rate

Then said the LORD unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no.

And they brought every man his present, vessels of silver, and vessels of gold, and garments, and armour, and spices, horses, and mules, a rate year by year.

And his allowance was a continual allowance given him of the king, a daily rate for every day, all the days of his life.

Even after a certain rate every day, offering according to the commandment of Moses, on the sabbaths, and on the new moons, and on the solemn feasts, three times in the year, even in the feast of unleavened bread, and in the feast of weeks, and in the feast of tabernacles.

And they brought every man his present, vessels of silver, and vessels of gold, and raiment, harness, and spices, horses, and mules, a rate year by year.

I have read somewhere that the Saviour said—and I question whether some one has assumed the person of the Saviour, or called the words to memory, or whether it be true that is said—but at any rate the Saviour himself says: He that is near me is near the fire. He that is far from me is far from the kingdom.

O my son! be not hasty in the wedding of a wife, for if it turns out well, she will say, 'My lord, make provision for me'; and if it turns out ill, she will rate at him who was the cause of it.

Give us, at any rate, the gods that remain, and we will give thee the proper price for the broken gods, also for the gods that have been preserved."

Now after the house is [built] as is fitting and right, let the bishop be appointed, being chosen by all the people according to the will of the Holy Ghost, being without fault, chaste, quiet, mild, without anxiety, watchful, not a money-lover blameless, not quarrelsome, ready to forgive, a teacher, not given to much speaking, a lover of good things, a lover of labour, a lover of widows, a lover of orphans, a lover of the poor, experienced in the mysteries, not lax and distracted in company with this world, peaceful, and in all good things perfect, as one to whom the order and place of God is entrusted. It is good indeed that he be without a wife, but at any rate that he have been the husband of one wife only, so that he may sympathise with the weakness of widows. Let him be appointed when he is of middle age, not a youth.

But concerning bishops, we have heard from our Lord, that a pastor who is to be ordained a bishop for the churches in every parish, must be unblameable, unreprovable, free from all kinds of wickedness common among men, not under fifty years of age; for such a one is in good part past youthful disorders, and the slanders of the heathen, as well as the reproaches which are sometimes cast upon many persons by some false brethren, who do not consider the word of God in the Gospel: Whosoever speaks an idle word shall give an account thereof to the Lord in the day of judgment. And again: By your words you shall be justified, and by your words you shall be condemned. Let him therefore, if it is possible, be well educated; but if he be unlettered, let him at any rate be skilful in the word, and of competent age. But if in a small parish one advanced in years is not to be found, let some younger person, who has a good report among his neighbours, and is esteemed by them worthy of the office of a bishop — who has carried himself from his youth with meekness and regularity, like a much elder person, — after examination, and a general good report, be ordained in peace. For Solomon at twelve years of age was king of Israel, and Josiah at eight years of age reigned righteously, and in like manner Joash governed the people at seven years of age. Wherefore, although the person be young, let him be meek, gentle, and quiet. For the Lord God says by Esaias: Upon whom will I look, but upon him who is humble and quiet, and always trembles at my words? In like manner it is in the Gospel also: Blessed are the meek: for they shall inherit the earth. Let him also be merciful; for again it is said: Blessed are the merciful: for they shall obtain mercy. Let him also be a peacemaker; for again it is said: Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the sons of God. Let him also be one of a good conscience, purified from all evil, and wickedness, and unrighteousness; for it is said again: Blessed are the pure in heart: for they shall see God.

And when the day came on which the king was to let the taxes of the cities to farm, and those that were the principal men of dignity in their several countries were to bid for them, the sum of the taxes together, of Celesyria, and Phoenicia, and Judea, with Samaria, [as they were bidden for,] came to eight thousand talents. Hereupon Joseph accused the bidders, as having agreed together to estimate the value of the taxes at too low a rate; and he promised that he would himself give twice as much for them: but for those who did not pay, he would send the king home their whole substance; for this privilege was sold together with the taxes themselves. The king was pleased to hear that offer; and because it augmented his revenues, he said he would confirm the sale of the taxes to him. But when he asked him this question, Whether he had any sureties that would be bound for the payment of the money? he answered very pleasantly, "I will give such security, and those of persons good and responsible, and which you shall have no reason to distrust." And when he bid him name them who they were, he replied, "I give thee no other persons, O king, for my sureties, than thyself, and this thy wife; and you shall be security for both parties." So Ptolemy laughed at the proposal, and granted him the farming of the taxes without any sureties. This procedure was a sore grief to those that came from the cities into Egypt, who were utterly disappointed; and they returned every one to their own country with shame.

But as they were in the midst of these deliberations, letters were brought from Herod about all his affairs, and proved contrary to the report, and of what they before expected; for when he was come to Antony, he soon recovered his interest with him, by the presents he made him, which he had brought with him from Jerusalem; and he soon induced him, upon discoursing with him, to leave off his indignation at him, so that Cleopatra's persuasions had less force than the arguments and presents he brought to regain his friendship; for Antony said that it was not good to require an account of a king, as to the affairs of his government, for at this rate he could be no king at all, but that those who had given him that authority ought to permit him to make use of it. He also said the same things to Cleopatra, that it would be best for her not busily to meddle with the acts of the king's government. Herod wrote an account of these things, and enlarged upon the other honors which he had received from Antony; how he sat by him at his hearing causes, and took his diet with him every day, and that he enjoyed those favors from him, notwithstanding the reproaches that Cleopatra so severely laid against him, who having a great desire of his country, and earnestly entreating Antony that the kingdom might be given to her, labored with her utmost diligence to have him out of the way; but that he still found Antony just to him, and had no longer any apprehensions of hard treatment from him; and that he was soon upon his return, with a firmer additional assurance of his favor to him, in his reigning and managing public affairs; and that there was no longer any hope for Cleopatra's covetous temper, since Antony had given her Celesyria instead of what she had desired; by which means he had at once pacified her, and got clear of the entreaties which she made him to have Judea bestowed upon her.

Now as Josephus was thus engaged in the administration of the affairs of Galilee, there arose a treacherous person, a man of Gischala, the son of Levi, whose name was John. His character was that of a very cunning and very knavish person, beyond the ordinary rate of the other men of eminence there, and for wicked practices he had not his fellow any where. Poor he was at first, and for a long time his wants were a hinderance to him in his wicked designs. He was a ready liar, and yet very sharp in gaining credit to his fictions: he thought it a point of virtue to delude people, and would delude even such as were the dearest to him. He was a hypocritical pretender to humanity, but where he had hopes of gain, he spared not the shedding of blood: his desires were ever carried to great things, and he encouraged his hopes from those mean wicked tricks which he was the author of. He had a peculiar knack at thieving; but in some time he got certain companions in his impudent practices; at first they were but few, but as he proceeded on in his evil course, they became still more and more numerous. He took care that none of his partners should be easily caught in their rogueries, but chose such out of the rest as had the strongest constitutions of body, and the greatest courage of soul, together with great skill in martial affairs; as he got together a band of four hundred men, who came principally out of the country of Tyre, and were vagabonds that had run away from its villages; and by the means of these he laid waste all Galilee, and irritated a considerable number, who were in great expectation of a war then suddenly to arise among them.

But as the truth came out in time, it appeared how the affairs of Jotapata really stood; yet was it found that the death of Josephus was a fiction; and when they understood that he was alive, and was among the Romans, and that the commanders treated him at another rate than they treated captives, they were as vehemently angry at him now as they had showed their good-will before, when he appeared to have been dead. He was also abused by some as having been a coward, and by others as a deserter; and the city was full of indignation at him, and of reproaches cast upon him; their rage was also aggravated by their afflictions, and more inflamed by their ill success; and what usually becomes an occasion of caution to wise men, I mean affliction, became a spur to them to venture on further calamities, and the end of one misery became still the beginning of another; they therefore resolved to fall on the Romans the more vehemently, as resolving to be revenged on him in revenging themselves on the Romans. And this was the state of Jerusalem as to the troubles which now came upon it.

