| subject | book bibliographic info |
|---|---|
| yetzer | Garcia, On Human Nature in Early Judaism: Creation, Composition, and Condition (2021) 43, 200 Wright, The Letter of Aristeas: 'Aristeas to Philocrates' or 'On the Translation of the Law of the Jews' (2015) 415, 416 |
| yetzer, adjuration of | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 18, 20, 52, 81, 88, 100, 146, 175, 188 |
| yetzer, and angels | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 187 |
| yetzer, and animals | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 188 |
| yetzer, and evil heart | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 80 |
| yetzer, and god | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 130 |
| yetzer, and heart | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 25, 33, 47, 49, 81, 139, 145, 209 |
| yetzer, and pauline sin | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 54 |
| yetzer, and philonic falsehood | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 54 |
| yetzer, and sages | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 112, 113 |
| yetzer, antinomian | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 2, 6, 17, 18, 30, 31, 52, 66, 83, 88, 96, 98, 104, 108, 118, 145, 149, 214 |
| yetzer, as a fly | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 181 |
| yetzer, as character trait | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 29, 30 |
| yetzer, as hair | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 151 |
| yetzer, as hunger | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 30 |
| yetzer, as intruder | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 71 |
| yetzer, as organ | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 75, 76 |
| yetzer, as robber | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 39, 70 |
| yetzer, as satan | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 79 |
| yetzer, as tendency | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 48 |
| yetzer, as torah scholar | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 20, 132 |
| yetzer, attacking | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 109 |
| yetzer, battle against | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 20, 21, 22, 34, 39, 40, 41, 50, 57, 74, 81, 88, 121, 125, 157, 177, 179, 188 |
| yetzer, capabilities of | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 69 |
| yetzer, causing death | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 150, 154 |
| yetzer, collective | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 79, 80 |
| yetzer, control of | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 187 |
| yetzer, cooperation with | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 88 |
| yetzer, cosmic | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 58, 62, 79, 80 |
| yetzer, crafty | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 88, 89 |
| yetzer, creation of | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 181 |
| yetzer, cunning | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 157, 181, 185, 207 |
| yetzer, deceiver | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 25 |
| yetzer, demonic | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 145 |
| yetzer, different types of | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 198 |
| yetzer, discursive component of resisting | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 89 |
| yetzer, discursive threat | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 97 |
| yetzer, divinity of | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 185 |
| yetzer, dual | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 56, 57, 61, 62, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 146, 206, 213 |
| yetzer, dualistic/dialectic | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 73 |
| yetzer, dynamic | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 108 |
| yetzer, enemy of humanity | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 106, 107 |
| yetzer, enticer | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 46 |
| yetzer, erroneous uses of | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 199 |
| yetzer, evil inclination hara | Frey and Levison, The Holy Spirit, Inspiration, and the Cultures of Antiquity Multidisciplinary Perspectives (2014) 9, 209, 211, 216, 230 |
| yetzer, forcing | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 109, 123 |
| yetzer, gender of | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 123 |
| yetzer, good | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 131, 175, 179 |
| yetzer, guises of | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 117 |
| yetzer, hara, evil inclination | Bar Asher Siegal, Early Christian Monastic Literature and the Babylonian Talmud (2013) 86 |
| yetzer, heart, and | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 150, 153, 184 |
| yetzer, heart, evil, and | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 182, 183 |
| yetzer, in legal discussions in the bavli | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 200 |
| yetzer, injuring | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 166 |
| yetzer, invader | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 2, 31, 37 |
| yetzer, kinetic | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 76 |
| yetzer, leaven, and | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 213 |
| yetzer, melting or exploding | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 142 |
| yetzer, mythological | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 185 |
