depend

From the skull of the Head (of Microprosopus) depend all those chiefs and leaders (otherwise, all those thousands and tens of thousands), and also from the locks of the hair.

And over these (locks of hair) are set all the Lords of Lamentation and Wailing; and they depend from the single locks.

And these all depend from the rigid locks; hence also these are entirely rigid, as we have before said.

From the second Brain the Lords of Lamentation and Wailing proceed through those rigid locks and depend (from them). Concerning whom it is written: Prov. iv. 19: “The path of the wicked is as darkness; they know not wherein they stumble.”

From the third Brain the Lords of Lords proceed through those locks arranged in the middle condition (i.e. partly hard and partly soft), and depend (therefrom); and they are called the Luminous and the Non-Luminous Countenances.

From this forehead depend twenty-four tribunals, for all those who are shameless in their deeds.

But truly (the tribunals) are only twenty; wherefore are four added? Assuredly, in respect of the punishments of the inferior tribunals which depend from the Supernals.

From those hairs depend one thousand seven hundred Lords of Inspection for striving in battles. And then all their emissaries arise and unclose the eyes.

From those ears depend all the Lords of Wings who receive the Voice of the Universe; and all those are called thus, the Ears of Tetragrammaton.

From this opening of the ears depend other openings, (namely) the opening of the eye, the opening of the mouth, the opening of the nose.

From that voice are all things; from that voice (a certain part) entereth into the whole body, and by it are all things affected. Whence doth this matter depend? From that ear.

Binah also, as it is written, 1 Sam. iii. 9, “Speak, for Thy servant heareth.” Also 2 Kings xviii. 26, “Because we have heard.” And hencefrom all things depend.

Däath also, as it is said, Prov. iv. 10, “Hear, O my son, and receive My sayings.” And again, ibid. ii. 1, “Thou shalt hide My sayings with thee.” And thereunto all things depend from the ears.

From these ears depend prayers and petitions, and the opening of the eyes.

This is the same which standeth written, 2 Kings xix. 16: “Incline, O Tetragrammaton, Thine ear, and hear; open Thine eyes, and see.” Thus all things depend hencefrom.

From this ear depend the highest Arcana, which go not forth without, and therefore is (this ear) curved in the interior parts, and the Arcana of Arcana are concealed therein. Woe unto him who revealeth the Arcana!

And then all things are found in judgment, and then (He putteth on) the vestments of zeal, which are called “the garments of vengeance” (Isa. lix. 17), and all things depend herefrom.

In this beard nine conformations are found, (among which are) six myriads which depend among them, and are extended throughout the whole body.

And those six which depend hang in the locks which are beneath the abodes of fragrance, three on this side and three on that.

And all those six (other conformations), three on this side and three on that side, go forth, and all depend from those locks which hang down, and they are extended throughout the whole body.

Therefore the nine (conformations) arise from and depend from the beard; and thus it commenceth from before the ears. But (the conformations) remain not in permanence save through another cause, as we have before laid down.

But the whole ornament of the beard consisteth in those locks which hang down, because all things depend thencefrom.

What is to be understood by KCh IHVH, Kach Tetragrammaton, the Power of Tetragrammaton? Thus is MZLA QDIShA, Mezla Qadisha, the Holy Influence, called, even the Concealed with all Concealments. And from the Influence that Strength and that Light depend.

From those lips alike depend good and evil, life and death.

From these lips depend the Lords of Vigilance. For when those lips murmur, they all are excited to bring forth secret things, as well as the Lords of Judgment in all the tribunals wherein they have their abiding-place.

