1. Hebrew Bible, Deuteronomy, 18.9-18.14 (9th cent. BCE - 3rd cent. BCE) Tagged with subjects: •zoroastrianism, religious study Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 73; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 73| 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׃", | 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.", |
|
2. Mishnah, Sanhedrin, 7.5 (1st cent. CE - 3rd cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •zoroastrianism, religious study Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 47; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 47| 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: \n", | 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.”", |
|
| 3. Anon., Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, None (2nd cent. CE - 7th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 73 |
| 4. Anon., Sifre Deuteronomy, None (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •zoroastrianism, religious study Found in books: Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 47 |
| 5. Anon., Sifra, None (2nd cent. CE - 4th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •zoroastrianism, religious study Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 47 |
6. Babylonian Talmud, Yevamot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 41| 47b. לא רוב טובה ולא רוב פורענות ואין מרבין עליו ואין מדקדקין עליו,קיבל מלין אותו מיד נשתיירו בו ציצין המעכבין את המילה חוזרים ומלין אותו שניה נתרפא מטבילין אותו מיד ושני ת"ח עומדים על גביו ומודיעין אותו מקצת מצות קלות ומקצת מצות חמורות טבל ועלה הרי הוא כישראל לכל דבריו,אשה נשים מושיבות אותה במים עד צוארה ושני ת"ח עומדים לה מבחוץ ומודיעין אותה מקצת מצות קלות ומקצת מצות חמורות,אחד גר ואחד עבד משוחרר ובמקום שנדה טובלת שם גר ועבד משוחרר טובלין וכל דבר שחוצץ בטבילה חוצץ בגר ובעבד משוחרר ובנדה,אמר מר גר שבא להתגייר אומרים לו מה ראית שבאת להתגייר ומודיעים אותו מקצת מצות קלות ומקצת מצות חמורות מ"ט דאי פריש נפרוש דא"ר חלבו קשים גרים לישראל כספחת דכתיב (ישעיהו יד, א) ונלוה הגר עליהם ונספחו על בית יעקב:,ומודיעים אותו עון לקט שכחה ופאה ומעשר עני: מ"ט א"ר חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן בן נח נהרג על פחות משוה פרוטה ולא ניתן להשבון,(ומודיעים אותו עון שכחה ופאה): ואין מרבים עליו ואין מדקדקים עליו: אמר רבי אלעזר מאי קראה דכתיב (רות א, יח) ותרא כי מתאמצת היא ללכת אתה ותחדל לדבר אליה,אמרה לה אסיר לן תחום שבת (רות א, טז) באשר תלכי אלך אסיר לן יחוד (רות א, טז) באשר תליני אלין,מפקדינן שש מאות וי"ג מצות (רות א, טז) עמך עמי אסיר לן עבודת כוכבים (רות א, טז) ואלהיך אלהי ארבע מיתות נמסרו לב"ד (רות א, יז) באשר תמותי אמות ב' קברים נמסרו לב"ד (רות א, יז) ושם אקבר,מיד ותרא כי מתאמצת היא וגו':,קיבל מלין אותו מיד: מ"ט שהויי מצוה לא משהינן:,נשתיירו בו ציצין המעכבין המילה וכו': כדתנן אלו הן ציצין המעכבין המילה בשר החופה את רוב העטרה ואינו אוכל בתרומה וא"ר ירמיה בר אבא אמר רב בשר החופה רוב גובהה של עטרה:,נתרפא מטבילין אותו מיד: נתרפא אין לא נתרפא לא מאי טעמא משום דמיא מרזו מכה:,ושני ת"ח עומדים על גביו: והא א"ר חייא א"ר יוחנן גר צריך שלשה הא א"ר יוחנן לתנא תני שלשה:,טבל ועלה הרי הוא כישראל לכל דבריו: למאי הלכתא דאי הדר ביה ומקדש בת ישראל ישראל מומר קרינא ביה וקידושיו קידושין:,אחד גר ואחד עבד משוחרר: קסלקא דעתך לקבל עליו עול מצות ורמינהו במה דברים אמורים בגר אבל בעבד משוחרר אין צריך לקבל,אמר רב ששת לא קשיא הא ר"ש בן אלעזר הא רבנן,דתניא (דברים כא, יג) ובכתה את אביה ואת אמה וגו' בד"א שלא קבלה עליה אבל קבלה עליה מטבילה ומותר בה מיד,ר"ש בן אלעזר אומר אע"פ שלא קבלה עליה כופה ומטבילה לשם שפחות וחוזר ומטבילה לשם שחרור ומשחררה | 47b. they are b not /b able to receive either b an abundance of good nor an abundance of calamities, /b since the primary place for reward and punishment is in the World-to-Come. b And they do not overwhelm him /b with threats, b and they are not exacting with him /b about the details of the mitzvot.,If b he accepts /b upon himself all of these ramifications, then b they circumcise him immediately. /b If b there /b still b remain on him shreds /b of flesh from the foreskin b that invalidate the circumcision, they circumcise him again a second /b time to remove them. When b he is healed /b from the circumcision, b they immerse him immediately, and two Torah scholars stand over him /b at the time of his immersion b and inform him of some of the lenient mitzvot and some of the stringent mitzvot. /b Once b he has immersed and emerged, he is like /b a born b Jew in every sense. /b ,For the immersion of b a woman: Women /b appointed by the court b seat her in the water /b of the ritual bath b up to her neck, and two Torah scholars stand outside /b the bath house so as not to compromise her modesty, b and /b from there b they inform her of some of the lenient mitzvot and some of the stringent mitzvot. /b ,The procedure applies for b both a convert and an emancipated slave /b who, upon immersion at the time of his emancipation, becomes a Jew in every sense. b And in the same place that a menstruating woman immerses, /b i.e., in a ritual bath of forty i se’a /i of water, b there a convert and an emancipated slave also immerse. And anything that interposes /b between one’s body and the water of the ritual bath b with regard to immersion /b of a ritually impure person, in a manner that would invalidate the immersion, also b interposes /b and invalidates the immersion b for a convert, and for an emancipated slave, and for a menstruating woman. /b ,The Gemara analyzes the i baraita /i . b The Master said /b in the i baraita /i : With regard to a potential b convert who comes to /b a court in order to b convert, /b the judges of the court b say to him: What did you see that /b motivated b you /b to b come to convert? And they inform him /b of b some of the lenient mitzvot and some of the stringent mitzvot. /b The Gemara asks: b What is the reason /b to say this to him? It is so b that if he /b is going to b withdraw /b from the conversion process, b let him withdraw /b already at this stage. He should not be convinced to continue, b as Rabbi Ḥelbo said: Converts are as harmful to the Jewish people as a /b leprous b scab [ i sappaḥat /i ] /b on the skin, b as it is written: “And the convert shall join himself with them, and they shall cleave [ i venispeḥu /i ] to the house of Jacob” /b (Isaiah 14:1). This alludes to the fact that the cleaving of the convert to the Jewish people is like a scab.,The i baraita /i continues: b And they inform him /b of b the sin /b of neglecting the mitzva to allow the poor to take b gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and /b produce in the b corner /b of one’s field, b and /b about the b poor man’s tithe. /b The Gemara asks: b What is the reason /b to specifically mention these mitzvot? b Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa said: /b Because b a gentile is executed /b even b on account of /b stealing b less than the value of a i peruta /i , /b since gentiles are particular about even such a small loss, b and /b an item that a gentile steals b is not subject to being returned, /b i.e., he is not obligated to return it to its owner. Since gentiles are unwilling to separate even from items of little value, a potential convert must be made aware that he if converts, he will be required to relinquish some of his property to others.,The i baraita /i continues: b And they inform him /b of b the sin /b of neglecting the mitzva to allow the poor to take b gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and /b produce in the b corner /b of one’s field. b And they do not overwhelm him /b with threats, b and they are not exacting with him /b about the details of the mitzvot, i.e., the court should not overly dissuade the convert from converting. b Rabbi Elazar said: What is the verse /b from which this ruling is derived? b As it is written: “And when she saw that she was steadfastly minded to go with her, she left off speaking with her” /b (Ruth 1:18). When Naomi set out to return to Eretz Yisrael, Ruth insisted on joining her. The Gemara understands this to mean that Ruth wished to convert. Naomi attempted to dissuade her, but Ruth persisted. The verse states that once Naomi saw Ruth’s resolve to convert, she desisted from her attempts to dissuade her. The Gemara infers from here that the same approach should be taken by a court in all cases of conversion.,The Gemara reconstructs the original dialogue in which Naomi attempted to dissuade Ruth from converting: Naomi b said to her: /b On Shabbat, b it is prohibited for us /b to go beyond b the Shabbat limit. /b Ruth responded: b “Where you go, I shall go” /b (Ruth 1:16), and no further. Naomi said to her: b It is forbidden for us to be alone together /b with a man with whom it is forbidden to engage in relations. Ruth responded: b “Where you lodge, I shall lodge” /b (Ruth 1:16), and in the same manner.,Naomi said to her: b We are commanded /b to observe b six hundred and thirteen mitzvot. /b Ruth responded: b “Your people are my people” /b (Ruth 1:16). Naomi said to her: b Idolatrous worship is forbidden to us. /b Ruth responded: b “Your God is my God” /b (Ruth 1:16). Naomi said to her: b Four types of capital punishment were handed over to a court /b with which to punish those who transgress the mitzvot. Ruth responded: b “Where you die, I shall die” /b (Ruth 1:17). Naomi said to her: b Two burial grounds were handed over to the court, /b one for those executed for more severe crimes and another for those executed for less severe crimes. Ruth responded: b “And there I shall be buried” /b (Ruth 1:17)., b Immediately /b following this dialogue, the verse states: b “And when she saw that she was steadfastly minded /b she left off speaking with her” (Ruth 1:18). Once Naomi saw Ruth’s resolve to convert, she desisted from her attempts to dissuade her.,The i baraita /i continues: If b he accepts /b upon himself all of these ramifications, then b they circumcise him immediately. /b The Gemara asks: b What is the reason /b to act immediately? It is that b we do not delay /b the performance of b a mitzva. /b ,The i baraita /i continues: If b there /b still b remain on him shreds /b of flesh from the foreskin b that invalidate the circumcision, /b he is circumcised a second time to remove them. The Gemara explains: This is b as we learned /b in a mishna ( i Shabbat /i 137a): b These are the shreds /b of flesh b that invalidate the circumcision /b if they are not cut: Any fragments of b the flesh that cover the greater part of the corona. /b If such shreds remain, the child is considered uncircumcised, b and he may not partake of i teruma /i . And /b in explanation of this mishna, b Rav Yirmeya bar Abba said /b that b Rav said: /b This also includes b the flesh that covers the greater part of the height of the corona. /b ,The i baraita /i continues: When b he is healed /b from the circumcision, b they immerse him immediately. /b The Gemara infers from the precise formulation of the i baraita /i that when b he has healed, /b then b yes, /b he is immersed, but as long as b he has not healed, /b then b no, /b he is not. b What is the reason /b for this? It is b because water agitates a wound. /b ,The i baraita /i continues: b And two Torah scholars stand over him /b at the time of his immersion. The Gemara asks: b But didn’t Rabbi Ḥiyya say /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa said /b that b a convert requires /b a court of b three /b to be present at his conversion? The Gemara answers: In fact, b Rabbi Yoḥa said to the i tanna /i /b reciting the mishna: Do not teach that there are two Torah scholars; rather, b teach /b that there are b three. /b ,The i baraita /i continues: Once b he has immersed and emerged he is a Jew in every sense. /b The Gemara asks: b With regard