raba

And we who keep two days [of the Festival], how do we proceed? Abaye ruled: The [paragraph for the] second day is to be omitted. Raba ruled,

[That of] the seventh day is omitted. It was taught in agreement with Raba: If the Sabbath falls on one of them “are moved” is omitted.

Raba said, snow is as beneficial to the mountains as five rainfalls to the level ground, for it is said (Job, 37.6): "For He saith to the snow: Fall thou on the earth; likewise to the shower of rain, and to the showers of His mighty rain." Raba further said, snow is beneficial to the mountains, a vehement rain to the trees, a gentle rain to the produce of the fields,

Raba said, snow is as beneficial to the mountains as five rainfalls to the level ground, for it is said (Job, 37.6): "For He saith to the snow: Fall thou on the earth; likewise to the shower of rain, and to the showers of His mighty rain." Raba further said, snow is beneficial to the mountains, a vehement rain to the trees, a gentle rain to the produce of the fields,

while 'urpilla (a drizzling rain) is helpful even to the kernel under hard clods. What is (the etymology of) 'urpilla? Said R. Mesharshaya, it is a combination of 'ûrû and pîlê (wake up, ye cracks). Raba further said, a young scholar is like the kernel under a clod which, having once sprouted, grows fast. Raba further said, when a scholar is hot-tempered, it is the Torah that boils within him, as it is said (Jer. 23.29): "Is not My word like as fire and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces? saith the Lord."

while 'urpilla (a drizzling rain) is helpful even to the kernel under hard clods. What is (the etymology of) 'urpilla? Said R. Mesharshaya, it is a combination of 'ûrû and pîlê (wake up, ye cracks). Raba further said, a young scholar is like the kernel under a clod which, having once sprouted, grows fast. Raba further said, when a scholar is hot-tempered, it is the Torah that boils within him, as it is said (Jer. 23.29): "Is not My word like as fire and like a hammer that breaketh the rock in pieces? saith the Lord."

One should not pray for rain until shortly before the season of rain. The Amoraim understood that praying for rain and mentioning it are the same thing. Who then is the author of this statement? Raba said, its author can only be R. Joshua, who said (above p. 8) that one is to mention the rain from the time when "the lulab is put away." 'Abbayi, however, replied to Raba, you might just as well say that the author of that statement is R. Eliezer, for praying for rain is one thing and mentioning it is another.

One should not pray for rain until shortly before the season of rain. The Amoraim understood that praying for rain and mentioning it are the same thing. Who then is the author of this statement? Raba said, its author can only be R. Joshua, who said (above p. 8) that one is to mention the rain from the time when "the lulab is put away." 'Abbayi, however, replied to Raba, you might just as well say that the author of that statement is R. Eliezer, for praying for rain is one thing and mentioning it is another.

that praying and mentioning are two different things. Who would then be the author of the statement? Raba said it was R. Eliezer, who said we begin the first day. 'Abbayi, however, replied, you may just as well say the author is R. Joshua, but praying and mentioning are one and the same thing.

Raba says: after having once begun mentioning it, one should not stop. So also said R. Sheshet. Rab, too, reversed his opinion, for R. Hananel said in the name of Rab: Beginning with the New Year's day, one should count twenty-one days, in the same way as one counts ten days from New Year to the Day of Atonement, and then begin mentioning the rain, but once having begun, one should not stop. And this is the law.

Said R. 'Abahu: When are we to pronounce the blessing over the rain? When the groom goes forth to meet the bride. How does the blessing read? Said R. Judah in the name of Rab: "We thank Thee, O Lord our God, for every drop Thou hast caused to descend for us"; and R. Johanan concluded this prayer thus: "Were our mouth full of song as the sea (is of water) and our tongue as loud as its roaring billows," etc., till "behold, they shall give thanks, bless, and praise unto Thy name, blessed art Thou, O Lord to whom many thanks are due." "Many thanks," and not "all thanks"?! Raba therefore directed to say, "God to whom thanks are due." R. Papa said: Let us therefore

R. Judah said: The day of rain is as important as the day on which the Torah was given to Israel, as it is said (Deut., 32.2): "My doctrine shall drop as the rain." "Doctrine" means the Torah, as it is said (Prov., 4.2): "For I give you good doctrine; forsake ye not my teaching." Raba said: (The day of rain is) more important than the day on which the Torah was given, for it is said: "My doctrine shall drop as the rain." Now, which is usually compared to which? The more important to the less important, or the reverse? No doubt, it is the less important that is compared to the more important.

Raba pointed out an incongruity: It is written: "My doctrine shall drop as the rain," and then: "My speech shall distil as the dew"! The explanation is that if the scholar is worthy, the Torah will distil on him like dew, but if he is not, it will drop on him like rain.

to whom his studies are as tough as iron, it is because his lesson is not properly ordered in his mind, as it is said, "and one do not whet the edge." What is his remedy? He should attend more diligently the sessions of the scholars, as it is said, "then must he put to more strength, but wisdom is profitable to direct," the latter part of which means to say that increased diligence will prove still more profitable if the scholar's studies have always been well ordered. Resh Laḳish used to arrange his studies in proper order forty times, corresponding to the forty days during which the Torah was given to Israel, before he appeared before R. Johanan. R. 'Adda b. 'Ahabah used to arrange his lessons in proper order twenty-four times, corresponding to the number of the books of the Pentateuch, Prophets, and Hagiographa, before he appeared before Raba.

