1. Hebrew Bible, Song of Songs, None (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 331| 6.11. "אֶל־גִּנַּת אֱגוֹז יָרַדְתִּי לִרְאוֹת בְּאִבֵּי הַנָּחַל לִרְאוֹת הֲפָרְחָה הַגֶּפֶן הֵנֵצוּ הָרִמֹּנִים׃", | 6.11. I went down into the garden of nuts, To look at the green plants of the valley, To see whether the vine budded, And the pomegranates were in flower. |
|
2. Hebrew Bible, Exodus, 25.8, 33.20 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hai gaon b sherira Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 332, 373| 25.8. "וְעָשׂוּ לִי מִקְדָּשׁ וְשָׁכַנְתִּי בְּתוֹכָם׃", | 25.8. "And let them make Me a sanctuary, that I may dwell among them.", 33.20. "And He said: ‘Thou canst not see My face, for man shall not see Me and live.’", |
|
3. Hebrew Bible, Psalms, 74.8 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira gaon of pumbeditha Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 25| 74.8. "אָמְרוּ בְלִבָּם נִינָם יָחַד שָׂרְפוּ כָל־מוֹעֲדֵי־אֵל בָּאָרֶץ׃", | 74.8. "They said in their heart: 'Let us make havoc of them altogether'; They have burned up all the meeting-places of God in the land.", |
|
4. Hebrew Bible, 1 Kings, 18.42 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hai gaon b sherira Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 332| 18.42. "וַיַּעֲלֶה אַחְאָב לֶאֱכֹל וְלִשְׁתּוֹת וְאֵלִיָּהוּ עָלָה אֶל־רֹאשׁ הַכַּרְמֶל וַיִּגְהַר אַרְצָה וַיָּשֶׂם פָּנָיו בֵּין ברכו [בִּרְכָּיו׃]", | 18.42. "So Ahab went up to eat and to drink. And Elijah went up to the top of Carmel; and he bowed himself down upon the earth, and put his face between his knees.", |
|
5. Hebrew Bible, 2 Kings, 21.4-21.7 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira gaon of pumbeditha Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 25| 21.4. "וּבָנָה מִזְבְּחֹת בְּבֵית יְהוָה אֲשֶׁר אָמַר יְהוָה בִּירוּשָׁלִַם אָשִׂים אֶת־שְׁמִי׃", 21.5. "וַיִּבֶן מִזְבְּחוֹת לְכָל־צְבָא הַשָּׁמָיִם בִּשְׁתֵּי חַצְרוֹת בֵּית־יְהוָה׃", 21.6. "וְהֶעֱבִיר אֶת־בְּנוֹ בָּאֵשׁ וְעוֹנֵן וְנִחֵשׁ וְעָשָׂה אוֹב וְיִדְּעֹנִים הִרְבָּה לַעֲשׂוֹת הָרַע בְּעֵינֵי יְהוָה לְהַכְעִיס׃", 21.7. "וַיָּשֶׂם אֶת־פֶּסֶל הָאֲשֵׁרָה אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה בַּבַּיִת אֲשֶׁר אָמַר יְהוָה אֶל־דָּוִד וְאֶל־שְׁלֹמֹה בְנוֹ בַּבַּיִת הַזֶּה וּבִירוּשָׁלִַם אֲשֶׁר בָּחַרְתִּי מִכֹּל שִׁבְטֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אָשִׂים אֶת־שְׁמִי לְעוֹלָם׃", | 21.4. "And he built altars in the house of the LORD, whereof the LORD said: ‘In Jerusalem will I put My name.’", 21.5. "And he built altars for all the host of heaven in the two courts of the house of the LORD.", 21.6. "And he made his son to pass through the fire, and practised soothsaying, and used enchantments, and appointed them that divined by a ghost or a familiar spirit: he wrought much evil in the sight of the LORD, to provoke Him.", 21.7. "And he set the graven image of Asherah, that he had made, in the house of which the LORD said to David and to Solomon his son: ‘In this house, and in Jerusalem, which I have chosen out of all the tribes of Israel, will I put My name for ever;", |
|
| 6. Hebrew Bible, Isaiah, 6 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •hai gaon b sherira Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 352 |
7. Hebrew Bible, Ezekiel, 8.1, 14.1 (6th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 25| 8.1. "וָאָבוֹא וָאֶרְאֶה וְהִנֵּה כָל־תַּבְנִית רֶמֶשׂ וּבְהֵמָה שֶׁקֶץ וְכָל־גִּלּוּלֵי בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל מְחֻקֶּה עַל־הַקִּיר סָבִיב סָבִיב׃", 8.1. "וַיְהִי בַּשָּׁנָה הַשִּׁשִּׁית בַּשִּׁשִּׁי בַּחֲמִשָּׁה לַחֹדֶשׁ אֲנִי יוֹשֵׁב בְּבֵיתִי וְזִקְנֵי יְהוּדָה יוֹשְׁבִים לְפָנָי וַתִּפֹּל עָלַי שָׁם יַד אֲדֹנָי יְהֹוִה׃", 14.1. "וְנָשְׂאוּ עֲוֺנָם כַּעֲוֺן הַדֹּרֵשׁ כַּעֲוֺן הַנָּבִיא יִהְיֶה׃", 14.1. "וַיָּבוֹא אֵלַי אֲנָשִׁים מִזִּקְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיֵּשְׁבוּ לְפָנָי׃", | 8.1. "And it came to pass in the sixth year, in the sixth month, in the fifth day of the month, as I sat in my house, and the elders of Judah sat before me, that the hand of the Lord GOD fell there upon me.", 14.1. "Then came certain of the elders of Israel unto me, and sat before me.", |
|
| 8. Hebrew Bible, Zechariah, 8 (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira gaon of pumbeditha Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 25 |
9. Anon., 1 Enoch, 37-71, 14 (3rd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 331 | 14. The book of the words of righteousness, and of the reprimand of the eternal Watchers in accordance,with the command of the Holy Great One in that vision. I saw in my sleep what I will now say with a tongue of flesh and with the breath of my mouth: which the Great One has given to men to",converse therewith and understand with the heart. As He has created and given to man the power of understanding the word of wisdom, so hath He created me also and given me the power of reprimanding,the Watchers, the children of heaven. I wrote out your petition, and in my vision it appeared thus, that your petition will not be granted unto you throughout all the days of eternity, and that judgement,has been finally passed upon you: yea (your petition) will not be granted unto you. And from henceforth you shall not ascend into heaven unto all eternity, and in bonds of the earth the decree,has gone forth to bind you for all the days of the world. And (that) previously you shall have seen the destruction of your beloved sons and ye shall have no pleasure in them, but they shall fall before,you by the sword. And your petition on their behalf shall not be granted, nor yet on your own: even though you weep and pray and speak all the words contained in the writing which I have,written. And the vision was shown to me thus: Behold, in the vision clouds invited me and a mist summoned me, and the course of the stars and the lightnings sped and hastened me, and the winds in,the vision caused me to fly and lifted me upward, and bore me into heaven. And I went in till I drew nigh to a wall which is built of crystals and surrounded by tongues of fire: and it began to affright,me. And I went into the tongues of fire and drew nigh to a large house which was built of crystals: and the walls of the house were like a tesselated floor (made) of crystals, and its groundwork was,of crystal. Its ceiling was like the path of the stars and the lightnings, and between them were,fiery cherubim, and their heaven was (clear as) water. A flaming fire surrounded the walls, and its,portals blazed with fire. And I entered into that house, and it was hot as fire and cold as ice: there,were no delights of life therein: fear covered me, and trembling got hold upon me. And as I quaked,and trembled, I fell upon my face. And I beheld a vision, And lo! there was a second house, greater,than the former, and the entire portal stood open before me, and it was built of flames of fire. And in every respect it so excelled in splendour and magnificence and extent that I cannot describe to,you its splendour and its extent. And its floor was of fire, and above it were lightnings and the path,of the stars, and its ceiling also was flaming fire. And I looked and saw therein a lofty throne: its appearance was as crystal, and the wheels thereof as the shining sun, and there was the vision of,cherubim. And from underneath the throne came streams of flaming fire so that I could not look",thereon. And the Great Glory sat thereon, and His raiment shone more brightly than the sun and,was whiter than any snow. None of the angels could enter and could behold His face by reason",of the magnificence and glory and no flesh could behold Him. The flaming fire was round about Him, and a great fire stood before Him, and none around could draw nigh Him: ten thousand times,ten thousand (stood) before Him, yet He needed no counselor. And the most holy ones who were,nigh to Him did not leave by night nor depart from Him. And until then I had been prostrate on my face, trembling: and the Lord called me with His own mouth, and said to me: ' Come hither,,Enoch, and hear my word.' And one of the holy ones came to me and waked me, and He made me rise up and approach the door: and I bowed my face downwards. |
|
10. Cicero, On Invention, 2.142 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira gaon Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 128| 2.142. tere accipi demonstrabit. et quemadmodum ei dice- bamus, qui ab scripto diceret, hoc fore utilissimum, si quid de aequitate ea, quae cum adversario staret, derogasset, sic huic, qui contra scriptum dicet, pluri- mum proderit, ex ipsa scriptura aliquid ad suam cau- sam convertere aut ambigue aliquid scriptum osten- dere; deinde ex illo ambiguo eam partem, quae sibi prosit, defendere aut verbi definitionem inducere et illius verbi vim, quo urgeri videatur, ad suae causae commodum traducere aut ex scripto non scriptum aliquid inducere per ratiocinationem, de qua post di- | |
|
| 11. Tosefta, Hagigah, 2.9 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira (gaon) Found in books: Balberg (2023), Fractured Tablets: Forgetfulness and Fallibility in Late Ancient Rabbinic Culture, 205 |
12. Josephus Flavius, Jewish Antiquities, 3.179-3.187 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hai gaon b sherira Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 332 | 3.179. 7. Now here one may wonder at the ill-will which men bear to us, and which they profess to bear on account of our despising that Deity which they pretend to honor; 3.180. for if any one do but consider the fabric of the tabernacle, and take a view of the garments of the high priest, and of those vessels which we make use of in our sacred ministration, he will find that our legislator was a divine man, and that we are unjustly reproached by others; for if any one do without prejudice, and with judgment, look upon these things, he will find they were every one made in way of imitation and representation of the universe. 3.181. When Moses distinguished the tabernacle into three parts, and allowed two of them to the priests, as a place accessible and common, he denoted the land and the sea, these being of general access to all; but he set apart the third division for God, because heaven is inaccessible to men. 3.182. And when he ordered twelve loaves to be set on the table, he denoted the year, as distinguished into so many months. By branching out the candlestick into seventy parts, he secretly intimated the Decani, or seventy divisions of the planets; and as to the seven lamps upon the candlesticks, they referred to the course of the planets, of which that is the number. 3.183. The veils, too, which were composed of four things, they declared the four elements; for the fine linen was proper to signify the earth, because the flax grows out of the earth; the purple signified the sea, because that color is dyed by the blood of a sea shell-fish; the blue is fit to signify the air; and the scarlet will naturally be an indication of fire. 3.184. Now the vestment of the high priest being made of linen, signified the earth; the blue denoted the sky, being like lightning in its pomegranates, and in the noise of the bells resembling thunder. And for the ephod, it showed that God had made the universe of four elements; and as for the gold interwoven, I suppose it related to the splendor by which all things are enlightened. 3.185. He also appointed the breastplate to be placed in the middle of the ephod, to resemble the earth, for that has the very middle place of the world. And the girdle which encompassed the high priest round, signified the ocean, for that goes round about and includes the universe. Each of the sardonyxes declares to us the sun and the moon; those, I mean, that were in the nature of buttons on the high priest’s shoulders. 3.186. And for the twelve stones, whether we understand by them the months, or whether we understand the like number of the signs of that circle which the Greeks call the Zodiac, we shall not be mistaken in their meaning. And for the mitre, which was of a blue color, it seems to me to mean heaven; 3.187. for how otherwise could the name of God be inscribed upon it? That it was also illustrated with a crown, and that of gold also, is because of that splendor with which God is pleased. Let this explication suffice at present, since the course of my narration will often, and on many occasions, afford me the opportunity of enlarging upon the virtue of our legislator. |
|
13. Josephus Flavius, Jewish War, 5.212-5.214, 5.217-5.218 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hai gaon b sherira Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 332 | 5.212. but before these doors there was a veil of equal largeness with the doors. It was a Babylonian curtain, embroidered with blue, and fine linen, and scarlet, and purple, and of a contexture that was truly wonderful. Nor was this mixture of colors without its mystical interpretation, but was a kind of image of the universe; 5.213. for by the scarlet there seemed to be enigmatically signified fire, by the fine flax the earth, by the blue the air, and by the purple the sea; two of them having their colors the foundation of this resemblance; but the fine flax and the purple have their own origin for that foundation, the earth producing the one, and the sea the other. 5.214. This curtain had also embroidered upon it all that was mystical in the heavens, excepting that of the [twelve] signs, representing living creatures. 5.217. Now, the seven lamps signified the seven planets; for so many there were springing out of the candlestick. Now, the twelve loaves that were upon the table signified the circle of the zodiac and the year; 5.218. but the altar of incense, by its thirteen kinds of sweet-smelling spices with which the sea replenished it, signified that God is the possessor of all things that are both in the uninhabitable and habitable parts of the earth, and that they are all to be dedicated to his use. |
|
14. Mishnah, Bikkurim, 3.6 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •iggeret of r. sherira gaon •sherira gaon, rabbi Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 106| 3.6. "עוֹדֵהוּ הַסַּל עַל כְּתֵפוֹ, קוֹרֵא מֵהִגַּדְתִּי הַיּוֹם לַה' אֱלֹהֶיךָ (דברים כו), עַד שֶׁגּוֹמֵר כָּל הַפָּרָשָׁה. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר עַד אֲרַמִּי אֹבֵד אָבִי. הִגִּיעַ לַאֲרַמִּי אֹבֵד אָבִי, מוֹרִיד הַסַּל מֵעַל כְּתֵפוֹ וְאוֹחֲזוֹ בְשִׂפְתוֹתָיו, וְכֹהֵן מַנִּיחַ יָדוֹ תַחְתָּיו וּמְנִיפוֹ, וְקוֹרֵא מֵאֲרַמִּי אֹבֵד אָבִי עַד שֶׁהוּא גוֹמֵר כָּל הַפָּרָשָׁה, וּמַנִּיחוֹ בְּצַד הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, וְהִשְׁתַּחֲוָה וְיָצָא: \n", | 3.6. "While the basket was still on his shoulder he recites from: \"I acknowledge this day before the LORD your God that I have entered the land that the LORD swore to our fathers to assign us” (Deuteronomy 26:3) until he completes the passage. Rabbi Judah said: until [he reaches] “My father was a fugitive Aramean” (v.. When he reaches, “My father was a fugitive Aramean”, he takes the basket off his shoulder and holds it by its edges, and the priest places his hand beneath it and waves it. He then recites from “My father was a fugitive Aramean” until he completes the entire passage. He then deposits the basket by the side of the altar, bow and depart.", |
|
15. Mishnah, Nedarim, 9.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira (ben hanina gaon), rav Found in books: Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 529| 9.5. "פּוֹתְחִין לָאָדָם בִּכְתֻבַּת אִשְׁתּוֹ. וּמַעֲשֶׂה בְאֶחָד שֶׁנָּדַר מֵאִשְׁתּוֹ הֲנָאָה וְהָיְתָה כְתֻבָּתָהּ אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת דִּינָרִין, וּבָא לִפְנֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא וְחִיְּבוֹ לִתֵּן לָהּ כְּתֻבָּתָהּ. אָמַר לוֹ, רַבִּי, שְׁמֹנֶה מֵאוֹת דִּינָרִין הִנִּיחַ אַבָּא, וְנָטַל אָחִי אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת וַאֲנִי אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת, לֹא דַיָּהּ שֶׁתִּטֹּל הִיא מָאתַיִם, וַאֲנִי מָאתָיִם. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, אֲפִלּוּ אַתָּה מוֹכֵר שְׂעַר רֹאשְׁךָ, אַתָּה נוֹתֵן לָהּ כְּתֻבָּתָהּ. אָמַר לוֹ, אִלּוּ הָיִיתִי יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁהוּא כֵן, לֹא הָיִיתִי נוֹדֵר, וְהִתִּירָהּ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא: \n", | 9.5. "They release a vow by reference to a wife’s kethubah. And it once happened that a man vowed not to benefit from his wife and her ketubah amounted to four hundred denarii. He went before Rabbi Akiva, who ordered him to pay her the ketubah [in full]. He said to him, “Rabbi! My father left eight hundred denarii, of which my brother took four hundred and I took four hundred. Isn’t it enough that she should receive two hundred and I two hundred?” Rabbi Akiva replied: even if you have to sell the hair of your head you must pay her her ketubah. He said to him, “Had I known that it is so, I would not have vowed.” And Rabbi Akiva released his vow.", |
|
16. Mishnah, Sotah, 9.9-9.16 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira, gaon Found in books: Rosen-Zvi (2012), The Mishnaic Sotah Ritual: Temple, Gender and Midrash, 161| 9.9. "מִשֶּׁרַבּוּ הָרַצְחָנִים, בָּטְלָה עֶגְלָה עֲרוּפָה, מִשֶּׁבָּא אֶלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן דִּינַאי, וּתְחִינָה בֶּן פְּרִישָׁה הָיָה נִקְרָא, חָזְרוּ לִקְרוֹתוֹ בֶּן הָרַצְחָן. מִשֶּׁרַבּוּ הַמְנָאֲפִים, פָּסְקוּ הַמַּיִם הַמָּרִים, וְרַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי הִפְסִיקָן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (הושע ד) לֹא אֶפְקוֹד עַל בְּנוֹתֵיכֶם כִּי תִזְנֶינָה וְעַל כַּלּוֹתֵיכֶם כִּי תְנָאַפְנָה כִּי הֵם וְגוֹ'. מִשֶּׁמֵּת יוֹסֵי בֶן יוֹעֶזֶר אִישׁ צְרֵדָה וְיוֹסֵי בֶן יוֹחָנָן אִישׁ יְרוּשָׁלַיִם, בָּטְלוּ הָאֶשְׁכּוֹלוֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (מיכה ז) אֵין אֶשְׁכּוֹל לֶאֱכֹל בִּכּוּרָה אִוְּתָה נַפְשִׁי: \n", 9.10. "יוֹחָנָן כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל הֶעֱבִיר הוֹדָיַת הַמַּעֲשֵׂר. אַף הוּא בִטֵּל אֶת הַמְעוֹרְרִין וְאֶת הַנּוֹקְפִין. עַד יָמָיו הָיָה פַטִּישׁ מַכֶּה בִירוּשָׁלַיִם. וּבְיָמָיו אֵין אָדָם צָרִיךְ לִשְׁאֹל עַל הַדְּמָאי: \n", 9.11. "מִשֶּׁבָּטְלָה סַנְהֶדְרִין, בָּטְלָה הַשִּׁיר מִבֵּית הַמִּשְׁתָּאוֹת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ישעיה כד) בַּשִּׁיר לֹא יִשְׁתּוּ יָיִן וְגוֹ': \n", 9.12. "מִשֶּׁמֵּתוּ נְבִיאִים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים, בָּטְלוּ אוּרִים וְתֻמִּים. מִשֶּׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, בָּטַל הַשָּׁמִיר וְנֹפֶת צוּפִים, וּפָסְקוּ אַנְשֵׁי אֲמָנָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהלים יב) הוֹשִׁיעָה ה' כִּי גָמַר חָסִיד וְגוֹ'. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, מִיּוֹם שֶׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, אֵין יוֹם שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ קְלָלָה, וְלֹא יָרַד הַטַּל לִבְרָכָה, וְנִטַּל טַעַם הַפֵּרוֹת. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אַף נִטַּל שֹׁמֶן הַפֵּרוֹת: \n", 9.13. "רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר, הַטָּהֳרָה נָטְלָה אֶת הַטַּעַם וְאֶת הָרֵיחַ. הַמַּעַשְׂרוֹת נָטְלוּ אֶת שֹׁמֶן הַדָּגָן. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, הַזְּנוּת וְהַכְּשָׁפִים כִּלּוּ אֶת הַכֹּל: \n", 9.14. "בַּפֻּלְמוֹס שֶׁל אַסְפַּסְיָנוּס גָּזְרוּ עַל עַטְרוֹת חֲתָנִים, וְעַל הָאֵרוּס. בַּפֻּלְמוֹס שֶׁל טִיטוּס גָּזְרוּ עַל עַטְרוֹת כַּלּוֹת, וְשֶׁלֹא יְלַמֵּד אָדָם אֶת בְּנוֹ יְוָנִית. בַּפֻּלְמוֹס הָאַחֲרוֹן גָּזְרוּ שֶׁלֹּא תֵצֵא הַכַּלָּה בָּאַפִּרְיוֹן בְּתוֹךְ הָעִיר, וְרַבּוֹתֵינוּ הִתִּירוּ שֶׁתֵּצֵא הַכַּלָּה בָּאַפִּרְיוֹן בְּתוֹךְ הָעִיר: \n", 9.15. "מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי מֵאִיר, בָּטְלוּ מוֹשְׁלֵי מְשָׁלִים. מִשֶּׁמֵּת בֶּן עַזַּאי, בָּטְלוּ הַשַּׁקְדָּנִים. מִשֶּׁמֵּת בֶּן זוֹמָא, בָּטְלוּ הַדַּרְשָׁנִים. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, פָּסְקָה טוֹבָה מִן הָעוֹלָם. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, בָּא גוֹבַי וְרַבּוּ צָרוֹת. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, פָּסַק הָעשֶׁר מִן הַחֲכָמִים. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, בָּטַל כְּבוֹד הַתּוֹרָה. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בֶּן דּוֹסָא, בָּטְלוּ אַנְשֵׁי מַעֲשֶׂה. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי יוֹסֵי קַטְנוּתָא, פָּסְקוּ חֲסִידִים. וְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ קַטְנוּתָא, שֶׁהָיָה קַטְנוּתָן שֶׁל חֲסִידִים. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, בָּטַל זִיו הַחָכְמָה. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הַזָּקֵן, בָּטַל כְּבוֹד הַתּוֹרָה וּמֵתָה טָהֳרָה וּפְרִישׁוּת. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בֶּן פָּאבִי, בָּטַל זִיו הַכְּהֻנָּה. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי, בָּטְלָה עֲנָוָה וְיִרְאַת חֵטְא. רַבִּי פִנְחָס בֶּן יָאִיר אוֹמֵר, מִשֶּׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, בּוֹשׁוּ חֲבֵרִים וּבְנֵי חוֹרִין, וְחָפוּ רֹאשָׁם, וְנִדַּלְדְּלוּ אַנְשֵׁי מַעֲשֶׂה, וְגָבְרוּ בַעֲלֵי זְרוֹעַ וּבַעֲלֵי לָשׁוֹן, וְאֵין דּוֹרֵשׁ וְאֵין מְבַקֵּשׁ, וְאֵין שׁוֹאֵל, עַל מִי לָנוּ לְהִשָּׁעֵן, עַל אָבִינוּ שֶׁבַּשָּׁמָיִם. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר הַגָּדוֹל אוֹמֵר, מִיּוֹם שֶׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, שָׁרוּ חַכִּימַיָּא לְמֶהֱוֵי כְסָפְרַיָּא, וְסָפְרַיָּא כְּחַזָּנָא, וְחַזָּנָא כְּעַמָּא דְאַרְעָא, וְעַמָּא דְאַרְעָא אָזְלָא וְדַלְדְּלָה, וְאֵין מְבַקֵּשׁ, עַל מִי יֵשׁ לְהִשָּׁעֵן, עַל אָבִינוּ שֶׁבַּשָּׁמָיִם. בְּעִקְּבוֹת מְשִׁיחָא חֻצְפָּא יִסְגֵּא, וְיֹקֶר יַאֲמִיר, הַגֶּפֶן תִּתֵּן פִּרְיָהּ וְהַיַּיִן בְּיֹקֶר, וְהַמַּלְכוּת תֵּהָפֵךְ לְמִינוּת, וְאֵין תּוֹכֵחָה, בֵּית וַעַד יִהְיֶה לִזְנוּת, וְהַגָּלִיל יֶחֱרַב, וְהַגַּבְלָן יִשּׁוֹם, וְאַנְשֵׁי הַגְּבוּל יְסוֹבְבוּ מֵעִיר לְעִיר וְלֹא יְחוֹנָּנוּ, וְחָכְמַת סוֹפְרִים תִּסְרַח, וְיִרְאֵי חֵטְא יִמָּאֲסוּ, וְהָאֱמֶת תְּהֵא נֶעְדֶּרֶת. נְעָרִים פְּנֵי זְקֵנִים יַלְבִּינוּ, זְקֵנִים יַעַמְדוּ מִפְּנֵי קְטַנִּים. (מיכה ז) בֵּן מְנַבֵּל אָב, בַּת קָמָה בְאִמָּהּ, כַּלָּה בַּחֲמֹתָהּ, אֹיְבֵי אִישׁ אַנְשֵׁי בֵיתוֹ. פְּנֵי הַדּוֹר כִּפְנֵי הַכֶּלֶב, הַבֵּן אֵינוֹ מִתְבַּיֵּשׁ מֵאָבִיו. וְעַל מִי יֵשׁ לָנוּ לְהִשָּׁעֵן, עַל אָבִינוּ שֶׁבַּשָּׁמָיִם. רַבִּי פִנְחָס בֶּן יָאִיר אוֹמֵר, זְרִיזוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי נְקִיּוּת, וּנְקִיּוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי טָהֳרָה, וְטָהֳרָה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי פְרִישׁוּת, וּפְרִישׁוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי קְדֻשָּׁה, וּקְדֻשָּׁה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי עֲנָוָה, וַעֲנָוָה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי יִרְאַת חֵטְא, וְיִרְאַת חֵטְא מְבִיאָה לִידֵי חֲסִידוּת, וַחֲסִידוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ, וְרוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ מְבִיאָה לִידֵי תְחִיַּת הַמֵּתִים, וּתְחִיַּת הַמֵּתִים בָּא עַל יְדֵי אֵלִיָּהוּ זָכוּר לַטּוֹב, אָמֵן: \n", | 9.9. "When murderers multiplied, the [ceremony of] breaking a heifer’s neck ceased. That was from the time of Eliezer ben Dinai, and he was also called Tehinah ben Perisha and he was afterwards renamed “son of the murderer”. When adulterers multiplied, the ceremony of the bitter waters ceased and it was Rabban Yoha ben Zakkai who discontinued it, as it is said, “I will not punish their daughters for fornicating, nor their daughters-in-law for committing adultery, for they themselves [turn aside with whores and sacrifice with prostitutes]” (Hosea 4:14). When Yose ben Yoezer of Zeredah and Yose ben Yoha of Jerusalem died, the grape-clusters ceased, as it is said, “There is not a cluster [of grapes] to eat; not a ripe fig I could desire [The pious are vanished from the land, none upright are left among men” (Micah 7:1-2).", 9.10. "Yoha the high priest brought to an end the confession made at the presentation of the tithe. He also discontinued the wakers and the knockers Up to his days the hammer used to strike in Jerusalem, And in his days there was no need to inquire about doubtfully tithed produce.", 9.11. "When the Sanhedrin ceased [to function], song ceased from the places of feasting, as it is said, “They drink their wine without song” (Isaiah 24:9).", 9.12. "When the former prophets died, the Urim and Thummim ceased. When Temple was destroyed, the shamir and nopheth zufim ceased. And people of faith ceased, as it says, “Help, O Lord, for the faithful are no more” (Psalms 12:2). Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel in the name of Rabbi Joshua: from the day the Temple was destroyed, there is no day without a curse, the dew has not descended for a blessing, and the flavor has departed from produce. Rabbi Yose says: the fatness was also removed from produce.", 9.13. "Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: [the cessation of observation of the] purity laws has removed taste and fragrance, [the cessation of observation of] the tithes has removed the fatness of grain. But the Sages say: licentiousness and sorcery destroyed everything.", 9.14. "During the war with Vespasian they [the rabbis] decreed against [the use of] crowns worn by bridegrooms and against [the use of] the bell. During the war with Quietus they decreed against [the use of] crowns worn by brides and that nobody should teach their child Greek. During the final war they decreed that a bride should not go out in a palanquin inside the city, but our rabbis decreed that a bride may go out in a palanquin inside the city.", 9.15. "When Rabbi Meir died, the composers of fables ceased. When Ben Azzai died, the diligent students [of Torah] ceased. When Ben Zoma died, the expounders ceased. When Rabbi Joshua died, goodness ceased from the world. When Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel died, locusts come and troubles multiplied. When Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah died, the sages ceased to be wealthy. When Rabbi Akiba died, the glory of the Torah ceased. When Rabbi Hanina ben Dosa died, men of wondrous deeds ceased. When Rabbi Yose Katnuta died, the pious men (hasidim) ceased and why was his name called Katnuta? Because he was the youngest of the pious men. When Rabban Yoha ben Zakkai died, the splendor of wisdom ceased. When Rabban Gamaliel the elder died, the glory of the torah ceased, and purity and separateness perished. When Rabbi Ishmael ben Fabi died, the splendor of the priesthood ceased. When Rabbi died, humility and fear of sin ceased. Rabbi Phineas ben Yair says: when Temple was destroyed, scholars and freemen were ashamed and covered their head, men of wondrous deeds were disregarded, and violent men and big talkers grew powerful. And nobody expounds, nobody seeks, and nobody asks. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. Rabbi Eliezer the Great says: from the day the Temple was destroyed, the sages began to be like scribes, scribes like synagogue-attendants, synagogue-attendants like common people, and the common people became more and more debased. And nobody seeks. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. In the footsteps of the messiah insolence (hutzpah) will increase and the cost of living will go up greatly; the vine will yield its fruit, but wine will be expensive; the government will turn to heresy, and there will be no one to rebuke; the meeting-place [of scholars] will be used for licentiousness; the Galilee will be destroyed, the Gablan will be desolated, and the dwellers on the frontier will go about [begging] from place to place without anyone to take pity on them; the wisdom of the learned will rot, fearers of sin will be despised, and the truth will be lacking; youths will put old men to shame, the old will stand up in the presence of the young, “For son spurns father, daughter rises up against mother, daughter-in-law against mother-in-law a man’s own household are his enemies” (Micah 7:6). The face of the generation will be like the face of a dog, a son will not feel ashamed before his father. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair says, “Heedfulness leads to cleanliness, cleanliness leads to purity, purity leads to separation, separation leads to holiness, holiness leads to modesty, modesty leads to fear of sin, fear of sin leads to piety, piety leads to the Holy Spirit, The Holy Spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead, and the resurrection of the dead comes from Elijah, blessed be his memory, Amen.”", |
