Talmud su Giudici 7:19

Rebbi⁹²Since Rebbi Eliezer in the Mishnah had defined the time of the recital of Shema‘ as the first watch in the night, the discussion of the Mishnah now turns to the legal determination of the length of a nightwatch. The text here is composed of two sources. The statement about the number of watches in a night according to Rebbi and Rebbi Nathan is a Tosephta (Berakhot1:1). This Tosephta also has the division of the hour and its subdivisions by 24 parts each. This seems to belong to Rebbi’s statement since this subdivision and the division of the night (and possibly the day) is Roman practice. Rebbi Nathan, a contemporary of Rebbi known as “the Babylonian”, follows a Babylonian tradition that also seems to have been the old Israelite practice since the verse from Judges speaks of one “middle watch” which is possible only if there are an odd number of watches in the night. According to Rebbi, a watch is three hours and it has been noted that R. Joshua, who allows Shema‘ to be recited during the first three hours of daylight, follows Rebbi in the division of the day. said: There are four watches during daytime and four at nighttime. The period is one twenty-fourth of an hour. The time is one twenty-fourth of a period. The moment is one twenty-fourth of a time. How much is a moment? Rebbi Berekhiah in the name of Rebbi Ḥelbo said: as long as one needs to pronounce it. The Sages say the moment is like the blink of an eyelash. Samuel did formulate: the moment is one in 56,848 of an hour⁹³Of this part there exist three Yerushalmi sources [the Talmud here, Midrash Ekha rabbati on Threni 2:19. Midrash Samuel 3(1)], all of which have an identical text and the definition of the number of moments in an hour by Rebbi as 24³= 13824, by Samuel as 56848, and by others either as the time needed to say the word or as the blinking of an eye. In Babylonian sources (Berakhot 7a, Abodah zarah 4a) the numbers are quoted anonymously and are given as 58888 (printed editions), 56880 (Munich manuscript), 56800 (Koronel manuscript) in Berakhot and 53848 (printed editions), 56884 (R. Ḥananel), 56888 (Munich ms.) in Abodah zarah. In Sefer Agadot Hatalmud the reading is 5845. The opinion that a moment is the length of time needed to pronounce the word is attributed in the Babli to Rebbi Abin (who might be identical with Rabin, a Galilean authority who escaped persecution by an emperor and became an authority in Babylonia.) Only the numbers given in the Yerushalmi tradition are composites of simple numbers; Samuel’s number is 16×11×17×19, whereas the Babylonian numbers have no decomposition into small factors. Now most of the numbers in the Babylonian sources (who have beeen copied and edited much more than the Yerushalmi and, therefore, are more likely to contain scribal errors) are close to Samuel’s number. One may, therefore, assume that the original number in all Talmud texts was 56848.
In the Babylonian Talmud, the number given is from an anonymous Tannaïtic source which also adds: “Nobody can determine the moment exactly; only Bileam the sorcerer could do that.” In Antiquity (and the Middle Ages), all astronomical computations were done in the technique of the old Babylonians, in a number system based on subdivisions by 60. In general, divisions were executed only for numbers that have an easy reciprocal in the sexagesimal system, i.e., they are composed by factors of 60 (2, 3, 5, and their multiples). Instead of dividing, people looked up the reciprocal in a table and then multiplied. Samuel is the astronomer of most authority in the Talmud. Hence, it is reasonable to assume that his number, which is not invertible by the Babylonian method, is a good example that “nobody can exactly determine the moment” because 1/56848 is an infinite sexagesimal fraction. Hence, the comment of the Tanna, that “nobody can determine the moment exactly,” is implied in the number of Samuel and the Babylonian text is a derivative of the Yerushalmi text here.. Rebbi Nathan said three: (Jud. 7:19) “at the start of the middle watch.”

