The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Index Database

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

For a list of book indices included, see here.

38 results for "polemic"

1. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 1.1, 1.26, 4.1, 21.10 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian •jewish-christian dispute/polemic, Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 56, 57; Fraade (2023), Multilingualism and Translation in Ancient Judaism: Before and After Babel. 19

1.1. "וַיִּקְרָא אֱלֹהִים לַיַּבָּשָׁה אֶרֶץ וּלְמִקְוֵה הַמַּיִם קָרָא יַמִּים וַיַּרְא אֱלֹהִים כִּי־טוֹב׃", 1.1. "בְּרֵאשִׁית בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ׃", 1.26. "וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ וְיִרְדּוּ בִדְגַת הַיָּם וּבְעוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם וּבַבְּהֵמָה וּבְכָל־הָאָרֶץ וּבְכָל־הָרֶמֶשׂ הָרֹמֵשׂ עַל־הָאָרֶץ׃", 4.1. "וַיֹּאמֶר מֶה עָשִׂיתָ קוֹל דְּמֵי אָחִיךָ צֹעֲקִים אֵלַי מִן־הָאֲדָמָה׃", 4.1. "וְהָאָדָם יָדַע אֶת־חַוָּה אִשְׁתּוֹ וַתַּהַר וַתֵּלֶד אֶת־קַיִן וַתֹּאמֶר קָנִיתִי אִישׁ אֶת־יְהוָה׃",

1.1. "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.", 1.26. "And God said: ‘Let us make man in our image, after our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.’", 4.1. "And the man knew Eve his wife; and she conceived and bore Cain, and said: ‘I have agotten a man with the help of the LORD.’", 21.10. "Wherefore she said unto Abraham: ‘Cast out this bondwoman and her son; for the son of this bondwoman shall not be heir with my son, even with Isaac.’",

2. Hebrew Bible, Leviticus, 16.12-16.15 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •jewish-christian dispute/polemic, Found in books: Fraade (2023), Multilingualism and Translation in Ancient Judaism: Before and After Babel. 19

16.12. "וְלָקַח מְלֹא־הַמַּחְתָּה גַּחֲלֵי־אֵשׁ מֵעַל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ מִלִּפְנֵי יְהוָה וּמְלֹא חָפְנָיו קְטֹרֶת סַמִּים דַּקָּה וְהֵבִיא מִבֵּית לַפָּרֹכֶת׃", 16.13. "וְנָתַן אֶת־הַקְּטֹרֶת עַל־הָאֵשׁ לִפְנֵי יְהוָה וְכִסָּה עֲנַן הַקְּטֹרֶת אֶת־הַכַּפֹּרֶת אֲשֶׁר עַל־הָעֵדוּת וְלֹא יָמוּת׃", 16.14. "וְלָקַח מִדַּם הַפָּר וְהִזָּה בְאֶצְבָּעוֹ עַל־פְּנֵי הַכַּפֹּרֶת קֵדְמָה וְלִפְנֵי הַכַּפֹּרֶת יַזֶּה שֶׁבַע־פְּעָמִים מִן־הַדָּם בְּאֶצְבָּעוֹ׃", 16.15. "וְשָׁחַט אֶת־שְׂעִיר הַחַטָּאת אֲשֶׁר לָעָם וְהֵבִיא אֶת־דָּמוֹ אֶל־מִבֵּית לַפָּרֹכֶת וְעָשָׂה אֶת־דָּמוֹ כַּאֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לְדַם הַפָּר וְהִזָּה אֹתוֹ עַל־הַכַּפֹּרֶת וְלִפְנֵי הַכַּפֹּרֶת׃",

16.12. "And he shall take a censer full of coals of fire from off the altar before the LORD, and his hands full of sweet incense beaten small, and bring it within the veil.", 16.13. "And he shall put the incense upon the fire before the LORD, that the cloud of the incense may cover the ark-cover that is upon the testimony, that he die not.", 16.14. "And he shall take of the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it with his finger upon the ark-cover on the east; and before the ark-cover shall he sprinkle of the blood with his finger seven times.", 16.15. "Then shall he kill the goat of the sin-offering, that is for the people, and bring his blood within the veil, and do with his blood as he did with the blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it upon the ark-cover, and before the ark-cover.",

3. Hebrew Bible, Micah, 4.13, 7.4 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 148, 161, 191

4.13. "קוּמִי וָדוֹשִׁי בַת־צִיּוֹן כִּי־קַרְנֵךְ אָשִׂים בַּרְזֶל וּפַרְסֹתַיִךְ אָשִׂים נְחוּשָׁה וַהֲדִקּוֹת עַמִּים רַבִּים וְהַחֲרַמְתִּי לַיהוָה בִּצְעָם וְחֵילָם לַאֲדוֹן כָּל־הָאָרֶץ׃", 7.4. "טוֹבָם כְּחֵדֶק יָשָׁר מִמְּסוּכָה יוֹם מְצַפֶּיךָ פְּקֻדָּתְךָ בָאָה עַתָּה תִהְיֶה מְבוּכָתָם׃",

4.13. "Arise and thresh, O daughter of Zion; For I will make thy horn iron, And I will make thy hoofs brass; And thou shalt beat in pieces many peoples; And thou shalt devote their gain unto the LORD, And their substance unto the Lord of the whole earth.", 7.4. "The best of them is as a brier; The most upright is worse than a thorn hedge; The day of thy watchmen, even thy visitation, is come; Now shall be their perplexity.",

4. Hebrew Bible, Numbers, 35.23 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 94

35.23. "אוֹ בְכָל־אֶבֶן אֲשֶׁר־יָמוּת בָּהּ בְּלֹא רְאוֹת וַיַּפֵּל עָלָיו וַיָּמֹת וְהוּא לֹא־אוֹיֵב לוֹ וְלֹא מְבַקֵּשׁ רָעָתוֹ׃",

35.23. "or with any stone, whereby a man may die, seeing him not, and cast it upon him, so that he died, and he was not his enemy, neither sought his harm;",

5. Hebrew Bible, Proverbs, 24.17 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 94

24.17. "בִּנְפֹל אויביך [אוֹיִבְךָ] אַל־תִּשְׂמָח וּבִכָּשְׁלוֹ אַל־יָגֵל לִבֶּךָ׃",

24.17. "Rejoice not when thine enemy falleth, And let not thy heart be glad when he stumbleth;",

6. Hebrew Bible, Hosea, 5.6, 8.12 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian •jewish-christian dispute/polemic, Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 191; Fraade (2023), Multilingualism and Translation in Ancient Judaism: Before and After Babel. 168

5.6. "בְּצֹאנָם וּבִבְקָרָם יֵלְכוּ לְבַקֵּשׁ אֶת־יְהוָה וְלֹא יִמְצָאוּ חָלַץ מֵהֶם׃", 8.12. "אכתוב־[אֶכְתָּב־] לוֹ רבו [רֻבֵּי] תּוֹרָתִי כְּמוֹ־זָר נֶחְשָׁבוּ׃",

5.6. "With their flocks and with their herds they shall go To seek the LORD, but they shall not find Him; He hath withdrawn Himself from them.", 8.12. "Though I write for him never so many things of My Law, they are accounted as a stranger’s.",

7. Hebrew Bible, Ruth, 4.2-4.8 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 191

4.2. "וַיִּקַּח עֲשָׂרָה אֲנָשִׁים מִזִּקְנֵי הָעִיר וַיֹּאמֶר שְׁבוּ־פֹה וַיֵּשֵׁבוּ׃", 4.2. "וְעַמִּינָדָב הוֹלִיד אֶת־נַחְשׁוֹן וְנַחְשׁוֹן הוֹלִיד אֶת־שַׂלְמָה׃", 4.3. "וַיֹּאמֶר לַגֹּאֵל חֶלְקַת הַשָּׂדֶה אֲשֶׁר לְאָחִינוּ לֶאֱלִימֶלֶךְ מָכְרָה נָעֳמִי הַשָּׁבָה מִשְּׂדֵה מוֹאָב׃", 4.4. "וַאֲנִי אָמַרְתִּי אֶגְלֶה אָזְנְךָ לֵאמֹר קְנֵה נֶגֶד הַיֹּשְׁבִים וְנֶגֶד זִקְנֵי עַמִּי אִם־תִּגְאַל גְּאָל וְאִם־לֹא יִגְאַל הַגִּידָה לִּי ואדע [וְאֵדְעָה] כִּי אֵין זוּלָתְךָ לִגְאוֹל וְאָנֹכִי אַחֲרֶיךָ וַיֹּאמֶר אָנֹכִי אֶגְאָל׃", 4.5. "וַיֹּאמֶר בֹּעַז בְּיוֹם־קְנוֹתְךָ הַשָּׂדֶה מִיַּד נָעֳמִי וּמֵאֵת רוּת הַמּוֹאֲבִיָּה אֵשֶׁת־הַמֵּת קניתי [קָנִיתָה] לְהָקִים שֵׁם־הַמֵּת עַל־נַחֲלָתוֹ׃", 4.6. "וַיֹּאמֶר הַגֹּאֵל לֹא אוּכַל לגאול־[לִגְאָל־] לִי פֶּן־אַשְׁחִית אֶת־נַחֲלָתִי גְּאַל־לְךָ אַתָּה אֶת־גְּאֻלָּתִי כִּי לֹא־אוּכַל לִגְאֹל׃", 4.7. "וְזֹאת לְפָנִים בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל עַל־הַגְּאוּלָּה וְעַל־הַתְּמוּרָה לְקַיֵּם כָּל־דָּבָר שָׁלַף אִישׁ נַעֲלוֹ וְנָתַן לְרֵעֵהוּ וְזֹאת הַתְּעוּדָה בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל׃", 4.8. "וַיֹּאמֶר הַגֹּאֵל לְבֹעַז קְנֵה־לָךְ וַיִּשְׁלֹף נַעֲלוֹ׃",

4.2. "And he took ten men of the elders of the city, and said: ‘Sit ye down here.’ And they sat down.", 4.3. "And he said unto the near kinsman: ‘Naomi, that is come back out of the field of Moab, selleth the parcel of land, which was our brother Elimelech’s;", 4.4. "and I thought to disclose it unto thee, saying: Buy it before them that sit here, and before the elders of my people. If thou wilt redeem it, redeem it; but if it will not be redeemed, then tell me, that I may know; for there is none to redeem it beside thee; and I am after thee.’ And he said: ‘I will redeem it.’", 4.5. "Then said Boaz: ‘What day thou buyest the field of the hand of Naomi—hast thou also bought of Ruth the Moabitess, the wife of the dead, to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance?’", 4.6. "And the near kinsman said: ‘I cannot redeem it for myself, lest I mar mine own inheritance; take thou my right of redemption on thee; for I cannot redeem it.’—", 4.7. "Now this was the custom in former time in Israel concerning redeeming and concerning exchanging, to confirm all things: a man drew off his shoe, and gave it to his neighbour; and this was the attestation in Israel.—", 4.8. "So the near kinsman said unto Boaz: ‘Buy it for thyself.’ And he drew off his shoe.",

8. Hebrew Bible, Psalms, 69.22 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •creation, in jewish-christian polemic •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 88, 191

69.22. "וַיִּתְּנוּ בְּבָרוּתִי רֹאשׁ וְלִצְמָאִי יַשְׁקוּנִי חֹמֶץ׃",

69.22. "Yea, they put poison into my food; And in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.",

9. Hebrew Bible, Joshua, 4.1-4.8 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •jewish-christian dispute/polemic, Found in books: Fraade (2023), Multilingualism and Translation in Ancient Judaism: Before and After Babel. 19

4.1. "וְהַכֹּהֲנִים נֹשְׂאֵי הָאָרוֹן עֹמְדִים בְּתוֹךְ הַיַּרְדֵּן עַד תֹּם כָּל־הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר־צִוָּה יְהוָה אֶת־יְהוֹשֻׁעַ לְדַבֵּר אֶל־הָעָם כְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר־צִוָּה מֹשֶׁה אֶת־יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וַיְמַהֲרוּ הָעָם וַיַּעֲבֹרוּ׃", 4.1. "וַיְהִי כַּאֲשֶׁר־תַּמּוּ כָל־הַגּוֹי לַעֲבוֹר אֶת־הַיַּרְדֵּן וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל־יְהוֹשֻׁעַ לֵאמֹר׃", 4.2. "וְאֵת שְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה הָאֲבָנִים הָאֵלֶּה אֲשֶׁר לָקְחוּ מִן־הַיַּרְדֵּן הֵקִים יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בַּגִּלְגָּל׃", 4.2. "קְחוּ לָכֶם מִן־הָעָם שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר אֲנָשִׁים אִישׁ־אֶחָד אִישׁ־אֶחָד מִשָּׁבֶט׃", 4.3. "וְצַוּוּ אוֹתָם לֵאמֹר שְׂאוּ־לָכֶם מִזֶּה מִתּוֹךְ הַיַּרְדֵּן מִמַּצַּב רַגְלֵי הַכֹּהֲנִים הָכִין שְׁתֵּים־עֶשְׂרֵה אֲבָנִים וְהַעֲבַרְתֶּם אוֹתָם עִמָּכֶם וְהִנַּחְתֶּם אוֹתָם בַּמָּלוֹן אֲשֶׁר־תָּלִינוּ בוֹ הַלָּיְלָה׃", 4.4. "וַיִּקְרָא יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אֶל־שְׁנֵים הֶעָשָׂר אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר הֵכִין מִבְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אִישׁ־אֶחָד אִישׁ־אֶחָד מִשָּׁבֶט׃", 4.5. "וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם יְהוֹשֻׁעַ עִבְרוּ לִפְנֵי אֲרוֹן יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם אֶל־תּוֹךְ הַיַּרְדֵּן וְהָרִימוּ לָכֶם אִישׁ אֶבֶן אַחַת עַל־שִׁכְמוֹ לְמִסְפַּר שִׁבְטֵי בְנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל׃", 4.6. "לְמַעַן תִּהְיֶה זֹאת אוֹת בְּקִרְבְּכֶם כִּי־יִשְׁאָלוּן בְּנֵיכֶם מָחָר לֵאמֹר מָה הָאֲבָנִים הָאֵלֶּה לָכֶם׃", 4.7. "וַאֲמַרְתֶּם לָהֶם אֲשֶׁר נִכְרְתוּ מֵימֵי הַיַּרְדֵּן מִפְּנֵי אֲרוֹן בְּרִית־יְהוָה בְּעָבְרוֹ בַּיַּרְדֵּן נִכְרְתוּ מֵי הַיַּרְדֵּן וְהָיוּ הָאֲבָנִים הָאֵלֶּה לְזִכָּרוֹן לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל עַד־עוֹלָם׃", 4.8. "וַיַּעֲשׂוּ־כֵן בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וַיִּשְׂאוּ שְׁתֵּי־עֶשְׂרֵה אֲבָנִים מִתּוֹךְ הַיַּרְדֵּן כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר יְהוָה אֶל־יְהוֹשֻׁעַ לְמִסְפַּר שִׁבְטֵי בְנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיַּעֲבִרוּם עִמָּם אֶל־הַמָּלוֹן וַיַּנִּחוּם שָׁם׃",

4.1. "And it came to pass, when all the nation were clean passed over the Jordan, that the LORD spoke unto Joshua, saying:", 4.2. "’Take you twelve men out of the people, out of every tribe a man,", 4.3. "and command ye them, saying: Take you hence out of the midst of the Jordan, out of the place where the priests’feet stood, twelve stones made ready, and carry them over with you, and lay them down in the lodging-place, where ye shall lodge this night.’", 4.4. "Then Joshua called the twelve men, whom he had prepared of the children of Israel, out of every tribe a man;", 4.5. "and Joshua said unto them: ‘Pass on before the ark of the LORD your God into the midst of the Jordan, and take you up every man of you a stone upon his shoulder, according unto the number of the tribes of the children of Israel;", 4.6. "that this may be a sign among you, that when your children ask in time to come, saying: What mean ye by these stones?", 4.7. "then ye shall say unto them: Because the waters of the Jordan were cut off before the ark of the covet of the LORD; when it passed over the Jordan, the waters of the Jordan were cut off; and these stones shall be for a memorial unto the children of Israel for ever.’", 4.8. "And the children of Israel did so as Joshua commanded, and took up twelve stones out of the midst of the Jordan, as the LORD spoke unto Joshua, according to the number of the tribes of the children of Israel; and they carried them over with them unto the place where they lodged, and laid them down there.",

10. Hebrew Bible, Amos, 4.13 (8th cent. BCE - 6th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •creation, in jewish-christian polemic •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 86, 107, 191

4.13. "כִּי הִנֵּה יוֹצֵר הָרִים וּבֹרֵא רוּחַ וּמַגִּיד לְאָדָם מַה־שֵּׂחוֹ עֹשֵׂה שַׁחַר עֵיפָה וְדֹרֵךְ עַל־בָּמֳתֵי אָרֶץ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי־צְבָאוֹת שְׁמוֹ׃",

4.13. "For, lo, He that formeth the mountains, and createth the wind, And declareth unto man what is his thought, That maketh the morning darkness, And treadeth upon the high places of the earth; The LORD, the God of hosts, is His name.",

11. Hebrew Bible, Isaiah, 54.1 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 191

54.1. "רָנִּי עֲקָרָה לֹא יָלָדָה פִּצְחִי רִנָּה וְצַהֲלִי לֹא־חָלָה כִּי־רַבִּים בְּנֵי־שׁוֹמֵמָה מִבְּנֵי בְעוּלָה אָמַר יְהוָה׃", 54.1. "כִּי הֶהָרִים יָמוּשׁוּ וְהַגְּבָעוֹת תְּמוּטֶנָה וְחַסְדִּי מֵאִתֵּךְ לֹא־יָמוּשׁ וּבְרִית שְׁלוֹמִי לֹא תָמוּט אָמַר מְרַחֲמֵךְ יְהוָה׃",

54.1. "Sing, O barren, thou that didst not bear, Break forth into singing, and cry aloud, thou that didst not travail; For more are the children of the desolate Than the children of the married wife, saith the LORD.",

12. Dead Sea Scrolls, Hodayot, 12.11 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •creation, in jewish-christian polemic Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 88

13. Dead Sea Scrolls, Hodayot, 12.11 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •creation, in jewish-christian polemic Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 88

14. Josephus Flavius, Jewish Antiquities, 1.14 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Niehoff (2011), Jewish Exegesis and Homeric Scholarship in Alexandria, 110

1.14. Upon the whole, a man that will peruse this history, may principally learn from it, that all events succeed well, even to an incredible degree, and the reward of felicity is proposed by God; but then it is to those that follow his will, and do not venture to break his excellent laws: and that so far as men any way apostatize from the accurate observation of them, what was practicable before becomes impracticable; and whatsoever they set about as a good thing is converted into an incurable calamity.

