1. Tosefta, Berachot, 3.25 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •tannaim, treatment of heretics Found in books: Cohen (2010), The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism, 59| 3.25. "שמונה עשרה שאמרו חכמים כנגד שמונה עשרה אזכרות שבהבו לה' בני אלים וכולל של מינים בשל פרושין ושל גרים בשל זקנים ושל דוד בירושלים ואם אמר אלו לעצמן ואלו לעצמן יצא.", | |
|
| 2. Tosefta, Sanhedrin, 12.9-13.12 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •tannaim, treatment of heretics Found in books: Cohen (2010), The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism, 59 |
3. Tosefta, Shabbat, 13.5 (1st cent. CE - 2nd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •tannaim, treatment of heretics Found in books: Cohen (2010), The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism, 59| 13.5. "הצד בהמה חיה ועוף מאפר [שברשות אדם] אם היו מחוסרין צידה חייב לאפר [שברשות אדם אע\"פ שמחוסרין] צידה פטור הפורס מצודה ע\"ג בהמה חיה ועוף [אע\"פ שנכנסין לתוכה פטור לבהמה חיה ועוף] אם היו נכנסין לתוכה חייב המפרק בהמה ועוף מן המצודה פטור.", | |
|
4. Josephus Flavius, Jewish Antiquities, 18.9 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •tannaim, treatment of heretics Found in books: Cohen (2010), The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism, 59 | 18.9. Such were the consequences of this, that the customs of our fathers were altered, and such a change was made, as added a mighty weight toward bringing all to destruction, which these men occasioned by their thus conspiring together; for Judas and Sadduc, who excited a fourth philosophic sect among us, and had a great many followers therein, filled our civil government with tumults at present, and laid the foundations of our future miseries, by this system of philosophy, which we were before unacquainted withal, |
|
5. Josephus Flavius, Against Apion, 2.193 (1st cent. CE - 1st cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •tannaim, treatment of heretics Found in books: Cohen (2010), The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism, 60 | 2.193. 24. There ought also to be but one temple for one God; for likeness is the constant foundation of agreement. This temple ought to be common to all men, because he is the common God of all men. His priests are to be continually about his worship, over whom he that is the first by his birth is to be their ruler perpetually. |
|
6. Mishnah, Berachot, 5.3, 9.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •tannaim, treatment of heretics Found in books: Cohen (2010), The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism, 59| 5.3. "הָאוֹמֵר עַל קַן צִפּוֹר יַגִּיעוּ רַחֲמֶיךָ, וְעַל טוֹב יִזָּכֵר שְׁמֶךָ, מוֹדִים מוֹדִים, מְשַׁתְּקִין אוֹתוֹ. הָעוֹבֵר לִפְנֵי הַתֵּיבָה וְטָעָה, יַעֲבֹר אַחֵר תַּחְתָּיו, וְלֹא יְהֵא סָרְבָן בְּאוֹתָהּ שָׁעָה. מִנַּיִן הוּא מַתְחִיל, מִתְּחִלַּת הַבְּרָכָה שֶׁטָּעָה בָהּ: \n", 9.5. "חַיָּב אָדָם לְבָרֵךְ עַל הָרָעָה כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהוּא מְבָרֵךְ עַל הַטּוֹבָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים ו) וְאָהַבְתָּ אֵת יְיָ אֱלֹהֶיךָ בְּכָל לְבָבְךָ וּבְכָל נַפְשְׁךָ וּבְכָל מְאֹדֶךָ. בְּכָל לְבָבְךָ, בִּשְׁנֵי יְצָרֶיךָ, בְּיֵצֶר טוֹב וּבְיֵצֶר רָע. וּבְכָל נַפְשְׁךָ, אֲפִלּוּ הוּא נוֹטֵל אֶת נַפְשֶׁךָ. וּבְכָל מְאֹדֶךָ, בְּכָל מָמוֹנֶךָ. דָּבָר אַחֵר בְּכָל מְאֹדֶךָ, בְּכָל מִדָּה וּמִדָּה שֶׁהוּא מוֹדֵד לְךָ הֱוֵי מוֹדֶה לוֹ בִּמְאֹד מְאֹד. לֹא יָקֵל אָדָם אֶת רֹאשׁוֹ כְּנֶגֶד שַׁעַר הַמִּזְרָח, שֶׁהוּא מְכֻוָּן כְּנֶגֶד בֵּית קָדְשֵׁי הַקָּדָשִׁים. לֹא יִכָּנֵס לְהַר הַבַּיִת בְּמַקְלוֹ, וּבְמִנְעָלוֹ, וּבְפֻנְדָּתוֹ, וּבְאָבָק שֶׁעַל רַגְלָיו, וְלֹא יַעֲשֶׂנּוּ קַפַּנְדַּרְיָא, וּרְקִיקָה מִקַּל וָחֹמֶר. כָּל חוֹתְמֵי בְרָכוֹת שֶׁהָיוּ בַמִּקְדָּשׁ, הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים מִן הָעוֹלָם. מִשֶּׁקִּלְקְלוּ הַמִּינִין, וְאָמְרוּ, אֵין עוֹלָם אֶלָּא אֶחָד, הִתְקִינוּ שֶׁיְּהוּ אוֹמְרִים, מִן הָעוֹלָם וְעַד הָעוֹלָם. וְהִתְקִינוּ, שֶׁיְּהֵא אָדָם שׁוֹאֵל אֶת שְׁלוֹם חֲבֵרוֹ בַּשֵּׁם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (רות ב) וְהִנֵּה בֹעַז בָּא מִבֵּית לֶחֶם, וַיֹּאמֶר לַקּוֹצְרִים יְיָ עִמָּכֶם, וַיֹּאמְרוּ לוֹ, יְבָרֶכְךָ יְיָ. וְאוֹמֵר (שופטים ו) יְיָ עִמְּךָ גִּבּוֹר הֶחָיִל. וְאוֹמֵר (משלי כג) אַל תָּבוּז כִּי זָקְנָה אִמֶּךָ. וְאוֹמֵר (תהלים קיט) עֵת לַעֲשׂוֹת לַייָ הֵפֵרוּ תוֹרָתֶךָ. רַבִּי נָתָן אוֹמֵר, הֵפֵרוּ תוֹרָתֶךָ עֵת לַעֲשׂוֹת לַייָ: \n", | 5.3. "The one who says, “On a bird’s nest may Your mercy be extended,” [or] “For good may Your name be blessed” or “We give thanks, we give thanks,” they silence him. One who was passing before the ark and made a mistake, another should pass in his place, and he should not be as one who refuses at that moment. Where does he begin? At the beginning of the blessing in which the other made a mistake.", 9.5. "One must bless [God] for the evil in the same way as one blesses for the good, as it says, “And you shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul and with all your might” (Deuteronomy 6:5). “With all your heart,” with your two impulses, the evil impulse as well as the good impulse. “With all your soul” even though he takes your soul [life] away from you. “With all your might” with all your money. Another explanation, “With all your might” whatever treatment he metes out to you. One should not show disrespect to the Eastern Gate, because it is in a direct line with the Holy of Holies. One should not enter the Temple Mount with a staff, or with shoes on, or with a wallet, or with dusty feet; nor should one make it a short cut, all the more spitting [is forbidden]. All the conclusions of blessings that were in the Temple they would say, “forever [lit. as long as the world is].” When the sectarians perverted their ways and said that there was only one world, they decreed that they should say, “for ever and ever [lit. from the end of the world to the end of the world]. They also decreed that a person should greet his fellow in God’s name, as it says, “And behold Boaz came from Bethlehem and said to the reapers, ‘May the Lord be with you.’ And they answered him, “May the Lord bless you’” (Ruth 2:. And it also says, “The Lord is with your, you valiant warrior” (Judges 6:12). And it also says, “And do not despise your mother when she grows old” (Proverbs 23:22). And it also says, “It is time to act on behalf of the Lord, for they have violated Your teaching” (Psalms 119:126). Rabbi Natan says: [this means] “They have violated your teaching It is time to act on behalf of the Lord.”", |
|
7. Mishnah, Hulin, 2.9 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •tannaim, treatment of heretics Found in books: Cohen (2010), The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism, 59| 2.9. "אֵין שׁוֹחֲטִין לֹא לְתוֹךְ יַמִּים, וְלֹא לְתוֹךְ נְהָרוֹת, וְלֹא לְתוֹךְ כֵּלִים. אֲבָל שׁוֹחֵט הוּא לְתוֹךְ עוּגָא שֶׁל מַיִם, וּבִסְפִינָה, עַל גַּבֵּי כֵלִים. אֵין שׁוֹחֲטִין לְגֻמָּא כָּל עִקָּר, אֲבָל עוֹשֶׂה גֻמָּא בְתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁיִּכָּנֵס הַדָּם לְתוֹכָהּ. וּבַשּׁוּק לֹא יַעֲשֶׂה כֵן, שֶׁלֹּא יְחַקֶּה אֶת הַמִּינִין: \n", | 2.9. "One may not slaughter [so that the blood runs] into the sea or into rivers, or into vessels, But one may slaughter into a pool (or vessel) of water. And when on board a ship on to vessels. One may not slaughter at all into a hole, but one may dig a hole in his own house for the blood to run into. In the street, however, he should not do so as not to follow the ways of the heretics.", |
|
8. Mishnah, Megillah, 4.8-4.9 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •tannaim, treatment of heretics Found in books: Cohen (2010), The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism, 59| 4.8. "הָאוֹמֵר אֵינִי עוֹבֵר לִפְנֵי הַתֵּבָה בִצְבוּעִין, אַף בִּלְבָנִים לֹא יַעֲבֹר. בְּסַנְדָּל אֵינִי עוֹבֵר, אַף יָחֵף לֹא יַעֲבֹר. הָעוֹשֶׂה תְפִלָּתוֹ עֲגֻלָּה, סַכָּנָה וְאֵין בָּהּ מִצְוָה. נְתָנָהּ עַל מִצְחוֹ אוֹ עַל פַּס יָדוֹ, הֲרֵי זוֹ דֶּרֶךְ הַמִּינוּת. צִפָּן זָהָב, וּנְתָנָהּ עַל בֵּית אֻנְקְלִי שֶׁלּוֹ, הֲרֵי זוֹ דֶּרֶךְ הַחִיצוֹנִים:", 4.9. "הָאוֹמֵר יְבָרְכוּךָ טוֹבִים, הֲרֵי זוֹ דֶּרֶךְ הַמִּינוּת. עַל קַן צִפּוֹר יַגִּיעוּ רַחֲמֶיךָ, וְעַל טוֹב יִזָּכֵר שְׁמֶךָ, מוֹדִים מוֹדִים, מְשַׁתְּקִין אוֹתוֹ. הַמְכַנֶּה בָעֲרָיוֹת, מְשַׁתְּקִין אוֹתוֹ. הָאוֹמֵר, וּמִזַּרְעֲךָ לֹא תִתֵּן לְהַעֲבִיר לַמֹּלֶךְ (ויקרא יח), וּמִזַרְעָךְ לֹא תִתֵּן לְאַעְבָּרָא בְּאַרְמָיוּתָא, מְשַׁתְּקִין אוֹתוֹ בִנְזִיפָה:", | 4.8. "If one says, “I will not pass before the ark in colored clothes,” even in white clothes he may not pass before it. [If one says], “I will not pass before it in shoes,” even barefoot he may not pass before it. One who makes his tefillin [for the head] round, it is dangerous and has no religious value. If he put them on his forehead or on the palm of his hand, behold this is the way of heresy. If he overlaid them with gold or put [the one for the hand] on his sleeve, behold this is the manner of the outsiders.", 4.9. "If one says “May the good bless you,” this is the way of heresy. [If one says], “May Your mercy reach the nest of a bird,” “May Your name be mentioned for the good,” “We give thanks, we give thanks,” they silence him. One who uses euphemisms in the portion dealing with forbidden marriages, he is silenced. If he says, [instead of] “And you shall not give any of your seed to be passed to Moloch,” (Leviticus 18:21) “You shall not give [your seed] to pass to a Gentile woman,” he silenced with a rebuke.", |
|
9. Mishnah, Parah, 3.3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •tannaim, treatment of heretics Found in books: Cohen (2010), The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism, 59| 3.3. "בָּאוּ לְהַר הַבַּיִת וְיָרְדוּ. הַר הַבַּיִת וְהָעֲזָרוֹת, תַּחְתֵּיהֶם חָלוּל, מִפְּנֵי קֶבֶר הַתְּהוֹם. וּבְפֶתַח הָעֲזָרָה הָיָה מְתֻקָּן קָלָל שֶׁל חַטָּאת, וּמְבִיאִין זָכָר שֶׁל רְחֵלִים וְקוֹשְׁרִים חֶבֶל בֵּין קַרְנָיו, וְקוֹשְׁרִים מַקֵּל וּמְסַבֵּךְ בְּרֹאשׁוֹ שֶׁל חֶבֶל, וְזוֹרְקוֹ לְתוֹךְ הַקָּלָל, וּמַכֶּה אֶת הַזָּכָר וְנִרְתָּע לַאֲחוֹרָיו, וְנוֹטֵל וּמְקַדֵּשׁ, כְּדֵי שֶׁיֵּרָאֶה עַל פְּנֵי הַמָּיִם. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, אַל תִּתְּנוּ מָקוֹם לַצְּדוֹקִים לִרְדּוֹת, אֶלָּא הוּא נוֹטֵל וּמְקַדֵּשׁ: \n", | 3.3. "They arrived at the Temple Mount and got down. Beneath the Temple Mount and the courts was a hollow which served as a protection against a grave in the depths. And at the entrance of the courtyard there was the jar of the ashes of the sin-offerings. They would bring a male from among the sheep and tie a rope between its horns, and a stick or a bushy twig was tied at the other end of the rope, and this was thrown into the jar. They then struck the male [sheep] was so that it started backwards. And [a child] took the ashes and put it [enough] so that it could be seen upon the water. Rabbi Yose said: do not give the Sadducees an opportunity to rule! Rather, [a child] himself took it and mixed it.", |
