verse

But would you not have eliminated the entire notion of one who watches a day for the next day? If they said, the night is permitted but the day is forbidden. Would you not have eliminated the entire notion of bending? Samuel bar Abba said, if they said, one cubit is permitted but two are forbidden. Would you not have eliminated the entire notion of prostrating? If they said, it is permitted to prostrate oneself but forbidden to sink down. Would you not have eliminated the entire notion of taking out? Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac said, if they said, one dried fig is permitted but two dried figs are forbidden. This follows him who said that bringing in and taking out are the same. But for him who said that bringing in and taking out are two notions, would you not have eliminated the entire notion of bringing in? Rebbi Yose said, not that they said that it was permitted to eat fat; they knew that it is forbidden to eat fat, but the Torah gave permission to the Court to instruct. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked, the [amount of] an olive today and of two olives tomorrow? What about a prophet and seducer? I could think that if they said to you, do not put on phylacteries today, put them on tomorrow, that you should listen to them. The verse says, to walk in them, in all of them, not only in part of them; you would have eliminated the notion of that entire day. You can say that this is not elimination of the entire subject. And here it is not elimination of the entire subject. Rebbi Mana understood it from the following; Samuel bar Abba said, if they said, one cubit is permitted but two are forbidden. You can say that this is not elimination of the entire subject. And here it is not elimination of the entire subject.

HALAKHAH: “If the Court ruled and all the public acted,” etc. Who stated “a majority”? Rebbi Meïr, as it was stated: Either half of the tribes or half of each tribe, if only it be a majority. Rebbi Jehudah says, half of each tribe, but only a majority of entire tribes. One tribe drags all tribes. Rebbi Meïr says, all tribes are called “the public”. Rebbi Jehudah says, each single tribe is called “public”. And Rebbi Simeon follows Rebbi Jehudah. Just as Rebbi Jehudah said, each single tribe is called “public”, so Rebbi Simeon says, each single tribe is called “public”. What is between them? Dragging. Rebbi Jehudah says, one tribe drags all tribes. Rebbi Simeon says, one tribe does not drag all tribes. [Even though Rebbi Jehudah says, one tribe drags all tribes,] he agrees that only if the ruling came from the ashlar hall. Rebbi Yose said, the reason of that Tanna: From this place which the Eternal will choose. Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Bejamin ben Levi: The verse supports him who said that each tribe is called “public”, as it is written: A people and a public of peoples will come from you, and Benjamin was not yet born. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said, just as they differ here, so they differ about impurity, as we have stated: If the public was half pure and half impure; pure [people] celebrate the first [Passover] and impure the second. Rebbi Jehudah said, the pure ones celebrate for themselves, and the impure ones celebrate for themselves. They told him, there is no split Passover; either all celebrate in impurity or all celebrate in purity. Who is “they told him”? Following Rebbi Jehudah? As it was stated: “If one of the loaves or one of the (leftovers) [orders] became impure, Rebbi Jehudah said, both have to be brought to be burned for a public offering cannot be split. But the Sages say, the impure in its impurity, and the pure shall be eaten.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, who is “they told him”? The Sages who argue like Rebbi Jehudah.

Rebbi Zeˋira in the name of Rav Ḥisdai. There, it was stated: “If the Court ruled, and they themselves acted, and they realized what they ruled about. If they erred in what they ruled, would they be liable? The verse says, if the sin became known, not that the sinners became known.” Anyway you take it, if about fat [ they ruled they are liable, if about Sabbath they ruled they are liable. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, this follows Rebbi Eliezer; it does not follow Rebbi Joshua. Rebbi Yose said, but] it follows Rebbi Joshua if they ruled and they did not know whether about idolatry or about any other commandment. If about idolatry by a bull, if about any other commandment a goat. Since it is in doubt whether a bull or [a bull and] a goat, it is a difference in sacrifice and he is not liable.

