1. Hebrew Bible, Numbers, 11.16 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 93| 11.16. "וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל־מֹשֶׁה אֶסְפָה־לִּי שִׁבְעִים אִישׁ מִזִּקְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר יָדַעְתָּ כִּי־הֵם זִקְנֵי הָעָם וְשֹׁטְרָיו וְלָקַחְתָּ אֹתָם אֶל־אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וְהִתְיַצְּבוּ שָׁם עִמָּךְ׃", | 11.16. "And the LORD said unto Moses: ‘Gather unto Me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people, and officers over them; and bring them unto the tent of meeting, that they may stand there with thee.", |
|
2. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 28.6 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 318| 28.6. "בָּרוּךְ אַתָּה בְּבֹאֶךָ וּבָרוּךְ אַתָּה בְּצֵאתֶךָ׃", 28.6. "וְהֵשִׁיב בְּךָ אֵת כָּל־מַדְוֵה מִצְרַיִם אֲשֶׁר יָגֹרְתָּ מִפְּנֵיהֶם וְדָבְקוּ בָּךְ׃", | 28.6. "Blessed shalt thou be when thou comest in, and blessed shalt thou be when thou goest out.", |
|
3. Hebrew Bible, Isaiah, 56.7 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 326| 56.7. "וַהֲבִיאוֹתִים אֶל־הַר קָדְשִׁי וְשִׂמַּחְתִּים בְּבֵית תְּפִלָּתִי עוֹלֹתֵיהֶם וְזִבְחֵיהֶם לְרָצוֹן עַל־מִזְבְּחִי כִּי בֵיתִי בֵּית־תְּפִלָּה יִקָּרֵא לְכָל־הָעַמִּים׃", | 56.7. "Even them will I bring to My holy mountain, And make them joyful in My house of prayer; Their burnt-offerings and their sacrifices Shall be acceptable upon Mine altar; For My house shall be called A house of prayer for all peoples.", |
|
4. Hebrew Bible, Judges, 9.2 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 93| 9.2. "דַּבְּרוּ־נָא בְּאָזְנֵי כָל־בַּעֲלֵי שְׁכֶם מַה־טּוֹב לָכֶם הַמְשֹׁל בָּכֶם שִׁבְעִים אִישׁ כֹּל בְּנֵי יְרֻבַּעַל אִם־מְשֹׁל בָּכֶם אִישׁ אֶחָד וּזְכַרְתֶּם כִּי־עַצְמֵכֶם וּבְשַׂרְכֶם אָנִי׃", 9.2. "וְאִם־אַיִן תֵּצֵא אֵשׁ מֵאֲבִימֶלֶךְ וְתֹאכַל אֶת־בַּעֲלֵי שְׁכֶם וְאֶת־בֵּית מִלּוֹא וְתֵצֵא אֵשׁ מִבַּעֲלֵי שְׁכֶם וּמִבֵּית מִלּוֹא וְתֹאכַל אֶת־אֲבִימֶלֶךְ׃", | 9.2. "Speak, I pray you, in the ears of all the men of Shekhem, Which is better for you, that all the sons of Yerubba῾al, who are seventy persons, reign over you, or that one should reign over you? remember also that I am your bone and your flesh.", |
|
5. Hebrew Bible, Jeremiah, 26.2 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 65| 26.2. "וְגַם־אִישׁ הָיָה מִתְנַבֵּא בְּשֵׁם יְהוָה אוּרִיָּהוּ בֶּן־שְׁמַעְיָהוּ מִקִּרְיַת הַיְּעָרִים וַיִּנָּבֵא עַל־הָעִיר הַזֹּאת וְעַל־הָאָרֶץ הַזֹּאת כְּכֹל דִּבְרֵי יִרְמְיָהוּ׃", 26.2. "כֹּה אָמַר יְהוָה עֲמֹד בַּחֲצַר בֵּית־יְהוָה וְדִבַּרְתָּ עַל־כָּל־עָרֵי יְהוּדָה הַבָּאִים לְהִשְׁתַּחֲוֺת בֵּית־יְהוָה אֵת כָּל־הַדְּבָרִים אֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתִיךָ לְדַבֵּר אֲלֵיהֶם אַל־תִּגְרַע דָּבָר׃", | 26.2. "’Thus saith the LORD: Stand in the court of the LORD’S house, and speak unto all the cities of Judah, which come to worship in the LORD’S house, all the words that I command thee to speak unto them; diminish not a word.", |
|
6. Hebrew Bible, 2 Samuel, 12.20 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 65 | 12.20. "Then David arose from the ground, and washed, and anointed himself, and changed his apparel, and came into the house of the Lord, and bowed down: then he came to his own house, and asked them to set bread before him, and he did eat.", |
|
7. Hebrew Bible, 2 Kings, 10.1 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 93| 10.1. "דְּעוּ אֵפוֹא כִּי לֹא יִפֹּל מִדְּבַר יְהוָה אַרְצָה אֲשֶׁר־דִּבֶּר יְהוָה עַל־בֵּית אַחְאָב וַיהוָה עָשָׂה אֵת אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר בְּיַד עַבְדּוֹ אֵלִיָּהוּ׃", 10.1. "וּלְאַחְאָב שִׁבְעִים בָּנִים בְּשֹׁמְרוֹן וַיִּכְתֹּב יֵהוּא סְפָרִים וַיִּשְׁלַח שֹׁמְרוֹן אֶל־שָׂרֵי יִזְרְעֶאל הַזְּקֵנִים וְאֶל־הָאֹמְנִים אַחְאָב לֵאמֹר׃", | 10.1. "Now Ahab had seventy sons in Samaria. And Jehu wrote letters, and sent to Samaria, unto the rulers of Jezreel, even the elders, and unto them that brought up [the sons of] Ahab, saying:", |
|
8. Hebrew Bible, 1 Kings, 8.29-8.30 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 326| 8.29. "לִהְיוֹת עֵינֶךָ פְתֻחוֹת אֶל־הַבַּיִת הַזֶּה לַיְלָה וָיוֹם אֶל־הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר אָמַרְתָּ יִהְיֶה שְׁמִי שָׁם לִשְׁמֹעַ אֶל־הַתְּפִלָּה אֲשֶׁר יִתְפַּלֵּל עַבְדְּךָ אֶל־הַמָּקוֹם הַזֶּה׃", | 8.29. "that Thine eyes may be open toward this house night and day, even toward the place whereof Thou hast said: My name shall be there; to hearken unto the prayer which Thy servant shall pray toward this place.", 8.30. "And hearken Thou to the supplication of Thy servant, and of Thy people Israel, when they shall pray toward this place; yea, hear Thou in heaven Thy dwelling-place; and when Thou hearest, forgive.", |
|
9. Hebrew Bible, Daniel, 6.11 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 164, 326| 6.11. "וְדָנִיֵּאל כְּדִי יְדַע דִּי־רְשִׁים כְּתָבָא עַל לְבַיְתֵהּ וְכַוִּין פְּתִיחָן לֵהּ בְּעִלִּיתֵהּ נֶגֶד יְרוּשְׁלֶם וְזִמְנִין תְּלָתָה בְיוֹמָא הוּא בָּרֵךְ עַל־בִּרְכוֹהִי וּמְצַלֵּא וּמוֹדֵא קֳדָם אֱלָהֵהּ כָּל־קֳבֵל דִּי־הֲוָא עָבֵד מִן־קַדְמַת דְּנָה׃", | 6.11. "And when Daniel knew that the writing was signed, he went into his house—now his windows were open in his upper chamber toward Jerusalem—and he kneeled upon his knees three times a day, and prayed, and gave thanks before his God, as he did aforetime.", |
|
10. Philo of Alexandria, Against Flaccus, 74 (1st cent. BCE - missingth cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 93 | 74. for he arrested thirty-eight members of our council of elders, which our saviour and benefactor, Augustus, elected to manage the affairs of the Jewish nation after the death of the king of our own nation, having sent written commands to that effect to Manius Maximus when he was about to take upon himself for the second time the government of Egypt and of the country, he arrested them, I say, in their own houses, and commanded them to be thrown into prison, and arranged a splendid procession to send through the middle of the market-place a body of old men prisoners, with their hands bound, some with thongs and others with iron chains, whom he led in this plight into the theatre, a most miserable spectacle, and one wholly unsuited to the times. |
|
11. Josephus Flavius, Jewish War, 2.128-2.131, 2.482, 2.570, 4.336 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 63, 65, 93 | 2.128. 5. And as for their piety towards God, it is very extraordinary; for before sunrising they speak not a word about profane matters, but put up certain prayers which they have received from their forefathers, as if they made a supplication for its rising. 2.129. After this every one of them are sent away by their curators, to exercise some of those arts wherein they are skilled, in which they labor with great diligence till the fifth hour. After which they assemble themselves together again into one place; and when they have clothed themselves in white veils, they then bathe their bodies in cold water. And after this purification is over, they every one meet together in an apartment of their own, into which it is not permitted to any of another sect to enter; while they go, after a pure manner, into the dining-room, as into a certain holy temple, 2.130. and quietly set themselves down; upon which the baker lays them loaves in order; the cook also brings a single plate of one sort of food, and sets it before every one of them; 2.131. but a priest says grace before meat; and it is unlawful for anyone to taste of the food before grace be said. The same priest, when he hath dined, says grace again after meat; and when they begin, and when they end, they praise God, as he that bestows their food upon them; after which they lay aside their [white] garments, and betake themselves to their labors again till the evening; 2.482. Now there came certain men seventy in number, out of Batanea, who were the most considerable for their families and prudence of the rest of the people; these desired to have an army put into their hands, that if any tumult should happen, they might have about them a guard sufficient to restrain such as might rise up against them. 2.570. And being conscious to himself that if he communicated part of his power to the great men, he should make them his fast friends; and that he should gain the same favor from the multitude, if he executed his commands by persons of their own country, and with whom they were well acquainted; he chose out seventy of the most prudent men, and those elders in age, and appointed them to be rulers of all Galilee, 4.336. So they called together, by a public proclamation, seventy of the principal men of the populace, for a show, as if they were real judges, while they had no proper authority. Before these was Zacharias accused of a design to betray their polity to the Romans, and having traitorously sent to Vespasian for that purpose. |
|
12. Mishnah, Megillah, 3.3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 185| 3.3. "וְעוֹד אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה, בֵּית הַכְּנֶסֶת שֶׁחָרַב, אֵין מַסְפִּידִין בְּתוֹכוֹ, וְאֵין מַפְשִׁילִין בְּתוֹכוֹ חֲבָלִים, וְאֵין פּוֹרְשִׂין לְתוֹכוֹ מְצוּדוֹת, וְאֵין שׁוֹטְחִין עַל גַּגּוֹ פֵרוֹת, וְאֵין עוֹשִׂין אוֹתוֹ קַפַּנְדַּרְיָא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כו), וַהֲשִׁמּוֹתִי אֶת מִקְדְּשֵׁיכֶם, קְדֻשָּׁתָן אַף כְּשֶׁהֵן שׁוֹמֵמִין. עָלוּ בוֹ עֲשָׂבִים, לֹא יִתְלֹשׁ, מִפְּנֵי עָגְמַת נָפֶשׁ: \n", | 3.3. "Rabbi Judah said further: a synagogue that has fallen into ruins, they may not eulogize in it, nor twist ropes, nor to spread nets [to trap animals], nor to lay out produce on its roof [to dry], nor to use it as a short cut, as it says, “And I will desolate your holy places” (Leviticus 26:3 their holiness remains even when they are desolate. If grass comes up in it, it should not be plucked, [in order to elicit] melancholy.", |
|
13. Josephus Flavius, Jewish Antiquities, 14.213-14.216, 14.231-14.232, 15.121-15.122, 16.164 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 72, 112, 318 | 14.213. 8. “Julius Caius, praetor [consul] of Rome, to the magistrates, senate, and people of the Parians, sendeth greeting. The Jews of Delos, and some other Jews that sojourn there, in the presence of your ambassadors, signified to us, that, by a decree of yours, you forbid them to make use of the customs of their forefathers, and their way of sacred worship. 14.214. Now it does not please me that such decrees should be made against our friends and confederates, whereby they are forbidden to live according to their own customs, or to bring in contributions for common suppers and holy festivals, while they are not forbidden so to do even at Rome itself; 14.215. for even Caius Caesar, our imperator and consul, in that decree wherein he forbade the Bacchanal rioters to meet in the city, did yet permit these Jews, and these only, both to bring in their contributions, and to make their common suppers. 14.216. Accordingly, when I forbid other Bacchanal rioters, I permit these Jews to gather themselves together, according to the customs and laws of their forefathers, and to persist therein. It will be therefore good for you, that if you have made any decree against these our friends and confederates, to abrogate the same, by reason of their virtue and kind disposition towards us.” 14.231. 14. The decree of the Delians. “The answer of the praetors, when Beotus was archon, on the twentieth day of the month Thargeleon. While Marcus Piso the lieutet lived in our city, who was also appointed over the choice of the soldiers, he called us, and many other of the citizens, and gave order, 14.232. that if there be here any Jews who are Roman citizens, no one is to give them any disturbance about going into the army, because Cornelius Lentulus, the consul, freed the Jews from going into the army, on account of the superstition they are under;—you are therefore obliged to submit to the praetor.” And the like decree was made by the Sardians about us also. 15.121. 2. At this time it was that the fight happened at Actium, between Octavius Caesar and Antony, in the seventh year of the reign of Herod and then it was also that there was an earthquake in Judea, such a one as had not happened at any other time, and which earthquake brought a great destruction upon the cattle in that country. 15.122. About ten thousand men also perished by the fall of houses; but the army, which lodged in the field, received no damage by this sad accident. 16.164. But if any one be caught stealing their holy books, or their sacred money, whether it be out of the synagogue or public school, he shall be deemed a sacrilegious person, and his goods shall be brought into the public treasury of the Romans. |
|
14. Tosefta, Avodah Zarah, 6.3 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 338| 6.3. "מוקצה שלו אסור ושל חברו מותר לפני הקדישו אסור לאחר הקדישו מותר מאימתי נקרא מוקצה משנעשה בו מעשה איזהו נעבד כל שעובדין אותו בין בשגגה בין במזיד איזה הוא מוקצה מקצה לעבודת כוכבים אבל אמר שור זה לעבודת כוכבים לא אמר כלום לפי שאין הקדש לעבודת כוכבים. ", | |
|
15. Tosefta, Berachot, 3.15-3.16 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 327| 3.15. "ויו\"ט של ראש השנה שחל בשבת ב\"ש אומרים מתפלל עשר ובית הלל אומרים מתפלל תשע יום טוב שחל להיות בשבת ב\"ש אומרים מתפלל שמונה ואומר של שבת בפני עצמו ושל יום טוב בפני עצמו ומתחיל בשל שבת וב\"ה אומרים מתפלל שבע מתחיל בשל שבת ומסיים בשל שבת ואומר קדושת היום באמצע ר' נתן אומר אף חותם ברוך מקדש את השבת וישראל והזמנים.", 3.16. "סומא ומי שאינו יכול לכוין את הרוחות מכוונים לבן לפני המקום ומתפללין שנא' (מלכים א ח) והתפללו אל ה' היה עומד בחו\"ל יכוין את לבו כנגד ארץ ישראל שנא' (שם) והתפללו אל ה' דרך ארצם היה עומד בא\"י יכוין את לבו כנגד ירושלים שנא' (שם) והתפללו אל העיר הזאת העומדים בירושלים מתפללין כנגד בית המקדש שנא' (שם) והתפללו אל הבית הזה העומדים במקדש יכונו את לבן כנגד בית קדשי הקדשים שנא' (שם) והתפללו אל המקום הזה נמצאו העומדין לצפון פניהם לדרום העומדים בדרום פניהם לצפון העומדים במזרח פניהם למערב העומדים למערב פניהם למזרח ונמצאו כל ישראל מתפללין למקום אחד.", | |
|
16. Tosefta, Megillah, 3.21 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 75, 93, 339| 3.21. "כתב הנכתב ליחיד מכנין אותה לרבים לרבים אין מכנין אותה ליחיד רבי יהודה אומר המתרגם פסוק כצורתו הרי זה בדאי והמוסיף הרי זה מגדף. תורגמן העומד לפני חכם אינו רשאי לא לפחות ולא להוסיף ולא לשנות אלא אם כן יהיה אביו או רבו. ", | |
|
17. Mishnah, Parah, 3.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 76| 3.5. "לֹא מָצְאוּ מִשֶּׁבַע, עוֹשִׂין מִשֵּׁשׁ, מֵחָמֵשׁ, מֵאַרְבַּע, מִשָּׁלשׁ, מִשְּׁתַּיִם וּמֵאֶחָת. וּמִי עֲשָׂאָם. הָרִאשׁוֹנָה עָשָׂה משֶׁה, וְהַשְּׁנִיָּה עָשָׂה עֶזְרָא, וְחָמֵשׁ, מֵעֶזְרָא וָאֵילָךְ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, שֶׁבַע מֵעֶזְרָא וָאֵילָךְ. וּמִי עֲשָׂאָן. שִׁמְעוֹן הַצַּדִּיק וְיוֹחָנָן כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל עָשׂוּ שְׁתַּיִם שְׁתַּיִם, אֶלְיְהוֹעֵינַי בֶּן הַקּוֹף וַחֲנַמְאֵל הַמִּצְרִי וְיִשְׁמָעֵאל בֶּן פִּיאָבִי עָשׂוּ אַחַת אֶחָת: \n", | 3.5. "If they did not find the residue of the ashes of the seven [red cows] they performed the sprinkling with those of six, of five, of four, of three, of two or of one. And who prepared these? Moses prepared the first, Ezra prepared the second, and five were prepared from the time of Ezra, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: seven from the time of Ezra. And who prepared them? Shimon the Just and Yoha the high priest prepared two; Elihoenai the son of Ha-Kof and Hanamel the Egyptian and Ishmael the son of Piabi prepared one each.", |
|
| 18. Tosefta, Moed Qatan, 2.15 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 229 |
19. Tosefta, Sukkah, 4.6 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 264, 339| 4.6. "[כיצד] ג' להבטיל את העם מן המלאכה חזן הכנסת נוטל חצוצרת ועולה לראש הגג גבוה שבעיר [נטל לקרות] הסמוכין לעיר בטלין הסמוכין לתחום מתכנסין ובאין לתוך התחום ולא היו נכנסין מיד אלא ממתינין עד שיבואו כולן ויתכנסו כולן בבת אחת [מאימתי הוא נכנס משימלא לו חבית ויצלה לו דגה וידליק לו את הנר].", | 4.6. "Why did they blow three blasts? To make the people cease from work. The sexton took the trumpets, and went to the top of the highest roof in the city to summon those near the city to cease from work. Those near the limits of the city assembled themselves together and came to the schoolhouse. They did not come immediately the trumpets blew, but waited till all were gathered together, and then all came at once. When did they assemble? After one could fill a bottle of water, or fry a fish, or light his lamp. ", |
