Талмуд к Нехемья 4:16
גַּ֣ם בָּעֵ֤ת הַהִיא֙ אָמַ֣רְתִּי לָעָ֔ם אִ֣ישׁ וְנַעֲר֔וֹ יָלִ֖ינוּ בְּת֣וֹךְ יְרוּשָׁלִָ֑ם וְהָֽיוּ־לָ֧נוּ הַלַּ֛יְלָה מִשְׁמָ֖ר וְהַיּ֥וֹם מְלָאכָֽה׃
В то же время я сказал народу: 'Пусть каждый со своим слугой поселится в Иерусалиме, чтобы ночью они были для нас стражами и могли трудиться днем.'
Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot
A sign for it (nightfall) is after stars have become visible20This is an extended quote from a parallel to the Tosephta (1:1) quoted in note 8. It is not from our Tosephta since the last sentence is missing there and the first sentence reads in the Tosephta, and in the Babylonian Talmud (2b), סימן לדבר צאת הכוֹכבים. Levi Ginzberg already has pointed out that the Biblical noun construction צאת הכוֹכבים “the emergence of stars” is never used in the Yerushalmi which prefers the verbal form. “It” referred to in this quote must be nightfall, the common time both for the criterion of R. Meïr and that of the Sages (Note 8).. And though there is no proof, at least there is a hint21This expression is found also in Yerushalmi Sheviït 9:2 (38d), Pesaḥim1:1 (27a), Moëd Qaṭan 1:4 (80c), Yebamot 4:11 (6a), Niddah 1:4 (49a). in (Neh. 4:15): “We wereworking; half of them were holding spears, from the beginning of dawn to the visibility of stars.” And it is written (v. 16): “The night was for us for watch duty and daytime for work.22The argument goes as follows: Nehemiah’s people worked from dawn to dusk (in contrast to hired workers who labor from sunrise to sunset; Baba meẓia‘ 7:1). The second verse, missing in the Tosephta, contains the proof: Neḥemiah declares that “day was for work” and, since he had defined his working day as dawn to dusk in the preceding verse, his definition at least for “day” is “dawn to dusk”. This is only a “hint”, not a proof, since his working day was irregular.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy