1. Hebrew Bible, Psalms, 33.6 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 26| 33.6. בִּדְבַר יְהוָה שָׁמַיִם נַעֲשׂוּ וּבְרוּחַ פִּיו כָּל־צְבָאָם׃ | 33.6. By the word of the LORD were the heavens made; And all the host of them by the breath of His mouth. |
|
2. Hebrew Bible, Hosea, 2-3, 1 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Ashbrook Harvey et al., A Most Reliable Witness: Essays in Honor of Ross Shepard Kraemer (2015) 235 | 1. And it shall come to pass at that day, that I will break the bow of Israel in the valley of Jezreel.’,But I will have compassion upon the house of Judah, and will save them by the LORD their God, and will not save them by bow, nor by sword, nor by battle, nor by horses, nor by horsemen.’,And the LORD said unto him: ‘Call his name Jezreel; for yet a little while, and I will visit the blood of Jezreel upon the house of Jehu, and will cause to cease the kingdom of the house of Israel.,And she conceived again, and bore a daughter. And He said unto him: ‘Call her name Lo-ruhamah; for I will no more have compassion upon the house of Israel, that I should in any wise pardon them.,When the LORD spoke at first with Hosea, the LORD said unto Hosea: ‘Go, take unto thee a wife of harlotry and children of harlotry; for the land doth commit great harlotry, departing from the LORD.’,Now when she had weaned Lo-ruhamah, she conceived, and bore a son.,And He said: ‘Call his name Lo-ammi; for ye are not My people, and I will not be yours.’,So he went and took Gomer the daughter of Diblaim; and she conceived, and bore him a son.,The word of the LORD that came unto Hosea the son of Beeri, in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah, and in the days of Jeroboam the son of Joash, king of Israel. |
|
3. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 35.22, 37.36, 38.16-38.18, 39.1 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •rabbinic, interpretation Found in books: Niehoff, Jewish Exegesis and Homeric Scholarship in Alexandria (2011) 57| 35.22. וַיְהִי בִּשְׁכֹּן יִשְׂרָאֵל בָּאָרֶץ הַהִוא וַיֵּלֶךְ רְאוּבֵן וַיִּשְׁכַּב אֶת־בִּלְהָה פִּילֶגֶשׁ אָבִיו וַיִּשְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיִּהְיוּ בְנֵי־יַעֲקֹב שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר׃ 37.36. וְהַמְּדָנִים מָכְרוּ אֹתוֹ אֶל־מִצְרָיִם לְפוֹטִיפַר סְרִיס פַּרְעֹה שַׂר הַטַּבָּחִים׃ 38.16. וַיֵּט אֵלֶיהָ אֶל־הַדֶּרֶךְ וַיֹּאמֶר הָבָה־נָּא אָבוֹא אֵלַיִךְ כִּי לֹא יָדַע כִּי כַלָּתוֹ הִוא וַתֹּאמֶר מַה־תִּתֶּן־לִּי כִּי תָבוֹא אֵלָי׃ 38.17. וַיֹּאמֶר אָנֹכִי אֲשַׁלַּח גְּדִי־עִזִּים מִן־הַצֹּאן וַתֹּאמֶר אִם־תִּתֵּן עֵרָבוֹן עַד שָׁלְחֶךָ׃ 38.18. וַיֹּאמֶר מָה הָעֵרָבוֹן אֲשֶׁר אֶתֶּן־לָּךְ וַתֹּאמֶר חֹתָמְךָ וּפְתִילֶךָ וּמַטְּךָ אֲשֶׁר בְּיָדֶךָ וַיִּתֶּן־לָּהּ וַיָּבֹא אֵלֶיהָ וַתַּהַר לוֹ׃ 39.1. וְיוֹסֵף הוּרַד מִצְרָיְמָה וַיִּקְנֵהוּ פּוֹטִיפַר סְרִיס פַּרְעֹה שַׂר הַטַּבָּחִים אִישׁ מִצְרִי מִיַּד הַיִּשְׁמְעֵאלִים אֲשֶׁר הוֹרִדֻהוּ שָׁמָּה׃ 39.1. וַיְהִי כְּדַבְּרָהּ אֶל־יוֹסֵף יוֹם יוֹם וְלֹא־שָׁמַע אֵלֶיהָ לִשְׁכַּב אֶצְלָהּ לִהְיוֹת עִמָּהּ׃ | 35.22. And it came to pass, while Israel dwelt in that land, that Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine; and Israel heard of it. Now the sons of Jacob were twelve: 37.36. And the Midianites sold him into Egypt unto Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh’s, the captain of the guard. 38.16. And he turned unto her by the way, and said: ‘Come, I pray thee, let me come in unto thee’; for he knew not that she was his daughter-in-law. And she said: ‘What wilt thou give me, that thou mayest come in unto me?’ 38.17. And he said: ‘I will send thee a kid of the goats from the flock.’ And she said: ‘Wilt thou give me a pledge, till thou send it?’ 38.18. And he said: ‘What pledge shall I give thee?’ And she said: ‘Thy signet and thy cord, and thy staff that is in thy hand.’ And he gave them to her, and came in unto her, and she conceived by him. 39.1. And Joseph was brought down to Egypt; and Potiphar, an officer of Pharaoh’s, the captain of the guard, an Egyptian, bought him of the hand of the Ishmaelites, that had brought him down thither. |
|
4. Hebrew Bible, Exodus, 2.5, 12.43-13.10, 13, 13.1, 13.2, 13.3, 13.4, 13.5, 13.6, 13.7, 13.8, 13.9, 13.10, 13.11, 13.12, 13.13, 13.14, 13.15, 13.16 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Alexander, Gender and Timebound Commandments in Judaism (2013) 170, 171| 13.4. הַיּוֹם אַתֶּם יֹצְאִים בְּחֹדֶשׁ הָאָבִיב׃ | 13.4. This day ye go forth in the month Abib. |
|
5. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 6.4, 6.7-6.9, 8.5-8.10, 11.13-11.21 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Alexander, Gender and Timebound Commandments in Judaism (2013) 96, 108, 170, 171, 174| 6.4. שְׁמַע יִשְׂרָאֵל יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵינוּ יְהוָה אֶחָד׃ 6.7. וְשִׁנַּנְתָּם לְבָנֶיךָ וְדִבַּרְתָּ בָּם בְּשִׁבְתְּךָ בְּבֵיתֶךָ וּבְלֶכְתְּךָ בַדֶּרֶךְ וּבְשָׁכְבְּךָ וּבְקוּמֶךָ׃ 6.8. וּקְשַׁרְתָּם לְאוֹת עַל־יָדֶךָ וְהָיוּ לְטֹטָפֹת בֵּין עֵינֶיךָ׃ 6.9. וּכְתַבְתָּם עַל־מְזוּזֹת בֵּיתֶךָ וּבִשְׁעָרֶיךָ׃ 8.5. וְיָדַעְתָּ עִם־לְבָבֶךָ כִּי כַּאֲשֶׁר יְיַסֵּר אִישׁ אֶת־בְּנוֹ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ מְיַסְּרֶךָּ׃ 8.6. וְשָׁמַרְתָּ אֶת־מִצְוֺת יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לָלֶכֶת בִּדְרָכָיו וּלְיִרְאָה אֹתוֹ׃ 8.7. כִּי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ מְבִיאֲךָ אֶל־אֶרֶץ טוֹבָה אֶרֶץ נַחֲלֵי מָיִם עֲיָנֹת וּתְהֹמֹת יֹצְאִים בַּבִּקְעָה וּבָהָר׃ 8.8. אֶרֶץ חִטָּה וּשְׂעֹרָה וְגֶפֶן וּתְאֵנָה וְרִמּוֹן אֶרֶץ־זֵית שֶׁמֶן וּדְבָשׁ׃ 8.9. אֶרֶץ אֲשֶׁר לֹא בְמִסְכֵּנֻת תֹּאכַל־בָּהּ לֶחֶם לֹא־תֶחְסַר כֹּל בָּהּ אֶרֶץ אֲשֶׁר אֲבָנֶיהָ בַרְזֶל וּמֵהֲרָרֶיהָ תַּחְצֹב נְחֹשֶׁת׃ 11.13. וְהָיָה אִם־שָׁמֹעַ תִּשְׁמְעוּ אֶל־מִצְוֺתַי אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי מְצַוֶּה אֶתְכֶם הַיּוֹם לְאַהֲבָה אֶת־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם וּלְעָבְדוֹ בְּכָל־לְבַבְכֶם וּבְכָל־נַפְשְׁכֶם׃ 11.14. וְנָתַתִּי מְטַר־אַרְצְכֶם בְּעִתּוֹ יוֹרֶה וּמַלְקוֹשׁ וְאָסַפְתָּ דְגָנֶךָ וְתִירֹשְׁךָ וְיִצְהָרֶךָ׃ 11.15. וְנָתַתִּי עֵשֶׂב בְּשָׂדְךָ לִבְהֶמְתֶּךָ וְאָכַלְתָּ וְשָׂבָעְתָּ׃ 11.16. הִשָּׁמְרוּ לָכֶם פֶּן יִפְתֶּה לְבַבְכֶם וְסַרְתֶּם וַעֲבַדְתֶּם אֱלֹהִים אֲחֵרִים וְהִשְׁתַּחֲוִיתֶם לָהֶם׃ 11.17. וְחָרָה אַף־יְהוָה בָּכֶם וְעָצַר אֶת־הַשָּׁמַיִם וְלֹא־יִהְיֶה מָטָר וְהָאֲדָמָה לֹא תִתֵּן אֶת־יְבוּלָהּ וַאֲבַדְתֶּם מְהֵרָה מֵעַל הָאָרֶץ הַטֹּבָה אֲשֶׁר יְהוָה נֹתֵן לָכֶם׃ 11.18. וְשַׂמְתֶּם אֶת־דְּבָרַי אֵלֶּה עַל־לְבַבְכֶם וְעַל־נַפְשְׁכֶם וּקְשַׁרְתֶּם אֹתָם לְאוֹת עַל־יֶדְכֶם וְהָיוּ לְטוֹטָפֹת בֵּין עֵינֵיכֶם׃ 11.19. וְלִמַּדְתֶּם אֹתָם אֶת־בְּנֵיכֶם לְדַבֵּר בָּם בְּשִׁבְתְּךָ בְּבֵיתֶךָ וּבְלֶכְתְּךָ בַדֶּרֶךְ וּבְשָׁכְבְּךָ וּבְקוּמֶךָ׃ 11.21. לְמַעַן יִרְבּוּ יְמֵיכֶם וִימֵי בְנֵיכֶם עַל הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּע יְהוָה לַאֲבֹתֵיכֶם לָתֵת לָהֶם כִּימֵי הַשָּׁמַיִם עַל־הָאָרֶץ׃ | 6.4. HEAR, O ISRAEL: THE LORD OUR GOD, THE LORD IS ONE. 6.7. and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. 6.8. And thou shalt bind them for a sign upon thy hand, and they shall be for frontlets between thine eyes. 6.9. And thou shalt write them upon the door-posts of thy house, and upon thy gates. 8.5. And thou shalt consider in thy heart, that, as a man chasteneth his son, so the LORD thy God chasteneth thee. 8.6. And thou shalt keep the commandments of the LORD thy God, to walk in His ways, and to fear Him. 8.7. For the LORD thy God bringeth thee into a good land, a land of brooks of water, of fountains and depths, springing forth in valleys and hills; 8.8. a land of wheat and barley, and vines and fig-trees and pomegranates; a land of olive-trees and honey; 8.9. a land wherein thou shalt eat bread without scarceness, thou shalt not lack any thing in it; a land whose stones are iron, and out of whose hills thou mayest dig brass. 8.10. And thou shalt eat and be satisfied, and bless the LORD thy God for the good land which He hath given thee. 11.13. And it shall come to pass, if ye shall hearken diligently unto My commandments which I command you this day, to love the LORD your God, and to serve Him with all your heart and with all your soul, 11.14. that I will give the rain of your land in its season, the former rain and the latter rain, that thou mayest gather in thy corn, and thy wine, and thine oil. 11.15. And I will give grass in thy fields for thy cattle, and thou shalt eat and be satisfied. 11.16. Take heed to yourselves, lest your heart be deceived, and ye turn aside, and serve other gods, and worship them; 11.17. and the anger of the LORD be kindled against you, and He shut up the heaven, so that there shall be no rain, and the ground shall not yield her fruit; and ye perish quickly from off the good land which the LORD giveth you. 11.18. Therefore shall ye lay up these My words in your heart and in your soul; and ye shall bind them for a sign upon your hand, and they shall be for frontlets between your eyes. 11.19. And ye shall teach them your children, talking of them, when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up. 11.20. And thou shalt write them upon the door-posts of thy house, and upon thy gates; 11.21. that your days may be multiplied, and the days of your children, upon the land which the LORD swore unto your fathers to give them, as the days of the heavens above the earth. |
|
6. Hebrew Bible, Song of Songs, 4.12 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •song of songs, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Ashbrook Harvey et al., A Most Reliable Witness: Essays in Honor of Ross Shepard Kraemer (2015) 235| 4.12. גַּן נָעוּל אֲחֹתִי כַלָּה גַּל נָעוּל מַעְיָן חָתוּם׃ | 4.12. A garden shut up is my sister, my bride; A spring shut up, a fountain sealed. |
|
7. Hebrew Bible, Judges, 13.18 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 29| 13.18. וַיֹּאמֶר לּוֹ מַלְאַךְ יְהוָה לָמָּה זֶּה תִּשְׁאַל לִשְׁמִי וְהוּא־פֶלִאי׃ | 13.18. And the angel of the Lord said to him, Why askest thou thus after my name, seeing it is hidden? |
|
8. Hebrew Bible, Isaiah, 54.6 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •song of songs, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Ashbrook Harvey et al., A Most Reliable Witness: Essays in Honor of Ross Shepard Kraemer (2015) 235| 54.6. כִּי־כְאִשָּׁה עֲזוּבָה וַעֲצוּבַת רוּחַ קְרָאָךְ יְהוָה וְאֵשֶׁת נְעוּרִים כִּי תִמָּאֵס אָמַר אֱלֹהָיִךְ׃ | 54.6. For the LORD hath called thee As a wife forsaken and grieved in spirit; And a wife of youth, can she be rejected? Saith thy God. |
|
| 9. Hebrew Bible, 1 Chronicles, 1.14 (5th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •2 chronicles, genealogies, allegorical rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Carleton Paget and Schaper, The New Cambridge History of the Bible (2013) 207 |
10. Xenophon, The Persian Expedition, 3.1.11-3.1.14, 4.3.8-4.3.20 (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •rabbinic, dreams and dream interpretation Found in books: Moxon, Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective (2017) 138| 3.1.11. ἐπεὶ δὲ ἀπορία ἦν, ἐλυπεῖτο μὲν σὺν τοῖς ἄλλοις καὶ οὐκ ἐδύνατο καθεύδειν· μικρὸν δʼ ὕπνου λαχὼν εἶδεν ὄναρ. ἔδοξεν αὐτῷ βροντῆς γενομένης σκηπτὸς πεσεῖν εἰς τὴν πατρῴαν οἰκίαν, καὶ ἐκ τούτου λάμπεσθαι πᾶσα. 3.1.12. περίφοβος δʼ εὐθὺς ἀνηγέρθη, καὶ τὸ ὄναρ τῇ μὲν ἔκρινεν ἀγαθόν, ὅτι ἐν πόνοις ὢν καὶ κινδύνοις φῶς μέγα ἐκ Διὸς ἰδεῖν ἔδοξε· τῇ δὲ καὶ ἐφοβεῖτο, ὅτι ἀπὸ Διὸς μὲν βασιλέως τὸ ὄναρ ἐδόκει αὐτῷ εἶναι, κύκλῳ δὲ ἐδόκει λάμπεσθαι τὸ πῦρ, μὴ οὐ δύναιτο ἐκ τῆς χώρας ἐξελθεῖν τῆς βασιλέως, ἀλλʼ εἴργοιτο πάντοθεν ὑπό τινων ἀποριῶν. 3.1.13. ὁποῖόν τι μὲν δὴ ἐστὶ τὸ τοιοῦτον ὄναρ ἰδεῖν ἔξεστι σκοπεῖν ἐκ τῶν συμβάντων μετὰ τὸ ὄναρ. γίγνεται γὰρ τάδε. εὐθὺς ἐπειδὴ ἀνηγέρθη πρῶτον μὲν ἔννοια αὐτῷ ἐμπίπτει· τί κατάκειμαι; ἡ δὲ νὺξ προβαίνει· ἅμα δὲ τῇ ἡμέρᾳ εἰκὸς τοὺς πολεμίους ἥξειν. εἰ δὲ γενησόμεθα ἐπὶ βασιλεῖ, τί ἐμποδὼν μὴ οὐχὶ πάντα μὲν τὰ χαλεπώτατα ἐπιδόντας, πάντα δὲ τὰ δεινότατα παθόντας ὑβριζομένους ἀποθανεῖν; 3.1.14. ὅπως δʼ ἀμυνούμεθα οὐδεὶς παρασκευάζεται οὐδὲ ἐπιμελεῖται, ἀλλὰ κατακείμεθα ὥσπερ ἐξὸν ἡσυχίαν ἄγειν. ἐγὼ οὖν τὸν ἐκ ποίας πόλεως στρατηγὸν προσδοκῶ ταῦτα πράξειν; ποίαν δʼ ἡλικίαν ἐμαυτῷ ἐλθεῖν ἀναμείνω; οὐ γὰρ ἔγωγʼ ἔτι πρεσβύτερος ἔσομαι, ἐὰν τήμερον προδῶ ἐμαυτὸν τοῖς πολεμίοις. 4.3.8. ταύτην μὲν οὖν τὴν ἡμέραν καὶ νύκτα ἔμειναν ἐν πολλῇ ἀπορίᾳ ὄντες. Ξενοφῶν δὲ ὄναρ εἶδεν· ἔδοξεν ἐν πέδαις δεδέσθαι, αὗται δὲ αὐτῷ αὐτόμαται περιρρυῆναι, ὥστε λυθῆναι καὶ διαβαίνειν ὁπόσον ἐβούλετο. ἐπεὶ δὲ ὄρθρος ἦν, ἔρχεται πρὸς τὸν Χειρίσοφον καὶ λέγει ὅτι ἐλπίδας ἔχει καλῶς ἔσεσθαι, καὶ διηγεῖται αὐτῷ τὸ ὄναρ. 4.3.9. ὁ δὲ ἥδετό τε καὶ ὡς τάχιστα ἕως ὑπέφαινεν ἐθύοντο πάντες παρόντες οἱ στρατηγοί· καὶ τὰ ἱερὰ καλὰ ἦν εὐθὺς ἐπὶ τοῦ πρώτου. καὶ ἀπιόντες ἀπὸ τῶν ἱερῶν οἱ στρατηγοὶ καὶ λοχαγοὶ παρήγγελλον τῇ στρατιᾷ ἀριστοποιεῖσθαι. 4.3.10. καὶ ἀριστῶντι τῷ Ξενοφῶντι προσέτρεχον δύο νεανίσκω· ᾔδεσαν γὰρ πάντες ὅτι ἐξείη αὐτῷ καὶ ἀριστῶντι καὶ δειπνοῦντι προσελθεῖν καὶ εἰ καθεύδοι ἐπεγείραντα εἰπεῖν, εἴ τίς τι ἔχοι τῶν πρὸς τὸν πόλεμον. 4.3.11. καὶ τότε ἔλεγον ὅτι τυγχάνοιεν φρύγανα συλλέγοντες ὡς ἐπὶ πῦρ, κἄπειτα κατίδοιεν ἐν τῷ πέραν ἐν πέτραις καθηκούσαις ἐπʼ αὐτὸν τὸν ποταμὸν γέροντά τε καὶ γυναῖκα καὶ παιδίσκας ὥσπερ μαρσίπους ἱματίων κατατιθεμένους ἐν πέτρᾳ ἀντρώδει. 4.3.12. ἰδοῦσι δὲ σφίσι δόξαι ἀσφαλὲς εἶναι διαβῆναι· οὐδὲ γὰρ τοῖς πολεμίοις ἱππεῦσι προσβατὸν εἶναι κατὰ τοῦτο. ἐκδύντες δʼ ἔφασαν ἔχοντες τὰ ἐγχειρίδια γυμνοὶ ὡς νευσόμενοι διαβαίνειν· πορευόμενοι δὲ πρόσθεν διαβῆναι πρὶν βρέξαι τὰ αἰδοῖα· 4.3.13. καὶ διαβάντες, λαβόντες τὰ ἱμάτια πάλιν ἥκειν. εὐθὺς οὖν Ξενοφῶν αὐτός τε ἔσπενδε καὶ τοῖς νεανίσκοις ἐγχεῖν ἐκέλευε καὶ εὔχεσθαι τοῖς φήνασι θεοῖς τά τε ὀνείρατα καὶ τὸν πόρον καὶ τὰ λοιπὰ ἀγαθὰ ἐπιτελέσαι. σπείσας δʼ εὐθὺς ἦγε τοὺς νεανίσκους παρὰ τὸν Χειρίσοφον, καὶ διηγοῦνται ταὐτά. 4.3.17. πορευομένων δʼ αὐτῶν ἀντιπαρῇσαν αἱ τάξεις τῶν ἱππέων. ἐπειδὴ δὲ ἦσαν κατὰ τὴν διάβασιν καὶ τὰς ὄχθας τοῦ ποταμοῦ, ἔθεντο τὰ ὅπλα, καὶ αὐτὸς πρῶτος Χειρίσοφος στεφανωσάμενος καὶ ἀποδὺς ἐλάμβανε τὰ ὅπλα καὶ τοῖς ἄλλοις πᾶσι παρήγγελλε, καὶ τοὺς λοχαγοὺς ἐκέλευεν ἄγειν τοὺς λόχους ὀρθίους, τοὺς μὲν ἐν ἀριστερᾷ τοὺς δʼ ἐν δεξιᾷ ἑαυτοῦ. καὶ οἱ μὲν μάντεις ἐσφαγιάζοντο εἰς τὸν ποταμόν· | 3.1.11. Now when the time of perplexity came, he was distressed as well as everybody else and was unable to sleep; but, getting at length a little sleep, he had a dream. It seemed to him that there was a clap of thunder and a bolt fell on his father's house, setting the whole house ablaze. 12 He awoke at once in great fear, and judged the dream in one way an auspicious one, because in the midst of hardships and perils he had seemed to behold a great light from Zeus; but looking at it in another way he was fearful, since the dream came, as he thought, from Zeus the King and the fire appeared to blaze all about, lest he might not be able to escape out of the King's country, but might be shut in on all sides by various difficulties. 13 Now what it really means to have such a dream one may learn from the events which followed the dream-and they were these: Firstly, on the moment of his awakening the thought occurred to him: 'Why do I lie here? The night is wearing on, and at daybreak it is likely that the enemy will be upon us. And if we fall into the King's hands, what is there to prevent our living to behold all the most grievous sights and to experience all the most dreadful sufferings, and then being put to death with insult? 14 As for defending ourselves, however, no one is making preparations or taking thought for that, but we lie here just as if it were possible for us to enjoy our ease. What about myself, then? From what state am I expecting the general to come who is to perform these duties? And what age must I myself wait to attain? For surely I shall never be any older, if this day I give myself up to the enemy.' 3.1.11. Now when the time of perplexity came, he was distressed as well as everybody else and was unable to sleep; but, getting at length a little sleep, he had a dream. It seemed to him that there was a clap of thunder and a bolt fell on his father’s house, setting the whole house ablaze. 3.1.12. He awoke at once in great fear, and judged the dream in one way an auspicious one, because in the midst of hardships and perils he had seemed to behold a great light from Zeus; but looking at it in another way he was fearful, since the dream came, as he thought, from Zeus the King and the fire appeared to blaze all about, lest he might not be able to escape out of the King’s country, King Zeus in the dream is the Persian King in the interpretation. but might be shut in on all sides by various difficulties. 3.1.13. Now what it really means to have such a dream one may learn from the events which followed the dream—and they were these: Firstly, on the moment of his awakening the thought occurred to him: Why do I lie here? The night is wearing on, and at daybreak it is likely that the enemy will be upon us. And if we fall into the King’s hands, what is there to prevent our living to behold all the most grievous sights and to experience all the most dreadful sufferings, and then being put to death with insult? 3.1.14. As for defending ourselves, however, no one is making preparations or taking thought for that, but we lie here just as if it were possible for us to enjoy our ease. What about myself, then? From what state am I expecting the general to come who is to perform these duties? And what age must I myself wait to attain? For surely I shall never be any older, if this day I give myself up to the enemy. 4.3.8. That day and night, accordingly, they remained there, in great perplexity. But Xenophon had a dream; he thought that he was bound in fetters, but that the fetters fell off from him of their own accord, so that he was released and could take as long steps as he pleased. When dawn came, he went to Cheirisophus, told him he had hopes that all would be well, and related to him his dream. 9 Cheirisophus was pleased, and as soon as day began to break, all the generals were at hand and proceeded to offer sacrifices. And with the very first victim the omens were favourable. Then the generals and captains withdrew from the sacrifice and gave orders to the troops to get their breakfasts. 4.3.8. That day and night, accordingly, they remained there, in great perplexity. But Xenophon had a dream; he thought that he was bound in fetters, but that the fetters fell off from him of their own accord, so that he was released and could take as long steps διαβαίνειν, which also means to cross a river (see above). Here lay the good omen of the dream. as he pleased. When dawn came, he went to Cheirisophus, told him he had hopes that all would be well, and related to him his dream. 4.3.9. Cheirisophus was pleased, and as soon as day began to break, all the generals were at hand and proceeded to offer sacrifices. And with the very first victim the omens were favourable. Then the generals and captains withdrew from the sacrifice and gave orders to the troops to get their breakfasts. 4.3.10. While Xenophon was breakfasting, two young men came running up to him; for all knew that they might go to him whether he was breakfasting or dining, and that if he were asleep, they might awaken him and tell him whatever they might have to tell that concerned the war. 11 In the present case the young men reported that they had happened to be gathering dry sticks for the purpose of making a fire, and that while so occupied they had descried across the river, among some rocks that reached down to the very edge of the river, an old man and a woman and some little girls putting away what looked like bags of clothes in a cavernous rock. 12 When they saw this proceeding, they said, they made up their minds that it was safe for them to cross, for this was a place that was not accessible to the enemy's cavalry. They accordingly stripped, keeping only their daggers, and started across naked, supposing that they would have to swim; but they went on and got across without wetting themselves up to the middle; once on the other side, they took the clothes and came back again. 