But besides this, Apion objects to us thus: "If the Jews [says he] be citizens of Alexandria, why do they not worship the same gods with the Alexandrians?" To which I give this answer: Since you are yourselves Egyptians, why do you fight it out one against another, and have implacable wars about your religion? At this rate we must not call you all Egyptians, nor indeed in general men, because you breed up with great care beasts of a nature quite contrary to that of men, although the nature of all men seems to be one and the same. Now if there be such differences in opinion among you Egyptians, why are you surprised that those who came to Alexandria from another country, and had original laws of their own before, should persevere in the observance of those laws? But still he charges us with being the authors of sedition; which accusation, if it be a just one, why is it not laid against us all, since we are known to be all of one mind. Moreover, those that search into such matters will soon discover that the authors of sedition have been such citizens of Alexandria as Apion is; for while they were the Grecians and Macedonians who were ill possession of this city, there was no sedition raised against us, and we were permitted to observe our ancient solemnities; but when the number of the Egyptians therein came to be considerable, the times grew confused, and then these seditions brake out still more and more, while our people continued uncorrupted. These Egyptians, therefore, were the authors of these troubles, who having not the constancy of Macedonians, nor the prudence of Grecians, indulged all of them the evil manners of the Egyptians, and continued their ancient hatred against us; for what is here so presumptuously charged upon us, is owing to the differences that are amongst themselves; while many of them have not obtained the privileges of citizens in proper times, but style those who are well known to have had that privilege extended to them all no other than foreigners: for it does not appear that any of the kings have ever formerly bestowed those privileges of citizens upon Egyptians, no more than have the emperors done it more lately; while it was Alexander who introduced us into this city at first, the kings augmented our privileges therein, and the Romans have been pleased to preserve them always inviolable. Moreover, Apion would lay a blot upon us, because we do not erect images for our emperors; as if those emperors did not know this before, or stood in need of Apion as their defender; whereas he ought rather to have admired the magnanimity and modesty of the Romans, whereby they do not compel those that are subject to them to transgress the laws of their countries, but are willing to receive the honors due to them after such a manner as those who are to pay them esteem consistent with piety and with their own laws; for they do not thank people for conferring honors upon them, When they are compelled by violence so to do. Accordingly, since the Grecians and some other nations think it a right thing to make images, nay, when they have painted the pictures of their parents, and wives, and children, they exult for joy; and some there are who take pictures for themselves of such persons as were no way related to them; nay, some take the pictures of such servants as they were fond of; what wonder is it then if such as these appear willing to pay the same respect to their princes and lords? But then our legislator hath forbidden us to make images, not by way of denunciation beforehand, that the Roman authority was not to be honored, but as despising a thing that was neither necessary nor useful for either God or man; and he forbade them, as we shall prove hereafter, to make these images for any part of the animal creation, and much less for God himself, who is no part of such animal creation. Yet hath our legislator no where forbidden us to pay honors to worthy men, provided they be of another kind, and inferior to those we pay to God; with which honors we willingly testify our respect to our emperors, and to the people of Rome; we also offer perpetual sacrifices for them; nor do we only offer them every day at the common expenses of all the Jews, but although we offer no other such sacrifices out of our common expenses, no, not for our own children, yet do we this as a peculiar honor to the emperors, and to them alone, while we do the same to no other person whomsoever. And let this suffice for an answer in general to Apion, as to what he says with relation to the Alexandrian Jews.

Nay, this miracle or piety derides us further, and adds the following pretended facts to his former fable; for he says that this man related how, "while the Jews were once in a long war with the Idumeans, there came a man out of one of the cities of the Idumeans, who there had worshipped Apollo. This man, whose name is said to have been Zabidus, came to the Jews, and promised that he would deliver Apollo, the god of Dora, into their hands, and that he would come to our temple, if they would all come up with him, and bring the whole multitude of the Jews with them; that Zabidus made him a certain wooden instrument, and put it round about him, and set three rows of lamps therein, and walked after such a manner, that he appeared to those that stood a great way off him to be a kind of star, walking upon the earth; that the Jews were terribly affrighted at so surprising an appearance, and stood very quiet at a distance; and that Zabidus, while they continued so very quiet, went into the holy house, and carried off that golden head of an ass, [for so facetiously does he write,] and then went his way back again to Dora in great haste." And say you so, sir! as I may reply; then does Apion load the ass, that is, himself, and lays on him a burden of fooleries and lies; for he writes of places that have no being, and not knowing the cities he speaks of, he changes their situation; for Idumea borders upon our country, and is near to Gaza, in which there is no such city as Dora; although there be, it is true, a city named Dora in Phoenicia, near Mount Carmel, but it is four days' journey from Idumea. Now, then, why does this man accuse us, because we have not gods in common with other nations, if our fathers were so easily prevailed upon to have Apollo come to them, and thought they saw him walking upon the earth, and the stars with him? for certainly those who have so many festivals, wherein they light lamps, must yet, at this rate, have never seen a candlestick! But still it seems that while Zabidus took his journey over the country, where were so many ten thousands of people, nobody met him. He also, it seems, even in a time of war, found the walls of Jerusalem destitute of guards. I omit the rest. Now the doors of the holy house were seventy cubits high, and twenty cubits broad; they were all plated over with gold, and almost of solid gold itself, and there were no fewer than twenty men required to shut them every day; nor was it lawful ever to leave them open, though it seems this lamp-bearer of ours opened them easily, or thought he opened them, as he thought he had the ass's head in his hand. Whether, therefore, he returned it to us again, or whether Apion took it, and brought it into the temple again, that Antiochus might find it, and afford a handle for a second fable of Apion's, is uncertain.

But let us now return to where the Jew is introduced, speaking of the mother of Jesus, and saying that “when she was pregnant she was turned out of doors by the carpenter to whom she had been betrothed, as having been guilty of adultery, and that she bore a child to a certain soldier named Panthera;” and let us see whether those who have blindly concocted these fables about the adultery of the virgin with Panthera, and her rejection by the carpenter, did not invent these stories to overturn His miraculous conception by the Holy Ghost: for they could have falsified the history in a different manner, on account of its extremely miraculous character, and not have admitted, as it were against their will, that Jesus was born of no ordinary human marriage. It was to be expected, indeed, that those who would not believe the miraculous birth of Jesus would invent some falsehood. And their not doing this in a credible manner, but [their] preserving the fact that it was not by Joseph that the Virgin conceived Jesus, rendered the falsehood very palpable to those who can understand and detect such inventions. Is it at all agreeable to reason, that he who dared to do so much for the human race, in order that, as far as in him lay, all the Greeks and Barbarians, who were looking for divine condemnation, might depart from evil, and regulate their entire conduct in a manner pleasing to the Creator of the world, should not have had a miraculous birth, but one the vilest and most disgraceful of all? And I will ask of them as Greeks, and particularly of Celsus, who either holds or not the sentiments of Plato, and at any rate quotes them, whether He who sends souls down into the bodies of men, degraded Him who was to dare such mighty acts, and to teach so many men, and to reform so many from the mass of wickedness in the world, to a birth more disgraceful than any other, and did not rather introduce Him into the world through a lawful marriage? Or is it not more in conformity with reason, that every soul, for certain mysterious reasons (I speak now according to the opinion of Pythagoras, and Plato, and Empedocles, whom Celsus frequently names), is introduced into a body, and introduced according to its deserts and former actions? It is probable, therefore, that this soul also which conferred more benefit by its residence in the flesh than that of many men (to avoid prejudice, I do not say “all”), stood in need of a body not only superior to others, but invested with all excellent qualities.

We ought to take note, however, that the power of foreknowing the future is by no means a proof of divinity; for in itself it is a thing indifferent, and is found occurring amongst both good and bad. Physicians, at any rate, by means of their professional skill foreknow certain things, although their character may happen to be bad. And in the same way also pilots, although perhaps wicked men, are able to foretell the signs [of good or bad weather], and the approach of violent tempests of wind, and atmospheric changes, because they gather this knowledge from experience and observation, although I do not suppose that on that account any one would term them “gods” if their characters happened to be bad. The assertion, then, of Celsus is false, when he says: “What could be called more divine than the power of foreknowing and foretelling the future?” And so also is this, that “many of the animals claim to have ideas of God;” for none of the irrational animals possess any idea of God. And wholly false, too, is his assertion, that “the irrational animals are nearer the society of God [than men],” when even men who are still in a state of wickedness, however great their progress in knowledge, are far removed from that society. It is, then, those alone who are truly wise and sincerely religious who are nearer to God’s society; such persons as were our prophets, and Moses, to the latter of whom, on account of his exceeding purity, the Scripture said: “Moses alone shall come near the Lord, but the rest shall not come nigh.”

