The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Index Database

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

For a list of book indices included, see here.

13 results for "sasanian"

1. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sasanian context, empire Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 191

59a. נוח לו לאדם שיבא על ספק אשת איש ואל ילבין פני חבירו ברבים מנ"ל מדדרש רבא דדרש רבא מאי דכתיב (תהלים לה, טו) ובצלעי שמחו ונאספו קרעו ולא דמו אמר דוד לפני הקב"ה רבש"ע גלוי וידוע לפניך שאם היו מקרעים בשרי לא היה דמי שותת לארץ,ולא עוד אלא אפילו בשעה שעוסקין בנגעים ואהלות אומרים לי דוד הבא על אשת איש מיתתו במה ואני אומר להם מיתתו בחנק ויש לו חלק לעוה"ב אבל המלבין את פני חבירו ברבים אין לו חלק לעוה"ב,(ואמר) מר זוטרא בר טוביה אמר רב ואמרי לה אמר רב חנא בר ביזנא אמר ר"ש חסידא ואמרי לה א"ר יוחנן משום רשב"י נוח לו לאדם שיפיל עצמו לכבשן האש ואל ילבין פני חבירו ברבים מנ"ל מתמר דכתיב (בראשית לח, כה) היא מוצאת והיא שלחה אל חמיה,אמר רב חננא בריה דרב אידי מאי דכתיב (ויקרא כה, יז) ולא תונו איש את עמיתו עם שאתך בתורה ובמצות אל תונהו אמר רב לעולם יהא אדם זהיר באונאת אשתו שמתוך שדמעתה מצויה אונאתה קרובה,א"ר אלעזר מיום שנחרב בית המקדש ננעלו שערי תפלה שנאמר (איכה ג, ח) גם כי אזעק ואשוע שתם תפלתי ואע"פ ששערי תפלה ננעלו שערי דמעות לא ננעלו שנאמר (תהלים לט, יג) שמעה תפלתי ה' ושועתי האזינה אל דמעתי אל תחרש,ואמר רב כל ההולך בעצת אשתו נופל בגיהנם שנאמר (מלכים א כא, כה) רק לא היה כאחאב וגו' א"ל רב פפא לאביי והא אמרי אינשי איתתך גוצא גחין ותלחוש לה לא קשיא הא במילי דעלמא והא במילי דביתא לישנא אחרינא הא במילי דשמיא והא במילי דעלמא,אמר רב חסדא כל השערים ננעלים חוץ משערי אונאה שנאמר (עמוס ז, ז) הנה ה' נצב על חומת אנך ובידו אנך א"ר אלעזר הכל נפרע בידי שליח חוץ מאונאה שנאמר ובידו אנך,א"ר אבהו ג' אין הפרגוד ננעל בפניהם אונאה וגזל וע"ז אונאה דכתיב ובידו אנך גזל דכתיב (ירמיהו ו, ז) חמס ושוד ישמע בה על פני תמיד ע"ז דכתיב (ישעיהו סה, ג) העם המכעיסים אותי על פני תמיד [וגו'],אמר רב יהודה לעולם יהא אדם זהיר בתבואה בתוך ביתו שאין מריבה מצויה בתוך ביתו של אדם אלא על עסקי תבואה שנאמר (תהלים קמז, יד) השם גבולך שלום חלב חטים ישביעך אמר רב פפא היינו דאמרי אינשי כמשלם שערי מכדא נקיש ואתי תיגרא בביתא,ואמר רב חיננא בר פפא לעולם יהא אדם זהיר בתבואה בתוך ביתו שלא נקראו ישראל דלים אלא על עסקי תבואה שנאמר (שופטים ו, ג) והיה אם זרע ישראל וגו' וכתיב (שופטים ו, ד) ויחנו עליהם וגו' וכתיב (שופטים ו, ו) וידל ישראל מאד מפני מדין,(וא"ר) חלבו לעולם יהא אדם זהיר בכבוד אשתו שאין ברכה מצויה בתוך ביתו של אדם אלא בשביל אשתו שנאמר (בראשית יב, טז) ולאברם הטיב בעבורה והיינו דאמר להו רבא לבני מחוזא אוקירו לנשייכו כי היכי דתתעתרו,תנן התם חתכו חוליות ונתן חול בין חוליא לחוליא ר"א מטהר וחכמים מטמאין

59a. b It is preferable for a person to engage in intercourse with a woman /b whose b married /b status is b uncertain and not humiliate another in public. /b The Gemara asks: b From where do we /b derive this? The Gemara answers: It is b from that which Rava interpreted, as Rava interpreted: What /b is the meaning of that b which is written: “And when I limped they rejoiced and gathered…they tore and did not cease [ i damu /i ]” /b (Psalms 35:15)? The term “ i damu /i ” can also be understood as a reference to blood. Concerning the fasting he undertook to atone for his sin with Bathsheba (see II Samuel, chapters 11–12), b David said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, it is revealed and known before You that if /b my tormenters b were to tear my flesh, my blood [ i dami /i ] would not flow to the ground, /b due to excessive fasting., b And moreover, /b they torment me to the extent that b even at the time /b when b they are engaged /b in the public study of the i halakhot /i b of leprous sores and tents /b in which there is a corpse, i.e., halakhic matters that have no connection to my sin, b they say to me: David, one who engages in intercourse with a married woman, his death /b is effected b with what /b form of execution? b And I say to them: One who engages in intercourse with a married woman /b before witnesses and with forewarning, b his death is by strangulation, but he /b still b has a share in the World-to-Come. But one who humiliates another in public has no share in the World-to-Come. /b The transgression of you, who humiliate me, is more severe than my transgression., b And Mar Zutra bar Toviyya says /b that b Rav says; and some say Rav Ḥana bar Bizna says /b that b Rabbi Shimon Ḥasida says; and some say Rabbi Yoḥa says in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: It is more comfortable for a person to cast himself into a fiery furnace, /b than to b humiliate another in public /b to avoid being cast into the furnace. b From where do we /b derive this? b From Tamar, /b daughter-in-law of Judah. When she was taken out to be burned, she did not reveal that she was pregt with Judah’s child. Rather, she left the decision to him, to avoid humiliating him in public, b as it is written: /b “And Judah said: Bring her forth, and let her be burnt. b When she was brought forth, she sent to her father-in-law, /b saying: I am pregt by the man to whom these belong. And she said: Examine these, whose are these, the signet, and the cords, and the staff?” (Genesis 38:24–25).,§ b Rav Ḥina, son of Rav Idi, says: What /b is the meaning of that b which is written: “And you shall not mistreat each man his colleague [ i amito /i ]” /b (Leviticus 25:17)? The word i amito /i is interpreted as a contraction of i im ito /i , meaning: One who is with him. b With /b one who is b with you in /b observance of b Torah and mitzvot, you shall not mistreat /b him. b Rav says: A person must always be careful about mistreatment of his wife. Since her tear is easily /b elicited, punishment for b her mistreatment is immediate. /b , b Rabbi Elazar says: Since the day the Temple was destroyed the gates of prayer were locked, /b and prayer is not accepted as it once was, b as it is stated /b in lament of the Temple’s destruction: b “Though I plead and call out, He shuts out my prayer” /b (Lamentations 3:8). Yet, b despite /b the fact b that the gates of prayer were locked /b with the destruction of the Temple, b the gates of tears were not locked, /b and one who cries before God may rest assured that his prayers will be answered, b as it is stated: “Hear my prayer, Lord, and give ear to my pleading, keep not silence at my tears” /b (Psalms 39:13)., b And Rav says: /b Nevertheless, b anyone who follows the counsel of his wife descends into Gehenna, as it is stated: “But there was none like Ahab, /b who did give himself over to do that which was evil in the sight of the Lord, whom Jezebel his wife incited” (I Kings 21:25). b Rav Pappa said to Abaye: But don’t people say /b a popular proverb: If b your wife is short, stoop and whisper to her /b and consult with her? The Gemara answers: This is b not difficult, /b as b this /b statement of Rav instructs that one not follow her counsel b in general matters; and that /b proverb instructs that one follow her counsel b in household matters. /b The Gemara presents b another version /b of this distinction: b This /b statement of Rav maintains that one should not follow her counsel b in divine matters; and that /b proverb maintains that one should follow her counsel b in general matters. /b , b Rav Ḥisda says: All the gates /b of Heaven are apt to be b locked, except for the gates /b of prayer for victims b of /b verbal b mistreatment, as it is stated: “And behold, the Lord stood upon a wall built with a plumb line, and a plumb line in His hand” /b (Amos 7:7). God stands with the scales of justice in His hand to determine if one has been subjected to injustice. b Rabbi Elazar says: /b In response to b all /b transgressions, God b punishes /b the perpetrator b by means of an agent, except for mistreatment [ i ona’a /i ], as it is stated: “And a plumb line [ i anakh /i ] in His hand.” /b The term for mistreatment and the term for plumb line are spelled in a similar manner, indicating that God Himself inflicts retribution., b Rabbi Abbahu says: /b There are b three /b sins b before /b whose transgressors b the curtain [ i hapargod /i ] /b between the world and the Divine Presence b is not locked; /b their sins reach the Divine Presence. They are: Verbal b mistreatment, robbery, and idol worship. Mistreatment, as it is stated: “And a plumb line in His hand”; robbery, as it is stated: “Violence and robbery are heard in her, they are before Me continually” /b (Jeremiah 6:7); b idol worship, as it is stated: “A people that angers Me before Me continually; /b that sacrifice in gardens, and burn incense upon bricks” (Isaiah 65:3).,Apropos the topic of how man should approach his household, b Rav Yehuda says: A person must always be careful about /b ensuring that there is b grain inside his house, as discord is found in a person’s house only over matters of grain, as it is stated: “He makes your borders peace; He gives you plenty with the finest wheat” /b (Psalms 147:14). If there is the finest wheat in your house, there will be peace there. b Rav Pappa said: This /b is in accordance with the adage b that people say: When the barley is emptied from the jug, quarrel knocks and enters the house. /b , b And Rav Ḥina bar Pappa says: A person must always be careful about /b ensuring that there is b grain inside his house, as the Jewish people were characterized as poor only over matters of grain, as it is stated: “And it was, if Israel sowed, /b and Midian and the children of the east ascended” (Judges 6:3); b and it is written: “And they encamped against them /b and they destroyed the crops of the land” (Judges 6:4); b and it is /b further b written: “And Israel was greatly impoverished due to Midian” /b (Judges 6:6)., b And Rabbi Ḥelbo says: A person must always be careful about /b sustaining b the honor of his wife, as blessing is found in a person’s house only because of his wife, as it is stated /b in allusion to this: b “And he dealt well with Abram for her sake, /b and he had sheep and oxen” (Genesis 12:16). b And that is what Rava said to the residents of Meḥoza, /b where he lived: b Honor your wives, so that you will become rich. /b ,§ Apropos the topic of verbal mistreatment, b we learned /b in a mishna b there /b ( i Kelim /i 5:10): If b one cut /b an earthenware oven widthwise b into segments, and placed sand between each and every segment, Rabbi Eliezer deems it ritually pure. /b Because of the sand, its legal status is not that of a complete vessel, and therefore it is not susceptible to ritual impurity. b And the Rabbis deem it ritually impure, /b as it is functionally a complete oven.

2. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sasanian context, empire Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 191

59b. תנו רבנן הרואה חמה בתקופתה לבנה בגבורתה וכוכבים במסילותם ומזלות כסדרן אומר ברוך עושה בראשית ואימת הוי אמר אביי כל כ"ח שנין והדר מחזור ונפלה תקופת ניסן בשבתאי באורתא דתלת נגהי ארבע:,ר' יהודה אומר הרואה הים וכו': לפרקים עד כמה אמר רמי בר אבא א"ר יצחק עד שלשים יום,ואמר רמי בר אבא א"ר יצחק הרואה פרת אגשרא דבבל אומר ברוך עושה בראשית והאידנא דשניוה פרסאי מבי שבור ולעיל רב יוסף אמר מאיהי דקירא ולעיל ואמר רמי בר אבא הרואה דגלת אגשרא דשביסתנא אומר ברוך עושה בראשית,מאי (בראשית ב, יד) חדקל א"ר אשי שמימיו חדין וקלין מאי פרת שמימיו פרין ורבין,ואמר רבא האי דחריפי בני מחוזא משום דשתו מיא דדגלת האי דגיחורי משום דמשמשי ביממא והאי דניידי עינייהו משום דדיירו בבית אפל:,על הגשמים כו': ועל הגשמים הטוב והמטיב מברך והא"ר אבהו ואמרי לה במתניתא תנא מאימתי מברכין על הגשמים משיצא חתן לקראת כלה,מאי מברכין אמר רב יהודה מודים אנחנו לך על כל טפה וטפה שהורדת לנו ורבי יוחנן מסיים בה הכי אילו פינו מלא שירה כים וכו' אין אנו מספיקין להודות לך ה' אלהינו עד תשתחוה בא"י רוב ההודאות,רוב ההודאות ולא כל ההודאות אמר רבא אימא האל ההודאות א"ר פפא הלכך נימרינהו לתרוייהו רוב ההודאות והאל ההודאות,ואלא קשיא ל"ק הא דשמע משמע הא דחזא מחזי,דשמע משמע היינו בשורות טובות ותנן על בשורות טובות אומר ברוך הטוב והמטיב,אלא אידי ואידי דחזי מחזי ולא קשיא הא דאתא פורתא הא דאתא טובא ואב"א הא והא דאתא טובא ולא קשיא הא דאית ליה ארעא הא דלית ליה ארעא,אית ליה ארעא הטוב והמטיב מברך והא (תנן) בנה בית חדש וקנה כלים חדשים אומר ברוך שהחיינו והגיענו לזמן הזה שלו ושל אחרים אומר הטוב והמטיב,לא קשיא הא דאית ליה שותפות הא דלית ליה שותפות והתניא קצרו של דבר על שלו הוא אומר ברוך שהחיינו וקיימנו על שלו ועל של חבירו אומר ברוך הטוב והמטיב,וכל היכא דלית לאחרינא בהדיה לא מברך הטוב והמטיב והתניא אמרו ליה ילדה אשתו זכר אומר ברוך הטוב והמטיב התם נמי דאיכא אשתו בהדיה דניחא לה בזכר,ת"ש מת אביו והוא יורשו בתחלה אומר ברוך דיין האמת ולבסוף הוא אומר ברוך הטוב והמטיב התם נמי דאיכא אחי דקא ירתי בהדיה,ת"ש שינוי יין א"צ לברך שינוי מקום צריך לברך וא"ר יוסף בר אבא א"ר יוחנן אע"פ שאמרו שינוי יין א"צ לברך אבל אומר ברוך הטוב והמטיב התם נמי דאיכא בני חבורה דשתו בהדיה:,בנה בית חדש וקנה כלים חדשים וכו': א"ר הונא לא שנו אלא שאין לו כיוצא בהן אבל יש לו כיוצא בהן א"צ לברך ור' יוחנן אמר אפילו יש לו כיוצא בהן צריך לברך

59b. b The Sages taught: One who sees the sun in /b the beginning of b its cycle, the moon in its might, the planets in their orbit, or the signs of the zodiac /b aligned b in their order recites: Blessed…Author of creation. /b The Gemara asks: b And when is it /b that the sun is at the beginning of its cycle? b Abaye said: Every twenty-eight years /b when the b cycle /b is complete and b returns /b to its genesis, b and the Nisan, /b vernal, b equinox, /b when the spring days and nights are of equal length, b falls within /b the constellation of b Saturn on the night of the third and eve of the fourth /b day of the week, as then their arrangement returns to be as it was when the constellations were first placed in the heavens.,We learned in the mishna that b Rabbi Yehuda said: One who sees the great sea /b intermittently b recites: /b Blessed…Who has made the great sea. The Gemara asks: b How much /b is b intermittently? Rami bar Abba said /b that b Rav Yitzḥak said: Thirty days. /b , b And Rami bar Abba said /b that b Rav Yitzḥak said: One who sees the Euphrates River near the bridge of Babylonia recites: Blessed…Author of creation. /b The Gemara adds: b And now that the Persians have rerouted /b the course of the river, one only recites the blessing b from Beit Shavor upriver. /b Downriver, it no longer flows as it did at creation, so there one does not recite the blessing: Author of creation. b Rav Yosef said: /b One only recites the blessing b from Ihi Dekira upriver. And Rami bar Abba said: One who sees the Tigris on the bridge of Shabistana recites: Blessed…Author of creation. /b ,The Gemara proceeds to explain the names of these rivers. b What is /b the source of the name b i Ḥidekel /i [ /b Tigris]? b Rav Ashi said: /b Its name is an acronym derived from the fact that b its waters are sharp [ i ḥadin /i ] and light [ i kalin /i ] /b and therefore good for drinking. b What is /b the source of the name b i Perat /i /b [Euphrates]? It is so named b because its waters are fruitful [ i parin /i ] and multiply [ i ravin /i ]; /b there are many fish in it.,As for the Tigris River, b Rava said: The inhabitants /b of the city b Meḥoza are sharp because they drink the water of the Tigris; they are red because they engage in /b conjugal b relations in the daytime; and their eyes move /b constantly b because they live in dark houses. /b ,We learned in our mishna that b over rain /b one recites the blessing: Blessed…Who is good and does good. The Gemara asks: b And over rain /b does b one /b really b recite the blessing: Who is good and does good? Didn’t Rabbi Abbahu say, and some say it was taught in a i baraita /i : From when does one recite the blessing on rain? From when the groom went out to meet the bride. /b In other words, there are puddles of water on the ground. The groom, meaning the raindrops from above, cause the bride, meaning the water below, to splash.,The Gemara asks: b What blessing does one recite? Rav Yehuda said: /b The formula of the blessing is: b We thank You for each and every drop that You have made fall for us. And Rav Yoḥa concludes /b the blessing b as follows: If our mouths were as full of song as the sea…we could not sufficiently praise You O Lord our God, /b and he continues with the formula of i nishmat /i that is recited on Shabbat morning, b until: Shall bow /b before You. b Blessed are You, O Lord, /b to Whom b abundant thanksgivings /b are offered.,The Gemara asks: Does the blessing say: b Abundant thanksgivings, and not: All thanksgivings? /b Certainly all thanksgivings are due to God. b Rava said: /b Emend the formula of the blessing and b say: The God of thanksgivings. Rav Pappa said: Therefore, we will recite them both: Abundant thanksgivings, and: The God of thanksgivings. /b , b However, it is /b still b difficult, /b as apparently the blessing for rain is not: Who is good and does good, as it appears in our mishna. The Gemara responds: This is b not difficult. This, /b which we learned in our mishna, that one recites: Who is good and does good, refers to a case b where one heard /b that rain fell. b This, /b where we learned that one recites: We thank You, etc., refers to a case b where one saw /b the rain fall.,The Gemara asks: b One heard /b that the rain fell; b that is /b a case of b good tidings. And we learned /b in the mishna b that upon /b hearing b good tidings one recites: Who is good and does good. /b Therefore, there is no reason for the mishna to mention rain separately., b Rather, /b the difficulty can be otherwise resolved: b This, /b Rabbi Abbahu’s statement, b and that, /b the mishna, both refer to a case where one saw the rain fall, b and /b this is b not difficult. This, /b Rabbi Abbahu’s statement that one recites We thank You, etc., b refers to /b a case b where a little /b rain b fell, /b while b that, /b the mishna which says that one recites: Who is good and does good, refers to a case b where a lot /b of rain b fell. And if you wish, say /b instead that b this and that /b refer to cases b where a lot /b of rain b fell, and /b this is b not difficult. This, /b the mishna, b refers to /b a case b where one owns land, /b while b that, /b Rabbi Abbahu’s statement that one recites: We thank You, etc., b refers to /b a case b where one does not own land, /b so the rain does not benefit him directly.,The Gemara asks: b One who owns land recites: Who is good and does good? Didn’t we learn /b in the mishna: b One who built a new house or purchased new vessels recites: Blessed…Who has given us life…and brought us to this time. /b However, if the land belonged b to him and others /b in partnership, b he recites: Who is good and does good? /b For rain falling onto land that one owns exclusively, he recites: Who has given us life and not: Who is good and does good.,The Gemara answers: This is b not difficult. This, /b the mishna where we learned that one recites: Who is good and does good, b refers to /b a case b where one /b owns his land b in partnership /b with another; b that, /b Rabbi Abbahu’s statement that one recites: Who has given us life, b refers to /b a case b where one /b owns the land exclusively and b does not have a partnership. And /b indeed, this i halakha /i b was taught /b in a i baraita /i : b The gist of the matter is, for /b that which b is /b exclusively b his, he recites: Blessed…Who has given us life and sustained us; for /b that which b belongs to him and to another /b in partnership, b he recites: Who is good and does good. /b ,The Gemara challenges this principle: b And in every case where others are not with him, one does not recite: Who is good and does good? Wasn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b If they told him that his wife gave birth to a male, he recites: Who is good and does good? /b The Gemara responds: b There too, his wife is with him, as she is also happy that a male /b child was born.,The Gemara challenges further: b Come and hear /b a contradiction from what was taught in a i baraita /i : One whose b father died and he is his heir, initially recites: Blessed…the true Judge, /b upon hearing of his father’s death, b and ultimately, /b upon receiving his inheritance, b he recites: Blessed…Who is good and does good. /b Despite the fact that the son alone benefits, he nevertheless recites: Who is good and does good. The Gemara responds: b There, too, /b it refers to a case b where he has brothers who inherit along with him. /b ,The Gemara cites an additional challenge: b Come and hear /b a contradiction based on what was taught in a i baraita /i : In the case of b a change in /b the type of b wine /b during a meal, b one need not recite the blessing: /b Who creates fruit of the vine, a second time. However, in the case of b a change in place, one must recite a /b second b blessing /b over the wine. b And Rabbi Yosef bar Abba said /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa said: Although /b the Sages b said that /b in the case of b a change in /b the type of b wine one need not recite a /b second b blessing /b over the wine, b he does recite: Blessed…Who is good and does good. /b The Gemara responds: b There, too, /b it refers to a case where he is not alone, but where b members of the group are drinking with him. /b ,We learned in the mishna: One who b built a new house or purchased new vessels /b recites: Blessed…Who has given us life, sustained us and brought us to this time. With regard to this blessing, b Rav Huna said: They only taught /b that one recites: Who has given us life, upon purchasing a new vessel when b he does not /b already b have something similar, /b i.e., something he inherited. b However, if he /b already b has something similar he need not recite a blessing, /b as it is not new to him. b Rabbi Yoḥa said: Even /b if b one /b already b has something similar /b that he inherited, b he must recite a blessing /b because he never before purchased a vessel of that kind.

3. Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sasanian context, empire Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 191

40a. אלא מחוץ לתחום אתא מאן דאכל סבר הבא בשביל ישראל זה מותר לישראל אחר,ומאן דלא אכל סבר כל דאתי לבי ריש גלותא אדעתא דכולהו רבנן אתי,והא אשכחיה רב ששת לרבה בר שמואל וא"ל לא היו דברים מעולם,ההוא ליפתא דאתי למחוזא נפק רבא חזיא דכמישא שרא רבא למיזבן מיניה אמר הא ודאי מאיתמול נעקרה,מאי אמרת מחוץ לתחום אתיא הבא בשביל ישראל זה מותר לאכול לישראל אחר וכל שכן האי דאדעתא דנכרים אתא,כיון דחזא דקא מפשי ומייתי להו אסר להו:,הנהו בני גננא דגזו להו אסא בי"ט שני לאורתא שרא להו רבינא לאורוחי ביה לאלתר א"ל רבא בר תחליפא לרבינא ליסר להו מר מפני שאינן בני תורה,מתקיף לה רב שמעיה טעמא דאינן בני תורה הא בני תורה שרי והא בעינן בכדי שיעשו אזלו שיילוה לרבא אמר להו בעינן בכדי שיעשו:,ר' דוסא אומר העובר לפני התיבה כו':,אמר רבה כי הוינן בי רב הונא איבעיא לן מהו להזכיר של ראש חדש בראש השנה כיון דחלוקין במוספין אמרינן או דילמא זכרון אחד עולה לכאן ולכאן,אמר לן תניתוה רבי דוסא אומר העובר לפני התיבה כו' מאי לאו להזכיר,לא להתנות,הכי נמי מסתברא מדקתני בברייתא וכן היה ר' דוסא עושה בראשי חדשים של כל השנה כולה ולא הודו לו,אי אמרת בשלמא להתנות משום הכי לא הודו לו אלא אי אמרת להזכיר אמאי לא הודו לו,ואלא מאי להתנות למה לי לאיפלוגי בתרתי צריכא דאי אשמעינן ר"ה הוה אמינא בהא קאמרי רבנן דלא משום דאתי לזלזולי ביה אבל בראשי חדשים של כל השנה כולה אימא מודו ליה לר' דוסא,ואי אתמר בהא בהא קאמר ר' דוסא אבל בהך אימא מודה להו לרבנן צריכא,מיתיבי ראש השנה שחל להיות בשבת בית שמאי אומרים מתפלל עשר ובית הלל אומרים מתפלל תשע ואם איתא בית שמאי אחת עשרה מבעי ליה

40a. b rather, /b it had already been caught beforehand, but it b came /b to the Exilarch’s house on the Festival b from outside the /b Shabbat b limit /b and was slaughtered on that day. b The one /b who b ate /b from it, namely, Rav Naḥman and Rav Ḥisda, b holds: /b Something b that comes /b from outside the Shabbat limit b for one Jew is permitted to another Jew. /b Since the deer was brought for the Exilarch, the Sages at his table were permitted to eat from it, and we do not prohibit them to derive benefit from something that a gentile did for another Jew., b And the one /b who b did not eat /b from it, Rav Sheshet, b holds: Anything that comes to the house of the Exilarch comes with all the Sages in mind, /b as it is known that the Exilarch invites them to dine with him on Festivals. Therefore, just as it was prohibited to the Exilarch himself, as it was brought from outside the Shabbat limit, so too, it was prohibited to all his guests.,The Gemara asks: b Didn’t Rav Sheshet meet Rabba bar Shmuel and say to him /b what he said, indicating that the issue is related to the question of whether the two days are considered distinct sanctities? The Gemara answers: According to Ameimar’s version of the story, b that /b encounter b never happened. /b ,The Gemara relates that a delivery of b turnip /b was once b brought to /b the town of b Meḥoza /b by gentile merchants from outside the Shabbat limit on a Festival in the Diaspora. b Rava went out /b to the market and b saw /b that the turnips b were withered, and /b therefore b he permitted /b people b to buy them /b immediately without having to wait the amount of time needed to bring similar items from outside the limit after the Festival. b He said: These /b turnips b were /b certainly b uprooted /b from the ground b yesterday, /b and no prohibited labor was performed with them today., b What /b might b you say; /b that b they came from outside the /b Shabbat b limit /b and should therefore be prohibited? The accepted principle is: Something b that comes for one Jew is permitted to be eaten by another Jew, and all the more so /b with regard to b this /b delivery of turnip, b which came with gentiles in mind, /b i.e., for their sake rather than for the sake of Jews. Therefore, if they are purchased by Jews, no prohibition is violated.,The Gemara adds: b Once /b Rava b saw that /b the gentile merchants started to b bring increased /b quantities of turnips on Festival days for the sake of their Jewish customers, b he prohibited /b the inhabitants of Meḥoza to buy them, for it was evident that they were now being brought for Jews.,The Gemara relates that b certain canopy makers, /b who would braid myrtle branches into their canopies, once b cut myrtles on the second day of a Festival, /b and b in the evening Ravina permitted /b people b to smell them immediately /b at the conclusion of the Festival. b Rava bar Taḥalifa said to Ravina: The Master should prohibit them /b to do this, b as they are not knowledgeable in Torah, /b and therefore we should be stringent with them lest they come to treat the sanctity of the second Festival day lightly., b Rav Shemaya strongly objects to this: The reason /b given here is b that they are not knowledgeable in Torah; /b but if b they were knowledgeable in Torah, would it be permitted? Don’t we require /b them to wait b the time needed for /b the myrtle’s b preparation, /b i.e., the time it takes to cut them? b They went and asked Rava. He said to them: We require /b them to wait b the time needed for /b the myrtle’s b preparation. /b ,The mishna cited Rabbi Dosa’s version of the Rosh HaShana prayer: b Rabbi Dosa says: He who passes before the ark /b and leads the congregation in prayer on the first day of the festival of Rosh HaShana says: Strengthen us, O Lord our God, on this day of the New Moon, whether it is today or tomorrow., b Rabba said: When we were in the house /b of study b of Rav Huna, we raised the /b following b dilemma: What is /b the i halakha /i with regard to whether it is proper b to mention the New Moon /b during prayer b on Rosh HaShana? /b The Gemara explains the two sides of the dilemma: Do we say that b since they have separate additional offerings, /b as one additional offering is brought for the New Moon and another for Rosh HaShana, b we mention /b them separately in prayer as well? b Or perhaps one remembrance counts for /b both b this and that? /b The Torah is referring to both Rosh HaShana and the New Moon as times of remembrance, and therefore perhaps simply mentioning that it is a Day of Remembrance should suffice.,Rav Huna b said to us: You have /b already b learned /b the answer to this question in the mishna, which states that b Rabbi Dosa says: He who passes before the ark /b and leads the congregation in prayer on the first day and on the second day of Rosh HaShana mentions the New Moon in a conditional manner: On this day of the New Moon, whether it is today or tomorrow. But the Rabbis did not agree with him. b What, is it not /b that the Rabbis disagree with Rabbi Dosa about the need b to mention /b the New Moon during prayer on Rosh HaShana?,The Gemara refutes this proof: b No, /b they disagree about whether b to make a condition. /b The novelty in Rabbi Dosa’s teaching was not that mention must be made of the New Moon, but that a condition must be made due to the day’s uncertain status. The Rabbis disagree about that.,The Gemara comments: b So too, it is reasonable /b to say that the dispute between Rabbi Dosa and the Rabbis relates to the condition and not to the very mention of the New Moon. This can be ascertained b from /b the fact b that it was taught in a i baraita /i : And so too, Rabbi Dosa would do /b this b on /b all b the New Moons /b for which two days are kept out of doubt b the entire year; and /b the Rabbis b did not agree with him. /b , b Granted, if you say /b that the disagreement was about whether b to make a condition, that is why they did not agree with him /b with regard to the New Moon throughout the year, as they did not accept the whole idea of a conditional prayer. b But if you say /b the main point of contention was whether b to mention /b the New Moon at all, b why didn’t they agree with him /b that the New Moon should be mentioned during prayer the rest of the year?,The Gemara asks: b Rather, what /b is the disagreement about, whether or not b to make a condition? Why do I /b need them b to disagree in two /b cases? The issue is the same on Rosh HaShana as on any other New Moon. The Gemara answers: b It was necessary /b to teach both cases, b as, if he had /b only b taught us /b the i halakha /i with regard to b Rosh HaShana, I might have said /b that only b in this /b case b did the Rabbis say that one should not /b mention the New Moon in a conditional manner b because people might come to demean /b the day and perform prohibited labor. b But in /b the case of an ordinary b New Moon throughout the year, /b I might b say /b that perhaps b they agree with Rabbi Dosa, /b since labor is not prohibited on the New Moon, and therefore there is no reason for concern lest people come to treat it lightly., b And if /b the disagreement b had /b only b been stated in this /b case, in the case of an ordinary New Moon, one might say that only b in this /b case b did Rabbi Dosa say /b that a condition may be made. b But in that /b other case of Rosh HaShana, I might b say /b that b he agrees with the Rabbis, /b due to concern lest people will come to treat the Festival lightly. It was therefore b necessary /b to state the disagreement in both cases.,The Gemara b raises an objection /b based on the i Tosefta /i that states that in the case of b Rosh HaShana that occurs on Shabbat, Beit Shammai say: One prays /b an i Amida /i that contains b ten /b blessings, including the nine blessings ordinarily recited on Rosh HaShana and an additional blessing in which Shabbat is mentioned. b And Beit Hillel say: One prays /b an i Amida /i that contains b nine /b blessings, as Shabbat and the Festival are mentioned in the same blessing. b And if there were /b an opinion that held that the New Moon must be separately mentioned in the Rosh HaShana prayer, then b it should /b say that according to b Beit Shammai, /b one must recite b eleven /b blessings, i.e., nine for Rosh HaShana, one for Shabbat, and one for the New Moon.

4. Babylonian Talmud, Gittin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sasanian context, empire Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 191

6a. אפי' קן קולמוסא וקן מגילתא,תניא כוותיה דרב אשי המביא גט ממדינת הים אפי' הוא בבית וסופר בעלייה הוא בעלייה וסופר בבית אפי' נכנס ויוצא כל היום כולו כשר,הוא בבית וסופר בעלייה הא לא קא חזי ליה אלא לאו כגון דשמע קן קולמוסא וקן מגילתא,אמר מר אפי' נכנס ויוצא כל היום כולו כשר מאן אילימא שליח השתא הוא בבית וסופר בעלייה דלא חזי ליה אמרת כשר נכנס ויוצא מיבעיא אלא סופר פשיטא משום דנכנס ויוצא נפסליניה,לא צריכא דנפק לשוקא ואתא מהו דתימא איניש אחרינא אשכחיה ואמר ליה קמ"ל:,איתמר בבל רב אמר כא"י לגיטין ושמואל אמר כחו"ל,לימא בהא קא מיפלגי דמר סבר לפי שאין בקיאין לשמה והני גמירי ומ"ס לפי שאין עדים מצויין לקיימו והני נמי לא שכיחי,ותסברא הא רבה אית ליה דרבא,אלא דכ"ע בעינן לקיימו רב סבר כיון דאיכא מתיבתא מישכח שכיחי ושמואל סבר מתיבתא בגירסייהו טרידי,איתמר נמי אמר ר' אבא אמר רב הונא עשינו עצמינו בבבל כא"י לגיטין מכי אתא רב לבבל,מתיב ר' ירמיה ר' יהודה אומר מרקם למזרח ורקם כמזרח מאשקלון לדרום ואשקלון כדרום מעכו לצפון ועכו כצפון והא בבל לצפונה דא"י קיימא דכתיב (ירמיהו א, יד) ויאמר ה' אלי מצפון תפתח הרעה,ותנן ר"מ אומר עכו כא"י לגיטין ואפי' ר"מ לא קאמר אלא בעכו דמקרבא אבל בבל דמרחקא לא הוא מותיב לה והוא מפרק לה לבר מבבל,עד היכן היא היא בבל אמר רב פפא כמחלוקת ליוחסין כך מחלוקת לגיטין ורב יוסף אמר מחלוקת ליוחסין אבל לגיטין דברי הכל עד ארבא תניינא דגישרא,רב חסדא מצריך מאקטיספון לבי ארדשיר ומבי ארדשיר לאקטיספון לא מצריך לימא קסבר לפי שאין בקיאין לשמה והני גמירי,ותסברא והא רבה אית ליה דרבא אלא דכ"ע בעינן לקיימו והני כיון דאזלי לשוקא להתם הנך ידעי בחתימות ידא דהני,והני בדהנך לא ידעי מ"ט בשוקייהו טרידי,רבה בר אבוה מצריך מערסא לערסא רב ששת מצריך משכונה לשכונה ורבא מצריך באותה שכונה,והא רבא הוא דאמר לפי שאין עדים מצויין לקיימו שאני בני מחוזא דניידי,רב חנין מישתעי רב כהנא אייתי גיטא ולא ידענא אי מסורא לנהרדעא אי מנהרדעא לסורא אתא לקמיה דרב א"ל צריכנא למימר בפני נכתב ובפני נחתם או לא צריכנא אמר ליה לא צריכת

6a. b Even /b if he b heard the sound of the quill [ i kulmusa /i ] and the sound of the scroll /b when the scribe was writing the bill of divorce for the sake of that woman, this is sufficient.,It b is taught /b in a i baraita /i b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rav Ashi: /b With regard to b one who brings a bill of divorce from a country overseas, even /b if b he /b was b in the house but the scribe /b was b in the loft /b writing the bill of divorce, or if b he /b was b in the loft and the scribe /b was b in the house /b writing the bill of divorce, and b even /b if b he /b was b entering and exiting the entire day /b the bill of divorce is b valid /b and he can testify that it was written properly.,The Gemara notes: If b he /b was b in the house and the scribe /b was b in the loft, he does not see him /b at all. b Rather, is it not /b correct to say that the i baraita /i is speaking about a case b where he heard the sound of the quill and the sound of the scroll? /b This is a proof which supports the statement of Rav Ashi., b The Master said /b above, in the i baraita /i : b Even /b if b he /b was b entering and exiting the entire day, /b the bill of divorce is b valid. /b The Gemara asks: b Who /b is the one entering and exiting? b If we say /b that this is referring to the b agent, /b who is required to later testify about the bill of divorce, b now /b that in the case where b he /b was b in the house and the scribe /b was b in the loft, when /b the agent b does not see /b the scribe at all and nevertheless b you said /b that the bill of divorce is b valid, is /b it b necessary /b to say that it is valid when b he /b was b entering and exiting /b the place where the bill of divorce was written? b Rather, /b perhaps this is referring to the b scribe /b himself, i.e., he enters and exits all day and does not write the bill of divorce in one uninterrupted act. The Gemara asks: This i halakha /i b is obvious, /b as b would we render /b the bill of divorce b invalid /b merely b because he /b was b entering and exiting? /b ,The Gemara answers: b No, /b it is b necessary /b to teach the i halakha /i in a case b where /b the scribe b exited /b the house b to /b go to b the market and returned /b to continue writing the bill of divorce. b Lest you say /b that perhaps while he was in the market b another person found him and told him /b to write a bill of divorce on his behalf, and he is now writing a bill of divorce for the sake of a woman other than the one for which he was writing it at the outset, the i baraita /i therefore b teaches us /b that this possibility is disregarded and the bill of divorce is valid.,§ b It was stated /b that the i amora’im /i disagreed concerning the status of Babylonia with regard to the i halakhot /i of bills of divorce: b Rav says /b that b Babylonia /b is considered to be b like Eretz Yisrael with regard to bills of divorce, and Shmuel says /b that it is considered b like outside of Eretz /b Yisrael.,The Gemara suggests: b Shall we say /b that Rav and Shmuel b disagree with regard to this, that /b one b Sage, /b Rav, b holds /b that the reason an agent is required to say: It was written in my presence and it was signed in my presence, is b because they are not experts /b in writing a bill of divorce b for her sake, and these /b Babylonians b are learned. And /b one b Sage, /b Shmuel, b holds /b that the reason is b because there are no witnesses available to ratify it, and these /b Babylonians b are also not frequently /b available.,The Gemara rejects this suggestion: b And can you understand it /b that way? b But /b it was already stated above that b Rabba, /b who says that the concern is whether the document was written for her sake, b is of /b the opinion that the reason is also in accordance with the opinion b of Rava, /b who maintains that witnesses are also required to ratify the bill of divorce. Therefore, even if Babylonians are knowledgeable about writing a bill of divorce for the woman’s sake, Babylonia should be treated like anywhere else outside of Eretz Yisrael because witnesses are not readily available., b Rather, everyone /b agrees that b we require /b witnesses b to ratify it, /b and they disagree with regard to this: b Rav holds /b that b since there are /b central b academies /b where people study, witnesses b are frequently /b available to ratify bills of divorce. b And Shmuel holds /b that those studying in the b academies are preoccupied by their studies; /b therefore, they cannot be used as witnesses to confirm a bill of divorce, as they will not recognize peoples’ signatures., b It was also stated /b that b Rabbi Abba says /b that b Rav Huna says: We made ourselves in Babylonia like Eretz Yisrael with regard to bills of divorce, from /b the time b when Rav came to Babylonia. /b , b Rabbi Yirmeya raises an objection /b from the mishna: b Rabbi Yehuda says: From Rekem eastward /b is considered to be part of the overseas country, b and Rekem /b itself b is like east /b of Eretz Yisrael. b From Ashkelon southward /b is outside of Eretz Yisrael, b and Ashkelon /b itself b is like south /b of Eretz Yisrael. b From Akko northward /b is outside of Eretz Yisrael, b and Akko /b itself b is like north /b of Eretz Yisrael. Rabbi Yirmeya explains his objection: b But Babylonia is situated north of Eretz Yisrael, as it is written /b with regard to the destruction that will come through Babylonia: b “Then the Lord said to me: Out of the north the evil shall break forth” /b (Jeremiah 1:14)., b And we /b further b learned /b in the mishna that b Rabbi Meir says: Akko is like Eretz Yisrael with regard to bills of divorce, and even Rabbi Meir said /b this b only with regard to Akko, which is close /b to Eretz Yisrael. b However, /b with regard to b Babylonia, which is far /b from Eretz Yisrael, b no, /b he did not dispute the ruling that it is not considered part of Eretz Yisrael. The Gemara explains: Rabbi Yirmeya b raised /b the objection b and he resolved it /b himself: This border of Eretz Yisrael was stated b with the exception of Babylonia. /b ,The Gemara inquires: b Until where is Babylonia? /b In other words, what are the boundaries of Babylonia with regard to this issue? b Rav Pappa says: /b Just b as /b there is b a dispute /b concerning the boundaries of Babylonia b with regard to lineage /b ( i Kiddushin /i 72a), as Babylonian Jews were considered to have a more prestigious lineage than those of Eretz Yisrael, b so /b is there the same b dispute with regard to bills of divorce. And Rav Yosef says: /b The b dispute /b that is stated there applies only b to lineage. However, with regard to bills of divorce, everyone agrees /b that the boundary of Babylonia is b until the second arch of the bridge /b over the Euphrates River.,The Gemara relates: b Rav Ḥisda required /b even those who delivered bills of divorce b from Akteisfon to Bei Ardeshir /b to say: It was written in my presence and it was signed in my presence. b But /b for bills of divorce brought b from Bei Ardeshir to Akteisfon he did not require /b this declaration. The Gemara asks: b Shall we say /b that b he holds /b that the reason an agent is required to say that it was written and it was signed in his presence, is b because they are not experts /b in writing a bill of divorce b for her sake, and these /b residents of Bei Ardeshir are b learned /b in this matter?,The Gemara asks: b And can you understand /b it that way? b But Rabba is of /b the opinion that the reason is also in accordance with the opinion b of Rava, /b that it is necessary to ratify a bill of divorce. b Rather, everyone /b agrees b that we require /b the presence of two witnesses b to ratify /b the document, b and /b with regard to b these /b residents of Bei Ardeshir, b since they go to the market there, /b in Akteisfon, b these /b residents of Akteisfon b recognize the signatures of these /b inhabitants of Bei Ardeshir., b But these /b residents of Bei Ardeshir b do not recognize /b the signatures b of these /b residents of Akteisfon. b What is the reason /b for this? b They are preoccupied by their market /b business, as they are buying and selling their merchandise, and therefore they are not familiar with the signatures of the residents of Akteisfon.,§ The Gemara relates that b Rabba bar Avuh would require /b that an agent state the declaration even when transmitting a bill of divorce b from /b one b side /b of the public domain b to /b the other b side [ i me’arsa le’arsa /i ]. Rav Sheshet required /b that an agent state the declaration even when transmitting a bill of divorce b from /b one b group /b of houses b to /b another b group /b of houses on the same side of the public domain. b And Rava required /b that an agent state the declaration even when transmitting a bill of divorce b within the same group /b of houses.,The Gemara asks: b But Rava is /b the one b who said /b that the reason an agent must state the declaration is b because there are no witnesses available to ratify it, /b so why would he require the declaration even when transmitting a bill of divorce within the same group of houses? The Gemara explains: Rava issued this decree only with regard to his city of Meḥoza. The reason is that b the residents of Meḥoza are different, as they are /b constantly b mobile, /b and do not stay in one place. Therefore, it is possible that the witnesses who were present when the bill of divorce was written have already moved elsewhere., b Rav Ḥanin relates: Rav Kahana brought a bill of divorce, and I do not know if /b he brought it b from Sura to Neharde’a /b or b if /b he brought it b from Neharde’a to Sura. He came before Rav /b and b said to him: Am I required to say: It was written in my presence and it was signed in my presence, or am I not required /b to state this declaration? Rav b said to him: You are not required /b to do so.

5. Babylonian Talmud, Hulin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 191

84a. וליפרקינהו וליכסינהו בעינן העמדה והערכה,וכמאן אי כר"מ דאמר הכל היו בכלל העמדה והערכה האמר שחיטה שאינה ראויה שמה שחיטה,אי כר' שמעון דאמר שחיטה שאינה ראויה לא שמה שחיטה האמר לא היו בכלל העמדה והערכה,אמר רב יוסף רבי היא ונסיב לה אליבא דתנאי בשחיטה שאינה ראויה סבר לה כר' שמעון בהעמדה והערכה סבר לה כר"מ,ואיבעית אימא כולה ר"ש היא ושאני הכא דאמר קרא (ויקרא יז, יג) ושפך וכסה מי שאינו מחוסר אלא שפיכה וכסוי יצא זה שמחוסר שפיכה פדייה וכסוי,והשתא דאתית להכי אפילו תימא קדשי מזבח מי שאינו מחוסר אלא שפיכה וכסוי יצא זה שמחוסר שפיכה גרירה וכסוי,מר בר רב אשי אמר אמר קרא (ויקרא יז, יג) חיה או עוף מה חיה אינה קדש אף עוף אינו קדש,אי מה חיה שאין במינו קדש אף עוף שאין במינו קדש אוציא תורין ובני יונה שיש במינן קדש,לא כחיה מה חיה לא חלקת בה אף עוף לא תחלוק בו,אמר ליה יעקב מינאה לרבא קי"ל חיה בכלל בהמה לסימנין אימא נמי בהמה בכלל חיה לכסוי,אמר ליה עליך אמר קרא (דברים יב, טז) על הארץ תשפכנו כמים מה מים לא בעי כסוי אף האי נמי לא בעי כסוי,אלא מעתה יטבילו בו אמר קרא (ויקרא יא, לו) אך מעין ובור מקוה מים יהיה טהור הני אין מידי אחרינא לא,ואימא ה"מ למעוטי שאר משקין דלא איקרו מים אבל דם דאיקרי מים ה"נ,תרי מיעוטי כתיבי מעין מים ובור מים,אימא אידי ואידי למעוטי שאר משקין חד למעוטי זוחלין וחד למעוטי מכונסין,תלתא מיעוטי כתיבי מעין מים ובור מים מקוה מים,ת"ר (ויקרא יז, יג) אשר יצוד אין לי אלא אשר יצוד נצודין ועומדין מאליהן מנין כגון אווזין ותרנגולים,ת"ל ציד מ"מ א"כ מה ת"ל אשר יצוד למדה תורה דרך ארץ שלא יאכל אדם בשר אלא בהזמנה הזאת,ת"ר (דברים יב, כ) כי ירחיב ה' אלהיך את גבולך למדה תורה דרך ארץ שלא יאכל אדם בשר אלא לתאבון,יכול יקח אדם מן השוק ויאכל ת"ל (דברים יב, כא) וזבחת מבקרך ומצאנך יכול יזבח כל בקרו ויאכל כל צאנו ויאכל ת"ל מבקרך ולא כל בקרך מצאנך ולא כל צאנך,מכאן אמר רבי אלעזר בן עזריה מי שיש לו מנה יקח לפסו ליטרא ירק עשרה מנה יקח לפסו ליטרא דגים חמשים מנה יקח לפסו ליטרא בשר מאה מנה ישפתו לו קדרה בכל יום ואינך אימת מערב שבת לערב שבת,אמר רב צריכין אנו לחוש לדברי זקן א"ר יוחנן אבא ממשפחת בריאים הוה אבל כגון אנו מי שיש לו פרוטה בתוך כיסו יריצנה לחנווני א"ר נחמן כגון אנו לווין ואוכלין,(משלי כז, כו) כבשים ללבושך מגז כבשים יהא מלבושך (משלי כז, כו) ומחיר שדה עתודים לעולם ימכור אדם שדה ויקח עתודים ואל ימכור אדם עתודים ויקח שדה (משלי כז, כז) ודי חלב עזים דיו לאדם שיתפרנס מחלב גדיים וטלאים שבתוך ביתו,(משלי כז, כז) ללחמך ללחם ביתך לחמך קודם ללחם ביתך (משלי כז, כז) וחיים לנערותיך אמר מר זוטרא בריה דרב נחמן תן חיים לנערותיך מיכן למדה תורה דרך ארץ שלא ילמד אדם את בנו בשר ויין,אמר רבי יוחנן

84a. The Gemara challenges: b But /b even if the mishna is dealing with birds consecrated for Temple maintece, b let one redeem them /b after they were slaughtered b and /b then b cover their /b blood. The Gemara responds: This is not feasible, because in order to redeem a consecrated animal b we require setting and valuating, /b i.e., the animal must be stood before a priest in order to evaluate it and only then is it redeemed (see Leviticus 27:11–12). A slaughtered bird cannot be stood before the priest; consequently, it cannot be redeemed.,The Gemara asks: b But /b if the mishna is dealing with birds consecrated for Temple maintece, b in accordance with whose /b opinion is the mishna? b If /b one suggests the mishna is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Meir, who says: Everything, /b i.e., animals consecrated both for the altar and for Temple maintece, b was included in /b the requirement of b setting and valuating, /b and therefore the slaughtered birds may not be redeemed, this cannot be so. b Doesn’t he /b also b say /b that b slaughter that is not fit /b to render the meat permitted b is /b nevertheless b considered /b a halakhic act of b slaughter /b that requires the covering of the blood? If so, one should be obligated to cover the blood of the bird even if it is not redeemed.,The Gemara continues: And b if /b one suggests the mishna is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Shimon, who says: Slaughter that is not fit /b to render the meat permitted b is not considered /b a halakhic act of b slaughter /b and therefore the bird would require redemption in order to cover its blood, this cannot be so. b Doesn’t /b he also b say /b that animals consecrated for Temple maintece b were not included in /b the requirement of b setting and valuating? /b If so, let one redeem the slaughtered birds and cover their blood., b Rav Yosef said /b in reconciliation of this dilemma: The mishna’s ruling b is in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi, b and he formulates /b the mishna b in accordance with /b the opinions of different b i tanna’im /i : With regard to /b the status of an act of b slaughter that is not fit /b to render the meat permitted b he holds in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Shimon, /b while b with regard to /b the requirement of b setting and valuating he holds in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Meir. /b Therefore, since one cannot redeem a bird that was consecrated for Temple maintece once it has been slaughtered, there is no obligation to cover its blood, as the slaughter was not fit to render the meat permitted., b And if you wish, say /b instead that b the entire /b mishna b is /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Shimon, /b who holds that birds consecrated for Temple maintece may be redeemed even after their slaughter. b And /b although it would seem that their slaughter is fit to render the meat permitted and that one should therefore be obligated in the mitzva of covering the blood, it is b different here, as the verse states: “And he shall pour out /b its blood b and cover /b it” (Leviticus 17:13). By juxtaposing “pour out” to “cover,” the verse indicates that the obligation to cover the blood applies only to blood b that is lacking only pouring and covering, /b without any intervening step. b Excluded /b is b this /b blood of birds consecrated for Temple maintece, b which is lacking pouring, redeeming, and covering. /b ,The Gemara notes: b And now that you have arrived at this /b explanation, b you /b may b even say /b that the mishna is referring to birds b consecrated for the altar. /b As for the question asked earlier: Why not let one scrape the blood from the altar and then cover it? The verse states: “And he shall pour out its blood and cover it,” indicating that the obligation to cover the blood applies only to blood that is b lacking only pouring and covering, /b without any intervening step. b Excluded /b is b this /b blood of bird offerings, b which is lacking pouring, scraping, and covering. /b ,The Gemara cites another source for the exclusion of consecrated animals from the requirement of covering their blood: b Mar bar Rav Ashi said /b that b the verse states /b with regard to the mitzva of covering the blood: b “An undomesticated animal or bird” /b (Leviticus 17:13). The juxtaposition of these two species intimates an analogy between them: b Just as /b the b undomesticated animal /b referred to in the verse b is not consecrated, /b as undomesticated animals are never fit for sacrifice, b so too, /b the b bird /b referred to in the verse b is not consecrated. /b ,The Gemara asks: b If /b it is so that the i halakhot /i of slaughtering a bird are derived from those of an undomesticated animal, then say: b Just as /b the verse is referring to b an undomesticated animal, whose species cannot be consecrated /b as an offering, b so too, /b the verse is referring only to b a bird whose species cannot be consecrated /b as an offering. Therefore, b I will exclude /b even non-sacred b doves and pigeons, whose species can be consecrated. /b ,The Gemara rejects this possibility: b No, /b the juxtaposition indicates that the i halakha /i with regard to the slaughter of birds is entirely b like /b that of b an undomesticated animal. /b Therefore, b just as /b in the case of b an undomesticated animal, you did not differentiate /b between its various species and all non-sacred animals are included in the mitzva, b so too, /b with regard to the b bird /b mentioned in the verse, b you should not differentiate /b between its various species.,§ Concerning the i halakha /i that covering the blood does not apply to a domesticated animal, the Gemara says that b Ya’akov the heretic said to Rava: We maintain /b that b an undomesticated animal, /b e.g., a deer, is b included /b in the category of b a domesticated animal with regard to /b the b characteristics /b necessary to determine whether the animal is kosher, i.e., it chews its cud and has split hooves (see Deuteronomy 14:4–6). If so, b I will also say /b that b a domesticated animal is included /b in the category of b an undomesticated animal with regard to /b the mitzva of b covering /b the blood.,Rava b said to him: With regard to your /b claim, b the verse states /b in reference to the blood of a domesticated animal: “You may slaughter of your cattle and of your sheep…but be strong not to eat the blood… b you shall pour it out on the ground, like water” /b (Deuteronomy 12:21–24). Accordingly, b just as water does not require covering, so too, this /b blood of a domesticated animal b does not require covering. /b ,The Gemara asks: b If that is so, /b that the verse equates the blood of a domesticated animal with water, then let one b immerse /b ritually impure items b in it /b to purify them, just as he can immerse them in water. The Gemara responds: b The verse states: “But a spring or a cistern, or a gathering of water shall be pure” /b (Leviticus 11:36). The exclusionary term: “But,” indicates that only concerning b these /b bodies of water, b yes, /b they render pure an impure item, while b something else, /b e.g., blood, does b not. /b ,The Gemara challenges: b But /b perhaps one can b say /b that b this matter, /b i.e., the exclusionary term in the verse, serves only b to exclude other liquids that are not called water. But /b with regard to b blood, which is called water, /b as the verse states: “You shall pour it out on the ground, like water,” one may b indeed /b immerse ritually impure items in it.,The Gemara responds: b Two exclusions are written /b in the verse discussing ritually purifying waters: b A spring of water, and: A cistern of water. /b The term “water” is understood as being attached to each of the bodies mentioned in the verse. The additional exclusion serves to exclude blood.,The Gemara challenges: b Say /b that both b this /b phrase, a spring of water, b and that /b phrase, a cistern of water, serve b to exclude other liquids, /b and not blood, whereby b one /b phrase is b to exclude flowing /b liquids that are not water from having the status of a spring, which renders an item ritually pure even when it is flowing; b and one /b phrase serves b to exclude gathered /b liquids that are not water from having the status of a ritual bath, which renders an item pure only when the water in the ritual bath is gathered.,The Gemara responds: b Three exclusions are written /b in the verse: b A spring of water, /b to exclude flowing liquids; b and: A cistern of water, /b to exclude gathered liquids; b and: A gathering of water, /b to exclude blood.,§ b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : The verse states with regard to covering the blood: “And any man of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among them, b who traps /b a trapping of an undomesticated animal or bird that may be eaten, he shall pour out its blood and cover it with earth” (Leviticus 17:13). b I have /b derived b only /b that one is obligated to cover the blood of an undomesticated animal or bird b that one traps. From where /b is it derived that undomesticated animals or birds that are b already /b considered b trapped on their own, such as geese and chickens /b that do not roam freely, are also included in the mitzva of covering the blood?, b The verse states “a trapping” /b to indicate that b in any case, /b one is obligated to cover the blood of an undomesticated animal. b If so, what /b is the meaning when b the verse states: “Who traps,” /b if it is not to be understood literally? The i baraita /i explains: b The Torah taught /b that it is b a desired mode of behavior that a person should consume meat only with this mode of preparation. /b That is, just as the meat that one traps is not readily available, so too, one should not become accustomed to consuming meat.,In a similar vein, b the Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i that the verse states: b “When the Lord, your God, expands your /b boundary…according to every craving of your soul you may eat meat” (Deuteronomy 12:20). b The Torah taught /b that it is b a desired mode of behavior that a person should consume meat due only to appetite. /b That is, one should consume meat only when he feels a need to eat it.,The i baraita /i continues: One b might /b have thought that b a person may purchase /b meat b from the marketplace and consume /b it. Therefore, b the /b next b verse states: “And you may slaughter of your cattle and of your flock,” /b indicating that one should consume the meat of animals of his own flock, not those purchased in the marketplace. One b might /b have thought that a person b may slaughter all of his cattle, /b i.e., his only cow, b and consume /b the meat, or slaughter b all of his flock, /b i.e., his only sheep, b and consume /b the meat. Therefore, b the verse states: “of your cattle,” /b indicating some, b but not all of, your cattle; “of your flock,” but not all of your flock. /b , b From here, Rabbi Elazar ben Azaria said: One who has one hundred /b dinars b should purchase a i litra /i of vegetables for his stewpot [ i lefaso /i ]; /b one who has b one thousand /b dinars b should purchase a i litra /i of fish for his stewpot; /b one who has b five thousand /b dinars b should purchase a i litra /i of meat for his stewpot; /b and if one has b ten thousand /b dinars, his servants b should place a pot /b of meat on the stove b for him every day. /b The Gemara asks: b And /b with regard to b these /b other individuals mentioned by Rabbi Elazar ben Azaria, b when, /b i.e., how often, should they consume meat? The Gemara responds: b Every Shabbat eve. /b , b Rav says: We must be concerned for the statement of the elder, /b i.e., Rabbi Elazar ben Azaria, and be thrifty with our expenditure on food items. b Rabbi Yoḥa says: Abba, /b i.e., Rav, b was from a family of /b particularly b healthy /b individuals, and was able to subsist on the modest diet suggested by Rabbi Elazar ben Azaria. b But /b with regard to people b such as us, /b who are not as healthy, b one who has /b even b one i peruta /i in his pocket should hasten /b with b it to the storekeeper /b and purchase food. Two generations later, b Rav Naḥman said: /b With regard to people b such as us, /b who are physically weaker than those in previous generations, not only do we not delay the purchase of food items, we even b borrow /b money to purchase food b and eat. /b ,The Gemara continues its discussion with regard to one’s livelihood: The verse states: “The lambs will be for your clothing, and goats the worth of a field. And there will be goats’ milk enough for your food, for the food of your household; and sustece for your maidens” (Proverbs 27:26–27). b “The lambs will be for your clothing” /b indicates that b your clothing should be /b produced b from the shearings of lambs, /b i.e., purchase lambs from whose wool you can produce clothing. b “And goats the worth of a field” /b indicates that b a person should always /b seek to b sell a field and purchase goats /b in order to benefit from their milk, wool, and offspring, b and a person should not sell goats and purchase a field /b instead. b “And there will be goats’ milk enough” /b indicates that b it is sufficient for a person that he be sustained from the milk of kids and lambs that are in his house. /b , b “For your food, for the food of your household” /b indicates that b your food comes before the food of your household, /b i.e., one must first ensure that he has food for himself before providing for others. With regard to the phrase: b “And sustece for your maidens,” Mar Zutra, son of Rav Naḥman, said: /b The verse indicates that you must b give sustece to your youth, /b i.e., to your children. b From here, the Torah taught /b that it is b a desired mode of behavior that a person should not accustom his son /b to eat b meat and /b drink b wine; /b rather, he should teach his children to eat less expensive foods., b Rabbi Yoḥa says: /b

6. Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 191

73a. b One /b is referring b to priests, /b to teach that people with flawed lineage may not enter their congregation; b and one /b is referring b to Levites; and one to Israelites; and one /b serves b to permit a i mamzer /i to /b marry b a i shetuki /i , /b since a i mamzer /i is prohibited from entering only the congregation of God, but he may marry someone who is not definitely a member of the congregation, e.g., a i shetuki /i ; b and one /b serves b to permit a i shetuki /i to /b marry b an Israelite, /b as only one who is a definite i mamzer /i may not marry an Israelite. As for the b congregation of converts, it is not called a congregation /b at all, and they may marry those prohibited from entering the congregation of Israel. b And Rabbi Yehuda /b holds that b priests and Levites are derived from one /b instance of the word b “congregation,” /b since they are from the same tribe, that of Levi. Consequently, one instance of the word “congregation” b remains for him /b to interpret. He interprets it as referring b to the congregation of converts, /b and deems it prohibited for a i mamzer /i to enter that congregation as well., b And if you wish, say: So too, /b Rabbi Yehuda agrees with Rabbi Yosei that Levites and priests b are two congregations, /b since there are special i halakhot /i of marriage that apply only to priests. Rather, Rabbi Yehuda holds that the permissibility of the marriage of b a i mamzer /i with a i shetuki /i and a i shetuki /i with an Israelite /b is b derived from one /b instance of the word b “congregation,” /b from the verse: b “A i mamzer /i shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord” /b (Deuteronomy 23:3).,This is accomplished by inferring the following: b It is /b one who is b a definite i mamzer /i who may not enter, but /b one who is b a i mamzer /i /b as a result b of an uncertainty, /b e.g., a i shetuki /i , b may enter. And similarly, it is into the congregation /b of those with b definite /b unflawed lineage that a i mamzer /i b may not enter, but into a congregation /b of those with b uncertain /b lineage, e.g., a i shetuki /i , b he may enter. /b This verse therefore teaches that both types of marriage are permitted. In any event, Rabbi Yehuda remains with one instance of the word “congregation” to interpret, from which he derives that it is also prohibited for a convert to marry a i mamzeret /i ., b And if you wish, say: These too, /b one who is a definite i mamzer /i and one who is a i mamzer /i as the result of an uncertainty, b are two congregations, /b each requiring its own verse, b and the reason of Rabbi Yehuda is from here: “As for the congregation, there shall be one statute both for you, and for the stranger that sojourns with you” /b (Numbers 15:15), which indicates that converts are considered like Israelites with regard to their being included in the category of “congregation.” b And according to Rabbi Yosei, /b who holds that a convert may marry a i mamzeret /i , the phrase b “one statute” interrupts the matter, /b and converts are not considered part of the congregation of God.,§ The Gemara comments: The statement of the i Tosefta /i that b a convert, and an emancipated slave, and a i ḥalal /i are all permitted to /b marry b the daughter of a priest supports /b the opinion b of Rav, as Rav Yehuda says /b that b Rav says: Women of unflawed /b lineage who are daughters of priests b were not prohibited /b from b marrying those disqualified /b from the priesthood b due to flawed lineage [ i ḥalalim /i ], /b since that prohibition applies only to male priests., b Rabbi Zeira taught in Meḥoza: /b It is b permitted /b for b a convert to /b marry b a i mamzeret /i . Everyone stoned him with their i etrogim /i , /b since the many converts present were insulted by his statement, which they understood to mean that converts are not members of God’s congregation. b Rava said: Is there /b a person b who teaches such a matter in a place where there are commonly converts? /b He should have been more circumspect. b Rava /b himself b taught /b this b in Meḥoza /b to ameliorate the situation: It is b permitted /b for b a convert to /b marry b the daughter of a priest. They carried him on silk [ i beshira’ei /i ] /b for elevating the honor of converts. b He later taught them: /b It is b permitted /b for b a convert to /b marry b a i mamzeret /i . They said to him: You have forfeited /b the honor of your b first /b sermon. Rava b said to them: I have done for you what is good for you. If /b a convert b wishes, /b he may b marry from here, /b i.e., from those of pure lineage, b and if he wishes, /b he may b marry from here, /b i.e., a i mamzeret /i .,The Gemara concludes: b And the i halakha /i /b is: It is b permitted /b for b a convert to /b marry b the daughter of a priest, and /b it is b permitted /b for him b to /b marry b a i mamzeret /i . /b It is b permitted /b for b a convert to /b marry b the daughter of a priest, /b since b women of unflawed /b lineage b were not prohibited /b from b marrying those disqualified /b for the priesthood. b And /b it is b permitted /b for him b to /b marry b a i mamzeret /i , in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yosei, /b who holds that the congregation of converts is not called a congregation.,§ The mishna teaches: b And these are /b the last two categories: b A i shetuki /i /b is b any /b person b who knows /b the identity of his mother but does not know the identity of his father. b Rava says: By Torah law, a i shetuki /i is fit /b to enter the congregation. b What is the reason /b for this? b Most are fit with regard to her, /b i.e., most men are fit to engage in intercourse with an unmarried woman, b and /b only b a minority are unfit with regard to /b engaging in intercourse with b her. /b There are few men who are related to a woman in a way that would render the offspring i mamzerim /i .,Rava analyzes two possibilities: b And if they came to her, /b i.e., if the father came to the mother’s location when the child was conceived, the following principle with regard to an uncertain prohibition takes effect: b Anything that separates /b from its fixed location is presumed to have b separated from the majority /b of items like it in that location. If the father separated from the population at large and came to the mother, one can assume that he was from the majority, who are of unflawed lineage. b What /b might b you say, /b that b perhaps she went to them, /b and the child was conceived in the place where the father was? In such a case, b it is /b an uncertain prohibition located in its b fixed /b place, b and /b the halakhic principle is: b Anything fixed is considered /b as though it were b half and half, /b i.e., fifty percent, and it remains a case of uncertainty, and it should be prohibited for the i shetuki /i to marry a Jew with unflawed lineage., b And /b in any case, this does not suffice to prevent her i shetuki /i child from marrying a Jew with unflawed lineage, since b the Torah states: “A i mamzer /i shall not enter /b into the congregation of the Lord” (Deuteronomy 23:3), which indicates: b It is a definite i mamzer /i who may not enter, but /b one who is b a i mamzer /i /b as a result b of an uncertainty may enter. /b Similarly, b it is into a congregation /b of those with b definite /b unflawed lineage that b he may not enter, but into a congregation /b of those with b uncertain /b lineage b he may enter. /b Therefore, even if it is uncertain if one is a i mamzer /i , by Torah law he may marry a Jew with unflawed lineage., b And for what reason did /b the Sages nevertheless b say /b that b a i shetuki /i /b is of b flawed /b lineage? Due to a rabbinic b decree, lest he marry his sister from his father, /b since the identity of his father is unknown. The Gemara asks: b If that is so, /b it b should not /b be permitted for b a i shetuki /i /b to b marry /b even b a female i shetuki /i , lest he marry his sister from his father. /b ,The Gemara responds: b And do /b people b engage in licentiousness to such an extent /b that one should be concerned that all the children of unknown paternity in one city were fathered by the same man? By the same reasoning, there should also be a decree that a i shetuki /i may b not marry the daughter of a female i shetuki /i /b from a proper marriage, b lest he marry his sister from his father, /b since the man who married the female i shetuki /i might have been his father. b Rather, /b it must be that b it is not common /b for a i shetuki /i to happen to marry his sister, and therefore he may marry the daughter of a female i shetuki /i . b So too, it is not common /b for him to happen to marry his sister, and the Sages would not issue a decree to prevent this from occurring.,The question therefore remains, why did they render it prohibited for a i shetuki /i to marry a Jew with unflawed lineage? The Gemara answers that it is not prohibited for a i shetuki /i to marry a Jew with unflawed lineage due to any halakhic concern. b Rather, /b the Sages b established a higher standard with regard to lineage, /b in that they rendered it prohibited for people from unknown backgrounds to marry those with unflawed lineage., b And Rava says /b a similar statement: b By Torah law, a foundling, /b a child found in the marketplace whose parents are unknown, b is fit, /b and there is no concern that the child is a i mamzer /i . b What is the reason /b for this? b A married woman /b who becomes pregt through extramarital intercourse, which results in the child being a i mamzer /i , b ascribes /b the child b to her husband. /b Since everyone assumes that her husband is the father, she has no reason to abandon the child in the marketplace. b What /b case b is there /b where a mother would want to abandon her i mamzer /i child? There is the b minority /b of situations involving b betrothed women /b who committed adultery but cannot claim that her betrothed is the father, as they had not been living together. b And /b there is the b minority /b of women b whose husbands have gone overseas /b and could not have fathered the children., b Since there are /b many other cases of b unmarried /b women who do abandon their children although those children have unflawed lineage, b and there are also /b children with unflawed lineage who are abandoned by their parents b due to hunger, /b the concern that the child is a i mamzer /i b is /b no more than b half and half, /b i.e., fifty percent. b And the Torah states: “A i mamzer /i shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord” /b (Deuteronomy 23:3), which indicates: b It is /b one who is b a definite i mamzer /i who may not enter, but /b one who is b a i mamzer /i /b as a result b of an uncertainty may enter. /b Similarly, b it is into a congregation /b of those with b definite /b unflawed lineage that b he may not enter, but into a congregation /b of those with b uncertain /b lineage b he may enter. /b This child is a i mamzer /i as the result of an uncertainty, and by Torah law may marry a Jew with unflawed lineage., b And for what reason did /b the Sages b say /b that b a foundling is unfit? Lest he marry his sister from his father. /b The Gemara asks: b If that is so, /b it b should not /b be permitted for b a foundling /b to b marry /b even a female b foundling, lest he marry his sister from either his father or his mother. /b The Gemara rejects this: Are they b continually throwing away all these /b children? Is it likely that the same parents abandoned both a son and a daughter? If you accept that suggestion, it b should not /b be permitted for b him /b to b marry the daughter of a foundling, lest he marry his sister, /b as perhaps the father of the one he wishes to marry is his father as well. b Rather, /b it must be that b it is not common /b for a foundling to happen to marry his sister, and therefore he may marry the daughter of a foundling. b So too, it is not common /b for him to happen to marry his sister, and the Sages would not make a decree to prevent this from occurring.,The question therefore remains: Why did they prohibit a foundling from marrying a Jew with unflawed lineage? The Gemara answers that it is prohibited for a foundling to marry a Jew with unflawed lineage not due to any halakhic concern. b Rather, /b the Sages b established a higher standard with regard to lineage, /b in that they rendered it prohibited for people from unknown backgrounds to marry those with unflawed lineage.,§ b Rava bar Rav Huna says: /b If an abandoned boy was b found circumcised, /b

7. Babylonian Talmud, Makkot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sasanian context, empire Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 191

22b. ואמדו שאין יכול לקבל ארבעים פטור אמדוהו לקבל שמונה עשרה ומשלקה אמדו שיכול הוא לקבל ארבעים פטור:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big מ"ט אי כתיב ארבעים במספר הוה אמינא ארבעים במניינא השתא דכתיב במספר ארבעים מנין שהוא סוכם את הארבעים אמר רבא כמה טפשאי שאר אינשי דקיימי מקמי ספר תורה ולא קיימי מקמי גברא רבה דאילו בס"ת כתיב ארבעים ואתו רבנן בצרו חדא:,רבי יהודה אומר ארבעים שלימות וכו' [בין כתפיו]: אמר ר' יצחק מאי טעמא דרבי יהודה דכתיב (זכריה יג, ו) מה המכות האלה בין ידיך ואמר אשר הכתי בית מאהבי ורבנן ההוא בתינוקות של בית רבן הוא דכתיב:,אין אומדין אלא במכות הראויות וכו': לקה אין לא לקה לא,ורמינהו אמדוהו לקבל ארבעים וחזרו ואמדו שאין יכול לקבל ארבעים פטור אמדוהו לקבל שמונה עשרה וחזרו ואמדוהו שיכול לקבל ארבעים פטור,אמר רב ששת לא קשיא הא דאמדוהו ליומי הא דאמדוהו למחר וליומא אוחרא:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big עבר עבירה שיש בה שני לאוין אמדוהו אומד אחד לוקה ופטור ואם לאו לוקה ומתרפא וחוזר ולוקה:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big והתניא אין אומדין אומד אחד לשני לאוין,אמר רב ששת לא קשיא הא דאמדוהו לארבעים וחדא הא דאמדוהו לארבעים ותרתי:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big כיצד מלקין אותו כופה שתי ידיו על העמוד הילך והילך וחזן הכנסת אוחז בבגדיו אם נקרעו נקרעו ואם נפרמו נפרמו עד שהוא מגלה את לבו והאבן נתונה מאחריו חזן הכנסת עומד עליו ורצועה בידו של עגל כפולה אחד לשנים ושנים לארבעה ושתי רצועות של חמור עולות ויורדות בה ידה טפח ורחבה טפח וראשה מגעת על פי כריסו,ומכה אותו שליש מלפניו ושתי ידות מלאחריו ואינו מכה אותו לא עומד ולא יושב אלא מוטה שנאמר (דברים כה, ב) והפילו השופט,והמכה מכה בידו אחת בכל כחו והקורא קורא (דברים כח, נח) אם לא תשמור לעשות וגו' והפלא ה' את מכותך ואת מכות וגו' וחוזר לתחלת המקרא (דברים כט, ח) ושמרתם את דברי הברית הזאת וגו' וחותם (תהלים עח, לח) והוא רחום יכפר עון וגו' וחוזר לתחלת המקרא,ואם מת תחת ידו פטור הוסיף לו עוד רצועה אחת ומת הרי זה גולה על ידו נתקלקל בין בריעי בין במים פטור רבי יהודה אומר האיש בריעי והאשה במים:

