bet

Rab Ezekiel taught : If a man acted in accordance with the view of Bet Shammai, he has done [rightly] ; if in accordance with the view of Bet Hillel, he has done [rightly].

Rab Ezekiel taught : If a man acted in accordance with the view of Bet Shammai, he has done [rightly] ; if in accordance with the view of Bet Hillel, he has done [rightly].

Rab Joseph said : If he acted in accordance with the view of Bet Shammai, he has done nothing at all. For there is a Mishnaic teaching : If the head and greater part of a man's body be in a Sukkah and his table inside his house, Bet Shammai pronounce it invalid, but Bet Hillel declare it valid.

Rab Joseph said : If he acted in accordance with the view of Bet Shammai, he has done nothing at all. For there is a Mishnaic teaching : If the head and greater part of a man's body be in a Sukkah and his table inside his house, Bet Shammai pronounce it invalid, but Bet Hillel declare it valid.

Rab Joseph said : If he acted in accordance with the view of Bet Shammai, he has done nothing at all. For there is a Mishnaic teaching : If the head and greater part of a man's body be in a Sukkah and his table inside his house, Bet Shammai pronounce it invalid, but Bet Hillel declare it valid.

Bet Hillel said to Bet Shammai, "It once happened that the Elders of Bet Shammai and the Elders of Bet Hillel went to visit R. Johanan b. ha-Horanit and they found him with his head and the greater part of his body in the Sukkah and his table inside his house, but they said nothing to him."

Bet Hillel said to Bet Shammai, "It once happened that the Elders of Bet Shammai and the Elders of Bet Hillel went to visit R. Johanan b. ha-Horanit and they found him with his head and the greater part of his body in the Sukkah and his table inside his house, but they said nothing to him."

Bet Hillel said to Bet Shammai, "It once happened that the Elders of Bet Shammai and the Elders of Bet Hillel went to visit R. Johanan b. ha-Horanit and they found him with his head and the greater part of his body in the Sukkah and his table inside his house, but they said nothing to him."

Bet Hillel said to Bet Shammai, "It once happened that the Elders of Bet Shammai and the Elders of Bet Hillel went to visit R. Johanan b. ha-Horanit and they found him with his head and the greater part of his body in the Sukkah and his table inside his house, but they said nothing to him."

Rab Nahman b. Isaac said : If one acted according to the view of Bet Shammai, he is worthy of death ; for we have learnt in our Mishnah: R. Tarphon said: I was once journeying by the way and I reclined to read [the Shema'] according to the view of Bet Shammai, and I placed myself in danger on account of robbers. They said to him : Thou didst justly incur a penalty for thyself, in that thou didst transgress the view of Bet Hillel.

Rab Nahman b. Isaac said : If one acted according to the view of Bet Shammai, he is worthy of death ; for we have learnt in our Mishnah: R. Tarphon said: I was once journeying by the way and I reclined to read [the Shema'] according to the view of Bet Shammai, and I placed myself in danger on account of robbers. They said to him : Thou didst justly incur a penalty for thyself, in that thou didst transgress the view of Bet Hillel.

Rab Nahman b. Isaac said : If one acted according to the view of Bet Shammai, he is worthy of death ; for we have learnt in our Mishnah: R. Tarphon said: I was once journeying by the way and I reclined to read [the Shema'] according to the view of Bet Shammai, and I placed myself in danger on account of robbers. They said to him : Thou didst justly incur a penalty for thyself, in that thou didst transgress the view of Bet Hillel.

But lo, there is a teaching : Bet Hillel say : Workmen may remain at their work and read it !

R. Joshua b. Levi also said : In twenty-four places [it is taught] that the Bet Din excommunicates a man for [lack of] respect to a teacher, and we learn them all in our Mishnah. R. Eleazar asked him : Where [are they to be found]? He replied : Search and thou wilt find them.

"Who talks after the bier of disciples of the wise" ; where is this to be found ? There is a Mishnaic teaching : ['Akabya b. Mahalalel] used to say : We may not administer the waters of a woman suspected of adultery to a female proselyte or freed woman ; but the Sages say : We may do so. And they said to him, "It happened with Karkemit, a [handmaid] freed handmaid of Jerusalem, and Shemayah and Abtalion did administer the waters to her!" 'Akabya said to them, "It was for show that they made her drink." Thereupon the Sages excommunicated him and he died under the ban, and the Bet Din stoned his coffin.