When Rabbi Meir died, the composers of fables ceased. When Ben Azzai died, the diligent students [of Torah] ceased. When Ben Zoma died, the expounders ceased. When Rabbi Joshua died, goodness ceased from the world. When Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel died, locusts come and troubles multiplied. When Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah died, the sages ceased to be wealthy. When Rabbi Akiba died, the glory of the Torah ceased. When Rabbi Hanina ben Dosa died, men of wondrous deeds ceased. When Rabbi Yose Katnuta died, the pious men (hasidim) ceased and why was his name called Katnuta? Because he was the youngest of the pious men. When Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai died, the splendor of wisdom ceased. When Rabban Gamaliel the elder died, the glory of the torah ceased, and purity and separateness perished. When Rabbi Ishmael ben Fabi died, the splendor of the priesthood ceased. When Rabbi died, humility and fear of sin ceased. Rabbi Phineas ben Yair says: when Temple was destroyed, scholars and freemen were ashamed and covered their head, men of wondrous deeds were disregarded, and violent men and big talkers grew powerful. And nobody expounds, nobody seeks, and nobody asks. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. Rabbi Eliezer the Great says: from the day the Temple was destroyed, the sages began to be like scribes, scribes like synagogue-attendants, synagogue-attendants like common people, and the common people became more and more debased. And nobody seeks. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. In the footsteps of the messiah insolence (hutzpah) will increase and the cost of living will go up greatly; the vine will yield its fruit, but wine will be expensive; the government will turn to heresy, and there will be no one to rebuke; the meeting-place [of scholars] will be used for licentiousness; the Galilee will be destroyed, the Gablan will be desolated, and the dwellers on the frontier will go about [begging] from place to place without anyone to take pity on them; the wisdom of the learned will rot, fearers of sin will be despised, and the truth will be lacking; youths will put old men to shame, the old will stand up in the presence of the young, “For son spurns father, daughter rises up against mother, daughter-in-law against mother-in-law a man’s own household are his enemies” (Micah 7:6). The face of the generation will be like the face of a dog, a son will not feel ashamed before his father. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair says, “Heedfulness leads to cleanliness, cleanliness leads to purity, purity leads to separation, separation leads to holiness, holiness leads to modesty, modesty leads to fear of sin, fear of sin leads to piety, piety leads to the Holy Spirit, The Holy Spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead, and the resurrection of the dead comes from Elijah, blessed be his memory, Amen.”

When Rabbi Meir died, the composers of fables ceased. When Ben Azzai died, the diligent students [of Torah] ceased. When Ben Zoma died, the expounders ceased. When Rabbi Joshua died, goodness ceased from the world. When Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel died, locusts come and troubles multiplied. When Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah died, the sages ceased to be wealthy. When Rabbi Akiba died, the glory of the Torah ceased. When Rabbi Hanina ben Dosa died, men of wondrous deeds ceased. When Rabbi Yose Katnuta died, the pious men (hasidim) ceased and why was his name called Katnuta? Because he was the youngest of the pious men. When Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai died, the splendor of wisdom ceased. When Rabban Gamaliel the elder died, the glory of the torah ceased, and purity and separateness perished. When Rabbi Ishmael ben Fabi died, the splendor of the priesthood ceased. When Rabbi died, humility and fear of sin ceased. Rabbi Phineas ben Yair says: when Temple was destroyed, scholars and freemen were ashamed and covered their head, men of wondrous deeds were disregarded, and violent men and big talkers grew powerful. And nobody expounds, nobody seeks, and nobody asks. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. Rabbi Eliezer the Great says: from the day the Temple was destroyed, the sages began to be like scribes, scribes like synagogue-attendants, synagogue-attendants like common people, and the common people became more and more debased. And nobody seeks. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. In the footsteps of the messiah insolence (hutzpah) will increase and the cost of living will go up greatly; the vine will yield its fruit, but wine will be expensive; the government will turn to heresy, and there will be no one to rebuke; the meeting-place [of scholars] will be used for licentiousness; the Galilee will be destroyed, the Gablan will be desolated, and the dwellers on the frontier will go about [begging] from place to place without anyone to take pity on them; the wisdom of the learned will rot, fearers of sin will be despised, and the truth will be lacking; youths will put old men to shame, the old will stand up in the presence of the young, “For son spurns father, daughter rises up against mother, daughter-in-law against mother-in-law a man’s own household are his enemies” (Micah 7:6). The face of the generation will be like the face of a dog, a son will not feel ashamed before his father. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair says, “Heedfulness leads to cleanliness, cleanliness leads to purity, purity leads to separation, separation leads to holiness, holiness leads to modesty, modesty leads to fear of sin, fear of sin leads to piety, piety leads to the Holy Spirit, The Holy Spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead, and the resurrection of the dead comes from Elijah, blessed be his memory, Amen.”

When Rabbi Meir died, the composers of fables ceased. When Ben Azzai died, the diligent students [of Torah] ceased. When Ben Zoma died, the expounders ceased. When Rabbi Joshua died, goodness ceased from the world. When Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel died, locusts come and troubles multiplied. When Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah died, the sages ceased to be wealthy. When Rabbi Akiba died, the glory of the Torah ceased. When Rabbi Hanina ben Dosa died, men of wondrous deeds ceased. When Rabbi Yose Katnuta died, the pious men (hasidim) ceased and why was his name called Katnuta? Because he was the youngest of the pious men. When Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai died, the splendor of wisdom ceased. When Rabban Gamaliel the elder died, the glory of the torah ceased, and purity and separateness perished. When Rabbi Ishmael ben Fabi died, the splendor of the priesthood ceased. When Rabbi died, humility and fear of sin ceased. Rabbi Phineas ben Yair says: when Temple was destroyed, scholars and freemen were ashamed and covered their head, men of wondrous deeds were disregarded, and violent men and big talkers grew powerful. And nobody expounds, nobody seeks, and nobody asks. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. Rabbi Eliezer the Great says: from the day the Temple was destroyed, the sages began to be like scribes, scribes like synagogue-attendants, synagogue-attendants like common people, and the common people became more and more debased. And nobody seeks. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. In the footsteps of the messiah insolence (hutzpah) will increase and the cost of living will go up greatly; the vine will yield its fruit, but wine will be expensive; the government will turn to heresy, and there will be no one to rebuke; the meeting-place [of scholars] will be used for licentiousness; the Galilee will be destroyed, the Gablan will be desolated, and the dwellers on the frontier will go about [begging] from place to place without anyone to take pity on them; the wisdom of the learned will rot, fearers of sin will be despised, and the truth will be lacking; youths will put old men to shame, the old will stand up in the presence of the young, “For son spurns father, daughter rises up against mother, daughter-in-law against mother-in-law a man’s own household are his enemies” (Micah 7:6). The face of the generation will be like the face of a dog, a son will not feel ashamed before his father. Upon whom shall we depend? Upon our father who is in heaven. Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair says, “Heedfulness leads to cleanliness, cleanliness leads to purity, purity leads to separation, separation leads to holiness, holiness leads to modesty, modesty leads to fear of sin, fear of sin leads to piety, piety leads to the Holy Spirit, The Holy Spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead, and the resurrection of the dead comes from Elijah, blessed be his memory, Amen.”

And why do they record the opinion of a single person among the many, when the halakhah must be according to the opinion of the many? So that if a court prefers the opinion of the single person it may depend on him. For no court may set aside the decision of another court unless it is greater than it in wisdom and in number. If it was greater than it in wisdom but not in number, in number but not in wisdom, it may not set aside its decision, unless it is greater than it in wisdom and in number.

All love that depends on a something, [when the] thing ceases, [the] love ceases; and [all love] that does not depend on anything, will never cease. What is an example of love that depended on a something? Such was the love of Amnon for Tamar. And what is an example of love that did not depend on anything? Such was the love of David and Jonathan.

All love that depends on a something, [when the] thing ceases, [the] love ceases; and [all love] that does not depend on anything, will never cease. What is an example of love that depended on a something? Such was the love of Amnon for Tamar. And what is an example of love that did not depend on anything? Such was the love of David and Jonathan.

If one slaughtered for a non-Jew, the slaughtering is valid. Rabbi Eliezer declares it invalid. Rabbi Eliezer said: even if one slaughtered a beast with the intention that a non-Jew should eat [only] its liver, the slaughtering is invalid, for the thoughts of a non-Jew are usually directed towards idolatry. Rabbi Yose said: is there not a kal vehomer argument? For if in the case of consecrated animals, where a wrongful intention can render invalid, it is established that everything depends solely upon the intention of him who performs the service, how much more in the case of unconsecrated animals, where a wrongful intention cannot render invalid, is it not logical that everything should depend solely upon the intention of him who slaughters!

These four colors combine with each other to declare free [from uncleanness], to certify or to shut up. "To shut up" one who is at the end of the first week; "To declare free [from uncleanness]", one who is at the end of the second week. "To certify", one in which a discoloration or white hair arose, by the end of the first week, by the end of the second week or after it had been declared free [from uncleanness]. "To certify", when a spreading arose in it by the end of the first week, by the end of the second week or after it had been declared free [from uncleanness]. "To certify", when all one's skin turned white after it had been declared free from uncleanness; "To declare free from uncleanness’, when all one's skin turned white after the sign had been certified unclean or after it had been shut up. These are the colors of signs of negaim upon which depend all decisions concerning negaim.

The case of a doubt about drawn water which the sages have declared clean; If there is a doubt whether [three logs of drawn water] fell into the mikveh or not, Or even if they did fall in, there is a doubt whether [the mikveh] contained forty seahs or not, Or if there were two mikvehs one of which contained forty seahs and the other did not, and drawn water fell into one of them and it is not known into which of them it fell, In such a doubt it is accounted clean, because there exists [a possibility] on which we may depend [in declaring it clean]. If they both contained less than forty seahs, and [drawn water] fell into one of them and it is not known into which of them it fell, in such a doubt it is accounted unclean, because there exists no [possibility] on which we may depend [in declaring it clean].

The case of a doubt about drawn water which the sages have declared clean; If there is a doubt whether [three logs of drawn water] fell into the mikveh or not, Or even if they did fall in, there is a doubt whether [the mikveh] contained forty seahs or not, Or if there were two mikvehs one of which contained forty seahs and the other did not, and drawn water fell into one of them and it is not known into which of them it fell, In such a doubt it is accounted clean, because there exists [a possibility] on which we may depend [in declaring it clean]. If they both contained less than forty seahs, and [drawn water] fell into one of them and it is not known into which of them it fell, in such a doubt it is accounted unclean, because there exists no [possibility] on which we may depend [in declaring it clean].

“ Early and late fruits are exempt. These are the early fruits, before one appoints a watchman.” But does this depend on the watchman? Rebbi Yose said, if they are not worth the attention of a watchman. “These are the late fruits, after they folded up the mats. Rebbi Illaï said in the name of Rebbi Eliezer, the early ones are obligated because of an assumption that they are being watched.” Rebbi Yose ben Ḥalaphta said, shitin in Sepphoris are obligated because of an assumption that they are watched.

It was stated: “He answers to the fellowship, his sons and household answer to him.” Some Tannaïm state: “He, his sons, and his household answer to the fellowship.” They do not disagree: the first, if they are dependent on their father, the second, if they do not depend on their father. Rebbi Ḥalaphta ben Saul stated, adults answer to the fellowship, minors answer to him.

HALAKHAH: It is written (Deut. 12:1): “These are the statutes and the rules of law which you will be required to follow in the Land.” In the Land you are required to follow them but not outside the Land. Still we say obligations depending on the Land apply only in the Land, but we might think that obligations not depending on the Land also should apply only in the Land. The verse says (Deut. 11:16–18) “Guard yourselves, lest your heart be seduced … And the Eternal’s rage be inflamed against you, etc. Put these words on your hearts, etc.” Even if you are exiled. (Deut. 11:18) “Put these words on your hearts and your persons.” You have to say, for example tefillin and the study of Torah. Just as tefillin and the study of Torah do not depend on the Land and apply both in the Land and outside the Land, so everything not depending on the Land applies both in the Land and outside the Land.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, I was robbed by the people of Qanah. He went to the assembly hall where Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish was asking him repeatedly but he did not answer. He said, what happened? He said, what can you do? He said, all limbs depend on the heart and the heart depends on the wallet. He said, I was robbed by the people of Qanah. He said, what do you have? He said to him, show me their corner. He went out to show him. They saw him from afar and started to chirp. They said, if that is Rebbi Joḥanan, may he take half of it. He said to them, by your life I am taking all of it; he took all.

“If he had one basket and he intended to fill half of it, it became ṭevel once it was half filled. If he intended to fill it completely, it does not become ṭevel until it is completely filled. If there were two and he intended to fill both of them, they do not become ṭevel until he filled both of them. When has this been said? When he brings it to market. But if be brings it to his house, he may eat snacks from it until he reaches his house.” What is the difference between him who brings to market and him who brings to his house? When he brings to his house, it depends on his intention. But if he brings to market, it does not depend on his intention but on that of his customers. Maybe he will find a customer; therefore, it becomes ṭevel immediately.

According to Rav, what is the difference between himself and his children? He is forbidden because he depends on muqẓeh. His children who do not depend on muqẓeh are permitted. We understand his children, but his wife? Does she not have a claim for food against him? Following him who says, the wife’s food is not from the Torah. Following what we have stated: “The court will not determine food for a wife from Sabbatical money, but she may be given Sabbatical produce to eat at her husband’s.” Can she not be considered like a worker whose work is not worth a peruṭah? It implies that she is not considered like a worker whose work is not worth a peruṭah. Even according to him who says, the wife’s food is not from the Torah, does she not have a claim to a dwelling? Following what we stated: “If men participate with food without the knowledge of their wives, the participation is valid. But if wives participate without the knowledge of their husbands, the participation is invalid”.

If somebody made a heap [of somebody’s grain] without the latter’s knowledge: Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is ṭevel, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, it is notṭevel. Rebbi Joḥanan objected to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, did we not state: “And similarly women who gave to a baker to make sour dough for them, if not one of them had the required amount it is free from ḥallah.” (But all of them had the required amount?) He said to him, because if somebody makes dough in order to distribute it, the dough is free from ḥallah. But we have stated: “A baker who made sour dough for distribution is obligated for ḥallah.” He said to him, do not answer back about a baker. For a baker, it does not depend on his opinion but on the opinions of his customers; maybe he will find a customer and it will become ṭevel immediately. He said to him, but was it not stated: “The holes of ants which were overnight near an obligated heap are obligated,” therefore, near an exempt heap they are exempt. Rebbi Jonah, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Because of resignation. Samuel ben Abba said, only if they dragged tips of ears.

Rav had flax which was blighted. He asked the elder Rebbi Ḥiyya, may one slaughter a bird and mix its blood with flax seed? He said, a cadaver. Why did he not say to him, a torn one? Because of Rebbi Meïr, for Rebbi Meïr said [the blood of] a torn [bird] must be covered. But did not Rebbi Immi say in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: From the time when they came from the diaspora, flax was never blighted and wine never became vinegar; they considered this to be due to the merit of the Great Rebbi Ḥiyya and his sons. But Rav is like (Is. 46:12): “Listen to me, mighty of heart, who are far from charity!” Rebbi Abbahu said, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagree. One says, all the world depend on charity but these on strong arms. But the other one said that all good things and consolations come to the world in their merit but they themselves do not profit at all. For example Mar Zuṭra who prayed and fasted for others but for himself he never fasted.

“The loaves for a thanksgiving sacrifice and those needed by the nazir, if he made them for himself they are exempt,” for it is written “the first of your baking troughs;” “to sell on the market he is obligated”, it does not depend on his intention but on that of his customers. Maybe he will find a customer; therefore, it becomes ṭevel immediately.

HALAKHAH: If somebody made a heap [of somebody’s grain] without the latter’s knowledge: Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is ṭevel, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, it is not ṭevel. Rebbi Joḥanan objected to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, did we not state: “And similarly women who gave to a baker to make sour dough for them, if none of them had the required amount it is free from ḥallah.” (But what if all of them had the required amount?) He said to him, because if somebody makes dough in order to distribute it, the dough is exempt from ḥallah. But we have stated: “A baker who made sour dough for distribution is obligated for ḥallah.” He said to him, do not answer back about a baker. For a baker, it does not depend on his opinion but on the opinions of his customers; maybe he will find a customer and will make bread dough for him. He said to him, but was it not stated: “The holes of ants which were overnight near an obligated heap are obligated,” therefore, near an exempt heap they are exempt. Rebbi Jonah said, Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Because of resignation. Samuel ben Abba said, only [if they dragged tips of] ears.

Does Rebbi Yose follow Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel? He might even hold with Rebbi! ‘Orlah depends on one’s intention, tithes do not depend on his intention.

“And kilaim by rabbinic decree.” Samuel said, this refers to vineyard kilaim. Therefore, kilaim of seeds are permitted. Rebbi Joḥanan said, this refers to vineyard kilaim. Therefore, kilaim of seeds are forbidden. Rav Huna said, when Westerners descended from there, they said this in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan and proved it. (Lev. 19:19) “You must keep My basic Laws, your animals you should not mate kilaim, your field you shall not sow kilaim, …, ša‘aṭnez shall not come upon you.” It bracketed kilaim of seeds with kilaim of clothing and kilaim of animals. Since kilaim of clothing and kilaim of animals do not depend on the Land and apply inside and outside the Land, so also kilaim of seeds, while they depend on the Land, do apply inside and outside the Land.

“And kilaim by rabbinic decree.” Samuel said, this refers to vineyard kilaim. Therefore, kilaim of seeds are permitted. Rebbi Joḥanan said, this refers to vineyard kilaim. Therefore, kilaim of seeds are forbidden. Rav Huna said, when Westerners descended from there, they said this in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan and proved it. (Lev. 19:19) “You must keep My basic Laws, your animals you should not mate kilaim, your field you shall not sow kilaim, …, ša‘aṭnez shall not come upon you.” It bracketed kilaim of seeds with kilaim of clothing and kilaim of animals. Since kilaim of clothing and kilaim of animals do not depend on the Land and apply inside and outside the Land, so also kilaim of seeds, while they depend on the Land, do apply inside and outside the Land.

