1. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 18.9-18.14 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Targum, and the Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrianism, Magianism (amgushta) • Zoroastrianism, Sasanian empire Zutra bar Toviyah, Rav • Zoroastrianism, negative Jewish perception of • Zoroastrianism, religious study • Zoroastrianism, “Magianism” (amgushta) • Zoroastrians • Zoroastrians, textual tradition (dēn) • amgûšā (Zoroastrian priest), association with magic, in Hellenism and in the Babylonian Talmud • intercultural encounters, Jews and Zoroastrians • priests, Zoroastrian, portrayals of, in the Babylonian Talmud, as sorcerers and corrupt administrators • ritual, Jewish, Zoroastrian
Found in books: Mokhtarian (2021), Rabbis, Sorcerers, Kings, and Priests: The Culture of the Talmud in Ancient Iran. 126, 128, 142; Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 44, 45, 73, 74, 173; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 44, 45, 73, 74, 173, 192
sup>
18.9 כִּי אַתָּה בָּא אֶל־הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר־יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ נֹתֵן לָךְ לֹא־תִלְמַד לַעֲשׂוֹת כְּתוֹעֲבֹת הַגּוֹיִם הָהֵם׃' '18.11 וְחֹבֵר חָבֶר וְשֹׁאֵל אוֹב וְיִדְּעֹנִי וְדֹרֵשׁ אֶל־הַמֵּתִים׃ 18.12 כִּי־תוֹעֲבַת יְהוָה כָּל־עֹשֵׂה אֵלֶּה וּבִגְלַל הַתּוֹעֵבֹת הָאֵלֶּה יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ מוֹרִישׁ אוֹתָם מִפָּנֶיךָ׃ 18.13 תָּמִים תִּהְיֶה עִם יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ׃ 18.14 כִּי הַגּוֹיִם הָאֵלֶּה אֲשֶׁר אַתָּה יוֹרֵשׁ אוֹתָם אֶל־מְעֹנְנִים וְאֶל־קֹסְמִים יִשְׁמָעוּ וְאַתָּה לֹא כֵן נָתַן לְךָ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ׃'' None | sup>
18.9 When thou art come into the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not learn to do after the abominations of those nations. 18.10 There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, one that useth divination, a soothsayer, or an enchanter, or a sorcerer, 18.11 or a charmer, or one that consulteth a ghost or a familiar spirit, or a necromancer. 18.12 For whosoever doeth these things is an abomination unto the LORD; and because of these abominations the LORD thy God is driving them out from before thee. 18.13 Thou shalt be whole-hearted with the LORD thy God. 18.14 For these nations, that thou art to dispossess, hearken unto soothsayers, and unto diviners; but as for thee, the LORD thy God hath not suffered thee so to do.'' None |
|
2. Hebrew Bible, Genesis, 5.3 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Mazdaean Zoroastrianism • Persia, Zoroastrian texts of • Zoroastrianism • Zoroastrianism, Mazdaean • astrological determinism, Mazdaean Zoroastrianism
Found in books: Neis (2012), When a Human Gives Birth to a Raven: Rabbis and the Reproduction of Species. 157; Scopello (2008), The Gospel of Judas in Context: Proceedings of the First International Conference on the Gospel of Judas, 277
sup>
5.3 וַיְחִי אָדָם שְׁלֹשִׁים וּמְאַת שָׁנָה וַיּוֹלֶד בִּדְמוּתוֹ כְּצַלְמוֹ וַיִּקְרָא אֶת־שְׁמוֹ שֵׁת׃
5.3 וַיְחִי־לֶמֶךְ אַחֲרֵי הוֹלִידוֹ אֶת־נֹחַ חָמֵשׁ וְתִשְׁעִים שָׁנָה וַחֲמֵשׁ מֵאֹת שָׁנָה וַיּוֹלֶד בָּנִים וּבָנוֹת׃'' None | sup>
5.3 And Adam lived a hundred and thirty years, and begot a son in his own likeness, after his image; and called his name Seth.'' None |
|
3. Hebrew Bible, Numbers, 15.30 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrianism, Magianism (amgushta) • Zoroastrianism, negative Jewish perception of • Zoroastrianism, “Magianism” (amgushta) • ritual, Jewish, Zoroastrian
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 74; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 74
| sup>
15.30 But the soul that doeth aught with a high hand, whether he be home-born or a stranger, the same blasphemeth the LORD; and that soul shall be cut off from among his people.'' None |
|
4. None, None, nan (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian priests • priests, Zoroastrian, portrayals of, in the Babylonian Talmud, as sorcerers and corrupt administrators
Found in books: Mokhtarian (2021), Rabbis, Sorcerers, Kings, and Priests: The Culture of the Talmud in Ancient Iran. 117, 118, 119; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 81
|
5. Hebrew Bible, Isaiah, 1.25, 45.7, 45.13 (8th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrianism, negative Jewish perception of • priests, Zoroastrian, portrayals of, in the Babylonian Talmud, as sorcerers and corrupt administrators • ritual, Jewish, Zoroastrian
Found in books: Mokhtarian (2021), Rabbis, Sorcerers, Kings, and Priests: The Culture of the Talmud in Ancient Iran. 117, 118, 119; Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 70, 188; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 70, 81, 188
sup>
1.25 וְאָשִׁיבָה יָדִי עָלַיִךְ וְאֶצְרֹף כַּבֹּר סִיגָיִךְ וְאָסִירָה כָּל־בְּדִילָיִךְ׃
45.7 יוֹצֵר אוֹר וּבוֹרֵא חֹשֶׁךְ עֹשֶׂה שָׁלוֹם וּבוֹרֵא רָע אֲנִי יְהוָה עֹשֶׂה כָל־אֵלֶּה׃
45.13 אָנֹכִי הַעִירֹתִהוּ בְצֶדֶק וְכָל־דְּרָכָיו אֲיַשֵּׁר הוּא־יִבְנֶה עִירִי וְגָלוּתִי יְשַׁלֵּחַ לֹא בִמְחִיר וְלֹא בְשֹׁחַד אָמַר יְהוָה צְבָאוֹת׃'' None | sup>
1.25 And I will turn My hand upon thee, And purge away thy dross as with lye, And will take away all thine alloy;
45.7 I form the light, and create darkness; I make peace, and create evil; I am the LORD, that doeth all these things.
45.13 I have roused him up in victory, And I make level all his ways; He shall build My city, And he shall let Mine exiles go free, Not for price nor reward, Saith the LORD of hosts.'' None |
|
6. Hebrew Bible, Zechariah, 11.7 (5th cent. BCE - 4th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrianism, as similar to Jewish priests and rabbis • Zoroastrianism, negative Jewish perception of • ritual, Jewish, Zoroastrian
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 86; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 86
sup>
11.7 וָאֶרְעֶה אֶת־צֹאן הַהֲרֵגָה לָכֵן עֲנִיֵּי הַצֹּאן וָאֶקַּח־לִי שְׁנֵי מַקְלוֹת לְאַחַד קָרָאתִי נֹעַם וּלְאַחַד קָרָאתִי חֹבְלִים וָאֶרְעֶה אֶת־הַצֹּאן׃'' None | sup>
11.7 So I fed the flock of slaughter, verily the poor of the flock. And I took unto me two staves; the one I called Graciousness, and the other I called Binders; and I fed the flock.'' None |
|
7. Herodotus, Histories, 3.65 (5th cent. BCE - 5th cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Dio Chrysostom, Zoroastrianism • Zoroastrianism
Found in books: Bickerman and Tropper (2007), Studies in Jewish and Christian History, 289; Kirkland (2022), Herodotus and Imperial Greek Literature: Criticism, Imitation, Reception, 178
sup>
3.65 τότε μὲν τοσαῦτα. ἡμέρῃσι δὲ ὕστερον ὡς εἴκοσι μεταπεμψάμενος Περσέων τῶν παρεόντων τοὺς λογιμωτάτους ἔλεγέ σφι τάδε. “ὦ Πέρσαι, καταλελάβηκέ με, τὸ πάντων μάλιστα ἔκρυπτον πρηγμάτων, τοῦτο ἐς ὑμέας ἐκφῆναι. ἐγὼ γὰρ ἐὼν ἐν Αἰγύπτῳ εἶδον ὄψιν ἐν τῷ ὕπνῳ, τὴν μηδαμὰ ὄφελον ἰδεῖν· ἐδόκεον δέ μοι ἄγγελον ἐλθόντα ἐξ οἴκου ἀγγέλλειν ὡς Σμέρδις ἱζόμενος ἐς τὸν βασιλήιον θρόνον ψαύσειε τῇ κεφαλῇ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ. δείσας δὲ μὴ ἀπαιρεθέω τὴν ἀρχὴν πρὸς τοῦ ἀδελφεοῦ, ἐποίησα ταχύτερα ἢ σοφώτερα· ἐν τῇ γὰρ ἀνθρωπηίῃ φύσι οὐκ ἐνῆν ἄρα τὸ μέλλον γίνεσθαι ἀποτρέπειν. ἐγὼ δὲ ὁ μάταιος Πρηξάσπεα ἀποπέμπω ἐς Σοῦσα ἀποκτενέοντα Σμέρδιν. ἐξεργασθέντος δὲ κακοῦ τοσούτου ἀδεῶς διαιτώμην, οὐδαμὰ ἐπιλεξάμενος μή κοτέ τίς μοι Σμέρδιος ὑπαραιρημένου ἄλλος ἐπανασταίη ἀνθρώπων. παντὸς δὲ τοῦ μέλλοντος ἔσεσθαι ἁμαρτὼν ἀδελφεοκτόνος τε οὐδὲν δέον γέγονα καὶ τῆς βασιληίης οὐδὲν ἧσσον ἐστέρημαι· Σμέρδις γὰρ δὴ ἦν ὁ Μάγος τόν μοι ὁ δαίμων προέφαινε ἐν τῇ ὄψι ἐπαναστήσεσθαι. τὸ μὲν δὴ ἔργον ἐξέργασταί μοι, καὶ Σμέρδιν τὸν Κύρου μηκέτι ὑμῖν ἐόντα λογίζεσθε· οἱ δὲ ὑμῖν Μάγοι κρατέουσι τῶν βασιληίων, τόν τε ἔλιπον ἐπίτροπον τῶν οἰκίων καὶ ὁ ἐκείνου ἀδελφεὸς Σμέρδις. τὸν μέν νυν μάλιστα χρῆν ἐμεῦ αἰσχρὰ πρὸς τῶν Μάγων πεπονθότος τιμωρέειν ἐμοί, οὗτος μὲν ἀνοσίῳ μόρῳ τετελεύτηκε ὑπὸ τῶν ἑωυτοῦ οἰκηιοτάτων· τούτου δὲ μηκέτι ἐόντος, δεύτερα τῶν λοιπῶν ὑμῖν ὦ Πέρσαι γίνεταί μοι ἀναγκαιότατον ἐντέλλεσθαι τὰ θέλω μοι γενέσθαι τελευτῶν τὸν βίον· καὶ δὴ ὑμῖν τάδε ἐπισκήπτω θεοὺς τοὺς βασιληίους ἐπικαλέων καὶ πᾶσι ὑμῖν καὶ μάλιστα Ἀχαιμενιδέων τοῖσι παρεοῦσι, μὴ περιιδεῖν τὴν ἡγεμονίην αὖτις ἐς Μήδους περιελθοῦσαν, ἀλλʼ εἴτε δόλῳ ἔχουσι αὐτὴν κτησάμενοι, δόλῳ ἀπαιρεθῆναι ὑπὸ ὑμέων, εἴτε καὶ σθένεϊ τεῷ κατεργασάμενοι, σθένεϊ κατὰ τὸ καρτερὸν ἀνασώσασθαι. καὶ ταῦτα μὲν ποιεῦσι ὑμῖν γῆ τε καρπὸν ἐκφέροι καὶ γυναῖκές τε καὶ ποῖμναι τίκτοιεν, ἐοῦσι ἐς τὸν ἅπαντα χρόνον ἐλευθέροισι· μὴ δὲ ἀνασωσαμένοισι τὴν ἀρχὴν μηδʼ ἐπιχειρήσασι ἀνασώζειν τὰ ἐναντία τούτοισι ἀρῶμαι ὑμῖν γενέσθαι, καὶ πρὸς ἔτι τούτοισι τὸ τέλος Περσέων ἑκάστῳ ἐπιγενέσθαι οἷον ἐμοὶ ἐπιγέγονε.” ἅμα τε εἴπας ταῦτα ὁ Καμβύσης ἀπέκλαιε πᾶσαν τὴν ἑωυτοῦ πρῆξιν.'' None | sup>
3.65 At this time he said no more. But about twenty days later, he sent for the most prominent of the Persians that were about him, and thus addressed them: “Persians, I have to make known to you something which I kept most strictly concealed. ,When I was in Egypt I had a dream, which I wish I had not had; it seemed to me that a messenger came from home to tell me that Smerdis sitting on the royal throne touched heaven with his head. ,Then I feared that my brother would take away my sovereignty from me, and I acted with more haste than wisdom; for it is not in the power of human nature to run away from what is to be; but I, blind as I was, sent Prexaspes to Susa to kill Smerdis. When that great wrong was done I lived without fear, for I never thought that when Smerdis was removed another man might rise against me. ,But I mistook altogether what was to be; I have killed my brother when there was no need, and I have lost my kingdom none the less; for it was the Magus Smerdis that the divinity forewarned in the dream would revolt. ,Now he has been done for by me, and I would have you believe that Smerdis Cyrus' son no longer lives; the Magi rule the kingdom, the one that I left caretaker of my house, and his brother Smerdis. So then, the man is dead of an unholy destiny at the hands of his relations who ought to have been my avenger for the disgrace I have suffered from the Magi; ,and as he is no longer alive, necessity constrains me to charge you, men of Persia, in his place, with the last desire of my life. In the name of the gods of my royal house I charge all of you, but chiefly those Achaemenids that are here, not to let the sovereignty fall again into Median hands; if they have it after getting it by trickery, take it back through trickery of your own; if they have got it away by force, then by force all the stronger get it back. ,And if you do this, may your land bring forth fruit, and your women and your flocks and herds be blessed with offspring, remaining free for all time; but if you do not get the kingdom back or attempt to get it back, then I pray things turn out the opposite for you, and on top of this, that every Persian meet an end such as mine.” With that Cambyses wept bitterly for all that had happened to him. "" None |
|
8. Hebrew Bible, Daniel, 12.2-12.3 (2nd cent. BCE - 2nd cent. BCE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrianism
Found in books: Beyerle and Goff (2022), Notions of Time in Deuterocanonical and Cognate Literature, 75; Vinzent (2013), Christ's Resurrection in Early Christianity and the Making of the New Testament, 31
sup>
12.2 וְרַבִּים מִיְּשֵׁנֵי אַדְמַת־עָפָר יָקִיצוּ אֵלֶּה לְחַיֵּי עוֹלָם וְאֵלֶּה לַחֲרָפוֹת לְדִרְאוֹן עוֹלָם׃ 12.3 וְהַמַּשְׂכִּלִים יַזְהִרוּ כְּזֹהַר הָרָקִיעַ וּמַצְדִּיקֵי הָרַבִּים כַּכּוֹכָבִים לְעוֹלָם וָעֶד׃'' None | sup>
12.2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to reproaches and everlasting abhorrence. 12.3 And they that are wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn the many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever.'' None |
|
9. Mishnah, Avot, 1.1 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrianism, relation to Judaism • Zoroastrians, textual tradition (dēn)
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 79; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 79
sup>
1.1 משֶׁה קִבֵּל תּוֹרָה מִסִּינַי, וּמְסָרָהּ לִיהוֹשֻׁעַ, וִיהוֹשֻׁעַ לִזְקֵנִים, וּזְקֵנִים לִנְבִיאִים, וּנְבִיאִים מְסָרוּהָ לְאַנְשֵׁי כְנֶסֶת הַגְּדוֹלָה. הֵם אָמְרוּ שְׁלשָׁה דְבָרִים, הֱווּ מְתוּנִים בַּדִּין, וְהַעֲמִידוּ תַלְמִידִים הַרְבֵּה, וַעֲשׂוּ סְיָג לַתּוֹרָה:
1.1 שְׁמַעְיָה וְאַבְטַלְיוֹן קִבְּלוּ מֵהֶם. שְׁמַעְיָה אוֹמֵר, אֱהֹב אֶת הַמְּלָאכָה, וּשְׂנָא אֶת הָרַבָּנוּת, וְאַל תִּתְוַדַּע לָרָשׁוּת:'' None | sup>
1.1 Moses received the torah at Sinai and transmitted it to Joshua, Joshua to the elders, and the elders to the prophets, and the prophets to the Men of the Great Assembly. They said three things: Be patient in the administration of justice, raise many disciples and make a fence round the Torah.'' None |
|
10. Mishnah, Sanhedrin, 7.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrianism, Magianism (amgushta) • Zoroastrianism, negative Jewish perception of • Zoroastrianism, religious study • Zoroastrianism, “Magianism” (amgushta) • Zoroastrians • Zoroastrians, textual tradition (dēn) • intercultural encounters, Jews and Zoroastrians • ritual, Jewish, Zoroastrian
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 47, 72; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 47, 72
sup>
7.5 הַמְגַדֵּף אֵינוֹ חַיָּב עַד שֶׁיְּפָרֵשׁ הַשֵּׁם. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן קָרְחָה, בְּכָל יוֹם דָּנִין אֶת הָעֵדִים בְּכִנּוּי יַכֶּה יוֹסֵי אֶת יוֹסֵי. נִגְמַר הַדִּין, לֹא הוֹרְגִים בְּכִנּוּי, אֶלָּא מוֹצִיאִים כָּל אָדָם לַחוּץ וְשׁוֹאֲלִים אֶת הַגָּדוֹל שֶׁבָּהֶן וְאוֹמְרִים לוֹ אֱמֹר מַה שֶּׁשָּׁמַעְתָּ בְּפֵרוּשׁ, וְהוּא אוֹמֵר, וְהַדַּיָּנִים עוֹמְדִין עַל רַגְלֵיהֶן וְקוֹרְעִין וְלֹא מְאַחִין. וְהַשֵּׁנִי אוֹמֵר אַף אֲנִי כָּמוֹהוּ, וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁי אוֹמֵר אַף אֲנִי כָּמוֹהוּ:' ' None | sup>
7.5 The blasphemer is punished only if he utters the divine name. Rabbi Joshua b. Korcha said: “The whole day of the trial the witnesses are examined by means of a substitute for the divine name:, ‘may Yose smite Yose.” When the trial was finished, the accused was not executed on this evidence, but all persons were removed from court, and the chief witness was told, ‘State literally what you heard.’ Thereupon he did so, using the divine name. The judges then arose and tore their garments, which were not to be resewn. The second witness stated: “I too have heard thus” but not uttering the divine name, and the third says: “I too heard thus.”' ' None |
|
11. Mishnah, Yoma, 1.1, 3.3 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrianism, as similar to Jewish priests and rabbis
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 89; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 89
sup>
1.1 שִׁבְעַת יָמִים קֹדֶם יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים מַפְרִישִׁין כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל מִבֵּיתוֹ לְלִשְׁכַּת פַּלְהֶדְרִין, וּמַתְקִינִין לוֹ כֹהֵן אַחֵר תַּחְתָּיו, שֶׁמָּא יֶאֱרַע בּוֹ פְסוּל. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אַף אִשָּׁה אַחֶרֶת מַתְקִינִין לוֹ, שֶׁמָּא תָמוּת אִשְׁתּוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא טז) וְכִפֶּר בַּעֲדוֹ וּבְעַד בֵּיתוֹ. בֵּיתוֹ, זוֹ אִשְׁתּוֹ. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, אִם כֵּן, אֵין לַדָּבָר סוֹף:
3.3 אֵין אָדָם נִכְנָס לָעֲזָרָה לָעֲבוֹדָה, אֲפִלּוּ טָהוֹר, עַד שֶׁיִּטְבֹּל. חָמֵשׁ טְבִילוֹת וַעֲשָׂרָה קִדּוּשִׁין טוֹבֵל כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל וּמְקַדֵּשׁ בּוֹ בַיּוֹם, וְכֻלָּן בַּקֹּדֶשׁ עַל בֵּית הַפַּרְוָה, חוּץ מִזּוֹ בִלְבָד:'' None | sup>
1.1 Seven days before Yom HaKippurim they remove the high priest from his house to the chamber of the counselors and they set up another priest to take his place lest something should occur to him to disqualify him from being able to worship. Rabbi Judah said: they even prepare another wife for him in case his wife should die, as it says “And he shall make atonement for himself and for his house” (Leviticus 16:6): “his house” this refers to his wife. They said to him: if so there would be no end to the matter.
3.3 A man may not enter the Temple courtyard or to worship even if he was clean until he immerses himself. Five immersions and ten sanctifications did the high priest perform on that day. And all in sanctity in the Bet Haparvah with the exception of this one alone.'' None |
|
12. None, None, nan (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrianism, as similar to Jewish priests and rabbis
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 103; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 103
|
13. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrianism, Magianism (amgushta) • Zoroastrianism, negative Jewish perception of • Zoroastrianism, “Magianism” (amgushta) • intercultural encounters, Jews and Zoroastrians • ritual, Jewish, Zoroastrian
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 45, 74; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 45, 74
|
14. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 5th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • ritual, Jewish, Zoroastrian
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 208; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 208
|
15. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrianism, Magianism (amgushta) • Zoroastrianism, negative Jewish perception of • Zoroastrianism, “Magianism” (amgushta) • Zoroastrians • Zoroastrians, textual tradition (dēn) • intercultural encounters, Jews and Zoroastrians • ritual, Jewish, Zoroastrian
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 44, 173; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 44, 173
|
16. None, None, nan (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrianism, Magianism (amgushta) • Zoroastrianism, negative Jewish perception of • Zoroastrianism, “Magianism” (amgushta) • ritual, Jewish, Zoroastrian
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 74; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 74
|
17. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian rabbinic culture, polemics against Zoroastrians • Sasanian Persia, Zoroastrianism • Zoroastrianism, as similar to Jewish priests and rabbis • Zoroastrianism, corpse exhumation • Zoroastrianism, polemics against • Zoroastrianism, priesthood • fire temples, Zoroastrian, in the Babylonian Talmud • priests, Zoroastrian, portrayals of, in the Babylonian Talmud, as sorcerers and corrupt administrators • silence during meals, Zoroastrian practice of
Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 408; Mokhtarian (2021), Rabbis, Sorcerers, Kings, and Priests: The Culture of the Talmud in Ancient Iran. 182, 204; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 99, 100
58a למדורה וקדרות מקיפות אותה,מטה של תלמידי חכמים כיצד כל שאין תחתיה אלא סנדלין בימות החמה ומנעלין בימות הגשמים ושל עם הארץ דומה לאוצר בלוס:,ר\' בנאה הוה קא מציין מערתא כי מטא למערתא דאברהם אשכחיה לאליעזר עבד אברהם דקאי קמי בבא א"ל מאי קא עביד אברהם א"ל גאני בכנפה דשרה וקא מעיינא ליה ברישיה,א"ל זיל אימא ליה בנאה קאי אבבא א"ל ליעול מידע ידיע דיצר בהאי עלמא ליכא עייל עיין ונפק,כי מטא למערתא דאדם הראשון יצתה בת קול ואמרה נסתכלת בדמות דיוקני בדיוקני עצמה אל תסתכל הא בעינא לציוני מערתא כמדת החיצונה כך מדת הפנימית ולמ"ד שני בתים זו למעלה מזו כמדת עליונה כך מדת התחתונה,א"ר בנאה נסתכלתי בשני עקיביו ודומים לשני גלגלי חמה הכל בפני שרה כקוף בפני אדם שרה בפני חוה כקוף בפני אדם חוה בפני אדם כקוף בפני אדם אדם בפני שכינה כקוף בפני אדם,שופריה דרב כהנא (מעין שופריה דרב שופריה דרב) מעין שופריה דרבי אבהו שופריה דר\' אבהו מעין שופריה דיעקב אבינו שופריה דיעקב אבינו מעין שופריה דאדם הראשון,ההוא אמגושא דהוה חטיט שכבי כי מטא אמערתא דרב טובי בר מתנה תפשיה בדיקניה אתא אביי א"ל במטותא מינך שבקיה לשנה אחריתי הדר אתא תפשיה בדיקניה אתא אביי לא שבקיה עד דאייתי מספרא וגזיא לדיקניה,ההוא דאמר להו חביתא דעפרא לחד בראי חביתא דגרמי לחד בראי חביתא דאודרא לחד בראי לא הוו ידעי מאי קאמר להו אתו לקמיה דרבי בנאה אמר להו אית לכו ארעא אמרו ליה אין אית לכו חיותא אין אית לכו בסתרקי אין אי הכי הכי קאמר לכו,ההוא גברא דשמעה לדביתהו דקא אמרה לברתה אמאי לא צניעת באיסורא הך איתתא עשרה בני אית לה ולית לי מאבוך אלא חד כי שכיב אמר להו כל נכסי לחד ברא,לא ידעי להי מינייהו אתו לקמיה דרבי בנאה אמר להו זילו חבוטו קברא דאבוכון עד דקאי ומגלי לכו להי מינייכו שבקא אזלו כולהו ההוא דבריה הוה לא אזל אמר להו כולהו נכסי דהאי אזלו אכלו קורצא בי מלכא אמרי איכא גברא חד ביהודאי דקא מפיק ממונא מאנשי בלא סהדי ובלא מידי אתיוהו חבשוהו,אזלא דביתהו אמרה להו עבדא חד הוה לי פסקו לרישיה ופשטו למשכיה ואכלו בישריה וקא מלו ביה מיא ומשקו ביה לחברייא ולא קא יהבי לי דמי ולא אגריה,לא ידעי מאי קא אמרה להו אמרי ניתו לחכימא דיהודאי ולימא קריוהו לר\' בנאה אמר להו זרנוקא אמרה לכו אמרי הואיל וחכים כולי האי ליתיב אבבא ונידון דינא,חזא דהוה כתיב באבולא כל דיין דמתקרי לדין לא שמיה דיין אמר להו אלא מעתה אתא איניש מעלמא 173b ואם אמר לו על מנת שאפרע ממי שארצה יפרע מן הערב רשב"ג אומר אם יש נכסים ללוה בין כך ובין כך לא יפרע מן הערב,וכן היה רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר הערב לאשה בכתובתה והיה בעלה מגרשה ידירנה הנאה שמא יעשו קנוניא על נכסים של זה ויחזיר את אשתו:,| 58a to a bonfire, where the fire is in the center and pots surround it. Similarly, the table of an ignoramus is arranged with the food in the center and is surrounded by plates.,Rabbi Yoḥa asked: How should the bed of Torah scholars be kept? He replied: It is acceptable as long as there is nothing except sandals beneath it during the summer, and shoes beneath it during the rainy season, i.e., winter. And the bed of an ignoramus is similar to a cluttered balus storehouse, as he keeps a wide array of items beneath it.,§ Having mentioned Rabbi Bena’a, the Gemara relates an incident in which he was involved. Rabbi Bena’a was marking burial caves for the purpose of helping to prevent the contracting of ritual impurity. When he arrived at the cave of Abraham, i.e., the Cave of Machpelah, he encountered Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, who was standing before the entrance. Rabbi Bena’a said to him: What is Abraham doing at this moment? Eliezer said to him: He is lying in the arms of Sarah, and she is examining his head.,Rabbi Bena’a said to him: Go tell him that Bena’a is standing at the entrance, so that he should assume an appropriate position to receive a visitor. Eliezer said to him: Let him, i.e., Rabbi Bena’a, enter, since it is known that there is no evil inclination in this higher world, so it is not inappropriate for Rabbi Bena’a to see Abraham and Sarah in this position. He entered, examined the cave in order to measure it, and exited.,When he arrived at the cave of Adam the first man, who is buried in the same area, a Divine Voice emerged and said: You gazed upon the likeness of My image, i.e., Abraham, who is similar to the image of Adam the first man. Do not gaze upon My image itself, i.e., Adam the first man, about whom the verse states that he was formed in the image of God (see Genesis 1:27). Rabbi Bena’a said: But I need to mark the cave. The voice said to him: As the measurements of the dimensions of the outer cave where Abraham is buried, so are the measurements of the dimensions of the inner cave, where Adam is buried. The Gemara notes: And according to the one who says that the Cave of Machpelah consists of two chambers, this one above that one, not two adjacent chambers, the voice said: As the measurements of the dimensions of the upper cave where Abraham is buried, so are the measurements of the dimensions of the lower cave. Therefore, there is no need to measure it.,Rabbi Bena’a says: I gazed at his, Adam’s, two heels, and they shone so brightly that they are similar to two suns. Along these lines, the Gemara states that all people compared to Sarah are like a monkey compared to a human, as Sarah was exceedingly beautiful; Sarah compared to Eve is like a monkey compared to a human; Eve compared to Adam is like a monkey compared to a human; and Adam compared to the Divine Presence is like a monkey compared to a human.,It was also stated that the beauty of Rav Kahana is a semblance of the beauty of Rav. The beauty of Rav is a semblance of the beauty of Rabbi Abbahu. The beauty of Rabbi Abbahu is a semblance of the beauty of Jacob our forefather. The beauty of Jacob our forefather is a semblance of the beauty of Adam the first man.,On the topic of burial caves, the Gemara relates that there was a certain magus amgusha who was rummaging through the graves of the dead. When he arrived at the burial cave of Rav Tovi bar Mattana, Rav Tovi grabbed him by his beard and would not release him. Abaye came and said to Rav Tovi: I beg of you to release him. The magus came again in another year, and Rav Tovi grabbed him by his beard. Abaye came and requested that he release him, but Rav Tovi did not release him, until Abaye brought a scissors and cut his beard.,§ The Gemara relates additional incidents involving Rabbi Bena’a: There was a certain individual who said to his family before he died: A barrel of earth to one of my sons, a barrel of bones to one of my sons, and a barrel of wads of wool to one of my sons. They did not know what he was saying to them. They came before Rabbi Bena’a for guidance. Rabbi Bena’a said to them: Do you have land that your father left as an inheritance? They said to him: Yes. He asked: Do you have livestock that your father left as an inheritance? They said: Yes. He asked: Do you have quilts bistarkei that your father left as an inheritance? They said: Yes. He said to them: If so, this is what he said to you, i.e., he meant that he is bequeathing land to one son, livestock to the second, and quilts to the third.,There was a certain man who heard his wife saying to her daughter: Why do you not act clandestinely when you engage in forbidden sexual intercourse? That woman has, i.e., I have, ten sons, and I have only one from your father, and no one knows. So too, you must be careful so that no one will discover your illicit behavior. Having overheard that only one son was his, when that man was dying he said to his family: All of my property is left to one son.,They did not know to which of them he intended to leave his property. They came before Rabbi Bena’a for guidance, and he said to the sons: Go strike your father’s grave, until he rises and reveals to you to which of you he left his property. They all went, but that one who was his son did not go. Rabbi Bena’a said to them: All of the property belongs to this son who did not go. The other brothers were angry. They went and slandered akhlu kuretza Rabbi Bena’a in the king’s house. They said: There is one man among the Jews who removes money from people without witnesses and without any evidence. The king’s guards brought Rabbi Bena’a and imprisoned him.,The wife of Rabbi Bena’a went and said to the guards: I had one servant. They cut off his head, and skinned him and ate his flesh, and they fill him with water and give their friends to drink from him, and they have not paid me his value nor have they rented him.,They did not know what she was saying to them. They said: Let us bring the wise man of the Jews, and let him say what she meant. They called Rabbi Bena’a, and he said to them: She spoke to you of a water skin zarnuka. In other words, she was referring to a goat she owned that was slaughtered, its meat eaten, and its skin made into a water skin that could be filled with drinking water. They said: Since he is so wise, let him sit at the gate where the judges congregate and render judgment.,Rabbi Bena’a saw that it was written upon the gate be’abbula: Any judge who is summoned to judgment is not considered a judge, as judges must be above reproach. He said to them: If that is so, then if a person comes from elsewhere 173b But if the creditor said to the debtor: I am lending the money on the condition that I will collect the debt from whomever I wish, i.e., either the debtor or the guarantor, he can collect the debt from the guarantor. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: If the debtor has property of his own, then whether in this case, where the creditor stipulated this condition, or that case, where he did not, he cannot collect the debt from the guarantor.,And so Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel would say: If there is a guarantor for a woman for her marriage contract, from whom the woman can collect payment of her marriage contract instead of collecting it from the husband, and her husband was divorcing her, the husband must take a vow prohibiting himself from deriving any benefit from her, so that he can never remarry her. This precaution is taken lest the couple collude kenunya to divorce in order to collect payment of the marriage contract from this guarantor’s property, and then the husband will remarry his wife.,What is the reason the guarantor’s commitment is limited? Rabba and Rav Yosef both say that the guarantor can tell the creditor: You gave a man over to me, to take responsibility for him if he dies or flees; I have given a man back to you. The debtor is here before you; take your money from him, and if he has nothing, suffer the loss yourself.,Rav Naḥman objects to this: This is Persian law.,The Gemara interjects: On the contrary, the Persian courts go after the guarantor directly, without even attempting to collect the debt from the debtor himself. Why, then, did Rav Naḥman say that excusing the guarantor from payment is Persian law?,The Gemara clarifies Rav Naḥman’s intent: Rather, Rav Naḥman meant to say that this kind of ruling would be appropriate for the members of a Persian court, who do not give a reason for their statements, but issue rulings by whim. Rav Naḥman was saying that it is not fair or logical to excuse the guarantor and cause a loss to the creditor who was depending on him.,Rather, Rav Naḥman said: What does the mishna mean when it says that the creditor cannot collect the debt from the guarantor? It means that he cannot claim payment from the guarantor at the outset, until after it is established that the debtor has no means to repay the debt. After the borrower defaults, the creditor can collect the debt from the guarantor.,This halakha is also taught in a baraita: One who lends money to another with the assurance of a guarantor cannot claim payment of the debt from the guarantor at the outset, rather, he must first attempt to collect the debt from the debtor. But if the creditor said to the debtor: I am lending the money on the condition that I will collect the debt from whomever I wish, he can claim payment of the debt from the guarantor at the outset, bypassing the debtor.,§ Rav Huna said: From where is it derived that a guarantor becomes obligated to repay a loan he has guaranteed? As it is written that Judah reassured his father concerning the young Benjamin: “I will be his guarantor; of my hand shall you request him” (Genesis 43:9). This teaches that it is possible for one to act as a guarantor that an item will be returned to the giver.,Rav Ḥisda objects to this: This incident involving Benjamin is not a case of a standard guarantor, but a case of an unconditional guarantee, as it is written, also in the context of Benjamin, that Reuben said: “Deliver him into my hand, and I will bring him back to you” (Genesis 42:37). One who undertakes unconditional responsibility for a loan has a different status than a standard guarantor, as will soon be elaborated. Therefore, a biblical source has yet to be adduced to teach that one can become a standard guarantor.,Rather, Rabbi Yitzḥak said that the source is from here: “Take his garment that is surety for a stranger; and hold him in pledge that is surety for an alien woman” (Proverbs 20:16). The verse advises a creditor to take the garment of the debtor’s guarantor as payment for the loan.,And it is stated: “My son, if you have become surety for your neighbor, if you have shaken your hands for a stranger, you have become ensnared by the words of your mouth, you have been caught by the words of your mouth. Do this now, my son, and save yourself, seeing that you have come into the hand of your neighbor: Go, humble yourself hitrappes, and assemble your neighbors” (Proverbs 6:1–3). This last part of the passage means: If your neighbor’s money is in your possession, as you owe it as a guarantor, open up hatter the palm pissat of your hand and repay him. And if it is not money that you owe him, but rather “you have become ensnared by the words of your mouth” and owe him an apology for a personal slight, gather together many neighbors through which to seek his forgiveness.,§ Ameimar said: The issue of whether or not a guarantor in fact becomes obligated to repay the loan he has guaranteed is a dispute between Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei. According to Rabbi Yosei, who says that a transaction with inconclusive consent asmakhta effects acquisition, a guarantor becomes obligated to repay the loan, whereas according to Rabbi Yehuda, who says that an asmakhta does not effect acquisition, a guarantor does not become obligated to repay the loan. Any obligation one undertakes that is dependent on the fulfillment of certain conditions that he does not expect will be fulfilled, in this case the debtor’s default on the loan, is considered an asmakhta.,Rav Ashi said to Ameimar that he was conflating these two issues: But it is a daily occurrence, i.e., it is taken for granted, that an asmakhta does not effect acquisition, and it is also taken for granted that a guarantor becomes obligated to repay the loan he has guaranteed.,Rather, Rav Ashi said: Through that satisfaction that the guarantor feels when the creditor trusts him and loans the money based on his guarantee, the guarantor resolves to obligate himself to repay the loan. Guaranteeing a loan is unlike a usual case of an obligation undertaken that is dependent on the fulfillment of certain conditions that he does not expect will be fulfilled, in which the commitment is not considered a real one. Here, the one obligating himself experiences a sense of satisfaction when the money is loaned to the debtor, and due to that, fully commits to fulfill his obligation.,§ The mishna teaches: But if the creditor said to the debtor: I am lending the money on the condition that I will collect the debt from whomever I wish, he can collect the debt from the guarantor. Rabba bar bar Ḥana says that Rabbi Yoḥa says: They taught this only when the debtor has no property of his own from which to repay the loan, but if the debtor has property the creditor cannot collect the debt from the guarantor.,The Gemara questions this assertion: But from the fact that the latter clause of the mishna teaches that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: If the debtor has property of his own, then whether in this case, where the creditor stipulated this condition, or that case, where he did not, he cannot collect the debt from the guarantor, by inference one can understand that the first tanna maintains that there is no difference if it is like this and there is no difference if it is like that. Whether or not the debtor has property from which to repay the loan, the creditor can collect the debt from the guarantor.,The Gemara clarifies: The mishna is incomplete and this is what it is teaching: One who lends money to another with the assurance of a guarantor cannot collect the debt from the guarantor before first claiming the debt from the debtor. But if the creditor said to the debtor: I am lending the money on the condition that I will collect the debt from whomever I wish, he can collect the debt from the guarantor. In what case is this statement said? When the debtor has no property of his own from which to repay the debt; but if the debtor has property, the creditor cannot collect the debt from the guarantor. This is the halakha with regard to a standard guarantor, but in the case of an unconditional guarantor, even if the debtor has property of his own, the creditor can collect the debt from the unconditional guarantor.'' None | |
|
18. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Jews and Judaism, in the Sasanian Empire, in Zoroastrian literature • Sasanian Persia, Zoroastrianism • Zoroastrian • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrian, context • Zoroastrian, tradition • Zoroastrianism • Zoroastrianism, Magianism (amgushta) • Zoroastrianism, as similar to Jewish priests and rabbis • Zoroastrianism, negative Jewish perception of • Zoroastrianism, rabbinic familiarity with Zoroastrian practices • Zoroastrianism, relation to Judaism • Zoroastrianism, religious study • Zoroastrianism, theological doctrines • Zoroastrianism, “Magianism” (amgushta) • holiness as legal status vs. numinous reality, and Zoroastrianism • priests, Zoroastrian, portrayals of, in the Babylonian Talmud, as sorcerers and corrupt administrators • ritual, Jewish, Zoroastrian • sexual ethics, Zoroastrian • silence during meals, Zoroastrian practice of
Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 180; Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 405; Herman, Rubenstein (2018), The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World. 157, 278, 287, 289; Mokhtarian (2021), Rabbis, Sorcerers, Kings, and Priests: The Culture of the Talmud in Ancient Iran. 116, 182; Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 41, 75, 100, 105, 184, 188; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 41, 67, 75, 100, 105, 184, 188
| 5a אם תלמיד חכם הוא אין צריך אמר אביי אף תלמיד חכם מיבעי ליה למימר חד פסוקא דרחמי כגון (תהלים לא, ו) בידך אפקיד רוחי פדיתה אותי ה\' אל אמת:,א"ר לוי בר חמא אמר ר"ש בן לקיש לעולם ירגיז אדם יצר טוב על יצר הרע שנא\' (תהלים ד, ה) רגזו ואל תחטאו. אם נצחו מוטב ואם לאו יעסוק בתורה שנאמר אמרו בלבבכם אם נצחו מוטב ואם לאו יקרא קריאת שמע שנאמר על משכבכם אם נצחו מוטב ואם לאו יזכור לו יום המיתה שנאמר ודומו סלה.,וא"ר לוי בר חמא אמר ר\' שמעון בן לקיש מאי דכתיב (שמות כד, יב) ואתנה לך את לוחות האבן והתורה והמצוה אשר כתבתי להורותם לוחות אלו עשרת הדברות תורה זה מקרא והמצוה זו משנה אשר כתבתי אלו נביאים וכתובים להורותם זה גמרא מלמד שכולם נתנו למשה מסיני:,א"ר יצחק כל הקורא ק"ש על מטתו כאלו אוחז חרב של שתי פיות בידו שנאמר (תהלים קמט, ו) רוממות אל בגרונם וחרב פיפיות בידם מאי משמע אמר מר זוטרא ואיתימא רב אשי מרישא דענינא דכתיב (תהלים קמט, ה) יעלזו חסידים בכבוד ירננו על משכבותם וכתיב בתריה רוממות אל בגרונם וחרב פיפיות בידם.,ואמר רבי יצחק כל הקורא קריאת שמע על מטתו מזיקין בדילין הימנו שנאמר (איוב ה, ז) ובני רשף יגביהו עוף ואין עוף אלא תורה שנאמר (משלי כג, ה) התעיף עיניך בו ואיננו ואין רשף אלא מזיקין שנאמר (דברים לב, כד) מזי רעב ולחומי רשף וקטב מרירי.,אמר רבי שמעון בן לקיש כל העוסק בתורה יסורין בדילין הימנו שנאמר ובני רשף יגביהו עוף ואין עוף אלא תורה שנאמר התעיף עיניך בו ואיננו ואין רשף אלא יסורין שנאמר מזי רעב ולחומי רשף,אמר ליה רבי יוחנן הא אפילו תינוקות של בית רבן יודעין אותו שנאמר (שמות טו, כו) ויאמר אם שמוע תשמע לקול ה\' אלהיך והישר בעיניו תעשה והאזנת למצותיו ושמרת כל חקיו כל המחלה אשר שמתי במצרים לא אשים עליך כי אני ה\' רופאך אלא כל שאפשר לו לעסוק בתורה ואינו עוסק הקב"ה מביא עליו יסורין מכוערין ועוכרין אותו שנא\' (תהלים לט, ג) נאלמתי דומיה החשיתי מטוב וכאבי נעכר ואין טוב אלא תורה שנאמר (משלי ד, ב) כי לקח טוב נתתי לכם תורתי אל תעזובו.,אמר רבי זירא ואיתימא רבי חנינא בר פפא בא וראה שלא כמדת הקב"ה מדת בשר ודם מדת בשר ודם אדם מוכר חפץ לחבירו מוכר עצב ולוקח שמח אבל הקב"ה אינו כן נתן להם תורה לישראל ושמח שנא\' כי לקח טוב נתתי לכם תורתי אל תעזובו.,אמר רבא ואיתימא רב חסדא אם רואה אדם שיסורין באין עליו יפשפש במעשיו שנא\' (איכה ג, מ) נחפשה דרכינו ונחקורה ונשובה עד ה\' פשפש ולא מצא יתלה בבטול תורה שנאמר (תהלים צד, יב) אשרי הגבר אשר תיסרנו יה ומתורתך תלמדנו,ואם תלה ולא מצא בידוע שיסורין של אהבה הם שנאמר (משלי ג, יב) כי את אשר יאהב ה\' יוכיח.,אמר רבא אמר רב סחורה אמר רב הונא כל שהקב"ה חפץ בו מדכאו ביסורין שנאמר (ישעיהו נג, י) וה\' חפץ דכאו החלי,יכול אפילו לא קבלם מאהבה תלמוד לומר (ישעיהו נג, י) אם תשים אשם נפשו מה אשם לדעת אף יסורין לדעת,ואם קבלם מה שכרו (ישעיהו נג, י) יראה זרע יאריך ימים ולא עוד אלא שתלמודו מתקיים בידו שנא\' (ישעיהו נג, י) וחפץ ה\' בידו יצלח,פליגי בה רבי יעקב בר אידי ורבי אחא בר חנינא חד אמר אלו הם יסורין של אהבה כל שאין בהן בטול תורה שנאמר (תהלים צד, יב) אשרי הגבר אשר תיסרנו יה ומתורתך תלמדנו,וחד אמר אלו הם יסורין של אהבה כל שאין בהן בטול תפלה שנאמר (תהלים סו, כ) ברוך אלהים אשר לא הסיר תפלתי וחסדו מאתי,אמר להו רבי אבא בריה דר\' חייא בר אבא הכי אמר ר\' חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן אלו ואלו יסורין של אהבה הן שנאמר כי את אשר יאהב ה\' יוכיח,אלא מה ת"ל (תהלים צד, יב) ומתורתך תלמדנו אל תקרי תלמדנו אלא תלמדנו דבר זה מתורתך תלמדנו,ק"ו משן ועין מה שן ועין שהן אחד מאבריו של אדם עבד יוצא בהן לחרות יסורין שממרקין כל גופו של אדם על אחת כמה וכמה,והיינו דרבי שמעון בן לקיש דאמר רשב"ל נאמר ברית במלח ונאמר ברית ביסורין נאמר ברית במלח דכתיב (ויקרא ב, יג) ולא תשבית מלח ברית ונאמר ברית ביסורין דכתיב (דברים כח, סט) אלה דברי הברית מה ברית האמור במלח מלח ממתקת את הבשר אף ברית האמור ביסורין יסורין ממרקין כל עונותיו של אדם:,תניא רבי שמעון בן יוחאי אומר שלש מתנות טובות נתן הקדוש ברוך הוא לישראל וכולן לא נתנן אלא ע"י יסורין אלו הן תורה וארץ ישראל והעולם הבא,תורה מנין שנאמר אשרי הגבר אשר תיסרנו יה ומתורתך תלמדנו,ארץ ישראל דכתיב (דברים ח, ה) כי כאשר ייסר איש את בנו ה\' אלהיך מיסרך וכתיב בתריה כי ה\' אלהיך מביאך אל ארץ טובה,העולם הבא דכתיב (משלי ו, כג) כי נר מצוה ותורה אור ודרך חיים תוכחות מוסר.,תני תנא קמיה דר\' יוחנן כל העוסק בתורה ובגמילות חסדים 8b ואפילו (במדבר לב) עטרות ודיבון שכל המשלים פרשיותיו עם הצבור מאריכין לו ימיו ושנותיו,רב ביבי בר אביי סבר לאשלומינהו לפרשייתא דכולא שתא במעלי יומא דכפורי תנא ליה חייא בר רב מדפתי כתיב (ויקרא כג) ועניתם את נפשתיכם בתשעה לחדש בערב,וכי בתשעה מתענין והלא בעשרה מתענין אלא לומר לך כל האוכל ושותה בתשיעי מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו מתענה תשיעי ועשירי.,סבר לאקדומינהו אמר ליה ההוא סבא תנינא ובלבד שלא יקדים ושלא יאחר,כדאמר להו ר\' יהושע בן לוי לבניה אשלימו פרשיותייכו עם הצבור שנים מקרא ואחד תרגום,והזהרו בורידין כרבי יהודה דתנן רבי יהודה אומר עד שישחוט את הורידין,והזהרו בזקן ששכח תלמודו מחמת אונסו דאמרינן לוחות ושברי לוחות מונחות בארון,אמר להו רבא לבניה כשאתם חותכין בשר אל תחתכו על גב היד איכא דאמרי משום סכנה ואיכא דאמרי משום קלקול סעודה,ואל תשבו על מטת ארמית ואל תעברו אחורי בית הכנסת בשעה שהצבור מתפללין. ואל תשבו על מטת ארמית. איכא דאמרי לא תגנו בלא ק"ש ואיכא דאמרי דלא תנסבו גיורתא וא"ד ארמית ממש,ומשום מעשה דרב פפא דרב פפא אזל לגבי ארמית הוציאה לו מטה אמרה לו שב אמר לה איני יושב עד שתגביהי את המטה הגביהה את המטה ומצאו שם תינוק מת מכאן אמרו חכמים אסור לישב על מטת ארמית,ואל תעברו אחורי בית הכנסת בשעה שהצבור מתפללין מסייע ליה לרבי יהושע בן לוי דאמר ר\' יהושע בן לוי אסור לו לאדם שיעבור אחורי בית הכנסת בשעה שהצבור מתפללין,אמר אביי ולא אמרן אלא דליכא פתחא אחרינא אבל איכא פתחא אחרינא לית לן בה ולא אמרן אלא דליכא בי כנישתא אחרינא אבל איכא בי כנישתא אחרינא לית לן בה ולא אמרן אלא דלא דרי טונא ולא רהיט ולא מנח תפילין אבל איכא חד מהנך לית לן בה:,תניא אמר ר"ע בשלשה דברים אוהב אני את המדיים כשחותכין את הבשר אין חותכין אלא על גבי השולחן כשנושקין אין נושקין אלא על גב היד וכשיועצין אין יועצין אלא בשדה,אמר רב אדא בר אהבה מאי קראה (בראשית לא) וישלח יעקב ויקרא לרחל וללאה השדה אל צאנו:,תניא אמר רבן גמליאל בשלשה דברים אוהב אני את הפרסיים הן צנועין באכילתן וצנועין בבית הכסא וצנועין בדבר אחר:,(ישעיהו יג) אני צויתי למקודשי תני רב יוסף אלו הפרסיים המקודשין ומזומנין לגיהנם:,רבן גמליאל אומר וכו\': אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל הלכה כר"ג,תניא ר"ש בן יוחי אומר פעמים שאדם קורא ק"ש שתי פעמים בלילה אחת קודם שיעלה עמוד השחר ואחת לאחר שיעלה עמוד השחר ויוצא בהן ידי חובתו אחת של יום ואחת של לילה.,הא גופא קשיא אמרת פעמים שאדם קורא קרית שמע שתי פעמים בלילה אלמא לאחר שיעלה עמוד השחר ליליא הוא והדר תני יוצא בהן ידי חובתו אחת של יום ואחת של לילה אלמא יממא הוא,לא לעולם ליליא הוא והא דקרי ליה יום דאיכא אינשי דקיימי בההיא שעתא,אמר רב אחא בר חנינא אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי הלכה כרבי שמעון בן יוחי,איכא דמתני להא דרב אחא בר חנינא אהא דתניא רבי שמעון בן יוחי אומר משום ר\' עקיבא פעמים שאדם קורא ק"ש שתי פעמים ביום אחת קודם הנץ החמה ואחת לאחר הנץ החמה ויוצא בהן ידי חובתו אחת של יום ואחת של לילה,הא גופא קשיא אמרת פעמים שאדם קורא קרית שמע שתי פעמים ביום אלמא קודם הנץ החמה יממא הוא והדר תני יוצא בהן ידי חובתו אחת של יום ואחת של לילה אלמא ליליא הוא 11b (ישעיהו מה, ז) יוצר אור ובורא חשך,לימא יוצר אור ובורא נוגה,כדכתיב קאמרינן,אלא מעתה (ישעיהו מה, ז) עושה שלום ובורא רע מי קא אמרינן כדכתיב אלא כתיב רע וקרינן הכל לישנא מעליא הכא נמי לימא נוגה לישנא מעליא,אלא אמר רבא כדי להזכיר מדת יום בלילה ומדת לילה ביום,בשלמא מדת לילה ביום כדאמרינן יוצר אור ובורא חשך אלא מדת יום בלילה היכי משכחת לה,אמר אביי גולל אור מפני חשך וחשך מפני אור,ואידך מאי היא אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל אהבה רבה וכן אורי ליה רבי אלעזר לר\' פדת בריה אהבה רבה,תניא נמי הכי אין אומרים אהבת עולם אלא אהבה רבה ורבנן אמרי אהבת עולם וכן הוא אומר (ירמיהו לא, ג) ואהבת עולם אהבתיך על כן משכתיך חסד,א"ר יהודה אמר שמואל השכים לשנות עד שלא קרא ק"ש צריך לברך משקרא ק"ש א"צ לברך שכבר נפטר באהבה רבה,אמר רב הונא למקרא צריך לברך ולמדרש א"צ לברך,ור\' אלעזר אמר למקרא ולמדרש צריך לברך למשנה א"צ לברך,ור\' יוחנן אמר אף למשנה נמי צריך לברך אבל לתלמוד א"צ לברך,ורבא אמר אף לתלמוד צריך (לחזור ו) לברך,דאמר רב חייא בר אשי זימנין סגיאין הוה קאימנא קמיה דרב לתנויי פרקין בספרא דבי רב הוה מקדים וקא משי ידיה ובריך ומתני לן פרקין.,מאי מברך א"ר יהודה אמר שמואל אשר קדשנו במצותיו וצונו לעסוק בדברי תורה,ור\' יוחנן מסיים בה הכי הערב נא ה\' אלהינו את דברי תורתך בפינו ובפיפיות עמך בית ישראל ונהיה אנחנו וצאצאינו וצאצאי עמך בית ישראל כלנו יודעי שמך ועוסקי תורתך ברוך אתה ה\' המלמד תורה לעמו ישראל,ורב המנונא אמר אשר בחר בנו מכל העמים ונתן לנו את תורתו ברוך אתה ה\' נותן התורה אמר רב המנונא זו היא מעולה שבברכות,הלכך לימרינהו לכולהו:,תנן התם אמר להם הממונה ברכו ברכה אחת והם ברכו וקראו עשרת הדברות שמע והיה אם שמוע ויאמר וברכו את העם ג\' ברכות אמת ויציב ועבודה וברכת כהנים ובשבת מוסיפין ברכה אחת למשמר היוצא,מאי ברכה אחת כי הא דרבי אבא ור\' יוסי בר אבא אקלעו לההוא אתרא בעו מנייהו מאי ברכה אחת לא הוה בידייהו ואתו שיילוהו לרב מתנה לא הוה בידיה אתו שיילוהו לרב יהודה אמר להו הכי אמר שמואל אהבה רבה,ואמר רבי זריקא אמר רבי אמי א"ר שמעון בן לקיש יוצר אור כי אתא רב יצחק בר יוסף אמר הא דרבי זריקא לאו בפירוש אתמר אלא מכללא אתמר דאמר ר\' זריקא א"ר אמי אמר ר\' שמעון בן לקיש זאת אומרת ברכות אין מעכבות זו את זו,אי אמרת בשלמא יוצר אור הוו אמרי היינו דברכות אין מעכבות זו את זו דלא קא אמרי אהבה רבה' 17b אין פרץ שלא תהא סיעתנו כסיעתו של דוד שיצא ממנו אחיתופל ואין יוצאת שלא תהא סיעתנו כסיעתו של שאול שיצא ממנו דואג האדומי ואין צוחה שלא תהא סיעתנו כסיעתו של אלישע שיצא ממנו גחזי ברחובותינו שלא יהא לנו בן או תלמיד שמקדיח תבשילו ברבים: (ישעיהו מו, יב),שמעו אלי אבירי לב הרחוקים מצדקה רב ושמואל ואמרי לה רבי יוחנן ורבי אלעזר חד אמר כל העולם כולו נזונין בצדקה והם נזונין בזרוע וחד אמר כל העולם כולו נזונין בזכותם והם אפילו בזכות עצמן אין נזונין כדרב יהודה אמר רב,דאמר רב יהודה אמר רב בכל יום ויום בת קול יוצאת מהר חורב ואומרת כל העולם כולו נזונין בשביל חנינא בני וחנינא בני די לו בקב חרובין מערב שבת לערב שבת,ופליגא דרב יהודה דאמר רב יהודה מאן אבירי לב גובאי טפשאי אמר רב יוסף תדע דהא לא איגייר גיורא מינייהו,אמר רב אשי בני מתא מחסיא אבירי לב נינהו דקא חזו יקרא דאורייתא תרי זמני בשתא ולא קמגייר גיורא מינייהו:,חתן אם רוצה לקרות וכו\':,למימרא דרבן שמעון בן גמליאל חייש ליוהרא ורבנן לא חיישי ליוהרא והא איפכא שמעינן להו דתנן מקום שנהגו לעשות מלאכה בתשעה באב עושין מקום שנהגו שלא לעשות אין עושין וכל מקום תלמידי חכמים בטלים רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר לעולם יעשה כל אדם את עצמו כתלמיד חכם,קשיא דרבנן אדרבנן קשיא דרבן שמעון בן גמליאל אדרבן שמעון בן גמליאל,אמר רבי יוחנן מוחלפת השיטה רב שישא בריה דרב אידי אמר לעולם לא תחליף דרבנן אדרבנן לא קשיא ק"ש כיון דכ"ע קא קרו ואיהו נמי קרי לא מיחזי כיוהרא הכא כיון דכולי עלמא עבדי מלאכה ואיהו לא קא עביד מיחזי כיוהרא,דרבן שמעון בן גמליאל אדרבן שמעון בן גמליאל לא קשיא התם בכונה תליא מילתא ואנן סהדי דלא מצי לכווני דעתיה אבל הכא הרואה אומר מלאכה הוא דאין לו פוק חזי כמה בטלני איכא בשוקא:,26a אקמטרא ככלי בתוך כלי דמי. אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי ס"ת צריך לעשות לו מחיצה עשרה מר זוטרא איקלע לבי רב אשי חזייה לדוכתיה דמר בר רב אשי דמנח ביה ספר תורה ועביד ליה מחיצה עשרה אמר ליה כמאן כרבי יהושע בן לוי אימר דאמר רבי יהושע בן לוי דלית ליה ביתא אחרינא מר הא אית ליה ביתא אחרינא אמר ליה לאו אדעתאי:,כמה ירחיק מהן ומן הצואה ארבע אמות: אמר רבא אמר רב סחורה אמר רב הונא לא שנו אלא לאחוריו אבל לפניו מרחיק מלא עיניו וכן לתפלה,איני והא אמר רפרם בר פפא אמר רב חסדא עומד אדם כנגד בית הכסא ומתפלל הכא במאי עסקינן בבית הכסא שאין בו צואה,איני והאמר רב יוסף בר חנינא בית הכסא שאמרו אע"פ שאין בו צואה ובית המרחץ שאמרו אע"פ שאין בו אדם אלא הכא במאי עסקינן בחדתי,והא מיבעי ליה לרבינא הזמינו לבית הכסא מהו יש זימון או אין זימון כי קא מיבעי ליה לרבינא למיקם עליה לצלויי בגויה אבל כנגדו לא,אמר רבא הני בתי כסאי דפרסאי אע"ג דאית בהו צואה כסתומין דמו:,40b אבל היכא דכי שקלת ליה לפירי ליתיה לגווזא דהדר מפיק לא מברכינן עליה בורא פרי העץ אלא בפה"א:,ועל כולן אם אמר שהכל וכו\': אתמר רב הונא אמר חוץ מן הפת ומן היין ורבי יוחנן אמר אפי\' פת ויין,נימא כתנאי ראה פת ואמר כמה נאה פת זו ברוך המקום שבראה יצא ראה תאנה ואמר כמה נאה תאנה זו ברוך המקום שבראה יצא דברי ר\' מאיר ר\' יוסי אומר כל המשנה ממטבע שטבעו חכמים בברכות לא יצא ידי חובתו נימא רב הונא דאמר כר\' יוסי ור\' יוחנן דאמר כר\' מאיר,אמר לך רב הונא אנא דאמרי אפי\' לר\' מאיר עד כאן לא קאמר ר\' מאיר התם אלא היכא דקא מדכר שמיה דפת אבל היכא דלא קא מדכר שמיה דפת אפילו ר\' מאיר מודה,ור\' יוחנן אמר לך אנא דאמרי אפילו לרבי יוסי עד כאן לא קאמר ר\' יוסי התם אלא משום דקאמר ברכה דלא תקינו רבנן אבל אמר שהכל נהיה בדברו דתקינו רבנן אפילו ר\' יוסי מודה,בנימין רעיא כרך ריפתא ואמר בריך מריה דהאי פיתא אמר רב יצא והאמר רב כל ברכה שאין בה הזכרת השם אינה ברכה דאמר בריך רחמנא מריה דהאי פיתא,והא בעינן שלש ברכות מאי יצא דקאמר רב נמי יצא ידי ברכה ראשונה,מאי קמשמע לן אע"ג דאמרה בלשון חול,תנינא ואלו נאמרים בכל לשון פרשת סוטה וידוי מעשר וקריאת שמע ותפלה וברכת המזון אצטריך סד"א הני מילי דאמרה בלשון חול כי היכי דתקינו רבנן בלשון קדש אבל לא אמרה בלשון חול כי היכי דתקינו רבנן בלשון קדש אימא לא קמ"ל:,גופא אמר רב כל ברכה שאין בה הזכרת השם אינה ברכה ורבי יוחנן אמר כל ברכה שאין בה מלכות אינה ברכה אמר אביי כוותיה דרב מסתברא דתניא (דברים כו, יג) לא עברתי ממצותיך ולא שכחתי לא עברתי מלברכך ולא שכחתי מלהזכיר שמך עליו ואילו מלכות לא קתני,ור\' יוחנן תני ולא שכחתי מלהזכיר שמך ומלכותך עליו:,56a אמר ליה קיסר לר\' יהושע בר\' (חנינא) אמריתו דחכמיתו טובא אימא לי מאי חזינא בחלמאי אמר ליה חזית דמשחרי לך פרסאי וגרבי בך ורעיי בך שקצי בחוטרא דדהבא הרהר כוליה יומא ולאורתא חזא אמר ליה שבור מלכא לשמואל אמריתו דחכמיתו טובא אימא לי מאי חזינא בחלמאי אמר ליה חזית דאתו רומאי ושבו לך וטחני בך קשייתא ברחייא דדהבא הרהר כוליה יומא ולאורתא חזא,בר הדיא מפשר חלמי הוה מאן דיהיב ליה אגרא מפשר ליה למעליותא ומאן דלא יהיב ליה אגרא מפשר ליה לגריעותא אביי ורבא חזו חלמא אביי יהיב ליה זוזא ורבא לא יהיב ליה אמרי ליה אקרינן בחלמין (דברים כח, לא) שורך טבוח לעיניך וגו\' לרבא אמר ליה פסיד עסקך ולא אהני לך למיכל מעוצבא דלבך לאביי א"ל מרווח עסקך ולא אהני לך למיכל מחדוא דלבך,אמרי ליה אקרינן (דברים כח, מא) בנים ובנות תוליד וגו\' לרבא אמר ליה כבישותיה לאביי א"ל בנך ובנתך נפישי ומינסבן בנתך לעלמא ומדמיין באפך כדקא אזלן בשביה,אקריין (דברים כח, לב) בניך ובנותיך נתונים לעם אחר לאביי א"ל בנך ובנתך נפישין את אמרת לקריבך והיא אמרה לקריבה ואכפה לך ויהבת להון לקריבה דהוי כעם אחר לרבא א"ל דביתהו שכיבא ואתו בניה ובנתיה לידי איתתא אחריתי דאמר רבא אמר ר\' ירמיה בר אבא אמר רב מאי דכתיב בניך ובנותיך נתונים לעם אחר זו אשת האב,אקרינן בחלמין (קהלת ט, ז) לך אכול בשמחה לחמך לאביי אמר ליה מרווח עסקך ואכלת ושתית וקרית פסוקא מחדוא דלבך לרבא אמר ליה פסיד עסקך טבחת ולא אכלת ושתית וקרית לפכוחי פחדך,אקרינן (דברים כח, לח) זרע רב תוציא השדה לאביי א"ל מרישיה לרבא א"ל מסיפיה,אקרינן (דברים כח, מ) זיתים יהיו לך בכל גבולך וגו\' לאביי א"ל מרישיה לרבא א"ל מסיפיה,אקרינן (דברים כח, י) וראו כל עמי הארץ וגו\' לאביי א"ל נפק לך שמא דריש מתיבתא הוית אימתך נפלת בעלמא לרבא אמר ליה בדיינא דמלכא אתבר ומתפסת בגנבי ודייני כולי עלמא קל וחומר מינך למחר אתבר בדיינא דמלכא ואתו ותפשי ליה לרבא.,אמרי ליה חזן חסא על פום דני לאביי א"ל עיף עסקך כחסא לרבא א"ל מריר עסקך כי חסא,אמרי ליה חזן בשרא על פום דני לאביי אמר ליה בסים חמרך ואתו כולי עלמא למזבן בשרא וחמרא מינך לרבא אמר ליה תקיף חמרך ואתו כולי עלמא למזבן בשרא למיכל ביה,אמרי ליה חזן חביתא דתלי בדיקלא לאביי אמר ליה מדלי עסקך כדיקלא לרבא אמר ליה חלי עסקך כתמרי,אמרי ליה חזן רומנא דקדחי אפום דני לאביי אמר ליה עשיק עסקך כרומנא לרבא אמר ליה קאוי עסקך כרומנא,אמרי ליה חזן חביתא דנפל לבירא לאביי א"ל מתבעי עסקך כדאמר נפל פתא בבירא ולא אשתכח לרבא א"ל פסיד עסקך ושדי\' ליה לבירא,אמרי ליה חזינן בר חמרא דקאי אאיסדן ונוער לאביי אמר ליה מלכא הוית וקאי אמורא עלך לרבא א"ל פטר חמור גהיט מתפילך א"ל לדידי חזי לי ואיתיה אמר ליה וא"ו דפטר חמור ודאי גהיט מתפילך,לסוף אזל רבא לחודיה לגביה אמר ליה חזאי דשא ברייתא דנפל אמר ליה אשתך שכבא אמר ליה חזיא ככי ושני דנתור א"ל בנך ובנתך שכבן אמר ליה חזאי תרתי יוני דפרחן א"ל תרי נשי מגרשת אמר ליה חזאי תרי גרגלידי דלפתא אמר ליה תרין קולפי בלעת אזל רבא ההוא יומא ויתיב בי מדרשא כוליה יומא אשכח הנהו תרי סגי נהורי דהוו קמנצו בהדי הדדי אזל רבא לפרוקינהו ומחוהו לרבא תרי דלו למחוייה אחריתי אמר מסתיי תרין חזאי,לסוף אתא רבא ויהיב ליה אגרא א"ל חזאי אשיתא דנפל א"ל נכסים בלא מצרים קנית א"ל חזאי אפדנא דאביי דנפל וכסיין אבקיה א"ל אביי שכיב ומתיבתיה אתיא לגבך א"ל חזאי אפדנא דידי דנפיל ואתו כולי עלמא שקיל לבינתא לבינתא א"ל שמעתתך מבדרן בעלמא א"ל חזאי דאבקע רישי ונתר מוקרי א"ל אודרא מבי סדיא נפיק א"ל אקריון הללא מצראה בחלמא א"ל ניסא מתרחשי לך,הוה קא אזיל בהדיה בארבא אמר בהדי גברא דמתרחיש ליה ניסא למה לי בהדי דקא סליק נפל סיפרא מיניה אשכחיה רבא וחזא דהוה כתיב ביה כל החלומות הולכין אחר הפה רשע בדידך קיימא וצערתן כולי האי כולהו מחילנא לך בר מברתיה דרב חסדא יהא רעוא דלמסר ההוא גברא לידי דמלכותא דלא מרחמו עליה,אמר מאי אעביד גמירי דקללת חכם אפילו בחנם היא באה וכ"ש רבא דבדינא קא לייט אמר איקום ואגלי דאמר מר גלות מכפרת עון,קם גלי לבי רומאי אזל יתיב אפתחא דריש טורזינא דמלכא ריש טורזינא חזא חלמא א"ל חזאי חלמא דעייל מחטא באצבעתי א"ל הב לי זוזא ולא יהב ליה לא א"ל ולא מידי א"ל חזאי דנפל תכלא בתרתין אצבעתי א"ל הב לי זוזא ולא יהב ליה ולא א"ל א"ל חזאי דנפל תכלא בכולה ידא א"ל נפל תכלא בכולהו שיראי שמעי בי מלכא ואתיוה לריש טורזינא קא קטלי ליה א"ל אנא אמאי אייתו להאי דהוה ידע ולא אמר אייתוהו לבר הדיא אמרי ליה אמטו זוזא דידך חרבו 58a אמר רבי ירמיה בן אלעזר נתקללה בבל נתקללו שכניה נתקללה שומרון נתברכו שכניה נתקללה בבל נתקללו שכניה דכתיב (ישעיהו יד, כג) ושמתיה למורש קפוד ואגמי מים נתקללה שומרון נתברכו שכניה דכתיב (מיכה א, ו) ושמתי שומרון לעי השדה למטעי כרם וגו\',ואמר רב המנונא הרואה אוכלוסי ישראל אומר ברוך חכם הרזים אוכלוסי עובדי כוכבים אומר (ירמיהו נ, יב) בושה אמכם וגו\',ת"ר הרואה אוכלוסי ישראל אומר ברוך חכם הרזים שאין דעתם דומה זה לזה ואין פרצופיהן דומים זה לזה בן זומא ראה אוכלוסא על גב מעלה בהר הבית אמר ברוך חכם הרזים וברוך שברא כל אלו לשמשני,הוא היה אומר כמה יגיעות יגע אדם הראשון עד שמצא פת לאכול חרש וזרע וקצר ועמר ודש וזרה וברר וטחן והרקיד ולש ואפה ואח"כ אכל ואני משכים ומוצא כל אלו מתוקנין לפני וכמה יגיעות יגע אדם הראשון עד שמצא בגד ללבוש גזז ולבן ונפץ וטוה וארג ואחר כך מצא בגד ללבוש ואני משכים ומוצא כל אלו מתוקנים לפני כל אומות שוקדות ובאות לפתח ביתי ואני משכים ומוצא כל אלו לפני,הוא היה אומר אורח טוב מהו אומר כמה טרחות טרח בעל הבית בשבילי כמה בשר הביא לפני כמה יין הביא לפני כמה גלוסקאות הביא לפני וכל מה שטרח לא טרח אלא בשבילי אבל אורח רע מהו אומר מה טורח טרח בעל הבית זה פת אחת אכלתי חתיכה אחת אכלתי כוס אחד שתיתי כל טורח שטרח בעל הבית זה לא טרח אלא בשביל אשתו ובניו,על אורח טוב מהו אומר (איוב לו, כד) זכור כי תשגיא פעלו אשר שוררו אנשים על אורח רע כתיב (איוב לז, כד) לכן יראוהו אנשים וגו\',(שמואל א יז, יב) והאיש בימי שאול זקן בא באנשים אמר רבא ואיתימא רב זביד ואיתימא רב אושעיא זה ישי אבי דוד שיצא באוכלוסא ונכנס באוכלוסא ודרש באוכלוסא אמר עולא נקיטינן אין אוכלוסא בבבל תנא אין אוכלוסא פחותה מששים רבוא,ת"ר הרואה חכמי ישראל אומר ברוך שחלק מחכמתו ליראיו חכמי עובדי כוכבים אומר ברוך שנתן מחכמתו לבריותיו הרואה מלכי ישראל אומר ברוך שחלק מכבודו ליראיו מלכי עובדי כוכבים אומר ברוך שנתן מכבודו לבריותיו,א"ר יוחנן לעולם ישתדל אדם לרוץ לקראת מלכי ישראל ולא לקראת מלכי ישראל בלבד אלא אפי\' לקראת מלכי עובדי כוכבים שאם יזכה יבחין בין מלכי ישראל למלכי עובדי כוכבים,רב ששת סגי נהור הוה הוו קאזלי כולי עלמא לקבולי אפי מלכא וקם אזל בהדייהו רב ששת אשכחיה ההוא צדוקי אמר ליה חצבי לנהרא כגני לייא אמר ליה תא חזי דידענא טפי מינך חלף גונדא קמייתא כי קא אוושא אמר ליה ההוא צדוקי אתא מלכא אמר ליה רב ששת לא קאתי חלף גונדא תניינא כי קא אוושא אמר ליה ההוא צדוקי השתא קא אתי מלכא אמר ליה רב ששת לא קא אתי מלכא חליף תליתאי כי קא שתקא אמר ליה רב ששת ודאי השתא אתי מלכא,אמר ליה ההוא צדוקי מנא לך הא אמר ליה דמלכותא דארעא כעין מלכותא דרקיעא דכתיב (מלכים א יט, יא) צא ועמדת בהר לפני ה\' והנה ה\' עובר ורוח גדולה וחזק מפרק הרים ומשבר סלעים לפני ה\' לא ברוח ה\' ואחר הרוח רעש לא ברעש ה\' ואחר הרעש אש לא באש ה\' ואחר האש קול דממה דקה,כי אתא מלכא פתח רב ששת וקא מברך ליה אמר ליה ההוא צדוקי למאן דלא חזית ליה קא מברכת ומאי הוי עליה דההוא צדוקי איכא דאמרי חברוהי כחלינהו לעיניה ואיכא דאמרי רב ששת נתן עיניו בו ונעשה גל של עצמות,ר\' שילא נגדיה לההוא גברא דבעל מצרית אזל אכל ביה קורצי בי מלכא אמר איכא חד גברא ביהודאי דקא דיין דינא בלא הרמנא דמלכא שדר עליה פריסתקא כי אתא אמרי ליה מה טעמא נגדתיה להאי אמר להו דבא על חמרתא אמרי ליה אית לך סהדי אמר להו אין אתא אליהו אדמי ליה כאיניש ואסהיד אמרי ליה אי הכי בר קטלא הוא אמר להו אנן מיומא דגלינן מארעין לית לן רשותא למקטל אתון מאי דבעיתון עבידו ביה,עד דמעייני ביה בדינא פתח ר\' שילא ואמר (דברי הימים א כט, יא) לך ה\' הגדולה והגבורה וגו\' אמרי ליה מאי קאמרת אמר להו הכי קאמינא בריך רחמנא דיהיב מלכותא בארעא כעין מלכותא דרקיעא ויהב לכו שולטנא ורחמי דינא אמרו חביבא עליה יקרא דמלכותא כולי האי יהבי ליה קולפא אמרו ליה דון דינא,כי הוה נפיק אמר ליה ההוא גברא עביד רחמנא ניסא לשקרי הכי אמר ליה רשע לאו חמרי איקרו דכתיב (יחזקאל כג, כ) אשר בשר חמורים בשרם חזייה דקאזיל למימרא להו דקרינהו חמרי אמר האי רודף הוא והתורה אמרה אם בא להרגך השכם להרגו מחייה בקולפא וקטליה,אמר הואיל ואתעביד לי ניסא בהאי קרא דרשינא ליה לך ה\' הגדולה זו מעשה בראשית וכן הוא אומר (איוב ט, י) עושה גדולות עד אין חקר והגבורה זו יציאת מצרים שנאמר (שמות יד, לא) וירא ישראל את היד הגדולה וגו\' והתפארת זו חמה ולבנה שיעמדו לו ליהושע שנאמר (יהושע י, יג) וידום השמש וירח עמד וגו\' והנצח זו מפלתה של רומי וכן הוא אומר (ישעיהו סג, ג) ויז נצחם על בגדי וגו\' וההוד זו מלחמת נחלי ארנון שנאמר (במדבר כא, יד) על כן יאמר בספר מלחמות ה\' את והב בסופה וגו\' כי כל בשמים ובארץ זו מלחמת סיסרא שנאמר (שופטים ה, כ) מן שמים נלחמו הכוכבים ממסלותם וגו\' לך ה\' הממלכה זו מלחמת עמלק וכן הוא אומר (שמות יז, טז) כי יד על כס יה והמתנשא זו מלחמת גוג ומגוג וכן הוא אומר (יחזקאל לח, ג) הנני אליך גוג נשיא ראש משך ותובל לכל לראש אמר רב חנן בר רבא אמר ר\' יוחנן אפילו ריש גרגיתא מן שמיא מנו ליה,במתניתא תנא משמיה דרבי עקיבא לך ה\' הגדולה זו קריעת ים סוף והגבורה זו מכת בכורות והתפארת זו מתן תורה והנצח זו ירושלים וההוד זו בית המקדש: 60a מכלל דכי קנה וחזר וקנה דברי הכל אין צריך לברך,וא"ד אמר רב הונא לא שנו אלא שלא קנה וחזר וקנה אבל קנה וחזר וקנה אין צריך לברך ור\' יוחנן אמר אפילו קנה וחזר וקנה צריך לברך מכלל דכי יש לו וקנה דברי הכל צריך לברך,מיתיבי בנה בית חדש ואין לו כיוצא בו קנה כלים חדשים ואין לו כיוצא בהם צריך לברך יש לו כיוצא בהם אין צריך לברך דברי ר"מ ר\' יהודה אומר בין כך ובין כך צריך לברך,בשלמא ללישנא קמא רב הונא כר"מ ורבי יוחנן כרבי יהודה אלא ללישנא בתרא בשלמא רב הונא כרבי יהודה אלא רבי יוחנן דאמר כמאן לא כר"מ ולא כרבי יהודה,אמר לך רבי יוחנן הוא הדין דלרבי יהודה קנה וחזר וקנה נמי צריך לברך והא דקא מיפלגי ביש לו וקנה להודיעך כחו דר"מ דאפי\' קנה ויש לו אין צריך לברך וכל שכן קנה וחזר וקנה דאין צריך לברך,וליפלגו בקנה וחזר וקנה דאין צריך לברך להודיעך כחו דר\' יהודה כח דהתירא עדיף ליה:,מברך על הרעה כו\':,היכי דמי כגון דשקל בדקא בארעיה אף על גב דטבא היא לדידיה דמסקא ארעא שירטון ושבחא השתא מיהא רעה היא:,ועל הטובה כו\':,היכי דמי כגון דאשכח מציאה אף על גב דרעה היא לדידיה דאי שמע בה מלכא שקיל לה מיניה השתא מיהא טובה היא:,היתה אשתו מעוברת ואמר יהי רצון שתלד כו\' הרי זו תפלת שוא:,ולא מהני רחמי מתיב רב יוסף (בראשית ל, כא) ואחר ילדה בת ותקרא את שמה דינה מאי ואחר אמר רב לאחר שדנה לאה דין בעצמה ואמרה י"ב שבטים עתידין לצאת מיעקב ששה יצאו ממני וארבעה מן השפחות הרי עשרה אם זה זכר לא תהא אחותי רחל כאחת השפחות מיד נהפכה לבת שנא\' ותקרא את שמה דינה אין מזכירין מעשה נסים,ואיבעית אימא מעשה דלאה בתוך ארבעים יום הוה כדתניא שלשה ימים הראשונים יבקש אדם רחמים שלא יסריח משלשה ועד ארבעים יבקש רחמים שיהא זכר מארבעים יום ועד שלשה חדשים יבקש רחמים שלא יהא סנדל משלשה חדשים ועד ששה יבקש רחמים שלא יהא נפל מששה ועד תשעה יבקש רחמים שיצא בשלום,ומי מהני רחמי והא"ר יצחק בריה דרב אמי איש מזריע תחלה יולדת נקבה אשה מזרעת תחלה יולדת זכר שנאמר (ויקרא יב, ב) אשה כי תזריע וילדה זכר הכא במאי עסקינן כגון שהזריעו שניהם בבת אחת:,היה בא בדרך:,ת"ר מעשה בהלל הזקן שהיה בא בדרך ושמע קול צוחה בעיר אמר מובטח אני שאין זה בתוך ביתי ועליו הכתוב אומר (תהלים קיב, ז) משמועה רעה לא יירא נכון לבו בטוח בה\' אמר רבא כל היכי דדרשת להאי קרא מרישיה לסיפיה מדריש מסיפיה לרישיה מדריש מרישיה לסיפיה מדריש משמועה רעה לא יירא מה טעם נכון לבו בטוח בה\' מסיפיה לרישיה מדריש נכון לבו בטוח בה\' משמועה רעה לא יירא,ההוא תלמידא דהוה קא אזיל בתריה דרבי ישמעאל ברבי יוסי בשוקא דציון חזייה דקא מפחיד אמר ליה חטאה את דכתיב (ישעיהו לג, יד) פחדו בציון חטאים אמר ליה והכתיב (משלי כח, יד) אשרי אדם מפחד תמיד אמר ליה ההוא בדברי תורה כתיב,יהודה בר נתן הוה שקיל ואזיל בתריה דרב המנונא אתנח אמר ליה יסורים בעי ההוא גברא לאתויי אנפשיה דכתיב (איוב ג, כה) כי פחד פחדתי ויאתיני ואשר יגורתי יבא לי והא כתיב אשרי אדם מפחד תמיד ההוא בדברי תורה כתיב:,הנכנס לכרך:,תנו רבנן בכניסתו מהו אומר יהי רצון מלפניך ה\' אלהי שתכניסני לכרך זה לשלום נכנס אומר מודה אני לפניך ה\' אלהי שהכנסתני לכרך זה לשלום בקש לצאת אומר יהי רצון מלפניך ה\' אלהי ואלהי אבותי שתוציאני מכרך זה לשלום יצא אומר מודה אני לפניך ה\' אלהי שהוצאתני מכרך זה לשלום וכשם שהוצאתני לשלום כך תוליכני לשלום ותסמכני לשלום ותצעידני לשלום ותצילני מכף כל אויב ואורב בדרך,אמר רב מתנא ל"ש אלא בכרך שאין דנין והורגין בו אבל בכרך שדנין והורגין בו לית לן בה,א"ד אמר רב מתנא אפילו בכרך שדנין והורגין בו זימנין דלא מתרמי ליה אינש דיליף ליה זכותא,ת"ר הנכנס לבית המרחץ אומר יהי רצון מלפניך יי\' אלהי שתצילני מזה ומכיוצא בו ואל יארע בי דבר קלקלה ועון ואם יארע בי דבר קלקלה ועון תהא מיתתי כפרה לכל עונותי,אמר אביי לא לימא אינש הכי דלא לפתח פומיה לשטן דאמר ר"ל וכן תנא משמיה דר\' יוסי לעולם אל יפתח אדם פיו לשטן,אמר רב יוסף מאי קראה דכתיב (ישעיהו א, ט) כמעט כסדום היינו לעמורה דמינו מאי אהדר להו נביא שמעו דבר יי\' קציני סדום וגו\',כי נפיק מאי אומר א"ר אחא מודה אני לפניך יי\' אלהי שהצלתני מן האור,ר\' אבהו על לבי בני אפחית בי בני מתותיה אתרחיש ליה ניסא קם על עמודא שזיב מאה וחד גברי בחד אבריה אמר היינו דר\' אחא,דאמר רב אחא הנכנס להקיז דם אומר יהי רצון מלפניך יי\' אלהי שיהא עסק זה לי לרפואה ותרפאני כי אל רופא נאמן אתה ורפואתך אמת לפי שאין דרכן של בני אדם לרפאות אלא שנהגו,אמר אביי לא לימא אינש הכי דתני דבי רבי ישמעאל (שמות כא, יט) ורפא ירפא מכאן שניתנה רשות לרופא לרפאות,כי קאי מאי אומר אמר רב אחא ברוך רופא חנם ' None | 5a If one is a Torah scholar, he need not recite Shema on his bed since he is always engaged in the study of Torah and will likely fall asleep engrossed in matters of Torah. Abaye said: Even a Torah scholar must recite at least one verse of prayer, such as: “Into Your hand I trust my spirit; You have redeemed me, Lord, God of truth” (Psalms 31:6).,Incidental to the verse, “Tremble, and do not sin,” the Gemara mentions that Rabbi Levi bar Ḥama said that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: One should always incite his good inclination against his evil inclination, i.e., that one must constantly struggle so that his evil inclination does not lead him to transgression, as it is stated: "Tremble, and do not sin."rIf one succeeds and subdues his evil inclination, excellent, but if he does not succeed in subduing it, he should study Torah, as alluded to in the verse: “Say to your heart.” rIf he subdues his evil inclination, excellent; if not, he should recite Shema, which contains the acceptance of the yoke of God, and the concept of reward and punishment, as it is stated in the verse: “Upon your bed,” which alludes to Shema, where it says: “When you lie down.” rIf he subdues his evil inclination, excellent; if not, he should remind himself of the day of death, whose silence is alluded to in the continuation of the verse: “And be still, Selah.”,And Rabbi Levi bar Ḥama said that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: God said to Moses, “Ascend to me on the mountain and be there, and I will give you the stone tablets and the Torah and the mitzva that I have written that you may teach them” (Exodus 24:12), meaning that God revealed to Moses not only the Written Torah, but all of Torah, as it would be transmitted through the generations. rThe “tablets” are the ten commandments that were written on the tablets of the Covet, rthe “Torah” is the five books of Moses. rThe “mitzva” is the Mishna, which includes explanations for the mitzvot and how they are to be performed. r“That I have written” refers to the Prophets and Writings, written with divine inspiration. r“That you may teach them” refers to the Talmud, which explains the Mishna. rThese explanations are the foundation for the rulings of practical halakha. This verse teaches that all aspects of Torah were given to Moses from Sinai.,The Gemara continues its treatment of the recitation of Shema upon one’s bed. Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Anyone who recites Shema on his bed, it is as if he holds a double-edged sword, guarding him from all evil, as it is stated: “High praises of God in their mouths, and a double-edged sword in their hands” (Psalms 149:6). The Gemara asks: From where is it inferred that this verse from Psalms refers to the recitation of Shema? Mar Zutra, and some say Rav Ashi, said: We derive it from the preceding verse, as it is written: “Let the pious exult in glory; let them joyously sing upon their beds.” The praise of God from one’s bed is the recitation of Shema. And it is written thereafter: “High praises of God in their mouths, and a double-edged sword in their hands.”,And Rabbi Yitzḥak said: Anyone who recites Shema upon his bed, demons stay away from him. This is alluded to, as it is stated: “But man is born into trouble, and the sparks reshef fly uf upward” (Job 5:7). The verse is explained: The word fly uf means nothing other than Torah, as Torah is difficult to grasp and easy to lose, like something that floats away, as it is stated: “Will you set your eyes upon it? It is gone; for riches certainly make themselves wings, like an eagle that flies into the heavens” (Proverbs 23:5). The word “sparks” means nothing other than demons, as it is stated: “Wasting of hunger, and the devouring of the sparks reshef and bitter destruction ketev meriri, and the teeth of beasts I will send upon them, with the venom of crawling things of the dust” (Deuteronomy 32:24). Here we see reshef listed along with ketev meriri, both of which are understood by the Sages to be names of demons.,Regarding this unclear verse, Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: If one engages in Torah study, suffering stays away from him, as it is stated: “And the sparks fly upward.” And fly means nothing other than Torah, as it is stated: “Will you set your eyes upon it? It is gone; and sparks means nothing other than suffering, as it is stated: “Wasting of hunger, and the devouring of the sparks,” equating devouring sparks with wasting hunger, as both are types of suffering. From here, we derive that through Torah, fly, one is able to distance himself, upward, from suffering, sparks.,Rabbi Yoḥa said to him: Even schoolchildren, who learn only the Written Torah, know this concept as it is stated: “And He said you shall surely hear the voice of the Lord your God, and what is upright in His eyes you shall do and you shall listen to His mitzvot and guard His statutes; any disease that I have placed upon Egypt I will not place upon you for I am the Lord your healer” (Exodus 15:26). Rather, one must interpret the verse: Anyone who is able to engage in Torah study yet does not engage in that study, not only does the Holy One, Blessed be He, fail to protect him, but He brings upon him hideous afflictions, that embarrass him and trouble him, as it is stated: “I was mute with silence; I was silent from good, and my pain was strong” (Psalms 39:3). The word good means nothing other than Torah, as it is stated: “For I have given you a good portion, My Torah, do not abandon it” (Proverbs 4:2). The verse should be understood: “I have been silent from the study of Torah, and my pain was strong.”,With regard to the verse: “For I have given you a good portion,” Rabbi Zeira, and some say Rabbi Ḥanina bar Pappa, said: Come and see how the characteristics of the Holy One, Blessed be He, are unlike the characteristics of flesh and blood. It is characteristic of flesh and blood that when one sells an object to another person, the seller grieves the loss of his possession and the buyer rejoices. With regard to the Holy One, Blessed be He, however, this is not so. He gave the Torah to Israel and rejoiced, as it is stated: “For I have given you a good portion, My Torah, do not abandon it.” A good portion is understood as a good purchase; although God sold Torah to Israel, He rejoices in the sale and praises the object before its new owner (Rabbi Yoshiyahu Pinto).,Previously, the Gemara discussed suffering that results from one’s transgressions. The Gemara shifts the focus and discusses suffering that does not result from one’s transgressions and the suffering of the righteous. Rava, and some say Rav Ḥisda, said: If a person sees that suffering has befallen him, he should examine his actions. Generally, suffering comes about as punishment for one’s transgressions, as it is stated: “We will search and examine our ways, and return to God” (Lamentations 3:40). If he examined his ways and found no transgression for which that suffering is appropriate, he may attribute his suffering to dereliction in the study of Torah. God punishes an individual for dereliction in the study of Torah in order to emphasize the gravity of the issue, as it is stated: “Happy is the man whom You punish, Lord, and teach out of Your law” (Psalms 94:12). This verse teaches us that his suffering will cause him to return to Your law.,And if he did attribute his suffering to dereliction in the study of Torah, and did not find this to be so, he may be confident that these are afflictions of love, as it is stated: “For whom the Lord loves, He rebukes, as does a father the son in whom he delights” (Proverbs 3:12).,So too, Rava said that Rav Seḥora said that Rav Huna said: Anyone in whom the Holy One, Blessed be He, delights, He oppresses him with suffering, as it is stated: “Yet in whom the Lord delights, He oppresses him with disease; to see if his soul would offer itself in guilt, that he might see his children, lengthen his days, and that the desire of the Lord might prosper by his hand” (Isaiah 53:10). This verse illustrates that in whomever God delights, he afflicts with illness.,I might have thought that God delights in him even if he does not accept his suffering with love. Therefore the verse teaches: “If his soul would offer itself in guilt.” Just as a guilt-offering is brought knowingly, as it is one of the sacrifices offered willingly, without coercion, so too his suffering must be accepted knowingly.,And if one accepts that suffering with love, what is his reward? As the second part of the verse states: “That he might see his children, lengthen his days.” Moreover, in addition to these earthly rewards, his Torah study will endure and his Torah study will be successful, as it is stated: “The purpose of the Lord,” the Torah, the revelation of God’s will, “might prosper by his hand.”,With regard to the acceptance of affliction with love and what exactly this entails, Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi and Rabbi Aḥa bar Ḥanina disagree. One of them said: Afflictions of love are any that do not cause dereliction in the study of Torah, i.e., any which do not afflict his body to the extent that he is unable to study Torah, as it is stated: “Happy is the man whom You afflict, Lord, and teach from Your Torah.” Afflictions of love are when You “teach from Your Torah.”,And one said: Afflictions of love are any that do not cause dereliction in the recitation of prayer, as it is stated: “Blessed is God Who did not turn away my prayer” (Psalms 66:20). Despite his suffering, the afflicted is still capable of praying to God.,Rabbi Abba, son of Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, said: My father, Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, said that Rabbi Yoḥa said as follows: Both, even afflictions that cause dereliction in the study of Torah and those that cause dereliction in the recitation of prayer, are afflictions of love, as with regard to one who suffers without transgression it is stated: “For whom He loves, He rebukes,” and inability to study Torah and to pray are among his afflictions.,What then, is the meaning when the verse states: “And teach him from Your Torah”? Do not read and teach to mean and teach him, rather, and teach us. You teach us the value of this affliction from Your Torah.,This is taught through an a fortiori inference from the law concerning the tooth and eye of a slave: The tooth and eye are each a single limb of a person and if his master damages either, the slave thereby obtains his freedom; suffering that cleanses a person’s entire body all the more so that one attains freedom, atonement, from his sins.,And that is the statement of Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, as Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: The word covet is used with regard to salt, and the word covet is used with regard to afflictions. The word covet is used with regard to salt, as it is written: “The salt of the covet with your God should not be excluded from your meal-offering; with all your sacrifices you must offer salt” (Leviticus 2:13). And the word covet is used with regard to afflictions, as it is written: “These are the words of the covet” (Deuteronomy 28:69). Just as, in the covet mentioned with regard to salt, the salt sweetens the taste of the meat and renders it edible, so too in the covet mentioned with regard to suffering, the suffering cleanses a person’s transgressions, purifying him for a more sublime existence.,Additionally, it was taught in a baraita with regard to affliction: Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says: The Holy One, Blessed be He, gave Israel three precious gifts, all of which were given only by means of suffering, which purified Israel so that they may merit to receive them. These gifts are: Torah, Eretz Yisrael, and the World-to-Come.,From where is it derived that Torah is only acquired by means of suffering? As it is said: “Happy is the man whom You afflict, Lord,” after which it is said: “And teach from Your Torah.”,Eretz Yisrael, as it is written: “As a man rebukes his son, so the Lord your God rebukes you” (Deuteronomy 8:5), and it is written thereafter: “For the Lord your God will bring you to a good land.”,The World-to-Come, as it is written: “For the mitzva is a lamp, the Torah is light, and the reproofs of instruction are the way of life” (Proverbs 6:23). One may arrive at the lamp of mitzva and the light of Torah that exists in the World-to-Come only by means of the reproofs of instruction in this world.,A tanna taught the following baraita before Rabbi Yoḥa: If one engages in Torah and acts of charity 8b This applies to every verse, even a verse like: “Atarot and Divon and Yazer and Nimra and Ḥeshbon and Elaleh and Sevam and Nevo and Beon” (Numbers 32:3). While that verse is comprised entirely of names of places that are identical in Hebrew and Aramaic, one is nevertheless required to read the verse twice and its translation once, as one who completes his Torah portions with the congregation is rewarded that his days and years are extended.,Rav Beivai bar Abaye thought to finish all the Torah portions of the entire year, which he had been unable to complete at their appointed time, on the eve of Yom Kippur when he would have time to do so. But Ḥiyya bar Rav of Difti taught him: It is written with regard to Yom Kippur: “And you shall afflict your souls on the ninth day of the month in the evening, from evening to evening you shall keep your Sabbath” (Leviticus 23:32).,The Gemara wonders: And does one fast on the ninth of Tishrei? Doesn’t one fast on the tenth of Tishrei, as the Torah says at the beginning of that portion: “However, on the tenth day of this seventh month is the Day of Atonement; there shall be a holy convocation for you, and you shall afflict your souls” (Leviticus 23:27)? Rather, this verse comes to tell you: One who eats and drinks on the ninth day of Tishrei in preparation for the fast the next day, the verse ascribes him credit as if he fasted on both the ninth and the tenth of Tishrei. Ḥiyya bar Rav of Difti cited this verse to Rav Beivai bar Abaye to teach him that Yom Kippur eve is dedicated to eating and drinking, not to completing the Torah portions one may have missed throughout the year.,When Rav Beivai heard this, he thought to read the Torah portions earlier, before they were to be read by the community. A certain unnamed elder told him, we learned: As long as one does not read the Torah portions earlier or later than the congregation. One must read them together with the congregation.,As Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi told his sons: Complete your portions with the congregation, the Bible text twice and the translation once.,He also advised them: Be careful with the jugular veins, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, as we learned in a mishna with regard to the laws of ritual slaughter: Rabbi Yehuda said: Cutting the trachea and esophagus in the ritual slaughter of a bird does not render the bird kosher until he slaughters the jugular veins as well. While this is not halakhically required, it is appropriate to do so to prevent significant amounts of blood from remaining in the bird.,Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi further advised: And be careful to continue to respect an elder who has forgotten his Torah knowledge due to circumstances beyond his control. Even though he is no longer a Torah scholar, he must still be respected for the Torah that he once possessed. As we say: Both the tablets of the Covet and the broken tablets are placed in the Ark of the Covet in the Temple. Even though the first tablets were broken, their sanctity obligates one not to treat them with contempt. An elder who forgot the Torah knowledge he once possessed is likened to these broken tablets.,Rava said to his sons three bits of advice: When you cut meat, do not cut it on your hand. The Gemara offers two explanations for this. Some say: Due to the danger that one might accidentally cut his hand, and some say: Due to the fact that it could ruin the meal, as even if one only cut himself slightly, that small amount of blood could still spoil the meat and render it repulsive to eat.,And Rava also advised: Do not sit on the bed of an Aramean woman, and do not pass by a synagogue when the community is praying. The Gemara explains: Some say: Do not sit on the bed of an Aramean woman means one should not go to sleep without reciting Shema, as by doing so, it is tantamount to sleeping in the bed of a non-Jew, as his conduct is unbecoming a Jew. Others say: This means that one should not marry a woman who converted, and it is better to marry a woman who was born Jewish. And some say: It literally means that one should not sit on the bed of an Aramean, i.e., a non-Jewish woman.,This bit of advice was due to an incident involving Rav Pappa. Rav Pappa went to visit an Aramean woman. She took out a bed and she said to him: Sit. He said to her: I will not sit until you lift the sheets covering the bed. She did so and they found a dead baby there. Had Rav Pappa sat upon the bed, he would have been blamed for killing the baby. From that incident, the Sages said: One is prohibited from sitting on the bed of an Aramean woman.,And Rava’s third bit of advice was, do not pass behind a synagogue while the congregation is praying. This statement supports the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: One is prohibited from passing behind a synagogue while the congregation is praying because they will suspect that he does not want to pray, and it is a show of contempt for the synagogue.,Abaye introduced several caveats to Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi’s statement and said: rWe only said this prohibition if there is no other entrance to the synagogue, but if there is another entrance, since it is possible that he will simply use the second entrance, they will not suspect him, and the prohibition does not apply. rAnd we only said this prohibition if there is no other synagogue in the city, but if there is another synagogue, the prohibition does not apply. rAnd we only said this prohibition when he is not carrying a burden, and not running, and not wearing phylacteries. But if one of those factors applies, the prohibition does not apply. If he is carrying a burden or running, clearly he is occupied with his work. If he is wearing phylacteries, it is evident that he is a God-fearing individual and they will not suspect him.,The Gemara cites a statement from a baraita, along the lines of Rava’s advice to refrain from cutting meat on one’s hands: Rabbi Akiva said: In three aspects of their conduct, I like the Medes, and we should learn from their practices. When they cut meat, they cut it only on the table and not on their hands; when they kiss, either as a show of affection or honor, they kiss only the back of the hand and do not give the person being kissed an unpleasant feeling; and when they hold counsel, they only hold counsel in the field so others will not hear their secrets.,Rav Adda bar Ahava said: From what verse is this derived? From the verse, “And Jacob sent and he called Rachel and Leah to the field to his flock” (Genesis 31:4); it was only there in the field that he held counsel with them.,It was taught in a baraita, Rabban Gamliel said: In three aspects of their conduct, I like the Persians: They are a modest people; they are modest in their eating, they are modest in the lavatory, and they are modest in another matter, i.e., sexual relations.,While they have been praised here regarding certain specific aspects of their conduct, the Gemara proceeds to offer another perspective on the Persians based on a verse describing the destruction of Babylonia at the hands of the Persian and Medean armies: “I have commanded My consecrated ones; I have also called My mighty ones for My anger, even My proudly exulting ones” (Isaiah 13:3). Rav Yosef taught a baraita: These are the Persians who are consecrated and designated for Gehenna, for they have been sent by God to carry out his mission of anger, and they will be sent to Gehenna.,The Gemara returns to explain the mishna, in which we learned that Rabban Gamliel says: One may recite Shema until dawn. Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Gamliel.,It was taught in a baraita: Based on Rabban Gamliel’s ruling, Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai said: At times, one recites Shema twice at night, once just before dawn and once just after dawn, and he thereby fulfills his obligation to recite Shema, one of the day and one of the night. According to Rabban Gamliel, the Shema that he recited before dawn fulfills his evening obligation and the Shema that he recited after dawn fulfills his morning obligation.,This Tosefta is self-contradictory. Initially, you said: At times one recites Shema twice at night. Apparently, the time just after dawn is still night. And then you taught: He thereby fulfills his obligation to recite Shema one of the day and one of the night. Apparently, the time in question is considered day, as otherwise, he would not have fulfilled his obligation to recite Shema during the day. There is an internal contradiction with regard to the status of the time just after dawn. Is it considered day or night?,The Gemara answers: No, there is no contradiction. Actually, the time just after dawn, when it is still dark, is considered night and the fact that it is referred to here as day is because there are people who rise from their sleep at that time and, if the need arises, it can be characterized as bekumekha, when you rise, despite the fact that it is still night.,Rav Aḥa bar Ḥanina said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai.,Some teach this statement of Rav Aḥa bar Ḥanina, in which he ruled that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai, with regard to this halakha, which is stylistically similar to the previous halakha. As it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai said in the name of Rabbi Akiva: At times, one recites Shema twice during the day, once just before sunrise and once just after sunrise, and he thereby fulfills his dual obligation to recite Shema: One, that he recites after sunrise, Shema of the day, and one, that he recites before sunrise, Shema of the night.,This baraita is self-contradictory. Initially, you said: “At times one recites Shema twice during the day.” Apparently, the time just before sunrise is considered day. And then you taught: “He thereby fulfills his dual obligation to recite Shema, one of the day and one of the night.” Apparently, the time in question is considered night, as otherwise, he could not thereby fulfill his obligation to recite Shema during the night. 11b “Who forms light and creates darkness, Who makes peace and creates evil, I am the Lord Who does all these things” (Isaiah 45:7).,With regard to this formula of the blessing, the Gemara asks: Let him say the following formula instead: Who forms light and creates brightness, so as not to mention darkness, which has negative connotations.,The Gemara answers: We say the blessing as the verse is written in the Bible and do not alter the formula that appears in the verse.,The Gemara strongly objects: But if so, what about the continuation of the verse: “Who makes peace and creates evil”? Do we say this blessing as it is written in the Bible? Rather, it is written evil and we euphemistically recite the blessing all things to avoid mention of evil. Here, too, let us euphemistically say brightness instead of darkness.,Rather, Rava said: The reason we recite: “Who creates darkness” is in order to mention the attribute of day at night and the attribute of night during the day, and thereby unify day and night as different parts of a single entity.,The Gemara continues and asks: Granted, the attribute of night is mentioned during the day, as we say: Who forms light and creates darkness, but where do you find the attribute of day mentioned at night? In the blessing over the radiant lights recited at night there is no mention of “Who forms light.”,Abaye said: Nevertheless, the attribute of day is mentioned at night in the words: Rolling away light before the darkness and darkness before the light.,The Gemara asks: And what is the formula of the other blessing recited before Shema? Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel: An abounding love ahava rabba. And Rabbi Elazar instructed his son, Rabbi Pedat, to also say: An abounding love.,That was also taught in a baraita: One does not recite: An eternal love ahavat olam; rather, one recites: An abounding love. And the Rabbis say that one recites: An eternal love, and so it says: “And an eternal love I have loved you, therefore I have drawn you with kindness” (Jeremiah 31:2).,The blessing: An abounding love, is about God’s love for us and includes praise for His giving us the Torah. Therefore, Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: One who arose to study, until he recites Shema he must recite a special blessing over the Torah. If he already recited Shema he need not recite that blessing, as he has exempted himself by reciting the blessing of: An abounding love, which includes the components of the blessing over the Torah.,Having mentioned the blessing recited over Torah, the Gemara focuses on a dispute over what constitutes Torah in terms of requiring a blessing. Rav Huna said: For the study of Bible, one must recite a blessing, as it is the word of God, and for halakhic midrash, the derivation of halakhot from verses, one need not recite a blessing.,And Rabbi Elazar said: For Bible and midrash, which includes halakhot derived from verses themselves, one must recite a blessing; for Mishna, which is only comprised of halakhic rulings issued by the Sages, one need not recite a blessing.,And Rabbi Yoḥa said: Even for Mishna, which includes final, binding halakhic rulings, one must recite a blessing as well, but for Talmud, which comprises a study of the Mishna and the rationales for its rulings, one need not recite a blessing.,And Rava said: Even for Talmud, which is the means to analyze the significance of the halakhot, and is the only form of Torah study that leads one to its true meaning, one must recite a blessing.,This statement is supported by the practical halakha derived from observation of Rav’s practice. His student, Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi, said: Many times I stood before Rav to study our chapter in the Sifra, also known as Torat Kohanim, the halakhic midrash on Leviticus, of the school of Rav, and I saw that Rav would first wash his hands, then recite a blessing, and only then he would teach us our chapter. This demonstrates that even before their study of Torat Kohanim, which, due to Rav’s explanation of the reasons behind the halakhot, was the equivalent of studying Talmud, one must recite a blessing.,The Gemara clarifies: What formula of blessings does he recite? There is a dispute over the formula of the blessings as well. Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: The formula of this blessing is like the standard formula for blessings recited over other mitzvot: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who sanctified us with his mitzvot and commanded us to engage in matters of Torah.,And Rabbi Yoḥa concludes the blessing by adding the following: Lord our God, make the words of Your Torah sweet in our mouths and in the mouths of Your people, the house of Israel, so that we and our descendants and the descendants of Your people, the house of Israel, may be those who know Your name and engage in Your Torah. Blessed are You, Lord, Who teaches Torah to His people Israel.,And Rav Hamnuna said an additional formula: Who has chosen us from all the peoples and given us His Torah. Blessed are You, Lord, Giver of the Torah. With regard to this formula, Rav Hamnuna said: This concise blessing is the most outstanding of all the blessings over the Torah, as it combines thanks to God for giving us the Torah as well as acclaim for the Torah and for Israel.,Since several formulas for the blessing over Torah were suggested, each with its own distinct advantage, the Gemara concludes: Therefore, let us recite them all as blessings over the Torah.,The Gemara returns to dealing with the blessings that accompany Shema, and describes the practice in the Temple. We learned there, in a mishna in tractate Tamid: In the morning the deputy High Priest appointed to oversee activity in the Temple, said to the priests who were members of the priestly watch mishmar on duty that week: Recite a single blessing. The members of the priestly watch recited a blessing, and read the Ten Commandments, Shema, VeHaya im Shamoa and VaYomer, the standard recitation of Shema. Additionally, they blessed the people with three blessings. These blessings were: True and Firm, the blessing of redemption recited after Shema; Avoda, service, the special blessing recited over God’s acceptance of the sacrifices with favor, similar to the blessing of Temple Service recited in the Amida prayer; and the priestly benediction, recited in the form of a prayer without the outstretched hands that usually accompany that blessing (Tosafot). And on Shabbat one blessing is added to bless the outgoing priestly watch, as the watch serving in the Temple was replaced on Shabbat.,Certain details in this mishna are not sufficiently clear. First, what is the single blessing that the deputy High Priest instructed the guards to recite? The Gemara relates: It is like the incident where Rabbi Abba and Rabbi Yosei bar Abba happened to visit a certain unnamed place, and the people there asked them: What is the single blessing mentioned in the mishna? They did not have an answer readily available. So they came and asked Rav Mattana, and he too did not have an answer readily available. They came and asked Rav Yehuda, and he told them: Shmuel said as follows: An abounding love is the single blessing recited by the priestly watch.,Rabbi Zerika said that Rabbi Ami said that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said a different answer: This single blessing is: Who creates light. That was how Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish’s statement was received in Babylonia, yet when Rav Yitzḥak bar Yosef came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that this halakha was not a direct quote of a statement by Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish. That which Rabbi Zerika said was not stated explicitly by Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, but rather it was inferred from another statement. As Rabbi Zerika said that Rabbi Ami said that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: From the expression: Recite a single blessing, in the mishna in tractate Tamid, it follows that failure to recite one of the blessings recited before Shema does not prevent one from reciting the other. This means that if only one of the blessings was recited, the obligation to recite that blessing was fulfilled, as the two blessings are not mutually dependent.,The conclusion was drawn from Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish’s statement that he held that the single blessing recited was: Who creates light. The considerations that led the Sages to that conclusion were: Granted, if you say that they would recite: Who creates light, then the conclusion of Reish Lakish, that failure to recite one of the blessings recited before Shema does not prevent one from reciting the other, is understandable, as they recited: Who creates light, and did not recite: An abounding love, and they nonetheless fulfilled their obligation.' 17b “There is no breach”; that our faction of Sages should not be like the faction of David, from which Ahitophel emerged, who caused a breach in the kingdom of David. r“And no going forth”; that our faction should not be like the faction of Saul, from which Doeg the Edomite emerged, who set forth on an evil path. r“And no outcry”; that our faction should not be like the faction of Elisha, from which Geihazi emerged. r“In our open places”; that we should not have a child or student who overcooks his food in public, i.e., who sins in public and causes others to sin, as in the well-known case of Jesus the Nazarene.,Having cited a dispute with regard to the interpretation of a verse where we are uncertain whether the dispute is between Rav and Shmuel or Rabbi Yoḥa and Rabbi Elazar, the Gemara cites another verse with regard to which there is a similar dispute. It is said: “Hear Me, stubborn-hearted who are far from charity” (Isaiah 46:12). While both agree that the verse refers to the righteous, Rav and Shmuel, and some say Rabbi Yoḥa and Rabbi Elazar, disagreed as to how to interpret the verse. One said: The entire world is sustained by God’s charity, not because it deserves to exist, while the righteous who are far from God’s charity are sustained by force, as due to their own good deeds they have the right to demand their sustece. And one said: The entire world is sustained by the merit of their righteousness, while they are not sustained at all, not even by their own merit, in accordance with the statement that Rav Yehuda said that Rav said.,As Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: Every day a Divine Voice emerges from Mount Horeb and says: The entire world is sustained by the merit of Ḥanina ben Dosa, my son, and for Ḥanina, my son, a kav of carobs is sufficient to sustain him for an entire week, from one Shabbat eve to the next Shabbat eve.,And this exegesis disagrees with the opinion of Rav Yehuda, as Rav Yehuda said, who are the stubborn-hearted? They are the foolish heathens of Gova’ei. Rav Yosef said: Know that this is so, as no convert has ever converted from their ranks.,Similarly, Rav Ashi said: The heathen residents of the city Mata Meḥasya are the stubborn-hearted, as they witness the glory of the Torah twice a year at the kalla gatherings in Adar and Elul, when thousands of people congregate and study Torah en masse, yet no convert has ever converted from their ranks.,We learned in our mishna that if a groom wishes to recite Shema on the first night of his marriage, he may do so, and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel prohibited doing so because of the appearance of presumptuousness.,The Gemara asks: Is that to say that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel is concerned about presumptuousness and the Rabbis are not concerned about presumptuousness? Didn’t we learn that they say the opposite? As we learned in a mishna: A place where they were accustomed to perform labor on Ninth of Av, one may perform labor. A place where they were accustomed not to perform labor on Ninth of Av, one may not perform labor. And everywhere, Torah scholars are idle and do not perform labor. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: With regard to performing labor on the Ninth of Av, one should always conduct himself as a Torah scholar.,If so, there is a contradiction between the statement of the Rabbis here and the statement of the Rabbis there. And, there is a contradiction between the statement of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel here and the statement of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel there.,Rabbi Yoḥa said: The attribution of the opinions is reversed in one of the sources in the interest of avoiding contradiction. Rav Sheisha, son of Rav Idi, said: Actually, you need not reverse the opinions, as the contradiction between the statement of the Rabbis here and the statement of the Rabbis there is not difficult. In the case of the recitation of Shema on his wedding night, since everyone is reciting Shema and he is also reciting Shema, he is not conspicuous and it does not appear as presumptuousness. Here, in the case of the Ninth of Av, however, since everyone is performing labor and he is not performing labor, his idleness is conspicuous and appears as presumptuousness.,So too, the contradiction between the statement of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel here and the statement of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel there is not difficult. There, in the case of the recitation of Shema on his wedding night, the matter is dependent upon his capacity to concentrate, and it is clear to all that he is unable to concentrate. Reciting Shema under those circumstances is a display of presumptuousness. But here, in the case of the Ninth of Av, one who sees him idle says: It is because he has no labor to perform. Go out and see how many idle people there are in the marketplace, even on days when one is permitted to work. Consequently, his idleness is not conspicuous.,,One whose deceased relative is laid out unburied before him is exempt from the recitation of Shema, from the Amida prayer, and from the mitzva to don phylacteries, as well as all positive mitzvot mentioned in the Torah, until the deceased has been buried.,With regard to the pallbearers and their replacements and the replacements of their replacements, those located before the bier who have not yet carried the deceased and those located after the bier. Those before the bier who are needed to carry the bier are exempt from reciting Shema; while those after the bier, even if they are still needed to carry it, since they have already carried the deceased, they are obligated to recite Shema. However, both these and those are exempt from reciting the Amida prayer, since they are preoccupied and are unable to focus and pray with the appropriate intent.,After they buried the deceased and returned, if they have sufficient time to begin to recite Shema and conclude before they arrive at the row, formed by those who attended the burial, through which the bereaved family will pass in order to receive consolation, they should begin. If they do not have sufficient time to conclude reciting the entire Shema, then they should not begin.,And those standing in the row, those in the interior row, directly before whom the mourners will pass and who will console them, are exempt from reciting Shema, while those in the exterior row, who stand there only to show their respect, are obligated to recite Shema. Women, slaves and minors are exempt from the recitation of Shema and from phylacteries, but are obligated in prayer, mezuza and Grace after Meals.,Shema and other positive mitzvot. The Gemara deduces: When the corpse is laid out before him, yes, he is exempt, but when the corpse is not physically laid out before him, no, he is not exempt from these mitzvot.,The Gemara raises a contradiction from a baraita: One whose deceased relative is laid out before him eats in another room. If he does not have another room, he eats in the house of a friend. If he does not have a friend’s house available, he makes a partition between him and the deceased and eats. If he does not have material with which to make a partition, he averts his face from the dead and eats. And in any case, he does not recline while he eats, as reclining is characteristic of a festive meal. Furthermore, he neither eats meat nor drinks wine, and does not recite a blessing before eating, and does not recite the formula to invite the participants in the meal to join together in the Grace after Meals zimmun, i.e., he is exempt from the obligation of Grace after Meals. 26a atop a chest is like a vessel within a vessel. On a similar note, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: One who wishes to engage in marital relations in a room in which there is a Torah scroll, must erect a partition ten handbreadths high. The Gemara relates: Mar Zutra happened to come to the house of Rav Ashi and he saw that in the bed chamber of his son Mar bar Rav Ashi, there was a Torah scroll, and a partition of ten handbreadths had been erected for it. He said to him: In accordance with whose opinion did you do this? Is it in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi? Say that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said this only as a makeshift solution in exigent situations, when he has no other room in which to place it, but don’t you, Master, have another room where you could place the Torah scroll? He said to him: Indeed, that did not enter my mind.,We learned in the mishna: And, how far must one distance himself from urine and from feces in order to recite Shema? Four cubits. Rava said that Rav Seḥora said that Rav Huna said: They only taught that it is sufficient to distance oneself four cubits when the feces are behind him, but if they are before him he must distance himself to the point that it is no longer within his range of vision; and the halakha is the same for prayer.,The Gemara challenges this: Is that so? Didn’t Rafram bar Pappa say that Rav Ḥisda said: One may stand opposite a bathroom and pray. The Gemara resolves this contradiction: With what are we dealing here? With a bathroom that has no feces, and therefore there is no need to distance himself to that extent.,The Gemara asks again: Is that so? Didn’t Rav Yosef bar Ḥanina say: The bathroom to which the Sages referred in all of the halakhot of distancing oneself was even one in which there were no feces, and the bathhouse to which the Sages referred in all of the halakhot of uttering sacred matters, was even one in which there was no naked person. Rather, with what are we dealing here? We are dealing with a new structure, built as a bathroom but not yet used for that purpose.,The Gemara asks: Wasn’t this already raised as a dilemma by Ravina: One who designated the structure for use as a bathroom, what is its legal status? Is designation effective or is designation not effective? The Gemara replies: When Ravina raised the dilemma, it was whether or not one may stand and pray inside it, but he had no dilemma whether or not one may pray opposite it.,Rava said: These Persian bathrooms, even though they contain feces, they are considered as sealed, as they are constructed on an incline so the feces will roll out of the bathroom underground.,halakhot of immersion for Torah study and prayer for one who experienced a seminal emission, the mishna discusses a case where individuals who were already impure with a severe form of ritual impurity are exposed to the impurity of a seminal emission as well. They are required to immerse themselves and purify themselves of the impurity of the seminal emission even though they remain impure due to the more severe impurity. Consequently, even a zav, whose impurity lasts at least seven days, who experienced a seminal emission, for which, were he not a zav, he would be impure for only one day; a menstruating woman who discharged semen, despite the fact that she is already impure with a severe impurity unaffected by her immersion; and a woman who engaged in conjugal relations with her husband and later saw menstrual blood, all require immersion. And Rabbi Yehuda exempts them from immersion.,A dilemma was raised before the students of the yeshiva: One who experienced a seminal emission and was therefore required to immerse himself, who later saw a discharge that rendered him a zav; according to Rabbi Yehuda, what is his legal status? The Gemara explains the sides of the dilemma: When, in our mishna, Rabbi Yehuda exempted a zav who saw a seminal emission from immersion, that was because from the outset he was not fit for immersion, as the immersion would not be effective in purifying him from the impurity of a zav; however, one who experienced a seminal emission, who later saw a discharge that rendered him a zav, who was fit for immersion and only later became impure with the severe impurity of a zav, would Rabbi Yehuda require immersion? Or perhaps there is no difference and he is exempt from immersion in both cases?,In order to resolve this dilemma, come and hear the last case of the mishna: A woman who engaged in conjugal relations with her husband and later saw menstrual blood requires immersion. And Rabbi Yehuda exempts them from immersion. Isn’t the woman who engaged in conjugal relations with her husband and later saw menstrual blood like one who experienced a seminal emission, who later saw a discharge that rendered him a zav, as in both cases there is a less severe ritual impurity followed by a more severe impurity; and nevertheless, Rabbi Yehuda exempts. Conclude from this that Rabbi Yehuda does not distinguish between the cases. And indeed, Rabbi Ḥiyya explicitly taught: One who experienced a seminal emission who later saw a discharge that rendered him a zav requires immersion, and Rabbi Yehuda exempts.,,the morning prayer may be recited until noon. Rabbi Yehuda says: It may be recited only until four hours after sunrise. According to the Rabbis, the afternoon prayer may be recited until the evening. Rabbi Yehuda says: It may be recited only until the midpoint of the afternoon pelag haminḥa, i.e., the midpoint of the period that begins with the sacrifice of the daily afternoon offering and ends at nightfall, which is the end of the afternoon.,The evening prayer may be recited throughout the night and is not fixed to a specific hour. According to the Rabbis, the additional prayer may be recited all day. Rabbi Yehuda says: It may be recited only until seven hours after sunrise.,raises a contradiction based on what was taught in a baraita: The mitzva is to recite the morning Shema with sunrise so that he will juxtapose redemption, which is mentioned in the blessings following Shema, to the Amida prayer, which is recited immediately after sunrise, and find himself praying in the daytime. Clearly, the time to recite the morning prayer is immediately after sunrise.,The Gemara responds: This baraita does not establish a binding halakha. Rather, it taught that rule specifically with regard to those who are scrupulous in fulfillment of mitzvot vatikin. As Rabbi Yoḥa said: Vatikin would finish reciting the morning Shema with sunrise, but those who are not vatikin may recite their prayers later.,The Gemara asks: Does everyone hold that one may recite the morning prayer only until noon and no later? Didn’t Rav Mari, son of Rav Huna, son of Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba, say that Rabbi Yoḥa said: One who erred and did not recite the evening prayer, prays in the morning prayer two Amida prayers; one who erred and did not recite the morning prayer, prays in the afternoon prayer two Amida prayers? Apparently, the morning prayer may be recited until the evening, at least in the event that he forgot to recite it in the morning.,The Gemara answers: Indeed, one may continue praying for the entire day. However, if he prayed until noon, they give him a reward for reciting the prayer at its appointed time. If he prayed from there on, they give him a reward for reciting the prayer. They do not give him a reward for reciting the prayer at its appointed time.,On the topic of one who forgot to pray and seeks to compensate for the prayer that he missed, a dilemma was raised before them in the study hall: One who erred and did not recite the afternoon prayer, what is the ruling? May he recite in the evening prayer two Amida prayers? The Gemara articulates the sides of the dilemma: If you say that one who erred and did not pray the evening prayer prays in the morning prayer two Amida prayers, perhaps that is because the evening and the morning are both part of one day, as it is written: “And there was evening and there was morning, one day” (Genesis 1:5); the evening and the following morning constitute a single unit. But here, in the case under discussion, perhaps prayer is in place of sacrifice. Since in the case of sacrifice we say, since its day passed, its sacrifice is invalid and there is no way to compensate for the missed opportunity, the same should be true for prayer. Or, perhaps, since prayer is supplication, any time that one wishes, he may continue to pray?,Come and hear a resolution to this dilemma from that which Rav Huna bar Yehuda said that Rabbi Yitzḥak said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: One who erred and did not recite the afternoon prayer, prays in the evening prayer two Amida prayers and there is no element of: Its day passed, its sacrifice is invalid.,With regard to the possibility to compensate for a prayer that he failed to recite at its appointed time, the Gemara raises an objection based on what was taught in a baraita. The meaning of the verse: “That which is crooked cannot be made straight; and that which is wanting cannot be numbered” (Ecclesiastes 1:15), is as follows: That which is crooked cannot be made straight refers to one who omitted the evening Shema and the morning Shema, or the evening prayer, or the morning prayer. And that which is wanting cannot be numbered lehimanot refers to one whose friends reached a consensus nimnu to perform a mitzva and he was not part of their consensus nimnu and, consequently, he missed his opportunity to join them in performance of the mitzva. This baraita clearly states that there is no way to compensate for a missed prayer.,To resolve this difficulty, Rabbi Yitzḥak said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: With what are we dealing here in this baraita? We are dealing with a case where one intentionally failed to recite the prayer. Only then he has no remedy. However, one who failed to pray due to error can compensate for the missed prayer by reciting the next prayer twice.,Rav Ashi said: The language of the baraita is also precise as it teaches omitted and did not teach erred. This indicates that the halakha is different in the case of error. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, learn from this. 40b However, in a situation where, when you take the fruit, the branch does not remain and again produce fruit, we do not recite the blessing: Who creates fruit of the tree, but rather: Who creates fruit of the ground.,We learned in the mishna: And on all food items, if he recited: By whose word all things came to be, he fulfilled his obligation. It was stated that the amora’im disputed the precise explanation of the mishna. Rav Huna said: This halakha applies to all foods except for bread and wine. Since they have special blessings, one does not fulfill his obligation by reciting the general blessing: By whose word all things came to be. And Rabbi Yoḥa said: One fulfills his obligation with the blessing: By whose word all things came to be, even over bread and wine.,The Gemara remarks: Let us say that this dispute is parallel to a tannaitic dispute found elsewhere, as it was taught in a Tosefta: One who saw bread and said: How pleasant is this bread, blessed is the Omnipresent Who created it, fulfilled his obligation to recite a blessing. One who saw a fig and said: How pleasant is this fig, blessed is the Omnipresent Who created it, fulfilled his obligation. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosei says: One who deviates from the formula coined by the Sages in blessings, did not fulfill his obligation. If so, let us say that Rav Huna, who said that one who recites: By whose word all things came to be, over bread or wine, did not fulfill his obligation, holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei; and Rabbi Yoḥa, who said that one who recites: By whose word all things came to be, over bread or wine fulfills his obligation, holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir.,The Gemara rejects this: Rav Huna could have said to you: I said my statement, even in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, as Rabbi Meir only stated his opinion, that one who alters the formula of the blessing fulfills his obligation, there, where the individual explicitly mentions the term bread in his blessing, but where he does not mention the term bread, even Rabbi Meir agrees that he did not fulfill his obligation.,And Rabbi Yoḥa could have said to you: I said my statement, even in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, as Rabbi Yosei only stated his opinion, that one who alters the formula of the blessing does not fulfill his obligation, there, because he recited a blessing that was not instituted by the Sages; however, if he recited: By whose word all things came to be, which was instituted by the Sages, even Rabbi Yosei agrees that, after the fact, he fulfilled his obligation to recite a blessing.,Regarding blessings that do not conform to the formula instituted by the Sages, the Gemara relates that Binyamin the shepherd ate bread and afterward recited in Aramaic: Blessed is the Master of this bread. Rav said, he thereby fulfilled his obligation to recite a blessing. The Gemara objects: But didn’t Rav himself say: Any blessing that does not contain mention of God’s name is not considered a blessing? The Gemara emends the formula of his blessing. He said: Blessed is the All-Merciful, Master of this bread.,The Gemara asks: But don’t we require three blessings in Grace after Meals? How did he fulfill his obligation with one sentence? The Gemara explains: What is: Fulfills his obligation, that Rav also said? He fulfills the obligation of the first of the three blessings, and must recite two more to fulfill his obligation completely.,The Gemara asks: What is he teaching us? The Gemara answers: Although he recited the blessing in a secular language, other than Hebrew, he fulfilled his obligation.,This remains difficult, as we already learned this in a mishna in Sota: And these are recited in any language that one understands: The portion of the swearing of the sota, the confession of the tithes when a homeowner declares that he has given all teruma and tithes appropriately, the recitation of Shema, and the Amida prayer and Grace after Meals. If Grace after Meals is clearly on the list of matters that may be recited in any language, what did Rav teach us? The Gemara answers: Rav’s ruling with regard to Binyamin the Shepherd is necessary, as it might have entered your mind to say: This, the permission to recite Grace after Meals in any language, applies only to a case where one recited it in a secular language, just as it was instituted by the Sages in the holy tongue. However, in a case where one did not recite the blessing in a secular language, just as it was instituted by the Sages in the holy tongue, say that no, he did not fulfill his obligation. Therefore, Rav teaches us that, after the fact, not only is the language not an impediment to fulfillment of his obligation to recite a blessing, the formula is not an impediment either.,The Gemara considers the matter of Rav’s opinion itself and cites the fundamental dispute in that regard. Rav said: Any blessing that does not contain mention of God’s name is not considered a blessing. And Rabbi Yoḥa said: Any blessing that does not contain mention of God’s sovereignty is not considered a blessing. Abaye said: It stands to reason in accordance with the opinion of Rav, as it was taught in a Tosefta: In the confession of the tithes, one recites, “I did not transgress your mitzvot and I did not forget” (Deuteronomy 26:13). The meaning of phrase, I did not transgress, is that I did not refrain from blessing You when separating tithes; and the meaning of the phrase, and I did not forget, is that I did not forget to mention Your name in the blessing recited over it. However, this baraita did not teach that one must mention God’s sovereignty in the blessing.,And Rabbi Yoḥa would say: Emend the baraita: And I did not forget to mention Your name and Your sovereignty in the blessing recited over it; indicating that one must mention both God’s name and God’s sovereignty.,And over a food item whose growth is not from the ground, one recites: By whose word all things came to be. And over vinegar, wine that fermented and spoiled, and over novelot, dates that spoiled, and over locusts, one recites: By whose word all things came to be. Rabbi Yehuda says: Over any food item that is a type resulting from a curse, one does not recite a blessing over it at all. None of the items listed exist under normal conditions, and they come about as the result of a curse.,On a different note: If there were many types of food before him, over which food should he recite a blessing first? Rabbi Yehuda says: If there is one of the seven species for which Eretz Yisrael was praised among them, he recites the first blessing over it. And the Rabbis say: He recites a blessing over whichever of them he wants.,The Sages taught: Over a food item whose growth is not from the earth, for example, meat from domesticated animals, non-domesticated animals, and fowl and fish, one recites: By whose word all things came to be. So too, over milk, and over eggs, and over cheese, one recites: By whose word all things came to be. This is not only true with regard to items that come from animals, but over moldy bread, and over wine that fermented slightly, and over a cooked dish that spoiled, one recites: By whose word all things came to be, because the designated blessing is inappropriate for food that is partially spoiled. Similarly, over salt and over brine, and over truffles and mushrooms, one recites: By whose word all things came to be. The Gemara asks: Is this to say that truffles and mushrooms are not items that grow from the ground? Wasn’t it taught in a baraita: One who vows not to eat from the fruit of the earth is forbidden to eat all fruit of the earth; however, he is permitted to eat truffles and mushrooms. And if he said: All items that grow from the ground are forbidden to me, he is forbidden to eat even truffles and mushrooms. Apparently, truffles and mushrooms are items that grow from the ground.,Abaye said: With regard to growth, they grow from the earth, but with regard to sustece, they do not draw sustece from the earth.,The Gemara asks: Why is that distinction significant? Wasn’t it taught: Over a food item whose growth is not from the ground one recites the blessing: By whose word all things came to be? Even according to Abaye, mushrooms grow from the ground. The Gemara answers: Emend the baraita to read: Over a food item that does not draw sustece from the ground, one recites: By whose word all things came to be. Consequently, even over mushrooms one recites: By whose word all things came to be.,We learned in the mishna that over novelot one recites: By whose word all things came to be. The Gemara asks: What are novelot? The Gemara responds that the amora’im Rabbi Zeira and Rabbi Il’a disputed this. One said that the term refers to dates that, due to extreme conditions, were burned by the heat of the sun and ripened prematurely. And one said that they are dates that fell from the tree because of the wind.,We learned later in the mishna that Rabbi Yehuda says: Over any food item that is a type resulting from a curse, one does not recite a blessing over it at all. Granted, according to the one who said that novelot are dates burned by the heat of the sun, that is the reason that he considers them a type of curse; however, according to the one who said that novelot are dates that fell because of the wind, what is the reason that it is considered a type of curse? Dates that fell from the tree are no worse than other dates.,The Gemara reconciles: Rabbi Yehuda’s statement was about the rest, the vinegar and locusts, not about the novelot.,Some say that the Gemara raised the question differently: Granted, according to the one who said that novelot are dates burned by the heat of the sun, that is the reason that we recite over them: By whose word all things came to be, as they are of inferior quality. However, to the one who said that novelot are dates that fell because of the wind, should we recite over them: By whose word all things came to be? We should recite: Who creates fruit of the tree.,Rather, the conclusion is, with regard to novelot unmodified, everyone agrees that they are dates that were burned by the heat of the sun. When they argue, it is with regard to those dates known as novelot temara, as we learned in a mishna concerning the laws of doubtfully tithed produce demai: Although, under normal circumstances, fruits that come into one’s possession by means of an am ha’aretz must be tithed due to concern lest the am ha’aretz failed to do so, the following fruits of inferior quality are lenient with regard to demai and one need not tithe them: Shittin, rimin, uzradin, benot shuaḥ, benot shikma, gufnin, nitzpa, and novelot temara.,The Gemara identifies these plants. Shittin, Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: They are a type of figs. Rimin are lote. Uzradin are crabapples. Benot shuaḥ, Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: They are white figs. Benot shikma, Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: They are the fruit of the sycamore tree. Gufnin are the last grapes which remain on the tree at the end of the season. Nitzpa are the fruit of the caper-bush. Novelot temara, Rabbi Il’a and Rabbi Zeira disagreed. One said that they are dates burned by the heat of the sun, and one said that they are dates that fell because of the wind.,Here too, the Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that novelot temara are dates burned by the heat of the sun, that is the reason that it was taught concerning them: Their halakhot are lenient with regard to demai, meaning that it is those with regard to which there is uncertainty whether or not they were tithed that are exempt from being tithed. Those with regard to which there is certainty that they were not tithed, one is obligated to tithe those dates. However, according to the one who said that novelot temara are dates felled because of the wind, this is difficult: Those regarding which there is certainty that they were not tithed, one is obligated? They are ownerless, and ownerless produce is exempt from the requirement to tithe.,The Gemara responds: With what are we dealing here? With a case where he gathered the dates that fell because of the wind and made them into a pile, like a pile of threshed grain, signifying that the produce is a finished product. As Rabbi Yitzḥak said that Rabbi Yoḥa said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov: Even gifts to the poor such as gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and produce of the corners, which are normally exempt from tithes, if a poor person gathered them and made them into a pile of threshed grain, by rabbinic law they were rendered obligated in tithes. In that case, only demai would be exempt from tithes.,Some say that the discussion was as follows: 56a On a similar note, the Gemara relates that the Roman emperor said to Rabbi Yehoshua, son of Rabbi Ḥaya: You Jews say that you are extremely wise. If that is so, tell me what I will see in my dream. Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: You will see the Persians capture you, and enslave you, and force you to herd unclean animals with a golden staff. He thought the entire day about the images described to him by Rabbi Yehoshua and that night he saw it in his dream. King Shapur of Persia said to Shmuel: You Jews say that you are extremely wise. If that is so, tell me what I will see in my dream. Shmuel said to him: You will see the Romans come and take you into captivity and force you to grind date pits in mills of gold. He thought the entire day about the images described to him by Shmuel, and that night he saw it in his dream.,The Gemara relates: Bar Haddaya was an interpreter of dreams. For one who gave him a fee, he would interpret the dream favorably, and for one who did not give him a fee, he would interpret the dream unfavorably. The Gemara relates: There was an incident in which both Abaye and Rava saw an identical dream and they asked bar Haddaya to interpret it. Abaye gave him money and paid his fee, while Rava did not give him money. They said to him: The verse: “Your ox shall be slain before your eyes and you shall not eat thereof” (Deuteronomy 28:31) was read to us in our dream. He interpreted their dream and to Rava he said: Your business will be lost and you will derive no pleasure from eating because of the extreme sadness of your heart. To Abaye he said: Your business will profit and you will be unable to eat due to the joy in your heart.,They said to him: The verse, “You shall beget sons and daughters, but they shall not be yours; for they shall go into captivity” (Deuteronomy 28:41), was read to us in our dream. He interpreted their dreams, and to Rava he said its literal, adverse sense. To Abaye he said: Your sons and daughters will be numerous, and your daughters will be married to outsiders and it will seem to you as if they were taken in captivity.,They said to him: The verse: “Your sons and your daughters shall be given unto another people” (Deuteronomy 28:32), was read to us in our dream. To Abaye he said: Your sons and daughters will be numerous. You say, that they should marry your relatives and your wife says that they should marry her relatives and she will impose her will upon you and they will be given in marriage to her relatives, which is like another nation as far as you are concerned. To Rava he said: Your wife will die and your sons and daughters will come into the hands of another woman. As Rava said that Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba said that Rav said: What is the meaning of that which is written in the verse: “Your sons and your daughters shall be given unto another people”? This refers to the father’s wife, the stepmother.,They said to him: The verse: “Go your way, eat your bread with joy, and drink your wine with a merry heart” (Ecclesiastes 9:7) was read to us in our dream. To Abaye he said: Your business will profit and you will eat and drink and read the verse out of the joy of your heart. To Rava he said: Your business will be lost, you will slaughter but not eat, you will drink wine and read passages from the Bible in order to allay your fears.,They said to him: The verse: “You shall carry much seed out into the field, and shall gather little in; for the locust shall consume it” (Deuteronomy 28:38), was read to us in our dream. To Abaye he said from the beginning of the verse, that he will enjoy an abundant harvest. To Rava he said from the end of the verse, that his harvest will be destroyed.,They said to him: The verse: “You shall have olive-trees throughout all your borders, but you shall not anoint yourself with the oil; for your olives shall drop off” (Deuteronomy 28:40), was read to us in our dream. And again, to Abaye he said from the beginning of the verse. To Rava he said from the end of the verse.,They said to him: The verse: “All the peoples of the earth shall see that the name of the Lord is called upon you; and they shall be afraid of you” (Deuteronomy 28:10), was read to us in our dream. To Abaye he said: Your name will become well-known as head of the yeshiva, and you will be feared by all. To Rava he said: The king’s treasury was broken into and you will be apprehended as a thief, and everyone will draw an a fortiori inference from you: If Rava who is wealthy and of distinguished lineage can be arrested on charges of theft, what will become of the rest of us? Indeed, the next day, the king’s treasury was burglarized, and they came and apprehended Rava.,Abaye and Rava said to him: We saw lettuce on the mouth of the barrels. To Abaye he said: Your business will double like lettuce whose leaves are wide and wrinkled. To Rava he said: Your work will be bitter like a lettuce stalk.,They said to him: We saw meat on the mouth of barrels. To Abaye he said: Your wine will be sweet and everyone will come to buy meat and wine from you. To Rava he said: Your wine will spoil, and everyone will go to buy meat in order to eat with it, to dip the meat in your vinegar.,They said to him: We saw a barrel hanging from a palm tree. To Abaye he said: Your business will rise like a palm tree. To Rava he said: Your work will be sweet like dates which are very cheap in Babylonia, indicating that you will be compelled to sell your merchandise at a cheap price.,They said to him: We saw a pomegranate taking root on the mouth of barrels. To Abaye he said: Your business will increase in value like a pomegranate. To Rava he said: Your work will go sour like a pomegranate.,They said to him: We saw a barrel fall into a pit. To Abaye he said: Your merchandise will be in demand as the adage says: Bread falls in a pit and is not found. In other words, everyone will seek your wares and they will not find them due to increased demand. To Rava he said: Your merchandise will be ruined and you will throw it away into a pit.,They said to him: We saw a donkey-foal standing near our heads, braying. To Abaye he said: You will be a king, that is to say, head of the yeshiva, and an interpreter will stand near you to repeat your teachings to the masses out loud. To Rava he said: I see the words peter ḥamor, first-born donkey, erased from your phylacteries. Rava said to him: I myself saw it and it is there. Bar Haddaya said to him: The letter vav of the word peter ḥamor is certainly erased from your phylacteries.,Ultimately, Rava went to bar Haddaya alone. Rava said to him: I saw the outer door of my house fall. Bar Haddaya said to him: Your wife will die, as she is the one who protects the house. Rava said to him: I saw my front and back teeth fall out. He said to him: Your sons and daughters will die. Rava said to him: I saw two doves that were flying. He said to him: You will divorce two women. Rava said to him: I saw two turnip-heads gargelidei. He said to him: You will receive two blows with a club shaped like a turnip. That same day Rava went and sat in the study hall the entire day. He discovered these two blind people who were fighting with each other. Rava went to separate them and they struck Rava two blows. When they raised their staffs to strike him an additional blow, he said: That is enough for me, I only saw two.,Ultimately, Rava came and gave him, bar Haddaya, a fee. And then Rava, said to him: I saw my wall fall. Bar Haddaya said to him: You will acquire property without limits. Rava said to him: I saw Abaye’s house appadna fall and its dust covered me. Bar Haddaya said to him: Abaye will die and his yeshiva will come to you. Rava said to him: I saw my house fall, and everyone came and took the bricks. He said to him: Your teachings will be disseminated throughout the world. Rava said to him: I saw that my head split and my brain fell out. He said to him: A feather will fall out of the pillow near your head. Rava said to him: The Egyptian hallel, the hallel that celebrates the Exodus, was read to me in a dream. He said to him: Miracles will be performed for you.,Bar Haddaya was going with Rava on a ship; bar Haddaya said: Why am I going with a person for whom miracles will be performed, lest the miracle will be that the ship will sink and he alone will be saved. As bar Haddaya was climbing onto the ship a book fell from him. Rava found it and saw: All dreams follow the mouth, written therein. He said to bar Haddaya: Scoundrel. It was dependent on you, and you caused me so much suffering. I forgive you for everything except for the daughter of Rav Ḥisda, Rava’s wife, whom bar Haddaya predicted would die. May it be Your will that this man be delivered into the hands of a kingdom that has no compassion on him.,Bar Haddaya said to himself: What will I do? We learned through tradition that the curse of a Sage, even if baseless, comes true? And all the more so in the case of Rava, as he cursed me justifiably. He said to himself: I will get up and go into exile, as the Master said: Exile atones for transgression.,He arose and exiled himself to the seat of the Roman government. He went and sat by the entrance, where the keeper of the king’s wardrobe stood. The wardrobe guard dreamed a dream. He said to bar Haddaya: I saw in the dream that a needle pierced my finger. Bar Haddaya said to him: Give me a zuz. He did not give him the coin so bar Haddaya said nothing to him. Again, the guard said to him: I saw a worm that fell between my two fingers, eating them. Bar Haddaya said to him: Give me a zuz. He did not give him the coin, so bar Haddaya said nothing to him. Again, the guard said to him: I saw that a worm fell upon my entire hand, eating it. Bar Haddaya said to him: A worm fell upon and ate all the silk garments. They heard of this in the king’s palace and they brought the wardrobe keeper and were in the process of executing him. He said to them: Why me? Bring the one who knew and did not say the information that he knew. They brought bar Haddaya and said to him: Because of your zuz, ruin came upon 58a With regard to Babylonia, the Gemara cites what Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar said: When Babylonia was cursed, its neighbors were cursed along with it. When Samaria was cursed, its neighbors were blessed. When Babylonia was cursed its neighbors were cursed along with it, as it is written: “I will also make it a possession for the bittern, a wading bird, and pools of water” (Isaiah 14:23); not only will it be destroyed, but the site will become a habitat for destructive, environmentally harmful creatures. When Samaria was cursed, however, its neighbors were blessed, as it is written: “Therefore I will make Samaria a heap in the field, a place for the planting of vineyards” (Micah 1:6); although destroyed, it will serve a beneficial purpose.,And Rav Hamnuna said: One who sees multitudes of Israel, six hundred thousand Jews, recites: Blessed…Who knows all secrets. One who sees multitudes of gentiles recites: “Your mother shall be sore ashamed, she that bore you shall be confounded; behold, the hindermost of the nations shall be a wilderness, a dry land, and a desert” (Jeremiah 50:12).,The Sages taught in a Tosefta: One who sees multitudes of Israel recites: Blessed…Who knows all secrets. Why is this? He sees a whole nation whose minds are unlike each other and whose faces are unlike each other, and He Who knows all secrets, God, knows what is in each of their hearts. The Gemara relates: Ben Zoma once saw a multitude okhlosa of Israel while standing on a stair on the Temple Mount. He immediately recited: Blessed…Who knows all secrets and Blessed…Who created all these to serve me.,Explaining his custom, he would say: How much effort did Adam the first man exert before he found bread to eat: He plowed, sowed, reaped, sheaved, threshed, winnowed in the wind, separated the grain from the chaff, ground the grain into flour, sifted, kneaded, and baked and only thereafter he ate. And I, on the other hand, wake up and find all of these prepared for me. Human society employs a division of labor, and each individual benefits from the service of the entire world. Similarly, how much effort did Adam the first man exert before he found a garment to wear? He sheared, laundered, combed, spun and wove, and only thereafter he found a garment to wear. And I, on the other hand, wake up and find all of these prepared for me. Members of all nations, merchants and craftsmen, diligently come to the entrance of my home, and I wake up and find all of these before me.,Ben Zoma would say: A good guest, what does he say? How much effort did the host expend on my behalf, how much meat did the host bring before me. How much wine did he bring before me. How many loaves geluskaot did he bring before me. All the effort that he expended, he expended only for me. However, a bad guest, what does he say? What effort did the host expend? I ate only one piece of bread, I ate only one piece of meat and I drank only one cup of wine. All the effort that the home owner expended he only expended on behalf of his wife and children.,With regard to a good guest, what does he say? “Remember that you magnify his work, whereof men have sung” (Job 36:24); he praises and acknowledges those who helped him. With regard to a bad guest it is written: “Men do therefore fear him; he regards not any who are wise of heart” (Job 37:24).,On the topic of multitudes, the Gemara cites another verse: “And the man in the days of Saul was old, and came among men” (I Samuel 17:12). Rava, and some say Rav Zevid, and some say Rav Oshaya, said: This refers to Yishai, father of David, who always went out with multitudes, and entered with multitudes, and taught Torah with multitudes. Ulla said: We hold there is no multitude in Babylonia. The Sage taught: A multitude is no fewer than six hundred thousand people.,The Sages taught: One who sees the Sages of Israel recites: Blessed…Who has shared of His wisdom with those who revere Him. One who sees Sages of the nations of the world recites: Blessed…Who has given of His wisdom to flesh and blood. One who sees kings of Israel recites: Blessed…Who has shared of His glory with those who revere Him. One who sees kings of the other nations of the world recites: Blessed…Who has given of His glory to flesh and blood.,Rabbi Yoḥa said: One should always strive to run toward kings of Israel to greet them. And not only should he run toward kings of Israel, but also toward kings of the nations of the world, so that if he will be privileged to witnesses the glory of the Messiah (Rashi) and the World-to-Come, he will distinguish between the kings of Israel and the kings of the nations of the world.,The Gemara relates: Rav Sheshet was blind. Everyone was going to greet the king and Rav Sheshet stood up and went along with them. This heretic found him there and said to him: The intact jugs go to the river, where do the broken jugs go? Why is a blind person going to see the king? Rav Sheshet said to him: Come see that I know more than you do. The first troop passed, and when the noise grew louder, this heretic said to him: The king is coming. Rav Sheshet said to him: The king is not coming. The second troop passed, and when the noise grew louder, this heretic said to him: Now the king is coming. Rav Sheshet said to him: The king is not coming. The third troop passed, and when there was silence, Rav Sheshet said to him: Certainly now the king is coming.,This heretic said to him: How do you know this? Rav Sheshet said to him: Royalty on earth is like royalty in the heavens, as it is written with regard to God’s revelation to Elijah the Prophet on Mount Horeb: r“And He said: Go forth, and stand upon the mount before the Lord.rAnd, behold, the Lord passed by, and a great and strong wind rent the mountains, and broke in pieces the rocks before the Lord;rbut the Lord was not in the wind;rand after the wind an earthquake;rbut the Lord was not in the earthquake;rand after the earthquake a fire;rbut the Lord was not in the fire;rand after the fire a still small voice.rAnd it was so, when Elijah heard it, that he wrapped his face in his mantle and went out, and stood in the entrance of the cave” (I Kings 19:11–13). God’s revelation was specifically at the moment of silence.,When the king came, Rav Sheshet began to bless him. The heretic mockingly said to him: Do you bless someone you do not see? The Gemara asks: And what ultimately happened to this heretic? Some say that his friends gouged out his eyes, and some say that Rav Sheshet fixed his gaze upon him, and the heretic became a pile of bones.,As for the connection between divine and earthly royalty, the Gemara cites another story: Rabbi Sheila ordered that a man who had relations with a gentile woman be flogged. That man went to inform the king and said: There is one man among the Jews who renders judgment without the king’s authority harmana. The king sent a messenger peristaka for Rabbi Sheila to bring him to trial. When Rabbi Sheila came, they said to him: Why did you order flogging for this man? He said to them: Because he had relations with a female donkey. According to Persian law this was an extremely heinous crime, so they said to him: Do you have witnesses that he did so? He replied: Yes, and Elijah the prophet came and appeared as a person and testified. They said to Rabbi Sheila: If so, he is liable for the death penalty; why did you not sentence him to death? He replied: Since the day we were exiled from our land we do not have the authority to execute, but you, do with him as you wish.,As they considered the sentence, Rabbi Sheila praised God for saving him from danger: “Yours, O Lord, is the greatness, power, glory, triumph, and majesty; for all that is in heaven and on earth is Yours; Yours is the kingdom, O Lord, and You are exalted as head above all” (I Chronicles 29:11). They asked him: What did you say? He told them: This is what I said: Blessed is Merciful One who grants kingdom on earth that is a microcosm of the kingdom in heaven, and granted you dominion and love of justice. They said to him: Indeed, the honor of royalty is so dear to you. They gave him a staff to symbolize his license to sit in judgment and said to him: Judge.,As he was leaving, that man said to Rabbi Sheila: Does God perform such miracles for liars? He replied: Scoundrel! Aren’t gentiles called donkeys? As it is written: “Whose flesh is as the flesh of donkeys” (Ezekiel 23:20). Rabbi Sheila saw that he was going to tell the Persian authorities that he called them donkeys. He said: This man has the legal status of a pursuer. He seeks to have me killed. And the Torah said: If one comes to kill you, kill him first. He struck him with the staff and killed him.,Rabbi Sheila said: Since a miracle was performed on my behalf with this verse that I cited, I will interpret it homiletically: Yours, O Lord, is the greatness; that is the act of creation, and so it says: “Who does great things past finding out” (Job 9:10); rAnd the power; that is the exodus from Egypt, as it is stated: “And Israel saw the great work which the Lord did to the Egyptians” (Exodus 14:31);rAnd the glory; that is the sun and the moon that stood still for Joshua, as it is stated: “And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed, until the nation had avenged themselves of their enemies” (Joshua 10:13);rAnd the triumph; that is the downfall of Rome, and so it says describing the downfall of Edom, whom the Sages identified as the forefather of Rome: “Their lifeblood is dashed against My garments and I have stained all My raiment” (Isaiah 63:3);rAnd the majesty; this is the war of the valleys of Arnon, as it is stated: “Wherefore it is said in the book of the Wars of the Lord: Vahev in Sufa, and the valleys of Arnon” (Numbers 21:14);rFor all that is in the heaven and in the earth is Yours; this is the war of Sisera, as it is stated: “They fought from heaven, the stars in their courses fought against Sisera” (Judges 5:20).rYours is the kingdom, O Lord; this is the war of Amalek, and so it says: “And he said: The hand upon the throne of the Lord: the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation” (Exodus 17:16), as then God will sit on His throne.rAnd you are exalted; this is the war of Gog and Magog, and so it says: “I am against you, O Gog, the chief prince of Meshekh and Tubal” (Ezekiel 38:3); and:rAs head above all; Rav Ḥa bar Rava said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: All leadership and authority, even the most insignificant, the one responsible for distributing water, is appointed by heaven.,It was taught in a baraita in the name of Rabbi Akiva: rYours, O Lord, is the greatness; this is the splitting of the Red Sea;rthe power; this is the plague of the firstborn;rthe glory; this is the giving of the Torah;rthe triumph; this is Jerusalem; rand the majesty; this is the Temple. 60a The Gemara deduces: This proves by inference that if he purchases a new object and then purchases a similar object, everyone agrees that he is not required to recite a blessing, as he has already recited a blessing over the purchase of that type of item.,Some say a different version of this dispute: Rav Huna said: They only taught that one recites the blessing: Who has given us life, on a new vessel if he did not purchase that item in the past and purchased the item now, for the first time. However, if he purchased that item in the past and purchased the item again, he need not recite a blessing. And Rabbi Yoḥa said: Even if one purchased that item in the past and purchased a similar item again, he must recite a blessing. This proves by inference that if one already has a vessel and then purchased similar vessels, everyone agrees that he must recite a blessing.,The Gemara raises an objection based on what was taught in a baraita: One who built a new house and does not already own a similar house, or purchased new vessels and does not already own similar vessels, must recite a blessing. However, if he already owns a similar one, he need not recite a blessing, this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda, on the other hand, says: In either case, he must recite a blessing.,The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the first version of the dispute between Rav Huna and Rabbi Yoḥa, one could say that Rav Huna holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir, and that Rabbi Yoḥa holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. However, according to the latter version of the dispute, granted, Rav Huna holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, but in accordance with whose opinion did Rabbi Yoḥa state his opinion? His statement is neither in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir nor in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda.,The Gemara responds: Rabbi Yoḥa could have said to you: The same is true according to Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion; in a case where one has purchased an item in the past and purchased a similar item again, he must recite a blessing. The fact that they only disagreed with regard to a case where he already owned similar vessels and he purchased new ones does not indicate that this is their only disagreement. The dispute was presented in this way to convey the far-reaching nature of Rabbi Meir’s opinion; even in a case where one purchased an item while owning a similar item, he need not recite a blessing; all the more so in a case where he purchased an item and then purchased a similar item again, he need not recite a blessing.,The Gemara asks: And if that is the reason for presenting the dispute in this manner, let them disagree with regard to a case where one purchased an item in the past and then purchased a similar item again, where according to Rabbi Meir one need not recite a blessing, in order to convey the far-reaching nature of Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion; as Rabbi Yehuda requires a blessing in that case. The Gemara responds: The Gemara preferred the version before us in order to demonstrate the extent to which Rabbi Meir was lenient in not requiring a blessing because the strength of leniency is preferable.,We learned in the mishna: One recites a blessing for the bad that befalls him just as he does for the good. This is to say that one recites the blessing appropriate for the present situation even if it is bad, despite the fact that it may develop into a positive situation in the future.,The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances? The Gemara explains: In a case where a dam was breached and water flowed onto one’s land, despite the fact that this will ultimately be beneficial for him, for his land will be covered with sediment from the flowing water which will enhance the quality of his soil, it is nonetheless bad at present.,One must recite a blessing for the good that befalls him just as for the bad.,The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances? The Gemara explains: In a case where one found a lost object, despite the fact that it is ultimately bad for him because if the king heard about it, he would certainly take it from him. At that time, the law deemed all found objects the property of the king’s treasury and one who did not report such an object would be punished. Nevertheless, it is favorable at present.,We learned in the mishna: One whose wife was pregt and he said: May it be God’s will that my wife will give birth to a male child, it is a vain prayer.,Is a prayer in that case ineffective? Rav Yosef raises an objection based on a baraita: It is stated: “And afterwards she bore a daughter, and called her name Dina” (Genesis 30:21). The Gemara asks: What is meant by the addition of the word: Afterwards? What does the verse seek to convey by emphasizing that after the birth of Zebulun she gave birth to Dina? Rav said: After Leah passed judgment on herself and said: Twelve tribes are destined to descend from Jacob, six came from me and four from the maidservants, that is ten, and if this fetus is male, my sister Rachel will not even be the equivalent of one the maidservants; immediately the fetus was transformed into a daughter, as it is stated: And she called her name Dina; meaning she named her after her judgment din. The Gemara rejects this: One does not mention miraculous acts to teach general halakha.,The Gemara introduces an alternative explanation: And if you wish, say instead that the story of Leah and her prayer with regard to the fetus was within forty days of conception. As it was taught in a baraita: During the first three days after intercourse, one should pray that the seed not putrefy, that it will fertilize the egg and develop into a fetus. From the third day until the fortieth, one should pray that it will be male. From the fortieth day until three months, one should pray that it will not be deformed, in the shape of a flat fish, as when the fetus does not develop it assumes a shape somewhat similar to a flat sandal fish. From the third month until the sixth, one should pray that it will not be stillborn. And from the sixth month until the ninth, one should pray that it will be emerge safely. Therefore, during the first forty days from conception, one may still pray to affect the gender of the fetus.,The Gemara asks: Is prayer effective for that purpose? Didn’t Rav Yitzḥak, son of Rav Ami, say: The tradition teaches that the gender of the fetus is determined at the moment of conception. If the man emits seed first, his wife gives birth to a female; if the woman emits seed first, she gives birth to a male, as it is stated: “When a woman emitted seed and bore a male” (Leviticus 12:2). The Gemara answers: With what are we dealing here? We are dealing with a case where they both emit seed simultaneously. In that case, the gender is undetermined and prayer may be effectual.,We learned in the mishna: One who was walking along the way and heard a scream from the city, and says: May it be God’s will that this scream will not be from my house, it is a vain prayer.,The Sages taught: There was an incident involving Hillel the Elder, who was coming on the road when he heard a scream in the city. He said: I am certain that the scream is not coming from my house. And of him, the verse says: “He shall not be afraid of evil tidings; his heart is steadfast, trusting in the Lord” (Psalms 112:7). Rava said: Any way that you interpret this verse, its meaning is clear. It can be interpreted from beginning to end or it can be interpreted from end to beginning. The Gemara explains: It can be interpreted from beginning to end: Why is it that: He shall not be afraid of evil tidings? Because his heart is steadfast, trusting in the Lord. The Gemara continues: And it can be interpreted from end to beginning: One whose heart is steadfast, trusting in the Lord is a person who shall not be afraid of evil tidings.,The Gemara relates: This student was once walking after Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, in the marketplace of Zion. Rabbi Yishmael saw that the student was afraid. He said to him: You are a sinner, as it is written: “The transgressors in Zion are afraid, trembling has seized the ungodly” (Isaiah 33:14). The student replied: And is it not written: “Happy is the man that fears always” (Proverbs 28:14)? Rabbi Yishmael said to him: That verse is written with regard to matters of Torah, that one should be afraid lest he forget them. For everything else, one must trust in God.,In a similar vein, the Gemara relates: Yehuda bar Natan was coming and going after Rav Hamnuna. Yehuda bar Natan sighed; Rav Hamnuna said to him: Do you wish to bring suffering upon yourself; as it is stated: “For that which I did fear is come upon me, and that which I was afraid of has overtaken me” (Job 3:25)? He responded: Is it not said: “Happy is the man who fears always”? Rav Hamnuna answered: That verse is written with regard to matters of Torah.,We learned in the mishna: One who enters a large city recites two prayers; Ben Azzai says he recites four prayers.,The Sages taught the details of Ben Azzai’s teaching in a baraita: rUpon his entrance to the city what does he recite? rMay it be Your will, O Lord my God, that You bring me into this city to peace. rAfter he entered the city, he recites: I thank You, O Lord my God, that You brought me into this city to peace. rWhen he seeks to leave the city, he recites: May it be Your will, O Lord my God and God of my ancestors, that You take me out of this city to peace. rAfter he left, he recites: I give thanks before You, O Lord my God, that You took me out of this city to peace; rand just as You took me out to peace, rso too lead me to peace, support me to peace, direct my steps to peace, rand rescue me from the hand of any enemy or those lying in ambush along the way.,Rav Mattana said: This was taught only with regard to a city where criminals are not tried and executed, as in a place like that he may be killed without trial. However, in a city where criminals are tried and executed, these prayers do not apply, as if one is not guilty he will not be harmed.,Some say that Rav Mattana said the opposite: Even in a city where criminals are tried and executed one must pray for mercy, as sometimes he may not encounter a person who will plead in his favor.,The Sages taught: One who enters a Roman bathhouse, where a fire burns beneath the pool of water used for bathing, and where there is the risk of collapse, says: rMay it be Your will, O Lord my God, that you save me from this and similar matters, rand do not let ruin or iniquity befall me, rand if ruin or iniquity does befall me, let my death be atonement for all of my transgressions.,Abaye said: One should not say: If ruin befalls me, so as not to open his mouth to Satan and provoke him. As Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said and as it was taught in a baraita in the name of Rabbi Yosei: One should never open his mouth to Satan by raising, at his own initiative, the possibility of mishap or death.,Rav Yosef said: What is the verse that alludes to this? As it is written: “We should have almost been as Sodom, we should have been like unto Gomorrah” (Isaiah 1:9), after which what did the prophet reply to them? “Hear the word of the Lord, rulers of Sodom; give ear unto the law of our God, people of Gomorrah” (Isaiah 1:10). After the analogy to Sodom was raised, it was realized.,Returning to the subject of the Roman bathhouse, the Gemara asks: When he emerges from the bathhouse, what does he say? Rav Aḥa said: I give thanks to You, Lord, that You saved me from the fire.,The Gemara relates: Rabbi Abbahu entered a bathhouse when the bathhouse floor collapsed beneath him and a miracle transpired on his behalf. He stood on a pillar and saved one hundred and one men with one arm. He held one or two people in his arm, with others holding on them and so on, so that all were saved. He said: This is confirmation of the statement of Rav Aḥa, who said that one should offer thanks upon leaving the bathhouse safely.,As Rav Aḥa said: One who enters to let blood says: rMay it be Your will, O Lord my God, rthat this enterprise be for healing and that You should heal me. rAs You are a faithful God of healing and Your healing is truth. rBecause it is not the way of people to heal, but they have become accustomed. rRav Aḥa is saying that people should not practice medicine as they lack the ability to heal; rather, healing should be left to God.,Abaye responded and said: One should not say this, as it was taught in the school of Rabbi Yishmael that from the verse, “And shall cause him to be thoroughly healed” (Exodus 21:19), from here we derive that permission is granted to a doctor to heal. The practice of medicine is in accordance with the will of God.,As for bloodletting, the Gemara asks: When one stands after having let blood, what does he say? Rav Aḥa said: He recites in gratitude: Blessed…Who heals without payment. ' None |
|
19. Babylonian Talmud, Hagigah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian • Zoroastrianism, as similar to Jewish priests and rabbis • silence during meals, Zoroastrian practice of
Found in books: Herman, Rubenstein (2018), The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World. 290; Mokhtarian (2021), Rabbis, Sorcerers, Kings, and Priests: The Culture of the Talmud in Ancient Iran. 182; Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 100, 105; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 100, 105
| 5a ומחריא תנורא שקלתא ואנחתא אגבה דכרעה קדחא ואיתרע מזלה ואייתיתה,א"ל רב ביבי בר אביי אית לכו רשותא למיעבד הכי אמר ליה ולא כתיב ויש נספה בלא משפט א"ל והכתיב (קהלת א, ד) דור הולך ודור בא,אמר דרעינא להו אנא עד דמלו להו לדרא והדר משלימנא ליה לדומה א"ל סוף סוף שניה מאי עבדת אמר אי איכא צורבא מרבנן דמעביר במיליה מוסיפנא להו ליה והויא חלופיה,רבי יוחנן כי מטי להאי קרא בכי (איוב ב, ג) ותסיתני בו לבלעו חנם עבד שרבו מסיתין לו וניסת תקנה יש לו רבי יוחנן כי מטי להאי קרא בכי (איוב טו, טו) הן בקדושיו לא יאמין אי בקדושיו לא יאמין במאן יאמין,יומא חד הוה קא אזיל באורחא חזייה לההוא גברא דהוה מנקיט תאני שביק הנך דמטו ושקיל הנך דלא מטו א"ל לאו הני מעלן טפי א"ל הני לאורחא בעינן להו הני נטרן והני לא נטרן אמר היינו דכתיב הן בקדושיו לא יאמין,איני והא ההוא תלמידא דהוה בשיבבותיה דרבי אלכסנדרי ושכיב אדזוטר ואמר אי בעי האי מרבנן הוה חיי ואם איתא דלמא מהן בקדושיו לא יאמין הוה ההוא מבעט ברבותיו הוה,רבי יוחנן כי מטי להאי קרא בכי (מלאכי ג, ה) וקרבתי אליכם למשפט והייתי עד ממהר במכשפים ובמנאפים ובנשבעים לשקר ובעושקי שכר שכיר עבד שרבו מקרבו לדונו וממהר להעידו תקנה יש לו,אמר רבי יוחנן בן זכאי אוי לנו ששקל עלינו הכתוב קלות כחמורות,אמר ריש לקיש כל המטה דינו של גר כאילו מטה דינו של מעלה שנאמר (מלאכי ג, ה) ומטי גר ומטי כתיב א"ר חנינא בר פפא כל העושה דבר ומתחרט בו מוחלין לו מיד שנאמר (מלאכי ג, ה) ולא יראוני הא יראוני מוחלין להם מיד,רבי יוחנן כי מטי להאי קרא בכי (קהלת יב, יד) כי את כל מעשה האלהים יביא במשפט על כל נעלם עבד שרבו שוקל לו שגגות כזדונות תקנה יש לו,מאי על כל נעלם אמר רב זה ההורג כינה בפני חברו ונמאס בה ושמואל אמר זה הרק בפני חבירו ונמאס,מאי אם טוב ואם רע אמרי דבי ר\' ינאי זה הנותן צדקה לעני בפרהסיא כי הא דרבי ינאי חזייה לההוא גברא דקא יהיב זוזא לעני בפרהסיא אמר ליה מוטב דלא יהבת ליה מהשתא דיהבת ליה וכספתיה,דבי ר\' שילא אמרי זה הנותן צדקה לאשה בסתר דקא מייתי לה לידי חשדא רבא אמר זה המשגר לאשתו בשר שאינו מחותך בערבי שבתות,והא רבא משגר שאני בת רב חסדא דקים ליה בגווה דבקיאה,רבי יוחנן כי מטי להאי קרא בכי (דברים לא, כא) והיה כי תמצאן אותו רעות רבות וצרות עבד שרבו ממציא לו רעות וצרות תקנה יש לו,מאי רעות וצרות אמר רב רעות שנעשות צרות זו לזו כגון זיבורא ועקרבא,ושמואל אמר זה הממציא לו מעות לעני בשעת דוחקו אמר רבא היינו דאמרי אינשי זוזא לעללא לא שכיחא לתליתא שכיח,(דברים לא, יז) וחרה אפי בו ביום ההוא ועזבתים והסתרתי פני מהם אמר רב ברדלא בר טביומי אמר רב כל שאינו בהסתר פנים אינו מהם כל שאינו בוהיה לאכול'5b אינו מהם אמרו ליה רבנן לרבא מר לא בהסתר פנים איתיה ולא בוהיה לאכול איתיה אמר להו מי ידעיתו כמה משדרנא בצנעא בי שבור מלכא אפי\' הכי יהבו ביה רבנן עינייהו אדהכי שדור דבי שבור מלכא וגרבוהו אמר היינו דתניא אמר רבן שמעון בן גמליאל כל מקום שנתנו חכמים עיניהם או מיתה או עוני,(דברים לא, יח) ואנכי הסתר אסתיר פני ביום ההוא אמר רבא אמר הקב"ה אף על פי שהסתרתי פני מהם בחלום אדבר בו רב יוסף אמר ידו נטויה עלינו שנאמר (ישעיהו נא, טז) ובצל ידי כסיתיך,ר\' יהושע בן חנניה הוה קאי בי קיסר אחוי ליה ההוא אפיקורוסא עמא דאהדרינהו מריה לאפיה מיניה אחוי ליה ידו נטויה עלינו אמר ליה קיסר לר\' יהושע מאי אחוי לך עמא דאהדרינהו מריה לאפיה מיניה ואנא מחוינא ליה ידו נטויה עלינו,אמרו ליה לההוא מינא מאי אחויית ליה עמא דאהדרינהו מריה מיניה ומאי אחוי לך לא ידענא אמרו גברא דלא ידע מאי מחוו ליה במחוג יחוי קמי מלכא אפקוהו וקטלוהו,כי קא ניחא נפשיה דרבי יהושע בן חנניה אמרו ליה רבנן מאי תיהוי עלן מאפיקורוסין אמר להם (ירמיהו מט, ז) אבדה עצה מבנים נסרחה חכמתם כיון שאבדה עצה מבנים נסרחה חכמתן של אומות העולם,ואי בעית אימא מהכא (בראשית לג, יב) ויאמר נסעה ונלכה ואלכה לנגדך,רבי אילא הוה סליק בדרגא דבי רבה בר שילא שמעיה לינוקא דהוה קא קרי (עמוס ד, יג) כי הנה יוצר הרים ובורא רוח ומגיד לאדם מה שיחו אמר עבד שרבו מגיד לו מה שיחו תקנה יש לו מאי מה שיחו אמר רב אפילו שיחה יתירה שבין איש לאשתו מגידים לו לאדם בשעת מיתה,איני והא רב כהנא הוה גני תותי פורייה דרב ושמעיה דסח וצחק ועשה צרכיו אמר דמי פומיה דרב כמאן דלא טעים ליה תבשילא אמר ליה כהנא פוק לאו אורח ארעא,לא קשיא כאן דצריך לרצויה הא דלא צריך לרצויה,(ירמיהו יג, יז) ואם לא תשמעוה במסתרים תבכה נפשי מפני גוה אמר רב שמואל בר איניא משמיה דרב מקום יש לו להקב"ה ומסתרים שמו מאי מפני גוה אמר רב שמואל בר יצחק מפני גאוותן של ישראל שניטלה מהם ונתנה לעובדי כוכבים ר\' שמואל בר נחמני אמר מפני גאוותה של מלכות שמים,ומי איכא בכיה קמיה הקב"ה והאמר רב פפא אין עציבות לפני הקב"ה שנאמר (דברי הימים א טז, כז) הוד והדר לפניו עוז וחדוה במקומו לא קשיא הא בבתי גואי הא בבתי בראי,ובבתי בראי לא והא כתיב (ישעיהו כב, יב) ויקרא אדני ה\' צבאות ביום ההוא לבכי ולמספד ולקרחה ולחגור שק שאני חרבן בית המקדש דאפילו מלאכי שלום בכו שנאמר (ישעיהו לג, ז) הן אראלם צעקו חוצה מלאכי שלום מר יבכיון:,(ירמיהו יג, יז) ודמע תדמע ותרד עיני דמעה כי נשבה עדר ה\' אמר ר\' אלעזר שלש דמעות הללו למה אחת על מקדש ראשון ואחת על מקדש שני ואחת על ישראל שגלו ממקומן ואיכא דאמרי אחת על ביטול תורה,בשלמא למאן דאמר על ישראל שגלו היינו דכתיב כי נשבה עדר ה\' אלא למאן דאמר על ביטול תורה מאי כי נשבה עדר ה\' כיון שגלו ישראל ממקומן אין לך ביטול תורה גדול מזה,תנו רבנן שלשה הקב"ה בוכה עליהן בכל יום על שאפשר לעסוק בתורה ואינו עוסק ועל שאי אפשר לעסוק בתורה ועוסק ועל פרנס המתגאה על הצבור,רבי הוה נקיט ספר קינות וקא קרי בגויה כי מטא להאי פסוקא (איכה ב, א) השליך משמים ארץ נפל מן ידיה אמר מאיגרא רם לבירא עמיקתא,רבי ורבי חייא הוו שקלי ואזלי באורחא כי מטו לההוא מתא אמרי איכא צורבא מרבנן הכא נזיל וניקביל אפיה אמרי איכא צורבא מרבנן הכא ומאור עינים הוא אמר ליה ר\' חייא לרבי תיב את לא תזלזל בנשיאותך איזיל אנא ואקביל אפיה,תקפיה ואזל בהדיה כי הוו מיפטרי מיניה אמר להו אתם הקבלתם פנים הנראים ואינן רואין תזכו להקביל פנים הרואים ואינן נראין אמר ליה איכו השתא מנעתן מהאי בירכתא,אמרו ליה ממאן שמיעא לך מפרקיה דרבי יעקב שמיע לי דרבי יעקב איש כפר חיטייא הוה מקביל אפיה דרביה כל יומא כי קש א"ל לא נצטער מר דלא יכיל מר,אמר ליה מי זוטר מאי דכתיב בהו ברבנן (תהלים מט, י) ויחי עוד לנצח לא יראה השחת כי יראה חכמים ימותו ומה הרואה חכמים במיתתן יחיה בחייהן על אחת כמה וכמה,רב אידי אבוה דרבי יעקב בר אידי הוה רגיל דהוה אזיל תלתא ירחי באורחא וחד יומא בבי רב והוו קרו ליה רבנן בר בי רב דחד יומא חלש דעתיה קרי אנפשיה (איוב יב, ד) שחוק לרעהו אהיה וגו\' א"ל ר\' יוחנן במטותא מינך לא תעניש להו רבנן,נפק ר\' יוחנן לבי מדרשא ודרש (ישעיהו נח, ב) ואותי יום יום ידרשון ודעת דרכי יחפצון וכי ביום דורשין אותו ובלילה אין דורשין אותו אלא לומר לך כל העוסק בתורה אפי\' יום אחד בשנה מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו עסק כל השנה כולה,וכן במדת פורענות דכתיב (במדבר יד, לד) במספר הימים אשר תרתם את הארץ וכי ארבעים שנה חטאו והלא ארבעים יום חטאו אלא לומר לך כל העובר עבירה אפי\' יום אחד בשנה מעלה עליו הכתוב כאילו עבר כל השנה כולה:,אי זהו קטן כל שאינו יכול לרכוב על כתפו של אביו: מתקיף לה רבי זירא ' None | 5a and sweeping the oven. She took the fire and set it on her foot; she was scalded and her luck suffered, which gave me the opportunity, and I brought her.,Rav Beivai bar Abaye said to the Angel of Death: Do you have the right to act in this manner, to take someone before his time? The Angel of Death said to him: And is it not written: “But there are those swept away without justice” (Proverbs 13:23)? Rav Beivai said to him: And isn’t it written: “One generation passes away, and another generation comes” (Ecclesiastes 1:4), which indicates that there is a predetermined amount of time for the life of every generation.,He said to him: I shepherd them, not releasing them until the years of the generation are completed, and then I pass them on to the angel Duma who oversees the souls of the dead. Rav Beivai said to him: Ultimately, what do you do with his extra years, those taken away from this individual? The Angel of Death said to him: If there is a Torah scholar who disregards his personal matters, i.e., who overlooks the insults of those who wrong him, I add those years to him and he becomes the deceased’s replacement for that time.,§ The Gemara returns to the previous topic. When Rabbi Yoḥa reached this verse, he cried, as God said to the Satan about Job: “Although you did incite Me against him, to destroy him without cause” (Job 2:3). Rabbi Yoḥa said: With regard to a slave whose master is one whom others incite to act harshly against the slave and the master is incited to do so, is there a remedy for the slave? Additionally, when Rabbi Yoḥa reached this verse, he cried: “Behold He puts no trust in His sacred ones” (Job 15:15), saying: If He does not place trust in His sacred ones, in whom does He place trust?,The Gemara relates: One day Rabbi Yoḥa was walking along the road, and he saw a certain man who was picking figs in an unusual manner: He left the ones that had reached the stage of ripeness and took those that had not yet reached that state. Rabbi Yoḥa said to him: Aren’t these ripe ones much better? He said to him: I need these dates for the road; these that are not yet ripe will be preserved, and these that are already ripe will not be preserved. Rabbi Yoḥa said: This is the same as is written: “Behold He puts no trust in His sacred ones”; there are righteous people whom God takes from this world before their time, as He knows that in the future they will stumble.,The Gemara asks: Is that so? But there was a certain student in the neighborhood of Rabbi Alexandri, and he died while he was still young. And Rabbi Alexandri said: If this young Sage had wanted, he would have lived, i.e., his actions caused him to die young. And if it is so, as Rabbi Yoḥa suggested, perhaps this student was from those concerning whom it is written: “Behold he puts no trust in his sacred ones,” and it was not his sins that caused his death. The Gemara answers: That student was one who acted irreverently toward his teachers, and Rabbi Alexandri knew of his improper behavior.,When Rabbi Yoḥa reached this verse, he cried: “And I will come near to you to judgment; and I will be a swift witness against the sorcerers, and against the adulterers, and against false witnesses, and against those who oppress the hireling in his wages, the widow, and the fatherless, and who turn aside the convert from his right, and do not fear Me, says the Lord” (Malachi\xa03:5). He said: With regard to a slave whose master comes near to him to judge him and is swift to testify against him, is there a remedy for him?,With regard to that same verse, Rabbi Yoḥa ben Zakkai said: Woe to us, as the verse weighs lenient mitzvot for us like more stringent mitzvot, as it lists both those who violate sins punishable by death, e.g., sorcerers and adulterers, with those who violate apparently less severe sins, e.g., those who withhold payment from a hired worker.,Reish Lakish said: Anyone who distorts the judgment of a convert, it is considered as if he distorted the judgment of the One above, as it is stated: “And who turn aside umattei the convert” (Malachi\xa03:5). This term is written as: Umatti, turn Me aside, i.e., one who distorts the judgment of a convert it considered as though he distorts the judgment of God, as it were. Rabbi Ḥanina bar Pappa said: Anyone who does something sinful and regrets it, he is forgiven immediately, as it is stated: “And do not fear Me” (Malachi 3:5), which indicates that if they do fear Me and are embarrassed to sin before God, they are forgiven immediately.,Additionally, when Rabbi Yoḥa reached this verse, he cried: “For God shall bring every work into the judgment concerning every hidden thing” (Ecclesiastes\xa012:14). He said: With regard to a slave whose master weighs his unwitting sins like intentional ones, i.e., God punishes him even for an action that was hidden from him, is there a remedy for him?,The Gemara asks: What sin is the verse referring to when it states: “Concerning every hidden thing”? Rav said: This is referring to one who kills a louse in the presence of another and his friend is disgusted by it. God judges him for the unintentional discomfort he caused. And similarly, Shmuel said: This is referring to one who spits in the presence of another and his friend is disgusted by his action.,The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the end of that verse: “Whether it be good, or whether it be evil” (Ecclesiastes 12:14)? This verse indicates that God judges man harshly even for the good deeds he performs. The Sages from the school of Rabbi Yannai say: This verse is referring to one who gives charity to a poor person in public. Although he performed a good deed, he embarrassed the pauper, as in this case of Rabbi Yannai, who saw a certain man who was giving a dinar to a poor person in public. He said to him: It would have been better had you not given it to him than what you did, as now you gave it to him and embarrassed him.,The Sages from the school of Rabbi Sheila say: This verse is referring to one who gives charity to a woman in private, as he subjects her to suspicion, for people might think that he is engaging her services as a prostitute. Rava said: This is referring to one who sends his wife meat that is not sliced, i.e., that has not yet had the prohibited sciatic nerve removed, on Shabbat eve. Since she is in a hurry she might not notice and will perhaps cook the prohibited meat.,The Gemara asks: But yet Rava himself would send this type of meat to his wife on Shabbat eve. The Gemara answers: The daughter of Rav Ḥisda, Rava’s wife, is different, as he was certain about her that she was an expert in this matter. Rava trusted that his wife would realize the sciatic nerve had not been removed even when she was in a hurry on Shabbat eve.,Additionally, when Rabbi Yoḥa reached this verse, he cried: “Then it shall come to pass, when many evils and troubles are come upon them” (Deuteronomy\xa031:21). He said: With regard to a slave whose master brings upon him evils and troubles, is there a remedy for him?,The Gemara asks: What is the verse referring to when it states: “Evils and troubles”? Rav said: Evils that become troubles for one another, i.e., the remedy for one problem has a deleterious effect on the other. For example, one who is stung by a hornet and a scorpion. The sting of a hornet must be treated only with a cold ointment, while that of a scorpion must be treated with a hot ointment. As these medicaments are mutually exclusive, one cannot treat both stings at the same time.,And Shmuel said: This verse is referring to one who provides money to a poor person as a loan during his exigent ficial circumstances, but immediately after the borrower is released from the initial pressure by receiving the loan, the lender begins to demand repayment, subjecting the recipient to further pressure. Rava said that this explains the folk saying that people say: A dinar for produce is not found; for hanging it can be found. A poor person cannot find money to buy basic necessities; however, when the lenders hang on and pressure him he must come up with the money somehow.,On the same topic the Gemara states: “Then My anger shall be kindled against them in that day, and I will forsake them, and I will hide My face from them, and they shall be devoured” (Deuteronomy\xa031:17). Rav Bardela bar Tavyumei said that Rav said: Anyone who is not subject to His hiding of the face, i.e., whose prayers are invariably answered, is not from the Jewish people, as the verse states about the Jewish people that God will hide His face from them as a result of their sins. Similarly, anyone who is not subject to: “And they shall be devoured,” i.e., gentiles do not steal his money,'5b is not from among them. The Sages said to Rava: Master, you are not subject to His hiding of the face, as your prayers are heard, and you are not subject to: “And they shall be devoured,” as the authorities take nothing from you. He said to them: Do you know how many gifts I send in private to the house of King Shapur? Although it might seem that the monarchy does not take anything from me, in actuality I am forced to give many bribes. Even so, the Sages looked upon Rava with suspicion. In the meantime, messengers from the house of King Shapur sent for him and imprisoned him to extort more money from him. Rava said: This is as it is taught in a baraita that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: Wherever the Sages looked upon someone, it resulted in either death or poverty.,With regard to the verse: “And I will hide my face in that day” (Deuteronomy\xa031:18), Rava said that the Holy One, Blessed be He, said: Even though I hid my face from them and My Divine Presence is not revealed, nevertheless: “I speak with him in a dream” (Numbers 12:6). Rav Yosef said: His hand is outstretched, guarding over us, as it is stated: “And I have covered you in the shadow of my hand” (Isaiah 51:16).,The Gemara relates: Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥaya was standing in the house of the Caesar. A certain heretic, who was also present, gestured to him, indicating that his was the nation whose Master, God, turned His face away from it. Rabbi Yehoshua gestured to him that His hand is outstretched over us in protection. The Caesar said to Rabbi Yehoshua: What did he gesture to you, and how did you respond? He replied: He indicated that mine is the nation whose Master turned His face from it, and I gestured to him that His hand is outstretched over us.,The members of the Caesar’s household said to that heretic: What did you gesture to him? He said to them: I gestured that his is the nation whose Master has turned His face from it. They asked: And what did he gesture to you? He said to them: I don’t know; I did not understand. They said: How can a man who does not know what others gesture to him dare to gesture in the presence of the king? They took him out and killed him.,The Gemara relates: When Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥaya was dying, the Sages said to him: What will become of us, from the threat of the heretics, when there is no scholar like you who can refute them? He said to them that the verse states: “Is wisdom no more in Teiman? Has counsel perished from the prudent? Has their wisdom vanished?” (Jeremiah\xa049:7). He explained: Since counsel has perished from the prudent, from the Jewish people, the wisdom of the nations of the world has vanished as well, and there will be no superior scholars among them.,And if you wish, say instead that the same idea can be derived from here: “And he said: Let us take our journey, and let us go, and I will go corresponding to you” (Genesis\xa033:12). Just as the Jewish people rise and fall, so too, the nations of the world simultaneously rise and fall, and they will never have an advantage.,The Gemara relates that Rabbi Ila was ascending the stairs in the house of Rabba bar Sheila, a children’s teacher. He heard a child who was reading a verse out loud: “For, lo, He Who forms the mountains, and creates the wind, and declares to man what is his speech” (Amos 4:13). Rabbi Ila said: With regard to a servant whose master declares to him what is his proper speech, is there a remedy for him? The Gemara asks. What is the meaning of the phrase: “What is his speech”? Rav said: Even frivolous speech that is between a man and his wife before engaging in relations is declared to a person at the time of death, and he will have to account for it.,The Gemara asks: Is that so? Is it prohibited for a man to speak in this manner with his wife? Wasn’t Rav Kahana lying beneath Rav’s bed, and he heard Rav chatting and laughing with his wife, and performing his needs, i.e., having relations with her. Rav Kahana said out loud: The mouth of Rav is like one who has never eaten a cooked dish, i.e., his behavior is lustful. Rav said to him: Kahana, leave, as this is not proper conduct. This shows that Rav himself engaged in frivolous talk before relations.,The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. Here, where this type of speech is permitted, it is referring to a situation where he must appease his wife before relations, and therefore this speech is appropriate. However, this statement, that it is prohibited, is referring to a situation where he doesn’t need to appease her. In these circumstances, it is prohibited to engage in excessively lighthearted chatter with one’s wife.,The verse states: “But if you will not hear it, my soul shall weep in secret bemistarim for your pride” (Jeremiah 13:17). Rav Shmuel bar Inya said in the name of Rav: The Holy One, Blessed be He, has a place where He cries, and its name is Mistarim. What is the meaning of “for your pride”? Rav Shmuel bar Yitzḥak said: God cries due to the pride of the Jewish people, which was taken from them and given to the gentile nations. Rav Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: He cries due to the pride of the kingdom of Heaven, which was removed from the world.,The Gemara asks: But is there crying before the Holy One, Blessed be He? Didn’t Rav Pappa say: There is no sadness before the Holy One, Blessed be He, as it is stated: “Honor and majesty are before Him; strength and gladness are in His place” (I\xa0Chronicles 16:27)? The Gemara responds: This is not difficult. This statement, that God cries, is referring to the innermost chambers, where He can cry in secret, whereas this statement, that He does not cry, is referring to the outer chambers.,The Gemara asks: And doesn’t God cry in the outer chambers? Isn’t it written: “And on that day the Lord, the God of hosts, called to weeping, and to mourning, and to baldness, and to girding with sackcloth” (Isaiah 22:12)? The Gemara responds: The destruction of the Temple is different, as even the angels of peace cried, as it is stated: “Behold, their valiant ones cry without; the angels of peace weep bitterly” (Isaiah 33:7).,The verse continues: “And my eye shall weep sore, and run down with tears, because the Lord’s flock is carried away captive” (Jeremiah 13:17). Rabbi Elazar said: Why these three references to tears in the verse? One is for the First Temple; one is for the Second Temple; and one is for the Jewish people who were exiled from their place. And there are those who say: The last one is for the unavoidable dereliction of the study of Torah in the wake of the exile.,The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that the last tear is for the Jewish people who were exiled, this is as it is written: “Because the Lord’s flock is carried away captive.” However, according to the one who said that this tear is for the dereliction of the study of Torah, what is the meaning of: “Because the Lord’s flock is carried away captive”? The Gemara answers: Since the Jewish people were exiled from their place, there is no greater involuntary dereliction of the study of Torah than that which was caused by this.,The Sages taught that there are three types of people for whom the Holy One, Blessed be He, cries every day: For one who is able to engage in Torah study and does not engage in it; and for one who is unable to engage in Torah study and nevertheless he endeavors and engages in it; and for a leader who lords over the community.,The Gemara relates: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was holding the book of Lamentations and was reading from it. When he reached the verse: “He has cast down from heaven to earth the beauty of Israel” (Lamentations 2:1), in his distress the book fell from his hand. He said: From a high roof to a deep pit, i.e., it is terrible to tumble from the sky to the ground.,§ The Gemara relates: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and Rabbi Ḥiyya were walking along the road. When they arrived at a certain city, they said: Is there a Torah scholar here whom we can go and greet? The people of the city said: There is a Torah scholar here but he is blind. Rabbi Ḥiyya said to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: You sit here; do not demean your dignified status as Nasi to visit someone beneath your stature. I will go and greet him.,Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi grabbed him and went with him anyway, and together they greeted the blind scholar. When they were leaving him, he said to them: You greeted one who is seen and does not see; may you be worthy to greet the One Who sees and is not seen. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to Rabbi Ḥiyya: Now, if I had listened to you and not gone to greet him, you would have prevented me from receiving this blessing.,They said to the blind scholar: From whom did you hear that we are worthy of this blessing? He said to them: I heard it from the instruction of Rabbi Ya’akov, as Rabbi Ya’akov of the village of Ḥitiyya would greet his teacher every day. When Rabbi Ya’akov grew elderly, his teacher said to him: Do not despair, my Master, that my Master is unable to make the effort to greet me. It is better that you should not visit me.,Rabbi Ya’akov said to him: Is it a minor matter, that which is written about the Sages: “That he should still live always, that he should not see the pit. For he sees that wise men die” (Psalms\xa049:10–11)? In this regard an a fortiori reference applies: Just as one who sees Sages in their death will live, all the more so one who sees them in their lifetime. From here the blind scholar learned the importance of greeting Torah scholars, which is why he blessed the Sages who came to greet him.,The Gemara relates: Rav Idi, father of Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi, would regularly travel three months on the road to reach the study hall and as he would immediately travel back again to arrive home for the festival of Sukkot, he spent only one day in the school of Rav. And the Sages would disparagingly call him: A student of Torah for one day. He was offended and read the following verse about himself: “I am as one that is a laughingstock to his neighbor, a man who calls upon God, and He answers him” (Job 12:4). Rabbi Yoḥa said to him: Please do not punish the Sages, i.e., do not take offense and be harsh with them, as this will cause them to be punished by God.,Rabbi Yoḥa left Rav Idi and went to the study hall and taught: “Yet they seek Me daily, and delight to know My ways” (Isaiah 58:2). But is it possible that only during the day they seek Him and at night they do not seek Him? What is the meaning of daily? Rather, this verse comes to say to you that with regard to anyone who engages in Torah study even one day a year, the verse ascribes him credit as though he engaged in Torah study the entire year.,And the same applies to the attribute of punishment, as it is written: “After the number of the days in which you spied out the land, even forty days, for every day a year, shall you bear your iniquities” (Numbers\xa014:34). But did they sin for forty years? Didn’t they sin for only forty days? Rather, this comes to say to you that anyone who transgresses a sin even one day a year, the verse ascribes him liability as though he transgressed the entire year.,§ The mishna taught: Who is a minor who is exempt from the mitzva of appearance in the Temple? Any child who is unable to ride on his father’s shoulders and ascend from Jerusalem to the Temple Mount. Rabbi Zeira strongly objects to this: ' None |
|
20. Babylonian Talmud, Moed Qatan, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Targum, and the Zoroastrian priests • Tort Law, in Zoroastrian texts • Zoroastrian • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrian, beliefs • Zoroastrian, context • Zoroastrian, tradition • Zoroastrianism • Zoroastrianism, as similar to Jewish priests and rabbis • Zoroastrianism, kirbag • Zoroastrianism, theological doctrines • amgûšā (Zoroastrian priest), association with magic, in Hellenism and in the Babylonian Talmud • fire temples, Zoroastrian, in the Babylonian Talmud • idolatry, in Zoroastrian texts • priests, Zoroastrian, portrayals of, in the Babylonian Talmud, as sorcerers and corrupt administrators
Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 173, 180; Herman, Rubenstein (2018), The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World. 115, 289, 290; Mokhtarian (2021), Rabbis, Sorcerers, Kings, and Priests: The Culture of the Talmud in Ancient Iran. 125, 204; Schick (2021), Intention in Talmudic Law: Between Thought and Deed, 99; Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 105; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 105, 169
| 26a ואלו קרעין שאין מתאחין הקורע על אביו ועל אמו ועל רבו שלימדו תורה ועל נשיא ועל אב ב"ד ועל שמועות הרעות ועל ברכת השם ועל ספר תורה שנשרף ועל ערי יהודה ועל המקדש ועל ירושלים וקורע על מקדש ומוסיף על ירושלים,אביו ואמו ורבו שלימדו תורה מנלן דכתיב (מלכים ב ב, יב) ואלישע ראה והוא מצעק אבי אבי רכב ישראל ופרשיו אבי אבי זה אביו ואמו רכב ישראל ופרשיו זה רבו שלימדו תורה,מאי משמע כדמתרגם רב יוסף רבי רבי דטב להון לישראל בצלותיה מרתיכין ופרשין,ולא מתאחין מנלן דכתיב (מלכים ב ב, יב) ויחזק בבגדיו ויקרעם לשנים קרעים ממשמע שנאמר ויקרעם איני יודע שלשנים אלא מלמד שקרועים ועומדים לשנים לעולם,אמר ליה ריש לקיש לרבי יוחנן אליהו חי הוא אמר ליה כיון דכתיב (מלכים ב ב, יב) ולא ראהו עוד לגבי דידיה כמת דמי,נשיא ואב בית דין ושמועות הרעות מנלן דכתיב (שמואל ב א, יא) ויחזק דוד בבגדיו ויקרעם וגם כל האנשים אשר אתו ויספדו ויבכו ויצומו עד הערב על שאול ועל יהונתן בנו ועל עם ה\' ועל בית ישראל כי נפלו בחרב,שאול זה נשיא יהונתן זה אב ב"ד על עם ה\' ועל בית ישראל אלו שמועות הרעות,א"ל רב בר שבא לרב כהנא ואימא עד דהוו כולהו א"ל על על הפסיק הענין,ומי קרעינן אשמועות הרעות והא אמרו ליה לשמואל קטל שבור מלכא תריסר אלפי יהודאי במזיגת קסרי ולא קרע לא אמרו אלא ברוב צבור וכמעשה שהיה,ומי קטל שבור מלכא יהודאי והא א"ל שבור מלכא לשמואל תיתי לי דלא קטלי יהודי מעולם התם אינהו גרמי לנפשייהו דא"ר אמי לקל יתירי דמזיגת קסרי פקע שורא דלודקיא,על ברכת השם מנלן דכתיב (מלכים ב יח, לז) ויבא אליקים בן חלקיה אשר על הבית ושבנא הסופר ויואח בן אסף המזכיר אל חזקיהו קרועי בגדים,ת"ר אחד השומע ואחד השומע מפי השומע חייב לקרוע והעדים אינן חייבין לקרוע שכבר קרעו בשעה ששמעו,בשעה ששמעו מאי הוי הא קא שמעי השתא לא ס"ד דכתיב (מלכים ב יט, א) ויהי כשמוע המלך חזקיהו ויקרע את בגדיו המלך קרע והם לא קרעו,ולא מתאחין מנלן אתיא קריעה קריעה,ספר תורה שנשרף מנלן דכתיב (ירמיהו לו, כג) ויהי כקרא יהודי שלש דלתות וארבעה ויקרעה בתער הסופר והשלך אל האש אשר אל האח וגו\' מאי שלש דלתות וארבעה,אמרו ליה ליהויקים כתב ירמיה ספר קינות אמר להו מה כתיב ביה (איכה א, א) איכה ישבה בדד אמר להו אנא מלכא א"ל (איכה א, ב) בכה תבכה בלילה אנא מלכא (איכה א, ג) גלתה יהודה מעוני אנא מלכא (איכה א, ד) דרכי ציון אבלות אנא מלכא,(איכה א, ה) היו צריה לראש אמר להו מאן אמרה (איכה א, ה) כי ה\' הוגה על רוב פשעיה מיד קדר כל אזכרות שבה ושרפן באש והיינו דכתיב (ירמיהו לו, כד) ולא פחדו ולא קרעו את בגדיהם מכלל דבעו למיקרע,אמר ליה רב פפא לאביי אימר משום שמועות הרעות א"ל שמועות רעות בההיא שעתא מי הוו,א"ר חלבו אמר רב הונא הרואה ספר תורה שנקרע חייב לקרוע שתי קריעות אחד על הגויל ואחד על הכתב שנאמר (ירמיהו לו, כז) אחרי שרוף המלך את המגלה ואת הדברים,רבי אבא ורב הונא בר חייא הוו יתבי קמיה דרבי אבא בעא לאפנויי שקליה לטוטפתיה אחתיה אבי סדיא אתאי בת נעמיתא בעא למיבלעיה,אמר השתא איחייבין לי שתי קריעות א"ל מנא לך הא והא בדידי הוה עובדא ואתאי לקמיה דרב מתנה ולא הוה בידיה אתאי לקמיה דרב יהודה ואמר לי הכי אמר שמואל לא אמרו אלא בזרוע וכמעשה שהיה,ערי יהודה מנלן דכתיב (ירמיהו מא, ה) ויבאו אנשים משכם משילו ומשמרון שמונים איש מגולחי זקן וקרועי בגדים ומתגודדים ומנחה ולבונה בידם להביא בית ה\' וגו\',א"ר חלבו אמר עולא ביראה אמר ר\' אלעזר הרואה ערי יהודה בחורבנן אומר (ישעיהו סד, ט) ערי קדשך היו מדבר וקורע ירושלים בחורבנה אומר (ישעיהו סד, ט) ציון מדבר היתה ירושלם שממה וקורע בית המקדש בחורבנו אומר (ישעיהו סד, י) בית קדשנו ותפארתנו אשר הללוך אבותינו היה לשריפת אש וכל מחמדינו היה לחרבה וקורע:,קורע על מקדש ומוסיף על ירושלים: ורמינהו אחד השומע ואחד הרואה כיון שהגיע לצופים קורע וקורע על מקדש בפני עצמו ועל ירושלים בפני עצמה,לא קשיא הא דפגע במקדש ברישא הא דפגע בירושלים ברישא,תנו רבנן וכולן רשאין לשוללן ולמוללן וללוקטן ולעשותן כמין סולמות אבל לא לאחותן,אמר רב חסדא 28a אלא חיה אבל שאר נשים מניחין,ר\' אלעזר אמר אפילו שאר הנשים דכתיב (במדבר כ, א) ותמת שם מרים ותקבר שם סמוך למיתה קבורה,ואמר ר\' אלעזר אף מרים בנשיקה מתה אתיא שם שם ממשה ומפני מה לא נאמר בה על פי ה\' מפני שגנאי הדבר לאומרו,א"ר אמי למה נסמכה מיתת מרים לפרשת פרה אדומה לומר לך מה פרה אדומה מכפרת אף מיתתן של צדיקים מכפרת א"ר אלעזר למה נסמכה מיתת אהרן לבגדי כהונה מה בגדי כהונה מכפרין אף מיתתן של צדיקים מכפרת,ת"ר מת פתאום זו היא מיתה חטופה חלה יום אחד ומת זו היא מיתה דחופה ר\' חנניא בן גמליאל אומר זו היא מיתת מגפה שנאמר (יחזקאל כד, טז) בן אדם הנני לוקח ממך את מחמד עיניך במגפה וכתיב (יחזקאל כד, יח) ואדבר אל העם בבקר ותמת אשתי בערב,שני ימים ומת זו היא מיתה דחויה ג\' גערה ארבעה נזיפה חמשה זו היא מיתת כל אדם,א"ר חנין מאי קרא (דברים לא, יד) הן קרבו ימיך למות הן חד קרבו תרי ימיך תרי הא חמשה הן חד שכן בלשון יוני קורין לאחת הן,מת בחמשים שנה זו היא מיתת כרת חמשים ושתים שנה זו היא מיתתו של שמואל הרמתי ששים זו היא מיתה בידי שמים,אמר מר זוטרא מאי קרא דכתיב (איוב ה, כו) תבא בכלח אלי קבר בכלח בגימטריא שיתין הוו,שבעים שיבה שמונים גבורות דכתיב (תהלים צ, י) ימי שנותינו בהם שבעים שנה ואם בגבורות שמונים שנה אמר רבה מחמשים ועד ששים שנה זו היא מיתת כרת והאי דלא חשיב להו משום כבודו של שמואל הרמתי,רב יוסף כי הוה בר שיתין עבד להו יומא טבא לרבנן אמר נפקי לי מכרת א"ל אביי נהי דנפק ליה מר מכרת דשני מכרת דיומי מי נפיק מר א"ל נקוט לך מיהא פלגא בידך,רב הונא נח נפשיה פתאום הוו קא דייגי רבנן תנא להו זוגא דמהדייב לא שנו אלא שלא הגיע לגבורות אבל הגיע לגבורות זו היא מיתת נשיקה,אמר רבא חיי בני ומזוני לא בזכותא תליא מילתא אלא במזלא תליא מילתא דהא רבה ורב חסדא תרוייהו רבנן צדיקי הוו מר מצלי ואתי מיטרא ומר מצלי ואתי מיטרא,רב חסדא חיה תשעין ותרתין שנין רבה חיה ארבעין בי רב חסדא שיתין הלולי בי רבה שיתין תיכלי,בי רב חסדא סמידא לכלבי ולא מתבעי בי רבה נהמא דשערי לאינשי ולא משתכח,ואמר רבא הני תלת מילי בעאי קמי שמיא תרתי יהבו לי חדא לא יהבו לי חוכמתיה דרב הונא ועותריה דרב חסדא ויהבו לי ענותנותיה דרבה בר רב הונא לא יהבו לי,רב שעורים אחוה דרבא הוה יתיב קמיה דרבא חזייה דהוה קא מנמנם א"ל לימא ליה מר דלא לצערן א"ל מר לאו שושביניה הוא א"ל כיון דאימסר מזלא לא אשגח בי א"ל ליתחזי לי מר איתחזי ליה א"ל הוה ליה למר צערא א"ל כי ריבדא דכוסילתא,רבא הוה יתיב קמיה דר"נ חזייה דקא מנמנם א"ל לימא ליה מר דלא לצערן א"ל מר לאו אדם חשוב הוא א"ל מאן חשיב מאן ספין מאן רקיע,א"ל ליתחזי לי מר אתחזי ליה א"ל ה"ל למר צערא א"ל כמישחל בניתא מחלבא ואי אמר לי הקב"ה זיל בההוא עלמא כד הוית לא בעינא דנפיש בעיתותיה,רבי אלעזר הוה קאכיל תרומה איתחזי ליה א"ל תרומה קא אכילנא ולאו קודש איקרי חלפא ליה שעתא,רב ששת איתחזי ליה בשוקא אמר ליה בשוקא כבהמה איתא לגבי ביתא,רב אשי איתחזי ליה בשוקא א"ל איתרח לי תלתין יומין ואהדרי לתלמודאי דאמריתו אשרי מי שבא לכאן ותלמודו בידו ביום תלתין אתא אמר ליה מאי כולי האי קא דחקא רגליה דבר נתן ואין מלכות נוגעת בחבירתה אפילו כמלא נימא,רב חסדא לא הוה יכיל ליה דלא הוה שתיק פומיה מגירסא סליק יתיב בארזא דבי רב פקע ארזא ושתק ויכיל ליה,ר\' חייא לא הוה מצי למיקרבא ליה יומא חד אידמי ליה כעניא אתא טריף אבבא א"ל אפיק לי ריפתא אפיקו ליה א"ל ולאו קא מרחם מר אעניא אההוא גברא אמאי לא קא מרחם מר גלי ליה אחוי ליה שוטא דנורא אמצי ליה נפשיה:' ' None | 26a And these are the rents of mourning that may never be properly mended: One who rends his garments for the death his father, or for his mother, or for his teacher who taught him Torah, or for the Nasi, or for the president of the court; or upon hearing evil tidings; or hearing God’s name being blessed, which is a euphemism for hearing God’s name being cursed; or when a Torah scroll has been burned; or upon seeing the cities of Judea that were destroyed or the destroyed Temple or Jerusalem in ruins. This is the way one conducts himself when approaching Jerusalem when it lies in ruin: He first rends his garments for the Temple and then extends the rent for Jerusalem.,The Gemara elaborates upon the halakhot mentioned in this baraita: From where do we derive that one must rend his clothing for his father, his mother, and his teacher who taught him Torah? As it is written with regard to the prophet Elijah, when he ascended to Heaven in a tempest: “And Elisha saw it, and he cried, My father, my father, the chariots of Israel and their horsemen” (II\xa0Kings 2:12). The Gemara interprets this verse as follows: “My father, my father”; this comes to teach that one must rend his garments for the death of his father or mother. “The chariots of Israel and their horsemen”; this comes to include also one’s teacher who taught him Torah.,The Gemara asks: From where may it be inferred that this is referring to one’s teacher? The Gemara explains: As the verse was translated by Rav Yosef: My teacher, my teacher, who was better for the protection of the Jewish people with his prayers than an army with chariots and horsemen.,And from where do we derive that these rents are never to be properly mended? As it is written: “And he took hold of his own clothes, and rent them in two pieces” (II\xa0Kings 2:12). From the fact that it is stated: “And he rent them,” do I not know that he rent them in two pieces? Rather, when the verse adds that they were torn into two pieces, it teaches that they must remain torn in two pieces forever. Accordingly, this rent must never be properly mended.,Reish Lakish said to Rabbi Yoḥa: But isn’t Elijah still alive? Why, then, did Elisha rend his garments for him? He said to him: Since it is written: “And he saw him no more” (II\xa0Kings 2:12), Elijah was considered dead from Elisha’s perspective, and so Elisha rent his clothing for him.,§ From where do we derive that one must rend his clothing for the death of the Nasi or the president of the court and upon hearing evil tidings? As it is written, when David heard about the defeat of Israel and the death of Saul and his sons: “Then David took hold of his clothes, and rent them; and likewise all the men that were with him: And they mourned, and wept, and fasted until evening, for Saul and for Jonathan his son, and for the people of the Lord, and for the house of Israel; because they were fallen by the sword” (II\xa0Samuel 1:11–12).,The Gemara explains how the aforementioned halakhot are derived from the verse: “Saul”; this is a reference to the Nasi, as Saul was king of Israel. “Jonathan”; this is a reference to the president of the court. “For the people of the Lord, and for the house of the Israel”; these are a reference to evil tidings.,Rav bar Shaba said to Rav Kahana: But perhaps you can say that one need not rend his clothing until all these calamities occur together, and that rending clothing is performed only over a tragedy of this magnitude. He said to him: The repetition of the word “for”: “For Saul,” “for Jonathan,” and “for the people of the Lord” divides the matter and teaches that each individual misfortune is sufficient cause to rend one’s garments.,The Gemara asks: But do we actually rend our clothing upon hearing evil tidings? But didn’t they say to Shmuel: King Shapur killed twelve thousand Jews in Mezigat Caesarea, and Shmuel did not rend his clothing?The Gemara answers: They said that one must rend his clothing upon hearing evil tidings only in a case where the calamity involved the majority of the community of Israel and resembles the incident that occurred when Saul was killed and the entire nation of Israel suffered defeat.,The Gemara tangentially asks: Did King Shapur really kill Jews? But didn’t King Shapur say to Shmuel: I have a blessing coming to me, for I have never killed a Jew? The Gemara answers: King Shapur never instigated the killing of Jews; there, however, they brought it upon themselves, as Rabbi Ami said in an exaggerated manner: Due to the noise of the harp strings of Mezigat Caesarea, the walls of Laodicea were breached, for the residents of the city celebrated when they rebelled against King Shapur. Because they rebelled against him and threatened his rule, he was forced to kill them.,§ The Gemara continues its analysis of the baraita: From where do we derive that one must rend his garments upon hearing God’s name being blessed, i.e., cursed? As it is written with regard to the blasphemous words said by Rab-shakeh: “Then came Eliakim, son of Hilkiya, who was over the household, and Shebna the scribe, and Joah, son of Asaph, the recorder, to Hezekiah with their clothes rent” (II\xa0Kings 18:37).,The Sages taught a baraita with regard to this issue: Both one who actually hears the curse and one who hears from the mouth of the one who heard the curse are obligated to rend their garments. But the witnesses who testify against the person who uttered the blasphemy are not obligated to rend their clothing when they testify as to what they heard because they already rent their clothing when they heard the curse the first time.,The Gemara asks: What difference does it make that they rent their garments when they heard the curse the first time? Didn’t they hear it again now? The Gemara rejects this argument: This will not enter your mind, as it is written: “And it came to pass, when King Hezekiah heard it, that he rent his clothes” (II\xa0Kings 19:1). This indicates that the king rent his garments, but those who reported the blasphemy to him did not rend theirs, as they had already rent their garments the first time.,And from where do we derive that these rents may not be properly mended? This is derived by way of a verbal analogy between the verb rending used here with regard to Hezekiah and the verb rending used in the case of Elijah and Elisha.,§ From where do we derive that one must rend his garments when a Torah scroll has been burned? As it is written: “And it came to pass, that when Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he would cut it with a penknife, and cast it into the fire that was in the brazier” (Jeremiah 36:23). With regard to the verse itself the Gemara asks: What is meant by “three or four leaves,” and why did he cut the book only at that point?,The Gemara explains: They said to Jehoiakim: Jeremiah has written a book of Lamentations over the future downfall and destruction of Jerusalem. He said to them: What is written in it? They read him the first verse: “How does the city sit solitary” (Lamentations 1:1). He said to them: I am king, and this does not apply to me. They read him the second verse: “She weeps sore in the night” (Lamentations 1:2). He said to them: I am king, and this does not apply to me. They read him the third verse: “Judah is gone into exile due to