מדרש על מלכים א 1:54

And these are the names of the Sons of Israel that came into Egypt with Yaakov, every man came with his household – There it is written (Mishlei 13, 24): “He who spares the rod hates his son; but he who loves him disciplines him in his youth.” Ordinarily in the world, if a person says to his friend: “So-and-so hit your son”, he would be ready to reduce his livelihood. And why is it taught “ He who spares the rod hates his son”?! In order to teach you, that anyone who refrains from disciplining his son in the end causes him to fall into evil ways and will hate him. This is what we have found with Yishmael, who behaved wickedly on Avraham his father but did not rebuke him, with the result that he fell into evil ways and he hated him and he left from his house with nothing. What did Yishmael do when he was fifteen years old? He started to bring idols from the market and he would play with them and worship them as he had seen others do, immediately (Bereishit 21, 9) “And Sarah saw the son of the Egyptian Hagar that she had given birth for Avraham was fooling around etc…” And there is no fooling except for idol worship, like that it says (Shemot 32,6): And they rose up to fool around. Immediately (Bereishit 21,10): And she said to Avraham , Send out this maid-servant and her son, perhaps my son will learn from him. Immediately, (Bereishit 21,11) And this thing was very bad in the eyes of Avraham etc...on account of his son because he had become evil. (Bereshit 21,12) And G-d said to Avraham, do not let it be evil in your eyes etc... From here you can learn, that Avraham was secondary to Sarah in prophecy, following on, (Bereishit 21,14): And Avraham got up in the morning and he took bread and a bottle of water, to teach you, that he hated Yishmael because of his evil ways, and sent him and his mother Hagar empty-handed and expelled them from his house because of this. Do you really think that Avraham, of whom it is written (Bereishit 13,2): And Avraham was very rich in cattle etc... that he would send his wife and his son from his house empty-handed, without clothes or means of a livelihood?! Rather, this is to teach you, since he turned evil, he stopped thinking about him. What was his end? After he had been expelled, he sat at the cross-roads and was a bandit, as it says (Bereishit 16,12): And he was a wild man. And similar to this (Bereishit 25,28): And Yitzchak loved Esav, therefore he turned to evil ways, because he was not rebuked, like we were taught: Five transgressions the evil Esav transgressed on that day: He seduced an engaged lady, and killed a man, denied resurrection, and rejected the fundamentals of religion and spurned his birthright, that he desired the death of his father, and sought to kill his brother, as it says (Bereishit 27,41):May the days of mourning for my father be brought close etc.. And he forced Ya'acov to flee from his father. And he even went with Yishmael, to learn from his evil ways and to add to his wives, as it says (Bereshit 28,9): And Esav went to Yishmael. Similarly with David, that he did not rebuke or chastise his son Avshalom, he turned to evil ways and sought to kill his father, and he lay with concubines, and becoming the cause if his wandering, bare-footed and crying, and many thousands and myriads of Israelites were slaughtered, and he caused much suffering upon them which did not end. As it is written (Psalms 3,1): A song of David, when he fled from Avshalom his son, just as it was written after (Psalms 3,2) How great in number have my enemies become etc. And cultural evil is harsher on one's home than the war of Gog and Magog, for regarding the war of Gog and Magog it says: (Tehilim 2:1) "Why do the nations stir?" and later it is written: (Tehilim 3:2) "God, how many my enemies are!" And similarly David behaved with Adoniyah, he did not beat him in punishment, and did not get angry at him, and therefore he left to cultural evil, as is written: (Kings 1 1:6) "And his father never scolded him...and she bore him after Avshalom." Wasn't Avshalom the son of Maacha, while Adoniyahu was the son of Chagit? What does it mean, "she bore him after Avshalom"? Instead- since he [Avshalom] left to cultural evil, and his father never beat him, and it is written about Adoniyahu "his father never scolded him," he too left to cultural evil, and therefore it is written: "and she bore him after Avshalom." (Proverbs 13:24) "But he who loves him disciplines him in his youth" refers to the Holy Blessed One, who loves Israel, as it is written (Malachi 1:2) "I have loved you, says God," who increases their suffering. One can find three good gifts that the Holy Blessed One gave to Israel, and they were each given only by means of suffering: the Torah, the Land of Israel, and life in the World to Come. The Torah, as it is written: (Psalms 94:12) "How lucky is the man who You discipline, God, and to whom You teach Your Torah." The Land of Israel, as it is written: (Deuteronomy 8:5) "Bear in mind that the LORD your God disciplines you just as a man disciplines his son." What is written next? (Deuteronomy 8:7) "For the LORD your God is bringing you into a good land..." The World to Come, as it is written: (Proverbs 6:23) "For the commandment is a lamp, the teaching is a light, and the way to life is the rebuke that disciplines." And when anyone rebukes his son, the son increases his love for his father, and he honors him, as it is said: (Proverbs 29:17) "Discipline your son and he will give you peace." And it says: (Proverbs 19:18) "Discipline your son while there is still hope." And he increases his love for him, as it says: "But he who loves him disciplines him early," meaning because he disciplines him early, therefore he loves him. You find that Abraham disciplined Isaac his son and taught him Torah and guided him in his ways, as is written about Avraham: (Genesis 26:5) "In return for Avraham's obedience to my voice" and it is written: (Genesis 25:19) "These are the descendants of Isaac, son of Abraham," which teaches you that he was similar to his father in all ways- in beauty, in wisdom, in wealth, and in good deeds. You should know that he [Isaac] was thirty-seven years old when his he was bound by his father, and it is written: (Genesis 24:1) "And Abraham was old, advanced in age" and yet he bound him and positioned him like a lamb, and he did not refuse. Therefore: (Genesis 25:5) "Abraham gave all that he had to Isaac," Which is to say, "he who loves him disciplines him early." In the same manner, Isaac would discipline Jacob early, for Isaac taught him Torah and disciplined him in his house of study, as it says: (Genesis 25:27) "but Jacob was a mild man who stayed home." And he learned what his father taught him, and then he separated from his father and hid in the house of Ever to study Torah. Therefore he merited blessing and inherited the land, as it says: (Genesis 27:1) "Jacob lived in the land of his father's residence, in the land of Canaan." And even our Patriarch Jacob disciplined his sons, and beat them and taught them his ways, so that none of them would be disposable, as it is written: (Exodus 1:1) "These are the names of the sons of Israel who arrived to Egypt..." The verse equates them all to Jacob, for they were all righteous as he had been. This resolves: "But he who loves him disciplines him early."

