laqish

Rebbi Tanḥuma said, I asked before Rebbi Phineas: It is acceptable following Rebbi Jehudah, it is not acceptable following Rebbi Meןr. What is the reason of Rebbi Jehudah? To take this Torah scroll and put it next to the side of the Ark of the Eternal’s covenant, etc In the opinion of Rebbi Jehudah, who said, where the Torah scroll was put? They made for it a kind of case outside and the Torah scroll was put into it. What is the reason of Rebbi Meןr? You should put the cover on top of the Ark. In the opinion of Rebbi Meןr who says that there is no earlier and later in the Torah, in the Ark you shall put the testimony that I shall give to you, and after that, you should put the cover on top of the Ark. Rebbi Phineas in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: The Torah which the Holy One, Praise to Him, gave to Moses, was white fire engraved in black fire. It was fire mixed with fire; hewn from fire, given from fire: That is what is written: From His right hand, the fiery law to them.

And it is difficult. May purification offering be brought as elevation offering? Rebbi Ḥizqiah (brother) in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: It is a stipulation of the Court that the excesses be brought as elevation sacrifices. By what is that woman atoned for? Rebbi Isaac said, it is a stipulation of the Court that the providers of nests also provide the disqualified ones. Would it not also be necessary between incense and wood, and frankincense, and gold for the cover? As it is stated at the end, “one follows nearness; in the middle one is stringent.”

The tenth of an ephah from the High Priest. [Rebbi Joḥanan said,] he splits it and then dedicates. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, he dedicates and afterwards splits it. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan: “He brings half of it; the other half is lost.” He explains it, because even the money has to be brought to the Dead Sea. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “It turns out that two halves are brought and two halves are lost.” And it was stated on this: “If the first one’s, the second half should lose its shape and be brought to the place of burning.” He explains it following Rebbi Ismael, for Rebbi Ismael said, the issaron dedicates. “If a Cohen comes first to serve, he brings his Tenth and officiates himself.” The officiating of both a High Priest and a common priest who officiated before they brought their tenth of an ephah is valid. Rebbi Mana wanted to say, if on that very day he was appointed High Priest he brings two, one for his initiation and one as daily obligation.

The tenth of an ephah from the High Priest. [Rebbi Joḥanan said,] he splits it and then dedicates. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, he dedicates and afterwards splits it. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Joḥanan: “He brings half of it; the other half is lost.” He explains it, because even the money has to be brought to the Dead Sea. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “It turns out that two halves are brought and two halves are lost.” And it was stated on this: “If the first one’s, the second half should lose its shape and be brought to the place of burning.” He explains it following Rebbi Ismael, for Rebbi Ismael said, the issaron dedicates. “If a Cohen comes first to serve, he brings his Tenth and officiates himself.” The officiating of both a High Priest and a common priest who officiated before they brought their tenth of an ephah is valid. Rebbi Mana wanted to say, if on that very day he was appointed High Priest he brings two, one for his initiation and one as daily obligation.

From where that higher than ten [hand-breadths] is a different domain? Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: There I shall make My Appearance to you, and I shall speak to you from above the cover. And it is written, you have seen that from Heaven I spoke to you. Since speech mentioned there is from another domain, also speech mentioned here is from another domain. But is the Ark not nine hand-breadths? In the House of Rebbi Yannai they said, the cover was one hand-breadth. Rebbi Ze`ira asked, from where that the cover was one hand-breadth? Rebbi Ḥananiah bar Samuel stated, for all the vessels in the Sanctuary the Torah gave the measure of length and width, and gave the measure of its height. Except for the cover where the Torah gave the measure of length and width, but did not give the measure of its height. Therefore we shall learn it from the smallest vessel in the Sanctuary, you shall make for it a frame of one hand-breadth all around. Since there it was one hand-breadth, so also here one hand-breadth. But maybe it refers only to: make a golden wreath as its frame all around? Since there it is a minimal size, so here also a minimal size. What about it? Rav Aḥa bar Jacob said, face. There is no face less than a hand-breadth.

And it was stated thus: “Two regular and the third even one hand-breadth is qualified.” Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Two of four hand-breadths each and the third even one hand-breadth is qualified. Rav Hoshaia asked, what if the one hand-breadth one is put in the middle? He came back and asked, if one of the four hand-breadths ones was put in the middle, how is it? Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa: Such a case came before Rebbi Yasa and he qualified it. And it was stated thus: “If a courtyard is enclosed by pillars, the pillars are like walls.” Does not a baraita disagree? If they are made according to the rules they are qualified, not according to the rules disqualified. They wanted to say, in the middle. Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac said, if these are not opposite those. Rav said, that one of one hand-breadth must be removed from the wall by one hand-breadth. Samuel said, even if it is arbitrarily close, one considers it as if distant. Rebbi Abba, Ḥinena bar Shelemiah, Rav Jeremiah in the name of Rav: even if it is arbitrarily close, one considers it as if distant. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, one follows this one, the other one the other. Cahana and Assi came and asked before Rav following that of Samuel. Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Only if it is within three hand-breadths like a lathe.

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥaninah: If one put in four poles at the four corners of a vineyard and connected them with a bast string on top, this saves as a symbolic fence. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the rules of separation walls for the Sabbath are the rules for kilaim. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it happened that Rebbi Joshua ben Qorḥah went to Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri at Nagnigar; he showed him a field called Bet Rata whose wall had parts torn down more than ten [cubits] wide. He took wood to insert, forked poles to insert, until he reduced to less than ten. He said, just like that is a dividing wall for the Sabbath. Rebbi Ze`ira said, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish agrees that on the Sabbath, a symbolic fence does not save more than ten. Rebbi Ḥaggai said, the Mishnah says so: “One may surround by three ropes one higher than the other.” If you say that the string saves, one rope would be sufficient.

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥaninah: If one put in four poles at the four corners of a vineyard and connected them with a bast string on top, this saves as a symbolic fence. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the rules of separation walls for the Sabbath are the rules for kilaim. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it happened that Rebbi Joshua ben Qorḥah went to Rebbi Joḥanan ben Nuri at Nagnigar; he showed him a field called Bet Rata whose wall had parts torn down more than ten [cubits] wide. He took wood to insert, forked poles to insert, until he reduced to less than ten. He said, just like that is a dividing wall for the Sabbath. Rebbi Ze`ira said, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish agrees that on the Sabbath, a symbolic fence does not save more than ten. Rebbi Ḥaggai said, the Mishnah says so: “One may surround by three ropes one higher than the other.” If you say that the string saves, one rope would be sufficient.

Rebbi Ze`ira, Rebbi Eudaimon of Haifa in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: In height even one hundred cubits. Rebbi Judan said, that is, for kilaim, but as regards (Peah), a symbolic fence should not be better than a beam. Rebbi Yose said, it is the same for kilaim and Sabbath. According to Rebbi Yose, what is the difference between a beam and a symbolic fence? A beam saves in one direction; a symbolic fence does not save from one side unless it is used to close all four sides;. This follows what Rebbi Ze`ira said in the name of Rav Hamnuna: A symbolic fence does not save unless it seals all four sides.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, when you collect from your threshing floor and your wine press. From the waste of the threshing floor and the wine press you make your thatching. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, and mist rose from the earth. Rebbi Tanḥuma said, each of them follows his own opinion. Rebbi Joḥanan who said that the clouds were above infers it from when you collect. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish who said that the clouds were below infers it from the clouds. Rebbi Abbin said, each of them follows his own opinion. Rebbi Joḥanan compares it to one who sends to another an amphora and its pitcher. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish compares it to one who says to another, bring your box and take wheat for yourself.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, when you collect from your threshing floor and your wine press. From the waste of the threshing floor and the wine press you make your thatching. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, and mist rose from the earth. Rebbi Tanḥuma said, each of them follows his own opinion. Rebbi Joḥanan who said that the clouds were above infers it from when you collect. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish who said that the clouds were below infers it from the clouds. Rebbi Abbin said, each of them follows his own opinion. Rebbi Joḥanan compares it to one who sends to another an amphora and its pitcher. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish compares it to one who says to another, bring your box and take wheat for yourself.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, when you collect from your threshing floor and your wine press. From the waste of the threshing floor and the wine press you make your thatching. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, and mist rose from the earth. Rebbi Tanḥuma said, each of them follows his own opinion. Rebbi Joḥanan who said that the clouds were above infers it from when you collect. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish who said that the clouds were below infers it from the clouds. Rebbi Abbin said, each of them follows his own opinion. Rebbi Joḥanan compares it to one who sends to another an amphora and its pitcher. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish compares it to one who says to another, bring your box and take wheat for yourself.

Samuel said, this you only are saying lengthwise; but crosswise it is qualified. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish both are saying, both lengthwise and crosswise are qualified. Rebbi Zeriqan in the name of Rav Hamnuna: Following the words of him who disqualifies here it disqualifies there. Rebbi Abbin and Rebbi Abun asked before Rebbi Ze`ira: Why are Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish both saying? He told them, because disqualified roofing disqualifies only in four cubits. A baraita disagrees with Rav Hamnuna: A sukkah which only contains his head, most of his body, and his table. If he brought a plank and added from it three hand-breadths. If you would say crosswise, this is impossible since Rebbi Zeriqan said in the name of Rav Hamnuna: Following the words of him who disqualifies here it disqualifies there. So we have to hold lengthwise, but it is impossible not to sleep under it.

Samuel said, this you only are saying lengthwise; but crosswise it is qualified. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish both are saying, both lengthwise and crosswise are qualified. Rebbi Zeriqan in the name of Rav Hamnuna: Following the words of him who disqualifies here it disqualifies there. Rebbi Abbin and Rebbi Abun asked before Rebbi Ze`ira: Why are Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish both saying? He told them, because disqualified roofing disqualifies only in four cubits. A baraita disagrees with Rav Hamnuna: A sukkah which only contains his head, most of his body, and his table. If he brought a plank and added from it three hand-breadths. If you would say crosswise, this is impossible since Rebbi Zeriqan said in the name of Rav Hamnuna: Following the words of him who disqualifies here it disqualifies there. So we have to hold lengthwise, but it is impossible not to sleep under it.

Where do they disagree? If he robbed it smoothed. But if he robbed it and smoothed it, he owes him money. If he robbed a lulav from one, a myrtle branch from another, and a willow branch from a third and tied them together? Let us hear from the following: A robbed sukkah, there are Tannaim who stated, it is qualified; there are Tannaim who stated, it is disqualified. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: He who said, it is qualified, if he robbed the real estate. He who said, it is disqualified, if he robbed the agricultural waste. It is impossible that he not tie them together. If he places it from the top. The rabbis of Caesarea in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: In every case it is disqualified. What is the robbed one which is disqualified? Any time a person enters another’s sukkah without his knowledge. As the following. Gamliel the twin made himself a sukkah on the market. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish passed by and told him, who gave you permission?

Rebbi Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan. So is the Mishnah: If one can shake it, it is qualified. It was stated: Myrtle and willow twig three, and lulav four. It was stated, by the cubit of five {hand-breadths}, the words of Rebbi Tarphon, but the Sages are saying, by the cubit of six. For Rebbi Tarphon, large hand-breadths; in the opinion of the Sages, thin hand-breadths. Rebbi Jonah and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Rebbi Jehudah the Patriarch: The lulav a hand-breadth. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: the hyssop a hand-breadth. Rebbi Ze`ira asked, the lulav a hand-breadth, the hyssop a hand-breadth? Rebbi Yose said, Rebbi Simon confirmed it. Rebbi Ḥinena, Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: the lulav a hand-breadth, the hyssop a hand-breadth, the ram’s horn a hand-breadth, the placenta a hand-breadth, and some are saying, also the third wall a hand-breadth. Rebbi Ze`ira asked, the lulav a hand-breadth except the spine? The hyssop a hand-breadth except for the stalk? Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Tabi in the name of Rav; Rebbi Ḥinena, Rebbi Parnakh, Rav Mattanah, Yose bar Manisha in the name of Rav: The lulav a hand-breadth except for the spine; the hyssop a hand-breadth except for its stalks.

