Talmud su Deuteronomio 8:78

⁵Babli 74b, Sifra Aḥare Pereq 7(1–4).“You shall deprive yourselves⁶.Lev. 15:29.. I could think that one should sit in the sun or in the cold to make himself feel badly, the verse says, do not do any work. The work which I forbade you elsewhere⁷All Sabbath prohibitions apply to the Day of Atonement.. And the deprivation of what I forbade you elsewhere. Since the work which I forbade you elsewhere is work for which one would be liable to extirpation, so also deprivation which I forbade you elsewhere is deprivation from which one would be liable to extirpation, and the following are those: piggul and leftovers⁸For piggul, cf. Chapter 5 Note 154. Eating sacrificial meat after the allotted time is sinful, Lev. 19:7.. From where to add ṭevel⁹Produce from which heave and tithes have not been taken? The verse says, you shall deprive yourselves; it added. [I am adding ṭevel which is a deadly sin, but would not add carcass meat which is not a deadly sin; the verse says, you shall deprive yourselves; it added.]¹⁰Corrector’s addition, necessary by the context. I am adding carcass meat which is prohibited, but would not add profane meat which is not prohibited; the verse says, you shall deprive yourselves; it added. I am adding profane meat which is not under a commandment to be eaten, but would not add heave and Second Tithe which is under a commandment to be eaten¹¹Heave must be eaten by Cohanim in purity, and Second Tithe by the farmer’s family in Jerusalem in purity. It is sinful to let pure heave and tithes go to waste. One could have thought that food for which there is a biblical commandment that it be eaten would be exempt from the prohibition.; the verse says, you shall deprive yourselves; it added. I am adding heave and tithe of which leftovers are not prohibited, but would not add sacrificial meat for which leftovers are prohibited, the verse says, you shall deprive yourselves; it added. Another explanation: You shall deprive yourselves, something which is a deprivation (father house) {which diminishes}¹²The incomprehensible אב בית has been emended to עֲבֵידת (Qorban ha-Edah). the spirit/ What is this? Eating and drinking. In the name of Rebbi Ismael they said, it is said here you shall deprive yourselves, and it says there, He deprived you and made you hungry¹³Deut. 8:3.. Since deprivation there is one of hunger, also deprivation here is one of hunger.”

Rebbi Zeïra¹²Rebbi Zeïra was a Babylonian who appears in the Babylonian Talmud as Rebbi Zera; he rose to be head of the Yeshivah of Tiberias after Rebbi Yoḥanan. in the name of Rav Jeremiah¹³Rav Jeremiah appears in the Babylonian Talmud as Rav Jeremiah bar Abba, one of the outstanding students of Rav. He should not be identified with Rebbi Jeremiah, a Babylonian and student of Rebbi Zeïra in Galilee.: One who is in doubt whether he said Grace after his meal or not, must say Grace, since it is written (Deut. 8:10): “You will eat and be satiated, then you must praise the Eternal¹⁴There is a problem how the Divine Name YHWH should be translated. The traditional “Lord”, taken from the Septuagint, is a translation not of the Name but of its substitute ădōnāi. The vocalization of the Name is unknown. The root is certainly הוה “to exist”. The form of the name indicates either qal or pi‘el, with a meaning “Eternal” or a hif‘il, meaning “Creator”. Probably it means both but for purposes of translation it is convenient to follow Mendelssohn and use the first meaning. [The so-called “scholarly” hif‘il vocalization, yahweh“Creator,” is certainly false since theophorous names show that the first syllable is vocalized either yā, yô, or yĕ, never yah, and, hence, as is to be expected, the Name does not follow any normative grammatical rule.], your God¹⁵The verse quoted shows that saying Grace is a Biblical obligation (at least for people who ate to be satiated). For Biblical obligations, we always follow the rule that in doubt one has to follow the most stringent alternative.”. One who who is in doubt whether he prayed or not, may not pray, against the opinion of Rebbi Yoḥanan¹⁶Rebbi Yoḥanan is the greatest authority among the Galilean Amoraïm of the second generation. It is rare to have a decision of later generations going against him. who said: If only one would pray the whole day long, why? Because prayer is never in vain¹⁷Everybody agrees that praying the Amidah three times a day is a rabbinic obligation. The majority opinion, reported here by R. Zeïra and anonymously in Babli Berakhot 21a, is that one may not recite this prayer more than three times a day (at least on weekdays) and that, therefore, when in doubt one may not pray since rabbinic ordinances are interpreted leniently in case of doubt. The contrary opinion of Rebbi Yoḥanan is also reported in the Babylonian Talmud (loc. cit.) but without the argument that prayer is never in vain. Rav Haï Gaon (Otzar HaGeonim Berakhot, Responsa p. 50, Commentaries p. 26) explains that Rebbi Yoḥanan thinks that prayer, as a supplication for Divine grace and in imitation of sacrifices, can be offered as fulfillment of a vow. It follows that, in his opinion, anyone who is in doubt whether he prayed already, should declare that his prayer should be counted as obligatory if he did not pray but as a voluntary offering if he already had fulfilled his obligation. This opinion is not acceptable to the Yerushalmi; since prayer is never in vain it does not need a prior declaration. There is a practical difference between the two Talmudim since according to Rav Haï’s interpretation, someone who started praying and remembered in the middle that he already had prayed, must stop in the middle even according to Rebbi Yoḥanan, but in the Jerusalem Talmud R. Yoḥanan is explicitly on record (Halakhah 4:3) that he goes on praying since prayer is never in vain.! About one who is in doubt whether he recited (the Shema‘) or not we may hear from this: He who recites (the Shema‘) before that time did not fulfill his duty. And before that time is it not doubtful¹⁸Later it will be discussed that sometime between sundown and nightfall there is a time of twilight when it is doubtful whether it belongs to day or night. Hence, someone who recites the Shema‘ during twilight cannot be said to certainly have violated the rule that the evening Shema‘ must be recited in the night and his case is equivalent to the one where the person is not sure whether he had recited the Shema‘ already during the current evening.? This means that one who is in doubt whether he recited (the Shema) or not must recite again¹⁹Since the Talmud has to prove indirectly that in reading the Shema‘ one is stringent in case of doubt it seems that it is implied that the reading of Shema‘ is a rabbinic institution (though it might leave in doubt the status of the first sentence or the first section.).

