dishes

And thou shalt make the dishes thereof, and spoons thereof, and covers thereof, and bowls thereof, to cover withal: of pure gold shalt thou make them.

And he made the vessels which were upon the table, his dishes, and his spoons, and his bowls, and his covers to cover withal, of pure gold.

And upon the table of shewbread they shall spread a cloth of blue, and put thereon the dishes, and the spoons, and the bowls, and covers to cover withal: and the continual bread shall be thereon:

“Hear the similitude which I am about to narrate to you relative to fasting. A certain man had a field and many slaves, and he planted a certain part of the field with a vineyard, and selecting a faithful and beloved and much valued slave, he called him to him, and said, ‘Take this vineyard which I have planted, and stake it until I come, and do nothing else to the vineyard; and attend to this order of mine, and you shall receive your freedom from me.’ And the master of the slave departed to a foreign country. And when he was gone, the slave took and staked the vineyard; and when he had finished the staking of the vines, he saw that the vineyard was full of weeds. He then reflected, saying, ‘I have kept this order of my master: I will dig up the rest of this vineyard, and it will be more beautiful when dug up; and being free of weeds, it will yield more fruit, not being choked by them.’ He took, therefore, and dug up the vineyard, and rooted out all the weeds that were in it. And that vineyard became very beautiful and fruitful, having no weeds to choke it. And after a certain time the master of the slave and of the field returned, and entered into the vineyard. And seeing that the vines were suitably supported on stakes, and the ground, moreover, dug up, and all the weeds rooted out, and the vines fruitful, he was greatly pleased with the work of his slave. And calling his beloved son who was his heir, and his friends who were his councillors, he told them what orders he had given his slave, and what he had found performed. And they rejoiced along with the slave at the testimony which his master bore to him. And he said to them, ‘I promised this slave freedom if he obeyed the command which I gave him, and he has kept my command, and done besides a good work to the vineyard, and has pleased me exceedingly. In return, therefore, for the work which he has done, I wish to make him co-heir with my son, because, having good thoughts, he did not neglect them, but carried them out.’ With this resolution of the master his son and friends were well pleased, viz. that the slave should be co-heir with the son. After a few days the master made a feast, and sent to his slave many dishes from his table. And the slave receiving the dishes that were sent him from his master, took of them what was sufficient for himself, and distributed the rest among his fellow-slaves. And his fellow-slaves rejoiced to receive the dishes, and began to pray for him, that he might find still greater favour with his master for having so treated them. His master heard all these things that were done, and was again greatly pleased with his conduct. And the master again calling together his friends and his son, reported to them the slave’s proceeding with regard to the dishes which he had sent him. And they were still more satisfied that the slave should become co-heir with his son.”

“Hear the similitude which I am about to narrate to you relative to fasting. A certain man had a field and many slaves, and he planted a certain part of the field with a vineyard, and selecting a faithful and beloved and much valued slave, he called him to him, and said, ‘Take this vineyard which I have planted, and stake it until I come, and do nothing else to the vineyard; and attend to this order of mine, and you shall receive your freedom from me.’ And the master of the slave departed to a foreign country. And when he was gone, the slave took and staked the vineyard; and when he had finished the staking of the vines, he saw that the vineyard was full of weeds. He then reflected, saying, ‘I have kept this order of my master: I will dig up the rest of this vineyard, and it will be more beautiful when dug up; and being free of weeds, it will yield more fruit, not being choked by them.’ He took, therefore, and dug up the vineyard, and rooted out all the weeds that were in it. And that vineyard became very beautiful and fruitful, having no weeds to choke it. And after a certain time the master of the slave and of the field returned, and entered into the vineyard. And seeing that the vines were suitably supported on stakes, and the ground, moreover, dug up, and all the weeds rooted out, and the vines fruitful, he was greatly pleased with the work of his slave. And calling his beloved son who was his heir, and his friends who were his councillors, he told them what orders he had given his slave, and what he had found performed. And they rejoiced along with the slave at the testimony which his master bore to him. And he said to them, ‘I promised this slave freedom if he obeyed the command which I gave him, and he has kept my command, and done besides a good work to the vineyard, and has pleased me exceedingly. In return, therefore, for the work which he has done, I wish to make him co-heir with my son, because, having good thoughts, he did not neglect them, but carried them out.’ With this resolution of the master his son and friends were well pleased, viz. that the slave should be co-heir with the son. After a few days the master made a feast, and sent to his slave many dishes from his table. And the slave receiving the dishes that were sent him from his master, took of them what was sufficient for himself, and distributed the rest among his fellow-slaves. And his fellow-slaves rejoiced to receive the dishes, and began to pray for him, that he might find still greater favour with his master for having so treated them. His master heard all these things that were done, and was again greatly pleased with his conduct. And the master again calling together his friends and his son, reported to them the slave’s proceeding with regard to the dishes which he had sent him. And they were still more satisfied that the slave should become co-heir with his son.”

“Hear the similitude which I am about to narrate to you relative to fasting. A certain man had a field and many slaves, and he planted a certain part of the field with a vineyard, and selecting a faithful and beloved and much valued slave, he called him to him, and said, ‘Take this vineyard which I have planted, and stake it until I come, and do nothing else to the vineyard; and attend to this order of mine, and you shall receive your freedom from me.’ And the master of the slave departed to a foreign country. And when he was gone, the slave took and staked the vineyard; and when he had finished the staking of the vines, he saw that the vineyard was full of weeds. He then reflected, saying, ‘I have kept this order of my master: I will dig up the rest of this vineyard, and it will be more beautiful when dug up; and being free of weeds, it will yield more fruit, not being choked by them.’ He took, therefore, and dug up the vineyard, and rooted out all the weeds that were in it. And that vineyard became very beautiful and fruitful, having no weeds to choke it. And after a certain time the master of the slave and of the field returned, and entered into the vineyard. And seeing that the vines were suitably supported on stakes, and the ground, moreover, dug up, and all the weeds rooted out, and the vines fruitful, he was greatly pleased with the work of his slave. And calling his beloved son who was his heir, and his friends who were his councillors, he told them what orders he had given his slave, and what he had found performed. And they rejoiced along with the slave at the testimony which his master bore to him. And he said to them, ‘I promised this slave freedom if he obeyed the command which I gave him, and he has kept my command, and done besides a good work to the vineyard, and has pleased me exceedingly. In return, therefore, for the work which he has done, I wish to make him co-heir with my son, because, having good thoughts, he did not neglect them, but carried them out.’ With this resolution of the master his son and friends were well pleased, viz. that the slave should be co-heir with the son. After a few days the master made a feast, and sent to his slave many dishes from his table. And the slave receiving the dishes that were sent him from his master, took of them what was sufficient for himself, and distributed the rest among his fellow-slaves. And his fellow-slaves rejoiced to receive the dishes, and began to pray for him, that he might find still greater favour with his master for having so treated them. His master heard all these things that were done, and was again greatly pleased with his conduct. And the master again calling together his friends and his son, reported to them the slave’s proceeding with regard to the dishes which he had sent him. And they were still more satisfied that the slave should become co-heir with his son.”

