Talmud su Isaia 60:78

HALAKHAH: “One does not put up animals in hostelries of Gentiles,” etc. Rebbi Ze‘ira, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina; Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Jonah⁵Unfortunately G is very lacunary here; therefore its readings are not given after the Hebrew text. The Halakhah starts: “R. Ze‘urah, R. Abbahu in the name of R. Yose ben Ḥanina, R. ..… R. Abbahu in the name of R. Yose ben Ḥanina, explain it …” There is no reason to mention the sixth generation R. Abba III and the fifth generation R. Jonah who later disagrees with the statement if already it was attributed to the second generation R. Yose ben Ḥanina.: explain it⁶The Mishnah which forbids to put up unsupervised animals in the stable of a Gentile hostelry makes travel outside Jewish settlements practically impossible. An attribution to R. Eliezer removes the first part of the Mishnah from practice. following Rebbi Eliezer, since Rebbi Eliezer said “it may not be bought from Gentiles.⁷Mishnah Parah2:1. This refers to the Red Cow (Num. 19) whose ashes are needed to cleanse people from the impurity of the dead. The Cow is not a Temple sacrifice; how far the restrictions imposed on sacrificial animals and the officiating priests apply to the Cow and its officiants are old matters of dispute between Sadducees and Pharisees (Mishnah Parah3:3,7) and among the rabbis themselves. One of the biblical requirements is that the Red Cow never carried a yoke (Num. 19:2). In Mishnah Parah2:1, a first statement of R. Eliezer validates a pregnant Red Cow for the ceremonies; the reason is explained in Mishnah 4 by his student’s R. Illai’s son R. Jehudah, that a bull mounting the Cow on his own cannot be considered making her carrying anything; only copulation by human intervention makes the ox the equivalent of a yoke. The majority rejects the ruling; it considers the Cow and its fetus as two separate beings but v. 19:3 requires the Cow alone to be taken. These restrictions do not apply to ordinary sacrifices. R. Eliezer then forbids buying a Red Cow from Gentiles since a sodomized animal is unfit for the altar; the Sages disagree since without reason one does not suspect that such a thing happened; this would make the Mishnah here unreasonable. (The last generation R. Yose bar Abun even introduces buying a Red Cow from a Gentile into a story about R. Eliezer; Peah1:1 Notes 99 ff., Qiddušin1:7 Notes 607 ff.) Babli 23a.” Rebbi Jonah asked, why do we not explain it according to everybody, following what Rebbi Eleazar said in the name of Rav: Even one who says it is permitted to sell [says] it is forbidden to leave alone⁸One may not leave the animal alone with a Gentile. Chapter 1:6, Note 165. There the first tradent is R. Jonah himself.. If he transgressed and left it alone by everybody’s opinion⁹It is not said what everybody’s opinion is; the corresponding passage in G is in the name of “the rabbis of Caesarea, Giddul bar Benjamin in the name of Rav” but then is missing the conclusion. One has to assume that it was “if he transgressed and left it alone by everybody’s opinion the animal remains permitted.”. Rebbi Jeremiah said, let us hear from the following¹⁰Mishnah Ketubot2:9. If she is jailed because of money matters one must assume that she was not raped; if she was condemned to death one must assume that she was raped or consented to sex with her jailers. If a woman can be alone in the custody of Gentiles without being raped, may the same not be assumed of female animals?: “A woman who was jailed by Gentiles.” Rebbi Yose said, it is different for a woman because she usually cries. Think of it if she was mute! She uses sign language. What about it¹¹The argument appears to be cogent.? Explain it following Rebbi Eliezer, since Rebbi Eliezer said “it may not be bought from Gentiles.” They wanted to say, where do Rebbi Eliezer and the rabbis disagree? About the cow, because of “eminence was given to the cow, an adornment was made for the cow.¹²In the Mishnah, not only do the rabbis permit to buy a Red Cow from a Gentile owner, they also allow to buy sacrificial animals from him. The question arises whether R. Eliezer will agree with this or not. The assumption here is that R. Eliezer will agree that sacrifices can be bought from Gentiles but not the Red Cow, whose ceremonies in pharisaic theory were made with many non-scriptural restrictions because of an important difference with Sadducees in matters of ritual purity (Mishnah Parah3:7,8).” But since the rabbis answer to Rebbi Eliezer all sheep of Qedar will be assembled for you¹³Is.60:7. The verse ends: they will be brought on My altar for pleasure. This gives divine sanction for using animals raised by Gentiles for the altar. Since the verse speaks of sacrifices, not of the Red C ow, R. Eliezer must hold that sacrificial animals cannot be bought from Gentiles. The same argument is quoted in the Babli 24a., this says that Rebbi Eliezer disagrees about everything. Rebbi Hoshaia asked, does one reply with an argument about the future against one about the past¹⁴The preceding argument does not prove anything in practice since in the next paragraph it will be shown that in messianic times the Gentiles will accept the Torah. Their animals may well be acceptable then but not now.? Rebbi Abin asked, does one reply with an argument when evil inclinations will have disappeared against one when evil inclinations exist¹⁵This is the same argument as before.?

