drinks

Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.

he commanded him, with a quantity of unmixed wine with handfuls of incense infused, to drug the elephants early on the following day. These five hundred elephants were, when infuriated by the copious drinks of frankincense, to be led up to the execution of death upon the Jews.

Then Hermon, who had filled his merciless elephants with copious drinks of mixed wine and frankincense, came early to the palace to report on these preparations.

As men give a deadly potion mixed with sweet wine; which he who drinks of, does with the treacherous pleasure sweetly drink in his own death.

“Foremost of all is the desire after another’s wife or husband, and after extravagance, and many useless dainties and drinks, and many other foolish luxuries; for all luxury is foolish and empty in the servants of God. These, then, are the evil desires which slay the servants of God. For this evil desire is the daughter of the devil. You must refrain from evil desires, that by refraining ye may live to God. But as many as are mastered by them, and do not resist them, will perish at last, for these desires are fatal. Put you on, then, the desire of righteousness; and arming yourself with the fear of the Lord, resist them. For the fear of the Lord dwells in good desire. But if evil desire see you armed with the fear of God, and resisting it, it will flee far from you, and it will no longer appear to you, for it fears your armour. Go, then, garlanded with the crown which you have gained for victory over it, to the desire of righteousness, and, delivering up to it the prize which you have received, serve it even as it wishes. If you serve good desire, and be subject to it, you will gain the mastery over evil desire, and make it subject to you even as you wish.”

Aud early in the morning they departed, and it came to pass that, when they had gone from thence, Joseph said unto the steward of his house: 'Pursue them, run and seize them, saying, "For good ye have requited me with evil; you have stolen from me the silver cup out of which my lord drinks." And bring back to me their youngest brother, and fetch (him) quickly before I go forth to my seat of judgment.'

Jesus said, "It's not possible for anyone to mount two horses or stretch two bows, and it's not possible for a servant to follow two leaders, because they'll respect one and despise the other. "No one drinks old wine and immediately wants to drink new wine. And new wine isn't put in old wineskins, because they'd burst. Nor is old wine put in new wineskins, because it'd spoil. "A new patch of cloth isn't sewn onto an old coat, because it'd tear apart."

Jesus said, "Whoever drinks from my mouth will become like me, and I myself will become like them; then, what's hidden will be revealed to them."

The sixth is the sense of taste, with which cometh the eating of meats and drinks; and by it strength is produced, for in food is the foundation. of strength.

For I suppose that most people feel a curiosity with regard to some of the enactments in the law, especially those about meats and drinks and animals recognised as unclean.

The rest are men not of God but of meats and drinks and clothing.

For in the matter of meats and drinks he bids us first of all offer part as a sacrifice and then forthwith enjoy our meal.

For by means of the directions which he gives with regard to meats and drinks and particular cases of touching, he bids us neither to do nor listen to anything thoughtlessly nor to resort to injustice by the abuse of the power of reason.

Two things are a merit, and of three there is pleasure to Shamash: one who drinks wine and gives it (to others), one who restrains wisdom . . .

and he hears a word and does not reveal (it). Behold, this is precious before Shamash. But one who drinks wine and does not give it to others

And weeping and bewailing he began to say: O marvellous head of heavenly adornment: O radiant as the sun which shines on heaven and earth: your hairs are known from Teman, your eyes from Bosor, your ears from thunder, your tongue from a trumpet, and your brain is a small creation, your head the energy of the whole body: O friendly and most fair beloved by all, and now falling into the earth it must become forgotten. O hands, mild, fair-fingered, worn with toil by which the body is nourished: O hands, deftest of all, heaping up from all quarters you made ready houses. O fingers adorned and decked with gold and silver (rings): and great worlds are led by the fingers: the three joints enfold the palms, and heap up beautiful things: and now you must become aliens to the world. O feet, skilfully walking about, self-running, most swift, unconquerable: O knees, fitted together, because without you the body does not move: the feet run along with the sun and the moon in the night and in the day, heaping up all things, foods and drinks, and nourishing the body: O feet, most swift and fair runners, moving on the face of the earth, getting ready the house with every good thing: O feet which bear up the whole body, that run up to the temples, making repentance and calling on the saints, and now you are to remain motionless. O head and hands and feet, until now I have kept you. O soul, what sent you into the humble and wretched body? And now being separated from it, you are going up where the Lord calls you, and the wretched body goes away to judgment. O body well-adorned, hair clothed with stars, head of heavenly adornment and dress: O face well-anointed, light-bringing eyes, voice trumpet-like, tongue placable, chin fairly adorned, hairs like the stars, head high as heaven, body decked out, light-bringing eyes that know all things — and now you shall fall into the earth and under the earth your beauty shall disappear.

For thou art he that art all light, and hast adorned thy house with precious stones and gold and perfumes and spices (or and jasper), and wood of balsam and cinnamon, and with roots of myrrh and costum hast thou strewed thine house, and with divers meats and sweetness of many drinks hast thou satisfied it. If therefore thou have not pity upon thy vineyard, all these things are done in vain. Lord, and thou wilt have none to glorify thee. For even if thou plant another vineyard, neither will that one trust in thee, because thou didst destroy the former. For if verily thou forsake the world, who will do for thee that that thou hast spoken as God. And now let thy wrath be restrained from thy vineyard the more (because of) that thou hast said and that which remaineth to be spoken, and let not thy labour be in vain, neither let thine heritage be torn asunder in humiliation.

And I Baruch said, Behold, Lord, Thou didst show me great and wonderful things; and now show me all things for the sake of the Lord. And the angel said to me, Come, let us proceed. (And I proceeded) with the angel from that place about one hundred and eighty-five days' journey. And he showed me a plain and a serpent, which appeared to be two hundred plethra in length. And he showed me Hades, and its appearance was dark and abominable. And I said, Who is this dragon, and who is this monster around him? And the angel said, The dragon is he who eats the bodies of those who spend their life wickedly, and he is nourished by them. And this is Hades, which itself also closely resembles him, in that it also drinks about a cubit from the sea, which does not sink at all. Baruch said, And how (does this happen)? And the angel said, Hearken, the Lord God made three hundred and sixty rivers, of which the chief of all are Alphias, Abyrus, and the Gericus; and because of these the sea does not sink. And I said, I pray thee show me which is the tree which led Adam astray. And the angel said to me, It is the vine, which the angel Sammael planted, whereat the Lord God was angry, and He cursed him and his plant, while also on this account He did not permit Adam to touch it, and therefore the devil being envious deceived him through his vine. [And I Baruch said, Since also the vine has been the cause of such great evil, and is under judgement of the curse of God, and was the destruction of the first created, how is it now so useful? And the angel said, Thou askest aright. When God caused the deluge upon earth, and destroyed all flesh, and four hundred and nine thousand giants, and the water rose fifteen cubits above the highest mountains, then the water entered into paradise and destroyed every flower; but it removed wholly without the bounds the shoot of the vine and cast it outside. And when the earth appeared out of the water, and Noah came out of the ark, he began to plant of the plants which he found. But he found also the shoot of the vine; and he took it, and was reasoning in himself, What then is it? And I came and spake to him the things concerning it. And he said, Shall I plant it, or what shall I do Since Adam was destroyed because of it, let me not also meet with the anger of God because of it. And saying these things he prayed that God would reveal to him what he should do concerning it. And when he had completed the prayer which lasted forty days, and having besought many things and wept, he said: Lord, I entreat thee to reveal to me what I shall do concerning this plant. But God sent his angel Sarasael, and said to him, Arise, Noah, and plant the shoot of the vine, for thus saith the Lord: Its bitterness shall be changed into sweetness, and its curse shall become a blessing, and that which is produced from it shall become the blood of God; and as through it the human race obtained condemnation, so again through Jesus Christ the Immanuel will they receive in Him the upward calling, and the entry into paradise]. Know therefore, Baruch, that as Adam through this very tree obtained condemnation, and was divested of the glory of God, so also the men who now drink insatiably the wine which is begotten of it, transgress worse than Adam, and are far from the glory of God, and are surrendering themselves to the eternal fire. For (no) good comes through it. For those who drink it to surfeit do these things: neither does a brother pity his brother, nor a father his son, nor children their parents, but from the drinking of wine come all evils, such as murders, adulteries, fornications, perjuries, thefts, and such like. And nothing good is established by it.

And I Baruch said to the angel, Let me ask thee one thing, Lord. Since thou didst say to me that the dragon drinks one cubit out of the sea, say to me also, how great is his belly? And the angel said, His belly is Hades; and as far as a plummet is thrown (by) three hundred men, so great is his belly. Come, then, that I may show thee also greater works than these.

Concerning trades and occupations. Let them examine them with firmness concerning their works and the life of their men, whether they are slaves or free. And if there is one who is a slave, let them examine his master whether he can bear testimony to him concerning his work. If he can bear good testimony he shall be received, and if he cannot bear testimony to him he shall be sent away, that he may make himself worthy of testimony being borne to him by his master, and if he should bear testimony he shall be received. If there is a slave and a handmaid, let them be taught to live according to the will of their masters, that the word of God should not be blasphemed. If there is one who has wife or husband, they shall be taught not to commit adultery and to abstain (from others). If there is one who is not married, they shall be taught not to commit adultery, but to be married according to law. If his master is a believer, and if he knows that his slave or his handmaid commits adultery, he shall give them in marriage according to law, and if he does not give in marriage according to law that servant and that handmaid, that master of slaves shall be rejected from the church, because he made them impure. If there is a man who has a devil, let him be taught that he should be cured, and that he should not come into the church to partake of the Mystery until he is purified. If he was at the point of death, they may bring him to receive the Oblation. If there is a man who eats of the house of the heretics and the adulterers and drinks with them, let him leave off and remove from the place of the unclean and wicked, or he shall be rejected. A harlot, if she wishes to come in, shall leave this habit or be rejected. If there is a man who makes idols, if he wishes to come in, he shall leave his former works or be rejected. If there is a man or woman and they come from another people, if they wish to come into our law, they shall leave their former work or be rejected. If there is a man or woman of the people of the games, or providers (of the games), or painter, or drunkard, or diviner with earth and ashes, and fruit of trees, and anything else with which heathen sorcerers work, they shall not do it. Or he who plays the harp, or he who sings to an instrument, or one who teaches singing, or who guides to fornication and the games, let them leave their works or be rejected. Or the circus-men who play in the circus; and in like manner if there is a witch, or woman who guides to fornication, or makes sport, or a piper, or a dancer, or I a singer, or teacher of this kind, she shall leave off or be rejected. Or one who inspires men with wickedness and hatred, or slanderers, or one of those who do the like of any of those things, they shall leave off and repudiate and be converted and repent They shall walk in the way of the believers, or they shall not be accepted. If there is a man of the army, and if he wishes to come in and know (the Faith), and if he came into our law, let him leave his robbery and violence and calumny and transgression and folly, and he shall be content with his pay, and if he left that occupation he shall be received, otherwise he shall be rejected. If there is a man who married a believing woman and did wickedly with his body or adultery, or is a soothsayer and an interpreter of unlucky hours and of good days, wishing to turn the hearts of men by this, and to corrupt their thoughts and their heart, and seduce them from the way of God. Or a shameless man, or a magician, or a charmer, or one who calls together spirits, or a star-gazer, or a fascinator, or lascivious, or drunkard, or who is evil in deed and word, or who speaks with a sign and his face to lead astray, or who divines by a bird, or who seals his hands and feet with a needle, who makes little marks with black and red, and wrote nonsense upon himself, or (who divines) with beans, (or divines) about a noise which he hears or words of men, that might be signs for him, or (divines) by what he sees or hears, or in suspicion he will not do what is known to be good. 3c Because all this is of the profane and fraudulent and impious. And they have writings, and they are like those who know concerning life and death, and they shall not be received into our law, until they have examined them and proved them concerning their occupations, if they repented of their conduct; and if they turned and left (the occupations) they shall be accepted, otherwise they shall be rejected.

Let us still further beseech God through His Christ, and let us beseech Him on account of the gift which is offered to the Lord God, that the good God will accept it, through the mediation of His Christ, upon His heavenly altar, for a sweet-smelling savour. Let us pray for this church and people. Let us pray for every episcopate, every presbytery, all the deacons and ministers in Christ, for the whole congregation, that the Lord will keep and preserve them all. Let us pray for kings and those in authority, that they may be peaceable toward us, that so we may have and lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. Let us be mindful of the holy martyrs, that we may be thought worthy to be partakers of their trial. Let us pray for those that are departed in the faith. Let us pray for the good temperature of the air, and the perfect maturity of the fruits. Let us pray for those that are newly enlightened, that they may be strengthened in the faith, and all may be mutually comforted by one another. Raise us up, O God, by Your grace. Let us stand up, and dedicate ourselves to God, through His Christ. And let the bishop say: O God, who art great, and whose name is great, who art great in counsel and mighty in works, the God and Father of Your holy child Jesus, our Saviour; look down upon us, and upon this Your flock, which You have chosen by Him to the glory of Your name; and sanctify our body and soul, and grant us the favour to be made pure from all filthiness of flesh and spirit, and may obtain the good things laid up for us, and do not account any of us unworthy; but be our comforter, helper, and protector, through Your Christ, with whom glory, honour, praise, doxology, and thanksgiving be to You and to the Holy Ghost forever. Amen. And after that all have said Amen, let the deacon say: Let us attend. And let the bishop speak thus to the people: Holy things for holy persons. And let the people answer: There is One that is holy; there is one Lord, one Jesus Christ, blessed for ever, to the glory of God the Father. Amen. Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good-will among men. Hosanna to the son of David! Blessed be He that comes in the name of the Lord, being the Lord God who appeared to us, Hosanna in the highest. And after that, let the bishop partake, then the presbyters, and deacons, and sub-deacons, and the readers, and the singers, and the ascetics; and then of the women, the deaconesses, and the virgins, and the widows; then the children; and then all the people in order, with reverence and godly fear, without tumult. And let the bishop give the oblation, saying, The body of Christ; and let him that receives say, Amen. And let the deacon take the cup; and when he gives it, say, The blood of Christ, the cup of life; and let him that drinks say, Amen. And let the thirty-third psalm be said, while the rest are partaking; and when all, both men and women, have partaken, let the deacons carry what remains into the vestry. And when the singer has done, let the deacon say:—

And they said to each other, This can only be that he eats and drinks, for no man can bear starvation for so many days or live as this man has, without even his countenance changing; and three men concealed themselves in a place where the poor man was stationed, to know who it was that brought him bread to eat.

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.

Now, since we are upon the subject of Peter, and of the teachers of Christianity to the circumcision, I do not deem it out of place to quote a certain declaration of Jesus taken from the Gospel according to John, and to give the explanation of the same. For it is there related that Jesus said: “I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will guide you into all the truth: for He shall not speak of Himself; but whatsoever He shall hear, that shall He speak.” And when we inquire what were the “many things” referred to in the passage which Jesus had to say to His disciples, but which they were not then able to bear, I have to observe that, probably because the apostles were Jews, and had been trained up according to the letter of the Mosaic law, He was unable to tell them what was the true law, and how the Jewish worship consisted in the pattern and shadow of certain heavenly things, and how future blessings were foreshadowed by the injunctions regarding meats and drinks, and festivals, and new moons, and sabbaths. These were many of the subjects which He had to explain to them; but as He saw that it was a work of exceeding difficulty to root out of the mind opinions that have been almost born with a man, and amid which he has been brought up till he reached the period of maturity, and which have produced in those who have adopted them the belief that they are divine, and that it is an act of impiety to overthrow them; and to demonstrate by the superiority of Christian doctrine, that is, by the truth, in a manner to convince the hearers, that such opinions were but “loss and dung,” He postponed such a task to a future season—to that, namely, which followed His passion and resurrection. For the bringing of aid unseasonably to those who were not yet capable of receiving it, might have overturned the idea which they had already formed of Jesus, as the Christ, and the Son of the living God. And see if there is not some well-grounded reason for such a statement as this, “I have many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now;” seeing there are many points in the law which require to be explained and cleared up in a spiritual sense, and these the disciples were in a manner unable to bear, having been born and brought up amongst Jews. I am of opinion, moreover, that since these rites were typical, and the truth was that which was to be taught them by the Holy Spirit, these words were added, “When He is come who is the Spirit of truth, He will lead you into all the truth;” as if He had said, into all the truth about those things which, being to you but types, ye believed to constitute a true worship which ye rendered unto God. And so, according to the promise of Jesus, the Spirit of truth came to Peter, saying to him, with regard to the four-footed beasts, and creeping things of the earth, and fowls of the air: “Arise, Peter; kill, and eat.” And the Spirit came to him while he was still in a state of superstitious ignorance; for he said, in answer to the divine command, “Not so, Lord; for I have never yet eaten anything common or unclean.” He instructed him, however, in the true and spiritual meaning of meats, by saying, “What God hath cleansed, that call not thou common.” And so, after that vision, the Spirit of truth, which conducted Peter into all the truth, told him the many things which he was unable to bear when Jesus was still with him in the flesh. But I shall have another opportunity of explaining those matters, which are connected with the literal acceptation of the Mosaic law.