David behaved similarly toward Adonijah. Because he did not reproach him or punish him he went astray, as it is written: And his father had not grieved him all his life in saying: “Why hast thou done so?” … and he was born after Absalom (I Kings 1:6). Was not Absalom actually the son of Micah, and Adonijah the son of Haggith? Why, then, does it say: And he was born after Absalom?²The verse gives the impression that they were born of the same mother. To teach us that just as Absalom went astray because his father failed to chastise him, so did Adonijah, concerning whom it is written: And his father had not grieved him all his life (I Kings 1:2) by asking: “Why have you done such-and-such?” He went astray for the same reason. Hence Scripture states: He that spareth his rod hateth his son.

David behaved similarly toward Adonijah. Because he did not reproach him or punish him he went astray, as it is written: And his father had not grieved him all his life in saying: “Why hast thou done so?” … and he was born after Absalom (I Kings 1:6). Was not Absalom actually the son of Micah, and Adonijah the son of Haggith? Why, then, does it say: And he was born after Absalom?²The verse gives the impression that they were born of the same mother. To teach us that just as Absalom went astray because his father failed to chastise him, so did Adonijah, concerning whom it is written: And his father had not grieved him all his life (I Kings 1:2) by asking: “Why have you done such-and-such?” He went astray for the same reason. Hence Scripture states: He that spareth his rod hateth his son.

(Ib.) Then said Memuchan. We are taugh in a Baraitha: Memuchan was Haman. Why was he called Memuchan? Because he was destined for the troubles that befell him afterwards. R. Abba b. Cahana said: "From this we see that usually an ignorant man comes forward first." That every man should bear rule in his own house. Said Raba: "But for the first letters, no remnant of Israel would have been left; because the men laughed at such a decree, saying, 'Is it not a matter of course? Even a weaver in his house must be the ruler,' and therefore they did not pay much attention to the second decree in the letters." And let the king appoint officers. Raba said: "What is the meaning of the passage (Prov. 13, 16) Every prudent man acteth with knowledge, but a fool spreadeth abroad his folloy; i.e., every prudent man acteth with knowledge, refers to David, of whom it is written (I Kings 1, 2) Wherefore his servants said unto him. Let them seek out for my lord the king a young virgin. Everyone who had a daughter, brought her himself to the king. But a fool spreadeth abroad his folly. This refers to Ahasuerus, who had to appoint officers, for whosoever had a beautiful daughter hid her from him."

One of the Rabbis who was sitting before R. Samuel b. Nachmeni said: "Job never existed; and is mentioned in the Scripture only as a parable." Whereupon R. Samuel b. Nachmeni said to him: "According to your theory then what is the meaning of the passage (Job. 1, 1) There was a man in the land of Utz whose name was Job." But even according to your theory is not the following passage (Sam. 12, 3) But the poor man had nothing, etc., a mere parable? The same may be said concerning Job." "If it were so," responded R. Samuel b. Nachmeni, "why, then, his name and the name of the country he came from?" R. Jochanan and R. Elazar both said that Job was from among the Babylonian exiles; and his college was in Tiberias. The following objection was raised: "Job's age was from the time when Israel came to Egypt until they left it." Read, as many years as the Israelites were in Egypt. (Ib. b)) Another objection was raised. "There were seven prophets who have prophesied to the nations, viz: Balaam and his father. Job, Eliphaz the Temanite, Bildad the Shuchite, Zophar the Na'amathite, and Elihu ben Barahel the Buzite." [Hence he was not from among the Babylonian exiles]. And even according to your theory, was then Elihu [just mentioned] not a Jew? Behold, it is written of the family of Ram, [which refers to Abraham. Surely you will say that the Baraitha means their prophecies were for the nations? The same can be said concerning Job. But have then the Jewish prophets not prophesied, for all nations? The Jewish prophets prophesied to Israel mainly, and to the nations also, but the above-mentioned seven have prophesied exclusively for other nations. Another objection was raised. A pious man was among the nations, and Job was his name; and he came to this world only for the purpose of receiving his reward. The Holy One, praised be He! however, brought chastisements upon him, and he began to blaspheme; the Holy One, praised be He! then doubled his reward in this world, so that he should have no share in the world to come. Hence Job was not a Jew? On this point the Tannaim of the following Baraitha differ. R. Elazar said: "Job lived in the time of the Judges as it is said (Job. 27, 12) … deal in such vanities. Which generation was one entirely of vanities? It was the generation of the Judges." R. Joshua b. Karcha said: "Job lived in the time of Ahasuerus; as it is said (Job 42, 15) And there were not found such handsome women as the daughters of Job, etc. And in which generation were handsome women searched for? This was in the generation of Ahasuerus." But perhaps it was in the time in David, of which the passage says (I Kings 1, 3) So they sought for a fair maiden throughout all the territory of Israel. There they searched only among the daughters of Israel, but in the time of Ahasuerus [it is written] in all the land. R. Nathan said: "Job was in the time of the Queen of Sheba, as it is said (Job 1, 15) When the Sabeans made an incursion." The sages, however, say: "Job lived in the time of the Chaldeans, as it is said (Ib., ib. 17) The Chaldeans posted themselves," etc. Still others say: "Job lived in the time of Jacob and married Dinah, the latter's daughter." And all the sages just mentioned, except the last, hold that Job was an Israelite. How can you assume that they hold Job was a non-Jew, for how is it possible that the Shechina should rest on a non-Jew after the death of Moses? Behold! the master said: "Moses asked that the Shechina might not dwell with nonJews, and his request was granted, as it is said (Ex. 33, 6) So shall we be distinguished I and Thy people."