22b. b and /b then b they assessed /b him again and concluded b that he cannot receive forty /b lashes and survive, he is b exempt /b from the additional lashes. If the doctors initially b assessed /b concerning b him /b that he is able b to receive /b only b eighteen /b lashes, b and once he was flogged /b eighteen times b they assessed that he is able to receive forty, /b he is b exempt /b from receiving additional lashes., strong GEMARA: /strong The Gemara begins with a discussion of the number of lashes. b What is the reason /b that the Rabbis said that he receives forty lashes less one? b If it had been written: Forty by number, I would say /b that it means b forty as /b a precise b sum; now that it is written: “By number, forty,” /b the reference is to b a sum that approaches forty. /b Likewise, b Rava said: How foolish /b are b the rest of the people who stand before a Torah scroll /b that passes before them, b and /b yet b they do not stand before a great man, /b when a Sage passes before them; b as in a Torah scroll, forty is written and the Sages came /b and b subtracted one, /b establishing the number of lashes as thirty-nine. Apparently, the authority of the Sages is so great that they are able to amend an explicit Torah verse.,The mishna teaches: b Rabbi Yehuda says: /b He is flogged with b a full forty /b lashes, with the additional lash administered between his shoulders. b Rabbi Yitzḥak says: What is the reason /b for the opinion b of Rabbi Yehuda? /b It is b as it is written: “And one shall say to him: What are these wounds between your arms? Then he shall answer: Those with which I was wounded in the house of my friends” /b (Zechariah 13:6). Rabbi Yehuda understands that this verse is referring to one with wounds from lashes administered between his arms, indicating that there is one lash administered between the shoulders. b And /b how do b the Rabbis, /b who hold that one is flogged only thirty-nine lashes, explain this verse? They explain that b this /b verse b is written with regard to schoolchildren /b struck by their teacher for laxity in their studies, and is not referring to lashes administered by the court.,The mishna teaches: b One assesses /b the number of lashes that the one being punished is capable of withstanding b only with /b a number of b lashes fit /b to be divided into three equal groups. If doctors assessed concerning him that he is able to receive forty lashes and survive, and he is then flogged some of those forty lashes, and they then assessed him again and concluded that he cannot receive forty lashes and survive, he is exempt from any additional lashes. If the doctors initially assessed concerning him that he is able to receive only eighteen lashes, and once he was flogged with eighteen lashes they assessed that he is able to receive forty, he is exempt from receiving further lashes. The Gemara infers: If b he was flogged /b in practice, b yes, /b he is exempt; if b he was not flogged, no, /b he is not exempt from the rest of the forty lashes., b And /b the Gemara b raises a contradiction /b from a i baraita /i : If doctors b assessed /b concerning b him /b that he is able b to receive forty /b lashes and survive, b and they then assessed /b him again and concluded b that he cannot receive forty /b lashes and survive, he is b exempt. /b If the doctors initially b assessed /b concerning b him /b that he is able b to receive /b only b eighteen /b lashes, b and they then assessed that he is able to receive forty, /b he is b exempt. /b Apparently, even if he did not receive any lashes, if the assessment changes, it is as though he was flogged., b Rav Sheshet said: /b This is b not difficult, /b as b this /b case in the mishna is one b where /b doctors b assessed his /b fitness to receive lashes b for /b that b day, /b and there was no change in his condition; rather, it was discovered that the initial assessment was mistaken. He is exempt only if he was already flogged; if not, another assessment is performed. b That /b case in the i baraita /i is one b where /b doctors b assess his /b fitness to receive lashes b for /b the b next day or for a different day. /b In that case, the initial assessment was accurate; it is his condition that changed. Therefore, if it is determined that he is unable to receive lashes, he is exempt., strong MISHNA: /strong If b one performed a transgression that involves two prohibitions, /b and b they assessed /b concerning b him a single assessment /b of the number of lashes that he could withstand in punishment for both transgressions, b he is flogged /b in accordance with their assessment b and /b is b exempt /b from any additional lashes. b And if not, /b if he was assessed with regard to the lashes that he could withstand for one transgression, b he is flogged and /b is allowed to b heal, and then is flogged /b again for violating the second prohibition., strong GEMARA: /strong The case in the mishna is one where there is one assessment performed for two sets of lashes. The Gemara asks: b But isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b One does not perform one assessment for two prohibitions? /b , b Rav Sheshet said: /b This is b not difficult; this /b ruling in the i baraita /i that one does not perform a single assessment for two prohibitions is in a case b where /b doctors b assessed /b concerning b him /b that he is able b to /b receive b forty-one /b lashes, two lashes beyond a full set. Since those two additional lashes are not divisible by three, which is a requirement based on the previous mishna, he receives only thirty-nine lashes. That constitutes just one set of lashes. He remains liable to receive another set of lashes after he recovers, requiring another assessment and another set of lashes. b That /b ruling in the mishna that one performs a single assessment for two prohibitions is in a case b where /b doctors b assessed /b concerning b him /b that he is able b to /b receive b forty-two /b lashes. In that case, it is possible to ascribe thirty-nine lashes to one prohibition and three additional lashes to the second prohibition. That is tantamount to two separate assessments, although in practice only one assessment was performed., strong MISHNA: /strong b How do they flog him? He ties /b the b two hands /b of the person being flogged b on this /b side b and that /b side b of a post, and the attendant of the congregation takes hold of his garments /b to remove them. b If they were ripped /b in the process, b they were ripped, and if they were unraveled, they were unraveled, /b and he continues b until he bares his chest. And the stone /b upon which the attendant stands when flogging b is situated behind /b the person being flogged. b The attendant of the congregation stands on it with a strap in his hand. /b It is a strap b of calf /b hide, and is b doubled, one into two, and two into four, and two straps of donkey /b hide b go up and down /b the doubled strap of calf hide. The length of b its handle /b is b one handbreadth, /b and the b width /b of the straps is b one handbreadth, and /b the strap must be long enough so that b its end reaches the top of his abdomen, /b i.e., his navel, when he is flogged from behind., b And /b the attendant b flogs him /b with b one-third /b of the lashes b from the front of him, /b on his chest, b and two /b one-third b portions from behind him, /b on his back. b And he does not flog him /b when the one receiving lashes is b standing, nor /b when he is b sitting; rather, /b he flogs him when he is b hunched, as it is stated: “And the judge shall cause him to lie down, /b and strike him” (Deuteronomy 25:2), which indicates that the one receiving lashes must be in a position that approximates lying down., b And the /b attendant b flogging /b the one receiving lashes b flogs [ i makeh /i ] him with one hand with all his strength, and the /b court b crier recites /b the verses: b “If you do not observe to perform /b all the words of this law that are written in this book, that you may fear this glorious and awesome name, the Lord your God. b And the Lord will make your plagues [ i makkotekha /i ] outstanding, and the plagues /b of your descendants, and even great plagues, and of long continuance, and severe sicknesses, and of long continuance” (Deuteronomy 28:58–59). b And /b then b he returns to the beginning of the verse. /b He also recites: b “And you shall observe the matters of this covet, /b and do them, that you may make all that you do to prosper” (Deuteronomy 29:8), b and concludes /b with the verse: b “And He is merciful and shall atone for transgression, and destroys not; /b and many a time does He turn His anger away, and does not stir up all His wrath” (Psalms 78:38), b and /b then b returns to the beginning of the verse /b that starts: “If you do not observe to perform.”, b If /b the one being flogged b dies at /b the b hand /b of the attendant, the latter is b exempt, /b because he acted at the directive of the court. If the attendant b added for him an additional /b lash with b a strap and he died, /b the attendant b is exiled /b to a city of refuge b on his account, /b as an unwitting murderer. b If /b the one being flogged involuntarily b sullies himself, /b due to fear or pain, b whether with excrement or with urine, /b he is b exempt /b from further lashes. b Rabbi Yehuda says /b that the threshold of shame for men and women is different: b The man /b is exempted if he sullies himself b with excrement, and the woman /b is exempted even b with urine. /b

8. Babylonian Talmud, Moed Qatan, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sasanian context, empire Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 191

28a. אלא חיה אבל שאר נשים מניחין,ר' אלעזר אמר אפילו שאר הנשים דכתיב (במדבר כ, א) ותמת שם מרים ותקבר שם סמוך למיתה קבורה,ואמר ר' אלעזר אף מרים בנשיקה מתה אתיא שם שם ממשה ומפני מה לא נאמר בה על פי ה' מפני שגנאי הדבר לאומרו,א"ר אמי למה נסמכה מיתת מרים לפרשת פרה אדומה לומר לך מה פרה אדומה מכפרת אף מיתתן של צדיקים מכפרת א"ר אלעזר למה נסמכה מיתת אהרן לבגדי כהונה מה בגדי כהונה מכפרין אף מיתתן של צדיקים מכפרת,ת"ר מת פתאום זו היא מיתה חטופה חלה יום אחד ומת זו היא מיתה דחופה ר' חנניא בן גמליאל אומר זו היא מיתת מגפה שנאמר (יחזקאל כד, טז) בן אדם הנני לוקח ממך את מחמד עיניך במגפה וכתיב (יחזקאל כד, יח) ואדבר אל העם בבקר ותמת אשתי בערב,שני ימים ומת זו היא מיתה דחויה ג' גערה ארבעה נזיפה חמשה זו היא מיתת כל אדם,א"ר חנין מאי קרא (דברים לא, יד) הן קרבו ימיך למות הן חד קרבו תרי ימיך תרי הא חמשה הן חד שכן בלשון יוני קורין לאחת הן,מת בחמשים שנה זו היא מיתת כרת חמשים ושתים שנה זו היא מיתתו של שמואל הרמתי ששים זו היא מיתה בידי שמים,אמר מר זוטרא מאי קרא דכתיב (איוב ה, כו) תבא בכלח אלי קבר בכלח בגימטריא שיתין הוו,שבעים שיבה שמונים גבורות דכתיב (תהלים צ, י) ימי שנותינו בהם שבעים שנה ואם בגבורות שמונים שנה אמר רבה מחמשים ועד ששים שנה זו היא מיתת כרת והאי דלא חשיב להו משום כבודו של שמואל הרמתי,רב יוסף כי הוה בר שיתין עבד להו יומא טבא לרבנן אמר נפקי לי מכרת א"ל אביי נהי דנפק ליה מר מכרת דשני מכרת דיומי מי נפיק מר א"ל נקוט לך מיהא פלגא בידך,רב הונא נח נפשיה פתאום הוו קא דייגי רבנן תנא להו זוגא דמהדייב לא שנו אלא שלא הגיע לגבורות אבל הגיע לגבורות זו היא מיתת נשיקה,אמר רבא חיי בני ומזוני לא בזכותא תליא מילתא אלא במזלא תליא מילתא דהא רבה ורב חסדא תרוייהו רבנן צדיקי הוו מר מצלי ואתי מיטרא ומר מצלי ואתי מיטרא,רב חסדא חיה תשעין ותרתין שנין רבה חיה ארבעין בי רב חסדא שיתין הלולי בי רבה שיתין תיכלי,בי רב חסדא סמידא לכלבי ולא מתבעי בי רבה נהמא דשערי לאינשי ולא משתכח,ואמר רבא הני תלת מילי בעאי קמי שמיא תרתי יהבו לי חדא לא יהבו לי חוכמתיה דרב הונא ועותריה דרב חסדא ויהבו לי ענותנותיה דרבה בר רב הונא לא יהבו לי,רב שעורים אחוה דרבא הוה יתיב קמיה דרבא חזייה דהוה קא מנמנם א"ל לימא ליה מר דלא לצערן א"ל מר לאו שושביניה הוא א"ל כיון דאימסר מזלא לא אשגח בי א"ל ליתחזי לי מר איתחזי ליה א"ל הוה ליה למר צערא א"ל כי ריבדא דכוסילתא,רבא הוה יתיב קמיה דר"נ חזייה דקא מנמנם א"ל לימא ליה מר דלא לצערן א"ל מר לאו אדם חשוב הוא א"ל מאן חשיב מאן ספין מאן רקיע,א"ל ליתחזי לי מר אתחזי ליה א"ל ה"ל למר צערא א"ל כמישחל בניתא מחלבא ואי אמר לי הקב"ה זיל בההוא עלמא כד הוית לא בעינא דנפיש בעיתותיה,רבי אלעזר הוה קאכיל תרומה איתחזי ליה א"ל תרומה קא אכילנא ולאו קודש איקרי חלפא ליה שעתא,רב ששת איתחזי ליה בשוקא אמר ליה בשוקא כבהמה איתא לגבי ביתא,רב אשי איתחזי ליה בשוקא א"ל איתרח לי תלתין יומין ואהדרי לתלמודאי דאמריתו אשרי מי שבא לכאן ותלמודו בידו ביום תלתין אתא אמר ליה מאי כולי האי קא דחקא רגליה דבר נתן ואין מלכות נוגעת בחבירתה אפילו כמלא נימא,רב חסדא לא הוה יכיל ליה דלא הוה שתיק פומיה מגירסא סליק יתיב בארזא דבי רב פקע ארזא ושתק ויכיל ליה,ר' חייא לא הוה מצי למיקרבא ליה יומא חד אידמי ליה כעניא אתא טריף אבבא א"ל אפיק לי ריפתא אפיקו ליה א"ל ולאו קא מרחם מר אעניא אההוא גברא אמאי לא קא מרחם מר גלי ליה אחוי ליה שוטא דנורא אמצי ליה נפשיה:

28a. with regard to b a woman /b who died b in childbirth, /b and therefore continues to bleed. b But /b the biers of b other women may be set down /b in the street., b Rabbi Elazar said: Even /b the biers of b other women /b must not be set down in the street, b as it is written: “And Miriam died there and was buried there” /b (Numbers 20:1), which teaches that b the /b site of her b burial was close to /b the place of her b death. /b Therefore, it is preferable to bury a woman as close as possible to the place where she died.,With regard to that same verse b Rabbi Elazar said /b further: b Miriam also died by /b the divine b kiss, /b just like her brother Moses. What is the source for this? b This is derived /b through a verbal analogy between the word b “there” /b stated with regard to Miriam and the word b “there” /b mentioned b with regard to Moses. /b With regard to Moses it says: “So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab by the mouth of the Lord” (Deuteronomy 34:5). b For what /b reason b was it not /b explicitly b stated with regard to her, /b as it is stated with regard to Moses, that she died b “by the mouth of the Lord”? /b It is b because it would be unseemly to say such a thing, /b that a woman died by way of a divine kiss, and therefore it is not said explicitly., b Rabbi Ami said: Why was /b the Torah portion that describes the b death of Miriam juxtaposed to the portion /b dealing with b the red heifer? To tell you: Just as the red heifer atones /b for sin, b so too, the death of the righteous atones /b for sin. b Rabbi Elazar said: Why was /b the Torah portion that describes the b death of Aaron juxtaposed to /b the portion discussing b the priestly garments? /b This teaches that b just as the priestly garments atone /b for sin, b so too, the death of the righteous atones /b for sin.,§ b The Sages taught /b the following i baraita /i : If one b dies suddenly /b without having been sick, b this is death /b through b snatching. /b If he b became sick for a day and died, this is an expedited death. Rabbi Ḥaya ben Gamliel says: This is death at a stroke, as it is stated: “Son of man, behold, I am about to take away from you the delight of your eyes at a stroke” /b (Ezekiel 24:16). b And /b when this prophecy is fulfilled b it is written: “So I spoke to the people in the morning and at evening my wife died” /b (Ezekiel 24:18).,If he was sick for b two days and died, this is a quickened death. /b If he was sick for b three /b days and died, this is a death of b rebuke. /b If he died after being sick for b four /b days, this is a death of b reprimand. /b If one died after a sickness lasting b five /b days, b this is the /b ordinary b death of all people. /b , b Rabbi Ḥanin said: What is the verse /b from which this is derived? It is stated: b “Behold, your days approach that you must die” /b (Deuteronomy 31:14). This verse is expounded in the following manner: b “Behold [ i hen /i ]” /b indicates b one; “approach [ i karvu /i ],” /b a plural term, indicates b two; “your days [ i yamekha /i ],” /b also a plural term, indicates another b two; /b and therefore in total b this is five. /b How does the word b i hen /i /b indicate b one? Because in the Greek language they call /b the number b one i hen /i . /b ,The Gemara discusses the significance of death at different ages: If one b dies when /b he is b fifty years /b old, b this is death through i karet /i , /b the divine punishment of excision, meted out for the most serious transgressions. If he dies when he is b fifty-two years /b old, b this is the death of Samuel from Ramah. /b If he dies at the age of b sixty, this is death at the hand of Heaven. /b , b Mar Zutra said: What is the verse /b from which this is derived? b As it is written: “You shall come to your grave in a ripe age [ i bekhelaḥ /i ]” /b (Job 5:26). The word b “ripe age” [ i bekhelaḥ /i ] has the numerical value of sixty, /b and it is alluded to there that dying at this age involves a divine punishment.,One who dies at the age of b seventy /b has reached b old age. /b One who dies at the age of b eighty /b dies in b strength, as it is written: “The days of our years are seventy, or if by reason of strength, eighty years” /b (Psalms 90:10). b Rabba said: /b Not only is death at the age of fifty a sign of i karet /i , but even death b from fifty to sixty years /b of age b is death by i karet /i . And /b the reason that b all of these years were not counted /b in connection with i karet /i is b due to the honor of Samuel from Ramah, /b who died at the age of fifty-two.,The Gemara relates that b when Rav Yosef turned sixty he made a holiday for the Sages. /b Explaining the cause for his celebration, b he said: I have passed /b the age of b i karet /i . Abaye said to him: Master, /b even b though you have passed the i karet /i of years, have you, Master, escaped the i karet /i of days? /b As previously mentioned, sudden death is also considered to be a form of i karet /i . b He said to him: Grasp at least half in your hand, /b for I have at least escaped one type of i karet /i .,It was related that b Rav Huna died suddenly, /b and b the Sages were concerned /b that this was a bad sign. The Sage b Zuga from Hadayeiv taught them /b the following: b They taught /b these principles b only when /b the deceased b had not reached /b the age of b strength, /b i.e., eighty. b But if he had reached /b the age of b strength /b and then died suddenly, b this is death by way of a /b divine b kiss. /b , b Rava said: /b Length of b life, children, and sustece do not depend on /b one’s b merit, but rather they depend upon fate. As, Rabba and Rav Ḥisda were both pious Sages; /b one b Sage /b would b pray /b during a drought b and rain would fall, and /b the other b Sage /b would b pray and rain would fall. /b ,And nevertheless, their lives were very different. b Rav Ḥisda lived for ninety-two years, /b whereas b Rabba lived for /b only b forty /b years. b The house of Rav Ḥisda /b celebrated b sixty wedding feasts, /b whereas the b house of Rabba /b experienced b sixty calamities. /b In other words, many fortuitous events took place in the house of Rav Ḥisda and the opposite occurred in the house of Rabba., b In the house of Rav Ḥisda /b there was bread from b the finest flour [ i semida /i ] /b even b for the dogs, and it was not asked after, /b as there was so much food. b In the house of Rabba, /b on the other hand, there was coarse b barley bread /b even b for people, and it was not found /b in sufficient quantities. This shows that the length of life, children, and sustece all depend not upon one’s merit, but upon fate.,Apropos Rav Ḥisda’s great wealth, the Gemara reports that b Rava said: These three things I requested from Heaven, two /b of which b were given to me, /b and b one was not given to me: /b I requested the b wisdom of Rav Huna and the wealth of Rav Ḥisda and they were given to me. /b I also requested the b humility of Rabba bar Rav Huna, /b but b it was not given to me. /b ,The Gemara continues its discussion of the deaths of the righteous. b Rav Seorim, Rava’s brother, sat before Rava, /b and b he saw that /b Rava b was dozing, /b i.e., about to die. Rava b said to /b his brother: b Master, tell him, /b the Angel of Death, b not to torment me. /b Knowing that Rava was not afraid of the Angel of Death, Rav Seorim b said to /b him: b Master, are you not a friend of /b the Angel of Death? Rava b said to him: Since /b my b fate has been handed over /b to him, and it has been decreed that I shall die, the Angel of Death b no longer pays heed to me. /b Rav Seorim b said to /b Rava: b Master, appear to me /b in a dream after your death. And Rava b appeared to him. /b Rav Seorim b said to /b Rava: b Master, did you have pain /b in death? b He said to him: Like the prick /b of the knife b when letting blood. /b ,It was similarly related that b Rava sat before Rav Naḥman, /b and b he saw that /b Rav Naḥman b was dozing, /b i.e., slipping into death. Rav Naḥman b said to /b Rava: b Master, tell /b the Angel of Death b not to torment me. /b Rava b said to him: Master, are you not an important person /b who is respected in Heaven? Rav Naḥman b said to him: /b In the supernal world b who is important? Who is honorable? Who is complete? /b ,Rava b said to /b Rav Naḥman: b Master, appear to me /b in a dream after your death. And b he appeared to him. /b Rava b said to him: Master, did you have pain /b in death? Rav Naḥman b said to him: Like the removal of hair from milk, /b which is a most gentle process. But nevertheless, b were the Holy One, Blessed be He, to say to me: Go /b back b to that world, /b the physical world, b as you were, I would not want to go, for the fear of /b the Angel of Death b is great. /b And I would not want to go through such a terrifying experience a second time.,The Gemara relates that b Rabbi Elazar was /b once b eating i teruma /i , /b when the Angel of Death b appeared to him. He said to /b the Angel of Death: b I am eating i teruma /i ; is it not called sacred? /b It would be inappropriate for me to die now and thereby defile this sacred i teruma /i . The Angel of Death accepted his argument and left him. b The moment passed, /b and he lived for some time afterward.,It was similarly related that the Angel of Death once b appeared to Rav Sheshet in the marketplace. /b Rav Sheshet b said to /b the Angel of Death: Shall I die b in the market like an animal? Come to /b my b house /b and kill me there like a human being.,So too, the Angel of Death b appeared to Rav Ashi in the marketplace. /b Rav Ashi b said to /b the Angel of Death: b Give me thirty days so that I may review my studies, for you say /b above: b Fortunate is he who comes here /b to Heaven b with his learning in his hand. On the thirtieth day /b the Angel of Death b came /b to take him. Rav Ashi b said to /b the Angel of Death: b What is all of this? /b Why are you in such a hurry to take me? Why can you not postpone my death? He said to him: b The foot of /b Rav Huna b bar Natan is pushing /b you, as he is ready to succeed you as the leader of the generation, b and one sovereignty does not overlap with its counterpart, even /b by b one hairbreadth. /b Therefore, you cannot live any longer.,The Angel of Death b was unable /b to take b Rav Ḥisda because his mouth was never silent from study. /b So the Angel of Death b went /b and b sat on the cedar /b column that supported the roof of b the study hall of the Sages. The cedar cracked and /b Rav Ḥisda b was silent /b for a moment, as he was startled by the sound. At that point the Angel of Death was b able to /b take b him. /b ,The Angel of Death b could not come near Rabbi Ḥiyya, /b owing to his righteousness. b One day /b the Angel of Death b appeared to him as a poor person. He came and knocked on the door. He said to /b Rabbi Ḥiyya: b Bring out bread for me, /b and b he took out /b bread b for him. /b The Angel of Death then b said /b to Rabbi Ḥiyya: b Master, do you not have mercy on a poor person? Why, then, do you not have mercy upon that man, /b i.e., upon me, and give me what I want? The Angel of Death then b revealed /b his identity b to him, /b and b showed him a fiery rod /b in order to confirm that he was the Angel of Death. At this point Rav Ḥiyya b surrendered /b himself b to him. /b