|
20. Tosefta, Kippurim, 1.9 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 169| 1.9. "כיצד מפיסין ללשכת הגזית מקיפין ועומדין [ככוליור] הממונה בא ונוטל מצנפתו של אחד מהן יודעין שממנו פייס מתחיל. לא היו מוציאים שתים אלא [אחת] אחת היחידים שבהן מוציאין שתים ולא היו מונין את היתירה רבי יהודה אומר לא היה פייס למחתה אלא מי שזכה בקטורת אומר לזה שעמו [אף אתה על המחתה] ר\"א בן יעקב אומר לא היה פייס [לחלבי שעיר] אלא מי שהיה מעלה אברים לכבש מעלה אותן לגבי [מזבח].", | |
|
| 21. Josephus Flavius, Life, 11, 14, 276-280, 331, 79, 92, 56 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 93 |
22. Mishnah, Rosh Hashanah, 2.8 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 229| 2.8. "דְּמוּת צוּרוֹת לְבָנוֹת הָיוּ לוֹ לְרַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל בַּטַּבְלָא וּבַכֹּתֶל בַּעֲלִיָּתוֹ, שֶׁבָּהֶן מַרְאֶה אֶת הַהֶדְיוֹטוֹת וְאוֹמֵר, הֲכָזֶה רָאִיתָ אוֹ כָזֶה. מַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁבָּאוּ שְׁנַיִם וְאָמְרוּ, רְאִינוּהוּ שַׁחֲרִית בַּמִּזְרָח וְעַרְבִית בַּמַּעֲרָב. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי, עֵדֵי שֶׁקֶר הֵם. כְּשֶׁבָּאוּ לְיַבְנֶה קִבְּלָן רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. וְעוֹד בָּאוּ שְׁנַיִם וְאָמְרוּ, רְאִינוּהוּ בִזְמַנּוֹ, וּבְלֵיל עִבּוּרוֹ לֹא נִרְאָה, וְקִבְּלָן רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל. אָמַר רַבִּי דוֹסָא בֶּן הַרְכִּינָס, עֵדֵי שֶׁקֶר הֵן, הֵיאָךְ מְעִידִין עַל הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁיָּלְדָה, וּלְמָחָר כְּרֵסָהּ בֵּין שִׁנֶּיהָ. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, רוֹאֶה אֲנִי אֶת דְּבָרֶיךָ:", | 2.8. "Rabban Gamaliel had diagrams of the moon on a tablet [hung] on the wall of his upper chamber, and he used to show them to the unlearned and say, “Did it look like this or this?” It happened that two witnesses came and said, “We saw it in the morning in the east and in the evening in the west.” Rabbi Yoha ben Nuri said: they are lying witnesses. When they came to Yavneh Rabban Gamaliel accepted them. On another occasion two witnesses came and said, “We saw it at its proper time, but on the night which should have been the new moon it was not seen,” and Rabban Gamaliel accepted their evidence. Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas said: they are lying witnesses. How can they testify that a woman has given birth when on the next day her belly is between her teeth (swollen)? Rabbi Joshua to him: I see your argument.", |
|
23. Mishnah, Tamid, 4.3-4.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 169| 4.3. "נָטַל אֶת הַסַּכִּין וְהִפְרִישׁ אֶת הָרֵאָה מִן הַכָּבֵד, וְאֶצְבַּע הַכָּבֵד מִן הַכָּבֵד, וְלֹא הָיָה מְזִיזָהּ מִמְּקוֹמָהּ. נָקַב אֶת הֶחָזֶה וּנְתָנוֹ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בוֹ. עָלָה לַדֹּפֶן הַיְמָנִית, הָיָה חוֹתֵךְ וְיוֹרֵד עַד הַשִּׁדְרָה, וְלֹא הָיָה נוֹגֵעַ בַּשִּׁדְרָה, עַד שֶׁהוּא מַגִּיעַ לִשְׁתֵּי צְלָעוֹת רַכּוֹת. חֲתָכָהּ וּנְתָנָהּ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָהּ, וְהַכָּבֵד תְּלוּיָה בָהּ. בָּא לוֹ לַגֵּרָה, וְהִנִּיחַ בָּהּ שְׁתֵּי צְלָעוֹת מִכָּאן וּשְׁתֵּי צְלָעוֹת מִכָּאן. חֲתָכָהּ וּנְתָנָהּ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָהּ, וְהַקָּנֶה וְהַלֵּב וְהָרֵאָה תְּלוּיִם בָּהּ. בָּא לוֹ לַדֹּפֶן הַשְּׂמָאלִית, וְהִנִּיחַ בָּהּ שְׁתֵּי צְלָעוֹת רַכּוֹת מִלְמַעְלָן וּשְׁתֵּי צְלָעוֹת רַכּוֹת מִלְּמַטָּן. וְכָךְ הָיָה מַנִּיחַ בַּחֲבֶרְתָּהּ. נִמְצָא מַנִּיחַ בִּשְׁתֵּיהֶן, שְׁתַּיִם שְׁתַּיִם מִלְמַעְלָן וּשְׁתַּיִם שְׁתַּיִם מִלְּמַטָּן. חֲתָכָהּ וּנְתָנָהּ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָהּ, וְהַשִּׁדְרָה עִמָּהּ, וְהַטְּחוֹל תָּלוּי בָּהּ. וְהִיא הָיְתָה גְדוֹלָה, אֶלָּא שֶׁל יָמִין קוֹרִין גְּדוֹלָה, שֶׁהַכָּבֵד תְּלוּיָה בָהּ. בָּא לוֹ לָעֹקֶץ, חוֹתְכוֹ וּנְתָנוֹ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בוֹ, וְהָאַלְיָה וְאֶצְבַּע הַכָּבֵד וּשְׁתֵּי כְלָיוֹת עִמּוֹ. נָטַל רֶגֶל הַשְּׂמָאלִי וּנְתָנָהּ לְמִי שֶׁזָּכָה בָהּ. נִמְצְאוּ כֻלָּן עוֹמְדִין בְּשׁוּרָה וְהָאֵבָרִים בְּיָדָם. הָרִאשׁוֹן, בָּרֹאשׁ וּבָרֶגֶל. הָרֹאשׁ בִּימִינוֹ, וְחוֹטְמוֹ כְלַפֵּי זְרוֹעוֹ, וְקַרְנָיו בֵּין אֶצְבְּעוֹתָיו, וּבֵית שְׁחִיטָתוֹ מִלְמַעְלָן, וְהַפֶּדֶר נָתוּן עָלֶיהָ. וְהָרֶגֶל שֶׁל יָמִין בִּשְׂמֹאלוֹ, וּבֵית עוֹרוֹ לַחוּץ. הַשֵּׁנִי, בִּשְׁתֵּי יָדַיִם, שֶׁל יָמִין בִּימִינוֹ, שֶׁל שְׂמֹאל בִּשְׂמֹאלוֹ, וּבֵית עוֹרָן לַחוּץ. הַשְּׁלִישִׁי, בָּעֹקֶץ וּבָרֶגֶל. הָעֹקֶץ בִּימִינוֹ, וְהָאַלְיָה מְדֻלְדֶּלֶת בֵּין אֶצְבְּעוֹתָיו, וְאֶצְבַּע הַכָּבֵד וּשְׁתֵּי הַכְּלָיוֹת עִמּוֹ. הָרֶגֶל שֶׁל שְׂמֹאל בִּשְׂמֹאלוֹ, וּבֵית עוֹרוֹ לַחוּץ. הָרְבִיעִי, בֶּחָזֶה וּבַגֵּרָה. הֶחָזֶה בִימִינוֹ, וְהַגֵּרָה בִשְׂמֹאלוֹ, וְצַלְעוֹתֶיהָ בֵין אֶצְבְּעוֹתָיו. הַחֲמִישִׁי, בִּשְׁתֵּי דְפָנוֹת. שֶׁל יָמִין בִּימִינוֹ, וְשֶׁל שְׂמֹאל בִּשְׂמֹאלוֹ, וּבֵית עוֹרָן לַחוּץ. הַשִּׁשִּׁי, בַּקְּרָבַיִם הַנְּתוּנִים בְּבָזָךְ וּכְרָעַיִם עַל גַּבֵּיהֶם מִלְמַעְלָה. הַשְּׁבִיעִי, בַּסֹּלֶת. הַשְּׁמִינִי, בַּחֲבִתִּין. הַתְּשִׁיעִי, בַּיָּיִן. הָלְכוּ וּנְתָנוּם מֵחֲצִי הַכֶּבֶשׁ וּלְמַטָּה בְּמַעֲרָבוֹ, וּמְלָחוּם. וְיָרְדוּ וּבָאוּ לָהֶם לְלִשְׁכַּת הַגָּזִית, לִקְרוֹת אֶת שְׁמַע: \n", | 4.3. "He then took a knife and separated the lung from the liver and the finger of the liver from the liver, but he did not remove it from its place. He cut out the breast and gave it to the one to the one who had merited [bringing it onto the ramp]. He came to the right flank and cut into it as far as the spine, without touching the spine, until he came to the place between two small ribs. He cut it off and gave it to the one who had merited [bringing it onto the ramp], with the liver attached to it. He then came to the neck, and he left two ribs on each side of it, cut it off and gave it to the one to the one who had merited [bringing it onto the ramp], with the windpipe and the heart and the lung attached to it. He then came to the left flank in which he left the two thin ribs above and two thin ribs below; and he had done similarly with the other flank. Thus he left two on each side above and two on each side below. He cut it off and gave it to the one to the one who had merited [bringing it onto the ramp], and the spine with it and the spleen attached to it. This was really the largest piece, but the right flank was called the largest, because the liver was attached to it. He then came to the tail bone, which he cut off and gave it to the one who had merited [bringing it onto the ramp], along with the tail, the finger of the liver and the two kidneys. He then took the left leg and cut it off and gave it to the one who had merited [bringing it onto the ramp]. Thus they were all standing in a row with the limbs in their hands The first had the head and the [right] hind leg. The head was in his right hand with its nose towards his arm, its horns between his fingers, and the place where it was severed turned upwards with the fat covering it. The right leg was in his left hand with the place where the flaying began turned away from him. The second had the two fore legs, the right leg in his right hand and the left leg in his left hand, the place where the flaying began turned away from him. The third had the tail bone and the other hind leg, the tail bone in his right hand with the tail hanging between his fingers and the finger of the liver and the two kidneys with it, and the left hind leg in his left hand with the place where the flaying began turned away from him. The fourth had the breast and the neck, the breast in his right hand and the neck in his left hand, its ribs being between two of his fingers. The fifth had the two flanks, the right one in his right hand, and the left one in his left hand, with the place where the flaying began turned away from him. The sixth had the innards on a platter with the knees on top of them. The seventh had the fine flour. The eighth had the griddle cakes. The ninth had the wine. They went and placed them on the lower half of the ramp on its western side, and salted them (see Leviticus 2:13). They then came down and went to the Chamber of Hewn Stone to recite the Shema.", |
|
24. New Testament, Acts, 6.1-6.9, 22.19, 24.12, 26.11 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 55| 6.1. ΕΝ ΔΕ ΤΑΙΣ ΗΜΕΡΑΙΣ ταύταις πληθυνόντων τῶν μαθητῶν ἐγένετο γογγυσμὸς τῶν Ἑλληνιστῶν πρὸς τοὺς Ἐβραίους ὅτι παρεθεωροῦντο ἐν τῇ διακονίᾳ τῇ καθημερινῇ αἱ χῆραι αὐτῶν. 6.2. προσκαλεσάμενοι δὲ οἱ δώδεκα τὸ πλῆθος τῶν μαθητῶν εἶπαν Οὐκ ἀρεστόν ἐστιν ἡμᾶς καταλείψαντας τὸν λόγον τοῦ θεοῦ διακονεῖν τραπέζαις· 6.3. ἐπισκέ ψασθε δέ, ἀδελφοί, ἄνδρας ἐξ ὑμῶν μαρτυρουμένους ἑπτὰ πλήρεις πνεύματος καὶ σοφίας, οὓς καταστήσομεν ἐπὶ τῆς χρείας ταύτης· 6.4. ἡμεῖς δὲ τῇ προσευχῇ καὶ τῇ διακονίᾳ τοῦ λόγου προσκαρτερήσομεν. 6.5. καὶ ἤρεσεν ὁ λόγος ἐνώπιον παντὸς τοῦ πλήθους, καὶ ἐξελέξαντο Στέφανον, ἄνδρα πλήρη πίστεως καὶ πνεύματος ἁγίου, καὶ Φίλιππον καὶ Πρόχορον καὶ Νικάνορα καὶ Τίμωνα καὶ Παρμενᾶν καὶ Νικόλαον προσήλυτον Ἀντιοχέα, 6.6. οὓς ἔστησαν ἐνώπιον τῶν ἀποστόλων, καὶ προσευξάμενοι ἐπέθηκαν αὐτοῖς τὰς χεῖρας. 6.7. Καὶ ὁ λόγος τοῦ θεοῦ ηὔξανεν, καὶ ἐπληθύνετο ὁ ἀριθμὸς τῶν μαθητῶν ἐν Ἰερουσαλὴμ σφόδρα, πολύς τε ὄχλος τῶν ἱερέων ὑπήκουον τῇ πίστει. 6.8. Στέφανος δὲ πλήρης χάριτος καὶ δυνάμεως ἐποίει τέρατα καὶ σημεῖα μεγάλα ἐν τῷ λαῷ. 6.9. Ἀνέστησαν δέ τινες τῶν ἐκ τῆς συναγωγῆς τῆς λεγομένης Λιβερτίνων καὶ Κυρηναίων καὶ Ἀλεξανδρέων καὶ τῶν ἀπὸ Κιλικίας καὶ Ἀσίας συνζητοῦντες τῷ Στεφάνῳ, 22.19. κἀγὼ εἶπον Κύριε, αὐτοὶ ἐπίστανται ὅτι ἐγὼ ἤμην φυλακίζων καὶ δέρων κατὰ τὰς συναγωγὰς τοὺς πιστεύοντας ἐπὶ σέ· 24.12. καὶ οὔτε ἐν τῷ ἱερῷ εὗρόν με πρός τινα διαλεγόμενον ἢ ἐπίστασιν ποιοῦντα ὄχλου οὔτε ἐν ταῖς συναγωγαῖς οὔτε κατὰ τὴν πόλιν, 26.11. καὶ κατὰ πάσας τὰς συναγωγὰς πολλάκις τιμωρῶν αὐτοὺς ἠνάγκαζον βλασφημεῖν, περισσῶς τε ἐμμαινόμενος αὐτοῖς ἐδίωκον ἕως καὶ εἰς τὰς ἔξω πόλεις. | 6.1. Now in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplying, there arose a grumbling of the Grecian Jews against the Hebrews because their widows were neglected in the daily service. 6.2. The twelve summoned the multitude of the disciples and said, "It is not appropriate for us to forsake the word of God and serve tables. 6.3. Therefore select from among you, brothers, seven men of good report, full of the Holy Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. 6.4. But we will continue steadfastly in prayer and in the ministry of the word." 6.5. These words pleased the whole multitude. They chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolaus, a proselyte of Antioch; 6.6. whom they set before the apostles. When they had prayed, they laid their hands on them. 6.7. The word of God increased and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem exceedingly. A great company of the priests were obedient to the faith. 6.8. Stephen, full of faith and power, performed great wonders and signs among the people. 6.9. But some of those who were of the synagogue called "The Libertines," and of the Cyrenians, of the Alexandrians, and of those of Cilicia and Asia arose, disputing with Stephen. 22.19. I said, 'Lord, they themselves know that I imprisoned and beat in every synagogue those who believed in you. 24.12. In the temple they didn't find me disputing with anyone or stirring up a crowd, either in the synagogues, or in the city. 26.11. Punishing them often in all the synagogues, I tried to make them blaspheme. Being exceedingly enraged against them, I persecuted them even to foreign cities. |
|
25. Mishnah, Sanhedrin, 1.6 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 93| 1.6. "סַנְהֶדְרִי גְדוֹלָה הָיְתָה שֶׁל שִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד, וּקְטַנָּה שֶׁל עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה. וּמִנַּיִן לַגְּדוֹלָה שֶׁהִיא שֶׁל שִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר יא) אֶסְפָה לִּי שִׁבְעִים אִישׁ מִזִּקְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, וּמֹשֶׁה עַל גַּבֵּיהֶן, הֲרֵי שִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, שִׁבְעִים. וּמִנַּיִן לַקְּטַנָּה שֶׁהִיא שֶׁל עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם לה) וְשָׁפְטוּ הָעֵדָה וְגוֹ' וְהִצִּילוּ הָעֵדָה, עֵדָה שׁוֹפֶטֶת וְעֵדָה מַצֶּלֶת, הֲרֵי כָאן עֶשְׂרִים. וּמִנַּיִן לָעֵדָה שֶׁהִיא עֲשָׂרָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם יד) עַד מָתַי לָעֵדָה הָרָעָה הַזֹּאת, יָצְאוּ יְהוֹשֻׁעַ וְכָלֵב. וּמִנַּיִן לְהָבִיא עוֹד שְׁלֹשָׁה, מִמַּשְׁמַע שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כג) לֹא תִהְיֶה אַחֲרֵי רַבִּים לְרָעֹת, שׁוֹמֵעַ אֲנִי שֶׁאֶהְיֶה עִמָּהֶם לְטוֹבָה, אִם כֵּן לָמָּה נֶאֱמַר (שם) אַחֲרֵי רַבִּים לְהַטֹּת, לֹא כְהַטָּיָתְךָ לְטוֹבָה הַטָּיָתְךָ לְרָעָה. הַטָּיָתְךָ לְטוֹבָה עַל פִּי אֶחָד, הַטָּיָתְךָ לְרָעָה עַל פִּי שְׁנַיִם, וְאֵין בֵּית דִּין שָׁקוּל, מוֹסִיפִין עֲלֵיהֶם עוֹד אֶחָד, הֲרֵי כָאן עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה. וְכַמָּה יְהֵא בְעִיר וּתְהֵא רְאוּיָה לְסַנְהֶדְרִין, מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים. רַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה אוֹמֵר, מָאתַיִם וּשְׁלשִׁים, כְּנֶגֶד שָׂרֵי עֲשָׂרוֹת: \n", | 1.6. "The greater Sanhedrin was made up of seventy one and the little Sanhedrin of twenty three.From where do we learn that the greater Sanhedrin should be made up of seventy one? As it says, “Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel” (Num. 11:16), and when Moses is added to them there is seventy one. Rabbi Judah says: “Seventy.” From where do we learn that the little Sanhedrin should be made up of twenty three? As it says, “The assembly shall judge”, “The assembly shall deliver” (Num. 35:24-25), an assembly that judges and an assembly that delivers, thus we have twenty. And from where do we know that an assembly has ten? As it says, “How long shall I bear this evil congregation?” (Num. 14:27) [which refers to the twelve spies] but Joshua and Caleb were not included. And from where do we learn that we should bring three others [to the twenty]? By inference from what it says, “You shall not follow after the many to do evil” (Ex. 23:2), I conclude that I must be with them to do well. Then why does it say, “[To follow] after the many to change judgment” (Ex. 23:2). [It means that] your verdict of condemnation should not be like your verdict of acquittal, for your verdict of acquittal is reached by the decision of a majority of one, but your verdict of condemnation must be reached by the decision of a majority of two. The court must not be divisible equally, therefore they add to them one more; thus they are twenty three. And how many should there be in a city that it may be fit to have a Sanhedrin? A hundred and twenty. Rabbi Nehemiah says: “Two hundred and thirty, so that [the Sanhedrin of twenty three] should correspond with them that are chiefs of [at least] groups of ten.", |
|
26. Mishnah, Avodah Zarah, 3.4 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 229| 3.4. "שָׁאַל פְּרוֹקְלוֹס בֶּן פִלוֹסְפוֹס אֶת רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל בְּעַכּוֹ, שֶׁהָיָה רוֹחֵץ בַּמֶּרְחָץ שֶׁל אַפְרוֹדִיטִי, אָמַר לוֹ, כָּתוּב בְּתוֹרַתְכֶם, וְלֹא יִדְבַּק בְּיָדְךָ מְאוּמָה מִן הַחֵרֶם. מִפְּנֵי מָה אַתָּה רוֹחֵץ בַּמֶּרְחָץ שֶׁל אַפְרוֹדִיטִי. אָמַר לוֹ, אֵין מְשִׁיבִין בַּמֶּרְחָץ. וּכְשֶׁיָּצָא אָמַר לוֹ, אֲנִי לֹא בָאתִי בִגְבוּלָהּ, הִיא בָאתָה בִגְבוּלִי, אֵין אוֹמְרִים, נַעֲשֶׂה מֶרְחָץ לְאַפְרוֹדִיטִי נוֹי, אֶלָּא אוֹמְרִים, נַעֲשֶׂה אַפְרוֹדִיטִי נוֹי לַמֶּרְחָץ. דָּבָר אַחֵר, אִם נוֹתְנִין לְךָ מָמוֹן הַרְבֵּה, אִי אַתָּה נִכְנָס לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה שֶׁלְּךָ עָרוֹם וּבַעַל קֶרִי וּמַשְׁתִּין בְּפָנֶיהָ, וְזוֹ עוֹמֶדֶת עַל פִּי הַבִּיב וְכָל הָעָם מַשְׁתִּינִין לְפָנֶיהָ. לֹא נֶאֱמַר אֶלָּא אֱלֹהֵיהֶם. אֶת שֶׁנּוֹהֵג בּוֹ מִשּׁוּם אֱלוֹהַּ, אָסוּר. וְאֶת שֶׁאֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג בּוֹ מִשּׁוּם אֱלוֹהַּ, מֻתָּר:", | 3.4. "Proclos, son of a plosphos, asked Rabban Gamaliel in Acco when the latter was bathing in the bathhouse of aphrodite. He said to him, “It is written in your torah, ‘let nothing that has been proscribed stick to your hand (Deuteronomy 13:18)’; why are you bathing in the bathhouse of Aphrodite?” He replied to him, “We do not answer [questions relating to torah] in a bathhouse.” When he came out, he said to him, “I did not come into her domain, she has come into mine. People do not say, ‘the bath was made as an adornment for Aphrodite’; rather they say, ‘Aphrodite was made as an adornment for the bath.’ Another reason is, even if you were given a large sum of money, you would not enter the presence of your idol while you were nude or had experienced seminal emission, nor would you urinate before it. But this [statue of Aphrodite] stands by a sewer and all people urinate before it. [In the torah] it is only stated, “their gods” (Deuteronomy 12:3) what is treated as a god is prohibited, what is not treated as a deity is permitted.", |