4.3.10. While Xenophon was breakfasting, two young men came running up to him; for all knew that they might go to him whether he was breakfasting or dining, and that if he were asleep, they might awaken him and tell him whatever they might have to tell that concerned the war. 4.3.11. In the present case the young men reported that they had happened to be gathering dry sticks for the purpose of making a fire, and that while so occupied they had descried across the river, among some rocks that reached down to the very edge of the river, an old man and a woman and some little girls putting away what looked like bags of clothes in a cavernous rock. 4.3.12. When they saw this proceeding, they said, they made up their minds that it was safe for them to cross, for this was a place that was not accesible to the enemy’s cavalry. They accordingly stripped, keeping only their daggers, and started across naked, supposing that they would have to swim; but they went on and got across without wetting themselves up to the middle; once on the other side, they took the clothes and came back again. 4.3.13. Upon hearing this report Xenophon immediately proceeded to pour a libation himself, and directed his attendants to fill a cup for the young men and to pray to the gods who had revealed the dream and the ford, to bring to fulfilment the other blessings also. The libation accomplished, he at once led the young men to Cheirisophus, and they repeated their story to him. 14 And upon hearing it Cheirisophus also made libation. Thereafter they gave orders to the troops to pack up their baggage, while they themselves called together the generals and took counsel as to how they might best effect a crossing so as to defeat the enemy in front without suffering any harm from those in their rear. 15 The decision was, that Cheirisophus should take the lead with half the army and attempt a crossing, that the other half with Xenophon should stay behind for a while, and that the baggage animals and camp followers should cross between the two divisions. 4.3.13. Upon hearing this report Xenopohon immediately proceeded to pour a libation himself, and directed his attendants to fill a cup for the young men and to pray to the gods who had revealed the dream and the ford, to bring to fulfilment the other blessings also. Especially a safe crossing and a safe return to Greece . The libation accomplished, he at once led the young men to Cheirisophus, and they repeated their story to him. 4.3.17. As they proceeded, the squadrons of the enemy’s cavalry kept along opposite to them. When they reached the ford, they halted under arms, and Cheirisophus put a wreath upon his head, As the Spartans were accustomed to do when going into battle. cp. Xen. Anab. 1.4.2-3 . threw off his cloak, and took up his arms, giving orders to all the others to do the same; he also directed the captains to lead their companies in column, part of them upon his left and the rest upon his right. Meanwhile the soothsayers were offering sacrifice to the river, |
|
11. Xenophon, The Education of Cyrus, 8.7.2 (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •rabbinic, dreams and dream interpretation Found in books: Moxon, Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective (2017) 138| 8.7.2. κοιμηθεὶς δʼ ἐν τῷ βασιλείῳ ὄναρ εἶδε τοιόνδε. ἔδοξεν αὐτῷ προσελθὼν κρείττων τις ἢ κατὰ ἄνθρωπον εἰπεῖν· συσκευάζου, ὦ Κῦρε· ἤδη γὰρ εἰς θεοὺς ἄπει. τοῦτο δὲ ἰδὼν τὸ ὄναρ ἐξηγέρθη καὶ σχεδὸν ἐδόκει εἰδέναι ὅτι τοῦ βίου ἡ τελευτὴ παρείη. | 8.7.2. As he slept in the palace, he saw a vision: a He is warned in a vision figure of more than human majesty appeared to him in a dream and said: Make ready, Literally Be packing up ; cf. Varro, de R.R. 1. 1: annus octogesimus admonet me ut sarcinas colligam antequam proficiscar e vita. Cyrus ; for thou shalt soon depart to the gods. When the vision was past, he awoke and seemed almost to know that the end of his life was at hand. |
|
12. Anon., Jubilees, 36.7 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 27 | 36.7. that He might multiply you and increase your seed as the stars of heaven in multitude, and establish you on the earth as the plant of righteousness which will not be rooted out unto all the generations for ever. |
|
| 13. Septuagint, Ecclesiasticus (Siracides), 43.5 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 26 |
14. Mishnah, Yadayim, 3.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •rabbinic exegesis, inner-biblical interpretation, continuity with Found in books: Carleton Paget and Schaper, The New Cambridge History of the Bible (2013) 194| 3.5. סֵפֶר שֶׁנִּמְחַק וְנִשְׁתַּיֵּר בּוֹ שְׁמוֹנִים וְחָמֵשׁ אוֹתִיּוֹת, כְּפָרָשַׁת וַיְהִי בִּנְסֹעַ הָאָרֹן, מְטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. מְגִלָּה שֶׁכָּתוּב בָּהּ שְׁמוֹנִים וְחָמֵשׁ אוֹתִיּוֹת כְּפָרָשַׁת וַיְהִי בִּנְסֹעַ הָאָרֹן, מְטַמָּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. כָּל כִּתְבֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ מְטַמְּאִין אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. שִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים וְקֹהֶלֶת מְטַמְּאִין אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, שִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים מְטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם, וְקֹהֶלֶת מַחֲלֹקֶת. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, קֹהֶלֶת אֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם וְשִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים מַחֲלֹקֶת. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, קֹהֶלֶת מִקֻּלֵּי בֵית שַׁמַּאי וּמֵחֻמְרֵי בֵית הִלֵּל. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן עַזַּאי, מְקֻבָּל אֲנִי מִפִּי שִׁבְעִים וּשְׁנַיִם זָקֵן, בַּיּוֹם שֶׁהוֹשִׁיבוּ אֶת רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה בַּיְשִׁיבָה, שֶׁשִּׁיר הַשִּׁירִים וְקֹהֶלֶת מְטַמְּאִים אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, חַס וְשָׁלוֹם, לֹא נֶחֱלַק אָדָם מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל עַל שִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים שֶׁלֹּא תְטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם, שֶׁאֵין כָּל הָעוֹלָם כֻּלּוֹ כְדַאי כַּיּוֹם שֶׁנִּתַּן בּוֹ שִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, שֶׁכָּל הַכְּתוּבִים קֹדֶשׁ, וְשִׁיר הַשִּׁירִים קֹדֶשׁ קָדָשִׁים. וְאִם נֶחְלְקוּ, לֹא נֶחְלְקוּ אֶלָּא עַל קֹהֶלֶת. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן חָמִיו שֶׁל רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, כְּדִבְרֵי בֶן עַזַּאי, כָּךְ נֶחְלְקוּ וְכָךְ גָּמְרוּ: | 3.5. A scroll on which the writing has become erased and eighty-five letters remain, as many as are in the section beginning, \"And it came to pass when the ark set forward\" (Numbers 11:35-36) defiles the hands. A single sheet on which there are written eighty-five letters, as many as are in the section beginning, \"And it came to pass when the ark set forward\", defiles the hands. All the Holy Scriptures defile the hands. The Song of Songs and Kohelet (Ecclesiastes) defile the hands. Rabbi Judah says: the Song of Songs defiles the hands, but there is a dispute about Kohelet. Rabbi Yose says: Kohelet does not defile the hands, but there is a dispute about the Song of Songs. Rabbi Shimon says: [the ruling about] Kohelet is one of the leniencies of Bet Shammai and one of the stringencies of Bet Hillel. Rabbi Shimon ben Azzai said: I have received a tradition from the seventy-two elders on the day when they appointed Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah head of the academy that the Song of Songs and Kohelet defile the hands. Rabbi Akiba said: Far be it! No man in Israel disputed that the Song of Songs [saying] that it does not defile the hands. For the whole world is not as worthy as the day on which the Song of Songs was given to Israel; for all the writings are holy but the Song of Songs is the holy of holies. If they had a dispute, they had a dispute only about Kohelet. Rabbi Yoha ben Joshua the son of the father-in-law of Rabbi Akiva said in accordance with the words of Ben Azzai: so they disputed and so they reached a decision. |
|
15. Mishnah, Sanhedrin, 7.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 27| 7.5. הַמְגַדֵּף אֵינוֹ חַיָּב עַד שֶׁיְּפָרֵשׁ הַשֵּׁם. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן קָרְחָה, בְּכָל יוֹם דָּנִין אֶת הָעֵדִים בְּכִנּוּי יַכֶּה יוֹסֵי אֶת יוֹסֵי. נִגְמַר הַדִּין, לֹא הוֹרְגִים בְּכִנּוּי, אֶלָּא מוֹצִיאִים כָּל אָדָם לַחוּץ וְשׁוֹאֲלִים אֶת הַגָּדוֹל שֶׁבָּהֶן וְאוֹמְרִים לוֹ אֱמֹר מַה שֶּׁשָּׁמַעְתָּ בְּפֵרוּשׁ, וְהוּא אוֹמֵר, וְהַדַּיָּנִים עוֹמְדִין עַל רַגְלֵיהֶן וְקוֹרְעִין וְלֹא מְאַחִין. וְהַשֵּׁנִי אוֹמֵר אַף אֲנִי כָּמוֹהוּ, וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁי אוֹמֵר אַף אֲנִי כָּמוֹהוּ: | 7.5. The blasphemer is punished only if he utters [the divine] name. Rabbi Joshua b. Korcha said: “The whole day [of the trial] the witnesses are examined by means of a substitute for the divine name:, ‘may Yose smite Yose.” When the trial was finished, the accused was not executed on this evidence, but all persons were removed [from court], and the chief witness was told, ‘State literally what you heard.’ Thereupon he did so, [using the divine name]. The judges then arose and tore their garments, which were not to be resewn. The second witness stated: “I too have heard thus” [but not uttering the divine name], and the third says: “I too heard thus.” |
|
| 16. Mishnah, Eruvin, 10.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •banim, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Alexander, Gender and Timebound Commandments in Judaism (2013) 96 |
| 17. Palestinian Talmud, Maaser Sheni, 55b, 55c, 55a (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Moxon, Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective (2017) 138 |
| 18. Palestinian Talmud, Eruvin, 26a (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •banim, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Alexander, Gender and Timebound Commandments in Judaism (2013) 96 |
| 19. Palestinian Talmud, Berachot, 6b (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •banim, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Alexander, Gender and Timebound Commandments in Judaism (2013) 108 |
| 20. Palestinian Talmud, Yoma, 3.7 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 28 |
| 21. Anon., Mekhilta Derabbi Yishmael, pischa 1.60-62 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •women, biblical, conflicting rabbinic interpretations of Found in books: Ashbrook Harvey et al., A Most Reliable Witness: Essays in Honor of Ross Shepard Kraemer (2015) 231 |
22. Anon., Odes of Solomon, 4.7-4.8 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 27 | 4.8. And Your hosts possess it, and the elect archangels are clothed with it. |
|
| 23. Anon., Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, ex. 28.30 (2nd cent. CE - 7th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 27 |
| 24. Palestinian Talmud, Sanhedrin, 10.2 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 27 |
| 25. Clement of Alexandria, Miscellanies, 1.23 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 26 |
26. Pausanias, Description of Greece, 1.30.3 (2nd cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •rabbinic, dreams and dream interpretation Found in books: Moxon, Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective (2017) 138| 1.30.3. Ἀκαδημίας δὲ οὐ πόρρω Πλάτωνος μνῆμά ἐστιν, ᾧ προεσήμαινεν ὁ θεὸς ἄριστον τὰ ἐς φιλοσοφίαν ἔσεσθαι· προεσήμαινε δὲ οὕτω. Σωκράτης τῇ προτέρᾳ νυκτὶ ἢ Πλάτων ἔμελλεν ἔσεσθαί οἱ μαθητὴς ἐσπτῆναί οἱ κύκνον ἐς τὸν κόλπον εἶδεν ὄνειρον· ἔστι δὲ κύκνῳ τῷ ὄρνιθι μουσικῆς δόξα, ὅτι Λιγύων τῶν Ἠριδανοῦ πέραν ὑπὲρ γῆς τῆς Κελτικῆς Κύκνον ἄνδρα μουσικὸν γενέσθαι βασιλέα φασί, τελευτήσαντα δὲ Ἀπόλλωνος γνώμῃ μεταβαλεῖν λέγουσιν αὐτὸν ἐς τὸν ὄρνιθα. ἐγὼ δὲ βασιλεῦσαι μὲν πείθομαι Λίγυσιν ἄνδρα μουσικόν, γενέσθαι δέ μοι ἄπιστον ὄρνιθα ἀπʼ ἀνδρός. | 1.30.3. Not far from the Academy is the monument of Plato, to whom heaven foretold that he would be the prince of philosophers. The manner of the foretelling was this. On the night before Plato was to become his pupil Socrates in a dream saw a swan fly into his bosom. Now the swan is a bird with a reputation for music, because, they say, a musician of the name of Swan became king of the Ligyes on the other side of the Eridanus beyond the Celtic territory, and after his death by the will of Apollo he was changed into the bird. I am ready to believe that a musician became king of the Ligyes, but I cannot believe that a bird grew out of a man. |
|
27. Anon., Genesis Rabba, 1.10, 18.2, 74.22 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of •women, biblical, conflicting rabbinic interpretations of •rabbinic, interpretation Found in books: Ashbrook Harvey et al., A Most Reliable Witness: Essays in Honor of Ross Shepard Kraemer (2015) 231; Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 28; Niehoff, Jewish Exegesis and Homeric Scholarship in Alexandria (2011) 57| 18.2. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ דְּסִכְנִין בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי לֵוִי אָמַר <>(בראשית ב, כב)<>: וַיִּבֶן כְּתִיב, הִתְבּוֹנֵן מֵאַיִן לִבְרֹאתָהּ, אָמַר לֹא אֶבְרָא אוֹתָהּ מִן הָרֹאשׁ שֶׁלֹא תְּהֵא מְיַקֶּרֶת ראשָׁהּ, לֹא מִן הָעַיִן שֶׁלֹא תְּהֵא סַקְרָנִית, וְלֹא מִן הָאֹזֶן שֶׁלֹא תְּהֵא צַיְתָנִית, וְלֹא מִן הַפֶּה שֶׁלֹא תְּהֵא דַּבְּרָנִית, וְלֹא מִן הַלֵּב שֶׁלֹא תְּהֵא קַנְתָּנִית, וְלֹא מִן הַיָּד שֶׁלֹא תְּהֵא מְמַשְׁמְשָׁנִית, וְלֹא מִן הָרֶגֶל שֶׁלֹא תְּהֵא פַּרְסָנִית, אֶלָּא מִמָּקוֹם שֶׁהוּא צָנוּעַ בָּאָדָם, אֲפִלּוּ בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁאָדָם עוֹמֵד עָרוֹם אוֹתוֹ הַמָּקוֹם מְכֻסֶּה, וְעַל כָּל אֵבָר וְאֵבָר שֶׁהָיָה בוֹרֵא בָהּ הָיָה אוֹמֵר לָהּ תְּהֵא אִשָּׁה צְנוּעָה אִשָּׁה צְנוּעָה, אַף עַל פִּי כֵן <>(משלי א, כה)<>: וַתִּפְרְעוּ כָל עֲצָתִי, לֹא בָרָאתִי אוֹתָהּ מִן הָרֹאשׁ, וַהֲרֵי הִיא מְיַקֶּרֶת רֹאשָׁהּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר <>(ישעיה יג, טז)<>: וַתֵּלַכְנָה נְטוּיוֹת גָּרוֹן, וְלֹא מִן הָעַיִן, וַהֲרֵי הִיא סַקְרָנִית, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר <>(ישעיה יג, טז)<>: וּמְסַקְּרוֹת עֵינַיִם, וְלֹא מִן הָאֹזֶן, וַהֲרֵי הִיא צַיְתָנִית, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר <>(בראשית יח, י)<>: וְשָׂרָה שׁוֹמַעַת פֶּתַח הָאֹהֶל, וְלֹא מִן הַלֵּב, וַהֲרֵי הִיא קַנְתָּנִית, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר <>(בראשית ל, א)<>: וַתְּקַנֵּא רָחֵל בַּאֲחוֹתָהּ, וְלֹא מִן הַיָּד, וַהֲרֵי הִיא מְמַשְׁמְשָׁנִית, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר <>(בראשית לא, יט)<>: וַתִּגְנֹב רָחֵל אֶת הַתְּרָפִים, וְלֹא מִן הָרֶגֶל, וַהֲרֵי הִיא פַּרְסָנִית, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר <>(בראשית לד, א)<>: וַתֵּצֵא דִּינָה. 18.2. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ דְּסִכְנִין בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי לֵוִי אָמַר (בראשית ב, כב): וַיִּבֶן כְּתִיב, הִתְבּוֹנֵן מֵאַיִן לִבְרֹאתָהּ, אָמַר לֹא אֶבְרָא אוֹתָהּ מִן הָרֹאשׁ שֶׁלֹא תְּהֵא מְיַקֶּרֶת ראשָׁהּ, לֹא מִן הָעַיִן שֶׁלֹא תְּהֵא סַקְרָנִית, וְלֹא מִן הָאֹזֶן שֶׁלֹא תְּהֵא צַיְתָנִית, וְלֹא מִן הַפֶּה שֶׁלֹא תְּהֵא דַּבְּרָנִית, וְלֹא מִן הַלֵּב שֶׁלֹא תְּהֵא קַנְתָּנִית, וְלֹא מִן הַיָּד שֶׁלֹא תְּהֵא מְמַשְׁמְשָׁנִית, וְלֹא מִן הָרֶגֶל שֶׁלֹא תְּהֵא פַּרְסָנִית, אֶלָּא מִמָּקוֹם שֶׁהוּא צָנוּעַ בָּאָדָם, אֲפִלּוּ בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁאָדָם עוֹמֵד עָרוֹם אוֹתוֹ הַמָּקוֹם מְכֻסֶּה, וְעַל כָּל אֵבָר וְאֵבָר שֶׁהָיָה בוֹרֵא בָהּ הָיָה אוֹמֵר לָהּ תְּהֵא אִשָּׁה צְנוּעָה אִשָּׁה צְנוּעָה, אַף עַל פִּי כֵן (משלי א, כה): וַתִּפְרְעוּ כָל עֲצָתִי, לֹא בָרָאתִי אוֹתָהּ מִן הָרֹאשׁ, וַהֲרֵי הִיא מְיַקֶּרֶת רֹאשָׁהּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ישעיה יג, טז): וַתֵּלַכְנָה נְטוּיוֹת גָּרוֹן, וְלֹא מִן הָעַיִן, וַהֲרֵי הִיא סַקְרָנִית, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ישעיה יג, טז): וּמְסַקְּרוֹת עֵינַיִם, וְלֹא מִן הָאֹזֶן, וַהֲרֵי הִיא צַיְתָנִית, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית יח, י): וְשָׂרָה שׁוֹמַעַת פֶּתַח הָאֹהֶל, וְלֹא מִן הַלֵּב, וַהֲרֵי הִיא קַנְתָּנִית, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית ל, א): וַתְּקַנֵּא רָחֵל בַּאֲחוֹתָהּ, וְלֹא מִן הַיָּד, וַהֲרֵי הִיא מְמַשְׁמְשָׁנִית, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית לא, יט): וַתִּגְנֹב רָחֵל אֶת הַתְּרָפִים, וְלֹא מִן הָרֶגֶל, וַהֲרֵי הִיא פַּרְסָנִית, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית לד, א): וַתֵּצֵא דִּינָה. | 1.10. "Rabbi Yonah said in the name of Rabbi Levi: Why was the world created with a \"bet\"? Just as a bet is closed on all sides and open in the front, so you are not permitted to say, \"What is beneath? What is above? What came before? What will come after?\" Rather from the day the world was created and after. Bar Kappara said: \"You have but to inquire about bygone ages that came before you [ever since God created humanity on earth]\" (Deuteronomy 4:32). From the moment God created them you may speculate, however you may not speculate on what was before that. [\"From one end of Heaven to the other\"] on this you may speculate and investigate, but you may not speculate and investigate 0n what was before. Rabbi Yehudah ben Pazzi explained the Creation story according to Bar Kappara: Why was the world created with a \"bet\"? To teach you there are two worlds: this world and the world-to-come. Another interpretation: Why with a \"bet\"? Because it is an expression of \"blessing.\" And why not with an \"aleph\"? Because it is an expression of \"cursing.\" Another interpretation: Why not with an \"aleph\"? So as not to give an argument to the heretics, who would say 'how could the world endure since it was created with an expression of curse?' Rather, the Holy One of Blessing said: 'behold I create it with an expression of blessing, and hopefully it will endure.' Another interpretation: Why with a \"bet\"? The bet has two points, one on its top and one behind it, they say to the \"bet\": 'who created you?' and he points with his point on top, and says: 'the One Above created me'. 'And what is His name?' and he shows with his point of behind, and says 'Hashem is His name.' Said Rabbi Eleazar Bar Chanina in the name of Rabbi Acha: for 26 generations the \"aleph\" screamed 'injustice!' in front of the throne of the Holy One of Blessing, saying to Him: 'Master of the Universe! I am the first of the letters and You did not create the world with me!' The Holy One of Blessing said to her [the aleph]: the world and all what it contains were only created due to the merit of Torah, as it is written: \"Ad-nai set the earth with wisdom [with understanding He established the heaven]\" (Mishlei/Prov 3:19). Tomorrow I come to give Torah at Sinai and I am going to open at first instance only with you, as it says Anochi 'I am Ad-nai your God' (Exodus/Shemot 20:2). Rabbi Hoshaya says: Why is its name \"aleph\"? Because he agrees from the outset [aleph], as it says \" the word which He commanded to a thousand [eleph] generations.\"", 18.2. "Rabbi Yehoshua of Sichnin said in the name of Rabbi Levi: \"And He built\" is written; He contemplated from where to create her. He said: I will not create her from the head, lest she be haughty; I will not create her from the eye, lest she be coquettish; I will not create her from the ear, lest she be an eavesdropper; I will not create her from the mouth, lest she be a chatter-box; I will not create her from the heart, lest she be jealous; I will not create her from the hand, lest she be a thief; I will not create her from the leg, lest she be a run-about; rather, I will create create her from the most modest place on a person, as even when a person stands naked this place is covered. And as He created each and every limb of the woman, He would say to her: be a modest woman, be a modest woman! Nevertheless, \"And they have disregarded all of my counsel\" (Proverbs 1:25). I did not create her from the head, and yet she is haughty, as it says: \"And they walk with stretched-forth necks\" (Isaiah 3:16). And not from the eye, yet she is coquettish, as it says: \"and with wanton eyes\" (ibid.). And not from the ear, and yet she is an eavesdropper, as it says: \"And Sarah listened from the entrance of the tent\" (Genesis 18:10). And not from the heart, and yet she is jealous, as it says: \"And Rachel was jealous of her sister\" (Genesis 30:1). And not from the hand, and yet she is a thief, as it says: \"And Rachel stole the idols\" (Genesis 31:19). And not from the leg, and yet she is a run-about, as it says: \"And Dinah went out...\" (Genesis 34:1).", |
