1. Hebrew Bible, Exodus, 18.22 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sect, enemies of Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 99| 18.22. "וְשָׁפְטוּ אֶת־הָעָם בְּכָל־עֵת וְהָיָה כָּל־הַדָּבָר הַגָּדֹל יָבִיאוּ אֵלֶיךָ וְכָל־הַדָּבָר הַקָּטֹן יִשְׁפְּטוּ־הֵם וְהָקֵל מֵעָלֶיךָ וְנָשְׂאוּ אִתָּךְ׃", | 18.22. "And let them judge the people at all seasons; and it shall be, that every great matter they shall bring unto thee, but every small matter they shall judge themselves; so shall they make it easier for thee and bear the burden with thee.", |
|
2. Hebrew Bible, Psalms, 19.8-19.9, 107.42 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sect, enemies of Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 185| 19.8. "תּוֹרַת יְהוָה תְּמִימָה מְשִׁיבַת נָפֶשׁ עֵדוּת יְהוָה נֶאֱמָנָה מַחְכִּימַת פֶּתִי׃", 19.9. "פִּקּוּדֵי יְהוָה יְשָׁרִים מְשַׂמְּחֵי־לֵב מִצְוַת יְהוָה בָּרָה מְאִירַת עֵינָיִם׃", 107.42. "יִרְאוּ יְשָׁרִים וְיִשְׂמָחוּ וְכָל־עַוְלָה קָפְצָה פִּיהָ׃", | 19.8. "The law of the LORD is perfect, restoring the soul; the testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple. .", 19.9. "The precepts of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the LORD is pure, enlightening the eyes.", 107.42. "The upright see it, and are glad; And all iniquity stoppeth her mouth.", |
|
3. Hebrew Bible, Proverbs, 15.12 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sect, enemies of Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 99| 15.12. "לֹא יֶאֱהַב־לֵץ הוֹכֵחַ לוֹ אֶל־חֲכָמִים לֹא יֵלֵךְ׃", | 15.12. "A scorner loveth not to be reproved; He will not go unto the wise.", |
|
4. Hebrew Bible, Numbers, 5.18-5.27, 6.24-6.27 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sect, enemies of Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 188| 5.18. "וְהֶעֱמִיד הַכֹּהֵן אֶת־הָאִשָּׁה לִפְנֵי יְהוָה וּפָרַע אֶת־רֹאשׁ הָאִשָּׁה וְנָתַן עַל־כַּפֶּיהָ אֵת מִנְחַת הַזִּכָּרוֹן מִנְחַת קְנָאֹת הִוא וּבְיַד הַכֹּהֵן יִהְיוּ מֵי הַמָּרִים הַמְאָרֲרִים׃", 5.19. "וְהִשְׁבִּיעַ אֹתָהּ הַכֹּהֵן וְאָמַר אֶל־הָאִשָּׁה אִם־לֹא שָׁכַב אִישׁ אֹתָךְ וְאִם־לֹא שָׂטִית טֻמְאָה תַּחַת אִישֵׁךְ הִנָּקִי מִמֵּי הַמָּרִים הַמְאָרֲרִים הָאֵלֶּה׃", 5.21. "וְהִשְׁבִּיעַ הַכֹּהֵן אֶת־הָאִשָּׁה בִּשְׁבֻעַת הָאָלָה וְאָמַר הַכֹּהֵן לָאִשָּׁה יִתֵּן יְהוָה אוֹתָךְ לְאָלָה וְלִשְׁבֻעָה בְּתוֹךְ עַמֵּךְ בְּתֵת יְהוָה אֶת־יְרֵכֵךְ נֹפֶלֶת וְאֶת־בִּטְנֵךְ צָבָה׃", 5.22. "וּבָאוּ הַמַּיִם הַמְאָרְרִים הָאֵלֶּה בְּמֵעַיִךְ לַצְבּוֹת בֶּטֶן וְלַנְפִּל יָרֵךְ וְאָמְרָה הָאִשָּׁה אָמֵן אָמֵן׃", 5.23. "וְכָתַב אֶת־הָאָלֹת הָאֵלֶּה הַכֹּהֵן בַּסֵּפֶר וּמָחָה אֶל־מֵי הַמָּרִים׃", 5.24. "וְהִשְׁקָה אֶת־הָאִשָּׁה אֶת־מֵי הַמָּרִים הַמְאָרֲרִים וּבָאוּ בָהּ הַמַּיִם הַמְאָרֲרִים לְמָרִים׃", 5.25. "וְלָקַח הַכֹּהֵן מִיַּד הָאִשָּׁה אֵת מִנְחַת הַקְּנָאֹת וְהֵנִיף אֶת־הַמִּנְחָה לִפְנֵי יְהוָה וְהִקְרִיב אֹתָהּ אֶל־הַמִּזְבֵּחַ׃", 5.26. "וְקָמַץ הַכֹּהֵן מִן־הַמִּנְחָה אֶת־אַזְכָּרָתָהּ וְהִקְטִיר הַמִּזְבֵּחָה וְאַחַר יַשְׁקֶה אֶת־הָאִשָּׁה אֶת־הַמָּיִם׃", 5.27. "וְהִשְׁקָהּ אֶת־הַמַּיִם וְהָיְתָה אִם־נִטְמְאָה וַתִּמְעֹל מַעַל בְּאִישָׁהּ וּבָאוּ בָהּ הַמַּיִם הַמְאָרֲרִים לְמָרִים וְצָבְתָה בִטְנָהּ וְנָפְלָה יְרֵכָהּ וְהָיְתָה הָאִשָּׁה לְאָלָה בְּקֶרֶב עַמָּהּ׃", 6.24. "יְבָרֶכְךָ יְהוָה וְיִשְׁמְרֶךָ׃", 6.25. "יָאֵר יְהוָה פָּנָיו אֵלֶיךָ וִיחֻנֶּךָּ׃", 6.26. "יִשָּׂא יְהוָה פָּנָיו אֵלֶיךָ וְיָשֵׂם לְךָ שָׁלוֹם׃", 6.27. "וְשָׂמוּ אֶת־שְׁמִי עַל־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וַאֲנִי אֲבָרֲכֵם׃", | 5.18. "And the priest shall set the woman before the LORD, and let the hair of the woman’s head go loose, and put the meal-offering of memorial in her hands, which is the meal-offering of jealousy; and the priest shall have in his hand the water of bitterness that causeth the curse.", 5.19. "And the priest shall cause her to swear, and shall say unto the woman: ‘If no man have lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness, being under thy husband, be thou free from this water of bitterness that causeth the curse;", 5.20. "but if thou hast gone aside, being under thy husband, and if thou be defiled, and some man have lain with thee besides thy husband—", 5.21. "then the priest shall cause the woman to swear with the oath of cursing, and the priest shall say unto the woman—the LORD make thee a curse and an oath among thy people, when the LORD doth make thy thigh to fall away, and thy belly to swell;", 5.22. "and this water that causeth the curse shall go into thy bowels, and make thy belly to swell, and thy thigh to fall away’; and the woman shall say: ‘Amen, Amen.’", 5.23. "And the priest shall write these curses in a scroll, and he shall blot them out into the water of bitterness.", 5.24. "And he shall make the woman drink the water of bitterness that causeth the curse; and the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her and become bitter.", 5.25. "And the priest shall take the meal-offering of jealousy out of the woman’s hand, and shall wave the meal-offering before the LORD, and bring it unto the altar.", 5.26. "And the priest shall take a handful of the meal-offering, as the memorial-part thereof, and make it smoke upon the altar, and afterward shall make the woman drink the water.", 5.27. "And when he hath made her drink the water, then it shall come to pass, if she be defiled, and have acted unfaithfully against her husband, that the water that causeth the curse shall enter into her and become bitter, and her belly shall swell, and her thigh shall fall away; and the woman shall be a curse among her people.", 6.24. "The LORD bless thee, and keep thee;", 6.25. "The LORD make His face to shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee;", 6.26. "The LORD lift up His countece upon thee, and give thee peace.", 6.27. "So shall they put My name upon the children of Israel, and I will bless them.’", |
|
5. Hebrew Bible, Leviticus, 19.17 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sect, enemies of Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 99| 19.17. "לֹא־תִשְׂנָא אֶת־אָחִיךָ בִּלְבָבֶךָ הוֹכֵחַ תּוֹכִיחַ אֶת־עֲמִיתֶךָ וְלֹא־תִשָּׂא עָלָיו חֵטְא׃", | 19.17. "Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy heart; thou shalt surely rebuke thy neighbour, and not bear sin because of him.", |
|
6. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 19.15, 22.14, 22.20, 25.15-25.26 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sect, enemies of Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 99, 188| 19.15. "לֹא־יָקוּם עֵד אֶחָד בְּאִישׁ לְכָל־עָוֺן וּלְכָל־חַטָּאת בְּכָל־חֵטְא אֲשֶׁר יֶחֱטָא עַל־פִּי שְׁנֵי עֵדִים אוֹ עַל־פִּי שְׁלֹשָׁה־עֵדִים יָקוּם דָּבָר׃", 22.14. "וְשָׂם לָהּ עֲלִילֹת דְּבָרִים וְהוֹצִיא עָלֶיהָ שֵׁם רָע וְאָמַר אֶת־הָאִשָּׁה הַזֹּאת לָקַחְתִּי וָאֶקְרַב אֵלֶיהָ וְלֹא־מָצָאתִי לָהּ בְּתוּלִים׃", 25.15. "אֶבֶן שְׁלֵמָה וָצֶדֶק יִהְיֶה־לָּךְ אֵיפָה שְׁלֵמָה וָצֶדֶק יִהְיֶה־לָּךְ לְמַעַן יַאֲרִיכוּ יָמֶיךָ עַל הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לָךְ׃", 25.16. "כִּי תוֹעֲבַת יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ כָּל־עֹשֵׂה אֵלֶּה כֹּל עֹשֵׂה עָוֶל׃", 25.17. "זָכוֹר אֵת אֲשֶׁר־עָשָׂה לְךָ עֲמָלֵק בַּדֶּרֶךְ בְּצֵאתְכֶם מִמִּצְרָיִם׃", 25.18. "אֲשֶׁר קָרְךָ בַּדֶּרֶךְ וַיְזַנֵּב בְּךָ כָּל־הַנֶּחֱשָׁלִים אַחַרֶיךָ וְאַתָּה עָיֵף וְיָגֵעַ וְלֹא יָרֵא אֱלֹהִים׃", 25.19. "וְהָיָה בְּהָנִיחַ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לְךָ מִכָּל־אֹיְבֶיךָ מִסָּבִיב בָּאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר יְהוָה־אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לְךָ נַחֲלָה לְרִשְׁתָּהּ תִּמְחֶה אֶת־זֵכֶר עֲמָלֵק מִתַּחַת הַשָּׁמָיִם לֹא תִּשְׁכָּח׃", | 19.15. "One witness shall not rise up against a man for any iniquity, or for any sin, in any sin that he sinneth; at the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, shall a matter be establishment", 22.14. "and lay wanton charges against her, and bring up an evil name upon her, and say: ‘I took this woman, and when I came nigh to her, I found not in her the tokens of virginity’;", 22.20. "But if this thing be true, that the tokens of virginity were not found in the damsel;", 25.15. "A perfect and just weight shalt thou have; a perfect and just measure shalt thou have; that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.", 25.16. "For all that do such things, even all that do unrighteously, are an abomination unto the LORD thy God.", 25.17. "Remember what Amalek did unto thee by the way as ye came forth out of Egypt;", 25.18. "how he met thee by the way, and smote the hindmost of thee, all that were enfeebled in thy rear, when thou wast faint and weary; and he feared not God.", 25.19. "Therefore it shall be, when the LORD thy God hath given thee rest from all thine enemies round about, in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee for an inheritance to possess it, that thou shalt blot out the remembrance of Amalek from under heaven; thou shalt not forget.", |
|
7. Hebrew Bible, Job, 6.25 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sect, enemies of Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 99| 6.25. "מַה־נִּמְרְצוּ אִמְרֵי־יֹשֶׁר וּמַה־יּוֹכִיחַ הוֹכֵחַ מִכֶּם׃", | 6.25. "How forcible are words of uprightness! But what doth your arguing argue?", |
|
8. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 5.29 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sect, enemies of Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 188| 5.29. "וַיִּקְרָא אֶת־שְׁמוֹ נֹחַ לֵאמֹר זֶה יְנַחֲמֵנוּ מִמַּעֲשֵׂנוּ וּמֵעִצְּבוֹן יָדֵינוּ מִן־הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר אֵרְרָהּ יְהוָה׃", | 5.29. "And he called his name Noah, saying: ‘This same shall comfort us in our work and in the toil of our hands, which cometh from the ground which the LORD hath cursed.’", |
|
9. Hebrew Bible, Ezekiel, 22.19-22.22 (6th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sect, enemies of Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 185| 22.19. "לָכֵן כֹּה אָמַר אֲדֹנָי יְהוִה יַעַן הֱיוֹת כֻּלְּכֶם לְסִגִים לָכֵן הִנְנִי קֹבֵץ אֶתְכֶם אֶל־תּוֹךְ יְרוּשָׁלִָם׃", 22.21. "וְכִנַּסְתִּי אֶתְכֶם וְנָפַחְתִּי עֲלֵיכֶם בְּאֵשׁ עֶבְרָתִי וְנִתַּכְתֶּם בְּתוֹכָהּ׃", 22.22. "כְּהִתּוּךְ כֶּסֶף בְּתוֹךְ כּוּר כֵּן תֻּתְּכוּ בְתוֹכָהּ וִידַעְתֶּם כִּי־אֲנִי יְהוָה שָׁפַכְתִּי חֲמָתִי עֲלֵיכֶם׃", | 22.19. "Therefore thus saith the Lord GOD: Because ye are all become dross, therefore, behold, I will gather you into the midst of Jerusalem.", 22.20. "As they gather silver and brass and iron and lead and tin into the midst of the furnace, to blow the fire upon it, to melt it; so will I gather you in Mine anger and in My fury, and I will cast you in, and melt you.", 22.21. "Yea, I will gather you, and blow upon you with the fire of My wrath, and ye shall be melted in the midst thereof.", 22.22. "As silver is melted in the midst of the furnace, so shall ye be melted in the midst thereof; and ye shall know that I the LORD have poured out My fury upon you.’", |
|
| 10. Dead Sea Scrolls, Damascus Covenant, 2.2, 5.7, 6.19, 7.5, 8.5, 8.16, 8.24, 15.7, 16.12, 19.18, 19.32-20.1, 20.6 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 185 |
| 11. Dead Sea Scrolls, (Cairo Damascus Covenant) Cd-A, 2.2, 5.7, 6.19, 7.5, 8.5, 8.16, 8.24, 15.7, 16.12, 19.18, 19.32-20.1, 20.6 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 185 |
| 12. Dead Sea Scrolls, of Discipline, 2.5-2.18, 3.1, 4.22, 6.1, 6.25-6.27, 7.2161 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sect, enemies of Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 99, 172, 185, 188 |
13. Hebrew Bible, Daniel, 7.18 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sect, enemies of Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 188| 7.18. "וִיקַבְּלוּן מַלְכוּתָא קַדִּישֵׁי עֶלְיוֹנִין וְיַחְסְנוּן מַלְכוּתָא עַד־עָלְמָא וְעַד עָלַם עָלְמַיָּא׃", | 7.18. "But the saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom, and possess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever.’", |
|
14. Tosefta, Demai, 2.10, 2.13 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sect, enemies of Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 99| 2.13. "לא יאמר אדם חבר לעם הארץ הולך ככר זו ותן לפלוני חבר שאין משלחין טהרות ביד עם הארץ חבר שאמר לו עם הארץ הולך ככר זו והולך לפלוני ע\"ה לא יתן לו שאין מוסרין טהרות לעם הארץ.", | |
|
15. Mishnah, Makkot, 3.15 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sect, enemies of Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 185| 3.15. "כָּל חַיָּבֵי כְרֵתוֹת שֶׁלָּקוּ, נִפְטְרוּ יְדֵי כְרֵתָתָן, שֶׁנֶאֱמַר (דברים כה) וְנִקְלָה אָחִיךָ לְעֵינֶיךָ, כְּשֶׁלָּקָה הֲרֵי הוּא כְאָחִיךָ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי חֲנַנְיָא בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. אָמַר רַבִּי חֲנַנְיָא בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, מָה אִם הָעוֹבֵר עֲבֵרָה אַחַת, נוֹטֵל נַפְשׁוֹ עָלֶיהָ, הָעוֹשֶׂה מִצְוָה אַחַת, עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה שֶׁתִּנָּתֵן לוֹ נַפְשׁוֹ. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר, מִמְּקוֹמוֹ הוּא לָמֵד, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יח) וְנִכְרְתוּ הַנְּפָשׁוֹת הָעֹשֹׂת וְגוֹ', וְאוֹמֵר (שם) אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשֶׂה אֹתָם הָאָדָם וָחַי בָּהֶם. הָא, כָּל הַיּוֹשֵׁב וְלֹא עָבַר עֲבֵרָה, נוֹתְנִין לוֹ שָׂכָר כְּעוֹשֶׂה מִצְוָה. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, הֲרֵי הוּא אוֹמֵר (דברים יב) רַק חֲזַק לְבִלְתִּי אֲכֹל הַדָּם כִּי הַדָּם הוּא הַנָּפֶשׁ וְגוֹ', וּמָה אִם הַדָּם שֶׁנַּפְשׁוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם קָצָה מִמֶּנּוּ, הַפּוֹרֵשׁ מִמֶּנּוּ מְקַבֵּל שָׂכָר, גָּזֵל וַעֲרָיוֹת שֶׁנַּפְשׁוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם מִתְאַוָּה לָהֶן וּמְחַמַּדְתָּן, הַפּוֹרֵשׁ מֵהֶן עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה שֶׁיִּזְכֶּה לוֹ וּלְדוֹרוֹתָיו וּלְדוֹרוֹת דּוֹרוֹתָיו עַד סוֹף כָּל הַדּוֹרוֹת: \n" | 3.15. "All who have incurred [the penalty of] kareth, on being flogged are exempt from their punishment of kareth, for it says, “[He may be given up to forty lashes, but not more] ... lest your brother shall be dishonored before your eyes” (Deut. 25;3) once he has been lashed he is [considered] “your brother”, the words of Rabbi Haiah ben Gamaliel. Rabbi Haiah ben Gamaliel said: “Just as one who transgresses one transgression forfeits his life, how much more does one who performs one commandment have his life granted him.” Rabbi Shimon says: “You can learn this from its own passage; as it says: “[All who do any of those abhorrent things] such persons shall be cut off from their people” (Lev. 18:29), and it says: “You shall keep my statutes and my ordices which if a man do, he shall live by them” (Lev. 18:5), which means that one who desists from transgressing is granted reward like one who performs a precept. Rabbi Shimon bar Rabbi says: Behold [the Torah] says, “But makes sure that you do not partake of the blood; for the blood is the life, and you must not consume the life with the flesh…[that it may go well with you and with your descendents to come..” (Deut. 12:23-25”-- now, if in the case of blood which a person’s soul loathes, anyone who refrains from it receives reward, how much more so in regard to robbery and sexual sin for which a person’s soul craves and longs shall one who refrains from them acquire merit for himself and for generations and generations to come, to the end of all generations!" |
|
| 16. Anon., Sifra, None (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sect, enemies of Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 185 |
| 17. Palestinian Talmud, Demai, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sect, enemies of Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 99 |
18. Babylonian Talmud, Niddah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sect, enemies of Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 185| 31b. שמשהין עצמן בבטן כדי שיזריעו נשותיהן תחלה שיהו בניהם זכרים מעלה עליהן הכתוב כאילו הם מרבים בנים ובני בנים והיינו דאמר רב קטינא יכולני לעשות כל בני זכרים אמר רבא הרוצה לעשות כל בניו זכרים יבעול וישנה,ואמר רבי יצחק אמר רבי אמי אין אשה מתעברת אלא סמוך לוסתה שנאמר (תהלים נא, ז) הן בעון חוללתי,ורבי יוחנן אמר סמוך לטבילה שנאמר (תהלים נא, ז) ובחטא יחמתני אמי,מאי משמע דהאי חטא לישנא דדכויי הוא דכתיב (ויקרא יד, מט) וחטא את הבית ומתרגמינן וידכי ית ביתא ואי בעית אימא מהכא (תהלים נא, ט) תחטאני באזוב ואטהר,ואמר רבי יצחק אמר רבי אמי כיון שבא זכר בעולם בא שלום בעולם שנאמר (ישעיהו טז, א) שלחו כר מושל ארץ זכר זה כר,ואמר ר' יצחק דבי רבי אמי בא זכר בעולם בא ככרו בידו זכר זה כר דכתיב (מלכים ב ו, כג) ויכרה להם כירה גדולה,נקבה אין עמה כלום נקבה נקייה באה עד דאמרה מזוני לא יהבי לה דכתיב (בראשית ל, כח) נקבה שכרך עלי ואתנה,שאלו תלמידיו את רבי שמעון בן יוחי מפני מה אמרה תורה יולדת מביאה קרבן אמר להן בשעה שכורעת לילד קופצת ונשבעת שלא תזקק לבעלה לפיכך אמרה תורה תביא קרבן,מתקיף לה רב יוסף והא מזידה היא ובחרטה תליא מילתא ועוד קרבן שבועה בעי איתויי,ומפני מה אמרה תורה זכר לשבעה ונקבה לארבעה עשר זכר שהכל שמחים בו מתחרטת לשבעה נקבה שהכל עצבים בה מתחרטת לארבעה עשר,ומפני מה אמרה תורה מילה לשמונה שלא יהו כולם שמחים ואביו ואמו עצבים,תניא היה ר"מ אומר מפני מה אמרה תורה נדה לשבעה מפני שרגיל בה וקץ בה אמרה תורה תהא טמאה שבעה ימים כדי שתהא חביבה על בעלה כשעת כניסתה לחופה,שאלו תלמידיו את רבי דוסתאי ברבי ינאי מפני מה איש מחזר על אשה ואין אשה מחזרת על איש משל לאדם שאבד לו אבידה מי מחזר על מי בעל אבידה מחזיר על אבידתו,ומפני מה איש פניו למטה ואשה פניה למעלה כלפי האיש זה ממקום שנברא וזו ממקום שנבראת,ומפני מה האיש מקבל פיוס ואין אשה מקבלת פיוס זה ממקום שנברא וזו ממקום שנבראת,מפני מה אשה קולה ערב ואין איש קולו ערב זה ממקום שנברא וזו ממקום שנבראת שנאמר {שיר השירים ב } כי קולך ערב ומראך נאוה, br br big strongהדרן עלך המפלת חתיכה /strong /big br br,מתני׳ big strongבנות /strong /big כותים נדות מעריסתן והכותים מטמאים משכב תחתון כעליון מפני שהן בועלי נדות,והן יושבות על כל דם ודם,ואין חייבין עליהן על ביאת מקדש ואין שורפין עליהם את התרומה מפני שטומאתן ספק, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ה"ד אי דקא חזיין אפילו דידן נמי ואי דלא קחזיין דידהו נמי לא,אמר רבא בריה דרב אחא בר רב הונא אמר רב ששת הכא במאי עסקינן בסתמא דכיון דאיכא מיעוטא דחזיין חיישינן ומאן תנא דחייש למיעוטא | 31b. b they delay /b while b in /b their wives’ b abdomen, /b initially refraining from emitting semen b so that their wives will emit seed first, /b in order b that their children will be male, the verse ascribes them /b credit b as though they have many sons and sons’ sons. And this /b statement b is /b the same as that b which Rav Ketina said: I could have made all of my children males, /b by refraining from emitting seed until my wife emitted seed first. b Rava says /b another method through which one can cause his children to be males: b One who wishes to make all of his children males