|
| 27. Palestinian Talmud, Berachot, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan nan nan nan nan |
| 28. Palestinian Talmud, Megillah, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan nan nan |
| 29. Palestinian Talmud, Pesahim, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan |
| 30. Palestinian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan nan nan |
| 31. Palestinian Talmud, Sukkah, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan |
| 32. Palestinian Talmud, Taanit, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan |
| 33. Palestinian Talmud, Sheqalim, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan |
| 34. Apuleius, Apology, 56.4 (2nd cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 326 |
| 35. Anon., Sifre Deuteronomy, 29 (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 327 |
| 36. Palestinian Talmud, Sheviit, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan nan nan |
| 37. Palestinian Talmud, Peah, None (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: nan nan |
| 38. Tosefta, Kelim Baba Batra, 1.11 (2nd cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 337 |
| 39. Minucius Felix, Octavius, 2.4 (2nd cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 326 |
40. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 338| 8b. פדיון שבוים מצוה רבה היא,אמר ליה רבא לרבה בר מרי מנא הא מילתא דאמור רבנן דפדיון שבוים מצוה רבה היא א"ל דכתיב (ירמיהו טו, ב) והיה כי יאמרו אליך אנה נצא ואמרת אליהם כה אמר ה' אשר למות למות ואשר לחרב לחרב ואשר לרעב לרעב ואשר לשבי לשבי ואמר רבי יוחנן כל המאוחר בפסוק זה קשה מחבירו,חרב קשה ממות אי בעית אימא קרא ואי בעית אימא סברא אי בעית אימא סברא האי קא מינוול והאי לא קא מינוול ואי בעית אימא קרא (תהלים קטז, טו) יקר בעיני ה' המותה לחסידיו,רעב קשה מחרב איבעית אימא סברא האי קא מצטער והאי לא קא מצטער איבעית אימא קרא (איכה ד, ט) טובים היו חללי חרב מחללי רעב שבי [קשה מכולם] דכולהו איתנהו ביה:,תנו רבנן קופה של צדקה נגבית בשנים ומתחלקת בשלשה נגבית בשנים שאין עושים שררות על הצבור פחות משנים ומתחלקת בשלשה כדיני ממונות,תמחוי נגבית בשלשה ומתחלקת בשלשה שגבויה וחלוקה שוים תמחוי בכל יום קופה מערב שבת לערב שבת,תמחוי לעניי עולם קופה לעניי העיר ורשאים בני העיר לעשות קופה תמחוי ותמחוי קופה ולשנותה לכל מה שירצו,ורשאין בני העיר להתנות על המדות ועל השערים ועל שכר פועלים ולהסיע על קיצתן,אמר מר אין עושין שררות על הצבור פחות משנים מנא הני מילי אמר רב נחמן אמר קרא (שמות כח, ה) והם יקחו את הזהב וגו',שררות הוא דלא עבדי הא הימוני מהימן מסייע ליה לרבי חנינא דאמר רבי חנינא מעשה ומינה רבי שני אחין על הקופה,מאי שררותא דאמר רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה לפי שממשכנין על הצדקה ואפילו בערב שבת איני והא כתיב (ירמיהו ל, כ) ופקדתי על כל לוחציו ואמר ר' יצחק בר שמואל בר מרתא משמיה דרב ואפילו על גבאי צדקה,לא קשיא הא דאמיד הא דלא אמיד כי הא דרבא אכפיה לרב נתן בר אמי ושקיל מיניה ארבע מאה זוזי לצדקה,(דניאל יב, ג) והמשכילים יזהירו כזוהר הרקיע וגו' (המשכילים יזהירו כזוהר הרקיע) זה דיין שדן דין אמת לאמתו (דניאל יב, ג) ומצדיקי הרבים ככוכבים לעולם ועד אלו גבאי צדקה,במתניתא תנא והמשכילים יזהירו כזוהר הרקיע זה דיין שדן דין אמת לאמתו וגבאי צדקה ומצדיקי הרבים ככוכבים לעולם ועד אלו מלמדי תינוקות כגון מאן אמר רב כגון רב שמואל בר שילת דרב אשכחיה לרב שמואל בר שילת דהוה קאי בגינתא אמר ליה שבקתיה להימנותך אמר ליה הא תליסר שנין דלא חזיא לי והשתא נמי דעתאי עלויהו,ורבנן מאי אמר רבינא (שופטים ה, לא) ואוהביו כצאת השמש בגבורתו,תנו רבנן גבאי צדקה אינן רשאין לפרוש זה מזה אבל פורש זה לשער וזה לחנות מצא מעות בשוק לא יתנם בתוך כיסו אלא נותנן לתוך ארנקי של צדקה ולכשיבא לביתו יטלם כיוצא בו היה נושה בחבירו מנה ופרעו בשוק לא יתננו לתוך כיסו אלא נותנן לתוך ארנקי של צדקה ולכשיבא לביתו יטלם,תנו רבנן גבאי צדקה שאין להם עניים לחלק פורטין לאחרים ואין פורטין לעצמן גבאי תמחוי שאין להם עניים לחלק מוכרין לאחרים ואין מוכרין לעצמן מעות של צדקה אין מונין אותן שתים אלא אחת אחת,אמר אביי מריש לא הוה יתיב מר אציפי דבי כנישתא כיון דשמעה להא דתניא ולשנותה לכל מה שירצו הוה יתיב אמר אביי מריש הוה עביד מר תרי כיסי חד לעניי דעלמא וחד לעניי דמתא כיון דשמעה להא דאמר ליה שמואל לרב תחליפא בר אבדימי עביד חד כיסא | 8b. that b redeeming captives is a great mitzva. /b , b Rava said to Rabba bar Mari: /b Concerning b this matter that the Sages stated, that redeeming captives is a great mitzva, from where is /b it derived? Rabba bar Mari b said to him: As it is written: “And it shall come to pass, when they say to you: To where shall we depart? Then you shall tell them: So says the Lord: Such as are for death, to death; and such as are for the sword, to the sword; and such as are for famine, to famine; and such as are for captivity, to captivity” /b (Jeremiah 15:2). b And Rabbi Yoḥa says: Whichever /b punishment b is /b written b later in this verse is more severe than the one /b before it.,Rabbi Yoḥa explains: b The sword is worse than death. If you wish, say /b that this is learned from b a verse; if you wish, say /b instead that it is derived by way of b logical reasoning. If you wish, say /b that this is derived by way of b logical reasoning: This /b punishment, i.e., death by sword, b mutilates /b the body, b but that /b punishment, i.e., natural death, b does not mutilate /b it. b And if you wish, say /b that the fact that the sword is worse than death is learned from b a verse: “Precious in the sight of the Lord is the death of His pious ones” /b (Psalms 116:15)., b Famine is worse than the sword. If you wish, say /b that this is derived by way of b logical reasoning: This one, /b who dies of famine, b suffers /b greatly before departing from this world, b but that one, /b who dies by the sword, b does not suffer. If you wish, say /b instead that the fact that famine is worse than the sword is learned from b a verse: “More fortunate were the victims of the sword than the victims of famine” /b (Lamentations 4:9). And b captivity is worse than all of them, as it includes all of them, /b i.e., famine, the sword, and death.,§ In connection with the previous discussion concerning charity distribution, the Gemara cites a i baraita /i in which b the Sages taught: /b Money for b the charity fund is collected by two /b people b and distributed by three /b people. b It is collected by two /b people b because one does not appoint an authority over the community /b composed b of fewer than two /b people. b And it is distributed by three people, like /b the number of judges needed in cases of b monetary law, /b since the distributors determine who receives money and who does not, as well as how much each person receives.,Food for b the charity platter is collected by three /b people b and distributed by three /b people b because its collection and its distribution /b take place on b the same /b day. Food for b the charity platter /b is collected and distributed b every day, /b and therefore a third individual must participate in the collection so that he will be available to take part in the distribution without delay; whereas the money of b the charity fund /b is distributed only once a week, on b each Shabbat eve. /b ,There are additional differences between these two types of charity operations: The food from b the charity platter /b is distributed b to the poor of the world, /b meaning, to any poor individual arriving in the city; the money of b the charity fund /b is allocated exclusively b to the poor of the city. But it is permitted for the residents of the city to use /b money that has been collected for b the charity fund /b to purchase food for b the charity platter /b to feed the poor; b and /b similarly they may use food that had been collected for b the charity platter /b for b the charity fund. /b In general, it is permitted for them b to change /b the purpose toward which charity will be used b to whatever they want, /b in accordance with the needs of the community.,Similarly, b it is permitted for the residents of the city to set the measures /b used in that city, b the prices /b set for products sold there, b and the wages /b paid b to /b its b workers, and to fine /b people b for violating their /b specifications, in order to enforce observance of these i halakhot /i . This marks the end of the i baraita /i , the details of which the Gemara proceeds to analyze., b The Master said /b in the i baraita /i : b One does not appoint an authority over the community /b composed b of fewer than two /b people. The Gemara asks: b From where are these matters /b derived? b Rav Naḥman says /b that this is derived from a verse referring to those engaged in building the Tabernacle and weaving the priestly vestments, who received the community’s donations. b The verse states: “And they shall take the gold, /b and the sky-blue wool, and the purple wool” (Exodus 28:5). The plural “they” indicates that the collection must be performed by two people.,The Gemara comments: The i baraita /i indicates that b authority may not be exercised /b by less than two people, b but /b even a single individual b is trusted /b to be a treasurer. That is, money for the charity fund is collected by two people, not because a single individual is not trusted not to misappropriate the money, but rather because a single individual should not be given authority over the community. b This supports /b the opinion b of Rabbi Ḥanina, as Rabbi Ḥanina says: There was an incident where Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b appointed two brothers to /b administer b the charity fund. /b Even though the brothers were relatives who are not trusted to testify against each other, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was not concerned and he appointed them.,The Gemara asks: b What authority /b is associated with collecting charity? The Gemara answers: b As Rav Naḥman says /b that b Rabba bar Avuh says: Because they can seize collateral for the charity; /b i.e., they can collect charity by force, b and even on Shabbat eve, /b when people are busy and might claim that they have no time or money. The Gemara objects: b Is that so? But isn’t it written: “I will punish all that oppress them” /b (Jeremiah 30:20), b and Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Shmuel bar Marta says in the name of Rav: And /b punishment will be meted out b even to charity collectors? /b If charity collectors are permitted to force people to contribute charity, why are they counted among Israel’s oppressors?,The Gemara answers: This is b not difficult. This, /b Rabbi Naḥman’s statement, applies b when /b the contributor is b rich, /b in which case the collectors may seize money from him even by force. b That, /b Rabbi Yitzḥak’s statement, applies b when /b he is b not rich, /b in which case the collectors who take money from him by force are termed oppressors of Israel. b This /b right to force contributions from the rich is b like /b what occurred in the incident in which b Rava compelled Rav Natan bar Ami and took four hundred dinars from him for charity. /b ,Having raised the issue of charity collection, the Gemara cites various rabbinic expositions with regard to the matter. The verse states: b “And they who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the firmament; /b and they who turn many to righteousness like the stars for ever and ever” (Daniel 12:3). b “And they who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the firmament”; this is a judge who judges an absolutely true judgment, /b as his wisdom and understanding lead him to a correct judgment. b “And they who turn many to righteousness like the stars for ever and ever”; these are the charity collectors, /b who facilitate the giving of charity., b It was taught in a i baraita /i : “And they who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the firmament”; this is a judge who judges an absolutely true judgment and /b also b charity collectors. “And they who turn many to righteousness like the stars for ever and ever”; these are schoolteachers. /b The Gemara asks: b Like whom? /b Certainly not every schoolteacher is worthy of such accolades. b Rav said: For example, Rav Shmuel bar Sheilat. As /b it is told that b Rav /b once b found Rav Shmuel bar Sheilat standing in a garden. /b Rav b said to him: Have you abandoned your trust /b and neglected your students? Rav Shmuel bar Sheilat b said to him: It has been thirteen years /b now b that I have not seen /b my garden, b and even now my thoughts are on /b the children.,In light of the praises heaped upon judges, tax collectors, and schoolteachers, the Gemara asks: b And what /b was said about b the Sages? Ravina said /b that about them it is stated: b “But let them that love Him be as the sun when it comes out in its might” /b (Judges 5:31).,The Gemara resumes its discussion of the i halakhot /i of charity collection: b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Charity collectors may not separate from each other, /b each one collecting in a different place; b but /b in a place where the two can see each other, one collector b may separate /b from the other, e.g., b this /b one going b to the gate /b of a house b and that /b one going b to a store. /b If a charity collector b found coins in the market, he may not put them into his /b own b pocket, but /b rather b he must put them into the charity purse, and /b then later b when he comes home, he may take them /b from there. This is necessary so that people should not suspect him of taking charity money for himself. b Similarly, /b if the charity collector b was owed one hundred dinars by another, and /b the latter b repaid /b his debt b in the market, /b the collector b may not put /b the money he received b into his /b own b pocket, but /b rather b he must put it into the charity purse, and /b then later b when he comes home, he may take it. /b , b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Charity collectors who have no poor people to /b whom they can b distribute /b the money, b may exchange [ i poretin /i ] /b the money, i.e., exchange the copper coins, which tend to rust, for silver dinars, b with other /b people, b but they should not change it /b by b themselves, /b i.e., with their own coins, to avoid any suspicion of wrongdoing. Likewise, b collectors /b of food b for the charity platter who do not have poor people /b to whom b to distribute /b the food b may sell /b the food b to others, but they should not sell it to themselves, /b for a similar reason. b Coins of charity are not counted two /b by two, b but rather one by one, /b to avoid errors in tallying., b Abaye said: At first, /b my b Master, /b Rabba, b would not sit on the mats in the synagogue because /b they had been purchased with charity funds. b Once he heard that which is taught /b in a i baraita /i , that it is permitted for the residents of a city b to change /b the purpose toward which charity will be used b to whatever they want, he did sit /b on them. b Abaye said: At first, /b my b Master, /b Rabba, b would make two purses, one for the poor of /b the rest of b the world, and one for the poor of his city. Once he heard what Shmuel said to Rav Taḥalifa bar Avdimi: Make /b only b one purse, /b |
|
41. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 340| 27b. לא כנגד רבו ולא אחורי רבו,ותניא רבי אליעזר אומר המתפלל אחורי רבו והנותן שלום לרבו והמחזיר שלום לרבו והחולק על ישיבתו של רבו והאומר דבר שלא שמע מפי רבו גורם לשכינה שתסתלק מישראל,שאני רבי ירמיה בר אבא דתלמיד חבר הוה והיינו דקאמר ליה רבי ירמיה בר אבא לרב מי בדלת אמר ליה אין בדילנא ולא אמר מי בדיל מר,ומי בדיל והאמר רבי אבין פעם אחת התפלל רבי של שבת בערב שבת ונכנס למרחץ ויצא ושנה לן פרקין ועדיין לא חשכה אמר רבא ההוא דנכנס להזיע וקודם גזירה הוה,איני והא אביי שרא ליה לרב דימי בר ליואי לכברויי סלי,ההוא טעותא הואי,וטעותא מי הדרא והא אמר אבידן פעם אחת נתקשרו שמים בעבים כסבורים העם לומר חשכה הוא ונכנסו לבית הכנסת והתפללו של מוצאי שבת בשבת ונתפזרו העבים וזרחה החמה,ובאו ושאלו את רבי ואמר הואיל והתפללו התפללו שאני צבור דלא מטרחינן להו:,א"ר חייא בר אבין רב צלי של שבת בערב שבת רבי יאשיה מצלי של מוצאי שבת בשבת רב צלי של שבת בערב שבת אומר קדושה על הכוס או אינו אומר קדושה על הכוס ת"ש דאמר רב נחמן אמר שמואל מתפלל אדם של שבת בערב שבת ואומר קדושה על הכוס והלכתא כוותיה,רבי יאשיה מצלי של מוצאי שבת בשבת אומר הבדלה על הכוס או אינו אומר הבדלה על הכוס ת"ש דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל מתפלל אדם של מוצאי שבת בשבת ואומר הבדלה על הכוס,אמר ר' זירא אמר רבי אסי אמר ר' אלעזר א"ר חנינא אמר רב בצד עמוד זה התפלל ר' ישמעאל בר' יוסי של שבת בערב שבת,כי אתא עולא אמר בצד תמרה הוה ולא בצד עמוד הוה ולא ר' ישמעאל ברבי יוסי הוה אלא ר' אלעזר בר' יוסי הוה ולא של שבת בערב שבת הוה אלא של מוצאי שבת בשבת הוה:,תפלת הערב אין לה קבע: מאי אין לה קבע אילימא דאי בעי מצלי כוליה ליליא ליתני תפלת הערב כל הלילה אלא מאי אין לה קבע,כמאן דאמר תפלת ערבית רשות דאמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל תפלת ערבית רבן גמליאל אומר חובה ר' יהושע אומר רשות אמר אביי הלכה כדברי האומר חובה ורבא אמר הלכה כדברי האומר רשות.,ת"ר מעשה בתלמיד אחד שבא לפני ר' יהושע א"ל תפלת ערבית רשות או חובה אמר ליה רשות,בא לפני רבן גמליאל א"ל תפלת ערבית רשות או חובה א"ל חובה א"ל והלא ר' יהושע אמר לי רשות א"ל המתן עד שיכנסו בעלי תריסין לבית המדרש,כשנכנסו בעלי תריסין עמד השואל ושאל תפלת ערבית רשות או חובה א"ל רבן גמליאל חובה אמר להם רבן גמליאל לחכמים כלום יש אדם שחולק בדבר זה אמר ליה ר' יהושע לאו א"ל והלא משמך אמרו לי רשות,אמר ליה יהושע עמוד על רגליך ויעידו בך עמד רבי יהושע על רגליו ואמר אלמלא אני חי והוא מת יכול החי להכחיש את המת ועכשיו שאני חי והוא חי היאך יכול החי להכחיש את החי,היה רבן גמליאל יושב ודורש ור' יהושע עומד על רגליו עד שרננו כל העם ואמרו לחוצפית התורגמן עמוד ועמד,אמרי עד כמה נצעריה וניזיל בר"ה אשתקד צעריה בבכורות במעשה דר' צדוק צעריה הכא נמי צעריה תא ונעבריה,מאן נוקים ליה נוקמיה לרבי יהושע בעל מעשה הוא נוקמיה לר' עקיבא דילמא עניש ליה דלית ליה זכות אבות,אלא נוקמיה לר' אלעזר בן עזריה דהוא חכם והוא עשיר והוא עשירי לעזרא הוא חכם דאי מקשי ליה מפרק ליה והוא עשיר דאי אית ליה לפלוחי לבי קיסר אף הוא אזל ופלח והוא עשירי לעזרא דאית ליה זכות אבות ולא מצי עניש ליה אתו ואמרו ליה ניחא ליה למר דליהוי ריש מתיבתא אמר להו איזיל ואימליך באינשי ביתי אזל ואמליך בדביתהו אמרה ליה | 27b. directly b next to his rabbi, /b presumptuously indicating that he is his rabbi’s equal, b and behind his rabbi /b as it creates the impression that he is bowing to him ( i Tosafot /i )?, b And it was taught /b in a i baraita /i , in a more extreme manner, as b Rabbi Eliezer says: One who prays behind his rabbi and one who greets his rabbi /b without waiting for his rabbi to greet him first, b one who returns his rabbi’s greeting /b without saying: Greetings to you, rabbi, b one who rivals his rabbi’s yeshiva, /b i.e., establishes a yeshiva of his own and teaches during his rabbi’s lifetime without his consent (Rambam), b and one who says something /b in the name of his rabbi b which he did not hear directly from his rabbi, causes the Divine Presence to withdraw from Israel. /b ,With regard to Rabbi Yirmeya’s conduct, the Gemara explains that b Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba is different, /b as he was not a mere student of Rav. Rather, he b was a disciple-colleague /b and was, therefore, permitted to act that way. b And that is why /b on one occasion, when Rav prayed the Shabbat prayer early, b Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba asked him: Did you distance yourself /b from labor and accept the sanctity of Shabbat? b Rav said to him: Yes, I distanced myself. And /b Rabbi Yirmeya b did not say to him: Did the Master distance himself, /b as would have been appropriate had he merely been Rav’s student.,Although Rav replied that he distanced himself from labor, b did he /b indeed need to b distance himself /b from labor? b Didn’t Rabbi Avin say: Once Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b prayed /b the b Shabbat /b prayer b on the eve of Shabbat /b before nightfall. b He /b then b entered the bathhouse and emerged and taught us our chapters /b that we had learned, b and it was not yet dark. Rava said: That /b is a case where he had b entered /b the bathhouse b to perspire, and it was before the /b Sages issued a b decree /b prohibiting perspiring in a bathhouse on Shabbat.,The Gemara asks: b Is that so, /b that he was required to refrain from labor? b Didn’t Abaye permit Rav Dimi bar Liva’ei to fumigate baskets with sulfur /b even though he had already recited the Shabbat prayer, indicating that it is permitted to perform labor even after the Shabbat prayer?,The Gemara responds: b That was an error, /b as Rav Dimi did not intend to begin Shabbat early. It was a cloudy day and he mistakenly thought that the sun had set and that was why he prayed. Consequently, even though he prayed, the Shabbat prayer did not obligate him to conduct himself in accordance with the sanctity of Shabbat and he was allowed to perform labor even after his prayer.,The Gemara goes on to ask: b Can a mistake be reversed, /b enabling one to conduct himself as if he had not prayed? b Didn’t Avidan, /b a student of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, b say: Once the sky became overcast, /b leading b the people to think that it was /b the b dark /b of night; b they entered the synagogue and recited the /b evening b prayer of the conclusion of Shabbat on Shabbat. And /b later, b the clouds cleared and the sun shone, /b indicating that it was still day., b And they came and asked Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi what they should do, b and he said: Since they have prayed, they have prayed, /b and they need not pray again. Although they prayed erroneously, their mistake is not reversible and what was done remains. The Gemara responds: b A community is different /b in b that we do not burden them /b to pray again.,The Gemara continues to discuss the possibility of reciting the evening prayer early, even on Shabbat. b Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Avin said: Rav prayed /b the b Shabbat /b prayer b on the eve of Shabbat /b before nightfall. b Rabbi Yoshiya would pray the /b evening b prayer of the conclusion of Shabbat on Shabbat. /b With regard to the fact that b Rav prayed /b the b Shabbat /b prayer b on the eve of Shabbat /b before nightfall, the dilemma is raised: In those cases, did b he recite i kiddush /i over the cup /b of wine, b or did he not recite i kiddush /i over the cup /b of wine before the stars emerged? b Come and hear /b a resolution to this, as b Rav Naḥman said /b that b Shmuel said: One prays /b the b Shabbat /b prayer b on the eve of Shabbat /b before nightfall b and recites i kiddush /i over the cup /b of wine. b And the i halakha /i is in accordance with his /b ruling.,A similar dilemma was raised concerning the fact that b Rabbi Yoshiya would pray the /b evening b prayer of the conclusion of Shabbat on Shabbat: /b After praying, while it is still Shabbat, b does he recite i havdala /i over the cup /b of wine b or does one not recite i havdala /i over the cup /b of wine? b Come and hear /b a resolution to this, as b Rav Yehuda said /b that b Shmuel said: One prays the /b evening b prayer of the conclusion of Shabbat on Shabbat and recites i havdala /i over the cup /b of wine., b Rabbi Zeira said /b that b Rabbi Asi said /b that b Rabbi Elazar said /b that b Rabbi Ḥanina said /b that b Rav said: Alongside this /b specific b pillar /b before me, b Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, prayed /b the b Shabbat /b prayer b on the eve of Shabbat /b before nightfall., b But when Ulla came /b from the Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he related a different version of this story. b He said /b that he had heard: This transpired b beside a palm tree, not beside a pillar, and it was not Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, but /b it was b Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Yosei, and it was not /b the b Shabbat /b prayer b on Shabbat eve /b before nightfall, b rather /b it was the b prayer of the conclusion of Shabbat on Shabbat. /b ,We learned in the mishna: b The evening prayer /b may be recited throughout the night and b is not fixed /b to a specific hour. The Gemara asks: b What is the meaning of is not fixed? If you say that if /b one b wishes, he may pray throughout the night, /b then b let /b the mishna b teach: The evening prayer /b may be recited b throughout the night. Rather, what is /b the meaning of b not fixed? /b ,It is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b the one who said: The evening prayer is optional. /b As b Rav Yehuda said /b that b Shmuel said /b with regard to b the evening prayer. Rabban Gamliel says: /b It is b obligatory. Rabbi Yehoshua says: /b It is b optional. Abaye said: The i halakha /i is in accordance with the statement of the one who said: /b The evening prayer is b obligatory. Rava said: The i halakha /i is in accordance with the statement of the one who said: /b The evening prayer is b optional. /b , b The Sages taught: /b There was b an incident involving a student, who came before Rabbi Yehoshua. /b The student b said to him: Is the evening prayer optional or obligatory? /b Rabbi Yehoshua b said to him: Optional. /b ,The same student b came before Rabban Gamliel and said to him: Is the evening prayer optional or obligatory? /b Rabban Gamliel b said to him: Obligatory. /b The student b said to /b Rabban Gamliel: b But didn’t Rabbi Yehoshua tell me /b that the evening prayer is b optional? /b Rabban Gamliel b said to /b the student: b Wait until the “masters of the shields,” /b a reference to the Torah scholars who battle in the war of Torah, b enter the study hall, /b at which point we will discuss this issue., b When the masters of the shields entered, the questioner stood /b before everyone present b and asked: Is the evening prayer optional or obligatory? Rabban Gamliel said to him: Obligatory. /b In order to ascertain whether or not Rabbi Yehoshua still maintained his opinion, b Rabban Gamliel said to /b the Sages: b Is there any person who disputes this matter? Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: No, /b no one disagrees. In deference to the i Nasi /i , he did not wish to argue with him publicly ( i Tziyyun LeNefesh Ḥayya /i ). Rabban Gamliel b said to /b Rabbi Yehoshua: b But was it not in your name that they told me /b that the evening prayer is b optional? /b ,Rabban Gamliel b said to /b Rabbi Yehoshua: b Yehoshua, stand on your feet and they will testify against you. Rabbi Yehoshua stood on his feet and said: If I were alive and /b the student b were dead, the living can contradict the dead, /b and I could deny issuing that ruling. b Now that I am alive and he is alive, how can the living contradict the living? /b I have no choice but to admit that I said it.,In the meantime, b Rabban Gamliel, /b as the i Nasi /i , b was sitting and lecturing, and Rabbi Yehoshua /b all the while b was standing on his feet, /b because Rabban Gamliel did not instruct him to sit. He remained standing in deference to the i Nasi /i . This continued for some time, b until /b it aroused great resentment against Rabban Gamliel, and b all of the people /b assembled began b murmuring and said to Ḥutzpit the disseminator: Stop /b conveying Rabban Gamliel’s lecture. b And he stopped. /b ,The Gemara relates that in their murmuring b they said: How long will /b Rabban Gamliel b continue afflicting him? Last year on Rosh HaShana, he afflicted him; /b Rabban Gamliel ordered Rabbi Yehoshua to come to him carrying his staff and bag, on the day on which Yom Kippur occurred, according to Rabbi Yehoshua’s calculations. b Regarding the firstborn, in the incident /b involving the question b of Rabbi Tzadok, he afflicted him /b just as he did now, and forced him to remain standing as punishment for his failure to defend his differing opinion. b Here too, he is afflicting him. Let us remove him /b from his position as i Nasi /i .,It was so agreed, but the question arose: b Who shall we establish /b in his place? Shall we b establish Rabbi Yehoshua /b in his place? The Sages rejected that option because Rabbi Yehoshua b was party to the incident /b for which Rabban Gamliel was deposed. Appointing him would be extremely upsetting for Rabban Gamliel. Shall we b establish Rabbi Akiva /b in his place? The Sages rejected that option because Rabbi Akiva, who descended from a family of converts, would be vulnerable. b Perhaps /b due to Rabban Gamliel’s resentment he b would /b cause b him /b to be divinely b punished as he lacks the merit of his ancestors /b to protect him., b Rather, /b suggested the Sages, b let us establish Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya /b in his place, his outstanding characteristics set him apart from the other candidates. b He is wise, rich, and a tenth /b generation descendant b of Ezra. /b The Gemara explains: b He is wise, so if /b Rabban Gamliel raises a b challenge /b in matters of Torah, b he will answer it /b and not be embarrassed. b And he is rich, so if the need /b arises b to pay homage to the Caesar’s court /b and serve as a representative of Israel to lobby and negotiate, he has sufficient wealth to cover the costs of the long journeys, taxes, and gifts, so b he too is able to go and pay homage. And he is /b a b tenth /b generation descendant b of Ezra, so he has the merit of his ancestors, and /b Rabban Gamliel b will be unable to /b cause b him /b to be b punished. They came and said to him: Would the Master consent to being the Head of the Yeshiva? He said to them: I will go and consult with my household. He went and consulted with his wife. She said to him: /b |
|
42. Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 318| 55b. נותנין קרפף לעיר דברי רבי מאיר וחכמים אומרים לא אמרו קרפף אלא בין שתי עיירות,ואיתמר רב הונא אמר קרפף לזו וקרפף לזו וחייא בר רב אמר אין נותנין אלא קרפף אחד לשניהם,צריכא דאי אשמעינן הכא משום דהוה ליה צד היתר מעיקרא אבל התם אימא לא,ואי אשמעינן התם משום דדחיקא תשמישתייהו אבל הכא דלא דחיקא תשמישתייהו אימא לא צריכא,וכמה הוי בין יתר לקשת רבה בר רב הונא אמר אלפים אמה רבא בריה דרבה בר רב הונא אמר אפילו יתר מאלפים אמה,אמר אביי כוותיה דרבא בריה דרבה בר רב הונא מסתברא דאי בעי הדר אתי דרך בתים:,היו שם גדודיות גבוהות עשרה טפחים כו': מאי גדודיות אמר רב יהודה שלש מחיצות שאין עליהן תקרה,איבעיא להו שתי מחיצות ויש עליהן תקרה מהו ת"ש אלו שמתעברין עמה נפש שיש בה ארבע אמות על ארבע אמות והגשר והקבר שיש בהן בית דירה ובית הכנסת שיש בה בית דירה לחזן ובית עבודת כוכבים שיש בה בית דירה לכומרים והאורוות והאוצרות שבשדות ויש בהן בית דירה והבורגנין שבתוכה והבית שבים הרי אלו מתעברין עמה,ואלו שאין מתעברין עמה נפש שנפרצה משתי רוחותיה אילך ואילך והגשר והקבר שאין להן בית דירה ובית הכנסת שאין לה בית דירה לחזן ובית עבודת כוכבים שאין לה בית דירה לכומרים והאורוות והאוצרות שבשדות שאין להן בית דירה ובור ושיח ומערה וגדר ושובך שבתוכה והבית שבספינה אין אלו מתעברין עמה,קתני מיהת נפש שנפרצה משתי רוחותיה אילך ואילך מאי לאו דאיכא תקרה לא דליכא תקרה,בית שבים למאי חזי אמר רב פפא בית שעשוי לפנות בו כלים שבספינה,ומערה אין מתעברת עמה והתני רבי חייא מערה מתעברת עמה אמר אביי כשיש בנין על פיה,ותיפוק ליה משום בנין גופיה לא צריכא להשלים,אמר רב הונא יושבי צריפין אין מודדין להן אלא מפתח בתיהן,מתיב רב חסדא (במדבר לג, מט) ויחנו על הירדן מבית הישימות ואמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יוחנן לדידי חזי לי ההוא אתרא והוי תלתא פרסי על תלתא פרסי,ותניא כשהן נפנין אין נפנין לא לפניהם ולא לצדיהן אלא לאחריהן,אמר ליה רבא דגלי מדבר קאמרת כיון דכתיב בהו (במדבר ט, כ) על פי ה' יחנו ועל פי ה' יסעו כמאן דקביע להו דמי,אמר רב חיננא בר רב כהנא אמר רב אשי אם יש שם שלש חצירות של שני בתים הוקבעו,אמר רב יהודה אמר רב יושבי צריפין והולכי מדברות חייהן אינן חיים ונשיהן ובניהן אינן שלהן,תניא נמי הכי אליעזר איש ביריא אומר יושבי צריפין כיושבי קברים ועל בנותיהם הוא אומר (דברים כז, כא) ארור שוכב עם כל בהמה,מאי טעמא עולא אמר שאין להן מרחצאות ורבי יוחנן אמר מפני שמרגישין זה לזה בטבילה,מאי בינייהו איכא בינייהו נהרא דסמיך לביתא,אמר רב הונא כל עיר שאין בה ירק אין תלמיד חכם רשאי לדור בה למימרא דירק מעליא והתניא שלשה מרבין את הזבל וכופפין את הקומה ונוטלין אחד מחמש מאות ממאור עיניו של אדם ואלו הן | 55b. b One allocates a i karpef /i to /b every b city, /b i.e., an area of slightly more than seventy cubits is added to the boundary of a city and the Shabbat limit is measured from there; this is b the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Sages say: They spoke of /b the measure of b a i karpef /i only /b with regard to the space b between two /b adjacent b cities, /b i.e., if adjacent cities are separated by a shorter distance than that, they are considered one city., b And it was stated /b that the i amora’im /i disputed this issue. b Rav Huna said: A i karpef /i /b is added b to this /b city b and /b another b i karpef /i /b is added b to that /b city, so that as long as the cities are not separated by a distance of slightly more than 141 cubits, they are considered one entity. b And Ḥiyya bar Rav said: One allocates only one i karpef /i to the two of them. /b Accordingly, Rav Huna has already stated that the measure of a i karpef /i is added to both cities in determining whether they are close enough to be considered a single entity.,The Gemara answers: b It is necessary /b for Rav Huna to state this i halakha /i in both instances, b as, had he taught it to us /b only b here, /b in the case of the breached wall, one might have said that a i karpef /i is allocated to each city only in that case b because it had an aspect of permissibility from the outset, /b namely, the two sections originally formed one city. b But there, /b with regard to the two cities, b say /b that this is b not the case /b and the two cities are only considered as one if they are separated by less than the measure of a single i karpef /i ., b And had he taught it /b to b us /b only b there, /b with regard to the two cities, one might have said that only in that case is a i karpef /i allocated to each city b because /b one i karpef /i would be too b cramped for the use /b of both cities. b But here, /b in the case of the breached wall, b where /b one i karpef /i b would not be /b too b cramped for the use of /b both sections, as the vacant space is inside the city, in an area that had not been used in this fashion before the wall was breached, b say /b that this is b not /b the case and a single i karpef /i is sufficient. Therefore, b it was necessary /b to state this i halakha /i in both cases.,The Gemara asks: b And how much /b distance may there be b between /b the imaginary b bowstring and /b the center of the b bow /b in a city that is shaped like a bow? b Rabba bar Rav Huna said: Two thousand cubits. Rava, son of Rabba bar Rav Huna, said: Even more than two thousand cubits. /b , b Abaye said: It stands to reason in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rava, son of Rabba bar Rav Huna, as if one wants, he can return and go /b anywhere within the bow b by way of the houses. /b Since one can always walk to the end of the city, and from there he is permitted to walk down the line of the imaginary bowstring, he should also be permitted to walk from the middle of the bow to the bowstring, even if the distance is more than two thousand cubits.,We learned in the mishna: If b there were remts /b of walls b ten handbreadths high /b on the outskirts of a city, they are considered part of the city, and the Shabbat limit is measured from them. The Gemara asks: b What are /b these b remts? Rav Yehuda said: Three partitions that do not have a roof over them, /b which are considered part of the city despite the fact that they do not comprise a proper house., b The dilemma was raised before /b the Sages: In the case of b two partitions /b that b have a roof over them, what is /b the i halakha /i ? Is this structure also treated like a house? b Come /b and b hear /b a proof from the i Tosefta /i : b These /b are the structures b that are included in /b the city’s b extension: A monument [ i nefesh /i ] /b over a grave b that is four cubits by four cubits; and a bridge or a grave in which there is a residence; and a synagogue in which there is a residence for the sexton /b or synagogue attendant, and which is used not only for prayer services at specific times; b and an idolatrous temple in which there is a residence for the priests; and /b similarly, horse b stables and storehouses in the fields in which there is a residence; and /b small b watchtowers in /b the fields; b and /b similarly, b a house on /b an island in b the sea /b or lake, which is located within seventy cubits of the city; all of b these /b structures b are included in the /b city’s boundaries., b And these /b structures b are not included in /b the boundaries of a city: b A tomb that was breached on both sides, /b from b here /b to b there, /b i.e., from one side all the way to the other; b and /b similarly, b a bridge and a grave that do not have a residence; and a synagogue that does not have a residence for the sexton; and an idolatrous temple that does not have a residence for the priests; and /b similarly, b stables and storehouses in fields that do not have a residence, /b and therefore are not used for human habitation; b and a cistern, and an /b elongated water b ditch, and a cave, /b i.e., a covered cistern, b and a wall, and a dovecote in /b the field; b and /b similarly, b a house on a boat /b that is not permanently located within seventy cubits of the city; all of b these /b structures b are not included in the /b city’s boundaries., b In any case, it was taught /b that b a tomb that was breached on both sides, /b from b here /b to b there, /b is not included in the city’s boundaries. b What, /b is this b not /b referring to a case where b there is a roof /b on the tomb, and the two remaining walls are not included in the city’s boundaries even though they have a roof? The Gemara answers: b No, /b the i Tosefta /i is referring to a case b where there is no roof /b on the tomb.,The Gemara asks: b A house on /b an island in b the sea, what is /b it b suitable for /b if it is not actually part of the inhabited area? b Rav Pappa said: /b It is referring to b a house used to move a ship’s utensils /b into it for storage.,The Gemara raises another question with regard to the i Tosefta /i : b And is a cave /b on the outskirts of a city really b not included in its extension? Didn’t Rabbi Ḥiyya teach /b in a i baraita /i : b A cave is included in its extension? Abaye said: /b That statement applies b when there is a structure /b built b at its entrance, /b which is treated like a house on the outskirts of the city.,The Gemara asks: If there is a structure at the entrance to the cave, why is the cave mentioned? b Let him derive /b the i halakha /i that it is treated like a house b because of the structure itself. /b The Gemara answers: b No, it is necessary /b only in a case where the cave serves b to complete /b the structure, i.e., where the area of the structure and cave combined are only four by four cubits, which is the minimum size of a house.,The discussion with regard to measuring Shabbat limits has been referring to a properly built city. b Rav Huna said: Those who dwell in huts, /b i.e., in thatched hovels of straw and willow branches, are not considered inhabitants of a city. Therefore, b one measures /b the Shabbat limit b for them only from the entrance to their homes; /b the huts are not combined together and considered a city., b Rav Ḥisda raised an objection: /b The Torah states with regard to the Jewish people in the desert: b “And they pitched by the Jordan, from Beit-HaYeshimot /b to Avel-Shittim in the plains of Moab” (Numbers 33:49), b and Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: I myself saw that place, and it is three parasangs [ i parsa /i ], /b the equivalent of twelve i mil /i , b by three parasangs. /b , b And it was taught /b in a i baraita /i : b When they would defecate /b in the wilderness, b they would not defecate in front of themselves, /b i.e., in front of the camp, b and not to their sides, /b due to respect for the Divine Presence; b rather, /b they would do so b behind /b the camp. This indicates that even on Shabbat, when people needed to defecate, they would walk the entire length of the camp, which was considerably longer than two thousand cubits, which equals one i mil /i . It is apparent that the encampment of the Jewish people was considered to be a city despite the fact that it was composed of tents alone. How, then, did Rav Huna say that those who live in huts are not considered city dwellers?, b Rava said to him: The banners of the desert, you say? /b Are you citing a proof from the practice of the Jewish people as they traveled through the desert according to their tribal banners? b Since it is written with regard to them: “According to the commandment of the Lord they remained encamped, and according to the commandment of the Lord they journeyed” /b (Numbers 9:20), b it was considered as though it were a permanent /b residence b for them. /b A camp that is established in accordance with the word of God is regarded as a permanent settlement., b Rav Ḥina bar Rav Kahana said that Rav Ashi said: If there are three courtyards of two /b properly built b houses /b among a settlement of huts, b they have been established /b as a permanent settlement, and the Shabbat limit is measured from the edge of the settlement.,On the topic of people who dwell in huts, b Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: Those who dwell in huts, /b such as shepherds who pass from one place to another and stay in a single location for only a brief period, b and desert travelers, their lives are not lives, /b i.e., they lead extremely difficult lives, b and their wives and children are not /b always b their /b own, as will be explained below., b That was also taught /b in the following i baraita /i : b Eliezer of Biriyya says: Those who dwell in huts are like those who dwell in graves. And with regard to /b one who marries b their daughters, /b the verse b says: “Cursed be he who sleeps with any manner of beast” /b (Deuteronomy 27:21).,The Gemara asks: b What is the reason /b for this harsh statement with regard to the daughters of those who dwell in huts or travel in deserts? b Ulla said: They do not have bathhouses, /b and therefore the men have to walk a significant distance in order to bathe. There is concern that while they are away their wives commit adultery, and that consequently their children are not really their own. b And Rabbi Yoḥa said: Because they sense when one another immerses. /b Similarly to the men, the women must walk a significant distance in order to immerse in a ritual bath. Since the settlement is very small and everyone knows when the women go to immerse, it is possible for an unscrupulous man to use this information to engage in adulterous relations with them by following them and taking advantage of the fact that they are alone.,The Gemara asks: b What is the /b practical difference b between /b the explanations of Ulla and Rabbi Yoḥa? The Gemara explains: b There is /b a practical difference b between them /b in a case where there is b a river that is adjacent to the house, /b and it is suitable for immersion but not for bathing. Consequently, the women would not have to go far to immerse themselves, but the men would still have to walk a significant distance in order to bathe.,Having mentioned various places of residence, the Gemara cites what b Rav Huna said: Any city that does not have vegetables, a Torah scholar is not permitted to dwell there /b for health reasons. The Gemara asks: b Is that to say that vegetables are beneficial /b to a person’s health? b Wasn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Three /b things b increase one’s waste, bend /b his b stature, and remove one five-hundredth of the light of a person’s eyes; and they are /b |
|
43. Babylonian Talmud, Moed Qatan, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 338| 22b. ממעט על אביו ועל אמו ממעט,על כל המתים כולן רצה חולץ רצה אינו חולץ על אביו ועל אמו חולץ,ומעשה בגדול הדור אחד שמת אביו וביקש לחלוץ וביקש גדול הדור אחר שעמו לחלוץ ונמנע ולא חלץ,אמר אביי גדול הדור רבי גדול הדור שעמו ר' יעקב בר אחא ואיכא דאמרי גדול הדור ר' יעקב בר אחא גדול הדור שעמו רבי,בשלמא למ"ד גדול הדור שעמו רבי היינו דנמנע ולא חלץ,אלא למ"ד רבי יעקב בר אחא אמאי נמנע ולא חלץ רשב"ג נשיא הוה וכולי עלמא מיחייבי למיחלץ קשיא,על כל המתים כולן מסתפר לאחר ל' יום על אביו ועל אמו עד שיגערו בו חבריו על כל המתים כולן נכנס לבית השמחה לאחר ל' יום על אביו ועל אמו לאחר י"ב חדש,אמר רבה בר בר חנה ולשמחת מריעות מיתיבי ולשמחה ולמריעות ל' יום קשיא,אמימר מתני הכי אמר רבה בר בר חנה ולשמחת מריעות מותר ליכנס לאלתר והא תניא לשמחה שלשים ולמריעות שלשים,ל"ק הא באריסותא הא בפורענותא,על כל המתים כולן קורע טפח על אביו ועל אמו עד שיגלה את לבו א"ר אבהו מאי קרא (שמואל ב א, יא) ויחזק דוד בבגדיו ויקרעם ואין אחיזה פחות מטפח,על כל המתים כולן אפילו לבוש עשרה חלוקין אינו קורע אלא עליון על אביו ועל אמו קורע את כולן ואפיקרסותו אינה מעכבת,אחד האיש ואחד אשה ר"ש בן אלעזר אומר האשה קורעת את התחתון ומחזירתו לאחוריה וחוזרת וקורעת את העליון,על כל המתים כולן רצה מבדיל קמי שפה שלו רצה אינו מבדיל על אביו ועל אמו מבדיל,רבי יהודה אומר כל קריעה שאינו מבדיל קמי שפה שלו אינו אלא קרע של תיפלות אמר רבי אבהו מ"ט דר' יהודה דכתיב (מלכים ב ב, יב) ויחזק בבגדיו ויקרעם לשנים קרעים ממשמע שנאמר ויקרעם איני יודע שהן לשנים אלא שנראין קרועים כשנים,על כל המתים כולן שולל לאחר שבעה ומאחה לאחר שלשים על אביו ועל אמו שולל לאחר ל' ואינו מאחה לעולם והאשה שוללתו לאלתר מפני כבודה,כי אתא רבין א"ר יוחנן על כל המתים רצה קורע ביד רצה קורע בכלי על אביו ועל אמו ביד,וא"ר חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן על כל המתים כולן מבפנים על אביו ועל אמו קורע מבחוץ אמר רב חסדא וכן לנשיא,מיתיבי לא הושוו לאביו ולאמו אלא לאיחוי בלבד,מאי לאו אפילו לנשיא לא לבר מנשיא,נשיאה שכיב א"ל רב חסדא (לרב חנן בר רבא) כפי אסיתא וקום עלה ואחוי קריעה לעלמא,על חכם חולץ מימין על אב ב"ד משמאל על נשיא מכאן ומכאן,ת"ר חכם שמת בית מדרשו בטל אב ב"ד שמת כל בתי מדרשות שבעירו בטילין ונכנסין לביהכ"נ ומשנין את מקומן היושבין בצפון יושבין בדרום היושבין בדרום יושבין בצפון נשיא שמת בתי מדרשות כולן בטילין ובני הכנסת נכנסין לבית הכנסת | 22b. b reduce /b it. b In /b the case of b his father or mother, /b he must always b reduce /b his business., b With regard to all /b other b deceased /b relatives, if the mourner b wishes, he may remove /b his garment from one of his shoulders, and if b he wishes /b not to remove it, b he need not remove /b it. However, b in /b the case of b his father or mother, he /b must always b remove /b his garment from one of his shoulders.,There was b an incident when the father of a leading authority of /b his b generation died, and /b the authority b wished to remove /b his garment from one shoulder. b Another leading authority of the generation /b also b wished to remove /b his own garment together b with him, /b in order to join him in his mourning, b but /b due to this the first person b refrained and did not remove /b his garment, so that his colleague would not remove his garment as well., b Abaye said: The leading authority of the generation /b mentioned here is b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi, and b the leading authority of the generation /b who was b with him /b was b Rabbi Ya’akov bar Aḥa. And some say: The leading authority of the generation /b was b Rabbi Ya’akov bar Aḥa, /b and b the leading authority of the generation /b who was b with him /b was b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi.,The Gemara examines this issue: b Granted, according to the one who said /b that b the leading authority of the generation /b who was b with him was Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi, b this is /b the reason that b he refrained and did not remove /b his garment from his shoulder. That is to say, Rabbi Ya’akov bar Aḥa refrained from doing so because he did not wish to cause the i Nasi /i to remove his own garment., b But according to the one who said /b that it is b Rabbi Ya’akov bar Aḥa /b who was the leader of the generation with him, b why did /b Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi b refrain and not remove /b his garment from his shoulder? b Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, /b the father of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, was also b the i Nasi /i , and everyone is required to remove /b his garment from his shoulder for him, as was the accepted practice. Therefore, Rabbi Ya’akov bar Aḥa would also have been required to bare his shoulder. Why, then, did Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi prevent him from doing so? The Gemara concludes: Indeed b this /b is b difficult. /b ,§ The Gemara returns to the continuation of the i baraita /i : b With regard to all deceased /b relatives except for parents, b one may cut his hair after thirty days. In /b the case of b one’s father or mother, /b one may not cut his hair b until his colleagues have rebuked him /b for his hair being too long. b With regard to all /b other b deceased /b relatives, b he may enter a place /b where b a joyous /b celebration is taking place b after thirty days; in /b the case of b his father or mother, /b he may enter such a place only b after twelve months. /b , b Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: /b The ruling that a mourner may enter a house of joy after thirty days applies specifically b to a joyous social gathering, /b that is to say, to the joyous meals that a group of friends would eat together, each taking a turn hosting. But this ruling does not apply to a large joyous occasion, such as a wedding feast. The Gemara b raises an objection /b from a i baraita /i which adds: b And /b also b for joyous social gatherings, thirty days. /b This implies that when the i baraita /i speaks of joyous celebrations without further specification, it is not referring to joyous social gatherings, but even to weddings and other joyous occasions. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, b it /b is b difficult. /b , b Ameimar taught /b the previous discussion b as follows: Rabba bar bar Ḥana said /b an alternative version of the discussion: b For a joyous social gathering one is permitted to enter immediately. /b The Gemara poses a question: b But isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i : b For joyous celebrations and for joyous social gatherings, /b one must wait b thirty /b days?,The Gemara answers: b This is not difficult. This /b ruling, of the i baraita /i , is referring b to an initial /b gathering, when the mourner is the first in the group of friends to host. The i baraita /i teaches that in such a situation the mourner is required to wait thirty days before doing so. b That /b ruling, of Rabba bar bar Ḥana, is referring b to a reciprocal /b gathering. The mourner’s friends have already hosted these gatherings, and now it is his turn to host. Since he is required to host such a gathering for his colleagues, he need not postpone it. Rather, he may host the group immediately.,The i baraita /i continues: b With regard to all /b other b deceased /b relatives, b one rends /b his garment the length b of a handbreadth, /b and that suffices. b In /b the case of b his father or mother, /b he must rend his garment b until he reveals his heart. Rabbi Abbahu said: What is the verse /b that teaches that the rent must be a handbreadth? b “And David took hold of his clothes and rent them” /b (II Samuel 1:11), b and taking hold cannot /b be done for a garment b less than a handbreadth. /b ,The i baraita /i teaches further: b With regard to all /b other deceased relatives, b even if he is wearing ten garments, /b one on top of the other, b he rends only /b his b outer /b garment. But b in /b the case of b his father or mother, he must rend them all. /b Failure to rend b his undergarment, /b however, b does not invalidate /b the fulfillment of the mitzva., b Both a man and a woman /b are required to rend their garments. b Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: A woman /b first b rends /b her b inner /b garment b and turns /b it b around, /b so that the tear is b on her back. And /b only b afterward /b does b she rend /b her b outer /b garment, so that she does not expose her chest., b With regard to all /b other b deceased /b relatives, if b one wishes he may rip apart /b his garment b on the hem, /b rather than merely expanding the neck hole, so that the tear stands out distinctly from the opening of the garment. If he b wishes /b not to do this, b he does not rip apart /b the hem in this manner. That is to say, one may simply enlarge the neck hole, although rending a garment in this way makes the tear less prominent. b In /b the case of b one’s father or mother, /b however, b he must /b always b rip apart /b the hem., b Rabbi Yehuda says: Any rending that does not rip apart /b his garment b on the hem /b of the garment b is nothing other than a frivolous rent /b of no significance, as it must be evident that one has rent his garment in mourning and that the rent is not merely an imperfection in the garment. b Rabbi Abbahu said: What is the reason /b for b Rabbi Yehuda’s /b opinion? b As it is written: “And he took hold of his own clothes and he rent them in two pieces” /b (II Kings 2:12). b From that which is stated: “And he rent,” do I not know that /b he rent them b in two? Rather, /b these words teach b that /b the rent clothes must b appear as if they were torn into two /b pieces, i.e., the tear must be obvious and visible.,The i baraita /i continues: b With regard to all /b other b deceased /b relatives, b one may tack /b the tear with rough stitches b after seven days, and one may join /b the edges more carefully b after thirty /b days. But b in /b the case of b one’s father or mother, he may tack /b the tear only b after thirty days, and he may never /b again b join /b the edges more carefully. b A woman, /b however, b may tack /b the tear b immediately, due to her honor, /b for it would be dishonorable for her to be seen with torn garments., b When Ravin came /b from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, b he said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: With regard to all /b other b deceased /b relatives, b if one wishes, he may rend /b his garment b with /b his b hand; /b and if b he wishes, he may rend /b it b with a utensil /b in a way that will preserve it. But b in /b the case of b his father or mother, /b he must rend his garment b with his hand /b in a manner that will utterly ruin it., b And Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: With regard to all /b other b deceased /b relatives, one rends his garment b on the inside, /b meaning, he rends his inner garment and not necessarily his outermost garment. b In /b the case of b one’s father or mother, /b however, b he must rend /b the garment b on the outside, /b i.e., the outermost garment. b Rav Ḥisda said: And likewise, over a i Nasi /i , /b one is required to rend his garment as he does over his father.,The Gemara b raises an objection /b from a i baraita /i in which it was taught: The i halakhot /i of rending for the death of other people referred to in the i baraita /i , e.g., a i Nasi /i , a president of the court, or one’s teacher, b were likened to /b the i halakhot /i of rending for b one’s father or mother only with regard to /b the issue of carefully b rejoining /b the edges of the rent, as in all of these cases it is prohibited to mend one’s garment with precise stitches., b What, is /b this i baraita /i b not /b also referring b even /b to one who rends his garment b for the i Nasi /i ? /b The Gemara rejects this: b No, /b the i baraita /i is referring to the other people, b aside /b from one who rends his garment for the i Nasi /i , as rending for the i Nasi /i is the same as rending for one’s father with regard to all aspects of the rending.,It was related that the b i Nasi /i died, /b and b Rav Ḥisda said to Rav Ḥa bar Rava: Turn the mortar over and stand on it, and show /b the b rent to everyone. /b Everyone will then rend his garment in this manner, as everyone is required to rend his garment over the death of the i Nasi /i .,§ It was further taught: b For /b mourning b a Sage, one removes /b his garment b from the right /b shoulder. b For /b the b president of the court /b he removes his garment b from the left /b shoulder. b For /b the b i Nasi /i /b he removes his garment b from here and from here, /b from both shoulders., b The Sages taught /b the following i baraita /i : When b a Sage dies, his study hall ceases /b its regular study as a sign of mourning over him. When b the president of the court dies, all of the study halls in his city cease /b their regular study, and everyone b enters the synagogue and changes their places /b there as a sign of mourning over him. b Those who /b ordinarily b sit in the north /b should b sit in the south, and those who /b ordinarily b sit in the south /b should b sit in the north. /b When b a i Nasi /i dies, all study halls cease /b their regular study. On Shabbat, b the members of the synagogue enter the synagogue /b for public Torah reading, which requires a congregation of ten, |
|
44. Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 337| 29a. נכרי שחקק קב בבקעת ישראל מסיקה ביו"ט ואמאי נולד הוא לדבריהם דר"א ור"ע קאמר ליה וליה לא סבירא ליה,רבא אמר היינו טעמא דרבי אליעזר לפי שאין מדליקין בפתילה שאינה מחורכת ולא בסמרטוטין שאינן מחורכין אלא הא דתני רב יוסף ג' על ג' מצומצמות למאי הלכתא לענין טומאה . דתנן ג' על ג' שאמרו חוץ מן המלל דברי ר"ש וחכ"א ג' על ג' מכוונות:,אמר רב יהודה אמר רב מסיקין בכלים ואין מסיקין בשברי כלים דברי רבי יהודה ור"ש מתיר מסיקין בתמרין אכלן אין מסיקין בגרעיניהן דברי רבי יהודה ור"ש מתיר מסיקין באגוזים אכלן אין מסיקין בקליפותיהן דברי רבי יהודה ורבי שמעון מתיר,וצריכא דאי אשמעינן קמייתא בההיא קאמר רבי יהודה משום דמעיקרא כלי והשתא שבר כלי והוה ליה נולד ואסור אבל תמרים דמעיקרא גרעינין והשתא גרעינין אימא שפיר דמי ואי אשמעינן גרעינין הוה אמינא דמעיקרא מכסיין והשתא מיגליין אבל קליפי אגוזין דמעיקרא מיגלו והשתא מיגלו אימא שפיר דמי צריכא,והא דרב לאו בפירוש איתמר אלא מכללא איתמר דרב אכל תמרי ושדא קשייתא לבוכיא אמר ליה רבי חייא בר פחתי כנגדו ביו"ט אסור קיבלה מיניה או לא קיבלה מיניה,ת"ש דכי אתא רב לבבל אכל תמרי ושדא קשייתא לחיותא מאי לאו בפרסייאתא ולא קיבלה לא בארמיאתא הואיל וחזי אגב אימייהו,א"ל ר' שמואל בר בר חנה לרב יוסף לרבי יהודה דאמר מסיקין בכלים ואין מסיקין בשברי כלים כיון דאדליק בהו פורתא הוה ליה שברי כלים וכי קא מהפך באיסורא קא מהפך דעבד כדרב מתנה דאמר רב מתנה אמר רב עצים שנשרו מן הדקל לתנור ביו"ט מרבה עצים מוכנין ומסיקן,רב המנונא אמר הכא בפחות משלשה על שלשה עסקינן ומקולי מטלניות שנו כאן,ואזדא ר' אליעזר לטעמיה ור"ע לטעמיה דתנן פחות משלשה על שלשה שהתקינו לפקק בו את המרחץ ולנער בו את הקדירה ולקנח בו את הרחיים בין מן המוכן ובין שאין מן המוכן טמא דברי רבי אליעזר ורבי יהושע אומר בין מן המוכן ובין שלא מן המוכן טהור ר"ע אומר מן המוכן טמא ושלא מן המוכן טהור ואמר עולא ואיתימא רבה בר בר חנה א"ר יוחנן הכל מודים זרקו באשפה דברי הכל טהור | 29a. b When a gentile carved out a /b vessel the size of a b i kav /i /b from a b piece of wood /b on a Festival and thereby rendered it a new vessel, b a Jew may burn /b the vessel b on a Festival /b i ab initio /i . b And why /b may he do so? This new vessel that was made from the wood b is /b an object that b came into being [ i nolad /i ] /b on a Festival, and is set-aside [ i muktze /i ]. Since Rav Adda bar Ahava permitted doing so, apparently he holds that the laws of set-aside do not apply on a Festival, contrary to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. The Gemara answers: Rav Adda bar Ahava b said this /b statement b in /b explanation of b the statements /b of b Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Akiva /b in the mishna; b however, he /b himself b does not hold that way. /b Although he explained the opinions in the mishna in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, he himself does not hold that that is the i halakha /i ., b Rava said, this is the reasoning /b behind b Rabbi Eliezer’s /b opinion with regard to lighting the wick: b Because /b he holds b that one may neither light /b on Shabbat b using a wick that is not /b slightly b singed /b and prepared for lighting b nor light with rags that were not singed /b before Shabbat. If a person singes the wick slightly before lighting it, it will burn well. A wick that has not been singed does not burn well and will not show the appropriate deference to Shabbat. The Gemara asks: If so, b that which Rav Yosef taught: Three by three exactly, to what i halakha /i /b is it relevant? According to Rava’s explanation, the precise size of the garment used in making the wick is irrelevant. The Gemara responds: Rav Yosef’s statement was b with regard to /b another b matter, /b the i halakhot /i of b ritual impurity. As we learned /b in a mishna in tractate i Kelim /i : b Three by three /b fingerbreadths b that they stated /b as the smallest sized garment that can become ritually impure, b excludes the /b portion used for the b hem, /b i.e., those threads that emerge at the edge of the garment and are sewn into a hem; this is b the statement of Rabbi Shimon. And the Rabbis say: Three by three exactly, /b even including the hem. That is the context of Rav Yosef’s statement: Three by three exactly.,With regard to the statement cited above, b Rav Yehuda said /b that b Rav said /b that there is a dispute between the i tanna /i ’ i im /i on this issue: b One may /b only b kindle /b a fire b with /b whole b vessels and one may not kindle /b a fire b with broken vessels; /b this is b the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. And Rabbi Shimon permits /b kindling a fire even with broken vessels. An additional i halakha /i : b One may kindle /b a fire b with /b whole b dates /b on a Festival, and if b he ate them, he may not kindle /b a fire b with their pits /b as they are set-aside; this is b the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. And Rabbi Shimon permits /b kindling a fire with the pits. Furthermore, b one may kindle /b a fire b with /b whole b nuts /b on a Festival, and if b he ate them, he may not kindle /b a fire b with their shells; /b this is b the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. And Rabbi Shimon permits /b doing so.,The Gemara comments: b And it was necessary /b to cite all three of these cases because each teaches a novel idea. b As, had /b Rav b taught us /b only b the first /b i halakha /i , we would have thought that it is specifically b in that /b case, with regard to burning broken vessels, that b Rabbi Yehuda said /b that it is prohibited, b as initially /b it was b a vessel and now /b it is a b broken vessel, and therefore it is /b considered an object that b came into being [ i nolad /i ] and prohibited; however, dates, initially /b there were b pits /b in the dates b and now /b they remain b pits, say /b that one may b well /b do so. b And had /b Rav b taught us /b only with regard to date b pits I would have said /b that they are prohibited because b initially /b they were b concealed /b within the fruit b and now /b they are b exposed, /b it is a case of an object that came into being and prohibited. b However, nutshells, which initially /b were b exposed and now /b are b exposed, /b as they were before, b say /b that one may b well /b do so. Therefore, it was necessary to teach all of these cases., b And /b the Gemara adds: b This /b i halakha /i of b Rav was not stated explicitly; rather, it was stated by inference /b based on conclusions drawn from Rav’s actions and not from his explicit statements. There was an instance where b Rav ate dates /b on a weekday and b threw /b the b pits into the oven. Rabbi Ḥiyya said to him: Son of noblemen, /b the b corresponding /b action, throwing pits into an oven, b is prohibited on a Festival. /b The Gemara asks: b Did /b Rav b accept /b this i halakha /i b from him or did he not accept /b it b from him? /b , b Come /b and b hear: When Rav came /b from Eretz Yisrael b to Babylonia, he ate dates /b on a Festival b and threw their pits to the animals /b so that they may eat them. b Wasn’t it /b a case involving b Persian /b dates, which are quality dates whose fruit comes completely off the pits, leaving the pits with no trace of fruit? Ostensibly, they are completely set-aside as they are of no use at all to people. b And /b the fact that Rav threw the pits to the animals indicates that b he did not accept /b this i halakha /i from Rabbi Ḥiyya, and he holds that there is no prohibition in that case. The