"Whoever despises the washing of the hands" ; where is this found ? There is a Mishnaic teaching : R. Judah said : God forbid that we should suppose that 'Akabya b. Mahalalel was excommunicated, for the Temple-court was not locked upon any man of Israel equal to him in knowledge, purity and fear of sin. But who was it they excommunicated? It was Eleazar b. Hanok, because he made light of the washing of the hands ; and when he died the Bet Din sent and placed a large stone upon his coffin, to teach that whoever is excommunicated and dies under the ban, the Bet Din stones his coffin.

"Whoever despises the washing of the hands" ; where is this found ? There is a Mishnaic teaching : R. Judah said : God forbid that we should suppose that 'Akabya b. Mahalalel was excommunicated, for the Temple-court was not locked upon any man of Israel equal to him in knowledge, purity and fear of sin. But who was it they excommunicated? It was Eleazar b. Hanok, because he made light of the washing of the hands ; and when he died the Bet Din sent and placed a large stone upon his coffin, to teach that whoever is excommunicated and dies under the ban, the Bet Din stones his coffin.

R. Abba explained that it speaks here of a Bet Peras which is declared unclean by the Rabbis.

For Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel : One may blow upon a Bet Peras [to see whether there are any bones ; and if there are none] he may walk on it. And Rab Judah b. Ashe said in the name of Rab : A Bet Peras which has been much trodden under foot is to be regarded as clean.

For Rab Judah said in the name of Samuel : One may blow upon a Bet Peras [to see whether there are any bones ; and if there are none] he may walk on it. And Rab Judah b. Ashe said in the name of Rab : A Bet Peras which has been much trodden under foot is to be regarded as clean.

There is a further teaching : When one is about to enter a regular privy, he divests himself of the Tefillin at a [minimum] distance of four cubits, leaves them on the window-sill which is near the public road, and then enters. When he comes out, he walks a distance of four cubits and relays them. These are the words of Bet Shammai. Bet Hillel declare that he may hold them in his hand and enter. R. 'Akiba says : He holds them in his garment and enters.

There is a further teaching : When one is about to enter a regular privy, he divests himself of the Tefillin at a [minimum] distance of four cubits, leaves them on the window-sill which is near the public road, and then enters. When he comes out, he walks a distance of four cubits and relays them. These are the words of Bet Shammai. Bet Hillel declare that he may hold them in his hand and enter. R. 'Akiba says : He holds them in his garment and enters.

Raba said in the name of Rab Sheshet : The Halakah is not in accord with the above Baraita because it emanates from Bet Shammai; for if it emanated from Bet Hillel, since one is allowed to enter a regular privy [holding the Tefillin], how much more so a chance one!

Raba said in the name of Rab Sheshet : The Halakah is not in accord with the above Baraita because it emanates from Bet Shammai; for if it emanated from Bet Hillel, since one is allowed to enter a regular privy [holding the Tefillin], how much more so a chance one!

It is quoted in objection: "What I have permitted thee in one place I have forbidden thee in another, [and this is an argument a fortiori which cannot be refuted"] — does this not refer to the Tefillin? It is quite right if thou sayest that the above Baraita emanates from Bet Hillel; for then I have permitted thee elsewhere [to enter] a regular privy [with Tefillin], but here I forbid thee [to enter] a chance privy ! On the other hand, if thou sayest that it emanates from Bet Shammai, they do not permit it in either case !

It is quoted in objection: "What I have permitted thee in one place I have forbidden thee in another, [and this is an argument a fortiori which cannot be refuted"] — does this not refer to the Tefillin? It is quite right if thou sayest that the above Baraita emanates from Bet Hillel; for then I have permitted thee elsewhere [to enter] a regular privy [with Tefillin], but here I forbid thee [to enter] a chance privy ! On the other hand, if thou sayest that it emanates from Bet Shammai, they do not permit it in either case !

Rab 'Anan said in the name of Rab : If a man erred and omitted the reference to the New Moon in the evening Tefillah, we do not require him to repeat it, because the Bet Din only consecrate the new month in the day-time.

