1. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 38.15, 38.21-38.22, 38.24 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel saba (sage) Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 113| 38.15. "וַיִּרְאֶהָ יְהוּדָה וַיַּחְשְׁבֶהָ לְזוֹנָה כִּי כִסְּתָה פָּנֶיהָ׃", 38.21. "וַיִּשְׁאַל אֶת־אַנְשֵׁי מְקֹמָהּ לֵאמֹר אַיֵּה הַקְּדֵשָׁה הִוא בָעֵינַיִם עַל־הַדָּרֶךְ וַיֹּאמְרוּ לֹא־הָיְתָה בָזֶה קְדֵשָׁה׃", 38.22. "וַיָּשָׁב אֶל־יְהוּדָה וַיֹּאמֶר לֹא מְצָאתִיהָ וְגַם אַנְשֵׁי הַמָּקוֹם אָמְרוּ לֹא־הָיְתָה בָזֶה קְדֵשָׁה׃", 38.24. "וַיְהִי כְּמִשְׁלֹשׁ חֳדָשִׁים וַיֻּגַּד לִיהוּדָה לֵאמֹר זָנְתָה תָּמָר כַּלָּתֶךָ וְגַם הִנֵּה הָרָה לִזְנוּנִים וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוּדָה הוֹצִיאוּהָ וְתִשָּׂרֵף׃", | 38.15. "When Judah saw her, he thought her to be a harlot; for she had covered her face.", 38.21. "Then he asked the men of her place, saying: ‘Where is the harlot, that was at Enaim by the wayside?’ And they said: ‘There hath been no harlot here.’", 38.22. "And he returned to Judah, and said: ‘I have not found her; and also the men of the place said: There hath been no harlot here.’", 38.24. "And it came to pass about three months after, that it was told Judah, saying: ‘Tamar thy daughter-in-law hath played the harlot; and moreover, behold, she is with child by harlotry.’ And Judah said: ‘Bring her forth, and let her be burnt.’", |
|
2. Hebrew Bible, Leviticus, 18.15, 20.12, 26.1 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel saba (sage) •r. samuel (palestinian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 482; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 113| 18.15. "עֶרְוַת כַּלָּתְךָ לֹא תְגַלֵּה אֵשֶׁת בִּנְךָ הִוא לֹא תְגַלֶּה עֶרְוָתָהּ׃", 20.12. "וְאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁכַּב אֶת־כַּלָּתוֹ מוֹת יוּמְתוּ שְׁנֵיהֶם תֶּבֶל עָשׂוּ דְּמֵיהֶם בָּם׃", 26.1. "לֹא־תַעֲשׂוּ לָכֶם אֱלִילִם וּפֶסֶל וּמַצֵּבָה לֹא־תָקִימוּ לָכֶם וְאֶבֶן מַשְׂכִּית לֹא תִתְּנוּ בְּאַרְצְכֶם לְהִשְׁתַּחֲוֺת עָלֶיהָ כִּי אֲנִי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם׃", 26.1. "וַאֲכַלְתֶּם יָשָׁן נוֹשָׁן וְיָשָׁן מִפְּנֵי חָדָשׁ תּוֹצִיאוּ׃", | 18.15. "Thou shalt not uncover the nakedness of thy daughter-in-law: she is thy son’wife; thou shalt not uncover her nakedness.", 20.12. "And if a man lie with his daughter-in-law, both of them shall surely be put to death; they have wrought corruption; their blood shall be upon them.", 26.1. "Ye shall make you no idols, neither shall ye rear you up a graven image, or a pillar, neither shall ye place any figured stone in your land, to bow down unto it; for I am the LORD your God.", |
|
| 3. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 31 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •r. samuel (palestinian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 43 |
| 4. Anon., Testament of Judah, 12.2, 12.8 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel (sage) •samuel saba (sage) Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 103, 113 |
| 5. Josephus Flavius, Life, 290 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel (babylonian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 495 |
6. Mishnah, Avodah Zarah, 3.3, 8.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •r. samuel (palestinian sage) •samuel (sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 482; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 151| 3.3. "הַמּוֹצֵא כֵלִים וַעֲלֵיהֶם צוּרַת חַמָּה, צוּרַת לְבָנָה, צוּרַת דְּרָקוֹן, יוֹלִיכֵם לְיָם הַמֶּלַח. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר, שֶׁעַל הַמְכֻבָּדִין, אֲסוּרִים. שֶׁעַל הַמְבֻזִּין, מֻתָּרִין. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, שׁוֹחֵק וְזוֹרֶה לָרוּחַ אוֹ מַטִּיל לַיָּם. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אַף הוּא נַעֲשֶׂה זֶבֶל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יג) וְלֹא יִדְבַּק בְּיָדְךָ מְאוּמָה מִן הַחֵרֶם:", | 3.3. "If one finds utensils upon which is the figure of the sun or moon or a dragon, he casts them into the Dead Sea. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: if [one of these figures] is upon precious utensils they are prohibited, but if upon common utensils they are permitted. Rabbi Yose says: he may grind [an idol] to powder and scatter it to the wind or throw it into the sea. They said to him, even so it may then become manure, as it says, “let nothing that has been proscribed stick to your hand (Deuteronomy 13:18)”.", |
|
7. Mishnah, Megillah, 3.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel (babylonian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 368| 3.1. "בְּנֵי הָעִיר שֶׁמָּכְרוּ רְחוֹבָהּ שֶׁל עִיר, לוֹקְחִין בְּדָמָיו בֵּית הַכְּנֶסֶת. בֵּית הַכְּנֶסֶת, לוֹקְחִין תֵּבָה. תֵּבָה, לוֹקְחִין מִטְפָּחוֹת. מִטְפָּחוֹת, לוֹקְחִין סְפָרִים. סְפָרִים, לוֹקְחִין תּוֹרָה. אֲבָל אִם מָכְרוּ תוֹרָה, לֹא יִקְחוּ סְפָרִים. סְפָרִים, לֹא יִקְחוּ מִטְפָּחוֹת. מִטְפָּחוֹת, לֹא יִקְחוּ תֵבָה. תֵּבָה, לֹא יִקְחוּ בֵית הַכְּנֶסֶת. בֵּית הַכְּנֶסֶת, לֹא יִקְחוּ אֶת הָרְחוֹב. וְכֵן בְּמוֹתְרֵיהֶן. אֵין מוֹכְרִין אֶת שֶׁל רַבִּים לְיָחִיד, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמּוֹרִידִין אוֹתוֹ מִקְּדֻשָּׁתוֹ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אִם כֵּן, אַף לֹא מֵעִיר גְּדוֹלָה לְעִיר קְטַנָּה: \n", | 3.1. "Townspeople who sold the town square, they may buy with the proceeds a synagogue. [If they sold] a synagogue, they may buy with the proceeds an ark. [If they sold] an ark they may buy covers [for scrolls]. [If they sold] covers, they may buy scrolls [of the Tanakh]. [If they sold] scrolls they may buy a Torah. But if they sold a Torah they may not buy with the proceeds scrolls [of the Tanakh]. If [they sold] scrolls they may not buy covers. If [they sold] covers they may not buy an ark. If [they sold] an ark they may not buy a synagogue. If [they sold] a synagogue they may not buy a town square. The same applies to any money left over. They may not sell [something] belonging to a community because this lowers its sanctity, the words of Rabbi Meir. They said to him: if so, it should not be allowed to sell from a larger town to a smaller one.", |
|
8. Mishnah, Sotah, 7.8 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •r. samuel (palestinian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 43| 7.8. "פָּרָשַׁת הַמֶּלֶךְ כֵּיצַד. מוֹצָאֵי יוֹם טוֹב הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁל חָג, בַּשְּׁמִינִי בְּמוֹצָאֵי שְׁבִיעִית, עוֹשִׂין לוֹ בִימָה שֶׁל עֵץ בָּעֲזָרָה, וְהוּא יוֹשֵׁב עָלֶיהָ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים לא) מִקֵּץ שֶׁבַע שָׁנִים בְּמֹעֵד וְגוֹ'. חַזַּן הַכְּנֶסֶת נוֹטֵל סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה וְנוֹתְנָהּ לְרֹאשׁ הַכְּנֶסֶת, וְרֹאשׁ הַכְּנֶסֶת נוֹתְנָהּ לַסְּגָן, וְהַסְּגָן נוֹתְנָהּ לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל, וְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל נוֹתְנָהּ לַמֶּלֶךְ, וְהַמֶּלֶךְ עוֹמֵד וּמְקַבֵּל וְקוֹרֵא יוֹשֵׁב. אַגְרִיפָּס הַמֶּלֶךְ עָמַד וְקִבֵּל וְקָרָא עוֹמֵד, וְשִׁבְּחוּהוּ חֲכָמִים. וּכְשֶׁהִגִּיעַ (שם יז) לְלֹא תוּכַל לָתֵת עָלֶיךָ אִישׁ נָכְרִי, זָלְגוּ עֵינָיו דְּמָעוֹת. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אַל תִּתְיָרֵא אַגְרִיפָּס, אָחִינוּ אָתָּה, אָחִינוּ אָתָּה, אָחִינוּ אָתָּה. וְקוֹרֵא מִתְּחִלַּת אֵלֶּה הַדְּבָרִים (דברים א׳:א׳) עַד שְׁמַע, וּשְׁמַע (שם ו), וְהָיָה אִם שָׁמֹעַ (שם יא), עַשֵּׂר תְּעַשֵּׂר (שם יד), כִּי תְכַלֶּה לַעְשֵׂר (שם כו), וּפָרָשַׁת הַמֶּלֶךְ (שם יז), וּבְרָכוֹת וּקְלָלוֹת (שם כח), עַד שֶׁגּוֹמֵר כָּל הַפָּרָשָׁה. בְּרָכוֹת שֶׁכֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל מְבָרֵךְ אוֹתָן, הַמֶּלֶךְ מְבָרֵךְ אוֹתָן, אֶלָּא שֶׁנּוֹתֵן שֶׁל רְגָלִים תַּחַת מְחִילַת הֶעָוֹן: \n", | 7.8. "How was the procedure in connection with the portion read by the king?At the conclusion of the first day of the festival (Sukkot) in the eighth [year], at the end of the seventh year, they erect a wooden platform in the Temple court, and he sits upon it, as it is said, “At the end of seven years, in the set time” etc (Deuteronomy 31:10). The synagogue attendant takes a Torah scroll and hands it to the head of the synagogue, the head of the synagogue hands it to the deputy and he hands it to the high priest, and the high priest hands it to the king and the king stands and receives it, but reads it while sitting. King Agrippa stood and received it and read standing, and the sages praised him. When he reached, “You shall not place a foreigner over you” (ibid 17:15) his eyes ran with tears. They said to him, “Fear not, Agrippas, you are our brother, you are our brother!” [The king] reads from the beginning of “These are the words” (ibid 1:1) until the Shema ((ibid 6:4-9), and the Shema, and “It will come to pass if you hear” (ibid 11:13-21 the second part of the Shema), and “You shall surely tithe” (ibid 14:22-29), and “When you have finished tithing” (ibid 26:12-15) and the portion of the king (ibid 17:14-20) and the blessings and curses (ibid, until he finishes all the section. The blessings that the high priest recites, the king recites, except that he substitutes one for the festivals instead of one for the pardon of sin.", |
|
9. Mishnah, Taanit, 1.4, 3.6 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel (babylonian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 495| 1.4. "הִגִּיעַ שִׁבְעָה עָשָׂר בְּמַרְחֶשְׁוָן וְלֹא יָרְדוּ גְשָׁמִים, הִתְחִילוּ הַיְחִידִים מִתְעַנִּין שָׁלשׁ תַּעֲנִיּוֹת. אוֹכְלִין וְשׁוֹתִין מִשֶּׁחֲשֵׁכָה, וּמֻתָּרִין בִּמְלָאכָה וּבִרְחִיצָה וּבְסִיכָה וּבִנְעִילַת הַסַּנְדָּל וּבְתַשְׁמִישׁ הַמִּטָּה: \n", 3.6. "מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁיָּרְדוּ זְקֵנִים מִירוּשָׁלַיִם לְעָרֵיהֶם, וְגָזְרוּ תַעֲנִית עַל שֶׁנִּרְאָה כִמְלֹא פִי תַנּוּר שִׁדָּפוֹן בְּאַשְׁקְלוֹן. וְעוֹד גָּזְרוּ תַעֲנִית עַל שֶׁאָכְלוּ זְאֵבִים שְׁנֵי תִינוֹקוֹת בְּעֵבֶר הַיַּרְדֵּן. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, לֹא עַל שֶׁאָכְלוּ, אֶלָּא עַל שֶׁנִּרְאָה: \n", | 1.4. "If the seventeenth of Marheshvan came and no rain fell, individuals begin to fast three fasts. They eat and drink after it gets dark and they are permitted to do work, to bathe, to anoint themselves with oil, to wear shoes, and to have marital relations.", 3.6. "It once happened that elders went down from Jerusalem to their own cities and ordered a fast because there was seen in Ashkelon a shidafon which affected as much grain as would fill an oven [with loaves]. They also decreed a fast because wolves devoured two children on the other side of the Jordan. Rabbi Yose says: not because they devoured [the children] but [merely] because they were seen.", |
|
10. Mishnah, Tamid, 5.3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •r. samuel (palestinian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 43| 5.3. "מְסָרוּם לַחַזָּנִים, הָיוּ מַפְשִׁיטִין אוֹתָם אֶת בִּגְדֵיהֶם, וְלֹא הָיוּ מַנִּיחִין עֲלֵיהֶם אֶלָּא מִכְנָסַיִם בִּלְבָד. וְחַלּוֹנוֹת הָיוּ שָׁם, וְכָתוּב עֲלֵיהֶם תַּשְׁמִישֵׁי הַכֵּלִים: \n", | 5.3. "He then handed them over to the attendants, who stripped them of their garments, and they would leave on them only the pants. There were windows there on which was inscribed the name of the garment to which each was assigned.", |
|
11. Mishnah, Yoma, 7.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •r. samuel (palestinian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 43| 7.1. "בָּא לוֹ כֹהֵן גָּדוֹל לִקְרוֹת. אִם רָצָה לִקְרוֹת בְּבִגְדֵי בוּץ, קוֹרֵא. וְאִם לֹא, קוֹרֵא בְאִצְטְלִית לָבָן מִשֶּׁלּוֹ. חַזַּן הַכְּנֶסֶת נוֹטֵל סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה וְנוֹתְנוֹ לְרֹאשׁ הַכְּנֶסֶת, וְרֹאשׁ הַכְּנֶסֶת נוֹתְנוֹ לַסְּגָן, וְהַסְּגָן נוֹתְנוֹ לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל, וְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל עוֹמֵד וּמְקַבֵּל וְקוֹרֵא עוֹמֵד, וְקוֹרֵא אַחֲרֵי מוֹת וְאַךְ בֶּעָשׂוֹר. וְגוֹלֵל סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה וּמַנִּיחוֹ בְחֵיקוֹ, וְאוֹמֵר, יוֹתֵר מִמַּה שֶּׁקָּרָאתִי לִפְנֵיכֶם כָּתוּב כָּאן, וּבֶעָשׂוֹר שֶׁבְּחֻמַּשׁ הַפְּקוּדִים קוֹרֵא עַל פֶּה, וּמְבָרֵךְ עָלֶיהָ שְׁמֹנֶה בְרָכוֹת, עַל הַתּוֹרָה, וְעַל הָעֲבוֹדָה, וְעַל הַהוֹדָאָה, וְעַל מְחִילַת הֶעָוֹן, וְעַל הַמִּקְדָּשׁ בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ, וְעַל יִשְׂרָאֵל בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָן וְעַל יְרוּשָׁלַיִם בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ וְעַל הַכֹּהֲנִים בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָן וְעַל שְׁאָר הַתְּפִלָּה: \n", | 7.1. "The high priest [then] came to read. If he wished to read in linen garments, he reads, and if not he reads in his own white cloak. The synagogue attendant would take a Torah scroll and give it to the head of the synagogue, and the head of the synagogue gives it to deputy high priest, and the deputy high priest gives it to the high priest, and the high priest stands and receives it, and reads, [section] beginning] “After the death …” (Leviticus 16:1-34) and “But on the tenth…” (Leviticus 23:26-32). Then he would roll up the Torah scroll and put it in his bosom and say, “More than what I have read out before you is written here.” And “On the tenth …” (Numbers 29:7-11) which is in the Book of Numbers he recites by heart. And he recites on it eight benedictions: “For the law”, “For the Temple service,” “For thanksgiving,” “For the forgiveness of sins” and “For the Temple” on its own, and “For Israel” on its own and “For Jerusalem” on its own, “For the priests” on their own and “For the rest of the prayer.”", |
|
| 12. Tosefta, Avodah Zarah, 2.7 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •r. samuel (palestinian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 392 |
13. Tosefta, Ketuvot, 1.1, 4.5, 4.8 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel (sage) •samuel (sage), father of Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 103, 142| 1.1. "מפני מה אמרו בתולה נשאת ליום הרביעי שאם היה לו טענת בתולים היה משכים לב\"ד א\"כ תנשא באחד בשבת אלא מפני [שמתקן] צרכיו [כל ימות השבת] התקינו שיהא נושא אותה ברביעי [מן הסכנה ואילך התקינו שיהא נושא בשלישי] ולא מיחו בידם חכמים רצה [לישא] בשני אין שומעין לו אם [מחמת אונס הרי זה מותר מפני מה מפרישין] את החתן מן הכלה לילי שבת תחלה מפני שהוא עושה חבורה מפני מה אמרו אלמנה [ליום החמישי] שאם נושא אותה באחד מכל ימות השבת מניחה והולך למלאכתו התקינו שיהא נושא אותה בחמישי שיהא בטל שלשה ימים חמישי וערב שבת ושבת [שלשה ימי בטלה] נמצא שמח עמה ג' ימים.", 4.5. "היתה ניזונית מנכסיו וצריכה רפואה הרי היא כמזונות רשב\"ג אומר רפואה שיש לה קצבה [נתרפא מכתובתה ושאין לה] קצבה הרי היא כמזונות היו שני בצורת ואמר לה טלי גיטיך וכתובתיך צאי ופרנסי את עצמיך הרשות בידו.", 4.8. "מצוה לזון את הבנות ואין צריך לומר את הבנים ר' יוחנן בן ברוקה אומר חובה לזון את הבנות.", | 1.1. "Why did they say that a virgin was married on Wednesday? For if he had a virginity claim, he would get up early to go to court. If so, let her be married on Sunday! Rather, because they could attend to all their needs for as many days of the week as possible, they decreed that he should marry her on Wednesday. From the danger and onwards, they decreed that he should marry on Tuesday, and the Sages did not object to them. If he wants to get married on Monday, they do not listen to him. If it is because of factors beyond their control, it is allowed. Why do the groom and bride separate on the first Friday night? Because he would make a bruise [when causing her to lose her virginity, and it is forbidden to cause a wound on Shabbat]. Why did they say that a widow should be married on Thursday? Because, if he married her on Sunday, the rest of the week he would leave her and go back to work; they decreed that he should marry her on Thursday, in order that he should be idle for 3 days (Thursday, Friday, Saturday), and through these idle days, it would result in him being happy with her for 3 days.", 4.5. "If she is supported from his property and needs healing—this is like her [required] support [and the husband has to pay for it]. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Healing that has a fixed price is healed [i.e. paid for] from her ketubah; but without a fixed price—this is like her support. If there were years of drought and he said to her: Take your get and your ketubah, go and fice yourself—he is allowed.", 4.8. "Ideally, one should feed [his] daughters, and it is not necessary to say [also his] sons. Rabbi Yoha ben Berokah says: It is required to feed daughters.", |
|
14. Tosefta, Megillah, 3.21 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •r. samuel (palestinian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 43| 3.21. "כתב הנכתב ליחיד מכנין אותה לרבים לרבים אין מכנין אותה ליחיד רבי יהודה אומר המתרגם פסוק כצורתו הרי זה בדאי והמוסיף הרי זה מגדף. תורגמן העומד לפני חכם אינו רשאי לא לפחות ולא להוסיף ולא לשנות אלא אם כן יהיה אביו או רבו. ", | |
|
15. Tosefta, Sukkah, 4.6 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •r. samuel (palestinian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 43| 4.6. "[כיצד] ג' להבטיל את העם מן המלאכה חזן הכנסת נוטל חצוצרת ועולה לראש הגג גבוה שבעיר [נטל לקרות] הסמוכין לעיר בטלין הסמוכין לתחום מתכנסין ובאין לתוך התחום ולא היו נכנסין מיד אלא ממתינין עד שיבואו כולן ויתכנסו כולן בבת אחת [מאימתי הוא נכנס משימלא לו חבית ויצלה לו דגה וידליק לו את הנר].", | 4.6. "Why did they blow three blasts? To make the people cease from work. The sexton took the trumpets, and went to the top of the highest roof in the city to summon those near the city to cease from work. Those near the limits of the city assembled themselves together and came to the schoolhouse. They did not come immediately the trumpets blew, but waited till all were gathered together, and then all came at once. When did they assemble? After one could fill a bottle of water, or fry a fish, or light his lamp. ", |
|
| 16. Tosefta, Taanit, 1.13 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel (babylonian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 495 |
| 17. Palestinian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan nan nan nan |
18. Anon., Leviticus Rabba, 5.1, 29.1, 34.14 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel (babylonian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 369, 495, 564| 5.1. אִם הַכֹּהֵן הַמָּשִׁיחַ יֶחֱטָא לְאַשְׁמַת הָעָם וְהִקְרִיב עַל חַטָּאתוֹ אֲשֶׁר חָטָא פַּר בֶּן בָּקָר תָּמִים לַה' לְחַטָּאת, זֶה שֶׁאָמַר הַכָּתוּב (איוב לד, כט): וְהוּא יַשְׁקִט וּמִי יַרְשִׁעַ וגו'. דָּרַשׁ רַבִּי מֵאִיר וְהוּא יַשְׁקִט מֵעוֹלָמוֹ, וְיַסְתֵּר פָּנִים מֵעוֹלָמוֹ, כַּדַּיָּן הַזֶּה שֶׁהוּא מוֹתֵחַ אֶת הַוִּילוֹן מִבִּפְנִים וְאֵינוֹ רוֹאֶה מַה נַּעֲשָׂה מִבַּחוּץ, כָּךְ אָמְרוּ דּוֹר הַמַּבּוּל (איוב כב, יד): עָבִים סֵתֶר לוֹ וגו'. אָמְרוּ לוֹ דַּיֶּךָ מֵאִיר אֶלָּא וְהוּא יַשְׁקִט וּמִי יַרְשִׁעַ, נָתַן שַׁלְוָה לְדוֹר הַמַּבּוּל, וּמִי בָּא וְחִיְּבָן, וּמַה שַּׁלְוָה נָתַן לָהֶם (איוב כא, ח): זַרְעָם נָכוֹן לִפְנֵיהֶם עִמָּם וְצֶאֱצָאֵיהֶם לְעֵינֵיהֶם, רַבִּי לֵוִי וְרַבָּנָן, רַבִּי לֵוִי אָמַר לִשְׁלשָׁה יָמִים הָיְתָה אִשָּׁה מֵהֶן מִתְעַבֶּרֶת וְיוֹלֶדֶת, נֶאֱמַר כָּאן נָכוֹן, וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן (שמות יט, טו): הֱיוּ נְכֹנִים לִשְׁלשֶׁת יָמִים, מָה נָכוֹן הָאָמוּר לְהַלָּן שְׁלשָׁה יָמִים, אַף נָכוֹן הָאָמוּר כָּאן לִשְׁלשָׁה יָמִים. וְרַבָּנָן אָמְרֵי לְיוֹם אֶחָד הָיְתָה אִשָּׁה מִתְעַבֶּרֶת וְיוֹלֶדֶת, נֶאֱמַר כָּאן נָכוֹן, וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן נָכוֹן (שמות לד, ב): וֶהְיֵה נָכוֹן לַבֹּקֶר, מָה נָכוֹן הָאָמוּר לְהַלָּן יוֹם אֶחָד, אַף נָכוֹן הָאָמוּר כָּאן יוֹם אֶחָד. וְצֶאֱצָאֵיהֶם לְעֵינֵיהֶם, שֶׁהָיוּ רוֹאִים בְּנֵיהֶם וּבְנֵי בְנֵיהֶם. (איוב כא, יא): יְשַׁלְּחוּ כַצֹּאן עֲוִילֵיהֶם, יָנוֹקֵיהוֹן. אָמַר רַבִּי לֵוִי בַּעֲרָבְיָא קוֹרִין לְיָנוֹקָא עֲוִילָא. (איוב): וְיַלְדֵיהֶם יְרַקֵּדוּן, כְּאִלֵּין שֵׁדַיָא, כְּמָה דְתֵימָא (ישעיה יג, כא): וּשְׂעִירִים יְרַקְּדוּ שָׁם, הָא כֵיצַד, כֵּיוָן שֶׁהָיְתָה אַחַת מֵהֶן יוֹלֶדֶת בַּיּוֹם הָיְתָה אוֹמֶרֶת לִבְנָהּ לֵךְ וְהָבֵא לִי צוֹר וַאֲנִי חוֹתֶכֶת אֶת שׁוּרֶךָ, וּכְשֶׁהָיְתָה יוֹלֶדֶת בַּלַּיְלָה הָיְתָה אוֹמֶרֶת לִבְנָהּ לֵךְ וְהַדְלֵק לִי אֶת הַנֵּר וַאֲנִי חוֹתֶכֶת אֶת שׁוּרֶךָ. עוּבְדָא הֲוָה בְּחַד אִתְּתָא דִּילֵידַת בַּלַּיְלָה וְאָמְרָה לִבְרָהּ אֲזֵיל וְאַדְלֵיק לִי בּוֹצִינָא וַאֲנָא קָטַע שׁוּרָךְ, אֲזַל לְמַדְלַק בּוֹצִינָא וּפָגַע לֵיהּ שֵׁדָא שָׂרֵיהוֹן דְּרוּחֲתָא, עִם דְּמִתְעַסְּקִין דֵּין עִם דֵּין קָרָא תַּרְנְגוֹלָא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ אֲזֵיל גְּלוֹג לְאִמְּךָ וֶאֱמֹר לָהּ אִלּוּלֵי דְּקָרָא תַרְנְגוֹלָא הֲוֵינָא קָטֵיל בָּךְ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ אֲזֵיל גְּלוֹג לְאִמָּא דְּאִמָּךְ דְּלָא קְטַעַת אִמִּי שׁוּרִי, דְּאִי קְטַעַת אִמִּי שׁוּרִי הֲוֵינָא קָטֵיל לָךְ, לְקַיֵּם מַה שֶּׁנֶּאֱמַר (איוב כא, ט): בָּתֵּיהֶם שָׁלוֹם מִפָּחַד, מִן הַמַּזִּיקִין. וְלֹא שֵׁבֶט אֱלוֹהַּ עֲלֵיהֶם, מִן הַיִּסּוּרִים. וּכְשֶׁהִסְתִּיר פָּנָיו מִי אָמַר לוֹ לֹא עָשִׂיתָ כַּשּׁוּרָה, וּבַמֶּה הִסְתִּיר פָּנָיו מֵהֶן, הֵבִיא עֲלֵיהֶן אֶת מֵי הַמַּבּוּל (בראשית ז, כג): וַיִּמַח אֶת כָּל הַיְקוּם וגו'. (איוב לד, כט): וְעַל גּוֹי וְעַל אָדָם יָחַד. גּוֹי זֶה דּוֹר הַמַּבּוּל, אָדָם זֶה נֹחַ. יָחַד, הָיָה לוֹ לְהַעֲמִיד אֶת עוֹלָמוֹ מֵאָדָם אֶחָד. יָחַד, הָיָה לוֹ לְהַעֲמִיד אֶת עוֹלָמוֹ מֵאֻמָּה אֶחָת. 29.1. בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשְּׁבִיעִי בְּאֶחָד לַחֹדֶשׁ (ויקרא כג, כד), הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (תהלים קיט, פט): לְעוֹלָם ה' דְּבָרְךָ נִצָּב בַּשָּׁמָיִם, תָּנֵי בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּעֶשְׂרִים וַחֲמִשָּׁה בֶּאֱלוּל נִבְרָא הָעוֹלָם וְאַתְיָא דְרַב כְּהַהִיא דְּתָנֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, דְּתָנִינָן בִּתְקִיעָתָא דְרַב זֶה הַיּוֹם תְּחִלַּת מַעֲשֶׂיךָ זִכָּרוֹן לְיוֹם רִאשׁוֹן (תהלים פא, ה): כִּי חֹק לְיִשְׂרָאֵל הוּא וגו', וְעַל הַמְדִינוֹת בּוֹ יֵאָמֵר אֵיזוֹ לַחֶרֶב אֵיזוֹ לְשָׁלוֹם אֵיזוֹ לָרָעָב וְאֵיזוֹ לַשּׂוֹבַע וּבְרִיּוֹת בּוֹ יִפָּקֵדוּ לְהַזְכִּירָם לַחַיִּים וְלַמָּוֶת. נִמְצֵאתָ אַתָּה אוֹמֵר בְּיוֹם רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה בְּשָׁעָה רִאשׁוֹנָה עָלָה בַּמַּחֲשָׁבָה, בַּשְּׁנִיָּה נִתְיָעֵץ עִם מַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת, בַּשְּׁלִישִׁית כִּנֵּס עֲפָרוֹ, בָּרְבִיעִית גִּבְּלוֹ, בַּחֲמִישִׁית רִקְּמוֹ, בַּשִּׁשִּׁית עֲשָׂאוֹ גֹּלֶם, בַּשְּׁבִיעִית נָפַח בּוֹ נְשָׁמָה, בַּשְּׁמִינִית הִכְנִיסוֹ לַגָּן, בַּתְּשִׁיעִית נִצְטַוָּה, בָּעֲשִׂירִית עָבַר, בְּאַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה נִדּוֹן, בִּשְׁתֵּים עֶשְׂרֵה יָצָא בְּדִימוּס. אָמַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְאָדָם, זֶה סִימָן לְבָנֶיךָ כְּשֵׁם שֶׁעָמַדְתָּ לְפָנַי בַּדִּין הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה וְיָצָאתָ בְּדִימוּס, כָּךְ עֲתִידִין בָּנֶיךָ לַעֲמֹד לְפָנַי בַּדִּין בְּיוֹם זֶה וְיוֹצְאִין לְפָנַי בְּדִימוּס, אֵימָתַי בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשְּׁבִיעִי בְּאֶחָד לַחֹדֶשׁ. 29.1. וַיִּשָּׂא אַבְרָהָם אֶת עֵינָיו וַיַּרְא וְהִנֵּה אַיִל אַחַר נֶאֱחַז בַּסְבַךְ בְּקַרְנָיו (בראשית כב, יג), מְלַמֵּד שֶׁהֶרְאָה הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְאַבְרָהָם אָבִינוּ אֶת הָאַיִל נִתַּשׁ מֵחוֹרֶשׁ זֶה וְנִסְבַּךְ בְּחֹרֶשׁ אַחֵר. אָמַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְאַבְרָהָם כָּךְ עֲתִידִין בָּנֶיךָ לִהְיוֹת נֶאֱחָזִים בַּעֲוֹנוֹת וְנִסְבָּכִים בְּצָרוֹת וְסוֹפָן לִגָּאֵל בְּקַרְנָיו שֶׁל אַיִל, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (זכריה ט, יד): וַה' אֱלֹהִים בַּשּׁוֹפָר יִתְקָע, אָמַר רַבִּי הוּנָא בְּרַבִּי יִצְחָק מְלַמֵּד שֶׁהֶרְאָה הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְאַבְרָהָם אֶת הָאַיִל נִתַּשׁ מֵחֹרֶשׁ זֶה וְנִסְבַּךְ בְּחֹרֶשׁ זֶה, אָמַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְאַבְרָהָם כָּךְ הֵם עֲתִידִין בָּנֶיךָ, נֶאֱחָזִין בָּאֻמּוֹת, וְנִסְבָּכִין בְּצָרוֹת וְנִמְשָׁכִין מִמַּלְכוּת לְמַלְכוּת, מִבָּבֶל לְמָדַי, מִמָּדַי לְיָוָן, וּמִיָּוָן לֶאֱדוֹם, וְסוֹפָן לִגָּאֵל בְּקַרְנָיו שֶׁל אַיִל, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (זכריה ט, יד): וַה' עֲלֵיהֶם יֵרָאֶה וְיָצָא כַבָּרָק חִצּוֹ וגו' בַּשּׁוֹפָר יִתְקָע. רַבִּי אַבָּא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב פַּפֵּי וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ דְּסִכְנִין בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי לֵוִי אָמַר, כָּל יְמוֹת הַשָּׁנָה יִשְׂרָאֵל עוֹסְקִין בִּמְלַאכְתָּן וּבְרֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה נוֹטְלִין שׁוֹפְרוֹתֵיהֶן וְתוֹקְעִין לִפְנֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא וְהוּא עוֹמֵד מִכִּסֵּא דִּין לְכִסֵּא רַחֲמִים וּמִתְמַלֵּא עֲלֵיהֶם רַחֲמִים, אֵימָתַי בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשְּׁבִיעִי. 34.14. כִּי תִרְאֶה עָרֹם וְכִסִּיתוֹ (ישעיה נח, ז), רַבִּי אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה וְרַב וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, חַד אָמַר מְדַקְדְּקִין בִּכְסוּת וְאֵין מְדַקְדְּקִין בְּחַיֵּי נֶפֶשׁ. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים אַף בִּכְסוּת אֵינָן מְדַקְדְּקִין, מִפְּנֵי בְּרִיתוֹ שֶׁל אַבְרָהָם אָבִינוּ, (ישעיה נח, ז): וּמִבְּשָׂרְךָ לֹא תִתְעַלָּם, בַּר קַפָּרָא אָמַר הֱוֵי רוֹאֶה בְּשָׂרוֹ כִּבְשָׂרֶךָ. תָּנֵי בַּר קַפָּרָא אֵין לְךָ אָדָם שֶׁאֵינוֹ בָּא לִידֵי מִדָּה זוֹ, אִם לֹא הוּא בְּנוֹ, אִם לֹא בְּנוֹ בֶּן בְּנוֹ. דָּבָר אַחֵר, וּמִבְּשָׂרְךָ לֹא תִתְעַלָּם, רַבִּי יַעֲקֹב אָמַר בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר זוֹ גְרוּשָׁתוֹ. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי הֲוָה לֵיהּ אִתְּתָא בִּישָׁא וַהֲוַת מְבַזָּה לֵיהּ קֳדָם תַּלְמִידָיו, אָמְרוּ לֵיהּ תַּלְמִידָיו רַבִּי שְׁבֹק הֲדָא אִתְּתָא מִנָּךְ דְּלֵית הִיא עָבְדָא לִיקָרָךְ, אֲמַר לוֹן פּוּרְנָא דִידָהּ רַב עָלַי וְלֵית בִּי מִשְׁבַּק לָהּ, חַד זְמַן הַוְיָן יָתְבִין פָּשְׁטִין הוּא וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, מִן דַּחֲסַלּוּן אֲמַר לֵיהּ מַשְׁגַּח רַבִּי וַאֲנַן סָלְקִין לְבֵיתָא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ אִין, מַה דְּסָלְקִין אַמַּכַת עַל אַפָּא וְנָפְקַת לָהּ, צָפָא בְּהַהִיא קִידְרָא עֲלֵי תְּפָיָה, אֲמַר לָהּ אִית בְּהַהִיא קִידְרָא כְּלוּם, אָמְרָה לֵיהּ אִית בָּהּ פַּרְפְּרָיִין, אָזַל גָּלִיתָא וְאַשְׁכַּח בְּגַוָהּ פַּרְגָּיִין, יָדַע רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה דְּלָא יְתִיבָה דַעְתָּהּ עִם בַּעֲלָהּ, כַּד יַתְבִין לְהוֹן אָכְלִין אֲמַר לֵיהּ לָא אָמְרָה פַּרְפְּרָיִין וְהָא אֲנָא אַשְׁכַּחְנָא בְּגַוָּהּ פַּרְגָּיִין, אָמַר מַעֲשֵׂה נִסִּים הֵן, כֵּיוָן דְּאָכְלִין מַה דְּאָכְלִין, אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי שְׁבֹק הָדָא אִתְּתָא מִנָּךְ דְּלֵית הִיא עָבְדָא לִיקָרָךְ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ פּוּרְנָא רַב עָלַי וְלֵית בִּי מִשְׁבַּק לָהּ, אָמְרוּ לֵיהּ אֲנַן פַּסְקִינָן פּוּרְנָא וְשַׁבְקַהּ מִינָךְ, עָבְדִין לֵיהּ כֵּן פְּסִיקוּ לֵיהּ פּוּרְנָא וְשַׁבְקָהּ מִנֵיהּ, וְאַסְבוּן יָתֵיהּ אִתְּתָא אָחֳרֵי טַבְתָּא מִנָּהּ, גָּרְמִין חוֹבָא דְּהַהִיא אִנְתְּתָא וְאָזְלָא וְאִתְנְסִיבַת לְסַנְטֵירָא דְּקַרְתָּא, לְבָתַר יוֹמִין אָתוֹן יִסּוּרִין עֲלוֹי וְאִתְעֲבֵיד הַהוּא גַבְרָא סַגֵּי נְהוֹר, וַהֲוַת אִתְּתָא נְגִידָא לֵיהּ בְּכָל קַרְתָּא וַהֲוַת אָזְלָא בְּכָל שְׁכוּנַיָא וּבִשְׁכוּנָתֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי לָא הֲוַת אָזְלָה, הֲוָה הַהוּא גַּבְרָא חָכֵם קַרְתָּא, אֲמַר לָהּ לָמָּה לֵית אַתְּ מוֹבִילָא לִי לִשְׁכוּנָתֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי דַּאֲנָא שְׁמִיעַ דְּהוּא עָבֵיד מִצְוָן, אָמְרָה לוֹ מַשְׁבַּקְתֵּיהּ אֲנָא וְלֵית בִּי חָמֵא אַפוֹי. אָתוֹן חַד זְמַן וְקָרוֹן בִּשְׁכוּנָתֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי, שְׁרֵי חָבֵט עֲלָהּ וַהֲוַת קָלְהוֹן מִתְבַּזְיָן בְּכָל קַרְתָּא, אוֹדִיק רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי וְחָמוֹן מִתְבַּזְיָן בְּגוֹ שׁוּקָא, נְסִיבֵיהוֹן וִיהַב יָתְהוֹן בְּחַד בֵּיתָא מִן דִּידֵיהּ, וַהֲוָה מְפַרְנֵס יַתְהוֹן כָּל יְמֵי חַיֵּיהוֹן, מִשּׁוּם וּמִבְּשָׂרְךָ לֹא תִתְעַלָּם. בְּיוֹמֵי דְּרַבִּי תַּנְחוּמָא הָיוּ צְרִיכִין יִשְׂרָאֵל לְמִטְרָא אָתוֹן לְגַבֵּיהּ וַאֲמָרִין לֵיהּ רַבִּי גְּזֹר תַּעֲנִיתָא דְּיֵיחוֹת מִטְרָא, גְּזַר תַּעֲנִיתָא פַּעַם רִאשׁוֹנָה וּשְׁנִיָּה וְלֹא יָרְדוּ גְשָׁמִים, פַּעַם שְׁלִישִׁית קָם וְדָרַשׁ אֲמַר לוֹן כָּל עַמָּא יַפְלִיגוּן מִצְוָה, קָם חַד גְבַר וּנְסַב מַה דַּהֲוָה לֵיהּ בְּגוֹ בֵּיתֵיהּ וְנָפַק לְמִפְלְגָה, פָּגְעָה בֵּיהּ מַשְׁבַּקְתֵּיהּ, וְאָמְרָה לֵיהּ זְכֵי בְּהַהִיא אִתְּתָא דְּמִן יוֹמָא דְּנָפְקֵית מִן בֵּיתָךְ לָא חָמֵית טַב, כֵּיוָן שֶׁרָאָה אוֹתָהּ עֲרֻמָּה וּבְצָרָה גְדוֹלָה, נִתְמַלֵּא עָלֶיהָ רַחֲמִים וְנָתַן לָהּ, עַל שׁוּם וּמִבְּשָׂרְךָ לֹא תִתְעַלָּם, חֲמִיתֵּיהּ חַד גְּבַר, סָלֵיק וַאֲמַר לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי תַּנְחוּמָא רַבִּי אַתְּ הָכָא וַעֲבֵרָה הָכָא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ מַה חָמֵית, אֲמַר לֵיהּ חָמֵית גְּבַר פְּלָן דְּמִשְׁתָּעֵי לְמַשְׁבַּקְתֵּיהּ, וְלָא עוֹד אֶלָּא דִּיהַב לָהּ פְּרִיטִין, אִי לָאו דַּחֲשִׁיד עֲלָהּ לָא יָהֵיב לָהּ. שָׁלַח רַבִּי תַּנְחוּמָא וְאַיְיתִיתֵיהּ, וַאֲמַר לֵיהּ בְּרִי אַתְּ יָדַע דְּעַלְמָא קָאי בְּצַעֲרָא וּבְרִיָּאתָה קָיְימֵא בְּצַעֲרָא וַאֲזַלְתְּ וְאִשְׁתָּעֵית עִם מַשְׁבַּקְתָּךְ, וְלָא עוֹד אֶלָּא דִיְהַבְתְּ לָהּ פְּרִיטִין, אִלּוּלֵי דַחֲשִׁיד אַתָּה לָא יְהַבְתְּ לָהּ פְּרִיטִין, אֲמַר לֵיהּ וְלָא כָךְ דָּרַשְׁתָּ וּמִבְּשָׂרְךָ לֹא תִתְעַלָּם, אַתְּ אֲמַרְתְּ כָּל עַמָּא יִפְקוּן וְיִפְלְגוּן מִצְוָה, קָאֵים אֲנָא לְמִפְלְגָה מִצְוָה פָּגְעַת בִּי מַשְׁבַּקְתִּי וַאֲמָרַת לִי זְכֵי בְּהַהִיא אִתְּתָא דְּמִן יוֹמָא דְּנָפְקֵית מִבֵּיתָךְ לָא חָמֵית טַב, כֵּיוָן שֶׁרְאִיתִיהָ עֲרֻמָּה וּבְצָרָה גְדוֹלָה נִתְמַלֵּאתִי עָלֶיהָ רַחֲמִים וְנָתַתִּי לָהּ עַל שׁוּם וּמִבְּשָׂרְךָ לֹא תִתְעַלָּם. בְּאוֹתָהּ שָׁעָה הִגְבִּיהַּ רַבִּי תַּנְחוּמָא פָּנָיו לַשָּׁמַיִם וְאָמַר לִפְנֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם מָה אִם זֶה שֶׁהוּא בָּשָׂר וָדָם וְאַכְזָרִי וְלֹא הָיָה עָלָיו מְזוֹנוֹתֶיהָ נִתְמַלֵּא עָלֶיהָ רַחֲמִים וְנָתַן לָהּ, אָנוּ שֶׁאָנוּ בְּנֵי בָנֶיךָ בְּנֵי אַבְרָהָם יִצְחָק וְיַעֲקֹב וּמְזוֹנוֹתֵינוּ עָלֶיךָ, עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה שֶׁתִּתְמַלֵּא עָלֵינוּ רַחֲמִים, בְּאוֹתָהּ שָׁעָה יָרְדוּ גְשָׁמִים וְנִתְרַוַּח הָעוֹלָם. | |
|
| 19. Anon., Sifre Numbers, 88, 7 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 142 |
| 20. Palestinian Talmud, Sheviit, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan |
| 21. Palestinian Talmud, Bikkurim, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan |
| 22. Palestinian Talmud, Yevamot, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan |
| 23. Palestinian Talmud, Taanit, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan nan nan nan nan nan nan |
| 24. Palestinian Talmud, Sukkah, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan |
| 25. Palestinian Talmud, Avodah Zarah, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan nan nan |
| 26. Palestinian Talmud, Berachot, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan nan nan nan nan nan nan |
| 27. Palestinian Talmud, Horayot, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan |
| 28. Palestinian Talmud, Kiddushin, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan nan nan |
| 29. Palestinian Talmud, Sotah, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan nan nan nan nan |
| 30. Palestinian Talmud, Nedarim, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •r. samuel (palestinian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 392 |
| 31. Palestinian Talmud, Qiddushin, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan nan nan |
| 32. Palestinian Talmud, Rosh Hashanah, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan |
| 33. Palestinian Talmud, Shabbat, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel (babylonian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 369 |
| 34. Palestinian Talmud, Megillah, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan |
35. Anon., Genesis Rabba, 16.6, 18.24, 26.5, 31.19, 33.3, 34.8, 36.1 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel (sage) •samuel (babylonian sage) •r. samuel (palestinian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 369, 392, 495; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 103, 151| 16.6. וַיְצַו ה' אֱלֹהִים עַל הָאָדָם לֵאמֹר מִכֹּל עֵץ הַגָּן אָכֹל תֹּאכֵל (בראשית ב, טז), רַבִּי לֵוִי אָמַר צִוָּהוּ עַל שֵׁשׁ מִצְווֹת, וַיְצַו, עַל עֲבוֹדַת כּוֹכָבִים, הֵיךְ מָה דְאַתְּ אָמַר (הושע ה, יא): כִּי הוֹאִיל הָלַךְ אַחֲרֵי צָו. ה', עַל בִּרְכַּת הַשֵּׁם, כְּמָה דְאַתְּ אָמַר (ויקרא כד, טז): וְנֹקֵב שֵׁם ה'. אֱלֹהִים, אֵלּוּ הַדַּיָּנִין, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כב, כז): אֱלֹהִים לֹא תְקַלֵּל. עַל הָאָדָם, זוֹ שְׁפִיכַת דָּמִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית ט, ו): שֹׁפֵךְ דַּם הָאָדָם. לֵאמֹר, זֶה גִּלּוּי עֲרָיוֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ירמיה ג, א): לֵאמֹר הֵן יְשַׁלַּח אִישׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ וגו'. מִכֹּל עֵץ הַגָּן אָכֹל, צִוָּהוּ עַל הַגָּזֵל. רַבָּנָן פָּתְרִין לֵיהּ כָּל עִנְיָנָא, וַיְצַו ה' אֱלֹהִים, רַחֲמָן אֲנִי וְדַיָּן אֲנִי לְהִפָּרַע. אֱלֹהִים, אָמַר לוֹ אֱלֹהִים אֲנִי, נְהֹג בִּי כֵּאלוֹהַּ, שֶׁלֹא תְקַלְּלֵנִי, כְּמָה דִכְתִיב: אֱלֹהִים לֹא תְקַלֵּל. גִּלּוּי עֲרָיוֹת מִנַּיִן (בראשית ב, כד): וְדָבַק בְּאִשְׁתּוֹ וְלֹא בְּאֵשֶׁת חֲבֵרוֹ, וְלֹא בְּזָכָר, וְלֹא בִּבְהֵמָה. אָכֹל תֹּאכֵל, אָמַר רַבִּי יַעֲקֹב דִּכְפַר חָנִין מָתַי יִתְכַּשֵּׁר לַאֲכִילָה מִשֶּׁתִּשָּׁחֵט, רָמַז לוֹ עַל אֵבָר מִן הַחַי. מוֹת תָּמוּת, מִיתָה לְאָדָם, מִיתָה לְחַוָּה, מִיתָה לוֹ, מִיתָה לְתוֹלְדוֹתָיו. 26.5. וַיִּרְאוּ בְנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים (בראשית ו, ב), רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחָאי קָרֵא לְהוֹן בְּנֵי דַיָּנַיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחָאי מְקַלֵּל לְכָל מַאן דְּקָרֵא לְהוֹן בְּנֵי אֱלָהַיָּא, תָּנֵי רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחָאי כָּל פִּרְצָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ מִן הַגְּדוֹלִים אֵינָהּ פִּרְצָה, כֻּמְרַיָא גָּנְבוּ אֱלָהַיָּא מַאן מוֹמֵי בֵּיהּ אוֹ מַאן מְקָרֵב. וְלָמָּה קוֹרֵא אוֹתָן בְּנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים, רַבִּי חֲנִינָא וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ תַּרְוֵיהוֹן אָמְרִין שֶׁהִרְבּוּ יָמִים בְּלֹא צַעַר וּבְלֹא יִסּוּרִין. רַבִּי חָנָא בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אָמַר כְּדֵי לַעֲמֹד עַל הַתְּקוּפוֹת וְעַל הַחִשְׁבוֹנוֹת. רַבָּנָן אָמְרִין כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּטְלוּ שֶׁלָּהֶם וְשֶׁל דּוֹרוֹת הַבָּאִים אַחֲרֵיהֶם. (בראשית ו, ב): כִּי טֹבֹת הֵנָּה, אָמַר רַבִּי יוּדָן טֹבֹת כְּתִיב, מִשֶּׁהָיוּ מְטִיבִין אִשָּׁה לְבַעֲלָהּ הָיָה גָדוֹל נִכְנַס וּבוֹעֲלָהּ תְּחִלָּה, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב כִּי טֹבֹת הֵנָּה, אֵלּוּ הַבְּתוּלוֹת, (בראשית ו, ב): וַיִּקְחוּ לָהֶם נָשִׁים מִכֹּל אֲשֶׁר בָּחָרוּ, אֵלּוּ נְשֵׁי אֲנָשִׁים. מִכֹּל אֲשֶׁר בָּחָרוּ, זֶה זָכָר וּבְהֵמָה. רַבִּי הוּנָא בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי אָמַר דּוֹר הַמַּבּוּל לֹא נִמּוֹחוּ מִן הָעוֹלָם עַד שֶׁכָּתְבוּ גִּמּוֹמְסִיּוֹת לְזָכָר וְלִבְהֵמָה. אָמַר רַבִּי שִׂמְלָאי בְּכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁאַתָּה מוֹצֵא זְנוּת, אַנְדְּרוֹלוֹמוּסְיָא בָּאָה לָעוֹלָם וְהוֹרֶגֶת טוֹבִים וְרָעִים. רַבִּי עֲזַרְיָה וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה בַּר רַבִּי סִימוֹן בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי אָמַר עַל הַכֹּל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מַאֲרִיךְ אַפּוֹ חוּץ מִן הַזְּנוּת, מַאי טַעְמָא וַיִּרְאוּ בְנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים וגו', וּמַה כְּתִיב בַּתְרֵיהּ (בראשית ו, ז): וַיֹּאמֶר ה' אֶמְחֶה אֶת הָאָדָם, רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בַּר לֵוִי בְּשֵׁם פְּדָיָה אָמַר כָּל אוֹתוֹ הַלַּיְלָה הָיָה לוֹט מְבַקֵּשׁ רַחֲמִים עַל הַסְּדוֹמִיִּים וְהָיוּ מְקַבְּלִין מִיָּדוֹ, כֵּיוָן שֶׁאָמְרוּ לוֹ (בראשית יט, ה): הוֹצִיאֵם אֵלִינוּ וְנֵדְעָה אֹתָם לְתַשְׁמִישׁ, אָמְרוּ לוֹ (בראשית יט, יב): עֹד מִי לְךָ פֹה לְלַמֵּד סָנֵגוֹרְיָא עֲלֵיהֶם, מִכָּאן וָאֵילָךְ אֵין לְךָ לְלַמֵּד עֲלֵיהֶם סָנֵגוֹרְיָא. 33.3. טוֹב ה' לַכֹּל וְרַחֲמָיו עַל כָּל מַעֲשָׂיו (תהלים קמה, ט), אָמַר רַבִּי לֵוִי טוֹב ה' לַכֹּל, עַל הַכֹּל, שֶׁהוּא מַעֲשָׂיו. אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל טוֹב ה' לַכֹּל וְרַחֲמָיו עַל הַכֹּל שֶׁהֵן מִדּוֹתָיו הוּא מְרַחֵם. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ דְּסִכְנִין בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי לֵוִי אָמַר טוֹב ה' לַכֹּל, וּמֵרַחֲמָיו הוּא נוֹתֵן לִבְרִיּוֹתָיו. רַבִּי תַּנְחוּמָא וְרַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר אָבִין בְּשֵׁם רַב אַחָא לְמָחָר שְׁנַת בַּצֹּרֶת בָּאָה וְהַבְּרִיּוֹת מְרַחֲמִין אֵלּוּ עַל אֵלּוּ, וְהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מִתְמַלֵּא עֲלֵיהֶן רַחֲמִים. בְּיוֹמֵי דְּרַבִּי תַּנְחוּמָא הָיוּ צְרִיכִין יִשְׂרָאֵל לְתַעֲנִית, אָתוֹן לְגַבֵּיהּ אָמְרִין לֵיהּ רַבִּי גְּזָר תַּעֲנִיתָא, גָּזַר תַּעֲנִיתָא יוֹם קַדְמָאי יוֹם ב' יוֹם ג' וְלָא נְחַת מִטְרָא, עָאל וְדָרַשׁ לְהוֹן אֲמַר לְהוֹן בָּנַי הִתְמַלְּאוּ רַחֲמִים אֵלּוּ עַל אֵלּוּ וְהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מִתְמַלֵּא עֲלֵיכֶם רַחֲמִים. עַד שֶׁהֵן מְחַלְּקִין צְדָקָה לַעֲנִיֵּיהֶם רָאוּ אָדָם אֶחָד נוֹתֵן מָעוֹת לִגְרוּשָׁתוֹ, אָתוֹן לְגַבֵּיהּ וַאֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ, רַבִּי מָה אֲנַן יָתְבִין הָכָא וַעֲבֵרְתָּא הָכָא. אֲמַר לָהֶן מָה רְאִיתֶם, אָמְרוּ לוֹ רָאִינוּ אָדָם פְּלוֹנִי נוֹתֵן מָעוֹת לִגְרוּשָׁתוֹ, שְׁלַח בַּתְרֵיהוֹן וְאַיְיתִינוֹן לְגוֹ צִבּוּרָא. אָמַר לֵיהּ מָה הִיא לָךְ זוֹ, אָמַר לוֹ גְּרוּשָׁתִי הִיא. אָמַר לוֹ מִפְּנֵי מָה נָתַתָּ לָהּ מָעוֹת, אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי רָאִיתִי אוֹתָהּ בְּצָרָה וְהִתְמַלֵּאתִי עָלֶיהָ רַחֲמִים. בְּאוֹתָהּ שָׁעָה הִגְבִּיהַּ רַבִּי תַּנְחוּמָא פָּנָיו כְּלַפֵּי מַעְלָה וְאָמַר רִבּוֹן כָּל הָעוֹלָמִים מָה אִם זֶה שֶׁאֵין לָהּ עָלָיו מְזוֹנוֹת רָאָה אוֹתָהּ בְּצָרָה וְנִתְמַלֵּא עָלֶיהָ רַחֲמִים, אַתָּה שֶׁכָּתוּב בְּךָ (תהלים קמה, ח): חַנּוּן וְרַחוּם, וְאָנוּ בְּנֵי יְדִידֶיךָ בְּנֵי אַבְרָהָם יִצְחָק וְיַעֲקֹב עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה שֶׁתִּתְמַלֵּא עָלֵינוּ רַחֲמִים, מִיָּד יָרְדוּ גְּשָׁמִים וְנִתְרַוָּה הָעוֹלָם. רַבֵּנוּ הֲוָה יָתֵיב לָעֵי בְּאוֹרַיְתָא קַמֵּי כְּנִשְׁתָּא דְּבַבְלָאי בְּצִפּוֹרִין, עֲבַר חַד עֵגֶל קוֹדָמוֹי, אָזֵל לְמִתְנְכָסָה וְשָׁרֵי גָּעֵי כְּמֵימַר שֵׁיזִבְנִי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ וּמָה אֲנִי יָכוֹל לְמֶעְבַּד לָךְ לְכָךְ נוֹצַרְתָּ, וְחָשַׁשׁ רַבִּי אֶת שִׁנָּיו שְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר אָבִין כָּל אוֹתָן שְׁלשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה שֶׁהָיָה חוֹשֵׁשׁ רַבִּי אֶת שִׁנָּיו, לֹא הִפִּילָה עֻבָּרָה בְּאֶרֶץ יִשְׂרָאֵל, וְלֹא נִצְטַעֲרוּ הַיּוֹלְדוֹת, בָּתַר יוֹמִין עֲבַר חַד שֶׁרֶץ קַמֵּי בְּרַתֵּיהּ וּבְעָא לְמִקְטְלָא, אֲמַר לָהּ בְּרַתִּי שַׁבְקֵיהּ, דִּכְתִיב: וְרַחֲמָיו עַל כָּל מַעֲשָׂיו. רַבֵּנוּ הֲוָה עִנְוָתָן סַגֵּי, וַהֲוָה אֲמַר כָּל מַה דְּיֹאמַר לִי בַּר נַשׁ אֲנָא עָבֵיד חוּץ מִמַּה שֶּׁעָשׂוּ בְּנֵי בְתֵירָא לִזְקֵנִי, שֶׁיָּרְדוּ מִגְדֻלָּתָן וְהֶעֱלוּ אוֹתוֹ, וְאִין סָלֵיק רַב הוּנָא רֵישׁ גָּלוּתָא לְהָכָא, אֲנָא קָאֵים לִי מִן קֳדָמוֹהִי, לָמָּה דְּהוּא מִן יְהוּדָה וַאֲנָא מִן בִּנְיָמִין, וְהוּא מִן דִּכְרַיָא דִּיהוּדָה וַאֲנָא מִן נֻקְבְתָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי חִיָּא רַבָּה וַהֲרֵי הוּא עוֹמֵד בַּחוּץ, נִתְכַּרְכְּמוּ פָּנָיו שֶׁל רַבִּי וְכֵיוָן שֶׁרָאָה שֶׁנִּתְכַּרְכְּמוּ פָּנָיו אָמַר לוֹ אֲרוֹנוֹ הוּא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ פּוֹק חֲזֵי מַאן בָּעֵי לָךְ לְבָרָא, נָפַק וְלָא אַשְׁכַּח בַּר נָשׁ, וְיָדַע דְּהוּא נָזוּף וְאֵין נְזִיפָה פְּחוּתָה מִשְּׁלשִׁים יוֹם. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר רַבִּי אָבִין כָּל אוֹתָן שְׁלשִׁים יוֹם שֶׁהָיָה רַבִּי חִיָּא רַבָּה נָזוּף מֵרַבֵּנוּ, אַלֵּיף לְרַב בַּר אֲחָתֵיהּ כָּל כְּלָלֵי דְאוֹרַיְתָא, וְאִלֵּין אִינוּן כְּלָלַיָיא דְאוֹרַיְתָא הִלְכְתָא דְּבַבְלָאֵי. לְסוֹף תְּלָתִין יוֹמִין אָתָא אֵלִיָּהוּ זָכוּר לַטּוֹב בִּדְמוּתֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי חִיָּא רַבָּה אֵצֶל רַבֵּנוּ וִיְהַב יְדֵיהּ עַל שִׁנֵּיהּ וְאִתְּסֵי, כֵּיוָן דְּאָתָא רַבִּי חִיָּא רַבָּה לְגַבֵּי רַבֵּנוּ אֲמַר לֵיהּ מָה עֲבַדְתְּ בְּשִׁנָּךְ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ מִן עוֹנָתָא דִּיהַבְתְּ יְדָךְ עִלּוֹהִי אִתְנְשֵׁימַת, אֲמַר לֵיהּ לֵית אֲנָא הֲוָה יָדַע מָה הוּא. כֵּיוָן דְּשָׁמַע כֵּן שָׁרֵי נָהֵיג בֵּיהּ יְקָרָא, וְקָרַב תַּלְמִידִים וּמְעַיֵּיל לֵיהּ מִלְּגַאו. אָמַר רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בֶּן רַבִּי יוֹסֵי וְלִפְנִים מִמֶּנִּי, אָמַר לֵיהּ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם לֹא יֵעָשֶׂה כֵן בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל. רַבֵּנוּ הֲוָה מְתַנֵּי שִׁבְחֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי חִיָּא רַבָּה קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בֶּן רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, אָמַר לֵיהּ אָדָם גָּדוֹל, אָדָם קָדוֹשׁ. חַד זְמַן חֲמִיתֵיהּ בֵּי בָנֵי וְלָא אִתְכְּנַע מִנֵּיהּ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ הַהוּא תַּלְמִידָךְ דַּהֲוַת מִשְׁתַּבַּח בֵּיהּ חֲמִיתֵּיהּ בֵּי בָנֵי וְלָא אִתְכְּנַע מִנָּאי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ וְלָמָּה לָא אִתְכְּנָעַת מִנֵּיהּ, אָמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי חִיָּא מִסְתַּכֵּל הָיִיתִי בְּאַגָּדַת תְּהִלִּים, כֵּיוָן דְּשָׁמַע כֵּן מְסַר לֵיהּ תְּרֵין תַּלְמִידוֹי וַהֲווֹ עָיְילִין עִמֵּיהּ לַאֲשׁוּנָה, דְּלָא יִשְׁהֵי וְתִזְעַר נַפְשֵׁיהּ. דָּבָר אַחֵר, טוֹב ה' לַכֹּל וגו', וַיִּזְכֹּר אֱלֹהִים אֶת נֹחַ וגו', אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמֵנִי אוֹי לָהֶם לָרְשָׁעִים שֶׁהֵם הוֹפְכִים מִדַּת רַחֲמִים לְמִדַּת הַדִין, בְּכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ה', מִדַּת רַחֲמִים, (שמות לד, ו): ה' ה' אֵל רַחוּם וְחַנּוּן, וּכְתִיב (בראשית ו, ה): וַיַּרְא ה' כִּי רַבָּה רָעַת הָאָדָם בָּאָרֶץ, (בראשית ו, ו): וַיִּנָּחֶם ה' כִּי עָשָׂה אֶת הָאָדָם (בראשית ו, ז): וַיֹּאמֶר ה' אֶמְחֶה וגו', אַשְׁרֵיהֶם הַצַּדִּיקִים שֶׁהֵן הוֹפְכִים מִדַּת הַדִּין לְמִדַּת רַחֲמִים. בְּכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר אֱלֹהִים הוּא מִדַּת הַדִּין (שמות כב, כז): אֱלֹהִים לֹא תְקַלֵּל, (שמות כב, ח): עַד הָאֱלֹהִים יָבֹא דְּבַר שְׁנֵיהֶם, וּכְתִיב (שמות ב, כד): וַיִּשְׁמַע אֱלֹהִים אֶת נַאֲקָתָם וַיִּזְכֹּר אֱלֹהִים אֶת בְּרִיתוֹ וגו' (בראשית ל, כב): וַיִּזְכֹּר אֱלֹהִים אֶת רָחֵל וגו', וַיִּזְכֹּר אֱלֹהִים אֶת נֹחַ, מַה זְּכִירָה נִזְכַּר לוֹ שֶׁזָּן וּפִרְנֵס אוֹתָם כָּל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ בַּתֵּבָה, וַיִּזְכֹּר אֱלֹהִים אֶת נֹחַ, וְהַדִּין נוֹתֵן מִזְּכוּת הַטְּהוֹרִים שֶׁהִכְנִיס עִמּוֹ בַּתֵּבָה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר לְשֵׁם קָרְבָּנוֹ נִקְרָא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית ח, כא): וַיָּרַח ה' אֶת רֵיחַ הַנִּיחֹחַ. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר חֲנִינָא לְשֵׁם נַחַת הַתֵּבָה נִקְרָא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית ח, ד): וַתָּנַח הַתֵּבָה בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשְּׁבִיעִי וגו'. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר (בראשית ח, כב): לֹא יִשְׁבֹּתוּ, מִכְּלַל שֶׁשָּׁבָתוּ. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן לֹא שִׁמְשׁוּ מַזָּלוֹת כָּל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ, אָמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן שִׁמְשׁוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹא הָיָה רִשּׁוּמָן נִכָּר. 34.8. וְכָל הַחַיָּה אֲשֶׁר אִתְּךָ וגו' (בראשית ח, יז), אָמַר רַבִּי יוּדָן הַוְצֵא כְּתִיב הַיְצֵא קְרִי. וְשָׁרְצוּ בָאָרֶץ, וְלֹא בַתֵּבָה. וּפָרוּ בָאָרֶץ, וְלֹא בַתֵּבָה. (בראשית ח, יט): כָּל הַחַיָּה [ו] כָל הָרֶמֶשׂ וגו', כֹּל רוֹמֵשׁ, אָמַר רַבִּי אַיְּבוּ רוֹמֵשׂ מָלֵא פְּרַט לְכִלְאָיִם. לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתֵיהֶם, פְּרַט לְסִירוּס. עַל שִׁבְעָה דְּבָרִים נִצְטַוּוּ בְּנֵי נֹחַ, עַל עֲבוֹדַת כּוֹכָבִים, וְעַל גִּלּוּי עֲרָיוֹת, וְעַל שְׁפִיכוּת דָּמִים, וְעַל בִּרְכַּת הַשֵּׁם, וְעַל הַדִּין, וְעַל הַגָּזֵל, וְעַל אֵבָר מִן הֶחָי. רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר אַף עַל הַדָּם מִן הֶחָי. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר אַף עַל הַכִּלְאָיִם. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחָאי אוֹמֵר אַף עַל הַכְּשָׁפִים. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן בְּרוֹקָא אוֹמֵר אַף עַל הַסֵּרוּס. אָמַר רַבִּי אַסֵּי עַל כָּל הָאָמוּר בַּפָּרָשָׁה נִצְטַוּוּ בְּנֵי נֹחַ (דברים יח, י): לֹא יִמָּצֵא בְךָ מַעֲבִיר בְּנוֹ וּבִתּוֹ וגו', וּכְתִיב בַּתְרֵיהּ (דברים יח, יב): כִּי תוֹעֲבַת ה' כָּל עוֹשֵׂה אֵלֶּה. 36.1. וַיִּהְיוּ בְנֵי נֹחַ הַיֹּצְאִים מִן הַתֵּבָה (בראשית ט, יח), (איוב לד, כט): וְהוּא יַשְׁקִט וּמִי יַרְשִׁעַ וְיַסְתֵּר פָּנִים וּמִי יְשׁוּרֶנּוּ וְעַל גּוֹי וְעַל אָדָם יָחַד, דָּרַשׁ רַבִּי מֵאִיר וְהוּא יַשְׁקִט מֵעוֹלָמוֹ, יַסְתֵּר פָּנִים לְעוֹלָמוֹ, כַּדַּיָּין שֶׁמּוֹתְחִין כִּלָּה עַל פָּנָיו וְאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ מַה נַּעֲשָׂה מִבַּחוּץ, כָּךְ אָמְרוּ דּוֹר הַמַּבּוּל (איוב כב, יד): עָבִים סֵתֶר לוֹ וְלֹא יִרְאֶה, אָמְרוּ לוֹ דַּיֶּךָ מֵאִיר. אָמַר לְהוֹן וּמָה הוּא דִּכְתִיב: וְהוּא יַשְׁקִט וּמִי יַרְשִׁעַ וגו', אָמַר נָתַן שַׁלְוָה לְדוֹר הַמַּבּוּל וּמִי בָא וְחִיְּבָן, וּמַה שַּׁלְוָה נָתַן לָהֶם (איוב כא, ח): זַרְעָם נָכוֹן לִפְנֵיהֶם עִמָּם וְצֶאֱצָאֵיהֶם לְעֵינֵיהֶם, (איוב כא, יא): יְשַׁלְּחוּ כַצֹּאן עֲוִילֵיהֶם וגו', רַבִּי לֵוִי וְרַבָּנָן, רַבִּי לֵוִי אָמַר לִשְׁלשָׁה יָמִים הָיְתָה אִשְׁתּוֹ מְעֻבֶּרֶת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר כָּאן נָכוֹן וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן (שמות יט, טו): הֱיוּ נְכוֹנִים, מַה נָּכוֹן שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר לְהַלָּן לִשְׁלשֶׁת יָמִים, אַף נָכוֹן שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר כָּאן לִשְׁלשֶׁת יָמִים. וְרַבָּנָן אָמְרִין לְיוֹם אֶחָד הָיְתָה אִשְׁתּוֹ מְעֻבֶּרֶת וְיוֹלֶדֶת, נֶאֱמַר כָּאן נָכוֹן וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן נָכוֹן (שמות לד, ב): וֶהֱיֵה נָכוֹן לַבֹּקֶר, מַה נָּכוֹן שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר לְהַלָּן יוֹם אֶחָד, אַף כָּאן יוֹם אֶחָד. וְצֶאֱצָאֵיהֶם לְעֵינֵיהֶם, שֶׁהָיוּ רוֹאִים בְּנֵיהֶם וּבְנֵי בְנֵיהֶם. יְשַׁלְּחוּ כַצֹּאן עֲוִילֵיהֶם, אָמַר רַבִּי לֵוִי בַּעֲרָבְיָא צָוְחִין לְיָנוּקָא עֲוִילָה. (איוב כא, יא): וְיַלְדֵיהֶם יְרַקֵּדוּן, כְּאִלֵּין שֵׁדַּיָא, הֵיךְ מָה דְאַתְּ אָמַר (ישעיה יג, כא): וּשְׂעִירִים יְרַקְּדוּ שָׁם, כְּשֶׁהָיְתָה אַחַת מֵהֶן יוֹלֶדֶת בַּיּוֹם, הָיְתָה אוֹמֶרֶת לִבְנָהּ צֵא וְהָבֵא לִי צֹר לַחְתֹּךְ טִבּוּרָא, בַּלַּיְלָה הָיְתָה אוֹמֶרֶת לִבְנָהּ צֵא הַדְלֵק לִי נֵר לַחְתֹּךְ טִבּוּרָא דִילָךְ. עוֹבָדָא הֲוָה בְּחָדָא אִתְּתָא דִּילֵדַת בַּלַּיְלָה, אָמְרָה לִבְרָא זִיל אַדְלֵיק בּוּצִינָא דְּנִקְטַע שׁוּרָךְ, נְפַק וּפְגַע בֵּיהּ שֵׁדָא שְׁמָדוֹן, אֲמַר לֵיהּ זִיל גְּלוֹג לְאִמָּךְ דִּקְרָא תַּרְנְגוֹלָא, וְאִלְמָלֵא דִּקְרָא תַּרְנְגוֹלָא הֲוֵינָא מָחְיֵיתָךְ וְקָטְלִיתָךְ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ זִיל אַתְּ גְּלוֹג לְאִמָּךְ דְּלָא קְטַעַתְ אִמָּא שׁוּרִי, דְּאִלְמָלֵא דִּקְטַעְתֵּיהּ הֲוֵינָא מָחֵי יָתָךְ וְקָטֵיל יָתָךְ. הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (איוב כא, ט): בָּתֵּיהֶם שָׁלוֹם מִפָּחַד, מִן הַמַּזִּיקִין, (איוב כא, ט): וְלֹא שֵׁבֶט אֱלוֹהַּ עֲלֵיהֶם, מִן הַיִּסּוּרִים. וּכְשֶׁהִסְתִּיר פָּנָיו מֵהֶם מִי אָמְרוּ לוֹ שֶׁלֹא עָשִׂיתָ כַּשּׁוּרָה. וּמָה הִסְתִּיר פָּנָיו מֵהֶם, שֶׁהֵבִיא עֲלֵיהֶם הַמַּבּוּל, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (בראשית ז, כג): וַיִּמַח אֶת כָּל הַיְקוּם וגו'. וְעַל גּוֹי וְעַל אָדָם יָחַד, עַל גּוֹי, זֶה דּוֹר הַמַּבּוּל. וְעַל אָדָם, זֶה נֹחַ. יָחַד, שֶׁמִּמֶּנּוּ הוּשְׁתַּת הָעוֹלָם, וְיֵשׁ לוֹ לְהַעֲמִיד עוֹלָמוֹ מֵאֻמָּה שְׁלֵמָה וּמֵאָדָם אֶחָד, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: וַיִּהְיוּ בְנֵי נֹחַ הַיֹּצְאִים. | 33.3. " b God is good to all and His mercies are upon all of His works (Psalms 145:9): /b Rabbi Levi said, \"'God is good to all,' upon all, that He is their maker.\" Rabbi Shmuel said, \"'God is good to all and His mercies' - upon all that are His traits, He has mercy.” Rabbi Yehoshua of Sakhnin said in the name of Rabbi Levi, \"'God is good to all' and His merciful ones He give to His creatures.\" Rabbi Tanchuma and Rabbi Abba bar Avin [said] in the name of Rav Acha, “Tomorrow a famine will arrive and the creatures will have mercy, these upon those, and the Holy One, blessed be He, will be filled with mercy on them.” In the days of Rabbi Tanchuma, Israel required a fast (to bring about rain). They came to [Rabbi Tanchuma and] said to him, “Rabbi, decree a fast.” [So] he decreed a fast on the first day, on the second day, on the third day and rain did not fall. He got up and expounded to them. He said to them, \"My children, have mercy, these upon those, and the Holy One, blessed be He, will be filled with mercy on you.\" While they were still distributing charity to the poor, they saw a man giving money to his ex-wife. They came to [Rabbi Tanchuma] and said to him, \"Rabbi, how are we sitting here [while] there is a sin here.\" He said [back] to them, \"What did you see?\" They said to him, \"We saw Mr. x give money to his ex-wife.\" They sent for them and they brought them in front of the community. [Rabbi Tanchuma] said to him, \"What is she to you?\" He said [back] to him, \"She is my ex-wife.\" He said to him, \"Why did you give her money?\" He said to him, \"Rabbi, I saw her in distress and I was filled with mercy on her.\" At that time, Rabbi Tanchuma lifted his head towards above and said, \"Master over the worlds, just like this one that does not have an obligation to sustain [her] saw her in distress and he was filled with mercy for her, all the more so, You, that it is written about You, 'Compassionate and Merciful' and we are the children of Your friends, Avraham, Yitschak and Yaakov, will You be filled with mercy on us.\" Immediately, rains fell and the world was irrigated. Our rabbi (Yehuda Hanassi) was sitting, involved in Torah in front of the synagogue of the Babylonian [Jews] in Tzippori [when] a calf passed in front of him [and] was going to be slaughtered and started to yell out as if to say, \"Save me.\" He said to it, \"And what can I do for you? That is what you were created for.\" [As a result, Rabbi Yehuda Hanassi] had toothaches for thirteen years. Rabbi Yoss bar Avin said, \"[During] those entire thirteen years that [he] had toothaches, no pregt woman had a miscarriage in the Land of Israel and no birthing mother had pain. After some time, a crawling animal passed in front of his daughter and she wanted to kill it. He said to her, \"My daughter, let it go, as it is written, \"and His mercies are upon all of his works.\" Our rabbi had great modesty and said, \"I will do anything that people tell me except what the sons of Batira did to my forefather - that they came down from their greatness (office) and brought him up; and [even] if Rabbi Huna, the Exilarch, came here, I would get up in front of him. Why? As he is from [the tribe of] Yehuda and I am from Binyamin, and he is from the males of Yehuda and I am from the females.\" Rabbi Chiya the Great said to him, \"And behold, he is [waiting] outside.\" [Rabbi Yehuda Hanassi]'s face changed colors. And when he saw that his face changed colors, [Rabbi Chiya] said to him, \"It is [Rabbi Huna]'s coffin.\" He said [back] to [Rabbi Chiya], \"Go out and see who needs you outside.\" He went out and did not find a person and he knew that he was excommunicated - and there is no excommunication less than thirty days. Rabbi Yossi bar Avin said, \"[During] the entire thirty days that Rabbi Chiya the Great was excommunicated from our rabbi, he taught Rav, the son of his sister, the principles of the Torah.\" And what are the principles of the Torah? They are the laws of the Babylonians. At the end of thirty days, Eliyahu - may he be remembered for good - came in the likeness of Rabbi Chiya the Great to our rabbi and put his hand on his teeth and he became healed. When Rabbi Chiya the Great came to our rabbi, he said to him, \"What did you do to your teeth?\" He said [back] to him, \"From the time that you put your hand on them, they became better. He said, \"I do not know what this is.\" When he heard this, he began to treat him with respect and he brought close the students and brought up [Rabbi Chiya] to the top. Rabbi Yishmael bar Yose said, \"And [should he] come closer than I?\" He said [back] to him, \"God forbid, such should not be done in Israel.\" Our rabbi was teaching the praises of Rabbi Chiya the Great in front of Rabbi Yishmael bar Yose - he said, \"He is a great man, he is a holy man.\" One time, [Rabbi Yishmael bar Yose] saw [Rabbi Chiya] in the bathhouse and [the latter] did not humble himself before him. He said to [Rabbi Yehuda Hanassi], \"Is this your student that you have been praising? I saw him in the bathhouse and he did not humble himself before me.\" He said to him, \"Why did you not humble yourself before him?\" Rabbi Chiya said [back], I was looking at the homilies (aggadot) of Psalms.\" Once [Rabbi Yehudah Hanassi] heard this, he gave him two students to go with him to the dark places, that he not get confounded and lose himself. Another explanation: \"God is good to all, etc.\" \"And God remembered Noach, etc.\" - Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachmani said, \"Woe to the evildoers who switch the [Divine] trait of mercy to the [Divine] trait of [strict] justice. In every place that it states 'the Lord,' it is the trait of mercy: 'The Lord, the Lord, merciful and compassionate God' (Exodus 34:6). And [yet] it is written (Genesis 6:5-6), 'And the Lord saw that the evil of man on the earth was very great[...] And the Lord regretted that He had made man on the earth, and the Lord said, \"I will erase, etc.\"' Happy are the righteous who switch the trait of [Divine] justice to the [divine] trait of mercy. In every place that it states ' i Elohim /i ,' it is the trait of mercy: 'Judges ( i Elohim /i ) you shall not curse' (Exodus 22:27); 'to the judges ( i elohim /i ) the matter of both of them will come' (Exodus 22:8). And [yet] it is written (Exodus 2:24), 'And God heard their cries and God remembered His covet'; '(Genesis 30:22), 'And God remembered Rachel'; 'And God remembered Noach.' And what memory did He remember for him? That he fed and sustained them all of the twelve months in the ark.\" \"And God remembered Noach\" - and justice requires it, from the merit of the pure ones that he brought with him into the ark. Rabbi Eliezer says, \"[Noach] was named corresponding to his sacrifice, as it states, 'And the Lord smelled the pleasant ( i nichoach /i ) fragrance.'\" Rabbi Yose bar Chaninah [says], \"He was named corresponding to the resting of the ark, as it states, 'And the ark rested ( i tanach /i ) on the seventh month, etc.'\" Rabbi Yehoshua says, \"'Will not cease' (Genesis 8:22) implies that they ceased.\"", 34.8. "Bring forth (hayetze) with you every living thing that is with you…that they may swarm in the earth (Gen. 8:18). R. Yudan said: havtze is written, but it is read hayetze: that they may swarm in the earth - but not in the Ark. And be fruitful and multiply upon the earth - but not in the Ark. 'Every beast, every creeping thing, and every fowl, whatsoever moves (kol romes) upon the earth (Gen 8:19). R. Aivu said: Kol romes is written fully [with a vav] - it excludes kilayim [mixing species]. After their families: this excludes emasculation. The children of Noah were enjoined concerning seven tings: Idolatry, incest, murder, cursing the Divine Name [blasphemy], civil law, and a limb torn from a living animal. Rabbi Chanina ben Gamliel says: also concerning blood from a living animal. Rabbi Eleazar says: also against mixing species. Rabbi Shime'on ben Yochai says: also against witchcraft. Rabbi Yocha ben Beroka says: also against emasculation. Rabbi Assi said: The children of Noah were ordered regarding everything stated in the sentence: 'There shall not be found among you any one that makes his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, etc.' (Deut. 18:10) and afterwards 'because it is an abomination for Ad-nai all that do this.' (Deut. 18:12)", |
|
36. Babylonian Talmud, Rosh Hashanah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 290| 31b. ומיבנה לאושא ומאושא ליבנה ומיבנה לאושא ומאושא לשפרעם ומשפרעם לבית שערים ומבית שערים לצפורי ומצפורי לטבריא וטבריא עמוקה מכולן שנאמר (ישעיהו כט, ד) ושפלת מארץ תדברי,רבי אלעזר אומר שש גלות שנאמר (ישעיהו כו, ה) כי השח יושבי מרום קריה נשגבה ישפילנה ישפילה עד ארץ יגיענה עד עפר א"ר יוחנן ומשם עתידין ליגאל שנאמר (ישעיהו נב, ב) התנערי מעפר קומי שבי:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big אמר ר' יהושע בן קרחה ועוד זאת התקין רבן יוחנן בן זכאי שאפילו ראש בית דין בכל מקום שלא יהו העדים הולכין אלא למקום הוועד:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ההיא איתתא דאזמנוה לדינא קמיה דאמימר בנהרדעי אזל אמימר למחוזא ולא אזלה בתריה כתב פתיחא עילווה אמר ליה רב אשי לאמימר והא אנן תנן אפילו ראש בית דין בכל מקום שלא יהו העדים הולכין אלא למקום הוועד,א"ל הנ"מ לענין עדות החדש דא"כ נמצאת מכשילן לעתיד לבא אבל הכא (משלי כב, ז) עבד לוה לאיש מלוה,ת"ר אין כהנים רשאין לעלות בסנדליהן לדוכן וזו אחד מתשע תקנות שהתקין ריב"ז שית דהאי פירקא וחדא דפירקא קמא,ואידך דתני' גר שנתגייר בזמן הזה צריך שיפריש רובע לקינו אמר רשב"א כבר נמנה עליה רבן יוחנן וביטלה מפני התקלה,ואידך פלוגתא דרב פפא ורב נחמן בר יצחק רב פפא אמר כרם רבעי רב נחמן בר יצחק אמר לשון של זהורית,רב פפא אמר כרם רבעי (דתניא) כרם רבעי היה עולה לירושלים מהלך יום לכל צד וזו היא תחומה אילת מן (הצפון) ועקרבת מן (הדרום) לוד מן המערב וירדן מן המזרח,ואמר עולא ואיתימא רבה בר עולא א"ר יוחנן מה טעם כדי לעטר שוקי ירושלים בפירות,ותניא כרם רבעי היה לו לרבי אליעזר במזרח לוד בצד כפר טבי וביקש ר' אליעזר להפקירו לעניים,אמרו לו תלמידיו רבי כבר נמנו חבריך עליו והתירוהו מאן חבריך רבן יוחנן בן זכאי,רב נחמן בר יצחק אמר לשון של זהורית דתניא בראשונה היו קושרין לשון של זהורית על פתח אולם מבחוץ הלבין היו שמחין לא הלבין היו עצבין התקינו שיהו קושרין אותו על פתח אולם מבפנים,ועדיין היו מציצין ורואין הלבין היו שמחין לא הלבין היו עצבין התקינו שיהו קושרין אותו חציו בסלע וחציו בין קרניו של שעיר המשתלח,רב נחמן בר יצחק מאי טעמא לא אמר כרב פפא אמר לך אי סלקא דעתך רבן יוחנן בן זכאי חבריו דרבי אליעזר מי הוה רבו הוה ואידך כיון דתלמידים הוו לאו אורח ארעא למימרא ליה לרביה רבך,ורב פפא מאי טעמא לא אמר כרב נחמן בר יצחק אמר לך אי ס"ד רבן יוחנן בן זכאי בימי רבן יוחנן בן זכאי מי הוה לשון של זהורית והתניא כל שנותיו של רבן יוחנן בן זכאי מאה ועשרים שנה מ' שנה עסק בפרקמטיא מ' שנה למד מ' שנה לימד,ותניא מ' שנה קודם שנחרב הבית לא היה לשון של זהורית מלבין אלא מאדים ותנן משחרב הבית התקין רבן יוחנן בן זכאי ואידך אותם ארבעים שנה דלמד תלמיד יושב לפני רבו הוה ואמר מילתא ואסתבר טעמיה | 31b. b and from Yavne to Usha; and from Usha /b it returned b to Yavne; and from Yavne /b it went back b to Usha; and from Usha to Shefaram; and from Shefaram to Beit She’arim; and from Beit She’arim to Tzippori; and from Tzippori to Tiberias. And Tiberias is lower than all of them, /b as it is in the Jordan Valley. A verse alludes to these movements, b as it is stated: “And brought down, you shall speak out of the ground” /b (Isaiah 29:4)., b Rabbi Elazar says: /b There are b six exiles, /b if you count only the places, not the number of journeys, and a different verse alludes to this, b as it is stated: “For He has brought down those who dwell high, the lofty city laying it low, laying it low, to the ground, bringing it to the dust” /b (Isaiah 26:5). This verse mentions six expressions of lowering: Brought down, laying it low, laying it low, to the ground, bringing it, and to the dust. b Rabbi Yoḥa said: And from there, /b i.e., from their lowest place of descent, b they are destined to be redeemed /b in the future, b as it is stated: “Shake yourself from the dust, arise, sit, /b Jerusalem” (Isaiah 52:2)., strong MISHNA: /strong b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa said: And this, too, Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai instituted, that even /b if b the head of the court /b of seventy-one b is in any /b other b place, /b not where the Great Sanhedrin is in session, b the witnesses should /b nevertheless b go only to the place /b where the Great Sanhedrin b gathers /b to deliver testimony to determine the start of the month. Although the date of the month is dependent on the head of the Great Sanhedrin, as it is he who declares that the month is sanctified (see 24a), nevertheless, Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai instituted that the members of the Great Sanhedrin may sanctify the month in the absence of the head of the court., strong GEMARA: /strong The Gemara relates: There was b a certain woman who was called to judgment before Ameimar in Neharde’a. Ameimar /b temporarily b went to Meḥoza, and she did not follow him /b to be judged there. b He wrote a document of excommunication [ i petiḥa /i ] concerning her, /b for disobeying the court. b Rav Ashi said to Ameimar: Didn’t we learn /b in the mishna: b Even /b if b the head of the court /b of seventy-one b is in any /b other b place, the witnesses should go only to the place /b where the Great Sanhedrin b gathers? /b This shows that one must appear in the court itself, rather than follow the head of the court.,Ameimar b said to him: This applies only to testimony /b to determine the start b of the month, /b for which it is necessary to have a fixed place. The reason is b that if so, /b if the witnesses come to court when the head of the court is absent and they will have to go to another place, b consequently you will be obstructing them for future /b occasions, as they will consider it too much trouble and perhaps they will not come the next time. Therefore, the Sages said that these witnesses should go to the regular place where the Great Sanhedrin meets. b However, here, /b with regard to monetary claims, the verse states: b “The borrower is servant to the lender” /b (Proverbs 22:7), i.e., the defendant must act as is convenient to the claimant and the court.,§ b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Priests are not allowed to ascend with their sandals to the platform /b to recite the Priestly Blessing in the synagogue. b And this is one of the nine ordices that Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai instituted. Six /b are mentioned b in this chapter: /b Sounding the i shofar /i on Shabbat in Yavne, taking the i lulav /i all seven days, the prohibition against eating new grain the entire day of waving, accepting testimony to determine the start of the month all day, having the witnesses to the New Moon go to the place of meeting, and reciting the Priestly Blessing without sandals. b And one /b is stated b in the first chapter, /b that the witnesses to the New Moon may desecrate Shabbat only for the months of Tishrei and Nisan., b And the other, as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b A convert who converts nowadays is required to set aside a quarter /b -shekel b for his nest, /b i.e., his pair of doves. By Torah law a convert must bring two burnt-offerings of birds, in addition to his immersion and circumcision. After the destruction, it was instituted that he must set aside the value of two young pigeons in anticipation of the rebuilding of the Temple. b Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said: Rabban Yoḥa /b ben Zakkai b already /b assembled a majority who b voted and rescinded /b the ordice b due to /b a potential b mishap. /b If a convert is obligated to set aside money, someone might unwittingly use this money, thereby violating the prohibition against misuse of consecrated property., b And the other /b ordice, the ninth, b is /b the subject of b a dispute between Rav Pappa and Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak. Rav Pappa said: /b The ordice concerned the fruit of a b fourth-year grapevine. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: /b It was with regard to b the strip of crimson /b wool.,The Gemara elaborates: b Rav Pappa said /b that the ordice is referring to the fruit of b a fourth-year grapevine, as it is taught /b in a mishna ( i Beitza /i 5a): The fruit of b a fourth-year grapevine /b has the status of second-tithe fruits, and therefore their owner b would ascend to Jerusalem /b and eat the grapes there. If he is unable to do so, due to the distance involved or the weight of the load, he may redeem the fruits with money where he is, and later redeem that money for other fruits in Jerusalem. However, the Sages decreed that fruit from the environs of Jerusalem should not be redeemed; rather, the owners should bring the fruit itself to Jerusalem. The environs of Jerusalem for this purpose were defined as b a day’s walk in each direction. And this is its boundary: Eilat to the north, Akrabat to the south, Lod to the west, and the Jordan /b river b to the east. /b , b And Ulla said, and some say Rabba bar Ulla /b said that b Rabbi Yoḥa said: /b For b what reason /b did the Sages institute this ordice, that one who lives near Jerusalem must bring his fruit there? b In order to adorn the markets of Jerusalem with fruit, /b as this decree ensures that there is always an abundance of fruit in Jerusalem., b And it was /b further b taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Rabbi Eliezer /b ben Hyrcanus, a student of Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai, b had a fourth-year grapevine /b located between Lod and Jerusalem, b to the east /b of b Lod alongside the village of Tavi. /b The vine was within the boundaries of Jerusalem for the purpose of this i halakha /i . Rabbi Eliezer could not bring the fruit to the Temple, as the Temple had been destroyed, b and Rabbi Eliezer sought to render /b the fruit b ownerless /b in favor b of the poor, /b for whom it would be worth the effort to bring the fruit to Jerusalem., b His students said to him: /b Our b teacher, /b there is no need to do so, as b your colleagues have already voted on /b the matter b and permitted it, /b as after the destruction of the Temple there is no need to adorn the markets of Jerusalem. The Gemara explains: b Who are: Your colleagues? /b This is referring to b Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai. /b , b Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: /b The ordice was with regard to b the strip of crimson /b wool used on Yom Kippur. b As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b At first they would tie a strip of crimson /b wool b to the opening of the Entrance Hall /b of the Temple b on the outside. /b If, after the sacrificing of the offerings and the sending of the scapegoat, the strip b turned white, /b the people b would rejoice, /b as this indicated that their sins had been atoned for. If b it did not turn white they would be sad. /b When the Sages saw that people were overly distressed on Yom Kippur, b they instituted that they should tie /b the strip of crimson wool b to the opening of the Entrance Hall on the inside, /b where only a few could enter to see it., b But /b people b would still peek and see /b it, and once again, if b it turned white they would rejoice, /b and if b it did not turn white they would be sad. /b Therefore, the Sages b instituted that they should tie half of /b the strip b to a rock /b near the place where the one who sent the scapegoat stood b and half of it between the horns of the scapegoat, /b so that the people would not know what happened to the strip until after the conclusion of Yom Kippur. This ordice was instituted by Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai.,The Gemara explains this dispute: b What is the reason /b that b Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak did not state /b his opinion with regard to the ordice b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rav Pappa? He /b could have b said to you: If it enters your mind /b to say that b Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai /b rescinded the ordice of the fruit of fourth-year grapevines, b was he /b one of b Rabbi Eliezer’s colleagues, /b that the students would have referred to him in this manner? b He was his teacher. /b Therefore, Rabbi Yoḥa cannot be the one who instituted this ordice. b And the other, /b Rav Pappa, what would he respond to this? He would say that b since they were /b Rabbi Eliezer’s b students /b it is b not proper conduct /b for one b to say to his teacher: Your teacher. /b Therefore, they referred to Rabbi Yoḥa as Rabbi Eliezer’s colleague.,The Gemara asks: b And what is the reason /b that b Rav Pappa did not state /b his opinion b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak? /b Rav Pappa could have b said to you: If it enters your mind /b to say that this ordice for Yom Kippur was instituted by b Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai, in the days of Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai was there /b in fact b a strip of crimson /b wool? b Isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b All the years of Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai’s /b life were b 120 years: Forty years he was involved in business /b so that he could achieve ficial independence and study Torah, b forty years he studied /b Torah, and b forty years he taught /b Torah., b And it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : During b the forty years before the /b Second b Temple was destroyed the strip of crimson /b wool b would not turn white; rather, /b it would b turn /b a deeper shade of b red. And we learned /b in the mishna: b When the Temple was destroyed Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai instituted /b his ordices. This shows that Rabban Yoḥa lived and taught Torah after the destruction. Therefore the ordice of the crimson wool must have been made while Rabban Yoḥa was still studying Torah, before he instituted any ordices. The Gemara asks: b And the other /b Sage, Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak, what would he answer? According to him, that ordice was instituted during b those forty years that he studied /b Torah. He b was /b then b a student sitting before his teacher, and he said a matter, /b i.e., he suggested this ordice, b and his reasoning made sense /b to the Sages, |
|
