text

Elazar began his discourse on this with the following text: “By laziness he that lays beams (mekoreh) becomes poor [yimak], and through idleness of the hands the house leaks” (Ecclesiastes 10:18). Through Israel’s laziness in not occupying themselves with Torah, the enemy of the Holy One, blessed be He, became poor. The meaning of “makh” is poor, as it says, “And if he is too makh for your evaluation” (Leviticus 27:8), and mekoreh means only the Holy One, blessed be He, as it says, “Who lays the beams [ha-mekareh] of Your upper chambers in the waters” (Psalms 104:3).

Nahman b. Isaac began his discourse on this section with the following text: “A Song of Ascents: If it had not been for the Lord who was for us let Israel now say, If it had not been the Lord who was for us when a man rose up against us” (Psalms 124:1-2) — “a man” and not a king.

“Seven and twenty and a hundred provinces”. R. Hisda said: At first he ruled over seven, then over twenty [more], and finally over a hundred [more]. But if so, [what did you do with the verse], “And the years of the life of Amram were seven and thirty and a hundred years?” (Exodus 6:20). How do you expound this? It is different here, because the whole text is superfluous, since it is written, “From Hodu to Cush,” what would I then do with, “seven and twenty and a hundred provinces”? You must conclude that it is for a special lesson.

GEMARA. From where is the rule [not to read backward] derived? Rava said: As the text says, “According to their writing and according to their appointed time” (Esther 9:27): just as the appointed time cannot be backward, so too the writing must not be backward. But does the text speak here of reading?

GEMARA. From where is the rule [not to read backward] derived? Rava said: As the text says, “According to their writing and according to their appointed time” (Esther 9:27): just as the appointed time cannot be backward, so too the writing must not be backward. But does the text speak here of reading?

And when the transgressors have disappeared, the horn of the righteous will be exalted, as it is written, “All the horns of the wicked also will I cut off, but the horns of the righteous shall be exalted” (Psalms 95:11). And “righteous converts” are included with the righteous, as it says, “Before the hoary head rise up, and honor the face of the elder”, and the text goes on, “And if a stranger sojourns with you” (Leviticus 19:32).

R. Aha also said in the name of R. Elazar: How do we know that the Holy One, blessed be He, called Jacob El [God]? As it says, “And the God of Israel called him [Jacob] El” (Genesis 33:20). For should you think that [what the text means is that] Jacob called the altar El, then it should be written, “And Jacob called it.” Rather [it is written] “And He called to Jacob, El.” And who called him so? The God of Israel.

The text [above states]: Rabbah b. Bar Hanah said in the name of R. Yohanan, It is forbidden to write one letter except from a copy. They objected: R. Shimon b. Elazar It happened that R. Meir went to intercalate the year in Assia, and there was no Megillah there and he wrote one out by heart.

And for the confession made over the oxen. For the “atonement” mentioned here is derived from the “atonement” mentioned in the context of Yom Kippur, as it has been taught in reference to Yom Kippur: “And he shall make atonement for himself and for his house” (Leviticus 16:6) the text speaks of atonement made by words. And atonement is by day, as it is written, “For on this day shall atonement be made for you” (Leviticus 16:30).

The text [above stated]: Rav happened to be in Babylon on a public fast day. He got up forward and read in the Torah scroll. He blessed before beginning, but when he finished he did not bless. The whole congregation [subsequently] fell on their faces, but Rav did not fall on his face. Why did not Rav fall on his face?

Our Rabbis taught: Wherever a disgraceful expression is written in the text, we read it in a more polite way. [Thus for] yishgalenah [we read] yishkavenah (Deuteronomy 28:30); [for] ba’afolim [we read] batehorim (Deut 28:27); [for] hiryonim [we read] divyonim (II Kings 6:25); [for] le’ekhol et horehem velishtot et meme shinehem [we read] le’ekhol et zo’atham velishtot et meme raglehem (II Kings 18:27); [for] lamahara’ot [we read] lemoza’ot (II Kings 10:27).

Nahman said: All mocking is forbidden except mocking idolatry, which is permitted, as it is written, “Bel is bowed, Nebo is cowering” and the text goes on, “They cowered, they bowed as well, they could not rescue the burden” (Isaiah 46:1-2). Jannai learns from here: The inhabitants of Samaria fear for the calf of Bet Aven, Indeed, its people and priestlings, whose joy it once was. Mourn over it for the glory that is departed from it” (Hosea 10:5). Do not read “for the glory” [kevodo], but “for the burden”.

There is a Baraitha, The uncircumcised person and the unclean person are exempt from appearing. This is all right as regards an unclean person, for it is written, "And thither thou shalt come: and thither ye shall bring" (Deut. xii. 5, 6). Every one who belongs to the category of coming belongs to the category of bringing, and every one who does not belong to the category of coming does not belong to the category of bringing. But "the uncircumcised person," whence do we get it? Behold, this comes not from a text but from R. Akiba, who includes an uncircumcised person as unclean. For there is a Baraitha, viz., R. Akiba says, The expression "each man" (Lev. xxii. 4) is to include the uncircumcised person. Our Rabbis have taught, The unclean person is exempt from appearing, for it is written, "And thither thou shalt come: and thither ye shall bring" (Deut. xii. 5, 6). Every one who belongs to the category of coming belongs to the category of bringing, and every one who does not belong to the category of coming does not belong to the category of bringing.

Rav Chiyah bar Ashi said in the name of Rav: Both [the Sages and Rebi] interpreted one verse. The iron breaks off from the wood [Ve'neshal]. Rebi holds that the transmission [how the written word appears in the text] is what matters, and 'Ve'Neyshal' it is written [the form of which implies that the phrase should be understood as meaning that the axe blade caused something else—i.e., a wood chip—to come loose], but the Sages hold that the pronunciation [how we actually read the word] is what matters and "nashal" we read [the form of which implies that the actual axe head flew off].

But does Rebi hold that the transmission [how the written word appears in the text] is what matters?

There are those that teach this on the following (Rava's statement, instead of being related to inadvertent killing will now be compared to laws of shemitah). "From the reaping and the plowing you shall rest" (Exodus 34:21). Rabbi Akiva says the text did not need to speak of reaping and plowing of the seventh year as it already said, "your field, do not plant and your vineyard do not prune" (Leviticus 25:4). Rather, it is teaching (the first verse) that even the plowing of the year before shemitah (is forbidden as its produce) will go into the 7th year and the (sanctity of shemitah is applied) for the reaping of the 7th year that will go out (continue to grow) after the 7th year.

The main [text]: "Those cities [of refuge]—make them neither small villages nor large cities but medium-sized towns. And don't set them up except in a place of water; if there is no water, then bring to them water. And don't set them up except in a place of market streets. And don't set them up except in a place [where there are] guard legions; if the legions get reduced, add to them. If the residencies get reduced, bring to them priests, Levites and Israelites.

'Nor one who loves wealth (hamon) will have income (t'vu'ah)'—for whom it is fitting to teach in public (hamon)? One who all of the reward (t'vuah) is his." [This drash plays on ambiguity in the Masoretic text between lamed-aleph ("lo" as in "no") and lamed-vav ("lo" as in "his")]. And this is [similar to] what Rabbi Elazar said: "What is that which is written, 'Who can sing the mighty deeds of God, [who can] recount all His praises?' (Psalms 106:2)? For whom is it filling to sing the mighty deeds of God? To the one who is able to recount all His praises."

The text is: Rava said a non-Kohen who eats from an ollah before the zerikah outside of the wall, according to Rebbi Shimon incurs five sets of malkus. But let him also incur malkus from (Exodus 29,33) "And a non-Kohen may not eat them for they are sanctified"? Those words only apply in a case where it is fit for Kohenim, but here it is also not fit for Kohenim.

The text said, Rebbi Yehoshua ben Levi says, Three things that Beis Din shel mattah [court] did that Beis din shel malleh [the heavenly court] agreed to. These are they, Reading Miggilah [on purim], greeting with the name of G-d, and bringing maiser.