affliction” (Lamentations 1:3). He said to them: I am king. They read to him: “The ways of Zion do mourn” (Lamentations 1:4). He said to them: I am king. These are the four leaves, or verses, that he read first.,They read him an additional verse: “Her adversaries have become the chief” (Lamentations 1:5), i.e., the reigning king will be removed from power. Once he heard this, he said to them: Who said this? They said to him: This is the continuation of the verse: “For the Lord has afflicted her for the multitude of her transgressions” (Lamentations 1:5). Immediately, he cut out all the names of God from the book and burned them in fire. This is as it is written: “Yet they were not afraid, nor rent their garments, neither the king, nor any of his servants that heard all these words” (Jeremiah 36:24). By inference, this shows that they were required to rend their clothing when they saw this.,Rav Pappa said to Abaye: Perhaps you can say that they should have rent their garments due to the evil tidings contained in the scroll and not because of the destruction of the book? Abaye said to him: Were they evil tidings at that time? This was a prophecy and not an account of current events.,Rabbi Ḥelbo said that Rav Huna said: One who sees a Torah scroll that was torn is obligated to make two rents, one for the parchment that was damaged and one for the writing, as it is stated: “Then the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, after the king had burned the scroll and the words” (Jeremiah 36:27). This implies that a separate rent must be made for each of them, both the parchment and the writing.,It was related that Rabbi Abba and Rav Huna bar Ḥiyya were sitting before Rabbi Abba. Rabbi Abba needed to relieve himself. He removed his phylacteries from his head and placed them on the cushion on which he was sitting. An ostrich came and wanted to swallow the phylacteries.,He said: Now, had it succeeded to swallow it, I would have been obligated to make two rents. He said to him: From where do you derive this? There was an incident in which I was involved and I came before Rav Mattana asking what to do, but he did not have an answer readily available. I then came before Rav Yehuda, and he said to me: Shmuel said as follows: They said that one is obligated to rend his clothing only when a Torah scroll or some other sacred book is torn by force, and it resembles the incident that occurred with Jehoiakim.,§ From where do we derive that one must rend his garments upon seeing the cities of Judea in ruin? As it is written: “There came certain men from Shechem, from Shiloh, and from Samaria, eighty people, their beards shaven, and their clothes rent, and having cut themselves, with offerings and incense in their hand, to bring to the house of the Lord” (Jeremiah 41:5). This indicates that they rent their garments upon seeing the destruction.,Rabbi Ḥelbo said that Ulla Bira’a said that Rabbi Elazar said: One who sees the cities of Judea in their desolation says: “Your sacred cities are become a wilderness” (Isaiah 64:9), and then rends his garments. One who sees Jerusalem in its desolation says: “Zion is a wilderness, Jerusalem a desolation” (Isaiah 64:9), and then rends his garments. One who sees the Temple in its desolation says: “Our sacred and our beautiful house, where our fathers praised You, is burned with fire; and all our pleasant things are laid waste” (Isaiah 64:10), and then rends his garments.,It was taught in the baraita: He first rends his garments for the Temple and then extends the rent for Jerusalem. And they raise a contradiction from another baraita that states: Both one who hears that Jerusalem is in ruin and one who sees the destruction, once he reaches Mount Scopus Tzofim, rends his garments. And he rends his garments for the Temple separately and for Jerusalem separately.,The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This baraita, which states that instead of making a separate rent for Jerusalem one may extend the first rent that he had made for the Temple, is referring to the case where one reached the Temple first, before seeing the rest of Jerusalem, and saw it in ruin. That baraita, which states that one must make separate rents for Jerusalem and for the Temple, is referring to the case where one reached Jerusalem first, and only afterward the Temple.,§ The Sages taught the following baraita: And all of these rents, one may tack them together with loose stitches, and hem them, and gather them, and fix them with imprecise ladder-like stitches. But one may not mend them with precise stitches.,Rav Ḥisda said: 28a with regard to a woman who died in childbirth, and therefore continues to bleed. But the biers of other women may be set down in the street.,Rabbi Elazar said: Even the biers of other women must not be set down in the street, as it is written: “And Miriam died there and was buried there” (Numbers 20:1), which teaches that the site of her burial was close to the place of her death. Therefore, it is preferable to bury a woman as close as possible to the place where she died.,With regard to that same verse Rabbi Elazar said further: Miriam also died by the divine kiss, just like her brother Moses. What is the source for this? This is derived through a verbal analogy between the word “there” stated with regard to Miriam and the word “there” mentioned with regard to Moses. With regard to Moses it says: “So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of Moab by the mouth of the Lord” (Deuteronomy 34:5). For what reason was it not explicitly stated with regard to her, as it is stated with regard to Moses, that she died “by the mouth of the Lord”? It is because it would be unseemly to say such a thing, that a woman died by way of a divine kiss, and therefore it is not said explicitly.,Rabbi Ami said: Why was the Torah portion that describes the death of Miriam juxtaposed to the portion dealing with the red heifer? To tell you: Just as the red heifer atones for sin, so too, the death of the righteous atones for sin. Rabbi Elazar said: Why was the Torah portion that describes the death of Aaron juxtaposed to the portion discussing the priestly garments? This teaches that just as the priestly garments atone for sin, so too, the death of the righteous atones for sin.,§ The Sages taught the following baraita: If one dies suddenly without having been sick, this is death through snatching. If he became sick for a day and died, this is an expedited death. Rabbi Ḥaya ben Gamliel says: This is death at a stroke, as it is stated: “Son of man, behold, I am about to take away from you the delight of your eyes at a stroke” (Ezekiel 24:16). And when this prophecy is fulfilled it is written: “So I spoke to the people in the morning and at evening my wife died” (Ezekiel 24:18).,If he was sick for two days and died, this is a quickened death. If he was sick for three days and died, this is a death of rebuke. If he died after being sick for four days, this is a death of reprimand. If one died after a sickness lasting five days, this is the ordinary death of all people.,Rabbi Ḥanin said: What is the verse from which this is derived? It is stated: “Behold, your days approach that you must die” (Deuteronomy 31:14). This verse is expounded in the following manner: “Behold hen” indicates one; “approach karvu,” a plural term, indicates two; “your days yamekha,” also a plural term, indicates another two; and therefore in total this is five. How does the word hen indicate one? Because in the Greek language they call the number one hen.,The Gemara discusses the significance of death at different ages: If one dies when he is fifty years old, this is death through karet, the divine punishment of excision, meted out for the most serious transgressions. If he dies when he is fifty-two years old, this is the death of Samuel from Ramah. If he dies at the age of sixty, this is death at the hand of Heaven.,Mar Zutra said: What is the verse from which this is derived? As it is written: “You shall come to your grave in a ripe age bekhelaḥ” (Job 5:26). The word “ripe age” bekhelaḥ has the numerical value of sixty, and it is alluded to there that dying at this age involves a divine punishment.,One who dies at the age of seventy has reached old age. One who dies at the age of eighty dies in strength, as it is written: “The days of our years are seventy, or if by reason of strength, eighty years” (Psalms 90:10). Rabba said: Not only is death at the age of fifty a sign of karet, but even death from fifty to sixty years of age is death by karet. And the reason that all of these years were not counted in connection with karet is due to the honor of Samuel from Ramah, who died at the age of fifty-two.,The Gemara relates that when Rav Yosef turned sixty he made a holiday for the Sages. Explaining the cause for his celebration, he said: I have passed the age of karet. Abaye said to him: Master, even though you have passed the karet of years, have you, Master, escaped the karet of days? As previously mentioned, sudden death is also considered to be a form of karet. He said to him: Grasp at least half in your hand, for I have at least escaped one type of karet.,It was related that Rav Huna died suddenly, and the Sages were concerned that this was a bad sign. The Sage Zuga from Hadayeiv taught them the following: They taught these principles only when the deceased had not reached the age of strength, i.e., eighty. But if he had reached the age of strength and then died suddenly, this is death by way of a divine kiss.,Rava said: Length of life, children, and sustece do not depend on one’s merit, but rather they depend upon fate. As, Rabba and Rav Ḥisda were both pious Sages; one Sage would pray during a drought and rain would fall, and the other Sage would pray and rain would fall.,And nevertheless, their lives were very different. Rav Ḥisda lived for ninety-two years, whereas Rabba lived for only forty years. The house of Rav Ḥisda celebrated sixty wedding feasts, whereas the house of Rabba experienced sixty calamities. In other words, many fortuitous events took place in the house of Rav Ḥisda and the opposite occurred in the house of Rabba.,In the house of Rav Ḥisda there was bread from the finest flour semida even for the dogs, and it was not asked after, as there was so much food. In the house of Rabba, on the other hand, there was coarse barley bread even for people, and it was not found in sufficient quantities. This shows that the length of life, children, and sustece all depend not upon one’s merit, but upon fate.,Apropos Rav Ḥisda’s great wealth, the Gemara reports that Rava said: These three things I requested from Heaven, two of which were given to me, and one was not given to me: I requested the wisdom of Rav Huna and the wealth of Rav Ḥisda and they were given to me. I also requested the humility of Rabba bar Rav Huna, but it was not given to me.,The Gemara continues its discussion of the deaths of the righteous. Rav Seorim, Rava’s brother, sat before Rava, and he saw that Rava was dozing, i.e., about to die. Rava said to his brother: Master, tell him, the Angel of Death, not to torment me. Knowing that Rava was not afraid of the Angel of Death, Rav Seorim said to him: Master, are you not a friend of the Angel of Death? Rava said to him: Since my fate has been handed over to him, and it has been decreed that I shall die, the Angel of Death no longer pays heed to me. Rav Seorim said to Rava: Master, appear to me in a dream after your death. And Rava appeared to him. Rav Seorim said to Rava: Master, did you have pain in death? He said to him: Like the prick of the knife when letting blood.,It was similarly related that Rava sat before Rav Naḥman, and he saw that Rav Naḥman was dozing, i.e., slipping into death. Rav Naḥman said to Rava: Master, tell the Angel of Death not to torment me. Rava said to him: Master, are you not an important person who is respected in Heaven? Rav Naḥman said to him: In the supernal world who is important? Who is honorable? Who is complete?,Rava said to Rav Naḥman: Master, appear to me in a dream after your death. And he appeared to him. Rava said to him: Master, did you have pain in death? Rav Naḥman said to him: Like the removal of hair from milk, which is a most gentle process. But nevertheless, were the Holy One, Blessed be He, to say to me: Go back to that world, the physical world, as you were, I would not want to go, for the fear of the Angel of Death is great. And I would not want to go through such a terrifying experience a second time.,The Gemara relates that Rabbi Elazar was once eating teruma, when the Angel of Death appeared to him. He said to the Angel of Death: I am eating teruma; is it not called sacred? It would be inappropriate for me to die now and thereby defile this sacred teruma. The Angel of Death accepted his argument and left him. The moment passed, and he lived for some time afterward.,It was similarly related that the Angel of Death once appeared to Rav Sheshet in the marketplace. Rav Sheshet said to the Angel of Death: Shall I die in the market like an animal? Come to my house and kill me there like a human being.,So too, the Angel of Death appeared to Rav Ashi in the marketplace. Rav Ashi said to the Angel of Death: Give me thirty days so that I may review my studies, for you say above: Fortunate is he who comes here to Heaven with his learning in his hand. On the thirtieth day the Angel of Death came to take him. Rav Ashi said to the Angel of Death: What is all of this? Why are you in such a hurry to take me? Why can you not postpone my death? He said to him: The foot of Rav Huna bar Natan is pushing you, as he is ready to succeed you as the leader of the generation, and one sovereignty does not overlap with its counterpart, even by one hairbreadth. Therefore, you cannot live any longer.,The Angel of Death was unable to take Rav Ḥisda because his mouth was never silent from study. So the Angel of Death went and sat on the cedar column that supported the roof of the study hall of the Sages. The cedar cracked and Rav Ḥisda was silent for a moment, as he was startled by the sound. At that point the Angel of Death was able to take him.,The Angel of Death could not come near Rabbi Ḥiyya, owing to his righteousness. One day the Angel of Death appeared to him as a poor person. He came and knocked on the door. He said to Rabbi Ḥiyya: Bring out bread for me, and he took out bread for him. The Angel of Death then said to Rabbi Ḥiyya: Master, do you not have mercy on a poor person? Why, then, do you not have mercy upon that man, i.e., upon me, and give me what I want? The Angel of Death then revealed his identity to him, and showed him a fiery rod in order to confirm that he was the Angel of Death. At this point Rav Ḥiyya surrendered himself to him.' ' None |
|
21. Babylonian Talmud, Niddah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrianism, religious study • purity (impurity), Zoroastrian
Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 182; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 41
13b מעטרה ולמעלה אסור,אמר רב המקשה עצמו לדעת יהא בנדוי ולימא אסור דקמגרי יצה"ר אנפשיה ורבי אמי אמר נקרא עבריין שכך אומנתו של יצר הרע היום אומר לו עשה כך ולמחר אומר לו עשה כך ולמחר אומר לו לך עבוד עבודת כוכבים והולך ועובד,איכא דאמרי אמר רבי אמי כל המביא עצמו לידי הרהור אין מכניסין אותו במחיצתו של הקב"ה כתיב הכא (בראשית לח, י) וירע בעיני ה\' וכתיב התם (תהלים ה, ה) כי לא אל חפץ רשע אתה לא יגורך רע,ואמר ר\' אלעזר מאי דכתיב (ישעיהו א, טו) ידיכם דמים מלאו אלו המנאפים ביד תנא דבי רבי ישמעאל (שמות כ, יג) לא תנאף לא תהא בך ניאוף בין ביד בין ברגל,ת"ר הגרים והמשחקין בתינוקות מעכבין את המשיח בשלמא גרים כדר\' חלבו דא"ר חלבו קשין גרים לישראל כספחת אלא משחקין בתנוקות מאי היא,אילימא משכב זכור בני סקילה נינהו אלא דרך אברים בני מבול נינהו,אלא דנסיבי קטנות דלאו בנות אולודי נינהו דא"ר יוסי אין בן דוד בא עד שיכלו כל הנשמות שבגוף שנאמר (ישעיהו נז, טז) כי רוח מלפני יעטוף ונשמות אני עשיתי,באנשים תקצץ איבעיא להו דינא תנן או לטותא תנן דינא תנן כי הא דרב הונא קץ ידא או לטותא תנן,ת"ש דתניא רבי טרפון אומר יד לאמה תקצץ ידו על טבורו אמרו לו ישב לו קוץ בכריסו לא יטלנו א"ל לא אמר להן מוטב תבקע כריסו ואל ירד לבאר שחת,אי אמרת בשלמא דינא תנן היינו דאמרי והלא כריסו נבקעת אלא אי אמרת לטותא תנן מאי כריסו נבקעת אלא מאי דינא תנן לא סגי דלאו על טבורו,אלא ה"ק רבי טרפון כל המכניס ידו למטה מטבורו תקצץ אמרו לו לרבי טרפון ישב לו קוץ בכריסו לא יטלנו אמר להן לא והלא כריסו נבקעת אמר להן מוטב תבקע כריסו ואל ירד לבאר שחת,| 13b From the corona and above, toward the body, it is prohibited.,§ Rav says: One who intentionally causes himself an erection shall be ostracized. The Gemara suggests: And let Rav say simply that it is prohibited. The Gemara explains that it is proper to ostracize such a man, as he arouses the evil inclination upon himself. And Rabbi Ami says: He is called a habitual transgressor, as this is the craft of the evil inclination. Today he says to a person: Do this sin, and when the individual obeys his inclination, on the following day the evil inclination says to him: Do that sin, and on the following day he says to him: Go and worship idols, and he goes and worships idols.,Some say that Rabbi Ami says: With regard to anyone who brings himself into a state of arousal, they do not bring him within the boundary of the Holy One, Blessed be He. The proof is that it is written here, with regard to O, son of Judah: “And the thing that he did was evil in the eyes of the Lord, and He slew him also” (Genesis 38:10), and it is written there: “For You are not a God who has pleasure in wickedness; evil shall not sojourn with You. The boasters shall not stand in Your sight…But as for me, in the abundance of Your kindness will I come into Your house; I will bow down toward Your holy Temple in fear of You” (Psalms 5:5–8). This demonstrates that whoever does evil, like O, shall not sojourn with God.,And Rabbi Elazar says, with regard to the severity of this transgression: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And when you spread forth your hands, I will hide My eyes from you; even when you make many prayers, I will not hear; your hands are full of blood” (Isaiah 1:15)? These are those men who commit adultery with the hand, by masturbating. Likewise, the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: When it is stated in the Ten Commandments: “You shall not commit adultery” (Exodus 20:13), this means that there shall not be adultery among you, whether you masturbate by hand or whether with one’s foot.,§ The Sages taught in a baraita: Converts and those who play with children delay the coming of the Messiah. The Gemara asks: Granted with regard to converts, this is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ḥelbo, as Rabbi Ḥelbo says: Converts are as harmful to the Jewish people as a leprous scab on the skin, as they are not proficient in the performance of the mitzvot and born Jews learn from them. But with regard to the category of those who play with children, to what is it referring?,If we say that this is referring to homosexuality, such men are liable to be executed by stoning, and their behavior is criticized not simply because they delay the Messiah. Rather, one might suggest that this is referring to those who emit semen by way of other limbs, i.e., without engaging in intercourse; if so, they are considered as though they are bringing a flood, and are therefore liable to be punished themselves with a flood.,Rather, the baraita means that they marry minor girls who are not yet capable of bearing children, consequently emitting semen for naught. As Rabbi Yosei said: The Messiah, son of David, will not come until all the souls of the body have been finished, i.e., until all souls that are destined to inhabit physical bodies do so. As it is stated: “For the spirit that enwraps itself is from Me, and the souls that I have made” (Isaiah 57:16). The verse is interpreted as follows: The spirit, i.e., the souls about which it has been decreed by Me that they are to be born, if they are not born, they enwrap the Messiah and prevent him from coming.,§ The mishna teaches that with regard to any hand that is diligent to examine bodily emissions, among men, such a hand should be severed. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: Do we learn this statement as a practical halakha, i.e., that the court should actually sever his hand, or do we learn it as a mere curse, but not as an actual instruction to punish him in that manner? The Gemara elaborates: Do we learn it as a practical halakha like that prohibition against striking another, in which the same expression is used: With regard to anyone who raises his hand upon another, his hand should be severed, and Rav Huna indeed acted accordingly and severed the hand of an offender? Or perhaps do we learn it as a mere curse?,The Gemara suggests: Come and hear, as it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Tarfon says: If one’s hand goes to his penis, his hand should be severed upon his navel. The Rabbis said to him: If so, in a case where a thorn was stuck in one’s belly, should he not remove it? Rabbi Tarfon said to them: Indeed, he should not remove it, and if he does so his hand should be severed. The Rabbis replied: But if his hand is severed while it is upon his navel, won’t his belly be split open? Rabbi Tarfon said to them: It is preferable that the belly of one who acts in this manner should be split open, and he should not descend into the pit of destruction.,The Gemara analyzes this discussion: Granted, if you say that we learn the statement in the mishna as a practical halakha, this is the meaning of that which the Rabbis said: But if his hand is severed upon his navel, won’t his belly be split open? But if you say that we learn the statement in the mishna as a mere curse, what is the meaning of the phrase: Won’t his belly be split open? The Gemara responds: Rather, what explanation is the alternative? That we learn the mishna as stating a practical halakha? That would not explain the exchange between the Rabbis to Rabbi Tarfon, because is it not sufficient that the hand be severed not upon his navel? In other words, even if the hand must actually be severed, it is not clear why it should be severed while it is upon his navel.,Rather, this is what Rabbi Tarfon is saying: With regard to anyone who inserts his hand below his navel, his hand should be severed. The Rabbis said to Rabbi Tarfon: If a thorn was stuck in one’s belly, should he not remove it? Rabbi Tarfon said to them: He should not. They responded: But won’t his belly be split open due to the thorn? Rabbi Tarfon said to them: It is preferable that his belly be split open, and he should not descend into the pit of destruction.,who is deaf haḥereshet, or an imbecile, or blind, or who went insane, and is therefore unable to examine herself reliably, if such women have competent friends, those friends prepare them by examining them and immersing them in a ritual bath. And on that basis the incompetent women may partake of teruma after the sun sets.,a deaf woman. The Gemara asks: Let her examine herself; as it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: There was a deaf woman in our neighborhood who was so proficient in these matters that not only did she examine herself, but when her friends would see stains similar to blood and were unsure whether or not the stains were ritually impure, they would show her the stains.,The Gemara answers: There, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi is referring to a woman who can speak but cannot hear. It is possible for such a woman to be an expert in examining blood. But here, the mishna is dealing with a woman who can neither speak nor hear, and she is therefore considered incompetent and incapable of examining herself. As we learned in a mishna (Terumot 1:2): The deaf person of whom the Sages spoke everywhere is one who can neither hear nor speak, i.e., a deaf-mute.,§ The mishna further teaches that competent women must assist a blind woman. The Gemara similarly asks: Let her examine herself and show the cloth to her friend. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says: The correct version of the mishna does not mention a blind woman.,§ The mishna also states that competent women must assist a woman who went insane. The Gemara asks: With regard to her ability to examine herself, isn’t this the same as an imbecile, who is already mentioned in the mishna? The Gemara answers: Here, the mishna is referring to a woman who went insane due to illness, which is a different category than that of an imbecile.,The Gemara further discusses halakhot pertaining to an imbecile. The Sages taught in a baraita: With regard to an imbecile priest who was ritually impure, competent men deal with his purification: They immerse him, and then enable him to partake of teruma in the evening, like any other priest who was impure. And those taking care of him must watch over him to ensure that he does not sleep before he partakes of teruma, in case he experiences a seminal emission, which would render him impure. If he slept, he is once again impure, and may not partake of teruma; if he did not sleep he is pure.,Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says that there is another method of allowing an imbecile priest to partake of teruma: One prepares for him a leather pouch, which is wrapped around his penis, and before giving him teruma to partake of one checks this pouch to see if he has emitted semen. The other Sages said to him: It is improper to do this, as all the more so he will be prevented from partaking of teruma; this pouch warms him and increases the likelihood of a seminal emission. Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Tzadok, said to them: According to your statement, an imbecile priest has no remedy that will enable him to partake of teruma.,They said to him: According to our statement there is a way he can partake of teruma, as stated above: If he slept, he is impure; if he did not sleep he is pure. But according to your statement, that one wraps a pouch around his penis, this is not a reliable method, as perhaps he will see, i.e., experience the emission of, a drop of semen as small as a mustard seed, and it will be absorbed in the pouch and will not be noticed, which would mean that he is eating teruma in a state of ritual impurity.,The Gemara continues to discuss the methods by which an imbecile priest can partake of teruma. It was taught in a baraita that the Sages said in the name of Rabbi Elazar: One prepares for him a metal pouch, which is placed on his penis and does not warm it.,In explanation of this statement, Abaye says: And when this tanna speaks of metal, he means that the pouch should be made of copper, which does not absorb liquid, and therefore any drop of semen would be visible. This is as it is taught in a mishna (Para 12:5), with regard to the amount of water of purification that must be sprinkled on an individual who is impure due to impurity imparted by a corpse, that Rabbi Yehuda says: One considers those hyssop stems, with which the waters of purification are sprinkled, as though they are made of copper, which does not absorb any of the water.,Rav Pappa says: One can learn from the statement of the Rabbis that a pouch wrapped around one’s penis can warm it enough to cause a seminal emission, that trousers are prohibited to be worn, as they too warm the penis, by being placed so they are tight against it. The Gemara asks: But isn’t it written with regard to the priestly garments: “And you shall make them linen trousers to cover the flesh of their nakedness, from the loins even to the thighs they shall reach” (Exodus 28:42)?,The Gemara explains: That garment, the trousers worn by priests, was different, as it is taught in a baraita: The trousers of priests, to what are they comparable? They are similar to riding trousers pamalanya of horsemen, and this is what they look like: Above, they reach up to the loins; below, they go down to the thighs, and they have straps, and they have no opening, neither at the back nor at the front.,Abaye says:'' None | |
|
22. Babylonian Talmud, Pesahim, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian rabbinic culture, polemics against Zoroastrians • Sasanian Persia, Zoroastrianism • Zoroastrian • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrianism, Magianism (amgushta) • Zoroastrianism, as similar to Jewish priests and rabbis • Zoroastrianism, corpse exhumation • Zoroastrianism, negative Jewish perception of • Zoroastrianism, polemics against • Zoroastrianism, priesthood • Zoroastrianism, “Magianism” (amgushta) • Zoroastrians • fire temples, Zoroastrian, in the Babylonian Talmud • intercultural encounters, Jews and Zoroastrians • priests, Zoroastrian, portrayals of, in the Babylonian Talmud, as sorcerers and corrupt administrators • ritual, Jewish, Zoroastrian
Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 408; Herman, Rubenstein (2018), The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World. 278; Mokhtarian (2021), Rabbis, Sorcerers, Kings, and Priests: The Culture of the Talmud in Ancient Iran. 204; Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 46, 74, 85, 90, 105; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 46, 74, 85, 90, 105
| 54a ואיש תבונה ידלנה מים עמוקים עצה בלב איש זה עולא ואיש תבונה ידלנה זה רבה בר בר חנה ואינהו כמאן סברוה כי הא דאמר ר\' בנימן בר יפת אמר רבי יוחנן מברכין על האור בין במוצאי שבת בין במוצאי יום הכפורים וכן עמא דבר,מיתיבי אין מברכין על האור אלא במוצאי שבת הואיל ותחילת ברייתו הוא וכיון שרואה מברך מיד רבי יהודה אומר סודרן על הכוס ואמר רבי יוחנן הלכה כרבי יהודה,לא קשיא כאן באור ששבת כאן באור היוצא מן העצים ומן האבנים,תני חדא אור היוצא מן העצים ומן האבנים מברכין עליו ותני חדא אין מברכין עליו לא קשיא כאן במוצאי שבת כאן במוצאי יום הכפורים,רבי מפזרן רבי חייא מכנסן אמר רבי יצחק בר אבדימי אע"פ שרבי מפזרן חוזר וסודרן על הכוס כדי להוציא בניו ובני ביתו,ואור במוצאי שבת איברי והא תניא עשרה דברים נבראו בערב שבת בין השמשות אלו הן באר והמן וקשת כתב ומכתב והלוחות וקברו של משה ומערה שעמד בו משה ואליהו פתיחת פי האתון ופתיחת פי הארץ לבלוע את הרשעים,רבי נחמיה אומר משום אביו אף האור והפרד ר\' יאשיה אומר משום אביו אף האיל והשמיר רבי יהודה אומר אף הצבת הוא היה אומר צבתא בצבתא מתעבדא וצבתא קמייתא מאן עבד הא לאי בריה בידי שמים היא אמר ליה אפשר יעשנה בדפוס ויקבענה כיון הא לאי בריה בידי אדם היא,לא קשיא הא באור דידן הא באור דגיהנם אור דידן במוצאי שבת אור דגיהנם בערב שבת ואור דגיהנם בערב שבת איברי והא תניא *שבעה דברים נבראו קודם שנברא העולם ואלו הן תורה ותשובה וגן עדן וגיהנם וכסא הכבוד ובית המקדש ושמו של משיח,תורה דכתיב (משלי ח, כב) ה\' קנני ראשית דרכו תשובה דכתיב (תהלים צ, ב) בטרם הרים יולדו וכתיב (תהלים צ, ג) תשב אנוש עד דכא ותאמר שובו בני אדם,גן עדן דכתיב (בראשית ב, ח) ויטע ה\' אלהים גן בעדן מקדם גיהנם דכתיב (ישעיהו ל, לג) כי ערוך מאתמול תפתה,כסא הכבוד ובית המקדש דכתיב (ירמיהו יז, יב) כסא כבוד מרום מראשון מקום מקדשנו שמו של משיח דכתיב (תהלים עב, יז) יהי שמו לעולם לפני שמש ינון שמו,אמרי חללה הוא דנברא קודם שנברא העולם ואור דידיה בערב שבת,ואור דידיה בערב שבת איברי והתניא רבי יוסי אומר אור שברא הקב"ה בשני בשבת אין לו כבייה לעולם שנאמר (ישעיהו סו, כד) ויצאו וראו בפגרי האנשים הפושעים בי כי תולעתם לא תמות ואשם לא תכבה ואמר רבי בנאה בריה דרבי עולא מפני מה לא נאמר כי טוב בשני בשבת מפני שנברא בו אור של גיהנם ואמר רבי אלעזר אע"פ שלא נאמר בו כי טוב חזר וכללו בששי שנאמר (בראשית א, לא) וירא אלהים את כל אשר עשה והנה טוב מאד,אלא חללה קודם שנברא העולם ואור דידיה בשני בשבת ואור דידן במחשבה עלה ליבראות בערב שבת ולא נברא עד מוצאי שבת דתניא ר\' יוסי אומר שני דברים עלו במחשבה ליבראות בערב שבת ולא נבראו עד מוצאי שבת ובמוצאי שבת נתן הקב"ה דיעה באדם הראשון מעין דוגמא של מעלה והביא שני אבנים וטחנן זו בזו ויצא מהן אור והביא שתי בהמות והרכיב זו בזו ויצא מהן פרד רבן שמעון בן גמליאל אומר פרד בימי ענה היה שנאמר (בראשית לו, כד) הוא ענה אשר מצא את הימים במדבר,דורשי חמורות היו אומרים ענה פסול היה לפיכך הביא פסול לעולם שנאמר (בראשית לו, כ) אלה בני שעיר החורי וכתיב אלה בני צבעון ואיה וענה אלא מלמד שבא צבעון על אמו והוליד ממנה ענה,ודילמא תרי ענה הוו אמר רבא אמינא מילתא דשבור מלכא לא אמרה ומנו שמואל איכא דאמרי אמר ר"פ אמינא מילתא דשבור מלכא לא אמרה ומנו רבא אמר קרא הוא ענה הוא ענה דמעיקרא,תנו רבנן עשרה דברים נבראו בערב שבת בין השמשות ואלו הן באר ומן וקשת הכתב והמכתב והלוחות קברו של משה ומערה שעמד בה משה ואליהו פתיחת פי האתון ופתיחת פי הארץ לבלוע את הרשעים ויש אומרים אף מקלו של אהרן שקדיה ופרחיה ויש אומרים אף המזיקין ויש אומרים אף 57a נימא תלתא תנאי הוו לא תרי תנאי הוו ותנא קמא דר\' שמעון היינו ר\' יוסי ותנא קמא דר\' יוסי היינו ר\' שמעון ומאי אף אקמייתא,ת"ר בן בוהיין נתן פיאה לירק ובא אביו ומצאן לעניים שהיו טעונין ירק ועומדין על פתח הגינה אמר להם בני השליכו מעליכם ואני נותן לכם כפליים במעושר לא מפני שעיני צרה אלא מפני שאמרו חכמים אין נותנין פיאה לירק,למה ליה למימרא להו לא מפני שעיני צרה כי היכי דלא לימרו דחויי קא מדחי לן,ת"ר בראשונה היו מניחין עורות קדשים בלשכת בית הפרוה לערב היו מחלקין אותן לאנשי בית אב והיו בעלי זרועות נוטלין אותן בזרוע התקינו שיהיו מחלקין אותן מערב שבת לע"ש דאתיין כולהו משמרות ושקלן בהדדי,ועדיין היו גדולי כהונה נוטלין אותן בזרוע עמדו בעלים והקדישום לשמים,אמרו לא היו ימים מועטים עד שחיפו את ההיכל כולו בטבלאות של זהב שהן אמה על אמה כעובי דינר זהב ולרגל היו מקפלין אותן ומניחין אותן על גב מעלה בהר הבית כדי שיהו עולי רגלים רואין שמלאכתם נאה ואין בה דלם,תנא אבא שאול אומר קורות של שקמה היו ביריחו והיו בעלי זרועות נוטלין אותן בזרוע עמדו בעלים והקדישום לשמים,עליהם ועל כיוצא בהם אמר אבא שאול בן בטנית משום אבא יוסף בן חנין אוי לי מבית בייתוס אוי לי מאלתן אוי לי מבית חנין אוי לי מלחישתן אוי לי מבית קתרוס אוי לי מקולמוסן אוי לי מבית ישמעאל בן פיאכי אוי לי מאגרופן שהם כהנים גדולים ובניהן גיזברין וחתניהם אמרכלין ועבדיהן חובטין את העם במקלות,תנו רבנן ארבע צווחות צוחה עזרה ראשונה צאו מכאן בני עלי שטימאו היכל ה\' ועוד צווחה צא מיכן יששכר איש כפר ברקאי שמכבד את עצמו ומחלל קדשי שמים דהוה כריך ידיה בשיראי ועביד עבודה,ועוד צווחה העזרה שאו שערים ראשיכם ויכנס ישמעאל בן פיאכי תלמידו של פנחס וישמש בכהונה גדולה ועוד צווחה העזרה שאו שערים ראשיכם ויכנס יוחנן בן נרבאי תלמידו של פנקאי וימלא כריסו מקדשי שמים,אמרו עליו על יוחנן בן נרבאי שהיה אוכל ג\' מאות עגלים ושותה ג\' מאות גרבי יין ואוכל ארבעים סאה גוזלות בקינוח סעודה אמרו כל ימיו של יוחנן בן נרבאי לא נמצא נותר במקדש מאי סלקא ביה ביששכר איש כפר ברקאי אמרי מלכא ומלכתא הוו יתבי מלכא אמר גדיא יאי ומלכתא אמרה אימרא יאי אמרו מאן מוכח כהן גדול דקא מסיק קרבנות כל יומא אתא איהו 110a מצוה באפי נפשה הוא,לא יעשה צרכיו תרי אמאי נמלך הוא אמר אביי הכי קאמר לא יאכל תרי וישתה תרי ולא יעשה צרכיו אפילו פעם אחת דילמא חליש ומיתרע,ת"ר שותה כפלים דמו בראשו אמר רב יהודה אימתי בזמן שלא ראה פני השוק אבל ראה פני השוק הרשות בידו אמר רב אשי חזינא ליה לרב חנניא בר ביבי דאכל כסא הוה נפיק וחזי אפי שוקא,ולא אמרן אלא לצאת לדרך אבל בביתו לא אמר ר\' זירא ולישן כלצאת לדרך דמי אמר רב פפא ולצאת לבית הכסא כלצאת לדרך דמי ובביתו לא והא רבא מני כשורי,ואביי כי שתי חד כסא מנקיט ליה אימיה תרי כסי בתרי ידיה ורב נחמן בר יצחק כי הוה שתי תרי כסי מנקיט ליה שמעיה חד כסא חד כסא מנקיט ליה תרי כסי בתרי ידיה אדם חשוב שאני,אמר עולא עשרה כוסות אין בהם משום זוגות עולא לטעמיה דאמר עולא ואמרי לה במתניתא תנא עשרה כוסות תיקנו חכמים בבית האבל ואי ס"ד עשרה כוסות יש בהן משום זוגות היכי קיימי רבנן ותקנו מילתא דאתי לידי סכנה אבל תמניא יש בהן משום זוגות,רב חסדא ורבה בר רב הונא דאמרי תרוייהו שלום לטובה מצטרף לרעה לא מצטרף אבל שיתא יש בהן משום זוגות,רבה ורב יוסף דאמרי תרוייהו ויחונך לטובה מצטרף לרעה לא מצטרף אבל ארבעה יש בהן משום זוגות,אביי ורבא דאמרי תרוייהו וישמרך לטובה מצטרף לרעה לא מצטרף,ואזדא רבא לטעמיה דרבא אפקינהו לרבנן בארבעה כוסות אע"ג דאיתזק רבא בר ליואי לא חש לה למילתא דאמר ההוא משום דאותבן בפירקא הוה,אמר רב יוסף אמר לי יוסף שידא אשמדאי מלכא דשידי ממונה הוא אכולהו זוגי ומלכא לא איקרי מזיק איכא דאמרי לה להאי גיסא אדרבה מלכא רתחנא הוא מאי דבעי עביד שהמלך פורץ גדר לעשות לו דרך ואין מוחין בידו,אמר רב פפא אמר לי יוסף שידא בתרי קטלינן בארבעה לא קטלינן בארבעה מזקינן בתרי בין בשוגג בין במזיד בארבעה במזיד אין בשוגג לא,ואי אישתלי ואיקרי ונפק מאי תקנתיה לינקוט זקפא דידיה דימיניה בידא דשמאליה וזקפא דשמאליה בידא דימיניה ונימא הכי אתון ואנא הא תלתא ואי שמיע ליה דאמר אתון ואנא הא ארבעה נימא ליה אתון ואנא הא חמשה ואי שמיע ליה דאמר אתון ואנא הא שיתא נימא ליה אתון ואנא הא שבעה הוה עובדא עד מאה וחד ופקע שידא,אמר אמימר אמרה לי רישתינהי דנשים כשפניות האי מאן דפגע בהו בנשים כשפניות נימא הכי חרי חמימי בדיקולא בזייא לפומייכו נשי דחרשייא קרח קרחייכי פרח פרחייכי' 113b תני תנא קמיה דרבא ורב ספרא צהבו פניו דרב ספרא אמר לו רבא לאו כגון מר אלא כגון רב חנינא ורב אושעיא דהוו אושכפי בארעא דישראל והוו יתבי בשוקא דזונות ועבדי להו מסאני לזונות ועיילי להו אינהו מסתכלי בהו ואינהו לא מדלן עינייהו לאיסתכולי בהו ומומתייהו הכי בחייהן רבנן קדישי דבארעא דישראל:,שלשה הקדוש ברוך הוא אוהבן מי שאינו כועס ומי שאינו משתכר ומי שאינו מעמיד על מדותיו שלשה הקדוש ברוך הוא שונאן המדבר א\' בפה ואחד בלב והיודע עדות בחבירו ואינו מעיד לו והרואה דבר ערוה בחבירו ומעיד בו יחידי,כי הא דטוביה חטא ואתא זיגוד לחודיה ואסהיד ביה קמיה דרב פפא נגדיה לזיגוד א"ל טוביה חטא וזיגוד מינגד אמר ליה אין דכתיב (דברים יט, טו) לא יקום עד אחד באיש ואת לחודך אסהדת ביה שם רע בעלמא קא מפקת ביה,אמר רבי שמואל בר רב יצחק אמר רב מותר לשנאתו שנאמר (שמות כג, ה) כי תראה חמור שנאך רובץ תחת משאו מאי שונא אילימא שונא נכרי והא תניא שונא שאמרו שונא ישראל ולא שונא נכרי,אלא פשיטא שונא ישראל ומי שריא למסניה והכתיב (ויקרא יט, יז) לא תשנא את אחיך בלבבך אלא דאיכא סהדי דעביד איסורא כולי עלמא נמי מיסני סני ליה מאי שנא האי אלא לאו כי האי גוונא דחזיא ביה איהו דבר ערוה,רב נחמן בר יצחק אמר מצוה לשנאתו שנאמר (משלי ח, יג) יראת ה\' (שונאי) רע אמר רב אחא בריה דרבא לרב אשי מהו למימרא ליה לרביה למשנייה אמר ליה אי ידע דמהימן לרביה כבי תרי לימא ליה ואי לא לא לימא ליה,תנו רבנן שלשה חייהן אינם חיים הרחמנין והרתחנין ואניני הדעת ואמר רב יוסף כולהו איתנהו בי,תנו רבנן שלשה שונאין זה את זה אלו הן הכלבים והתרנגולין והחברין וי"א אף הזונות וי"א אף תלמידי חכמים שבבבל,ת"ר שלשה אוהבין זה את זה אלו הן הגרים ועבדים ועורבין,ארבעה אין הדעת סובלתן אלו הן דל גאה ועשיר מכחש וזקן מנאף ופרנס מתגאה על הציבור בחנם ויש אומרים אף המגרש את אשתו פעם ראשונה ושניה ומחזירה,ותנא קמא זימנא דכתובתה מרובה אי נמי יש לו בנים הימנה ולא מצי מגרש לה,חמשה דברים צוה כנען את בניו אהבו זה את זה ואהבו את הגזל ואהבו את הזמה ושנאו את אדוניכם ואל תדברו אמת,ששה דברים נאמרים בסוס אוהב את הזנות ואוהב את המלחמה ורוחו גסה ומואס את השינה ואוכל הרבה ומוציא קמעה וי"א אף מבקש להרוג בעליו במלחמה,שבעה מנודין לשמים אלו הן יהודי שאין לו אשה ושיש לו אשה ואין לו בנים ומי שיש לו בנים ואין מגדלן לתלמוד תורה ומי שאין לו תפילין בראשו ותפילין בזרועו וציצית בבגדו ומזוזה בפתחו והמונע מנעלים מרגליו וי"א אף מי שאין מיסב בחבורה של מצוה,אמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי שמואל בר מרתא אמר רב משום רבי יוסי איש הוצל מניין שאין שואלין בכלדיים שנאמר (דברים יח, יג) תמים תהיה עם ה\' אלהיך,ומניין היודע בחבירו שהוא גדול ממנו אפילו בדבר אחד שחייב לנהוג בו כבוד שנאמר (דניאל ו, ד) כל קבל די רוח יתירא ביה ומלכא עשית להקמותיה על כל מלכותא,והיושבת על דם טהור אסורה לשמש עד כמה אמר רב עונה,תנא הוא יוסף איש הוצל הוא יוסף הבבלי הוא איסי בן גור אריה הוא איסי בן יהודה הוא איסי בן גמליאל הוא איסי בן מהללאל ומה שמו איסי בן עקביה שמו הוא רבי יצחק בן טבלא הוא רבי יצחק בן חקלא הוא רבי יצחק בן אלעא הוא ' None | 54a but a man of understanding will draw it out” (Proverbs 20:5). Counsel in the heart of man is like deep water; that is a reference to Ulla, who had a thought but did not articulate it. But a man of understanding will draw it out; that is a reference to Rabba bar bar Ḥana, who understood the allusion even though it was not articulated. The Gemara asks: And in accordance with whose opinion do Ulla and Rabba bar bar Ḥana hold, leading them to reject Rabbi Abba’s statement of Rabbi Yoḥa’s opinion? The Gemara answers: They hold in accordance with that which Rabbi Binyamin bar Yefet said that Rabbi Yoḥa said: One recites the blessing over fire both at the conclusion of Shabbat and at the conclusion of Yom Kippur. And that is how the people act.,The Gemara raises an objection from that which was previously taught: One recites a blessing over fire only at the conclusion of Shabbat and not at the conclusion of Festivals or Yom Kippur, since the conclusion of Shabbat is the time of its original creation. And once he sees it, he recites the blessing immediately. Rabbi Yehuda says: One does not recite the blessing immediately; rather, he waits and arranges and recites the blessings over fire and spices over the cup of wine that accompanies the recitation of havdala. And Rabbi Yoḥa said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. How does Rabbi Yoḥa explain the baraita?,The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. Here, where Rabbi Yoḥa said that one recites the blessing at the conclusion of Yom Kippur, it is referring to fire that rested on Yom Kippur, i.e., fire for which no prohibition was involved in its kindling, either because it was kindled before Yom Kippur or because it was kindled in a permitted manner, e.g., for a dangerously ill person. There, where Rabbi Yoḥa said that the blessing is recited only at the conclusion of Shabbat, it is referring to fire generated from wood and from stones after Shabbat, similar to the primordial fire, which was created at the conclusion of Shabbat.,It was taught in one baraita: With regard to fire generated from wood and stones, one recites a blessing over it; and it was taught in one other baraita: One does not recite a blessing over it. This apparent contradiction is not difficult. Here, where the baraita states that one recites a blessing, it is referring to the conclusion of Shabbat. There, where the baraita states that one does not recite a blessing, it is referring to the conclusion of Yom Kippur.,Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi would distribute the blessings over the fire and the spices, reciting each when the opportunity arose. Rabbi Ḥiyya would collect them, reciting all the blessings at the same time in the framework of havdala. Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Avdimi said: Even though Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi distributes them and recites each blessing at his first opportunity, he repeats the blessings and arranges and recites them over the cup of wine in order to discharge the obligation of his children and the members of his household.,The Gemara stated that fire was originally created at the conclusion of Shabbat. The Gemara asks: Was fire created at the conclusion of Shabbat? Wasn’t it taught in a baraita: Ten miraculous phenomena were created in heaven on Shabbat eve during twilight, and were revealed in the world only later? They were: Miriam’s well, and the manna that fell in the desert, and the rainbow, writing ketav, and the writing instrument mikhtav, and the tablets of the Ten Commandments, and the grave of Moses, and the cave in which Moses and Elijah stood, the opening of the mouth of Balaam’s donkey, and the opening of the earth’s mouth to swallow the wicked in the incident involving Korah.,Rabbi Neḥemya said in the name of his father: Even the fire and the mule, which is a product of crossbreeding, were created at that time. Rabbi Yoshiya said in the name of his father: Even the ram slaughtered by Abraham in place of Isaac, and the shamir worm used to shape the stones for the altar, were created at that time. Rabbi Yehuda says: Even the tongs were created at this time. He would say: Tongs can be fashioned only with other tongs, but who fashioned the first tongs? Indeed, the first pair of tongs was fashioned at the hand of Heaven. An anonymous questioner said to him: It is possible to fashion tongs with a mold and align it without the need for other tongs. Indeed, the first tongs were a creation of man. In any event, fire was originally created before Shabbat, not at the conclusion of Shabbat.,The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This baraita is referring to our fire, and that baraita is referring to the fire of Gehenna. The Gemara explains: Our fire was created at the conclusion of Shabbat, but the fire of Gehenna was created on Shabbat eve. The Gemara proceeds to ask: Was the fire of Gehenna created on Shabbat eve? Wasn’t it taught in a baraita: Seven phenomena were created before the world was created, and they are: Torah, and repentance, and the Garden of Eden, and Gehenna, and the Throne of Glory, and the Temple, and the name of Messiah.,The Gemara provides sources for the notion that each of these phenomena was created before the world was. Torah was created before the world was created, as it is written: “The Lord made me as the beginning of His way, the first of His works of old” (Proverbs 8:22), which, based on the subsequent verses, is referring to the Torah. Repentance was created before the world was created, as it is written: “Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever You had formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, You are God,” and it is written immediately afterward: “You return man to contrition; and You say: Repent, children of man” (Psalms 90:2–3).,The Garden of Eden was created before the world was created, as it is written: “And God planted the Garden of Eden in the east mikedem” (Genesis 2:8). The term: In the east mikedem is interpreted in the sense of: Before mikodem, i.e., before the world was created. Gehenna was created before the world was created, as it is written: “For its hearth is ordained of old” (Isaiah 30:33). The hearth, i.e., Gehenna, was created before the world was created.,The Throne of Glory and the Temple were created before the world was created, as it is written: “Your Throne of Glory on high from the beginning, in the place of our Sanctuary” (Jeremiah 17:12). The name of Messiah was created before the world was created, as it is written in the chapter discussing the Messiah: “May his name endure forever; his name existed before the sun” (Psalms 72:17). The name of Messiah already existed before the creation of the sun and the rest of the world. This baraita states that Gehenna was created before the world was created and not during twilight before the first Shabbat.,They say in answer: The void of Gehenna was created before the world, but its fire was created on Shabbat eve.,The Gemara asks: And was its fire created on Shabbat eve? Wasn’t it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei says: The fire that the Holy One, Blessed be He, created on the second day of the week will never be extinguished, as it is stated: “And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcasses of the men who have rebelled against Me; for their worm shall not die, nor will their fire be extinguished; and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh” (Isaiah 66:24)? And Rabbi Bana’a, son of Rabbi Ulla, said: Why doesn’t the verse state: That it was good, at the end of the second day of the week of Creation, as it does on the other days? It is because on that day the fire of Gehenna was created. And Rabbi Elazar said that even though: That it was good, was not stated with regard to the creations of the second day, He later included it on the sixth day, as it is stated: “And God saw all that He had done and behold, it was very good” (Genesis 1:31).,Rather, the void of Gehenna was created before the world was created, and its fire was created only on the second day of the week. And the thought arose in God’s mind to create our fire on Shabbat eve; however, it was not actually created until the conclusion of Shabbat, as it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei says: The thoughts of two phenomena arose in God’s mind on Shabbat eve, but were not actually created until the conclusion of Shabbat. At the conclusion of Shabbat, the Holy One, Blessed be He, granted Adam, the first man, creative knowledge similar to divine knowledge, and he brought two rocks and rubbed them against each other, and the first fire emerged from them. Adam also brought two animals, a female horse and a male donkey, and mated them with each other, and the resultant offspring that emerged from them was a mule. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel disagrees and says that the first mule was in the days of Anah, as it is stated: “And these are the children of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah; this is Anah who found the mules in the wilderness, as he fed the donkeys of Zibeon his father” (Genesis 36:24).,The interpreters of Torah symbolism ḥamurot would say: Anah was the product of an incestuous relationship, and as a result he was spiritually unfit to produce offspring. Therefore, he brought an example of unfitness, i.e., an animal physically unfit to produce offspring, into the world, as it is stated: “These are the sons of Seir the Horite, the inhabitants of the land: Lotan, and Shoval, and Zibeon, and Anah” (Genesis 36:20). And it is also stated: “And these are the sons of Zibeon: Aiah and Anah” (Genesis 36:24). One verse describes both Anah and Zibeon as sons of Seir, meaning that they are brothers, while the other verse describes Anah as Zibeon’s son. Rather, this teaches that Zibeon cohabited with his mother, the wife of Seir, and fathered Anah from her. He is called Seir’s son although in fact he was the offspring of Seir’s son and Seir’s wife.,The Gemara asks: And perhaps there were two people named Anah, one the son of Zibeon and the other the son of Seir? Rava said: I will state a matter that even King Shapur did not state. And who is this King Shapur? This cannot be a reference to Shapur, king of Persia; rather, it must be an epithet for someone else. He is Shmuel, whose legal rulings were accepted by the public like the edicts of a king by his subjects. Some say a different version, that it was Rav Pappa who said: I will state a matter that even King Shapur did not state. And who is he that Rav Pappa is referring to by the epithet King Shapur? He is Rava. The verse said: “This is Anah who found the mules,” indicating that he is the same Anah mentioned initially in the earlier verse.,The Sages taught: Ten phenomena were created on Shabbat eve during twilight, and they were: Miriam’s well, and manna, and the rainbow, writing, and the writing instrument, and the tablets, the grave of Moses, and the cave in which Moses and Elijah stood, the opening of the mouth of Balaam’s donkey, and the opening of the mouth of the earth to swallow the wicked in the time of Korah. And some say that even Aaron’s staff was created then with its almonds and its blossoms. Some say that even the demons were created at this time. And some say that even 57a Let us say that there are three tanna’im who dispute this point: The two unattributed opinions, each of which is referring to two vegetables, and the opinion common to Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon that includes all three vegetables. The Gemara rejects this: No, there are only two tanna’im who dispute the point, and the first tanna whose opinion appears before the opinion of Rabbi Shimon is Rabbi Yosei. And the first tanna whose opinion appears before the opinion of Rabbi Yosei is Rabbi Shimon. And what is the meaning of the word even in both their statements? They agree with regard to the first vegetable, turnips; however, they disagree with regard to the second, and replace it with another vegetable.,The Gemara cites an episode from the Tosefta. The Sages taught: The son of a man named Bohayan designated for the poor the produce in the corner in a garden of vegetables, and his father Bohayan found the poor laden with vegetables and standing at the opening of the garden on their way out. He said to them: My sons, cast the vegetables that you have gathered from upon yourselves and I will give you twice the amount in tithed produce, and you will be no worse off. Not because I begrudge you what you have taken. Rather, it is because the Sages say: One does not designate for the poor the produce in the corner in a garden of vegetables. Therefore, the vegetables that you took require tithing.,The Gemara asks: Why was it necessary for him to say to them: Not because I begrudge you what you have taken? It would have been sufficient to offer them tithed produce. The Gemara answers that he said it so they would not say: He is putting us off, taking what we collected now, but later he will not fulfill his commitment.,Apropos the people of Jericho, the Gemara relates that powerful people would steal wood from them. The Sages taught: Initially, the priests would place the hides that were flayed from animals consecrated as offerings of the most sacred order, which were given to the priests, in the Parva chamber. In the evening, they would distribute them to the members of the family of priests serving in the Temple that day. And the powerful priests among them would take them by force before they could be distributed. The Rabbis decreed that they would distribute them each Shabbat eve, because then all the families of both priestly watches came and took their part together. All the families from both the watch that was beginning its service and the one ending its service were together when they divided the hides. The powerful priests were unable to take the hides by force.,Yet still the prominent priests by virtue of their lineage would take them by force. Due to their prominence, the members of the rest of the watch dared not challenge them. When they realized that there was no equitable distribution, the owners of the sacrifices (Me’iri) arose and consecrated the hides to Heaven so the priests could not take them.,The Sages said: Not a few days passed before they had plated the entire sanctuary with golden tablets with the proceeds from the redemption and sale of the hides. These plates were one cubit by one cubit and as thick as a golden dinar. And when the people assembled for the Festival pilgrimage they would remove the tablets and place them on a stair of the Temple Mount so that the pilgrims would see that the craftsmanship of the tablets was beautiful and without flaw dalam. Afterward they replaced the tablets in the Sanctuary.,It was similarly taught that Abba Shaul says: There were sycamore tree trunks in Jericho, and powerful people would take them from their owners by force. The owners stood and consecrated these trunks to Heaven. It was with regard to these trunks and the branches that grew from them that the residents of Jericho acted against the will of the Sages.,With regard to the prominent priests and those like them, Abba Shaul ben Batnit said in the name of Abba Yosef ben Ḥanin: Woe is me due to the High Priests of the house of Baitos, woe is me due to their clubs. Woe is me due to the High Priests of the house of Ḥanin; woe is me due to their whispers and the rumors they spread. Woe is me due to the High Priests of the house of Katros; woe is me due to their pens that they use to write lies. Woe is me due to the servants of the High Priests of the house of Yishmael ben Piakhi; woe is me due to their fists. The power of these households stemmed from the fact that the fathers were High Priests, and their sons were the Temple treasurers, and their sons-in-law were Temple overseers amarkalin. And their servants strike the people with clubs, and otherwise act inappropriately.,Apropos the critique of several prominent priests, the Gemara relates that the Sages taught: The people in the Temple courtyard all cried four cries, as they were in agreement over various issues (Pardes Rimonim). The first cry was: Leave here, sons of Eli, who defiled God’s Sanctuary (see I Samuel 2:22). Subsequently the priesthood was transferred to the house of Zadok. And an additional cry: Leave here, Yissakhar of Kfar Barkai, who honors himself and desecrates the items consecrated to Heaven. Due to his delicate nature and his disrespect for the Temple service, he would wrap his hands in silk shirai and perform the service. This would invalidate the service because the silk was an interposition between his hands and the Temple vessels. Furthermore, his conduct demeaned the Temple service, as he demonstrated that he was unwilling to dirty his hands for it.,And the people in the Temple courtyard cried additionally: Lift your heads, O gates, and let the righteous Yishmael ben Piakhi, the student of Pinehas ben Elazar the priest, enter and serve as High Priest, although the members of this family were violent. And the people in the Temple courtyard cried additionally: Lift your heads, O gates, and let Yoḥa ben Narbbai, the student of Pinkai, enter and fill his belly with meat of offerings consecrated to Heaven, as he is worthy to eat offerings.,They said about Yoḥa ben Narbbai that he and his household would eat three hundred calves, and drink three hundred jugs of wine, and eat forty se’a of doves for dessert. They said: Throughout all the days of Yoḥa ben Narbbai there was no leftover sacrificial meat in the Temple, as he would make certain that someone ate it. The Gemara asks: What ultimately happened to Yissakhar of Kfar Barkai? They said: The king and the queen were sitting and talking. The king said that goat meat is better food, and the queen said lamb meat is better food. They said: Who can prove which one of us is correct? The High Priest can, as he offers sacrifices all day and tastes their meat. The High Priest had the right to take a portion from any sacrifice offered in the Temple, and therefore was well acquainted with the tastes of different meat. Yissakhar of Kfar Barkai came, and when they asked him this question, 110a is a distinct mitzva in its own right. In other words, each cup is treated separately and one is not considered to be drinking in pairs.,The baraita taught that one should not attend to his sexual needs in pairs. The Gemara asks: Why should one be concerned for this; he has changed his mind? One does not plan in advance to engage in marital relations twice, and therefore the two acts should not combine to form a dangerous pair. Abaye said: This is what the tanna is saying, i.e., the baraita should be understood in the following manner: One should not eat in pairs nor drink in pairs, and if he does so he should not attend to his sexual needs right afterward even once, lest he is weakened by the act and will be harmed for having eaten or drunk in pairs.,The Sages taught in another baraita: If one drinks in pairs his blood is upon his head, i.e., he bears responsibility for his own demise. Rav Yehuda said: When is that the case? When one did not leave the house and view the marketplace between cups. However, if he saw the marketplace after the first cup, he has permission to drink another cup without concern. Likewise, Rav Ashi said: I saw Rav Ḥaya bar Beivai follow this policy: Upon drinking each cup, he would leave the house and view the marketplace.,And we said that there is concern for the safety of one who drinks in pairs only when he intends to set out on the road after drinking, but if he intends to remain in his home there is no need for concern. Rabbi Zeira said: And one who plans to sleep is comparable to one who is setting out on the road. He should be concerned that he might be harmed. Rav Pappa said: And going to the bathroom is comparable to setting out on the road. The Gemara asks: And if one intends to remain in his home, is there no cause for concern? But Rava would count the beams of the house to keep track of the number of cups he had drunk so as to ensure that he would not consume an even number.,And likewise Abaye, when he would drink one cup, his mother would immediately place two cups in his two hands so that he would not inadvertently drink only one more cup and thereby expose himself to the danger of drinking in pairs. And similarly, when Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak would drink two cups, his attendant would immediately place one more cup in his hand, and if he would drink one cup, the attendant would place two cups in his two hands. These reports indicate that one should be concerned for his safety after drinking an even number of cups, even when he remains at home. The Gemara answers: An important person is different. The demons focus their attention on him, and he must therefore be more careful than the average person.,Ulla said: Ten cups contain no element of the danger associated with pairs. Ulla rules here in accordance with his reasoning stated elsewhere, as Ulla said, and some say it was taught in a baraita: The Sages instituted that one must drink ten cups of wine in the house of a mourner during the meal of comfort. And if it could enter your mind that ten cups do contain the element of danger associated with pairs, how could the Sages arise and institute something that might bring a person to a state of danger? However, eight cups do contain the element of danger associated with pairs.,Rav Ḥisda and Rabba bar Rav Huna both say that eight is also safe from the dangers of pairs, as the number seven, represented by the word shalom, combines with the previous cups for the good but does not combine for the bad. The final verse of the priestly benediction reads: “The Lord lift His countece upon you and give you peace shalom” (Numbers 6:26). The word shalom, the seventh Hebrew word in this verse, has a purely positive connotation. Rav Ḥisda and Rabba bar Rav Huna therefore maintain that the seventh cup combines with the previous six only for good purposes. After the seventh cup, i.e., from the eighth cup and on, the cups constitute pairs for the good but not for the bad. However, six cups do contain the element of danger associated with pairs.,Rabba and Rav Yosef both say that even drinking six cups is not dangerous. The reason is that the fifth cup, represented by the word viḥuneka in the second verse of the priestly benediction: “The Lord make His face to shine upon you, and be gracious to you viḥuneka” (Numbers 6:25), combines with the previous cups for the good but does not combine for the bad. However, four cups do contain the element of danger associated with pairs.,Abaye and Rava both say that even the number four is not dangerous, as veyishmerekha, the third word in the first verse of the priestly benediction, reads: “The Lord bless you and keep you veyishmerekha” (Numbers 6:24). It combines for the good but does not combine for the bad.,And Rava follows his standard line of reasoning in this regard, as Rava allowed the Sages to leave after having drunk four cups and was not concerned for their safety. Although Rava bar Livai was injured on one such occasion, Rava was not concerned that the matter had been caused by his consumption of an even number of cups, as he said: That injury occurred because Rava bar Livai challenged me during the public lecture. It is improper for a student to raise difficulties against his rabbi during a public lecture, lest the rabbi be embarrassed by his inability to answer.,Rav Yosef said: Yosef the Demon said to me: Ashmedai, the king of the demons, is appointed over all who perform actions in pairs, and a king is not called a harmful spirit. A king would not cause harm. Consequently, there is no reason to fear the harm of demons for having performed an action in pairs. Some say this statement in this manner: On the contrary, he is an angry king who does what he wants, as the halakha is that a king may breach the fence of an individual in order to form a path for himself, and none may protest his action. Similarly, the king of demons has full license to harm people who perform actions in pairs.,Rav Pappa said: Yosef the Demon said to me: If one drinks two cups, we demons kill him; if he drinks four, we do not kill him. But this person who drank four, we harm him. There is another difference between two and four: With regard to one who drinks two, whether he did so unwittingly or intentionally, we harm him. With regard to one who drinks four, if he does so intentionally, yes, he is harmed; if he does so unwittingly, no, he will not be harmed.,The Gemara asks: And if one forgets and it happens that he goes outside after having drunk an even number of cups, what is his solution? The Gemara answers: He should take his right thumb in his left hand, and his left thumb in his right hand, and say as follows: You, my thumbs, and I are three, which is not a pair. And if he hears a voice that says: You and I are four, which makes a pair, he should say to it: You and I are five. And if he hears it say: You and I are six, he should say to it: You and I are seven. The Gemara relates that there was an incident in which someone kept counting after the demon until he reached a hundred and one, and the demon burst in anger.,Ameimar said: The chief of witches said to me: One who encounters witches should say this incantation: Hot feces in torn date baskets in your mouth, witches; may your hairs fall out because you use them for witchcraft; your crumbs, which you use for witchcraft, should scatter in the wind;' 113b When the tanna taught this baraita before Rava and Rav Safra, Rav Safra’s face lit up with joy, as he was listed among those praised by God. Rava said to him: This does not refer to someone like the Master. Rather, the statement applies to people like Rav Ḥanina and Rav Oshaya, who were cobblers in Eretz Yisrael, and they would sit in the marketplace of prostitutes and fashion shoes for prostitutes. And the prostitutes would enter their shops and look at them. However, due to their piety, these Sages did not raise their eyes to look at the women. And those prostitutes were so impressed with this behavior that when they swore, they would say as follows: By the lives of the holy Sages of Eretz Yisrael. It is this type of bachelor who is praised by Heaven.,The Gemara cites a similar statement. The Holy One, Blessed be He, loves three people: One who does not get angry; one who does not get drunk; and one who is forgiving. The Holy One, Blessed be He, hates three people: One who says one statement with his mouth and means another in his heart, i.e., a hypocrite; one who knows testimony about another person and does not testify on his behalf; and one who observes a licentious matter performed by another person and testifies against him alone. His testimony is meaningless, as he is the only witness; consequently, he merely gives the individual a bad reputation.,The Gemara comments: This is like that incident where Tuveya sinned with immorality, and Zigud came alone to testify about him before Rav Pappa. Rav Pappa instructed that Zigud be lashed. Zigud said to him: Tuveya sinned and Zigud is lashed, an objection that became a popular saying. He said to him: Yes, as it is written: “One witness shall not rise up against a man” (Deuteronomy 19:15), and you testified against him alone. You have merely given him a bad reputation.,Rabbi Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak said that Rav said: Although one who sees another committing a sin should not testify against him by himself, he is nonetheless permitted to hate him, as it is stated: “If you see the donkey of he who hates you lying under its load” (Exodus 23:5). The Gemara clarifies this verse: What is the meaning of he who hates you mentioned in the verse? If you say it is referring to a gentile who hates you, but wasn’t it taught in a baraita that the phrase: He who hates, of which the Torah spoke, is a Jew who hates you, not a gentile who hates you?,Rather, it is obvious that the verse is referring to a Jew who hates you. But is one permitted to hate a fellow Jew? But isn’t it written: “You shall not hate your brother in your heart” (Leviticus 19:17), which clearly prohibits the hatred of another Jew? Rather, perhaps you will say that the verse is referring to a situation where there are witnesses that he performed a sin. However, in that case, everyone else should also hate him. What is different about this particular person who hates him? Rather, is it not referring to a case like this, when he saw him perform a licentious matter? He is therefore permitted to hate him for his evil behavior, whereas others who are unaware of his actions may not hate him.,Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: Not only is this permitted, it is even a mitzva to hate him, as it is stated: “The fear of God is to hate evil” (Proverbs 8:13). Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi: What is the halakha with regard to whether one who saw someone sin may tell his teacher so that he too will hate him? Rav Ashi said to him: If the student knows that he is trusted by his teacher as two witnesses, and therefore his statement will be accepted, he should tell him, and if he is not trusted by his teacher as two witnesses, he should not tell him.,The Sages taught: There are three types of people whose lives are not lives, due to their constant suffering: The compassionate, the hot tempered, and the delicate. Rav Yosef said: All of these attributes are found in me.,Furthermore, the Sages taught: Members of three groups hate other members of the same group: Dogs, roosters, and the Persian priests. And some say: Also prostitutes. And some say: Also Torah scholars in Babylonia.,Likewise, the Sages taught: Members of three groups love one another: Converts, slaves, and ravens.,Four types of people cannot be endured by anyone: An arrogant pauper; a wealthy person who denies monetary claims against him; a lecherous old man; and a leader who lords over the community for no cause. And some say: Also one who divorces his wife once and twice and takes her back a third time. He should decide definitively whether or not he wants her.,The Gemara asks: And why didn’t the first tanna mention this case of a man who remarries his wife after two divorces? The Gemara answers: Sometimes the husband’s payment to her in the event of divorce, as stipulated in her marriage contract, is large, and since he is unable to pay he is forced to take her back. Alternatively, he has children with her and cannot divorce her, as he wants someone to care for them.,The Gemara continues: Canaan commanded his sons with regard to five matters that are apparently normal behavior for slaves: Love one another, love robbery, love promiscuity, hate your masters, and do not speak the truth.,Six matters are said with regard to a horse: It loves promiscuity, it loves war, its demeanor is arrogant, it despises sleep, it eats much, and it excretes little. And some say: Just as a horse always rushes straight into the heat of a battle, it also attempts to kill its master in war.,Seven are ostracized by Heaven, despite the fact that they have not been ostracized in any court: A Jew who does not have a wife; and one who has a wife but has no sons; and one who has sons whom he does not raise to engage in Torah study; and one who does not have phylacteries on his head, and phylacteries on his arm, and ritual fringes on his garment, and a mezuza in his doorway; and one who withholds shoes from his feet. And some say: Also one who does not sit with a group that is partaking of a feast in celebration of a mitzva.,Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Shmuel bar Marta said that Rav said, citing Rabbi Yosei of Hutzal: From where is it derived that one may not consult astrologers? As it is stated: “You shall be wholehearted with the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 18:13). The Torah demands absolute faith in God and acceptance of His justice, without attempting to predict the future.,And from where is it derived concerning one who knows about another that he is greater than him, even in one matter, that he must treat him with respect? As it is stated: “Because a surpassing spirit was in him, the king thought to set him over the whole realm” (Daniel 6:4). This verse teaches that one who is in any way greater than another person is worthy of his respect.,And it was also stated by Rabba bar bar Ḥana: With regard to a woman who was observing her days of ritually pure blood, and those days have ended, she is prohibited to engage in intimacy immediately, lest she see ritually impure blood. Any blood emitted by a woman within forty days after giving birth to a male child or eighty days after giving birth to a female child is ritually pure. After this period of time has passed, a woman should not have relations with her husband immediately. The Gemara asks: Until when is she prohibited to her husband? Rav said: She must wait a set interval of time for the ritual impurity of a nidda, i.e., either one day or one night.,With regard to Rabbi Yosei of Hutzal, it was taught: The Yosef of Hutzal mentioned in other places in the Gemara is the same person as Yosef the Babylonian. Yosef is the full name of Yosei. Furthermore, he is also known as Isi ben Gur Arye, he is Isi ben Yehuda, he is Isi ben Gamliel, and he is Isi ben Mahalalel. And what is his real name? His real name is Isi ben Akavya. Similarly, the Sage Rabbi Yitzḥak ben Tavla is also known as Rabbi Yitzḥak ben Ḥakla, who is Rabbi Yitzḥak ben Ela. These are two cases of one Sage with several names. ' None |