|
28. Babylonian Talmud, Menachot, 29b (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 28 | 29b. had the leg of the letter heh in the term: “The nation [ha’am]” (Exodus 13:3), written in his phylacteries, severed by a perforation. He came before his son-in-law Rabbi Abba to clarify the halakha. Rabbi Abba said to him: If there remains in the leg that is attached to the roof of the letter the equivalent of the measure of a small letter, i.e., the letter yod, it is fit. But if not, it is unfit.,The Gemara relates: Rami bar Tamrei, who was the father-in-law of Rami bar Dikkulei, had the leg of the letter vav in the term: “And the Lord slew [vayaharog] all the firstborn” (Exodus 13:15), written in his phylacteries, severed by a perforation. He came before Rabbi Zeira to clarify the halakha. Rabbi Zeira said to him: Go bring a child who is neither wise nor stupid, but of average intelligence; if he reads the term as “And the Lord slew [vayaharog]” then it is fit, as despite the perforation the letter is still seen as a vav. But if not, then it is as though the term were: Will be slain [yehareg], written without the letter vav, and it is unfit.,§ Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: When Moses ascended on High, he found the Holy One, Blessed be He, sitting and tying crowns on the letters of the Torah. Moses said before God: Master of the Universe, who is preventing You from giving the Torah without these additions? God said to him: There is a man who is destined to be born after several generations, and Akiva ben Yosef is his name; he is destined to derive from each and every thorn of these crowns mounds upon mounds of halakhot. It is for his sake that the crowns must be added to the letters of the Torah.,Moses said before God: Master of the Universe, show him to me. God said to him: Return behind you. Moses went and sat at the end of the eighth row in Rabbi Akiva’s study hall and did not understand what they were saying. Moses’ strength waned, as he thought his Torah knowledge was deficient. When Rabbi Akiva arrived at the discussion of one matter, his students said to him: My teacher, from where do you derive this? Rabbi Akiva said to them: It is a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai. When Moses heard this, his mind was put at ease, as this too was part of the Torah that he was to receive.,Moses returned and came before the Holy One, Blessed be He, and said before Him: Master of the Universe, You have a man as great as this and yet You still choose to give the Torah through me. Why? God said to him: Be silent; this intention arose before Me. Moses said before God: Master of the Universe, You have shown me Rabbi Akiva’s Torah, now show me his reward. God said to him: Return to where you were. Moses went back and saw that they were weighing Rabbi Akiva’s flesh in a butcher shop [bemakkulin], as Rabbi Akiva was tortured to death by the Romans. Moses said before Him: Master of the Universe, this is Torah and this is its reward? God said to him: Be silent; this intention arose before Me.,§ The Gemara continues its discussion of the crowns on letters of the Torah: Rava says: Seven letters require three crowns [ziyyunin], and they are the letters shin, ayin, tet, nun, zayin; gimmel and tzadi. Rav Ashi says: I have seen that the exacting scribes of the study hall of Rav would put a hump-like stroke on the roof of the letter ḥet and they would suspend the left leg of the letter heh, i.e., they would ensure that it is not joined to the roof of the letter.,Rava explains: They would put a hump-like stroke on the roof of the letter ḥet as if to thereby say: The Holy One, Blessed be He, lives [ḥai] in the heights of the universe. And they would suspend the left leg of the letter heh, as Rabbi Yehuda Nesia asked Rabbi Ami: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Trust in the Lord forever, for in the Lord [beYah] is God, an everlasting [olamim] Rock” (Isaiah 26:4)? Rabbi Ami said to him: Anyone who puts their trust in the Holy One, Blessed be He, will have Him as his refuge in this world and in the World-to-Come. This is alluded to in the word “olamim,” which can also mean: Worlds.,Rabbi Yehuda Nesia said to Rabbi Ami: I was not asking about the literal meaning of the verse; this is what poses a difficulty for me: What is different about that which is written: “For in the Lord [beYah],” and it is not written: For the Lord [Yah]?,Rav Ashi responded: It is as Rabbi Yehuda bar Rabbi Elai taught: The verse “For in the Lord [beYah] is God, an everlasting Rock [Tzur olamim]” is understood as follows: The term “Tzur olamim” can also mean Creator of worlds. These letters yod and heh that constitute the word yah are referring to the two worlds that the Holy One, Blessed be He, created; one with [be] the letter heh and one with [be] the letter yod. And I do not know whether the World-to-Come was created with the letter yod and this world was created with the letter heh, or whether this world was created with the letter yod and the World-to-Come was created with the letter heh.,When the verse states: “These are the generations of the heaven and of the earth when they were created [behibare’am]” (Genesis 2:4), do not read it as behibare’am, meaning: When they were created; rather, read it as beheh bera’am, meaning: He created them with the letter heh. This verse demonstrates that the heaven and the earth, i.e., this world, were created with the letter heh, and therefore the World-to-Come must have been created with the letter yod.,And for what reason was this world created specifically with the letter heh? It is because the letter heh, which is open on its bottom, has a similar appearance to a portico, which is open on one side. And it alludes to this world, where anyone who wishes to leave may leave, i.e., every person has the ability to choose to do evil. And what is the reason that the left leg of the letter heh is suspended, i.e., is not joined to the roof of the letter? It is because if one repents, he is brought back in through the opening at the top.,The Gemara asks: But why not let him enter through that same way that he left? The Gemara answers: That would not be effective, since one requires assistance from Heaven in order to repent, in accordance with the statement of Reish Lakish. As Reish Lakish says: What is the meaning of that which is written: “If it concerns the scorners, He scorns them, but to the humble He gives grace” (Proverbs 3:34)? Concerning one who comes in order to become pure, he is assisted from Heaven, as it is written: “But to the humble He gives grace.” Concerning one who comes to become impure, he is provided with an opening to do so. The Gemara asks: And what is the reason that the letter heh has a crown on its roof? The Gemara answers: The Holy One, Blessed be He, says: If a sinner returns, repenting for his sin, I tie a crown for him from above.,The Gemara asks: For what reason was the World-to-Come created specifically with the letter yod, the smallest letter in the Hebrew alphabet? The Gemara answers: It is because the righteous of the world are so few. And for what reason is the left side of the top of the letter yod bent downward? It is because the righteous who are in the World-to-Come hang their heads in shame, since the actions of one are not similar to those of another. In the World-to-Come some of the righteous will be shown to be of greater stature than others.,§ Rav Yosef says: Rav states these two matters with regard to scrolls, and in each case a statement is taught in a baraita that constitutes a refutation of his ruling. One is that which Rav says: A Torah scroll that contains two errors on each and every column may be corrected, but if there are three errors on each and every column then it shall be interred.,And a statement is taught in a baraita that constitutes a refutation of his ruling: A Torah scroll that contains three errors on every column may be corrected, but if there are four errors on every column then it shall be interred. A tanna taught in a baraita: If the Torah scroll contains one complete column with no errors, it saves the entire Torah scroll, and it is permitted to correct the scroll rather than interring it. Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Shmuel bar Marta says in the name of Rav: And this is the halakha only when the majority of the scroll is written properly and is not full of errors.,Abaye said to Rav Yosef: If that column contained three errors, what is the halakha? Rav Yosef said to him: Since the column itself may be corrected, it enables the correction of the entire scroll. The Gemara adds: And with regard to the halakha that a Torah scroll may not be fixed if it is full of errors, this statement applies when letters are missing and must be added in the space between the lines. But if there were extraneous letters, we have no problem with it, since they can easily be erased. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that a scroll with letters missing may not be corrected? Rav Kahana said: Because it would look speckled if one adds all of the missing letters in the spaces between the lines.,The Gemara relates: Agra, the father-in-law of Rabbi Abba, had many extraneous letters in his scroll. He came before Rabbi Abba to clarify the halakha. Rabbi Abba said to him: We said that one may not correct the scroll only in a case where the letters are missing. |
|
29. Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, 39b (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 28| 39b. חמצן עד יום מותו,אמר רבה בר (בר) שילא מאי קרא (תהלים עא, ד) אלהי פלטני מיד רשע מכף מעול וחומץ רבא אמר מהכא (ישעיהו א, יז) למדו היטב דרשו משפט אשרו חמוץ אשרו חמוץ ואל תאשרו חומץ,תנו רבנן אותה שנה שמת בה שמעון הצדיק אמר להם בשנה זו הוא מת אמרו לו מניין אתה יודע אמר להם בכל יום הכפורים היה מזדמן לי זקן אחד לבוש לבנים ועטוף לבנים נכנס עמי ויצא עמי והיום נזדמן לי זקן אחד לבוש שחורים ועטוף שחורים נכנס עמי ולא יצא עמי אחר הרגל חלה שבעה ימים ומת,ונמנעו אחיו הכהנים מלברך בשם,ת"ר ארבעים שנה קודם חורבן הבית לא היה גורל עולה בימין ולא היה לשון של זהורית מלבין ולא היה נר מערבי דולק,והיו דלתות ההיכל נפתחות מאליהן עד שגער בהן רבן יוחנן בן זכאי אמר לו היכל היכל מפני מה אתה מבעית עצמך יודע אני בך שסופך עתיד ליחרב וכבר נתנבא עליך זכריה בן עדוא (זכריה יא, א) פתח לבנון דלתיך ותאכל אש בארזיך,אמר רבי יצחק בן טבלאי למה נקרא שמו לבנון שמלבין עונותיהן של ישראל,אמר רב זוטרא בר טוביה למה נקרא שמו יער דכתיב (מלכים א י, יז) בית יער הלבנון לומר לך מה יער מלבלב אף בית המקדש מלבלב דאמר רב הושעיא בשעה שבנה שלמה בית המקדש נטע בו כל מיני מגדים של זהב והיו מוציאין פירות בזמניהן וכיון שהרוח מנשבת בהן היו נושרין פירותיהן שנאמר (תהלים עב, טז) ירעש כלבנון פריו ומהן היתה פרנסה לכהונה,וכיון שנכנסו עובדי כוכבים להיכל יבשו שנאמר (נחום א, ד) ופרח לבנון אומלל ועתיד הקב"ה להחזירה לנו שנאמר (ישעיהו לה, ב) פרוח תפרח ותגל אף גילת ורנן כבוד הלבנון נתן לה,נתנן על שני השעירים תנו רבנן עשר פעמים מזכיר כהן גדול את השם בו ביום ג' בוידוי ראשון ושלשה בוידוי שני ושלשה בשעיר המשתלח ואחד בגורלות,וכבר אמר השם ונשמע קולו ביריחו אמר רבה בר בר חנה מירושלים ליריחו עשרה פרסאות,וציר דלתות ההיכל נשמע בשמונה תחומי שבת עזים שביריחו היו מתעטשות מריח הקטורת נשים שביריחו אינן צריכות להתבשם מריח קטורת כלה שבירושלים אינה צריכה להתקשט מריח קטורת,אמר רבי (יוסי בן דולגאי) עזים היו לאבא בהרי (מכמר) והיו מתעטשות מריח הקטורת אמר רבי חייא בר אבין אמר רבי יהושע בן קרחה סח לי זקן אחד פעם אחת הלכתי לשילה והרחתי ריח קטורת מבין כותליה,אמר ר' ינאי עליית גורל מתוך קלפי מעכבת הנחה אינה מעכבת ורבי יוחנן אמר אף עלייה אינה מעכבת,אליבא דרבי יהודה דאמר דברים הנעשין בבגדי לבן מבחוץ לא מעכבא כולי עלמא לא פליגי דלא מעכבא כי פליגי אליבא דר' נחמיה מ"ד מעכבא כר' נחמיה ומאן דאמר לא מעכבא הני מילי עבודה הגרלה לאו עבודה היא,איכא דאמרי,אליבא דרבי נחמיה דאמר מעכבא כולי עלמא לא פליגי דמעכבא,כי פליגי אליבא דר' יהודה מאן דאמר לא מעכבא כרבי יהודה ומאן דאמר מעכבא שאני הכא דתנא ביה קרא אשר עלה אשר עלה תרי זימני,מיתיבי מצוה להגריל ואם לא הגריל כשר,בשלמא להך לישנא דאמרת אליבא דרבי יהודה כולי עלמא לא פליגי דלא מעכבא הא מני רבי יהודה היא | 39b. a robber [ḥamtzan] until the day of his death.,Rabba bar bar Sheila said: What is the verse that indicates that a ḥamtzan is a robber? The verse states: “O, my God, rescue me out of the hand of wicked, out of the hand of the unrighteous and robbing man [ḥometz]” (Psalms 71:4). Rava said: From here: “Learn to do well, seek justice, strengthen the robbed [ḥamotz]” (Isaiah 1:17), which teaches that one should strengthen the robbed, but not strengthen the robber.,§ The Sages taught: During the year in which Shimon HaTzaddik died, he said to them, his associates: In this year, he will die, euphemistically referring to himself. They said to him: How do you know? He said to them: In previous years, on every Yom Kippur, upon entering the Holy of Holies, I was met, in a prophetic vision, by an old man who was dressed in white, and his head was wrapped up in white, and he would enter the Holy of Holies with me, and he would leave with me. But today, I was met by an old man who was dressed in black, and his head was wrapped up in black, and he entered the Holy of Holies with me, but he did not leave with me. He understood this to be a sign that his death was impending. Indeed, after the festival of Sukkot, he was ill for seven days and died.,Without the presence of Shimon HaTzaddik among them, the Jewish people were no longer worthy of the many miracles that had occurred during his lifetime. For this reason, following his death, his brethren, the priests, refrained from blessing the Jewish people with the explicit name of God in the priestly blessing.,The Sages taught: During the tenure of Shimon HaTzaddik, the lot for God always arose in the High Priest’s right hand; after his death, it occurred only occasionally; but during the forty years prior to the destruction of the Second Temple, the lot for God did not arise in the High Priest’s right hand at all. So too, the strip of crimson wool that was tied to the head of the goat that was sent to Azazel did not turn white, and the westernmost lamp of the candelabrum did not burn continually.,And the doors of the Sanctuary opened by themselves as a sign that they would soon be opened by enemies, until Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai scolded them. He said to the Sanctuary: Sanctuary, Sanctuary, why do you frighten yourself with these signs? I know about you that you will ultimately be destroyed, and Zechariah, son of Ido, has already prophesied concerning you: “Open your doors, O Lebanon, that the fire may devour your cedars” (Zechariah 11:1), Lebanon being an appellation for the Temple.,Rabbi Yitzḥak ben Tavlai said: Why is the Temple called Lebanon [Levanon]? Because it whitens [malbin] the Jewish people’s sins, alluded to by the root lavan, meaning white.,Rav Zutra bar Toviya said: Why is the Temple called: Forest, as it is written: “The house of the forest of Lebanon” (I Kings 10:17)? To tell you: Just as a forest blooms, so too the Temple blooms. As Rav Hoshaya said: When Solomon built the Temple, he planted in it all kinds of sweet fruit trees made of gold, and miraculously these brought forth fruit in their season. And when the wind blew upon them, their fruit would fall off, as it is stated: “May his fruits rustle like Lebanon” (Psalms 72:16). And through selling these golden fruits to the public, there was a source of income for the priesthood.,But once the gentile nations entered the Sanctuary the golden trees withered, as it states “And the blossoms of Lebanon wither” (Nahum 1:4). And in the future hour of redemption, the Holy One, Blessed be He, will restore them to us as it is stated: “It shall blossom abundantly, it shall also rejoice and shout, the glory of Lebanon will be given to it” (Isaiah 35:2).,§ The mishna states that after selecting the two lots, the High Priest places them upon the two goats. Upon placing the lot for God upon the appropriate goat, he says: For God, as a sin-offering. This is just one of the occasions on which he mentions God’s name, as the Sages taught in the Tosefta (Yoma 2:2): The High Priest mentions the name of God ten times on that day: Three times during the first confession; and three times during the second confession, over the bull; and three times when he confesses over the scapegoat to Azazel; and one time with the lots, when placing the lot for God upon the goat.,And there already was an incident when the High Priest said the name of God and his voice was so strong that it was heard even in Jericho. Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: The distance from Jerusalem to Jericho is ten parasangs. Despite the great distance, his voice was miraculously heard there.,The Gemara describes similar miracles in which events in the Temple were sensed a great distance away. And the sound of the doors of the Sanctuary opening was heard from a distance of eight Shabbat limits, which is eight mil. Furthermore, goats that were in Jericho would sneeze from smelling the fragrance of the incense that burned in the Temple; the women that were in Jericho did not need to perfume themselves, since they were perfumed by the fragrance of the incense, which reached there; a bride that was in Jerusalem did not need to adorn herself with perfumes, since she was perfumed by the fragrance of the incense, which filled the air of Jerusalem.,Rabbi Yosei ben Dolgai said: Father had goats in the hills of Mikhmar, a district some distance from Jerusalem, and they would sneeze from smelling the fragrance of the incense. Similarly, Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Avin said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa said: An old man reported to me: One time I went to the ruins of the Tabernacle in Shiloh, and I smelled the smell of the incense from between its walls. The Tabernacle stood there during the period of the Judges, and more than a thousand years had passed since its destruction.,§ Rabbi Yannai said: The drawing of the lot from inside the receptacle is an indispensable part of the service, as it determines which goat will be for God and which for Azazel. However, the actual placing of the lots upon the goats is not indispensable. And Rabbi Yoḥa said: Even the drawing of the lots from inside the receptacle is not indispensable, since the High Priest may designate the goats himself, without employing the lottery.,The Gemara explains the dispute: In accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who said that matters that are performed in the white garments outside of the Holy of Holies are not indispensable, everyone agrees that the drawing of the lots is not indispensable, since it is held outside the Holy of Holies. When they disagree, it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Neḥemya. He holds that all matters performed in the white garments, even those performed outside the Holy of Holies, are indispensable. The one who said the drawing of the lots is indispensable holds in accordance with the straightforward application of the principle of Rabbi Neḥemya. And the one who said the drawing of the lots is not indispensable claims that this principle applies only with regard to matters that are classified as a Temple service. The drawing of the lots is not a Temple service, therefore it is indispensable, even according to Rabbi Neḥemya’s principle.,Some say a different version of the dispute:,In accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Neḥemya, who said that all matters performed in the white garments, even those performed outside the Holy of Holies, are indispensable, everyone agrees that the drawing of the lots is indispensable.,When they disagree, it is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who holds that matters that are performed in the white garments outside of the Holy of Holies are not indispensable. The one who said that the drawing of the lots is not indispensable holds in accordance with the straightforward application of the principle of Rabbi Yehuda. And the one who said that the drawing of the lots is indispensable claims that although Rabbi Yehuda’s principle is generally true, it is different here, in the case of the lottery, because the verse repeated the phrase “which came up” (Leviticus 16:9) “which came up” (Leviticus 16:10) two times. In the laws of sacrifices, a repeated phrase indicates the matter is indispensable.,The Gemara raises an objection from that which was taught in a baraita: It is a mitzva to draw the lots, and if the High Priest did not draw the lots but instead designated the goats without using the lots, the designation is valid.,The Gemara considers the opinion presented in the baraita: Granted, according to that first version of the dispute, in which you said: In accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda everyone, i.e., Rabbi Yannai and Rabbi Yoḥa, agrees that the drawing of the lots is not indispensable, in accordance with whose opinion is this baraita taught? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, according to all opinions. |