Celsus afterwards states what is adduced by Jews and Christians alike in defence of abstinence from idol sacrifices, namely, that it is wrong for those who have dedicated themselves to the Most High God to eat with demons. What he brings forward against this view, we have already seen. In our opinion, a man can only be said to eat and drink with demons when he eats the flesh of what are called sacred victims, and when he drinks the wine poured out to the honour of the demons. But Celsus thinks that we cannot eat bread or drink wine in any way whatever, or taste fruits, or even take a draught of water, without eating and drinking with demons. He adds also, that the air which we breathe is received from demons, and that not an animal can breathe without receiving the air from the demons who are set over the air. If any one wishes to defend this statement of Celsus, let him show that it is not the divine angels of God, but demons, the whole race of whom are bad, that have been appointed to communicate all those blessings which have been mentioned. We indeed also maintain with regard not only to the fruits of the earth, but to every flowing stream and every breath of air, that the ground brings forth those things which are said to grow up naturally,—that the water springs in fountains, and refreshes the earth with running streams,—that the air is kept pure, and supports the life of those who breathe it only in consequence of the agency and control of certain beings whom we may call invisible husbandmen and guardians; but we deny that those invisible agents are demons. And if we might speak boldly, we would say that if demons have any share at all in these things, to them belong famine, blasting of the vine and fruit trees, pestilence among men and beasts: all these are the proper occupations of demons, who in the capacity of public executioners receive power at certain times to carry out the divine judgments, for the restoration of those who have plunged headlong into wickedness, or for the trial and discipline of the souls of the wise. For those who through all their afflictions preserve their piety pure and unimpaired, show their true character to all spectators, whether visible or invisible, who behold them; while those who are otherwise minded, yet conceal their wickedness, when they have their true character exposed by misfortunes, become manifest to themselves as well as to those whom we may also call spectators.

If one has eaten grapes, figs or pomegranates he blesses after them three blessings, the words of Rabban Gamaliel. The sages say: one blessing which includes three. Rabbi Akiva says: even if one ate only boiled vegetables and that is his meal, he says after it the three blessings. If one drinks water to quench his thirst, he says “By Whose word all things exist.” Rabbi Tarfon says: “Who creates many living things and their requirements.”

One who eats terumah unwittingly must repay its value plus a fifth, whether he eats it or drinks it, or anoints himself with it, or whether the terumah is clean or unclean. [If he eats the added fifth] he must pay its fifth, and a fifth of that fifth. He may not repay with terumah, but rather with tithed hullin, which becomes terumah. And whatever may be repaid in its place also becomes terumah and if the priest wishes to forego [the fine], he cannot do so.

If wine of terumah was left uncovered, it must be poured out, and there is no need to say this in the case of hullin. Three kinds of liquids are forbidden if they were left uncovered: water, wine and milk, but all other drinks are permitted. How long do they remain uncovered for them to become prohibited? The time it takes the snake to creep out from a place near by and drink.

A man may not stand in a private domain and drink in the public domain or stand in a public domain and drink in a private domain unless he puts his head and the greater part of his body into the domain in which he drinks. And similarly concerning a winepress. A man may intercept water from a gutter at a level below ten handbreadths, And from a water-spout he may drink in any manner.

If a woman takes a nazirite vow and then drinks wine or is defiled by a corpse, she receives forty [lashes]. If her husband annuls [her vow] and she did not know that he annulled it, and she drinks wine or is defiled by a corpse, she does not receive the forty [lashes]. Rabbi Judah says: even though she does not receive the forty [lashes] she should receive lashes for disobedience.

If a woman takes a nazirite vow and then drinks wine or is defiled by a corpse, she receives forty [lashes]. If her husband annuls [her vow] and she did not know that he annulled it, and she drinks wine or is defiled by a corpse, she does not receive the forty [lashes]. Rabbi Judah says: even though she does not receive the forty [lashes] she should receive lashes for disobedience.

Three things are forbidden to a nazirite: ritual defilement, shaving, and products of the vine. All products of the vine join together [to add up to a minimum measure], and he is not liable until he eats an olive’s worth of grapes. According to the earlier mishnah, until he drinks a quarter [of a log] of wine. Rabbi Akiba says: even if he soaked his bread in wine and it is enough to make an olive’s worth he is liable.

The wife of a priest drinks and [if she is found to be innocent] is permitted to her husband. The wife of a eunuch drinks. Through [seclusion with] all persons forbidden to her in marriage wives are subjected to warning with the exception of a minor and one not a human.

The wife of a priest drinks and [if she is found to be innocent] is permitted to her husband. The wife of a eunuch drinks. Through [seclusion with] all persons forbidden to her in marriage wives are subjected to warning with the exception of a minor and one not a human.

If one witness says that she was defiled and another witness says that she was not defiled; Or if a woman says [of her] that she was defiled and another woman says that she was not defiled, she drinks. If one witness says that she was defiled and two say that she was not defiled, she drinks. If two say that she was defiled and one says that she did not, she does not drink.

If one witness says that she was defiled and another witness says that she was not defiled; Or if a woman says [of her] that she was defiled and another woman says that she was not defiled, she drinks. If one witness says that she was defiled and two say that she was not defiled, she drinks. If two say that she was defiled and one says that she did not, she does not drink.

One who incites [individuals to idolatry] -- this refers to an ordinary person who incites an individual who said, “There is an idol in such and such a place; it eats thus, it drinks thus, it does good [to those who worship it] and harm [to those who do not].” For all who are liable for the death penalty according to the Torah no witnesses are hidden to entrap them, excepting for this one. If he said [these things] to two, they themselves are witnesses against him, and he is brought to court and stoned. But if he said [these things] to one, he should reply, “I have friends who wish to do so likewise [come and propose it to them too].” But if he was cunning and declined to speak before them, witnesses are hidden behind a partition, while he [who was incited] says to him, make your proposal to me now in private. When the inciter says to him (repeats to him what he had already said), the other replies, “How can we abandon our God in heaven to go and serve wood and stones?” Should he retract, it is well. But if he answers, “It is our duty [to worship idols], and is seemly for us”, then the witnesses stationed behind the partition take him to court, and have him stoned. He who incites [individuals to idolatry is one who] is one who says, “I will worship it”, or, “I will go and worship”, or, “let us go and worship”; or, “I will sacrifice [to it]”, “I will go and sacrifice”, “let us go and sacrifice”; “I will burn incense, “I will go and burn incense”; “let us go and burn incense”; or “I will make libations to it”, “I will go and make libations to it”, “let us go and make libations”; “I will prostrate myself before it”, “I will go and prostrate myself”, “let us go and prostrate ourselves”. One who seduces [a whole town to idolatry] is one who says, “Let us go and serve idols”.

When does he become liable [to be stoned]? Once he has eaten a tartemar of meat and drunk half a log of wine. Rabbi Yose said: “A maneh of meat and a log of wine. If he ate it in a company [celebrating] a religious act; or at a gathering for the purpose of intercalating the month; if he ate the second tithe in Jerusalem; if he ate the carrion or terefoth (meat that was not slaughtered in a kosher fashion), abominable and creeping things, or untithed produce, or the first tithe from which terumah had not been separated, or unredeemed second tithe, or unredeemed sacred food; if his eating involved a religious act or a transgression; if he ate any food but did not eat meat or drank any drink but did not drink wine, he does not become a ‘stubborn and rebellious son’, unless he eats meat and drinks wine, for it is written, “This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice;] he is a glutton and a drunkard” (Deut. 21:20). Although there is no clear proof for this, there is at least a hint, as it is says, “Do not be among wine drinkers, among gluttonous meat eaters of flesh” (Proverbs 23:20).

Elisha ben Abuyah said: He who learns when a child, to what is he compared? To ink written upon a new writing sheet. And he who learns when an old man, to what is he compared? To ink written on a rubbed writing sheet. Rabbi Yose ben Judah a man of Kfar Ha-babli said: He who learns from the young, to what is he compared? To one who eats unripe grapes, and drinks wine from his vat; And he who learns from the old, to what is he compared? To one who eats ripe grapes, and drinks old wine. Rabbi said: don’t look at the container but at that which is in it: there is a new container full of old wine, and an old [container] in which there is not even new [wine].

Elisha ben Abuyah said: He who learns when a child, to what is he compared? To ink written upon a new writing sheet. And he who learns when an old man, to what is he compared? To ink written on a rubbed writing sheet. Rabbi Yose ben Judah a man of Kfar Ha-babli said: He who learns from the young, to what is he compared? To one who eats unripe grapes, and drinks wine from his vat; And he who learns from the old, to what is he compared? To one who eats ripe grapes, and drinks old wine. Rabbi said: don’t look at the container but at that which is in it: there is a new container full of old wine, and an old [container] in which there is not even new [wine].

