precede

It therefore behoves us, who inquire much concerning events at hand, to search diligently into those things which are able to save us. Let us then utterly flee from all the works of iniquity, lest these should take hold of us; and let us hate the error of the present time, that we may set our love on the world to come: let us not give loose reins to our soul, that it should have power to run with sinners and the wicked, lest we become like them. The final stumbling-block (or source of danger) approaches, concerning which it is written, as Enoch says, “For for this end the Lord has cut short the times and the days, that His Beloved may hasten; and He will come to the inheritance.” And the prophet also speaks thus: “Ten kingdoms shall reign upon the earth, and a little king shall rise up after them, who shall subdue under one three of the kings.” In like manner Daniel says concerning the same, “And I beheld the fourth beast, wicked and powerful, and more savage than all the beasts of the earth, and how from it sprang up ten horns, and out of them a little budding horn, and how it subdued under one three of the great horns.” Ye ought therefore to understand. And this also I further beg of you, as being one of you, and loving you both individually and collectively more than my own soul, to take heed now to yourselves, and not to be like some, adding largely to your sins, and saying, “The covenant is both theirs and ours.” But they thus finally lost it, after Moses had already received it. For the Scripture saith, “And Moses was fasting in the mount forty days and forty nights, and received the covenant from the Lord, tables of stone written with the finger of the hand of the Lord;” but turning away to idols, they lost it. For the Lord speaks thus to Moses: “Moses, go down quickly; for the people whom thou hast brought out of the land of Egypt have transgressed.” And Moses understood [the meaning of God], and cast the two tables out of his hands; and their covenant was broken, in order that the covenant of the beloved Jesus might be sealed upon our heart, in the hope which flows from believing in Him. Now, being desirous to write many things to you, not as your teacher, but as becometh one who loves you, I have taken care not to fail to write to you from what I myself possess, with a view to your purification. We take earnest heed in these last days; for the whole [past] time of your faith will profit you nothing, unless now in this wicked time we also withstand coming sources of danger, as becometh the sons of God. That the Black One may find no means of entrance, let us flee from every vanity, let us utterly hate the works of the way of wickedness. Do not, by retiring apart, live a solitary life, as if you were already [fully] justified; but coming together in one place, make common inquiry concerning what tends to your general welfare. For the Scripture saith, “Woe to them who are wise to themselves, and prudent in their own sight!” Let us be spiritually-minded: let us be a perfect temple to God. As much as in us lies, let us meditate upon the fear of God, and let us keep His commandments, that we may rejoice in His ordinances. The Lord will judge the world without respect of persons. Each will receive as he has done: if he is righteous, his righteousness will precede him; if he is wicked, the reward of wickedness is before him. Take heed, lest resting at our ease, as those who are the called [of God], we should fall asleep in our sins, and the wicked prince, acquiring power over us, should thrust us away from the kingdom of the Lord. And all the more attend to this, my brethren, when ye reflect and behold, that after so great signs and wonders were wrought in Israel, they were thus [at length] abandoned. Let us beware lest we be found [fulfilling that saying], as it is written, “Many are called, but few are chosen.”

Jesus said, "If your leaders tell you, 'Look, the kingdom is in heaven,' then the birds of heaven will precede you. If they tell you, 'It's in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is within you and outside of you. "When you know yourselves, then you'll be known, and you'll realize that you're the children of the living Father. But if you don't know yourselves, then you live in poverty, and you are the poverty."

Jesus said, "If your leaders tell you, 'Look, the kingdom is in heaven,' then the birds of heaven will precede you. If they tell you, 'It's in the sea,' then the fish will precede you. Rather, the kingdom is within you and outside of you. "When you know yourselves, then you'll be known, and you'll realize that you're the children of the living Father. But if you don't know yourselves, then you live in poverty, and you are the poverty."

Behold, the Lord cometh! Behold, the "holy ones" have been prepared! The crowns and the prizes of the victors precede them!

CONCERNING THE DIVINE LOVE WHICH OUGHT TO PRECEDE THE ACQUISITION OF THIS KNOWLEDGE

The third trumpet is the last, at which the dead will rise, and the living be changed, as the blessed Paul says, ‘ Swiftly, as in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trumpet when it sounds; and the dead shall rise without corruption, and we shall be changed.’ So swiftly and speedily will the resurrection of all men be wrought, according to the spiritual nature of the new world. For the swiftness of the resurrection will surpass the swiftness of understanding, and the spiritual hosts alone see and know in what manner it will take place, every man being suddenly found standing in his spirituality. Some men therefore have a tradition that the resurrection of the righteous and the just and the believers will precede that of other men, who are remote from the true faith; but according to the opinion of the truthful and of people generally, the resurrection of the whole human race will take place quicker than lightning and than the twinkling of an eye; from the generation of Adam to the latest generation they shall rise at the last trumpet. And though, according to the opinion of the Expositor, many sounds will be heard on that night, each one of which is a sign of what will happen, yet, according to the consent of the greater part of the - expositors and of Scripture, three distinct trumpets will sound by which the whole work of the resurrection will be completed and finished. Michael the expositor and exegete, however, says otherwise in the book of Questions, speaking as follows: ‘ The world will not pass away and be dissolved before the vivification of the dead, but the coming of our Lord will be seen first of all, who will come with the spiritual hosts; and immediately our Lord’s power will compel the earth to give up the parts of the bodies of men who have been slain and have become dust and ashes within it; and there will be a making ready and preparation of the souls to receive their bodies all together. If, before the vivification of the dead, the world and all that is therein were to pass away, from whence pray would the dead rise? Those who say that the world will pass away before the vivification of the dead are fools and simpletons; for Christ will not make the world pass away before the vivification of the dead, but He will first of all raise the dead, and men will see with their eyes the passing away of the world, the uprooting of the elements, and the destruction of the heavens and the earth and the sun and the moon and the stars; and from here sorrow will begin to reign in the mind of the wicked, and endless joy in the mind of the righteous.’

"In a word, all the souls of men who shall receive the mysteries of the Light, will precede all the rulers who have repented, and they will precede all those of the region of the Midst and those of the whole region of the Right, and they will precede those of the whole region of the Treasury of the Light. In a word, they will precede all those of the region [of the Treasury], and they will precede all those of the regions of the first Commandment, and they will pass into the interior of them all and go into the Inheritance of the Light up to the region of their mystery; and every one abideth in the region up to which he hath received mysteries. And those of the region of the Midst and of the Right and those of the whole region of the Treasury, every one abideth in the region of the order into which he hath been set from the beginning on, until the universe shall be raised up. And every one of them accomplisheth his economy to which he hath been set, in respect of the ingathering of the souls who have received the mysteries, in respect of this economy, so that they may seal all the souls who will receive the mysteries and who will pass through their interior towards the Inheritance of the Light.

"In a word, all the souls of men who shall receive the mysteries of the Light, will precede all the rulers who have repented, and they will precede all those of the region of the Midst and those of the whole region of the Right, and they will precede those of the whole region of the Treasury of the Light. In a word, they will precede all those of the region [of the Treasury], and they will precede all those of the regions of the first Commandment, and they will pass into the interior of them all and go into the Inheritance of the Light up to the region of their mystery; and every one abideth in the region up to which he hath received mysteries. And those of the region of the Midst and of the Right and those of the whole region of the Treasury, every one abideth in the region of the order into which he hath been set from the beginning on, until the universe shall be raised up. And every one of them accomplisheth his economy to which he hath been set, in respect of the ingathering of the souls who have received the mysteries, in respect of this economy, so that they may seal all the souls who will receive the mysteries and who will pass through their interior towards the Inheritance of the Light.

"In a word, all the souls of men who shall receive the mysteries of the Light, will precede all the rulers who have repented, and they will precede all those of the region of the Midst and those of the whole region of the Right, and they will precede those of the whole region of the Treasury of the Light. In a word, they will precede all those of the region [of the Treasury], and they will precede all those of the regions of the first Commandment, and they will pass into the interior of them all and go into the Inheritance of the Light up to the region of their mystery; and every one abideth in the region up to which he hath received mysteries. And those of the region of the Midst and of the Right and those of the whole region of the Treasury, every one abideth in the region of the order into which he hath been set from the beginning on, until the universe shall be raised up. And every one of them accomplisheth his economy to which he hath been set, in respect of the ingathering of the souls who have received the mysteries, in respect of this economy, so that they may seal all the souls who will receive the mysteries and who will pass through their interior towards the Inheritance of the Light.

