ex

When this was said, Herod commanded that both Alexander and Melas should be carried to Glaphyra, Archelaus's daughter, and that she should be asked, whether she did not know somewhat of Alexander's treacherous designs against Herod? Now as soon as they were come to her, and she saw Alexander in bonds, she beat her head, and in a great consternation gave a deep and moving groan. The young man also fell into tears. This was so miserable a spectacle to those present, that, for a great while, they were not able to say or to do any thing; but at length Ptolemy, who was ordered to bring Alexander, bid him say whether his wife was conscious of his actions. He replied, "How is it possible that she, whom I love better than my own soul, and by whom I have had children, should not know what I do?" Upon which she cried out that she knew of no wicked designs of his; but that yet, if her accusing herself falsely would tend to his preservation, she would confess it all. Alexander replied, "There is no such wickedness as those [who ought the least of all so to do] suspect, which either I have imagined, or thou knowest of, but this only, that we had resolved to retire to Archelaus, and from thence to Rome." Which she also confessed. Upon which Herod, supposing that Archelaus's ill-will to him was fully proved, sent a letter by Olympus and Volumnius; and bid them, as they sailed by, to touch at Eleusa of Cilicia, and give Archelaus the letter. And that when they had ex-postulated with him, that he had a hand in his son's treacherous design against him, they should from thence sail to Rome; and that, in case they found Nicolaus had gained any ground, and that Cæsar was no longer displeased at him, he should give him his letters, and the proofs which he had ready to show against the young men. As to Archelaus, he made his defense for himself, that he had promised to receive the young men, because it was both for their own and their father's advantage so to do, lest some too severe procedure should be gone upon in that anger and disorder they were in on occasion of the present suspicions; but that still he had not promised to send them to Cæsar; and that he had not promised any thing else to the young men that could show any ill-will to him.

But now Herod's distemper greatly increased upon him after a severe manner, and this by God's judgment upon him for his sins; for a fire glowed in him slowly, which did not so much appear to the touch outwardly, as it augmented his pains inwardly; for it brought upon him a vehement appetite to eating, which he could not avoid to supply with one sort of food or other. His entrails were also ex-ulcerated, and the chief violence of his pain lay on his colon; an aqueous and transparent liquor also had settled itself about his feet, and a like matter afflicted him at the bottom of his belly. Nay, further, his privy-member was putrefied, and produced worms; and when he sat upright, he had a difficulty of breathing, which was very loathsome, on account of the stench of his breath, and the quickness of its returns; he had also convulsions in all parts of his body, which increased his strength to an insufferable degree. It was said by those who pretended to divine, and who were endued with wisdom to foretell such things, that God inflicted this punishment on the king on account of his great impiety; yet was he still in hopes of recovering, though his afflictions seemed greater than any one could bear. He also sent for physicians, and did not refuse to follow what they prescribed for his assistance, and went beyond the river Jordan, and bathed himself in the warm baths that were at Callirrhoe, which, besides their other general virtues, were also fit to drink; which water runs into the lake called Asphaltiris. And when the physicians once thought fit to have him bathed in a vessel full of oil, it was supposed that he was just dying; but upon the lamentable cries of his domestics, he revived; and having no longer the least hopes of recovering, he gave order that every soldier should be paid fifty drachmae; and he also gave a great deal to their commanders, and to his friends, and came again to Jericho, where he grew so choleric, that it brought him to do all things like a madman; and though he were near his death, he contrived the following wicked designs. He commanded that all the principal men of the entire Jewish nation, wheresoever they lived, should be called to him. Accordingly, they were a great number that came, because the whole nation was called, and all men heard of this call, and death was the penalty of such as should despise the epistles that were sent to call them. And now the king was in a wild rage against them all, the innocent as well as those that had afforded ground for accusations; and when they were come, he ordered them to be all shut up in the hyppodrome, and sent for his sister Salome, and her husband Alexas, and spake thus to them: "I shall die in a little time, so great are my pains; which death ought to be cheerfully borne, and to be welcomed by all men; but what principally troubles me is this, that I shall die without being lamented, and without such mourning as men usually expect at a king's death." For that he was not unacquainted with the temper of the Jews, that his death would be a thing very desirable, and exceedingly acceptable to them, because during his lifetime they were ready to revolt from him, and to abuse the donations he had dedicated to God that it therefore was their business to resolve to afford him some alleviation of his great sorrows on this occasion; for that if they do not refuse him their consent in what he desires, he shall have a great mourning at his funeral, and such as never had any king before him; for then the whole nation would mourn from their very soul, which otherwise would be done in sport and mockery only. He desired therefore, that as soon as they see he hath given up the ghost, they shall place soldiers round the hippodrome, while they do not know that he is dead; and that they shall not declare his death to the multitude till this is done, but that they shall give orders to have those that are in custody shot with their darts; and that this slaughter of them all will cause that he shall not miss to rejoice on a double account; that as he is dying, they will make him secure that his will shall be executed in what he charges them to do; and that he shall have the honor of a memorable mourning at his funeral. So he deplored his condition, with tears in his eyes, and obtested them by the kindness due from them, as of his kindred, and by the faith they owed to God, and begged of them that they would not hinder him of this honorable mourning at his funeral. So they promised him not to transgress his commands.

If one of the trees was capable of bearing a cake of dried figs [weighing sixty manehs], and the other two unable; or, if two could do so, but one cannot, then they may plow them only for their own needs. [This is the rule if the number of trees is] from three to nine, but if there were ten trees or more, whether they produce [the requisite amount of fruit or not] the whole bet seah may be plowed on their account. As it says: “In plowing and in harvesting, you shall rest” (Ex 34:21). It was unnecessary to state plowing and harvesting in the seventh year, rather [what it means is] the plowing of the year preceding which encroaches on the sabbatical year, and the harvest of the seventh year which extends into the year after. Rabbi Ishmael says: just as plowing is an optional act, so harvesting [referred to in the verse] is optional, thus excluding the harvesting of the omer [which is obligatory].

More encompassing in use is the rule of twofold restitution than the rule of fourfold or fivefold restitution; For the rule of twofold restitution applies both to what has life and what does not have life, while the rule of fourfold and fivefold restitution applies only to an ox or a sheep, for it is written, “If a man shall steal an ox or a sheep and kill it, or sell it, he shall pay five oxen for an ox and four sheep for a sheep” (Ex. 21:37). One who steals from a thief does not pay twofold restitution; And the one who slaughters or sells what is [already] stolen does not make fourfold or fivefold restitution.

The greater Sanhedrin was made up of seventy one and the little Sanhedrin of twenty three. From where do we learn that the greater Sanhedrin should be made up of seventy one? As it says, “Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel” (Num. 11:16), and when Moses is added to them there is seventy one. Rabbi Judah says: “Seventy.” From where do we learn that the little Sanhedrin should be made up of twenty three? As it says, “The assembly shall judge”, “The assembly shall deliver” (Num. 35:24-25), an assembly that judges and an assembly that delivers, thus we have twenty. And from where do we know that an assembly has ten? As it says, “How long shall I bear this evil congregation?” (Num. 14:27) [which refers to the twelve spies] but Joshua and Caleb were not included. And from where do we learn that we should bring three others [to the twenty]? By inference from what it says, “You shall not follow after the many to do evil” (Ex. 23:2), I conclude that I must be with them to do well. Then why does it say, “[To follow] after the many to change judgment” (Ex. 23:2). [It means that] your verdict of condemnation should not be like your verdict of acquittal, for your verdict of acquittal is reached by the decision of a majority of one, but your verdict of condemnation must be reached by the decision of a majority of two. The court must not be divisible equally, therefore they add to them one more; thus they are twenty three. And how many should there be in a city that it may be fit to have a Sanhedrin? A hundred and twenty. Rabbi Nehemiah says: “Two hundred and thirty, so that [the Sanhedrin of twenty three] should correspond with them that are chiefs of [at least] groups of ten.

The greater Sanhedrin was made up of seventy one and the little Sanhedrin of twenty three. From where do we learn that the greater Sanhedrin should be made up of seventy one? As it says, “Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel” (Num. 11:16), and when Moses is added to them there is seventy one. Rabbi Judah says: “Seventy.” From where do we learn that the little Sanhedrin should be made up of twenty three? As it says, “The assembly shall judge”, “The assembly shall deliver” (Num. 35:24-25), an assembly that judges and an assembly that delivers, thus we have twenty. And from where do we know that an assembly has ten? As it says, “How long shall I bear this evil congregation?” (Num. 14:27) [which refers to the twelve spies] but Joshua and Caleb were not included. And from where do we learn that we should bring three others [to the twenty]? By inference from what it says, “You shall not follow after the many to do evil” (Ex. 23:2), I conclude that I must be with them to do well. Then why does it say, “[To follow] after the many to change judgment” (Ex. 23:2). [It means that] your verdict of condemnation should not be like your verdict of acquittal, for your verdict of acquittal is reached by the decision of a majority of one, but your verdict of condemnation must be reached by the decision of a majority of two. The court must not be divisible equally, therefore they add to them one more; thus they are twenty three. And how many should there be in a city that it may be fit to have a Sanhedrin? A hundred and twenty. Rabbi Nehemiah says: “Two hundred and thirty, so that [the Sanhedrin of twenty three] should correspond with them that are chiefs of [at least] groups of ten.