should engage in intercourse /b with his wife b and repeat /b the act.,§ b And Rabbi Yitzḥak says /b that b Rabbi Ami says: A woman becomes pregt only /b by engaging in intercourse b close to the onset of her /b menstrual b cycle, as it is stated: “Behold, I was brought forth in iniquity” /b (Psalms 51:7). This iniquity is referring to intercourse close to the woman’s menstrual cycle, when intercourse is prohibited. Accordingly, David is saying that his mother presumably conceived him at this time., b And Rabbi Yoḥa says: /b A woman becomes pregt only by engaging in intercourse b near /b the time of her b immersion /b in a ritual bath, through which she is purified from her status as a menstruating woman, b as it is stated /b in the continuation of the same verse: b “And in sin [ i uvḥet /i ] did my mother conceive me” /b (Psalms 51:7).,The Gemara explains this derivation: b From where may /b it b be inferred that this term “ i ḥet /i ” is /b a reference b to purity? /b The Gemara answers: b As it is written /b with regard to leprosy of houses: b “ i Veḥittei /i the house” /b (Leviticus 14:52), b and we translate /b the verse into Aramaic as: b And he shall purify the house. And if you wish, say /b that the interpretation is derived b from here: “Purge me [ i teḥatte’eni /i ] with hyssop, and I shall be pure” /b (Psalms 51:9). Evidently, the root i ḥet /i , i tet /i , i alef /i refers to purification.,§ b And Rabbi Yitzḥak says /b that b Rabbi Ami says: When a male comes into the world, /b i.e., when a male baby is born, b peace comes to the world, as it is stated: “Send the lambs [ i khar /i ] for the ruler of the land” /b (Isaiah 16:1). This i khar /i , or i kar /i , a gift one sends the ruler, contributes to the stability of the government and peace, and the word b male [ i zakhar /i ] /b can be interpreted homiletically as an abbreviation of: b This is a i kar /i [ i zeh kar /i ]. /b , b And Rabbi Yitzḥak from the school of Rabbi Ami says: When a male comes into the world, his loaf /b of bread, i.e., his sustece, b comes into his possession. /b In other words, a male can provide for himself. This is based on the aforementioned interpretation of the word b male [ i zakhar /i ] /b as an abbreviation of: b This is a i kar /i [ i zeh kar /i ], /b and the term i kar /i refers to sustece, b as it is written: “And he prepared great provision [ i kera /i ] for them” /b (II Kings 6:23).,By contrast, b when a female comes into the world, nothing, /b i.e., no sustece, comes b with her. /b This is derived from the homiletic interpretation of the word b female [ i nekeva /i ] /b as an abbreviation of the phrase: b She comes clean [ i nekiya ba’a /i ], /b i.e., empty. Furthermore, b until she says: /b Give me b sustece, /b people b do not give her, as it is written /b in Laban’s request of Jacob: b “Appoint me [ i nokva /i ] your wages, and I will give it” /b (Genesis 30:28). Laban used the word i nokva /i , similar to i nekeva /i , when he said that he would pay Jacob only if he explicitly demanded his wages., b The students of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai asked him: For what /b reason b does the Torah say /b that b a woman after childbirth brings an offering? He said to them: At the time that /b a woman b crouches to give birth, /b her pain is so great that b she impulsively takes an oath that she will not engage in intercourse with her husband /b ever again, so that she will never again experience this pain. b Therefore, the Torah says /b that b she must bring an offering /b for violating her oath and continuing to engage in intercourse with her husband., b Rav Yosef objects to this /b answer: b But isn’t /b the woman b an intentional violator /b of her oath? b And /b if she wishes that her oath be dissolved, so that she may engage in intercourse with her husband, b the matter depends on /b her b regret /b of her oath. One is obligated to bring an offering for violating an oath of an utterance only if his transgression is unwitting. b And furthermore, /b if the purpose of the offering that a woman brings after childbirth is to atone for violating an oath, then b she /b should be b required to bring /b a female lamb or goat as b an offering, /b which is the requirement of one who violated b an oath, /b rather than the bird offering brought by a woman after childbirth., b And /b the students of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai further inquired of him: b For what /b reason b does the Torah say /b that a woman who gives birth to b a male /b is ritually impure b for seven /b days, b but /b a woman who gives birth to b a female /b is impure b for fourteen /b days? Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai answered them: When a woman gives birth to b a male, over which everyone is happy, she regrets /b her oath, that she will never again engage in intercourse with her husband, already b seven /b days after giving birth. By contrast, after giving birth to b a female, over which everyone is unhappy, she regrets /b her oath only b fourteen /b days after giving birth., b And /b the students further asked him: b For what /b reason b does the Torah say /b that b circumcision /b is performed only b on the eighth /b day of the baby’s life, and not beforehand? He answered them: It is b so that /b there b will not be /b a situation where b everyone /b is b happy /b at the circumcision ceremony b but the father and mother of /b the infant b are unhappy, /b as they are still prohibited from engaging in intercourse., b It is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Meir would say: For what /b reason b does the Torah say /b that b a menstruating woman /b is prohibited from engaging in intercourse with her husband b for seven /b days? It is b because /b if a woman were permitted to engage in intercourse with her husband all the time, her husband would be too b accustomed to her, and /b would eventually be b repulsed by her. /b Therefore, b the Torah says /b that a menstruating woman b shall be ritually impure /b for b seven days, /b during which she is prohibited from engaging in intercourse with her husband, b so that /b when she becomes pure again b she will be dear to her husband as /b at b the time when she entered the wedding canopy /b with him.,§ b The students of Rabbi Dostai, son of Rabbi Yannai, asked him: For what /b reason is it the norm that b a man pursues a woman /b for marriage, b but a woman does not pursue a man? /b Rabbi Dostai answered them by citing b a parable of a person who lost an item. Who searches for what? /b Certainly b the owner of the lost item searches for his item; /b the item does not search for its owner. Since the first woman was created from the body of the first man, the man seeks that which he has lost., b And /b the students of Rabbi Dostai further asked him: b For what /b reason does b a man /b engage in intercourse b facing down, and a woman /b engage in intercourse b facing up toward the man? /b Rabbi Dostai answered them: b This /b man faces b the place from which he was created, /b i.e., the earth, b and that /b woman faces b the place from which she was created, /b namely man., b And /b the students also inquired: b For what /b reason is b a man /b who is angry likely to b accept appeasement, but a woman /b is b not /b as likely to b accept appeasement? /b Rabbi Dostai answered them: It is b because this /b man behaves like b the place from which he was created, /b i.e., the earth, which yields to pressure, b and that /b woman behaves like b the place from which she was created, /b i.e., from bone, which cannot be molded easily.,The students continued to ask Rabbi Dostai: b For what /b reason b is a woman’s voice pleasant, but a man’s voice is not pleasant? /b He answered: b This /b man is similar to b the place from which he was created, /b the earth, which does not issue a sound when it is struck, b and that /b woman is similar to b the place from which she was created, /b a bone, which makes a sound when it is struck. The proof that a woman’s voice is pleasant is b that it is stated /b in Song of Songs that the man says to his beloved: b “For sweet is your voice, and your countece is beautiful” /b (Song of Songs 2:14).,, strong MISHNA: /strong Samaritan b girls /b are considered b menstruating women from /b the time they lie in b their cradle. And the Samaritan /b men b impart ritual impurity /b to the b lower bedding like the upper /b bedding, i.e., all layers of bedding beneath them are impure, and their status is like the bedding above a man who experiences a gonorrhea-like discharge [ i zav /i ]: The status of both levels of bedding is that of first-degree ritual impurity, which can impart impurity to food and drink. This is b due to /b the fact b that /b Samaritan men are considered men who b engage in intercourse with menstruating women. /b , b And /b they are considered men who engage in intercourse with menstruating women because Samaritan women b observe /b the seven-day menstrual period of ritual impurity b for each and every /b emission of b blood, /b even for blood that does not render them impure. Accordingly, if a Samaritan woman has an emission of impure blood during the seven-day period, she will nevertheless continue counting seven days from the first emission. It is therefore possible that the Samaritan men will engage in intercourse with their wives