15. Mishnah, Avot, 4.19 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 94

4.19. "שְׁמוּאֵל הַקָּטָן אוֹמֵר, (משלי כד) בִּנְפֹל אוֹיִבְךָ אַל תִּשְׂמָח וּבִכָּשְׁלוֹ אַל יָגֵל לִבֶּךָ, פֶּן יִרְאֶה ה' וְרַע בְּעֵינָיו וְהֵשִׁיב מֵעָלָיו אַפּוֹ: \n",

4.19. "Shmuel Hakatan said: “If your enemy falls, do not exult; if he trips, let your heart not rejoice, lest the Lord see it and be displeased, and avert his wrath from you” (Proverbs 24:17).",

16. New Testament, Matthew, 5.12, 5.43 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 60

5.12. χαίρετε καὶ ἀγαλλιᾶσθε, ὅτι ὁ μισθὸς ὑμῶν πολὺς ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς· οὕτως γὰρ ἐδίωξαν τοὺς προφήτας τοὺς πρὸ ὑμῶν. 5.43. Ἠκούσατε ὅτι ἐρρέθη Ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου καὶ μισήσεις τὸν ἐχθρόν σου.

5.12. Rejoice, and be exceedingly glad, for great is your reward in heaven. For that is how they persecuted the prophets who were before you. 5.43. "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor, and hate your enemy.'

17. Justin, Dialogue With Trypho, 15.2, 19.3 (2nd cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Niehoff (2011), Jewish Exegesis and Homeric Scholarship in Alexandria, 110

18. Anon., Sifre Numbers, 160 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 94

19. Anon., Genesis Rabba, 1.14, 22.2, 53.15 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 56, 57

1.14. רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל שָׁאַל אֶת רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אָמַר לוֹ בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁשִּׁמַּשְׁתָּ אֶת נַחוּם אִישׁ גַּם זוּ עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁתַּיִם שָׁנָה, אַכִין וְרַקִּין מִעוּטִין, אֶתִין וְגַמִּין רִבּוּיִן, הָדֵין אֶת דִּכְתִיב הָכָא, מַה הוּא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ, אִלּוּ נֶאֱמַר בְּרֵאשִׁית בָּרָא אֱלֹהִים שָׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ, הָיִינוּ אוֹמְרִים הַשָּׁמַיִם וְהָאָרֶץ אֱלָהוּת הֵן, אֲמַר לֵיהּ (דברים לב, מז): כִּי לֹא דָבָר רֵק הוּא מִכֶּם, וְאִם רֵק הוּא מִכֶּם, לָמָּה שֶׁאֵין אַתֶּם יוֹדְעִין לִדְרשׁ בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁאִי אַתֶּם יְגֵעִין בּוֹ, (דברים לב, מז): כִּי הוּא חַיֵּיכֶם, אֵימָתַי הוּא חַיֵּיכֶם, בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁאַתֶּם יְגֵעִין בּוֹ. אֶלָּא אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם, לְרַבּוֹת חַמָּה וּלְבָנָה וּמַזָּלוֹת, וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ, לְרַבּוֹת אִילָנוֹת וּדְשָׁאִין וְגַן עֵדֶן. רַבִּי תַּנְחוּמָא מִשּׁוּם רַב הוּנָא אָמַר (שמות לח, כב): וּבְצַלְאֵל בֶּן אוּרִי בֶּן חוּר לְמַטֵּה יְהוּדָה עָשָׂה אֵת אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה אֹתוֹ משֶׁה, לֹא נֶאֱמַר, אֶלָּא אֵת כָּל אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה ה' אֶת משֶׁה, אֲפִלּוּ דְּבָרִים שֶׁלֹא שָׁמַע מִפִּי רַבּוֹ, הִסְכִּימָה דַעְתּוֹ לְמַה שֶּׁנֶּאֱמַר לְמשֶׁה בְּסִינַי. רַבִּי חוֹנְיָא בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי אָמַר (מלאכי ב, ו): תּוֹרַת אֱמֶת הָיְתָה בְּפִיהוּ, אֵלּוּ דְּבָרִים שֶׁשָּׁמַע מִפִּי רַבּוֹ. וְרַבָּנָן אָמְרֵי (משלי ג, כו): כִּי ה' יִהְיֶה בְכִסְלֶךָ, אֲפִלּוּ דְּבָרִים שֶׁאַתָּה כְּסִיל בָּהֶן, (משלי ג, כו): וְשָׁמַר רַגְלְךָ מִלָּכֶד, רַבִּי דוֹסָאי אָמַר, מִן הַהוֹרָיָה. רַבִּי אַבָּהוּ אָמַר, מִן הָעֲבֵרָה. רַבִּי לֵוִי אָמַר, מִן הַמַּזִּיקִין. אָמַר רַבִּי אַבְדִימוּס, אִם נָתַתָּ מִכִּסְךָ צְדָקָה, הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מְשַׁמֶּרְךָ מִן הַפִּיסִין וּמִן הַזִּמְיוֹנוֹת, מִן הַגֻּלְגְּלָאוֹת וּמִן הָאַרְנוֹנִית. 22.2. וְהָאָדָם יָדַע וגו', רַבִּי הוּנָא וְרַבִּי יַעֲקֹב בְּרַבִּי אָבִין בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר כַּהֲנָא אָמַר, לֹא שִׁמְשָׁה בְּרִיָּה קֹדֶם לְאָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן, וַיֵּדַע אֵין כְּתִיב כָּאן, אֶלָּא וְהָאָדָם יָדַע אֶת חַוָּה אִשְׁתּוֹ, הוֹדִיעַ דֶּרֶךְ אֶרֶץ לַכֹּל. דָּבָר אַחֵר, וְהָאָדָם יָדַע, יָדַע מֵאֵיזוֹ שַׁלְוָה נִשְׁלָה, יָדַע מָה עָבְדַת לֵיהּ חַוָּה. אָמַר רַב אַחָא חִיוְיָא חִיוְיִךְ וְאַתְּ חִיוְיָא דְאָדָם. וַתַּהַר וַתֵּלֶד אֶת קַיִן, אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה שְׁלשָׁה פְּלָאִים נַעֲשׂוּ בְּאוֹתוֹ הַיּוֹם, בּוֹ בַּיּוֹם נִבְרְאוּ, בּוֹ בַּיּוֹם שִׁמְּשׁוּ, בּוֹ בַּיּוֹם הוֹצִיאוּ תּוֹלָדוֹת. אָמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן קָרְחָה עָלוּ לַמִּטָּה שְׁנַיִם וְיָרְדוּ שִׁבְעָה, קַיִּן וּתְאוֹמָתוֹ, וְהֶבֶל וּשְׁתֵּי תְאוֹמוֹתָיו, וַתֹּאמֶר קָנִיתִי אִישׁ אֶת ה', חָמַת לָהּ הָא אִיתְּתָא בְּנִין, אָמְרָה הָא קִנְיַן בַּעֲלִי בְּיָדִי. רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל שָׁאַל אֶת רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אָמַר לוֹ בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁשִּׁמַּשְׁתָּ נַחוּם אִישׁ גַּם זוֹ עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁתַּיִם שָׁנָה, אַכִין וְרַקִּין מִעוּטִים, אֶתִין וְגַמִּין רִבּוּיִים, הַאי אֶת דִּכְתִיב הָכָא מַהוּ, אָמַר אִלּוּ נֶאֱמַר קָנִיתִי אִישׁ ה', הָיָה הַדָּבָר קָשֶׁה, אֶלָּא אֶת ה'. אָמַר לֵיהּ (דברים לב, מז): כִּי לֹא דָּבָר רֵק הוּא מִכֶּם, וְאִם רֵק הוּא מִכֶּם, שֶׁאֵין אַתֶּם יוֹדְעִים לִדְרשׁ, אֶלָּא אֶת ה', לְשֶׁעָבַר אָדָם נִבְרָא מֵאֲדָמָה, וְחַוָּה נִבְרֵאת מֵאָדָם, מִכָּאן וְאֵילָךְ (בראשית א, כו): בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ, לֹא אִישׁ בְּלֹא אִשָּׁה וְלֹא אִשָּׁה בְּלֹא אִישׁ, וְלֹא שְׁנֵיהֶם בְּלֹא שְׁכִינָה. 53.15. וַיְהִי אֱלֹהִים אֶת הַנַּעַר וַיִּגְדָּל (בראשית כא, כ), רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל שָׁאַל אֶת רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אָמַר לוֹ בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁשִּׁמַּשְׁתָּ נַחוּם אִישׁ גַּם זוֹ עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁתַּיִם שָׁנָה, אַכִים וְרַקִּים מִעוּטִים, אֶתִין וְגַמִּין רִבּוּיִם, הָדֵין אֶת דִּכְתִיב הָכָא מַהוּ, אָמַר לוֹ אִלּוּ נֶאֱמַר וַיְהִי אֱלֹהִים הַנַּעַר, הָיָה הַדָּבָר קָשֶׁה, אֶלָּא אֶת הַנַּעַר. אָמַר לוֹ (דברים לב, מז): כִּי לֹא דָּבָר רֵק הוּא מִכֶּם, וְאִם רֵק מִכֶּם, שֶׁאֵין אַתֶּם יוֹדְעִים לִדְרשׁ, אֶלָא אֶת הַנַּעַר, הוּא וְחַמָּרָיו וְגַמָּלָיו וּבְנֵי בֵיתוֹ. (בראשית כא, כ): וַיְהִי רֹבֶה קַשָּׁת, רָבֶה וְקַשְׁיוּתוֹ עִמּוֹ [נסח אחר: וקשיותו אמו], רָבֶה, מִתְלַמֵּד בְּקֶּשֶׁת, רָבֶה עַל כָּל הַמּוֹרִים בַּקֶּשֶׁת. (בראשית כא, כא): וַיֵּשֶׁב בְּמִדְבַּר פָּארָן, אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק זְרוֹק חוּטְרָא לַאֲוִירָא וְעַל עִקְרֵיהּ הוּא קָאֵים, כָּךְ לְפִי שֶׁכָּתוּב (בראשית טז, א): וְלָהּ שִׁפְחָה מִצְרִית וּשְׁמָהּ הָגָר, לְפִיכָךְ (בראשית כא, כא): וַתִּקַּח לוֹ אִמּוֹ אִשָּׁה מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם.

1.14. "Rabbi Yishmael asked Rabbi Akiva and said to him \"seeing as you served Nahum, the man from Gamzu, twenty two years, [who teaches that] i ach /i and i raq /i are [hermeneutic tools for] dimunition ( i mi'ut /i ) and i et /i and i gam /i are [tools for] expansion ( i ribuy /i ) what is your opinion on the i et /i written here; what is it?\" and he said to him: \"if it was said \"in the beginning God created heavens and earth\" we would say that the heavens and the earth are divinities.\" He said to him \"\"for this is no empty thing for you\" (Deuteronomy 32:47) and if it seems empty to you, then it is because you do not know to interpret correctly when you are not careful with it \"for it is your life\" (Deuteronomy 32:47). When is it your life? When you are careful with it.\" But, i et /i the heavens, [this i et /i ] expands to include the sun and moon and zodiac signs, and i et /i the earth, [this i et /i ] expands to include the trees and grass and the Garden of Eden. Rabbi Tanchuma from Rav Huna said \"And Bezalel son of Uri son of Hur from the tribe of Judah made what Moses commanded him\" (Exodus 38:22), does it not say \" i et /i all which Hashem commanded Moses\", even the words which he did not hear from the mouth of his master, he planned his judgment from what was spoken to Moses on Sinai. Rabbi Chonya in the name of Rabbi said \"\"The Torah of truth was from his mouth\" (Malachi 2:6) these are the words which he heard from the mouth of his master\". And the rabbis said \"For Hashem will be your confidence\" (Proverbs 3:26), even though you are confident in them, \"He will guard your foot from being caught\" (Proverbs 3:26)\". Rabbi Dosai said \"from erroneous decisions\". Rabbi Abbahu said \"from sin\". Rabbi Levi said \"from harm\". Said Rabbi Avdimus \"if you gave charity from your money, the Holy One, blessed be He, guards you from tariffs and from fines, from head-taxes and from forced contributions\". ", 22.2. "Now the man knew his woman Chava, etc. Rabbi Huna and Rabbi Yaakov the son of Rabbi Avin, in the name of Rabbi Aba bar Kahana said: Before the man, the creations had never had sexual relations, behold here it is not written \"and he knows\" rather, and it is written \"and he knew\", that is, he made known the way of the land to all. Another interpretation: And Adam knew - he knew from what bliss he was expelled; he knew what Chava did to him. Said Rav Acha: Chivyiah [the snake] is your snake, and you are the snake of Adam. 'And she conceived and gave birth to Kayin' - Said Rabbi Eleazar ben Azaryiah three wonders happened on that day:on that day they were created, on that day they had relations, on that day they had children. Said Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korcha: two went up to the bed and seven descended, Kayin and his female twin, Hevel and his two female twins. 'And she said: I acquired a man with God' - the woman sees herself with a baby and says 'behold the acquiring of my husband [is definitely] in my hand.'Rabbi Ishmael asked Rabbi Akiva: since you have served Nachum Ish Gam Zu for twenty two years, and [he taught that] every 'ach' and every 'rak' make for exclusion and every 'et' and every 'gam' make for inclusion, in this verse what is 'et' doing here? He [Akiva] answered: if it were written 'I acquired a man of God [w/o the 'et']' that would be a difficult thing, rather it says 'I acquired a man with God'. He said to him: 'Because this is not an empty thing for you' (Devarim 32:47), and if it was empty, it is because of you, because you cannot LIDROSH, rather 'with God' [means] that in the past Adam was created from the adamah and Chavah was created from the adam. From here and onward, “in our image as our likeness”—not man without woman and not woman without man, and not both of them without Shekhinah [God’s presence].",

20. Anon., Mekhilta Derabbi Yishmael, None (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •polemics, jewish-christian Found in books: Bickerman and Tropper (2007), Studies in Jewish and Christian History, 41

21. Origen, On Jeremiah (Homilies 1-11), 15.3.2 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 148

22. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Qamma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 62