9. Babylonian Talmud, Pesahim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 191

50b. ואל ישנה אדם מפני המחלוקת כיוצא בו המוליך פירות שביעית ממקום שכלו למקום שלא כלו או ממקום שלא כלו למקום שכלו חייב לבער ר' יהודה אומר צא והבא לך אף אתה:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big מאי איריא ערבי פסחים אפילו ערבי שבתות וערבי ימים טובים נמי דתניא העושה מלאכה בערבי שבתות וימים טובים מן המנחה ולמעלה אינו רואה סימן ברכה לעולם התם מן המנחה ולמעלה הוא דאסור סמוך למנחה לא הכא מחצות אי נמי התם סימן ברכה הוא דלא חזי אבל שמותי לא משמתינן ליה הכא שמותי נמי משמתינן ליה,גופא העושה מלאכה בערבי שבתות ובערבי ימים טובים מן המנחה ולמעלה ובמוצאי שבת ובמוצאי יו"ט ובמוצאי יום הכפורים ובכל מקום שיש שם נידנוד עבירה לאתויי תענית ציבור אינו רואה סימן ברכה לעולם:,ת"ר יש זריז ונשכר ויש זריז ונפסד יש שפל ונשכר ויש שפל ונפסד זריז ונשכר דעביד כולי שבתא ולא עביד במעלי שבתא זריז ונפסד דעביד כולי שבתא ועביד במעלי שבתא שפל ונשכר דלא עביד כולי שבתא ולא עביד במעלי שבתא שפל ונפסד דלא עביד כולי שבתא ועביד במעלי שבתא אמר רבא הני נשי דמחוזא אע"ג דלא עבדן עבידתא במעלי שבתא משום מפנקותא הוא דהא כל יומא נמי לא קא עבדן אפילו הכי שפל ונשכר קרינן להו,רבא רמי כתיב (תהלים נז, יא) כי גדול עד שמים חסדך וכתיב (תהלים קח, ה) כי גדול מעל שמים חסדך הא כיצד כאן בעושין לשמה וכאן בעושין שלא לשמה וכדרב יהודה דאמר רב יהודה אמר רב לעולם יעסוק אדם בתורה ומצות אף על פי שלא לשמה שמתוך שלא לשמה בא לשמה:,תנו רבנן המצפה לשכר אשתו וריחים אינו רואה סימן ברכה לעולם שכר אשתו מתקולתא ריחייא אגרתא אבל עבדה ומזבנה אישתבוחי משתבח בה קרא דכתיב (משלי לא, כד) סדין עשתה ותמכור:,ת"ר המשתכר בקנים ובקנקנים אינו רואה סימן ברכה לעולם מאי טעמא כיון דנפיש אפחזייהו שלטא בהו עינא: תנו רבנן תגרי סימטא ומגדלי בהמה דקה וקוצצי אילנות טובות ונותנין עיניהן בחלק יפה אינו רואה סימן ברכה לעולם מאי טעמא דתהו ביה אינשי:,ת"ר ד' פרוטות אין בהן סימן ברכה לעולם שכר כותבין ושכר מתורגמנין ושכר יתומים ומעות הבאות ממדינת הים,בשלמא שכר מתורגמנין משום דמיחזי כשכר שבת ומעות יתומים נמי לאו בני מחילה נינהו מעות הבאות ממדינת הים משום דלאו כל יומא מתרחיש ניסא,אלא שכר כותבין מאי טעמא א"ר יהושע בן לוי כ"ד תעניות ישבו אנשי כנסת הגדולה על כותבי ספרים תפילין ומזוזות שלא יתעשרו שאילמלי מתעשרין אין כותבין: ת"ר כותבי ספרים תפילין ומזוזות הן ותגריהן ותגרי תגריהן וכל העוסקין במלאכת שמים לאיתויי מוכרי תכלת אינן רואין סימן ברכה לעולם ואם עוסקין לשמה רואין:,בני ביישן נהוג דלא הוו אזלין מצור לצידון במעלי שבתא אתו בנייהו קמיה דר' יוחנן אמרו לו אבהתין אפשר להו אנן לא אפשר לן אמר להו כבר קיבלו אבותיכם עליהם שנאמר (משלי א, ח) שמע בני מוסר אביך ואל תטוש תורת אמך:,בני חוזאי נהגי דמפרשי חלה מארוזא אתו ואמרו ליה לרב יוסף אמר להו ניכלה זר באפייהו איתיביה אביי דברים המותרים ואחרים נהגו בהן איסור

50b. The Sages stated a principle: b And a person /b may b not deviate /b from the local custom, b due to /b potential b dispute. Similarly, /b one b who transports Sabbatical /b Year produce b from a place /b where a crop b has ceased /b in the fields b to a place where it has not /b yet b ceased or from a place where it has not /b yet b ceased to a place where it has /b already b ceased is obligated to remove /b the produce from his possession, in accordance with the stringencies of both locations. It is permitted for homeowners to eat Sabbatical Year produce in their houses only as long as that species of fruit remains in the field as ownerless property. However, once that particular fruit is no longer available for animals in the fields, one is required to remove what remains of that species from his home. The statement in the mishna is referring to one who transported fruit from a location where it ceased in the fields to one where it did not, and vice versa. b Rabbi Yehuda says /b that he need not remove the produce, as he can say to a local resident: b You, too, go out and bring /b this produce from a place where it remains in the field., strong GEMARA: /strong The Gemara asks: b Why /b discuss this prohibition b particularly /b with regard to b Passover eves? It /b is prohibited to perform labor b even /b on b Shabbat eves and Festival eves as well, as it was taught /b in a i baraita /i : b One who performs labor on Shabbat eves and Festival eves from i minḥa /i /b time b onward never sees a sign of blessing /b from this work. The Gemara answers that there is a difference between the two situations: b There, /b in the case of Shabbat and Festivals, performing labor is prohibited b from i minḥa /i /b time b onward; /b it is b not /b prohibited b adjacent to i minḥa /i /b time, i.e., just before it. b Here, /b in the case of Passover eve, it is prohibited b from midday. Alternatively, there, /b on Shabbat eve and Festival eve, it is b a sign of blessing that he does not see; however, /b the Sages b do not excommunicate him /b for performing labor. b Here, /b in the case of Passover eve, the Sages b also excommunicate him /b for performing labor, as it is explicitly prohibited.,The Gemara cites the source of the b matter itself /b in its entirety: b One who performs labor on Shabbat eves or on Festival eves from i minḥa /i /b time b onward, /b and similarly one who works immediately upon b the conclusion of Shabbat, /b or b the conclusion of a Festival, /b or b the conclusion of Yom Kippur, or on any occasion where there is a trace of sin, /b which comes b to include a communal fast, /b e.g., the Ninth of Av or a fast for rain, when it is prohibited to perform labor, b never sees a sign of blessing /b from this work. If one performs labor just before Shabbat or immediately after Shabbat, the concern is that even a slight miscalculation could lead to performance of labor on Shabbat itself, when it is prohibited.,Apropos reward or lack thereof, the Gemara cites th i e Tosefta /i in which b the Sages taught: There is /b one who is b diligent and rewarded /b for his diligence; b and there is /b one who is b diligent and penalized /b due to his diligence; b there is /b one who is b lazy and rewarded; and there is /b one who is b lazy and penalized. /b How so? b Diligent and rewarded /b is referring to one b who works the entire week and does not work on Shabbat eve. Diligent and penalized /b is one who b works all week and works on Shabbat eve. Lazy and rewarded /b is one b who does not work the entire week and does not work on Shabbat eve. Lazy and penalized /b is one who does b not work the entire week and works on Shabbat eve /b to complete the work he neglected to perform during the week. b Rava said: /b With regard to b those women of Meḥoza, even though they do not perform labor on Shabbat eve, it is due to /b excessive b pampering, as neither do they work on any /b other b day. Even so, we call them lazy and rewarded. /b Despite the fact that their laziness is not motivated by piety, their inactivity has a positive aspect to it.,On the topic of reward for a mitzva fulfilled without intent, b Rava raised a contradiction: /b It b is written: “For Your mercy is great unto the heavens, /b and Your truth reaches the skies” (Psalms 57:11); b and it is written /b elsewhere: b “For Your mercy is great above the heavens, /b and Your truth reaches the skies” (Psalms 108:5). b How so? /b How can these verses be reconciled? The Gemara explains: b Here, /b where the verse says that God’s mercy is above the heavens, it is referring to a case where b one performs /b a mitzva b for its own sake; and here, /b where the verse says that God’s mercy reaches the heavens, it is referring to a case where b one performs /b a mitzva b not for its own sake. /b Even a mitzva performed with ulterior motives garners reward, b as Rav Yehuda said /b that b Rav said: A person should always engage in Torah /b study and performance of b mitzvot, even if /b he does so b not for their /b own b sake, as through /b the performance of mitzvot b not for their /b own b sake, /b one gains understanding and b comes /b to perform them b for their /b own b sake. /b , b The Sages taught: One who anticipates /b receiving b the earnings of his wife or /b of b a mill never sees a sign of blessing /b from them. The Gemara explains: b Earnings of his wife /b is referring to a case where she spins thread for others and charges by weight on b a scale /b (Rabbeinu Ḥael). The profit is small and it is demeaning to walk in public to solicit customers. Earnings of the b mill /b is referring to a hand mill for which people pay b rent /b and grind their grain. In that case too, the profits are meager. b However, if a woman works and sells /b the product of her labor, b the verse praises her, as it is written /b about a woman of valor: b “She made a cloak and sold it, /b and delivered a belt to the peddler” (Proverbs 31:24)., b The Sages taught /b with regard to a sign of blessing: b One who earns /b a living b from /b selling b rods or jugs will never see a sign of blessing /b from them. b What is the reason /b for this? b Since their volume /b is great, b the /b evil b eye dominates them. /b People believe that one is selling more than he is actually selling. Similarly, b the Sages taught: Merchants /b who sell their wares b in an alleyway [ i simta /i ] /b adjacent to a thoroughfare, where they are seen by all; b and those who raise small livestock, /b which tend to damage other people’s fields; b and those who chop down good /b fruit b trees, /b even if they were permitted to do so; and b those who direct their eyes to the fine portion /b with the intention of taking that portion for himself when dividing an item with others, will b never see a sign of blessing /b from them. b What is the reason /b for this? It is b that /b due to these actions b people wonder about him /b and pay special attention to his conduct. Due to that attention, his actions will not be blessed.,Similarly b the Sages taught: In four i perutot /i , /b payments, b there is never a sign of blessing: Wages of scribes /b of sacred books; b wages of disseminators, /b who repeat and explain the lectures delivered by the Sages on Shabbat; b payment of orphans, /b which one receives when engaging in a partnership with the executor of an orphan’s estate; b and money that comes from a country overseas. /b ,The Gemara asks: b Granted, /b one will be unsuccessful when receiving b wages of disseminators, as it appears as /b if he is receiving b wages /b for work performed on b Shabbat, /b even though what he is doing is not actually prohibited. b And /b it is also understandable that one will see no blessing from b orphans’ money, /b as minors b are not capable of relinquishing /b property. Minors do not have the legal right to forgive even negligible losses, which partners typically overlook. Therefore, one who in the course of business takes even the smallest amount of money from them beyond the sum to which he is entitled is considered a thief. One sees no blessing from b money that comes from a country overseas, /b because b a miracle does not transpire every day. /b Since the risks involved in shipping cargo on long sea voyages are great, one’s merit is diminished each time his merchandise miraculously arrives intact.,However, b what is the reason /b that one sees no blessing from b wages of scribes? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: The members of the Great Assembly observed twenty-four fasts, /b corresponding to the twenty-four priestly watches (Maharsha), b for scribes /b who write Torah b scrolls, phylacteries, and i mezuzot /i , so that they will not become wealthy /b from their craft, b as were they /b to b become wealthy, they /b would no longer b write /b these sacred items. Similarly, b the Sages taught: Scribes /b who write b scrolls, phylacteries, and i mezuzot /i ; /b and b their merchants, /b who buy the sacred scrolls from the scribes to sell them; and b their merchants’ merchants; and all those engaged in the work of Heaven /b and earn their living from it, a phrase that comes b to include those who sell the sky-blue /b dye for ritual fringes, b never see a sign of blessing /b from their labor. b And if they engage /b in these activities b for their own sake, /b to ensure that there will be more sacred items available to the public, then b they /b do b see /b blessing from their labor.,As the mishna discusses the requirement to observe local customs, the Gemara relates: b The residents of Beit She’an were accustomed not to travel from Tyre to /b market day in b Sidon on Shabbat eve. /b In deference to Shabbat, they adopted a stringency and would not interrupt their Shabbat preparations even for a short sea voyage. b Their children came before Rabbi Yoḥa /b to request that he repeal this custom. b They said to him: /b Due to their wealth, it was possible for b our fathers /b to earn a living without traveling to the market on Friday; b however, it is not possible for us /b to do so. b He said to them: Your fathers already accepted /b this virtuous custom b upon themselves, /b and it remains in effect for you, b as it is stated: “My son, hear your father’s rebuke and do not abandon your mother’s teaching” /b (Proverbs 1:8). In addition to adhering to one’s father’s rebuke, i.e., i halakha /i , one is also required to preserve his mother’s teaching, i.e., ancestral customs.,The Gemara relates additional customs: b The residents /b of the city of b Ḥozai were accustomed to separate i ḥalla /i from rice /b dough. b They came and told Rav Yosef /b about this custom. b He said to them: Let a non-priest eat /b this dough b in their presence /b to show them unequivocally that this custom has no legal basis. b Abaye raised an objection to him: /b With regard to b matters /b that are b permitted, but others were accustomed to /b treat b them /b as a b prohibition, /b

10. Babylonian Talmud, Rosh Hashanah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sasanian context, empire Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 191

17a. ומצפצפין ועולין שנאמר (זכריה יג, ט) והבאתי את השלישית באש וצרפתים כצרוף את הכסף ובחנתים כבחון את הזהב הוא יקרא בשמי ואני אענה אותו ועליהם אמרה חנה (שמואל א ב, ו) ה' ממית ומחי' מוריד שאול ויעל,ב"ה אומרים ורב חסד מטה כלפי חסד ועליהם אמר דוד (תהלים קטז, א) אהבתי כי ישמע ה' את קולי ועליהם אמר דוד כל הפרשה כולה דלותי ולי יהושיע,פושעי ישראל בגופן ופושעי אומות העולם בגופן יורדין לגיהנם ונידונין בה י"ב חדש לאחר י"ב חדש גופן כלה ונשמתן נשרפת ורוח מפזרתן תחת כפות רגלי צדיקים שנא' (מלאכי ג, כא) ועסותם רשעים כי יהיו אפר תחת כפות רגליכם,אבל המינין והמסורות והאפיקורסים שכפרו בתורה ושכפרו בתחיית המתים ושפירשו מדרכי צבור ושנתנו חיתיתם בארץ חיים ושחטאו והחטיאו את הרבים כגון ירבעם בן נבט וחביריו יורדין לגיהנם ונידונין בה לדורי דורות שנאמר (ישעיהו סו, כד) ויצאו וראו בפגרי האנשים הפושעים בי וגו',גיהנם כלה והן אינן כלין שנאמר (תהלים מט, טו) וצורם לבלות שאול (מזבול לו) וכל כך למה מפני שפשטו ידיהם בזבול שנאמר מזבול לו ואין זבול אלא בית המקדש שנאמר (מלכים א ח, יג) בנה בניתי בית זבול לך ועליהם אמרה חנה (שמואל א ב, י) ה' יחתו מריביו,א"ר יצחק בר אבין ופניהם דומין לשולי קדירה ואמר רבא ואינהו משפירי שפירי בני מחוזא ומקריין בני גיהנם,אמר מר ב"ה אומרים ורב חסד מטה כלפי חסד והכתיב והבאתי את השלישית באש התם בפושעי ישראל בגופן,פושעי ישראל בגופן והא אמרת לית להו תקנתא כי לית להו תקנה ברוב עונות הכא מחצה עונות ומחצה זכיות ואית בהו נמי עון דפושעי ישראל בגופן לא סגיא ליה דלאו והבאתי את השלישית באש ואם לאו ורב חסד מטה כלפי חסד ועליהן אמר דוד אהבתי כי ישמע ה',דרש רבא מאי דכתיב אהבתי כי ישמע ה' אמרה כנסת ישראל לפני הקב"ה רבש"ע אימתי אני אהובה לפניך בזמן שאתה שומע קול תחנוני דלותי ולי יהושיע אע"פ שדלה אני מן המצות לי נאה להושיע,פושעי ישראל בגופן מאי ניהו אמר רב קרקפתא דלא מנח תפלין פושעי אומות העולם בגופן אמר רב בעבירה,ושנתנו חיתיתם בארץ חיים אמר רב חסדא זה פרנס המטיל אימה יתירה על הצבור שלא לשם שמים א"ר יהודה אמר רב כל פרנס המטיל אימה יתירה על הצבור שלא לשם שמים אינו רואה בן תלמיד חכם שנאמר (איוב לז, כד) לכן יראוהו אנשים לא יראה כל חכמי לב,בית הלל אומרים ורב חסד מטה כלפי חסד היכי עביד רבי אליעזר אומר כובשו שנאמר (מיכה ז, יט) ישוב ירחמנו יכבוש עונותינו ר' יוסי בר חנינא אמר נושא שנאמר (מיכה ז, יח) נושא עון ועובר על פשע,תנא דבי רבי ישמעאל מעביר ראשון ראשון וכן היא המדה אמר רבא ועון עצמו אינו נמחק דאי איכא רובא עונות מחשיב בהדייהו,(רבא אמר) כל המעביר על מדותיו מעבירין לו על כל פשעיו שנאמר נושא עון ועובר על פשע למי נושא עון למי שעובר על פשע,רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע חלש על רב פפא לשיולי ביה חזייה דחליש ליה עלמא אמר להו צביתו ליה זוודתא לסוף איתפח הוה מיכסיף רב פפא למיחזייה א"ל מאי חזית אמר (ליה) אין הכי הוה ואמר להו הקב"ה הואיל ולא מוקים במיליה לא תקומו בהדיה שנאמר נושא עון ועובר על פשע למי נושא עון לעובר פשע,(מיכה ז, יח) לשארית נחלתו אמר רבי אחא בר חנינא אליה וקוץ בה לשארית נחלתו ולא לכל נחלתו