Ḥiyya bar Ada in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. They taught about the blackish ones. Why? Because they do not resemble its wood or because its fruit is ripened? What is the difference between these? If it is used to grow green ones. If you are saying, because they do not resemble its wood, they do not resemble its wood. Therefore the reason must be because its fruit is ripened.

It was stated: Bodily defective ones. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked before Rebbi Joḥanan, may bodily defective ones enter between the altar and the Temple entrance? He told him, they were qualified.

Yose Bar Ashian in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: The bowls have to be plugged at the moment of pouring. What is the reason? In the sanctuary pouring a libation of shekhar to the Eternal.

They wanted to say that the large {hole} was for water, the small one for wine, for Rebbi Jonah said in the name of Rebbi Immi: A hole which does not let pass water passes wine, what does not let pass wine passes oil, does not let pass oil passes honey. And even if you say it is the other way around, is that not Rebbi Jehudah’s? And Rebbi Jehudah said, a log he was pouring all eight days. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked before Rebbi Joḥanan: If he preceded them before the sacrifice, what? If he poured in the night, what? If he did not pour today may he pour the next day? He said to him, let us hear from the following which Rebbi Ila said in the name of Rebbi Yasa: And its libations, the same for libations of water as for libations of wine. This implies that if he preceded them before the sacrifice, it is qualified. If he poured in the night, it is qualified. If he did not pour today he may not pour the next day, because if the day passed, its sacrifice passed.

Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, harp and lute are the same, extra strings make the difference between one and the other. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, why is it called נֶבֶל? Because it whitens many kinds of musical instruments. Rebbi Ḥuna in the name of Rav Joseph: By untanned leather and an abundance of strings it whitens many kinds of musical instruments. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish says, עוּגָב is a water organ. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel stated, there was no water organ in Jerusalem because its sound overhangs the melody.

HALAKHAH: From where years? One verse says, the festival of gathering at the end of the year, and another verse says, the festival of gathering at the turn of the year. Which month contains a festival, and a turning point, and the year starts from it? Which one is this? It is Tishre. If you would say Ṭevet, there is a turning point but neither festival nor gathering. If you would say Nisan, there is a turning point and a festival, but no gathering. If you would say Tamuz, there is a turning point and gathering but no festival. So which one is this? It is Tishre. The colleagues said before Rebbi Jonah: should it not be Tamuz? He told them, it is written, in the seventh month, and your are saying so? They said to him, should it not be Tamuz? He said to them, from here on you are quarrelling with me about names of months? As Rebbi Ḥanina said, the names of the months ascended with them from Babylonia. Originally, in the month of Ethanim, in which the Patriarchs were born, and the Patriarchs died, and the Mothers were remembered. Originally, in the month of Bul, where the leaves are falling, and the earth is made into lumps; where one mixes for domestic animals in the house. Originally, in the month of Ziw, which is the splendor of the world, when plants are recognized and trees recognized. From then onwards, it was in the month of Nisan of year twenty; it was in the month of Kislew of year twenty; in the tenth month, this is the month of Ṭevet. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, also the names of angels were in their hands from Babylonia. Originally, there flew to me one of the Seraphim; Seraphim standing over Him. From then on, but the man Gabriel; but your lord Michael.

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked, does cutting the `omer during daytime push aside the Sabbath? Rebbi Abbai objected, did we not state, “its obligation is to harvest during nighttime. If it was cut during daytime it is qualified and pushes the Sabbath aside.” But he did not accept it. Rebbi Aḥa said, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish changed his opinion about this. “After nightfall he says to them, did the sun set? They say, yes. Did the sun set? They say, yes.” Where do we hold? If about nighttime, that already was said. But if it does not refer to nighttime, let it refer to daytime; it is a matter that pushes aside the Sabbath during daytime. Do the preparations push aside the Sabbath during nighttime? Did we not state, “they made the maker of pan-baked breads make pan-baked breads.” Explain it, on a weekday. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada stated, “this is the daily order of service of our God’s Temple,” whether on a weekday or a Sabbath. But did we not state, “they harvested it and put it in boxes, brought it to the Temple courtyard, and were parching it in fire to fulfill the commandment of roasting, [the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Yose says], since he started the meritorious work, one tells him to complete it.” Rebbi Judah from Kappadokia objected before Rebbi Yose: Think of it, if it came from storage. Since he started the meritorious work, there is no reason to tell him to complete it. Rebbi Jacob bar Sosai objected, did we not state, “for on a distance of walking a night and a day one desecrates the Sabbath and goes for testimony of the new moon”? He said to them, since the daytime needs the nighttime and the nighttime needs the daytime, it is as if it were all daytime. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, is it not sanctified retroactively? Since it is sanctified retroactively there is no difference between day and night.

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked, does cutting the `omer during daytime push aside the Sabbath? Rebbi Abbai objected, did we not state, “its obligation is to harvest during nighttime. If it was cut during daytime it is qualified and pushes the Sabbath aside.” But he did not accept it. Rebbi Aḥa said, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish changed his opinion about this. “After nightfall he says to them, did the sun set? They say, yes. Did the sun set? They say, yes.” Where do we hold? If about nighttime, that already was said. But if it does not refer to nighttime, let it refer to daytime; it is a matter that pushes aside the Sabbath during daytime. Do the preparations push aside the Sabbath during nighttime? Did we not state, “they made the maker of pan-baked breads make pan-baked breads.” Explain it, on a weekday. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada stated, “this is the daily order of service of our God’s Temple,” whether on a weekday or a Sabbath. But did we not state, “they harvested it and put it in boxes, brought it to the Temple courtyard, and were parching it in fire to fulfill the commandment of roasting, [the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Yose says], since he started the meritorious work, one tells him to complete it.” Rebbi Judah from Kappadokia objected before Rebbi Yose: Think of it, if it came from storage. Since he started the meritorious work, there is no reason to tell him to complete it. Rebbi Jacob bar Sosai objected, did we not state, “for on a distance of walking a night and a day one desecrates the Sabbath and goes for testimony of the new moon”? He said to them, since the daytime needs the nighttime and the nighttime needs the daytime, it is as if it were all daytime. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, is it not sanctified retroactively? Since it is sanctified retroactively there is no difference between day and night.

They preferred an old man to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish for intercalation but had to remove him by the other door. He said, this be their reward. He did not hear what Rebbi Crispus said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: It happened that the year was intercalated by three cow hands. One said, in Adar, early and late grain sprout together. Another one said, if in Adar the East wind blows, open your jaws and go towards it. Another one said, in Adar the ox will die naked and try to strip off his hide under the fig tree. And we see that this year nothing of these applies. They intercalated the year on their word. Rebbi Ḥelbo said, because the Court agreed with them. Did not Rebbi Ze`ira say, but they all have to agree to the same reason? But since they all agree with one another it was that they all agreed as to the reason.

Why was Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish offended by this? He was worried about what Rebbi Eleazar said, since Rebbi Eleazar said: My hand will be against the prophets who see vain things and who conjure lies, in my people’s council they shall not be; that is the secret of intercalation; in the documents of the House of Israel they will not be inscribed; that is ordination; and to the earth of Israel they shall not come; that is the Land of Israel. Rebbi Eleazar said, when I came here, I said, I have one. When they ordained me, I said, I have two. When I was asked to participate in the intercalation, I said, I have all three with me.

“Rabban Gamliel rose, kissed him on his head, and said to him, come in peace, my teacher and my student.” My teacher in wisdom and my student in the fear of sin. My teacher in wisdom and my student since all that I am deciding about him he fulfills. It is written, our chiefs are patient. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan said, [it is not written our bulls are carrying but] our chiefs are patient. When the great ones suffer the smaller ones then there is neither breach, nor tumult, nor crying in our streets. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish inverts this verse. It is not written (our bulls) [the bulls] are carrying but our chiefs are tolerated. When the smaller ones tolerate the greater ones then there is neither breach, nor tumult, nor crying in our streets.

“Rabban Gamliel rose, kissed him on his head, and said to him, come in peace, my teacher and my student.” My teacher in wisdom and my student in the fear of sin. My teacher in wisdom and my student since all that I am deciding about him he fulfills. It is written, our chiefs are patient. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan said, [it is not written our bulls are carrying but] our chiefs are patient. When the great ones suffer the smaller ones then there is neither breach, nor tumult, nor crying in our streets. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish inverts this verse. It is not written (our bulls) [the bulls] are carrying but our chiefs are tolerated. When the smaller ones tolerate the greater ones then there is neither breach, nor tumult, nor crying in our streets.

Rebbi Shila from Kefar Tamarta in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He made the moon for festive times, the sun knows its destination. Because the sun knows its destination, He made the moon for festive times. Rebbi Berekhiah said, it is written: They travelled from Rameses in the first month,etc. When {the sun} sets on the nights of the holiday there were fourteen settings preceding it. This means that one counts for the moon from the setting of the sun. Rebbi Simon said, they shall be, by both of them. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it was evening, it was morning, one day. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, the month, until it be totally from the new one. You are finding to say, what Rebbi Joḥanan said requires the statement of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, and what Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said requires the statement of Rebbi Joḥanan. If Rebbi Joḥanan had stated his but Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish had not made his statement, we would have said that he only said that all might be from the new one. Therefore it is necessary that Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish made his statement. Or if Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish had stated his but Rebbi Joḥanan had not made his statement, we would have said that he stated day, therefore not night. Therefore what Rebbi Joḥanan said is necessary and what Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said is necessary.

Rebbi Shila from Kefar Tamarta in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He made the moon for festive times, the sun knows its destination. Because the sun knows its destination, He made the moon for festive times. Rebbi Berekhiah said, it is written: They travelled from Rameses in the first month,etc. When {the sun} sets on the nights of the holiday there were fourteen settings preceding it. This means that one counts for the moon from the setting of the sun. Rebbi Simon said, they shall be, by both of them. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it was evening, it was morning, one day. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, the month, until it be totally from the new one. You are finding to say, what Rebbi Joḥanan said requires the statement of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, and what Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said requires the statement of Rebbi Joḥanan. If Rebbi Joḥanan had stated his but Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish had not made his statement, we would have said that he only said that all might be from the new one. Therefore it is necessary that Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish made his statement. Or if Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish had stated his but Rebbi Joḥanan had not made his statement, we would have said that he stated day, therefore not night. Therefore what Rebbi Joḥanan said is necessary and what Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said is necessary.

Rebbi Shila from Kefar Tamarta in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He made the moon for festive times, the sun knows its destination. Because the sun knows its destination, He made the moon for festive times. Rebbi Berekhiah said, it is written: They travelled from Rameses in the first month,etc. When {the sun} sets on the nights of the holiday there were fourteen settings preceding it. This means that one counts for the moon from the setting of the sun. Rebbi Simon said, they shall be, by both of them. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it was evening, it was morning, one day. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, the month, until it be totally from the new one. You are finding to say, what Rebbi Joḥanan said requires the statement of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, and what Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said requires the statement of Rebbi Joḥanan. If Rebbi Joḥanan had stated his but Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish had not made his statement, we would have said that he only said that all might be from the new one. Therefore it is necessary that Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish made his statement. Or if Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish had stated his but Rebbi Joḥanan had not made his statement, we would have said that he stated day, therefore not night. Therefore what Rebbi Joḥanan said is necessary and what Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said is necessary.

Rebbi Shila from Kefar Tamarta in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He made the moon for festive times, the sun knows its destination. Because the sun knows its destination, He made the moon for festive times. Rebbi Berekhiah said, it is written: They travelled from Rameses in the first month,etc. When {the sun} sets on the nights of the holiday there were fourteen settings preceding it. This means that one counts for the moon from the setting of the sun. Rebbi Simon said, they shall be, by both of them. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it was evening, it was morning, one day. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, the month, until it be totally from the new one. You are finding to say, what Rebbi Joḥanan said requires the statement of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, and what Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said requires the statement of Rebbi Joḥanan. If Rebbi Joḥanan had stated his but Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish had not made his statement, we would have said that he only said that all might be from the new one. Therefore it is necessary that Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish made his statement. Or if Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish had stated his but Rebbi Joḥanan had not made his statement, we would have said that he stated day, therefore not night. Therefore what Rebbi Joḥanan said is necessary and what Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said is necessary.