|
17. Mishnah, Taanit, 2.2 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira gaon of pumbeditha Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 289| 2.2. "עָמְדוּ בִתְפִלָּה, מוֹרִידִין לִפְנֵי הַתֵּבָה זָקֵן וְרָגִיל, וְיֶשׁ לוֹ בָנִים, וּבֵיתוֹ רֵיקָם, כְּדֵי שֶׁיְּהֵא לִבּוֹ שָׁלֵם בַּתְּפִלָּה, וְאוֹמֵר לִפְנֵיהֶם עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע בְּרָכוֹת, שְׁמֹנֶה עֶשְׂרֵה שֶׁבְּכָל יוֹם, וּמוֹסִיף עֲלֵיהֶן עוֹד שֵׁשׁ:", | 2.2. "[When] they stand up to pray they bring down before the ark an old man conversant [with the prayers], one who has children and whose house is empty [of food], so that his heart is complete prayer. He recites before them twenty-four benedictions, the eighteen recited daily, to which he adds six.", |
|
18. New Testament, 1 Corinthians, 7.10, 7.25, 14.37 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira (ben hanina gaon), rav Found in books: Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 92| 7.10. Τοῖς δὲ γεγαμηκόσιν παραγγέλλω, οὐκ ἐγὼ ἀλλὰ ὁ κύριος, γυναῖκα ἀπὸ ἀνδρὸς μὴ χωρισθῆναι,— 7.25. Περὶ δὲ τῶν παρθένων ἐπιταγὴν κυρίου οὐκ ἔχω, γνώμην δὲ δίδωμι ὡς ἠλεημένος ὑπὸ κυρίου πιστὸς εἶναι. 14.37. ἢ εἰς ὑμᾶς μόνους κατήντησεν; Εἴ τις δοκεῖ προφήτης εἶναι ἢ πνευματικός, ἐπιγινωσκέτω ἃ γράφω ὑμῖν ὅτι κυρίου ἐστὶν ἐντολή· | 7.10. But to the married I command-- not I, but the Lord -- that the wife not leave her husband 7.25. Now concerning virgins, I have no commandment from the Lord,but I give my judgment as one who has obtained mercy from the Lord tobe trustworthy. 14.37. If any man thinks himself to be a prophet, orspiritual, let him recognize the things which I write to you, that theyare the commandment of the Lord. |
|
| 19. New Testament, 2 Corinthians, 12 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hai gaon b sherira Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 352 |
| 20. New Testament, Acts, 15 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira (ben hanina gaon), rav Found in books: Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 39 |
21. New Testament, Mark, 9.5 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira (ben hanina gaon), rav Found in books: Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 529, 582| 9.5. καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Πέτρος λέγει τῷ Ἰησοῦ Ῥαββεί, καλόν ἐστιν ἡμᾶς ὧδε εἶναι, καὶ ποιήσωμεν τρεῖς σκηνάς, σοὶ μίαν καὶ Μωυσεῖ μίαν καὶ Ἠλείᾳ μίαν. | 9.5. Peter answered Jesus, "Rabbi, it is good for us to be here. Let's make three tents: one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah." |
|
22. New Testament, Matthew, 23.8 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira (ben hanina gaon), rav Found in books: Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 582| 23.8. ὑμεῖς δὲ μὴ κληθῆτε Ῥαββεί, εἷς γάρ ἐστιν ὑμῶν ὁ διδάσκαλος, πάντες δὲ ὑμεῖς ἀδελφοί ἐστε· | 23.8. But don't you be called 'Rabbi,' for one is your teacher, the Christ, and all of you are brothers. |
|
23. Tosefta, Kippurim, 4.6 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hai gaon b sherira Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 332| 4.6. "רבי יהודה אומר עוברה שהריחה שביעית תוחבין לה בכוש הריחה תרומה תוחבין לה בכוש לא ינעול אדם מנעל מסומר ויטייל בתוך הבית אפילו ממטה למטה [ורשב\"ג מתיר וכן היה] רשב\"ג אומר אם היו ידיו מלוכלכות בטיט ובצואה מדיחן במים כדי שלא יטנפו כליו היה הולך להקביל פני אביו פני רבו [פני תלמידו] עובר כדרכו אפילו עד צוארו ואינו חושש.", | |
|
24. Tosefta, Sotah, 13.6-13.10 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira, gaon Found in books: Rosen-Zvi (2012), The Mishnaic Sotah Ritual: Temple, Gender and Midrash, 161| 13.6. "יוחנן כהן גדול שמע דבר מבית קדש הקדשים נצחין טליא דאזלי לאגחא קרבא באנטוכת וכתבו אותה [שעה] ואותו היום וכוונו ואותה שעה היתה שנצחו שמעון הצדיק שמע דבר מבית קדש הקדשים בטילת עבידתא דיאמר סנאה [לתתאה] להיכלא ונהרג גסקלנוס ובטלו גזירותיו ובלשון ארמי שמע.", 13.7. "כל זמן שהיה שמעון הצדיק קיים [היתה] נר מערבי תדיר משמת הלכו ומצאוהו שכבה מכאן ואילך מוצאין אותה פעמים כבה פעמים [דולק] כל זמן שהיה שמעון הצדיק קיים היתה מערכה תדירה כשמסדרין אותה בשחרית היתה מתגברת והולכות כל היום כולו והיו מקריבין עליה תמידין ומוספין ונסכיהן ולא היו מוסיפין עליה אלא שני גזרי עצים עם תמיד של בין הערבים כדי לקיים מצות [עצים] שנאמר (ויקרא ו׳:ה׳) ובער עליה הכהן משמת שמעון הצדיק תשש כחה של מערכה כשמסדרין אותה [משחרית] לא היו נמנעין מלהוסיף עליה עצים כל היום כולו כל זמן שהיה שמעון הצדיק קיים ברכה נכנסת בשתי [הלחם] ובלחם הפנים שתי הלחם מתחלקת בעצרת לכהנים ולחם הפנים ברגל לכל המשמרות [לאנשי משמר] יש מהן שאוכלין ושובעין ויש שאוכלין ומותירין ולא עלה ביד כל אחד ואחד אלא כזית משמת שמעון הצדיק לא היתה ברכה נכנסת לא בשתי הלחם ולא בלחם הפנים הצנועין מושכין ידיהן והגרגרנין חולקין ביניהם ולא עלה ביד כל אחד ואחד אלא כפול. מעשה בכהן אחד מצפורי שנטל חלקו וחלק חבירו ואעפ\"כ לא עלה בידו אלא כפול והיו קורין אותו בן [חמסן] עד היום.", 13.8. "שנה שמת בה שמעון הצדיק [אמר להם בשנה זו אני] מת אמרו לו מנין אתה יודע אמר להם כל ימות הכפורים היה זקן [אחד לובש] בגדים לבנים ומתכסה לבנים נכנס עמי [ויוצא] עמי שנה זו נכנס עמי ולא יצא לאחר הרגל חלה שבעת ימים ומת משמת שמעון הצדיק פסקו מלברך בשם <ס\"א> [נמנעו אחיו מלברך בשם].", 13.9. "מעוררין אלו הלוים [שאומר] על הדוכן (תהילים מד) עורה למה תישן ה' [וגו'] אמר להן ר' יוחנן בן זכאי וכי יש שינה לפניו והלא כבר נאמר (תהילים קכא) הנה לא ינום ולא יישן אלא כל זמן שישראל שרוין בצער ועובדי כוכבים [שרוין בשלוה כביכול] עורה למה תישן נוקפין אלו [שמכין את העגל] בין קרניו כדרך שעושין לעבודת כוכבים אמר להם יוחנן [כהן גדול] עד מתי אתם מאכילין [את המזבח טריפות].", | 13.8. "The year in which Shimon the Righteous died [he said to them] \"in this year I will die\" \"how do you know this?\" they responded. He (Shimon the Righteous) responded: \"all of the Yom Kippur days there was an old man dressed in all white who would go with me into the holy of holies and leave with me, on this year he went in with me but did not come out with me.\" Seven days passed after the holiday and he died. From the time of the death of Rebbi Shimon the Righteous they ceased blessing in the name of Hashem.", |
|
| 25. Tosefta, Negaim, None (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira gaon Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 128 |
26. Mishnah, Pesahim, 10.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •iggeret of r. sherira gaon •sherira gaon, rabbi Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 106, 107| 10.4. "מָזְגוּ לוֹ כוֹס שֵׁנִי, וְכָאן הַבֵּן שׁוֹאֵל אָבִיו, וְאִם אֵין דַּעַת בַּבֵּן, אָבִיו מְלַמְּדוֹ, מַה נִּשְׁתַּנָּה הַלַּיְלָה הַזֶּה מִכָּל הַלֵּילוֹת, שֶׁבְּכָל הַלֵּילוֹת אָנוּ אוֹכְלִין חָמֵץ וּמַצָּה, הַלַּיְלָה הַזֶּה כֻלּוֹ מַצָּה. שֶׁבְּכָל הַלֵּילוֹת אָנוּ אוֹכְלִין שְׁאָר יְרָקוֹת, הַלַּיְלָה הַזֶּה מָרוֹר. שֶׁבְּכָל הַלֵּילוֹת אָנוּ אוֹכְלִין בָּשָׂר צָלִי, שָׁלוּק, וּמְבֻשָּׁל, הַלַּיְלָה הַזֶּה כֻלּוֹ צָלִי. שֶׁבְּכָל הַלֵּילוֹת אָנוּ מַטְבִּילִין פַּעַם אַחַת, הַלַּיְלָה הַזֶּה שְׁתֵּי פְעָמִים. וּלְפִי דַעְתּוֹ שֶׁל בֵּן, אָבִיו מְלַמְּדוֹ. מַתְחִיל בִּגְנוּת וּמְסַיֵּם בְּשֶׁבַח, וְדוֹרֵשׁ מֵאֲרַמִּי אוֹבֵד אָבִי, עַד שֶׁיִּגְמֹר כֹּל הַפָּרָשָׁה כֻלָּהּ: \n", | 10.4. "They mixed him a second cup, and here the son questions his father. If the son lacks the intelligence to ask, his father instructs him: On all other nights we dip once, on this night we dip twice? On all other nights we eat hametz or matzah, on this night only matzah. On all other nights we eat roasted, stewed or boiled meat, on this night only roasted. He begins with shame and concludes with praise; and expounds from “A wandering Aramean was my father” (Deuteronomy 6:20-25) until he completes the whole section.", |
|
| 27. Anon., Sifre Deuteronomy, 269 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira (ben hanina gaon), rav Found in books: Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 92 |
| 28. Palestinian Talmud, Horayot, 8 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira gaon Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 128 |
| 29. Palestinian Talmud, Rosh Hashanah, 1.3 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira gaon Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 128 |
30. Anon., Genesis Rabba, 3.4 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hai gaon b sherira Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 332| 3.4. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יְהוֹצָדָק שָׁאַל לְרַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָן, אָמַר לוֹ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁשָּׁמַעְתִּי עָלֶיךָ שֶׁאַתָּה בַּעַל אַגָּדָה, מֵהֵיכָן נִבְרֵאת הָאוֹרָה, אָמַר לוֹ מְלַמֵּד שֶׁנִּתְעַטֵּף בָּהּ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא כַּשַֹּׂלְמָה וְהִבְהִיק זִיו הֲדָרוֹ מִסּוֹף הָעוֹלָם וְעַד סוֹפוֹ. אֲמָרָהּ לֵיהּ בִּלְחִישָׁה, אָמַר לוֹ מִקְרָא מָלֵא הוּא (תהלים קד, ב): עוֹטֶה אוֹר כַּשַֹּׂלְמָה, וְאַתְּ אֲמַרְתְּ לִי בִּלְחִישָׁה, אֶתְמְהָא. אָמַר לוֹ כְּשֵׁם שֶׁשְּׁמַעְתִּיהָ בִּלְחִישָׁה כָּךְ אֲמַרְתִּיהָ לָךְ בִּלְחִישָׁה. אָמַר רַבִּי בֶּרֶכְיָה, אִלּוּלֵי שֶׁדְּרָשָׁהּ רַבִּי יִצְחָק בָּרַבִּים לֹא הָיָה אֶפְשָׁר לְאָמְרָהּ, מִקַּמֵּי כֵּן מָה הָיוּ אָמְרִין. רַבִּי בֶּרֶכְיָה בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי יִצְחָק אָמַר מִמָּקוֹם בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ נִבְרֵאת הָאוֹרָה, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (יחזקאל מג, ב): וְהִנֵּה כְּבוֹד אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בָּא מִדֶּרֶךְ הַקָּדִים, וְאֵין כְּבוֹדוֹ אֶלָּא בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, כְּמָה דְאַתְּ אָמַר (ירמיה יז, יב): כִּסֵּא כָבוֹד מָרוֹם מֵרִאשׁוֹן מְקוֹם מִקְדָּשֵׁנוּ וגו'. | 3.4. "Rabbi Shimeon Ben Yehotzadak asked Rabbi Shmuel Bar Nachman: Since I heard that you are a master of agadot, tell me from where was the light created? He answered: [the text] teaches that the Holy One of Blessing enveloped Himself [in it] as [one does with] a cloak, and made the splendor of His glory shine from one end of the world to the other. He told him this agadah in a whisper: he said to him - there is even a full verse [about it] 'He wears light as a cloak' (Ps. 104:2). [Rabbi Shmuel Bar Nachman said] And you are telling this to me in a whisper? This is surprising! He told him: Just as I heard it in a whisper, I'm telling you in a whisper. Said Rabbi Berachia in the name of Rabbi Itzchak: The light was created from the place of the Beit Hamikdash, since it is written 'And behold the glory of the God of Israel comes from the way of the East' (Ezekiel 43:2) and there is no His glory except the Beit Hamikdash, as you say: 'A throne of glory, on high from the beginning, the place of our sanctuary' (Jeremiah 17:12) etc.", |
|
| 31. Palestinian Talmud, Taanit, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan |
| 32. Palestinian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •iggeret of r. sherira gaon •sherira gaon, rabbi Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 169 |
33. Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hai gaon b sherira Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 373 | 72a. b And it is /b only b now /b that b the Persians moved /b the bridge further b up /b northward. b Abaye said to Rav Yosef: Until where does /b the border extend b on this /b western b side of the Euphrates? Rav Yosef said to him: What are you thinking? /b Why do you ask? Is it b due to /b the town of b Biram? /b Even b those of /b pure b lineage /b who live in b Pumbedita marry /b women b from Biram, /b which demonstrates that the residents of Biram are presumed to have unflawed lineage., b Rav Pappa says: Just as /b there is b a dispute /b between Rav and Shmuel as to the northern border of Babylonia with regard b to lineage, so /b is there b a dispute with regard to bills of divorce. /b An agent bringing a bill of divorce from a country overseas to Eretz Yisrael must state that it was written and signed in his presence. If he brought it from Babylonia, there is no requirement for him to state this. Rav Pappa is teaching that the borders that define Babylonia with regard to this issue are the same as the borders with regard to lineage. b And Rav Yosef says: /b This b dispute /b is b with regard to lineage, but with regard to bills of divorce, everyone agrees /b that it is considered Babylonia b up to the second lake of the bridge /b that Shmuel mentioned., b Rami bar Abba said: /b The province of b Ḥaveil Yamma is the glory of Babylonia /b with regard to lineage; b Shunya and Guvya /b are b the glory of Ḥaveil Yamma. Ravina said: /b The town of b Tzitzora /b is b also /b like Shunya and Guvya. b This is also taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Ḥa ben Pineḥas says: Ḥaveil Yamma is the glory of Babylonia; Shunya and Guvya and Tzitzora /b are b the glory of Ḥaveil Yamma. Rav Pappa says: And nowadays, Samaritans have assimilated with them, /b and their lineage is problematic. The Gemara comments: b And /b that b is not so. /b Rather, one Samaritan b requested /b to marry b a woman from them and they would not give /b her b to him, /b which led to the rumor that Samaritans had assimilated with them. The Gemara asks: b What /b is this region called b Ḥaveil Yamma? Rav Pappa said: This /b is the area near the b Euphrates /b adjacent b to Bursi. /b ,The Gemara relates: There was b a certain man who said to /b the Sages: b I am from /b a place called b Shot Mishot. Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa stood on his feet and said: Shot Mishot is located between the /b Tigris and Euphrates b Rivers. /b The Gemara asks: b And if it is located between the rivers, what of it? /b What i halakha /i is this relevant for? b Abaye said /b that b Rabbi Ḥama bar Ukva says /b that b Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says: /b The area b between the rivers is like the exile, /b meaning Pumbedita, b with regard to lineage. /b The Gemara inquires: b And where is /b the area between the rivers b located /b for the purpose of this i halakha /i ? b Rabbi Yoḥa said: From Ihi Dekira and upward, /b i.e., northward. The Gemara asks: b But doesn’t Rabbi Yoḥa say: Until the crossing at Gizma /b but no further? b Abaye said: A strip extends /b from that region past Ihi Dekira., b Rav Ika bar Avin says /b that b Rav Ḥael says /b that b Rav says: Ḥillazon Nihavnad is like the exile with regard to lineage. Abaye said to them: Do not listen to /b Rav Ika bar Avin about this, as b it was a i yevama /i /b who b fell before him /b from b there /b to perform levirate marriage, and he said that its lineage was unflawed because he wished to marry her. Rav Ika bar Avin b said to him: Is that to say /b that this i halakha /i b is mine? It is Rav Ḥael’s, /b and it is not reasonable to say that I was influenced by my own interests in stating it. b They went and asked Rav Ḥael. He said to them: Rav said as follows: Ḥillazon Nihavnad is like the exile with regard to lineage. /b ,The Gemara comments: b And /b this b disagrees /b with the statement b of Rabbi Abba bar Kahana, as Rabbi Abba bar Kahana says: What /b is the meaning of that b which is written /b with regard to the exile of the ten tribes of the kingdom of Israel: b “And he put them in Halah, and in Habor, on the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes” /b (II Kings 18:11)? b Halah is Ḥillazon; Habor is Hadyav; the river of Gozan is Ginzak; the cities of the Medes are Ḥamadan and its neighboring towns, and some say: This is Nihavnad and its neighboring towns. /b Since the ten tribes assimilated with the gentiles, the lineage of Jews from those places is flawed, unlike that which was taught before.,The Gemara asks: b What /b are the b neighboring towns /b of Nihavnad? b Shmuel said: /b The b city /b of b Mushekhei, Ḥosekei, and Rumekei. Rabbi Yoḥa says: And /b all of these are the same with regard b to flawed /b lineage. b It was assumed /b that b Mushekhei is /b the same as b Mushekanei. /b The Gemara therefore asks: b But doesn’t Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Avin say /b that b Shmuel says: Mushekanei is like the exile with regard to lineage? Rather, /b it must be that b Mushekhei is discrete, and Mushekanei is discrete. /b ,In connection to the aforementioned places, the Gemara analyzes the following verse, describing a vision of a bear-like animal: b “And it had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth” /b (Daniel 7:5). b Rabbi Yoḥa says: This is Ḥillazon, Hadyav, and Netzivin, which /b the Persian government b sometimes swallows and sometimes discharges. /b In other words, control over these places passed from the Persians to the Romans and back again several times.,The first part of that verse stated: b “And behold a second beast, similar to a bear” /b (Daniel 7:5). b Rav Yosef taught: These are Persians, who eat and drink /b copious amounts b like a bear, and are corpulent like a bear, and grow hair like a bear, and have no rest like a bear, /b which is constantly on the move from one place to another. b When Rabbi Ami saw a Persian riding, he would say: This is a bear on the move. /b , b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b said to Levi: Show me Persians, /b i.e., describe a typical Persian to me. Levi b said to him: /b They b are similar to the legions of the house of David. /b Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: b Show me Ḥabbarin, /b Persian priests. Levi said to him: They b are similar to angels of destruction. /b Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: b Show me Ishmaelites. /b Levi said to him: They b are similar to demons of an outhouse. /b Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: b Show me Torah scholars of Babylonia. /b Levi said to him: They b are similar to ministering angels. /b , b When Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b was dying, he said /b prophetically: b There is /b a place called b Homanya in Babylonia, /b and b all its /b people are the sons b of Ammon. There is /b a place called b Masgariya in Babylonia, /b and b all its /b people are b i mamzerim /i . There is /b a place called b Bireka in Babylonia, /b and b there are two brothers /b there b who exchange wives with each other, /b and their children are therefore i mamzerim /i . b There is /b a place called b Bireta DeSatya in Babylonia. Today they turned away from the Omnipresent. /b What did they do? b A ditch with fish overflowed, and they went and trapped /b the fish b on Shabbat. Rabbi Aḥai, son of Rabbi Yoshiya, excommunicated them, and they /b all b became apostates. There is /b a place called b Akra DeAgma in Babylonia. There is /b a man named b Adda bar Ahava there. /b |
|
34. Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Bickart (2022), The Scholastic Culture of the Babylonian Talmud, 69| 32b. סבר אותו חבר אוכל ואינו צריך לעשר דודאי עישורי מעשר ההוא חבר קמא עילויה ורבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר לא יאכל עד שיעשר לפי שלא נחשדו חברים לתרום שלא מן המוקף ואמר ליה רבי מוטב שיחשדו חברים לתרום שלא מן המוקף ואל יאכילו עמי הארץ טבלים,במאי קמיפלגי רבי סבר ניחא ליה לחבר דלעביד הוא איסורא קלילא ולא ליעבד עם הארץ איסורא רבה ורבן שמעון בן גמליאל סבר ניחא ליה לחבר דליעבד עם הארץ איסורא רבה ואיהו אפי' איסורא קלילא לא ליעבד:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big נתנו באילן למעלה מעשרה טפחים אין עירובו עירוב למטה מעשרה טפחים עירובו עירוב נתנו בבור אפילו עמוק מאה אמה עירובו עירוב:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big יתיב רבי חייא בר אבא ורבי אסי ורבא בר נתן ויתיב רב נחמן גבייהו ויתבי וקאמרי האי אילן דקאי היכא אילימא דקאי ברשות היחיד מה לי למעלה מה לי למטה רשות היחיד עולה עד לרקיע,ואלא דקאי ברשות הרבים דמתכוין לשבות היכא אילימא דנתכוון לשבות למעלה הוא ועירובו במקום אחד הוא אלא נתכוון לשבות למטה והא קא משתמש באילן,לעולם דקאי ברה"ר ונתכוון לשבות למטה ורבי היא דאמר כל דבר שהוא משום שבות לא גזרו עליו בין השמשות,אמר להו רב נחמן ישר וכן אמר שמואל אמרו ליה פתריתו בה כולי האי אינהו נמי הכי קא פתרי בה [אלא הכי] אמרו ליה קבעיתו ליה בגמרא אמר להו אין אתמר נמי אמר רב נחמן אמר שמואל הכא באילן העומד ברשות הרבים עסקינן גבוה עשרה ורחב ארבעה ונתכוון לשבות למטה ורבי היא דאמר כל דבר שהוא משום שבות לא גזרו עליו בין השמשות,אמר רבא ל"ש אלא באילן העומד חוץ לעיבורה של עיר אבל אילן העומד בתוך עיבורה של עיר אפילו למעלה מעשרה הרי זה עירוב דמתא כמאן דמליא דמיא,אי הכי חוץ לעיבורה של עיר נמי כיון דאמר רבא הנותן עירובו יש לו ארבע אמות הויא לה רשות היחיד ורשות היחיד עולה עד לרקיע,אמר רב יצחק בריה דרב משרשיא הכא באילן הנוטה חוץ לארבע אמות עסקינן | 32b. b holds: That i ḥaver /i , /b who heard the first i ḥaver /i speaking to the i am ha’aretz /i , b may /b immediately b eat /b from the basket, b and he is not required to tithe /b the produce, b as the first i ḥaver /i certainly separated tithes for /b the person who picked the figs, as he would not have caused an i am ha’aretz /i to eat i tevel /i . b And Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel /b disagrees and b says: /b That i ḥaver /i b may not eat /b of the fruit b until he has tithed /b them, b for i ḥaverim /i are not suspected of separating /b i teruma /i and tithes b from /b produce that is b not adjacent /b to the produce they seek to exempt. b And Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b said to him: It is better that i ḥaverim /i should be suspected of separating /b i teruma /i and tithes b from /b produce that is b not adjacent /b to the produce they seek to exempt, b and they should not feed i amei ha’aretz /i /b produce that is b i tevel /i . /b ,The Gemara asks: b With regard to what /b principle b do they disagree? /b The Gemara answers: b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b holds: It is preferable to a i ḥaver /i that he commit a minor transgression, /b namely separating tithes from produce that is not adjacent to the produce they seek to exempt, so that b an i am ha’aretz /i will not commit /b the b major transgression /b of eating i tevel /i on his account. b And Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel holds: It is preferable to a i ḥaver /i that an i am ha’aretz /i commit a major transgression, and that he /b himself b not commit even a minor transgression. /b , strong MISHNA: /strong If b one placed /b his i eiruv /i b in a tree above ten handbreadths /b from the ground, b his i eiruv /i is not a /b valid b i eiruv /i ; /b if it is b below ten handbreadths, his i eiruv /i is /b a valid b i eiruv /i . /b If b he placed /b the i eiruv /i b in a pit, even /b if b it was a hundred cubits deep, his i eiruv /i is /b a valid b i eiruv /i . /b , strong GEMARA: /strong b Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba sat, and /b with him sat b Rabbi Asi and Rava bar Natan, and Rav Naḥman sat beside them, and they sat and said: This tree /b mentioned in the mishna, b where does it stand? If you say it stands in the private domain, what /b is the difference b to me /b whether the i eiruv /i is placed b above /b ten handbreadths or b below /b ten handbreadths? b The private domain ascends to the sky, /b and there is no difference whether an object is above or below ten handbreadths., b Rather, /b say b that /b the tree b stands in the public domain; /b but in that case the question arises: b Where /b did the person b intend to establish his Shabbat residence? If you say that /b he b intended to /b establish his b Shabbat residence /b in the tree b above, he and his i eiruv /i are in one place. /b Consequently, the i eiruv /i should be valid, even if is at a height of more than ten handbreadths. b Rather, /b say that he b intended to establish his Shabbat residence /b on the ground b below; /b but b isn’t he making use of the tree /b if he accesses his i eiruv /i ? It is prohibited to make use of a tree on Shabbat, and therefore his i eiruv /i should invalid even if it is less than ten handbreadths above the ground because it is inaccessible to him.,The Gemara answers: b Actually, /b we can accept the latter assumption b that /b the tree b stands in the public domain, and that he intended to establish his Shabbat residence /b on the ground b below, /b in the public domain. b And /b with regard to the prohibition against making use of a tree, this mishna b is /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi, b who said: Anything that is /b prohibited on Shabbat not by Torah law, but rather b due to a rabbinic decree [ i shevut /i ], /b the Sages b did not issue the decree /b to apply b during twilight, /b which is neither definitively day nor definitively night. Since using a tree is only prohibited due to a i shevut /i , it is permitted to make use of the tree and remove one’s i eiruv /i from it during the twilight period, which is when the i eiruv /i establishes the person’s Shabbat residence. Therefore, the i eiruv /i is valid, provided that it is below ten handbreadths. If, however, the i eiruv /i is above ten handbreadths, it is invalid. At that height, removing the i eiruv /i from the tree entails violation of the Torah prohibition of carrying from a private domain to a public domain, which is prohibited even during twilight., b Rav Naḥman said to them: Well /b said, b and Shmuel said similarly /b with regard to this issue. b They said to him: Have you, /b the Sages of Babylonia, b gone so far in your explanation /b of the mishna? The Gemara asks: Why were the Sages of Eretz Yisrael so surprised? b They, too, explained /b the mishna b in this /b manner. b Rather, this is what they said to /b Rav Naḥman: b Have you established this /b explanation b as part of your /b regular b study /b of the mishna? b He said to them: Yes. /b Indeed, b it was also /b explicitly b stated /b that b Rav Naḥman said /b that b Shmuel said: Here, we are dealing with a tree standing in the public domain, /b and the tree is b ten /b handbreadths b high and four /b handbreadths b wide. /b It thereby constitutes a private domain, b and /b one b intended to establish his Shabbat residence below /b in the public domain. b And /b the mishna b is /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi, b who said: Anything that is /b prohibited on Shabbat not by Torah law, but rather b due to a rabbinic decree, /b the Sages b did not issue the decree /b to apply b during twilight. /b , b Rava said /b in continuation of this discussion: b They only taught /b this law b with regard to a tree that stands beyond the outskirts of the city, /b i.e., outside a radius of seventy and two-thirds cubits around the city. b However, /b with regard to b a tree that stands within the outskirts of the city, even /b if the i eiruv /i was placed b above ten /b handbreadths, b it is a /b valid b i eiruv /i , as the city is considered as though it were filled in /b with earth, so that anything located at any height within the town itself or its outskirts is regarded as being in the same domain. Even though the person intended to establish his Shabbat residence below the tree in the public domain, we view the ground as raised to the height of the i eiruv /i , and his i eiruv /i is therefore valid even though he cannot actually remove it from the tree during the twilight period.,The Gemara asks: b If so, /b if the tree stood b beyond the outskirts of the town, /b there should b also /b be no difference whether the i eiruv /i is above or below the height of ten handbreadths. b Since Rava /b himself b said: One who places his i eiruv /i /b in a particular location b has four cubits /b surrounding him that are considered as a private domain, here too, the area should be considered b a private domain; and a private domain rises to the sky. /b Since the tree stands within this area, all parts of the tree should be regarded as a private domain regardless of their height., b Rav Yitzḥak, son of Rav Mesharshiya, said: Here, we are dealing with a tree that leans out /b horizontally b beyond four cubits /b from its trunk, and one placed the i eiruv /i on a section that is beyond four cubits, |