while they are still halakhically considered menstruating women, as the seven-day period of impurity should have been counted from the emission of the impure blood., b But /b one who enters the Temple while wearing b those /b garments upon which a Samaritan had lain b is not liable /b to bring an offering b for entering the Temple /b in a status of impurity, b nor does one burn i teruma /i /b that came into contact with b those /b garments, b because their impurity /b is b uncertain. /b , strong GEMARA: /strong The mishna teaches that Samaritan girls are considered menstruating women from the time they lie in their cradle. The Gemara asks: b What are the circumstances /b of this statement? b If /b the mishna is referring to girls b who /b already b see /b menstrual blood, then b even our own, /b i.e., Jewish girls, are b also /b considered menstruating women under such circumstances. b And if /b it is referring to girls b who do not /b yet b see /b menstrual blood, then b their /b girls, i.e., those of the Samaritans, should b also not /b have the status of menstruating women., b Rava, son of Rav Aḥa bar Rav Huna, says /b that b Rav Sheshet says: Here we are dealing with an unspecified /b case, i.e., it is unknown whether these girls have experienced their first menstrual period. b Since there is a minority /b of girls b who see /b menstrual blood, b we are concerned /b with regard to each Samaritan girl that she might be from this minority. The Gemara asks: b And who /b is the i tanna /i who b taught that one must be concerned for the minority? /b |
|
19. Babylonian Talmud, Megillah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sect, enemies of Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 185| 28a. ולא ברכתי לפני כהן ולא אכלתי מבהמה שלא הורמו מתנותיה,דא"ר יצחק א"ר יוחנן אסור לאכול מבהמה שלא הורמו מתנותיה ואמר ר' יצחק כל האוכל מבהמה שלא הורמו מתנותיה כאילו אוכל טבלים ולית הלכתא כוותיה,ולא ברכתי לפני כהן,למימרא דמעליותא היא והא א"ר יוחנן כל תלמיד חכם שמברך לפניו אפילו כ"ג עם הארץ אותו ת"ח חייב מיתה שנאמר (משלי ח, לו) כל משנאי אהבו מות אל תקרי משנאי אלא משניאי,כי קאמר איהו בשוין,שאלו תלמידיו את רבי נחוניא בן הקנה במה הארכת ימים אמר להם מימי לא נתכבדתי בקלון חברי ולא עלתה על מטתי קללת חברי וותרן בממוני הייתי,לא נתכבדתי בקלון חברי כי הא דרב הונא דרי מרא אכתפיה אתא רב חנא בר חנילאי וקא דרי מיניה א"ל אי רגילת דדרית במאתיך דרי ואי לא אתייקורי אנא בזילותא דידך לא ניחא לי,ולא עלתה על מטתי קללת חברי כי הא דמר זוטרא כי הוה סליק לפורייה אמר שרי ליה לכל מאן דצערן,וותרן בממוני הייתי דאמר מר איוב וותרן בממוניה הוה שהיה מניח פרוטה לחנוני מממוניה,שאל ר"ע את רבי נחוניא הגדול (אמר לו) במה הארכת ימים אתו גווזי וקא מחו ליה סליק יתיב ארישא דדיקלא א"ל רבי אם נאמר (במדבר כח, ד) כבש למה נאמר אחד אמר להו צורבא מדרבנן הוא שבקוהו,א"ל אחד מיוחד שבעדרו,א"ל מימי לא קבלתי מתנות ולא עמדתי על מדותי וותרן בממוני הייתי,לא קבלתי מתנות כי הא דר' אלעזר כי הוו משדרי ליה מתנות מבי נשיאה לא הוה שקיל כי הוה מזמני ליה לא הוה אזיל אמר להו לא ניחא לכו דאחיה דכתיב (משלי טו, כז) שונא מתנות יחיה ר' זירא כי הוו משדרי ליה מבי נשיאה לא הוה שקיל כי הוה מזמני ליה אזיל אמר אתייקורי דמתייקרי בי,ולא עמדתי על מדותי דאמר רבא כל המעביר על מדותיו מעבירין ממנו כל פשעיו שנאמר (מיכה ז, יח) נושא עון ועובר על פשע למי נושא עון למי שעובר על פשע,שאל רבי את ר' יהושע בן קרחה במה הארכת ימים א"ל קצת בחיי אמר לו רבי תורה היא וללמוד אני צריך א"ל מימי לא נסתכלתי בדמות אדם רשע דאמר ר' יוחנן אסור לאדם להסתכל בצלם דמות אדם רשע שנאמר (מלכים ב ג, יד) לולא פני יהושפט מלך יהודה אני נושא אם אביט אליך ואם אראך,ר"א אמר עיניו כהות שנאמר (בראשית כז, א) ויהי כי זקן יצחק ותכהין עיניו מראות משום דאסתכל בעשו הרשע,והא גרמא ליה והאמר ר' יצחק לעולם אל תהי קללת הדיוט קלה בעיניך שהרי אבימלך קלל את שרה ונתקיים בזרעה שנאמר (בראשית כ, טז) הנה הוא לך כסות עינים אל תקרי כסות אלא כסיית עינים,הא והא גרמא ליה רבא אמר מהכא (משלי יח, ה) שאת פני רשע לא טוב,בשעת פטירתו א"ל [רבי] ברכני א"ל יהי רצון שתגיע לחצי ימי ולכולהו לא אמר לו הבאים אחריך בהמה ירעו,אבוה בר איהי ומנימן בר איהי חד אמר תיתי לי דלא אסתכלי בכותי וחד אמר תיתי לי דלא עבדי שותפות בהדי כותי,שאלו תלמידיו את ר' זירא במה הארכת ימים אמר להם מימי לא הקפדתי בתוך ביתי ולא צעדתי בפני מי שגדול ממני ולא הרהרתי במבואות המטונפות ולא הלכתי ד"א בלא תורה ובלא תפילין ולא ישנתי בבית המדרש לא שינת קבע ולא שינת עראי ולא ששתי בתקלת חבירי ולא קראתי לחבירי (בחניכתו) ואמרי לה (בחכינתו):, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big ועוד א"ר יהודה בית הכנסת שחרב אין מספידין בתוכו ואין מפשילין בתוכו חבלים ואין פורשין לתוכו מצודות ואין שוטחין על גגו פירות ואין עושין אותו קפנדריא,שנאמר (ויקרא כו, לא) והשמותי את מקדשכם קדושתן אף כשהן שוממין,עלו בו עשבים לא יתלוש מפני עגמת נפש:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ת"ר בתי כנסיות אין נוהגין בהן קלות ראש אין אוכלין בהן ואין שותין בהן | 28a. b And I never recited /b Grace after Meals b in the presence of a priest, /b but rather I gave him the privilege to lead. b And I never ate from an animal whose /b priestly b portions, /b i.e., the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw, b had not /b already b been set aside. /b ,Another example of Rabbi Perida’s meticulous behavior is based on that b which Rabbi Yitzḥak said /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa said: It is prohibited to eat /b meat b from an animal whose /b priestly b portions have not been set aside. And Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Anyone who eats /b meat b from an animal whose /b priestly b portions have not been set aside is /b regarded b as if he were eating untithed produce. /b The Gemara comments: b And the i halakha /i is not in accordance with his /b opinion. Rather, it is permitted to eat meat from such an animal. Nevertheless, Rabbi Perida acted stringently and did not eat from it.,The Gemara considers another of Rabbi Perida’s actions: He said: b And I never blessed /b Grace after Meals b in the presence of a priest, /b but rather I gave him the privilege to lead., b Is this to say that /b doing so b is /b especially b virtuous? But /b hasn’t b Rabbi Yoḥa said: Any Torah scholar who /b allows someone else b to bless /b Grace after Meals b in his presence, /b i.e., to lead for him, b even /b if that person is b a High Priest who is an ignoramus, /b then b that Torah scholar is liable to /b receive the b death penalty /b for belittling his own honor? This is b as it is stated: “All those who hate me, love death” /b (Proverbs 8:36). b Do not read /b it as b “those who hate Me [ i mesan’ai /i ],” rather /b read it as though it said: b Those who make Me hated [ i masni’ai /i ]. /b The honor due to a Torah scholar is representative of the honor of God in the world. Therefore, by belittling his own honor, he causes others to fail to respect God, which can ultimately develop into hate. If so, why did Rabbi Perida consider his behavior to be so deserving of praise?,The Gemara answers: b When /b Rabbi Perida b says this, /b he was speaking b of /b people of b equal /b stature. He was particular to honor the priesthood only when the priest was also a Torah scholar.,The Gemara discusses the fourth Sage who was blessed with longevity: b Rabbi Neḥunya ben HaKana was /b once b asked by his disciples: In /b the merit of b which /b virtue b were you /b blessed with b longevity? He said to them: In /b all b my days, I never attained veneration at /b the expense of b my fellow’s degradation. Nor did my fellow’s curse /b ever b go up with me upon my bed. /b If ever I offended someone, I made sure to appease him that day. Therefore, when I went to bed I knew that no one had any grievances against me. b And I was /b always b openhanded with my money. /b ,The Gemara clarifies the meaning of his statement: Rabbi Neḥunya said: b I never attained veneration at /b the expense of b my fellow’s denigration. /b This is referring to conduct b such as that of Rav Huna, who was carrying a hoe over his shoulder /b as he returned from his work. b Rav Ḥana bar Ḥanilai came and, /b out of respect for his teacher, b took the hoe from him /b to carry it for him. Rav Huna b said to him: If you are accustomed to carry /b such objects b in your own city, /b you may b carry it; but if not, /b then b for me to be venerated through your denigration is not pleasing for me. /b ,Rabbi Neḥunya also said: b Nor did /b I ever allow the resentment caused by b my fellow’s curse /b to b go up with me upon my bed. /b This is referring to conduct b such as that of Mar Zutra. When he would go to bed /b at night, b he would /b first b say: I forgive anyone who has vexed me. /b ,Lastly, Rabbi Neḥunya said: b And I was /b always b openhanded with my money. /b This is referring to conduct such as b that which the Master said: Job was openhanded with his money, as he would /b always b leave /b at least b a i peruta /i of his money with the shopkeeper. /b He never demanded the change from his transactions.,On a similar occasion, b Rabbi Akiva asked Rabbi Neḥunya the Great; he said to him: In /b the merit of b which /b virtue b were you /b blessed with b longevity? /b Rabbi Neḥunya’s b attendants [ i gavzei /i ] came and /b started b beating /b Rabbi Akiva, for they felt that he was acting disrespectfully by highlighting Rabbi Neḥunya’s old age. Rabbi Akiva ran away from them, and b he climbed up and sat upon the top of a date palm. /b From there, b he said to /b Rabbi Neḥunya: b My teacher, /b I have a question about the verse concerning the daily offering that states “one lamb” (Numbers 