사무엘하 17:30의 미드라쉬

(Lev. 14:2:) “This shall be the law of the leper.” Let our master instruct us: How many people have no share in the world to come?¹Numb. R. 14:1; PR 6:4; ARN, A, 36; Midrash on Proverbs, 22. Thus have our masters taught (in Sanh. 10:1-2): These are they who have no share in the world to come…. Three kings and four commoners²Gk.: idiotes. have no share in the world to come. The three kings are Jeroboam, Ahab, and Manasseh.³See Sanh. 101b-104a. R. Judah ben Shallum said, “The sages of the Mishnah wanted to teach that there were four kings and reckon Solomon with them; however, a heavenly voice (bat qol) came forth and said (in the words of Ps. 105:15), ‘Touch not my anointed.’ Nevertheless they returned one day to teaching [as before]. Fire from the heavens came and destroyed their benches. [The heavenly voice] returned and said (according to Job 34:33), ‘Should He repay as you would, when you have refused?’” All the same, why did they so teach? Because it is written (in I Kings 11:1, 6), “Now King Solomon loved many foreign wives […]. And Solomon did what was evil in the eyes of the Lord.” (Sanh. 10:2, at the end:) The four commoners are Balaam, Doeg, Ahithophel and Gehazi. You find that these were condemned to Geihinnom on account of the words of their mouths. In the case of Balaam, he was driven into Geihinnom because of his speech, as stated (in Numb. 23:7), “From Aram has Balak brought me, the king of Moab,”⁴Numb. R. 20:19; also below, Numb. 7:17. [meaning] I was one of the exalted ones;⁵Heb.: MRMYM, which the midrash seems to understand as related to M’RMYM, i.e., “one of the Arameans.” I was one of the division of the patriarchs, [but] Balak brought me (yanheni) and cast me into Geihinnom.” Now brought me (yanheni, rt.: nhh) can only imply Geihinnom, since it is stated (in Ezek. 32:18), “Son of man, lament over (rt.: nhh)⁶The Buber text reads the middle letter in this root as a het in agreement with Numb. 23:7; but the parallels in Numb. R. 20:19, and the Masoretic Text all read the middle letter as a he, a reading which together with the preposition ‘al, requires the translation, LAMENT OVER. [the masses of Egypt and cast them down… unto the lowest part of the nether world].” So also was Doeg banished because of his speech. When? When David fled to Nob, the city of priests where Ahimelech received him, Saul noticed and gathered all his servants. He said to them, “A fine way you are treating me! For David does whatever he wishes, and not one of you has put a word in my ear.” It is so stated (in I Sam. 22:8), “Is that why all of you have conspired against me? For no one is putting a word in my ear when my son is making a deal with the son of Jesse….” Doeg began to utter evil speech, as stated (in vs. 9), “Then Doeg the Edomite, who was standing among the servants of Saul, answered and said, ‘I saw the son of Jesse come to Nob….’” It was also by his hand that eighty-five priests who wear the ephod and Ahimelech the High Priest were slain. “And he smote Nob the city of priests with the edge of the sword” (I Samuel 22:19). R. Eleazar said, “Anyone who becomes merciful upon the cruel one will end by being cruel to the merciful: It is written (I Samuel 15:9), ‘But Saul had pity upon Agag and upon the best of the sheep and the cattle’; and it is [also] written (I Samuel 22:19) about Nob the city of priest, ‘And he smote Nob the city of priests with the edge of the sword.’“ So also was Ahithophel banished because of his speech. Thus it is stated (in II Sam. 17:23), “So when Ahithophel saw that his counsel was not heeded… and he set his house in order and hanged himself.” Gehazi also was banished on account of his speech. When Naaman became leprous and was healed at the hands of Elisha, Naaman began to give silver, gold and gifts⁷Gk.: dora. to Elisha, but he did not want to accept them. Now Gehazi was ministering to Elisha. He saw the silver, the gold, and the clothes; so he said (in II Kings 5:20), “My Lord has spared that Aramean Naaman without accepting what he brought; as the Lord lives, I will run after him and get something from him.” Certainly he took [something; he took] his deformity. Thus it is stated (in vs. 27), “And the leprosy of Naaman shall cleave to you and to your seed forever.” Why [did Elisha not want anything]? Because it is stated (in Deut. 13:18), “And let nothing cleave to your hand of that which is devoted.” Now Naaman and the king of Aram served idols; and it is written (in Deut. 7:26), “Do not bring an abomination unto your house.” R. Pedat said, “The Holy One, blessed be He, has made a covenant with the world that anyone who utters evil speech receives leprosy.” Where is it shown? From what is written on the matter (in Lev. 14:2), “This shall be the law of the leper (hametsora'),” [ i.e. ] the one who proclaims evil (hamotsi' ra').⁸Below, 5:5; ySot. 2:1 (17d); ‘Arakh. 15b; Cf. Lev. R. 16:1. Our masters have said, “Plagues only affect a person on account of the evil speech which comes out of his mouth.” So the holy spirit cries out (in Eccl. 5:5), “Do not let your mouth cause your flesh to sin,” [ i.e. ] to afflict your body; (ibid., cont.) “and do not say before the angel that it was a mistake,” [ i.e. ] and do not say before the angel who is appointed over you, “By mistake I brought forth the word from my mouth.” For every word which issues from your mouth, whether good, evil, by mistake, or on purpose, is written in a book. Where is it shown that it is so? Where it is stated (in Mal. 3:16), “Then those who feared the Lord spoke with one another; the Lord has hearkened and listened, and a book of remembrance has been written before Him […].” And so with the trait of calamity, David said (in Ps. 139:2), “You know when I sit down and when I stand up, You discern my thoughts from afar.” Job also said (in Job 14:16), “For You count my footsteps,” and (Job 13:27) “You look closely over the treading of my feet.” (Eccl. 5:5, cont.:) “Why should God be angry over your voice and destroy the work of your hands?” These are the hands and the body when they are afflicted by leprosy. Another interpretation (of Eccl. 5:5), “Do not let your mouth cause your flesh to sin”: The Torah has spoken to you euphemistically. If your wife has told you that she is menstruating (niddah), do not cause your body to sin by touching her. Do not say before the angel who is appointed over the formation of the fetus, “’I made a mistake and did not know.” (Ibid., cont.:) “Why should God be angry over your voice and destroy the work of your hands?” This refers to the children who are afflicted with leprosy. R. Aha said, “If a man has intercourse with his wife when she is menstruating, the children will be afflicted with leprosy. How? [If] he has intercourse on the first day of her menstruating, the child which is born shall be afflicted after ten years. [If] he has intercourse with her on the second day, it shall be afflicted after twenty years. On the third day it shall be afflicted after thirty years. On the fourth day it shall be afflicted after forty years. On the fifth day it shall be afflicted after fifty years. On the sixth day it shall be afflicted after sixty years. On the seventh day it shall be afflicted after seventy years, corresponding to the seven days of her menstruation. Moreover, he shall not depart from the world before he has seen his fruit spoiled. Now the days of a person's life are only seventy years, for so David says (in Ps. 90:10), ‘The days of our life comprise seventy years, and’ [only if] one merited, ‘eighty.’ Therefore if a man has intercourse with a menstruating woman on the seventh day, the fetus is afflicted at seventy years of age, so that he does not depart from the world until he has seen his fruit spoiled. This punishment, as it were, does not come from Me. I have already testified to you and told you (in Lev. 14:2,) ‘This shall be the law of the leper.’” Another interpretation (of Eccl. 5:5), “Do not let your mouth [cause your flesh to sin, and do not say before the angel (mal'akh) that it was a mistake]”: If you have acted with malice aforethought and led astray a high priest, who is called an angel (mal'akh), as stated (in Mal. 2:7), “For the lips of a priest preserve knowledge, and they should seek Torah from his mouth; for he is the messenger (mal'akh) of the Lord of hosts”; then do not say, “I sinned by mistake,” [ i.e. ] (in Eccl. 5:5), “ do not say before the angel (i.e., before the high priest) that it was a mistake.” Why? You are leading yourself astray. You are afflicting yourself. The voice which you send forth from your mouth will destroy the work of your hands. (Eccl. 5:5) “Why should God be angry over your voice [and destroy the work of your hands]?” This refers to the children who are afflicted with leprosy.