| yetzer, national enemy | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 78, 79, 80, 139 |
| yetzer, natural predisposition | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 16 |
| yetzer, not identical to body | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 2, 31, 32, 34, 37 |
| yetzer, not passion | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 25 |
| yetzer, not sex | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 103 |
| yetzer, obstacle for service of god | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 27 |
| yetzer, of harlotry | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 207 |
| yetzer, of the wicked | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 46, 49, 50 |
| yetzer, one or two | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 3, 21, 26, 29 |
| yetzer, ontology | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 171 |
| yetzer, personal or collective | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 183 |
| yetzer, plots of | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 50 |
| yetzer, protection from | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 141 |
| yetzer, rabbi ishmael’s | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 61, 62 |
| yetzer, reification of | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 34 |
| yetzer, rest from | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 148 |
| yetzer, satan, and | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 162 |
| yetzer, separation from | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 33 |
| yetzer, sexual | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 108, 111, 118 |
| yetzer, source of violence | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 71 |
| yetzer, speaking to | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 151 |
| yetzer, terminology | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 18, 22, 27, 135, 138, 141, 145, 146 |
| yetzer, very good | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 72 |
| yetzer, violent | Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 179 |
| yetzer, yeṣer | Smith and Stuckenbruck, Testing and Temptation in Second Temple Jewish and Early Christian Texts (2020) 89, 179 |
| 7 validated results for "yetzer" |
|---|
| 1. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 2.7, 6.5, 8.21 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: • Heart, and Yetzer • Heart, evil, and yetzer • Yetzer, Rabbi Ishmael’s • Yetzer, adjuration of • Yetzer, and animals • Yetzer, battle against • Yetzer, dual • Yetzer, dualistic/dialectic • Yetzer, one or two • Yetzer, ontology • Yetzer, protection from • Yetzer, terminology • yetzer Found in books: Garcia, On Human Nature in Early Judaism: Creation, Composition, and Condition (2021) 43, 200; Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 3, 21, 57, 61, 73, 135, 141, 171, 182, 184, 188; Wright, The Letter of Aristeas: 'Aristeas to Philocrates' or 'On the Translation of the Law of the Jews' (2015) 416 2.7 וַיִּיצֶר יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים אֶת־הָאָדָם עָפָר מִן־הָאֲדָמָה וַיִּפַּח בְּאַפָּיו נִשְׁמַת חַיִּים וַיְהִי הָאָדָם לְנֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה׃, 6.5 וַיַּרְא יְהוָה כִּי רַבָּה רָעַת הָאָדָם בָּאָרֶץ וְכָל־יֵצֶר מַחְשְׁבֹת לִבּוֹ רַק רַע כָּל־הַיּוֹם׃, 8.21 וַיָּרַח יְהוָה אֶת־רֵיחַ הַנִּיחֹחַ וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל־לִבּוֹ לֹא־אֹסִף לְקַלֵּל עוֹד אֶת־הָאֲדָמָה בַּעֲבוּר הָאָדָם כִּי יֵצֶר לֵב הָאָדָם רַע מִנְּעֻרָיו וְלֹא־אֹסִף עוֹד לְהַכּוֹת אֶת־כָּל־חַי כַּאֲשֶׁר עָשִׂיתִי׃ 2.7 Then the LORD God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul. 6.5 And the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 8.21 And the LORD smelled the sweet savour; and the LORD said in His heart: ‘I will not again curse the ground any more for man’s sake; for the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done. |
| 2. Hebrew Bible, Ezekiel, 36.26 (6th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: • Evil Inclination (yetzer hara) • Heart, and Yetzer Found in books: Frey and Levison, The Holy Spirit, Inspiration, and the Cultures of Antiquity Multidisciplinary Perspectives (2014) 230; Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 184 36.26 וְנָתַתִּי לָכֶם לֵב חָדָשׁ וְרוּחַ חֲדָשָׁה אֶתֵּן בְּקִרְבְּכֶם וַהֲסִרֹתִי אֶת־לֵב הָאֶבֶן מִבְּשַׂרְכֶם וְנָתַתִּי לָכֶם לֵב בָּשָׂר׃ 36.26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you; and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh. |
| 3. Septuagint, Ecclesiasticus (Siracides), 15.14, 17.31, 23.6 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: • Yetzer, antinomian • Yetzer, battle against • Yetzer, good • Yetzer, violent • yeṣer, yetzer • yetzer Found in books: Garcia, On Human Nature in Early Judaism: Creation, Composition, and Condition (2021) 43, 200; Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 149, 179; Smith and Stuckenbruck, Testing and Temptation in Second Temple Jewish and Early Christian Texts (2020) 179; Wright, The Letter of Aristeas: 'Aristeas to Philocrates' or 'On the Translation of the Law of the Jews' (2015) 416 15.14 It was he who created man in the beginning,and he left him in the power of his own inclination. 17.31 What is brighter than the sun? Yet its light fails. So flesh and blood devise evil. |
| 4. Septuagint, Wisdom of Solomon, 23.6 (2nd cent. BCE - 1st cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: • Yetzer, battle against • Yetzer, good • Yetzer, violent • yeṣer, yetzer Found in books: Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 179; Smith and Stuckenbruck, Testing and Temptation in Second Temple Jewish and Early Christian Texts (2020) 179 NA> |