Rabina found Mar b. Rab Ashe throwing away the berries and eating the caper-buds. He said to him : What is thy opinion — like R. 'Akiba's who takes the lenient view? Then let the master act in accord with Bet Shammai who take a still more lenient view. For there is a Mishnaic teaching : In the case of the caper-bush. Bet Shammai say : It constitutes Kila'im in a vineyard ; but Bet Hillel say : It does not. Both, however, admit that it is subject to 'Orlah.

Rabina found Mar b. Rab Ashe throwing away the berries and eating the caper-buds. He said to him : What is thy opinion — like R. 'Akiba's who takes the lenient view? Then let the master act in accord with Bet Shammai who take a still more lenient view. For there is a Mishnaic teaching : In the case of the caper-bush. Bet Shammai say : It constitutes Kila'im in a vineyard ; but Bet Hillel say : It does not. Both, however, admit that it is subject to 'Orlah.

Rabina found Mar b. Rab Ashe throwing away the berries and eating the caper-buds. He said to him : What is thy opinion — like R. 'Akiba's who takes the lenient view? Then let the master act in accord with Bet Shammai who take a still more lenient view. For there is a Mishnaic teaching : In the case of the caper-bush. Bet Shammai say : It constitutes Kila'im in a vineyard ; but Bet Hillel say : It does not. Both, however, admit that it is subject to 'Orlah.

This is self-contradictory ! Thou declarest, "In the case of the caper-bush, Bet Shammai say : It constitutes Kila'im in a vineyard" — hence it is a kind of vegetable ! It then goes on to state, "Both, however, admit that it is subject to 'Orlah" — hence it is a kind of tree!

There is no contradiction; for Bet Shammai, being in doubt, take the stricter view in both cases. Nevertheless Bet Shammai have a doubt whether it is subject to 'Orlah; and we have a Mishnaic teaching: Where there is a doubt [whether a thing is subject to] 'Orlah — in the Land of Israel it is prohibited [to be used], in Syria it is permitted, and outside the Land one may go down and buy it,

There is no contradiction; for Bet Shammai, being in doubt, take the stricter view in both cases. Nevertheless Bet Shammai have a doubt whether it is subject to 'Orlah; and we have a Mishnaic teaching: Where there is a doubt [whether a thing is subject to] 'Orlah — in the Land of Israel it is prohibited [to be used], in Syria it is permitted, and outside the Land one may go down and buy it,

When R. 'Akiba is in opposition to R. Eliezer, we act according to his view; but when Bet Shammai are in opposition to Bet Hillel, [the opinion of the former] is not Mishnah.

When R. 'Akiba is in opposition to R. Eliezer, we act according to his view; but when Bet Shammai are in opposition to Bet Hillel, [the opinion of the former] is not Mishnah.

Rab Shimi of Nehardea asked : But do the Rabbis differ from him in the case of other trees? For lo, there is a Mishnaic teaching : From what time must we cease cutting down the trees in the seventh year? Bet Shammai say : All trees, as soon as they produce fruit. Bet Hillel say : Carob trees when they begin to form chains, vines when they form globules, olive-trees when they bloom, and all other trees when they produce fruit.

Rab Shimi of Nehardea asked : But do the Rabbis differ from him in the case of other trees? For lo, there is a Mishnaic teaching : From what time must we cease cutting down the trees in the seventh year? Bet Shammai say : All trees, as soon as they produce fruit. Bet Hillel say : Carob trees when they begin to form chains, vines when they form globules, olive-trees when they bloom, and all other trees when they produce fruit.

MISHNAH If a man said the benediction over wine before the meal, he is exempt from saying it over the wine after the meal. If he said it over the dainty served before the meal, he is exempt from saying it over the dainty served after the meal. If he said it over the bread, he is exempt from saying it over the dainty; over the dainty, he is not exempt from saying it over the bread. Bet Shammai declare : Nor from saying it over a cooked dish.

If he said it over the bread, he is exempt from saying it over the dainty ; over the dainty, he is not exempt from saying it over the bread. Bet Shammai declare : Nor from saying it over a cooked dish.

The question was asked : Are Bet Shammai in disagreement with the first clause of this teaching, or is it perhaps with the second clause? They are in disagreement with the first clause; for the first Tanna declares : If he said it over the bread, he is exempt from saying it over the dainty, so how much more [is it unnecessary for him to say a benediction] over a cooked dish ; then Bet Shammai come to declare that not only does [the benediction over] the bread not exempt that over the dainty, but it does not even exempt that over a cooked dish ! Or is it perhaps with the second clause that Bet Shammai disagree? For it teaches : [Having said the benediction] over the dainty, he is not exempt from saying it over the bread ; it is [the benediction over] the bread from which he is not exempt, but he is exempt from that over the cooked dish ; and then Bet Shammai come to say : He is not even exempt from that over the cooked dish!