"In a word, all the souls of men who shall receive the mysteries of the Light, will precede all the rulers who have repented, and they will precede all those of the region of the Midst and those of the whole region of the Right, and they will precede those of the whole region of the Treasury of the Light. In a word, they will precede all those of the region [of the Treasury], and they will precede all those of the regions of the first Commandment, and they will pass into the interior of them all and go into the Inheritance of the Light up to the region of their mystery; and every one abideth in the region up to which he hath received mysteries. And those of the region of the Midst and of the Right and those of the whole region of the Treasury, every one abideth in the region of the order into which he hath been set from the beginning on, until the universe shall be raised up. And every one of them accomplisheth his economy to which he hath been set, in respect of the ingathering of the souls who have received the mysteries, in respect of this economy, so that they may seal all the souls who will receive the mysteries and who will pass through their interior towards the Inheritance of the Light.

"In a word, all the souls of men who shall receive the mysteries of the Light, will precede all the rulers who have repented, and they will precede all those of the region of the Midst and those of the whole region of the Right, and they will precede those of the whole region of the Treasury of the Light. In a word, they will precede all those of the region [of the Treasury], and they will precede all those of the regions of the first Commandment, and they will pass into the interior of them all and go into the Inheritance of the Light up to the region of their mystery; and every one abideth in the region up to which he hath received mysteries. And those of the region of the Midst and of the Right and those of the whole region of the Treasury, every one abideth in the region of the order into which he hath been set from the beginning on, until the universe shall be raised up. And every one of them accomplisheth his economy to which he hath been set, in respect of the ingathering of the souls who have received the mysteries, in respect of this economy, so that they may seal all the souls who will receive the mysteries and who will pass through their interior towards the Inheritance of the Light.

From where do we derive that first-fruits must precede terumah, seeing that this one is called “terumah” and “the first” and the other is [also] called “terumah” and “the first”? Rather first-fruits take precedence since they are the first fruits of all produce. And terumah comes before the first tithe also because it is called “first.” And first tithe [precedes second tithe,] because it includes that which is called “first.”

This is the order of inheritance: “If a man dies without leaving a son, you shall transfer his property to his daughter” (Numbers 27:8) the son precedes the daughter, and all the son’s offspring precede the daughter. The daughter precedes the brothers and the daughters’ offspring precede the brothers.’ Brothers precede the father’s brothers and the brothers’ offspring precede the father’s brothers. This is the general rule: whosoever has precedence in inheritance, his offspring also has precedence. The father has precedence over all his offspring.

This is the order of inheritance: “If a man dies without leaving a son, you shall transfer his property to his daughter” (Numbers 27:8) the son precedes the daughter, and all the son’s offspring precede the daughter. The daughter precedes the brothers and the daughters’ offspring precede the brothers.’ Brothers precede the father’s brothers and the brothers’ offspring precede the father’s brothers. This is the general rule: whosoever has precedence in inheritance, his offspring also has precedence. The father has precedence over all his offspring.

This is the order of inheritance: “If a man dies without leaving a son, you shall transfer his property to his daughter” (Numbers 27:8) the son precedes the daughter, and all the son’s offspring precede the daughter. The daughter precedes the brothers and the daughters’ offspring precede the brothers.’ Brothers precede the father’s brothers and the brothers’ offspring precede the father’s brothers. This is the general rule: whosoever has precedence in inheritance, his offspring also has precedence. The father has precedence over all his offspring.

This is the order of inheritance: “If a man dies without leaving a son, you shall transfer his property to his daughter” (Numbers 27:8) the son precedes the daughter, and all the son’s offspring precede the daughter. The daughter precedes the brothers and the daughters’ offspring precede the brothers.’ Brothers precede the father’s brothers and the brothers’ offspring precede the father’s brothers. This is the general rule: whosoever has precedence in inheritance, his offspring also has precedence. The father has precedence over all his offspring.

Whatever is more frequent than another, takes precedence over the other. The daily offerings precede the additional offerings; The additional offerings of Shabbat precede the additional offerings of Rosh Hodesh; The additional offerings of Rosh Hodesh precede the additional offerings of Rosh Hashanah. As it is said, “You shall present these in addition to the morning portion of the regular burnt offering” (Numbers 28:23).

Whatever is more frequent than another, takes precedence over the other. The daily offerings precede the additional offerings; The additional offerings of Shabbat precede the additional offerings of Rosh Hodesh; The additional offerings of Rosh Hodesh precede the additional offerings of Rosh Hashanah. As it is said, “You shall present these in addition to the morning portion of the regular burnt offering” (Numbers 28:23).

Whatever is more frequent than another, takes precedence over the other. The daily offerings precede the additional offerings; The additional offerings of Shabbat precede the additional offerings of Rosh Hodesh; The additional offerings of Rosh Hodesh precede the additional offerings of Rosh Hashanah. As it is said, “You shall present these in addition to the morning portion of the regular burnt offering” (Numbers 28:23).

Whatever is more sacred than another precedes the other. The blood of a hatat precedes the blood of a olah, because it propitiates. The limbs of a olah precede the innards of a hatat, because it [the former] is entirely for the fires [of the altar]. A hatat precedes an asham, because its blood is sprinkled on the four horns and on the base. An asham precedes a today and a nazirite’s ram, because it is a most holy sacrifice. A todah and a nazirite's ram precede a shelamim, because they are eaten one day [only] and require [the accompaniment of] loaves. A shelamim precedes a firstling, because it requires four [blood] applications and laying [of hands], libations, and the waving of the breast and the thigh.

Whatever is more sacred than another precedes the other. The blood of a hatat precedes the blood of a olah, because it propitiates. The limbs of a olah precede the innards of a hatat, because it [the former] is entirely for the fires [of the altar]. A hatat precedes an asham, because its blood is sprinkled on the four horns and on the base. An asham precedes a today and a nazirite’s ram, because it is a most holy sacrifice. A todah and a nazirite's ram precede a shelamim, because they are eaten one day [only] and require [the accompaniment of] loaves. A shelamim precedes a firstling, because it requires four [blood] applications and laying [of hands], libations, and the waving of the breast and the thigh.

Birds precede meal-offerings (minhah), because they are blood sacrifices. A sinner’s meal-offering precedes a voluntary meal-offering, because it comes on account of sin. A hatat of a bird precedes an olah of a bird. And it is likewise when he dedicates them.

All hatats in the Torah precede ashams, except the asham of a metzora (one with a skin affliction), because it comes to make [a person] fit. All ashams of the Torah must be two-year olds and [two] silver shekels in value, except a nazirite’s asham and the asham of a metzorah, for they are a year old, and need not be [two] silver shekels in value.

MISHNAH: Ribbi Joshua ben Qorḥah said: Why does Shema‘ precede “it shall be when you will really listen”? In order that one should accept the Kingdom of Heaven before he accepts the yoke of the commandments. And “it shall be when you will really listen” to “The Eternal said”? Because “it shall be when you will really listen” is applicable day and night, “the Eternal said” is applicable only during daytime.

Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan: Minḥah and Musaph prayers, the Minḥah prayer has precedence. They wanted to say, that is if there is no time in the day to pray both of them; but if there is time in the day to pray both of them then the Musaph prayer has precedence. Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan: Even if there is time in the day to pray both of them, the Minḥah prayer has precedence. Rebbi Nathan bar Ṭobi in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan: Even if there is time in the day to pray both of them, the Minḥah prayer has precedence. But did we not state: “If somebody made Minḥah prayer precede Musaph prayer, he has done his duty.” Retrospectively, but from the start, not so. Explain it if the time for prayer has not yet arrived, as in the following: Rebbi Joshua ben Levi commanded his students: If you have lunch and the day progressed to six hours before you entered, then pray Minḥah before you enter.