Raba explained the above verse as follows: If thou seest a disciple to whom his studies are as tough as iron, it is due to his master's lack of kindness toward him, as it is said, "and one do not whet the edge." What is his remedy? He should send many friends to the master, as it is said, "then must he put to more strength, but wisdom is profitable to direct," which means to say that the intercession of the friends will prove the more profitable when prior to that the pupil's ways had been improved before his master.

Raba interprets the latter verse thus: If two scholars living in the same city are unpleasant toward one another because of differences in their interpretations of the law, they solicit wrath and bring it upon themselves, as it is said, "the cattle also concerning the storm that cometh up."

R. Samuel b. 'Idi, R. Huna b. Manoah and R. Ḥiyya of Vastania used to study under Raba. After Raba's death they studied under R. Papa. Whenever the latter taught them something which did not appeal to them, he noticed that they were winking to one another. R. Papa therefore felt discouraged,

(On the nights preceding the fasts) they may eat and drink, etc. The Rabbis have taught: Until what time in the night (preceding a fast) may one eat and drink? Until the morning dawn; this is the opinion of Rabbi. R. Eleazar b. Simeon says, until one hears the crowing of the cock. Said Raba, this applies only to one who has not finished his meal, but if one has finished his meal, he should not start eating again. 'Abbayi objects hereto from the following Baraita: If one has eaten and gotten up, he may eat again! Answer: This refers to one who has not yet put away the table. Some give to the foregoing passage the following wording: Said Raba, this applies only to one who has not yet slept, but if he has slept, he should not start eating again. In objection hereto 'Abbayi quoted: If he slept and then got up, he may eat again! Answer: This refers only to one who merely dozed. What is meant by dozing? Said R. 'Ashi:

(On the nights preceding the fasts) they may eat and drink, etc. The Rabbis have taught: Until what time in the night (preceding a fast) may one eat and drink? Until the morning dawn; this is the opinion of Rabbi. R. Eleazar b. Simeon says, until one hears the crowing of the cock. Said Raba, this applies only to one who has not finished his meal, but if one has finished his meal, he should not start eating again. 'Abbayi objects hereto from the following Baraita: If one has eaten and gotten up, he may eat again! Answer: This refers to one who has not yet put away the table. Some give to the foregoing passage the following wording: Said Raba, this applies only to one who has not yet slept, but if he has slept, he should not start eating again. In objection hereto 'Abbayi quoted: If he slept and then got up, he may eat again! Answer: This refers only to one who merely dozed. What is meant by dozing? Said R. 'Ashi:

'Abbayi and Raba used to wear shoes without soles. Maremar and Mar Zuṭra used to transfer the right shoe to the left foot and the left shoe to the right foot. The scholars of the school of R. 'Ashi, however, wore their shoes in the usual way, agreeing with Samuel, who said, there are no public fasts in Babylonia except the Ninth of Ab.

R. Joshua, son of R. 'Idi, happened to come to R. 'Ashi, where meat of a three-year-old calf was prepared in his honor. They asked him to eat, but he replied, I am keeping a fast. They said to him: Can you not postpone it and make it up another time? Do you not agree with the statement which R. Judah transmitted in the name of Rab, namely, that one may postpone his fast and make it up at another time? "It is a fast on account of a bad dream," he replied, and Raba b. Maḥseya said in the name of R. Ḥama b. Gurya, who reported it in the name of Rab: Fasting is good for a bad dream even as fire is for consuming flax. R. Ḥisda said: But the fast must take place on the same day, to which R. Joseph added: Even if that day is the Sabbath.

Raba said, a mourner is not allowed to bathe in warm water, but he may bathe in cold water. What is the reason?

Because it is something that can be classed with the enjoyment of meat and wine. An objection was raised against Raba. We read: "A maiden that has reached maturity should not neglect herself during the days of her mourning for her father." This statement indicates that a maiden who did not reach maturity is in duty bound to neglect herself. Now, in what respect is she supposed to neglect herself? By abstaining from warm baths? And is not a mature maiden allowed to neglect herself in this way? Did not R. Ḥisda say, a mourner is not allowed to put even a finger into warm water? You must therefore admit that the prohibition of self-neglect refers only to bathing in cold water (which proves that to other mourners cold bathing, too, is forbidden)! Answer: No, by neglect is meant only painting the eyelids and fixing the hair.

Some give the passage in the following version: Raba said, a mourner is not allowed to bathe either in warm or in cold water during the seven days. Why should bathing be different from the enjoyment of meat and wine? In the case of meat and wine, indulgence is permitted because it is done merely to lessen the mourner's suffering, while bathing is a matter of (avoidable) pleasure. Is not Raba's statement supported by the following passage: "A maiden that has reached maturity should not neglect herself during the days of her mourning for her father?" This wording certainly indicates that a maiden who did not yet reach maturity is in duty bound to neglect herself. Now, what is meant by neglect? Does it mean abstaining from bathing in warm water? Is a maiden of maturity, then, not allowed so to neglect herself? Did not R. Ḥisda say, a mourner is not allowed to put even a finger into warm water? You must therefore admit that the prohibition of neglect refers only to bathing in cold water! Answer: No, by neglect is meant painting her eyelids and fixing her hair.