Gemara replies: b No, /b this is a case involving b Aramean /b dates whose fruit does not come off completely, and remts of the date remain attached to the pit. These pits, b since they are /b still b fit for use due to their mother, /b i.e., the fruit itself, one is permitted to carry them., b Rav Shmuel bar bar Ḥana said to Rav Yosef: According to /b the opinion of b Rabbi Yehuda, /b who b said /b that b one may kindle /b a fire b with /b whole b vessels, and one may not kindle /b a fire b with broken vessels, /b how it is possible to use whole vessels? b Once they are ignited a bit, they become broken vessels, and when one turns /b the wood b over /b to accelerate their ignition, b he turns /b them b over in a prohibited /b manner, as it is prohibited to light with broken vessels. The Gemara answers: This is a case b where he acted in accordance with /b the statement of b Rav Mattana. /b As b Rav Mattana said /b that b Rav said: Branches that fell from a palm tree into an oven on a Festival, /b since these branches were attached to the tree at the onset of the Festival, they are set-aside and it is prohibited to move them. Nevertheless, he can remedy the situation if he b adds wood /b that was b prepared /b for burning prior to the Festival, until the majority of the wood in the oven is not set-aside, b and then kindles them. /b Since the majority of the wood is permitted, he need not concern himself with the minority. One may do the same when burning vessels by adding wood that is not set-aside., b Rav Hamnuna said /b a different explanation of the dispute in the mishna. In his opinion, b here we are dealing with /b a garment that is b smaller than three by three /b handbreadths, b and they taught here /b i halakhot /i established by the Sages b with regard to insignificant small cloths. /b , b And Rabbi Eliezer followed his /b line of b reasoning /b expressed elsewhere, b and Rabbi Akiva /b followed b his /b line of b reasoning /b expressed elsewhere. b As we learned /b in a mishna in tractate i Kelim /i : A cloth b smaller than three by three /b handbreadths b that was utilized to plug the bath, and to pour /b from a boiling b pot, and to wipe the millstone, whether /b this cloth was expressly b prepared /b for that purpose or b whether /b it b was not prepared, /b it can become b ritually impure; /b this is b the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. And Rabbi Yehoshua says: Whether /b it was b prepared or whether /b it was b not prepared, /b it is b ritually pure, /b i.e., it cannot become ritually impure. b Rabbi Akiva /b distinguishes between the cases and b says: /b If it was b prepared /b it is b ritually impure, and /b if it was b not prepared /b it is b ritually pure. And Ulla said, and some say /b that b Rabba bar bar Ḥana said /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa said: Everyone agrees /b that a cloth this size, if b one threw it into the garbage /b dump, b it is ritually pure. /b His discarding of the cloth indicates that he no longer considers this cloth a garment and no longer considers it significant. |
|
45. Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 169| 19b. מי איכא מידי דאנן לא מצינן למעבד ושלוחי דידן מצו עבדי הכי קאמרי ליה משביעין אנו עליך על דעתינו ועל דעת בית דין,הוא פורש ובוכה והן פורשין ובוכין וכו' הוא פורש ובוכה שחשדוהו צדוקי והם פורשין ובוכין דא"ר יהושע בן לוי כל החושד בכשרים לוקה בגופו,וכל כך למה שלא יתקן מבחוץ ויכניס כדרך שהצדוקין עושין,ת"ר מעשה בצדוקי אחד שהתקין מבחוץ והכניס ביציאתו היה שמח שמחה גדולה פגע בו אביו אמר לו בני אף על פי שצדוקין אנו מתיראין אנו מן הפרושים אמר לו כל ימי הייתי מצטער על המקרא הזה (ויקרא טז, ב) כי בענן אראה על הכפורת אמרתי מתי יבוא לידי ואקיימנו עכשיו שבא לידי לא אקיימנו,אמרו לא היו ימים מועטין עד שמת והוטל באשפה והיו תולעין יוצאין מחוטמו ויש אומרים ביציאתו ניגף דתני רבי חייא כמין קול נשמע בעזרה שבא מלאך וחבטו על פניו ונכנסו אחיו הכהנים ומצאו ככף רגל עגל בין כתפיו שנאמר (יחזקאל א, ז) ורגליהם רגל ישרה וכף רגליהם ככף רגל עגל,א"ר זכריה בן קבוטל וכו' מתני ליה רב חנן בר רבא לחייא בר רב קמיה דרב א"ר זכריה בן קפוטל ומחוי ליה רב בידיה קבוטל ונימא ליה מימר ק"ש הוה קרי,וכי האי גוונא מי שרי והא"ר יצחק בר שמואל בר מרתא הקורא את שמע לא ירמוז בעיניו ולא יקרוץ בשפתותיו ולא יורה באצבעותיו ותניא רבי אלעזר חסמא אומר הקורא את שמע ומרמז בעיניו ומקרץ בשפתותיו ומראה באצבעו עליו הכתוב אומר (ישעיהו מג, כב) ולא אותי קראת יעקב,לא קשיא הא בפרק ראשון הא בפרק שני,ת"ר (דברים ו, ז) ודברת בם בם ולא בתפלה ודברת בם בם יש לך רשות לדבר ולא בדברים אחרים,רבי אחא אומר ודברת בם עשה אותן קבע ואל תעשם עראי אמר רבא השח שיחת חולין עובר בעשה שנאמר ודברת בם בם ולא בדברים אחרים רב אחא בר יעקב אמר עובר בלאו שנאמר (קהלת א, ח) כל הדברים יגעים לא יוכל איש לדבר, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big בקש להתנמנם פרחי כהונה מכין לפניו באצבע צרדא ואומרים לו אישי כ"ג עמוד והפג אחת על הרצפה ומעסיקין אותו עד שיגיע זמן השחיטה, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big מאי צרדא אמר רב יהודה צרתה דדא מאי היא גודל מחוי רב הונא ואזל קלא בכולי בי רב,ואומרים לו אישי כ"ג הפג אחת על הרצפה וכו' אמר רב יצחק על חדת מאי היא אמרי ליה אחוי קידה,ומעסיקין אותו עד שיגיע זמן שחיטה (וכו') תנא לא היו מעסיקין אותו לא בנבל ולא בכנור אלא בפה ומה היו אומרין (תהלים קכז, א) אם ה' לא יבנה בית שוא עמלו בוניו בו,מיקירי ירושלים לא היו ישנין כל הלילה כדי שישמע כ"ג קול הברה ולא תהא שינה חוטפתו תניא אבא שאול אמר אף בגבולין היו עושין כן זכר למקדש אלא שהיו חוטאין,אמר אביי ואיתימא ר"נ בר יצחק תרגומא נהרדעא דא"ל אליהו לרב יהודה אחוה דרב סלא חסידא אמריתו אמאי לא אתי משיח והא האידנא יומא דכיפורי הוא ואבעול כמה בתולתא בנהרדעא אמר ליה הקב"ה מאי אמר אמר ליה | 19b. b is there any matter that we are unable to perform and our agents are able to perform? /b The role of the agent is to perform a task on behalf of the one who commissioned him. The agent cannot perform a task that the one who commissioned him is unable to perform. Since it is prohibited for Israelites to enter the priests’ courtyard and to perform the sacrificial rites, clearly the priests are not agents representing the Israelites. The language of the mishna in which the court Elders address the High Priest as their agent apparently contradicts that understanding. The Gemara answers: b This is what they say to him: We administer an oath to you according to our understanding and the understanding of the court, /b cautioning him that he cannot rationalize violating the oath by claiming that he took the oath based on his own interpretation. He is bound by the understanding of the court. The mishna does not address the nature of the High Priest’s agency.,§ The mishna continues: After this oath, b he would leave /b them b and cry and they would leave /b him b and cry. /b The Gemara explains: b He turned aside and cried /b due to the indignity b that they suspected him /b of being b a Sadducee; and they turned aside and cried, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: One who suspects the innocent /b of indiscretion b is afflicted in his body. /b The High Priest might in fact be beyond reproach and they may have suspected him falsely.,The Gemara asks: b And why /b were the Elders b so /b insistent that the High Priest take an oath? The Gemara explains: So that b he would not prepare /b the incense and light it b outside /b in the Sanctuary, before entering the Holy of Holies, b and bring /b the coal pan with the incense already burning on it b into /b the Holy of Holies b in the manner /b that b the Sadducees did. /b Since the High Priest is alone inside the Sanctuary and there is no way to ascertain whether he is in fact performing the service in the proper manner, the Elders insisted that he take an oath to perform it according to their instructions., b The Sages taught /b in the i Tosefta /i : There was b an incident involving a /b certain b Sadducee /b who was appointed as High Priest, b who prepared the incense outside /b and then b brought /b it into the Holy of Holies. b Upon his emergence he was overjoyed /b that he had succeeded. b The father of /b that Sadducee b met him and said to him: My son, although we are Sadducees /b and you performed the service in accordance with our opinion, b we fear the Pharisees /b and do not actually implement that procedure in practice. The son b said to his /b father: b All my days I have been troubled over this verse: “For I will appear in the cloud above the Ark cover” /b (Leviticus 16:2). The Sadducees interpreted this verse to mean that God will appear above the Ark cover, i.e., will enter the Holy of Holies, only after the incense cloud is already there. b I said: When will /b the opportunity b become available to me, and I will fulfill it /b according to the Sadducee interpretation? b Now that /b the opportunity b has become available to me, /b will b I not fulfill it? /b ,The Sages b said: Not /b even b a few days /b passed b until he died and was laid out in the garbage /b dump, b and worms were coming out of his nose /b in punishment for his actions. b And some say /b that b he was struck /b as soon b as he emerged /b from the Holy of Holies, b as Rabbi Ḥiyya taught: A type of sound was heard in the /b Temple b courtyard, as an angel came and struck him in the face. And his fellow priests came in /b to remove him from there b and they found the likeness of a footprint of a calf between his shoulders. /b That is the mark left by an angel striking, b as it is stated /b with regard to angels: b “And their feet were straight feet, and the sole of their feet was like the sole of a calf’s foot” /b (Ezekiel 1:7).,§ It was taught in the mishna that b Rabbi Zekharya ben Kevutal /b says: Many times I read before the High Priest from the book of Daniel. b Rav Ḥa bar Rava taught this to Ḥiyya bar Rav before Rav /b in the following manner: b Rabbi Zekharya bar Kefutal said, and Rav demonstrated with his hand /b that the name should be pronounced b Kevutal. /b The Gemara asks: Why did Rav demonstrate his point with a gesture? b Let him /b simply b say it. /b The Gemara answers: Rav b was reciting i Shema /i /b at that moment and could not interrupt i Shema /i by speaking.,The Gemara asks: b And is /b interrupting in a manner b of that sort, /b by gesturing, b permitted /b during i Shema /i ? b Didn’t Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Shmuel bar Marta say: One who is reciting i Shema /i should neither make allusions with his eyes, nor open and close /b his mouth b with his lips /b to convey a message, b nor gesture with his fingers? And it was taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Elazar Ḥisma says: Concerning one who recites i Shema /i and makes allusions with his eyes, or opens and closes /b his mouth b with his lips, or gestures with his fingers, the verse says: “And you did not call out to Me, O Jacob” /b (Isaiah 43:22). By signaling while reciting i Shema /i he behaves contemptuously toward God, and it is tantamount to not having recited i Shema /i before Him. How, then, could Rav gesture while reading i Shema /i ?,The Gemara answers: This is b not difficult. This /b prohibition to interrupt one’s recitation of i Shema /i with a gesture applies b in /b the course of reciting the b first paragraph /b of i Shema /i , which is more fundamental; b that /b case where Rav gestured was b in /b the course of reciting the b second paragraph /b of i Shema /i , where gesturing to convey a significant message is permitted.,Apropos interruptions in the course of reciting i Shema /i , the Gemara cites a i baraita /i in which b the Sages taught: /b “And these words, which I command you this day, shall be upon your heart; and you shall teach them diligently unto your children, b and you shall talk of them /b when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you arise” (Deuteronomy 6:6–7). This means that in the course b of /b reciting b them, /b the study of Torah and the recitation of i Shema /i , it is permitted to interrupt to state a significant matter, b but not /b in the course b of /b reciting the i Amida /i b prayer, /b which may not be interrupted for any kind of speech. Another interpretation of the verse is: b And you shall talk of them /b is to emphasize that b it is permitted /b to interrupt i Shema /i b to speak these matters /b of Torah, but not to speak b other matters /b that may lead to levity., b Rabbi Aḥa says: Talk of them /b means one must b render them, /b the words of Torah, b a permanent /b fixture, b and not render them a temporary /b exercise. b Rava said: One who engages in idle chatter /b without Torah or any particular purpose b violates /b a b positive /b commandment, b as it is stated: And you shall talk of them; /b talk b of them and not of other matters. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: /b Furthermore, b one /b even b violates a negative /b commandment, b as it is stated: “All these matters are wearisome; no man can ever state them” /b (Ecclesiastes 1:8). The phrase: No man can ever state them, is understood as a prohibition against engaging in idle chatter., strong MISHNA: /strong If the High Priest b sought to sleep /b at night, b the young priests /b would b snap the middle [ i tzerada /i ] finger /b against the thumb b before him, and they /b would b say to him /b every so often: b My Master, High Priest. Stand /b from your bed b and chill /b yourself b once on the floor /b and overcome your drowsiness. b And they /b would b engage him /b in various ways b until the time would arrive to slaughter the /b daily offering., strong GEMARA: /strong The Gemara asks: b What /b is the b i tzerada /i /b finger mentioned in the mishna? b Rav Yehuda said: It is the rival [ i tzara /i ] of that [ i da /i ] /b one. Which finger b is it? /b i Tzerada /i is the rival of b the thumb; /b it is the middle finger. The middle finger would be strongly positioned against the thumb, and when one separates them, the finger hits the palm, creating a sound. b Rav Huna demonstrated /b the loud noise that could be achieved by snapping with the middle finger, and b the sound traveled throughout Rav’s study hall. /b The sound created was loud enough to keep the High Priest awake.,It was taught in the mishna that b they said to him: My Master, High Priest. /b Stand from your bed and b chill /b yourself b once on the floor /b and overcome your drowsiness. b Rav Yitzḥak said /b that they said to the High Priest: b Introduce something new. /b The Gemara asks: b What is it /b that they asked him to introduce? b They say to him: Demonstrate /b how to perform the ceremonial b bowing /b [ b i kidda /i ]. /b This was a form of bowing that was difficult to perform, in which the High Priest was expert. The thought was that the exercise would keep him awake.,The mishna continues: b And they /b would b engage him /b in different ways b until the time to slaughter the /b daily offering b would arrive. /b It was b taught: They would not occupy him with a harp or a lyre, /b which may not be played on a Festival, b but /b would sing b with /b their b mouths. And what would they say? /b They would say this verse: b “Unless the Lord builds the house, its builders labor in vain on it; /b unless the Lord watches over the city, the watchman keeps vigil in vain” (Psalms 127:1). The message to the High Priest was that his service must be performed for the sake of Heaven for it to be accepted by God; otherwise his efforts would be in vain.,The Gemara relates that b the prominent /b men b of Jerusalem would not sleep the entire night /b but instead engaged in Torah study, b so that /b the b High Priest would hear /b the b sound of noise /b in the city b and sleep would not overcome him /b in the silence of the sleeping city. b It was taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Abba Shaul said: They would do so even in the outlying areas /b and stay awake all night b in acknowledgment of the Temple; however, /b the result was b that they would sin, /b as the men and women would participate in games together to pass the time, leading to transgression., b Abaye said, and some say /b it was b Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak /b who said: b Interpret /b that statement as referring to b Neharde’a, as Elijah /b the Prophet b said to Rav Yehuda, brother /b of b Rav Salla Ḥasida: You have said /b and wondered: b Why has the Messiah not come? /b Why is that surprising? b Isn’t today Yom Kippur, and relations were had with several virgins in Neharde’a, /b as the men and women stayed awake all night and that led to promiscuity? Rav Yehuda b said to him: What did the Holy One, Blessed be He, say /b about those sins committed by the Jewish people? b He said: /b This is what God said: |