Who disagrees? Rebbi Ḥanina the Colleague of the Rabbis asked: Just as you say in the evening that it is night if three stars are visible even though the sun is in the middle of the sky it is night, so you must say the same thing in the morning. Rebbi Abba said: It is written (Gen. 19:23): “The sun went out over the earth and Lot came to Zoar.” And it is written (Lev. 22:7): “The sun will come and he shall be pure.” He brackets going out and coming. Since coming means that it is hidden from the creatures so also its coming out when it will be ascertained by the creatures. Rebbi Abba said, it is written (Gen. 44:3): “In the morning it was light.” The Torah called the light morning. Rebbi Ismael stated: (Ex. 12:10) “In the morning, in the morning,” to give a domain to the very early morning.

He who prepares to pray must equalize his feet. Two Amoraim, Rebbi Levi and Rebbi Simon; one of them says like angels and one of them says like priests. He who says like priests, (Ex. 20:23): “You shall not ascend my alter by stairs;” that means that they were walking with their heel next to the great toe and great toe next to the heel. He who says like angels (Ez. 1:7)” “Their feet were a straight foot.” Rebbi Ḥanina bar Andrei in the name of R. Samuel ben Soṭar: angels have no moving joints. What is the reason? (Dan. 7:16) “I approached one of those standing,” the fixed ones.

Is has been stated: The Tree of Life is wide a parcourse of 500 years. Rebbi Yehudah ben Rebbi Ilaï said: not only its crown but even its stem.All the splitting of primeval waters splits under it since (Ps. 1:3) “He shall be like a tree planted on split waters.” It has been stated: The Tree of Life is one sixtieth of the Garden. (Gen. 2:10) “And a river originated in Eden to irrigate the Garden.” The remainder of a kur is a triple qab, a sixtieth. The remainder of Africa is Egypt, a sixtieth. We find that it is said that Egypt can be traversed in 40 days. Black Africa can be traversed in slightly more than seven years. But the teachers say [the sky is determined] by the days of the patriarchs (Deut. 11:21) “like the days of the sky over the earth.” And just as the sky over the earth is at a distance of a way of 500 years so between one sky and the next is a way of 500 years and its thickness is a way of 500 years. Why did you see fit to say the thickness of the sky is a way of 500 years? Rebbi Abun said (Gen. 1:6): “There shall exist a spread-sky within the water.” The spread-sky shall be in the middle. Rav said: the sky was wet on the first day and jelled on the second day. Rav said: “There shall exist a spread-sky”: the sky shall strengthen, the sky shall jell, the sky shall solidify, the sky shall be spread. Rebbi Yehudah ben Pazi said: The sky (רקיע) shall be made like a piece of cloth, just as it is said (Ex. 39:3) “They stretched (וירקעו) out the gold sheets.”

We have stated “the eating of the Passover sacrifice”. Some people do not formulate “the eating of the Passover sacrifice”. Who formulates “the eating of the Passover sacrifice”? The Sages. Who does not formulate “the eating of the Passover sacrifice”? Rebbi Eliezer. What is the reason of Rebbi Eliezer? It is written here (Ex. 12:8) “in the night”, and it is written there (Ex. 12:29) “in the night”. Just as there it means midnight, so also here it means midnight. Rebbi Ḥuna says: “The eating of the Passover sacrifice” cannot be here even for the Sages since we have stated (Pesaḥim 10:9) “the Passover sacrifice after midnight makes one’s hands impure.”

We have stated “the eating of the Passover sacrifice”. Some people do not formulate “the eating of the Passover sacrifice”. Who formulates “the eating of the Passover sacrifice”? The Sages. Who does not formulate “the eating of the Passover sacrifice”? Rebbi Eliezer. What is the reason of Rebbi Eliezer? It is written here (Ex. 12:8) “in the night”, and it is written there (Ex. 12:29) “in the night”. Just as there it means midnight, so also here it means midnight. Rebbi Ḥuna says: “The eating of the Passover sacrifice” cannot be here even for the Sages since we have stated (Pesaḥim 10:9) “the Passover sacrifice after midnight makes one’s hands impure.”

Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: He who puts on tefillin in the night transgresses a positive commandment. What is the reason? (Ex. 13:10) “ “You shall keep this law in its time, from day to day;” “days” not night, “to days” to exclude Sabbaths and holidays. But Rebbi Abbahu sat studying at night with his tefillin on his head! He put them on the side; they were like a deposit in his keeping. Some want to say, he only meant not to put them on, but when they were on him during daytime it would be permitted. Some want to say, let us hear it from there (Ex. 13:9): “It shall be for you a sign,” when you need it for a sign, but not holiday or Sabbaths that are all sign. But is it not written “to days”? You have only what Rebbi Yoḥanan said: Everything that is not clear one supports from many places.

Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: He who puts on tefillin in the night transgresses a positive commandment. What is the reason? (Ex. 13:10) “ “You shall keep this law in its time, from day to day;” “days” not night, “to days” to exclude Sabbaths and holidays. But Rebbi Abbahu sat studying at night with his tefillin on his head! He put them on the side; they were like a deposit in his keeping. Some want to say, he only meant not to put them on, but when they were on him during daytime it would be permitted. Some want to say, let us hear it from there (Ex. 13:9): “It shall be for you a sign,” when you need it for a sign, but not holiday or Sabbaths that are all sign. But is it not written “to days”? You have only what Rebbi Yoḥanan said: Everything that is not clear one supports from many places.

It was stated: “He who did pray and did not make his ear hear did fulfill his obligation.” For whom do we need that? For Rebbi Yose! For which statement of Rebbi Yose? For that which we have stated: “He who recites the Shema‘ and did not make his ear hear has fulfilled his obligation, Rebbi Yose says that he has not fulfilled his obligation.” Rav Mattanah said: That formulation is Rebbi Yose’s. Rebbi Yose said: We could be of the opinion that the rabbis and Rebbi Yose disagree only about Shema‘ since there it is written: “hear!”, but not about any other obligations. Since Rav Mattanah said “that formulation is Rebbi Yose’s”, it is the same for all obligations. What is the reason of Rebbi Yose? (Ex. 15:26) “Bend your ear to His commandments”, your ears should hear what your mouth says.

Minors from where? (Ex. 13:9) “So that the Torah of the Eternal should stay in your mouth”, at a time when he is permanent in it.

Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Tanḥum ben Rebbi Ḥiyya: In the days of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi they wanted to abolish this immersion because of the Galilean women who became sterile because of the cold. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi told them: Do you want to uproot something that fences Israel off from sin? What means: Fences Israel off from sin? It happened that a watchman of vinyards wanted to have an affair with a married woman. By the time they were preparing a place where they could immerse themselves, passers-by came by and the sin was not committed. It happened that someone wanted to have an affair with Rebbi’s slave girl. She said to him: If my mistress does not immerse herself, I do not immerse myself. He said to her: Are you not like an animal? She said to him: Did you not hear that one who has relations with an animal will be stoned, as it is said (Ex. 22:18): “Anyone lying with an animal shall certainly be executed.”

Rebbi Judah bar Titus, Rebbi Aḥa in the name Rebbi Eliezer: as at the start (Ex. 19:11) “They shall be prepared on the third day, do not approach a woman.”

Rebbi Yehudah learned from words of the Torah, since Rebbi Ismael stated: (Ex. 16:21) “The sun was hot and it melted,” four hours into the day. You say four hours or should it be six hours? When it says (Gen. 18:1): “In the heat of the day”, that means at six hours. Therefore, how can I interpret: “The sun was hot and it melted,” four hours into the day! You derive it from (Ex. 17:21): “In the morning,” (Num. 28:4) “in the morning.” Since the first “morning” meant “four hours”, “morning” mentioned there also means “four hours.” At four hours the sun is warm and the shadow is cool. At six hours both sun and shadow are hot. Rebbi Tanḥuma said (Gen. 18:1): “In the heat of the day”, at an hour when there is no shadow for any creature.

Rebbi Yehudah learned from words of the Torah, since Rebbi Ismael stated: (Ex. 16:21) “The sun was hot and it melted,” four hours into the day. You say four hours or should it be six hours? When it says (Gen. 18:1): “In the heat of the day”, that means at six hours. Therefore, how can I interpret: “The sun was hot and it melted,” four hours into the day! You derive it from (Ex. 17:21): “In the morning,” (Num. 28:4) “in the morning.” Since the first “morning” meant “four hours”, “morning” mentioned there also means “four hours.” At four hours the sun is warm and the shadow is cool. At six hours both sun and shadow are hot. Rebbi Tanḥuma said (Gen. 18:1): “In the heat of the day”, at an hour when there is no shadow for any creature.

Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥmani in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan: Corresponding to the eighteen times “commandment” is mentioned in the second description of the tabernacle. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, only from (Ex. 38:23) “And with him Aholiab ben Aḥisamakh” to the end of the book.

Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Ḥiyya, in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan: A person has to pray at a place that is dedicated for prayer. What is the reason? (Ex. 20:24) “At every place where I shall let My name be mentioned.” It does not say “where you will mention” but “at every place where I shall let My name be mentioned.” Rebbi Tanḥum bar Ḥanina said: A person has to select a fixed place in the synagogue where he prays. What is the reason? (2Sam. 15:32) “David came to the top”, it does not say “where he prostrated himself before God” but “where he was used to prostrate himself before God.”