“If one lifted the Second Tithe before the First, it is also acceptable.” Hence, one should not do it on purpose. Rebbi Abba, son of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, one may make the Second precede the First in demay. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa bar Idi in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: One should not do it, but if he did, what he did is valid.

We have stated ḥallah between First and Second Tithes. Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: This means that ḥallah is not subject to “do not give too late.” Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: The Mishnah is not formulated in sequence, do we not deal with demay? Did not Rebbi Abba, son of Rebbi Ḥiyya, say in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan that the Mishnah deals with demay; hence, not with certain produce? And here we deal with demay. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: Also for certain. On that, Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Zeïra said, this means that ḥallah is not subject to “do not give too late.” Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: The Mishnah is not formulated in sequence, should not ḥallah precede the First Tithe? Then ḥallah should be subject to tithes but not tithes to ḥallah, because everything that precedes another, the other is obligated for it. And we have stated in this respect: “He who makes dough from ṭevel, whether he takes ḥallah before heave or heave before ḥallah, what he did is done. Ḥallah should not be eaten until he take heave for it, heave should not be eaten until he separate ḥallah for it.” But why does First Tithe have precedence? Because it started at the threshing floor. But does the Second Tithe not start at the threshing floor? Rebbi Mattaniah said, it would have been logical that ḥallah should precede everything else. Why does First Heave have precedence? Because it started at the threshing floor and it is called “beginning.” Second Tithe, even though it started at the threshing floor, is not called “beginning.”

We have stated ḥallah between First and Second Tithes. Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: This means that ḥallah is not subject to “do not give too late.” Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: The Mishnah is not formulated in sequence, do we not deal with demay? Did not Rebbi Abba, son of Rebbi Ḥiyya, say in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan that the Mishnah deals with demay; hence, not with certain produce? And here we deal with demay. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: Also for certain. On that, Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Zeïra said, this means that ḥallah is not subject to “do not give too late.” Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Zeïra: The Mishnah is not formulated in sequence, should not ḥallah precede the First Tithe? Then ḥallah should be subject to tithes but not tithes to ḥallah, because everything that precedes another, the other is obligated for it. And we have stated in this respect: “He who makes dough from ṭevel, whether he takes ḥallah before heave or heave before ḥallah, what he did is done. Ḥallah should not be eaten until he take heave for it, heave should not be eaten until he separate ḥallah for it.” But why does First Tithe have precedence? Because it started at the threshing floor. But does the Second Tithe not start at the threshing floor? Rebbi Mattaniah said, it would have been logical that ḥallah should precede everything else. Why does First Heave have precedence? Because it started at the threshing floor and it is called “beginning.” Second Tithe, even though it started at the threshing floor, is not called “beginning.”

“What is here on this side is profane ṭevel.” Why does he not say, what is here on this side is tithe? He would precede. Why does he not say, that on this side is heave? It would turn out that either he diminishes or increases the heave. Since he says, what is here on this side is profane ṭevel, whether he diminishes or increases the heave does not matter.

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

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

It was stated: “The blood of the daily sacrifice and its limbs precede the Pesaḥ, and the Pesaḥ the incense, and the incense the trimming of the lights.” There are Tannaim who state: “The blood of the daily sacrifice and its limbs precede the incense, and the incense the Pesaḥ, and the Pesaḥ the trimming of the lights, so that the libations of the daily sacrifice should be accompanying it.” There is nothing preceding the daily morning sacrifice and nothing later than the daily evening sacrifice except Pesaḥ and incense on Passover Eve. “ From where that nothing should precede the daily morning sacrifice? The verse says, on it ˋolah. And from where that nothing should invalidate the daily evening sacrifice? The verse says, on it šelamim. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish says, it is not written here he arranges on it ˋolah but he arranges on it the ˋolah, that no elevation offering precede the daily morning sacrifice. It was stated: Rebbi Ismael the son of Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa says, people lacking expiation bring their expiatory sacrifices after the daily evening sacrifice to enable them to immerse themselves and eat their Pesaḥ in the evening. Rebbi Yudan said, that is, for a rich sufferer from skin disease. But a poor sufferer from skin disease, does he not bring a bird? Said Rebbi Samuel ben Eudaimon, does he not bring a reparation sacrifice?

It was stated: “The blood of the daily sacrifice and its limbs precede the Pesaḥ, and the Pesaḥ the incense, and the incense the trimming of the lights.” There are Tannaim who state: “The blood of the daily sacrifice and its limbs precede the incense, and the incense the Pesaḥ, and the Pesaḥ the trimming of the lights, so that the libations of the daily sacrifice should be accompanying it.” There is nothing preceding the daily morning sacrifice and nothing later than the daily evening sacrifice except Pesaḥ and incense on Passover Eve. “ From where that nothing should precede the daily morning sacrifice? The verse says, on it ˋolah. And from where that nothing should invalidate the daily evening sacrifice? The verse says, on it šelamim. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish says, it is not written here he arranges on it ˋolah but he arranges on it the ˋolah, that no elevation offering precede the daily morning sacrifice. It was stated: Rebbi Ismael the son of Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa says, people lacking expiation bring their expiatory sacrifices after the daily evening sacrifice to enable them to immerse themselves and eat their Pesaḥ in the evening. Rebbi Yudan said, that is, for a rich sufferer from skin disease. But a poor sufferer from skin disease, does he not bring a bird? Said Rebbi Samuel ben Eudaimon, does he not bring a reparation sacrifice?

It was stated: “The blood of the daily sacrifice and its limbs precede the Pesaḥ, and the Pesaḥ the incense, and the incense the trimming of the lights.” There are Tannaim who state: “The blood of the daily sacrifice and its limbs precede the incense, and the incense the Pesaḥ, and the Pesaḥ the trimming of the lights, so that the libations of the daily sacrifice should be accompanying it.” There is nothing preceding the daily morning sacrifice and nothing later than the daily evening sacrifice except Pesaḥ and incense on Passover Eve. “ From where that nothing should precede the daily morning sacrifice? The verse says, on it ˋolah. And from where that nothing should invalidate the daily evening sacrifice? The verse says, on it šelamim. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish says, it is not written here he arranges on it ˋolah but he arranges on it the ˋolah, that no elevation offering precede the daily morning sacrifice. It was stated: Rebbi Ismael the son of Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa says, people lacking expiation bring their expiatory sacrifices after the daily evening sacrifice to enable them to immerse themselves and eat their Pesaḥ in the evening. Rebbi Yudan said, that is, for a rich sufferer from skin disease. But a poor sufferer from skin disease, does he not bring a bird? Said Rebbi Samuel ben Eudaimon, does he not bring a reparation sacrifice?

It was stated: “The blood of the daily sacrifice and its limbs precede the Pesaḥ, and the Pesaḥ the incense, and the incense the trimming of the lights.” There are Tannaim who state: “The blood of the daily sacrifice and its limbs precede the incense, and the incense the Pesaḥ, and the Pesaḥ the trimming of the lights, so that the libations of the daily sacrifice should be accompanying it.” There is nothing preceding the daily morning sacrifice and nothing later than the daily evening sacrifice except Pesaḥ and incense on Passover Eve. “ From where that nothing should precede the daily morning sacrifice? The verse says, on it ˋolah. And from where that nothing should invalidate the daily evening sacrifice? The verse says, on it šelamim. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish says, it is not written here he arranges on it ˋolah but he arranges on it the ˋolah, that no elevation offering precede the daily morning sacrifice. It was stated: Rebbi Ismael the son of Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa says, people lacking expiation bring their expiatory sacrifices after the daily evening sacrifice to enable them to immerse themselves and eat their Pesaḥ in the evening. Rebbi Yudan said, that is, for a rich sufferer from skin disease. But a poor sufferer from skin disease, does he not bring a bird? Said Rebbi Samuel ben Eudaimon, does he not bring a reparation sacrifice?

“If one slaughtered it before noon it is disqualified,” [after noontime] immediately it is qualified. “If one slaughtered it before the daily sacrifice it is qualified.” It was stated thus: One could think that if Pesaḥ preceded the daily sacrifice, the daily sacrifice could not be delayed. The verse says, do, adding. Rebbi Abun said, the Mishnah implies that the Pesaḥ itself is qualified. If you would say, it is disqualified, it would be as if it did not precede.