“They said to him, if that is so, one should always mention it⁶²Quote from the Mishnah, not quite correct. It is the objection of R. Eliezer to R. Joshua’s statement..” The argument of Rebbi Eliezer seems inverted; the argument of Rebbi Joshua seems inverted⁶³The argument is not about the prayer text of the Amidah but about the doxology of the introductory benediction preceding to Amidah, “praise to You, Eternal, Redeemer of Israel”. According to R. Eliezer, redemption uniquely depends on Israel’s actions; therefore prayer for redemption either is unnecessary because all of Israel are repenting or it is useless because not all of Israel are repenting; the prayer text should be forbidden as vain invocation of the Name. According to R. Joshua the prayer is legitimate but one cannot understand why during the summer one should not mention God’s power to give rain in its time just as one prays for redemption in its time.. As they disagree: Rebbi Eliezer says, unless Israel repent they never will be redeemed, as it is said, by repentance and satisfaction you will be helped⁶⁴Is. 30:15. The interpretation agrees with the interpretation in Targum Jonathan ben Uziel.. Rebbi Joshua said to him, if Israel would stay and never repent, would they never be redeemed? Rebbi Eliezer said to him, the Holy One, praise to Him, causes a hard king like Haman to rule over them and immediately they repent and are redeemed. What is the reason? It is an evil time for Jacob and from it he will be helped⁶⁵Jer. 30:7.. Rebbi Joshua said to him, but is it not written, gratis you were sold and not by money you will be redeemed⁶⁶Is. 52:3. Not by money, but by repentance. The argument is switched between RR. Eliezer and Joshua in the Babli, Sanhedrin97b.? How does Rebbi Eliezer deal with this? Repentance, as you are saying, a bundle of money he took in his hand⁶⁷Prov.7:20. In the Babli, Sanhedrin96b, the “bundle of money” is interpreted as referring to the pious people (whom God took away by death, since in Prov. Chapter 7 the adulteress is interpreted as apostle of apostasy.) If this interpretation is accepted here, R. Eliezer’s argument is that for redemption it is not required that all of Israel rise to the status of pious people, but universal repentance is required nevertheless, etc. Rebbi Joshua said to him, but is it not written, in its time I shall quickly do it⁶⁸Is. 60:22.. How does Rebbi Eliezer deal with this? Repentance, as you are saying, but now, Israel, what does the Eternal, your God, ask from you but to fear⁶⁹Deut. 10:12. Fear of God is repentance. etc. Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: If you merit it, I shall quickly do it; if not, in its time⁷⁰Babli Sanhedrin98a.. When Rebbi Joshua said to him, he lifted his right and his left arms to heaven and swore by the Eternally Living that in term, terms and a half, when he finished to smash the hand of the holy people, all this will finish⁷¹Dan. 12:7. In the entire talmudic literature it is understood that the prophecies contained in Daniel have no relation with Maccabean times., Rebbi Eliezer withdrew⁷²Since this prophecy is unconditional. Babli Sanhedrin98a..