Celsus then proceeds to say that “we shrink from raising altars, statues, and temples; and this,” he thinks, “has been agreed upon among us as the badge or distinctive mark of a secret and forbidden society.” He does not perceive that we regard the spirit of every good man as an altar from which arises an incense which is truly and spiritually sweet-smelling, namely, the prayers ascending from a pure conscience. Therefore it is said by John in the Revelation, “The odours are the prayers of saints;” and by the Psalmist, “Let my prayer come up before Thee as incense.” And the statues and gifts which are fit offerings to God are the work of no common mechanics, but are wrought and fashioned in us by the Word of God, to wit, the virtues in which we imitate “the First-born of all creation,” who has set us an example of justice, of temperance, of courage, of wisdom, of piety, and of the other virtues. In all those, then, who plant and cultivate within their souls, according to the divine word, temperance, justice, wisdom, piety, and other virtues, these excellences are their statues they raise, in which we are persuaded that it is becoming for us to honour the model and prototype of all statues: “the image of the invisible God,” God the only-begotten. And again, they who “put off the old man with his deeds, and put on the new man, which is renewed in knowledge after the image of Him that hath created him,” in taking upon them the image of Him who hath created them, do raise within themselves a statue like to what the Most High God Himself desires. And as among statuaries there are some who are marvellously perfect in their art, as for example Pheidias and Polycleitus, and among painters, Zeuxis and Apelles, whilst others make inferior statues, and others, again, are inferior to the second-rate artists,—so that, taking all together, there is a wide difference in the execution of statues and pictures,—in the same way there are some who form images of the Most High in a better manner and with a more perfect skill; so that there is no comparison even between the Olympian Jupiter of Pheidias and the man who has been fashioned according to the image of God the Creator. But by far the most excellent of all these throughout the whole of creation is that image in our Saviour who said, “My Father is in me.”

Having said so much on this subject, let us proceed to another statement of Celsus: “Since men are born united to a body, whether to suit the order of the universe, or that they may in that way suffer the punishment of sin; or because the soul is oppressed by certain passions until it is purged from these at the appointed period of time,—for, according to Empedocles, all mankind must be banished from the abodes of the blessed for 30,000 periods of time,—we must therefore believe that they are entrusted to certain beings as keepers of this prison-house.” You will observe that Celsus, in these remarks, speaks of such weighty matters in the language of doubtful human conjecture. He adds also various opinions as to the origin of man, and shows considerable reluctance to set down any of these opinions as false. When he had once come to the conclusion neither indiscriminately to accept nor recklessly to reject the opinions held by the ancients, would it not have been in accordance with that same rule of judging, if, when he found himself not disposed to believe the doctrines taught by the Jewish prophets and by Jesus, at any rate to have held them as matters open to inquiry? And should he not have considered whether it is very probable that a people who faithfully served the Most High God, and who ofttimes encountered numberless dangers, and even death, rather than sacrifice the honour of God, and what they believed to be the revelations of His will, should have been wholly overlooked by God? Should it not rather be thought probable that people who despised the efforts of human art to represent the Divine Being, but strove rather to rise in thought to the knowledge of the Most High, should have been favoured with some revelation from Himself? Besides, he ought to have considered that the common Father and Creator of all, who sees and hears all things, and who duly esteems the intention of every man who seeks Him and desires to serve Him, will grant unto these also some of the benefits of His rule, and will give them an enlargement of that knowledge of Himself which He has once bestowed upon them. If this had been remembered by Celsus and the others who hate Moses and the Jewish prophets, and Jesus, and His faithful disciples, who endured so much for the sake of His word, they would not thus have reviled Moses, and the prophets, and Jesus, and His apostles; and they would not have singled out for their contempt the Jews beyond all the nations of the earth, and said they were worse even than the Egyptians,—a people who, either from superstition or some other form of delusion, went as far as they could in degrading the Divine Being to the level of brute beasts. And we invite inquiry, not as though we wished to lead any to doubt regarding the truths of Christianity, but in order to show that it would be better for those who in every way revile the doctrines of Christianity, at any rate to suspend their judgment, and not so rashly to state about Jesus and His apostles such things as they do not know, and as they cannot prove, either by what the Stoics call “apprehensive perception,” or by any other methods used by different sects of philosophers as criteria of truth.

Having said so much on this subject, let us proceed to another statement of Celsus: “Since men are born united to a body, whether to suit the order of the universe, or that they may in that way suffer the punishment of sin; or because the soul is oppressed by certain passions until it is purged from these at the appointed period of time,—for, according to Empedocles, all mankind must be banished from the abodes of the blessed for 30,000 periods of time,—we must therefore believe that they are entrusted to certain beings as keepers of this prison-house.” You will observe that Celsus, in these remarks, speaks of such weighty matters in the language of doubtful human conjecture. He adds also various opinions as to the origin of man, and shows considerable reluctance to set down any of these opinions as false. When he had once come to the conclusion neither indiscriminately to accept nor recklessly to reject the opinions held by the ancients, would it not have been in accordance with that same rule of judging, if, when he found himself not disposed to believe the doctrines taught by the Jewish prophets and by Jesus, at any rate to have held them as matters open to inquiry? And should he not have considered whether it is very probable that a people who faithfully served the Most High God, and who ofttimes encountered numberless dangers, and even death, rather than sacrifice the honour of God, and what they believed to be the revelations of His will, should have been wholly overlooked by God? Should it not rather be thought probable that people who despised the efforts of human art to represent the Divine Being, but strove rather to rise in thought to the knowledge of the Most High, should have been favoured with some revelation from Himself? Besides, he ought to have considered that the common Father and Creator of all, who sees and hears all things, and who duly esteems the intention of every man who seeks Him and desires to serve Him, will grant unto these also some of the benefits of His rule, and will give them an enlargement of that knowledge of Himself which He has once bestowed upon them. If this had been remembered by Celsus and the others who hate Moses and the Jewish prophets, and Jesus, and His faithful disciples, who endured so much for the sake of His word, they would not thus have reviled Moses, and the prophets, and Jesus, and His apostles; and they would not have singled out for their contempt the Jews beyond all the nations of the earth, and said they were worse even than the Egyptians,—a people who, either from superstition or some other form of delusion, went as far as they could in degrading the Divine Being to the level of brute beasts. And we invite inquiry, not as though we wished to lead any to doubt regarding the truths of Christianity, but in order to show that it would be better for those who in every way revile the doctrines of Christianity, at any rate to suspend their judgment, and not so rashly to state about Jesus and His apostles such things as they do not know, and as they cannot prove, either by what the Stoics call “apprehensive perception,” or by any other methods used by different sects of philosophers as criteria of truth.