|
10. Mishnah, Rosh Hashanah, 2.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •tannaim, treatment of heretics Found in books: Cohen (2010), The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism, 59| 2.1. "אִם אֵינָן מַכִּירִין אוֹתוֹ, מְשַׁלְּחִין אַחֵר עִמּוֹ לַהֲעִידוֹ. בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיוּ מְקַבְּלִין עֵדוּת הַחֹדֶשׁ מִכָּל אָדָם. מִשֶּׁקִּלְקְלוּ הַמִּינִין, הִתְקִינוּ שֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ מְקַבְּלִין אֶלָּא מִן הַמַּכִּירִים:", | 2.1. "If they don’t know him [the one who came to testify], they send another with him to testify concerning [his reliability]. Originally testimony concerning the new moon was accepted from anyone. When the minim disrupted this, it was decreed that testimony should be received only from persons known [to the court].", |
|
11. Mishnah, Sanhedrin, 4.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •tannaim, treatment of heretics Found in books: Cohen (2010), The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism, 59| 4.5. "כֵּיצַד מְאַיְּמִין אֶת הָעֵדִים עַל עֵדֵי נְפָשׁוֹת, הָיוּ מַכְנִיסִין אוֹתָן וּמְאַיְּמִין עֲלֵיהֶן. שֶׁמָּא תֹאמְרוּ מֵאֹמֶד, וּמִשְּׁמוּעָה, עֵד מִפִּי עֵד וּמִפִּי אָדָם נֶאֱמָן שָׁמַעְנוּ, אוֹ שֶׁמָּא אִי אַתֶּם יוֹדְעִין שֶׁסּוֹפֵנוּ לִבְדֹּק אֶתְכֶם בִּדְרִישָׁה וּבַחֲקִירָה. הֱווּ יוֹדְעִין שֶׁלֹּא כְדִינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת. דִּינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת, אָדָם נוֹתֵן מָמוֹן וּמִתְכַּפֵּר לוֹ. דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת, דָּמוֹ וְדַם זַרְעִיּוֹתָיו תְּלוּיִין בּוֹ עַד סוֹף הָעוֹלָם, שֶׁכֵּן מָצִינוּ בְקַיִן שֶׁהָרַג אֶת אָחִיו, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית ד) דְּמֵי אָחִיךָ צֹעֲקִים, אֵינוֹ אוֹמֵר דַּם אָחִיךָ אֶלָּא דְּמֵי אָחִיךָ, דָּמוֹ וְדַם זַרְעִיּוֹתָיו. דָּבָר אַחֵר, דְּמֵי אָחִיךָ, שֶׁהָיָה דָמוֹ מֻשְׁלָךְ עַל הָעֵצִים וְעַל הָאֲבָנִים. לְפִיכָךְ נִבְרָא אָדָם יְחִידִי, לְלַמֶּדְךָ, שֶׁכָּל הַמְאַבֵּד נֶפֶשׁ אַחַת מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל, מַעֲלֶה עָלָיו הַכָּתוּב כְּאִלּוּ אִבֵּד עוֹלָם מָלֵא. וְכָל הַמְקַיֵּם נֶפֶשׁ אַחַת מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל, מַעֲלֶה עָלָיו הַכָּתוּב כְּאִלּוּ קִיֵּם עוֹלָם מָלֵא. וּמִפְּנֵי שְׁלוֹם הַבְּרִיּוֹת, שֶׁלֹּא יֹאמַר אָדָם לַחֲבֵרוֹ אַבָּא גָדוֹל מֵאָבִיךָ. וְשֶׁלֹּא יְהוּ מִינִין אוֹמְרִים, הַרְבֵּה רָשֻׁיּוֹת בַּשָּׁמָיִם. וּלְהַגִּיד גְּדֻלָּתוֹ שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, שֶׁאָדָם טוֹבֵעַ כַּמָּה מַטְבְּעוֹת בְּחוֹתָם אֶחָד וְכֻלָּן דּוֹמִין זֶה לָזֶה, וּמֶלֶךְ מַלְכֵי הַמְּלָכִים הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא טָבַע כָּל אָדָם בְּחוֹתָמוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן וְאֵין אֶחָד מֵהֶן דּוֹמֶה לַחֲבֵרוֹ. לְפִיכָךְ כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד חַיָּב לוֹמַר, בִּשְׁבִילִי נִבְרָא הָעוֹלָם. וְשֶׁמָּא תֹאמְרוּ מַה לָּנוּ וְלַצָּרָה הַזֹּאת, וַהֲלֹא כְבָר נֶאֱמַר (ויקרא ה) וְהוּא עֵד אוֹ רָאָה אוֹ יָדָע אִם לוֹא יַגִּיד וְגוֹ'. וְשֶׁמָּא תֹאמְרוּ מַה לָּנוּ לָחוּב בְּדָמוֹ שֶׁל זֶה, וַהֲלֹא כְבָר נֶאֱמַר (משלי יא) וּבַאֲבֹד רְשָׁעִים רִנָּה: \n", | 4.5. "How did they admonish witnesses in capital cases? They brought them in and admonished them, [saying], “Perhaps you will say something that is only a supposition or hearsay or secondhand, or even from a trustworthy man. Or perhaps you do not know that we shall check you with examination and inquiry? Know, moreover, that capital cases are not like non-capital cases: in non-capital cases a man may pay money and so make atonement, but in capital cases the witness is answerable for the blood of him [that is wrongfully condemned] and the blood of his descendants [that should have been born to him] to the end of the world.” For so have we found it with Cain that murdered his brother, for it says, “The bloods of your brother cry out” (Gen. 4:10). It doesn’t say, “The blood of your brother”, but rather “The bloods of your brother” meaning his blood and the blood of his descendants. Another saying is, “The bloods of your brother” that his blood was cast over trees and stones. Therefore but a single person was created in the world, to teach that if any man has caused a single life to perish from Israel, he is deemed by Scripture as if he had caused a whole world to perish; and anyone who saves a single soul from Israel, he is deemed by Scripture as if he had saved a whole world. Again [but a single person was created] for the sake of peace among humankind, that one should not say to another, “My father was greater than your father”. Again, [but a single person was created] against the heretics so they should not say, “There are many ruling powers in heaven”. Again [but a single person was created] to proclaim the greatness of the Holy Blessed One; for humans stamp many coins with one seal and they are all like one another; but the King of kings, the Holy Blessed One, has stamped every human with the seal of the first man, yet not one of them are like another. Therefore everyone must say, “For my sake was the world created.” And if perhaps you [witnesses] would say, “Why should we be involved with this trouble”, was it not said, “He, being a witness, whether he has seen or known, [if he does not speak it, then he shall bear his iniquity] (Lev. 5:1). And if perhaps you [witnesses] would say, “Why should we be guilty of the blood of this man?, was it not said, “When the wicked perish there is rejoicing” (Proverbs 11:10).]", |