“Hear the similitude which I am about to narrate to you relative to fasting. A certain man had a field and many slaves, and he planted a certain part of the field with a vineyard, and selecting a faithful and beloved and much valued slave, he called him to him, and said, ‘Take this vineyard which I have planted, and stake it until I come, and do nothing else to the vineyard; and attend to this order of mine, and you shall receive your freedom from me.’ And the master of the slave departed to a foreign country. And when he was gone, the slave took and staked the vineyard; and when he had finished the staking of the vines, he saw that the vineyard was full of weeds. He then reflected, saying, ‘I have kept this order of my master: I will dig up the rest of this vineyard, and it will be more beautiful when dug up; and being free of weeds, it will yield more fruit, not being choked by them.’ He took, therefore, and dug up the vineyard, and rooted out all the weeds that were in it. And that vineyard became very beautiful and fruitful, having no weeds to choke it. And after a certain time the master of the slave and of the field returned, and entered into the vineyard. And seeing that the vines were suitably supported on stakes, and the ground, moreover, dug up, and all the weeds rooted out, and the vines fruitful, he was greatly pleased with the work of his slave. And calling his beloved son who was his heir, and his friends who were his councillors, he told them what orders he had given his slave, and what he had found performed. And they rejoiced along with the slave at the testimony which his master bore to him. And he said to them, ‘I promised this slave freedom if he obeyed the command which I gave him, and he has kept my command, and done besides a good work to the vineyard, and has pleased me exceedingly. In return, therefore, for the work which he has done, I wish to make him co-heir with my son, because, having good thoughts, he did not neglect them, but carried them out.’ With this resolution of the master his son and friends were well pleased, viz. that the slave should be co-heir with the son. After a few days the master made a feast, and sent to his slave many dishes from his table. And the slave receiving the dishes that were sent him from his master, took of them what was sufficient for himself, and distributed the rest among his fellow-slaves. And his fellow-slaves rejoiced to receive the dishes, and began to pray for him, that he might find still greater favour with his master for having so treated them. His master heard all these things that were done, and was again greatly pleased with his conduct. And the master again calling together his friends and his son, reported to them the slave’s proceeding with regard to the dishes which he had sent him. And they were still more satisfied that the slave should become co-heir with his son.”

I said to him, “Sir, I do not see the meaning of these similitudes, nor am I able to comprehend them, unless you explain them to me.” “I will explain them all to you,” he said, “and whatever I shall mention in the course of our conversations I will show you. [Keep the commandments of the Lord, and you will be approved, and inscribed amongst the number of those who observe His commands.] And if you do any good beyond what is commanded by God, you will gain for yourself more abundant glory, and will be more honoured by God than you would otherwise be. If, therefore, in keeping the commandments of God, you do, in addition, these services, you will have joy if you observe them according to my command.” I said to him, “Sir, whatsoever you enjoin upon me I will observe, for I know that you are with me.” “I will be with you,” he replied, “because you have such a desire for doing good; and I will be with all those,” he added, “who have such a desire. This fasting,” he continued, “is very good, provided the commandments of the Lord be observed. Thus, then, shall you observe the fasting which you intend to keep. First of all, be on your guard against every evil word, and every evil desire, and purify your heart from all the vanities of this world. If you guard against these things, your fasting will be perfect. And you will do also as follows. Having fulfilled what is written, in the day on which you fast you will taste nothing but bread and water; and having reckoned up the price of the dishes of that day which you intended to have eaten, you will give it to a widow, or an orphan, or to some person in want, and thus you will exhibit humility of mind, so that he who has received benefit from your humility may fill his own soul, and pray for you to the Lord. If you observe fasting, as I have commanded you, your sacrifice will be acceptable to God, and this fasting will be written down; and the service thus performed is noble, and sacred, and acceptable to the Lord. These things, therefore, shall you thus observe with your children, and all your house, and in observing them you will be blessed; and as many as hear these words and observe them shall be blessed; and whatsoever they ask of the Lord they shall receive.”

“I said to you a little ago,” he answered, “that you were cunning and obstinate in asking explanations of the parables; but since you are so persistent, I shall unfold to you the meaning of the similitudes of the field, and of all the others that follow, that you may make them known to every one. Hear now,” he said, “and understand them. The field is this world; and the Lord of the field is He who created, and perfected, and strengthened all things; [and the son is the Holy Spirit;] and the slave is the Son of God; and the vines are this people, whom He Himself planted; and the stakes are the holy angels of the Lord, who keep His people together; and the weeds that were plucked out of the vineyard are the iniquities of God’s servants; and the dishes which He sent Him from His table are the commandments which He gave His people through His Son; and the friends and fellow-councillors are the holy angels who were first created; and the Master’s absence from home is the time that remains until His appearing.” I said to him, “Sir, all these are great, and marvellous, and glorious things. Could I, therefore,” I continued, “understand them? No, nor could any other man, even if exceedingly wise. Moreover,” I added, “explain to me what I am about to ask you.” “Say what you wish,” he replied. “Why, sir,” I asked, “is the Son of God in the parable in the form of a slave?”

And with the escort he sent Eleazar ten couches with silver legs and all the necessary equipment, a sideboard worth thirty talents, ten robes, purple, and a magnificent crown, and a hundred pieces of the finest woven linen, also bowls and dishes, and two golden beakers to be dedicated to God.

OF THE DIVISIONS OF THE UNGODLY AND UNBELIEVING. [vi., 1.) O Bishops, first of all beware of the divisions of the ungodly and unbelieving; turn aside from the way of the impure, and keep far from them, for he that draweth near unto them shall burn in consuming fire. Turn not, then, your hearts towards them, nor separate one from another, devising to obtain a position of authority. And if there be anyone who draweth near unto them, and doeth their works, he shall find eternal condemnation. As for Dathan and Abiram, who were moved to jealousy against Moses, the earth opened her mouth and swallowed them up: and in like manner the fire devoured the five thousand sons of Korah, who were moved to jealousy against Aaron. Miriam also, the sister of Moses, when she reproached (him), was put forth from the camp for seven days, for she said, ‘‘How greatly hath Moses transgressed, and he hath married a strange woman.” And further Uzziah the King of Judah usurped the duty of the priesthood, and offered incense which it was not lawful for him to do. But Eleazar the priest, and eighty priests who were with him, reproved him, and he refused to hearken to their word; and leprosy appeared in his face, because the Lord was wroth with him. (vi., 2.] But if kings when they transgress meet with condemnation, how much more others who transgress against the priests. For the priest’s office is greater than the kingly; the priests minister to souls, and the kings by the sword have power over the body. And they who transgress against the priests shall receive a greater condemnation than they who transgress against kings. Howbeit there is none that can escape from the condemnation of either. And again it is said, Absalom... and the sons of Korah, and Dathan, and the others who transgressed against the priesthood saved not themselves from condemnation. For these rose up against David concerning the kingdom, and (the others) again strove with Moses in their desire to become rulers, and Absalom accounted his father an unjust judge. And again, it is said concerning Dathan and Abiram, “And they answered and said unto Moses, Is it not enough for thee that thou hast brought us forth from the land of Egypt, from a land that floweth with milk and honey, and hast plucked out the eyes of these men, and become a ruler over us?" And then many were gathered and joined together against him. And in like manner the sons of Korah said, “Hath the Lord spoken to Moses only, and to Aaron the high-priest? And among the children of Israel is there none holy save Aaron alone?” And concerning this there were some who said unto Moses, “Who made thee a prince and ruler over us? ” (vi, 3.] And then they rose up against Moses the man of God, and the faithful one who had wrought all these signs, and performed all the wonders, and brought down on the Egyptians many plagues. He divided the water, and made the sea to stand like a wall on this side and on that, and brought forth the people therefrom as one that walketh on dry ground. And Pharaoh and all his hosts were overwhelmed in the sea. He clave the rock asunder and caused water to flow for them, and gave them manna from heaven, and made flesh to rain upon them like dust, and he led them with a cloud by day, and all the night through with a light of fire. And moreover he gave them the law at the mouth of God the Father Almighty, and the two tables of stone whereon were written the ten words by the finger of God: and he spake with God face to face as a man speaketh with his friend. And concerning him it is said, “There shall not arise a prophet like unto Moses.” And against this man rose up the sons of Korah and the sons of Reuben, and they stoned him with stones as he prayed. And he said, Regard not thou their offering, and the earth swallowed them up, and then the glory of God appeared. And there were some whom the fire devoured; and in like manner those who unjustly sought for power—the earth swallowed them up; with their tents and all their substance they went down alive into Sheol. ([vi., 4.] Now if God requited them with the judgment of His wrath, how much more (will He execute judgment) against those who follow the way of the ungodly and unbelieving, and blaspheme against His creation. Do ye, brethren, hearken to the word of admonition of the Scriptures; and beware of divisions of opinion; and let not your faith be lacking, and seek not to get power with the ungodly and unbelieving who destroy the people. Keep far from their ungodliness, and have no fellowship with them, for God saith, “Depart from those that do thus, lest ye perish with them.” [vi., 5.] Ye ought to keep far from those who blaspheme the name of God. For to abide with the ungodly and unbelieving removeth far from God. These are they that contend with Him, and because of their evil deeds the earth is defiled. Even as Jeremiah the prophet saith, ‘This wicked people is far from the living God.” And again it is said, “I have left mine inheritance and my house, and I have turned my face from them.” And again it is said, ‘‘My vineyard I have not digged, nor pruned, nor cleansed, but within it thorns and thistles shall spring up, and I will command the clouds that they rain no rain upon it,” and it shall become a desert. For the Lord “hath left this people as the tabernacle of a tent in the midst of a vineyard, and as the guardian of a hut, and as a ruined city; and the Holy Spirit hath removed from them the spirit of prophecy, but hath filled this Church with spiritual grace as the river of Egypt in the days of rain; and hath exalted it as a house on the top of a fruitful mountain, “a fat mountain and a fruitful mountain, a mountain wherein God hath been well aT) pleased to dwell and (wherein) He will abide for ever.” And again it is said by Jeremiah the prophet, ‘The throne of the Most High and Exalted is the holy place prepared for us.” And moreover, it is said by Isaiah, “In those days shall the mountain of the Lord appear on the high hilltops, and the house of God upon the extremity of the mountains, and it shall be exalted far above the hills.’’? Wherefore God hath left the people of Judah, and made their temple a desert, and rent the veil, and taken the Holy Spirit from them, even as it is written, ‘Behold your house is left unto you desolate.” But to you Christians hath been given the grace of the Holy Spirit, even as it is written by Joel the prophet, “I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy; and your young men shall see a vision, and your old men shall dream a dream.’’?' For God hath removed from the Jews the power of wisdom and knowledge, and hath given it unto you. Wherefore the devil hath been moved to envy against the Holy Church of God, and hath brought upon you fear and trembling, affliction and trouble, and all (manner of) reproach and division at the hands of the ungodly. for Satan moved the people of the Jews to slay Christ; but ye hated them and despised the evil of their deeds. Wherefore he hath brought upon you temptation and hatred, even as he did upon the righteous Job, and as he contended with Joshua, the son of Josedech. Us also Satan oftentimes desired to sift as wheat and (sought) to weaken our faith. But our Lord and Master cursed him and rebuked him, saying, ‘The Lord who hath saved Israel put thee to shame.” For He said formerly while we were assembled together, “I have prayed for you to the Father that your faith fail not.” [vi., 6.] For formerly there arose divisions and wicked enmities in the midst of the congregation of the Jews; the Sadducees who did not believe in the resurrection of the dead, and the Pharisees who say, When a man is born, there is written concerning him all the sin that he shall do, and also what he shall be. These, then, are they who believe not in the work of God concerning us. And again, they say that the dead shall be raised in one hour. But these believe not in the resurrection. And there are some who taste no food, unless every day they baptize beds and pots and dishes and cups and seats, (that is) wash and cleanse (them) with water. And there are others who are called Ebionites who think and say that the Son of God is a (mere) man, and was born by the will of the flesh from the union of Joseph and Mary, though they were pure from any such thing. These,” then, are they who from the beginning have observed the law of their fathers.

