן אֲשֶׁר תלום [תְּלָאוּם] שם הפלשתים [שָׁמָּה] [פְּלִשְׁתִּים] בְּיוֹם הַכּוֹת פְּלִשְׁתִּים אֶת־שָׁאוּל בַּגִּלְבֹּעַ׃", 21.13. "וַיַּעַל מִשָּׁם אֶת־עַצְמוֹת שָׁאוּל וְאֶת־עַצְמוֹת יְהוֹנָתָן בְּנוֹ וַיַּאַסְפוּ אֶת־עַצְמוֹת הַמּוּקָעִים׃", 21.14. "וַיִּקְבְּרוּ אֶת־עַצְמוֹת־שָׁאוּל וִיהוֹנָתָן־בְּנוֹ בְּאֶרֶץ בִּנְיָמִן בְּצֵלָע בְּקֶבֶר קִישׁ אָבִיו וַיַּעֲשׂוּ כֹּל אֲשֶׁר־צִוָּה הַמֶּלֶךְ וַיֵּעָתֵר אֱלֹהִים לָאָרֶץ אַחֲרֵי־כֵן׃", | 21.1. "Then there was a famine in the days of David three years, year after year; and David inquired of the Lord. And the Lord answered, It is for Sha᾽ul, and for his bloody house, because he slew the Giv῾onim.", 21.2. "And the king called the Giv῾onim, and said to them; (now the Giv῾onim were not of the children of Yisra᾽el, but of the remt of the Emori; and the children of Yisra᾽el had sworn to them: and Sha᾽ul sought to slay them in his zeal for the children of Yisra᾽el and Yehuda.)", 21.3. "Then David said to the Giv῾onim, What shall I do for you? and with what shall I make atonement, that you may bless the inheritance of the Lord?", 21.4. "And the Giv῾onim said to him, We will have no silver nor gold of Sha᾽ul, nor of his house; neither for us shalt thou kill any man in Yisra᾽el. And he said, What you shall say, that will I do for you.", 21.5. "And they answered the king, The man that consumed us, and that devised against us that we should be destroyed from remaining in any of the borders of Yisra᾽el,", 21.6. "let seven men of his sons be delivered to us, and we will hang them up to the Lord in Giv῾at-sha’ul (whom the Lord did choose.) And the king said, I will give them.", 21.7. "But the king spared Mefivoshet, the son of Yehonatan the son of Sha᾽ul, because of the Lord’s oath that was between them, between David and Yehonatan the son of Sha᾽ul.", 21.8. "But the king took the two sons of Riżpa the daughter of Ayya, whom she bore to Sha᾽ul, Armoni and Mefivoshet; and the five sons of Mikhal the daughter of Sha᾽ul, whom she bore to ῾Adri᾽el the son of Barzillay the Meĥolatite:", 21.9. "and he delivered them into the hands of the Giv῾onim, and they hanged them on the hill before the Lord: and they fell all seven together, and were put to death in the days of harvest, in the first days, in the beginning of the barley harvest.", 21.10. "And Riżpa the daughter of Ayya took sackcloth, and spread it for her upon the rock, from the beginning of harvest until water dropped upon them out of heaven, and suffered neither the birds of the air to rest on them by day, nor the beasts of the field by night.", 21.11. "And it was told David what Riżpa the daughter of Ayya, the concubine of Sha᾽ul, had done.", 21.12. "And David went and took the bones of Sha᾽ul and the bones of Yehonatan his son from the men of Yavesh-gil῾ad, who had stolen them from the open place of Bet-shan, where the Pelishtim had hanged them, when the Pelishtim had slain Sha᾽ul in Gilboa:", 21.13. "and he brought up from there the bones of Sha᾽ul and the bones of Yehonatan his son; and they gathered the bones of them that were hanged.", 21.14. "And the bones of Sha᾽ul and Yehonatan his son they buried in the country of Binyamin in Żela, in the tomb of Qish his father: and they performed all that the king commanded. And after that God was entreated for the land.", |
|
19. Hebrew Bible, Amos, 8.9 (8th cent. BCE - 6th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 107| 8.9. "וְהָיָה בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא נְאֻם אֲדֹנָי יְהוִה וְהֵבֵאתִי הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ בַּצָּהֳרָיִם וְהַחֲשַׁכְתִּי לָאָרֶץ בְּיוֹם אוֹר׃", | 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.", |
|
20. Hebrew Bible, Isaiah, 54.13, 65.11 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 186, 203| 54.13. "וְכָל־בָּנַיִךְ לִמּוּדֵי יְהוָה וְרַב שְׁלוֹם בָּנָיִךְ׃", 65.11. "וְאַתֶּם עֹזְבֵי יְהוָה הַשְּׁכֵחִים אֶת־הַר קָדְשִׁי הַעֹרְכִים לַגַּד שֻׁלְחָן וְהַמְמַלְאִים לַמְנִי מִמְסָךְ׃", | 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,", |
|
21. Hebrew Bible, Jeremiah, 4.4, 5.22, 42.5, 50.6 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66, 68, 107, 124| 4.4. "הִמֹּלוּ לַיהֹוָה וְהָסִרוּ עָרְלוֹת לְבַבְכֶם אִישׁ יְהוּדָה וְיֹשְׁבֵי יְרוּשָׁלִָם פֶּן־תֵּצֵא כָאֵשׁ חֲמָתִי וּבָעֲרָה וְאֵין מְכַבֶּה מִפְּנֵי רֹעַ מַעַלְלֵיכֶם׃", 5.22. "הַאוֹתִי לֹא־תִירָאוּ נְאֻם־יְהֹוָה אִם מִפָּנַי לֹא תָחִילוּ אֲשֶׁר־שַׂמְתִּי חוֹל גְּבוּל לַיָּם חָק־עוֹלָם וְלֹא יַעַבְרֶנְהוּ וַיִּתְגָּעֲשׁוּ וְלֹא יוּכָלוּ וְהָמוּ גַלָּיו וְלֹא יַעַבְרֻנְהוּ׃", 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׃", | 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.", 5.22. "Fear ye not Me? saith the LORD; Will ye not tremble at My presence? Who have placed the sand for the bound of the sea, An everlasting ordice, which it cannot pass; And though the waves thereof toss themselves, yet can they not prevail; Though they roar, yet can they not pass over it.", 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.", |
|
| 22. Septuagint, Isaiah, None (8th cent. BCE - 6th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 186 |
23. Hebrew Bible, Ezekiel, 24.6-24.8, 34.4, 34.16 (6th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 134; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 124, 186| 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׃", 24.7. "כִּי דָמָהּ בְּתוֹכָהּ הָיָה עַל־צְחִיחַ סֶלַע שָׂמָתְהוּ לֹא שְׁפָכַתְהוּ עַל־הָאָרֶץ לְכַסּוֹת עָלָיו עָפָר׃", 24.8. "לְהַעֲלוֹת חֵמָה לִנְקֹם נָקָם נָתַתִּי אֶת־דָּמָהּ עַל־צְחִיחַ סָלַע לְבִלְתִּי הִכָּסוֹת׃", 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׃", | 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.", 24.7. "For her blood is in the midst of her; she set it upon the bare rock; she poured it not upon the ground, to cover it with dust;", 24.8. "that it might cause fury to come up, that vengeance might be taken, I have set her blood upon the bare rock, that it should not be covered.", 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.", |
|
24. Hebrew Bible, 2 Chronicles, 24.17-24.22 (5th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 135; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 67| 24.17. "וְאַחֲרֵי מוֹת יְהוֹיָדָע בָּאוּ שָׂרֵי יְהוּדָה וַיִּשְׁתַּחֲווּ לַמֶּלֶךְ אָז שָׁמַע הַמֶּלֶךְ אֲלֵיהֶם׃", 24.18. "וַיַּעַזְבוּ אֶת־בֵּית יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי אֲבוֹתֵיהֶם וַיַּעַבְדוּ אֶת־הָאֲשֵׁרִים וְאֶת־הָעֲצַבִּים וַיְהִי־קֶצֶף עַל־יְהוּדָה וִירוּשָׁלִַם בְּאַשְׁמָתָם זֹאת׃", 24.19. "וַיִּשְׁלַח בָּהֶם נְבִאִים לַהֲשִׁיבָם אֶל־יְהוָה וַיָּעִידוּ בָם וְלֹא הֶאֱזִינוּ׃", 24.21. "וַיִּקְשְׁרוּ עָלָיו וַיִּרְגְּמֻהוּ אֶבֶן בְּמִצְוַת הַמֶּלֶךְ בַּחֲצַר בֵּית יְהוָה׃", 24.22. "וְלֹא־זָכַר יוֹאָשׁ הַמֶּלֶךְ הַחֶסֶד אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה יְהוֹיָדָע אָבִיו עִמּוֹ וַיַּהֲרֹג אֶת־בְּנוֹ וּכְמוֹתוֹ אָמַר יֵרֶא יְהוָה וְיִדְרֹשׁ׃", | 24.17. "Now after the death of Jehoiada came the princes of Judah, and prostrated themselves before the king. Then the king hearkened unto them.", 24.18. "And they forsook the house of the LORD, the God of their fathers, and served the Asherim and the idols; and wrath came upon Judah and Jerusalem for this their guiltiness.", 24.19. "Yet He sent prophets to them, to bring them back unto the LORD; and they admonished them, but they would not give ear.", 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.’", 24.21. "And they conspired against him, and stoned him with stones at the commandment of the king in the court of the house of the LORD.", 24.22. "Thus Joash the king remembered not the kindness which Jehoiada his father had done to him, but slew his son. And when he died, he said: ‘The LORD look upon it, and require it.’", |
|
25. Hebrew Bible, 1 Chronicles, 26.14, 27.23 (5th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 67, 186| 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׃", | 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.", |
|
26. Hebrew Bible, Ecclesiastes, 4.7 (5th cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic 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.", |
|
27. Hebrew Bible, Ezra, 6.9 (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 50| 6.9. "וּמָה חַשְׁחָן וּבְנֵי תוֹרִין וְדִכְרִין וְאִמְּרִין לַעֲלָוָן לֶאֱלָהּ שְׁמַיָּא חִנְטִין מְלַח חֲמַר וּמְשַׁח כְּמֵאמַר כָּהֲנַיָּא דִי־בִירוּשְׁלֶם לֶהֱוֵא מִתְיְהֵב לְהֹם יוֹם בְּיוֹם דִּי־לָא שָׁלוּ׃", | 6.9. "And that which they have need of, both young bullocks, and rams, and lambs, for burnt-offerings to the God of heaven, wheat, salt, wine, and oil, according to the word of the priests that are at Jerusalem, let it be given them day by day without fail;", |
|
| 28. Dead Sea Scrolls, Rule of The Community, 1.9, 1.20, 2.16 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66, 68 |
| 29. Dead Sea Scrolls, Rule of The Community, 1.9, 1.20, 2.16 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66, 68 |
| 30. Dead Sea Scrolls, of Discipline, 2.18, 3.15, 3.25, 4.6, 4.9, 4.10, 4.11, 4.12, 4.13, 4.14, 5.5, 5.8, 5.20, 5.24, 6.1, 6.4, 6.5, 6.6, 6.25, 6.26, 6.27, 6.27-7.2, 7.3, 7.8, 7.15, 7.16, 7.17, 8.16, 8.17, 8.18, 8.19, 8.21, 8.22, 8.23, 8.24, 9.1, 9.17, 10.16, 13, 14, 15 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 67, 189 |
31. Septuagint, Ecclesiasticus (Siracides), 4.20, 4.22, 6.8, 7.30, 19.13, 36.21, 39.31, 50.24 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 53, 66, 107, 109, 124, 186 | 4.22. Do not show partiality, to your own harm,or deference, to your downfall. 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. 39.31. they will rejoice in his commands,and be made ready on earth for their service,and when their times come they will not transgress his word. 50.24. May he entrust to us his mercy!And let him deliver us in our days! |
|
| 32. Dead Sea Scrolls, Hodayot, 4.23, 5.32, 7.3, 7.34 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 186 |
| 33. Dead Sea Scrolls, Hodayot, 4.23, 5.32, 7.3, 7.34 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 186 |
| 34. Dead Sea Scrolls, (Cairo Damascus Covenant) Cd-A, 2.2, 6.19, 8.5, 9.8-9.10, 10.13-10.14, 12.3-12.6, 12.10, 12.24, 13.4-13.6, 13.20, 14.3, 14.10, 14.20, 14.22, 15.1-15.11, 15.15, 16.10, 19.18, 20.2, 20.4-20.8, 20.19, 20.25 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 50, 66, 68, 99, 109, 124, 136, 176, 186, 189 |
| 35. Dead Sea Scrolls, Pesher On Habakkuk, 11.13 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 107 |
| 36. Dead Sea Scrolls, Damascus Covenant, 2.2, 6.19, 8.5, 9.8-9.10, 10.13-10.14, 12.3-12.6, 12.10, 12.24, 13.4-13.6, 13.20, 14.3, 14.10, 14.20, 14.22, 15.1-15.11, 15.15, 16.10, 19.18, 20.2, 20.4-20.8, 20.19, 20.25 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 50, 66, 68, 99, 109, 124, 136, 176, 186, 189 |
| 37. Dead Sea Scrolls, Community Rule, 1.9, 1.20, 2.16 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66, 68 |
38. Hebrew Bible, Daniel, 4.14 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 50| 4.14. "בִּגְזֵרַת עִירִין פִּתְגָמָא וּמֵאמַר קַדִּישִׁין שְׁאֵלְתָא עַד־דִּבְרַת דִּי יִנְדְּעוּן חַיַּיָּא דִּי־שַׁלִּיט עליא [עִלָּאָה] בְּמַלְכוּת אנושא [אֲנָשָׁא] וּלְמַן־דִּי יִצְבֵּא יִתְּנִנַּהּ וּשְׁפַל אֲנָשִׁים יְקִים עליה [עֲלַהּ׃]", | 4.14. "The matter is by the decree of the watchers, And the sentence by the word of the holy ones; To the intent that the living may know That the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, And giveth it to whomsoever He will, And setteth up over it the lowest of men.", |
|
39. Mishnah, Berachot, 9.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic 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.”", |
|
40. Mishnah, Avot, 1.4, 1.10, 5.21 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 220; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 68, 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", 1.10. "שְׁמַעְיָה וְאַבְטַלְיוֹן קִבְּלוּ מֵהֶם. שְׁמַעְיָה אוֹמֵר, אֱהֹב אֶת הַמְּלָאכָה, וּשְׂנָא אֶת הָרַבָּנוּת, וְאַל תִּתְוַדַּע לָרָשׁוּת: \n", 5.21. "הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר, בֶּן חָמֵשׁ שָׁנִים לַמִּקְרָא, בֶּן עֶשֶׂר לַמִּשְׁנָה, בֶּן שְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה לַמִּצְוֹת, בֶּן חֲמֵשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה לַתַּלְמוּד, בֶּן שְׁמֹנֶה עֶשְׂרֵה לַחֻפָּה, בֶּן עֶשְׂרִים לִרְדֹּף, בֶּן שְׁלשִׁים לַכֹּחַ, בֶּן אַרְבָּעִים לַבִּינָה, בֶּן חֲמִשִּׁים לָעֵצָה, בֶּן שִׁשִּׁים לַזִּקְנָה, בֶּן שִׁבְעִים לַשֵּׂיבָה, בֶּן שְׁמֹנִים לַגְּבוּרָה, בֶּן תִּשְׁעִים לָשׁוּחַ, בֶּן מֵאָה כְּאִלּוּ מֵת וְעָבַר וּבָטֵל מִן הָעוֹלָם: \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.", 1.10. "Shemaiah and Abtalion received [the oral tradition] from them. Shemaiah used to say: love work, hate acting the superior, and do not attempt to draw near to the ruling authority.", 5.21. "He used to say: At five years of age the study of Scripture; At ten the study of Mishnah; At thirteen subject to the commandments; At fifteen the study of Talmud; At eighteen the bridal canopy; At twenty for pursuit [of livelihood]; At thirty the peak of strength; At forty wisdom; At fifty able to give counsel; At sixty old age; At seventy fullness of years; At eighty the age of “strength”; At ninety a bent body; At one hundred, as good as dead and gone completely out of the world.", |
|
41. Mishnah, Menachot, 8.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic 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.”", |
|
42. Mishnah, Niddah, 5.9, 6.11 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 68| 5.9. "בַּת עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה שֶׁלֹּא הֵבִיאָה שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת, תָּבִיא רְאָיָה שֶׁהִיא בַת עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה, וְהִיא אַיְלוֹנִית, לֹא חוֹלֶצֶת וְלֹא מִתְיַבֶּמֶת. בֶּן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה שֶׁלֹּא הֵבִיא שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת, יָבִיא רְאָיָה שֶׁהוּא בֶן עֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה, וְהוּא סָרִיס, לֹא חוֹלֵץ וְלֹא מְיַבֵּם, אֵלּוּ דִּבְרֵי בֵית הִלֵּל. בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים, זֶה וָזֶה בְּנֵי שְׁמֹנֶה עֶשְׂרֵה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, הַזָּכָר כְּדִבְרֵי בֵית הִלֵּל, וְהַנְּקֵבָה כְּדִבְרֵי בֵית שַׁמַּאי, שֶׁהָאִשָּׁה מְמַהֶרֶת לָבֹא לִפְנֵי הָאִישׁ:", 6.11. "תִּינוֹקֶת שֶׁהֵבִיאָה שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת, אוֹ חוֹלֶצֶת אוֹ מִתְיַבֶּמֶת, וְחַיֶּבֶת בְּכָל מִצְוֹת הָאֲמוּרוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה. וְכֵן תִּינוֹק שֶׁהֵבִיא שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת, חַיָּב בְּכָל מִצְוֹת הָאֲמוּרוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה. וְרָאוּי לִהְיוֹת בֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה, מִשֶּׁיָּבִיא שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת עַד שֶׁיַּקִּיף זָקָן, הַתַּחְתּוֹן וְלֹא הָעֶלְיוֹן, אֶלָּא שֶׁדִּבְּרוּ חֲכָמִים בְּלָשׁוֹן נְקִיָּה. תִּינוֹקֶת שֶׁהֵבִיאָה שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת, אֵינָהּ יְכוֹלָה לְמָאֵן. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, עַד שֶׁיִּרְבֶּה הַשָּׁחֹר: \n", | 5.9. "If a woman at the age of twenty did not bring forth two hairs, she must bring evidence that she is twenty years of age and she is an aylonit, she doesn't perform halitzah or yibbum. If a man at the age of twenty years did not produce two hairs, he must bring evidence that he is twenty years old and he becomes confirmed as a saris and he doesn't perform halitzah or yibbum, the words of Bet Hillel. Bet Shammai says: with both of them at the age of eighteen. Rabbi Eliezer says: In the case of the male, according to the words of Bet Hillel, while in that of the female, in accordance with the words of Bet Shammai, since a woman matures earlier than a man.", 6.11. "If a girl has grown two pubic hairs she may perform either halitzah or contract levirate marriage, and she is obligated in all the commandments in the Torah. So too if a boy has grown two pubic hairs, he is obligated in all of the commandments in the Torah. He is fit to become a wayward and rebellious son from the time he has grown two hairs until the time when his beard forms a circle. This refers to the lower, and not to the upper one, but the sages spoke using a euphemism. A girl who has grown two hairs may no longer refuse the marriage. Rabbi Judah says: [she may refuse] until the black [hairs] predominate.", |
|
43. Josephus Flavius, Jewish War, 1.204-1.212 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 26 | 1.204. 5. Now Herod was an active man, and soon found proper materials for his active spirit to work upon. As therefore he found that Hezekias, the head of the robbers, ran over the neighboring parts of Syria with a great band of men, he caught him and slew him, and many more of the robbers with him; 1.205. which exploit was chiefly grateful to the Syrians, insomuch that hymns were sung in Herod’s commendation, both in the villages and in the cities, as having procured their quietness, and having preserved what they possessed to them; on which occasion he became acquainted with Sextus Caesar, a kinsman of the great Caesar, and president of Syria. 1.206. A just emulation of his glorious actions excited Phasaelus also to imitate him. Accordingly, he procured the goodwill of the inhabitants of Jerusalem, by his own management of the city affairs, and did not abuse his power in any disagreeable manner; 1.207. whence it came to pass that the nation paid Antipater the respects that were due only to a king, and the honors they all yielded him were equal to the honors due to an absolute lord; yet did he not abate any part of that goodwill or fidelity which he owed to Hyrcanus. 1.208. 6. However, he found it impossible to escape envy in such his prosperity; for the glory of these young men affected even Hyrcanus himself already privately, though he said nothing of it to anybody; but what he principally was grieved at was the great actions of Herod, and that so many messengers came one before another, and informed him of the great reputation he got in all his undertakings. There were also many people in the royal palace itself who inflamed his envy at him; those, I mean, who were obstructed in their designs by the prudence either of the young men, or of Antipater. 1.209. These men said, that by committing the public affairs to the management of Antipater and of his sons, he sat down with nothing but the bare name of a king, without any of its authority; and they asked him how long he would so far mistake himself, as to breed up kings against his own interest; for that they did not now conceal their government of affairs any longer, but were plainly lords of the nation, and had thrust him out of his authority; that this was the case when Herod slew so many men without his giving him any command to do it, either by word of mouth, or by his letter, and this in contradiction to the law of the Jews; who therefore, in case he be not a king, but a private man, still ought to come to his trial, and answer it to him, and to the laws of his country, which do not permit anyone to be killed till he had been condemned in judgment. 1.210. 7. Now Hyrcanus was, by degrees, inflamed with these discourses, and at length could bear no longer, but he summoned Herod to take his trial. Accordingly, by his father’s advice, and as soon as the affairs of Galilee would give him leave, he came up [to Jerusalem], when he had first placed garrisons in Galilee; however, he came with a sufficient body of soldiers, so many indeed that he might not appear to have with him an army able to overthrow Hyrcanus’s government, nor yet so few as to expose him to the insults of those that envied him. 1.211. However, Sextus Caesar was in fear for the young man, lest he should be taken by his enemies, and brought to punishment; so he sent some to denounce expressly to Hyrcanus that he should acquit Herod of the capital charge against him; who acquitted him accordingly, as being otherwise inclined also so to do, for he loved Herod. 1.212. 8. But Herod, supposing that he had escaped punishment without the consent of the king, retired to Sextus, to Damascus, and got everything ready, in order not to obey him if he should summon him again; whereupon those that were evil-disposed irritated Hyrcanus, and told him that Herod was gone away in anger, and was prepared to make war upon him; and as the king believed what they said, he knew not what to do, since he saw his antagonist was stronger than he was himself. |