|
46. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 326| 61b. מ"ש איהו מינן דידן ואין דקאמרי אחוכי עליה,ומתני' כאן ביחיד הניסת כאן ברבים הניסתים יחיד לא מימלך וטעי בתריה רבים מימלכי ולא טעו בתריה,אמר רב יוסף מנא אמינא לה דכתיב (דברים יג, ט) לא תאבה לו ולא תשמע אליו הא אבה ושמע חייב,איתיביה אביי מי שאני בין ניסת דרבים לניסת יחיד והתניא (דברים יג, ז) כי יסיתך אחיך בן אמך אחד יחיד הניסת ואחר רבים הניסתים והוציא הכתוב יחיד מכלל רבים ורבים מכלל יחיד,יחיד מכלל רבים להחמיר על גופו ולהקל על ממונו,רבים מכלל יחיד להקל על גופם ולהחמיר על ממונם,בהא מילתא הוא דשאני אבל בכל מילי כי הדדי נינהו,אלא אמר אביי כאן בניסת מפי עצמו כאן בניסת מפי אחרים מפי עצמו מימלך מפי אחרים גריר בתרייהו,אמר אביי מנא אמינא לה דכתיב לא תאבה לו ולא תשמע אליו הא אבה ושמע חייב,רבא אמר אידי ואידי בניסת מפי אחרים הא דא"ל כך אוכלת כך שותה כך מטיבה כך מריעה הא דלא א"ל כך אוכלת כך שותה כו',אמר רבא מנא אמינא לה דכתיב (דברים יג, ח) מאלהי העמים אשר סביבותיכם הקרובים אליך וגו' מה לי קרובים ומה לי רחוקים הכי קא"ל מטיבותן של קרובים אתה למד מה טיבותן של רחוקים,מאי לאו דאמר ליה כך אוכלת כך שותה כך מטיבה כך מריעה ש"מ,רב אשי אמר סיפא בישראל מומר,רבינא אמר לא זו אף זו קתני,איתמר העובד עבודת כוכבים מאהבה ומיראה אביי אמר חייב רבא אמר פטור,אביי אמר חייב דהא פלחה רבא אמר פטור אי קבליה עליה באלוה אין אי לא לא:,סימן עב"ד ישתחו"ה למשי"ח:,ואמר אביי מנא אמינא לה דתנן העובד עבודת כוכבים אחד העובד כו' מאי לאו אחד העובד מאהבה ומיראה,ורבא אמר לך לא כדמתרץ רבי ירמיה,אמר אביי מנא אמינא לה דתניא (שמות כ, ד) לא תשתחוה להם להם אי אתה משתחוה אבל אתה משתחוה לאדם כמותך יכול אפילו נעבד כהמן ת"ל (שמות כ, ד) ולא תעבדם והא המן מיראה הוה נעבד,ורבא כהמן ולא כהמן כהמן דאיהו גופיה עבודת כוכבים ולא כהמן דאילו המן מיראה והכא לאו מיראה,ואמר אביי מנא אמינא לה דתניא כהן משיח בעבודת כוכבים רבי אומר בשגגת מעשה וחכמים אומרים בהעלם דבר,ושוין שבשעירה כיחיד ושוין שאין מביא אשם תלוי,האי שגגת מעשה דעבודת כוכבים ה"ד אי קסבר בית הכנסת הוא והשתחוה לו הרי לבו לשמים אלא דחזא אנדרטא והשתחוה לו,אי קבליה עליה באלוה מזיד הוא | 61b. In b what /b way b is he different from us? /b The suggestion to worship him is nonsense. b And /b the fact b that they say to him: Yes, /b is because b they ridicule him. /b , b And /b the contradiction between the b i mishnayot /i /b can be resolved as follows: b There, /b where the mishna states that one is liable for speech alone, the reference is b to an individual /b who was b incited; here, /b where the mishna indicates that one not is liable for speech alone, it is referring b to /b a case of b an incited multitude /b of people. The Gemara explains: b An individual /b who was incited b does not /b typically b change his mind, and he goes astray after /b idol worship. Therefore, once he agrees to the suggestion to worship an idol, he has fully accepted the idol upon himself as a god and is liable. By contrast, b a multitude /b of people are apt to b change their minds, and /b consequently they b do not go astray after /b idol worship., b Rav Yosef said: From where do I say /b that the i halakha /i that one is liable for merely stating that he will worship an idol is referring to an individual who was incited? b As it is written /b with regard to one who incites people to engage in idol worship: b “You shall not approve of him, nor listen to him” /b (Deuteronomy 13:9), which indicates that if one b approved /b of b and listened /b to the inciter, stating his intention to engage in idol worship, he is b liable /b even if he does not actually worship an idol., b Abaye raised an objection to /b Rav Yosef’s opinion: b Is /b there b a difference /b in i halakha /i b between /b the cases of b an incited multitude /b of people b and an individual /b who was b incited? But isn’t it taught /b in a i baraita /i with regard to the verse: b “If your brother, the son of your mother, /b or your son, or your daughter, or the wife of your bosom, or your neighbor who is like your own soul, b incites you /b secretly, saying: Let us go and serve other gods” (Deuteronomy 13:7), that b both an individual /b who was b incited and an incited multitude /b of people are included in this i halakha /i , b but the verse singles out the individual from the category of the multitude, and /b another verse singles out b the multitude from the category of the individual. /b ,The Torah states separately the i halakhot /i of an individual who is incited to engage in idol worship and of an entire city that is subverted to engage in idol worship in order to distinguish between the two cases, as follows: b An individual /b who was incited is singled out b from the category of /b a subverted b multitude /b of people in order b to render /b the punishment b to /b an individual’s b body /b more b stringent. /b The individual is executed by stoning, whereas the residents of an idolatrous city are executed by decapitation. b And /b an individual was singled out b to render /b the treatment of b the property of /b an individual who was incited more b lenient, /b as it is not destroyed like that of the residents of an idolatrous city.,Additionally, the Torah singles out the subverted b multitude /b of people b from the category of an individual /b who was incited in order b to render /b the punishment given b to the bodies of /b the residents of an idolatrous city, decapitation, more b lenient /b than that given to an individual who was incited, b and to render /b the treatment b of their property /b more b stringent, /b as the city and the property of its residents are burned.,Abaye concluded his objection to Rav Yosef’s opinion: It can be inferred from the i baraita /i that only b with regard to this matter, /b i.e., the i halakhot /i mentioned in the i baraita /i , b is /b the i halakha /i of an individual who was incited b different /b than that of an incited multitude of people, b but with regard to all /b other halakhic b matters they are the same. /b Therefore, a distinction cannot be made between them with regard to the i halakha /i in the case of a verbal commitment to idol worship., b Rather, Abaye said /b that the contradiction between the i mishnayot /i is to be resolved as follows: b Here, /b where the mishna indicates that one is liable only for actual worship, the reference is b to /b one who is b incited by himself, /b i.e., no one incited him to idol worship and he made the decision on his own. Whereas b there, /b in the mishna that deems one liable for stating that he will worship an idol, the reference is b to /b one who is b incited by others. /b The reason for the difference is that one who makes the decision b on his own /b is apt to b change his mind, /b whereas one who is incited b by others is drawn after them /b and is unlikely to change his mind., b Abaye said: From where do I say /b that this distinction is correct? b As it is written: “You shall not approve of him, nor listen to him” /b (Deuteronomy 13:9), referring to another individual who tried to incite him, and the verse indicates that if one b approved /b of b and listened /b to the inciter, he is b liable /b even for the approval alone., b Rava says: /b Both b this /b mishna b and that /b mishna are referring b to one incited by others, /b and they should be differentiated as follows: b That /b mishna, which deems one liable for merely expressing approval, is referring to a case b where /b the inciter described the qualities of the idol and b said to him: It eats like this; it drinks like this; it does good /b for its worshippers b like this; /b and b it harms /b those who do not worship it b like this. /b In this case, expressing approval verbally suffices to render one liable, as he was evidently convinced by the description. b This /b mishna, which indicates that one is not liable for speech alone, is referring to a case b where /b the inciter b did not say to him: It eats like this; it, drinks like this, /b it does good for its worshippers like this; and it harms those who do not worship it like this., b Rava said: From where do I say /b that this distinction is correct? b As it is written: /b “Let us go and worship other gods… b from the gods of the peoples that surround you, the ones near to you /b or the ones far from you” (Deuteronomy 13:7–8). b What /b difference is there b to me /b whether they are b near, and what /b difference is there b to me /b whether they are b far? /b Why would the distance affect the prohibition? Rather, b this /b is what the Torah b is saying to you: /b Do not be tempted to listen to the inciter, as b from the nature of /b the objects of idol worship that are b near /b you, which you recognize to be false, b you can derive what the nature /b is b of /b the ones that are b far /b from you. Therefore, if you are told that there is an idol in a distant land that is real, realize that it is a lie.,It is from this interpretation that Rava derives his halakhic distinction: b What, /b is it b not /b referring to a case b where /b the inciter described to another the qualities of the idol and b said to him: It eats like this; it drinks like this; it does good /b for its worshippers b like this; /b and b it harms /b those who do not worship it b like this? Conclude from it /b that only in such a case is the incited person liable for stating his approval., b Rav Ashi says /b that there is a different resolution to the contradiction between the i mishnayot /i : b The latter clause /b of the mishna (67a), which deems one liable for speech alone, is referring b to an apostate Jew; /b since he is already an apostate, his stated commitment to idol worship is certainly final. Consequently, he is liable. By contrast, a regular Jew is not liable for speech alone., b Ravina says /b that there is no contradiction; rather, the i tanna /i b teaches /b the mishna employing the style: b Not /b only b this /b but b also that. /b In other words, the i tanna /i first teaches the elementary i halakha /i that one who worships an idol is liable, and afterward it teaches the more novel i halakha /i that even one who merely says that he will engage in idol worship is immediately liable.,§ b It was stated /b that i amora’im /i engaged in a dispute concerning the following matter: In the case of b one who worships idols due to /b his b love /b of another who requested that he bow before the statue, b or due to fear /b of someone coercing him to do so, but not due to faith in that idol, what is the i halakha /i ? b Abaye says: /b He is b liable. Rava says: /b He is b exempt. /b ,The Gemara explains: b Abaye says /b he is b liable because he worshipped it. Rava says /b he is b exempt, /b as the criterion for becoming liable for idol worship is as follows: b If /b one sincerely b accepted /b the idol b upon himself as a god, yes, /b he is liable; but b if /b he did b not /b accept it sincerely, he is b not /b liable.,Abaye attempts to cite several proofs, whose b mnemonic /b is: b A slave will bow to the anointed. /b , b And Abaye said: From where do I say /b that one who worships idols due to love or fear is liable? b As we learned /b in the mishna: b One who worships idols /b is executed by stoning. This includes b one who worships /b an idol, and one who slaughters an animal as an idolatrous offering, and one who burns incense as an idolatrous offering. b What /b is added by the mishna by stating twice: One who worships? b Is it not /b to include the case of b one who worships /b idols b due to love or due to fear, /b in addition to the case of one who worships idols out of faith? Evidently, in this case as well, the worshipper is liable., b And Rava /b could have b said to you /b in response that the term: One who worships, should b not /b be understood as Abaye suggests but rather b as Rabbi Yirmeya explains /b it, namely, that one who worships an idol in its standard manner of worship is liable, and one who sacrifices an idolatrous offering is liable even if that is not the standard manner of worship of that particular idol., b Abaye /b attempts to cite another proof for his opinion. He b said: From where do I say /b that one who worships idols due to love or fear is liable? b As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i with regard to the verse: b “You shall not bow to them /b nor worship them” (Exodus 20:5): b “To them,” /b to idols, b you may not bow, but you may bow to a person like yourself; /b bowing to a person is merely the acceptance of authority. One b might /b have thought that it is permitted to bow b even /b to a person who b is worshipped /b like a god, b like Haman; /b therefore, b the verse states: “Nor worship them,” /b i.e., any form of pagan worship is prohibited. Abaye concludes: b And wasn’t Haman worshipped due to fear, /b and not because the people considered him a god? Evidently, one who engages in idol worship due to fear is liable., b And Rava /b explains this i baraita /i as follows: One might have thought that it is permitted to bow even to a person b like Haman /b in one regard, b but not like Haman /b in all aspects. It is referring to one b like Haman /b in b that /b Haman b himself was /b an object of b idol worship, /b as he claimed he was a god, and one who worships a person out of belief in his divinity is liable. b But /b the reference is to one who is b not like Haman /b in all aspects, b as while Haman /b was worshipped b due to fear, and /b one who engages in idol worship due to fear is not liable, b here /b the reference is to one who worships a person b not due to fear, /b but because he believes in that person’s divinity., b And Abaye /b furthermore b said: From where do I say /b my opinion? b As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : If b an anointed priest, /b i.e., the High Priest, unwittingly engaged b in idol worship, Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b says: /b He brings an offering b for /b the b unwitting act. And the Rabbis say: /b A High Priest does not bring an offering b for /b an unwitting act of idol worship unless it was due to b a lapse of awareness /b concerning the fundamental i halakhot /i of idol worship, i.e., he thought that this action was halakhically permitted., b And they agree that /b a High Priest brings b a female goat /b as his offering to atone for his act of idol worship, b as /b does an ordinary b individual, /b and not a bull, as a High Priest brings as a sin-offering for other sins. b And they agree that /b a High Priest b does not bring a provisional guilt-offering, /b which is ordinarily brought by one who is uncertain as to whether he committed a sin that requires him to bring a sin-offering. In such a case, he is exempt.,Abaye infers: b What are the circumstances of /b the High Priest’s b unwitting act of idol worship /b that is not due to a lack of awareness of the fundamental i halakhot /i of idol worship? b If /b the High Priest b thought /b that a certain building was b a synagogue and bowed to it, /b and he then realized that it is a house of idol worship, why should he be obligated to bring an offering, even according to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi? Since b his heart /b was directed b toward Heaven, /b it is not even an unwitting transgression. b Rather, /b it is a case b where /b the High Priest b saw /b the b statue /b of a person b and bowed to it. /b ,This case must also be clarified: b If he accepted /b that person b upon himself as a god, he is an intentional /b transgressor, and he is liable to receive the death penalty and not to bring an offering. |
|
| 47. Epiphanius, Panarion, 19.3.5 (4th cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 326 |
| 48. Septuagint, 4 Maccabees, 36 Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 339 |
| 49. Anon., Tanhuma, None Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 327 |
| 51. Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah, None Tagged with subjects: •synagogue architecture, benches Found in books: Levine (2005), The Ancient Synagogue, The First Thousand Years, 229 |