37. Babylonian Talmud, Hulin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel (babylonian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 563| 95b. מחוור רישא נפל מיניה אזל אייתי סילתא שדא אסיק תרין אמר רב עבדי נמי הכי אסרינהו ניהליה,אמרי ליה רב כהנא ורב אסי לרב דאיסורא שכיחי דהתירא לא שכיחי אמר להו דאיסורא שכיחי טפי,וכי מכללא מאי פרוותא דעובדי כוכבים הואי תדע דקאמר להו דאיסורא שכיחי טפי,אלא רב היכי אכל בשרא בשעתיה דלא עלים עיניה מיניה איבעית אימא בציירא וחתומא ואי נמי בסימנא כי הא דרבה ב"ר הונא מחתך ליה אתלת קרנתא,רב הוה קאזיל לבי רב חנן חתניה חזי מברא דקאתי לאפיה אמר מברא קאתי לאפי יומא טבא לגו,אזל קם אבבא אודיק בבזעא דדשא חזי חיותא דתליא טרף אבבא נפוק אתו כולי עלמא לאפיה אתא טבחי נמי לא עלים רב עיניה מיניה אמר להו איכו השתא ספיתו להו איסורא לבני ברת לא אכל רב מההוא בישרא,מ"ט אי משום איעלומי הא לא איעלים אלא דנחיש,והאמר רב כל נחש שאינו כאליעזר עבד אברהם וכיונתן בן שאול אינו נחש אלא סעודת הרשות הואי ורב לא מתהני מסעודת הרשות,רב בדיק במברא ושמואל בדיק בספרא רבי יוחנן בדיק בינוקא,כולהו שני דרב הוה כתב ליה רבי יוחנן לקדם רבינו שבבבל כי נח נפשיה הוה כתב לשמואל לקדם חבירינו שבבבל אמר לא ידע לי מידי דרביה אנא כתב שדר ליה עיבורא דשיתין שני אמר השתא חושבנא בעלמא ידע,כתב שדר ליה תליסר גמלי ספקי טריפתא אמר אית לי רב בבבל איזיל איחזייה א"ל לינוקא פסוק לי פסוקיך אמר ליה (שמואל א כח, ג) ושמואל מת אמר ש"מ נח נפשיה דשמואל,ולא היא לא שכיב שמואל אלא כי היכי דלא ליטרח רבי יוחנן,תניא רבי שמעון בן אלעזר אומר בית תינוק ואשה אף על פי שאין נחש יש סימן,אמר ר' אלעזר והוא דאיתחזק תלתא זימני דכתיב (בראשית מב, לו) יוסף איננו ושמעון איננו ואת בנימין תקחו,בעא מיניה רב הונא מרב בחרוזין מהו א"ל אל תהי שוטה בחרוזין הרי זה סימן איכא דאמרי אמר רב הונא אמר רב בחרוזין הרי זה סימן,רב נחמן מנהרדעא איקלע לגבי רב כהנא לפום נהרא במעלי יומא דכפורי אתו עורבי שדו כבדי וכוליתא אמר ליה שקול ואכול האידנא דהיתרא שכיח טפי,רב חייא בר אבין איתבד ליה כרכשא (בי דינא) אתא לקמיה דרב הונא אמר ליה אית לך סימנא בגויה א"ל לא אית לך טביעות עינא בגויה אמר ליה אין אם כן זיל שקול,רב חנינא חוזאה איתבד ליה גבא דבשרא אתא לקמיה דרב נחמן אמר ליה אית לך סימנא בגויה אמר ליה לא אית לך טביעות עינא בגויה אמר ליה אין אם כן זיל שקול,רב נתן בר אביי איתבד ליה קיבורא דתכלתא אתא לקמיה דרב חסדא אמר ליה אית לך סימנא בגויה אמר ליה לא אית לך טביעות עינא בגויה אמר ליה אין אם כן זיל שקול,אמר רבא מרישא הוה אמינא סימנא עדיף מטביעות עינא דהא מהדרינן אבידתא בסימנא | 95b. b cleaning /b the b head /b of an animal in the river. The head b fell from him. He went and brought a basket, cast /b the basket into the river, and b pulled out two /b animal heads. b Rav said /b to him: Does it commonly b happen this /b way that one loses one item and finds two? Just as one of the animal heads is not the one you dropped, it is possible that neither of them is the one you dropped. Therefore, Rav rendered both of b them forbidden to him. /b , b Rav Kahana and Rav Asi said to Rav: /b Is b forbidden /b meat b common /b but b permitted /b meat b not common? /b Most of the meat in this general location is kosher, so why did you forbid the two animal heads? b He said to them: Forbidden /b meat b is more common. /b From this incident the Sages derived that according to Rav, meat that has been obscured from sight becomes forbidden due to the possibility that the meat one finds now was actually deposited by ravens, who transported it from a location where the majority of the meat is forbidden.,The Gemara asks: b And what /b does it matter b if /b this opinion of Rav is known b by inference /b based on this incident, rather than by an explicit statement made by Rav? The Gemara answers: There is room to say that this incident cannot serve as a precedent for a general policy, because that location b was a port of gentiles, /b where most of the meat was non-kosher. b Know /b that this is the case, b as /b Rav b said to /b Rav Kahana and Rav Asi: b Forbidden /b meat b is more common. /b Consequently, it is possible that Rav would not have prohibited the meat in a location where the majority of the meat is kosher.,The Gemara asks: b But how did Rav /b ever b eat meat /b if he holds that meat becomes forbidden if it is unsupervised for even a short time? The Gemara answers: Rav ate meat only b in its time, /b i.e., shortly after it was slaughtered, b when it had not been obscured from his sight /b from the time of the slaughter until he ate it. Alternatively, b if you wish, say /b that Rav ate meat that was b tied and sealed /b in a way that proved it had not been swapped for non-kosher meat. b Or alternatively, /b he ate meat that could be recognized b by a distinguishing mark, like that /b practice of b Rabba bar Rav Huna, /b who would b cut /b meat into pieces b with three corners, /b i.e., triangles, before he would send it to his family members.,The Gemara relates that b Rav was going to the home of Rav Ḥa, his son-in-law. He saw /b that b the ferry was coming toward him /b just when he arrived at the riverbank. b He said: The ferry is coming toward me /b even though I did not arrange for it to come now; this is a sign that b a good day, /b i.e., a festive meal, awaits me b in /b the place where I am going.,After crossing the river on the ferry, Rav b went and stood at the gate /b of Rav Ḥa’s home. b He looked /b through b a crack in the door /b and b saw an animal that was hanging /b and ready to be cooked. b He knocked on the gate, /b and b everyone went out to /b greet b him, /b and b the butchers also came /b out to greet him. b Rav did not remove his eyes from /b the meat that the butchers were preparing. b He said to them: If /b you had eaten the meat based upon the supervision you provided b now, /b you would have b fed forbidden /b meat b to the sons of /b my b daughter /b because no one apart from me was watching the meat when you all came out to greet me. And despite the fact that he had kept the meat in his sight b Rav did not eat from that meat. /b ,The Gemara asks: b What is the reason /b that Rav did not eat the meat? b If /b one suggests that he was concerned b because /b it had been b obscured /b from sight, that cannot be the reason, as Rav kept watching it so that it b was not obscured /b from sight. b Rather, /b Rav did not eat b because he divined, /b i.e., he saw the arrival of the ferry as a good omen. This is prohibited, and therefore Rav penalized himself and abstained from the meat.,The Gemara asks: b But doesn’t Rav say /b that b any divination that is not like /b the divination of b Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, /b when he went to seek a bride for Isaac (see Genesis 24:14), b or like /b the divination of b Jonathan, son of Saul, /b who sought an omen as to whether he and his arms bearer would defeat the Philistines (see I Samuel 14:8–12), b is not divination? /b Since Rav did not rely on the omen in his decision making, he did not violate the prohibition against divination, and there was no reason for him to penalize himself. The Gemara answers: b Rather, /b the reason Rav did not eat the meat is that b it was an optional feast, /b rather than a feast associated with a mitzva, b and Rav would not derive pleasure from an optional feast. /b ,Having mentioned Rav’s reaction to the ferry in the incident cited above, the Gemara states that b Rav would check /b whether to travel based upon b the ferry; /b if it came quickly he would take the ferry, but otherwise he would not. b And Shmuel would check /b what would happen to him b by /b opening b a scroll /b and reading from wherever it was open to. b Rabbi Yoḥa would check /b what was in store for him b by /b asking b a child /b to recite the verse he was learning.,The Gemara relates an incident when Rabbi Yoḥa checked his luck based on a child’s verse. During b all the years /b when b Rav /b lived in Babylonia, b Rabbi Yoḥa, /b who lived in Eretz Yisrael, would b write to him /b and begin with the greeting: b To our Master who is in Babylonia. When /b Rav b died, /b Rabbi Yoḥa b would write to Shmuel /b and begin with the greeting: b To our colleague who is in Babylonia. /b Shmuel b said: Does /b Rabbi Yoḥa b not know /b any b matter in which I am his master? /b Shmuel b wrote /b and b sent to /b Rabbi Yoḥa the calculation of the b leap /b years b for /b the next b sixty years. /b Rabbi Yoḥa was not impressed by this and b said: Now he /b has b merely /b demonstrated that b he knows mathematics, /b which does not make him my master.,Shmuel then b wrote /b and b sent to /b Rabbi Yoḥa explications of b uncertainties /b pertaining to b i tereifot /i /b that had to be transported on b thirteen camels. /b Rabbi Yoḥa was impressed by this and b said: I have a Master in Babylonia; I will go and see him. /b Before departing on his journey, Rabbi Yoḥa b said to a child: Recite to me your verse /b that you studied today. The child b recited /b the following verse b to /b Rabbi Yoḥa: b “Now Samuel was dead” /b (I Samuel 28:3). Rabbi Yoḥa b said /b to himself: b Learn from this /b that b Shmuel has died. /b Therefore, Rabbi Yoḥa did not go to see Shmuel.,The Gemara comments: b But it was not so; Shmuel had not died. Rather, /b the reason Rabbi Yoḥa was given this sign was b so that Rabbi Yoḥa would not trouble himself /b to embark on the long and arduous journey from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia., b It is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: /b With regard to one who is successful with his first business transaction after he has built b a home, /b after the birth of b a child, or /b after he marries b a woman, even though /b he may b not /b use this as a means of b divination /b to decide upon future courses of action, b it is /b an auspicious b sign /b that he will continue to be successful. Conversely, if his first transaction is not successful he may take that as an inauspicious sign., b Rabbi Elazar said: But this /b is provided b that /b the sign b has been established /b by repeating itself b three times. /b This is based on a verse, b as it is written: /b “And Jacob their father said to them: Me you have bereaved of my children: b Joseph is not, and Simeon is not, and you will take Benjamin away; /b upon me are all these things come” (Genesis 42:36). If calamity were to befall Benjamin, that would establish a pattern of three tragedies.,§ The Gemara returns to discuss distinguishing marks that prevent meat from being prohibited despite its having been obscured from sight. b Rav Huna inquired of Rav: /b If pieces of meat were b strung /b together and then were obscured from sight, b what is /b the i halakha /i ? Rav b said to him: Do not be an imbecile; /b of course if the meat is b strung /b together b it is /b considered to be b a distinguishing mark, /b and the meat is permitted. b There are /b those b who say /b this i halakha /i as follows: b Rav Huna said /b that b Rav said: /b If pieces of meat are b strung /b together b it is a distinguishing mark, /b and the meat remains permitted even if it is obscured from sight.,The Gemara relates that b Rav Naḥman of Neharde’a arrived at /b the home of b Rav Kahana in Pum Nahara on the eve of Yom Kippur, /b which is a day when people commonly eat meat. b Ravens came /b and b dropped livers and kidneys. /b Rav Kahana b said to /b Rav Naḥman: b Take /b these livers and kidneys b and eat /b them, as they are not forbidden, even though they were obscured from sight. This is because b at this time permitted /b meat is b more common /b than forbidden meat, since Jews slaughter many animals on this day., b Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin lost /b a cut of meat from an animal b intestine among /b the b barrels /b of wine in his wine cellar. When he found it, b he came before Rav Huna /b to ask whether the meat was now prohibited because it had been obscured from sight. Rav Huna b said to him: Do you have a distinguishing mark on it /b so that you can identify it? Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin b said to him: No. /b Rav Huna asked him: b Do you have visual recognition of it? /b Rav Ḥiyya bar Avin b said to him: Yes. /b Rav Huna said: b If so, go and take /b it and eat it., b Rav Ḥanina Ḥoza’a lost a side of meat. /b When he found it, b he came before Rav Naḥman /b and asked him whether the meat was now prohibited because it had been obscured from sight. Rav Naḥman b said to him: Do you have a distinguishing mark on it /b so that you can identify it? Rav Ḥanina Ḥoza’a b said to him: No. /b Rav Naḥman asked him: b Do you have visual recognition of it? /b Rav Ḥanina Ḥoza’a b said to him: Yes. /b Rav Naḥman said: b If so, go and take /b it and eat it., b Rav Natan bar Abaye lost a skein of sky-blue /b wool prepared for use in ritual fringes. He searched for it and found it. b He came before Rav Ḥisda /b to ask whether the wool was now prohibited because it had been obscured from sight and may have become confused with other blue wool that is not valid for ritual fringes. Rav Ḥisda b said to him: Do you have a distinguishing mark in it /b so that you can identify it? Rav Natan bar Abaye b said to him: No. /b Rav Ḥisda asked him: b Do you have visual recognition of it? /b Rav Natan bar Abaye b said to him: Yes. /b Rav Ḥisda said: b If so, go and take /b it, and you may use it for ritual fringes., b Rava said: At first I would say /b that b a distinguishing mark is preferable to visual recognition, because we return a lost item /b to its owner based b on a distinguishing mark, /b |
|
38. Babylonian Talmud, Ketuvot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 103| 3b. מאי שקדו דתניא מפני מה אמרו בתולה נשאת ליום הרביעי שאם היה לו טענת בתולים היה משכים לב"ד ותנשא באחד בשבת ואם היה לו טענת בתולים היה משכים לב"ד שקדו חכמים על תקנת בנות ישראל שיהא אדם טורח בסעודה שלשה ימים אחד בשבת ושני בשבת ושלישי בשבת וברביעי כונסה,ומסכנה ואילך נהגו העם לכנוס בשלישי ולא מיחו בידם חכמים ובשני לא יכנוס ואם מחמת האונס מותר ומפרישין את החתן מן הכלה לילי שבת תחלה מפני שהוא עושה חבורה,מאי סכנה אילימא דאמרי בתולה הנשאת ליום הרביעי תיהרג נהגו לגמרי ניעקריה,אמר רבה דאמרי בתולה הנשאת ביום הרביעי תיבעל להגמון תחלה האי סכנה אונס הוא משום דאיכא צנועות דמסרן נפשייהו לקטלא ואתיין לידי סכנה,ולידרוש להו דאונס שרי איכא פרוצות ואיכא נמי כהנות,וליעקריה גזירה עבידא דבטלא ותקנתא דרבנן מקמי גזירה לא עקרינן אי הכי בשלישי נמי אתי ובעיל מספיקא לא עקר נפשיה,ובשני לא יכנוס ואם מחמת האונס מותר מאי אונס אילימא הא דאמרן התם קרי ליה סכנה והכא קא קרי ליה אונס ותו התם נהגו הכא מותר,אמר רבא דאמרי שר צבא בא לעיר ה"ד אי דאתי וחליף ליעכב לא צריכא דאתי וקבע בג' מיהא לכנוס אספרווא דידיה בג' קאתו,ואיבעית אימא מאי מחמת האונס כדתני' הרי שהיה פתו אפוי וטבחו טבוח ויינו מזוג ומת אביו של חתן או אמה של כלה מכניסין את המת לחדר ואת החתן ואת הכלה לחופה | 3b. The Gemara asks: b What is /b the meaning of: The Sages b were assiduous? /b It is b as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Due to what /b reason b did /b the Sages in the mishna b say /b that b a virgin is married on Wednesday? /b It is so b that if /b the husband b had a claim concerning /b the bride’s b virginity, he would go early /b the next day b to court /b and make his claim. The i baraita /i continues: b But /b if that is the reason, b let her marry on Sunday, as /b then too, b if /b the husband b had a claim concerning /b the bride’s b virginity, he would go early /b the next day b to court /b and make his claim. The Gemara answers: The Sages b were assiduous in seeing to the well-being of Jewish women /b and preferred Wednesday, b so that /b the husband b would exert /b himself b in /b arranging b the /b wedding b feast for three days, Sunday, Monday and Tuesday, and on Wednesday, he marries her. /b ,The i baraita /i continues: b And from /b the time of b danger and onward, the people adopted the custom to marry on Tuesday /b as well, b and the Sages did not reprimand them. And on Monday one may not marry /b even in time of danger. b However, if it is due to the coercion, /b it is b permitted. /b The i baraita /i concludes: b One isolates the groom from the /b virgin b bride, /b so that he will not engage in intercourse with her for the b first /b time b on Shabbat evening, because /b by rupturing the hymen b he inflicts a wound, /b which is a labor prohibited on Shabbat.,The Gemara elaborates: b What is /b the b danger /b mentioned in the i baraita /i ? b If we say /b it is referring to a situation where the government b said that a virgin who is married on Wednesday will be executed, /b would the response be merely b that they adopted the custom /b to marry on Tuesday? b Let them /b totally b abolish /b the ordice to marry on Wednesday in the face of life-threatening danger., b Rabba said: /b The i baraita /i is referring to a period where the government b said that a virgin who is married on Wednesday will /b submit to b intercourse with the prefect [ i hegmon /i ] first. /b The Gemara questions the formulation of the i baraita /i : b Is that /b characterized as b danger? It is coercion. /b The Gemara answers: There is also danger involved, b as there are virtuous women who give their lives /b rather than allow themselves to be violated, b and they will come to /b mortal b danger. /b ,The Gemara asks: b And /b if so, b let /b the Sages b instruct /b these women b that /b in cases of b coercion /b it is b permitted /b to submit to violation rather than sacrifice their lives, and they will not be forbidden to their husbands. The Gemara answers: The Sages cannot issue an instruction of that sort, because b there are licentious women /b who would exploit the situation to engage in intercourse willingly, rendering them forbidden to their husbands. b And /b furthermore, b there are also /b women married to b priests, /b who are rendered forbidden to their husbands even if they are raped.,The Gemara asks: b And let /b the Sages completely b abolish /b the ordice to marry on Wednesday and establish marriage on a different day. The Gemara answers: b A decree of religious persecution [ i shemada /i ] is likely to be abrogated, and we do not abolish a rabbinic ordice in the face of a decree of religious persecution. /b Rather, a lenient ruling is issued instructing them not to follow the ordice, as long as the decree of persecution is in effect. The Gemara asks: b If so, /b what is accomplished by moving the marriage to Tuesday? The prefect b will come on Tuesday too, /b to violate them. The Gemara answers: The date of the marriage is not fixed, and b for /b a situation of b uncertainty /b the prefect will not b uproot himself /b to violate the bride.,The i baraita /i continues: b And on Monday one may not marry /b even in time of danger. b However, if it is due to the coercion, it is permitted. /b The Gemara asks: b What is /b the b coercion /b mentioned in the i baraita /i ? b If we say it is referring to that which we mentioned /b with regard to the decree of i prima nocta /i it is difficult, as b there /b the i tanna /i b calls it danger, and here he calls it coercion. Furthermore, there /b it says that they b adopted the custom /b to marry on Tuesday; b here /b it states that it is b permitted. /b , b Rava said: /b Coercion refers to a case b where they said: A general /b and his army b are coming to the city /b on Wednesday, and the concern is that the troops will appropriate the supplies for the feast. b What are the circumstances? If /b it is a situation b where /b the general b comes and passes /b through, b let /b them b postpone /b the wedding until the following week. b Rather, it is necessary /b to teach the i halakha /i with regard to the general only in a case b where he comes and establishes /b himself there. The Gemara asks: b In any case, let one marry on Tuesday. /b Why does the i baraita /i permit marrying on Monday? The Gemara answers: It was necessary to move the wedding to Monday because b his entourage [ i asperava /i ] arrives on Tuesday. /b , b And if you wish, say /b instead: b What is /b the meaning of: b Due to the coercion? /b It is b as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b If one’s bread was baked, and his animal slaughtered, and his wine diluted, /b and all preparations for the wedding feast were complete, b and the father of the groom or the mother of the bride died /b before the wedding, then before burying the deceased, which would trigger the onset of mourning, b one moves the corpse into a room, and the bride and groom /b are ushered b to the wedding canopy /b and they are married. |
|
39. Babylonian Talmud, Makkot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel (babylonian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 290| 16b. התם גברא בר תשלומין הוא ושיעבודא דגר הוא דקא פקע,והא איכא פאה דרחמנא אמר (ויקרא כג, כב) לא תכלה פאת וגו' לעני ולגר תעזוב אותם וגו',דמשכחת לה בקיימו ולא קיימו ביטלו ולא ביטלו דתנן מצות פאה להפריש מן הקמה לא הפריש מן הקמה מפריש מן העומרין לא הפריש מן העומרין מפריש מן הכרי עד שלא מירח מירחו מעשר ונותן לו,כדרבי ישמעאל דאמר אף מפריש מן העיסה ולר' ישמעאל נמי משכחת לה דאכל עיסה,אלא זאת ועוד אחרת אהא אבל אונס לא דהיכא אמרינן על דעת רבים אין לו הפרה לדבר הרשות אבל לדבר מצוה יש לו הפרה,כי הא דההוא מקרי דרדקי דהוה פשע בינוקי אדריה רב אחא ואהדריה רבינא דלא אשתכח דדייק כוותיה:,והאוכל נבילות וטריפות שקצים ורמשים וכו': אמר רב יהודה האי מאן דאכל ביניתא דבי כרבא מלקינן ליה משום (ויקרא יא, כט) שרץ השורץ על הארץ ההוא דאכל ביניתא דבי כרבא ונגדיה רב יהודה,אמר אביי אכל פוטיתא לוקה ארבעה,נמלה לוקה חמש משום שרץ השורץ על הארץ,צרעה לוקה שש משום (דברים יד, יט) שרץ העוף,אמר רב אחאי המשהה את נקביו עובר משום (ויקרא כ, כה) לא תשקצו אמר רב ביבי בר אביי האי מאן דשתי בקרנא דאומנא קא עבר משום לא תשקצו,אמר רבא בר רב הונא ריסק תשעה נמלים והביא אחד חי והשלימן לכזית לוקה ו' ה' משום בריה ואחד משום כזית נבילה רבא א"ר יוחנן אפילו שנים והוא רב יוסף אמר אפילו אחד והוא ולא פליגי הא ברברבי והא בזוטרי:,אכל טבל ומעשר ראשון כו': אמר רב אכל טבל של מעשר עני לוקה,כמאן כי האי תנא דתניא אמר ר' יוסי יכול לא יהא חייב אלא על הטבל שלא הורם ממנו כל עיקר הורם ממנו תרומה גדולה ולא הורם ממנו מעשר ראשון מעשר ראשון ולא מעשר שני ואפי' מעשר עני מנין,ת"ל (דברים יב, יז) לא תוכל לאכול בשעריך וגו' ולהלן הוא אומר (דברים כו, יב) ואכלו בשעריך ושבעו מה להלן מעשר עני אף כאן מעשר עני ואמר רחמנא לא תוכל,אמר רב יוסף כתנאי ר"א אומר אין צריך לקרות את השם על מעשר עני של דמאי וחכ"א | 16b. The Gemara answers: b There, the man /b who appropriated the collateral b is liable to /b remit monetary b payment, and it is /b only b that the lien of the convert /b on the property b has lapsed, /b as there is no one to receive payment. Therefore, he is not flogged, based on the principle: One is not both flogged and liable to pay restitution.,The Gemara asks: b But isn’t there /b the case of b i pe’a /i , /b where there is a prohibition, b as the Merciful One states: “You shall not wholly reap the corner of /b your field” (Leviticus 23:22), followed by the mitzva: b “To the poor and the convert you shall leave them” /b (Leviticus 23:22)?,And b you find /b one liable to receive lashes b in /b those cases both if the criterion is whether b he fulfilled /b the mitzva b or did not fulfill /b the mitzva, b and /b if the criterion is whether b he nullified /b the mitzva b or he did not nullify it, as we learned /b in a i baraita /i : The b mitzva of i pe’a /i /b is b to separate /b it b from the standing grain /b still growing from the ground. If b he did not separate /b it b from the standing grain, /b but reaped the entire field, b he separates /b a portion b from the sheaves /b as i pe’a /i . If he did b not separate /b it b from the sheaves, he separates /b it b from the pile /b where one places the kernels after threshing, b before he smooths /b the pile. Once he smooths the pile, the produce is considered grain from which one is obligated to separate i terumot /i and tithes. If he already b smoothed /b the pile before designating the i pe’a /i , b he tithes /b the grain in the pile b and /b then b gives /b the i pe’a /i b to /b the poor person. Once he grinds the kernels into flour, he no longer separates i pe’a /i .,Apparently, it is possible to nullify the possibility of fulfilling the mitzva of leaving i pe’a /i by grinding the grain; why, then, did Rabbi Yoḥa omit this case from his list of prohibitions rectified by a positive mitzva for which one is flogged? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yoḥa holds b in accordance with /b the opinion b of Rabbi Yishmael, who says: /b One b separates /b i pe’a /i b even from the dough. /b He maintains that the possibility of fulfilling the mitzva of i pe’a /i is never nullified, as one may separate i pe’a /i even after grinding and kneading. The Gemara challenges: b And /b according b to Rabbi Yishmael, you also find /b a way to nullify the possibility of fulfilling the mitzva, in a case b where one ate /b the b dough. /b , b Rather, /b the Gemara retracts its previous understanding of the statement of Rabbi Yoḥa: We have only this mitzva and another where one would be flogged if not for the relevant mitzva. The term: b This, /b is in reference to the sending away of the mother bird, b and /b the term: b Another, /b is in reference b to this /b i halakha /i of i pe’a /i . b But /b in the case of b a rapist, no, /b the possibility of remarrying the rape victim whom he divorced is not nullified, even if he vows on the basis of the consent of the public. b Where do we say /b that a vow b on /b the basis of b the consent of the public has no nullification? /b It is only in a case where one seeks nullification of the vow b for /b the purpose of b a matter /b that is b optional, /b i.e., not a mitzva; b but /b if one seeks nullification of the vow b for /b the purpose of b a matter /b that is b a mitzva, /b even a vow taken on the basis of the consent of the public b has /b the possibility of b nullification. /b In the case of the rapist, he could seek nullification of his vow to enable him to fulfill the mitzva of remarrying his divorcée, and therefore the vow can be nullified.,The Gemara relates an incident that proves this point. b As /b this happened in b that /b incident b where /b there was b a certain teacher of children who was negligent in /b his supervision of the b children, /b and b Rav Aḥa vowed /b on the basis of the consent of the public that b he /b would no longer be allowed to teach children. b And /b nevertheless b Ravina restored him /b to his position, b because no /b other teacher b was found who was as accurate as he. /b Apparently, even a vow taken on the basis of the consent of the public has the possibility of nullification, if that nullification is sought in order to fulfill a mitzva.,§ The mishna teaches: b And one who eats unslaughtered /b animal or bird b carcasses, or i tereifot /i , /b or b repugt creatures, or creeping animals, /b is liable to receive lashes. b Rav Yehuda says: One who eats a fish- /b like creature found b in /b the furrows of a field formed by b a plow [ i binnita devei kerava /i ], we flog him due to /b violation of the prohibition: b “Creeping animals that creep on the ground… /b shall not be eaten” (Leviticus 11:41). The Gemara relates: There was b a certain /b person b who ate a fish- /b like creature found b in /b the furrows of a field formed by b a plow, and Rav Yehuda flogged him. /b , b Abaye says: /b One who ate b a i putita /i , /b a creeping animal found in the sea, b is flogged /b with b four /b sets of lashes. There are two prohibitions stated with regard to creeping animals in the sea: “And any that do not have fins and scales in the seas and in the rivers…you shall not eat of their flesh” (Leviticus 11:10–11), and: “And any that do not have fins and scales you shall not eat” (Deuteronomy 14:10). In addition, there are two other prohibitions stated with regard to creeping animals in general: “You shall not render yourselves detestable with any creeping animal that creeps, neither shall you render yourselves impure with them” (Leviticus 11:43), for a total of four.,If one ate b an ant, he is flogged /b with b five /b sets of lashes. In addition to the two prohibitions stated with regard to repugt creatures in general, he is also flogged b for /b violating the prohibitions: b “Creeping animals that creep on the ground… /b shall not be eaten” (Leviticus 11:41), and: “And all creeping animals that creep on the ground, you shall not eat them” (Leviticus 11:42), and: “Neither shall you render yourselves impure with any manner of creeping things that crawls upon the ground” (Leviticus 11:44).,If one ate b a wasp, he is flogged /b with b six /b sets of lashes. In addition to the five prohibitions violated by one who eats an ant, he is flogged with an additional set of lashes b due to /b violation of the prohibition with regard to b winged creeping creatures: /b “And all winged creeping creatures are impure for you, they may not be eaten” (Deuteronomy 14:19)., b Rav Aḥai says: One who delays /b relieving himself through b his orifices /b when the need arises b violates /b the prohibition b of: “You shall not make /b your souls b detestable” /b (Leviticus 20:25). b Rav Beivai bar Abaye says: One who drinks from the horn of a bloodletter /b through which blood has passed b violates /b the prohibition b of: “You shall not make /b your souls b detestable.” /b , b Rava bar Rav Huna says: /b If one b crushed nine ants and brought /b another b one /b that was b alive and /b thereby b completed /b their measure b to an olive-bulk /b and ate them, he is b flogged /b with b six /b sets of lashes: b Five for /b eating b an entity /b for which one is flogged five times as stated above with regard to one who eats an ant, b and one for /b eating b an olive-bulk of an unslaughtered carcass /b all together. b Rava /b says that b Rabbi Yoḥa says: Even /b if b he ate two /b crushed ants b and /b the ant that was alive, he is flogged with six sets of lashes. b Rav Yosef says: Even /b if b he ate one /b crushed ant b and /b the ant that was alive. The Gemara comments: b And they do not disagree; this /b case, where Rava and Rav Yosef say that he is flogged for eating one or two crushed ants and one that is alive, is referring b to large /b ants, which together amount to an olive-bulk. b And that /b case, where Rava bar Rav Huna mentions nine ants, is referring b to small /b ants, as a greater number of ants is required to constitute an olive-bulk and render him liable. Consequently, there is no halakhic dispute in this case.,§ The mishna teaches that among those flogged is one who b ate untithed produce or first-tithe /b produce whose i teruma /i of the tithe was not taken. b Rav says: /b If one b ate untithed produce /b from which i teruma /i and first tithe were separated and b poor man’s tithe /b was not separated, he is b flogged. /b ,The Gemara explains: b In accordance with whose /b opinion did Rav issue this ruling? It is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b this i tanna /i , as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Yosei says: /b One b might /b have thought b that one is liable for /b eating b only untithed produce from which no /b gifts b were taken at all; /b but if b i teruma gedola /i was taken from /b the produce, b but first tithe was not taken from it, /b or if the b first tithe /b was separated b but not second tithe, or even /b if only b poor man’s tithe /b was not separated, b from where /b is it derived that the halakhic status of the produce is that of untithed produce and one is liable for eating it?,The i baraita /i continues: It is derived as b the verse states: “You may not eat within your gates /b the tithe of your grain or of your wine or of your oil” (Deuteronomy 12:17), b and there it states: /b “And you shall give to the Levite, to the convert, to the orphan, and to the widow, b and they shall eat within your gates and be satisfied” /b (Deuteronomy 26:12). b Just as there, /b with regard to the phrase “and they shall eat within your gates,” it is referring to b poor man’s tithe, here too, /b “you may not eat within your gates” is referring to produce in which there is b poor man’s tithe, /b as it has not yet been separated, b and the Merciful One states /b a prohibition: b You may not /b eat it., b Rav Yosef said: /b This matter is b subject to /b a dispute between b i tanna’im /i . Rabbi Eliezer says: One need not /b separate by means of b calling the name upon poor man’s tithe of doubtfully tithed produce [ i demai /i ]. /b With regard to produce purchased from an i am ha’aretz /i , i.e., one who is unreliable with regard to tithes, there is a rabbinic ordice requiring one to separate first and second tithe and i teruma /i of the tithe from it. Nevertheless, one is not required to separate poor man’s tithe from that produce, because poor man’s tithe is a monetary debt owed to the poor, and in a case of uncertainty, the principle is: The burden of proof rests upon the claimant. Rabbi Eliezer holds that failure to separate poor man’s tithe does not accord the produce the status of untithed produce. b And the Rabbis say: /b |
|