HALAKHAH: “If the Anointed Priest ruled,” etc. A person; if the Anointed Priest.” This makes the Anointed like a private person. Since the private person is not liable if he ate on the Court’s ruling, also neither is this one liable if he ate on the Court’s ruling. Since the private person is liable if he ate without a ruling, this one also should be liable if he ate without a ruling; the verse says, for the fault of the people. As the people are liable only if they issued a ruling, this one also is liable only if he issued a ruling. There are Tannaïm who state that the people are the Court. Since the people are liable if they instructed and others acted, this one also should be liable if he ruled and others acted. The verse says, as he sinned. He brings for what he sinned but he does not bring for what others sinned. There are Tannaïm who state that the people are the public. Since the people are liable if others ruled and they acted, this one also should be liable if others ruled and he acted. The verse says, as he sinned. He brings for what he sinned but he does not bring for what others sinned. Rebbi Jacob in the name of Rebbi Eleazar. Only if he is competent to argue about practice. Otherwise, would we say the incompetents give instructions? The anointed who ate following the Court’s prescript is not liable; following another Anointed’s prescript he is liable. Following the Court’s prescript he is not liable, since the prescript of others is nothing compared to their prescripts. Following another Anointed’s prescript he is liable, on condition that he instructed similarly.

HALAKHAH: “If the Anointed Priest ruled,” etc. A person; if the Anointed Priest.” This makes the Anointed like a private person. Since the private person is not liable if he ate on the Court’s ruling, also neither is this one liable if he ate on the Court’s ruling. Since the private person is liable if he ate without a ruling, this one also should be liable if he ate without a ruling; the verse says, for the fault of the people. As the people are liable only if they issued a ruling, this one also is liable only if he issued a ruling. There are Tannaïm who state that the people are the Court. Since the people are liable if they instructed and others acted, this one also should be liable if he ruled and others acted. The verse says, as he sinned. He brings for what he sinned but he does not bring for what others sinned. There are Tannaïm who state that the people are the public. Since the people are liable if others ruled and they acted, this one also should be liable if others ruled and he acted. The verse says, as he sinned. He brings for what he sinned but he does not bring for what others sinned. Rebbi Jacob in the name of Rebbi Eleazar. Only if he is competent to argue about practice. Otherwise, would we say the incompetents give instructions? The anointed who ate following the Court’s prescript is not liable; following another Anointed’s prescript he is liable. Following the Court’s prescript he is not liable, since the prescript of others is nothing compared to their prescripts. Following another Anointed’s prescript he is liable, on condition that he instructed similarly.

HALAKHAH: “If the Anointed Priest ruled,” etc. A person; if the Anointed Priest.” This makes the Anointed like a private person. Since the private person is not liable if he ate on the Court’s ruling, also neither is this one liable if he ate on the Court’s ruling. Since the private person is liable if he ate without a ruling, this one also should be liable if he ate without a ruling; the verse says, for the fault of the people. As the people are liable only if they issued a ruling, this one also is liable only if he issued a ruling. There are Tannaïm who state that the people are the Court. Since the people are liable if they instructed and others acted, this one also should be liable if he ruled and others acted. The verse says, as he sinned. He brings for what he sinned but he does not bring for what others sinned. There are Tannaïm who state that the people are the public. Since the people are liable if others ruled and they acted, this one also should be liable if others ruled and he acted. The verse says, as he sinned. He brings for what he sinned but he does not bring for what others sinned. Rebbi Jacob in the name of Rebbi Eleazar. Only if he is competent to argue about practice. Otherwise, would we say the incompetents give instructions? The anointed who ate following the Court’s prescript is not liable; following another Anointed’s prescript he is liable. Following the Court’s prescript he is not liable, since the prescript of others is nothing compared to their prescripts. Following another Anointed’s prescript he is liable, on condition that he instructed similarly.