Three who ate together and one wants to leave, Rav said he should recite the first benediction, then he may leave. What is the first benediction? In the Yeshivah of Rav³⁰After Rav’s death. they said, the benediction of invitation. Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rav Jeremiah: that is “He Who feeds all.”³¹The first benediction of Grace when recited without “invitation”. It seems that Rebbi Zeïra also agrees that the one who wants to leave has to recite the benediction “of invitation” aloud so that the other two may answer and fulfill their duty to recite Grace with “invitation”; the disagreement is only about how much he has to recite aloud, whether only the “invitation” or also the first benediction of Grace proper. [If all three recite Grace together, the one who recites the “invitation” has to recite all of Grace aloud; this custom has disappeared in Eastern European Ashkenazic Jewry after the invention of printing and the availability of inexpensive prayer books for everyone.] Rebbi Ḥelbo, Rav Ḥanan in the name of Rav: that is “He Who feeds all.” Rav Sheshet objected, but a baraita disagrees: “Two, three are obliged to recite Grace.³²It is generally agreed that ברכת הזימון is a scribal error and that the correct reading is that of Alfassi ברכת המזון “Grace”. The explanation of the elliptic baraita is according to Alfassi: If two or three people sit together and neither of them knows how to recite the entire Grace but each of them knows one or two benedictions that the others do not, then they take turns in reciting the benedictions and they all have fulfilled their obligations, the one reciting by pronouncing the benediction and the others by listening and answering “Amen”. The numbers are important to show that we require one person to recite an entire benediction; it is not permissible to split one benediction among several people. Hence, the maximal number of people who can share in reciting Grace is the number of benedictions in Grace.” If you want to say the benediction of invitation is the first one, one should state “four.” They found stated “four.” If you want to say this is “He Who feeds all”, it is difficult. If you want to say that it³³The fourth benediction according to him who requires the first benediction to include “He Who feeds all.” is “He Who is good and does good”, you cannot do that, there is a difference³⁴Between the first three benedictions that are Torah obligations and the fourth one who seems to be Rabbinic in character. because Rav Huna said that “He Who is good and does good” was fixed³⁵It says “fixed”, not “instituted” as in the parallel in the Babli (48b). According to the Yerushalmi, the fourth benediction is old, probably Biblical, but it was not permanently required in earlier times; the problem is discussed in the author’s The Scholar’s Haggadah (Northvale NJ, 1995) p. 358–359. after permission was received to bury the slain of Betar³⁶Roman law did not allow the burial of rebels against the government. Hence, the dead of Betar, the last of Bar Kokhba’s fortresses, could certainly not be buried during Hadrian’s lifetime. It is not known which of his successors gave permission to bury the dead. We may assume that it was the same emperor who permitted the re-establishment of the Synhedrion., “He Who is good” because the dead did not decompose and “He Who does good” that they could be buried. Rav Huna said, you may explain it following Rebbi Ismael since Rebbi Ismael said³⁷Mekhilta deR. Ismael Ba 16., “He Who is good and does good” is an obligation from the Torah as it is written (Deut.8:10): You will eat and be satiated, then you must praise, that is the benediction of invitation; the Eternal, your God, that is “He Who feeds all”³⁸Since the name “God” represents God as Creator of the physical world.; for the Land, that is the benediction over the Land; the good one, that is the benediction “builder of Jerusalem” [and so it says (Deut. 3:25) “this good mountain and the Lebanon³⁹“Lebanon” means the Temple; this identification goes back at least to the time of Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai who predicted to Vespasian that he would become emperor, since he would destroy the Temple and it is written (Is. 10:34) “the Lebanon will fall through a powerful one” (Babli Giṭṭin 56b; Yerushalmi sources: Abot deR. Nathan 4, Midrash Ekha rabba 1).”]; that He gave you, that is “He Who is good and does good”.

For Torah⁴⁰Torah study, including Torah reading. there is written a benediction before, but no benediction is written after. What is written before it? (Deut. 32:3) “For I am invoking the name of the Eternal, attribute greatness to our God.” For food there is written a benediction after, but no benediction is written before. What is written after it? (Deut. 8:10): “You will eat and be satiated, then you must praise”. From where that which is said about one on the other and vice-versa? Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥmani in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: The Name is mentioned in both verses as parallel expressions⁴¹In general, it is assumed in the system of Rebbi Aqiba that a word can have only one meaning. A stronger implication, agreed to by all tannaïtic authorities, is a “parallel expression”. The formal definition of the school of R. Ismael is that if one has a tradition that two equal or synonymous expressions are written in the Torah for purposes of comparison and if these two words are not used for any other inference, then all laws connected with one word apply to the other and vice-versa. The derivation here does not fulfill these conditions; hence, it is labelled to follow the rules of R. Aqiba who is not known to require too much formality in case the verse is used to give a biblical base to an old tradition.. Just as the Name that is mentioned concerning Torah implies a benediction before, so the Name that is mentioned concerning food implies a benediction before. And just as the Name that is mentioned concerning food implies a benediction after, so the Name that is mentioned concerning Torah implies a benediction after. That follows Rebbi Aqiba⁴²Who is an exponent of intensional interpretation, whereas R. Ismael is an exponent of extensional interpretation. The rules of R. Ismael are systematized in his “13 rules” given in the introduction to the halakhic Midrash Sifra on Leviticus. The problem of both Rebbi Aqiba and Rebbi Ismael is that in its mishnaic-talmudic form, the rules of Jewish conduct form a logically consistent whole. It was shown earlier in this chapter, Notes 24 – 29, that rules must be consistent from one application to the next, such as rules of Grace and forming a court of law. But the basis of these laws, the words of the Torah, are unsystematic, fragmentary, and sometimes appear contradictory. Hence, one needs a method of translating the aphoristic text of the Torah in a legally consistent new language; cf. the author’s Logical problems in Jewish tradition, in: Confrontations with Judaism, ed. P. Longworth, Blond, London 1966, 171–196. The rules are discussed in the medieval texts Introduction to the Talmud by R. Samuel Hanaggid and Sefer Keritut of R. Simson of Sens.. What following Rebbi Ismael? Rebbi Yoḥanan in the name of Rebbi Ismael, an inference from the lesser to the greater⁴³קל וחוֹמר, the first rule of R. Ismael. If there are two commandments, A and B, and if every rule for A is no more stringent than the corresponding rule for B, then a rule expressed for A that has no equivalent for B is valid also for B. The Babli (21a) quotes the following qal waḥomer in the name of R. Yoḥanan only and points out that the application here is not justified since it is self-contradictory. The Yerushalmi seems to be of the opinion that in the formulation given here, with “not more stringent” instead of “less stringent”, the argument is logically admissible.. If food that needs no explicit benediction before, needs a benediction afterwards, regarding Torah that needs a benediction before, it is only logical that it should need a benediction afterwards. That works for Torah; what about food? If Torah that needs no benediction afterwards, needs a benediction before, regarding food that needs a benediction afterwards, it is only logical that it should need a benediction before. Rebbi Isaac and Rebbi Nathan say, (1Sam. 9:13): “For he will recite the benediction over the sacrifice and after that the invited guests will eat.”⁴⁴In the Babli (48b) and in the Mekhilta (loc. cit.) this is given in the name of R. Nathan only. A verse from Samuel (Biblical but not Pentateuchal) cannot prove a commandment but can prove a practice. Rebbi Nathan⁴⁵In the Babli and the Mekhilta, this appears in the name of Rebbi Isaac. said, (Ex. 23:24) “you shall serve the Eternal, your God and give praise for your bread and your water”; when is it called your bread and your water, before you eat⁴⁶The full verse seems to read: “You shall serve the Eternal, your God, then He will bless your bread and your water and I will remove sickness from your midst.” The switch from third to first person is awkward in any case. In the Babli (in particular, in the Sephardic incunabula print) it is spelled out: Do not read וּבֵרַךְ “He will bless” but וּבָרֵךְ “and praise”. However, the Bible Concordance of G. Lisowsky (Stuttgart 1958) takes the verse, as it stands, to mean “You shall serve the Eternal, your God, and praise for your bread and your water, then I will remove sickness from your midst.” One may recite a benediction one one’s bread and one’s water only before it is consumed; afterwards one may speak only of nourishment and sustenance.. Rebbi said, if he has to give praise when he ate and is satiated, somuch more at a time when he is hungry for food. That is for food, what about Torah? If food, which sustains only temporary life, needs a benediction before and after, Torah, which sustains eternal life, so much more⁴⁷In the Babli and the Mekhilta this is a קל וחוֹמר of Rebbi Ismael..

⁴⁵The following is quoted from Berakhot 7:1, Notes 40–52 (ב). For Torah⁴⁶Torah study, including Torah reading. there is written a benediction before, but no benediction is written after. What is written before it? For I am invoking the name of the Eternal, attribute greatness to our God⁴⁷Deut. 32:3.. For food there is written a benediction after, but no benediction is written before. What is written after it? You will eat and be satiated, then you must praise⁴⁸Deut. 8:10.. From where that which is said about one on the other and vice-versa? Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: The Name is mentioned in both verses as parallel expressions⁴⁹In general, it is assumed in the system of Rebbi Aqiba that a word can have only one meaning in the Pentateuch. A stronger implication, agreed to by all tannaitic authorities, is a “parallel expression”. The technical term is equal cut. The formal definition of the school of R. Ismael is that if one has a tradition that two equal or synonymous expressions are written in the Torah for purposes of comparison and if these two words are not used for any other inference, then all laws connected with one word apply to the other and vice-versa. The derivation here does not fulfill these conditions; hence, it is labelled to follow the rules of R. Aqiba who is not known to require too much formality in case the verse is used to give a biblical base to an old tradition.. Just as the Name that is mentioned concerning Torah implies a benediction before, so the Name that is mentioned concerning food implies a benediction before. And just as the Name that is mentioned concerning food implies a benediction after, so the Name that is mentioned concerning Torah implies a benediction after. That follows Rebbi Aqiba. How following Rebbi Ismael⁵⁰The rules of R. Ismael are systematized in his 13 hermeneutical rules given in the introduction to Sifra on Leviticus.? Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Ismael, an inference de minore ad majus⁵¹The first rule of R. Ismael. If there are two commandments, A and B, and if every rule for A is no more stringent than the corresponding rule for B, then a rule expressed for A that has no equivalent for B is valid also for B. The Babli (Berakhot 21a) quotes the following in the name of R. Joḥanan only and points out that the application here is not justified since it is self-contradictory. The Yerushalmi seems to be of the opinion that in the formulation given here, with “not more stringent” instead of “less stringent”, the argument is logically admissible.. If food that needs no explicit benediction before, needs a benediction afterwards, regarding Torah which needs a benediction before, it is only logical that it should need a benediction afterwards. That works for Torah; what about food? If Torah which needs no benediction afterwards, needs a benediction before, regarding food which needs a benediction afterwards, it is only logical that it should need a benediction before. Rebbi Isaac and Rebbi Nathan say, For he will recite the benediction over the sacrifice and after that the invited guests will eat⁵²1S. 9:13. In the Babli (Berakhot 48b) and in the Mekhilta dR. Ismael (Ba 16, ed. Horovitz-Rabin p. 61) this is given in the name of R. Nathan only. A verse from Samuel (Biblical but not Pentateuchal) cannot prove a commandment but can prove a practice.. Rebbi Nathan said, you shall serve the Eternal, your God, and give praise for your bread and your water⁵³Ex. 23:25. In the Babli and the Mekhilta, this appears in the name of Rebbi Isaac.; when is it called your bread and your water, before you eat⁵⁴The full verse seems to read: You shall serve the Eternal, your God, then He will bless your bread and your water and I will remove sickness from your midst. The switch from third to first person is awkward in any case. In the Babli (in particular, in the Sephardic incunabula print) it is spelled out: Do not read וּבֵרַךְ He will bless but וּבָרֵךְ “and praise”. The Bible Concordance of G. Lisowsky (Stuttgart 1958) takes the verse, as it stands, to mean You shall serve the Eternal, your God, and praise for your bread and your water, then I will remove sickness from your midst. One may recite a benediction on one’s bread and one’s water only before it is consumed; afterwards one may speak only of nourishment and sustenance.. Rebbi said, if he has to give praise when he ate and is satiated, so much more at a time when he is hungry for food. That is for food, what about Torah? If food, which sustains only temporary life, needs a benediction before and after, Torah, which sustains eternal life, so much more⁵⁵In the Babli and the Mekhilta this is an argument of Rebbi Ismael..

HALAKHAH: ⁴¹A similar text in Sifra Deut. 197(2), a third version in Babli Menaḥot 84b.“One does not bring First Fruits”, etc. If it were written (Deut. 26:2): “You shall take the First Fruits of your land”, I would have said that all kinds should be obligated for First Fruits. The verse says,“from⁴²As always, prefix מ is read as partitive. the First Fruits”, not all firsts. If “from the first” and not all first, then you have only wheat and barley. The verse says “fruits of your land”; this is inclusive. Does it include everything? Here⁴³Deut. 26:2. “your land” has been said; at another place⁴⁴Deut. 8:8. “the Land of wheat and barley” has been said. Since “land” mentioned there deals with the Seven Kinds, so also “land” mentioned in this verse must deal with the Seven Kinds.

Rebbi Berekhiah in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman: Why is “Land, Land” written twice⁵⁰Deut. 8:8: A Land of wheat and barley, and vine, and fig tree, and pomegranate, a Land of the oil-olive and honey.? To tell you that a house stands only on these two things⁵¹The necessities of life are wheat and olive oil.. Why are [the others] included? Rebbi Jehuda ben Rebbi and Rebbi Samuel ben Naḥman, one says for benedictions⁵²Explained Berakhot 6:4, Notes 150–151, where this opinion is labelled “Babylonian”., the other says for measures⁵³In the Babli, Eruvin 4a/b, Sukkah 5b, this is reported in the name of the Babylonian Rav Ḥanin. The seven measures are: I. A person entering a leprous house is severely impure only if he remains long enough that he could have eaten a slice of wheat bread (Lev. 14:47). 2. A fragment of a human bone the size of a barley corn imparts impurity. 3. A quarter log of wine drunk by a nazir makes him subject to punishment. As a derivative, a quarter log of wine is the minimum for legal obligations. 4. Somebody carrying food in the volume of a dried fig from private to public domain on the Sabbath is guilty of desecrating the Sabbath. 5. A vessel having a pomegranate-sized hole is unusable and freed from the impurity of vessels. 6. The volume of an olive is the standard for most rules involving solid food. 7. Eating food in the volume of a dried date on the Day of Atonement is a desecration of the day.. He who says for benedictions is understandable. He who says for measures, did we not state: “A shiny mark the size of half a bean⁵⁴Lev. 13:1–8, Mishnah Nega‘im 6:1.. A smaller lesion does not make impure.”? That is not reliable⁵⁵The size of the lesion does not mean anything in itself. Even if the lesion is larger, if it does not grow after being seen by the Cohen it does not make impure. If it is smaller but seen by the Cohen and then spreads, there is impurity. (Explanation of Pene Moshe). Another interpretation would be that this and the next measure are not standardized.. “The size of a lentil from a crawling thing”⁵⁶Mishnah Kelim 17:6. A fragment of a dead crawling animal (Lev. 11:29–31) in the size of a lentil makes impure.? That is not reliable⁵⁷An integral limb makes impure even if it is smaller than a lentil..