Rebbi Shila from Kefar Tamarta in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He made the moon for festive times, the sun knows its destination. Because the sun knows its destination, He made the moon for festive times. Rebbi Berekhiah said, it is written: They travelled from Rameses in the first month,etc. When {the sun} sets on the nights of the holiday there were fourteen settings preceding it. This means that one counts for the moon from the setting of the sun. Rebbi Simon said, they shall be, by both of them. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it was evening, it was morning, one day. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, the month, until it be totally from the new one. You are finding to say, what Rebbi Joḥanan said requires the statement of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, and what Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said requires the statement of Rebbi Joḥanan. If Rebbi Joḥanan had stated his but Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish had not made his statement, we would have said that he only said that all might be from the new one. Therefore it is necessary that Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish made his statement. Or if Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish had stated his but Rebbi Joḥanan had not made his statement, we would have said that he stated day, therefore not night. Therefore what Rebbi Joḥanan said is necessary and what Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said is necessary.

Rebbi Shila from Kefar Tamarta in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He made the moon for festive times, the sun knows its destination. Because the sun knows its destination, He made the moon for festive times. Rebbi Berekhiah said, it is written: They travelled from Rameses in the first month,etc. When {the sun} sets on the nights of the holiday there were fourteen settings preceding it. This means that one counts for the moon from the setting of the sun. Rebbi Simon said, they shall be, by both of them. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it was evening, it was morning, one day. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, the month, until it be totally from the new one. You are finding to say, what Rebbi Joḥanan said requires the statement of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, and what Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said requires the statement of Rebbi Joḥanan. If Rebbi Joḥanan had stated his but Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish had not made his statement, we would have said that he only said that all might be from the new one. Therefore it is necessary that Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish made his statement. Or if Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish had stated his but Rebbi Joḥanan had not made his statement, we would have said that he stated day, therefore not night. Therefore what Rebbi Joḥanan said is necessary and what Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said is necessary.

Rebbi Shila from Kefar Tamarta in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He made the moon for festive times, the sun knows its destination. Because the sun knows its destination, He made the moon for festive times. Rebbi Berekhiah said, it is written: They travelled from Rameses in the first month,etc. When {the sun} sets on the nights of the holiday there were fourteen settings preceding it. This means that one counts for the moon from the setting of the sun. Rebbi Simon said, they shall be, by both of them. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it was evening, it was morning, one day. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, the month, until it be totally from the new one. You are finding to say, what Rebbi Joḥanan said requires the statement of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, and what Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said requires the statement of Rebbi Joḥanan. If Rebbi Joḥanan had stated his but Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish had not made his statement, we would have said that he only said that all might be from the new one. Therefore it is necessary that Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish made his statement. Or if Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish had stated his but Rebbi Joḥanan had not made his statement, we would have said that he stated day, therefore not night. Therefore what Rebbi Joḥanan said is necessary and what Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said is necessary.

HALAKHAH: “If the holiday of the New Year,” etc. Rebbi Abba bar Pappos said, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish were sitting and questioning. They said, we have stated: “if the holiday of the New Year falls on a Sabbath, at the Temple they were blowing but not in the countryside.” If it is a word of the Torah, in the countryside it also should push aside; if it is not a word of the Torah also in the Temple it should not push aside. Cahana passed by. They said, this is a [an important] man whom we may ask. They went and asked him. He said to them, one verse says, a day of sounding; another verse says, a remembrance of sounding. How is that? If it falls on a weekday, a day of sounding. If it falls on a Sabbath, a remembrance of sounding, one mentions it but does not blow. Rebbi Ze`ira told the colleagues to go and listen to Rebbi Levi preaching since it would be impossible that he would let a weekly reading go by without enlightenment. He came and said before them, one verse says, a day of sounding; another verse says, a remembrance of sounding. How is that? If it falls on a weekday, a day of sounding. If it falls on a Sabbath, a remembrance of sounding, one mentions it but does not blow. Then also in the Temple it should not push aside. It was stated, on the first of the month. Then also anywhere they know that it is the first of the month it should push aside. Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai stated, and you shall sacrifice, at the place where the sacrifices are offered. The colleagues said before Rebbi Jonah. Is it not written, you shall convey a sounding shofar in the seventh month, etc? He said to them, this one you convey in all your Land, therefore not another one. They said to him, or we might say, this one you convey in your Land, therefore another one both in your Land and outside the Land. Rebbi Jonah said, if it were written “convey a shofar in your Land”, I would have said that here he restricted and at another place he extended. But in all your Land, here he extended and at another place he restricted.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He who cooks carcass meat on a holiday is not flogged, because the category of cooking is permitted on a holiday. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, he is flogged, for the category of cooking is permitted only for food. Rebbi Abba bar Mamal objected to this {statement} by Rebbi Joḥanan. Then one who ploughs on a holiday should not be flogged since actions of the category of ploughing are permitted on a holiday. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Ila: ordinary ploughing was not permitted. Rebbi Shammai said before Rebbi Yose: Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Ila, this is Rebbi Simeon’s, for Rebbi Simeon said, only if he needs the essence of the matter. Rebbi Yose met Rebbi Aḥa. He said to him, did you say this? But did not Rebbi Joḥanan say, the words of Rebbi Meïr are that in 24 matters the House of Shammai are lenient and the House of Hillel restrictive, and this is one of them. Should we say 23? But Rebbi Meïr and Rebbi Simeon both said the same. But were we not of the opinion that Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Simeon both said the same? Should we say, Rebbi Meïr, Rebbi Yose, and Rebbi Simeon all three said the same? But matters which are problematic for the rabbis are obvious for you; are those which are obvious for the rabbis problematic for you? If one harvested for grasses he is liable for harvesting but is not liable for improving the soil. There is only the problem if he harvested in order to improve the soil. Is he liable for harvesting and for improving the soil? Even if you say it follows Rebbi Simeon, but for the rabbis in any case he ploughed, in any case he harvested. Rebbi Mana said, the words of the rabbis support my teacher Rebbi Yose, for Rebbi Ḥiyya said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, if one compressed a fish, if for its body he is not liable, but if to produce fish sauce he is liable. Even if you say that he said this following Rebbi Simeon, but for the rabbis in any case he compressed, in any case he produced fish sauce.

Samuel pounded on the side of the mortar. Rav said, anything that is pounded may be pounded in its ordinary way. Rav Huna, Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Garlic, and cress, and mustard seed are pounded in their ordinary way. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He who makes oenanthium on a Sabbath is liable because of compounding. Is it therefore permitted on a holiday? Rebbi Ḥizqiah in the name of Rebbi Jeremiah: Making oenanthium on a holiday is forbidden because of compounding. Isaac Gold asked Rebbi Joḥanan, may one pound for spice wine on a holiday? He said to him, it is permitted. <rebbi isaac from atosha asked rebi simeon be laqish, may one pound to make spice wine on a holiday? he said to him, it is permitted;> give it to me and I shall drink. Rebbi Ze`ira asked before Rebbi Abbahu: Would one not act well in pounding it the day before? He said to him, yes. The argument of Rebbi Abbahu is inverted. Here he says permitted, and there he says forbidden. But since Rebbi Abbahu knew that Rebbi Ze`ira was restrictive, and that they are restrictive, therefore he agreed with them. Some want to say that so he said to him: If one wants that it be good he will not pound it the day before. Rebbi Ze`ira asked Kallidromos, the slave of Rebbi Judah the Prince, does your master pound to make spice wine on a holiday? He said to him yes, and all kinds of cuts of meat. Rebbi Isaac ben Rebbi Elazar in the name of Rebbi Immi, the father of Rebbi Eudaimon of Sepphoris. Where do they disagree? For grilling. Put for the pot it is permitted. Rebbi Naḥum said, Rebbi Samuel bar Abba asked about noodle dough. To let it dry is forbidden, for the pot it is permitted, part and part is questionable.

It was stated: One does neither select, nor grind, nor sift. He who selects, or grinds, or sifts, on the Sabbath is stoned. On a holiday he absorbs the 40. But did we not state: “he picks out normally into his chest or a basket”? Rebbi Ḥanina from Antonia said, this is Rabban Gamliel’s, for “Rabban Gamliel says, also he drenches and scoops off.” And was it not stated, in the household of Rabban Gamliel they were grinding pepper in their mills? It is permitted to grind but forbidden to select. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun: Normal grinding was not permitted. And from where that one may neither select, nor grind, nor sift? Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: No work shall be done on them up to and you shall guard the unleavened bread. Rebbi Yose asked, but did one not infer cooking only from there? Rebbi Yose did not say so, but Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Only what can be eaten by every person this alone may be made by you, up to and you shall guard the unleavened bread. Ḥizqiah stated in disagreement: only, every, person, are diminutions, not to select, nor to grind, nor to sift on a holiday.

It was stated: One does neither select, nor grind, nor sift. He who selects, or grinds, or sifts, on the Sabbath is stoned. On a holiday he absorbs the 40. But did we not state: “he picks out normally into his chest or a basket”? Rebbi Ḥanina from Antonia said, this is Rabban Gamliel’s, for “Rabban Gamliel says, also he drenches and scoops off.” And was it not stated, in the household of Rabban Gamliel they were grinding pepper in their mills? It is permitted to grind but forbidden to select. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun: Normal grinding was not permitted. And from where that one may neither select, nor grind, nor sift? Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: No work shall be done on them up to and you shall guard the unleavened bread. Rebbi Yose asked, but did one not infer cooking only from there? Rebbi Yose did not say so, but Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Only what can be eaten by every person this alone may be made by you, up to and you shall guard the unleavened bread. Ḥizqiah stated in disagreement: only, every, person, are diminutions, not to select, nor to grind, nor to sift on a holiday.

Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish was passing by the school when he heard them reciting the verse, they sacrificed animal sacrifices and brought elevation sacrifices the next day. He said, he who interrupts follows the House of Shammai; he who reads it as one sentence follows the House of Hillel. One understands elevation sacrifices the next day; but well-being sacrifices the next day? Are not well-being sacrifices brought following the House of Shammai? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, David died on Pentecost; all of Israel were deep mourners and they brought the next day.

“Nor clap the hands in joy.” טִיפּוּחַ is by his desire. Rebbi Jonah and the colleagues, one said this way it is permitted, the other way it is forbidden, but the other said, both ways it is forbidden. We did not know who said what, but since Rebbi Jonah said, in our days there were old men who were clapping the backs of their hands on the Sabbath; this implies that he said, this way it is permitted, the other way it is forbidden. Rebbi was marrying off his son Rebbi Simeon where they were clapping the backs of their hands on the Sabbath. Rebbi Meïr passed by and heard their sound. He said, our teachers, is the Sabbath permitted? Rebbi heard his voice; he said, who is that who comes to trouble us in our home? [There are those who are saying that he said so: who is the one who comes to hide us in our home?] Rebbi Meïr heard his voice and fled. They went out and ran after him running. The wind blew his turban from Rebbi Meïr’s neck. Rebbi peeked from the window and saw the neck of Rebbi Meïr from behind. He said, I attained learning only because I saw Rebbi Meïr’s neck from behind. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish both said, we attained learning only because we saw Rebbi’s finger from [the back of his sleeve.]

Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Immi: Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagreed. One said, one dedicates; the other said, one does not dedicate. The rabbis of Caesarea make it explicit: Rebbi Joḥanan said, one dedicates without problems on a holiday; Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, one does not dedicate without problems on a holiday. There are Tannaim who state, he goes to sellers of lambs; there are Tannaim who state, he goes to sellers of Pesaḥim. He who says, he goes to sellers of lambs, follows him who says, one dedicates. He who says, he goes to sellers of Pesaḥim, follows him who says, one does not dedicate. This implies that it does not become profane and then dedicated again. If you would say that it becomes profane and then dedicated again, it should be forbidden [because of dedicating], and we have stated, “one does [not] dedicate.” Rebbi Ḥananiah and Rebbi Mana, one said, if he dedicates for the next day; but the other said, if he dedicated for the upkeep of the Temple. Rebbi Shammai said, even for him who said that one dedicates, in the Temple Court because rabbinic Sabbath prohibitions were permitted in the Temple.

Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Immi: Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagreed. One said, one dedicates; the other said, one does not dedicate. The rabbis of Caesarea make it explicit: Rebbi Joḥanan said, one dedicates without problems on a holiday; Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, one does not dedicate without problems on a holiday. There are Tannaim who state, he goes to sellers of lambs; there are Tannaim who state, he goes to sellers of Pesaḥim. He who says, he goes to sellers of lambs, follows him who says, one dedicates. He who says, he goes to sellers of Pesaḥim, follows him who says, one does not dedicate. This implies that it does not become profane and then dedicated again. If you would say that it becomes profane and then dedicated again, it should be forbidden [because of dedicating], and we have stated, “one does [not] dedicate.” Rebbi Ḥananiah and Rebbi Mana, one said, if he dedicates for the next day; but the other said, if he dedicated for the upkeep of the Temple. Rebbi Shammai said, even for him who said that one dedicates, in the Temple Court because rabbinic Sabbath prohibitions were permitted in the Temple.

Rebbi Jacob from Kefar Ḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: When Abraham their forefather did My will, I swore to him that I never shall remove dew from his descendants forever; what is the reason? The Eternal swore and He will not change His intention, you are appointed forever. And it is written there, you have the dew of your youth. Rebbi Judah ben Pazi said, by a will I gave it to Abraham: God may give you from the dew of Heaven. Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman said, when Israel comes to sin by their evil deeds the rains are arrested. They bring an old man like Rebbi Yose the Galilean, he prays for them and immediately the rains come. But dew does not descend by the merit of any creature, what is the reason? Which do not listen to anybody nor wait for humans.

Rebbi Ḥanina ben Rebbi Abbahu said, in the book of Rebbi Meïr they found: a saying about Duma, “a saying about Domae, to me He called from Seïr. Rebbi Joḥanan said, He called to me because of Seïr. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, from where was He inimical to me, from Seïr. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, if a person asks you, where is your God? Tell him, in the great fortification at Rome. What is the reason? To me He called from Seïr.

How much rain should fall that a man is required to recite a benediction? Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: At the start, that it should fertilize, at the end that a brick should be soaked. Rebbi Yannai ben Rebbi Ismael in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: At the start, that it should fertilize, at the end that the seal of the amphora should be soaked. Is the seal ever soaked? But it is as if it were soaked. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rav Jehudah, Rebbi Jonah, Rav Jehudah in the name of Samuel: At the start, that it should fertilize, at the end even a minimal amount. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Ze`ira: It was said for the interruption of fasting. Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Naḥum, and Rav Ada bar (Ikoma) <abimi>> is to be adopted here also. were sitting. Rebbi Naḥum said to Rav Ada bar (Ikoma) <abimi>: Is it not reasonable that this was said for the benediction; he answered: Yes. <rebbi Ḥizqiah said to rav ada bar (ikoma) <abimi>: Is it not reasonable that this was said for the interruption of fasting; he answered: Yes.> He said to him, why did you say “yes” here? He said to him, because he follows the argumentation of his teacher. Rebbi Mana asked Rebbi Ḥizqiah, who is his teacher? He said to him, Rebbi Ze`ira. He said to him, so we are saying: Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Ze`ira: It was said for the interruption of fasting.

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, it is written: and distress rose from the earth. If rupture rises from the earth, rain will fall immediately. Rebbi Berekhiah said, it is written: may my teaching drip like rain, because if one confesses in repentance rain will fall immediately. Rebbi Berekhiah made thirteen fast days but no rain fell; at the end locusts came. He went and said before them, our brethren, look at what we are doing. Is that not what the prophet needles us, from evil hands to profit, we damage one another with our hands and expect good things; the noble asks where is the bribe to be collected, and the judge in payment, pay me and I shall pay you, the great one speaks lies from his soul and they will distort it, they will turn it thick, they turned it into a plaiting of debts. And who can stop it? Their best one is like thorns, the best one among them is like thorns, the straight one like a hedge of thorns, the most upright among them is like those branches, on the day to which they looked comes their due, on the day which we expected relief locusts, this shall be their consternation! From the midst of their crying, and crying, and crying, there fell rain.

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, the people of Nineveh repented in trickery. What did they do? Rebbi Ḥuna in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Ḥalfuta: They put calves inside and their mothers outside, foals inside and their mothers outside; these were mooing from one side and those mooing from the other side. They said, if He does not have mercy on us we shall not have mercy on them. That is what is written, how the animals groan, are cattle herds confused, etc. Rebbi Aḥa said, that is what they do in Arabia. They should be covered by sack-cloth, humans and animals, and call on God in force. What means “in force”? Rebbi Simeon ben Ḥalfuta said, the brash one wins over the proper one, so much more if it is for the good of the world. Each man shall repent his evil ways and robbery in their hands. Rebbi Joḥanan said, what they had in their hands they returned, what was in a chest, a trunk and a cupboard they did not return.

Rebbi Ze`ira in the name of (Rebbi) <rav> Jeremiah, a private person has to mention the occasion on a public fast day. Where does he say it? Between “Redeemer of Israel” and “Healer of the sick.” What does he say? “Answer us, Eternal, answer us in this time and season because we are in great trouble, do not hide Your presence from us, do not be oblivious to our supplications, because You, Eternal, will answer in time of trouble, redeem and save in any time of distress. They cried to the Eternal in their trouble, He led them out from their distress. Praise to You, Eternal, Answering in times of trouble.” Rebbi Yannai ben Rebbi Ismael in the name <of the house of rebbi yannai says: in “he who hears prayer.”The Fifteenth benediction, place of all personal additions to the weekday prayers. <Rebbi Jonah> in the name of (Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish) <rav>: Even an individual who decreed a fast day on himself has to mention the occasion. Where does he say it? Rebbi Ze`ira in the name of Rav Ḥuna: Similar to Friday night and Sabbath day. Rebbi Mana said: I, who did not check whether one follows Rav Jeremiah or Rebbi Yannai the son of Rebbi Ismael, went to the study hall and I heard: “Rav Ḥuna in the name of Rav: Even an individual who decreed a fast day on himself has to mention the occasion.” Rebbi Yose objected that a baraita disagrees: Every day one prays eighteen benedictions, including the night after Sabbath and the nights after Yom Kippur and after Public Fasts. Since Rebbi Yose said, this baraita disagrees, it contradicts the statement: between “Redeemer of Israel” and “Healer of the sick.”

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Rebbi Yannai: The Holy One, praise to Him, associated His great Name with Israel. {A parable} of a king who had the small key of a jewelry box. The king said, if I leave it as it is, it is apt to be lost. Therefore I shall put in on a chain. Then if it were lost the key would prove where it is. So the Holy One, praise to Him, said, if I leave Israel as they are, they would be absorbed by the nations. Therefore I shall associate My great Name with them and they will survive. What is the reason? The Canaanites and all inhabitants of the Land will hear, and encircle us, and eradicate our Name from the Land; then what would You do for Your great Name?[Immediately], the Eternal said to Joshua, get up. Rise for what You mentioned.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: One blows the shofar for the failure of the flax crop. What is the reason? Horrible and execrable things happened in the land. Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: One blows the shofar about hot East wind. What is the reason? I went black without sun, I rose in the assembly to pray. Rebbi Eleazar said, honor your healer before you need him. What is the reason? If your prayer had preceded your need, and all efforts of power. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan said, [if you prayed, no one up high will begrudge you, but all will reinforce your power, and all efforts of power. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, if you prayed,] do not keep your mouth narrow, but open your mouth and I shall fill it.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Ḥama bar Uqba in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina: One blows the shofar for the failure of the flax crop. What is the reason? Horrible and execrable things happened in the land. Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: One blows the shofar about hot East wind. What is the reason? I went black without sun, I rose in the assembly to pray. Rebbi Eleazar said, honor your healer before you need him. What is the reason? If your prayer had preceded your need, and all efforts of power. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan said, [if you prayed, no one up high will begrudge you, but all will reinforce your power, and all efforts of power. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, if you prayed,] do not keep your mouth narrow, but open your mouth and I shall fill it.

“And the city was breached.” It is written, on the Ninth of the month the city was breached, and you are saying so? Rebbi Tanḥum bar Ḥanilai said, here is an erroneous computation. That is what is written, it was in the eleventh year, on the first of the month, was the Eternal’s word to me, saying: Son of man, since Tyre said about Jerusalem hurrah. What “hurrah”? If you are saying on the first of Av, it still was not burned. If you are saying on the first of Ellul, cannot in one day and night the messenger leave Jerusalem and arrive at Tyre? But here is an erroneous computation. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan said, {a parable} of a king who was sitting and computing computations. They came and told him, your son was kidnapped; his computations became erroneous. He said, let this be the beginning of computations. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, {a parable} of a king who was sitting and computing computations. They came and told him, your son was kidnapped and incapacitated; his computations became erroneous. He said, let this be the beginning of computations. Rebbi Mana asked, one understands this that they were erroneous for the past; maybe for the future? Whether one follows him who said on the ninth of the month, or the one who said on the seventeenth, [in what do they differ?] there are twenty-one days from the day the city was breached to the day the Temple was destroyed. Rebbi Abuna said, an indication, I am seeing an almond stick. Since this almond tree from sprouting its flower to finishing its fruit needs twenty-one days, so from the day the city was breached to the day the Temple was destroyed twenty-one days. He who says on the Ninth of the month, the Temple was destroyed on the first of Av. He who says on the Seventeenth, the Temple was destroyed on the Ninth of Av.

“And the city was breached.” It is written, on the Ninth of the month the city was breached, and you are saying so? Rebbi Tanḥum bar Ḥanilai said, here is an erroneous computation. That is what is written, it was in the eleventh year, on the first of the month, was the Eternal’s word to me, saying: Son of man, since Tyre said about Jerusalem hurrah. What “hurrah”? If you are saying on the first of Av, it still was not burned. If you are saying on the first of Ellul, cannot in one day and night the messenger leave Jerusalem and arrive at Tyre? But here is an erroneous computation. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan said, {a parable} of a king who was sitting and computing computations. They came and told him, your son was kidnapped; his computations became erroneous. He said, let this be the beginning of computations. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, {a parable} of a king who was sitting and computing computations. They came and told him, your son was kidnapped and incapacitated; his computations became erroneous. He said, let this be the beginning of computations. Rebbi Mana asked, one understands this that they were erroneous for the past; maybe for the future? Whether one follows him who said on the ninth of the month, or the one who said on the seventeenth, [in what do they differ?] there are twenty-one days from the day the city was breached to the day the Temple was destroyed. Rebbi Abuna said, an indication, I am seeing an almond stick. Since this almond tree from sprouting its flower to finishing its fruit needs twenty-one days, so from the day the city was breached to the day the Temple was destroyed twenty-one days. He who says on the Ninth of the month, the Temple was destroyed on the first of Av. He who says on the Seventeenth, the Temple was destroyed on the Ninth of Av.

He said to them, even so, what did you see? They told him, it is a Land devouring its inhabitants; in any town we entered there people had died. The Holy One, praise to Him, said to them: Because of the benefit which I gave you, you are saying it is a Land devouring its inhabitants? In any town which they entered, a head of the town died. While they were occupied with him, they passed through the town and left before anybody noticed them. Not only this, but you said, we were in our eyes like locusts, and so we were in their eyes. You knew what I made you in their eyes. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, they said things against Heaven: for he is stronger than Him; even He can do nothing against them. Rebbi Levi in the name of Rebbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina: with a big uproar, by the noise of the big (word) [uproar] which you pronounced, He started a fire which broke its branches.

It was stated: Rebbi Yose says, the day of the destruction of the Temple was after the end of the Sabbath, at the end of a Sabbatical year, during the watch of Yehoyariv, on the Ninth of Av. And so it happened the second time. Both times the Levites were standing on the platform and singing, He turned on them their wrongs, in their malice he eradicates them, eradicates them the Eternal, our God. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked before Rebbi Joḥanan; may one sing without libations? He said to him, let us hear from what was stated: “both times the Levites were standing on the platform and singing, He turned on them their wrongs, etc.” Rebbi Abbahu said, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagreed. Rebbi Joḥanan said, one may sing without libations. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, one may not sing without libations. Rebbi Joḥanan objected to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Was it not stated, “both times the Levites were standing on the platform and singing, He turned on them their wrongs”? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said to him, what do you conclude from this? He said to him, since if there were libations it would have been time for the song. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the daily song. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, yesterday’s song.