|
12. Mishnah, Sotah, 9.15 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •tannaim, treatment of heretics Found in books: Cohen (2010), The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism, 59| 9.15. "מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי מֵאִיר, בָּטְלוּ מוֹשְׁלֵי מְשָׁלִים. מִשֶּׁמֵּת בֶּן עַזַּאי, בָּטְלוּ הַשַּׁקְדָּנִים. מִשֶּׁמֵּת בֶּן זוֹמָא, בָּטְלוּ הַדַּרְשָׁנִים. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, פָּסְקָה טוֹבָה מִן הָעוֹלָם. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, בָּא גוֹבַי וְרַבּוּ צָרוֹת. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, פָּסַק הָעשֶׁר מִן הַחֲכָמִים. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, בָּטַל כְּבוֹד הַתּוֹרָה. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בֶּן דּוֹסָא, בָּטְלוּ אַנְשֵׁי מַעֲשֶׂה. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי יוֹסֵי קַטְנוּתָא, פָּסְקוּ חֲסִידִים. וְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ קַטְנוּתָא, שֶׁהָיָה קַטְנוּתָן שֶׁל חֲסִידִים. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, בָּטַל זִיו הַחָכְמָה. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הַזָּקֵן, בָּטַל כְּבוֹד הַתּוֹרָה וּמֵתָה טָהֳרָה וּפְרִישׁוּת. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בֶּן פָּאבִי, בָּטַל זִיו הַכְּהֻנָּה. מִשֶּׁמֵּת רַבִּי, בָּטְלָה עֲנָוָה וְיִרְאַת חֵטְא. רַבִּי פִנְחָס בֶּן יָאִיר אוֹמֵר, מִשֶּׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, בּוֹשׁוּ חֲבֵרִים וּבְנֵי חוֹרִין, וְחָפוּ רֹאשָׁם, וְנִדַּלְדְּלוּ אַנְשֵׁי מַעֲשֶׂה, וְגָבְרוּ בַעֲלֵי זְרוֹעַ וּבַעֲלֵי לָשׁוֹן, וְאֵין דּוֹרֵשׁ וְאֵין מְבַקֵּשׁ, וְאֵין שׁוֹאֵל, עַל מִי לָנוּ לְהִשָּׁעֵן, עַל אָבִינוּ שֶׁבַּשָּׁמָיִם. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר הַגָּדוֹל אוֹמֵר, מִיּוֹם שֶׁחָרַב בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ, שָׁרוּ חַכִּימַיָּא לְמֶהֱוֵי כְסָפְרַיָּא, וְסָפְרַיָּא כְּחַזָּנָא, וְחַזָּנָא כְּעַמָּא דְאַרְעָא, וְעַמָּא דְאַרְעָא אָזְלָא וְדַלְדְּלָה, וְאֵין מְבַקֵּשׁ, עַל מִי יֵשׁ לְהִשָּׁעֵן, עַל אָבִינוּ שֶׁבַּשָּׁמָיִם. בְּעִקְּבוֹת מְשִׁיחָא חֻצְפָּא יִסְגֵּא, וְיֹקֶר יַאֲמִיר, הַגֶּפֶן תִּתֵּן פִּרְיָהּ וְהַיַּיִן בְּיֹקֶר, וְהַמַּלְכוּת תֵּהָפֵךְ לְמִינוּת, וְאֵין תּוֹכֵחָה, בֵּית וַעַד יִהְיֶה לִזְנוּת, וְהַגָּלִיל יֶחֱרַב, וְהַגַּבְלָן יִשּׁוֹם, וְאַנְשֵׁי הַגְּבוּל יְסוֹבְבוּ מֵעִיר לְעִיר וְלֹא יְחוֹנָּנוּ, וְחָכְמַת סוֹפְרִים תִּסְרַח, וְיִרְאֵי חֵטְא יִמָּאֲסוּ, וְהָאֱמֶת תְּהֵא נֶעְדֶּרֶת. נְעָרִים פְּנֵי זְקֵנִים יַלְבִּינוּ, זְקֵנִים יַעַמְדוּ מִפְּנֵי קְטַנִּים. (מיכה ז) בֵּן מְנַבֵּל אָב, בַּת קָמָה בְאִמָּהּ, כַּלָּה בַּחֲמֹתָהּ, אֹיְבֵי אִישׁ אַנְשֵׁי בֵיתוֹ. פְּנֵי הַדּוֹר כִּפְנֵי הַכֶּלֶב, הַבֵּן אֵינוֹ מִתְבַּיֵּשׁ מֵאָבִיו. וְעַל מִי יֵשׁ לָנוּ לְהִשָּׁעֵן, עַל אָבִינוּ שֶׁבַּשָּׁמָיִם. רַבִּי פִנְחָס בֶּן יָאִיר אוֹמֵר, זְרִיזוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי נְקִיּוּת, וּנְקִיּוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי טָהֳרָה, וְטָהֳרָה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי פְרִישׁוּת, וּפְרִישׁוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי קְדֻשָּׁה, וּקְדֻשָּׁה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי עֲנָוָה, וַעֲנָוָה מְבִיאָה לִידֵי יִרְאַת חֵטְא, וְיִרְאַת חֵטְא מְבִיאָה לִידֵי חֲסִידוּת, וַחֲסִידוּת מְבִיאָה לִידֵי רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ, וְרוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ מְבִיאָה לִידֵי תְחִיַּת הַמֵּתִים, וּתְחִיַּת הַמֵּתִים בָּא עַל יְדֵי אֵלִיָּהוּ זָכוּר לַטּוֹב, אָמֵן: \n", | 9.15. "When Rabbi Meir died, the composers of fables ceased. When Ben Azzai died, the diligent students [of Torah] ceased. When Ben Zoma died, the expounders ceased. When Rabbi Joshua died, goodness ceased from the world. When Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel died, locusts come and troubles multiplied. When Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah died, the sages ceased to be wealthy. When Rabbi Akiba died, the glory of the Torah ceased. When Rabbi Hanina ben Dosa died, men of wondrous deeds ceased. When Rabbi Yose Katnuta died, the pious men (hasidim) ceased and why was his name called Katnuta? Because he was the youngest of the pious men. When Rabban Yoha ben Zakkai died, the splendor of wisdom ceased. When Rabban Gamaliel the elder died, the glory of the torah ceased, and purity and separateness perished. When Rabbi Ishmael ben Fabi died, the splendor of the priesthood ceased. When Rabbi died, humility and fear of sin ceased. Rabbi Phineas ben Yair says: when Temple was destroyed, scholars and freemen were ashamed and covered their head, men of wondrous deeds were disregarded, and violent men and big talkers grew powerful. And nobody expounds, nobody seeks, and nobody asks. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. Rabbi Eliezer the Great says: from the day the Temple was destroyed, the sages began to be like scribes, scribes like synagogue-attendants, synagogue-attendants like common people, and the common people became more and more debased. And nobody seeks. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. In the footsteps of the messiah insolence (hutzpah) will increase and the cost of living will go up greatly; the vine will yield its fruit, but wine will be expensive; the government will turn to heresy, and there will be no one to rebuke; the meeting-place [of scholars] will be used for licentiousness; the Galilee will be destroyed, the Gablan will be desolated, and the dwellers on the frontier will go about [begging] from place to place without anyone to take pity on them; the wisdom of the learned will rot, fearers of sin will be despised, and the truth will be lacking; youths will put old men to shame, the old will stand up in the presence of the young, “For son spurns father, daughter rises up against mother, daughter-in-law against mother-in-law a man’s own household are his enemies” (Micah 7:6). The face of the generation will be like the face of a dog, a son will not feel ashamed before his father. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair says, “Heedfulness leads to cleanliness, cleanliness leads to purity, purity leads to separation, separation leads to holiness, holiness leads to modesty, modesty leads to fear of sin, fear of sin leads to piety, piety leads to the Holy Spirit, The Holy Spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead, and the resurrection of the dead comes from Elijah, blessed be his memory, Amen.”", |
|
| 13. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •tannaim, treatment of heretics Found in books: Cohen (2010), The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism, 59 |
14. Babylonian Talmud, Rosh Hashanah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •tannaim, treatment of heretics Found in books: Cohen (2010), The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism, 59| 29b. ברכת הלחם של מצה וברכת היין של קידוש היום מהו כיון דחובה הוא מפיק או דלמא ברכה לאו חובה היא,ת"ש דאמר רב אשי כי הוינן בי רב פפי הוה מקדש לן וכי הוה אתי אריסיה מדברא הוה מקדש להו,ת"ר לא יפרוס אדם פרוסה לאורחין אלא אם כן אוכל עמהם אבל פורס הוא לבניו ולבני ביתו כדי לחנכן במצות ובהלל ובמגילה אף על פי שיצא מוציא:, br br big strongהדרן עלך ראוהו בית דין /strong /big br br,מתני׳ big strongיום /strong /big טוב של ר"ה שחל להיות בשבת במקדש היו תוקעין אבל לא במדינה משחרב בהמ"ק התקין רבן יוחנן בן זכאי שיהו תוקעין בכל מקום שיש בו ב"ד אמר רבי אלעזר לא התקין רבן יוחנן בן זכאי אלא ביבנה בלבד אמרו לו אחד יבנה ואחד כל מקום שיש בו בית דין,ועוד זאת היתה ירושלים יתירה על יבנה שכל עיר שהיא רואה ושומעת וקרובה ויכולה לבוא תוקעין וביבנה לא היו תוקעין אלא בב"ד בלבד:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big מנה"מ אמר רבי לוי בר לחמא אמר רבי חמא בר חנינא כתוב אחד אומר (ויקרא כג, כד) שבתון זכרון תרועה וכתוב אחד אומר (במדבר כט, א) יום תרועה יהיה לכם לא קשיא כאן ביו"ט שחל להיות בשבת כאן ביום טוב שחל להיות בחול,אמר רבא אי מדאורייתא היא במקדש היכי תקעינן ועוד הא לאו מלאכה היא דאצטריך קרא למעוטי,דתנא דבי שמואל (במדבר כט, א) כל מלאכת עבודה לא תעשו יצתה תקיעת שופר ורדיית הפת שהיא חכמה ואינה מלאכה,אלא אמר רבא מדאורייתא מישרא שרי ורבנן הוא דגזור ביה כדרבה דאמר רבה הכל חייבין בתקיעת שופר ואין הכל בקיאין בתקיעת שופר גזירה שמא יטלנו בידו וילך אצל הבקי ללמוד ויעבירנו ד' אמות ברה"ר,והיינו טעמא דלולב והיינו טעמא דמגילה:,משחרב בהמ"ק התקין רבי יוחנן בן זכאי כו': תנו רבנן פעם אחת חל ראש השנה להיות בשבת [והיו כל הערים מתכנסין] אמר להם רבן יוחנן בן זכאי לבני בתירה נתקע אמרו לו נדון,אמר להם נתקע ואחר כך נדון לאחר שתקעו אמרו לו נדון אמר להם כבר נשמעה קרן ביבנה ואין משיבין לאחר מעשה:,אמר רבי אלעזר לא התקין רבן יוחנן בן זכאי אלא ביבנה בלבד אמרו לו אחד יבנה ואחד כל מקום שיש בו ב"ד: אמרו לו היינו ת"ק,איכא בינייהו בי דינא דאקראי:,אמרו לו אחד יבנה ואחד כל מקום שיש בו ב"ד: אמר רב הונא | 29b. With regard to b the blessing over bread /b that is recited before eating b i matza /i /b at the Passover seder b and the blessing over wine /b recited as part b of the sanctification of the day /b of Shabbat or a Festival, b what is /b the i halakha /i ? The Gemara analyzes the question: Do we say that b since there is an obligation /b to recite these blessings due to the mitzva involved, therefore b one can discharge /b the obligation for others, even if he himself has already fulfilled his obligation? b Or perhaps /b we say that b the blessing /b itself b is not an obligation, /b but rather the obligation lies in the eating and drinking, and the blessing is recited over one’s physical enjoyment; therefore, if he already fulfilled his own obligation, he cannot recite the blessing for others, as he derives no pleasure at this time.,The Gemara answers: b Come /b and b hear /b an answer to this question from what b Rav Ashi said: When we were /b studying b in the school of Rav Pappi, he would recite i kiddush /i for us, and when his tets would arrive from the field he would recite i kiddush /i /b once again b on their behalf. /b Therefore, it is clear that one may recite i kiddush /i on behalf of others, including the blessing that is recited over the wine, even if he himself has already fulfilled his own obligation., b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b One should not break bread /b and recite a blessing b for guests unless he is eating with them, /b so that he is obligated to recite a blessing for himself. b But he may break /b bread b for his children and for /b the other b members of his household /b and recite the blessing, b in order to educate them to /b perform b