50b. (שמות לד, ו) ארך אפים ולא כתיב ארך אף ארך אפים לצדיקים ולרשעים:,ת"ר לא יסקל אדם מרשותו לרה"ר מעשה באדם אחד שהיה מסקל מרשותו לרה"ר ומצאו חסיד אחד אמר לו ריקה מפני מה אתה מסקל מרשות שאינה שלך לרשות שלך לגלג עליו,לימים נצרך למכור שדהו והיה מהלך באותו רה"ר ונכשל באותן אבנים אמר יפה אמר לי אותו חסיד מפני מה אתה מסקל מרשות שאינה שלך לרשות שלך:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big החופר בור ברה"ר ונפל לתוכו שור או חמור חייב אחד החופר בור שיח ומערה חריצין ונעיצין חייב א"כ למה נאמר בור מה בור שיש בו כדי להמית עשרה טפחים אף כל שיש בו כדי להמית עשרה טפחים היו פחותין מעשרה טפחים ונפל לתוכו שור או חמור ומת פטור ואם הוזק בו חייב:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big אמר רב בור שחייבה עליו תורה להבלו ולא לחבטו אלמא קסבר חבטה קרקע עולם הוא דמזקא ליה,ושמואל אמר להבלו וכ"ש לחבטו וא"ת לחבטו אמרה תורה ולא להבלו התורה העידה על הבור ואפילו מלא ספוגין של צמר,מאי בינייהו איכא בינייהו דעבד גובה ברה"ר לרב אגובה לא מיחייב לשמואל אגובה נמי מיחייב,מ"ט דרב דאמר קרא ונפל עד שיפול דרך נפילה ולשמואל ונפל כל דהו משמע,תנן א"כ למה נאמר בור מה בור שיש בו כדי להמית עשרה טפחים אף כל שיש בו כדי להמית עשרה טפחים בשלמא לשמואל אף כל לאתויי גובה אלא לרב אף כל לאתויי מאי,לאתויי חריצין ונעיצין חריצין ונעיצין בהדיא קתני להו תני והדר מפרש,והני כולהו דקתני למה לי צריכא דאי תנא בור הוה אמינא בור עשרה הוא דאית ביה הבלא משום דקטין וכריכא אבל שיח דאריך אימא בעשרה לית ביה הבלא,ואי תנא שיח הוה אמינא שיח עשרה הוא דאית ביה הבלא משום דקטין אבל מערה דמרבעא אימא בעשרה לית בה הבלא,ואי תני מערה הוה אמינא מערה בעשרה הוא דאית בה הבלא משום דמטללא אבל חריצין דלא מטללי אימא בעשרה לית בהו הבלא,ואי תנא חריצין הוה אמינא חריצין עשרה הוא דאית בהו הבלא משום דלית בהו רויחא מלעיל טפי מתתאי אבל נעיצין דרויחי מלעיל טפי מתתאי אימא בעשרה לית בהו הבלא קמ"ל:,תנן היו פחותין מעשרה טפחים ונפל לתוכו שור או חמור ומת פטור ואם הוזק בו חייב נפל לתוכו שור או חמור ומת פטור מ"ט לאו משום דלית ביה חבטה,לא משום דלית ביה הבלא אי הכי אם הוזק בו חייב הא לית ביה הבלא אמרי אין הבלא למיתה ויש הבלא לנזקין,ההוא תורא דנפל לאריתא דדלאי שחטיה מריה טרפיה רב נחמן,אמר רב נחמן אי שקיל מריה דהאי תורא קבא דקמחא ואזל תנא בי מדרשא אם שהתה מעת לעת כשירה לא אפסדיה לתורא דשוה כמה קבי אלמא קסבר ר"נ יש חבטה בפחות מעשרה,איתיביה רבא לרב נחמן היו פחותין מעשרה טפחים ונפל לתוכו שור או חמור ומת פטור מאי טעמא לאו משום דלית ביה חבטה

50b. in the verse that recounts the thirteen attributes of mercy: b “Long-suffering [ i erekh appayim /i ]” /b (Exodus 34:6), using the plural form, b and it is not written /b as b i erekh af /i , /b in the singular? In order to teach that He is b long-suffering for /b both b the righteous and for the wicked /b and does not punish them immediately for their transgressions.,§ b The Sages taught: A person should not throw stones from his property into the public domain. An incident /b occurred b involving a certain individual who was throwing stones from his property into the public domain, and a certain pious man found him. /b The latter b said to him: Lowlife [ i reika /i ], for what /b reason b are you throwing stones from property that is not yours into your property? /b The man b mocked him, /b as he did not understand what he meant, as the property from which he was throwing stones was his., b Some days /b later, b he was forced to sell his field /b from which he had thrown the stones. b And he was walking in the same public domain /b into which he had thrown them, b and he stumbled on those same stones. He said: That pious man said /b it b well to me /b when he said: b For what /b reason b are you throwing stones from property that is not yours into your own property, /b since that property no longer belongs to me, and only the public domain remains mine to use., strong MISHNA: /strong In the case of b one who digs a pit in the public domain and an ox or a donkey fell into it, /b he is b liable. /b The i halakha /i is the b same /b for b one who digs /b either b a pit; a ditch, /b which is narrow and long; b or a cave, /b which is rectangular and roofed; b trenches and /b water b channels. /b In all these cases he is b liable. If so, why is /b the verse b stated /b as referring to b a pit, /b as it states: “And if a man shall open a pit” (Exodus 21:33)? To teach that b just as a pit that has sufficient /b depth b to cause death /b when falling into it is at least b ten handbreadths /b deep, b so too, any /b other excavations b that have sufficient /b depth b to cause death /b may be no less than b ten handbreadths. /b If any of the types of excavations b were less than ten handbreadths /b deep, b and an ox or a donkey fell into /b one of b them and died, /b the digger of the excavation is b exempt. But if it was injured in it, /b not killed, he is b liable /b to pay damages., strong GEMARA: /strong b Rav says: /b Damage by b Pit for which the Torah obligates one /b to pay is referring specifically b to /b damage caused by the pit’s lethal b fumes, /b i.e., suffocation, b but not to /b damage caused by b the impact /b of hitting the ground, for which the digger of the pit is exempt from paying compensation. The Gemara continues to explain: b Apparently, /b it can be inferred that Rav b maintains /b that with regard to the b impact /b of hitting the bottom of the pit, b it is merely the ground that injures him. /b The digger of the pit does not own the ground, so it is not a case where his property caused damage. Therefore, he does not bear responsibility for the damage., b And Shmuel says: /b The Torah renders one liable for damage caused b by its /b lethal b fumes, and all the more so for /b damage resulting from b the impact. /b Shmuel adds: b And if you say /b that the b Torah spoke /b only b about /b liability for b its impact and not for its /b lethal b fumes, /b one could respond that b the Torah testifies about a pit /b without specifying for which type of pit one is liable, b and /b this includes b even /b a pit b full of woolen sponges [ i sefogin /i ], /b which would completely absorb the impact.,The Gemara asks: b What /b is the difference b between /b the opinions of Rav and Shmuel, given that falling into any pit involves injury due to both the lethal fumes and the impact? The Gemara answers: The practical difference b between them /b is in the case b where /b one b fashioned a mound /b with a height of ten handbreadths b in the public domain /b without digging, and an animal fell from this raised platform and died. b According to Rav, /b the one who fashioned the mound b is not liable for /b damage by Pit in the case of b a mound, /b since there are no fumes, as the animal fell to the level ground. By contrast, b according to Shmuel, he is also liable for /b damage by Pit in the case of b a mound, /b since there is nevertheless an impact when hitting the ground.,The Gemara asks: b What is /b the source for b the reasoning of Rav, /b that one is not liable in that case? The Gemara answers: b Since the verse states: “And /b an ox or a donkey b fall /b therein” (Exodus 21:33), indicating that there is no liability for damage by Pit b unless /b the animal b falls /b in the b normal manner of falling, /b but not where it first climbed onto an elevated surface and then fell from there to the level ground. b And according to Shmuel, /b the term: b “And /b an ox or a donkey b fall,” indicates any manner /b of falling, regardless of whether the animal fell into a hole or fell to the ground from an elevated surface.,The Gemara challenges Rav’s opinion: b We learned /b in the mishna: b If so, why is /b the verse b stated /b as referring to b a pit, /b as it states: “And if a man shall open a pit” (Exodus 21:33)? To teach that b just as a pit that has sufficient /b depth b to cause death /b when falling into it is at least b ten handbreadths /b deep, b so too, any /b other excavations b that have sufficient /b depth b to cause death /b may be no less than b ten handbreadths. /b Now, b granted /b that according b to Shmuel, /b the term: b So too, any /b other, serves b to include /b the case where the animal fell from b a height /b of ten handbreadths, in which case the one who fashioned the mound would also be liable. b But according to Rav, /b who exempts him in that case, b what /b does the term: b So too, any /b other, b add? /b ,The Gemara answers: According to Rav, it serves b to include trenches and /b water b channels. /b The Gemara asks: But b trenches and /b water b channels are explicitly taught /b in the mishna. Why does the mishna then allude to them again? The Gemara answers: It first b teaches /b the i halakha /i about them b and then explains /b its source in the Torah.,Having mentioned these details, the Gemara asks: b And why do I /b need b all these /b cases b that are taught /b by the mishna? The Gemara answers: They are b necessary, for had /b it b taught /b only the case of b a pit, I would say /b that it b is /b specifically b a pit /b of b ten /b handbreadths b that contains /b lethal b fumes, because it is constricted and round. /b Therefore, this measurement suffices to cause death. b But /b concerning b a ditch, which is long, say /b that b in /b a case where it is b ten /b handbreadths deep, b there are no /b lethal b fumes /b and there is no liability. Therefore, the mishna teaches both the case of a pit and a ditch., b And /b furthermore, b had /b the mishna b taught /b the case of b a ditch /b in addition to the pit, b I would say /b that it b is /b specifically b a ditch /b of b ten /b handbreadths b that contains /b the necessary lethal b fumes, because it is narrow. But /b concerning b a cave, which is rectangular /b and not narrow, b say /b that b in /b a case where it is b ten /b handbreadths deep, b there are no /b lethal b fumes /b and there is no liability. Therefore, the mishna teaches the case of a cave as well., b And /b furthermore, b had /b the mishna b taught /b the case of b a cave /b in addition to the previous two, b I would say /b that it b is /b specifically b a cave of ten /b handbreadths b that contains /b lethal b fumes, because it is covered. But /b concerning b trenches, which are not covered, say /b that at a depth b of ten /b handbreadths, b there are no /b lethal b fumes /b and there is no liability. Therefore, the mishna also teaches the case of trenches., b And /b finally, b had /b the mishna b taught /b the case of b trenches /b in addition to the previous three, b I would say /b that it b is /b specifically b trenches /b of b ten /b handbreadths b that contain /b lethal b fumes, since they are no wider at the top than at the bottom. But with regard to channels, which are wider at the top than at the bottom, say /b that at a depth b of ten /b handbreadths b there are no /b lethal b fumes /b and there is no liability. Therefore, the mishna b teaches us /b the case of channels as well, and each subsequent case listed contains a novel aspect.,The Gemara raises a further challenge from that which b we learned /b in the mishna: If any of the types of excavations b were less than ten handbreadths /b deep, b and an ox or a donkey fell into /b one of b them and died, /b the digger of the excavation is b exempt. But if it was injured, /b not killed, he is b liable /b to pay damages. b What is the reason /b for the ruling of: If b an ox or a donkey fell into it and died, /b he is b exempt? Is it not because /b at this height b there is not /b sufficient b impact, /b although there are lethal fumes?,The Gemara responds: b No, /b he is exempt b because there are no /b lethal b fumes. /b The Gemara challenges this: b If that is so, /b that a pit less than ten handbreadths deep lacks sufficient lethal fumes, why is the one who dug it b liable if /b the animal b is injured; but there are no /b lethal b fumes? /b The Gemara b answers: There are not /b sufficient b fumes to /b cause b death, but there are /b sufficient b fumes to /b cause b damage. /b ,The Gemara relates: There was b a certain ox that fell into a water channel [ i la’arita dedala’ei /i ] /b whose depth was one cubit, i.e., six handbreadths. Because it suffered the impact of the fall, b its owner /b assumed it would die and b slaughtered it /b first, in order to eat the meat. b Rav Naḥman, /b who was concerned that its organs were crushed by the fall, b deemed it an animal with a condition that will cause it to die within twelve months [ i tereifa /i ], /b which it is prohibited to consume.,Furthermore, b Rav Naḥman said: If the owner of this ox had taken a i kav /i of flour /b to bake into bread to eat instead of slaughtering his animal for its meat, b and gone and learned in the study hall /b that although an ox that falls and hits the ground is considered i tereifa /i if slaughtered immediately, b if /b the animal b remained /b alive b for twenty-four hours /b and is then slaughtered, b it is fit to eat, he would not have lost /b his b ox that was worth several i kav /i /b of flour. The Gemara notes: b Apparently, Rav Naḥman maintains /b that b there is an impact /b caused even b by /b a pit that is b less than ten /b handbreadths, as Rav Naḥman was concerned in this case that its organs were crushed and it was fatally wounded., b Rava raised an objection to /b the opinion of b Rav Naḥman /b from the mishna: If any of the types of excavations b were less than ten handbreadths /b deep, b and an ox or a donkey fell into /b one of b them and died, /b he is b exempt. What is the reason /b for this? b Is it not because there is no /b significant b impact /b capable of causing death? If so, why is this animal deemed a i tereifa /i ?

23. Babylonian Talmud, Taanit, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 62

20a. ועכשיו ירדו גשמים נכנס לבית המרחץ בשמחה עד שהאדון נכנס בשמחתו לבית המרחץ נקדימון נכנס לבית המקדש כשהוא עצב נתעטף ועמד בתפלה,אמר לפניו רבונו של עולם גלוי וידוע לפניך שלא לכבודי עשיתי ולא לכבוד בית אבא עשיתי אלא לכבודך עשיתי שיהו מים מצויין לעולי רגלים מיד נתקשרו שמים בעבים וירדו גשמים עד שנתמלאו שתים עשרה מעינות מים והותירו,עד שיצא אדון מבית המרחץ נקדימון בן גוריון יצא מבית המקדש כשפגעו זה בזה אמר לו תן לי דמי מים יותר שיש לי בידך אמר לו יודע אני שלא הרעיש הקב"ה את עולמו אלא בשבילך אלא עדיין יש לי פתחון פה עליך שאוציא ממך את מעותיי שכבר שקעה חמה וגשמים ברשותי ירדו,חזר ונכנס לבית המקדש נתעטף ועמד בתפלה ואמר לפניו רבונו של עולם הודע שיש לך אהובים בעולמך מיד נתפזרו העבים וזרחה החמה באותה שעה אמר לו האדון אילו לא נקדרה החמה היה לי פתחון פה עליך שאוציא ממך מעותיי תנא לא נקדימון שמו אלא בוני שמו ולמה נקרא שמו נקדימון שנקדרה חמה בעבורו,תנו רבנן שלשה נקדמה להם חמה בעבורן משה ויהושע ונקדימון בן גוריון בשלמא נקדימון בן גוריון גמרא יהושע נמי קרא דכתיב (יהושע י, יג) וידם השמש וירח עמד וגו' אלא משה מנלן,אמר רבי אלעזר אתיא אחל אחל כתיב הכא (דברים ב, כה) אחל תת פחדך וכתיב התם (יהושע ג, ז) אחל גדלך,רבי שמואל בר נחמני אמר אתיא תת תת כתיב הכא אחל תת פחדך וכתיב התם (יהושע י, יב) ביום תת ה' את האמרי,רבי יוחנן אמר אתיא מגופיה דקרא (דברים ב, כה) אשר ישמעון שמעך ורגזו וחלו מפניך אימתי רגזו וחלו מפניך בשעה שנקדמה לו חמה למשה:,וכן עיר שלא ירדו עליה גשמים כו': אמר רב יהודה אמר רב ושתיהן לקללה,(איכה א, יז) היתה ירושלם לנדה ביניהם אמר רב יהודה אמר רב לברכה כנדה מה נדה יש לה היתר אף ירושלים יש לה תקנה,(איכה א, א) היתה כאלמנה אמר רב יהודה לברכה כאלמנה ולא אלמנה ממש אלא כאשה שהלך בעלה למדינת הים ודעתו לחזור עליה,(מלאכי ב, ט) וגם אני נתתי אתכם נבזים ושפלים אמר רב יהודה לברכה דלא מוקמי מינן לא רישי נהרי ולא גזיריפטי,(מלכים א יד, טו) והכה ה' את ישראל כאשר ינוד הקנה במים אמר רב יהודה אמר רב לברכה דאמר רבי שמואל בר נחמני אמר רבי יונתן מאי דכתיב (משלי כז, ו) נאמנים פצעי אוהב ונעתרות נשיקות שונא טובה קללה שקילל אחיה השילוני את ישראל יותר מברכה שבירכן בלעם הרשע,אחיה השילוני קללן בקנה אמר להם לישראל והכה ה' את ישראל כאשר ינוד הקנה מה קנה זה עומד במקום מים וגזעו מחליף ושרשיו מרובין ואפילו כל הרוחות שבעולם באות ונושבות בו אין מזיזות אותו ממקומו אלא הולך ובא עמהן דממו הרוחות עמד הקנה במקומו,אבל בלעם הרשע בירכן בארז שנאמר (במדבר כד, ו) כארזים (עלי מים) מה ארז זה אינו עומד במקום מים ואין גזעו מחליף ואין שרשיו מרובין אפילו כל הרוחות שבעולם נושבות בו אין מזיזות אותו ממקומו כיון שנשבה בו רוח דרומית עוקרתו והופכתו על פניו ולא עוד אלא שזכה קנה ליטול הימנו קולמוס לכתוב בו ספר תורה נביאים וכתובים,תנו רבנן לעולם יהא אדם רך כקנה ואל יהא קשה כארז מעשה שבא רבי אלעזר (בן ר') שמעון ממגדל גדור מבית רבו והיה רכוב על החמור ומטייל על שפת נהר ושמח שמחה גדולה והיתה דעתו גסה עליו מפני שלמד תורה הרבה