to what i halakha /i /b is this said? It is b that if he reverts back /b to behaving as a gentile, he nevertheless remains Jewish, b and /b so if b he betroths a Jewish woman, /b although b he is considered to be an apostate Jew, his betrothal is /b a valid b betrothal. /b ,The i baraita /i continues: This applies b both for a convert and for an emancipated slave. /b The Gemara considers the meaning of this clause: If b it enters your mind /b to interpret the i baraita /i to mean that a convert and an emancipated slave are the same b with regard to accepting upon oneself the yoke of mitzvot, /b then one could b raise a contradiction /b from that which is taught in another i baraita /i : b In what /b case b is this statement /b that there is a need to accept the yoke of mitzvot b said? /b It is b with respect to a convert; however, an emancipated slave does not need to accept /b upon himself the yoke of mitzvot when he immerses for the sake of emancipation. Rather, the immersion alone is sufficient to emancipate him and thereby render him a Jew., b Rav Sheshet said: /b This is b not difficult, /b as b this /b i baraita /i that states that an emancipated slave is not required to accept the yoke of mitzvot b is /b in accordance with the opinion of b Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar, /b whereas b that /b i baraita /i that implies he is required to do so b is /b in accordance with the opinion of b the Rabbis, /b the first i tanna /i of the following i baraita /i ., b As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : The Torah permits a Jewish soldier to take a beautiful female prisoner of war out of her captivity in order to marry her. Before he may do so, she must first undergo the process that the Torah describes: “And she shall shave her head, and do her nails; and she shall remove the raiment of her captivity from upon her, and she shall remain in your house b and bewail her father and her mother /b a month of days” (Deuteronomy 21:12–13). She may then be immersed for the sake of conversion, even though she does not accept upon herself the yoke of mitzvot. At that point it is permitted to marry her. The i baraita /i asks: b Under what /b circumstance b are these matters stated? /b It is b when she did not accept upon herself /b the yoke of mitzvot; b however, /b if b she /b willingly b accepted upon herself /b the yoke of mitzvot, b he may immerse her /b for the sake of conversion, b and he is permitted to /b marry b her immediately /b without the need for her to undergo the process described in the Torah., b Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: Even if she did not accept upon herself /b the yoke of mitzvot, the need for the process can still be circumvented if b he forces /b her b and immerses her for the sake of slavery, and then he again immerses her for the sake of emancipation and /b thereby b emancipates her, /b rendering her a Jewess. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar holds that the immersion of a slave for the sake of emancipation is effective even if the slave does not accept upon himself the yoke of mitzvot. |
|
7. Babylonian Talmud, Sotah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •zoroastrianism, religious study Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 73; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 73| 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 | 22a. is one b who read /b the Written Torah b and learned /b the Mishna b but did not serve Torah scholars /b in order to learn the reasoning behind the i halakhot /i . 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., b It was stated: /b With regard to one who b read /b the Written Torah b and learned /b the Mishna b but did not serve Torah scholars, Rabbi Elazar says: This /b person b is an ignoramus. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: This /b person b is a boor. Rabbi Yannai says: This /b person b is /b comparable to b a Samaritan, /b who follows the Written Torah but not the traditions of the Sages., b Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov says: This /b person b is /b comparable to b a sorcerer [ i magosh /i ], /b who uses his knowledge to mislead people. b Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: It is reasonable to /b accept the opinion of b Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov, as people say /b proverbially: b The sorcerer chants and does not know what he is saying; /b so too, b the i tanna /i teaches /b the Mishna b and does not know what he is saying. /b ,§ b The Sages taught: Who is an ignoramus [ i am ha’aretz /i ]? /b It is b anyone who does not recite i Shema /i /b in the b morning and evening with its blessings; /b this is b the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say: /b It is b anyone who does not don phylacteries. Ben Azzai says: /b It is b anyone who does not have ritual fringes on his garment. Rabbi Yonatan ben Yosef said: /b It is b anyone who has sons and does not raise them to study Torah. i Aḥerim /i say: Even if one reads /b the Written Torah b and learns /b the Mishna b but does not serve Torah scholars, he is an ignoramus. /b ,If one b read /b the Written Torah b but did not learn /b the Mishna, b he is a boor. With regard to /b one who b did not read and did not learn /b at all, b the verse states: /b “Behold, the days come, says the Lord, b and I will sow the house of Israel and the house of Judah with the seed of man, and with the seed of beast” /b (Jeremiah 31:26). One who has not studied at all is comparable to a beast.,The verse states: b “My son, fear the Lord and the king; and meddle not with those who are repeating” /b (Proverbs 24:21). b Rabbi Yitzḥak says: These are /b individuals b who repeatedly learn /b the b i halakhot /i /b but do not know the reasons behind them. The Gemara asks: b Isn’t /b that b obvious? /b How else could the verse be understood? The Gemara answers: He states this b lest you say /b that the verse is referring to individuals who b repeatedly /b commit b sins, and /b this is b in accordance with /b the words of b Rav Huna, as Rav Huna says: Once a person committed a transgression and repeated it, /b in his eyes b it became permitted for him. /b Since the verse could be interpreted in this manner, Rabbi Yitzḥak b teaches us /b that the verse is referring to those who learn without understanding., b It was taught /b in a i baraita /i : b The i tanna’im /i , /b who recite the tannaitic sources by rote, b are /b individuals b who erode the world. /b The Gemara is puzzled by this statement: b Could /b it b enter your mind /b that they are individuals b who erode the world? Ravina says: /b This statement is referring to those b who issue halakhic rulings based /b on b their /b knowledge of b i mishnayot /i . This is also taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Rabbi Yehoshua said: Are they /b individuals b who erode the world? Aren’t they settling the world, as it is stated: “His ways [ i halikhot /i ] are eternal” /b (Habakkuk 3:6)? The Sages read the term i halikhot /i as i halakhot /i , inferring that one who learns i halakhot /i attains eternal life. b Rather, /b this is referring to those b who issue halakhic rulings based /b on b their /b knowledge of b i mishnayot /i . /b ,§ The mishna states that b an abstinent woman /b is among those who erode the world. b The Sages taught: A maiden who prays /b constantly, b and a neighborly [ i shovavit /i ] widow /b who constantly visits her neighbors, b and a child whose months /b of gestation b were not completed, /b all b these are /b people b who erode the world. /b ,The Gemara asks: b Is that so? But didn’t Rabbi Yoḥa say: We learned /b the meaning of b fear of sin from a maiden, and /b the significance of b receiving /b divine b reward from a widow. /b The meaning of b fear of sin /b can be learned b from a maiden, as Rabbi Yoḥa heard a certain maiden who fell on her face /b in prayer, b and she was saying: Master of the Universe, You created the Garden of Eden and You created Gehenna, You created /b the b righteous and You created /b the b wicked. May it be Your will that men shall not stumble because of me /b and consequently go to Gehenna.,The significance of b receiving /b divine b reward /b can be learned b from a widow, as /b there was b a certain widow in whose neighborhood there was a synagogue, /b and despite this b every day she went and prayed in the study hall of Rabbi Yoḥa. /b Rabbi Yoḥa b said to her: My daughter, /b is there b not a synagogue in your neighborhood? She said to him: My teacher, don’t I attain a reward /b for all b the steps /b I take while walking to pray in the distant study hall?,The Gemara answers: b When it is stated /b in the i baraita /i that a maiden who prays constantly is one who erodes the world, it is referring, b for example, /b to b Yoḥani bat Retivi, /b who constantly prayed and pretended to be saintly but actually engaged in sorcery.,The Gemara asks: b What /b is the meaning of b a child whose months /b of gestation b were not completed? Here, /b in Babylonia, b they interpreted this /b as alluding to an imperfect, incomplete b Torah scholar who scorns his teachers. /b , b Rabbi Abba says: This is a student who has not /b yet b attained /b the ability b to issue /b halakhic b rulings, and /b yet b he issues rulings /b and is therefore compared to a prematurely born child. This is b as Rabbi Abbahu says /b that b Rav Huna says /b that b Rav says: What /b is the meaning of that b which is written: “For she has cast down many wounded; and a mighty host are all her slain” /b (Proverbs 7:26)? b “For she has cast down [ i hippila /i ] many wounded”; this /b is referring to b a Torah scholar who has not /b yet b attained /b the ability b to issue rulings, and /b yet b he issues rulings. “And a mighty host [ i ve’atzumim /i ] are all her slain”; this /b is referring to b a Torah scholar who has attained /b the ability b to issue rulings, but does not issue rulings /b and prevents the masses from learning Torah properly. |
|
8. Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •zoroastrianism, religious study Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 43, 47; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 43, 47| 75a. שכן יריעה שנפל בה דרנא קורעין בה ותופרין אותה,אמר רב זוטרא בר טוביה אמר רב המותח חוט של תפירה בשבת חייב חטאת והלומד דבר אחד מן המגוש חייב מיתה והיודע לחשב תקופות ומזלות ואינו חושב אסור לספר הימנו,מגושתא רב ושמואל חד אמר חרשי וחד אמר גדופי תסתיים דרב דאמר גדופי דאמר רב זוטרא בר טוביה אמר רב הלומד דבר אחד מן המגוש חייב מיתה דאי ס"ד חרשי הכתיב (דברים יח, ט) לא תלמד לעשות אבל אתה למד להבין ולהורות תסתיים,אר"ש בן פזי א"ר יהושע בן לוי משום בר קפרא כל היודע לחשב בתקופות ומזלות ואינו חושב עליו הכתוב אומר (ישעיהו ה, יב) ואת פועל ה' לא יביטו ומעשה ידיו לא ראו א"ר שמואל בר נחמני א"ר יוחנן מנין שמצוה על האדם לחשב תקופות ומזלות שנאמר (דברים ד, ו) ושמרתם ועשיתם כי היא חכמתכם ובינתכם לעיני העמים איזו חכמה ובינה שהיא לעיני העמים הוי אומר זה חישוב תקופות ומזלות:,הצד צבי וכו': ת"ר הצד חלזון והפוצעו אינו חייב אלא אחת רבי יהודה אומר חייב שתים שהיה ר' יהודה אומר פציעה בכלל דישה אמרו לו אין פציעה בכלל דישה אמר רבא מ"ט דרבנן קסברי אין דישה אלא לגדולי קרקע וליחייב נמי משום נטילת נשמה אמר רבי יוחנן שפצעו מת,רבא אמר אפילו תימא שפצעו חי מתעסק הוא אצל נטילת נשמה והא אביי ורבא דאמרי תרווייהו מודה ר"ש בפסיק רישא ולא ימות שאני הכא דכמה דאית ביה נשמה טפי ניחא ליה כי היכי דליציל ציבעיה:,השוחטו: שוחט משום מאי חייב רב אמר משום צובע ושמואל אמר משום נטילת נשמה | 75a. b As, when a curtain had a worm /b which made a tear b in it, they would tear /b the curtain further to lengthen the tear, b and /b that enabled them to then b sew it /b in a manner that obscured the tear., b Rav Zutra bar Toviya said /b that b Rav said: One who tightens the thread of a stitch on Shabbat is liable to /b bring b a sin-offering. /b If two parts of a garment that were sewn together begin to separate, and one pulls the thread to reattach them, it is tantamount to having sewn them. The Gemara cites additional i halakhot /i cited by Rav Zutra in the name of Rav. b And one who learns /b even b one matter from a i magosh /i , /b a Persian priest, b is liable to /b receive the b death /b penalty. b And one who knows how to calculate astronomical seasons and /b the movement of b constellations, and does not do so, one may not speak with him /b because his actions are improper.,The Gemara proceeds to discuss the additional i halakhot /i cited by Rav Zutra bar Toviya. With regard to the b i magosh /i , Rav and Shmuel /b disagreed. b One said /b that they are b sorcerers, while the other said /b they are b heretics. /b The Gemara adds: b Conclude that Rav /b is the one b who said /b that they are b heretics, as Rav Zutra bar Toviya said /b that b Rav /b said: b One who learns one matter from the i magosh /i is liable to /b receive the b death /b penalty. b As, if it should enter your mind /b that they are b sorcerers, wasn’t it written: /b “When you come into the land which the Lord your God gives you, b you shall not learn to do /b after the abominations of those nations. There shall not be found among you any one that makes his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, one that uses divination, a soothsayer, or an enchanter, or a sorcerer” (Deuteronomy 18:9–10)? And the Sages inferred: You shall not learn to do, b but you /b may b learn to understand and to teach /b the topic of sorcery. Apparently, merely learning about sorcery does not violate a prohibition. Only acting upon that learning is prohibited. Rav, who prohibited learning even a single matter from a i magosh /i , must hold that they are heretics, not merely sorcerers. The Gemara states: Indeed, b conclude /b that Rav is the one who said that they are heretics., b Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi said /b that b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said in the name of bar Kappara: Anyone who knows how to calculate astronomical seasons and /b the movement of b constellations and does not do so, the verse says about him: “They do not take notice of the work of God, and they do not see His handiwork” /b (Isaiah 5:12). And b Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said /b that b Rabbi Yoḥa said: From where /b is it derived b that /b there is b a mitzva /b incumbent b upon a person to calculate astronomical seasons and /b the movement of b constellations? As it was stated: “And you shall guard and perform, for it is your wisdom and understanding in the eyes of the nations” /b (Deuteronomy 4:6). b What wisdom and understanding /b is there in the Torah b that is in the eyes of the nations, /b i.e., appreciated and recognized by all? b You must say: This is the calculation of astronomical seasons and /b the movement of b constellations, /b as the calculation of experts is witnessed by all.,We learned in the mishna, among those liable for performing primary categories of labor: b One who traps a deer /b or any other living creature. b The Sages taught /b in a i Tosefta /i : b One who traps a i ḥilazon /i and breaks its /b shell to remove its blood for the dye b is liable to /b bring b only one /b sin-offering. He is not liable for breaking the shell. b Rabbi Yehuda says: He is liable to /b bring b two, /b for performing the prohibited labors of trapping and for threshing, b as Rabbi Yehuda would say: The breaking of a i ḥilazon /i is included /b in the primary category of b threshing, /b as its objective is to extract the matter that he desires from the shell that he does not. The Rabbis b said to him: Breaking /b the shell b is not included /b in the primary category of b threshing. Rava said: What is the rationale /b for the opinion b of the Rabbis? They hold: Threshing /b applies b only to /b produce b that grows /b from b the ground. /b One who extracts other materials from their covering is exempt. The Gemara asks: Even if extracting blood is not considered threshing, b let him be liable for taking a life as well. Rabbi Yoḥa said: /b This is referring to a case b where he broke its /b shell after it was b dead. /b , b Rava said: Even /b if you b say that he broke it /b when it was b alive, /b he is exempt. Since he had no intention of killing the i ḥilazon /i , he is considered as one who b is acting unawares with regard to taking a life. /b The Gemara raises a difficulty: b Didn’t Abaye and Rava both say /b that b Rabbi Shimon, /b who rules that an unintentional act is permitted, b agrees /b that b in /b a case of: b Cut off its head and will it not die, /b one is liable? One who performs an action that will inevitably result in a prohibited labor cannot claim that he did not intend for his action to lead to that result. Lack of intention is only a valid claim when the result is merely possible, not inevitable. Since one who extracts blood from a i ḥilazon /i inevitably takes its life, how can Rava claim that his action is unintentional? The Gemara answers: b Here it is different, as the longer /b the i ḥilazon /i b lives, the better /b it is b for /b the trapper, b so that its dye will become clear. /b Dye extracted from a live i ḥilazon /i is a higher quality than that which is extracted from a dead one. Rabbi Shimon agrees that one who performs an action with inevitable consequences is liable only in a case where the consequences are not contrary to his interests. Since he prefers that the i ḥilazon /i remain alive as long as possible, he is not liable for the inevitable consequences.,We learned in the mishna, among those liable for performing primary categories of labor: b And one who slaughters /b an animal on Shabbat. The Gemara asks: As there was no slaughter necessary for construction of the Tabernacle, b one who slaughters /b an animal, b due to what /b prohibited labor is he b liable? Rav said: /b He is liable b due to dyeing, /b as in the course of the slaughter the hide is dyed with blood. b And Shmuel said: /b He is liable b due to taking a life. /b |
|
9. Babylonian Talmud, Taanit, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •zoroastrianism, religious study Found in books: Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 41| 8a. שלמודו קשה עליו כברזל בשביל משנתו שאינה סדורה עליו שנאמר (קהלת י, י) והוא לא פנים קלקל,מאי תקנתיה ירבה בישיבה שנאמר (קהלת י, י) וחילים יגבר ויתרון הכשיר חכמה כ"ש אם משנתו סדורה לו מעיקרא,כי הא דריש לקיש הוה מסדר מתני' ארבעין זמנין כנגד מ' יום שניתנה תורה ועייל לקמיה דר' יוחנן רב אדא בר אהבה מסדר מתני' עשרין וארבע זמנין כנגד תורה נביאים וכתובים ועייל לקמיה דרבא,רבא אמר אם ראית תלמיד שלמודו קשה עליו כברזל בשביל רבו שאינו מסביר לו פנים שנאמר והוא לא פנים קלקל,מאי תקנתיה ירבה עליו רעים שנאמר וחילים יגבר ויתרון הכשיר חכמה כ"ש אם הוכשרו מעשיו בפני רבו מעיקרא,ואמר ר' אמי מאי דכתיב (קהלת י, יא) אם ישוך הנחש בלא לחש ואין יתרון לבעל הלשון אם ראית דור שהשמים משתכין כנחשת מלהוריד טל ומטר בשביל לוחשי לחישות שאין בדור,מאי תקנתן ילכו אצל מי שיודע ללחוש דכתיב (איוב לו, לג) יגיד עליו רעו ואין יתרון לבעל הלשון ומי שאפשר לו ללחוש ואינו לוחש מה הנאה יש לו,ואם לחש ולא נענה מאי תקנתיה ילך אצל חסיד שבדור וירבה עליו בתפלה שנאמר (איוב לו, לב) ויצו עליה במפגיע ואין פגיעה אלא תפלה שנאמר (ירמיהו ז, טז) ואתה אל תתפלל בעד העם הזה ואל תשא בעדם רנה ותפלה ואל תפגע בי,ואם לחש ועלתה בידו ומגיס דעתו עליו מביא אף לעולם שנאמר (איוב לו, לג) מקנה אף על עולה,רבא אמר שני ת"ח שיושבין בעיר אחת ואין נוחין זה לזה בהלכה מתקנאין באף ומעלין אותו שנאמר מקנה אף על עולה,אמר ר"ל מאי דכתיב אם ישוך הנחש בלא לחש ואין יתרון לבעל הלשון לעתיד לבא מתקבצות ובאות כל החיות אצל הנחש ואומרים לו ארי דורס ואוכל זאב טורף ואוכל אתה מה הנאה יש לך אמר להם ואין יתרון לבעל הלשון,אמר רבי אמי אין תפלתו של אדם נשמעת אלא אם כן משים נפשו בכפו שנאמר (איכה ג, מא) נשא לבבנו אל כפים [איני והא] אוקים שמואל אמורא עליה ודרש (תהלים עח, לו) ויפתוהו בפיהם ובלשונם יכזבו לו ולבם לא נכון עמו ולא נאמנו בבריתו ואף על פי כן (תהלים עח, לח) והוא רחום יכפר עון וגו',לא קשיא כאן ביחיד כאן בציבור,אמר ר' אמי אין גשמים יורדין אלא בשביל בעלי אמנה שנאמר (תהלים פה, יב) אמת מארץ תצמח וצדק משמים נשקף,וא"ר אמי בא וראה כמה גדולים בעלי אמנה מניין מחולדה ובור ומה המאמין בחולדה ובור כך המאמין בהקב"ה עאכ"ו,אמר רבי יוחנן כל המצדיק את עצמו מלמטה מצדיקין עליו הדין מלמעלה שנאמר אמת מארץ תצמח וצדק משמים נשקף רבי חייא בר אבין אמר רב הונא מהכא (תהלים צ, יא) וכיראתך עברתך,ריש לקיש אמר מהכא (ישעיהו סד, ד) פגעת את שש ועושה צדק בדרכיך יזכרוך הן אתה קצפת ונחטא בהם עולם ונושע אמר ריב"ל כל השמח ביסורין שבאין עליו מביא ישועה לעולם שנאמר בהם עולם ונושע,אמר ריש לקיש מאי דכתיב (דברים יא, יז) ועצר את השמים בשעה שהשמים נעצרין מלהוריד (טל ומטר) דומה לאשה שמחבלת ואינה יולדת והיינו דאמר ריש לקיש משום בר קפרא נאמרה עצירה בגשמים ונאמרה עצירה באשה | 8a. b whose studies are hard as iron for him, /b i.e., difficult to understand, this is b due to his /b lack of familiarity with the b Mishna, which is not organized for him. /b If the Mishna is unclear, any further study of Gemara is rendered all the more difficult, b as it is stated: “And does not whet [ i kilkal /i ] the edge [ i panim /i ]” /b (Ecclesiastes 10:10). As panim can also mean surface, this indicates that the surface, i.e., the basic statements of the Mishna, is corrupted. As stated previously, i kilkal /i can also mean corrupted., b What is his remedy? /b He must b increase /b the time he b sits /b and studies, b as it is stated: “Then must he increase his strength” /b (Ecclesiastes 10:10). The last part of the verse: b “But wisdom is profitable to direct,” /b means that b all the more so, if his /b study of the b Mishna is organized for him from the beginning, /b he will avoid this trouble.,That is b like this /b practice b of Reish Lakish, /b who b would review his studies forty times, corresponding to /b the b forty days in which the Torah was given /b to Moses at Sinai, b and /b only afterward would he b go before Rabbi Yoḥa /b to study from his teacher. Similarly, b Rav Adda bar Ahava /b would b review his learning twenty-four times, corresponding to /b the twenty-four books in the b Torah, Prophets, and Writings, /b i.e., the Bible, b and /b only afterward b go before Rava /b to study with him.,With regard to the aforementioned verse from Ecclesiastes, b Rava said: If you see a student whose studies are /b as b difficult for him as iron, /b this is b due to his teacher, who does not show him a friendly countece, /b but is overly strict with him. This practice inhibits the student’s learning, b as it is stated: “And it has not whetted the surface [ i panim /i ]” /b (Ecclesiastes 10:10). As explained previously, i panim /i can also mean countece., b What is the remedy /b for this student? He must b increase /b the number of b friends /b he sends to the teacher to intercede b for him, as it is stated: “Then must he increase his strength.” /b The term used for strength, i ḥayalim /i , can also mean soldiers or colleagues. Nevertheless: b “But wisdom is profitable to direct,” /b meaning that b all the more so /b would he be spared this trouble b if his deeds /b were properly b directed before his teacher from the beginning. /b ,§ The Gemara returns to the topic of rain. b And Rabbi Ami said: What is /b the meaning of that b which is written: “If the serpent [ i naḥash /i ] bites [ i yishokh /i ] before it is charmed [ i laḥash /i ], then the charmer has no advantage” /b (Ecclesiastes 10:11)? b If you see a generation /b for whom b the heavens corrode [ i meshatkhin /i ] like copper [ i neḥoshet /i ], /b which prevents them b from bringing down dew and rain, /b this is b due to the lack of those who whisper quiet [ i loḥashei leḥishot /i ] /b prayers b in the generation. /b , b What is their remedy? /b They should b go to one who knows /b how b to whisper /b prayers in the proper manner, b as it is written: “Its noise tells concerning it” /b (Job 36:33). As for the phrase: b “Then the charmer has no advantage,” /b this is referring to b one who is able to whisper /b his prayers correctly b and yet does not whisper /b them correctly. In this case, of b what benefit to him /b is his ability to pray?, b And if he whispered /b his prayers b and /b yet b was not answered, what is his remedy? /b He should b go to /b the most b pious individual of the generation, and /b this pious individual will b increase /b his b prayers on his behalf, as it is stated /b one verse earlier: b “And He has commanded it due to imploring” /b (Job 36:32). b And “imploring” /b means b nothing other /b than b prayer, as it is stated: “Therefore, do not pray you for this nation, neither lift up cry nor prayer for them, neither implore Me” /b (Jeremiah 7:16)., b And if he whispered /b his prayers for rain, b and /b his prayers were b successful, /b i.e., rain fell as he requested, b and he becomes prideful /b as a result, b he brings anger into the world, as it is stated: “The cattle [ i mikne /i ] also [ i af /i ] concerning the rising storm [ i al oleh /i ]” /b (Job 36:33). This verse can be read homiletically as: Anger [ i af /i ] is acquired [ i mikne /i ] by one who raises [ i al oleh /i ] his pride.,Following the same interpretation of this verse, b Rava said: /b If there are b two Torah scholars who live in one city, and they are not courteous with one another in /b their discussions of b i halakha /i , they arouse anger /b upon the world b and cause it to rise up, as it is stated: “Anger is acquired by one who raises his pride.” /b ,The Gemara cites another interpretation of the aforementioned verse. b Reish Lakish said: What is /b the meaning of that b which is written: “If the snake bites before it is charmed, then the charmer has no advantage” /b (Ecclesiastes 10:11)? b In the future, all the animals will gather together and come to the snake and say to him: A lion mauls /b its prey b and eats /b it; b a wolf tears apart /b its prey b and eats /b it; but b you, what pleasure do you have /b when you bite a person, as you are incapable of eating him? The snake will b say to them: “The charmer has no advantage.” /b The Hebrew phrase for snake charmer literally means the master of the tongue, and therefore the snake is saying that he has a more difficult question: What pleasure does a slanderer receive, as he inflicts more harm for which he obtains no physical enjoyment., b Rabbi Ami said: A person’s prayer is heard only if he places his soul in his palm, /b i.e., one must submit his entire soul with sincerity in his outstretched hands as he prays, b as it is stated: “Let us lift up our heart with our hands” /b (Lamentations 3:41). The Gemara raises an objection: b Is that so? But Shmuel /b once b established for himself an interpreter /b to teach in public, b and interpreted homiletically /b the verse: b “But they beguiled Him with their mouth and lied to Him with their tongue, for their heart was not steadfast with Him, neither were they faithful to His covet” /b (Psalms 78:36–37), b and nevertheless /b the psalm continues: b “But He, being full of compassion, forgives iniquity, /b and does not destroy” (Psalms 78:38). This indicates that all prayers are accepted, even if they lack sincerity.,The Gemara responds: This is b not difficult, /b as b here /b Rabbi Ami is referring b to an individual /b who prays without sincerity and consequently his prayer goes unheard, whereas b there /b Shmuel is saying that when one prays b with /b the b community, /b even if his prayers are deficient, they are accepted in the merit of the congregation., b Rabbi Ami /b further b said: Rain falls only due to faithful people, as it is stated: “Truth springs out of the earth, and righteousness has looked down from heaven” /b (Psalms 85:12). When “truth springs out of the earth,” i.e., if people are faithful, they will find that “righteousness,” in the form of rain “has looked down from heaven.”, b And Rabbi Ami said: Come and see how great /b the b faithful people are, /b and how God assists them. b From where /b is it derived? b From /b the story of the b marten [ i ḥulda /i ] and /b the b pit. /b Once a young man saved a girl who had fallen into a pit. After rescuing her they swore to remain faithful to each other, and they declared the pit and a passing marten their witnesses. As time went by the young man forgot his vow and married another woman. They had two children, both of whom died tragically, one by falling into a pit and the other when he was bitten by a marten. Their unusual deaths led the young man to realize his error and he returned to the first woman. b And if this /b is the outcome for one b who believes in /b signs from b a pit and a marten, all the more so /b for b one who has faith in the Holy One, Blessed be He. /b ,§ b Rabbi Yoḥa said: Whoever is exacting with himself, /b by striving to act righteously in every way on earth b below, he is judged in an exact manner /b in Heaven b above, /b in order to improve him further still, b as it is stated: “Truth springs out of the earth, and righteousness has looked down from heaven” /b (Psalms 85:12). b Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Avin said /b that b Rav Huna said /b that this idea is derived b from here: “And Your wrath is according to the fear that is due to You” /b (Psalms 90:11). The level of God’s wrath correlates with the offender’s fear of God., b Reish Lakish said /b that this principle is derived b from here: “You took him away who joyfully performed righteousness, those who remembered You in Your ways, behold You were wroth, and we sinned, upon them have we stayed of old, that we might be saved” /b (Isaiah 64:4). This verse also teaches that God displays wrath specifically due to the transgressions of those who are accustomed to acting righteously. b Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said /b concerning the same verse: b Whoever is joyful in /b the b suffering /b that comes upon him b brings salvation to the world [ i olam /i ], as it is stated: “Upon them have we stayed of old [ i olam /i ], that we might be saved.” /b ,§ Returning to the topic of rain, b Reish Lakish said: What is /b the meaning of that b which is written: “And He will close up the heavens” /b (Deuteronomy 11:17)? This verse teaches that b when the heavens are closed up from bringing down dew and rain, /b this is b similar to a woman who has the pangs of labor and /b yet b does not give birth, /b as the heavens themselves suffer from their inability to bring down rain and dew. b And this is what Reish Lakish said in the name of bar Kappara: Closing up is stated with regard to rains, and closing up is /b likewise b stated with regard to a woman. /b |
|
10. Babylonian Talmud, Qiddushin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •nan 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| 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 | 70b. b One may not send greetings to a woman /b 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 b with her husband, /b which would remove all concerns. Rav Yehuda b said to him: This is what Shmuel says: One may not send greetings to a woman at all. /b Yalta, b his wife, /b who overheard that Rav Yehuda was getting the better of the exchange, b sent /b a message b to him: Release him /b and conclude your business with him, b so that he not equate you with another ignoramus. /b ,Desiring to release Rav Yehuda, Rav Naḥman b said to him: What is the reason /b that b the Master is here? /b Rav Yehuda b said to him: The Master sent me a summons. /b Rav Naḥman b said to him: Now /b that b I have not /b even b learned the Master’s /b form of b speech, /b as you have demonstrated your superiority to me by reproving me even over such matters, b could I /b have b sent a summons to the Master? /b Rav Yehuda b removed the summons from his bosom and showed it to him. /b While doing so, Rav Yehuda b said to him: Here is the man and here is the document. /b Rav Naḥman b said to him: Since the Master has come here, let him present his statement, in order that /b people b should not say: The Sages flatter one another /b and do not judge each other according to the letter of the law.,Rav Naḥman commenced the deliberation, and b said to him: What is the reason /b that b the Master excommunicated that man? /b Rav Yehuda replied: b He caused discomfort to an agent /b of one b of the Sages, /b and therefore he deserved the punishment of one who causes discomfort to a Torah scholar. Rav Naḥman challenged this answer: If so, b let the Master flog him, as Rav would flog one who causes discomfort to an agent of the Sages. /b Rav Yehuda responded: b I /b punished b him more severely than that. /b Rabbi Yehuda held that excommunication is a more severe punishment than flogging.,Rav Naḥman further inquired: b What is the reason /b that b the Master proclaimed about him that he is a slave? /b Rav Yehuda b said to him: /b Because he b is in the habit of calling people slaves, and /b it b is taught: Anyone who disqualifies /b others by stating that their lineage is flawed, that is a sign that he himself b is /b of b flawed /b lineage. Another indication of his lineage being flawed is that b he never speaks in praise /b of others. b And Shmuel said: He disqualifies with his /b own b flaw. /b Rav Naḥman retorted: You can b say that Shmuel said /b this i halakha /i only b to /b the degree that one should b suspect him /b of being of flawed lineage. But b did he /b actually b say /b this b to /b the extent that one could b proclaim about him /b that he is of flawed lineage?,The Gemara continues the story: b 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? /b Rav Yehuda b said to him: This is what Shmuel says: Anyone who says: I come from the house of the Hasmonean /b kings, b is a slave. /b As will be explained, only slaves remained of their descendants.,Rav Naḥman, who heard this exchange, b said to /b Rav Yehuda: b Does the Master not hold in accordance with this /b i halakha /i b that Rabbi Abba says /b that b Rav Huna says /b that b Rav says: /b With regard to b any Torah scholar who proceeds to teach /b a ruling of b i halakha /i /b with regard to a particular issue, b if he said it before an action /b that concerns himself occurred, b they /b should b listen to him, /b and his ruling is accepted. b But if not, /b if he quoted the i halakha /i only after he was involved in an incident related to the i halakha /i he is quoting, b they do not listen to him, /b 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 b said to /b Rav Naḥman: b There is Rav Mattana, who stands by my /b report, since he has also heard this ruling of Shmuel.,The Gemara continues: b Rav Mattana had not seen /b the city of b Neharde’a /b for b thirteen years. That /b very b day he arrived. /b Rav Yehuda b said to him: /b Does b the Master remember what Shmuel said when he was standing /b with b one foot on the bank and one foot on the ferry? /b Rav Mattana b said to him: This is what Shmuel said /b at that time: b Anyone who says: I come from the house of the Hasmonean /b kings, b is a slave, as none remained of them except for that young girl who ascended to the roof and raised her voice and said: /b From now