Within what time must he eat them [for him to be liable]? [The time he would need] if he ate a similar amount of parched grains of corn, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the rabbis say: he must take from the beginning to the end [of his eating] no more time than is required for the eating of a peras (a half a loaf of bread) [to be liable]. If one eats unclean food or drinks unclean drinks, or if he drinks a quarter [of a log] of wine and then enters the Temple [he is liable if it takes less time] than it takes to eat a peras. Rabbi Eliezer says: if the drinking was interrupted or if he diluted it, he is exempt.

Within what time must he eat them [for him to be liable]? [The time he would need] if he ate a similar amount of parched grains of corn, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the rabbis say: he must take from the beginning to the end [of his eating] no more time than is required for the eating of a peras (a half a loaf of bread) [to be liable]. If one eats unclean food or drinks unclean drinks, or if he drinks a quarter [of a log] of wine and then enters the Temple [he is liable if it takes less time] than it takes to eat a peras. Rabbi Eliezer says: if the drinking was interrupted or if he diluted it, he is exempt.

Within what time must he eat them [for him to be liable]? [The time he would need] if he ate a similar amount of parched grains of corn, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the rabbis say: he must take from the beginning to the end [of his eating] no more time than is required for the eating of a peras (a half a loaf of bread) [to be liable]. If one eats unclean food or drinks unclean drinks, or if he drinks a quarter [of a log] of wine and then enters the Temple [he is liable if it takes less time] than it takes to eat a peras. Rabbi Eliezer says: if the drinking was interrupted or if he diluted it, he is exempt.

All kinds of food can combine with one another: To make up the quantity of half a peras in order to render the body unfit [To make up the food] for two meals to form an eruv; To make up the volume of an egg to contaminate food; To make up the volume of a dry fig with regard to carrying on Shabbat; And the volume of a date with regard to Yom Kippur. All kinds of drinks can combine with one another: To make up a quarter [of a log] in order to render the body unfit; To make up a mouthful with regard to Yom Kippur.

Sometimes they stated a smaller measure: Liquid and dry measures were measured with the Italian standard which was the one that was used in the wilderness. Sometimes they stated a measure that varied according to the individual concerned: One who takes the handful of a minhah, One who takes both hands full of incense, One who drinks a cheek full on Yom Kippur, And the two meals for an eruv, The quantity being the food one eats on weekdays and not on Shabbat, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah says: as on Shabbat and not as on weekdays. And both intended to give the more lenient ruling. Rabbi Shimon says: two thirds of a loaf, when three [loaves] are made of a kav. Rabbi Yohanan ben Beroka says: not less than a loaf that is purchased for a pundium when the price of wheat is four se'ah for a sela’.

If one intended to drink the hatat water: Rabbi Eliezer says: it becomes invalid. Rabbi Joshua says: only when one tips the flask. Rabbi Yose said: To what does this apply? To water that had not yet been prepared, But in the case of water that had been prepared: Rabbi Eliezer says: it becomes invalid [only] when one tips the flask; And Rabbi Joshua says: [only] when one drinks. And if it was poured directly into one's throat, it remains valid.

All foods combine together to make up the half of a half-loaf which makes the body unfit. All liquids combine together to make up the quarter-log which makes the body unfit. This is more of a stringency in the case of one who drinks unclean liquids than in the case of the mikveh, for in this case they have made all other liquids like water.

The following cause neither uncleanness nor susceptibility to uncleanness: Sweat, rotten secretion, excrement, blood issuing with any of these, liquid [issuing from a child born in the] eight month. Rabbi Yose says: except its blood. [The discharge from the bowels of] one who drinks the water of Tiberias even though it comes out clean. Blood from the slaughtering of cattle and wild animals and birds that are unclean, and blood from bloodletting for healing. Rabbi Eliezer declares these unclean. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: the milk of a male is clean.

The following disqualify terumah: One who eats foods with first degree uncleanness; Or one who eats food with second degree uncleanness; And who drinks unclean liquids. And the one who has immersed his head and the greater part of him in drawn water; And a clean person upon whose head and greater part of him there fell three logs of drawn water; And a scroll [of Holy Scriptures], And [unwashed] hands; And one that has had immersion that same day; And foods and vessels which have become defiled by liquids.

But Rebbi Yoḥanan required that traditions should be reported in his name. Also David begged for divine mercy in this respect, (Ps. 61:5) “may I dwell in Your tent forever!” Rebbi Phineas, Rebbi Jeremiah, in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan; Could David think of living forever? Rather, David meant: May I have the merit that my words will be mentioned in my name in synagogues and houses of study. What good does that do to him? Levi, the son of the Nazir said: If someone mentions a tradition in the name of its author, the latter’s lips whisper with him in the grave. What is the reason? (Cant. 7:10) “Dripping from the lips of the sleeping ones.” Like that bunch of grapes which drips by itself. Rebbi Ḥanina bar Pappai and Rebbi Simon, one said, like one who drinks spiced wine, the other said, like one who drinks old wine, even though he consumed it, its taste remains in his mouth.

But Rebbi Yoḥanan required that traditions should be reported in his name. Also David begged for divine mercy in this respect, (Ps. 61:5) “may I dwell in Your tent forever!” Rebbi Phineas, Rebbi Jeremiah, in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan; Could David think of living forever? Rather, David meant: May I have the merit that my words will be mentioned in my name in synagogues and houses of study. What good does that do to him? Levi, the son of the Nazir said: If someone mentions a tradition in the name of its author, the latter’s lips whisper with him in the grave. What is the reason? (Cant. 7:10) “Dripping from the lips of the sleeping ones.” Like that bunch of grapes which drips by itself. Rebbi Ḥanina bar Pappai and Rebbi Simon, one said, like one who drinks spiced wine, the other said, like one who drinks old wine, even though he consumed it, its taste remains in his mouth.

All the time that his deceased in lying before him, he eats at his neighbor’s, and if he has no neighbor, he eats in another room. If he has no other room, he makes a wall of separation and eats. If he is unable to make a wall of separation, he turns his face towards the wall and eats. He does not eat reclining; he does neither eat nor drink his fill. He eats neither meat nor drinks wine. One does not allow him to participate in a group to say Grace. If he recited Grace, one does not answer “amen” after him. If others recited Grace, he does not anwer “amen”. That is meant on weekdays. But on the Sabbath, he does eat reclining; he eats meat and drinks wine, eats and drinks his fill. One lets him participate in a group to say Grace. If he recited Grace, one does answer “amen” after him. If others recited Grace, he answers “amen”. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said: Because I allowed all of these, oblige him for all other obligations of the Torah. If I permitted him temporary life, so much more eternal life. Rebbi Judah ben Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Practice follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel.

All the time that his deceased in lying before him, he eats at his neighbor’s, and if he has no neighbor, he eats in another room. If he has no other room, he makes a wall of separation and eats. If he is unable to make a wall of separation, he turns his face towards the wall and eats. He does not eat reclining; he does neither eat nor drink his fill. He eats neither meat nor drinks wine. One does not allow him to participate in a group to say Grace. If he recited Grace, one does not answer “amen” after him. If others recited Grace, he does not anwer “amen”. That is meant on weekdays. But on the Sabbath, he does eat reclining; he eats meat and drinks wine, eats and drinks his fill. One lets him participate in a group to say Grace. If he recited Grace, one does answer “amen” after him. If others recited Grace, he answers “amen”. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said: Because I allowed all of these, oblige him for all other obligations of the Torah. If I permitted him temporary life, so much more eternal life. Rebbi Judah ben Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Practice follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel.

All the time that his deceased in lying before him, he eats at his neighbor’s, and if he has no neighbor, he eats in another room. If he has no other room, he makes a wall of separation and eats. If he is unable to make a wall of separation, he turns his face towards the wall and eats. He does not eat reclining; he does neither eat nor drink his fill. He eats neither meat nor drinks wine. One does not allow him to participate in a group to say Grace. If he recited Grace, one does not answer “amen” after him. If others recited Grace, he does not anwer “amen”. That is meant on weekdays. But on the Sabbath, he does eat reclining; he eats meat and drinks wine, eats and drinks his fill. One lets him participate in a group to say Grace. If he recited Grace, one does answer “amen” after him. If others recited Grace, he answers “amen”. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel said: Because I allowed all of these, oblige him for all other obligations of the Torah. If I permitted him temporary life, so much more eternal life. Rebbi Judah ben Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Practice follows Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel.

It is stated: Ten cups one drinks in the house of a mourner: two before the meal, five during the meal, and three after the meal. These are the three after the meal: one for Grace, one for those who exercise charity, one for those who console mourners. And when Rabban (Simeon ben) Gamliel died, they added another three: One for the Ḥazzan of the community, one for the head of the community, and one for Rabban Gamliel. But when the Rabbinical authorities saw that they regularly got drunk they decreed and returned it to the original status.

