תלמוד על במדבר 15:41

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Levi said⁷⁸In the parallel in the Babli (14a), the explanation is by R. Abbahu in the name of R. Yoḥanan. Since Rebbi Levi was preacher in the Yeshivah of Rebbi Yoḥanan, the explanation originated in that Yeshivah. In addition, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan in the Babli declares that the practice follows Rebbi Yehudah; this decision is missing in the Yerushalmi and, hence, it seems that in Israel one used to follow the majority opinion that an interruption is permitted between the last words of the Shema‘ and “true”. Hence, the question asked in the Babli, whether after reciting “the Eternal, your God. True!” one stops and starts again “true and outstanding”, is irrelevant for the Yerushalmi. The question in the Babli is whether Rebbi Yehudah disagrees with the first Tanna in principle, that ‘between “the Eternal spoke” and “true and outstanding” ’ there is no interruption allowed or whether he simply moves the end of technical Shema‘ by one word and then allows the regular interruptions there., the reason of Rebbi Yehudah: (Num. 15:41) “I am the Eternal, your God⁷⁹These are the concluding words of Shema‘.”, and it is written (Jer. 10:10) “But the Eternal is the true God”.

Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Jehudah: if it was made like half a bagel³²⁰If a Mezuzah is written in calligraphy in the shape of half-circles one inside the other then the inner arcs are shorter than the outer ones and contain fewer words.. The uppermost line under which are two others must contain at least three words, the middle one two, the lowest one even [on the] earth³²¹Deut. 11:21. The addition by the corrector clearly has to be deleted.. Rebbi Ze`ira in the name of Rav Ḥisda: if it was made like a double flute<sup>322</sup>Greek συμφωνία. It is \_/-shaped, having the two mouth pieces close together but the bodies of the flutes diverging., the uppermost line under which are two others must contain at least three words, the lowest two. The middle one I do not know<sup>323</sup>Whether it need 2 or 3 words. Therefore 3 certainly are sufficient. The Babli Menaḥot 30b quotes the first Tanna as R. Yose (whom Babylonian practice follows), the second one as R. Jehudah’s.. Rebbi Jeremiah said it: Rebbi Ze`ira in the name of Rav Ḥisda; Rebbi Jonah and Rebbi Yose both say, Rebbi Ze`ura in the name of Ashian bar Nidba; the colleagues say, Rebbi Ze`ira in the name of Rav Ḥananel. If the ink comes out of the holes it is disqualified. What does he do? He licks it off with his tongue and it jells³²³Whether it need 2 or 3 words. Therefore 3 certainly are sufficient. The Babli Menaḥot 30b quotes the first Tanna as R. Yose (whom Babylonian practice follows), the second one as R. Jehudah’s.. If he made an error and omitted the Name. There are Tannaim who state, he suspends the Name. There are Tannaim who state, he erases the profane, writes the Name, and suspends the profane³²⁴If there is a hole in the leather or parchment which is visible once the ink has dried, the letter is incomplete and disqualified. But if the ink when dry covers the hole completely so that the reader will not notice the hole, it is qualified. Babli Šabbat 108a.. Rebbi Ze`ira, Rav Ḥananel in the name of Rav: practice follows him who says, he erases the profane, writes the Name, and suspends the profane. Rebbi Ze`ira, Rav Ḥananel in the name of Rav: but if it was like I am the Eternal your God³²⁵Num. 15:41. it is permitted. Why? Because these are three words or because part of it is profane? What is the difference between them? God, Highest Power, Eternal³²⁶Jos. 22:22. The situation does not occur in the Pentateuch.. If you are saying because they are three words, they are three words. If you are saying, because part of it is profane, nothing there is profane. For the Eternal is questionable, by the Eternal is questionable³²⁷Since it will be stated later that prefixes of the Name may be erased while suffixes may not, the question is whether an erasable prefix has the same status as a profane word preceding the Name..