jehudah

MISHNAH: If somebody paid off part of his debt, deposited his bond with a third party, and told him, if I have not paid him by date x, return the bond to him. If the time has passed while he did not pay, Rebbi Yose says, he shall return it; Rebbi Jehudah says, he shall not return it. If somebody’s bond became illegible, he presents witnesses about it to the court and they confirm for him: The bond of Mr. X, son of Mr. Y, dated from day Z became illegible; U and V were his witnesses.

MISHNAH: If somebody paid off part of his debt, Rebbi Jehudah said, he shall exchange [his bond], but Rebbi Yose said, he shall write a receipt. Said Rebbi Jehudah, but then this one must guard his receipt from the rats! Rebbi Yose answered him, that comes to him rightly, not to impair the other one’s rights.

MISHNAH: If somebody paid off part of his debt, Rebbi Jehudah said, he shall exchange [his bond], but Rebbi Yose said, he shall write a receipt. Said Rebbi Jehudah, but then this one must guard his receipt from the rats! Rebbi Yose answered him, that comes to him rightly, not to impair the other one’s rights.

Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi said, even the Holy One, praise to Him, does not judge alone, as it is said: all the hosts of Heaven were standing by Him, to His right side and to His left. These vote to acquit, those to convict. Even though He does not judge alone, He signs alone, as it is said: really I shall tell you what is noted in true writing. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the Holy One, praise to Him, never does anything in His world unless He took counsel with the Heavenly Court. What is the reason? True is the statement and a large host. When is the seal of the Holy One, praise to Him, true? When He took counsel with the Heavenly Court. Rebbi Eleazar said, any place where it is said “the Eternal, Almighty,” it is He and His Heavenly Court. The paradigm of all is: and the Eternal spoke evil about him.

“Rebbi Jehudah ben Laqish said: If two people appeared before a judge, one decent and one agressive. Before he started to hear their arguments, he may tell them, I will not hear your case, lest the agressive one lose his case and become his enemy. After he started hearing their arguments, he may not tell them, I will not hear your case, for it is said, do not be afraid of anybody.

MISHNAH: Whipping by three [judges]; in the name of Rebbi Ismael they said, by 23. The lengthening of a month by three [judges], the intercalation of a year by three [judges], the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, one starts with three, one discusses with five, and one votes with seven. But if they voted with three, it is intercalated. The leaning of Elders and the breaking of the calf’s neck by three [judges], the words of Rebbi Simeon, but Rebbi Jehudah says, by five. Ḥalîṣah and repudiations by three [judges], [redemption of] the growth of the fourth year and Second Tithe whose value is not known by three [appraisers], also of Temple dedications by three. Estimations of movables by three [appraisers], Rebbi Jehudah says that one of them must be a Cohen; of real estate nine and a Cohen. The same holds for humans. Capital crimes [are judged] by 23. The participants in active or passive bestiality [is judged] by 23, as it is said, you shall slay the woman and the animal, and it says, and you shall slay the animal. The bull to be stoned [is judged] by 23, as it is said, the bull shall be stoned, also its owner shall die; like the owner’s death sentence so is the ox’s death sentence. The wolf and the lion, the bear, and the tiger, and the panther, and the snake are sentenced to death by 23. Rebbi Eliezer says, anyone quick to kill them is meritorious; Rebbi Aqiba says, they are sentenced by 23.

MISHNAH: Whipping by three [judges]; in the name of Rebbi Ismael they said, by 23. The lengthening of a month by three [judges], the intercalation of a year by three [judges], the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, one starts with three, one discusses with five, and one votes with seven. But if they voted with three, it is intercalated. The leaning of Elders and the breaking of the calf’s neck by three [judges], the words of Rebbi Simeon, but Rebbi Jehudah says, by five. Ḥalîṣah and repudiations by three [judges], [redemption of] the growth of the fourth year and Second Tithe whose value is not known by three [appraisers], also of Temple dedications by three. Estimations of movables by three [appraisers], Rebbi Jehudah says that one of them must be a Cohen; of real estate nine and a Cohen. The same holds for humans. Capital crimes [are judged] by 23. The participants in active or passive bestiality [is judged] by 23, as it is said, you shall slay the woman and the animal, and it says, and you shall slay the animal. The bull to be stoned [is judged] by 23, as it is said, the bull shall be stoned, also its owner shall die; like the owner’s death sentence so is the ox’s death sentence. The wolf and the lion, the bear, and the tiger, and the panther, and the snake are sentenced to death by 23. Rebbi Eliezer says, anyone quick to kill them is meritorious; Rebbi Aqiba says, they are sentenced by 23.

lt was stated: If the Synhedrion saw the killer. Some Tannaïm state: two of them become witnesses and testify before the rest of them. There are Tannaïm who state that they all are witnesses and have to go and testify before other [judges]. Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi in the name of Rebbi Zeˋira: As they differ here, so they differ about testimony for the New Moon.

“Rebbi Jehudah said: it happened that Rabban Gamliel and the Elders were sitting on stairs on the Temple Mount; their scribe Joḥanan was sitting before them when Rabban Gamliel said to him, write: To our brothers in the Upper Southland and the Lower Southland, may you have much peace. We inform you that the time of liquidation has come, to deliver tithes from the sheaves of grain. To our brothers in the Upper Galilee and the Lower Galilee, may you have much peace. We inform you that the time of liquidation has come, to deliver tithes from the olive presses. To our brothers in the diaspora of Babylonia, the diaspora of Media, the diaspora of Greece, and all other diasporas of Israel, may you have much peace. We inform you that the sheep are thin, the pigeon chicks small, and springtime has not arrived; it appears good in my eyes and those of my colleagues to add thirty days to this year.”

“One does not intercalate a year unless it be missing most of a month. How much is most of a month? 16 days. Rebbi Jehudah says two thirds of a month, 21 days.” Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman said, only that the ˋOmer should be brought at the end of Nisan of equinoxes. Rebbi Yose said, before Passover. Rav Mattaniah said, only that lulav be taken at the end of Tishre of equinoxes.

Some Tannaïm state: “One does not intercalate because of impurity.” Rebbi Yose says, one intercalates, since we find that Hezekiah intercalated because of the impurity, as it is said: For most of the people from Ephraim, Manasse, Issachar, and Zevulun had not been purified, for they ate the Passover contrary to what is written, for Hezekiah had prayed, saying, the Eternal, the Benevolent, will pardon this. Rebbi Simeon says, even though he intercalated Nisan, it was Adar which was intercalated. Rebbi Simeon ben Jehudah said in the name of Rebbi Simeon: Hezekiah forced the community to celebrate the Second Passover.”

Jeremiah intercalated outside the Land. Ezechiel intercalated outside the Land. Baruch ben Neriah intercalated outside the Land. Ḥanania the nephew of Rebbi Joshua intercalated outside the Land. Rebbi sent him three letters through Rebbi Isaac and Rebbi Nathan. In one he wrote, to His holiness Ḥanania. And in one he wrote, the kid goats you left behind became rams. And in one he wrote, if you do not accept, go to the thistle desert, do the slaughtering and let Onias sprinkle. After the first [letter], he honored them. After the second, he honored them. After the third, he wanted to disgrace them. They said to him, you cannot do that since you already did honor us. Rebbi Isaac rose and read in the Torah: These are the holidays of Ḥanania the nephew of Rebbi Joshua. They said to him, the holidays of the Eternal. He told them, that is with us. Rebbi Nathan rose and concluded: For from Babylonia will Torah go forth and the Eternal’s word from Nahar-Peqod. They said to him, for from Zion will Torah go forth and the Eternal’s word from Jerusalem. He told them, that is with us. He went to complain about them to Rebbi Jehudah ben Bathyra at Nisibis. He said to him, follow them, follow them. He said to him, I do not know whom I left there. Who would tell me that they are knowledgeable in computations as I am? If they did not know the computations, they should listen to him. Since they are knowledgeable in computations as he is, he has to listen to them. He got up and rode on a horse. Where he reached, he reached. Where he did not reach, they continued to follow the corrupt [calendar].

“The leaning of Elders and the breaking of the calf’s neck by three [judges], the words of Rebbi Simeon, but Rebbi Jehudah says, by five.” What is the reason of Rebbi Simeon? “[The Elders] shall lean,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds another one; that makes three. What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah? “They shall lean,” two. “The Elders,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds one; that makes five. And for the calf whose neck is broken, what is the reason of Rebbi Simeon? “Your Elders,” two, “and your judges,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds one; that makes five. What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah? “Your elders, your judges,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds another one; that makes three. Rebbi said, the words of Rebbi Jehudah are reasonable for the breaking of the neck, for he does not refer to “they shall go out.” The words of Rebbi Simeon are reasonable for the leaning of the hands, for he does not refer to “they shall lean.” If you would say that the words of Rebbi Jehudah are reasonable for the calf whose neck is broken, if he refers to “they shall lean”, he also should refer to “they shall go out.” It turns out that you have to say “they shall go out” two, “your Elders” two, “and your judges” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds one more; that makes seven. How does Rebbi Simeon explain “your Elders and your judges”? Your Elders who are your judges. It was stated: Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob says “your Elders,” that is the High Court; “and your judges,” these are king and High Priest.