It is said above, "from the first day of the month of Nisan", etc.—why from the first? Why does he not say from the second day of Nisan, since the first day of Nisan is a holiday, on which mourning is anyhow forbidden? Said Raba: The first of Nisan is mentioned in order that the prohibition may include also the preceding day. But could not this be inferred from the fact that the day following is New Moon? The New Moon is of biblical origin, and biblical laws require no reënforcement, for it is stated in a Baraita: The prohibition (of fasting and mourning) on the days recorded in the Scroll of Fasts includes also, in each case, the preceding as well as the following day; as regards, however, the Sabbaths and holidays, fasting on these days is forbidden, but is permitted on the days preceding or following them. Why is such a difference made between the two? Because these (Sabbaths and holidays) are biblical laws, which need no reënforcement, while the others are soferic laws, which need reënforcement.

mourning and fasting during these days is allowed. Now, which of these days is here meant? If you say that the Mishnah refers to those people who under ordinary circumstances would have to read the Megillah on the fifteenth of Adar but, as it happens, read it on the fourteenth, the question must be asked, is it true that in this event mourning and fasting are allowed on the fourteenth? Is it not written in the Scroll of Fasts that the fourteenth and fifteenth must be celebrated as Purim days, on which mourning is forbidden—, a rule on which Raba commented, saying that their listing in the Scroll was needed only for the purpose of emphasizing that whatever was prohibited on the one day should be prohibited also on the other? If, however, you say that the Mishnah refers to those who would have to read the Megillah on the fourteenth, but for given reasons are to read it on the thirteenth, you, then, face the difficulty that the thirteenth is Nicanor Day (on which fasting is likewise forbidden); if, finally, you say that the Mishnah refers to those who would have to read the Megillah on the fourteenth but, as it happens, have to read it on the twelfth, you face again the difficulty that the twelfth is Trajan's Day (on which, too, fasting is forbidden). You will therefore have to say that the Mishnah refers to those that would have to read the Megillah on the fourteenth but happen to be compelled to read it on the eleventh, and it is thus with reference to this day that the anonymous Mishnah teaches that mourning and fasting thereon are allowed! No, the Mishnah, no doubt, refers to those who would ordinarily have to read the Megillah on the fourteenth but who by reason of circumstances are permitted to read it on the twelfth, and as to your objection that the twelfth is Trajan's Day, the festive character of that day was later abolished, as is instanced by R. Naḥman who ordered a public fast on the twelfth, and when the Rabbis objected thereto, pointing out that it was Trajan's Day, he replied that Trajan's Day had been abolished, because on that day Shemaiah and Ahijah were executed. But ought not fasting on that day be prohibited on the ground that it precedes Nicanor Day? Said R. 'Ashi, if Trajan Day itself was abolished, should we declare it a holiday because it comes before Nicanor Day?

Raba said to Rafrem b. Papa, tell me some of the noble deeds performed by R. Huna. Said Rafrem, of his earlier days I remember nothing; as to his later years I remember that after cloudy (stormy) days he used to be taken out in a gilt carriage, in which he inspected the whole city, and wherever there was a damaged wall, he ordered it to be torn down. If the owner was in a position to build a new wall, he had to do so, if not, R. Huna would have it built at his own expense. Every Friday toward evening R. Huna would send a servant to the market who would buy up all the vegetables left over with the gardeners and throw them into the river. Why did he not rather give them to the poor? Because they would sometimes rely on these gifts and fail to provide themselves for the Sabbath. Why did he not throw it to the animals? He was of the opinion that food proper for human beings should not be given to animals. Why did he buy them at all? Because if he had not done so, it would lead the gardeners to sin in the future (by failing to provide the community with vegetables).

When R. Huna was in possession of some medicament, he would take a pitcherful thereof, hang it on the door-post and say: "Whoever wishes to have some, let him come and take it." Some report that he knew of a medicine against a disease called shibta, and he would place it on a jug of water, hang the latter outside and say: "Anyone who needs it, let him come (and use it) to avoid danger (of contagion)." When he was about to sit down to a meal, he would open the doors, saying: "Anyone who desires to eat, let him come in and eat." Said Raba, I could do all these things myself, except this last one,

'Abba the Bleeder received every day a greeting from the heavenly academy while 'Abbayi received one every Friday, and Raba every year on the eve of the Day of Atonement. 'Abbayi felt discouraged on account of the greater distinction of 'Abba the Bleeder. 'Abbayi was therefore told, "Thou canst not perform deeds like those of 'Abba the Bleeder!" What were the deeds of 'Abba the Bleeder? When he performed the operation (of bleeding), he had a separate place for men and another for women. He had a garment ready in which there were numerous slits, and when a woman came, he made her put it on, so that he should not have to look upon her bare body. Outside of his office he had a place (box) where his fees were to be deposited. Whoever had money could put it in, but those who had none could come in without feeling embarrassed. When he saw a person who was in no position to pay, he would offer him some money, saying to him: "Go, strengthen thyself." One day 'Abbayi sent a pair of scholars to him to find out the truth about him. When they came to his house, he gave them to eat and to drink and laid cushions before them to sleep on.