|
| 30. Eusebius of Caesarea, Preparation For The Gospel, 9.27 (3rd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 26 |
| 31. Origen, Commentary On The Song of Songs, prol. 1.1 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •song of songs, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Ashbrook Harvey et al., A Most Reliable Witness: Essays in Honor of Ross Shepard Kraemer (2015) 235 |
32. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, 55b, 55a (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Moxon, Peter's Halakhic Nightmare: The 'Animal' Vision of Acts 10:9–16 in Jewish and Graeco-Roman Perspective (2017) 138| 55a. כל המאריך בתפלתו ומעיין בה סוף בא לידי כאב לב שנאמר (משלי יג, יב) תוחלת ממושכה מחלה לב וא"ר יצחק שלשה דברים מזכירים עונותיו של אדם ואלו הן קיר נטוי ועיון תפלה ומוסר דין על חבירו לשמים,הא לא קשיא הא דמעיין בה הא דלא מעיין בה והיכי עביד דמפיש ברחמי,והמאריך על שלחנו דלמא אתי עניא ויהיב ליה דכתיב (יחזקאל מא, כב) המזבח עץ שלש אמות גבוה וכתיב (יחזקאל מא, כב) וידבר אלי זה השלחן אשר לפני ה' פתח במזבח וסיים בשלחן ר' יוחנן ור' אלעזר דאמרי תרוייהו כל זמן שבהמ"ק קיים מזבח מכפר על ישראל ועכשיו שלחנו של אדם מכפר עליו,והמאריך בבית הכסא מעליותא הוא והתניא עשרה דברים מביאין את האדם לידי תחתוניות האוכל עלי קנים ועלי גפנים ולולבי גפנים ומוריגי בהמה ושדרו של דג ודג מליח שאינו מבושל כל צרכו והשותה שמרי יין והמקנח בסיד ובחרסית והמקנח בצרור שקנח בו חבירו וי"א אף התולה עצמו בבית הכסא יותר מדאי,לא קשיא הא דמאריך ותלי הא דמאריך ולא תלי,כי הא דאמרה ליה ההיא מטרוניתא לר' יהודה בר' אלעאי פניך דומים למגדלי חזירים ולמלוי ברבית אמר לה הימנותא לדידי תרוייהו אסירן אלא עשרים וארבעה בית הכסא איכא מאושפיזאי לבי מדרשא דכי אזילנא בדיקנא נפשאי בכולהו.,ואמר רב יהודה שלשה דברים מקצרים ימיו ושנותיו של אדם מי שנותנין לו ס"ת לקרות ואינו קורא כוס של ברכה לברך ואינו מברך והמנהיג עצמו ברבנות,ס"ת לקרות ואינו קורא דכתיב (דברים ל, כ) כי הוא חייך ואורך ימיך כוס של ברכה לברך ואינו מברך דכתיב (בראשית יב, ג) ואברכה מברכיך והמנהיג עצמו ברבנות דא"ר חמא בר חנינא מפני מה מת יוסף קודם לאחיו מפני שהנהיג עצמו ברבנות:,ואמר רב יהודה אמר רב שלשה צריכים רחמים מלך טוב שנה טובה וחלום טוב מלך טוב דכתיב (משלי כא, א) פלגי מים לב מלך ביד ה' שנה טובה דכתיב (דברים יא, יב) תמיד עיני ה' אלהיך בה מראשית השנה ועד אחרית שנה חלום טוב דכתיב (ישעיהו לח, טז) ותחלימני (ותחייני):,אמר רבי יוחנן שלשה דברים מכריז עליהם הקב"ה בעצמו ואלו הן רעב ושובע ופרנס טוב רעב דכתיב (מלכים ב ח, א) כי קרא ה' לרעב וגו' שובע דכתיב (יחזקאל לו, כט) וקראתי אל הדגן והרביתי אותו פרנס טוב דכתיב (שמות לא, ב) (ויאמר) ה' אל משה לאמר ראה קראתי בשם בצלאל וגו',אמר רבי יצחק אין מעמידין פרנס על הצבור אלא אם כן נמלכים בצבור שנא' (שמות לה, ל) ראו קרא ה' בשם בצלאל אמר לו הקדוש ברוך הוא למשה משה הגון עליך בצלאל אמר לו רבונו של עולם אם לפניך הגון לפני לא כל שכן אמר לו אף על פי כן לך אמור להם הלך ואמר להם לישראל הגון עליכם בצלאל אמרו לו אם לפני הקדוש ברוך הוא ולפניך הוא הגון לפנינו לא כל שכן,א"ר שמואל בר נחמני א"ר יונתן בצלאל על שם חכמתו נקרא בשעה שאמר לו הקדוש ברוך הוא למשה לך אמור לו לבצלאל עשה לי משכן ארון וכלים הלך משה והפך ואמר לו עשה ארון וכלים ומשכן אמר לו משה רבינו מנהגו של עולם אדם בונה בית ואחר כך מכניס לתוכו כלים ואתה אומר עשה לי ארון וכלים ומשכן כלים שאני עושה להיכן אכניסם שמא כך אמר לך הקב"ה עשה משכן ארון וכלים אמר לו שמא בצל אל היית וידעת,אמר רב יהודה אמר רב יודע היה בצלאל לצרף אותיות שנבראו בהן שמים וארץ כתיב הכא (שמות לה, לא) וימלא אותו רוח אלהים בחכמה ובתבונה ובדעת וכתיב התם (משלי ג, יט) ה' בחכמה יסד ארץ כונן שמים בתבונה וכתיב (משלי ג, כ) בדעתו תהומות נבקעו,אמר רבי יוחנן אין הקדוש ברוך הוא נותן חכמה אלא למי שיש בו חכמה שנא' (דניאל ב, כא) יהב חכמתא לחכימין ומנדעא לידעי בינה שמע רב תחליפא בר מערבא ואמרה קמיה דרבי אבהו אמר ליה אתון מהתם מתניתו לה אנן מהכא מתנינן לה דכתיב (שמות לא, ו) ובלב כל חכם לב נתתי חכמה:,אמר רב חסדא כל חלום ולא טוות ואמר רב חסדא חלמא דלא מפשר כאגרתא דלא מקריא ואמר רב חסדא לא חלמא טבא מקיים כוליה ולא חלמא בישא מקיים כוליה ואמר רב חסדא חלמא בישא עדיף מחלמא טבא וא"ר חסדא חלמא בישא עציבותיה מסתייה חלמא טבא חדויה מסתייה אמר רב יוסף חלמא טבא אפילו לדידי בדיחותיה מפכחא ליה ואמר רב חסדא חלמא בישא קשה מנגדא שנאמר (קהלת ג, יד) והאלהים עשה שייראו מלפניו ואמר רבה בר בר חנה א"ר יוחנן זה חלום רע,(ירמיהו כג, כח) הנביא אשר אתו חלום יספר חלום ואשר דברי אתו ידבר דברי אמת מה לתבן את הבר נאם ה' וכי מה ענין בר ותבן אצל חלום אלא אמר ר' יוחנן משום ר' שמעון בן יוחי כשם שאי אפשר לבר בלא תבן כך אי אפשר לחלום בלא דברים בטלים,אמר ר' ברכיה חלום אף על פי שמקצתו מתקיים כולו אינו מתקיים מנא לן מיוסף דכתיב (בראשית לז, ט) והנה השמש והירח וגו' | 55a. Anyone who prolongs his prayer and expects it to be answered, will ultimately come to heartache, as it is stated: “Hope deferred makes the heart sick” (Proverbs 13:12). Similarly, Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Three matters evoke a person’s sins, and they are: Endangering oneself by sitting or standing next to an inclined wall that is about to collapse, expecting prayer to be accepted, as that leads to an assessment of his status and merit, and passing a case against another to Heaven, as praying for Heaven to pass judgment on another person causes one’s own deeds to be examined and compared with the deeds of that other person. This proves that prolonging prayer is a fault.,The Gemara resolves the apparent contradiction: This is not difficult. This, where we learned that prolonging prayer is undesirable, refers to a situation when one expects his prayer to be accepted, while this, where Rav Yehuda says that prolonging prayer prolongs one’s life, refers to a situation where one does not expect his prayer to be accepted. How does he prolong his prayer? By increasing his supplication.,As for the virtue of prolonging one’s mealtime at the table, which Rav Yehuda mentioned, the Gemara explains: Perhaps a poor person will come during the meal and the host will be in a position to give him food immediately, without forcing the poor person to wait. The Sages elsewhere praised a person who acts appropriately at a meal, as it is written: “The altar, three cubits high and the length thereof, two cubits, was of wood, and so the corners thereof; the length thereof, and the walls thereof, were also of wood” (Ezekiel 41:22), and it is written in the continuation of that verse: “And he said unto me: This is the table that is before the Lord.” The language of this verse is difficult, as it begins with the altar and concludes with the table. Rather, Rabbi Yoḥa and Rabbi Elazar both say: As long as the Temple stood, the altar atoned for Israel’s transgressions. Now that it is destroyed, a person’s table atones for his transgressions.,With regard to what Rav Yehuda said in praise of one who prolongs his time in the bathroom, the Gemara asks: Is that a virtue? Wasn’t it taught in a baraita: Ten things bring a person to suffer from hemorrhoids: One who eats the leaves of bulrushes, grape leaves, tendrils of grapevines, the palate and tongue of an animal, as well as any other part of the animal which is not smooth and which has protrusions, the spine of a fish, a salty fish that is not fully cooked, and one who drinks wine dregs, and one who wipes himself with lime and clay, the materials from which earthenware is made, and one who wipes himself with a stone with which another person wiped himself. And some say: One who suspends himself too much in the bathroom as well. This proves that prolonging one’s time in the bathroom is harmful.,The Gemara responds: This is not difficult. This baraita, which teaches that doing so is harmful, refers to where one prolongs his time there and suspends himself, while this statement of Rav Yehuda refers to where one prolongs his time there and does not suspend himself.,The Gemara relates the benefits of prolonging one’s time in the bathroom. Like that incident when a matron [matronita] said to Rabbi Yehuda son of Rabbi El’ai: Your face is fat and full, like the faces of pig farmers and usurers who do not work hard and who make a plentiful living. He said to her: Honestly, those two occupations are prohibited to me; rather, why is it that my face is nice? Because there are twenty-four bathrooms between my lodging and the study hall, and when I walk I stop and examine myself in all of them.,And Rav Yehuda said: Three things curtail a person’s days and years: One who is invited and given the Torah scroll to read and he does not read, one who is given a cup of blessing over which to recite a blessing and he does not recite a blessing, and one who conducts himself with an air of superiority.,The Gemara details the biblical sources for these cases: One who is given the Torah scroll to read and he does not read, as it is written of the Torah: “It is your life and the length of your days” (Deuteronomy 30:20). A cup of blessing over which to recite a blessing and he does not recite a blessing, as it is written: “I will bless them that bless you” (Genesis 12:3); one who blesses is blessed and one who does not bless does not merit a blessing. And with regard to one who conducts himself with an air of superiority, as Rabbi Ḥama, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: Why did Joseph die before his brothers, as evidenced by the order in the verse: “And Joseph died, and all his brethren, and all that generation” (Exodus 1:6)? Because he conducted himself with an air of superiority, and those who did not serve in a leadership role lived on after he died.,Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav: Three matters require a plea for mercy to bring them about: A good king, a good year, and a good dream. These three, kings, years, and dreams, are all bestowed by God and one must pray that they should be positive and constructive. The Gemara enumerates the sources for these cases: A good king, as it is written: “The king’s heart is in the hand of the Lord as the watercourses: He turns it whithersoever He will” (Proverbs 21:1). A good year, as it is written: “The eyes of the Lord, thy God, are always upon it, from the beginning of the year even unto the end of the year” (Deuteronomy 11:12). And a good dream, as it is written: “O Lord, by these things men live, and altogether therein is the life of my spirit; wherefore You will recover me [vataḥlimeni], and make me to live” (Isaiah 38:16). Due to their apparent etymological similarity, the word taḥlimeni is interpreted as deriving from the word ḥalom, dream.,Similarly, Rabbi Yoḥa said: Three matters are proclaimed by the Holy One, Blessed be He, Himself: Famine, plenty, and a good leader. The Gemara enumerates the sources for these cases: Famine, as it is written: “For the Lord has called for a famine; and it shall also come upon the land seven years” (II Kings 8:1). Plenty, as it is written: “And I will call for the grain, and will increase it, and lay no famine upon you” (Ezekiel 36:29). And a good leader, as it is written: “And the Lord spoke unto Moses, saying: See, I have called by name Bezalel, son of Uri, son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah” (Exodus 31:1–2).,With regard to Bezalel’s appointment, Rabbi Yitzḥak said: One may only appoint a leader over a community if he consults with the community and they agree to the appointment, as it is stated: “And Moses said unto the children of Israel: See, the Lord has called by name Bezalel, son of Uri, son of Hur, of the tribe of Judah” (Exodus 35:30). The Lord said to Moses: Moses, is Bezalel a suitable appointment in your eyes? Moses said to Him: Master of the universe, if he is a suitable appointment in Your eyes, then all the more so in my eyes. The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to him: Nevertheless, go and tell Israel and ask their opinion. Moses went and said to Israel: Is Bezalel suitable in your eyes? They said to him: If he is suitable in the eyes of the Holy One, Blessed be He, and in your eyes, all the more so he is suitable in our eyes.,Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan said: Bezalel was called by that name on account of his wisdom. When the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Moses: Go say to Bezalel, “Make a tabernacle, an ark, and vessels” (see Exodus 31:7–11), Moses went and reversed the order and told Bezalel: “Make an ark, and vessels, and a tabernacle” (see Exodus 25–26). He said to Moses: Moses, our teacher, the standard practice throughout the world is that a person builds a house and only afterward places the vessels in the house, and you say to me: Make an ark, and vessels, and a tabernacle. If I do so in the order you have commanded, the vessels that I make, where shall I put them? Perhaps God told you the following: “Make a tabernacle, ark, and vessels” (see Exodus 36). Moses said to Bezalel: Perhaps you were in God’s shadow [betzel El], and you knew precisely what He said. You intuited God’s commands just as He stated them, as if you were there.,Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: Bezalel knew how to join the letters with which heaven and earth were created. From where do we derive this? It is written here in praise of Bezalel: “And I have filled him with the spirit of God, in wisdom, and in understanding, and in knowledge, and in all manner of workmanship” (Exodus 31:3); and it is written there with regard to creation of heaven and earth: “The Lord, by wisdom, founded the earth; by understanding He established the heavens” (Proverbs 3:19), and it is written: “By His knowledge the depths were broken up and the skies drop down the dew” (Proverbs 3:20). We see that wisdom, understanding, and knowledge, the qualities with which the heavens and earth were created, are all found in Bezalel.,On a similar note, Rabbi Yoḥa said: The Holy One, Blessed be He, only grants wisdom to one who already possesses wisdom, as it is stated: “He gives wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to they who know understanding” (Daniel 2:21). Rav Taḥalifa, from the West, Eretz Yisrael, heard this and repeated it before Rabbi Abbahu. Rabbi Abbahu said to him: You learned proof for this idea from there; we learn it from here: As it is written in praise of the builders of the Tabernacle: “And in the hearts of all who are wise-hearted I have placed wisdom” (Exodus 31:6).,Related to what was stated above, that one should pray for a good dream, the Gemara cites additional maxims concerning dreams and their interpretation. Rav Ḥisda said: One should see any dream, and not a fast. In other words, any dream is preferable to a dream during a fast. And Rav Ḥisda said: A dream not interpreted is like a letter not read. As long as it is not interpreted it cannot be fulfilled; the interpretation of a dream creates its meaning. And Rav Ḥisda said: A good dream is not entirely fulfilled and a bad dream is not entirely fulfilled. And Rav Ḥisda said: A bad dream is preferable to a good dream, as a bad dream causes one to feel remorse and to repent. And Rav Ḥisda said: A bad dream, his sadness is enough for him; a good dream, his joy is enough for him. This means that the sadness or joy engendered by the dream renders the actual fulfillment of the dream superfluous. Similarly, Rav Yosef said: Even for me, the joy of a good dream negates it. Even Rav Yosef, who was blind and ill, derived such pleasure from a good dream that it was never actually realized. And Rav Ḥisda said: A bad dream is worse than lashes, as it is stated: “God has so made it, that men should fear before Him” (Ecclesiastes 3:14), and Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: That is a bad dream that causes man to fear.,With regard to the verse: “The prophet that has a dream, let him tell a dream; and he that has My word, let him speak My word faithfully. What has the straw to do with the grain? says the Lord” (Jeremiah 23:28), the Gemara asks: What do straw and grain have to do with a dream? Rather, Rabbi Yoḥa said in the name of Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai: Just as it is impossible for the grain to grow without straw, so too it is impossible to dream without idle matters. Even a dream that will be fulfilled in the future contains some element of nonsense.,On a similar note, Rabbi Berekhya said: Even though part of a dream is fulfilled, all of it is not fulfilled. From where do we derive this? From the story of Joseph’s dream, as it is written: “And he said: Behold, I have dreamed yet a dream: and, behold, the sun and the moon |
|