| 5. Anon., Genesis Rabba, 14.4 (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: • Heart, evil, and yetzer • Yetzer, adjuration of • Yetzer, and angels • Yetzer, and animals • Yetzer, as a fly • Yetzer, battle against • Yetzer, control of • Yetzer, creation of • Yetzer, cunning • Yetzer, dual • Yetzer, dualistic/dialectic • Yetzer, good • Yetzer, personal or collective • Yetzer, violent • yetzer Found in books: Garcia, On Human Nature in Early Judaism: Creation, Composition, and Condition (2021) 43; Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 73, 179, 181, 183, 187, 188 " 14.4 וַיִּיצֶר, שְׁנֵי יְצָרִים, יֵצֶר טוֹב וְיֵצֶר הָרָע. שֶׁאִלּוּ הָיָה לִבְהֵמָה ב יְצָרִים, כֵּיוָן שֶׁהָיְתָה רוֹאָה סַכִּין בְּיַד אָדָם לְשָׁחֲטָהּ הָיְתָה מְפַחֶדֶת וּמֵתָה, וַהֲרֵי אָדָם יֵשׁ לוֹ ב יְצָרִים, אָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בַּר אִידָא <>(זכריה יב, א)<>: וְיֹצֵר רוּחַ אָדָם בְּקִרְבּוֹ, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁנַּפְשׁוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם צְרוּרָה בְּקִרְבּוֹ, אִלְּמָלֵא כֵּן כֵּיוָן שֶׁהָיְתָה הַצָּרָה בָּאָה עָלָיו הָיָה שׁוֹמְטָהּ וּמַשְׁלִיכָהּ." 14.4 "Wayyiyzer: two formations, the good and the evil. For if an animal possessed two such formations, it would die of fright on seeing a man holding a knife to kill it. But surely a man does possess these two faculties! Said R. Hanina (rjinena) b. Idi: He bound up the spirit of man within him (Zechariah 12:1); for if that were not so, whenever a trouble came upon him he would remove and cast it from him.", |
| 6. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, 61a (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: • Yetzer, and God • Yetzer, and angels • Yetzer, antinomian • Yetzer, battle against • Yetzer, control of • Yetzer, cunning • Yetzer, divinity of • Yetzer, dual • Yetzer, mythological • yetzer Found in books: Garcia, On Human Nature in Early Judaism: Creation, Composition, and Condition (2021) 43; Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 57, 74, 83, 130, 185, 187 61a הכל לטובה:ואמר רב הונא אמר רב משום ר\ מאיר לעולם יהיו דבריו של אדם מועטין לפני הקב"ה שנאמר (קהלת ה, א) אל תבהל על פיך ולבך אל ימהר להוציא דבר לפני האלהים כי האלהים בשמים ואתה על הארץ על כן יהיו דבריך מעטים:דרש רב נחמן בר רב חסדא מאי דכתיב (בראשית ב, ז) וייצר ה\ אלהים את האדם בשני יודי"ן שני יצרים ברא הקב"ה אחד יצר טוב ואחד יצר רע,מתקיף לה רב נחמן בר יצחק אלא מעתה בהמה דלא כתיב בה וייצר לית לה יצרא והא קא חזינן דמזקא ונשכא ובעטא אלא כדר"ש בן פזי דאמר ר\ שמעון בן פזי אוי לי מיוצרי ואוי לי מיצרי,אי נמי כדר\ ירמיה בן אלעזר דאמר ר\ ירמיה בן אלעזר דו פרצופין ברא הקב"ה באדם הראשון שנאמר (תהלים קלט, ה) אחור וקדם צרתני:(בראשית ב, כב) ויבן ה\ אלהים את הצלע,רב ושמואל חד אמר פרצוף וחד אמר זנב,בשלמא למאן דאמר פרצוף היינו דכתיב אחור וקדם צרתני אלא למאן דאמר זנב מאי אחור וקדם צרתני כדרבי אמי דאמר ר\ אמי אחור למעשה בראשית וקדם לפורענות,בשלמא אחור למעשה בראשית דלא אברי עד מעלי שבתא אלא וקדם לפורענות פורענות דמאי אילימא פורענות דנחש והתניא רבי אומר בגדולה מתחילין מן הגדול ובקללה מתחילין מן הקטן,בגדולה מתחילין מן הגדול דכתיב (ויקרא י, יב) וידבר משה אל אהרן ואל אלעזר ואל איתמר בניו הנותרים קחו וגו\ בקללה מתחילין מן הקטן בתחלה נתקלל נחש ולבסוף נתקללה חוה ולבסוף נתקלל אדם,אלא פורענות דמבול דכתיב (בראשית ז, כג) וימח את כל היקום אשר על פני האדמה מאדם ועד בהמה ברישא אדם והדר בהמה,בשלמא למאן דאמר פרצוף היינו דכתיב וייצר בשני יודי"ן אלא למאן דאמר זנב מאי וייצר,כדר"ש בן פזי דאמר ר\ שמעון בן פזי אוי לי מיוצרי אוי לי מיצרי,בשלמא למאן דאמר פרצוף היינו דכתיב (בראשית ה, ב) זכר ונקבה בראם אלא למאן דאמר זנב מאי זכר ונקבה בראם כדר\ אבהו דרבי אבהו רמי כתיב זכר ונקבה בראם וכתיב (בראשית ט, ו) כי בצלם אלהים עשה את האדם הא כיצד בתחלה עלה במחשבה לבראת ב\ ולבסוף לא נברא אלא אחד,בשלמא למאן דאמר פרצוף היינו דכתיב (בראשית ב, כא) ויסגור בשר תחתנה אלא למאן דאמר זנב מאי ויסגור בשר תחתנה א"ר ירמיה ואיתימא רב זביד ואיתימא רב נחמן בר יצחק לא נצרכה אלא למקום חתך,בשלמא למ"ד זנב היינו דכתיב ויבן אלא למ"ד פרצוף מאי ויבן,לכדר"ש בן מנסיא דדרש ר"ש בן מנסיא מאי דכתיב ויבן ה\ את הצלע מלמד שקלעה הקב"ה לחוה והביאה לאדם הראשון שכן בכרכי הים קורין לקליעתא בנייתא,דבר אחר ויבן אמר רב חסדא ואמרי לה במתניתא תנא מלמד שבנאה הקב"ה לחוה כבנין אוצר מה אוצר זה קצר מלמעלה ורחב מלמטה כדי לקבל את הפירות אף אשה קצרה מלמעלה ורחבה מלמטה כדי לקבל את הולד,ויביאה אל האדם א"ר ירמיה בן אלעזר מלמד שנעשה הקב"ה שושבין לאדם הראשון מכאן למדה תורה דרך ארץ שיחזור גדול עם קטן בשושבינות ואל ירע לו,ולמאן דאמר פרצוף הי מינייהו סגי ברישא אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק מסתברא דגברא סגי ברישא דתניא לא יהלך אדם אחורי אשה בדרך ואפי\ אשתו נזדמנה לו על הגשר יסלקנה לצדדין וכל העובר אחורי אשה בנהר אין לו חלק לעולם הבא,תנו רבנן המרצה מעות לאשה מידו לידה כדי להסתכל בה אפילו יש בידו תורה ומעשים טובים כמשה רבינו לא ינקה מדינה של גיהנם שנאמר (משלי יא, כא) יד ליד לא ינקה רע לא ינקה מדינה של גיהנם,א"ר נחמן מנוח עם הארץ היה דכתיב (שופטים יג, יא) וילך מנוח אחרי אשתו,מתקיף לה רב נחמן בר יצחק אלא מעתה גבי אלקנה דכתיב וילך אלקנה אחרי אשתו וגבי אלישע דכתיב (מלכים ב ד, ל) ויקם וילך אחריה הכי נמי אחריה ממש אלא אחרי דבריה ואחרי עצתה הכא נמי אחרי דבריה ואחרי עצתה,א"ר אשי ולמאי דקאמר רב נחמן מנוח עם הארץ היה אפי\ בי רב נמי לא קרא שנאמר (בראשית כד, סא) ותקם רבקה ונערותיה ותרכבנה על הגמלים ותלכנה אחרי האיש ולא לפני האיש,א"ר יוחנן אחורי ארי ולא אחורי אשה אחורי אשה ולא אחורי עכו"ם אחורי עכו"ם ולא אחורי בהכ"נ בשעה שהצבור מתפללין,ולא אמרן אלא דלא דרי מידי ואי דרי מידי לית לן בה ולא אמרן אלא דליכא פתחא אחרינא ואי איכא פתחא אחרינא לית לן בה ולא אמרן אלא דלא רכיב