Raba felt discouraged on account of 'Abbayi's greater distinction; he was therefore told: "It is honor enough to you that your merits protect the whole city."

Said R. Johanan: All his life long this righteous man (Ḥoni) was troubled about this verse (Psalms, 126. 1): "When the Lord brought back those that returned to Zion, we were like unto them that dream." Did anybody ever sleep seventy years (without interruption)? One day while walking on the road he noticed a man planting a carob-tree. Said Ḥoni to the man: "You know that it takes seventy years before a carob-tree bears fruit; are you so sure that you will live seventy years and eat therefrom?" "I found this world provided with carob-trees," the man replied, "as my ancestors planted them for me, so I plant them for my progeny." Thereupon Ḥoni sat down to eat and was overcome by sleep. As he slept, a grotto was formed around him, so that he was screened off from the human eye, and thus he slept for seventy years. When he awoke, he saw a man gathering carobs from the carob-tree and eating them. "Do you know who planted this carob-tree?" Ḥoni asked. "My grandfather," the man replied. "I must have slept seventy years!" Ḥoni exclaimed. (He saw the many herds that had descended from his she ass.) He then went to his house and inquired whether the son of Ḥoni the Circle-drawer was still alive. He was told that the son was no longer among the living, but that his grandson was still alive. "I am Ḥoni," he said, but the people did not believe him. He betook himself to the Bet ha-Midrash where he heard the scholars say, "Our studies are as clear to us today as they used to be in the times of Ḥoni the Circle-drawer, for when he came to the Bet ha-Midrash he used to explain to the scholars all their difficulties." He then said to them: "I am Ḥoni," but they would not believe him nor would they show him the respect due him. [This grieved him very much], and he therefore prayed to God (that he should die), and he died. Said Raba, hence comes the popular proverb, "either a companion or death!"

Raba ordered a fast, prayed for rain, but rain did not come. He was therefore asked: "Why is it that when R. Judah ordered a fast rain came?" "What can I do?" replied Raba. "As far as learning goes, we are superior to them; for in his time all studies

Raba ordered a fast, prayed for rain, but rain did not come. He was therefore asked: "Why is it that when R. Judah ordered a fast rain came?" "What can I do?" replied Raba. "As far as learning goes, we are superior to them; for in his time all studies

Raba once came to Hagrunya, where he ordered a fast and prayed for rain, but rain did not come. He therefore advised the people to continue their fast over night. The next morning he said to them: "Is there any one among you who saw something in a dream last night?" Said to him R. Eleazar of Hagrunya, I dreamed that I read the following words: "Good health to the good master from the good Lord, who will grant of His goodness to His people." Raba then said: "It is evident that the time is propitious;" accordingly he prayed and rain fell.

Raba once came to Hagrunya, where he ordered a fast and prayed for rain, but rain did not come. He therefore advised the people to continue their fast over night. The next morning he said to them: "Is there any one among you who saw something in a dream last night?" Said to him R. Eleazar of Hagrunya, I dreamed that I read the following words: "Good health to the good master from the good Lord, who will grant of His goodness to His people." Raba then said: "It is evident that the time is propitious;" accordingly he prayed and rain fell.

A certain man was sentenced in the court of Raba to be lashed because he had sexual intercourse with a Gentile woman. Raba had the lashing administered to him, and the man died of the effects. The matter came to the hearing of king Shabur (Sapor), who wanted to punish Raba for the deed, but 'Ifra 'Ormuzd, mother of king Shabur, said to him: "Have no quarrels with the Jews, because anything they ask of their God, He does for them." Said he: "What, for instance?" "They pray for rain," she replied, "and rain comes." Said he: "That is because it is the season when rain is due, let them pray for it now, in the equinox of Tammuz, and bring down rain!" 'Ifra 'Ormuzd thereupon sent word to Raba that he should concentrate his mind and pray for rain. Raba did so, but no rain came. Said he: "Master of the world! 'O God, we have heard with our ears, our fathers have told us, what work Thou didst in their days, in the days of old' (Ps., 44.2), but we did not see it with our own eyes." Immediately a heavy rain fell, so that the gutters of Maḥuza carried the water into the Tigris. Thereupon Raba's father appeared to him in a dream, saying: "Is there another man who puts Heaven to so much trouble! Change thy place." (He did so and) the next morning he found that his bed was scratched with knives.

A certain man was sentenced in the court of Raba to be lashed because he had sexual intercourse with a Gentile woman. Raba had the lashing administered to him, and the man died of the effects. The matter came to the hearing of king Shabur (Sapor), who wanted to punish Raba for the deed, but 'Ifra 'Ormuzd, mother of king Shabur, said to him: "Have no quarrels with the Jews, because anything they ask of their God, He does for them." Said he: "What, for instance?" "They pray for rain," she replied, "and rain comes." Said he: "That is because it is the season when rain is due, let them pray for it now, in the equinox of Tammuz, and bring down rain!" 'Ifra 'Ormuzd thereupon sent word to Raba that he should concentrate his mind and pray for rain. Raba did so, but no rain came. Said he: "Master of the world! 'O God, we have heard with our ears, our fathers have told us, what work Thou didst in their days, in the days of old' (Ps., 44.2), but we did not see it with our own eyes." Immediately a heavy rain fell, so that the gutters of Maḥuza carried the water into the Tigris. Thereupon Raba's father appeared to him in a dream, saying: "Is there another man who puts Heaven to so much trouble! Change thy place." (He did so and) the next morning he found that his bed was scratched with knives.