“Vanity of vanities, said Kohelet; vanity of vanities, everything is vanity” (Ecclesiastes 1:2).
“Vanity of vanities [havel havalim]” – Rabbi Huna said in the name of Rabbi Aḥa: David made a statement and did not explain it, but his son Solomon explained it. Solomon made a statement and did not explain it, but his father David explained it. David said: “Man is like hevel” (Psalms 144:4); to what hevel [is man compared]? If it is to the hevel [heat] of an oven, it has significance. If it is to the hevel of a stove, it has significance. His son Solomon came and explained: “Vanity of vanities [havel havalim], said Kohelet.” Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani taught it in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa: It is comparable to a person who places seven pots on the fire one atop the other, and the heat of the upper one is insignificant.⁹This comparison is based on the fact that the term vanity [hevel] appears five times in Ecclesiastes 1:2, and twice it appears in the plural, for a total of seven mentions of the term hevel.
Solomon said: “For who knows what is good for man in his life, [all the days of his vain life,] that he spends like a shadow” (Ecclesiastes 6:12). What shadow? If it is like the shadow of a wall, it has substance. If it is like the shadow of a palm tree, it has substance. David came and explained: “His days are like a passing shadow” (Psalms 144:4). Rabbi Huna [said] in the name of Rav Aḥa: Like that bird that passes and its shadow passes with it. Shmuel said: Like the shadow of bees that have no substance at all.
Rabbi Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak taught it in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar: The seven vanities [havalim] that Kohelet mentioned correspond to the seven worlds that a person sees. A one-year-old is like a king who is on a canopied litter and everyone is hugging and kissing him. A two- or three-year-old is like a pig that extends its hands into the sewers. A ten-year-old jumps like a goat. A twenty-year-old whinnies like a horse, beautifies himself and seeks a wife. When he marries a wife he is like a donkey. When he begets children, he is as audacious as a dog to bring [home] bread and food. When he grows old, he is like a monkey. That is stated regarding the common people; however, regarding Torah personalities, it is written: “King David was old” – even though he was old, he was a king.
Rabbi Yehuda ben Rabbi Simon said: The seven vanities that Kohelet mentioned correspond to the seven days of Creation. On the first, “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth” (Genesis 1:1), and it is written: “For the heavens will vanish like smoke” (Isaiah 51:6). On the second: “Let there be a firmament” (Genesis 1:6), and it is written: “The heavens will be furled like a scroll” (Isaiah 34:4). On the third: “Let the waters be gathered” (Genesis 1:9), and it is written: “The Lord will destroy the tongue of the sea of Egypt” (Isaiah 11:15). On the fourth: “Let there be lights” (Genesis 1:14), and it is written: “The moon will be disgraced” (Isaiah 24:23). On the fifth: “Let the waters swarm [with swarms of living creatures, and let fowl fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven]” (Genesis 1:20), and it is written: “I will destroy the birds of the heavens” (Zephaniah 1:3). On the sixth: “Let us make man” (Genesis 1:26), and it is written: “I will destroy man and animal” (Zephaniah 1:3). Regarding Shabbat, what do you have to say? “One who profanes it will be put to death” (Exodus 31:14). That is stated regarding one who does so intentionally; but [one who profanes it] unwittingly, he will bring an offering and gain atonement. When Adam saw the praise of Shabbat, that one who brings an offering gains atonement, he began singing in its regard to the Holy One blessed be He, praise and psalm. That is what is written: “A psalm, a song for the day of Shabbat” (Psalms 92:1). Rabbi Levi said: This [psalm] was stated by Adam.

Similarly, concerning King David it is written: Now King David was old (I Kings 1:1). When he drew near to death, it is written about him: Now the days of David drew near that he should die (ibid. 2:1).