on, b anyone who says: I come from the house of the Hasmonean /b kings, b is a slave. /b 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 b fell from the roof and died, /b leaving only slaves from the Hasmoneans. With the confirmation of the report of the statement of Shmuel, b they /b also b publicized /b in Neharde’a b about him, /b i.e., that man who claimed to come from the Hasmonean kings, b that he was a slave. /b ,The Gemara relates: On b that day, several marriage contracts were torn up in Neharde’a, /b as many had their marriages annulled after having discovered that they had married slaves. b When /b Rav Yehuda b was leaving /b Neharde’a, b they pursued him, /b seeking b to stone him, /b as because of him it was publicized that their lineage was flawed. Rav Yehuda b said to them: If you are silent, /b remain b silent. And if /b you will b not /b remain silent, b I will reveal about you this /b statement b that Shmuel said: There are two /b lines of b offspring in Neharde’a. One is called the dove’s house, and one is called the raven’s house. And your mnemonic /b with regard to lineage is: The b impure /b bird, the raven, is b impure, /b meaning flawed, and the b pure /b one, the dove, is b pure, /b meaning unflawed. Upon hearing this, b they threw /b all b those /b stones that they were intending b to stone him /b with b from their hands, /b as they did not want him to reveal who had a flawed lineage. b And /b as a result of all of the stones thrown into the river, b a dam arose in the Malka River. /b ,§ The Gemara continues the discussion of those with a flawed lineage: b Rav Yehuda proclaimed in Pumbedita: Adda and Yonatan, /b known residents of that town, are b slaves; Yehuda bar Pappa /b is a b i mamzer /i ; Bati bar Tuviyya, in his arrogance, did not accept a bill of manumission /b and is still a slave. b Rava proclaimed in /b his city of b Meḥoza: Balla’ai, Danna’ai, Talla’ai, Malla’ai, Zagga’ai: All /b these families b are /b of b flawed /b lineage. b Rav Yehuda /b likewise b says: Gova’ai, /b the inhabitants of a place called Gova, are in fact b Gibeonites, /b and their name has been corrupted. Similarly, those people known as b Dorenunita /b are from b the village of Gibeonites, /b and they may not marry Jews with unflawed lineage. b Rav Yosef says: /b With regard to b this /b place called b Bei Kuvei of Pumbedita, /b its residents b are all /b descendants b of slaves. /b , b Rav Yehuda says /b that b Shmuel says: Four hundred slaves, and some say four thousand slaves, were owned by Pashḥur ben Immer, /b a priest in the time of Jeremiah, b and /b due to their greatness b they were assimilated into the priesthood /b and became known as priests. b And any priest who has /b the trait of b insolence is only from them. Abaye said: They all sit in the rows /b of honor b that are in /b the city of b Neharde’a. /b The Gemara comments: And this statement b disagrees with /b the statement b of Rabbi Elazar, as Rabbi Elazar says: If you see an insolent priest, do not speculate about him /b that he may be of flawed lineage, b since it is stated: “For your people are as those who strive with a priest” /b (Hosea 4:4), which indicates that priests had a reputation for being cantankerous.,§ The Gemara discusses an idea raised earlier. b Rabbi Avin bar Rav Adda says /b that b Rav says: /b Concerning b anyone who marries a woman who is not suited for him /b to marry, b when the Holy One, Blessed be He, rests His Divine Presence /b upon the Jewish people, b He testifies with regard to all the tribes /b that they are His people, b but He does not testify with regard to he /b who married improperly, b as it is stated: “The tribes of the Lord, as a testimony to Israel” /b (Psalms 122:4). b When is it a testimony to Israel? When the tribes are the tribes of the Lord, /b but not when their lineage is flawed., b 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 /b unflawed lineage b among Israel, as it is stated: “At that time, says the Lord, will I be the God of all the families of Israel” /b (Jeremiah 30:25). b of all Israel, is not stated, but “of all the families,” /b which includes only those of unflawed lineage, the renowned families of Israel.,The verse from Jeremiah ends with the words b “And they shall be my people.” Rabba bar Rav Huna says: This is a higher standard /b that differentiates b between /b those born as b Jews and converts, as with regard to /b those born as b Jews it is written about them: “And I will be their God, and they shall be My people” /b (Ezekiel 37:27), b 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” /b (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.”, b Rabbi Ḥelbo says: Converts are /b as b difficult for the Jewish people as a scab. /b The proof is b that it is stated: “And the convert shall join himself with them, and they shall cleave [ i venispeḥu /i ] to the house of Jacob” /b (Isaiah 14:1). b It is written here “ i venispeḥu /i ,” and it is written there, /b among the types of leprosy: b “And for a sore and for a scab [ i sappaḥat /i ]” /b (Leviticus 14:56). The use of a term with a similar root indicates that converts are like a scab for the Jewish people., b Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina says: When the Holy One, Blessed be He, /b |
|
11. Babylonian Talmud, Niddah, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •zoroastrianism, religious study Found in books: 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, big strongמתני׳ /strong /big החרשת והשוטה והסומא ושנטרפה דעתה אם יש להן פקחות מתקנות אותן והן אוכלות בתרומה, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big חרשת איהי תבדוק לנפשה דתניא אמר רבי חרשת היתה בשכונתינו לא דיה שבודקת לעצמה אלא שחברותיה רואות ומראות לה,התם במדברת ואינה שומעת הכא בשאינה מדברת ואינה שומעת כדתנן חרש שדברו חכמים בכל מקום אינו שומע ואינו מדבר,הסומא איהי תבדוק לנפשה ותיחזי לחבירתה א"ר יוסי ברבי חנינא סומא אינה משנה,ושנטרפה דעתה היינו שוטה שנטרפה דעתה מחמת חולי,תנו רבנן כהן שוטה מטבילין אותו ומאכילין אותו תרומה לערב ומשמרין אותו שלא יישן ישן טמא לא ישן טהור,רבי אליעזר ברבי צדוק אומר עושין לו כיס של עור אמרו לו כל שכן שמביא לידי חימום אמר להן לדבריכם שוטה אין לו תקנה,אמרו לו לדברינו ישן טמא לא ישן טהור לדבריך שמא יראה טפה כחרדל ותבלע בכיס,תנא משום רבי אלעזר אמרו עושין לו כיס של מתכת,אמר אביי ושל נחשת כדתניא רבי יהודה אומר רואין אותן גבעולין של אזוב כאילו הן של נחשת,אמר רב פפא שמע מינה מכנסים אסורים והכתיב (שמות כח, מב) ועשה להם מכנסי בד לכסות בשר ערוה,ההוא כדתניא מכנסי כהנים למה הן דומין כמין פמלניא של פרשים למעלה עד מתנים למטה עד ירכים ויש להם שנצים ואין להם לא בית הנקב ולא בית הערוה,אמר אביי | 13b. b From the corona and above, /b toward the body, it is b prohibited. /b ,§ b Rav says: One who intentionally causes himself an erection shall be ostracized. /b The Gemara suggests: b And let /b Rav b say /b simply that it is b prohibited. /b The Gemara explains that it is proper to ostracize such a man, b as he arouses the evil inclination upon himself. And Rabbi Ami says: He is called /b a habitual b transgressor, as this is the craft of the evil inclination. Today he says to /b a person: b Do this /b sin, b and /b when the individual obeys his inclination, b on the following day /b the evil inclination b says to him: Do that /b sin, b and on the following day he says to him: Go /b and b worship idols, and he goes and worships /b idols., b Some say /b that b Rabbi Ami says: /b With regard to b anyone who brings himself into /b a state of b arousal, /b they b do not bring him within the boundary of the Holy One, Blessed be He. /b The proof is that b it is written here, /b with regard to O, son of Judah: b “And the thing that he did was evil in the eyes of the Lord, /b and He slew him also” (Genesis 38:10), b and it is written there: “For You are not a God who has pleasure in wickedness; evil shall not sojourn with You. /b 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., b And Rabbi Elazar says, /b with regard to the severity of this transgression: b What /b is the meaning of that b which is written: /b “And when you spread forth your hands, I will hide My eyes from you; even when you make many prayers, I will not hear; b your hands are full of blood” /b (Isaiah 1:15)? b These are /b those men b who commit adultery with the hand, /b by masturbating. Likewise, b the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: /b When it is stated in the Ten Commandments: b “You shall not commit adultery” /b (Exodus 20:13), this means that b there shall not be adultery among you, whether /b you masturbate b by hand /b or b whether with /b one’s b foot. /b ,§ b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Converts and those who play with children delay /b the coming of b the Messiah. /b The Gemara asks: b Granted /b with regard to b converts, /b this is b in accordance with /b the opinion b of Rabbi Ḥelbo, as Rabbi Ḥelbo says: Converts are as harmful to the Jewish people as a leprous scab /b on the skin, as they are not proficient in the performance of the mitzvot and born Jews learn from them. b But /b with regard to the category of b those who play with children, /b to b what is it /b referring?, b If we say /b that this is referring to b homosexuality, /b such men b are liable to /b be executed by b stoning, /b and their behavior is criticized not simply because they delay the Messiah. b Rather, /b one might suggest that this is referring to those who emit semen b by way of /b other b limbs, /b i.e., without engaging in intercourse; if so, b they are /b considered as though they are bringing a flood, and are therefore b liable to /b be punished themselves with b a flood. /b , b Rather, /b the i baraita /i means b that they marry minor girls who are not /b yet b capable of bearing children, /b consequently emitting semen for naught. b As Rabbi Yosei said: The /b Messiah, b son of David, will not come until all the souls of the body have been finished, /b i.e., until all souls that are destined to inhabit physical bodies do so. b As it is stated: “For the spirit that enwraps itself is from Me, and the souls that I have made” /b (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, b among men, /b such a hand b should be severed. A dilemma was raised before /b the Sages: b Do we learn /b this statement as a practical b i halakha /i , /b i.e., that the court should actually sever his hand, b or do we learn /b it as a mere b curse, /b but not as an actual instruction to punish him in that manner? The Gemara elaborates: b Do we learn /b it as a practical b i halakha /i like that /b 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 b Rav Huna /b indeed acted accordingly and b severed the hand /b of an offender? b Or /b perhaps b do we learn /b it as a mere b curse? /b ,The Gemara suggests: b Come /b and b hear, as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi Tarfon says: /b If one’s b hand /b goes b to /b his b penis, his hand should be severed upon his navel. /b The Rabbis b said to him: /b If so, in a case where b a thorn was stuck in /b one’s b belly, should he not remove it? /b Rabbi Tarfon b said to them: /b Indeed, he should b not /b remove it, and if he does so his hand should be severed. The Rabbis replied: b But /b if his hand is severed while it is upon his navel, b won’t his belly be split open? /b Rabbi Tarfon b said to them: It is preferable that the belly of /b one who acts in this manner b should be split open, and he should not descend into the pit of destruction. /b ,The Gemara analyzes this discussion: b Granted, if you say /b that b we learn /b the statement in the mishna as a practical b i halakha /i , this is /b the meaning of that b which /b the Rabbis