1. Hebrew Bible, Exodus, 22.5, 23.2 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sanhedrin (jewish court) Found in books: Kanarek (2014) 16, 147| 22.5. "כִּי־תֵצֵא אֵשׁ וּמָצְאָה קֹצִים וְנֶאֱכַל גָּדִישׁ אוֹ הַקָּמָה אוֹ הַשָּׂדֶה שַׁלֵּם יְשַׁלֵּם הַמַּבְעִר אֶת־הַבְּעֵרָה׃", 23.2. "הִנֵּה אָנֹכִי שֹׁלֵחַ מַלְאָךְ לְפָנֶיךָ לִשְׁמָרְךָ בַּדָּרֶךְ וְלַהֲבִיאֲךָ אֶל־הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר הֲכִנֹתִי׃", 23.2. "לֹא־תִהְיֶה אַחֲרֵי־רַבִּים לְרָעֹת וְלֹא־תַעֲנֶה עַל־רִב לִנְטֹת אַחֲרֵי רַבִּים לְהַטֹּת׃", | 22.5. "If fire break out, and catch in thorns, so that the shocks of corn, or the standing corn, or the field are consumed; he that kindled the fire shall surely make restitution.", 23.2. "Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil; neither shalt thou bear witness in a cause to turn aside after a multitude to pervert justice;", |
|
2. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 42.5 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sanhedrin (jewish court) Found in books: Kanarek (2014) 149, 150, 164| 42.5. "וַיָּבֹאוּ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לִשְׁבֹּר בְּתוֹךְ הַבָּאִים כִּי־הָיָה הָרָעָב בְּאֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן׃", | 42.5. "And the sons of Israel came to buy among those that came; for the famine was in the land of Caa.", |
|
3. Hebrew Bible, Leviticus, 22.32 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sanhedrin (jewish court) Found in books: Kanarek (2014) 164, 165| 22.32. "וְלֹא תְחַלְּלוּ אֶת־שֵׁם קָדְשִׁי וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲנִי יְהוָה מְקַדִּשְׁכֶם׃", | 22.32. "And ye shall not profane My holy name; but I will be hallowed among the children of Israel: I am the LORD who hallow you,", |
|
4. Hebrew Bible, Numbers, 11.16, 14.27, 16.21, 35.24-35.25 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sanhedrin (jewish court) Found in books: Kanarek (2014) 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 164, 165| 11.16. "וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל־מֹשֶׁה אֶסְפָה־לִּי שִׁבְעִים אִישׁ מִזִּקְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר יָדַעְתָּ כִּי־הֵם זִקְנֵי הָעָם וְשֹׁטְרָיו וְלָקַחְתָּ אֹתָם אֶל־אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וְהִתְיַצְּבוּ שָׁם עִמָּךְ׃", 14.27. "עַד־מָתַי לָעֵדָה הָרָעָה הַזֹּאת אֲשֶׁר הֵמָּה מַלִּינִים עָלָי אֶת־תְּלֻנּוֹת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר הֵמָּה מַלִּינִים עָלַי שָׁמָעְתִּי׃", 16.21. "הִבָּדְלוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה הַזֹּאת וַאַכַלֶּה אֹתָם כְּרָגַע׃", 35.24. "וְשָׁפְטוּ הָעֵדָה בֵּין הַמַּכֶּה וּבֵין גֹּאֵל הַדָּם עַל הַמִּשְׁפָּטִים הָאֵלֶּה׃", 35.25. "וְהִצִּילוּ הָעֵדָה אֶת־הָרֹצֵחַ מִיַּד גֹּאֵל הַדָּם וְהֵשִׁיבוּ אֹתוֹ הָעֵדָה אֶל־עִיר מִקְלָטוֹ אֲשֶׁר־נָס שָׁמָּה וְיָשַׁב בָּהּ עַד־מוֹת הַכֹּהֵן הַגָּדֹל אֲשֶׁר־מָשַׁח אֹתוֹ בְּשֶׁמֶן הַקֹּדֶשׁ׃", | 11.16. "And the LORD said unto Moses: ‘Gather unto Me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people, and officers over them; and bring them unto the tent of meeting, that they may stand there with thee.", 14.27. "’How long shall I bear with this evil congregation, that keep murmuring against Me? I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel, which they keep murmuring against Me.", 16.21. "’Separate yourselves from among this congregation, that I may consume them in a moment.’", 35.24. "then the congregation shall judge between the smiter and the avenger of blood according to these ordices;", 35.25. "and the congregation shall deliver the manslayer out of the hand of the avenger of blood, and the congregation shall restore him to his city of refuge, whither he was fled; and he shall dwell therein until the death of the high priest, who was anointed with the holy oil.", |
|
5. Hebrew Bible, Psalms, 68.27 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sanhedrin (jewish court) Found in books: Kanarek (2014) 150| 68.27. "בְּמַקְהֵלוֹת בָּרְכוּ אֱלֹהִים יְהוָה מִמְּקוֹר יִשְׂרָאֵל׃", | 68.27. "'Bless ye God in full assemblies, Even the Lord, ye that are from the fountain of Israel.'", |
|
6. Hebrew Bible, Lamentations, 4.11 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sanhedrin (jewish court) Found in books: Kanarek (2014) 16| 4.11. "כִּלָּה יְהוָה אֶת־חֲמָתוֹ שָׁפַךְ חֲרוֹן אַפּוֹ וַיַּצֶּת־אֵשׁ בְּצִיּוֹן וַתֹּאכַל יְסוֹדֹתֶיהָ׃", | 4.11. "The LORD hath accomplished His fury, He hath poured out His fierce anger; And He hath kindled a fire in Zion, Which hath devoured the foundations thereof.", |
|
7. Hebrew Bible, Zechariah, 2.9 (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sanhedrin (jewish court) Found in books: Kanarek (2014) 16| 2.9. "וַאֲנִי אֶהְיֶה־לָּהּ נְאֻם־יְהוָה חוֹמַת אֵשׁ סָבִיב וּלְכָבוֹד אֶהְיֶה בְתוֹכָהּ׃", | 2.9. "For I, saith the LORD, will be unto her a wall of fire round about, and I will be the glory in the midst of her.", |
|
8. Mishnah, Sanhedrin, 1.4, 1.6-1.7 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sanhedrin (jewish court) Found in books: Kanarek (2014) 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 164, 165| 1.4. "דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת, בְּעֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה. הָרוֹבֵעַ וְהַנִּרְבָּע, בְּעֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה, שֶׁנֶאֱמַר (ויקרא כ) וְהָרַגְתָּ אֶת הָאִשָּׁה וְאֶת הַבְּהֵמָה, וְאוֹמֵר (שם) וְאֶת הַבְּהֵמָה תַּהֲרֹגוּ. שׁוֹר הַנִּסְקָל, בְּעֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כא) הַשּׁוֹר יִסָּקֵל וְגַם בְּעָלָיו יוּמָת, כְּמִיתַת בְּעָלִים כָּךְ מִיתַת הַשּׁוֹר. הַזְּאֵב וְהָאֲרִי, הַדֹּב וְהַנָּמֵר וְהַבַּרְדְּלָס וְהַנָּחָשׁ, מִיתָתָן בְּעֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, כָּל הַקּוֹדֵם לְהָרְגָן, זָכָה. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, מִיתָתָן בְּעֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה: \n", 1.6. "סַנְהֶדְרִי גְדוֹלָה הָיְתָה שֶׁל שִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד, וּקְטַנָּה שֶׁל עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה. וּמִנַּיִן לַגְּדוֹלָה שֶׁהִיא שֶׁל שִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר יא) אֶסְפָה לִּי שִׁבְעִים אִישׁ מִזִּקְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, וּמֹשֶׁה עַל גַּבֵּיהֶן, הֲרֵי שִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, שִׁבְעִים. וּמִנַּיִן לַקְּטַנָּה שֶׁהִיא שֶׁל עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם לה) וְשָׁפְטוּ הָעֵדָה וְגוֹ' וְהִצִּילוּ הָעֵדָה, עֵדָה שׁוֹפֶטֶת וְעֵדָה מַצֶּלֶת, הֲרֵי כָאן עֶשְׂרִים. וּמִנַּיִן לָעֵדָה שֶׁהִיא עֲשָׂרָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם יד) עַד מָתַי לָעֵדָה הָרָעָה הַזֹּאת, יָצְאוּ יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וְכָלֵב. וּמִנַּיִן לְהָבִיא עוֹד שְׁלֹשָׁה, מִמַּשְׁמַע שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כג) לֹא תִהְיֶה אַחֲרֵי רַבִּים לְרָעֹת, שׁוֹמֵעַ אֲנִי שֶׁאֶהְיֶה עִמָּהֶם לְטוֹבָה, אִם כֵּן לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר (שם) אַחֲרֵי רַבִּים לְהַטֹּת, לֹא כְהַטָּיָתְךָ לְטוֹבָה הַטָּיָתְךָ לְרָעָה. הַטָּיָתְךָ לְטוֹבָה עַל פִּי אֶחָד, הַטָּיָתְךָ לְרָעָה עַל פִּי שְׁנַיִם, וְאֵין בֵּית דִּין שָׁקוּל, מוֹסִיפִין עֲלֵיהֶם עוֹד אֶחָד, הֲרֵי כָאן עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה. וְכַמָּה יְהֵא בְעִיר וּתְהֵא רְאוּיָה לְסַנְהֶדְרִין, מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים. רַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה אוֹמֵר, מָאתַיִם וּשְׁלשִׁים, כְּנֶגֶד שָׂרֵי עֲשָׂרוֹת: \n", | 1.4. "Cases concerning offenses punishable by death [are decided] by twenty three. A beast that has sexual relations with a woman or with a man is [judged] by twenty three, as it says, “You shall execute the woman and the beast” (Lev. 20:16) and it says, “You shall execute the beast”. The ox that is stoned [is judged] by twenty three., as it says, “The ox shall be stoned and also its owner shall be put to death” (Exodus 21:29), as is the death of the owner, so too is the death of the ox. The wolf, the lion, the bear, the leopard, the panther, or serpent [that have killed a human being] their death is [adjudicated] by twenty three. Rabbi Eliezer says: “Anyone who kills them before they come to court merits.” But Rabbi Akiva says: “Their death must be [adjudicated] by twenty three.", 1.6. "The greater Sanhedrin was made up of seventy one and the little Sanhedrin of twenty three.From where do we learn that the greater Sanhedrin should be made up of seventy one? As it says, “Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel” (Num. 11:16), and when Moses is added