(I Kings 1, 5) And Adoniah the son of Chaggith exalted himself, saying, I shall te king. R. Juda said in the name of Rab: "Infer from this that he attempted to fasten [the crown on his head] but it would not fit him." (Ib) And he procured himself a chariot and horsemen, and fifty men who ran before him. What is there exceptional in this for a prince? R. Juda said in the name of Rab: "The sheen of all of them was taken out [so that it should be easy for them to run], and also the flesh of the soles of their feet was cut off."

“Anger is better than laughter, as with a cross countenance the heart will be bettered” (Ecclesiastes 7:3).
“Anger is better than laughter.” Solomon said: Had [my] father been a little angry at Adoniya, it would have been better for him than the laughter with which the attribute of justice mocked him. Why? It is because “with a cross countenance the heart will be bettered.” Had he shown him a cross countenance, he would have caused him to better his ways. Instead, “his father had never aggrieved him” (I Kings 1:6).³⁸Ultimately, this lead to Adoniya’s attempt to sieze power, and his eventual death. See I Kings chapters 1–2. Likewise regarding Amnon, had David his father been a little angry with him, it would have been better for him than the laughter which which the attribute of justice mocked him. Why? It is because “with a cross countenance the heart will be bettered.” Instead, “Amnon alone is dead” (II Samuel 13:32).
Another matter, “anger is better than laughter” – had the Holy One blessed be He been angry at the generation of the Flood, it would have been better than the laughter with which the attribute of justice mocked them, as it is stated: “Their offspring are established before them” (Job 21:8).³⁹Had the Holy One blessed be He shown them anger, they would have improved their ways, and died in peace with their offspring surrounding them. Another matter, “anger is better than laughter” – had the Holy One blessed be He been angry at the Sodomites, it would have been better than the laughter with which the attribute of justice mocked them, as it is stated: “Their houses are safe, without fear” (Job 21:9).⁴⁰That would have been their plight.

(Fol. 44) R. Huna pointed out the following contradictions: It is written (I Chr. 14, 12) And they left their Gods there; and David gave commandments, and they were burnt with fire. And again there is a verse (II Sam. 5, 21) And David and his man took them away [and did not burn them?]. This is not difficult to explain: The former speaks prior to the arrival of Ithai, the Gethite; and the latter speaks of a time after the arrival of Ithai, the Gethite, as it is written in connection with a similar thing (II Sam. 12, 30) And he took the Crown of Malkam from off his head; and the weight thereof was a talent of gold, and in it were precious stones, and it was set on David's head. Now, how could he make use of the crown of an idol? Whereupon R. Nachman said: "It was Ithai, the Gethite, who had first provoked its idolatrous value." But see, how could David's head carry a crown of a talent? R. Juda in the name of Rab explains this figuratively to mean: The crown was worthy of adorning the head of David. However, R. Jose b. Chanina said: "The crown was kept in the air by the force of a magnet] and David was sitting beneath it, so that it looked as if he had it on]." But R. Elazar said: "David actually had the crown on his head, but it was not of a talent weight, but it consisted only of precious stones, which value amounted to that of a talent in gold." (Ps. 119, 56) This I have had, that I have kept Thy precepts. What does he mean by the word this? David said thus: "As a reward for observing Thy precepts, I have had this testimony (the crown)." What testimonial? Said R. Joshua b. Levi: "He placed it on the spot where the Tephilin are carried and it fitted him [thus proving his title to the crown]. But where did he then carry the Tephilin? Said R. Samuel b. Isaac: "There is sufficient space on the head to carry two Tephilin [hence he could carry both]." (II Kings 11, 12) And he brought forth the King's son, and put the crown upon him, and gave him the testimony. The crown is the princely diadem [but what is the meaning of] the testimony? Said R. Juda in the name of Rab: "This crown was a testimony in itself to the house of David; for it fitted only him to whom the kingdom belonged, but not one who was not fit to be king." (I Kings 1, 5) And adonyah, the son of Chaggith, exalted himself, saying, I shall be king. Said R. Juda in the name of Rab: "Adonyah imagined that the crown would fit him, but this was not the case." And he procured himself a chariot and horsemen and fifty men who ran before him. What kind of distinctive marks had the mentioned forerunners? We are taught in a Baraitha that their spleens were cut out, and the flesh was removed from their footsoles in order that they might run with greater speed.

And also in the case of David, it is written of him (in I Kings 1:1): NOW KING DAVID WAS OLD. Then, when he was about to die, what is written (in I Kings 2:1)? THEN, WHEN THE DAYS FOR DAVID TO DIE DREW NEAR. "King David" is not written here but THEN, WHEN THE DAYS FOR DAVID < TO DIE > DREW NEAR.⁸I.e., David lost the royal title shortly before his death. Deut. R. 9:3. And also in the case of Jacob, when he was at the point of death, he began humiliating himself with Joseph and said (in Gen. 47:29): PLEASE, IF I HAVE FOUND FAVOR IN YOUR EYES. When? When he was approaching death (according to the beginning of the verse): THEN, WHEN THE DAYS FOR ISRAEL TO DIE DREW NEAR.