40. Babylonian Talmud, Megillah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 482| 22a. אין מתחילין בפרשה פחות משלשה פסוקים ליקרי תרי מהא ותלתא מהך פשו להו תרי,אמר לו זו לא שמעתי כיוצא בה שמעתי דתנן ביום הראשון בראשית ויהי רקיע ותני עלה בראשית בשנים יהי רקיע באחד,והוינן בה בשלמא יהי רקיע באחד דתלתא פסוקי הוו אלא בראשית בשנים חמשה פסוקי הוו ותניא הקורא בתורה לא יפחות משלשה פסוקים,ואיתמר עלה רב אמר דולג ושמואל אמר פוסק,רב אמר דולג מאי טעמא לא אמר פוסק קסבר כל פסוקא דלא פסקיה משה אנן לא פסקינן ליה,ושמואל אמר פסקינן ליה והא אמר רבי חנניא קרא צער גדול היה לי אצל רבי חנינא הגדול ולא התיר לי לפסוק אלא לתינוקות של בית רבן הואיל ולהתלמד עשויין,התם טעמא מאי משום דלא אפשר הכא נמי לא אפשר,ושמואל אמר פוסק מאי טעמא לא אמר דולג גזירה משום הנכנסין ומשום היוצאין,מיתיבי פרשה של ששה פסוקים קורין אותה בשנים ושל חמשה פסוקים ביחיד קרא ראשון שלשה השני קורא שנים מפרשה זו ואחד מפרשה אחרת ויש אומרים שלשה לפי שאין מתחילין בפרשה פחות משלשה פסוקים,ואם איתא למאן דאמר דולג נדלוג ולמאן דאמר פוסק נפסוק,שאני התם דאפשר בהכי,אמר רבי תנחום אמר ריב"ל הלכה כיש אומרים ואמר רבי תנחום אמר ריב"ל כשם שאין מתחילין בפרשה פחות מג' פסוקים כך אין משיירין בפרשה פחות משלשה פסוקים,פשיטא השתא ומה אתחלתא דקא מקיל תנא קמא מחמירי יש אומרים שיור דמחמיר ת"ק לא כ"ש דמחמירי יש אומרים,מהו דתימא נכנסין שכיחי יוצאין לא שכיחי דמנחי ספר תורה ונפקי קמ"ל,ות"ק מ"ש שיורי דלא משום יוצאין אתחולי נמי גזירה משום הנכנסין אמרי מאן דעייל שיולי שייל,שלח ליה רבה בריה דרבא לרב יוסף הלכתא מאי שלח ליה הלכתא דולג ואמצעי דולגן:,זה הכלל כל שיש בו מוסף וכו': איבעיא להו תענית צבור בכמה ראש חדש ומועד דאיכא קרבן מוסף ארבעה אבל הכא דליכא קרבן מוסף לא או דלמא הכא נמי איכא מוסף תפלה,ת"ש בראשי חדשים ובחולו של מועד קורין ארבעה הא בתענית צבור ג' אימא רישא בשני ובחמישי ובשבת במנחה קורין ג' הא תענית צבור ארבעה אלא מהא ליכא למישמע מינה,ת"ש דרב איקלע לבבל בתענית צבור קם קרא בסיפרא פתח בריך חתים ולא בריך נפול כולי עלמא אאנפייהו ורב לא נפל על אפיה,מכדי רב בישראל קרא מאי טעמא חתם ולא בריך לאו משום דבעי למיקרי אחרינא בתריה,לא רב בכהני קרא דהא רב הונא קרי בכהני,בשלמא רב הונא קרי בכהני דהא אפילו רב אמי ורב אסי דכהני חשיבי דארעא ישראל מיכף כייפו ליה לרב הונא אלא רב הא איכא שמואל דכהנא הוה ודבר עליה,שמואל נמי מיכף הוה כייף ליה לרב ורב הוא דעבד ליה כבוד וכי עביד ליה בפניו שלא בפניו לא עביד ליה,הכי נמי מסתברא דרב בכהני קרא דאי סלקא דעתך בישראל קרא לפניה מאי טעמא בריך לאחר תקנה,אי הכי לאחריה נמי לבריך שאני היכא דיתיב רב דמיעל עיילי | 22a. b one may not begin /b a new b paragraph /b and read b fewer than three verses /b from it. And if you say b he should read two /b verses b from this /b paragraph, i.e., the entire second paragraph, b and /b then b three /b verses b from that /b final paragraph, b only two /b verses will b remain /b from the final paragraph. This is problematic because one may not conclude a reading with fewer than three verses left until the end of a paragraph and because the fourth reader will not have a sufficient number of verses to read.,Rava b said to him: I have not heard /b a solution for b this /b problem from my teachers. However, b with regard to a similar /b problem b I heard /b a solution from them, b as we learned /b in a mishna ( i Ta’anit /i 26a): b On Sunday, /b the non-priestly watches would read two paragraphs from the Torah: b “In the beginning” /b (Genesis 1:1–5) b and “Let there be a firmament” /b (Genesis 1:6–8). b And it is taught in that regard /b that the paragraph b “In the beginning” /b was read b by two /b readers and the paragraph b “Let there be a firmament” by one /b reader., b And we discussed /b this ruling and raised difficulties with b it: Granted, /b the paragraph b “Let there be a firmament” /b was read b by one /b reader, b as it /b consists of b three verses. But /b how was the paragraph b “In the beginning” /b read b by two? /b It consists of only b five verses, and it was taught /b in a mishna (23b): b One who reads from the Torah should not /b read b fewer than three verses. /b , b And it was stated with regard to /b that mishna that the i amora’im /i disagreed about how to divide the verses. b Rav said: /b The second reader b repeats /b the last verse that the first reader had recited, so that each of them reads three verses. b And Shmuel said: /b The first reader b divides /b the third verse and reads half of it, and the second reader begins with the second half of that verse, as though each half were its own verse.,The Gemara explains the opinions of Rav and Shmuel. b Rav said /b that the second reader b repeats /b the last verse that the first reader recited. b What is the reason /b that b he did not state /b that the first reader b divides /b the third verse, in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel? The Gemara answers: b He holds /b that b any verse that Moses did not divide, we may not divide. /b ,The Gemara asks: b Does Shmuel say /b that b we may divide /b a verse into two parts? b Didn’t Rabbi Ḥaya Kara, /b the Bible expert, b say: I had great distress with Rabbi Ḥanina the Great; /b there were many times I had to ask his permission to divide a verse, b and he permitted me to divide /b it b only for the /b benefit of b schoolchildren, since they /b need b to be taught /b in this manner, as it is difficult for children to learn long verses all at once? In other cases, however it is prohibited to divide a verse.,The Gemara answers: b There, /b in the case of schoolchildren, b what is the reason /b that it is permitted to divide a verse? b Because it is not possible /b to teach the children without doing so. b Here, too, /b when a paragraph of five verses must be divided between two readers, b it is not possible /b to divide them without dividing the middle verse.,The Gemara now examines the opinion of Shmuel. b And Shmuel said: /b The first reader b divides /b the third verse and reads half of it. The Gemara asks: b What is the reason /b that b he did not state /b that the second reader b repeats /b the last verse recited by the first reader, in accordance with the opinion of Rav? The Gemara answers: It is because of a rabbinic b decree /b that was instituted b due to those who enter and those who leave /b the synagogue between the readings. These individuals might erroneously conclude that since the reading they heard consisted of three verses, the reading they missed consisted of only two verses. Therefore, the middle verse is divided into two parts, so that all will realize that no reader recites only two verses.,The Gemara b raises an objection /b to the opinions of Rav and Shmuel from the following i baraita /i : b Two /b people may b read a paragraph of six verses, but /b a paragraph b of five /b verses may be read only by b a single /b reader. If b the first /b one b read three /b verses, b the second /b one b reads /b the remaining b two /b verses b from this paragraph /b and then b one /b verse b from another, /b i.e., the following, b paragraph. And some say /b that it does not suffice to read one verse from the next paragraph; rather, he must read b three /b verses, as b one may not begin /b a new b paragraph /b and read b fewer than three verses /b from it., b And if it is so, /b if it is permissible to do as Rav and Shmuel suggested, b according to the one who said /b that the second reader b repeats /b a verse that the previous reader recited, i.e., Rav, b let him repeat /b the verse in this case as well. b And according to the one who said /b that the second reader b divides /b the verse, i.e., Shmuel, b let him divide /b the verse in this case as well.,The Gemara answers: b There, /b in the case of the i baraita /i , b it is different, as it is possible to /b solve the problem b in this /b manner by reading additional verses. On the New Moon, however, the next paragraph deals with an entirely different subject, and consequently it cannot be included in the Torah reading. Therefore, Rav and Shmuel presented alternate solutions.,With regard to the dispute cited in the i baraita /i , b Rabbi Tanḥum said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: The i halakha /i is in accordance with /b the opinion introduced by the phrase: b Some say, /b which maintains that at least three verses must be read from the next paragraph. b And /b furthermore, b Rabbi Tanḥum said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: Just as one may not begin /b a new b paragraph /b and read b fewer than three verses /b from it, b so too, one may not leave fewer than three verses /b before the end of b a paragraph /b at the conclusion of a reading.,The Gemara challenges this statement: This b is obvious. Now, /b if with regard to b the beginning /b of a paragraph, where b the first i tanna /i is lenient /b and holds that it is sufficient to read one verse from the next paragraph, the opinion introduced with the phrase: b Some say, is stringent, /b then with regard to b leaving /b verses at the end of a paragraph, where even b the first i tanna /i is stringent /b and holds that one may not conclude a reading with fewer than three verses remaining until the end of a paragraph, is it b not all the more so /b obvious that the opinion introduced with: b Some say, is stringent? /b ,The Gemara answers: b Lest you say: Entering /b in the middle of the Torah reading b is common, /b and therefore one should not conclude a reading after having read fewer than three verses of a paragraph, but b leaving /b in the middle of the Torah reading, whereby one b abandons a Torah scroll and leaves, is not common, /b and therefore one may conclude a reading with fewer than three verses left in the paragraph, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi b teaches us /b that the second opinion cited in the i baraita /i is also concerned that people may leave in the middle of the Torah reading, and consequently one may not conclude a reading with fewer than three verses left in the paragraph.,The Gemara asks: b And /b according to b the first i tanna /i , what is different /b about b leaving /b fewer than three verses at the end of a paragraph, b which /b is b not /b permitted b due to /b concern about b those who leave /b the synagogue in the middle of the Torah reading? In the case of b beginning /b a paragraph without reading at least three verses, he should b also /b hold that there is a rabbinic b decree due to those who enter, /b lest the latecomer think that the previous reader read fewer than three verses. The Gemara responds: b Say /b in answer to this question that b one who enters /b in the middle of the Torah reading b asks /b how the Torah was read until then, and those present will explain to him that the reader started in the previous paragraph. Therefore, he will not erroneously think that the reader recited fewer than three verses., b Rabba, son of Rava, sent /b a messenger b to /b ask b Rav Yosef: What is the i halakha /i /b with regard to dividing a small Torah portion? Rav Yosef b sent him /b the following answer: b The i halakha /i is /b that b one repeats /b a verse, in accordance with the opinion of Rav, b and /b it is b the middle /b reader who b repeats /b it, and not the last reader, so that it will not be necessary to leave fewer than three verses until the end of the paragraph.,§ We learned in the mishna: b This is the principle: Any /b day b on which there is an additional offering /b sacrificed in the Temple and that is not a Festival, four people read from the Torah. b A dilemma was raised before /b the Sages: On b a public fast, how many /b people read from the Torah? Does the mishna mean to say that only on b the New Moon and /b the intermediate days of b a Festival, when there is an additional offering, four /b people read; b but here, /b on a public fast day, b when there is no additional offering, no, /b only three people read? b Or perhaps here, too, there is an additional prayer, /b as on public fast days the prayer: i Aneinu /i , is inserted into the i Amida /i prayer, and so too an additional reader is called to read from the Torah.,The Gemara attempts to adduce a proof: b Come /b and b hear that which /b we learned in the mishna: b On /b the days of the b New Moon and on the intermediate days of a Festival, four /b people b read /b from the Torah. b Doesn’t /b this indicate that b on a public fast, /b only b three /b people read? The Gemara responds: b Say the first clause /b of the mishna: b On Mondays and Thursdays /b during the morning service b and on Shabbat during the afternoon service, three /b people b read /b from the Torah. b Doesn’t /b this indicate that on b a public fast, four /b people read from the Torah? b Rather, /b it must be concluded that b nothing can be derived from this /b mishna with regard to a public fast day, as the mishna does not mean to indicate the i halakha /i in every possible case.,A different proof is now suggested. b Come /b and b hear /b the following incident: b Rav /b once b happened /b to come b to Babylonia on a public fast. He stood and read from /b a Torah b scroll. /b When b he began /b to read, b he recited a blessing, /b but when b he concluded, he did not recite a blessing. Everyone /b else b fell on their faces, /b i.e., bowed down on the floor, during the i Taḥanun /i supplication, as was the custom, b but Rav did not fall on his face. /b ,The Gemara attempts to clarify the i halakha /i based upon Rav’s conduct. b Now, Rav /b must have b read /b the portion that is designated for b an Israelite, /b as he was neither a priest nor a Levite, and therefore he was the third person to read from the Torah. b What, /b then, b is the reason /b that when b he concluded /b his reading b he did not recite a blessing? Was it not because another /b person b was to read after him, /b and since only the last reader recites a blessing, Rav did not recite a blessing upon completion of his portion? This would indicate that four readers are called to the Torah on public fasts.,The Gemara rejects this proof: b No, Rav read /b the first reading, which is generally designated for b priests. /b He was the leading Torah authority of his generation, and one who holds this position is called to read from the Torah even before a priest, b as Rav Huna would read /b the first reading, which is generally designated for b priests, /b and Rav would do the same.,The Gemara raises a difficulty: b Granted, Rav Huna read /b the portion designated for b priests, as even Rav Ami and Rav Asi, /b who were b the most esteemed priests in Eretz Yisrael, were subordinate to Rav Huna, /b and he was considered the undisputed rabbinic leader of the Jewish people. b However, /b in the case of b Rav, there was Shmuel, who was a priest, and /b Rav had b elevated /b him b above himself, /b showing Shmuel deference in all matters of honor. Consequently, Rav was not the singular leader of his generation and would not have read the first reading in place of a priest.,The Gemara answers: In fact, b Shmuel was also subordinate to Rav, /b as Rav was indeed the leading authority in Babylonia, b and it was Rav who showed /b Shmuel b honor /b of his own volition, in order to appease him for having cursed him. b And he did this /b only when Shmuel was b in his presence, /b but b when he was not in his presence, /b Rav b did not do this, /b and therefore Rav would read first from the Torah when Shmuel was not present.,The Gemara comments: b So too, it is reasonable /b to assume that b Rav read /b first b from /b the portion that is generally designated for b priests, because if it enters your mind to say /b that b he read /b third, b from /b the portion designated for b an /b ordinary b Israelite, what is the reason he recited a blessing before /b reading his portion? Only the first reader recites a blessing before reading from the Torah. The Gemara rejects this argument: This incident took place b after it was instituted /b that all those called to read from the Torah recite a blessing.,The Gemara asks: b If so, he should also have recited a blessing after /b his reading, as the rabbinic enactment requires those who read from the Torah to recite blessings both before and after their reading. The Gemara answers: The reason that the Sages required all the readers to recite blessings both before and after their readings was to prevent misunderstandings on the part of both those who enter the synagogue in the middle of the reading and those who leave early. But b it was different where Rav was present, as /b people b would enter /b the synagogue in the middle of the reading, |
|
41. Babylonian Talmud, Nedarim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel (sage), father of Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 142| 90b. למימרא דלא הוה ביה מעשה,מיתיבי קונם שאיני נהנה לפלוני ולמי שנשאל עליו נשאל על הראשון ואח"כ נשאל על השני אמאי אי בעי על האי ניתשיל ברישא ואי בעי על האי ניתשיל ברישא,מי יודע הי ראשון והי שני,מיתיבי קונם שאיני נהנה והריני נזיר לכשאשאל עליו נשאל על נדרו ואח"כ נשאל על נזרו ואמאי אי בעי על נדרו ניתשיל ברישא ואי בעי על נזרו ניתשיל ברישא תיובתא, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big בראשונה היו אומרים שלש נשים יוצאות ונוטלות כתובה האומרת טמאה אני לך שמים ביני לבינך ונטולה אני מן היהודים,חזרו לומר שלא תהא אשה נותנת עיניה באחר ומקלקלת על בעלה האומרת טמאה אני לך תביא ראיה לדבריה השמים ביני לבינך יעשו דרך בקשה ונטולה אני מן היהודים יפר לחלקו ותהא משמשתו ותהא נטולה מן היהודים, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big איבעיא להו אמרה לבעלה טמאה אני מהו שתאכל בתרומה רב ששת אמר אוכלת שלא תוציא לעז על בניה רבא אמר אינה אוכלת אפשר דאכלה חולין,אמר רבא ומודה רב ששת שאם נתארמלה שאינה אוכלת מידי הוא טעמא אלא משום תוציא לעז על בניה נתארמלה ונתגרשה אמרי השתא דאיתניסא,אמר רב פפא בדיק לן רבא אשת כהן שנאנסה יש לה כתובה או אין לה כתובה כיון דאונס לגבי כהן כרצון לגבי ישראל דמי אין לה כתובה או דילמא מצי אמרה ליה אנא הא חזינא | 90b. b That is to say that there was not /b yet any b action /b but only speech, and even so the halakhic authority can dissolve the vow.,The Gemara b raises an objection /b against this version of the tannaitic dispute from the aforementioned i baraita /i : If one says: The property b of so-and-so is i konam /i /b for me, and for b that /b reason b I will not benefit /b from it, b and /b deriving benefit from b he who I will request /b dissolution b for /b the vow is also i konam /i for me, if he desires to dissolve the vows b he /b must first b request /b dissolution b with regard to the first /b vow, b and afterward he /b can b request /b dissolution b with regard to the second. /b But according to what was stated above, that all agree that a vow can be dissolved even before it has taken effect, b why /b is this so? b If he /b so b wishes, he /b can b first request /b dissolution b with regard to this /b vow, and b if he wishes, he /b can b first request /b dissolution b with regard to that /b one.,The Gemara answers: b Does he know which /b vow b is first and which is /b the b second? /b The wording of the i baraita /i is not at all clear on this point. Perhaps, if he so wishes, he can first request dissolution of the vow not to derive benefit from the halakhic authority from whom he will request dissolution of his vow.,The Gemara b raises /b a further b objection /b from the second i baraita /i cited above: If one says: The property b of so-and-so is i konam /i /b for me, and for b that /b reason b I will not benefit /b from it, and b I am hereby a nazirite for when I will request /b dissolution b of /b this vow, if he desires to dissolve the vows b he /b must first b request /b dissolution b with regard to his vow /b that rendered benefit from a particular person forbidden, b and afterward he /b can b request /b dissolution b with regard to his /b vow of b naziriteship /b that he accepted upon himself should he request dissolution of his first vow. b But why /b must he proceed in this manner? b If he /b so b wishes he /b can b first request /b dissolution b with regard to his vow /b not to derive benefit from that other person, b and if he wishes he /b can b first request /b dissolution b with regard to his /b vow of b naziriteship. /b The fact that the i baraita /i does not say this indicates that a vow can be dissolved only once it has gone into effect. The Gemara concludes: Here is b a conclusive refutation /b of this version of the dispute between Rabbi Natan and the Rabbis., strong MISHNA: /strong b Initially /b the Sages b would say /b that b three women are divorced /b even against their husbands’ will, b and /b nevertheless b they receive /b payment of what is due to them according to their b marriage contract. /b The first is the wife of a priest b who says /b to her husband: b I am defiled to you, /b i.e., she claims that she had been raped, so that she is now forbidden to her husband. The second is a woman who says to her husband: b Heaven is between me and you, /b i.e., she declares that he is impotent, a claim she cannot prove, as the truth of it is known only to God. b And /b the third is a woman who takes a vow, stating: b I am removed from the Jews, /b i.e., benefit from sexual intercourse with any Jew, including my husband, is forbidden to me., b They /b subsequently b retracted /b their words b and said /b that in order b that /b a married b woman should not cast her eyes on another /b man b and /b to that end b ruin /b her relationship b with her husband /b and still receive payment of her marriage contract, these i halakhot /i were modified as follows: A priest’s wife b who says /b to her husband: b I am defiled to you, must bring proof for her words /b that she was raped. As for a woman who says: b Heaven is between me and you, /b the court b must act /b and deal with the matter b by way of a request, /b rather than force the husband to divorce his wife. b And /b with regard to a woman who says: b I am removed from the Jews, /b her husband b must nullify his part, /b i.e., the aspect of the vow that concerns him, so that she should be permitted to him, b and she may engage in sexual intercourse with him, but she is removed from /b all other b Jews, /b so that if he divorces her she is forbidden to all., strong GEMARA: /strong b A dilemma was raised before /b the Sages, based on the second ruling of the mishna: If the wife of a priest b said to her husband: I am defiled /b to you, b what is /b the i halakha /i b with regard to /b whether b she may partake of i teruma /i ? /b Is the i halakha /i that just as she is not believed with regard to divorce, so she is not believed with regard to i teruma /i , or is the i halakha /i that with regard to i teruma /i she is believed, and therefore it is prohibited for her to partake of i teruma /i , as is the i halakha /i of a woman married to a priest who engages in sexual intercourse with a man other than her husband? b Rav Sheshet said: /b She b may partake /b of i teruma /i , b so that she not cast aspersions on her children. /b If she is barred from partaking of i teruma /i , people will see this as supporting her claim that she had been raped, and rumors will circulate that her sons are unfit for the priesthood. b Rava said: She may not partake /b of i teruma /i , as b she can partake of non-sacred /b food, and it is preferable that her claim that she is no longer permitted to eat i teruma /i be taken into account., b Rava said: And Rav Sheshet concedes that if /b this wife of the priest who claimed to have been raped b was /b then b widowed /b from him, b she may not /b continue to b partake /b of i teruma /i . Why? b Isn’t the reason /b that she is permitted to partake of i teruma /i b only that she /b should not b cast aspersions on her children? /b This being the case, if she b was widowed or divorced, /b people b will say /b that only b now /b it occurred b that she was raped, /b i.e., the entire incident occurred after she was no longer married to her husband. Therefore, rumors will not circulate that the children that she bore him beforehand are unfit.,§ b Rav Pappa said: Rava tested us /b with the following question: As for the b wife of a priest who was raped /b in the presence of witnesses, is b she /b entitled to b receive /b payment of her b marriage contract or /b is b she not /b entitled to b receive /b payment of her b marriage contract? /b The Gemara explains the two sides of the question: Is the i halakha /i that b since rape with regard to /b a woman married to b a priest is like willing /b sexual intercourse b with regard to a /b woman married to b an Israelite, /b as the wife of a priest who was raped is obligated to leave her husband, just as the wife of an Israelite who willingly engaged in sexual intercourse with another man is obligated to leave her husband, b she /b is therefore b not /b entitled to b receive /b payment of her b marriage contract? Or perhaps she can say to him: I am fit /b to continue being married, as, if her husband were an Israelite she would not be forbidden to him after being raped. |
|
42. Babylonian Talmud, Pesahim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 290| 117b. מאי לאו בהא קמיפלגי למ"ד עד אם הבנים שמחה סבר הללויה ריש פירקא ומאן דאמר עד בצאת ישראל סבר הללויה סוף פירקא,רב חסדא מתרץ לטעמיה דכולי עלמא סברי הללויה סוף פירקא מ"ד עד בצאת ישראל שפיר ומאן דאמר עד אם הבנים שמחה עד ועד בכלל,ונימא עד הללויה וכי תימא דלא ידעינן הי הללויה ונימא הללויה של אם הבנים שמחה קשיא,רבה בר רב הונא מתרץ לטעמיה דכולי עלמא הללויה ריש פירקא מאן דאמר עד אם הבנים שמחה שפיר ומאן דאמר עד בצאת ישראל סבר עד ולא עד בכלל,ונימא עד הללויה וכי תימא דלא ידעינן הי הללויה ונימא עד הללויה שבצאת ישראל קשיא:,וחותם בגאולה: אמר רבא ק"ש והלל גאל ישראל דצלותא גואל ישראל מ"ט דרחמי נינהו,אמר רבי זירא דקידושא אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו דצלותא קדשנו במצותיך מ"ט דרחמי נינהו,אמר רב אחא בר יעקב וצריך שיזכיר יציאת מצרים בקידוש היום כתיב הכא (דברים טז, ג) למען תזכור את יום וכתיב התם (שמות כ, ז) זכור את יום השבת לקדשו,אמר רבה בר שילא דצלותא מצמיח קרן ישועה דאפטרתא מגן דוד,(שמואל ב ז, ט) ועשיתי לך שם גדול כשם הגדולים תני רב יוסף זהו שאומרים מגן דוד,א"ר שמעון בן לקיש (בראשית יב, ב) ואעשך לגוי גדול זהו שאומרים אלהי אברהם ואברכך זהו שאומרים אלהי יצחק ואגדלה שמך זהו שאומרים אלהי יעקב,יכול יהו חותמין בכולן ת"ל והיה ברכה בך חותמין ואין חותמין בכולן,אמר רבא אשכחתינא לסבי דפומבדיתא דיתבי וקאמרי בשבתא בין בצלותא בין בקידושא מקדש השבת ביומא טבא בין בצלותא ובין בקידושא מקדש ישראל והזמנים ואמינא להו אנא אדרבה דצלותא בין בשבתא בין ביומא טבא מקדש ישראל בקידושא דשבתא מקדש השבת ביומא טבא מקדש ישראל והזמנים,ואנא אמינא טעמא דידי וטעמא דידכו טעמא דידכו שבת דקביעא וקיימא בין בצלותא ובין בקידושא מקדש השבת יומא טבא דישראל הוא דקבעי ליה דקמעברי ירחי וקבעי לשני מקדש ישראל והזמנים,טעמא דידי צלותא דברבים איתא מקדש ישראל קידוש דביחיד איתא בשבת מקדש השבת ביום טוב מקדש ישראל והזמנים,ולא היא צלותא ביחיד מי ליתיה וקידושא ברבים מי ליתיה ורבא סבר זיל בתר עיקר,עולא בר רב נחית קמיה דרבא אמר כסבי דפומבדיתא ולא א"ל ולא מידי אלמא הדר ביה רבא רב נתן אבוה דרב הונא בריה דרב נתן נחית קמיה דרב פפא אמר כסבי דפומבדיתא ושבחיה רב פפא,אמר רבינא אנא איקלע לסורא קמיה דמרימר ונחית קמיה שלוחא דציבורא ואמר כסבי דפומבדיתא והוו משתקי ליה כולי עלמא אמר להו שבקוהו הילכתא כסבי דפומבדיתא ולא הוו משתקו ליה:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big מזגו לו כוס שלישי מברך על מזונו רביעי גומר עליו את הלל ואומר עליו ברכת השיר בין הכוסות הללו אם רוצה לשתות ישתה בין שלישי לרביעי לא ישתה:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big א"ל רב חנן לרבא ש"מ ברכת המזון טעונה כוס א"ל ארבע כסי תיקנו רבנן דרך חירות כל חד וחד נעביד ביה מצוה:,רביעי גומר עליו את ההלל ואומר עליו ברכת השיר: | 117b. b What, is it not /b the case b that the /b mishna and the i baraita /i b disagree /b concerning b the following /b matter: b According to the one who says /b that one must recite b until “A joyful mother of children,” /b he b maintains /b that the subsequent b i halleluya /i /b is b the start of a chapter. And the one who said /b that one must recite b until “When Israel came forth” maintains /b that b i halleluya /i /b is b the end of the /b previous b chapter. /b The mishna and the i baraita /i disagree only with regard to when the word i halleluya /i should be recited, at this point in the seder or when i hallel /i is resumed after the meal.,The Gemara rejects this contention: This is no proof, as b Rav Ḥisda explains /b the difference between the mishna and the i baraita /i b in accordance with his reasoning, that everyone maintains /b that b i halleluya /i /b marks b the end of a chapter. /b However, b the one who said /b that one must recite b until “When Israel came forth” /b spoke b well, /b as he cites the beginning of the next verse. b And the one who said /b that one must recite b until “A joyful mother of children” /b means b until and including, /b i.e., one finishes the entire verse including the word i halleluya /i .,The Gemara asks: If so, b let /b the i tanna /i b say: Until i halleluya /i . And if you say that we /b would b not know which i halleluya /i /b he meant, b let /b the i tanna /i b say: /b The b i halleluya /i of “A joyful mother of children.” /b The Gemara comments: This is indeed b difficult /b for the opinion of Rav Ḥisda.,Likewise, b Rabba bar Rav Huna explains /b the difference between the mishna and the i baraita /i b in accordance with his reasoning, that everyone agrees /b that b i halleluya /i /b signifies b the start of a chapter. The one who said /b that one must recite b until “A joyful mother of children” /b spoke b well, and the one who said /b that one must recite b until “When Israel came forth” maintains /b that the term means b until and not including, /b as one does not conclude with the word i halleluya /i after “A joyful mother of children.”,The Gemara asks a similar question with regard to the opinion of Rabba bar Rav Huna: If so, b let /b the i tanna /i b say: Until i halleluya /i . And if you say that we /b would b not know which i halleluya /i /b he meant, b let /b the i tanna /i b say: /b The b i halleluya /i of “When Israel came forth.” /b The Gemara comments: This is indeed b difficult /b for Rabba bar Rav Huna’s opinion., b And /b the mishna stated that b one concludes /b this section of i hallel /i b with /b a blessing that refers b to redemption. /b With regard to the dispute over how to conclude the blessing, b Rava said: /b For b the recitation of i Shema /i and i hallel /i /b on Passover, the wording of the final blessing is: b Who redeemed Israel, /b in the past tense, whereas the seventh blessing of the weekday i Amida /i b prayer /b concludes with: b Who redeems Israel, /b in the present tense. b What is the reason /b for this difference? Prayer b is a /b supplication for mercy and therefore one mentions and requests the anticipated redemption in his prayers.,Likewise, b Rabbi Zeira said: /b The formula b of i kiddush /i /b is: b Who sanctified us with His mitzvot and commanded us, /b in the past tense. In contrast, the formula in the i Amida /i b prayer /b is: b Sanctify us with Your mitzvot, /b in the future tense. b What is the reason /b for this difference? Prayer b is a /b supplication for mercy, and one submits a request for the future., b Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: And one must mention the exodus from Egypt in the i kiddush /i /b of Shabbat day, despite the fact that Shabbat is not directly connected to the Exodus. The proof is that b here, /b with regard to Passover, b it is written: “That you may remember the day /b when you came out of the land of Egypt all the days of your life” (Deuteronomy 16:3); b and it is written there, /b with regard to Shabbat: b “Remember the Shabbat day to sanctify it” /b (Exodus 20:8). By means of a verbal analogy of the word “day,” these verses teach that one must also recall the Exodus on Shabbat.,The Gemara discusses the formulas of other prayers. b Rabba bar Sheila said: /b The b prayer /b that describes the future restoration of the kingship of Israel concludes with: b He Who causes the horn of salvation to flourish, /b while the blessing recited b after the i haftara /i , /b the portion read from the Prophets, concludes with: b Shield of David. /b ,Incidentally, the Gemara cites the promise God issued to David through Nathan the Prophet: b “And I will make you a great name, like the names of the great ones /b in the earth” (II Samuel 7:9). b Rav Yosef teaches: This is /b the meaning of the phrase “like the names of the great ones,” that Jews will b say: Shield of David, /b just as they say: Shield of Avraham., b Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said /b with regard to God’s blessing of Avraham: “And I will make of you a great nation, and I will bless you, and I will make your name great, and you will be a blessing,” (Genesis 12:2). b “And I will make of you a great nation”; this is /b fulfilled in the opening of the first blessing of the i Amida /i , b as /b Jews b say: God of Abraham. “And I will bless you”; this is /b fulfilled when b they say: God of Isaac, /b as it is a blessing for a father when the name of his son is eternalized. b “And I will make your name great”; this is /b fulfilled b when they say: God of Jacob. /b ,One b might /b have thought that Jews should b conclude /b the first blessing of the i Amida /i prayer b with /b the names of b all /b the forefathers; therefore b the verse states: “And you will be a blessing,” /b i.e., b with you, /b Avraham, b they /b will b conclude /b the blessing, b and they /b will b not conclude with /b a mention of b all /b of the forefathers. This is why the first blessing of the i Amida /i prayer ends: Shield of Avraham., b Rava said: I found the Elders of Pumbedita sitting and saying: On Shabbat, both in prayer and in i kiddush /i , /b one recites: b Who sanctifies Shabbat. On a Festival, both in prayer and in i kiddush /i /b one recites: b Who sanctifies Israel and the seasons. And I said to them: On the contrary, /b in b prayer, both on Shabbat and on a Festival, /b one should recite: b Who sanctifies Israel. /b However, b in the i kiddush /i of Shabbat /b one should recite: b Who sanctifies Shabbat, /b whereas in the i kiddush /i b of a Festival /b one should recite: b Who sanctifies Israel and the seasons. /b ,Rava further said to the Elders of Pumbedita: b And I /b can b say my reason and your reason. Your reason /b is that since b Shabbat is established and permanent, /b i.e., it always occurs on the seventh day of the week, b both in prayers and in i kiddush /i /b one should recite: b Who sanctifies Shabbat. /b It is not necessary for Israel to sanctify Shabbat, as it is permanently sanctified by God. Conversely, with regard to a b Festival, as it is Israel who establishes it, as /b the Sages b add /b extra days to certain b months and establish years /b by intercalating them, one recites: b Who sanctifies Israel and the seasons. /b This is Rava’s explanation of the reason for the ruling of the Elders of Pumbedita.,Rava continues: b My reason is /b that in the case of b prayer, which is in public, /b one recites: b Who sanctifies Israel, /b in honor of the community. Conversely, for b i kiddush /i , which is /b recited by an individual b alone on Shabbat, /b one says: b Who sanctifies Shabbat, /b as Israel does not sanctify Shabbat. b On a Festival /b one recites: b Who sanctifies Israel and the seasons. /b In this case, Israel is mentioned, as its Sages sanctify the Festivals.,The Gemara rejects Rava’s reason: b And that is not so. Is there not /b also the b prayer /b recited b by /b a person who is b alone; and is there not /b also kiddush b in public? /b The above distinction is rendered meaningless in practice. b But Rava maintains: Follow the main /b practice of each mitzva. Prayer is primarily a communal activity, whereas i kiddush /i is fundamentally the obligation of each individual.,The Gemara reports: b Ulla bar Rav descended /b to lead the prayer service b before Rava. He said /b the formula b in accordance with /b the opinion b of the Elders of Pumbedita, and /b Rava b did not say anything to him. Apparently, Rava retracted /b his opinion and accepted the formula of the Elders of Pumbedita. Likewise, the Gemara relates: b Rav Natan, father of Rav Huna, son /b of b Rav Natan, descended /b to lead the prayer service b before Rav Pappa /b and b recited /b the liturgy b in accordance with /b the opinion b of the Elders of Pumbedita, /b and b Rav Pappa praised him /b for his correct recitation., b Ravina said: I happened /b to come b to Sura before Mareimar, and the prayer leader descended before him and recited /b the liturgy b in accordance with /b the opinion b of the Elders of Pumbedita, and everyone /b tried to b silence him, /b as they had never heard that version of the prayer before. Mareimar b said to them: Leave him, /b as b the i halakha /i is in accordance with /b the opinion b of the Elders of Pumbedita. And /b the people in attendance listened to him and b no /b longer tried to b silence /b the prayer leader, but allowed him to complete the prayer., strong MISHNA: /strong b They poured for /b the leader of the seder b the third cup /b of wine, b and he recites the blessing over his food, /b Grace After Meals. Next, they pour him the b fourth /b cup. b He completes i hallel /i over it, /b as he already recited the first part of i hallel /i before the meal. b And he /b also b recites the blessing of the song /b at the end of i hallel /i b over /b the fourth cup. During the period b between these cups, /b i.e., the first three cups established by the Sages, b if one wishes to drink /b more b he /b may b drink; /b however, b between the third /b cup b and the fourth /b cup one should b not drink. /b , strong GEMARA: /strong b Ran Ḥa said to Rava: /b Since the mishna states that Grace After Meals must be recited over the third cup, b learn from it /b that Grace After Meals b requires a cup /b of wine. Rava b said to him: /b This is no proof, for although b the Sages instituted /b the drinking of b four cups in the manner of freedom, /b once the four cups are in place, with b each and every one /b of them b we will perform a mitzva, /b despite the fact that they were not originally instituted for this purpose. After the Sages instituted these four cups, they attached a special mitzva to each one. However, this does not prove that there is an obligation to recite Grace After Meals over a cup of wine during the rest of the year.,We learned in the mishna that they pour the leader of the seder the b fourth /b cup and b he completes i hallel /i over it, and he recites the blessing of the song /b at the end of i hallel /i b over /b that cup. |
|
43. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel (babylonian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 290| 167a. ומשוי להו זוזי מאי אמרת שית מאה איסתירי וזוזא (שית מאה זוזי וחד זוזא) יד בעל השטר על התחתונה,אמר אביי האי מאן דבעי למחוי חתימות ידיה בבי דינא לא לחוי בסוף מגילתא דלמא משכח לה אחר וכתיב דמסיק ביה זוזי ותנן הוציא עליו כתב ידו שהוא חייב לו גובה מנכסים בני חורין, ההוא בזבינא דאתא לקמיה דאביי אמר ליה ניחזי לי מר חתימות ידיה דכי אתו רבנן מחוו לי מעברנא להו בלא מכסא אחוי ליה בריש מגילתא הוה קא נגיד ביה א"ל כבר קדמוך רבנן,אמר אביי מתלת ועד עשר לא לכתוב בסוף שיטה דלמא מזייף וכתב ואי איתרמי ליה ניהדריה לדבוריה תרין תלתא זימני אי אפשר דלא מיתרמי ליה באמצע שיטה,ההוא דהוה כתיב ביה תילתא בפרדיסא אזל מחקיה לגגיה דבי"ת וכרעיה ושויה ופרדיסא אתא לקמיה דאביי אמר ליה מאי טעמא רויח ליה עלמא להאי וי"ו כפתיה ואודי,ההוא דהוה כתב ביה מנת ראובן ושמעון אחי הוה להו אחא דשמיה אחי אזל כתב ביה וי'ו ושויה ואחי אתא לקמיה דאביי אמר ליה מאי טעמא דחיק ליה עלמא להאי וי"ו כולי האי כפתיה ואודי,ההוא שטרא דהוה חתים עליה רבא ורב אחא בר אדא אתא לקמיה דרבא אמר ליה דין חתימות ידא דידי היא מיהו קמיה דרב אחא בר אדא לא חתימי לי מעולם כפתיה ואודי א"ל בשלמא דידי זייפת אלא דרב אחא בר אדא דרתית ידיה היכי עבדת אמר אנחי ידאי אמצרא ואמרי לה קם אזרנוקא וכתב:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big כותבין גט לאיש אע"פ שאין אשתו עמו והשובר לאשה אע"פ שאין בעלה עמה ובלבד שיהא מכירן והבעל נותן שכר | 167a. b and change them /b into a smaller number of b dinars. /b Therefore, b what can you say? /b The highest and lowest remaining possibilities are: b Six hundred i istira /i and a dinar, /b and b six hundred dinars and one /b more b dinar. /b The guiding principle is that b the holder of the document /b is b at a disadvantage, /b and the lesser of these two values is assumed.,§ b Abaye said: /b With regard to b this one who needs to show his signature in court /b for the purpose of corroborating his signature on a document, he b should not show /b it by writing it b at the end of the parchment, lest another, /b unscrupulous, person b find /b the parchment b and write /b above the signature b that /b the signatory b owes him money. And /b such a document would be valid, as b we learned /b in a mishna (175b): If one b presents to /b a debtor a document in the b handwriting of /b the debtor stating b that he owes /b money b to him, /b but without witnesses signed on the document, the creditor b can collect /b only b from unsold property, /b i.e., property that is currently in the possession of the debtor.,The Gemara relates: There was b a certain /b Jewish b tax collector who came before Abaye /b and b said to him: Let the Master show me his signature /b on a piece of paper to keep in my records, b as when rabbis come /b to me and b show me /b a note with your signature on it, attesting to the fact that they are Torah scholars, b I let them pass without /b paying the b tax. Abaye showed him /b his signature b at the top of the parchment, /b though the unscrupulous tax collector kept b pulling /b the parchment away from Abaye so that the signature would be at the bottom. Abaye noticed this and b said to him: The Sages /b have b already anticipated /b people such as b you /b and advised that one should never write his signature at the bottom of a paper.,§ b Abaye said: /b When writing a promissory note, one b should not write /b any number b from three until ten at the end of a line, lest /b someone b commit forgery and write /b an extension to the number, since it is at the end of the line. In Hebrew and Aramaic, the words for the numbers three through nine can be changed to thirty through ninety, respectively, by appending to them the suffix i in /i , written with the letters i yod /i and i nun /i . Ten can be changed to twenty in a similar manner. b And if /b by chance b it occurs for him /b that these numbers fall out at the end of a line, b he should repeat his words two /b or b three times, /b stating and restating the agreement in question, as b it is impossible that /b the number will b not /b eventually b occur for him in the middle of a line. /b When there is a contradiction, it is the final mention of the amount that is authoritative, as the mishna teaches.,The Gemara relates: There was b a certain /b bill of sale b in which it was written /b that the item sold was: In my garden, b one-third of the orchard. /b The purchaser b went /b and b erased the roof and the foot of the i beit /i /b of the term: of the orchard [ i befardeisa /i ], b and /b thereby b changed /b the prefix i beit /i into a i vav /i , yielding: In my garden one-third, b and the orchard [ i ufardeisa /i ], /b indicating that the sale included one-third of the garden in addition to all of the orchard. The document b came before Abaye, /b who b said to /b the purchaser: b What is the reason /b that there is b so much space around this i vav /i ? /b Since the letter i vav /i is narrower than the letter i beit /i , a larger space between letters emerged as compared to the spacing of letters in the rest of the document. Abaye b bound /b the purchaser, i.e., he subjected him to physical coercion, b and he admitted /b to the forgery.,The Gemara relates: There was b a certain /b bill of sale b in which it was written /b that the item being sold was: b The portions of Reuven and Shimon, brothers [ i aḥei /i ]. /b Reuven and Shimon happened to b have a brother whose name /b was b Aḥai, /b which, when writing without vowels, is spelled identically to i aḥei /i . The purchaser b went /b and b wrote /b a conjunctive b i vav /i in /b the document before the word i aḥei /i , b and changed /b the wording into: The portions of Reuven and Shimon b and Aḥai. /b The document b came before Abaye, /b who b said to /b the purchaser: b What is the reason /b that it is b so crowded around this i vav /i ? /b By inserting the extra i vav /i , a smaller space between letters emerged as compared to the spacing of letters in the rest of the document. Abaye b bound /b the purchaser, i.e., he subjected him to physical coercion, b and he admitted /b the forgery.,The Gemara relates: There was b a certain document upon which /b the signatures of b Rava and Rav Aḥa bar Adda were signed. /b The one holding the document b came before Rava, /b who b said to him: This is my signature, but I never signed /b any document b before Rav Aḥa bar Adda. /b Rava b bound /b the holder of the document, i.e., he subjected him to physical coercion, b and he admitted /b the forgery. Rava b said to him: Granted, you /b were able to b forge my /b signature, b but how did you perform /b a forgery of b Rav Aḥa bar Adda’s /b signature, b since his hands shake /b and as a result his signature is distinctive? The man b said: I placed my hands on /b the rope of b a narrow footbridge [ i amitzra /i ], /b and was thereby able to duplicate Rav Aḥa’s signature. b And some say /b that the forgery was accomplished when the forger b stood upon a /b wobbly b water skin [ i azarnuka /i ] and wrote /b the signature., strong MISHNA: /strong A scribe may b write a bill of divorce for a man /b who requests one, b even if his wife is not with him /b to give her consent when he presents his request, as there is no possibility that he will misuse the document. b And /b a scribe may write b a receipt for a woman /b upon her request, attesting to the payment of her marriage contract, b even if her husband is not with her /b to give his consent. This is true b provided that /b the scribe b recognizes /b the parties requesting the document, to prevent misrepresentation. b And /b for both documents, b the husband gives /b the scribe his b wages. /b |
|
44. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 151| 56a. בכל יום דנין את העדים בכינוי יכה יוסי את יוסי,נגמר הדין לא הורגין בכינוי אלא מוציאין כל אדם לחוץ שואלין את הגדול שביניהן ואומר לו אמור מה ששמעת בפירוש והוא אומר והדיינין עומדין על רגליהן וקורעין ולא מאחין,והשני אומר אף אני כמוהו והשלישי אומר אף אני כמוהו:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big תנא עד שיברך שם בשם,מנהני מילי אמר שמואל דאמר קרא (ויקרא כד, טז) ונוקב שם וגו' בנקבו שם יומת,ממאי דהאי נוקב לישנא דברוכי הוא דכתיב (במדבר כג, ח) מה אקב לא קבה אל ואזהרתיה מהכא (שמות כב, כז) אלהים לא תקלל,ואימא מיברז הוא דכתיב (מלכים ב יב, י) ויקב חור בדלתו ואזהרתיה מהכא (דברים יב, ג) ואבדתם את שמם לא תעשון כן לה' אלהיכם,בעינא שם בשם וליכא,ואימא דמנח שני שמות אהדדי ובזע להו ההוא נוקב וחוזר ונוקב הוא ואימא דחייק שם אפומא דסכינא ובזע בה ההוא חורפא דסכינא הוא דקא בזע,אימא פרושי שמיה הוא דכתיב (במדבר א, יז) ויקח משה ואהרן את האנשים האלה אשר נקבו בשמות ואזהרתיה מהכא (דברים ו, יג) את ה' אלהיך תירא,חדא דבעינא שם בשם וליכא ועוד הויא ליה אזהרת עשה ואזהרת עשה לא שמה אזהרה,ואיבעית אימא אמר קרא (ויקרא כד, יא) ויקב ויקלל למימרא דנוקב קללה הוא,ודילמא עד דעבד תרוייהו לא סלקא דעתך דכתיב (ויקרא כד, יד) הוצא את המקלל ולא כתיב הוצא את הנוקב והמקלל שמע מינה חדא היא,תנו רבנן איש מה ת"ל איש איש לרבות את העובדי כוכבים שמוזהרין על ברכת השם כישראל ואינן נהרגין אלא בסייף שכל מיתה האמורה בבני נח אינה אלא בסייף,והא מהכא נפקא מהתם נפקא ה' זו ברכת השם,אמר ר' יצחק נפחא לא נצרכא אלא לרבותא הכינויין ואליבא דרבי מאיר,דתניא (ויקרא כד, טו) איש איש כי יקלל אלהיו ונשא חטאו מה תלמוד לומר והלא כבר נאמר (ויקרא כד, טז) ונוקב שם ה' מות יומת לפי שנאמר ונוקב שם מות יומת יכול לא יהא חייב אלא על שם המיוחד בלבד מניין לרבות כל הכינויין תלמוד לומר איש כי יקלל אלהיו מכל מקום דברי רבי מאיר,וחכמים אומרים על שם המיוחד במיתה ועל הכינויין באזהרה,ופליגא דרבי מיישא דאמר רבי מיישא בן נח שבירך את השם בכינויים לרבנן חייב,מאי טעמא דאמר קרא (ויקרא כד, טז) כגר כאזרח גר ואזרח הוא דבעינן בנקבו שם אבל עובד כוכבים אפילו בכינוי,ורבי מאיר האי כגר כאזרח מאי עביד ליה גר ואזרח בסקילה אבל עובד כוכבים בסייף סלקא דעתך אמינא הואיל ואיתרבו איתרבו קמ"ל,ורבי יצחק נפחא אליבא דרבנן האי כגר כאזרח מאי עביד ליה גר ואזרח הוא דבעינן שם בשם אבל עובד כוכבים לא בעינן שם בשם,איש איש למה לי דיברה תורה כלשון בני אדם,תנו רבנן שבע מצות נצטוו בני נח דינין וברכת השם ע"ז גילוי עריות ושפיכות דמים וגזל ואבר מן החי | 56a. b On every day /b of a blasphemer’s trial, when the judges b judge the witnesses, /b i.e., interrogate the witnesses, they ask the witnesses to use b an appellation /b for the name of God, so that they do not utter a curse of God’s name. Specifically, the witnesses would say: b Let Yosei smite Yosei, /b as the name Yosei has four letters in Hebrew, as does the Tetragrammaton.,When b the judgment is over, /b and the court votes to deem the defendant guilty, b they do not sentence /b him b to death based on /b the testimony of the witnesses in which they used b an appellation /b for the name of God, without having ever heard the exact wording of the curse. b Rather, they remove all /b the b people /b who are not required to be there from the court, so that the curse is not heard publicly, and the judges b interrogate the eldest of /b the witnesses, b and say to him: Say what you heard explicitly. And he says /b exactly what he heard. b And the judges stand on their feet and make a tear /b in their garments, as an act of mourning for the desecration of the honor of God. b And they do not /b ever fully b stitch /b it back together again., b And the second /b witness b says: I too /b heard b as he /b did, but he does not repeat the curse explicitly. b And the third /b witness, in the event that there is one, b says: I too /b heard b as he /b did. In this manner, the repetition of the invective sentence is limited to what is absolutely necessary., strong GEMARA: /strong The Sage b taught /b in a i baraita /i : A blasphemer is not liable b unless he blesses, /b a euphemism for curses, the b name /b of God b with /b the b name /b of God, e.g., by saying: Let such and such a name strike such and such a name.,The Gemara asks: b From where is this matter /b derived? b Shmuel says: /b It is derived from that b which the verse states: “And he who blasphemes [ i venokev /i ] the name /b of the Lord shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him; the convert as well as the homeborn, b when he blasphemes [ i benokvo /i ] the name, he shall be put to death” /b (Leviticus 24:16). It is derived from the repetition of the phrase “blasphemes the name” that the reference is to cursing the name of God with the name of God.,The Gemara asks: b From where /b is it derived b that this /b word b i nokev /i is a term for blessing, /b i.e., cursing? The Gemara answers that it is derived from the statement of Balaam, who was sent by Balak to curse the Jewish people: b “How shall I curse [ i ekkov /i ] whom God has not cursed?” /b (Numbers 23:8). b And /b the b prohibition /b against cursing God is derived b from here: “You shall not curse God” /b (Exodus 22:27).,The Gemara asks: b But say /b that perhaps the meaning of i nokev /i b is /b not cursing, but rather b making a hole, as it is written: “And made a hole [ i vayyikkov /i ] in its lid” /b (II Kings 12:10). According to this, the word i nokev /i is referring to one who makes a hole and damages the written name of God. b And /b the b prohibition /b against doing so is derived b from here: “And you shall destroy their name /b out of that place. b You shall not do so to the Lord your God” /b (Deuteronomy 12:3–4).,The Gemara answers: It is derived from the repetition of i nokev /i that for one to be liable, it is b necessary /b that his transgression involve the b name /b of God b with /b the b name /b of God, b and /b such a transgression is b not /b possible if the reference is to making a hole.,The Gemara challenges: b But say that /b such a transgression is possible, as one can b place two /b written b names /b of God, b one on top of the other, and tear /b through b them /b at once. The Gemara explains: b That /b would be defined as b making a hole and again making a hole, /b not making a hole in one name by means of another name. The Gemara asks: b But say that /b one can b etch /b the b name /b of God b on the point of a knife and cut /b through another name b with it. /b The Gemara answers: In b that /b case, b it is the point of the knife that is cutting, /b not the name of God.,The Gemara asks: b Say /b that i nokev /i means the b utterance of the /b ineffable b name of /b God. b As it is written: “And Moses and Aaron took these men that are pointed out [ i nikkevu /i ] by name” /b (Numbers 1:17). b And /b the b prohibition /b to do so is derived b from here: “You shall fear the Lord, your God” /b (Deuteronomy 6:13).,The Gemara answers: b One /b answer is b that /b for one to be liable, it is b necessary /b that his transgression involve the b name /b of God b with /b the b name /b of God, b and /b such a transgression is b not /b possible if the reference is to uttering the ineffable name of God. b Furthermore, /b the prohibition derived from the verse “You shall fear the Lord, your God” b is a prohibition /b stated as b a positive mitzva, and a prohibition /b stated as b a positive mitzva is not considered a prohibition. /b ,The Gemara presents an alternative proof that i nokev /i is referring to cursing: b And if you wish, say /b instead that b the verse states: “And /b the son of the Israelite woman b blasphemed [ i vayyikkov /i ] /b the name b and cursed” /b (Leviticus 24:11). b That is to say that /b the meaning of b i nokev /i is /b to b curse. /b ,The Gemara asks: b But perhaps /b this verse does not prove that the meaning of i nokev /i is to curse; rather, it indicates that one is not liable to be executed b unless he does both, /b i.e., both i nokev /i and cursing God? The Gemara answers: This shall b not enter your mind, as it is written: “Bring forth the one who cursed… /b and stone him” (Leviticus 24:14), b and it is not written: Bring forth the i nokev /i and one who cursed. Conclude from it /b that b it is one /b act and not two.,§ b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i with regard to the verse: “Anyone who curses his God shall bear his sin” (Leviticus 24:15), that the verse could have stated: b One [ i ish /i ] /b who curses his God. b Why /b must b the verse state: “Anyone [ i ish ish /i ]”? /b It is b to include the gentiles, who are prohibited from blessing, /b i.e., cursing, b the name /b of God, just b like Jews /b are. b And they are executed /b for this transgression b by the sword alone, as all death /b penalties b stated with regard to the descendants of Noah are by the sword alone. /b ,The Gemara asks: b But is this /b i halakha /i b derived from here? /b Rather, b it is derived from there: /b “And the Lord God commanded the man” (Genesis 2:16), as is stated in a i baraita /i that will soon be quoted at length: b “The Lord,” this /b is referring to b the blessing, /b i.e., cursing, b of the name /b of God. This verse concerns Adam, the first man, and is therefore binding on all of humanity., b Rav Yitzḥak Nappaḥa says: /b The verse “anyone who curses his God” b is necessary only to include /b gentiles who curse God using b the appellations /b for the name of God, rather than mentioning the ineffable name, b and /b this is b in accordance with /b the opinion b of Rabbi Meir. /b , b As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Why /b must b the verse state: “Anyone who curses his God shall bear his sin”? But isn’t it already stated: “And he who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall be put to death” /b (Leviticus 24:16)? Rather, b since it is stated: “And he who blasphemes the name /b of the Lord b shall be put to death,” /b one b might /b have thought that one b will be liable only for /b cursing b the ineffable name /b of God. b From where /b is it derived that the verse b includes /b one who curses b any of the appellations /b as well? b The verse states: “Anyone who curses his God,” /b to indicate that one is liable to be executed b in any case. /b This is b the statement of Rabbi Meir. /b , b And the Rabbis say: For /b cursing b the ineffable name /b of God, one is punished b by death, and for /b cursing b the appellations, /b one is liable to receive lashes b for /b violating b a prohibition. /b ,The Gemara comments: b And /b Rav Yitzḥak Nappaḥa, who holds that according to the Rabbis, gentiles are not liable for cursing appellations for the name of God, b disagrees with /b the opinion of b Rav Meyasha. As Rav Meyasha says: A descendant of Noah who blessed God by /b one of the b appellations is liable /b to be executed even b according to /b the opinion of b the Rabbis. /b , b What is the reason? /b It is b because the verse states: “The convert as well as the homeborn, /b when he blasphemes the name, he shall be put to death” (Leviticus 24:16), from which it is derived that b it is /b only in the case of b a convert or a homeborn /b Jew b that we require /b the condition: b “When he blasphemes the name,” /b i.e., he is liable to be executed only if he curses the ineffable name. b But a gentile /b is liable to be executed b even due to /b merely cursing b an appellation. /b ,The Gemara asks: b And what does Rabbi Meir do with this /b part of the verse: b “The convert as well as the homeborn”? /b What does he derive from it? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Meir derives that b a convert or a homeborn /b Jew is liable to be executed b by stoning /b for this transgression, b but a gentile /b is executed b by the sword. /b This exclusion is necessary as otherwise it might b enter your mind to say /b that b since /b gentiles b are included /b in the i halakhot /i of this verse, b they are included /b in all the i halakhot /i of blasphemy. Therefore the verse b teaches us /b that they are not stoned.,The Gemara asks: b And what does Rav Yitzḥak Nappaḥa do with this /b part of the verse: b “The convert as well as the homeborn,” according to /b the opinion b of the Rabbis, /b since Rav Yitzḥak Nappaḥa holds that the Rabbis do not deem either a Jew or a gentile liable for cursing an appellation of God’s name? The Gemara answers: He derives that b it is /b specifically with regard to b a convert and a homeborn /b Jew b that we require /b the condition that he curse b a name /b of God b by a name /b of God; b but /b with regard to b a gentile, we do not require /b that he curse b a name /b of God b by a name /b of God in order for him to be liable.,The Gemara asks: b Why do I /b need the inclusive term b “anyone /b who curses his God,” according to the opinions that do not derive from it that a gentile is liable for cursing an appellation of God’s name? The Gemara answers: No i halakha /i is derived from it; it is not a superfluous term, as b the Torah spoke in the language of people. /b ,§ Since the i halakhot /i of the descendants of Noah have been mentioned, a full discussion of the Noahide mitzvot is presented. b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b The descendants of Noah, /b i.e., all of humanity, b were commanded /b to observe b seven mitzvot: /b The mitzva of establishing courts of b judgment; and /b the prohibition against b blessing, /b i.e., cursing, b the name /b of God; and the prohibition of b idol worship; /b and the prohibition against b forbidden sexual relations; and /b the prohibition of b bloodshed; and /b the prohibition of b robbery; and /b the prohibition against eating b a limb from a living /b animal. |
|
| 45. Origen, Homilies On Luke, 28.2 (3rd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel saba (sage) Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 113 |
46. Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 392| 150a. מדוד והבא ואיכא דאמרי שאמרה מאד מאד הביא בלא מדה,(דניאל ד, לג) ורבו יתירה הוספת לי אמר רב יהודה אמר רב ירמיה בר אבא מלמד שרכב על ארי זכר וקשר תנין בראשו לקיים מה שנא' (ירמיהו כז, ו) וגם את חית השדה נתתי לו לעבדו:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big לא ישכור אדם פועלים בשבת ולא יאמר אדם לחבירו לשכור לו פועלים אין מחשיכין על התחום לשכור לו פועלים ולהביא פירות אבל מחשיך הוא לשמור ומביא פירות בידו כלל אמר אבא שאול כל שאני זכאי באמירתו רשאי אני להחשיך עליו:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big (פשיטא) מ"ש הוא ומ"ש חבירו אמר רב פפא חבר נכרי מתקיף לה רב אשי אמירה לנכרי שבות,אלא אמר רב אשי אפילו תימא חבירו ישראל הא קמ"ל לא יאמר אדם לחבירו שכור לי פועלים אבל אומר אדם לחבירו הנראה שתעמוד עמי לערב ומתני' מני כרבי יהושע בן קרחה דתניא לא יאמר אדם לחבירו הנראה שתעמוד עמי לערב רבי יהושע בן קרחה אומר אומר אדם לחבירו הנראה שתעמוד עמי לערב,אמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יוחנן הלכה כרבי יהושע בן קרחה ואמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יוחנן מ"ט דרבי יהושע בן קרחה דכתיב (ישעיהו נח, יג) ממצוא חפצך ודבר דבר דיבור אסור הרהור מותר,רמי ליה רב אחא בר רב הונא לרבא מי אמר ר' יוחנן דיבור אסור הרהור מותר אלמא הרהור לאו כדיבור דמי והאמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יוחנן בכל מקום מותר להרהר חוץ מבית המרחץ ומבית הכסא שאני התם דבעינן (דברים כג, טו) והיה מחניך קדוש וליכא,הכא נמי כתיב (דברים כג, טו) ולא יראה בך ערות דבר ההוא מיבעי ליה לכדרב יהודה דאמר רב יהודה עכו"ם ערום אסור לקרות קרית שמע כנגדו,מאי איריא עכו"ם אפי' ישראל נמי לא מיבעיא קאמר לא מיבעיא ישראל דאסור אבל עכו"ם כיון דכתיב ביה (יחזקאל כג, כ) אשר בשר חמורים בשרם אימא שפיר דמי קמ"ל,אימא הכי נמי אמר קרא (בראשית ט, כג) וערות אביהם לא ראו,ודיבור מי אסיר והא רב חסדא ורב המנונא דאמרי תרוייהו חשבונות של מצוה מותר לחשבן בשבת וא"ר אלעזר פוסקים צדקה לעניים בשבת וא"ר יעקב בר אידי אמר רבי יוחנן מפקחין פיקוח נפש ופיקוח רבים בשבת והולכין לבתי כנסיות לפקח על עסקי רבים בשבת,וא"ר שמואל בר נחמני א"ר יוחנן הולכין לטרטיאות ולקרקסאות ולבסילקאות לפקח על עסקי רבים בשבת ותנא דבי מנשה משדכין על התינוקות ליארס בשבת ועל התינוק ללמדו ספר וללמדו אומנות אמר קרא ממצוא חפצך ודבר דבר חפציך אסורים חפצי שמים מותרין,א"ר יהודה אמר שמואל חשבונות של [מלך] ושל מה בכך מותר לחשבן בשבת תנ"ה חשבונות שעברו ושעתידין להיו' אסור לחשבן של) מלך | 150a. b Measure and bring /b a lot of money, b has ceased. And some say /b that the meaning of the statement is that this nation b said: Bring very, very much, without measure. /b ,The Gemara cites another verse pertaining to Nebuchadnezzar: b “And surpassing greatness was added unto me” /b (Daniel 4:33), about which b Rav Yehuda said /b that b Rav Yirmeya bar Abba said: This teaches that /b Nebuchadnezzar b rode atop a male lion and tied a serpent to its head, fulfilling what was said /b of him: b “And the beasts of the field I have also given him to serve him” /b (Jeremiah 27:6)., strong MISHNA: /strong b A person may not hire workers on Shabbat /b to work for him after Shabbat because even speaking about weekday matters is prohibited on Shabbat. Similarly, b a person may not tell another /b on Shabbat b to hire workers for him. One may not /b even b wait for nightfall at /b the edge of b the Shabbat boundary /b in order to leave the boundary immediately after Shabbat b to hire workers for himself or to bring produce /b from his field. b But he may wait for nightfall /b at the edge of the Shabbat boundary in order b to guard /b his produce that is outside the Shabbat boundary, b and /b he may then b bring produce /b back b in his hand, /b since he did not initially intend to wait at the edge of the boundary for this purpose. b Abba Shaul stated a /b general b principle: /b With regard to b anything that I am permitted to discuss /b on Shabbat, b I am permitted to wait for nightfall /b at the edge of the Shabbat boundary b for its sake. /b , strong GEMARA: /strong The beginning of the mishna taught that one may not hire workers on Shabbat, and one may not tell another to hire workers for him. The Gemara finds this puzzling and states: This is b obvious. What is the difference between him and another? /b Just as he is prohibited from hiring workers on Shabbat, others are also prohibited from doing so. b Rav Pappa said: Another /b is referring to b a gentile. Rav Ashi strongly objects to this: /b This is itself a prohibition, for b telling a gentile /b to do something that is prohibited for a Jew on Shabbat violates a b rabbinic prohibition. /b , b Rather, Rav Ashi said: Even if you say /b that it is referring to b another Jew, /b it can be said that the novel element of this ruling is not the statement itself but what can be derived from it. b This is what it is teaching us: One may not say to another /b explicitly on Shabbat: b Hire workers for me, but one may say to another: Does it seem that you will join me this evening? /b This is permitted even though both of them understand that the questioner intends to hire the other person to work for him. b And /b in accordance with b whose /b opinion is b the mishna? /b It is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa; as it was taught /b in a i baraita /i : b A person may not say to another /b on Shabbat: b Does it seem that you will join me this evening? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa says: A person may say to another /b on Shabbat: b Does it seem that you will join me this evening? /b , b Rabba bar bar Ḥana said /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa said: /b The b i halakha /i is in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa. And Rabba bar bar Ḥana said /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa said: What is the reason for Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa’s /b ruling? b As it is written /b in the verse from which we derive the prohibition to speak on Shabbat about activities that one may not perform on that day: “And you shall honor it by not doing your ways, b nor pursuing your business, nor speaking of it” /b (Isaiah 58:13). We derive from this verse that b speaking is prohibited, /b but merely b contemplating /b these matters b is permitted. /b , b Rav Aḥa bar Rav Huna raised a contradiction to Rava: Did Rabbi Yoḥa /b really b state /b as a general principle that b speaking is prohibited, /b but b contemplating is permitted? Consequently, /b we can derive from here that b contemplation is not tantamount to speech. But Rabba bar bar Ḥana said /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa said: It is permitted to think /b about Torah b in any place except for a bathhouse and a bathroom. /b This statement indicates that contemplation is tantamount to speech, as even thought is prohibited in these locations. The Gemara answers: b It is different there, for /b with regard to Torah b we need /b to fulfill the verse: “For the Lord your God walks in the midst of your camp to deliver you and to give your enemies before you; b therefore, your camp shall be sacred /b so that He see no unseemly thing in you and turn away from you” (Deuteronomy 23:15); b and /b the requirement to be sacred is b not /b fulfilled if one thinks about Torah while in the bathhouse or bathroom.,The Gemara challenges this: But b here, too, /b with regard to a bathhouse and a bathroom, b it is written: “So that He see no unseemly thing [ i davar /i ] in you” /b (Deuteronomy 23:15). We can infer that this prohibits speech [ i dibbur /i ] but not contemplation. The Gemara answers: b That /b verse is not referring to speech. b It is needed for /b the ruling of b Rav Yehuda, for Rav Yehuda said: Opposite a naked gentile, it is prohibited to recite i Shema /i , /b as this is included in the prohibition of unseemly things mentioned above.,The Gemara asks: b Why did /b Rav Yehuda b teach /b this prohibition b particularly /b with regard to b a gentile? Even /b in the presence of a naked b Jew, /b reciting i Shema /i is b also /b prohibited. The Gemara answers: That ruling b is stated /b employing the style of: b There is no need. /b The Gemara explains: b There is no need /b to state this i halakha /i with regard to b a Jew, /b as it is certainly b prohibited /b to recite i Shema /i in the presence of a naked Jew. b However, /b with regard to b a gentile, since it is written about him: “Whose flesh is as the flesh of donkeys” /b (Ezekiel 23:20), perhaps his flesh is not considered nakedness, and one may b say that it seems well /b and permitted. Therefore, Rav Yehuda b teaches us /b that it is also prohibited to recite i Shema /i before a naked gentile.,The Gemara asks: Why not b say /b that b it is indeed so, /b that gentile flesh is not considered nakedness? The Gemara rejects this idea: b The verse /b already b said /b with regard to the sons of Noah: “And they walked backward and covered their father’s nakedness, and their faces were turned backward, b and they did not see their father’s nakedness” /b (Genesis 9:23). The verse uses the term nakedness with regard to Noah, who was a gentile.,The Gemara addresses the basis of the i halakha /i mentioned above: b And is it speaking /b about proscribed activities b prohibited /b on Shabbat? b But Rav Ḥisda and Rav Hamnuna both said: It is permitted to make calculations pertaining to a mitzva on Shabbat, and Rabbi Elazar said /b that this means that b one may apportion charity for the poor on Shabbat. And Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi said /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa said: One may attend to /b activities necessary for b saving a life or for communal needs on Shabbat, and one may go to a synagogue to attend to communal affairs on Shabbat. /b , b And Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa said: One may go to theaters [ i tarteiot /i ], and circus performances [ i kirkesaot /i ], and courthouses [ i basilkaot /i ] to attend to communal affairs on Shabbat. And /b one of the Sages in b the school of Menashe taught: One may /b make the necessary arrangements to b pair off children /b so that they will b be betrothed on Shabbat, and /b one may likewise make arrangements b for a child /b by finding someone b to teach him /b how to read b books and to teach him a craft. /b If speaking about monetary matters is prohibited on Shabbat, how is it possible to participate in all these activities? The Gemara answers that although speaking about similar things is generally prohibited on Shabbat, it is permitted in these cases because b the verse said: “Nor pursuing your business, nor speaking of it” /b (Isaiah 58:13), which indicates that b your business /b matters b are prohibited /b to speak of on Shabbat, but b the business of Heaven, /b matters which have religious significance, b is permitted /b to speak of., b Rav Yehuda said /b that b Shmuel said: /b With regard to b calculations of: What is it to you, [ i mallakh /i ], /b calculations that are in no way relevant to the person making them, b and of: What /b significance b does it have [ i ma bekhakh /i ], /b calculations that do not have any practical significance, it is b permitted to make them on Shabbat. /b This b was also taught /b in the i Tosefta /i : b Calculations /b with regard to matters b that have passed /b or b that will be in the future may not be calculated /b on Shabbat. However, with regard to calculations of: b What is it to you, /b |
|
47. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 564| 12b. רב ששת כי כרע כרע כחיזרא כי קא זקיף זקיף כחיויא:,ואמר רבה בר חיננא סבא משמיה דרב כל השנה כולה אדם מתפלל האל הקדוש מלך אוהב צדקה ומשפט חוץ מעשרה ימים שבין ראש השנה ויום הכפורים שמתפלל המלך הקדוש והמלך המשפט,ורבי אלעזר אמר אפילו אמר האל הקדוש יצא שנאמר (ישעיהו ה, טז) ויגבה ה' צבאות במשפט והאל הקדוש נקדש בצדקה אימתי ויגבה ה' צבאות במשפט אלו עשרה ימים שמר"ה ועד יוה"כ וקאמר האל הקדוש,מאי הוה עלה,אמר רב יוסף האל הקדוש ומלך אוהב צדקה ומשפט רבה אמר המלך הקדוש והמלך המשפט והלכתא כרבה:,ואמר רבה בר חיננא סבא משמיה דרב כל שאפשר לו לבקש רחמים על חבירו ואינו מבקש נקרא חוטא שנאמר (שמואל א יב, כג) גם אנכי חלילה לי מחטא לה' מחדול להתפלל בעדכם,אמר רבא אם ת"ח הוא צריך שיחלה עצמו עליו,מ"ט אילימא משום דכתיב (שמואל א כב, ח) ואין חולה מכם עלי (ואין) [ו] גולה את אזני דילמא מלך שאני אלא מהכא (תהלים לה, יג) ואני בחלותם לבושי וגו':,ואמר רבה בר חיננא סבא משמיה דרב כל העושה דבר עבירה ומתבייש בו מוחלין לו על כל עונותיו שנאמר (יחזקאל טז, סג) למען תזכרי ובשת ולא יהיה לך עוד פתחון פה מפני כלמתך בכפרי לך לכל אשר עשית נאם ה' אלהים,דילמא צבור שאני אלא מהכא (שמואל א כח, טו) ויאמר שמואל אל שאול למה הרגזתני להעלות אותי ויאמר שאול צר לי מאד ופלשתים נלחמים בי וה' סר מעלי ולא ענני עוד גם ביד הנביאים גם בחלומות ואקראה לך להודיעני מה אעשה ואילו אורים ותומים לא קאמר,משום דקטליה לנוב עיר הכהנים,ומנין דאחילו ליה מן שמיא שנא' (שמואל א כח, יט) (ויאמר שמואל אל שאול) [ו] מחר אתה ובניך עמי וא"ר יוחנן עמי במחיצתי,ורבנן אמרי מהכא (שמואל ב כא, ו) והוקענום לה' בגבעת שאול בחיר ה' יצתה בת קול ואמרה בחיר ה',אמר ר' אבהו בן זוטרתי אמר רב יהודה בר זבידא בקשו לקבוע פרשת בלק בקריאת שמע ומפני מה לא קבעוה משום טורח צבור,מ"ט אילימא משום דכתיב בה (במדבר כג, כב) אל מוציאם ממצרים לימא פרשת רבית ופרשת משקלות דכתיב בהן יציאת מצרים,אלא אמר ר' יוסי בר אבין משום דכתיב בה האי קרא (במדבר כד, ט) כרע שכב כארי וכלביא מי יקימנו,ולימא האי פסוקא ותו לא,גמירי כל פרשה דפסקה משה רבינו פסקינן דלא פסקה משה רבינו לא פסקינן,פרשת ציצית מפני מה קבעוה,א"ר יהודה בר חביבא מפני שיש בה חמשה דברים מצות ציצית יציאת מצרים עול מצות ודעת מינים הרהור עבירה והרהור ע"ז,בשלמא הני תלת מפרשן עול מצות דכתיב (במדבר טו, לט) וראיתם אותו וזכרתם את כל מצות ה' ציצית דכתיב ועשו להם ציצית וגו' יציאת מצרים דכתיב אשר הוצאתי וגו' אלא דעת מינים הרהור עבירה והרהור ע"ז מנלן,דתניא אחרי לבבכם זו מינות וכן הוא אומר (תהלים יד, א) אמר נבל בלבו אין אלהים אחרי עיניכם זה הרהור עבירה שנאמר (שופטים יד, ג) ויאמר שמשון אל אביו אותה קח לי כי היא ישרה בעיני אתם זונים זה הרהור ע"ז וכן הוא אומר (שופטים ח, לג) ויזנו אחרי הבעלים:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big מזכירין יציאת מצרים בלילות א"ר אלעזר בן עזריה הרי אני כבן שבעים שנה ולא זכיתי שתאמר יציאת מצרים בלילות עד שדרשה בן זומא,שנא' (דברים טז, ג) למען תזכור את יום צאתך מארץ מצרים כל ימי חייך ימי חייך הימים כל ימי חייך הלילות, וחכ"א ימי חייך העוה"ז כל להביא לימות המשיח:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big תניא אמר להם בן זומא לחכמים וכי מזכירין יציאת מצרים לימות המשיח והלא כבר נאמר (ירמיהו כג, ז) הנה ימים באים נאם ה' ולא יאמרו עוד חי ה' אשר העלה את בני ישראל מארץ מצרים כי אם חי ה' אשר העלה ואשר הביא את זרע בית ישראל מארץ צפונה ומכל הארצות אשר הדחתים שם,אמרו לו לא שתעקר יציאת מצרים ממקומה אלא שתהא שעבוד מלכיות עיקר ויציאת מצרים טפל לו,כיוצא בו אתה אומר (בראשית לה, י) לא יקרא שמך עוד יעקב כי אם ישראל יהיה שמך | 12b. With regard to bowing, the Gemara relates: b When Rav Sheshet bowed he bowed /b all at once, b like a cane, /b without delay. b When he stood upright he stood upright like a snake, /b lifting himself slowly, demonstrating that the awe of God was upon him in the manner that he bowed and stood upright ( i HaBoneh /i )., b And, /b with regard to the formulation of the blessings, b Rabba bar Ḥina Sava said in the name of Rav: Throughout the year a person prays /b and concludes the third blessing of the i Amida /i prayer with: b The holy God, /b and concludes the blessing regarding the restoration of justice to Israel with: b King who loves righteousness and justice, with the exception of the ten days between Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur, /b the Ten Days of Atonement. These days are comprised of Rosh HaShana, Yom Kippur, and the seven days in between, when one emphasizes God’s sovereignty, and so b when he prays /b he concludes these blessings with: b The holy King and: The King of justice, /b i.e., the King who reveals Himself through justice.,In contrast, b Rabbi Elazar said /b that one need not be exacting, and b even /b if b he said: The holy God /b during those ten days, he fulfilled his obligation, b as it is stated: “And the Lord of Hosts is exalted through justice, and the holy God is sanctified through righteousness” /b (Isaiah 5:16). The Gemara explains: b When /b is it appropriate to describe God with terms like: b And the Lord of Hosts is exalted through justice? /b It is appropriate when God reveals Himself through justice, b during the ten days between Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur, /b yet the verse b says: The holy God. /b This appellation sufficiently underscores God’s transcendence, and there is no need to change the standard formula.,The Gemara asks: b What is /b the conclusion that was reached b about this /b i halakha /i ?,Here, too, opinions differ: b Rav Yosef said /b in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar: There is no need to change the standard formula: b The holy God and: King Who loves righteousness and justice. Rabba said /b in accordance with the opinion of Rav: b The holy King and: The King of justice. /b The Gemara concludes: b The i halakha /i is /b in accordance b with /b the opinion of b Rabba. /b , b And Rabba bar Ḥina Sava said in the name of Rav: Anyone who can ask for mercy on behalf of another, and does not ask is called a sinner, as it is stated /b following Samuel’s rebuke of the people: b “As for me, far be it from me that I should transgress against the Lord in ceasing to pray for you, /b but I will teach you the good and the right way” (I Samuel 12:23). Had Samuel refrained from prayer, he would have committed a sin., b Rava said: If /b the one in need of mercy b is a Torah scholar, /b it is insufficient to merely pray on his behalf. Rather, b one must make himself ill /b worrying b about him. /b ,The Gemara seeks to clarify the source of this i halakha /i . b What is the reason /b that one must make oneself ill over a Torah scholar in need of mercy? b If you say /b that it is b because /b of what Saul said to his men, b as it is written: “And there is none of you that is ill over me or tells unto me” /b (I Samuel 22:8), meaning that because Saul was a Torah scholar, it would have been appropriate for people to make themselves ill worrying about him; this is not an absolute proof. b Perhaps a king is different, /b and excessive worry is appropriate in that case. Rather, proof that one must make oneself ill over a Torah scholar in need for mercy is b from here: /b When David speaks of his enemies, Doeg and Ahitophel, who were Torah scholars, he says: b “But for me, when they were sick, my clothing was sackcloth, /b I afflicted my soul with fasting” (Psalms 35:13). One must be concerned to the extent that he dresses in sackcloth and fasts for the recovery of a Torah scholar., b And Rabba bar Ḥina Sava said in the name of Rav: One who commits an act of transgression and is ashamed of it, all of his transgressions are forgiven. /b Shame is a sign that one truly despises his transgressions and that shame has the power to atone for his actions (Rabbi Yoshiyahu Pinto), b as it is stated: “In order that you remember, and be embarrassed, and never open your mouth anymore, because of your shame, when I have forgiven you for all that you have done, said the Lord, God” /b (Ezekiel 16:63).,However this proof is rejected: b Perhaps a community is different, /b as a community is forgiven more easily than an individual. b Rather, /b proof that an individual ashamed of his actions is forgiven for his transgressions is cited b from here, /b when King Saul consulted Samuel by means of a necromancer before his final war with the Philistines: b “And Samuel said to Saul, why have you angered me to bring me up? And Saul said, I am very pained, and the Philistines are waging war against me, and God has removed Himself from me and answers me no more, neither by the hands of the prophets nor by dreams. And I call to you to tell me what to do” /b (I Samuel 28:15). Saul says that he consulted prophets and dreams, but b he did not say /b that he consulted b the i Urim VeTummim /i . /b ,The reason for this is b because he killed /b all the residents of b Nov, the city of priests, /b and because of this transgression Saul was ashamed to consult the i Urim VeTummim /i , which was accomplished by means of a priest.,The Gemara concludes: b And from where /b is it derived b that Saul was pardoned by /b God in b the heavens /b for his transgressions? b As it is stated: “And Samuel said to Saul: Tomorrow you and your sons will be with me” /b (I Samuel 28:19). b And Rabbi Yoḥa said: With me /b does not only mean that they will die, but also means, in a statement that contains an aspect of consolation, that they will be b in my company /b among the righteous in heaven, as Saul was pardoned for his transgressions., b And the Rabbis say /b that proof that Saul was pardoned is derived b from here, /b from what the Gibeonites said to David: “Let seven men of his sons be given to us b and we will hang them up unto the Lord in the Giva of Saul, the chosen of the Lord” /b (II Samuel 21:6). Certainly the Gibeonites, who were furious at Saul, would not refer to him as the chosen of the Lord. Therefore, this phrase must be understood as having been spoken by b a Divine Voice that emerged and said the chosen of the Lord, /b because Saul had been pardoned for his transgressions and included among the completely righteous. br The Gemara returns to the primary focus of the chapter, the recitation of i Shema /i ., b Rabbi Abbahu ben Zutarti said /b that b Rabbi Yehuda bar Zevida said: /b The Sages b sought to establish /b the blessings of Balaam that appear in b the /b Torah b portion of Balak, /b as part of b the /b twice-daily b recitation of /b i Shema /i . b And why did they not establish it /b there? b Because /b extending i Shema /i would place an b encumbrance on the congregation, /b from which the Sages sought to refrain.,The Gemara seeks: b Why /b did the Sages seek to add the blessings of Balaam in the first place? b If you say /b that they did so b because /b the exodus from Egypt is mentioned, b as it is written therein: “God, who brought them forth out of Egypt, /b is like the horns of the wild ram” (Numbers 23:22), certainly mention of the Exodus is not unique to this Torah portion. Many other portions mention the exodus as well. b Let us say the portion of usury /b (Leviticus 25:35–38) or the b portion of weights /b (Leviticus 19:35–37), b as the exodus from Egypt is written therein /b as well. In addition, they are brief and would not constitute an encumbrance on the congregation., b Rather, Rabbi Yosei bar Avin said: /b The reason the Sages sought to establish the portion of Balak as part of the recitation of i Shema /i is b because it is written therein: “He couched, He lay down like a lion and a lioness; who shall rouse Him? /b Those who bless You are blessed and those who curse You are cursed” (Numbers 24:9). This is reminiscent of what is said in i Shema /i : When you lie down, and when you rise.,On this, the Gemara asks: b And /b if it is important to include this as part of i Shema /i because of this single verse, then b let us say this verse and nothing more. /b ,The Gemara rejects this: It is impossible to do this, as b they learned /b through tradition that b any portion that Moses, our teacher, divided, we /b too b divide /b and read separately. However, a portion b that Moses, our teacher, did not divide, we do not divide /b and read separately. And, as stated above, the Sages did not wish to institute the recitation of the entire portion of Balak to avoid placing an encumbrance on the congregation.,The Gemara continues: b Why was the portion of ritual fringes established /b as part of the recitation of i Shema /i when its content is unrelated to that of the preceding portions?, b Rabbi Yehuda bar Ḥaviva said: /b The portion of ritual fringes was added b because it includes five elements /b including the primary reason for its inclusion, the exodus from Egypt ( i Melo HaRo’im /i ): b The mitzva of ritual fringes, /b mention of b the exodus from Egypt, /b the acceptance of b the yoke of mitzvot, /b admonition against b the opinions of the heretics, /b admonition against b thoughts of /b the b transgressions /b of licentiousness, b and /b admonition against b thoughts of idolatry. /b ,The Gemara clarifies: b Granted, these three are mentioned explicitly: The yoke of mitzvot /b is mentioned in the portion of ritual fringes, b as it is written: “And you shall look upon them and remember all the mitzvot of the Lord /b and you shall do them” (Numbers 15:39). b Ritual fringes /b are mentioned explicitly, b as it is written: “And they will make for themselves ritual fringes” /b (Numbers 15:38). b The exodus from Egypt /b is also mentioned explicitly, b as it is written: /b “I am the Lord, your God, b who took you out /b from the Land of Egypt” (Numbers 15:41). b But where do we /b derive the other elements mentioned above: Admonition against b the opinions of the heretics, /b admonition against b thoughts of transgressions /b of licentiousness, b and /b admonition against b thoughts of idolatry? /b ,In response, the Gemara cites a i baraita /i where these elements were derived from allusions in the verse, “You shall stray neither after your hearts nor after your eyes, after which you would lust” (Numbers 15:39). b As it was taught: “After your hearts” refers to /b following opinions b of heresy /b that may arise in one’s heart. The Gemara offers a proof, b as it is stated: “The fool said in his heart: ‘There is no God’; /b they have been corrupt, they have acted abominably; there is none who does good” (Psalms 14:1). The phrase: b “After your eyes,” /b in b this /b verse refers to following b thoughts of transgressions /b of licentiousness, that a person might see and desire, b as it is stated: “And Samson said to his father, ‘That one take for me, for she is upright in my eyes’” /b (Judges 14:3). The passage: b “You shall stray after” /b refers to promiscuity, which in the parlance of the prophets is a metaphor for b idol worship, as it is stated: /b “The children of Israel again b went astray after the Be’alim” /b (Judges 8:33)., strong MISHNA: /strong It is a mitzva by Torah law to mention the exodus from Egypt at night, but some held that this mitzva was, like phylacteries or ritual fringes, fulfilled only during the day and not at night. For this reason it was decided: b The exodus from Egypt is mentioned at night, /b adjacent to the recitation of i Shema /i . b Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya said: I am approximately seventy years old, and /b although I have long held this opinion, b I was never privileged /b to prevail ( i Me’iri /i ) and prove that there is a biblical obligation to fulfill the accepted custom (Ra’avad) and have b the exodus from Egypt mentioned at night, until Ben Zoma interpreted it homiletically /b and proved it obligatory.,Ben Zoma derived it b as it is stated: “That you may remember the day you went out of the land of Egypt all the days of your life” /b (Deuteronomy 16:3). b The days of your life, /b refers to daytime alone; however, the addition of the word all, as it is stated: b All the days of your life, /b comes to add nights as well., b And the Rabbis, /b who posit that there is no biblical obligation to mention the exodus from Egypt at night, explain the word, all, differently and b say: The days of your life, /b refers to the days in b this world, all /b is added b to include the days of the Messiah. /b , strong GEMARA: /strong The fundamental dispute between Ben Zoma and the Sages appears in the mishna, and the i baraita /i cites its continuation. Disputing the position of the Sages that: All the days of your life, refers to both this world and the days of the Messiah, b it was taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Ben Zoma said to the Sages: And is the exodus from Egypt mentioned in the days of the Messiah? Was it not already said /b that Jeremiah prophesied that in the days of the Messiah: b “Behold, days are coming, says the Lord, that they will no longer say: The Lord lives Who brought up the children of Israel out of the Land of Egypt. Rather: As the Lord lives, that brought up and led the seed of the house of Israel up out of the north country and from all the countries where I had driven them” /b (Jeremiah 23:7–8).,The Sages rejected this claim b and they said to him /b that these verses do b not /b mean b that /b in the future b the exodus from Egypt will be uprooted from its place /b and will be mentioned no more. b Rather, /b redemption from b the subjugation of the kingdoms will be primary and the exodus from Egypt will be secondary. /b , b On a similar /b note, b you say: /b The meaning of the expressions: It will not say, and they will no longer mention, are not absolute, as in the verse: b “Your name shall no longer be called Jacob; rather, Israel will be your name” /b (Genesis 35:10). There, too, the meaning i |
|
48. Babylonian Talmud, Sotah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 142| 26a. מעוברת חבירו ומינקת חבירו לא שותות ולא נוטלות כתובה דברי ר' מאיר,שהיה רבי מאיר אומר לא ישא אדם מעוברת חבירו ומינקת חבירו ואם נשא יוציא ולא יחזיר עולמית וחכמים אומרים יוציא וכשיגיע זמנו לכנוס יכנוס,והרובא שנשא עקרה וזקינה ואין לו אשה ובנים מעיקרא לא שותה ולא נוטלת כתובה ר' אלעזר אומר יכול הוא לישא אחרת ולפרות ולרבות הימנה,אבל המקנא לארוסתו ולשומרת יבם שלו ומשכנסה נסתרה או שותה או לא נוטלת כתובה מעוברת ומינקת עצמו או שותה או לא נוטלת כתובתה הרובא שנשא עקרה וזקינה ויש לו אשה ובנים או שותה או לא נוטלת כתובה,אשת ממזר לממזר ואשת נתין לנתין ואשת גר ועבד משוחרר ואיילונית או שותה או לא נוטלת כתובה קתני מיהא איילונית תיובתיה דרב נחמן,אמר לך רב נחמן תנאי היא ואנא דאמרי כי האי תנא דתניא ר' שמעון בן אלעזר אומר איילונית לא שותה ולא נוטלת כתובה שנאמר (במדבר ה, כח) ונקתה ונזרעה זרע מי שדרכה להזריע יצאתה זו שאין דרכה להזריע,ורבנן האי ונקתה ונזרעה זרע מאי עבדי ליה מיבעי להו לכדתניא ונקתה ונזרעה [זרע] שאם היתה עקרה נפקדת דברי ר' עקיבא אמר לו ר' ישמעאל אם כן יסתרו כל העקרות ויפקדו וזו הואיל ולא נסתרה הפסידה,אם כן מה תלמוד לומר ונקתה ונזרעה זרע שאם היתה יולדת בצער יולדת בריוח נקבות יולדת זכרים קצרים יולדת ארוכים שחורים יולדת לבנים,אשת ממזר לממזר פשיטא מהו דתימא אפושי פסולין לא ליפוש קא משמע לן,אשת גר ועבד משוחרר ואיילונית פשיטא,מהו דתימא (במדבר ה, ו) דבר אל בני ישראל ולא גרים קמ"ל ואימא הכי נמי ואמרת רבויא הוא,אשת כהן שותה כו' (אשת כהן. שותה) פשיטא מהו דתימא (במדבר ה, יג) והיא לא נתפשה אסורה הא נתפשה מותרת וזו הואיל ונתפשה אסורה אימא לא תשתה קא משמע לן,ומותרת לבעלה פשיטא אמר רב הונא במתנוונה מתנוונה הא בדקוה מיא,במתנוונה דרך אברים מהו דתימא הא זנויי זנאי והא דלא בדקוה מיא כי אורחיה משום דבאונס זנאי ולגבי כהן אסירא קא משמע לן,אשת סריס שותה פשיטא מהו דתימא מבלעדי אישך אמר רחמנא והאי לאו בר הכי הוא קא משמע לן,על ידי כל עריות מקנין פשיטא | 26a. The i baraita /i continues: b A woman who was pregt /b with the child b of another /b man at the time of her marriage b and a woman who was nursing /b the child b of another /b man at the time of her marriage b neither drink /b the bitter water b nor collect /b payment of their b marriage contracts, /b as their marriages were prohibited by rabbinic law. This is b the statement of Rabbi Meir. /b ,The i baraita /i continues: The reason for this is b as Rabbi Meir would say: A man may not marry a woman who is pregt /b with the child b of another /b man b or a woman who is nursing /b the child b of another /b man, until twenty-four months pass after the baby’s birth, so as to ensure that the woman will not become pregt while the child needs to nurse. b And if he married /b her, b he must divorce /b her b and may never remarry /b her, as the Sages penalized him for transgressing the prohibition. b And the Rabbis say: He must divorce /b her, b and when his time to marry /b her b arrives, /b i.e., twenty-four months after the baby’s birth, b he can marry /b her again.,The i baraita /i continues: In b the /b case of a b young man who married a barren woman or an elderly woman, and he did not have a wife and children beforehand, /b the woman b neither drinks nor collects /b payment of her b marriage contract, /b as it is prohibited for him to marry a woman with whom he cannot procreate. b Rabbi Elazar says: /b This marriage is not forbidden, as b he can marry another /b woman b and procreate through her, /b and therefore she can drink the bitter water.,The i baraita /i continues: b However, /b in the case of b one who issued a warning to his betrothed, or to his /b i yevama /i while she was a b widow awaiting her i yavam /i , and she secluded herself /b with the other man b after he consummated /b the marriage, b she either drinks /b the bitter water b or does not collect /b payment of her b marriage contract. /b If b his own pregt or nursing /b wife becomes a i sota /i , then despite the concern that the bitter water may harm the fetus, she b either drinks /b the bitter water b or does not collect /b payment of b her marriage contract. /b In b the /b case of a b young man who married a barren woman or an elderly woman, and he /b already b had a wife and children /b and was therefore permitted to marry his barren or elderly wife, the woman b either drinks /b the bitter water b or does not collect /b payment of her b marriage contract. /b ,The i baraita /i concludes: With regard to b the wife of a i mamzer /i /b who is married b to a i mamzer /i /b in a permitted marriage, b and the wife of a Gibeonite /b who is married b to a Gibeonite /b in a permitted marriage, b and the wife of a convert or an emancipated slave, and a sexually underdeveloped woman, /b if any of these women becomes a i sota /i she b either drinks /b the bitter water b or does not collect /b payment of her b marriage contract, /b as the marriage is permitted. After citing the entire i baraita /i , the Gemara explains the difficulty: b In any event, /b the i baraita /i b teaches /b that b a sexually underdeveloped woman /b can drink the bitter water if the marriage is permitted, and this is b a conclusive refutation /b of the opinion b of Rav Naḥman. /b ,The Gemara answers: b Rav Naḥman /b could have b said to you: /b There b is /b a dispute between b i tanna’im /i /b with regard to this matter, b and I state /b my opinion b in accordance with /b the opinion of b this i tanna /i , as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Rabbi Shimon Ben Elazar says: A sexually underdeveloped woman neither drinks nor collects /b payment of her b marriage contract, as it is stated: “And she shall be cleared, and shall conceive seed” /b (Numbers 5:28), indicating that the i sota /i ritual pertains only to b one whose way is to bear seed /b and give birth, b excluding this /b sexually underdeveloped woman, b whose way is not to bear seed. /b ,The Gemara asks: b And /b as for b the Rabbis, what do they do with this /b verse: b “And she shall be cleared, and shall conceive seed”? /b Since they hold that a sexually underdeveloped woman drinks the bitter water, what do they derive from the verse? The Gemara answers: b They require /b it b for that which is taught /b in a i baraita /i : The verse: b “And she shall be cleared, and shall conceive seed” /b (Numbers 5:28), indicates b that if she was barren, she will be remembered /b and conceive a child; this is b the statement of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Yishmael said to him: If so, all the barren women will seclude themselves /b with other men, b and they will be remembered /b and conceive after drinking the bitter water and being found innocent; b but that /b virtuous barren woman, who does not transgress the prohibition of seclusion, b since she does not seclude herself /b with other men, b she loses /b the opportunity to receive this blessing.,Rabbi Yishmael continues: b If so, what /b is the meaning when b the verse states: “And she shall be cleared, and shall conceive seed” /b (Numbers 5:28)? This means b that if /b in the past she b would give birth in pain, /b from then on b she will give birth with ease; /b if she gave birth to b females, she will /b now b give birth to males; /b if her children were b short, she will /b now b give birth to tall /b children; if her children were b black, she will give birth to white /b children.,§ The i baraita /i in the i Tosefta /i cited above states: b The wife of a i mamzer /i /b who is married b to a i mamzer /i /b in a permitted marriage… either drinks the bitter water or does not collect payment of her marriage contract. The Gemara asks: b Isn’t /b that b obvious? /b Since their marriage is permitted, why should the i sota /i ritual not apply? The Gemara answers: It is necessary b lest you say /b that she should not drink, since if she drinks and is found to be innocent of adultery, she is permitted to her husband. This is undesirable since their offspring are also i mamzerim /i , and b we do not cause /b the number of individuals b of flawed lineage to proliferate. /b The i baraita /i in the i Tosefta /i therefore b teaches us /b that this is not a concern, and the wife of a i mamzer /i is permitted to drink.,The aforementioned i baraita /i in the i Tosefta /i states: b The wife of a convert or an emancipated slave, and a sexually underdeveloped woman /b can drink the bitter water. The Gemara asks with regard to the wife of a convert or an emancipated slave, who also has the status of a convert: b Isn’t /b that b obvious? /b Since their marriage is permitted, why should the i sota /i ritual not apply?,The Gemara answers: It is necessary b lest you say /b that she does not drink, as the verse states: b “Speak to the children of Israel, /b and say unto them: If the wife of any man goes astray, and acts unfaithfully against him” (Numbers 5:12). One might have inferred from this verse that the i sota /i ritual applies only to those born as Jews b and not /b to b converts; /b the i baraita /i in the i Tosefta /i therefore b teaches us /b that this is not so. The Gemara asks: Why not b say /b that b indeed /b the verse excludes converts? The Gemara answers: The subsequent term: b “And say /b unto them” (Numbers 5:12) b is an amplification, /b which serves to include converts.,§ The mishna states: b The wife of a priest drinks /b the bitter water, and if she is found to be innocent of adultery she is permitted to her husband. The Gemara asks: Why does the mishna state: b The wife of a priest drinks? Isn’t /b that b obvious? /b The Gemara answers: It is necessary b lest you say /b that she does not drink, as the verse states: “And a man lay with b her…neither was she seized” /b (Numbers 5:13). This indicates that if the i sota /i was not seized b she is forbidden; however, /b if she was b seized, /b i.e., raped, she is b permitted /b to her husband. b And /b with regard to b this /b woman, the wife of a priest, b since /b even if she was b seized /b she is b forbidden /b to her husband, as a priest may not remain married to his wife if she was raped while they were married, one might b say /b that the i sota /i ritual does not apply to her, and she b does not drink. /b Therefore, the mishna b teaches us /b that she does drink.,§ The mishna states: The wife of a priest drinks, b and /b if she is found to be innocent of adultery, b she is permitted to her husband. /b The Gemara asks: b Isn’t /b that b obvious? Rav Huna says: /b The mishna is referring to a case b where /b the woman’s health b deteriorates /b after she drinks the bitter water, and one might have thought that she is defiled. The Gemara asks: In the case of a woman whose health b deteriorates, hasn’t the /b bitter b water /b already b evaluated /b that b she /b was unfaithful? The fact that her health deteriorates indicates that she is defiled and forbidden to her husband, and her death is delayed due to her merit in other matters.,The Gemara answers: The mishna is referring to a case b where her /b health b deteriorates, /b but not in the manner of a i sota /i , who is afflicted in her belly and thighs (see Numbers 5:27). Rather, she is afflicted b by way of /b other b limbs. Lest you say: This /b woman b engaged in licentious intercourse, and /b the fact b that the /b bitter b water did not evaluate her in /b the b usual manner /b is b because she engaged in licentious intercourse under duress, and with regard to a priest, /b even rape b renders her forbidden to her /b to her husband, the mishna therefore b teaches us /b that the woman’s deteriorating health does not indicate anything.,§ The mishna states: b The wife of a eunuch drinks. /b The Gemara asks: b Isn’t /b that b obvious? /b Since their marriage is permitted, why should the i sota /i ritual not apply? The Gemara replies: It is necessary b lest you say /b that she does not drink, since b the Merciful One states /b with regard to the i sota /i : “But if you have gone astray while under your husband, and if you are defiled, and some man has lain with you b besides your husband” /b (Numbers 5:20). This indicates that her husband had lain with her, b and this /b husband, the eunuch, b is not capable of that. /b The mishna therefore b teaches us /b that the wife of a eunuch does drink the bitter water.,§ The mishna states: A husband b can issue a warning /b to his wife b with regard to all those with whom relations are forbidden, /b e.g., her father or brother. The Gemara asks: b Isn’t /b that b obvious? /b |
|
49. Babylonian Talmud, Taanit, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 392, 495| 24a. יומא חד שמעיה דקא גריס אמר שמואל השולה דג מן הים בשבת כיון שיבש בו כסלע חייב א"ל ולימא מר ובין סנפיריו אמר ליה ולא סבר לה מר דההיא רבי יוסי בן רבי אבין אמרה אמר ליה אנא ניהו,א"ל ולאו קמיה דר' יוסי דמן יוקרת הוה שכיח מר א"ל (הין) א"ל ומ"ט שבקיה מר ואתא הכא אמר ליה גברא דעל בריה ועל ברתיה לא חס עלי דידי היכי חייס,בריה מאי היא יומא חד הוו אגרי ליה אגירי בדברא נגה להו ולא אייתי להו ריפתא אמרו ליה לבריה כפינן הוו יתבי תותי תאינתא אמר תאנה תאנה הוציאי פירותיך ויאכלו פועלי אבא אפיקו ואכלו,אדהכי והכי אתא אבוה אמר להו לא תינקטו בדעתייכו דהאי דנגהנא אמצוה טרחנא ועד השתא הוא דסגאי אמרו ליה רחמנא לישבעך כי היכי דאשבען ברך אמר להו מהיכא אמרו הכי והכי הוה מעשה אמר לו בני אתה הטרחת את קונך להוציא תאנה פירותיה שלא בזמנה יאסף שלא בזמנו,ברתיה מאי היא הויא ליה ברתא בעלת יופי יומא חד חזיא לההוא גברא דהויא כריא בהוצא וקא חזי לה אמר לו מאי האי אמר ליה רבי אם ללוקחה לא זכיתי לראותה לא אזכה אמר לה בתי קא מצערת להו לברייתא שובי לעפריך ואל יכשלו ביך בני אדם,הויא ליה ההוא חמרא כדהוו אגרי לה כל יומא לאורתא הוו משדרי לה אגרה אגבה ואתיא לבי מרה ואי טפו לה או בצרי לה לא אתיא יומא חד אינשו זוגא דסנדלי עלה ולא אזלה עד דשקלונהו מינה והדר אזלה,אלעזר איש בירתא כד הוו חזו ליה גבאי צדקה הוו טשו מיניה דכל מאי דהוה גביה יהיב להו יומא חד הוה סליק לשוקא למיזבן נדוניא לברתיה חזיוהו גבאי צדקה טשו מיניה,אזל ורהט בתרייהו אמר להו אשבעתיכו במאי עסקיתו אמרו ליה ביתום ויתומה אמר להן העבודה שהן קודמין לבתי שקל כל דהוה בהדיה ויהב להו פש ליה חד זוזא זבן ליה חיטי ואסיק שדייה באכלבא,אתא דביתהו אמרה לה לברתיה מאי אייתי אבוך אמרה לה כל מה דאייתי באכלבא שדיתיה אתיא למיפתח בבא דאכלבא חזת אכלבא דמליא חיטי וקא נפקא בצינורא דדשא ולא מיפתח בבא מחיטי אזלא ברתיה לבי מדרשא אמרה ליה בא וראה מה עשה לך אוהבך אמר לה העבודה הרי הן הקדש עליך ואין לך בהן אלא כאחד מעניי ישראל,ר' יהודה נשיאה גזר תעניתא בעי רחמי ולא אתא מיטרא אמר כמה איכא משמואל הרמתי ליהודה בן גמליאל אוי לו לדור שכן נתקע אוי לו למי שעלתה בימיו כך חלש דעתיה ואתא מיטרא,דבי נשיאה גזר תעניתא ולא אודעינהו לרבי יוחנן ולריש לקיש לצפרא אודעינהו אמר ליה ריש לקיש לרבי יוחנן הא לא קבילנא עלן מאורתא אמר ליה אנן בתרייהו גררינן,דבי נשיאה גזר תעניתא ולא אתא מיטרא תנא להו אושעיא זעירא דמן חברייא (במדבר טו, כד) והיה אם מעיני העדה נעשתה לשגגה,משל לכלה שהיא בבית אביה כל זמן שעיניה יפות אין כל גופה צריכה בדיקה עיניה טרוטות כל גופה צריכה בדיקה,אתו עבדיה ורמו ליה סודרא בצואריה וקא מצערו ליה אמרו (ליה) בני מאתיה שבקיה דהא נמי מצער לן כיון דחזינן דכל מיליה לשום שמים לא אמרי ליה מידי ושבקינן ליה אתון נמי שבקוהו,רבי גזר תעניתא ולא אתא מיטרא נחית קמיה אילפא ואמרי לה רבי אילפי אמר משיב הרוח ונשא זיקא מוריד הגשם ואתא מיטרא אמר ליה מאי עובדך אמר ליה דיירנא בקוסטא דחיקא דלית ביה חמרא לקידושא ואבדלתא טרחנא ואתינא חמרא לקידושא ואבדלתא ומפיקנא להו ידי חובתייהו,רב איקלע לההוא אתרא גזר תעניתא ולא אתא מיטרא נחית קמיה שליחא דצבורא אמר משיב הרוח ונשב זיקא אמר מוריד הגשם ואתא מיטרא אמר ליה מאי עובדך אמר ליה מיקרי דרדקי אנא ומקרינא לבני עניי כבני עתירי וכל דלא אפשר ליה לא שקלינא מיניה מידי ואית לי פירא דכוורי וכל מאן דפשע משחדינא ליה מינייהו ומסדרינן ליה ומפייסינן ליה עד דאתי וקרי,רב נחמן גזר תעניתא בעא רחמי ולא אתא מיטרא אמר שקלוה לנחמן חבוטו מן גודא לארעא חלש דעתיה ואתא מיטרא,רבה גזר תעניתא בעי רחמי ולא אתא מיטרא אמרו ליה והא רב יהודה כי הוה גזר תעניתא אתא מיטרא אמר להו מאי אעביד אי משום תנויי אנן עדיפינן מינייהו דבשני דרב יהודה כל תנויי | 24a. b One day /b Rabbi Yosei bar Avin b heard /b Rav Ashi b studying /b and reciting the following statement. b Shmuel said: /b With regard to b one who removes a fish from the sea /b on Shabbat, b when /b an area b on /b the skin of the fish b the size of a i sela /i /b coin b has dried up, /b he is b liable /b for violating the prohibition against slaughtering an animal on Shabbat. A fish in that condition cannot survive, and therefore one who removed it from the water is liable for killing it. Rabbi Yosei bar Avin b said to /b Rav Ashi: b And let the Master say /b that this is the case provided that the skin that dried is b between its fins. /b Rav Ashi b said to him: And doesn’t the Master maintain that Rabbi Yosei ben Rabbi Avin said this /b ruling? Why didn’t you state it in his name? Rabbi Yosei bar Avin b said to him: I am he. /b ,Rav Ashi b said to him: And didn’t the Master /b sit b before /b and b frequent /b the study hall b of Rabbi Yosei from Yokrat? /b Rabbi Yosei bar Avin b said to him: Yes. /b Rav Ashi b said to him: And what is the reason /b that b the Master left /b him b and came here? /b Rabbi Yosei bar Avin b said to him: /b I was concerned and departed because he is so severe and unforgiving. He is b a man who has no mercy on his /b own b son, and no mercy on his daughter. How, /b then, b could he have mercy on me? /b ,The Gemara asks: b What is /b the incident involving b his son? One day /b Rabbi Yosei from Yokrat b hired /b day b laborers to /b work his b field. It grew late and he did not bring them food. /b The workers b said to the son of /b Rabbi Yosei from Yokrat: b We are starving. They were sitting under a fig tree, /b so the son b said: Fig tree, fig tree. Yield your fruits, /b so that my b father’s workers may eat. /b The fig tree b yielded /b fruit, b and they ate. /b , b In the meantime, his father came /b and b said to /b the workers: b Do not be angry with me for being late, as I was engaged in a mitzva, and until just now I was traveling /b for that purpose and could not get here any sooner. b They said to him: /b May b the Merciful One satisfy you just as your son satisfied us /b and gave us food. b He said to them: From where /b did he find food to give you? b They said: Such-and-such an incident occurred. /b Rabbi Yosei from Yokrat b said to /b his son: b My son, you troubled your Creator /b to cause b the fig to yield its fruit not in its /b proper b time, /b so too, you will die young. And indeed, his son b died before his time. /b ,The Gemara asks: b What is /b the incident involving b his daughter? He had /b a very b beautiful daughter. One day /b Rabbi Yosei from Yokrat b saw a certain man piercing a hole in the hedge /b surrounding his property b and looking at /b his daughter. Rabbi Yosei b said to him: What is this? /b The man b said to him: My teacher, if I have not merited taking her /b in marriage, shall b I not /b at least b merit to look at her? Rabbi Yosei said to her: My daughter, you are causing people distress. Return to your dust, and let people no /b longer b stumble /b into sin b due to you. /b ,§ The Gemara relates another story involving Rabbi Yosei from Yokrat. b He had a certain donkey that people hired each day /b for work. b In the evening they would send it back /b with b the money for its hire on its back, and /b the animal would b go to its owner’s house. But if they added or subtracted from /b the appropriate sum, the donkey b would not go. One day /b someone b forgot a pair of sandals on /b the donkey, b and it did not move until they removed /b the sandals b from /b its back, b after which it went off. /b ,The Gemara cites more stories about miracles that occurred to righteous individuals. b Whenever the charity collectors would see Elazar of /b the village of b Birta, they would hide from him, as any /b money Elazar b had with him he would give them, /b and they did not want to take all his property. b One day, /b Elazar b went to the market to purchase /b what he needed b for his daughter’s dowry. The charity collectors saw him and hid from him. /b , b He went and ran after them, saying to them: I adjure you, /b tell me, b in what /b mitzva b are you engaged? They said to him: /b We are collecting money for the wedding b of an orphan boy and an orphan girl. He said to them: /b I swear b by the Temple service that they take precedence over my daughter. He took everything he had with him and gave it to them. He was left with one /b single b dinar, /b with which b he bought himself wheat, and /b he then b ascended /b to his house b and threw it into the granary. /b ,Elazar’s b wife came and said to her daughter: What has your father brought? She said to /b her mother: b Whatever he brought he threw into the granary. She went to open the door of the granary, /b and b saw that the granary was full of wheat, /b so much so that b it was coming out through the doorknob, and the door would not open /b due b to the wheat. /b The granary had miraculously been completely filled. Elazar’s b daughter went to the study hall /b and b said to /b her father: b Come and see what He Who loves You, /b the Almighty, b has performed for you. He said to her: /b I swear b by the Temple service, /b as far b as you /b are concerned this wheat b is consecrated /b property, b and you have /b a share b in it only as one of the poor Jews. /b He said this because he did not want to benefit from a miracle.,The Gemara returns to the topic of fasting for rain. b Rabbi Yehuda Nesia decreed a fast /b and b prayed for mercy, but rain did not come. He said, /b lamenting: b How great /b is the difference b between /b the prophet b Samuel of Rama, /b for whom rain fell even when he prayed for it in summer, b and /b myself, b Yehuda ben Gamliel. Woe to the generation that is stuck /b with this leadership; b woe to him in whose days this has occurred. He grew upset, and rain came. /b ,The Gemara relates another story involving a i Nasi’s /i decree of a fast for rain. b In the house of the i Nasi /i a fast was declared, but they didn’t inform Rabbi Yoḥa and Reish Lakish /b of the fast the day before. b In the morning they informed them. Reish Lakish said to Rabbi Yoḥa: /b What are we to do? b We did not accept /b this fast b upon ourselves the evening before, /b and a fast must be accepted in the afternoon service of the day preceding the fast. Rabbi Yoḥa b said to him: We are drawn after /b the community, and therefore, when the i Nasi /i declares a public fast there is no need for an individual to accept it upon himself the day before.,The Gemara further states that on another occasion, b a fast was declared in the house of the i Nasi /i , but rain did not come. Oshaya, the youngest /b member b of the group /b of Sages, b taught them /b a i baraita /i . It is written: b “Then it shall be, if it shall be committed in error by the congregation, it being hidden from their eyes” /b (Numbers 15:24). This verse indicates that the leaders are considered the eyes of the congregation.,Oshaya continued: There is b a parable /b that illustrates this, b involving a bride who is in her father’s home /b and has not yet been seen by her bridegroom. b As long as her eyes are beautiful, her body need not be examined, /b as certainly she is beautiful. However, if b her eyes are bleary [ i terutot /i ], her entire body requires examination. /b So too, if the leaders of the generation are flawed, it is a sign that the entire generation is unworthy. By means of this parable, Oshaya was hinting that rain was withheld from the entire nation due to the evil committed by the household of the i Nasi /i . ,The b servants /b of the i Nasi /i b came and placed a scarf around his neck and tormented him /b as punishment for insulting the house of the i Nasi /i . b His townsmen said to them: Let him be, as he also causes us pain /b with his harsh reproof, but b since we see that all his actions are for the sake of Heaven we do not say anything to him and let him be. You too /b should b let him be. /b ,§ The Gemara relates: b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b declared a fast but rain did not come. Ilfa descended /b to lead the service b before him, and some say /b it was b Rabbi Ilfi. He recited: He Who makes the wind blow, and the wind /b indeed b blew. /b He continued to recite: And b Who makes the rain come, and /b subsequently, b the rain came. /b Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi b said to him: What are your /b good b deeds, /b in the merit of which your prayers are answered so speedily? b He said to him: I live in an impoverished city, in which there is no wine for i kiddush /i or i havdala /i . I go to the effort of bringing /b the residents b wine for i kiddush /i and i havdala /i , and I /b thereby enable them to b fulfill their duty. /b In reward for this mitzva, my prayers for rain were answered.,The Gemara relates a similar incident. b Rav happened /b to come to b a certain place /b where b he decreed a fast but rain did not come. The prayer leader descended /b to lead the service b before him /b and b recited: He Who makes the wind blow, and the wind blew. /b He continued and b said: /b And b Who makes the rain fall, and the rain came. /b Rav b said to him: What are your /b good b deeds? He said to him: I am a teacher of children, and I teach the Bible to the children of the poor as to the children of the rich, and /b if there is b anyone who cannot /b pay, b I do not take anything from him. And I have a fishpond, and any /b child b who neglects /b his studies, b I bribe him with /b the fish b and calm him, and soothe him until he comes and reads. /b ,The Gemara further relates: b Rav Naḥman decreed a fast, prayed for mercy, but rain did not come. /b In his misery, he b said: Take Naḥman /b and b throw him from the wall to the ground, /b as the fast he decreed has evidently had no effect. b He grew upset, and rain came. /b ,The Gemara relates: b Rabba decreed a fast. He prayed for mercy, but rain did not come. They said to him: But when /b this b Rav Yehuda decreed a fast, rain would come. He said to them: What can I do? If /b the difference between us is b due to /b Torah b study, we are superior to /b the previous generation, b as in the years of Rav Yehuda all of their learning /b |
|
50. Babylonian Talmud, Yevamot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 106| 69b. עיברה לא תאכל בתרומה נחתך העובר במעיה תאכל היה כהן שבא על בת ישראל לא תאכל בתרומה עיברה לא תאכל ילדה תאכל נמצא כחו של בן גדול משל אב,העבד פוסל משום ביאה ואינו פוסל משום זרע כיצד בת ישראל לכהן בת כהן לישראל וילדה הימנו בן והלך הבן ונכבש על השפחה וילדה הימנו בן הרי זה עבד היתה אם אביו בת ישראל לכהן לא תאכל בתרומה בת כהן לישראל תאכל בתרומה,ממזר פוסל ומאכיל כיצד בת ישראל לכהן ובת כהן לישראל וילדה הימנו בת והלכה הבת ונישאת לעבד או לעובד כוכבים וילדה הימנו בן הרי זה ממזר היתה אם אמו בת ישראל לכהן תאכל בתרומה בת כהן לישראל לא תאכל בתרומה,כהן גדול פעמים שהוא פוסל כיצד בת כהן לישראל וילדה הימנו בת והלכה הבת וניסת לכהן וילדה הימנו בן ה"ז ראוי להיות כהן גדול עומד ומשמש על גבי המזבח מאכיל את אמו ופוסל אם אמו זאת אומרת לא כבני כ"ג שהוא פוסלני מן התרומה:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big תנינא להא דת"ר שוטה וקטן שנשאו נשים ומתו נשותיהן פטורות מן החליצה ומן הייבום,כיצד היה ישראל שבא על בת כהן תאכל בתרומה עיברה לא תאכל כיון דעיברה לא תאכל ליחוש שמא עיברה מי לא תנן מפרישין אותן ג' חדשים שמא מעוברות הן,אמר רבה בר רב הונא ליוחסין חששו לתרומה לא חששו ולתרומה לא חששו והתניא הרי זה גיטיך שעה אחת קודם למיתתי אסורה לאכול בתרומה מיד,אלא אמר רבה בר רב הונא בנישואין חששו בזנות לא חששו,ובנישואין מי חששו והתניא בת כהן שנישאת לישראל ומת טובלת ואוכלת בתרומה לערב,אמר רב חסדא טובלת ואוכלת עד ארבעים דאי לא מיעברא הא לא מיעברא ואי מיעברא עד ארבעים מיא בעלמא היא,אמר ליה אביי אי הכי אימא סיפא הוכר עוברה במעיה תהא מקולקלת למפרע מאי מקולקלת עד ארבעים,איתמר הבא על ארוסתו בבית חמיו רב אמר הולד ממזר ושמואל אמר הולד שתוקי אמר רבא מסתברא מילתיה דרב דדיימא מעלמא אבל לא דיימא מעלמא בתרא דידיה שדינן ליה,אמר רבא מנא אמינא לה דקתני ילדה תאכל היכי דמי אילימא דדיימא מעלמא ילדה אמאי תאכל אלא לאו מיניה דיימא ולא דיימא מעלמא,ומה התם דלהאי איסורא ולהאי איסורא בתרא דידיה שדינן ליה הכא דלהאי איסורא ולהאי היתירא לא כל שכן,א"ל אביי לעולם אימא לך כל היכא דדיימא מיניה אע"ג דלא דיימא מעלמא אמר רב הולד ממזר מ"ט דאמרינן מדאפקרא נפשה לגבי ארוס אפקרא נפשה לעלמא ומתני' שהיו שניהם חבושים בבית האסורין,איכא דאמרי בבא עליה כ"ע לא פליגי דבתריה דידיה שדינן ליה והכי איתמר ארוסה שעיברה רב אמר הולד ממזר ושמואל אמר הולד שתוקי אמר רבא מסתברא מילתיה דרב דלא דיימא מיניה ודיימא מעלמא | 69b. If b he impregnated her, she may not partake of i teruma /i , /b as she is carrying an Israelite fetus. If b the fetus was cut in her womb, /b i.e., she miscarried, b she may partake /b of i teruma /i . If the man b was a priest who engaged in /b intercourse b with an Israelite woman, she may not partake of i teruma /i . /b If b he impregnated her, she /b still b may not partake /b of i teruma /i , as a fetus does not enable its mother to partake. If b she gave birth she may partake /b due to her child, a priest. It is therefore b found /b in this case that b the power of the son is greater than /b that b of the father, /b as the father of this child does not enable the woman to partake of i teruma /i , but the son does., b A slave disqualifies /b a woman from partaking of i teruma /i b due to /b his engaging in b intercourse /b with her, b and he does not disqualify /b a woman b because /b he is her b offspring. How so? /b In what case would a slave theoretically disqualify a woman because he is her offspring? If b an Israelite woman /b was married b to a priest, /b or b the daughter of a priest /b was married b to an Israelite; and she a bore him a son; and the son went and pressed himself onto a maidservant, /b an epithet for intercourse used in this context due to the shame involved in having intercourse with a maidservant; b and she bore him a son, /b then b this /b son b is a slave. /b If the latter’s b father’s mother was an Israelite /b who was married b to a priest, /b and her husband died, b she may not partake of i teruma /i /b due to her grandson, as he is not a priest but a slave. On the other hand, if b she was the daughter of a priest /b married b to an Israelite, /b and he died, leaving only this grandson, b she may partake of i teruma /i , /b as the grandson is not considered his father’s offspring., b A i mamzer /i disqualifies /b a woman from partaking of i teruma /i , b and /b he also b enables /b a woman b to partake /b of i teruma /i . b How so? /b If b an Israelite woman /b was married b to a priest, or the daughter of a priest /b was married b to an Israelite, and she bore him a daughter, and the daughter went and married a slave or a gentile and bore him a son, this /b son b is a i mamzer /i . /b If b his mother’s mother was an Israelite woman /b married b to a priest, /b even if her husband died, b she may partake of i teruma /i , /b as she has surviving offspring from a priest. Conversely, if she is b the daughter of a priest /b married b to an Israelite, she may not partake of i teruma /i , /b even after her Israelite husband’s death, as she has offspring from him.,Even with regard to b a High Priest, sometimes he disqualifies /b his grandmother from partaking of i teruma /i . b How so? /b If b the daughter of a priest /b was married b to an Israelite, and she bore him a daughter, and the daughter went and married a priest and bore him a son, this /b son b is fit to be a High Priest, /b who b stands and serves on the altar. /b This son b enables his mother to partake /b of i teruma /i , as he is a priest. b And /b yet, b he disqualifies his mother’s mother /b from partaking of i teruma /i , as he is her offspring from her Israelite husband. b This /b grandmother can b say /b in disapproval: Let there b not /b be many b like my /b daughter’s b son, /b the b High Priest, as he disqualifies me from /b partaking of b i teruma /i . /b , strong GEMARA: /strong b We /b already b learned that /b the marriage of an imbecile is invalid, b as the Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : With regard to b an imbecile and a minor boy who married women and died, their wives are exempt from i ḥalitza /i and from levirate marriage. /b ,§ It is stated in the mishna: b How so? If an Israelite engaged in /b extramarital b intercourse with the daughter of a priest, she may partake of i teruma /i . /b If b he impregnated her, she may not partake /b of i teruma /i . The Gemara asks: b Since /b if b he impregnated her she may not partake, let us be concerned /b in any case of intercourse between an Israelite and the daughter of a priest b lest he impregnated her, /b thereby rendering it prohibited for her to partake of i teruma /i . b Didn’t we learn /b in a mishna that if two men betrothed two women, and then at the time that they entered the wedding canopy, they accidently switched wives, and engaged in relations with each other’s wives that night, in this case, after the accident is discovered, the court b removes /b the wives from their husbands b for three months, lest they are pregt /b from the men they presumed to be their husbands and the fetus is therefore a i mamzer /i , although they engaged in intercourse only once (33b)?,The Gemara answers that b Rabba, son of Rav Huna, said: About lineage /b the Sages b were concerned, /b and they therefore decreed a three-month separation of the husbands and wives, to prevent the possibility of a child being of uncertain lineage. However, b about /b the prohibition against a non-priest eating b i teruma /i they were not concerned. /b The Gemara asks: b And for i teruma /i were they not concerned? Isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i that if a husband says to his wife: b This is your bill of divorce one hour before my death, /b if she is an Israelite woman married to a priest b it is prohibited for her to partake of i teruma /i immediately, /b as the Sages were concerned that her husband might die within the hour?, b Rather, Rabba, son of Rav Huna, said: About /b impregnation through an act of b marriage they were concerned, /b but b about /b impregnation through b licentious intercourse they were not concerned, /b as the woman generally takes precautions to ensure that she will not become pregt.,The Gemara asks: b And about marriage were they concerned? Isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : In the case of b the daughter of a priest who married an Israelite and /b her husband b died /b on that same day, b she immerses /b to purify herself, as she is ritually impure due to their intercourse, b and she may partake of i teruma /i that /b same b evening? /b Evidently, the Sages were not concerned that she became pregt from the initial act of intercourse, even that of marriage., b Rav Ḥisda said: She immerses and partakes /b of i teruma /i only b until forty /b days after her husband’s death, when there is still no reason for concern, b as if she is not pregt /b then b she is not pregt. And if she is pregt, until forty /b days from conception the fetus b is merely water. /b It is not yet considered a living being, and therefore it does not disqualify its mother from partaking of i teruma /i ., b Abaye said to him: If so, say the latter clause /b of the i baraita /i : Once b her fetus in her womb is noticeable, /b she b is ruined retroactively. /b Her prior consumption of i teruma /i is retroactively prohibited. Evidently, pregcy immediately disqualifies her from partaking of i teruma /i . Therefore, the reason that she may partake of i teruma /i immediately after her husband’s death is that the Sages were not concerned that she became pregt. Rav Ḥisda responded: b What is /b the period in which she is retroactively b ruined? /b It is from the moment the fetus is noticeable and back in time b until forty /b days from the beginning of her pregcy. During the first forty days of the pregcy, she is not retroactively ruined, as the fetus is not yet considered a living being., b It was stated: /b With regard to a man b who engaged in intercourse with his betrothed in his father-in-law’s house, /b i.e., before they got married, b Rav said /b that b the offspring is a i mamzer /i , /b as the future husband is not considered his father. b And Shmuel said /b that b the offspring is a i shetuki /i , /b a child of unknown paternity. b Rava said: Rav’s statement stands to reason /b in a case b where she is rumored /b to have engaged in intercourse b with others. However, /b if b she is not rumored /b to have engaged in intercourse b with others, we cast /b the child b after him, /b i.e., we assume that the child is the betrothed’s son., b Rava said: From where do I say that? /b What is the source for my assertion? The source is the mishna, which b teaches /b that if a priest engaged in extramarital intercourse with an Israelite woman and she b gave birth, she may partake /b of i teruma /i due to her child, who is a priest. b What are the circumstances? If we say that she is rumored /b to have engaged in intercourse b with others, /b even if b she gave birth, why may she partake /b of i teruma /i ? Shouldn’t there be concern that the child’s father is not the priest? b Rather, is it not /b a case where b she is rumored /b to have engaged in intercourse b with him and is not rumored /b to have engaged in intercourse b with others? /b , b And if there, /b in the case of the mishna, b where /b for her b to /b engage in intercourse with b this /b priest is b a prohibition, and to /b engage in intercourse with b that /b non-priest, with whom she is not rumored to have engaged in intercourse, is b a prohibition /b of the same degree, nevertheless, b we cast /b the child b after /b the priest, then b here, where /b for her b to /b engage in intercourse with b that /b man who is not her betrothed is a Torah b prohibition, and to /b engage in intercourse with b this /b man, her betrothed, b is permitted /b by Torah law, is it b not all the more so /b that her betrothed should be considered the father? Therefore, Rav’s statement stands to reason only if the woman is rumored to have engaged in intercourse with others as well., b Abaye said to him /b in rejection of his proof: b Actually, I /b could b say to you /b that b anywhere that she is rumored /b to have engaged in intercourse b with him, /b her betrothed, b even if she is not rumored /b to have engaged in intercourse b with others, Rav said /b that b the offspring is a i mamzer /i . What is the reason? /b It is b that we say /b that b since she exposed herself to her betrothed, /b although they were not married yet, b she /b apparently b exposed herself to others /b as well. b And the mishna /b that you cited as support for your assertion is referring to a situation b where they were both incarcerated /b alone together b in prison. /b Therefore, there is no concern that she engaged in intercourse with another man. This is one version of the dispute between Rav and Shmuel., b Some say /b that b when /b the betrothed admits that b he engaged in intercourse with her, everyone agrees that we cast /b the child b after him. /b Rather, their dispute b was stated as follows: /b In the case of b a betrothed woman who became pregt, /b if her betrothed denies that he engaged in intercourse with her, b Rav said /b that b the offspring is a i mamzer /i , and Shmuel said /b that b the offspring is a child whose father’s identity is not known. Rava said: Rav’s statement stands to reason /b in a case b where /b the woman b is not rumored /b to have engaged in intercourse b with him and she is rumored /b to have engaged in intercourse b with others. /b Therefore, it is assumed that the child is a i mamzer /i . |
|
51. Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel (babylonian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 564| 87b. אתא ר' חייא הדר לרישא עייל בר קפרא הדר לרישא אתא ר"ש ברבי הדר לרישא אתא ר' חנינא (בר) חמא אמר כולי האי נהדר וניזיל לא הדר איקפיד ר' חנינא אזל רב לגביה תליסר מעלי יומי דכפורי ולא איפייס,והיכי עביד הכי והאמר ר' יוסי בר חנינא כל המבקש מטו מחבירו אל יבקש ממנו יותר משלש פעמים רב שאני ור' חנינא היכי עביד הכי והאמר רבא כל המעביר על מדותיו מעבירין לו על כל פשעיו,אלא ר' חנינא חלמא חזי ליה לרב דזקפוהו בדיקלא וגמירי דכל דזקפוהו בדיקלא רישא הוי אמר שמע מינה בעי למעבד רשותא ולא איפייס כי היכי דליזיל ולגמר אורייתא בבבל,ת"ר מצות וידוי ערב יוה"כ עם חשכה אבל אמרו חכמים יתודה קודם שיאכל וישתה שמא תטרף דעתו בסעודה ואע"פ שהתודה קודם שאכל ושתה מתודה לאחר שיאכל וישתה שמא אירע דבר קלקלה בסעודה ואף על פי שהתודה ערבית יתודה שחרית שחרית יתודה במוסף במוסף יתודה במנחה במנחה יתודה בנעילה,והיכן אומרו יחיד אחר תפלתו ושליח צבור אומרו באמצע מאי אמר אמר רב אתה יודע רזי עולם ושמואל אמר ממעמקי הלב ולוי אמר ובתורתך כתוב לאמר ר' יוחנן אמר רבון העולמים,ר' יהודה אמר כי עונותינו רבו מלמנות וחטאתינו עצמו מספר רב המנונא אמר אלהי עד שלא נוצרתי איני כדאי עכשיו שנוצרתי כאילו לא נוצרתי עפר אני בחיי ק"ו במיתתי הרי אני לפניך ככלי מלא בושה וכלימה יהי רצון מלפניך שלא אחטא ומה שחטאתי מרוק ברחמיך אבל לא ע"י יסורין והיינו וידויא דרבא כולה שתא ודרב המנונא זוטא ביומא דכפורי,אמר מר זוטרא לא אמרן אלא דלא אמר אבל אנחנו חטאנו אבל אמר אבל אנחנו חטאנו תו לא צריך דאמר בר המדודי הוה קאימנא קמיה דשמואל והוה יתיב וכי מטא שליחא דצבורא ואמר אבל אנחנו חטאנו קם מיקם אמר שמע מינה עיקר וידוי האי הוא,תנן התם בשלשה פרקים בשנה כהנים נושאין את כפיהן ארבעה פעמים ביום בשחרית במוסף במנחה ובנעילת שערים ואלו הן שלשה פרקים בתעניות ובמעמדות וביום הכפורים,מאי נעילת שערים רב אמר צלותא יתירתא ושמואל אמר מה אנו מה חיינו מיתיבי אור יוה"כ מתפלל שבע ומתודה בשחרית מתפלל שבע ומתודה במוסף מתפלל שבע ומתודה במנחה מתפלל שבע ומתודה בנעילה מתפלל שבע ומתודה,תנאי היא דתניא יום הכפורים עם חשיכה מתפלל שבע ומתודה וחותם בוידוי דברי ר"מ וחכמים אומרים מתפלל שבע ואם רצה לחתום בוידוי חותם תיובתא דשמואל תיובתא,עולא בר רב נחית קמיה דרבא פתח באתה בחרתנו וסיים במה אנו מה חיינו ושבחיה רב הונא בריה דרב נתן אמר ויחיד אומרה אחר תפלתו,אמר רב תפלת נעילה פוטרת את של ערבית רב לטעמיה דאמר צלותא יתירא היא וכיון דצלי ליה תו לא צריך,ומי אמר רב הכי והאמר רב הלכה כדברי האומר תפלת ערבית רשות לדברי האומר חובה קאמר,מיתיבי אור יום הכפורים מתפלל שבע ומתודה שחרית שבע ומתודה מוסף שבע ומתודה בנעילה מתפלל שבע ומתודה ערבית מתפלל שבע מעין שמונה עשרה רבי חנינא בן גמליאל משום אבותיו מתפלל שמונה עשרה שלימות | 87b. b Rabbi Ḥiyya, /b Rav’s uncle and teacher, b came in, /b whereupon Rav b returned to the beginning /b of the portion and began to read it again. Afterward, b bar Kappara came in, /b and Rav b returned to the beginning /b of the portion out of respect for bar Kappara. Then b Rabbi Shimon, son of Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi, b came in, /b and b he returned /b again b to the beginning /b of the portion. Then, b Rabbi Ḥanina bar Ḥama came in, /b and Rav b said /b to himself: b Shall I go back /b and read b so many times? He did not return /b but continued from where he was. b Rabbi Ḥanina was offended /b because Rav showed that he was less important than the others. b Rav went before /b Rabbi Ḥanina b on Yom Kippur eve /b every year for b thirteen /b years to appease him, b but he would not be appeased. /b ,The Gemara asks: b How could /b Rav b act this way? Didn’t Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina say: Anyone who requests forgiveness from another should not ask more than three times? /b The Gemara answers: b Rav is different, /b since he was very pious and forced himself to act beyond the letter of the law. The Gemara asks: b And how could Rabbi Ḥanina act this way /b and refuse to forgive Rav, though he asked many times? b Didn’t Rava say: /b With regard to b anyone who suppresses his honor /b and forgives someone for hurting him, God b pardons all his sins? /b ,The Gemara explains: b Rather, /b this is what happened: b Rabbi Ḥanina saw in a dream /b that b Rav was being hung on a palm tree, and /b he b learned /b as a tradition that b anyone /b about whom there is a dream in b which he was being hung on a palm tree will become the head /b of a yeshiva. b He said: Learn from this that /b providence has decreed that b he must eventually become the head /b of the yeshiva. Therefore, b I will not be appeased, so that he will have to go and study Torah in Babylonia. /b He was conscious of the principle that one kingdom cannot overlap with another, and he knew that once Rav was appointed leader, he, Rabbi Ḥanina, would have to abdicate his own position or die. Therefore, he delayed being appeased, so that Rav would go to Babylonia and be appointed there as head of the yeshiva. In this way, the dream would be fulfilled, as Rav would indeed be appointed as head of a yeshiva, but since he would be in Babylonia, Rabbi Ḥanina would not lose his own position.,§ b The Sages taught: /b The main b mitzva of confession /b is on b Yom Kippur eve when darkness /b falls. b But the Sages said: /b One should also b confess /b on Yom Kippur eve b before he eats and drinks /b at his last meal before the fast b lest he become confused at the meal, /b due to the abundance of food and drink, and be unable to confess afterward. b And although one confessed before he ate and drank, he confesses /b again b after he eats and drinks, /b as b perhaps he committed some sin during the meal /b itself. b And although one confessed /b during b the evening prayer /b on the night of Yom Kippur, b he /b should b confess /b again during b the morning prayer. /b Likewise, although one confessed during the b morning prayer, he /b should still b confess during /b the b additional prayer. /b Similarly, although one confessed b during /b the b additional prayer, he /b should also b confess during /b the b afternoon prayer; /b and although one confessed b during /b the b afternoon prayer, he /b should b confess /b again b during /b the b closing prayer [ i ne’ila /i ]. /b , b And where /b in the Yom Kippur prayers b does one say /b the confession? b An individual /b says it b after his /b i Amida /i b prayer, and the prayer leader says it in the middle /b of the i Amida /i prayer. The Gemara asks: b What does one say; /b what is the liturgy of the confession? b Rav said: /b One says the prayer that begins: b You know the mysteries of the universe, /b in accordance with the standard liturgy. b And Shmuel said /b that the prayer begins with: b From the depths of the heart. And Levi said /b that it begins: b And in your Torah it is written, saying, /b and one then recites the forgiveness achieved by Yom Kippur as stated in the Torah. b Rabbi Yoḥa said /b that it begins: b Master of the Universe. /b , b Rabbi Yehuda said /b that one says: b For our iniquities are too many to count and our sins are too great to number. Rav Hamnuna said: /b This is the liturgy of the confession: b My God, before I was formed I was unworthy. Now that I have been formed, it is as if I had not been formed. I am dust while alive, how much more so when I am dead. See, I am before You like a vessel filled with shame and disgrace. May it be Your will that I may sin no more, and as for /b the sins b I have committed before You, erase /b them b in Your compassion, but not by suffering. /b The Gemara comments: b This is the confession that Rava /b used b all year /b long; b and /b it was the confession b that Rav Hamnuna Zuta /b used b on Yom Kippur. /b , b Mar Zutra said: We said only /b that one must follow all these versions b when he did not say /b the words: b But we have sinned. However, /b if b he said /b the words: b But we have sinned, he need not /b say b anything further /b because that is the essential part of the confession. b As bar Hamdudei said: I was standing before Shmuel and he was sitting; and when the prayer leader reached /b the words: b But we have sinned, /b Shmuel b stood. /b Bar Hamdudei b said: Learn from here that this is the main /b part of b the confession, /b and Shmuel stood up to emphasize the significance of these words.,§ b We learned /b in a mishna b there, /b in tractate i Ta’anit /i : b At three times in the year, priests raise their hands /b to recite the priestly benediction b four times in /b a single b day: In /b the b morning prayer, in /b the b additional prayer, in /b the b afternoon prayer, and at /b the b closing [ i ne’ila /i ] of the gates. And these are /b the b three times /b in the year: b During /b communal b fasts /b for lack of rain, on which the i ne’ila /i prayer is recited; b and during /b non-priestly b watches [ i ma’amadot /i ], /b when the Israelite members of the guard parallel to the priestly watch come and read the account of Creation (see i Ta’anit /i 26a); b and on Yom Kippur. /b ,The Gemara asks: b What is the closing of the gates, /b i.e., the i ne /i ’ i ila /i prayer? b Rav said: /b It is b an added prayer /b of i Amida /i . b And Shmuel said: /b It is not a full prayer but only a confession that begins with the words: b What are we, what are our lives? /b The Gemara b raises an objection /b to this from a i baraita /i , as it was taught: On b the night of Yom Kippur, one prays seven /b blessings in the i Amida /i prayer b and confesses; during /b the b morning prayer, one prays seven /b blessings b and confesses; during /b the b additional prayer, one prays seven /b blessings b and confesses; during /b the b afternoon prayer, one prays seven /b blessings b and confesses; /b and b during /b the b i ne’ila /i prayer, one prays seven /b blessings b and confesses. /b This concurs with Rav’s opinion that i ne’ila /i is an added prayer., b This is /b a dispute between b i tanna’im /i /b They all agree that i ne’ila /i is an added prayer but disagree about the obligation to confess at the i ne’ila /i prayer, b as it was taught /b in a i baraita /i : At the end of b Yom Kippur, as darkness /b falls, b one prays seven /b blessings of the i Amida /i b and confesses and ends with the confession; /b this is b the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: He prays seven /b blessings of the i Amida /i , b and if he wishes to end /b his prayer b with a confession, he ends /b it in this way. The Gemara says: If so, b this is a refutation of /b the opinion of b Shmuel, /b since all agree that i ne’ila /i is a complete prayer. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, it is b a /b conclusive b refutation. /b ,The Gemara relates: b Ulla bar Rav went down /b to lead the i ne’ila /i prayer b before Rava, /b who was in the synagogue. b He opened /b the prayer b with: You have chosen us, and he concluded with: What are we, what are our lives? And /b Rava b praised him. Rav Huna, son of Rav Natan, said: And an individual says it after his /b i Amida /i b prayer. /b The individual says the confession after his i Amida /i prayer, not within the i Amida /i prayer as the prayer leader does., b Rav said: The i ne’ila /i prayer exempts /b one from b the evening prayer. /b Since one recited an added prayer after the afternoon prayer, when darkness fell, it serves as the evening prayer. The Gemara comments that b Rav /b conforms b to his /b line of b reasoning /b above, b as he said: It is an added prayer, and since he has prayed it he needs no further /b prayer in the evening.,The Gemara is surprised at this: b And did Rav /b actually b say this? Didn’t Rav say: /b The b i halakha /i is in accordance with the statement of the one who says /b that the b evening prayer is optional? /b If it is optional, why would Rav use the term exempt? One is exempt even if he does not pray the closing prayer. The Gemara answers: b He said this in accordance with the statement of the one who says /b that the evening prayer b is mandatory. /b Even according to the opinion that maintains that the evening prayer is mandatory, if one recites i ne’ila /i , he has fulfilled his obligation to recite the evening prayer.,The Gemara b raises an objection /b from that which we learned in a i baraita /i : During the b evening /b after b Yom Kippur, one prays seven /b blessings in the i Amida /i b and confesses; /b during the b morning prayer, /b one prays b seven /b blessings in the i Amida /i b and confesses; /b during the b additional prayer, /b one prays b seven /b blessings in the i Amida /i b and confesses; during i ne’ila /i one prays seven /b blessings in the i Amida /i b and confesses; /b and during b the evening prayer, /b one prays b seven /b blessings b in /b an b abridged /b version of the b eighteen /b blessings of the weekday i Amida /i prayer. One recites the first three blessings, the final three, and a middle blessing that includes an abbreviated form of the other weekday blessings. b Rabbi Ḥanina ben Gamliel /b says b in the name of his ancestors: One prays /b the b full eighteen /b blessings of the weekday i Amida /i prayer as usual, |
|
52. Babylonian Talmud, Sukkah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel (babylonian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 290| 55a. ואמר ר' יוחנן לידע שהוקבע ר"ח בזמנו תרי היכירא עבדינן דחזי האי חזי וחזי בהאי חזי,מיתיבי דתני רבא בר שמואל יכול כשם שתוקעין על שבת בפני עצמו ועל ראש חדש בפני עצמו כך יהיו תוקעין על כל מוסף ומוסף ת"ל (במדבר י, י) ובראשי חדשיכם תיובתא דרבי אחא תיובתא,מאי תלמודא אמר אביי אמר קרא ובראשי חדשיכם הוקשו כל חדשים כולם זה לזה רב אשי אמר כתיב חדשכם וכתיב ובראשי ואיזה חדש שיש לו שני ראשים הוי אומר זה ר"ה ואמר רחמנא חדשכם חד היא,ועוד תניא בחולו של מועד בראשון מה היו אומרים (תהלים כט, א) הבו לה' בני אלים בשני מה היו אומרים (תהלים נ, טז) ולרשע אמר אלהים בשלישי מה היו אומרים (תהלים צד, טז) מי יקום לי עם מרעים,ברביעי מה היו אומרים (תהלים צד, ח) בינו בוערים בעם בחמישי מה היו אומרים (תהלים פא, ז) הסירותי מסבל שכמו בששי מה היו אומרים (תהלים פב, ה) ימוטו כל מוסדי ארץ ואם חל שבת באחד מהם ימוטו ידחה,רב ספרא מנח בהו סימנא הומבה"י רב פפא מנח בהו סמנא הומהב"י וסימנך אמבוהא דספרי,תיובתא דר' אחא בר חנינא תיובתא והא ר' אחא בר חנינא קרא ומתניתא קאמר,אמר רבינא לומר שמאריכין בתקיעות רבנן דקיסרי משמיה דר' אחא אמרי לומר שמרבה בתוקעין,ואנן דאית לן תרי יומי היכי עבדינן אביי אמר שני ידחה,רבא אמר שביעי ידחה תניא כותיה דרבא אם חל שבת להיות באחד מהן ימוטו ידחה,אתקין אמימר בנהרדעא דמדלגי דלוגי: | 55a. b And Rabbi Yoḥa said: /b Why was it placed in this manner? It was as an indicator for the people b to know that the New Moon was established at its /b proper b time, /b after the twenty-ninth day of the previous month. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult, as b they implemented two indicators: /b One b who saw this /b one, i.e., the sequence of the songs, b saw /b it; b and /b one who b saw that /b one, i.e., where the fats were placed, b saw /b it, and there is no contradiction.,The Gemara b raises /b another b objection /b to the opinion of Rabbi Aḥa, b as Rava bar Shmuel taught /b this i baraita /i : I b might /b have thought b that just as /b when Shabbat and the New Moon do not coincide b they sound /b the trumpets b for /b the additional b Shabbat /b offering b in and of itself, and for the /b additional b New Moon /b offering b in and of itself, so too would they sound /b the trumpets b for each and every additional offering /b when the days coincide. Therefore, b the verse states: /b “And on the day of your rejoicing, and at your appointed times, b and on your New Moons, /b and you shall sound the trumpets for your burnt-offerings and your peace-offerings, and they will be a memorial for you before your God. I am the Lord your God” (Numbers 10:10), indicating that one blast is sounded for all. The Gemara suggests: This is b a conclusive refutation /b of the opinion b of Rabbi Aḥa. /b The Gemara concludes: Indeed, it is b a conclusive refutation. /b ,Since the i baraita /i was cited, the Gemara asks: b What is the derivation /b cited in this i baraita /i ? How does the phrase: And on your New Moons, prove that the trumpets are sounded once for all the additional offerings? b Abaye said: The verse states: “And on your New Moons,” /b in plural, indicating that b all the months are equated to each other, /b and just as on a typical New Moon the trumpets are sounded once for the additional offering, so too when Shabbat and the New Moon coincide the trumpets are sounded once and no more. b Rav Ashi said /b that in this verse b it is written: Your moon [ i ḥodshekhem /i ], /b without a i yod /i , in the singular, b and /b in the same verse b it is written: “And on /b your b new [ i uverashei /i ],” /b in the plural. b And which /b is the b month that has two new /b beginnings? b You must say it is Rosh HaShana, /b which is the beginning of both the new year and the new month. b And /b yet b the Merciful One says: Your moon, /b in the singular, indicating b it is one /b and the trumpets are sounded once., b And furthermore, /b contrary to the statement of Rabbi Aḥa, b it was taught /b in a i baraita /i : b On the intermediate days of the Festival, on the first /b day, b what would they say /b as the song accompanying the offering on that day? b “Ascribe [ i havu /i ] unto the Lord, O you sons of might” /b (Psalms 29:1). b On the second /b day, b what would they say? /b The psalm that contains the verse: b “But unto the wicked [ i velarasha /i ] God says: /b What have you to do to declare My statutes?” (Psalms 50:16). b On the third /b day, b what would they say? /b The psalm containing the verse: b “Who [ i mi /i ] will rise up for me against the evildoers?” /b (Psalms 94:16)., b On the fourth /b day, b what would they say? “Consider [ i binu /i ], you brutish among the people” /b (Psalms 94:8). b On the fifth /b day, b what would they say? “I removed [ i hasiroti /i ] his shoulder from the burden” /b (Psalms 81:7). b On the sixth /b day, b what would they say? “All the foundations of the earth are moved [ i yimotu /i ]” /b (Psalms 82:5). b And if Shabbat occurred on any /b of the intermediate days of the Festival, since Shabbat has its own song (Psalms 92), the last of the songs of the intermediate days, i.e., “All the foundations of the earth b are moved,” is superseded, /b and all the other songs are recited in their proper sequence., b Rav Safra established a mnemonic for /b the sequence of the psalms recited during the intermediate days of the Festival: b i Heh /i , i vav /i , i mem /i , i beit /i , i heh /i , i yod /i , /b the first letters of the transliterated word in the verses cited. b Rav Pappa established a /b different b mnemonic for /b a different sequence of the Psalms: b i Heh /i , i vav /i , i mem /i , i heh /i , i beit /i , i yod /i , /b as in his opinion, the psalm containing: “I removed” is recited before the psalm containing: “Consider.” The Gemara notes: b A mnemonic /b to identify which i amora /i established which mnemonic is the expression: b Convoy [ i ambuha /i ] of scribes [ i desafrei /i ], /b as the spelling of i ambuha /i is like the mnemonic of Rav Safra.,The Gemara concludes: This i baraita /i is b a conclusive refutation /b of the opinion b of Rabbi Aḥa bar Ḥanina, /b as on Shabbat the song for Shabbat was recited alone without the song for the Festival, and similarly, separate trumpet blasts are not sounded for the various additional offerings. Rabbi Aḥa’s opinion was rejected based on several sources. The Gemara asks: b But didn’t Rabbi Aḥa say a verse and a i baraita /i /b in support of his opinion? How can those citations be rejected?, b Ravina said: /b The verse and the i baraita /i that he cited do not teach that trumpet blasts were sounded for each additional offering. Rather, they come b to say that one extends /b the duration b of the blasts /b to honor the added additional offerings, but does not sound even one additional blast. b The Sages of Caesarea, in the name of Rabbi Aḥa, said: /b The verse and the i baraita /i cited by Rabbi Aḥa come b to say that one increases /b the number of b trumpeters /b to honor the added additional offerings, but not the number of blasts sounded.,Apropos the psalms recited during the Festival, the Gemara asks: b And we, /b outside Eretz Yisrael, b who have two days /b of Festival due to the uncertainty, as well as uncertainty with regard to each of the intermediate days, b how do we conduct /b ourselves with regard to the mention of the additional offerings in the additional prayer of the Festival during the intermediate days, and with regard to Torah reading on those days? b Abaye said: /b Mention of b the second /b day b will be superseded. /b Since the first of the intermediate days outside Eretz Yisrael is the third day of the Festival in Eretz Yisrael, the additional offering for the third day alone is mentioned, and the offerings for the fourth day on the fourth day, etc. No mention is made of the second day outside Eretz Yisrael., b Rava said: /b Mention of the b seventh /b day b will be superseded. /b On the first of the intermediate days outside Eretz Yisrael, the third day of the Festival, the passage beginning “And on the second day” (Numbers 29:17) is mentioned in the additional i Amida /i prayer and read in the Torah, and on each succeeding day the succeeding passage is mentioned and read. There is no mention of the seventh day on the eighth day, as that is no longer i Sukkot /i but rather the Eighth Day of Assembly. The Gemara notes: A i baraita /i b was taught in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rava: And if Shabbat occurs on any /b of the intermediate days of the Festival, the song of the seventh day of i Sukkot /i : “All the foundations of the earth b are moved,” is superseded. /b ,The Gemara cites a third opinion: b Ameimar instituted in /b his city of b Neharde’a that /b during the intermediate days, b one repeats /b the second of the additional offerings that he mentioned the day before and adds the additional offerings of the subsequent day. On the first of the intermediate days in the Diaspora, one mentions the additional offerings of both the second and third days of i Sukkot /i . On the second of the intermediate days, one repeats the verses of the third day of i Sukkot /i and adds the verses of the fourth day. |