חמרא אבל רכיב חמרא לית לן בה ולא אמרן אלא דלא מנח תפילין אבל מנח תפילין לית לן בה:אמר רב יצר הרע דומה לזבוב ויושב בין שני מפתחי הלב שנא\ (קהלת י, א) זבובי מות יבאיש יביע שמן רוקח ושמואל אמר כמין חטה הוא דומה שנאמר (בראשית ד, ז) לפתח חטאת רובץ,ת"ר שתי כליות יש בו באדם אחת יועצתו לטובה ואחת יועצתו לרעה ומסתברא דטובה לימינו ורעה לשמאלו דכתיב (קהלת י, ב) לב חכם לימינו ולב כסיל לשמאלו:תנו רבנן כליות יועצות לב מבין לשון מחתך פה גומר ושט מכניס ומוציא כל מיני מאכל קנה מוציא קול 61a He does for the best.,And Rav Huna said that Rav said in the name of Rabbi Meir: One’s words should always be few before the Holy One, Blessed be He, as it is stated: “Be not rash with your mouth and let not your heart be hasty to utter a word before God; for God is in heaven, and you upon earth. Therefore, let your words be few” (Ecclesiastes 5:1).Rav Naḥman bar Rav Ḥisda interpreted homiletically: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Then the Lord God formed vayyitzer man” (Genesis 2:7), with a double yod? This double yod alludes to that fact that the Holy One, Blessed be He, created two inclinations; one a good inclination and one an evil inclination.,Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak strongly objects to this: If that is so, does an animal, with regard to whom vayyitzer is not written with a double yod, not have an inclination? Don’t we see that it causes damage and bites and kicks? Rather, interpret the double yod homiletically, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi, as Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi said: This alludes to the difficulty of human life; woe unto me from my Creator yotzri and woe unto me from my inclination yitzri. If one opts to follow either his Creator or his inclination, woe unto him from the other.Alternatively, this duplication in the language of creation can be explained in accordance with the statement of Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar, as Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar said: The Holy One, Blessed be He, created two faces du partzufin on Adam the first man; he was created both male and female in a single body, as it is stated: “You have formed me tzartani behind and before” (Psalms 139:5); tzartani is derived from the word tzura face. God formed two faces on a single creation, back and front.It is stated: “And the tzela which the Lord, God, had taken from the man, He made a woman, and brought her unto the man” (Genesis 2:22).Rav and Shmuel disagree over the meaning of the word tzela: One said: It means face. Eve was originally one face or side of Adam. And one said: It means tail, which he explains to mean that the tzela was an appendage, i.e. one of the ribs in Adam’s chest.The Gemara analyzes this dispute: Granted, according to the one who said that tzela means face; that is why it is written: “You have formed me tzartani behind and before.” However, according to the one who said that tzela means tail, what is meant by the verse: “You have formed me tzartani behind and before”? The Gemara answers: It can be explained in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ami, as Rabbi Ami said: Behind means Adam was created at the end of the act of creation; and before means that he was first for punishment.,The Gemara asks: Granted, Adam was behind, or last, in the act of creation, meaning that he was not created until the sixth day, Shabbat eve; however, before, or first, for punishment, to what punishment does this refer? If you say that he was first for punishment in the wake of the episode with the snake, wasn’t it taught in a baraita that, with regard to punishment, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: In conferring honor, one begins with the greatest; in cursing, one begins with the least significant.,The Gemara explains: In conferring honor, one begins with the greatest, as it is written: “And Moses said unto Aaron, and Elazar and Itamar, his remaining sons: Take the meal-offering that remains” (Leviticus 10:12). Aaron, who was the greatest among those involved, is mentioned first. And in cursing, one begins with the least significant, as first the snake was cursed, then Eve was cursed, and ultimately Adam himself was cursed. The punishment did not begin with Adam.Rather, this refers to the punishment of the flood, as it is written: “And He blotted out every living substance which was upon the face of the ground, both man and cattle, creeping things and fowl of the heaven” (Genesis 7:23); the punishment began with man, then the animals, and ultimately all the other creatures.Returning to interpretation of vayyitzer, the Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was originally a face or side of Adam; that is why it is written vayyitzer, with a double yod, which allude to the two formations. However, according to the one who said that she was a tail, or appendage, of Adam, what is conveyed by spelling vayyitzer with a double yod?The Gemara responds: This is interpreted homiletically in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi, as Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi said: This comes to emphasize that which a person says to himself in every circumstance: Woe unto me from my Creator and woe unto me from my inclination.,Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was a face, that is why it is written: “Male and female, He created them” (Genesis 5:2). However, according to the one who said that Eve was a tail, what is the meaning of the verse: “Male and female, He created them”? The Gemara answers: It can be explained