(Fol. 13b) Our Rabbis were taught: If it happened that he, his teacher and his father were in captivity [and he was able to redeem only one] he himself has the preference over the teacher, and his teacher has the preference over his father. His mother, however, has the preference over all. A sage has the preference over a king of Israel, for if a sage dies, we have no equal to him, but if a king dies all Israel is fit for the throne. A king has the preference over a High-priest, as it is said (I Kings 1, 33) Take with you the servants of your lord. A High-priest has the preference over a prophet, as it is said (Ib.) And let Zadok the priest with Nathan the prophet, hence the priest precedes the prophet, and there is another passage (Zech. 3, 8) Hear now, O Joshua the High-priest, thou and thy fellows, etc. One might say that they were ignorants therefore the priest precedes them. The verse therefore says (Ib.) For they are men that are a sign (Mofeth). The word Mofeth is applied to prophecy, as it is said (Deut. 13, 2) And he gives thee a sign (Mofeth) or a wonder.

(Fol. 13b) Our Rabbis were taught: If it happened that he, his teacher and his father were in captivity [and he was able to redeem only one] he himself has the preference over the teacher, and his teacher has the preference over his father. His mother, however, has the preference over all. A sage has the preference over a king of Israel, for if a sage dies, we have no equal to him, but if a king dies all Israel is fit for the throne. A king has the preference over a High-priest, as it is said (I Kings 1, 33) Take with you the servants of your lord. A High-priest has the preference over a prophet, as it is said (Ib.) And let Zadok the priest with Nathan the prophet, hence the priest precedes the prophet, and there is another passage (Zech. 3, 8) Hear now, O Joshua the High-priest, thou and thy fellows, etc. One might say that they were ignorants therefore the priest precedes them. The verse therefore says (Ib.) For they are men that are a sign (Mofeth). The word Mofeth is applied to prophecy, as it is said (Deut. 13, 2) And he gives thee a sign (Mofeth) or a wonder.

[(Gen. 24:1:) NOW ABRAHAM WAS OLD.] Come and see: From Adam even to Abraham there are twenty generation, but there is no < mention of > old age written about < any of > them except about him.¹⁷BM 87a; Sanh. 107b; Gen. R. 59:6; 65:9; below, 6:7; PRE 52. They sired children and grandchildren, but one did not recognize which was the son and which was the father. Also the children were striking the fathers without knowing it, as stated (in Ps. 78:33): SO HE ENDED THEIR DAYS IN FUTILITY AND THEIR YEARS IN TERROR, because they were all alike until Abraham came along. Then the Holy One gave him this < gray > crown which is an ornament for when one becomes old. And when did it come over him? When he practiced righteousness, since it is stated (in Prov. 16:31): GRAY HAIR IS A CROWN OF GLORY. And how do you find it? (Ibid., cont.:) IT IS FOUND BY WAY OF RIGHTEOUSNESS. To whom does this < verse > refer? To Abraham, concerning whom it is written (in Gen. 18:19): FOR I HAVE CHOSEN HIM SO THAT HE MAY CHARGE < HIS CHILDREN AND HIS HOUSEHOLD AFTER HIM TO KEEP THE WAY OF THE LORD, TO PRACTICE RIGHTEOUSNESS AND JUSTICE >…. The Holy One said to him: By your life, you are worthy of an old age. It is therefore stated (in Gen. 24:1): NOW ABRAHAM WAS OLD. Now David also received this crown, as stated (in I Kings 1:1): NOW KING DAVID WAS OLD. Why? Because he had acted according to Abraham's standard, as stated (in II Sam. 8:15): AND DAVID PRACTICED JUSTICE AND RIGHTEOUSNESS TOWARD ALL HIS PEOPLE. It is therefore stated (in Prov. 16:31): GRAY HAIR IS A CROWN OF GLORY.

The law: If a Jewish person who passes before the ark [to lead the prayer], what is the law, should it be permitted for him to answer "Amen" after the [blessings of] the Kohanim? Such taught the sages: One who passes before the ark, he should not answer "Amen" after the Kohanim because of distraction. Our rabbis taught us: If he can answer without being distracted, he may answer. Why? Because nothing is greater before the Holy One, blessed be He, more than the "Amen" that the Jews answer. Rabbi Yehudah bar Simon: This "Amen" has three intentions. Oath, acceptance, faithfulness. How do we know "oath"? As its says, (Numbers 5:19-22) "The Kohen should put her under oath... and the woman is to say, Amen Amen."