33. Babylonian Talmud, Sotah, 47a, 38a (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 29 38a. ככתבו ובמדינה בכינויו במדינה כהנים נושאים את ידיהן כנגד כתפיהן ובמקדש על גבי ראשיהן חוץ מכהן גדול שאינו מגביה את ידיו למעלה מן הציץ ר' יהודה אומר אף כהן גדול מגביה ידיו למעלה מן הציץ שנאמר (ויקרא ט, כב) וישא אהרן את ידיו אל העם ויברכם,| 38a. as it is written in the Torah, i.e., the Tetragrammaton, and in the country they use its substitute name of Lordship. In the country, the priests lift their hands so they are aligned with their shoulders during the benediction. And in the Temple they lift them above their heads, except for the High Priest, who does not lift his hands above the frontplate. Since the Tetragrammaton is inscribed on it, it is inappropriate for him to lift his hands above it. Rabbi Yehuda says: Even the High Priest lifts his hands above the frontplate, as it is stated: “And Aaron lifted up his hands toward the people and blessed them” (Leviticus 9:22).,The Sages taught: The mitzva given to the priests: “So you shall bless the children of Israel” (Numbers 6:23), is that they bless them in the sacred tongue, Hebrew. Do you say that the benediction must be recited in the sacred tongue, or perhaps it may be recited in any language? The baraita answers: It is stated here, with regard to the Priestly Benediction: “So you shall bless,” and it is stated there, with regard to the blessings and curses: “These shall stand on Mount Gerizim to bless the people” (Deuteronomy 27:12). There is a verbal analogy between these two usages of the word “bless”: Just as there, the blessings and curses were recited in the sacred tongue, as stated above (33a), so too here, the Priestly Benediction is recited in the sacred tongue.,Rabbi Yehuda says: It is not necessary to derive this from a verbal analogy, as it says with regard to the Priestly Benediction: “Thus,” which means that it is not recited correctly unless they recite it in this exact language, as it is written in the Torah.,It is taught in another baraita: “So you shall bless,” means while standing. Do you say that the benediction must be recited while standing, or perhaps it may even be recited while sitting? It is stated here: “So you shall bless,” and it is stated there, with regard to the blessings and curses: “These shall stand on Mount Gerizim to bless.” Just as there, the blessing was recited while standing, so too here, the priests must recite the Priestly Benediction while standing.,Rabbi Natan says: It is not necessary to derive this from a verbal analogy, as it says in the verse: “At that time the Lord separated the tribe of Levi to bear the Ark of the Covet of the Lord, to stand before the Lord to minister to Him and to bless in His name” (Deuteronomy 10:8). Just as a priest performs the Temple service while standing, so too, he blesses while standing. The Gemara asks: And from where do we derive that he performs the service itself while standing? As it is written: “To stand to minister in the name of the Lord” (Deuteronomy 18:5).,It is taught in another baraita: “So you shall bless” means with lifted hands. Do you say that the priests must recite the benediction with lifted hands, or perhaps they may recite it without lifted hands? It is stated here: “So you shall bless,” and it is stated there, with regard to the dedication of the Tabernacle: “And Aaron lifted up his hands toward the people and blessed them” (Leviticus 9:22). Just as there, Aaron blessed the nation with lifted hands, so too here, the Priestly Benediction is recited with lifted hands.,This halakha was difficult for Rabbi Yonatan to understand: If this halakha is derived from the dedication of the Tabernacle, then why not also say: Just as there, the High Priest was the one who recited the blessing, and it was the New Moon, and the offerings that were brought were a communal service, so too here, the Priestly Benediction must be recited only by the High Priest, and on the New Moon, and when performing a communal service?,Rabbi Natan says: It is not necessary to derive from a verbal analogy that the Priestly Benediction is recited with lifted hands, as it says with regard to Aaron: “To stand to minister in the name of the Lord, him and his sons forever” (Deuteronomy 18:5). In this verse, his sons are juxtaposed with him. Just as Aaron recited the Priestly Benediction with lifted hands, so too, his sons recite the benediction with lifted hands. And furthermore, it is written “forever,” which indicates that it is referring not only to special occasions. And although the verse is not referring to the Priestly Benediction, the benediction is juxtaposed to the Temple service in another verse: “To minister to Him and to bless in His name” (Deuteronomy 10:8).,And it is taught in another baraita: “So you shall bless the children of Israel” means the blessing should be recited with the ineffable name. Do you say that the Priestly Benediction must be recited with the ineffable name, or perhaps it is recited with only the substitute name, Adonai? The verse states: “So shall they put My name” (Numbers 6:27), which means My name that is unique to Me.,One might have thought that even in the outlying areas, outside the Temple, this ineffable name is used. It is stated here, with regard to the Priestly Benediction: “So shall they put My name,” and it is stated there, with regard to the place one must sacrifice offerings: “The place that the Lord your God has chosen out of all your tribes to put His name there” (Deuteronomy 12:5). The verbal analogy teaches that just as there, the expression “to put His name there” is referring to the Temple, so too here, the mitzva of “so shall they put My name” applies in the Temple and not anywhere else.,Rabbi Yoshiya says: It is not necessary to derive this halakha from the verbal analogy, as it can be derived from a verse. It says in the verse: “In every place where I cause My name to be mentioned I will come to you and bless you” (Exodus 20:20). Does it enter your mind that this verse literally means that the Divine Presence will be revealed everywhere? Rather, this verse must be interpreted by transposition. It must be reordered and read as follows: In every place where I will come to you and bless you, there I will cause My name to be mentioned. Rabbi Yoshiya explains that God is stating: And where will I come to you and bless you? In the Temple. Therefore, he derives: There, in the Temple, I will cause My name to be mentioned, but the ineffable name is not mentioned elsewhere.,It is taught in another baraita: “So you shall bless the sons of Israel” (Numbers 6:23). I have derived only the halakha to bless the sons of Israel. From where do I derive the halakha of blessing converts, women, and emancipated slaves? The verse states immediately afterward: “You shall say to them,” meaning to all of the Jewish people.,It is taught in another baraita: “So you shall bless,” means that the priests must recite the Priestly Benediction face-to-face with the congregation. Do you say that the Benediction must be recited face-to-face, or perhaps it is only recited with the faces of the priests facing the back of the necks of the congregation? The verse states: “You shall say to them,” face-to-face, like a person who is talking to another.,It is taught in another baraita: “So you shall bless” means that the benediction must be recited out loud. Or, perhaps, is it recited only in a whisper? The verse states: “You shall say to them,” like a person who is talking to another.,Abaye said: We have a tradition with regard to the prayer leader calling the priests to recite the Priestly Benediction: When there are two priests, he calls: Priests, but when there is one priest he does not call: Priest, as it is stated: “You shall say to them,” in plural, meaning to a minimum of two priests. And Rav Ḥisda said: We have a tradition that a priest calls: Priests, but an Israelite does not call: Priests, as it is stated: “You shall say to them,” which means that the saying | |
|
34. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, 107b, 56a, 29a (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 27 29a. קרובים ונתרחקו הוו אתו לקמיה לדינא אמר להו פסילנא לכו לדינא,אמרו ליה מאי דעתיך כר' יהודה אנן מייתינן איגרתא ממערבא דאין הלכה כרבי יהודה,אמר להו אטו בקבא דקירא אידבקנא בכו דלא קאמינא פסילנא לכו לדינא אלא משום דלא צייתיתו דינא:,אוהב זה שושבינו וכו':,וכמה אמר ר' אבא אמר רבי ירמיה אמר רב כל שבעת ימי המשתה ורבנן משמיה דרבא אמרי אפילו מיום ראשון ואילך:,השונא כל שלא דבר כו': ת"ר (במדבר לה, כג) והוא לא אויב לו יעידנו (במדבר לה, כג) ולא מבקש רעתו ידיננו,אשכחן שונא אוהב מנלן,קרי ביה הכי והוא לא אויב לו ולא אוהב לו יעידנו ולא מבקש רעתו ולא טובתו ידיננו,מידי אוהב כתיב אלא סברא הוא אויב מאי טעמא משום דמרחקא דעתיה אוהב נמי מקרבא דעתיה,ורבנן האי לא אויב לו ולא מבקש רעתו מאי דרשי ביה,חד לדיין,אידך כדתניא אמר רבי יוסי ברבי יהודה והוא לא אויב לו ולא מבקש רעתו מכאן לשני תלמידי חכמים ששונאין זה את זה שאין יושבין בדין כאחד:,| 29a. were relatives of his and became not related to him, as Mar Ukva’s wife, who was their sister, died. They came before him for judgment. Mar Ukva said to them: I am disqualified from adjudicating for you.,They said to Mar Ukva: What is your opinion according to which you disqualify yourself? Do you rule in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, that since you have children we are still relatives? We shall bring a letter from the West, Eretz Yisrael, that the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda.,Mar Ukva said to them: Is that to say that I am stuck to you with a kav of wax [kira]? I agree that we are not considered relatives; I am saying that I am disqualified from adjudicating for you only because you will not obey the verdict, and I do not wish to participate in such judgment.,§ The mishna teaches that according to Rabbi Yehuda, one who loves or one who hates one of the litigants is disqualified from bearing witness. One who loves one of the litigants; this is referring to his groomsman.,The Gemara asks: And for how long is the groomsman disqualified? Rabbi Abba says that Rabbi Yirmeya says that Rav says: Throughout all of the seven days of feasting. And the Rabbis say in the name of Rava: Even from the first day after the wedding and onward he is no longer disqualified; he is disqualified only on the wedding day itself.,§ The mishna teaches: One who hates the litigant is referring to anyone who, out of enmity, did not speak with the litigant for three days. The Sages taught in a baraita: This halakha is derived from the verse: “And he was not his enemy, neither sought his harm” (Numbers 35:23), that one about whom it can be stated: “And he was not his enemy,” can testify about him. And one who “neither sought his harm” can judge him.,The Gemara asks: We found a source for the disqualification of one who hates; from where do we derive that one who loves is disqualified?,The Gemara answers that one should read into the verse like this: One about whom it can be stated: And he who was not his enemy nor one who loves him, can testify about him; and one who neither sought his harm nor his favor can judge him.,The Gemara asks: Is: One who loves, written in the verse? How can the verse be read in this manner? Rather, the extension of the disqualification to one who loves him as well is based on logical reasoning: What is the reason an enemy is disqualified from bearing witness? It is because he feels a sense of aversion toward that individual and might testify falsely against him. A similar logic can be employed with regard to one who loves, as well: He feels a sense of affinity toward that individual, and might testify falsely on his behalf.,The Gemara asks: And what do the Rabbis, who do not agree with Rabbi Yehuda, derive from this verse: “And he was not his enemy, neither sought his harm”?,The Gemara answers: One part of the verse is necessary for the halakha that a judge who loves or hates one of the litigants is disqualified. The Rabbis agree with this halakha, as such a judge is naturally inclined to favor one of the litigants.,The other part of the verse is interpreted in accordance with that which is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: With regard to the verse “And he was not his enemy, neither sought his harm,” it is derived from here that two Torah scholars who hate each other cannot sit in judgment together as one. Because of their hatred they will come to contradict each other’s rulings unjustly.,How do the judges examine the witnesses? They bring them into a room in the courthouse and intimidate them so that they will speak only the truth. And they take all the people, other than the judges, outside so that they should not tell the other witnesses the questions the judges ask and the answers the first witness gives, and they leave only the eldest of the witnesses to testify first.,And they say to him: Say how exactly you know that this litigant owes money to that litigant, as the plaintiff claims. If he said: The defendant said to me: It is true that I owe the plaintiff, or if he says: So-and-so said to me that the defendant owes the plaintiff, the witness has said nothing and his testimony is disregarded. It is not valid testimony unless he says: The defendant admitted in our presence to the plaintiff that he owes him, e.g., two hundred dinars. By admitting to the debt in the presence of witnesses he renders himself liable to pay the amount that he mentioned.,And afterward they bring in the second witness and examine him in the same manner. If their statements are found to be congruent the judges then discuss the matter.,If the opinions of the judges are divided, as two judges say that the defendant is exempt from payment and one says he is liable to pay, he is exempt. If two say he is liable and one says he is exempt, he is liable. If one says he is liable and one says he is exempt, or even if two of the judges deem him exempt or two of them deem him liable, and the other one says: I do not know, the court must add more judges and then rule in accordance with the majority opinion. This is because the one who abstains is considered as though he is not a member of the court.,After the judges finish the matter and reach a decision, they bring in the litigants. The greatest of the judges says: So-and-so, you are exempt from paying; or: So-and-so, you are liable to pay.,And from where is it derived that when the judge leaves the courtroom he may not say: I deemed you exempt and my colleagues deemed you liable, but what can I do, as my colleagues outnumbered me and consequently you were deemed liable? About this it is stated: “You shall not go as a talebearer among your people” (Leviticus 19:16), and it says: “One who goes about as a talebearer reveals secrets, but one who is of a faithful spirit conceals a matter” (Proverbs 11:13).,What do we say to them? Rav Yehuda says that this is what we say to them: It is stated: “As clouds and wind without rain, so is he who boasts himself of a false gift” (Proverbs 25:14). In other words, there will be no rain and no blessing from your deeds if you lie.,Rava said to him: If so, false witnesses can say to themselves that they do not have to worry about this punishment, according to the folk saying: Seven years there was a famine, but over the craftsman’s door it did not pass. If the witnesses are not farmers, they do not need to worry over lack of rain. Consequently, they will disregard this concern.,Rather, Rava said that we say this verse to them: “As a hammer, and a sword, and a sharp arrow, so is a man who bears false witness against his neighbor” (Proverbs 25:18), meaning that a false witness will die prematurely.,Rav Ashi said to him: Here too, false witnesses can say to themselves a folk saying: Seven years there was a pestilence, but a man who has not reached his years did not die; everyone dies at his predestined time. Therefore, they will disregard this concern as well.,The Gemara presents another suggestion: Rather, Rav Ashi said: Natan bar Mar Zutra said to me that we say to them that false witnesses are belittled even by those who hire them, and all the more so by others; as it is written that Jezebel said when she ordered witnesses to be hired to testify against Naboth: “And set two men, base fellows, before him, and let them bear witness against him, saying: You cursed God and the king” (I Kings 21:10). Even Jezebel, who gave the orders to hire them, called them “base fellows.”,§ The mishna teaches that if the witness said: The defendant said to me: It is true that I owe him, his testimony is disregarded unless he says: The defendant admitted in our presence to the plaintiff that he owes him two hundred dinars.,The Gemara comments: This supports the opinion of Rav Yehuda, as Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: The debtor needs to say to the witnesses to the loan or in his admission that he owes the creditor: You are my witnesses. Otherwise, their testimony is not valid.,It was also stated that Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba says that Rabbi Yoḥa says: If one said to another: I have one hundred dinars in your possession, i.e., you owe me one hundred dinars, and the other said to him: Yes, and the next day the claimant said to him: Give it to me, if the other then said to him: I was teasing you, i.e., I did not mean it seriously when I said that I owed it to you, the respondent is exempt.,This is also taught in a baraita: If one said to another: I have one hundred dinars in your possession, and the other said to him: Yes, and the next day the claimant said to him: Give it to me, if the other then said to him: I was teasing you, the respondent is exempt.,And moreover, the respondent is exempt even in a case where the claimant hid witnesses for the respondent behind a fence so that the respondent would not see them, and said to him: I have one hundred dinars in your possession, and the respondent said to him: Yes, and the claimant then said to him: Do you wish to admit the debt in the presence of so-and-so and so-and-so? And the respondent said to him: I am afraid to do so, lest you compel me to go to judgment, where, based on their testimony, you will be given the right to forcibly take the money from me whenever you want. But between you and me, I admit that I owe you. And the next day the claimant said to him: Give me the one hundred dinars that you admitted to owing me, and the respondent said to him: I was teasing you. The respondent is exempt because he can claim that he stated his admission only to appease the claimant temporarily, and did not mean to actually admit to owing the money, as he did not know that there were witnesses present.,But the judges do not advance a claim on behalf of an inciter, i.e., one who is accused of inciting others to idol worship.,The Gemara asks: An inciter? Who mentioned anything about it? This matter was not discussed in the baraita. The Gemara answers: The baraita is incomplete, and this is what it is teaching: If the defendant did not advance a claim that he was teasing the plaintiff, the judges do not advance this claim for him. Apparently, he stated his admission seriously. But in cases of capital law, even if the defendant did not advance any claim on his own behalf, the judges advance a claim on his behalf. But the judges do not advance claims on behalf of an inciter.,The Gemara asks: What is different about an inciter, that the court does not seek to deem him innocent? Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina says: I heard at the lecture of Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba that an inciter is different, as the Merciful One states concerning him: “Neither shall you spare, neither shall you conceal him” (Deuteronomy 13:9). In this unique case, the court is not required to try to deem him innocent.,Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman says that Rabbi Yonatan says: From where is it derived that the judges do not advance a claim on behalf of an inciter? It is derived from the incident of the primordial snake who tempted Eve; he was the first inciter. As Rabbi Simlai says: The snake could have advanced many claims on its own behalf, but it did not claim them. And for what reason did the Holy One, Blessed be He, not advance these claims for it, deeming the snake exempt from punishment? Because the snake did not advance these claims itself.,The Gemara asks: What could he have said? The Gemara answers: The snake could have said that it is not to blame, as when there is a contradiction between the statement of the teacher and the statement of the student, whose statement should one listen to? One should listen to the statement of the teacher. Since God instructed Adam and Eve not to eat from the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge, Adam and Eve should have heeded God’s words and not those of the snake.,Ḥizkiyya says: From where is it derived that anyone who adds, subtracts? It is derived from a verse, as it is stated that Eve said: “God has said: You shall not eat of it, neither shall you touch it” (Genesis 3:3), whereas God had actually rendered prohibited only eating from the tree but not touching it, as it is stated: “But of the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil, you shall not eat of it” (Genesis 2:17). Because Eve added that there was a prohibition against touching the tree, the snake showed her that touching it does not cause her to die, and she consequently sinned by eating from it as well.,Rav Mesharshiyya says that the idea that one who adds, subtracts can also be proven from here: “Two cubits [amatayim] and a half shall be its length” (Exodus 25:10). Without the letter alef at the beginning of the word amatayim, it would be read matayim, which would mean two hundred cubits. The addition of the alef therefore reduces this term to only two cubits.,Rav Ashi says another example: In the verse: “Eleven [ashtei esrei] curtains” (Exodus 26:7), without the letter ayin at the beginning of the phrase it would read shtei esrei, twelve. Therefore, the additional letter ayin reduces the amount from twelve to eleven.,Abaye says: With regard to the case of one who denies a debt to which he admitted in the presence of hidden witnesses, the Sages taught that he is exempt only in a case where he says: I was teasing you. But if he says: | |