And with wise intent Solomon sent to her meats which would make her thirsty, and drinks that were mingled with vinegar, and fish and dishes made with pepper.

The king also made pouring vessels, in number eighty thousand, and a hundred thousand golden vials, and twice as many silver vials: of golden dishes, in order therein to offer kneaded fine flour at the altar, there were eighty thousand, and twice as many of silver. Of large basons also, wherein they mixed fine flour with oil, sixty thousand of gold, and twice as many of silver. Of the measures like those which Moses called the Hin and the Assaron, [a tenth deal,] there were twenty thousand of gold, and twice as many of silver. The golden censers, in which they carried the incense to the altar, were twenty thousand; the other censers, in which they carried fire from the great altar to the little altar, within the temple, were fifty thousand. The sacerdotal garments which belonged to the high priest, with the long robes, and the oracle, and the precious stones, were a thousand. But the crown upon which Moses wrote [the name of God] was only one, and hath remained to this very day. He also made ten thousand sacerdotal garments of fine linen, with purple girdles for every priest; and two hundred thousand trumpets, according to the command of Moses; also two hundred thousand garments of fine linen for the singers, that were Levites. And he made musical instruments, and such as were invented for singing of hymns, called Nablee and Cindree, [psalteries and harps,] which were made of electrum, [the finest brass,] forty thousand.

But when he was now in the eighteenth year of his reign, he sent to Eliakim the high priest, and gave order, that out of what money was overplus, he should cast cups, and dishes, and vials, for ministration [in the temple]; and besides, that they should bring all the gold or silver which was among the treasures, and expend that also in making cups and the like vessels. But as the high priest was bringing out the gold, he lighted upon the holy books of Moses that were laid up in the temple; and when he had brought them out, he gave them to Shaphan the scribe, who, when he had read them, came to the king, and informed him that all was finished which he had ordered to be done. He also read over the books to him, who, when he had heard them read, rent his garment, and called for Eliakim the high priest, and for [Shaphan] the scribe, and for certain [other] of his most particular friends, and sent them to Huldah the prophetess, the wife of Shallum, [which Shallum was a man of dignity, and of an eminent family,] and bid them go to her, and say that [he desired] she would appease God, and endeavor to render him propitious to them, for that there was cause to fear, lest, upon the transgression of the laws of Moses by their forefathers, they should be in peril of going into captivity, and of being cast out of their own country; lest they should be in want of all things, and so end their days miserably. When the prophetess had heard this from the messengers that were sent to her by the king, she bid them go back to the king, and say that "God had already given sentence against them, to destroy the people, and cast them out of their country, and deprive them of all the happiness they enjoyed;" which sentence none could set aside by any prayers of theirs, since it was passed on account of their transgressions of the laws, and of their not having repented in so long a time, while the prophets had exhorted them to amend, and had foretold the punishment that would ensue on their impious practices; which threatening God would certainly execute upon them, that they might be persuaded that he is God, and had not deceived them in any respect as to what he had denounced by his prophets; that yet, because Josiah was a righteous man, he would at present delay those calamities, but that after his death he would send on the multitude what miseries he had determined for them.

And when the king had received these books from Demetrius, as we have said already, he adored them, and gave order that great care should be taken of them, that they might remain uncorrupted. He also desired that the interpreters would come often to him out of Judea, and that both on account of the respects that he would pay them, and on account of the presents he would make them; for he said it was now but just to send them away, although if, of their own accord, they would come to him hereafter, they should obtain all that their own wisdom might justly require, and what his generosity was able to give them. So he then sent them away, and gave to every one of them three garments of the best sort, and two talents of gold, and a cup of the value of one talent, and the furniture of the room wherein they were feasted. And these were the things he presented to them. But by them he sent to Eleazar the high priest ten beds, with feet of silver, and the furniture to them belonging, and a cup of the value of thirty talents; and besides these, ten garments, and purple, and a very beautiful crown, and a hundred pieces of the finest woven linen; as also vials and dishes, and vessels for pouring, and two golden cisterns to be dedicated to God. He also desired him, by an epistle, that he would give these interpreters leave, if any of them were desirous of coming to him, because he highly valued a conversation with men of such learning, and should be very willing to lay out his wealth upon such men. And this was what came to the Jews, and was much to their glory and honor, from Ptolemy Philadelphus.

But as for John, when he could no longer plunder the people, he betook himself to sacrilege, and melted down many of the sacred utensils, which had been given to the temple; as also many of those vessels which were necessary for such as ministered about holy things, the caldrons, the dishes, and the tables; nay, he did not abstain from those pouring vessels that were sent them by Augustus and his wife; for the Roman emperors did ever both honor and adorn this temple; whereas this man, who was a Jew, seized upon what were the donations of foreigners, and said to those that were with him, that it was proper for them to use Divine things, while they were fighting for the Divinity, without fear, and that such whose warfare is for the temple should live of the temple; on which account he emptied the vessels of that sacred wine and oil, which the priests kept to be poured on the burnt-offerings, and which lay in the inner court of the temple, and distributed it among the multitude, who, in their anointing themselves and drinking, used [each of them] above an hin of them. And here I cannot but speak my mind, and what the concern I am under dictates to me, and it is this: I suppose, that had the Romans made any longer delay in coming against these villains, that the city would either have been swallowed up by the ground opening upon them, or been overflowed by water, or else been destroyed by such thunder as the country of Sodom perished by, for it had brought forth a generation of men much more atheistical than were those that suffered such punishments; for by their madness it was that all the people came to be destroyed.

But after this, Celsus, having a suspicion that the great works performed by Jesus, of which we have named a few out of a great number, would be brought forward to view, affects to grant that those statements may be true which are made regarding His cures, or His resurrection, or the feeding of a multitude with a few loaves, from which many fragments remained over, or those other stories which Celsus thinks the disciples have recorded as of a marvellous nature; and he adds: “Well, let us believe that these were actually wrought by you.” But then he immediately compares them to the tricks of jugglers, who profess to do more wonderful things, and to the feats performed by those who have been taught by Egyptians, who in the middle of the market-place, in return for a few obols, will impart the knowledge of their most venerated arts, and will expel demons from men, and dispel diseases, and invoke the souls of heroes, and exhibit expensive banquets, and tables, and dishes, and dainties having no real existence, and who will put in motion, as if alive, what are not really living animals, but which have only the appearance of life. And he asks, “Since, then, these persons can perform such feats, shall we of necessity conclude that they are ‘sons of God,’ or must we admit that they are the proceedings of wicked men under the influence of an evil spirit?” You see that by these expressions he allows, as it were, the existence of magic. I do not know, however, if he is the same who wrote several books against it. But, as it helped his purpose, he compares the [miracles] related of Jesus to the results produced by magic. There would indeed be a resemblance between them, if Jesus, like the dealers in magical arts, had performed His works only for show; but now there is not a single juggler who, by means of his proceedings, invites his spectators to reform their manners, or trains those to the fear of God who are amazed at what they see, nor who tries to persuade them so to live as men who are to be justified by God. And jugglers do none of these things, because they have neither the power nor the will, nor any desire to busy themselves about the reformation of men, inasmuch as their own lives are full of the grossest and most notorious sins. But how should not He who, by the miracles which He did, induced those who beheld the excellent results to undertake the reformation of their characters, manifest Himself not only to His genuine disciples, but also to others as a pattern of most virtuous life, in order that His disciples might devote themselves to the work of instructing men in the will of God, and that the others, after being more fully instructed by His word and character than by His miracles, as to how they were to direct their lives, might in all their conduct have a constant reference to the good pleasure of the universal God? And if such were the life of Jesus, how could any one with reason compare Him with the sect of impostors, and not, on the contrary, believe, according to the promise, that He was God, who appeared in human form to do good to our race?

An onion [of terumah] was placed into lentils: If the onion was whole, it is permissible; But if [the onion] had been cut up, [it is forbidden if it] imparts a flavor. In the case of other dishes, whether the onion is whole or cut up [it is forbidden] if it imparts a flavor. Rabbi Judah permits it in the case of mashed fish, because it is used only to remove the unpleasant flavor.

A dish which one cooked with shells of orlah must be burned. If [the dish] became mixed up with other [dishes], it becomes neutralized in two-hundred-and-one.

They bring [it] in front of him. He dips lettuce before until he reaches the appetizer that precedes the bread. They bring before him matzah, lettuce, and haroset (and two dishes) though the haroset is not mandatory. Rabbi Elazar son of Rabbi Zadok says: it is mandatory. And in the Temple they bring the body of the pesah before him.

Yom Tov which fell on the eve of Shabbat, one should not begin to cook on Yom Tov for Shabbat. But he may cook for Yom Tov, and if any is left over it is left over for Shabbat. And he may prepare a dish on the eve of Yom Tov and rely upon it [to prepare food] for Shabbat. Bet Shammai says: two dishes. But Bet Hillel says: one dish. Yet they [both] agree that a fish and an egg upon it are [considered as] two dishes. [If] he ate it or it was lost, he may not begin to cook [relying] on it. But if he left over any [small] portion of it, he may rely on it [to cook] for Shabbat.

Yom Tov which fell on the eve of Shabbat, one should not begin to cook on Yom Tov for Shabbat. But he may cook for Yom Tov, and if any is left over it is left over for Shabbat. And he may prepare a dish on the eve of Yom Tov and rely upon it [to prepare food] for Shabbat. Bet Shammai says: two dishes. But Bet Hillel says: one dish. Yet they [both] agree that a fish and an egg upon it are [considered as] two dishes. [If] he ate it or it was lost, he may not begin to cook [relying] on it. But if he left over any [small] portion of it, he may rely on it [to cook] for Shabbat.

During the week in which the ninth of Av falls it is forbidden to cut the hair and to wash clothes but on Thursday it is permitted in honor of Shabbat. On the eve of the ninth of Av one should not eat a meal of two cooked dishes, nor should he eat meat or drink wine. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: one should make change [his diet.] Rabbi Judah obligated turning over the bed, but the sages did not agree with him.

As for the fistful and the frankincense, if one offered one of them [without the other] outside [the Temple], he is liable. Rabbi Elazar says: he is exempt unless he offers the second too. [If one offered] one inside and the other outside, he is liable. As for the two dishes of frankincense, if one offered one of them outside, he is liable. Rabbi Elazar says: he is exempt unless he offers the second too. [If one offered] one inside and the other outside, he is liable. If one sprinkles part of the blood outside, he is liable. Rabbi Elazar says: also one who makes a libation of the water of the Festival [of Sukkot] on the festival, outside is liable. Rabbi Nehemiah says: if one offered the residue of the blood outside, he is liable.

If he slaughtered the two lambs [intending] to eat one of the [two] loaves the next day, or if he burned the two dishes [of the frankincense intending] to eat one of the [two] rows of the showbread the next day: Rabbi Yose says: that loaf or that row about which he expressed the intention is piggul and he is liable for karet for it, while the other is invalid but he is not liable for karet for it. But the sages say, both are piggul and he is liable for karet for both of them. If one of the [two] loaves or one of the [two] rows [of the showbread] became unclean: Rabbi Judah says: both must be taken out to the place of burning, for the offering of the congregation may not be divided. But the sages say, the unclean [is treated] as unclean, but the clean may be eaten.

If he had an intention which makes piggul [with regard to the remainder of the minhah] during the [burning of the] handful and not during the [burning of the] frankincense, or during the [burning of the] frankincense and not during the [burning of the] incense: Rabbi Meir says: it is piggul and he is liable for karet for it; But the sages say: there is no karet unless he had an intention that makes piggul during the service of the whole of the mattir. The sages agree with Rabbi Meir with regard to a sinner’s minhah or a minhah of jealousy, that if he had an intention which makes piggul during the [burning of the] handful, [the remainder] is piggul and he is liable for karet for it, since the handful is the entire mattir. If he slaughtered one of the lambs intending to eat the two loaves the next day, or if he burned one of the dishes of frankincense intending to eat the two rows [of the showbread] on the next day: Rabbi Meir says: it is piggul and he is liable for karet for it; But the sages say: it is not piggul, unless he had an intention that makes piggul during the service of the whole of the mattir. If he slaughtered one of the lambs intending to eat part of it the next day, that [lamb] is piggul but the other [lamb] is valid. If he intended to eat the other [lamb] the next day, both are valid.