When Adam and Eve went forth from Paradise, they were both virgins. After thirty years Adam knew Eve his wife, and she conceived and bare Cain and Leboda his sister with him; and again she conceived and bare Abel and Kelemath his sister with him. When the youths had grown up, Adam said to Eve, “ Let Cain take to wife Kelemath who was born with Abel, and let Abel take Leboda who was born with Cain.” But Cain said to Eve his mother, “ I will take to wife my own sister, and let Abel take his;” for Leboda was beautiful. When Adam heard these words, he was very grieved, and said, “ It is a transgression of the […] Cain’s sister to Abel; but Cain desired his own sister more than Abel’s. Both (i. e. Kelemath and Leboda) were his sisters, but because of their birth at one time I have called them thus. Now Cain’s sister was exceedingly beautiful. The two brothers made an offering to God because of this matter. Abel, because he was a shepherd, offered up of the fat firstlings of his flock in great love, with a pure heart and a sincere mind. Cain, because he was a husbandman, made an offering of some of the refuse of the fruits of his husbandry with reluctance. He made an offering of ears of wheat that were smitten by blight; but some say of straw only. And the divine fire came down from heaven and consumed the offering of Abel, and it was accepted; while the offering of Cain was rejected. And Cain was angry with God, and envied his brother; and he persuaded his brother to come out into the plain, and slew him. Some say that he smashed his head with stones, and killed him; and others say that Satan appeared to him in the form of wild beasts that fight with one another and slay each other. [VI At any rate, he killed him, whether this way or that way. Then God said to Cain, ‘ Where is Abel thy brother?’ Cain said, ‘Am I forsooth my brother’s keeper?’ God said, ‘ Behold, the sound of the cry of thy brother Abel’s blood has come unto me; ’ and God cursed Cain, and made him a wanderer and a fugitive all the days of his life. From the day in which the blood of Abel was shed upon the ground, it did not again receive the blood of any animal until Noah came forth from the ark. Adam and Eve mourned for Abel one hundred years. In the two hundred and thirtieth year, Seth, the beautiful, was born in the likeness of Adam; and Adam and Eve were consoled by him. Cain and his descendants went down and dwelt in the plain, while Adam and his children, that is the sons of Seth, dwelt upon the top of the Mount of Eden. And the sons of Seth went down and saw the beauty of the daughters of Cain, and lay with them; and the earth was corrupted and polluted with lasciviousness; and Adam and Eve heard of it and conceived by them and brought forth mighty men, the sons of heroes, like towers. Hence early writers have erred and written, “ The angels came down from heaven, and had intercourse with mankind, and from them were born mighty men of renown.” But this is not true; they have said this because they did not understand. Now see, my brother readers, and know that this is neither in the nature of spiritual beings, nor in the nature of the impure and evil-doing demons who love adultery; for there are no males nor females among them, nor has there been even one added to their number since they fell. If the devils were able to have intercourse with women, they would not leave one single virgin undefiled in the whole human race.’ oIaAL/.a,.JIch-s&a,? mourned. Now Adam lived nine hundred and thirty years \ Some say that in the days of Seth the knowledge of books went forth in the earth; but the Church does not accept this. When Seth was two hundred and fifty years old, he begat Enos; and Seth lived nine hundred and thirteen years, and he died. Enos was two hundred and ninety years old when he begat Cainan; and Enos first called upon the name of the Lord. Some say that he first composed books upon the course of the stars and the signs of the Zodiac. Enos lived nine hundred and five years. Cainan was a hundred and forty years old when he begat Mahalaleel; and he lived nine hundred and ten years. Mahalaleel was one hundred and sixty-five years old when he begat Jared; and he lived eight hundred and ninety-five years. Jared was one hundred and sixty-two years old when he begat Enoch; and he lived nine hundred and sixty-two years. Enoch was one hundred and sixty-five years old when he begat Methuselah; and when he was three hundred and sixty-five years old, God removed him to the generation of life, that is to Paradise. Methuselah was one hundred ‘Seth became a leader to the children of his people, and he ruled them in purity and holiness. And because of their purity they received this name, which is better than all names, that they should be called the children of God. and they went up in place of that band of demons which fell from and eighty-seven years old when he begat Lamech; and he lived nine hundred and sixty-nine years. Lamech was a hundred and eighty-two years old when he begat Noah; and he lived seven hundred and seventy-seven years.

One who lends money to his fellow may not dwell in his courtyard for free or rent it from him at a reduced rate, since that counts as usury. One may increase rent-charge [not paid in advance] but not purchase price [not paid in advance]. How so? If his fellow rented him his courtyard, and said to him, “If you pay me now the cost is 10 selas per year, but if you pay me on a monthly basis, the rent is one sela per month”, this is permitted. However, if he sold him his field, and said to him, “If you pay me now it is yours for 1,000 zuz, but if you pay me at the time of threshing it will be 1,200 zuz”, it is forbidden.

One may not set a price for produce before its market-price is known. After its market-price is known, one may set a price, for even though this one does not have [the produce] another does have it. If he was the first to harvest his crop, he may set a price with his fellow over grain stacked in a heap, or over grapes in their harvesting basket, or over olives in a vat, or over the clay-balls of the potter, or over lime as soon as the limestone is sunk in the kiln. One may set a price for manure at any time of the year. Rabbi Yose says: “One may not set a price over manure unless the seller has manure on the dungheap.” But the Sages permit it. One may set the price at the cheapest rate [that will be at the time of delivery]. Rabbi Judah says: “Even if he didn’t set the price at the cheapest rate he may say, “Give me at the such a price or give me back my money.”

One may not set a price for produce before its market-price is known. After its market-price is known, one may set a price, for even though this one does not have [the produce] another does have it. If he was the first to harvest his crop, he may set a price with his fellow over grain stacked in a heap, or over grapes in their harvesting basket, or over olives in a vat, or over the clay-balls of the potter, or over lime as soon as the limestone is sunk in the kiln. One may set a price for manure at any time of the year. Rabbi Yose says: “One may not set a price over manure unless the seller has manure on the dungheap.” But the Sages permit it. One may set the price at the cheapest rate [that will be at the time of delivery]. Rabbi Judah says: “Even if he didn’t set the price at the cheapest rate he may say, “Give me at the such a price or give me back my money.”

[A landowner] may lend his tenants wheat to be repaid in wheat, if it is for planting but not if it is for food. For Rabban Gamaliel used to lend his tenants wheat to be repaid in wheat when it was for planting. And if he lent it when the price was high and it afterward fell, or when it was low and it afterward rose, he used to take wheat back at the lower rate, not because such was the rule but because he wanted to be strict upon himself.

If one leased a field from his fellow and he let it lie fallow, they assess how much it was likely to have yielded and he must pay the owner accordingly, since he wrote [in the leasing agreement]: “If I suffer the land to lie fallow and do not till it, I will pay thee at the rate of its highest yield.”

The sufficiency of means is according to the ability of the vower. And the age is according to the subject of the vow. The evaluation is according to the subject of the evaluation. And the evaluations [shall be paid according to the rate prescribed] at the time of the evaluation. The sufficiency of means is according to the ability of the vower. How so? If a poor man evaluated a rich man, he pays only the valuation of a poor man. But if a rich man evaluated a poor man, he must pay the valuation of a rich man.

“And the age is according to the subject of the vow:” How so? If a child evaluates an old man, he must pay the value of an old man. And if an old man evaluates a child he must pay the value of a child. The evaluation is according to the subject of the evaluation. How so? If a man evaluated a woman, he must pay the value of a woman. And if a woman evaluated a man, she must pay the value of a man. “And the evaluations [shall be paid according to the rate prescribed] at the time of the evaluation.” How so? If he evaluated one who was less than five years of age, and he became [meantime] older than five years of age, or if [he evaluated one] who was less than twenty years of age and he became twenty years old, he must pay [only] in accord with the age at the time of the valuation. The thirtieth day is considered to be under this age. The fifth year or twentieth year is considered to be under this age. For it says: “And if he is from sixty years old and upward” (Leviticus 27:7), thus we can learn thus with regard to all others from what is said about sixty years: just as the sixtieth year is considered to be under this age, so also the fifth and twentieth years are under this age. Is that so! Just because [the Torah] accounts the sixtieth year to be under this age, thereby being more stringent, shall we make the fifth or the twentieth year be considered under this age, in order to be lenient? Scripture says, “Years,” “years” as a gezerah shavah: just as with the sixtieth year the word “years” means that it is considered under this age, so the word “years” with the fifth and with the twentieth year are considered under this age, whether this results in being lenient or being stringent. Rabbi Elazar says: [this rule holds good] until they are a month and a day beyond the year.

The colleagues in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Because of the children lest they should eat ṭevel. Rebbi La in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, in retail, because the seller takes the large margin, the seller separates. In wholesale, because the buyer will take the large margin, the buyer separates. One statement supports one and another statement supports the other. A statement supports the colleagues: “Rebbi Neḥemiah said, that which is connected to a retail outlet is like retail, connected to a wholesale outlet it is wholesale.” A statement supports Rebbi La. It was stated: “Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa said, if he measured with a retail measure, he is obligated. Even if he did measure only one seah and a quarter qab, he must tithe the quarter qab.” Rebbi Zeïra said, computation of gain is between them. If he measured for him the seah at the rate of quarter qabs, since the seller takes the large margin, the seller separates. If he measures the quarter qab at the rate of seahs, since the buyer will take the large margin, the buyer separates.

The colleagues in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Because of the children lest they should eat ṭevel. Rebbi La in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, in retail, because the seller takes the large margin, the seller separates. In wholesale, because the buyer will take the large margin, the buyer separates. One statement supports one and another statement supports the other. A statement supports the colleagues: “Rebbi Neḥemiah said, that which is connected to a retail outlet is like retail, connected to a wholesale outlet it is wholesale.” A statement supports Rebbi La. It was stated: “Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Joḥanan ben Beroqa said, if he measured with a retail measure, he is obligated. Even if he did measure only one seah and a quarter qab, he must tithe the quarter qab.” Rebbi Zeïra said, computation of gain is between them. If he measured for him the seah at the rate of quarter qabs, since the seller takes the large margin, the seller separates. If he measures the quarter qab at the rate of seahs, since the buyer will take the large margin, the buyer separates.