A certain man was sentenced in the court of Raba to be lashed because he had sexual intercourse with a Gentile woman. Raba had the lashing administered to him, and the man died of the effects. The matter came to the hearing of king Shabur (Sapor), who wanted to punish Raba for the deed, but 'Ifra 'Ormuzd, mother of king Shabur, said to him: "Have no quarrels with the Jews, because anything they ask of their God, He does for them." Said he: "What, for instance?" "They pray for rain," she replied, "and rain comes." Said he: "That is because it is the season when rain is due, let them pray for it now, in the equinox of Tammuz, and bring down rain!" 'Ifra 'Ormuzd thereupon sent word to Raba that he should concentrate his mind and pray for rain. Raba did so, but no rain came. Said he: "Master of the world! 'O God, we have heard with our ears, our fathers have told us, what work Thou didst in their days, in the days of old' (Ps., 44.2), but we did not see it with our own eyes." Immediately a heavy rain fell, so that the gutters of Maḥuza carried the water into the Tigris. Thereupon Raba's father appeared to him in a dream, saying: "Is there another man who puts Heaven to so much trouble! Change thy place." (He did so and) the next morning he found that his bed was scratched with knives.

A certain man was sentenced in the court of Raba to be lashed because he had sexual intercourse with a Gentile woman. Raba had the lashing administered to him, and the man died of the effects. The matter came to the hearing of king Shabur (Sapor), who wanted to punish Raba for the deed, but 'Ifra 'Ormuzd, mother of king Shabur, said to him: "Have no quarrels with the Jews, because anything they ask of their God, He does for them." Said he: "What, for instance?" "They pray for rain," she replied, "and rain comes." Said he: "That is because it is the season when rain is due, let them pray for it now, in the equinox of Tammuz, and bring down rain!" 'Ifra 'Ormuzd thereupon sent word to Raba that he should concentrate his mind and pray for rain. Raba did so, but no rain came. Said he: "Master of the world! 'O God, we have heard with our ears, our fathers have told us, what work Thou didst in their days, in the days of old' (Ps., 44.2), but we did not see it with our own eyes." Immediately a heavy rain fell, so that the gutters of Maḥuza carried the water into the Tigris. Thereupon Raba's father appeared to him in a dream, saying: "Is there another man who puts Heaven to so much trouble! Change thy place." (He did so and) the next morning he found that his bed was scratched with knives.

A certain man was sentenced in the court of Raba to be lashed because he had sexual intercourse with a Gentile woman. Raba had the lashing administered to him, and the man died of the effects. The matter came to the hearing of king Shabur (Sapor), who wanted to punish Raba for the deed, but 'Ifra 'Ormuzd, mother of king Shabur, said to him: "Have no quarrels with the Jews, because anything they ask of their God, He does for them." Said he: "What, for instance?" "They pray for rain," she replied, "and rain comes." Said he: "That is because it is the season when rain is due, let them pray for it now, in the equinox of Tammuz, and bring down rain!" 'Ifra 'Ormuzd thereupon sent word to Raba that he should concentrate his mind and pray for rain. Raba did so, but no rain came. Said he: "Master of the world! 'O God, we have heard with our ears, our fathers have told us, what work Thou didst in their days, in the days of old' (Ps., 44.2), but we did not see it with our own eyes." Immediately a heavy rain fell, so that the gutters of Maḥuza carried the water into the Tigris. Thereupon Raba's father appeared to him in a dream, saying: "Is there another man who puts Heaven to so much trouble! Change thy place." (He did so and) the next morning he found that his bed was scratched with knives.

R. Ḥanina b. Dosa once travelled on the road, when it began to rain. Said he: "Master of the world! The whole world is at ease, but Ḥanina alone is in distress!" The rain stopped. When he came home, he said again: "Master of the world! The whole world is in distress, while Ḥanina alone is at ease!" The rain came again. Said R. Joseph, what good did the prayer of the high priest do if R. Ḥanina could make it to naught? For we read in a Mishnah that the high priest used to recite a short prayer in the outer hall. What was the prayer? R. 'Abin b. R. 'Adda and Raba b. R. 'Adda said, both in the name of R. Judah, the prayer ran thus: "May it be Thy will, Lord our God, that this year be one of heat and rain." Is a hot year of any benefit? On the contrary, it is a calamity! But the prayer read thus: "If the year is to be hot, let it also be blessed with ample rain, and may the prayers of travellers find no hearing before Thee." R. Aḥa the son of Raba reported in the name of R. Judah the following conclusion (of the prayer): "May the rulership never depart from the house of Judah and may Thy people Israel never be in need of supporting one another or of assistance from other people."