There, you are saying: “The blood of the daily sacrifice and its limbs precede the Pesaḥ, and the Pesaḥ the incense, and the incense the trimming of the lights.” And here you are saying so? Rebbi La said, one if it is living, the other if it is slaughtered.

Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, the tenth of an ephah and breeches obstruct. What is the reason? Both are “making”. Rebbi Ḥanina said, and do with Aaron and his sons so, all which is written in the Chapter obstructs. This comes following what Rebbi Samuel bar Nahman said in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: this is the word, and this is the word, even reading the Chapter obstructs. Rebbi Joḥanan said, anything obstructing for future generations obstructs here, [and anything not obstructing for future generations does not obstruct here.] What do you have? The leaning of hands and the remainders of the blood which are not obstructing in future generations are obstructing here. Rebbi Ḥanina said, the diadem and Aaron’s mitre precede the sons’ belts. Jehudah the great says, you shall gird them with belts, Aaron and his sons. Rebbi Idi said, what you are saying is as a meritorious deed. But as a commandment, Moses brought near Aaron and his sons and washed them in water, and after that, he put the vest on him, and after that, Moses brought Aaron and his sons near and clothed them with shirts.

He shall bring it, before the additional sacrifices, but when he repeats you shall sacrifice even after the libations. There are Tannaim who state, before the libations. He who says before the libations, before the wine libations. He who says after the libations, after the libations of fine flour. The fine flour precedes the pan-baked breads; even though this is for the fire and that is for the fire, this is a private sacrifice and the other a public sacrifice. The pan-baked bread precede the cups; even though this is a private sacrifice and the other a public sacrifice, this is frequent but the other is not frequent. The pan-baked breads precede the wine since this is for the fire but that is for the bowls. Cups and wine, which one has precedence? Is that not the Mishnah, incense before the wine? Here for a private offering, there for public offering.

He shall bring it, before the additional sacrifices, but when he repeats you shall sacrifice even after the libations. There are Tannaim who state, before the libations. He who says before the libations, before the wine libations. He who says after the libations, after the libations of fine flour. The fine flour precedes the pan-baked breads; even though this is for the fire and that is for the fire, this is a private sacrifice and the other a public sacrifice. The pan-baked bread precede the cups; even though this is a private sacrifice and the other a public sacrifice, this is frequent but the other is not frequent. The pan-baked breads precede the wine since this is for the fire but that is for the bowls. Cups and wine, which one has precedence? Is that not the Mishnah, incense before the wine? Here for a private offering, there for public offering.

HALAKHAH: It is written about the daily sacrifice in the morning, and it is written about wood in the morning. Something about which is written in the morning, in the morning, shall precede something about which in the morning is written only once. Then even before its blood? Rebbi Hila said, you shall do, preceded action for it. It is written about the daily sacrifice in the morning, and it is written about incense in the morning, in the morning. Something about which is written in the morning, in the morning, shall precede something about which only [one] in the morning is written. Where do we hold? If about limbs, are they not like wood? But we are holding, even for its blood. It is written about wood in the morning, in the morning, and it is written about incense in the morning, in the morning, and I do not know which of the two is preceding. Which one is enabling what? Wood enables the incense; the wood shall precede the incense. Come and see, wood precedes the blood and blood precedes incense, and you are saying so? Rebbi Hila said, no. Since I could not prove by a logical argument that wood enables the incense, you needed that baraita. They wanted to say, what enables the incense? Charcoal. Rebbi Eleazar said, smoke-creating herb.

HALAKHAH: It is written about the daily sacrifice in the morning, and it is written about wood in the morning. Something about which is written in the morning, in the morning, shall precede something about which in the morning is written only once. Then even before its blood? Rebbi Hila said, you shall do, preceded action for it. It is written about the daily sacrifice in the morning, and it is written about incense in the morning, in the morning. Something about which is written in the morning, in the morning, shall precede something about which only [one] in the morning is written. Where do we hold? If about limbs, are they not like wood? But we are holding, even for its blood. It is written about wood in the morning, in the morning, and it is written about incense in the morning, in the morning, and I do not know which of the two is preceding. Which one is enabling what? Wood enables the incense; the wood shall precede the incense. Come and see, wood precedes the blood and blood precedes incense, and you are saying so? Rebbi Hila said, no. Since I could not prove by a logical argument that wood enables the incense, you needed that baraita. They wanted to say, what enables the incense? Charcoal. Rebbi Eleazar said, smoke-creating herb.

HALAKHAH: It is written about the daily sacrifice in the morning, and it is written about wood in the morning. Something about which is written in the morning, in the morning, shall precede something about which in the morning is written only once. Then even before its blood? Rebbi Hila said, you shall do, preceded action for it. It is written about the daily sacrifice in the morning, and it is written about incense in the morning, in the morning. Something about which is written in the morning, in the morning, shall precede something about which only [one] in the morning is written. Where do we hold? If about limbs, are they not like wood? But we are holding, even for its blood. It is written about wood in the morning, in the morning, and it is written about incense in the morning, in the morning, and I do not know which of the two is preceding. Which one is enabling what? Wood enables the incense; the wood shall precede the incense. Come and see, wood precedes the blood and blood precedes incense, and you are saying so? Rebbi Hila said, no. Since I could not prove by a logical argument that wood enables the incense, you needed that baraita. They wanted to say, what enables the incense? Charcoal. Rebbi Eleazar said, smoke-creating herb.

HALAKHAH: It is written: He said, I called on the Eternal in my trouble and he answered me. Would not David and Solomon have to precede Elijah and Jonah? Only to conclude with “Who shows mercy for the Land.”

MISHNAH: The scroll is read on the Eleventh, the Twelfth, the Thirteenth, the Fourteenth, the Fifteenth, no less and no more. Places walled from the days of Joshua bin Nun read on the Fifteenth. Hamlets and large villages read on the Fourteenth, except that hamlets precede to the market day.

Samuel stated: Why do they precede to the market day? So they may provide [water and] food to their brothers in the fortified places. Rebbi Philippos ben Protos said before Rebbi Jonah: Could this mean that it is forbidden for {agricultural} work? He said to him, if from this you can conclude nothing. Are there not the intermediate days of holidays which are forbidden for {agricultural} work but they provide food to their brothers in the fortified places. You only have this from Rebbi, for Rebbi acted demonstratively on two days in the year. He took a bath on the Seventeenth of Tammuz and planted saplings on Purim.

MISHNAH: How is this? If it falls on Monday, hamlets and large villages read on this day, but walled cities the next day. If it falls on Tuesday or Wednesday, hamlets precede to the market day, large villages read on this day, but walled cities the next day.

MISHNAH: If it falls on Thursday, hamlets and large villages read on this day, but walled cities on the next day. If it falls on Friday, hamlets precede to the market day, large villages and walled cities read on this day. If it falls on the Sabbath, hamlets and large villages precede and read on the market day, but walled cities on the next day.

MISHNAH: If it falls on Thursday, hamlets and large villages read on this day, but walled cities on the next day. If it falls on Friday, hamlets precede to the market day, large villages and walled cities read on this day. If it falls on the Sabbath, hamlets and large villages precede and read on the market day, but walled cities on the next day.

HALAKHAH: They asked before Rebbi Ze`ira: Come and see, if it falls so that in walled cities one should read on the Sabbath, one reads on Friday. If it falls so that in villages one should read on the Sabbath, it is being pushed to the market day! Rebbi La said, because of the honor of walled cities, that one should not say, we saw walled cities and villages read at the same day. Then it should not be pushed to the market day, that one should not say, we saw hamlets and villages read on the same day. Then if it falls on Monday, falls on [Thursday, falls on] the Sabbath? It was found stated, Hamlets [and villages] and walled cities may read together; and this Tanna does not show (respect) [even] for any creature. He holds that walled cities cannot precede villages; he holds that any which is pushed away is pushed to the market day. “Rebbi says, all shall be pushed to the market day.” For he holds that walled cities cannot precede villages; for he holds that any which is pushed away is pushed to the market day. How does one act? Rebbi Yose said, following the Mishnah.