|
44. Mishnah, Sanhedrin, 2.2, 3.2 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 24, 27, 28; Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 67| 2.2. "הַמֶּלֶךְ לֹא דָן וְלֹא דָנִין אוֹתוֹ, לֹא מֵעִיד וְלֹא מְעִידִין אוֹתוֹ, לֹא חוֹלֵץ וְלֹא חוֹלְצִין לְאִשְׁתּוֹ. לֹא מְיַבֵּם וְלֹא מְיַבְּמִין לְאִשְׁתּוֹ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אִם רָצָה לַחֲלֹץ אוֹ לְיַבֵּם, זָכוּר לָטוֹב. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לוֹ. וְאֵין נוֹשְׂאִין אַלְמָנָתוֹ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, נוֹשֵׂא הַמֶּלֶךְ אַלְמָנָתוֹ שֶׁל מֶלֶךְ, שֶׁכֵּן מָצִינוּ בְדָוִד שֶׁנָּשָׂא אַלְמָנָתוֹ שֶׁל שָׁאוּל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמואל ב יב) וָאֶתְּנָה לְךָ אֶת בֵּית אֲדֹנֶיךָ וְאֶת נְשֵׁי אֲדֹנֶיךָ בְּחֵיקֶךָ: \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", | 2.2. "The king can neither judge nor be judged, he cannot testify and others cannot testify against him. He may not perform halitzah, nor may others perform halitzah for his wife. He may not contract levirate marriage nor may his brothers contract levirate marriage with his wife. Rabbi Judah says: “If he wished to perform halitzah or to contract levirate marriage his memory is a blessing.” They said to him: “They should not listen to him.” None may marry his widow. Rabbi Judah says: “The king may marry the widow of a king, for so have we found it with David, who married the widow of Saul, as it says, “And I gave you my master’s house and my master’s wives into your embrace” (II Samuel 12:8).", 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.”", |
|
45. Mishnah, Shevuot, 8.2-8.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 50| 8.2. "אָמַר לְשׁוֹמֵר חִנָּם, הֵיכָן שׁוֹרִי, אָמַר לוֹ מֵת, וְהוּא שֶׁנִּשְׁבַּר אוֹ נִשְׁבָּה אוֹ נִגְנַב אוֹ אָבַד. נִשְׁבָּר, וְהוּא שֶׁמֵּת אוֹ נִשְׁבָּה אוֹ נִגְנַב אוֹ אָבַד. נִשְׁבָּה, וְהוּא שֶׁמֵּת אוֹ נִשְׁבַּר אוֹ נִגְנַב אוֹ אָבַד. נִגְנָב, וְהוּא שֶׁמֵּת אוֹ נִשְׁבַּר אוֹ נִשְׁבָּה אוֹ אָבַד. אָבַד, וְהוּא שֶׁמֵּת אוֹ נִשְׁבַּר אוֹ נִשְׁבָּה אוֹ נִגְנַב. מַשְׁבִּיעֲךָ אָנִי, וְאָמַר אָמֵן, פָּטוּר: \n", 8.3. "הֵיכָן שׁוֹרִי, אָמַר לוֹ אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ מָה אַתָּה סָח, וְהוּא שֶׁמֵּת אוֹ נִשְׁבַּר אוֹ נִשְׁבָּה אוֹ נִגְנַב אוֹ אָבַד. מַשְׁבִּיעֲךָ אָנִי, וְאָמַר אָמֵן, פָּטוּר. הֵיכָן שׁוֹרִי, אָמַר לוֹ אָבַד. מַשְׁבִּיעֲךָ אָנִי, וְאָמַר אָמֵן, וְהָעֵדִים מְעִידִין אוֹתוֹ שֶׁאֲכָלוֹ, מְשַׁלֵּם אֶת הַקֶּרֶן. הוֹדָה מֵעַצְמוֹ, מְשַׁלֵּם קֶרֶן וְחֹמֶשׁ וְאָשָׁם. הֵיכָן שׁוֹרִי, אָמַר לוֹ נִגְנָב. מַשְׁבִּיעֲךָ אָנִי, וְאָמַר אָמֵן, וְהָעֵדִים מְעִידִין אוֹתוֹ שֶׁגְּנָבוֹ, מְשַׁלֵּם תַּשְׁלוּמֵי כֶפֶל. הוֹדָה מֵעַצְמוֹ, מְשַׁלֵּם קֶרֶן וְחֹמֶשׁ וְאָשָׁם: \n", 8.4. "אָמַר לְאֶחָד בַּשּׁוּק הֵיכָן שׁוֹרִי שֶׁגָּנַבְתָּ, וְהוּא אוֹמֵר לֹא גָנַבְתִּי, וְהָעֵדִים מְעִידִים אוֹתוֹ שֶׁגְּנָבוֹ, מְשַׁלֵּם תַּשְׁלוּמֵי כֶפֶל. טָבַח וּמָכַר, מְשַׁלֵּם תַּשְׁלוּמֵי אַרְבָּעָה וַחֲמִשָּׁה. רָאָה עֵדִים שֶׁמְּמַשְׁמְשִׁין וּבָאִין, אָמַר גָּנַבְתִּי אֲבָל לֹא טָבַחְתִּי וְלֹא מָכָרְתִּי, אֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם אֶלָּא קֶרֶן: \n", | 8.2. "If he [the owner] said to the unpaid guardian, “Where is my ox?” and he replied to him, “It died,” whereas in reality it was injured or captured or stolen or lost; [Or he replied], “It was injured,” whereas in reality it died or was captured or stolen or lost; [Or he replied,] “It was captured,” whereas in reality it died or was injured or stolen or lost; [Or he replied,] “It was stolen,” whereas in reality it died or was injured or captured or lost; [Or he replied,] “It was lost,” whereas in reality it died or was injured or captured or stolen; [And the owner said,] “I adjure you,” and he said, “amen”, he is exempt [from having to bring a sacrifice for a false oath].", 8.3. "[If the owner said,] “Where is my ox?” and he replied to him, “I do not know what you are talking about,” whereas in reality it died or was injured or captured or stolen or lost, [and the owner said,] “I adjure you,” and he said, “Amen”, he is exempt. [If the owner said,] “Where is my ox?” and he replied to him, “It was lost”; [and the owner said,] “I adjure you”, and he said, “Amen”, and witnesses testify against him that he had consumed it, he pays the principal; if he confessed himself, he pays the principal, a fifth, and brings a guilt-offering. [If the owner said,] “Where is my ox?” and he replied to him, “It was stolen;” [and the owner said,] “I adjure you, and he said, “Amen”, and witnesses testify against him that he himself stole it, he pays double; if he confessed himself, he pays the principal, fifth, and brings a guilt-offering.", 8.4. "If a man said to one in the market, “Where is my ox which you have stolen?” and he replied, “I did not steal it,” and witnesses testified against him that he did steal it, he pays double. If he killed it or sold it, he pays four or five times its value. If he saw witnesses coming nearer and nearer, and he said, “I did steal it, but I did not kill or sell it,” he pays only the principal.", |
|
46. Josephus Flavius, Jewish Antiquities, 14.168-14.177 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 26, 27, 28 | 14.168. 4. Upon Hyrcanus hearing this, he complied with them. The mothers also of those that had been slain by Herod raised his indignation; for those women continued every day in the temple, persuading the king and the people that Herod might undergo a trial before the Sanhedrim for what he had done. 14.169. Hyrcanus was so moved by these complaints, that he summoned Herod to come to his trial for what was charged upon him. Accordingly he came; but his father had persuaded him to come not like a private man, but with a guard, for the security of his person; and that when he had settled the affairs of Galilee in the best manner he could for his own advantage, he should come to his trial, but still with a body of men sufficient for his security on his journey, yet so that he should not come with so great a force as might look like terrifying Hyrcanus, but still such a one as might not expose him naked and unguarded [to his enemies.] 14.170. However, Sextus Caesar, president of Syria, wrote to Hyrcanus, and desired him to clear Herod, and dismiss him at his trial, and threatened him beforehand if he did not do it. Which epistle of his was the occasion of Hyrcanus delivering Herod from suffering any harm from the Sanhedrim, for he loved him as his own son. 14.171. But when Herod stood before the Sanhedrim, with his body of men about him, he affrighted them all, and no one of his former accusers durst after that bring any charge against him, but there was a deep silence, and nobody knew what was to be done. 14.172. When affairs stood thus, one whose name was Sameas, a righteous man he was, and for that reason above all fear, rose up, and said, “O you that are assessors with me, and O thou that art our king, I neither have ever myself known such a case, nor do I suppose that any one of you can name its parallel, that one who is called to take his trial by us ever stood in such a manner before us; but every one, whosoever he be, that comes to be tried by this Sanhedrim, presents himself in a submissive manner, and like one that is in fear of himself, and that endeavors to move us to compassion, with his hair dishevelled, and in a black and mourning garment: 14.173. but this admirable man Herod, who is accused of murder, and called to answer so heavy an accusation, stands here clothed in purple, and with the hair of his head finely trimmed, and with his armed men about him, that if we shall condemn him by our law, he may slay us, and by overbearing justice may himself escape death. 14.174. Yet do not I make this complaint against Herod himself; he is to be sure more concerned for himself than for the laws; but my complaint is against yourselves, and your king, who gave him a license so to do. However, take you notice, that God is great, and that this very man, whom you are going to absolve and dismiss, for the sake of Hyrcanus, will one day punish both you and your king himself also.” 14.175. Nor did Sameas mistake in any part of this prediction; for when Herod had received the kingdom, he slew all the members of this Sanhedrim, and Hyrcanus himself also, excepting Sameas, 14.176. for he had a great honor for him on account of his righteousness, and because, when the city was afterward besieged by Herod and Sosius, he persuaded the people to admit Herod into it; and told them that for their sins they would not be able to escape his hands:—which things will be related by us in their proper places. 14.177. 5. But when Hyrcanus saw that the members of the Sanhedrim were ready to pronounce the sentence of death upon Herod, he put off the trial to another day, and sent privately to Herod, and advised him to fly out of the city, for that by this means he might escape. |
|
47. Mishnah, Sotah, 9.15 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 124| 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", | 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.”", |
|
48. New Testament, John, 6.45 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic 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. |
|
49. New Testament, Matthew, 5.22 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 109| 5.22. Ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω ὑμῖν ὅτι πᾶς ὁ ὀργιζόμενος τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ ἔνοχος ἔσται τῇ κρίσει· ὃς δʼ ἂν εἴπῃ τῷ ἀδελφῷ αὐτοῦ Ῥακά, ἔνοχος ἔσται τῷ συνεδρίῳ· ὃς δʼ ἂν εἴπῃ Μωρέ, ἔνοχος ἔσται εἰς τὴν γέενναν τοῦ πυρός. | 5.22. But I tell you, that everyone who is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgment; and whoever shall say to his brother, 'Raca!' shall be in danger of the council; and whoever shall say, 'You fool!' shall be in danger of the fire of Gehenna. |
|
50. Tosefta, Berachot, 5.7 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic 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.", | |
|
51. Tosefta, Demai, 2.10, 2.13-2.14, 2.16 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 68, 99| 2.13. "לא יאמר אדם חבר לעם הארץ הולך ככר זו ותן לפלוני חבר שאין משלחין טהרות ביד עם הארץ חבר שאמר לו עם הארץ הולך ככר זו והולך לפלוני ע\"ה לא יתן לו שאין מוסרין טהרות לעם הארץ.", 2.14. "עם הארץ שאמר לחבר תן לי ככר זה ואוכלנו יין זה ואשתנו לא יתן לו שאין מאכילין טהרות לעם הארץ היה נדור מן הככר ואמר לו תן לי ואוכלנו אבטיח שניקר ואמר [לו] תן לי ואוכלנו יין ונתגלה ואמר לו תן לי ואשתנו לא יתן שאין מאכילין את האדם דבר האסור לו כיוצא בו לא יושיט ישראל אבר מן החי לבני נח ולא כוס יין לנזיר שאין מאכילין את האדם דבר האסור לו ועל כולן אין מברכין עליהן ואין מזמנין עליהן ואין עונין אחריהן אמן.", | |
|
52. Tosefta, Hagigah, 1.3 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 68| 1.3. "קטן שאין צריך לאמו חייב בסוכה קטן שצריך לאמו יוצא בעירוב אמו ושאינו צריך לאמו מערבין עליו מזון שתי סעודות בעירובי תחומין [יודע] לנענע חייב בלולב יודע להתעטף חייב בציצית יודע לדבר אביו מלמדו שמע ותורה ולשון קודש ואם לאו ראוי לו שלא בא לעולם יודע לשמור תפיליו אביו לוקח לו תפילין [כיצד בודקין אותו מטבילין אותו ונותנין לו חולין לשם תרומה] יודע לשמור גופו אוכלין על גופו טהרות יודע לפרוש [חוקו] חולקין לו על הגורן יש בו דעת לישאל ספיקו ברשות היחיד טמא ברשות הרבים טהור יודע לשחוט שחיטתו כשירה יכול לאכול כזית דגן פורשין מצואתו וממימי רגליו ארבע אמות כזית צלי שוחטין עליו [את] הפסח רבי יהודה אומר לעולם אין שוחטין [את] הפסח [עליו] [אא\"כ יודע] הפרש אכילה [אמר לו] איזו הפרש אכילה כל שנותנין לו ביצה ונוטלה אבן וזורקה.", | |
|
| 53. Tosefta, Hulin, 2.24 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66 |
54. Tosefta, Nedarim, 1.1 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 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.", | |
|
55. Tosefta, Niddah, 6.2 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 68| 6.2. "בן תשע ויום אחד שהביא שתי שערות שומא מבן תשע שנים ויום אחד עד בן שתים עשרה שנה ויום אחד שהביא שתי שערות שומא ר' יוסי בר\"י אומר סימן. בן שתים עשרה שנה ויום אחד עד בן שלש עשרה ויום א' שהביא שתי שערות הרי הוא כאיש לכל דבר בן ארבע עשרה שנה ובן חמש עשרה שהביא שתי שערות הרי הוא כבן תשע ויום אחד לכל דבר בן כ' שנה שלא הביא שתי שערות אע\"פ שהביא אחר מכאן הרי הוא כסריס לכל דבר בת כ' שנה שלא הביאה שתי שערות אע\"פ שהביאה לאחר מכאן הרי היא כאילונית רבי יוסי בן כיפר אומר שנת עשרים שנכנסו ממנו שלשים יום מונין אותה שנה שלמה הורה רבי בלוד על תינוקת בת שמונה עשרה שנכנסו הימנה ל' יום שתהא כתינוקת בת שמונה עשרה ויום אחד לכל דבר.", | |
|
56. Tosefta, Sanhedrin, 11.1 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 109| 11.1. "ושאר חייבי מיתות ב\"ד אין ממיתין אותם אלא על פי עדים והתראה עד שיודיעוהו שחייב מיתה בב\"ד ר' יוסי ברבי יהודה אומר עד שיודיעוהו באיזה מיתה הוא מת בין שהתרו בו כל עדיו ובין שהתרו בו מקצת עדיו חייב ורבי יוסי פוטר עד שהתרו בו כל עדיו שנא' (דברים י״ז:ו׳) על פי שנים עדים או שלשה עדים עד שיהיו פי שני עדים מתרין בו כאחד מודים חכמים לר' יוסי שאם התרה בו <את> הראשון והלך לו הב' והלך לו שהוא פטור מתרין בו ושותקים מתרין בו ומרכין בראשו אע\"פ שאמר יודע אני פטור עד שיאמר יודע אני וע\"מ כך אני עושה כיצד ראוהו שמחלל את השבת ואומרים לו הוי יודע שהשבת מחלליה מות יומת אע\"פ שאמר יודע אני פטור עד שיאמר יודע אני וע\"מ כך אני עושה כיצד שהורג את הנפש ואומר הוי יודע שהוא בן ברית ונאמר (בראשית ט׳:ו׳) שופך דם האדם באדם דמו ישפך וגו' אע\"פ שאמר יודע אני פטור עד שיאמר יודע אני וע\"מ כן אני עושה רבי יוסי אומר הוא שיתודה בעצמו פטור שנא' (דברים י״ט:ט״ז) לענות בו סרה שיחזרו בו אחרים ולא שיתודה הוא בעצמו.", | |
|
57. Tosefta, Shevuot, 3.6 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 53| 3.6. "והוא עד הכשר לעדות (ויקרא ה) ושמעה להוציא את החרש. או ראה להוציא את הסומא או ידע להוציא את השוטה אם לא יגיד ונשא את עונו להוציא את האלם. אלו דברים הראשונים ר\"ע אומר (דברים י״ג:ט״ו) ודרשת וחקרת וכי יש דורשין לחרשין ויש חוקרין לשוטים ת\"ל (ויקרא כ״ד:כ״ב) משפט אחד יהיה לכם לכם כדיני ממונות כך בדיני נפשות מה דיני נפשות בדרישה וחקירה אף דיני ממונות בדרישה ובחקירה אי מה דיני נפשות לעדיו יכול אף דיני ממונות כן ת\"ל (שמות כא) עין ישלם אי מה דיני נפשות פטר את השוגג יכול אף דיני ממונות פטר ת\"ל עין ישלם אי מה דיני נפשות פרט משזרק והרג יכול אף דיני ממונות כן ת\"ל אבן יד ישלם אי מה דיני נפשות בכ\"ג יכול אף דיני ממונות כן ת\"ל (שמות כ״ב:ז׳) ונקרב בעל הבית אל האלהים ריבה לו הכתוב דיין אחד עד האלהים יבא דבר שניהם ריבה לו הכתוב שני דיינין אשר ירשיעון אלהים ריבה הכתוב ג' דיינין מכאן אמרו דיני ממונות בג' ור' יוסי אומר בחמשה כדי שיגמור הדין בג' יכול אין לי בג' אלא דיני ממונות הקלין מנין לרבות החמורים וחומר בחמורים ת\"ל עין וגו' כויה תחת כויה וגו'.", | |
|
58. Tosefta, Kippurim, 1.12 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 133| 1.12. "איל קרב באחד עשר כבשי צבור בשמונה שאין עמהן חביתין פר קרב בעשרים וארבעה הראש והרגל שנים אוחזין ברגל ומעלין אותה לגבי מזבח שלשה אוחזין ומקריבין אותה לגבי מזבח בד\"א בקרבנות הצבור אבל קרבנות יחיד כל הרוצה להקריב מקריב מעשה בבניה של מרתה בת בייתוס שהיה אחד מהם נוטל שתי יריכות בשתי אצבעותיו משור לקוח באלף דנרין והיה מהלך עקב בצד גודל ומעלה אותן לגבי מזבח.", | |
|
59. Anon., Genesis Rabba, 45.7 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 71| 45.7. וַיִּמְצָאָהּ מַלְאַךְ ה' עַל עֵין הַמַּיִם וגו' (בראשית טז, ז), בְּאוֹרְחָא דַּחֲלוּצָה. (בראשית טז, ח): וַיֹּאמַר הָגָר שִׁפְחַת שָׂרַי, מַתְלָא אָמַר אִם אָמַר לָךְ חַד אוּנָיִךְ דַּחֲמַר לָא תֵיחוּשׁ, תְּרֵין עֲבֵיד לָךְ פָּרוֹכֵי. כָּךְ אַבְרָם אָמַר: הִנֵּה שִׁפְחָתֵךְ בְּיָדֵךְ, הַמַּלְאָךְ אָמַר: הָגָר שִׁפְחַת שָׂרַי. וַתֹּאמֶר מִפְּנֵי שָׂרַי גְּבִרְתִּי אָנֹכִי בֹּרַחַת. (בראשית טז, ט): וַיֹּאמֶר לָהּ מַלְאַךְ ה' שׁוּבִי אֶל גְּבִרְתֵּךְ וְהִתְעַנִּי וגו', (בראשית טז, י): וַיֹּאמֶר לָהּ מַלְאַךְ ה' הַרְבָּה וגו'. כַּמָּה מַלְאָכִים נִזְדַּוְּגוּ לָהּ, רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר חֲנִינָא אָמַר חֲמִשָּׁה, בְּכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר אֲמִירָה, מַלְאָךְ. רַבָּנָן אָמְרֵי אַרְבָּעָה, בְּכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר מַלְאָךְ. אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּא בּוֹא וּרְאֵה כַּמָּה בֵּין רִאשׁוֹנִים לְאַחֲרוֹנִים, מָנוֹחַ אָמַר לְאִשְׁתּוֹ (שופטים יג, כב): מוֹת נָמוּת כִּי אֱלֹהִים רָאִינוּ, וְהָגָר שִׁפְחַת שָׂרַי רוֹאָה חֲמִשָּׁה מַלְאָכִים בָּזֶה אַחַר זֶה וְלֹא נִתְיָרְאָה מֵהֶם. אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּא צִפָּרְנָן שֶׁל אָבוֹת וְלֹא כְרֵסָן שֶׁל בָּנִים. אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק (משלי לא, כז): צוֹפִיָּה הֲלִיכוֹת בֵּיתָהּ, בְּנֵי בֵיתוֹ שֶׁל אַבְרָהָם אָבִינוּ צוֹפִים הָיוּ, וְהָיְתָה רְגִילָה לִרְאוֹת בָּהֶם. | 45.7. "And he went into Hagar and she conceived (Gen. 16:4). Rabbi Levi bar Hayta said: She became pregt at the first intimacy. Said Rabbi Eleazar: A woman never conceives by the first intimacy. An objection is raised: surely it is written, So both of Lot's daughters got pregt by their father (Gen. 19:36)? Said R. Tanhuma: By an effort of will power they brought forth their virginity, and conceived at the second “act of intercourse”. [The first act is what they did to themselves. Said Rabbi Chanina ben Pazi: Thorns are neither weeded nor sown, but they grow and spring up on their own. But how much suffering and effort for wheat to grow! Why were the matriarchs barren? Rabbi Levi said in Rabbi Shila’s name and Rabbi Chelbo in R. Yocha’s name: Because the Holy One of Blessing yearns for their prayers and supplications, as it is written 'O my dove, you on the clefts of the rock let Me see your face, let Me hear your voice' (Song of Songs 2:14): Why did I make you barren? In order to 'see your face... hear your voice'. Rabbi Azariah said in the name of Rabbi Yocha bar Papa: So that their husbands might cling to them in their beauty. Rabbi Huna in the name of Rabbi Hiya bar Abba said: So that they might pass the greater part of their life without hard work. Rabbi Huna and R. Avun in the name of Rabbi Meir: So that their husbands might derive pleasure from them, for when a woman is with child she is disfigured and does not care for her appearance. The ninety years that Sarah did not bear she was like a bride in her canopy. Ladies would come to ask how she was, and she would say to them, 'Go and ask about the welfare of this wretched woman [Hagar]!' Hagar would tell them: 'My mistress Sarai is not inside what she is outside: she appears to be righteous but she is not righteous, had she been a righteous woman, see how many years have passed without her conceiving, whereas I conceived in one night!' Said Sarah: 'Am I going to argue with this woman?! I should argue with her master!...", |
|
| 60. Palestinian Talmud, Sotah, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66 |
| 61. Palestinian Talmud, Qiddushin, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 161 |
| 62. Palestinian Talmud, Nedarim, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 203 |
| 63. Palestinian Talmud, Kiddushin, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 161 |
| 64. Palestinian Talmud, Peah, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 189 |
| 65. Anon., Sifra, None (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 67 |