The question was asked : Are Bet Shammai in disagreement with the first clause of this teaching, or is it perhaps with the second clause? They are in disagreement with the first clause; for the first Tanna declares : If he said it over the bread, he is exempt from saying it over the dainty, so how much more [is it unnecessary for him to say a benediction] over a cooked dish ; then Bet Shammai come to declare that not only does [the benediction over] the bread not exempt that over the dainty, but it does not even exempt that over a cooked dish ! Or is it perhaps with the second clause that Bet Shammai disagree? For it teaches : [Having said the benediction] over the dainty, he is not exempt from saying it over the bread ; it is [the benediction over] the bread from which he is not exempt, but he is exempt from that over the cooked dish ; and then Bet Shammai come to say : He is not even exempt from that over the cooked dish!

The question was asked : Are Bet Shammai in disagreement with the first clause of this teaching, or is it perhaps with the second clause? They are in disagreement with the first clause; for the first Tanna declares : If he said it over the bread, he is exempt from saying it over the dainty, so how much more [is it unnecessary for him to say a benediction] over a cooked dish ; then Bet Shammai come to declare that not only does [the benediction over] the bread not exempt that over the dainty, but it does not even exempt that over a cooked dish ! Or is it perhaps with the second clause that Bet Shammai disagree? For it teaches : [Having said the benediction] over the dainty, he is not exempt from saying it over the bread ; it is [the benediction over] the bread from which he is not exempt, but he is exempt from that over the cooked dish ; and then Bet Shammai come to say : He is not even exempt from that over the cooked dish!

The question was asked : Are Bet Shammai in disagreement with the first clause of this teaching, or is it perhaps with the second clause? They are in disagreement with the first clause; for the first Tanna declares : If he said it over the bread, he is exempt from saying it over the dainty, so how much more [is it unnecessary for him to say a benediction] over a cooked dish ; then Bet Shammai come to declare that not only does [the benediction over] the bread not exempt that over the dainty, but it does not even exempt that over a cooked dish ! Or is it perhaps with the second clause that Bet Shammai disagree? For it teaches : [Having said the benediction] over the dainty, he is not exempt from saying it over the bread ; it is [the benediction over] the bread from which he is not exempt, but he is exempt from that over the cooked dish ; and then Bet Shammai come to say : He is not even exempt from that over the cooked dish!

Our Rabbis have taught: If they set before him oil and myrtle, Bet Shammai declare : He first says the benediction over the oil and then over the myrtle ; Bet Hillel declare : He first says the benediction over the myrtle and then over the oil. Rabban Gamaliel said : I will decide — Oil we use for its fragrance and for anointing, whereas we use the myrtle only for its fragrance and not for anointing. R. Johanan said : The Halakah is in accord with him who decided.

Our Rabbis have taught: If they set before him oil and myrtle, Bet Shammai declare : He first says the benediction over the oil and then over the myrtle ; Bet Hillel declare : He first says the benediction over the myrtle and then over the oil. Rabban Gamaliel said : I will decide — Oil we use for its fragrance and for anointing, whereas we use the myrtle only for its fragrance and not for anointing. R. Johanan said : The Halakah is in accord with him who decided.

Rab Pappa visited the house of Rab Huna b. Rab Ika; they set before him oil and myrtle. He took and made the benediction first over the myrtle and then over the oil. Rab Huna said to him : Does not the master hold that the Halakah is in accord with the words of him who decided ? He replied : Thus said Raba : The Halakah is in accord with Bet Hillel. But it was not so, and he only did this to extricate himself.

Our Rabbis have taught : If oil and wine are set before him, Bet Shammai declare : He should take hold of the oil in his right hand and the wine in his left, say the benediction over the oil and then over the wine ; Bet Hillel declare : He should take hold of the wine in his right hand and the oil in his left, say the benediction over the wine and then over the oil. And he should rub the oil upon the head of the attendant ; but if the attendant be a disciple of the wise, he should rub it upon the wall, because it is a disgrace for a disciple of the wise to go into the street perfumed.