⁷⁷A parallel to the entire paragraph is in the Babli, Keritut 5b. One anoints kings only at a spring, as it was said⁷⁸1K. 1:33–34.: “Let Solomon, my son, ride on my mule and take him down to the Giḥon; there Ṣadoq the priest and Nathan the prophet shall anoint him, etc.” One anoints kings only because of disputes. Why was Solomon anointed? Because of the dispute of Adoniahu; Joash because of Athaliah, Jehu because of Joram. Is it not written⁷¹1Sam. 16:12.: “Do anoint him, for this one is it,” this one needs anointing, but the kings of Israel do not need anointing⁷⁹There is no indication that Yehu was anointed with the oil deposited in Jerusalem.! But Joaḥaz because of his brother Joakim who was two years his elder⁸⁰In 2K. 23:31,36 and 2Chr. 36:2,5 it is noted that Joaḥaz was 23 years old in the same year in which Joakim was 25. Cf. Seder ‘Olam, Chapter 24 (in the author’s edition, pp. 213–215); Babli Arakhin 12a.. But did not Josiahu hide it⁸¹As indicated in the previous paragraph. Then Josiah’s son could not have been anointed with the oil made by Moses. The explanation given here is in the Babli, Horaiot 11b, in the name of the later Amora Rav Papa.? That means, they anointed with balsamum. One anoints kings only from a horn. Saul and Jehu were anointed from a can because their kingdom was temporary; David and Solomon were anointed from a horn because their kingdom was permanent⁸²Quoted in Babli, Megillah 14a, Keritut 6a.. One does not anoint priests as kings⁸³The Maccabean kings were anointed as High Priests, not as kings.. Rebbi Yudan Antordiyya said, because of “the scepter shall not be removed from Jehudah⁸⁴Gen. 49:10.”. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, because “he shall have many days of his kingdom, he and his sons in the midst of Israel⁸⁵Deut. 7:20, last verse in the chapter..” What is written after that? “The levitic Cohanim should not.⁸⁶Deut. 8:1.”

And grace after meals, as it is written (Deut. 8:10): “You will eat and be satiated; then you must praise the Eternal, your God.¹⁴²According to the Yerushalmi, women and slaves are required to recite Grace from the Torah since everybody who eats must give praise. In the Babli (loc. cit.), this remains questionable.”

It is stated: “For every obligation that a man is free of, he may help the congregation to fulfill their obligation, except for Grace.” But have we not stated: “Anybody who is not obligated may not help the congregation to fulfill their obligation”? If he were obligated, he could help them to fulfill even if he himself already fulfilled it!¹⁴⁷“To be free” does not mean the same as “not being obligated” but rather “having already acquitted himself of the obligation.” The first statement means, e. g., that someone who already has heard the shofar on Rosh Hashanah nevertheless may blow the shofar and recite the appropriate benediction for somebody who did not hear the blowing. The only exception mentioned is that of saying Grace. The second statement means, e. g., that a woman, not being obligated to hear the shofar, may not blow the shofar for a man who is obligated. Since everybody is obligated to say Grace after a meal, there seems to be no reason why Grace should be exempted in the first statement. Rebbi Lia said: There is a difference about Grace since it is written (Deut. 8:10): “You will eat and be satiated, then you must praise the Eternal, your God;” he who ate must give praise. Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Judah ben Pazi were sitting together and saying: It would be reasonable¹⁴⁸The exemption mentioned for Grace should be extended to the recital of Shema‘ and prayer. The argument for Shema‘ rests on the expression (Deut. 6:7) ושננתם ל֩בניך “you should repeat it to your sons”; it implies a personal action and cannot be performed by listening to a reader. The discussion of prayer presupposes the Galilean practice that the reader recite the Amidah aloud, without silent prayer, and it is stated that everyone is required to say the prayer with the reader, not just to respond with “Amen”. In Babylonia the question did not arise since silent prayer was always required before the repetition by the reader. for reciting the Shema‘ that every single person should repeat it aloud. It would be reasonable for prayer that every single person should pray for mercy by himself.

BARAITHA. If you desire to learn, do not say of what you do not understand, ‘I understand it’. If you are asked a question about something in which you are not well versed do not be ashamed to say, ‘I do not know’. If you are taught something and you do not understand it, be not ashamed to say, ‘I do not understand it’.
GEMARA. Whence do we learn this? [From David], for it is written, I will also speak of Thy testimonies before kings, and will not be ashamed²⁴Ps. 119, 46.—that is, [to inquire] of Mephibosheth²⁵On Mephibosheth as David’s teacher, cf. Ber. 4a (Sonc. ed., p. 11). how to act, whether to declare it forbidden or permissible.
BARAITHA.²⁶Ned. 62a (Sonc. ed., p. 197). Do good deeds for the sake of their Maker.²⁷i.e. God Who desires them to be done. Or, ‘for the sake of doing them’; cf. Aboth I, 3 (Sonc. ed., pp. 2f.). Do not make them a crown wherewith to adorn yourself, or an axe wherewith to cut. Accustom yourself to take upon yourself the precepts of the Torah [even] at the cost of suffering.
GEMARA. [‘Do not make them a crown’, etc.,] lest you receive your share [of the World to Come] in this world; for he who glorifies himself with the crown of the Torah has no share in the World to Come.²⁸cf. Ned. loc. cit. (Sonc. ed., p. 196): ‘Whoever puts the crown of the Torah to [profane] use is uprooted from the world’. [‘Nor an axe wherewith to cut.’] Do not withhold corn²⁹Figuratively used of the Torah. The comparison is based on Prov. 11, 26. Cf. Sanh. 91b-92a (Sonc. ed., pp. 614f.). from others; for [53b] even the embryos [in their mothers’ wombs] curse him who withholds corn from others. Here³⁰In this Gemara. [only if he is asked to teach] without payment [is he under the curse], but there³¹In the passage quoted from Sanh. even if he is offered payment [and refuses to teach].