“And if not he should focus his intent towards the Holiest of Holies.” Toward which Holiest of Holies? The Great Rebbi Ḥiyya: towards the Heavenly Holiest of Holies. Rebbi Simeon ben Ḥalaphta said, towards the earthly Holiest of Holies. Rebbi Phineas said, they do not disagree, the earthly Holiest of Holies corresponds to the Heavenly Holiest of Holies. (Ex. 15:16) “A base for Your throne”, corresponding to Your throne.

Rebbi Ḥaggai and Rebbi Jeremiah went to the Bazaar. Rebbi Ḥaggai was quick to recite a blessing. Rebbi Jeremiah said to him: You acted correctly because all commandments need a benediction. And from where that all commandments need a benediction? Rebbi Tanḥuma, Rebbi Abba bar Cahana in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: (Ex. 24:12) “I want to give you the stone tablets, the Torah and the commandment.” It brackets Torah and commandment. Just as Torah needs a benediction, a commandment also needs benediction.

For Torah there is written a benediction before, but no benediction is written after. What is written before it? (Deut. 32:3) “For I am invoking the name of the Eternal, attribute greatness to our God.” For food there is written a benediction after, but no benediction is written before. What is written after it? (Deut. 8:10): “You will eat and be satiated, then you must praise”. From where that which is said about one on the other and vice-versa? Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥmani in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: The Name is mentioned in both verses as parallel expressions. Just as the Name that is mentioned concerning Torah implies a benediction before, so the Name that is mentioned concerning food implies a benediction before. And just as the Name that is mentioned concerning food implies a benediction after, so the Name that is mentioned concerning Torah implies a benediction after. That follows Rebbi Aqiba. What following Rebbi Ismael? Rebbi Yoḥanan in the name of Rebbi Ismael, an inference from the lesser to the greater. If food that needs no explicit benediction before, needs a benediction afterwards, regarding Torah that needs a benediction before, it is only logical that it should need a benediction afterwards. That works for Torah; what about food? If Torah that needs no benediction afterwards, needs a benediction before, regarding food that needs a benediction afterwards, it is only logical that it should need a benediction before. Rebbi Isaac and Rebbi Nathan say, (1Sam. 9:13): “For he will recite the benediction over the sacrifice and after that the invited guests will eat.” Rebbi Nathan said, (Ex. 23:24) “you shall serve the Eternal, your God and give praise for your bread and your water”; when is it called your bread and your water, before you eat. Rebbi said, if he has to give praise when he ate and is satiated, somuch more at a time when he is hungry for food. That is for food, what about Torah? If food, which sustains only temporary life, needs a benediction before and after, Torah, which sustains eternal life, so much more.

They came back and asked him: What is that which is written (Jos. 24:19): “For He is a holy God.” He answered them, it is not written: “they”, but “He,” “He is a jealous God.” His students told him: Teacher, these you pushed away with a stick, what can you answer us? Rebbi Isaac said, He is holy in all kinds of holiness, as Rebbi Yudan said in the name of Rebbi Aḥa: The Holy One, praise to Him, is holy in all kinds of holiness. His speech is in holiness, His throning is in holiness, the baring of His arm is in holiness, God is awesome and majestic in holiness. His way is in holiness, (Ps. 77:14) “God, Your way is in holiness.” His walking is in holiness, (Ps. 68:25) “the course of my God, my King, in holiness.” His throning is in holiness, (Ps. 47:9) “God throned on His holy throne.” His speech is in holiness, (Ps. 60:8) “God spoke [in His holiness].” The baring of His arm is in holiness, (Is. 52:10) “The Eternal bared His holy arm.” He is awesome and glorious in holiness, (Ex. 15:11) “Who is like You, glorious in holiness!”

Rebbi Yudan in the name of Rebbi Isaac said it in four versions. Flesh and blood has a protector. When they tell him, your client was arrested, he will say: I will protect him. When they tell him, he is going before a court, he will say: I will protect him. When they tell him, he is taken to be hanged, where is he and where is his protector? But the Holy One, praise to Him, saved Moses from the sword of Pharao; that is what is written (Ex. 18:4): “He saved me from the sword of Pharao.” Rebbi Yannai said, it is written (Ex. 2:15): “Moses fled from before Pharao.” Is it possible for flesh and blood to flee from the government? But at the moment when Pharao arrested Moses, he sentenced him to have him beheaded. The sword slipped off the neck of Moses and broke. That is what is written (Songs 7:5): “Your neck is like the ivory tower,” that is Moses’s neck. Rebbi said, Rebbi Eviathar: Not only that, but He moved the sword from the neck of Moses on the neck of the executioner and killed him. That is what is written: “He saved me from the sword of Pharao.” He saved me, but killed the executioner. Rebbi Berekhiah quoted on this (Prov. 21:18) “The evil one is ransom for the just one.” Rebbi Abun quoted on this (Prov. 11:8): “The just will be extricated from distress, the evil one will take his place.” Bar Qappara stated: An angel came down and appeared to them in the shape of Moses. They arrested the angel and Moses fled. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said: when Moses fled from before Pharao, all his troops became dumb, deaf, or blind. He asked the dumb, where is Moses? But they could not speak. He asked the deaf, they could not hear. He asked the blind, they could not see. That is what the Holy One, praise to Him, said to Moses (Ex. 4:11): “Who gave man a mouth, or who makes dumb?” There it upheld you and here you do not want to uphold. That is what is written (Deut. 4:8): “Who is like the Eternal, our ĕlōhīm, always when we call on Him!”

Rebbi Yudan in the name of Rebbi Isaac said it in four versions. Flesh and blood has a protector. When they tell him, your client was arrested, he will say: I will protect him. When they tell him, he is going before a court, he will say: I will protect him. When they tell him, he is taken to be hanged, where is he and where is his protector? But the Holy One, praise to Him, saved Moses from the sword of Pharao; that is what is written (Ex. 18:4): “He saved me from the sword of Pharao.” Rebbi Yannai said, it is written (Ex. 2:15): “Moses fled from before Pharao.” Is it possible for flesh and blood to flee from the government? But at the moment when Pharao arrested Moses, he sentenced him to have him beheaded. The sword slipped off the neck of Moses and broke. That is what is written (Songs 7:5): “Your neck is like the ivory tower,” that is Moses’s neck. Rebbi said, Rebbi Eviathar: Not only that, but He moved the sword from the neck of Moses on the neck of the executioner and killed him. That is what is written: “He saved me from the sword of Pharao.” He saved me, but killed the executioner. Rebbi Berekhiah quoted on this (Prov. 21:18) “The evil one is ransom for the just one.” Rebbi Abun quoted on this (Prov. 11:8): “The just will be extricated from distress, the evil one will take his place.” Bar Qappara stated: An angel came down and appeared to them in the shape of Moses. They arrested the angel and Moses fled. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said: when Moses fled from before Pharao, all his troops became dumb, deaf, or blind. He asked the dumb, where is Moses? But they could not speak. He asked the deaf, they could not hear. He asked the blind, they could not see. That is what the Holy One, praise to Him, said to Moses (Ex. 4:11): “Who gave man a mouth, or who makes dumb?” There it upheld you and here you do not want to uphold. That is what is written (Deut. 4:8): “Who is like the Eternal, our ĕlōhīm, always when we call on Him!”

Rebbi Yudan in the name of Rebbi Isaac said it in four versions. Flesh and blood has a protector. When they tell him, your client was arrested, he will say: I will protect him. When they tell him, he is going before a court, he will say: I will protect him. When they tell him, he is taken to be hanged, where is he and where is his protector? But the Holy One, praise to Him, saved Moses from the sword of Pharao; that is what is written (Ex. 18:4): “He saved me from the sword of Pharao.” Rebbi Yannai said, it is written (Ex. 2:15): “Moses fled from before Pharao.” Is it possible for flesh and blood to flee from the government? But at the moment when Pharao arrested Moses, he sentenced him to have him beheaded. The sword slipped off the neck of Moses and broke. That is what is written (Songs 7:5): “Your neck is like the ivory tower,” that is Moses’s neck. Rebbi said, Rebbi Eviathar: Not only that, but He moved the sword from the neck of Moses on the neck of the executioner and killed him. That is what is written: “He saved me from the sword of Pharao.” He saved me, but killed the executioner. Rebbi Berekhiah quoted on this (Prov. 21:18) “The evil one is ransom for the just one.” Rebbi Abun quoted on this (Prov. 11:8): “The just will be extricated from distress, the evil one will take his place.” Bar Qappara stated: An angel came down and appeared to them in the shape of Moses. They arrested the angel and Moses fled. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said: when Moses fled from before Pharao, all his troops became dumb, deaf, or blind. He asked the dumb, where is Moses? But they could not speak. He asked the deaf, they could not hear. He asked the blind, they could not see. That is what the Holy One, praise to Him, said to Moses (Ex. 4:11): “Who gave man a mouth, or who makes dumb?” There it upheld you and here you do not want to uphold. That is what is written (Deut. 4:8): “Who is like the Eternal, our ĕlōhīm, always when we call on Him!”

He who passes by a pagan temple says (Prov. 15:25): “The Eternal will tear down the house of the haughty.” Rebbi Yose, son of Rebbi Abun, in the name of Rebbi Levi: “If he saw them sacrificing to an idol, he says (Ex. 22:19): He who sacrifices to gods shall be devoted to destruction.”