|
35. Babylonian Talmud, Gittin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira (ben hanina gaon), rav Found in books: Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 92| 90a. והלכתא מותרת לשניהם:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big בית שמאי אומרים לא יגרש אדם את אשתו אלא אם כן מצא בה דבר ערוה שנאמר (דברים כד, א) כי מצא בה ערות דבר,ובית הלל אומרים אפילו הקדיחה תבשילו שנאמר כי מצא בה ערות דבר,ר' עקיבא אומר אפי' מצא אחרת נאה הימנה שנאמר (דברים כד, א) והיה אם לא תמצא חן בעיניו:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big תניא אמרו בית הלל לבית שמאי והלא כבר נאמר דבר אמרו להם ב"ש והלא כבר נאמר ערות,אמרו להם ב"ה אם נאמר ערות ולא נאמר דבר הייתי אומר משום ערוה תצא משום דבר לא תצא לכך נאמר דבר ואילו נאמר דבר ולא נאמר ערות הייתי אומר משום דבר תנשא לאחר ומשום ערוה לא תנשא לאחר לכך נאמר ערות,וב"ש האי דבר מאי עבדי ליה נאמר כאן דבר ונאמר להלן דבר (דברים יט, טו) על פי שני עדים או על פי שלשה עדים יקום דבר מה להלן בשני עדים אף כאן בשני עדים,וב"ה מי כתיב ערוה בדבר וב"ש מי כתיב או ערוה או דבר,וב"ה להכי כתיב ערות דבר דמשמע הכי ומשמע הכי:,ר"ע אומר אפי' מצא אחרת: במאי קא מיפלגי בדר"ל דאמר ריש לקיש כי משמש בד' לשונות אי דלמא אלא דהא,ב"ש סברי [והיה אם לא תמצא חן בעיניו] כי מצא בה ערות דבר דהא מצא בה ערות דבר ור"ע סבר כי מצא בה ערות דבר אי נמי מצא בה ערות דבר,אמר ליה רב פפא לרבא לא מצא בה לא ערוה ולא דבר מהו,א"ל מדגלי רחמנא גבי אונס (דברים כב, יט) לא יוכל לשלחה כל ימיו כל ימיו בעמוד והחזיר קאי התם הוא דגלי רחמנא אבל הכא מאי דעבד עבד,א"ל רב משרשיא לרבא אם לבו לגרשה והיא יושבת תחתיו ומשמשתו מהו קרי עליה (משלי ג, כט) אל תחרש על רעך רעה והוא יושב לבטח אתך,תניא היה רבי מאיר אומר כשם שהדעות במאכל כך דעות בנשים יש לך אדם שזבוב נופל לתוך כוסו וזורקו ואינו שותהו וזו היא מדת פפוס בן יהודה שהיה נועל בפני אשתו ויוצא,ויש לך אדם שזבוב נופל לתוך כוסו וזורקו ושותהו וזו היא מדת כל אדם שמדברת עם אחיה וקרוביה ומניחה,ויש לך אדם שזבוב נופל לתוך תמחוי מוצצו ואוכלו זו היא מדת אדם רע שרואה את אשתו יוצאה וראשה פרוע וטווה בשוק | 90a. b And the i halakha /i /b is that b she is permitted to both of them. /b , strong MISHNA: /strong b Beit Shammai say: A man may not divorce his wife unless he finds /b out b about her /b having engaged in b a matter of forbidden sexual intercourse [ i devar erva /i ], /b i.e., she committed adultery or is suspected of doing so, b as it is stated: “Because he has found some unseemly matter [ i ervat davar /i ] in her, /b and he writes her a scroll of severance” (Deuteronomy 24:1)., b And Beit Hillel say: /b He may divorce her b even /b due to a minor issue, e.g., because b she burned /b or over-salted b his dish, as it is stated: “Because he has found some unseemly matter in her,” /b meaning that he found any type of shortcoming in her., b Rabbi Akiva says: /b He may divorce her b even /b if b he found another woman /b who is b better looking than her /b and wishes to marry her, b as it is stated /b in that verse: b “And it comes to pass, if she finds no favor in his eyes” /b (Deuteronomy 24:1)., strong GEMARA: /strong It b is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Beit Hillel said to Beit Shammai: But isn’t /b the word b “matter” already stated /b in the verse, indicating that any disadvantageous matter is a legitimate reason for divorce? b Beit Shammai said to them: But isn’t /b the word b “unseemly [ i ervat /i ]” already stated? /b , b Beit Hillel said to them: If /b the word b “unseemly” had been stated and /b the word b “matter” had not been stated, I would have said /b that a wife b should leave /b her husband b due to forbidden sexual intercourse, /b but b she should not /b have to b leave /b him b due to /b any other b matter. Therefore, /b the word b “matter” is stated. And if /b the word b “matter” had been stated and /b the word b “unseemly” had not been stated, I would have said /b that if he divorced her merely b due to /b a disadvantageous b matter she may marry another /b man, as the Torah continues: “And she departs out of his house, and goes and becomes another man’s wife” (Deuteronomy 24:2). b But /b if she was divorced b due to /b her engaging in b forbidden sexual intercourse, she may not marry another /b man, as she is prohibited from remarrying. b Therefore, /b the word b “unseemly” is stated, /b indicating that even a wife who is divorced due to adultery is permitted to remarry.,The Gemara asks: b And what do Beit Shammai do with this /b word b “matter”? /b How do they interpret it? It seems superfluous, as in their opinion the verse refers specifically to a wife who engaged in forbidden sexual intercourse. The Gemara answers: The word b “matter” is stated here, /b with regard to divorce, b and /b the word b “matter” is stated there, /b with regard to testimony: b “At the mouth of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witnesses, a matter shall be established” /b (Deuteronomy 19:15). b Just as there, /b it is stated that a matter is established only b through two witnesses, so too here, /b a matter of forbidden sexual intercourse justifies divorce only if it is established b through two witnesses. /b , b And Beit Hillel /b would respond to this analogy in the following manner: b Is it written: /b Because he has found something b unseemly in a matter [ i erva bedavar /i ], /b indicating that it was established through the testimony of two witnesses that she engaged in adultery? b And Beit Shammai /b would respond to Beit Hillel’s interpretation as follows: b Is it written: /b Because he has found b either /b something b unseemly or /b another b matter i [o erva o davar /i ], /b in accordance with Beit Hillel’s understanding?, b And Beit Hillel /b would respond that b for this /b reason the expression b “some unseemly matter [ i ervat davar /i ]” is written, as it indicates that /b interpretation, i.e., that a husband is not obligated to divorce his wife unless there are two witnesses to her having engaged in forbidden sexual intercourse, b and it /b also b indicates this /b interpretation, i.e., that he may divorce her due to any deficiency, be it adultery or any other shortcoming.,§ It is stated in the mishna that b Rabbi Akiva says: /b He may divorce her b even /b if b he found another woman /b who is better looking than her. b With regard to what do they disagree? /b They disagree b with regard to /b the application of b Reish Lakish’s /b statement, b as Reish Lakish said /b that the term b i ki /i /b actually b has /b at least b four /b distinct b meanings: If, perhaps, rather, /b and b because. /b , b Beit Shammai hold /b that the verse b “And it comes to pass, if she finds no favor in his eyes, because [ i ki /i ] he has found some unseemly matter in her” /b means that she did not find favor in his eyes b due to /b the fact that b he has found some unseemly matter in her. And Rabbi Akiva holds /b that the phrase b “because [ i ki /i ] he has found some unseemly matter in her” /b means: b Or if he has found some unseemly matter in her. /b ,§ b Rav Pappa said to Rava: /b According to Beit Hillel, if the husband b found about her neither forbidden sexual intercourse nor /b any other b matter, /b but divorced her anyway, b what is /b the i halakha /i ? Is the divorce valid?,Rava b said to him /b that the answer can be derived b from what the Merciful One reveals /b in the Torah b with regard to a rapist: “He may not send her away all his days” /b (Deuteronomy 22:29), indicating that even if he divorces the woman whom he raped and was subsequently commanded to marry, b all his days he stands /b commanded b to arise and remarry /b her as his wife. Evidently, b specifically there /b the husband is obligated to remarry his divorcée, b as the Merciful One reveals /b as much. b But here, what he did, he did. /b , b Rav Mesharshiyya said to Rava: If he intends to divorce her and she is living with him and serving him, what is /b the i halakha /i ? Rava b read /b the following verse b about /b such a person: b “Devise not evil against your neighbor, seeing he dwells securely by you” /b (Proverbs 3:29).,§ It b is taught /b in a i baraita /i ( i Tosefta /i , i Sota /i 5:9) that b Rabbi Meir would say: Just as there are /b different b attitudes with regard to food, so too, there are /b different b attitudes with regard to women. /b With regard to food, b you have a person who, /b when b a fly falls into his cup, he throws out /b the wine with the fly b and does not drink it. And this is /b comparable to b the demeanor of Pappos ben Yehuda /b with regard to his wife, b as he would lock /b the door b before his wife and leave /b so that she would not see any other man., b And you have a person who, /b when b a fly falls into his cup, he throws out /b the fly b and drinks /b the wine. b And this is /b comparable to b the demeanor of any /b common b man, whose /b wife b speaks with her siblings and relatives, and he lets her /b do so., b And you have a man who, /b when b a fly falls into /b his b serving bowl, he sucks /b the fly b and eats /b the food. b This is the demeanor of a bad man, who sees his wife going out /b into the street b with her head uncovered, and spinning in the marketplace /b immodestly, |
|
36. Babylonian Talmud, Hagigah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hai gaon b sherira Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 232| 14b. הא בדברי תורה הא במשא ומתן בדברי תורה הוו במשא ומתן לא הוו.,ת"ר מעשה ברבן יוחנן בן זכאי שהיה רוכב על החמור והיה מהלך בדרך ור' אלעזר בן ערך מחמר אחריו אמר לו רבי שנה לי פרק אחד במעשה מרכבה אמר לו לא כך שניתי לכם ולא במרכבה ביחיד אלא א"כ היה חכם מבין מדעתו אמר לו רבי תרשיני לומר לפניך דבר אחד שלמדתני אמר לו אמור,מיד ירד רבן יוחנן בן זכאי מעל החמור ונתעטף וישב על האבן תחת הזית אמר לו רבי מפני מה ירדת מעל החמור אמר אפשר אתה דורש במעשה מרכבה ושכינה עמנו ומלאכי השרת מלוין אותנו ואני ארכב על החמור מיד פתח ר"א בן ערך במעשה המרכבה ודרש וירדה אש מן השמים וסיבבה כל האילנות שבשדה פתחו כולן ואמרו שירה,מה שירה אמרו (תהלים קמח, ז) הללו את ה' מן הארץ תנינים וכל תהומות עץ פרי וכל ארזים הללויה נענה מלאך מן האש ואמר הן הן מעשה המרכבה עמד רבן יוחנן ב"ז ונשקו על ראשו ואמר ברוך ה' אלהי ישראל שנתן בן לאברהם אבינו שיודע להבין ולחקור ולדרוש במעשה מרכבה יש נאה דורש ואין נאה מקיים נאה מקיים ואין נאה דורש אתה נאה דורש ונאה מקיים אשריך אברהם אבינו שאלעזר בן ערך יצא מחלציך,וכשנאמרו הדברים לפני ר' יהושע היה הוא ורבי יוסי הכהן מהלכים בדרך אמרו אף אנו נדרוש במעשה מרכבה פתח רבי יהושע ודרש ואותו היום תקופת תמוז היה נתקשרו שמים בעבים ונראה כמין קשת בענן והיו מלאכי השרת מתקבצין ובאין לשמוע כבני אדם שמתקבצין ובאין לראות במזמוטי חתן וכלה,הלך רבי יוסי הכהן וסיפר דברים לפני רבן יוחנן בן זכאי ואמר אשריכם ואשרי יולדתכם אשרי עיני שכך ראו ואף אני ואתם בחלומי מסובין היינו על הר סיני ונתנה עלינו בת קול מן השמים עלו לכאן עלו לכאן טרקלין גדולים ומצעות נאות מוצעות לכם אתם ותלמידיכם ותלמידי תלמידיכם מזומנין לכת שלישית,איני והתניא ר' יוסי בר' יהודה אומר שלשה הרצאות הן ר' יהושע הרצה דברים לפני רבן יוחנן בן זכאי ר"ע הרצה לפני ר' יהושע חנניא בן חכינאי הרצה לפני ר"ע ואילו ר"א בן ערך לא קא חשיב דארצי וארצו קמיה קחשיב דארצי ולא ארצו קמיה לא קא חשיב והא חנניא בן חכינאי דלא ארצו קמיה וקא חשיב דארצי מיהא קמיה מאן דארצי.,ת"ר ארבעה נכנסו בפרדס ואלו הן בן עזאי ובן זומא אחר ורבי עקיבא אמר להם ר"ע כשאתם מגיעין אצל אבני שיש טהור אל תאמרו מים מים משום שנאמר (תהלים קא, ז) דובר שקרים לא יכון לנגד עיני,בן עזאי הציץ ומת עליו הכתוב אומר (תהלים קטז, טו) יקר בעיני ה' המותה לחסידיו בן זומא הציץ ונפגע ועליו הכתוב אומר (משלי כה, טז) דבש מצאת אכול דייך פן תשבענו והקאתו אחר קיצץ בנטיעות רבי עקיבא יצא בשלום,שאלו את בן זומא מהו לסרוסי כלבא אמר להם (ויקרא כב, כד) ובארצכם לא תעשו כל שבארצכם לא תעשו שאלו את בן זומא בתולה שעיברה מהו לכ"ג מי חיישינן לדשמואל דאמר שמואל | 14b. b This /b case is referring b to words of Torah, /b while b that /b case is referring b to commerce. With regard to words of Torah, they were /b trustworthy; b with regard to commerce, they were not. /b ,§ The Gemara returns to the topic of the Design of the Divine Chariot. b The Sages taught: An incident /b occurred b involving Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai, who was riding on a donkey and was traveling along the way, and /b his student, b Rabbi Elazar ben Arakh, was riding a donkey behind him. /b Rabbi Elazar b said to him: My teacher, teach me one chapter in the Design of the /b Divine b Chariot. He said to him: /b Have b I not taught you: And one may not /b expound the Design of the Divine Chariot b to an individual, unless he is a Sage who understands on his own accord? /b Rabbi Elazar b said to him: My teacher, allow me to say before you one thing that you taught me. /b In other words, he humbly requested to recite before him his own understanding of this issue. b He said to him: Speak. /b , b Immediately, Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai alighted from the donkey, and wrapped /b his head in his cloak in a manner of reverence, b and sat on a stone under an olive tree. /b Rabbi Elazar b said to him: My teacher, for what reason did you alight from the donkey? He said: /b Is it b possible that /b while b you are expounding the Design of the /b Divine b Chariot, and the Divine Presence is with us, and the ministering angels are accompanying us, that I should ride on a donkey? Immediately, Rabbi Elazar ben Arakh began /b to discuss b the Design of the /b Divine b Chariot and expounded, and fire descended from heaven and encircled all the trees in the field, and all /b the trees b began reciting song. /b , b What song did they recite? “Praise the Lord from the earth, sea monsters and all depths…fruit trees and all cedars…praise the Lord” /b (Psalms 148:7–14). b An angel responded from the fire, saying: This is the very Design of the /b Divine b Chariot, /b just as you expounded. b Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai stood and kissed /b Rabbi Elazar ben Arakh b on his head, and said: Blessed be God, Lord of Israel, who gave our father Abraham a son /b like you, b who knows /b how b to understand, investigate, and expound the Design of the /b Divine b Chariot. There are some who expound /b the Torah’s verses b well but do not fulfill /b its imperatives b well, /b and there are some b who fulfill /b its imperatives b well but do not expound /b its verses b well, /b whereas b you expound /b its verses b well and fulfill /b its imperatives b well. Happy are you, our father Abraham, that Elazar ben Arakh came from your loins. /b ,The Gemara relates: b And when /b these b matters, /b this story involving his colleague Rabbi Elazar ben Arakh, b were recounted before Rabbi Yehoshua, he was walking along the way with Rabbi Yosei the Priest. They said: We too shall expound the Design of the /b Divine b Chariot. Rabbi Yehoshua began expounding. And that was the day of the summer solstice, /b when there are no clouds in the sky. Yet the b heavens became filled with clouds, and there was the appearance of a kind of rainbow in a cloud. And ministering angels gathered and came to listen, like people gathering and coming to see the rejoicing of a bridegroom and bride. /b , b Rabbi Yosei the Priest went and recited /b these b matters before Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai, /b who b said /b to him: b Happy are /b all of b you, and happy are /b the mothers b who gave birth to you; happy are my eyes that saw this, /b students such as these. b As for you and I, /b I saw b in my dream /b that b we were seated at Mount Sinai, and a Divine Voice came to us from heaven: Ascend here, ascend here, /b for b large halls /b [ b i teraklin /i /b ] b and pleasant couches are made up for you. You, your students, and the students of your students are invited to /b the b third group, /b those who will merit to welcome the Divine Presence.,The Gemara poses a question: b Is that so? But isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: There are three lectures. /b In other words, there are three Sages with regard to whom it states that they delivered lectures on the mystical tradition: b Rabbi Yehoshua lectured /b on these b matters before Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai; Rabbi Akiva lectured before Rabbi Yehoshua; /b and b Ḥaya ben Ḥakhinai lectured before Rabbi Akiva. However, Rabbi Elazar ben Arakh was not included /b in the list, despite the testimony that he lectured before Rabban Yoḥa. The Gemara explains: Those b who lectured and were /b also b lectured to were included; /b but those b who lectured and were not lectured to were not included. /b The Gemara asks: b But wasn’t /b there b Ḥaya ben Ḥakhinai, who was not lectured to, and /b yet b he is included? /b The Gemara answers: Ḥaya ben Ḥakhinai b actually lectured before one who lectured /b in front of his own rabbi, so he was also included in this list.,§ b The Sages taught: Four entered the orchard [ i pardes /i ], /b i.e., dealt with the loftiest secrets of Torah, b and they are as follows: Ben Azzai; and ben Zoma; i Aḥer /i , /b the other, a name for Elisha ben Avuya; b and Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Akiva, /b the senior among them, b said to them: When, /b upon your arrival in the upper worlds, b you reach pure marble stones, do not say: Water, water, /b although they appear to be water, b because it is stated: “He who speaks falsehood shall not be established before My eyes” /b (Psalms 101:7).,The Gemara proceeds to relate what happened to each of them: b Ben Azzai glimpsed /b at the Divine Presence b and died. And with regard to him the verse states: “Precious in the eyes of the Lord is the death of His pious ones” /b (Psalms 116:15). b Ben Zoma glimpsed /b at the Divine Presence b and was harmed, /b i.e., he lost his mind. b And with regard to him the verse states: “Have you found honey? Eat as much as is sufficient for you, lest you become full from it and vomit it” /b (Proverbs 25:16). b i Aḥer /i chopped down the shoots /b of saplings. In other words, he became a heretic. b Rabbi Akiva came out safely. /b ,The Gemara recounts the greatness of ben Zoma, who was an expert interpreter of the Torah and could find obscure proofs: b They asked ben Zoma: What is /b the i halakha /i with regard to b castrating a dog? /b The prohibition against castration appears alongside the sacrificial blemishes, which may imply that it is permitted to castrate an animal that cannot be sacrificed as an offering. b He said to them: /b The verse states “That which has its testicles bruised, or crushed, or torn, or cut, you shall not offer to God, nor b shall you do so in your land” /b (Leviticus 22:24), from which we learn: With regard to b any /b animal b that is in your land, you shall not do /b such a thing. b They /b also b asked ben Zoma: /b A woman considered b to be a virgin who became pregt, what is /b the i halakha /i ? b A High Priest /b may marry only a virgin; is he permitted to marry her? The answer depends on the following: b Are we concerned for /b the opinion of b Shmuel? Shmuel says: /b |
|
37. Babylonian Talmud, Ketuvot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira gaon Found in books: Bickart (2022), The Scholastic Culture of the Babylonian Talmud, 159| 60a. עד כמה אמר רבא אמר רב ירמיה בר אבא אמר רב שלשה חדשים ושמואל אמר שלשים יום ורבי יצחק אמר ר' יוחנן חמשים יום אמר רב שימי בר אביי הלכה כרבי יצחק שאמר משום רבי יוחנן בשלמא רב ורבי יוחנן כל חד וחד כי חורפיה אלא לשמואל כי האי גוונא מי משכחת לה,כי אתא רמי בר יחזקאל אמר לא תציתינהו להני כללי דכייל יהודה אחי משמיה דשמואל הכי אמר שמואל כל זמן שמכירה,ההיא דאתאי לקמיה דשמואל אמר ליה לרב דימי בר יוסף זיל בדקה אזל אותבה בדרי דנשי ושקליה לברה וקמהדר ליה עלייהו כי מטא לגבה הות קא מסוי לאפה כבשתנהי לעינה מיניה אמר לה נטף עיניך קום דרי בריך סומא מנא ידע אמר רב אשי בריחא ובטעמא:,תנו רבנן יונק תינוק והולך עד עשרים וארבעה חדש מכאן ואילך כיונק שקץ דברי רבי אליעזר רבי יהושע אומר אפילו ארבע וחמש שנים פירש לאחר עשרים וארבעה חדש וחזר כיונק שקץ,אמר מר מכאן ואילך כיונק שקץ ורמינהי יכול יהא חלב מהלכי שתים טמא ודין הוא ומה בהמה שהקלת במגעה החמרת בחלבה אדם שהחמרת במגעו אינו דין שתחמיר בחלבו,תלמוד לומר (ויקרא יא, ד) את הגמל כי מעלה גרה הוא הוא טמא ואין חלב מהלכי שתים טמא אלא טהור יכול אוציא את החלב שאינו שוה בכל ולא אוציא את הדם שהוא שוה בכל תלמוד לומר הוא הוא טמא ואין דם מהלכי שתים טמא אלא טהור,ואמר רב ששת אפילו מצות פרישה אין בו,לא קשיא הא דפריש הא דלא פריש,וחלופא בדם כדתניא דם שעל גבי ככר גוררו ואוכלו שבין השינים מוצצו ואינו חושש,אמר מר רבי יהושע אומר אפילו ארבע וחמש שנים והתניא ר' יהושע אומר אפילו חבילתו על כתיפיו אידי ואידי חד שיעורא הוא אמר רב יוסף הלכה כרבי יהושע:,תניא רבי מרינוס אומר גונח יונק חלב בשבת מאי טעמא יונק מפרק כלאחר יד ובמקום צערא לא גזרו רבנן אמר רב יוסף הלכה כרבי מרינוס,תניא נחום איש גליא אומר צינור שעלו בו קשקשין ממעכן ברגלו בצנעא בשבת ואינו חושש מאי טעמא מתקן כלאחר יד הוא ובמקום פסידא לא גזרו בה רבנן אמר רב יוסף הלכה כנחום איש גליא:,פירש לאחר עשרים וארבעה חדש וחזר כיונק שקץ: וכמה אמר רב יהודה בר חביבא אמר שמואל שלשה ימים איכא דאמרי תני רב יהודה בר חביבא קמיה דשמואל שלשה ימים,תנו רבנן מינקת שמת בעלה בתוך עשרים וארבעה חדש הרי זו לא תתארס ולא תינשא | 60a. The Gemara asks: b How old /b does the child have to be so that one can assume that he already recognizes his mother? b Rava said /b that b Rav Yirmeya bar Abba said /b that b Rav said: Three months, and Shmuel said: Thirty days, and Rabbi Yitzḥak said /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa said: Fifty days. Rav Shimi bar Abaye said: /b The b i halakha /i is in accordance with /b what b Rabbi Yitzḥak said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥa. /b The Gemara asks: b Granted, Rav and Rabbi Yoḥa /b are in dispute with regard to the difference between fifty days and three months, as it is possible that b each /b baby varies b according to its intelligence, /b as one baby is sufficiently developed at fifty days, while another knows his mother at only three months. b However, according to Shmuel, can you find a case like this, /b a one-month-old baby who recognizes his mother?,The Gemara relates: b When Rami bar Yeḥezkel came /b from Eretz Yisrael, b he said: Do not listen to, /b i.e., do not accept, b those principles that my brother Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel, /b as Shmuel did not establish a particular time with regard to this matter. Rather, b this is what Shmuel said: Whenever he recognizes her, /b i.e., there is no fixed age at which this occurs. One must check each baby to see whether he recognizes his mother.,The Gemara relates: b A certain /b divorcée b came before Shmuel, /b as she did not wish to nurse her son. b He said to Rav Dimi bar Yosef: Go and check her, /b i.e., verify whether the child recognizes his mother. b He went, placed her in a row of women, and took her son /b in his arms b and passed him near them /b to see how the child would react. b When /b the child b reached her, he looked at her face with joy, /b and b she averted her eyes from him, /b as she did not want to look at him. b He said to her: Lift up your eyes, get up and take your son, /b as it is obvious that he knows you. The Gemara asks: If this is so, then b how does a blind /b baby b know /b and recognize his mother? b Rav Ashi said: Through smell and through the taste /b of her milk.,§ Apropos the period of time during which a child nurses, the Gemara continues to debate different aspects of this matter. b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b A child may continue to nurse until /b the age of b twenty-four months, /b and b from this /b point b forward, /b if he continues to nurse, he is b like one who nurses /b from b a non-kosher animal, /b as a woman’s milk is forbidden to anyone other than a small child; this is b the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Yehoshua says: /b A child may continue to nurse b even /b for b four or five years, /b and this is permitted. However, b if he ceased, /b i.e., was weaned, b after twenty-four months and /b then b resumed /b nursing, he is b like one who nurses /b from b a non-kosher animal. /b , b The Master said /b in the i baraita /i : b From this /b point b forward /b he is b like one who nurses from a non-kosher animal. /b The Gemara b raises a contradiction /b from a i baraita /i : One b might /b have thought that the b milk /b of b bipeds, /b i.e., humans, b would be non-kosher /b like that of a non-kosher animal, based on a b logical derivation: Just as /b with regard to a non-kosher b animal, where you were lenient with regard to its contact, /b meaning that it does not render people or items impure through contact when it is alive, b you were stringent with regard to its milk, /b which is prohibited, even more so should this be true with regard to a person. An i a fortiori /i inference would indicate that with regard to b a person, where you were stringent about contact, /b as people can render other people and objects impure even when they are alive, one should be stricter. So b isn’t it logical that you should be stringent with regard to his milk? /b ,This is as b the verse states: /b “But this you shall not eat, of those that only chew the cud, or of those that only part the hoof; b the camel, because it chews the cud /b but does not part the hoof, it is impure for you” (Leviticus 11:4). The somewhat superfluous word “it” teaches that b it /b alone b is impure, but /b the b milk /b of b bipeds is not impure; rather, /b it is b kosher. /b Furthermore, one b might /b have thought that b I should exclude the milk /b of humans from the prohibition against consumption, as this issue b does not apply equally to everyone, /b since only women produce milk, but b I should not exclude /b from the prohibition human b blood, which /b does b apply equally to everyone. /b Consequently, b the verse states “it” /b with regard to a camel, to say that b it /b alone b is impure, /b whereas the b blood /b of b bipeds is not impure, /b but b rather /b is b kosher. /b , b And Rav Sheshet said /b about this ruling: b There is not even a /b rabbinic b command to refrain /b from consuming human milk. Therefore, this presents a contradiction to the statement that a child who nurses beyond a certain age is like one who nurses from a non-kosher animal.,The Gemara answers: b This /b is b not difficult, /b as b this /b statement that the milk is permitted is referring to b when it /b has been b removed /b from the woman’s body, and b that /b statement, that the milk is forbidden, is referring to b when it /b has b not /b been b removed. /b Fundamentally, human milk is a permitted substance. However, it is prohibited by rabbinic law for anyone other than a very young child to nurse directly from a woman’s breasts, and one who does so is considered like one who consumes milk from a non-kosher animal., b And the opposite /b applies b to blood: /b Human blood that has been removed from the body is forbidden, but if it has not yet been removed, it is permitted. b As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : If some human b blood was on a loaf /b of bread, one b scrapes off /b the blood b and /b then he may b eat /b the bread. Since the blood was detached from the body, it is forbidden by rabbinic law, but if blood b was between /b the b teeth, he may suck it /b and swallow it b without concern, /b as the blood is permitted if it has not been removed from the body., b The Master said /b in the aforementioned i baraita /i : b Rabbi Yehoshua says: /b A child may continue to nurse b even /b for b four or five years. But isn’t it taught /b in a different i baraita /i : b Rabbi Yehoshua says: Even if /b he can carry b his package on his shoulder /b he can continue to nurse? The Gemara answers: This is not a contradiction, since b both this and that are one, /b the same, b measure, /b and the difference between them is only semantic. b Rav Yosef said: /b The b i halakha /i is in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yehoshua. /b ,On the same topic b it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Rabbi Marinos says: One who is coughing /b due to an illness that requires milk but did not have milk available b may suck milk /b directly from an animal’s udders b on Shabbat, /b although milking is a prohibited labor on Shabbat. b What is the reason? Sucking /b the milk in this way constitutes an act of b extracting in an unusual manner. /b Although milking is an example of the labor of extracting, a subcategory of the primary category of threshing, it is prohibited by Torah law only when the labor is performed in its typical manner. One who nurses from an animal is extracting the milk in an unusual manner. Such labor is prohibited by rabbinic law, b but in a situation /b involving b pain, /b like one who is coughing, b the Sages did not issue a decree. Rabbi Yosef said: /b The b i halakha /i is in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Marinos. /b ,A ruling similar to the previous i halakha /i b is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Naḥum of Galia says: /b If b a /b drainage b pipe is blocked by weeds [ i kashkashin /i ] /b and grass, preventing water from running through the pipe, b one may crush them with his foot in private /b on Shabbat b without concern /b that he is performing the labor of preparing a vessel. The Gemara explains: b What is the reason /b for this leniency? b This is /b an example of b repairing /b a vessel b in an unusual manner, /b since it is uncommon to fix an item without using a tool or one’s hands. Performing labor in an unusual manner is ordinarily prohibited by rabbinic decree, b but in a situation /b involving ficial b loss, the Sages did not issue a decree. Rabbi Yosef said: /b The b i halakha /i is in accordance with /b the opinion of b Naḥum of Galia. /b ,The Gemara continues discussing the aforementioned i baraita /i , which states: If the child b ceased /b nursing b after twenty-four months and /b then b resumed, /b he is b like one who nurses /b from b a non-kosher animal. /b The Gemara asks: b How long /b must he cease nursing to be considered weaned? b Rav Yehuda bar Ḥaviva said /b that b Shmuel said: Three days. There are /b those b who say /b that this was not an amoraic statement, but rather a i baraita /i that b is taught /b by b Rav Yehuda bar Ḥaviva before Shmuel: /b Weaning takes effect after b three days. /b ,§ The Gemara discusses other i halakhot /i relating to nursing. b The Sages taught: A nursing woman whose husband died within twenty-four months /b of her child’s birth b may not be betrothed and may not get married /b |
|
38. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 332| 34b. כהן גדול בסוף כל ברכה וברכה והמלך תחלת כל ברכה וברכה וסוף כל ברכה וברכה,אמר רבי יצחק בר נחמני לדידי מפרשא לי מיניה דריב"ל הדיוט כמו שאמרנו כהן גדול תחלת כל ברכה וברכה המלך כיון שכרע שוב אינו זוקף שנאמר (מלכים א ח, נד) ויהי ככלות שלמה להתפלל וגו' קם מלפני מזבח ה' מכרוע על ברכיו:,ת"ר קידה על אפים שנאמר (מלכים א א, לא) ותקד בת שבע אפים ארץ כריעה על ברכים שנאמר מכרוע על ברכיו השתחואה זו פשוט ידים ורגלים שנאמר (בראשית לז, י) הבא נבא אני ואמך ואחיך להשתחות לך ארצה,אמר רב חייא בריה דרב הונא חזינא להו לאביי ורבא דמצלו אצלויי,תני חדא הכורע בהודאה הרי זה משובח ותניא אידך הרי זה מגונה,לא קשיא הא בתחלה הא לבסוף,רבא כרע בהודאה תחלה וסוף אמרי ליה רבנן אמאי קא עביד מר הכי אמר להו חזינא לרב נחמן דכרע וחזינא ליה לרב ששת דקא עבד הכי,והתניא הכורע בהודאה הרי זה מגונה,ההיא בהודאה שבהלל,והתניא הכורע בהודאה ובהודאה של הלל הרי זה מגונה,כי תניא ההיא בהודאה דברכת המזון:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big המתפלל וטעה סימן רע לו ואם שליח צבור הוא סימן רע לשולחיו מפני ששלוחו של אדם כמותו אמרו עליו על ר' חנינא בן דוסא שהיה מתפלל על החולים ואומר זה חי וזה מת אמרו לו מנין אתה יודע אמר להם אם שגורה תפלתי בפי יודע אני שהוא מקובל ואם לאו יודע אני שהוא מטורף:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big אהייא,א"ר חייא אמר רב ספרא משום חד דבי רבי באבות,איכא דמתני לה אברייתא המתפלל צריך שיכוין את לבו בכולן ואם אינו יכול לכוין בכולן יכוין את לבו באחת,א"ר חייא אמר רב ספרא משום חד דבי רבי באבות,אמרו עליו על רבי חנינא וכו': מנא הני מילי א"ר יהושע בן לוי דאמר קרא (ישעיהו נז, יט) בורא ניב שפתים שלום שלום לרחוק ולקרוב אמר ה' ורפאתיו,א"ר חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן כל הנביאים כולן לא נתנבאו אלא למשיא בתו לתלמיד חכם ולעושה פרקמטיא לת"ח ולמהנה ת"ח מנכסיו אבל תלמידי חכמים עצמן (ישעיהו סד, ג) עין לא ראתה אלהים זולתך יעשה למחכה לו,ואמר רבי חייא בר אבא אמר רבי יוחנן כל הנביאים כולן לא נתנבאו אלא לימות המשיח אבל לעולם הבא עין לא ראתה אלהים זולתך,ופליגא דשמואל דאמר שמואל אין בין העוה"ז לימות המשיח אלא שעבוד מלכיות בלבד שנאמר (דברים טו, יא) כי לא יחדל אביון מקרב הארץ,וא"ר חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן כל הנביאים כולן לא נתנבאו אלא לבעלי תשובה אבל צדיקים גמורים עין לא ראתה אלהים זולתך,ופליגא דר' אבהו דא"ר אבהו מקום שבעלי תשובה עומדין צדיקים גמורים אינם עומדין שנאמר (ישעיהו נז, יט) שלום שלום לרחוק ולקרוב לרחוק ברישא והדר לקרוב,ורבי יוחנן אמר לך מאי רחוק שהיה רחוק מדבר עבירה מעיקרא ומאי קרוב שהיה קרוב לדבר עבירה ונתרחק ממנו השתא,מאי עין לא ראתה אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי זה יין המשומר בענביו מששת ימי בראשית רבי שמואל בר נחמני אמר זה עדן שלא שלטה בו עין כל בריה,שמא תאמר אדם הראשון היכן היה בגן,ושמא תאמר הוא גן הוא עדן תלמוד לומר (בראשית ב, י) ונהר יוצא מעדן להשקות את הגן גן לחוד ועדן לחוד:,ת"ר מעשה שחלה בנו של ר"ג שגר שני ת"ח אצל רבי חנינא בן דוסא לבקש עליו רחמים כיון שראה אותם עלה לעלייה ובקש עליו רחמים בירידתו אמר להם לכו שחלצתו חמה אמרו לו וכי נביא אתה אמר להן לא נביא אנכי ולא בן נביא אנכי אלא כך מקובלני אם שגורה תפלתי בפי יודע אני שהוא מקובל ואם לאו יודע אני שהוא מטורף ישבו וכתבו וכוונו אותה שעה וכשבאו אצל ר"ג אמר להן העבודה לא חסרתם ולא הותרתם אלא כך היה מעשה באותה שעה חלצתו חמה ושאל לנו מים לשתות,ושוב מעשה ברבי חנינא בן דוסא שהלך ללמוד תורה אצל ר' יוחנן בן זכאי וחלה בנו של ריב"ז אמר לו חנינא בני בקש עליו רחמים ויחיה הניח ראשו בין ברכיו ובקש עליו רחמים וחיה אמר רבי יוחנן בן זכאי אלמלי הטיח בן זכאי את ראשו בין ברכיו כל היום כולו לא היו משגיחים עליו אמרה לו אשתו וכי חנינא גדול ממך אמר לה לאו אלא הוא דומה כעבד לפני המלך ואני דומה כשר לפני המלך:,ואמר רבי חייא בר אבא אמר רבי יוחנן אל יתפלל אדם אלא בבית שיש שם חלונות שנאמר (דניאל ו, יא) וכוין פתיחן ליה בעליתיה (לקבל) [נגד],ירושלם אמר רב כהנא חציף עלי מאן דמצלי בבקתא,ואמר רב כהנא חציף עלי מאן דמפרש חטאיה שנאמר (תהלים לב, א) אשרי נשוי פשע כסוי חטאה:, br br big strongהדרן עלך אין עומדין /strong /big br br | |
|
39. Babylonian Talmud, Megillah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira gaon of pumbeditha Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 25| 29a. מבטלין ת"ת להוצאת המת ולהכנסת הכלה אמרו עליו על ר' יהודה בר' אילעאי שהיה מבטל ת"ת להוצאת המת ולהכנסת הכלה בד"א בשאין שם כל צורכו אבל יש שם כל צורכו אין מבטלין,וכמה כל צורכו אמר רב שמואל בר איניא משמיה דרב תריסר אלפי גברי ושיתא אלפי שיפורי ואמרי לה תריסר אלפי גברי ומינייהו שיתא אלפי שיפורי עולא אמר כגון דחייצי גברי מאבולא עד סיכרא,רב ששת אמר כנתינתה כך נטילתה מה נתינתה בששים ריבוא אף נטילתה בס' ריבוא ה"מ למאן דקרי ותני אבל למאן דמתני לית ליה שיעורא,תניא ר"ש בן יוחי אומר בוא וראה כמה חביבין ישראל לפני הקב"ה שבכל מקום שגלו שכינה עמהן גלו למצרים שכינה עמהן שנאמר (שמואל א ב, כז) הנגלה נגליתי לבית אביך בהיותם במצרים וגו' גלו לבבל שכינה עמהן שנאמר (ישעיהו מג, יד) למענכם שלחתי בבלה ואף כשהן עתידין ליגאל שכינה עמהן שנאמר (דברים ל, ג) ושב ה' אלהיך את שבותך והשיב לא נאמר אלא ושב מלמד שהקב"ה שב עמהן מבין הגליות,בבבל היכא אמר אביי בבי כנישתא דהוצל ובבי כנישתא דשף ויתיב בנהרדעא ולא תימא הכא והכא אלא זמנין הכא וזמנין הכא אמר אביי תיתי לי דכי מרחיקנא פרסה עיילנא ומצלינא התם אבוה דשמואל [ולוי] הוו יתבי בכנישתא דשף ויתיב בנהרדעא אתיא שכינה שמעו קול ריגשא [קמו ונפקו,רב ששת הוה יתיב בבי כנישתא דשף ויתיב בנהרדעא אתיא שכינה] ולא נפק אתו מלאכי השרת וקא מבעתו ליה אמר לפניו רבש"ע עלוב ושאינו עלוב מי נדחה מפני מי אמר להו שבקוהו,(יחזקאל יא, טז) ואהי להם למקדש מעט אמר רבי יצחק אלו בתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות שבבבל ור"א אמר זה בית רבינו שבבבל,דרש רבא מאי דכתיב (תהלים צ, א) ה' מעון אתה היית לנו אלו בתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות אמר אביי מריש הואי גריסנא בביתא ומצלינא בבי כנשתא כיון דשמעית להא דקאמר דוד (תהלים כו, ח) ה' אהבתי מעון ביתך הואי גריסנא בבי כנישתא,תניא ר"א הקפר אומר עתידין בתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות שבבבל שיקבעו בא"י שנאמר (ירמיהו מו, יח) כי כתבור בהרים וככרמל בים יבא והלא דברים ק"ו ומה תבור וכרמל שלא באו אלא לפי שעה ללמוד תורה נקבעים בארץ ישראל בתי כנסיות ובתי מדרשות שקורין ומרביצין בהן תורה עאכ"ו,דרש בר קפרא מאי דכתיב (תהלים סח, יז) למה תרצדון הרים גבנונים יצתה בת קול ואמרה להם למה תרצו דין עם סיני כולכם בעלי מומים אתם אצל סיני כתיב הכא גבנונים וכתיב התם (ויקרא כא, כ) או גבן או דק אמר רב אשי ש"מ האי מאן דיהיר בעל מום הוא:,אין עושין אותו קפנדריא: מאי קפנדריא אמר רבא קפנדריא כשמה מאי כשמה כמאן דאמר אדמקיפנא אדרי איעול בהא,א"ר אבהו אם היה שביל מעיקרא מותר,אר"נ בר יצחק הנכנס ע"מ שלא לעשות קפנדריא מותר לעשותו קפנדריא וא"ר חלבו אמר ר"ה הנכנס לבהכ"נ להתפלל מותר לעשותו קפנדריא שנא' (יחזקאל מו, ט) ובבא עם הארץ לפני ה' במועדים הבא דרך שער צפון להשתחוות יצא דרך שער נגב:,עלו בו עשבים לא יתלוש מפני עגמת נפש: והתניא אינו תולש ומאכיל אבל תולש ומניח כי תנן נמי מתני' תולש ומאכיל תנן,ת"ר בית הקברות אין נוהגין בהן קלות ראש אין מרעין בהן בהמה ואין מוליכין בהן אמת המים ואין מלקטין בהן עשבים ואם ליקט שורפן במקומן מפני כבוד מתים,אהייא אילימא אסיפא כיון ששורפן במקומן מאי כבוד מתים איכא אלא ארישא:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big ר"ח אדר שחל להיות בשבת קורין בפרשת שקלים חל להיות בתוך השבת מקדימין לשעבר ומפסיקין לשבת אחרת,בשניה זכור בשלישית פרה אדומה ברביעית החודש הזה לכם בחמישית חוזרין לכסדרן,לכל מפסיקין בראשי חדשים בחנוכה ובפורים בתעניות ובמעמדות וביוה"כ:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big תנן התם באחד באדר משמיעין על השקלים | 29a. b One interrupts /b his b Torah study to carry out the dead /b for burial b and to escort a bride /b to her wedding. b They said about Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Elai, that he would interrupt /b his b Torah study to carry out the dead /b for burial b and to escort a bride /b to her wedding. The Gemara qualifies this ruling: b In what /b case b is this statement said? /b Only b where there are not sufficient /b numbers of other people available to perform these mitzvot and honor the deceased or the bride appropriately. b However, /b when b there are sufficient /b numbers, additional people b should not interrupt /b their Torah study to participate.,The Gemara asks: b And how many /b people b are /b considered b sufficient? Rav Shmuel bar Inya said in the name of Rav: Twelve thousand men and /b another b six thousand /b men to blow b horns /b as a sign of mourning. b And some say /b a different version: b Twelve thousand men, among whom are six thousand /b men with b horns. Ulla said: For example, /b enough b to make a procession of people /b all the way b from the /b town b gate [ i abbula /i ] to the place of burial. /b , b Rav Sheshet said: As /b the Torah b was given, so it /b should be b taken away, /b i.e., the same honor that was provided when the Torah was given at Mount Sinai should be provided when the Torah is taken through the passing away of a Torah scholar. b Just as /b the Torah b was given in the presence of six hundred thousand /b men, b so too its taking /b should be done b in the presence of six hundred thousand /b men. The Gemara comments: b This applies to someone who read /b the Bible b and studied /b i halakhot /i for himself. b But for someone who taught /b others, b there is no limit /b to the honor that should be shown to him.,§ b It is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says: Come and see how beloved the Jewish people are before the Holy One, Blessed be He. As every place they were exiled, the Divine Presence /b went b with them. They were exiled to Egypt, /b and b the Divine Presence /b went b with them, as it is stated: “Did I reveal myself to the house of your father when they were in Egypt?” /b (I Samuel 2:27). b They were exiled to Babylonia, /b and b the Divine Presence /b went b with them, as it is stated: “For your sake I have sent to Babylonia” /b (Isaiah 43:14). b So too, when, in the future, they will be redeemed, the Divine Presence will be with them, as it is stated: “Then the Lord your God will return with your captivity” /b (Deuteronomy 30:3). b It does not state: He will bring back, /b i.e., He will cause the Jewish people to return, b but rather /b it says: b “He will return,” /b which b teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, will return /b together b with them from among the /b various b exiles. /b ,The Gemara asks: b Where in Babylonia /b does the Divine Presence reside? b Abaye said: In the /b ancient b synagogue of Huzal and in the synagogue that was destroyed and rebuilt in Neharde’a. And do not say /b that the Divine Presence resided b here and there, /b i.e., in both places simultaneously. b Rather, at times /b it resided b here /b in Huzal b and at times there /b in Neharde’a. b Abaye said: I have /b a blessing b coming to me, for whenever I am /b within b a distance of a parasang /b from one of those synagogues, b I go in and pray there, /b due to the special honor and sanctity attached to them. It was related that b the father of Shmuel and Levi were /b once b sitting in the synagogue that was destroyed and rebuilt in Neharde’a. The Divine Presence came /b and b they heard a loud sound, /b so b they arose and left. /b ,It was further related that b Rav Sheshet was /b once b sitting in the synagogue that was destroyed and rebuilt in Neharde’a, /b and b the Divine Presence came but he did not go out. The ministering angels came and were frightening him /b in order to force him to leave. Rav Sheshet turned to God and b said before Him: Master of the Universe, /b if one is b wretched and /b the other is b not wretched, who should defer to whom? /b Shouldn’t the one who is not wretched give way to the one who is? Now I am blind and wretched; why then do you expect me to defer to the angels? God then turned to the angels and b said to them: Leave him. /b ,The verse states: b “Yet I have been to them as a little sanctuary /b in the countries where they have come” (Ezekiel 11:16). b Rabbi Yitzḥak said: This /b is referring to b the synagogues and study halls in Babylonia. And Rabbi Elazar said: This /b is referring to b the house of our master, /b i.e., Rav, b in Babylonia, /b from which Torah issues forth to the entire world., b Rava interpreted /b a verse b homiletically: What is /b the meaning of that b which is written: “Lord, You have been our dwelling place /b in all generations” (Psalms 90:1)? b This /b is referring to b the synagogues and study halls. Abaye said: Initially, I used to study /b Torah b in /b my b home and pray in the synagogue. Once I heard /b and understood b that which /b King b David says: “Lord, I love the habitation of Your house” /b (Psalms 26:8), b I would /b always b study /b Torah b in the synagogue, /b to express my love for the place in which the Divine Presence resides., b It is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Rabbi Elazar HaKappar says: In the future, the synagogues and the study halls in Babylonia will be /b transported and b reestablished in Eretz Yisrael, as it is stated: “Surely, like Tabor among the mountains, and like Carmel by the sea, so shall he come” /b (Jeremiah 46:18). There is a tradition that these mountains came to Sinai at the giving of the Torah and demanded that the Torah should be given upon them. b And are /b these b matters not /b inferred through an b i a fortiori /i /b argument: b Just as Tabor and Carmel, which came only momentarily to study Torah, were /b relocated and b established in Eretz Yisrael /b in reward for their actions, b all the more so /b should b the synagogues and study halls /b in Babylonia, b in which the Torah is read and disseminated, /b be relocated to Eretz Yisrael., b Bar Kappara interpreted /b a verse b homiletically: What is /b the meaning of that b which is written: “Why do you look askance [ i teratzdun /i ], O high-peaked mountains, /b at the mountain that God has desired for His abode” (Psalms 68:17)? b A Divine Voice issued forth and said to /b all the mountains that came and demanded that the Torah be given upon them: b Why do you seek [ i tirtzu /i ] /b to enter into b a legal dispute [ i din /i ] with /b Mount b Sinai? You are all blemished in comparison to /b Mount b Sinai, /b as b it is written here: “High-peaked [ i gavnunnim /i ]” and it is written there, /b with regard to the blemishes that disqualify a priest: b “Or crookbacked [ i gibben /i ] or a dwarf” /b (Leviticus 21:20). b Rav Ashi said: Learn from /b this that b one who is arrogant is /b considered b blemished. /b The other mountains arrogantly insisted that the Torah should be given upon them, and they were therefore described as blemished.,§ The mishna teaches that even if a synagogue fell into ruin, b it may not be made /b into b a i kappendarya /i . /b The Gemara asks: b What is /b meant by b i kappendarya /i ? Rava said: A shortcut, as /b implied by b its name. /b The Gemara clarifies: b What /b do you mean by adding: b As /b implied by b its name? /b It is b like one who said: Instead of going around the /b entire row of b houses [ i makkifna addari /i ] /b to get to the other side, thereby lengthening my journey, b I will enter this /b house and walk through it to the other side. The word i kappendarya /i sounds like a contraction of i makkifna addari /i . This is what Rava meant by saying: As implied by its name., b Rabbi Abbahu said: If /b a public b path had initially /b passed through that location, before the synagogue was built, b it is permitted /b to continue to use it as a shortcut, for the honor due to a synagogue cannot annul the public’s right of access to the path., b Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: /b With regard to b one who enters /b a synagogue b without intending to make it /b into b a shortcut, /b when he leaves b he is permitted to make it /b into b a shortcut /b for himself, by leaving through the exit on the other side of the building. b And Rabbi Ḥelbo said /b that b Rav Huna said: /b With regard to b one who enters a synagogue to pray, he is permitted to make it /b into b a shortcut /b for himself by leaving through a different exit, and it is fitting to do so, b as it is stated: “And when the people of the land shall come before the Lord in the appointed seasons, he that enters by way of the north gate to bow down shall go forth by the way of the south gate” /b (Ezekiel 46:9). This indicates that it is a show of respect not to leave through the same entrance through which one came in; it is better to leave through the other side.,§ The mishna teaches: If b grass sprang up in /b a 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 cause to those who see it. It will remind them of the disrepair of the synagogue and the need to rebuild it. The Gemara asks: b But isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b One may not pick /b the grass b and feed /b it to one’s animals, b but he may pick /b it b and leave /b it there? The Gemara answers: b When we learned /b the prohibition against picking the grass in b the mishna as well, we learned /b only that it is prohibited to b pick /b it and b feed /b it to one’s animals, but it is permitted to leave it there., b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : In b a cemetery, one may not act with frivolity; one may not graze an animal /b on the grass growing b inside it; and one may not direct a water channel /b to pass b through it; and one may not gather grass inside it /b to use the grass as feed for one’s animals; b and if one gathered /b grass for that purpose, b it should be burnt on the spot, out of respect for the dead. /b ,The Gemara clarifies: With regard to the phrase: Out of respect for the dead, b to which /b clause of the i baraita /i does it refer? b If we say /b it is referring b to the last clause, /b that if one gathered grass that it should be burnt out of respect for the dead, then one could ask: b Since /b the grass b is burnt on the spot, /b and not publicly, b what respect for the dead is there /b in this act? b Rather, /b the phrase must be referring b to the first clause /b of the i baraita /i , and it explains why it is prohibited to act with frivolity., strong MISHNA: /strong On four i Shabbatot /i during and surrounding the month of Adar, a Torah portion of seasonal significance is read. When b the New Moon of Adar occurs on Shabbat, /b the congregation b reads the portion of i Shekalim /i /b on that Shabbat. If the New Moon b occurs during /b the middle of b the week, they advance /b the reading of that portion b to the previous /b Shabbat, b and, /b in such a case, b they interrupt /b the reading of the four portions b on the following Shabbat, /b which would be the first Shabbat of the month of Adar, and no additional portion is read on it., b On the second /b Shabbat, the Shabbat prior to Purim, they read the portion: b “Remember /b what Amalek did” (Deuteronomy 25:17–19), which details the mitzva to remember and destroy the nation of Amalek. b On the third /b Shabbat, they read the portion of b the Red Heifer [ i Para /i ] /b (Numbers 19:1–22), which details the purification process for one who became ritually impure through contact with a corpse. b On the fourth /b Shabbat, they read the portion: b “This month [ i haḥodesh /i ] shall be for you” /b (Exodus 12:1–20), which describes the offering of the Paschal lamb. b On the fifth /b Shabbat, b they resume the /b regular weekly b order /b of readings and no special portion is read., b For all /b special days, the congregation b interrupts /b the regular weekly order of readings, and a special portion relating to the character of the day is read. This applies b on the New Moons, on Hanukkah, and on Purim, on fast days, and on the /b non-priestly b watches, and on Yom Kippur. /b , strong GEMARA: /strong b We learned /b in a mishna b there /b ( i Shekalim /i 1:1): b On the first of Adar they make /b a public b announcement concerning /b the forthcoming collection of half- b shekels. /b The money is used for the communal offerings in the Temple in the coming year. |
|
40. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Bickart (2022), The Scholastic Culture of the Babylonian Talmud, 159| 157b. אלא הא מני ר' מאיר היא דאמר אדם מקנה דבר שלא בא לעולם,אמר רב יעקב מנהר פקוד משמיה דרבינא תא שמע שטרי חוב המוקדמין פסולין והמאוחרין כשרין,ואי סלקא דעתך דאיקני קנה ומכר דאיקני קנה והוריש לא משתעבד מאוחרין אמאי כשרין דאיקני הוא,הא מני רבי מאיר היא דאמר אדם מקנה דבר שלא בא לעולם,אמר רב משרשיא משמיה דרבא תא שמע לשבח קרקעות כיצד הרי שמכר שדה לחבירו והשביחה ובא בעל חוב וטרפה כשהוא גובה גובה את הקרן מנכסין משועבדין ואת השבח מנכסין בני חורין,ואי סלקא דעתך דאיקני קנה ומכר דאיקני קנה והוריש לא משתעבד בעל חוב אמאי גובה שבחא,הא מני ר' מאיר היא דאמר אדם מקנה דבר שלא בא לעולם,אם תמצא לומר דאיקני קנה ומכר דאיקני קנה והוריש לא משתעבד הא לא משתעבד אם תמצא לומר משתעבד לוה ולוה וחזר וקנה מהו לקמא משתעבד או לבתרא משתעבד,אמר רב נחמן הא מילתא איבעיא לן ושלחו מתם ראשון קנה רב הונא אמר יחלוקו וכן תני רבה בר אבוה יחלוקו אמר רבינא מהדורא קמא דרב אשי אמר לן ראשון קנה מהדורא בתרא דרב אשי אמר לן יחלוקו והלכתא יחלוקו,מיתיבי לשבח קרקעות כיצד הרי שמכר שדה לחבירו והשביחה ובא בעל חוב וטרפה כשהוא גובה גובה את הקרן מנכסין משועבדין ואת השבח מנכסין בני חורין ואם איתא חצי שבח מבעי ליה,מאי גובה נמי דקתני חצי שבח: | 157b. b Rather, /b in accordance with b whose /b opinion b is this /b mishna? This mishna b is /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Meir, who says: A person can transfer /b ownership of b an entity that has not /b yet b come into the world. /b Similarly, Rabbi Meir maintains that one can place a lien on property that the borrower will subsequently acquire., b Rav Yaakov from Nehar Pekod says in the name of Ravina: Come /b and b hear /b proof from a mishna ( i Shevi’it /i 10:5): b Promissory notes that are antedated, /b i.e., that are dated prior to the date on which the loan actually was given, b are invalid. /b This is because the promissory note places a lien on the borrower’s property. By dating the document earlier than the loan itself, the lender appears to have a lien on property that the borrower sold prior to taking out the loan, enabling the lender to fraudulently repossess it from the buyer. b But /b promissory notes b that are postdated are valid, /b as this does not enable the lender to defraud a buyer.,The Gemara explains: b And if it enters your mind /b to say that property that the borrower acquires after receiving the loan b is not liened /b even when he writes: The property b that I will acquire /b shall be liened, and he b acquires /b property b and sells /b it to others, or when he writes: The property b that I will acquire /b shall be liened, and he b acquires /b property b and bequeaths /b it to his heirs, b why, /b then, b are postdated /b promissory notes b valid? /b They should be invalid, as in some instances they enable the creditor to fraudulently repossess property that is not liened, e.g., if the borrower acquires property after receiving the loan but before the date on the promissory note, and he sells it after that date. This case b is /b comparable to one where the borrower writes: The property b that I will acquire /b shall be liened.,The Gemara answers: In accordance with b whose /b opinion b is this /b mishna? This mishna b is /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Meir, who says: A person can transfer /b ownership of b an entity that has not /b yet b come into the world. /b , b Rav Mesharshiyya says in the name of Rava: Come /b and b hear /b proof from a i baraita /i : With regard to collecting a debt b in /b a case of b enhancement of land, how /b does it happen that the debt cannot be collected from liened property that has been sold? This question arises in a case b where /b a debtor b sold a field to another and /b the buyer b enhanced it, and a creditor came and repossessed it /b from the buyer. b When /b the buyer b collects /b the value of the land from the seller, he b collects the principal /b even b from liened property /b that was sold to others, b but /b he collects the value of b the enhancement /b only b from unsold property. /b , b And if it enters your mind /b to say that property that the borrower acquires after receiving the loan b is not liened /b even when he writes: The property b that I will acquire /b shall be liened, and he b acquires /b property b and sells /b it to others, or when he writes: The property b that I will acquire /b shall be liened, and he b acquires /b property b and bequeaths /b it to his heirs, b why does /b the b creditor collect /b his debt by repossessing the b enhancement /b from the buyer? Since the enhancement was not extant at the time of the loan, it is not liened.,The Gemara answers: In accordance with b whose /b opinion b is this /b mishna? This mishna b is /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Meir, who says: A person can transfer /b ownership of b an entity that has not /b yet b come into the world. /b The dilemma of Shmuel is raised according to the opinion of the Rabbis.,The Gemara comments: b If you say /b that when the borrower writes: The property b that I will acquire /b shall be liened, and he b acquires /b property b and sells /b it to others, it is not liened, and that when he writes: The property b that I will acquire /b shall be liened, and he b acquires /b property b and bequeaths /b it to his heirs, b it is not liened, /b then b it is not liened /b and the following question will not arise. b If you say /b that b it is liened, what is /b the i halakha /i with regard to one who b borrowed /b money from one lender b and /b then b borrowed /b money from another lender, stating in both cases that the property that he will acquire shall be liened, b and /b he b then acquired /b land? Does b the first /b lender b have a lien upon /b the property b or /b does b the last /b lender b have a lien upon /b the property?, b Rav Naḥman said: This matter was raised before us, and /b the Sages b sent /b a response b from there, /b from Eretz Yisrael: b The first /b lender b acquires /b the property, since his lien came first. b Rav Huna says: /b The lenders b divide /b the property between them. b And so teaches Rabba bar Avuh: /b The lenders b divide /b the property between them. b Ravina said: The first time Rav Ashi /b taught this matter b he said to us: The first /b lender b acquires /b the property. b The last time Rav Ashi /b taught this matter b he said to us: /b The lenders b divide /b the property between them. b And the i halakha /i /b is that b they divide /b the property between them.,The Gemara b raises an objection /b from the aforementioned i baraita /i : With regard to collecting a debt b in /b a case of b enhancement of land, how /b does it occur that the debt cannot be collected from liened property that has been sold? This question arises in a case b where /b one b sold a field to another, and /b the buyer b enhanced it, and a creditor came and repossessed it /b from the buyer. b When /b the buyer b collects /b the value of the land from the seller, he b collects the principal /b even b from liened property /b that was sold to others, b but /b he collects the value of b the enhancement /b only b from unsold property. And if it is so /b that in general, the property is divided between the creditors, then, since both the creditor and the buyer have a lien upon the enhancement of the property, the buyer b should /b collect only b half of /b the value of b the enhancement. /b ,The Gemara answers: b What /b does the i baraita /i mean, b as well, /b when b it teaches /b that the buyer b collects /b the enhancement? The i baraita /i means that he collects b half of /b the value of b the enhancement. /b |
|
41. Babylonian Talmud, Qiddushin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •hai gaon b sherira Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 373| 72a. והאידנא הוא דליוה פרסאי אמר ליה אביי לרב יוסף להא גיסא דפרת עד היכא אמר ליה מאי דעתיך משום בירם מייחסי דפומבדיתא מבירם נסבי,אמר רב פפא כמחלוקת ליוחסין כך מחלוקת לענין גיטין ורב יוסף אמר מחלוקת ליוחסין אבל לגיטין דברי הכל עד ארבא תניינא דגישרא,אמר רמי בר אבא חביל ימא תכילתא דבבל שוניא וגוביא תכילתא דחביל ימא רבינא אמר אף ציצורא תניא נמי הכי חנן בן פנחס אומר חביל ימא תכילתא דבבל שוניא וגוביא וציצורא תכילתא דחביל ימא אמר רב פפא והאידנא איערבי בהו כותאי ולא היא איתתא הוא דבעא מינייהו ולא יהבו ליה מאי חביל ימא אמר רב פפא זו פרת דבורסי,ההוא גברא דאמר להו אנא מן שוט מישוט עמד רבי יצחק נפחא על רגליו ואמר שוט מישוט בין הנהרות עומדת וכי בין הנהרות עומדת מאי הוי אמר אביי אמר ר' חמא בר עוקבא אמר רבי יוסי בר' חנינא בין הנהרות הרי היא כגולה ליוחסין והיכא קיימא אמר ר' יוחנן מאיהי דקירא ולעיל והא אמר רבי יוחנן עד מעברתא דגיזמא אמר אביי רצועה נפקא,אמר רב איקא בר אבין אמר רב חננאל אמר רב חלזון ניהוונד הרי היא כגולה ליוחסין א"ל אביי לא תציתו ליה יבמה היא דנפלה ליה התם א"ל אטו דידי היא דרב חננאל היא אזיל שיילוה לרב חננאל אמר להו הכי אמר רב חלזון ניהוונד הרי היא כגולה ליוחסין,ופליגא דר' אבא בר כהנא דאמר ר' אבא בר כהנא מאי דכתיב (מלכים ב יח, יא) וינחם בחלח ובחבור נהר גוזן וערי מדי חלח זו חלזון חבור זו הדייב נהר גוזן זו גינזק ערי מדי זו חמדן וחברותיה ואמרי לה זו נהוונד וחברותיה,מאי חברותיה אמר שמואל כרך מושכי חוסקי ורומקי אמר רבי יוחנן וכולם לפסול קסלקא דעתא מושכי היינו מושכני והאמר ר' חייא בר אבין אמר שמואל מושכני הרי היא כגולה ליוחסין אלא מושכי לחוד ומושכני לחוד,(דניאל ז, ה) ותלת עלעין בפומה בין שיניה אמר רבי יוחנן זו חלזון הדייב ונציבין שפעמים בולעתן ופעמים פולטתן,(דניאל ז, ה) וארו חיוא אחרי תנינא דמיה לדוב תני רב יוסף אלו פרסיים שאוכלין ושותין כדוב ומסורבלין כדוב ומגדלין שער כדוב ואין להם מנוחה כדוב ר' אמי כי הוה חזי פרסא דרכיב אמר היינו דובא ניידא,א"ל רבי ללוי הראני פרסיים אמר ליה דומים לחיילות של בית דוד הראני חברין דומין למלאכי חבלה הראני ישמעאלים דומין לשעירים של בית הכסא הראני תלמידי חכמים שבבבל דומים למלאכי השרת,כי הוה ניחא נפשיה דרבי אמר הומניא איכא בבבל כולה עמונאי היא מסגריא איכא בבבל כולה דממזירא היא בירקא איכא בבבל שני אחים יש שמחליפים נשותיהם זה לזה בירתא דסטיא איכא בבבל היום סרו מאחרי המקום דאקפי פירא בכוורי בשבתא ואזיל וצדו בהו בשבתא ושמתינהו ר' אחי ברבי יאשיה ואישתמוד אקרא דאגמא איכא בבבל אדא בר אהבה יש בה | 72a. b And it is /b only b now /b that b the Persians moved /b the bridge further b up /b northward. b Abaye said to Rav Yosef: Until where does /b the border extend b on this /b western b side of the Euphrates? Rav Yosef said to him: What are you thinking? /b Why do you ask? Is it b due to /b the town of b Biram? /b Even b those of /b pure b lineage /b who live in b Pumbedita marry /b women b from Biram, /b which demonstrates that the residents of Biram are presumed to have unflawed lineage., b Rav Pappa says: Just as /b there is b a dispute /b between Rav and Shmuel as to the northern border of Babylonia with regard b to lineage, so /b is there b a dispute with regard to bills of divorce. /b An agent bringing a bill of divorce from a country overseas to Eretz Yisrael must state that it was written and signed in his presence. If he brought it from Babylonia, there is no requirement for him to state this. Rav Pappa is teaching that the borders that define Babylonia with regard to this issue are the same as the borders with regard to lineage. b And Rav Yosef says: /b This b dispute /b is b with regard to lineage, but with regard to bills of divorce, everyone agrees /b that it is considered Babylonia b up to the second lake of the bridge /b that Shmuel mentioned., b Rami bar Abba said: /b The province of b Ḥaveil Yamma is the glory of Babylonia /b with regard to lineage; b Shunya and Guvya /b are b the glory of Ḥaveil Yamma. Ravina said: /b The town of b Tzitzora /b is b also /b like Shunya and Guvya. b This is also taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Ḥa ben Pineḥas says: Ḥaveil Yamma is the glory of Babylonia; Shunya and Guvya and Tzitzora /b are b the glory of Ḥaveil Yamma. Rav Pappa says: And nowadays, Samaritans have assimilated with them, /b and their lineage is problematic. The Gemara comments: b And /b that b is not so. /b Rather, one Samaritan b requested /b to marry b a woman from them and they would not give /b her b to him, /b which led to the rumor that Samaritans had assimilated with them. The Gemara asks: b What /b is this region called b Ḥaveil Yamma? Rav Pappa said: This /b is the area near the b Euphrates /b adjacent b to Bursi. /b ,The Gemara relates: There was b a certain man who said to /b the Sages: b I am from /b a place called b Shot Mishot. Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa stood on his feet and said: Shot Mishot is located between the /b Tigris and Euphrates b Rivers. /b The Gemara asks: b And if it is located between the rivers, what of it? /b What i halakha /i is this relevant for? b Abaye said /b that b Rabbi Ḥama bar Ukva says /b that b Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says: /b The area b between the rivers is like the exile, /b meaning Pumbedita, b with regard to lineage. /b The Gemara inquires: b And where is /b the area between the rivers b located /b for the purpose of this i halakha /i ? b Rabbi Yoḥa said: From Ihi Dekira and upward, /b i.e., northward. The Gemara asks: b But doesn’t Rabbi Yoḥa say: Until the crossing at Gizma /b but no further? b Abaye said: A strip extends /b from that region past Ihi Dekira., b Rav Ika bar Avin says /b that b Rav Ḥael says /b that b Rav says: Ḥillazon Nihavnad is like the exile with regard to lineage. Abaye said to them: Do not listen to /b Rav Ika bar Avin about this, as b it was a i yevama /i /b who b fell before him /b from b there /b to perform levirate marriage, and he said that its lineage was unflawed because he wished to marry her. Rav Ika bar Avin b said to him: Is that to say /b that this i halakha /i b is mine? It is Rav Ḥael’s, /b and it is not reasonable to say that I was influenced by my own interests in stating it. b They went and asked Rav Ḥael. He said to them: Rav said as follows: Ḥillazon Nihavnad is like the exile with regard to lineage. /b ,The Gemara comments: b And /b this b disagrees /b with the statement b of Rabbi Abba bar Kahana, as Rabbi Abba bar Kahana says: What /b is the meaning of that b which is written /b with regard to the exile of the ten tribes of the kingdom of Israel: b “And he put them in Halah, and in Habor, on the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes” /b (II Kings 18:11)? b Halah is Ḥillazon; Habor is Hadyav; the river of Gozan is Ginzak; the cities of the Medes are Ḥamadan and its neighboring towns, and some say: This is Nihavnad and its neighboring towns. /b Since the ten tribes assimilated with the gentiles, the lineage of Jews from those places is flawed, unlike that which was taught before.,The Gemara asks: b What /b are the b neighboring towns /b of Nihavnad? b Shmuel said: /b The b city /b of b Mushekhei, Ḥosekei, and Rumekei. Rabbi Yoḥa says: And /b all of these are the same with regard b to flawed /b lineage. b It was assumed /b that b Mushekhei is /b the same as b Mushekanei. /b The Gemara therefore asks: b But doesn’t Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Avin say /b that b Shmuel says: Mushekanei is like the exile with regard to lineage? Rather, /b it must be that b Mushekhei is discrete, and Mushekanei is discrete. /b ,In connection to the aforementioned places, the Gemara analyzes the following verse, describing a vision of a bear-like animal: b “And it had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth” /b (Daniel 7:5). b Rabbi Yoḥa says: This is Ḥillazon, Hadyav, and Netzivin, which /b the Persian government b sometimes swallows and sometimes discharges. /b In other words, control over these places passed from the Persians to the Romans and back again several times.,The first part of that verse stated: b “And behold a second beast, similar to a bear” /b (Daniel 7:5). b Rav Yosef taught: These are Persians, who eat and drink /b copious amounts b like a bear, and are corpulent like a bear, and grow hair like a bear, and have no rest like a bear, /b which is constantly on the move from one place to another. b When Rabbi Ami saw a Persian riding, he would say: This is a bear on the move. /b , b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b said to Levi: Show me Persians, /b i.e., describe a typical Persian to me. Levi b said to him: /b They b are similar to the legions of the house of David. /b Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: b Show me Ḥabbarin, /b Persian priests. Levi said to him: They b are similar to angels of destruction. /b Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: b Show me Ishmaelites. /b Levi said to him: They b are similar to demons of an outhouse. /b Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: b Show me Torah scholars of Babylonia. /b Levi said to him: They b are similar to ministering angels. /b , b When Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b was dying, he said /b prophetically: b There is /b a place called b Homanya in Babylonia, /b and b all its /b people are the sons b of Ammon. There is /b a place called b Masgariya in Babylonia, /b and b all its /b people are b i mamzerim /i . There is /b a place called b Bireka in Babylonia, /b and b there are two brothers /b there b who exchange wives with each other, /b and their children are therefore i mamzerim /i . b There is /b a place called b Bireta DeSatya in Babylonia. Today they turned away from the Omnipresent. /b What did they do? b A ditch with fish overflowed, and they went and trapped /b the fish b on Shabbat. Rabbi Aḥai, son of Rabbi Yoshiya, excommunicated them, and they /b all b became apostates. There is /b a place called b Akra DeAgma in Babylonia. There is /b a man named b Adda bar Ahava there. /b |
|
42. Babylonian Talmud, Rosh Hashanah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira gaon Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 128| 16a. big strongמתני׳ /strong /big בארבעה פרקים העולם נידון בפסח על התבואה בעצרת על פירות האילן בר"ה כל באי עולם עוברין לפניו כבני מרון שנאמר (תהלים לג, טו) היוצר יחד לבם המבין אל כל מעשיהם ובחג נידונין על המים:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big הי תבואה אילימא הא תבואה דקיימא כל הני הרפתקי דעדו עלה אימת איתדון אלא תבואה דמזדרעא,למימרא דחד דינא מתדנא והתניא תבואה שאירע בה קרי או אונס קודם הפסח נידונית לשעבר לאחר הפסח נידונית להבא אדם שאירע בו קרי או אונס קודם יוה"כ נידון לשעבר לאחר יוה"כ נידון להבא,אמר רבא ש"מ תרי דיני מתדנא אמר אביי הלכך כי חזי אינש דמצלח זרעא אפלא ליקדים וליזרע חרפא דעד דמטי למדייניה קדים סליק,מני מתני' לא ר"מ ולא ר' יהודה ולא ר' יוסי ולא ר' נתן,דתניא הכל נידונים בר"ה וגזר דין שלהם נחתם ביוה"כ דברי ר"מ ר' יהודה אומר הכל נידונין בר"ה וגזר דין שלהם נחתם כל אחד ואחד בזמנו בפסח על התבואה בעצרת על פירות האילן בחג נידונין על המים ואדם נידון בר"ה וגזר דין שלו נחתם ביוה"כ,ר' יוסי אומר אדם נידון בכל יום שנאמר (איוב ז, יח) ותפקדנו לבקרים רבי נתן אומר אדם נידון בכל שעה שנא' (איוב ז, יח) לרגעים תבחננו,וכי תימא לעולם ר' יהודה היא וכי קתני מתניתין אגזר דין אי הכי קשיא אדם,אמר רבא האי תנא דבי ר' ישמעאל היא דתנא דבי ר' ישמעאל בארבעה פרקים העולם נידון בפסח על התבואה בעצרת על פירות האילן בחג נידונין על המים ואדם נידון בר"ה וגזר דין שלו נחתם ביוה"כ וכי קתני מתני' אתחלת דין,אמר רב חסדא מ"ט דר' יוסי כדקאמר טעמיה ותפקדנו לבקרים אנן הכי קאמרינן מ"ט לא אמר כר' נתן בחינה עיוני בעלמא היא פקידה נמי עיוני בעלמא היא,אלא א"ר חסדא טעמיה דר' יוסי מהכא (מלכים א ח, נט) לעשות משפט עבדו ומשפט עמו ישראל דבר יום ביומו,וא"ר חסדא מלך וצבור מלך נכנס תחלה לדין שנאמר לעשות משפט עבדו ומשפט עמו ישראל מ"ט איבעית אימא לאו אורח ארעא למיתב מלכא אבראי ואיבעית אימא מקמי דליפוש חרון אף,א"ר יוסף כמאן מצלינן האידנא אקצירי ואמריעי כמאן כר' יוסי ואיבעית אימא לעולם כרבנן וכדר' יצחק דא"ר יצחק יפה צעקה לאדם בין קודם גזר דין בין לאחר גזר דין,תניא א"ר יהודה משום ר"ע מפני מה אמרה תורה הביאו עומר בפסח מפני שהפסח זמן תבואה הוא אמר הקב"ה הביאו לפני עומר בפסח כדי שתתברך לכם תבואה שבשדות ומפני מה אמרה תורה הביאו שתי הלחם בעצרת מפני שעצרת זמן פירות האילן הוא אמר הקב"ה הביאו לפני שתי הלחם בעצרת כדי שיתברכו לכם פירות האילן,ומפני מה אמרה תורה נסכו מים בחג אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא נסכו לפני מים בחג כדי שיתברכו לכם גשמי שנה ואמרו לפני בראש השנה מלכיות זכרונות ושופרות מלכיות כדי שתמליכוני עליכם זכרונות כדי שיעלה זכרוניכם לפני לטובה ובמה בשופר,אמר רבי אבהו למה תוקעין בשופר של איל אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא תקעו לפני בשופר של איל כדי שאזכור לכם עקידת יצחק בן אברהם ומעלה אני עליכם כאילו עקדתם עצמכם לפני,(ואמר) רבי יצחק למה תוקעין בר"ה למה תוקעין רחמנא אמר תקעו אלא למה מריעין מריעין רחמנא אמר זכרון תרועה אלא למה תוקעין ומריעין כשהן יושבין | 16a. strong MISHNA: /strong b At four times /b of the year b the world is judged: On Passover /b judgment is passed b concerning grain; on i Shavuot /i concerning fruits /b that grow on b a tree; on Rosh HaShana all creatures pass before Him like sheep [ i benei maron /i ], as it is stated: “He Who fashions their hearts alike, Who considers all their deeds” /b (Psalms 33:15); b and on the festival /b of i Sukkot /i b they are judged concerning water, /b i.e., the rainfall of the coming year., strong GEMARA: /strong The mishna taught that on Passover judgment is passed concerning grain. The Gemara asks: b Which grain /b is judged on Passover? b If we say /b it is b the grain that is /b presently b standing /b in the fields ready to be reaped between Passover and i Shavuot /i , b when was judgment passed with regard to all those events [ i harpatkei /i ] /b that already happened to the grain while it was growing in the winter? b Rather, /b the mishna must be referring to the b grain that will be sown /b over the coming year.,The Gemara asks further: b Is this to say that /b only b one judgment is passed /b concerning a particular crop, and no more? b But isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : If b grain suffers an incident or accident before Passover, it was judged in the past, /b the previous Passover; if this occurs b after Passover, it was judged /b this Passover b for the future. /b And similarly, if b a person suffered an incident or accident before Yom Kippur, he was judged in the past, /b the previous Rosh HaShana; if this occurred b after Yom Kippur, he was judged /b this Rosh HaShana b for the future. /b , b Rava said: Learn from here /b that b two judgments are passed /b concerning each crop, one covering the period between the time it is sown and Passover and another covering the period between Passover and the time it is harvested. b Abaye said: Therefore, if a person sees that /b his b slow-growing crops, /b those that are sown at the beginning of the winter but ripen only in the spring or summer, b are doing well, he should quickly sow fast-growing crops, /b such as barley, which can be sown at the end of the winter and still ripen before Passover, b as before it is brought to judgment /b on the next Passover b it will already have /b successfully b grown, /b since he knows that this year’s crops were judged for a favorable yield.,The Gemara raises a question about the mishna: b Whose /b opinion is expressed in b the mishna? /b It is b not /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Meir, and not /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Yehuda, and not /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Yosei, and not /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Natan. /b ,The Gemara explains: b As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b All are judged on Rosh HaShana, and their sentence is sealed on Yom Kippur; /b this is b the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: All are judged on Rosh HaShana, and their sentence is sealed each in its /b own b time: On Passover /b the sentence is sealed b concerning grain; on i Shavuot /i concerning fruits /b that grow on b a tree; on the festival /b of i Sukkot /i b they are judged concerning water; and mankind is judged on Rosh HaShana, and the sentence is sealed on Yom Kippur. /b , b Rabbi Yosei says: A person is judged every day, /b and not just once a year, b as it is stated: “You visit him every morning” /b (Job 7:18), meaning that every morning an accounting is made and a judgment is passed. b Rabbi Natan says: A person is judged every hour, as it is stated: “You try him every moment” /b (Job 7:18)., b And lest you say /b that b actually, /b the mishna b is /b taught in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Yehuda, and when the mishna is taught, /b it is taught with regard to b the sentence, /b and not the judgments, which are all passed on Rosh HaShana, b if so, /b it is b difficult /b with regard to b mankind, /b as the mishna should have stated that the sentence is sealed on Yom Kippur., b Rava said: The i tanna /i /b of the mishna b is /b a i tanna /i b from the school of Rabbi Yishmael, as /b a i tanna /i b from the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: At four times /b of the year b the world is judged: On Passover concerning grain; on i Shavuot /i concerning fruits /b that grow on b a tree; on the festival /b of i Sukkot /i b they are judged concerning water; and mankind is judged on Rosh HaShana and the sentence is sealed on Yom Kippur. And when the mishna is taught, /b it is taught with regard to b the beginning of the judgment /b process, i.e., the judgment of mankind is initially passed on Rosh HaShana., b Rav Ḥisda said: What is the reason for /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yosei? /b The Gemara is astonished by this question: Why ask about his reason? b He stated his reason, /b the verse that states: b “You visit him every morning.” /b The Gemara explains: b This is what we are saying: /b If Rabbi Yosei relies on this verse, b what is the reason that he did not state /b his opinion b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Natan /b that a person is judged every hour? And if you say that he holds that the verse “You try him every moment” cannot serve as proof, because b trying merely /b indicates b examination /b and not actual judgment, then in the same way b visiting merely /b indicates b examination. /b If so, there is no clear proof from this verse., b Rather, Rav Ḥisda said: Rabbi Yosei’s reason is from here, /b another verse, which states: b “To make the judgment of His servant and the judgment of His people Israel at all times, as each day may require” /b (I Kings 8:59), which indicates that the entire world is judged every day.,§ About this verse b Rav Ḥisda said: /b When b a king and a community /b are brought before God for judgment, b the king is brought in for judgment first, as it is stated: “To make the judgment of His servant,” /b and afterward: b “And the judgment of His people Israel.” What is the reason /b for this? b If you wish, say /b that it is b not proper conduct for the king to stand outside /b and wait for the trial of his subjects to come to an end. And b if you wish, say /b instead that the king is brought in first so that he may be judged b before /b God’s b anger intensifies /b due to the sins of the community, and consequently he may be saved from overly harsh judgment., b Rav Yosef said: In accordance with whose /b opinion b do we pray nowadays /b on a daily basis b for the sick and afflicted? /b The Gemara repeats the question: b In accordance with whose /b opinion? It is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yosei, /b who holds that one is judged every day, and so there is reason to pray every day in order to affect the outcome of his judgment. b And if you wish, say /b that b actually, /b normative practice is even b in accordance with /b the opinion of b the Rabbis, /b who hold that one is judged only once a year, but b also in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yitzḥak. As Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Crying /b out to God b is beneficial for a person both before /b his b sentence /b has been issued b and after /b his b sentence /b has been issued.,§ b It is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Yehuda said in the name of Rabbi Akiva: For what /b reason did b the Torah say: Bring the i omer /i /b offering b on /b the second day of b Passover? /b It is b because Passover is the time of grain, /b the beginning of the grain harvest season, and therefore b the Holy One, Blessed be He, said: Bring the i omer /i /b offering b before Me on Passover so that the grain in the fields will be blessed for you. And for what /b reason did b the Torah say: Bring /b the offering of b the two loaves /b from the new wheat b on i Shavuot /i ? /b It is b because i Shavuot /i is the time of /b the b fruits /b that grow on b a tree, /b when it begins to ripen, and therefore b the Holy One, Blessed be He, said: Bring /b the offering of b the two loaves before Me on i Shavuot /i so that the fruits /b that grow on b a tree will be blessed for you. /b , b And for what /b reason did b the Torah say: Pour water /b onto the altar in the Temple b on the festival /b of i Sukkot /i ? b The Holy One, Blessed be He, said: Pour water before Me on the festival /b of i Sukkot /i b so that the rains of the year, /b which begin to fall after i Sukkot /i , b will be blessed for you. And recite before Me on Rosh HaShana /b verses that mention b Kingships, Remembrances, and i Shofarot /i : Kingships so that you will crown Me as King over you; Remembrances so that your remembrance will rise before Me for good; and with what /b will the remembrance rise? It will rise b with the i shofar /i . /b ,Similarly, b Rabbi Abbahu said: Why does one sound /b a blast b with a i shofar /i /b made b from a ram’s /b horn on Rosh HaShana? b The Holy One, Blessed be He, said: Sound /b a blast b before Me with a i shofar /i /b made b from a ram’s /b horn, b so that I will remember for you the binding of Isaac, son of Abraham, /b in whose stead a ram was sacrificed, b and I will ascribe it to you as if you had bound yourselves before Me. /b , b Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Why does one sound /b [ b i tokin /i /b ] a blast b on Rosh HaShana? /b The Gemara is astonished by the question: b Why do we sound /b a blast? b The Merciful One states /b in the verse: b “Sound [ i tiku /i ] /b a i shofar /i ” (Psalms 81:4). b Rather, /b the question is: b Why does one sound /b a staccato series of i shofar /i b blasts [ i terua /i ] /b in addition to a long continuous i shofar /i blast [ i tekia /i ]? The Gemara is still surprised by the question: b Sound a i terua /i ? The Merciful One states: /b “In the seventh month, in the first day of the month, shall be a solemn rest unto you, b a memorial proclaimed with the blast of horns [ i terua /i ]” /b (Leviticus 23:24). b Rather, /b Rabbi Yitzḥak asked about the common practice in Jewish communities, which is not explicitly stated in the Torah: b Why does one sound /b a long, continuous i shofar /i b blast [ i tekia /i ] and /b then a staccato series of i shofar /i b blasts [ i terua /i ] /b while the congregation is still b sitting /b before the silent prayer, |
|
43. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •iggeret of r. sherira gaon •sherira gaon, rabbi Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 168, 169| 86a. תני תנא קמיה דרב ששת א"ל אני שונה רבי שמעון אומר מאחיו עד שיוציאנו מרשות אחיו ואת אמרת חייב תני פטור,מאי קושיא דילמא הא ר"ש הא רבנן,לא ס"ד דאמר ר' יוחנן סתם מתני' ר' מאיר סתם תוספתא ר' נחמיה סתם ספרא רבי יהודה סתם ספרי ר"ש וכולהו אליבא דר"ע:,הגונב בנו: מאי טעמא דרבנן,אמר אביי דאמר קרא (דברים כד, ז) כי ימצא פרט למצוי,א"ל רב פפא לאביי אלא מעתה (דברים כב, כב) כי ימצא איש שוכב עם אשה בעולת בעל הכי נמי כי ימצא פרט למצוי כגון של בית פלוני דשכיחן גבייהו הכי נמי דפטירי,א"ל אנא מונמצא בידו קאמינא,אמר רבא הלכך הני מיקרי דרדקי ומתנו רבנן כמצויין בידן דמו ופטירי:,גנב מי שחציו וכו': תנן התם רבי יהודה אומר אין לעבדים בושת,מאי טעמא דר' יהודה אמר קרא (דברים כה, יא) כי ינצו אנשים יחדיו איש ואחיו מי שיש לו אחוה יצא עבד שאין לו אחוה,ורבנן אחיו הוא במצות,והכא היכי דריש ר' יהודה,סבר מאחיו לאפוקי עבדים בני ישראל למעוטי מי שחציו עבד וחציו בן חורין מבני ישראל למעוטי מי שחציו עבד וחציו בן חורין הוי מיעוט אחר מיעוט ואין מיעוט אחר מיעוט אלא לרבות,ורבנן מאחיו לאפוקי עבדים לא משמע להו דהא אחיו הוא במצות בני ישראל מבני ישראל חד למעוטי עבד וחד למעוטי מי שחציו עבד וחציו בן חורין,אזהרה לגונב נפש מנין רבי יאשיה אמר (שמות כ, יב) מלא תגנב רבי יוחנן אמר (ויקרא כה, מב) מלא ימכרו ממכרת עבד ולא פליגי מר קא חשיב לאו דגניבה ומר קא חשיב לאו דמכירה,ת"ר (שמות כ, יב) לא תגנוב בגונב נפשות הכתוב מדבר אתה אומר בגונב נפשות או אינו אלא בגונב ממון אמרת צא ולמד משלש עשרה מדות שהתורה נדרשת בהן דבר הלמד מעניינו במה הכתוב מדבר בנפשות אף כאן בנפשות,תניא אידך (ויקרא יט, יא) לא תגנובו בגונב ממון הכתוב מדבר אתה אומר בגונב ממון או אינו אלא בגונב נפשות אמרת צא ולמד משלש עשרה מדות שהתורה נדרשת בהן דבר הלמד מעניינו במה הכתוב מדבר בממון אף כאן בממון,איתמר עידי גניבה ועידי מכירה בנפש שהוזמו חזקיה אמר אין נהרגין רבי יוחנן אמר נהרגין,חזקיה דאמר כר"ע דאמר דבר ולא חצי דבר ורבי יוחנן אמר כרבנן דאמרי דבר ואפי' חצי דבר,ומודה חזקיה בעדים האחרונים של בן סורר ומורה שהוזמו שנהרגין מתוך שיכולים לומר הראשונים | 86a. b A i tanna /i /b who recited i mishnayot /i and i baraitot /i in the study hall b recited /b that i baraita /i , where the i tanna /i holds that one is liable for abducting another and selling him to the abductee’s father, b before Rav Sheshet. /b Rav Sheshet b said to him: I teach /b that b Rabbi Shimon says: /b From the term b “of his brethren” /b it is derived that there is no liability b unless he removes /b the abductee b from the domain of his brethren, and you say /b that one who sells the abductee to his father is b liable? /b Emend the i baraita /i and b teach /b instead: He is b exempt. /b ,The Gemara asks: b What /b is b the difficulty /b raised by Rav Sheshet? b Perhaps that /b statement that he cited is the opinion of b Rabbi Shimon, /b while b this /b i baraita /i is the opinion of b the Rabbis, /b who disagree with him.,The Gemara responds: That should b not enter your mind, as /b the unattributed i baraita /i that was cited is a passage from the halakhic midrash on the books of Numbers and Deuteronomy entitled i Sifrei /i , and b Rabbi Yoḥa says: An unattributed mishna /b is in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Meir; an unattributed /b i baraita /i in the b i Tosefta /i /b is in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Neḥemya; an unattributed /b i baraita /i in the b i Sifra /i , /b the halakhic midrash on the book of Leviticus, is in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Yehuda; /b and b an unattributed /b i baraita /i in the b i Sifrei /i /b is in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Shimon. And all of these are in accordance with /b the opinion b of Rabbi Akiva, /b as all the Sages mentioned were his disciples. Therefore, it is unlikely that an unattributed i baraita /i from the i Sifrei /i would run counter to the opinion of Rabbi Shimon.,§ The mishna teaches that there is a dispute between Rabbi Yehuda and the Rabbis with regard to the liability of b one who abducts his son. /b The Gemara asks: b What is the reason /b for the opinion b of the Rabbis, /b who deem him exempt?, b Abaye said: /b It is derived b from the verse /b that b states: “If /b a man b shall be found /b abducting a person of his brethren” (Deuteronomy 24:7), to b exclude /b one who is already b found /b in the custody of the abductor before the abduction. Since the son is already in the custody of his father, the father is not liable for abducting him., b Rav Pappa said to Abaye: If that is so, /b then the verse: b “If a man shall be found lying with a woman married to a husband, /b then they shall both of them die” (Deuteronomy 22:22), may b also /b be interpreted: b “If /b a man b shall be found,” /b to b exclude /b one who was already b found. So too, /b would one say b that /b adulterers b are exempt /b from liability if they commit adultery in, b for example, the house of so-and-so, where /b married women b are commonly /b found and they have a preexisting reputation for licentiousness?,Abaye b said to /b Rav Pappa: The Rabbis’ opinion is derived from the phrase: b “Or if he is found in his possession, /b he shall be put to death” (Exodus 21:16), from which b I am saying /b my inference, that it is derived: If he is found, to the exclusion of one who was already found., b Rava said: Therefore, /b with regard to b those teachers of children [ i dardekei /i ] and those who recite /b i mishnayot /i b to Torah scholars, /b the status of their students b is as /b though they are b found in their possession, and /b the teachers b are exempt /b from liability for abducting them.,§ The mishna teaches that there is a dispute between Rabbi Yehuda and the Rabbis with regard to liability if b one abducted one who is half-slave /b half-freeman. b We learned /b in a mishna b there /b ( i Bava Kamma /i 87a) that b Rabbi Yehuda says: There is no /b indemnity for the b humiliation of a slave, /b since he is not a full-fledged Jew.,The Gemara asks: b What is the reason /b for the opinion b of Rabbi Yehuda? /b It is derived from b the verse /b that b states: “When men struggle together, a man and his brother, /b and the wife of the one drew near to deliver her husband from the hand of the one who smites him, and extended her hand, and grabbed his genitals” (Deuteronomy 25:11). This is the source for liability to pay restitution for humiliating another. From the term “his brother” it is derived that b one who has brotherhood, /b i.e., who is halakhically related to his biological family, receives payment for humiliation. b A slave is excluded, as he has no brotherhood, /b i.e., he is not halakhically related to his family., b And /b what is the reason for the opinion of b the Rabbis? /b They hold that although the slave has no family ties, he b is the brother of /b the assailant b with regard to /b the fulfillment of b mitzvot, /b as a Canaanite slave is obligated to fulfill the same mitzvot that a woman is obligated to fulfill.,The Gemara asks: b And here, /b with regard to abduction, b how does Rabbi Yehuda interpret /b the verses and arrive at the conclusion that one is liable for abducting one who is half-slave half-freeman? Shouldn’t the term “from his brethren” render exempt from liability one who abducts a slave?,The Gemara answers that Rabbi Yehuda b holds /b that the term in the verse: b “From his brethren” /b (Deuteronomy (24:7), serves b to exclude /b from liability one who abducts b slaves. /b Had the verse continued: b The children of Israel, /b that phrase would have been interpreted b to exclude /b from liability one who abducts b one who is half-slave half-freeman. /b Since the verse states: b “From the children of Israel,” /b the prefix letter i mem /i , meaning from, indicates that there are some from the children of Israel for whose abduction one is liable and there are some for whose abduction one is exempt. That prefix also serves b to exclude /b from liability one who abducts b one who is half-slave half-freeman. /b Therefore, b this is /b an example of b a restriction following a restriction, and /b there is a hermeneutical principle that b a restriction following a restriction /b serves b only to amplify /b the i halakha /i and to include in the category of those who are liable one who abducts one who is half-slave half-freeman., b And the Rabbis, /b who deem one who abducts one who is half-slave half-freeman exempt, how do they interpret the verse? b They do not exclude slaves /b based on the term b “from his brethren,” as /b the slave b is the brother of /b the abductor b with regard to the /b fulfillment of b mitzvot. /b Concerning the expression b “children of Israel” /b and the more expanded expression b “from the children of Israel,” one /b serves b to exclude /b from liability one who abducts b slaves, /b as the slave is not a full-fledged Jew, b and one /b serves b to exclude /b from liability one who abducts b one who is half-slave half-freeman. /b ,§ The Gemara asks: b From where /b is b a prohibition against abducting a person /b derived? b Rabbi Yoshiya says /b that it is derived b from /b the verse: b “You shall not steal” /b (Exodus 20:13). b Rabbi Yoḥa says /b that it is derived b from /b the verse: b “They shall not be sold as slaves” /b (Leviticus 25:42). The Gemara comments: b And they do not disagree, /b as each requires both verses to derive the prohibition. One b Sage, /b Rabbi Yoshiya, b enumerates /b the b prohibition against abduction, and /b one b Sage, /b Rabbi Yoḥa, b enumerates /b the b prohibition against selling /b the abductee into slavery., b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b “You shall not steal” /b (Exodus 20:13), and it is b with regard to /b one who b abducts people /b that b the verse is speaking. Do you say /b that the verse is speaking b with regard to /b one who b abducts people, or /b perhaps the verse is speaking b only with regard to /b one who b steals property? You say: Go out and learn from /b one of b the thirteen hermeneutical principles: A matter derived from its context. With regard to what /b context are the adjacent prohibitions “You shall not kill; you shall not commit adultery” in b the verse speaking? /b They are speaking b with regard to capital /b cases. b So too here, /b the prohibition is speaking b with regard to a capital /b case of abduction., b It is taught /b in b another /b i baraita /i : b “You shall not steal” /b (Leviticus 19:11), and it is b with regard to /b one who b steals property /b that b the verse is speaking. Do you say /b that the verse is speaking b with regard to /b one who b steals property, or /b perhaps the verse is speaking b only with regard to /b one who b abducts people? You say: Go out and learn from /b one of b the thirteen hermeneutical principles: A matter derived from its context. With regard to what /b context b is the /b subsequent b verse: /b “You shall neither exploit your neighbor nor rob him” (Leviticus 19:13), b speaking? /b It is speaking b with regard to property. So too here, /b the verse is speaking b with regard to property. /b , b It was stated: /b If b the witnesses to the abduction and the witnesses to the sale of a person were rendered conspiring witnesses, Ḥizkiyya says: /b The typical sentence of conspiring witnesses is not implemented and b they are not executed. Rabbi Yoḥa says: They are executed. /b ,The Gemara elaborates: It is b Ḥizkiyya who said /b his statement b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabbi Akiva, who said /b one derives from the verse: “On the basis of two witnesses…shall a matter be established” (Deuteronomy 19:15), that the testimony of witnesses is valid only when they attest to an entire b matter, but not /b to b half a matter. /b Since each pair of witnesses provides testimony concerning only half the transgression for which the perpetrator would be liable, i.e., they each testify to only the abduction or the sale, the testimony of each pair is not valid. Therefore, when they are deemed conspiring witnesses, they are not executed. b And Rabbi Yoḥa says /b his statement b in accordance with /b the opinion of b the Rabbis, who said /b that one derives from the verse that the testimony is valid when they testify with regard to an entire b matter, and even /b when they testify with regard to b half a matter. /b Since the testimony of the two pairs of witnesses together constitutes a complete testimony, if they are rendered conspiring witnesses, they are executed.,The Gemara notes: b And Ḥizkiyya concedes with regard to the final witnesses of a stubborn and rebellious son who were rendered conspiring witnesses that they are executed. /b A stubborn and rebellious son is executed only if witnesses testified that he engaged in gluttonous and drunken conduct and he was flogged, and then a second pair of witnesses testifies that he again engaged in gluttonous and drunken conduct. His death sentence is based solely on the testimony of the second pair, b as the first /b witnesses b could say: /b |
|
44. Babylonian Talmud, Sotah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira gaon of pumbeditha Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 289| 21a. הן תהוי ארכא לשלותיך וכתיב (דניאל ד, כה) כלא מטא על נבוכדנצר מלכא וכתיב (דניאל ד, כו) לקצת ירחין תרי עשר,לעולם רבי ישמעאל ואשכח קרא דאמר ותני דכתיב (עמוס א, יא) כה אמר ה' על שלשה פשעי אדום,ומאי אע"פ שאין ראיה לדבר זכר לדבר דלמא שאני עובדי כוכבים דלא מפקיד דינא עלייהו,ויש זכות תולה ג' שנים כו' זכות דמאי אילימא זכות דתורה הא אינה מצווה ועושה היא אלא זכות דמצוה,זכות דמצוה מי מגנא כולי האי והתניא את זו דרש רבי מנחם בר יוסי (משלי ו, כג) כי נר מצוה ותורה אור תלה הכתוב את המצוה בנר ואת התורה באור את המצוה בנר לומר לך מה נר אינה מגינה אלא לפי שעה אף מצוה אינה מגינה אלא לפי שעה,ואת התורה באור לומר לך מה אור מגין לעולם אף תורה מגינה לעולם ואומר (משלי ו, כב) בהתהלכך תנחה אותך וגו' בהתהלכך תנחה אותך זה העוה"ז בשכבך תשמור עליך זו מיתה והקיצות היא תשיחך לעתיד לבא,משל לאדם שהיה מהלך באישון לילה ואפילה ומתיירא מן הקוצים ומן הפחתים ומן הברקנים ומחיה רעה ומן הליסטין ואינו יודע באיזה דרך מהלך,נזדמנה לו אבוקה של אור ניצל מן הקוצים ומן הפחתים ומן הברקנים ועדיין מתיירא מחיה רעה ומן הליסטין ואינו יודע באיזה דרך מהלך כיון שעלה עמוד השחר ניצל מחיה רעה ומן הליסטין ועדיין אינו יודע באיזה דרך מהלך הגיע לפרשת דרכים ניצל מכולם,ד"א עבירה מכבה מצוה ואין עבירה מכבה תורה שנאמר (שיר השירים ח, ז) מים רבים לא יוכלו לכבות את האהבה,א"ר יוסף מצוה בעידנא דעסיק בה מגנא ומצלא בעידנא דלא עסיק בה אגוני מגנא אצולי לא מצלא תורה בין בעידנא דעסיק בה ובין בעידנא דלא עסיק בה מגנא ומצלא,מתקיף לה רבה אלא מעתה דואג ואחיתופל מי לא עסקי בתורה אמאי לא הגינה עלייהו אלא אמר רבא תורה בעידנא דעסיק בה מגנא ומצלא בעידנא דלא עסיק בה אגוני מגנא אצולי לא מצלא מצוה בין בעידנא דעסיק בה בין בעידנא דלא עסיק בה אגוני מגנא אצולי לא מצלא,רבינא אמר לעולם זכות תורה ודקאמרת אינה מצווה ועושה נהי דפקודי לא מפקדא באגרא דמקרין ומתניין בנייהו ונטרן להו לגברייהו עד דאתו מבי מדרשא מי לא פלגאן בהדייהו,מאי פרשת דרכים א"ר חסדא זה ת"ח ויום מיתה רב נחמן בר יצחק אמר זה ת"ח ויראת חטא מר זוטרא אמר זה ת"ח דסלקא ליה שמעתתא אליבא דהלכתא,ד"א עבירה מכבה מצוה ואין עבירה מכבה תורה א"ר יוסף דרשיה רבי מנחם בר יוסי להאי קרא כי סיני ואילמלא דרשוה דואג ואחיתופל הכי לא רדפו בתר דוד דכתיב (תהלים עא, יא) לאמר אלהים עזבו וגו',מאי דרוש (דברים כג, טו) ולא יראה בך ערות דבר וגו' והן אינן יודעין שעבירה מכבה מצוה ואין עבירה מכבה תורה,מאי (שיר השירים ח, ז) בוז יבוזו לו אמר עולא לא כשמעון אחי עזריה ולא כר' יוחנן דבי נשיאה,אלא כהלל ושבנא דכי אתא רב דימי אמר הלל ושבנא אחי הוו הלל עסק בתורה שבנא עבד עיסקא לסוף א"ל תא נערוב וליפלוג יצתה בת קול ואמרה (שיר השירים ח, ז) אם יתן איש את כל הון ביתו וגו' | 21a. b and then there shall be an extension to your tranquility” /b (Daniel 4:24). b And it is written: “All this came upon King Nebuchadnezzar” /b (Daniel 4:25), b and it is written /b in the following verse that this occurred: b “At the end of twelve months” /b (Daniel 4:26). None of the opinions in the i baraita /i are in accordance with the mishna’s statement that merit can delay punishment for up to three years.,The Gemara answers: b Actually, /b the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Yishmael, /b who states that merit delays punishment for one year, b and he found a verse which states and repeats /b the possibility that punishment can be delayed, indicating that merit can delay punishment up to three times, b as it is written: “Thus says the Lord: For three transgressions of Edom, /b yes, but for four, I will not reverse it” (Amos 1:11). Punishment can therefore be delayed for three consecutive periods of one year.,The Gemara asks: b And what /b does Rabbi Yishmael mean by stating: b Although there is no /b explicit b proof for the concept /b of merit delaying punishment for twelve months, there is b an allusion to the concept? /b The verses he cites state explicitly that punishment can be delayed for twelve months. The Gemara answers: The proof is not explicit, as b perhaps gentiles are different, as /b swift b judgment is not administered upon them /b as readily as it is upon the Jewish people, with whom God is more precise in executing judgment.,§ The mishna states: b And there is a merit /b that b delays /b punishment for b three years. /b The Gemara asks: b Which merit /b can delay the punishment of a i sota /i ? b If we say /b it is the b merit of /b the b Torah /b that she has studied; b but /b a woman who studies Torah b is /b one who is b not commanded /b to do so b and performs /b a mitzva, whose reward is less than that of one who is obligated? Therefore, it would be insufficient to suspend her punishment. b Rather, /b perhaps it is the b merit of a mitzva /b that she performed.,The Gemara asks: b Does /b the b merit of a mitzva protect /b one b so much /b as to delay her punishment? b But isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Rabbi Menaḥem bar Yosei interpreted this /b verse b homiletically: “For the mitzva is a lamp and the Torah is light” /b (Proverbs 6:23). b The verse associates the mitzva with a lamp and the Torah with /b the b light /b of the sun. b The mitzva /b is associated b with a lamp /b in order b to say to you: Just as a lamp does not protect /b one by its light extensively but b only temporarily, /b while the lamp is in one’s hand, b so too, a mitzva protects /b one b only temporarily, /b i.e., while one is performing the mitzva., b And the Torah /b is associated b with light /b in order b to say to you: Just as /b the b light /b of the sun b protects /b one b forever, so too, /b the b Torah /b one studies b protects /b one b forever; and it states /b in the previous verse with regard to the Torah: b “When you walk, it shall lead you; /b when you lie down, it shall watch over you; and when you awake, it shall talk with you” (Proverbs 6:22). The Gemara explains: b “When you walk, it shall lead you”; this is /b referring to when one is in b this world. “When you lie down, it shall watch over you”; this is /b referring to the time of b death, /b when one lies in his grave. b “And when you awake, it shall talk with you”; /b this is referring b to the time to come /b after the resurrection of the dead. The Torah that one studies protects and guides him both in this world and in the next world.,This can be illustrated by b a parable, /b as it is comparable b to a man who is walking in /b the b blackness of night and the darkness, and he is afraid of the thorns, and of the pits, and of the thistles, /b which he cannot see due to the darkness. b And /b he is also afraid b of /b the b wild animals and of the bandits /b that lurk at night, b and he does not know which way he is walking. /b ,If b a torch of fire comes his way, /b which is analogous to a mitzva, b he is safe from the thorns and from the pits and from the thistles, but he is still afraid of /b the b wild animals and of the bandits, and /b still b does not know which way he is walking. Once the light of dawn rises, /b which is analogous to Torah study, b he is safe from /b the b wild animals and from the bandits, /b which no longer roam the roads, b but he still does not know which way he is walking. /b If b he arrives at a crossroads /b and recognizes the way, b he is saved from all of them. /b , b Alternatively, /b the verse associates the mitzva with a lamp and the Torah with the light of the sun in order to teach that b a transgression extinguishes /b the merit of b a mitzva /b one performed, b but a transgression does not extinguish /b the merit of the b Torah /b one studied, b as it is stated: “Many waters cannot extinguish the love, /b neither can the floods drown it” (Song of Songs 8:7). The Torah is compared to love several times in the Song of Songs. One can conclude from the i baraita /i that the merit of performing a mitzva is insufficient to suspend punishment., b Rav Yosef said /b that with regard to b a mitzva, at the time when one is engaged in its /b performance it b protects /b one from misfortune b and saves /b one from the evil inclination; b at the time when one is not engaged in its /b performance, it b protects /b one from misfortune but it b does not save /b one from the evil inclination. With regard to b Torah /b study, b both at the time when one is engaged in it and at the time when one is not engaged in it, /b it b protects /b one from misfortune b and saves /b one from the evil inclination. Therefore, the merit of the woman’s mitzvot does protect her from misfortune and delay her punishment., b Rabba objects to this /b explanation: b If that is so, /b then with regard to b Doeg /b (see I Samuel, chapters 21–22) b and Ahithophel /b (see II Samuel, chapter 16), who were both wise scholars despite their wickedness, b did they not engage in the /b study of b Torah? Why did /b it b not protect them /b from sinning? b Rather, Rava said: /b With regard to b Torah /b study, b at the time when one is engaged in it, it protects and saves; at the time when one is not engaged in it, it protects /b one from misfortune but b it does not save /b one from the evil inclination. With regard to b a mitzva, both at the time when one is engaged in its /b performance b and at the time when one is not engaged in its /b performance, b it protects /b one from misfortune but it b does not save /b one from the evil inclination., b Ravina said: Actually, /b the merit that delays the punishment of the i sota /i is the b merit of Torah /b study, b and /b with regard to that b which you say, /b i.e., that b she is not commanded /b to do so b and performs /b a mitzva, the mishna is not referring to the merit of her own Torah study. b Granted, she is not commanded /b to study Torah herself; however, b in reward for causing their sons to read /b the Written Torah b and to learn /b the Mishna, b and /b for b waiting for their husbands until they come /b home b from the study hall, don’t they share /b the reward b with their /b sons and husbands? Therefore, if the i sota /i enabled her sons and husband to study Torah, the merit of their Torah study can protect her and delay her punishment.,With regard to the aforementioned parable, the Gemara asks: b What /b is the meaning of the b crossroads, /b which provide clarity? b Rav Ḥisda says: This /b is referring to b a Torah scholar and /b his b day of death. /b Due to his continued commitment to the Torah, when the time comes for him to die, it is clear to him that he will go to the place of his eternal reward. b Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak says: This is a Torah scholar /b who has also acquired b fear of sin, /b as his fear of sin guides him to the correct understanding of the Torah. b Mar Zutra says: This is a Torah scholar who reaches /b conclusions from b his discussion in accordance with the i halakha /i , /b as that is an indication that he is following the right path.,The i baraita /i states: b Alternatively: A transgression extinguishes /b the merit of b a mitzva, but a transgression does not extinguish /b the merit of the b Torah. Rav Yosef says: Rabbi Menaḥem bar Yosei interpreted this verse as /b it was given on Mount b Sinai, and had Doeg and Ahithophel only interpreted it in this way they would not have pursued David, as it is written: /b “For my enemies speak concerning b me…saying, God has forsaken him; /b pursue and take him, for there is none to deliver” (Psalms 71:10–11). Doeg and Ahithophel incorrectly thought that since David had sinned, his sins had extinguished his merits and God had forsaken him.,The Gemara asks: b What /b verse b did /b Doeg and Ahithophel b interpret /b incorrectly, causing them to err? They interpreted this verse: “For the Lord your God walks in the midst of your camp…to give up your enemies before you… b that He see no licentious matter in you, /b and turn away from you” (Deuteronomy 23:15), to indicate that God turns away from one who engaged in forbidden relations, and since David had sinned with Bathsheba God must have turned away from him. b But they did not know that a transgression extinguishes /b the merit of b a mitzva, but a transgression does not extinguish /b the merit of the b Torah. /b ,The Gemara interprets the continuation of the verse cited by the i baraita /i with regard to Torah study: b What /b is the meaning of: “Many waters cannot extinguish the love…if a man would give all the fortune of his house for love, b he would utterly be condemned” /b (Song of Songs 8:7)? The Torah is compared to love several times in the Song of Songs. Therefore, the verse indicates that one cannot acquire a share in the reward for Torah study with money. b Ulla says: /b The verse is b not /b speaking of individuals b like Shimon, brother of Azarya, /b whose brother Azarya supported him and enabled him to study Torah. b And /b it is b not /b speaking of individuals b like Rabbi Yoḥa of the house of the i Nasi /i , /b whom the i Nasi /i supported so that he could study Torah., b Rather, /b it is speaking of individuals b like Hillel and Shevna, as when Rav Dimi came /b to Babylonia b he said: Hillel and Shevna were brothers; Hillel engaged in Torah /b study and remained impoverished, whereas b Shevna entered into a /b business b venture /b and became wealthy. b In the end, /b Shevna b said to /b Hillel: b Come, let us join /b our wealth b together and divide /b it between us; I will give you half of my money and you will give me half of the reward for your Torah study. In response to this request b a Divine Voice issued forth and said: “If a man would give all the fortune of his house /b for love, he would utterly be condemned” (Song of Songs 8:7). |
|