|
35. Babylonian Talmud, Megillah, 13a (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •2 chronicles, genealogies, allegorical rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Carleton Paget and Schaper, The New Cambridge History of the Bible (2013) 207| 13a. דלא קטליה דוד לשמעי דאתיליד מיניה מרדכי דמיקני ביה המן ומה שילם לי ימיני דלא קטליה שאול לאגג דאתיליד מיניה המן דמצער לישראל,רבי יוחנן אמר לעולם מבנימן קאתי ואמאי קרי ליה יהודי על שום שכפר בע"ז שכל הכופר בע"ז נקרא יהודי כדכתיב (דניאל ג, יב) איתי גוברין יהודאין וגו',רבי שמעון בן פזי כי הוה פתח בדברי הימים אמר הכי כל דבריך אחד הם ואנו יודעין לדורשן (דברי הימים א ד, יח) ואשתו היהודיה ילדה את ירד אבי גדור ואת חבר אבי שוכו ואת יקותיאל אבי זנוח ואלה בני בתיה בת פרעה אשר לקח מרד,אמאי קרי לה יהודיה על שום שכפרה בע"ז דכתיב (שמות ב, ה) ותרד בת פרעה לרחוץ על היאור ואמר רבי יוחנן שירדה לרחוץ מגילולי בית אביה,ילדה והא רבויי רביתיה לומר לך שכל המגדל יתום ויתומה בתוך ביתו מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו ילדו,ירד זה משה ולמה נקרא שמו ירד שירד להם לישראל מן בימיו גדור שגדר פרצותיהן של ישראל חבר שחיבר את ישראל לאביהן שבשמים סוכו שנעשה להם לישראל כסוכה יקותיאל שקוו ישראל לאל בימיו זנוח שהזניח עונותיהן של ישראל,אבי אבי אבי אב בתורה אב בחכמה אב בנביאות,ואלה בני בתיה אשר לקח מרד וכי מרד שמו והלא כלב שמו אמר הקב"ה יבא כלב שמרד בעצת מרגלים וישא את בת פרעה שמרדה בגלולי בית אביה,אשר הגלה מירושלם אמר רבא שגלה מעצמו,ויהי אומן את הדסה קרי לה הדסה וקרי לה אסתר תניא ר"מ אומר אסתר שמה ולמה נקרא שמה הדסה על שם הצדיקים שנקראו הדסים וכן הוא אומר (זכריה א, ח) והוא עומד בין ההדסים,רבי יהודה אומר הדסה שמה ולמה נקראת שמה אסתר על שם שהיתה מסתרת דבריה שנאמר אין אסתר מגדת את עמה וגו',ר' נחמיה אומר הדסה שמה ולמה נקראת אסתר שהיו אומות העולם קורין אותה על שום אסתהר בן עזאי אומר אסתר לא ארוכה ולא קצרה היתה אלא בינונית כהדסה ר' יהושע בן קרחה אמר אסתר ירקרוקת היתה וחוט של חסד משוך עליה,כי אין לה אב ואם ובמות אביה ואמה למה לי אמר רב אחא עיברתה מת אביה ילדתה מתה אמה,ובמות אביה ואמה לקחה מרדכי לו לבת תנא משום ר"מ אל תקרי לבת אלא לבית וכן הוא אומר (שמואל ב יב, ג) ולרש אין כל כי אם כבשה אחת קטנה אשר קנה ויחיה ותגדל עמו ועם בניו יחדו מפתו תאכל ומכוסו תשתה ובחיקו תשכב ותהי לו כבת משום דבחיקו תשכב הוות ליה (לבת) אלא (לבית) הכי נמי לבית,ואת שבע הנערות וגו' אמר רבא שהיתה מונה בהן ימי שבת וישנה ואת נערותיה וגו' אמר רב שהאכילה מאכל יהודי,ושמואל אמר שהאכילה קדלי דחזירי,ור' יוחנן אמר זרעונים וכן הוא אומר (דניאל א, טז) ויהי המלצר נושא את פת בגם ונותן להם זרעונים,ששה חדשים בשמן המור מאי שמן המור ר' חייא בר אבא אמר סטכת רב הונא אמר שמן זית שלא הביא שליש תניא רבי יהודה אומר אנפקינון שמן זית שלא הביא שליש ולמה סכין אותו שמשיר את השיער ומעדן את הבשר,בערב היא באה ובבקר היא שבה אמר רבי יוחנן מגנותו של אותו רשע למדנו שבחו שלא היה משמש מטתו ביום,ותהי אסתר נשאת חן אר"א מלמד שלכל אחד ואחד נדמתה לו כאומתו ותלקח אסתר אל המלך אחשורוש אל בית מלכותו בחדש העשירי הוא חדש טבת ירח שנהנה גוף מן הגוף,ויאהב המלך את אסתר מכל הנשים ותשא חן וחסד לפניו מכל הבתולות אמר רב ביקש לטעום טעם בתולה טעם טעם בעולה טעם,ויעש המלך משתה גדול עבד משתיא ולא גליא ליה דלי כרגא ולא גליא ליה שדר פרדישני ולא גליא ליה,ובהקבץ בתולות שנית וגו' אזיל שקל עצה ממרדכי אמר אין אשה מתקנאה אלא בירך חבירתה ואפי' הכי לא גליא ליה דכתיב אין אסתר מגדת מולדתה וגו',אמר רבי אלעזר מאי דכתיב | 13a. the responsibility of Judah, as David did not kill Shimei, although he was liable to the death penalty. The grave consequences of this failure included that Mordecai was born from him, and it was he against whom Haman was jealous, leading Haman to issue a decree against all of the Jewish people. And how a Benjamite has repaid me is referring to the fact that Saul, who was from the tribe of Benjamin, did not kill the Amalekite king Agag immediately, from whom Haman was later born, and he caused suffering to the Jewish people.,Rabbi Yoḥa said a different explanation of the verse: Actually, Mordecai came from the tribe of Benjamin. Why, then, was he referred to as Yehudi? On account of the fact that he repudiated idol worship, for anyone who repudiates idolatry is called Yehudi. It is understood here in the sense of yiḥudi, one who declares the oneness of God, as it is written: “There are certain Jews [Yehuda’in] whom thou hast appointed over the affairs of the province of Babylonia, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-Nego; these men, O king, have not regarded you: They serve not your gods, nor worship the golden image which you have set up” (Daniel 3:12). These three individuals were in fact Haiah, Mishael, and Azariah, who were not all from the tribe of Judah but are referred to as Yehuda’in because they repudiated idol worship.,§ Incidental to the exposition of the word Yehudi as one who repudiates idolatry, the Gemara relates that when Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi introduced his exposition of the book of Chronicles, he addressed the book of Chronicles and said as follows: All of your words are one, and we know how to expound them. This introduction made reference to the fact that the book of Chronicles cannot always be interpreted literally but requires exposition, as the same individual might be called by various different names, as in the following verse: “And his wife HaYehudiyya bore Jered the father of Gedor, and Heber the father of Soco, and Jekuthiel the father of Zanoah. And these are the sons of Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered took” (I Chronicles 4:18).,Why is she, who we are told at the end of the verse was Pharaoh’s daughter Bithiah, referred to as Yehudiyya? Because she repudiated idol worship, as it is written: “And the daughter of Pharaoh came down to wash herself in the river” (Exodus 2:5), and Rabbi Yoḥa said: She went down to wash and purify herself from the idols of her father’s house.,The Gemara understands that all the names referred to in the verse as children of Pharaoh’s daughter refer to Moses, as it will soon explain. The Gemara asks: Pharaoh’s daughter bore Moses? But didn’t she merely raise him? Rather, it is telling you that with regard to anyone who raises an orphan boy or girl in his house, the verse ascribes him credit as if he gave birth to him.,The Gemara explains how all the names in fact are referring to Moses: “Jered”; this is Moses, and why was he called Jered? Because manna came down [yarad] for the Jewish people in his days. He was also called “Gedor” because he fenced in [gadar] the breaches of the Jewish people. He was called “Heber” because he connected [ḥibber] the Jewish people to their Father in Heaven. He was called “Soco” because he was for the Jewish people like a shelter [sukka] and shield. He was called “Jekuthiel” because the Jewish people trusted in God [kivu laEl] in his days. Lastly, he was called “Zanoah” because he caused the iniquities of the Jewish people to be disregarded [hizniaḥ].,The Gemara notes that the words “father of” appear three times in that same verse: “And his wife Hajehudijah bore Jered the father of Gedor, and Heber the father of Soco, and Jekuthiel the father of Zanoah.” This teaches that Moses was a father to all of the Jewish people in three respects: A father in Torah, a father in wisdom, and a father in prophecy.,The aforementioned verse stated: “And these are the sons of Bithiah the daughter of Pharaoh, whom Mered took.” The Gemara asks: Was Bithiah’s husband’s name Mered? Wasn’t his name Caleb? Rather, the verse alludes to the reason that Caleb married Bithiah. The Holy One, Blessed be He, said: Let Caleb, who rebelled [marad] against the advice of the spies, come and marry the daughter of Pharaoh, who rebelled against the idols of her father’s home.,§ The Gemara resumes its explanation of the book of Esther. The verse states with regard to Mordecai: “Who had been exiled from Jerusalem” (Esther 2:6). Rava said: This language indicates that he went into exile on his own, not because he was forced to leave Jerusalem. He knew that he would be needed by those in exile, and therefore he consciously left Jerusalem to attend to the needs of his people.,The verse states: “And he had brought up Hadassah, that is, Esther” (Esther 2:7). She is referred to as “Hadassah” and she is referred to as “Esther.” What was her real name? It is taught in a baraita that the Sages differed in their opinion as to which was in fact her name and which one was a description: Rabbi Meir says: Esther was her real name. Why then was she called Hadassah? On account of the righteous, who are called myrtles [hadassim], and so it states: “And he stood among the myrtles [hahadassim]” (Zechariah 1:8).,Rabbi Yehuda differs and says: Hadassah was her real name. Why then was she called Esther? Because she concealed [masteret] the truth about herself, as it is stated: “Esther had not yet made known her kindred nor her people” (Esther 2:20).,Rabbi Neḥemya concurs and says: Hadassah was her real name. Why then was she called Esther? This was her non-Hebrew name, for owing to her beauty the nations of the world called her after Istahar, Venus. Ben Azzai says: Esther was neither tall nor short, but of average size like a myrtle tree, and therefore she was called Hadassah, the Hebrew name resembling that myrtle tree. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa said: Esther was called Hadassah because she was greenish, having a pale complexion like a myrtle, but a cord of Divine grace was strung around her, endowing her with a beautiful appearance.,The verse initially states with regard to Esther: “For she had neither father nor mother” (Esther 2:7). Why do I need to be told in the continuation of the verse: “And when her father and mother were dead, Mordecai took her for his own daughter”? Rav Aḥa said: This repetition indicates that when her mother became pregt with her, her father died, and when she gave birth to her, her mother died, so that she did not have a mother or a father for even a single day.,The verse states: “And when her father and mother were dead, Mordecai took her for his own daughter” (Esther 2:7). A tanna taught a baraita in the name of Rabbi Meir: Do not read the verse literally as for a daughter [bat], but rather read it as for a home [bayit]. This indicates that Mordecai took Esther to be his wife. And so it states: “But the poor man had nothing, except one little ewe lamb, which he had bought and reared: And it grew up together with him, and with his children; it did eat of his bread, and drank of his own cup, and lay in his bosom, and was like a daughter [kevat] to him” (II Samuel 12:3). The Gemara questions: Because it lay in his bosom, it “was like a daughter to him”? Rather, the parable in II Samuel referenced the illicit taking of another’s wife, and the phrase should be read: Like a home [bayit] to him, i.e., a wife. So too, here, Mordecai took her for a home, i.e., a wife.,The verse states: “And the seven maids chosen to be given her out of the king’s house” (Esther 2:9). Rava said: She would have a separate maid attend her each day, and she would count the days of the week by them, so she was always aware when Shabbat was. The verse continues: “And he advanced her and her maids to the best place in the house of the women.” Rav said: The advancement in the verse signals that he fed her food of Jews, i.e., kosher food.,And Shmuel said an alternative understanding: The advancement was a well-intentioned act in that he fed her pig hinds, thinking she would view it as a delicacy, although in fact they were not kosher.,And Rabbi Yoḥa said a third understanding: He gave her vegetables, which did not pose a problem with regard to the kosher laws. And so it states with regard to the kindness done for Daniel and his associates: “So the steward took away their food and the wine that they should drink; and gave them vegetables” (Daniel 1:16).,The verse states: “Six months with oil of myrrh” (Esther 2:12). The Gemara asks: What is “oil of myrrh”? Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said: It is the aromatic oil called setakt. Rav Huna said: It is a cosmetic oil derived from olives that have not yet reached one-third of their growth. It is similarly taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda says: Anpakinon is the oil of olives that have not reached one-third of their growth. And why is it smeared on the body? Because it removes the hair and softens the skin.,The verse states: “In the evening she went, and in the morning she returned” (Esther 2:14). Rabbi Yoḥa said: From the implicit criticism of that wicked man, Ahasuerus, who cohabited with many women, we have incidentally learned his praise as well, that he would not engage in sexual relations during the day, but in a more modest fashion at night.,The verse states: “And Esther obtained favor in the sight of all those who looked upon her” (Esther 2:15). Rabbi Elazar said: This teaches that she appeared to each and every one as if she were a member of his own nation, and therefore she obtained favor in the eyes of all. The next verse states: “So Esther was taken to King Ahasuerus into his royal house in the tenth month, which is the month Tevet” (Esther 2:16). It was by act of divine providence that Esther was taken to Ahasuerus in a cold winter month, in which the body takes pleasure in the warmth of another body, and therefore she found favor in his eyes.,The verse states: “And the king loved Esther more than all the women, and she obtained grace and favor in his sight more than all the virgins” (Esther 2:17). Rav said: This double language indicates that if he wanted to taste in her the taste of a virgin during intercourse, he tasted it, and if he wanted to experience the taste of a non-virgin, he tasted it, and therefore he loved her more than all the other women.,The verse states: “Then the king made a great feast for all his princes and his servants, even Esther’s feast” (Esther 2:18). The Gemara explains that this was part of an attempt to have Esther reveal her true identity. He made a great feast in her honor, but she did not reveal her identity to him. He lowered the taxes [karga] in her name, but still she did not reveal it to him. He sent gifts [pardishenei] to the ministers in her name, but even so she did not reveal it to him.,The verse states: “And when the virgins were gathered together the second time and Mordecai sat in the king’s gate” (Esther 2:19). The Gemara explains: The reason Ahasuerus gathered the women together was that he went and took advice from Mordecai as to what he should do to get Esther to reveal her identity. Mordecai said to him: As a rule, a woman is jealous only of the thigh of another woman. Therefore, you should take for yourself additional women. But even so she did not reveal her origins to him, as it is written: “Esther had not yet made known her kindred nor her people” (Esther 2:20).,§ Rabbi Elazar said: What is the meaning of that which is written: |
|
36. Babylonian Talmud, Makkot, 11a (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 27 11a. בלשון עזה דכתיב (יהושע כ, א) וידבר ה' אל יהושע לאמר דבר אל בני ישראל לאמר תנו לכם את ערי המקלט אשר דברתי אליכם וגו' מפני שהן של תורה,למימרא דכל דיבור לשון קשה אין כדכתיב (בראשית מב, ל) דבר האיש אדוני הארץ אתנו קשות והתניא (מלאכי ג, טז) נדברו אין נדברו אלא לשון נחת וכן הוא אומר (תהלים מז, ד) ידבר עמים תחתינו דבר לחוד ידבר לחוד:,(סימנ"י רבנ"ן מהמנ"י וספר"י),פליגי בה רבי יהודה ורבנן חד אומר מפני ששיהם וחד אומר מפני שהן של תורה,(יהושע כד, כו) ויכתוב יהושע את הדברים האלה בספר תורת אלהים פליגי בה ר' יהודה ור' נחמיה חד אומר שמנה פסוקים וחד אומר ערי מקלט,בשלמא למ"ד ח' פסוקים היינו דכתיב בספר תורת אלהים אלא למ"ד ערי מקלט מאי בספר תורת אלהים ה"ק ויכתוב יהושע בספרו את הדברים האלה הכתובים בספר תורת אלהים,ספר שתפרו בפשתן פליגי בה ר' יהודה ור"מ חד אומר כשר וחד אומר פסול,למ"ד פסול דכתיב (שמות יג, ט) למען תהיה תורת ה' בפיך ואיתקש כל התורה כולה לתפילין מה תפילין הלכה למשה מסיני לתופרן בגידין אף כל לתופרן בגידין ואידך כי איתקש למותר בפיך להלכותיו לא איתקש,אמר רב חזינן להו לתפילין דבי חביבי דתפירי בכיתנא ולית הלכתא כוותיה:,| 11a. with harsh language, as it is written: “And the Lord spoke [vayedabber] to Joshua saying: Speak [dabber] to the children of Israel, saying: Assign you the cities of refuge of which I spoke [dibbarti] to you by means of Moses” (Joshua 20:1–2). Why does the Torah repeatedly employ a term of dibbur, connoting harsh speech, as opposed to the term of amira, connoting neutral speech? It is due to the fact that the cities of refuge are a mitzva of the Torah, and therefore they warrant emphasis.,The Gemara asks: Is that to say that all instances of speaking [dibbur] indicate harsh language? The Gemara answers: Yes, as it is written with regard to Joseph’s brothers: “The man, the lord of the land, spoke [dibber] harshly to us” (Genesis 42:30). The Gemara asks: But isn’t it taught in a baraita with regard to the verse: “Then they who feared the Lord spoke [nidberu] with one another” (Malachi 3:16), that the term “they spoke” is nothing other than a term of gentleness, and likewise, the same is true of the verse which states: “He subdues [yadber] peoples under us” (Psalms 47:4), meaning that God will calmly and gently conduct the nations under the influence of the Jewish people? The Gemara answers: The meaning of dibber is discrete and the meaning of yadber is discrete. There is a difference between the two conjugations of the same root.,The Gemara provides a mnemonic for the disputes involving Rabbi Yehuda that follow: Rabbis; mehemni, i.e., the dispute with Rabbi Neḥemya; and the dispute with regard to Torah scrolls sewn with threads of flax.,The Gemara resumes the discussion of the harsh language employed in the portion discussing murderers in the book of Joshua. Rabbi Yehuda and the Rabbis disagree with regard to this matter. One says harsh language was employed because Joshua delayed fulfilling the mitzva of designating cities of refuge, and one says it is because the cities of refuge are a mitzva of the Torah, and therefore they warrant emphasis.,The Gemara cites an additional dispute with regard to the portion of the cities of refuge in the book of Joshua. It is written: “And Joshua wrote these matters in the scroll of the Torah of God” (Joshua 24:26). Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Neḥemya disagree with regard to this matter. One says: The reference is to the final eight verses in the Torah that record the death of Moses and were recorded by Joshua in the scroll of the Torah, in addition to the rest of the Torah that was written by Moses (see Bava Batra 15a). And one says: The reference is to the portion of the cities of refuge that appears in the book of Joshua.,The Gemara discusses these two opinions: Granted, according to the one who says that the reference is to the final eight verses in the Torah, that is the reason that it is written: “And Joshua wrote these matters in the scroll of the Torah of God,” as he wrote those verses and they were included in the Torah. But according to the one who says that the reference is to the portion of the cities of refuge in the book of Joshua, what is the meaning of the phrase “in the scroll of the Torah of God”? They appear in the book of Joshua, not in the Torah. The Gemara answers: This is what the verse is saying: And Joshua wrote in his book these matters that are also written in the scroll of the Torah of God.,The Gemara proceeds to cite another dispute between Rabbi Yehuda and one of the Sages in which it is not clear which opinion is attributable to which Sage. In the case of a Torah scroll where one sewed its sheets with linen threads, Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Meir disagree with regard to this matter. One says: The Torah scroll is fit for use, and one says: The Torah scroll is unfit for use.,The Gemara elaborates: According to the one who says that the Torah scroll is unfit for use, the reason is as it is written with regard to phylacteries: “And it shall be for you a sign on your hand and a memorial between your eyes, in order that the Torah of God shall be in your mouth” (Exodus 13:9). And in this verse the entire Torah is juxtaposed and likened to phylacteries: Just as with regard to phylacteries, there is a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai to sew them with sinews, so too, with regard to all sheets of the Torah scroll, there is a requirement to sew them with sinews. And the other Sage holds: When the Torah scroll is juxtaposed and likened to phylacteries, it is only with regard to the principle that the sheets of the Torah scroll may be prepared only from a species of animal that is permitted to your mouth, i.e., that it is permitted for a Jew to eat; but with regard to its other halakhot, it is not juxtaposed and likened to phylacteries.,Rav said: I saw that the phylacteries of the house of my uncle, Rabbi Ḥiyya, were sewn with linen. But the halakha is not in accordance with his opinion; phylacteries may be sewn only with sinews.,one anointed with the anointing oil, which was the method through which High Priests were consecrated until the oil was sequestered toward the end of the First Temple period; and one consecrated by donning multiple garments, the eight vestments unique to the High Priest, which was the practice during the Second Temple period; and one who received a temporary appointment due to the unfitness of the serving High Priest, who departed from his anointment with the restoration of the serving High Priest to active service, their deaths facilitate the return of the murderer from the city of refuge to his home. Rabbi Yehuda says: Even the death of a priest anointed for war to address the soldiers (see Deuteronomy 20:1–7) facilitates the return of the murderer.,The mishna continues: Therefore, the mothers of High Priests would provide those exiled to cities of refuge with sustece and garments so that they would not pray that their sons would die. The more comfortable their lives in the city of refuge, the less urgency they would feel to leave, and the less likely it would be that they would pray for the death of the High Priests.,From where are these matters, that the death of these High Priests facilitates the return of the murderer, derived? Rav Kahana said they are derived from a verse, as the verse states: “And he shall dwell there until the death of the High Priest who was anointed with the sacred oil” (Numbers 35:25), and it is written: “For in his city of refuge he shall dwell until the death of the High Priest” (Numbers 35:28), and it is written: “And after the death of the High Priest the murderer shall return to his ancestral land” (Numbers 35:28). The three mentions of the death of the High Priest correspond to the three types of High Priest enumerated by the first tanna of the mishna: One anointed with oil, one consecrated by donning the eight vestments, and one who was relieved of his position.,And Rabbi Yehuda holds that another verse is written: “And you shall take no ransom for him that fled to his city of refuge, to return and dwell in the land until the death of the priest” (Numbers 35:32), from which it is derived that the death of the priest anointed for war also facilitates the return of the murderer. And the other tanna says: From the fact that High Priest is not written in that verse, it is clear that the reference is not to an additional type of High Priest; rather, the reference is to one of those High Priests mentioned in the preceding verses.,§ The mishna teaches: Therefore, the mothers of High Priests would provide those exiled to cities of refuge with sustece and garments so that they would not pray that their sons will die. The Gemara asks: The reason that the High Priest will not die is that they do not pray; but if they prayed for the death of the High Priest, would he die? But isn’t it written: “As the wandering sparrow, as the flying swallow, so a curse that is baseless shall come home” (Proverbs 26:2)? Why does the mishna express concern over a baseless curse? A certain elder said to him: I heard in the lecture delivered by Rava that it is not a baseless curse, as the High Priests share the blame for the unintentional murders performed by these people, as they should have pleaded for mercy for their generation, that no murder should transpire, even unintentionally, and they did not plead. Due to their share in the blame, prayers for their death could be effective.,And some teach a variant reading of the mishna: Therefore, the mothers of High Priests would provide those exiled to cities of refuge with sustece and garments, so that those exiled would pray that their sons will not die. The Gemara infers: The reason that the High Priests will not die is that they pray, but if they did not pray for the High Priest not to die, would the High Priest die? What could the High Priest have done to prevent the unintentional murder? Here, in Babylonia, we say an adage to describe a situation of that sort: Toviyya sinned and Zigud is flogged. Toviyya violated a prohibition and Zigud came as a single witness to testify against him. Since the testimony of a single witness is not valid in court, he is flogged for defaming Toviyya. The sinner is unpunished and the person who sought to testify against him is flogged. This became a colloquialism for a situation where one is punished for the sin of another.,There, in Eretz Yisrael, they say a different adage with the same application: Shechem married a woman and Mavgai circumcised himself. This is based on the episode of the abduction of Dinah in the city of Shechem (see Genesis, chapter 34), where Shechem compelled all the male residents of the city to undergo circumcision so that he could marry Dinah. Shechem married Dinah, while the rest of the males suffered the pain of circumcision and received no benefit.,A certain elder said to him: I heard in the lecture delivered by Rava that the High Priests share the blame, as they should have pleaded for mercy for their generation and they did not plead. Consequently, they required the exiles to pray on their own behalf. The Gemara illustrates the concept of the responsibility held by the spiritual leadership: This is like in this incident where a certain man was eaten by a lion at a distance of three parasangs from the place of residence of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, and Elijah the prophet did not speak with him for three days because of his failure to pray that an incident of this kind would not transpire in his place of residence.,Apropos curses that are realized, Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: With regard to the curse of a Sage, even if it is baseless, i.e., based on a mistaken premise, it nevertheless comes to fruition and affects the object of the curse. From where do we derive this? It is derived from this incident involving Ahithophel. When David dug the drainpipes in preparation for building the Temple, the waters of the depths rose and sought to inundate the world. David said: What is the halakha? Is it permitted to write the sacred name on an earthenware shard and throw it into the depths, so that the water will subside and stand in its place? There was no one who said anything to him. David said: Anyone who knows the answer to this matter and does not say it shall be strangled.,Then Ahithophel raised an a fortiori inference on his own and said: And if in order to make peace between a man and his wife in the case of a sota, when the husband suspects his wife of having committed adultery, the Torah says: My name that was written in sanctity shall be erased on the water, then, in order to establish peace for the whole world in its entirety, is it not all the more so permitted? Ahithophel said to David: It is permitted. David wrote the sacred name on an earthenware shard and cast it into the depths, and the water in the depths subsided and stood in its place.,And even so it is written that during the rebellion of Absalom: “And Ahithophel saw that his counsel was not taken, and he saddled his donkey and he arose and went to his house, to his town, and he commanded his household and strangled himself” (II Samuel 17:23). Although David stipulated that his curse would take effect only if one who knows the answer fails to share it with him, and Ahithophel did not fail to share it with him, the curse was realized.,The Gemara cites a similar statement: Rabbi Abbahu says: With regard to the curse of a Sage, even if it is stated conditionally, it comes to realization. From where do we derive this? It is derived from an incident involving Eli the High Priest, as Eli said to Samuel, after the latter had received a prophetic vision with regard to Eli, that his sons do not follow his path: “Therefore may God do to you, and more also, if you hide any matter from me of all the matters that He spoke unto you” (I Samuel 3:17). And even though it is written immediately thereafter: “And Samuel told him all the matters, and did not hide from him” (I Samuel 3:18), it is written at the time of Samuel’s death: “And his sons did not follow in his ways” (I Samuel 8:3), indicating that God did to Samuel as he prophesied with regard to Eli, and his own sons did not follow his path. Despite the fact that Eli stated the curse conditionally, Samuel was affected by the curse. | |
|
37. Babylonian Talmud, Gittin, 68b (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 28| 68b. איחננא ליה כפא לקומתיה מיניה איתבר ביה גרמא אמר היינו דכתיב (משלי כה, טו) ולשון רכה תשבר גרם,חזא סמיא דהוה קא טעי באורחא אסקיה לאורחיה חזא רויא דהוה קא טעי באורחא אסקיה לאורחיה חזא חדוותא דהוו קמחדי לה בכה שמעיה לההוא גברא דהוה קאמר לאושכפא עביד לי מסאני לשב שני אחיך חזא ההוא קסמא דהוה קסים אחיך,כי מטא להתם לא עיילוה לגביה דשלמה עד תלתא יומי יומא קמא אמר להו אמאי לא קא בעי לי מלכא לגביה א"ל אנסיה מישתיא שקל לבינתא אותיב אחברתה אתו אמרו ליה לשלמה אמר להו הכי אמר לכו הדור אשקיוה,למחר אמר להו ואמאי לא קא בעי לי מלכא לגביה אמרו ליה אנסיה מיכלא שקל לבינתא מחברתה אותבה אארעא אתו אמרו ליה לשלמה אמר להו הכי אמר לכו נגידו מיניה מיכליה,[לסוף] תלתא יומי עייל לקמיה שקל קניא ומשח ארבעה גרמידי ושדא קמיה א"ל מכדי כי מיית ההוא גברא לית ליה בהדין עלמא אלא ד' גרמידי השתא כבשתיה לכולי עלמא ולא שבעת עד דכבשת נמי לדידי,א"ל לא קא בעינא מינך מידי בעינא דאיבנייה לבית המקדש וקא מיבעי לי שמירא א"ל לדידי לא מסיר לי לשרא דימא מסיר ליה ולא יהיב ליה אלא לתרנגולא ברא דמהימן ליה אשבועתיה,ומאי עבד ביה ממטי ליה לטורי דלית בהו ישוב ומנח לה אשינא דטורא ופקע טורא ומנקיט מייתי ביזרני מאילני ושדי התם והוי ישוב והיינו דמתרגמינן נגר טורא,בדקו קינא דתרנגולא ברא דאית ליה בני וחפויה לקיניה זוגיתא חיורתי כי אתא בעי למיעל ולא מצי אזל אייתי שמירא ואותביה עלויה רמא ביה קלא שדייה שקליה אזל חנק נפשיה אשבועתיה,אמר ליה בניהו מאי טעמא כי חזיתיה לההוא סמיא דהוה קא טעי באורחא אסיקתיה לאורחיה אמר ליה מכרזי עליה ברקיעא דצדיק גמור הוא ומאן דעבד ליה ניחא נפשיה זכי לעלמא דאתי,ומאי טעמא כי חזיתיה לההוא רויא דקטעי באורחא אסיקתיה לאורחיה א"ל מכרזי עליה ברקיעא דרשע גמור הוא ועבדי ליה ניחא נפשיה כי היכי דליכליה לעלמא,מאי טעמא כי חזיתיה לההוא חדוותא בכית אמר ליה בעי מימת גברא בגו תלתין יומין ובעיא מינטר ליבם קטן תליסרי שנין,מאי טעמא כי שמעתיה לההוא גברא דאמר ליה לאושכפא עביד לי מסאני לשב שנין אחיכת אמר ליה ההוא שבעה יומי לית ליה מסאני לשב שנין בעי,מ"ט כי חזיתיה לההוא קסמא דהוה קסים אחיכת אמר ליה דהוה יתיב אבי גזא דמלכא לקסום מאי דאיכא תותיה,תרחיה גביה עד דבנייה לבית המקדש יומא חד הוה קאי לחודיה אמר ליה כתיב (במדבר כד, ח) כתועפות ראם לו ואמרינן כתועפות אלו מלאכי השרת ראם אלו השדים מאי רבותייכו מינן,א"ל שקול שושילתא מינאי והב לי עיזקתך ואחוי לך רבותאי שקליה לשושילתא מיניה ויהיב ליה עיזקתיה בלעיה אותביה לחד גפיה ברקיעא ולחד גפיה בארעא פתקיה ארבע מאה פרסי על ההיא שעתא אמר שלמה (קהלת א, ג) מה יתרון לאדם בכל עמלו שיעמול תחת השמש,(קהלת ב, י) וזה היה חלקי מכל עמלי מאי וזה רב ושמואל חד אמר מקלו וחד אמר גונדו היה מחזר על הפתחים כל היכא דמטא אמר (קהלת א, יב) אני קהלת הייתי מלך על ישראל בירושלים כי מטא גבי סנהדרין אמרו רבנן מכדי שוטה בחדא מילתא לא סריך מאי האי,אמרו ליה לבניהו קא בעי לך מלכא לגביה אמר להו לא שלחו להו למלכוותא קאתי מלכא לגבייכו שלחו להו אין קאתי שלחו להו בידקו בכרעיה שלחו להו במוקי קאתי,וקא תבע להו בנידותייהו וקא תבע לה נמי לבת שבע אימיה אתיוה לשלמה והבו ליה עזקתא ושושילתא דחקוק עליה שם כי עייל חזייה פרח,ואפילו הכי הוה ליה ביעתותא מיניה והיינו דכתיב (שיר השירים ג, ז) הנה מטתו שלשלמה ששים גבורים סביב לה מגבורי ישראל כולם אחוזי חרב מלומדי מלחמה איש חרבו על יריכו מפחד בלילות,רב ושמואל חד אמר מלך והדיוט וחד אמר מלך והדיוט ומלך,לדמא דרישא ליתי שורבינא ובינא ואסא דרא וזיתא וחילפא וחילפי דימא ויבלא ולישלוקינהו בהדי הדדי ולנטול תלת מאה כסי אהאי גיסא דרישא ותלת מאה כסי אהאי גיסא דרישא,ואי לא ליתי ורדא חיורא דקאי בחד דרא ולישלקיה ולינטול שיתין כסי אהאי גיסא דרישא ושיתין כסי אהאי גיסא דרישא,לצליחתא ליתי תרנגולא ברא ולישחטיה בזוזא חיורא אההוא גיסא דכייב ליה ונזדהר מדמיה דלא לסמינהו לעיניה וליתלייה בסיפא דבבא דכי עייל חייף ביה וכי נפיק חייף ביה | 68b. and she begged him not to knock down the house. He bent his body away from her, to the other side, and broke one of his bones. He said: This is as it is written: “Soft speech can break a bone” (Proverbs 25:15).,Ashmedai saw a blind man who was lost on the road and he brought him to the correct road. He saw a drunk who was lost on the road and he brought him to the correct road. He saw the joy of a wedding celebration in which they were celebrating, and he cried. He heard a certain man say to a shoemaker [ushkafa]: Make me shoes that will last for seven years, and he laughed. He saw a certain sorcerer performing magic, and he laughed.,When Ashmedai arrived there, in Jerusalem, they did not bring him before Solomon until three days had passed. On the first day he said to them: Why doesn’t the king want me to come to him? They said to him: He drank too much and was overcome by drink. Ashmedai took a brick and placed it on top of another brick. The servants came and told Solomon what he had done. Solomon interpreted the action and said to them: This is what he said to you through this allusion: Return and give the king more to drink.,The following day Ashmedai said to them: And why doesn’t the king want me to come to him? They said to him: He ate too much and was overcome by food. Ashmedai took the brick off the other brick and placed it on the ground. The servants came and told Solomon what Ashmedai had done. He interpreted Ashmedai’s actions and said to them: This is what he said to you through this allusion: Take his food away from him.,At the end of three days Ashmedai came before Solomon. Ashmedai took a reed and measured four cubits [garmidei], and threw it before him. He said to Solomon: See, when that man, Solomon, dies, he will have nothing in this world except the four cubits of his grave. Now you have conquered the entire world and yet you are not satisfied until you also conquer me?,Solomon said to him: I need nothing from you. I want to build the Temple and I need the shamir for this. Ashmedai said to him: The shamir was not given to me, but it was given to the angelic minister of the sea. And he gives it only to the wild rooster, also known as the dukhifat or the hoopoe, whom he trusts by the force of his oath to return it.,And what does the wild rooster do with it? He brings it to mountains that are not fit for habitation, and he places the shamir on the craggy rock and the mountain splits. And he takes and brings seeds of trees, throws them there, and it becomes fit for habitation. And this is why we interpret the word dukhifat as a cutter of mountains [naggar tura], i.e., the Aramaic translation of the word dukhifat in the Bible is naggar tura, cutter of mountains.,They investigated and found the nest of a wild rooster in which there were chicks, and he covered its nest with translucent glass. When the rooster came it wanted to enter the nest but was unable to do so. It went and brought the shamir and placed it on top to crack the glass. Solomon’s servant threw a clump of dirt at the rooster and the rooster knocked over the shamir. The man took it and the wild rooster went and strangled itself over the fact that it had not kept its oath, by not returning the shamir.,Later, Benayahu said to Ashmedai: What is the reason that when you saw that blind man who was lost on the road you brought him to the correct road? Ashmedai said to him: They proclaim about him in heaven that he is a completely righteous man, and anyone who does good for his soul shall merit to enter the World-to-Come.,Then Benayahu asked: And what is the reason that when you saw the drunk man who was lost on the road you brought him to the correct road? Ashmedai said to him: They proclaim about him in heaven that he is a completely wicked man. And I did good for his soul so that he will consume his reward in this world and not have any reward in the World-to-Come.,Benayahu continued and asked him: What is the reason that when you saw that joy of the wedding you cried? Ashmedai said to him: I knew that this man will die within thirty days. And his wife is required to wait for the yavam, the husband’s brother, who is a minor, to reach the age of thirteen years, the age of majority, so that he can release her through ḥalitza, the ritual through which the yavam frees the yevama of her levirate bonds.,In addition, he asked: What is the reason that when you heard that man say to a shoemaker: Make me shoes that will last for seven years, you laughed? Ashmedai said to him: That man does not have seven days to live; does he need shoes that will last for seven years?,Benayahu then asked: What is the reason that when you saw that sorcerer performing magic you laughed? Ashmedai said to him: Because he was sitting on the king’s treasury [bei gaza]. Let him use his magic to know what there is buried underneath him.,Solomon kept Ashmedai with him until he completed building the Temple. One day he stood with Ashmedai