Rebbi Yasa stated before Rebbi Joḥanan: The appearance is with anything; the sages only said: “One silver obolus, two silver coins.” He said to him: Is there anything like that? Rebbi Jonah said, are not all measures determined by the sages? They said: “The volume of an olive from a corpse, the volume of an olive from a cadaver, the volume of a lentil from a dead reptile.” The question here is only what Rebbi Hoshaia stated: (Ex. 23:15, 34:20) “They should not be seen before Me empty-handed,” with anything; the sages only said: “A silver obolus, two silver coins.” The difficulty is that this is support for the opinion that [the rule] is based on words of the Torah. He said that only the sages instituted: “One silver obolus, two silver coins.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said: Rebbi Johanan follows his own opinion since Rebbi Joḥanan said that all measures are practice taught by Moses at Sinai;

Rebbi Ismael stated: (Ex. 15:2) “This is my God and I will glorify Him!” Is it possible for a human to glorify his God? Rather I shall appear beautiful before Him with religious articles. I shall make before Him a beautiful lulab, a beautiful sukkah, a beautiful shofar, beautiful ẓiẓit, beautiful tefillin. Abba Shaul said, I want to be like Him! Just as He is merciful and gracious, so you also should be merciful and gracious!

Rebbi Tanḥuma in the name of Rav Huna: It does not say (Ex. 38:22) “Bezalel ben Uri ben Ḥur of the tribe of Judah made everything Moses had commanded him,” but “that the Eternal had commanded Moses.” Even matters he did not hear from Moses he did by himself in the way it was said to Moses on Sinai. Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Benaiah (Jos. 11:15): “As the Eternal had commanded His servant Moses, so Moses commanded Joshua, and so Joshua executed it.” It does not say “he did not omit anything Moses had commanded him,” but “everything the Eternal commanded Moses.” Even matters he did not hear from his teacher, he did by himself in the way it was said to Moses on Sinai. Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Benaiah, Rebbi Ḥuna in the name of Rebbi: (Mal. 2:6) “True teaching was in his mouth,” these are the things he heard from his teacher, “injustice was not found on his lips,” even in matters he did not hear from his teacher.”

It is said (Lev. 19:3): “Everybody must fear his mother and his father,” and it is said (Deut. 6:13): “You must fear the Eternal, your God, and serve Him.” This brackets the fear of father and mother with the fear of Heaven. It is said (Ex. 20:12): “Honor your father and your mother,” and it is said (Prov. 3:9): “Honor the Eternal with your property.” This brackets the honor of father and mother with the honor of the Omnipresent. Is is said (Ex. 21:17): “He who curses his father or his mother shall be put to death,” and it is said (Lev. 24:19): “Everybody who curses his God must bear his sin.” This brackets cursing father and mother with cursing the Omnipresent. It is impossible to speak about hitting relative to the Deity. All this is logical since all three of them are partners in his creation.

It is said (Lev. 19:3): “Everybody must fear his mother and his father,” and it is said (Deut. 6:13): “You must fear the Eternal, your God, and serve Him.” This brackets the fear of father and mother with the fear of Heaven. It is said (Ex. 20:12): “Honor your father and your mother,” and it is said (Prov. 3:9): “Honor the Eternal with your property.” This brackets the honor of father and mother with the honor of the Omnipresent. Is is said (Ex. 21:17): “He who curses his father or his mother shall be put to death,” and it is said (Lev. 24:19): “Everybody who curses his God must bear his sin.” This brackets cursing father and mother with cursing the Omnipresent. It is impossible to speak about hitting relative to the Deity. All this is logical since all three of them are partners in his creation.

The words of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba disagree, for Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rebbi Yudan, son of Rebbi Simeon bar Ioḥai’s daughter, stated that Rebbi Simeon bar Ioḥai stated: Honoring father and mother is great because the Holy One, praise to Him, preferred it over His own honor. It is said (Ex. 20:12): “Honor your father and your mother,” and it is said (Prov. 3:9): “Honor the Eternal with your property.” When do you start to honor Him? When He was gracious to you! One gives gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and peah, one gives terumah, the First and Second Tithes and the tithe for the poor, ḥallah, one makes a sukkah,lulav, and shofar,tefillin and ẓiẓit, one feeds the poor and hungry and gives to drink to the thirsty. If you have the wherewhithal, you are obliged for all of these; if you have nothing, you are not obliged even for one of them. But when it comes to honoring father and mother, whether you own property or you do not own property, you must honor father and mother, even if you are a beggar at people’s doors.

Correspondingly, there are four things that a person has to pay for in this world and the principal remains for him in the future world: Idolatry, incest and adultery, and murder. But slander is equivalent to all of these. Idolatry from where? (Num. 15:31) “This soul shall certainly be cut off, its sin is inside it.” Why does the verse say “its sin is inside it?” This teaches that the soul is destroyed and its sin is still inside it. And it is written (Ex.32:21): “Please, this people has committed a grave sin, they made for themselves golden gods.” Incest and adultery from where? (Gen. 39:9) “How can I commit that grave evil and sin before God.” Murder from where? (Gen. 4:13) “Cain said to the Eternal, my sin is grave, it cannot be removed.” When he comes to calumny, it does not say in the singular “grave” or “the grave” but in the plural “grave” (Ps. 12:4): “May the Eternal cut off all slippery lips, all tongues peaking grave words.”

There (Sanhedrin 10:1) we have stated: The following have no part in the Future World: He who says there is no resurrection of the dead, that the Torah is not from Heaven, and the Epicurean. Rebbi Aqiba says, also he who reads apocryphal books. And he who recites magical spells over a wound and says (Ex. 15:26): “Any disease that I put upon Egypt I shall not put on you because I am the Eternal, your Healer.” Abba Saul says, also he who pronounces the Name by its letters. They added him who tears away the yoke, him who breaks the Covenant, and him who finds aspects in the Torah to those who have no part in the Future World. He who breaks the yoke is one who says the Torah is obligatory but I cannot stand it. He who breaks the Covenant is one who pulls himself a prepuce. He who finds aspects in the Torah is one who says that the Torah was not given from Heaven. But did we not state separately: “He who says that the Torah is not from Heaven?” Rebbi Ḥanania Entanayah stated before Rebbi Mana: That is one who publicly transgresses the words of the Torah in the manner of Joiakim, king of Judah, and his circle.

He who has a preponderance of merit inherits paradise. He who has a preponderance of sins inherits hell. Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said: It does not say “He lifts sins,” but rather (Ex. 34:7, Michah 7:18) “He lifts sin.” The Holy One, praise to Him, seizes one document from the sins and the merits tilt. Rebbi Eleazar said (Ps. 62:13): “Kindness is Yours, o Master, because You repay to everyone according to his deeds,” and if he has none, You give him from Yours. That is the opinion of Rebbi Eleazar, because Rebbi Eleazar said (Ex. 34:6): “And much kindness,” He turns towards kindness.

He who has a preponderance of merit inherits paradise. He who has a preponderance of sins inherits hell. Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said: It does not say “He lifts sins,” but rather (Ex. 34:7, Michah 7:18) “He lifts sin.” The Holy One, praise to Him, seizes one document from the sins and the merits tilt. Rebbi Eleazar said (Ps. 62:13): “Kindness is Yours, o Master, because You repay to everyone according to his deeds,” and if he has none, You give him from Yours. That is the opinion of Rebbi Eleazar, because Rebbi Eleazar said (Ex. 34:6): “And much kindness,” He turns towards kindness.

Rebbi Ḥuna said in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: There is no forgetting before the Holy One, but for Israel He becomes forgetful. What is the reason? It is written (Ex. 34:7, Michah 7:18) “He forgets sin.” And so David says (Ps. 85:3): “You forgot your people’s sin, You covered up all their misdeeds, Selah.”

Rebbi Ḥaggai in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥmani: Things have been said orally and things have been said in writing, and we do not know which ones are preferred. From what is written (Ex. 34:27): “By the mouth of these words I concluded a covenant with you and Israel;” it follows that the oral traditions are preferred.

Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: He who has no real estate is free from the appearance since it is said (Ex. 34:24): “Nobody will illegally desire your land.” It happened that one person left his grain heap; when he returned, he found lions surrounding it. It happened that one left a chicken coop; when he returned, he found torn cats before it. One man left his house open; when he came, he found a snake rolled up on its tail. Rebbi Phineas told the following story: Two brothers in Askalon had Gentile neighbors. These said, if those Jews go up to Jerusalem, we will take all they have. When they went up, the Holy One, praise to Him, alotted to them two angels who came and went in their likeness. When they returned, they sent them valuable presents. They said to them: where have you been? They said to them, in Jerusalem. They said to them: Whom did you leave in your house? They said, nobody. They said: Praised be the God of the Jews Who did not let us act and did not abandon them!

From where that gleanings in doubt are gleanings? Rebbi Samuel ben Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: “Poor and rich, justify him” in his gifts. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Bar Qappara: (Ex. 23:6) “Do not bend the lawsuit of your destitute.” In his lawsuit, you may not bend, but you may bend for him in his gifts. Rebbi Joḥanan said, he acquires in this case, as Rebbi instructed us (Lev. 19:10, 23:22): “abandon,” put something before him of your own. Rebbi La said, it is written (Deut. 24:19–21): “It shall be the sojourner’s, the orphan’s, and the widow’s;” give him both from yours and from his!

