Talmud su Salmi 66:18

BARAITHA.²⁰K 3. R. Eliezer was asked, ‘Is it permissible to drink from [the hand of] the bride so long as her husband is sitting with her at the festive table?’ He replied, ‘Whoever drinks from [the hand of] the bride is as though he drank from the hand of a harlot’. [His colleagues] said to him, ‘Are not the daughters of Israel possessed of good manners?’ He answered, ‘God forbid! Anyone who is not familiar with the Torah cannot be possessed of good manners’. R. Eleazar b. Azariah made a public proclamation accompanied by the sounding of four hundred shofars, ‘He who receives a cup from the bride will never be pardoned’.
GEMARA. Wherein do they²¹R. Eliezer and the Sages opposed to him. dispute? The Sages are of the opinion that since she is the daughter of a scholar she continues the customs of her father;²²And would disregard any improper advances made to her. whereas R. Eliezer maintains that a woman follows in the ways of her husband.²³And can be easily misled.
The story²⁴Cf. ‘A.Z. 39a (Sonc. ed., p. 193). is told of a woman, married to a scholar, that she used to bind the tefillin around his arm. The scholar died and she married a tax-collector and used to attach the tax-seals for him. R. Eleazar b. Azariah made a public proclamation. ‘Infer from this that thinking a thing is like doing it’. [And should you say that it is not so,] why do we then take the stricter view and declare that he²⁵viz. one who receives a cup of wine from the hand of the bride, and there it can only be a case of impure thought and not of improper action. will never be pardoned? I will answer you, ‘ “Thinking” is not like “doing”, since it is written, If I had regarded iniquity in my heart, the Lord would not hear!’²⁶Ps. 66, 18. [Thinking in connection with] a married woman is different because it is much stricter.²⁷It may lead to a grave moral lapse.
Raba expounded: What is the meaning of the verse, Good and upright is the Lord; therefore doth He instruct sinners in the way?²⁸ibid. XXV, 9. Come and see the righteousness of the Holy One, blessed be He. Whoever has the intention to perform a precept but under duress fails to perform it, Scripture accounts it to him as though he had fulfilled it;²⁹Cf. Ḳid. 40a (Sonc. ed., p. 196). and whoever has the intention to commit a sin is not regarded as guilty until the time of its commission; as it is written, If I had regarded iniquity in my heart, the Lord would not hear.

The¹⁹⁰The first clause of this paragraph is also in the Tosephta and Babli mentioned in Note 186. The second part is different both in the Babli and the Tosephta which both make a difference between good deeds that produced yield and those that did not. The Tosephta clearly represents the position of the Babli. Holy One, praise to Him, adds good intention to deeds; the Holy One, praise to Him, does not add bad intention to deeds. The Holy One, praise to Him, adds good intention to deeds as it is written (Mal. 3:16): “Then those who fear the Eternal will speak together, each man with his neighbor¹⁹¹The proof is from the part of the verse not quoted: “The Eternal will be attentive and listen and write it into a book of remembrance before Him,” simply for the good intention..” The Holy One, praise to Him, does not add bad intention to deeds (Ps. 66:12): “If I saw mischief in my heart, the Eternal would not listen.” That refers to Israel, but for Gentiles it is the reverse; the Holy One, praise to Him, does not add good intention; bad intention the Holy One, praise to Him, does add. The Holy One, praise to Him, does not add good intention, as it is written (Dan. 6:15): “Until sundown he tried to rescue him;” it does not say “to save him¹⁹²Even though the first part of the verse, not quoted here, declares that Darius tried to save Daniel from the lions’ den..” The Holy One, praise to Him, adds bad intention: (Obad. 9–10) “From killing¹⁹³In the masoretic text, the word belongs to the previous verse, stating that nobody from Mount Seïr will escape being killed. Here the word is taken as explanation of the following verse.. Because of the oppression of your brother Jacob.” But did he kill him? This teaches that he thought about killing him and the verse counts it as if he had killed him.