(Fol. 90b) We are taught in a Mishna that there was a round place for collecting the ashes in the middle of the altar, and there were at times in it nearly as much as three hundred cors of ashes. "This must be an exaggeration," remarked Raba. R. Ami said: "The Pentateuch, the Prophets and the sages are wont to speak in a hyperbolical language. That the sages speak in a hyperbolical language, as quoted above; that the Pentateuch speaks in a hyperbolical language, we find in the following verses (Deut. 1, 28) Cities great and walled up to heaven; that the Prophets speak in a hyperbolical language, we find in the following verse (I Kings 1, 40) So that the earth rent with the sound of them." R. Isaac said: "In three places did the Rabbis use a hyperbolical language. They are: In connection with the ash-pile [in the altar] in connection with the vine, and in connection with the veil [of the Temple]. As to the ash-pile it was stated above; as to the vine, we find in the following Mishna: There was a golden vine at the entrance of the Temple, trailing on crystals, on which people, who donated fruit or grape clusters, would suspend on it. R. Elazar b. Zadok said: "It happened once that three hundred priests were summoned to clear [the vine of such offerings]." The veil refers to the following Mishna: Rabban Simon b. Gamaliel says in the name of R. Simon, the High-priest's substitute: "The thickness of the veil [of the Temple] was a hand-breadth. It was woven of seventy-two cords, each cord consisting of twenty-four strands. Its length was forty cubits, by twenty in width. It was made by eighty-two myriads of damsels, and two such veils were made every year. It took three hundred priests to immerse and cleanse it [if it becomes unclean]." (Fol. 91) R. Joshua b. Levi said: "The passage states (Gen. 32, 26) And he wrestled with him. This means that they did like a man wrestles with his friend, when his hand reaches the right thigh of his friend." R. Samuel b. Nachmeni said: "The Angel appeared to him in the guise of a heathen, as the master said [elsewhere] that of an Israelite is joined by a heathen on the road, the latter should join at the right side of the Israelite." R. Samuel b. Acha said before R. Papa, in the name of Raba b. Ulla that the Angel appeared to Jacob in the guise of a scholar, as the master said [elsewhere] whoever walks at the right side of his teacher is to be considered an ignorant [hence he walked at the left of Jacob and thus reached Jacob's right thigh]. The Rabbis, however, maintain that he appeared at the back of Jacob and hit him at both thighs. But how will the Rabbis explain the passage, as he wrestled with him [which means that they had a frontal encounter]? This they explain in the way of the other interpretation of R. Joshua b. Levi, who said: "Infer from the above passage that the dust [caused by their wrestling] went upward until it reached the Divine throne; for it is written here (be'he'abko) as he wrestled with him, and again there is a passage (Nahum 1, 3) And the clouds are the dust (Abak) of His feet.

(Fol. 109 b) But is not the name of the mother's side also mentioned [in the record]? Behold! it is written (Jud. 17, 7) And there was a young man out of Bethlehem-Judah of the family of Judah, but he was a Levite, and sojourned there. Now, does not this passage contradict itself? It says of the family of Judah, from which it is to be inferred that they came from the tribe of Juda; and then it says he is a Levite, which means that he was of the tribe of Levi. We must conclude that his father was from Levi and his mother from Juda, and nevertheless it is said of the family of Juda, Raba b. Chanan said: "The passage reads, and he is Levi, which does not mean that he was a Levite, but that his name was Levi." If so, how is the following to be understood (Ib. 17) I have obtained a Levite for a priest. There it is understood that he happened to get a man by the name of Levi? Was not his name Jonathan, as it is written (Ib. 18, 30) And Jonathan the son of Gershom… . were priests, etc. And according to your theory, was he then the son of Menashe? Behold, he was the son of Moses, as it is written (I Chron. 23, 15) The sons of Moses were Gershom and Eliczer. But you will have to explain this that it is written Menashe, because he acted (idolatrous) like Menashe, therefore he is called Menashe. In this instance you could explain likewise that the phrase of Juda is employed because Menashe came from Juda. R. Jochanan, in the name of R. Simon b. Jochai, said: "From this it is to be inferred that every corruption is fastened to the corrupt (who originally started it)." You may infer the same from the following (I Kings 1, 6) And his mother had borne him after Abshalom the son of Maacha? We must say that because he acted like Abshalom, who also rebelled against the kingdom, the verse conjoined him with Abshalom.