It is a condition of Joshua that one may collect grasses everywhere except in a field of fenugreek. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman: The Mishnah deals with him who sowed for sheaves. But did we not state: “One is not required to weed … fenugreek in which grasses appeared?” Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in his own name: “When it grew for seeds.” Rebbi Yose said, did Joshua come only to help sinners? If he committed a sin, it is forbidden as robbery, if he did not commit a sin it is permitted in respect to robbery. Hence, there is no difference whether he sowed for seeds or for sheaves. But did we not state: “One is not required to weed … fenugreek in which grasses appeared?” If he intends to use the grasses, one should oblige him to weed! Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Miasha: He would be happy if they were torn out and lying before him. Rebbi Yose did not say so, but in the end he approves that they should be torn out and lying before him. But then, if somebody found kilaim in a vineyard, they should be forbidden as robbery since in the end he desires that they should be torn out and lie before him! There, he has the means to bring it in, here he does not have the means to bring it in. Rav Naḥman said that Rebbi Mana asked: Think about it, if he had another field of fenugreek close by, then he has the means to bring it in! The words of the rabbis disagree, since Rebbi Zeriqan said in the name of the House of Yannai: All aftergrowth is forbidden except for that which appears on a fallow field, a field ready to be ploughed under, and a vineyard. He should have added, except for a field of fenugreek sown for the production of seeds! Rebbi Yose said, the words of Rebbi Joḥanan support me. It happened that somebody bought a garden plot of vegetables from a Gentile. He came and asked Rebbi Joḥanan, who said to him, go, harvest and sell at the going rate. Rebbi Abbahu objected before Rebbi Joḥanan: Did we not state: “or the threshing place on which many kinds are appearing?” He said to him, that place proves that he does not want them to exist. Could he not have answered, the one is like robbery, the other is permitted with respect to robbery? How can you object based on a scenario where it is forbidden as robbery to a decision in a case which is permitted with respect to robbery? It is as Rebbi Immi said, they were rich in answers. Or it is as Rebbi Nasa said, like a person who has two reasons but he answers only with one of them.

MISHNAH: The rate of heave: A generous person one in forty, the House of Shammay say, one in thirty. Average, one in fifty, and stingy, one in sixty. If somebody gave heave and it turned out to be one in sixty, this is heave and he does not have to give more. When he added, [the addition] is subject to tithes. If it turned out to be one in sixty-one, this is heave and he has to add in his usual way, by measure, weight, or count. Rebbi Jehudah says, even from what is not earmarked.

MISHNAH: Rebbi Eliezer says, heave is lifted at the rate of one in 101. Rebbi Joshua says by 100 and more. This “and more” has no measure; Rebbi Yose ben Meshullam says “and more” is one qab per one hundred seah, one sixth of what makes dema‘.

MISHNAH: If somebody transports Second Tithe produce from a place of high prices to one of low prices or vice versa, he redeems at the level of his place. If he brings produce from the threshing floor to town or from the wine-press to town, the excess value belongs to the Second but the expense is on him. One redeems Second Tithe following the low rate at which the grocer buys, not at which he sells; the one at which the banker gives small coins, not at which he assembles large coins. One does not redeem Second Tithe en bloc; if the price is known it is redeemed by the information of one person, if the price is not known by the information of three, as e. g., wine getting sour, fruit rotting, or coins rusting.

Rebbi Immi said, Kama came before Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. They said to him, go and pay according to those Tannaїm: “One redeems Second Tithe when it is cheap, not when it is expensive; at the rate at which the grocer buys, not at which he sells; the one at which the banker gives small coins, not at which he assembles large coins.” So far for large quantities, what about small ones? Even so, at the rate at which the grocer buys, not at which he sells; the one at which the banker gives small coins, not at which he assembles large coins.

Rebbi Immi said, Kama came before Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. They said to him, go and pay according to those Tannaїm: “One redeems Second Tithe when it is cheap, not when it is expensive; at the rate at which the grocer buys, not at which he sells; the one at which the banker gives small coins, not at which he assembles large coins.” So far for large quantities, what about small ones? Even so, at the rate at which the grocer buys, not at which he sells; the one at which the banker gives small coins, not at which he assembles large coins.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Abun said, Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Yose bar Ḥanina disagree. One said, why may one circumvent it? For “blessing” is written about it. The other said, why is it redeemed at a cheap rate? For “blessing” is written about it.

MISHNAH: If somebody gives ḥallah from flour it is not ḥallah and will be robbery in the hand if the Cohen. The dough itself is subject to ḥallah; the flour, if it is a full measure, is obligated for ḥallah and forbidden to laymen, the words of Rebbi Joshua. They said to him, it happened that a layman rabbi grabbed it. He said to them, he destroyed himself and put others in order. Five quarters of coarse flour are obligated for ḥallah; including hulls and bran it is obligated by five quarters. If the bran was sifted out and later returned, it is free. The rate of ḥallah is one in 24. If somebody makes dough for himself or his son’s wedding feast, one in 24. A baker who makes to sell on the market, and also a woman who makes to sell on the market, one in 48. If the dough became impure by error or accident, one in 48. If it became impure intentionally, one in 24 so the sinner should not be rewarded. Rebbi Eliezer says, it may be taken from pure for impure. How is this? With pure and impure dough, he takes the amount needed for ḥallah from dough from which ḥallah was not yet taken and gives less than the volume of an egg in the middle so he should take from the earmarked. But the Sages forbid it.

There, we have stated: “Rebbi Eliezer says, heave is lifted at the rate of one in 100. Rebbi Joshua says by 100 and more.” There, [Rebbi] Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Abbahu said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, everywhere where Rebbi taught a disagreement and returned to the problem later and taught it anonymously, practice follows the anonymous opinion. Since we have stated: “A seah of heave which fell into 100” and Rebbi Eleazar said, one cannot say “into 100” but “into 99.” As we have stated, Rebbi Eliezer and Rebbi Joshua.

It is all Rebbi Ismael’s. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph explains the Mishnah: The leftover of produce is the gain of the Temple; the leftover of libations is the fourth seah. Rebbi Joḥanan explains the Mishnah, The leftover of produce is the fourth seah; the leftover of libations is the overflow. Does Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph not have overflow? Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, what is counted for the fourth seah is overflow. The opinion of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph is understandable. “one does not gain neither for the Temple nor funds for the poor,” therefore “neither of them did agree about produce.” The opinion of Rebbi Joḥanan is difficult. We have stated: “if the going rate was three, he has to deliver for four” and we have stated, “neither of them did agree about produce.” They did not agree about produce to adorn the altar; they did agree for Service vessels. So far overflow of public {sacrifices}. Even overflow for private {sacrifices}. Would then not Service vessels come from private donations? It is as it was stated, “a woman who made a coat for her son has to surrender it to the public.” So far the overflow of fluids; even the overflow of dry goods; as that which we stated, “in case libations were sanctified in a vessel when the sacrifice was found disqualified, if there is another sacrifice they should be brought with it; otherwise they will become disqualified by staying overnight.”

MISHNAH: Once every thirty days one sets the prices for the office. Anyone who accepts to supply fine flour at a rate of four, if the going rate goes up to three he has to supply at the rate of four; if at the rate of three and the going rate went down to four he has to supply at four since the hand of the sanctuary is privileged. If the flour turned out worm-infected, it was infected in his possession; and if the wine turned into vinegar it was vinegar in his possession. He is not paid until the altar did atone.

MISHNAH: Once every thirty days one sets the prices for the office. Anyone who accepts to supply fine flour at a rate of four, if the going rate goes up to three he has to supply at the rate of four; if at the rate of three and the going rate went down to four he has to supply at four since the hand of the sanctuary is privileged. If the flour turned out worm-infected, it was infected in his possession; and if the wine turned into vinegar it was vinegar in his possession. He is not paid until the altar did atone.

MISHNAH: Once every thirty days one sets the prices for the office. Anyone who accepts to supply fine flour at a rate of four, if the going rate goes up to three he has to supply at the rate of four; if at the rate of three and the going rate went down to four he has to supply at four since the hand of the sanctuary is privileged. If the flour turned out worm-infected, it was infected in his possession; and if the wine turned into vinegar it was vinegar in his possession. He is not paid until the altar did atone.

MISHNAH: Once every thirty days one sets the prices for the office. Anyone who accepts to supply fine flour at a rate of four, if the going rate goes up to three he has to supply at the rate of four; if at the rate of three and the going rate went down to four he has to supply at four since the hand of the sanctuary is privileged. If the flour turned out worm-infected, it was infected in his possession; and if the wine turned into vinegar it was vinegar in his possession. He is not paid until the altar did atone.