Our Rabbis have taught : If oil and wine are set before him, Bet Shammai declare : He should take hold of the oil in his right hand and the wine in his left, say the benediction over the oil and then over the wine ; Bet Hillel declare : He should take hold of the wine in his right hand and the oil in his left, say the benediction over the wine and then over the oil. And he should rub the oil upon the head of the attendant ; but if the attendant be a disciple of the wise, he should rub it upon the wall, because it is a disgrace for a disciple of the wise to go into the street perfumed.

One who has eaten Demai, etc. But he had no right [to eat it] ! If he so choose, he can renounce his possessions and become a poor man, and then he would have the right [to eat it] ; for we have a Mishnaic teaching : We may feed the poor and soldiers on Demai. But Rab Huna has said : It has been taught : Bet Shammai declare that we may not feed the poor and soldiers on Demai.

MISHNAH The following are the points of variance between Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel in connection with the meal. Bet Shammai say : [On a Sabbath or Festival] one pronunces the benediction over the day and then over the wine ; but Bet Hillel say : He pronounces the benediction over the wine and afterwards over the day.

MISHNAH The following are the points of variance between Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel in connection with the meal. Bet Shammai say : [On a Sabbath or Festival] one pronunces the benediction over the day and then over the wine ; but Bet Hillel say : He pronounces the benediction over the wine and afterwards over the day.

MISHNAH The following are the points of variance between Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel in connection with the meal. Bet Shammai say : [On a Sabbath or Festival] one pronunces the benediction over the day and then over the wine ; but Bet Hillel say : He pronounces the benediction over the wine and afterwards over the day.

MISHNAH The following are the points of variance between Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel in connection with the meal. Bet Shammai say : [On a Sabbath or Festival] one pronunces the benediction over the day and then over the wine ; but Bet Hillel say : He pronounces the benediction over the wine and afterwards over the day.

Bet Shammai say : We wash the hands and then fill the cup ; but Bet Hillel say: We fill the cup and then wash the hands.

Bet Shammai say : We wash the hands and then fill the cup ; but Bet Hillel say: We fill the cup and then wash the hands.

Bet Shammai say : One wipes his hands with a napkin which he lays upon the table ; but Bet Hillel say : [He lays it] upon the bolster [of his couch].

Bet Shammai say : One wipes his hands with a napkin which he lays upon the table ; but Bet Hillel say : [He lays it] upon the bolster [of his couch].

Bet Shammai say: [After the meal] they clear up and then we wash the hands [prior to Grace] ; but Bet Hillel say : We wash the hands and then they clear up.

Bet Shammai say: [After the meal] they clear up and then we wash the hands [prior to Grace] ; but Bet Hillel say : We wash the hands and then they clear up.

Bet Shammai say : [The order of benedictions is] light, food, spices and Habdalah; but Bet Hillel say : Light, spices, food and Habdalah.

Bet Shammai say : [The order of benedictions is] light, food, spices and Habdalah; but Bet Hillel say : Light, spices, food and Habdalah.

Bet Shammai say : The wording is "...Who created the light of fire" ; but Bet Hillel say : It is "...Who createst the lights of the fire."

Bet Shammai say : The wording is "...Who created the light of fire" ; but Bet Hillel say : It is "...Who createst the lights of the fire."

If one ate and forgot to say Grace, Bet Shammai declare he should return to his place and say it ; but Bet Hillel declare he may say it wherever [the omission] is remembered by him. And what length of time may elapse in which he can say Grace? A Sufficient time for the food in the stomach to be digested.

If one ate and forgot to say Grace, Bet Shammai declare he should return to his place and say it ; but Bet Hillel declare he may say it wherever [the omission] is remembered by him. And what length of time may elapse in which he can say Grace? A Sufficient time for the food in the stomach to be digested.

If wine is brought to them after the food and there is [only sufficient for] one cup, Bet Shammai declare he says the benediction over the wine and then over the food ; but Bet Hillel declare he says the benediction over the food and then over the wine.

If wine is brought to them after the food and there is [only sufficient for] one cup, Bet Shammai declare he says the benediction over the wine and then over the food ; but Bet Hillel declare he says the benediction over the food and then over the wine.

GEMARA Our Rabbis have taught : The points of variance between Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel in connection with the meal are : Bet Shammai say : [On a Sabbath or Festival] one pronounces the benediction over the day and then over the wine, because the day causes the wine to be brought and because he has already hallowed the day before the wine was brought.

GEMARA Our Rabbis have taught : The points of variance between Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel in connection with the meal are : Bet Shammai say : [On a Sabbath or Festival] one pronounces the benediction over the day and then over the wine, because the day causes the wine to be brought and because he has already hallowed the day before the wine was brought.

GEMARA Our Rabbis have taught : The points of variance between Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel in connection with the meal are : Bet Shammai say : [On a Sabbath or Festival] one pronounces the benediction over the day and then over the wine, because the day causes the wine to be brought and because he has already hallowed the day before the wine was brought.

But Bet Hillel say : One pronounces the benediction over the wine and then over the day, because the wine causes the Sanctification to be said. Another reason is : The benediction over the wine is constant but that over the day is not constant, and when we have that which is constant and not constant, the former takes precedence. The Halakah is in agreement with Bet Hillel.

But Bet Hillel say : One pronounces the benediction over the wine and then over the day, because the wine causes the Sanctification to be said. Another reason is : The benediction over the wine is constant but that over the day is not constant, and when we have that which is constant and not constant, the former takes precedence. The Halakah is in agreement with Bet Hillel.

Why is this other reason necessary ? Shouldest thou say that there [Bet Shammai offer] two reasons but here [Bet Hillel offer] only one, therefore here also we have two reasons. "The benediction over the wine is constant but that over the day is not constant, and when we have that which is constant and not constant, the former takes precedence.

Why is this other reason necessary ? Shouldest thou say that there [Bet Shammai offer] two reasons but here [Bet Hillel offer] only one, therefore here also we have two reasons. "The benediction over the wine is constant but that over the day is not constant, and when we have that which is constant and not constant, the former takes precedence.

The Halakah is in agreement with Bet Hillel." All this is obvious, for a Bat Kol had issued forth!

Do Bet Shammai, however, hold that the benediction over the day is of greater importance? Lo, there is a teaching: On entering his house at the conclusion of the Sabbath, he says the benediction over the wine, the light and the spices and after that says the Habdalah ; and should he have only one cup [of wine], he leaves it until after the meal and combines all [the benedictions] afterwards.

But how is it shown that this teaching emanates from Bet Shammai ; perhaps it is from Bet Hillel ?

But how is it shown that this teaching emanates from Bet Shammai ; perhaps it is from Bet Hillel ?

That cannot enter thy mind ; because it states "light and afterwards spices," and from whom hast thou heard that opinion? Bet Shammai; for there is a teaching : R. Judah said : Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel do not differ that the benediction over food comes first and Habdalah afterwards ; in what do they differ ? About light and spices — Bet Shammai declare : Light and afterwards spices, whereas Bet Hillel declare : Spices and afterwards light.

That cannot enter thy mind ; because it states "light and afterwards spices," and from whom hast thou heard that opinion? Bet Shammai; for there is a teaching : R. Judah said : Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel do not differ that the benediction over food comes first and Habdalah afterwards ; in what do they differ ? About light and spices — Bet Shammai declare : Light and afterwards spices, whereas Bet Hillel declare : Spices and afterwards light.

That cannot enter thy mind ; because it states "light and afterwards spices," and from whom hast thou heard that opinion? Bet Shammai; for there is a teaching : R. Judah said : Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel do not differ that the benediction over food comes first and Habdalah afterwards ; in what do they differ ? About light and spices — Bet Shammai declare : Light and afterwards spices, whereas Bet Hillel declare : Spices and afterwards light.

That cannot enter thy mind ; because it states "light and afterwards spices," and from whom hast thou heard that opinion? Bet Shammai; for there is a teaching : R. Judah said : Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel do not differ that the benediction over food comes first and Habdalah afterwards ; in what do they differ ? About light and spices — Bet Shammai declare : Light and afterwards spices, whereas Bet Hillel declare : Spices and afterwards light.

That cannot enter thy mind ; because it states "light and afterwards spices," and from whom hast thou heard that opinion? Bet Shammai; for there is a teaching : R. Judah said : Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel do not differ that the benediction over food comes first and Habdalah afterwards ; in what do they differ ? About light and spices — Bet Shammai declare : Light and afterwards spices, whereas Bet Hillel declare : Spices and afterwards light.