the mitzvot, /b so that they know how to recite a blessing. b And with regard to i hallel /i and the Scroll /b of Esther, the i halakha /i is that b even if he /b already b fulfilled /b his obligation, b he can /b still b discharge /b the obligation of others.,, strong MISHNA: /strong With regard to the b Festival day of Rosh HaShana that occurs on Shabbat, in the Temple they would sound /b the i shofar /i as usual. b However, /b they would b not /b sound it b in the /b rest of the b country /b outside the Temple. b After the Temple was destroyed, Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai instituted that /b the people b should sound /b the i shofar /i on Shabbat b in every place where there is a court /b of twenty-three judges. b Rabbi Elazar said: Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai instituted /b this practice b only in Yavne, /b where the Great Sanhedrin of seventy-one judges resided in his time, but nowhere else. b They said to him: /b He instituted the practice b both /b in b Yavne and /b in b any place where there is a court. /b ,The mishna adds: b And Jerusalem /b in earlier times b had this additional superiority over Yavne /b after Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai instituted this practice, b for /b in b any city whose /b residents b could see /b Jerusalem b and hear /b the sounding of the i shofar /i from there, b and /b which b was near /b to Jerusalem b and /b people b could come /b to Jerusalem from there, b they /b would b sound /b the i shofar /i there as well, as it was considered part of Jerusalem. b But in Yavne they would sound /b the i shofar /i b only in the court /b itself, not in the surrounding cities., strong GEMARA: /strong The Gemara asks: b From where /b are b these matters; /b from where is it derived that the i shofar /i is not sounded on Shabbat? b Rabbi Levi bar Laḥma said /b that b Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said: One verse says, /b with regard to Rosh HaShana: b “A solemn rest, a memorial of blasts” /b (Leviticus 23:24), which indicates that one should merely remember the i shofar /i without actually sounding it. b And another verse says: “It is a day of blowing for you” /b (Numbers 29:1), i.e., a day on which one must actually sound the i shofar /i . This apparent contradiction is b not difficult: Here, /b the verse in which the i shofar /i is only being remembered but not sounded, is referring b to a Festival that occurs on Shabbat; there, /b the verse in which the i shofar /i is actually sounded, is referring b to a Festival that occurs on a weekday. /b , b Rava said: /b This explanation is difficult, for b if /b the distinction between Shabbat and the rest of the week applies b by Torah law, how does one sound /b the i shofar /i on Shabbat b in the Temple? /b If it is prohibited to sound the i shofar /i on Shabbat, it should be prohibited everywhere. b And furthermore, /b there is an additional problem with this explanation: Although the Sages prohibited sounding a i shofar /i and playing other musical instruments on Shabbat, by Torah law sounding a i shofar /i b is not a prohibited labor /b on Shabbat such b that a verse is necessary to exclude /b it when Rosh HaShana occurs on Shabbat.,The Gemara cites a proof for this last claim: b As /b a Sage b of the school of Shmuel taught /b in a i baraita /i , with regard to the verse that prohibits performing prohibited labor on Festivals: b “Any prohibited labor of work you shall not perform” /b (Numbers 29:1). This comes b to exclude /b from the category of prohibited labors b the sounding of the i shofar /i and the removal of bread /b from the oven, each of b which is a skill and not a labor, /b and therefore they are not included in the category of prohibited labor. Apparently, sounding the i shofar /i is not prohibited by Torah law., b Rather, Rava said: By Torah law one is permitted /b to sound the i shofar /i on Rosh HaShana even on Shabbat, b and it was the Sages who decreed /b that b it /b is prohibited. This is b in accordance with /b the opinion of b Rabba, as Rabba said: All are obligated to sound the i shofar /i /b on Rosh HaShana, b but not all are experts in sounding the i shofar /i . /b Therefore, the Sages instituted b a decree /b that the i shofar /i should not be sounded on Shabbat, b lest one take /b the i shofar /i b in his hand and go to an expert to learn /b how to sound it or to have him sound it for him, b and /b due to his preoccupation b he /b might b carry it four cubits in the public domain, /b which is a desecration of Shabbat.,The Gemara comments: b And this is /b also b the reason for /b the rabbinical decree that b the palm branch /b [ b i lulav /i /b ] may not be taken on Shabbat, b and this is /b likewise b the reason for /b the decree that b the Megilla /b of Esther may not be read on Shabbat. The Sages were concerned that one might carry the i lulav /i or the Megilla four cubits in the public domain to take it to an expert who will teach him the proper manner to perform these mitzvot.,§ The mishna taught: b After the Temple was destroyed, Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai instituted that /b the people should sound the i shofar /i even on Shabbat in every place where there is a court of twenty-three judges. The background to this decree is related in greater detail in a i baraita /i , as b