It was stated: Rebbi Yose says, the day of the destruction of the Temple was after the end of the Sabbath, at the end of a Sabbatical year, during the watch of Yehoyariv, on the Ninth of Av. And so it happened the second time. Both times the Levites were standing on the platform and singing, He turned on them their wrongs, in their malice he eradicates them, eradicates them the Eternal, our God. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked before Rebbi Joḥanan; may one sing without libations? He said to him, let us hear from what was stated: “both times the Levites were standing on the platform and singing, He turned on them their wrongs, etc.” Rebbi Abbahu said, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagreed. Rebbi Joḥanan said, one may sing without libations. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, one may not sing without libations. Rebbi Joḥanan objected to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Was it not stated, “both times the Levites were standing on the platform and singing, He turned on them their wrongs”? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said to him, what do you conclude from this? He said to him, since if there were libations it would have been time for the song. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the daily song. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, yesterday’s song.

It was stated: Rebbi Yose says, the day of the destruction of the Temple was after the end of the Sabbath, at the end of a Sabbatical year, during the watch of Yehoyariv, on the Ninth of Av. And so it happened the second time. Both times the Levites were standing on the platform and singing, He turned on them their wrongs, in their malice he eradicates them, eradicates them the Eternal, our God. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked before Rebbi Joḥanan; may one sing without libations? He said to him, let us hear from what was stated: “both times the Levites were standing on the platform and singing, He turned on them their wrongs, etc.” Rebbi Abbahu said, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagreed. Rebbi Joḥanan said, one may sing without libations. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, one may not sing without libations. Rebbi Joḥanan objected to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Was it not stated, “both times the Levites were standing on the platform and singing, He turned on them their wrongs”? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said to him, what do you conclude from this? He said to him, since if there were libations it would have been time for the song. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the daily song. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, yesterday’s song.

It was stated: Rebbi Yose says, the day of the destruction of the Temple was after the end of the Sabbath, at the end of a Sabbatical year, during the watch of Yehoyariv, on the Ninth of Av. And so it happened the second time. Both times the Levites were standing on the platform and singing, He turned on them their wrongs, in their malice he eradicates them, eradicates them the Eternal, our God. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked before Rebbi Joḥanan; may one sing without libations? He said to him, let us hear from what was stated: “both times the Levites were standing on the platform and singing, He turned on them their wrongs, etc.” Rebbi Abbahu said, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagreed. Rebbi Joḥanan said, one may sing without libations. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, one may not sing without libations. Rebbi Joḥanan objected to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Was it not stated, “both times the Levites were standing on the platform and singing, He turned on them their wrongs”? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said to him, what do you conclude from this? He said to him, since if there were libations it would have been time for the song. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the daily song. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, yesterday’s song.

It was stated: Rebbi Yose says, the day of the destruction of the Temple was after the end of the Sabbath, at the end of a Sabbatical year, during the watch of Yehoyariv, on the Ninth of Av. And so it happened the second time. Both times the Levites were standing on the platform and singing, He turned on them their wrongs, in their malice he eradicates them, eradicates them the Eternal, our God. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked before Rebbi Joḥanan; may one sing without libations? He said to him, let us hear from what was stated: “both times the Levites were standing on the platform and singing, He turned on them their wrongs, etc.” Rebbi Abbahu said, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagreed. Rebbi Joḥanan said, one may sing without libations. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, one may not sing without libations. Rebbi Joḥanan objected to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Was it not stated, “both times the Levites were standing on the platform and singing, He turned on them their wrongs”? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said to him, what do you conclude from this? He said to him, since if there were libations it would have been time for the song. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the daily song. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, yesterday’s song.

It was stated: Rebbi Yose says, the day of the destruction of the Temple was after the end of the Sabbath, at the end of a Sabbatical year, during the watch of Yehoyariv, on the Ninth of Av. And so it happened the second time. Both times the Levites were standing on the platform and singing, He turned on them their wrongs, in their malice he eradicates them, eradicates them the Eternal, our God. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked before Rebbi Joḥanan; may one sing without libations? He said to him, let us hear from what was stated: “both times the Levites were standing on the platform and singing, He turned on them their wrongs, etc.” Rebbi Abbahu said, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagreed. Rebbi Joḥanan said, one may sing without libations. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, one may not sing without libations. Rebbi Joḥanan objected to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Was it not stated, “both times the Levites were standing on the platform and singing, He turned on them their wrongs”? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said to him, what do you conclude from this? He said to him, since if there were libations it would have been time for the song. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the daily song. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, yesterday’s song.

Rebbi Jonah said, what you are saying refers to washing to wear; but washing to mend? So we are saying, this washerman is forbidden to work in his trade? Our Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Jonah, “the week in which the Ninth of Av falls one is forbidden to barber and to launder, but on Thursday one is permitted for the honor of the Sabbath.” Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rav Hamnuna, it was repeated regarding (addition) [barbering.] Rebbi Abba bar Cohen said before Rebbi Yose: Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Abbahu. If the Ninth of Av falls on a Sabbath, both weeks are permitted. What is afterwards? Rebbi Joḥanan said, afterwards is forbidden; Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, afterwards is permitted. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba preached it to the Sepphoreans but they did not accept it. Rebbi Immi said to Rebbi [Yasa]. Does not the nephew of the Great Rebbi Ḥiyya disagree with him? He answered, they disagree explicitly: Rebbi Joḥanan said, afterwards is forbidden; Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, afterwards is permitted. How does Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish explain it? He explains it if the Ninth of Av falls on a Sabbath, and one cannot infer anything. Rebbi Isaac ben Eleazar announced at the end of the Ninth of Av, the barbers shall open, any who has to eulogize may eulogize. It is written, I shall eliminate all her enjoyment, her holiday, her month, her Sabbath, and all her feast. The Southerners have the custom of ḥer holiday, the Sepphoreans have the custom of her month, the Tiberians have the custom of her week. The Rabbis of Tiberias changed to follow the Rabbis of Sepphoris.

Rebbi Jonah said, what you are saying refers to washing to wear; but washing to mend? So we are saying, this washerman is forbidden to work in his trade? Our Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Jonah, “the week in which the Ninth of Av falls one is forbidden to barber and to launder, but on Thursday one is permitted for the honor of the Sabbath.” Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rav Hamnuna, it was repeated regarding (addition) [barbering.] Rebbi Abba bar Cohen said before Rebbi Yose: Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Abbahu. If the Ninth of Av falls on a Sabbath, both weeks are permitted. What is afterwards? Rebbi Joḥanan said, afterwards is forbidden; Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, afterwards is permitted. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba preached it to the Sepphoreans but they did not accept it. Rebbi Immi said to Rebbi [Yasa]. Does not the nephew of the Great Rebbi Ḥiyya disagree with him? He answered, they disagree explicitly: Rebbi Joḥanan said, afterwards is forbidden; Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, afterwards is permitted. How does Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish explain it? He explains it if the Ninth of Av falls on a Sabbath, and one cannot infer anything. Rebbi Isaac ben Eleazar announced at the end of the Ninth of Av, the barbers shall open, any who has to eulogize may eulogize. It is written, I shall eliminate all her enjoyment, her holiday, her month, her Sabbath, and all her feast. The Southerners have the custom of ḥer holiday, the Sepphoreans have the custom of her month, the Tiberians have the custom of her week. The Rabbis of Tiberias changed to follow the Rabbis of Sepphoris.

Rebbi Jonah said, what you are saying refers to washing to wear; but washing to mend? So we are saying, this washerman is forbidden to work in his trade? Our Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Jonah, “the week in which the Ninth of Av falls one is forbidden to barber and to launder, but on Thursday one is permitted for the honor of the Sabbath.” Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rav Hamnuna, it was repeated regarding (addition) [barbering.] Rebbi Abba bar Cohen said before Rebbi Yose: Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Abbahu. If the Ninth of Av falls on a Sabbath, both weeks are permitted. What is afterwards? Rebbi Joḥanan said, afterwards is forbidden; Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, afterwards is permitted. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba preached it to the Sepphoreans but they did not accept it. Rebbi Immi said to Rebbi [Yasa]. Does not the nephew of the Great Rebbi Ḥiyya disagree with him? He answered, they disagree explicitly: Rebbi Joḥanan said, afterwards is forbidden; Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, afterwards is permitted. How does Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish explain it? He explains it if the Ninth of Av falls on a Sabbath, and one cannot infer anything. Rebbi Isaac ben Eleazar announced at the end of the Ninth of Av, the barbers shall open, any who has to eulogize may eulogize. It is written, I shall eliminate all her enjoyment, her holiday, her month, her Sabbath, and all her feast. The Southerners have the custom of ḥer holiday, the Sepphoreans have the custom of her month, the Tiberians have the custom of her week. The Rabbis of Tiberias changed to follow the Rabbis of Sepphoris.

All the towns which Joshua enumerated are at least one hundred. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, he enumerated those walled. Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina said, he enumerated those close to the border. The verse supports Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina: their border was Meḥelef [etc. And Qaḥtat, and Nahallal, and Shimron, and Yedeala, and Bet Leḥem.] Meḥelef, Ḥelef. Me’elon, Aylin. Baṣa`ananim, Basin of Qedesh. And Adami, Damin. Hanneqeb, Ṣaidata. And Yabneel, Kefar Yama. Up to Laqqum, Loqim. And Qaṭtat, Qeṭonit. And Nahallal, Mahlul. And Shimron, Simonieh. And Yedeala, Ḥirieh. And Bet Leḥem, Bet Leḥem Sarieh.

Rav, and Rebbi Ḥanina, and Rebbi Jonathan, and Bar Qappara, and Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, this scroll had be said to Moses on Sinai; only there is no earlier and later in the Torah. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan said, Prophets and Hagiographs will in the future be nullified, but the five books of the Torah will never be nullified. What is the reason? A strong voice, never ending. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, also the Esther scroll and practices will never be nullified. It is said here, a strong voice, never ending, and it is said there, their remembrance will not end from their descendants. Practices? His practices are eternal.

Rav, and Rebbi Ḥanina, and Rebbi Jonathan, and Bar Qappara, and Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, this scroll had be said to Moses on Sinai; only there is no earlier and later in the Torah. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. Rebbi Joḥanan said, Prophets and Hagiographs will in the future be nullified, but the five books of the Torah will never be nullified. What is the reason? A strong voice, never ending. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, also the Esther scroll and practices will never be nullified. It is said here, a strong voice, never ending, and it is said there, their remembrance will not end from their descendants. Practices? His practices are eternal.

Rebbi Levi in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. The Holy One, praiuse to Him, saw that the evil Haman in the future would weigh his money against Israel. He said, it is better that my children’s money should precede this evil one’s money. Therefore one precedes and reads the paragraph about Šeqalim.

“The only difference between Sabbath and the Day of Atonement is that in the first case its intentional desecration is punished by man and in the second case by extirpation.” Therefore, for payment both follow the same rules. This is by Rebbi Neḥoniah ben Haqanah since Rebbi Neḥoniah ben Haqanah says, the Day of Atonement follows the rules of Sabbath for payment. But Rebbi Simeon ben Menassiah says those subject to extirpation equal those subject to capital punishment. What is between them? Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Abuna said, a menstruating adolescent girl is between them. Rebbi Mana said, also his wife’s sister is between them. In the opinion of Rebbi Neḥoniah ben Haqanah, just as the Sabbath does not become permitted after its prohibition started; so the Day of Atonement does not become permitted after its prohibition started. However, these may become permitted after their prohibition started, he has to pay. But Rebbi Simeon ben Menassiah said, extirpation applies to the Sabbath and the day of Atonement; extirpation does not apply to these, he has to pay. Rebbi Judah bar Pazi asked: What say these Tannaim about whipping and extirpation? Rebbi Yose said, that is a problem for the rabbis. Rebbi Jonah said, why can we not understand it from what Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai stated? As Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai stated: Rebbi Tarphon says, extirpation was mentioned for the Sabbath and the Day of Atonement. Since for extirpation mentioned for the Sabbath there can be no whipping connected to extirpation, so for extirpation mentioned for the Day of Atonement there is no whipping in a case involving extirpation. Rebbi Mana said before Rebbi Yose: When do we need this? Not for Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish? But for Rebbi Joḥanan, if he admits flogging in death penalty cases, certainly flogging in extirpation cases, since they disagreed: If somebody slaughters an animal and its young for idolatrous purposes. Rebbi Joḥanan says, if he was cautioned about an animal and its young, he is flogged, about idolatry, he is stoned to death. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, even if he was cautioned about an animal and its young, he is not flogged since he would be stoned to death had he been cautioned about idolatry. He said to him, we need it even for Rebbi Joḥanan! Here are two cases, there it is one case.