HALAKHAH: They asked before Rebbi Ze`ira: Come and see, if it falls so that in walled cities one should read on the Sabbath, one reads on Friday. If it falls so that in villages one should read on the Sabbath, it is being pushed to the market day! Rebbi La said, because of the honor of walled cities, that one should not say, we saw walled cities and villages read at the same day. Then it should not be pushed to the market day, that one should not say, we saw hamlets and villages read on the same day. Then if it falls on Monday, falls on [Thursday, falls on] the Sabbath? It was found stated, Hamlets [and villages] and walled cities may read together; and this Tanna does not show (respect) [even] for any creature. He holds that walled cities cannot precede villages; he holds that any which is pushed away is pushed to the market day. “Rebbi says, all shall be pushed to the market day.” For he holds that walled cities cannot precede villages; for he holds that any which is pushed away is pushed to the market day. How does one act? Rebbi Yose said, following the Mishnah.

MISHNAH: What is a large village? Any in which there are ten unoccupied people. Less than that is a hamlet. About these it was said that one precedes and does not trail. But for the times of offering of wood by the priests and the people, and the Ninth of Av, and the festive offering, and the public assembly, one trails but does not precede. Even though they said, one precedes but does not trail, one is permitted to eulogize, and to fast, and gifts to the poor. Rebbi Jehudah said, when has this been said? At places where one assembles Monday and Thursday. But at a place where one assembles neither Monday nor Thursday one reads on its time.

“About these it was said that one precedes and does not trail.” Reading the Scroll and paying the Sheqel tax one precedes and does not trail; the Meal of the New Moon and the Purim Meal one trails but does not precede. Rebbi Ze`ira said before Rebbi Abbahu: then could one make it on the Sabbath? He answered him, to make them days of drinking and joy; those whose joy depends on the court; this excludes those whose joy depends on Heaven.

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.

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.

What does one read if it falls on a Friday? Rebbi Ze`ira says, one reads earlier. Rebbi Ila, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: one reads later. Rebbi Ze`ira was looking at him. He said to him, why are you looking at me? I said to you from tradition, and you are saying an opinion; why are you looking at me? A baraita supports one and a baraita supports the other. A baraita supports Rebbi Ze`ira: What is the first week? Any in which the New Month of Adar falls, even on Friday. What Samuel stated supports Rebbi Ila: What is the second week? Any in which Purim falls, even on Friday. Rav Naḥman bar Jacob asked, think of it if the Fifteenth fell on a Sabbath? You may not read in the Esther scroll since one reads in Hagiographs only after afternoon prayers. Could they not read remember? He said to him, so says Rav, these days are remembered and executed, that the remembrance precedes the execution. Rebbi Abba the son of Rebbi Pappai asked, think of it if the Fourteenth fell on a Sabbath? Does not the remembrance precede the execution? He said to him, was this not already contradicted, it cannot happen. And if it could happen it would be belated for towns.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi: One does not interrupt between Purim and cow. Rebbi Levi in the name of Rebbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina: One does not interrupt between cow and this month. Rebbi Levi said, a sign for these paragraphs, “between these cups, he may drink if he wants to drink; between the third and the fourth he may not drink.” Rebbi Levi in the name of Rebbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina, it would have been logical that this month should precede cow since the Tabernacle was erected on the First of Nisan and the cow was burned on the Second. Why does cow precede? Because it is the purification of all of Israel.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ashi: One does not interrupt between Purim and cow. Rebbi Levi in the name of Rebbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina: One does not interrupt between cow and this month. Rebbi Levi said, a sign for these paragraphs, “between these cups, he may drink if he wants to drink; between the third and the fourth he may not drink.” Rebbi Levi in the name of Rebbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina, it would have been logical that this month should precede cow since the Tabernacle was erected on the First of Nisan and the cow was burned on the Second. Why does cow precede? Because it is the purification of all of Israel.

Rebbi Eleazar instructed Simeon bar Abba: the holiday is counted in the count of thirty. Rebbi Yose said, we find that thirty precede seven: “The decree of seven is cancelled for him who buried his dead three days before the holiday.” He only said three, therefore not two. That is what you are saying, in private; but the public does not occupy themselves with him. It was stated this way: One who buried his dead three days during the holiday counts seven after the holiday. During the first three days the public occupies themselves with him; the last four days the public do not occupy themselves with him. His work is done by others and his slaves and animals work in privacy at other places. Does one visit him? Rebbi Jacob bar Idi in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina: Did they not say that there is no mourning on the Sabbath? Why did they say that one visits him? Not to honor? So here to honor. Similarly, one day before the holiday cancels the decree of two.

MISHNAH: Joseph had the merit to bury his father and none of his brothers was greater than he, as it is said: “Joseph ascended to bury his father.” Who would be greater than Joseph? Only Moses could occupy himself with him. Moses had the merit to take Joseph’s bones and no one in Israel was greater than he, as it is said: “Moses took Joseph’s bones with him.” Who would be greater than Moses? Only the Holy One, Praise to Him, could occupy himself with him, as it is said: “He buried him in the valley.” Not only about Moses was this said but about all the just, as it is said: “Your righteousness will precede you, the glory of the Eternal will gather you in.”

From where that weaves precede presentations? Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Pedat: They learned that from the case of the suspected wife. Rebbi Yose said, the suspected wife is different because of its novelty and one cannot infer from anything that is different because of its novelty. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya understood it from the following: “This is the teaching about the flour offering, present.” Where is the weave? It already preceded. Rebbi Yose said, explain it about flour offerings that do not need weaves; you cannot infer anything. Which [verse] says anything? “You shall bring,” to include the ‘Omer flour offering in presentations. “He shall present,” to include the suspected wife’s flour offering in presentations. It is written after that: “He shall lift a fist full”; where is the weave? It already preceded.

MISHNAH: If somebody was married to two women when he died, the first one precedes the second, and the heirs of the first precede the heirs of the second. If the first one he had married died, then he married the second one and he himself died, the second and her heirs precede the heirs of the first.

MISHNAH: If somebody was married to two women when he died, the first one precedes the second, and the heirs of the first precede the heirs of the second. If the first one he had married died, then he married the second one and he himself died, the second and her heirs precede the heirs of the first.

Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If he polluted himself during his son’s nezirut but was warned because of his own nezirut, he is whipped. If he dedicated his sacrifices, they are sanctified. One does not consider what Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: “His sacrifice to the Eternal for his nezirut,” i. e., his vow of nazir should precede his sacrifice, rather than that his sacrifice precede his vow of nazir.

Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If he polluted himself during his son’s nezirut but was warned because of his own nezirut, he is whipped. If he dedicated his sacrifices, they are sanctified. One does not consider what Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: “His sacrifice to the Eternal for his nezirut,” i. e., his vow of nazir should precede his sacrifice, rather than that his sacrifice precede his vow of nazir.

Rebbi Judah asked before Rebbi Yose: Why should his nezirut not precede that of his son? Did not Rebbi Abbahu say in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: “This animal shall be dedicated as elevation sacrifice after 30 days.” If he sold it within the thirty days, it is sold; its dedication sanctifies. He said, is that not, if one said “This”. Perhaps if he said: “I have the obligation”? But the one who says, “I am”, is like one who says, “I have the obligation.”