to them there is seventy one. Rabbi Judah says: “Seventy.” From where do we learn that the little Sanhedrin should be made up of twenty three? As it says, “The assembly shall judge”, “The assembly shall deliver” (Num. 35:24-25), an assembly that judges and an assembly that delivers, thus we have twenty. And from where do we know that an assembly has ten? As it says, “How long shall I bear this evil congregation?” (Num. 14:27) [which refers to the twelve spies] but Joshua and Caleb were not included. And from where do we learn that we should bring three others [to the twenty]? By inference from what it says, “You shall not follow after the many to do evil” (Ex. 23:2), I conclude that I must be with them to do well. Then why does it say, “[To follow] after the many to change judgment” (Ex. 23:2). [It means that] your verdict of condemnation should not be like your verdict of acquittal, for your verdict of acquittal is reached by the decision of a majority of one, but your verdict of condemnation must be reached by the decision of a majority of two. The court must not be divisible equally, therefore they add to them one more; thus they are twenty three. And how many should there be in a city that it may be fit to have a Sanhedrin? A hundred and twenty. Rabbi Nehemiah says: “Two hundred and thirty, so that [the Sanhedrin of twenty three] should correspond with them that are chiefs of [at least] groups of ten.", |
|
9. Anon., Genesis Rabba, 91.3 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sanhedrin (jewish court) Found in books: Kanarek (2014) 140| 91.3. וַיָּבֹאוּ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לִשְׁבֹּר וגו' (בראשית מב, ה), וּמִנַּיִן לְעֵדָה שֶׁהִיא עֲשָׂרָה, רַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר כַּהֲנָא וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, נֶאֱמַר כָּאן (במדבר לה, כד): עֵדָה, וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן (במדבר יד, כז): עַד מָתַי לָעֵדָה הָרָעָה, מָה עֵדָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר לְהַלָּן עֲשָׂרָה, אַף עֵדָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר כָּאן עֲשָׂרָה. אָמַר רַבִּי סִימוֹן, נֶאֱמַר כָּאן (ויקרא כב, לב): תּוֹךְ, וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן (בראשית מב, ה): תּוֹךְ, מַה תּוֹךְ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר לְהַלָּן עֲשָׂרָה, אַף תּוֹךְ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר הָכָא עֲשָׂרָה. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר אָבוֹן אִם בְּתוֹךְ אֲפִלּוּ עַד כַּמָּה, אֶלָּא נֶאֱמַר כָּאן בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְנֶאֱמַר לְהַלָּן בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, מַה בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר לְהַלָּן עֲשָׂרָה אַף בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר כָּאן עֲשָׂרָה. רַבִּי סִימוֹן בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי אָמַר, תִּינוֹק עוֹשִׂין אוֹתוֹ סְנִיף לַעֲשָׂרָה, וְהָא תָּנֵי אֵין מְדַקְדְּקִין בְּקָטָן, אָמַר רַבִּי סִימוֹן בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי לִשְׁנֵי קְטַנִּים נִצְרְכָה, אֶחָד סָפֵק וְאֶחָד קָטָן עוֹשִׂין אֶת הַסָּפֵק עִקָּר וְאֶת הַקָּטָן לִסְנִיף. תָּנֵי קָטָן וְסֵפֶר תּוֹרָה, עוֹשִׂין אוֹתוֹ סְנִיף. אָמַר רַבִּי יוּדָן כֵּן הוּא מַתְנִיתִין, קָטָן לְסֵפֶר תּוֹרָה עוֹשִׂין אוֹתוֹ סְנִיף. מֵאֵימָתַי עוֹשִׂין אוֹתוֹ סְנִיף, רַבִּי אֲבוּנָא אָמַר אִתְפַּלְגוּן בְּהָא רַבִּי יוּדָן וְרַב הוּנָא תַּרְוֵיהוֹן בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל, חַד אֲמַר כְּדֵי שֶׁיְהֵא יוֹדֵעַ טִיב בְּרָכָה. וְאוֹחֲרָנָא אֲמַר כְּדֵי שֶׁיְהֵא יוֹדֵעַ לְמִי הוּא מְבָרֵךְ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בַּר פָּזִי בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי אַסֵּי תִּשְׁעָה נִרְאִים כַּעֲשָׂרָה מְזַמְּנִין, מַאי עָבֵיד מְסֻיָּמִין, אֶלָּא אֲפִלּוּ קָטָן בֵּינֵיהֶם. רַבִּי בֶּרֶכְיָה בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר זַבְדִי בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רַבִּי יוֹסֵף, כְּשֵׁם שֶׁעוֹשִׂין אוֹתוֹ סְנִיף לַעֲשָׂרָה כָּךְ עוֹשִׂין אוֹתוֹ סְנִיף לִשְׁלשָׁה. אֲמַר לֵיהּ הֲדָא הִיא וְלֹא כָּל שֶׁכֵּן לְהַלָּן שֶׁהוּא מַזְכִּיר אֶת הַשֵּׁם עוֹשִׂין אוֹתוֹ סְנִיף, כָּאן שֶׁאֵינוֹ מַזְכִּיר אֶת הַשֵּׁם אֵין עוֹשִׂין אוֹתוֹ סְנִיף. אֲמַר לֵיהּ הֲדָא אָמְרָה עוֹשִׂין אוֹתוֹ סְנִיף בְּבִרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן אֲבָל לִקְרִיאַת שְׁמַע וְלִתְפִלָּה אֵין עוֹשִׂין אוֹתוֹ סְנִיף עַד שֶׁיָּבִיא שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת: אֲמַר רַבִּי אַסֵּי זִמְנִין סַגִּיאִין אֲכָלִית עִם רַבִּי תַּחְלִיפָא וְזִמְנִין סַגִּיאִין אֲכָלִית עִם רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בַּר סִיסִי חֲבִיבִי וְלָא זָמְנִין עָלַי עַד שֶׁהֵבֵאתִי שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת. וּמֵאֵימָתַי הוּא קוֹרֵא בַּתּוֹרָה, אֲמַר רַבִּי אֲבִינָא אִתְפַּלְגוּן רַב הוּנָא וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה תַּרְוֵיהוֹן בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל, חַד אָמַר מִשֶּׁהוּא יוֹדֵעַ לְבָרֵךְ, וְאוֹחֲרָנָא אָמַר עַד שֶׁיּוֹדֵעַ טִיב בְּרָכָה שֶׁיּוֹדֵעַ לְמִי מְבָרְכִין. רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר שִׁילַת בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רַב, וְאִית דְּאָמְרִין בְּעוֹן קַמֵּיהּ שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר שִׁילַת, תִּשְׁעָה פַּת וְאֶחָד יָרָק מַהוּ, אֲמַר לְהוֹן, מְזַמְּנִין. שְׁמוֹנָה פַּת וּשְׁנַיִם יָרָק, מְזַמְּנִין. שִׁבְעָה וְשִׁשָּׁה פַּת וְאַרְבָּעָה יָרָק מַהוּ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ מְזַמְּנִין. רַבִּי אֲבִינָא בְּעָא וּמֶחֱצָה עַל מֶחֱצָה מַהוּ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי זְעֵירָא עַד דַּאֲנָא תַּמָּן אִצְטְרָכִית לְמִשְׁאֲלֵיהּ וּמֵיצְרָי לִי מִינָהּ דְּלָא שְׁאִלְתִּיו. רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה בָּעֵי אוֹתוֹ שֶׁאָכַל יָרָק מַהוּ מְזַמְּנָא עֲלוֹהִי. תָּנֵי שְׁלשׁ מֵאוֹת נְזִירִין סָלְקִין בָּעֲיִין לִמְקָרְבָה תְּשַׁע מְאָה קוּרְבָּנִין בְּיוֹמֵי דְּשִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטַח, לִמְאָה וְחַמְשִׁין מָצָא לָהֶם פֶּתַח וּמְאָה וְחַמְשִׁין לָא מָצָא פֶּתַח. סָלֵיק רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטַח גַּבֵּי יַנַּאי מַלְכָּא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ תְּלַת מְאָה נְזִירִין סָלְקוּ בָּעֲיִין לִמְקָרְבָה תְּשַׁע מְאָה קוּרְבָּנִין וְלֵית לְהוֹן, אֶלָּא יְהֵיב אַתְּ פַּלְגָּא מִן דִּידָךְ וַאֲנָא פַּלְגָא מִן דִּידִי וְיֵזְלוּן וִיקָרְבוּן, יְהַב יַנַּאי מַלְכָּא פַּלְגָא מִן דִּילֵיהּ וַאֲזַלּוּן וְקָרְבוּן. אֲתוֹן וַאֲמָרִין לִשְׁנָא בִּישָׁא לְיַנַּאי מַלְכָּא עַל שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטַח, תֶּהֱוֵי יְדַע דְּכָל מַה דְּקָרְבוּן מִדִּידָךְ קָרְבוּן, בְּרַם שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטַח לָא יָהֵיב מִן דִּידֵיהּ כְּלוּם. כָּעַס יַנַּאי מַלְכָּא עַל שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטַח. שְׁמַע דְּהוּא כָּעֵס עֲלוֹהִי, צְרַת [נסח אחר צרח] לֵיהּ וַעֲרַק, לְבָתַר יוֹמֵי הֲווֹן בְּנֵי אֱנָשָׁא רַבְרְבִין מִן מַלְכוּתָא דְּפַרְסָאֵי יַתְבִין נָגְסִין עַל פָּתוֹרָא דְּיַנַּאי מַלְכָּא, אֲמַרוּן לֵיהּ מָרִי מַלְכָּא נָהֲרִין אֲנַן דַּהֲוָה הָכָא חַד סַב וַהֲוָה אֲמַר לָן מִילֵי דְאוֹרָיְיתָא, אֲמַר לַאֲחָתֵיהּ שְׁלַחִי בַּתְרֵיהּ וְאַיְיתִיתֵיהּ. אֲמַרָה לֵיהּ הַב לִי מִלָּא וּשְׁלַח לֵיהּ עִזְקָתָךְ, וְהוּא אָתֵי. יְהַב לָהּ מִלָּא וּשְׁלַח לֵיהּ עִזְקָתֵיהּ וַאֲתָא. מִדַּאֲתָא יְתֵיב לֵיהּ בֵּין מַלְכָּא לְמַלְכְּתָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ, לְמָה עֲרַקְתְּ, שְׁמָעִית דְּמָרִי מַלְכָּא כָּעֵיס עֲלַי וּצְרַח לִי מִינָךְ דְּלָא תִקְטְלַנִּי וְקַיְימַת הָדֵין קְרָיָא (ישעיה כו, כ): חֲבִי כִּמְעַט רֶגַע עַד יַעֲבָר זָעַם, אֲמַר לֵיהּ לְמָה אַפְלֵית בִּי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ חַס וְשָׁלוֹם לָא אַפְלֵית בָּךְ, אֶלָּא אַתְּ מִמָּמוֹנָךְ וַאֲנָא מִן אוֹרָיְיתָא, דִּכְתִיב (קהלת ז, יב): כִּי בְּצֵל הַחָכְמָה בְּצֵל הַכָּסֶף. אָמַר לוֹ וּלְמָה לָא אֲמַרְתְּ לִי, אֲמַר לֵיהּ אִי אֲמַרִית לָךְ לָא הֲוָה יַהֲבִית. אֲמַר לֵיהּ לְמָה יְתַבְתְּ לָךְ בֵּין מַלְכָּא לְמַלְכְּתָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ בְּסֵפֶר בֶּן סִירָא כָּתוּב: סַלְסְלֶהָ וּתְרוֹמְמֶךּ וּבֵין נְגִידִים תּוֹשִׁיבֶךָּ. אֲמַר מְזוֹג לֵיהּ יְבָרֵךְ. אֲמַר בָּרוּךְ עַל הַמָּזוֹן שֶׁאָכַל יַנַּאי וַחֲבֵרָיו. אֲמַר עַד כַּדּוּן אַתְּ בְּקַשְׁיוּתָךְ, לָא שְׁמָעִית מִן יוֹמוֹי יַנַּאי בְּבִרְכְתָא. אֲמַר וּמָה אִית לִי לְמֵימַר, נְבָרֵךְ עַל שֶׁאָכַלְנוּ, וַאֲנִי לֹא אָכַלְתִּי. אֲמַר אַיְיתוֹן לֵיהּ וְיֵיכוּל. מִן דַּאֲכֵיל אֲמַר בָּרוּךְ שֶׁאָכַלְנוּ. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן חֲלוּקִין עָלָיו עַל שְׁמוּעַת שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן שָׁטַח, רַבִּי אַבָּא אָמַר עַל הָרִאשׁוֹנָה, רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה אָמַר עַל הַשְּׁנִיָּה. מִחְלְפָא שִׁיטָתֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יִרְמְיָה, תַּמָּן צְרִיכָה לֵיהּ, וְהָכָא פְּשִׁיטָא לֵיהּ. מַאן דִּצְרִיכָה לֵיהּ כְּרַבָּנָן, וּמַאן דִּפְשִׁיטָא לֵיהּ כְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, דְּתָנֵי עֲלָהּ וְהֵסֵב עִמָּהֶן וְטִיבֵּל עִמָּהֶן אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹא אָכַל כַּזַּיִת דָּגָן מְזַמְּנִין עָלָיו, דִּבְרֵי חֲכָמִים. רַבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אַחָא בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר לְעוֹלָם אֵין מְזַמְּנִין עָלָיו עַד שֶׁאוֹכֵל כַּזַּיִת דָּגָן, וְהָא תָּנֵי שְׁנַיִם פַּת וְאֶחָד יָרָק מְזַמְּנִין. מַתְנִיתִין כְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. | |