(Lev. 14:2:) THIS SHALL BE THE LAW OF THE LEPER. Let our master instruct us: How many children of Adam have no share in the world to come?¹Tanh., Lev. 5:1; Numb. R. 14:1; PR 6:4; ARN, A, 36; Midrash on Proverbs, 22. Thus have our masters taught (in Sanh. 10:1–2): THESE ARE THEY WHO HAVE NO SHARE IN THE WORLD TO COME…. THREE KINGS AND FOUR COMMONERS²Gk.: idiotes. HAVE NO SHARE IN THE WORLD TO COME. THE THREE KINGS ARE JEROBOAM, AHAB, AND MANASSEH.³See Sanh. 101b-104a. R. Judah ben Shallum the Levite said: The sages of the Mishnah wanted to teach that there were four kings and reckon Solomon with them; however, a heavenly voice (bat qol) came forth and said (in the words of Ps. 105:15): TOUCH NOT MY ANOINTED. Nevertheless they returned one day to teaching < as before >. Fire from the heavens came and destroyed their benches. < The heavenly voice > returned and said (according to Job 34:33): SHOULD HE REPAY AS YOU WOULD, WHEN YOU HAVE REFUSED? All the same, why did they so teach? Because it is written (in I Kings 11:1, 6): NOW KING SOLOMON LOVED MANY FOREIGN WIVES < …. > AND SOLOMON DID WHAT WAS EVIL IN THE EYES OF THE LORD. (Sanh. 10:2, at the end:) THE FOUR COMMONERS ARE BALAAM, DOEG, AHITHOPHEL AND GEHAZI. You find that these were condemned to Gehinnom on account of the words of their mouths. In the case of Balaam, he was driven into Gehinnom because of his speech, as stated (in Numb. 23:7): FROM ARAM HAS BALAK BROUGHT ME, THE KING OF MOAB < FROM THE HILLS OF THE EAST: COME, CURSE JACOB FOR ME…. >⁴Numb. R. 20:19; also below, Numb. 7:17. < He said: > I was one of the exalted ones;⁵Heb.: MRMYM, which the midrash seems to understand as related to M’RMYM, i.e., “one of the Arameans.” I was one of the division of < the > patriarchs. BALAK BROUGHT ME (yanheni) and cast me into Gehinnom. Now BROUGHT ME (yanheni, rt.: NHH) can only imply Gehinnom, since it is stated (in Ezek. 32:18): SON OF ADAM, BRING (rt.: NHH)⁶The Buber text reads the middle letter in this root as a het in agreement with Numb. 23:7; but the parallels in Tanh., Lev. 5:1; Numb. R. 20:19, and the Masoretic Text all read the middle letter as a he, a reading which together with the preposition ‘al, requires the translation, LAMENT OVER. THE MASSES OF EGYPT AND CAST THEM DOWN… < UNTO THE LOWEST PART OF THE NETHER WORLD ALONG WITH THOSE WHO GO DOWN TO THE PIT >. So also was Doeg banished because of his speech. When? When David fled to Nob, the city of priests {to Ahimelech}, where Ahimelech received him, Saul noticed and gathered all his servants. He said to them: A fine way you are treating me! For David does whatever he wishes, and not one of you has put a word in my ear. It is so stated (in I Sam. 22:8): IS THAT WHY ALL OF YOU HAVE CONSPIRED [AGAINST ME? FOR NO ONE IS PUTTING A WORD IN MY EAR] < WHEN MY SON IS MAKING A DEAL WITH THE SON OF JESSE >…. Doeg began to utter evil speech, as stated (in vs. 9): THEN DOEG THE EDOMITE, WHO WAS STANDING AMONG THE SERVANTS OF SAUL, < ANSWERED AND SAID: I SAW THE SON OF JESSE COME TO NOB…. > It was also by his hand that eighty-five priests who wear the ephod and the high priest Ahimelech were slain. And he smote Nob the city of priests with the edge of the sword. So also was Ahithophel banished because of his speech. Thus it is stated (in II Sam. 17:23): SO WHEN AHITHOPHEL SAW THAT HIS COUNSEL WAS NOT HEEDED…. THEN HE SET HIS HOUSE IN ORDER AND HANGED HIMSELF. Gehazi also was banished on account of his speech. When Naaman became leprous and was healed at the hands of Elisha, Naaman began to give silver, gold and gifts⁷Gk.: dora. to Elisha, but he did not want to accept them. Now Gehazi was ministering to Elisha. He saw the silver, the gold, and the clothes; so he said (in II Kings 5:20, 21, 27): MY LORD HAS SPARED < THAT ARAMEAN > NAAMAN…. < THEN GEHAZI CHASED AFTER NAAMAN…. > THEREFORE THE LEPROSY OF NAAMAN [SHALL CLEAVE TO YOU AND TO YOUR SEED FOREVER]. Why? Because it is stated (in Deut. 13:18): AND LET NOTHING CLEAVE TO YOUR HAND OF THAT WHICH IS DEVOTED. Now Naaman and the king of Aram served idols; and it is written (in Deut. 7:26): DO NOT BRING AN ABOMINATION UNTO YOUR HOUSE…. Since you said (in II Kings 5:20): AND I WILL ACCEPT SOMETHING FROM {HIS HAND} [HIM], by your life, you shall < also > take his deformity. Thus it is stated (in vs. 27): THEREFORE THE LEPROSY OF NAAMAN SHALL CLEAVE TO YOU. R. Pedat said: The Holy One has made a covenant with the world that anyone who utters evil speech receives leprosy. Where is it shown? From what is written on the matter (in Lev. 14:2): THIS SHALL BE THE LAW OF THE LEPER (hametsora'), < i.e. > the one who proclaims evil (hamotsi' ra').⁸Below, 5:5; ySot. 2:1 (17d); ‘Arakh. 15b; Cf. Lev. R. 16:1.