“The only difference between Sabbath and the Day of Atonement is that in the first case its intentional desecration is punished by man and in the second case by extirpation.” Therefore, for payment both follow the same rules. This is by Rebbi Neḥoniah ben Haqanah since Rebbi Neḥoniah ben Haqanah says, the Day of Atonement follows the rules of Sabbath for payment. But Rebbi Simeon ben Menassiah says those subject to extirpation equal those subject to capital punishment. What is between them? Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Abuna said, a menstruating adolescent girl is between them. Rebbi Mana said, also his wife’s sister is between them. In the opinion of Rebbi Neḥoniah ben Haqanah, just as the Sabbath does not become permitted after its prohibition started; so the Day of Atonement does not become permitted after its prohibition started. However, these may become permitted after their prohibition started, he has to pay. But Rebbi Simeon ben Menassiah said, extirpation applies to the Sabbath and the day of Atonement; extirpation does not apply to these, he has to pay. Rebbi Judah bar Pazi asked: What say these Tannaim about whipping and extirpation? Rebbi Yose said, that is a problem for the rabbis. Rebbi Jonah said, why can we not understand it from what Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai stated? As Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai stated: Rebbi Tarphon says, extirpation was mentioned for the Sabbath and the Day of Atonement. Since for extirpation mentioned for the Sabbath there can be no whipping connected to extirpation, so for extirpation mentioned for the Day of Atonement there is no whipping in a case involving extirpation. Rebbi Mana said before Rebbi Yose: When do we need this? Not for Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish? But for Rebbi Joḥanan, if he admits flogging in death penalty cases, certainly flogging in extirpation cases, since they disagreed: If somebody slaughters an animal and its young for idolatrous purposes. Rebbi Joḥanan says, if he was cautioned about an animal and its young, he is flogged, about idolatry, he is stoned to death. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, even if he was cautioned about an animal and its young, he is not flogged since he would be stoned to death had he been cautioned about idolatry. He said to him, we need it even for Rebbi Joḥanan! Here are two cases, there it is one case.

According to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, what is between these Tannaim and those rabbis? Prohibitions without extirpation. Rebbi Judan said, he who sleeps with a bastard girl is between them. Rebbi Ḥananiah said, he who puts fire to the grain stack of his neighbor on a holiday is between them. These Tannaim think, since there is no extirpation, he pays. Those rabbis think, since there is flogging he does not pay. But then “these are the adolescent girls who can claim a fine” cannot follow the rabbis! Rebbi Mattaniah said, explain it according to everybody if it refers to a bastard male who sleeps with a bastard girl But is his brother’s wife not his sister-in-law? Explain it that the man’s brother had children and had performed the preliminary wedding with a woman when he died and his brother came and raped her.

HALAKHAH: Therefore vessels used to prepare food are forbidden. But did he not make the vow about food? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: so is the Mishnah: The only difference between one who is under a vow {not to have} usufruct from another and one who is under a vow about use for food. In the House of Rebbi it was stated thus: “One who is under a vow about use of food should not borrow from him a fine or coarse sieve, a grindstone, or an oven.” It was stated: But he may borrow from him cups and bowls and fruit bowls, since these are not used to prepare food, only to serve food. Pans and pots are forbidden. To mill grain and to press grapes is forbidden. Harvesting grain is a problem, harvesting grapes is a problem. What kind of usufruct of food? It was stated: But he may borrow an axe from him. We wanted to say, an axe to split. Explain it by a hatchet for weeding, and you cannot infer anything. Rebbi Abuna said, that zwsta since one removes and separates the bran from flour with it, it is like a sieve.

It was stated in the name of Rebbi Simeon: “The community only brings what Scripture fixed for it.” Rebbi Simeon is of the opinion that since when Second Tithe was introduced it was not interrupted. What is between them? Rebbi Abba bar Mamal said, the bull of hidden things is between them. Rebbi Yose says, voluntary offerings of the community are between them. It was stated, both men and women. Rebbi Joḥanan said, there is no woman here, “man” is written in the paragraph. It was stated, also a nazir’s sacrifices. Rebbi Joḥanan said, there are no nazir’s sacrifices here; nazir’s sacrifices are an obligation. It was stated, also libations. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, he who states “libations” does not hold with Rebbi, as it was stated, Rebbi says, I am saying that also after Israel entered the Land, libations only are brought inside. What is the reason? In the Sanctuary pour alcoholic libations to the Eternal. A prohibition is written only for inside; from where for the outside? Let us hear from the following. From where that one who slaughters as Pesah for an individual on a private altar or the public altar in a time where altars are forbidden, that he transgresses a prohibition? The verse says, you may not slaughter the Pesaḥ at one. He is punished with extirpation and you are saying so? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, this is about one who slaughters in the afternoon not for its name in a time when altars are permitted. Then why does he say, in a time when altars are forbidden? In a time when his altar is forbidden. Why not for its name? That you should not say, it is well-being offering and qualified. In addition, from the following: I could think that if he slaughtered it in the afternoon it should be qualified. Why do you have (in the afternoon it should be qualified) [in the morning it should be disqualified]? No. It is not for its name. Rebbi Yose said, this implies that well-being sacrifices brought because of Pesaḥ are qualified on an altar. Would an elevation offering be brought because of a reparation sacrifice be qualified on an altar according to Rebbi Eleazar? Let us hear from the following: “This is the principle: Anything which can be vowed or donated is sacrificed on a private altar; but nothing which cannot be vowed or donated is sacrificed on a private altar.”

Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: This is the indication: Any time the Ark is inside, private altars are forbidden; once it left, private altars are permitted. Rebbi Ze`ura asked before Rebbi Yasa: even temporarily, as in the case of Eli? Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, “there”, “there”. Just as in the case of “there” mentioned there private altars are forbidden, so in the case of “there” mentioned here private altars are forbidden. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked before Rebbi Joḥanan, in that case if there is no Ark is there no Pesaḥ? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, “appellation”, “appellation”. Just as in the case of “appellation” mentioned there private altars are forbidden, so in the case of “appellation” mentioned here private altars are forbidden. And so Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Simeon were saying, Second Tithe in Nob and Gibeon. One understands Rebbi Jehudah, since Rebbi Jehudah said, purification sacrifice and Pesaḥ for the individual on the public altar, no purification sacrifice and Pesah for the individual on a private altar. Following Rebbi Simeon? Since Rebbi Simeon said, “The community only brings what Scripture fixed for it.” Rebbi Simeon is of the opinion that since when Second Tithe was introduced it was not interrupted.

From where that the Cohanim may fulfill their obligation with ḥallah or heave, and Israel with Second Tithe on Passover? The verse says, you shall eat mazzot; this adds. Could I think that they may fulfill their obligation with First Fruits? The verse says, inallyour dwelling places you shall eat mazzot, mazzah which may be eaten at any dwelling place; this excludes First Fruits which are not eaten at any dwelling place. They objected, but may Second Tithe be eaten at any dwelling place? It may be redeemed and be eaten at any dwelling place. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked: What was bought with tithe money and became impure, following Rebbi Jehudah, since it is not subject to being redeemed and eaten at any dwelling place, one may not fulfill one’s obligation with it. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked: Ḥallah from dough made from Second Tithe in Jerusalem, since it is not subject to being redeemed and eaten at any dwelling place, one may not fulfill one’s obligation with it.

I could think that they may fulfill their obligation with flat cakes for a thanksgiving offering and wafers of a nazir. The verse says, seven days you shall eat mazzot; mazzah which may be eaten all seven days. This excludes thanksgiving offering and wafers of a nazir which may not be eaten all seven days. Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: since flat cakes for a thanksgiving offering and (goats) [wafers] of a nazir may be eaten in the entire domain of the Land of Israel, the presenter could not exclude because of “dwelling place”. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: this implies that wafers of a nazir may be eaten in the entire domain of the Land of Israel, the presenter could not exclude because of “dwelling place”. One understands about flat cakes for a thanksgiving offering. But it is not so for wafers of a nazir. Rebbi Joḥanan said, there is no nazir here; nezirut is an obligation. Rebbi Abun bar Cahana said, explain it if his purification offering was presented in Shiloh but his elevation and well-being offerings in Nob or Gibeon. Rebbi Ḥananiah, Rebbi Ezrah asked before Rebbi Mana: Did not the teacher say in the name of Rebbi Yose: Holiday well-being offerings brought at an elevated place are qualified but they are not counted against an obligation of the owner? But it must be for Rebbi Jehudah, as Rebbi Jehudah said, purification and Passover offerings of individuals at a principal elevated place, but no purification and Passover offerings of individuals at a private altar. It only follows Rebbi Simeon, since “Rebbi Simeon said, when one of the bloods was sprinkled, the nazir is permitted to drink wine and to defile himself for the dead.”

I could think that they may fulfill their obligation with flat cakes for a thanksgiving offering and wafers of a nazir. The verse says, seven days you shall eat mazzot; mazzah which may be eaten all seven days. This excludes thanksgiving offering and wafers of a nazir which may not be eaten all seven days. Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: since flat cakes for a thanksgiving offering and (goats) [wafers] of a nazir may be eaten in the entire domain of the Land of Israel, the presenter could not exclude because of “dwelling place”. Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: this implies that wafers of a nazir may be eaten in the entire domain of the Land of Israel, the presenter could not exclude because of “dwelling place”. One understands about flat cakes for a thanksgiving offering. But it is not so for wafers of a nazir. Rebbi Joḥanan said, there is no nazir here; nezirut is an obligation. Rebbi Abun bar Cahana said, explain it if his purification offering was presented in Shiloh but his elevation and well-being offerings in Nob or Gibeon. Rebbi Ḥananiah, Rebbi Ezrah asked before Rebbi Mana: Did not the teacher say in the name of Rebbi Yose: Holiday well-being offerings brought at an elevated place are qualified but they are not counted against an obligation of the owner? But it must be for Rebbi Jehudah, as Rebbi Jehudah said, purification and Passover offerings of individuals at a principal elevated place, but no purification and Passover offerings of individuals at a private altar. It only follows Rebbi Simeon, since “Rebbi Simeon said, when one of the bloods was sprinkled, the nazir is permitted to drink wine and to defile himself for the dead.”

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked, does cutting the `omer during daytime push aside the Sabbath? Rebbi Abbai objected, did we not state, “its obligation is to harvest during nighttime. If it was cut during daytime it is qualified and pushes the Sabbath aside.” But he did not accept it. Rebbi Aḥa said, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish changed his opinion because of this: “After nightfall he says to them, did the sun set? They say, yes. Did the sun set? They say, yes.” Where do we hold? If about nighttime, that already was said. But if it does not refer to nighttime, let it refer to daytime; it is a matter that pushes aside the Sabbath during daytime. Do the preparations push aside the Sabbath during nighttime? Did we not state, “they made the maker of pan-baked breads make pan-baked breads.” Explain it, on a weekday. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada stated, “this is the daily order of service of our God’s Temple,” whether on a weekday or a Sabbath. But did we not state, “they harvested it and put it in boxes, brought it to the Temple courtyard, and were parching it in fire to fulfill the commandment of roasting. Rebbi Yose said, since he started the meritorious work, one tells him to complete it.” Rebbi Judah from Kappadokia objected before Rebbi Yose: Think of it, if it came from storage. Since he did not start the meritorious work, there is no reason to tell him to complete it. Rebbi Jacob bar Sosai objected before Rebbi Yose, did we not state, “for on a distance of walking a night and a day one desecrates the Sabbath and goes for testimony of the new moon”? He said to them, since the daytime needs the nighttime and the nighttime needs the daytime, it is as if it were all daytime. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, is it not sanctified retroactively? Since it is sanctified retroactively there is no difference between day and night.