|
10. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Qamma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sanhedrin (jewish court) Found in books: Kanarek (2014) 16| 60b. לעולם יכנס אדם בכי טוב ויצא בכי טוב שנאמר (שמות יב, כב) ואתם לא תצאו איש מפתח ביתו עד בקר,ת"ר דבר בעיר כנס רגליך שנאמר ואתם לא תצאו איש מפתח ביתו עד בקר ואומר (ישעיהו כו, כ) לך עמי בא בחדריך וסגור דלתיך בעדך ואומר (דברים לב, כה) מחוץ תשכל חרב ומחדרים אימה,מאי ואומר וכי תימא ה"מ בליליא אבל ביממא לא תא שמע לך עמי בא בחדריך וסגור דלתיך,וכי תימא ה"מ [היכא] דליכא אימה מגואי אבל היכא דאיכא אימה מגואי כי נפיק יתיב ביני אינשי בצוותא בעלמא טפי מעלי ת"ש מחוץ תשכל חרב ומחדרים אימה אע"ג דמחדרים אימה מחוץ תשכל חרב,רבא בעידן רתחא הוי סכר כוי דכתי' (ירמיהו ט, כ) כי עלה מות בחלונינו,ת"ר רעב בעיר פזר רגליך שנא' (בראשית יב, י) ויהי רעב בארץ וירד אברם מצרימה [לגור] (ויגר) שם ואומר (מלכים ב ז, ד) אם אמרנו נבא העיר והרעב בעיר ומתנו שם,מאי ואומר וכי תימא ה"מ היכא דליכא ספק נפשות אבל היכא דאיכא ספק נפשות לא ת"ש (מלכים ב ז, ד) לכו ונפלה אל מחנה ארם אם יחיונו נחיה,ת"ר דבר בעיר אל יהלך אדם באמצע הדרך מפני שמלאך המות מהלך באמצע הדרכים דכיון דיהיבא ליה רשותא מסגי להדיא שלום בעיר אל יהלך בצדי דרכים דכיון דלית ליה רשותא מחבי חבויי ומסגי,ת"ר דבר בעיר אל יכנס אדם יחיד לבית הכנסת שמלאך המות מפקיד שם כליו וה"מ היכא דלא קרו ביה דרדקי ולא מצלו ביה עשרה,ת"ר כלבים בוכים מלאך המות בא לעיר כלבים משחקים אליהו הנביא בא לעיר וה"מ דלית בהו נקבה:,יתיב רב אמי ורב אסי קמיה דר' יצחק נפחא מר א"ל לימא מר שמעתתא ומר א"ל לימא מר אגדתא פתח למימר אגדתא ולא שביק מר פתח למימר שמעתתא ולא שביק מר,אמר להם אמשול לכם משל למה הדבר דומה לאדם שיש לו שתי נשים אחת ילדה ואחת זקינה ילדה מלקטת לו לבנות זקינה מלקטת לו שחורות נמצא קרח מכאן ומכאן,אמר להן אי הכי אימא לכו מלתא דשויא לתרוייכו (שמות כב, ה) כי תצא אש ומצאה קוצים תצא מעצמה שלם ישלם המבעיר את הבערה אמר הקב"ה עלי לשלם את הבערה שהבערתי,אני הציתי אש בציון שנאמר (איכה ד, יא) ויצת אש בציון ותאכל יסודותיה ואני עתיד לבנותה באש שנאמר (זכריה ב, ט) ואני אהיה לה חומת אש סביב ולכבוד אהיה בתוכה,שמעתתא פתח הכתוב בנזקי ממונו וסיים בנזקי גופו לומר לך אשו משום חציו:,(שמואל ב כג, טו) ויתאוה דוד ויאמר מי ישקני מים מבור בית לחם אשר בשער ויבקעו שלשת הגבורים במחנה פלשתים וישאבו מים מבור בית לחם אשר בשער [וגו'],מאי קא מיבעיא ליה אמר רבא אמר ר"נ טמון באש קמיבעיא ליה אי כר' יהודה אי כרבנן ופשטו ליה מאי דפשטו ליה,רב הונא אמר גדישים דשעורים דישראל הוו דהוו מטמרי פלשתים בהו וקא מיבעיא ליה מהו להציל עצמו בממון חבירו,שלחו ליה אסור להציל עצמו בממון חבירו אבל אתה מלך אתה [ומלך] פורץ לעשות לו דרך ואין מוחין בידו,ורבנן ואיתימא רבה בר מרי אמרו גדישים דשעורין דישראל הוו וגדישין דעדשים דפלשתים וקא מיבעיא להו מהו ליטול גדישין של שעורין דישראל ליתן לפני בהמתו על מנת לשלם גדישין של עדשים דפלשתים,שלחו ליה (יחזקאל לג, טו) חבול ישיב רשע גזילה ישלם אע"פ שגזילה משלם רשע הוא אבל אתה מלך אתה ומלך פורץ לעשות לו דרך ואין מוחין בידו,בשלמא למאן דאמר לאחלופי היינו דכתיב חד קרא (שמואל ב כג, יא) ותהי שם חלקת השדה מלאה עדשים וכתיב חד קרא (דברי הימים א יא, יג) ותהי חלקת השדה מלאה שעורים,אלא למאן דאמר למקלי מאי איבעיא להו להני תרי קראי אמר לך דהוו נמי גדישים דעדשים דישראל דהוו מיטמרו בהו פלשתים,בשלמא למאן דאמר למקלי היינו דכתיב (שמואל ב כג, יב) ויתיצב בתוך החלקה ויצילה אלא למ"ד לאחלופי מאי ויצילה,דלא שבק להו לאחלופי,בשלמא הני תרתי היינו דכתיב תרי קראי | 60b. b A person /b should b always enter /b an unfamiliar city b at /b a time of b good, /b i.e., while it is light, as the Torah uses the expression “It is good” with regard to the creation of light (see Genesis 1:4). This goodness is manifest in the sense of security one feels when it is light. b And /b likewise, when one leaves a city b he /b should b leave at /b a time of b good, /b meaning after sunrise the next morning, b as it is stated /b in the verse: b “And none of you shall go out of the opening of his house until the morning” /b (Exodus 12:22).,§ b The Sages taught: /b If there is b plague in the city, gather your feet, /b i.e., limit the time you spend out of the house, b as it is stated /b in the verse: b “And none of you shall go out of the opening of his house until the morning.” And it says /b in another verse: b “Come, my people, enter into your chambers, and shut your doors behind you; /b hide yourself for a little moment, until the anger has passed by” (Isaiah 26:20). b And it says: “Outside the sword will bereave, and in the chambers terror” /b (Deuteronomy 32:25).,The Gemara asks: b What /b is the reason for citing the additional verses introduced with the term: b And it says? /b The first verse seems sufficient to teach the principle that one should not emerge from one’s house when there is a plague. The Gemara answers: b And if you would say /b that b this matter, /b the first verse that states that none of you shall go out until morning, applies only b at night, but in the day /b one may think that the principle does b not /b apply, for this reason the Gemara teaches: b Come /b and b hear: “Come, my people, enter into your chambers, and shut your doors behind you.” /b , b And if you would say /b that b this matter /b applies only b where there is no fear inside, /b which explains why it is preferable to remain indoors, b but where there is fear inside, /b one might think that b when he goes out /b and b sits among people in general company /b it is b better, /b therefore, the Gemara introduces the third verse and says: b Come /b and b hear: “Outside the sword will bereave, and in the chambers terror.” /b This means that b although there is terror in the chambers, outside the sword will bereave, /b so it is safer to remain indoors., b At a time /b when there was a b plague, Rava would close the windows /b of his house, b as it is written: “For death is come up into our windows” /b (Jeremiah 9:20)., b The Sages taught: /b If there is b famine in the city, spread your feet, /b i.e., leave the city, b as it is stated /b in the verse: b “And there was a famine in the land; and Abram went down into Egypt to sojourn there” /b (Genesis 12:10). b And it says: “If we say: We will enter into the city, then the famine is in the city, and we shall die there; /b and if we sit here, we die also, now come, and let us fall unto the host of the Arameans; if they save us alive, we shall live; and if they kill us, we shall but die” (II Kings 7:4)., b What /b is the reason for citing the second verse, introduced with the term: b And it says? And if you would say /b that b this matter, /b the principle of leaving the city, applies only b where there is no uncertainty /b concerning b a life-threatening /b situation, b but where there is uncertainty /b concerning b a life-threatening /b situation this principle does b not /b apply, b come /b and b hear: “Come, and let us fall unto the host of the Arameans; if they save us alive, we shall live; /b and if they kill us, we shall but die.”, b The Sages taught: /b If there is b a plague in the city, a person should not walk in the middle of the road, due to /b the fact b that the Angel of Death walks in the middle of the road, as, since /b in Heaven b they have given him permission /b to kill within the city, b he goes openly /b in the middle of the road. By contrast, if there is b peace /b and quiet b in the city, do not walk on the sides of the road, as, since /b the Angel of Death b does not have permission /b to kill within the city, b he hides /b himself b and walks /b on the side of the road., b The Sages taught: /b If there is b a plague in the city, a person should not enter the synagogue alone, as the Angel of Death leaves his utensils there, /b and for this reason it is a dangerous place. b And this matter, /b the danger in the synagogue, applies only b when there are no children learning in /b the synagogue, b and /b there are b not ten /b men b praying in it. /b But if there are children learning or ten men praying there, it is not a dangerous