MISHNAH: Once every thirty days one sets the prices for the office. Anyone who accepts to supply fine flour at a rate of four, if the going rate goes up to three he has to supply at the rate of four; if at the rate of three and the going rate went down to four he has to supply at four since the hand of the sanctuary is privileged. If the flour turned out worm-infected, it was infected in his possession; and if the wine turned into vinegar it was vinegar in his possession. He is not paid until the altar did atone.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Levi said, it is written: The Eternal will stick to you the epidemic. {A parable} of a woman who sticks three loaves together. How is this acted on? Is it not that larger it needs another rate? Let us hear it from the following: Even a city large as Antiochia, and there were brought out three dead persons during three consecutive days. This implies that larger it needs another rate. The houses about which they spoke, healthy but not shaky. And similarly, young people but not old ones. It was stated: Diphtheria any; two by plague and one by diphtheria. Come and see, “diphtheria any” and you are saying so? It is needed for the case that they blew the shofar about diphtheria and it went away and after that two died of a plague and one of diphtheria.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Levi said, it is written: The Eternal will stick to you the epidemic. {A parable} of a woman who sticks three loaves together. How is this acted on? Is it not that larger it needs another rate? Let us hear it from the following: Even a city large as Antiochia, and there were brought out three dead persons during three consecutive days. This implies that larger it needs another rate. The houses about which they spoke, healthy but not shaky. And similarly, young people but not old ones. It was stated: Diphtheria any; two by plague and one by diphtheria. Come and see, “diphtheria any” and you are saying so? It is needed for the case that they blew the shofar about diphtheria and it went away and after that two died of a plague and one of diphtheria.

Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If she brought him gold, at full value. This was also stated. Jewellery to be turned into denars, at the rate of one and one half. Denars to be turned into jewellery, at their full value. Rebbi Aḥa bar Pappos asked before Rebbi Immi: If she brought him an animal? He said to him, at full value. If she brought him real estate: He said to him, at full value. But does he not gain from it? But she collects the real estate, he has only the usufruct.

It was stated: He supports her the first five years, whether in inflation or in deflation. If [living expenses] were high and became low, if he was the cause, he pays the high rate, if she was the cause, he pays the low rate. If they were low and became high, whether he was the cause or she was the cause, he pays the low rate. That is, “the daughter neither ascends nor descends.”

It was stated: He supports her the first five years, whether in inflation or in deflation. If [living expenses] were high and became low, if he was the cause, he pays the high rate, if she was the cause, he pays the low rate. If they were low and became high, whether he was the cause or she was the cause, he pays the low rate. That is, “the daughter neither ascends nor descends.”

It was stated: He supports her the first five years, whether in inflation or in deflation. If [living expenses] were high and became low, if he was the cause, he pays the high rate, if she was the cause, he pays the low rate. If they were low and became high, whether he was the cause or she was the cause, he pays the low rate. That is, “the daughter neither ascends nor descends.”

There, we have stated: “If somebody collects coins and says, ‘these are for my Temple tax,’ the House of Shammai say, the excess should be given as a donation, but the House of Hillel say, the excess is profane. ‘That I shall be able to pay my Temple tax,’ they agree that the excess is profane. ‘These [monies] are for my purification offering’, they agree that the excess is profane.” Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: When do they disagree? If he collects little by little. But if he says “these,” everybody agrees that the excess should be given as a donation. Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Bevai in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: When do they disagree? If he collects little by little. But if he says “these,” everybody agrees that the excess is profane. Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, the Mishnah supports Rebbi Bevai: “Rebbi Simeon says, what is the difference between Temple tax and purification sacrifices? Only that the Temple tax is a fixed amount.” Where do we hold? If he says, “that I shall use it for the Temple tax,” everybody agrees that the excess should be given as a donation. If he says, “that I shall use it for my purification offering,” everybody agrees that the excess is profane. But we are considering one who says “these.” Since the Temple tax has a fixed rate from the Torah, the excess is profane. Since purification offerings do not have a fixed rate from the Torah, the excess should be given as a donation. How does Rebbi Yose handle this? He explains it if he collects little by little, following the House of Hillel.

There, we have stated: “If somebody collects coins and says, ‘these are for my Temple tax,’ the House of Shammai say, the excess should be given as a donation, but the House of Hillel say, the excess is profane. ‘That I shall be able to pay my Temple tax,’ they agree that the excess is profane. ‘These [monies] are for my purification offering’, they agree that the excess is profane.” Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: When do they disagree? If he collects little by little. But if he says “these,” everybody agrees that the excess should be given as a donation. Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Bevai in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: When do they disagree? If he collects little by little. But if he says “these,” everybody agrees that the excess is profane. Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, the Mishnah supports Rebbi Bevai: “Rebbi Simeon says, what is the difference between Temple tax and purification sacrifices? Only that the Temple tax is a fixed amount.” Where do we hold? If he says, “that I shall use it for the Temple tax,” everybody agrees that the excess should be given as a donation. If he says, “that I shall use it for my purification offering,” everybody agrees that the excess is profane. But we are considering one who says “these.” Since the Temple tax has a fixed rate from the Torah, the excess is profane. Since purification offerings do not have a fixed rate from the Torah, the excess should be given as a donation. How does Rebbi Yose handle this? He explains it if he collects little by little, following the House of Hillel.

MISHNAH: If somebody sells his slave to Gentiles or outside the Land, the slave gains his freedom. One does not ransom kidnap victims for more than the going rate because of the public good. One does not smuggle kidnap victims out because of the public good; Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, because of the welfare of the kidnap victims. One does not buy Torah scrolls, phylacteries, and mezuzot from Gentiles for more than their worth because of the public good.

“One does not ransom kidnap victims for more than the going rate because of the public good. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, because of the welfare of the kidnap victims.” That they should not be put in chains. “One does not smuggle kidnap victims out because of the public good.”

Rebbi Abba, Rav Huna in the name of Rav: One who handles a wine-skin and it splits in his hand is not responsible for it. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun, it is necessary even if he takes it in the store when he had no other intention than that no other person should take it. Can he take possession at a minimal rate? Rebbi Ḥaggai said in the name of Rebbi Yose: A Mishnah says that it cannot become his possession at a minimal rate, as we have stated there: “If somebody sells his wine to a Non-Jew. If he fixed the price before he measured, the proceeds are permitted; if he measured before he fixed the price, the proceeds are forbidden.” If you say that it can come into his possession at a minimal rate, even if he measured before he fixed the price, it should be as if he fixed the price before he measured and the proceeds would be permitted.

Rebbi Abba, Rav Huna in the name of Rav: One who handles a wine-skin and it splits in his hand is not responsible for it. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun, it is necessary even if he takes it in the store when he had no other intention than that no other person should take it. Can he take possession at a minimal rate? Rebbi Ḥaggai said in the name of Rebbi Yose: A Mishnah says that it cannot become his possession at a minimal rate, as we have stated there: “If somebody sells his wine to a Non-Jew. If he fixed the price before he measured, the proceeds are permitted; if he measured before he fixed the price, the proceeds are forbidden.” If you say that it can come into his possession at a minimal rate, even if he measured before he fixed the price, it should be as if he fixed the price before he measured and the proceeds would be permitted.

Rebbi Abba, Rav Huna in the name of Rav: One who handles a wine-skin and it splits in his hand is not responsible for it. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun, it is necessary even if he takes it in the store when he had no other intention than that no other person should take it. Can he take possession at a minimal rate? Rebbi Ḥaggai said in the name of Rebbi Yose: A Mishnah says that it cannot become his possession at a minimal rate, as we have stated there: “If somebody sells his wine to a Non-Jew. If he fixed the price before he measured, the proceeds are permitted; if he measured before he fixed the price, the proceeds are forbidden.” If you say that it can come into his possession at a minimal rate, even if he measured before he fixed the price, it should be as if he fixed the price before he measured and the proceeds would be permitted.

“A promise to Heaven is like delivery to an individual.” How? If he bought a cow from the Temple for 200. If he did not have occasion to pay the 200 until the going rate was a mina, he has to pay 200. That means, a promise to Heaven is like delivery to an individual. A cow from the Temple for a mina. If he did not have occasion to pay the mina until the going rate was 200, he has to pay 200. That is what is written: “He has to add a fifth of its estimated value, then it is delivered to him.” Therefore, if he adds, it is delivered to him; if he does not add, it is not delivered to him. “ ‘This steer as elevation offering, or this house as a qorbān,’ they are in the Temple’s possession wherever they are, for it is written: “The Eternal’s are the earth and what fills it,” etc. But among private persons one obtains possession only be taking hold.”