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked, does cutting the `omer during daytime push aside the Sabbath? Rebbi Abbai objected, did we not state, “its obligation is to harvest during nighttime. If it was cut during daytime it is qualified and pushes the Sabbath aside.” But he did not accept it. Rebbi Aḥa said, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish changed his opinion because of this: “After nightfall he says to them, did the sun set? They say, yes. Did the sun set? They say, yes.” Where do we hold? If about nighttime, that already was said. But if it does not refer to nighttime, let it refer to daytime; it is a matter that pushes aside the Sabbath during daytime. Do the preparations push aside the Sabbath during nighttime? Did we not state, “they made the maker of pan-baked breads make pan-baked breads.” Explain it, on a weekday. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada stated, “this is the daily order of service of our God’s Temple,” whether on a weekday or a Sabbath. But did we not state, “they harvested it and put it in boxes, brought it to the Temple courtyard, and were parching it in fire to fulfill the commandment of roasting. Rebbi Yose said, since he started the meritorious work, one tells him to complete it.” Rebbi Judah from Kappadokia objected before Rebbi Yose: Think of it, if it came from storage. Since he did not start the meritorious work, there is no reason to tell him to complete it. Rebbi Jacob bar Sosai objected before Rebbi Yose, did we not state, “for on a distance of walking a night and a day one desecrates the Sabbath and goes for testimony of the new moon”? He said to them, since the daytime needs the nighttime and the nighttime needs the daytime, it is as if it were all daytime. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, is it not sanctified retroactively? Since it is sanctified retroactively there is no difference between day and night.

The people of Bet Shean asked Rebbi Immi, may one take stones from one synagogue to build another synagogue? He said to them, it is forbidden. Rebbi Ḥelbo said, Rebbi Immi forbade it only to make them feel bad. Rebbi Gorion said, the people from Magdala asked Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: May one take stones from one village to build in another village? He said to them, it is forbidden. Rebbi Immi instructed, even from East to West is forbidden because of the destruction of that place. May one sell a synagogue to buy a school? Rebbi Joshua ben Levi’s word implies that it is permitted. For Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, he burned the Eternal’s House, that is the Temple, and the king’s house, that is Sedecias’s palace, and all the houses of Jerusalem, these are the 480 synagogues which were in Jerusalem. As Rebbi Phineas said in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: There were 480 synagogues in Jerusalem, each of which had a school and a Talmud study; [the school] for Bible and the Talmud study for Mishnah. Against all of them came Vespasian. And every large house he burned in fire, that is the study of Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai where one was telling the great deeds of the Holy One, praise to Him, in the sense of tell please of the great deeds which Elisha accomplished. Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: That you are saying about a private synagogue. But with a public synagogue it is forbidden; I am saying that one at the end of the world has part in it. But did we not state, “it happened that Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Ṣadoq bought the synagogue of the Alexandrians and used it for all his needs”? The Alexandrians made it from their own. So far if it was built as a synagogue. If it was built as a court and he dedicated it, what is the rule? Let us hear from the following: “A qônam that I shall not enter this house and it was turned into a synagogue.” This implies that if it was built as a court and he dedicated it, it became sanctified. When is it sanctified, immediately [or] at the moment of use? Let us hear from the following: If one builds a chest for a scroll or makes ribands for a scroll. As long as it was not used for a scroll profane use is permitted; after it was used for the scroll private use is prohibited. Therefore, if these who were made for a scroll are not sanctified until used, this which was built as court not so much more? What is the rule for these if they were made for profane use? Since you are saying there, if it was built as a court and he dedicated it, it is sanctified, so here if they were made for profane use and he dedicated them they are sanctified.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Levi in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. The Holy One, praiuse to Him, saw that the evil Haman in the future would weigh his money against Israel. He said, it is better that my children’s money should precede this evil one’s money. Therefore one precedes and reads the paragraph about Šeqalim.

“One does not skip in the Torah.” Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Because one does not scroll the book of the Torah in public. Rebbi Yose asked, think of it, if it was a small paragraph? But so that Israel should hear the Torah in due order. But did we not state: “he reads after the death and but on the tenth day”? There is a difference since this is the order of the day. You should know this, as Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, one never recites from memory but here he recites. Rebbi Yose ordered Bar Ulla, the beadle of the synagogue of the Babylonians: If there is one Torah, scroll it behind a curtain. If there are two, take away one and bring the other.

“One does not skip in the Torah.” Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Because one does not scroll the book of the Torah in public. Rebbi Yose asked, think of it, if it was a small paragraph? But so that Israel should hear the Torah in due order. But did we not state: “he reads after the death and but on the tenth day”? There is a difference since this is the order of the day. You should know this, as Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, one never recites from memory but here he recites. Rebbi Yose ordered Bar Ulla, the beadle of the synagogue of the Babylonians: If there is one Torah, scroll it behind a curtain. If there are two, take away one and bring the other.

Rebbi Joḥanan said: “One silver obolus and two silver coins are words of the Torah.” Rebbi Yasa stated before Rebbi Joḥanan: The appearance is with anything; the Sages only said: “One silver obolus, two silver coins.” He said to him: Is there anything like that? Rebbi Jonah said, are not all measures determined by the Sages? They said: The volume of an olive from a corpse, the volume of an olive from a cadaver, the volume of a lentil from a dead reptile. The question here is only what Rebbi Hoshaia stated: They should not be seen before Me empty-handed, with anything; the Sages only said: “A silver obolus, two silver coins.” The difficulty is that this is support for the opinion that it is based on words of the Torah. He said that only the Sages instituted: “one silver obolus, two silver coins.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said: Rebbi Joḥanan follows his own opinion and Rebbi Hoshaia follows his own opinion. Rebbi Joḥanan follows his own opinion since Rebbi Joḥanan said that all measures are practice taught by Moses at Sinai; he says that “one obolus and two silver coins are the word of the Torah.” Rebbi Hoshaia follows his own opinion; Rebbi Hoshaia is the one who said: he who eats forbidden food in the present time has to study the quantities; maybe a new court will arise and change the measures for him; then he will know what measure he ate. Therefore he is the one who said, the appearance is with anything; the Sages only said: “one silver obolus, two silver coins.” They said, Rebbi Joḥanan changed his mind about this. Rebbis Jonah and Jonathan said, he did not change his mind; additionally, Rebbi La said in the name of Rebbi Ammi: Ḥizqiah and Rebbi Joḥanan disagreed. Ḥizqiah said, a man may split his obligation for two animals. Rebbi Joḥanan said, nobody may split his obligation for two animals, but for each one he has to have two silver coins in his hand. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Ḥizqiah: A person adjoins an animal to an animal but no person may adjoin money to money. Rebbi Joḥanan said, a person may adjoin money to money but no person may adjoin animals to an animal. What may be done? There were before him ten animals, he sacrificed five of them on the first holiday. May the remainder push aside the last holiday? Rebbi Crispus said, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagree. One said, they push; the other one said, they do not push. We do not know who said what. Rebbi Ze`ira said, we may explain the words of the rabbis by their own words. Rebbi Joḥanan said: a person may adjoin coins to coins but not animals to an animal; he must say, they push. But Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, a person adjoins an animal to an animal but no person may adjoin money to money; he must say, they do not push. Simeon bar Abba came in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He adds and pushes the holiday further until he says: I do not intend to add further.

Rebbi Joḥanan said: “One silver obolus and two silver coins are words of the Torah.” Rebbi Yasa stated before Rebbi Joḥanan: The appearance is with anything; the Sages only said: “One silver obolus, two silver coins.” He said to him: Is there anything like that? Rebbi Jonah said, are not all measures determined by the Sages? They said: The volume of an olive from a corpse, the volume of an olive from a cadaver, the volume of a lentil from a dead reptile. The question here is only what Rebbi Hoshaia stated: They should not be seen before Me empty-handed, with anything; the Sages only said: “A silver obolus, two silver coins.” The difficulty is that this is support for the opinion that it is based on words of the Torah. He said that only the Sages instituted: “one silver obolus, two silver coins.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said: Rebbi Joḥanan follows his own opinion and Rebbi Hoshaia follows his own opinion. Rebbi Joḥanan follows his own opinion since Rebbi Joḥanan said that all measures are practice taught by Moses at Sinai; he says that “one obolus and two silver coins are the word of the Torah.” Rebbi Hoshaia follows his own opinion; Rebbi Hoshaia is the one who said: he who eats forbidden food in the present time has to study the quantities; maybe a new court will arise and change the measures for him; then he will know what measure he ate. Therefore he is the one who said, the appearance is with anything; the Sages only said: “one silver obolus, two silver coins.” They said, Rebbi Joḥanan changed his mind about this. Rebbis Jonah and Jonathan said, he did not change his mind; additionally, Rebbi La said in the name of Rebbi Ammi: Ḥizqiah and Rebbi Joḥanan disagreed. Ḥizqiah said, a man may split his obligation for two animals. Rebbi Joḥanan said, nobody may split his obligation for two animals, but for each one he has to have two silver coins in his hand. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Ḥizqiah: A person adjoins an animal to an animal but no person may adjoin money to money. Rebbi Joḥanan said, a person may adjoin money to money but no person may adjoin animals to an animal. What may be done? There were before him ten animals, he sacrificed five of them on the first holiday. May the remainder push aside the last holiday? Rebbi Crispus said, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagree. One said, they push; the other one said, they do not push. We do not know who said what. Rebbi Ze`ira said, we may explain the words of the rabbis by their own words. Rebbi Joḥanan said: a person may adjoin coins to coins but not animals to an animal; he must say, they push. But Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, a person adjoins an animal to an animal but no person may adjoin money to money; he must say, they do not push. Simeon bar Abba came in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He adds and pushes the holiday further until he says: I do not intend to add further.

Rebbi Joḥanan said: “One silver obolus and two silver coins are words of the Torah.” Rebbi Yasa stated before Rebbi Joḥanan: The appearance is with anything; the Sages only said: “One silver obolus, two silver coins.” He said to him: Is there anything like that? Rebbi Jonah said, are not all measures determined by the Sages? They said: The volume of an olive from a corpse, the volume of an olive from a cadaver, the volume of a lentil from a dead reptile. The question here is only what Rebbi Hoshaia stated: They should not be seen before Me empty-handed, with anything; the Sages only said: “A silver obolus, two silver coins.” The difficulty is that this is support for the opinion that it is based on words of the Torah. He said that only the Sages instituted: “one silver obolus, two silver coins.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said: Rebbi Joḥanan follows his own opinion and Rebbi Hoshaia follows his own opinion. Rebbi Joḥanan follows his own opinion since Rebbi Joḥanan said that all measures are practice taught by Moses at Sinai; he says that “one obolus and two silver coins are the word of the Torah.” Rebbi Hoshaia follows his own opinion; Rebbi Hoshaia is the one who said: he who eats forbidden food in the present time has to study the quantities; maybe a new court will arise and change the measures for him; then he will know what measure he ate. Therefore he is the one who said, the appearance is with anything; the Sages only said: “one silver obolus, two silver coins.” They said, Rebbi Joḥanan changed his mind about this. Rebbis Jonah and Jonathan said, he did not change his mind; additionally, Rebbi La said in the name of Rebbi Ammi: Ḥizqiah and Rebbi Joḥanan disagreed. Ḥizqiah said, a man may split his obligation for two animals. Rebbi Joḥanan said, nobody may split his obligation for two animals, but for each one he has to have two silver coins in his hand. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish in the name of Ḥizqiah: A person adjoins an animal to an animal but no person may adjoin money to money. Rebbi Joḥanan said, a person may adjoin money to money but no person may adjoin animals to an animal. What may be done? There were before him ten animals, he sacrificed five of them on the first holiday. May the remainder push aside the last holiday? Rebbi Crispus said, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagree. One said, they push; the other one said, they do not push. We do not know who said what. Rebbi Ze`ira said, we may explain the words of the rabbis by their own words. Rebbi Joḥanan said: a person may adjoin coins to coins but not animals to an animal; he must say, they push. But Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, a person adjoins an animal to an animal but no person may adjoin money to money; he must say, they do not push. Simeon bar Abba came in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: He adds and pushes the holiday further until he says: I do not intend to add further.

Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish was passing by the school when he heard them reciting the verse, they sacrificed animal sacrifices and brought elevation sacrifices the next day. He said, he who interrupts follows the House of Shammai; he who reads it as one sentence follows the House of Hillel. One understands elevation sacrifices the next day; but well-being sacrifices the next day? Are not well-being sacrifices brought following the House of Shammai? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, David died on Pentecost; all of Israel were deep mourners and they brought the next day.

“They agree that if it falls on the Sabbath that its slaughter-day is after the Sabbath.” So the House of Hillel are saying, its slaughter-day is after the Sabbath. Whose are the hides? Rebbi Tabi in the name of Rebbi Joshia: Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagree. Rebbi Joḥanan said, of all watches. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, of this watch. And you are saying, its slaughter-day is after the Sabbath; whose are the hides? The disagreement between Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish? Rebbi Joḥanan said, Pentecost has all of seven days as make-up. Rav Hoshaia objected: was it not stated, just as the New Moon is one day after its count, to Pentecost is one day after its count? Rebbi La said, if he did not bring his holiday sacrifice on the first day, he may bring it all seven days.

“They agree that if it falls on the Sabbath that its slaughter-day is after the Sabbath.” So the House of Hillel are saying, its slaughter-day is after the Sabbath. Whose are the hides? Rebbi Tabi in the name of Rebbi Joshia: Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagree. Rebbi Joḥanan said, of all watches. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, of this watch. And you are saying, its slaughter-day is after the Sabbath; whose are the hides? The disagreement between Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish? Rebbi Joḥanan said, Pentecost has all of seven days as make-up. Rav Hoshaia objected: was it not stated, just as the New Moon is one day after its count, to Pentecost is one day after its count? Rebbi La said, if he did not bring his holiday sacrifice on the first day, he may bring it all seven days.

“They agree that if it falls on the Sabbath that its slaughter-day is after the Sabbath.” So the House of Hillel are saying, its slaughter-day is after the Sabbath. Whose are the hides? Rebbi Tabi in the name of Rebbi Joshia: Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagree. Rebbi Joḥanan said, of all watches. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, of this watch. And you are saying, its slaughter-day is after the Sabbath; whose are the hides? The disagreement between Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish? Rebbi Joḥanan said, Pentecost has all of seven days as make-up. Rav Hoshaia objected: was it not stated, just as the New Moon is one day after its count, to Pentecost is one day after its count? Rebbi La said, if he did not bring his holiday sacrifice on the first day, he may bring it all seven days.

“And for the Red Cow if his hands became impure so became his body.” Rebbi Ḥanina said, not that they introduced new impurities for the Red Cow but they said, he who becomes impure in an easy impurity is like one who became impure in severe impurity. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: And it shall be collected by a man, why does the verse say, pure? Think of it. Even if you collect it by a shovel, the Torah requires pure. Where do we hold? If a metal shovel, but also flat metal implements are subject to impurity. If a wooden shovel, is it not held together because of something subject to impurity? Rav Hoshaia said, explain it if he collects it with a plank. Then it is impossible that he should not carry it. Rebbi Yudan, the father of Rebbi Mattaniah, said, explain it if he collects it with a coarse cross-beam. Rebbi Abba bar Mamal asked before Rebbi Immi: what is the difference between a person pure for the Red Cow and an empty vessel pure for the Red Cow? He answered him, And it shall be collected by a pure, why does the the verse say, man? Only to prescribe extraordinary purity to the man to handle the water for ashes of the Red Cow and the ashes of the Red Cow. Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: The moving which I declared pure for you for crawling animals I declared impure for you here.

There, we have stated: “A staff which is full of impure fluids, when it touched the miqweh it is pure, the words of Rebbi Joshua. But the Sages are saying, only if he immerses it completely.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, where do they disagree? For easy impurity; but for severe impurity even Rebbi Joshua agrees. Rebbi Joḥanan said, they even disagree for severe impurity. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “As long as his feet are in the water, he may consider himself pure for any stage he chooses.” Explain it about one who ate impure food and drank impure drinks. Did not Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi, Rebbi Abbahu say in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, the body of one who ate impure food and drank impure drinks is pure without special intention? From the moment he intended elevated purity he (needs) [does not need] intention. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “A miqweh containing exactly 40 seah into two persons descended, [both are pure]. One after the other, the first one is pure, the second impure. Rebbi Jehudah says, if the feet of the first touched the water, the second one also is pure.” Still this is about one who ate impure food and drank impure drinks. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: A woman in her period may rinse a radish in a cave and it is pure. If she lifted it in any way out of the water it is impure. And we have stated thereto: Rebbi Jehudah declares it pure in the name of Rebbi Joshua. And represents a menstruating woman not a severe impurity? This disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish and it has no standing.

There, we have stated: “A staff which is full of impure fluids, when it touched the miqweh it is pure, the words of Rebbi Joshua. But the Sages are saying, only if he immerses it completely.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, where do they disagree? For easy impurity; but for severe impurity even Rebbi Joshua agrees. Rebbi Joḥanan said, they even disagree for severe impurity. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “As long as his feet are in the water, he may consider himself pure for any stage he chooses.” Explain it about one who ate impure food and drank impure drinks. Did not Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi, Rebbi Abbahu say in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, the body of one who ate impure food and drank impure drinks is pure without special intention? From the moment he intended elevated purity he (needs) [does not need] intention. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “A miqweh containing exactly 40 seah into two persons descended, [both are pure]. One after the other, the first one is pure, the second impure. Rebbi Jehudah says, if the feet of the first touched the water, the second one also is pure.” Still this is about one who ate impure food and drank impure drinks. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: A woman in her period may rinse a radish in a cave and it is pure. If she lifted it in any way out of the water it is impure. And we have stated thereto: Rebbi Jehudah declares it pure in the name of Rebbi Joshua. And represents a menstruating woman not a severe impurity? This disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish and it has no standing.

There, we have stated: “A staff which is full of impure fluids, when it touched the miqweh it is pure, the words of Rebbi Joshua. But the Sages are saying, only if he immerses it completely.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, where do they disagree? For easy impurity; but for severe impurity even Rebbi Joshua agrees. Rebbi Joḥanan said, they even disagree for severe impurity. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “As long as his feet are in the water, he may consider himself pure for any stage he chooses.” Explain it about one who ate impure food and drank impure drinks. Did not Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi, Rebbi Abbahu say in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, the body of one who ate impure food and drank impure drinks is pure without special intention? From the moment he intended elevated purity he (needs) [does not need] intention. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “A miqweh containing exactly 40 seah into two persons descended, [both are pure]. One after the other, the first one is pure, the second impure. Rebbi Jehudah says, if the feet of the first touched the water, the second one also is pure.” Still this is about one who ate impure food and drank impure drinks. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: A woman in her period may rinse a radish in a cave and it is pure. If she lifted it in any way out of the water it is impure. And we have stated thereto: Rebbi Jehudah declares it pure in the name of Rebbi Joshua. And represents a menstruating woman not a severe impurity? This disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish and it has no standing.

There, we have stated: “A staff which is full of impure fluids, when it touched the miqweh it is pure, the words of Rebbi Joshua. But the Sages are saying, only if he immerses it completely.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, where do they disagree? For easy impurity; but for severe impurity even Rebbi Joshua agrees. Rebbi Joḥanan said, they even disagree for severe impurity. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “As long as his feet are in the water, he may consider himself pure for any stage he chooses.” Explain it about one who ate impure food and drank impure drinks. Did not Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi, Rebbi Abbahu say in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, the body of one who ate impure food and drank impure drinks is pure without special intention? From the moment he intended elevated purity he (needs) [does not need] intention. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “A miqweh containing exactly 40 seah into two persons descended, [both are pure]. One after the other, the first one is pure, the second impure. Rebbi Jehudah says, if the feet of the first touched the water, the second one also is pure.” Still this is about one who ate impure food and drank impure drinks. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: A woman in her period may rinse a radish in a cave and it is pure. If she lifted it in any way out of the water it is impure. And we have stated thereto: Rebbi Jehudah declares it pure in the name of Rebbi Joshua. And represents a menstruating woman not a severe impurity? This disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish and it has no standing.

There, we have stated: “A staff which is full of impure fluids, when it touched the miqweh it is pure, the words of Rebbi Joshua. But the Sages are saying, only if he immerses it completely.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, where do they disagree? For easy impurity; but for severe impurity even Rebbi Joshua agrees. Rebbi Joḥanan said, they even disagree for severe impurity. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “As long as his feet are in the water, he may consider himself pure for any stage he chooses.” Explain it about one who ate impure food and drank impure drinks. Did not Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi, Rebbi Abbahu say in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, the body of one who ate impure food and drank impure drinks is pure without special intention? From the moment he intended elevated purity he (needs) [does not need] intention. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “A miqweh containing exactly 40 seah into two persons descended, [both are pure]. One after the other, the first one is pure, the second impure. Rebbi Jehudah says, if the feet of the first touched the water, the second one also is pure.” Still this is about one who ate impure food and drank impure drinks. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: A woman in her period may rinse a radish in a cave and it is pure. If she lifted it in any way out of the water it is impure. And we have stated thereto: Rebbi Jehudah declares it pure in the name of Rebbi Joshua. And represents a menstruating woman not a severe impurity? This disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish and it has no standing.

There, we have stated: “A staff which is full of impure fluids, when it touched the miqweh it is pure, the words of Rebbi Joshua. But the Sages are saying, only if he immerses it completely.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, where do they disagree? For easy impurity; but for severe impurity even Rebbi Joshua agrees. Rebbi Joḥanan said, they even disagree for severe impurity. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “As long as his feet are in the water, he may consider himself pure for any stage he chooses.” Explain it about one who ate impure food and drank impure drinks. Did not Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi, Rebbi Abbahu say in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, the body of one who ate impure food and drank impure drinks is pure without special intention? From the moment he intended elevated purity he (needs) [does not need] intention. A Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: “A miqweh containing exactly 40 seah into two persons descended, [both are pure]. One after the other, the first one is pure, the second impure. Rebbi Jehudah says, if the feet of the first touched the water, the second one also is pure.” Still this is about one who ate impure food and drank impure drinks. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: A woman in her period may rinse a radish in a cave and it is pure. If she lifted it in any way out of the water it is impure. And we have stated thereto: Rebbi Jehudah declares it pure in the name of Rebbi Joshua. And represents a menstruating woman not a severe impurity? This disagrees with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish and it has no standing.

Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is from Rebbi Aqiba’s testimony. As we have stated there, “Rebbi Aqiba added that fine flour, and incense, frankincense, and coals, part of which were touched by a Tevul Yom are all disqualified.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, they knew that vessels of Servive do combine. About what comes he to testify? About the leftovers of flour-offerings that they do combine together. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Zamina in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Why did they say, leftovers of flour-offerings do combine together? Because they need their vessel. Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Ila in the name of Rebbi Yasa: they knew that vessels of Service do combine. About what comes he to testify? About fine flour, and incense, and frankincense, and coals. One understands fine flour, and incense, and frankincense. Coals? Rebbi Abun bar Cahana said, explain it about coals on the Day of Atonement which he has to carry inside in the vessel which he used to scoop up. But [not] about every day’s coals. As we have stated there, “If a qab of coals were dispersed, one sweeps them into the water canal, but on the Sabbath one covers it with a wine-cooler. Rebbi Mattania said, do fine flour, and incense, frankincense, and coals, need a minimum volume in this respect? Not because they have to be in their vessel? Here also because they have to be in their vessel.

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked: Does a dry piece of flour-offering start a count? Rebbi Eleazar objected: Is it not written, of all foodstuff which is edible on which comes water is susceptible to impurity. Any whose impurity is caused by water starts a count, nothing whose impurity is not caused by water starts a count. Rebbi Yose objected: Is there not a carcass of a kosher bird which causes impurity of foodstuff without preparation and without impurity, because it ends up causing severe impurity? What about this? Of all foodstuff which is edible, any whose impurity is caused by the category of edibles starts a count, nothing whose impurity is not caused by edibles the category of starts a count.