place., b The Sages taught: /b If the b dogs /b in a certain place b are crying /b for no reason, it is a sign that they feel the b Angel of Death has come to the city. /b If the b dogs are playing, /b it is a sign that they feel that b Elijah the prophet has come to the city. These matters /b apply only b if there is no female /b dog among them. If there is a female dog nearby, their crying or playing is likely due to her presence.,§ b Rav Ami and Rav Asi sat before Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa. /b One b Sage said to /b Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa: b Let the Master say /b words of b i halakha /i , and /b the other b Sage said to /b Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa: b Let the Master say /b words of b i aggada /i . /b Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa b began to say /b words of b i aggada /i but /b one b Sage did not let him, /b so he b began to say /b words of b i halakha /i but /b the other b Sage did not let him. /b ,Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa b said to them: I will relate a parable. To what can this be compared? /b It can be compared b to a man who has two wives, one young and one old. The young /b wife b pulls out his white /b hairs, so that her husband will appear younger. b The old /b wife b pulls out his black /b hairs so that he will appear older. And it b turns out /b that he is b bald from here and from there, /b i.e., completely bald, due to the actions of both of his wives.,Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa continued and b said to them: If so, I will say to you a matter that is appropriate to both of you, /b which contains both i halakha /i and i aggada /i . In the verse that states: b “If a fire breaks out, and catches in thorns” /b (Exodus 22:5), the term b “breaks out” /b indicates that it breaks out b by itself. /b Yet, the continuation of the verse states: b “The one who kindled the fire shall pay compensation,” /b which indicates that he must pay only if the fire spread due to his negligence. The verse can be explained allegorically: b The Holy One, Blessed be He, said /b that although the fire broke out in the Temple due to the sins of the Jewish people, b it is incumbent upon Me to pay /b restitution b for the fire that I kindled. /b , b I, /b God, b kindled a fire in Zion, as it is stated: /b “The Lord has accomplished His fury, He has poured out His fierce anger; b and He has kindled a fire in Zion, which has devoured its foundations” /b (Lamentations 4:11). b And I will build it with fire /b in the b future, as it is stated: “For I, /b says the Lord, b will be for her a wall of fire round about; and I will be the glory in her midst” /b (Zechariah 2:9).,There is b a i halakha /i /b that can be learned from the verse in Exodus, as b the verse begins with damage /b caused through one’s b property: /b “If a fire breaks out,” b and concludes with damage /b caused by b one’s body: /b “The one who kindled the fire.” This indicates that when damage is caused by fire, it is considered as though the person who kindled the fire caused the damage directly with his body. That serves b to say to you /b that the liability for b his fire /b damage is b due to /b its similarity to b his arrows. /b Just as one who shoots an arrow and causes damage is liable because the damage was caused directly through his action, so too, one who kindles a fire that causes damage is liable because it is considered as though the damage were caused directly by his actions.,§ The Gemara continues with another statement of i aggada /i on a related topic: The verse states: b “And David longed, and said: Oh, that one would give me water to drink of the well of Bethlehem, which is by the gate! And the three mighty men broke through the host of the Philistines, and drew water out of the well of Bethlehem, that was by the gate, /b and took it, and brought it to David; but he would not drink it, but poured it out to the Lord” (II Samuel 23:15–16). The Sages understood that David was not simply asking for water, but was using the term as a metaphor referring to Torah, and he was raising a halakhic dilemma., b What is the dilemma /b that David b is raising? Rava says /b that b Rav Naḥman says: He was asking /b about the i halakha /i with regard to b a concealed /b article damaged by b a fire. /b He wanted to know whether the i halakha /i is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yehuda, /b who holds that one is liable to pay for such damage, or b whether /b the i halakha /i is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b the Rabbis, /b who hold that one is exempt from liability for damage by fire to concealed articles. b And /b the Sages in Bethlehem b answered him what they answered him. /b , b Rav Huna stated /b a different explanation of the verse: b There were stacks of barley belonging to Jews in which the Philistines were hiding, and /b David wanted to burn down the stacks to kill the Philistines and save his own life. b He raised the dilemma: What is /b the i halakha /i ? Is it permitted b to save oneself /b by destroying b the property of another? /b , b They sent /b the following answer b to him: It is prohibited to save oneself /b by destroying b the property of another. But you are king, and a king may breach the fence /b of an individual b in order to form a path for himself, and none may protest his /b action, i.e., the normal i halakhot /i of damage do not apply to you since you are king., b The Rabbis, and some say /b that it was b Rabba bar Mari, /b give an alternative explanation of the dilemma and b said: The stacks of barley belonged to Jews, and /b there were b stacks of lentils belonging to the Philistines. /b David needed barley to feed his animals. b And /b David b raised the /b following b dilemma: What is /b the i halakha /i ? I know that I may take the lentils belonging to a gentile to feed my animals, but is it permitted b to take a stack of barley /b belonging to b a Jew, to place before one’s animal /b for it to consume, b with the intent to pay /b the owner of the barley with the b stacks of lentils belonging to the Philistines? /b ,The Sages of Bethlehem b sent /b the following reply b to him: “If the wicked restore the pledge, give back that which he had taken by robbery, /b walk in the statutes of life, committing no iniquity; he shall surely live, he shall not die” (Ezekiel 33:15). This verse teaches that b even though /b the robber b repays /b the value of the b stolen item, he /b is nevertheless considered to be b wicked, /b and is described as such in the verse, and a commoner would not be allowed to act as you asked. b But you are king, and a king may breach the fence /b of an individual b in order to form a path for himself, and none may protest his /b action.,The Gemara discusses the different explanations: b Granted, according to the one who says /b that David was asking whether he could take the stacks of barley and b exchange /b them, i.e., repay the owners of the barley, with stacks of lentils, b this is as it is written /b in b one verse: /b “And the Philistines were gathered together into a troop, b where was a plot of ground full of lentils; /b and the people fled from the Philistines” (II Samuel 23:11), b and it is written /b in b one /b other b verse: /b “He was with David at Pas Dammim, and there the Philistines were gathered together to battle, b where was a plot of ground full of barley; /b and the people fled from before the Philistines” (I Chronicles 11:13). This apparent contradiction can be reconciled by saying that there were two fields, one of barley and one of lentils., b But according to /b Rav Huna, b the one who says /b that David’s question was asked because he wanted b to burn /b the stacks of barley, for b what /b purpose b does he require these two verses? /b How does he explain this contradiction? Rav Huna could have b said to you that there were also stacks of lentils belonging to Jews, inside which the Philistines were hiding. /b , b Granted, according to the one who says /b that David asked his question because he wanted b to burn /b the stacks, b this is as it is writ-ten /b in the following verse with regard to David: b “But he stood in the midst of the plot, and saved it, /b and slew the Philistines; and the Lord performed a great victory” (II Samuel 23:12). b But according to the one who says /b that David’s question was asked b with regard to exchanging /b the lentils for the barley, b what /b is the meaning of the phrase: b “And saved it”? /b ,The Rabbis answer that David saved it in b that he did not permit them to exchange /b the value of the barley with the lentils., b Granted, /b according to both of b these two /b opinions, b this is as it is written /b in b two /b distinct b verses, /b one describing the field of lentils and one describing the field of barley. |