[‘Accustom yourself to take upon yourself the precepts’, etc.] It has been taught:³²Sanh. 111a (Sonc. ed., p. 762). Whoever maintains himself by words of Torah, the Torah does not become intimate with him. There³³In the passage from Sanh. it speaks of self-pleasure and here³⁴In this Gemara. Pursue the study of the Torah even at the cost of sleep. of sleep.
BARAITHA. Do not resent an insult to you. A good record and a blameless adolescence [inspire] security and truth.
GEMARA. [‘Do not resent an insult to you.’] How is this meant? [Do not boast,] ‘So-and-so did such-and-such to me and I have not retaliated’. What is meant by ‘a good record’? Do 1 ot [give cause] to be included in the number of the dissolute, lest people say, ‘How many dissolute persons there are here, including you among them!’ ‘And a blameless adolescence.’ But this has already been taught in the preceding chapter!³⁵In III, 12. There it speaks of his actual doing evil and here [of not giving cause for suspicion] against him. ‘[Inspire] security.’ Some say [that this means]: One should have a sense of security so that the Torah becomes rolled³⁶So that he studies Torah with a carefree mind. H reads nikleleth, ‘contained’. up in his heart. Others [explain]: Inspire confidence in those who ask of you. The latter interpretation conforms to the wording of the Baraitha, ‘and truth’, which implies: Do not falsify confidence [which is placed in you].
BARAITHA.³⁷Cf. Aboth III, 16 (Sonc. ed., III, 12, p. 35). Be submissive to a superior, patient under oppression, of cheerful appearance and keep away from sin.
GEMARA. ‘Be submissive to a superior’: that is, to the ruling power. ‘Patient under oppression’: that is, forced labour as happened with R. Eleazar b. Ḥarson.³⁸Cf. Yoma 35b (Sonc. ed., p. 164). When conscripted by the authorities for forced labour, R. Eleazar paid them a large sum of money for his release so that he could continue his study of the Torah. ‘Be of cheerful appearance’: can one [always] keep his appearance cheerful? [Yes]; for when R. Dimi came he said: The man who [by smiling] shows his teeth white [to his fellow] is better than he who gives him milk to drink.³⁹Cf. Keth. 111b (Sonc. ed., p. 723) where the saying is attributed to R. Joḥanan. What is to be derived from this statement? As illustrated by the experience of R. Beroḳa.⁴⁰Cf. Ta‘an. 22a (Sonc. ed., p. 110). Two men passed by R. Beroḳa when Elijah appeared and exclaimed that these men had a share in the World to Come. On inquiring of them what their occupation was, they told the Rabbi, ‘We are jesters, and when we see men depressed we cheer them up’. ‘Keep away from sin’: so that all can speak about you and you have no need to clear yourself of suspicion.
BARAITHA. Refrain from committing a light sin lest it lead you to one that is grievous. Be mindful of a small precept that it may lead you to one that is important.
GEMARA. It has been learnt:⁴¹Aboth IV, 2 (Sonc. ed., p. 44). Ben ‘Azzai said: Run to do a slight precept and flee from transgression. There [it speaks of fleeing from sin] of one’s free will; here [of fleeing] even when under compulsion. [The proof of this is that the Baraitha] teaches, ‘Refrain, etc.’⁴²The Heb. verb means ‘tremble, shake’ and in the niph‘al ‘move backward’; hence, fleeing under compulsion.
BARAITHA. If you desire to gain the love of your friend,⁴³This is the reading of H in agreement with DER I. busy yourself with his welfare. If you desire to keep away from sin consider where it eventually leads. Attach yourself lovingly to the precepts. Be proud and happy to speak diligently and sing of its details.⁴⁴So GRA, who reads פרטיה.
GEMARA. ‘If you desire to gain the love’, etc. As it is written, But thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.⁴⁵Lev. 19, 18. Because you love your neighbour as yourself he is like yourself. ‘If you desire to keep away from sin consider where it eventually leads.’ As it is written, The wise man, his eyes are in his head.⁴⁶Eccl. 2, 14. But the eyes of a fool are in the ends of the earth;⁴⁷Prov. 17, 24. he regards only what is before him and ignores the consequences. ‘Attach yourself lovingly to the precepts’, by respecting those who fulfil the precepts. ‘Be proud’, etc., by inquiring into the reason of a precept.
BARAITHA. If He has bestowed upon you a small bounty, let it be in your eyes as great and you need to give thanks that He cared⁴⁸Reading the root ספן instead of ספר. for you and bestowed bounty upon you.
GEMARA. ‘If He has bestowed’, etc. Whence do we learn this? For it is written, And thou shalt eat and be satisfied, and bless the Lord thy God for the good land which He hath given thee.⁴⁹Deut. 8, 10. And whence do we know that one is obliged [to bless God] although he has not eaten to satisfaction? For it is written, Give the people that they may eat,⁵⁰2 Kings 4, 43. and it is written, And they did eat, and left thereof, according to the word of the Lord,⁵¹ibid. 44. There were twenty loaves with which to feed 100 men, and therefore insufficient to satisfy them; yet they blessed God. The words according to the word of the Lord, on this interpretation, refer back to the passage in Deut., and bless the Lord thy God. [which means] blessing [God]. An objection was raised against this: [It is stated,] He restored the border of Israel … according to the word of the Lord, the God of Israel, which He spoke by the hand of His servant Jonah, the son of Amittai!⁵²ibid. XIV, 25. Here the phrase according to the word of the Lord occurs without reference to thanking God for food. There, too, it was a case of thanksgiving.⁵³For victory and regaining the former territories of Israel. Come and hear: [It is stated,] According to the word of the Lord, which He spoke to Elijah!⁵⁴ibid. X, 17, where again there is no reference to thanking God. There, too, say that [the word of the Lord] implies: Blessed be He Who has fulfilled His promise [to inflict punishment upon the house of Ahab]. Come and hear: [It is stated,] According unto the saying of the Lord, which He spoke by the hand of His servant Aḥijah the Shilonite!⁵⁵1 Kings 15, 29. And if you think it is as you said [that the phrase means thanking God, how will you explain this verse?] There^55a(55a) In the verses cited in the various objections. it is written by the hand of, here⁵⁶In the verses quoted as proof from 2 Kings 4, 43f. it is without any qualification.⁵⁷i.e. without the addition by the hand of, etc.