in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Abbahu. As Rabbi Abbahu raised a contradiction between the verses: On the one hand it is written: “Male and female, He created them,” and on the other hand it is written: “For in the image of God He made man” (Genesis 9:6), indicating that man was created alone. How, then, does he resolve the contradiction? At first, the thought entered God’s mind to create two, and ultimately, only one was actually created.,The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was a face, that is why it is written: “And He took one of his sides and closed up the place with flesh in its place” (Genesis 2:21), as it was necessary to close the side that was open. However, according to the one who said that Eve was originally a tail, what is meant by the verse: “And closed up the place with flesh in its place”? Rabbi Yirmeya said, and some say Rav Zevid said, and some say Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: It was necessary to say that only with regard to the place of the incision.,The Gemara challenges the other opinion: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was a tail, that is why it is written: “And the Lord God built the tzela” (Genesis 2:22); it was a completely new building. However, according to the one who said that Eve was a complete face or side, what is the meaning of: “And He built”? What needed to be built?The Gemara responds: This must be interpreted homiletically, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Menasya, as Rabbi Shimon ben Menasya interpreted homiletically: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And the Lord God built the tzela”? This verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, braided Eve’s hair, and then brought her to Adam, as in the coastal towns, they call braiding hair, building.,Alternatively, the verse: And He built, could be understood as a description of her basic shape, as Rav Ḥisda said, and some say that it is taught in a baraita: This verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, built Eve like the structure of a storehouse. Just as a storehouse is built narrow on top and wide on the bottom, in order to hold produce without collapsing; so too a woman is created narrow on top and wide on the bottom, in order to hold the fetus.,With regard to the verse: “And brought her unto the man” (Genesis 2:22), Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar said: This verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, was Adam the first man’s best man. From here, the Torah taught that it is a desired mode of behavior for a greater individual to seek out a lesser individual to assist him and serve as his best man. The greater individual should help the lesser and should not feel badly about it, that it might be beneath his dignity.The Gemara asks: And according to the one who said that Eve was a face or side of Adam, which one of them walked in front? Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: It is reasonable to say that the man walked in front, as it is taught in a baraita: A man should not walk behind a woman on a path, as he will look at her constantly, even if it is his wife. If a woman happens upon him along a bridge, he should walk quickly in order to move her to his side so that she will not walk in front of him. And anyone who walks behind a woman in a river in order to see her exposed skin when she lifts her clothing as she passes through the water has no portion in the World-to-Come.,The Sages taught: One who counts money for a woman from his hand to her hand in order to look upon her, even if he has accumulated Torah and good deeds like Moses our teacher, he will not be absolved from the punishment of Gehenna, as it is stated: “Hand to hand, the evil man shall not go unpunished” (Proverbs 11:21); one who hands money from his hand to her hand, even if he received the Torah from God’s hand to his own, like Moses, he will not be absolved from the punishment of Gehenna, which is called evil.Rav Naḥman said: From the following verse we know that Samson’s father, Manoah, was an ignoramus, as it is written: “And Manoah…went after his wife” (Judges 13:11).Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak strongly objects to this: If that is so that you understand the verse literally, what do you say about the verse with regard to Elkana, the father of the prophet Samuel, as it is written: “And Elkana walked after his wife,” and what of the verse with regard to the prophet Elisha, as it is written: “And he arose and followed her” (II Kings 4:30)? Does this verse mean that he literally walked after her? Rather, certainly this verse means that he followed her words and advice. Here, too, then the verse concerning Manoah may be similarly interpreted; he followed his wife’s words and followed her advice, and did not literally walk behind her.Rav Ashi said: And according to what Rav Naḥman said, that Manoah was an ignoramus; he did not even learn to read the basic Torah stories that even children learn in school, as it is stated: “Rebecca arose, and her damsels, and they rode upon the camels, and followed the man” (Genesis 24:61); they followed him and did not walk before the man.,On this topic, Rabbi Yoḥa said: It is preferable to walk behind a lion and not behind a woman, and preferable to walk behind a woman and not behind idolatry, for then it will appear as if he is accompanying the idolatry. It is preferable to walk behind idolatry and not behind a synagogue when the congregation is praying, as he appears to separate himself from the community in that he does not wish to join them