Regarding the two goats of Yom Hakippurim, the [absence of] one invalidates the other. Regarding the two lambs of Shavuot, the [absence of] one invalidates the other. Regarding the two loaves [that accompany the lambs] the [absence of] one invalidates the other. Regarding the two rows [of the showbread] the [absence of] one invalidates the other. Regarding the two dishes [of frankincense] the [absence of] one invalidates the other. Regarding the rows and the dishes the [absence of] one invalidates the other. Regarding the: two kinds [of cakes] used in the offering of the nazirite, the three kinds used for the red cow, the four kinds [of cakes] used in the todah, the four kinds [of species] used for the lulav, and the four kinds used for the [purification of the] leper, the [absence of] one invalidates the others. Regarding the seven sprinklings [of the blood] of the red cow the [absence of] one invalidates the others. Regarding the seven sprinklings between the staves of the ark, and of those towards the veil and upon the golden altar, the [absence of] one invalidates the others.

Regarding the two goats of Yom Hakippurim, the [absence of] one invalidates the other. Regarding the two lambs of Shavuot, the [absence of] one invalidates the other. Regarding the two loaves [that accompany the lambs] the [absence of] one invalidates the other. Regarding the two rows [of the showbread] the [absence of] one invalidates the other. Regarding the two dishes [of frankincense] the [absence of] one invalidates the other. Regarding the rows and the dishes the [absence of] one invalidates the other. Regarding the: two kinds [of cakes] used in the offering of the nazirite, the three kinds used for the red cow, the four kinds [of cakes] used in the todah, the four kinds [of species] used for the lulav, and the four kinds used for the [purification of the] leper, the [absence of] one invalidates the others. Regarding the seven sprinklings [of the blood] of the red cow the [absence of] one invalidates the others. Regarding the seven sprinklings between the staves of the ark, and of those towards the veil and upon the golden altar, the [absence of] one invalidates the others.

The table was ten handbreadths long and five wide; the showbread was ten handbreadths long and five wide. Each cake was placed lengthwise across the breadth of the table, and two and a half handbreadths were turned up at either side so that its length filled the entire breadth of the table, the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Meir says: the table was twelve handbreadths long and six wide; the showbread was ten handbreadths long and five wide. Each cake was placed lengthwise across the breadth of the table, and two handbreadths were turned up at either side; and there was a space of two handbreadths between [the two sets] so that the wind could blow between them. Abba Shaul says: there they used to put the two dishes of frankincense for the showbread. They said to him: Has it not already been said, “And you shall put pure frankincense upon [al] each row” (Leviticus 24:7)? He replied, But has it not also been said, “And next unto [al] him shall be the tribe of Manasseh” (Numbers 2:20)?

There were two tables inside the sanctuary, at the entrance of the Temple, the one of marble and the other of gold. On the table of marble they laid the showbread when it was brought in, and on the table of gold they laid the showbread when it was brought out, since we raise [the status] of what is holy and we don’t lower it down. And within [the sanctuary] there was a table of gold on which the showbread lay continually. Four priests entered: two bearing the two rows [of the showbread] in their hands and two bearing the two dishes [of frankincense] in their hands; And four went in before them, two to take away the two rows [of the showbread] and two to take away the two dishes [of frankincense]. Those who brought them in stood at the north side facing the south, and those who took them away stood at the south side facing the north. These withdrew [the old] and the others laid down [the new], the handbreadth of the one being by the side of the handbreadth of the other, as it is said, “Before me continually” (Exodus 25:30). Rabbi Yose says: even if these [first] took away [the old] and the others laid down [the new later on], this too fulfills the requirement of continually. They went out and laid [the old bread] on the table of gold that was in the sanctuary [at its entrance]. They then burned the dishes [of frankincense] and the loaves were distributed among the priests. If Yom Kippur fell on a Shabbat the cakes were distributed in the evening. If it fell on a Friday the he-goat of Yom Kippur was eaten in the evening. The Babylonian [priests] used to eat it raw for they were not fastidious.

There were two tables inside the sanctuary, at the entrance of the Temple, the one of marble and the other of gold. On the table of marble they laid the showbread when it was brought in, and on the table of gold they laid the showbread when it was brought out, since we raise [the status] of what is holy and we don’t lower it down. And within [the sanctuary] there was a table of gold on which the showbread lay continually. Four priests entered: two bearing the two rows [of the showbread] in their hands and two bearing the two dishes [of frankincense] in their hands; And four went in before them, two to take away the two rows [of the showbread] and two to take away the two dishes [of frankincense]. Those who brought them in stood at the north side facing the south, and those who took them away stood at the south side facing the north. These withdrew [the old] and the others laid down [the new], the handbreadth of the one being by the side of the handbreadth of the other, as it is said, “Before me continually” (Exodus 25:30). Rabbi Yose says: even if these [first] took away [the old] and the others laid down [the new later on], this too fulfills the requirement of continually. They went out and laid [the old bread] on the table of gold that was in the sanctuary [at its entrance]. They then burned the dishes [of frankincense] and the loaves were distributed among the priests. If Yom Kippur fell on a Shabbat the cakes were distributed in the evening. If it fell on a Friday the he-goat of Yom Kippur was eaten in the evening. The Babylonian [priests] used to eat it raw for they were not fastidious.

There were two tables inside the sanctuary, at the entrance of the Temple, the one of marble and the other of gold. On the table of marble they laid the showbread when it was brought in, and on the table of gold they laid the showbread when it was brought out, since we raise [the status] of what is holy and we don’t lower it down. And within [the sanctuary] there was a table of gold on which the showbread lay continually. Four priests entered: two bearing the two rows [of the showbread] in their hands and two bearing the two dishes [of frankincense] in their hands; And four went in before them, two to take away the two rows [of the showbread] and two to take away the two dishes [of frankincense]. Those who brought them in stood at the north side facing the south, and those who took them away stood at the south side facing the north. These withdrew [the old] and the others laid down [the new], the handbreadth of the one being by the side of the handbreadth of the other, as it is said, “Before me continually” (Exodus 25:30). Rabbi Yose says: even if these [first] took away [the old] and the others laid down [the new later on], this too fulfills the requirement of continually. They went out and laid [the old bread] on the table of gold that was in the sanctuary [at its entrance]. They then burned the dishes [of frankincense] and the loaves were distributed among the priests. If Yom Kippur fell on a Shabbat the cakes were distributed in the evening. If it fell on a Friday the he-goat of Yom Kippur was eaten in the evening. The Babylonian [priests] used to eat it raw for they were not fastidious.

If he arranged the showbread on Shabbat and the dishes [of frankincense] on the day after Shabbat, and burned the dishes [of frankincense] on the [next] Shabbat, it is not valid, and one is not liable over it for piggul, remnant, or uncleanness. If he arranged the bread and the dishes [of frankincense] on Shabbat and burned the dishes of frankincense on the day after Shabbat, it is not valid, and one is not liable over it for piggul, remnant, or uncleanness. If he arranged the bread and the dishes [of frankincense] on the day after Shabbat and burned the dishes [of frankincense] on the [next] Shabbat, it is not valid. What should he do? He should leave it until the following Shabbat, for even if it remains many days on the table there is nothing to this.

If he arranged the showbread on Shabbat and the dishes [of frankincense] on the day after Shabbat, and burned the dishes [of frankincense] on the [next] Shabbat, it is not valid, and one is not liable over it for piggul, remnant, or uncleanness. If he arranged the bread and the dishes [of frankincense] on Shabbat and burned the dishes of frankincense on the day after Shabbat, it is not valid, and one is not liable over it for piggul, remnant, or uncleanness. If he arranged the bread and the dishes [of frankincense] on the day after Shabbat and burned the dishes [of frankincense] on the [next] Shabbat, it is not valid. What should he do? He should leave it until the following Shabbat, for even if it remains many days on the table there is nothing to this.