Rebbi Jehudah came back and presented another argument: Leavened matter is forbidden as food and leftover is forbidden as food. Since the latter is to be burned, the former is to be burned. They told him, carcass meat disproves since it is forbidden as food and is not to be burned. He said to them, leavened matter is forbidden as food and for usufruct and leftover is forbidden as food and for usufruct; carcass meat does not disprove since it is not forbidden for usufruct. They told him, the stoned ox disproves which is forbidden as food and for usufruct and is not to be burned. He said to them, leavened matter is forbidden as food, and for usufruct, and makes liable for extirpation, [and leftover is forbidden as food, and for usufruct, and makes liable for extirpation]; the stoned ox does not disprove since it does not make liable for extirpation. They told him, the fat of the stoned ox disproves which is forbidden as food, and for usufruct, and makes liable for extirpation, and is not to be burned. He said to them, leavened matter is forbidden as food, and for usufruct, and makes liable for extirpation, and is dependent on time, and leftover is forbidden as food, and for usufruct, and makes liable for extirpation, and is dependent on time; the fat of the stoned ox does not disprove since it does not depend on time. They told him, a suspended sacrifice following your opinion does disprove since it is forbidden as food, and for usufruct, and makes liable for extirpation, and is dependent on time, [but is not to be burned]. Rebbi Jehudah remained silent.

A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan: “If two are saying, she was kidnapped but is pure, and two are saying, she was kidnapped and is impure, she should not be married, but if she married she should not leave.” Rebbi Yose said, since these say, she is pure, and those say, she is impure, it is as if two said, she was kidnapped, and two said, she was not kidnapped, and we depend on what she says.

There came a case before Rebbi Ḥanina of a woman whose ketubah was less than 200 zuz, and he said, she should take what he had written for her. He said to Rebbi Mana, sit down and sign. He answered, follow your argument and sign yourself, did not Rebbi Ḥiyya say in the name of Samuel, by the Temple šeqel? Rebbi Eudaimon of Sepphoris in the name of Rebbi Ḥuna: Because of a renunciation. Now, should a woman whose ketubah was for less than 200 [zuz] not hide her ketubah in order to collect by the Temple šeqel? They said in the name of Rebbi Ḥuna, at a place where one does not write a ketubah. But at a place where one writes a ketubah, what she presents she collects. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it was stated thus: If a deaf-mute man married a hearing wife, she has no claim for support nor ketubah, but if she died, he inherits from her, for she wanted to connect him with her property, but he could not want to connect her with his property. If a hearing male married a deaf-mute woman, she has a claim to support and ketubah, but if she died, he does not inherit, for he wanted to connect her with his property, but she could not want to connect him with her property. But can a deaf-mute woman acquire and have ketubah? Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, explain it that at the moment he married her, she was hearing. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, he married her when she was hearing but she turned deaf-mute. In any case, did he not marry her when she was hearing? Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, explain it that she was deaf-mute and turned hearing; he married her when she was hearing and she turned deaf. That you should not say, because at the start she was deaf-mute she has [no] ketubah, therefore it is necessary to say that she (does not have) [has]. Rebbi Yose does not say so, but since if one has sexual relations with a deaf-mute, is he not liable for a fine? Only if there were no fine would there be no ketubah. Rebbi Yudan said, does that depend on a fine? Look, the adult woman collects no fine but her ketubah is 200, the virgin after marriage collects a fine but her ketubah is a mina!