| 66. Palestinian Talmud, Taanit, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 133, 134, 135, 137, 138, 139, 140, 141, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 161, 162 |
| 67. Anon., Mekhilta Derabbi Yishmael, None (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 109 |
| 68. Palestinian Talmud, Demai, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 99 |
69. Babylonian Talmud, Yevamot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 68| 80a. שלא ראה שעה אחת בכשרותו מנא ידעינן אמר אביי כל המטיל מים ואינו עושה כיפה,ממאי הואי דאפיה אימיה בטיהרא ושתיא שיכרא מרקא אמר רב יוסף היינו דשמענא לאמי דאמר כל שממעי אמו לקוי ולא ידענא מאי ניהו,וליחוש שמא הבריא בינתים כיון דתחלתו וסופו לקוי לא חיישינן,מתיב רב מרי רבי חנינא בן אנטיגנוס אומר בודקין אותו שלש פעמים בתוך שמונים יום,לחד אבר חיישינן לכוליה גופא לא חיישינן:,רבי אליעזר אומר לא כי וכו': ורמינהו בן עשרים שנה ולא הביא שתי שערות יביאו ראיה שהוא בן עשרים והוא הסריס לא חולץ ולא מייבם בת עשרים ולא הביאה שתי שערות יביאו ראיה שהיא בת עשרים והיא האילונית לא חולצת ולא מתייבמת דברי בית הלל ובית שמאי אומרים זה וזה בני שמנה עשרה,רבי אליעזר אומר הזכר כדברי ב"ה ונקבה כדברי ב"ש מפני שהאשה ממהרת לבא לפני האיש,אמר רמי בר דיקולי אמר שמואל חזר בו ר' אליעזר איבעיא להו מהי הדר ביה תא שמע דתניא רבי אליעזר אומר סריס חמה חולץ וחולצין לאשתו שכן במינן מתרפאין באלכסנדריא של מצרים,רבי אלעזר אומר לעולם לא הדר ביה וכי תנן ההיא לעונשין,איתמר אכל חלב מבן שתים עשרה [ויום אחד] עד בן שמנה עשרה ונולדו בו סימני סריס ולאחר מכאן הביא שתי שערות רב אמר נעשה סריס למפרע ושמואל אמר קטן היה באותה שעה,מתקיף לה רב יוסף לרב אילונית לרבי מאיר יהא לה קנס,אמר ליה אביי מקטנותה יצתה לבגר,א"ל כל כי הני מילי מעלייתא יתאמרו משמאי דתניא אין הסריס נידון כבן סורר ומורה לפי שאין בן סורר ומורה נידון אלא בחתימת זקן התחתון ואין אילונית נידונית כנערה המאורסה שמקטנותה יצתה לבגר,אמר רבי אבהו סימני סריס ואילונית ובן שמנה אין עושין בהן מעשה עד שיהו בן עשרים,ובן שמנה מי קחיי והתניא בן שמנה הרי הוא כאבן ואסור לטלטלו אבל אמו שוחה עליו ומניקתו | 80a. b who never saw a single hour /b of life b in /b a state of b fitness, /b as he was born infertile. The Gemara asks: b How do we know /b that one was born this way and was never capable of having children? b Abaye said: Anyone who passes water and does not form an arch /b with his urine, but rather his urine dribbles out downward, never had sexual capacity.,Incidentally, the Gemara inquires: b From what /b does this defect arise? What is its cause? The Gemara answers: It results from b his mother baking /b bread b at noon and drinking strong beer [ i shikhra marka /i ] /b while pregt. The excessive heating of the mother’s body causes her child to be born with defective reproductive organs. b Rav Yosef said: This is /b the meaning of that b which I heard /b Rabbi b Ami say: Anyone who is impaired from his mother’s womb, and /b at the time b I did not know what /b he was referring to. Now I understand that he was speaking about a man who was infertile from birth.,The Gemara asks: b Let us be concerned that perhaps he was cured /b for some period b in the meantime, /b without our having known about it, in which case he would have had an hour of fitness at some point. The Gemara answers: b Since /b both b his beginning and his end are impaired, /b i.e., he was born with a defect and he presently suffers from the same condition, b we are not concerned /b about such a possibility., b Rav Mari raised an objection /b from the following mishna ( i Bekhorot /i 38b): b Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus says: One examines /b a firstborn animal that developed a blemish in its eye b three times within eighty days /b to see whether the defect is permanent. This shows that no presumptions are made in such a case; rather, there is concern that the animal may have been cured in the meantime, even if it had the defect at the beginning and at the end of the period.,The Gemara answers: b With respect to /b a blemish affecting b a single organ, /b e.g., an eye, b we are concerned /b that the blemish might have passed and then later redeveloped, but b with regard to /b a defect affecting b the entire body, we are not concerned /b about such a possibility. A eunuch is not impaired in a single organ; rather, he has a defect that affects his entire body. Consequently, there is no concern that, though he was born with the defect and presently suffers from it, he might have regained his potency for some time in the middle.,§ It is taught in the mishna that b Rabbi Eliezer says: No; rather, /b a eunuch by natural causes performs i ḥalitza /i , whereas a eunuch caused by man does not perform i ḥalitza /i . The Gemara b raises a contradiction /b from the following mishna ( i Nidda /i 47b): If b a twenty-year-old /b man b has not grown two /b pubic b hairs, /b a sign of sexual maturity, the relatives of the widow who wish to exempt her from i ḥalitza /i and levirate marriage b must bring proof that he is twenty years old, and he, /b having been established as b a sexually underdeveloped man, does not perform i ḥalitza /i or levirate marriage /b with his i yevama /i . If b a twenty-year-old /b woman b has not grown two /b pubic b hairs, /b the relatives of her deceased husband’s brother b must bring proof that she is twenty years old, and she, /b having been established as b a sexually underdeveloped woman, does not perform i ḥalitza /i or enter into levirate marriage /b with her i yavam /i . This is b the statement of Beit Hillel. And Beit Shammai say: /b With regard to both b this and that, /b males and females, the relevant age is b eighteen years old, /b not twenty.,The mishna continues: b Rabbi Eliezer says /b that for a b male /b the i halakha /i is b in accordance with the statement of Beit Hillel, and /b for b a female /b the i halakha /i is b in accordance with the statement of Beit Shammai, because a woman reaches /b maturity b more quickly than /b does b a man, /b and therefore, if she fails to develop the signs of maturity by the age of eighteen it is assumed that she is a sexually underdeveloped woman. In any case, it is clear from this mishna that even Rabbi Eliezer agrees that one who lacks sexual capacity from birth may neither perform i ḥalitza /i nor enter into levirate marriage., b Rami bar Dikulei said /b that b Shmuel said: Rabbi Eliezer retracted his /b opinion. b A dilemma was raised before /b the Sages: b Which /b statement b did he retract? /b Did he retract what he said here in the mishna, that a eunuch by natural causes performs i ḥalitza /i with his i yevama /i and his brothers perform i ḥalitza /i with his wife? Alternatively, perhaps the mishna here reflects his final view, after he retracted what he said in the other mishna. The Gemara suggests: b Come /b and b hear /b a resolution to this question, b as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Eliezer says: A eunuch by natural causes performs i ḥalitza /i /b with his i yevama /i b and /b his brothers b perform i ḥalitza /i with his wife, as such type /b of men b are cured in Alexandria of Egypt. /b This additional source and its reasoning suggest that Rabbi Eliezer did not retract what he said in the mishna here. Rather, he retracted his statement with regard to the dispute between Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai in the other mishna., b Rabbi Elazar says: Actually, he did not retract /b anything at all. b And when we learned /b Rabbi Eliezer’s ruling in b that /b mishna with regard to the age of a sexually underdeveloped individual, that ruling was stated b with regard to punishments, /b i.e., the age at which such an individual is considered an adult so that he is liable to receive punishment, and not with regard to i ḥalitza /i or levirate marriage.,And b it was stated /b that the i amora’im /i disagreed on this issue: With regard to one who b ate /b forbidden b fats /b or performed any other transgression for which one is liable to receive lashes or i karet /i , when he was b between the age of twelve years and one day and the age of eighteen years, and he developed the signs of one who was a eunuch /b by natural causes, as explained below, b and afterward he grew two /b pubic b hairs, Rav said: /b He is b retroactively considered a eunuch /b by natural causes. In other words, these hairs are not viewed as a sign of maturity. Rather, he lacked sexual capacity from the outset, which means he became an adult at the standard age of thirteen and is held liable for his actions from that point in time. b And Shmuel said: /b No, b he was a minor at the time /b he committed his offense, as the two hairs are a sign of his maturity, albeit delayed., b Rav Yosef strongly objects to this: /b If so, b according to Rav, a sexually underdeveloped woman according to Rabbi Meir should be entitled to the fine /b paid by a rapist. Rabbi Meir maintains that a rapist is liable to be fined only if he raped a young woman between the ages of twelve and twelve and a half, but not if he raped a minor. And furthermore, a sexually underdeveloped woman is not entitled to the fine because she is considered a minor, as she never showed the signs of maturity. But according to Rav she should retroactively be viewed as an adult and would therefore be entitled to the fine., b Abaye said to him: /b A sexually underdeveloped woman b passes /b directly b from minority to /b full b adulthood. /b In other words, she is first considered a minor and then immediately an adult, without passing through the intermediate stage of young womanhood, and an adult woman is not entitled to the rapist’s fine.,Greatly impressed with this answer, Rav Yosef b said to /b Abaye: Would that b all such excellent matters be stated in my name. As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b A sexually underdeveloped man is not judged as a stubborn and rebellious son, as /b a boy is b judged as a stubborn and rebellious son only when /b he has b the mark of /b his b lower beard, /b i.e., when his pubic hair begins to grow in. At that point he has reached the age of maturity but is not yet a fully developed man, a stage that parallels young womanhood for women. A sexually underdeveloped man never passes through this intermediate stage between minority and full adulthood. b And /b similarly, b a sexually underdeveloped woman /b who was betrothed and raped b is not judged /b in accordance with the laws governing b a betrothed young woman /b (see Deuteronomy 22:23–27), b as she passes /b directly b from minority to /b full b adulthood /b without the intermediate stage of young womanhood. Therefore, the i baraita /i fully corroborates Abaye’s view., b Rabbi Abbahu said: /b If one has b the signs of a sexually underdeveloped man; or /b the signs of b a sexually underdeveloped woman; or /b the signs of a child b born during the eighth /b month of pregcy, whose survival is uncertain; b no action is taken in their regard, /b i.e., the sexually underdeveloped male or female is not treated as an adult and the child born during the eighth month is not deemed viable, b until they are twenty /b years old.,The Gemara asks: b Can /b a child b born during the eighth /b month of pregcy b survive? But isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : A child b born during the eighth /b month b is like a stone /b with regard to the i halakhot /i of set-aside [ i muktze /i ] on Shabbat, and therefore b it is prohibited to move him /b on Shabbat, as it may be presumed that he is not viable at all. b However, his mother may bend over him and nurse him, /b |
|
| 70. Babylonian Talmud, Tamid, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 207, 213, 220, 234, 235 |
71. Babylonian Talmud, Taanit, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan 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. |
|
72. Babylonian Talmud, Sotah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 64, 65| 33a. כל התורה בכל לשון נאמרה דאי סלקא דעתך בלשון הקודש נאמרה והיו דכתב רחמנא למה לי,איצטריך משום דכתיב שמע,לימא קסברי רבנן כל התורה כולה בלשון קודש נאמרה דאי סלקא דעתך בכל לשון שמע דכתב רחמנא למה לי,איצטריך משום דכתיב והיו,תפלה רחמי היא כל היכי דבעי מצלי,ותפלה בכל לשון והאמר רב יהודה לעולם אל ישאל אדם צרכיו בלשון ארמית דאמר רבי יוחנן כל השואל צרכיו בלשון ארמי אין מלאכי השרת נזקקין לו לפי שאין מלאכי השרת מכירין בלשון ארמי,לא קשיא הא ביחיד הא בצבור,ואין מלאכי השרת מכירין בלשון ארמי והתניא יוחנן כהן גדול שמע ב"ק מבית קדש הקדשים שהוא אומר נצחו טליא דאזלו לאגחא קרבא לאנטוכיא ושוב מעשה בשמעון הצדיק ששמע בת קול מבית קדש הקדשים שהוא אומר בטילת עבידתא דאמר שנאה לאייתאה על היכלא ונהרג גסקלגס ובטלו גזירותיו וכתבו אותה שעה וכיוונו ובלשון ארמי היה אומר,אי בעית אימא בת קול שאני דלאשמועי עבידא ואי בעית אימא גבריאל הוה דאמר מר בא גבריאל ולימדו שבעים לשון,ברכת המזון דכתיב (דברים ח, י) ואכלת ושבעת וברכת את ה' אלהיך בכל לשון שאתה מברך,שבועת העדות דכתיב (ויקרא ה, א) ונפש כי תחטא ושמעה קול אלה בכל לשון שהיא שומעת,שבועת הפקדון אתיא תחטא תחטא משבועת העדות,ואלו נאמרין בלשון הקודש מקרא ביכורים וחליצה כו' עד מקרא ביכורים כיצד (דברים כו, ה) וענית ואמרת לפני ה' אלהיך ולהלן הוא אומר (דברים כז, יד) וענו הלוים ואמרו אל כל איש ישראל מה ענייה האמורה להלן בלשון הקודש אף כאן בלה"ק,ולוים גופייהו מנלן אתיא קול קול ממשה כתיב הכא קול רם וכתיב התם (שמות יט, יט) משה ידבר והאלהים יעננו בקול מה להלן בלשון הקודש אף כאן בלשון הקודש,חליצה כיצד וכו' ורבנן האי ככה מאי עבדי ליה מיבעי להו לדבר שהוא מעשה מעכב,ור' יהודה מכה ככה ורבנן כה ככה לא משמע להו | 33a. that b the entire Torah may be recited in any language, as, if it should enter your mind /b to say b that /b the entire Torah b may be recited /b only b in the sacred tongue /b and not in any other language, b why do I /b need b that which the Merciful One writes: “And /b these words, which I command you this day, b will be”? /b If in fact it is prohibited for one to recite any portion of the Torah in a language other than Hebrew, then prohibiting the recitation of i Shema /i in a language other than Hebrew is superfluous. Since the Torah specifically requires i Shema /i to be recited in Hebrew, it must be because the rest of the Torah may be recited in any language.,The Gemara rejects this suggestion: This is not unquestionably so, as the phrase “and these words, which I command you this day, will be” b is necessary /b in this case b because “hear” is /b also b written. /b Had it not said “and these words, which I command you this day, will be,” it would have been derived from the word “hear” that i Shema /i may be recited in any language, in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis. Therefore, the phrase “and these words, which I command you this day, will be” is necessary.,The Gemara asks: b Shall we say /b that b the Rabbis hold /b that b the entire Torah may be recited /b only b in the sacred tongue /b and not in any other language? b As, if it should enter your mind /b to say b that /b the Torah b may be recited in any language, why do I /b need b that which the Merciful One writes: “Hear”? /b It is permitted for one to recite the entire Torah in any language, rendering a specific requirement with regard to i Shema /i superfluous.,The Gemara rejects this: The word “hear” b is necessary /b in any case, b because “and /b these words, which I command you this day, b will be” is /b also b written. /b Had it not been for the word “hear,” the Rabbis would have understood that it is prohibited to recite i Shema /i in any other language, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Therefore, the word “hear” is necessary.,§ It is stated in the mishna that the i Amida /i b prayer /b may be recited in any language. The reason for this is that since prayer b is /b a request for divine b mercy, one may pray in any way that one desires. /b ,The Gemara asks: b But /b may b prayer /b really be recited b in any language? But didn’t Rav Yehuda say: A person should never request in the Aramaic language /b that b his needs /b be met, b as Rabbi Yoḥa said /b that with regard to b anyone who requests in the Aramaic language /b that b his needs /b be met, b the ministering angels do not attend to him, as the ministering angels are not familiar [ i makkirin /i ] with the Aramaic language? /b ,The Gemara answers: This is b not difficult, /b as b that /b statement of Rabbi Yoḥa is referring b to /b the prayer of b an individual, /b who needs the support of the angels, whereas b this /b statement of the mishna is referring b to communal /b prayer.,The Gemara asks: b And are the ministering angels not familiar with the Aramaic language? But isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i ( i Tosefta /i 13:5): b Yoḥa the High Priest heard a Divine Voice /b emerging b from the House of the Holy of Holies that was saying: The youth who went to wage war in Antokhya have been victorious. And /b there was b another incident involving Shimon HaTzaddik, who heard a Divine Voice /b emerging b from the House of the Holy of Holies that was saying: The decree that the enemy intended to bring against the Temple is annulled, and Gaskalgas, /b Caligula, b has been killed and his decrees have been voided. And /b people b wrote /b down b that time /b that the Divine Voice was heard, b and /b later found that it b matched /b exactly the moment that Caligula was killed. The Gemara concludes: b And /b this Divine Voice b was speaking in the Aramaic language. /b ,The Gemara answers: b If you wish, say /b that the b Divine Voice is different, as its purpose is to communicate /b a message, and therefore it also communicates in Aramaic. b And if you wish, say /b instead that b it was /b the angel b Gabriel, as the Master said /b with regard to Joseph: b Gabriel came and taught him seventy languages, /b as he knows all of the languages, as opposed to the other angels, who do not.,§ It is stated in the mishna that b Grace after Meals /b may be recited in any language. b As it is written: “And you shall eat, and be satisfied, and bless the Lord your God” /b (Deuteronomy 8:10). The word “bless” is homiletically interpreted to mean: b In any language that you bless. /b ,It is stated in the mishna that b an oath of testimony /b may be said in any language, b as it is written: “And if anyone sins, in that he heard the voice of adjuration” /b (Leviticus 5:1). The emphasis on hearing in the verse is interpreted to mean that it can be recited b in any language that a person hears, /b i.e., understands.,It is stated in the mishna that b an oath on a deposit /b may be taken in any language. This b is derived /b by means of a verbal analogy b from /b the word b “sins” /b (Leviticus 5:21) that appears in the portion of an oath on a deposit, and the word b “sins” /b (Leviticus 5:1) that is mentioned in the portion of b an oath of testimony. /b ,§ It is stated in the mishna: b And these are recited /b only b in the sacred tongue: The recitation of /b the verses that one recounts when bringing the b first fruits /b to the Temple; b and i ḥalitza /i …how /b is it derived that the b recitation /b when bringing the b first fruits /b is recited specifically in Hebrew? When the Torah discusses this mitzva it states: b “And you shall speak and say before the Lord your God” /b (Deuteronomy 26:5), b and below, /b in the discussion of the blessings and curses, b it states: “And the Levites shall speak and say to all the men of Israel” /b (Deuteronomy 27:14). b Just as there, /b in the portion of the Levites, they speak b in the sacred tongue, so too here, /b in the portion of the first fruits, the recitation is b in the sacred tongue. /b ,The Gemara asks: b And from where do we /b derive that b the Levites themselves /b answered in Hebrew? The Gemara answers: It is b derived from /b a verbal analogy between the word b “voice” /b that appears here, in the portion of the blessings and curses, and the word b “voice” /b in the verse that relates to b Moses. It is written here: “With a loud voice” /b (Deuteronomy 27:14), b and it is written there: “Moses spoke, and God answered him by a voice” /b (Exodus 19:19). b Just as there, /b the Ten Commandments were stated b in the sacred tongue, so too here, /b the Levites spoke b in the sacred tongue. /b ,It is stated in the mishna: b How /b is it derived that the recitation at b a i ḥalitza /i /b ceremony must be in Hebrew? The verse states: “And she shall speak and say: So shall it be done to the man that doth not build up his brother’s house” (Deuteronomy 25:9). Rabbi Yehuda derives this i halakha /i from the phrase: “And she shall speak and say: So” (Deuteronomy 25:9). The Gemara asks: b And what do the Rabbis do with, /b i.e., how do they interpret, b this /b word b “so”? They require /b it b to /b teach that any b matter /b detailed in the portion b that is an action is indispensable /b to the i ḥalitza /i ceremony, as the verse states: “So shall it be done.” However, the other aspects of the ritual, e.g., the recitations, are not indispensable, and in their absence the ritual is valid after the fact., b And Rabbi Yehuda /b derives this i halakha /i b from /b the fact that the verse could have used the shorter form of the word b so [ i ko /i ], /b and instead uses the longer form of the word b so [ i kakha /i ]. /b He therefore derives both i halakhot /i from this word. b And the Rabbis do not learn anything from /b the difference between b i ko /i /b and b i kakha /i . /b |