“The leaning of Elders and the breaking of the calf’s neck by three [judges], the words of Rebbi Simeon, but Rebbi Jehudah says, by five.” What is the reason of Rebbi Simeon? “[The Elders] shall lean,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds another one; that makes three. What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah? “They shall lean,” two. “The Elders,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds one; that makes five. And for the calf whose neck is broken, what is the reason of Rebbi Simeon? “Your Elders,” two, “and your judges,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds one; that makes five. What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah? “Your elders, your judges,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds another one; that makes three. Rebbi said, the words of Rebbi Jehudah are reasonable for the breaking of the neck, for he does not refer to “they shall go out.” The words of Rebbi Simeon are reasonable for the leaning of the hands, for he does not refer to “they shall lean.” If you would say that the words of Rebbi Jehudah are reasonable for the calf whose neck is broken, if he refers to “they shall lean”, he also should refer to “they shall go out.” It turns out that you have to say “they shall go out” two, “your Elders” two, “and your judges” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds one more; that makes seven. How does Rebbi Simeon explain “your Elders and your judges”? Your Elders who are your judges. It was stated: Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob says “your Elders,” that is the High Court; “and your judges,” these are king and High Priest.

“The leaning of Elders and the breaking of the calf’s neck by three [judges], the words of Rebbi Simeon, but Rebbi Jehudah says, by five.” What is the reason of Rebbi Simeon? “[The Elders] shall lean,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds another one; that makes three. What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah? “They shall lean,” two. “The Elders,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds one; that makes five. And for the calf whose neck is broken, what is the reason of Rebbi Simeon? “Your Elders,” two, “and your judges,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds one; that makes five. What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah? “Your elders, your judges,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds another one; that makes three. Rebbi said, the words of Rebbi Jehudah are reasonable for the breaking of the neck, for he does not refer to “they shall go out.” The words of Rebbi Simeon are reasonable for the leaning of the hands, for he does not refer to “they shall lean.” If you would say that the words of Rebbi Jehudah are reasonable for the calf whose neck is broken, if he refers to “they shall lean”, he also should refer to “they shall go out.” It turns out that you have to say “they shall go out” two, “your Elders” two, “and your judges” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds one more; that makes seven. How does Rebbi Simeon explain “your Elders and your judges”? Your Elders who are your judges. It was stated: Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob says “your Elders,” that is the High Court; “and your judges,” these are king and High Priest.

“The leaning of Elders and the breaking of the calf’s neck by three [judges], the words of Rebbi Simeon, but Rebbi Jehudah says, by five.” What is the reason of Rebbi Simeon? “[The Elders] shall lean,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds another one; that makes three. What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah? “They shall lean,” two. “The Elders,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds one; that makes five. And for the calf whose neck is broken, what is the reason of Rebbi Simeon? “Your Elders,” two, “and your judges,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds one; that makes five. What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah? “Your elders, your judges,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds another one; that makes three. Rebbi said, the words of Rebbi Jehudah are reasonable for the breaking of the neck, for he does not refer to “they shall go out.” The words of Rebbi Simeon are reasonable for the leaning of the hands, for he does not refer to “they shall lean.” If you would say that the words of Rebbi Jehudah are reasonable for the calf whose neck is broken, if he refers to “they shall lean”, he also should refer to “they shall go out.” It turns out that you have to say “they shall go out” two, “your Elders” two, “and your judges” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds one more; that makes seven. How does Rebbi Simeon explain “your Elders and your judges”? Your Elders who are your judges. It was stated: Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob says “your Elders,” that is the High Court; “and your judges,” these are king and High Priest.

“The leaning of Elders and the breaking of the calf’s neck by three [judges], the words of Rebbi Simeon, but Rebbi Jehudah says, by five.” What is the reason of Rebbi Simeon? “[The Elders] shall lean,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds another one; that makes three. What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah? “They shall lean,” two. “The Elders,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds one; that makes five. And for the calf whose neck is broken, what is the reason of Rebbi Simeon? “Your Elders,” two, “and your judges,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds one; that makes five. What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah? “Your elders, your judges,” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds another one; that makes three. Rebbi said, the words of Rebbi Jehudah are reasonable for the breaking of the neck, for he does not refer to “they shall go out.” The words of Rebbi Simeon are reasonable for the leaning of the hands, for he does not refer to “they shall lean.” If you would say that the words of Rebbi Jehudah are reasonable for the calf whose neck is broken, if he refers to “they shall lean”, he also should refer to “they shall go out.” It turns out that you have to say “they shall go out” two, “your Elders” two, “and your judges” two. No court has an even number of members; one adds one more; that makes seven. How does Rebbi Simeon explain “your Elders and your judges”? Your Elders who are your judges. It was stated: Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob says “your Elders,” that is the High Court; “and your judges,” these are king and High Priest.

It was stated: One does not make public tender for slaves, securities, and movables. [What is public tender?] Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi said, announcement. Ulla bar Ismael said, slaves lest they flee, securities and movables lest they be stolen. Rebbi Abba bar Cohen asked before Rebbi Yose: Does this not imply that a slave be redeemed in front of three people? He answered him, yes. But did we not state: “Real estate nine and a Cohen. The same holds for humans”? He answered him, but the human here is a free person. Ḥanania bar Šelemiah in the name of Rav: A case came before Rebbi who wanted to act following the rabbis. Rebbi Eleazar ben Proteus, the grandson of Rebbi Eleazar ben Proteus, said to him: Rebbi, did you not teach us in your grandfather’s name, “except if he offered public tender”? He answered, yes, changed his mind, and acted following Rabban Gamliel.

“One may start a war of choice only by the court of 71 [judges]. Rebbi Jehudah says, as at the start: David ascended following Gad’s word, that is king and prophet. Solomon started to build the Temple of the Eternal, Israel’s God, on Mount Moriah where He had appeared to him, there are Urim and Tummim. To his father David, this is the Synhedrion, ask your father and he will tell you, your Elders and they will speak to you. Song, after them went Hoshaia and half the officers of Judea. Thanksgiving sacrifices, I put up two large thanksgiving sacrifices being in procession going to their right on the wall going to the dung gate. Rebbi Samuel bar Yudan said, what is written, walking? No, being in procession, only being taken by others.

How did the processions go? The elder Rebbi Ḥiyya and Rebbi Simeon ben Rebbi. One said, one opposite the other; the other said, one after the other; both are explaining the same verse: The second thanksgiving sacrifice went לְמוּל and I after it. He who said, one opposite the other, and he dwells opposite me. But he who said, one after the other, he should break off its head behind its neck. For him who said, one opposite the other, it turns out that every place was purified by one thanksgiving sacrifice; for him who said, one after the other, it turns out that every place was purified by two thanksgiving sacrifices. For him who said, one after the other, this is correct following what he had stated: “the inner one is being eaten, the outer one is being burned.” For him who said, one opposite the other, what is the inner one? The one closer to the Temple. Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: It was eaten on the instruction of a prophet. Rebbi Zeˋira said, they state there: Since a prophet is there, for what do I need Urim and Tummim? It was found stated: Rebbi Jehudah says, Urim and Tummim are needed.

MISHNAH: The High Synhedrion had 71 members and a lower one 23 members. From where that the High Court has 71 members? For it is said: Assemble for me 70 men of the Elders of Israel, and Moses was presiding, that makes 71. Rebbi Jehudah says, 70. From where that a lower court has 23 members? For it is said, the congregation shall judge, the congregation shall save. One congregation judges, one congregation saves, this makes twenty. And from where that a congregation consists of ten persons? As it is said, how long this evil congregation, without Joshua and Caleb. From where that one adds another three? From the interpretation of what is said, do not follow the majority to be unfavorable, I understand that He said, follow them to be favorable. Then why was it said, to bend after the majority? Your bending to be favorable is not equal to your bending to be unfavorable. Your bending to be favorable shall be by one [vote] (witness), your bending to be unfavorable shall be by two. Since no court may be even-numbered, one adds another one to obtain 23. How many people shall live in a town that it may have a criminal court? 120. Rebbi Nehemiah said 230, that they might be commanders over tens.

“And Moses was presiding.” Moses found a way to settle things. When the Holy One, praise to Him, told him, count all male firstborns among the Children of Israel, he said, who will consent voluntarily to give five sheqel per head? What did he do? He took 22’000 tickets and wrote on them “Levite” and 273 on which he wrote “five sheqel” and put all of them in an urn. He told them, come and take your ticket. To any one who drew a ticket saying “Levite” he said, a Levite already redeemed you. To anybody who drew a slip saying “five sheqel” he said, what can I do, it is from Heaven; Rebbi Jehudah. But Rebbi Nehemiah the Tanna objected to the colleagues: If you had given me the possibility of a Levite, it would have come up for me. But the following is what he did. He took 22’000 tickets and wrote on them “Levite” and two hundred seventy three on which he wrote “five sheqel” and put all of them in an urn. He told them, come and take your ticket. To any one who drew a slip saying “Levite” he said, a Levite already redeemed you. The anybody who drew a ticket saying “five sheqel” he said, what can I do, it is from Heaven. The Tanna objected to the colleagues: Think of it, if all came up as “Levite”? They told him, it was miraculous and they came up alternatingly. Rebbi Samuel said, in the opinion of the second Tanna, it was a miracle. In the opinion of the first Tanna, it was not a miracle. They told him, it was a miracle in any case since they came up alternatingly.

Similarly. the Eternal said to Moses, assemble for Me seventy men of the Elders of Israel. Moses said, if I am taking six per tribe, there will be 72, ten of six each and two of five, which tribe will agree to be discriminated against? What did he do? He took 70 tickets and wrote on them “Elder”, two he left blank, and put them in an urn. He told them, come and take your ticket. To any one who drew a slip saying “Elder” he said, from Heaven they appointed you. To anybody who drew a blank slip he said, what can I do, it is from Heaven; Rebbi Jehudah. But Rebbi Nehemiah the Tanna objected to the colleagues: If you had given me the possibility of an Elder, it would have come up for me. But the following is what he did. He took 72 tickets and wrote on them “Elder” and two blank ones and put all of them in an urn. He told them, come and take your ticket. To any one who drew a slip saying “Elder” he said, from Heaven they appointed you. The anybody who drew a blank slip he said, what can I do, it is from Heaven. The Tanna objected to the colleagues: Think of it, if all came up as “Elder”? They told him, it was miraculous and they came up alternatingly. Rebbi Samuel said, I objected before Rebbi Abbahu: in the opinion of the second Tanna, it was a miracle. In the opinion of the first Tanna, it was not a miracle. He told him, it was a miracle in any case since they came up alternatingly.