(Deut. 21:10:) WHEN YOU GO OUT TO WAR <AGAINST YOUR ENEMIES, AND THE LORD YOUR GOD GIVES THEM INTO YOUR HAND> AND YOU TAKE THEM CAPTIVE. Our masters have taught (Avot 4:2): <ONE> GOOD DEED BRINGS ABOUT <ANOTHER> GOOD DEED, AND <ONE> TRANSGRESSION BRINGS ABOUT <ANOTHER> TRANSGRESSION. (Deut. 21:11–12:) AND WHEN YOU SEE AMONG THE CAPTIVES A BEAUTIFUL WOMAN <WHOM YOU DESIRE TO TAKE FOR A WIFE, YOU SHALL BRING HER INTO YOUR HOUSE, > WHERE SHE SHALL SHAVE HER HEAD, so that she will not find favor in his eyes.¹Tanh., Deut. 6:1; see Deut. R. 6:4. What is written after that (in vs. 15):) WHEN A MAN HAS TWO WIVES. Two wives in <one> house <means> strife in the house. And moreover (ibid., cont.:) ONE LOVED AND THE OTHER HATED, or both of them hated. What is written after that (in vs. 18)? IF ONE HAS A DEFIANT AND REBELLIOUS SON. Whenever anyone marries a pretty face, there results from it A DEFIANT AND REBELLIOUS SON. Thus we find it so in the case of David, because (as suggested by II Sam. 3:3) he had lusted for Maacah bat Talmai king of Geshur, while he had gone to war.²By having sexual relations while at war with Saul (II Sam. 3:1), David was disobeying the Mosaic law of warfare. See Deut. 20:7–8. So Absalom came out of him <in this union>, who wanted to kill him and (according to II Sam. 16:22) slept with his wives before the eyes of all Israel and in broad daylight. Also because of him several myriads from Israel were killed. So he made discord in Israel. Also killed were Shimei [ben Gera] (in I Kings 2:46), Sheba ben Bichri (in II Sam. 20:22), Ahithophel (in II Sam. 17:23), Mephibosheth,³There seems to be some confusion between Mephibosheth who was a son of Saul that David had killed (in II Sam. 21:8) and the Mephibosheth who was Saul’s grandson and who was falsely accused of betraying David for Absalom (II Sam. 16:3; but cf. 19:24–30). and Ishbosheth (in II Sam. 4:7). Moreover <David> had Ziba rule over the whole house of Saul (II Sam. 16:4; cf. II Sam. 9:9). It is also taught: R. Jose says:⁴Sanh. 72a. Is it because A DEFIANT AND REBELLIOUS SON ate half a pound⁵Gk.: litra. of meat and drank half a log of wine that Torah says for one to go out to the place for <execution by> stoning (cf. Deut. 21:18–21)? It is simply that Torah has foreseen the end of A DEFIANT AND REBELLIOUS SON, that he ends up squandering his father's assets with wastrels with whom he eats and drinks, until he seeks what he has been accustomed to and does not find it.⁶Cf. Luke 15:14–16. Then he goes out to the crossroads, where he kills people and robs⁷Melastem, from the Gk.: lestes (“robber”). them. So Torah is saying: Let him die innocent and not die guilty, for the death of the wicked is fitting for them and fitting for the world. And what is written after that (in vs. 22)? AND WHEN SOMEONE IS GUILTY OF A CRIME PUNISHABLE BY DEATH AND IS PUT TO DEATH. If he is delivered from the one,⁸I.e., the preventive punishment as A DEFIANT AND REBELLIOUS SON. he is not delivered from the other. We have learned (in Avot 4:2): THAT <ONE> TRANSGRESSION BRINGS ABOUT <ANOTHER> TRANSGRESSION; <ONE> GOOD DEED/COMMANDMENT BRINGS ABOUT <ANOTHER> GOOD DEED/COMMANDMENT.⁹In the text of Avot the clauses are reversed. For the correct order, see the beginning of the paragraph. Note also that the word for GOOD DEED (mitswah) also means COMMANDMENT and that the midrash has both meanings in mind. Where is it shown (in Scripture)? Where it is stated (in Deut. 22:6–7): WHEN YOU COME ACROSS A BIRD NEST…. YOU MUST SURELY LET <THE MOTHER> GO …, IN ORDER THAT IT MAY BE WELL WITH YOU AND YOU MAY LENGTHEN YOUR LIFE. What is written after that (in vs. 8)? [WHEN YOU BUILD A NEW HOUSE, <YOU SHALL MAKE A PARAPET FOR YOUR ROOF>.] You have the right to build a house and make a parapet. What is written after that (in vs. 9)? YOU SHALL NOT SOW YOUR VINEYARD WITH TWO KINDS OF SEED. You do have a right to <possess> a vineyard and to sow a field. What is written after that (in vs. 10)? YOU SHALL NOT PLOW WITH AN OX AND AN ASS <TOGETHER>. You do have a right to <possess> oxen and asses. What is written after that (in vs. 11)? YOU SHALL NOT WEAR INTERWOVEN STUFF, <WOOL AND FLAX TOGETHER>. You do have the right to nice clothes of wool and of linen (but not in combination). What is written after that (in vs. 12)? YOU SHALL MAKE YOURSELVES TASSELS. You have a right to the commandment on tassels. What is written after that (in vs. 13)? WHEN A MAN TAKES A WIFE. A man has a right to a wife and children. We learn (in Avot 4:2): THAT <ONE> GOOD DEED/COMMANDMENT BRINGS ABOUT <ANOTHER> GOOD DEED/COMMANDMENT; therefore the parashot are dependent on each other.

(Deut. 21:10:) “When you go out to war [against your enemies, and the Lord your God gives them into your hand and you take them captive].” Our masters have taught (Avot 4:2), “[One] good deed/commandment brings about [another] good deed/commandment, and [one] transgression brings about [another] transgression.” (Deut. 21:11-12:) “And when you see among the captives a woman of pretty form [whom you desire to take for a wife. And you shall bring her into your house,] where she shall shave her head and do her nails,” so that she will not find favor in his eyes.¹See Deut. R. 6:4. What is written after that (in vs. 15), “When a man has two wives.” Two [wives] in [one] house [means] strife in the house. And moreover (ibid., cont.) “one loved and the other hated,” or both of them hated. What is written after that (in vs. 18)? “If one has a defiant and rebellious son.” Whenever anyone marries a “woman of pretty form,” there results from it a defiant and rebellious son. Thus we find it so in the case of David, because (as suggested by II Sam. 3:3) he had desired Maacah bat Talmai king of Geshur, while he had gone to war; so Absalom came out of him [in this union. The latter] wanted to kill him and (according to II Sam. 16:22) slept with his ten concubines before the eyes of all Israel and in broad daylight. Also because of him several myriads from Israel were killed. And he created discord in Israel, [through which] were killed Shimei ben Gera (in I Kings 2:46), Sheba ben Bichri (in II Sam. 20:22), Ahithophel (in II Sam. 17:23). And he killed Mephibosheth,²There may be some confusion between Mephibosheth who was a son of Saul that David had killed (in II Sam. 21:8) and the Mephibosheth who was Saul’s grandson and who was falsely accused of betraying David for Absalom (II Sam. 16:3; but cf. 19:24–30). and had Ziba rule over the whole house of Saul (II Sam. 16:4; cf. II Sam. 9:9). It is taught: R. Jose says,³Sanh. 72a. “Is it because a defiant and rebellious son ate half a pound⁴Gk.: litra. of meat and drank half a log of undiluted wine that the Torah says for him to go out to the court and be [executed by] stoning (cf. Deut. 21:18-21)? It is simply that Torah has foreseen the end of the thinking of a defiant and rebellious son. As in the end he will squander his father's assets with wastrels with whom he eats and drinks, until he seeks what he has been accustomed to and does not find it. Then he goes out to the crossroads, where he kills people and robs⁵Melastem, from the Gk.: lestes (“robber”). them. So the Torah is saying, ‘Let him die innocent and not die guilty,’ for the death of the wicked benefits them and benefits the world.” And what is written after that (in vs. 22)? “And when someone is guilty of a crime punishable by death and is put to death.” If he is delivered from the one,⁶I.e., the preventive punishment as A DEFIANT AND REBELLIOUS SON. he is not delivered from the other. [Hence] we have learned “[One] transgression brings about [another] transgression.” [But that one] good deed/commandment brings about [another] good deed/commandment,⁷In the text of Avot the clauses are reversed. For the correct order, see the beginning of the paragraph. Note also that the word for GOOD DEED (mitswah) also means COMMANDMENT and that the midrash has both meanings in mind. where is it shown (in Scripture)? Where it is stated (in Deut. 22:6-7), “When you come across a bird nest…. You must surely let [the mother] go …, in order that it may be well with you and you may lengthen your life.” What is written after that (in vs. 8)? “When you build a new house, [you shall make a parapet for your roof].]” You will merit to build a house and make a parapet. What is written after that (in vs. 9)? “You shall not sow your vineyard with two kinds of seed.” You will merit to [possess] a vineyard and to sow a field. What is written after that (in vs. 10)? “You shall not plow with an ox and an ass [together].” You will merit to [possess] oxen and asses. What is written after that (in vs. 11)? “You shall not wear interwoven stuff, [wool and flax together].” You will merit to [possess] nice clothes of wool and of linen. What is written after that (in vs. 12)? “You shall make yourselves tassels.” You shall merit the commandment of tassels. What is written after that (in vs. 13)? “When a man takes a wife.” You shsll merit to [have] a wife and children. Behold, we have learned that [one] good deed/commandment brings about [another] good deed/commandment and one] transgression brings about [another] transgression. Therefore these sections of the Torah are adjacent to one another.