Rebbi Zeriqan and Rebbi Ammi⁹⁴Rebbi Ammi (or Immi) was the successor of Rebbi Yoḥanan as head of the academy of Tiberias. Rebbi Zeriqan was another student of Rebbi Yoḥanan. Their argument goes as follows: King David declares that he is used to get up at midnight and also that he gets up at the start of some night watch. But if midnight is the start of a watch then the number of watches has to be even. [The parallel in the Babli (Berakhot 3b) is a shortened version of the Yerushalmi (in particular, in the Ashkenazic manuscript tradition.)] in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: The reason of Rebbi is (Ps. 119:62): “At midnight I get up to thank You for Your just laws.” And it is written (Ps. 119:148): “My eyes preceded night watches.” Rebbi Ḥizqiah said: Rebbi Zeriqan and Rebbi Abba, one explained the reason of Rebbi, the other the reason of Rebbi Nathan. He who explained the reason of Rebbi: “at midnight”. He who explained the reason of Rebbi Nathan (Jud. 7:19): “at the start of the middle watch.”⁹⁵See the preceding paragraph. How does Rebbi Nathan uphold the basis of Rebbi’s reason, “at midnight”? Sometimes “at midnight,” sometimes “my eyes preceded night watches.” How is that? When David had a state dinner, “at midnight.” When he ate by himself, “my eyes preceded night watches.” In no case did dawn come and found David asleep. That is what David said (Ps. 57:9): “Wake up, my honor, wake up, o harp and lute, I shall awake dawn.” My honor has to be awake because of the honor of my Creator. My honor counts for nothing before the honor of my Creator. I shall awake dawn, dawn will not awake me. His evil instinct was trying to seduce him and told him: David, usually dawn awakes kings and you say “I shall awake dawn!” Usually kings sleep until three hours into the day and you say “at midnight I get up!” But he answers, “for Your just laws.” What did David do? Rebbi Phineas in the name of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Menaḥem⁹⁶Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Menaḥem was an Aggadist of the generation of Rebbi Ammi; Rebbi Phineas belongs to the following generation. A parallel Babylonian tradition is given in Babli Berakhot 4a. The Yerushalmi version is also found in Pesiqta dRav Kahana,ויהי בחצי הלילה, 13 and in Midrash Tehillim 119.: He took a harp, put it on his headboard, got up at midnight and started playing on it so that his companions in the study of Torah should hear it. What were his companions in the study of Torah saying? When king David studies Torah, certainly we have to do it also! Rebbi Levi⁹⁷The preacher in the academy of R. Yoḥanan. A shortened version, without the reference to the story of Elisha, is a Babylonian tradition, by contemporary Babylonian teachers, in Babli Berakhot 3b. The verse quoted talks about the prophetic extasy of Elisha before king Jehoshaphat. R. Elazar Azkari explains that the verse from Kings can be taken to be parallel to Psalms 57:9 since in the latter verse the harp is also adressed directly, as a living being. said: a lute was hanging in David’s window and in the night the North wind was blowing and moving it and it was playing by itself. This refers to what is written (2Kings 3:15): “It happened when the musical instrument was playing.” It does not say “when he played on the musical instrument” but “when the instrument was playing”; it was playing by itself.

How many form a camp? Rebbi Ḥananiah said, one hundred. Gideon came with the hundred men who were with him to the border of the camp³⁰⁰Jud. 7:19.. Rebbi Abuna asked, if it had said, “the camp of a hundred men who were with him” it would be acceptable³⁰¹Since the camp was the enemy’s the quote does not prove anything.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, ten: David’s servants came and spoke to Nabal³⁰²1S. 25:9. It had been stated in v. 5 that they were ten., etc. What means and they rested³⁰²1S. 25:9. It had been stated in v. 5 that they were ten.? Rebbi Justus bar Shune said, they made a camp. Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi said, ten: Until the camp was large like God’s camp³⁰³1Chr. 12:22.. How many are “God’s camp”? Ten³⁰⁴The source of this statement is unknown. Rashba col. 124, who quotes this statement, does not comment on it.. It was stated in the name of Rebbi Jehudah: 12’000 who are marching off as camp of Israel in a war of choice are permitted to rob moist wood but are forbidden to rob dry wood. Those who march out in a war of obligation are permitted to rob both dry and moist wood³⁰⁵Details of the statement in Mishnah 10. The Babli disagrees about the kind of wood, 17a, Tosephta 2:6.
The source of the number 12’000 is unknown. In Midrash Shemuel (ed. Buber 23(9)) the quote is “12’000 like the camp of Midyan.” This cannot be correct since the escapees from Gideon’s attack were about 15’000 (Jud. 8:10). Our text is confirmed by R. Ḥananel (ad 17a).. Rebbi Daniel the son of Rav Qatina in the name of Rav Ḥuna: If they were made into bundles it is forbidden. So far if it was not close to a forest; even if it was close to a forest. So far if it was not close to a spring; even if it was close to a spring. ³⁰⁶This refers to the statement in Mishnah 10 that in a camp one is not liable for demay. It is specified that food delivered to the camp is not liable even in a town but food acquired in town remains liable even if taken out to camp. If they brought it with them to a town, they already are freed from liability. What they took out with them from a town already is liable for demay. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Abbahu, Rebbi Ḥizqiah said in the name of Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi: Demay was put in order or not in order³⁰⁷Cf. Šabbat 2, Note 238..