MISHNAH: The High Priest judges and one judges him; he testifies and one testifies against him. He gives ḥalîṣah and one gives ḥalîṣah to his wife, and one marries his wife in levirate marriage. But he may not marry in levirate marriage since a widow is forbidden to him. If a family member of his dies, he cannot follow the bier but if they are unseen he can be seen; if they are seen he must be unseen. He leaves with them up to the city gate, the words of Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Jehudah said, he does not leave the Temple since it is said: The Sanctuary he shall not leave.

Rebbi Eleazar said, if a High Priest sinned, one whips him but does not remove him from his elevated status. Rebbi Mana said, it is written: For the crown of his God’s ointment is on him, I am the Eternal; if one could compare it, just as I am in My Sanctity, so Aaron is in his sanctity. Rebbi Ḥanina the scribe, Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: if a High Priest sinned, one whips him. If you would say by 23, his elevation would be his degradation. And Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, if a patriarch sinned, one whips him by a court of three [judges]. Does one return him? Rebbi Haggai said, by Moses, if one would return him, he would kill them. Rebbi Jehudah the Prince heard this and became angry. He sent Goths to catch Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. They beat him. He fled to Magdala, some say to Kefar Ḥiṭṭim. The next day, Rebbi Joḥanan went to the assembly hall, when Rebbi Jehudah the Prince also went to the assembly hall. He said to him, why is the master not telling us words of instruction? He started clapping with one hand. He asked, does one clap with one? He answered him, no, but without ben Laqish there is nothing. He told him, I shall free him. He said to him, in Magdala. He told him, tomorrow I and you will go out to meet him. Rebbi Joḥanan sent to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, prepare for yourself some words of instruction since the Patriarch will go out to meet you. He went out to meet them and said, your example is similar to that of your Creator. For when the Merciful went to liberate Israel [from Egypt], He sent neither messenger nor angel but He went Himself, as is written: I shall pass through the Land of Egypt, He and all His Court. He asked him, why did you say these things? He told him, what are you thinking? That for fear of you I would refrain from the teachings of the Merciful? As Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac said, No my sons, because the reputation is not good.

Rebbi Eleazar said, if a High Priest sinned, one whips him but does not remove him from his elevated status. Rebbi Mana said, it is written: For the crown of his God’s ointment is on him, I am the Eternal; if one could compare it, just as I am in My Sanctity, so Aaron is in his sanctity. Rebbi Ḥanina the scribe, Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: if a High Priest sinned, one whips him. If you would say by 23, his elevation would be his degradation. And Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, if a patriarch sinned, one whips him by a court of three [judges]. Does one return him? Rebbi Haggai said, by Moses, if one would return him, he would kill them. Rebbi Jehudah the Prince heard this and became angry. He sent Goths to catch Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. They beat him. He fled to Magdala, some say to Kefar Ḥiṭṭim. The next day, Rebbi Joḥanan went to the assembly hall, when Rebbi Jehudah the Prince also went to the assembly hall. He said to him, why is the master not telling us words of instruction? He started clapping with one hand. He asked, does one clap with one? He answered him, no, but without ben Laqish there is nothing. He told him, I shall free him. He said to him, in Magdala. He told him, tomorrow I and you will go out to meet him. Rebbi Joḥanan sent to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, prepare for yourself some words of instruction since the Patriarch will go out to meet you. He went out to meet them and said, your example is similar to that of your Creator. For when the Merciful went to liberate Israel [from Egypt], He sent neither messenger nor angel but He went Himself, as is written: I shall pass through the Land of Egypt, He and all His Court. He asked him, why did you say these things? He told him, what are you thinking? That for fear of you I would refrain from the teachings of the Merciful? As Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac said, No my sons, because the reputation is not good.

Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Cahana: On top, high starting with the seam, below, low starting with the seam. Rebbi Joḥanan said, really low. Rebbi Joḥanan was going up the mountain to visit Rebbi Ḥanina; on the road he heard that he had died. He sent, brought his good Sabbath garment, and tore it. Rebbi Joḥanan disagrees with Rebbi Jehudah in two things, but Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Cahana follows Rebbi Jehudah. If following Rebbi Jehudah, he should not tear at all! This refers only to his father or mother, following Rebbi Meïr, as it was stated: One tears the seam for nobody who died except for father and mother, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Jehudah says, any tear which does not completely sever the seam is a frivolous tear. How is that? It is a stringency for the High Priest that he shall sever the seam completely.

Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Cahana: On top, high starting with the seam, below, low starting with the seam. Rebbi Joḥanan said, really low. Rebbi Joḥanan was going up the mountain to visit Rebbi Ḥanina; on the road he heard that he had died. He sent, brought his good Sabbath garment, and tore it. Rebbi Joḥanan disagrees with Rebbi Jehudah in two things, but Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Cahana follows Rebbi Jehudah. If following Rebbi Jehudah, he should not tear at all! This refers only to his father or mother, following Rebbi Meïr, as it was stated: One tears the seam for nobody who died except for father and mother, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Jehudah says, any tear which does not completely sever the seam is a frivolous tear. How is that? It is a stringency for the High Priest that he shall sever the seam completely.

Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Cahana: On top, high starting with the seam, below, low starting with the seam. Rebbi Joḥanan said, really low. Rebbi Joḥanan was going up the mountain to visit Rebbi Ḥanina; on the road he heard that he had died. He sent, brought his good Sabbath garment, and tore it. Rebbi Joḥanan disagrees with Rebbi Jehudah in two things, but Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Cahana follows Rebbi Jehudah. If following Rebbi Jehudah, he should not tear at all! This refers only to his father or mother, following Rebbi Meïr, as it was stated: One tears the seam for nobody who died except for father and mother, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Jehudah says, any tear which does not completely sever the seam is a frivolous tear. How is that? It is a stringency for the High Priest that he shall sever the seam completely.

Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Cahana: On top, high starting with the seam, below, low starting with the seam. Rebbi Joḥanan said, really low. Rebbi Joḥanan was going up the mountain to visit Rebbi Ḥanina; on the road he heard that he had died. He sent, brought his good Sabbath garment, and tore it. Rebbi Joḥanan disagrees with Rebbi Jehudah in two things, but Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Cahana follows Rebbi Jehudah. If following Rebbi Jehudah, he should not tear at all! This refers only to his father or mother, following Rebbi Meïr, as it was stated: One tears the seam for nobody who died except for father and mother, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Jehudah says, any tear which does not completely sever the seam is a frivolous tear. How is that? It is a stringency for the High Priest that he shall sever the seam completely.

“The High Priest sacrifices while in deep sorrow but does not eat, the words of Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Jehudah says, the entire day. Rebbi Simeon says, he completely finishes the service he is engaged in and then leaves.” Between Rebbi Meïr and Rebbi Simeon there is one [difference], between Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Simeon there is one [difference]. Between Rebbi Meïr and Rebbi Jehudah is entering. Rebbi Jacob ben Dositheos: interruption is between them. Rebbi Meïr says, if he was inside, he leaves; if he was outside, he did [not] enter. Rebbi Jehudah says, if he was inside, he enters; if he was outside, he did not enter. Rebbi Simeon says, he completely finishes the service he is engaged in and then leaves. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rav Huna: a baraita is from Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: The Sanctuary he shall not leave, he may not leave with them, but he may leave after them. If they are unseen he can be seen; he leaves with them up to the city gate, the words of Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Jehudah said, he does not leave the Temple since it is said: The Sanctuary he shall not leave. If he left, he may not return.”

“The High Priest sacrifices while in deep sorrow but does not eat, the words of Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Jehudah says, the entire day. Rebbi Simeon says, he completely finishes the service he is engaged in and then leaves.” Between Rebbi Meïr and Rebbi Simeon there is one [difference], between Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Simeon there is one [difference]. Between Rebbi Meïr and Rebbi Jehudah is entering. Rebbi Jacob ben Dositheos: interruption is between them. Rebbi Meïr says, if he was inside, he leaves; if he was outside, he did [not] enter. Rebbi Jehudah says, if he was inside, he enters; if he was outside, he did not enter. Rebbi Simeon says, he completely finishes the service he is engaged in and then leaves. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rav Huna: a baraita is from Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: The Sanctuary he shall not leave, he may not leave with them, but he may leave after them. If they are unseen he can be seen; he leaves with them up to the city gate, the words of Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Jehudah said, he does not leave the Temple since it is said: The Sanctuary he shall not leave. If he left, he may not return.”

“The High Priest sacrifices while in deep sorrow but does not eat, the words of Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Jehudah says, the entire day. Rebbi Simeon says, he completely finishes the service he is engaged in and then leaves.” Between Rebbi Meïr and Rebbi Simeon there is one [difference], between Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Simeon there is one [difference]. Between Rebbi Meïr and Rebbi Jehudah is entering. Rebbi Jacob ben Dositheos: interruption is between them. Rebbi Meïr says, if he was inside, he leaves; if he was outside, he did [not] enter. Rebbi Jehudah says, if he was inside, he enters; if he was outside, he did not enter. Rebbi Simeon says, he completely finishes the service he is engaged in and then leaves. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rav Huna: a baraita is from Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: The Sanctuary he shall not leave, he may not leave with them, but he may leave after them. If they are unseen he can be seen; he leaves with them up to the city gate, the words of Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Jehudah said, he does not leave the Temple since it is said: The Sanctuary he shall not leave. If he left, he may not return.”