R. Ḥanina b. Dosa once travelled on the road, when it began to rain. Said he: "Master of the world! The whole world is at ease, but Ḥanina alone is in distress!" The rain stopped. When he came home, he said again: "Master of the world! The whole world is in distress, while Ḥanina alone is at ease!" The rain came again. Said R. Joseph, what good did the prayer of the high priest do if R. Ḥanina could make it to naught? For we read in a Mishnah that the high priest used to recite a short prayer in the outer hall. What was the prayer? R. 'Abin b. R. 'Adda and Raba b. R. 'Adda said, both in the name of R. Judah, the prayer ran thus: "May it be Thy will, Lord our God, that this year be one of heat and rain." Is a hot year of any benefit? On the contrary, it is a calamity! But the prayer read thus: "If the year is to be hot, let it also be blessed with ample rain, and may the prayers of travellers find no hearing before Thee." R. Aḥa the son of Raba reported in the name of R. Judah the following conclusion (of the prayer): "May the rulership never depart from the house of Judah and may Thy people Israel never be in need of supporting one another or of assistance from other people."

It happened that a fast was ordered in Lydda, etc. Why did they not recite the great Hallel before they ate and drank? Both 'Abbayi and Raba said, the great Hallel must be read only

Why does the Mishnah not say also that on the first of Nisan there was no Ma'amad service, because on that day there was the recital of Hallel, a Musaf and a wood offering? Said Raba, this omission proves that the recital of Hallel on New Moon is not a biblical ordinance, for thus said R. Johanan in the name of R. Simeon b. Jehozadak: On eighteen days of the year the whole Hallel is recited, namely, on the eight days of the Feast of Booths, the eight days of Ḥanukkah, the first day of Passover, and on Pentecost; in the Diaspora, however, Hallel is recited on twenty-one days: nine days of the Feast of Booths, eight days of Ḥanukkah, the (first) two Days of Passover, and the two days of Pentecost.

A breach was made in the walls of the city. Was that on the seventeenth of Tammuz? Is it not written (Jerem., 52. 6-7): "In the fourth month, in the ninth day of the month, the famine was sore in the city," and further on it is said (ibid., 52. 7): "Then a breach was made in the city"? Said Raba, this is no difficulty, for one statement refers to the time of the First Temple, and the other to the time of the Second, as is stated in a Baraita: On the ninth day of the month a breach was made in the city during the time of the First Temple, but during the time of the Second Temple the breach was made on the seventeenth thereof.

He set up an idol in the Temple. Whence is this known? It is written (Dan., 12. 11): "And from the time that the continual burnt-offering shall be taken away, and the detestable thing that causeth appalment set up." Was there only one (detestable thing)? Is it not written (ibid., 9. 27): "And upon the wing of detestable things?" Said Raba, there were two, but one fell upon the other, breaking off its hand. On the idol the following inscription was later found:

Said Raba, the law is in accordance with R. Meir; Raba further said, the law is in accordance with Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel. Both these statements of Raba were made for the purpose of indicating a lenient view, and both were needed; for if he had said only the law is in accordance with R. Meir, one might have understood it to mean that the prohibition is in force from the very beginning of the month to the fast day (as is actually the opinion of R. Meir), therefore he adds that the law is in accordance with Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel (who restricts it to the week of the ninth); if, on the other hand, he had said only the law is in accordance with Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel, one might have understood him to mean that the prohibition extends even to the days following immediately upon the ninth (as is the opinion of Rabban Simeon), therefore he said also the law is in accordance with R. Meir (who denies this).

Said Raba, the law is in accordance with R. Meir; Raba further said, the law is in accordance with Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel. Both these statements of Raba were made for the purpose of indicating a lenient view, and both were needed; for if he had said only the law is in accordance with R. Meir, one might have understood it to mean that the prohibition is in force from the very beginning of the month to the fast day (as is actually the opinion of R. Meir), therefore he adds that the law is in accordance with Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel (who restricts it to the week of the ninth); if, on the other hand, he had said only the law is in accordance with Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel, one might have understood him to mean that the prohibition extends even to the days following immediately upon the ninth (as is the opinion of Rabban Simeon), therefore he said also the law is in accordance with R. Meir (who denies this).

Said Raba, the law is in accordance with R. Meir; Raba further said, the law is in accordance with Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel. Both these statements of Raba were made for the purpose of indicating a lenient view, and both were needed; for if he had said only the law is in accordance with R. Meir, one might have understood it to mean that the prohibition is in force from the very beginning of the month to the fast day (as is actually the opinion of R. Meir), therefore he adds that the law is in accordance with Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel (who restricts it to the week of the ninth); if, on the other hand, he had said only the law is in accordance with Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel, one might have understood him to mean that the prohibition extends even to the days following immediately upon the ninth (as is the opinion of Rabban Simeon), therefore he said also the law is in accordance with R. Meir (who denies this).

R. Judah made it obligatory to overturn the couches, but the other Sages did not agree with him. It is taught in a Baraita: The Sages said to R. Judah: If your opinion be accepted, what shall become of pregnant and nursing women? Said R. Judah in reply to the other Sages: I am speaking only of those who can do it. The same is taught also in the following Baraita: The Sages accept R. Judah's opinion in the case of people who can do it (overturn their couches), while R. Judah accedes to the opinion of the Sages in the case of those who can not do it. What then is the difference between the two views? Said 'Abbayi, there is a difference with regard to other couches in the house (upon which he does not sleep), as is evident from this Baraita: One should overturn not only the couch upon which he sleeps, but also all the other couches in the house. Said Raba, the law is in accordance with the version given by the author of our Mishnah, namely that the Sages did not accept R. Judah's opinion at all.