If he arranged the showbread on Shabbat and the dishes [of frankincense] on the day after Shabbat, and burned the dishes [of frankincense] on the [next] Shabbat, it is not valid, and one is not liable over it for piggul, remnant, or uncleanness. If he arranged the bread and the dishes [of frankincense] on Shabbat and burned the dishes of frankincense on the day after Shabbat, it is not valid, and one is not liable over it for piggul, remnant, or uncleanness. If he arranged the bread and the dishes [of frankincense] on the day after Shabbat and burned the dishes [of frankincense] on the [next] Shabbat, it is not valid. What should he do? He should leave it until the following Shabbat, for even if it remains many days on the table there is nothing to this.

If he arranged the showbread on Shabbat and the dishes [of frankincense] on the day after Shabbat, and burned the dishes [of frankincense] on the [next] Shabbat, it is not valid, and one is not liable over it for piggul, remnant, or uncleanness. If he arranged the bread and the dishes [of frankincense] on Shabbat and burned the dishes of frankincense on the day after Shabbat, it is not valid, and one is not liable over it for piggul, remnant, or uncleanness. If he arranged the bread and the dishes [of frankincense] on the day after Shabbat and burned the dishes [of frankincense] on the [next] Shabbat, it is not valid. What should he do? He should leave it until the following Shabbat, for even if it remains many days on the table there is nothing to this.

If he arranged the showbread on Shabbat and the dishes [of frankincense] on the day after Shabbat, and burned the dishes [of frankincense] on the [next] Shabbat, it is not valid, and one is not liable over it for piggul, remnant, or uncleanness. If he arranged the bread and the dishes [of frankincense] on Shabbat and burned the dishes of frankincense on the day after Shabbat, it is not valid, and one is not liable over it for piggul, remnant, or uncleanness. If he arranged the bread and the dishes [of frankincense] on the day after Shabbat and burned the dishes [of frankincense] on the [next] Shabbat, it is not valid. What should he do? He should leave it until the following Shabbat, for even if it remains many days on the table there is nothing to this.

If he arranged the showbread on Shabbat and the dishes [of frankincense] on the day after Shabbat, and burned the dishes [of frankincense] on the [next] Shabbat, it is not valid, and one is not liable over it for piggul, remnant, or uncleanness. If he arranged the bread and the dishes [of frankincense] on Shabbat and burned the dishes of frankincense on the day after Shabbat, it is not valid, and one is not liable over it for piggul, remnant, or uncleanness. If he arranged the bread and the dishes [of frankincense] on the day after Shabbat and burned the dishes [of frankincense] on the [next] Shabbat, it is not valid. What should he do? He should leave it until the following Shabbat, for even if it remains many days on the table there is nothing to this.

[If one said,] “I take upon myself to bring [pieces of] wood,” he must bring not less than two logs. “Frankincense,” he must bring not less than a handful. There are five cases of [not less than] a handful: One who says, “I take upon myself to bring frankincense,” he must bring not less than a handful. One who voluntarily offered a minhah must bring a handful of frankincense with it. One who offered up the handful outside [the Temp] is liable. The two dishes [of frankincense] require two handfuls.

Rabbi Akiba asked again: If a man slaughtered five sacrifices outside [the Temple] in one spell of unawareness, what is the law? Is he liable to a separate offering for each act or only to one for them all? They replied: we have heard nothing about this. Rabbi Joshua: I have heard that if one eats an offering from five different dishes in one spell of unawareness, he is guilty of sacrilege for each of them; and it seems to me that the case in question may be inferred from this by a kal vehomer. Rabbi Shimon said: Rabbi Akiba did not ask this, but rather concerning one who ate of notar (remnant) from five sacrifices in one spell of unawareness what is the law? Is he liable only to one [offering] for all of them, or is he liable to one for each of them? They replied: we have heard nothing about this. Rabbi Joshua: I have heard that if one eats an offering from five different dishes in one spell of unawareness, he is guilty of sacrilege for each of them; and it seems to me that the case in question may be inferred from this by a kal vehomer. Rabbi Akiba replied: if this is a received tradition we accept it; but if it is only a logical deduction, there is a rebuttal. He [Rabbi Joshua] said: rebut it. He replied: It is not so. For if you hold the view with regard to sacrilege, for in this case one who gives food to another is as guilty as the one who eats it himself, and the person who causes others to derive a benefit from them is as guilty as the person who himself made use of them; furthermore, [small quantities are] reckoned together in the case of sacrilege even after the lapse of a long period, can you say it in connection with notar (remnant) where not one of these laws applies.

Rabbi Akiba asked again: If a man slaughtered five sacrifices outside [the Temple] in one spell of unawareness, what is the law? Is he liable to a separate offering for each act or only to one for them all? They replied: we have heard nothing about this. Rabbi Joshua: I have heard that if one eats an offering from five different dishes in one spell of unawareness, he is guilty of sacrilege for each of them; and it seems to me that the case in question may be inferred from this by a kal vehomer. Rabbi Shimon said: Rabbi Akiba did not ask this, but rather concerning one who ate of notar (remnant) from five sacrifices in one spell of unawareness what is the law? Is he liable only to one [offering] for all of them, or is he liable to one for each of them? They replied: we have heard nothing about this. Rabbi Joshua: I have heard that if one eats an offering from five different dishes in one spell of unawareness, he is guilty of sacrilege for each of them; and it seems to me that the case in question may be inferred from this by a kal vehomer. Rabbi Akiba replied: if this is a received tradition we accept it; but if it is only a logical deduction, there is a rebuttal. He [Rabbi Joshua] said: rebut it. He replied: It is not so. For if you hold the view with regard to sacrilege, for in this case one who gives food to another is as guilty as the one who eats it himself, and the person who causes others to derive a benefit from them is as guilty as the person who himself made use of them; furthermore, [small quantities are] reckoned together in the case of sacrilege even after the lapse of a long period, can you say it in connection with notar (remnant) where not one of these laws applies.

The law of sacrilege applies to the showbread from the moment of its dedication. Once it has formed a crust in the oven it becomes susceptible to be disqualified through contact with a tevul yom or one who still requires atonement, and it may be arranged upon the table [of the Sanctuary]. Once the dishes of incense have been offered it is subject to [the laws of] piggul, notar and defilement, and the law of sacrilege no longer applies to it.

They picked out from there some good fig-tree branches to make a second fire for the incense near the south-western corner some four cubits to the north of it, using as much wood as he judged sufficient to form five seahs of coals, and on the Shabbat as much as he thought would make eight seahs of coals, because from there they used to take fire for the two dishes of frankincense for the showbread. The limbs and the pieces of fat which had not been consumed over night were put back on the wood. They then kindled the two fires and descended and went to the chamber of hewn stone.

The following among earthen vessels are susceptible to impurity: A tray with a rim, An unbroken fire-pan, And a tray made up of dishes, If one of them was defiled by a [dead] creeping thing they do not all become unclean, But if it had a rim that projected above the rims of the dishes and one of them was defiled all are unclean. Similarly with an earthen spice-box and a double ink-pot, and a wooden spice-box, if one container was defiled from a liquid, the other is not unclean. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri says: its thickness is divided and that side which serves the unclean one is unclean while that which serves the clean one remains clean. If its rim projects above the others and one of them contracted impurity the other is unclean.

The following among earthen vessels are susceptible to impurity: A tray with a rim, An unbroken fire-pan, And a tray made up of dishes, If one of them was defiled by a [dead] creeping thing they do not all become unclean, But if it had a rim that projected above the rims of the dishes and one of them was defiled all are unclean. Similarly with an earthen spice-box and a double ink-pot, and a wooden spice-box, if one container was defiled from a liquid, the other is not unclean. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri says: its thickness is divided and that side which serves the unclean one is unclean while that which serves the clean one remains clean. If its rim projects above the others and one of them contracted impurity the other is unclean.