“What is the positive commandment about the menstruating woman?” Rebbi Abin said, Keep the Children of Israel away from their impurities. Rebbi Jonathan sent to ask Rebbi Simeon ben Rebbi Yose bar Lakonia, from where a warning for one having sex with an impure woman? He wanted to throw a stone after him; he told him, you are asking me something that children recite every day in the synagogue: To a woman in the separation ofher impurity you shall not come near to uncover her nakedness. He answered him, that is not my problem. My only problem is rather “if he was having sex with an impure woman, he is liable. If he was having sex with a pure one and she said to him, I became impure,” if he separates immediately, is he liable? He told him, I and you have the same problem. Let us go out and learn. They went out and heard the voice of a Tanna who stated following Ḥiskiah: If lying a man will lie with her. Not only that if he was having sex with an impure woman, he is liable. If he was having sex with a pure one and she said to him, I became impure, if he separates immediately, is he liable? The verse says, her secretion shall be, even if her secretion starts with him. What should he do? Rav Hoshaia, Rav Jehudah in the name of Samuel, he shall cool down. If he did not cool down? Rebbi Yose said, for him I am reading do not come near as “do not separate”. Closeness is separation. Rav Ḥuna in the name of Rav Abba: Those who say, be close to yourself, do not touch me for I sanctified you. Rebbi Zeˋira said, he should imagine that a sword is cutting into his flesh. Is everybody Rebbi Zeˋira? Rebbi Tanḥuma in the name of Rav Ḥuna: He shall press his fingertips on the wall, then he will cool down.

“The Prince.” I could think a tribal chieftain like Naḥshon; the verse says, “if he transgressed one of the commandments of the Eternal, his God; and further it says, that he may learn to fear the Eternal, his God. “His God, [his God]” for an equal cut. Since “his God” mentioned there refers to a Prince over whom there is only [the Eternal] his God, so also “his God” mentioned here refers to a Prince over whom there is only [the Eternal] his God.

It was stated: The Anointed Priest brings a bull, the one clothed in multiple garb does not bring a bull. This disagrees with Rebbi Meïr. What is Rebbi Meïr’s reason? The Anointed. Why does the verse say priest? To exclude the one clothed in multiple garb. What is the rabbis’ reason? The anointed. I could think that this is the king. Why does the verse say, priest? To include the one clothed in multiple garb. Here you say, to exclude the one clothed in multiple garb. But there you say, to include the one clothed in multiple garb. Rebbi Hila said, each inference refers to its meaning. If it had said the Anointed but not priest, I would have said, he brings a bull for forgetting a topic, but for acting in error he brings a goat. Therefore it is necessary that it mention priest. But if it had mentioned priest but not the Anointed, I would have said, this refers to the king. If you would say by a bull, preceding the paragraph about the king, assuming that for forgetting a topic he brings a bull but for acting in error he brings a goat. Therefore it is necessary that it mention the Anointed and that it mention priest.

It was stated: The Anointed Priest brings a bull, the one clothed in multiple garb does not bring a bull. This disagrees with Rebbi Meïr. What is Rebbi Meïr’s reason? The Anointed. Why does the verse say priest? To exclude the one clothed in multiple garb. What is the rabbis’ reason? The anointed. I could think that this is the king. Why does the verse say, priest? To include the one clothed in multiple garb. Here you say, to exclude the one clothed in multiple garb. But there you say, to include the one clothed in multiple garb. Rebbi Hila said, each inference refers to its meaning. If it had said the Anointed but not priest, I would have said, he brings a bull for forgetting a topic, but for acting in error he brings a goat. Therefore it is necessary that it mention priest. But if it had mentioned priest but not the Anointed, I would have said, this refers to the king. If you would say by a bull, preceding the paragraph about the king, assuming that for forgetting a topic he brings a bull but for acting in error he brings a goat. Therefore it is necessary that it mention the Anointed and that it mention priest.

The remainder of the text (to line three of the next paragraph) is missing in B without indication of a lacuna. It happened that Simeon ben Qimḥit went out for a walk with the king on the Day of Atonement at sundown and a drop of spittle squirted on his garment and defiled him. His brother Jehudah entered and officiated in his stead. On that day their mother saw two of her sons as High Priests. Qimḥit had seven sons; all of them served as High Priests. They sent and asked Qimḥit, what good deeds are in your hand? She told them, there should come over me if the beams of the roof of my house ever saw the hair on my head or the seam of my undershirt. They said, all flours are flour but Qimḥit’s flour is fine flour. They recited about her the verse: All the honor of the king’s daughter is inside; gold settings her garments.