“A promise to Heaven is like delivery to an individual.” How? If he bought a cow from the Temple for 200. If he did not have occasion to pay the 200 until the going rate was a mina, he has to pay 200. That means, a promise to Heaven is like delivery to an individual. A cow from the Temple for a mina. If he did not have occasion to pay the mina until the going rate was 200, he has to pay 200. That is what is written: “He has to add a fifth of its estimated value, then it is delivered to him.” Therefore, if he adds, it is delivered to him; if he does not add, it is not delivered to him. “ ‘This steer as elevation offering, or this house as a qorbān,’ they are in the Temple’s possession wherever they are, for it is written: “The Eternal’s are the earth and what fills it,” etc. But among private persons one obtains possession only be taking hold.”

MISHNAH: What is a lost animal? If he found a donkey or a cow grazing on the road, this is no lost animal. A donkey whose gear is upside-down or a cow running in a vineyard are lost animals. If he returned it but it ran away, returned it but it ran away even four or five times, he is obligated to return it since it is said: “Return it returning.” If he was losing time worth a tetradrachma, he cannot say, give me a tetradrachma but [the owner] may pay him at the rate of an unemployed worker. If there is a court, he can stipulate with him before the court. If there is no court, before whom could he stipulate? His own comes first. If one found it in the cow-shed, he has no obligation; in the public domain he is obligated. But if it was between graves, he may not defile himself. If his father told him to defile himself, or told him not to return it, he should not listen to him. If he unloaded and loaded, unloaded and loaded even four or five times, he is obligated since it is said: “restoring restore”. If he sat down and said, since it is your religious obligation, if you want to unload, unload, he is free since it is said: “with him”. It is a religious obligation to unload, but not to load; Rebbi Simeon says, also to load. Rebbi Yose the Galilean said, if the load was more than the ordinary, he need not do anything since it is said: “under its load,” a load which it can carry.

HALAKHAH: “Cheating is four obols,” etc. Rav said, this is the rate; Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is not the rate. Rav said, if somebody trades on condition that the rules of cheating not apply to him, the rules of cheating do apply to him. Rebbi Levi stated: Cheating applies to a peruṭah, cheating can be by a peruṭah. But what is the status of cheating? It was stated: The item was acquired, he returns the overcharge, the words of Rebbi Jehudah the Prince; Rebbi Joḥanan said, the sale is annulled.

HALAKHAH: “Cheating is four obols,” etc. Rav said, this is the rate; Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is not the rate. Rav said, if somebody trades on condition that the rules of cheating not apply to him, the rules of cheating do apply to him. Rebbi Levi stated: Cheating applies to a peruṭah, cheating can be by a peruṭah. But what is the status of cheating? It was stated: The item was acquired, he returns the overcharge, the words of Rebbi Jehudah the Prince; Rebbi Joḥanan said, the sale is annulled.

MISHNAH: What is biting and what is increase? What is biting, lending a tetradrachma for five denars, two se’ah of wheat for three; because this bites. What is increase? Paying more for produce. How is this? One bought from another wheat for a gold denar the kor at the going rate. Wheat appreciated to thirty denars. He told him, deliver my wheat, for I want to sell it and buy wine with the proceeds. The other said, let your wheat be given to me for thirty denars and you have wine with me, but he has no wine. A creditor may not dwell on the debtor’s premises for free or rent it below the going rate, for this would be interest.

MISHNAH: What is biting and what is increase? What is biting, lending a tetradrachma for five denars, two se’ah of wheat for three; because this bites. What is increase? Paying more for produce. How is this? One bought from another wheat for a gold denar the kor at the going rate. Wheat appreciated to thirty denars. He told him, deliver my wheat, for I want to sell it and buy wine with the proceeds. The other said, let your wheat be given to me for thirty denars and you have wine with me, but he has no wine. A creditor may not dwell on the debtor’s premises for free or rent it below the going rate, for this would be interest.

“One bought wheat from another.” Rebbi Abba bar Cahana said, the rate which is valid for everybody. Less than that, woe to the seller; more than that, woe to the buyer!

“A person was transporting from a lowprice place to a highprice one. Another said to him, give it to me, I shall pay you what you would charge at place X. If the responsibility is the giver’s, it is forbidden, but the buyer’s is permitted. A person was transporting a package from place to place. Another said to him, give it to me, I shall pay you what you would charge at place X. If the responsibility is the giver’s, it is forbidden, but the buyer’s is permitted. But donkey drivers who receive from householders obtain produce for a highprice place at lowprice rates.” Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi: At a place where usually they can go and return the same day. Rav Huna said, he becomes his agent. But did one not object to [Rav] Huna: If an agent fell victim to an accident, is he liable? If he was the victim of an accident, he is not liable. Does it not happen that an unpaid trustee accepts to be like a borrower? But did not Rebbi Hoshaia state: Just as he is liable for the entirety, so he is liable for a part! Why does one quote this? There, he would pay a high price, but here he pays at the low rate.

“A Jew can lend a Gentile’s money on interest by the Gentile’s instruction but not by a Jew’s.” “A Jew had loaned money from a Gentile and wanted to return it when another Jew said to him, give it to me and I shall pay him the same rate as you are paying; this is forbidden. But if he introduced him to the Gentile, it is permitted.” [Rebbi Yose said, only if he let him stand with the Gentile.]

“A Gentile had borrowed money from a Jew and wanted to return it when another Jew said to him, give it to me and I shall pay him the same rate as you are paying; this is permitted. But if he introduced him to the Gentile, it is forbidden.” Rebbi Yose said, only if he let him stand with the Gentile.

MISHNAH: One does not contract for produce until a rate was established. If he was the first to harvest, he may contract for the stack of sheaves, or the vat of grapes, or the barrel of olives, or for potter’s clay and lime when it was loaded in his oven. One may contract for manure the entire year; Rebbi Yose says, one may not contract for manure unless he has manure on his dungheap, but the Sages permit it. One contracts for wholesale price; Rebbi Jehudah says, even if one did not contract for wholesale price he may say to him, give me some like that or return my money. A person may lend to his sharecroppers wheat for wheat as seed grain but not as food; but Rebban Gamliel lent his sharecroppers wheat grain; if at high price and the rate went down or at low price and the rate went up, he took from them at the low rate, not because this is practice but because he wanted to be strict with himself.

MISHNAH: One does not contract for produce until a rate was established. If he was the first to harvest, he may contract for the stack of sheaves, or the vat of grapes, or the barrel of olives, or for potter’s clay and lime when it was loaded in his oven. One may contract for manure the entire year; Rebbi Yose says, one may not contract for manure unless he has manure on his dungheap, but the Sages permit it. One contracts for wholesale price; Rebbi Jehudah says, even if one did not contract for wholesale price he may say to him, give me some like that or return my money. A person may lend to his sharecroppers wheat for wheat as seed grain but not as food; but Rebban Gamliel lent his sharecroppers wheat grain; if at high price and the rate went down or at low price and the rate went up, he took from them at the low rate, not because this is practice but because he wanted to be strict with himself.

MISHNAH: One does not contract for produce until a rate was established. If he was the first to harvest, he may contract for the stack of sheaves, or the vat of grapes, or the barrel of olives, or for potter’s clay and lime when it was loaded in his oven. One may contract for manure the entire year; Rebbi Yose says, one may not contract for manure unless he has manure on his dungheap, but the Sages permit it. One contracts for wholesale price; Rebbi Jehudah says, even if one did not contract for wholesale price he may say to him, give me some like that or return my money. A person may lend to his sharecroppers wheat for wheat as seed grain but not as food; but Rebban Gamliel lent his sharecroppers wheat grain; if at high price and the rate went down or at low price and the rate went up, he took from them at the low rate, not because this is practice but because he wanted to be strict with himself.

MISHNAH: One does not contract for produce until a rate was established. If he was the first to harvest, he may contract for the stack of sheaves, or the vat of grapes, or the barrel of olives, or for potter’s clay and lime when it was loaded in his oven. One may contract for manure the entire year; Rebbi Yose says, one may not contract for manure unless he has manure on his dungheap, but the Sages permit it. One contracts for wholesale price; Rebbi Jehudah says, even if one did not contract for wholesale price he may say to him, give me some like that or return my money. A person may lend to his sharecroppers wheat for wheat as seed grain but not as food; but Rebban Gamliel lent his sharecroppers wheat grain; if at high price and the rate went down or at low price and the rate went up, he took from them at the low rate, not because this is practice but because he wanted to be strict with himself.