HALAKHAH: “If somebody vowed two neziriot,” etc. If he finished his first period of nezirut and started to lean on the second, when they did not find an opening for the first while they found an opening for the second, the second can be used for the first. Where do we hold? If he said, “I am a nazir twice,” a vow which is partially annulled is totally annulled. If he said, “I am a nazir for these 30 days and those 30 days,” in this case the second cannot be used for the first. But we must hold that he said, “I am a nazir and nazir.” If he said, “these are for nezirut.” But if he said, “these are for my nezirut; those are for the other nezirut,” in this case the second cannot be used for the first. Rebbi Eleazar said, if he finished the first nezirut, as soon as he brought a sacrifice and shaved, the first is credited for the second. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa commanded the colleagues: If you hear anything formulated by Rebbi Eleazar, you should know that Rebbi Joḥanan disagrees: not unless he brings all his sacrifices, following the rabbis; but following Rebbi Simeon even if he brings only one sacrifice. If he dedicated both together, he has only one in his hand. If he dedicated each of them separately or brought each of them for the other, he did not acquit himself [of his obligation]. This means that as far as holiness goes, they became holy. But did not Rebbi Ḥiyya state: “His sacrifice to the Eternal for his nezirut,” i. e., that his vow of nazir should precede his sacrifice, rather than that his sacrifice precede his vow of nazir. It is different, because he still is in nezirut. One understands the second for the first. The first for the second? Rebbi Jehudah said, this supports Rebbi Eleazar. But did not Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa command the colleagues: If you hear anything formulated by Rebbi Eleazar, you should know that Rebbi Joḥanan disagrees; not unless he brings all his sacrifices. They wanted to say, following the rabbis. But here, we hold with Rebbi Simeon. Rebbi Ḥinena in the name of Rebbi Phineas: Explain it for his nezirut and the nezirut he pledged for his son. In that, the second can be used for the first. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, did we not argue about one who said, “I am a nazir”? He really should be a nazir only once. You were severe with him and obligated him to be a nazir twice. Is it not enough that you were severe with him and obligated him to be a nazir twice, that now you say, he has nothing in his hands?

HALAKHAH: “If somebody vowed two neziriot,” etc. If he finished his first period of nezirut and started to lean on the second, when they did not find an opening for the first while they found an opening for the second, the second can be used for the first. Where do we hold? If he said, “I am a nazir twice,” a vow which is partially annulled is totally annulled. If he said, “I am a nazir for these 30 days and those 30 days,” in this case the second cannot be used for the first. But we must hold that he said, “I am a nazir and nazir.” If he said, “these are for nezirut.” But if he said, “these are for my nezirut; those are for the other nezirut,” in this case the second cannot be used for the first. Rebbi Eleazar said, if he finished the first nezirut, as soon as he brought a sacrifice and shaved, the first is credited for the second. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa commanded the colleagues: If you hear anything formulated by Rebbi Eleazar, you should know that Rebbi Joḥanan disagrees: not unless he brings all his sacrifices, following the rabbis; but following Rebbi Simeon even if he brings only one sacrifice. If he dedicated both together, he has only one in his hand. If he dedicated each of them separately or brought each of them for the other, he did not acquit himself [of his obligation]. This means that as far as holiness goes, they became holy. But did not Rebbi Ḥiyya state: “His sacrifice to the Eternal for his nezirut,” i. e., that his vow of nazir should precede his sacrifice, rather than that his sacrifice precede his vow of nazir. It is different, because he still is in nezirut. One understands the second for the first. The first for the second? Rebbi Jehudah said, this supports Rebbi Eleazar. But did not Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa command the colleagues: If you hear anything formulated by Rebbi Eleazar, you should know that Rebbi Joḥanan disagrees; not unless he brings all his sacrifices. They wanted to say, following the rabbis. But here, we hold with Rebbi Simeon. Rebbi Ḥinena in the name of Rebbi Phineas: Explain it for his nezirut and the nezirut he pledged for his son. In that, the second can be used for the first. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, did we not argue about one who said, “I am a nazir”? He really should be a nazir only once. You were severe with him and obligated him to be a nazir twice. Is it not enough that you were severe with him and obligated him to be a nazir twice, that now you say, he has nothing in his hands?

What is Rebbi Yose’s reason? “His offering to the Eternal for his vow”, that (his sacrifice precede his vow) but not (that his vow precede his sacrifice). They wanted to say that Rebbi Jehudah would agree with Rebbi Yose. It was found said that neither of them agrees with the other.

What is Rebbi Yose’s reason? “His offering to the Eternal for his vow”, that (his sacrifice precede his vow) but not (that his vow precede his sacrifice). They wanted to say that Rebbi Jehudah would agree with Rebbi Yose. It was found said that neither of them agrees with the other.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said: “The ram he shall offer, etc.” Why does the verse say, “he shall offer”? Start the procedure with it. Rebbi Ḥinena objected before Rebbi Mana: But is it not written: “He shall offer his flour offering and his libation”? Should he not start with them? How is that? Rebbi Ḥinena in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: If he shaved for any of the three, he satisfied his obligation. Rebbi Ze‘ira asked before Rebbi Mana: Who is the Tanna of: “All purification offerings in the Torah precede the reparation offerings”? Rebbi Eleazar said, it is everybody’s opinion, “all purification offerings in the Torah precede the reparation offerings.”

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said: “The ram he shall offer, etc.” Why does the verse say, “he shall offer”? Start the procedure with it. Rebbi Ḥinena objected before Rebbi Mana: But is it not written: “He shall offer his flour offering and his libation”? Should he not start with them? How is that? Rebbi Ḥinena in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: If he shaved for any of the three, he satisfied his obligation. Rebbi Ze‘ira asked before Rebbi Mana: Who is the Tanna of: “All purification offerings in the Torah precede the reparation offerings”? Rebbi Eleazar said, it is everybody’s opinion, “all purification offerings in the Torah precede the reparation offerings.”

MISHNAH: There was no law of siqarii in Judea for those killed in the war. After those killed in the war there was a law of siqarii. How is this? If one bought from a siqarius and afterwards from the original owner, his acquisition is void; from the original owner and afterwards from the siqarius, his acquisition is valid. If one bought from a husband and afterwards from the wife, his acquisition is void; from the wife and afterwards from the husband, his acquisition is valid. This is the earlier Mishnah; a later court said that he who buys from a siqarius gives a quarter to the original owner. When is this? If they have no means to buy, but if they have the means to buy, they precede everybody else. Rebbi (Joshua) assembled a court who voted that if it was in the siqarius’s hand for twelve months, any who wants to buy shall buy and give a quarter to the original owner.

MISHNAH: Some inherit and bequeath; inherit but do not bequeath, bequeath but do not inherit, neither inherit nor bequeath. The following inherit and bequeath: The father from the sons, and the sons from the father, and the paternal brothers inherit and bequeath. A man from his mother, a man from his wife, and the sons of sisters inherit but do not bequeath. A woman to her son, a woman to her husband, and the mother’s brothers bequeath but do not inherit. But the maternal brothers neither inherit nor bequeath. The order of inheritances is the following: “If a man die without a son, you shall transfer his estate to his daughter.” The son precedes the daughter and all the son’s descendants come before the daughter. The daughter precedes the brothers and all the daughter’s descendants precede the brothers. The brothers precede the father’s brothers and all their descendants precede the father’s brothers. This is the principle: For every one preceding in inheritance, his descendants precede. But the father precedes all his descendants.

MISHNAH: Some inherit and bequeath; inherit but do not bequeath, bequeath but do not inherit, neither inherit nor bequeath. The following inherit and bequeath: The father from the sons, and the sons from the father, and the paternal brothers inherit and bequeath. A man from his mother, a man from his wife, and the sons of sisters inherit but do not bequeath. A woman to her son, a woman to her husband, and the mother’s brothers bequeath but do not inherit. But the maternal brothers neither inherit nor bequeath. The order of inheritances is the following: “If a man die without a son, you shall transfer his estate to his daughter.” The son precedes the daughter and all the son’s descendants come before the daughter. The daughter precedes the brothers and all the daughter’s descendants precede the brothers. The brothers precede the father’s brothers and all their descendants precede the father’s brothers. This is the principle: For every one preceding in inheritance, his descendants precede. But the father precedes all his descendants.

MISHNAH: Some inherit and bequeath; inherit but do not bequeath, bequeath but do not inherit, neither inherit nor bequeath. The following inherit and bequeath: The father from the sons, and the sons from the father, and the paternal brothers inherit and bequeath. A man from his mother, a man from his wife, and the sons of sisters inherit but do not bequeath. A woman to her son, a woman to her husband, and the mother’s brothers bequeath but do not inherit. But the maternal brothers neither inherit nor bequeath. The order of inheritances is the following: “If a man die without a son, you shall transfer his estate to his daughter.” The son precedes the daughter and all the son’s descendants come before the daughter. The daughter precedes the brothers and all the daughter’s descendants precede the brothers. The brothers precede the father’s brothers and all their descendants precede the father’s brothers. This is the principle: For every one preceding in inheritance, his descendants precede. But the father precedes all his descendants.