in prayer.This last halakha has numerous caveats: And we only said this in a case where he is not carrying something, and if he is carrying something, this does not apply, as everyone will understand why he did not enter the synagogue. And we only said this in a case where there is no other entrance to the synagogue, and if there is another entrance, this does not apply. And we only said this in a case where he is not riding a donkey, and if he is riding a donkey, this does not apply. And we only said this in a case where he is not donning phylacteries, but if he is donning phylacteries, this does not apply.,Rav said: The evil inclination is like a fly and it sits between the two entrances of the heart, as it is stated: “Dead flies make the ointment of the perfumer fetid and putrid” (Ecclesiastes 10:1). And Shmuel said: The evil inclination is like a type of wheat, as it is stated: “Transgression ḥatat couches at the door” (Genesis 4:7); ḥatat is interpreted homiletically as related to ḥitta, wheat.The Sages taught in a baraita: A person has two kidneys; one advises him to do good and one advises him to do evil. And it stands to reason that the one advising him to do good is to his right and the one that advises him to do evil is to his left, as it is written: “A wise man’s understanding is at his right hand, but a fool’s understanding is at his left” (Ecclesiastes 10:2).Tangential to the subject of kidneys, the Gemara cites that which the Sages taught in a baraita with regard to the roles of various organs: The kidneys advise, the heart understands, the tongue shapes the sounds that emerges from the mouth, the mouth completes the shaping of the voice, the esophagus takes in and lets out all kinds of food, the trachea produces the voice, |
| 7. Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, 69b (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: • Yetzer hara (evil inclination) • Yetzer, cunning • Yetzer, divinity of • Yetzer, mythological • Yetzer, rest from Found in books: Bar Asher Siegal, Early Christian Monastic Literature and the Babylonian Talmud (2013) 86; Rosen-Zvi, Demonic Desires: Yetzer Hara and the Problem of Evil in Late Antiquity (2011). 148, 185 69b אין ישיבה בעזרה אלא למלכי בית דוד בלבד שנאמר (דברי הימים א יז, טז) ויבא המלך דוד וישב לפני ה\ כדאמר רב חסדא בעזרת נשים הכא נמי בעזרת נשים,והיכא איתמר דרב חסדא אהא מיתיבי דתניא היכן קורין בו בעזרה ראב"י אומר בהר הבית שנאמר (נחמיה ח, ג) ויקרא בו לפני הרחוב אשר לפני שער המים ואמר רב חסדא בעזרת נשים,(נחמיה ח, ו) ויברך עזרא את ה\ האלהים הגדול מאי גדול אמר רב יוסף אמר רב שגדלו בשם המפורש רב גידל אמר (דברי הימים א טז, לו) ברוך ה\ אלהי ישראל מן העולם ועד העולם,אמר ליה אביי לרב דימי ודילמא שגידלו בשם המפורש א"ל אין אומרים שם המפורש בגבולים,ולא והכתיב (נחמיה ח, ד) ויעמוד עזרא הסופר על מגדל עץ אשר עשו לדבר ואמר רב גידל שגדלו בשם המפורש הוראת שעה היתה,(נחמיה ט, ד) ויצעקו אל ה\ אלהים בקול גדול מאי אמור אמר רב ואיתימא ר\ יוחנן בייא בייא היינו האי דאחרביה למקדשא וקליה להיכליה וקטלינהו לכולהו צדיקי ואגלינהו לישראל מארעהון ועדיין מרקד בינן כלום יהבתיה לן אלא לקבולי ביה אגרא לא איהו בעינן ולא אגריה בעינן,נפל להו פיתקא מרקיעא דהוה כתב בה אמת,אמר רב חנינא שמע מינה חותמו של הקב"ה אמת,אותיבו בתעניתא תלתא יומין ותלתא לילואתא מסרוהו ניהליהו נפק אתא כי גוריא דנורא מבית קדשי הקדשים אמר להו נביא לישראל היינו יצרא דעבודת כוכבים שנאמר (זכריה ה, ח) ויאמר זאת הרשעה,בהדי דתפסוה ליה אשתמיט ביניתא ממזייא ורמא קלא ואזל קליה ארבע מאה פרסי אמרו היכי נעביד דילמא חס ושלום מרחמי עליה מן שמיא אמר להו נביא שדיוהו בדודא דאברא וחפיוהו לפומיה באברא דאברא משאב שאיב קלא שנאמר (זכריה ה, ח) ויאמר זאת הרשעה וישלך אותה אל תוך האיפה וישלך את אבן העופרת אל פיה,אמרו הואיל ועת רצון הוא נבעי רחמי איצרא דעבירה בעו רחמי ואמסר בידייהו,אמר להו חזו דאי קטליתו ליה לההוא כליא עלמא חבשוהו תלתא יומי ובעו ביעתא בת יומא בכל ארץ ישראל ולא אשתכח אמרי היכי נעביד נקטליה כליא עלמא ניבעי רחמי אפלגא פלגא ברקיעא לא יהבי כחלינהו לעיניה ושבקוהו ואהני דלא מיגרי ביה לאיניש בקריבתה,במערבא מתנו הכי רב גידל אמר גדול שגדלו בשם המפורש ורב מתנא אמר (נחמיה ט, לב) האל הגדול הגבור והנורא,והא דרב מתנא מטייא לדרבי יהושע בן לוי דאמר רבי יהושע בן לוי למה נקרא שמן אנשי כנסת הגדולה שהחזירו עטרה ליושנה אתא משה אמר (דברים י, יז) האל הגדול הגבור והנורא אתא ירמיה ואמר נכרים מקרקרין בהיכלו איה נוראותיו לא אמר נורא אתא דניאל אמר נכרים משתעבדים בבניו איה גבורותיו לא אמר גבור,אתו אינהו ואמרו אדרבה זו היא גבורת גבורתו שכובש את יצרו שנותן ארך אפים לרשעים ואלו הן נוראותיו שאלמלא מוראו של הקב"ה היאך אומה אחת יכולה להתקיים בין האומות,ורבנן היכי עבדי הכי ועקרי תקנתא דתקין משה אמר רבי אלעזר מתוך שיודעין בהקב"ה שאמתי הוא לפיכך לא כיזבו בו,וקורא אחרי מות ואך בעשור ורמינהי מדלגין בנביא ואין מדלגין בתורה,לא קשיא כאן בכדי שיפסיק התורגמן כאן בכדי שלא יפסיק התורגמן,והא עלה קתני מדלגין בנביא ואין מדלגין בתורה ועד כמה מדלג בכדי שלא יפסיק התורגמן הא בתורה כלל כלל לא,אמר אביי לא קשיא כאן בענין אחד כאן בשני ענינין,והתניא מדלגין בתורה בענין אחד ובנביא בשני ענינין כאן וכאן בכדי שלא יפסיק התורגמן ואין מדלגין מנביא לנביא ובנביא של שנים עשר מדלגין 69b Sitting in the Temple courtyard is permitted only for kings of the House of David, as it is stated: “Then King David went in and sat before the Lord” (I Chronicles 17:16)? How, then, could the High Priest have been sitting? The Gemara explains: As Rav Ḥisda said in a similar context: This took place not in the Israelite courtyard, where the prohibition against sitting applies, but in the women’s courtyard. Here, too, the reading was in the women’s courtyard, where it is permitted to sit.