|
73. Babylonian Talmud, Shevuot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan 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 | |
|
74. Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 64, 65| 12b. רבי יהודה אומר המקום ירחם עליך ועל חולי ישראל רבי יוסי אומר המקום ירחם עליך בתוך חולי ישראל שבנא איש ירושלים בכניסתו אומר שלום וביציאתו אומר שבת היא מלזעוק ורפואה קרובה לבא ורחמיו מרובין ושבתו בשלום כמאן אזלא הא דאמר רבי חנינא מי שיש לו חולה בתוך ביתו צריך שיערבנו בתוך חולי ישראל כמאן כר' יוסי,ואמר רבי חנינא בקושי התירו לנחם אבלים ולבקר חולים בשבת אמר רבה בר בר חנה כי הוה אזלינן בתריה דרבי אלעזר לשיולי בתפיחה זימנין אמר המקום יפקדך לשלום וזימנין אמר (ליה) רחמנא ידכרינך לשלם היכי עביד הכי והאמר רב יהודה לעולם אל ישאל אדם צרכיו בלשון ארמי ואמר רבי יוחנן כל השואל צרכיו בלשון ארמי אין מלאכי השרת נזקקין לו שאין מלאכי השרת מכירין בלשון ארמי שאני חולה דשכינה עמו,דאמר רב ענן אמר רב מנין ששכינה סועד את החולה שנאמר (תהלים מא, ד) ה' יסעדנו על ערש דוי תניא נמי הכי הנכנס לבקר את החולה לא ישב לא על גבי מטה ולא על גבי כסא אלא מתעטף ויושב לפניו מפני ששכינה למעלה מראשותיו של חולה שנאמר ה' יסעדנו על ערש דוי ואמר רבא אמר רבין מנין שהקב"ה זן את החולה שנאמר ה' יסעדנו על ערש דוי:,ולא יקרא לאור הנר: אמר רבה אפילו גבוה שתי קומות ואפי' שתי מרדעות ואפילו עשרה בתים זו על גב זו חד הוא דלא ליקרי הא תרי שפיר דמי והתניא לא אחד ולא שנים אמר ר' אלעזר לא קשיא כאן בענין אחד כאן בשני ענינים אמר רב הונא ובמדורה אפי' עשרה בני אדם אסור,אמר רבא אם אדם חשוב הוא מותר מיתיבי לא יקרא לאור הנר שמא יטה אמר ר' ישמעאל בן אלישע אני אקרא ולא אטה פעם א' קרא ובקש להטות אמר כמה גדולים דברי חכמים שהיו אומרים לא יקרא לאור הנר ר' נתן אומר קרא והטה וכתב על פנקסו אני ישמעאל בן אלישע קריתי והטיתי נר בשבת לכשיבנה בהמ"ק אביא חטאת שמנה א"ר אבא שאני ר' ישמעאל בן אלישע הואיל ומשים עצמו על דברי תורה כהדיוט,תני חדא שמש בודק כוסות וקערות לאור הנר ותניא אידך לא יבדוק לא קשיא כאן בשמש קבוע כאן בשמש שאינו קבוע ואי בעית אימא הא והא בשמש קבוע ולא קשיא הא בדמשחא והא בדנפטא,איבעיא להו שמש שאינו קבוע בדמשחא מהו אמר רב הלכה ואין מורין כן ור' ירמיה בר אבא אמר הלכה ומורין כן ר' ירמיה בר אבא איקלע לבי רב אסי קם שמעיה קא בדיק לנהורא דשרגא אמרה ליה דביתהו ומר לא עביד הכי אמר לה שבקיה כרביה ס"ל:,באמת אמרו החזן כו': והאמרת רישא רואה מאי לאו לקרות לא לסדר ראשי פרשיותיו וכן אמר רבה בר שמואל אבל מסדר הוא ראשי פרשיותיו וכולה פרשה לא | 12b. b Rabbi Yehuda says /b that it is appropriate to say: b May the Omnipresent have compassion upon you and upon all the sick people of Israel. Rabbi Yosei says /b that it is appropriate to say: b May the Omnipresent have compassion upon you among the sick people of Israel, /b thereby including this sick person within the community of Israel. When b Shevna of Jerusalem /b would visit a sick person on Shabbat, b upon entering, he would say /b i shalom /i b . And when he exited he would say: It is Shabbat /b when one is prohibited b to cry out, and healing is soon to come, and His compassion is abundant, and rest /b on Shabbat b in peace. /b The Gemara asks: b In accordance with whose /b opinion b is /b the i halakha /i that b Rabbi Ḥanina said: One who has a sick person in his house must include him among the sick people of Israel /b in his prayer? b In accordance with whose /b opinion? b In accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yosei. /b , b And Rabbi Ḥanina said: It was /b only b with great difficulty that /b the Sages b permitted to comfort the mourners and visit the sick on Shabbat, /b as both the visitor and the comforter experience suffering on Shabbat. They permitted it only due to the mitzva involved in these activities. b Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: When we would follow Rabbi Elazar to inquire about /b the health of b a sick person; sometimes he would say /b in Hebrew: b May the Omnipresent remember you for peace /b , b and sometimes he would say to him /b in Aramaic: b May the all-Merciful remember you for peace. /b He would say it in Aramaic when the sick person did not understand Hebrew (Rav Elazar Moshe Horovitz). The Gemara asks: b How did he do this, /b pray in Aramaic? b Didn’t Rav Yehuda say: A person should never request /b that b his needs /b be met b in the Aramaic language /b ? b And, /b similarly, b Rabbi Yoḥa said: Anyone who requests /b that b his needs /b be met b in the Aramaic language /b , b the ministering angels do not attend to him /b to bring his prayer before God, b as the ministering angels are not familiar with the Aramaic language, /b but only with the sacred tongue, Hebrew, exclusively. The Gemara responds: b A sick person is different. /b He does not need the angels to bring his prayer before God because b the Divine Presence is with him. /b , b As Rav A said /b that b Rav said: From where is it derived that the Divine Presence cares for /b and aids b the sick person? As it is stated: “God will support him on the bed of illness” /b (Psalms 41:4). The Gemara comments: b That was also taught /b in a i baraita /i : b One who enters to visit the sick person should sit neither on the bed nor on a chair; rather, he should wrap himself /b in his prayer shawl with trepidation and awe, b and sit before /b the sick person below him, b as the Divine Presence is above the head of the sick person, as it is stated: “God will support him on the bed of illness,” /b and he must treat the Divine Presence with deference. On a similar note, b Rava said /b that b Ravin said: From where /b is it derived b that the Holy One, Blessed be He, feeds the sick person /b during his illness? b As it is stated: “God will support him on the bed of illness.” /b ,We learned in the mishna that b one may not read /b a book b by candlelight /b on Shabbat. b Rabba said: /b Since a decree was issued, there is no distinction whether or not the lamp was near enough to him to enable him to adjust the wick. The prohibition applies b even /b if the lamp was b two statures /b of a person b high, and even /b as high as b two plow handles, and even /b if it was as high as b ten houses one atop the other. /b We learned in the mishna that one may not read, and the Gemara infers: b One may not read, but /b for b two, /b apparently, he may b well /b do so. They will not violate any prohibition, as two people together will certainly not forget the Shabbat prohibition. The Gemara asks: b Wasn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i that b neither one nor two /b are permitted to read by the light of the lamp? b Rabbi Elazar said: /b This is b not difficult, /b as there is room to distinguish between them and say that b here, /b where two were permitted to read by candlelight, it is referring to a case where they are both engaged b in one matter /b and will remind each other to refrain from adjusting the wick. b There, /b where two were prohibited to read by candlelight it is referring to a case where they are engaged b in two /b different b matters. /b Since each is preoccupied with a different text, they will not pay attention and remind each other. b Rav Huna said: And with regard to a bonfire, /b where everyone is sitting around it and not adjacent to it, b even /b if they were b ten people, it is prohibited /b to read by its light. When sitting around a bonfire, everyone sits at a distance from the others, and therefore they do not notice each other, and each is liable to adjust the firebrands to provide himself with more light., b Rava said: /b Even though they prohibited reading by candlelight due to a decree lest they adjust the wick, b if he is an important person, it is permitted, /b as even on weekdays he is not accustomed to adjust a lamp that is dirty with oil. The Gemara b raises an objection /b from that which was taught in a i Tosefta /i : b One may not read /b a book on Shabbat b by the light of the lamp, lest he adjust it. /b The i Tosefta /i relates that b Rabbi Yishmael ben Elisha said: I will read and will not adjust, /b as I will certainly not forget that it is Shabbat. However, b once he read /b a book by candlelight b and /b he b sought to adjust /b the wick. b He said: How great are the words of the Sages, who would say /b that b one may not read by candlelight, /b as even a person like me sought to adjust the wick. b Rabbi Natan says: /b That was not the way it happened. Rather, b he read and /b actually b adjusted /b the wick, b and he wrote /b afterward b in his notebook [ i pinkas /i ]: I, Yishmael ben Elisha, read and adjusted a lamp on Shabbat. When the Temple will be rebuilt I will bring a fat sin-offering /b as atonement for this sin. This proves that even an important person like Rabbi Yishmael ben Elisha is liable to adjust the wick. b Rabbi Abba said: Rabbi Yishmael ben Elisha is different, since with regard to the study of Torah, he comports himself like a simple man /b with no air of importance, but generally, an important person would not dirty his hands and adjust the wick.,On this subject, the Gemara cites two apparently contradictory i baraitot /i . b It was taught /b in b one /b i baraita /i that a b servant may examine cups and bowls by candlelight /b to check if they are clean. b And it was taught /b in b another /b i baraita /i that b he may not examine /b them. The Gemara explains: This is b not difficult. /b Rather, b here, /b the i baraita /i that prohibited examining the cups, is referring b to a regularly /b employed b servant /b who fears his master and examines the dishes meticulously. Therefore, there is concern lest he come to adjust the wick. While b there, /b the i baraita /i that permitted examining the cups, is referring b to a servant who is not regularly /b employed, does not fear his master, and therefore will not check meticulously. There is no concern lest he come to adjust the wick. b And if you wish, say /b instead that b this /b i baraita /i b and that /b i baraita /i are both referring b to a regularly /b employed b servant. And /b this is b not difficult, /b as they are not referring to the same kind of lamp. b This /b i baraita /i , which prohibited examining the dishes, is referring b to an oil lamp, /b where there is room for concern lest he adjust it. b And that /b i baraita /i , which permitted examining the dishes, is referring b to a naphtha /b [ b i nafta /i /b ] b lamp. /b Since the naphtha lamp is dirty, the servant certainly will not touch it while checking the cups and dishes., b A dilemma was raised before /b the Sages: b What is /b the ruling with regard to b a servant who is not regularly /b employed in terms of examining cups and dishes by the light of b an oil lamp? /b Is he permitted to examine the cups by candlelight, or not? From the perspective of his being a servant not regularly employed, it should be permitted. On the other hand, because it is an oil lamp it should be prohibited. b Rav said: The i halakha /i /b is that it is permitted, b and, /b however, i ab initio /i b a /b public b ruling is not issued to that effect /b so that they will not come to sin. However, one who knows the i halakha /i that it is permitted may practice accordingly. b Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba said: That i halakha /i is /b that it is permitted b and a /b public b ruling is issued to that effect. /b The Gemara relates that b Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba happened to /b come to b the house of Rav Asi /b on Shabbat. Rabbi Yirmeya’s b servant stood and examined the cups by the light of a lamp /b [ b i sheraga /i /b ], as he was not a regularly employed servant in the house of Rav Asi. Rav Asi’s b wife said to /b Rav Asi: But b the Master, /b you, b does not do so. /b You prohibit doing so. Why is the servant of Rabbi Yirmeya examining the cups? b He said to her: Leave him, he holds in accordance with /b the opinion of b his master. /b ,We learned in the mishna that b in truth they said /b that b the attendant /b sees where in the book the children under his supervision are reading, but he himself should not read. The Gemara asked: b Didn’t you say in the first clause /b of the mishna that the attendant b sees? Doesn’t /b that mean that he sees in order b to read? /b How can that part of the mishna conclude by saying that he may not read? The Gemara answers: b No, /b it does not mean that the attendant is permitted to actually read; rather, he is only permitted b to /b look and b arrange the beginning of his sections /b of the Torah that b he /b must read the next day. b And so too, Rabba bar Shmuel said: However, he may arrange the beginning of his sections /b that he must read the next day. The Gemara asks: b And /b may he b not /b read b the entire section? /b |
|
75. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 109| 80b. אלא למ"ד זה וזה גורם מותר מאי איכא למימר,אלא אמר רבינא אימא אם עד שלא נגמר דינה עיברה וילדה ולדה מותר ואם עד שלא נגמר דינה עיברה ומשנגמר דינה ילדה ולדה אסור עובר ירך אמו הוא:,כל חייבי מיתות: ש"מ מותרה לדבר חמור הוי מותרה לדבר קל,א"ר ירמיה הכא במאי עסקינן כגון שהתרו בו סתם והאי תנא הוא דתניא ושאר חייבי מיתות שבתורה אין ממיתין אותן אלא בעדה ועדים והתראה ועד שיודיעוהו שהוא חייב מיתת ב"ד רבי יהודה אומר עד שיודיעוהו באיזה מיתה הוא נהרג,ת"ק יליף ממקושש ורבי יהודה אומר מקושש הוראת שעה היתה:,הנסקלין בנשרפין: מתני ליה רב יחזקאל לרמי בריה הנשרפין בנסקלין ר"ש אומר ידונו בסקילה שהשריפה חמורה,אמר ליה רב יהודה אבא לא תיתנייה הכי מאי איריא דשריפה חמורה תיפוק ליה דרובה נסקלין נינהו אלא היכי אתנייה,הנסקלין בנשרפין ר"ש אומר ידונו בסקילה שהשריפה חמורה אי הכי אימא סיפא וחכ"א ידונו בשריפה שהסקילה חמורה תיפוק ליה דרובה נשרפין נינהו,התם רבנן הוא דקאמרו ליה לר"ש לדידך דאמרת שריפה חמורה לא סקילה חמורה,אמר ליה שמואל לרב יהודה שיננא | 80b. b But according to the one who says /b that in a case where b this /b permitted factor b and that /b forbidden factor b cause /b an outcome to be produced, that outcome is b permitted, what can be said? /b Since deriving benefit from the bull that sired the offspring is permitted, deriving benefit from the offspring should be permitted as well., b Rather, Ravina says: /b Emend the i baraita /i and b say /b that the distinction in the i baraita /i is: b If before its verdict was finalized, /b the cow b was impregnated and calved, its offspring is permitted. If before its verdict was finalized, /b the cow b was impregnated and after its verdict was finalized it calved, its offspring is forbidden /b because the legal status of b the fetus is /b not that of an independent entity; rather, its status is like that of b its mother’s thigh, /b i.e., a part of its body. Therefore, when the mother is sentenced to death, the offspring is also forbidden once it is born.,§ The mishna teaches: b All /b those b liable to /b be executed with different court-imposed b death /b penalties who became intermingled are sentenced to the most lenient form of execution. The Gemara noted: b Conclude from /b the mishna that an individual who is b forewarned for a severe matter is forewarned for a lesser matter. /b If one is forewarned that if he violates a certain prohibition then he is liable to be stoned, while in fact, he is liable to be executed with a less severe form of execution, the forewarning is effective and he is executed with the less severe form of execution. That is the reason for the i halakha /i in the mishna that even those liable to be executed with a more severe form of execution are executed with the less severe form of execution., b Rabbi Yirmeya /b rejects that proof and b says: With what are we dealing here? /b It is a case b where /b the witnesses b forewarned /b the individual that if he violates the prohibition he is liable to be executed, b without specification /b of the mode of execution. b And /b this i halakha /i b is /b in accordance with the opinion of b this i tanna /i , as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : With regard to b all the others, /b those who are b liable for /b the various b death penalties /b stated b in the Torah /b other than the inciter to idol worship, the court b executes them only when /b the following elements are present: b The congregation, /b represented by the court, b and witnesses, and forewarning /b just before the defendant commits the transgression. b And /b the court does not execute him b unless /b the witnesses b informed /b the defendant b that he is liable /b to receive b the death penalty from /b the b court. Rabbi Yehuda says: /b The defendant is not executed b unless /b the witnesses b informed /b the defendant b by which /b form of b death /b penalty b he is /b to be b executed. /b ,Based on the statement of Rabbi Yehuda, it may be inferred that according to the first i tanna /i , although they must inform him that he is liable to be executed, they are not required to inform him of the specific mode of execution. The Gemara explains the basis for the dispute between the first i tanna /i and Rabbi Yehuda: b The first i tanna /i derived /b forewarning b from /b the incident of the b wood gatherer /b (see Numbers 15:32–36), who was executed even though even Moses did not know with which death penalty he was to be executed. Clearly, the mode of execution could not have been included in his forewarning. b Rabbi Yehuda says: /b The execution of the b wood gatherer was a provisional edict /b based on the word of God. The i halakha /i throughout the generations cannot be derived from it.,§ The mishna teaches: In a case where those b who are /b liable to be b stoned /b were intermingled b with /b those b who are /b liable to be b burned, /b Rabbi Shimon says: They are all sentenced to be executed by stoning, and the Rabbis say: They are all sentenced to be executed by burning. b Rav Yeḥezkel taught /b a different version b to Rami, his son: /b In a case where those b who are /b liable to be b burned /b were intermingled b with /b those b who are /b liable to be b stoned, Rabbi Shimon says: They shall /b all b be sentenced /b to execution b by stoning, as burning is /b a more b severe /b form of execution., b Rav Yehuda, /b son of Rav Yeḥezkel, b said to him: Father, do not teach it /b in b that manner, /b as it is difficult to understand: b Why /b does Rabbi Shimon teach that the reason is b specifically that burning is /b a more b severe /b form of execution than stoning? b Derive /b this i halakha /i , b that /b they are stoned, for a different reason: The principle with regard to a mixture is to follow the majority, and in b this /b case b the majority /b of the intermingled group b is liable to be stoned. /b Rav Yeḥezkel asked Rav Yehuda: b Rather, how /b then b shall I teach it? /b ,Rav Yehuda said: You should teach: In a case where those b who are /b liable to be b stoned /b were intermingled b with /b those b who are /b liable to be b burned, /b where the majority is liable to be burned, b Rabbi Shimon says: They shall /b all b be sentenced /b to execution b by stoning, as burning is /b a more b severe /b form of execution. Rav Yeḥezkel, his father, asked: b If so, say the latter clause /b of the mishna: b And the Rabbis say: They shall /b all b be sentenced /b to execution b by burning, as stoning is /b a more b severe /b form of execution. If so, b derive /b this i halakha /i , b that /b they are burned because in b this /b case b the majority /b of the intermingled group b is liable to be burned, /b not because stoning is a more severe form of execution.,Rav Yehuda answered: b There, /b in the latter clause, b it is the Rabbis who say to Rabbi Shimon: According to you, who say /b that b burning is /b a more b severe /b form of execution than stoning, the fact that the majority is liable to be burned does not warrant the execution of the entire group by burning, since the minority was sentenced to stoning, which is more lenient in your opinion. That is b not /b so, as b stoning is /b a more b severe /b form of execution. And that reason is extraneous, as in this case, they are burned because the majority of the group is liable to be burned.,When this narrative was heard, b Shmuel said to Rav Yehuda: Long-toothed one: /b |