|
23. Babylonian Talmud, Qiddushin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Babylonian rabbinic culture, polemics against Zoroastrians • Sasanian Persia, Zoroastrianism • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrianism, as similar to Jewish priests and rabbis • Zoroastrianism, corpse exhumation • Zoroastrianism, dualism • Zoroastrianism, negative Jewish perception of • Zoroastrianism, persecution of others • Zoroastrianism, polemics against • Zoroastrianism, priesthood • Zoroastrianism, relation to Judaism • Zoroastrianism, religious study • ritual, Jewish, Zoroastrian
Found in books: Hayes (2022), The Literature of the Sages: A Re-Visioning, 408, 409; Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 41, 80, 86, 87; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 41, 80, 81, 86, 87
| 70b אין שואלין בשלום אשה על ידי בעלה אמר ליה הכי אמר שמואל אין שואלין בשלום אשה כלל שלחה ליה דביתהו שרי ליה תגריה דלא נישוויך כשאר עם הארץ,א"ל מאי שיאטיה דמר הכא אמר ליה טסקא דהזמנותא שדר מר אבתראי אמר ליה השתא שותא דמר לא גמירנא טסקא דהזמנותא משדרנא למר אפיק דיסקא דהזמנותא מבי חדיה ואחזי ליה אמר ליה הא גברא והא דסקא אמר ליה הואיל ואתא מר להכא לישתעי מיליה כי היכי דלא לימרו מחנפי רבנן אהדדי,אמר ליה מאי טעמא שמתיה מר לההוא גברא ציער שליחא דרבנן ונגדיה מר דרב מנגיד על מאן דמצער שלוחא דרבנן דעדיף מיניה עבדי ליה,מאי טעמא אכריז מר עליה דעבדא הוא אמר ליה דרגיל דקרי אינשי עבדי ותני כל הפוסל פסול ואינו מדבר בשבחא לעולם ואמר שמואל במומו פוסל אימר דאמר שמואל למיחש ליה לאכרוזי עליה מי אמר,אדהכי והכי (אתא ההוא בר דיניה מנהרדעי) א"ל ההוא בר דיניה לרב יהודה לדידי קרית לי עבדא דאתינא מבית חשמונאי מלכא אמר ליה הכי אמר שמואל כל דאמר מדבית חשמונאי קאתינא עבדא הוא,א"ל לא סבר לה מר להא דא"ר אבא אמר רב הונא אמר רב כל ת"ח שמורה הלכה ובא אם קודם מעשה אמרה שומעין לו ואם לאו אין שומעין לו אמר ליה הא איכא רב מתנה דקאי כוותי,רב מתנה לא חזייה לנהרדעא תליסר שני ההוא יומא אתא אמר ליה דכיר מר מאי אמר שמואל כי קאי חדא כרעא אגודא וחדא כרעא במברא א"ל הכי אמר שמואל כל דאמר מדבית חשמונאי מלכא קאתינא עבדא הוא דלא אישתיור מינייהו אלא ההיא רביתא דסלקא לאיגרא ורמיא קלא ואמרה כל דאמר מבית חשמונאי אנא עבדא הוא,נפלה מאיגרא ומיתה אכרוז עליה דעבדא הוא,ההוא יומא אקרען כמה כתובתא בנהרדעא כי קא נפיק נפקי אבתריה למירגמיה אמר להו אי שתיקו שתיקו ואי לא מגלינא עלייכו הא דאמר שמואל תרתי זרעייתא איכא בנהרדעא חדא מיקריא דבי יונה וחדא מיקריא דבי עורבתי וסימניך טמא טמא טהור טהור שדיוה לההוא ריגמא מידייהו וקם אטמא בנהר מלכא,מכריז רב יהודה בפומבדיתא אדא ויונתן עבדי יהודה בר פפא ממזירא בטי בר טוביה ברמות רוחא לא שקיל גיטא דחירותא מכריז רבא במחוזא בלאי דנאי טלאי מלאי זגאי כולם לפסול אמר רב יהודה גובאי גבעונאי דורנוניתא דראי נתינאי אמר רב יוסף האי בי כובי דפומבדיתא כולם דעבדי,אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל ארבע מאות עבדים ואמרי לה ארבעת אלפים עבדים היו לו לפשחור בן אימר וכולם נטמעו בכהונה וכל כהן שיש בו עזות פנים אינו אלא מהם אמר אביי כולהו יתבן בשורא דבנהרדעא ופליגא דרבי אלעזר דאמר ר\' אלעזר אם ראית כהן בעזות מצח אל תהרהר אחריו שנא\' (הושע ד, ד) ועמך כמריבי כהן,אמר רבי אבין בר רב אדא אמר רב כל הנושא אשה שאינה הוגנת לו כשהקב"ה משרה שכינתו מעיד על כל השבטים ואין מעיד עליו שנאמר (תהלים קכב, ד) שבטי יה עדות לישראל אימתי הוי עדות לישראל בזמן שהשבטים שבטי יה,אמר ר\' חמא ברבי חנינא כשהקב"ה משרה שכינתו אין משרה אלא על משפחות מיוחסות שבישראל שנא\' (ירמיהו לא, א) בעת ההיא נאם ה\' אהיה לאלהים לכל משפחות ישראל לכל ישראל לא נאמר אלא לכל משפחות,והמה יהיו לי לעם אמר רבה בר רב הונא זו מעלה יתירה יש בין ישראל לגרים דאילו בישראל כתיב בהו (יחזקאל לז, כז) והייתי להם לאלהים והמה יהיו לי לעם ואילו בגרים כתיב (ירמיהו ל, כא) מי הוא זה ערב את לבו לגשת אלי נאם ה\' והייתם לי לעם ואנכי אהיה לכם לאלהים,אמר רבי חלבו קשים גרים לישראל כספחת שנאמר (ישעיהו יד, א) ונלוה הגר עליהם ונספחו על בית יעקב כתיב הכא ונספחו וכתיב התם (ויקרא יד, נו) לשאת ולספחת,אמר רבי חמא בר חנינא כשהקדוש ברוך הוא'72a והאידנא הוא דליוה פרסאי אמר ליה אביי לרב יוסף להא גיסא דפרת עד היכא אמר ליה מאי דעתיך משום בירם מייחסי דפומבדיתא מבירם נסבי,אמר רב פפא כמחלוקת ליוחסין כך מחלוקת לענין גיטין ורב יוסף אמר מחלוקת ליוחסין אבל לגיטין דברי הכל עד ארבא תניינא דגישרא,אמר רמי בר אבא חביל ימא תכילתא דבבל שוניא וגוביא תכילתא דחביל ימא רבינא אמר אף ציצורא תניא נמי הכי חנן בן פנחס אומר חביל ימא תכילתא דבבל שוניא וגוביא וציצורא תכילתא דחביל ימא אמר רב פפא והאידנא איערבי בהו כותאי ולא היא איתתא הוא דבעא מינייהו ולא יהבו ליה מאי חביל ימא אמר רב פפא זו פרת דבורסי,ההוא גברא דאמר להו אנא מן שוט מישוט עמד רבי יצחק נפחא על רגליו ואמר שוט מישוט בין הנהרות עומדת וכי בין הנהרות עומדת מאי הוי אמר אביי אמר ר\' חמא בר עוקבא אמר רבי יוסי בר\' חנינא בין הנהרות הרי היא כגולה ליוחסין והיכא קיימא אמר ר\' יוחנן מאיהי דקירא ולעיל והא אמר רבי יוחנן עד מעברתא דגיזמא אמר אביי רצועה נפקא,אמר רב איקא בר אבין אמר רב חננאל אמר רב חלזון ניהוונד הרי היא כגולה ליוחסין א"ל אביי לא תציתו ליה יבמה היא דנפלה ליה התם א"ל אטו דידי היא דרב חננאל היא אזיל שיילוה לרב חננאל אמר להו הכי אמר רב חלזון ניהוונד הרי היא כגולה ליוחסין,ופליגא דר\' אבא בר כהנא דאמר ר\' אבא בר כהנא מאי דכתיב (מלכים ב יח, יא) וינחם בחלח ובחבור נהר גוזן וערי מדי חלח זו חלזון חבור זו הדייב נהר גוזן זו גינזק ערי מדי זו חמדן וחברותיה ואמרי לה זו נהוונד וחברותיה,מאי חברותיה אמר שמואל כרך מושכי חוסקי ורומקי אמר רבי יוחנן וכולם לפסול קסלקא דעתא מושכי היינו מושכני והאמר ר\' חייא בר אבין אמר שמואל מושכני הרי היא כגולה ליוחסין אלא מושכי לחוד ומושכני לחוד,(דניאל ז, ה) ותלת עלעין בפומה בין שיניה אמר רבי יוחנן זו חלזון הדייב ונציבין שפעמים בולעתן ופעמים פולטתן,(דניאל ז, ה) וארו חיוא אחרי תנינא דמיה לדוב תני רב יוסף אלו פרסיים שאוכלין ושותין כדוב ומסורבלין כדוב ומגדלין שער כדוב ואין להם מנוחה כדוב ר\' אמי כי הוה חזי פרסא דרכיב אמר היינו דובא ניידא,א"ל רבי ללוי הראני פרסיים אמר ליה דומים לחיילות של בית דוד הראני חברין דומין למלאכי חבלה הראני ישמעאלים דומין לשעירים של בית הכסא הראני תלמידי חכמים שבבבל דומים למלאכי השרת,כי הוה ניחא נפשיה דרבי אמר הומניא איכא בבבל כולה עמונאי היא מסגריא איכא בבבל כולה דממזירא היא בירקא איכא בבבל שני אחים יש שמחליפים נשותיהם זה לזה בירתא דסטיא איכא בבבל היום סרו מאחרי המקום דאקפי פירא בכוורי בשבתא ואזיל וצדו בהו בשבתא ושמתינהו ר\' אחי ברבי יאשיה ואישתמוד אקרא דאגמא איכא בבבל אדא בר אהבה יש בה 73a חד לכהנים וחד ללוים וחד לישראלים וחד למישרי ממזר בשתוקי וחד למישרי שתוקי בישראל קהל גרים לא איקרי קהל ורבי יהודה כהנים ולוים מחד קהל נפקי אייתר ליה לקהל גרים,ואיבעית אימא ה"נ תרי קהלי נינהו ממזר בשתוקי ושתוקי בישראל מחד קהל נפקא (דברים כג, ג) לא יבא ממזר בקהל ה\',ממזר ודאי הוא דלא יבא הא ממזר ספק יבא בקהל ודאי הוא דלא יבא הא בקהל ספק יבא,ואיבעית אימא הני נמי תרי קהלי נינהו וטעמיה דרבי יהודה מהכא (במדבר טו, טו) הקהל חוקה אחת לכם ולגר הגר ולרבי יוסי חוקה אחת הפסיק הענין,אחד גר ואחד עבד משוחרר וחלל מותרין בכהנת מסייעא ליה לרב דאמר רב יהודה אמר רב לא הוזהרו כשירות להנשא לפסולים,דרש ר\' זירא במחוזא גר מותר בממזרת רגמוהו כולי עלמא באתרוגייהו אמר רבא מי איכא דדריש מילתא כי האי בדוכתא דשכיחי גיורי דרש רבא במחוזא גר מותר בכהנת טענוהו בשיראי הדר דרש להו גר מותר בממזרת אמרו ליה אפסידתא לקמייתא אמר להו דטבא לכו עבדי לכו אי בעי מהכא נסיב ואי בעי מהכא נסיב,והילכתא גר מותר בכהנת ומותר בממזרת מותר בכהנת לא הוזהרו כשירות להנשא לפסולים ומותר בממזרת כרבי יוסי,אלו הן שתוקי כל שמכיר אמר רבא דבר תורה שתוקי כשר מאי טעמא רוב כשרים אצלה ומיעוט פסולין אצלה,ואי אזלי אינהו לגבה כל דפריש מרובא פריש מאי אמרת דילמא אזלה איהי לגבייהו הוה ליה קבוע וכל קבוע כמחצה על מחצה דמי,והתורה אמרה (דברים כג, ג) לא יבא ממזר ממזר ודאי הוא דלא יבא הא ממזר ספק יבא בקהל ודאי הוא דלא יבא הא בקהל ספק יבא,ומה טעם אמרו שתוקי פסול גזירה שמא ישא אחותו מאביו אלא מעתה שתוקי שתוקית לא ישא שמא ישא אחותו מאביו,כל כי הני מזנו ואזלי בת שתוקית לא ישא שמא ישא אחותו מאביו אלא לא שכיחא ה"נ לא שכיחא,אלא מעלה עשו ביוחסין,ואמר רבא דבר תורה אסופי כשר מאי טעמא אשת איש בבעלה תולה מאי איכא מיעוט ארוסות ומיעוט שהלך בעליהם למדינת הים,כיון דאיכא פנויה ואיכא נמי דמחמת רעבון הוה פלגא ופלגא והתורה אמרה לא יבא ממזר בקהל ה\' ממזר ודאי הוא דלא יבא הא ממזר ספק יבא בקהל ודאי הוא דלא יבא הא בקהל ספק יבא,ומה טעם אמרו אסופי פסול שמא ישא אחותו מאביו אלא מעתה אסופי אסופית לא ישא שמא ישא אחותו בין מאביו בין מאמו כל הני שדי ואזלי בת אסופי לא ישא שמא ישא אחותו אלא לא שכיח ה"נ לא שכיח,אלא מעלה עשו ביוחסים,אמר רבא בר רב הונא מצאו מהול 76b מוקים לה בלויה ובת ישראל אלא מתניתא נימא פליגא לא מאי עוד אחת זוג אחת,אמר רב יהודה א"ר זו דברי ר\' מאיר אבל חכמים אומרים כל משפחות בחזקת כשרות הן עומדות איני והאמר רב חמא בר גוריא אמר רב משנתינו כשקורא עליו ערער מאן דמתני הא לא מתני הא,איכא דאמרי אמר רב יהודה אמר רב זו דברי ר\' מאיר אבל חכמים אומרים כל משפחות בחזקת כשרות הן עומדות אמר רב חמא בר גוריא אמר רב אם קורא עליו ערער צריך לבדוק אחריה,אין בודקין מן המזבח ולמעלה מאי טעמא אי לאו דבדקוה לא הוו מסקי ליה ולא מן הדוכן ולמעלה מאי טעמא דאמר מר ששם היו יושבים מייחסי כהונה ומייחסי לויה,ולא מסנהדרין ולמעלה מאי טעמא דתני רב יוסף כשם שבית דין מנוקין בצדק כך מנוקין מכל מום אמר מרימר מאי קראה (שיר השירים ד, ז) כולך יפה רעיתי ומום אין בך,אימא מומא ממש אמר רב אחא בר יעקב אמר קרא (במדבר יא, טז) והתיצבו שם עמך עמך בדומים לך,ודלמא משום שכינה אמר רב נחמן אמר קרא (שמות יח, כב) והקל מעליך ונשאו אתך בדומים לך,כל מי שהוחזקו אבותיו משוטרי הרבים למימרא דלא מוקמינן מפסולים ורמינהו הכל כשרים לדון דיני ממונות ואין הכל כשרים לדון דיני נפשות והוינן בה הכל לאיתויי מאי ואמר רב יהודה לאיתויי ממזר אמר אביי בירושלים וכן תני רב שמעון בר זירא בקידושי דבי לוי בירושלים,וגבאי צדקה משיאים מאי טעמא כיון דמנצו בהדי אינשי דאמר מר ממשכנים על הצדקה ואפילו בערב שבת ואם איתא דאיכא אית ליה קלא,אושפזיכניה דרב אדא בר אהבה גיורא הוה והוה קא מנצי איהו ורב ביבי מר אמר אנא עבידנא סררותא דמתא ומר אמר אנא עבידנא סררותא דמתא אתו לקמיה דרב יוסף אמר להו תנינא (דברים יז, טו) שום תשים עליך מלך מקרב אחיך כל משימות שאתה משים לא יהיה אלא מקרב אחיך,אמר ליה רב אדא בר אהבה ואפילו אמו מישראל אמר ליה אמו מישראל מקרב אחיך קרינא ביה הלכך רב ביבי דגברא רבא הוא ליעיין במילי דשמיא ומר ליעיין במילי דמתא אמר אביי הלכך מאן דמשרי צורבא מדרבנן באושפיזיכניה לאשרי כרב אדא בר אהבה דידע למהפיך ליה בזכותיה,רבי זירא מטפל בהו רבה בר אבוה מטפל בהו במערבא אפילו ריש כורי לא מוקמי מינייהו בנהרדעא אפי\' ריש גרגותא לא מוקמי מינייהו,רבי יוסי אומר אף מי שהיה וכו\' מאי טעמא דייקי ומחתמי,רבי חנינא בן אנטיגנוס וכו\' אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל בחיילות של בית דוד אמר רב יוסף מאי קרא (דברי הימים א ז, מ) והתיחשם בצבא במלחמה וטעמא מאי אמר רב יהודה אמר רב כדי שתהא זכותן וזכות אבותם מסייעתן,והאיכא (שמואל ב כג, לז) צלק העמוני מאי לאו דאתי מעמון לא דיתיב בעמון והאיכא (שמואל ב כג, לט) אוריה החתי מאי לאו דאתי מחת לא דיתיב בחת,והאיכא (שמואל ב טו, יט) אתי הגיתי וכי תימא הכי נמי דיתיב בגת והא אמר רב נחמן אתי הגיתי בא ובטלה,ועוד אמר רב יהודה אמר רב ארבע מאות ילדים היו לו לדוד וכולם בני יפת תואר היו וכולם מסתפרים קומי ומגדלים בלורית היו וכולם יושבים בקרוניות של זהב והיו מהלכים בראשי גייסות והן הן בעלי אגרופים של בית דוד דאזלי לבעותי עלמא ' None | 70b One may not send greetings to a woman even with a messenger, as this may cause the messenger and the woman to relate to each other inappropriately. Rav Naḥman countered by suggesting that he send his greetings with her husband, which would remove all concerns. Rav Yehuda said to him: This is what Shmuel says: One may not send greetings to a woman at all. Yalta, his wife, who overheard that Rav Yehuda was getting the better of the exchange, sent a message to him: Release him and conclude your business with him, so that he not equate you with another ignoramus.,Desiring to release Rav Yehuda, Rav Naḥman said to him: What is the reason that the Master is here? Rav Yehuda said to him: The Master sent me a summons. Rav Naḥman said to him: Now that I have not even learned the Master’s form of speech, as you have demonstrated your superiority to me by reproving me even over such matters, could I have sent a summons to the Master? Rav Yehuda removed the summons from his bosom and showed it to him. While doing so, Rav Yehuda said to him: Here is the man and here is the document. Rav Naḥman said to him: Since the Master has come here, let him present his statement, in order that people should not say: The Sages flatter one another and do not judge each other according to the letter of the law.,Rav Naḥman commenced the deliberation, and said to him: What is the reason that the Master excommunicated that man? Rav Yehuda replied: He caused discomfort to an agent of one of the Sages, and therefore he deserved the punishment of one who causes discomfort to a Torah scholar. Rav Naḥman challenged this answer: If so, let the Master flog him, as Rav would flog one who causes discomfort to an agent of the Sages. Rav Yehuda responded: I punished him more severely than that. Rabbi Yehuda held that excommunication is a more severe punishment than flogging.,Rav Naḥman further inquired: What is the reason that the Master proclaimed about him that he is a slave? Rav Yehuda said to him: Because he is in the habit of calling people slaves, and it is taught: Anyone who disqualifies others by stating that their lineage is flawed, that is a sign that he himself is of flawed lineage. Another indication of his lineage being flawed is that he never speaks in praise of others. And Shmuel said: He disqualifies with his own flaw. Rav Naḥman retorted: You can say that Shmuel said this halakha only to the degree that one should suspect him of being of flawed lineage. But did he actually say this to the extent that one could proclaim about him that he is of flawed lineage?,The Gemara continues the story: Meanwhile, that litigant arrived from Neharde’a. That litigant said to Rav Yehuda: You call me a slave? I, who come from the house of the Hasmonean kings? Rav Yehuda said to him: This is what Shmuel says: Anyone who says: I come from the house of the Hasmonean kings, is a slave. As will be explained, only slaves remained of their descendants.,Rav Naḥman, who heard this exchange, said to Rav Yehuda: Does the Master not hold in accordance with this halakha that Rabbi Abba says that Rav Huna says that Rav says: With regard to any Torah scholar who proceeds to teach a ruling of halakha with regard to a particular issue, if he said it before an action that concerns himself occurred, they should listen to him, and his ruling is accepted. But if not, if he quoted the halakha only after he was involved in an incident related to the halakha he is quoting, they do not listen to him, due to his personal involvement? Your testimony with regard to what Shmuel ruled should be ignored, as you stated it only after the incident. Rav Yehuda said to Rav Naḥman: There is Rav Mattana, who stands by my report, since he has also heard this ruling of Shmuel.,The Gemara continues: Rav Mattana had not seen the city of Neharde’a for thirteen years. That very day he arrived. Rav Yehuda said to him: Does the Master remember what Shmuel said when he was standing with one foot on the bank and one foot on the ferry? Rav Mattana said to him: This is what Shmuel said at that time: Anyone who says: I come from the house of the Hasmonean kings, is a slave, as none remained of them except for that young girl who ascended to the roof and raised her voice and said: From now on, anyone who says: I come from the house of the Hasmonean kings, is a slave. Other than this girl, the only members of the family who remained were descendants of Herod, and he was an Edomite slave.,The girl then fell from the roof and died, leaving only slaves from the Hasmoneans. With the confirmation of the report of the statement of Shmuel, they also publicized in Neharde’a about him, i.e., that man who claimed to come from the Hasmonean kings, that he was a slave.,The Gemara relates: On that day, several marriage contracts were torn up in Neharde’a, as many had their marriages annulled after having discovered that they had married slaves. When Rav Yehuda was leaving Neharde’a, they pursued him, seeking to stone him, as because of him it was publicized that their lineage was flawed. Rav Yehuda said to them: If you are silent, remain silent. And if you will not remain silent, I will reveal about you this statement that Shmuel said: There are two lines of offspring in Neharde’a. One is called the dove’s house, and one is called the raven’s house. And your mnemonic with regard to lineage is: The impure bird, the raven, is impure, meaning flawed, and the pure one, the dove, is pure, meaning unflawed. Upon hearing this, they threw all those stones that they were intending to stone him with from their hands, as they did not want him to reveal who had a flawed lineage. And as a result of all of the stones thrown into the river, a dam arose in the Malka River.,§ The Gemara continues the discussion of those with a flawed lineage: Rav Yehuda proclaimed in Pumbedita: Adda and Yonatan, known residents of that town, are slaves; Yehuda bar Pappa is a mamzer; Bati bar Tuviyya, in his arrogance, did not accept a bill of manumission and is still a slave. Rava proclaimed in his city of Meḥoza: Balla’ai, Danna’ai, Talla’ai, Malla’ai, Zagga’ai: All these families are of flawed lineage. Rav Yehuda likewise says: Gova’ai, the inhabitants of a place called Gova, are in fact Gibeonites, and their name has been corrupted. Similarly, those people known as Dorenunita are from the village of Gibeonites, and they may not marry Jews with unflawed lineage. Rav Yosef says: With regard to this place called Bei Kuvei of Pumbedita, its residents are all descendants of slaves.,Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: Four hundred slaves, and some say four thousand slaves, were owned by Pashḥur ben Immer, a priest in the time of Jeremiah, and due to their greatness they were assimilated into the priesthood and became known as priests. And any priest who has the trait of insolence is only from them. Abaye said: They all sit in the rows of honor that are in the city of Neharde’a. The Gemara comments: And this statement disagrees with the statement of Rabbi Elazar, as Rabbi Elazar says: If you see an insolent priest, do not speculate about him that he may be of flawed lineage, since it is stated: “For your people are as those who strive with a priest” (Hosea 4:4), which indicates that priests had a reputation for being cantankerous.,§ The Gemara discusses an idea raised earlier. Rabbi Avin bar Rav Adda says that Rav says: Concerning anyone who marries a woman who is not suited for him to marry, when the Holy One, Blessed be He, rests His Divine Presence upon the Jewish people, He testifies with regard to all the tribes that they are His people, but He does not testify with regard to he who married improperly, as it is stated: “The tribes of the Lord, as a testimony to Israel” (Psalms 122:4). When is it a testimony to Israel? When the tribes are the tribes of the Lord, but not when their lineage is flawed.,Rabbi Ḥama, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says: When the Holy One, Blessed be He, rests His Divine Presence, He rests it only upon families of unflawed lineage among Israel, as it is stated: “At that time, says the Lord, will I be the God of all the families of Israel” (Jeremiah 30:25). of all Israel, is not stated, but “of all the families,” which includes only those of unflawed lineage, the renowned families of Israel.,The verse from Jeremiah ends with the words “And they shall be my people.” Rabba bar Rav Huna says: This is a higher standard that differentiates between those born as Jews and converts, as with regard to those born as Jews it is written about them: “And I will be their God, and they shall be My people” (Ezekiel 37:27), whereas with regard to converts it is written: “For who is he that has pledged his heart to approach unto Me? says the Lord. And you shall be My people, and I will be your God” (Jeremiah 30:21–22). This teaches that converts are not drawn close to God, as indicated by the words “And I will be your God,” until they first draw themselves near to God, as indicated by the subsequent phrase “And you shall be my people.”,Rabbi Ḥelbo says: Converts are as difficult for the Jewish people as a scab. The proof is that it is stated: “And the convert shall join himself with them, and they shall cleave venispeḥu to the house of Jacob” (Isaiah 14:1). It is written here “venispeḥu,” and it is written there, among the types of leprosy: “And for a sore and for a scab sappaḥat” (Leviticus 14:56). The use of a term with a similar root indicates that converts are like a scab for the Jewish people.,Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina says: When the Holy One, Blessed be He,'72a And it is only now that the Persians moved the bridge further up northward. Abaye said to Rav Yosef: Until where does the border extend on this western side of the Euphrates? Rav Yosef said to him: What are you thinking? Why do you ask? Is it due to the town of Biram? Even those of pure lineage who live in Pumbedita marry women from Biram, which demonstrates that the residents of Biram are presumed to have unflawed lineage.,Rav Pappa says: Just as there is a dispute between Rav and Shmuel as to the northern border of Babylonia with regard to lineage, so is there a dispute with regard to bills of divorce. An agent bringing a bill of divorce from a country overseas to Eretz Yisrael must state that it was written and signed in his presence. If he brought it from Babylonia, there is no requirement for him to state this. Rav Pappa is teaching that the borders that define Babylonia with regard to this issue are the same as the borders with regard to lineage. And Rav Yosef says: This dispute is with regard to lineage, but with regard to bills of divorce, everyone agrees that it is considered Babylonia up to the second lake of the bridge that Shmuel mentioned.,Rami bar Abba said: The province of Ḥaveil Yamma is the glory of Babylonia with regard to lineage; Shunya and Guvya are the glory of Ḥaveil Yamma. Ravina said: The town of Tzitzora is also like Shunya and Guvya. This is also taught in a baraita: Ḥa ben Pineḥas says: Ḥaveil Yamma is the glory of Babylonia; Shunya and Guvya and Tzitzora are the glory of Ḥaveil Yamma. Rav Pappa says: And nowadays, Samaritans have assimilated with them, and their lineage is problematic. The Gemara comments: And that is not so. Rather, one Samaritan requested to marry a woman from them and they would not give her to him, which led to the rumor that Samaritans had assimilated with them. The Gemara asks: What is this region called Ḥaveil Yamma? Rav Pappa said: This is the area near the Euphrates adjacent to Bursi.,The Gemara relates: There was a certain man who said to the Sages: I am from a place called Shot Mishot. Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa stood on his feet and said: Shot Mishot is located between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers. The Gemara asks: And if it is located between the rivers, what of it? What halakha is this relevant for? Abaye said that Rabbi Ḥama bar Ukva says that Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says: The area between the rivers is like the exile, meaning Pumbedita, with regard to lineage. The Gemara inquires: And where is the area between the rivers located for the purpose of this halakha? Rabbi Yoḥa said: From Ihi Dekira and upward, i.e., northward. The Gemara asks: But doesn’t Rabbi Yoḥa say: Until the crossing at Gizma but no further? Abaye said: A strip extends from that region past Ihi Dekira.,Rav Ika bar Avin says that Rav Ḥael says that Rav says: Ḥillazon Nihavnad is like the exile with regard to lineage. Abaye said to them: Do not listen to Rav Ika bar Avin about this, as it was a yevama who fell before him from there to perform levirate marriage, and he said that its lineage was unflawed because he wished to marry her. Rav Ika bar Avin said to him: Is that to say that this halakha is mine? It is Rav Ḥael’s, and it is not reasonable to say that I was influenced by my own interests in stating it. They went and asked Rav Ḥael. He said to them: Rav said as follows: Ḥillazon Nihavnad is like the exile with regard to lineage.,The Gemara comments: And this disagrees with the statement of Rabbi Abba bar Kahana, as Rabbi Abba bar Kahana says: What is the meaning of that which is written with regard to the exile of the ten tribes of the kingdom of Israel: “And he put them in Halah, and in Habor, on the river of Gozan, and in the cities of the Medes” (II\xa0Kings 18:11)? Halah is Ḥillazon; Habor is Hadyav; the river of Gozan is Ginzak; the cities of the Medes are Ḥamadan and its neighboring towns, and some say: This is Nihavnad and its neighboring towns. Since the ten tribes assimilated with the gentiles, the lineage of Jews from those places is flawed, unlike that which was taught before.,The Gemara asks: What are the neighboring towns of Nihavnad? Shmuel said: The city of Mushekhei, Ḥosekei, and Rumekei. Rabbi Yoḥa says: And all of these are the same with regard to flawed lineage. It was assumed that Mushekhei is the same as Mushekanei. The Gemara therefore asks: But doesn’t Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Avin say that Shmuel says: Mushekanei is like the exile with regard to lineage? Rather, it must be that Mushekhei is discrete, and Mushekanei is discrete.,In connection to the aforementioned places, the Gemara analyzes the following verse, describing a vision of a bear-like animal: “And it had three ribs in its mouth between its teeth” (Daniel 7:5). Rabbi Yoḥa says: This is Ḥillazon, Hadyav, and Netzivin, which the Persian government sometimes swallows and sometimes discharges. In other words, control over these places passed from the Persians to the Romans and back again several times.,The first part of that verse stated: “And behold a second beast, similar to a bear” (Daniel 7:5). Rav Yosef taught: These are Persians, who eat and drink copious amounts like a bear, and are corpulent like a bear, and grow hair like a bear, and have no rest like a bear, which is constantly on the move from one place to another. When Rabbi Ami saw a Persian riding, he would say: This is a bear on the move.,Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to Levi: Show me Persians, i.e., describe a typical Persian to me. Levi said to him: They are similar to the legions of the house of David. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: Show me Ḥabbarin, Persian priests. Levi said to him: They are similar to angels of destruction. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: Show me Ishmaelites. Levi said to him: They are similar to demons of an outhouse. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: Show me Torah scholars of Babylonia. Levi said to him: They are similar to ministering angels.,When Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was dying, he said prophetically: There is a place called Homanya in Babylonia, and all its people are the sons of Ammon. There is a place called Masgariya in Babylonia, and all its people are mamzerim. There is a place called Bireka in Babylonia, and there are two brothers there who exchange wives with each other, and their children are therefore mamzerim. There is a place called Bireta DeSatya in Babylonia. Today they turned away from the Omnipresent. What did they do? A ditch with fish overflowed, and they went and trapped the fish on Shabbat. Rabbi Aḥai, son of Rabbi Yoshiya, excommunicated them, and they all became apostates. There is a place called Akra DeAgma in Babylonia. There is a man named Adda bar Ahava there. 73a One is referring to priests, to teach that people with flawed lineage may not enter their congregation; and one is referring to Levites; and one to Israelites; and one serves to permit a mamzer to marry a shetuki, since a mamzer is prohibited from entering only the congregation of God, but he may marry someone who is not definitely a member of the congregation, e.g., a shetuki; and one serves to permit a shetuki to marry an Israelite, as only one who is a definite mamzer may not marry an Israelite. As for the congregation of converts, it is not called a congregation at all, and they may marry those prohibited from entering the congregation of Israel. And Rabbi Yehuda holds that priests and Levites are derived from one instance of the word “congregation,” since they are from the same tribe, that of Levi. Consequently, one instance of the word “congregation” remains for him to interpret. He interprets it as referring to the congregation of converts, and deems it prohibited for a mamzer to enter that congregation as well.,And if you wish, say: So too, Rabbi Yehuda agrees with Rabbi Yosei that Levites and priests are two congregations, since there are special halakhot of marriage that apply only to priests. Rather, Rabbi Yehuda holds that the permissibility of the marriage of a mamzer with a shetuki and a shetuki with an Israelite is derived from one instance of the word “congregation,” from the verse: “A mamzer shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord” (Deuteronomy 23:3).,This is accomplished by inferring the following: It is one who is a definite mamzer who may not enter, but one who is a mamzer as a result of an uncertainty, e.g., a shetuki, may enter. And similarly, it is into the congregation of those with definite unflawed lineage that a mamzer may not enter, but into a congregation of those with uncertain lineage, e.g., a shetuki, he may enter. This verse therefore teaches that both types of marriage are permitted. In any event, Rabbi Yehuda remains with one instance of the word “congregation” to interpret, from which he derives that it is also prohibited for a convert to marry a mamzeret.,And if you wish, say: These too, one who is a definite mamzer and one who is a mamzer as the result of an uncertainty, are two congregations, each requiring its own verse, and the reason of Rabbi Yehuda is from here: “As for the congregation, there shall be one statute both for you, and for the stranger that sojourns with you” (Numbers 15:15), which indicates that converts are considered like Israelites with regard to their being included in the category of “congregation.” And according to Rabbi Yosei, who holds that a convert may marry a mamzeret, the phrase “one statute” interrupts the matter, and converts are not considered part of the congregation of God.,§ The Gemara comments: The statement of the Tosefta that a convert, and an emancipated slave, and a ḥalal are all permitted to marry the daughter of a priest supports the opinion of Rav, as Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: Women of unflawed lineage who are daughters of priests were not prohibited from marrying those disqualified from the priesthood due to flawed lineage ḥalalim, since that prohibition applies only to male priests.,Rabbi Zeira taught in Meḥoza: It is permitted for a convert to marry a mamzeret. Everyone stoned him with their etrogim, since the many converts present were insulted by his statement, which they understood to mean that converts are not members of God’s congregation. Rava said: Is there a person who teaches such a matter in a place where there are commonly converts? He should have been more circumspect. Rava himself taught this in Meḥoza to ameliorate the situation: It is permitted for a convert to marry the daughter of a priest. They carried him on silk beshira’ei for elevating the honor of converts. He later taught them: It is permitted for a convert to marry a mamzeret. They said to him: You have forfeited the honor of your first sermon. Rava said to them: I have done for you what is good for you. If a convert wishes, he may marry from here, i.e., from those of pure lineage, and if he wishes, he may marry from here, i.e., a mamzeret.,The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is: It is permitted for a convert to marry the daughter of a priest, and it is permitted for him to marry a mamzeret. It is permitted for a convert to marry the daughter of a priest, since women of unflawed lineage were not prohibited from marrying those disqualified for the priesthood. And it is permitted for him to marry a mamzeret, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, who holds that the congregation of converts is not called a congregation.,§ The mishna teaches: And these are the last two categories: A shetuki is any person who knows the identity of his mother but does not know the identity of his father. Rava says: By Torah law, a shetuki is fit to enter the congregation. What is the reason for this? Most are fit with regard to her, i.e., most men are fit to engage in intercourse with an unmarried woman, and only a minority are unfit with regard to engaging in intercourse with her. There are few men who are related to a woman in a way that would render the offspring mamzerim.,Rava analyzes two possibilities: And if they came to her, i.e., if the father came to the mother’s location when the child was conceived, the following principle with regard to an uncertain prohibition takes effect: Anything that separates from its fixed location is presumed to have separated from the majority of items like it in that location. If the father separated from the population at large and came to the mother, one can assume that he was from the majority, who are of unflawed lineage. What might you say, that perhaps she went to them, and the child was conceived in the place where the father was? In such a case, it is an uncertain prohibition located in its fixed place, and the halakhic principle is: Anything fixed is considered as though it were half and half, i.e., fifty percent, and it remains a case of uncertainty, and it should be prohibited for the shetuki to marry a Jew with unflawed lineage.,And in any case, this does not suffice to prevent her shetuki child from marrying a Jew with unflawed lineage, since the Torah states: “A mamzer shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord” (Deuteronomy 23:3), which indicates: It is a definite mamzer who may not enter, but one who is a mamzer as a result of an uncertainty may enter. Similarly, it is into a congregation of those with definite unflawed lineage that he may not enter, but into a congregation of those with uncertain lineage he may enter. Therefore, even if it is uncertain if one is a mamzer, by Torah law he may marry a Jew with unflawed lineage.,And for what reason did the Sages nevertheless say that a shetuki is of flawed lineage? Due to a rabbinic decree, lest he marry his sister from his father, since the identity of his father is unknown. The Gemara asks: If that is so, it should not be permitted for a shetuki to marry even a female shetuki, lest he marry his sister from his father.,The Gemara responds: And do people engage in licentiousness to such an extent that one should be concerned that all the children of unknown paternity in one city were fathered by the same man? By the same reasoning, there should also be a decree that a shetuki may not marry the daughter of a female shetuki from a proper marriage, lest he marry his sister from his father, since the man who married the female shetuki might have been his father. Rather, it must be that it is not common for a shetuki to happen to marry his sister, and therefore he may marry the daughter of a female shetuki. So too, it is not common for him to happen to marry his sister, and the Sages would not issue a decree to prevent this from occurring.,The question therefore remains, why did they render it prohibited for a shetuki to marry a Jew with unflawed lineage? The Gemara answers that it is not prohibited for a shetuki to marry a Jew with unflawed lineage due to any halakhic concern. Rather, the Sages established a higher standard with regard to lineage, in that they rendered it prohibited for people from unknown backgrounds to marry those with unflawed lineage.,And Rava says a similar statement: By Torah law, a foundling, a child found in the marketplace whose parents are unknown, is fit, and there is no concern that the child is a mamzer. What is the reason for this? A married woman who becomes pregt through extramarital intercourse, which results in the child being a mamzer, ascribes the child to her husband. Since everyone assumes that her husband is the father, she has no reason to abandon the child in the marketplace. What case is there where a mother would want to abandon her mamzer child? There is the minority of situations involving betrothed women who committed adultery but cannot claim that her betrothed is the father, as they had not been living together. And there is the minority of women whose husbands have gone overseas and could not have fathered the children.,Since there are many other cases of unmarried women who do abandon their children although those children have unflawed lineage, and there are also children with unflawed lineage who are abandoned by their parents due to hunger, the concern that the child is a mamzer is no more than half and half, i.e., fifty percent. And the Torah states: “A mamzer shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord” (Deuteronomy 23:3), which indicates: It is one who is a definite mamzer who may not enter, but one who is a mamzer as a result of an uncertainty may enter. Similarly, it is into a congregation of those with definite unflawed lineage that he may not enter, but into a congregation of those with uncertain lineage he may enter. This child is a mamzer as the result of an uncertainty, and by Torah law may marry a Jew with unflawed lineage.,And for what reason did the Sages say that a foundling is unfit? Lest he marry his sister from his father. The Gemara asks: If that is so, it should not be permitted for a foundling to marry even a female foundling, lest he marry his sister from either his father or his mother. The Gemara rejects this: Are they continually throwing away all these children? Is it likely that the same parents abandoned both a son and a daughter? If you accept that suggestion, it should not be permitted for him to marry the daughter of a foundling, lest he marry his sister, as perhaps the father of the one he wishes to marry is his father as well. Rather, it must be that it is not common for a foundling to happen to marry his sister, and therefore he may marry the daughter of a foundling. So too, it is not common for him to happen to marry his sister, and the Sages would not make a decree to prevent this from occurring.,The question therefore remains: Why did they prohibit a foundling from marrying a Jew with unflawed lineage? The Gemara answers that it is prohibited for a foundling to marry a Jew with unflawed lineage not due to any halakhic concern. Rather, the Sages established a higher standard with regard to lineage, in that they rendered it prohibited for people from unknown backgrounds to marry those with unflawed lineage.,§ Rava bar Rav Huna says: If an abandoned boy was found circumcised, 76b he interprets his statement as referring to a Levite woman or an Israelite woman, about whom the mishna states that one must investigate one additional generation. Therefore, Rav Adda bar Ahava’s ruling accords with that of the mishna. But shall we say the baraita disputes the mishna? The Gemara rejects this: No, what is the meaning of the mishna’s phrase: One additional? It means one pair, i.e., two more mothers on each side.,Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: This mishna presents the statement of Rabbi Meir, but the Rabbis say: All families retain a presumptive status of fitness, and do not require investigation. The Gemara asks: Is that so, did Rav really say this? But doesn’t Rav Ḥama bar Gurya say that Rav says: Our mishna is referring only to a case when an objection was registered about the family concerning its lineage, but if no objection was registered, everyone agrees that the family retains its presumptive status of fitness. The Gemara answers: The one who taught this statement in the name of Rav did not teach that other statement.,There are those who say that this discussion occurred as follows: Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: This mishna presents the statement of Rabbi Meir, but the Rabbis say: All families retain presumptive status of fitness. Rav Ḥama bar Gurya says that Rav says: When an objection is registered about a family concerning its lineage, everyone agrees that he must investigate it. According to this version, there is no contradiction between these two complementary statements.,§ The mishna teaches that one need not investigate from the altar and above. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? The Gemara answers: If the Sanhedrin had not examined his lineage they would not have allowed him to ascend to the altar and perform the sacrificial rites. The mishna further teaches: Nor must one investigate from the platform and above. The Gemara asks: What is the reason? The Gemara answers: It is as the Master said in his description of the Temple chambers (Tosefta, Ḥagiga 2:4): For there in the Hewn Chamber those of the priesthood with unflawed lineage and the Levites of unflawed lineage sat and examined the lineage of everyone who came to serve in the Temple.,The mishna also taught: Nor must one investigate from the Sanhedrin and above. What is the reason there is no need to investigate further? The Gemara answers: It is as Rav Yosef taught that just as the court is clean in justice, so too, it is clean of any blemish, i.e., it does not include anyone of flawed lineage. Mareimar said: What is the verse from which it is derived? It states: “You are all fair, my love; and there is no blemish in you” (Song of Songs 4:7).,The Gemara asks: But perhaps you should say that this is referring to an actual blemish, that one who has a physical blemish may not be appointed to the Sanhedrin. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: It is not necessary to derive the halakha that one who has a physical blemish may not be appointed to the Sanhedrin from this verse, as the verse states with regard to the transfer of the Divine Spirit from Moses to the Elders: “That they may stand there with you” (Numbers 11:16), and the phrase “with you” is explained to mean: With similarity to you, teaching that the members of the Sanhedrin must be whole in body like Moses.,The Gemara rejects this proof: But perhaps those who were with Moses had to be free of any blemish due to the Divine Presence, which rested upon them, but this is not a requirement for judges on the Sanhedrin. Rav Naḥman said that the verse states: “So shall they make it easier for you and bear the burden with you” (Exodus 18:22). The phrase “with you” is explained to mean: With similarity to you, i.e., without blemish. This verse is referring to the appointment of regular judges, upon whom the Divine Presence does not rest, and teaches that all members of the Sanhedrin must be whole in body. The verse from Song of Songs teaches that they must be of unflawed lineage as well.,§ The mishna teaches: Anyone whose ancestors held public posts may marry into the priesthood without investigation. The Gemara asks: Is this to say that we do not establish officers and other public appointees from people with flawed lineage? And the Gemara raises a contradiction from the following statement: All are fit to judge cases of monetary law, but not all are fit to judge cases of capital law. And we discussed it: What does the word: All, serve to include? And Rav Yehuda says: It serves to include a mamzer, that he may judge cases of monetary law. This indicates that even a mamzer may occupy a public position. Abaye said: The mishna is referring to public officials in Jerusalem, where they were particular that all their judges should be of unflawed lineage. And Rav Shimon bar Zeira similarly taught in the baraita of Kiddushin from the school of Levi: It is referring to public officials in Jerusalem.,The mishna teaches: And anyone whose ancestors were charity collectors may marry into the priesthood without investigation. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? The Gemara answers: It is due to the fact that they quarrel with people, as the Master said: Those appointed to collect charity may forcibly take collateral for charity from those who have not fulfilled their obligations even on the eve of Shabbat, when people are preoccupied and rushed, leading to quarrels. And if it is so that there is a flaw in the lineage of the collector’s family, it would generate publicity through the quarrels that are an unavoidable aspect of his job.,The Gemara relates: Rav Adda bar Ahava’s host was the son of a convert, and he and Rav Beivai were quarreling. One said: I will perform the service of the city, i.e., I will be appointed to a position of authority, and one said: I will perform the service of the city. They came before Rav Yosef to decide between them. Rav Yosef said to them: We learned: “You shall set him king over you, whom the Lord your God shall choose; one from among your brothers” (Deuteronomy 17:15). The repetition of the verb “set” in the verse som tasim indicates: All appointments that you appoint may be only from among your brothers. Therefore, a convert may not serve in any official position.,Rav Adda bar Ahava said to Rav Yosef: And does this halakha apply even if the mother of the person in question is born Jewish? In other words, does this apply to one whose father is a convert? Rav Yosef said to him: If his mother is born Jewish, the words: “From among your brothers” are said about him. Therefore, now that it has been determined that this person’s mother was born Jewish and that he is fit to serve a public role, Rav Beivai, who is a great man in Torah learning, should oversee the matters of Heaven, i.e., the public issues that involve the performance of mitzvot; and the Master, Rav Adda bar Ahava’s host, should oversee the other matters of the city. Abaye said, as a moral of the story: Therefore, if one has a Torah scholar as a guest, let him host a person such as Rav Adda bar Ahava, who knows how to plead in his favor, as it was the argument of Rav Adda bar Ahava that led to his host’s appointment.,The Gemara relates: Rabbi Zeira would deal with converts and assign them to positions of authority. Similarly, Rabba bar Avuh would deal with them. In the West, Eretz Yisrael, they would not establish even an appointee over measurements from them, as they extended the prohibition against appointing a convert as a king to include all positions of power. In Neharde’a, they would not establish even an appointee over irrigation of the city fields from them.,The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yosei says: Even the descendants of one who had signed as a witness in the Old Court of Tzippori does not need to have their lineage investigated. The Gemara explains: What is the reason for this? The Gemara answers: In that city, they would first examine witnesses and only afterward have them sign. Consequently, anyone who signed as a witness in Tzippori must certainly have been of unflawed lineage.,The mishna teaches that Rabbi Ḥanina ben Antigonus says: Even the descendants of one who was written in the army list of the Jewish king does not have their lineage investigated. Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: The reference is to one who was written in the list of the military troops of the House of David, who were all of pure lineage. Rav Yosef said: What is the verse from which it is derived? The phrase is: “Reckoned by lineage for service in war” (I\xa0Chronicles 7:40). The Gemara asks: And what is the reason for this requirement that they be of unflawed lineage? Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: It is in order that their merit and the merit of their ancestors will help them in battle.,The Gemara asks: But isn’t there Zelek the Ammonite, one of David’s warriors (II\xa0Samuel 23:37); what, is it not indicated that he was a convert who came from Ammon? The Gemara rejects this: No, his name indicates only that he dwelled in Ammon, but he was born a Jew. The Gemara asks: But isn’t there Uriah the Hittite (II\xa0Samuel 23:39); what, is it not indicated that he came from Heth? The Gemara rejects this: No, his name indicates only that he dwelled in Heth.,The Gemara further asks: But isn’t there Ittai the Gittite (II\xa0Samuel 15:19)? And if you would say that so too his name indicates that he dwelled in Gath but was born a Jew, but doesn’t Rav Naḥman say, to explain how David could make use of the crown of the idol of Ammon in apparent violation of the prohibition against deriving benefit from idolatry: Ittai the Gittite came and nullified its status of an idol. The halakha is that only a gentile can nullify an idol, by doing something degrading to it. This indicates that Ittai the Gittite must have been a gentile.,The Gemara again questions the statement that all of the soldiers in David’s army were of unflawed lineage. And further, Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: David had four hundred youths in his camp, all sons of beautiful women, i.e., born to women captured in war, who were therefore gentiles, all of whom had their hair cut in the komei style or who grew their hair in a gentile hairstyle belorit on the back of their heads, and all of them sat in gold carts bikroniyyot and would march at the head of troops in David’s army; and these very ones were the strong men of the House of David, i.e., David would rely on their strength. This states that David’s army included men of flawed lineage. The Gemara answers: These four hundred youths did not fight in the battles, but rather they would go forth in front of the troops in order to frighten everyone. ' None |
|
24. Babylonian Talmud, Rosh Hashanah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrianism, negative Jewish perception of
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 70; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 70
| 3b למנינא אחרינא הוא אמר רב פפא שנת עשרים שנת עשרים לגזירה שוה מה התם לארתחשסתא אף הכא לארתחשסתא,וממאי דמעשה דכסליו קדים דילמא מעשה דניסן קדים,לא ס"ד דתניא דברים שאמר חנני לנחמיה בכסליו אמרן נחמיה למלך בניסן,דברים שאמר חנני לנחמיה בכסליו שנאמר (נחמיה א, א) דברי נחמיה בן חכליה ויהי בחדש כסליו שנת עשרים ואני הייתי בשושן הבירה ויבא חנני אחד מאחי הוא ואנשים מיהודה ואשאלם על היהודים הפליטה אשר נשארו מן השבי ועל ירושלם ויאמרו לי הנשארים אשר נשארו מן השבי שם במדינה ברעה גדולה ובחרפה וחומת ירושלם מפורצת ושעריה נצתו באש,אמרן נחמיה למלך בניסן שנאמר (נחמיה ב, א) ויהי בחדש ניסן שנת עשרים לארתחשסתא המלך יין לפניו ואשא את היין ואתנה למלך ולא הייתי רע לפניו ויאמר לי המלך מדוע פניך רעים ואתה אינך חולה אין זה כי אם רע לב ואירא הרבה מאד ואומר למלך המלך לעולם יחיה מדוע לא ירעו פני אשר העיר בית קברות אבותי חרבה ושעריה אוכלו באש,ויאמר לי המלך על מה זה אתה מבקש ואתפלל אל אלהי השמים ואומר למלך אם על המלך טוב ואם ייטב עבדך לפניך אשר תשלחני אל יהודה אל עיר קברות אבותי ואבננה ויאמר לי המלך והשגל יושבת אצלו עד מתי יהיה מהלכך ומתי תשוב וייטב לפני המלך וישלחני ואתנה לו זמן,מתיב רב יוסף (חגי א, טו) ביום עשרים וארבעה לחדש בששי בשנת שתים לדריוש וכתיב (חגי ב, א) בשביעי (בשנת שתים) בעשרים ואחד לחדש ואם איתא בשביעי בשנת ג\' מיבעי ליה,אמר ר\' אבהו כורש מלך כשר היה לפיכך מנו לו כמלכי ישראל,מתקיף לה רב יוסף חדא דא"כ קשו קראי אהדדי דכתיב (עזרא ו, טו) ושיציא ביתא דנא עד יום תלתא לירח אדר די היא שנת שית למלכות דריוש מלכא ותניא באותו זמן לשנה הבאה עלה עזרא מבבל וגלותו עמו וכתיב (עזרא ז, ח) ויבא ירושלם בחדש החמישי היא שנת השביעית למלך ואם איתא שנת השמינית מיבעי ליה,ועוד מי דמי התם כורש הכא דריוש תנא הוא כורש הוא דריוש הוא ארתחשסתא כורש שמלך כשר היה ארתחשסתא על שם מלכותו ומה שמו דריוש שמו,מ"מ קשיא א"ר יצחק לא קשיא כאן קודם שהחמיץ כאן לאחר שהחמיץ,מתקיף לה רב כהנא ומי החמיץ והכתיב'' None | 3b it follows some other count. Rav Pappa said: The meaning of the first instance of the expression “the twentieth year” may be inferred from the second instance of the expression “the twentieth year” by way of a verbal analogy: Just as there the reference is to the twentieth year of Artaxerxes, so too, here the reference is to the twentieth year of Artaxerxes.,The Gemara raises another question: Even though those two events took place in the same year, from where is it known that the incident that occurred in Kislev took place first? Perhaps the incident that occurred in Nisan took place first, in which case it is possible that even the years of gentile kings are counted from Nisan.,The Gemara answers: It should not enter your mind to say this, as it is taught in a baraita: The words that Hai told Nehemiah in the month of Kislev, Nehemiah told the king in the month of Nisan.,The baraita explains: The words that Hai said to Nehemiah in Kislev are as it is stated: “The words of Nehemiah, son of Hachaliah: And it came to pass in the month Kislev, in the twentieth year, as I was in Shushan the capital, that Hai, one of my brothers, came out of Judah, he and certain men; and I asked them concerning the Jews who had escaped, who were left of the captivity, and concerning Jerusalem. And they said to me: The remt who are left of the captivity there in the province suffer much hardship and insult; and the wall of Jerusalem is broken down, and its gates are burned with fire” (Nehemiah 1:1–3).,Nehemiah told these words to the king in Nisan, as it is stated: “And it came to pass in the month Nisan, in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes the king, that wine was before him, and I took up the wine and gave it to the king. Now I had not been before sad in his presence. And the king said to me: Why is your face sad, seeing that you are not sick? This is nothing else but sorrow of the heart. Then I was very much afraid, and I said to the king: Let the king live forever: Why should not my face be sad, when the city, the place of the tombs of my ancestors, lies waste, and its gates are consumed with fire?” (Nehemiah 2:1–3).,“Then the king said to me: For what do you ask? So I prayed to the God of heaven. And I said to the king: If it please the king, and if your servant has found favor in your sight, that you would send me to Judea, to the city of the graves of my ancestors, that I may rebuild it. And the king said to me, the consort also sitting by him: For how long shall your journey be? And when will you return? So it pleased the king to send me; and I set him a time” (Nehemiah 2:4–6).,Rav Yosef raised an objection against the rule established by Rav Ḥisda that the years of gentile kings are counted from Tishrei from the verse that states: “On the twenty-fourth day of the sixth month, in the second year of Darius the king” (Haggai 1:15), and it is written immediately afterward: “In the seventh month, in the second year, on the twenty-first day of the month, the word of the Lord came by the prophet Haggai, saying” (Haggai 2:1). And if it were so that the years of gentile kings are counted from Tishrei, what the verse needed to state is: In the seventh month in the third year, as a new year had already started for him.,Rabbi Abbahu said in answer to this objection: Cyrus was a virtuous king, and consequently Haggai counted the years of his reign like those of the kings of Israel, i.e., from Nisan.,Rav Yosef strongly objects to this explanation for two reasons: One objection is that if this is so, the verses contradict each other, as it is written: “And this house was finished on the third of the month Adar, which was in the sixth year of the reign of Darius the king” (Ezra 6:15), and it is taught in a baraita: At that same time in the following year Ezra went up from Babylonia together with his company of exiles. And it is written in the Bible: “And he came to Jerusalem in the fifth month, which was in the seventh year of the king” (Ezra 7:8). And if it were so that this king’s years were counted like those of the kings of Israel, what the verse needed to state is: Which was in the eighth year of the king.,And further, a second objection: Are Rav Yosef’s objection and Rabbi Abbahu’s resolution comparable? There, Rabbi Abbahu speaks of Cyrus, whereas here, the verses speak of Darius, and it was never said about Darius that he was a virtuous king. The Gemara explains: This is not difficult, as the Sages taught in a baraita: All three names are referring to the same person: He is Cyrus; he is Darius; and he is also Artaxerxes. He was called Cyrus Koresh because he was a virtuous kasher king; he was called Artaxerxes after his kingdom, i.e., this was his royal title; and what was his real name? Darius was his name.,The Gemara notes: In any case, it is difficult, as in one place his years are counted from Nisan, whereas in another place they are counted from Tishrei. Rabbi Yitzḥak said: This is not difficult, as it can be explained as follows: Here, where his years are counted from Nisan like the kings of Israel, it speaks of him before he became corrupt, whereas there, where his years are counted from Tishrei, it speaks of him after he became corrupt.,Rav Kahana strongly objects to this explanation: Did he really become corrupt after Ezra went to Eretz Yisrael? But isn’t it written:'' None |
|
25. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrian, beliefs • Zoroastrian, tradition • Zoroastrianism • Zoroastrianism, Magianism (amgushta) • Zoroastrianism, as similar to Jewish priests and rabbis • Zoroastrianism, negative Jewish perception of • Zoroastrianism, religious study • Zoroastrianism, “Magianism” (amgushta) • Zoroastrians • intercultural encounters, Jews and Zoroastrians • kustīg (Zoroastrian ritual belt) • ritual, Jewish, Zoroastrian
Found in books: Herman, Rubenstein (2018), The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World. 44, 115, 369; Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 45, 47, 50, 74, 86, 105, 129, 173, 175, 208; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 39, 45, 47, 50, 64, 74, 81, 86, 105, 129, 173, 175, 208