§ The Gemara clarifies: And where was this statement of Rav Ḥisda originally stated? It was stated in relation to the following: The Sages raised an objection based on that which was taught in a baraita: Where did they read the Torah scroll in fulfillment of the mitzva of assembly, in which the Torah is publicly read on the Sukkot following the Sabbatical Year? It was read in the Temple courtyard. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: It is read on the Temple Mount, as it is stated concerning the public reading performed by Ezra: “And he read from it before the wide road that was before the Gate of the Water” (Nehemiah 8:3). And Rav Ḥisda said: The courtyard referred to by the first tanna is the women’s courtyard.,Apropos the verse in Nehemiah, the Gemara interprets an adjacent verse homiletically. It is stated: “And Ezra blessed the Lord, the great God” (Nehemiah 8:6). The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of “great” here? Rav Yosef said that Rav said: It means that he ascribed greatness to Him by enunciating God’s explicit name. Rav Giddel said: He established that one should say at the conclusion of every blessing: “Blessed be the Lord, God of Israel, from eternity to eternity” (I Chronicles 16:36).Abaye said to Rav Dimi: Why does Rav Giddel interpret it this way? Perhaps the meaning of “great” is that he ascribed greatness to Him by enunciating God’s explicit name? Rav Dimi said to him: The explicit name may not be enunciated in the provinces, i.e. outside the Temple courtyard.The Gemara asks: And is this really not permitted? Isn’t it written: “And Ezra the Scribe stood upon a pulpit of wood, which they had made for the purpose... and Ezra blessed the Lord, the great God” (Nehemiah 8:4-6); and Rav Giddel said: “Great” in this verse means that he ascribed greatness to Him by enunciating God’s explicit name. Since this event took place outside the Temple (see Nehemiah 8:3), it suggests that God’s explicit name may indeed be enunciated outside the Temple. The Gemara answers: That cannot be proven from here because the permission to use God’s explicit name in that context was a provisional edict issued in exigent circumstances, since the people had uniquely come together in a prayerful commitment to God.The Gemara recounts the event described in the verses: The verse states: And they cried with a loud voice to the Lord their God (Nehemiah 9:4). What was said? Rav said, and some say it was Rabbi Yoḥa who said: Woe, woe. It is this, i.e. the evil inclination for idol worship, that destroyed the Temple, and burned its Sanctuary, and murdered all the righteous ones, and caused the Jewish people to be exiled from their land. And it still dances among us, i.e. it still affects us. Didn’t You give it to us solely for the purpose of our receiving reward for overcoming it? We do not want it, and we do not want its reward. We are prepared to forgo the potential rewards for overcoming the evil inclination as long as it departs from us.In response to their prayer a note fell to them from the heavens upon which was written: Truth, indicating that God accepted their request.The Gemara makes a parenthetical observation. Rav Ḥanina said: Learn from this that the seal of the Holy One, Blessed be He, is truth.,In response to the indication of divine acceptance, they observed a fast for three days and three nights, and He delivered the evil inclination to them. A form of a fiery lion cub came forth from the chamber of the Holy of Holies. Zechariah the prophet said to the Jewish people: This is the evil inclination for idol worship, as it is stated in the verse that refers to this event: “And he said: This is the evil one” (Zechariah 5:8). The use of the word “this” indicates that the evil inclination was perceived in a physical form.When they caught hold of it one of its hairs fell, and it let out a shriek of pain that was heard for four hundred parasangs. They said: What should we do to kill it? Perhaps, Heaven forfend, they will have mercy upon him from Heaven, since it cries out so much. The prophet said to them: Throw it into a container made of lead and seal the opening with lead, since lead absorbs sound. As it is stated: “And he said: This is the evil one. And he cast it down into the midst of the measure, and he cast a stone of lead upon its opening” (Zechariah 5:8). They followed this advice and were freed of the evil inclination for idol worship.When they saw that the evil inclination for idol worship was delivered into their hands as they requested, the Sages said: Since it is an auspicious time, let us pray also concerning the evil inclination for sin in the area of sexual relationships. They prayed, and it was also delivered into their hands.,Zechariah the prophet said to them: See and understand that if you kill this evil inclination the world will be destroyed because as a result there will also no longer be any desire to procreate. They followed his warning, and instead of killing the evil inclination they imprisoned it for three days. At that time, people searched for a fresh egg throughout all of Eretz Yisrael and could not find one. Since the inclination to reproduce was quashed, the chickens stopped laying eggs. They said: What should we do? If we kill it, the world will be destroyed. If we pray for half, i.e. that only half its power be annulled, nothing will be achieved because Heaven does not grant half gifts, only whole gifts. What did they do? They gouged out its eyes, effectively limiting its power, and set it free. And this was effective to the extent that a person is no longer aroused to commit incest with his close relatives.,The Gemara returns to its discussion of the verse in Nehemiah cited above: In the West, i.e. Eretz Yisrael, they