|
76. Babylonian Talmud, Rosh Hashanah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic 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 |
|
77. Babylonian Talmud, Niddah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 68| 47b. הכף,וכן היה רבי שמעון (בן יוחי) אומר שלשה סימנין נתנו חכמים באשה מלמטה וכנגדן מלמעלה פגה מלמעלה בידוע שלא הביאה שתי שערות בוחל מלמעלה בידוע שהביאה שתי שערות צמל מלמעלה בידוע שנתמעך הכף,מאי כף אמר רב הונא מקום תפוח יש למעלה מאותו מקום כיון שמגדלת מתמעך והולך שאלו את רבי הלכה כדברי מי שלח להו כדברי כולן להחמיר,רב פפא ורב חיננא בריה דרב איקא חד מתני אהא וחד מתני אחצר צורית דתנן איזוהי חצר צורית שחייבת במעשר ר"ש אומר חצר הצורית שהכלים נשמרים בתוכה,מאי חצר הצורית אמר רבה בר בר חנה א"ר יוחנן שכן בצור מושיבין שומר על פתח החצר ר"ע אומר כל שאחד פותח ואחד נועל פטורה,ר' נחמיה אומר כל שאין אדם בוש לאכול בתוכה חייבת רבי יוסי אומר כל שנכנסים לה ואין אומרים לו מה אתה מבקש פטורה,ר' יהודה אומר שתי חצרות זו לפנים מזו הפנימית חייבת והחיצונה פטורה,שאלו את רבי הלכה כדברי מי אמר להו הלכה כדברי כולן להחמיר, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big בת עשרים שנה שלא הביאה שתי שערות תביא ראיה שהיא בת עשרים שנה והיא איילונית לא חולצת ולא מתיבמת,בן עשרים שנה שלא הביא שתי שערות יביאו ראיה שהוא בן עשרים שנה והוא סריס לא חולץ ולא מיבם אלו דברי בית הלל בית שמאי אומרים זה וזה בן שמונה עשרה,ר' אליעזר אומר הזכר כדברי בית הלל והנקבה כדברי בית שמאי שהאשה ממהרת לבא לפני האיש, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ורמינהי אחד לי בן תשע שנים ויום אחד ואחד לי בן עשרים שלא הביא שתי שערות,אמר רב שמואל בר רב יצחק אמר רב והוא שנולדו בו סימני סריס אמר רבא דיקא נמי דקתני והוא סריס ש"מ,וכי לא נולדו לו סימני סריס עד כמה תני ר' חייא עד רוב שנותיו,כי אתו לקמיה דרבי חייא אי כחיש אמר להו אבריוה אי בריא אמר להו אכחשוה דהני סימנים זימנין דאתו מחמת כחישותא זימנין דאתו מחמת בריאותא,אמר רב הלכתא בכולי פרקא מעת לעת ועולא אמר דתנן תנן ודלא תנן לא תנן,בשלמא לעולא היינו דקתני הכא יום אחד והכא לא קתני אלא לרב ליתני,ועוד תני רבי יוסי בן כיפר אומר משום רבי אליעזר שנת עשרים שיצאו ממנה שלשים יום הרי היא כשנת עשרים לכל דבריה וכן הורה רבי בלוד שנת שמנה עשרה שיצאו ממנה שלשים יום הרי היא כשנת שמנה עשרה לכל דבריה,בשלמא דרבי ודרבי יוסי בן כיפר לא קשיא הא כבית שמאי הא כבית הילל אלא לרב קשיא,תנאי היא דתניא שנה האמורה בקדשים שנה האמורה בבתי ערי חומה שתי שנים שבשדה אחוזה,שש שנים שבעבד עברי וכן שבבן ושבבת כולן מעת לעת,שנה האמורה בקדשים מנא לן אמר רב אחא בר יעקב אמר קרא (ויקרא יב, ו) כבש בן שנתו שנתו שלו ולא שנה של מנין עולם,שנה האמורה בבתי ערי חומה מנלן אמר קרא (ויקרא כה, כט) עד תום שנת ממכרו ממכרו שלו ולא שנת של מנין עולם שתי שנים שבשדה אחוזה מנלן אמר קרא {ויקרא כה } במספר | 47b. of b the protuberance above the womb, /b the mons pubis., b And Rabbi Shimon /b ben Yoḥai b would likewise say: The Sages provided three signs /b indicating puberty b in a woman below, /b i.e., near her vagina, b and /b they stated three b corresponding /b signs b above. /b If a woman has the signs of b an unripe fig above, it is known that she has not grown two /b pubic b hairs; /b if she has the signs of b a ripening fig above, it is known that she has grown two hairs; /b and if she has the signs of b a ripe fig above, it is known that the protuberance has softened. /b ,The Gemara asks: b What /b is this b protuberance? Rav Huna says: There is a swollen place /b in a woman’s body, b above that place, /b a euphemism for the vagina. It is initially hard, but b when /b a girl b grows it increasingly softens. /b The Sages b asked Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi: With regard to the signs of maturity in woman, b in accordance with whose statement is the i halakha /i ? He sent them /b in response: The i halakha /i b is stringent in accordance with all of their statements, /b i.e., if any one of these signs mentioned by the Sages cited above appears in a girl, she must be treated as an adult with regard to all stringent aspects of this classification., b Rav Pappa and Rav Ḥina, son of Rav Ika, /b disagree about the context of this statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi that the i halakha /i is stringent in accordance with all of the Sages’ statements. b One /b of them b teaches /b it b with regard to this /b matter, of a woman’s signs of puberty, b and /b the other b one teaches /b it b with regard to /b the case of b a Tyrian courtyard, as we learned /b in a mishna ( i Ma’asrot /i 3:5): b What is a Tyrian courtyard, which /b renders food brought inside it to be b required to be tithed? Rabbi Shimon says: A Tyrian courtyard /b is one b inside of which vessels are safe. /b ,The Sages discuss this mishna: b What /b is the meaning of b a Tyrian courtyard? Rabba bar bar Ḥana says /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa says: /b The courtyard is called by this name b as /b the custom b in /b the city of b Tyre /b is to b place a watchman at the entrance of the courtyard /b to guard the articles inside. Consequently, any courtyard in which vessels are safe is called a Tyrian courtyard. b Rabbi Akiva says: /b In b any /b courtyard b where /b there is no permanent watchman who locks and unlocks it, but rather b one /b of its residents b opens /b the courtyard b and /b another b one locks /b it, e.g., a courtyard shared by several partners, each of whom can do as he chooses without asking the other, the produce inside it is b exempt /b from the obligation of separating tithe, as such a courtyard is not considered one in which vessels are safe., b Rabbi Neḥemya says: Any /b courtyard b which /b is hidden from the gaze of outsiders, and therefore b a person is not ashamed to eat inside it, /b that courtyard renders produce inside it b obligated /b to have tithe separated from it. b Rabbi Yosei says: Any /b courtyard b that /b one who does not live there b can enter it, and /b the residents b do not say to him: What do you want /b here, produce inside such a courtyard is b exempt /b from tithe., b Rabbi Yehuda says: /b If there are b two courtyards, one within the other, /b positioned in such a manner that the residents of the inner courtyard cannot enter their houses without passing through the outer courtyard, whereas the residents of the outer courtyard do not traverse the inner one, b the inner /b courtyard renders any produce located inside it b obligated /b to have tithe separated from it, b but /b produce located in b the outer /b courtyard is b exempt /b from tithe. It is not safe, as residents of a different courtyard pass freely through it.,According to the opinion of one of the i amora’im /i mentioned above, i.e., either Rav Pappa or Rav Ḥina, son of Rav Ika, it was with regard to this issue that the Sages b asked Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi: b In accordance with whose statement is the i halakha /i ? He said to them: The i halakha /i is stringent in accordance with all of /b the Sages’ b statements. /b In other words, with regard to any courtyard in which produce must be tithed according to any of these opinions, the i halakha /i is that tithe must be separated from this produce., strong MISHNA: /strong A girl twelve years and one day old who grew two pubic hairs is classified as a young woman. Six months later, she becomes a grown woman. But a woman who is b twenty years old who did not grow two /b pubic b hairs /b and was never classified as a young woman b shall bring proof that she is twenty years old, and /b from that point forward b she /b assumes the status of b a sexually underdeveloped woman [ i ailonit /i ], /b who is incapable of bearing children. If she married and her husband died childless, b she neither performs i ḥalitza /i nor does she enter into levirate marriage, /b as the mitzva of levirate marriage applies only to a woman capable of conceiving a child. An i ailonit /i is excluded from that mitzva.,In the case of a man who is b twenty years old who did not grow two /b pubic b hairs, they shall bring proof that he is twenty years old and he /b assumes the status of b a sexually underdeveloped man [ i saris /i ], /b who is excluded from the mitzva of levirate marriage. Therefore, if his married brother dies childless, b he neither performs i ḥalitza /i nor enters into levirate marriage /b with his i yevama /i . b This is the statement of Beit Hillel. Beit Shammai say: /b For both b this /b case of a woman b and that /b case of a man, they shall bring proof that they are b eighteen years old, /b and they assume the status of a sexually underdeveloped woman and man respectively., b Rabbi Eliezer says: /b The status of b the male /b is determined b in accordance with the statement of Beit Hillel, /b i.e., he assumes the status of a sexually underdeveloped man at the age of twenty; b and /b the status of b the female /b is determined b in accordance with the statement of Beit Shammai, /b i.e., she assumes the status of a sexually underdeveloped woman at the age of eighteen. The reason is b that the woman is quick to reach /b physical maturity, and reaches that stage b before the man /b reaches physical maturity., strong GEMARA: /strong The mishna teaches that a sexually underdeveloped man does not enter into levirate marriage with the widow of his childless brother. b And /b the Gemara b raises a contradiction /b from another mishna ( i Yevamot /i 96b): A boy who is b nine years and one day old, /b who has not developed two hairs, b and /b a man who is b twenty years old who has not grown two hairs, are one and the same to me /b with regard to levirate marriage, in that if they engaged in intercourse with the widow of their childless brother, this levirate marriage is partially effective, to the extent that this woman requires both a bill of divorce and i ḥalitza /i ., b Rav Shmuel bar Yitzḥak says /b that b Rav says /b in explanation of the ruling of the mishna here: b And this /b i halakha /i applies only in a case b where he developed /b physical b signs of a sexually underdeveloped man /b (see i Yevamot /i 80b) by the age of twenty. By contrast, the mishna in i Yevamot /i is referring to one who did not develop signs of a sexually underdeveloped man. b Rava said: /b The language of the mishna b is also precise, as it teaches: And he is a sexually underdeveloped man, /b which indicates that he had already developed physical signs of such a condition. The Gemara concludes: b Conclude from it /b that this is the correct interpretation of the mishna.,The Gemara asks a question with regard to the i halakha /i itself: b And /b in a case b where he does not develop the signs of a sexually underdeveloped man, until what /b age is he considered a minor? b Rabbi Ḥiyya teaches: Until most of his years /b have passed, i.e., until he reaches the age of thirty-five, halfway to seventy, which is the standard length of a person’s life.,The Gemara relates: b When /b people b would come before Rabbi Ḥiyya /b to inquire about someone who had reached the age of puberty but had not yet developed the physical signs of maturity, b if /b the person in question was b thin, he /b would b say to them: Go /b and b fatten him /b up before we decide on his status. b If /b he was b fat, /b Rabbi Ḥiyya would b say to them: Go /b and b make him thin. As these signs /b indicating puberty b sometimes come due to thinness /b and b sometimes they come due to fatness. /b It is therefore possible that after his bodily shape is properly adjusted this individual will develop the signs indicating puberty and will not have the status of a sexually underdeveloped man.,§ b Rav said: The i halakha /i in /b this b entire chapter /b with regard to all of the places where an age is mentioned in years is that even when the phrase: And one day, is not explicitly noted, they are all calculated b from /b the b time /b of year of birth b until /b that same b time /b of year in the age specified. b And Ulla said: /b With regard to cases b where we learned /b in the mishna a quantity of years including the phrase: And one day, b we learned /b that the reference is to full years; b and /b with regard to cases b where we did not learn /b this phrase, i.e., where a quantity of years is mentioned in the mishna without the phrase: And one day, b we did not learn /b it, and part of the final year is equivalent to a whole year.,The Gemara discusses these two opinions. b Granted, according to Ulla, this /b is the reason b that /b the i tanna /i b teaches there, /b in previous i mishnayot /i (44b, 45a, 45b): And b one day; and here, /b in this mishna, the i tanna /i b does not teach /b this phrase. b But according to Rav, let /b the i tanna /i be consistent and b teach /b this phrase in all cases, including the mishna here., b And furthermore, it is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Yosei ben Keifar says in the name of Rabbi Eliezer /b with regard to the i halakhot /i of a sexually underdeveloped man and a sexually underdeveloped woman: b The twentieth year, of which thirty days have passed, /b i.e., from the age of nineteen and thirty days, b is /b considered b like the twentieth year in all regards; and Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b similarly issued /b a practical b ruling /b of i halakha /i b in /b the city of b Lod, /b that b the eighteenth year of which thirty days have passed is /b considered b like the eighteenth year in all regards. /b , b Granted, /b according to the opinion of Ulla, it is b not difficult that Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi is referring to the eighteenth year whereas b Rabbi Yosei ben Keifar /b discusses the twentieth year, as b this /b statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Beit Shammai /b with regard to the age of a sexually underdeveloped woman, and b that /b statement of Rabbi Yosei ben Keifar is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Beit Hillel. But according to /b the opinion of b Rav, /b who maintains that full years are required for a sexually underdeveloped man or woman, this i baraita /i poses b a difficulty. /b ,The Gemara answers that this matter b is /b a dispute between b i tanna’im /i , /b and Rav maintains in accordance with the opinion that full years are required. b As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : Full years are required with regard to the period of one b year stated with regard to sacrificial /b animals, e.g., “a lamb in its first year” (Leviticus 12:6); the one b year stated with regard to houses of walled cities, /b during which one can redeem a house he has sold in a walled city (see Leviticus 25:29); and the b two years /b stated b with regard to an ancestral field, /b during which one cannot yet redeem an ancestral field he has sold (see Leviticus 25:15).,The b six years /b stated b with regard to a Hebrew slave /b (see Exodus 21:2) b and similarly /b the years b of a son and of a daughter, /b as will be explained, b all of /b these are years b from /b the b time /b of the first year b until /b that same b time /b of year in the year specified, i.e., these periods are units of whole years instead of expiring on predetermined dates, as at the end of the calendar year. This supports the opinion of Rav that the years mentioned with regard to a sexually underdeveloped man or woman are full years.,The Gemara asks: b From where do we /b derive that the one b year stated with regard to sacrificial /b animals is calculated by whole years and not by calendar years? b Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said /b that b the verse states: “A lamb in its first year” /b (Leviticus 12:6). Since the verse does not state: A one-year-old lamb, it means b a year /b based on calculation of b its /b life, b and not a year of the universal count, /b i.e., the calendar year.,The Gemara further asks: b From where do we /b derive the i halakha /i that the one b year stated with regard to houses of walled cities /b is calculated by a whole year and not by calendar year? b The verse states: /b “Then he may redeem it b within a whole year after it is sold, /b for a full year he shall have the right of redemption” (Leviticus 25:29). The verse is referring to a year counted from the day b of its /b own b sale, and not the year of the universal count. From where do we /b derive that the b two years /b stated b with regard to an ancestral field /b are whole years? b The verse states: /b “According the number of years after the Jubilee you shall buy from your neighbor, and b according to the number /b |
|