the Sages taught: Once Rosh HaShana occurred on Shabbat, and all the cities gathered /b at the Great Sanhedrin in Yavne for the Festival prayers. b Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai said to the sons of Beteira, /b who were the leading halakhic authorities of the generation: b Let us sound /b the i shofar /i , as in the Temple. b They said to him: Let us discuss /b whether or not this is permitted., b He said to them: /b First b let us sound /b it, b and afterward, /b when there is time, b let us discuss /b the matter. b After they sounded /b the i shofar /i , the sons of Beteira b said to /b Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai: b Let us /b now b discuss /b the issue. b He said to them: The horn has already been heard in Yavne, and one does not refute /b a ruling b after action /b has already been taken. There is no point in discussing the matter, as it would be inappropriate to say that the community acted erroneously after the fact.,§ The mishna further stated that b Rabbi Elazar said: Rabban Yoḥa ben Zakkai instituted /b this practice b only in Yavne. They said to him: /b He instituted the practice b both /b in b Yavne and /b in b any place where there is a court. /b The Gemara asks: This last statement of the Rabbis: b They said to him, /b etc.; b is /b the same as the opinion of b the first i tanna /i /b of the mishna. Why did the mishna repeat this opinion?,The Gemara answers: The practical difference b between /b the opinion of the first i tanna /i and the opinion of the Rabbis who issued that last statement is with regard to b a temporary court, /b i.e., one that is not fixed in a certain place. According to the opinion of the first i tanna /i , the i shofar /i is sounded there as well, whereas according to the opinion of the Rabbis who responded to Rabbi Elazar, the i shofar /i is sounded only in a place where there is a permanent court, similar to that in Yavne.,§ The mishna taught that b they said to him: /b He instituted the practice b both /b in b Yavne and /b in b any place where there is a court. Rav Huna said: /b |
|
15. Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •tannaim, treatment of heretics Found in books: Cohen (2010), The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism, 58| 5b. מילתא דכתיבא בהאי ענינא מילתא דלא כתיבא בהאי ענינא מנא לן,אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק יליף פתח פתח רב משרשיא אמר (ויקרא ח, לה) ושמרתם את משמרת ה' עכובא רב אשי אמר (ויקרא ח, לה) כי כן צויתי עכובא,ת"ר כי כן צויתי (ויקרא י, יח) כאשר צויתי (ויקרא י, טו) כאשר צוה ה' כי כן צויתי באנינות יאכלוה כאשר צויתי בשעת מעשה אמר להם כאשר צוה ה' ולא מאלי אני אומר,א"ר יוסי בר חנינא מכנסים אין כתובין בפרשה כשהוא אומר (שמות כט, א) וזה הדבר אשר תעשה להם לקדש אותם לכהן להביא המכנסים ועשירית האיפה,בשלמא מכנסים כתיבי בענינא דבגדים אלא עשירית האיפה מנא לן אתיא זה זה (ויקרא ו, יג) מוזה קרבן אהרן ובניו אשר יקריבו לה' עשירית האיפה,א"ר יוחנן משום ר"ש בן יוחאי מניין שאף מקרא פרשה מעכב ת"ל (ויקרא ח, ה) ויאמר משה אל העדה זה הדבר אשר צוה ה' אפילו דיבור מעכב,כיצד הלבישן כיצד הלבישן מאי דהוה הוה אלא כיצד מלבישן לעתיד לבוא לעתיד לבוא נמי לכשיבואו אהרן ובניו ומשה עמהם,אלא כיצד הלבישן למיסבר קראי פליגי בה בני ר' חייא ורבי יוחנן חד אמר אהרן ואח"כ בניו וחד אמר אהרן ובניו בבת אחת,אמר אביי בכתונת ומצנפת כולי עלמא לא פליגי דאהרן ואח"כ בניו דבין בצוואה ובין בעשיה אהרן קדים כי פליגי באבנט מאן דאמר אהרן ואחר כך בניו דכתיב (ויקרא ח, ז) ויחגור אותו באבנט והדר כתיב ויחגור אותם אבנט ומאן דאמר אהרן ובניו בבת אחת דכתיב (שמות כט, ט) וחגרת אותם ולמאן דאמר אהרן ובניו בבת אחת הכתיב ויחגור אותו באבנט והדר כתיב ויחגור אותם אבנט | 5b. b matters that are written in /b the context of b this topic /b of inauguration in the book of Exodus invalidate the inauguration. However, with regard to b matters that are not written in that context, /b but are written in the portion of the inauguration in Leviticus, b from where do we derive /b that they invalidate the inauguration?, b Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: /b One b derives a /b verbal analogy between the word opening that appears in the two portions of the inauguration. It is written in the command concerning the inauguration: “The b opening /b of the Tent of Meeting” (Exodus 29:32), and in its fulfillment it is written: “The b opening /b of the Tent of Meeting” (Leviticus 8:31). Failure to perform the matters written in both portions invalidates the inauguration. br b Rav Mesharshiyya said: /b The verbal analogy is unnecessary, as the conclusion can be derived directly from the verse written with regard to the implementation of the inauguration: b “And keep the charge of the Lord, /b that you not die, for so I am commanded” (Leviticus 8:35). The emphasis on this being the charge of the Lord comes to teach that failure to perform all the details mentioned in the implementation of the command b invalidates /b the inauguration. br b Rav Ashi says: /b The phrase: b For so I am commanded, /b is the source from which it is derived that all the details written in both portions b invalidate /b the inauguration.,Apropos that phrase, the Gemara cites a related halakhic midrash. b The Sages taught: /b In the context of the implementation of the inauguration, three variations of the phrase appear: b “For so I am commanded” /b (Leviticus 8:35); b “as I commanded” /b (Leviticus 10:18); and b “as God has commanded” /b (Leviticus 