MISHNAH: Some inherit and bequeath; inherit but do not bequeath, bequeath but do not inherit, neither inherit nor bequeath. The following inherit and bequeath: The father from the sons, and the sons from the father, and the paternal brothers inherit and bequeath. A man from his mother, a man from his wife, and the sons of sisters inherit but do not bequeath. A woman to her son, a woman to her husband, and the mother’s brothers bequeath but do not inherit. But the maternal brothers neither inherit nor bequeath. The order of inheritances is the following: “If a man die without a son, you shall transfer his estate to his daughter.” The son precedes the daughter and all the son’s descendants come before the daughter. The daughter precedes the brothers and all the daughter’s descendants precede the brothers. The brothers precede the father’s brothers and all their descendants precede the father’s brothers. This is the principle: For every one preceding in inheritance, his descendants precede. But the father precedes all his descendants.

So far a daughter. A son? Since the daughter, whose power is diminished regarding the father’s property, has her power increased regarding the mother’s property, should the son’s power not be increased regarding the mother’s property, since his power is increased regarding the father’s property? It turns out that for the daughter one infers from the verse and for the son from an argument de minore ad majus. Does the son precede the daughter? Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar said in the name of Rebbi Zachariah the butcher’s son: So did Rebbi Simeon ben Jehudah say in the name of Rebbi Simeon: Both son and daughter are equal for the mother’s tribe Rebbi Mallukh in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Practice follows Rebbi Zachariah. Rebbi Yannai the Kappadokian had a case; the judges were Rav Huna, Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi, and Rebbi Aḥa. Rebbi Aḥa told them: Our brothers outside the Land are unqualified and err in practice; in particular they rely on Rebbi Mallukh in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, but it is not so. Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Practice does not follow Rebbi Zachariah. Rebbi Abba the son of Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Practice does not follow Rebbi Zachariah. Rebbi Eleazar the father of Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Hoshaiah: Practice does not follow Rebbi Zachariah. Rebbi Yannai and Rebbi Joḥanan were sitting when Rebbi Yudan the Prince came and asked concerning: “Any daughter who is an heiress of the tribes,” what is the rule? He said to him, it binds the father’s tribe together with the mother’s tribe. Since from the father’s tribe there is nothing for the daughter when there is a son, so also from the mother’s tribe there is nothing for the daughter when there is a son. Or is it the other way around? Since from the mother’s tribe there is something for the daughter when there is a son, so also from the father’s tribe is there something for the daughter when there is a son? Rebbi Joḥanan said to him, let us leave; that man does not want to listen to words of instruction.

HALAKHAH: “If both of them disavowed simultaneously,” etc. If they dedicated a sacrifice and said, we are going to disavowe in court. This is what Rebbi Ḥiyya stated, his sacrifice for the Eternal for his vow of nazir; that his vow of nazir precede his sacrifice, not that his sacrifice precede his vow of nazir. If they were sworn to out of court, dedicated a sacrifice and said, we are going to renege in court, how do you treat this? As if his sin did precede his sacrifice or since the are liable only in court as if their sacrifice did precede their sin?

HALAKHAH: “If both of them disavowed simultaneously,” etc. If they dedicated a sacrifice and said, we are going to disavowe in court. This is what Rebbi Ḥiyya stated, his sacrifice for the Eternal for his vow of nazir; that his vow of nazir precede his sacrifice, not that his sacrifice precede his vow of nazir. If they were sworn to out of court, dedicated a sacrifice and said, we are going to renege in court, how do you treat this? As if his sin did precede his sacrifice or since the are liable only in court as if their sacrifice did precede their sin?

HALAKHAH: “If both of them disavowed simultaneously,” etc. If they dedicated a sacrifice and said, we are going to disavowe in court. This is what Rebbi Ḥiyya stated, his sacrifice for the Eternal for his vow of nazir; that his vow of nazir precede his sacrifice, not that his sacrifice precede his vow of nazir. If they were sworn to out of court, dedicated a sacrifice and said, we are going to renege in court, how do you treat this? As if his sin did precede his sacrifice or since the are liable only in court as if their sacrifice did precede their sin?

HALAKHAH: “If both of them disavowed simultaneously,” etc. If they dedicated a sacrifice and said, we are going to disavowe in court. This is what Rebbi Ḥiyya stated, his sacrifice for the Eternal for his vow of nazir; that his vow of nazir precede his sacrifice, not that his sacrifice precede his vow of nazir. If they were sworn to out of court, dedicated a sacrifice and said, we are going to renege in court, how do you treat this? As if his sin did precede his sacrifice or since the are liable only in court as if their sacrifice did precede their sin?

HALAKHAH: “If he said to two persons, I am putting an oath on you,” etc. Rebbi Mana understood it from the following, “or one of them was a relative or disqualified.” Therefore, unless one of them was a relative or disqualified, they are liable. And he knows who they are. Therefore the reason can only be that he does not intend them. Rebbi Yose understood it from the preceding, “since the oath preceded the testimony.” Therefore, if the oath did not precede the testimony, they are liable. And he knows who they are. Therefore the reason can only be that he does not intend them.

HALAKHAH: “Anything which is more frequent than another,” etc. [“If the bull of the Anointed and the bull of the community are standing, the Anointed’s bull precedes the community’s bull”,] for one is atoning, the other is being atoned for. It is preferable that the atoner precede the atoned for, as it is written, he shall atone for himself, and for his house, and for all the congregation of Israel. Between a voluntary gift of the Anointed and a voluntary gift of the prince, the voluntary gift of the Anointed has precedence. Between a voluntary gift of the community and a voluntary gift of the prince, the voluntary gift of the prince has precedence. Between a voluntary gift of the Anointed and a voluntary gift of the community, which one has precedence? Let us hear from the following: A voluntary gift of the Anointed and rams of idolatry were standing. The rams of idolatry have precedence since their blood enters inside. He only said “since their blood enters inside;” this implies that between a voluntary gift of the Anointed and a voluntary gift of the community, the voluntary gift of the Anointed has precedence. If there were standing the bull of idolatry, the ram which accompanies it, and another purification sacrifice. The bull precedes the ram, the ram precedes the other purification sacrifice, and the other purification sacrifice precedes the bull. How is this done? Rebbi Yose said, since the ram is dependent in time on the bull, it is as if the bull preceded it, and the other purification sacrifice precedes the bull. The bull of idolatry precedes the ram because it precedes in Scripture. Rebbi Samuel the brother of Rebbi Berekhiah asked: But then that of the New Moon should precede the ram which comes with it because it precedes [in Scripture.] Rebbi Abba Mari said, you cannot do this; its purification sacrifice is defective: After the permanent elevation offering it shall be made, with its libation; it made it lean on the permanent elevation offering. Between the sacrifice of a man and the sacrifice of a woman, the man’s sacrifice has precedence. That is, if both were equal. But if one was a bull and the other a lamb, it is what Rebbi Phineas said in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: A slave brings a bull and his master brings a bull, the slave’s precedes the master’s, as we have stated there: “If the bull of the Anointed and the bull of the community are standing, the Anointed’s bull precedes the community’s bull in all its ceremonies.”