|
11. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sanhedrin (jewish court) Found in books: Kanarek (2014) 140, 164, 165| 21b. או צבור וצבור אבל יחיד לגבי צבור כמאן דלא צלי דמי קמ"ל ואי אשמעינן הכא משום דלא אתחיל בה אבל התם דאתחיל בה אימא לא צריכא,אמר רב הונא הנכנס לבית הכנסת ומצא צבור שמתפללין אם יכול להתחיל ולגמור עד שלא יגיע ש"ץ למודים יתפלל ואם לאו אל יתפלל ריב"ל אמר אם יכול להתחיל ולגמור עד שלא יגיע ש"צ לקדושה יתפלל ואם לאו אל יתפלל,במאי קא מפלגי מר סבר יחיד אומר קדושה ומר סבר אין יחיד אומר קדושה,וכן אמר רב אדא בר אהבה מנין שאין היחיד אומר קדושה שנאמר (ויקרא כב, לב) ונקדשתי בתוך בני ישראל כל דבר שבקדושה לא יהא פחות מעשרה,מאי משמע דתני רבנאי אחוה דרבי חייא בר אבא אתיא תוך תוך כתיב הכא ונקדשתי בתוך בני ישראל וכתיב התם (במדבר טז, כא) הבדלו מתוך העדה הזאת מה להלן עשרה אף כאן עשרה,ודכולי עלמא מיהת מפסק לא פסיק,איבעיא להו מהו להפסיק ליהא שמו הגדול מבורך כי אתא רב דימי אמר ר' יהודה ור"ש תלמידי דרבי יוחנן אמרי לכל אין מפסיקין חוץ מן יהא שמו הגדול מבורך שאפילו עוסק במעשה מרכבה פוסק ולית הלכתא כותיה:,ר' יהודה אומר מברך לפניהם ולאחריהם: למימרא דקסבר רבי יהודה בעל קרי מותר בדברי תורה והאמר ריב"ל מנין לבעל קרי שאסור בדברי תורה שנאמר (דברים ד, ט) והודעתם לבניך ולבני בניך וסמיך ליה יום אשר עמדת וגו' מה להלן בעלי קריין אסורין אף כאן בעלי קריין אסורין,וכי תימא רבי יהודה לא דריש סמוכים והאמר רב יוסף אפילו מאן דלא דריש סמוכים בכל התורה במשנה תורה דריש דהא רבי יהודה לא דריש סמוכין בכל התורה כולה ובמשנה תורה דריש,ובכל התורה כולה מנא לן דלא דריש דתניא בן עזאי אומר נאמר (שמות כב, יז) מכשפה לא תחיה ונאמר כל שוכב עם בהמה מות יומת סמכו ענין לו לומר מה שוכב עם בהמה בסקילה אף מכשפה נמי בסקילה,אמר ליה ר' יהודה וכי מפני שסמכו ענין לו נוציא לזה לסקילה אלא אוב וידעוני בכלל כל המכשפים היו ולמה יצאו להקיש להן ולומר לך מה אוב וידעוני בסקילה אף מכשפה בסקילה,ובמשנה תורה מנא לן דדריש דתניא רבי אליעזר אומר נושא אדם אנוסת אביו ומפותת אביו אנוסת בנו ומפותת בנו,ר' יהודה אוסר באנוסת אביו ובמפותת אביו ואמר רב גידל אמר רב מאי טעמא דר' יהודה דכתיב (דברים כג, א) לא יקח איש את אשת אביו ולא יגלה (את) כנף אביו כנף שראה אביו לא יגלה,וממאי דבאנוסת אביו כתיב דסמיך ליה ונתן האיש השוכב עמה וגו',אמרי אין במשנה תורה דריש והני סמוכין מבעי ליה לאידך דריב"ל דאמר ריב"ל כל המלמד לבנו תורה מעלה עליו הכתוב כאלו קבלה מהר חורב שנאמר (דברים ד, ט) והודעתם לבניך ולבני בניך וכתיב בתריה יום אשר עמדת לפני ה' אלהיך בחורב,תנן זב שראה קרי ונדה שפלטה שכבת זרע המשמשת וראתה דם צריכין טבילה ורבי יהודה פוטר,עד כאן לא פטר רבי יהודה אלא בזב שראה קרי דמעיקרא לאו בר טבילה הוא אבל בעל קרי גרידא מחייב,וכי תימא ה"ה דאפילו בעל קרי גרידא נמי פטר רבי יהודה והאי דקא מפלגי בזב שראה קרי להודיעך כחן דרבנן אימא סיפא המשמשת וראתה דם צריכה טבילה,למאן קתני לה אילימא לרבנן פשיטא השתא ומה זב שראה קרי דמעיקרא לאו בר טבילה הוא מחייבי רבנן המשמשת וראתה דם דמעיקרא בת טבילה היא לא כל שכן אלא לאו ר' יהודה היא ודוקא קתני לה | 21b. b or /b a case where he prayed as part of b a congregation and /b began to repeat it as part of b a congregation; however, /b in a case where he initially prayed by himself and subsequently joined the congregation at the venue where it was praying, we might have said that b an individual vis-à-vis the congregation is /b considered b as one who has not prayed. /b Therefore, b he taught us /b that in this case, too, one may not repeat the prayer. b And, /b on the other hand, b if he had taught us here /b only with regard to one who entered a synagogue, we would have thought that the reason he may not pray again is b because he did not /b yet b begin /b to recite the prayer, b but there, in the case where he /b already b began /b to recite the prayer, b say /b that this is b not /b the case and he may continue to repeat the prayer. Therefore, both statements are b necessary. /b , b Rav Huna said: One who /b did not yet pray and b enters a synagogue and found that the congregation is /b in the midst of b reciting /b the i Amida /i b prayer, if he is able to begin and complete /b his own prayer b before the prayer leader reaches /b the blessing of b thanksgiving [ i modim /i ], he should /b begin to b pray, and, if not, he should not /b begin to b pray. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: If he is able to begin and complete /b his prayer b before the prayer leader reaches sanctification [ i kedusha /i ], then he should /b begin to b pray. If not, then he should not /b begin to b pray. /b ,The Gemara clarifies: b With regard to what do they disagree? /b The basis for their dispute is that one b Sage, /b Rav Huna, b holds: An individual /b is permitted to b recite i kedusha /i /b on his own, so he need not insist on reciting it along with the prayer leader; b and /b the other b Sage, /b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, b holds /b that b an individual may not recite i kedusha /i /b alone, and, therefore he is required to complete his prayer before the communal prayer leader reaches i kedusha /i ., b Similarly, Rav Adda bar Ahava stated, /b in accordance with the second opinion: b From where is it derived that an individual may not recite i kedusha /i /b alone? b As it is stated: “And I shall be hallowed among the children of Israel” /b (Leviticus 22:32), b any expression of sanctity may not be /b recited in a quorum of b fewer than ten /b men.,The Gemara asks: b How is this inferred /b from that verse? The Gemara responds: This must be understood in light of a i baraita /i , b which was taught by Rabbenai, the brother /b of b Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba: It is inferred /b by means of a verbal analogy [ i gezera shava /i ] between the words b among, among. Here it is written: “And I shall be hallowed among the children of Israel,” and there, /b regarding Korah’s congregation, b it is written “Separate yourselves from among this congregation” /b (Numbers 16:21). b Just as there /b among connotes b ten, so too here, /b among connotes b ten. /b The connotation of ten associated with the word among written in the portion of Korah is, in turn, derived by means of another verbal analogy between the word congregation written there and the word congregation written in reference to the ten spies who slandered Eretz Yisrael: “How long shall I bear with this evil congregation?” (Numbers 14:27). Consequently, among the congregation there must be at least ten., b And, in any case, everyone /b agrees that b one may not interrupt /b his prayer in order to respond to i kedusha /i .,However, b a dilemma was raised /b before the Sages of the yeshiva: b What is /b the ruling? Is one permitted b to interrupt /b his prayer in order b to /b recite: b “May His great name be blessed” /b in i kaddish /i ? b When Rav Dimi came /b from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, b he said: Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon, disciples of Rabbi Yoḥa, said: One may not interrupt /b his prayer b for anything, except for: “May His great name be blessed,” as even /b if one was b engaged in /b the exalted study of the b Act of the /b Divine b Chariot /b [ b i Ma’aseh Merkava /i ] /b (see Ezekiel 1) b he stops /b to recite it. However, the Gemara concludes: b The i halakha /i is not in accordance with his /b opinion.,We learned in the mishna that b Rabbi Yehuda says /b with regard to one who experiences a seminal emission; b he recites a blessing beforehand and afterward /b in both the case of i Shema /i and in the case of food. The Gemara asks: b Is that to say that Rabbi Yehuda holds that one who experienced a seminal emission is permitted /b to engage b in matters of Torah? Didn’t Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi say: From where /b in the Torah is it derived b that one who experiences a seminal emission is prohibited from /b engaging b in matters of Torah? As it is stated: /b “Just take heed and guard your soul diligently lest you forget the things your eyes have seen, and lest they depart from your heart, for all the days of your life, b and you shall impart them to your children and your children’s children” /b (Deuteronomy 4:9), from which we derive, among other things, the obligation to study Torah. b And, juxtaposed to it, /b is the verse: b “The day that you stood /b before the Lord your God at Horeb” (Deuteronomy 4:10). This juxtaposition teaches us that b just as below, /b at the revelation at Mount Sinai, b those who experienced a seminal emission were prohibited /b and were commanded to