“The High Priest sacrifices while in deep sorrow but does not eat, the words of Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Jehudah says, the entire day. Rebbi Simeon says, he completely finishes the service he is engaged in and then leaves.” Between Rebbi Meïr and Rebbi Simeon there is one [difference], between Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Simeon there is one [difference]. Between Rebbi Meïr and Rebbi Jehudah is entering. Rebbi Jacob ben Dositheos: interruption is between them. Rebbi Meïr says, if he was inside, he leaves; if he was outside, he did [not] enter. Rebbi Jehudah says, if he was inside, he enters; if he was outside, he did not enter. Rebbi Simeon says, he completely finishes the service he is engaged in and then leaves. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rav Huna: a baraita is from Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: The Sanctuary he shall not leave, he may not leave with them, but he may leave after them. If they are unseen he can be seen; he leaves with them up to the city gate, the words of Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Jehudah said, he does not leave the Temple since it is said: The Sanctuary he shall not leave. If he left, he may not return.”

“The High Priest sacrifices while in deep sorrow but does not eat, the words of Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Jehudah says, the entire day. Rebbi Simeon says, he completely finishes the service he is engaged in and then leaves.” Between Rebbi Meïr and Rebbi Simeon there is one [difference], between Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Simeon there is one [difference]. Between Rebbi Meïr and Rebbi Jehudah is entering. Rebbi Jacob ben Dositheos: interruption is between them. Rebbi Meïr says, if he was inside, he leaves; if he was outside, he did [not] enter. Rebbi Jehudah says, if he was inside, he enters; if he was outside, he did not enter. Rebbi Simeon says, he completely finishes the service he is engaged in and then leaves. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun in the name of Rav Huna: a baraita is from Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: The Sanctuary he shall not leave, he may not leave with them, but he may leave after them. If they are unseen he can be seen; he leaves with them up to the city gate, the words of Rebbi Meïr; Rebbi Jehudah said, he does not leave the Temple since it is said: The Sanctuary he shall not leave. If he left, he may not return.”

It is stated: Rebbi Jehudah says, if they are all standing in one row, those who are standing because of honor are obligated, those because of mourning are exempt. When they descend for a eulogy, those who see inside are exempt, those who do not see inside are obligated. It would be what we stated: “If he consoles others, the people come in single file and the executive officer becomes a partition between himself and the people,” the first teaching. And what we stated: “the innermost are exempt and the outer ones obligated,” is the first teaching. Rebbi Ḥanina said: Originally, all families were standing still and the mourners passed between them. When competition increased in Sepphoris, Rebbi Yose ben Ḥalaphta instituted that the families should pass by and the mourners stand still. Rebbi Samuel Sofefta said: Matters returned to their original state.

MISHNAH: The king does not judge, nor may one judge him; he does not testify, nor may one testify against him; he does not give ḥalîṣah, nor does one give ḥalîṣah to his wife. He does not marry in levirate, nor may one marry his wife in levirate. Rebbi Jehudah says, if he wants to give ḥalîṣah or marry in levirate, let his good deeds be remembered. They told him, even if he wants to, one does not listen to him. One may not marry his widow; Rebbi Jehudah says, a king may marry a king’s widow, since we find that David married Saul’s widow, as it is said: I gave your master’s house to you and your master’s wives on your breast.

MISHNAH: The king does not judge, nor may one judge him; he does not testify, nor may one testify against him; he does not give ḥalîṣah, nor does one give ḥalîṣah to his wife. He does not marry in levirate, nor may one marry his wife in levirate. Rebbi Jehudah says, if he wants to give ḥalîṣah or marry in levirate, let his good deeds be remembered. They told him, even if he wants to, one does not listen to him. One may not marry his widow; Rebbi Jehudah says, a king may marry a king’s widow, since we find that David married Saul’s widow, as it is said: I gave your master’s house to you and your master’s wives on your breast.

“Rebbi Jehudah says, if he wants to give ḥalîṣah or marry in levirate, let his good deeds be remembered.” They told him, if you say so, you injure the king’s prestige.

One marries neither the king’s widow nor his divorcee, because they were secluded to the day of their death, living in widowhood. Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: This teaches that David had them braided and adorned, and brought them before himself every day and told his evil inclination, you desire something which is forbidden to you; by your life, I shall make you desire what is permitted to you. The rabbis of Caesarea said, they actually were forbidden to him. If a private person’s vessel used by a private person is forbidden for the king’s use, a fortiori the king is forbidden to use the king’s vessels which were used by a private person.

“Rebbi Jehudah says, a king may marry a king’s widow, since we find that David married Saul’s widow, as it is said: I gave your master’s house to youand your master’s wives on your breast.” This refers to Riṣpah, Abigail and Batseba.

MISHNAH: If a relative of his died, he does not leave his palace. Rebbi Jehudah says, if he wants to follow the bier, he may follow it, as we find that David followed Abner’s bier, as it is said: King David followedthe bier. They told him, this was only to quiet. When one brings him the first meal, the people sit in a circle on the floor and he sits in their circle on a couch.

MISHNAH: He shall not add wives, only eighteen. Rebbi Jehudah says, he may have many on condition that they not deflect his mind. Rebbi Simeon says, he should not marry even one if she deflects his mind. Then why was it said, he shall not add wives? Even one like Abigail. He shall not add horses, over and above what he needs for his chariots. And silver and gold he shall not add excessively, over and above what he needs for his payroll. And he shall write a Torah scroll for himself. If he goes to war, it is with him; if he returns, it is with him; if he sits in court, it is with him; if he sits down for dinner, it is with him, as it is said: It shall be with him, and he shall read in it all the days of his life. One does not ride on his horse, nor does one sit on his throne, nor does one use his scepter. One may not see him when he is barbered, nor when he is naked, nor when he is in the bath, as it is said: You certainly shall put a king over you, that his fear be upon you.

One may not see him when naked, nor when he is being barbered, nor when he is in his bath, because your eyes shall see the king in his beauty. Rebbi Ḥanina went to visit Rebbi Jehudah the Prince. He came to meet him dressed in sail-cloth. He told him, go and wear your lagin, because of your eyes shall see the king in his beauty. Rebbi Joḥanan went to visit Rebbi Jehudah the Prince. He came to meet him dressed in a linen gown. He told him, go and wear your woolen gown, because of the king in his beauty. When he left, he told him, bring עטעמה. He answered, send and get Menaḥem Ptolemy, for it is written: Graceful teaching is on her tongue. Leaving, he saw Rebbi Ḥanina bar Sisi splitting wood. He told him, Rebbi, that is not fitting for you. He answered, what can I do? I have nobody to serve me. He retorted, if you have nobody to serve you, you should not have accepted ordination.

One may not see him when naked, nor when he is being barbered, nor when he is in his bath, because your eyes shall see the king in his beauty. Rebbi Ḥanina went to visit Rebbi Jehudah the Prince. He came to meet him dressed in sail-cloth. He told him, go and wear your lagin, because of your eyes shall see the king in his beauty. Rebbi Joḥanan went to visit Rebbi Jehudah the Prince. He came to meet him dressed in a linen gown. He told him, go and wear your woolen gown, because of the king in his beauty. When he left, he told him, bring עטעמה. He answered, send and get Menaḥem Ptolemy, for it is written: Graceful teaching is on her tongue. Leaving, he saw Rebbi Ḥanina bar Sisi splitting wood. He told him, Rebbi, that is not fitting for you. He answered, what can I do? I have nobody to serve me. He retorted, if you have nobody to serve you, you should not have accepted ordination.

Yose from Maon interpreted in the synagogue of Tiberias: Listen to this, you priests, why do you not study Torah? Did I not give you 24 gifts? They told him, they do not give us anything. And hearken, House of Israel, why do you not give the 24 gifts which I commanded you at Sinai? They told him, the king takes everything. Listen, king’s court, for yours are legal proceedings, for you I did say, these are the priests’ legal rights; in the future I shall sit in judgment over you, to stop them and to eliminate them from the world. Rebbi Jehudah the Prince heard this and became angry. He was afraid and fled. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish went to appease him. They told him, Rabbi, he is a great man. He asked them, would it be possible that he could answer any question which I would ask him? They told him, yes. He asked him: What is that which is written: For their mother whored? Was our mother Sarah a whore? He answered, like daughter like mother, like mother like daughter, like generation like the prince, like the prince like the generation, like the altar like its priests. Cahana used to say, like the garden like its gardener. He told them, not only did he curse me once in my absence, but he cursed me three times in my presence! He asked him, what is that which is written: Anybody wanting to formulate a simile about you will state as follows: like mother like daughter; was our mother Leah a prostitute since it is written, Dinah went out? He told him, for it is written, Leah went out towards him. One identifies going out with going out.

MISHNAH: The following are disqualified: The dice-player, the lender on interest, participants in pigeon contests, dealers in sabbatical produce, and slaves. Rebbi Simeon said, earlier they were listing harvesters of sabbatical produce; but since the increase of oppressors they returned to list only dealers in sabbatical produce. Rebbi Jehudah said, when? If he has no profession but this; but if he has another profession, he is qualified.