Rav Jeremiah and Rav Joseph, one said these are the ones who came up from Egypt, the other said these are the ones who lost their property; a blind man is called “plenty of light.” Rebbi Isaac said, (Is. 58:7) “degraded poor you shall bring to your house.” Rebbi Abin said, if you do this, I will credit it to you as if you had presented First Fruits in the Temple. It says here, “you shall bring,” and it says there (Ex. 23:19): “The first fruits of your land you shall bring to the Eternal’s Temple.”

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, the reason of the House of Hillel, (Ex.23:11) “let drop,” why does the verse say, “and abandon it”? There is another abandoning like this one. Just as this one is for poor and rich alike, also what is spoken of elsewhere is for poor and rich alike.

There we have stated: “If someone sets fire to a stack in which were hidden vessels, Rebbi Jehudah says, he pays for all that was in it. But the Sages say, he only pays for a stack of wheat or barley.” The argument of Rebbi Jehudah is inverted; there he says to include the hidden things, but here he says to exclude the hidden things. There (Ex. 22:5) “and a stack or standing grain was consumed.” I understand that since it says “standing grain” it includes a stack. Why does the verse add “a stack?” In order to include the hidden things. But here (Deut. 24:10) “your field,” in the open, to exclude anything hidden. The argument of the rabbis is inverted; there they say to exclude the hidden things, but here they say to include the hidden things. There, “or standing grain or a field,” just as a field is in the open, so all must be in the open. But here, “your field,” in the open, to exclude that which is hidden; “your harvest,” in the open, to exclude that which is hidden. That is a restriction after a restriction and every restriction after a restriction is only to add the hidden things.

MISHNAH: He who has 50 zuz and uses them for trade should not take. One who has no need to take but takes will not die of old age until he needs the creatures. One who has need to take but does not take will not die of old age until he can provide for others from what is his; for him is was said (Jer. 17:7): “Blessed be the man who will be confident in the Eternal, the Eternal will be his trust.” The same applies to a judge who delivers strictly true judgment. But one who is neither lame nor blind nor limping and presents himself as such will not die from old age until he will be one of them, as it is said (Deut. 16:20): “Justice, justice you shall pursue.” But every judge who takes bribes and bends the law will not die from old age until his eyes are dimmed, as it is said (Ex. 23:8): “Do not take bribes, for bribes blind the eyes of the seeing.”

There, we have stated: “He who turns over cow dung in the public domain and a third party was hurt, is liable for damages.” It was also stated: “It is forbidden because of robbery.” Cahana said, only if he turned it over in order to acquire it. But if he did not turn it over in order to acquire it, about that one does not speak. But as regards damages, there is no difference whether he turned it over in order to acquire it or he did not turn it over in order to acquire it; if a third party was hurt, he is liable for damages. And here, you say so? Rebbi Abun said, there it is written (Ex. 21:34): “The one responsible for the pit shall pay,” the one responsible for the damage shall pay. But here (Deut. 14:22): “You shall give tithes,” you give tithes from your property but not from other people’s property.

Originally there were only two as it is written (Gen. 41:43): “He made him ride in his two-horse carriage.” Pharao came and made them three, as it is written (Ex. 14:7): “three-horse over everything.” The evil kingdom arose and made it four.

Rebbi Zeïra said: It is written (Lev. 16:4) “He shall wear a garment of holy bad,” growing singly. But wool also grows in single strands. It is explained in tradition (Ez. 44:17): “There should be no wool on them when they officiate inside the inner doors.” Therefore, on the outside wool may be on them. From where that they may wear kilaim? As it says (Ex. 39:28): “The cap of byssus, the hat-turbans of byssus, the cloth trousers of spun byssus, and the belt of spun byssus, blue, purple, and crimson.” And it is written (Ez. 44:18): “Linen turbans shall be on their heads, linen trousers shall be on their hips, they shall not belt with sweat.” You infer “byssus” from “byssus”, “byssus” from “turbans”, “turbans” from “turbans”. Just as crimson is made from a living being, so the rest is made from a living being. Just as wool cannot have an epithet so linen cannot have an epithet.

HALAKHAH: “Until when may one plough, etc.” It is written (Ex. 23:12): “Six days you shall do your work but on the Seventh Day you shall rest.” And it is written (Ex. 34:21): “You shall rest from ploughing and harvesting.” Where do we hold? If one speaks about the Sabbath of Creation, was it not already said (Ex. 20:9): “Six days you shall labor and do all your work?” If one speaks about Sabbatical years, was it not already said (Lev. 25:3): “Six years you shall sow your field and six years you shall prune your vineyard?” If it cannot refer to the Sabbath of Creation nor to Sabbatical years, let it refer to the prohibition of the first two terms. “You shall rest from ploughing and harvesting,” from ploughing when harvesting is forbidden; what is this? This is ploughing in the year preceding the Sabbatical in preparation of the Sabbatical. And from harvesting when ploughing is forbidden, what is this? That is the harvest of Sabbatical growth after the Sabbatical.

HALAKHAH: “Until when may one plough, etc.” It is written (Ex. 23:12): “Six days you shall do your work but on the Seventh Day you shall rest.” And it is written (Ex. 34:21): “You shall rest from ploughing and harvesting.” Where do we hold? If one speaks about the Sabbath of Creation, was it not already said (Ex. 20:9): “Six days you shall labor and do all your work?” If one speaks about Sabbatical years, was it not already said (Lev. 25:3): “Six years you shall sow your field and six years you shall prune your vineyard?” If it cannot refer to the Sabbath of Creation nor to Sabbatical years, let it refer to the prohibition of the first two terms. “You shall rest from ploughing and harvesting,” from ploughing when harvesting is forbidden; what is this? This is ploughing in the year preceding the Sabbatical in preparation of the Sabbatical. And from harvesting when ploughing is forbidden, what is this? That is the harvest of Sabbatical growth after the Sabbatical.

HALAKHAH: “Until when may one plough, etc.” It is written (Ex. 23:12): “Six days you shall do your work but on the Seventh Day you shall rest.” And it is written (Ex. 34:21): “You shall rest from ploughing and harvesting.” Where do we hold? If one speaks about the Sabbath of Creation, was it not already said (Ex. 20:9): “Six days you shall labor and do all your work?” If one speaks about Sabbatical years, was it not already said (Lev. 25:3): “Six years you shall sow your field and six years you shall prune your vineyard?” If it cannot refer to the Sabbath of Creation nor to Sabbatical years, let it refer to the prohibition of the first two terms. “You shall rest from ploughing and harvesting,” from ploughing when harvesting is forbidden; what is this? This is ploughing in the year preceding the Sabbatical in preparation of the Sabbatical. And from harvesting when ploughing is forbidden, what is this? That is the harvest of Sabbatical growth after the Sabbatical.

Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: When they forbade it, they were inspired by Scripture, and when they permitted it, they were inspired by Scripture. When they forbade it, they were inspired by Scripture, (Lev. 25:3): “You shall rest from ploughing and harvesting,” from ploughing when harvesting is forbidden; what is this? This is ploughing in the year preceding the Sabbatical in preparation of the Sabbatical. And from harvesting when ploughing is forbidden, what is this? That is the harvest of Sabbatical growth after the Sabbatical. When they permitted it, they were inspired by Scripture, (Ex. 20:9): “Six days you shall labor and do all your work,” just as on the eve of the Sabbath of Creation one may do work until sundown, also before the start of the Sabbatical year one may work until sundown.

MISHNAH: Any useless or fruit trees are considered as if they were fig trees. If they would produce a fig cake in the weight of a talent of 60 Italic minas one ploughs the entire bet seah because of them. If less, one ploughs for them only as necessary. If one tree yields a “fig cake” but two do not, or two do and one does not, one only ploughs for them as necessary, unless there are three, and so from three to nine. If there are ten or more than ten one ploughs the entire bet seah because of them, whether they produce or not, since it is said (Ex. 34:21): : “You shall rest from ploughing and harvesting.” One does not have to mention ploughing and harvesting of the Sabbatical, but it refers to ploughing in the year preceding the Sabbatical in preparation of the Sabbatical, and harvesting of Sabbatical growth after the Sabbatical. Rebbi Ismael says, just as ploughing is voluntary so harvesting is voluntary; this excludes the harvest of the ‘omer.

“One ploughs the entire bet seah because of them since it is said (Ex. 34:21): ‘You shall rest from ploughing and harvesting.’ ” That refers only to the first part, “one ploughs for them only as necessary because it is said ‘you shall rest from ploughing and harvesting.’ ”.

HALAKHAH: What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah: (Ex. 23:11) “The destitute of your people should eat including the remainder.” What is the reason of Rebbi Yose: (Ex. 23:11) “The destitute of your people should eat with the remainder.” It was stated: Rebbi Simeon says, richpersons may eat from storage. What is the reason of Rebbi Simeon: (Ex. 23:11) “The destitute of your people should eat, and the remainder.”

HALAKHAH: What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah: (Ex. 23:11) “The destitute of your people should eat including the remainder.” What is the reason of Rebbi Yose: (Ex. 23:11) “The destitute of your people should eat with the remainder.” It was stated: Rebbi Simeon says, richpersons may eat from storage. What is the reason of Rebbi Simeon: (Ex. 23:11) “The destitute of your people should eat, and the remainder.”