“Two are better than one; because they have a good reward for their toil. For if they fall, the one will lift the other; but if one who is alone falls, there is no other to lift him.… And if one attacks, two will stand against him, and the threefold thread will not be quickly severed” (Ecclesiastes 4:9–12).
“Two are better than one” – two who labored in Torah are better than one, when this one engages alone and that one alone. “For if they fall, the one will lift the other” – if one of them forgot a halakha, the other will restore the halakha. “And the threefold thread will not be quickly severed” – this is the rabbi who corrects their error.
Another matter: “Two are better than one” – two, who conduct business with merchandise, “are better than one,” this one alone and that one alone. “For if they fall” – for if one falls and endangers himself, the other will lift him. “And the threefold thread” – when they are three.²⁵In that case, it is even better. Rabbi Meir, when he would see one going out on the highway, he would shout to him: ‘Go, peace be upon you, dead man’; two, he would shout to them: ‘Peace be with you, disputants’; three, he would shout to them: ‘Peace be with you, peaceful ones.’
Rabbi Yoḥanan said: “Two are better” – man and his wife; “than one” – this one alone and that one alone. “And the threefold thread” – this is the Holy One blessed be He, who remembers them and provides them with children. Rabbi Yoḥanan said another matter in its regard: “Two are better” – this is Amram and Yokheved, who “have a good reward for their toil” – this is Moses, who is called good, as it is stated: “She saw him that he was good [tov]” (Exodus 2:2), as his name is Toviya because he was born circumcised.
Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Neḥemya, and the Rabbis: Rabbi Yehuda says: This is David and Batsheva. “And the threefold thread,” this is Natan the prophet, who said to Batsheva: “I will come after you and I will complete your words” (I Kings 1:14). When they came to David, he agreed with them, and said: “Mount Solomon my son on the mule that is mine…” (I Kings 1:33). Rabbi Neḥemya said: “Two are better” – this is Yehoyada and Yehosheva; “than one” – this one alone and that one alone. “And the threefold thread” – this is the Sanhedrin that agreed with them;²⁶They agreed to unseat Atalya and crown Yoash as king. that is what is written: “They took out the king’s son and placed the crown upon him…” (II Chronicles 23:11). The Rabbis say: “Two are better” – this is Mordekhai and Esther; “than one” – this one alone and that one alone. “And the threefold thread” – this is Aḥashverosh, who agreed with them, and decreed, and said: “You, write regarding the Jews…” (Esther 8:8).
Rabbi Levi bar Ḥama said in the name of Rabbi Ḥanina: “Two,” whom Mordekhai and Esther hanged,²⁷Bigtan and Teresh. “are better than one,” whom Joseph hanged,²⁸The baker, whose dream Joseph interpreted to mean that Pharaoh would hang him. See Genesis, chap. 40. as these, miracles were performed through them on behalf of all of Israel, and this one, no miracle was performed through him. “And the threefold thread” – this is the Holy One blessed be He above them all, who toppled an enemy, as it is written: “They hanged Haman on the tree that he had prepared for Mordekhai…” (Esther 7:10).
Rabbi Yitzḥak said: A portion that was stated by means of two is better than a portion that was stated by means of one. By means of two, as it is stated: “The Lord said to Moses and Aaron in the land of Egypt, saying: This month is for you…” (Exodus 12:1–2), than a portion said to an individual, [such as that which] is stated: “The Lord said to Moses saying” (e.g., Exodus 13:1). “And the threefold thread” – “The Lord said to Moses and to Aaron to say to them” (Leviticus 11:1) – to his sons, to Elazar and Itamar. Rabbi Ḥiyya taught: “To say to them” – to Elazar and Itamar, and for them to say to all Israel.
Another matter: “Two are better” – this is Moses and Aaron; “than one” – this one alone and that one alone. You find that when Moses came and blessed Israel, the Divine Presence did not rest [on Israel] through him, but when both of them came and blessed Israel, immediately the Divine Presence rested through them, as it is written: “Moses and Aaron came to the Tent of Meeting and they emerged and blessed the people” (Leviticus 9:23), they blessed Israel, and then, “the glory of the Lord appeared,” (Leviticus 9:23), the Divine Presence rested through them.
Rabbi Ze’eira said: There are various families: A family of teachers produces teachers; Torah scholars produce Torah scholars; the wealthy produce wealthy. They objected: But there are descendants of a certain family that achieved wealth and it ceased. He said to them: Is it written that it will never be severed? “It will not be quickly severed,” is written. If one poses difficulties for us,²⁹If he does not contribute to charitable causes supporting Torah study and the needy. he will be parted from his wealth. This is what bar Kappara said: If not him, his son will come to it, and if not his son, his grandson will come to it.³⁰Sooner or later, if one of his descendants gives charity, he will be wealthy, and if he fails to do so, he will lose the wealth.

“One who transports stones will be saddened by them; and one who splits wood will benefit from it” (Ecclesiastes 10:9).
“One who transports stones will be saddened by them” – one who transports himself from his studies will ultimately be sorry. He will seek a matter but will not find it.⁴⁸He will seek to recall some detail of his Torah study but will not remember it.
“And one who splits wood will benefit [yisakhen] from it.” As long as he toils in it, he will benefit from it, just as you say: “She will be an attendant [sokhenet] for him” (I Kings 1:2).
Another matter: “One who transports stones” from place to place “will be saddened by them”; “and one who splits wood will benefit from it.”⁴⁹Previously the midrash interpreted the phrase “one who transports stones” to refer to one who removes himself from Torah study, as stones are an allusion to the tablets given at Sinai. Now the midrash interprets the verse literally as referring to one who moves stones from place to place. Unscrupulous individuals might remove stones from their fields to the public domain, but ultimately it is they who will stumble (Midrash HaMevo’ar). Rabbi Meyashya said: In reward for the two logs that Abraham chopped on Mount Moriah, he was privileged to have the sea split for his descendants into twelve strips.

Moshe immediately arose and went to Yehoshua's home. Yehoshua was frightened and said, "Moshe, my rabbi, come next to me." They left to go, and Moshe walked on Yehoshua's left. They entered the Tent of Meeting, and the pillar of cloud descended and stood in between them.

Raba said to Rabba b. Mari: "It is written (I Kings 1, 47) May God make the name of Solomon more famous than thy name, and make his throne greater than thy throne." Is this the usual way of speaking to a king? And he answered: "It is not to be taken literally; they meant to say similar to thy name, for if you would not say so, how is to be understood (Jul. 5. 24) Blessed above women shall Joel be, the wife of Heber the Kenite, above women in the tent shall she be blessed? Who is meant by women in the tent, if not Sarah, Rebeka, Rachel, and Leah? Now, is this prayer to mean that Joel shall be more blessed than they? But it means, similar to them; so also here it means similar to them." This, however, disagrees with the opinion of R. Jose b. Choni; for R. Jose b. Choni said that of every one a man is jealous except of his own son and disciple. Of his son, as we see from the above-cited verse concerning Solomon. And of his disciple, if you wish you may infer it from (II Kings 2, 9) And Elisha said, Let there be, I pray thee, a double portion of thy spirit upon me, and if you wish you may infer it from (Num. 27, 23) And he laid his hands (both) upon him, though he was commanded (Ib. ib. 18) Thou shalt lay thy hand (one) upon him.