BARAITHA. If you have done much good let it be in your eyes as little. Say, ‘Not with what belongs to me have I done good’, but ‘with what has been granted to me’.
GEMARA. [We learn this] from David; for it is written, Who am I, O Lord God, and what is my house?⁵⁸2 Sam. 7, 18. and it states, And what can David say more unto Thee?⁵⁹ibid. 20. and it states, And this was yet a small thing in Thine eyes, O Lord God.⁶⁰ibid. 19. What [is the force of] the additional verses which are cited? Should you say: There because He said to him, And I will make thee a great name, like unto the name of the great ones that are in the earth,⁶¹ibid. 9. [David] exclaimed, Who am I?⁶²Although David was a pious man, he felt himself to be unworthy of God’s promise. This would be a support for the statement of the Baraitha. then come and hear: [What is the force of] And what can David say more unto Thee? Should you reply [that it means,] What else can I pray for? then come and hear: He said, And this was yet a small thing in Thine eyes, O Lord God, that is, it is a small thing for Thee but for me it is a very great thing. [It is stated,] But Thou hast spoken also of Thy servant’s house for a great while to come.⁶³ibid. 19. The word also is intended to add something: [David said,] ‘Not only didst Thou praise me, but also of my seed hast Thou declared, And thy house and thy kingdom shall be made sure for ever before thee.⁶⁴ibid. 16.
But Thou hast spoken also of Thy servant’s house for a great while to come: this⁶⁵Reading with H זה (this) for לא (not). means ‘in the days to come’.⁶⁶The Heb. for a great while to come is lit. ‘from afar’, here equated with the hereafter. As the word is interpreted here to refer to the hereafter, it follows that there is another meaning of the word without reference to the hereafter. Whence do we know this? [It is stated,] I will fetch my knowledge from afar⁶⁷Job 36, 3, where the phrase from afar cannot mean the hereafter but the distant past.— to what [does this refer]? To what has happened from the beginning. Raba said: Infer from this that one who knows when the Messiah will come is here speaking of his times:⁶⁸Cf. H’s note ad loc. Hence the verse from Job refers to the hereafter. and this is also how David used [the word]. And what Isaiah⁶⁹The Text reads ‘Jeremiah’ in error for ‘Isaiah’. said must be included in the reckoning of the years,⁷⁰In alluding to the Messianic era Isaiah speaks of it as coming within a year, according to the years of a hireling, and this makes the date of that era more definite. This would be contrary to the indefiniteness conveyed by the days to come. Hence the phrase within a year, etc., must not be taken literally but understood to denote ‘a time in the future’. as it is written, Within a year, according to the years of a hireling, and all the glory of Ḳedar shall fail; and the residue of the number of the archers, the mighty men of the children of Ḳedar, shall be diminished; for the Lord, the God of Israel, hath spoken it.⁷¹Isa. 21, 16f.
BARAITHA. If men have done you much evil let it be little in your eyes. Say, ‘Only a small part of the punishment due to me have I received; I have deserved more’.
GEMARA. Whence do we learn this? From Abraham⁷²Who acknowledged that God dealt with him with more consideration than he deserved. Cf. Gen. 18, 27, who am but dust and ashes. Another possible translation is: ‘The reward from the Maker is greater [than I merit]’. [who exclaimed,] ‘The reward is greater than the labourer [merits]’.
BARAITHA. If you have done a little evil let it be great in your eyes. Say, ‘Woe to me that I have sinned, that a stumbling-block should have chanced to me!’
GEMARA. Whence do we learn this? From the Gibeonites.⁷³Cf. Josh. 9. Raba objected, ‘Must we, then, learn this from the Gibeonites as otherwise we would not know it?’⁷⁴If it were not for the Gibeonites, would such an ethical teaching be unknown from Hebraic sources? R. Aḥa said to him, ‘And why should we not learn it from them? Were they not merged in Israel?’ It is written, And made as if they hath been ambassadors;⁷⁵Josh. 9, 4; the Heb. verb is wayyiẓṭayyaru. and it is also written, This is our bread we took hot for our provision,⁷⁶ibid. 12; the Heb. verb is hiẓṭayyadnu. [which means] they took provisions with them and said, ‘This is the food which we provided for ourselves in our country; behold,⁷⁷Reading הרי for V וקרי. it has become mouldy⁷⁸Heb. niẓṭayyar. because of the length of the journey’. When they had spoken to Israel and the latter knew [the true facts], what is the meaning of [the Gibeonites’ words to Joshua], And now, behold, we are in thy hand?⁷⁹ibid. 25. [Because it is written,] And Joshua made peace with them,⁸⁰ibid. 15. Since Joshua had already made peace with them, why should they have said this to him? and it is written, And the men took of their provision,⁸¹ibid. 14. The men are the Israelites, who believed the story told to them. the Holy One, blessed be He, said, ‘You gluttons, sons of gluttons, who love gluttony, your fathers also acted likewise [when they declared,] We remember the fish.⁸²Num. 11, 5. All food finds its way to the mouth, but My mouth⁸³lit. ‘His mouth’, i.e. God’s command. you do not remember, [as it is stated,] And asked not counsel at the mouth of the Lord,⁸⁴Josh. 9, 14. [Who warned you] in the words, Lest thou make a covenant with the inhabitants of the land, and they go astray after their gods, and do sacrifice unto their gods, and they call thee and thou eat of their sacrifice.⁸⁵Ex. 34, 15.