HALAKHAH: What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah: (Ex. 23:11) “The destitute of your people should eat including the remainder.” What is the reason of Rebbi Yose: (Ex. 23:11) “The destitute of your people should eat with the remainder.” It was stated: Rebbi Simeon says, richpersons may eat from storage. What is the reason of Rebbi Simeon: (Ex. 23:11) “The destitute of your people should eat, and the remainder.”

HALAKHAH: “Five [persons] cannot give heave,” etc. Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman understood all of these from here (Ex. 25:2–3): “Speak to the Children of Israel that they should give heave for Me”, excluding the Gentile, “from every man”, excluding the minor, “whose intention is to volunteer”, excluding the deaf-mute and the insane. “The following is the heave you shall accept from them”, except from one who gives heave for what is not his.

Who needs this? Rebbi Yose! Which [statement of] Rebbi Yose? What we had stated there: “He who did read the Shema‘ and did not make his ear hear did fulfill his obligation.” For whom do we need that? For Rebbi Yose! For which statement of Rebbi Yose? For that which we have stated: “He who recites the Shema‘ and does not make his ear hear has fulfilled his obligation, Rebbi Yose says that he has not fulfilled his obligation.” Rav Mattanah said: That formulation is Rebbi Yose’s. Rebbi Yose said: We could be of the opinion that the rabbis and Rebbi Yose disagree only about Shema‘ since there it is written: “hear!”, but not about any other obligations. Since Rav Mattanah said “that formulation is Rebbi Yose’s”, it is the same for all commandments of the Torah. What is the reason of Rebbi Yose? (Ex. 15:26) “Bend your ear to His commandments and keep all His basic laws”; your ears should hear what your mouth says.

MISHNAH: He who says the heave of this heap is contained in it, the tithes are contained in it and the heave of this tithe is contained in it, Rebbi Simeon says he gave it a name but the Sages say, only if he said in its Northern or Southern part. Rebbi Eleazar Ḥisma says, he who says, the heave of this heap is from it for itself, gave it a name. Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob says, he who says, one tenth of this tithe is made heave of the tithe for it, gave it a name. One who gives heave before First Fruits, First Tithe before heave, Second Tithe before First, even though he transgresses a prohibition what he did is done since it is said (Ex. 22:28): "Your fullness you should not make follow your dema ’ ”. From where that First Fruits should precede heave since either one is called heave and first. First Fruits should precede since they are due before everything else, heave before First Tithe because it is first, First Tithe before the Second because it contains “first”.

Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba in the name of Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina: Since he transgresses a prohibition it follows that what he did is valid. Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba said in the name of Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina: He is whipped. Rebbi Zeïra said, they objected before Rebbi Joḥanan and he remained silent: If he transgresses, is he whipped or not? Rebbi Aḥa bar Jacob in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He is not whipped. How does Rebbi Joḥanan explain (Ex. 22:28): “Your fullness you should not make follow your dema‘”. He explains it for removal.

It was stated: “With his lips but not in his mind.” I could think that I exclude him who decides in his mind, the verse says (Lev. 5:4): “To articulate”. But Samuel said, he who decides in his mind is not obliged until he pronounces with his lips. But did we not state: “(Ex. 35:5) Everyone who volunteers in his mind,” that is he who decides in his mind. You say, that is he who decides in his mind, but maybe that is he who pronounces with his lips? When he says (Deut. 23:24): “What comes out from your lips you have to keep,” that speaks about him who pronounces with his lips. Therefore, how can I confirm “every one who volunteers in his mind?” That is he who decides in his mind. What Samuel said refers to a sacrifice.

“Since double restitution does not apply to the Sanctuary”. For it was said (Ex. 22:8): “He should restitute double to his neighbor,” but not to the Sanctuary.

Rebbi Ḥinena said before Rebbi Mana: If Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish thought the entire Mishnaiot were Rebbi Meïr’s, he would call them “the words of Meïr.” But is it not written (Lev. 22:14): “If a person ate consecrated food in error, etc.”? But Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish must hold that the fifth is a sacrifice. But even if he holds that the fifth is a sacrifice, can the principal be a sacrifice? Rebbi Yudan bar Shalom said, the Mishnah declares that the principal is a fine, as we have stated: “He does not pay in heave but in totally profane food which is turned into heave.” If he had to pay from what he ate, it would be fine. And it was stated: “If he ate impure heave, he has to pay in pure profane food, but if he paid in impure profane, he discharged his obligation.” Does he not owe him the price of wood? That shows that the principal is a fine and since the principal is a fine, the fifth also is a fine. But Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish follows his own opinion. Just as Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, there, everybody was under the obligation of (Ex. 20:16) “Do not become a false witness against your neighbor”, but this one was treated separately, (Deut. 19:19) “do to him what he intended to do to his brother”, to force him to pay; also here, everybody was under the obligation of (Lev. 22:10) “no outsider shall eat holy [food],” but this one was treated separately, (Lev. 22:14) “if somebody should eat holy [food] in error,” to force him to pay.

It happened that a butcher in Sepphoris sold to Jews carcasses and torn meats. Once he drank wine Friday night, went to the roof, fell down, and died. The dogs were licking his blood. People came and asked Rebbi Ḥanina, should we lift him from before them? He said to them, it is written (Ex. 22:30): “Torn meat on the fields you shall not eat, you must throw it to the dogs!” This one robbed the dogs and fed it to Jews. He said to them, let them, they are eating from their own!

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.

How do we hold? If she is an adult, she acquired [her freedom] by the signs [of puberty]; if she is a minor, may a minor acquire? Rebbi Yudan bar Shalom said before Rebbi Yose, explain it following him who said, a minor may give heave. He said to him, even following him who said, a minor may give heave, may a minor acquire? Following the opinion of the rabbis there it is acceptable since there, they say in the name of Rav Naḥman bar Jacob: One to whom one gives a nut and he throws it away, a pebble and he keeps it, what is found in his hand is as if found on a garbage heap; a nut and he keeps it, a pebble and he throws it away, what is robbed from him is robbed because of communal peace; a nut or a pebble he takes, hides them, and produces them later, what is robbed from him is total robbery. He can acquire for himself but not for others. Rav Huna said, just as he can acquire for himself so he can acquire for others. Everybody agrees that his gift is not a gift since it is written (Ex. 22:6): “If a man give.” The gift of a man is a gift, but the gift of a minor is no gift, the words of the Sages. Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, robbing from him is not total robbery unless he grew two pubic hairs. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, that is, to recover from him by a law suit, but to have to bring a sacrifice for [a false] oath only if he grew two pubic hairs. But following the rabbis here, Rebbi Yose asked that even for himself he should not be able to acquire since it is written (Ex. 22:6): “To his neighbor”, until he be like his neighbor. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Samuel ben Rav Isaac explained it by the method of small children. As we have stated there: “For school children, their buying is buying and their selling selling, for movables.” But did we not state: “He cannot make them acquire through his minor son or daughter or his Canaanite male or female slave, because their hand is like his hand.” The rabbis of Caesarea say, here a minor with knowledge, there a minor without knowledge.

How do we hold? If she is an adult, she acquired [her freedom] by the signs [of puberty]; if she is a minor, may a minor acquire? Rebbi Yudan bar Shalom said before Rebbi Yose, explain it following him who said, a minor may give heave. He said to him, even following him who said, a minor may give heave, may a minor acquire? Following the opinion of the rabbis there it is acceptable since there, they say in the name of Rav Naḥman bar Jacob: One to whom one gives a nut and he throws it away, a pebble and he keeps it, what is found in his hand is as if found on a garbage heap; a nut and he keeps it, a pebble and he throws it away, what is robbed from him is robbed because of communal peace; a nut or a pebble he takes, hides them, and produces them later, what is robbed from him is total robbery. He can acquire for himself but not for others. Rav Huna said, just as he can acquire for himself so he can acquire for others. Everybody agrees that his gift is not a gift since it is written (Ex. 22:6): “If a man give.” The gift of a man is a gift, but the gift of a minor is no gift, the words of the Sages. Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, robbing from him is not total robbery unless he grew two pubic hairs. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, that is, to recover from him by a law suit, but to have to bring a sacrifice for [a false] oath only if he grew two pubic hairs. But following the rabbis here, Rebbi Yose asked that even for himself he should not be able to acquire since it is written (Ex. 22:6): “To his neighbor”, until he be like his neighbor. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Samuel ben Rav Isaac explained it by the method of small children. As we have stated there: “For school children, their buying is buying and their selling selling, for movables.” But did we not state: “He cannot make them acquire through his minor son or daughter or his Canaanite male or female slave, because their hand is like his hand.” The rabbis of Caesarea say, here a minor with knowledge, there a minor without knowledge.

MISHNAH: Nittai from Tekoa brought ḥallot from Baithur but they did not accept from him. The people of Alexandria brought their ḥallot from Alexandria but they did not accept from them. The people from Hyena Mountain brought their First Fruits before Pentecost but they did not accept from them because of the verse in the Torah: (Ex. 23:16) “The pilgrimage holiday of harvest, the First Fruits of your work from sowing the field.” Ben-Atitas brought firstlings from Babylonia and they did not accept them. Joseph the Cohen brought his First Fruits as wine and oil and they did not accept them. He also brought his children and members of his household to make the second Passover in Jerusalem but they turned him back so as not to create a precedent for the future. Ariston brought his First Fruits from Apamea and they accepted them for they said, he who buys in Syria is like him who buys in the suburbs of Jerusalem.