HALAKHAH: “Anything which is more frequent than another,” etc. [“If the bull of the Anointed and the bull of the community are standing, the Anointed’s bull precedes the community’s bull”,] for one is atoning, the other is being atoned for. It is preferable that the atoner precede the atoned for, as it is written, he shall atone for himself, and for his house, and for all the congregation of Israel. Between a voluntary gift of the Anointed and a voluntary gift of the prince, the voluntary gift of the Anointed has precedence. Between a voluntary gift of the community and a voluntary gift of the prince, the voluntary gift of the prince has precedence. Between a voluntary gift of the Anointed and a voluntary gift of the community, which one has precedence? Let us hear from the following: A voluntary gift of the Anointed and rams of idolatry were standing. The rams of idolatry have precedence since their blood enters inside. He only said “since their blood enters inside;” this implies that between a voluntary gift of the Anointed and a voluntary gift of the community, the voluntary gift of the Anointed has precedence. If there were standing the bull of idolatry, the ram which accompanies it, and another purification sacrifice. The bull precedes the ram, the ram precedes the other purification sacrifice, and the other purification sacrifice precedes the bull. How is this done? Rebbi Yose said, since the ram is dependent in time on the bull, it is as if the bull preceded it, and the other purification sacrifice precedes the bull. The bull of idolatry precedes the ram because it precedes in Scripture. Rebbi Samuel the brother of Rebbi Berekhiah asked: But then that of the New Moon should precede the ram which comes with it because it precedes [in Scripture.] Rebbi Abba Mari said, you cannot do this; its purification sacrifice is defective: After the permanent elevation offering it shall be made, with its libation; it made it lean on the permanent elevation offering. Between the sacrifice of a man and the sacrifice of a woman, the man’s sacrifice has precedence. That is, if both were equal. But if one was a bull and the other a lamb, it is what Rebbi Phineas said in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: A slave brings a bull and his master brings a bull, the slave’s precedes the master’s, as we have stated there: “If the bull of the Anointed and the bull of the community are standing, the Anointed’s bull precedes the community’s bull in all its ceremonies.”

Against this view I quote : He who reads [the Shema'] from that time onward incurs no loss ; he is regarded as one reading in the Torah, but he must precede it with two benedictions and follow it with one ! This refutation of Rab Hisda's view remains unshaken. Some declare:

Rab Hisda said in the name of Mar 'Ukba : What means he incurs no loss? He loses none of the benedictions. There is a teaching to the same effect : He who reads [the Shema'] from that time onward incurs no loss ; he is regarded as one reading in the Torah, but he must precede it with two benedictions and follow it with one.

R. Joshua b. Karhah said: Why does the section "Hear, O Israel" precede "And it shall come to pass if ye shall hearken"? So that a man shall first receive upon himself the yoke of the kingdom of heaven, and afterwards receive upon himself the yoke of the commandments. And why does "And it shall came to pass if ye shall hearken" precede "And the Lord spake" ? Because the former applies both during the day and night, but the latter during the day only.

R. Joshua b. Karhah said: Why does the section "Hear, O Israel" precede "And it shall come to pass if ye shall hearken"? So that a man shall first receive upon himself the yoke of the kingdom of heaven, and afterwards receive upon himself the yoke of the commandments. And why does "And it shall came to pass if ye shall hearken" precede "And the Lord spake" ? Because the former applies both during the day and night, but the latter during the day only.

R. Joshua b. Karhah said: Why does the section "Hear O Israel" precede "And it shall come to pass if ye shall hearken"?

R. Joshua b. Karhah certainly said that the reading [of the yoke of heaven, i.e. "Hear O Israel"] is to precede the reading [of the yoke of the commandments, i.e. "And it shall come to pass"] ; but hast thou heard him say that the reading [of the Shema'] should precede the performance [of the duty of Tefillin] ?

R. Joshua b. Karhah certainly said that the reading [of the yoke of heaven, i.e. "Hear O Israel"] is to precede the reading [of the yoke of the commandments, i.e. "And it shall come to pass"] ; but hast thou heard him say that the reading [of the Shema'] should precede the performance [of the duty of Tefillin] ?

Rab Hisda and Rab Hamnuna were sitting at a meal, when dates and pomegranates were set before them. Rab Hamnuna took and pronounced the benediction over the dates first. Rab Hisda said to him, "Does not the master agree with the statement of Rab Joseph (another version : R. Isaac), viz. : That which is given precedence in the verse (Deut. viii. 8) must precede for the benediction?"

The question was raised: Is the sixtieth day to be counted with those that precede it or with those that follow? Rab said, the sixtieth day belongs to the days that succeed it, but Samuel said, the sixtieth day belongs to the days that precede it. Said R. Naḥman b. Isaac, the sign for it should be: Those high up need water, those below need no water. R. Papa said, the law is that the sixtieth day is to be treated like those following it.

The question was raised: Is the sixtieth day to be counted with those that precede it or with those that follow? Rab said, the sixtieth day belongs to the days that succeed it, but Samuel said, the sixtieth day belongs to the days that precede it. Said R. Naḥman b. Isaac, the sign for it should be: Those high up need water, those below need no water. R. Papa said, the law is that the sixtieth day is to be treated like those following it.

Rav says it is read on the Shabbat before, so that the celebration [of Purim] should not precede the remembrance [of Amalek]. Shmuel says on the Shabbat after. He could say to you that since there are the walled cities which celebrate on the fifteenth, celebration and remembrance come together.

On the last day of the festival we read, “All the firstlings” [but first we read] the commandments and statutes [which precede it], and then “all the firstlings” (Deuteronomy 15:19-16:17) and for haftarah, “And when Solomon had finished” (I Kings 8:54-9:1). On the next day we read, “And this is the blessing” (Deuteronomy 33:1-34:12), and for haftarah, “And Solomon stood” (I Kings 8:23-53).

Whence do you gather this? R. Jochanan said in the name of R. Ishmael, The same word, Restraint, is used of the seventh day of Passover, and of the eighth day of the Feast of Tabernacles. What is true of the former as regards postponement of payments, the same is true of the latter. The word is used in an unrestricted way. For if it were not used in an unrestricted way, the force of the argument drawn from it might have been broken by saying, Whereas the seventh day of Passover is not separated from those that precede it, you may say that the eighth day of the Feast of Tabernacles is separated from those that precede it. Assuredly, it is used in a wholly unrestricted sense. What does restraint really mean? That one is restrained from acts of work. But we have the passage, "Thou shalt do no work" (Deut. xvi. 8). Why then has the Merciful One written me Restraint? But learn from it that it was to give the unrestricted sense of the word. And a Baraitha brings out the same thing thus. For there is a Baraitha, "And ye shall keep it a feast unto the Lord seven days" (Lev. xxiii. 41). One might have thought from this passage that one was to go on sacrificing all seven days. No, for the teaching says "it." Thou art to sacrifice "it," and thou art not to sacrifice all seven days. If so, why have we seven stated as the number of the days of the Feast? For postponements of payments; and whence do you gather that if a man has not observed the Feast on the first high holiday of the Feast, he is to go and sacrifice during any part of its extent, even including the last high holiday? Because the teaching says, "Ye shall keep it in the seventh month" (Lev. xxiii. 41). If it had merely said, In the seventh month, one might have thought that one was to go and sacrifice the whole month. No; for the teaching says "it." Thou art to sacrifice "it" and thou art not to sacrifice further.

Whence do you gather this? R. Jochanan said in the name of R. Ishmael, The same word, Restraint, is used of the seventh day of Passover, and of the eighth day of the Feast of Tabernacles. What is true of the former as regards postponement of payments, the same is true of the latter. The word is used in an unrestricted way. For if it were not used in an unrestricted way, the force of the argument drawn from it might have been broken by saying, Whereas the seventh day of Passover is not separated from those that precede it, you may say that the eighth day of the Feast of Tabernacles is separated from those that precede it. Assuredly, it is used in a wholly unrestricted sense. What does restraint really mean? That one is restrained from acts of work. But we have the passage, "Thou shalt do no work" (Deut. xvi. 8). Why then has the Merciful One written me Restraint? But learn from it that it was to give the unrestricted sense of the word. And a Baraitha brings out the same thing thus. For there is a Baraitha, "And ye shall keep it a feast unto the Lord seven days" (Lev. xxiii. 41). One might have thought from this passage that one was to go on sacrificing all seven days. No, for the teaching says "it." Thou art to sacrifice "it," and thou art not to sacrifice all seven days. If so, why have we seven stated as the number of the days of the Feast? For postponements of payments; and whence do you gather that if a man has not observed the Feast on the first high holiday of the Feast, he is to go and sacrifice during any part of its extent, even including the last high holiday? Because the teaching says, "Ye shall keep it in the seventh month" (Lev. xxiii. 41). If it had merely said, In the seventh month, one might have thought that one was to go and sacrifice the whole month. No; for the teaching says "it." Thou art to sacrifice "it" and thou art not to sacrifice further.