Rabbah the son of Raba sent to R. Joseph: What is the law? He sent him back: The law is that the verse is repeated, and it is a middle reader who repeats.

Raba said, Since the later portion of the Mishnah is on account of interposition, the former is not on account of interposition. But in the former one this is the reason. It is a precaution, in order that needles and pipes should not be dipped in a vessel, the mouth of which is not of the size of the pipe of a wine-skin bottle. For there is a canonical Mishnah, viz., The communication between religious baths must be as the pipe of a wine-skin as regards its thickness,

What real difference is there between what Raba and what R. Ela says? There is this difference between them. In the case of a basket and a wine-strainer which are filled with vessels and cleansed, according to the one who says, The prohibition is because of interposition, there is an interposition; but according to the one who says, The prohibition is for a precaution, lest haply needles and pipes should be dipped in a vessel, the mouth of which is not of the size of the pipe of a wine-skin, the answer is, there is no basket or wine-strainer the mouth of which is not of the size of the pipe of a wine-skin. And Raba has acted consistently with himself; for Raba said, In the case of a basket and wine-strainer, which are filled with vessels and dipped, all are clean; but in the case of a bath, which is divided by a basket or wine-strainer, he who seeks to cleanse there—the cleansing avails him nought, for lo, all the earth is trembling, and we require that there should be forty seahs of water in one place. And these words refer to a clean vessel, but in the case of an unclean vessel, seeing that the cleansing has gone up over the whole surface of the vessel, it has gone up also over the vessels which are in it. For there is a canonical Mishnah, viz., Vessels which are filled with vessels and are dipped, lo, these are clean, and if they are not dipped, the mingled waters must reach that amount of mingling which takes place by means of a communication as large as the pipe of a wine-skin (Mikvaoth, vi. 2). How is it that it says, And if they are not dipped? This is the meaning, viz., And if it is not necessary to dip them, still the mingled waters must reach that amount of mingling which takes place by means of a communication as large as the pipe of a wine-skin. And lo, as regards the sayings of Raba and R. Ela, they are the subject of a Baraitha. For there is a Baraitha, A basket and a wine-strainer which are filled with vessels and are dipped are clean as well for hallowed things as for a heave-offering. Abba Saul says, For a heave-offering, but not for hallowed things. If so, then is not a heave-offering also invalid? No, for to whom are we speaking? Is it not to teachers? teachers who are possessed of knowledge? But if so, the same rule will apply to hallowed things also. No, for a common person sees him and goes and dips. Then in the case of heave-offering also, a common person sees him and goes and dips. We need not receive it from him. Hallowed things also we need not receive from him. He would be angry. In the case of heave-offering also he would be angry.

What real difference is there between what Raba and what R. Ela says? There is this difference between them. In the case of a basket and a wine-strainer which are filled with vessels and cleansed, according to the one who says, The prohibition is because of interposition, there is an interposition; but according to the one who says, The prohibition is for a precaution, lest haply needles and pipes should be dipped in a vessel, the mouth of which is not of the size of the pipe of a wine-skin, the answer is, there is no basket or wine-strainer the mouth of which is not of the size of the pipe of a wine-skin. And Raba has acted consistently with himself; for Raba said, In the case of a basket and wine-strainer, which are filled with vessels and dipped, all are clean; but in the case of a bath, which is divided by a basket or wine-strainer, he who seeks to cleanse there—the cleansing avails him nought, for lo, all the earth is trembling, and we require that there should be forty seahs of water in one place. And these words refer to a clean vessel, but in the case of an unclean vessel, seeing that the cleansing has gone up over the whole surface of the vessel, it has gone up also over the vessels which are in it. For there is a canonical Mishnah, viz., Vessels which are filled with vessels and are dipped, lo, these are clean, and if they are not dipped, the mingled waters must reach that amount of mingling which takes place by means of a communication as large as the pipe of a wine-skin (Mikvaoth, vi. 2). How is it that it says, And if they are not dipped? This is the meaning, viz., And if it is not necessary to dip them, still the mingled waters must reach that amount of mingling which takes place by means of a communication as large as the pipe of a wine-skin. And lo, as regards the sayings of Raba and R. Ela, they are the subject of a Baraitha. For there is a Baraitha, A basket and a wine-strainer which are filled with vessels and are dipped are clean as well for hallowed things as for a heave-offering. Abba Saul says, For a heave-offering, but not for hallowed things. If so, then is not a heave-offering also invalid? No, for to whom are we speaking? Is it not to teachers? teachers who are possessed of knowledge? But if so, the same rule will apply to hallowed things also. No, for a common person sees him and goes and dips. Then in the case of heave-offering also, a common person sees him and goes and dips. We need not receive it from him. Hallowed things also we need not receive from him. He would be angry. In the case of heave-offering also he would be angry.