Our Rabbis were taught: "There are six persons over whom the Angel of Death did not dominate: Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Aaron, and Miriam. The first three because of the words mentioned, and the latter because it is written (Num. 33, 38) By the order of the Lord, etc. But concerning Miriam these words are not written? R. Elazar said: "Miriam also died the same death, because we infer it through the analogy by the word Sham Sham, and Scripture merely withheld it." Our Rabbis were taught: There are seven upon whom the worms have no domination: Abraham, Isaac Jacob, Moses, Aaron, Miriam, Benjamin ben Jacob; according to others, also David. The former six, because of the reasons stated above; and Benjamin, because it is written concerning him (Deut. 23, 12) The beloved of the Lord [is he], he shall dwell in safety, etc. There are four who died without sins of their own but [for the sin committed] through the instigation of the serpent; viz: Benjamin b. Jacob, Amram, father of Moses, Jesse, father of David, and Khiliab b. David. Concerning all of them we hold a tradition, except Jesse, the father of David, which is deduced from the verse, as it is written (II Sam. 17, 25) Now Amasa was the son of a man, whose name was Ithra the Israelite, that went in to Abigal, the daughter of Nachash, sister of Zeruiah, Joab's mother. Was she then the daughter of Nachash? Behold she was the daughter of Ithra as it is written (I Chr. 2, 16) And their sisters were Zeruiah, etc. We therefore say that it means who died through the instigation of the serpent.

Said R. Juda in the name of Rab: "The curse of a scholar, even if it is without cause, is realized; and this we see to have been the case with Achithophel. When David was digging the Shittin (foundation) of the altar [to reach the watery depth of the earth] the waters of the deep came up and threatened to flood the world; whereupon David said: 'Is there anyone who knows if it is permitted to inscribe the Holy name upon a piece of broken clay and drop it into the water?' No one responded. He exclaimed: 'Whoever amongst ye knows and abstains from answering, shall be choked.' Then Achithophel concluded a fortiori, saying: 'If for the sake of bringing pecae between husband and wife, the Lord has allowed His name [which is written in all sacredness] to be erased by water, so much the more when the peace of the entire world is threatened!' Accordingly, he decided that it is permitted. David then [following this decision] dropped into the water a bit of clay upon which the Holy name was written and the deep came back unto its original place. Nevertheless concerning Achitophel it is written (II Sam. 17, 23) And when Achitophel saw that his council was not followed, etc., and strangled himself." R. Abahu said: "The curse of a scholar, even if it is on condition, is nevertheless realized. Whence do we infer it? From Eli, for Eli said unto Samuel (I Sam. 3, 17) God do so to thee, and more also, if thou hide anything from me. And although Samuel did disclose to him everything, as it is written (Ib.) And Samuel told him all the words, and hid nothing from him, yet it is written [concerning Samuel] (Ib. 8, 3) And his sons walked not in his ways, etc."