28:4). b If it is stated “lamb” /b in the singular, b why is it /b also b stated “one”; /b isn’t this superfluous? Upon hearing Rabbi Akiva’s scholarly question, Rabbi Neḥunya b said to /b his attendants: b He is /b clearly b a young Torah scholar, let him be. /b ,Rabbi Neḥunya then addressed Rabbi Akiva’s questions. With regard to the second question, b he said to him: /b The word b “one” /b teaches that the lamb should be b the unique one of its flock, /b i.e., only the best quality lamb should be used.,With regard to the original question, Rabbi Neḥunya b said to him: In /b all b my days I never accepted gifts. Nor was I /b ever b inflexible /b by exacting b a measure /b of retribution against those who wronged me. b And I was /b always b openhanded with my money. /b ,The Gemara explains: b I never accepted gifts; /b this is referring to conduct b such as that of Rabbi Elazar. When they would send him gifts from the house of the i Nasi /i , he would not take /b them, b and when they would invite him, he would not go /b there, as he considered hospitality to be a type of gift. b He /b would b say to them: Is it not pleasing to you that I should live, as it is written: “He that hates gifts shall live” /b (Proverbs 15:27)? In contrast, it was reported about b Rabbi Zeira /b that b when they would send him /b gifts b from the house of the i Nasi /i , he would not accept /b them, b but when they would invite him, he would go /b there. b He said: They are honored by my /b presence; therefore my visiting is not considered like I am taking a gift from them.,He also said: b Nor was I /b ever b inflexible /b in exacting b a measure /b of retribution against those who wronged me. This is referring to conduct such as that b which Rava said: Anyone who overlooks /b exacting b a measure /b of retribution against those who wronged him, b all his transgressions are removed from him, as it is stated: “He pardons iniquity and overlooks transgression” /b (Micah 7:18), which is homiletically read as saying: b For whom does He pardon iniquity? For he who overlooks transgressions /b that others have committed against him.,In a similar incident, b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi once b asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa: In /b the merit of b which /b virtue b were you /b blessed with b longevity? He said to him: /b Why do you ask me, b are you wearied of my /b long b life? /b Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi b said to him: My teacher, it is Torah and /b so b I must learn /b it. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa b said to him: In /b all b my days I never gazed at the likeness of a wicked man, as Rabbi Yoḥa said: It is prohibited for a person to gaze in the image of the likeness of a wicked man, as it is stated /b that the prophet Elisha said to Jehoram king of Israel: b “Were it not that I regard the presence of Jehoshaphat, the king of Judea, I would not look toward you, nor see you” /b (II Kings 3:14)., b Rabbi Elazar said: /b One who gazes at the likeness of an evil man, b his eyes become dim, as it is stated: “And it came to pass, that when Isaac was old, and his eyes were dim so that he could not see” /b (Genesis 27:1). This happened b because he gazed at the wicked Esau. /b ,The Gemara asks: b Did this cause /b Isaac’s blindness? b Didn’t Rabbi Yitzḥak say: A curse of an ordinary person should not be lightly regarded in your eyes, because Abimelech cursed Sarah, and /b although he was not a righteous man, his curse b was /b nevertheless b fulfilled, /b albeit b in her descendant. As it is stated /b that Abimelech said to Sarah with regard to the gift that he gave to Abraham: b “Behold, it is for you a covering of the eyes” /b (Genesis 20:16). b Do not read /b it as b “a covering [ i kesut /i ] /b of the eyes,” but b rather /b read it as: b A blindness [ i kesiat /i ] of the eyes. /b Abimelech’s words were a veiled curse for Sarah to suffer from blindness. While she herself did not suffer, the curse was apparently fulfilled in the blindness of her son, Isaac.,According to Rabbi Yitzḥak, Abimelech’s curse was the cause of Isaac’s blindness, and it was not, as Rabbi Elazar suggested, the fact he gazed at Esau. The Gemara explains: Both b this and that /b jointly b caused it. Rava said: /b The prohibition against gazing at the likeness of a wicked person is derived b from here: “It is not good to raise the face of the wicked” /b (Proverbs 18:5)., b At the time of /b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa’s b departure /b from this world, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi b said to him: My teacher, bless me. He said to him: May it be /b God’s b will that you /b live to b reach to half of my days. /b When Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi heard this, he asked in astonishment: Are you saying that b to the entirety of /b your days I should b not /b reach? Why? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa b said to him: Shall those who come after you /b just b tend cattle? /b If you live as long as me, your sons will never be able to succeed you in the position of Nasi. As such, they will never achieve greatness in Torah, and it will be as if they just tended cattle throughout their lives. It is therefore better that your life not be so prolonged, so that they have the opportunity to rise to eminence., b Avuh bar Ihi and Minyamin bar Ihi /b both spoke on this topic: b One /b of them b said: May /b a blessing b come to me for I never gazed at /b a wicked b gentile. And /b the other b one said: May /b a blessing b come to me for I never formed a partnership with /b a wicked b gentile, /b so as not to have any association with a wicked person.,The Gemara presents a similar incident: b Rabbi Zeira was /b once b asked by his disciples: In /b the merit of b which /b virtue b were you /b blessed with b longevity? He said to them: In /b all b my days, I was never angry inside my house /b with members of my household who acted against my wishes. b Nor did I /b ever b walk ahead of someone who was a greater /b Torah scholar b than me. Nor did I /b ever b meditate /b upon words of Torah b in filthy alleyways, /b as doing so is a disgrace to the Torah. b Nor did I /b ever b walk four cubits without /b meditating on words of b Torah or without /b wearing b phylacteries. Nor did I /b ever b sleep in a study hall, neither a deep sleep or a brief nap. Nor did I /b ever b rejoice when my fellow stumbled. Nor did I /b ever b call my fellow by his derogatory nickname [ i ḥanikhato /i ]. And some say /b that he said: I never called my fellow by b his nickname [ i ḥakhinato /i ], /b i.e., even one that is not derogatory., strong MISHNA: /strong b And Rabbi Yehuda said further: A synagogue that fell into ruin /b still may not be used for a mundane purpose. Therefore, b one may not eulogize in it. And nor may one stretch out /b and repair b ropes in it. /b The wide expanse of the synagogue would have been particularly suitable for this. b And nor may one spread /b animal b traps within it. And nor may one spread out produce upon its roof /b to dry. b And nor may one make it /b into b a shortcut. /b ,The i halakha /i that a synagogue in disrepair still may not be used for mundane purposes is derived from a verse, b as it is stated: “And I will bring desolation to your sanctuaries” /b (Leviticus 26:31). The fact that the word “sanctuaries” appears after the word “desolation” indicates that b their sanctity /b remains upon them b even when they are desolate. /b ,However, if b grass sprang up /b of its own accord b in /b the ruined synagogue, although it is not befitting its sanctity, b one should not pick /b it, b due to /b the b anguish /b that it will bring to those who see it. It will remind them of the disrepair of the synagogue and the need to rebuild it., strong GEMARA: /strong b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : With regard to b synagogues: One may not act inside them with frivolity. /b Therefore, b one may not eat in them; nor may one drink in them; /b |
|
20. Babylonian Talmud, Makkot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sect, enemies of Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 185| 23b. (ויקרא יח, ה) אשר יעשה אותם האדם וחי בהם הא כל היושב ולא עבר עבירה נותנין לו שכר כעושה מצוה,ר"ש בר רבי אומר הרי הוא אומר (דברים יב, כג) רק חזק לבלתי אכול (את) הדם כי הדם הוא הנפש וגו' ומה אם הדם שנפשו של אדם קצה ממנו הפורש ממנו מקבל שכר גזל ועריות שנפשו של אדם מתאוה להן ומחמדתן הפורש מהן על אחת כמה וכמה שיזכה לו ולדורותיו ולדורות דורותיו עד סוף כל הדורות,ר' חנניא בן עקשיא אומר רצה הקב"ה לזכות את ישראל לפיכך הרבה להם תורה ומצות שנאמר (ישעיהו מב, כא) ה' חפץ למען צדקו יגדיל תורה ויאדיר:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big א"ר יוחנן חלוקין עליו חבריו על רבי חנניה בן גמליאל אמר רב אדא בר אהבה אמרי בי רב תנינן אין בין שבת ליום הכפורים אלא שזה זדונו בידי אדם וזה זדונו בהכרת ואם איתא אידי ואידי בידי אדם הוא,רב נחמן (בר יצחק) אומר הא מני רבי יצחק היא דאמר מלקות בחייבי כריתות ליכא דתניא רבי יצחק אומר חייבי כריתות בכלל היו ולמה יצאת כרת באחותו לדונו בכרת ולא במלקות,רב אשי אמר אפילו תימא רבנן זה עיקר זדונו בידי אדם וזה עיקר זדונו בידי שמים,אמר רב אדא בר אהבה אמר רב הלכה כר' חנניה בן גמליאל אמר רב יוסף מאן סליק לעילא ואתא ואמר אמר ליה אביי אלא הא דאמר רבי יהושע בן לוי שלשה דברים עשו ב"ד של מטה והסכימו ב"ד של מעלה על ידם מאן סליק לעילא ואתא ואמר אלא קראי קא דרשינן ה"נ קראי קא דרשינן,גופא א"ר יהושע בן לוי שלשה דברים עשו ב"ד של מטה והסכימו ב"ד של מעלה על ידם [אלו הן] מקרא מגילה ושאילת שלום [בשם] והבאת מעשר,מקרא מגילה דכתיב (אסתר ט, כז) קימו וקבלו היהודים קיימו למעלה מה שקבלו למטה,ושאילת שלום דכתיב (רות ב, ד) והנה בועז בא מבית לחם ויאמר לקוצרים ה' עמכם ואומר (שופטים ו, יב) ה' עמך גבור החיל מאי ואומר וכי תימא בועז הוא דעביד מדעתיה ומשמיא לא אסכימו על ידו ת"ש ואומר ה' עמך גבור החיל,הבאת מעשר דכתיב (מלאכי ג, י) הביאו את כל המעשר אל בית האוצר ויהי טרף בביתי ובחנוני נא בזאת אמר ה' צבאות אם לא אפתח לכם את ארובות השמים והריקותי לכם ברכה עד בלי די מאי עד בלי די אמר רמי בר רב עד שיבלו שפתותיכם מלומר די,א"ר אלעזר בג' מקומות הופיע רוח הקודש בבית דינו של שם ובבית דינו של שמואל הרמתי ובבית דינו של שלמה בבית דינו של שם דכתיב (בראשית לח, כו) ויכר יהודה ויאמר צדקה ממני מנא ידע דלמא כי היכי דאזל איהו לגבה אזל נמי אינש אחרינא [לגבה] יצאת בת קול ואמרה ממני יצאו כבושים:,בבית דינו של שמואל דכתיב (שמואל א יב, ג) הנני ענו בי נגד ה' ונגד משיחו את שור מי לקחתי ויאמרו לא עשקתנו ולא רצותנו ויאמר עד ה' ועד משיחו כי לא מצאתם בידי מאומה ויאמר עד ויאמר ויאמרו מיבעי ליה יצאת בת קול ואמרה אני עד בדבר זה,בבית דינו של שלמה דכתיב (מלכים א ג, כז) ויען המלך ויאמר תנו לה את הילד החי והמת לא תמיתוהו (כי) היא אמו מנא ידע דלמא איערומא מיערמא יצאת בת קול ואמרה היא אמו,אמר רבא ממאי דלמא יהודה כיון דחשיב ירחי ויומי ואיתרמי דחזינן מחזקינן דלא חזינן לא מחזקינן,שמואל נמי כולהו ישראל קרי להו בלשון יחידי דכתיב (ישעיהו מה, יז) ישראל נושע בה',שלמה נמי מדהא קא מרחמתא והא לא קא מרחמתא אלא גמרא:,דרש רבי שמלאי שש מאות ושלש עשרה מצות נאמרו לו למשה שלש מאות וששים וחמש לאוין כמנין ימות החמה ומאתים וארבעים ושמונה עשה כנגד איבריו של אדם אמר רב המנונא מאי קרא (דברים לג, ד) תורה צוה לנו משה מורשה תורה בגימטריא | 23b. b “That a person shall perform and live by them” /b (Leviticus 18:5). It is inferred b that /b with regard to b one who sits and did not perform a transgression, /b God b gives him a reward like /b that received by one who b performs a mitzva. /b , b Rabbi Shimon bar Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b says /b that as the verse b states: “Only be steadfast to not eat the blood, as the blood is the soul” /b (Deuteronomy 12:23), it can be derived i a fortiori /i : b And if /b with regard to b the blood, which a person’s soul loathes, one who abstains from its /b consumption b receives a reward /b for that action, as it is written in a subsequent verse: “You shall not eat it, so that it shall be good for you and for your children after you” (Deuteronomy 12:25); then concerning b robbery and /b intercourse with b forbidden relatives, which a person’s soul desires and covets, one who abstains from their /b performance and overcomes his inclination, b all the more so that he and his descendants and the descendants of his descendants until the end of all generations will merit /b a reward., b Rabbi Ḥaya ben Akashya says: The Holy One, Blessed be He, sought to confer merit upon the Jewish people; therefore, He increased for them Torah and mitzvot, /b as each mitzva increases merit, b as it is stated: “It pleased the Lord for the sake of His righteousness to make the Torah great and glorious” /b (Isaiah 42:21). God sought to make the Torah great and glorious by means of the proliferation of mitzvot., strong GEMARA: /strong b Rabbi Yoḥa says: Rabbi Ḥaya ben Gamliel’s colleagues are in disagreement with him /b and hold that lashes do not exempt the sinner from i karet /i . b Rav Adda bar Ahava said /b that this is so, as b they say /b in b the school of Rav /b that b we learned /b in a mishna ( i Megilla /i 7b): b The difference between Shabbat and Yom Kippur /b with regard to the labor prohibited on those days b is only that /b in b this /b case, Shabbat, b its intentional /b desecration is punishable b by human hands, /b as he is stoned by a court based on the testimony of witnesses who forewarned the transgressor, b and /b in b that /b case, Yom Kippur, b its intentional /b desecration is punishable at the hand of God, b with i karet /i . And if /b the statement of Rabbi Ḥaya ben Gamliel b is so, /b in both b this /b case, Shabbat, b and that /b case, Yom Kippur, the punishment would be b by human hands. /b Apparently, the i tanna /i of the mishna, the Rabbis, disagrees with Rabbi Ḥaya ben Gamliel., b Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak says: /b There is no proof from here that Rabbi Ḥaya ben Gamliel’s colleagues disagree with him, as in accordance with b whose /b opinion b is this /b mishna taught? b It is /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Yitzḥak, who says: There are no lashes in /b cases of b those liable /b to receive b i karet /i . As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Yitzḥak says: /b All b those liable /b to receive b i karet /i /b in cases of forbidden relations b were included in /b the principle: “For whoever shall commit any of these abominations, even the people who commit them shall be cut off from among their people” (Leviticus 18:29). b And why was i karet /i /b in the case of relations with b one’s sister excluded /b from this verse and mentioned independently (Leviticus 20:17)? It is b to sentence /b one who transgresses a prohibition punishable with i karet /i b to /b be punished b with i karet /i /b alone, b and not with lashes. /b Other Sages disagree with Rabbi Yitzḥak (see 13b)., b Rav Ashi said: Even /b if b you say /b that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of b the Rabbis, /b who disagree with Rabbi Yitzḥak and hold that there are lashes even in cases where there is liability for i karet /i , there is no proof that Rabbi Ḥaya ben Gamliel’s colleagues disagree with him. The mishna can be understood as follows: In b this /b case, Shabbat, the b primary /b punishment for b its intentional /b desecration is b by human hands, and /b in b that /b case, Yom Kippur, the b primary /b punishment for b its intentional /b desecration is i karet /i , which is a punishment b at the hand of Heaven. /b If he was flogged, he is exempt from i karet /i ., b Rav Adda bar Ahava says /b that b Rav says: The i halakha /i /b is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Ḥaya ben Gamliel, /b who ruled that lashes exempt the sinner from i karet /i . b Rav Yosef said: Who ascended on high and came and said /b to you that one who is flogged is exempted from i karet /i ? That is not dependent upon the decision of an earthly court. b Abaye said to /b Rav Yosef: b But /b according to your reasoning, then with regard to b that which Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: /b There are b three matters /b that the b earthly court implemented and the heavenly court agreed with them, /b the same question applies: b Who ascended on high and came and said /b to him that this is so? b Rather, /b in arriving at Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi’s conclusion b we /b homiletically b interpret verses. Here too, /b with regard to lashes and i karet /i , b we /b homiletically b interpret verses. /b ,§ With regard to b the /b matter b itself, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: /b There are b three matters /b that the b earthly court implemented and the heavenly court agreed with them, and these are they: Reading the Scroll /b of Esther on Purim, b and greeting /b another b with the name of God, and bringing /b the first b tithe /b to the Temple treasury in Jerusalem. From where is it derived that the heavenly court agreed with them?, b Reading the Scroll /b of Esther is derived from a verse, b as it is written: “The Jews confirmed, and they took upon themselves” /b (Esther 9:27). The verse could have simply said: They took upon themselves. From the formulation of the verse it is interpreted: b They confirmed above /b in Heaven that b which they took upon themselves below /b on earth., b And greeting /b another with the name of God is derived from a verse, b as it is written: “And presently Boaz came from Bethlehem and said to the harvesters: The Lord is with you, and they said to him: May the Lord bless you” /b (Ruth 2:4). b And it states: /b “And the angel of the Lord appeared to him and said to him: b The Lord is with you, mighty man of valor” /b (Judges 6:12). The Gemara asks: b What /b is the reason that the Gemara cites the additional source about Gideon, introduced with the phrase: b And it states? /b Why was the proof from Boaz’s statement to the harvesters insufficient? The Gemara explains: b And if you would say: It is Boaz who did /b so b on his own, and from Heaven they did not agree with him; come /b and b hear /b proof, b and it says: “The Lord is with you, mighty man of valor.” /b The angel greeted Gideon with the name of God, indicating that there is agreement in Heaven that this is an acceptable form of greeting.,From where is it derived that the heavenly court agreed to the b bringing /b of the first b tithe /b to the Temple treasury in Jerusalem? It is derived from a verse, b as it is written: “Bring you the whole tithe into the storehouse, that there may be food in My house, and try Me now with this, says the Lord of hosts, if I will not open for you the windows of heaven and pour you out a blessing, that there shall be more than sufficiency [ i ad beli dai /i ]” /b (Malachi 3:10). This indicates that the heavenly court agreed that the first tithe should be brought to the Temple