45. Babylonian Talmud, Taanit, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira gaon of pumbeditha Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 289| 16a. למתבייש מאחרים והיכא מנח להו אמר רבי יצחק במקום תפילין שנאמר (ישעיהו סא, ג) לשום לאבילי ציון לתת להם פאר תחת אפר:,רחוב תיבה ושקים אפר אפר קבורה ומוריה סימן: למה יוצאין לרחוב ר' חייא בר אבא אמר לומר זעקנו בצנעא ולא נענינו נבזה עצמנו בפרהסיא,ריש לקיש אמר גלינו גלותינו מכפרת עלינו מאי בינייהו איכא בינייהו דגלי מבי כנישתא לבי כנישתא,ולמה מוציאין את התיבה לרחובה של עיר אמר ר' יהושע בן לוי לומר כלי צנוע היה לנו ונתבזה בעוונינו,ולמה מתכסין בשקים אמר ר' חייא בר אבא לומר הרי אנו חשובין כבהמה ולמה נותנין אפר מקלה על גבי תיבה אמר רבי יהודה בן פזי כלומר (תהלים צא, טו) עמו אנכי בצרה ריש לקיש אמר (ישעיהו סג, ט) בכל צרתם לו צר אמר ר' זירא מריש כי הוה חזינא להו לרבנן דיהבי אפר מקלה על גבי תיבה מזדעזע לי כוליה גופאי,ולמה נותנין אפר בראש כל אחד ואחד פליגי בה ר' לוי בר חמא ור' חנינא חד אמר הרי אנו חשובין לפניך כאפר וחד אמר כדי שיזכור לנו אפרו של יצחק מאי בינייהו איכא בינייהו עפר סתם,למה יוצאין לבית הקברות פליגי בה ר' לוי בר חמא ור' חנינא חד אמר הרי אנו חשובין לפניך כמתים וחד אמר כדי שיבקשו עלינו מתים רחמים מאי בינייהו איכא בינייהו קברי עכו"ם,מאי (דברי הימים ב ג, א) הר המוריה פליגי בה ר' לוי בר חמא ור' חנינא חד אמר הר שיצא ממנו הוראה לישראל וחד אמר הר שיצא ממנו מורא לעובדי כוכבים:,הזקן שבהן אומר לפניהן דברי כבושין: ת"ר אם יש זקן אומר זקן ואם לאו אומר חכם ואם לאו אומר אדם של צורה אטו זקן דקאמרי אף על גב דלאו חכם הוא אמר אביי הכי קאמר אם יש זקן והוא חכם אומר זקן והוא חכם ואם לאו אומר חכם ואם לאו אומר אדם של צורה,אחינו לא שק ותענית גורמים אלא תשובה ומעשים טובים גורמים שכן מצינו באנשי נינוה שלא נאמר בהם וירא האלהים את שקם ואת תעניתם אלא (יונה ג, י) וירא האלהים את מעשיהם כי שבו מדרכם הרעה,(יונה ג, ח) ויתכסו שקים האדם והבהמה מאי הוו עבדי אסרא הבהמות לחוד ואת הוולדות לחוד אמרו לפניו רבונו של עולם אם אין אתה מרחם עלינו אין אנו מרחמים על אלו,(יונה ג, ח) ויקראו אל אלהים בחזקה מאי אמור אמרו לפניו רבונו של עולם עלוב ושאינו עלוב צדיק ורשע מי נדחה מפני מי,(יונה ג, ח) וישובו איש מדרכו הרעה ומן החמס אשר בכפיהם מאי ומן החמס אשר בכפיהם אמר שמואל אפילו גזל מריש ובנאו בבירה מקעקע כל הבירה כולה ומחזיר מריש לבעליו,אמר רב אדא בר אהבה אדם שיש בידו עבירה ומתודה ואינו חוזר בה למה הוא דומה לאדם שתופס שרץ בידו שאפי' טובל בכל מימות שבעולם לא עלתה לו טבילה זרקו מידו כיון שטבל בארבעים סאה מיד עלתה לו טבילה,שנאמר (משלי כח, יג) ומודה ועוזב ירוחם ואומר (איכה ג, מא) נשא לבבינו אל כפים אל אל בשמים:,עמדו בתפלה מורידין לפני התיבה זקן כו': תנו רבנן עמדו בתפלה אע"פ שיש שם זקן וחכם אין מורידין לפני התיבה אלא אדם הרגיל (איזהו רגיל) ר' יהודה אומר מטופל ואין לו ויש לו יגיעה בשדה וביתו ריקם,ופרקו נאה ושפל ברך ומרוצה לעם ויש לו נעימה וקולו ערב ובקי לקרות בתורה ובנביאים ובכתובים ולשנות במדרש בהלכות ובאגדות ובקי בכל הברכות כולן ויהבו ביה רבנן עינייהו בר' יצחק בר אמי | 16a. b one who is humiliated by others. /b Accordingly, ashes are placed on the heads of the leaders of the community by others, to increase the appearance of their suffering. The Gemara asks: b And where /b exactly b are /b the ashes b placed /b upon their heads? b Rabbi Yitzḥak said: On the place /b of the b phylacteries /b of the head, b as it is stated: “To appoint to those who mourn in Zion, to give to them an ornament [ i pe’er /i ] instead of ashes” /b (Isaiah 61:3). This verse likens the placement of ashes on one’s head to an ornament, and the term i pe’er /i is traditionally interpreted as a reference to phylacteries.,§ The Gemara provides b a mnemonic /b device for the forthcoming statements. b Square; ark; and sackcloth; ashes; ashes; cemetery; and Moriah. /b The Gemara asks: b Why do they go out to the square? Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said: /b This is a symbolic action, as though b to say: We cried out in private /b inside the synagogue b and we were not answered. We will /b therefore b disgrace ourselves in public, /b so that our prayers will be heard., b Reish Lakish said /b that the move into the square symbolizes exile, as though they are saying: b We have been exiled; may our exile atone for us. /b The Gemara asks: b What is /b the practical difference b between /b these two explanations? The Gemara answers that the practical difference between b them /b is in a case b where they are exiled, /b i.e., they move, b from /b one b synagogue to /b another b synagogue. /b According to the opinion of Reish Lakish, they have exiled themselves, and therefore this ceremony is adequate. Conversely, Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba maintains that as the ritual is performed in private, it is insufficient.,The Gemara asks another question concerning the meaning of the ritual. b And why do they remove the ark to the city square? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: /b This is done as though b to say: We had a modest vessel, /b which was always kept concealed, b but it has been /b publicly b exposed due to our transgressions. /b ,The Gemara further asks: b And why do they cover themselves in sackcloth? Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said: /b This is as though b to say: We are considered /b before You b like animals, /b which are likewise covered with hide. b And why do they place burnt ashes on top of the ark? Rabbi Yehuda ben Pazi said: /b This is b as though to say /b in God’s name: b “I will be with him in trouble” /b (Psalms 91:15). b Reish Lakish said /b that the same idea can be derived from a different verse: b “In all their affliction, He was afflicted” /b (Isaiah 63:9). By placing burnt ash on the ark, which is the symbol of the Divine Presence, it is as though God Himself joins the Jews in their pain. b Rabbi Zeira said: At first, when I saw the Sages place burnt ashes upon the ark, my entire body trembled /b from the intensity of the event., b And why do they place ashes upon the head of each and every /b individual? b Rabbi Levi bar Ḥama and Rabbi Ḥanina disagree with regard to this /b matter. b One said /b that this is as though to say: b We are considered like ashes before You. And one said /b that these ashes are placed b in order to remind /b God of b the ashes of /b our forefather b Isaac, on our behalf. /b The Gemara asks: b What is /b the practical difference b between /b these two explanations? The Gemara answers that the practical difference b between them /b is in a case where one placed b ordinary earth /b upon the heads of the individuals instead of ashes. Although earth does symbolize self-nullification and may be used according to the first explanation, it has no connection to the sacrifice of Isaac, and therefore it does not satisfy the second explanation.,The Gemara further asks: b And why do they go out to the cemetery /b on a fast day? Again, b Rabbi Levi bar Ḥama and Rabbi Ḥanina disagree with regard to this /b matter. b One said /b this is as though to say: b We are like the dead before You. And one said /b that one goes out to the cemetery b in order that /b the deceased will b request mercy on our behalf. /b The Gemara asks: b What is /b the practical difference b between them? /b The Gemara answers that the practical difference b between them /b concerns b graves of gentiles. /b If the purpose of going to graves is to say that they stand before God like the dead, graves of gentiles would suffice. However, if they go to the cemetery for the deceased to ask for mercy on their behalf, they should visit specifically Jewish graves.,§ Apropos disputes between Rabbi Levi bar Ḥama and Rabbi Ḥanina, the Gemara mentions another dispute between them. b What /b is the meaning of the name b Mount [ i Har /i ] Moriah, /b the Temple Mount? b Rabbi Levi bar Ḥama and Rabbi Ḥanina disagree /b with regard to b this /b matter. b One said /b that the name alludes to the Great Sanhedrin that convened there, as it is the b mountain from which instruction [ i hora’a /i ] went out to the Jewish people. And one said /b that it is the b mountain from which fear [ i mora /i ] went out to the nations of the world, /b as this place signifies God’s choice of the Jewish people.,§ The mishna taught: b The eldest of /b the community b says to them statements of reproof. The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b If there is an elder, /b then b the elder says /b the admonition, b and if not, a Sage says /b the admonition. b And if not, a person of /b imposing b appearance says /b it. The Gemara asks: b Is that to say /b that the b elder /b of whom b we spoke /b is preferred to a scholar simply by virtue of his age, b even though he is not a scholar? Abaye said /b that b this is what /b the mishna b is saying: If there is an elder, and he is /b also b a scholar, /b this b elder scholar says /b the admonition. b And if not, /b even a young b scholar says /b the reproof. b And if /b there is b no /b scholar of any kind available, b a person of /b imposing b appearance says /b it.,What does he say? b Our brothers, /b it is b not sackcloth and fasting /b that b cause /b atonement for our sins. b Rather, repentance and good deeds /b will b cause /b our atonement. This is b as we find with regard to the people of Nineveh, that it is not stated about them: And God saw their sackcloth and their fasting. Rather, /b the verse states: b “And God saw their deeds, that they had turned from their evil way” /b (Jonah 3:10).,§ Apropos the repentance of the inhabitants of Nineveh, the Gemara discusses their behavior further. The verse states: b “But let them be covered with sackcloth, both man and beast” /b (Jonah 3:8). b What did they do? They confined the /b female b animals alone, and /b their b young alone, /b in a different place. b They /b then b said before /b God: b Master of the Universe, if You do not have mercy on us, we will not have mercy on these /b animals. Even if we are not worthy of Your mercy, these animals have not sinned.,It is further stated with regard to the people of Nineveh: b “And let them cry mightily to God” /b (Jonah 3:8). The Gemara asks: b What did they say /b that could be described as calling out “mightily”? The Gemara explains that b they said before /b God: b Master of the Universe, /b if there is a dispute between b a submissive one and an intractable one, /b or between b a righteous one and a wicked one, who must yield before whom? /b Certainly the righteous forgives the wicked. Likewise, You must have mercy on us.,The verse states: b “And let them turn, every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands” /b (Jonah 3:8). b What is /b the meaning of the phrase b “and from the violence that is in their hands”? Shmuel said /b that the king of Nineveh proclaimed: b Even /b if b one stole a beam and built it into /b his b building, /b he must b tear down the entire building and return the beam to its owner. /b Although the Sages decreed that one need only pay ficial compensation in a case of this kind, these people wanted to repent completely by removing any remt of stolen property from their possession.,§ Similarly, b Rav Adda bar Ahava said: A person who has a transgression in his hand, and he confesses but does not repent for /b his sin, b to what is he comparable? To a person who holds in his hand /b a dead b creeping animal, /b which renders one ritually impure by contact. b As /b in this situation, b even if he immerses in all the waters of the world, his immersion is ineffective for him, /b as long as the source of ritual impurity remains in his hand. However, if he has b thrown /b the animal b from his hand, once he has immersed in /b a ritual bath of b forty i se’a /i , the immersion is immediately effective for him. /b , b As it is stated: /b “He who covers his transgressions shall not prosper, b but whoever confesses and forsakes them shall obtain mercy” /b (Proverbs 28:13). That is, confession alone is futile, but one who also abandons his transgressions will receive mercy. b And it states /b elsewhere: b “Let us lift up our heart with our hands to God in Heaven” /b (Lamentations 3:41), which likewise indicates that it is not enough to lift one’s hands in prayer; rather, one must also raise his heart and return to God.,§ The mishna teaches: b They stood for prayer, /b and the congregation appoints b an elder. The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b They stood for prayer, /b and b even if there is /b a man b there who is elderly and a scholar, they /b appoint b to descend before the ark /b as prayer leader b only a person who is accustomed /b to lead in prayer. Who is considered an accustomed prayer leader in this sense? b Rabbi Yehuda says: /b One who has ficially b dependent /b children b but he does not have /b the means to support them, b and he has /b no choice but to b toil in the field, and whose house is empty, /b and who will therefore pray for rain with great devotion.,Rabbi Yehuda continues with his depiction of the worthy prayer leader. b And his youth was becoming, and /b he is b humble and accepted by the people, /b as he is likable. b And /b furthermore, he must be b familiar with songs and his voice pleasant, and /b he is b expert in reading the Torah, the Prophets, and the Writings, and /b he knows how b to study midrash, i halakha /i , and i aggada /i . And /b finally, he must be b expert in all of the blessings. /b Clearly, it is hard to find someone with all these qualities. b And /b the Gemara relates that when this worthy person was described, those b Sages /b present b turned their eyes toward Rav Yitzḥak bar Ami, /b who possessed all of these virtues. |
|
46. Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 332| 54b. כאיש המעורה בלוייה שלו אמר ריש לקיש בשעה שנכנסו נכרים להיכל ראו כרובים המעורין זה בזה הוציאון לשוק ואמרו ישראל הללו שברכתן ברכה וקללתן קללה יעסקו בדברים הללו מיד הזילום שנאמר (איכה א, ח) כל מכבדיה הזילוה כי ראו ערותה,ושתיה היתה נקראת תנא שממנה הושתת העולם תנן כמאן דאמר מציון נברא העולם דתניא רבי אליעזר אומר עולם מאמצעיתו נברא שנאמר (איוב לח, לח) בצקת עפר למוצק ורגבים ידובקו,רבי יהושע אומר עולם מן הצדדין נברא שנאמר (איוב לז, ו) כי לשלג יאמר הוי ארץ וגשם מטר וגשם מטרות עוזו רבי יצחק (נפחא) אמר אבן ירה הקב"ה בים ממנו נשתת העולם שנאמר (איוב לח, ו) על מה אדניה הטבעו או מי ירה אבן פנתה,וחכמים אומרים מציון נברא שנאמר (תהלים נ, א) מזמור לאסף אל אלהים ה' ואומר מציון מכלל יופי ממנו מוכלל יפיו של עולם,תניא ר' אליעזר הגדול אומר (בראשית ב, ד) אלה תולדות השמים והארץ בהבראם ביום עשות ה' אלהים ארץ ושמים תולדות שמים משמים נבראו תולדות הארץ מארץ נבראו,וחכמים אומרים אלו ואלו מציון נבראו שנאמר מזמור לאסף אל אלהים ה' דבר ויקרא ארץ ממזרח שמש עד מבואו ואומר מציון מכלל יופי אלהים הופיע ממנו מוכלל יופיו של עולם,נטל את הדם ממי שממרס בו וכו' מאי כמצליף מחוי רב יהודה | 54b. It means b like a man /b joined and b clinging to his i livaya /i , /b his partner, i.e., his wife. In other words, the cherubs appeared to be embracing one another. b Reish Lakish said: When gentiles /b destroyed the Second Temple and b entered the Sanctuary, they saw /b these drawings of b cherubs clinging to one another. /b They peeled them from the wall, b took them out to the market, and said: These Jews, whose blessing is a blessing and whose curse is a curse, /b due to their great fear of God, should b they be occupied with such matters, /b making images of this kind? b They immediately debased /b and destroyed b them, as it is stated: “All who honored her debase her because they have seen her nakedness” /b (Lamentations 1:8).,§ The mishna taught that a stone sat in the Holy of Holies b and it was called /b the b foundation [ i shetiyya /i ] /b rock. A Sage b taught /b in the i Tosefta /i : Why was it called i shetiyya /i ? It is b because the world was created [ i hushtat /i ] from it. /b The Gemara comments: b We learned /b the mishna b in accordance with /b the opinion of b the one who said /b that b the world was created from Zion. As it was taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Eliezer says: The world was created from its center, as it is stated: “When the dust runs into a mass, and the clods cleave fast together” /b (Job 38:38). The world was created by adding matter to the center, like the formation of clumps of earth., b Rabbi Yehoshua says: /b The b world was created from the sides, as it is stated: “For He said to the snow: Become the earth, likewise to the shower of rain, and to the showers of His mighty rain” /b (Job 37:6). This verse indicates that the rains fell from all sides, which led to the creation of the earth. b Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa said: The Holy One, Blessed be He, cast a stone into the sea, from which the world was created, as it is stated: “Upon what were its foundations fastened; or who laid its cornerstone?” /b (Job 38:6)., b And the Rabbis say: /b The world b was created from Zion, as it is stated: “A Psalm of Asaph. God, the Lord God /b has spoken and called the earth, from the rising of the sun to its place of setting” (Psalms 50:1), b and it states: “Out of Zion, the perfection of beauty, /b God has shined forth” (Psalms 50:2). The mishna is taught in accordance with this last opinion., b It was taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Eliezer the Great says: “These are the generations of the heaven and the earth when they were created, on the day that the Lord God made earth and heaven” /b (Genesis 2:4) means that the b generations of the heavens, /b i.e., all things found in the heavens, b were created from the heavens, /b while the b generations of the earth were created from the earth. /b , b And the Rabbis say: Both these and those were created from Zion, as it is stated: “A Psalm of Asaph. God, the Lord God has spoken and called the earth, from the rising of the sun to its place of setting,” and it says: “Out of Zion, the perfection of beauty, God has shined forth,” /b i.e., b from /b Zion b the beauty of the world was perfected, /b which includes both the generations of the heavens and the generations of the earth.,§ The mishna taught that the High Priest b took the blood /b of the bull b from /b the one b who was stirring it /b so it would not coagulate, b and he entered /b and sprinkled it like one who whips. The Gemara asks: b What is /b the meaning of: b Like one who whips? Rav Yehuda demonstrated /b the action with his hand, |
|
47. Babylonian Talmud, Pesahim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 105| 70a. לאו חובה היא דאי סלקא דעתך חובה היא תיתי בשבת ותיתי במרובה ותיתי בטומאה,ובמועט מיהו מ"ט אתיא כדתניא חגיגה הבאה עם הפסח נאכלת תחילה כדי שיהא פסח נאכל על השבע:,ונאכלת לשני ימים וכו': מתני' דלא כבן תימא דתניא בן תימא אומר חגיגה הבאה עם הפסח הרי היא כפסח ואינה נאכלת אלא ליום ולילה וחגיגת חמשה עשר נאכלת לשני ימים ולילה אחד,וחגיגת ארבעה עשר יוצא בה משום שמחה ואין יוצא בה משום חגיגה,מ"ט דבן תימא כדמתני רב לחייא בריה (שמות לד, כה) ולא ילין לבקר זבח חג הפסח זבח חג זה חגיגה הפסח כמשמעו ואמר רחמנא לא ילין,איבעיא להו לבן תימא נאכלת צלי או אין נאכלת צלי כי אקשיה רחמנא לפסח ללינה אבל לצלי לא או דילמא לא שנא,ת"ש הלילה הזה כולו צלי ואמר רב חסדא זו דברי בן תימא שמע מינה,איבעיא להו לבן תימא באה מן הבקר או אינה באה מן הבקר באה מן הנקבות או אינה באה מן הנקבות באה בת שתי שנים או אינה באה בת שתי שנים,כי אקשיה רחמנא לפסח למידי דאכילה אבל לכל מילי לא או דילמא לא שנא,ת"ש חגיגה הבאה עם הפסח הרי היא כפסח באה מן הצאן ואינה באה מן הבקר באה מן הזכרים ואינה באה מן הנקבות באה בת שנתה ואינה באה בת שתי שנים ואינה נאכלת אלא ליום ולילה ואינה נאכלת אלא צלי ואינה נאכלת אלא למנויו,מאן שמעת ליה דאית ליה האי סברא בן תימא שמע מינה כולהו מילתא בעינן ש"מ,איבעיא להו לבן תימא יש בה משום שבירת עצם או אין בה משום שבירת העצם אע"ג דכי אקשיה רחמנא לפסח אמר קרא בו בו ולא בחגיגה או דילמא האי בו בכשר ולא בפסול הוא דאתא,ת"ש סכין שנמצאת בארבעה עשר שוחט בה מיד בשלשה עשר שונה ומטביל קופיץ בין בזה ובין בזה שונה ומטביל,מני אילימא רבנן מאי שנא סכין דמטביל דחזיא לפסח קופיץ נמי הא חזי לחגיגה,אלא לאו דבן תימא היא ושמע מינה יש בה משום שבירת העצם,לא לעולם רבנן וכגון שבא בשבת,והא מדקתני סיפא חל ארבעה עשר להיות בשבת שוחט בה מיד ובחמשה עשר שוחט בה מיד נמצאת קופיץ קשורה לסכין הרי היא כסכין מכלל דרישא לאו בשבת עסקינן,ואלא שבא | 70a. b is not an obligation, /b meaning there is no Torah obligation to bring this offering. b For if it should enter your mind /b to say that b it is an obligation, it should come /b even b on Shabbat, and it should come /b even when each member of the group will receive b a large /b portion of the Paschal lamb, b and it should come /b even b in /b a state of b ritual impurity. /b ,The Gemara asks: If there is no obligation to bring this offering, b what is the reason that it nevertheless comes /b when each person’s portion of the Paschal lamb is b small? /b The Gemara explains that the reason is b as it was taught /b in a i baraita /i : b The Festival peace-offering that comes with the Paschal lamb is eaten first; /b the reason for this is b so that the Paschal lamb will be eaten when /b one is already b satiated. /b The Paschal lamb should not be eaten in a needy manner, but rather in joy and when one is already filled to satisfaction.,The mishna taught that the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth b is eaten for two days /b and the intervening night. The Gemara notes that b the mishna is not in accordance with /b the opinion of b ben Teima, for it was taught /b in a i baraita /i that b ben Teima says: The Festival peace-offering that comes with the Paschal lamb /b on the fourteenth of Nisan b is like the Paschal lamb and is eaten for only a day and a night, /b whereas b the Festival peace-offering of the fifteenth, /b i.e., the Festival peace-offering brought on the first day of Passover, just as it is brought on the first day of each of the other Festivals, is treated like a regular peace-offering and b is eaten for two days and one, /b i.e., the intervening, b night. /b , b And /b if one consecrated an animal to be used as b a Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth, /b but it was not slaughtered on that day, on the next day b he can fulfill with it /b his obligation to bring a peace-offering of b rejoicing, /b as it is stated: “And you shall rejoice on your Festival,” but b he cannot fulfill with it /b his obligation to bring a b Festival peace-offering /b of the fifteenth.,The Gemara asks: b What is the reason /b and scriptural basis b for ben Teima’s /b opinion? The Gemara explains: b As Rav taught his son Ḥiyya /b based on the following verse: b “Neither shall the offering of the feast of the Passover be left to the morning” /b (Exodus 34:25). b “The offering of the feast,” this /b is referring to b the Festival peace-offering; “the Passover,” as per its plain meaning, /b i.e., this is referring to the Paschal lamb itself. b And /b with regard to both sacrifices, b the Merciful One states /b in the Torah: b “It shall not be left /b to the morning.” This proves that the Festival peace-offering may be eaten for only a day and a night., b A dilemma was raised before /b the Sages: b According to /b the opinion of b ben Teima, is /b the Festival peace-offering that is brought with the Paschal lamb b eaten roasted /b like the Paschal lamb itself b or is it not eaten roasted? /b The possible considerations are as follows: b When the Merciful One compares /b the Festival peace-offering b to the Paschal lamb /b in the Torah, was that only b with regard to leaving /b it b over /b until the morning, b but with regard to /b the mitzva of b roasting, no /b such comparison is made? b Or perhaps there is no difference; /b the comparison was complete, and the Festival peace-offering is roasted just like the Paschal lamb.,The Gemara suggests: b Come /b and b hear /b a solution from what was taught in a mishna: In the time of the Temple, one of the questions that the children would ask on the night of Passover was: How is this night different from all other nights? For on all other nights we eat meat that is roasted, stewed, or boiled, whereas b on this night it is all roasted. And Rav Ḥisda said: This is the statement of ben Teima, /b indicating that even the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth must be roasted. The Gemara concludes: b Learn from this /b that the Festival peace-offering must be roasted just like the Paschal lamb.,Another b dilemma was raised before /b the Sages: b According to /b the opinion of b ben Teima, does /b the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth b come from the herd or does it not come from the herd, /b like the Paschal offering, which must be brought from the flock? b Does it come /b even b from females or does it not come from females, /b just like the Paschal offering comes only from males? b Does it come /b even from b a two-year-old /b animal b or does it not come /b from b a two-year-old /b animal, but rather only from a one-year-old animal, like the Paschal offering itself?,The Gemara explains that this dilemma is based on a fundamental question similar to the one raised earlier: b When the Merciful One compares /b the Festival peace-offering b to the Paschal lamb /b in the Torah, was that only b with regard to matters /b pertaining to b eating /b and the time during which the Paschal lamb must be eaten, b but for everything /b else there is b no /b comparison? b Or perhaps there is no difference /b and the Torah compared these two offerings in every way., b Come /b and b hear /b an answer to these questions from what was taught in a i baraita /i : b The Festival peace-offering that comes with the Paschal offering /b on the fourteenth of Nisan b is like the Paschal offering /b in every respect. b It comes from the flock and does not come from the herd, it comes from males and does not come from females, it comes /b from an animal that is b a year old and does not come /b from an animal that is b two years old, and it is eaten for only a day and a night, and it is eaten only roasted, and it is eaten only by those who registered for it /b in advance.,The Gemara explains how this i baraita /i answers the questions raised above: b Who have you heard adopts this reasoning, /b comparing the Paschal offering and the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth? Surely it is b ben Teima. Learn from this /b that b we require everything, /b that the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth must parallel the Paschal offering in all its details. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, b learn from this /b that they are comparable in every way.,Yet another b dilemma was raised before /b the Sages: b According to /b the opinion of b ben Teima, is /b the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth b subject to /b the prohibition against b breaking a bone, /b as is the Paschal lamb, with regard to which the Torah explicitly states: “And you shall not break a bone in it” (Exodus 12:46), b or is it not subject to /b the prohibition against b breaking a bone? /b The possible considerations are as follows: Do we say that b even though the Merciful One compares /b the Festival peace-offering b to the Paschal lamb, the verse /b that teaches the prohibition against breaking a bone b says “in it,” /b and these words serve as a qualifying statement, indicating that the prohibition applies only b in it, /b the Paschal lamb, b and not in the Festival peace-offering /b that comes with it? b Or perhaps this /b term, b “in it,” /b teaches that the prohibition applies only b to a fit /b Paschal lamb b but not to a disqualified /b one.,The Gemara proposes: b Come /b and b hear /b a solution based on the following mishna: If b a /b slaughtering b knife was found on the fourteenth /b day of Nisan in Jerusalem, b one may slaughter with it immediately /b without concern that perhaps it is ritually impure, for presumably any knife that is valid for slaughtering had already been immersed on the previous day so that it could be used for slaughtering the Paschal lamb. But if it was found b on the thirteenth /b day of Nisan, b he must immerse /b it b again /b due to the possibility that it had not yet been immersed and purified.As for b a cleaver [ i kofitz /i ], /b a large knife that is used primarily for chopping bones, b whether /b it was found b on this /b day, the fourteenth, b or on the other /b day, the thirteenth, b he must immerse /b it b again. /b ,The Gemara clarifies: b Whose /b opinion is taught in this mishna? b If you say it is /b the opinion of b the Rabbis, /b who permit breaking the bones of the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth, b what is different /b about a slaughtering b knife /b found on the fourteenth b that /b we say its owner presumably b immersed /b it on the previous day? Is it b because it is fit for /b slaughtering b the Paschal lamb? /b If so, b a cleaver /b found on the fourteenth should b also /b not require immersion before being used, for presumably its owner already immersed it, as b it is fit for /b chopping the bones of b the Festival peace-offering. /b , b Rather, is it not /b the opinion of b ben Teima, and learn from this /b that even the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth b is subject to /b the prohibition against b breaking a bone, /b and therefore a cleaver must be immersed again even if it was found on the fourteenth. Since no bones may be broken on the fourteenth of Nisan, neither those of the Paschal lamb nor those of the Festival peace-offering, it is possible that the knife was not immersed in preparation for the Festival.,The Gemara rejects this proof: b No, actually /b one can explain that the mishna reflects the opinion of b the Rabbis, and /b it is referring to a case b where /b the time to slaughter the Paschal lamb b comes on Shabbat. /b In this circumstance, all agree that the Festival peace-offering of the fourteenth is not sacrificed. Since there is no need for a cleaver, there is no reason to assume that the knife had been immersed in preparation for the Festival.,The Gemara asks: b But from the fact that the latter clause /b of that same mishna b teaches /b that b if the fourteenth /b of Nisan b occurred on Shabbat he may slaughter with /b the knife b immediately, /b without immersing it, and similarly, if he found it b on the fifteenth, /b i.e., on the first day of the Festival, b he may slaughter with it immediately, /b as it was certainly immersed the day before, and b if a cleaver was found tied to /b a slaughtering b knife, /b then even if it was found on the fourteenth on a weekday, b it is like the /b slaughtering b knife, /b as they were certainly immersed together, it follows b by inference that /b in b the first clause /b of the mishna b we are not dealing with /b a case where the fourteenth of Nisan occurred on b Shabbat. /b , b Rather, /b this understanding must be rejected and instead we should say that the mishna is talking about a case where the Paschal lamb b came /b |
|
| 48. Epiphanius, Panarion, 1.459 (4th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira (ben hanina gaon), rav Found in books: Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 582 |