78. Babylonian Talmud, Nedarim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 72| 25a. אמר ליה כי משתבע אדעתא דידן משתבע ואנן לא מסקינן נפשין אשומשמני,ועל דעתא דנפשיה לא עביד איניש דמשתבע והתניא כשהן משביעין אותו אומרים לו הוי יודע שלא על תנאי שבלבך אנו משביעין אותך אלא על דעתינו ועל דעת בית דין לאפוקי מאי לאו לאפוקי דאסיק להו לאיסקונדרי ואסיק להון שמא זוזי,ומדקאמר על דעתינו מכלל דעביד אינש דמשתבע אדעתא דנפשיה,לא לאפוקי מקניא דרבא דההוא גברא דהוה מסיק בחבריה זוזי אתא לקמיה דרבא אמר ליה ללווה זיל פרע לי אמר ליה פרעתיך אמר ליה רבא אם כן זיל אישתבע ליה דפרעתיה,אזל ואייתי קניא ויהיב זוזי בגויה והוה מסתמיך ואזיל ואתי עליה לבי דינא אמר ליה למלוה נקוט האי קניא בידך נסב ספר תורה ואישתבע דפרעיה כל מה דהוה ליה בידיה,ההוא מלוה רגז ותברה לההוא קניא ואישתפך הנהו זוזי לארעא ואישתכח דקושטא אישתבע,ואכתי לא עביד דמישתבע אדעתא דנפשיה והתניא וכן מצינו במשה רבינו כשהשביע את ישראל בערבות מואב אמר להם הוו יודעים שלא על דעתכם אני משביע אתכם אלא על דעתי ועל דעת המקום שנאמר ולא אתכם לבדכם וגו' (דברים כט יג),מאי אמר להו משה לישראל לאו הכי קאמר להו דלמא עבידתון מילי ואמריתון על דעתינו משום הכי אמר להו על דעתי לאפוקי מאי לאו לאפוקי דאסיקו שמא לעבודת כוכבים אלוה מכלל דעביד איניש דמשתבע אדעתא דנפשיה,לא עבודת כוכבים איקרי אלוה דכתיב ובכל אלהי מצרים וגו',ולשבע יתהון דמקיימיתון מצוות משמע מצוַת המלך,ולשבע יתהון דמקיימיתון כל מצוות משמע מצוַת ציצית דאמר מר שקולה מצוַת ציצית כנגד כל מצוות שבתורה,ולשבע יתהון דמקיימיתון תורה משמע תורה אחת ולשבע יתהון דמקיימיתון תורות משמע תורת מנחה תורת חטאת תורת אשם ולשבע יתהון דמקיימיתון [תורות] ומצוות [תורות] משמע תורת המנחה מצוות משמע מצות המלך,ולשבע יתהון דמקיימיתון תורה כולה תורה כולה משמע עבודת כוכבים דתניא חמורה עבודת כוכבים שכל הכופר בה כאילו מודה בתורה כולה,ולשבע יתהון דמקיימיתון עבודת כוכבים ותורה כולה אי נמי שש מאות ושלוש עשרה מצוות אלא משה רבינו מילתא דלא טריחא נקט:,אם לא ראיתי נחש כקורת בית הבד: ולא והא ההוא חויא דהוה בשני שבור מלכא רמו ליה תליסר אורוותא דתיבנא ובלע יתהון אמר שמואל בטרוף כולהו נחשי מיטרף טרפי אגבו טרוף קאמרינן,ולתני טרוף מילתא אגב אורחיה קא משמע לן דקורת בית הבד גבו טרוף למאי נפקא מינה למקח וממכר לומר לך המוכר קורת בית הבד לחבירו אי גבו טרוף אין ואי לא לא: | 25a. Rav Ashi b said to him: When he takes an oath, he takes an oath based on our understanding, /b which is that of an ordinary person, b and we do not entertain /b the possibility b in our mind /b that he is b referring to ants [ i shumshemanei /i ]. /b Therefore, if he took an oath in that manner, it is assumed that he referred to people, like those that left Egypt.,The Gemara asks: b And does a person not take an oath according to his own understanding? /b There are times when one takes an oath with a particular stipulation in mind or intends a special meaning to his words. b But isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b When /b the judges b administer an oath /b to one who claims he paid a debt, b they say to him: Know that we do not administer an oath to you based on a stipulation in your heart, /b i.e., you cannot claim that you are taking the oath based on a condition you have in mind. b Rather, /b your oath is taken b based on our understanding and on the understanding of the court. /b The Gemara clarifies: b What does /b the phrase that they say to him: Based on our understanding, come b to exclude? Does it not /b serve b to exclude /b a case b where one gave /b the debtor b tokens [ i iskundarei /i ] /b from a game, b and /b in his mind b he gives them /b the b title /b of b coins /b and takes an oath that he returned these coins, which is the truth based on his unspoken thoughts.,The Gemara clarifies its question: b And since /b the i baraita /i b says /b that the oath taken in court is: b According to our understanding, by inference /b it means b that a person commonly takes an oath according to his own understanding /b and the oath would take effect according to his intent. Therefore, such a practice must be specifically excluded when taking an oath in a court.,The Gemara responds: b No, /b this warning comes b to exclude /b a case similar to b that cane of Rava, /b in which a person attempts to deceive the court but does not necessarily utilize his own terminology, b as /b there was b a certain man who claimed money from another. He came before Rava /b to adjudicate the case. The creditor b said to the borrower: Go repay me /b your debt. The borrower b said to him: I /b already b repaid you. Rava said to him: If so, go take an oath to him that you repaid him. /b ,The borrower b went and brought /b a hollow b cane, and placed /b the b money inside it, and was leaning upon it, and went /b leaning b upon it to the court. He said to the lender: Hold this cane in your hand /b so that I can take an oath while holding a Torah scroll. The borrower b took the Torah scroll and swore that he had repaid /b the b entire /b sum b that had been in his possession. /b , b That creditor /b then b became angry /b upon hearing the borrower taking a false oath b and broke that cane, and /b all of b those coins /b placed inside b fell to the ground. And it turned out that he had taken the oath in truth, /b since he had returned all the money at the time of the oath by giving him the cane with the money inside. However, this was a deceitful tactic, as he intended that the creditor return the cane and the money in it to him after he had taken the oath. In order to prevent this kind of deception, the one taking the oath is warned that he must take the oath according to the understanding of the court.,The Gemara asks: b And still, does /b a person b not commonly take an oath according to his own understanding? But isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b And so we found with regard to Moses our teacher. When he administered an oath to the Jewish people in the plains of Moab, /b that they accept the Torah upon themselves, b he said to them: Know that I do not administer an oath upon you according to your understanding /b and the stipulations in your hearts b but according to my understanding and the understanding of the Omnipresent, as it is stated: “Neither with you only /b do I make this covet” (Deuteronomy 29:13)., b What did Moses say to Israel? Isn’t this what he said to them: Perhaps you will perform /b negative b actions, /b i.e., transgressions, b and say: /b The oath was taken b according to our understanding. Due to that /b reason, b he said to them: /b You take the oath b according to my understanding. /b The Gemara clarifies: b What /b did his warning come b to exclude? Does it not /b serve b to exclude /b the possibility b that they give the title God, to /b an object of b idol worship /b and say that this was their intention when they took an oath to worship God? The fact that Moses needed to preclude this claim indicates b by inference /b that b a person commonly takes an oath according to his own understanding. /b ,The Gemara responds: b No, idol worship is /b also b called: God, /b in the Bible, b as it is written: “And against all the gods of Egypt /b I will execute judgments” (Exodus 12:12). Therefore, this would not have been a special stipulation in their minds but a misguided intention within the oath itself. Moses suspected this and therefore issued the warning.,The Gemara asks: b And /b why did Moses have to state the oath with this warning? b Let him administer an oath to them /b with the words: b That you will fulfill the mitzvot, /b which also includes the prohibition against idol worship. The Gemara answers: The word mitzvot, meaning commandments, could also b indicate /b the b commandments of the king, /b and this might be their intention if they were to take an oath in this manner.,The Gemara asks: b And let him administer an oath to them /b with the words: b That you will fulfill all /b the b mitzvot. /b The Gemara answers: This too does not suffice, because this phrase could b indicate /b specifically b the mitzva of ritual fringes, as the Master said: The mitzva of ritual fringes is equivalent to all the mitzvot in the Torah. /b Consequently, if they would accept upon themselves: All the mitzvot, they may have intended to refer only to the mitzva of ritual fringes.,The Gemara asks: b And let him administer an oath to them: That you fulfill the Torah. /b The Gemara answers: That phrase b indicates /b only b one Torah, /b the Written Torah and not the Oral Torah. The Gemara asks: b And let him administer an oath: That you fulfill the Torahs, /b in the plural, to include both the Written Torah and Oral Torah. The Gemara answers: This too does not necessarily include the entire Torah, since it is possible that it b indicates the Torah of the meal-offering, the Torah of the sin-offering, /b and b the Torah of the guilt-offering. /b The Gemara asks: b And let him administer an oath: That you fulfill the Torahs and mitzvot. /b The Gemara answers: This also does not include the entire Torah, because the word b Torahs /b could b indicate the Torah of the meal-offering, /b and b mitzvot /b could b indicate the commandments of the king. /b ,The Gemara asks: b And let him administer an oath: That you fulfill the entire Torah. /b The Gemara answers: Fulfilling b the entire Torah /b could b indicate /b specifically the denial of b idol worship, /b which is also deemed fulfilling the entire Torah, b as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Idol worship is so severe /b a sin b that anyone who denies it is /b considered b as though he concedes to /b the truth of b the entire Torah. /b The opposite is true for someone who worships idols. Therefore, the Jewish people could have claimed that fulfilling the entire Torah denotes nothing more than not practicing idol worship.,The Gemara asks: b And let him administer an oath: That you fulfill /b the mitzva to distance oneself from b idol worship and /b also fulfill b the entire Torah. Or, alternatively, /b let Moses administer an oath that the Jewish people will fulfill b six hundred thirteen mitzvot, /b so there will be no doubt as to their intention. b Rather, Moses our teacher used an expression that was not troublesome /b for the Jews. Although he could have found another manner in which they could take an oath, and it would leave no doubt as to the correct intentions, he did not want to trouble them by employing a more complex method. Therefore, he administered the oath and stated that it was according to his understanding and the understanding of the Omnipresent.,§ It was taught in the mishna that if one prohibits an item with a i konam /i vow: b If I did not see a snake /b as large b as the beam of an olive press, /b it is a vow of exaggeration. The Gemara asks: b And /b is there b not /b a snake like this? b But a certain snake that lived in the days of King Shapur /b was so big that b they threw thirteen bundles of straw and it swallowed them, /b so it was certainly bigger than the beam of an olive press. b Shmuel said: /b It is speaking here of a snake b that is notched, /b and the one who took the vow intended to say that the snake had notches in its back like the beam of an olive press. The Gemara asks: But b all snakes have notches /b like this. The Gemara answers: b We are saying that it is notched on its back, /b which is exceedingly rare.,The Gemara asks: b And let /b the i tanna /i b teach /b explicitly that the snake was b notched; /b why did he say: Like the beam of an olive press? The Gemara answers: b He teaches us a matter in passing, /b which is b that the back of the beam of an olive press /b must be b notched. /b The Gemara asks: b What is the difference /b whether there are notches in the beam of an olive press? The Gemara answers: b For /b purposes of b buying and selling, to tell you /b that b one who sells the beam of an olive press to another, if its back is notched /b then b yes, /b the sale is valid, b and if /b its back is b not /b notched and there are no slits, then it is b not /b a valid sale, as a beam without notches is not called a beam of an olive press. |
|
79. Babylonian Talmud, Menachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic 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 |
|
80. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 50| 30b. לא יהיה בך אביון שלך קודם לשל כל אדם,אלא לזקן ואינו לפי כבודו,אמר רבה הכישה חייב בה אביי הוה יתיב קמיה דרבה חזא להנך עיזי דקיימו שקל קלא ושדא בהו א"ל איחייבת בהו קום אהדרינהו,איבעיא להו דרכו להחזיר בשדה ואין דרכו להחזיר בעיר מהו מי אמרינן השבה מעליא בעינן וכיון דלאו דרכיה להחזיר בעיר לא לחייב או דלמא בשדה מיהת הוא דאיחייב ליה וכיון דאיחייב ליה בשדה איחייב ליה בעיר תיקו,אמר רבא כל שבשלו מחזיר בשל חבירו נמי מחזיר וכל שבשלו פורק וטוען בשל חבירו נמי פורק וטוען,רבי ישמעאל ברבי יוסי הוה קאזיל באורחא פגע ביה ההוא גברא הוה דרי פתכא דאופי אותבינהו וקא מיתפח א"ל דלי לי אמר ליה כמה שוין א"ל פלגא דזוזא יהיב ליה פלגא דזוזא ואפקרה,הדר זכה בהו הדר יהיב ליה פלגא דזוזא ואפקרה חזייה דהוה קא בעי למיהדר למזכיה בהו א"ל לכולי עלמא אפקרנהו ולך לא אפקרנהו,ומי הוי הפקר כי האי גוונא והתנן בש"א הפקר לעניים הפקר וב"ה אומרים אינו הפקר עד שיהא הפקר לעניים ולעשירים כשמיטה,אלא רבי ישמעאל ברבי יוסי לכולי עלמא אפקרינהו ובמלתא בעלמא הוא דאוקמיה,והא רבי ישמעאל ברבי יוסי זקן ואינו לפי כבודו הוה ר' ישמעאל ברבי יוסי לפנים משורת הדין הוא דעבד,דתני רב יוסף (שמות יח, כ) והודעת להם זה בית חייהם את הדרך זו גמילות חסדים [(אשר) ילכו זה ביקור חולים בה זו קבורה ואת המעשה זה הדין אשר יעשון זו לפנים משורת הדין:,אמר מר (אשר) ילכו זה ביקור חולים היינו גמילות חסדים לא נצרכה אלא לבן גילו דאמר מר בן גילו נוטל אחד מששים בחליו ואפי' הכי מבעי ליה למיזל לגביה,בה זו קבורה היינו גמילות חסדים לא נצרכה אלא לזקן ואינו לפי כבודו,אשר יעשון זו לפנים משורת הדין דאמר ר' יוחנן לא חרבה ירושלים אלא על שדנו בה דין תורה אלא דיני דמגיזתא לדיינו אלא אימא שהעמידו דיניהם על דין תורה ולא עבדו לפנים משורת הדין:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big אי זו היא אבידה מצא חמור או פרה רועין בדרך אין זו אבידה חמור וכליו הפוכין פרה רצה בין הכרמים הרי זו אבידה החזירה וברחה החזירה וברחה אפי' ארבעה וחמשה פעמים חייב להחזירה שנאמר (דברים כב, א) השב תשיבם,היה בטל מסלע לא יאמר לו תן לי סלע אלא נותן לו שכרו כפועל אם יש שם בית דין מתנה בפני ב"ד אם אין שם ב"ד בפני מי יתנה שלו קודם:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big אטו כל הני דאמרינן לאו אבידה הוו אמר רב יהודה הכי קאמר אי זו היא כלל אבידה שהוא חייב בה מצא חמור ופרה רועין בדרך אין זו אבידה ולא מיחייב בה חמור וכליו הפוכים פרה ורצה בין הכרמים הרי זו אבידה ומיחייב בה,ולעולם אמר רב יהודה אמר רב עד שלשה ימים היכי דמי אי בלילותא אפי' חדא שעתא נמי אי ביממא אפי' טובא נמי לא,לא צריכא דהוה חזי לה בקדמתא ובחשכתא תלתא יומי אמרינן איתרמויי אתרמי לה ונפקא טפי ודאי אבידה היא,תניא נמי הכי מצא טלית וקרדום | 30b. b there shall be no needy among you” /b (Deuteronomy 15:4). This verse can be understood as a command, indicating that it is incumbent upon each individual to ensure that he will not become needy. Therefore, b your /b assets b take precedence over /b the assets b of any /b other b person. /b ,The Gemara concludes: b Rather, /b the verse is necessary b to /b derive the exemption from returning the lost item in the case where he was b an elderly person and it is not in keeping with his dignity /b to tend to the item., b Rabba says: /b If there was a lost animal and the elderly person began the process of returning it, e.g., if he b struck it /b even once to guide it in a certain direction, he is b obligated /b to tend b to it /b and return it. The Gemara relates: b Abaye was sitting before Rabba /b and b saw these goats standing /b nearby. b He picked up a clod of dirt and threw it at them, /b causing them to move. Rabba b said to him: You have /b thereby b obligated yourself to /b return b them. Arise and return them /b to their owner., b A dilemma was raised before /b the Sages: In a case of a person for whom it b is his /b typical b manner to return /b an item of that type b in the field, /b where there are fewer onlookers, b but it is not his /b typical b manner to return /b an item of that type b in the city, what is /b the i halakha /i ? Do b we say /b that for one to be obligated to return a lost item b we need an unequivocal /b obligation to b return /b it that applies in all cases, b and since it is not his /b typical b manner to return /b an item of that sort b in the city, let him not be obligated /b to return such an item at all? b Or perhaps, he is obligated in any event /b to return the item b in the field, and once he is obligated /b to return b it in the field, he is /b also b obligated in the city. /b The Gemara concludes: The dilemma b shall stand /b unresolved., b Rava says: /b In b any /b case b where he would recover his own /b item and would consider it to be in keeping with his dignity, he is b also /b obligated to b return another’s /b item. b And any /b case where b he unloads and loads his own /b animal’s burden, he is b also /b obligated to b unload and load /b the burden of b another’s /b animal.,The Gemara relates: b Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, was walking on the road. A certain man encountered him, /b and that man b was carrying a burden /b that consisted of sticks b of wood. He set down /b the wood b and was resting. /b The man b said to him: Lift /b them b for me /b and place them upon me. Since it was not in keeping with the dignity of Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, to lift the wood, Rabbi Yishmael b said to him: How much are they worth? /b The man b said to him: A half-dinar. /b Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, b gave him a half-dinar, /b took possession of the wood, b and declared /b the wood b ownerless. /b ,The man b then reacquired /b the wood b and /b again requested that Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, lift the wood for him. Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, b again gave him a half-dinar, /b again took possession of the wood, b and /b again b declared /b the wood b ownerless. He /b then b saw that /b the man b desired to reacquire /b the sticks of wood. Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, b said to him: I declared /b the sticks of wood b ownerless with regard to everyone /b else, b but I did not declare them ownerless with regard to you. /b ,The Gemara asks: b But is /b property b rendered ownerless in a case like this? But didn’t we learn /b in a mishna ( i Pe’a /i 6:1) that b Beit Shammai say: /b Property b declared ownerless for the poor is /b thereby rendered b ownerless. And Beit Hillel say: It is not ownerless, until /b the property b will be ownerless for the poor and for the rich, like /b produce during b the Sabbatical Year, /b which is available for all. As the i halakha /i is in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel, how could Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, declare the wood ownerless selectively, excluding the prior owner of the wood?, b Rather, Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, /b actually b declared /b the wood b ownerless to everyone /b without exception, b and /b it b was with a mere statement that he prevented him /b from reacquiring the wood, i.e., he told the man not to reacquire the wood even though there was no legal impediment to that reacquisition.,The Gemara asks: b But wasn’t Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, an elderly person and it was not in keeping with his dignity /b to tend to the item? Why did he purchase the wood and render it ownerless in order to absolve himself of the obligation to lift the burden if he had no obligation to do so in the first place? The Gemara answers: In the case of b Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, he conducted /b himself b beyond the letter of the law, /b and he could have simply refused the request for help.,The Gemara cites a source for going beyond the letter of the law in the performance of mitzvot. b As Rav Yosef taught /b in a i baraita /i with regard to the verse: “And you shall teach them the statutes and the laws, and shall show them the path wherein they shall walk and the action that they must perform” (Exodus 18:20). The i baraita /i parses the various directives in the verse. b “And you shall teach them,” that /b is referring to b the structure of their livelihood, /b i.e., teach the Jewish people trades so that they may earn a living; b “the path,” that /b is referring to b acts of kindness; “they shall walk,” that /b is referring to b visiting the ill; “wherein,” that /b is referring to b burial; “and the action,” that /b is referring to acting in accordance with the letter of the b law; “that they must perform,” that /b is referring to acting b beyond the letter of the law. /b ,The Gemara analyzes the i baraita /i . b The Master said: /b With regard to the phrase b “they shall walk,” that /b is referring to b visiting the ill. /b The Gemara asks: b That is /b a detail of b acts of kindness; /b why does the i baraita /i list it separately? The Gemara answers: The reference to visiting the ill is b necessary only for the contemporary of /b the ill person, b as the Master said: /b When b one who is a contemporary /b of an ill person visits him, he b takes one-sixtieth of his illness. /b Since visiting an ill contemporary involves contracting a bit of his illness, a special derivation is necessary to teach that b even so, he is required to go /b and visit b him. /b ,It was taught in the i baraita /i : With regard to the phrase b “wherein,” that /b is referring to b burial. /b The Gemara asks: b That is /b a detail of b acts of kindness; /b why does the i baraita /i list it separately? The Gemara answers: The reference to burial is b necessary