refrain from relations with their wives and immerse themselves, b so too here, /b throughout the generations, b those who experience a seminal emission are prohibited /b from engaging in Torah study., b And if you say that Rabbi Yehuda does not derive homiletic interpretations from juxtaposed /b verses, b didn’t Rav Yosef /b already say: b Even one who does not derive homiletic interpretations from juxtaposed /b verses throughout b the entire Torah, /b nevertheless, b derives /b them b in Deuteronomy [ i Mishne Torah /i ], as Rabbi Yehuda does not derive homiletic interpretations from juxtaposed /b verses b throughout the entire Torah and he does derive them in i Mishne Torah /i . /b , b And from where do we derive /b that Rabbi Yehuda b does not derive homiletic interpretations /b from juxtaposed verses b throughout the entire Torah? As it was taught /b in a i baraita /i with regard to the punishment of a sorceress, b ben Azzai says: It is stated: “You shall not allow a sorceress to live” /b (Exodus 22:17), although the manner of her execution is not specified, b and it is stated: “Whoever lies with a beast shall surely be put to death” /b (Exodus 22:18). The fact that the Torah b juxtaposed this matter to that /b was b to say: Just as one who lies with a beast /b is executed b by stoning /b (see Leviticus 20), b so too a sorceress /b is executed b by stoning. /b ,With regard to this proof b Rabbi Yehuda said to him: And does /b the fact b that /b the Torah b juxtaposed this matter to that warrant taking /b this person b out to be stoned? /b Should he be sentenced to the most severe of the death penalties on that basis b Rather, /b the source is: b Mediums and wizards were included among all sorcerers. And why were they singled out /b from the rest, in the verse: “And a man or a woman who is a medium or a wizard shall surely be put to death; they shall stone them with stones, their blood is upon them” (Leviticus 20:27)? In order to b draw an analogy to them and say to you: Just as a medium and a wizard /b are executed b by stoning, so too is a sorceress /b executed b by stoning. /b , b And from where do we derive /b that Rabbi Yehuda b derives homiletic interpretations /b from juxtaposed verses b in i Mishne Torah /i ? As it was taught /b in another i baraita /i : b Rabbi Eliezer said that a man /b may b wed /b a woman b raped by his father and /b one b seduced by his father; /b a woman b raped by his son and /b one b seduced by his son. /b Though one is prohibited by Torah law from marrying the wife of his father or the wife of his son, this prohibition does not apply to a woman raped or seduced by them., b And Rabbi Yehuda prohibits /b him from marrying b a woman raped by his father and a woman seduced by his father. And Rav Giddel said /b that b Rav said: What is the reason for Rabbi Yehuda’s /b opinion? b As it is written: “A man shall not take his father’s wife, and shall not uncover his father’s skirt” /b (Deuteronomy 23:1). The last expression, “and shall not uncover his father’s skirt,” implies that: b A skirt that has been seen by his father, /b i.e., any woman who has had sexual relations with his father, b may not be uncovered /b by his son, i.e., his son may not marry her., b And from where /b do we know b that /b the verse b is written with regard to a woman raped by his father? As /b the previous section, b juxtaposed to it, /b deals with the laws of rape: b “And the man who lay with her must give /b her father fifty shekels…because he has violated her” (Deuteronomy 22:29).,At any rate, we see that in Deuteronomy, Rabbi Yehuda derives homiletic interpretations from juxtaposed verses. Why does he fail to derive that one who experiences a seminal emission is prohibited from engaging in matters of Torah from the juxtaposition of the verses? b They replied: Indeed, in i Mishne Torah /i /b Rabbi Yehuda b does derive homiletic interpretations /b from the juxtaposition of verses, b but /b he requires b these juxtaposed verses /b in order b to /b derive b another /b statement of b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: One who teaches his son Torah, the verse ascribes to him /b credit b as if he received /b the Torah b from Mount Horeb. As it is stated: “And you shall impart them to your children and your children’s children” /b (Deuteronomy 4:9) b after which it is written: “The day that you stood before the Lord your God at Horeb.” /b Therefore, Rabbi Yehuda cannot derive from that same juxtaposition a prohibition banning one who experienced a seminal emission from engaging in matters of Torah., b We learned /b in a mishna that b a i zav /i who experienced a seminal emission, and a menstruating woman who discharged semen, and a woman who engaged in intercourse /b with her husband b and she saw /b menstrual b blood, /b all of whom are ritually impure for at least seven days due to the severity of their impurity, nevertheless b require ritual immersion /b in order to purify themselves from the impurity of the seminal emission before they may engage in matters of Torah. b And Rabbi Yehuda exempts /b them from immersion.,However, b Rabbi Yehuda only exempted /b from immersion in the case b of a i zav /i who experienced a seminal emission, who was unfit to immerse himself from the outset, /b as even after immersion he would remain impure with the seven-day impurity of the i zav /i . b But, /b in the case of b one who experienced a seminal emission alone, /b with no concurrent impurity, even Rabbi Yehuda b requires /b immersion before he may engage in Torah matters., b And if you say: The same is true even /b in the case of b one who experienced a seminal emission alone, /b that b Rabbi Yehuda also exempts /b him from immersion, b and the fact that they disagree /b in the case of b a i zav /i who experienced a seminal emission /b and not in the case of a person who experienced a seminal emission alone b is in order to convey the far-reaching /b nature of the opinion b of the Rabbis, /b who require immersion even in this case. If so, b say the last case /b of that same mishna: b A woman who was engaged in intercourse and she saw /b menstrual b blood requires immersion. /b ,The Gemara seeks to clarify: b In accordance with whose /b opinion b was this /b case in the mishna b taught? If you say /b that it is in accordance with the opinion of b the Rabbis, that is obvious; if /b in the case of b a i zav /i who experienced a seminal emission who was unfit to immerse himself from the outset, /b when he experienced the seminal emission, b the Rabbis /b nevertheless b require immersion, all the more so /b wouldn’t they require immersion for b a woman who engaged in intercourse and /b only then b saw blood, /b who b was fit to immerse herself from the outset, /b when she came into contact with the seminal emission of her husband? b Rather, isn’t this Rabbi Yehuda’s /b opinion, b and /b this case b was taught specifically /b in order to teach |
|
12. Babylonian Talmud, Megillah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sanhedrin (jewish court) Found in books: Kanarek (2014) 140, 164, 165| 23b. כנגדו נמי לא בעי,מתקיף לה רבא והרי (ירמיהו ז, כא) עולותיכם ספו דלא הויין עשרין וחד וקרינן שאני התם דסליק עניינא,והיכא דלא סליק עניינא לא והאמר רב שמואל בר אבא זמנין סגיאין הוה קאימנא קמיה דר' יוחנן וכי הוה קרינן עשרה פסוקי אמר לן אפסיקו מקום שיש תורגמן שאני דתני רב תחליפא בר שמואל לא שנו אלא במקום שאין תורגמן אבל מקום שיש תורגמן פוסק:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big אין פורסין על שמע ואין עוברין לפני התיבה ואין נושאין את כפיהם ואין קורין בתורה ואין מפטירין בנביא,ואין עושין מעמד ומושב ואין אומרים ברכת אבלים ותנחומי אבלים וברכת חתנים ואין מזמנין בשם פחות מעשרה ובקרקעות תשעה וכהן ואדם כיוצא בהן:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big מה"מ אמר ר' חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן דאמר קרא (ויקרא כב, לב) ונקדשתי בתוך בני ישראל כל דבר שבקדושה לא יהא פחות מעשרה,מאי משמע דתני ר' חייא אתיא תוך תוך כתיב הכא ונקדשתי בתוך בני ישראל וכתיב התם (במדבר טז, כא) הבדלו מתוך העדה,ואתיא עדה עדה דכתיב התם (במדבר יד, כז) עד מתי לעדה הרעה הזאת מה להלן עשרה אף כאן עשרה:,ואין עושין מעמד ומושב פחות מעשרה: כיון דבעי למימר עמדו יקרים עמודו שבו יקרים שבו בציר מעשרה לאו אורח ארעא:,ואין אומרים ברכת אבלים וברכת חתנים (וכו'): מאי ברכת אבלים ברכת רחבה דא"ר יצחק א"ר יוחנן ברכת אבלים בעשרה ואין אבלים מן המנין ברכת חתנים בעשרה וחתנים מן המנין:,ואין מזמנין על המזון בשם פחות מעשרה (וכו'): כיון דבעי למימר נברך לאלהינו בציר מעשרה לאו אורח ארעא:,והקרקעות תשעה וכהן ואדם כיוצא בהן (וכו'): מנה"מ,אמר שמואל עשרה כהנים כתובים בפרשה חד לגופיה (וחד למעוטי) ואידך הוי מיעוט אחר