alone. He said to Ashmedai: It is written: “For him like the lofty horns of the wild ox” (Numbers 24:8), and the Sages say in explanation of the verse: “Like the lofty horns”; these are the ministering angels. “The wild ox”; these are the demons. In what way are you greater than us? Why does the verse praise your abilities and powers over those of human beings?,Ashmedai said to him: Take the chain engraved with God’s name off me and give me your ring with God’s name engraved on it, and I will show you my strength. Solomon took the chain off him and he gave him his ring. Ashmedai swallowed the ring and grew until he placed one wing in the heaven and one wing on the earth. He threw Solomon a distance of four hundred parasangs. With regard to that moment Solomon said: “What profit is there for a person through all of his toil under the sun?” (Ecclesiastes 1:3). With Solomon deposed from the throne, Ashmedai took his place.,With regard to the verse: “And this was my portion from all of my toil” (Ecclesiastes 2:10), the Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the expression: “And this”? This expression is always an allusion to an item that is actually in his hand or can be shown. Rav and Shmuel disagree with regard to the meaning of this phrase. One said: This is referring to Solomon’s staff that remained in his hand. And one said: This is referring to his cloak. Solomon circulated from door to door collecting charity, and wherever he arrived he would say: “I, Ecclesiastes, was king over Israel in Jerusalem” (Ecclesiastes 1:12). When he finally arrived at the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem the sages said: Now, an imbecile does not fixate on one matter all of the time, so what is this matter? Is this man perhaps telling the truth that he is Solomon?,The sages said to Benayahu: Does the king require you to be with him? Benayahu said to them: No. They sent to the queens and asked: Does the king come to be with you? The queens sent a response to them: Yes, he comes. They sent a request to the queens: Check his feet to see if they are human feet. The queens sent a response to the sages: He always comes in socks [bemokei], and it is not possible to see his feet.,The queens continued discussing the king’s behavior: And he demands of them, i.e., the queens, to engage in sexual inter-course when they are menstruating. And he also demands that Bathsheba his mother engage in sexual intercourse with him. Once the Sanhedrin heard this they understood that this was an imposter and not actually Solomon. They brought Solomon, gave him a ring and the chain on which the name of God was carved. When Solomon entered, Ashmedai saw him and fled.,The Gemara adds: And even so, although Ashmedai fled, Solomon was fearful of him, and this is as it is written: “Behold the bed of Solomon surrounded by sixty strong men from the warriors of Israel. All of them holding swords and trained in war, each man with his sword on his thigh from fear in the nights” (Song of Songs 3:7–8).,Rav and Shmuel disagreed with regard to this story of Solomon. One said: He was a king and afterward he became a commoner, and never returned to his position as king. And one said: He was a king, and became a commoner, and a king, as ultimately he returned to his throne and defeated Ashmedai.,§ The Gemara returns to the discussion concerning the different remedies with which the chapter began: As a remedy for a headache caused by excessive blood in the head, let him bring cypress [shurvina], willow, fresh myrtle [asa dara], olive, poplar, sea willow, and cynodon grass and boil them together. And he should pour three hundred cups of this liquid on one side of his head and three hundred cups on this, the other side of his head.,And if it is not effective or he is unable to obtain all of these ingredients then let him bring a white rose [varda] that stands in one row, meaning that it was growing alone, and he should boil it. And he should pour sixty cups on this side of his head and sixty cups on this side of his head.,As a remedy for a migraine, let him bring a wild rooster and slaughter it using a silver dinar, so that the blood flows over the side of his head that hurts him. And he should be careful of its blood so as not to blind his eye. And he should hang it on the doorpost of his house, so that when he enters he rubs against it and when he exits he rubs against it. |
|
38. Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin, 13a (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 30| 13a. ר"ע אומר על זה ועל זה נחלקו כו':,ר"ע היינו תנא קמא איכא בינייהו דרב אחלי ואיתימא רב יחיאל ולא מסיימי,תניא אמר ר"ע לא אמר ר' ישמעאל דבר זה אלא אותו תלמיד אמר דבר זה והלכה כאותו תלמיד,הא גופה קשיא אמרת לא א"ר ישמעאל דבר זה אלמא לית הלכתא כוותיה והדר אמרת הלכה כאותו תלמיד,אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל לא אמרה ר' עקיבא אלא לחדד בה התלמידים,ור"נ בר יצחק אמר נראין איתמר,א"ר יהושע בן לוי כל מקום שאתה מוצא משום רבי ישמעאל אמר תלמיד אחד לפני ר"ע אינו אלא ר"מ ששימש את ר' ישמעאל ואת ר"ע,דתניא אמר ר"מ כשהייתי אצל ר' ישמעאל הייתי מטיל קנקנתום לתוך הדיו ולא אמר לי דבר כשבאתי אצל רבי עקיבא אסרה עלי,איני והאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל משום ר' מאיר כשהייתי לומד אצל ר' עקיבא הייתי מטיל קנקנתום לתוך הדיו ולא אמר לי דבר וכשבאתי אצל ר' ישמעאל אמר לי בני מה מלאכתך אמרתי לו לבלר אני אמר לי בני הוי זהיר במלאכתך שמלאכתך מלאכת שמים היא שמא אתה מחסר אות אחת או מייתר אות אחת נמצאת מחריב את כל העולם כולו,אמרתי לו דבר אחד יש לי וקנקנתום שמו שאני מטיל לתוך הדיו אמר לי וכי מטילין קנקנתום לתוך הדיו והלא אמרה תורה (במדבר ה, כג) וכתב (במדבר ה, כג) ומחה כתב שיכול למחות,מאי קא"ל ומאי קא מהדר ליה,הכי קא"ל לא מיבעיא בחסירות וביתירות [דלא טעינא] דבקי אנא אלא אפילו מיחש לזבוב נמי דילמא אתי ויתיב אתגיה דדל"ת ומחיק ליה ומשוי ליה רי"ש דבר אחד יש לי וקנקנתום שמו שאני מטיל לתוך הדיו,קשיא שימוש אשימוש קשיא אסרה אאסרה,בשלמא שימוש אשימוש לא קשיא מעיקרא אתא לקמיה דר"ע ומדלא מצי למיקם אליביה אתא לקמיה דרבי ישמעאל וגמר גמרא והדר אתא לקמיה דר"ע וסבר סברא,אלא אסרה אאסרה קשיא קשיא,תניא רבי יהודה אומר ר"מ היה אומר לכל מטילין קנקנתום לתוך הדיו חוץ מפרשת סוטה ורבי יעקב אומר משמו חוץ מפרשת סוטה שבמקדש,מאי בינייהו אמר רב ירמיה למחוק לה מן התורה איכא בינייהו,והני תנאי כי הני תנאי דתניא אין מגילתה כשירה להשקות בה סוטה אחרת ר' אחי בר יאשיה אמר מגילתה כשירה להשקות בה סוטה אחרת,אמר רב פפא דילמא לא היא עד כאן לא קאמר ת"ק התם אלא כיון דאינתיק לשום רחל תו לא הדרא מינתקא לשום לאה אבל גבי תורה דסתמא מיכתבא הכי נמי דמחקינן,אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק דילמא לא היא עד כאן לא קאמר רבי אחי בר יאשיה התם אלא דאיכתיב מיהת לשום סוטה בעולם אבל גבי תורה דלהתלמד כתיבא הכי נמי דלא מחקינן,ולית ליה לרבי אחי בר יאשיה הא דתנן כתב [גט] לגרש את אשתו | 13a. The mishna relates that a student recited a halakha before Rabbi Akiva, and he did not accept the student’s version of the dispute between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel, as Rabbi Akiva said: They disagree about this, an alleyway less than four cubits wide, and about that, an alleyway more than four cubits wide.,The Gemara asks: In that case, the opinion of Rabbi Akiva is identical with the opinion first tanna of the mishna, as he too holds that Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disagree in all cases, irrespective of the width of the alleyway. The Gemara answers: There is a practical difference between them with regard to the halakha stated by Rav Aḥlai, and some say it was Rav Yeḥiel, that an alleyway less than four handbreadths wide requires no corrective action. However, their respective opinions are not defined; which tanna accepts the view of Rav Aḥlai and which tanna rejects it cannot be determined.,It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Akiva said: Rabbi Yishmael did not state this matter, as it is unlikely that Rabbi Yishmael would err in this manner; rather, it was that disciple who stated that matter on his own, and the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of that disciple.,With regard to that baraita the Gemara asks: This baraita itself is difficult. You stated initially that Rabbi Yishmael did not state this matter; apparently the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of the disciple. And then you said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of that disciple.,Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: Rabbi Akiva said that the halakha is in accordance with that disciple only to sharpen the minds of his students with his statement. Seeking to encourage his students to suggest novel opinions, he praised that disciple before them but did not actually rule in accordance with the disciple’s opinion.,And Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said, in another attempt to resolve the contradiction: The statement of the disciple appears to be reasonable was stated. Although Rabbi Yishmael himself did not make that statement, the statement of the disciple is reasonable.,Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: Anywhere that you find a statement introduced with: A certain disciple said before Rabbi Akiva in the name of Rabbi Yishmael, it is none other than Rabbi Meir, who was the student who served both Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Akiva.,As it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir said: When I was a student with Rabbi Yishmael, I used to put iron sulfate [kankantom] into the ink with which I wrote Torah scrolls, and he did not say anything to me. When I came to study with Rabbi Akiva, he prohibited me from doing so.,The Gemara challenges this statement: Is that so? Didn’t Rav Yehuda say that Shmuel said in the name of Rabbi Meir: When I studied with Rabbi Akiva as his disciple, I used to put iron sulfate into the ink, and he did not say anything to me. But when I came to study with Rabbi Yishmael, he said to me: My son, what is your vocation? I replied: I am a scribe [lavlar] who writes Torah scrolls. He said to me: My son, be careful in your vocation, as your vocation is heavenly service, and care must be taken lest you omit a single letter or add a single letter out of place, and you will end up destroying the whole world in its entirety. Addition or omission of a single letter can change the meaning from truth [emet] to death [met].,I said to him: I have one substance called iron sulfate, which I place into the ink, and therefore I am not concerned. He said to me: May one place iron sulfate into the ink? Didn’t the Torah state with regard to sota: “And the priest shall write these curses in a book, and he shall blot them out into the water of bitterness” (Numbers 5:23)? The Torah requires writing that can be blotted out.,The Gemara clarifies elements of the conversation: What is Rabbi Yishmael saying to Rabbi Meir, and what is he answering him? Rabbi Meir’s response with regard to iron sulfate does not seem to address Rabbi Yishmael’s comments with regard to omissions and additions.,The Gemara explains that this is what Rabbi Meir is saying to Rabbi Yishmael: There is no need to mention defective and plene words, as I am an expert; however, even with regard to the concern that a fly might come and land on the crown of the letter dalet and blot it out and render it a reish, thereby changing the meaning of the word, I am not concerned, as I have a substance called iron sulfate that I place into the ink so that it will not be erased.,Nevertheless, there is a difficulty between service and service, as one source states that Rabbi Meir initially served Rabbi Akiva, whereas the other source states that he served Rabbi Yishmael first. There is a difficulty between the words he prohibited it in the baraita, which is referring to Rabbi Akiva, and he prohibited it in the statement of Rav Yehuda, which is referring to Rabbi Yishmael.,The Gemara comments: Granted, there is no difficulty between the accounts in the two sources with regard to service and service, as it can be suggested as follows: Rabbi Meir initially came to study before Rabbi Akiva, and since he was unable to comprehend the teachings in accordance with his opinion, he came before Rabbi Yishmael and studied the tradition, and again came before Rabbi Akiva and studied logical analysis. After studying the basic principles from Rabbi Yishmael, he was able to understand the more complex teachings of Rabbi Akiva.,Having reconciled the first difficulty, the Gemara continues: However, the difficulty with regard to whether Rabbi Akiva prohibited iron sulfate or Rabbi Yishmael prohibited it remains difficult. The Gemara notes: It indeed remains difficult; no answer was found.,The Gemara continues the discussion of iron sulfate. It was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda says that Rabbi Meir would say: One may place iron sulfate into the ink that is to be used for all sacred writings, except for the writing of the Torah passage with regard to a sota, as it must be possible to erase that writing. Rabbi Ya’akov says in his name: Except for the writing of the Torah passage with regard to a sota used in the Temple in the ordeal to determine the guilt or innocence of the wife suspected of adultery.,The Gemara asks: What is the difference between their opinions, i.e., what is their point of dispute? The Gemara answers: Rav Yirmeya said: The difference between their opinions is whether it is permissible to erase the passage of a sota from a Torah scroll. The tanna’im of the baraita disagree whether or not a section taken from a Torah scroll may be used for this purpose, or whether a special scroll must be written for use in the ordeal of the sota.,And those tanna’im disagree in the same dispute as these tanna’im, as it was taught in a baraita: A scroll that was written for one woman suspected of infidelity but was not used, her scroll is not fit to prepare the water to give to another sota to drink. However, Rabbi Aḥai bar Yoshiya said: Her scroll is fit to be used to prepare the water to give another sota to drink. The legal status of a Torah scroll, which is not written for a particular sota, should be the same.,Rav Pappa said: Perhaps that is not the case, as the two circumstances are not comparable. The first tanna of the baraita stated his opinion that one woman’s scroll may not be used for another woman only there; since it had originally been designated in the name of one woman, e.g., Rachel, it cannot then be designated in the name of another woman, e.g., Leah. However, in the case of a Torah scroll, which is written with no particular person in mind, he too may say that we may erase it to be used for another woman, and it is not disqualified because it was not written in her name.,Furthermore, Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said in another attempt to resolve the matter: Perhaps it is not so, as an additional distinction exists between the two cases: Rabbi Aḥai bar Yoshiya stated his opinion that the first woman’s scroll may be used for another woman only there because at least, in that case, it was written for a particular sota in the world. However, in the case of a Torah scroll, which was written for study, he too would agree that we do not erase it.,The Gemara asks: And does Rabbi Aḥai bar Yoshiya not hold in accordance with that which we learned in a mishna: If one wrote a bill of divorce to divorce his wife, |
|
| 39. Anon., Exodus Rabbah, 1.29 (4th cent. CE - 9th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 28 |
40. Marinus, Vita Proclus, 22 (4th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 28 | 22. Provided with this sort of virtues, without effort, and with a steady stride making constant progress in following the order of the degrees of mystic initiation, he achieved greater and higher [contemplative] virtues, as if led by the hand, first by his fortunate disposition, then by an education founded upon a profound science. For he was already purified from and raised above the world of generation and change, scorning the "many who carry the narthex," who revel therein. He on the contrary intoxicated himself with love for the primary beings. So he had himself achieved seeing directly the really beatific visions from beyond, establishing his assured science not on apodeictic and discursive syllogisms, but on what he could contemplate with his eyes, on the intuitions of intellectual activity, on the models contained within divine reason. So he acquired this virtue whose true and proper name is not science, but rather wisdom, sophia, or any other if possible more reverend name. Conforming all his actions to this virtue, the philosopher had no trouble in understanding the whole Hellenic and foreign mythology, even those revelations which had been obscured by mythical fictions; and these he expounded for those who would or could attain their elevation, giving to all of them profoundly religious interpretations, and relating them all in a perfect harmony. The writings of the most ancient authors he studied thoroughly, and after having subjected them to criticism, he gathered whatever thoughts he therein found to be useful and fruitful; but whatever seemed to lack force or value he set aside, branding them ridiculous puerilities. What however was contrary to true principles, he very energetically discussed, submitting it to thorough-going criticism, in his lectures treating each one of these theories with as much clearness as vigor, and recording all his observations in books. For without stint did he give himself up to his love for work, daily teaching five periods, and sometimes more, and writing much, about 700 lines. Nor did this labor hinder him from visiting other philosophers, from giving purely oral evening lectures, from practicing his devotions during the night, for which he denied himself sleep; and further, from worshipping the sun at dawn, noon, and dusk. |
|
| 41. Anon., Midrash Psalms, 3.2, 91.8 (4th cent. CE - 9th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 28, 30 |
| 42. Anon., Pirqe Rabbi Eliezer, 3 Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 30 |
| 43. Anon., Prayer of Manasseh, 1.3 Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 27 |
| 44. Nachmanides, Commentary On Genesis, 1.1 Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 30 |
45. Anon., Midrash On Song of Songs, 1.2 Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 28 | 1.2. "An additional meaning: \"See a man diligent in his work, before kings he will stand, he will not stand before mean men.\" That is Moses, our teacher, regarding the work of the Tabernacle. Therefore, before kings he will stand, this is Pharaoh, as it says, \"Hurriedly awaken in the morning and stand before Pharaoh (Exodus 8).\" \"He will not stand before mean men\", this is Jethro. Rabbi Nehemiah said: \"You have made that which is holy, profane!\" Rather, \"Before kings he will stand\", that is King, the King of Kings, the Holy One Blessed Be He. As it is said, \"And he (Moses) was there with the Lord, for 40 days (Exodus 34).\" \"He will not stand before mean men\", that is Pharaoh, as it says: \"And there was dark darkness, etc. (Exodus 10).\"", |
|
| 46. Anon., Massekhet Hekhalot, 2.46 Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 28 |
| 47. Anon., Midrash Konen, 2.23-2.24 Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 30 |
| 48. Anon., 3 Enoch, 13.1 Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 28 |
| 49. Dead Sea Scrolls, Xqphyl, 3, 1 Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Alexander, Gender and Timebound Commandments in Judaism (2013) 170 |
| 50. Anon., Midrash On Samuel, 26 Tagged with subjects: •divine names, rabbinic interpretation of Found in books: Janowitz, Icons of Power: Ritual Practices in Late Antiquity (2002b) 27 |