Rebbi Eleazar asked, what about a male who sleeps with a manumitted slave girl? Let us hear from the following: I could think that a male who sleeps with a Gentile slave has to pay; the verse says: “He shall take her as wife by the bride price.” If he can marry her. This excludes the [gentile] slave (or any) whom he cannot marry. Only because he cannot marry her! Therefore, if he can marry her, she collects the fine, and any who collects the fine has a ketubah. Rebbi Yudan said, does that depend on a fine? Look, the adult collects no fine but her ketubah is 200, the virgin after marriage collects a fine but her ketubah is a mina! Rebbi Ze‘ira said before Rebbi Mana, explain it if she was converted or freed before she reached three years and one day. He said to him, any woman who was converted or manumitted before she reached three years and one day is like an Israel.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, it was stated thus: “Two [witnesses] say he died, [later] two witnesses say, he did not die. She shall not remarry, but if she has remarried she should not leave. Two [witnesses] say she was divorced, [later] two witnesses say, she was not divorced. She shall not remarry; if she has remarried she must leave.” There, they say, it makes no difference; whether about death or divorce she should not leave. In the opinion of the rabbis there it is understandable, there is no difference between death and divorce. In the opinion of the rabbis here, what is the difference between death and divorce? Rebbi Ze‘ira said it without attribution, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: It is reasonable to decide in the case of witnesses of death that if he returns he contradicts them. Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, the rabbis there stick to their opinion since the rabbis there say, when the [first] testimony was accepted, it was accepted as certain. So the rabbis here say, at the moment of her remarriage, she remarried based on certified testimony. Rebbi Yose said, it is reasonable that the rabbis there did not change their argument. Do the rabbis there not agree if two [witnesses] say, his father died while in possession, [and two say his father died while not in possession,] that the field is in Reuben’s possession? Therefore, if two say, she was divorced and remarried, and two say she was not divorced, rightly she should not leave. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan: “If two are saying, she was preliminarily married, and two are saying, she was not preliminarily married, she should not get married, but if she married she should not leave.” Rebbi Hoshaia said, Rebbi Joḥanan may explain it as follows: “If two are saying, she was divorced, and two are saying, she was not divorced, she should not get married, but if she married she should not leave.” What is the difference between this and the first case? There, she was considered a married woman in everybody’s opinion. Here, she is considered a married woman only for two people. If two others came and identified the man who was betrothed to her. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan: “If two are saying, she was kidnapped but is pure, and two are saying, she was kidnapped and is impure, she should not get married, but if she married she should not leave.” Rebbi Yose said, since these say, she is pure, and those say, she is impure, it is as if two said, she was kidnapped, and two said, she was not kidnapped, and we depend on what she says. If two are saying, she had been betrothed and two are saying she had not been betrothed. Rebbi Jonah compares that to fat. If two said, X ate fat, and two said, X did not eat fat, did he not have to bring a “hung” reparation sacrifice because of the doubt? Here, he should give a bill of divorce because of the doubt. Rebbi Yose said to him, do not compare this to fat, because even if he says my conscience bothers me, he brings a “hung” reparation sacrifice. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Yose: If two are saying she had been betrothed and two are saying she had not been betrothed, she should not get married. The end disagrees with Rebbi Jonah: If she married she must leave. Rebbi Mana said, Rebbi Yose did not say that she may marry, nor did Rebbi Jonah say if she married she must leave, he said only, do not compare this to fat, because even if he says my conscience bothers me, he brings a “hung” reparation sacrifice.

Rebbi Crispus asked: Does he check every year or only once every three years? Let us hear from the following: If somebody sells unspecified wine to another person, he has to warrant it until after Tabernacles. Rebbi Yudan said, explain it for those Galileans who harvest only after the beginning of Tabernacles and you cannot deduce anything. That which was said, “old from the preceding year, very old aged three years”, should we say because of the tasting? This means that any time it is declared old he has to warrant it for two years. This means that very old [wine] has to be warranted until Tabernacles. This means that he has to check every year. How does he check? May one check one amphora on which all others depend that they would not become vinegar? Rebbi Shammai said, there are people who knock on the barrel from the outside and know what is inside.

HALAKHAH: “Any commandment which does not refer to the Land,” etc. It is written (Deut. 12:1): “These are the statutes and the rules of law which you will be required to follow in the Land.” In the Land you are required to follow them but not outside the Land. Still we say obligations depending on the Land only apply in the Land, but we might think that obligations not depending on the Land also should only apply in the Land. The verse says (Deut. 11:16–18) “Be careful, lest your heart be seduced … and the Eternal’s rage be inflamed against you, etc. Put these words on your hearts,”. Even if you are exiled. (Deut. 11:18) “Put these words on your hearts and your persons.” You have to say, for example tefillin and the study of Torah. Just as tefillin and the study of Torah do not depend on the Land and apply both in the Land and outside the Land, so everything not depending on the Land applies both in the Land and outside the Land.

HALAKHAH: “One hands a cow or a donkey over for care,” etc. It was stated: “A person may receive from another an animal on condition to deliver to him one lamb and one shearing per year, a chicken for ten eggs a month. The woman receiving a chicken has to care for the chicks as long as those depend on their mother. One cares for small animals 30 days and for large animals 50 days. Rebbi Yose says, for (large) [small] animals three months because they need special care. After that, he gives the owner his part equally, everything according to local practice.” What means “he gives the owner his part equally”? A person gave to another 100 denars; they produced 20 denars. Each takes half of it; the half of the owner remains with him as capital. Do people do that? But they trade, and at the end they divide it up. “A person receiving an animal for care is responsible for it, for an unclean animal twelve months, for a human 24 months. At a place where work is compensated separately, one pays; for offspring of animals, one pays, everything following local custom.”