MISHNAH: One who ate figs, grapes, or pomegranates recites for them three benedictions, the words of Rabban Gamliel; but the Sagessay, one benediction imitating three. Rebbi Aqiba says, even if one ate cooked food and that is his meal he recites for it three benedictions. He who drinks water for his thirst says “By Whose word everything was created.” Rebbi Tarphon said, “Creator of many living things”.

“ He who drinks water for his thirst says ‘That everything was created by His word.’” Rebbi Jonah said, except pick-axe water. Rebbi Yose said, on any water that he thirsts for. Rebbi Abun said, he who drinks pick-axe water, what does he say? “Praise to Him Who created medicinal waters.” Some Tannaïm state “deqarim water”, other Tannaïm state “deqalim waters”. He who said deqarim (pick-axe) waters, because they pierce the gall bladder. And he who says deqalim (date palm) waters, because they gush forth between two palm trees.

“ He who drinks water for his thirst says ‘That everything was created by His word.’” Rebbi Jonah said, except pick-axe water. Rebbi Yose said, on any water that he thirsts for. Rebbi Abun said, he who drinks pick-axe water, what does he say? “Praise to Him Who created medicinal waters.” Some Tannaïm state “deqarim water”, other Tannaïm state “deqalim waters”. He who said deqarim (pick-axe) waters, because they pierce the gall bladder. And he who says deqalim (date palm) waters, because they gush forth between two palm trees.

“One does not recite a benediction over wine unless he added water; these are the words of Rebbi Eliezer. But the Sages say, one may recite the benediction.” Rebbi Zeriqa in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: The Sages agree with Rebbi Eliezer that one has to add a small amount of water into the cup used for Grace. The rabbis do so for the Qiddush cup. The statement of Rebbi Yose disagrees with Rebbi Jonah, for Rebbi Jonah tasted it and restored it. If you imply that it was mixed, did we not formulate: He who drinks mixed drinks that were standing through the night, his blood is on his head. Rebbi Yoḥanan said, that is only if it was standing in metal vessels.

“One does not recite a benediction over wine unless he added water; these are the words of Rebbi Eliezer. But the Sages say, one may recite the benediction.” Rebbi Zeriqa in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: The Sages agree with Rebbi Eliezer that one has to add a small amount of water into the cup used for Grace. The rabbis do so for the Qiddush cup. The statement of Rebbi Yose disagrees with Rebbi Jonah, for Rebbi Jonah tasted it and restored it. If you imply that it was mixed, did we not formulate: He who drinks mixed drinks that were standing through the night, his blood is on his head. Rebbi Yoḥanan said, that is only if it was standing in metal vessels.

Rebbi Ḥuna and Simeon Qamateria in the name of Rebbi Samuel ben Naḥman (Jud. 18:30): “Jonathan ben Gershom ben Manasseh,” a hanging נ. If he merits it, ben Mosheh. If he does not merit it, ben Manasseh. The colleagues asked before Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman: He was a priest of idol worship and lived so long? He said to them, because he [Jonathan] was grudging to his idol. How was he grudging to his idol? If a man came to sacrifice an ox, a sheep, or a goat to the idol and told him: Make it favorably inclined towards me, he would say: What use does it have for you? It neither sees, nor hears, nor eats, nor drinks, nor does good or evil, and does not talk. He said to him, by your life, what should we do? He said to him, go, make, and bring me a wooden vessel full of fine flour and put on it ten eggs, then I shall prepare it before that one and it will eat from all that comes and I shall make it favorably inclined towards you! After he left, he would eat it. One day, a son of pashas came and he said that to him. He said to him, if it is of no use, what are you doing here? He said to him, because of my livelihood. When David became king, he sent and brought him. He said to him, you are the grandson of that righteous man and you worship idols? He said to him: I have a tradition from my grandfather’s house: Sell yourself to idol worship rather than need other people. He said to him: Heaven forbid! He did not say so, but sell yourself to work that is strange to you rather than to need other people. When David saw that he loved money, he made him count of his treasuries. That is what is written (1Chr. 26:24): “Shabuel ben Gershom ben Moshe, overseer of the treasuries.” “Shabuel” because he returned to God with all his heart and all his might. “Overseer of the treasuries,” that he made him count of the treasuries. They objected to Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman: (Jud. 18:30): “Until the day the land went into exile.” He said to them, when David died, Shelomo rose and exchanged all his counselors. He returned to his former bad ways. That is what is written: (1K. 13:11) “An old prophet was dwelling at Beth El;” they say that this was he.

Rebbi Ḥanina bar Yaqqa in the name of Rav Yehudah: The roots of wheat split the earth to a depth of 50 cubits. The soft roots of a fig tree split rock. It has been stated: Rebbi Ismael ben Eleazar says, the earth drinks only according to its hardness. If this is so, what do the roots of the carob do? What do the roots of the sycamore do? Rebbi Ḥanina said, once every thirty days the abyss wells up and drenches them. What is the reason? (Is. 27:3) “I, the Eternal, watch over it and water it in moments.”

MISHNAH: If someone buys wine from Samaritans he may say: Two log that I shall separate in the future are heave, ten tithe, and nine Second Tithe; then he redeems and drinks.

It was stated: “If there were two amphoras before him, one of pure tithe which was ṭevel and one of impure tithe which was ṭevel, he brings two vessels and takes from each of them heave of the tithe for both of them. He then turns and lifts one vessel and says: If this one is pure, I am making it heave of the tithe; else I did not do anything. Then he turns, does the same for the second vessel, immerses himself and drinks, the words of Rebbi. Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar says, he takes it only at the end.” What is the reason of Rebbi? I say, maybe he started drinking the impure one first. And what is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon? Maybe he drank the impure one at the end. Everybody agrees that he who drinks impure liquids may not even eat heave that is in doubt. If the liquids were possibly impure, everybody agrees that he may eat what certainly is heave. But here we deal with another Mishnah. What is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon? Since according to both the impurity is certain, he needs immersion. What is the reason of Rebbi? That he should not be led into drinking a reviït. According to the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon, he drinks less than a reviït. Is Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon not afraid that he would be led into drinking a reviït? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, the only explanation you have is our first one. Rebbi is afraid that he drank the impure liquid first and Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon is afraid that he drank the impure liquid at the end.

It was stated: “If there were two amphoras before him, one of pure tithe which was ṭevel and one of impure tithe which was ṭevel, he brings two vessels and takes from each of them heave of the tithe for both of them. He then turns and lifts one vessel and says: If this one is pure, I am making it heave of the tithe; else I did not do anything. Then he turns, does the same for the second vessel, immerses himself and drinks, the words of Rebbi. Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar says, he takes it only at the end.” What is the reason of Rebbi? I say, maybe he started drinking the impure one first. And what is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon? Maybe he drank the impure one at the end. Everybody agrees that he who drinks impure liquids may not even eat heave that is in doubt. If the liquids were possibly impure, everybody agrees that he may eat what certainly is heave. But here we deal with another Mishnah. What is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon? Since according to both the impurity is certain, he needs immersion. What is the reason of Rebbi? That he should not be led into drinking a reviït. According to the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon, he drinks less than a reviït. Is Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon not afraid that he would be led into drinking a reviït? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, the only explanation you have is our first one. Rebbi is afraid that he drank the impure liquid first and Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon is afraid that he drank the impure liquid at the end.

It was stated: “If there were two amphoras before him, one of pure tithe which was ṭevel and one of impure tithe which was ṭevel, he brings two vessels and takes from each of them heave of the tithe for both of them. He then turns and lifts one vessel and says: If this one is pure, I am making it heave of the tithe; else I did not do anything. Then he turns, does the same for the second vessel, immerses himself and drinks, the words of Rebbi. Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar says, he takes it only at the end.” What is the reason of Rebbi? I say, maybe he started drinking the impure one first. And what is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon? Maybe he drank the impure one at the end. Everybody agrees that he who drinks impure liquids may not even eat heave that is in doubt. If the liquids were possibly impure, everybody agrees that he may eat what certainly is heave. But here we deal with another Mishnah. What is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon? Since according to both the impurity is certain, he needs immersion. What is the reason of Rebbi? That he should not be led into drinking a reviït. According to the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon, he drinks less than a reviït. Is Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon not afraid that he would be led into drinking a reviït? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, the only explanation you have is our first one. Rebbi is afraid that he drank the impure liquid first and Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon is afraid that he drank the impure liquid at the end.

HALAKHAH: What means “to eat everything commonly eaten”? “One does not oblige anybody to eat mouldy bread, or discarded leaves of vegetables, or spoiled food.” On the other hand, if somebody wants to eat raw beets or chew raw wheat kernels one does not listen to him.What means “to drink everything one commonly drinks”? “ One does not oblige anybody to drink oily fish sauce, or sour fish sauce, or wine with yeast. He who has a toothache should not sip vinegar and spit out but he may sip and swallow. He may dip his food in as much [vinegar] as he wants without second thoughts. He who has a throat ache should not gargle with oil but he may load fish sauce with oil and sip it.”