treasury. The Gemara asks: b What /b is the meaning of b “ i ad beli dai /i ”? Rami bar Rav says: /b It means that the abundance will be so great b that your lips will be worn out [ i yivlu /i ], from saying enough [ i dai /i ]. /b ,The Gemara cites a somewhat similar statement. b Rabbi Elazar says: In three places the Divine Spirit appeared /b before all to affirm that the action taken was appropriate: b In the court of Shem, in the court of Samuel the Ramathite, and in the court of Solomon. /b The Gemara elaborates: This occurred b in the court of Shem, as it is written /b in the context of the episode of Judah and Tamar: b “And Judah acknowledged them and said: She is more righteous than I [ i mimmenni /i ]” /b (Genesis 38:26). b How did /b Judah b know /b that Tamar’s assertion that she was bearing his child was correct? b Perhaps, just as he went to her /b and hired her as a prostitute, b another person went to her /b and hired her b as well, /b and he is not the father. Rather, b a Divine Voice emerged and said: /b It is b from Me [ i mimmenni /i ] /b that these b secrets emerged. /b God affirmed that her assertion was correct and that it was His divine plan that Judah would father a child from Tamar.,Likewise, this occurred b in the court of Samuel, as it is written: “Here I am; testify against me before the Lord and before His anointed: Whose ox have I taken…And they said: You have neither defrauded us nor oppressed us…And he said to them: The Lord is witness against you, and His anointed is witness this day, that you have not found anything in my hand. And he said: He is witness” /b (I Samuel 12:3–5). Based on the context, instead of the singular: b “And he said,” /b the plural: b And they said, should have /b been written, as the verse appears to be the reply of the Jewish people to Samuel’s challenge, attesting to the truth of his statement. Rather, b a Divine Voice emerged and said: I, /b God, b am witness to this matter. /b ,This occurred b in the court of Solomon, /b when the Divine Spirit appeared in the dispute between two prostitutes over who was the mother of the surviving child, b as it is written: “And the king answered and said: Give her the living child, and do not slay him; she is his mother” /b (I Kings 3:27). b How did /b Solomon b know /b that she was the mother? b Perhaps she was devious /b and was not the mother of the surviving child at all. Rather, b a Divine Voice emerged and said: She is his mother. /b , b Rava said: From where /b do you draw these conclusions? None of these proofs is absolute. b Perhaps /b in the case of b Judah, once he calculated /b the passage of the b months and the days /b from when he engaged in intercourse with Tamar b and it happened /b to correspond with the duration of her pregcy, he realized that her assertion is correct. There is no room to suspect that another man was the father, as the principle is: Based on that b which we see, we establish presumptive status; /b based on that b which we do not see, we do not establish presumptive status. /b ,With regard to b Samuel too, /b no proof may be cited from the use of the singular, as on occasion the b entire Jewish people is referred to in the singular, as it is written, /b e.g.: b “The Jewish people is saved by the Lord” /b (Isaiah 45:17).,With regard to b Solomon too, /b perhaps he reasoned that b due to /b the fact b that this /b woman b is merciful /b and seeks to spare the baby b and this /b woman b is not merciful, /b it is evident that the former is its mother. b Rather, /b Rava concludes: There is no proof from the verses that a Divine Spirit appeared in those circumstances; rather, there is b a tradition /b that this is the case.,§ b Rabbi Simlai taught: /b There were b 613 mitzvot stated to Moses /b in the Torah, consisting of b 365 prohibitions corresponding to the number of days /b in b the solar year, and 248 positive /b mitzvot b corresponding to /b the number of b a person’s limbs. Rav Hamnuna said: What is the verse /b that alludes to this? It is written: b “Moses commanded to us the Torah, an inheritance /b of the congregation of Jacob” (Deuteronomy 33:4). The word b Torah, in /b terms of b its numerical value [ i gimatriyya /i ], /b |
|
21. Babylonian Talmud, Bekhorot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Schiffman (1983) 185| 37a. לאפוקי מדרבי יוסי שלשה מפירין את הנדר במקום שאין חכם לאפוקי מדרבי יהודה דתניא הפרת נדרים בג' ר' יהודה אומר אחד מהם חכם,במקום שאין חכם כגון מאן אמר רב נחמן כגון אנא ר' יהודה אומר אחד מהן חכם מכלל דהנך כל דהו אמר רבינא דמסתברי ליה וסבר:,רבי יוסי אומר אפילו יש שם כ"ג כו': אמר רב חננאל אמר רב אין הלכה כרבי יוסי פשיטא יחיד ורבים הלכה כרבים מהו דתימא נמוקו עמו קמ"ל,תפשוט מהא דהך קמייתא משמיה דשמואל איתמר דאי משמיה דרב תרתי למה לי,חדא מכלל דחבירתה איתמר:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big השוחט את הבכור ונודע שלא הראהו מה שאכלו אכלו ויחזיר להם הדמים ומה שלא אכלו הבשר יקבר ויחזיר את הדמים,וכן השוחט את הפרה ומכרה ונודע שהיא טרפה מה שאכלו אכלו ומה שלא אכלו הם יחזירו לו את הבשר והוא יחזיר להם את הדמים מכרוהו לעובד כוכבים או הטילוהו לכלבים ישלמו דמי טרפה:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big ת"ר המוכר בשר לחבירו ונמצא בשר בכור פירות ונמצא טבלים יין ונמצא יין נסך מה שאכלו אכלו ויחזיר להם את הדמים,ר' שמעון בן אלעזר אומר דברים שהנפש קצה בהן יחזיר להן את הדמים ושאין הנפש קצה בהם ינכה להם את הדמים ואלו הן דברים שהנפש קצה בהן נבילות וטריפות שקצים ורמשים ואלו הן דברים שאין הנפש קצה בהן בכורות טבלים ויין נסך,בכור ולימא ליה מאי אפסדתך,לא צריכא כגון דזבין ליה ממקום מומא דא"ל אי לאו דאכלת הוה מחזינא ליה ושרי ניהליה כרבי יהודה,טבלים הוה מתקיננא להו ואכלנא להו יין נסך על ידי תערובת וכרשב"ג,דתנן יין נסך שנפל לבור כולו אסור בהנאה רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר ימכר כולו לעובדי כוכבים חוץ מדמי יי"נ שבו:, br br big strongהדרן עלך כל פסולי המוקדשין /strong /big br br,מתני׳ big strongעל /strong /big אלו מומין שוחטין את הבכור נפגמה אזנו מן החסחוס אבל לא העור נסדקה אעפ"י שלא חסרה ניקבה מלא כרשינה או שיבשה איזהו יבשה כל שתנקב ואינה מוציאה טיפת דם ר' יוסי בן המשולם אומר יבשה שתהא נפרכת:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big אמאי (דברים טו כא) פסח ועור כתיב,כתיב נמי (דברים טו, כא) כי יהיה בו מום ואימא כי יהיה בו מום כלל פסח או עור פרט כלל ופרט אין בכלל אלא מה שבפרט פסח ועור אין מידי אחרינא לא,(דברים טו, כא) כל מום רע חזר וכלל כלל ופרט וכלל אי אתה דן אלא כעין הפרט מה הפרט מפורש מומין שבגלוי ואינן חוזרין אף כל מומין שבגלוי ואינן חוזרין,ואימא מה הפרט מפורש מומין שבגלוי ובוטל ממלאכתו ואינו חוזר אף כל מומין שבגלוי ובוטל ממלאכתו ואינו חוזר אלמה תנן נפגמה אזנו מן החסחוס ולא מן העור,כל מום רע ריבויא הוא אי הכי מומין שבסתר נמי אלמה תנן חוטין החיצונות שנפגמו ושנגממו והפנימיות שנעקרו | 37a. is b to the exclusion of /b the opinion b of Rabbi Yosei /b in the mishna, who prohibits any number of laymen to deem a firstborn animal permitted. The ruling that a group of b three /b laymen may b dissolve a vow in a place where there is no Sage /b is b to the exclusion of /b the opinion b of Rabbi Yehuda, as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Dissolution of vows /b requires a court of b three. Rabbi Yehuda says: /b This is the i halakha /i only if at least b one of them /b is b a Sage. /b If no Sage is available, laymen may not dissolve a vow.,Rav Ḥiyya bar Amram stated above that a group of three may dissolve a vow b in a place where there is no Sage. /b This indicates that if there is a Sage, he alone may dissolve a vow. The Gemara asks: b Who, for example, /b is considered such a Sage? b Rav Naḥman said: For example, /b one such as b me. /b The i baraita /i further stated that b Rabbi Yehuda says: /b At least b one of /b the three laymen must be b a Sage. /b The Gemara asks: Should one conclude b by inference that those /b other two members can be b anyone, /b even complete ignoramuses? b Ravina said /b in explanation: Each member of the group must be one b to whom /b the i halakhot /i of vows b is explained and he /b is able to b comprehend /b them.,§ The mishna teaches that b Rabbi Yosei says: Even if there is /b a court of b twenty-three /b Sages b there, /b it may be slaughtered only on the basis of the ruling of an expert. b Rav Ḥael says /b that b Rav says: /b The b i halakha /i /b is b not in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yosei. /b The Gemara challenges: This is b obvious, /b as there is a principle that in a dispute between b an individual /b Sage b and many /b Sages, the b i halakha /i /b is b in accordance with /b the opinion of the b many /b Sages. The Gemara answers: Rav’s statement is necessary, b lest you say /b that Rabbi Yosei is an exception to the principle, as b his reasoning [ i nimmuko /i ] is with him, /b i.e., his logic is sound. Rav Ḥael therefore b teaches us /b that this is not so, and the i halakha /i does not follow his opinion.,Earlier (36b), the Gemara cited a ruling, which was issued either by Rav or Shmuel, that three regular Jews may deem a firstborn animal permitted in a place where there is no expert, in contrast to the opinion of Rabbi Yosei. The Gemara suggests: b Resolve /b that dilemma b from this /b statement in the name of Rav, that the i halakha /i is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei. It can be inferred from here b that that first, /b uncertain ruling b was stated in the name of Shmuel. As, if /b it was stated b in the name of Rav, why do I /b need b two /b identical