(Num. 1, 2) So that they rose up before Moses, with certain men of the children of Israel in number two hundred and fifty, — i.e., the distinguished of the congregation. Called to the assembly; i.e., who were able through their wisdom to intercalate months and establish leap years. Men of renown; i.e., whose name was renowned through all the world. And Moses heard it, and fell upon his face. What had he heard? Samuel b. Nachmeni said in the name of R. Jonathan: "That they suspect him of adultery, as it is said (Ps. 106, 16) Moreover, they envied Hoses." (Num. 16) And Moses went to Dathan and Abiram. Resh Lakish said: "Infer from this that one must do all that he can not to strengthen a quarrel (since he himself who was a king went to Dathan and Abiram); for Rab said: 'He who strengthens a quarrel transgresses a negative commandment'." (Ib. 17, 5) That he become not as Korah and as his company. R. Ashi said: "Such is worthy to be punished with leprosy; for here (Ib.) it is written, by the hand of Moses, and it is written there (Ex. 4, 6) And he put his hand into his bosom, etc." R. Jose said: "He who fights against the kingdom of David deserves to be bitten by a snake, for it is written here (I Kings, 1, 9) … by the stone Zoheleth, and it is written there (Deut. 32, 24) With the poison of Zochle aphar (serpents)."

Another interpretation (of Gen. 19:24): AND THE LORD RAINED DOWN UPON SODOM < AND UPON GOMORRAH BRIMSTONE AND FIRE FROM THE LORD OUT OF THE HEAVENS >. What is the meaning of FROM THE LORD? It says (in Exod. 16:4): BEHOLD, I WILL RAIN DOWN BREAD FROM THE HEAVENS FOR YOU, while here (in Gen. 19:24) it says: AND THE LORD RAINED DOWN UPON SODOM < AND UPON GOMORRAH BRIMSTONE AND FIRE FROM THE LORD >. R. Berekhyah said: To what is the matter comparable?⁷⁰Cf. Gen. R. 51:2; Tanh. (Buber), Exod. 4:20. To a king who was standing at a baker's oven. < When > his friend came in to him, he took out a piece of hot bread < and > gave it to him. < When > his enemy came in to him, he took up burning coals < and > gave them to him. So < it is with > the Holy One. When Israel came unto the desert, he brought down bread from the heavens for them, as stated (in Exod. 16:4): BEHOLD, I WILL RAIN DOWN BREAD FROM THE HEAVENS FOR YOU. But when the Sodomites came to the point of transgressions, he brought down fire from the heavens for them, as stated (in Gen. 19:24): AND THE LORD RAINED DOWN UPON SODOM < AND UPON GOMORRAH BRIMSTONE AND FIRE FROM THE LORD OUT OF THE HEAVENS >. What is the meaning of AND THE LORD? That he sat over them with the authority of a court⁷¹Gk.: synedrion. of seventy-one,⁷²The AND implies that it was THE LORD plus a Great Sanhedrin with seventy-one members, the proper court for trying an apostate town. See Sanh. 1:5. found them guilty, and brought down fire upon them. So they went forth to < an execution by > burning, as stated (in Gen. 19:24): < FIRE > FROM THE LORD. In a similar way you say on the matter < at hand >: AND THE LORD… FROM THE LORD.⁷³The first LORD has to do with the court trial, and the second concerns the punishment. If someone comes to ask you < about > what is written in this verse: AND THE LORD … FROM THE LORD, say to him: There are similar cases < of redundancy > in < other > verses. (I Kings 1:33:) AND {HE} [THE KING] SAID {UNTO HIS SERVANTS} [TO THEM]: TAKE WITH YOU THE SLAVES OF YOUR LORD. It was only necessary to say: "My servants." And where < is an example found > in the Torah? (In Gen. 4:23:) AND LAMECH SAID TO HIS WIVES: ADAH AND ZILLAH, HEAR MY VOICE; O WIVES OF LAMECH. It was only necessary to say: "My wives." So much for the Torah, but where < is an example found > in the Writings? Where it is stated (in Esth. 8:8): FOR A WRITING WHICH IS WRITTEN IN THE KING'S NAME AND SEALED WITH THE KING'S SEAL. It was only necessary to say: "With my seal." So also here (in Gen. 19:24): AND THE LORD RAINED DOWN … FROM THE LORD.

96:3 "And Israel approached the time of dying" (Gen 47:29). It is written, "No one rules over the wind to restrain the wind, and there is no ruling over the day of death" (Eccles 8:8). Rabbi Yehoshua of Sichnin said in the name of Rabbi Levi: The trumpets which Moses made in the wilderness were hidden by the Holy One, who is blessed, when Moses neared death so that no one else would sound them while they were coming to him, as it is written, "Gather to me all the elders of your tribes" (Deut 31:28), in order to fulfill what is stated, "And there is no ruling over the day of death"....And so too when Jacob neared death he began to lower himself before Joseph and said to him, "Please, if I have found favor in your eyes" (Gen 47:29). When [did he say this]? As he was approaching death, as it is stated, "And Israel drew near to the time of dying" (ibid.).