A skin bottle [becomes clean if the holes in it are of] a size through which warp-stoppers [can fall out]. If a warp-stopper cannot be held in, but it can still hold a woof-stopper it remains unclean. A dish holder that cannot hold dishes but can still hold trays remains unclean. A chamber-pot that cannot hold liquids but can still hold excrements remains unclean. Rabban Gamaliel rules that it is clean since people do not usually keep one that is in such a condition.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, Rebbi Yehudah and the rabbis disagree only when he intended afterwards to eat bread, but if he did not intend to eat bread afterwards, everybody agrees that if among them one is of the Seven Kinds, that is the one over which he recites the benediction. Rebbi Abba said, he has to recite a benediction at the end. Rebbi Yose said, the statement of Rebbi Abba disagrees with Rebbi Joshua ben Levi since Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, Rebbi Yehudah and the rabbis disagree only when he intended afterwards to eat bread, but if he did not intend to eat bread afterwards everybody agrees that if among them is one of the Seven Kinds, that is the one over which he recites the benediction; but Rebbi Abba said, he has to recite a benediction at the end. If he did not recite a benediction at the end it became an accessory and we have stated there (Mishna 7): “In every situation where there is a main course and side dishes, one recites the benediction for the main course and thereby frees the side dishes.”

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, Rebbi Yehudah and the rabbis disagree only when he intended afterwards to eat bread, but if he did not intend to eat bread afterwards, everybody agrees that if among them one is of the Seven Kinds, that is the one over which he recites the benediction. Rebbi Abba said, he has to recite a benediction at the end. Rebbi Yose said, the statement of Rebbi Abba disagrees with Rebbi Joshua ben Levi since Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, Rebbi Yehudah and the rabbis disagree only when he intended afterwards to eat bread, but if he did not intend to eat bread afterwards everybody agrees that if among them is one of the Seven Kinds, that is the one over which he recites the benediction; but Rebbi Abba said, he has to recite a benediction at the end. If he did not recite a benediction at the end it became an accessory and we have stated there (Mishna 7): “In every situation where there is a main course and side dishes, one recites the benediction for the main course and thereby frees the side dishes.”

“ They came back to say, a dish which will improve the more it shrinks is forbidden, deteriorate the more it shrinks is permitted. What is a dish better the more it shrinks? Cabbage, peas, and chopped meat.” Rebbi Tanḥum bar Illa said, they also considered heads of turnips and leeks as dishes better the more they shrink. What about eggs? Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Ismael: Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Ḥanina in the name of Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose: My father came home and found eggs and forbade them, hot water and permitted it. Rebbi Samuel bar Natan in the name of Rebbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina: I went with my father to Ḥammat Gader where they brought before us eggs small like ḥizrar apples and they tasted delicious like sweet bread.

“One does not put bread dough into the oven.” Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Assi: Women are more careful with bread than with dishes. What is the difference between bread and dish? A dish one usually eats hot, bread one usually does not eat hot. There, they say, hot bread is accompanied by fever. A wasp, cold; a scorpion, hot. He who switches is in danger.

Rebbi Joshua the son of the circumciser was serving Rebbi Zeˋira; he brought him piping hot dishes. He asked him, how was this done? He told him, I cleaned out the stove and put it on top. He told him, you should not do this but clean out the stove, take three stones and cast it on them.

“They came back to say, a dish which will improve the more it shrinks is forbidden; a dish which will deteriorate the more it shrinks is permitted. What is a dish which improves the more it shrinks? For example cabbage, peas, and chopped meat.” Rebbi Tanḥum bar Illa said, they also considered heads of beets and heads of of leeks as dishes which improve the more they shrink. What about eggs? Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose: My father came home and found hot water and permitted it, eggs and forbade them. Rebbi Samuel bar Natan in the name of Rebbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina: I went with my father to Ḥammat Gader where they brought before us eggs small like crab apples and they tasted delicious like sweetbread.

It was stated: One does not store away in hot ashes. Rebbi Zeˋira said, this implies that it is permitted to store away in cold ashes. As the following: Rebbi Yannai’s daughter was serving her father and brought him hot dishes. He asked her, how was this made? She told him, (with a spade and) [it was hidden in] olive cake. He said to her, you should not do this, but (with a spade) [hide it] in a box and put the box on the olive cake. Rebbi Zeˋira said, Rebbi Ḥanina disagrees with this. Rebbi Aḥa preached in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: Olive cake at the bottom and straw on both sides is forbidden, and Rebbi Yannai agrees.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, there is here no “not liable” but “permitted.” There, we have stated: “He who opens a boil on the Sabbath, if to make an opening he is liable, if to remove fluid he is not liable.” Rebbi Joḥanan said, there is here no “not liable” but “permitted.” There, we have stated: “One who catches a snake on the Sabbath, if he is active that it should not bite him he is not liable, if for medicine he is liable.” Rebbi Joḥanan said, there is here no “not liable” but “permitted.” There, we have stated: “About rural dishes that they are pure in a tent with a corpse but impure if carried by a sufferer from gonorrhea.” Rebbi Zeˋira said, this is correct. If for a need, that is what we have stated, “if for medicine he is liable.” This implies that there is here no “not liable” but “permitted.”

HALAKHAH: Paragraph. “Five groups who rested in one big hall,” etc. The big hall for them is like a courtyard for houses. If there were tents there, it is as if they were houses. Where do we hold? If the tents reach to the ceiling, everybody agrees that every group has to contribute to the eruv. If the tents do not reach to the ceiling, everybody agrees that one eruv is valid for all of them. But we must hold that the tents were ten [hand-breadths] high. They equally agree that if they join in dough and dishes that one eruv is valid for all of them. Rebbi Ashian asked, then even if part of them dwell in separate rooms or on upper floors?

Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac in the name of Rav: In a pot in which one cooked with water one may cook the same kind only after Passover. Therefore another kind is permitted although only after three dishes. If it becomes insignificant by other kinds, should it not become insignificant also by its own kind? A kind awakes its own kind to prohibit. Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi said, Rebbi Abbahu ordered the millers not to put boxes one on top of the other lest they heated up and became leavened. Rebbi Ḥinena bar Pappos went to the millers. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun milled himself as guest. Rebbi Abun instructed the millers to fill a quartarius of water in the modii and moisten it four times. Rebbi Ḥananiah and Rebbi Mana, one said, grasses are permitted, moistened it is forbidden, but the other one switches. Rebbi Ḥananiah the son of Rebbi Hillel said, even the one who permits grasses, if he collected them in the afternoon. Why? For dew faded away from it.

It was stated: The festival offering which comes with the Pesaḥ has to be eliminated with it. Come and see, a festival offering may be eaten for two days but the Pesaḥ only until midnight, and you are saying so? If it comes to the table with it. Dishes who come to the table with it have to be eliminated with it. Rebbi Yose said, this implies that he who ate soft cheese and wants to eat meat must eliminate the bread slices.

MISHNAH: They bring before him vegetables and Romaine lettuce. One dips Romaine lettuce, until he comes to filling the bread, when one brings before him mazzah, and Romaine lettuce, and haroset, and two dishes, even though haroset is not an obligation; Rebbi Eliezer ben Rebbi Sadoq says, it is an obligation. In the Temple one brings before him the body of the Pesaḥ.

It was stated: Outside Jerusalem one needs two dishes, one as remembrance of the Pesaḥ, and one as remembrance of the holiday offering.

MISHNAH: If the holiday falls on a Friday a person may not cook on the holiday especially for the Sabbath but he may cook for the holiday and if he left over he left over; or he cooks a dish before the holiday and relies on it for the Sabbath. The House of Shammai say two dishes, but the House of Hillel say one dish. But they agree about a fish and the egg on it that they are two dishes. If he ate it or it was lost, he may not start cooking based on it, but if even a minute amount was left, he relies on it for the Sabbath.

MISHNAH: If the holiday falls on a Friday a person may not cook on the holiday especially for the Sabbath but he may cook for the holiday and if he left over he left over; or he cooks a dish before the holiday and relies on it for the Sabbath. The House of Shammai say two dishes, but the House of Hillel say one dish. But they agree about a fish and the egg on it that they are two dishes. If he ate it or it was lost, he may not start cooking based on it, but if even a minute amount was left, he relies on it for the Sabbath.