b said: But /b if his hand is severed upon his navel, b won’t his belly be split open? But if you say /b that b we learn /b the statement in the mishna as a mere b curse, what /b is the meaning of the phrase: Won’t b his belly be split open? /b The Gemara responds: b Rather, what /b explanation is the alternative? That b we learn /b the mishna as stating a practical b i halakha /i ? /b That would not explain the exchange between the Rabbis to Rabbi Tarfon, because is it b not sufficient that /b the hand be severed b not upon his navel? /b 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., b Rather, this /b is what b Rabbi Tarfon is saying: /b With regard to b anyone who inserts his hand below his navel, /b his hand b should be severed. /b The Rabbis b said to Rabbi Tarfon: /b If b a thorn was stuck in /b one’s b belly, should he not remove it? /b Rabbi Tarfon b said to them: /b He should b not. /b They responded: b But won’t his belly be split open /b due to the thorn? Rabbi Tarfon b said to them: It is preferable that his belly be split open, and he should not descend into the pit of destruction. /b , strong MISHNA: /strong In the case of a woman b who is deaf [ i haḥereshet /i ], or an imbecile, or blind, or who went insane, /b and is therefore unable to examine herself reliably, b if /b such women b have competent /b friends, those friends b prepare them /b by examining them and immersing them in a ritual bath. b And /b on that basis the incompetent women b may partake of i teruma /i /b after the sun sets., strong GEMARA: /strong The mishna states that competent women must assist b a deaf woman. /b The Gemara asks: b Let her examine herself; as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i that b Rabbi /b Yehuda HaNasi b said: There was a deaf woman in our neighborhood /b who was so proficient in these matters that b not only did she examine herself, but /b when b her friends would see /b stains similar to blood b and /b were unsure whether or not the stains were ritually impure, they would b show her /b the stains.,The Gemara answers: b There, /b Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi is referring b to /b a woman who b can speak but cannot hear. /b It is possible for such a woman to be an expert in examining blood. But b here, /b the mishna is dealing b with /b a woman b who can neither speak nor hear, /b and she is therefore considered incompetent and incapable of examining herself. b As we learned /b in a mishna ( i Terumot /i 1:2): The b deaf person /b of b whom the Sages spoke everywhere /b is one b who can neither hear nor speak, /b i.e., a deaf-mute.,§ The mishna further teaches that competent women must assist b a blind /b woman. The Gemara similarly asks: b Let her examine herself and show /b the cloth b to her friend. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says: /b The correct version of the b mishna /b does b not /b mention b a blind /b woman.,§ The mishna also states that competent women must assist b a woman who went insane. /b The Gemara asks: With regard to her ability to examine herself, b isn’t this /b the same as b an imbecile, /b who is already mentioned in the mishna? The Gemara answers: Here, the mishna is referring to a woman b who went insane due to illness, /b which is a different category than that of an imbecile.,The Gemara further discusses i halakhot /i pertaining to an imbecile. b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : With regard to b an imbecile priest /b who was ritually impure, competent men deal with his purification: b They immerse him, and /b then b enable him to partake of i teruma /i in the evening, /b like any other priest who was impure. b And /b those taking care of him must b watch over him /b to ensure b that he does not sleep /b before he partakes of i teruma /i , in case he experiences a seminal emission, which would render him impure. If b he slept, /b he is once again b impure, /b and may not partake of i teruma /i ; if he b did not sleep /b he is b pure. /b , b Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says /b that there is another method of allowing an imbecile priest to partake of i teruma /i : b One prepares for him a leather pouch, /b which is wrapped around his penis, and before giving him i teruma /i to partake of one checks this pouch to see if he has emitted semen. The other Sages b said to him: /b It is improper to do this, as b all the more so /b he will be prevented from partaking of i teruma /i ; this pouch b warms him /b and increases the likelihood of a seminal emission. Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Tzadok, b said to them: According to your statement, an imbecile /b priest b has no remedy /b that will enable him to partake of i teruma /i ., b They said to him: According to our statement /b there is a way he can partake of i teruma /i , as stated above: If b he slept, /b he is b impure; /b if he b did not sleep /b he is b pure. /b But b according to your statement, /b that one wraps a pouch around his penis, this is not a reliable method, as b perhaps he will see, /b i.e., experience the emission of, b a drop /b of semen as small b as a mustard /b seed, b and it will be absorbed in the pouch /b and will not be noticed, which would mean that he is eating i teruma /i in a state of ritual impurity.,The Gemara continues to discuss the methods by which an imbecile priest can partake of i teruma /i . It was b taught /b in a i baraita /i that the Sages b said in the name of Rabbi Elazar: One prepares for him a metal pouch, /b which is placed on his penis and does not warm it.,In explanation of this statement, b Abaye says: And /b when this i tanna /i speaks of metal, he means that the pouch should be made b of copper, /b which does not absorb liquid, and therefore any drop of semen would be visible. This is b as it is taught /b in a mishna ( i Para /i 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 b Rabbi Yehuda says: One considers those hyssop stems, /b with which the waters of purification are sprinkled, b as though they are /b made b of copper, /b which does not absorb any of the water., b Rav Pappa says: /b One can b learn from /b the statement of the Rabbis that a pouch wrapped around one’s penis can warm it enough to cause a seminal emission, that b trousers are prohibited /b to be worn, as they too warm the penis, by being placed so they are tight against it. The Gemara asks: b But isn’t it written /b with regard to the priestly garments: b “And you shall make them linen trousers to cover the flesh of their nakedness, /b from the loins even to the thighs they shall reach” (Exodus 28:42)?,The Gemara explains: b That /b garment, the trousers worn by priests, was different, b as it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b The trousers of priests, to what are they comparable? /b They are b similar to riding trousers [ i pamalanya /i ] of horsemen, /b and this is what they look like: b Above, /b they reach b up to /b the b loins; below, /b they go b down to /b the b thighs, and they have straps, and they have no opening, /b neither b at the back nor at the front. /b , b Abaye says: /b |
|
12. Babylonian Talmud, Berachot, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) 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| 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:, br br big strongהדרן עלך היה קורא /strong /big br br,מתני׳ big strongמי /strong /big שמתו מוטל לפניו פטור מק"ש ומן התפלה ומן התפילין ומכל מצות האמורות בתורה,נושאי המטה וחלופיהן וחלופי חלופיהן את שלפני המטה ואת שלאחר המטה את שלפני המטה צורך בהם פטורים ואת שלאחר המטה צורך בהם חייבין ואלו ואלו פטורים מן התפלה,קברו את המת וחזרו אם יכולין להתחיל ולגמור עד שלא יגיעו לשורה יתחילו ואם לאו לא יתחילו,העומדים בשורה הפנימיים פטורים והחיצונים חייבים (נשים ועבדים וקטנים פטורים מק"ש ומן התפילין וחייבין בתפלה ובמזוזה ובברכת המזון):, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big מוטל לפניו אין ושאינו מוטל לפניו לא,ורמינהי מי שמתו מוטל לפניו אוכל בבית אחר ואם אין לו בית אחר אוכל בבית חבירו ואם אין לו בית חבירו עושה מחיצה ואוכל ואם אין לו דבר לעשות מחיצה מחזיר פניו ואוכל ואינו מיסב ואוכל ואינו אוכל בשר ואינו שותה יין ואינו מברך ואינו מזמן | 17b. b “There is no breach”; that our faction /b of Sages b should not be like the faction of David, from which Ahitophel emerged, /b who caused a breach in the kingdom of David. br b “And no going forth”; that our faction should not be like the faction of Saul, from which Doeg the Edomite emerged, /b who set forth on an evil path. br b “And no outcry”; that our faction should not be like the faction of Elisha, from which Geihazi emerged. /b br b “In our open places”; that we should not have a child or student who overcooks his food in public, /b i.e., who sins in public and causes others to sin, b as /b in the well-known case of b Jesus the Nazarene. /b ,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: b “Hear Me, stubborn-hearted who are far from charity” /b (Isaiah 46:12). While both agree that the verse refers to the righteous, b Rav and Shmuel, and some say Rabbi Yoḥa and Rabbi Elazar, /b disagreed as to how to interpret the verse. b One said: The entire world is sustained by /b God’s b charity, /b not because it deserves to exist, b while /b the righteous who are far from God’s charity b are sustained by force, /b as due to their own good deeds they have the right to demand their sustece. b And one said: The entire world is sustained by the merit /b of b their /b righteousness, b while they are not sustained /b at all, b not even by their own merit, in accordance with /b the statement that b Rav Yehuda /b said that b Rav said. /b , b As Rav Yehuda said /b that b Rav said: Every day a Divine Voice emerges from Mount Horeb and says: The entire world is sustained by /b the merit of b Ḥanina /b ben Dosa, b my son, and /b for b Ḥanina, my son, a i kav /i of carobs is sufficient /b to sustain him for an entire week, b from /b one b Shabbat eve to /b the next b Shabbat eve. /b , b And /b this exegesis b disagrees with /b the opinion of b Rav Yehuda, as Rav Yehuda said, who are the stubborn-hearted? /b They are the b foolish /b heathens b of Gova’ei. Rav Yosef said: Know /b that this is so, b as no convert has ever converted from their /b ranks.,Similarly, b Rav Ashi said: /b The heathen residents b of /b the city b Mata Meḥasya are the stubborn-hearted, as they witness the glory of the Torah twice a year /b at the i kalla /i gatherings in Adar and Elul, when thousands of people congregate and study Torah i en masse /i , b yet no convert has ever converted from their /b ranks.,We learned in our mishna that b if a groom wishes to recite /b i Shema /i 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: b 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 /b that b they /b say b the opposite? As we learned /b in a mishna: b A place where they were accustomed to perform labor on Ninth of Av, one /b may b perform /b labor. b A place where they were accustomed not to perform /b labor on Ninth of Av, b one /b may b not perform /b labor. b And everywhere, Torah scholars are idle /b and do not perform labor. b Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: /b With regard to performing labor on the Ninth of Av, b one should always conduct himself as a Torah scholar. /b ,If so, b there is a contradiction between /b the statement of b the Rabbis /b here b and /b the statement of b the Rabbis /b there. And, b there is a contradiction between /b the statement of b Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel /b here b and /b the statement of b Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel /b there., b Rabbi