|
53. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Qamma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel (babylonian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 290| 113a. אבל איתיה במתא לא דאמרינן אימר לא אמרו ליה דאמרי אשכחינהו שליחא דב"ד ואמר ליה,ולא אמרן אלא דלא חליף אבבא דבי דינא אבל חליף אבבא דבי דינא לא אמרי אשכחוה בי דינא ואמרי ליה,ולא אמרן אלא דאתי ביומיה אבל לא אתי ביומיה לא אימא אישתלויי אשתלי,אמר רבא האי מאן דכתיב עליה פתיחא על דלא אתי לדינא עד דאתי לדינא לא מקרעינן ליה על דלא ציית לדינא עד דציית לא מקרעינן ליה ולא היא כיון דאמר צייתנא קרעינן ליה:,אמר רב חסדא קובעים זמן שני וחמישי ושני זמנא וזמנא בתר זמנא ולמחר כתבינן,רב אסי איקלע בי רב כהנא חזא ההיא איתתא דאזמנה לדינא בפניא ובצפרא כתיב עלה פתיחא א"ל לא סבר לה מר להא דאמר רב חסדא קובעין זמן שני וחמישי ושני,א"ל ה"מ גברא דאניס וליתיה במתא אבל איתתא כיון דאיתה במתא ולא אתיא מורדת היא:,אמר רב יהודה לא יהבינא זמנא לא ביומי ניסן ולא ביומי תשרי לא במעלי יומא טבא ולא במעלי שבתא אבל מניסן לבתר יומי ניסן וביומי תשרי לבתר תשרי קבעינן ממעלי שבתא לבתר מעלי שבתא לא קבעינן מאי טעמא בעבידתיה דשבתא טריד,אמר רב נחמן לא יהבינן זמנא לא לבני כלה בכלה ולא לבני ריגלא בריגלא כי הוו אתו לקמיה דרב נחמן אמר להו וכי לדידכו כנופייכו והאידנא דאיכא רמאי חיישינן:,אם היה דבר שיש בו אחריות חייב לשלם: מתני ליה רבי לר"ש בריה לא דבר שיש בו אחריות ממש אלא אפילו פרה וחורש בה חמור ומחמר אחריו חייבין להחזיר מפני כבוד אביהן,בעי מיניה רב כהנא מרב מטה ומיסב עליה שולחן ואוכל עליו מהו אמר לו (משלי ט, ט) תן לחכם ויחכם עוד:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big אין פורטין לא מתיבת המוכסין ולא מכיס של גבאין ואין נוטלין מהם צדקה אבל נוטל הוא מתוך ביתו או מן השוק:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big תנא אבל נותן לו דינר ונותן לו את השאר:,ומוכסין והאמר שמואל דינא דמלכותא דינא,אמר רב חנינא בר כהנא אמר שמואל במוכס שאין לו קצבה דבי ר' ינאי אמרי במוכס העומד מאליו,איכא דמתני לה אהא לא ילבש אדם כלאים אפי' על גבי עשרה בגדים להבריח בו את המכס מתני' דלא כר"ע דתניא אסור להבריח את המכס ר"ש אומר משום ר"ע מותר להבריח את המכס,בשלמא לענין כלאים בהא קמיפלגי דמר סבר דבר שאין מתכוין מותר ומר סבר דבר שאין מתכוין אסור אלא להבריח בו את המכס מי שרי והאמר שמואל דינא דמלכותא דינא,א"ר חנינא בר כהנא אמר שמואל במוכס שאין לו קצבה דבי ר' ינאי אמרי במוכס העומד מאליו,ואיכא דמתני אהא נודרין להרגין ולחרמין ולמוכסין שהיא של תרומה שהיא של בית מלך אע"פ שאינה של תרומה אע"פ שאינה של מלך ולמוכסין והאמר שמואל דינא דמלכותא דינא,א"ר חנינא בר כהנא אמר שמואל במוכס שאין לו קצבה דבי ר' ינאי אמרי במוכס העומד מאליו,רב אשי אמר במוכס כנעני דתניא ישראל וכנעני אנס שבאו לדין אם אתה יכול לזכהו בדיני ישראל זכהו ואמור לו כך דינינו בדיני כנענים זכהו ואמור לו כך דינכם ואם לאו באין עליו בעקיפין דברי ר' ישמעאל ר"ע אומר אין באין עליו בעקיפין מפני קידוש השם,ור"ע טעמא דאיכא קידוש השם הא ליכא קידוש השם באין,וגזל כנעני מי שרי והתניא אמר ר' שמעון דבר זה דרש ר"ע כשבא מזפירין מנין לגזל כנעני שהוא אסור ת"ל (ויקרא כה, מח) אחרי נמכר גאולה תהיה לו | 113a. b But /b if the defendant b is in the city, /b the court does b not /b ostracize him for failing to respond to a summons conveyed through a woman or a neighbor, b as we say: /b Perhaps b they did not tell him /b of the court’s summons, b as they said /b to themselves: Since the defendant is in the city, b a court agent /b has already b found him and told him. /b As a result, these unofficial messengers will not deliver the court’s summons to the defendant at all., b And /b similarly, b we said /b that the court will ostracize one who does not respond to a summons conveyed through a woman or a neighbor b only /b in a case b where he does not pass by the court’s entrance /b on his way home, b but /b if he does b pass by the court’s entrance, /b the court does b not /b ostracize him. This is because it is possible that the unofficial messengers will b say /b to themselves: Since he passes by the courthouse, b the court /b has already b found him and told him. /b , b And /b furthermore, b we said /b that the court will ostracize one who does not respond to a summons b only /b in a case b where he comes /b home b on the /b same b day /b that the woman or neighbor is sent to deliver the court summons. b But /b if he does b not come /b home b on the /b same b day, /b he is b not /b ostracized, because it is possible to b say /b that b they forgot /b to notify him., b Rava said: /b With regard to b one /b who had b a document of ostracism written about him due to /b the fact that b he did not come to court, we do not tear up the document for him until he /b actually b comes to court, /b and it is not enough for him to simply commit to appearing. Similarly, if the document of ostracism was written b due to /b the fact that b he did not obey /b the ruling of b the court, we do not tear it up for him until he /b actually b obeys /b the ruling. The Gemara comments: This second statement b is not so. /b Rather, b once he /b has acquiesced and b said: I will obey, we /b immediately b tear up the document for him. /b , b Rav Ḥisda said: /b The court b sets a date /b for an individual to appear in court on the upcoming b Monday. And /b if he does not appear, they set a date for that b Thursday, and /b if he does not appear, they set a date for the following b Monday, /b so that he has a second b date and /b then a third b date after /b the first b date. And /b if he does not appear in court by the third date, then b on the next day we write /b a document of ostracism.,The Gemara relates that b Rav Asi happened /b to come to b the house of Rav Kahana. He saw /b that there was b a certain woman whom /b Rav Kahana had b summoned to /b appear in b court in the evening, /b but she did not appear, b and in the morning /b Rav Kahana b wrote a document of ostracism concerning her. /b Rav Asi said b to him: /b Does b the Master not hold /b in accordance with b that which Rav Ḥisda says, /b that the court b sets a date /b for the coming b Monday, and /b then b Thursday, and /b then the following b Monday /b before it issues a document of ostracism?,Rav Kahana b said to him: That matter /b applies only with regard to b a man, as he is a victim of circumstance and is not /b always b in the city /b due to his vocational activities. b But /b in the case of b a woman, since she is /b always b in the city, /b when b she does not come /b to court the first time b she is /b immediately considered b rebellious, /b and the court may issue a document of ostracism right away.,Continuing the discussion of court dates, b Rav Yehuda says: /b The court b does not set a date for /b legal proceedings b during the days of Nisan, nor during the days of Tishrei, /b and also b not on the eve of a Festival nor the eve of Shabbat /b because these are busy times. b But during Nisan we may set /b a court date to take place b after Nisan, and /b likewise, b during Tishrei /b we may set a court date to take place b after Tishrei. /b By contrast, b on the eve of Shabbat we do not /b set a court date to take place b after the eve of Shabbat. What is the reason /b for this? It is because b one is preoccupied with his work /b in preparation b for Shabbat /b and it is possible that he will forget about the court summons., b Rav Naḥman says: We do not set /b a court b date for participants in the i kalla /i , /b the gatherings for Torah study during Elul and Adar, b during /b the months of the b i kalla /i , nor for participants in /b the public discourses prior to b the Festival during the /b period leading up to b the Festival. /b The Gemara relates: b When /b people b would come before Rav Naḥman /b during the i kalla /i period in order to make legal claims against others, b he would say to them: Did I gather you /b here b for your /b own needs? No, I gathered you to participate in Torah study. The Gemara adds: b But now that there are scoundrels, /b who do not come to study Torah but rather to avoid trial, b we are concerned /b that they will continue to evade prosecution, and therefore we summon them to court even during these time periods.,§ The mishna teaches, with regard to one who left a stolen item to his children, b if /b the item b was something that may serve /b as a legal b guarantee /b of a loan, the heirs b are obligated to pay /b the owner. The Gemara states that b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi would b teach /b this mishna to b Rabbi Shimon, his son, /b and explain that it does b not /b refer only to b something that can actually /b serve as b a guarantee /b for a loan, i.e., land. b Rather, /b it refers b even /b to b a cow /b that b he plows with, /b or b a donkey /b that b he drives /b by directing it from b behind, /b which the heirs b are obligated to return because of the honor of their father, /b so that people will not continually point out that the inheritance was stolen and thereby disgrace their deceased parent., b Rav Kahana raises a dilemma before Rav: /b If the robber left his heirs a stolen item that is used in relative privacy, such as b a bed that he lies on /b or b a table upon which he eats, /b rather than something as conspicuous as a large animal, b what is /b the i halakha /i ? Are the heirs obligated to return it to its owner? Rav b said to him: “Give to a wise man, and he will be yet wiser” /b (Proverbs 9:9), meaning that from the fact that the heirs must return a cow and a donkey, one can infer that they must also return a bed and a table., strong MISHNA: /strong b One may not exchange /b larger coins for smaller ones b from the trunk of customs collectors nor from the purse of tax collectors, and one may not take charity from them, /b as they are assumed to have obtained their funds illegally. b But one may take /b money b from /b the collector’s b house or from /b money he has with him in b the market /b that he did not take from his collection trunk or purse., strong GEMARA: /strong It was b taught /b in a i baraita /i with regard to the prohibition against exchanging money from the trunk of a customs collector: b But one may give /b the customs collector b a dinar /b as payment for a debt that amounts to less than a dinar, b and /b when the collector b gives him change, /b he may accept it.,It was taught in the mishna that one may not exchange money from the trunks of b customs collectors, /b which are assumed to include stolen funds. The Gemara questions this ruling: b But doesn’t Shmuel say /b that b the law of the kingdom is the law, /b i.e., i halakha /i requires Jews to obey the laws of the state in which they live. Accordingly, the customs are collected legally and it should be permitted to make use of the funds.,The Gemara answers: b Rabbi Ḥanina bar Kahana said /b that b Shmuel says: /b The mishna is discussing b a customs collector who does not have a limitation /b placed by the governor on the amount he may collect, and he collects as he pleases. Alternatively, the Sages of b the school of Rabbi Yannai said: /b The mishna is discussing b a customs collector who stands on his own, /b i.e., he was not appointed by the government but, on his own, he forces people to give him money.,The Gemara notes: b There are /b those b who teach /b the statements of Rabbi Ḥanina bar Kahana and the Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai b with regard to this /b following mishna ( i Kilayim /i 9:2) and its attendant discussion. The customs collectors would not levy a duty for the garments one was wearing. In light of this, the mishna teaches: b A person may not wear /b a garment made of b diverse kinds, /b i.e., a combination of wool and linen, b even /b if he wears it b on top of ten garments, /b in order b to avoid /b paying b customs. /b It was noted that this b mishna is not in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Akiva, as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b It is prohibited to avoid /b paying b customs /b by wearing a garment of diverse kinds. b Rabbi Shimon says in the name of Rabbi Akiva: It is permitted to avoid /b paying b customs /b in this manner.,The Gemara comments: b Granted, with regard to /b the prohibition of b diverse kinds, they disagree about this: /b One b Sage, /b i.e., Rabbi Akiva, b holds /b that b an unintentional act is permitted. /b In this case, the prohibition is to benefit from wearing the garment, and that is not his intent, as his intention is merely to avoid paying the customs duties. Therefore, it is permitted. b And /b one b Sage, /b i.e., the first i tanna /i in the i baraita /i , b holds /b that b an unintentional act is prohibited. But is /b it ever b permitted to avoid customs? Doesn’t Shmuel say: The law of the kingdom is the law? /b ,In answer to this question, b Rabbi Ḥanina bar Kahana said /b that b Shmuel says: /b The dispute in the i baraita /i is b with regard to a customs collector who does not have a limitation /b placed on the amount he may collect. Alternatively, Sages of b the school of Rabbi Yannai said: /b The dispute is b with regard to a customs collector who stands on his own, /b i.e., who is self-appointed.,The Gemara notes: b And there are /b those b who teach /b the statements of Rabbi Ḥanina bar Kahana and the Sages of the school of Rabbi Yannai b with regard to this /b mishna ( i Nedarim /i 27b): One b may vow before murderers, plunderers, and customs collectors /b in order to reinforce the claim b that /b a certain item that is being commandeered b is i teruma /i , /b or that b it belongs to the king’s house, /b and thereby avoid its seizure, b despite /b the fact b that it is not i teruma /i /b or b that it does not belong to the king’s house. /b It was asked: Can it be that it is permitted to pronounce such a vow b before customs collectors? But doesn’t Shmuel say: The law of the kingdom is the law? /b It should therefore be prohibited to state such a vow before the customs collectors., b Rabbi Ḥanina bar Kahana said /b that b Shmuel says: /b The mishna in i Nedarim /i issues its ruling b with regard to a customs collector who does not have a limitation /b placed on the amount he may collect. Alternatively, the Sages of b the school of Rabbi Yannai say: /b The mishna issues its ruling b with regard to a customs collector who stands on his own. /b , b Rav Ashi said: /b The mishna issues its ruling b with regard to a gentile customs collector, /b whom one may deceive, b as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : In the case of b a Jew and a gentile who approach /b the court b for judgment /b in a legal dispute, b if you can vindicate /b the Jew b under Jewish law, vindicate him, and say to /b the gentile: b This is our law. /b If he can be vindicated b under gentile law, vindicate him, and say to /b the gentile: b This is your law. And if /b it is b not /b possible to vindicate him under either system of law, b one approaches /b the case b circuitously, /b seeking a justification to vindicate the Jew. This is b the statement of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva /b disagrees and b says: One does not approach /b the case b circuitously /b in order to vindicate the Jew b due to the sanctification of God’s name, /b as God’s name will be desecrated if the Jewish judge employs dishonest means.,The Gemara infers from this i baraita /i : b And /b even according to b Rabbi Akiva, the reason /b that the court does not employ trickery in order to vindicate the Jew is only b because there is /b the consideration of b the sanctification of God’s name. Consequently, /b if there b is no /b consideration of b the sanctification of God’s name, /b the court does b approach /b the case circuitously. Apparently, it is permitted to deceive a gentile.,The Gemara challenges this assertion: b But is robbery /b from b a gentile permitted? Isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Rabbi Shimon said /b that b Rabbi Akiva taught this matter when he came from Zephirin: From where /b is it derived that it is b prohibited /b to b rob a gentile? /b It is from the fact that b the verse states /b with regard to a Jew who has been sold as a slave to a gentile: b “After he is sold he may be redeemed” /b (Leviticus 25:48), |
|
| 54. Ephrem, Commentary On Genesis, 34.6 (4th cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel saba (sage) Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 113 |
| 55. Ephrem, Hymns On Nativity, 9.9-9.11 (4th cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel saba (sage) Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 113 |
| 56. John Chrysostom, Homilies On Genesis, 62.2-62.3 (4th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel saba (sage) Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 113 |
| 57. Epiphanius, De 12 Gemmis, 11 (4th cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •samuel saba (sage) Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 113 |
58. Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah, None Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 564| 8a. רבי יהושע סבר ילפינן ממשה ור"א סבר לא ילפינן ממשה שאני משה דרב גובריה וחכ"א לא כדברי זה ולא כדברי זה אלא שואל אדם צרכיו בשומע תפלה,אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל הלכה שואל אדם צרכיו בשומע תפלה אמר רב יהודה בריה דרב שמואל בר שילת משמיה דרב אע"פ שאמרו שואל אדם צרכיו בשומע תפלה אבל אם בא לומר בסוף כל ברכה וברכה מעין כל ברכה וברכה אומר,א"ר חייא בר אשי אמר רב אע"פ שאמרו שואל אדם צרכיו בשומע תפלה אם יש לו חולה בתוך ביתו אומר בברכת חולים ואם צריך לפרנסה אומר בברכת השנים,אמר ר' יהושע בן לוי אע"פ שאמרו שואל אדם צרכיו בשומע תפלה אבל אם בא לומר אחר תפלתו אפילו כסדר יוה"כ אומר:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big ואלו אידיהן של עובדי כוכבים קלנדא וסטרנורא וקרטיסים ויום גנוסיא של מלכיהם ויום הלידה ויום המיתה דברי רבי מאיר וחכמים אומרים כל מיתה שיש בה שריפה יש בה עבודת כוכבים ושאין בה שריפה אין בה עבודת כוכבים אבל יום תגלחת זקנו ובלוריתו ויום שעלה בו מן הים ויום שיצא מבית האסורין ועובד כוכבים שעשה משתה לבנו אינו אסור אלא אותו היום ואותו האיש בלבד:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big אמר רב חנן בר רבא קלנדא ח' ימים אחר תקופה סטרנורא ח' ימים לפני תקופה וסימנך (תהלים קלט, ה) אחור וקדם צרתני וגו',ת"ר לפי שראה אדם הראשון יום שמתמעט והולך אמר אוי לי שמא בשביל שסרחתי עולם חשוך בעדי וחוזר לתוהו ובוהו וזו היא מיתה שנקנסה עלי מן השמים עמד וישב ח' ימים בתענית [ובתפלה],כיון שראה תקופת טבת וראה יום שמאריך והולך אמר מנהגו של עולם הוא הלך ועשה שמונה ימים טובים לשנה האחרת עשאן לאלו ולאלו ימים טובים הוא קבעם לשם שמים והם קבעום לשם עבודת כוכבים,בשלמא למ"ד בתשרי נברא העולם יומי זוטי חזא יומי אריכי אכתי לא חזא אלא למ"ד בניסן נברא העולם הא חזא ליה יומי זוטי ויומי אריכי דהוי זוטי כולי האי לא חזא,ת"ר יום שנברא בו אדם הראשון כיון ששקעה עליו חמה אמר אוי לי שבשביל שסרחתי עולם חשוך בעדי ויחזור עולם לתוהו ובוהו וזו היא מיתה שנקנסה עלי מן השמים היה יושב בתענית ובוכה כל הלילה וחוה בוכה כנגדו כיון שעלה עמוד השחר אמר מנהגו של עולם הוא עמד והקריב שור שקרניו קודמין לפרסותיו שנאמר (תהלים סט, לב) ותיטב לה' משור פר מקרין מפריס,ואמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל שור שהקריב אדם הראשון קרן אחת היתה [לו] במצחו שנאמר ותיטב לה' משור פר מקרין מפריס מקרין תרתי משמע אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק מקרן כתיב,אמר רב מתנה רומי שעשתה קלנדא וכל העיירות הסמוכות לה משתעבדות לה אותן עיירות אסורות או מותרות רבי יהושע בן לוי אמר קלנדא אסורה לכל היא רבי יוחנן אמר אין אסורה אלא לעובדיה בלבד,תנא כוותיה דר' יוחנן אע"פ שאמרו רומי עשתה קלנדא וכל עיירות הסמוכות לה משתעבדות לה היא עצמה אינה אסורה אלא לעובדיה בלבד,סטרנליא וקרטסים ויום גנוסיא של מלכיהם ויום שהומלך בו מלך לפניו אסור אחריו מותר ועובד כוכבים שעשה (בו) משתה לבנו אין אסור אלא אותו היום ואותו האיש,אמר רב אשי אף אנן נמי תנינא דקתני יום תגלחת זקנו ובלוריתו ויום שעלה בו מן הים ויום שיצא בו מבית האסורין אין אסור אלא אותו היום בלבד ואותו האיש,בשלמא אותו היום לאפוקי לפניו ולאחריו אלא אותו האיש לאפוקי מאי לאו לאפוקי משעבדיו ש"מ,תניא רבי ישמעאל אומר ישראל שבחוצה לארץ עובדי עבודת כוכבים בטהרה הן כיצד עובד כוכבים שעשה משתה לבנו וזימן כל היהודים שבעירו אע"פ שאוכלין משלהן ושותין משלהן ושמש שלהן עומד לפניהם מעלה עליהם הכתוב כאילו אכלו מזבחי מתים שנאמר (שמות לד, טו) וקרא לך ואכלת מזבחו,ואימא עד דאכיל אמר רבא אם כן נימא קרא ואכלת מזבחו מאי וקרא לך משעת קריאה הלכך | 8a. b Rabbi Yehoshua holds /b that b we derive from /b the case of b Moses /b that one should first praise God in prayer and only afterward issue personal requests. b And Rabbi Eliezer holds /b that b we do not derive from Moses /b how to act, since b Moses is different, as his might is great, /b i.e., he knew how to pray to God in this order. b And the Rabbis say: /b The i halakha /i b is not in accordance with the statement of this /b Sage, who says that one should issue personal requests before praying, b nor /b is it b in accordance with the statement of that /b Sage, who says that personal requests should follow prayer. b Rather, a person requests his own needs in /b the blessing ending: b Who listens to prayer. /b Therefore, when Naḥum the Mede stated that this is the i halakha /i , he was merely concurring with the opinion of the Rabbis.,With regard to the halakhic ruling, b Rav Yehuda says /b that b Shmuel says: /b The b i halakha /i /b is that b a person requests his own needs /b during the i Amida /i prayer b in /b the blessing ending: b Who listens to prayer. Rav Yehuda, son of Rav Shmuel bar Sheilat, says in the name of Rav: Although /b the Sages b said /b that b a person requests his own needs in /b the blessing ending: b Who listens to prayer, /b that is not the only option. b Rather, if he wishes to recite at the conclusion of each and every blessing /b personal requests that b reflect the nature of each and every blessing, he may recite /b them.,Similarly, b Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi says /b that b Rav says: Although /b the Sages b said /b that b a person requests his own needs in /b the blessing ending: b Who listens to prayer, if he has a sick person in his house he recites /b a special prayer for him b during the blessing of the sick. And if he is in need of sustece, he recites /b a request b during the blessing of the years. /b , b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: Although /b the Sages b said /b that b a person requests his own needs in /b the blessing ending: b Who listens to prayer; but if one wishes to recite /b prayers and supplications b after /b finishing b his /b i Amida /i b prayer, even /b if his personal requests b are as /b long as b the order /b of the confession of b Yom Kippur, he may recite /b them., strong MISHNA: /strong b And these are the festivals of gentiles: Kalenda, Saturnalia, and Kratesis, and the day of the festival of their kings, and the birthday /b of the king, b and /b the anniversary of b the day of the death /b of the king. This is b the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: Every death that includes /b public b burning /b is a festival that b includes idol worship, and /b any death b that does not include /b public b burning /b is b not /b a festival that b includes idol worship. But /b in the case of b the day of shaving his, /b i.e., a gentile’s, b beard and his locks, and the day of /b his b ascent from the sea, and the day that he left prison, and /b also in the case of b a gentile who prepared /b a wedding b feast for his son /b and celebrates on that day, engaging in business b is prohibited only /b on b that day and /b with b that man. /b , strong GEMARA: /strong b Rav Ḥa bar Rava says: /b When are these festivals celebrated? b Kalenda /b is celebrated during the b eight days after /b the winter b solstice, /b and b Saturnalia /b is celebrated during the b eight days before /b the winter b solstice. And your mnemonic /b to remember which festival is that the one that occurs after the solstice is mentioned first in the mishna, and the festival that takes place before the solstice is mentioned after, as in the verse: b “You have hemmed me in behind and before, /b and laid Your Hand upon me” (Psalms 139:5), where the word “before” appears after the term “behind.”,With regard to the dates of these festivals, b the Sages taught: When Adam the first /b man b saw /b that b the day was progressively diminishing, /b as the days become shorter from the autumnal equinox until the winter solstice, he did not yet know that this is a normal phenomenon, and therefore he b said: Woe /b is b me; perhaps because I sinned the world is becoming dark around me and /b will ultimately b return to /b the primordial state of b chaos and disorder. And this is the death that was sentenced upon me from Heaven, /b as it is written: “And to dust shall you return” (Genesis 3:19). b He arose and spent eight days in fasting and in prayer. /b , b Once he saw /b that the b season of Tevet, /b i.e., the winter solstice, had arrived, b and saw /b that b the day was progressively lengthening /b after the solstice, he b said: /b Clearly, the days become shorter and then longer, and this b is the order of the world. He went and observed a festival /b for b eight days. Upon the next year, he observed /b both b these /b eight days on which he had fasted on the previous year, b and these /b eight days of his celebration, as b days of festivities. He, /b Adam, b established /b these festivals b for the sake of Heaven, but they, /b the gentiles of later generations, b established them for the sake of idol worship. /b ,The Gemara raises a difficulty: b Granted, according to the one who says /b that b the world was created in /b the month of b Tishrei, /b one can understand why Adam believed that the days were becoming shorter as part of his punishment, as b he saw the short days /b of the winter and b had not yet seen the long days /b of summer. b But according to the one who says /b that b the world was created in /b the month of b Nisan, he had /b already b seen /b the difference between b the short days and the long days, /b as the days in the month of Nisan become progressively longer with the passage of time. The Gemara answers: Although Adam had experienced short days, b he had not seen days that were this short, /b as in the days before the winter solstice., b The Sages taught: /b On b the day that Adam the first /b man b was created, when the sun set upon him he said: Woe /b is b me, as because I sinned, the world is becoming dark around me, and the world will return to /b the primordial state of b chaos and disorder. And this is the death that was sentenced upon me from Heaven. He spent all night fasting and crying, and Eve was crying opposite him. Once dawn broke, he said: /b Evidently, the sun sets and night arrives, and b this is the order of the world. He arose and sacrificed a bull whose horns preceded its hoofs /b in the order that they were created, b as it is stated: “And it shall please the Lord better than a bullock that has horns and hoofs” /b (Psalms 69:32). This verse is referring to the one particular bull whose horns preceded its hoofs., b And Rav Yehuda says /b that b Shmuel says: /b The b bull that Adam the first /b man b sacrificed had one horn in its forehead, as it is stated: “And it shall please the Lord better than a bullock that has horns [ i makrin /i ] and hooves.” /b The Gemara raises a difficulty: Isn’t b i makrin /i /b plural, which b indicates two /b horns? b Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak says: i Mikkeren /i is written, /b i.e., the letter i yod /i is missing from the word, indicating that there was only one horn.,§ b Rav Mattana says: /b Since b Rome established /b the festival of b Kalenda /b on a specific date, b and all of the nearby towns are ruled by /b Rome, i.e., they pay their tax to Rome and provide its needs but do not themselves celebrate the festival, is it b prohibited or permitted /b to engage in business transactions with the gentile residents of b those towns? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: It is prohibited /b to engage in business during the time of the b Kalenda with everyone. Rabbi Yoḥa says: It is prohibited /b to engage in business b only with its worshippers, /b whereas it is permitted to engage in business transactions with gentiles who do not celebrate the festival.,The Sage b taught /b in a i baraita /i b in accordance with /b the opinion b of Rabbi Yoḥa: Although they said /b that b Rome /b has b established /b the festival of b Kalenda and all of the nearby towns are ruled by /b Rome, b it is prohibited /b to engage in business b only with its worshippers. /b ,The i baraita /i continues: With regard to the festivals b Saturnalia and Kratesis, and the day of the festival of their kings, and /b the b day on which /b the b king was crowned, /b the i halakha /i is that b before /b the festival it is b prohibited /b to engage in business transactions, whereas b after /b the festival it is b permitted. But /b in the case of b a gentile who prepared a feast for his son /b and celebrates on that day, engaging in business b is prohibited only /b on b that day /b itself b and /b with b that man. /b , b Rav Ashi said: We learn /b in the mishna b as well /b in accordance with Rabbi Yoḥa’s statement that the prohibition applies only to gentiles who celebrate the festival, not to people who are ruled by them. b As /b the mishna b teaches: /b With regard to b the day of shaving his beard and his locks, and the day of his ascent from the sea, and the day that he left prison, /b engaging in business b is prohibited only /b on b that day and /b with b that man. /b ,Rav Ashi explains the proof: b Granted, /b the mishna specifies that the prohibition is limited to b that day /b alone, in order b to exclude /b the days b before and after it. But /b when it states that the prohibition applies only to b that man, what does /b the mishna b exclude? /b Obviously the prohibition does not extend to all gentiles, as it is a personal festival. b Doesn’t /b the mishna’s ruling serve b to exclude those who are ruled by him? /b Therefore, b conclude from /b the language of the mishna that a prohibition extends only to gentiles who celebrate the festival, not to those who are ruled by them., b It is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Yishmael says: Jews who are outside of Eretz /b Yisrael b are /b considered to b engage in idol worship in purity, /b i.e., unwittingly. b How /b does this occur? In the case of b a gentile who prepared a feast for /b the marriage of b his son, and invited all of the Jews in his town, even though they eat of their own /b kosher food b and drink of their own /b kosher beverages, b and their own attendant stands before them, the verse ascribes /b guilt b to them as though they ate of /b the b offerings to the dead, /b i.e., idols, b as it is stated: /b “And sacrifice to their gods, b and they call you, and you eat of their sacrifice” /b (Exodus 34:15). Since Jews participate in a feast in which the gentile sacrifices offerings to his idol, it is as though they partook of the offering themselves.,The Gemara asks: b But /b why not b say /b that the verse is criticizing the Jews only b once they eat /b from the sacrifice? b Rava said: If /b that b is /b what is meant, b let the verse say /b only: b And you eat of their sacrifice. What /b is meant by the additional phrase: b “And they call you”? /b This indicates that the prohibition occurs b from the time of the call. Therefore, /b |
|
| 59. Anon., Kallah, 1.10 Tagged with subjects: •samuel (sage) Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 106 |
| 60. Anon., Tanhuma, None Tagged with subjects: •samuel (babylonian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 564 |
| 61. Otzar Hagaonim, Ketubbot, 346 Tagged with subjects: •samuel (sage), father of Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 142 |
| 62. Anon., Sifre Zuta Numbers, 11.6 Tagged with subjects: •samuel saba (sage) Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 113 |
| 63. Anon., Pesiqta De Rav Kahana, 23.1 Tagged with subjects: •samuel (babylonian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 564 |
| 64. Anon., Lexicon Artis Grammaticae (E Cod. Coislin. 345), 5.1, 29.1, 34.14 Tagged with subjects: •samuel (babylonian sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 369, 495, 564 |
| 65. Eusebius, Greek Questions, 7 Tagged with subjects: •samuel saba (sage) Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 113 |
| 66. Anon., Halakhot Gedolot, 2.30-2.31 Tagged with subjects: •samuel (sage), father of Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 142 |
| 67. Otzar Hagaonim, Yebamot, 7.379 Tagged with subjects: •samuel (sage) Found in books: Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 106 |
| 68. Anon., Midrash On Samuel, 7.5, 10.4 Tagged with subjects: •r. samuel (palestinian sage) •samuel saba (sage) Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 392; Monnickendam (2020), Jewish Law and Early Christian Identity: Betrothal, Marriage, and Infidelity in the Writings of Ephrem the Syrian, 113 |