“ It was stated: Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar said, the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel agree that there are two dishes. Where do they disagree? About the fish and the egg on it, where the House of Shammai are saying it is one dish while the House of Hillel are saying they are two dishes. Everybody agrees that if he applied the egg on salted fish, or cut leeks under the fish, or cooked two kinds in a pot, that they are counted as two dishes.” And practice follows the student.

“ It was stated: Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar said, the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel agree that there are two dishes. Where do they disagree? About the fish and the egg on it, where the House of Shammai are saying it is one dish while the House of Hillel are saying they are two dishes. Everybody agrees that if he applied the egg on salted fish, or cut leeks under the fish, or cooked two kinds in a pot, that they are counted as two dishes.” And practice follows the student.

“ It was stated: Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar said, the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel agree that there are two dishes. Where do they disagree? About the fish and the egg on it, where the House of Shammai are saying it is one dish while the House of Hillel are saying they are two dishes. Everybody agrees that if he applied the egg on salted fish, or cut leeks under the fish, or cooked two kinds in a pot, that they are counted as two dishes.” And practice follows the student.

MISHNAH: From the start of Av one restricts happy occasions. The week in which the Ninth of Av falls one is forbidden to barber and to launder, but on Thursday one is permitted for the honor of the Sabbath. In the day before the Ninth of Av a person may not eat two dishes, he may not eat meat nor drink wine. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, he shall alterate. Rebbi Jehudah obligates him to turn up his couch but the Sages did not agree with him.

What happened in Ascalon supports him who said, Simeon ben Sheṭaḥ was president. Two pious men were in Ascalon. They ate together, drank together, and studied Torah together. One of them died, and nobody attended his funeral. The son of Ma`yan the publican died; the entire city stopped working to attend his funeral. The other pious man started crying and said woe, do the haters of Israel have no hope? He was shown in a dream that it was said to him, do not denigrate your Master’s children. This one committed one sin and died with it, the other one did one good deed and died with it. What sin did this pious man commit? Far be it that he committed a sin, but once he put on his head phylacteries before his arm phylacteries. What good deed did the son of publican Ma`yan do? Far be it that he ever committed a good deed, but once he prepared a breakfast for the city council but they did not come to eat it. He said, let the poor eat it, so it should not go to waste. Some say, he was walking in the street when a loaf fell down from him and a poor person picked it up. He did not say anything [in order not to embarrass him]. After days this pious man saw his comrade the pious walking in gardens, in orchards, at water sources, and he saw the son of Ma`yan the publican with his tongue out on the river bank trying in vain to reach the water. He also saw Miriam, Onion-leaf’s daughter. Rebbi Eleazar bar Yose said, she was hanging on her breast nipples. Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, the hinge of Hell’s door was fixed in her ear. He asked them, why? They told him, because she fasted and made herself famous. Some say, she fasted one day and was dissolute two. He asked them for how long is she in this state? They told him, until Simeon ben Shetah comes, when we shall remove it from her ear and put it in his ear. [He asked them, and why?] They told him, because he said, that if I would be elected Patriarch, I would kill sorcerers. But now he was made Patriarch and he did not kill them. In fact, there are eighty women sorcerers in the cave of Ascalon who hurt the world. You shall go and tell him! He told them, I am afraid that since he is Patriarch he will not believe me. They told him, if he will believe you it will be good. In case that he will not believe you, perform a sign in front of him: put your hand on an eye and take it out, put it back and it will be back. He went and told him. He wanted to perform [the miracle] before him, but he told him, I know that you are a pious person; more than that you could do. In fact, I never spoke it with my mouth even though I intended so in my thoughts. Immediately Simeon ben Shetaḥ went on a stormy day and took with him eighty select men. He gave them eighty clean garments, put them in eighty new amphoras, and put them on them upside down. He told them, when I whistle once, put on your garments. When I whistle for the second time, come in all of you together. When you enter, each of you shall choose one and lift her from the ground, since the nature of this sorcery is that separated from the earth it cannot do anything. He went and stood at the entrance to the cave. He said אוים, אוים, open for me, I am one of yours. They asked, how did you come here on such a day? He said, I was walking between the raindrops. They asked him, what do you want to do here? He said, to learn and to teach. Every one should make what he is able to. One of them said what she said and produced bread. One of them said what she said and produced meat. One of them said what she said and produced dishes. One said what she said and produced wine. They asked him, what can you do? He told them, when I whistle twice, I shall bring here eighty select men for your pleasure and entertainment. They told him, that is what we desire. When he whistled the first time, they put on their garments; when he whistled for the second time, they all entered together. He said, every one who comes shall select his mate. They lifted them, took them away, and crucified them. That is what we have stated: “It happened that Simeon ben Shetaḥ hanged women in Ascalon. [They said, he hanged eighty women but one does not try two on the same day.” But the hour needed it.]

MISHNAH: One who makes a vow to abstain from cooked food is permitted roasted and scalded food. If one said, a qônām that I will not taste a cooked dish, he is forbidden fine dishes and permitted thick ones. Also he is permitted a soft boiled egg and ash-gourd.

Reading of Rashba (Novellae ad 49a): Is one who makes a vow to abstain from cooked food permitted a thick dish? Let us hear from the following: “He is forbidden soft dishes and permitted thick ones.” Since a dish which would be forbidden roasted or scalded is permitted as a thick dish, regarding “cooked food” which permits roasted and scalded, is it not logical that he be permitted the thick dish? Are there arguments de minore ad majus in matters of vows? But it must be so: Since a dish which is forbidden roasted or scalded is permitted as a thick dish, the cooked which is permitted roasted or scalded is permitted as a thick dish.

The Holy One, praise to Him, shows to the just their rewards in this world; their soul is satisfied and they go to sleep. [A parable] of a king who gave a dinner and pictured all kinds of dishes on a chart. When the guests entered they saw it, they were satiated and went to sleep.

Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi in the name of Rebbi Immi: A roasted egg of Samaritans is permitted. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Samaritans’ dishes are permitted. This is what you say about a dish usually made without wine or vinegar. Therefore if it is certain that he put some in, it is forbidden even for usufruct. As what had been stated: In earlier times they used to say, why is the wine of Ogdor forbidden? Because of Kefar-Pagesh, and of Burgata because of the Saracen tower, and of the Kushit spring because of Kefar Shalem. They changed to say, open it is everywhere forbidden, sealed it is permitted. Perforated and repaired it is like sealed, Rebbi Isaac ben Ḥaqula said, it is like open. Rebbi Ḥanina said, I can confirm. If it has a cavity on it it was not opened, otherwise it was opened. As the following: Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar went to the city of Samaria. The scribe came to him. He told him, bring me a closed jug. He answered him, there is a spring in front of you, drink. He importuned him; he said, there is a spring in front of you, drink. When he saw that he was going to importune him, he told him, if you are master of yourself, there is a spring in front of you, drink. But if your soul brings you to rebellion, you are going to swallow a knife if you are too covetous. The Samaritans already are degenerate.

Is not rice a cooked dish? And lo, there is a teaching ; The following are cooked dishes : grist, groats, fine flour, split grain, barley-meal and rice!

Rav Judah said: [And so too] do they divide the musaf offerings. They objected: "The outgoing watch offered the morning Tamid and the musaf offerings, and the incoming watch offered the evening Tamud and the incense dishes" and it does not state, that they divided the musaf offerings? — This Tanna does not deal with the question of division.

Rava said: But the Tanna of the house of Shmuel does deal with the question of division, and yet does not mention the division of the additional offerings, as it was taught in the school of Shmuel: The outgoing watch offered the morning Tamid and the musaf offerings; the incoming watch offered the Evening Tamid and the incense dishes. Four priests entered there, two from one watch and two from the other and they divided the showbread. But it does not mention that they divided the musaf offerings. This is a refutation of Rav Judah? It is indeed a refutation.

Abaye said: When I went out of the Master’s [Rabbah’s] house, I was already full, but when I reached the other place they set before me sixty dishes of sixty different preparations, and I had sixty pieces from them. The last preparation was called pot-roast, and [I liked it so much that] I wanted to lick the dish after it.