taught the debate concerning the verse “the Lord, the great God” as follows: Rav Giddel said: “Great” means that he ascribed greatness to Him by enunciating God’s explicit name. And Rav Mattana said: They reinserted the following appellations of God into their prayers: “The great, the mighty, and the awesome God” (Nehemiah 9:32).The Gemara comments: This interpretation that Rav Mattana said leans to, i.e. is consot with, the exposition of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi. As Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: Why are the Sages of those generations called the members of the Great Assembly? It is because they returned the crown of the Holy One, Blessed be He, to its former glory. How so? Moses came and said in his prayer: “The great, the mighty, and the awesomeGod” (Deuteronomy 10:17). Jeremiah the prophet came and said: Gentiles, i.e. the minions of Nebuchadnezzar, are carousing in His sanctuary; where is His awesomeness? Therefore, he did not say awesome in his prayer: “The great God, the mighty Lord of Hosts, is His name” (Jeremiah 32:18). Daniel came and said: Gentiles are enslaving His children; where is His might? Therefore he did not say mighty in his prayer: “The great and awesome God” (Daniel 9:4).The members of the Great Assembly came and said: On the contrary, this is the might of His might, i.e. this is the fullest expression of it, that He conquers His inclination in that He exercises patience toward the wicked. God’s anger is flared by the gentile nations’ enslavement of His people, yet He expresses tremendous might by suppressing His anger and holding back from punishing them immediately. Therefore, it is still appropriate to refer to God as mighty. And these acts also express His awesomeness: Were it not for the awesomeness of the Holy One, Blessed be He, how could one people, i.e. the Jewish people, who are alone and hated by the gentile nations, survive among the nations?,The Gemara asks: And the Rabbis, i.e. Jeremiah and Daniel, how could they do this and uproot an ordice instituted by Moses, the greatest teacher, who instituted the mention of these attributes in prayer? Rabbi Elazar said: They did so because they knew of the Holy One Blessed be He, that He is truthful and hates a lie. Consequently, they did not speak falsely about Him. Since they did not perceive His attributes of might and awesomeness, they did not refer to them; therefore, they cannot be criticized for doing so.§ It was taught in the mishna: And he reads from the scroll the Torah portion beginning with the verse: “After the death” (Leviticus 16:1), and the portion beginning with the verse: “But on the tenth” (Leviticus 23:26). Although both of these portions appear in the book of Leviticus, they are not adjacent to one another. Perforce, the High Priest skipped the sections in between the two portions. The Gemara raises a contradiction: It is taught in a mishna in tractate Megilla: One may skip sections when reading the haftara in the Prophets, but one may not skip sections when reading in the Torah.,The Gemara answers: This is not difficult: There, in the mishna in tractate Megilla that teaches that one may not skip, the intention is that one should not skip if the sections are so far apart from one another that the delay caused by doing so will be of such length that the translator who recites the Aramaic translation will conclude his translation before the next section is reached. In that case, the community would have to remain in silence while waiting for the next section to be reached, which is considered disrespectful of the community’s honor. Here, in the case of the mishna, where it is permitted to skip, the delay caused is of such short length that the translator will still not conclude his translation before the new section is reached.The Gemara challenges this resolution: But it was taught concerning this statement in the continuation of that mishna: One may skip sections when reading in the Prophets, and one may not skip sections when reading in the Torah. And how much may one skip? One may skip when the section skipped is of such short length that when the furling of the scroll is completed the translator will still not have concluded his translation. The baraita implies that the qualification for the length of the section that may be skipped applies only to reading the Prophets, but when reading the Torah, one may not skip at all. The Gemara’s resolution is therefore refuted.The Gemara offers a different resolution. Abaye said: This is not difficult. Here, in the case of the mishna here, where it is permitted to skip, it is referring to when both sections pertain to a single topic, and therefore the listeners will be unaware that sections were skipped. There, in the mishna in tractate Megilla, which teaches that one may not skip, it is referring to when the two sections pertain to two different topics.,As it was taught in a baraita: One may skip sections when reading in the Torah when both sections read pertain to one topic, and in the Prophets one may skip from one section to another even if they pertain to two different topics. Both here and there, one may skip only when the section skipped is of such short length that when furling is completed the translator will still not have concluded his translation. But one may not skip from one book of the Prophets to another book of the Prophets even if both pertain to the same topic, and even if the gap between them is short. However, among the books of the Twelve Prophets one may skip, as the twelve are considered one book for these purposes. |