“Rebbi Simeon says, earlier they were listing harvesters of sabbatical produce; but since the increase of oppressors they returned to list only dealers in sabbatical produce. Rebbi Jehudah said, when? If he has no profession but this; but if he has another profession, he is qualified.” How is this implemented? If he was sitting idle all the years of the sabbatical cycle but when the Sabbatical began he became active and traded in sabbatical produce. If at the same time he is engaged in another occupation, he is qualified; otherwise he is disqualified. But if he was working in his profession all the years of the sabbatical cycle and when the Sabbatical began he became active and traded in sabbatical produce, even if he has no other profession on the side he is qualified. Rebbi Abba bar Zavda, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Practice follows Rebbi Jehudah of our Mishnah. Rebbi Abba bar Zavda was praised for formulating the tradition in the name of a person younger than himself.

“Rebbi Simeon says, earlier they were listing harvesters of sabbatical produce; but since the increase of oppressors they returned to list only dealers in sabbatical produce. Rebbi Jehudah said, when? If he has no profession but this; but if he has another profession, he is qualified.” How is this implemented? If he was sitting idle all the years of the sabbatical cycle but when the Sabbatical began he became active and traded in sabbatical produce. If at the same time he is engaged in another occupation, he is qualified; otherwise he is disqualified. But if he was working in his profession all the years of the sabbatical cycle and when the Sabbatical began he became active and traded in sabbatical produce, even if he has no other profession on the side he is qualified. Rebbi Abba bar Zavda, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Practice follows Rebbi Jehudah of our Mishnah. Rebbi Abba bar Zavda was praised for formulating the tradition in the name of a person younger than himself.

Rebbi Ḥiyya stated restrictively. How is this implemented? If he was working in his profession all the years of the sabbatical cycle but when the Sabbatical began he became active and traded in sabbatical produce. Even if he has another profession on the side he is disqualified. This is not what Rebbi Abba bar Zavda, Rebbi Abbahu said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Practice follows Rebbi Jehudah of our Mishnah. Rebbi Abba bar Zavda was praised for formulating the tradition in the name of a person younger than himself. Here also should it be so? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, there the government is not oppressive, here the government is oppressive.

Rav Jehudah in the name of Rav: Practice follows Rebbi Jehudah.

Rav Jehudah in the name of Rav: Practice follows Rebbi Jehudah.

MISHNAH: The following are the relatives: His brother, his father’s brother and his mother’s brother, his sister’s husband, his father’s sister’s husband and his mother’s sister’s husband, his father-in-law, and his brother-in-law; these, their sons and sons-in-law, but his steps alone. Rebbi Yose said, this is Rebbi Aqiba’s teaching; but the original Mishnah was: His uncle and his uncle’s son, and anybody in line to inherit from him, and any related to him at that moment. If he had been related but became unrelated, he is qualified. Rebbi Jehudah says, even if his daughter had died but he had children from him, he remains a relative.

As the following: A brother-in-law of Rav Huna’s had a case with some person. He said, I am accepting anything which Rav Huna will decide. Rav Huna heard it and said, this is it. I know that just as they said for the preceding generations, so it is for the following. Rav Jehudah in the name of Rav: Practice follows Rebbi Jehudah.

As the following: A brother-in-law of Rav Huna’s had a case with some person. He said, I am accepting anything which Rav Huna will decide. Rav Huna heard it and said, this is it. I know that just as they said for the preceding generations, so it is for the following. Rav Jehudah in the name of Rav: Practice follows Rebbi Jehudah.

Rebbi Jehudah said, I heard that if the judge wants to let both of them sit, he may tell them to sit down. Rebbi Ismael says, one says to him, either you dress as he is dressed or pay him to be dressed as you are.

HALAKHAH: “Both civil suits,” etc. Rebbi Joḥanan said, to protect Israel’s money they said, “tell why you know that this person owes the other.” Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba asked before Rebbi Yasa: What does one do in practice? He answered, following Rebbi Joḥanan, as Rebbi Joḥanan said, to protect Israel’s money they said, “tell why you know that this person owes the other.” Ze‘ir bar Ḥinena in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina and Rav Jehudah, one said: You shall cross-examine, investigate, and inquire well. The other said, equity, equity you shall pursue. How is that? If you see that the verdict will be the truth, investigate it; otherwise, act in equity.

Rebbi Ḥilqiah in the name of Rebbi Simon: Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagreed. One said, our procedures are like their procedures, and one said, our procedures are not like their procedures. He who said, our procedures are like their procedures, is understandable. He wo said, our procedures are not like their procedures, how does he understand Jehudah said, Memukhan said? They agreed with what Jehudah said, they agreed with what Memukhan said.

Rebbi Ḥilqiah in the name of Rebbi Simon: Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagreed. One said, our procedures are like their procedures, and one said, our procedures are not like their procedures. He who said, our procedures are like their procedures, is understandable. He wo said, our procedures are not like their procedures, how does he understand Jehudah said, Memukhan said? They agreed with what Jehudah said, they agreed with what Memukhan said.

“Anybody is qualified to judge money matters.” Rebbi Jehudah says, even bastards. Rebbi Jehudah says, one does not investigate about libation wine.

“Anybody is qualified to judge money matters.” Rebbi Jehudah says, even bastards. Rebbi Jehudah says, one does not investigate about libation wine.

MISHNAH: The Synhedrion was like a semicircular threshing floor, so that they could see one another. Two court reporters were standing before them, one to the right and one to the left, and they wrote down the arguments of those who argued for acquittal and those who argued for conviction. Rebbi Jehudah says, there were three. One wrote the arguments for conviction, one wrote the arguments for acquittal, and one wrote the arguments for acquittal and for conviction. Three rows of students of the Sages were sitting before them; each one of them knew his place. If they needed to ordain, they ordained one from the first row. One of the second row came to sit in the first, and one of the third came to sit in the second. They chose a person from the general public and placed him in the third row; he did not sit in the place of the one promoted but in the place befitting him.

It was stated: Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai said, by the mouth of two witnesses shall the dead die. Does he die when dead? But to tell him by which kind of death he will be executed. It was stated: Rebbi Jehudah ben Rebbi Illai said, and if a man intentionally kill his neighbor knowingly; they shall inform him by which kind of death he will be executed.

If his death should have been a severe one but they warned him about an easy one. He could say that had he known that his death was to be severe, he would not have committed that crime. If his death should have been an easy one but they warned him about a severe one; in the opinion of Rebbi Jehudah ben Rebbi Illai they have to inform him by which kind of death he will be executed.

Rav said, if testimony was contradictory in its essence, the testimony is not void. Rebbi Joḥanan said, if testimony is contradictory in itself, the testimony is void. In the opinion of everybody, if testimony was contradictory in aspects that belong after the fact, the testimony is not void. The strength of Rebbi Joḥanan is consistent with what Rebbi Abba bar Ḥiyya said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, if it was agreed that he counted but one [witness] said, he counted from a wallet, and the other said, he counted from a bundle, that contradicts the essence of the testimony, and Rav will agree that the testimony be void. Where do they disagree? If there were two groups of witnesses, one says he counted from a wallet and the other says he counted from a bundle. That contradicts the essence of the testimony: the testimony is void, but according to Rav, the testimony is not void. One said, he counted into his bosom, but the other said, he counted into his money-belt: everybody agrees that this contradicts the essence of the testimony but the testimony is not void. If one [witness] said, he killed him with a sword, the other [witness] said, he killed him with a mace, that contradicts the essence of the testimony; Rav will agree that the testimony be void. Where do they disagree? If there were two groups of witnesses, one says he killed him with a sword and the other says, he killed him with a mace. That contradicts the essence of the testimony, the testimony is void, but according to Rav, the testimony is not void. One says, he turned to the North and one says, he ran away to the South, everybody agrees that the testimony was contradictory in aspects that belong after the fact, and the testimony is not void. The strength of Rav comes from what we have stated there: “Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Simeon say, since both agree that he is not alive they can be remarried.” He did not hear that Rebbi Eleazar said, Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Simeon concede in the case of witnesses. What is the difference between witnesses and the co-wife? They do not consider the co-wife’s words compared to those of her companion. Rebbi Joḥanan said, if Rebbi Eleazar said this, he said it because he had heard it from me. The Mishnah disagrees with Rav: “Both in investigations and cross-examinations, if they contradict one another their testimony is worthless.” What does Rav do with this? Rebbi Mana said, Rav will explain it as referring to single witness against single witness. Rebbi Abun said, even if you say groups and groups. There is a difference in criminal cases, as it is written: Justice, justice you shall pursue.

Rav said, if testimony was contradictory in its essence, the testimony is not void. Rebbi Joḥanan said, if testimony is contradictory in itself, the testimony is void. In the opinion of everybody, if testimony was contradictory in aspects that belong after the fact, the testimony is not void. The strength of Rebbi Joḥanan is consistent with what Rebbi Abba bar Ḥiyya said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, if it was agreed that he counted but one [witness] said, he counted from a wallet, and the other said, he counted from a bundle, that contradicts the essence of the testimony, and Rav will agree that the testimony be void. Where do they disagree? If there were two groups of witnesses, one says he counted from a wallet and the other says he counted from a bundle. That contradicts the essence of the testimony: the testimony is void, but according to Rav, the testimony is not void. One said, he counted into his bosom, but the other said, he counted into his money-belt: everybody agrees that this contradicts the essence of the testimony but the testimony is not void. If one [witness] said, he killed him with a sword, the other [witness] said, he killed him with a mace, that contradicts the essence of the testimony; Rav will agree that the testimony be void. Where do they disagree? If there were two groups of witnesses, one says he killed him with a sword and the other says, he killed him with a mace. That contradicts the essence of the testimony, the testimony is void, but according to Rav, the testimony is not void. One says, he turned to the North and one says, he ran away to the South, everybody agrees that the testimony was contradictory in aspects that belong after the fact, and the testimony is not void. The strength of Rav comes from what we have stated there: “Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Simeon say, since both agree that he is not alive they can be remarried.” He did not hear that Rebbi Eleazar said, Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Simeon concede in the case of witnesses. What is the difference between witnesses and the co-wife? They do not consider the co-wife’s words compared to those of her companion. Rebbi Joḥanan said, if Rebbi Eleazar said this, he said it because he had heard it from me. The Mishnah disagrees with Rav: “Both in investigations and cross-examinations, if they contradict one another their testimony is worthless.” What does Rav do with this? Rebbi Mana said, Rav will explain it as referring to single witness against single witness. Rebbi Abun said, even if you say groups and groups. There is a difference in criminal cases, as it is written: Justice, justice you shall pursue.