מיעוט ואין מיעוט אחר מיעוט אלא לרבות תשעה ישראלים וחד כהן,ואימא חמשה כהנים וחמשה ישראלים קשיא:,ואדם כיוצא בהן: אדם מי קדוש,אמר רבי אבהו באומר דמי עלי דתניא האומר דמי עלי שמין אותו כעבד ועבד איתקש לקרקעות דכתיב (ויקרא כה, מו) והתנחלתם אותם לבניכם אחריכם לרשת אחוזה:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big הקורא בתורה לא יפחות משלשה פסוקים ולא יקרא למתורגמן יותר מפסוק אחד | 23b. b it is not necessary /b to b also /b add corresponding verses in the i haftara /i ., b Rava strongly objects to this /b i baraita /i : b But /b there is the i haftara /i that begins with the words: b “Add your burnt offerings” /b (Jeremiah 7:21–28), b which does not have twenty-one verses, and /b nevertheless b we read it. /b The Gemara answers: b There it is different, as the topic is completed /b in fewer than twenty-one verses, and it is not necessary to begin another topic merely to complete the number of verses.,The Gemara asks: b But /b is it true that b where the topic is not completed, /b we do b not /b read fewer than twenty-one verses? b Didn’t Rav Shmuel bar Abba say: Many times I stood before Rabbi Yoḥa /b as a translator, b and when we had read ten verses he would say to us: Stop. /b This indicates that a i haftara /i need not be twenty-one verses. The Gemara answers: b In a place where there is a translator, /b who translates each verse into Aramaic and adds additional explanation, b it is different. /b In that case, it is not necessary for the i haftara /i to consist of twenty-one verses, so as not to overburden the congregation, b as Rav Taḥalifa bar Shmuel taught: They taught /b that twenty-one verses must be read from the i haftara /i b only /b in b a place where there is no translator; but in a place where there is a translator, one may stop /b even before that., strong MISHNA: /strong b One does not recite the /b introductory prayers and b blessing [ i poresin /i ] /b before b i Shema /i ; nor does one pass before the ark /b to repeat the i Amida /i prayer; b nor do the /b priests b lift their hands /b to recite the Priestly Benediction; b nor is the Torah read /b in public; b nor does one conclude with /b a reading from b the Prophets /b [ i haftara /i ] in the presence of fewer than ten men., b And one does not observe /b the practice of b standing up and sitting down /b for the delivery of eulogies at a funeral service; b nor does one recite the mourners’ blessing or comfort mourners /b in two lines after the funeral; b or /b recite the b bridegrooms’ blessing; and one does not invite /b others to recite Grace after Meals, i.e., conduct a i zimmun /i , b with the name /b of God, b with fewer than ten /b men present. If one consecrated b land /b and now wishes to redeem it, the land must be assessed by b nine /b men b and one priest, /b for a total of ten. b And similarly, /b assessing the value of b a person /b who has pledged his own value to the Temple must be undertaken by ten people, one of whom must be a priest., strong GEMARA: /strong The Gemara asks: b From where are these matters, /b i.e., that ten people are needed in each of these cases, derived? b Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: /b It is b as the verse states: “And I shall be hallowed among the children of Israel” /b (Leviticus 22:32), which indicates that b any expression of sanctity may not be /b recited in a quorum of b fewer than ten /b men.,The Gemara asks: b From where /b in the verse may this b be inferred? /b The Gemara responds that it must be understood b as Rabbi Ḥiyya taught: It is inferred /b by means of a verbal analogy [ i gezera shava /i ] between the words b “among,” “among.” Here, it is written: “And I shall be hallowed among the children of Israel,” and there, /b with regard to Korah’s congregation, b it is written “Separate yourselves from among this congregation” /b (Numbers 16:21). Just as with regard to Korah the reference is to ten men, so too, the name of God is to be hallowed in a quorum of ten men.,The connotation of ten associated with the word “among” in the portion of Korah is, in turn, b inferred /b by means of another verbal analogy between the word b “congregation” /b written there and the word b “congregation” /b written in reference to the ten spies who slandered Eretz Yisrael, b as it is written there: “How long shall I bear with this evil congregation?” /b (Numbers 14:27). Consequently, b just as there, /b in the case of the spies, it was a congregation of b ten /b people, as there were twelve spies altogether, and Joshua and Caleb were not included in the evil congregation, b so too, here, /b in the case of Korah, the reference is to a congregation of b ten /b people. The first several items mentioned in the mishna are expressions of sanctity, and they consequently require a quorum of ten.,§ We learned in the mishna: b And one does not observe /b the practice of b standing up and sitting down /b for the delivery of eulogies at a funeral service b with fewer than ten /b men present. As this is not an expression of sanctity, it is therefore necessary to explain why a quorum is required. The Gemara explains: b Since /b the leader of the funeral procession b is required to say: Stand, dear /b friends, b stand; sit down, dear /b friends, b sit down, /b when there are b fewer than ten it is not proper conduct /b to speak in such a dignified style.,We also learned in the mishna that b one does not recite the mourners’ blessing and the bridegrooms’ blessing /b with fewer than ten men present. The Gemara asks: b What is the mourners’ blessing? The blessing /b recited b in the square /b next to the cemetery. Following the burial, those who participated in the funeral would assemble in the square and bless the mourners that God should comfort them, b as Rabbi Yitzḥak said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: The mourners’ blessing /b is recited only b with ten /b men present, b and mourners /b themselves b are not included in the count. The bridegrooms’ blessing /b is also recited only b with ten /b men present, b and bridegrooms /b themselves b are included in the count. /b Consequently, only nine other men are needed.,We learned further in the mishna: b And one does not invite /b others to recite Grace after Meals, i.e., conduct a i zimmun /i , in order to thank God b for /b one’s b nourishment, with the name /b of God, b with fewer than ten /b men present. b Since one is required to say: Let us bless our Lord, /b in the presence of b fewer than ten /b it is b not proper conduct /b to mention the name of God.,§ If one consecrated b land /b and now wishes to redeem it, the land must be assessed by b nine /b Israelites b and one priest, /b for a total of ten. b And similarly, /b assessing the value of b a person /b who has pledged his own value to the Temple must be undertaken by ten people, one of whom must be a priest. The Gemara asks: b From where are these matters, /b that consecrated land must be assessed by ten people, one of whom is a priest, derived?, b Shmuel said: /b The word b priest /b is b written ten /b times b in the /b Torah b portion /b that addresses the redemption of consecrated property, indicating that ten people are required to assess the value of such property (Leviticus, chapter 27). b One /b instance of the word is needed b for itself, /b to indicate that a priest must participate in the assessment. b And one /b instance is needed b to exclude /b all non-priests from fulfilling that role. b And /b all b the other /b instances of the word b are restrictions following /b other b restrictions, /b and there is a general hermeneutical principle that b one restriction after another /b serves b only to amplify. /b Therefore, each additional time the word priest is repeated, it extends the criteria applied to appraisers, so as to allow non-priests to participate. Consequently, the assessment may be carried out by b nine /b ordinary b Israelites and one priest. /b ,The Gemara asks: b And /b on the basis of this principle, b say /b that the first usage of the term is restrictive and requires a priest for the assessment; the second usage amplifies and allows for a non-priest; the third usage again requires a priest; the fourth usage allows for a non-priest; and so on. Consequently, the assessment must be carried out by b five priests and five /b ordinary b Israelites. /b The Gemara concludes: Indeed, it is b difficult, /b as the derivation has not been sufficiently explained.,We learned in the mishna: b And similarly, /b assessing the value of b a person /b who has pledged his own value to the Temple must be undertaken by ten people, one of whom must be a priest. The Gemara asks: b Can a person become consecrated /b and thereby require redemption?, b Rabbi Abbahu said: /b The mishna is referring b to one who says: My assessment /b is incumbent b upon me, /b and thereby pledges to donate a sum of money equivalent to his own monetary value to the Temple treasury, b as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : With regard to b one who says: My assessment /b is incumbent b upon me, /b the court b assesses him as /b though he were b a slave /b in order to determine the amount he is obligated to donate to the Temple treasury. b And a slave is compared to land, as it is written /b with regard to slaves: b “And you shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession” /b (Leviticus 25:46). Consequently, the same criteria that apply to assessing consecrated land apply to assessing the monetary value of an individual., strong MISHNA: /strong b One who reads from the Torah /b in the synagogue b should not read fewer than three verses. And /b when it is being translated, b he should not read to the translator more than one verse /b at a time, so that the translator will not become confused. |