MISHNAH: If somebody eats heave in error, he pays principal and fifth; whether he eats, drinks, or anoints, whether the heave be pure or impure, he pays. The fifth and the fifth of the fifths he does not pay in heave but in totally profane food which is turned into heave. All payments become heave. Although the Cohen may want to forgive this, he has no right to forgive. If an Israel woman ate heave and then was married to a Cohen, ate the heave before a Cohen had acquired it, she pays principal and fifth to herself, but if she ate heave which a Cohen had acquired, she pays principal to its owner and the fifth to herself since they said, he who eats heave in error pays the principal to its owner and the fifth to a person of his choice.

MISHNAH: Date honey, apple wine, vinegar from winter grapes, and any other fruit juices from heave, Rebbi Eliezer subjects to [repayment of] value and fifth, but Rebbi Joshua frees [from payment]. Rebbi Eliezer declares them impure as drinks. Rebbi Joshua said, the Sages did not enumerate seven fluids as one counts raw materials for perfumes but they said, seven fluids are impure, all other fluids are pure.

The reason of Rebbi Eliezer (Lev. 11:34): “Any drink.” What is the reason of the rabbis? “That can be drunk.” Does Rebbi Eliezer hold with Rebbi Ismael, that for a particular statement after a general one, everything is included? He assumes more than Rebbi Ismael, in that even if there is a second general statement, all is included. Rebbi Paregoros from Caesarea: Rebbi Eliezer ben Rebbi Ismael said: So did Rebbi Eliezer answer the Sages: Since you interpret (Lev. 11:34): “That can be eaten,” to exclude stinking food, so I hold “that can be drunk,” to exclude stinking drinks. They said to him, solid food and drinks are not comparable. If you argue about food, which is pure if stinking from the start, what can you infer for drinks since drinks stinking from the start can become impure? Another approach: If you argue about food, when human food does not need thinking about, what can you infer for drinks since human drink needs thinking about? Because they need thinking about them, should drinks stinking from the start become impure? Because they need thinking about them, drinks stinking from the start should be pure! Another approach. They said to him: If you argue about food, animal feed for humans is not created by thought, what can you infer for drinks since animal drinks for humans need thought? We have stated thus: (Lev. 11:34) “Any drink,” why does the verse have to add “that can be drunk”? This excludes stinking drinks, the words of Rebbi Eliezer. They said to him, no drink is rejected by birds or a cow.

The reason of Rebbi Eliezer (Lev. 11:34): “Any drink.” What is the reason of the rabbis? “That can be drunk.” Does Rebbi Eliezer hold with Rebbi Ismael, that for a particular statement after a general one, everything is included? He assumes more than Rebbi Ismael, in that even if there is a second general statement, all is included. Rebbi Paregoros from Caesarea: Rebbi Eliezer ben Rebbi Ismael said: So did Rebbi Eliezer answer the Sages: Since you interpret (Lev. 11:34): “That can be eaten,” to exclude stinking food, so I hold “that can be drunk,” to exclude stinking drinks. They said to him, solid food and drinks are not comparable. If you argue about food, which is pure if stinking from the start, what can you infer for drinks since drinks stinking from the start can become impure? Another approach: If you argue about food, when human food does not need thinking about, what can you infer for drinks since human drink needs thinking about? Because they need thinking about them, should drinks stinking from the start become impure? Because they need thinking about them, drinks stinking from the start should be pure! Another approach. They said to him: If you argue about food, animal feed for humans is not created by thought, what can you infer for drinks since animal drinks for humans need thought? We have stated thus: (Lev. 11:34) “Any drink,” why does the verse have to add “that can be drunk”? This excludes stinking drinks, the words of Rebbi Eliezer. They said to him, no drink is rejected by birds or a cow.

The reason of Rebbi Eliezer (Lev. 11:34): “Any drink.” What is the reason of the rabbis? “That can be drunk.” Does Rebbi Eliezer hold with Rebbi Ismael, that for a particular statement after a general one, everything is included? He assumes more than Rebbi Ismael, in that even if there is a second general statement, all is included. Rebbi Paregoros from Caesarea: Rebbi Eliezer ben Rebbi Ismael said: So did Rebbi Eliezer answer the Sages: Since you interpret (Lev. 11:34): “That can be eaten,” to exclude stinking food, so I hold “that can be drunk,” to exclude stinking drinks. They said to him, solid food and drinks are not comparable. If you argue about food, which is pure if stinking from the start, what can you infer for drinks since drinks stinking from the start can become impure? Another approach: If you argue about food, when human food does not need thinking about, what can you infer for drinks since human drink needs thinking about? Because they need thinking about them, should drinks stinking from the start become impure? Because they need thinking about them, drinks stinking from the start should be pure! Another approach. They said to him: If you argue about food, animal feed for humans is not created by thought, what can you infer for drinks since animal drinks for humans need thought? We have stated thus: (Lev. 11:34) “Any drink,” why does the verse have to add “that can be drunk”? This excludes stinking drinks, the words of Rebbi Eliezer. They said to him, no drink is rejected by birds or a cow.

The reason of Rebbi Eliezer (Lev. 11:34): “Any drink.” What is the reason of the rabbis? “That can be drunk.” Does Rebbi Eliezer hold with Rebbi Ismael, that for a particular statement after a general one, everything is included? He assumes more than Rebbi Ismael, in that even if there is a second general statement, all is included. Rebbi Paregoros from Caesarea: Rebbi Eliezer ben Rebbi Ismael said: So did Rebbi Eliezer answer the Sages: Since you interpret (Lev. 11:34): “That can be eaten,” to exclude stinking food, so I hold “that can be drunk,” to exclude stinking drinks. They said to him, solid food and drinks are not comparable. If you argue about food, which is pure if stinking from the start, what can you infer for drinks since drinks stinking from the start can become impure? Another approach: If you argue about food, when human food does not need thinking about, what can you infer for drinks since human drink needs thinking about? Because they need thinking about them, should drinks stinking from the start become impure? Because they need thinking about them, drinks stinking from the start should be pure! Another approach. They said to him: If you argue about food, animal feed for humans is not created by thought, what can you infer for drinks since animal drinks for humans need thought? We have stated thus: (Lev. 11:34) “Any drink,” why does the verse have to add “that can be drunk”? This excludes stinking drinks, the words of Rebbi Eliezer. They said to him, no drink is rejected by birds or a cow.

The reason of Rebbi Eliezer (Lev. 11:34): “Any drink.” What is the reason of the rabbis? “That can be drunk.” Does Rebbi Eliezer hold with Rebbi Ismael, that for a particular statement after a general one, everything is included? He assumes more than Rebbi Ismael, in that even if there is a second general statement, all is included. Rebbi Paregoros from Caesarea: Rebbi Eliezer ben Rebbi Ismael said: So did Rebbi Eliezer answer the Sages: Since you interpret (Lev. 11:34): “That can be eaten,” to exclude stinking food, so I hold “that can be drunk,” to exclude stinking drinks. They said to him, solid food and drinks are not comparable. If you argue about food, which is pure if stinking from the start, what can you infer for drinks since drinks stinking from the start can become impure? Another approach: If you argue about food, when human food does not need thinking about, what can you infer for drinks since human drink needs thinking about? Because they need thinking about them, should drinks stinking from the start become impure? Because they need thinking about them, drinks stinking from the start should be pure! Another approach. They said to him: If you argue about food, animal feed for humans is not created by thought, what can you infer for drinks since animal drinks for humans need thought? We have stated thus: (Lev. 11:34) “Any drink,” why does the verse have to add “that can be drunk”? This excludes stinking drinks, the words of Rebbi Eliezer. They said to him, no drink is rejected by birds or a cow.

The reason of Rebbi Eliezer (Lev. 11:34): “Any drink.” What is the reason of the rabbis? “That can be drunk.” Does Rebbi Eliezer hold with Rebbi Ismael, that for a particular statement after a general one, everything is included? He assumes more than Rebbi Ismael, in that even if there is a second general statement, all is included. Rebbi Paregoros from Caesarea: Rebbi Eliezer ben Rebbi Ismael said: So did Rebbi Eliezer answer the Sages: Since you interpret (Lev. 11:34): “That can be eaten,” to exclude stinking food, so I hold “that can be drunk,” to exclude stinking drinks. They said to him, solid food and drinks are not comparable. If you argue about food, which is pure if stinking from the start, what can you infer for drinks since drinks stinking from the start can become impure? Another approach: If you argue about food, when human food does not need thinking about, what can you infer for drinks since human drink needs thinking about? Because they need thinking about them, should drinks stinking from the start become impure? Because they need thinking about them, drinks stinking from the start should be pure! Another approach. They said to him: If you argue about food, animal feed for humans is not created by thought, what can you infer for drinks since animal drinks for humans need thought? We have stated thus: (Lev. 11:34) “Any drink,” why does the verse have to add “that can be drunk”? This excludes stinking drinks, the words of Rebbi Eliezer. They said to him, no drink is rejected by birds or a cow.