MISHNAH: One says, on the second of the month, but the other says, on the third of the month, their testimony may be valid, since one knew about the addition to the month but the other did not know. One says on the third, the other says on the fifth, their testimony is invalid. One says, at two hours but the other said at three hours, their testimony is valid. One says at three but the other says at five, their testimony is invalid; Rebbi Jehudah says it is valid. One says at five but the other says at seven, their testimony is invalid since at five hours the sun is in the East but at seven in the West.

Rebbi Meïr says, from noontime on it is from their words; Rebbi Jehudah says, from noontime on it is biblical. What is Rebbi Meïr’s reason? Only on the first day, that is the fifteenth. I could think at nightfall; the verse says only, to separate. How is this? Give it one hour before sundown. What is Rebbi Jehudah’s reason? Only on the first day, that is the fourteenth. I could think the entire day; the verse says only, to separate. Half for leavened matter, half for mazzah. Rebbi Meïr’s argument seems inverted. There, he said only to add; here he said only to diminish. Rebbi Samuel bar Eudaimon said, he diminished, lest it be for leavened matter. Rebbi Meïr said, do not eat leavened matter with it, while it is eaten. Rebbi Jehudah said, do not eat leavened matter with it, while it is prepared.

Rebbi Meïr says, from noontime on it is from their words; Rebbi Jehudah says, from noontime on it is biblical. What is Rebbi Meïr’s reason? Only on the first day, that is the fifteenth. I could think at nightfall; the verse says only, to separate. How is this? Give it one hour before sundown. What is Rebbi Jehudah’s reason? Only on the first day, that is the fourteenth. I could think the entire day; the verse says only, to separate. Half for leavened matter, half for mazzah. Rebbi Meïr’s argument seems inverted. There, he said only to add; here he said only to diminish. Rebbi Samuel bar Eudaimon said, he diminished, lest it be for leavened matter. Rebbi Meïr said, do not eat leavened matter with it, while it is eaten. Rebbi Jehudah said, do not eat leavened matter with it, while it is prepared.

Rebbi Meïr says, from noontime on it is from their words; Rebbi Jehudah says, from noontime on it is biblical. What is Rebbi Meïr’s reason? Only on the first day, that is the fifteenth. I could think at nightfall; the verse says only, to separate. How is this? Give it one hour before sundown. What is Rebbi Jehudah’s reason? Only on the first day, that is the fourteenth. I could think the entire day; the verse says only, to separate. Half for leavened matter, half for mazzah. Rebbi Meïr’s argument seems inverted. There, he said only to add; here he said only to diminish. Rebbi Samuel bar Eudaimon said, he diminished, lest it be for leavened matter. Rebbi Meïr said, do not eat leavened matter with it, while it is eaten. Rebbi Jehudah said, do not eat leavened matter with it, while it is prepared.

Rebbi Jehudah has both a positive and a negative commandment concerning its eating, a positive and a negative commandment concerning its removal. A positive commandment concerning its eating, seven days you shall eat unleavened bread for it, not leavened. Any prohibition which is implied by a positive commandment has the status of positive commandment. A negative commandment concerning its eating, do not eat leavened. A positive commandment concerning its removal, seven days … you shall remove sour dough from your houses. A negative commandment concerning its removal, for seven days sour dough shall not be found in your houses.

Now Rebbi Meïr says, after noontime it is forbidden because of their words. The (sixth) [seventh] hour it is forbidden because of a fence. Why the (fifth) [sixth]? Because of a fence. Is there a fence around a fence? But the (fifth) [sixth] may be confounded with the seventh. Rebbi Jehudah’s argument seems inverted. There, he says that the fifth cannot be confounded with the seventh. But here, he says that the fifth can be confounded with the seventh. Rebbi Yose said, there the matter is given over to women who are lazy, here the matter is given over to the court who is careful. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, there it is a matter between the beginning of the fifth and the end of the seventh hour. Here it is between the end of the fifth and the start of the seventh. It also was stated thus: At the start of the fifth hour, the sun is in the East, and the end of the seventh the sun is in the West. The sun never starts setting before the end of the seventh hour.

MISHNAH: Ten cubits’ distance from the place of stoning one tells him: confess! So is the way of any dying person to confess, since anyone who confesses has part in the World to Come. For so we find about Achan towhom Joshua said, my son, honor the Eternal, the God of Israel, confess to Him, and tell me what you did, do not hide it from me. Achan answered Joshua and said, in fact I sinned against the Eternal, the God of Israel, and such and such I did. From where that his confession atoned for him? For it is said, Joshua said to him, how did you devastate us; may the Eternal devastate you on this day. This day you are devastated; you are not devastated in the Future World. If he does not know how to confess, one tells him, say: “My death shall be atonement for all my sins.” Rebbi Jehudah said, if he knows that he was the victim of perjurers, he says: “My death shall be atonement for all my sins except this one.” They told him, if so, everybody would say so to declare themselves innocent.

HALAKHAH: “Ten cubits’ distance from the place of stoning,” etc. You find that when Achan stole from the ban, Joshua started supplicating before the Holy One, praise to Him, and said: Master of the Universe, inform me who is the man. The Holy One, praise to Him, answered: I never publicize any creature. In addition, would I not be guilty of slander? But go and let Israel stand up by its tribes and throw lots, then immediately I shall draw him out. That is what is written: Joshua got up early in the morning and summoned Israel by its tribes. Achan ben Karmi ben Zeraḥ from the tribe of Jehudah was caught. Achan told him, how? Do you catch me by lots? There is nobody more pious in the present generation than you or Phineas. Let lots be thrown between you, certainly one of you will be caught. Not only this, but your teacher Moses died only 30 or 40 days ago. Did not our teacher Moses instruct us: By the testimony of two witnesses? You started erring. At that moment did Joshua have a vision by the holy spirit how he distributes the Land to Israel by lots. That is what is written: Joshua threw lots for them. This means, we are giving lots a bad name. Not only this, but if lots are confirmed now, all of Israel will say, since the lots were true in criminal matters, so much more in money matters. But if they are repudiated now, all of Israel will say, since the lots were repudiated in criminal matters, so much more in money matters. At that moment, Joshua started supplicating Achan, entreated him in the name of Israel’s God, and said to him: my son, honor the Eternal,the God of Israel, … Achan answered Joshua and said, in fact. What means אָמְנָה? Truth. I sinned against the Eternal, God of Israel. He told him, I asked you for one and you are answering me two? he answered, I stole from the ban of Midian and the ban of Jericho. Rebbi Tanḥuma said, he stole from four bans: The ban of the Phoenician, king of Arad, the ban of Siḥon and Og, the ban of Midian, the ban of Jericho. From where that his confession atoned for him? It is said, the sons of Zeraḥ: Zimri and Ethan, etc. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, Zimri is Achan who behaved like Zimri. Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman said, Heman that is Achan, omna I sinned. Altogether five. Did I not know that they were five? But it teaches that Achan also has part in the World to Come.

“At a distance of four cubits from the place of stoning,” etc. “Rebbi Jehudah ben Ṭabbai said, may I never see consolation if I did not execute a perjured witness, for they were saying, until he was executed, as it is said, a life for a life. Simeon ben Shetaḥ told him, may I never see consolation if it is not held against you that you spilled innocent blood. At that time, he took it upon himself not to teach except what he heard from Simeon ben Sheṭaḥ.”

Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi went to the upper floor of the House of Study and saw two men in homosexual activity. They said to him, Rebbi! Realize that you are one and we are two!

MISHNAH: At a distance of four cubits from the place of stoning one removes his clothes. One covers a man in front, a woman one covers front and back, the words of Rebbi Jehudah; but the Sages say, a man is stoned naked, but no woman is stoned naked.

HALAKHAH: “Rebbi Eliezer said,” etc. The argument of Rebbi Jehudah seems inverted. There, he says: “If her hair was beautiful, he did not uncover it.” And here, he says so? Here, anyhow she goes to her death, but there, maybe she will be found to be pure and the young priests would attack her. The argument of the rabbis seems inverted. There, they say: “A man is stoned naked, but no woman is stoned naked.” And here, they say so? Here, you shall love your neighbor as yourself, choose for him a decorous death. But here, all women should be taught.

Some Tannaïm state: Jehudah ben Ṭabbai was president; some Tannaïm state, Simeon ben Sheṭaḥ was president.

What happened in Alexandria supports him who said, Jehudah ben Ṭabbai was president, since the people from Jerusalem did write: From the great Jerusalem to the small Alexandria: How long still will my husband live in your midst and I am sitting sorrowful in my house?

MISHNAH: The order of burning: One makes him sink into manure up to his knees, puts a stiff cloth into soft ones and winds them around his throat. One person draws in his direction, the other draws in his direction until he opens his mouth. Then one lights a wick and throws it into his mouth that it enters his innards and chars his intestines. Rebbi Jehudah says, in that case, if he would die in their hands they would not have fulfilled the duty of burning; one opens his mouth forcefully with tongs, lights a wire and throws it into his mouth that it enters his innards and chars his intestines. Rebbi Eleazar ben Ṣadoq said, it happened that a Cohen’s daughter whored; they surrounded her with firewood and burned her. They told him, because the court at that time was incompetent.