Yoḥa said: The attribution /b of the opinions b is reversed /b in one of the sources in the interest of avoiding contradiction. b Rav Sheisha, son of Rav Idi, said: Actually, /b you need b not reverse /b the opinions, as the contradiction between the statement of b the Rabbis /b here b and /b the statement of b the Rabbis /b there b is not difficult. /b In the case of b the recitation of i Shema /i /b on his wedding night, b since everyone is reciting /b i Shema /i b and he is also reciting /b i Shema /i , he is not conspicuous and b it does not appear as presumptuousness. Here, /b in the case of the Ninth of Av, however, b since everyone is performing labor and he is not performing labor, /b his idleness is conspicuous and b appears as presumptuousness. /b ,So too, the contradiction b between /b the statement of b Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel /b here b and /b the statement of b Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel /b there b is not difficult. There, /b in the case of the recitation of i Shema /i on his wedding night, b the matter is dependent upon his /b capacity to b concentrate, /b and b it is clear to all /b that b he is unable to concentrate. /b Reciting i Shema /i under those circumstances is a display of presumptuousness. b But here, /b in the case of the Ninth of Av, b one who sees /b him idle b says: It is /b because b he has no labor /b to perform. b Go out and see how many idle people there are in the marketplace, /b even on days when one is permitted to work. Consequently, his idleness is not conspicuous.,, strong MISHNA: /strong b One whose deceased /b relative b is laid out /b unburied b before him is exempt from the recitation of i Shema /i , from /b the i Amida /i b prayer, and from /b the mitzva to don b phylacteries, as well as all /b positive b mitzvot mentioned in the Torah, /b until the deceased has been buried.,With regard to b the pallbearers and their replacements and the replacements of their replacements, those /b located b before the bier /b who have not yet carried the deceased b and those /b located b after the bier. Those before the bier who are needed /b to carry the bier b are exempt /b from reciting i Shema /i ; b while those after the bier, /b even if b they are /b still b needed /b to carry it, since they have already carried the deceased, they are b obligated /b to recite i Shema /i . However, both b these and those are exempt from /b reciting the i Amida /i b prayer, /b since they are preoccupied and are unable to focus and pray with the appropriate intent.,After b they buried the deceased and returned, if they /b have sufficient time to b begin /b to recite i Shema /i b and conclude before they arrive at the row, /b formed by those who attended the burial, through which the bereaved family will pass in order to receive consolation, b they should begin. If /b they do b not /b have sufficient time to conclude reciting the entire i Shema /i , then b they should not begin. /b ,And b those standing in the row, those /b in the b interior /b row, directly before whom the mourners will pass and who will console them, b are exempt /b from reciting i Shema /i , while b those /b in the b exterior /b row, who stand there only to show their respect, b are obligated /b to recite i Shema /i . b Women, slaves and minors are exempt from the recitation of i Shema /i and from phylacteries, but are obligated in prayer, i mezuza /i and Grace after Meals. /b , strong GEMARA: /strong We learned in the mishna that one whose deceased relative is laid out before him is exempt from the recitation of i Shema /i and other positive mitzvot. The Gemara deduces: When the corpse is b laid out before him, yes, /b he is exempt, but when the corpse is b not /b physically b laid out before him, no, /b he is not exempt from these mitzvot.,The Gemara b raises a contradiction /b from a i baraita /i : b One whose deceased /b relative b 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 /b available, b he makes a partition /b between him and the deceased b and eats. If he does not have material /b with which b to make a partition, he averts his face /b from the dead and b eats. And /b in any case, b he does not recline while he eats, /b as reclining is characteristic of a festive meal. b Furthermore, he neither eats meat nor drinks wine, and does not recite /b a b blessing /b before eating, b and does not /b recite the formula to b invite /b the participants in the meal to join together in the Grace after Meals [ i zimmun /i ], i.e., he is exempt from the obligation of Grace after Meals. |
|
13. Babylonian Talmud, Bava Batra, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •zoroastrianism, religious study Found in books: Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 41| 149a. יהנה בהן מהי דניהוי כולהו מתנה קאמר או דלמא ליתהני מינייהו מידי קאמר יראה בהן מהו יעמוד בהן מהו ישען בהן מהו תיקו,איבעיא להו מכר כל נכסיו מהו אמר רב יהודה אמר רב אם עמד אינו חוזר וזימנין אמר רב יהודה אמר רב אם עמד חוזר ולא פליגי הא דאיתנהו לזוזי בעינייהו הא דפרעינהו בחובו,איבעיא להו שכיב מרע שהודה מהו ת"ש דאיסור גיורא הוה ליה תריסר אלפי זוזי בי רבא רב מרי בריה הורתו שלא בקדושה ולידתו בקדושה הואי ובי רב הוה,אמר רבא היכי ניקנינהו רב מרי להני זוזי אי בירושה לאו בר ירושה הוא אי במתנה מתנת שכיב מרע כירושה שויוה רבנן כל היכא דאיתיה בירושה איתיה במתנה כל היכא דליתיה בירושה ליתיה במתנה,אי במשיכה ליתנהו גביה אי בחליפין אין מטבע נקנה בחליפין אי אגב קרקע לית ליה ארעא אי במעמד שלשתן אי שלח לי לא אזילנא,מתקיף לה רב איקא בריה דרב אמי אמאי ולודי איסור דהלין זוזי דרב מרי נינהו וליקנינהו באודיתא אדהכי נפק אודיתא מבי איסור איקפד רבא אמר קא מגמרי טענתא לאינשי ומפסדי לי | 149a. If a person on his deathbed says: So-and-so b shall benefit from /b my property, b what is /b the i halakha /i ? Is he b saying that all /b of the property b shall be a gift? Or perhaps /b he is b saying /b that the recipient b shall derive some benefit from /b the property. If he says: So-and-so b shall be seen in /b my property, b what is /b the i halakha /i ? If he says: So-and-so b shall stand in /b my property, b what is /b the i halakha /i ? If he says: So-and-so b shall rely on /b my property, b what is /b the i halakha /i ? The Gemara concludes: All these dilemmas b shall stand /b unresolved., b A dilemma was raised before /b the Sages: If a person on his deathbed b sold all of his property, what is /b the i halakha /i ? b Rav Yehuda says /b that b Rav says: If he recovers, he cannot retract /b the sale. b And /b at b times, Rav Yehuda said /b that b Rav said: If he recovers, he can retract /b the sale. b And /b these statements b do not disagree. This /b statement, that he can retract the sale, applies in a case b where the dinars /b he received as payment b are /b still b extant, /b i.e., in his possession. b That /b statement, that he cannot retract the sale, applies in a case b where he paid his debt with /b those dinars.,§ b A dilemma was raised before /b the Sages: In the case of b a person on his deathbed who admitted /b that he owed money to a certain person, where it was possible that he did not actually owe him money, b what is /b the i halakha /i ? Does his admission qualify as the gift of a person on his deathbed? The Gemara answers: b Come /b and b hear /b a proof, b as Issur the convert had twelve thousand dinars /b deposited in b the house of Rava. Rav Mari, /b Issur’s b son, whose conception was not in /b the b sanctity /b of the Jewish people, i.e., he was conceived before his father converted, b but his birth was in /b the b sanctity /b of the Jewish people, i.e., he was born after his father converted, b was /b in b a study hall /b elsewhere when his father was on his deathbed., b Rava /b reasoned that he would acquire possession of the deposit for himself, as he b said: How can Rav Mari acquire these dinars? If /b he attempts to acquire the money b as inheritance, he is not fit to inherit /b from Issur. Since he was conceived before his father converted, he is therefore not halakhically considered his son. b If /b he attempts to acquire it b as a gift, the Sages equated /b the halakhic status of the b gift of a person on his deathbed with /b that of b inheritance. /b Therefore, b anywhere that /b the property b can be /b acquired b as inheritance, it can /b also b be /b acquired b as a gift, /b and b anywhere that /b the property b cannot be /b acquired b as inheritance, it cannot be /b acquired b as a gift. /b , b If /b he attempts to acquire the dinars b by pulling /b them, which is a formal act of acquisition, he will not be able to do this, as the dinars b are not with him. If /b he attempts to acquire them b by /b means of symbolic b exchange, /b a pro forma act of acquisition effecting the transfer of ownership of an article, b money cannot be acquired by /b means of symbolic b exchange. If /b he attempts to acquire them b by means of /b the acquisition of b land, /b Issur b does not have /b any b land. If /b he attempts to acquire them by means of verbal instruction made by his father b in the presence of /b all b three /b parties, i.e., the giver, the recipient, and the bailee, b if he sends for me, /b the bailee, b I shall not go, /b as without the presence of the bailee he cannot transfer ownership of the money., b Rav Ika, son of Rav Ami, objected to this: Why /b is Rav Mari unable to acquire the money? b But /b why not b let Issur admit that these dinars are /b owned b by Rav Mari, and he shall transfer /b ownership of b them /b to Rav Mari b by /b means of a document of b admission? In the meantime, /b a document of b admission /b stating that the dinars belonged to Rav Mari b emerged from Issur’s house. Rava became angry, /b and b said: They are teaching people /b legal b claims and causing me loss. /b In any event, this incident proves that the admission of a person on his deathbed is a valid means of transferring ownership. |
|
14. Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin, None (3rd cent. CE - 6th cent. CE) Tagged with subjects: •zoroastrianism, religious study Found in books: Secunda (2014), The Iranian Talmud: Reading the Bavli in Its Sasanian Context. 47; Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 47| 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:, big strongגמ׳ /strong /big תנא עד שיברך שם בשם,מנהני מילי אמר שמואל דאמר קרא (ויקרא כד, טז) ונוקב שם וגו' בנקבו שם יומת,ממאי דהאי נוקב לישנא דברוכי הוא דכתיב (במדבר כג, ח) מה אקב לא קבה אל ואזהרתיה מהכא (שמות כב, כז) אלהים לא תקלל,ואימא מיברז הוא דכתיב (מלכים ב יב, י) ויקב חור בדלתו ואזהרתיה מהכא (דברים יב, ג) ואבדתם את שמם לא תעשון כן לה' אלהיכם,בעינא שם בשם וליכא,ואימא דמנח שני שמות אהדדי ובזע להו ההוא נוקב וחוזר ונוקב הוא ואימא דחייק שם אפומא דסכינא ובזע בה ההוא חורפא דסכינא הוא דקא בזע,אימא פרושי שמיה הוא דכתיב (במדבר א, יז) ויקח משה ואהרן את האנשים האלה אשר נקבו בשמות ואזהרתיה מהכא (דברים ו, יג) את ה' אלהיך תירא,חדא דבעינא שם בשם וליכא ועוד הויא ליה אזהרת עשה ואזהרת עשה לא שמה אזהרה,ואיבעית אימא אמר קרא (ויקרא כד, יא) ויקב ויקלל למימרא דנוקב קללה הוא,ודילמא עד דעבד תרוייהו לא סלקא דעתך דכתיב (ויקרא כד, יד) הוצא את המקלל ולא כתיב הוצא את הנוקב והמקלל שמע מינה חדא היא,תנו רבנן איש מה ת"ל איש איש לרבות את העובדי כוכבים שמוזהרין על ברכת השם כישראל ואינן נהרגין אלא בסייף שכל מיתה האמורה בבני נח אינה אלא בסייף,והא מהכא נפקא מהתם נפקא ה' זו ברכת השם,אמר ר' יצחק נפחא לא נצרכא אלא לרבותא הכינויין ואליבא דרבי מאיר,דתניא (ויקרא כד, טו) איש איש כי יקלל אלהיו ונשא חטאו מה תלמוד לומר והלא כבר נאמר (ויקרא כד, טז) ונוקב שם ה' מות יומת לפי שנאמר ונוקב שם מות יומת יכול לא יהא חייב אלא על שם המיוחד בלבד מניין לרבות כל הכינויין תלמוד לומר איש כי יקלל אלהיו מכל מקום דברי רבי מאיר,וחכמים אומרים על שם המיוחד במיתה ועל הכינויין באזהרה,ופליגא דרבי מיישא דאמר רבי מיישא בן נח שבירך את השם בכינויים לרבנן חייב,מאי טעמא דאמר קרא (ויקרא כד, טז) כגר כאזרח גר ואזרח הוא דבעינן בנקבו שם אבל עובד כוכבים אפילו בכינוי,ורבי מאיר האי כגר כאזרח מאי עביד ליה גר ואזרח בסקילה אבל עובד כוכבים בסייף סלקא דעתך אמינא הואיל ואיתרבו איתרבו קמ"ל,ורבי יצחק נפחא אליבא דרבנן האי כגר כאזרח מאי עביד ליה גר ואזרח הוא דבעינן שם בשם אבל עובד כוכבים לא בעינן שם בשם,איש איש למה לי דיברה תורה כלשון בני אדם,תנו רבנן שבע מצות נצטוו בני נח דינין וברכת השם ע"ז גילוי עריות ושפיכות דמים וגזל ואבר מן החי | 56a. b On every day /b of a blasphemer’s trial, when the judges b judge the witnesses, /b i.e., interrogate the witnesses, they ask the witnesses to use b an appellation /b for the name of God, so that they do not utter a curse of God’s name. Specifically, the witnesses would say: b Let Yosei smite Yosei, /b as the name Yosei has four letters in Hebrew, as does the Tetragrammaton.,When b the judgment is over, /b and the court votes to deem the defendant guilty, b they do not sentence /b him b to death based on /b the testimony of the witnesses in which they used b an appellation /b for the name of God, without having ever heard the exact wording of the curse. b Rather, they remove all /b the b people /b who are not required to be there from the court, so that the curse is not heard publicly, and the judges b interrogate the eldest of /b the witnesses, b and say to him: Say what you heard explicitly. And he says /b exactly what he heard. b And the judges stand on their feet and make a tear /b in their garments, as an act of mourning for the desecration of the honor of God. b And they do not /b ever fully b stitch /b it back together again., b And the second /b witness b says: I too /b heard b as he /b did, but he does not repeat the curse explicitly. b And the third /b witness, in the event that there is one, b says: I too /b heard b as he /b did. In this manner, the repetition of the invective sentence is limited to what is absolutely necessary., strong GEMARA: /strong The Sage b taught /b in a i baraita /i : A blasphemer is not liable b unless he blesses, /b a euphemism for curses, the b name /b of God b with /b the b name /b of God, e.g., by saying: Let such and such a name strike such and such a name.,The Gemara asks: b From where is this matter /b derived? b Shmuel says: /b It is derived from that b which the verse states: “And he who blasphemes [ i venokev /i ] the name /b of the Lord shall be put to death; all the congregation shall stone him; the convert as well as the homeborn, b when he blasphemes [ i benokvo /i ] the name, he shall be put to death” /b (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: b From where /b is it derived b that this /b word b i nokev /i is a term for blessing, /b 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: b “How shall I curse [ i ekkov /i ] whom God has not cursed?” /b (Numbers 23:8). b And /b the b prohibition /b against cursing God is derived b from here: “You shall not curse God” /b (Exodus 22:27).,The Gemara asks: b But say /b that perhaps the meaning of i nokev /i b is /b not cursing, but rather b making a hole, as it is written: “And made a hole [ i vayyikkov /i ] in its lid” /b (II Kings 12:10). According to this, the word i nokev /i is referring to one who makes a hole and damages the written name of God. b And /b the b prohibition /b against doing so is derived b from here: “And you shall destroy their name /b out of that place. b You shall not do so to the Lord your God” /b (Deuteronomy 12:3–4).,The Gemara answers: It is derived from the repetition of i nokev /i that for one to be liable, it is b necessary /b that his transgression involve the b name /b of God b with /b the b name /b of God, b and /b such a transgression is b not /b possible if the reference is to making a hole.,The Gemara challenges: b But say that /b such a transgression is possible, as one can b place two /b written b names /b of God, b one on top of the other, and tear /b through b them /b at once. The Gemara explains: b That /b would be defined as b making a hole and again making a hole, /b not making a hole in one name by means of another name. The Gemara asks: b But say that /b one can b etch /b the b name /b of God b on the point of a knife and cut /b through another name b with it. /b The Gemara answers: In b that /b case, b it is the point of the knife that is cutting, /b not the name of God.,The Gemara asks: b Say /b that i nokev /i means the b utterance of the /b ineffable b name of /b God. b As it is written: “And Moses and Aaron took these men that are pointed out [ i nikkevu /i ] by name” /b (Numbers 1:17). b And /b the b prohibition /b to do so is derived b from here: “You shall fear the Lord, your God” /b (Deuteronomy 6:13).,The Gemara answers: b One /b answer is b that /b for one to be liable, it is b necessary /b that his transgression involve the b name /b of God b with /b the b name /b of God, b and /b such a transgression is b not /b possible if the reference is to uttering the ineffable name of God. b Furthermore, /b the prohibition derived from the verse “You shall fear the Lord, your God” b is a prohibition /b stated as b a positive mitzva, and a prohibition /b stated as b a positive mitzva is not considered a prohibition. /b ,The Gemara presents an alternative proof that i nokev /i is referring to cursing: b And if you wish, say /b instead that b the verse states: “And /b the son of the Israelite woman b blasphemed [ i vayyikkov /i ] /b the name b and cursed” /b (Leviticus 24:11). b That is to say that /b the meaning of b i nokev /i is /b to b curse. /b ,The Gemara asks: b But perhaps /b this verse does not prove that the meaning of i nokev /i is to curse; rather, it indicates that one is not liable to be executed b unless he does both, /b i.e., both i nokev /i and cursing God? The Gemara answers: This shall b not enter your mind, as it is written: “Bring forth the one who cursed… /b and stone him” (Leviticus 24:14), b and it is not written: Bring forth the i nokev /i and one who cursed. Conclude from it /b that b it is one /b act and not two.,§ b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i with regard to the verse: “Anyone who curses his God shall bear his sin” (Leviticus 24:15), that the verse could have stated: b One [ i ish /i ] /b who curses his God. b Why /b must b the verse state: “Anyone [ i ish ish /i ]”? /b It is b to include the gentiles, who are prohibited from blessing, /b i.e., cursing, b the name /b of God, just b like Jews /b are. b And they are executed /b for this transgression b by the sword alone, as all death /b penalties b stated with regard to the descendants of Noah are by the sword alone. /b ,The Gemara asks: b But is this /b i halakha /i b derived from here? /b Rather, b it is derived from there: /b “And the Lord God commanded the man” (Genesis 2:16), as is stated in a i baraita /i that will soon be quoted at length: b “The Lord,” this /b is referring to b the blessing, /b i.e., cursing, b of the name /b of God. This verse concerns Adam, the first man, and is therefore binding on all of humanity., b Rav Yitzḥak Nappaḥa says: /b The verse “anyone who curses his God” b is necessary only to include /b gentiles who curse God using b the appellations /b for the name of God, rather than mentioning the ineffable name, b and /b this is b in accordance with /b the opinion b of Rabbi Meir. /b , b As it is taught /b in a i baraita /i : b Why /b must b 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” /b (Leviticus 24:16)? Rather, b since it is stated: “And he who blasphemes the name /b of the Lord b shall be put to death,” /b one b might /b have thought that one b will be liable only for /b cursing b the ineffable name /b of God. b From where /b is it derived that the verse b includes /b one who curses b any of the appellations /b as well? b The verse states: “Anyone who curses his God,” /b to indicate that one is liable to be executed b in any case. /b This is b the statement of Rabbi Meir. /b , b And the Rabbis say: For /b cursing b the ineffable name /b of God, one is punished b by death, and for /b cursing b the appellations, /b one is liable to receive lashes b for /b violating b a prohibition. /b ,The Gemara comments: b And /b Rav Yitzḥak Nappaḥa, who holds that according to the Rabbis, gentiles are not liable for cursing appellations for the name of God, b disagrees with /b the opinion of b Rav Meyasha. As Rav Meyasha says: A descendant of Noah who blessed God by /b one of the b appellations is liable /b to be executed even b according to /b the opinion of b the Rabbis. /b , b What is the reason? /b It is b because the verse states: “The convert as well as the homeborn, /b when he blasphemes the name, he shall be put to death” (Leviticus 24:16), from which it is derived that b it is /b only in the case of b a convert or a homeborn /b Jew b that we require /b the condition: b “When he blasphemes the name,” /b i.e., he is liable to be executed only if he curses the ineffable name. b But a gentile /b is liable to be executed b even due to /b merely cursing b an appellation. /b ,The Gemara asks: b And what does Rabbi Meir do with this /b part of the verse: b “The convert as well as the homeborn”? /b What does he derive from it? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Meir derives that b a convert or a homeborn /b Jew is liable to be executed b by stoning /b for this transgression, b but a gentile /b is executed b by the sword. /b This exclusion is necessary as otherwise it might b enter your mind to say /b that b since /b gentiles b are included /b in the i halakhot /i of this verse, b they are included /b in all the i halakhot /i of blasphemy. Therefore the verse b teaches us /b that they are not stoned.,The Gemara asks: b And what does Rav Yitzḥak Nappaḥa do with this /b part of the verse: b “The convert as well as the homeborn,” according to /b the opinion b of the Rabbis, /b 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 b it is /b specifically with regard to b a convert and a homeborn /b Jew b that we require /b the condition that he curse b a name /b of God b by a name /b of God; b but /b with regard to b a gentile, we do not require /b that he curse b a name /b of God b by a name /b of God in order for him to be liable.,The Gemara asks: b Why do I /b need the inclusive term b “anyone /b 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 i halakha /i is derived from it; it is not a superfluous term, as b the Torah spoke in the language of people. /b ,§ Since the i halakhot /i of the descendants of Noah have been mentioned, a full discussion of the Noahide mitzvot is presented. b The Sages taught /b in a i baraita /i : b The descendants of Noah, /b i.e., all of humanity, b were commanded /b to observe b seven mitzvot: /b The mitzva of establishing courts of b judgment; and /b the prohibition against b blessing, /b i.e., cursing, b the name /b of God; and the prohibition of b idol worship; /b and the prohibition against b forbidden sexual relations; and /b the prohibition of b bloodshed; and /b the prohibition of b robbery; and /b the prohibition against eating b a limb from a living /b animal. |
|
| 16. Zoroastrian Literature, Yasna, 18.3 Tagged with subjects: •zoroastrianism, religious study 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 |
| 17. Yannai, Piyyutim, 7.5, 8.5 Tagged with subjects: •nan Found in books: Secunda (2020), The Talmud's Red Fence: Menstrual Impurity and Difference in Babylonian Judaism and its Sasanian Context , 47, 48, 49, 73 |
| 22. Anon., Kallah Rabbati Higge, 2.4 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 |