rulings?,The Gemara answers: This is insufficient proof, as it is possible that Rav did not issue two identical rulings. Rather, b one /b ruling b was stated from the other, by inference. /b Rav issued only one of these statements explicitly; the other was reported by his students in his name based on an inference from what he had said., strong MISHNA: /strong In the case of b one who slaughters a firstborn /b animal and sells its meat, b and it was discovered that he did not /b initially b show it /b to one of the Sages, the i halakha /i is that it was actually prohibited to derive any benefit from the meat. In that case, b what /b the buyers b ate, they ate, and /b the Sages penalized the seller in that b he must return the money to them, /b which they paid for the meat that they ate. b And /b with regard to b that which they did not eat, /b that b meat must be buried, and he must return the money /b that they paid for the meat that they did not eat., b And likewise, /b in the case of b one who slaughters a cow and sells it, and it was discovered that it is a i tereifa /i , what /b the buyers b ate, they ate, and what they did not eat, they must return the meat to /b the seller, who may sell it to a gentile or feed it to the dogs, b and he must return the money to /b the buyers. If the buyers b sold it to gentiles or cast it to the dogs, they pay /b the seller b the value of a i tereifa /i , /b which is less than the value of kosher meat, and the seller refunds the balance to the buyers., strong GEMARA: /strong b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : In a case where b one sells meat to another and it was discovered /b that it is the b meat /b of b a firstborn /b animal, which was not deemed permitted for consumption by an expert, or if one sells b produce /b to another b and it was discovered /b that it is b untithed produce, /b or if one sells b wine /b to another b and it turns out /b that it is b wine /b that was used for b a libation /b in idol worship, the i halakha /i is that b what /b the purchasers b ate, they ate, and /b the seller b reimburses them /b all their b money. /b , b Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says, /b qualifying this ruling: If he sold them b items from which one is /b generally b repulsed, he must reimburse them /b all their b money, /b as they are presumed to not have derived benefit from the consumption of such items. b But /b if he sold them b items from which one is not /b generally b repulsed, he deducts for them the value /b of the benefit from those items and reimburses them the balance. b And the following are items from which one is /b generally b repulsed: Carcasses and i tereifot /i , repugt creatures, and creeping animals. And the following are items from which one is /b generally b not repulsed: Firstborn /b animals, b untithed produce, and wine /b used for b a libation /b in idol worship.,The Gemara asks: Why does the seller deduct the value of the meat of b a firstborn /b animal eaten by the purchaser and reimburse him the difference? b Let /b the purchaser b say to /b the seller: b What loss have I caused you /b by eating the meat? Had you not sold it to me, you would have had no rights to partake of it, as this is an unblemished firstborn animal from which deriving benefit is prohibited.,The Gemara answers: b No, /b this ruling is b necessary /b in a case b where he sold him /b a cut of meat b from an area /b on the animal that contained b a blemish, /b but the seller had not yet brought the animal to be examined and deemed permitted by a Sage. In b that /b instance, the seller can b say to /b the purchaser: b Had you not eaten /b the meat, b I would have shown /b the animal to a Sage b and he /b would have b deemed it permitted /b to me. The Gemara notes that this is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yehuda /b (28a), who permits a firstborn animal to be examined and deemed permitted even after it has been slaughtered.,The Gemara adds that with regard to b untithed produce, /b although one could claim that the purchaser did not cause a loss to the seller, as untithed produce is prohibited for consumption, the seller can say to the purchaser: Had you not eaten my produce, b I would have remedied it, /b i.e., separated its tithes, b and eaten it. /b Similarly, with regard to b wine /b used for b a libation /b in idol worship, which is also prohibited to be consumed, this is referring to a seller who sold it b in a mixture /b of permitted wine. In this case, had the purchaser not consumed the wine mixture, the seller could have derived benefit from it, b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. /b , b As we learned /b in a mishna ( i Avoda Zara /i 74a): In the case of b wine /b used for b a libation /b in idol worship b that fell into /b a wine b cistern, /b it is b prohibited /b to b derive benefit /b from b all /b the wine in the cistern, even if the volume of the wine used for a libation was small in comparison to the volume of the rest of the wine in the cistern. b Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: All of the /b wine in the cistern b may be sold to a gentile, /b and the money paid for it is permitted, b except for the value of the wine /b used for b a libation /b that is b in it. /b ,, strong MISHNA: /strong b For these blemishes, one may slaughter the firstborn /b animal outside the Temple: If the firstborn’s b ear was damaged /b and lacking b from the cartilage [ i haḥasḥus /i ], but not /b if b the skin /b was damaged; and likewise, if the ear b was split, although it is not lacking; /b or if the ear b was pierced /b with a hole b the size of a bitter vetch, /b which is a type of legume; b or /b if it was an ear b that /b is b desiccated. What is a desiccated /b ear that is considered a blemish? It is b any /b ear b that /b if b it is pierced it does not discharge a drop of blood. Rabbi Yosei ben HaMeshullam says: Desiccated /b means that the ear is so dry b that it will crumble /b if one touches it., strong GEMARA: /strong With regard to the blemishes mentioned in this mishna and in the subsequent i mishnayot /i , the Gemara asks: b Why /b is it permitted to slaughter and eat a firstborn that sustained these blemishes? Only b a lame /b animal b and a blind /b animal are b written /b in the verse that discusses this i halakha /i . That verse states: “And if there be any blemish therein, lameness, or blindness, any ill blemish whatsoever, you shall not sacrifice it to the Lord your God. You shall eat it within your gates” (Deuteronomy 15:21–22).,The Gemara answers: b It is also written /b in the beginning of the verse: b “If there be any blemish therein,” /b which indicates that other blemishes are also included. The Gemara asks: b But /b why not b say /b that the phrase b “if there be any blemish therein” /b is b a generalization, /b while b “lameness, or blindness” /b is b a detail. /b According to the principles of midrashic exegesis, if b a generalization and a detail /b are mentioned, b the generalization includes only that which is /b specified b in the detail. /b Therefore, it should be concluded that in the event of b lameness and blindness, yes, /b one may slaughter the firstborn, but in the event of b another matter, /b one may b not /b slaughter it.,The Gemara answers: By subsequently stating: b “Any ill blemish,” it then generalized /b again. Consequently, it is b a generalization and a detail and a generalization, /b represented in the phrases “any blemish,” “lameness or blindness,” and “any ill blemish,” and according to the principles of midrashic exegesis, b you may deduce /b that the verse is referring b only /b to items b similar to the detail. Just as /b the items mentioned in b the detail, /b i.e., in the phrase “lameness or blindness,” are clearly b defined as blemishes that are exposed and do not regenerate, so too, all blemishes that are exposed and do not regenerate /b are considered blemishes with regard to a firstborn.,The Gemara suggests: b But say /b instead that b just as /b the items mentioned in b the detail, /b i.e., in the phrase “lameness or blindness,” are clearly b defined as blemishes that are exposed and /b that cause an animal to b desist from its /b normal b labor, and /b they are blemishes that b do not regenerate, so too, all blemishes that are exposed and /b that cause an animal to b desist from its labor and do not regenerate /b are included in this i halakha /i . If so, a blemish that does not fit these criteria would not render the firstborn permitted to be slaughtered. b Why /b then b did we learn /b in the mishna that if the firstborn’s b ear was damaged /b and lacking b from the cartilage, but not /b if it is lacking b from the skin, /b it is considered a blemish, despite the fact that this does not cause the animal to desist from its labor?,The Gemara answers: The word “any” in b “any ill blemish” is an amplification, /b and it includes even blemishes that are different from those defined by the detail. The Gemara challenges: b If so, blemishes that are hidden /b should b also /b be included. b Why /b then b did we learn /b in the mishna (39a) that animals with b external gums that were damaged /b and lacking b or that were scratched [ i veshenigmemu /i ] and /b likewise animals with b internal /b gums b that were /b entirely b extracted /b are considered blemished? |
|