MISHNAH: The order of beheading. They were chopping off his head with a sword just as the [Roman] government does. Rebbi Jehudah says, this is ugliness but one puts his head on the block and cuts it with a butcher knife. They told him, there is no death uglier than this.

HALAKHAH: “The order of beheading,” etc. “Rebbi Jehudah agrees that there is no death uglier than this but the Torah said, in their statutes you shall not walk.” Rebbi Joḥanan said, also it was stated thus: One shall murder the murderer, the way he murdered. I could think that if he killed with a sword, one should kill him with a sword, with a rod one should kill him with a rod? Avenging is written here, and there it is written: I shall bring over you a sword which avenges the vengeance of the Covenant. Since avenging mentioned there is by the sword, also avenging mentioned here is by the sword. I could think that he should kill him between the arms? It is said here, you shall eliminate the evil from your midst, and it is said there, you shall eliminate the innocent blood from your midst. Elimination, elimination; breaking the neck, breaking the neck. Since elimination here is at the neck, also there it is at the neck. Since breaking the neck there implies chopping off the head, also here chopping off the head.

MISHNAH: A person having sexual relations with the mother is guilty because of mother and because of father’s wife. Rebbi Jehudah say, he is guilty only because of mother. A person having sexual relations with the father’s wife is guilty because of father’s wife and because of married woman, whether during his father’s lifetime or after his father’s death, whether preliminarily married or definitively married. A person having sexual relations with his daughter-in-law is guilty because of his daughter-in-law and because of a married woman, whether during his son’s lifetime or after his son’s death, whether preliminarily married or definitively married.

There, we have stated: Rebbi Jehudah says, if his mother was not fit for his father, he is liable only for one [sacrifice]. Therefore, if his mother was fit for his father, he is liable for two. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: There is no difference. Whether his mother was fit for his father or unfit for his father, he is liable only once. The reason of Rebbi Joḥanan: Your mother is she, you find him guilty because of his mother; this directs the entire chapter towards his mother. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked before Rebbi Zeˋira: What caused Rebbi Joḥanan to concentrate on the mother and to leave the father’s wife aside? He told him, for he argues with Rebbi Ismael, as Rebbi Ismael explained: Your father’s wife’s nakedness; the verse refers to the male. Is not his father included in the category of the male? Only to make him liable twice, as we have stated: A person having sexual relations with his father is doubly liable about him. Then should we not state “thirty-seven extirpations in the Torah”? Rebbi Mana said, all denotations of males are one. Your father’s wife’s nakedness; the verse refers to the father’s wife. Your mother’s nakedness, that is his mother who is his father’s wife. From where his mother who is not his father’s wife? Your mother is she; do not uncover her nakedness. How does Rebbi Ismael treat this? He explains it to apply after [the father’s] death. Does Rebbi Aqiba not explain she is your father’s nakedness? There is no difference whether during lifetime or after death. Rebbi Aqiba explains: Your father’s wife’s nakedness, the verse refers to the father’s wife. Your mother’s nakedness, that is his mother who is his father’s wife. From where his mother who is not his father’s wife? Your mother is she; do not uncover her nakedness. How does Rebbi Ismael treat this? He explains it to apply after [the father’s] death. Does not Rebbi Aqiba treat your father’s nakedness, your mother’s nakedness? Since your father refers to your father in any capacity both for punishment and warning, so also your mother refers to one’s mother in any capacity both for punishment and warning. Is it not reasonable to explain that verse except following Rebbi Jehudah who because he does not accept “his mother who is his father’s wife” must explain that your father’s nakedness, your mother’s nakedness refers to your father in any capacity both for punishment and warning, so also your mother refers to your mother in any capacity both for punishment and warning. Rebbi Zeˋira said, this implies that one infers from parallel language even if it is free only from one side. Rebbi Yudan said to him, this is obvious for Rebbi Aqiba since Rebbi Aqiba infers from parallel language even if it is not free.

There, we have stated: Rebbi Jehudah says, if his mother was not fit for his father, he is liable only for one [sacrifice]. Therefore, if his mother was fit for his father, he is liable for two. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: There is no difference. Whether his mother was fit for his father or unfit for his father, he is liable only once. The reason of Rebbi Joḥanan: Your mother is she, you find him guilty because of his mother; this directs the entire chapter towards his mother. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked before Rebbi Zeˋira: What caused Rebbi Joḥanan to concentrate on the mother and to leave the father’s wife aside? He told him, for he argues with Rebbi Ismael, as Rebbi Ismael explained: Your father’s wife’s nakedness; the verse refers to the male. Is not his father included in the category of the male? Only to make him liable twice, as we have stated: A person having sexual relations with his father is doubly liable about him. Then should we not state “thirty-seven extirpations in the Torah”? Rebbi Mana said, all denotations of males are one. Your father’s wife’s nakedness; the verse refers to the father’s wife. Your mother’s nakedness, that is his mother who is his father’s wife. From where his mother who is not his father’s wife? Your mother is she; do not uncover her nakedness. How does Rebbi Ismael treat this? He explains it to apply after [the father’s] death. Does Rebbi Aqiba not explain she is your father’s nakedness? There is no difference whether during lifetime or after death. Rebbi Aqiba explains: Your father’s wife’s nakedness, the verse refers to the father’s wife. Your mother’s nakedness, that is his mother who is his father’s wife. From where his mother who is not his father’s wife? Your mother is she; do not uncover her nakedness. How does Rebbi Ismael treat this? He explains it to apply after [the father’s] death. Does not Rebbi Aqiba treat your father’s nakedness, your mother’s nakedness? Since your father refers to your father in any capacity both for punishment and warning, so also your mother refers to one’s mother in any capacity both for punishment and warning. Is it not reasonable to explain that verse except following Rebbi Jehudah who because he does not accept “his mother who is his father’s wife” must explain that your father’s nakedness, your mother’s nakedness refers to your father in any capacity both for punishment and warning, so also your mother refers to your mother in any capacity both for punishment and warning. Rebbi Zeˋira said, this implies that one infers from parallel language even if it is free only from one side. Rebbi Yudan said to him, this is obvious for Rebbi Aqiba since Rebbi Aqiba infers from parallel language even if it is not free.

Rebbi Jeremiah asked: Is a person having sexual relations with his mother guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? Come and see: if a third person had sexual relations with her, would he not be guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? Her son not so much more? Rebbi Yose objected: is not her stepson guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman, but her son is not guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? As we have stated: Also with all other cases of incest and adultery the situation is the same. His mother-in-law as a married woman, you catch him because of his mother-in-law. His daughter-in-law as a married woman, you catch him because of his daughter-in-law. His sister as a married woman, do you catch him because of his sister? You smuggle him away from the serious crime and strike him for the easier one; this you cannot do as we have stated: A person having sexual relations with his sister is liable because of her as his sister and as a daughter of his father’s wife. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah says, a person having sexual relations with his sister is only liable because of her as his sister; the same is true for his daughter-in-law. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah follows the argument of his father Rebbi Jehudah. Just as Rebbi Jehudah accepts the description mentioned first, so Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah accepts the description mentioned first. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan turned around: Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah does not follow the argument of his father Rebbi Jehudah. There he is liable because of his mother, who is not his father’s wife; he is liable because of his father’s wife who is not his mother. But here we find that he is permitted his father’s wife’s daughter, who is not his sister.

Rebbi Jeremiah asked: Is a person having sexual relations with his mother guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? Come and see: if a third person had sexual relations with her, would he not be guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? Her son not so much more? Rebbi Yose objected: is not her stepson guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman, but her son is not guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? As we have stated: Also with all other cases of incest and adultery the situation is the same. His mother-in-law as a married woman, you catch him because of his mother-in-law. His daughter-in-law as a married woman, you catch him because of his daughter-in-law. His sister as a married woman, do you catch him because of his sister? You smuggle him away from the serious crime and strike him for the easier one; this you cannot do as we have stated: A person having sexual relations with his sister is liable because of her as his sister and as a daughter of his father’s wife. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah says, a person having sexual relations with his sister is only liable because of her as his sister; the same is true for his daughter-in-law. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah follows the argument of his father Rebbi Jehudah. Just as Rebbi Jehudah accepts the description mentioned first, so Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah accepts the description mentioned first. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan turned around: Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah does not follow the argument of his father Rebbi Jehudah. There he is liable because of his mother, who is not his father’s wife; he is liable because of his father’s wife who is not his mother. But here we find that he is permitted his father’s wife’s daughter, who is not his sister.

Rebbi Jeremiah asked: Is a person having sexual relations with his mother guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? Come and see: if a third person had sexual relations with her, would he not be guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? Her son not so much more? Rebbi Yose objected: is not her stepson guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman, but her son is not guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? As we have stated: Also with all other cases of incest and adultery the situation is the same. His mother-in-law as a married woman, you catch him because of his mother-in-law. His daughter-in-law as a married woman, you catch him because of his daughter-in-law. His sister as a married woman, do you catch him because of his sister? You smuggle him away from the serious crime and strike him for the easier one; this you cannot do as we have stated: A person having sexual relations with his sister is liable because of her as his sister and as a daughter of his father’s wife. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah says, a person having sexual relations with his sister is only liable because of her as his sister; the same is true for his daughter-in-law. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah follows the argument of his father Rebbi Jehudah. Just as Rebbi Jehudah accepts the description mentioned first, so Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah accepts the description mentioned first. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan turned around: Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah does not follow the argument of his father Rebbi Jehudah. There he is liable because of his mother, who is not his father’s wife; he is liable because of his father’s wife who is not his mother. But here we find that he is permitted his father’s wife’s daughter, who is not his sister.