20a. b and now it will rain? He entered the bathhouse in /b a state of b joy, /b anticipating the large sum of money he was about to receive. b As the master entered the bathhouse in his joy, Nakdimon entered the Temple in /b a state of b sadness. He wrapped himself /b in his prayer shawl b and stood in prayer. /b , b He said before /b God: b Master of the Universe, it is revealed and known before You that I did not act for my own honor, nor did I act for the honor of my father’s house. Rather, I acted for Your honor, so that there should be water for the Festival pilgrims. Immediately the sky became overcast and rain fell until the twelve cisterns were filled with water, and /b there was even more water, so that b they overflowed. /b , b As the master left the bathhouse, Nakdimon ben Guryon left the Temple. When they met one another, /b Nakdimon b said to him: Give me /b the b money you owe me /b for b the extra water /b you received. The official b said to him: I know that the Holy One, Blessed be He, has shaken His world and caused rain to fall only for you. However, I still maintain a claim against you, /b by b which I can /b legally b take my coins from you, as /b you did not pay me on the agreed date, b for the sun had already set, and /b therefore b the rain fell onto my property. /b ,Nakdimon b went back and entered the Temple, wrapped himself /b in his prayer shawl, b and stood in prayer. He said before /b God: b Master of the Universe, let it be known that You have beloved ones in Your world. Immediately, the clouds scattered and the sun shined. At that time, the master said to him: If the sun had not broken through /b the clouds, b I would have /b had a claim b against you, /b by b which I could /b have b taken my coins from you. /b A Sage b taught: Nakdimon was not his /b real b name; rather his name was Buni. And why was /b he b called Nakdimon? Because the sun broke through [ i nikdera /i ] for him. /b , b The Sages taught: /b With regard to b three /b people, b the sun broke through /b and shone at an irregular time b for their sake: Moses, Joshua, and Nakdimon ben Guryon. /b The Gemara asks: b Granted, /b the case of b Nakdimon ben Guryon /b is known by the aforementioned b tradition. The case of Joshua too /b is derived from b a verse, as it is written: “And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed /b until the people had avenged themselves upon their enemies” (Joshua 10:13). b However, from where do we /b derive that the sun shined in a supernatural way for b Moses? /b , b Rabbi Elazar said: /b It is b derived /b by verbal analogy between b “I will begin” /b and b “I will begin.” Here, /b with regard to Moses, b it is written: /b “This day b I will begin to put the dread of you /b and the fear of you upon the peoples that are under all the whole heaven” (Deuteronomy 2:25). b And there, /b with regard to Joshua, b it is written: /b “On this day b I will begin to magnify you /b in the sight of all Israel, that they may know that just as I was with Moses, so I will be with you” (Joshua 3:7). The repeated use of the phrase “I will begin” indicates that all the miracles performed for Joshua were also performed for Moses., b Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: /b The fact that the sun stood still for Moses is b derived /b by a different verbal analogy, between the terms b “put” /b and b “put.” Here, /b with regard to Moses, b it is written: “I will begin to put the dread of you” /b (Deuteronomy 2:25). b And there, /b with regard to Joshua, b is it written: /b “Then Joshua spoke to the Lord, b on the day when the Lord put the Amorites /b before the children of Israel, and he said in the sight of Israel: Sun, stand still upon Gibeon, and you, moon, in the valley of Aijalon” (Joshua 10:12)., b Rabbi Yoḥa said: /b This idea is b derived from the verse itself, /b as it says with regard to Moses: “This day I will begin to put the dread of you and the fear of you upon the peoples that are under all the whole heaven, b who, when they hear the report of you, shall tremble, and be in anguish due to you” /b (Deuteronomy 2:25). b When /b did the nations of the world b tremble and /b when were they b in anguish due to you? When the sun broke through for Moses. /b ,§ The mishna taught: b And likewise, /b if there is a particular b city upon which it did not rain, /b while the surrounding area did receive rain, this is considered a divine curse, as it is written: “And I will cause it to rain on one city, but on one city I will not cause it to rain, one portion will be rained upon, and the portion upon which it did not rain shall wither” (Amos 4:7). b Rav Yehuda said /b that b Rav said: And both of /b the cities are faced b with a curse, /b as one city suffers from drought while the other is afflicted with destructive storms.,This statement reverses the plain meaning of a verse. The Gemara provides other interpretations that Rav Yehuda attributed to Rav, which also run contrary to the simple meaning of a verse. b “Jerusalem among them was a like a menstruating woman” /b (Lamentations 1:17). b Rav Yehuda said /b that b Rav said: /b Although the simple meaning of this verse is a curse, it can also be understood b as a blessing. /b Jerusalem was b like a menstruating woman: Just as a menstruating woman /b will become b permitted /b to her husband after the conclusion of her days of ritual impurity, b so too, Jerusalem /b will be b repaired /b from its destruction.,Similarly, with regard to the verse: b “How she has become like a widow” /b (Lamentations 1:1), b Rav Yehuda said: /b This too is b for a blessing. /b The verse states that Jerusalem is b like a widow, but is not an actual widow. Rather, /b Jerusalem is b like a woman whose husband has gone to a country overseas. /b Without her husband by her side she is likened to a widow, b and /b yet b he intends to return to her. /b ,The same manner of explanation is provided for the verse: b “Therefore I have also made you contemptible and base” /b (Malachi 2:9). b Rav Yehuda said: /b This too can be interpreted b as a blessing, as /b meaning that the nations view us as lowly, but nevertheless, they do not assign us unpleasant jobs. b They do not /b appoint b from us either river officials or government officials [ i geziripatei /i ]. /b ,The prophet Ahijah the Shilonite cursed Israel in the following terms: b “For the Lord will smite Israel as a reed is shaken in the water” /b (I Kings 14:15). b Rav Yehuda said /b that b Rav said: /b This too is b for a blessing, as Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said /b that b Rabbi Yonatan said: What is /b the meaning of that b which is written: “Faithful are the wounds of a friend, but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful” /b (Proverbs 27:6)? b The curse with which Ahijah the Shilonite cursed the Jewish people is more /b effective b than the blessing with which Balaam the wicked blessed them. /b ,Rabbi Yoḥa elaborates: b Ahijah the Shilonite cursed /b the Jewish people b by /b comparing them to b a reed: “For the Lord will smite Israel as a reed is shaken in the water.” /b Although it seems to be a curse, this verse is actually a blessing. b Just as this reed stands in a place of water, and its shoots replenish /b themselves when cut, b and its roots are numerous /b for a plant of its size, b and even if all the winds in the world come and blow against it, they cannot move it from its place, rather, it sways with them /b until b the winds subside, and the reed /b still b stands in its place, /b the same applies to the Jewish people. After all the difficulties that they endure, they will ultimately survive and return home., b However, Balaam the wicked blessed /b the Jews b by /b comparing them to b a cedar, as it is stated: “As cedars beside the waters” /b (Numbers 24:6). b Just as this cedar does not stand in a place of water, and its shoots do not replenish /b themselves, b and its roots are not numerous, /b Balaam wished that the same should apply to the Jewish people. Furthermore, while it is true that b even /b if b all the winds in the world blow /b against b it they will not move it from its place, once the southern wind blows /b against b it, it uproots /b the cedar b and turns it on its face. And not only that, but /b the b reed merited /b that b a quill [ i kulmos /i ] is taken from it to write with it a Torah scroll, the Prophets, and the Writings. /b Evidently, the curse comparing Israel to a reed is better than the blessing likening them to a cedar., b The Sages /b further b taught /b in praise of the reed: b A person should always be soft like a reed, and he should not be stiff like a cedar. An incident /b occurred in b which Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, came from Migdal Gedor, from his rabbi’s house, and he was riding on a donkey and strolling on the bank of the river. And he was very happy, and his head was swollen with pride because he had studied much Torah. /b

24. Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 62

104b. big strongמתני׳ /strong /big הכותב שתי אותיות בהעלם אחד חייב כתב בדיו בסם בסיקרא בקומוס ובקנקנתום ובכל דבר שהוא רושם על שני כותלי זויות ועל שני לווחי פינקס והן נהגין זה עם זה חייב הכותב על בשרו חייב המסרט על בשרו ר' אליעזר מחייב חטאת וחכמים פוטרין,כתב במשקין במי פירות באבק דרכים באבק הסופרים ובכל דבר שאינו מתקיים פטור לאחר ידו ברגלו בפיו ובמרפיקו כתב אות אחת סמוך לכתב וכתב על גבי כתב נתכוון לכתוב חי"ת וכתב ב' זיינין אחת בארץ ואחת בקורה כתב על ב' כותלי הבית על שני דפי פנקס ואין נהגין זה עם זה פטור כתב אות אחת נוטריקון ר' יהושע בן בתירא מחייב וחכמים פוטרין:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big דיו דיותא סם סמא סקרא אמר רבה בר בר חנה סקרתא שמה קומוס קומא קנקנתום אמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר שמואל חרתא דאושכפי:,ובכל דבר שהוא רושם: לאתויי מאי לאתויי הא דתני רבי חנניא כתבו במי טריא ואפצא כשר תני ר' חייא כתבו באבר בשחור ובשיחור כשר:,המסרט על בשרו: תניא אמר להן רבי אליעזר לחכמים והלא בן סטדא הוציא כשפים ממצרים בסריטה שעל בשרו אמרו לו שוטה היה ואין מביאין ראיה מן השוטים: [הוספה מחסרונות הש"ס: בן סטדא בן פנדירא הוא אמר רב חסדא בעל סטדא בועל פנדירא בעל פפוס בן יהודה הוא אמו סטדא אמו מרים מגדלא שיער נשיא הואי כדאמרינן בפומדיתא סטת דא מבעלה:],כתב אות אחת סמוך לכתב: מאן תנא אמר רבא בר רב הונא דלא כר' אליעזר דאי ר' אליעזר האמר אחת על האריג חייב:,כתב על גבי כתב: מאן תנא א"ר חסדא דלא כר' יהודה דתניא הרי שהיה צריך לכתוב את השם ונתכוין לכתוב יהודה וטעה ולא הטיל בו דלת מעביר עליו קולמוס ומקדשו דברי ר' יהודה וחכמים אומרים אין השם מן המובחר,תנא כתב אות אחת והשלימה לספר ארג חוט אחד והשלימה לבגד חייב מאן תנא אמר רבא בר רב הונא ר' אליעזר היא דאמר אחת על האריג חייב רב אשי אמר אפילו תימא רבנן להשלים שאני,א"ר אמי כתב אות אחת בטבריא ואחת בציפורי חייב כתיבה היא אלא שמחוסר קריבה והתנן כתב על שני כותלי הבית ועל שני דפי פנקס ואין נהגין זה עם זה פטור התם מחוסר מעשה דקריבה הכא לא מחוסר מעשה דקריבה,תנא הגיה אות אחת חייב השתא כתב אות אחת פטור הגיה אות אחת חייב אמר רב ששת הכא במאי עסקינן כגון שנטלו לגגו של חי"ת ועשאו שני זיינין רבא אמר כגון שנטלו לתגו של דל"ת ועשאו רי"ש,תנא נתכוין לכתוב אות אחת

104b. strong MISHNA: /strong b One who writes two letters /b on Shabbat b during one lapse of awareness is liable. /b The following substances used as ink are explained in the Gemara. One is liable if b he wrote with i deyo /i , with i sam /i , with i sikra /i , with gum [ i komos /i ], or with copper sulfate [ i kankantom /i ] or with any substance that makes a mark. /b If one wrote b on two walls /b of a house that form b a corner, or on two parts of a writing tablet, and /b the two items b are read together, he is liable. One who writes on his flesh /b on Shabbat b is liable. /b If b one /b unwittingly b scratches /b letters b on his flesh /b on Shabbat, b Rabbi Eliezer deems /b him b liable /b to bring b a sin-offering and the Sages deem /b him b exempt. /b ,If b one wrote with liquids /b or b with fruit juice, /b or if one drew letters b with road dust, with scribes’ dust /b that they use to dry the ink, b or with any substance /b with b which /b the writing b does not endure, he is exempt. /b Similarly, if one wrote by holding the pen on b the back of his hand, with his foot, with his mouth, /b or b with his elbow; /b if b one wrote /b only b a single letter, /b even if it was b adjacent to /b other preexisting b writing; /b or if b one wrote over /b other b writing; /b if b one meant to write /b the letter b i ḥet /i /b and instead b wrote /b the two halves of the i ḥet /i as b two /b instances of the letter b i zayin /i ; /b if one wrote b one /b letter b on the ground and one on a rafter; /b if b one wrote /b one letter b on two walls of a house, /b or b on two parts of a writing tablet that are not read together, he is exempt. /b If b one wrote one letter /b as b an abbreviation /b representing an entire word, b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Beteira deems /b him b liable /b to bring a sin-offering, b and the Rabbis deem /b him b exempt. /b , strong GEMARA: /strong The Gemara defines the terms used in the mishna. b i Deyo /i /b is b i deyota /i /b made from soot. b i Sam /i /b is b i samma /i , /b which is yellow-tinged arsenic. b i Sikra /i , Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: It is called i sikreta /i /b in Aramaic and is a lead-based red paint. b i Komos /i /b is b i koma /i /b in Aramaic, and it is an ink made with gum Arabic from the sap of a tree. b i Kankantom /i , Rabba bar bar Ḥana said /b that b Shmuel said: /b This is b the black /b substance b used by cobblers, /b copper sulfate., b And /b we learned in the mishna that one who writes b with any substance that makes a mark /b is liable. The Gemara asks: b What /b does this statement come b to include? /b The Gemara answers: It comes b to include that which Rabbi Ḥaya taught /b with regard to writing a bill of divorce: If b one wrote it with the juice of /b the fruit called b i teriya /i , or /b with b gallnut juice /b instead of ink, b it is valid. /b Similarly, b Rabbi Ḥiyya taught: /b If b one wrote /b a bill of divorce b with lead, with soot /b ( i ge’onim /i ), b or with shoeblack, it is valid. /b Since those substances leave a permanent mark, one who writes with them on Shabbat is liable.,We learned in the mishna: If b one /b unwittingly b scratches /b letters b on his flesh /b on Shabbat, Rabbi Eliezer deems him liable to bring a sin-offering and the Sages deem him exempt. b It was taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Eliezer said to the Rabbis: Didn’t /b the infamous b ben Stada take /b magic b spells out of Egypt in a scratch on his flesh? They said to him: He was a fool, and you cannot cite proof from a fool. /b That is not the way that most people write. Incidentally, the Gemara asks: Why did they call him b ben Stada, /b when b he was the son of Pandeira? Rav Ḥisda said: /b His mother’s b husband, /b who acted as his father, was named b Stada, /b but the b one who had relations /b with his mother and fathered him was named b Pandeira. /b The Gemara asks: Wasn’t his mother’s b husband Pappos ben Yehuda? Rather, his mother /b was named b Stada /b and he was named ben Stada after her. The Gemara asks: But wasn’t b his mother Miriam, who braided women’s hair? /b The Gemara explains: That is not a contradiction. b Rather, /b Stada was merely a nickname, b as they say in Pumbedita: This /b one b strayed [ i setat da /i ] from her husband. /b ,We learned in the mishna: If b one wrote /b only b a single letter, /b even if it was b adjacent to /b other preexisting b writing, /b he is exempt. The Gemara asks: b Who is /b the b i tanna /i /b whose opinion is cited in the mishna? b Rava bar Rav Huna said: /b This i halakha /i is b not in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Eliezer, as if /b it were b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Eliezer, didn’t he say: /b One who adds b a single /b thread b to a /b previously b woven fabric is liable /b for weaving? In his opinion, although a single thread or letter is insignificant in and of itself, one is liable because adding even a small measure to existing material is significant.,We learned in the mishna: If b one wrote over /b other b writing /b he is exempt. The Gemara asks: b Who is /b the b i tanna /i /b whose opinion is cited in the mishna? b Rav Ḥisda said: /b This i halakha /i is b not in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yehuda, as it was taught /b in a i baraita /i : b If one needed to write the /b Tetragrammaton, the b name /b of God, in a Torah scroll, and became confused b and intended /b instead b to write /b the name b Yehuda, and /b while intending to write Yehuda b he erred and omitted /b the letter b i dalet /i , /b thereby writing the name of God, he should do the following. b He passes a quill /b with more ink b over /b the name b and sanctifies it, /b i.e., he writes it with the intention required when writing a holy name. This is b the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. And the Rabbis say: /b Even if he adds ink over what he wrote, b this /b writing of God’s b name is not ideal. /b Apparently, according to Rabbi Yehuda, writing over other writing is considered writing anew.,A i tanna /i b taught /b in a i baraita /i : If b one wrote a single letter and /b thereby b completed a book, /b or if b one wove a single thread and /b thereby b completed an /b entire b garment, he is liable. /b The Gemara asks: b Who is /b the b i tanna /i /b whose opinion is cited in the i baraita /i ? b Rava bar Rav Huna said: It is /b the opinion of b Rabbi Eliezer, /b who b said: /b One who adds b a single /b thread b to a /b previously b woven fabric is liable /b for weaving. b Rav Ashi said: Even /b if you b say /b that in accordance with the opinion of b the Rabbis, /b one who does so b to complete /b a garment is b different. /b Even if he is not liable for weaving, he is liable at least for striking a blow with a hammer to complete the production process of a vessel., b Rabbi Ami said: /b If b one wrote one letter /b on paper b in Tiberias and one /b letter on paper b in Tzippori, he is liable /b because he performed a full-fledged act of b writing that is lacking /b only in b proximity. /b When the two pieces of paper are brought together he will have written two associated letters. The Gemara asks: b Didn’t we learn /b in the mishna: If b one wrote /b one letter b on two walls of a house, /b or b on two parts of a writing tablet that are not read together, he is exempt? /b All the more so that this is the i halakha /i with regard to one who wrote in two different cities. The Gemara answers: b There, /b in the case of the parts of a tablet, b there is the lack of /b an additional b act /b of cutting or tearing to facilitate bringing the letters b together. /b However, b here, /b in the case of two cities, even though they are distant from one another, there is b no lack /b of an additional act to facilitate b bringing them together. /b ,A i tanna /i b taught /b in the i Tosefta /i : If b one emended a single letter /b on Shabbat, b he is liable. /b The Gemara wonders: b Now, /b if b one wrote a single letter /b on Shabbat b he is exempt; /b is it possible that if b one emends a single letter /b he is b liable? Rav Sheshet said: With what are we dealing here? /b We are dealing with a case b where one removed the roof of a i ḥet /i and transformed it into two /b instances of the letter b i zayin /i , /b effectively writing two letters with a single correction. b Rava said: /b It is not necessarily referring to that specific case. It could even be referring to a case b where one removed the protrusion /b from the back b of a i dalet /i and transformed it into a i reish /i , /b thereby emending the written text. One who did so is liable for performing the prohibited labor of striking a blow with a hammer to complete the production process of a vessel.,A i tanna /i b taught: /b If b one intended to write one letter /b on Shabbat

25. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 87

39a. (יחזקאל יח, ב) אבות יאכלו בוסר ושיני בנים תקהינה (ויקרא יט, לו) מאזני צדק אבני צדק (משלי יא, ח) צדיק מצרה נחלץ ויבא רשע תחתיו,א"ל כופר לרבן גמליאל אלהיכם גנב הוא דכתיב (בראשית ב, כא) ויפל ה' אלהים תרדמה על האדם ויישן אמרה ליה ברתיה שבקיה דאנא מהדרנא ליה אמרה ליה תנו לי דוכוס אחד א"ל למה ליך ליסטין באו עלינו הלילה ונטלו ממנו קיתון של כסף והניחו לנו קיתון של זהב אמר לה ולוואי שיבא עלינו בכל יום ולא יפה היה לו לאדם הראשון שנטלו ממנו צלע אחת ונתנו לו שפחה לשמשו,אמר לה הכי קאמינא אלא לשקליה בהדיא אמרה ליה אייתו לי אומצא דבישרא אייתו לה אותבה תותי בחשא אפיקתה אמרה ליה אכול מהאי אמר לה מאיסא לי אמרה ליה ואדם הראשון נמי אי הות שקילה בהדיא הוה מאיסא ליה,א"ל כופר לרבן גמליאל ידענא אלהייכו מאי קא עביד (והיכן יתיב) איתנגד ואיתנח א"ל מאי האי א"ל בן אחד יש לי בכרכי הים ויש לי גיעגועים עליו בעינא דמחוית ליה ניהלי אמר מי ידענא היכא ניהו א"ל דאיכא בארעא לא ידעת דאיכא בשמיא ידעת,אמר ליה כופר לרבן גמליאל כתיב (תהלים קמז, ד) מונה מספר לכוכבים מאי רבותיה אנא מצינא למימנא כוכבי אייתי חבושי שדינהו בארבילא וקא מהדר להו אמר ליה מנינהו א"ל אוקמינהו א"ל רקיע נמי הכי הדרא,איכא דאמרי הכי א"ל מני לי כוכבי א"ל אימא לי ככיך ושיניך כמה הוה שדא ידיה לפומיה וקא מני להו א"ל דאיכא בפומיך לא ידעת דאיכא ברקיעא ידעת,א"ל כופר לרבן גמליאל מי שברא הרים לא ברא רוח שנאמר (עמוס ד, יג) כי הנה יוצר הרים ובורא רוח אלא מעתה גבי אדם דכתיב ויברא וייצר הכי נמי מי שברא זה לא ברא זה,טפח על טפח יש בו באדם ושני נקבים יש בו מי שברא זה לא ברא זה שנאמר (תהלים צד, ט) הנוטע אוזן הלא ישמע ואם יוצר עין הלא יביט א"ל אין א"ל ובשעת מיתה כולן נתפייסו,א"ל ההוא אמגושא לאמימר מפלגך לעילאי דהורמיז מפלגך לתתאי דאהורמיז א"ל א"כ היכי שביק ליה אהורמיז להורמיז לעבורי מיא בארעיה,אמר ליה קיסר לר' תנחום תא ליהוו כולן לעמא חד אמר לחיי אנן דמהלינן לא מצינן מיהוי כוותייכו אתון מהליתו והוו כוותן א"ל מימר שפיר קאמרת מיהו כל דזכי למלכא לשדיוה לביבר שדיוה לביבר ולא אכלוה א"ל ההוא מינא האי דלא אכלוה משום דלא כפין הוא שדיוה ליה לדידיה ואכלוה,א"ל כופר לר"ג אמריתו כל בי עשרה שכינתא שריא כמה שכינתא איכא קרייה לשמעיה מחא ביה באפתקא א"ל אמאי על שמשא בביתיה דכופר א"ל שמשא אכולי עלמא ניחא ומה שמשא דחד מן אלף אלפי רבוא שמשי דקמי קודשא בריך הוא ניחא לכולי עלמא שכינתא דקב"ה על אחת כמה וכמה,א"ל ההוא מינא לרבי אבהו אלהיכם גחכן הוא דקאמר ליה ליחזקאל (יחזקאל ד, ד) שכב על צדך השמאלי וכתיב (יחזקאל ד, ו) ושכבת על צדך הימני אתא ההוא תלמידא א"ל מ"ט דשביעתא א"ל השתא אמינא לכו מילתא דשויא לתרוייהו,אמר הקב"ה לישראל זרעו שש והשמיטו שבע כדי שתדעו שהארץ שלי היא והן לא עשו כן אלא חטאו וגלו מנהגו של עולם מלך בשר ודם שסרחה עליו מדינה אם אכזרי הוא הורג את כולן אם רחמן הוא הורג חצים אם רחמן מלא רחמים הוא מייסר הגדולים שבהן ביסורין אף כך הקב"ה מייסר את יחזקאל כדי למרק עונותיהם של ישראל,א"ל ההוא מינא לרבי אבהו אלהיכם כהן הוא דכתיב (שמות כה, ב) ויקחו לי תרומה כי קבריה למשה במאי טביל וכי תימא במיא והכתיב (ישעיהו מ, יב) מי מדד בשעלו מים,א"ל בנורא טביל דכתיב (ישעיהו סו, טו) כי הנה ה' באש יבא ומי סלקא טבילותא בנורא א"ל אדרבה עיקר טבילותא בנורא הוא דכתיב (במדבר לא, כג) וכל אשר לא יבא באש תעבירו במים,אמר ליה ההוא מינא לרבי אבינא כתיב (שמואל ב ז, כג) מי כעמך כישראל גוי אחד בארץ מאי רבותייהו אתון נמי ערביתו בהדן דכתיב (ישעיהו מ, יז) כל הגוים כאין נגדו אמר ליה מדידכו אסהידו עלן דכתיב

39a. And they are the parables concerning the following verses: b “The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge” /b (Ezekiel 18:2); b “Just balances, just weights /b …shall you have” (Leviticus 19:36); and b “The righteous is delivered out of trouble, and the wicked comes in his stead” /b (Proverbs 11:8).,§ b The /b Roman b emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: Your God is a thief, as it is written: “And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man and he slept; /b and He took one of his sides, and closed up the place with flesh instead” (Genesis 2:21). b The daughter of /b the emperor b said to /b Rabban Gamliel: b Leave him, as I will respond to him. She said /b to her father: b Provide one commander [ i dukhus /i ] for me /b to avenge someone’s wrongdoing. The emperor b said to her: Why do you need /b him? She said to him: b Armed bandits came to us this /b past b night, and took a silver jug [ i kiton /i ] from us, and left a golden jug for us. /b The emperor b said to her: /b If so, b would it be that /b armed bandits such as these b would come to us every day. /b She said to him: b And was it not /b similarly b good for Adam the first /b man b that /b God b took a side from him and gave him a maidservant to serve him? /b ,The emperor b said to her: This is what I was saying: But /b if it is good for Adam, b let /b God b take /b his side from him b in the open, /b not during the time of his deep sleep, like a thief. b She said to him: Bring me /b a slice of b raw meat. They brought it to her. She placed it under the embers, /b and b removed it /b after it was roasted. b She said to him: Eat from this /b meat. The emperor b said to her: It is repulsive to me. /b Although he knew that this is how meat is prepared, seeing the raw meat made it repulsive to him. b She said to him: /b With regard to b Adam the first /b man b as well, had /b God b taken her /b from him b in the open, she would have been repulsive to him. /b Therefore God acted while Adam was asleep., b The emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: I know your God, what He does and where He sits. /b Meanwhile, the emperor b was moaning and groaning. /b Rabban Gamliel b said to him: What /b is b this? /b Why are you in distress? The emperor b said to him: I have one son in the cities overseas and I miss him. /b Rabban Gamliel said to him: b I want you to show him to me. /b The emperor b said: Do I know where he is? /b Rabban Gamliel b said to him: /b If b you do not know that which is on earth, /b is it possible that b you do know that which is in the heavens? /b , b The emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: It is written /b in praise of the Lord: b “He counts the number of the stars; /b He gives them all their names” (Psalms 147:4). b What is His greatness? I can /b also b count the stars. /b Rabban Gamliel b brought quinces, put them in a sieve, and spun them. He said /b to the emperor: b Count them. /b The emperor b said to him: Stand them still /b so that I can count them. Rabban Gamliel b said to him: /b The b firmament also revolves like this, /b therefore you cannot count the stars in it., b Some say /b that b this is /b what the emperor b said to him: I have counted the stars. /b Rabban Gamliel b said to him: Tell me how many teeth and incisors you /b have. The emperor b put his hand in his mouth and was counting them. /b Rabban Gamliel b said to him: You do not know what is in your mouth, /b but b you do know what is in the firmament? /b , b The emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: He Who created mountains did not create wind, /b rather two separate gods created them, b as it is stated: “For, lo, He forms mountains and creates wind” /b (Amos 4:13); one is described with the verb “forms,” and the other with the verb “creates.” Rabban Gamliel said to him: b If that is so, /b then b with regard to Adam, as it is written /b concerning him: b “And /b God b created” /b (Genesis 1:27), and also: b “And /b the Lord God b formed” /b (Genesis 2:7), b so too /b should one say that b He who created this did not create that? /b ,If you will claim that different gods created different parts of Adam, that will not suffice. b A person has one handbreadth by one handbreadth /b of facial countece, with b two /b types of b orifices in it, /b eyes and ears. Should one say that b He who created this did not create that; as it is stated: “He that planted the ear, shall He not hear? He that formed the eye, shall He not see?” /b (Psalms 94:9)? The verse employs two verbs for the eyes and ears alone. The emperor b said to him: Yes, /b different gods created different parts of the face. Rabban Gamliel b said to him: And at the moment of death, are they all appeased? /b Do all these gods agree as one that the time arrived for the person to die?,The Gemara relates: b A certain magus said to Ameimar: From your midpoint and up /b is in the domain b of Hurmiz, /b the god of good, who created the significant and important parts of the body, and b from your midpoint and down /b is in the domain b of Ahurmiz, /b the god of bad. Ameimar b said to him: If so, how does Ahurmiz allow Hurmiz to urinate in his territory? /b A person drinks with his mouth, which is in his upper half, and urinates from below.,The Gemara relates: b The emperor said to Rabbi Tanḥum: Come, let us all be one people. /b Rabbi Tanḥum b said: Very well. /b But b we, who are circumcised, cannot become /b uncircumcised b as you /b are; b you /b all b circumcise /b yourselves b and become like us. /b The emperor b said to /b Rabbi Tanḥum: In terms of the logic of your b statement, you are saying well, but anyone who bests the king /b in a debate b is thrown to the enclosure [ i labeivar /i ] /b of wild animals. b They threw him to the enclosure but /b the animals b did not eat him, /b as God protected him. b A certain heretic said to /b the emperor: b This /b incident, b that they did not eat him, /b happened b because they are not hungry. They /b then b threw the /b heretic into the enclosure b and /b the animals b ate him. /b , b The emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: You say /b that b the Divine Presence dwells /b in b any place where there are ten /b adult male Jews. He asked, sarcastically: b How many Divine Presences are there? /b Rabban Gamliel b summoned the servant /b of the emperor and b hit him on his neck [ i be’appatka /i ]. /b Rabban Gamliel b said to him: Why /b did you allow b the sun /b to b enter the house of the emperor? The emperor said to him: The sun rests upon all the world; /b no one can prevent it from shining. Rabban Gamliel said to him: b And if the sun, which is one of ten thousand attendants that are before the Holy One, Blessed be He, rests upon all the world, the Divine Presence of the Holy One, Blessed be He, all the more so /b rests upon the world., b A certain heretic said to Rabbi Abbahu: Your God is a jester, as He said to Ezekiel /b the prophet: b “Lie on your left side” /b (Ezekiel 4:4), b and /b it b is /b also b written: “Lie on your right side” /b (Ezekiel 4:6); God had Ezekiel turn from side to side, apparently for comic effect. In the meantime, b a certain student came /b before Rabbi Abbahu and b said to him: What is the reason for /b the mitzva of b the Sabbatical /b Year? Rabbi Abbahu b said to them: Now I will tell you something that is fit for the two of you. /b ,Rabbi Abbahu continued: b The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to the Jewish people: Sow /b for b six /b years, b and withhold /b sowing during the b seventh /b year, b so that that you will know that the land is Mine. But /b the Jewish people b did not do so; rather, they sinned and were /b consequently b exiled. The manner of the world /b is that in the case of b a flesh-and-blood king whose province sinned against him, if he is cruel, he kills them all; if he is compassionate, he kills /b only b half of them; /b and b if he is compassionate /b and b is full of compassion, he afflicts the leaders among them with suffering. /b Rabbi Abbahu continues: b So /b too in b this /b case, b the Holy One, Blessed be He, afflicts Ezekiel in order to cleanse the sins of the Jewish people. /b God instructed him to lie down and suffer the same number of days as the number of years that the Jewish people did not observe the i halakhot /i of the Sabbatical Year., b A certain heretic said to Rabbi Abbahu: Your God is a priest, as it is written: “That they take for Me an offering [ i teruma /i ]” /b (Exodus 25:2), and i teruma /i is given to the priests. He asked, sarcastically: b When He buried Moses, in what /b ritual bath b did He immerse? /b A priest who contracts impurity from a corpse must immerse in order to be able to partake of i teruma /i . b And if you would say /b that He immersed b in water, but isn’t it written: “Who has measured the waters in the hollow of His hand” /b (Isaiah 40:12), that all waters of the world fit in the palm of God, so He could not immerse in them.,Rabbi Abbahu b said to him: He immersed in fire, as it is written: “For, behold, the Lord will come in fire” /b (Isaiah 66:15). The heretic said to him: b But is immersion in fire effective? /b Rabbi Abbahu b said to him: On the contrary, the main /b form of b immersion is in fire, as it is written /b with regard to the removal of non-kosher substances absorbed in a vessel: b “And all that abides not the fire you shall make to go through the water” /b (Numbers 31:23), indicating that fire purifies more than water does., b A certain heretic said to Rabbi Avina: It is written: “And who is like Your people, Israel, one nation in the earth” /b (II Samuel 7:23). The heretic asked: b What is your greatness? You are also mixed together with us, as it is written: “All nations before Him are as nothing; /b they are counted by Him less than nothing and vanity” (Isaiah 40:17). Rabbi Avina b said to him: One of yours, /b the gentile prophet Balaam, b has /b already b testified for us, as it is written: /b

26. Babylonian Talmud, Niddah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 60

52b. איוב מן הסערה ויאמר אליו שוטה שבעולם הרבה נימין בראתי בראשו של אדם ולכל נימא ונימא בראתי לו גומא בפני עצמה שלא יהיו שתים יונקות מגומא אחת שאלמלא שתים יונקות מגומא אחת מכחיש מאור עיניו של אדם גומא בגומא לא נתחלף לי איוב באויב נתחלף לי,לא קשיא הא בגופא הא ברישא,אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל שתי שערות שאמרו אפילו אחת על הכף ואחת על הביצים,תניא נמי הכי שתי שערות שאמרו אפילו אחת בגבה ואחת בכריסה אחת ע"ג קשרי אצבעותיה של יד ואחת ע"ג קשרי אצבעותיה של רגל דברי ר' שמעון בן יהודה איש כפר עכו שאמר משום רבי שמעון ורבנן אמר רב חסדא עד שיהו ב' שערות במקום אחד,ת"ר עד מתי הבת ממאנת עד שתביא שתי שערות דברי רבי מאיר ר' יהודה אומר עד שירבה השחור רבי יוסי אומר עד שתקיף העטרה בן שלקות אומר עד שתכלכל,ואמר רבי שמעון מצאני חנינא בן חכינאי בצידן ואמר כשאתה מגיע אצל ר"ע אמור לו עד מתי הבת ממאנת אם יאמר לך עד שתביא שתי שערות אמור לו והלא בן שלקות העיד במעמד כולכם ביבנה עד שתכלכל ולא אמרתם לו דבר,כשבאתי אצל רבי עקיבא אמר לי כלכול זה איני יודע מהו בן שלקות איני מכיר עד מתי הבת ממאנת עד שתביא ב' שערות, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big שתי שערות האמורות בפרה ובנגעים והאמורות בכל מקום כדי לכוף ראשן לעיקרן דברי רבי ישמעאל ר"א אומר כדי לקרוץ בציפורן ר' עקיבא אומר כדי שיהו ניטלות בזוג, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big אמר רב חסדא אמר מר עוקבא הלכה כדברי כולן להחמיר, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big הרואה כתם הרי זו מקולקלת,וחוששת משום זוב דברי רבי מאיר וחכ"א אין בכתמים משום זוב, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big מאן חכמים ר' חנינא בן אנטיגנוס היא דתניא ר"ח בן אנטיגנוס אומר כתמים אין בהן משום זוב ופעמים שהכתמים מביאין לידי זיבה,כיצד לבשה ג' חלוקות הבדוקות לה ומצאה עליהם כתם או שראתה ב' ימים וחלוק אחד הן הן הכתמים המביאין לידי זיבה,השתא שלשה חלוקות דלאו מגופה קחזיא חיישינן ב' ימים וחלוק אחד מיבעיא,מהו דתימא כל כי האי גוונא מביאה קרבן ונאכל קא משמע לן,אמר רבא בהא זכנהו ר' חנינא בן אנטיגנוס לרבנן מאי שנא פחות מג' גריסין במקום אחד דלא חיישינן דאמרי' בתרי יומי חזיתיה שלשה גריסין במקום אחד נמי נימא תרתי ופלגא מגופה חזיתיה ואידך אגב זוהמא דם מאכולת הוא,ורבנן כיון דאיכא לפלוגי בגריס ועוד לכל יומא לא תלינן,ור"ח בן אנטיגנוס ג' גריסין במקום א' הוא דלא חיישינן הא בג' מקומות חיישינן הא אמרת בג' חלוקות אין בג' מקומות לא,לדבריהם דרבנן קאמר להו לדידי בג' חלוקות אין בג' מקומות לא אלא לדידכו אודו לי מיהת דהיכא דחזאי ג' גריסין במקום אחד דאמרינן תרי ופלגא מגופה חזיתיה ואידך אגב זוהמא דם מאכולת הוא,ורבנן כיון דאיכא לפלוגי בגריס ועוד לכל יומא לא תלינן,ת"ר הרואה כתם אם יש בו כדי לחלק ג' גריסין שהן כגריס ועוד חוששת ואם לאו אינה חוששת,ר' יהודה בן אגרא אומר משום רבי יוסי אחת זו ואחת זו חוששת