17a. b and they will cry out /b in their pain b and /b eventually b ascend /b from there, b as it is stated: “And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried; they shall call on My name, and I will answer them” /b (Zechariah 13:9). This is referring to the members of the third group, who require refinement and cleansing. b And about them, Hannah said: “The Lord kills, and gives life; he brings down to the grave, and brings up” /b (I Samuel 2:6)., b Beit Hillel say: /b He Who is b “and abundant in kindness” /b (Exodus 34:6) b tilts /b the scales b in favor of kindness, /b so that middling people should not have to pass through Gehenna. b And about them, David said: “I love the Lord, Who hears my voice /b and my supplications” (Psalms 116:1). b And about them, David said the entire passage: “I was brought low [ i daloti /i ] and He saved me” /b (Psalms 116:6). Although they are poor [ i dalim /i ] in mitzvot, God saves them., b The rebellious Jews /b who have sinned b with their bodies and /b also b the rebellious /b people b of the nations of the world /b who have sinned b with their bodies descend to Gehenna and are judged there for twelve months. After twelve months, their bodies are consumed, their souls are burned, and a wind scatters them under the soles of the feet of the righteous, as it is stated: “And you shall tread down the wicked; for they shall be ashes under the soles of your feet” /b (Malachi 3:21)., b But the heretics; and the informers; and the apostates [ i apikorsim /i ]; /b and those b who denied the Torah; and /b those who b denied the resurrection of the dead; and /b those who b separated from the ways of /b the Jewish b community /b and refused to share the suffering; b and /b those b who cast their fear over the land of the living; and /b those who b sinned and caused the masses to sin, for example, Jeroboam, son of Nebat, and his company; /b all of these people b descend to Gehenna and are judged there for generations and generations, as it is stated: “And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcasses of the men that have rebelled against Me; /b for their worm shall not die; neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh” (Isaiah 66:24)., b Gehenna will terminate, but they /b still b will not terminate, as it is stated: “And their form shall wear away the netherworld, so that there be no dwelling for Him” /b (Psalms 49:15); that is to say, Gehenna itself will be worn away before their punishment has come to an end. b And why /b are they punished b so severely? Because they stretched out their hands against /b God’s b dwelling, /b the Temple, and everything else that is sanctified, b as it is stated: “So that there be no dwelling [ i zevul /i ] for Him.” Dwelling [ i zevul /i ] is referring /b here b only to the Temple, as it is stated: “I have built You a house for dwelling [ i zevul /i ] in” /b (I Kings 8:13). b And about them Hannah said: “The adversaries of the Lord shall be broken in pieces” /b (I Samuel 2:10)., b Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Avin said: And their faces /b on the Day of Judgment b will be /b black and sooty b like the bottom of a pot. And Rava said: And they shall include the most handsome, /b i.e., upstanding, b of the people of Meḥoza, /b as Rava thought that even the most upstanding people of the city of Meḥoza were wicked, b and they shall be called the people of Gehenna. /b , b The Master said /b in the i baraita /i above: It stated that b Beit Hillel say: /b He Who is b “and abundant in kindness” /b (Exodus 34:6) b tilts /b the scales b in favor of kindness, /b so that middling people will not have to pass through Gehenna. The Gemara asks: b But isn’t it written: “And I will bring the third part through the fire” /b (Zechariah 13:9), implying that there is a third group, which is sent to Gehenna temporarily? The Gemara answers: b There, /b the verse is referring to b the rebellious Jews /b who have sinned b with their bodies. /b ,The Gemara asks: Can the verse be referring to b the rebellious Jews /b who have sinned b with their bodies? But didn’t you say that they have no rectification? /b The Gemara responds: b When do they have no rectification? When /b in addition to their having sinned with their bodies, the b majority /b of their actions are b sins. /b But b here, /b the verse is referring to people for whom b half /b of their actions are b sins and half /b are b meritorious deeds, and /b those sins b include the sin of the rebellious Jews /b who sin b with their bodies. It is not sufficient that they not be /b subject to the verse: b “And I will bring the third part through the fire.” However, if /b their sins and meritorious deeds are equally balanced, and they did b not /b sin with their bodies, He Who is b “abundant in kindness” tilts /b the scales b in favor of kindness. And about them, David said: “I love the Lord, Who hears /b my voice and my supplications” (Psalms 116:1)., b Rava interpreted /b the verse b homiletically: What is /b the meaning of that b which is written: “I love the Lord, Who hears /b my voice and my supplications”? b The Congregation of Israel said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, when /b do I know that b I am loved by You? When You hear the voice of my supplications, /b as the verse states: b “I was brought low [ i daloti /i ], and He saved me” /b (Psalms 116:6). b Although I am poor [ i dala /i ] in mitzvot, /b nevertheless b it is fitting to save me. /b ,The Gemara asks: b The rebellious Jews /b who have sinned b with their bodies, who are they? Rav said: /b This is referring to b the skull that did not /b ever b don phylacteries. /b The Gemara asks further: b The rebellious /b ones b of the nations of the world /b who sin b with their bodies, /b who are they? b Rav said: /b They are those who engage b in the sin, /b i.e., forbidden sexual relations., b And those who cast their fear over the land of the living, /b who are they? b Rav Ḥisda said: This is referring to /b a communal b leader [ i parnas /i ] who casts excessive fear on the community not for the sake of Heaven. Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: Any /b community b leader who casts excessive fear on the community not for the sake of Heaven will /b be punished and b not see any Torah scholar among his sons, as it is stated: “Men do therefore fear him; he sees not any who are wise of heart” /b (Job 37:24). One who brings others to fear him will not merit having wise-hearted people in his family.,§ It was taught in the i baraita /i : b Beit Hillel say: /b He who is b “and abundant in kindness” /b (Exodus 34:6) b tilts /b the scales b in favor of kindness, /b so that middling people will not have to pass through Gehenna. The Gemara asks: b How does He do /b this? b Rabbi Eliezer says: He pushes down /b on the side of the merits, tipping the scale in their favor, b as it is stated: “He will again have compassion upon us; He will push down our iniquities” /b (Micah 7:19). b Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said: He bears, /b i.e., raises, the side of the sins, b as it is stated: “He bears [ i noseh /i ] sin and forgives transgression” /b (Micah 7:18).,A Sage b from the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught /b in a i baraita /i : b He overlooks /b each and every b first /b transgression, b and that is the attribute /b of mercy, that God forgives one’s first sin, and therefore He tips the scale in favor of the merits. b Rava said: But /b that b sin itself, /b which God overlooks, b is not /b completely b erased; if /b the individual’s actions are still b mostly sins, /b God b counts /b the overlooked sin b with them /b and metes out punishment accordingly., b Rava /b understood this verse differently and b said: /b With regard to b whoever forgoes his reckonings /b with others for injustices done to him, the heavenly court in turn b forgoes /b punishment b for all his sins, as it is stated: “He bears sin and forgives transgression” /b (Micah 7:18). b Whose sins does He bear? /b The sins b of one who forgoes his reckonings /b with others for injustices committed against him.,It is related that b Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, became sick, /b and b Rav Pappa went into /b his home to b inquire about his /b well-being. b He saw that the world was growing weak for /b Rav Huna, i.e., he was dying. Rav Pappa b said to /b his attendants: b Prepare his provisions [ i zavdata /i ], /b i.e., his shrouds. b In the end, /b Rav Huna b recovered. Rav Pappa was embarrassed to /b go and b see him, /b as it seemed as if he had decreed Rav Huna’s death. Rav Huna’s friends b said to him: What did you see /b when you were lying there suspended between life and death? b He said to them: Yes, it was so, /b I was truly close to dying, b but the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to /b the heavenly court: b Since he does not stand on his rights, /b i.e., he is ready to waive what is due him, b you /b too b should not be exacting /b with him in his judgment, b as it is stated: “He bears [ i noseh /i ] sin and forgives transgression.” Whose sins does He bear? /b The sins b of one who forgoes his reckonings /b with others for injustices committed against him.,That same verse continues: “He bears sins and forgives transgression b for the remt of His inheritance” /b (Micah 7:18). b Rav Aḥa bar Ḥanina said: /b This is like the b fat tail that has a thorn in it, /b i.e., something good that contains something bad. God forgives and pardons only b “for the remt of His inheritance,” but not for all His inheritance. /b

11. Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 191

47b. אבל אסור ולא יתקע ואם תקע חייב חטאת רשב"ג אומר אם היה רפוי מותר,בי רב חמא הוה מטה גללניתא הוה מהדרי לה ביומא טבא א"ל ההוא מדרבנן לרבא מאי דעתיך בנין מן הצד הוא נהי דאיסורא דאורייתא ליכא איסורא דרבנן מיהא איכא אמר ליה אנא כרשב"ג סבירא לי דאמר אם היה רפוי מותר:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big נותנין כלי תחת הנר לקבל ניצוצות ולא יתן לתוכו מים מפני שהוא מכבה:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big והא קמבטל כלי מהיכנו אמר רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע ניצוצות אין בהן ממש:,ולא יתן לתוכו מים מפני שהוא מכבה: לימא תנן סתמא כרבי יוסי דאמר גורם לכיבוי אסור,ותסברא אימור דאמר ר' יוסי בשבת בערב שבת מי אמר וכי תימא הכא נמי בשבת והתניא נותנין כלי תחת הנר לקבל ניצוצות בשבת ואין צריך לומר בע"ש ולא יתן לתוכו מים מפני שהוא מכבה מע"ש ואין צריך לומר בשבת אלא אמר רב אשי אפילו תימא רבנן שאני הכא מפני שמקרב את כיבויו:, br br big strongהדרן עלך כירה /strong /big br br,מתני׳ big strongבמה /strong /big טומנין ובמה אין טומנין אין טומנין לא בגפת ולא בזבל לא במלח ולא בסיד ולא בחול בין לחין בין יבשין,ולא בתבן ולא בזגין ולא במוכין ולא בעשבין בזמן שהן לחין אבל טומנין בהן כשהן יבשין:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big איבעיא להו גפת של זיתים תנן אבל דשומשמין שפיר דמי או דילמא דשומשמין תנן וכל שכן דזיתים,ת"ש דאמר ר' זירא משום חד דבי ר' ינאי קופה שטמן בה אסור להניחה על גפת של זיתים ש"מ של זיתים תנן,לעולם אימא לך לענין הטמנה דשומשמין נמי אסור לענין

47b. b However, /b doing so is b prohibited. And one may not fasten /b the pieces together forcefully, b and if he fastens /b them, b he is liable to /b bring b a sin-offering /b for performing a labor prohibited by Torah law. b Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: If it was loose /b and could be assembled with ease, b it is permitted. /b Rabbi Abba and Rav Huna bar Ḥiyya relied on this opinion.,The Gemara relates: b In the house of Rav Ḥama, /b Rava’s grandfather, b there was a collapsible bed, /b similar to a weaver’s loom, b and they would reassemble it on a Festival. One of the Sages said to Rava: What is your opinion? /b Do you hold that this b is allowed /b because b it is building in an atypical manner? /b In other words, one is not performing the prohibited labor of building since it is was not performed in the standard manner? b Although there is no Torah prohibition, there is, in any case, a rabbinic prohibition. /b Rava b said to him: I hold in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel /b who said that b if it were loose, it is permitted /b even i ab initio /i ., strong MISHNA: /strong b One may place a vessel beneath the /b oil b lamp /b in order b to receive /b burning b sparks /b of oil that fall from the lamp so that they will not cause a fire. b And he may not place water into /b the vessel b because he /b thereby b extinguishes /b the sparks., strong GEMARA: /strong The Gemara asks: How is it permitted to position this vessel to receive the sparks, b doesn’t he /b thereby b negate /b the b vessel’s preparedness? /b It is no longer prepared for any use on Shabbat as the sparks accord it set-aside status. The opinion that negating the preparedness of a vessel is prohibited has already been stated. b Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said: Sparks have no substance. /b They burn immediately and do not leave behind any trace of oil in the vessel. Therefore, the vessel remains suitable to be moved., b And /b we also learned in the mishna that b one may not place water into /b the vessel situated beneath the candle b because he /b thereby b extinguishes /b the sparks. The Gemara remarks: b Is that to say /b that b we learned /b an b unattributed /b mishna b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yosei, /b who b said /b that even an action that b causes extinguishing /b indirectly b is prohibited? /b The extinguishing in this case, where water was placed into a vessel, was not accomplished by means of a direct action. His action only caused it to extinguish indirectly.,The Gemara rejects this question in astonishment: b And /b how can b you understand /b it in that manner? b Say /b that b Rabbi Yosei said /b that indirectly causing extinguishing is prohibited b on Shabbat; on Shabbat eve did he say /b this? b And if you say /b that b here, too, it is /b referring to a case where he placed water in the vessel b on Shabbat, wasn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b One may place a vessel underneath an /b oil b lamp to receive sparks /b that fall from the lamp b on Shabbat, and, needless to say, /b placing it there is permitted b on Shabbat eve? And one may not put water into /b the vessel b because he will /b thereby b extinguish /b the spark, even if he placed it there b on Shabbat eve, and, needless to say, /b doing so is prohibited b on Shabbat /b itself. Apparently, the prohibition in the mishna is not at all connected to Rabbi Yosei’s approach. b Rather, Rav Ashi said: Even if you say /b that this mishna is in accordance with the opinion of b the Rabbis, it is different here because, /b in this case, he is not only causing the spark to extinguish. He is b hastening its extinguishing, /b as the sparks are extinguished immediately when they fall into the water (Rabbeinu Ḥael). In this matter even the Rabbis would prohibit doing so.,,When a pot is removed from the fire on Shabbat eve it may be insulated in materials that preserve its heat, but not in materials that increase its heat. Raising the temperature of a pot is tantamount to cooking. The i mishnayot /i that follow list those materials in which such a pot may be insulated on Shabbat eve and those materials in which it may not be insulated. br br strong MISHNA: /strong b In what may one insulate /b a pot of cooked food on Shabbat eve, b and in what may one not insulate /b it? b One may neither insulate /b it b in the solid residue /b of produce that has been pressed free of its oil, b nor in manure, nor in salt, nor in lime, nor in sand, whether /b those materials are b moist /b or b whether /b they are b dry. /b All of these materials spontaneously generate heat when piled for an extended period. Therefore, they add heat to a pot insulated in them., b And /b one may b neither /b insulate a pot b in straw, nor in the residue of grapes /b that have been pressed for their juice, b nor in soft material, /b e.g., from tattered clothing, b nor in grass, when these /b materials b are moist. However, one may insulate /b a pot b in them when they are dry. /b , strong GEMARA: /strong b A dilemma was raised before /b the Sages: b Did we learn /b with regard to b the residue of olives /b in the mishna, b but /b the residue b of sesame /b seeds that were pressed for their oil, which produces less heat, may b well /b be used for insulating food on Shabbat eve? b Or, perhaps, we learned /b with regard to the residue b of sesame /b in the mishna, b and all the more so /b insulating food in the residue b of olives /b is prohibited?, b Come /b and b hear /b a resolution to this dilemma from what b Rabbi Zeira said in the name of one /b of the Sages b of the school of Rabbi Yannai: /b With regard to b a basket in which one insulated /b food in a permissible manner, e.g., in dry soft material or the like, b it is prohibited to place it upon the residue of olives. Conclude from this /b that b we learned /b with regard to the residue b of olives /b in our mishna; however, insulating food in the residue of sesame is permitted.,The Gemara rejects this proof: b Actually, I /b can b say to you /b that b with regard to /b actual b insulation, /b the residue b of sesame is also prohibited. /b However, b with regard to /b

12. Babylonian Talmud, Taanit, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sasanian context, empire Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 191

20b. נזדמן לו אדם אחד שהיה מכוער ביותר אמר לו שלום עליך רבי ולא החזיר לו אמר לו ריקה כמה מכוער אותו האיש שמא כל בני עירך מכוערין כמותך אמר לו איני יודע אלא לך ואמור לאומן שעשאני כמה מכוער כלי זה שעשית כיון שידע בעצמו שחטא ירד מן החמור ונשתטח לפניו ואמר לו נעניתי לך מחול לי אמר לו איני מוחל לך עד שתלך לאומן שעשאני ואמור לו כמה מכוער כלי זה שעשית,היה מטייל אחריו עד שהגיע לעירו יצאו בני עירו לקראתו והיו אומרים לו שלום עליך רבי רבי מורי מורי אמר להם למי אתם קורין רבי רבי אמרו לו לזה שמטייל אחריך אמר להם אם זה רבי אל ירבו כמותו בישראל אמרו לו מפני מה אמר להם כך וכך עשה לי אמרו לו אעפ"כ מחול לו שאדם גדול בתורה הוא,אמר להם בשבילכם הריני מוחל לו ובלבד שלא יהא רגיל לעשות כן מיד נכנס רבי אלעזר בן רבי שמעון ודרש לעולם יהא אדם רך כקנה ואל יהא קשה כארז ולפיכך זכה קנה ליטול הימנה קולמוס לכתוב בו ספר תורה תפילין ומזוזות:,וכן עיר שיש בה דבר או מפולת כו': תנו רבנן מפולת שאמרו בריאות ולא רעועות שאינן ראויות ליפול ולא הראויות ליפול,הי ניהו בריאות הי ניהו שאינן ראויות ליפול הי ניהו רעועות הי ניהו ראויות ליפול לא צריכא דנפלו מחמת גובהייהו אי נמי דקיימן אגודא דנהרא,כי ההיא אשיתא רעועה דהואי בנהרדעא דלא הוה חליף רב ושמואל תותה אע"ג דקיימא באתרה תליסר שנין יומא חד איקלע רב אדא בר אהבה להתם אמר ליה שמואל לרב ניתי מר נקיף אמר ליה לא צריכנא האידנא דאיכא רב אדא בר אהבה בהדן דנפיש זכותיה ולא מסתפינא,רב הונא הוה ליה ההוא חמרא בההוא ביתא רעיעא ובעי לפנוייה עייליה לרב אדא בר אהבה להתם משכי' בשמעתא עד דפנייה בתר דנפק נפל ביתא ארגיש רב אדא בר אהבה איקפד,סבר לה כי הא דאמר רבי ינאי לעולם אל יעמוד אדם במקום סכנה ויאמר עושין לי נס שמא אין עושין לו נס ואם תימצי לומר עושין לו נס מנכין לו מזכיותיו אמר רב חנן מאי קרא דכתיב (בראשית לב, יא) קטנתי מכל החסדים ומכל האמת,מאי הוה עובדיה דרב אדא בר אהבה כי הא דאתמר שאלו תלמידיו (את רבי זירא ואמרי לה) לרב אדא בר אהבה במה הארכת ימים אמר להם מימי לא הקפדתי בתוך ביתי ולא צעדתי בפני מי שגדול ממני,ולא הרהרתי במבואות המטונפות ולא הלכתי ד' אמות בלא תורה ובלא תפילין ולא ישנתי בבית המדרש לא שינת קבע ולא שינת עראי ולא ששתי בתקלת חברי ולא קראתי לחבירי בהכינתו ואמרי לה בחניכתו,אמר ליה רבא לרפרם בר פפא לימא לן מר מהני מילי מעלייתא דהוה עביד רב הונא אמר ליה בינקותיה לא דכירנא בסיבותיה דכירנא דכל יומא דעיבא הוו מפקין ליה בגוהרקא דדהבא וסייר לה לכולה מתא וכל אשיתא דהוות רעיעתא הוה סתר לה אי אפשר למרה בני לה ואי לא אפשר בני לה איהו מדידיה,וכל פניא דמעלי שבתא הוה משדר שלוחא לשוקא וכל ירקא דהוה פייש להו לגינאי זבין ליה ושדי ליה לנהרא וליתביה לעניים זמנין דסמכא דעתייהו ולא אתו למיזבן ולשדייה לבהמה קסבר מאכל אדם אין מאכילין לבהמה,ולא ליזבניה כלל נמצאת מכשילן לעתיד לבא,כי הוה ליה מילתא דאסותא הוי מלי כוזא דמיא ותלי ליה בסיפא דביתא ואמר כל דבעי ליתי ולישקול ואיכא דאמרי מילתא דשיבתא הוה גמיר והוה מנח כוזא דמיא ודלי ליה ואמר כל דצריך ליתי וליעול דלא לסתכן,כי הוה כרך ריפתא הוה פתח לבביה ואמר כל מאן דצריך ליתי וליכול אמר רבא כולהו מצינא מקיימנא לבר מהא דלא מצינא למיעבד