But how is it shown that this teaching emanates from Bet Shammai as interpreted by R. Judah ; perhaps it is from Bet Hillel as interpreted by R. Meir?

But how is it shown that this teaching emanates from Bet Shammai as interpreted by R. Judah ; perhaps it is from Bet Hillel as interpreted by R. Meir?

That cannot enter thy mind; for it states here in our Mishnah: Bet Shammai say : [The order of benedictions is] light, food, spices and Habdalah ; but Bet Hillel say : Light, spices, food and Habdalah ; and there in the Baraita it states : "Should he have only one cup [of wine], he leaves it until after the meal and combines all [the benedictions] afterwards." Conclude therefore that it emanates from Bet Shammai as interpreted by R. Judah.

That cannot enter thy mind; for it states here in our Mishnah: Bet Shammai say : [The order of benedictions is] light, food, spices and Habdalah ; but Bet Hillel say : Light, spices, food and Habdalah ; and there in the Baraita it states : "Should he have only one cup [of wine], he leaves it until after the meal and combines all [the benedictions] afterwards." Conclude therefore that it emanates from Bet Shammai as interpreted by R. Judah.

That cannot enter thy mind; for it states here in our Mishnah: Bet Shammai say : [The order of benedictions is] light, food, spices and Habdalah ; but Bet Hillel say : Light, spices, food and Habdalah ; and there in the Baraita it states : "Should he have only one cup [of wine], he leaves it until after the meal and combines all [the benedictions] afterwards." Conclude therefore that it emanates from Bet Shammai as interpreted by R. Judah.

Nevertheless there is a difficulty ! Bet Shammai hold that the advent of a [holy] day is different from its conclusion ; for with its advent the more we anticipate it the better ; but with its conclusion the later we defer it the better, so that it may not seem to us a burden.

Do Bet Shammai hold that the Grace after meals requires a cup of wine ? For our Mishnah teaches : If wine is brought to them after the food and there is only sufficient for one cup, Bet Shammai declare : He says the benediction over the wine and then over the food. Is it not to be supposed that he says the benediction [over the wine] and then drinks it ? No ; he says the benediction and leaves it [undrunk for the Grace].

Do Bet Shammai hold that the Grace after meals requires a cup of wine ? For our Mishnah teaches : If wine is brought to them after the food and there is only sufficient for one cup, Bet Shammai declare : He says the benediction over the wine and then over the food. Is it not to be supposed that he says the benediction [over the wine] and then drinks it ? No ; he says the benediction and leaves it [undrunk for the Grace].

But R. Hiyya has taught : Bet Shammai declare : He says the benediction over the wine and drinks it, and after that says Grace ! Nay, there are two Tannaim who differ as to the teaching of Bet Shammai.

But R. Hiyya has taught : Bet Shammai declare : He says the benediction over the wine and drinks it, and after that says Grace ! Nay, there are two Tannaim who differ as to the teaching of Bet Shammai.

Bet Shammai say : We wash the hands and then fill the cup, etc.

Our Rabbis have taught : Bet Shammai say : We wash the hands and then fill the cup ; for if thou sayest that we till the cup first, there is a fear lest the liquid which is on the outside of the cup may contract defilement on account of his hands and in its turn defile the cup.

But Bet Hillel declare : We fill the cup and then wash the hands ; for if thou sayest that we wash the hands first, there is a fear lest the moisture on the hands may contract defilement on account of the cup [which might be ritually unclean] and in its turn defile the hands. But the cup can defile the hands!

Bet Shammai hold that it is forbidden to use a vessel whose exterior has become defiled by liquid for fear of the spillings, but there is no need to fear lest the moisture of the hand will contract defilement through the cup.

Bet Hillel, on the other hand, hold that it is permitted to use a cup whose exterior has become defiled by a liquid, saying that spillings are not frequent ; but there is reason to fear lest the moisture on the hand contract defilement on account of the cup.

Why this other reason? Thus said Bet Hillel to Bet Shammai : According to you who maintain that it is forbidden to use a cup whose exterior has been defiled because of the fear of spillings, even so it is better [to wash the hands last] because the meal follows immediately on the washing of the hands.

Why this other reason? Thus said Bet Hillel to Bet Shammai : According to you who maintain that it is forbidden to use a cup whose exterior has been defiled because of the fear of spillings, even so it is better [to wash the hands last] because the meal follows immediately on the washing of the hands.