only to /b teach the i halakha /i of b an elderly person, and /b it is in a circumstance where b it is not in keeping with his dignity /b to bury the dead. Therefore, a special derivation is necessary to teach that even so, he is required to participate in the burial.,It was taught in the i baraita /i : b “That they must perform”; that /b is referring to acting b beyond the letter of the law, as Rabbi Yoḥa says: Jerusalem was destroyed only for /b the fact b that they adjudicated /b cases on the basis of b Torah law in /b the city. The Gemara asks: b Rather, /b what else should they have done? b Should they rather have adjudicated /b cases on the basis of b arbitrary decisions [ i demagizeta /i ]? Rather, say: That they established their rulings on /b the basis of b Torah law and did not go beyond the letter of the law. /b , strong MISHNA: /strong b Which is /b the item that is considered b lost property? /b If b one found a donkey or a cow grazing on the path, that is not lost property, /b as presumably the owners are nearby and are aware of the animals’ whereabouts. If one found b a donkey with its accoutrements overturned, or a cow /b that b ran through the vineyards, that is lost property. /b In a case where b one returned /b the lost animal b and it fled, /b and he again b returned it and it fled, even /b if this scenario repeats itself b four or five times, /b he is b obligated to return it /b each time, as it b is stated: /b “You shall not see your brother’s ox or his sheep wandering and disregard them; b you shall return them /b to your brother” (Deuteronomy 22:1).,If in the course of tending to and returning the lost item, the finder b was idle from /b labor that would have earned him b a i sela /i , he shall not say to /b the owner of the item: b Give me a i sela /i /b to compensate me for my lost income. b Rather, /b the owner b gives him his wage as /b if he were b a laborer, /b a payment that is considerably smaller. b If there are /b three men b there /b who can convene as b a court, /b he b may stipulate before the court /b that he will undertake to return the item provided that he receives full compensation for lost income. b If there is no court there before whom can he stipulate /b his condition, b his /b ficial interests b take precedence /b and he need not return the lost item., strong GEMARA: /strong With regard to the question in the mishna: Which is the item that is considered lost property, the Gemara asks: b Is that to say that all those other /b cases b that we stated /b in this chapter b are not lost property? Rav Yehuda said /b that b this /b is what the i tanna /i b is saying: What is the principle /b employed in defining b a lost item that one is obligated to /b return? The mishna cites examples to illustrate the principle: If one b found a donkey or a cow grazing on the path, that is not lost property, and he is not obligated to /b return b it. /b But if one found b a donkey with its accoutrements overturned, or a cow that was running through the vineyards, that is lost property, and he is obligated to /b return b it. /b ,With regard to the ruling in the mishna that a donkey and cow grazing on the path are not considered lost property, the Gemara asks: b And /b is that the case even if they graze there untended b forever? Rav Yehuda said /b that b Rav said: Until three days /b pass they are not lost. Thereafter, they are considered lost. The Gemara asks: b What are the circumstances? If /b the animal is found grazing b at night, even /b if it is untended for b even one hour /b it can be presumed to be lost, as an owner never grazes his animals untended at night. b If /b the animal is found grazing b during the day, even /b if it is untended for b more /b than three days, it is b also not /b presumed to be lost.,The Gemara answers: b No, /b the measure of three days b is necessary /b only in a case b where one saw /b the animal grazing b in the early /b hours in the morning b and in the dark /b of nightfall. For the first b three days, we say: It happened /b that the animal b went out /b a bit earlier or a bit later than usual, but nevertheless, it was with the owner’s knowledge. Once this is observed for b more /b than three days, it is b certainly a lost item. /b , b This is also taught /b in a i baraita /i : If b one found a cloak or an ax /b |
|
81. Babylonian Talmud, Ketuvot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 189| 46a. רב פפא אמר מאי בעל לוקה דקתני התם ממון וקרי ליה לממון מלקות אין והא תנן האומר חצי ערכי עלי נותן חצי ערכו רבי יוסי בר' יהודה אומר לוקה ונותן ערך שלם לוקה אמאי אמר רב פפא לוקה בערך שלם,מאי טעמא גזירה חצי ערכו אטו ערך חציו וערך חציו הוי ליה אבר שהנשמה תלויה בו,ת"ר (דברים כב, יט) וענשו אותו זה ממון (דברים כב, יח) ויסרו זה מלקות,בשלמא וענשו זה ממון דכתיב וענשו אותו מאה כסף ונתנו לאבי הנערה אלא ויסרו זה מלקות מנלן,א"ר אבהו למדנו יסרו מיסרו ויסרו מבן ובן מבן (דברים כה, ב) והיה אם בן הכות הרשע,אזהרה למוציא שם רע מנלן ר' אלעזר אמר (ויקרא יט, טז) מלא תלך רכיל רבי נתן אומר (דברים כג, י) מונשמרת מכל דבר רע,ורבי אלעזר מאי טעמא לא אמר מהאי ההוא מיבעי ליה לכדר' פנחס בן יאיר ונשמרת מכל דבר רע מכאן אמר ר' פנחס בן יאיר אל יהרהר אדם ביום ויבא לידי טומאה בלילה,ור' נתן מאי טעמא לא אמר מהאי ההוא אזהרה לב"ד שלא יהא רך לזה וקשה לזה,לא אמר לעדים בואו והעידוני והן מעידים אותו מאליהן הוא אינו לוקה ואינו נותן מאה סלעים היא וזוממיה מקדימין לבית הסקילה,היא וזוממיה סלקא דעתך אלא או היא או זוממיה מקדימין לבית הסקילה,טעמא דלא אמר להו הא אמר להו אע"ג דלא אגרינהו לאפוקי מדר' יהודה דתניא רבי יהודה אומר אינו חייב עד שישכור עדים,מ"ט דר' יהודה אמר ר' אבהו אתיא שימה שימה כתיב הכא (דברים כב, יד) ושם לה עלילות דברים וכתיב התם (שמות כב, כד) לא תשימון עליו נשך מה להלן ממון אף כאן ממון,אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק וכן תני רב יוסף צידוני בי רבי שמעון בן יוחאי אתיא שימה שימה,בעי רבי ירמיה שכרן בקרקע מהו בפחות משוה פרוטה מהו שניהם בפרוטה מהו,בעי רב אשי הוציא שם רע על הנישואין הראשונים מהו על נשואי אחיו מהו,פשוט מיהא חדא דתני ר' יונה (דברים כב, טז) את בתי נתתי לאיש הזה לזה ולא ליבם,מאי רבנן ומאי ר' אליעזר בן יעקב דתניא כיצד הוצאת שם רע בא לבית דין ואמר פלוני לא מצאתי לבתך בתולים אם יש עדים שזינתה תחתיו יש לה כתובה מנה,אם יש עדים שזינתה תחתיו יש לה כתובה מנה בת סקילה היא הכי קאמר אם יש עדים שזינתה תחתיו בסקילה זינתה מעיקרא יש לה כתובה מנה,נמצא ששם רע אינו שם רע הוא לוקה ונותן מאה סלע בין בעל ובין לא בעל רבי אליעזר בן יעקב אומר לא נאמרו דברים הללו אלא כשבעל בשלמא לרבי אליעזר בן יעקב היינו דכתיב (דברים כב, יג) ובא אליה ואקרב אליה,אלא לרבנן מאי ובא אליה ואקרב אליה ובא אליה בעלילות ואקרב אליה בדברים,בשלמא לרבי אליעזר בן יעקב היינו דכתיב לא מצאתי לבתך בתולים אלא לרבנן מאי לא מצאתי לבתך בתולים לא מצאתי לבתך כשרי בתולים,בשלמא לרבי אליעזר בן יעקב היינו דכתיב ואלה בתולי בתי אלא לרבנן מאי ואלה בתולי בתי ואלה כשרי בתולי בתי,בשלמא לר"א בן יעקב היינו דכתיב ופרשו השמלה אלא לרבנן מאי ופרשו השמלה,אמר רבי אבהו פרשו מה ששם לה כדתניא ופרשו השמלה מלמד שבאין עדים של זה ועדים של זה ובוררין את הדבר כשמלה חדשה רבי אליעזר בן יעקב אומר דברים ככתבן שמלה ממש,שלח רבי יצחק בר רב יעקב בר גיורי משמיה דרבי יוחנן אע"ג שלא מצינו בכל התורה כולה שחלק הכתוב בין ביאה כדרכה לביאה שלא כדרכה למכות ולעונשין אבל מוציא שם רע חלק אינו חייב עד שיבעול שלא כדרכה ויוציא שם רע כדרכה,כמאן אי כרבנן אף על גב דלא בעל אי כר' אליעזר בן יעקב | 46a. b Rav Pappa said: What /b of the statement b that is taught there, /b in the i baraita /i , that it is only if b he had intercourse /b with her that he is b flogged? /b It is referring to the b money /b of the fine. The Gemara asks: b And /b does one b call monetary /b payment b flogging? /b The Gemara answers: b Yes, and we learned /b in a i baraita /i : b One who says: Half my valuation is upon me, he gives half his valuation, /b in accordance with the sum fixed by the Torah according to sex and age (see Leviticus 27:2–3). b Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: He is flogged and gives /b his b full valuation. /b The Sages inquired: b Why is he flogged? /b What transgression did he commit? b Rav Pappa said: He is flogged by /b having to pay b a full valuation. /b This proves that monetary payment can be referred to as flogging.,The Gemara clarifies: b What is the reason /b of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda? It is a rabbinic b decree /b in the case of one who vows to donate b half of his valuation, due to /b a case where one vowed the b valuation of half of himself. And /b one who vows to donate the b valuation of half of himself has /b effectively vowed to donate the valuation of b a limb upon which /b his b life depends, /b e.g., his head or heart, in which case it is as though he vowed to donate his entire valuation. Consequently, even one who vows to donate half of his valuation must donate his entire valuation.,§ The Gemara continues to discuss the i halakhot /i of the defamer. b The Sages taught /b the following i baraita /i , based upon the following verses: “And the Elders of that city shall take the man and chastise him. And they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver, and give them to the father of the young woman” (Deuteronomy 22:18–19). b “And they shall fine [ i ve’anshu /i ] him”; this /b is referring to b money. “And chastise /b him”; b this /b is referring to b flogging. /b ,The Gemara asks: b Granted, /b with regard to the phrase b “and they fine [ i ve’anshu /i ] him,” /b although the word i ve’anshu /i can refer to any punishment, in b this /b case it is referring to b money, as it is written: And they shall fine him a hundred shekels of silver, and give them to the father of the young woman. However, /b with regard to the statement of the i baraita /i that: b “And chastise /b him”; b this /b is referring to b flogging, from where do we /b derive this?, b Rabbi Abbahu said: We learned /b the meaning of the word b chastise /b in the case of a defamer by verbal analogy b from /b the word b chastise /b stated in the verse “if a man have a stubborn and rebellious son [ i ben /i ], that will not listen to the voice of his father or the voice of his mother, and though they chastise him, will not listen to them” (Deuteronomy 21:18). b And /b the implication of the word b chastise /b in that verse is derived b from /b the word b son /b that appears in the same verse. b And /b the implication of the word b son [ i ben /i ] /b with regard to a rebellious son is derived b from /b the word b i bin /i /b in the verse b “Then it shall be if the wicked man deserve [ i bin /i ] to be flogged” /b (Deuteronomy 25:2).,The Gemara asks: b From where do we /b derive the b warning, /b i.e., the prohibition that serves as the source for the flogging b for a defamer? Rabbi Elazar says /b that the prohibition is derived b from /b the verse b “You shall not go up and down as talebearer” /b (Leviticus 19:16). b Rabbi Natan says /b that it is derived b from: “Then you shall keep yourself from every evil thing [ i davar ra /i ]” /b (Deuteronomy 23:10), which is expounded to mean i dibbur ra /i , evil speech.,The Gemara asks: b And what is the reason /b that b Rabbi Elazar did not state /b that it is derived from b this /b verse quoted by Rabbi Natan? The Gemara answers: b He requires that /b verse b for /b the statement of b Rabbi Pineḥas ben Yair, /b as it was taught: b “Then you shall keep yourself from every evil thing”; from here Rabbi Pineḥas ben Yair said: A person should not think /b impure thoughts b by day and /b thereby b come by night to /b the b impurity /b of an emission.,The Gemara asks the reverse question: b And what is the reason /b that b Rabbi Natan did not state /b that it is derived b from that /b verse cited by Rabbi Elazar? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Natan explains b that /b verse, which includes the term talebearer [ i rakhil /i ], as b a warning to the court that it should not be soft to [ i rakh la /i ] this /b litigant b and harsh to that /b one, but it must treat both sides as equals.,§ The Gemara cites another statement that deals with a defamer: If the husband b did not say to witnesses: Come and testify for me /b that my wife committed adultery, b but they testify /b for b him of their own accord /b and are subsequently discovered to be liars, the husband b is not flogged and does not give /b the b one hundred i sela /i , /b as he did not harm her. b She and her conspiring witnesses are brought early to the place of stoning. /b ,The Gemara asks: b Does it enter your mind /b to say that b she and her conspiring witnesses /b are stoned? If she is liable to be stoned, they are not conspiring witnesses, and conversely, if they are conspiring witnesses, they are stoned and she is exempt. b Rather, /b this must mean: b Either she or her conspiring witnesses are brought early to the place of stoning. /b If they were telling the truth, she is stoned. If they conspired and offered false testimony, they are liable to be stoned.,The Gemara infers from the i baraita /i that the b reason /b the husband is not flogged or fined is b that /b the husband b did not tell them /b to testify, b but /b if b he told them /b to testify, b although he did not hire them /b but merely persuaded them to testify that his wife had committed adultery as a betrothed woman, he is flogged and must pay the fine. This serves b to exclude /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yehuda, as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Yehuda says: /b The husband b is liable /b to the punishments of a defamer b only if he hired witnesses. /b ,The Gemara asks: b What is the reason /b of b Rabbi Yehuda? /b Nowhere does the Torah explicitly state that the husband hired false witnesses. The Gemara answers that b Rabbi Abbahu said: /b It is b derived /b by a verbal analogy between the term b placing, /b written with regard to a defamer, and the term b placing, /b written with regard to the prohibition against charging interest. b It is written here, /b with regard to a defamer: b “And he place wanton charges against her” /b (Deuteronomy 22:14), b and it is written there: “Neither shall you place upon him interest” /b (Exodus 22:24). b Just as below, /b with regard to interest, the verse is referring to b money, so too here, /b in the case of a defamer, it is referring to b money, /b thereby indicating that the husband paid money in order to substantiate his false accusation., b Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: Rav Yosef Tzidoni likewise taught in the school of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: /b It is b derived /b from the verbal analogy between the term b placing, /b written with regard to a defamer, and the term b placing, /b written with regard to the prohibition against charging interest., b Rabbi Yirmeya raised a dilemma: /b According to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, if the husband b hired /b the false witnesses b with land /b instead of money, b what is /b the i halakha /i ? If he hired them b with less than the value of a i peruta /i , what is /b the i halakha /i ? If he hired b both /b witnesses b with a i peruta /i , what is /b the i halakha /i ? Since this i halakha /i is derived from the case of interest, perhaps, like the prohibition against charging interest, it applies only with regard to money, rather than land, and only with money that is greater than the value of a i peruta /i .,Similarly, b Rav Ashi raised a dilemma /b concerning a defamer: If b he defamed /b his wife b with regard to /b their b first marriage, what is /b the i halakha /i ? In other words, if a man married a woman, divorced her, remarried her, and subsequently defamed her by claiming that she had committed adultery during the period of betrothal before their first marriage, what is the i halakha /i ? Similarly, if he performed levirate marriage and then defamed her b with regard to his brother’s marriage /b to her, b what is /b the i halakha /i ?,The Gemara comments: b Resolve at least one /b of these dilemmas, b as Rabbi Yona taught /b that the verse “And the father of the young woman shall say to the Elders: b I gave my daughter to this man” /b (Deuteronomy 22:16) serves to emphasize: I gave him b to this /b man b and not to the i yavam /i , /b i.e., the brother of the original husband. Consequently, if one defames his i yevama /i with regard to her original marriage to his brother, the unique i halakhot /i of defamation do not apply.,§ In the course of the previous discussion, the Gemara mentioned a dispute between the Rabbis and Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov. The Gemara asks: b What /b is the opinion of b the Rabbis and what /b is the opinion of b Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov, /b referred to above (45b)? b As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b How /b does the case of b defamation /b proceed? It involves a situation where the husband b came to the court and said /b to the father: b So-and-so, I have not found /b indications of b your daughter’s virginity. If there are witnesses /b who testify b that she committed adultery under his /b authority, i.e., while betrothed to him, b she has a marriage contract of one hundred dinars. /b ,The Gemara interrupts its citation of the i baraita /i , as this last statement is very surprising: b If there are witnesses /b who testify b that she committed adultery under his /b authority, does b she have a marriage contract of one hundred dinars? She is /b punished b by stoning. /b The Gemara explains that b this is what /b the i tanna /i b said: If there are witnesses /b who testify b that she committed adultery under his /b authority, she is liable b to /b receive the punishment of b stoning. /b However, if b she engaged in licentious sexual relations at the outset, /b before her betrothal, when she was still a single woman, she is merely guilty of deceiving her husband with regard to her virginity, and therefore b she has a marriage contract of one hundred dinars, /b which is the standard marriage contract of a non-virgin.,The Gemara resumes its quotation of the i baraita /i : If it was b discovered that the bad name is not a bad name, /b i.e., the husband’s accusation was false, b he is flogged and gives /b her father b one hundred i sela /i , whether he had intercourse with her /b or b whether he had not had intercourse with her. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: These matters were stated only /b in a case b where he had intercourse /b with his wife before defaming her. The Gemara asks: b Granted, according to /b the opinion of b Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov, this is as it is written: /b “If a man take a wife b and go in unto her” /b (Deuteronomy 22:13), and: b “And when I came near to her, /b I did not find in her the tokens of virginity” (Deuteronomy 22:14), as both expressions refer to sexual intercourse., b However, according to /b the opinion of b the Rabbis, what is /b the meaning of the phrases b “and go in unto her,” /b and b “and when I came near to her,” /b if the couple never engaged in intercourse? The Gemara explains that, according to the Rabbis, b “and go in unto her” /b is referring b to /b the b wanton charges /b the husband leveled against his wife; b “and when I came near to her” /b means that he came near b with words, /b not intercourse.,The Gemara asks: b Granted, according to /b the opinion of b Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov, this is as it is written: “I did not find in your daughter the tokens of virginity” /b (Deuteronomy 22:17), as Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov claims that the husband had relations with her and discovered that she was not a virgin. b However, according to /b the opinion of b the Rabbis, what is /b the meaning of b “I did not find in your daughter the tokens of virginity,” /b if they did not have intercourse? The Gemara answers: The Rabbis explain that he means: b I did not find for your daughter the fitness of virginity, /b i.e., I have discovered that she was unfaithful.,The Gemara asks further: b Granted, according to /b the opinion of b Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov, this is as it is written /b that the father replies: b “And these are the tokens of my daughter’s virginity” /b (Deuteronomy 22:17). He presents a cloth that proves she was a virgin, in opposition to the husband’s claim. b However, according to /b the opinion of b the Rabbis, what is /b the meaning of b “And these are the tokens of my daughter’s virginity”? /b The Rabbis answer that the father means: b And these are the /b proofs of the b fitness of my daughter’s virginity, /b i.e., he either brings witnesses to counter the testimony of the husband’s witnesses or provides some other proof that his daughter was a virgin at the time of her marriage.,The Gemara poses yet another question on the same lines: b Granted, according to /b the opinion of b Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov, this is at it is written: “And they shall spread the garment” /b (Deuteronomy 22:17). The father brings the sheet on which the couple had intercourse and shows that it is stained with blood. b However, according to /b the opinion of b the Rabbis, /b who claim that a husband can defame his wife even if they have not engaged in intercourse, b what is /b the meaning of the phrase b “And they shall spread the garment [ i hasimla /i ]”? /b , b Rabbi Abbahu said /b that the Rabbis interpret this expression as follows: b They shall spread, /b i.e., examine, b that which he placed against her [ i sam la /i ]. /b In other words, they cross-examine the witnesses who testified against her, b as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b “And they shall spread the garment”; /b this b teaches that the witnesses of this /b husband b come /b forward, b and /b likewise b the witnesses of that /b father come forward, b and /b the court b clarifies the matter like a new garment. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: The matters /b are b as they are written, /b i.e., the verse refers to b an actual cloth. /b ,§ b Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Rav Ya’akov bar Giyyorei sent /b a message from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia b in the name of Rabbi Yoḥa: Although we have not found in the entire Torah that /b any b verse distinguishes between sexual intercourse in a typical manner and sexual intercourse in an atypical manner, /b i.e., anal intercourse, b with regard to flogging or /b any other b punishment. However, /b in the case of the b defamer, /b the Torah b does distinguish /b in this manner, as the husband b is obligated /b to pay the fine b only /b if b he had intercourse /b with his wife, even it was b in an atypical manner, and /b he b defames /b her by claiming that she had previously had intercourse b in a typical manner /b with someone else.,The Gemara asks: In b accordance with whose /b opinion is this ruling of Rabbi Yoḥa? b If /b it is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b the Rabbis, /b the husband should be liable b even if he did not have intercourse /b with his wife. b If /b it is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov, /b |
|
82. 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, |
|
| 83. Babylonian Talmud, Meilah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 64, 65, 66, 71, 72, 76 |
84. Babylonian Talmud, Bekhorot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 68, 99| 30b. חשוד על המעשר ומאן חכמים ר' יהודה וחד אמר החשוד על המעשר חשוד על השביעית ומאן חכמים ר' מאיר,דתניא עם הארץ שקיבל עליו דברי חבירות ונחשד לדבר אחד נחשד לכל התורה כולה דברי רבי מאיר וחכמים אומרים אינו נחשד אלא לאותו דבר בלבד,הגר שקיבל עליו דברי תורה אפי' נחשד לדבר אחד הוי חשוד לכל התורה כולה והרי הוא כישראל משומד נפקא מינה דאי קדיש קידושיו קידושין,ת"ר הבא לקבל דברי חבירות חוץ מדבר אחד אין מקבלין אותו עובד כוכבים שבא לקבל דברי תורה חוץ מדבר אחד אין מקבלין אותו ר' יוסי בר' יהודה אומר אפי' דקדוק אחד מדברי סופרים,וכן בן לוי שבא לקבל דברי לויה וכהן שבא לקבל דברי כהונה חוץ מדבר אחד אין מקבלין אותו שנאמר (ויקרא ז, לג) המקריב את דם השלמים וגו' העבודה המסורה לבני אהרן כל כהן שאינו מודה בה אין לו חלק בכהונה,ת"ר הבא לקבל דברי חבירות אם ראינוהו שנוהג בצינעה בתוך ביתו מקבלין אותו ואחר כך מלמדין אותו ואם לאו מלמדין אותו ואחר כך מקבלין אותו ר"ש בן יוחי אומר בין כך ובין כך מקבלין אותו והוא למד כדרכו והולך:,ת"ר מקבלין לכנפים ואח"כ מקבלין לטהרות ואם אמר איני מקבל אלא לכנפים מקבלין אותו קיבל לטהרות ולא קיבל לכנפים אף לטהרות לא קיבל:,ת"ר עד כמה מקבלין אותו בית שמאי אומרים למשקין שלשים יום לכסות שנים עשר חודש ובית הלל אומרים אחד זה ואחד זה לשנים עשר חודש,אם כן הוה ליה מקולי בית שמאי ומחומרי בית הלל אלא בית הלל אומרים אחד זה ואחד זה לשלשים:,(סימן חב"ר תלמי"ד תכל"ת מכ"ם חז"ר גבא"י בעצמ"ו),תנו רבנן הבא לקבל דברי חבירות צריך לקבל בפני שלשה חבירים ובניו ובני ביתו אינן צריכין לקבל בפני שלשה חבירים רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר אף בניו ובני ביתו צריכין לקבל בפני שלשה חבירים לפי שאינו דומה חבר שקיבל לבן חבר שקיבל:,תנו רבנן הבא לקבל דברי חבירות צריך לקבל בפני ג' חבירים ואפילו תלמיד חכם צריך לקבל בפני שלשה חבירים זקן ויושב בישיבה אינו צריך לקבל בפני שלשה חבירים שכבר קיבל עליו משעה שישב אבא שאול אומר אף תלמיד חכם אינו צריך לקבל בפני שלשה חבירים ולא עוד אלא שאחרים מקבלין לפניו,אמר רבי יוחנן בימי בנו של רבי חנינא בן אנטיגנוס נשנית משנה זו רבי יהודה ור' יוסי איסתפק להו מילתא בטהרות שדרו רבנן לגבי בנו של ר' חנינא בן אנטיגנוס אזילו אמרו ליה לעיין בה אשכחוה דקא טעין טהרות אותיב רבנן מדידיה לגבייהו וקאי איהו לעיוני בה,אתו אמרי ליה לר' יהודה ור' יוסי אמר להו ר' יהודה אביו של זה ביזה תלמידי חכמים אף הוא מבזה תלמידי חכמים,אמר לו ר' יוסי כבוד זקן יהא מונח במקומו אלא מיום שחרב בית המקדש נהגו כהנים סילסול בעצמן שאין מוסרין את הטהרות לכל אדם:,תנו רבנן חבר שמת אשתו ובניו ובני ביתו הרי הן בחזקתן עד שיחשדו וכן חצר שמוכרין בה תכלת הרי היא בחזקתה עד שתיפסל:,תנו רבנן אשת עם הארץ שנשאת לחבר וכן בתו של עם הארץ שנשאת לחבר וכן עבדו של עם הארץ שנמכר לחבר כולן צריכין לקבל דברי חבירות בתחלה אבל אשת חבר שנשאת לעם הארץ וכן בתו של חבר שנשאת לעם הארץ וכן עבדו של חבר שנמכר לעם הארץ אין צריכין לקבל דברי חבירות בתחלה,ר"מ אומר אף הן צריכין לקבל עליהן דברי חבירות לכתחלה ר"ש בן אלעזר אומר משום ר"מ מעשה באשה אחת שנשאת לחבר והיתה קומעת לו תפילין על ידו נשאת לעם הארץ והיתה קושרת לו קשרי מוכס על ידו: | 30b. is b suspect with regard to tithe. And who /b are the Sages referred to here as b the Rabbis? /b It is b Rabbi Yehuda, /b as in his locale they treated the prohibition of produce of the Sabbatical Year stringently. b And /b the other b one says: One who is suspect with regard to tithe is suspect with regard to /b produce of the b Sabbatical /b Year. b And who /b are the Sages referred to here as b the Rabbis? /b It is b Rabbi Meir. /b , b As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i ( i Tosefta /i , i Demai /i 2:4): With regard to b an i am ha’aretz /i , /b i.e., one who is unreliable with regard to ritual impurity and tithes, b who accepts upon himself /b the commitment to observe b the matters /b associated with b i ḥaver /i status, /b i.e., that he will be stringent in all matters observed by i ḥaverim /i , including i teruma /i , tithes, and i ḥalla /i , and also undertake to eat only food that is ritually pure, and the Sages accepted him as trustworthy b but /b subsequently he b was suspected with regard to one matter /b in which others saw him act improperly, b he is suspected with regard to the entire Torah. /b This is the b statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: He is suspected only with regard to that particular matter. /b ,It is also taught in a i baraita /i ( i Tosefta /i , i Demai /i 2:4): With regard to b a convert who accepted upon himself /b upon his conversion b matters of Torah, /b i.e., all of the mitzvot, b even if he is suspect with regard to one matter /b alone, b he is suspect with regard to the entire Torah, and he is /b considered b like a Jewish transgressor [ i meshummad /i ], /b who habitually transgresses the mitzvot. The Gemara explains that the practical b difference /b resulting from the fact that he is considered like a Jewish transgressor is b that if he betroths /b a woman, b his betrothal is /b a valid b betrothal, /b and they are married. Although he is suspect with regard to the entire Torah, he does not return to his prior gentile status., b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : In the case of b one who comes to accept upon himself /b the commitment to observe b the matters /b associated with b i ḥaver /i status except for one matter, /b which he does not wish to observe, b he is not accepted, /b and he is not trustworthy even with regard to those matters that he does wish to accept upon himself. Likewise, in the case of b a gentile who comes to /b convert and takes upon himself to b accept the words of Torah except for one matter, he is not accepted /b as a convert. b Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: Even /b if he refuses to accept b one detail of rabbinic law, /b he is not accepted.,The i baraita /i continues: b And similarly, /b in the case of b a Levite who comes to accept the matters of a Levite, or a priest who comes to accept the matters of priesthood, except for one matter, he is not accepted. As it is stated: /b “He among the sons of Aaron, b that sacrifices the blood of the peace offerings, /b and the fat, shall have the right thigh for a portion” (Leviticus 7:33). This means that with regard to b the /b Temple b service, which is handed /b over b to the sons of Aaron, any priest who does not admit to it /b in its entirety b has no share in the priesthood. /b ,The Gemara continues on a similar topic. b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : In the case of b one who comes to accept upon himself /b a commitment to observe b the matters /b associated with b i ḥaver /i status, if we have seen that he practices /b such matters b in private, within his home, he is accepted, and afterward he is taught /b the precise details of being a i ḥaver /i . b But if /b we have b not /b seen him act as a i ḥaver /i in his home, b he is taught /b first b and afterward accepted. Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says: Whether /b in b this /b case b or that /b case, b he is /b first b accepted, and he /b then b continues to learn in /b the b usual manner, /b i.e., as a i ḥaver /i he learns from others how to behave., b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : An i am ha’aretz /i who wishes to become a i ḥaver /i b is accepted /b first b with regard to hands, /b i.e., he is presumed to be stringent concerning the ritual purity of his hands by making sure to wash his hands before handling pure items, b and afterward he is accepted /b as trustworthy b for purity /b in general. b And if he says: I /b wish to b accept /b purity b only with regard to hands, he is accepted /b for this. If he wishes to b accept /b upon himself the stringencies of a i ḥaver /i b with regard to ritual purity but he does not accept /b upon himself the stringencies b with regard to hands, /b i.e., to wash his hands, which is a simple act, b he is not accepted even for purity /b in general., b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Until when is he accepted, /b i.e., how much time must elapse before he is considered trustworthy as a i ḥaver /i ? b Beit Shammai say: With regard to liquids, thirty days. With regard to /b impurity of b clothing, /b about which i ḥaverim /i would be careful as well, b twelve months. And Beit Hillel say: Both /b with regard to b this, /b liquids, b and that, /b clothing, he must maintain the practice b for twelve months /b before he is fully accepted as a i ḥaver /i .,The Gemara raises a difficulty: b If so, this is /b one b of /b the rare cases of b the leniencies of Beit Shammai and of the stringencies of Beit Hillel, /b and yet it is not included in tractate i Eduyyot /i , which lists all of the cases where Beit Shammai are more lenient than Beit Hillel. b Rather, /b the text of the i baraita /i must be emended so that it reads: b Beit Hillel say: Both /b with regard to b this, /b liquids b and that, /b clothing, he must maintain the practice b for thirty /b days before he is fully accepted as a i ḥaver /i .,§ The Gemara provides b a mnemonic /b to remember the topics from here until the end of the chapter: b i Ḥaver /i ; student; sky-blue dye [ i tekhelet /i ]; tax; return; /b tax b collector; by himself. /b , b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b One who comes to accept upon himself /b a commitment to observe b the matters /b associated with b i ḥaver /i status must accept /b it b in the presence of three i ḥaverim /i . But his children and /b the b members of his household are not required to accept /b the status of i ḥaver /i separately b in the presence of three i ḥaverim /i . Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Even his children and /b the b members of his household must accept /b the status of i ḥaver /i b in the presence of three i ḥaverim /i , because a i ḥaver /i , who accepted it /b himself in the presence of three others, b is not comparable to the son of a i ḥaver /i , /b who b accepted /b that status only due to his father but did not accept it himself explicitly, and their accepting the status not in the presence of three people is insufficient., b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b One who comes to accept upon himself /b a commitment to observe b the matters /b associated with b i ḥaver /i status must accept /b it b in the presence of three i ḥaverim /i , and even a Torah scholar /b who wishes to become a i ḥaver /i b must accept /b the status of i ḥaver /i b in the presence of three i ḥaverim /i . /b But b an elder who sits /b and studies Torah b in a yeshiva is not required to accept /b the status of i ḥaver /i b in the presence of three i ḥaverim /i , as he already accepted it upon himself from the moment he sat /b and dedicated himself to study Torah in yeshiva. b Abba Shaul says: Even a Torah scholar is not required to accept /b the status of i ḥaver /i b in the presence of three i ḥaverim /i ; and not only /b does he have the status of i ḥaver /i without an explicit declaration in the presence of three i ḥaverim /i , b but others /b can b accept /b that they wish to become a i ḥaver /i b in his presence. /b , b Rabbi Yoḥa says: This mishna, /b i.e., the ruling that a Torah scholar must declare his intent to become a i ḥaver /i in the presence of three i ḥaverim /i , b was taught in the days of the son of Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus. /b At that time, b Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei were uncertain about /b a certain b matter of ritual purity. The Sages sent /b a delegation of their students b to the son of Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus /b and told them to b go /b and b tell him to examine /b this matter. The students b found him while he was carrying /b items that were ritually b pure. /b The son of Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus b seated Sages from his own /b yeshiva b next to /b the students who came to ask the question, because he did not trust these students to keep his items pure. b And he stood and examined /b the matter.,The students returned and b came and told Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei /b that the son of Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus had treated them as though they had the status of i amei ha’aretz /i . b Rabbi Yehuda said to them /b in anger: b This one’s father, /b i.e., Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus, b degraded Torah scholars /b by not trusting them with matters of ritual purity. And b he too, /b the son of Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus, b degrades Torah scholars. /b , b Rabbi Yosei said to him: Let the honor of the elder, /b i.e., both the father and son, b be left in its place. /b He did not act in this manner to degrade Torah scholars. b Rather, from the day the Temple was destroyed, the priests were accustomed to act with a higher standard for themselves, /b and they decided b that they will not pass ritually pure /b items b to any /b other b person. /b Therefore, the son of Rabbi Ḥanina, as a priest, acted appropriately., b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : In the case of b a i ḥaver /i that died, his wife and children and members of his household retain their presumptive /b status b until they are suspected /b of engaging in inappropriate deeds. b And similarly, /b in the case of b a courtyard in which one sells sky-blue dye, it retains its presumptive /b status as a place in which fit sky-blue dye is sold b until it is disqualified /b due to the merchant’s unscrupulous behavior., b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b The /b former b wife an i am ha’aretz /i who /b later b marries a i ḥaver /i , and likewise the daughter of an i am ha’aretz /i who marries a i ḥaver /i , and likewise the slave of an i am ha’aretz /i who is sold to a i ḥaver /i , must all accept /b upon themselves a commitment to observe b the matters /b associated with b i ḥaver /i status. But /b with regard to b the /b former b wife of a i ḥaver /i who /b later b marries an i am ha’aretz /i , and likewise the daughter of a i ḥaver /i who marries an i am ha’aretz /i , and likewise the slave of a i ḥaver /i who was sold to an i am ha’aretz /i , /b these people b need not accept /b upon themselves a commitment to observe b the matters /b associated with b i ḥaver /i status i ab initio /i , /b as each of them is already accustomed to behave as a i ḥaver /i .,The i baraita /i continues: b Rabbi Meir says: They too must accept /b upon themselves a commitment to observe b the matters /b associated with b i ḥaver /i status i ab initio /i . And similarly, Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar would /b illustrate this point and b say in the name of Rabbi Meir: /b There was b an incident involving a certain woman who married a i ḥaver /i and would tie [ i koma’at /i ] for him phylacteries on his hand, /b and she later b married a tax collector and would tie for him tax seals on his hand, /b which shows that her new husband had a great influence on her level of piety. |
|
| 85. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 26 |
| 86. Epiphanius, Panarion, 26.12.1-26.12.4 (4th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 134 |
| 87. Anon., Wängel Qǝddus, 163 Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 161 |
| 88. Anon., Pesikta Rabbati, None Tagged with subjects: •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 72 |
| 89. Anon., Pesiqta De Rav Kahana, 258, 257 Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 133, 141, 150, 162 |
| 90. Anon., Alexander Romance, 2.39-2.41 Tagged with subjects: •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 213 |
91. Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah, None Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic 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 |
|
| 92. Dead Sea Scrolls, Isaiah A, 54.13 Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 186 |
| 93. Psalms of Solomon, 2 Enoch, 2.37, 3.16 Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 66 |
| 94. Anon., Sifrei Zuta Devarim, None Tagged with subjects: •aramaic, and hebrew, in rabbinic literature •hebrew, and aramaic, in rabbinic literature Found in books: Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 24, 26, 27 |
| 95. Anon., Every Good Man, 87 Tagged with subjects: •hebrew, rabbinic Found in books: Schiffman (1983), Testimony and the Penal Code, 50 |