Rebbi Jeremiah asked: Is a person having sexual relations with his mother guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? Come and see: if a third person had sexual relations with her, would he not be guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? Her son not so much more? Rebbi Yose objected: is not her stepson guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman, but her son is not guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? As we have stated: Also with all other cases of incest and adultery the situation is the same. His mother-in-law as a married woman, you catch him because of his mother-in-law. His daughter-in-law as a married woman, you catch him because of his daughter-in-law. His sister as a married woman, do you catch him because of his sister? You smuggle him away from the serious crime and strike him for the easier one; this you cannot do as we have stated: A person having sexual relations with his sister is liable because of her as his sister and as a daughter of his father’s wife. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah says, a person having sexual relations with his sister is only liable because of her as his sister; the same is true for his daughter-in-law. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah follows the argument of his father Rebbi Jehudah. Just as Rebbi Jehudah accepts the description mentioned first, so Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah accepts the description mentioned first. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan turned around: Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah does not follow the argument of his father Rebbi Jehudah. There he is liable because of his mother, who is not his father’s wife; he is liable because of his father’s wife who is not his mother. But here we find that he is permitted his father’s wife’s daughter, who is not his sister.

Rebbi Jeremiah asked: Is a person having sexual relations with his mother guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? Come and see: if a third person had sexual relations with her, would he not be guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? Her son not so much more? Rebbi Yose objected: is not her stepson guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman, but her son is not guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? As we have stated: Also with all other cases of incest and adultery the situation is the same. His mother-in-law as a married woman, you catch him because of his mother-in-law. His daughter-in-law as a married woman, you catch him because of his daughter-in-law. His sister as a married woman, do you catch him because of his sister? You smuggle him away from the serious crime and strike him for the easier one; this you cannot do as we have stated: A person having sexual relations with his sister is liable because of her as his sister and as a daughter of his father’s wife. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah says, a person having sexual relations with his sister is only liable because of her as his sister; the same is true for his daughter-in-law. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah follows the argument of his father Rebbi Jehudah. Just as Rebbi Jehudah accepts the description mentioned first, so Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah accepts the description mentioned first. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan turned around: Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah does not follow the argument of his father Rebbi Jehudah. There he is liable because of his mother, who is not his father’s wife; he is liable because of his father’s wife who is not his mother. But here we find that he is permitted his father’s wife’s daughter, who is not his sister.

Rebbi Jeremiah asked: Is a person having sexual relations with his mother guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? Come and see: if a third person had sexual relations with her, would he not be guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? Her son not so much more? Rebbi Yose objected: is not her stepson guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman, but her son is not guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? As we have stated: Also with all other cases of incest and adultery the situation is the same. His mother-in-law as a married woman, you catch him because of his mother-in-law. His daughter-in-law as a married woman, you catch him because of his daughter-in-law. His sister as a married woman, do you catch him because of his sister? You smuggle him away from the serious crime and strike him for the easier one; this you cannot do as we have stated: A person having sexual relations with his sister is liable because of her as his sister and as a daughter of his father’s wife. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah says, a person having sexual relations with his sister is only liable because of her as his sister; the same is true for his daughter-in-law. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah follows the argument of his father Rebbi Jehudah. Just as Rebbi Jehudah accepts the description mentioned first, so Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah accepts the description mentioned first. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan turned around: Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah does not follow the argument of his father Rebbi Jehudah. There he is liable because of his mother, who is not his father’s wife; he is liable because of his father’s wife who is not his mother. But here we find that he is permitted his father’s wife’s daughter, who is not his sister.

Rebbi Jeremiah asked: Is a person having sexual relations with his mother guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? Come and see: if a third person had sexual relations with her, would he not be guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? Her son not so much more? Rebbi Yose objected: is not her stepson guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman, but her son is not guilty [of adultery] with her as a married woman? As we have stated: Also with all other cases of incest and adultery the situation is the same. His mother-in-law as a married woman, you catch him because of his mother-in-law. His daughter-in-law as a married woman, you catch him because of his daughter-in-law. His sister as a married woman, do you catch him because of his sister? You smuggle him away from the serious crime and strike him for the easier one; this you cannot do as we have stated: A person having sexual relations with his sister is liable because of her as his sister and as a daughter of his father’s wife. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah says, a person having sexual relations with his sister is only liable because of her as his sister; the same is true for his daughter-in-law. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah follows the argument of his father Rebbi Jehudah. Just as Rebbi Jehudah accepts the description mentioned first, so Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah accepts the description mentioned first. Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan turned around: Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah does not follow the argument of his father Rebbi Jehudah. There he is liable because of his mother, who is not his father’s wife; he is liable because of his father’s wife who is not his mother. But here we find that he is permitted his father’s wife’s daughter, who is not his sister.

HALAKHAH: “The sorcerer is one who does a deed,” etc. A sorceress you shall not let live, whether man or woman, but the Torah taught you the way of the world that most women have a tendency to sorcery. Rebbi Eliezer said, a sorcerer is [executed] by stoning. What is Rebbi Eliezer’s reason? It says here, a sorceress you shall not let live, and it says there, whether human or animal they shall not live. Since shall not live there means by stoning, also here by stoning. What is the rabbis’ reason? It says here, a sorceress you shall not let live, and it says there, you shall not let live anybody. Since you shall not let live there means death by the sword, also you shall not let live here means death by the sword. Rebbi Aqiba said, from this argument I am deciding. It is preferable to learn you shall not let live from you shall not let live rather than from shall not live. What is Rebbi Jehudah’s reason? It says here, a sorceress you shall not let live, and it says there, anybody lying with an animal shall die the death. Since the execution of the animal is by stoning, so here also by stoning.

Example. Rebbi Eliezer, and Rebbi Joshua, and Rabban Gamliel travelled to Rome. They came to a place where they found children making stone heaps and saying as follows: What they do in the Land of Israel is to say, this is heave, this is tithe. They said, it is clear that Jews live here. They entered a place and were received at a house. They sat down to eat. It happened that no dish was brought to them unless it was brought [first] to a certain bedroom. They became afraid that perhaps they were eating offerings to the dead. They asked him, why is it that you bring no dish before us unless you brought it first to that bedroom? He told them, I have an old father who vowed not to leave that bedroom until he might see the Sages of Israel. They told him, go and tell him to come out because they are here. He came out; they asked him, what is your problem? He told them, pray for my son because he is sterile. Rebbi Eliezer said to Rebbi Joshua: Joshua ben Ḥanania, look what you can do. He told them, bring me linseed; they brought him linseed. It appeared to them as if he was sowing it on a table. It appeared as if he was watering it; it appeared to grow; it appeared that he was plucking out of it, until there appeared a woman with braided hair. He told her, undo what you did. She answered, I shall not undo. He told her, then I shall make you known. She said, I cannot, because they were thrown into the sea. Rebbi Joshua commanded the prince of the sea who disgorged them. Then they prayed for him and he had the merit of raising Rebbi Jehudah ben Bathyra. They said, if we came here only to bring the just person to the world, it would have been enough.

MISHNAH: If he stole from his father and ate at his father’s property, or from others and ate at others’ property, or from others and ate at his father’s property, he is not treated as deviant and rebellious son unless he stole from his father and ate at others’ property. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Jehudah says, unless he stole both from his father and his mother.

MISHNAH: If his father was willing but not his mother, or his father unwilling but his mother willing, he cannot be treated as deviant and rebellious son unless both be willing. Rebbi Jehudah says if his mother was inappropriate for his father, he cannot be treated as deviant and rebellious son.

But when I came to Rebbi Jehudah ben Bathyra at Nisibis, he agreed with me in two cases and disagreed in one. He disagreed about the rebellious Elder, lest quarrels increase in Israel.

HALAKHAH: “The following ones one saves at the cost of their own persons” etc. “He who pursues another to kill him, whether in a house or on the field one saves at the cost of his own person, both him who pursues another to kill him or him who pursues any of the transgressions in the Torah one saves at the cost of his own person. But if it was a widow for a High Priest, a divorcee or one who had received ḥalîṣah for a common priest, a bastard or a Gibeonite for an Israel, an Israel woman for a bastard or a Gibeonite, one does not save him at the cost of his own person. If the deed had been done, one does not save him at the cost of his own person. If there are people to save her, one does not save him at the cost of his own person. Rebbi Jehudah says, if she said, let him do it, one does not save at the cost of his own person. For if they would injure him, they through him would come to spill blood.”

Rebbi Eleazar said, Symmachos and Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri said the same thing, since we stated there: “If he slaughtered her, her daughter’s daughter, and afterwards her daughter, he absorbs forty [lashes]. Symmachos said in Rebbi Meïr’s name, he absorbs eighty.” There, we have stated: “Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri said, he who copulates with his mother-in-law may be liable because of his mother-in-law, his mother-in-law’s mother, and his father-in-law’s mother. They said to him, all three fall under the same law.” Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Symmachos agrees with Rebbi Joḥanan. It was found stated: it still is in dispute. What is Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri’s reason? Since a woman and her daughter and a woman and her daughter’s daughter fall under two separate prohibitions, also a woman and (her daughter) [her son’s daughter] and her daughter’s daughter fall under two separate prohibitions. What is the reason of the rabbis? Since a woman and her daughter and a woman and her daughter’s daughter fall under one and the same prohibition, also a woman and her son’s daughter and her daughter’s daughter fall the under same prohibition.