(Numb. 19:2:) “This is the statute of the Torah.” R. Tanhum bar Hanila'i opened [his discourse] (with Ps. 12:7), “The sayings of the Lord are pure sayings.”³⁶Lev. R. 26:1; PRK 4:2; PR 14:4. Are the sayings of the Lord [true] sayings, but the sayings of flesh and blood not [true] sayings? Now by universal custom, when a king of flesh and blood enters a province, the inhabitants of the province praise³⁷Rt.: QLS. Cf. Gk.: kalos (“beautiful”). him; and their praise is pleasing to him. He says to them, “Tomorrow I am building bath houses³⁸Dimosa’ot: The translation derives its meaning from the Gk. demosia (“public buildings”), but Jastrow, s.v., demosia, understands the plural of this word more specifically to mean “public baths”, a meaning that well fits this context. for you, and I am building baths for you and I am bringing in a water carrier for you.” [Then] he goes to sleep and never gets up. Where is he [now], and where are his promises (literally, statements)? The Holy One, blessed be He, however, is not like this. Rather the statement of God is true, as (in Jer. 10:10), “He is a living God and an everlasting King.” R. Joshua ben Levi said, “We find that the Torah has twisted two or three words in the Torah, so as not to bring forth something unclean from His (i.e., the Holy One, blessed be He's) mouth.³⁹In addition to the parallels for the last section, see Gen. R. 32:4; also cf. M. Pss. 12:5; also Pes. 3b. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 7:2), ‘From the clean beast and from the beast which is not clean.’ So it is not written, ‘of the unclean beast.’" R. Judan said, “When He came to introduce the signs of an unclean beast, He only began with the signs of purity. It is not written here (in Lev. 11:4), ‘the camel, because it does not have a cloven hoof,’ but “[the camel] because it chews its cud [but does not have a cloven hoof].’ It is not written here (in Lev. 11:6), ‘The hare, because it does not have a hoof,’ but ‘[The hare], because it chews its cud [but does not have a cloven hoof].’ It is not written (in Lev. 11:7), ‘The pig, because it does not chew its cud,’ but ‘[the pig], because it has a cloven hoof [and is cleft footed, but does not chew its cud].’” R. Joshua of Sikhnin said in the name of R. Levi, “The infants who lived in the days of David, [even] before they had a gotten a taste of sin, knew how to interpret the Torah with forty-nine reasons for declaring an object unclean and forty-nine reasons for declaring an object clean.⁴⁰Lev. R. 26:2; Numb. R. 19:2; Cant. R. 2:4:1; PRK 4:2; PR 14:10; 21:10; M. Pss. 7:7; 12:4; cf. PR 14:6; see also below. So David prayed for them and said (in Ps. 12:8), ‘You, O Lord, will keep them; You will guard each [of them] from this generation unto eternity.’ (ibid.:) ‘You, O Lord, will keep them,’ [i.e.,] watch over their instruction in their hearts; (ibid., cont.) ‘You will guard each [of them from this generation unto eternity],’ from the generation which is worthy of destruction. But after all this praise, they went out to war and fell, because there were slanderers⁴¹Lat.: delatores (“informers”). among them. This is what David says (in Ps. 57:5), ‘My soul is in the midst of lions, I lie down among those who are aflame, men whose teeth are spears and darts, and whose tongues are a sharp sword.’ (ibid.:) ‘My soul is in the midst of lions,’ these are Abner and Amasa, who were lions with the Torah⁴²Although lions, they did not support David when they should have. See Ps. 17:12.; (ibid., cont.) ‘I lie down among those who are aflame,’ these are Doeg and Ahithophel, who were aflame to slander [David]⁴³On Doeg, see I Sam. 22:8-10; Ps. 52:1. On Ahithophel, see II Sam. 17:1-23.; (ibid., cont.) ‘men whose teeth are spears and darts,’ these are the people of Keilah, of whom it is stated (in I Sam. 23:12), ‘Will the people of Keilah surrender me?’ (Ps. 57:5, cont.:) ‘And whose tongue is a sharp sword,’ these are the Ziphites, of whom it is stated (in Ps. 54:2), ‘When the Ziphites came and said to Saul, “Is not David hiding among us […]?”’ At that time David said (in Ps. 57:6), ‘”Be exalted, O God, above the heavens,” remove your Divine Presence from among them.’ The generation of Ahab, however, were all worshipers of idols; yet because there were no slanderers among them, they went out to war and won.⁴⁴Deut. R. 5:10; cf. Meg. 11a, according to which Ahab was one of three who ruled over the whole world. The other two were Ahasuerus and Nebuchadnezzar. That [freedom from informers] is what [enabled] Obadiah to say to Elijah (in I Kings 18:13), ‘Has it not been told to my lord what I did [when Jezebel slew the prophets, how I hid a hundred prophets of the Lord …, and provided them with bread and water?’ If bread [is mentioned], why [mention] water? Simply because it was more difficult to bring them the water than the bread.⁴⁵Because of the drought, the greater difficulty in obtaining water would advertise what he was doing. And yet Elijah made his proclamation⁴⁶Rt.: KRZ; see Gk.: keryssein. on Mount Carmel and said (in vs. 22), ‘I am the only prophet of the Lord left,’ and [even though] all the people knew [about Obadiah’s prophets], they did not expose it to the king.” R. Samuel b. R. Nahman said, “They said to the serpent, ‘Why is it that you are found among the fences?’ It said to them, ‘I made a breach in the fence of the world.’⁴⁷I.e., brought sin into the world. They said to it, ‘Why is it that you move along with your tongue slavering?’⁴⁸See also yPe’ah 1:1 (16ab); cf. ‘Arakh. 15b. It said to them, ‘That [tongue] caused me [to make the breach].’ They said to it, ‘Why is it that, when all the [other] animals bite, they do not kill; but when you bite, you do kill?’ It said to them (in Eccl. 10:11), ‘”If a snake bites without being under a spell, the owner of the tongue (i.e., one able to charm the snake) has no advantage.” Is it possible for me to do anything without me being told from on High?’ ‘Then why is it that, when you bite one limb, all the limbs feel [the pain]?’ It said to them, ‘Are you asking me? Ask a slandering informer,⁴⁹Literally: “Master of the tongue.” the one who [remains] here and [yet] slays in Rome.’” Why is the slandering informer named a "third?”⁵⁰See Targum Pseudo-Jonathan on Lev. 19:16. The targumist translates rakhil, which came to be interpreted as “slanderer” or “informer,” with lishan telita’e (“triple tongue”). Because [such a slanderer] kills three people: the one who speaks it, the one who accepts it, and the one about whom it is spoken.⁵¹Also ‘Arakh. 15b; M. Pss. 12:2. In the days of Saul it killed four: Doeg, who spoke it⁵²I Sam 22:9-10 and II Sam. 1:15, as interpreted by Rashi on II Sam. 1:2.; Saul, who received it⁵³See Rashi on II Sam. 1:9, who knows a midrash, according to which Saul was slain for slaying the priests of Nob.; Ahimelech, about whom it was spoken⁵⁴In I Sam. 22:16-19.; and Abner ben Ner. Now why was Abner ben Ner slain? Joshua ben Levi said, “[He was slain] because he had his [own] name precede the name of David. This is what is written (in II Sam. 3:12), ‘Then Abner sent messengers unto David where he was, saying, “To whom does the land belong?”’ [In the message] he wrote, ‘From Abner to David.’”⁵⁵Instead of “to David from Abner.” R. Simeon ben Laqish said, “[He was slain] because he made the blood of young men [a matter of] amusement (rt.: shq), as stated (in II Sam. 2:14), ‘Please let the young men arise and play (rt.: shq) before us.’” Our masters have said, “[He was slain] because he did [not] wait for Saul to be reconciled⁵⁶Rt.: PYS. Cf. the Gk. noun, peisis, which designates the softer feelings. with David, where it is stated (in I Sam. 24:12, with David addressing Saul), ‘See, my father, see the corner of your cloak in my hand; for when I cut off the corner of your cloak, I did not kill you].’ [Saul] said to him, ‘Abner, what do you want [to understand] from the cloak? You said, “It was caught on a thorn.”’ When [David] came toward wagons around the camp, he said to him (in I Sam. 26:14), ‘“Abner, will you not answer?’ As for the corner of the cloak, you said was caught on a thorn. Were [the] spear and [the] water jar (of I Sam. 26:11) caught on a thorn?’” There are also some who say, “[Abner was slain] because he had the power to protest about Nob, the city of priests, but did not protest.”