|
13. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sanhedrin (jewish court) Found in books: Kanarek (2014) 140, 164, 165| 74b. אפילו לשנויי ערקתא דמסאנא,וכמה פרהסיא אמר ר' יעקב אמר רבי יוחנן אין פרהסיא פחותה מעשרה בני אדם פשיטא ישראלים בעינן דכתיב (ויקרא כב, לב) ונקדשתי בתוך בני ישראל בעי רבי ירמיה תשעה ישראל ונכרי אחד מהו,תא שמע דתני רב ינאי אחוה דרבי חייא בר אבא אתיא תוך תוך כתיב הכא ונקדשתי בתוך בני ישראל וכתיב התם (במדבר טז, כא) הבדלו מתוך העדה הזאת מה להלן עשרה וכולהו ישראל אף כאן עשרה וכולהו ישראל,והא אסתר פרהסיא הואי אמר אביי אסתר קרקע עולם היתה,רבא אמר הנאת עצמן שאני,דאי לא תימא הכי הני קוואקי ודימוניקי היכי יהבינן לה אלא הנאת עצמן שאני הכא נמי הנאת עצמן שאני,ואזדא רבא לטעמיה דאמר רבא עכו"ם דאמר ליה להאי ישראל קטול אספסתא בשבתא ושדי לחיותא ואי לא קטילנא לך ליקטיל ולא לקטליה שדי לנהרא ליקטליה ולא ליקטול מ"ט לעבורי מילתא קא בעי,בעו מיניה מר' אמי בן נח מצווה על קדושת השם או אין מצווה על קדושת השם,אמר אביי ת"ש שבע מצות נצטוו בני נח ואם איתא תמני הויין א"ל רבא אינהו וכל אבזרייהו,מאי הוי עלה אמר רב אדא בר אהבה אמרי בי רב כתיב (מלכים ב ה, יח) לדבר הזה יסלח ה' לעבדך בבא אדני בית רמון להשתחות שמה והוא נשען על ידי והשתחויתי וכתיב (מלכים ב ה, יט) ויאמר לו לך לשלום | 74b. b Even to change the strap of a sandal. /b There was a Jewish custom with regard to sandal straps. If the gentile authorities were to decree that Jews must change their practice and wear sandal straps like those worn by the gentiles, one would be obligated to give up his life rather than veer from the accepted custom.,The Gemara asks: b And /b the presence of b how many /b people is required so that it should be deemed b a public /b act? b Rabbi Ya’akov says /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa says: /b An action is b not /b considered b a public /b act if it is performed in the presence of b fewer than ten people. /b The Gemara clarifies this point: It is b obvious /b that b we require /b that these ten people be b Jews, as it is written /b in the verse from which we derive the requirement of ten for the sanctification of God’s name: b “And I shall be sanctified among the children of Israel” /b (Leviticus 22:32). b Rabbi Yirmeya asks: What is /b the i halakha /i if there were b nine Jews and one gentile /b present?,The Gemara answers: b Come /b and b hear /b an answer from what b Rav Yannai, the brother of Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, teaches /b in a i baraita /i : This is b derived /b by means of a verbal analogy between the word b “among” /b written with regard to the sanctification of God’s name, and the word b “among” /b written with regard to Korah and his assembly. b Here, /b with regard to the sanctification of God’s name, b it is written: “And I shall be sanctified among the children of Israel,” and there, /b with regard to Korah, b it is written: “Separate yourselves from among this congregation” /b (Numbers 16:21). The meaning of the word “congregation” written with regard to Korah is derived by means of a verbal analogy to the word “congregation” written with regard to the spies sent out by Moses to scout the land: “How long shall I bear with this evil congregation” (Numbers 14:27). b Just as there, /b the congregation of spies numbered b ten, and all /b were b Jews, so too here, /b concerning the sanctification of God, there must be b ten, all of them /b being b Jews. /b ,The Gemara raises a difficulty: b But wasn’t /b the incident involving b Esther, /b i.e., her cohabitation with Ahasuerus, b a public /b sin? Why then did Esther not surrender her life rather than engage in intercourse? The Gemara answers: b Abaye says: Esther was /b merely like b natural ground, /b i.e., she was a passive participant. The obligation to surrender one’s life rather than engage in forbidden sexual intercourse applies only to a man who transgresses the prohibition in an active manner. A woman who is passive and merely submits is not required to give up her life so that she not sin., b Rava says /b that there is another justification for Esther’s behavior: When gentiles order the transgression of a prohibition not in order to persecute the Jews or to make them abandon their religion, but for b their /b own b personal pleasure, /b it b is different. /b In such a situation there is no obligation to sacrifice one’s life, even when the sin is committed in public.,Rava explains: b As if you do not say so, /b then b how do we give them coal shovels [ i kevakei vedimonikei /i ]? /b The Persian priests would take coal shovels from every house, fill them with coals, and use them to heat their temples on their festival days. Although this involved assisting idol worship in public, Jews would not sacrifice their lives in order not to do so. b Rather, /b the reason they cooperated is certainly that a measure enacted for the gentiles’ b personal pleasure is different. Here too, /b concerning Esther, Ahasuerus engaged in intercourse with her for his personal pleasure, and a measure enacted for a gentile’s b personal pleasure is different, /b and there is no obligation to sacrifice one’s life to avoid it.,The Gemara comments: b And Rava follows his /b own line of b reasoning, as Rava says: If a gentile said to a certain Jew: Cut grass [ i aspasta /i ] on Shabbat and throw it before the cattle, and if /b you b do not /b do this b I will kill you, he should cut /b the grass b and not be killed. /b But if the gentile said to him: Cut the grass and b throw it into the river, he should be killed and not cut /b the grass. b What is the reason /b for the latter ruling? Because it is clear that the gentile is not seeking his own personal pleasure, but rather b he wants /b to force the Jew b to violate /b his b religion. /b ,§ The Sages b raised a dilemma before Rabbi Ami: /b Is b a descendant of Noah, /b who is commanded to refrain from idol worship, also b commanded about the sanctification of God’s name, or is he not commanded about the sanctification of God’s name? /b , b Abaye says: Come /b and b hear /b an answer to this question from a i baraita /i in which it was taught: b Descendants of Noah were commanded /b to observe b seven mitzvot: /b To establish courts of law, to refrain from cursing God, idol worship, adultery, bloodshed, robbery, and from eating the limb of a living animal. b And if it is so /b that they are commanded about the sanctification of God’s name, then b there would be eight /b mitzvot in which they are commanded. b Rava said to him: /b There is no proof from here, as when the i baraita /i speaks of seven mitzvot it means the seven mitzvot b themselves with all their associated [ i avzaraihu /i ] /b obligations. The mitzva to sanctify God’s name can be understood as a detail of the prohibition of idolatry.,The Gemara asks: b What /b halakhic conclusion b was /b reached b about /b this matter? b Rav Adda bar Ahava says /b that b they say /b in b the school of Rav: It is written /b that Naaman, commander of the army of the king of Aram, said to the prophet Elisha: b “For this matter may the Lord pardon your servant, that when my master goes into the house of Rimmon to bow down there and he leans on my hand, and I bow myself down /b in the house of Rimmon” (II Kings 5:18). That is, he was forced to bow down before an idol out of fear of his master, the king of Aram. b And it is written /b in the following verse: b “And he said to him: Go in peace,” /b indicating that Elisha did not criticize him for acting in this manner. |
|