20b. b He happened /b upon b an exceedingly ugly person, /b who b said to him: Greetings to you, my rabbi, but /b Rabbi Elazar b did not return /b his greeting. Instead, Rabbi Elazar b said to him: Worthless [ i reika /i ] /b person, b how ugly is that man. Are all the people of your city as ugly as you? /b The man b said to him: I do not know, but you /b should b go and say to the Craftsman Who made me: How ugly is the vessel you made. When /b Rabbi Elazar b realized that he /b had b sinned /b and insulted this man merely on account of his appearance, b he descended from his donkey and prostrated himself before him, and he said to /b the man: b I have sinned against you; forgive me. /b The man b said to him: I will not forgive you go until you go to the Craftsman Who made me and say: How ugly is the vessel you made. /b , b He walked behind /b the man, trying to appease him, b until they reached /b Rabbi Elazar’s b city. The people of his city came out to greet him, saying to him: Greetings to you, my rabbi, my rabbi, my master, my master. /b The man b said to them: Who are you calling my rabbi, my rabbi? They said to him: To this man, who is walking behind you. He said to them: If this /b man b is a rabbi, may there not be many like him among the Jewish people. They asked him: For what /b reason do you say this? He b said to them: He did such and such to me. They said to him: Even so, /b forgive him, b as he is a great Torah scholar. /b , b He said to them: For your sakes I forgive him, provided that /b he accepts upon himself b not to become accustomed to behave like this. Immediately, Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, entered the study hall and taught: A person should always be soft like a reed and he should not be stiff like a cedar, /b as one who is proud like a cedar is likely to sin. b And therefore, /b due to its gentle qualities, the b reed merited /b that b a quill is taken from it to write with it a Torah scroll, phylacteries, and i mezuzot /i . /b ,§ The mishna taught: b And likewise, /b if a b city is /b afflicted b by pestilence or collapsing buildings, /b that city fasts and sounds the alarm, and all of its surrounding areas fast but they do not sound the alarm. Rabbi Akiva says: They sound the alarm but they do not fast. b The Sages taught: /b These collapsing buildings b to which /b the Sages b referred /b are those of b sturdy and not dilapidated /b walls; they have walls b that are not ready to fall, and not those that are ready to fall. /b ,The Gemara expresses puzzlement with regard to the wording of the i baraita /i : b What are sound /b walls; b what are /b walls b that are not ready to fall; what are dilapidated /b walls; b what are those that are ready to fall? /b The elements in each pair of walls are apparently the same, and the i baraita /i is repetitive. The Gemara answers: b No, /b it is b necessary /b to specify that in the case of walls b that fell due to their height, /b i.e., they are sound but also ready to fall, due to their excessive height. b Alternatively, /b the i baraita /i is referring to a case b where /b the walls b were positioned on a riverbank, /b as they are likely to fall despite the fact that they are not dilapidated, as the riverbank itself is unstable.,The Gemara relates: This is b like that /b dilapidated wall b that was in Neharde’a, under which Rav and Shmuel would not pass, although it stood in place thirteen years. One day Rav Adda bar Ahava happened /b to come b there /b and walked with them. As they passed the wall, b Shmuel said to Rav: Come, Master, let us circumvent /b this wall, so that we do not stand beneath it. Rav b said to him: /b It is b not necessary /b to do so b today, as Rav Adda bar Ahava is with us, whose merit is great, and /b therefore b I am not afraid /b of its collapse.,The Gemara relates another incident. b Rav Huna had a certain /b quantity of b wine in a certain dilapidated house and he wanted to move it, /b but he was afraid that the building would collapse upon his entry. b He brought Rav Adda bar Ahava to there, /b to the ramshackle house, and b he dragged /b out a discussion with b him /b concerning a matter of b i halakha /i until they had removed /b all the wine. b As soon as they exited, the building collapsed. Rav Adda bar Ahava realized /b what had happened b and became angry. /b ,The Gemara explains: Rav Adda bar Ahava b holds in accordance with this /b statement, b as Rabbi Yannai said: A person should never stand in a place of danger and say: A miracle will be performed for me, /b and I will escape unharmed, b lest a miracle is not performed for him. And if you say /b that b a miracle /b will be b performed for him, they will deduct it from his merits. Rav Ḥa said: What is the verse /b that alludes to this idea? b As it is written: “I have become small from all the mercies and all the truth /b that You have showed Your servant” (Genesis 32:11). In other words, the more benevolence one receives from God, the more his merit is reduced.,After recounting stories that reflect Rav Adda bar Ahava’s great merit, the Gemara asks: b What were /b the exceptional deeds b of Rav Adda bar Ahava? /b The Gemara reports that they are b as it is stated: /b The students of Rabbi Zeira asked him, and some say that b the students of Rav Adda bar Ahava asked him: To what /b do you attribute b your longevity? He said to them: In all my days I did not become angry with my household, and I never walked before someone greater than myself; /b rather, I always gave him the honor of walking before me.,Rav Adda bar Ahava continued: b And I did not think /b about matters of Torah b in filthy alleyways; and I did not walk four cubits without /b engaging in b Torah and without /b donning b phylacteries; and I /b would b not fall asleep in the study hall, neither a deep sleep nor a brief nap; and I /b would b not rejoice in the mishap of my colleague; and I /b would b not call my colleague by his nickname. And some say /b that he said: I would b not call my colleague by his /b derogatory b family name. /b ,§ The Gemara relates another story about the righteous deeds of the Sages involving a dilapidated wall. b Rava said to Rafram bar Pappa: Let the Master tell us some of those fine /b deeds b that Rav Huna performed. He said to him: I do not remember /b what he did b in his youth, but /b the deeds b of his old age I remember. As on every cloudy day they would take him out in a golden carriage [ i guharka /i ], and he would survey the entire city. And /b he would command b that every unstable wall /b be b torn down, /b lest it fall in the rain and hurt someone. b If its owner was able /b to build another, Rav Huna would instruct him b to rebuild it. And if he was unable /b to rebuild it, Rav Huna would b build it himself with his own money. /b ,Rafram bar Pappa further relates: b And every Shabbat eve, /b in the b afternoon, /b Rav Huna b would send a messenger to the marketplace, and he would purchase all the vegetables that were left with the gardeners /b who sold their crops, b and throw /b them b into the river. /b The Gemara asks: b But /b why did he throw out the vegetables? b Let him give them to the poor. /b The Gemara answers: If he did this, the poor would b sometimes rely /b on the fact that Rav Huna would hand out vegetables, b and they would not come to purchase /b any. This would ruin the gardeners’ livelihood. The Gemara further asks: b And let him throw them to the animals. /b The Gemara answers: b He holds /b that b human food /b may b not be fed to animals, /b as this is a display of contempt for the food.,The Gemara objects: b But /b if Rav Huna could not use them in any way, he should b not purchase /b the vegetables b at all. /b The Gemara answers: If nothing is done, b you /b would have been b found /b to have caused b a stumbling block for them in the future. /b If the vegetable sellers see that some of their produce is left unsold, the next week they will not bring enough for Shabbat. Therefore, Rav Huna made sure that the vegetables were all bought, so that the sellers would continue to bring them.,Another custom of Rav Huna was b that when he had /b a new b medicine, he would fill /b a water b jug /b with the medicine b and hang it from the doorpost of his house, saying: All who need, let him come and take /b from this new medicine. b And there are /b those b who say: He had a remedy /b against the demon b Shivta /b that he knew by b tradition, /b that one must wash his hands for protection against this evil spirit. b And /b to this end, b he would place a water jug and hang /b it by the door, b saying: Anyone who needs, let him come /b to the house and wash his hands, so b that he will not be in danger. /b ,The Gemara further relates: b When /b Rav Huna b would eat bread, he would open the doors /b to his house, b saying: Whoever needs, let him come in and eat. Rava said: I can fulfill all these /b customs of Rav Huna, b except for this one, which I cannot do, /b

13. Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah, None Tagged with subjects: •sasanian context, empire Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 191

70a. יצרא דיין נסך לא תקיף להו זונה ישראלית ועובדי כוכבים מסובין חמרא אסור מ"ט הואיל וזילה עלייהו בתרייהו גרירא,ההוא ביתא דהוה יתיב ביה חמרא דישראל על עובד כוכבים אחדה לדשא באפיה והוה ביזעא בדשא אישתכח עובד כוכבים דקאי ביני דני אמר רבא כל דלהדי ביזעא שרי דהאי גיסא והאי גיסא אסור,ההוא חמרא דישראל דהוה יתיב בביתא דהוה דייר ישראל בעליונה ועובד כוכבים בתחתונה שמעו קל תיגרא נפקי קדים אתא עובד כוכבים אחדה לדשא באפיה אמר רבא חמרא שרי מימר אמר כי היכי דקדים אתאי אנא קדים ואתא ישראל ויתיב בעליונה וקא חזי לי,ההוא אושפיזא דהוה יתיב ביה חמרא דישראל אישתכח עובד כוכבים דהוה יתיב בי דני אמר רבא אם נתפס עליו כגנב שרי ואי לא אסיר,ההוא ביתא דהוה יתיב ביה חמרא אישתכח עובד כוכבים דהוה קאים בי דני אמר רבא אי אית ליה לאישתמוטי חמרא אסיר ואי לא חמרא שרי מיתיבי ננעל הפונדק או שאמר לו שמור אסור מאי לאו אע"ג דלית ליה לאישתמוטי לא בדאית ליה לאישתמוטי,ההוא ישראל ועובד כוכבים דהוו יתיבי וקא שתו חמרא שמע ישראל קל צלויי בי כנישתא קם ואזל אמר רבא חמרא שרי מימר אמר השתא מדכר ליה לחמריה והדר אתי,ההוא ישראל ועובד כוכבים דהוו יתיבי בארבא שמע ישראל קל שיפורי דבי שימשי נפק ואזל אמר רבא חמרא שרי מימר אמר השתא מדכר ליה לחמריה והדר אתי,ואי משום שבתא האמר רבא אמר לי איסור גיורא כי הוינן בארמיותן אמרינן יהודאי לא מנטרי שבתא דאי מנטרי שבתא כמה כיסי קא משתכחי בשוקא ולא ידענא דסבירא לן כרבי יצחק דא"ר יצחק המוצא כיס בשבת מוליכו פחות פחות מד' אמות,ההוא אריא דהוה נהים במעצרתא שמע עובד כוכבים טשא ביני דני אמר רבא חמרא שרי מימר אמר כי היכי דטשינא אנא איטשא נמי ישראל אחוריי וקא חזי לי,הנהו גנבי דסלקי לפומבדיתא ופתחו חביתא טובא אמר רבא חמרא שרי מ"ט רובא גנבי ישראל נינהו הוה עובדא בנהרדעי ואמר שמואל חמרא שרי,כמאן כרבי אליעזר דאמר ספק ביאה טהור,דתנן הנכנס לבקעה בימות הגשמים וטומאה בשדה פלונית ואמר הלכתי במקום הלז ואיני יודע אם נכנסתי לאותה שדה אם לא נכנסתי ר"א אומר ספק ביאה טהור ספק מגע טמא,לא שאני התם כיון דאיכא דפתחי לשום ממונא הוה ליה ספק ספיקא

70a. but b the passion for wine /b used for b a libation does not overwhelm their /b judgment, and they will not allow her to use it for a libation. In the case of b a Jewish prostitute and gentiles dining /b with her, b the wine /b is b forbidden. What is the reason? /b It is that b since she is contemptible in their /b eyes, b she is subjugated to them, /b and they use the wine for a libation without consideration for her.,§ The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving b a certain house where Jews’ wine was stored. A gentile entered /b the house, and b he locked the door before /b the Jew, b but there was a crack in the door, /b and b the gentile was found standing between the barrels. Rava said: All /b the barrels b that were opposite the crack /b through which the gentile could be seen are b permitted, /b because he would have been wary about being seen tampering with them. Barrels b on this side and that side /b of the crack, where the gentile could not be seen, are b forbidden, /b as perhaps the gentile used them for a libation.,The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving b a certain Jew’s wine that was stored in /b the lower story of b a house, /b in b which the Jew was living in the upper /b story b and a gentile in the lower /b story, and the wine could be supervised from the upper story. One day the residents b heard a sound of quarreling /b and b went outside. The gentile came /b back in b first /b and b locked the door before /b the Jew. b Rava said: The wine /b is b permitted, /b because the gentile presumably b said /b to himself: b Just as I came /b back in b early, /b perhaps my neighbor the b Jew came /b back in b early and is sitting in the upper /b story b and watching me, /b and therefore he would not use the wine for a libation.,The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving b a certain inn [ i ushpiza /i ] where a Jew’s wine was stored, /b and b a gentile was found sitting among the barrels. Rava said: If he was caught as a thief, /b i.e., if the gentile seemed startled and did not have a good explanation for being there, the wine is b permitted, /b as the gentile was presumably afraid about being caught and would not have used it for a libation. b But if not, /b the wine is b forbidden. /b ,The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving b a certain house where wine was stored. A gentile was found standing among the barrels. Rava said: If he has /b a way b to excuse /b his entrance to where the wine was stored, b the wine /b is b forbidden, but if not, the wine /b is b permitted. /b The Gemara b raises an objection /b to this ruling from a i baraita /i : If b an inn was locked /b and a gentile was inside, b or /b if the Jew b said to /b the gentile: b Safeguard /b my wine, the wine is b forbidden. What, is it not /b forbidden b even if /b the gentile b does not have /b a way b to excuse /b his entrance? The Gemara answers: b No, /b the i baraita /i is referring to a situation b where he does have /b a way b to excuse /b his entrance; otherwise the wine is permitted.,The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving b a certain Jew and /b a certain b gentile who were sitting and drinking wine. /b The b Jew heard the sound of praying at the synagogue. He got up and went /b to pray. b Rava said: The wine /b is b permitted, /b because the gentile presumably b said /b to himself: Any moment b now he will remember his wine and come back. /b ,The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving b a certain Jew and /b a certain b gentile who were sitting on a ship. /b The b Jew heard the sound of the shofar of twilight /b indicating the beginning of Shabbat. b He disembarked and went /b into town to spend Shabbat there. b Rava said: The wine /b is b permitted, /b because the gentile presumably b said /b to himself: Any moment b now he will remember his wine and come back. /b ,The Gemara comments: b And if /b one might object that the gentile is presumably not concerned b because /b he knows that the Jew will not return until the end of b Shabbat, didn’t Rava say: Issur the Convert told me: When we were /b still b gentiles, /b before converting, b we /b used to b say: Jews do not /b actually b observe Shabbat, as, if they observe Shabbat, how many wallets would be found in the marketplace /b that the Jews could not take on Shabbat? b And I did not know that we maintain /b that the i halakha /i is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yitzḥak, as Rabbi Yitzḥak says: One who finds a wallet on Shabbat may carry it /b in increments of b less than four cubits. /b Evidently, gentiles assume that a Jew would violate Shabbat for monetary gain.,The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving b a certain lion who roared in a winepress. A gentile heard /b the roar and was frightened, and b he hid among the barrels /b of wine. b Rava said: The wine /b is b permitted, /b because the gentile presumably b said /b to himself: b Just as I am hiding, a Jew /b might b also /b be b hiding behind me and see me. /b ,The Gemara relates: There was an incident involving b certain thieves who came to Pumbedita and opened many barrels /b of wine. b Rava said: The wine /b is b permitted. What is the reason? Most of the thieves /b in Pumbedita b are Jews, /b and the i halakha /i follows the majority, and therefore the wine is not rendered forbidden. b There was /b a similar b incident in Neharde’a, and Shmuel said: The wine /b is b permitted. /b ,The Gemara asks: b In accordance with whose /b opinion is this? Perhaps it is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Eliezer, who says /b with regard to cases of uncertainty concerning ritual purity that if the b uncertainty /b is with regard to a person’s b entry /b into a certain place, he is deemed b pure. /b ,This is b as we learned /b in a mishna ( i Teharot /i 6:5): With regard to b one who enters into a valley during the rainy season, /b i.e., winter, when people generally do not enter this area, b and /b there was b ritual impurity in such and such a field, and /b he b said: /b I know b I walked to that place, /b i.e., I walked in the valley, b but I do not know whether I entered that field /b where the ritual impurity was b or whether I did not /b enter, b Rabbi Eliezer says: /b In a case of b uncertainty /b with regard to b entry, /b i.e., it is uncertain whether he entered the area where the ritual impurity is located, he is b ritually pure. /b But if he certainly entered the area where the ritual impurity is located and the b uncertainty /b pertains to b contact /b with the source of ritual impurity, he is b ritually impure. /b Apparently, the ruling of Shmuel, that in a case where it is uncertain whether gentile thieves entered the house at all the wine is permitted, is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer.,The Gemara rejects this: b No, /b it b is different there, /b with regard to the wine barrels. b Since there are /b thieves b who open /b barrels b for the sake of /b perhaps finding b money /b in them and are not interested in the wine, b it is /b a case of b compound uncertainty, /b as it is uncertain whether the thieves were gentiles or Jews, and even if they were gentiles, it is uncertain whether or not they touched the wine. In a case of compound uncertainty, everyone agrees that the wine is not forbidden.

Tiresias: The Ancient Mediterranean Religions Source Database