Regarding that which the verse states: “Shaḥarayim begot children in the field of Moav [after he had sent them away, Ḥushim and Baara his wives]” (I Chronicles 8:8), Elijah, of blessed memory, asked Rabbi Nehorai, he said to him: ‘What is this that is written: “Shaḥarayim begot in the field of Moav”?’ [Rabbi Nehorai] said to him: ‘A great man begot in the field of Moav.’ “After he had sent them away” (I Chronicles 8:8) – as they were from the tribe of Benjamin, as it is written: “The tribes of Israel sent men through all the tribe of Benjamin, saying” (Judges 20:12).¹⁴³Just as the term “sent” appears in Judges regarding the tribe of Benjamin, the verse in Chronicles is hinting to the fact that the man’s wives were from the tribe of Benjamin.
Another interpretation, “Shaḥarayim,” this is Boaz. Why was his name called Shaḥarayim? It is because he was free [meshuḥrar] of iniquities. “Begot in the field of Moav,” as he begot from Ruth the Moavite. “After he had sent them away,” as he was from the tribe of Judah, as it is stated: “And he sent Judah before him to Joseph” (Genesis 46:28). “Ḥushim and Baara his wives,” does a man beget his wives? Rather, he was swift like a leopard and articulated the halakha:¹⁴⁴He expounded the verse: “An Amonite and a Moavite shall not enter the congregation of the Lord” (Deuteronomy 23:4). An Amonite but not an Amonite woman, a Moavite but not a Moavite woman. “He begot from Ḥodesh his wife” (I Chronicles 8:9) – it should have stated only, “from Baara his wife.” Rather, in his days, the halakha of an Amonite but not an Amonite woman, a Moavite and not a Moavite woman, was introduced [nitḥadsha].
One verse says: “Yitra the Ishmaelite” (see I Chronicles 2:17), and one verse says: “Yitra the Israelite” (II Samuel 17:25). Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: He is Yitra the Ishmaelite, he is Yitra the Israelite.¹⁴⁵Both verses refer to the same person. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman and the Rabbis: Rabbi Shmuel said: He was an Ishmaelite, and you say Israelite? Rather, he was an Ishmaelite. He entered the study hall and found Yishai sitting and expounding thus: “Look to Me, and be saved, all the ends of the earth…” (Isaiah 45:22).¹⁴⁶Anyone from all the ends of the earth can look to God and be saved. He converted, and [Yishai] gave him his daughter. The Rabbis say: He was an Israelite, and you say Ishmaelite? Rather, he was an Israelite and he girded his sword like an Ishmaelite. He stuck his sword in the middle of the study hall and said: I will either kill or be killed until I establish the halakha for the multitudes, so that anyone who abrogates this halakha, I will behead him with this sword: An Amonite but not an Amonite woman, a Moavite and not a Moavite woman.

R. Ami said: "Death does not come except through sin, and afflictions do not come except through iniquity; death does not come unless through sin, as it is written (Ez. 18, 20.) The soul that sinneth, she alone shall die; afflictions do not come except through iniquity, as it is written (Ps. 89, 33.) Then will I visit their transgressions with the rod, and their iniquities with plagues. (Ib. b.) The following objection was raised: "The ministering angels said before the Holy One, praised be He! 'Sovereign of the universe, why hast Thou decreed death unto Adam, the first man?' 'Because,' said the Lord unto them, 'I gave him one light commandment and he transgressed it.' They then said to Him, 'Did not Moses and Aaron die although they fulfilled the entire Torah?' Whereupon the Lord answered, 'There is but one chance for the righteous and for the wicked; for the good, etc. (Ecc. 9, 2). [This is contrary to R. Ami's opinion.] R. Ami said like the Tana of the following Baraitha; for we are taught that R. Simon b. Elazar said: "Moses and Aaron also died on account of their sins, as it is said (Num. 20, 12.) Because ye had no confidence in me, etc. But if they had had confidence, then their time to depart from the world would not have come." Another objection was raised from the following: [It is taught in a Baraitha.] "Four died in consequence of the instigation of the serpent, viz., Benjamin, the son of Jacob; Amram, the father of Moses; Jesse, the father of David, and Chilab, the son of David. We know of all by tradition except that of Jesse, the father of David, which the Scripture explains, for it is written (II Sam. 17, 25.) And Abshalom placed Amassa instead of Jo'ab as captain over the army; and Amassa was the son of a man, whose name was Yithra, the Israelite, who had gone into Abigail, the daughter of Nachash, the sister of Zeruyah, Jo'ab's mother. Was Abigal then the daughter of Nachash? Behold" she was the daughter of Jesse, as is written (I. Chr. 2, 16. And their (Jesse's sons) sisters were Zeruyah and Abigail. We must therefore say that it means 'the daughter of him who died [for the sin committed] through the instigation of the serpent." Now, according to whose opinion has this been taught? Shall we say it is in accordance with the sages of the ministering angels [mentioned above]? Behold, [according to that one], Moses and Aaron also died in consequence of the instigation of the serpent [why then but Jesse]? We must assume then that it agrees with the opinion of R. Simon b. Elazar, who, though he says that Moses and Aaron died on account of their sins, nevertheless contends that death is possible without sin. We therefore derive the fact that there is death without sin and affliction without iniquities. Hence the theory of R. Ami is refuted. This refutation is sustained.

III) Like when [a man] asks of the word (II Samuel 17:23). The word man is removed from within the verse, for a human is removed from God, and thus it says (Psalms 8:6) You have removed him slightly from God , and his word will not come about like the word of God, thus the word man is removed from within the verse and suspended on the verse from the margin. If he had been meritorious in his deeds and done them for the sake of Heaven, his advice would be as the word of God.

(Gen. 28:12:) THEN HE DREAMED THAT HERE WAS A LADDER…. Let our master instruct us: What is the difference between the death of the righteous and the death of the wicked? R. Justa bar Shunem said in the name of R. Joshua of Sikhnin: The death of the wicked is neither on the earth nor in the heavens. For it is so written of Ahithophel (in II Sam. 17:23): THEN HE {GAVE INSTRUCTIONS UNTO HIS CHILDREN} [SET HIS HOUSE IN ORDER] AND HANGED HIMSELF. And likewise in the case of Haman, < his death was > neither on the earth nor in the heavens. It is so stated (in Esth. 7:10): THEN THEY HANGED HAMAN; and his children as well (according to Esth. 9:25): SO THAT HE AND HIS CHILDREN WOULD BE HANGED. But the death of the righteous is < both > in the heavens and on the earth, as stated (in I Sam. 25:29): YET THE LIFE OF MY LORD (David) SHALL BE FOUND IN THE BUNDLE OF THE LIVING < WITH THE LORD YOUR GOD >. Where is it shown < that the death of the righteous > is on the earth? (II Chron. 32:33:) SO THEY TOOK HIM (Hezekiah) UP AND BURIED HIM IN THE ASCENT OF THE TOMBS OF THE HOUSE OF DAVID. THUS < ALL JUDAH AND THE INHABITANTS OF JERUSALEM > PAID HIM HONOR AT HIS DEATH.