| 39a (יחזקאל יח, ב) אבות יאכלו בוסר ושיני בנים תקהינה (ויקרא יט, לו) מאזני צדק אבני צדק (משלי יא, ח) צדיק מצרה נחלץ ויבא רשע תחתיו,א"ל כופר לרבן גמליאל אלהיכם גנב הוא דכתיב (בראשית ב, כא) ויפל ה\' אלהים תרדמה על האדם ויישן אמרה ליה ברתיה שבקיה דאנא מהדרנא ליה אמרה ליה תנו לי דוכוס אחד א"ל למה ליך ליסטין באו עלינו הלילה ונטלו ממנו קיתון של כסף והניחו לנו קיתון של זהב אמר לה ולוואי שיבא עלינו בכל יום ולא יפה היה לו לאדם הראשון שנטלו ממנו צלע אחת ונתנו לו שפחה לשמשו,אמר לה הכי קאמינא אלא לשקליה בהדיא אמרה ליה אייתו לי אומצא דבישרא אייתו לה אותבה תותי בחשא אפיקתה אמרה ליה אכול מהאי אמר לה מאיסא לי אמרה ליה ואדם הראשון נמי אי הות שקילה בהדיא הוה מאיסא ליה,א"ל כופר לרבן גמליאל ידענא אלהייכו מאי קא עביד (והיכן יתיב) איתנגד ואיתנח א"ל מאי האי א"ל בן אחד יש לי בכרכי הים ויש לי גיעגועים עליו בעינא דמחוית ליה ניהלי אמר מי ידענא היכא ניהו א"ל דאיכא בארעא לא ידעת דאיכא בשמיא ידעת,אמר ליה כופר לרבן גמליאל כתיב (תהלים קמז, ד) מונה מספר לכוכבים מאי רבותיה אנא מצינא למימנא כוכבי אייתי חבושי שדינהו בארבילא וקא מהדר להו אמר ליה מנינהו א"ל אוקמינהו א"ל רקיע נמי הכי הדרא,איכא דאמרי הכי א"ל מני לי כוכבי א"ל אימא לי ככיך ושיניך כמה הוה שדא ידיה לפומיה וקא מני להו א"ל דאיכא בפומיך לא ידעת דאיכא ברקיעא ידעת,א"ל כופר לרבן גמליאל מי שברא הרים לא ברא רוח שנאמר (עמוס ד, יג) כי הנה יוצר הרים ובורא רוח אלא מעתה גבי אדם דכתיב ויברא וייצר הכי נמי מי שברא זה לא ברא זה,טפח על טפח יש בו באדם ושני נקבים יש בו מי שברא זה לא ברא זה שנאמר (תהלים צד, ט) הנוטע אוזן הלא ישמע ואם יוצר עין הלא יביט א"ל אין א"ל ובשעת מיתה כולן נתפייסו,א"ל ההוא אמגושא לאמימר מפלגך לעילאי דהורמיז מפלגך לתתאי דאהורמיז א"ל א"כ היכי שביק ליה אהורמיז להורמיז לעבורי מיא בארעיה,אמר ליה קיסר לר\' תנחום תא ליהוו כולן לעמא חד אמר לחיי אנן דמהלינן לא מצינן מיהוי כוותייכו אתון מהליתו והוו כוותן א"ל מימר שפיר קאמרת מיהו כל דזכי למלכא לשדיוה לביבר שדיוה לביבר ולא אכלוה א"ל ההוא מינא האי דלא אכלוה משום דלא כפין הוא שדיוה ליה לדידיה ואכלוה,א"ל כופר לר"ג אמריתו כל בי עשרה שכינתא שריא כמה שכינתא איכא קרייה לשמעיה מחא ביה באפתקא א"ל אמאי על שמשא בביתיה דכופר א"ל שמשא אכולי עלמא ניחא ומה שמשא דחד מן אלף אלפי רבוא שמשי דקמי קודשא בריך הוא ניחא לכולי עלמא שכינתא דקב"ה על אחת כמה וכמה,א"ל ההוא מינא לרבי אבהו אלהיכם גחכן הוא דקאמר ליה ליחזקאל (יחזקאל ד, ד) שכב על צדך השמאלי וכתיב (יחזקאל ד, ו) ושכבת על צדך הימני אתא ההוא תלמידא א"ל מ"ט דשביעתא א"ל השתא אמינא לכו מילתא דשויא לתרוייהו,אמר הקב"ה לישראל זרעו שש והשמיטו שבע כדי שתדעו שהארץ שלי היא והן לא עשו כן אלא חטאו וגלו מנהגו של עולם מלך בשר ודם שסרחה עליו מדינה אם אכזרי הוא הורג את כולן אם רחמן הוא הורג חצים אם רחמן מלא רחמים הוא מייסר הגדולים שבהן ביסורין אף כך הקב"ה מייסר את יחזקאל כדי למרק עונותיהם של ישראל,א"ל ההוא מינא לרבי אבהו אלהיכם כהן הוא דכתיב (שמות כה, ב) ויקחו לי תרומה כי קבריה למשה במאי טביל וכי תימא במיא והכתיב (ישעיהו מ, יב) מי מדד בשעלו מים,א"ל בנורא טביל דכתיב (ישעיהו סו, טו) כי הנה ה\' באש יבא ומי סלקא טבילותא בנורא א"ל אדרבה עיקר טבילותא בנורא הוא דכתיב (במדבר לא, כג) וכל אשר לא יבא באש תעבירו במים,אמר ליה ההוא מינא לרבי אבינא כתיב (שמואל ב ז, כג) מי כעמך כישראל גוי אחד בארץ מאי רבותייהו אתון נמי ערביתו בהדן דכתיב (ישעיהו מ, יז) כל הגוים כאין נגדו אמר ליה מדידכו אסהידו עלן דכתיב 46b ולא היו מתאבלין אבל אוננין שאין אנינות אלא בלב:,56a בכל יום דנין את העדים בכינוי יכה יוסי את יוסי,נגמר הדין לא הורגין בכינוי אלא מוציאין כל אדם לחוץ שואלין את הגדול שביניהן ואומר לו אמור מה ששמעת בפירוש והוא אומר והדיינין עומדין על רגליהן וקורעין ולא מאחין,והשני אומר אף אני כמוהו והשלישי אומר אף אני כמוהו:,59a והא דינין קום עשה הוא וקא חשיב קום עשה ושב אל תעשה נינהו,ואמר ר\' יוחנן עובד כוכבים שעוסק בתורה חייב מיתה שנאמר (דברים לג, ד) תורה צוה לנו משה מורשה לנו מורשה ולא להם,וליחשבה גבי שבע מצות מ"ד מורשה מיגזל קא גזיל לה מאן דאמר מאורסה דינו כנערה המאורסה דבסקילה,מיתיבי היה ר"מ אומר מניין שאפילו עובד כוכבים ועוסק בתורה שהוא ככהן גדול שנאמר (ויקרא יח, ה) אשר יעשה אותם האדם וחי בהם כהנים לוים וישראלים לא נאמר אלא האדם הא למדת שאפילו עובד כוכבים ועוסק בתורה הרי הוא ככהן גדול,התם בשבע מצות דידהו:,ר\' חנינא בן גמליאל אומר אף הדם מן החי: ת"ר (בראשית ט, ד) אך בשר בנפשו דמו לא תאכלו זה אבר מן החי רבי חנינא בן גמליאל אומר אף הדם מן החי,מ"ט דרבי חנינא בן גמליאל קרי ביה בשר בנפשו לא תאכל דמו בנפשו לא תאכל ורבנן ההוא למישרי שרצים הוא דאתא,כיוצא בדבר אתה אומר (דברים יב, כג) רק חזק לבלתי אכל הדם כי הדם הוא הנפש וגו\' (רק חזק לבלתי אכל הדם זה אבר מן החי כי הדם הוא הנפש זה דם מן החי),ורבנן ההוא לדם הקזה שהנשמה יוצאה בו הוא דאתא,למה לי למיכתב לבני נח ולמה לי למשני בסיני,כדר\' יוסי בר\' חנינא דא"ר יוסי בר\' חנינא כל מצוה שנאמרה לבני נח ונשנית בסיני לזה ולזה נאמרה,לבני נח ולא נשנית בסיני לישראל נאמרה ולא לבני נח ואנו אין לנו אלא גיד הנשה ואליבא דר\' יהודה,אמר מר כל מצוה שנאמרה לבני נח ונשנית בסיני לזה ולזה נאמרה אדרבה מדנשנית בסיני לישראל נאמרה ולא לבני נח,מדאיתני עבודת כוכבים בסיני ואשכחן דענש עובדי כוכבים עילווה ש"מ לזה ולזה נאמרה:,לבני נח ולא נשנית בסיני לישראל נאמרה ולא לבני נח: אדרבה מדלא נישנית בסיני לבני נח נאמרה ולא לישראל ליכא מידעם דלישראל שרי ולעובד כוכבים אסור,ולא והרי יפת תואר התם משום דלאו בני כיבוש נינהו,והרי פחות משוה פרוטה התם משום דלאו בני מחילה נינהו:,כל מצוה שנאמרה לבני נח ונישנית בסיני לזה ולזה נאמרה 65b מתיב ר\' זירא יצאו עדים זוממין שאין בהן מעשה ואמאי הא ליתנהו בלב,אמר רבא שאני עדים זוממין הואיל וישנו בקול,וקול לרבי יוחנן לאו מעשה הוא והא איתמר חסמה בקול והנהיגה בקול רבי יוחנן אמר חייב ור"ל אמר פטור,רבי יוחנן אמר חייב עקימת פיו הוי מעשה ר"ל אמר פטור עקימת פיו לא הוי מעשה,אלא אמר רבא שאני עדים זוממין הואיל וישנן בראיה,ת"ר בעל אוב זה המדבר בין הפרקים ומבין אצילי ידיו ידעוני זה המניח עצם ידוע בפיו והוא מדבר מאליו,מיתיבי (ישעיהו כט, ד) והיה כאוב מארץ קולך מאי לאו דמשתעי כי אורחיה לא דסליק ויתיב בין הפרקים ומשתעי,תא שמע (שמואל א כח, יג) ותאמר האשה אל שאול אלהים ראיתי עולים מן הארץ מאי לאו דמשתעי כי אורחיה לא דיתיב בין הפרקים ומשתעי,ת"ר בעל אוב אחד המעלה בזכורו ואחד הנשאל בגולגולת מה בין זה לזה מעלה בזכורו אינו עולה כדרכו ואינו עולה בשבת נשאל בגולגולת עולה כדרכו ועולה בשבת,עולה להיכא סליק הא קמיה מנח אלא אימא עונה כדרכו ועונה בשבת,ואף שאלה זו שאל טורנוסרופוס את ר"ע אמר לו ומה יום מיומים אמר לו ומה גבר מגוברין א"ל דמרי צבי שבת נמי דמרי צבי,א"ל הכי קאמינא לך מי יימר דהאידנא שבתא אמר לו נהר סבטיון יוכיח בעל אוב יוכיח קברו של אביו יוכיח שאין מעלה עשן בשבת אמר לו ביזיתו ביישתו וקיללתו,שואל אוב היינו ודורש אל המתים,דורש למתים כדתניא (דברים יח, יא) ודורש אל המתים זה המרעיב עצמו והולך ולן בבה"ק כדי שתשרה עליו רוח טומאה,וכשהיה ר"ע מגיע למקרא זה היה בוכה ומה המרעיב עצמו כדי שתשרה עליו רוח טומאה שורה עליו רוח טומאה המרעיב עצמו כדי שתשרה עליו רוח טהרה על אחת כמה וכמה אבל מה אעשה שעונותינו גרמו לנו שנאמר (ישעיהו נט, ב) כי אם עונותיכם היו מבדילים ביניכם לבין אלהיכם,אמר רבא אי בעו צדיקי ברו עלמא שנאמר כי עונותיכם היו מבדילים וגו\',רבא ברא גברא שדריה לקמיה דר\' זירא הוה קא משתעי בהדיה ולא הוה קא מהדר ליה אמר ליה מן חבריא את הדר לעפריך,רב חנינא ורב אושעיא הוו יתבי כל מעלי שבתא ועסקי בספר יצירה ומיברו להו עיגלא תילתא ואכלי ליה,תנו רבנן מעונן ר\' שמעון אומר זה המעביר שבעה מיני זכור על העין וחכ"א זה האוחז את העינים ר"ע אומר זה המחשב עתים ושעות ואומר היום יפה לצאת למחר יפה ליקח לימודי ערבי שביעיות חיטין יפות עיקורי קטניות מהיות רעות,תנו רבנן מנחש זה האומר פתו נפלה מפיו מקלו נפלה מידו בנו קורא לו מאחריו עורב קורא לו צבי הפסיקו בדרך נחש מימינו ושועל משמאלו 67b מיתה אחת,בן עזאי אומר נאמר (שמות כב, יז) מכשפה לא תחיה ונאמר (שמות כב, יח) כל שוכב עם בהמה מות יומת סמכו ענין לו מה שוכב עם בהמה בסקילה אף מכשף בסקילה,אמר לו רבי יהודה וכי מפני שסמכו ענין לו נוציא לזה בסקילה אלא אוב וידעוני בכלל מכשפים היו ולמה יצאו להקיש עליהן ולומר לך מה אוב וידעוני בסקילה אף מכשף בסקילה,לרבי יהודה נמי ליהוו אוב וידעוני שני כתובים הבאים כאחד וכל שני כתובין הבאין כאחד אין מלמדין,אמר רבי זכריה עדא אמרה קסבר ר\' יהודה שני כתובין הבאין כאחד מלמדין,אמר רבי יוחנן למה נקרא שמן כשפים שמכחישין פמליא של מעלה:,(דברים ד, לה) אין עוד מלבדו אמר רבי חנינא אפילו לדבר כשפים,ההיא איתתא דהות קא מהדרא למשקל עפרא מתותי כרעיה דרבי חנינא אמר לה אי מסתייעת זילי עבידי אין עוד מלבדו כתיב,איני והאמר רבי יוחנן למה נקרא שמן מכשפים שמכחישין פמליא של מעלה שאני רבי חנינא דנפיש זכותיה,אמר רבי אייבו בר נגרי אמר רבי חייא בר אבא בלטיהם אלו מעשה שדים בלהטיהם אלו מעשה כשפים וכן הוא אומר (בראשית ג, כד) ואת להט החרב המתהפכת,אמר אביי דקפיד אמנא שד דלא קפיד אמנא כשפים,אמר אביי הלכות כשפים כהלכות שבת יש מהן בסקילה ויש מהן פטור אבל אסור ויש מהן מותר לכתחלה,העושה מעשה בסקילה האוחז את העינים פטור אבל אסור מותר לכתחלה כדרב חנינא ורב אושעיא כל מעלי שבתא הוו עסקי בהלכות יצירה ומיברי להו עיגלא תילתא ואכלי ליה,אמר רב אשי חזינא ליה לאבוה דקרנא דנפיץ ושדי כריכי דשיראי מנחיריה,(שמות ח, טו) ויאמרו החרטומים אל פרעה אצבע אלהים היא אמר ר\' אליעזר מיכן שאין השד יכול לבראות בריה פחות מכשעורה,רב פפא אמר האלהים אפילו כגמלא נמי לא מצי ברי האי מיכניף ליה והאי לא מיכניף ליה,א"ל רב לרבי חייא לדידי חזי לי ההוא טייעא דשקליה לספסירא וגיידיה לגמלא וטרף ליה בטבלא וקם אמר ליה לבתר הכי דם ופרתא מי הואי אלא ההיא אחיזת עינים הוה,זעירי איקלע לאלכסנדריא של מצרים זבן חמרא כי מטא לאשקוייה מיא פשר וקם גמלא דוסקניתא אמרו ליה אי לאו זעירי את לא הוה מהדרינן לך מי איכא דזבין מידי הכא ולא בדיק ליה אמיא:,ינאי איקלע לההוא אושפיזא אמר להו אשקין מיא קריבו שתיתא חזא דקא מרחשן שפוותה שדא פורתא מיניה הוו עקרבי אמר להו אנא שתאי מדידכו אתון נמי שתו מדידי אשקייה הואי חמרא רכבה סליק לשוקא אתא חברתה פשרה לה חזייה דרכיב וקאי אאיתתא בשוקא,(שמות ח, ב) ותעל הצפרדע ותכס את ארץ מצרים אמר ר\' אלעזר צפרדע אחת היתה השריצה ומלאה כל ארץ מצרים,כתנאי רבי עקיבא אומר צפרדע אחת היתה ומלאה כל ארץ מצרים אמר לו רבי אלעזר בן עזריה עקיבא מה לך אצל הגדה כלה מדברותיך ולך אצל נגעים ואהלות צפרדע אחת היתה שרקה להם והם באו:,אמר ר\' עקיבא כו\': 98a מלכים יראו וקמו שרים וישתחוו,אמר לו רבי אליעזר והלא כבר נאמר (ירמיהו ד, א) אם תשוב ישראל נאום ה\' אלי תשוב אמר לו רבי יהושע והלא כבר נאמר (דניאל יב, ז) ואשמע את האיש לבוש הבדים אשר ממעל למימי היאור וירם ימינו ושמאלו אל השמים וישבע בחי העולם כי למועד מועדים וחצי וככלות נפץ יד עם קדש תכלינה כל אלה וגו\' ושתק רבי אליעזר,ואמר רבי אבא אין לך קץ מגולה מזה שנאמר (יחזקאל לו, ח) ואתם הרי ישראל ענפכם תתנו ופריכם תשאו לעמי ישראל וגו\' רבי (אליעזר) אומר אף מזה שנאמר (זכריה ח, י) כי לפני הימים (האלה) ההם שכר האדם לא נהיה ושכר הבהמה איננה וליוצא ולבא אין שלום מן הצר,מאי ליוצא ולבא אין שלום מן הצר רב אמר אף תלמידי חכמים שכתוב בהם שלום דכתיב (תהלים קיט, קסה) שלום רב לאהבי תורתך אין שלום מפני צר ושמואל אמר עד שיהיו כל השערים כולן שקולין,אמר רבי חנינא אין בן דוד בא עד שיתבקש דג לחולה ולא ימצא שנאמר (יחזקאל לב, יד) אז אשקיע מימיהם ונהרותם כשמן אוליך וכתב (בתריה) (יחזקאל כט, כא) ביום ההוא אצמיח קרן לבית ישראל,אמר רבי חמא בר חנינא אין בן דוד בא עד שתכלה מלכות הזלה מישראל שנאמר (ישעיהו יח, ה) וכרת הזלזלים במזמרות וכתיב בתריה בעת ההיא יובל שי לה\' צבאות עם ממשך ומורט,אמר זעירי אמר רבי חנינא אין בן דוד בא עד שיכלו גסי הרוח מישראל שנאמר (צפניה ג, יא) כי אז אסיר מקרבך עליזי גאותך וכתיב (צפניה ג, יב) והשארתי בקרבך עם עני ודל וחסו בשם ה\',אמר רבי שמלאי משום רבי אלעזר בר"ש אין בן דוד בא עד שיכלו כל שופטים ושוטרים מישראל שנאמר (ישעיהו א, כה) ואשיבה ידי עליך ואצרוף כבור סיגיך וגו\' ואשיבה שופטיך,אמר עולא אין ירושלים נפדית אלא בצדקה שנאמר (ישעיהו א, כז) ציון במשפט תפדה ושביה בצדקה אמר רב פפא אי בטלי יהירי בטלי אמגושי אי בטלי דייני בטלי גזירפטי אי בטלי יהירי בטלי אמגושי דכתיב (ישעיהו א, כה) ואצרוף כבור סיגיך ואסירה כל בדיליך ואי בטלי דייני בטלי גזירפטי דכתיב (צפניה ג, טו) הסיר ה\' משפטיך פנה אויבך,אמר ר\' יוחנן אם ראית דור שמתמעט והולך חכה לו שנאמר (שמואל ב כב, כח) ואת עם עני תושיע וגו\' אמר רבי יוחנן אם ראית דור שצרות רבות באות עליו כנהר חכה לו שנאמר (ישעיהו נט, יט) כי יבא כנהר צר (ו) רוח ה\' נוססה בו וסמיך ליה ובא לציון גואל,ואמר רבי יוחנן אין בן דוד בא אלא בדור שכולו זכאי או כולו חייב בדור שכולו זכאי דכתיב (ישעיהו ס, כא) ועמך כולם צדיקים לעולם יירשו ארץ בדור שכולו חייב דכתיב (ישעיהו נט, טז) וירא כי אין איש וישתומם כי אין מפגיע וכתיב (ישעיהו מח, יא) למעני אעשה,אמר רבי אלכסנדרי רבי יהושע בן לוי רמי כתיב (ישעיהו ס, כב) בעתה וכתיב אחישנה זכו אחישנה לא זכו בעתה,אמר רבי אלכסנדרי רבי יהושע בן לוי רמי כתיב (דניאל ז, יג) וארו עם ענני שמיא כבר אינש אתה וכתיב (זכריה ט, ט) עני ורוכב על חמור זכו עם ענני שמיא לא זכו עני רוכב על חמור,אמר ליה שבור מלכא לשמואל אמריתו משיח על חמרא אתי אישדר ליה סוסיא ברקא דאית לי אמר ליה מי אית לך בר חיור גווני,ר\' יהושע בן לוי אשכח לאליהו דהוי קיימי אפיתחא דמערתא דרבי שמעון בן יוחאי אמר ליה אתינא לעלמא דאתי אמר ליה אם ירצה אדון הזה אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי שנים ראיתי וקול ג\' שמעתי,אמר ליה אימת אתי משיח אמר ליה זיל שייליה לדידיה והיכא יתיב אפיתחא דקרתא ומאי סימניה יתיב ביני עניי סובלי חלאים וכולן שרו ואסירי בחד זימנא איהו שרי חד ואסיר חד אמר דילמא מבעינא דלא איעכב,אזל לגביה אמר ליה שלום עליך רבי ומורי אמר ליה שלום עליך בר ליואי א"ל לאימת אתי מר א"ל היום אתא לגבי אליהו א"ל מאי אמר לך א"ל שלום עליך בר ליואי א"ל אבטחך לך ולאבוך לעלמא דאתי א"ל שקורי קא שקר בי דאמר לי היום אתינא ולא אתא א"ל הכי אמר לך (תהלים צה, ז) היום אם בקולו תשמעו,שאלו תלמידיו את רבי יוסי בן קיסמא אימתי בן דוד בא אמר מתיירא אני שמא תבקשו ממני אות אמרו לו אין אנו מבקשין ממך אות,א"ל לכשיפול השער הזה ויבנה ויפול ויבנה ויפול ואין מספיקין לבנותו עד שבן דוד בא אמרו לו רבינו תן לנו אות אמר להם ולא כך אמרתם לי שאין אתם מבקשין ממני אות,אמרו לו ואף על פי כן אמר להם אם כך יהפכו מי מערת פמייס לדם ונהפכו לדם,בשעת פטירתו אמר להן העמיקו לי ארוני 108b א"כ לא נפנה דרך כרמים,דרש רבא מאי דכתיב (איוב יב, ה) לפיד בוז לעשתות שאנן נכון למועדי רגל מלמד שהיה נח הצדיק מוכיח אותם ואמר להם דברים שהם קשים כלפידים והיו (בוזים) מבזין אותו אמרו לו זקן תיבה זו למה אמר להם הקב"ה מביא עליכם את המבול אמרו מבול של מה אם מבול של אש יש לנו דבר אחר ועליתה שמה ואם של מים הוא מביא אם מן הארץ הוא מביא יש לנו עששיות של ברזל שאנו מחפין בהם את הארץ ואם מן השמים הוא מביא יש לנו דבר ועקב שמו ואמרי לה עקש שמו,אמר להם הוא מביא מבין עקבי רגליכם שנאמר (איוב יב, ה) נכון למועדי רגל תניא מימי המבול קשים כשכבת זרע שנאמר נכון למועדי רגל אמר רב חסדא ברותחין קלקלו בעבירה וברותחין נידונו כתיב הכא (בראשית ח, א) וישכו המים וכתיב התם (אסתר ז, י) וחמת המלך שככה,(בראשית ז, י) ויהי לשבעת הימים ומי המבול היו על הארץ מה טיבם של שבעת הימים,אמר רב אלו ימי אבילות של מתושלח ללמדך שהספדן של צדיקים מעכבין את הפורענות לבא דבר אחר לשבעת ששינה עליהם הקב"ה סדר בראשית שהיתה חמה יוצאת ממערב ושוקעת במזרח דבר אחר שקבע להם הקב"ה זמן גדול ואח"כ זמן קטן ד"א לשבעת הימים שהטעימם מעין העולם הבא כדי שידעו מה טובה מנעו מהן,(בראשית ז, ב) מכל הבהמה הטהורה תקח לך שבעה שבעה איש ואשתו אישות לבהמה מי אית לה א"ר שמואל בר נחמני א"ר יונתן מאותם שלא נעבדה בהם עבירה,מנא ידע אמר רב חסדא שהעבירן לפני התיבה כל שהתיבה קולטתו בידוע שלא נעבדה בהם עבירה וכל שאין התיבה קולטתו בידוע שנעבדה בה עבירה רבי אבהו אמר מאותן הבאין מאיליהן,(בראשית ו, יד) עשה לך תיבת עצי גופר מאי גופר אמר רב אדא אמרי דבי ר\' שילא זו מבליגה ואמרי לה גולמיש,צוהר תעשה לתיבה א"ר יוחנן אמר לו הקב"ה לנח קבע בה אבנים טובות ומרגליות כדי שיהיו מאירות לכם כצהרים,(בראשית ו, טז) ואל אמה תכלנה מלמעלה דבהכי הוא דקיימא,(בראשית ו, טז) תחתיים שנים ושלישים תעשה תנא תחתיים לזבל אמצעיים לבהמה עליונים לאדם,(בראשית ח, ז) וישלח את העורב אמר ר"ל תשובה ניצחת השיבו עורב לנח אמר לו רבך שונאני ואתה שנאתני רבך שונאני מן הטהורין שבעה מן הטמאים שנים ואתה שנאתני שאתה מניח ממין שבעה ושולח ממין שנים אם פוגע בי שר חמה או שר צנה לא נמצא עולם חסר בריה אחת או שמא לאשתי אתה צריך,אמר לו רשע במותר לי נאסר לי בנאסר לי לא כ"ש,ומנלן דנאסרו דכתיב (בראשית ו, יח) ובאת אל התיבה אתה ובניך ואשתך ונשי בניך אתך וכתיב (בראשית ח, טז) צא מן התיבה אתה ואשתך ובניך ונשי בניך אתך וא"ר יוחנן מיכן אמרו שנאסרו בתשמיש המטה,ת"ר שלשה שמשו בתיבה וכולם לקו כלב ועורב וחם כלב נקשר עורב רק חם לקה בעורו,(בראשית ח, ח) וישלח את היונה מאתו לראות הקלו המים א"ר ירמיה מכאן שדירתן של עופות טהורים עם הצדיקים,(בראשית ח, יא) והנה עלה זית טרף בפיה א"ר אלעזר אמרה יונה לפני הקב"ה רבש"ע יהיו מזונותי מרורים כזית ומסורים בידך ואל יהיו מתוקים כדבש ומסורים ביד בשר ודם מאי משמע דהאי טרף לישנא דמזוני הוא דכתיב (משלי ל, ח) הטריפני לחם חוקי,(בראשית ח, יט) למשפחותיהם יצאו מן התיבה א"ר יוחנן למשפחותם ולא הם,אמר רב חנא בר ביזנא אמר ליה אליעזר לשם רבא כתיב למשפחותיהם יצאו מן התיבה אתון היכן הויתון א"ל צער גדול היה לנו בתיבה בריה שדרכה להאכילה ביום האכלנוה ביום שדרכה להאכילה בלילה האכלנוה בלילה האי זקיתא לא הוה ידע אבא מה אכלה יומא חד הוה יתיב וקא פאלי רמונא נפל תולעתא מינה אכלה מיכן ואילך הוה גביל לה חיזרא כי מתלע אכלה,אריא אישתא זינתיה דאמר רב לא בציר משיתא ולא טפי מתריסר זינא אישתא אורשינה אשכחיניה אבא דגני בספנא דתיבותא א"ל לא בעית מזוני א"ל חזיתיך דהות טרידא אמינא לא אצערך א"ל יהא רעוא דלא תמות שנאמר (איוב כט, יח) ואומר עם קני אגוע וכחול ארבה ימים,אמר רב חנה בר לואי אמר שם רבא לאליעזר כי אתו עלייכו מלכי מזרח ומערב אתון היכי עבידיתו אמר ליה אייתי הקב"ה לאברהם ואותביה מימיניה והוה שדינן עפרא והוו חרבי גילי והוי גירי שנאמר (תהלים קי, א) מזמור לדוד נאם ה\' לאדוני שב לימיני עד אשית אויביך הדום לרגליך וכתיב (ישעיהו מא, ב) מי העיר ממזרח צדק יקראהו לרגלו יתן לפניו גוים ומלכים ירד יתן כעפר חרבו כקש נדף קשתו,נחום איש גם זו הוה רגיל דכל דהוה סלקא ליה אמר גם זו לטובה יומא חד בעו ישראל לשדורי דורון לקיסר אמרי בהדי' ' None | 39a And they are the parables concerning the following verses: “The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge” (Ezekiel 18:2); “Just balances, just weights…shall you have” (Leviticus 19:36); and “The righteous is delivered out of trouble, and the wicked comes in his stead” (Proverbs 11:8).,§ The Roman emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: Your God is a thief, as it is written: “And the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man and he slept; and He took one of his sides, and closed up the place with flesh instead” (Genesis 2:21). The daughter of the emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: Leave him, as I will respond to him. She said to her father: Provide one commander dukhus for me to avenge someone’s wrongdoing. The emperor said to her: Why do you need him? She said to him: Armed bandits came to us this past night, and took a silver jug kiton from us, and left a golden jug for us. The emperor said to her: If so, would it be that armed bandits such as these would come to us every day. She said to him: And was it not similarly good for Adam the first man that God took a side from him and gave him a maidservant to serve him?,The emperor said to her: This is what I was saying: But if it is good for Adam, let God take his side from him in the open, not during the time of his deep sleep, like a thief. She said to him: Bring me a slice of raw meat. They brought it to her. She placed it under the embers, and removed it after it was roasted. She said to him: Eat from this meat. The emperor said to her: It is repulsive to me. Although he knew that this is how meat is prepared, seeing the raw meat made it repulsive to him. She said to him: With regard to Adam the first man as well, had God taken her from him in the open, she would have been repulsive to him. Therefore God acted while Adam was asleep.,The emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: I know your God, what He does and where He sits. Meanwhile, the emperor was moaning and groaning. Rabban Gamliel said to him: What is this? Why are you in distress? The emperor said to him: I have one son in the cities overseas and I miss him. Rabban Gamliel said to him: I want you to show him to me. The emperor said: Do I know where he is? Rabban Gamliel said to him: If you do not know that which is on earth, is it possible that you do know that which is in the heavens?,The emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: It is written in praise of the Lord: “He counts the number of the stars; He gives them all their names” (Psalms 147:4). What is His greatness? I can also count the stars. Rabban Gamliel brought quinces, put them in a sieve, and spun them. He said to the emperor: Count them. The emperor said to him: Stand them still so that I can count them. Rabban Gamliel said to him: The firmament also revolves like this, therefore you cannot count the stars in it.,Some say that this is what the emperor said to him: I have counted the stars. Rabban Gamliel said to him: Tell me how many teeth and incisors you have. The emperor put his hand in his mouth and was counting them. Rabban Gamliel said to him: You do not know what is in your mouth, but you do know what is in the firmament?,The emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: He Who created mountains did not create wind, rather two separate gods created them, as it is stated: “For, lo, He forms mountains and creates wind” (Amos 4:13); one is described with the verb “forms,” and the other with the verb “creates.” Rabban Gamliel said to him: If that is so, then with regard to Adam, as it is written concerning him: “And God created” (Genesis 1:27), and also: “And the Lord God formed” (Genesis 2:7), so too should one say that He who created this did not create that?,If you will claim that different gods created different parts of Adam, that will not suffice. A person has one handbreadth by one handbreadth of facial countece, with two types of orifices in it, eyes and ears. Should one say that He who created this did not create that; as it is stated: “He that planted the ear, shall He not hear? He that formed the eye, shall He not see?” (Psalms 94:9)? The verse employs two verbs for the eyes and ears alone. The emperor said to him: Yes, different gods created different parts of the face. Rabban Gamliel said to him: And at the moment of death, are they all appeased? Do all these gods agree as one that the time arrived for the person to die?,The Gemara relates: A certain magus said to Ameimar: From your midpoint and up is in the domain of Hurmiz, the god of good, who created the significant and important parts of the body, and from your midpoint and down is in the domain of Ahurmiz, the god of bad. Ameimar said to him: If so, how does Ahurmiz allow Hurmiz to urinate in his territory? A person drinks with his mouth, which is in his upper half, and urinates from below.,The Gemara relates: The emperor said to Rabbi Tanḥum: Come, let us all be one people. Rabbi Tanḥum said: Very well. But we, who are circumcised, cannot become uncircumcised as you are; you all circumcise yourselves and become like us. The emperor said to Rabbi Tanḥum: In terms of the logic of your statement, you are saying well, but anyone who bests the king in a debate is thrown to the enclosure labeivar of wild animals. They threw him to the enclosure but the animals did not eat him, as God protected him. A certain heretic said to the emperor: This incident, that they did not eat him, happened because they are not hungry. They then threw the heretic into the enclosure and the animals ate him.,The emperor said to Rabban Gamliel: You say that the Divine Presence dwells in any place where there are ten adult male Jews. He asked, sarcastically: How many Divine Presences are there? Rabban Gamliel summoned the servant of the emperor and hit him on his neck be’appatka. Rabban Gamliel said to him: Why did you allow the sun to enter the house of the emperor? The emperor said to him: The sun rests upon all the world; no one can prevent it from shining. Rabban Gamliel said to him: And if the sun, which is one of ten thousand attendants that are before the Holy One, Blessed be He, rests upon all the world, the Divine Presence of the Holy One, Blessed be He, all the more so rests upon the world.,A certain heretic said to Rabbi Abbahu: Your God is a jester, as He said to Ezekiel the prophet: “Lie on your left side” (Ezekiel 4:4), and it is also written: “Lie on your right side” (Ezekiel 4:6); God had Ezekiel turn from side to side, apparently for comic effect. In the meantime, a certain student came before Rabbi Abbahu and said to him: What is the reason for the mitzva of the Sabbatical Year? Rabbi Abbahu said to them: Now I will tell you something that is fit for the two of you.,Rabbi Abbahu continued: The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to the Jewish people: Sow for six years, and withhold sowing during the seventh year, so that that you will know that the land is Mine. But the Jewish people did not do so; rather, they sinned and were consequently exiled. The manner of the world is that in the case of a flesh-and-blood king whose province sinned against him, if he is cruel, he kills them all; if he is compassionate, he kills only half of them; and if he is compassionate and is full of compassion, he afflicts the leaders among them with suffering. Rabbi Abbahu continues: So too in this case, the Holy One, Blessed be He, afflicts Ezekiel in order to cleanse the sins of the Jewish people. God instructed him to lie down and suffer the same number of days as the number of years that the Jewish people did not observe the halakhot of the Sabbatical Year.,A certain heretic said to Rabbi Abbahu: Your God is a priest, as it is written: “That they take for Me an offering teruma” (Exodus 25:2), and teruma is given to the priests. He asked, sarcastically: When He buried Moses, in what ritual bath did He immerse? A priest who contracts impurity from a corpse must immerse in order to be able to partake of teruma. And if you would say that He immersed in water, but isn’t it written: “Who has measured the waters in the hollow of His hand” (Isaiah 40:12), that all waters of the world fit in the palm of God, so He could not immerse in them.,Rabbi Abbahu said to him: He immersed in fire, as it is written: “For, behold, the Lord will come in fire” (Isaiah 66:15). The heretic said to him: But is immersion in fire effective? Rabbi Abbahu said to him: On the contrary, the main form of immersion is in fire, as it is written with regard to the removal of non-kosher substances absorbed in a vessel: “And all that abides not the fire you shall make to go through the water” (Numbers 31:23), indicating that fire purifies more than water does.,A certain heretic said to Rabbi Avina: It is written: “And who is like Your people, Israel, one nation in the earth” (II\xa0Samuel 7:23). The heretic asked: What is your greatness? You are also mixed together with us, as it is written: “All nations before Him are as nothing; they are counted by Him less than nothing and vanity” (Isaiah 40:17). Rabbi Avina said to him: One of yours, the gentile prophet Balaam, has already testified for us, as it is written: 46b And the relatives of the executed man would not mourn him with the observance of the usual mourning rites, so that his unmourned death would atone for his transgression; but they would grieve over his passing, since grief is felt only in the heart.,The Sages taught in a baraita: Were it stated: And if a man has committed a sin worthy of death you shall hang him on a tree, I would have said that first they hang him and only afterward they put him to death, the way the gentile government does, executing the transgressor by hanging. Therefore, the verse states: “And if a man has committed a sin worthy of death, and he is put to death, and you shall hang him on a tree” (Deuteronomy 21:22), teaching that first they put him to death, and only afterward they hang him. How so? They delay the verdict until it is near to sunset, and then they conclude his judgment, and they put him to death, and immediately afterward hang him. One ties him to the hanging post, and another immediately unties him, in order to fulfill the mitzva of hanging the corpse of the executed transgressor.,The Sages taught: From the verse: “And you shall hang him on a tree,” I would derive that the body may be hung either on a tree that has been detached from the ground or on one that is still attached to the ground. Therefore, the verse states: “His body shall not remain all night upon the tree, but you shall bury him kavor tikberennu that day” (Deuteronomy 21:23). Based on the doubled verb, it is derived that not only must the transgressor’s body be buried, but the tree on which it is hung must also be buried. As the verse employs the same term to instruct that both must be buried, the verse teaches that the corpse must be hung on a tree that has already been detached from the ground and is lacking only burial, just as the corpse is lacking only burial. This serves to exclude hanging the corpse on a tree that is still attached to the ground and is lacking both cutting down and burial.,Rabbi Yosei says: The tree upon which the corpse is hung is not sunk into the ground; rather, it is leaned against a wall, as the verse teaches that the tree must be lacking only burial. This serves to exclude hanging the corpse on a tree that is lacking both detachment and burial. And the Rabbis say: Detaching from the ground a tree that had already been cut down and was later sunk back into the ground is nothing, i.e., it is an insignificant act.,§ The mishna teaches: That is to say: Were the dead man’s corpse to remain hanging, reminding everyone of his transgression, people would ask: For what reason was this one hung? They would be answered: Because he blessed God, a euphemism for blasphemy, and the name of Heaven would be desecrated. It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir says: The Sages told a parable: To what is this matter comparable? It is comparable to two brothers who were twins and lived in the same city. One was appointed king, while the other went out to engage in banditry. The king commanded that his brother be punished, and they hanged his twin brother for his crimes. Anyone who saw the bandit hanging would say: The king was hanged. The king, therefore, commanded that his brother be taken down, and they took the bandit down. Similarly, people are created in God’s image, and therefore God is disgraced when a corpse is hung for a transgression that the person has committed.,The mishna teaches that Rabbi Meir said that the phrase “For he that is hung is a curse kilelat of God” should be understood as follows: When a man suffers in the wake of his sin, the Divine Presence says: I am distressed kallani about My head, I am distressed about My arm. The Gemara asks: From where is this inferred? How does Rabbi Meir understand the word kilelat? Abaye says: When a man is hung after he is put to death, God is like one who said: I am not light kal leit, meaning: My head is heavy for Me, My arm is heavy for Me. God is in distress when He has to administer punishment. Rava said to him: If so, he should have said explicitly: My head is heavy for Me, My arm is heavy for Me. Rather, Rava said: When a man is hung after he is put to death, God is like one who said: The world is light for me kil li alma, meaning: I am light, and therefore the world is heavy for Me, and I am in distress.,The Gemara asks: This word “kilelat” is needed for what it itself teaches, namely that a blasphemer is hung after he has been stoned. How, then, can it be interpreted as alluding to God’s distress at the death of a transgressor? The Gemara answers: If so, the verse should have stated: One who curses mekallel . What is the meaning of kilelat? It serves to teach the statement taught by Rabbi Meir. The Gemara asks: If so, say perhaps that the entire verse comes for this purpose, to underscore the dignity of the transgressor, who was created in God’s image, and not to teach the halakha governing a blasphemer. The Gemara responds: If so, the verse should have stated: Lightness kilat. What is the meaning of kilelat? Conclude two conclusions from it: Conclude that the blasphemer is hung after he has been stoned, and conclude that God is distressed at the death of a transgressor.,§ The mishna teaches that everyone, not only an executed transgressor, must be buried on the day of his death, if that is at all possible. Rabbi Yoḥa says in the name of Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai: From where is it derived that one who leaves his deceased relative overnight without burying him transgresses a prohibition? The verse states: “But you shall bury him kavor tikberennu” (Deuteronomy 21:23), doubling the verb for emphasis. From here it is derived that one who leaves his deceased relative overnight without burying him transgresses a prohibition.,There are those who say that Rabbi Yoḥa says in the name of Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai: From where in the Torah is there a hint to the mitzva of burial? The verse states: “But you shall bury him kavor tikberennu,” doubling the verb for emphasis. From here there is a hint to the mitzva of burial in the Torah.,The Gemara relates: King Shapur, the monarch of Persia, once said to Rav Ḥama: From where in the Torah is there a hint to the mitzva of burial? What proof is there that the dead must be buried and not treated in some other manner? Rav Ḥama was silent and said nothing to him, as he could not find a suitable source. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: The world has been handed over to the foolish, as Rav Ḥama should have said to King Shapur that the mitzva of burial is derived from the verse: “But you shall bury him” (Deuteronomy 21:23).,The Gemara explains: In that case, King Shapur could have replied that the verse merely proves that a coffin should be made for the deceased so that he can be placed in it, not that the deceased should be buried in the ground, as the verse could be understood as instructing that the corpse be placed in some sort of receptacle, not in the ground. The Gemara challenges: Rav Ḥama could still have claimed that the mitzva of burial is derived from the doubled verb “you shall bury him kavor tikberennu.” The Gemara answers: In that case, King Shapur could have replied that he does not learn anything from a doubled verb, which seems to be merely a stylistic choice and not the source of a new halakha.,The Gemara asks: But let Rav Ḥama say that the mitzva to bury the dead is derived from the fact that the righteous forefathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, were all buried. The Gemara answers: King Shapur could have said that this was merely a custom of the time, but not a mitzva. The Gemara asks: Rav Ḥama could have derived the mitzva from the fact that the Holy One, Blessed be He, buried Moses, which proves that this is the proper way to handle the dead. The Gemara answers: King Shapur could still have said that God acted in this manner in order not to deviate from the general custom, but this does not prove that burying the dead is a mitzva.,The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof that burying the dead is a mitzva, as the prophet Ahijah the Shilonite said about Abijah, son of Jeroboam: “And all Israel shall eulogize him and bury him” (I\xa0Kings 14:13). The Gemara answers: From here, too, there is no proof, as they may have buried Abijah in order not to deviate from the general custom of the world, and not because they were required to do so.,The Gemara proposes another proof: Jeremiah pronounced a curse upon the wicked, saying: “They shall not be eulogized, nor shall they be buried; but they shall be as dung upon the face of the earth” (Jeremiah 16:4), which proves that when no curse has been pronounced, the dead should be buried. The Gemara rejects this proof: From here, too, there is no proof that it is a mitzva to bury the dead, as Jeremiah cursed the wicked, saying that they would deviate from the general custom and not be buried. Due to all these difficulties, Rav Ḥama was unable to adduce incontrovertible proof that there is a mitzva to bury the dead.,§ A dilemma was raised before the Sages: Is burial obligatory on account of disgrace, i.e., so that the deceased should not suffer the disgrace of being left exposed as his body begins to decompose, or is it on account of atonement, i.e., so that the deceased will achieve atonement by being returned to the ground from which he was formed?,The Gemara asks: What is the practical difference that arises from knowing the reason that burial is necessary? The Gemara answers: There is a difference in a case where one said before he died: I do not want them to bury that man, i.e., myself. If you say that burial is required on account of disgrace, it is not in his power to waive his own burial, as his family shares in the disgrace. But if you say that burial is required on account of atonement, didn’t he effectively say: I do not want atonement, and with regard to himself one should be able to do as he wishes? What, then, is the halakha?,The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof from the fact that the righteous patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, were all buried. And if you say that burial is required on account of atonement, do the righteous need atonement? The Gemara rejects this proof: Yes, even the righteous are in need of atonement, as it is written: “For there is no righteous person on earth who does good and never sins” (Ecclesiastes 7:20), and so even the righteous need atonement for the few sins that they committed over the course of their lifetimes.,The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof from the verse referring to Abijah, son of Jeroboam: “And all Israel shall eulogize him and bury him, for he alone of Jeroboam shall come to the grave” (I\xa0Kings 14:13). And if you say that burial is required so that the deceased should achieve atonement, these too, i.e., Jeroboam’s other sons, should also be buried so that they should achieve atonement. The Gemara rejects this argument: This son, Abijah, who was righteous, should achieve atonement through his death and burial, but these other sons, who were wicked, should not achieve atonement even in death.,The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof from the curse pronounced by Jeremiah upon the wicked: “They shall not be eulogized, nor shall they be buried” (Jeremiah 16:4), which indicates that it is not on account of atonement that burial is required, as were that the case the wicked are certainly in need of atonement, and therefore they should be buried. The Gemara answers: This is no proof, as Jeremiah’s intention might be that the wicked should not achieve atonement. Therefore, the question of whether burial is necessary in order to prevent disgrace or achieve atonement remains unresolved.,§ A dilemma was raised before the Sages: Is the eulogy delivered for the honor of the living relatives of the deceased, or is it delivered for the honor of the dead? The Gemara asks: What is the practical difference between the two possible reasons? The Gemara answers: There is a difference in a case where one said before he died: Do not eulogize that man, i.e., myself. If the eulogy is delivered to honor the deceased, he is able to forgo this honor, but if it is delivered to honor the living, he is not, as it is not in the power of one individual to forgo the honor of others. Alternately, the difference is with regard to whether it is possible to collect the eulogist’s fee from the heirs. If the eulogy is to honor the dead, it is possible to collect this fee from the heirs, even against their will, but if it is to honor the living, they are able to forgo this honor.,The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof from the verse that states: “And Abraham came to eulogize Sarah and weep over her” (Genesis 23:2), indicating that Sarah’s funeral was delayed until Abraham returned from Beersheba to Hebron to eulogize her. And if you say that a eulogy is delivered due to the honor of the living, would they have unduly delayed burying Sarah due to Abraham’s honor? The Gemara rejects this argument: It was satisfactory to Sarah herself that her funeral was delayed so that Abraham could be honored by eulogizing her. Since Sarah herself would prefer that Abraham eulogize her, there was no disgrace in waiting for Abraham to arrive.,The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a different resolution of this dilemma from the verse referring to Abijah, son of Jeroboam: “And all Israel shall eulogize him and bury him” (I\xa0Kings 14:13). And if you say that a eulogy is delivered due to the honor of the living, are these people, Jeroboam’s surviving family, worthy of this honor? The Gemara answers: It is satisfactory to the righteous when other people are honored through them. Since that is their wish, they are eulogized even if their wicked relatives are honored as a result.,The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof from the curse pronounced by Jeremiah upon the wicked: “They shall not be eulogized, nor shall they be buried” (Jeremiah 16:4). If you say that a eulogy is delivered due to the honor of the living, why should the wicked not be eulogized, as perhaps they are survived by righteous people who are worthy of this honor? The Gemara answers: It is not satisfactory to the righteous when they are honored through the wicked, and therefore they prefer that a eulogy not be delivered for their wicked relatives.,The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a resolution of this dilemma from what Jeremiah said to Zedekiah: “You shall die in peace; and with the burnings of your fathers, the former kings that were before you, so shall they make a burning for you; and they will eulogize you, saying: Ah, master” (Jeremiah 34:5). And if you say that a eulogy is delivered due to the honor of the living relatives of the deceased, what difference does it make to him if he is eulogized? The Gemara answers: It is possible that a eulogy is to honor the living, and this is what Jeremiah is saying to Zedekiah: Enjoy the thought that Israel shall be honored through you at your funeral just as they were honored through your ancestors at their funerals. 56a On every day of a blasphemer’s trial, when the judges judge the witnesses, i.e., interrogate the witnesses, they ask the witnesses to use an appellation for the name of God, so that they do not utter a curse of God’s name. Specifically, the witnesses would say: Let Yosei smite Yosei, as the name Yosei has four letters in Hebrew, as does the Tetragrammaton.,When the judgment is over, and the court votes to deem the defendant guilty, they do not sentence him to death based on the testimony of the witnesses in which they used an appellation for the name of God, without having ever heard the exact wording of the curse. Rather, they remove all the people who are not required to be there from the court, so that the curse is not heard publicly, and the judges interrogate the eldest of the witnesses, and say to him: Say what you heard explicitly. And he says exactly what he heard. And the judges stand on their feet and make a tear in their garments, as an act of mourning for the desecration of the honor of God. And they do not ever fully stitch it back together again.,And the second witness says: I too heard as he did, but he does not repeat the curse explicitly. And the third witness, in the event that there is one, says: I too heard as he did. In this manner, the repetition of the invective sentence is limited to what is absolutely necessary.,taught in a baraita: A blasphemer is not liable unless he blesses, a euphemism for curses, the name of God with the name of God, e.g., by saying: Let such and such a name strike such and such a name.,The Gemara asks: From where is this matter derived? Shmuel says: It is derived from that which the verse states: “And he who blasphemes venokev the name of the Lord shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him; the convert as well as the homeborn, when he blasphemes benokvo the name, he shall be put to death” (Leviticus 24:16). It is derived from the repetition of the phrase “blasphemes the name” that the reference is to cursing the name of God with the name of God.,The Gemara asks: From where is it derived that this word nokev is a term for blessing, i.e., cursing? The Gemara answers that it is derived from the statement of Balaam, who was sent by Balak to curse the Jewish people: “How shall I curse ekkov whom God has not cursed?” (Numbers 23:8). And the prohibition against cursing God is derived from here: “You shall not curse God” (Exodus 22:27).,The Gemara asks: But say that perhaps the meaning of nokev is not cursing, but rather making a hole, as it is written: “And made a hole vayyikkov in its lid” (II\xa0Kings 12:10). According to this, the word nokev is referring to one who makes a hole and damages the written name of God. And the prohibition against doing so is derived from here: “And you shall destroy their name out of that place. You shall not do so to the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 12:3–4).,The Gemara answers: It is derived from the repetition of nokev that for one to be liable, it is necessary that his transgression involve the name of God with the name of God, and such a transgression is not possible if the reference is to making a hole.,The Gemara challenges: But say that such a transgression is possible, as one can place two written names of God, one on top of the other, and tear through them at once. The Gemara explains: That would be defined as making a hole and again making a hole, not making a hole in one name by means of another name. The Gemara asks: But say that one can etch the name of God on the point of a knife and cut through another name with it. The Gemara answers: In that case, it is the point of the knife that is cutting, not the name of God.,The Gemara asks: Say that nokev means the utterance of the ineffable name of God. As it is written: “And Moses and Aaron took these men that are pointed out nikkevu by name” (Numbers 1:17). And the prohibition to do so is derived from here: “You shall fear the Lord, your God” (Deuteronomy 6:13).,The Gemara answers: One answer is that for one to be liable, it is necessary that his transgression involve the name of God with the name of God, and such a transgression is not possible if the reference is to uttering the ineffable name of God. Furthermore, the prohibition derived from the verse “You shall fear the Lord, your God” is a prohibition stated as a positive mitzva, and a prohibition stated as a positive mitzva is not considered a prohibition.,The Gemara presents an alternative proof that nokev is referring to cursing: And if you wish, say instead that the verse states: “And the son of the Israelite woman blasphemed vayyikkov the name and cursed” (Leviticus 24:11). That is to say that the meaning of nokev is to curse.,The Gemara asks: But perhaps this verse does not prove that the meaning of nokev is to curse; rather, it indicates that one is not liable to be executed unless he does both, i.e., both nokev and cursing God? The Gemara answers: This shall not enter your mind, as it is written: “Bring forth the one who cursed…and stone him” (Leviticus 24:14), and it is not written: Bring forth the nokev and one who cursed. Conclude from it that it is one act and not two.,§ The Sages taught in a baraita with regard to the verse: “Anyone who curses his God shall bear his sin” (Leviticus 24:15), that the verse could have stated: One ish who curses his God. Why must the verse state: “Anyone ish ish”? It is to include the gentiles, who are prohibited from blessing, i.e., cursing, the name of God, just like Jews are. And they are executed for this transgression by the sword alone, as all death penalties stated with regard to the descendants of Noah are by the sword alone.,The Gemara asks: But is this halakha derived from here? Rather, it is derived from there: “And the Lord God commanded the man” (Genesis 2:16), as is stated in a baraita that will soon be quoted at length: “The Lord,” this is referring to the blessing, i.e., cursing, of the name of God. This verse concerns Adam, the first man, and is therefore binding on all of humanity.,Rav Yitzḥak Nappaḥa says: The verse “anyone who curses his God” is necessary only to include gentiles who curse God using the appellations for the name of God, rather than mentioning the ineffable name, and this is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir.,As it is taught in a baraita: Why must the verse state: “Anyone who curses his God shall bear his sin”? But isn’t it already stated: “And he who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall be put to death” (Leviticus 24:16)? Rather, since it is stated: “And he who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall be put to death,” one might have thought that one will be liable only for cursing the ineffable name of God. From where is it derived that the verse includes one who curses any of the appellations as well? The verse states: “Anyone who curses his God,” to indicate that one is liable to be executed in any case. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir.,And the Rabbis say: For cursing the ineffable name of God, one is punished by death, and for cursing the appellations, one is liable to receive lashes for violating a prohibition.,The Gemara comments: And Rav Yitzḥak Nappaḥa, who holds that according to the Rabbis, gentiles are not liable for cursing appellations for the name of God, disagrees with the opinion of Rav Meyasha. As Rav Meyasha says: A descendant of Noah who blessed God by one of the appellations is liable to be executed even according to the opinion of the Rabbis.,What is the reason? It is because the verse states: “The convert as well as the homeborn, when he blasphemes the name, he shall be put to death” (Leviticus 24:16), from which it is derived that it is only in the case of a convert or a homeborn Jew that we require the condition: “When he blasphemes the name,” i.e., he is liable to be executed only if he curses the ineffable name. But a gentile is liable to be executed even due to merely cursing an appellation.,The Gemara asks: And what does Rabbi Meir do with this part of the verse: “The convert as well as the homeborn”? What does he derive from it? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Meir derives that a convert or a homeborn Jew is liable to be executed by stoning for this transgression, but a gentile is executed by the sword. This exclusion is necessary as otherwise it might enter your mind to say that since gentiles are included in the halakhot of this verse, they are included in all the halakhot of blasphemy. Therefore the verse teaches us that they are not stoned.,The Gemara asks: And what does Rav Yitzḥak Nappaḥa do with this part of the verse: “The convert as well as the homeborn,” according to the opinion of the Rabbis, since Rav Yitzḥak Nappaḥa holds that the Rabbis do not deem either a Jew or a gentile liable for cursing an appellation of God’s name? The Gemara answers: He derives that it is specifically with regard to a convert and a homeborn Jew that we require the condition that he curse a name of God by a name of God; but with regard to a gentile, we do not require that he curse a name of God by a name of God in order for him to be liable.,The Gemara asks: Why do I need the inclusive term “anyone who curses his God,” according to the opinions that do not derive from it that a gentile is liable for cursing an appellation of God’s name? The Gemara answers: No halakha is derived from it; it is not a superfluous term, as the Torah spoke in the language of people.,§ Since the halakhot of the descendants of Noah have been mentioned, a full discussion of the Noahide mitzvot is presented. The Sages taught in a baraita: The descendants of Noah, i.e., all of humanity, were commanded to observe seven mitzvot: The mitzva of establishing courts of judgment; and the prohibition against blessing, i.e., cursing, the name of God; and the prohibition of idol worship; and the prohibition against forbidden sexual relations; and the prohibition of bloodshed; and the prohibition of robbery; and the prohibition against eating a limb from a living animal. 59a The Gemara challenges: But the mitzva of establishing courts of judgment is a mitzva to stand up and take action, and nevertheless he counts it among the seven mitzvot. The Gemara answers: This mitzva contains a requirement to stand up and take action, i.e., the obligation to establish courts and carry out justice, and it also contains a requirement to sit and refrain from action, i.e., the prohibition against doing injustice.,And Rabbi Yoḥa says: A gentile who engages in Torah study is liable to receive the death penalty; as it is stated: “Moses commanded us a law torah, an inheritance of the congregation of Jacob” (Deuteronomy 33:4), indicating that it is an inheritance for us, and not for them.,The Gemara challenges: But if so, let the tanna count this prohibition among the seven Noahide mitzvot. The Gemara explains: According to the one who says that the verse is referring to the Torah as an inheritance, this prohibition is included in the prohibition of robbery, as a gentile who studies Torah robs the Jewish people of it. According to the one who says that the verse is referring to the Torah as betrothed, as the spelling of the Hebrew word for betrothed me’orasa, is similar to that of the word for inheritance morasha, the punishment of a gentile who studies Torah is like that of one who engages in intercourse with a betrothed young woman, which is execution by stoning.,The Gemara raises an objection to Rabbi Yoḥa’s statement from a baraita: Rabbi Meir would say: From where is it derived that even a gentile who engages in Torah study is considered like a High Priest? It is derived from that which is stated: “You shall therefore keep My statutes and My ordices, which if a man does he shall live by them” (Leviticus 18:5). The phrase: Which if priests, Levites, and Israelites do they shall live by them, is not stated, but rather: “A man,” which indicates mankind in general. You have therefore learned that even a gentile who engages in Torah study is considered like a High Priest.,The Gemara answers: There, in the baraita, the reference is to a gentile who engages in the study of their seven mitzvot. It is a mitzva for a gentile to study the halakhot that pertain to the seven Noahide mitzvot, and when he does so he is highly regarded.,§ The baraita that lists the Noahide mitzvot (56a) teaches that Rabbi Ḥanina ben Gamliel says: The descendants of Noah are also commanded concerning the prohibition against consuming the blood from a living animal. The Sages taught in a baraita: With regard to the verse: “Only flesh with its life, which is its blood, you shall not eat” (Genesis 9:4), this is the prohibition against eating a limb from a living animal. Rabbi Ḥanina ben Gamliel says: The blood from a living animal is also prohibited in this verse.,The Gemara asks: What is the reasoning behind the opinion of Rabbi Ḥanina ben Gamliel? The Gemara answers: He reads into the verse: Flesh with its life you shall not eat; blood with its life you shall not eat. The Gemara asks: And how do the Rabbis explain the mention of blood in this verse? After all, in their opinion, blood from a living animal is not forbidden. The Gemara answers: That comes to permit eating limbs from living creeping animals. The verse indicates that the prohibition does not apply to creeping animals, whose blood is not considered separate from their flesh (see 59b).,The baraita continues: Similarly, you can say that according to the opinion of Rabbi Ḥanina, blood from a living animal is also forbidden to the Jewish people in particular; as it is stated: “Only be steadfast in not eating blood, as the blood is the life, and you shall not eat the life with the flesh” (Deuteronomy 12:23). With regard to the statements: “Only be steadfast in not eating blood,” this is a limb from a living animal; “as the blood is the life,” this is blood from a living animal.,The Gemara asks: And how do the Rabbis, who hold that there is no specific prohibition with regard to blood from a living animal, interpret this verse? The Gemara answers: That verse comes to teach the prohibition against consuming blood spilled in the process of bloodletting, as this is blood through which the soul departs (see Karetot 20b).,The Gemara asks: According to Rabbi Ḥanina ben Gamliel, why do I need the Torah to write this halakha with regard to descendants of Noah, and why do I need the Torah to repeat it at Sinai with regard to Jews? Aren’t Jews also descendants of Noah?,The Gemara answers that it is to be understood in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina; as Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says: Any mitzva that was first stated with regard to the descendants of Noah and was repeated at Sinai was stated for this group and for that group, i.e., it applies to both gentiles and Jews.,But a mitzva that was stated with regard to the descendants of Noah and was not repeated at Sinai among the mitzvot given to the Jewish people was stated for the Jewish people and not for the descendants of Noah. And we have only the prohibition against eating the sciatic nerve to which this classification applies, and this is according to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who holds that the verse: “Therefore the children of Israel do not eat the sciatic nerve, which is on the hollow of the thigh, until this day” (Genesis 32:32), is referring to the sons of Jacob, who were commanded to observe this prohibition even though they had the status of descendants of Noah.,§ The Master said in a baraita: Any mitzva that was stated with regard to the descendants of Noah and was repeated at Sinai was stated for this group and for that group. The Gemara raises an objection: On the contrary, from the fact that it was repeated at Sinai, clearly it can be derived that it was stated for the Jewish people and not for the descendants of Noah, as if it pertains to the descendants of Noah as well, why repeat it at Sinai? Aren’t the Jewish people are also descendants of Noah?,The Gemara answers: From the fact that the prohibition of idol worship was repeated at Sinai, and we find that God punished gentiles for it, conclude from it that any mitzva that was repeated at Sinai was stated for this group and for that group, and not only for the Jewish people.,It is further stated in the baraita that a mitzva that was stated with regard to the descendants of Noah and was not repeated at Sinai was stated for the Jewish people and not for the descendants of Noah. The Gemara raises an objection: On the contrary, from the fact that it was not repeated at Sinai, clearly it can be derived that it was stated for the descendants of Noah and not for the Jewish people. The Gemara answers: There is nothing that is permitted to a Jew and forbidden to a gentile.,The Gemara asks: And is there not? But isn’t there the permission for a Jew to take a married beautiful woman, who was taken as a prisoner of war, to be his wife? For a gentile to do so is forbidden. The Gemara answers: There, the reason gentiles are prohibited from doing so is because they are not authorized to conquer. It is not permitted for gentiles to wage wars of conquest, and the halakha of marrying a beautiful woman is stated only with regard to a war of conquest. Therefore the fact that a beautiful woman who is a prisoner of war is permitted only to a Jew and not to a gentile does not indicate that gentiles have a higher degree of sanctity.,The Gemara asks: But isn’t stealing less than the value of one peruta prohibited to a gentile and permitted to a Jew? The Gemara answers: There it is because gentiles are not apt to grant forgiveness of debts, even of less than the value of one peruta. Therefore, for a gentile to take even such a minuscule amount is considered robbery. Jews normally forgive such small amounts.,It is stated in the baraita that any mitzva that was stated with regard to the descendants of Noah and was repeated at Sinai was stated both for this group and for that group. 65b Rabbi Zeira raises an objection to Rava’s answer, as it is stated in a baraita that one who unwittingly commits a transgression punishable by death is obligated to bring a sin-offering, excluding conspiring witnesses, who are not obligated to bring a sin-offering, as their transgressions do not involve an action. Rabbi Zeira asks: And why is a false witness’s testimony not considered a transgression that involves an action? The testimony is delivered through speech, which should be considered an action, as this is not a transgression that is committed in the heart; the witnesses are liable for what they said, and not for their intention.,Rava says: Conspiring witnesses are different, since their transgression is committed through their voice. The essence of their transgression is not speech itself but rather making themselves heard by the court. Therefore, since the projection of one’s voice does not involve action, the transgression of conspiring witnesses is considered not be to involving action.,The Gemara asks: And is projecting one’s voice not considered an action according to Rabbi Yoḥa? But wasn’t it stated that amora’im engaged in a dispute concerning the following case: If one muzzled an animal by projecting his voice, by berating it whenever it tried to eat, has he transgressed the prohibition of: “You shall not muzzle an ox while it treads out the corn” (Deuteronomy 25:4)? And similarly, if one led different species to work together by projecting his voice, without performing any action, has he transgressed the prohibition of: “You shall not plow with an ox and a donkey together” (Deuteronomy 22:10)? Rabbi Yoḥa says he is liable, and Reish Lakish says he is exempt.,The Gemara explains the reasoning behind their opinions: Rabbi Yoḥa says he is liable, as he maintains that the twisting of one’s mouth to speak is considered an action, whereas Reish Lakish says he is exempt, because he holds that that the twisting of one’s mouth to speak is not considered an action. Evidently, Rabbi Yoḥa holds that a transgression one commits by projecting his voice is considered to involve an action.,Rather, Rava says there is a different answer to Rabbi Zeira’s objection: Conspiring witnesses are different, since they are rendered liable mainly through sight, i.e., the important part of their testimony is what they saw, which is not considered an action.,§ The Sages taught: A necromancer is one who causes the voice of the dead to be heard speaking from between his joints or from his armpit. A sorcerer yideoni is one who places a bone of an animal called a yadua in his mouth, and the bone speaks on its own.,The Gemara raises an objection from the verse: “And your voice shall be as a ghost out of the ground” (Isaiah 29:4). What, does the dead person not speak from the grave on his own? The Gemara answers: No, this is not so, as the dead person rises by sorcery and sits between the joints of the necromancer and speaks.,The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a proof from the statement of the necromancer to King Saul: “And the woman said to Saul, I see a godlike being coming up out of the earth” (I\xa0Samuel 28:13). What, does the verse not mean to say that the dead person spoke on his own? The Gemara refutes this proof: No, this is not so, as the dead person sits between the joints of the necromancer and speaks.,The Sages taught: The category of a necromancer includes both one who raises the dead with his zekhur, which is a form of sorcery, and one who inquires about the future from a skull begulgolet. What is the difference between this type of necromancer and that type of necromancer? When one raises the dead with his zekhur, the dead does not rise in its usual manner, but appears upside-down, and it does not rise on Shabbat. By contrast, when one inquires about the future from a skull, the dead rises in its usual manner, and it rises oleh even on Shabbat.,The Gemara asks with regard to the wording of the last statement: Rises? To where does it rise? Isn’t the skull lying before him? Rather, say as follows: The dead answers in its usual manner, and it answers ve’oneh even on Shabbat.,With regard to the statement that the dead do not rise on Shabbat, the Gemara relates: The wicked Turnus Rufus, the Roman governor of Judea, asked this question of Rabbi Akiva as well. Turnus Rufus said to him: And what makes this day, Shabbat, different from other days? Rabbi Akiva said to him: And what makes this man, referring to his interlocutor, more distinguished than other men? Turnus Rufus said to him: I am more distinguished because my master the emperor wants it that way. Rabbi Akiva said to him: Shabbat too is unique because my Master wants it that way, as he has sanctified that day.,Turnus Rufus said to him: This is what I mean to say to you: Who is to say that now is Shabbat? Perhaps a different day of the week is Shabbat. Rabbi Akiva said to him: The Sabbatyon River can prove that today is Shabbat, as it is calm only on Shabbat. A necromancer can also prove this, as the dead do not rise on Shabbat. The grave of his father, referring to Turnus Rufus’s father, can also prove this, as it does not emit smoke on Shabbat, although smoke rises from it all week, as during the week he is being punished in Gehenna. Turnus Rufus said to him: You have demeaned my father, you have publicly shamed him, and you have cursed him by saying that he is being punished in Gehenna.,§ The Gemara asks: Isn’t one who inquires about the future from a necromancer the same as what is described in the verse: “Or directs inquiries to the dead” (Deuteronomy 18:11)? Why are they mentioned separately in the verse?,The Gemara answers: One who directs inquiries to the dead em-ploys a different method to contact the dead, as it is taught in a baraita: “Or directs inquiries to the dead”; this is one who starves himself and goes and sleeps overnight in a graveyard so that a spirit of impurity should settle upon him, and he can listen to what the dead are saying.,And when Rabbi Akiva would arrive at this verse he would weep and say: If one who starves himself so that a spirit of impurity will settle upon him succeeds in doing so, and a spirit of impurity settles upon him, all the more so one who starves himself so that a spirit of purity will settle upon him should be successful, and a spirit of purity should settle upon him. But what can I do, as our iniquities have caused us not to merit the spirit of sanctity and purity, as it is stated: “But your iniquities have separated between you and your God, and your sins have hid His face from you, that He will not hear” (Isaiah 59:2).,Rava says: If the righteous wish to do so, they can create a world, as it is stated: “But your iniquities have separated between you and your God.” In other words, there is no distinction between God and a righteous person who has no sins, and just as God created the world, so can the righteous.,Indeed, Rava created a man, a golem, using forces of sanctity. Rava sent his creation before Rabbi Zeira. Rabbi Zeira would speak to him but he would not reply. Rabbi Zeira said to him: You were created by one of the members of the group, one of the Sages. Return to your dust.,The Gemara relates another fact substantiating the statement that the righteous could create a world if they so desired: Rav Ḥanina and Rav Oshaya would sit every Shabbat eve and engage in the study of Sefer Yetzira, and a third-born calf igla tilta would be created for them, and they would eat it in honor of Shabbat.,§ The Sages taught: What is the definition of the soothsayer mentioned in the verse: “There shall not be found among you…a soothsayer” (Deuteronomy 18:10)? Rabbi Shimon says: This is one who applies seven types of semen zekhur to one’s eye in order to perform sorcery. And the Rabbis say: This is one who deceives the eyes, as though he is performing sorcery. Rabbi Akiva says: This is one who calculates the fortune of times and hours, and says, for example: Today is a propitious day for going away on a journey; tomorrow is propitious for purchasing property successfully. Or he says that on the eve of the Sabbatical Years, the wheat harvest is generally good; uprooting legumes rather than cutting them from above the ground prevents them from going bad.,The Sages taught: The enchanter mentioned in the verse (Deuteronomy 18:10) is one who relies on superstitious signs, e.g., one who says: If one’s bread fell from his mouth, that is a bad sign for him; or: If one’s staff fell from his hand, it is a bad sign; or: If one’s son calls him from behind, it is a sign that he should return from his journey; or: If a raven calls to him, or if a deer blocks him on the way, or if a snake is to his right, or if a fox is to his left, all of these are bad signs. An enchanter is one who relies on these as bad signs and consequently changes his course of action. 67b one type of death penalty, namely, decapitation. Since that is the only type of capital punishment that applies to gentiles, it cannot be derived through a verbal analogy that the same type applies to a Jewish sorceror.,The baraita continues: Ben Azzai says that it is stated: “You shall not allow a witch to live” (Exodus 22:17), and it is stated in the following verse: “Whoever lies with an animal shall be put to death” (Exodus 22:18). The fact that the Torah juxtaposes this matter to that matter is to teach that just as one who lies with an animal is executed by stoning (see Leviticus, chapter 20), so too, a warlock is executed by stoning.,With regard to this derivation, Rabbi Yehuda said to him: And because the Torah juxtaposes this matter with that matter, shall we take this person out to be stoned? Should he be sentenced to the most severe type of capital punishment on that basis? Rather, the source is as follows: A necromancer and a sorcerer were included in the general category of warlocks, and why were they singled out from the rest, with their prohibition and punishment stated independently? This was done in order to draw an analogy to them and say to you: Just as a necromancer and a sorcerer are executed by stoning, so too, a warlock is executed by stoning.,The Gemara asks: According to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda as well, let the punishment with regard to a necromancer and a sorcerer be considered two verses that come as one, i.e., that teach the same matter, and therefore the halakha of other cases cannot be derived from it, according to the principle that any two verses that come as one do not teach about other cases. In other words, if a halakha is taught with regard to two individual cases in the Torah, the understanding is that this halakha applies only to those cases. Had this halakha applied to all other relevant cases as well, it would not have been necessary for the Torah to teach it twice. The fact that two cases are mentioned indicates that they are the exceptions rather than the rule.,Rabbi Zekharya says: This means that Rabbi Yehuda holds that two verses that come as one do teach about other cases.,§ Rabbi Yoḥa says: Why is sorcery called keshafim? Because it is an acronym for: Contradicts the heavenly entourage shemakhḥishin pamalia shel mala. Sorcery appears to contradict the laws of nature established by God.,The verse states: “To you it was shown, so that you should know that the Lord is God; there is none else besides Him” (Deuteronomy 4:35). Rabbi Ḥanina says: This is true even with regard to a matter of sorcery; sorcery is ineffective against a righteous person.,The Gemara relates: There was a certain woman who was attempting to take dust from under the feet of Rabbi Ḥanina in order to perform sorcery on him and harm him. Rabbi Ḥanina said to her: If you succeed, go and do it. I am not concerned about it, as it is written: “There is none else besides Him.”,The Gemara asks: Is that so? But doesn’t Rabbi Yoḥa say: Why are sorcerers called mekhashefim? Because it is an acronym for: Contradicts the heavenly entourage. This indicates that one should be wary of sorcery. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Ḥanina is different, as his merit is great, and sorcery certainly has no effect on such a righteous person.,Rabbi Aivu bar Nagri says that Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba says that in the verse: “And the magicians of Egypt did in that manner with their secret arts belateihem” (Exodus 7:22), these words are describing acts of employing demons, which are invisible, and their actions are therefore hidden balat. With regard to the similar term “belahateihem” (Exodus 7:11), these are acts of sorcery, which sorcerers perform themselves, without using demons. And likewise it says: “And the flaming lahat sword that turned every way” (Genesis 3:24), referring to a sword that revolves by itself.,Abaye says: A sorcerer who is particular about using a certain utensil for his sorcery is employing a demon; one who is not particular about using a certain utensil is performing an act of sorcery.,Abaye says: The halakhot of sorcery are like the halakhot of Shabbat, in that their actions can be divided into three categories: There are some of them for which one is liable to be executed by stoning, and there are some of them for which one is exempt from punishment by Torah law but they are prohibited by rabbinic law, and there are some of them that are permitted ab initio.,Abaye elaborates: One who performs a real act of sorcery is liable to be executed by stoning. One who deceives the eyes is exempt from punishment, but it is prohibited for him to do so. What is permitted ab initio is to act like Rav Ḥanina and Rav Oshaya: Every Shabbat eve they would engage in the study of the halakhot of creation, and a third-born calf would be created for them, and they would eat it in honor of Shabbat.,Rav Ashi said: I saw Karna’s father perform a magic trick in which he would blow his nose and cast rolls of silk from his nostrils by deceiving the eye.,With regard to the verse: “And the magicians said to Pharaoh: This is the finger of God” (Exodus 8:15), Rabbi Eliezer says: It is derived from here that a demon cannot create an entity smaller than the size of a barley grain. Consequently, the magicians were not capable of duplicating the plague of lice, and they realized that this was not an act of sorcery but was performed by God.,Rav Pappa said: By God! They cannot create even an entity as large as a camel. They do not create anything. Rather, they can gather these large animals, leading them from one place to another, but they cannot gather those small animals.,Rav said to Rabbi Ḥiyya: I myself saw a certain Arab who took a sword and sliced a camel and then beat a drum betavla, and the camel arose from the dead. Rabbi Ḥiyya said to him: Was there blood and excretion afterward in that place, which flowed from the camel when it was sliced? Rather, since there was none, that was clearly a deception of the eyes and not sorcery.,The Gemara relates: Ze’eiri happened to come to Alexandria of Egypt. He bought a donkey. When he was about to give it water to drink the magic thawed when the donkey touched the water and it was revealed that it was not a donkey, and it turned into the plank of a bridge. The ones who sold it to him said to him: If you were not Ze’eiri, a distinguished person, we would not refund you the money for the donkey. Is there anyone who buys an item here and does not examine it first with water? Since sorcery was widespread there, anyone who bought an item examined it in order to find out if it was affected by sorcery, and if one did not examine an acquired item by exposing it to water and it turned out to be under a spell, he suffered the loss.,The Gemara relates: A man named Yannai arrived at a certain inn. He said to the innkeepers: Give me water to drink. They brought him flour mixed with water. He saw that the lips of the innkeeper woman were moving, and he cast a bit of the drink to the ground, and it turned into scorpions, and he understood that the innkeepers performed sorcery on the drink. Yannai said to them: I drank from yours; you too drink from mine, and he also performed sorcery on the drink. He gave it to her to drink and she turned into a donkey. He rode upon her and went to the marketplace. Her friend came and released her from the sorcery, and people saw him riding on a woman in the marketplace.,It is stated with regard to the plagues of Egypt: “And the frog came up and covered the land of Egypt” (Exodus 8:2). Noting that the term “the frog” is written in the singular, Rabbi Elazar says: At first it was one frog; it spawned and filled the entire land of Egypt with frogs.,The Gemara comments: This matter is subject to a dispute between tanna’im: Rabbi Akiva says: It was one frog, and it spawned and filled the entire land of Egypt with frogs. Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya said to him: Akiva, what are you doing occupying yourself with the study of aggada? This is not your field of expertise. Take your statements to the tractates of Nega’im and Oholot. In other words, it is preferable that you teach the halakhot of the impurity of leprosy and the impurity imparted in a tent, which are among the most difficult areas of halakha and are within your field of expertise. Rather, the verse is to be understood as follows: It was one frog; it whistled to the other frogs, and they all came after it.,§ In the mishna, Rabbi Akiva says in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua that two people can each gather cucumbers by sorcery, one of whom is exempt, as he merely deceives the eyes, and one of whom is liable, as he performs real sorcery. 98a Kings shall see and arise, princes shall prostrate themselves, because of the Lord, Who is faithful, and the Holy One of Israel, Who has chosen you” (Isaiah 49:7), indicating that redemption will come independent of repentance?,Rabbi Eliezer said to him: But isn’t it already stated: “If you will return, Israel, says the Lord, return to Me” (Jeremiah 4:1), indicating that redemption is contingent upon repentance? Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: But isn’t it already stated: “And I heard the man clothed in linen, who was above the waters of the river, when he lifted up his right hand and his left hand to heaven and swore by the One Who lives forever that it shall be for a period, periods, and a half; when the crushing of the power of the holy people shall have been completed, all these things shall be finished” (Daniel 12:7), indicating that the time for redemption is set and unrelated to repentance? And Rabbi Eliezer was silent, unable to refute the proof from that verse.,§ And Rabbi Abba says: You have no more explicit manifestation of the end of days than this following phenomenon, as it is stated: “But you, mountains of Israel, you shall give your branches, and yield your fruit to My people of Israel, for they will soon be coming” (Ezekiel 36:8). When produce will grow in abundance in Eretz Yisrael, it is an indication that the Messiah will be coming soon. Rabbi Eliezer says: You have no greater manifestation of the end of days than this following phenomenon as well, as it is stated: “For before these days there was no hire for man, nor any hire for beast; nor was there peace from the oppressor to him who exits and to him who enters” (Zechariah 8:10). When there are no wages for work and no rent paid for use of one’s animal, that is an indication that the coming of the Messiah is at hand.,The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the phrase: “Nor was there peace from the oppressor to him who exits and to him who enters”? Rav says: It means that even for Torah scholars, with regard to whom the promise of peace is written, as it is written: “Great peace have they who love Your Torah; and there is no obstacle for them” (Psalms 119:165), there will be no peace from the oppressor. And Shmuel says: It means that the Messiah will not come until all the prices are equal.,Rabbi Ḥanina says: The son of David will not come until a fish will be sought for an ill person and will not be found, as it is stated with regard to the downfall of Egypt: “Then I will make their waters clear and cause their rivers to run like oil” (Ezekiel 32:14), meaning that the current in the rivers will come to a virtual standstill. And it is written thereafter: “On that day I will cause the glory of the house of Israel to flourish” (Ezekiel 29:21).,Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina says: The son of David will not come until the contemptuous hazalla kingdom of Rome will cease from the Jewish people, as it is stated: “And He shall sever the sprigs hazalzallim with pruning hooks” (Isaiah 18:5). And it is written thereafter: “At that time shall a present be brought to the Lord of hosts, by a people scattered and hairless” (Isaiah 18:7).,Ze’eiri says that Rabbi Ḥanina says: The son of David will not come until the arrogant will cease to exist from among the Jewish people, as it is stated: “For then I will remove from your midst your proudly exulting ones” (Zephaniah 3:11), and it is written afterward: “And I will leave in your midst a poor and lowly people, and they shall take refuge in the name of the Lord” (Zephaniah 3:12).,Rabbi Simlai says in the name of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon: The son of David will not come until all the judges and officers will cease to exist from among the Jewish people, and there will be no more autonomous government in Eretz Yisrael, as it is stated: “And I will turn My hand against you and purge away your dross as with lye and take away your base alloy. And I will restore your judges as at the first” (Isaiah 1:25–26).,Ulla says: Jerusalem is redeemed only by means of righteousness, as it is stated: “Zion shall be redeemed with justice and those who return to it with righteousness” (Isaiah 1:27). Rav Pappa says: If the arrogant will cease to exist, the Persian sorcerers will cease to exist as well. If the deceitful judges will cease to exist, the royal officers gazirpatei and taskmasters will cease to exist. Rav Pappa elaborates: If the arrogant will cease, the Persian sorcerers will cease, as it is written: “And I will purge away your dross sigayikh as with lye, and I will remove all your alloy bedilayikh.” When the arrogant sigim are purged, the sorcerers, who are separated muvdalim from the fear of God, will also cease. And if the deceitful judges cease to exist, the royal officers and taskmasters will cease to exist, as it is written: “The Lord has removed your judgments; cast out your enemy” (Zephaniah 3:15).,Rabbi Yoḥa says: If you saw a generation whose wisdom and Torah study is steadily diminishing, await the coming of the Messiah, as it is stated: “And the afflicted people You will redeem” (II\xa0Samuel 22:28). Rabbi Yoḥa says: If you saw a generation whose troubles inundate it like a river, await the coming of the Messiah, as it is stated: “When distress will come like a river that the breath of the Lord drives” (Isaiah 59:19). And juxtaposed to it is the verse: “And a redeemer will come to Zion” (Isaiah 59:20).,And Rabbi Yoḥa says: The son of David will come only in a generation that is entirely innocent, in which case they will be deserving of redemption, or in a generation that is entirely guilty, in which case there will be no alternative to redemption. He may come in a generation that is entirely innocent, as it is written: “And your people also shall be all righteous; they shall inherit the land forever” (Isaiah 60:21). He may come in a generation that is entirely guilty, as it is written: “And He saw that there was no man, and was astonished that there was no intercessor; therefore His arm brought salvation to Him, and His righteousness, it sustained Him” (Isaiah 59:16). And it is written: “For My own sake, for My own sake will I do it; for how should it be profaned? And My glory I will not give it to another” (Isaiah 48:11).,§ Rabbi Alexandri says: Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi raises a contradiction in a verse addressing God’s commitment to redeem the Jewish people. In the verse: “I the Lord in its time I will hasten it” (Isaiah 60:22), it is written: “In its time,” indicating that there is a designated time for the redemption, and it is written: “I will hasten it,” indicating that there is no set time for the redemption. Rabbi Alexandri explains: If they merit redemption through repentance and good deeds I will hasten the coming of the Messiah. If they do not merit redemption, the coming of the Messiah will be in its designated time.,Rabbi Alexandri says: Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi raises a contradiction between two depictions of the coming of the Messiah. It is written: “There came with the clouds of heaven, one like unto a son of man…and there was given him dominion and glory and a kingdom…his dominion is an everlasting dominion” (Daniel 7:13–14). And it is written: “Behold, your king will come to you; he is just and victorious; lowly and riding upon a donkey and upon a colt, the foal of a donkey” (Zechariah 9:9). Rabbi Alexandri explains: If the Jewish people merit redemption, the Messiah will come in a miraculous manner with the clouds of heaven. If they do not merit redemption, the Messiah will come lowly and riding upon a donkey.,King Shapur of Persia said to Shmuel mockingly: You say that the Messiah will come on a donkey; I will send him the riding barka horse that I have. Shmuel said to him: Do you have a horse with one thousand colors bar ḥivar gavanei like the donkey of the Messiah? Certainly his donkey will be miraculous.,Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi found Elijah the prophet, who was standing at the entrance of the burial cave of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said to him: Will I be privileged to come to the World-to-Come? Elijah said to him: If this Master, the Holy One, Blessed be He, will wish it so. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: Two I saw, Elijah and me, and the voice of three I heard, as the Divine Presence was also there, and it was in reference to Him that Elijah said: If this Master will wish it so.,Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said to Elijah: When will the Messiah come? Elijah said to him: Go ask him. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi asked: And where is he sitting? Elijah said to him: At the entrance of the city of Rome. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi asked him: And what is his identifying sign by means of which I can recognize him? Elijah answered: He sits among the poor who suffer from illnesses. And all of them untie their bandages and tie them all at once, but the Messiah unties one bandage and ties one at a time. He says: Perhaps I will be needed to serve to bring about the redemption. Therefore, I will never tie more than one bandage, so that I will not be delayed.,Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi went to the Messiah. He said to the Messiah: Greetings to you, my rabbi and my teacher. The Messiah said to him: Greetings to you, bar Leva’i. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said to him: When will the Master come? The Messiah said to him: Today. Sometime later, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi came to Elijah. Elijah said to him: What did the Messiah say to you? He said to Elijah that the Messiah said: Greetings shalom to you, bar Leva’i. Elijah said to him: He thereby guaranteed that you and your father will enter the World-to-Come, as he greeted you with shalom. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said to Elijah: The Messiah lied to me, as he said to me: I am coming today, and he did not come. Elijah said to him that this is what he said to you: He said that he will come “today, if you will listen to his voice” (Psalms 95:7).,§ Rabbi Yosei ben Kisma’s students asked him: When will the son of David come? Rabbi Yosei ben Kisma said: I am hesitant to answer you, lest you request from me a sign to corroborate my statement. They said to him: We are not asking you for a sign.,Rabbi Yosei ben Kisma said to them: You will see when this existing gate of Rome falls and will be rebuilt, and will fall a second time and will be rebuilt, and will fall a third time. And they will not manage to rebuild it until the son of David comes. The students said to him: Our rabbi, give us a sign. Rabbi Yosei ben Kisma said to them: But didn’t you say to me that you are not asking me for a sign?,They said to him: And nevertheless, provide us with a sign. Rabbi Yosei ben Kisma said to them: If it is as I say, the water of the Cave of Pamyas will be transformed into blood. The Gemara relates: And it was transformed into blood.,At the time of his death, Rabbi Yosei ben Kisma said to his students: Place my coffin deep in the ground, 108b They said to him: If so we will not clear a path through vineyards, i.e., we will continue to sin.,Rava taught: What is the meaning of that which is written: “A contemptible torch lapid in the thought of him that is at ease, a thing ready for them whose foot slips” (Job 12:5)? This teaches that Noah the righteous would rebuke the people of his generation, and he said to them statements that are harsh as torches kelapidim, and they would treat him with contempt. They said to him: Old man, why are you building this ark? Noah said to them: The Holy One, Blessed be He, is bringing a flood upon you. They said to him: A flood of what? If it is a flood of fire, we have another item and it is called alita, and it is fireproof. And if it is a flood of water that He brings, if He brings the water from the earth, we have iron plates with which we can plate the earth to prevent the water from rising. And if He brings the water from the heavens, we have an item and it is called ekev, and some say it is called ikkesh, which will absorb the water.,Noah said to them: If He wishes He will bring the water from between your feet and you can do nothing to prevent it, as it is stated: “For them whose foot slips.” It is taught in a baraita: The waters of the flood were as hard and thick as semen, as it is stated: “For them whose foot slips”; foot is a euphemism. Rav Ḥisda says: With hot semen they sinned, and with hot water they were punished. As it is written here, at the conclusion of the flood: “And the waters assuaged” (Genesis 8:1), and it is written there: “Then the king’s wrath was assuaged” (Esther 7:10). Just as the term “assuaged” there is referring to the heat of Ahasuerus’s wrath, so too, “assuaged” with regard to the flood is referring to the heat of the waters.,With regard to the verse: “And it came to pass that after seven days the waters of the flood were upon the earth” (Genesis 7:10), the Gemara asks: What is the nature of these seven additional days?,Rav says: These were the days of mourning for the death of Methuselah; and this is to teach you that eulogies for the righteous prevent calamities from ensuing. Alternatively, “after seven days” means that the Holy One, Blessed be He, altered the order of Creation for that generation, i.e., in seven days He reversed the process of Creation, so that the sun would emerge in the west and set in the east. Alternatively, it means that the Holy One, Blessed be He, designated a substantial period for them, one hundred and twenty years, to repent, and thereafter designated a brief period for them, an additional seven days, as a final opportunity for them to repent. Alternatively, “after seven days” means that during those seven days, God gave them a foretaste of the delights of the World-to-Come, which will be actualized during the seventh millennium, so that they would know what munificence their sins prevented them from receiving.,§ With regard to the verse: “of every kosher animal you shall take to you by sevens, husband and wife” (Genesis 7:2), the Gemara asks: Is there marriage for animals? Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani says that Rabbi Yonatan says: The reference is to those animals with which the transgression of relations with another species was not performed. Therefore, the Torah underscores that the animals that entered the ark were husband and wife.,The Gemara asks: From where did Noah know which animals were not involved in that transgression? Rav Ḥisda says: He passed them before the ark. All animals that the ark accepted, it was known that a transgression had not been performed with them. And any animal that the ark did not accept, it was known that a transgression had been performed with it. Rabbi Abbahu says: Noah took onto the ark only from those animals that came on their own, as it appeared that they were sent from Heaven, and they were certainly fit for this purpose.,With regard to the verse: “Make you an ark of gopher wood” (Genesis 6:14), the Gemara asks: What is gopher wood? Rav Adda says that they say in the school of Rabbi Sheila: This is wood from the mavliga tree; and some say that it is wood from the willow gulamish tree.,With regard to the verse: “A tzohar you shall make for the ark” (Genesis 6:16), Rabbi Yoḥa says that the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Noah: Set precious stones and jewels in the ark so that they will shine for you as the afternoon tzohorayim sun.,With regard to the verse: “And to a cubit you shall finish it above” (Genesis 6:16), the Gemara explains that in that manner, having been built wide at its base and narrow at its top, the ark would stand upright and would not capsize.,With regard to the verse: “With lower, second and third stories shall you make it” (Genesis 6:16), it was taught in a baraita: The bottom story was for manure, the middle story was for animals, and the top story was for people.,With regard to the verse: “And he sent forth the raven, which went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from the earth” (Genesis 8:7), Reish Lakish says: The raven provided a convincing response to Noah; when it did not wish to leave the ark the raven said to him: Your Master, God, hates me, and you hate me. Your Master hates me, as He commanded to take from the kosher species seven and from the non-kosher species two. And you hate me, as you disregard those from the species of seven, i.e., the kosher birds, and instead dispatch one from the species of two, i.e., the non-kosher birds. If the angel of heat or the angel of cold harms me and kills me, will the world not be lacking one species of creature, as there was only one pair of ravens? Or perhaps you are sending me because it is my wife that you need, in order to engage in intercourse with her.,Noah said to the raven: Wicked one! If with the woman who is generally permitted to me, my wife, intercourse is forbidden to me, then with regard to domesticated and undomesticated animals, which are generally forbidden to me, is it not all the more so the case that they are forbidden to me?,The Gemara asks: And from where do we derive that it was prohibited for them to engage in intercourse while in the ark? The Gemara answers: It is derived from that which is written: “And you shall come into the ark, you, and your sons, and your wife, and your sons’ wives with you” (Genesis 6:18); and it is written: “Emerge from the ark, you and your wife, and your sons and your sons’ wives with you” (Genesis 8:16). And Rabbi Yoḥa says: From here, the Sages derived and said that it was prohibited to engage in intercourse while in the ark, as when Noah and his family entered, the husbands and wives were listed separately, and when they emerged, the husbands were listed with their wives.,The Sages taught: Three violated that directive and engaged in intercourse while in the ark, and all of them were punished for doing so. They are: The dog, and the raven, and Ham, son of Noah. The dog was punished in that it is bound; the raven was punished in that it spits, and Ham was afflicted in that his skin turned black.,With regard to the verse: “And he sent forth the dove from him, to see if the waters abated” (Genesis 8:8), Rabbi Yirmeya says: From here it is derived that the dwelling place of kosher birds in the ark was with the righteous people, as the verse emphasizes that Noah dispatched the dove from his place.,With regard to the verse: “And in her mouth was an olive branch plucked off taraf ” (Genesis 8:11), Rabbi Elazar says: The dove said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, may my sustece be bitter as the olive and dependent on Your hands, and not sweet as honey and dependent on the hands of flesh and blood. The Gemara asks: From where may it be inferred that taraf is a term that indicates sustece? The Gemara answers: It is inferred from that which is written: “Feed me hatrifeni with my allotted portion” (Proverbs 30:8).,With regard to the verse: “After their kinds lemishpeḥoteihem, they emerged from the ark” (Genesis 8:19), Rabbi Yoḥa says: After their kinds lemishpeḥotam the animals emerged, but not them hem themselves, as some of the animals that entered the ark died during that year and it was their descendants who emerged.,Rav Ḥana bar Bizna says: Eliezer, servant of Abraham, said to Shem the Great, son of Noah: It is written: “After their kinds, they emerged from the ark,” indicating that the different types of animals were not intermingled while in the ark. Where were you and what did you do to care for them while they were in the ark? Shem said to him: We experienced great suffering in the ark caring for the animals. Where there was a creature that one typically feeds during the day, we fed it during the day, and where there was a creature that one typically feeds at night, we fed it at night. With regard to that chameleon, my father did not know what it eats. One day, my father was sitting and peeling a pomegranate. A worm fell from it and the chameleon ate it. From that point forward my father would knead bran with water, and when it became overrun with worms, the chameleon would eat it.,With regard to the lion, a fever sustained it, since when it suffered from a fever, it did not need to eat; as Rav said: For no fewer than six days and no more than twelve days, fever sustains a person; he need not eat and is sustained from his own fats. Shem continued: With regard to the phoenix avarshina, my father found it lying in its compartment on the side of the ark. He said to the bird: Do you not want food? The bird said to him: I saw that you were busy, and I said I would not trouble you by requesting food. Noah said to the bird: May it be God’s will that you shall not die, and through that bird the verse was fulfilled, as it is stated: “And I said, I shall die in my nest, and I shall multiply my days as the phoenix” (Job 29:18).,§ Rav Ḥana bar Leva’ei says that Shem the Great said to Eliezer, servant of Abraham: When the four great kings of the east and the west came upon you to wage war with Abraham, what did you do? Eliezer said to him: The Holy One, Blessed be He, brought Abraham and placed him to His right, and we would throw dust and it became swords, and we threw straw and it became arrows, as it is stated: “A Psalm of David. The Lord says to my master: Sit to My right, until I make your enemies your footstool” (Psalms 110:1), and it is written: “Who has raised up one from the east at whose steps victory attends? He gives nations before him, and makes him rule over kings; his sword makes them as the dust, his bow as driven straw” (Isaiah 41:2).,Apropos Abraham’s miraculous weapons, the Gemara relates: Naḥum of Gam Zo was accustomed that in response to any circumstance that arose in his regard, he would say: This too gam zo is for the best. One day the Jewish people sought to send a gift doron to the emperor. They said: With' ' None |
|
26. Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Jews and Judaism, in the Sasanian Empire, in Zoroastrian literature • Zoroastrian • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrianism • Zoroastrianism, Be Abadan • Zoroastrianism, Magianism (amgushta) • Zoroastrianism, and demonology • Zoroastrianism, as similar to Jewish priests and rabbis • Zoroastrianism, negative Jewish perception of • Zoroastrianism, relation to Judaism • Zoroastrianism, religious study • Zoroastrianism, theological doctrines • Zoroastrianism, “Magianism” (amgushta) • Zoroastrians • Zoroastrians, textual tradition (dēn) • books, Jewish, Zoroastrian • books, Zoroastrian • fire temples, Zoroastrian, in the Babylonian Talmud • intercultural encounters, Jews and Zoroastrians • priests, Zoroastrian, portrayals of, in the Babylonian Talmud, as sorcerers and corrupt administrators • priests, Zoroastrian, portrayals of, in the Babylonian Talmud, as sorcerers and corrupt administrators, role of, in Sasanian society, as judges, administrators, and scholar-priests • ritual, Jewish, Zoroastrian
Found in books: Fonrobert and Jaffee (2007), The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Cambridge Companions to Religion, 174, 180, 192, 193; Herman, Rubenstein (2018), The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World. 75, 279, 281, 290, 292, 297; Kalmin (2014), Migrating tales: the Talmud's narratives and their historical context, 199; Mokhtarian (2021), Rabbis, Sorcerers, Kings, and Priests: The Culture of the Talmud in Ancient Iran. 118, 119, 120, 204; Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 58, 71, 72, 74, 75, 90, 194; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 58, 71, 72, 74, 75, 90, 194
116a שאין זה מקומה ר\' אומר לא מן השם הוא זה אלא מפני שספר חשוב הוא בפני עצמו,כמאן אזלא הא דא"ר שמואל בר נחמן א"ר יונתן (משלי ט, א) חצבה עמודיה שבעה אלו שבעה ספרי תורה כמאן כר\',מאן תנא דפליג עליה דר\' רשב"ג הוא דתניא רשב"ג אומר עתידה פרשה זו שתיעקר מכאן ותכתב במקומה ולמה כתבה כאן כדי להפסיק בין פורענות ראשונה לפורענות שנייה פורענות שנייה מאי היא (במדבר יא, א) ויהי העם כמתאוננים פורענות ראשונה (במדבר י, לג) ויסעו מהר ה\' וא"ר חמא בר\' חנינא שסרו מאחרי ה\' והיכן מקומה אמר רב אשי בדגלים,איבעיא להו הגליונין של ס"ת מצילין אותן מפני הדליקה או אין מצילין אותן מפני הדליקה ת"ש ס"ת שבלה אם יש בו ללקט שמונים וחמש אותיות כגון פרשת ויהי בנסוע הארון מצילין ואם לאו אין מצילין ואמאי תיפוק ליה משום גיליון דידיה בלה שאני,ת"ש ס"ת שנמחק אם יש בו ללקט שמונים וחמש אותיות כגון פרשת ויהי בנסוע הארון מצילין ואם לאו אין מצילין ואמאי תיפוק ליה משום גיליון דידיה מקום הכתב לא קמיבעיא לי דכי קדוש אגב כתב הוא דקדוש אזל כתב אזלא לה קדושתיה כי קמיבעיא לי של מעלה ושל מטה שבין פרשה לפרשה שבין דף לדף שבתחלת הספר שבסוף הספר ותיפוק ליה משום ההוא דגייז ושדי,ת"ש הגליונין של מעלה ושל מטה שבין פרשה לפרשה שבין דף לדף שבתחלת הספר שבסוף הספר מטמאין את הידים דילמא אגב ס"ת שאני,ת"ש הגיליונין וספרי מינין אין מצילין אותן מפני הדליקה אלא נשרפין במקומן הן ואזכרותיהן מאי לאו גליונין דספר תורה לא גליונין דספרי מינין השתא ספרי מינין גופייהו אין מצילין גליונין מבעיא הכי קאמר וספרי מינין הרי הן כגליונים,גופא הגליונים וספרי מינין אין מצילין אותם מפני הדליקה רבי יוסי אומר בחול קודר את האזכרות שבהן וגונזן והשאר שורפן א"ר טרפון אקפח את בני שאם יבאו לידי שאני אשרוף אותם ואת האזכרות שבהן שאפי\' אדם רודף אחריו להורגו ונחש רץ להכישו נכנס לבית ע"ז ואין נכנס לבתיהן של אלו שהללו מכירין וכופרין והללו אין מכירין וכופרין ועליהן הכתוב אומר (ישעיהו נז, ח) ו אחר הדלת והמזוזה שמת זכרונך,א"ר ישמעאל ק"ו ומה לעשות שלום בין איש לאשתו אמרה תורה שמי שנכתב בקדושה ימחה על המים הללו שמטילין קנאה ואיבה ותחרות בין ישראל לאביהן שבשמים על אחת כמה וכמה ועליהם אמר דוד (תהלים קלט, כא) הלא משנאיך ה\' אשנא ובתקוממיך אתקוטט תכלית שנאה שנאתים לאויבים היו לי וכשם שאין מצילין אותן מפני הדליקה כך אין מצילין אותן לא מן המפולת ולא מן המים ולא מדבר המאבדן,בעי מיניה יוסף בר חנין מר\' אבהו הני ספרי דבי אבידן מצילין אותן מפני הדליקה או אין מצילין אין ולאו ורפיא בידיה רב לא אזיל לבי אבידן וכ"ש לבי נצרפי שמואל לבי נצרפי לא אזיל לבי אבידן אזיל אמרו ליה לרבא מ"ט לא אתית לבי אבידן אמר להו דיקלא פלניא איכא באורחא וקשי לי ניעקריה דוכתיה קשי לי מר בר יוסף אמר אנא מינייהו אנא ולא מסתפינא מינייהו זימנא חדא אזיל בעו לסכוניה הוספה מחסרונות הש"ס: רבי מאיר הוה קרי ליה און גליון רבי יוחנן הוה קרי ליה עון גליון.,אימא שלום דביתהו דרבי אליעזר אחתיה דרבן גמליאל הואי הוה ההוא פילוסופא בשבבותיה' 139a הלכה ברורה ומשנה ברורה במקום אחד:,תניא רבי יוסי בן אלישע אומר אם ראית דור שצרות רבות באות עליו צא ובדוק בדייני ישראל שכל פורענות שבאה לעולם לא באה אלא בשביל דייני ישראל שנאמר (מיכה ג, ט) שמעו נא זאת ראשי בית יעקב וקציני בית ישראל המתעבים משפט ואת כל הישרה יעקשו בונה ציון בדמים וירושלים בעולה ראשיה בשוחד ישפוטו וכהניה במחיר יורו ונביאיה בכסף יקסומו ועל ה\' ישענו וגו\',רשעים הן אלא שתלו בטחונם במי שאמר והיה העולם לפיכך מביא הקב"ה עליהן ג\' פורעניות כנגד ג\' עבירות שבידם שנאמר (מיכה ג, יב) לכן בגללכם ציון שדה תחרש וירושלים עיין תהיה והר הבית לבמות יער,ואין הקב"ה משרה שכינתו על ישראל עד שיכלו שופטים ושוטרים רעים מישראל שנאמר (ישעיהו א, כה) ואשיבה ידי עליך ואצרוף כבור סגיך ואסירה כל בדיליך ואשיבה שופטיך כבראשונה ויועציך כבתחלה וגו\',אמר עולא אין ירושלים נפדה אלא בצדקה שנאמר (ישעיהו א, כז) ציון במשפט תפדה ושביה בצדקה,אמר רב פפא אי בטלי יהירי בטלי אמגושי אי בטלי דייני בטלי גזירפטי,אי בטלי יהירי בטלי אמגושי דכתיב ואצרוף כבור סגיך,אי בטלי דייני בטלי גזירפטי דכתיב (צפניה ג, טו) הסיר ה\' משפטיך פנה אויבך,אמר רבי מלאי משום ר"א בר\' שמעון מ"ד (ישעיהו יד, ה) שבר ה\' מטה רשעים שבט מושלים שבר ה\' מטה רשעים אלו הדיינין שנעשו מקל לחזניהם שבט מושלים אלו ת"ח שבמשפחות הדיינין מר זוטרא אמר אלו תלמידי חכמים שמלמדים הלכות ציבור לדייני בור,אמר ר"א בן מלאי משום ר"ל מאי דכתיב (ישעיהו נט, ג) כי כפיכם נגואלו בדם ואצבעותיכם בעון שפתותיכם דברו שקר לשונכם עולה תהגה,כי כפיכם נגואלו בדם אלו הדיינין ואצבעותיכם בעון אלו סופרי הדיינין שפתותיכם דברו שקר אלו עורכי הדיינין לשונכם עולה תהגה אלו בעלי דינין,ואמר רבי מלאי משום ר\' יצחק מגדלאה מיום שפירש יוסף מאחיו לא טעם טעם יין דכתיב (בראשית מט, כו) ולקדקד נזיר אחיו,ר\' יוסי בר\' חנינא אמר אף הן לא טעמו טעם יין דכתיב (בראשית מג, לד) וישתו וישכרו עמו מכלל דעד האידנא לא (הוה שיכרות) ואידך שיכרות הוא דלא הוה שתיה מיהא הוה,ואמר רבי מלאי בשכר (שמות ד, יד) וראך ושמח בלבו זכה לחשן המשפט על לבו:,שלחו ליה בני בשכר ללוי כילה מהו כשותא בכרמא מהו מת בי"ט מהו,אדאזיל נח נפשיה דלוי אמר שמואל לרב מנשיא אי חכימת שלח להו שלח להו כילה חזרנו על כל צידי כילה ולא מצינו לה צד היתר,ולישלח להו כדרמי בר יחזקאל לפי שאינן בני תורה,כשותא בכרמא עירבובא ולישלח להו כדר"ט דתניא כישות ר\' טרפון אומר אין כלאים בכרם וחכמים אומרים כלאים בכרם וקי"ל כל המיקל בארץ הלכה כמותו בחו"ל לפי שאינן בני תורה,מכריז רב האי מאן דבעי למיזרע כשותא בכרמא ליזרע רב עמרם חסידא מנגיד עילויה,רב משרשיא יהיב ליה פרוטה לתינוק נכרי וזרע ליה וליתן ליה לתינוק ישראל אתי למיסרך וליתן ליה לגדול נכרי אתי לאיחלופי בישראל,מת שלח להו מת לא יתעסקו ביה לא יהודאין ולא ארמאין לא ביום טוב ראשון ולא ביום טוב שני,איני והאמר רבי יהודה בר שילת אמר רבי אסי עובדא הוה בבי כנישתא דמעון ביום טוב הסמוך לשבת 156b דקאי צדק במערב מהדרנא ומוקמינא ליה במזרח והיינו דכתיב (ישעיהו מא, ב) מי העיר ממזרח צדק יקראהו לרגלו,ומדשמואל נמי אין מזל לישראל דשמואל ואבלט הוו יתבי והוו קאזלי הנך אינשי לאגמא א"ל אבלט לשמואל האי גברא אזיל ולא אתי טריק ליה חיויא ומיית א"ל שמואל אי בר ישראל הוא אזיל ואתי אדיתבי אזיל ואתי,קם אבלט שדיה לטוניה אשכח ביה חיויא דפסיק ושדי בתרתי גובי א"ל שמואל מאי עבדת א"ל כל יומא הוה מרמינן ריפתא בהדי הדדי ואכלינן האידנא הוה איכא חד מינן דלא הוה ליה ריפתא הוה קא מיכסף אמינא להו אנא קאימנא וארמינא כי מטאי לגביה שואי נפשאי כמאן דשקילי מיניה כי היכי דלא ליכסיף א"ל מצוה עבדת נפק שמואל ודרש (משלי י, ב) וצדקה תציל ממות ולא ממיתה משונה אלא ממיתה עצמה,ומדר"ע נמי אין מזל לישראל דר"ע הויא ליה ברתא אמרי ליה כלדאי ההוא יומא דעיילה לבי גננא טריק לה חיויא ומיתא הוה דאיגא אמילתא טובא ההוא יומא שקלתה למכבנתא דצתא בגודא איתרמי איתיב בעיניה דחיויא לצפרא כי קא שקלה לה הוה קא סריך ואתי חיויא בתרה,אמר לה אבוה מאי עבדת אמרה ליה בפניא אתא עניא קרא אבבא והוו טרידי כולי עלמא בסעודתא וליכא דשמעיה קאימנא שקלתי לריסתנאי דיהבית לי יהבתיה ניהליה אמר לה מצוה עבדת נפק ר"ע ודרש וצדקה תציל ממות ולא ממיתה משונה אלא ממיתה עצמה,ומדר"נ בר יצחק נמי אין מזל לישראל דאימיה דר"נ בר יצחק אמרי לה כלדאי בריך גנבא הוה לא שבקתיה גלויי רישיה אמרה ליה כסי רישיך כי היכי דתיהוו עלך אימתא דשמיא ובעי רחמי לא הוה ידע אמאי קאמרה ליה יומא חד יתיב קא גריס תותי דיקלא נפל גלימא מעילויה רישיה דלי עיניה חזא לדיקלא אלמיה יצריה סליק פסקיה לקיבורא בשיניה:,| 116a that this is not its place, as the previous portion does not discuss the nation’s travels. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: It is not for that reason that signs were inserted. Rather, the signs are there because this portion is considered a book unto itself.,The Gemara asks: According to whose opinion is that which Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman said that Rabbi Yonatan said, that with regard to the verse: “With wisdom she built her house, she carved its seven pillars” (Proverbs 9:1), these are the seven books of the Torah? According to whose opinion? It is according to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, as by his count there are seven books of the Torah: Genesis; Exodus; Leviticus; Numbers until: “And when the Ark traveled”; the portion: “And when the Ark traveled,” which is considered its own book; the remainder of Numbers; and Deuteronomy.,Who is the tanna who disagrees with Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi? It is Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. As it was taught in a baraita that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: In the future, this portion will be uprooted from here, where it appears, and will be written in its proper place. And why was it written here, even though it discusses the travels of the children of Israel, and the portion before it does not? It is in order to demarcate between the first punishment and the second punishment. What is the second punishment that appears immediately afterward? It is the verse: “And the people complained wickedly in God’s ears, and God heard and became angry, and the fire of God burned in them and it consumed the edge of the camp” (Numbers 11:1). What is the first punishment? It is the verse: “And they traveled from the mountain of God mehar Hashem for three days” (Numbers 10:33), and Rabbi Ḥama, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: That they turned from after God me’aḥarei Hashem and hurriedly fled Mount Sinai. The Gemara asks: And if so, where is the proper place for this paragraph? Rav Ashi said: In the portion of the flags, where there is a description of the manner in which the Jewish people traveled through the desert.,A dilemma was raised before the Sages: With regard to the blank folios of parchment of a Torah scroll, does one rescue them from the fire on Shabbat, or does one not rescue them from the fire? Come and hear a resolution to this from that which we learned: With regard to a Torah scroll that is worn, if there is enough in it to compile eighty-five complete letters as in the portion of: “And when the Ark traveled,” one rescues it from the fire, and if not one does not rescue it. If even the blank folios are rescued, why would one not rescue a Torah scroll with fewer than the requisite number of letters? Derive that this scroll may be rescued due to its blank folios. The Gemara answers: A Torah scroll that is worn is different, because at that point its sanctity is negated, and its blank folios are not sacred. Therefore, one may rescue the scroll only if it contains eighty-five letters.,Come and hear a different resolution from that which was taught in another baraita: With regard to a Torah scroll that was erased, if there is enough in it to compile eighty-five complete letters as in the portion of: “And when the Ark traveled,” one rescues it from the fire, and if not, one does not rescue it. And why is that so? Derive that this scroll may be rescued due to its blank folios, as the erased section is surely no less significant than the blank folios of the scroll. The Gemara answers: That is not so. In a case where the place of the writing is erased it is not a dilemma for me, as it is sacred due to the writing. If the writing is gone, its sanctity is gone. When it is a dilemma for me is with regard to the blank portions that are above and below, that are between one section and another section, that are between one page and another page, that are at the beginning of the scroll, and that are at the end of the scroll. The Gemara asks again: Derive that this scroll may be rescued due to that area that is blank, whose sanctity remains. The Gemara replies: There, it is referring to a case where the blank area was cut and thrown out, and all that remains is the place of the writing.,Come and hear a different resolution from what we learned in a mishna: The Sages decreed that the blank folios that are above and below, that are between one section and another section, that are between one page and another page, that are at the beginning of the scroll, and that are at the end of the scroll render the hands that touch them ritually impure. Apparently, the blank folios have the sanctity of a Torah scroll. The Gemara replies: That is not a proof, as perhaps when it is part of the Torah scroll, it is different, and in those circumstances the sanctity of the Torah extends to the blank portions. When they stand alone they have no sanctity.,Therefore, come and hear a different resolution from that which was taught in another baraita: With regard to the blank folios and the Torah scrolls of heretics, one does not rescue them from the fire; rather, they burn in their place, they and the names of God contained therein. What, is this not referring to the blank folios of a Torah scroll? The Gemara rejects this: No, it is referring to the blank folios of the scrolls of heretics. The Gemara is surprised at this: Now, with regard to the scrolls of heretics themselves, one does not rescue them; is it necessary to say that one does not rescue their blank folios? Rather, this is what it is saying: And the scrolls of heretics are like blank folios.,Apropos the scrolls of heretics, the Gemara analyzes the matter itself. With regard to the blank folios and the Torah scrolls of the heretics, one does not rescue them from the fire. Rabbi Yosei says: During the week, one cuts the names of God contained therein and buries them, and burns the rest. Rabbi Tarfon said in the form of an oath: I will bury my sons if I fail to do the following, that if these books come into my possession I will burn them and the names contained therein. As even if a person is pursuing him with the intent to kill him, and a snake is hurrying to bite him, one enters a house of idolatry and does not enter the houses of these heretics. The reason is that these heretics are aware of the greatness of the Creator manifest in the Torah and its mitzvot, and nevertheless, they deny the existence of God; whereas these idolators are not aware, and that is the reason that they deny the existence of God. And with regard to the heretics, the verse says: “And behind the door and the doorpost you place your memory” (Isaiah 57:8). Although they remember the word of God, they treat it contemptuously, as if casting it behind the door.,Rabbi Yishmael said: The fact that the names of God in the scrolls of heretics may be burned can be derived through an a fortiori inference: Just as to make peace between a husband and his wife, the Torah says: My name that was written in sanctity shall be erased in the water in the framework of the ordeal of the sota; these, the heretics, who impose jealousy, and hatred, and conflict between the Jewish people and their Father in Heaven, all the more so it is proper to erase God’s names because of them. And with regard to heretics, David said: “For I hate those who hate You, God, and I fight those who rise against You. I hate them with the utmost hatred, they have become enemies to me” (Psalms 139:21–22). And just as they, the scrolls of heretics, are not rescued from the fire, neither are they rescued from a rockslide, nor from water, nor from any other matter that destroys them.,Yosef bar Ḥanin raised a dilemma before Rabbi Abbahu: With regard to these books of the house of Abidan, does one rescue them from the fire or does one not rescue them? There were sacred Jewish texts in that house, which were used in debates and discussions on matters of faith. Rabbi Abbahu did not give him a clear answer but said yes and no, and the matter was uncertain to him. Rav would not go to the house of Abidan for conversation, and all the more so he would not go to the house of Nitzrefei, the Persian fire-temple. Shmuel, to the house of Nitzrefei he did not go, but to the house of Abidan he did go. The gentile scholars said to Rava: Why did you not come to the house of Abidan? He evaded their question with an excuse and said to them: There is a certain palm tree on the road, and that makes the path difficult for me. They said to him: We will uproot it. He said to them: Nevertheless, the resulting pit in its place will be difficult for me. Mar bar Yosef said: I am one of them, we are friends, and I do not fear them. Still, one time he went and argued with them and they sought to endanger his life. Rabbi Meir would call the Christian writing, the Evangelion, the wicked folio aven gilyon; Rabbi Yoḥa called it the sinful folio avon gilyon.,The Gemara relates: Imma Shalom, the wife of Rabbi Eliezer, was Rabban Gamliel’s sister. There was a Christian philosopher pilosofa in their neighborhood' 139a clear halakha and clear teaching together, but rather there will be disputes among the Sages.,It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei ben Elisha says: If you see a generation that many troubles are befalling it, go and examine the judges of Israel. Perhaps their sins are the cause, as any calamity that comes to the world comes due to the judges of Israel acting corruptly, as it is stated: “Please hear this, heads of the house of Jacob, and officers of the house of Israel, who abhor justice and pervert all equity, who build up Zion with blood, and Jerusalem with iniquity. Their heads they judge for bribes, and their priests teach for hire, and their prophets divine for money; yet they lean upon the Lord, saying: Is not the Lord in our midst? No evil shall befall us” (Micah 3:9–11).,The Gemara comments: They are wicked, but they placed their trust in the One Who spoke and the world came into being, the Almighty. Therefore, the Holy One, Blessed be He, brings upon them three calamities corresponding to the three transgressions for which they are responsible, as it is stated in the following verse: “Therefore, because of you, Zion shall be plowed as a field, and Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the Temple Mount as the high places of a forest” (Micah 3:12).,And the Holy One, Blessed be He, will not rest His Divine Presence on the Jewish people until evil judges and officers shall be eliminated from the Jewish people, as it is stated: “And I will turn My hand upon you, and I will purge away your dross as with lye, and I will remove all your alloy. And I will restore your judges as at first, and your counselors as at the beginning; afterward you shall be called the city of righteousness, a faithful city” (Isaiah 1:25–26).,Ulla said: Jerusalem will be redeemed only through righteousness, as it is stated: “Zion will be redeemed with justice and those who return to her with righteousness” (Isaiah 1:27).,Rav Pappa said: If the arrogant will cease to exist, the Persian fire priests will cease to exist as well. If the deceitful judges will cease to exist, the royal officers gazirpatei and taskmasters will cease to exist.,He explains: If the arrogant will cease, the Persian fire priests will cease, as it is written: “And I will purge away your dross sigayikh as with lye, and I will remove all your alloy bedilayikh.” This teaches that when the conceited and haughty sigim are purged, the priests of fire, who are separated muvdalim from the fear of God, will also cease.,He said: If the deceitful judges cease, the royal officers and taskmasters will cease, as it is written: “The Lord has removed your judgment, cast out your enemy” (Zephaniah 3:15).,Rabbi Mallai said in the name of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon: What is the meaning of that which is written: “The Lord has broken the staff of the wicked, the rod of the rulers” (Isaiah 14:5)? He explains: “The Lord has broken the staff of the wicked”; these are the judges who have become staffs for their attendants. The attendants abuse people, and the judges provide the attendants with legal backing and moral support. “The rod of the rulers”; these are the Torah scholars who are members of the families of the judges. These Torah scholars assist their relatives, the judges, conceal their faults. Mar Zutra said: These are the Torah scholars who teach communal halakhot to ignorant judges. They teach ignorant judges just enough Torah and modes of conduct to prevent the people from realizing how ignorant they are, enabling them to maintain their positions.,Rabbi Eliezer ben Mallai said in the name of Reish Lakish: What is the meaning of that which is written: “For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity; your lips have spoken lies, your tongue utters wickedness” (Isaiah 59:3)?,He explains: “For your hands are defiled with blood”; these are the judges who take bribes in their hands. “And your fingers with iniquity”; these are the scribes of the judges, who write falsehood with their fingers. “Your lips have spoken lies”; these are the legal advisors. “Your tongue utters wickedness”; these are the litigants themselves.,And Rabbi Mallai said in the name of Rabbi Yitzḥak from Migdal: From the day that Joseph took leave from his brothers, he did not sample a taste of wine, as it is written: “They shall be on the head of Joseph, and on the crown of the head of he who was separated nezir from his brothers” (Genesis 49:26). The language of the verse alludes to the fact that Joseph conducted himself like a nazirite and abstained from wine.,Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: Joseph’s brothers too did not sample the taste of wine during the intervening period, due to their remorse, as it is written: “And they drank and became drunk with him” (Genesis 43:34). By inference: Until now there was no drunkenness, as they abstained from drinking. And the other Sage, Rabbi Mallai, holds: It was drunkenness of which there was none; however, there was drinking on the part of the brothers during the intervening years.,And Rabbi Mallai said: It is stated in the verse: “And the anger of the Lord was kindled against Moses, and He said: Is there not Aaron your brother the Levite, I know that he can surely speak, and also behold, he is coming out to greet you, and he will see you and be glad in his heart” (Exodus 4:14). Rabbi Mallai taught that as reward for Aaron’s lack of jealousy at seeing his brother Moses rise to greatness, as it is stated: “And he will see you and be glad in his heart,” he merited to become the High Priest, and for the breastplate of judgment to rest on his heart.,The Gemara returns to the laws of a canopy. The inhabitants of the town of Bashkar sent to Levi: What is the halakha with regard to spreading a canopy on Shabbat? Additionally, what is the halakha with regard to hops in a vineyard? Do they constitute a prohibited mixture of diverse kinds? Finally, what is the halakha with regard to one who died on a Festival? How can the people attend to his burial?,As the messenger was going with the question, Levi died. Shmuel said to Rav Menashya: If you are wise and able to respond, send them answers to their questions. He sent them: With regard to a canopy, we reviewed all aspects of the matter of the canopy, and we did not find any permissible aspect.,The Gemara asks: And let him send them that it can be permitted in accordance with the opinion of Rami bar Yeḥezkel. The Gemara answers: He did not want to reveal that leniency to them, because they are not well versed in Torah, and they would not distinguish between permitted and prohibited methods of spreading the canopy.,He also told them: Hops in a vineyard are a forbidden mixture of diverse kinds. The Gemara asks: And let him send them the message that it is permitted in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Tarfon, as it was taught in the Tosefta: With regard to hops, Rabbi Tarfon says: They do not constitute a prohibited mixture of food crops in a vineyard, and the Rabbis say: They constitute a forbidden mixture of food crops in a vineyard. And we maintain that anyone who is lenient with regard to the halakhot of diverse kinds in Eretz Yisrael, even if the halakha is not ruled in accordance with his opinion, the halakha is ruled in accordance with his opinion outside of Eretz Yisrael, where the halakhot of diverse kinds apply only by rabbinic law. The Gemara explains: He did not reveal this leniency to them, because they were not well versed in Torah.,With regard to the matter of hops in a vineyard, the Gemara relates that Rav would announce: One who seeks to sow hops in a vineyard, let him sow. In contrast, Rav Amram Ḥasida would administer lashes for sowing hops in a vineyard.,The Gemara relates that Rav Mesharshiya would give a peruta to a gentile child, and the child would sow hops for him. The Gemara asks: And let him give the peruta to a Jewish child, who is also not obligated in mitzva observance. The Gemara answers: He may come to continue this habit and violate the prohibition as an adult. The Gemara asks: And let him give the peruta to an adult gentile. The Gemara answers: He may come to confuse him with a Jew.,With regard to a person who died on a Festival, he sent them in response: If a person died on a Festival, neither Jews nor Arameans, i.e., gentiles, should attend to his burial, neither on the first day of a Festival, nor on the second day of a Festival observed in the Diaspora.,The Gemara asks: Is that so? Didn’t Rabbi Yehuda bar Sheilat say that Rabbi Asi said: There was an incident in the synagogue of the settlement of Maon on a Festival adjacent to Shabbat. A person died, 156b Is it because Jupiter is situated in the west that you cannot have children? I will restore it and establish it in the east. And that is the meaning of that which is written with regard to Abraham: “Who has raised up one from the east, he will call justice tzedek to his steps leraglo. He gives nations before him, and makes him rule over kings; his sword makes them as the dust, his bow as the driven stubble” (Isaiah 41:2). God established Jupiter tzedek in the east on behalf of leraglo Abraham.,And from that which transpired to Shmuel, one can also conclude that there is no constellation for the Jewish people. The Gemara relates that Shmuel and the gentile sage Ablet were sitting, and they saw these people were going to the lake. Ablet said to Shmuel: This person will go and he will not return, because a snake will bite him and he will die. Shmuel said to him: If he is a Jew, he will go and come back. As they were sitting for a while, the person they discussed went away and then returned.,Ablet stood up, threw down the person’s burden, and inside he found a snake cut and cast in two pieces. Shmuel said to him: What did you do to merit being saved from death? The person said to him: Every day we all take bread together and eat from the bread. Today, there was one of us who did not have bread, and when it came time to gather the bread, he was embarrassed because he did not have any to give. I said to the others: I will go and take the bread. When I came to the person who did not have bread, I rendered myself as one who was taking from him so that he would not be embarrassed. Shmuel said to him: You performed a mitzva. Shmuel went out and taught based on this incident that even though it is written: “And charity will save from death” (Proverbs 10:2), it does not only mean that it will save a person from an unusual death but even from death itself.,And from that which transpired to Rabbi Akiva as well it can be derived that there is no constellation for the Jewish people, as Rabbi Akiva had a daughter, and Chaldean astrologers told him that on the same day that she enters the wedding canopy, a snake will bite her and she will die. She was very worried about this. On that day, her wedding day, she took the ornamental pin from her hair and stuck it into a hole in the wall for safekeeping, and it happened that it entered directly into the eye of the snake. In the morning, when she took the pin, the snake was pulled and came out with it.,Her father Rabbi Akiva said to her: What did you do to merit being saved from the snake? She told him: In the evening a poor person came and knocked on the door, and everyone was preoccupied with the feast and nobody heard him. I stood and took the portion that you had given me and gave it to him. Rabbi Akiva said to her: You performed a mitzva, and you were saved in its merit. Rabbi Akiva went out and taught based on this incident that even though it is written: “And charity will save from death” (Proverbs 10:2), it does not mean that it will save a person only from an unusual death, but even from death itself.,And from that which transpired to Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak as well it can be derived that there is no constellation for the Jewish people, As Chaldean astrologers told Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak’s mother: Your son will be a thief. She did not allow him to uncover his head. She said to her son: Cover your head so that the fear of Heaven will be upon you, and pray for Divine mercy. He did not know why she said this to him. One day he was sitting and studying beneath a palm tree that did not belong to him, and the cloak fell off of his head. He lifted his eyes and saw the palm tree. He was overcome by impulse and he climbed up and detached a bunch of dates with his teeth. Apparently, he had an inborn inclination to steal, but was able to overcome that inclination with proper education and prayer.,One may cut the pumpkins before an animal on Shabbat, as long as they were picked prior to Shabbat. And likewise one may cut an animal carcass before the dogs on Shabbat. Rabbi Yehuda says: If it was not already a carcass, i.e., it was not dead, prior to Shabbat, it is prohibited to cut it or even move it on Shabbat because it is not prepared for use on Shabbat.,amora’im with regard to the prohibition of set-aside on Shabbat was stated. Ayin, reish, lamed, shin, ḥet, zayin is a mnemonic for the names of the amora’im who stated the following halakhot. Ulla said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who holds that there is a prohibition of set-aside on Shabbat. And Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon.,And Rav also holds that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. From where is it ascertained that this is Rav’s opinion? From that which was taught with regard to the mats that are on ships; Rav prohibited moving them on Shabbat due to the prohibition of set-aside, and Shmuel permitted moving them. And Levi also holds that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, as can be seen from his practice when they would bring a slaughtered animal with regard to which there was concern that it was an animal with a condition that will cause it to die within twelve months tereifa, before Levi on a Festival. He would examine it only when he was sitting near a garbage dump, as he said: Perhaps it would not be determined to be kosher and it would not be suited even for dogs, and then it would be prohibited to move the carcass. Apparently, he holds that it is prohibited to move a carcass that was not prepared for use before Shabbat.,And Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, who holds that the prohibition of set-aside does not apply on Shabbat. And Ze’eiri also holds that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, as we learned in a mishna: With regard to an animal that died on Shabbat, one may not move it from its place on Shabbat. And Ze’eiri explained: This prohibition only applies to a consecrated animal, as consecrated items may not be fed to dogs in deference to their sanctity; therefore, it is set-aside and may not be moved on Shabbat. However, in the case of a non-sacred animal, one may well move it and use it because it does not have set-aside status. And Rabbi Yoḥa also said that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon. The Gemara asks: And did Rabbi Yoḥa really say that? Didn’t Rabbi Yoḥa say: The halakha is in accordance with an unattributed mishna, and we learned in a mishna: ' None | |
|
27. Babylonian Talmud, Sotah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Targum, and the Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrianism, as similar to Jewish priests and rabbis • Zoroastrianism, negative Jewish perception of • Zoroastrianism, religious study • fire temples, Zoroastrian, in the Babylonian Talmud • priests, Zoroastrian, portrayals of, in the Babylonian Talmud, as sorcerers and corrupt administrators
Found in books: Mokhtarian (2021), Rabbis, Sorcerers, Kings, and Priests: The Culture of the Talmud in Ancient Iran. 142, 204; Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 73, 88; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 73, 88
| 22a שקרא ושנה ולא שימש תלמידי חכמים,אתמר קרא ושנה ולא שימש ת"ח ר\' אלעזר אומר הרי זה עם הארץ ר\' שמואל בר נחמני אמר הרי זה בור ר\' ינאי אומר ה"ז כותי,רב אחא בר יעקב אומר הרי זה מגוש אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק מסתברא כרב אחא בר יעקב דאמרי אינשי רטין מגושא ולא ידע מאי אמר תני תנא ולא ידע מאי אמר,ת"ר איזהו ע"ה כל שאינו קורא ק"ש שחרית וערבית בברכותיה דברי ר\' מאיר וחכ"א כל שאינו מניח תפילין בן עזאי אומר כל שאין לו ציצית בבגדו ר\' יונתן בן יוסף אמר כל שיש לו בנים ואינו מגדלן ללמוד תורה אחרים אומרים אפילו קורא ושונה ולא שימש ת"ח זהו ע"ה,קרא ולא שנה הרי זה בור לא קרא ולא שנה עליו הכתוב אומר (ירמיהו לא, כז) וזרעתי את בית ישראל ואת בית יהודה זרע אדם וזרע בהמה,(משלי כד, כא) ירא את ה\' בני ומלך ועם שונים אל תתערב אמר רבי יצחק אלו ששונים הלכות פשיטא מהו דתימא שונין בחטא וכדרב הונא דאמר רב הונא כיון שעבר אדם עבירה ושנה בה הותרה לו קמ"ל,תנא התנאים מבלי עולם מבלי עולם ס"ד אמר רבינא שמורין הלכה מתוך משנתן תניא נמי הכי א"ר יהושע וכי מבלי עולם הן והלא מיישבי עולם הן שנאמר (חבקוק ג, ו) הליכות עולם לו אלא שמורין הלכה מתוך משנתן,אשה פרושה וכו\' ת"ר בתולה צליינית ואלמנה שובבית וקטן שלא כלו לו חדשיו הרי אלו מבלי עולם,איני והאמר רבי יוחנן למדנו יראת חטא מבתולה וקיבול שכר מאלמנה יראת חטא מבתולה דר\' יוחנן שמעה לההיא בתולה דנפלה אאפה וקאמרה רבש"ע בראת גן עדן ובראת גיהנם בראת צדיקים ובראת רשעים יהי רצון מלפניך שלא יכשלו בי בני אדם,קיבול שכר מאלמנה דההיא אלמנה דהואי בי כנישתא בשיבבותה כל יומא הות אתיא ומצלה בי מדרשיה דר\' יוחנן אמר לה בתי לא בית הכנסת בשיבבותך אמרה ליה רבי ולא שכר פסיעות יש לי,כי קאמר כגון יוחני בת רטיבי,מאי קטן שלא כלו לו חדשיו הכא תרגימו זה ת"ח המבעט ברבותיו,רבי אבא אמר זה תלמיד שלא הגיע להוראה ומורה דא"ר אבהו אמר רב הונא אמר רב מאי דכתיב (משלי ז, כו) כי רבים חללים הפילה ועצומים כל הרוגיה כי רבים חללים הפילה זה ת"ח שלא הגיע להוראה ומורה ועצומים כל הרוגיה זה ת"ח שהגיע להוראה ואינו מורה'' None | 22a is one who read the Written Torah and learned the Mishna but did not serve Torah scholars in order to learn the reasoning behind the halakhot. Since he believes himself knowledgeable, he issues halakhic rulings, but due to his lack of understanding he rules erroneously and is therefore considered wicked. His cunning is in his public display of knowledge, which misleads others into considering him a true Torah scholar.,It was stated: With regard to one who read the Written Torah and learned the Mishna but did not serve Torah scholars, Rabbi Elazar says: This person is an ignoramus. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: This person is a boor. Rabbi Yannai says: This person is comparable to a Samaritan, who follows the Written Torah but not the traditions of the Sages.,Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov says: This person is comparable to a sorcerer magosh, who uses his knowledge to mislead people. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: It is reasonable to accept the opinion of Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov, as people say proverbially: The sorcerer chants and does not know what he is saying; so too, the tanna teaches the Mishna and does not know what he is saying.,§ The Sages taught: Who is an ignoramus am ha’aretz? It is anyone who does not recite Shema in the morning and evening with its blessings; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: It is anyone who does not don phylacteries. Ben Azzai says: It is anyone who does not have ritual fringes on his garment. Rabbi Yonatan ben Yosef said: It is anyone who has sons and does not raise them to study Torah. Aḥerim say: Even if one reads the Written Torah and learns the Mishna but does not serve Torah scholars, he is an ignoramus.,If one read the Written Torah but did not learn the Mishna, he is a boor. With regard to one who did not read and did not learn at all, the verse states: “Behold, the days come, says the Lord, and I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of man, and with the seed of beast” (Jeremiah 31:26). One who has not studied at all is comparable to a beast.,The verse states: “My son, fear the Lord and the king; and meddle not with those who are repeating” (Proverbs 24:21). Rabbi Yitzḥak says: These are individuals who repeatedly learn the halakhot but do not know the reasons behind them. The Gemara asks: Isn’t that obvious? How else could the verse be understood? The Gemara answers: He states this lest you say that the verse is referring to individuals who repeatedly commit sins, and this is in accordance with the words of Rav Huna, as Rav Huna says: Once a person committed a transgression and repeated it, in his eyes it became permitted for him. Since the verse could be interpreted in this manner, Rabbi Yitzḥak teaches us that the verse is referring to those who learn without understanding.,It was taught in a baraita: The tanna’im, who recite the tannaitic sources by rote, are individuals who erode the world. The Gemara is puzzled by this statement: Could it enter your mind that they are individuals who erode the world? Ravina says: This statement is referring to those who issue halakhic rulings based on their knowledge of mishnayot. This is also taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehoshua said: Are they individuals who erode the world? Aren’t they settling the world, as it is stated: “His ways halikhot are eternal” (Habakkuk 3:6)? The Sages read the term halikhot as halakhot, inferring that one who learns halakhot attains eternal life. Rather, this is referring to those who issue halakhic rulings based on their knowledge of mishnayot.,§ The mishna states that an abstinent woman is among those who erode the world. The Sages taught: A maiden who prays constantly, and a neighborly shovavit widow who constantly visits her neighbors, and a child whose months of gestation were not completed, all these are people who erode the world.,The Gemara asks: Is that so? But didn’t Rabbi Yoḥa say: We learned the meaning of fear of sin from a maiden, and the significance of receiving divine reward from a widow. The meaning of fear of sin can be learned from a maiden, as Rabbi Yoḥa heard a certain maiden who fell on her face in prayer, and she was saying: Master of the Universe, You created the Garden of Eden and You created Gehenna, You created the righteous and You created the wicked. May it be Your will that men shall not stumble because of me and consequently go to Gehenna.,The significance of receiving divine reward can be learned from a widow, as there was a certain widow in whose neighborhood there was a synagogue, and despite this every day she went and prayed in the study hall of Rabbi Yoḥa. Rabbi Yoḥa said to her: My daughter, is there not a synagogue in your neighborhood? She said to him: My teacher, don’t I attain a reward for all the steps I take while walking to pray in the distant study hall?,The Gemara answers: When it is stated in the baraita that a maiden who prays constantly is one who erodes the world, it is referring, for example, to Yoḥani bat Retivi, who constantly prayed and pretended to be saintly but actually engaged in sorcery.,The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of a child whose months of gestation were not completed? Here, in Babylonia, they interpreted this as alluding to an imperfect, incomplete Torah scholar who scorns his teachers.,Rabbi Abba says: This is a student who has not yet attained the ability to issue halakhic rulings, and yet he issues rulings and is therefore compared to a prematurely born child. This is as Rabbi Abbahu says that Rav Huna says that Rav says: What is the meaning of that which is written: “For she has cast down many wounded; and a mighty host are all her slain” (Proverbs 7:26)? “For she has cast down hippila many wounded”; this is referring to a Torah scholar who has not yet attained the ability to issue rulings, and yet he issues rulings. “And a mighty host ve’atzumim are all her slain”; this is referring to a Torah scholar who has attained the ability to issue rulings, but does not issue rulings and prevents the masses from learning Torah properly.'' None |