49. Babylonian Talmud, Arakhin, None (6th cent. CE - missingth cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •sherira gaon of pumbeditha Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 289| 6b. איני והא רבי ינאי יזיף ופרע שאני רבי ינאי דניחא להו לעניים דכמה דמשהי מעשי ומייתי להו,ת"ר ישראל שהתנדב מנורה או נר לבית הכנסת אסור לשנותה סבר רבי חייא בר אבא למימר לא שנא לדבר הרשות ולא שנא לדבר מצוה אמר ליה רב אמי הכי אמר רבי יוחנן לא שנו אלא לדבר הרשות אבל לדבר מצוה מותר לשנותה,מדאמר ר' אסי אמר ר' יוחנן בעובד כוכבים שהתנדב מנורה או נר לבית הכנסת עד שלא נשתקע שם בעליה אסור לשנותה משנשתקע שם בעליה מותר לשנותה,למאי אילימא לדבר הרשות מאי איריא עובד כוכבים אפילו ישראל נמי,אלא לדבר מצוה וטעמא דעובד כוכבים הוא דפעי אבל ישראל דלא פעי שפיר דמי,שעזרק טייעא אינדב שרגא לבי כנישתא דרב יהודה שנייה רחבא ואיקפד רבא איכא דאמרי שנייה רבא ואיקפד רחבא וא"ד שנייה חזני דפומבדיתא ואיקפד רחבא ואיקפד רבה,מאן דשנייה סבר דלא שכיח ומאן דאיקפד סבר זמנין דמקרי ואתי:, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big הגוסס והיוצא ליהרג לא נידר ולא נערך ר' חנינא בן עקביא אומר נערך מפני שדמיו קצובין רבי יוסי אומר דנודר ומעריך ומקדיש ואם הזיק חייב:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big בשלמא גוסס לא נידר דלאו בר דמים הוא ולא נערך דלאו בר העמדה והערכה הוא אלא יוצא ליהרג בשלמא לא נידר דלאו בר דמים הוא אלא לא נערך אמאי לא,דתניא מנין היוצא ליהרג ואמר ערכי עלי שלא אמר כלום ת"ל (ויקרא כז, כח) כל חרם לא יפדה יכול אפילו קודם שנגמר דינו תלמוד לומר (ויקרא כז, כט) מן האדם ולא כל האדם,ולרבי חנינא בן עקביא דאמר נערך מפני שדמיו קצובין האי כל חרם מאי עביד ליה,לכדתניא רבי ישמעאל בנו של רבי יוחנן בן ברוקה אומר לפי שמצינו למומתים בידי שמים שנותנין ממון ומתכפר להם שנאמר (שמות כא, ל) אם כופר יושת עליו יכול אף בידי אדם כן תלמוד לומר כל חרם לא יפדה,אין לי אלא מיתות חמורות שלא ניתנה שגגתן לכפרה מיתות קלות שניתנה שגגתן לכפרה מנין תלמוד לומר כל חרם:,רבי יוסי אומר נודר ומעריך כו': ותנא קמא מי קאמר דלא,אלא בנודר ומעריך ומקדיש כ"ע לא פליגי כי פליגי באם הזיק תנא קמא סבר אם הזיק אינו חייב בתשלומין ורבי יוסי סבר אם הזיק חייב בתשלומין,במאי קמיפלגי אמר רב יוסף במלוה על פה גובה מן היורשין קמיפלגי תנא קמא סבר מלוה על פה אינו גובה מן היורשין ורבי יוסי סבר המלוה על פה גובה מן היורשין,רבא אמר דכ"ע מלוה על פה אינו גובה מן היורשין והכא במלוה כתובה בתורה קמיפלגי תנא קמא סבר מלוה כתובה בתורה לאו ככתובה בשטר דמיא ורבי יוסי סבר ככתובה בשטר דמיא,ואיכא דמתני לה אהא היוצא ליהרג הוא שחבל באחרים חייב אחרים שחבלו בו פטורין רבי שמעון בן אלעזר אומר אף הוא אם חבל באחרים פטור שלא ניתן לחזרת עמידת בית דין | 6b. The Gemara asks: b Is that so? But Rabbi Yannai, /b who was a charity collector, b borrowed /b money belonging to charity b and repaid. /b The Gemara answers: The case of b Rabbi Yannai is different; /b it is b beneficial to the poor /b that he be allowed to borrow and repay, b as the longer he leaves /b the charity fund empty, the more he b impels /b people to give charity, b and /b he thereby b brings /b more money b to /b the poor., b The Sages taught /b a i baraita /i that deals with a similar matter: In the case of b a Jew who donated a candelabrum or a lamp to the synagogue, /b it is b prohibited to change it /b and use it for another purpose. b Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba thought to say /b that there b is no difference /b whether he wishes to change b for a voluntary matter or for a matter /b involving b a mitzva, /b as in both cases it is prohibited. b Rav Ami said to /b Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba: b This /b is what b Rabbi Yoḥa says: /b When the Sages taught the i baraita /i , they b taught only /b that it is prohibited when he changes it b for a voluntary matter, but /b it is b permitted to change it for a matter /b involving b a mitzva. /b ,This i halakha /i is derived b from /b the fact b that Rabbi Asi says /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa says: /b With regard to b a gentile who donated a candelabrum or a lamp to the synagogue, if /b it is b before its owner’s name /b has been b forgotten, /b i.e., people still remember that he donated the item, it is b prohibited to change it /b and use it for another purpose. b Once its owner’s name /b has been b forgotten, /b it is b permitted to change it. /b ,The Gemara clarifies: b With regard to what /b purpose is it stated that one may not change it before the owner’s name was forgotten? b If we say /b that it is prohibited to change it b for a voluntary matter, why /b does the i baraita /i b specifically /b mention b a gentile? /b It is prohibited to change it in this manner b even /b if it was donated by b a Jew. /b , b Rather, /b the i baraita /i must be dealing with a change b for a matter /b involving b a mitzva, /b and therefore it is prohibited only if the donor is a gentile and his name has not yet been forgotten. b And the reason /b for this i halakha /i is b that it is /b specifically b a gentile who /b would protest and b scream: /b Where is the candelabrum that I donated? b But /b in the case of b a Jew, who /b would b not /b protest and b scream /b if they used his donation for a different mitzva, one may b well /b change it.,The Gemara relates that b Sha’azrak, an Arab [ i tayya’a /i ] /b merchant, b donated a candelabrum to Rav Yehuda’s synagogue. Raḥava changed its /b purpose before Sha’azrak’s name was forgotten as the donor, and b Rava became angry /b at Raḥava for not waiting. b Some say /b the opposite: b Rava changed its /b purpose, and b Raḥava became angry /b at Rava. b And some say /b that the b attendants of Pumbedita, /b the charity collectors, b changed /b its purpose, and b Raḥava became angry /b at them, b and Rabba became angry /b at them as well.,The Gemara explains: The b one who changed /b its purpose b holds that /b it was permitted to change it, b as /b it was b not common /b for Sha’azrak to be in the city and it was unlikely that he would protest the change. b And /b the b one who became angry holds /b that even so, they should not have changed it, as b sometimes he happens to come /b there., strong MISHNA: /strong b One who is moribund and one who is taken to be executed /b after being sentenced by the court b is neither /b the object of b a vow nor valuated. Rabbi Ḥanina ben Akavya says: /b He is not the object of a vow, because he has no market value; but b he is valuated, due to /b the fact b that one’s value is fixed /b by the Torah based on age and sex. b Rabbi Yosei says: /b One with that status b vows /b to donate the assessment of another person to the Temple treasury, b and takes /b vows of b valuation, and consecrates /b his property; b and if he damages /b the property of others, he is b liable /b to pay compensation., strong GEMARA: /strong The Gemara asks: b Granted, /b it makes sense that b one who is moribund is not /b the object of b a vow, as he has no monetary /b value. b And /b it also stands to reason that he b is not valuated, /b as b he is not subject to setting, /b i.e., standing, b and /b therefore is not subject to b valuation. /b The verse states: “Then he shall be set before the priest, and the priest shall value him” (Leviticus 27:8). This teaches that anyone who cannot stand, such as one who is dying, is not included in the i halakha /i of valuation. b But /b with regard to b one who is taken to be executed, granted, /b he b is not /b the object of b a vow, as he has no monetary /b value, since no one would purchase him. b But /b with regard to the mishna’s statement that he is b not valuated, why not? /b ,The Gemara answers that the reason is b as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b From where /b is it derived that in the case of b one who /b is being b taken to be executed and /b who b said: My valuation is upon me /b to donate to the Temple, b that he did not say anything, /b and the valuation is not collected from his estate? b The verse states: “Anything dedicated [ i ḥerem /i ], /b that may be dedicated of men, b shall not be redeemed” /b (Leviticus 27:29). This teaches that with regard to one who is worthy of excommunication [ i ḥerem /i ], i.e., condemned to death, one cannot redeem him, i.e., pay his valuation. One b might /b have thought that this applies b even before his verdict is issued, /b i.e., that this i halakha /i applies even if one issued this statement before being sentenced to death. Therefore, b the verse states: “of men,” and not all men, /b i.e., only some men destined to be executed have no valuation, and not all of them.,The Gemara asks: b And with regard to Rabbi Ḥanina ben Akavya, who says /b in the mishna that even a person taken to be executed b is valuated, due to /b the fact b that one’s value is fixed, what does he do /b with the phrase b “anything dedicated”? /b ,The Gemara answers that he requires it b for that which is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥa ben Beroka, says: Since we found with regard to those executed at the hand of Heaven that they give money and their /b sins b are atoned, as it is stated /b in the case of the owner of a forewarned ox that killed a person: “The ox shall be stoned, and its owner shall also be put to death. b If there be laid upon him a ransom, /b then he shall give for the redemption of his life whatsoever is laid upon him” (Exodus 21:29–30), one b might /b have thought that b even /b with regard to those liable to receive the death penalty b at the hands of man /b it is b so, /b that one can pay in lieu of execution. Therefore, b the verse states: “Anything dedicated /b that may be dedicated of men, b shall not be redeemed” /b (Leviticus 27:29)., b I have /b derived b only /b that one cannot give payment in lieu of execution with regard to b severe /b prohibitions punishable by the b death /b penalty, e.g., blasphemy or cursing one’s father, b for which no atonement is designated /b in the Torah b for their unwitting /b violation. b From where /b is it derived that the same applies to b less severe /b prohibitions punishable by the b death /b penalty, e.g., violating Shabbat or killing, b for which atonement /b of an offering or exile b is designated /b in the Torah b for their unwitting /b violation? b The verse states: “Anything dedicated,” /b to include all prohibitions punishable by court-administered execution.,§ The mishna teaches, with regard to one who is taken to be executed, that b Rabbi Yosei says: /b Such a person b vows /b to donate the assessment of another person to the Temple treasury, b and takes /b vows of b valuation, /b and consecrates his property; and if he damages the property of others, he is liable to pay compensation. The Gemara asks: b And does the first i tanna /i say /b that such a person does b not /b vow to donate the assessment of another person to the Temple treasury and take vows of valuation, such that Rabbi Yosei could be understood as disputing his opinion? The first i tanna /i merely said that such an individual is not subject to vows and valuations. What is the difference between their opinions?, b Rather, with regard to /b whether or not one who is taken to be executed can b vow /b to donate the assessment of another person to the Temple treasury, b and take /b vows of b valuation, and consecrate /b his property, b everyone, /b including the first i tanna /i , b agrees /b that he can. b When they disagree, /b it is b in /b a case b where /b he b causes damage. The first i tanna /i holds /b that b if /b he b causes damage /b he is b not liable for payment, and Rabbi Yosei holds /b that b if /b he b causes damage /b he is b liable to pay /b compensation.,The Gemara asks: b With regard to what /b principle b do /b these i tanna’im /i b disagree, /b as it is an accepted principle that one who causes damage must pay? b Rav Yosef said: /b They b disagree /b as to whether the payment can be collected from his estate. This depends on the question of whether or not one who is owed money from b a loan by oral /b agreement, i.e., a loan given without a document that places a lien on the land, can b collect from the heirs. The first i tanna /i holds /b that one who is owed money from b a loan by oral /b agreement b cannot collect from the heirs, and Rabbi Yosei holds /b that one who is owed money from b a loan by oral /b agreement can b collect from the heirs. /b , b Rava says: /b In fact, b everyone /b agrees that one who is owed money from b a loan by oral /b agreement b cannot collect from the heirs; and here /b the i tanna’im /i b disagree with regard to /b the status of b a loan that is written in the Torah, /b i.e., a ficial obligation decreed by Torah law, such as paying damages. b The first i tanna /i holds /b that b a loan that is written in the Torah is not /b considered b as though it is written in a document, /b and may not be collected from the heirs. b Rabbi Yosei holds /b that such a loan b is /b considered b as though it is written in a document, /b and therefore it may be collected from the heirs., b And there are those who teach /b the dispute between Rava and Rav Yosef b with regard to this /b i baraita /i : In the case of b one who is taken to be executed /b after being sentenced by the court, if b he injured another /b he is b liable /b for payment. But if b others injured him /b they are b exempt, /b as they would be if they injured a dead person. b Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: Even if /b it was b he /b who b injured others, /b he is b exempt, as /b he b cannot be brought back to stand /b before b the court /b for judgment, since he must be executed without delay. |
|
| 51. Anon., Tanhuma, None Tagged with subjects: •hai gaon b sherira Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 332 |
| 52. Anon., Tanchuma (Buber), None Tagged with subjects: •hai gaon b sherira Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 332 |
| 53. Anon., Shemoneh Esreh, 0 Tagged with subjects: •sherira (ben hanina gaon), rav Found in books: Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 529 |
| 54. Anon., Hekhalot Rabbati, 100-302, 304-306, 81-99, 303 Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 232, 265, 268 |
| 55. Paul of Elusa, Encomium, None Tagged with subjects: •sherira gaon Found in books: Hidary (2017), Rabbis and Classical Rhetoric: Sophistic Education and Oratory in the Talmud and Midrash, 128 |
| 56. Anon., Maase Merkava, 595 Tagged with subjects: •hai gaon b sherira Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 331 |
57. Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah, None Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 332| 17a. והנאך ועליו נתפסת אמר לו עקיבא הזכרתני פעם אחת הייתי מהלך בשוק העליון של ציפורי ומצאתי אחד ומתלמידי ישו הנוצרי ויעקב איש כפר סכניא שמו אמר לי כתוב בתורתכם (דברים כג, יט) לא תביא אתנן זונה [וגו'] מהו לעשות הימנו בהכ"ס לכ"ג ולא אמרתי לו כלום,אמר לי כך לימדני ישו הנוצרי (מיכה א, ז) כי מאתנן זונה קבצה ועד אתנן זונה ישובו ממקום הטנופת באו למקום הטנופת ילכו,והנאני הדבר על ידי זה נתפסתי למינות ועברתי על מה שכתוב בתורה (משלי ה, ח) הרחק מעליה דרכך זו מינות ואל תקרב אל פתח ביתה זו הרשות ואיכא דאמרי הרחק מעליה דרכך זו מינות והרשות ואל תקרב אל פתח ביתה זו זונה וכמה אמר רב חסדא ארבע אמות,ורבנן [האי] מאתנן זונה מאי דרשי ביה כדרב חסדא דאמר רב חסדא כל זונה שנשכרת לבסוף היא שוכרת שנאמר (יחזקאל טז, לד) ובתתך אתנן ואתנן לא נתן לך [ותהי להפך],ופליגא דרבי פדת דא"ר פדת לא אסרה תורה אלא קריבה של גלוי עריות בלבד שנא' (ויקרא יח, ו) איש איש אל כל שאר בשרו לא תקרבו לגלות ערוה,עולא כי הוה אתי מבי רב הוה מנשק להו לאחתיה אבי ידייהו ואמרי לה אבי חדייהו ופליגא דידיה אדידיה דאמר עולא קריבה בעלמא אסור משום לך לך אמרין נזירא סחור סחור לכרמא לא תקרב,(משלי ל, טו) לעלוקה שתי בנות הב הב מאי הב הב אמר מר עוקבא [קול] שתי בנות שצועקות מגיהנם ואומרות בעוה"ז הבא הבא ומאן נינהו מינות והרשות איכא דאמרי אמר רב חסדא אמר מר עוקבא קול גיהנם צועקת ואומרת הביאו לי שתי בנות שצועקות ואומרות בעולם הזה הבא הבא,(משלי ב, יט) כל באיה לא ישובון ולא ישיגו אורחות חיים וכי מאחר שלא שבו היכן ישיגו ה"ק ואם ישובו לא ישיגו אורחות חיים,למימרא דכל הפורש ממינות מיית והא ההיא דאתאי לקמיה דרב חסדא ואמרה ליה קלה שבקלות עשתה בנה הקטן מבנה הגדול ואמר לה רב חסדא טרחו לה בזוודתא ולא מתה,מדקאמרה קלה שבקלות עשתה מכלל דמינות [נמי] הויא בה ההוא דלא הדרא בה שפיר ומש"ה לא מתה,איכא דאמרי ממינות אין מעבירה לא והא ההיא דאתאי קמיה דרב חסדא וא"ל [ר"ח זוידו לה זוודתא] ומתה מדקאמרה קלה שבקלות מכלל דמינות נמי הויא בה,ומעבירה לא והתניא אמרו עליו על ר"א בן דורדיא שלא הניח זונה אחת בעולם שלא בא עליה פעם אחת שמע שיש זונה אחת בכרכי הים והיתה נוטלת כיס דינרין בשכרה נטל כיס דינרין והלך ועבר עליה שבעה נהרות בשעת הרגל דבר הפיחה אמרה כשם שהפיחה זו אינה חוזרת למקומה כך אלעזר בן דורדיא אין מקבלין אותו בתשובה,הלך וישב בין שני הרים וגבעות אמר הרים וגבעות בקשו עלי רחמים אמרו לו עד שאנו מבקשים עליך נבקש על עצמנו שנאמר (ישעיהו נד, י) כי ההרים ימושו והגבעות תמוטינה אמר שמים וארץ בקשו עלי רחמים אמרו עד שאנו מבקשים עליך נבקש על עצמנו שנאמר (ישעיהו נא, ו) כי שמים כעשן נמלחו והארץ כבגד תבלה,אמר חמה ולבנה בקשו עלי רחמים אמרו לו עד שאנו מבקשים עליך נבקש על עצמנו שנאמר (ישעיהו כד, כג) וחפרה הלבנה ובושה החמה אמר כוכבים ומזלות בקשו עלי רחמים אמרו לו עד שאנו מבקשים עליך נבקש על עצמנו שנאמר (ישעיהו לד, ד) ונמקו כל צבא השמים,אמר אין הדבר תלוי אלא בי הניח ראשו בין ברכיו וגעה בבכיה עד שיצתה נשמתו יצתה בת קול ואמרה ר"א בן דורדיא מזומן לחיי העולם הבא [והא הכא בעבירה הוה ומית] התם נמי כיון דאביק בה טובא כמינות דמיא,בכה רבי ואמר יש קונה עולמו בכמה שנים ויש קונה עולמו בשעה אחת ואמר רבי לא דיין לבעלי תשובה שמקבלין אותן אלא שקורין אותן רבי,ר' חנינא ור' יונתן הוו קאזלי באורחא מטו להנהו תרי שבילי חד פצי אפיתחא דעבודת כוכבים וחד פצי אפיתחא דבי זונות אמר ליה חד לחבריה ניזיל אפיתחא דעבודת כוכבים | 17a. b and you derived pleasure from it, and because of /b this b you were held responsible /b by Heaven. Rabbi Eliezer b said to him: Akiva, /b you are right, as b you have reminded me /b that b once I was walking in the upper marketplace of Tzippori, and I found a man /b who was one b of the students of Jesus the Nazarene, and his name was Ya’akov of Kefar Sekhanya. He said to me: It is written in your Torah: “You shall not bring the payment to a prostitute, /b or the price of a dog, into the house of the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 23:19). b What is /b the i halakha /i : Is it permitted b to make from /b the payment to a prostitute for services rendered b a bathroom for a High Priest /b in the Temple? b And I said nothing to him /b in response., b He said to me: Jesus the Nazarene taught me the following: /b It is permitted, as derived from the verse: b “For of the payment to a prostitute she has gathered them, and to the payment to a prostitute they shall return” /b (Micah 1:7). Since the coins b came from a place of filth, let them go to a place of filth /b and be used to build a bathroom., b And I derived pleasure from the statement, /b and b due to this, I was arrested for heresy /b by the authorities, because b I transgressed that which is written in the Torah: /b “Remove your way far from her, and do not come near the entrance of her house” (Proverbs 5:8). b “Remove your way far from her,” this /b is a reference to b heresy; “and do not come near the entrance of her house,” this /b is a reference to b the ruling authority. /b The Gemara notes: b And there are /b those b who say /b a different interpretation: b “Remove your way far from her,” this /b is a reference to b heresy and the ruling authority; “and do not come near the entrance of her house,” this /b is a reference to b a prostitute. And how much /b distance must one maintain from a prostitute? b Rav Ḥisda said: Four cubits. /b ,With regard to the derivation of the verse by Jesus the Nazarene, the Gemara asks: b And what do the Sages derive from this /b phrase: b “Payment to a prostitute”? /b The Gemara answers: They explain it b in accordance with /b the opinion b of Rav Ḥisda, as Rav Ḥisda says: Any prostitute who hires herself /b out to others for money will become so attached to this practice that b ultimately, /b when others no longer wish to hire her, b she /b will b hire /b others to engage in intercourse with her. b As it is stated: “And in that you gave payment, and no payment is given to you, therefore you are contrary” /b (Ezekiel 16:34).,The Gemara comments: b And /b Rav Ḥisda, who stated above that the Torah requires one to maintain a distance of four cubits from a prostitute, b disagrees with /b the opinion b of Rabbi Pedat. As Rabbi Pedat says: The Torah prohibited only intimacy that involves engaging in prohibited sexual relations, as it is stated: “None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness” /b (Leviticus 18:6). The prohibition against intimacy in the Torah applies exclusively to sexual intercourse, and all other kinds of intimacy that do not include actual intercourse are not included in the prohibition.,The Gemara relates: b When Ulla would come from the study hall, he would kiss his sisters on their hands. And some say: On their chests. And /b the Gemara points out that this action of b his disagrees with /b another ruling that Ulla b himself /b issued, b as Ulla says: Mere intimacy /b with a woman with whom one is prohibited from engaging in sexual intercourse is b prohibited, due to /b the maxim: b Go, go, we say to a nazirite, go around, go around /b but b do not come near to the vineyard. /b Just as a nazirite is warned not even to come into close proximity of a vineyard lest he consume a product of the vine, so too one is obligated to distance himself from anyone with whom intercourse is forbidden.,§ In connection to the earlier mention of heresy and the ruling authorities, the Gemara cites a verse: b “The horseleech has two daughters: Give, give” /b (Proverbs 30:15). b What /b is meant by b “give, give”? Mar Ukva says: /b This is the b voice /b of b the two daughters who cry /b out b from Gehenna /b due to their suffering; b and /b they are the ones who b say in this world: Give, give, /b demanding dues and complete allegiance. b And who are they? /b They are b heresy and the ruling authority. There are /b those b who say /b that b Rav Ḥisda says /b that b Mar Ukva says: The voice of Gehenna cries /b out b and says: Bring me two daughters who cry and say in this world: Give, give. /b ,The following verse in Proverbs makes reference to a foreign woman, which according to the Sages is a euphemism for heresy: b “None that go to her return, neither do they attain the paths of life” /b (Proverbs 2:19). The Gemara asks: b Since /b those that are drawn to heresy b do not return, /b from b where would they attain /b the path of life? Why is it necessary for the verse to add that they do not attain the paths of life? The Gemara explains that b this /b is what the verse b is saying: /b In general, those who go to her do not return, b and /b even b if they return, they do not attain the paths of life, /b i.e., the pain of their regret will shorten their lives.,The Gemara asks: Is this b to say that anyone who separates /b himself b from heresy /b and returns from his mistaken ways must b die? But /b what about b that /b woman b who came before Rav Ḥisda /b to confess to him, b and she said to him: The lightest of the light, /b i.e., the least of the sins that she committed, is that b she conceived her younger son from /b engaging in intercourse with b her older son. And Rav Ḥisda said to her: Prepare funeral shrouds for her, /b i.e., yourself, as you will certainly die soon, b but she did not die. /b ,The above incident refutes the claim that anyone who repents for the sin of heresy must die, as b from /b the fact b that she said /b that b the lightest of the light /b of her sins was that b she conceived /b one son from engaging in intercourse with another son, b by inference /b one can learn b that she was also involved in heresy, /b and yet she did not die. The Gemara answers: b That /b is a case b where /b the woman b did not repent properly, and due to that /b reason b she did not die. /b , b There are /b those b who say /b there is a different version of the objection to the Gemara’s statement that those who repent for the sin of heresy must die: Is that to say that if one repents b for /b the sin of b heresy, yes, /b the result is death, whereas if one repents b for /b the b sin /b of forbidden sexual intercourse he does b not /b die? b But /b what about b that /b woman b who came before Rav Ḥisda /b to confess to him b and Rav Ḥisda said to /b those present: b Prepare funeral shrouds for her, and she died? /b The Gemara answers: b From /b the fact b that she said: The lightest of the light, by inference /b one can learn b that she was also involved in heresy. /b ,The Gemara asks: b And /b is it correct that one who repents b of the sin /b of forbidden sexual intercourse does b not /b die? b But isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b They said about Rabbi Elazar ben Durdayya that /b he was so promiscuous that b he did not leave one prostitute in the world with whom he did not engage in sexual intercourse. Once, he heard that there was one prostitute in /b one of the b cities overseas who would take a purse /b full of b dinars as her payment. He took a purse /b full of b dinars and went and crossed seven rivers /b to reach b her. When /b they were engaged in the b matters /b to which they were b accustomed, /b a euphemism for intercourse, b she passed wind /b and b said: Just as this passed wind /b will b not return to its place, so too Elazar ben Durdayya will not be accepted in repentance, /b even if he were to try to repent.,This statement deeply shocked Elazar ben Durdayya, and b he went and sat between two mountains and hills /b and b said: Mountains and hills, pray for mercy on my /b behalf, so that my repentance will be accepted. b They said to him: Before we pray for mercy on your /b behalf, b we must pray for mercy on our own /b behalf, b as it is stated: “For the mountains may depart, and the hills be removed” /b (Isaiah 54:10). b He said: Heaven and earth, pray for mercy on my /b behalf. b They said /b to him: b Before we pray for mercy on your /b behalf, b we must pray for mercy on our own /b behalf, b as it is stated: “For the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment” /b (Isaiah 51:6)., b He said: Sun and moon, pray for mercy on my /b behalf. b They said to him: Before we pray for mercy on your /b behalf, b we must pray for mercy on our own /b behalf, b as it is stated: “Then the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed” /b (Isaiah 24:23). b He said: Stars and constellations, pray for mercy on my /b behalf. b They said to him: Before we pray for mercy on your /b behalf, b we must pray for mercy on our own /b behalf, b as it is stated: “And all the hosts of heaven shall molder away” /b (Isaiah 34:4).,Elazar ben Durdayya b said: /b Clearly b the matter depends on nothing other than myself. He placed his head between his knees and cried loudly until his soul left /b his body. b A Divine Voice emerged and said: Rabbi Elazar ben Durdayya is destined for life in the World-to-Come. /b The Gemara explains the difficulty presented by this story: b And here /b Elazar ben Durdayya b was /b guilty of b the sin /b of forbidden sexual intercourse, b and /b yet b he died /b once he repented. The Gemara answers: b There too, since he was attached so strongly /b to the sin, to an extent that transcended the physical temptation he felt, b it is similar to heresy, /b as it had become like a form of idol worship for him.,When b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi heard this story of Elazar ben Durdayya, b he wept and said: There is /b one who b acquires his /b share in the World-to-Come only b after many years /b of toil, b and there is /b one who b acquires his /b share in the World-to-Come b in one moment. And Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi further b says: Not only are penitents accepted, but they are even called: Rabbi, /b as the Divine Voice referred to Elazar ben Durdayya as Rabbi Elazar ben Durdayya.,§ In relation to the issue of distancing oneself from idol worship and prostitution, the Gemara relates: b Rabbi Ḥanina and Rabbi Yonatan were /b once b walking along the road /b when b they came to a certain two paths, one /b of which b branched off toward the entrance of /b a place of b idol worship, and /b the other b one branched off toward the entrance of a brothel. One said to the other: Let us go by /b the path that leads to b the entrance /b of the place b of idol worship, /b |
|
| 58. Anon., Sifre Zuta Deuteronomy, 89 Tagged with subjects: •sherira (ben hanina gaon), rav Found in books: Tomson (2019), Studies on Jews and Christians in the First and Second Centuries. 92 |
| 59. Anon., Pesiqta De Rav Kahana, 21 Tagged with subjects: •hai gaon b sherira Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 332 |
| 60. Anon., Hekhalot Zutarti, None Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Rowland (2009), The Mystery of God: Early Jewish Mysticism and the New Testament, 233, 266, 267, 268 |
| 61. Anon., Iggeret Rav Sherira Gaon, 104-105, 103 Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 107, 113, 167, 168, 169 |