[(Ps. 12:7 [61], cont:) REFINED SEVENFOLD.] R. Joshua of Sikhnin said in the name of R. Levi: The infants who lived in the days of David, <even> before they had a gotten a taste of sin, knew how to interpret the Torah with forty-nine reasons for declaring an object unclean and forty-nine reasons for declaring an object clean.⁵⁰Tanh, Numb. 6:4, cont.; Lev. R. 26:2; Numb. R. 19:2; Cant. R. 2:4:1; PRK 4:2; PR 14:10; 21:10; M. Pss. 7:7; 12:4; cf. PR 14:6; see also below, Numb. 6:18. So David prayed for them and said (in Ps. 12:8 [7]): YOU, O LORD, WILL KEEP THEM; YOU WILL GUARD EACH <OF THEM> FROM THIS GENERATION UNTO ETERNITY. (ibid.:) YOU, O LORD, WILL KEEP THEM, <i.e.,> watch over their instruction in their hearts. (Ibid., cont.:) YOU WILL GUARD EACH <OF THEM> FROM THIS GENERATION UNTO ETERNITY. [From the generation] which is worthy of destruction. Moreover, after all this glory, they went out to war and fell, [because there were slanderers⁵¹Lat.: delatores (“informers”). among them.] This is what David says (in Ps. 57:5 [4]): MY SOUL IS IN THE MIDST OF LIONS, I LIE DOWN AMONG THOSE WHO ARE AFLAME, THE CHILDREN OF ADAM WHOSE TEETH ARE SPEARS AND DARTS, AND WHOSE TONGUE IS A SHARP SWORD. (ibid.:) MY SOUL IS IN THE MIDST OF LIONS. These are Abner and Amasa, who were lions in the Torah.⁵²Although lions, they did not support David when they should have. See Ps. 17:12. (Ibid., cont.:) I LIE DOWN AMONG THOSE WHO ARE AFLAME. These are Doeg and Ahithophel, who were aflame to slander <David>.⁵³On Doeg, see I Sam. 22:8-10; Ps. 52:1. On Ahithophel, see II Sam. 17:1-23. (Ibid., cont.:) THE CHILDREN OF ADAM WHOSE TEETH ARE SPEARS AND DARTS. These are the people of Keilah, of whom it is stated (in I Sam. 23:12): WILL THE PEOPLE OF KEILAH SURRENDER ME? (Ps. 57:5 [4], cont.:) AND WHOSE TONGUE IS A SHARP SWORD. These are the Ziphites, of whom it is stated (in Ps. 54:2 [1]): WHEN THE ZIPHITES CAME AND SAID TO SAUL: IS NOT DAVID HIDING AMONG US <…>? At that time David said (in Ps. 57:6 [5]): BE EXALTED, O GOD, ABOVE THE HEAVENS. Remove your Divine Presence from among them. The generation of Ahab, however, were all worshipers of idols; yet because there were no slanderers among them, they went out to war and won.⁵⁴Deut. R. 5:10; cf. Meg. 11a, according to which Ahab was one of three who ruled over the whole world. The other two were Ahasuerus and Nebuchadnezzar. That <freedom from informers> is what <enabled> Obadiah to say to Elijah (in I Kings 18:13): HAS IT NOT BEEN TOLD TO MY LORD WHAT I DID <WHEN JEZEBEL SLEW THE PROPHETS, HOW I HID A HUNDRED PROPHETS OF THE LORD> …, AND PROVIDED THEM WITH BREAD AND WATER? If bread <is mentioned>, why <mention> water? Simply because it was more difficult to bring them the water than the bread.⁵⁵Because of the drought, the greater difficulty in obtaining water would advertise what he was doing. Even though Elijah made his proclamation⁵⁶Rt.: KRZ; see Gk.: keryssein. on Mount Carmel and said (in vs. 22): I AM THE ONLY PROPHET OF THE LORD LEFT, and even though all the people knew it, they did not expose⁵⁷Rt.: PRSM; see Gk.: parresiazesthai (“to speak freely”). him to the king.

It is taught: Until a person sins, he is given terror and fear and creatures are afraid of him. Once he sins, terror and fear are imposed upon him and he is afraid of others. Know that it is so, as Rabbi said: Until Adam the first man sinned, he would hear the voice of divine speech while standing on his feet and was not afraid. Once he sinned, when he heard the voice of divine speech, he was afraid and hid, as it is stated: “I heard your voice…” (Genesis 3:10); “the man hid” (Genesis 3:8). Rabbi Aivu said: At that moment the height of Adam’s stature diminished and it became only one hundred cubits. Rabbi Levi said: Until Adam the first man sinned, he would hear a soothing divine voice. Once he sinned, he would hear a thundering voice.
Until Israel sinned, they would see⁹⁰They would see the glory of God. through the consecutive partitions and they were not afraid, shocked, and frightened. Once they sinned, they could not have even looked at an intermediary. That is what is written: “They saw the skin of Moses’s face, that it was radiant” (Exodus 34:35), and it is written: “They feared to approach him” (Exodus 34:30).
Rabbi Pinḥas and Rabbi Avun said in the name of Rabbi Ḥanin: Even the intermediary was affected with them in that transgression. Until Israel sinned, what is written? “The kings of armies flee again and again” (Psalms 68:13). Rabbi Aivu said: “Angels [malakhei] of armies” is not written, but rather “kings [malkhei] of armies”—the kings of the angels. Which is they? They are Mikhael and Gavriel. They were unable to look at Moses’s face. Once [the Israelites] sinned, [Moses] was unable to look even at the most ordinary among [the angels]. That is what is written: “For I was in dread of the wrath and the fury” (Deuteronomy 9:19).
Until that incident befell David,⁹¹The reference is to David’s sin with Batsheva. See II Samuel chap. 11. it is written: “The Lord is my light and my salvation; whom shall I fear?” (Psalms 27:1). Once it befell him, it is written: “I will come upon him, and he will be weary and discouraged” (II Samuel 17:2). Until Solomon sinned, he would subjugate sharim and sharot.⁹²The meaning of these words is unclear. Perhaps it may be read sarim and sarot, in which case it means princes and princesses. Alternatively, some suggest that the text should read shedim veshedot, male and female demons. That is the text found in a parallel midrash in Yalkut Shimoni Tehillim 795. That is what is written: “I acquired for myself male and female singers [sharim vesharot]” (Ecclesiastes 2:8), male singers [meshorerim] and female singers [meshorerot];⁹³In this phrase, the midrash has merely translated the terms used in the verse to more familiar forms of the words. “and the pleasures of people” (Ecclesiastes 2:8), bathhouses; “chests [shida] and wagons [shidot]” (Ecclesiastes 2:8), male and female demons [sheda veshedta] who would heat them. Once he sinned, he appointed for him “sixty valiant men…from the valiant of Israel” and positioned them to protect his bed. That is what is written: “Behold the bed…each armed with a sword,” because he was afraid of the spirits.