The reason of Rebbi Eliezer (Lev. 11:34): “Any drink.” What is the reason of the rabbis? “That can be drunk.” Does Rebbi Eliezer hold with Rebbi Ismael, that for a particular statement after a general one, everything is included? He assumes more than Rebbi Ismael, in that even if there is a second general statement, all is included. Rebbi Paregoros from Caesarea: Rebbi Eliezer ben Rebbi Ismael said: So did Rebbi Eliezer answer the Sages: Since you interpret (Lev. 11:34): “That can be eaten,” to exclude stinking food, so I hold “that can be drunk,” to exclude stinking drinks. They said to him, solid food and drinks are not comparable. If you argue about food, which is pure if stinking from the start, what can you infer for drinks since drinks stinking from the start can become impure? Another approach: If you argue about food, when human food does not need thinking about, what can you infer for drinks since human drink needs thinking about? Because they need thinking about them, should drinks stinking from the start become impure? Because they need thinking about them, drinks stinking from the start should be pure! Another approach. They said to him: If you argue about food, animal feed for humans is not created by thought, what can you infer for drinks since animal drinks for humans need thought? We have stated thus: (Lev. 11:34) “Any drink,” why does the verse have to add “that can be drunk”? This excludes stinking drinks, the words of Rebbi Eliezer. They said to him, no drink is rejected by birds or a cow.

The reason of Rebbi Eliezer (Lev. 11:34): “Any drink.” What is the reason of the rabbis? “That can be drunk.” Does Rebbi Eliezer hold with Rebbi Ismael, that for a particular statement after a general one, everything is included? He assumes more than Rebbi Ismael, in that even if there is a second general statement, all is included. Rebbi Paregoros from Caesarea: Rebbi Eliezer ben Rebbi Ismael said: So did Rebbi Eliezer answer the Sages: Since you interpret (Lev. 11:34): “That can be eaten,” to exclude stinking food, so I hold “that can be drunk,” to exclude stinking drinks. They said to him, solid food and drinks are not comparable. If you argue about food, which is pure if stinking from the start, what can you infer for drinks since drinks stinking from the start can become impure? Another approach: If you argue about food, when human food does not need thinking about, what can you infer for drinks since human drink needs thinking about? Because they need thinking about them, should drinks stinking from the start become impure? Because they need thinking about them, drinks stinking from the start should be pure! Another approach. They said to him: If you argue about food, animal feed for humans is not created by thought, what can you infer for drinks since animal drinks for humans need thought? We have stated thus: (Lev. 11:34) “Any drink,” why does the verse have to add “that can be drunk”? This excludes stinking drinks, the words of Rebbi Eliezer. They said to him, no drink is rejected by birds or a cow.

The reason of Rebbi Eliezer (Lev. 11:34): “Any drink.” What is the reason of the rabbis? “That can be drunk.” Does Rebbi Eliezer hold with Rebbi Ismael, that for a particular statement after a general one, everything is included? He assumes more than Rebbi Ismael, in that even if there is a second general statement, all is included. Rebbi Paregoros from Caesarea: Rebbi Eliezer ben Rebbi Ismael said: So did Rebbi Eliezer answer the Sages: Since you interpret (Lev. 11:34): “That can be eaten,” to exclude stinking food, so I hold “that can be drunk,” to exclude stinking drinks. They said to him, solid food and drinks are not comparable. If you argue about food, which is pure if stinking from the start, what can you infer for drinks since drinks stinking from the start can become impure? Another approach: If you argue about food, when human food does not need thinking about, what can you infer for drinks since human drink needs thinking about? Because they need thinking about them, should drinks stinking from the start become impure? Because they need thinking about them, drinks stinking from the start should be pure! Another approach. They said to him: If you argue about food, animal feed for humans is not created by thought, what can you infer for drinks since animal drinks for humans need thought? We have stated thus: (Lev. 11:34) “Any drink,” why does the verse have to add “that can be drunk”? This excludes stinking drinks, the words of Rebbi Eliezer. They said to him, no drink is rejected by birds or a cow.

The reason of Rebbi Eliezer (Lev. 11:34): “Any drink.” What is the reason of the rabbis? “That can be drunk.” Does Rebbi Eliezer hold with Rebbi Ismael, that for a particular statement after a general one, everything is included? He assumes more than Rebbi Ismael, in that even if there is a second general statement, all is included. Rebbi Paregoros from Caesarea: Rebbi Eliezer ben Rebbi Ismael said: So did Rebbi Eliezer answer the Sages: Since you interpret (Lev. 11:34): “That can be eaten,” to exclude stinking food, so I hold “that can be drunk,” to exclude stinking drinks. They said to him, solid food and drinks are not comparable. If you argue about food, which is pure if stinking from the start, what can you infer for drinks since drinks stinking from the start can become impure? Another approach: If you argue about food, when human food does not need thinking about, what can you infer for drinks since human drink needs thinking about? Because they need thinking about them, should drinks stinking from the start become impure? Because they need thinking about them, drinks stinking from the start should be pure! Another approach. They said to him: If you argue about food, animal feed for humans is not created by thought, what can you infer for drinks since animal drinks for humans need thought? We have stated thus: (Lev. 11:34) “Any drink,” why does the verse have to add “that can be drunk”? This excludes stinking drinks, the words of Rebbi Eliezer. They said to him, no drink is rejected by birds or a cow.

Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai: If somebody would say to you there are eight drinks, tell him, are not dew and water the same? But they counted them as two! If we had another, would they not have counted it? If another did exist, would they not have counted it?

MISHNAH: One does not make honey from dates, or wine from apples, or vinegar from winter grapes, nor does one change any fruit of heave or second tithe from the way it grew except olives and grapes. Nobody endures the forty because of ‘orlah, except for produce of olives and grapes; one does not bring First Fruits as drinks except for products from olives and grapes. Nothing makes impure as a drink except what comes from olives and grapes. Nothing is presented on the altar except what comes from olives and grapes. The stalks of fresh figs, dried figs, kelisin, and carobs are forbidden to laymen.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Ila in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: So says the Mishnah, “one does not bring First Fruits as drinks except for those made from olives and grapes,” even after it became property of the owners. But did we not state: “If he pressed First Fruits as a drink, from where that he should bring them? The verse says (Ex. 23:19, 34:26), ‘bring!’”. That is, if he harvested them from the start for this purpose. But here, if he did not harvest them from the start for this purpose.

HALAKHAH: “Second Tithe is to be used for eating,” etc. It is to be used for eating, since eating is written regarding it. For drinking, since drinking is included in eating. From where that drinking is included in eating? Rebbi Jonah understood if from the following (Lev. 17:12): “Therefore, I said to the Children of Israel, no person among you may eat blood.” Where do we hold? If about congealed blood, did we not state: “Congealed blood is neither food nor drink”? So we must hold as is, and the Torah called it “eating.” But did we not state: “If he mashed the fat and sipped it, congealed the blood and ate it, he is guilty!” How does Rebbi Jonah explain? It is neither food, to accept the impurity of food, nor drink, to accept the impurity of drinks.

Some want to understand it from this (Deut. 12:17): “You may not eat in your gates the tithe of your grain, your cider, and your shining oil.” ‘Your cider’, that is the wine. ‘And your shining oil’ refers to anointing and the Torah called it ‘eating’. But this is not clear. If it were clear one should be whipped because of it outside the walls! Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, one is whipped outside the walls only for pure Second Tithe which entered Jerusalem and left. From where that it is not clear? From what was stated: “On the Sabbath, both anointing for pleasure and anointing not for pleasure are permitted. On the Day of Atonement, both anointing for pleasure and anointing not for pleasure are forbidden. On the Ninth of Ab and public fasts anointing for pleasure is forbidden but anointing not for pleasure is permitted.” Did we not state: “Anointing is equal to drinking for prohibition and replacement but not for punishment, on the Day of Atonement for prohibition but not for punishment”? Did we not state (Lev. 22:15): “They should not desecrate,” to include him who anoints and him who drinks. Rebbi Joḥanan said, there is no ‘anoints’ here. Rebbi Abba Mari said, if there is no ‘anoints’ here then there is no ‘drinks’ for otherwise something that comes from two different prohibitions would be added together!

