Talmud do Przysłów 16:4

“Emptying its intestines”. Rebbi Joḥanan said, all the Eternal’s works are for Himself³²Prov. 16:4. Quoted Babli Šabbat116b.; that it should not look as if he took the parts from a disgusting sacrifice³³Since for profane use the emptying of the intestines would be a Sabbath violation.. Rebbi Ismael stated, its skinning pushes the Sabbath aside³⁴But for profane use it would be a Sabbath violation.. It was stated: Rebbi Ismael the son of Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa says, on the Sabbath one was skinning the breast³⁵With Tosephta 4:10 one has to read: “One was skinning up to the breast (starting with the feet).”. What is Rebbi Ismael’s reason? That it should not look as if he took the parts from a disgusting sacrifice. What does Rebbi Ismael the son of Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa do with this? Because he turns it around, it is not as if he was taking the parts from a disgusting sacrifice³⁶Since it is obvious that one skins from the feet for sacrificial use, it is not necessary to push aside the Sabbath more than a minimum.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Ismael and Rebbi Ismael the son of Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa said the same. As Rebbi Ismael said, choice pushes aside but choicest does not push aside³⁷In Mishnah Menaḥot 6:1, R. Ismael states that while on a Sabbath the ˋOmer(3/10 of a seah) of barley flour was sifted from three seah of grain while on weekdays it was from five. This implies that for the Temple service one uses choice material but only on weekdays it must be of the choicest kind if it is a matter of pushing aside Sabbath prohibitions., so Rebbi Ismael the son of Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa said choice pushes aside but choicest does not push aside. If you are saying, this is choice, can he not tear it open and remove the parts³⁸If we interpret R. Ismael ben R. Joḥanan ben Beroqa in this way, then R. Ismael would be inconsistent by requiring total stripping of the Pesaḥ. Also R. Ismael ben R. Joḥanan ben Beroqa could obtain the desired result with much less Sabbath desecration. Therefore R. Joḥanan’s statement cannot be correct.? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, it only follows Rebbi Simeon.

⁵²This and the next paragraphs are from Yoma3:8, Notes 225–235, where also the differences in readings are noted. The additions of the corrector in the story of the family Eutinos are from B. The family Garmu were experts in preparing the shew-bread and its removal from the oven, but they did not want to teach. They sent and brought craftsmen from Alexandria who were experts in preparing the shew-bread but were not experts in its removal from the oven. The family Garmu were heating from within and removing from the outside, and it did not become moldy. But those were heating from the inside and removing from the inside, and it became moldy. When the Sages realized this situation, they said, everything which the Holy One, praise to Him, created, he created to His glory; all work of the Eternal is for Himself⁵³Prov. 16:4.. They sent after them, but they refused to come until they doubled their wages. They used to take twelve mina, so they gave them twenty-four. Rebbi Jehudah says, they used to take 24, so they gave them 48. They asked them, why do you not want to teach? They answered them, there is a tradition among us from our forefathers that this Temple will be destroyed in the future. Others should not learn and prepare the same before their foreign worship. In the following matter one mentions them for praise, that in the hands of their children white bread was never found, so people should not say, from the preparation of shew-bread they are eating.

HALAKHAH: “The following are for shame: The family Garmu.” ²²⁵Tosephta 2:5, Šeqalim 5:2 (ש), Babli 38a, Cant. rabba 3:8. The Šeqalim text of the Babli editio princeps belongs to the spelling tradition of the Tosephta.“The family Garmu were experts in preparing the shew-bread and its removal from the oven, but they did not want to teach. They sent and brought craftsmen from Alexandria who were experts in preparing the shew-bread but were not experts in its removal from the oven. The family Garmu were heating from within and removing from the outside, and it did not become moldy²²⁶It had to stay fresh for a full week. The shew-bread was baked on clay forms in the shape of a ship.. But those were heating from the outside and removing from the inside, and it became moldy. When the Sages realized the situation, they said, everything which the Holy One, praise to Him, created, he created to His glory; all work of the Eternal is for Himself²²⁷Prov. 16:4.. They sent after them, but they refused to come until they doubled their wages. They used to take twelve mina²²⁸As yearly wages. The Babli and Cant. rabba declare this weekly wages, an exaggeration., so they gave them twenty-four. Rebbi Jehudah says, they used to take 24, so they gave them 48. They asked them, why do you not want to teach? They answered them, there is a tradition among us from our forefathers that this Temple will be destroyed in the future. Others should not learn and prepare the same before their foreign worship²²⁹Idolatry.. In the following matter one mentions them for praise, that in the hands of their children white bread was never found, so people should not say, from the preparation of shew-bread they are eating.”

And at the end [of the reading of the portion from the Prophets], one says the following benedictions: ‘Blessed art Thou, O Lord our God, King of the universe, Rock of all worlds, righteous through all generations, O faithful God, Who sayest and doest, Who speakest⁶⁴V reads medabber, without the article, as in the current version (P.B., loc. cit.). and fulfillest, all Whose words are truth and righteousness’. The people forthwith stand and say:⁶⁵This is not the present usage when the reader proceeds to say the benedictions mentioned in Rule 11. ‘Faithful art Thou, O Lord our God, faithful are Thy words, ever faithful, living and enduring are Thy name and remembrance; and do Thou reign⁶⁶So GRA. V reads ‘He will reign’, H ‘Thou wilt reign’. continually over us for ever and ever’. This point⁶⁷Whether the benediction is to be said while sitting or standing. is one of the disagreements between the scholars of the East and West; the former give the response⁶⁸To the reader, with the benediction. while sitting and the latter while standing. But wherever two Tanna’im or two ’Amora’im differ, and we are not certain with whom the halakah agrees, we follow him who maintains the stricter view. How much more then must we, in regard to the praise⁶⁹The benedictions. of the Life of all the worlds,⁷⁰[On this designation of God, cf. Marmorstein, The Old Rabbinic Doctrine of God, I, p. 85.] which is a matter of the heart,⁷¹V reads galuï (revealed), M and H taluï (dependent). teach our disciples as the rule to be practised that the halakah is in agreement with him who upholds the stricter view;⁷²Following the emended text of GRA. as Scripture states, The Lord hath made every thing for His own purpose.⁷³Prov. 16, 4. There is consequently all the more reason why the stricter view should be followed, viz. that the blessings and praises of God be said while standing.