“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.

Does it follow him who says the Pesaḥ of women is voluntary? It was stated: “A woman may make the First Pesaḥ by herself and the Second joining others, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Yose says, a woman may make the Second Pesaḥ by herself, even on the Sabbath, and certainly the First. Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar says, a woman may make the First Pesaḥ joining others but does not make the Second.” What is the reason of Rebbi Meïr? (Ex. 12:3) “Every man a sheep for the family,” if they want “a sheep for the house.” What is the reason of Rebbi Yose, “Every man a sheep for the family,” a fortiori “a sheep for the house.” What is the reason of Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar? “Every man”, not woman. How do the rabbis uphold “man”? A man, not a minor. Rebbi Jonah said, even according to him who says it is an obligation, it is different here since the occasion was news, that it should not become an obligation. Did we not hold: “Before the Two Breads one should not bring but if somebody brought it is acceptable?” It is different here since the occasion was news, that it should not become an obligation. Did we not state: “If they were without blemish they should be sacrificed”? It is different here since the occasion was news, that it should not become an obligation.

Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Everywhere it is written “do not eat, do not eat, it shall not be eaten”, you understand a prohibition of usufruct included in the probition of eating unless the verse comes and explains to you as it did explain about limbs of a living animal and a carcass. What did it explain about limbs of a living animal? (Ex. 22:30) “Flesh torn in the field you shall not eat.” And what did it explain about a carcass? (Deut. 14:21) “Do not eat any carcass; to the sojourner in your gates you shall give it and he may eat it.” Hizqiah stated a disagreement. What does one forbid to the dog?

In a baraita one disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan: “What does one understand from what has been said (Ex. 21:28): ‘The ox shall certainly be stoned’? Do we not know that its meat is forbidden as food? Then why does the verse say, ‘its meat shall not be eaten’? To tell you that just as it is forbidden as food so it is forbidden for usufruct.” What does Rebbi Joḥanan do with this? He explained it if the owners slaughtered it before sentence was pronounced.

The rabbis of Caesarea, Rabbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Nowhere do you understand a prohibition of usufruct included in the probition of eating if it is written “do not eat”. The paradigm for all cases is (Lev. 6:23): “Any purification offering of whose blood was brought into the Tent of Meeting to purify the sanctuary shall not be eaten, in fire it shall be burned.” Ḥizqiah stated support for Rebbi Joḥanan: If one understands what has been said (Lev. 7:23): “Any fat of cattle, sheep, or goats you shall not eat,” why has it been said (Lev. 7:24): “But fat of a carcass and fat of a torn animal may be used for any work”? It comes to tell you, even for the work of Heaven. If one understands what has been said (Lev. 12:16): “But the blood you shall not eat,” why has it been said “you shall pour it on the ground like water”? It comes to tell you, as water prepares, so blood prepares. If one understands what has been said (Deut. 14:21) “Do not eat any carcass;” why has it been said “to the sojourner in your gates you shall give it and he may eat it”? To tell you that the resident sojourner may eat carcass meat. If one understands what has been said (Ex. 22:30): “Flesh torn in the field you shall not eat,” why has it been said “throw it to the dog”? This you throw to the dog but not profane meat slaughered in the Temple precinct.

A baraita supports both of them. The baraita supports Rebbi Eleazar. “(Ex. 13:3) ‘Sour bread shall not be eaten’, to make the feeder equal to the eater. You say for this, or is it only to forbid its usufruct? Since it says (Deut. 16:3): ‘You shall not eat sour bread with it,’ we learned that usufruct is forbidden. Therefore, why does the verse say, sour bread shall not be eaten? To make the feeder equal to the eater, the words of Rebbi Josia. Rebbi Isaac says, this is unnecessary. Since for crawling things, a minor prohibition, He made the feeder equal to the eater; regarding sour bread which is a major prohibition it should only be logical that he feeder be equal to the eater. Therefore, why does the verse say, sour bread shall not be eaten? The verse comes only to forbid its usufruct.” Since it is written “sour bread shall not be eaten.” Therefore, from “you shall not eat” one cannot infer anything. This supports Rebbi Joḥanan.

MISHNAH: One does not bring First Fruits except from the Seven Kinds, nor from mountain dates, nor from valley fruits, nor from oil olives which are not best quality. One may not bring First Fruits before Pentecost. The people from Hyena Mountain brought their First Fruits before Pentecost but they did not accept from them because of the verse in the Torah: (Ex. 23:16) “The pilgrimage holiday of harvest, the First Fruits of your work from sowing the field.”

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish; Rebbi Jonah, Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: Sixteen mil in a circle around Sepphoris is the Land flowing with milk and honey. Rebbi Jonah said, if one measures as the crow flies, the outskirts of Beth Shean belong to it. If one measures as the crow flies, the valley of Genezareth belongs to it. One objected to Rebbi Jonah: (Ex. 3:17) “I said, I shall lift you from the deprivation of Egypt” (Ex. 3:8) “into a good and wide land, [to] a land flowing with milk and honey”! He said to them, which contains [stretches of] milk and honey.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish; Rebbi Jonah, Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: Sixteen mil in a circle around Sepphoris is the Land flowing with milk and honey. Rebbi Jonah said, if one measures as the crow flies, the outskirts of Beth Shean belong to it. If one measures as the crow flies, the valley of Genezareth belongs to it. One objected to Rebbi Jonah: (Ex. 3:17) “I said, I shall lift you from the deprivation of Egypt” (Ex. 3:8) “into a good and wide land, [to] a land flowing with milk and honey”! He said to them, which contains [stretches of] milk and honey.

“One is responsible for them,” for it is written (Ex. 23:19): “The beginning of the First Fruits of your land.”

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.

Rebbi Mana made light of those ordained for money. Rebbi Ammi read for them (Ex. 20:19): “Do not make for yourselves gods of silver or gods of gold.” Rebbi Yoshia said, their prayer shawl is like a donkey’s saddle cover. Rebbi Ashian said, if somebody is ordained for money, one does not get up before him and one does not address him as Rebbi; his prayer shawl is like a donkey’s saddle cover. Rebbi Zeïra and one of the rabbis were sitting together when a person ordained for money was passing by. One of the rabbis said to Rebbi Zeïra, let us behave like Tannaïm and not get up before him.

“To the Palhedrin lodge.” Abba Shaul was calling it the council member’s lodge. Earlier it was called the council member’s lodge. But now one calls it the Palhedrin lodge. The ex-priests, a passing matter. In the first {Temple}, where he, his son, and his grandson served, there were eighteen priests serving. But in the second, where they bought it for money, but some say that they killed one another by sorcery, there served 80 priests, but some say 81, and some say 82, and some say 84, and some say 85. And from these Simeon the Just served for 40 years. Rebbi Aḥa said, it is written, the fear of the Eternal adds days, these are the priests who served in the first Temple, but the years of the wicked ones will be shortened’, these are those who served in the second building. It happened that one sent through his son two measures of silver, full of silver, and their covers silver. Another came and sent through his son two measures of gold, full of gold, and their covers gold. They said, the foal overturned the candelabrum.

HALAKHAH: “If a woman’s child was mixed up,” etc. Rebbi Joḥanan said: So is the Mishnah: The sister-in-law’s sons’ wives, the old woman’s sons’ wives. Rebbi Ḥaggai said, this implies that a man may marry a nephew’s ex-wife.

Rebbi Ḥinena said before Rebbi Mana: Even if Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish thought the entire Mishnaiot were Rebbi Meïr’s, does the verse agree with Rebbi Meïr? Is it not written (Lev. 22:14): “If a person ate consecrated food in error”? But Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish must hold that the fifth is a sacrifice. But even if he holds that the fifth is a sacrifice, can the principal be a sacrifice? Rebbi Yudan bar Shalom said, the Mishnah declares that the principal is a fine, as we have stated: “He does not pay in heave but in totally profane food which is turned into heave.” If he had to pay from what he ate, it would be fine. And it was stated: “If he ate impure heave, he has to pay in pure profane food, but if he paid in impure profane, he discharged his obligation.” Does he not owe him the price of wood? That shows that the principal is a fine and since the principal is a fine, the fifth also is a fine. But Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish follows his own opinion. Just as Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, there, everybody was under the obligation of (Ex. 20:16) “Do not become a false witness against your neighbor”, but this one was treated separately, (Deut. 19:19) “do to him what he intended to do to his brother”, to pay money; also here, everybody was under the obligation of (Lev. 22:10) “no outsider shall eat holy [food],” but this one was treated separately, (Lev. 22:14) “if somebody should eat holy [food] in error,” to pay money.

“With his lips but not in his mind.” I could think that I exclude him who decides in his mind; the verse says (Lev. 5:4): “To articulate”. But Samuel said, he who decides in his mind is not obligated until he pronounces with his lips. But did we not state: “(Ex. 35:5) Everyone who volunteers in his mind,” that is he who decides in his mind. You say, that is he who decides in his mind, but maybe that is he who pronounces with his lips? When he says (Deut. 23:24): “What comes out from your lips you have to keep,” that speaks about him who pronounces with his lips. Therefore, how can I confirm “every one who volunteers in his mind?” That is he who decides in his mind. What Samuel said refers to a sacrifice.