I could think that the one anointed for war should (not) bring his tenth of an ephah. The verse says, in his stead, of his sons. One whose son will stand in his stead brings a tenth of an ephah. But one whose sons will not stand in his stead does not bring a tenth of an ephah. From where the anointed’s for war son will not stand in his stead? The verse says, seven days shall the priest wear them, etc. If one officiates in the Tent of Meeting, his son will stand in his stead. But one who does not officiate in the Tent of Meeting, his son will not stand in his stead. From where that he can be appointed as High Priest? [As is written,] Phineas the son of Eleazar was leader over them;in earlier times the Eternal was with him. When Rebbi Yose wanted to needle Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Yose, he said to him, “before, he was with him.” In the days of Zimri, he protested. In the days of the concubine at Gibea, he did not protest.

I could think that the one anointed for war should (not) bring his tenth of an ephah. The verse says, in his stead, of his sons. One whose son will stand in his stead brings a tenth of an ephah. But one whose sons will not stand in his stead does not bring a tenth of an ephah. From where the anointed’s for war son will not stand in his stead? The verse says, seven days shall the priest wear them, etc. If one officiates in the Tent of Meeting, his son will stand in his stead. But one who does not officiate in the Tent of Meeting, his son will not stand in his stead. From where that he can be appointed as High Priest? [As is written,] Phineas the son of Eleazar was leader over them;in earlier times the Eternal was with him. When Rebbi Yose wanted to needle Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Yose, he said to him, “before, he was with him.” In the days of Zimri, he protested. In the days of the concubine at Gibea, he did not protest.

And from where that he officiated in eight? Rebbi Abba bar Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: And Aaron’s holy garments shall be for his descendants in his stead. Why does the verse say, in his stead? For greatness after him. And from where that he was asked in eight? Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: And Aaron’s holy garments shall be for his descendants in his stead. Why does the verse say, in his stead? For holiness after him. In what was he asked? They brought it, רבבהו, a Mishnah of Bar Qappara came from the South which stated: He officiates neither in the four of a common priest nor in the eight of a High Priest. Rebbi Abba said, it would be logical that he officiate in four. Why did they say that he did not officiate? Lest people say, we saw a simple priest who sometimes officiated in eight like a High Priest. Rebbi Jonah said, would he not officiate inside and would he not be asked outside? Does one err between inside and outside? But did Rebbi Tarphon, the teacher of all of Israel, not err between blowing for assembly and the blowing for a sacrifice? As it is written: The descendants of Aaron, the priests, shall blow the trumpets, blameless ones, not with bodily defects, the words of Rebbi Aqiba. Rebbi Tarphon said to him, I would hit my sons if I did not see Simeon, my mother’s brother, lame in one of his legs, standing in the Temple court with his trumpet in his hand and blowing! Rebbi Aqiba answered him, maybe you saw him only at the time of assembly; but I was saying, at the time of sacrifices. Rebbi Tarphon said to him, I would hit my sons but you did not deviate right or left. I am the one who heard but I could not explain. You derive it and agree with tradition. Therefore, anybody who separates from you is as if he separated himself from his life.

And from where that he officiated in eight? Rebbi Abba bar Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: And Aaron’s holy garments shall be for his descendants in his stead. Why does the verse say, in his stead? For greatness after him. And from where that he was asked in eight? Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: And Aaron’s holy garments shall be for his descendants in his stead. Why does the verse say, in his stead? For holiness after him. In what was he asked? They brought it, רבבהו, a Mishnah of Bar Qappara came from the South which stated: He officiates neither in the four of a common priest nor in the eight of a High Priest. Rebbi Abba said, it would be logical that he officiate in four. Why did they say that he did not officiate? Lest people say, we saw a simple priest who sometimes officiated in eight like a High Priest. Rebbi Jonah said, would he not officiate inside and would he not be asked outside? Does one err between inside and outside? But did Rebbi Tarphon, the teacher of all of Israel, not err between blowing for assembly and the blowing for a sacrifice? As it is written: The descendants of Aaron, the priests, shall blow the trumpets, blameless ones, not with bodily defects, the words of Rebbi Aqiba. Rebbi Tarphon said to him, I would hit my sons if I did not see Simeon, my mother’s brother, lame in one of his legs, standing in the Temple court with his trumpet in his hand and blowing! Rebbi Aqiba answered him, maybe you saw him only at the time of assembly; but I was saying, at the time of sacrifices. Rebbi Tarphon said to him, I would hit my sons but you did not deviate right or left. I am the one who heard but I could not explain. You derive it and agree with tradition. Therefore, anybody who separates from you is as if he separated himself from his life.