Also Joshua was punished on this account. The Holy One, blessed be He, said, ‘Because [the Gibeonites] entreated you [saying], And now, behold, we are in thy hand; as it seemeth good and right unto thee to do unto us, do,⁸⁶Josh. 9, 25. I will bring forth a son from you who will implore Israel in the same manner,⁸⁷Reading sidra with H. [saying,] As for me, behold I am in your hand; do with me as is good and right in your eyes.⁸⁸Jer. 26, 14. The allusion is to Jeremiah’s plea to the princes and people on being arrested for prophesying the destruction of the Temple. Jeremiah was descended from Rahab.⁸⁹Cf. Meg. 14b (Sonc. ed., p. 86) where it is stated that Joshua married Rahab, and Jeremiah was one of their descendants.

”The period mentioned in the Torah.” ¹⁸²In Mekhilta dR.Ismael (ed. Horovitz-Rabin p. 259), the first opinion is attributed to Rebbi, the second to R. Joshia; the explanation attributed here to R. Eliezer ben Jacob is there in the name of R. Jonathan. In the Babli, 47b, the first opinion is attributed to R. Eleazar or R. Eliezer, the second is anonymous; the midrash of R. Eliezer ben Jacob is given in his name, 48a. Mekhilta dR.Simeon ben Ioḥai follows the attributions of the Yerushalmi (pp. 167–168). Some Tannaïm state¹⁸³The problem is Ex. 21:9 which states that a man who takes an additional wife may not diminish שְׁאֵר, כְּסוּת, and עֹנָה of his first wife. The meaning of כְּסוּת “garment, covering” is clear but the meaning of the other two words is a matter of controversy. שְׁאֵר means “flesh” but, as the verses quoted in support of different meanings show, it means both “meat” and “relative, one’s flesh and blood.” Note also in Accadic šērum “flesh”, š’r (of a different etymology) “to go towards; to have sexual relations”. The root שאר II has no connection with the usual שאר “to remain, be a remainder” (Arabic سار.).
The problem with עֹנָה is that the verb ענה “to humiliate, inflict pain” in sexual context always means “to rape, to have forced intercourse” but in the verse here it has a positive meaning, the intercourse to which the wife is entitled. [Note that in Arabic, عنا means both “produce plants” (said of the earth) and “to be humiliated, captive” (from this العَوَانِي “Moslem women”).] From the positive meaning of עֹנָה in the verse comes the rabbinic-modern Hebrew עוֹנָה “season”, used in the midrash of R. Eliezer ben Jacob.: שְׁאֵר that is intercourse; עוֹנָה that is food. Some Tannaïm state: עוֹנָה that is intercourse; שְׁאֵר that is food. He who said שְׁאֵר is intercourse: “No person to the שְׁאֵר of his flesh;¹⁸⁴Lev. 18:6: “No person to the שְׁאֵר of his flesh should come close, to uncover nakedness.”” עוֹנָה is food: “He fed you and made you hunger¹⁸⁵Deut. 8:3, usually translated as: “He chastised you and made you hunger before He fed you with the manna that neither you nor your fathers knew.””. He who said שְׁאֵר is food: “He let rain on them שְׁאֵר like dust¹⁸⁶Ps. 78:27.”; עוֹנָה that is intercourse, “that you should not deprive my daughters,¹⁸⁷Gen. 31:50. “That you should not deprive my daughters nor take wives in addition to my daughters.” In Gen. rabba 74(12), this verse is explained that (a) Bilha and Silpa also were Laban’s daughters from slave women and (b) that Laban made Jacob swear that he would not deprive his daughters of intercourse during their lifetime nor take additional wives after their deaths.” that refers to intercourse. Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob explains the verse¹⁸⁸He denies that there is a biblical command which fixes minimal amounts of sexual attention due wives. He explains Ex. 21:9 as exhortation rather than prescription, reading “her flesh, her garment, and her season he should not diminish”., “her flesh her garment”, that her garment should fit her flesh, that he should not give a young woman clothes of an old woman nor an old woman clothes of a young one. “Her garment her season”, that he should not give summer clothing for the rainy season nor that for the rainy season in summer. From where does he get food¹⁸⁹How can he establish an obligation of the husband to feed his wife?? Since he is not permitted to withhold from her things that are not necessities of life¹⁹⁰A new garment at least twice a year., not so much more things that are necessities of life! From where does he get the obligation of periodic intercourse? Since he may not withhold from her things which do not constitute the main reason for marriage¹⁹⁰A new garment at least twice a year., so certainly he may not withhold the things which constitute the main reason for marriage!

MISHNAH: For the following one makes the declaration, one brings and makes the declaration between Pentecost and Tabernacles: From the Seven Kinds¹⁶⁸Deut. 8:8–9; cf. Berakhot 6, Note 151. Only fruits mentioned in these verses qualify as First Fruits., from produce of the hills, from dates in the valleys¹⁶⁹Only these produce date honey., from oil olives¹⁷⁰These usually are larger than eating olives., and from Transjordan. Rebbi Yose the Galilean says, one does not bring from Transjordan since it is not a Land flowing with milk and honey.

The snake has six names: [Nahash], Saraf, Tanin, Tzifoni, Efeh, and Akhshuv.