52b. b Job out of the tempest, and said” /b (Job 38:1–3) b to him: /b Greatest b imbecile in the world! I have created many hairs on a person’s head, and for each and every hair I created /b its own b distinct follicle, so that two hairs should not draw /b sustece b from one follicle. As, were two /b hairs b to draw /b sustece b from one follicle, /b it would b weaken a man’s vision. /b Now if b I did not confuse one follicle with another, would I confuse /b a man named b Iyyov with i oyev /i ? /b This indicates that two hairs do not grow from one follicle.,The Gemara answers: It is b not difficult; that /b statement above, that two hairs in one follicle is a valid sign of adulthood, is referring to the hairs b in /b the rest of a person’s b body, /b whereas b this /b statement, that there cannot be two hairs in one follicle, is referring to the hairs b on /b a person’s b head. /b , b Rav Yehuda says /b that b Shmuel says: /b The b two hairs that /b the Sages b said /b are signs of adulthood are valid signs b even if /b they are not adjacent; but rather b one /b hair is b on the spoon- /b shaped area above his organ b and one /b is b on the /b young boy’s b testicles. /b ,The Gemara notes b that /b this b is also taught /b in a i baraita /i : The b two hairs that /b the Sages b said /b are signs of adulthood are valid signs b even /b if b one /b hair is b on /b the young girl’s b back, /b below her pubic area, b and one on her lower abdomen. /b The same applies if b one /b hair is b on the finger joints of her hand and one /b hair is b on the toe joints of her foot. /b This is b the statement of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehuda, of the village of Akko, who said /b it b in the name of Rabbi Shimon. And /b what do b the Rabbis /b say about this matter? b Rav Ḥisda says: /b According to the Rabbis, they are not a valid sign of adulthood b unless /b the b two hairs are in one place. /b ,§ The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yehuda and the Rabbis disagree with regard to when a young girl can perform refusal. According to the Rabbis, it is until she grows two pubic hairs after she reaches the age of twelve years and one day. According to Rabbi Yehuda she still retains the right to perform refusal at that point, until the majority of the pubic area is filled with hair. In this regard, b the Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Until when can a young girl perform refusal? Until she grows two /b pubic b hairs; /b this is b the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: /b She can perform refusal b until /b the area covered by the b black /b pubic hairs b is greater /b than the white skin of the genital area. b Rabbi Yosei says: Until the nipple is surrounded /b by hair. b Ben Shelakot says: Until /b the pubic area is b filled with hair. /b , b And Rabbi Shimon said: Ḥanina ben Ḥakhinai found me in /b the city of b Tzaidan and said /b to me: b When you reach Rabbi Akiva, say to him: Until when can a young girl perform refusal? If he says to you /b that she may perform refusal b until she grows two /b pubic b hairs, say to him: But didn’t ben Shelakot testify in the presence of all of you in Yavne /b that she may perform refusal b until /b the pubic area b is filled with hair [ i shetekhalkel /i ], and you did not say anything to him, /b thereby indicating that you conceded to him?,Rabbi Shimon continued: b When I reached Rabbi Akiva, /b and I said what I had been told to say to him, b he said to me: I do not know what this filling with hair [ i kilkul /i ] is, I don’t know /b any b ben Shelakot, /b and my opinion with regard to your question, b until when can a young girl perform refusal, /b is that she can perform refusal b until she grows two /b pubic b hairs. /b , strong MISHNA: /strong The b two /b white or black b hairs that are mentioned with regard to /b disqualification of a red b heifer; and /b the two white hairs mentioned b with regard to leprous marks, /b i.e., that if they grow within a white leprous mark, it is impure; b and /b the two hairs b that are mentioned in every place, /b i.e., with regard to a young boy and girl, are significant only if they are long b enough to bend the top /b of the hairs b to /b reach b their roots. /b This is b the statement of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Eliezer says: /b They must be long b enough to /b grasp them and b cut /b them b with a fingernail. Rabbi Akiva says: /b They must be long b enough to be cut with a pair [ i bezug /i ] /b of scissors., strong GEMARA: /strong b Rav Ḥisda says /b that b Mar Ukva says /b with regard to the various opinions in the mishna on the measure of hairs: The b i halakha /i /b is b in accordance with the statements of all of them to be stringent. /b One should consider it hair only if all of the criteria are met, or consider it to be hair if any one condition is met, depending on which standard yields the more stringent result., strong MISHNA: /strong With regard to a woman b who sees /b a red b stain /b on her garment, b that /b woman’s reckoning b is distorted. /b Since she does not know when the blood that caused the stain appeared, she does not know when the seven days of menstrual flow end and when the eleven days of the flow of the i zava /i begin., b And /b therefore she must be b concerned due to /b the possibility that it might have been caused by the b flow of a i zava /i . /b If she wore the same garment for three days on which she can assume the status of a i zava /i , and subsequently discovered a stain with an area that is the size of at least three split beans, the concern is that on each of those three days a stain with the area of at least one split bean, the minimum area that transmits impurity, was formed. The result is that she is a greater i zava /i and is required to count seven clean days before immersion. This is b the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: No /b configuration b of stains /b leads to concern b due to the flow of a i zava /i . /b , strong GEMARA: /strong The Gemara asks: b Who /b are b the Rabbis /b in this mishna? b It is Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus, as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus says: Stains do not /b lead to concern b due to the flow of a i zava /i , but stains can sometimes lead to i ziva /i . /b , b How so, /b i.e., how can stains lead to i ziva /i according to Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus? If a woman b wore three /b different b robes that /b had been b examined by her /b for blood stains, b and /b she then b found a stain on /b each of b them; or /b if she b saw /b blood flowing from her body on b two /b consecutive b days and /b on the third day she saw a stain on b one /b of the b robes /b that she wore that day, b those are the stains that lead to i ziva /i . /b ,The Gemara raises a difficulty with regard to the above statement: According to the opinion of Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus, b now /b that in a case where she sees stains on b three robes we /b are b concerned /b for i ziva /i , despite the fact b that /b she b does not see /b the blood flowing b from her body, is /b it b necessary /b to state that we are concerned if she experiences bleeding from her body on b two days and /b sees a stain on b one /b of the b robes? /b ,The Gemara answers: It is necessary to state that, b lest you say /b that in b any case like this, /b where she experiences bleeding from her body on two days and on the third day she sees a stain on one of the robes, b she brings an offering and it is consumed, /b like one who is definitely a i zava /i . Therefore, Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus b teaches us /b that her status as a i zava /i is uncertain, and consequently she brings a bird for a sin offering that is due to uncertainty, which is not eaten., b Rava said: With this /b claim b Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus bested the /b other b Rabbis, /b who agree with the opinion of Rabbi Meir in the mishna: b What is different /b about a stain that is b less than three split beans in one place, that we are not concerned /b she might be a i zava /i ? The reason is b that we say /b she b saw /b blood b on /b only b two days. /b But in a case where she discovered a stain on her robe with the area of at least b three split beans in one place, /b one can b also say: /b The area of b two and a half /b split beans should be attributed to blood b seen from her body, but the other is /b the b blood of a louse that /b was there b due to the dirt /b associated with her bleeding.,The Gemara asks: b And /b how do b the Rabbis /b respond to this claim? The Gemara answers: They maintain that b since it is possible to divide /b the stain into b at least one split bean for each /b of the three b days, we do not attribute /b the stain to the blood of a louse.,The Gemara raises a difficulty with regard to the statement of Rava: b And /b according to the opinion of b Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus, /b one can infer that b it is /b specifically in the case of a stain with the area of at least b three split beans in one place that we are not concerned /b she might be a i zava /i . It can be inferred from here that if it is b in three places, we are concerned. /b But b didn’t you say /b that if she discovered stains b in three robes, yes, /b we are concerned, which indicates that if it is b in three places /b on a single robe we are b not /b concerned.,The Gemara answers that it was b in accordance with the statement of the Rabbis /b that Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus b stated /b his opinion b to them, /b as follows: b According to my /b opinion, if she discovered stains b in three robes, yes /b we are concerned, whereas if it is b in three places /b we are b not /b concerned. b But according to your /b opinion, b at least concede to me that where /b she b saw /b a stain on her robe with the area of at least b three split beans in one place, that we say /b that the area of b two and a half /b split beans can be attributed to blood b seen from her body, and the other is /b the b blood of a louse /b that was there b due to the dirt /b associated with her bleeding.,The Gemara asks: b And /b how do b the Rabbis /b respond to this claim? The Gemara answers: They maintain that b since it is possible to divide /b the stain into b at least one split bean for each /b of the three b days, we do not attribute /b the stain to the blood of a louse.,§ With regard to a woman who finds a stain on her robe, b the Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : In the case of a woman b who sees /b a red b stain /b on her garment that she wore for a number of days and she does not know when and where it is from, what is her status? b If /b the area is large b enough to be divided /b into three parts, where the total area is the size of b three split beans, /b each of b which is /b the minimum measure to render her a i zava /i , i.e., an area the size of b at least a split bean, /b she must be b concerned /b that she is a i zava /i , as this stain might be the result of seeing a sufficient measure of blood on each of three occasions. b But if /b the stain is b not /b that size, she does b not /b need to b be concerned. /b , b Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra says in the name of Rabbi Yosei: Both /b in b this /b case, where she saw a stain large enough to be divided into three parts, where the total area is the size of three split beans, b and that /b case, where the stain was not that large, she must be b concerned /b that she might be a i zava /i . This is due to the fact that she possibly saw stains of sufficient size on only two occasions, but one was during twilight, which counts as two days, amounting to a total of three days.

27. Babylonian Talmud, Menachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 23, 87

87a. b the flour- /b like white scum that floats on the surface, b nor from /b the wine at b bottom of /b the cask b due to the sediment /b that collects there. b Rather, one brings from /b the wine in b its middle third. /b , b How does /b the Temple treasurer b inspect /b the wine to determine that it is from the middle of the cask? b The treasurer sits /b alongside the cask b and /b has b the /b measuring b reed in his hand. /b The spigot is opened and the wine begins to flow. When he sees that the wine emerging b draws /b with it b chalk /b -like scum b [ i hagir /i ], he /b immediately b knocks with the reed /b to indicate that the spigot should be closed., b Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: /b Wine b in which there is flour- /b like white scum is b unfit /b for libations, b as it is stated /b with regard to animal offerings: b “Unblemished they shall be for you…and their meal offering /b shall be fine flour mixed with b oil…unblemished they shall be for you, and their libations” /b (Numbers 28:19–20, 31). This indicates that animal offerings, meal offerings, and libations must all be brought from flawless products. Therefore, the presence of flour-like white scum in wine renders it unfit., strong GEMARA: /strong The mishna teaches: b One may not bring /b libations from b sweet /b wine, b nor /b from b boiled /b wine, b nor /b from wine produced from b smoked /b grapes, b and if one did bring /b a libation from such wine, it is b not valid. /b The Gemara asks: b But doesn’t the first clause teach: One may not bring libations from sweet wine made from sun-dried grapes, but if one did bring /b a libation from such wine it is b valid? /b How can one clause teach that a libation of one type of sweet wine is valid, and the other clause teach that a libation of another type of sweet wine is not valid?, b Ravina said: /b The text of the mishna is corrupt. To correct it, b combine /b the two clauses into one b and teach /b with regard to all the wines mentioned that they are unfit to be used for libations. b Rav Ashi said: /b The text of the mishna is correct. The reason for the difference between the two wines is that b the sweetness /b of grapes sweetended b by the sun is not objectionable, /b so libations of wine made from such grapes are valid, while b sweetness /b that results from the sugars b of the fruit /b itself b is objectionable, /b so libations of wine made from such grapes are not valid.,§ The mishna teaches: b 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. /b The Gemara provides the source for Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s ruling. b Rabbi Ḥizkiyya said: What is the reasoning of Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi? b The verse states /b with regard to the libations that accompany the New Moon offering: “And their libations: Half a i hin /i for a bull, a third of a i hin /i for a ram, and a quarter of a i hin /i b for a lamb, of wine” /b (Numbers 28:14). The juxtaposition of the terms lamb and wine teaches that b just as a lamb /b is fit to be used as an offering only if brought b in its /b first b year, so too wine /b is fit to be used as a libation only if it is b in its /b first b year. /b ,The Gemara ask: b If /b so, take the analogy further and conclude that b just as /b if one offers b a lamb in /b its b second year, /b it is b not valid, so too /b a libation of b wine in /b its b second year /b is b not valid. And if you would say /b that this is b indeed /b the i halakha /i , that is difficult: b But isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i that b wine in /b its b second year may not be brought /b i ab initio /i , but b if one did bring it /b as a libation, it is b valid? /b That i baraita /i certainly expresses the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, as b whom did you hear who said /b that aged wine b may not be brought? /b Only b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi, who explicitly states this opinion in the mishna. b And yet he says /b in the i baraita /i : b If one did bring /b a libation of aged wine, it is b valid. /b According to Rabbi Ḥizkiyya’s explanation of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s opinion, such an opinion is illogical., b Rather, Rava said: This is the reasoning of Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi: b As it is written /b in the verse exhorting a person not to be enticed by fine wines: b “Look not upon the wine when it is red” /b (Proverbs 23:31). Evidently, the redness of wine is indicative of its quality. After a year, wine begins to lose its redness and so it should not be used, i ab initio /i . Nevertheless, it is still of a sufficient quality to be acceptable, after the fact.,§ The mishna teaches: b One may not bring /b wine produced from b grapes suspended /b on stakes or trees; rather, one brings wine produced from grapes at foot height and from vineyards that are cultivated. The definition of vineyards that are cultivated is clarified in a i baraita /i that b taught: Vineyards that are cultivated twice a year. /b This is done by hoeing the earth underneath the vines.,The Gemara relates the efficacy of cultivating the land twice a year: b Rav Yosef had a tract /b of land b that was /b used b an orchard [ i depardeisa /i ] /b to b which he /b used to b give an extra hoeing, and /b consequently b it produced wine /b of such superior quality that when preparing the wine for drinking it required b a dilution using twice /b the amount b of water /b than that which is usually used to dilute wine.,§ The mishna teaches: When people produced wine for libations b they would not collect /b the wine b into large barrels, /b as it causes the wine to spoil; rather, it would be placed in small casks. The Sages b taught /b in a i baraita /i : The b casks /b referred to by the mishna are b flasks /b that are made in b Lod and /b that b are medium-sized. /b ,The Gemara adds another i halakha /i : When storing casks containing wine for libations, b they should not be placed in twos, /b i.e., one atop the other, but b rather singly, /b i.e., each one should be placed separately.,§ The mishna teaches: b How does /b the Temple treasurer b inspect /b wine to determine that it is from the middle of the cask? The b treasurer sits /b alongside the cask b and /b has b the /b measuring b reed in his hand. /b The spigot is opened and the wine begins to flow. If he sees that the wine emerging b draws /b with it b chalk /b -like scum, b he /b immediately b knocks with the reed /b to indicate that the spigot should be closed. The precise point at which he knocks is clarified in a i baraita /i that b taught: /b If the wine b draws /b with it b chalk /b -like scum, which comes b from the sediment, he knocks with the reed. /b ,The Gemara challenges: Why does the treasurer knock with the reed; b let him /b simply b speak. /b The Gemara explains: This b supports /b the opinion b of Rabbi Yoḥa, as Rabbi Yoḥa said: Just as speech is beneficial to the /b incense b spices, so is speech detrimental to wine, /b and so the treasurer avoids speaking.,§ The mishna teaches: b Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: /b Wine in which there is flour-like white scum is unfit for libations. b Rabbi Yoḥa raises a dilemma /b concerning such wine: If b one consecrated it /b to be used as a libation, b what is /b the i halakha /i with regard to whether b he should be flogged for /b consecrating b it due to /b the prohibition against consecrating b a flawed /b item as an offering? Does one say that b since it /b is b unfit, it is comparable to a blemished /b animal? b Or perhaps, /b the prohibition to consecrate b a flawed /b item b applies only to an animal. /b The Gemara concludes: The dilemma b shall stand /b unresolved.,§ Having discussed which flours, oils, and wine are fit to be offered in the Temple, the Gemara considers which animals are of sufficient quality to be used as offerings. b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : The choicest b rams /b are those b from Moab; /b the choicest b lambs /b are those b from Hebron; /b the choicest b calves /b are those b from Sharon; /b and the choicest b fledglings, /b i.e., doves and pigeons, are those b from the King’s Mountain. /b , b Rabbi Yehuda says: One should bring lambs whose height is like their width, /b i.e., they are so robust that they are as wide as they are tall. b Rava bar Rav Sheila said: What is the reason of Rabbi Yehuda? As it is written: /b “And He will give the rain for your seed, with which you sow the ground, and bread of the produce of the ground, and it shall be fat and bountiful; b your cattle shall graze in wide pastures [ i kar nirḥav /i ] on that day” /b (Isaiah 30:23). The word “ i kar /i ” can also mean a lamb, and “ i nirḥav /i ” means wide. Accordingly, Rabbi Yehuda interprets this verse, on a homiletical level, to be alluding to robust sheep.,The chapter concludes by quoting an additional prophecy of Isaiah concerning the rebuilding of Eretz Yisrael: It b is written: “I have set watchmen upon your walls, Jerusalem; they shall never be silent day nor night; those who remind the Lord, take no rest” /b (Isaiah 62:6). This is referring to the angels appointed by God to bring the redemption. The Gemara asks: b What /b do these watchmen b say /b to remind the Lord? b This /b is what b Rava bar Rav Sheila said: /b They recite the verse: b “You will arise and have compassion upon Zion; /b for it is time to be gracious to her, for the appointed time has come” (Psalms 102:14)., b Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak says: /b They recite the verse: b “The Lord builds up Jerusalem, /b He gathers together the dispersed of Israel” (Psalms 147:2). The Gemara asks: b And initially, /b when the Temple still stood and the Jewish people were gathered together in Eretz Yisrael, b what would /b the watchmen b say? Rava bar Rav Sheila says: /b They would say: b “For the Lord has chosen Zion; He has desired it for His habitation. /b This is My resting place forever; here will I dwell for I have desired it” (Psalms 132:13–14).,, strong MISHNA: /strong b Two /b sizes of b measuring vessels for dry /b substances b were /b used b in the Temple /b for measuring flour for the meal offerings. One held b a tenth /b of an ephah b and /b the other held b one-half of a tenth /b of an ephah. b Rabbi Meir says: /b There were three measuring vessels; one that held b a tenth /b of an ephah, another one that also held b a tenth /b of an ephah, b and /b a third one that held b one /b - b half of a tenth /b of an ephah., b What /b purpose b did /b the b tenth /b of an ephah measuring vessel b serve? /b It was the vessel b with which one would measure /b flour b for all the meal offerings. One would not measure /b the flour by using a measuring vessel of a size that held the entire volume of flour required at once, i.e., b neither with /b a vessel of b three- /b tenths of an ephah b for /b the meal offering accompanying the sacrifice of b a bull, nor with /b a vessel of b two /b -tenths of an ephah b for /b the meal offering accompanying the sacrifice of b a ram. Rather, one measures /b the flour for b them /b by repeatedly using the tenth of an ephah measuring vessel to measure the required number of b tenths. /b , b What /b purpose b did /b the b one /b - b half of a tenth /b of an ephah measuring vessel b serve? /b It was the vessel b with which one would measure /b the flour for the b High Priest’s griddle-cake /b offering. A tenth of an ephah was required each day; he sacrificed b half /b of it b in the morning and /b the other b half /b of it b in the afternoon. /b , strong GEMARA: /strong The Gemara cites a i baraita /i that clarifies Rabbi Meir’s opinion. It b is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Meir would say: What /b is the meaning when b the verse states: “A tenth, a tenth, for every lamb” /b (Numbers 28:29)? The fact the word “tenth” appears twice b teaches that there were two /b measuring vessels that each held b a tenth /b of an ephah b in the Temple. One /b of them held that volume when it was b heaped, and /b the other b one /b was slightly larger and held that same volume when the flour was b leveled /b with the rim.,The one that held a tenth of an ephah when b heaped /b was the vessel b with which one would measure /b the flour b for all the meal offerings. /b

28. Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 161

101a. big strongמתני׳ /strong /big הדלת שבמוקצה וחדקים שבפרצה ומחצלות אין נועלין בהן אלא אם כן גבוהים מן הארץ:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ורמינהו דלת הנגררת ומחצלת הנגררת וקנקן הנגרר בזמן שקשורין ותלויין נועלין בהן בשבת ואין צריך לומר ביום טוב,אמר אביי בשיש להם ציר רבא אמר בשהיה להן ציר,מיתיבי דלת הנגררת ומחצלת הנגררת וקנקן הנגרר בזמן שקשורין ותלויין וגבוהים מן הארץ אפילו מלא נימא נועלין בהן ואם לאו אין נועלין בהן,אביי מתרץ לטעמיה ורבא מתרץ לטעמיה אביי מתרץ לטעמיה או שיש להן ציר או שגבוהין מן הארץ רבא מתרץ לטעמיה כשהיה להן ציר או שגבוהין מן הארץ,ת"ר סוכי קוצים וחבילין שהתקינן לפירצה שבחצר בזמן שקשורין ותלויין נועלין בהן בשבת וא"צ לומר ביו"ט,תני ר' חייא דלת אלמנה הנגררת אין נועלין בה היכי דמי דלת אלמנה איכא דאמרי דחד שיפא ואיכא דאמרי דלית ליה גשמה,אמר רב יהודה האי מדורתא ממעלה למטה שרי ממטה למעלה אסיר,וכן ביעתא וכן קידרא וכן פוריא וכן חביתא,א"ל ההוא צדוקי לרבי יהושע בן חנניה חדקאה דכתיב בכו (מיכה ז, ד) טובם כחדק אמר ליה שטיא שפיל לסיפיה דקרא דכתיב ישר ממסוכה ואלא מאי טובם כחדק כשם שחדקים הללו מגינין על הפירצה כך טובים שבנו מגינים עלינו דבר אחר טובם כחדק שמהדקין את הרשעים לגיהנם שנאמר (מיכה ד, יג) קומי ודושי בת ציון כי קרנך אשים ברזל ופרסותיך אשים נחושה והדיקות עמים רבים וגו':, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big לא יעמוד אדם ברשות היחיד ויפתח ברשות הרבים ברשות הרבים ויפתח ברשות היחיד אא"כ עשה מחיצה גבוה עשרה טפחים דברי ר' מאיר,אמרו לו מעשה בשוק של פטמים שהיה בירושלים שהיו נועלין ומניחין את המפתח בחלון שעל גבי הפתח רבי יוסי אומר שוק של צמרים הוה:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ורבנן אמר רבי מאיר רשות הרבים ומהדרו אינהו כרמלית דאמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יוחנן ירושלים אלמלא דלתותיה ננעלות בלילה חייבין עליה משום רשות הרבים,אמר רב פפא כאן קודם שנפרצו בה פרצות כאן לאחר שנפרצו בה פרצות,רבא אמר סיפא אתאן לשערי גינה והכי קאמר וכן לא יעמוד ברשות היחיד ויפתח בכרמלית בכרמלית ויפתח ברשות היחיד

101a. strong MISHNA: /strong With regard to b the door to a rear court, /b i.e., a door that opens from a house to the courtyard situated behind it, which is typically not a proper door but merely a wooden board without hinges that closes off the doorway; b and /b likewise b bundles of thorns /b that seal b a breach; and /b reed b mats, one /b may b not close /b an opening b with them /b on Shabbat. This would be considered building or completing a building, b unless they /b remain b above the ground /b even when they are open., strong GEMARA: /strong b And /b the Gemara b raises a contradiction /b from a i baraita /i : With regard to b a door, or a mat, or a lattice [ i kankan /i ] that drag /b along the ground and are used for closing up openings, b when they are tied and suspended /b in place b one /b may b close /b an opening b with them on Shabbat; and needless to say /b this is permitted b on a Festival. /b According to the i baraita /i , the critical factor is apparently that they must be tied and suspended, not that they have to be held up above the ground., b Abaye said: /b The i baraita /i is referring b to /b ones b that have a hinge. /b As they are considered proper doors, closing them does not appear like building. b Rava said: /b The i baraita /i is referring even b to /b doors b that /b once b had a hinge, /b even though they no longer have one. These partitions also bear the clear form of a door, and therefore one’s action does not have the appearance of building.,The Gemara b raises an objection /b from another i baraita /i : With regard to b a door, or a mat, or a lattice that drag /b along the ground, b when they are tied and suspended /b in place b and /b they are held b above the ground even by /b as little as b a hairbreadth, one /b may b close /b an opening b with them. However, if /b they are b not /b raised in this manner, b one /b may b not close /b an opening b with them. /b Clearly, these doors must indeed be raised above the ground as well.,The Gemara answers: b Abaye reconciles /b the objection b in accordance with his reasoning, and Rava reconciles /b the objection b in accordance with his reasoning. /b The Gemara elaborates: b Abaye reconciles /b the objection b in accordance with his reasoning /b by adding to the i baraita /i : They must b either have a hinge or /b be held b above the ground. Rava /b likewise b reconciles /b the objection b in accordance with his reasoning, /b as he reads: They must b have had a hinge or /b else be held b above the ground. /b , b The Sages taught /b a i baraita /i : With regard to b branches of thorn bushes or bundles /b of wood b that were arranged /b so that they sealed off b a breach in a courtyard, when they are tied and suspended /b in place, b one /b may b close /b an opening b with them on Shabbat; and needless to say, /b this is permitted b on a Festival. /b , b Rabbi Ḥiyya taught /b a i baraita /i : With regard to b a widowed door that drags /b along the ground, b one /b may b not close /b an opening b with it. /b The Gemara asks: b What are the circumstances /b of b a widowed door? Some say /b it refers to a door built b from a single plank, /b which does not look like a door, b and others say /b it is b a door that does not have a lower doorsill /b ( i ge’onim /i ) and that touches the ground when closed.,With regard to activities that are prohibited because of their similarity to building, the Gemara cites a teaching that b Rav Yehuda said: /b When arranging a pile of wood for b a fire /b on a Festival, if the logs are arranged b from the top down, /b i.e., the upper logs are temporarily suspended in the air while the lower logs are inserted below them, b it is permitted. /b However, if the wood is placed from b the bottom up, it is prohibited, /b as the arrangement of wood in the regular manner is a form of building., b And the same /b applies to b eggs /b that are to be arranged in a pile, b and the same /b applies to b a cauldron /b that is to be set down on a fire by means of supports, b and the same /b applies to a b bed /b that will be placed on its frame, b and the same /b applies to b barrels /b arranged in a cellar. In all these cases, the part that goes on top must be temporarily suspended in the air while the lower section is inserted beneath it.,With regard to bundles of thorns used to seal a breach, the Gemara cites a related incident: b A certain heretic /b once b said to Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥaya: Man of thorns! For it says about you: “The best of them is as a brier” /b (Micah 7:4), which indicates that even Israel’s best are merely thorns. b He said to him: Fool, go down to the end of the verse: “The most upright is worse than a thorn hedge,” /b a derogatory expression meant as praise. b Rather, what is /b the meaning of b the best of them is as a brier? /b It means that b just as these thorns protect a breach, so the best among us protect us. Alternatively: The best of them is as a brier [ i ḥedek /i ] /b means b that they grind [ i mehaddekin /i ] the nations of the world into Gehenna, as it is stated: “Arise and thresh, O daughter of Zion, for I will make your horn iron, and I will make your hoofs brass, and you shall beat in pieces [ i vahadikot /i ] many peoples; /b and you shall devote their gain to God, and their substance to the God of the whole earth” (Micah 4:13)., strong MISHNA: /strong b A person /b may b not stand in the private domain and open /b a door located b in the public domain /b with a key, lest he inadvertently transfer the key from one domain to the other. Likewise, one may not stand b in the public domain and open /b a door b in the private domain /b with a key, b unless /b in the latter case b he erected a partition ten handbreadths high /b around the door and stands inside it. This is b the statement of Rabbi Meir. /b ,The Rabbis b said to him: /b There was b an incident at the poultry dealers’ market in Jerusalem, /b where they would fatten fowl for slaughter (Rabbeinu Ḥael), b and they would lock /b the doors to their shops b and place the key in the window that was over the door, /b which was more than ten handbreadths off the ground, and nobody was concerned about the possible violation of any prohibition. b Rabbi Yosei says: /b That place b was a market of wool dealers. /b , strong GEMARA: /strong The Gemara asks: b And /b those b Rabbis, /b who cited the case of the poultry dealers of Jerusalem to rebut Rabbi Meir’s opinion, b Rabbi Meir spoke /b to them about unlocking a door in a private domain while standing b in the public domain, and they responded /b with an incident involving b a i karmelit /i . As Rabba bar bar Ḥana said /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa said: /b With regard to b Jerusalem, were it not /b for the fact that b its doors are locked at night, one would be liable for /b carrying in b it /b on Shabbat, b because /b its thoroughfares have the status of b the public domain. /b However, since Jerusalem’s doors are typically locked, it is considered one large i karmelit /i , which is subject to rabbinic prohibitions. How, then, could a proof be cited from the markets of Jerusalem with regard to the transfer of objects between a public domain and a private domain, which is prohibited by Torah law?, b Rav Pappa said: Here, /b in the statement of Rabbi Yoha, Jerusalem was considered a i karmelit /i during the period b before breaches were made in its /b walls. Its doors did not turn it into a public domain, as they were locked. Whereas b there, /b the Rabbis in the mishna are referring to the time b after breaches had been made in /b the walls, and it therefore acquired the status of a public domain., b Rava said: In the latter clause /b of the mishna b we came to /b a different issue, i.e., the final section of the mishna is not designed to counter Rabbi Meir’s statement with regard to the public domain. Rather, it refers b to /b the b gates of a garden /b with an area greater than two i beit se’a /i in size, whose legal status is that of a i karmelit /i . Consequently, the mishna b is saying as follows: And likewise, /b one may b not stand in the private domain and open /b a door b in a i karmelit /i ; /b neither may one stand b in a i karmelit /i and open /b a door b in the private domain, /b

29. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 62

22a. משמשת וראתה נדה אינה צריכה טבילה אבל בעל קרי גרידא מחייב לא תימא מברך אלא מהרהר,ומי אית ליה לרבי יהודה הרהור והתניא בעל קרי שאין לו מים לטבול קורא קריאת שמע ואינו מברך לא לפניה ולא לאחריה ואוכל פתו ומברך לאחריה ואינו מברך לפניה אבל מהרהר בלבו ואינו מוציא בשפתיו דברי רבי מאיר רבי יהודה אומר בין כך ובין כך מוציא בשפתיו,אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק עשאן ר' יהודה כהלכות דרך ארץ,דתניא (דברים ד, ט) והודעתם לבניך ולבני בניך וכתיב בתריה יום אשר עמדת לפני ה' אלהיך בחורב מה להלן באימה וביראה וברתת ובזיע אף כאן באימה וביראה וברתת ובזיע,מכאן אמרו הזבים והמצורעים ובאין על נדות מותרים לקרות בתורה ובנביאים ובכתובים לשנות במשנה וגמרא ובהלכות ובאגדות אבל בעלי קריין אסורים,רבי יוסי אומר שונה הוא ברגיליות ובלבד שלא יציע את המשנה רבי יונתן בן יוסף אומר מציע הוא את המשנה ואינו מציע את הגמרא רבי נתן בן אבישלום אומר אף מציע את הגמרא ובלבד שלא יאמר אזכרות שבו רבי יוחנן הסנדלר תלמידו של רבי עקיבא משום ר"ע אומר לא יכנס למדרש כל עיקר ואמרי לה לא יכנס לבית המדרש כל עיקר ר' יהודה אומר שונה הוא בהלכות דרך ארץ,מעשה ברבי יהודה שראה קרי והיה מהלך על גב הנהר אמרו לו תלמידיו רבינו שנה לנו פרק אחד בהלכות דרך ארץ ירד וטבל ושנה להם אמרו לו לא כך למדתנו רבינו שונה הוא בהלכות דרך ארץ אמר להם אע"פ שמיקל אני על אחרים מחמיר אני על עצמי:,תניא ר' יהודה בן בתירא היה אומר אין דברי תורה מקבלין טומאה מעשה בתלמיד אחד שהיה מגמגם למעלה מרבי יהודה בן בתירא אמר ליה בני פתח פיך ויאירו דבריך שאין דברי תורה מקבלין טומאה שנאמר (ירמיהו כג, כט) הלא כה דברי כאש נאם ה' מה אש אינו מקבל טומאה אף דברי תורה אינן מקבלין טומאה,אמר מר מציע את המשנה ואינו מציע את הגמרא מסייע ליה לרבי אלעאי דאמר רבי אלעאי אמר ר' אחא בר יעקב משום רבינו הלכה מציע את המשנה ואינו מציע את הגמרא כתנאי מציע את המשנה ואינו מציע את הגמרא דברי רבי מאיר רבי יהודה בן גמליאל אומר משום רבי חנינא בן גמליאל זה וזה אסור ואמרי לה זה וזה מותר,מ"ד זה וזה אסור כרבי יוחנן הסנדלר מ"ד זה וזה מותר כרבי יהודה בן בתירא,אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק נהוג עלמא כהני תלת סבי כרבי אלעאי בראשית הגז כרבי יאשיה בכלאים כרבי יהודה בן בתירא בד"ת,כרבי אלעאי בראשית הגז דתניא רבי אלעאי אומר ראשית הגז אינו נוהג אלא בארץ,כרבי יאשיה בכלאים כדכתיב (דברים כב, ט) (כרמך) לא תזרע [כרמך] כלאים רבי יאשיה אומר לעולם אינו חייב עד שיזרע חטה ושעורה וחרצן במפולת יד,כרבי יהודה בן בתירא בדברי תורה דתניא רבי יהודה בן בתירא אומר אין דברי תורה מקבלין טומאה,כי אתא זעירי אמר בטלוה לטבילותא ואמרי לה בטלוה לנטילותא מאן דאמר בטלוה לטבילותא כרבי יהודה בן בתירא מאן דאמר בטלוה לנטילותא כי הא דרב חסדא לייט אמאן דמהדר אמיא בעידן צלותא:,תנו רבנן בעל קרי שנתנו עליו תשעה קבין מים טהור נחום איש גם זו לחשה לרבי עקיבא ורבי עקיבא לחשה לבן עזאי ובן עזאי יצא ושנאה לתלמידיו בשוק פליגי בה תרי אמוראי במערבא רבי יוסי בר אבין ורבי יוסי בר זבידא חד תני שנאה וחד תני לחשה,מאן דתני שנאה משום בטול תורה ומשום בטול פריה ורביה ומאן דתני לחשה שלא יהו תלמידי חכמים מצויים אצל נשותיהם כתרנגולים,אמר רבי ינאי שמעתי שמקילין בה ושמעתי שמחמירין בה וכל המחמיר בה על עצמו מאריכין לו ימיו ושנותיו,אמר ריב"ל מה טיבן של טובלי שחרין מה טיבן הא איהו דאמר בעל קרי אסור בדברי תורה הכי קאמר מה טיבן בארבעים סאה אפשר בתשעה קבין מה טיבן בטבילה אפשר בנתינה,אמר רבי חנינא גדר גדול גדרו בה דתניא מעשה באחד שתבע אשה לדבר עבירה אמרה לו ריקא יש לך ארבעים סאה שאתה טובל בהן מיד פירש,אמר להו רב הונא לרבנן רבותי מפני מה אתם מזלזלין בטבילה זו אי משום צינה אפשר במרחצאות,אמר ליה רב חסדא וכי יש טבילה בחמין אמר ליה רב אדא בר אהבה קאי כוותך,רבי זירא הוה יתיב באגנא דמיא בי מסותא אמר ליה לשמעיה זיל ואייתי לי תשעה קבין ושדי עלואי אמר ליה רבי חייא בר אבא למה ליה למר כולי האי והא יתיב בגווייהו אמר ליה כארבעים סאה מה ארבעים סאה בטבילה ולא בנתינה אף תשעה קבין בנתינה ולא בטבילה,רב נחמן תקן חצבא בת תשעה קבין כי אתא רב דימי אמר רבי עקיבא ורבי יהודה גלוסטרא אמרו לא שנו אלא לחולה לאונסו אבל לחולה המרגיל ארבעים סאה,אמר רב יוסף אתבר חצביה דרב נחמן כי אתא רבין אמר באושא הוה עובדא

22a. that b a woman who engaged in intercourse and saw menstrual /b blood b is not required to immerse herself, but one who experienced a seminal emission alone, /b with no concurrent impurity, b is required to do so? /b If so, we must interpret Rabbi Yehuda’s statement in the mishna that one recites a blessing both beforehand and thereafter as follows: b Do not say /b that one b recites a blessing /b orally, but rather he means that b one contemplates /b those blessings in his heart.,The Gemara challenges this explanation: b And does Rabbi Yehuda maintain that /b there is validity to b contemplating /b in his heart? b Wasn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b One who experienced a seminal emission and who has no water to immerse /b and purify himself b recites i Shema /i and neither recites the blessings /b of i Shema /i b beforehand nor thereafter? And /b when b he eats his bread, he recites the blessing thereafter, /b Grace after Meals, b but does not recite the blessing: /b Who brings forth bread from the earth, b beforehand. However, /b in the instances where he may not recite the blessing, b he contemplates /b it b in his heart rather than utter /b it b with his lips, /b this is b the statement of Rabbi Meir. /b However b Rabbi Yehuda says: In either case, he utters /b all of the blessings b with his lips. /b Rabbi Yehuda does not consider contemplating the blessings in his heart a solution and permits them to be recited., b Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: /b Rabbi Yehuda’s statement in the mishna should be interpreted in another way. b Rabbi Yehuda rendered /b the blessings b like i Hilkhot Derekh Eretz /i , /b which according to some Sages were not considered to be in the same category as all other matters of Torah and therefore, one is permitted to engage in their study even after having experienced a seminal emission., b As it was taught /b in a i baraita /i : It is written: b “And you shall impart them to your children and your children’s children” /b (Deuteronomy 4:9), b and it is written thereafter: “The day that you stood before the Lord your God at Horeb” /b (Deuteronomy 4:10). b Just as below, /b the Revelation at Sinai was b in reverence, fear, quaking, and trembling, so too here, /b in every generation, Torah must be studied with a sense of b reverence, fear, quaking, and trembling. /b , b From here /b the Sages b stated: i Zavim /i , lepers, and those who engaged in intercourse with menstruating women, /b despite their severe impurity, b are permitted to read the Torah, Prophets, and Writings, and to study Mishna and Gemara and i halakhot /i and i aggada /i . However, those who experienced a seminal emission are prohibited /b from doing so. The reason for this distinction is that the cases of severe impurity are caused by ailment or other circumstances beyond his control and, as a result, they do not necessarily preclude a sense of reverence and awe as he studies Torah. This, however, is not the case with regard to impurity resulting from a seminal emission, which usually comes about due to frivolity and a lack of reverence and awe. Therefore, it is inappropriate for one who experiences a seminal emission to engage in matters of in Torah.,However, there are many opinions concerning the precise parameters of the Torah matters prohibited by this decree. b Rabbi Yosei says: /b One who experiences a seminal emission b studies /b i mishnayot /i that he is b accustomed /b to study, b as long as he does not expound upon a /b new b mishna /b to study it in depth. b Rabbi Yonatan ben Yosef says: He expounds upon the mishna but he does not expound upon the Gemara, /b which is the in-depth analysis of the Torah. b Rabbi Natan ben Avishalom says: He may even expound upon the Gemara, as long as he does not utter /b the b mentions /b of God’s name b therein. Rabbi Yoḥa the Cobbler, Rabbi Akiva’s student, says in the name of Rabbi Akiva: /b One who experiences a seminal emission b may not enter into homiletic interpretation [ i midrash /i ] /b of verses b at all. Some say /b that he says: b He may not enter the study hall [ i beit hamidrash /i ] at all. Rabbi Yehuda says: He may study /b only b i Hilkhot Derekh Eretz /i . /b In terms of the problem raised above, apparently Rabbi Yehuda considers the legal status of the blessings to be parallel to the legal status of i Hilkhot Derekh Eretz /i , and therefore one may utter them orally.,The Gemara relates b an incident involving Rabbi Yehuda /b himself, who b experienced a seminal emission and was walking along the riverbank /b with his disciples. b His disciples said to him: Rabbi, teach us a chapter from i Hilkhot Derekh Eretz /i , /b as he maintained that even in a state of impurity, it is permitted. b He descended and immersed himself /b in the river b and taught them /b i Hilkhot Derekh Eretz /i . b They said to him: Did you not teach us, our teacher, that he may study i Hilkhot Derekh Eretz /i ? He said to them: Although I am lenient with others, /b and allow them to study it without immersion, b I am stringent with myself. /b ,Further elaborating on the issue of Torah study while in a state of impurity, b it was taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira would say: Matters of Torah do not become ritually impure /b and therefore one who is impure is permitted to engage in Torah study. He implemented this i halakha /i in practice. The Gemara relates b an incident involving a student who was /b reciting i mishnayot /i and i baraitot /i b hesitantly before /b the study hall of b Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira. /b The student experienced a seminal emission, and when he was asked to recite he did so in a rushed, uneven manner, as he did not want to utter the words of Torah explicitly. Rabbi Yehuda b said to him: My son, open your mouth and let your words illuminate, as matters of Torah do not become ritually impure, as it is stated: “Is not my word like fire, says the Lord” /b (Jeremiah 23:29). b Just as fire does not become ritually impure, so too matters of Torah do not become ritually impure. /b ,In this i baraita /i b the Master said /b that one who is impure because of a seminal emission b expounds upon the mishna but does not expound upon the Gemara. /b The Gemara notes: This statement b supports /b the opinion of b Rabbi El’ai, /b as b Rabbi El’ai said /b that b Rabbi Aḥa bar Ya’akov said in the name of Rabbeinu, /b Rav b : The /b i halakha /i is that one who experienced a seminal emission b may expound upon the mishna but may not expound upon the Gemara. /b This dispute b is parallel a tannaitic /b dispute, as it was taught: One who experienced a seminal emission b expounds upon the mishna but does not expound upon the Gemara; /b that is b the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda ben Gamliel says in the name of Rabbi Ḥanina ben Gamliel: /b Both b this and that are prohibited. And some say /b that he said: Both b this and that are permitted. /b ,Comparing these opinions: b The one who said /b that both b this and that are prohibited /b holds b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yoḥa the Cobbler; the one who said /b that both b this and that are permitted /b holds b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira. /b ,Summarizing the i halakha /i , b Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: The universally /b accepted b practice is in accordance with /b the opinions of b these three elders: In accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi El’ai with regard to /b the i halakhot /i of b the first shearing, in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yoshiya with regard to /b the laws of prohibited b diverse kinds, /b and b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira with regard to matters of Torah. /b ,The Gemara elaborates: b In accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi El’ai with regard to the first shearing, as it was taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi El’ai says: /b The obligation to set aside b the first shearing /b from the sheep for the priest b is only practiced in Eretz /b Yisrael and not in the Diaspora, and that is the accepted practice., b In accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yoshiya with regard to diverse kinds, as it is written: “You shall not sow your vineyard with diverse kinds” /b (Deuteronomy 22:9). b Rabbi Yoshiya says: /b This means that b one /b who sows diverse kinds b is not liable /b by Torah law b until he sows wheat and barley and a /b grape b pit with a single hand motion, /b meaning that while sowing in the vineyard he violates the prohibition of diverse kinds that applies to seeds and to the vineyard simultaneously., b In accordance with Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira with regard to /b one who experiences a seminal emission is permitted to engage in b matters of Torah, as it was taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: Matters of Torah do not become ritually impure. /b ,And the Gemara relates: b When Ze’iri came /b from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, b he /b succinctly capsulated this i halakha /i and b said: They abolished ritual immersion, and some say that /b he said: b They abolished ritual washing of the hands. /b The Gemara explains: b The one who says /b that b they abolished immersion /b holds in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira /b that one who experienced a seminal emission is not required to immerse. b And the one who says /b that b they abolished washing of the hands /b holds b in accordance with that which Rav Ḥisda cursed one who /b goes out of his way b to seek water at the time of prayer. /b , b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b One who experienced a seminal emission who had nine i kav /i of /b drawn b water poured over him, /b that is sufficient to render him b ritually pure /b and he need not immerse himself in a ritual bath. The Gemara relates: b Naḥum of Gam Zo whispered /b this i halakha /i to b Rabbi Akiva, and Rabbi Akiva whispered it to /b his student b ben Azzai, and ben Azzai went out and taught it to his students /b publicly b in the marketplace. Two i amora’im /i in Eretz Yisrael, Rabbi Yosei bar Avin and Rabbi Yosei bar Zevida, disagreed /b as to the correct version of the conclusion of the incident. b One taught: /b Ben Azzai b taught it /b to his students in the market. b And the other taught: Ben Azzai /b also b whispered it /b to his students.,The Gemara explains the rationale behind the two versions of this incident. b The /b Sage b who taught /b that ben Azzai b taught /b the law openly in the market held that the leniency was b due to /b concern that the i halakhot /i requiring ritual immersion would promote b dereliction /b in the study b of Torah. /b The ruling of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira eases the way for an individual who experienced a seminal emission to study Torah. This was b also due to /b concern that the i halakhot /i requiring ritual immersion would promote b the suspension of procreation, /b as one might abstain from marital relations to avoid the immersion required thereafter. b And the /b Sage, b who taught /b that ben Azzai only b whispered /b this i halakha /i to his students, held that he did so b in order that Torah scholars would not be with their wives like roosters. /b If the purification process was that simple, Torah scholars would engage in sexual activity constantly, which would distract them from their studies.,With regard to this ritual immersion, b Rabbi Yannai said: I heard that there are those who are lenient with regard to it and I have heard that there are those who are stringent with regard to it. /b The i halakha /i in this matter was never conclusively established b and anyone who /b accepts b upon himself to be stringent with regard to it, they prolong for him his days and years. /b ,The Gemara relates that b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: What is the essence of those who immerse themselves in the morning? /b The Gemara retorts: How can one ask b what is their essence? Isn’t he /b the one b who said /b that b one who experiences a seminal emission is prohibited from /b engaging in b matters of Torah /b and is required to immerse himself in the morning? Rather, b this is /b what b he /b meant to b say: What is the essence of /b immersion in a ritual bath of b forty i se’a /i /b of water when b it is possible /b to purify oneself b with nine i kav /i ? /b Furthermore, b what is the essence of immersion /b when b it is /b also b possible /b to purify oneself by b pouring /b water?,Regarding this, b Rabbi Ḥanina said: They established a massive fence /b protecting one from sinning with their decree that one must immerse himself in forty i se’a /i of water. b As it was taught /b in a i baraita /i : There was b an incident involving one who solicited a woman to /b commit b a sinful act. She said to him: Good-for-nothing. Do you have forty i se’a /i in which to immerse /b and purify b yourself /b afterwards? He b immediately desisted. /b The obligation to immerse oneself caused individuals to refrain from transgression., b Rav Huna said to the Sages: Gentlemen, why do you disdain this immersion? If it is because /b it is difficult for you to immerse in the b cold /b waters of the ritual bath, b it is possible /b to purify oneself by immersing oneself in the heated b bathhouses, /b which are unfit for immersion for other forms of ritual impurity but are fit for immersion in this case., b Rabbi Ḥisda said to him: Is there ritual immersion in hot water? /b Rav Huna b said to him: /b Indeed, doubts with regard to the fitness of baths have been raised, and b Rav Adda bar Ahava holds in accordance with your /b opinion. Nevertheless, I remain convinced that it is permitted.,The Gemara relates: b Rabbi Zeira was sitting in a tub of water in the bathhouse. He said to his attendant: Go and get nine i kav /i /b of water b and pour /b it b over me /b so that I may purify myself from the impurity caused by a seminal emission. b Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said to him: Why does my master /b require b all of this? Aren’t you seated in /b at least nine i kav /i of water in the tub. b He said to him: /b The law of nine i kav /i b parallels /b the law of b forty i se’a /i , /b in that their i halakhot /i are exclusive. b Just as forty i se’a /i /b can only purify an individual through b immersion and not through pouring, so too nine i kav /i /b can only purify one who experienced a seminal emission b through pouring and not through immersion. /b ,The Gemara relates that b Rav Naḥman prepared a jug /b with a capacity b of nine i kav /i /b so that his students could pour water over themselves and become pure. b When Rav Dimi came /b from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, b he said: Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yehuda Gelostera said: /b The i halakha /i that one who experienced a seminal emission can be purified by pouring nine i kav /i b was only taught for a sick person /b who experienced the emission b involuntarily. However, a sick person /b who experienced a b normal /b seminal emission in the course of marital relations, is required to immerse himself in b forty i se’a /i . /b , b Rav Yosef said: /b In that case, b Rav Naḥman’s jug is broken, /b meaning it is no longer of any use, as few people fall into the category of sick people who experienced seminal emissions. Nevertheless, b when Ravin came /b from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia b he said: In Usha there was an incident /b

30. Ambrose, On The Holy Spirit, 7.52 (4th cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 148

31. Ambrose, The Prayer of Job And David, 2.5.18 (4th cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 148

32. Jerome, Commentaria In Xii Prophetas Minoras, 101, 99-100 (5th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 148

33. Cleomedes (Ed. Todd), Oration 12 (Olympicus), 2.58 Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 148

34. Athanasius, Expositiones In Psalmos, None Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 60

35. Asterius, Pg, None Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 62

36. Anon., Gedulat Moshe, 5 Tagged with subjects: •polemic, jewish-christian Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal (2018), Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud, 62

Tiresias: The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Source Database