GEMARA: Whence do we learn that (that females are permitted)? R. Jochanan said: From the following passage (I Sam. 17, 55) And when Saul saw David going forth against the Philistine, he said unto Abner, the captain of the army; 'Abner, whose son is this lad?' And Abner said: 'As thy soul liveth, O king, I know it not.' Was it then the fact that he (Saul) did not know him? Behold it is written (Ib. 16, 21) And he (Saul) loved him greatly, and he became his armour-bearer. Shall we assume that his question was regarding David's father? Then our question is: Was he then not known to Saul? Behold it is written (Ib. 17, 12) And the man was old in the days of Saul, belonging to the persons [of high esteem,] whereupon Rab, and according to others R. Abba said: This refers to Jesse, David's father, who came in with the army and went out with the army." [Hence Jesse was well known to Saul.] We must therefore say that Saul thus said unto Abner: "Go and ask whether David is the descendant of Perez or of Zerach. If he is the offspring of Perez, then he is destined to royalty, and a king may break through fences [to cut a way through for his army,] against which no one has the right to protest; but if he is of the progeny of Zerach, then he will merely rise to eminence." But what caused Saul bid Abner to ask of David's origin? Because of his garments, concerning which it is written (Ib., ib., 38) And Saul clothed David with his garments (madav). Why is madav used here? This means that his (Saul's) garments were such as fitted David's stature, although it is written (Ib. 10, 23) And he (Saul) was higher than any of the people from his shoulder and upward. [Saul then said to himself:] "What does this fact that my garments fit him signify? Surely he is destined to become the king." To which Doeg the Adamian remarked: "Before you begin an inquiry as to his fitness to the royalty or not, inquire rather whether he is fit to enter the congregation (to inter-marry with Israelites), because he is of the seed of Ruth the Moabite." Thereupon Abner said to him: "We are taught in a Mishnah: A converted male-Ammouite [is excluded from intermarrying] with Judaeans, but not a female; a converted male-Mo'abite, but not a female." According to your interpretation," remarked Saul, "then in the case of a Mamzer also say that a male is prohibited from entering the congregation but not a female?" "The passage says Mamzer, [which means] anything repulsive, including both sexes." Concerning the Egyptians, let us say also that only male Egyptians are mentioned but not females!" "Here [concerning the Ammonites and Mo'abites] it is different, because the reason [of the restriction] is given in the Torah (Deut. 23, 5) For the reason, that they met you not with bread and with water. The custom is for men to meet with bread and wine, but not for women to meet." Nevertheless the men should have met the Israelites and the women the Israelitish woman [hence the reason is for both]. Thereupon Abner remained silent [and was not able to answer this refutation.] Soon after this (I Sam. 17, 56) And the king said: Ask thou whose son this youth is. Why in the first place call David Na'ar (lad), and then call him elem (youth)? Thus did Saul say to Abner: "This law is concealed from thee, go therefore and inquire in the academy." He finally made inquiry, and they told him: "An Ammonite but not an Ammonitish woman, a Moabite, but not a Moamitish woman." (Fol. 77) Doeg raised all the above objections, which silenced them, [causing them to reverse their decisions,] and they were about to announce that he (David) was not fit to be in the congregation of Israel. Immediately after this [the passage says] (II Sam. 17, 25) And Amassa was the son of a man, whose name was Yithra the Israelite, who had gone into Abigail the daughter of Nachash, etc. And it is written (I Chr. 2, 17) And the father of Amassa was Jether the Ishmaelite, whereupon Raba said: Infer from this that Jether tied a sword around him like an Ishmaelite and said: 'Whoever will not obey this decision shall be stabbed with a sword, for thus have I a tradition from the court of Samuel of Ramathaim: An Ammonite, but not an Ammonitish woman; a Moabite, but not a Moabitish woman.' " But how can such evidence be relied upon? Has not R. Abba said in the name of Rab: "A scholar that renders a decision [concerning a disputed question,] if he rendered the decision prior to the incident he is to be heeded, but not otherwise." Here it is different, because Samuel [the prophet] and his court were then still in existence [and could thus be easily verified.] However, what about the above objection? Here (in Babylon) it was explained because (Ps. 45, 14) All gloriously attired awaited the king's daughter in the inner chamber, [hence the women are exempt from outside duty.] In the Land of Israel, it was inferred, and according to some, R. Isaac said: From the following passage (Gen. 18, 9) And they said unto him where is Sarah thy wife? etc. [Hence the women were exempt from the duty of meeting Israel.]

And whence do we know that he has no share in the world to come? From the following passage (I Kings, 21, 21) Behold, I will bring evil upon thee, and I will utterly sweep thee away, and will cut off from Achab every man-child, and him that is shut up and him that is left at large in Israel. Shut up, refers to this world; and that is left at large, refers to the world to come. R. Jochanan said: "What are the deeds that caused Omri (Achab's father) to obtain the kingdom? Because he added one great city to the land of Israel, as it is said (Ib. 16, 24) And he bought the mount Samaria of Shemer for two talents of silver, and built on the mount, and called the name of the city which he had built, Samaria, after the name of Shemer, the lord of the mount." R. Jochanan said again: "Why was Achab rewarded by the prolongation of his kingdom for twenty-two years? Because he respected the Torah which is written with the twenty-two letters of the alphabet, as it is said (Ib. 20, 2-9) And he sent messengers to Achab, the king of Israel, into the city, and he said unto him: 'Thus said Ben-hadad: Thy silver and thy gold is mine; thy wives also and thy children, even the goodliest, are mine. And the king of Israel answered and said: It is according to thy saying, my lord, O king, am I thine, and all that I have. And the messengers came again and said: Thus speaketh Ben-hadad, saying: I sent indeed unto thee, saying: Thou shalt deliver me thy silver, and thy gold, and thy wives, and thy children. But will I send my servants unto thee to-morrow about this time, and they shall search thy house, and the houses of thy servants; and it shall be, that whatsoever is pleasant in thine eyes, they shall put it in their hand, and take it away. Then the king of Israel called all the elders of the land, and said: 'Mark, I pray you, and see how this man seeketh mischief; for he hath sent unto me for my wives, and for my children, and for my silver, and for my gold; and I denied him not. Wherefore he said unto the messengers of Ben-hadad: 'Tell my lord the king: all that thou didst send for to thy servants at the first I will do; but this thing I may not do.' What does pleasant in thine eyes mean? We must say this means the holy scrolls." But perhaps it means an idol. This is impossible to be considered, for it is written farther, And all the elders, and all the people said unto him, Thou must not hearken nor consent [which is a too mild warning against idols.] But perhaps it means the elders of disgrace, as it is written (II Sam. 17, 4) That they are also names of the elders of Israel, and R. Joseph explained it to mean the elders of disgrace. There it does not read all the people, but here it does; and it is impossible that among them were no righteous, since it is written (I Kings 19, 18) And I will leave in Israel seven thousand, all the knees which have not bent unto Baal and every mouth which has not kissed him.

"Gilead is mine," refers to Ahab, king of Israel, who died in Ramoth-Gilead; "and Manasseh is mine," is to be taken literally; "Ephraim is the defence of mine head," refers to Jeroboam; "Judah || is my sceptre," points to Ahithophel; "Moab is my washpot" (Ps. 60:8), means Gehazi; "upon Edom will I cast my shoe" (ibid.), refers to Doeg; "Philistia, shout thou because of me" (ibid.). The Holy One, blessed be He, said: It is for Me to search for merit on their behalf, and to make them friendly towards one another.

This is the ordinance of the Torah - (Psalms 12:6) The sayings of G-d are pure (purify). R. Hanan Ben Pazzi elucidated this verse [of psalms with the parsha of Parah] Parah- which has seven seven sevens; seven cows, seven fires, seven sprinkling, seven washes, seven unclean, seven pure, seven priests. And if someone tells you they are five, tell him: Moses and Aaron are included, as it is said: And the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron, saying, This is the ordinance of the Torah:

Hillel the Elder said: Abraham took all the wealth of Sodom and Gomorrah and all the wealth of Lot, the son of his brother, and he returned in peace, and not even one of his men failed him, as it is said, "And he brought back all the goods, and also his brother Lot" (Gen. 14:16).

(Although) the Israelites were like the sand of the sea, yet it was owing to the force of the sign of the covenant of Abraham's oath. David saw (this) and turned backwards, as it is said, "And David dwelt in the stronghold" (2 Sam. 5:9). They said to him: Thou wilt not be able to enter the city of the Jebusites until thou hast removed all those images upon which the sign of the covenant of Abraham's oath is written, as it is said, "Except thou take away the blind and the lame" (2 Sam. 5:6). "The lame" refers to the images, as it is said, "Wherefore they say, The blind and the lame shall not come into the house" (2 Sam. 5:8). Lest thou shouldst say, The blind and the lame did not enter the Sanctuary, Heaven forbid (that we should say this), but these "blind and lame" refer to the images which have eyes and see not, feet and they walk not, (as it is said), "That are hated of David's soul" (ibid.). Because David hated to hear of and to see idolatry, as it is said, "Wherefore they say, The blind and the lame shall not come into the house" (ibid.).