Some want to understand it from this (Deut. 12:17): “You may not eat in your gates the tithe of your grain, your cider, and your shining oil.” ‘Your cider’, that is the wine. ‘And your shining oil’ refers to anointing and the Torah called it ‘eating’. But this is not clear. If it were clear one should be whipped because of it outside the walls! Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, one is whipped outside the walls only for pure Second Tithe which entered Jerusalem and left. From where that it is not clear? From what was stated: “On the Sabbath, both anointing for pleasure and anointing not for pleasure are permitted. On the Day of Atonement, both anointing for pleasure and anointing not for pleasure are forbidden. On the Ninth of Ab and public fasts anointing for pleasure is forbidden but anointing not for pleasure is permitted.” Did we not state: “Anointing is equal to drinking for prohibition and replacement but not for punishment, on the Day of Atonement for prohibition but not for punishment”? Did we not state (Lev. 22:15): “They should not desecrate,” to include him who anoints and him who drinks. Rebbi Joḥanan said, there is no ‘anoints’ here. Rebbi Abba Mari said, if there is no ‘anoints’ here then there is no ‘drinks’ for otherwise something that comes from two different prohibitions would be added together!

What means “to eat everything commonly eaten”? “One does not oblige anybody to eat mouldy bread, or discarded leaves of vegetables, or spoiled food.” On the other hand, if somebody wants to eat raw beets or chew raw wheat kernels one does not listen to him. What means “to drink everything one commonly drinks”? “One does not oblige anybody to drink oily fish sauce, or sour fish sauce, or wine with yeast. He who has a toothache should not sip vinegar and spit out but he may sip and swallow. He may dip his food in as much [vinegar] as he wants without second thoughts. He who has a throat ache should not gargle with oil but he may load fish sauce with oil and sip it.” “One should not anoint with wine or vinegar, but with olive oil.” “If somebody has a headache or he has a scab, he may rub with oil but not with wine or vinegar.”

Rebbi Joḥanan said, all dreams follow their interpretations except for wine. There is one who drinks and it is good for him and one who drinks and it is bad for him. A scholar drinks and it is good for him, a vulgar drinks and it is bad for him.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, all dreams follow their interpretations except for wine. There is one who drinks and it is good for him and one who drinks and it is bad for him. A scholar drinks and it is good for him, a vulgar drinks and it is bad for him.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, all dreams follow their interpretations except for wine. There is one who drinks and it is good for him and one who drinks and it is bad for him. A scholar drinks and it is good for him, a vulgar drinks and it is bad for him.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, all dreams follow their interpretations except for wine. There is one who drinks and it is good for him and one who drinks and it is bad for him. A scholar drinks and it is good for him, a vulgar drinks and it is bad for him.

“It may be made on a holiday.” The Mishnah is Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar’s, as it was stated: “One does not make [food] on a holiday for use after the holiday.” Also, it was stated: “A woman may fill a pot with meat even if one eats only one piece from it, a water pot with hot water even if one drinks only one cup from it. But baking, she should bake only what she needs.” For it is stated: “Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar says, a woman may fill the entire oven with bread because the bread turns out well if the oven is filled.”

“The people from Hyena Mountain brought their First Fruits before Pentecost but they did not accept from them.” There, we have stated: “One does not bring First Fruits as drinks.” Rebbi Hila in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: So says the Mishnah, “one does not turn First Fruits into drinks” even after they became property of the owners. But did we not state: “If he pressed First Fruits as a drink in order to bring them, from where that he should bring them? The verse says (Ex. 23:19, 34:26), ‘bring!’ ”. That is, if he harvested them from the start for this purpose. But here, if he did not harvest them from the start for this purpose.

“The people from Hyena Mountain brought their First Fruits before Pentecost but they did not accept from them.” There, we have stated: “One does not bring First Fruits as drinks.” Rebbi Hila in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: So says the Mishnah, “one does not turn First Fruits into drinks” even after they became property of the owners. But did we not state: “If he pressed First Fruits as a drink in order to bring them, from where that he should bring them? The verse says (Ex. 23:19, 34:26), ‘bring!’ ”. That is, if he harvested them from the start for this purpose. But here, if he did not harvest them from the start for this purpose.

“Not only heave food in heave food; from where heave food in profane food, profane food in heave food, heave food in sacrificial food, sacrificial food in heave food, heave drink in heave drink, heave drink in profane drink, profane drink in heave drink, heave drink in sacrificial drink, sacrificial drink in heave drink, sacrificial drink in sacrificial drink? From where? The verse says (Lev. 22:7) ‘From the holy foods’, it adds.” Rebbi Abin in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Explain it if the log of oil of the skin-diseased was mixed with the excess of the loaves of the gift of the nazir; so we have stated, two drinks. Rebbi Ḥanania said, that means burned offerings in burned offerings; but purification offerings in burned offerings is certainly a prohibition.

Rebbi Ḥizqia, Rebbi Ḥanina the son of Rebbi Abbahu, in the name of Rebbi Eudaimon from Haifa: For an Elder four cubits; once he passed one sits down. The High Priest, from the moment one sees him until he disappears from view. What is the reason? (Ex. 33:8) “It was, when Moses went to the tent, the entire people rose, etc.” Two Amoraïm, one as praise and one as shame. The one who says, as praise: To see the just person and acquire merit. The one who says, as shame: Look at his thighs, look at his feet, he eats from the Jews, he drinks from the Jews, all he has is from the Jews.

It was stated, eighteen things they decided, in eighteen they were a majority and in eighteen they were divided. The following they decided: About Gentiles’ bread, and about their cheeses, and about their oil, and about their daughters, and about their semen, and about their urine, and about the rules of a person with an emission, and about the rules of the land of Gentiles. There we have stated: “The following make heave unusable. One who eats food impure in the first degree, and one who eats food impure in the second degree, and one who drinks impure drinks, and one who comes with his head and most of his body in drawn water, and a pure person on whose head and most of his body fell three log drawn water, and a scroll, and hands, and the Ṭevul yom, and food and vessels which became impure by fluids.”

It was stated, eighteen things they decided, in eighteen they were a majority and in eighteen they were divided. The following they decided: About Gentiles’ bread, and about their cheeses, and about their oil, and about their daughters, and about their semen, and about their urine, and about the rules of a person with an emission, and about the rules of the land of Gentiles. There we have stated: “The following make heave unusable. One who eats food impure in the first degree, and one who eats food impure in the second degree, and one who drinks impure drinks, and one who comes with his head and most of his body in drawn water, and a pure person on whose head and most of his body fell three log drawn water, and a scroll, and hands, and the Ṭevul yom, and food and vessels which became impure by fluids.”

MISHNAH: One may not put an egg next to the hot water container to make it soft boiled and he may not break it on tissue, but Rebbi Yose permits. One should not bury it in dust of roads that it should be roasted. What the people of Tiberias did was to divert a jet of cold water into a canal of hot water. The Sages told them if this is on a Sabbath this is like hot water which was heated on the Sabbath; it is forbidden for washing and drinking. But if it is on a holiday it is like water heated on the holiday; it is forbidden for washing but permitted for drinking. From a cleaned-out cooking vessel one drinks on the Sabbath; from an Antiochean vessel one does not drink even if it is cleaned out.

“From a cleaned-out samowar one drinks on the Sabbath.” Therefore not if it was not cleaned out. Rebbi Ashian said, because the coals touch its body. Rebbi Ḥanina the son of Rebbi Hillel said, because the wind enters its body and the coals will burn. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, because it was made in pieces; he is afraid that its glue was weathered away and he adds water

May one drink them together? Since Rebbi Joḥanan said about Hallel, if he heard it in the synagogue he has fulfilled his obligation, this implies that if he drank them together he fulfilled his obligation. May one drink them with interruptions? They said that he should drink, not that he should get drunk. If he drinks them with interruptions, would he not become drunk? May one fulfill his obligation with Sabbatical wine? Rebbi Hoshaia stated, one may fulfill his obligation with Sabbatical wine. May one fulfill his obligation with spiced wine? Since Bar Qappara stated, spiced wine is like wine, which implies that one may fulfill his obligation with spiced wine. May one fulfill his obligation with mixed wine? Since Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: the Four Cups which they prescribed, one may fulfill his obligation either with unmixed or mixed, on condition that it have the taste and looks of wine. Rebbi Jeremiah said, it is meritorious to fulfill one’s obligation with red wine. What is the reason? Do not see wine when it shows its red color. It was stated, cooked for spice. May one fulfill his obligation with cooked wine? Rebbi Jonah said, one may fulfill his obligation with cooked wine. Rebbi Jonah follows his own opinion, since Rebbi Jonah drank his four cups in the Passover night and had a headache until Pentecost.