|
28. Babylonian Talmud, Sukkah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrianism, as similar to Jewish priests and rabbis
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 105; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 105
| 53a אשה היתה בוררת חטים לאור של בית השואבה:,חסידים ואנשי מעשה כו\': ת"ר יש מהן אומרים אשרי ילדותנו שלא ביישה את זקנותנו אלו חסידים ואנשי מעשה ויש מהן אומרים אשרי זקנותנו שכפרה את ילדותנו אלו בעלי תשובה אלו ואלו אומרים אשרי מי שלא חטא ומי שחטא ישוב וימחול לו,תניא אמרו עליו על הלל הזקן כשהיה שמח בשמחת בית השואבה אמר כן אם אני כאן הכל כאן ואם איני כאן מי כאן הוא היה אומר כן למקום שאני אוהב שם רגלי מוליכות אותי אם תבא אל ביתי אני אבא אל ביתך אם אתה לא תבא אל ביתי אני לא אבא אל ביתך שנאמר (שמות כ, כד) בכל המקום אשר אזכיר את שמי אבא אליך וברכתיך,אף הוא ראה גלגולת אחת שצפה על פני המים אמר לה על דאטפת אטפוך ומטיפיך יטופון אמר רבי יוחנן רגלוהי דבר איניש אינון ערבין ביה לאתר דמיתבעי תמן מובילין יתיה,הנהו תרתי כושאי דהוו קיימי קמי שלמה (מלכים א ד, ג) אליחרף ואחיה בני שישא סופרים דשלמה הוו יומא חד חזייה למלאך המות דהוה קא עציב א"ל אמאי עציבת א"ל דקא בעו מינאי הני תרתי כושאי דיתבי הכא מסרינהו לשעירים שדרינהו למחוזא דלוז כי מטו למחוזא דלוז שכיבו,למחר חזיא מלאך המות דהוה קבדח א"ל אמאי בדיחת א"ל באתר דבעו מינאי תמן שדרתינהו מיד פתח שלמה ואמר רגלוהי דבר איניש אינון ערבין ביה לאתר דמיתבעי תמן מובילין יתיה,תניא אמרו עליו על רבן שמעון בן גמליאל כשהיה שמח שמחת בית השואבה היה נוטל שמנה אבוקות של אור וזורק אחת ונוטל אחת ואין נוגעות זו בזו וכשהוא משתחוה נועץ שני גודליו בארץ ושוחה ונושק את הרצפה וזוקף ואין כל בריה יכולה לעשות כן וזו היא קידה,לוי אחוי קידה קמיה דרבי ואיטלע והא גרמא ליה והאמר רבי אלעזר לעולם אל יטיח אדם דברים כלפי מעלה שהרי אדם גדול הטיח דברים כלפי מעלה ואיטלע ומנו לוי הא והא גרמא ליה,לוי הוה מטייל קמיה דרבי בתמני סכיני שמואל קמיה שבור מלכא בתמניא מזגי חמרא אביי קמיה (דרבא) בתמניא ביעי ואמרי לה בארבעה ביעי,תניא אמר ר\' יהושע בן חנניה כשהיינו שמחים שמחת בית השואבה לא ראינו שינה בעינינו כיצד שעה ראשונה תמיד של שחר משם לתפלה משם לקרבן מוסף משם לתפלת המוספין משם לבית המדרש משם לאכילה ושתיה משם לתפלת המנחה משם לתמיד של בין הערבים מכאן ואילך לשמחת בית השואבה,איני והאמר רבי יוחנן שבועה שלא אישן שלשה ימים מלקין אותו וישן לאלתר אלא הכי קאמר לא טעמנו טעם שינה דהוו מנמנמי אכתפא דהדדי:,חמש עשרה מעלות: אמר ליה רב חסדא לההוא מדרבנן דהוי קמסדר אגדתא קמיה א"ל שמיע לך הני חמש עשרה מעלות כנגד מי אמרם דוד א"ל הכי אמר רבי יוחנן בשעה שכרה דוד שיתין קפא תהומא ובעי למשטפא עלמא אמר דוד חמש עשרה מעלות והורידן אי הכי חמש עשרה מעלות יורדות מיבעי ליה,אמר ליה הואיל ואדכרתן (מלתא) הכי אתמר בשעה שכרה דוד שיתין קפא תהומא ובעא למשטפא עלמא אמר דוד מי איכא דידע אי שרי למכתב שם'' None | 53a It was so bright that a woman would be able to sort wheat by the light of the Celebration of the Place of the Drawing of the Water.,§ The mishna continues: The pious and the men of action would dance before the people who attended the celebration. The Sages taught in the Tosefta that some of them would say in their song praising God: Happy is our youth, as we did not sin then, that did not embarrass our old age. These are the pious and the men of action, who spent all their lives engaged in Torah and mitzvot. And some would say: Happy is our old age, that atoned for our youth when we sinned. These are the penitents. Both these and those say: Happy is he who did not sin; and he who sinned should repent and God will absolve him.,It is taught in the Tosefta: They said about Hillel the Elder that when he was rejoicing at the Celebration of the Place of the Drawing of the Water he said this: If I am here, everyone is here; and if I am not here, who is here? In other words, one must consider himself as the one upon whom it is incumbent to fulfill obligations, and he must not rely on others to do so. He would also say this: To the place that I love, there my feet take me, and therefore, I come to the Temple. And the Holy One, Blessed be He, says: If you come to My house, I will come to your house; if you do not come to My house, I will not come to your house, as it is stated: “In every place that I cause My name to be mentioned, I will come to you and bless you” (Exodus 20:21).,The Gemara cites another statement of Hillel the Elder. Additionally, he saw one skull that was floating on the water and he said to it: Because you drowned others, they drowned you, and those that drowned you will be drowned. That is the way of the world; everyone is punished measure for measure. Apropos following one’s feet, Rabbi Yoḥa said: The feet of a person are responsible for him; to the place where he is in demand, there they lead him.,The Gemara relates with regard to these two Cushites who would stand before Solomon: “Elihoreph and Ahijah, the sons of Shisha” (I Kings 4:3), and they were scribes of Solomon. One day Solomon saw that the Angel of Death was sad. He said to him: Why are you sad? He said to him: They are asking me to take the lives of these two Cushites who are sitting here. Solomon handed them to the demons in his service, and sent them to the district of Luz, where the Angel of Death has no dominion. When they arrived at the district of Luz, they died.,The following day, Solomon saw that the Angel of Death was happy. He said to him: Why are you happy? He replied: In the place that they asked me to take them, there you sent them. The Angel of Death was instructed to take their lives in the district of Luz. Since they resided in Solomon’s palace and never went to Luz, he was unable to complete his mission. That saddened him. Ultimately, Solomon dispatched them to Luz, enabling the angel to accomplish his mission. That pleased him. Immediately, Solomon began to speak and said: The feet of a person are responsible for him; to the place where he is in demand, there they lead him.,§ It is taught in a baraita: They said about Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel that when he would rejoice at the Celebration of the Place of the Drawing of the Water, he would take eight flaming torches and toss one and catch another, juggling them, and, though all were in the air at the same time, they would not touch each other. And when he would prostrate himself, he would insert his two thumbs into the ground, and bow, and kiss the floor of the courtyard and straighten, and there was not any other creature that could do that due to the extreme difficulty involved. And this was the form of bowing called kidda performed by the High Priest.,The Gemara relates: Levi demonstrated a kidda before Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and strained his thigh and came up lame. The Gemara asks: And is that what caused him to be lame? But didn’t Rabbi Elazar say: One should never speak impertinently toward God above; as a great person once spoke impertinently toward God above, and even though his prayers were answered, he was still punished and came up lame. And who was this great person? It was Levi. Apparently his condition was not caused by his bow. The Gemara answers: There is no contradiction. Both this and that caused him to come up lame; because he spoke impertinently toward God, he therefore was injured when exerting himself in demonstrating kidda.,Apropos the rejoicing of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel at the Celebration of the Place of the Drawing of the Water, the Gemara recounts: Levi would walk before Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi juggling with eight knives. Shmuel would juggle before King Shapur with eight glasses of wine without spilling. Abaye would juggle before Rabba with eight eggs. Some say he did so with four eggs. All these were cited.,It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥaya said: When we would rejoice in the Celebration of the Place of the Drawing of the Water, we did not see sleep in our eyes the entire Festival. How so? In the first hour of the day, the daily morning offering was sacrificed and everyone came to watch. From there they proceeded to engage in prayer in the synagogue; from there, to watch the sacrifice of the additional offerings; from there, to the synagogue to recite the additional prayer. From there they would proceed to the study hall to study Torah; from there to the eating and drinking in the sukka; from there to the afternoon prayer. From there they would proceed to the daily afternoon offering in the Temple. From this point forward, they proceeded to the Celebration of the Place of the Drawing of the Water.,The Gemara wonders: Is that so? But didn’t Rabbi Yoḥa say: One who took an oath that I will not sleep three days, one flogs him immediately for taking an oath in vain, and he may sleep immediately because it is impossible to stay awake for three days uninterrupted. Rather, this is what Rabbi Yehoshua is saying: We did not experience the sense of actual sleep, because they would merely doze on each other’s shoulders. In any case, they were not actually awake for the entire week.,§ The mishna continues: The musicians would stand on the fifteen stairs that descend from the Israelites’ courtyard to the Women’s Courtyard, corresponding to the fifteen Songs of the Ascents in Psalms. Rav Ḥisda said to one of the Sages who was organizing aggada before him: Did you hear with regard to these fifteen Songs of Ascents in Psalms, corresponding to what did David say them? He said to him that this is what Rabbi Yoḥa said: At the time that David dug the drainpipes in the foundation of the Temple, the waters of the depths rose and sought to inundate the world. Immediately, David recited the fifteen Songs of the Ascents and caused them to subside. Rav Ḥisda asked: If so, should they be called fifteen Songs of the Ascents? They should have been called Songs of the Descents.,Rav Ḥisda continued and said to him: Since you reminded me of this matter, this is what was originally stated: At the time that David dug the drainpipes, the waters of the depths rose and sought to inundate the world. David said: Is there anyone who knows whether it is permitted to write the sacred name'' None |
|
29. Babylonian Talmud, Yevamot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrianism • Zoroastrianism, persecution of others • Zoroastrianism, relation to Judaism • fire temples, Zoroastrian, in the Babylonian Talmud • priests, Zoroastrian, portrayals of, in the Babylonian Talmud, as sorcerers and corrupt administrators • priests, Zoroastrian, portrayals of, in the Babylonian Talmud, as sorcerers and corrupt administrators, bribery, motif of • priests, Zoroastrian, portrayals of, in the Babylonian Talmud, as sorcerers and corrupt administrators, role of, in Sasanian society, as judges, administrators, and scholar-priests
Found in books: Bickart (2022), The Scholastic Culture of the Babylonian Talmud, 2; Herman, Rubenstein (2018), The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World. 290; Mokhtarian (2021), Rabbis, Sorcerers, Kings, and Priests: The Culture of the Talmud in Ancient Iran. 121, 122, 204; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 80
| 63b מן החטא מקרי ליה רב יהודה לרב יצחק בריה (קהלת ז, כו) ומוצא אני מר ממות את האשה א"ל כגון מאן כגון אמך,והא מתני ליה רב יהודה לרב יצחק בריה אין אדם מוצא קורת רוח אלא מאשתו ראשונה שנאמר (משלי ה, יח) יהי מקורך ברוך ושמח מאשת נעוריך וא"ל כגון מאן כגון אמך מתקיף תקיפא ועבורי מיעברא במלה,היכי דמי אשה רעה אמר אביי מקשטא ליה תכא ומקשטא ליה פומא רבא אמר מקשטא ליה תכא ומהדרא ליה גבא,אמר רבי חמא בר חנינא כיון שנשא אדם אשה עונותיו מתפקקין שנאמר (משלי יח, כב) מצא אשה מצא טוב ויפק רצון מה\' במערבא כי נסיב אינש איתתא אמרי ליה הכי מצא או מוצא מצא דכתיב מצא אשה מצא טוב מוצא דכתיב ומוצא אני מר ממות את האשה,אמר רבא אשה רעה מצוה לגרשה דכתיב (משלי כב, י) גרש לץ ויצא מדון וישבות דין וקלון ואמר רבא אשה רעה וכתובתה מרובה צרתה בצדה דאמרי אינשי בחברתה ולא בסילתא ואמר רבא קשה אשה רעה כיום סגריר שנאמר (משלי כז, טו) דלף טורד ביום סגריר ואשת מדינים נשתוה,ואמר רבא בא וראה כמה טובה אשה טובה וכמה רעה אשה רעה כמה טובה אשה טובה דכתיב מצא אשה מצא טוב אי בגוה משתעי קרא כמה טובה אשה טובה שהכתוב משבחה אי בתורה משתעי קרא כמה טובה אשה טובה שהתורה נמשלה בה כמה רעה אשה רעה דכתיב ומוצא אני מר ממות את האשה אי בגוה משתעי קרא כמה רעה אשה רעה שהכתוב מגנה אי בגיהנם משתעי קרא כמה רעה אשה רעה שגיהנם נמשלה בה,(ירמיהו יא, יא) הנני מביא רעה אשר לא יוכלו לצאת ממנה אמר רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה זו אשה רעה וכתובתה מרובה (איכה א, יד) נתנני ה\' בידי לא אוכל קום אמר רב חסדא אמר מר עוקבא בר חייא זו אשה רעה וכתובתה מרובה במערבא אמרו זה שמזונותיו תלוין בכספו,(דברים כח, לב) בניך ובנותיך נתונים לעם אחר אמר רב חנן בר רבא אמר רב זו אשת האב (דברים לב, כא) בגוי נבל אכעיסם אמר רב חנן בר רבא אמר רב זו אשה רעה וכתובתה מרובה רבי אליעזר אומר אלו הצדוקים וכן הוא אומר (תהלים יד, א) אמר נבל בלבו אין אלהים וגו\',במתניתא תנא אלו אנשי ברבריא ואנשי מרטנאי שמהלכין ערומים בשוק שאין לך משוקץ ומתועב לפני המקום יותר ממי שמהלך בשוק ערום רבי יוחנן אמר אלו חברים אמרו ליה לר\' יוחנן אתו חברי לבבל שגא נפל אמרו ליה מקבלי שוחדא תריץ יתיב,גזרו על ג\' מפני ג\' גזרו על הבשר מפני המתנות גזרו על המרחצאות מפני הטבילה,קא מחטטי שכבי מפני ששמחים ביום אידם שנאמר (שמואל א יב, טו) והיתה יד ה\' בכם ובאבותיכם אמר רבה בר שמואל זו חטוטי שכבי דאמר מר בעון חיים מתים מתחטטין,א"ל רבא לרבה בר מארי כתיב (ירמיהו ח, ב) לא יאספו ולא יקברו לדומן על פני האדמה יהיו וכתיב (ירמיהו ח, ג) ונבחר מות מחיים אמר ליה נבחר מות לרשעים שלא יחיו בעולם הזה ויחטאו ויפלו בגיהנם,כתוב בספר בן סירא אשה טובה מתנה טובה לבעלה וכתיב טובה בחיק ירא אלהים תנתן אשה רעה צרעת לבעלה מאי תקנתיה יגרשנה ויתרפא מצרעתו אשה יפה אשרי בעלה מספר ימיו כפלים,העלם עיניך מאשת חן פן תלכד במצודתה אל תט אצל בעלה למסוך עמו יין ושכר כי בתואר אשה יפה רבים הושחתו ועצומים כל הרוגיה רבים היו פצעי רוכל המרגילים לדבר ערוה כניצוץ מבעיר גחלת ככלוב מלא עוף כן בתיהם מלאים מרמה,אל תצר צרת מחר כי לא תדע מה ילד יום שמא מחר בא ואיננו נמצא מצטער על העולם שאין שלו מנע רבים מתוך ביתך ולא הכל תביא ביתך רבים יהיו דורשי שלומך גלה סוד לאחד מאלף,אמר רבי אסי אין בן דוד בא עד שיכלו כל הנשמות שבגוף שנאמר (ישעיהו נז, טז) כי רוח מלפני יעטוף ונשמות אני עשיתי תניא רבי אליעזר אומר כל מי שאין עוסק בפריה ורביה כאילו שופך דמים שנאמר (בראשית ט, ו) שופך דם האדם באדם דמו ישפך וכתיב בתריה ואתם פרו ורבו,רבי יעקב אומר כאילו ממעט הדמות שנאמר (בראשית ט, ו) כי בצלם אלהים עשה את האדם וכתיב בתריה ואתם פרו וגו\' בן עזאי אומר כאילו שופך דמים וממעט הדמות שנאמר ואתם פרו ורבו,אמרו לו לבן עזאי יש נאה דורש ונאה מקיים נאה מקיים ואין נאה דורש ואתה נאה דורש ואין נאה מקיים אמר להן בן עזאי ומה אעשה שנפשי חשקה בתורה אפשר לעולם שיתקיים על ידי אחרים,תניא אידך רבי אליעזר אומר כל מי שאין עוסק בפריה ורביה כאילו שופך דמים שנאמר שופך דם האדם וסמיך ליה ואתם פרו וגו\' רבי אלעזר בן עזריה אומר כאילו ממעט הדמות בן עזאי אומר וכו\' אמרו לו לבן עזאי יש נאה דורש וכו\',ת"ר (במדבר י, לו) ובנחה יאמר שובה ה\' רבבות אלפי ישראל'' None | 63b from sin. We should therefore show our gratitude to them. The Gemara cites a related incident: Rav Yehuda was teaching Torah to Rav Yitzḥak, his son, and they encountered the verse: “And I find more bitter than death the woman” (Ecclesiastes 7:26). His son said to him: For example, whom? His father replied: For example, your mother.,The Gemara asks: Didn’t Rav Yehuda teach Rav Yitzḥak, his son, the following baraita: A man finds peace of mind only with his first wife, as it is stated: “Let your fountain be blessed, and have joy from the wife of your youth” (Proverbs 5:18), and his son said to him: For example, whom, and his father responded in this case as well: For example, your mother. This indicates that Rav Yehuda did find peace of mind with his wife. The Gemara answers: She was aggressive and forceful, but she was easily appeased.,The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances when a woman is considered a bad wife? Abaye said: She arranges a table for him and arranges her mouth for him at the same time. In other words, although she prepares food for him, she verbally abuses him while he eats. Rava said: She arranges a table for him and then turns her back to him, displaying her lack of interest in his company.,Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said: Once a man marries a woman his iniquities crumble mitpakekin, as it is stated: “Whoever finds a wife finds good, and obtains veyafek favor of the Lord” (Proverbs 18:22). In the West, i.e., Eretz Yisrael, when a man married a woman they would say to him as follows: Matza or motze? In other words, they would ask the groom if the appropriate passage for his wife is that verse, which begins with the word matza, as it is written: Whoever finds matza a wife finds good, or whether the more appropriate verse is the one beginning with the word motze, as it is written: “And I find motze more bitter than death the woman” (Ecclesiastes 7:26).,Rava said: It is a mitzva to divorce a bad wife, as it is written: “Cast out the scorner and contention will depart; strife and shame will cease” (Proverbs 22:10). And Rava said: A bad wife whose marriage contract settlement is too large for her husband to pay in the event of a divorce, her rival wife is at her side. In other words, the only way for him to improve matters is to take another wife. As people say in the well-known adage: The way to trouble a woman is with her peer and not with a thorn. And Rava said: A bad wife is as troublesome as a day of heavy rain, as it is stated: “A continual dropping on a very rainy day and a contentious woman are alike” (Proverbs 27:15).,And Rava said: Come and see how good a good wife is and how bad a bad wife is. How good is a good wife? As it is written: Whoever finds a wife finds good. If the verse speaks of her, a wife, this demonstrates how good a good wife is, as the Bible praises her. If the verse speaks metaphorically of the Torah, it nevertheless indicates how good a good wife is, as the Torah is compared to her. Conversely, how bad is a bad wife? As it is written: “And I find more bitter than death the woman.” If the verse speaks of her, this demonstrates how bad a bad wife is, as the Bible condemns her. If the verse speaks metaphorically of Gehenna, it still demonstrates how bad a bad wife is, as Gehenna is compared to her.,The Gemara cites further statements on the same issue. The verse states: “Behold, I will bring evil upon them, which they shall not be able to escape” (Jeremiah 11:11). Rav Naḥman said that Rabba bar Avuh said: This is a bad wife whose marriage contract is large. Similarly, with regard to the verse: “The Lord has given me into the hands of those against whom I cannot stand” (Lamentations 1:14), Rav Ḥisda said that Mar Ukva bar Ḥiyya said: This is a bad wife whose marriage contract is large. In the West, Eretz Yisrael, they said this verse is referring to one whose food is dependent on his money. He is forced to purchase his food with cash, as he does not possess land of his own.,With regard to the verse: “Your sons and your daughters shall be given to another people” (Deuteronomy 28:32), Rav Ḥa bar Rava said that Rav said: This is a reference to the children’s father’s wife, their stepmother. With regard to the verse: “I will provoke them with a vile nation” (Deuteronomy 32:21), Rav Ḥa bar Rava said that Rav said: This is a bad wife whose marriage contract is large. Rabbi Eliezer says that these are apostates, and so too the verse states: “The vile man has said in his heart: There is no God, they have dealt corruptly” (Psalms 14:1), which proves that an apostate is called vile.,It was taught in a baraita with regard to the verse: “I will provoke them with a vile nation,” that these are the inhabitants of Barbarya and the inhabitants of Martenai, who walk naked in the marketplace, as none is more despised and abominable before the Omnipresent than one who walks naked in the marketplace. Rabbi Yoḥa said: These are the Ḥabbarim, a sect of Persian priests. The Gemara relates: When they said to Rabbi Yoḥa: The Ḥabbarim have come to Babylonia, he shuddered and fell of his chair, out of concern for the Jews living there. They said to him: There is a way to deal with their persecution, as they accept bribes. Upon hearing that not all was lost, he straightened himself and sat in his place once again.,Apropos the Ḥabbarim, the Gemara cites the following statement of the Sages: The Ḥabbarim were able to issue decrees against the Jewish people with regard to three matters, due to three transgressions on the part of the Jewish people. They decreed against meat, i.e., they banned ritual slaughter, due to the failure of the Jewish people to give the priests the gifts of the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw. They decreed against Jews bathing in bathhouses, due to their neglect of ritual immersion.,Third, they exhumed the dead from their graves because the Jews rejoice on the holidays of the gentiles, as it is stated: “Then shall the hand of the Lord be against you and against your fathers” (I\xa0Samuel 12:15). Rabba bar Shmuel said: This verse is referring to exhuming the dead, which upsets both the living and the dead, as the Master said: Due to the iniquity of the living, the dead are exhumed.,Rava said to Rabba bar Mari: It is written: “They shall not be gathered nor buried; they shall be for dung upon the face of the earth” (Jeremiah 8:2), and it is written: “And death shall be chosen rather than life” (Jeremiah 8:3). If death will be so indecent that their bodies will not even be buried, why would people choose death over life? Rabba bar Mari said to him: The latter verse does not refer to the previously described state of affairs, but rather it means: Death is preferable for the wicked, as it is better that they not live in this world and sin and consequently descend into Gehenna.,The Gemara cites more statements concerning women. It is written in the book of Ben Sira: A good wife is a good gift for her husband. And it is written: A good one will be placed in the bosom of a God-fearing man; a bad wife is a plague to her husband. What is his remedy? He should divorce her and he will be cured of his plague. A beautiful wife, happy is her husband; the number of his days are doubled. His pleasure in her beauty makes him feel as though he has lived twice as long.,Turn your eyes from a graceful woman who is married to another man, lest you be caught in her trap. Do not turn to her husband to mix wine and strong drink with him, which can lead to temptation. For on account of the countece of a beautiful woman many have been destroyed, and her slain is a mighty host. Furthermore, many have been the wounded peddlers. This is referring to men who travel from place to place to sell women’s jewelry. Their frequent dealings with women lead their husbands to harm the peddlers. Those who accustom themselves to licentious matters are like a spark that ignites a coal. As a cage is full of birds, so are their houses full of deceit.,The Gemara quotes additional statements from the book of Ben Sira: Do not suffer from tomorrow’s trouble, that is, do not worry about problems that might arise in the future, as you do not know what a day will bring. Perhaps when tomorrow comes, the individual who was so worried will not be among the living, and he was consequently upset over a world that is not his. Prevent a crowd from inside your house, do not let many people enter, and do not even bring all your friends into your house. Make sure, however, that a crowd seeks your welfare, and that you have many allies. Reveal a secret to only one in a thousand, since most people are unable to keep a secret.,Rabbi Asi said: The Messiah, son of David, will not come until all the souls of the body have been finished, i.e., until all souls that are destined to inhabit physical bodies will do so. As it is stated: “For the spirit that enwraps itself is from Me, and the souls that I have made” (Isaiah 57:16). It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer says: Anyone who does not engage in the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply is considered as though he sheds blood, as it is stated: “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed” (Genesis 9:6), and it is written immediately afterward: “And you, be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 9:7).,Rabbi Ya’akov says: It is as though he diminishes the Divine Image, as it is stated: “For in the image of God He made man” (Genesis 9:6), and it is written immediately afterward: “And you, be fruitful and multiply” (Genesis 9:7). Ben Azzai says: It is as though he sheds blood and also diminishes the Divine Image, as it is stated: “And you, be fruitful and multiply,” after the verse that alludes to both shedding blood and the Divine Image.,They said to ben Azzai: There is a type of scholar who expounds well and fulfills his own teachings well, and another who fulfills well and does not expound well. But you, who have never married, expound well on the importance of procreation, and yet you do not fulfill well your own teachings. Ben Azzai said to them: What shall I do, as my soul yearns for Torah, and I do not wish to deal with anything else. It is possible for the world to be maintained by others, who are engaged in the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply.,It is similarly taught in another baraita that Rabbi Eliezer says: Anyone who does not engage in the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply is considered as though he sheds blood, as it is stated: “Whoever sheds the blood of man,” and it is stated near it: “And you, be fruitful and multiply.” Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya says: It is as though he diminishes the Divine Image. Ben Azzai says: It is as though he both sheds blood and diminishes the Divine Image. They said to ben Azzai: There is a type of scholar who expounds well, etc.,The Sages taught with regard to the mitzva to be fruitful and multiply: “And when it rested, he would say: Return, Lord, to the ten thousands of the thousands of Israel” (Numbers 10:36).'' None |
|
30. Babylonian Talmud, Yoma, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrianism, as similar to Jewish priests and rabbis • fire temples, Zoroastrian, in the Babylonian Talmud • priests, Zoroastrian, portrayals of, in the Babylonian Talmud, as sorcerers and corrupt administrators
Found in books: Mokhtarian (2021), Rabbis, Sorcerers, Kings, and Priests: The Culture of the Talmud in Ancient Iran. 204; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 89
35a | 35a What is the meaning of the name Parva? Rav Yosef said: Parva is the name of a Persian sorcerer, whose name is associated with the chamber due to a particular incident.,§ It was stated in the mishna: They spread there a sheet of fine linen. The Gemara asks: What is different that the sheet that they spread was made of fine linen? Rav Kahana said: It was so that the High Priest will be aware and remember that the service of the day is performed in fine linen.,§ The mishna continues: In the morning, he would wear garments worth eighteen maneh, and in the afternoon he would wear garments worth twelve maneh. In total, the clothes were worth thirty maneh. The Gemara expresses surprise at the total in the mishna: Does the tanna come to tell us the tally that eighteen and twelve equal thirty? The Gemara answers: This comes to teach us that one may not fashion garments worth less than the total of these morning and afternoon garments. The Gemara elaborates: If one decreases the value of these morning garments, and raises the value of those afternoon garments, we have no problem with it. One can distribute the total of thirty maneh between the two sets of garments in any manner that he chooses.,The Gemara comments: However, everyone, both Rabbi Meir and the Rabbis, agrees that the clothes of the morning are superior and must be more valuable than those of the afternoon. From where do we derive this? Rav Huna, son of Rav Ilai, said that with regard to the linen garments donned by the High Priest in the morning, the verse states: “He shall be dressed in a sacred linen tunic, and with linen trousers next to his flesh, and he shall be girded with a linen belt, and he shall wear a linen mitre” (Leviticus 16:4). From the fact that the verse repeats the term linen four times it is derived that the choicest linen should be used for this purpose.'' None | |
|
31. None, None, nan (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrianism, negative Jewish perception of • Zoroastrians • intercultural encounters, Jews and Zoroastrians
Found in books: Herman, Rubenstein (2018), The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World. 278; Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 46; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 46
|
32. None, None, nan (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE)
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrianism, negative Jewish perception of
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 70; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 70, 192
|
33. Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah, None
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian • Zoroastrian priests • Zoroastrian, beliefs • Zoroastrianism • Zoroastrianism, as similar to Jewish priests and rabbis • Zoroastrianism, in comparison to Talmudic Judaism • Zoroastrianism, negative Jewish perception of • Zoroastrians • intercultural encounters, Jews and Zoroastrians • ritual, Jewish, Zoroastrian
Found in books: Herman, Rubenstein (2018), The Aggada of the Bavli and Its Cultural World. 194; Mokhtarian (2021), Rabbis, Sorcerers, Kings, and Priests: The Culture of the Talmud in Ancient Iran. 66; Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 45, 50, 102, 103, 188; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 45, 50, 101, 102, 103, 169, 188
10b ולימא ליה מימר בהדיא אמר שמעי (בי) חשובי רומי ומצערו ליה ולימא ליה בלחש משום דכתיב (קהלת י, כ) כי עוף השמים יוליך את הקול,הוה ליה ההוא ברתא דשמה גירא קעבדה איסורא שדר ליה גרגירא שדר ליה כוסברתא שדר ליה כרתי שלח ליה חסא,כל יומא הוה שדר ליה דהבא פריכא במטראתא וחיטי אפומייהו אמר להו אמטיו חיטי לרבי אמר ליה רבי לא צריכנא אית לי טובא אמר ליהוו למאן דבתרך דיהבי לבתראי דאתו בתרך ודאתי מינייהו ניפוק עלייהו,ה"ל ההיא נקרתא דהוה עיילא מביתיה לבית רבי כל יומא הוה מייתי תרי עבדי חד קטליה אבבא דבי רבי וחד קטליה אבבא דביתיה א"ל בעידנא דאתינא לא נשכח גבר קמך,יומא חד אשכחיה לר\' חנינא בר חמא דהוה יתיב אמר לא אמינא לך בעידנא דאתינא לא נשכח גבר קמך א"ל לית דין בר איניש א"ל אימא ליה לההוא עבדא דגני אבבא דקאים וליתי,אזל ר\' חנינא בר חמא אשכחיה דהוה קטיל אמר היכי אעביד אי איזיל ואימא ליה דקטיל אין משיבין על הקלקלה אשבקיה ואיזיל קא מזלזלינן במלכותא בעא רחמי עליה ואחייה ושדריה אמר ידענא זוטי דאית בכו מחיה מתים מיהו בעידנא דאתינא לא נשכח איניש קמך,כל יומא הוה משמש לרבי מאכיל ליה משקי ליה כי הוה בעי רבי למיסק לפוריא הוה גחין קמי פוריא א"ל סק עילואי לפורייך אמר לאו אורח ארעא לזלזולי במלכותא כולי האי אמר מי ישימני מצע תחתיך לעולם הבא,א"ל אתינא לעלמא דאתי א"ל אין א"ל והכתיב (עובדיה א, יח) לא יהיה שריד לבית עשו בעושה מעשה עשו,תניא נמי הכי לא יהיה שריד לבית עשו יכול לכל ת"ל לבית עשו בעושה מעשה עשו,א"ל והכתיב (יחזקאל לב, כט) שמה אדום מלכיה וכל נשיאיה א"ל מלכיה ולא כל מלכיה כל נשיאיה ולא כל שריה,תניא נמי הכי מלכיה ולא כל מלכיה כל נשיאיה ולא כל שריה מלכיה ולא כל מלכיה פרט לאנטונינוס בן אסוירוס כל נשיאיה ולא כל שריה פרט לקטיעה בר שלום,קטיעה בר שלום מאי הוי דההוא קיסרא דהוה סני ליהודאי אמר להו לחשיבי דמלכותא מי שעלה לו נימא ברגלו יקטענה ויחיה או יניחנה ויצטער אמרו לו יקטענה ויחיה,אמר להו קטיעה בר שלום חדא דלא יכלת להו לכולהו דכתיב (זכריה ב, י) כי כארבע רוחות השמים פרשתי אתכם מאי קאמר אלימא דבדרתהון בד\' רוחות האי כארבע רוחות לארבע רוחות מבעי ליה אלא כשם שא"א לעולם בלא רוחות כך א"א לעולם בלא ישראל ועוד קרו לך מלכותא קטיעה,א"ל מימר שפיר קאמרת מיהו כל דזכי (מלכא) שדו ליה לקמוניא חלילא כד הוה נקטין ליה ואזלין אמרה ליה ההיא מטרוניתא ווי ליה לאילפא דאזלא בלא מכסא נפל על רישא דעורלתיה קטעה אמר יהבית מכסי חלפית ועברית כי קא שדו ליה אמר כל נכסאי לר"ע וחביריו יצא ר"ע ודרש (שמות כט, כח) והיה לאהרן ולבניו מחצה לאהרן ומחצה לבניו,יצתה בת קול ואמרה קטיעה בר שלום מזומן לחיי העוה"ב בכה רבי ואמר יש קונה עולמו בשעה אחת ויש קונה עולמו בכמה שנים,אנטונינוס שמשיה לרבי אדרכן שמשיה לרב כי שכיב אנטונינוס א"ר נתפרדה חבילה כי שכיב אדרכן אמר רב' 11b המנשר פרסותיה מן הארכובה ולמטה תרגמא רב פפא בעגלה המושכת בקרון:,יום תגלחת זקנו: איבעיא להו היכי קתני יום תגלחת זקנו והנחת בלוריתו או דלמא יום תגלחת זקנו והעברת בלוריתו ת"ש דתני\' תרוייהו יום תגלחת זקנו והנחת בלוריתו יום תגלחת זקנו והעברת בלוריתו,אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל עוד אחרת יש להם ברומי אחת לשבעים שנה מביאין אדם שלם ומרכיבין אותו על אדם חיגר ומלבישין אותו בגדי אדם הראשון ומניחין לו בראשו קרקיפלו של רבי ישמעאל,ותלו ליה בצואריה מתקל ר\' זוזא דפיזא ומחפין את השווקים באינך ומכריזין לפניו סך קירי פלסתר אחוה דמרנא זייפנא דחמי חמי ודלא חמי לא חמי מאי אהני לרמאה ברמאותיה ולזייפנא בזייפנותיה ומסיימין בה הכי ווי לדין כד יקום דין,אמר רב אשי הכשילן פיהם לרשעים אי אמרו זייפנא אחוה דמרנא כדקאמרי השתא דאמרי דמרנא זייפנא מרנא גופיה זייפנא הוא,ותנא דידן מ"ט לא קחשיב לה להאי דאיתא בכל שתא ושתא קחשיב דליתא בכל שתא ושתא לא קחשיב,הני דרומאי ודפרסאי מאי מוטרדי וטוריסקי מוהרנקי ומוהרין הני דפרסאי ודרומאי דבבלאי מאי מוהרנקי ואקניתי\' בחנוני ועשר באדר,אמר רב חנן בר רב חסדא אמר רב ואמרי לה א"ר חנן בר רבא אמר רב חמשה בתי עבודת כוכבים קבועין הן אלו הן בית בל בבבל בית נבו בכורסי תרעתא שבמפג צריפא שבאשקלון נשרא שבערביא כי אתא רב דימי הוסיפו עליהן יריד שבעין בכי נדבכה שבעכו איכא דאמרי נתברא שבעכו רב דימי מנהרדעא מתני איפכא יריד שבעכו נדבכה שבעין בכי,א"ל רב חנן בר רב חסדא לרב חסדא מאי קבועין הן א"ל הכי אמר אבוה דאימך קבועין הן לעולם תדירא כולה שתא פלחי להו,אמר שמואל בגולה אינו אסור אלא יום אידם בלבד ויום אידם נמי מי אסיר והא רב יהודה שרא ליה לרב ברונא לזבוני חמרא ולרב גידל לזבוני חיטין בחגתא דטייעי שאני חגתא דטייעי דלא קביעא:,18a הוגה את השם באותיותיו והיכי עביד הכי והתנן אלו שאין להם חלק לעולם הבא האומר אין תורה מן השמים ואין תחיית המתים מן התורה אבא שאול אומר אף ההוגה את השם באותיותיו,להתלמד עבד כדתניא (דברים יח, ט) לא תלמד לעשות אבל אתה למד להבין ולהורות,אלא מאי טעמא אענש משום הוגה את השם בפרהסיא דהוי ועל אשתו להריגה דלא מיחה ביה מכאן אמרו כל מי שיש בידו למחות ואינו מוחה נענש עליו,ועל בתו לישב בקובה של זונות דאמר ר\' יוחנן פעם אחת היתה בתו מהלכת לפני גדולי רומי אמרו כמה נאות פסיעותיה של ריבה זו מיד דקדקה בפסיעותיה והיינו דאמר ר\' שמעון בן לקיש מאי דכתיב (תהלים מט, ו) עון עקבי יסבני עונות שאדם דש בעקביו בעולם הזה מסובין לו ליום הדין,בשעה שיצאו שלשתן צדקו עליהם את הדין הוא אמר (דברים לב, ד) הצור תמים פעלו וגו\' ואשתו אמרה (דברים לב, ד) אל אמונה ואין עול בתו אמרה (ירמיהו לב, יט) גדול העצה ורב העליליה אשר עיניך פקוחות על כל דרכי וגו\' אמר רבי כמה גדולים צדיקים הללו שנזדמנו להן שלש מקראות של צדוק הדין בשעת צדוק הדין,תנו רבנן כשחלה רבי יוסי בן קיסמא הלך רבי חנינא בן תרדיון לבקרו אמר לו חנינא אחי (אחי) אי אתה יודע שאומה זו מן השמים המליכוה שהחריבה את ביתו ושרפה את היכלו והרגה את חסידיו ואבדה את טוביו ועדיין היא קיימת ואני שמעתי עליך שאתה יושב ועוסק בתורה ומקהיל קהלות ברבים וספר מונח לך בחיקך,אמר לו מן השמים ירחמו אמר לו אני אומר לך דברים של טעם ואתה אומר לי מן השמים ירחמו תמה אני אם לא ישרפו אותך ואת ספר תורה באש אמר לו רבי מה אני לחיי העולם הבא,אמר לו כלום מעשה בא לידך אמר לו מעות של פורים נתחלפו לי במעות של צדקה וחלקתים לעניים אמר לו אם כן מחלקך יהי חלקי ומגורלך יהי גורלי,אמרו לא היו ימים מועטים עד שנפטר רבי יוסי בן קיסמא והלכו כל גדולי רומי לקברו והספידוהו הספד גדול ובחזרתן מצאוהו לרבי חנינא בן תרדיון שהיה יושב ועוסק בתורה ומקהיל קהלות ברבים וס"ת מונח לו בחיקו,הביאוהו וכרכוהו בס"ת והקיפוהו בחבילי זמורות והציתו בהן את האור והביאו ספוגין של צמר ושראום במים והניחום על לבו כדי שלא תצא נשמתו מהרה אמרה לו בתו אבא אראך בכך אמר לה אילמלי אני נשרפתי לבדי היה הדבר קשה לי עכשיו שאני נשרף וס"ת עמי מי שמבקש עלבונה של ס"ת הוא יבקש עלבוני,אמרו לו תלמידיו רבי מה אתה רואה אמר להן גליון נשרפין ואותיות פורחות אף אתה פתח פיך ותכנס בך האש אמר להן מוטב שיטלנה מי שנתנה ואל יחבל הוא בעצמו,אמר לו קלצטונירי רבי אם אני מרבה בשלהבת ונוטל ספוגין של צמר מעל לבך אתה מביאני לחיי העולם הבא אמר לו הן השבע לי נשבע לו מיד הרבה בשלהבת ונטל ספוגין של צמר מעל לבו יצאה נשמתו במהרה אף הוא קפץ ונפל לתוך האור,יצאה בת קול ואמרה רבי חנינא בן תרדיון וקלצטונירי מזומנין הן לחיי העולם הבא בכה רבי ואמר יש קונה עולמו בשעה אחת ויש קונה עולמו בכמה שנים,ברוריא דביתהו דר\' מאיר ברתיה דר\' חנינא בן תרדיון הואי אמרה לו זילא בי מלתא דיתבא אחתאי בקובה של זונות שקל תרקבא דדינרי ואזל אמר אי לא איתעביד בה איסורא מיתעביד ניסא אי עבדה איסורא לא איתעביד לה ניסא,אזל נקט נפשיה כחד פרשא אמר לה השמיעני לי אמרה ליה דשתנא אנא אמר לה מתרחנא מרתח אמרה לו נפישין טובא (ואיכא טובא הכא) דשפירן מינאי אמר ש"מ לא עבדה איסורא כל דאתי אמרה ליה הכי,אזל לגבי שומר דידה א"ל הבה ניהלה אמר ליה מיסתפינא ממלכותא אמר ליה שקול תרקבא דדינרא פלגא פלח ופלגא להוי לך א"ל וכי שלמי מאי איעביד א"ל אימא אלהא דמאיר ענני ומתצלת א"ל 76b גדנפא דלישא אפומא ומליוה מיא וארתחה אמר רבא מאן חכים למעבד כי הא מילתא אי לאו רב עקביה דגברא רבא הוא קסבר כבולעו כך פולטו מה בולעו בנצוצות אף פולטו בנצוצות:,הסכין שפה והיא טהורה: אמר רב עוקבא בר חמא ונועצה עשרה פעמים בקרקע אמר רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע ובקרקע שאינה עבודה א"ר כהנא ובסכין יפה שאין בה גומות תניא נמי הכי סכין יפה שאין בה גומות נועצה עשרה פעמים בקרקע אמר רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע לאכול בה צונן,כי הא דמר יהודה ובאטי בר טובי הוו יתבי קמיה דשבור מלכא אייתו לקמייהו אתרוגא פסק אכל פסק והב ליה לבאטי בר טובי הדר דצה עשרה זימני בארעא פסק הב ליה למר יהודה א"ל באטי בר טובי וההוא גברא לאו בר ישראל הוא א"ל מר קים לי בגויה ומר לא קים לי בגויה,איכא דאמרי א"ל אידכר מאי עבדת באורתא:,| 10b The Gemara asks: But why not let him say his advice explicitly? Why did Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi answer in such a circumspect way, which could have been interpreted incorrectly? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to himself: If I answer openly, the important Romans might hear me and will cause me anguish. The Gemara asks: But why not let him say his advice quietly? The Gemara explains: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was still worried that they might hear what he had said, because it is written: “Curse not the king, no, not in your thought, and curse not the rich in your bedchamber, for a bird of the air shall carry the voice” (Ecclesiastes 10:20).,The Gemara relates: Antoninus had a certain daughter whose name was Gira, who performed a prohibited action, i.e., she engaged in promiscuous intercourse. Antoninus sent a rocket plant gargira to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, to allude to the fact that Gira had acted promiscuously gar. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi sent him coriander kusbarta, which Antoninus understood as a message to kill kos his daughter barta, as she was liable to receive the death penalty for her actions. Antoninus sent him leeks karti to say: I will be cut off karet if I do so. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi then sent him lettuce ḥasa, i.e., Antoninus should have mercy ḥas on her.,The Gemara relates: Every day Antoninus would send to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi crushed gold in large sacks, with wheat in the opening of the sacks. He would say to his servants: Bring this wheat to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and they did not realize that the bags actually contained gold. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to Antoninus: I do not need gold, as I have plenty. Antoninus said: The gold should be for those who will come after you, who will give it to the last ones who come after you. And those who descend from them will bring forth the gold that I now give you, and will be able to pay taxes to the Romans from this money.,The Gemara relates anther anecdote involving Antoninus. Antoninus had a certain underground cave from which there was a tunnel that went from his house to the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Every day he would bring two servants to serve him. He would kill one at the entrance of the house of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and would kill the other one at the entrance of his house, so that no living person would know that he had visited Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. He said to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: When I come to visit, let no man be found before you.,One day, Antoninus found that Rabbi Ḥanina bar Ḥama was sitting there. He said: Did I not tell you that when I come to visit, let no man be found before you? Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to him: This is not a human being; he is like an angel, and you have nothing to fear from him. Antoninus said to Rabbi Ḥanina bar Ḥama: Tell that servant who is sleeping at the entrance that he should rise and come.,Rabbi Ḥanina bar Ḥama went and found that the servant Antoninus referred to had been killed. He said to himself: How shall I act? If I go and tell Antoninus that he was killed, this is problematic, as one should not report distressing news. If I leave him and go, then I would be treating the king with disrespect. He prayed for God to have mercy and revived the servant, and he sent him to Antoninus. Antoninus said: I know that even the least among you can revive the dead; but when I come to visit let no man be found before you, even one as great as Rabbi Ḥanina bar Ḥama.,The Gemara relates: Every day Antoninus would minister to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi; he would feed him and give him to drink. When Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi wanted to ascend to his bed, Antoninus would bend down in front of the bed and say to him: Ascend upon me to your bed. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said in response: It is not proper conduct to treat the king with this much disrespect. Antoninus said: Oh, that I were set as a mattress under you in the World-to-Come!,On another occasion, Antoninus said to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: Will I enter the World-to-Come? Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to him: Yes. Antoninus said to him: But isn’t it written: “And there shall not be any remaining of the house of Esau” (Obadiah 1:18)? Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi answered: The verse is stated with regard to those who perform actions similar to those of the wicked Esau, not to people like you.,This is also taught in a baraita: From the verse: “And there shall not be any remaining of the house of Esau,” one might have thought that this applies to everyone descended from Esau, irrespective of an individual’s actions. Therefore, the verse states: “of the house of Esau,” to indicate that the verse is stated only with regard to those who continue in the way of Esau, and perform actions similar to those of Esau.,Antoninus said to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: But isn’t it written in the description of the netherworld: “There is Edom, her kings and all her leaders” (Ezekiel 32:29)? Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to him: The verse states: “Her kings,” but not: All of her kings, and likewise it states: “All her leaders,” but not: All of her officers. Some of them will merit the World-to-Come.,This is also taught in a baraita: The verse states: “Her kings,” but not: All of her kings, and: “All her leaders,” but not: All of her officers. The inference learned from the wording of the verse: “Her kings,” but not: All of her kings, serves to exclude Antoninus the son of Asveirus; and the inference from the wording: “All her leaders,” but not: All of her officers, serves to exclude the Roman officer Ketia, son of Shalom.,The Gemara asks: What is it that occurred involving Ketia, son of Shalom? As there was a certain Roman emperor who hated the Jews. He said to the important members of the kingdom: If one had an ulcerous sore nima rise on his foot, should he cut it off and live, or leave it and suffer? They said to him: He should cut it off and live. The ulcerous sore was a metaphor for the Jewish people, whom the emperor sought to eliminate as the cause of harm for the Roman Empire.,Ketia, son of Shalom, said to them: It is unwise to do so, for two reasons. One is that you cannot destroy all of them, as it is written: “For I have spread you abroad as the four winds of the heaven, says the Lord” (Zechariah 2:10). He clarified: What is it saying? Shall we say that the verse means that God has scattered them to the four winds of the world? If so, this phrase: “As the four winds,” is inaccurate, since it should have said: To the four winds. Rather, this is what the verse is saying: Just as the world cannot exist without winds, so too, the world cannot exist without the Jewish people, and they will never be destroyed. And furthermore, if you attempt to carry out the destruction of the Jews, they will call you the severed kingdom, as the Roman Empire would be devoid of Jews, but Jews would exist in other locations.,The emperor said to Ketia: You have spoken well and your statement is correct; but they throw anyone who defeats the king in argument into a house full of ashes lekamonya ḥalila, where he would die. When they were seizing Ketia and going to take him to his death, a certain matron matronita said to him: Woe to the ship that goes without paying the tax. Ketia bent down over his foreskin, severed it, and said: I gave my tax; I will pass and enter. When they threw him into the house of ashes, he said: All of my property is given to Rabbi Akiva and his colleagues. How was this inheritance to be divided? The Gemara relates: Rabbi Akiva went out and taught that the verse: “And it shall be for Aaron and his sons” (Exodus 29:28), means half to Aaron and half to his sons. Here too, as Rabbi Akiva is mentioned separately, he should receive half, while his colleagues receive the other half.,The Gemara returns to the story of Ketia. A Divine Voice emerged and said: Ketia, son of Shalom, is destined for life in the World-to-Come. When Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi heard this, he wept, saying: There is one who acquires his share in the World-to-Come in one moment, and there is one who acquires his share in the World-to-Come only after many years of toil.,The Gemara relates: Antoninus would attend to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and similarly the Persian king Adrakan would attend to Rav. When Antoninus died, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: The bundle is separated. When Adrakan died, Rav likewise said:' 11b One who cuts the hooves of the animal, severing the legs from the knee and below, does not render the animal a tereifa. It is evident from the baraita, which discusses the cases in which an animal is rendered a tereifa and is therefore unfit to eat, that it is discussing kosher animals. The Gemara answers: Rav Pappa interpreted the baraita as referring to the calf that pulls the king’s coach, a kosher animal of which the king made use.,§ The mishna teaches: The day of shaving his, i.e., the gentile’s, beard and his locks. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: What is the mishna teaching here? Is it referring to the day of shaving his beard and head, when he cuts the hair of his head and as a result his long locks at the back of his head are left as a form of idol worship? Or perhaps the mishna is speaking of the day of shaving his beard and removing his locks, which are removed some time after they were left on the head? The Gemara responds: Come and hear an answer, as both opinions are taught in baraitot: One baraita mentions the day of shaving his beard and head when his long locks at the back of his head are left, whereas a different baraita specifies the day of shaving his beard and removing his locks.,The Gemara continues to discuss Roman festivals. Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: They have another festival in Rome: Once every seventy years they bring a man who is whole and free from any defect and have him ride on a lame man, to symbolize the healthy Esau ruling over Jacob, who walked with a limp after his fight with the angel. And they dress him in the garments of Adam the first man and place on his head the scalp karkifelo of Rabbi Yishmael, which the Romans flayed when they executed him.,And they hang gold on his neck weighing two hundred dinars, and cover the markets with onyx, and announce before him: The calculation sakh of the master kiri Jacob with regard to the time of the redemption is fraudulent plaster; the brother of our master, i.e., Esau, a forger. They further announce: One who witnesses this festival witnesses it, and whoever does not witness it will not witness it ever, as it was celebrated only once every seventy years. What purpose does deceit serve for the deceiver, and forgery for the forger? And they conclude in this fashion: Woe unto this one, Esau, when that one, Jacob, will arise, as this will cause Esau’s downfall.,Rav Ashi says: The mouths of these wicked people have caused their downfall. Had they said: A forger is the brother of our master, their claim would be interpreted as they say and wish to be understood. Now that they say: The brother of our master, a forger; they can be understood as saying: It is our master himself who is the forger.,The Gemara asks: And what is the reason that the tanna of our mishna does not count this festival in his list of gentile festivals? The Gemara answers: The tanna of the mishna counts those festivals that occur each and every year, and he does not count those festivals that do not occur each and every year.,The Gemara comments: Those festivals enumerated in the mishna are the festivals of the Romans. The Gemara asks: And what are the idolatrous festivals of the Persians? The Gemara answers: Mutredei and Turyaskei, Moharnekei and Moharin. The Gemara asks: Those are the festivals of the Persians and the Romans, and what are the festivals of the Babylonians? The Gemara answers: Moharnekei and Akenitei, Beḥanunei and the tenth of Adar.,§ Rav Ḥa bar Rav Ḥisda says that Rav says, and some say that it was Rav Ḥa bar Rava who says that Rav says: There are five established temples of idol worship, and they are: The temple of Bel in Babylonia; the temple of Nebo in the city of Khursei; the temple of Tirata, which is located in the city of Mapag; Tzerifa, which is located in Ashkelon; and Nashra, which is located in Arabia. When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said: The Sages added to these places the marketplace that is located in Ein Bekhi and Nadbekha, which is located in Akko. There are those who say that Rav Dimi was referring to Natbera that is located in Akko. Rav Dimi from Neharde’a teaches the opposite, that it is the marketplace that is located in Akko, and Nadbekha that is located in Ein Bekhi.,Rav Ḥa bar Rav Ḥisda said to Rav Ḥisda: What does it mean that these temples of idol worship are established? Rav Ḥisda said to him: This is what your mother’s father, Rav Ḥa bar Rava, said: In contrast to festivals, which last for one or several days, they are always fixed as the site of idol worship, as constantly, all year round, worship takes place there.,§ Shmuel says: The halakha is that in the Diaspora, engaging in business with gentiles is prohibited only on the day of their festival itself, not during the days preceding and following the festival. Since Jews live among the gentiles, they are unable to refrain from engaging in business with them for such an extended period. The Gemara asks: And is it prohibited even on their festival day itself? But didn’t Rav Yehuda permit Rav Beruna to sell wine to gentiles, and permitted Rav Giddel to sell wheat, on the festival of the Arab merchants? The Gemara answers: The festival of the Arab merchants is different, as it does not have a fixed time, and therefore the Sages did not include it in the prohibition.,a city in which there is active idol worship, it is permitted to engage in business transactions with gentiles who live outside of the city. If the idol worship is outside the city, it is permitted to engage in business within the city. What is the halakha with regard to traveling there, a place where a pagan festival is being celebrated? When the road is designated only for that place, it is prohibited to use the road, as onlookers will assume that the traveler intends to join the festival. But if one were able to travel on it to arrive at another place, it is permitted to use the road to reach the place that is observing the festival.,What are the circumstances that determine whether a place is sufficiently far from a city to be considered outside of it? Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says in the name of Rabbi Ḥanina: A place that is far enough away is, for example, the bazaar atluza of Gaza, which is located outside the city walls. And some say that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish asked Rabbi Ḥanina about this issue: What is the halakha with regard to the bazaar of Gaza? May one conduct business there on the day of a festival celebrated in Gaza? Rabbi Ḥanina said to him: Did you never in your lifetime travel to Tyre and see a Jew and a gentile 18a pronounce the ineffable name of God with all of its letters, i.e., as it is spelled. The Gemara asks: And how could he do that? But didn’t we learn in the mishna (Sanhedrin 90a): These are the people who have no share in the World-to-Come: One who says that the Torah is not from Heaven or that there is no source from the Torah for the resurrection of the dead. Abba Shaul says: Also one who pronounces the ineffable name as it is written, with all of its letters, has no share in the World-to-Come.,The Gemara answers: Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon did it to teach himself, as it is taught in a baraita with regard to the prohibition against sorcery: “You shall not learn to do” (Deuteronomy 18:9); this indicates: But you may learn to understand and to teach. In other words, certain prohibitions do not apply when one is acting only in order to acquire knowledge of the subject.,The Gemara asks: Rather, what is the reason that he was punished? The Gemara answers: He was punished because he would pronounce the ineffable name of God in public, instead of privately. And his wife was condemned to execution by decapitation because she did not protest his doing so. From here the Sages stated: Anyone who has the capability to protest effectively the sinful conduct of another and does not protest is punished for that person’s sin.,The Gemara asks: And why was his daughter condemned to sit in a brothel? As Rabbi Yoḥa says: Once, the daughter of Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon was walking before the nobles of Rome, and they said to each other: How pleasant are the steps of this young woman. Upon hearing this, she immediately took care to keep walking in such a fashion that her steps would continue to be pleasing to them. And this is the same as that which Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says: What is the meaning of that which is written: “The iniquity of my heel encircles me” (Psalms 49:6)? It means that the sins that a person tramples with one’s heel in this world, i.e., dismisses and pays no attention to them as they seem to lack importance, e.g., the way that one walks, come and encircle him on the Day of Judgment.,The Gemara relates: When the three of them went out after being sentenced, they accepted the justice of God’s judgment. Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon said: “The Rock, His work is perfect; for all His ways are justice” (Deuteronomy 32:4). And his wife said the continuation of the verse: “A God of faithfulness and without iniquity.” His daughter said: “Great in counsel, and mighty in work; whose eyes are open upon all the ways of the sons of men, to give every one according to his ways” (Jeremiah 32:19). Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: How great are these righteous people, that these three verses, which speak of the acceptance of God’s judgment, occurred to them at the time of accepting the righteousness of His judgment.,§ The Sages taught: When Rabbi Yosei ben Kisma fell ill, Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon went to visit him. Rabbi Yosei ben Kisma said to him: Ḥanina my brother, do you not know that this nation has been given reign by a decree from Heaven? The proof is that Rome has destroyed God’s Temple, and burned His Sanctuary, and killed His pious ones, and destroyed His best ones, and it still exists. Evidently, all of this is by Divine decree. And yet I heard about you that you sit and engage in Torah study, and convene assemblies in public, and have a Torah scroll placed in your lap, thereby demonstrating complete disregard for the decrees issued by the Romans.,Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon said to him: Heaven will have mercy and protect me. Rabbi Yosei ben Kisma said to him: I am saying reasonable matters to you, and you say to me: Heaven will have mercy? I wonder if the Romans will not burn both you and your Torah scroll by fire. Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon said to him: My teacher, what will become of me? Am I destined for life in the World-to-Come?,Rabbi Yosei ben Kisma said to him: Did any special incident occur to you which might serve as an indication? Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon said to him: I confused my own coins that I needed for the festivities of Purim with coins of charity, and I distributed them all to the poor at my own expense. Rabbi Yosei ben Kisma said to him: If that is so, may my portion be of your portion, and may my lot be of your lot.,The Sages said: Not even a few days passed before Rabbi Yosei ben Kisma died of his illness, and all of the Roman notables went to bury him, and they eulogized him with a great eulogy. And upon their return, they found Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon, who was sitting and engaging in Torah study and convening assemblies in public, with a Torah scroll placed in his lap.,They brought him to be sentenced, and wrapped him in the Torah scroll, and encircled him with bundles of branches, and they set fire to it. And they brought tufts of wool and soaked them in water, and placed them on his heart, so that his soul should not leave his body quickly, but he would die slowly and painfully. His daughter said to him: Father, must I see you like this? Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon said to her: If I alone were being burned, it would be difficult for me, but now that I am burning along with a Torah scroll, He who will seek retribution for the insult accorded to the Torah scroll will also seek retribution for the insult accorded to me.,His students said to him: Our teacher, what do you see? Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon said to them: I see the parchment burning, but its letters are flying to the heavens. They said to him: You too should open your mouth and the fire will enter you, and you will die quickly. Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon said to them: It is preferable that He who gave me my soul should take it away, and one should not harm oneself to speed his death.,The executioner kaltzatoniri said to him: My teacher, if I increase the flame and take off the tufts of wool from your heart, so that you will die sooner and suffer less, will you bring me to the life of the World-to-Come? Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon said to the executioner: Yes. The executioner said: Take an oath for me, that what you say is true. Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon took the oath for him, and the executioner immediately increased the flame and took off the tufts of wool from his heart, causing his soul to leave his body quickly. The executioner too leaped and fell into the fire and died.,A Divine Voice emerged and said: Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon and the executioner are destined for the life of the World-to-Come. Upon hearing this, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi wept and said: There is one who acquires his share in the World-to-Come in one moment, such as the executioner, and there is one who acquires his share in the World-to-Come only after many years of toil, such as Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon.,§ The Gemara relates: Berurya, the wife of Rabbi Meir, was a daughter of Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon. She said to Rabbi Meir: It is a disrespectful matter for me that my sister is sitting in a brothel; you must do something to save her. Rabbi Meir took a vessel tarkeva full of dinars and went. He said to himself: If no transgression was committed with her, a miracle will be performed for her; if she committed a transgression, no miracle will be performed for her.,Rabbi Meir went and dressed as a Roman knight, and said to her: Accede to my wishes, i.e., engage in intercourse with me. She said to him: I am menstruating dashtana and cannot. He said to her: I will wait. She said to him: There are many women in the brothel, and there are many women here who are more beautiful than I. He said to himself: I can conclude from her responses that she did not commit a transgression, as she presumably said this to all who come.,Rabbi Meir went over to her guard, and said to him: Give her to me. The guard said to him: I fear that if I do so, I will be punished by the government. Rabbi Meir said to him: Take this vessel full of dinars; give half to the government as a bribe, and half will be for you. The guard said to him: But when the money is finished, what shall I do? Rabbi Meir said to him: Say: God of Meir answer me! And you will be saved. The guard said to him: 76b with a rim gedanfa of dough around its rim, and filled it with water and boiled it, so that the water boiled along its rim. Rava said: Who would be clever enough to perform such an action if not Rav Akavya, as he is a great man. He maintains that as it absorbs it so it expels it; just as the rim absorbs the forbidden substance by small drops of it that reach the rim, so too it expels the forbidden substance by small drops of boiling water that reach the rim.,§ The mishna teaches: With regard to the knife, one must polish it and it is rendered pure. Rav Ukva bar Ḥama says: And one must thrust it ten times into the ground. Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, says: And this must be done in untilled earth, i.e., hard earth. Rav Kahana says: And this applies to a good knife that does not have notches, so that the entire surface of the knife is scraped against the ground. This is also taught in a baraita: With regard to a good knife that does not have notches, one can thrust it ten times into the ground. Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, says: This is sufficient for the purpose of eating cold food with it.,This is like that incident involving Mar Yehuda, an important personage of the house of the Exilarch, and Bati bar Tuvi, a wealthy man, who were sitting before King Shapur, the king of Persia. The king’s servants brought an etrog before them. The king cut a slice and ate it, and then he cut a slice and gave it to Bati bar Tuvi. He then stuck the knife ten times in the ground, cut a slice, and gave it to Mar Yehuda. Bati bar Tuvi said to him: And is that man, referring to himself, not Jewish? King Shapur said to him: I am certain of that master, Mar Yehuda, that he is meticulous about halakha; but I am not certain of that master, referring to Bati bar Tuvi, that he is meticulous in this regard.,There are those who say that King Shapur said to him: Remember what you did last night. The Persian practice was to present a woman to each guest, with whom he would engage in intercourse. Mar Yehuda did not accept the woman who was sent to him, but Bati bar Tuvi did, and therefore he was not assumed to be meticulous with regard to eating kosher food., ' None | |
|
34. None, None, nan
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrianism, religious study
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 41; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 41
|
35. None, None, nan
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian priests • kustīg (Zoroastrian ritual belt) • ritual, Jewish, Zoroastrian
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 129, 130; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 129, 130
|
36. None, None, nan
Tagged with subjects: • Zoroastrian priests • ritual, Jewish, Zoroastrian
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 166; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 166
|
37. None, None, nan
Tagged with subjects: • Avesta, Sasanian Zoroastrianism and • Zoroastrianism, religious study • Zoroastrians • intercultural encounters, Jews and Zoroastrians
Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 49; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 49
|