HALAKHAH: “One does not contract for produce,” etc. May one contract based on Saracens’ rates? Rebbi Joḥanan says, one may contract; Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, one may not contract. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked before Rebbi Ze‘ira: Would it not be reasonable that Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish agree with Rebbi Joḥanan about rates of Saracens of Sepphoris, since that is uninterrupted? Rebbi Abun bar Cahana said, I am wondering about what the rabbis disagree? Whether contracting for produce, or contracting for money, or a loan on produce? Rebbi Jeremiah said, they disagree about a loan, but about (a hostelry) [a contract] everybody agrees that it is forbidden. Rebbi Yose said, they disagree about a contract, but about a loan everybody agrees that it is permitted. In the House of Rebbi Yannai they said, one contracts for cattle feed. Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, also on honeycombs. Rebbi Joḥanan said, in all villages near Tiberias one contracts once the rate was established at Tiberias.

Abba bar Zamina gave a denar to the food merchant and took from him at the cheapest rate of the entire year. Rav did not agree. Rebbi Ḥiyya the Elder had flax. The donkey drivers wanted to buy from him. He told them, it is not my intention to sell this before Purim. They said to him, sell it to us now at the price which you would sell it for at Purim. He went to ask Rebbi, who told him, it is forbidden. He went out, formulated this in a baraita, and stated the following: “If one was owing money and the other wanted to take from him on the threshing floor, when he told him, credit it to my account by the market rate and I shall provide you all twelve months; this is forbidden for it is not as if the assarion came to his hand.” Rav said, my uncle Rebbi Ḥiyya will agree that if they paid him and he immediately acquired, then it is permitted. If he paid beforehand and acquired afterwards, it is permitted; if he acquired earlier and paid afterwards, it is forbidden.

Abba bar Zamina gave a denar to the food merchant and took from him at the cheapest rate of the entire year. Rav did not agree. Rebbi Ḥiyya the Elder had flax. The donkey drivers wanted to buy from him. He told them, it is not my intention to sell this before Purim. They said to him, sell it to us now at the price which you would sell it for at Purim. He went to ask Rebbi, who told him, it is forbidden. He went out, formulated this in a baraita, and stated the following: “If one was owing money and the other wanted to take from him on the threshing floor, when he told him, credit it to my account by the market rate and I shall provide you all twelve months; this is forbidden for it is not as if the assarion came to his hand.” Rav said, my uncle Rebbi Ḥiyya will agree that if they paid him and he immediately acquired, then it is permitted. If he paid beforehand and acquired afterwards, it is permitted; if he acquired earlier and paid afterwards, it is forbidden.

HALAKHAH: “Somebody’s [property] surrounded another’s,” etc. Halakhah 5: “If the wall of a courtyard collapsed,” etc. Rav Ḥuna said, only at the rate he is building now. For if he built it arched, he had to build arched. But here if it was built arched and he built it with bricks, he can collect the cost of arches, and if it should collapse, he has to rebuild it.

If she fell sick and was healed, the medical costs are on the estate. It was stated: “Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, for any hurt which has a fixed medical fee, she is healed from her ketubah; if it does not have a fixed medical fee, she is healed from the estate.” As the following: The eye of a female relative of Rebbi Simeon bar Abba hurt. She came to Rebbi Joḥanan. He asked her: Did your doctor mention a fixed fee? If [the fee] is fixed, from your ketubah, if it is not fixed, your husband will give it to you. But did we not state: “Do not turn yourself into a pleader”, and did not Rebbi Ḥaggai say in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, it is forbidden to disclose a judgment to a party? They said, Rebbi Joḥanan knew her to be an honest woman; therefore, he disclosed it to her. If her husband wants a treatment at a fixed rate, but she wants one without fixed rate, does one not listen to her husband? Rebbi Mattaniah said, only if the case not be before him. But if the case be before him, he has to tell it as it is.

If she fell sick and was healed, the medical costs are on the estate. It was stated: “Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel says, for any hurt which has a fixed medical fee, she is healed from her ketubah; if it does not have a fixed medical fee, she is healed from the estate.” As the following: The eye of a female relative of Rebbi Simeon bar Abba hurt. She came to Rebbi Joḥanan. He asked her: Did your doctor mention a fixed fee? If [the fee] is fixed, from your ketubah, if it is not fixed, your husband will give it to you. But did we not state: “Do not turn yourself into a pleader”, and did not Rebbi Ḥaggai say in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, it is forbidden to disclose a judgment to a party? They said, Rebbi Joḥanan knew her to be an honest woman; therefore, he disclosed it to her. If her husband wants a treatment at a fixed rate, but she wants one without fixed rate, does one not listen to her husband? Rebbi Mattaniah said, only if the case not be before him. But if the case be before him, he has to tell it as it is.

Rebbi Ḥinena asked: Why did he not say, “an oath if I would eat of X” without detail? Because of Rebbi Simeon. But if following Rebbi Simeon, how could we state the Day of Atonement, since Rebbi Simeon stated, you shall deprive yourselves, of what is (forbidden) to you, not of what is (permitted) to you. Only one has a fixed rate sacrifice, the other a variable one.

They objected, is there not impurity of the Sanctuary and its sancta which need a variable rate [sacrifice] and did the Tanna not state it? We come to state only things carrying a liability to extirpation; there is no extirpation for oaths.

HALAKHAH: “If somebody sold his wine to a Non-Jew,” etc. Rebbi Abba, Rav Huna in the name of Rav: One who handles a wine-skin and it splits in his hand is not responsible for it. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, it is necessary even if he takes it in the store when he has no other intention than that no other person should take it. Can he take possession at a minimal rate? Rebbi Ḥaggai said before Rebbi Yose, a Mishnah says that it cannot become his possession at a minimal rate, as we have stated there: “If somebody sells his wine to a Non-Jew, in case he fixed the price before that one measured, the proceeds are permitted; if that one measured before he fixed the price, the proceeds are forbidden.” If you say that it can come into his possession at a minimal price, even if he measured before he fixed the price should be as if he fixed the price before he measured and the proceeds would be permitted.

HALAKHAH: “If somebody sold his wine to a Non-Jew,” etc. Rebbi Abba, Rav Huna in the name of Rav: One who handles a wine-skin and it splits in his hand is not responsible for it. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, it is necessary even if he takes it in the store when he has no other intention than that no other person should take it. Can he take possession at a minimal rate? Rebbi Ḥaggai said before Rebbi Yose, a Mishnah says that it cannot become his possession at a minimal rate, as we have stated there: “If somebody sells his wine to a Non-Jew, in case he fixed the price before that one measured, the proceeds are permitted; if that one measured before he fixed the price, the proceeds are forbidden.” If you say that it can come into his possession at a minimal price, even if he measured before he fixed the price should be as if he fixed the price before he measured and the proceeds would be permitted.

It is here at any rate taught that [the mourner, although he is not in the same room as the body,] is exempt from reading the Shema', from Tefillah, Tefillin, and all the commandments mentioned in the Torah ! Rab Pappa replied : [The Baraita] is to be interpreted as referring to one who turns his face from the body and eats. Rab Ashe said : Since the duty of burying rests upon him, it is to be regarded as though the body was lying before him; as it is said, "And Abraham rose up from before his dead" (Gen. xxiii. 3) and it is said "That I may bury my dead from before me" (ibid. v. 4), i.e. so long as the duty of burial rested upon him, it was as though the body was actually before him.

Now is this analogy correct? In the latter instance, he was at any rate under the obligation [to say the Tefillah] and the Rabbis did not trouble him out of regard for the Sabbath ; but in the former case, he had already said the prayer.

At any rate it teaches "swollen or decayed." Is it not, swollen from without and decayed from within? No! Both refer to the outside, and yet there is no difficulty. One refers to a case where the etrog is swollen even although it is not decayed; the other to a case where it was decayed without being swollen.

Rather, it must be according to the Rabbis, and [even according to them] we read [on the other days] at any rate when the years are properly fixed and Israel reside on their own soil! This is refutation of R. Yohanan.

But at any rate all agree that the Megillah is not to be read on Shabbat. What is the reason? Rabbah said: All are obligated to read the Megillah, but not all are competent to read it, and there is therefore a decree [not to read on Shabbat] lest one take the scroll in his hand and go to an expert to learn and [in doing so] carry it four cubits in a public domain.