What real difference is there between what Raba and what R. Ela says? There is this difference between them. In the case of a basket and a wine-strainer which are filled with vessels and cleansed, according to the one who says, The prohibition is because of interposition, there is an interposition; but according to the one who says, The prohibition is for a precaution, lest haply needles and pipes should be dipped in a vessel, the mouth of which is not of the size of the pipe of a wine-skin, the answer is, there is no basket or wine-strainer the mouth of which is not of the size of the pipe of a wine-skin. And Raba has acted consistently with himself; for Raba said, In the case of a basket and wine-strainer, which are filled with vessels and dipped, all are clean; but in the case of a bath, which is divided by a basket or wine-strainer, he who seeks to cleanse there—the cleansing avails him nought, for lo, all the earth is trembling, and we require that there should be forty seahs of water in one place. And these words refer to a clean vessel, but in the case of an unclean vessel, seeing that the cleansing has gone up over the whole surface of the vessel, it has gone up also over the vessels which are in it. For there is a canonical Mishnah, viz., Vessels which are filled with vessels and are dipped, lo, these are clean, and if they are not dipped, the mingled waters must reach that amount of mingling which takes place by means of a communication as large as the pipe of a wine-skin (Mikvaoth, vi. 2). How is it that it says, And if they are not dipped? This is the meaning, viz., And if it is not necessary to dip them, still the mingled waters must reach that amount of mingling which takes place by means of a communication as large as the pipe of a wine-skin. And lo, as regards the sayings of Raba and R. Ela, they are the subject of a Baraitha. For there is a Baraitha, A basket and a wine-strainer which are filled with vessels and are dipped are clean as well for hallowed things as for a heave-offering. Abba Saul says, For a heave-offering, but not for hallowed things. If so, then is not a heave-offering also invalid? No, for to whom are we speaking? Is it not to teachers? teachers who are possessed of knowledge? But if so, the same rule will apply to hallowed things also. No, for a common person sees him and goes and dips. Then in the case of heave-offering also, a common person sees him and goes and dips. We need not receive it from him. Hallowed things also we need not receive from him. He would be angry. In the case of heave-offering also he would be angry.

What real difference is there between what Raba and what R. Ela says? There is this difference between them. In the case of a basket and a wine-strainer which are filled with vessels and cleansed, according to the one who says, The prohibition is because of interposition, there is an interposition; but according to the one who says, The prohibition is for a precaution, lest haply needles and pipes should be dipped in a vessel, the mouth of which is not of the size of the pipe of a wine-skin, the answer is, there is no basket or wine-strainer the mouth of which is not of the size of the pipe of a wine-skin. And Raba has acted consistently with himself; for Raba said, In the case of a basket and wine-strainer, which are filled with vessels and dipped, all are clean; but in the case of a bath, which is divided by a basket or wine-strainer, he who seeks to cleanse there—the cleansing avails him nought, for lo, all the earth is trembling, and we require that there should be forty seahs of water in one place. And these words refer to a clean vessel, but in the case of an unclean vessel, seeing that the cleansing has gone up over the whole surface of the vessel, it has gone up also over the vessels which are in it. For there is a canonical Mishnah, viz., Vessels which are filled with vessels and are dipped, lo, these are clean, and if they are not dipped, the mingled waters must reach that amount of mingling which takes place by means of a communication as large as the pipe of a wine-skin (Mikvaoth, vi. 2). How is it that it says, And if they are not dipped? This is the meaning, viz., And if it is not necessary to dip them, still the mingled waters must reach that amount of mingling which takes place by means of a communication as large as the pipe of a wine-skin. And lo, as regards the sayings of Raba and R. Ela, they are the subject of a Baraitha. For there is a Baraitha, A basket and a wine-strainer which are filled with vessels and are dipped are clean as well for hallowed things as for a heave-offering. Abba Saul says, For a heave-offering, but not for hallowed things. If so, then is not a heave-offering also invalid? No, for to whom are we speaking? Is it not to teachers? teachers who are possessed of knowledge? But if so, the same rule will apply to hallowed things also. No, for a common person sees him and goes and dips. Then in the case of heave-offering also, a common person sees him and goes and dips. We need not receive it from him. Hallowed things also we need not receive from him. He would be angry. In the case of heave-offering also he would be angry.

That which is unclean by reason of a dead body requires sprinkling on the third and on the seventh day. But men do not borrow a vessel for use at the end of seven days. And with regard to dipping, are we not to take a man's word? And yet there is the Baraitha, The word of a common person is taken with respect to the purification of washing of that which is unclean by reason of a dead body. Abai said, There is no difficulty. The one refers to his body, the other to his vessels. But Raba said, Both the one and the other teaching refer to his vessels. And even so there is no difficulty. The one is the case of a man who says, I have never dipped vessels in the midst of vessels; and the other is the case of a man who says, I have dipped, but I have not dipped in a vessel the mouth of which is not of the size of the pipe of a wine-skin. And this is borne out by a Baraitha, viz., A common person is believed when he says, Fruits have not been rendered predisposed to defilement. But he is not believed, when he says, The fruits have been rendered predisposed to defilement, but they have not been defiled. And with regard to his body, is he to be believed? Surely not, For lo, there is a Baraitha, viz., In the case of a learned and observant man who comes for sprinkling, he is to be sprinkled at once; in the case of a common person, who comes for sprinkling, he is not to be sprinkled, until he performs before us the things appertaining to the third and seventh days. But Abai says, As the result of thy severity towards him at the beginning, thou dealest gently with him at the end.