Rebbi Crispus asked: Does he check every year or only once every three years? Let us hear from the following: If somebody sells wine for a year, he has to warrant it until after Tabernacles. Rebbi Yudan said, explain it for those Galileans who only harvest after Tabernacles and you cannot deduce anything. That is what was said, “old from the preceding year, aged three years”, should we say because of the tasting? May one check one amphora on which all others depend [or] does he have to check every single one whether they would not turn into vinegar? Rebbi Shammai said, there are people who knock on the barrel at the top and know what is inside.

MISHNAH: If the Court ruled to violate one of the commandments spelled out in the Torah and a single person went and acted inadvertently following their pronouncement, whether they acted and he acted simultaneously with them, or they acted and he followed their example, or they did not act but he did, he is not liable since he depended on the Court. If the Court ruled but one of them knew that they erred, or a student worthy of ordination went and acted following their pronouncement, whether they acted and he acted simultaneously with them, or they acted and he followed their example, or they did not act but he did, he is liable since he did not depend on the Court. This is the principle: The person depending on himself is liable, but one depending on the Court is not liable.

Rebbi Isaac asked: Is it the same with the eating of half loaves? Rebbi Yose said, this question of Rebbi Isaac is nothing. (Is it written) [Does] the matter depend on eating half loaves? If one ate the volume of half an olive during the time allotted for this half loaf and another volume of half an olive during the time allotted for that half loaf, is that anything? If one ate the volume of several olives during times allotted for several half-loaves in one oblivion, he is liable only for one [sacrifice]. The rabbis of Caesarea say, instead of comparing it to kinds of fat, why not compare it to [the laws of] Sabbath? If he wove a single thread for one cloth and a single thread for another cloth, is that anything? If he wove several threads for several pieces of cloth in one oblivion, he is liable only for one [sacrifice]. Was there not an obligation for a sacrifice in the meantime, and you say that they are counted together? Rebbi Abun said, there it is about the obligation of a sacrifice; but here [a change] of sacrifice.

“An old woman.” Who is an old woman? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, any person whom one calls “mother” and she is not offended. Does that depend on her opinion? Rebbi Abun said, any who should be called “mother”.

It is certainly in agreement with R. Judah, even though it be ab initio ; and there is no contradiction. The latter is his own opinion, the other the opinion of his teacher. For there is a teaching : R. Judah says in the name of R. Eleazar b. 'Azariah : When one reads the Shema' he must make it audible to his ear ; as it is said, "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one" (Deut. vi. 4). R. Meir said to him : Behold the Scriptures state, "And these words which I command thee this day shall be upon thy heart" (ibid. v. 6), i.e. the words depend on the Kawwanah of the heart. Since thou hast reached so far, thou mayest even suppose that

It is certainly R. Judah's view, and even ab initio it is valid. Nor is there any contradiction ; the latter being R. Judah's own opinion, the other that of his teacher. For there is a teaching : R. Judah says in the name of R. Eleazar b. 'Azariah : He who reads the Shema' must make it audible to his ear ; as it is said, "Hear O Israel." R. Meir said to him : Behold the Scriptures state, "And these words which I command thee this day shall be upon thy heart," i.e. the words depend upon the Kawwanah of the heart.

GEMARA Why are the reading of the Shema' and Tefillin different [from the others] ? Because they are commands the observance of which depends upon a certain point of time, and women are exempt from all commands of this class. Tefillah, Mezuzah and Grace after meals, being commands the observance of which does not depend upon a certain point of time, are obligatory upon women. That the reading of the Shema' [is not obligatory upon women] is self-evident, because it is a command the observance of which depends upon a certain point of time, and women are exempt from all commands of this class!

Raba and R. Zera went on a visit to the house of the Exilarch. After the tray had been taken away from before them, there was sent to them from the Exilarch's house a gift [of fruit]. Raba ate it, but R. Zera did not. The latter said to him, "Does not the master hold that if the table has been cleared, it is forbidden to eat?" He replied, "We depend upon the Exilarch's tray."

Bar Kappara expounded : Which is a brief Scriptural passage upon which all the principles of the Torah depend? "In all thy ways acknowledge Him, and He will direct thy paths" (ibid. iii. 6). Raba said : Even for a matter of transgression.

but if there is a scholar in charge [of charity] there, it should be given to the town scholar, and all the more so in this case, seeing that both my poor and your poor depend upon me.