Following the opinion of the rabbis there it is acceptable since there, they say in the name of Rav Naḥman bar Jacob: One to whom one gives a nut and he throws it away, a pebble and he keeps it, what is found in his hand is as if found on a garbage heap; a nut and he keeps it, a pebble and he throws it away, what is robbed from him is robbed because of communal peace; a nut or a pebble he takes, hides them, and produces them later, what is robbed from him is total robbery. He can acquire for himself but not for others. Rav Huna said, just as he can acquire for himself so he can acquire for others. Everybody agrees that his gift is not a gift since it is written (Ex. 22:6): “If a man give.” The gift of a man is a gift, but the gift of a minor is no gift, the words of the Sages. Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, robbing from him is not clear unless he grew two pubic hairs. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, that is, to recover from him by a law suit, but to have to bring a sacrifice for [a false] oath only if he grew two pubic hairs. But following the rabbis here, Rebbi Yose asked that even for himself he should not be able to acquire since it is written (Ex. 22:6): “A man to his neighbor”, until he be like his neighbor. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac explained it by the method of the artless. As we have stated there: “For underage children, their buying is buying and their selling selling, for movables.” But did we not state there: “He cannot make them acquire through his minor son or daughter or his Canaanite male or female slave, because their hand is like his hand.” The rabbis of Caesarea say, here a minor with knowledge, there a minor without knowledge.

Following the opinion of the rabbis there it is acceptable since there, they say in the name of Rav Naḥman bar Jacob: One to whom one gives a nut and he throws it away, a pebble and he keeps it, what is found in his hand is as if found on a garbage heap; a nut and he keeps it, a pebble and he throws it away, what is robbed from him is robbed because of communal peace; a nut or a pebble he takes, hides them, and produces them later, what is robbed from him is total robbery. He can acquire for himself but not for others. Rav Huna said, just as he can acquire for himself so he can acquire for others. Everybody agrees that his gift is not a gift since it is written (Ex. 22:6): “If a man give.” The gift of a man is a gift, but the gift of a minor is no gift, the words of the Sages. Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, robbing from him is not clear unless he grew two pubic hairs. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, that is, to recover from him by a law suit, but to have to bring a sacrifice for [a false] oath only if he grew two pubic hairs. But following the rabbis here, Rebbi Yose asked that even for himself he should not be able to acquire since it is written (Ex. 22:6): “A man to his neighbor”, until he be like his neighbor. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac explained it by the method of the artless. As we have stated there: “For underage children, their buying is buying and their selling selling, for movables.” But did we not state there: “He cannot make them acquire through his minor son or daughter or his Canaanite male or female slave, because their hand is like his hand.” The rabbis of Caesarea say, here a minor with knowledge, there a minor without knowledge.

It is said (Lev. 19:3): “Everybody must fear his mother and his father,” and it is said (Deut. 6:13): “You must fear the Eternal, your God, and serve Him.” This brackets the fear of father and mother with the fear of the Omnipresent. [It is said (Ex. 20:12): “Honor your father and your mother,” and it is said (Prov. 3:9): “Honor the Eternal with your property.” This brackets the honor of father and mother with the honor of the Omnipresent.] Is is said (Ex. 21:17): “He who curses his father or his mother shall be put to death,” and it is said (Lev. 24:19): “Everybody who curses his God must bear his sin.” This brackets cursing father and mother with cursing the Omnipresent. It is impossible to speak about hitting relative to the Deity. All this is logical since all three of them are partners in him.

It is said (Lev. 19:3): “Everybody must fear his mother and his father,” and it is said (Deut. 6:13): “You must fear the Eternal, your God, and serve Him.” This brackets the fear of father and mother with the fear of the Omnipresent. [It is said (Ex. 20:12): “Honor your father and your mother,” and it is said (Prov. 3:9): “Honor the Eternal with your property.” This brackets the honor of father and mother with the honor of the Omnipresent.] Is is said (Ex. 21:17): “He who curses his father or his mother shall be put to death,” and it is said (Lev. 24:19): “Everybody who curses his God must bear his sin.” This brackets cursing father and mother with cursing the Omnipresent. It is impossible to speak about hitting relative to the Deity. All this is logical since all three of them are partners in him.

The words of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba disagree, for Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rebbi Yudan, son of Rebbi Simeon bar Ioḥai’s daughter, stated that Rebbi Simeon bar Ioḥai stated: Honoring father and mother is great because the Holy One, praise to Him, preferred it over His own honor. It is said (Ex. 20:12): “Honor your father and your mother,” and it is said (Prov. 3:9): “Honor the Eternal with your property.” How do you honor Him? From your property! One gives gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and peah, one gives terumah, the First and Second Tithes and the tithe for the poor, ḥallah, one makes a sukkah, and lulav,shofar, and tefillin, and ẓiẓit, one feeds the hungry and gives to drink to the thirsty. If you have the wherewhithal, you are obliged for all of these; if you have nothing, you are not obliged even for one of them. But when it comes to honoring father and mother, whether you own property or you do not, you must honor father and mother, even if you are a beggar at people’s doors.

Does it follow him who says the Pesaḥ of women is voluntary? It was stated: “A woman may make the First Pesaḥ by herself and the Second joining others, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Yose says, a woman may make the Second Pesaḥ by herself, and certainly the First. Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon says, a woman may make the First Pesaḥ joining others but does not make the Second.” What is the reason of Rebbi Meïr? (Ex. 12:3) “Every man a sheep for the family,” if they want “a sheep for the house.” What is the reason of Rebbi Yose, “Every man a sheep for the family,” a fortiori “a sheep for the house.” What is the reason of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon? “Every man”, not woman. How do the rabbis uphold “man”? A man, not a minor. Rebbi Jonah said, even according to him who says it is an obligation, it is different here since the occasion was news, lest it become an obligation.

Now to what case does this refer? Now to what case does this refer? If I say where he did not interweave them, then behold he joins the invalid covering to the valid one? Rather it refers to a case where one did interweave them; and we learn from here that we don't decree against this?What might you have thought? That [this is permissible] only ex post facto but not ab initio, hence we were informed

Our Rabbis have taught: If an individual separates from the community when the latter is in distress, the two ministering angels that accompany every man, place their hands upon his head and say, such and such a man who separated himself from the community shall not live to see the comfort of the community. Another Baraita reads: When the community is in distress one should not say, I will go home, eat and drink, and peace will be upon my soul. And if he does so, Scripture says of him (Is., 22.13): "And behold joy and gladness, slaying oxen and killing sheep, eating flesh and drinking wine—'let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we shall die.'" Now, what are the words that follow this verse? "And the Lord of hosts revealed Himself in mine ears, surely this iniquity shall not be expiated by you till ye die." This is the way of the average people, but what is the way of the wicked? "Come ye (say they), I will fetch wine and we will fill ourselves with strong drink; and tomorrow shall be as this day, and much more abundant" (Is., 56.12). But what are the words that follow? "The righteous perisheth, and no man layeth it to heart" (ibid., 57. 1). One should therefore afflict himself with the community, for thus we find that Moses afflicted himself out of sympathy with the community, as it is said (Ex., 17. 12): "But Moses's hands were heavy and they took a stone and put it under him, and he sat thereon." Now, did not Moses have a cushion or a pillow to sit upon? But Moses said to himself, as Israel is in trouble I will also share it with them. If a person should say, however, Who is going to testify against me? Yea, the stones of a man's house and the beams of a man's roof testify against him, as it is said (Hab., 2.11): "For the stone shall cry out of the wall, and the beam out of the timber shall answer it." R. Shila said, the two ministering angels that accompany a man testify against him, for it is said (Ps., 91. 11): "For He will give His angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways." R. Ḥidḳa says, one's soul testifies against him, for it is said (Micah, 7. 5): "Keep the doors of thy mouth from her that lieth in thy bosom." The other sages said, one's own limbs testify against him, for it is said (Is., 43. 12): "Ye are My witnesses, saith the Lord, and I am God."

Why did they not fast on Sunday? Said R. Johanan, because of the Christians; R. Samuel b. Naḥamani said, because Sunday is the third day after the creation of man; Resh Laḳish said, because of the additional soul; for Resh Laḳish holds that an additional soul is given to man on Friday eve, which is taken away from him at the expiration of the Sabbath, as it is said (Ex., 31.17): "He ceased from work and rested"—alas, the soul is gone after the Sabbath is over.

Do not think such a thing: For a deaf person is mentioned in the same category as an imbecile and a minor; just as the reading of an imbecile and a minor is not accepted ex post facto, so the reading of a deaf man is not accepted ex post facto.

Do not think such a thing: For a deaf person is mentioned in the same category as an imbecile and a minor; just as the reading of an imbecile and a minor is not accepted ex post facto, so the reading of a deaf man is not accepted ex post facto.

How then have you explained [the first clause of the Mishnah]? Like R. Judah and ex post facto.

Then that which was taught by R. Judah the son of R. Shimon b. Pazzi: One who can speak but not hear may set aside terumah ab initio. Whose view is this? If you say, R. Judah, he holds that this is only ex post facto, but not ab initio. If you say R. Yose, he invalidates the action even ex post facto.