10:15). What does this repetition teach? From the phrase: b “For so I am commanded,” /b it is derived that even in a state of b acute mourning, /b on the first day after the death of a relative, one must b eat /b the offering. God stated the verse: b “As I commanded,” at the time of the incident /b just after the deaths of Nadav and Avihu, when Aaron and his sons were in a state of acute mourning. And when Moses states: b “As God commanded,” /b he is saying: The command is from God b and /b it is b not from my /b own initiative that b I am saying /b it.,Apropos the matters mentioned that are not explicit in the portion, the Gemara cites that which b Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said: Trousers /b are one of the priestly vestments worn during the inauguration, but they b are not written in the /b Torah b portion. When /b the verse b says: “And this is the matter that you shall do for them to sanctify them for /b My b service” /b (Exodus 29:1), the superfluous word: And, which appears at the beginning of the verse, comes to add to that which was written previously and b to include trousers and the tenth of an ephah /b offered by a priest on the day that he begins his service.,The Gemara asks: b Granted, trousers /b can be derived, as the verse b is written /b in the context b of the matter of /b priestly b garments /b detailed adjacent to the portion of the inauguration. b However, /b with regard to b the tenth of an ephah, from where do we /b derive that there is an obligation to offer it during the inauguration? The Gemara answers: It is b derived /b by means of a verbal analogy between the word b this /b that appears in one verse and the word b this /b that appears in another. It is written: b “This is the offering of Aaron and of his sons, which they shall offer to the Lord /b in the day when he is anointed, b a tenth of an ephah” /b (Leviticus 6:13). And in the verse cited above in the context of the inauguration it says: “And this is the matter that you shall do for them,” which teaches that there is an obligation to offer a tenth of an ephah during the inauguration., b Rabbi Yoḥa said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: From where /b is it derived b that even /b failure to b read the /b Torah b portion /b of the inauguration b invalidates /b the inauguration? b The verse states: “And Moses said to the assembly: This is the matter [ i davar /i ] that God has commanded /b to be done” (Leviticus 8:5), teaching that b even /b failure to perform the b recitation [ i dibbur /i ] /b of the Torah portion to the people b invalidates /b the inauguration.,§ Apropos the inauguration of the priests, the Gemara asks: b How, /b i.e., in what order, did Moses b dress /b Aaron and his sons in the priestly vestments? The Gemara wonders: b In what order did he dress them? /b That is an irrelevant question, as b what was, was. /b The order in which Moses dressed the priests has no practical ramifications. b Rather, /b the question must be: b How /b will Moses b dress /b the priests b in the future, /b following the resurrection of the dead, when the Temple service will be restored? The Gemara rejects this question as well: b In the future, too, when Aaron and his sons will come and Moses /b will be b with them, /b he will know the proper sequence, and there is no point to raising the question., b Rather, /b the question is: b How /b did Moses b dress them? /b The Gemara seeks b to explain the verses /b on this topic, as they appear somewhat contradictory. The Gemara responds: b The sons of Rabbi Ḥiyya and Rabbi Yoḥa disagree with regard to /b this matter. b One said: /b Moses dressed b Aaron /b first b and afterward /b Moses dressed b his sons; and one said: /b Moses dressed b Aaron and his sons simultaneously, /b i.e., consecutively from one to the next, without interruption, to avoid changing the order prescribed in the verses., b Abaye said: /b With regard to the b tunic and mitre everyone agrees that /b Moses dressed b Aaron and afterward his sons, as both in /b the portion of b the command /b concerning the inauguration b and in /b the portion of b the implementation, /b mention of b Aaron precedes /b mention of his sons. b When they disagree, /b it is b with regard to the belt. /b The Gemara elaborates. The b one who said: /b Moses dressed b Aaron and afterward his sons /b derives it from that b which is written: “And he girded him with the belt” /b (Leviticus 8:7), b and then it is written: “And he girded them with belts” /b (Leviticus 8:13). Moses first dressed Aaron in all of the garments, including the belt, and then Moses dressed Aaron’s sons. b And /b the b one who said: /b Moses dressed b Aaron and his sons, simultaneously /b derives it from that b which is /b subsequently b written: “And gird them /b with belts, Aaron and his sons” (Exodus 29:9), indicating that Moses girded them all with belts simultaneously. The Gemara asks: b And /b according b to the one who says: /b Moses dressed b Aaron and his sons simultaneously, isn’t it written: He girded him with the belt, and then it is written: He girded them with belts, /b clearly indicating that he dressed Aaron and then his sons? |
|
| 16. Marcian, Regulae, 8.3 Tagged with subjects: •tannaim, treatment of heretics Found in books: Cohen (2010), The Significance of Yavneh and other Essays in Jewish Hellenism, 59 |