The priest shall atone who was anointed. Since the entire chapter is said about Aaron, from where [to include another priest? The verse says, who was anointed;] not only the anointed with the anointing oil; from where the one clothed in multiple garb? The verse says, who was inducted into office. And from where another who was appointed? The verse says, the priest shall atone. How is he being appointed? The rabbis of Caesarea in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph, by mouth. Rebbi Zeˋira said, this implies that one may ordain Elders by word of mouth. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, a Mishnah says so: “Recant the four things that you are used to say and we shall make you president of the Court for Israel.”

The priest shall atone who was anointed. Since the entire chapter is said about Aaron, from where [to include another priest? The verse says, who was anointed;] not only the anointed with the anointing oil; from where the one clothed in multiple garb? The verse says, who was inducted into office. And from where another who was appointed? The verse says, the priest shall atone. How is he being appointed? The rabbis of Caesarea in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph, by mouth. Rebbi Zeˋira said, this implies that one may ordain Elders by word of mouth. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, a Mishnah says so: “Recant the four things that you are used to say and we shall make you president of the Court for Israel.”

The priest shall atone who was anointed. Since the entire chapter is said about Aaron, from where [to include another priest? The verse says, who was anointed;] not only the anointed with the anointing oil; from where the one clothed in multiple garb? The verse says, who was inducted into office. And from where another who was appointed? The verse says, the priest shall atone. How is he being appointed? The rabbis of Caesarea in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Joseph, by mouth. Rebbi Zeˋira said, this implies that one may ordain Elders by word of mouth. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada said, a Mishnah says so: “Recant the four things that you are used to say and we shall make you president of the Court for Israel.”

It happened that Rebbi Eliezer, Rebbi Joshua, and Rebbi Aqiba went to the dunes of Antiochia on the occasion of fundraising for the rabbis. There was there a certain Abba Jehudah who gave alms generously. Once he lost his property, he saw our teachers and gave up hope about them. He went home looking sickly. His wife asked him, why are you looking sickly? He told her, our teachers are here and I do not know what I could do. His wife, who was even more pious than he, told him: You have a field left; go, sell half of it, and give to them. He went and did so, came to our teachers and gave them. Our teachers prayed for him and said to him, Abba Jehudah, the Holy One, praise to Him, may fill your want. After they left, he went to plough his half of the field. When he was ploughing in his half of the field, his cow sank down and broke [its leg]. He went to lift her up when the Holy One, praise to Him, enlightened his eyes and he found a treasure. He said, my cow’s leg broke for my benefit. When our teachers returned, they inquired about him. They asked, how is Abba Jehudah doing? They answered, who can appear before Abba Jehudah? Abba Jehudah of his cattle, Abba Jehudah of his camels, Abba Jehudah of his donkeys! Abba Jehudah had returned to his former self; he came to our teachers to greet them. They asked him, how is Abba Jehudah doing? He told them, your prayer brought result and compound results. They told him, even though others had given more than you the last time, we wrote you on top of the honor list. They took him, made him sit with them, and recited for him this verse: The gifts of a man put him at ease; in front of great ones they will make him rest.

Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba held a pledging for a certain house of study at Tiberias. There was one there of the family of Bar Silene, who pledged a pound of gold. (The Elder Rebbi Ḥiyya) [Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba] took him, made him sit with him, and recited for him this verse: The gifts of a man put him at ease, etc.

Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish went up to Bostra. Over there was a cheater. God forbid that he was a cheater, but he cheated in charity. He looked how much the community pledged, and he pledged the same amount. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish took him, made him sit with him, and recited for him this verse: The gifts of a man put him at ease, etc.

“If both of them stand in [a house of] ill repute, the man precedes the woman.” Why? For a woman it is natural, for a man it is not natural. It happened that Rebbi Joshua went to Rome. They informed him about a child from Jerusalem who was reddish with beautiful eyes, good to look at, and his locks ordered in curls, standing in [a house of] ill repute. Rebbi Joshua went to check him out. When he came to the door, Rebbi Joshua started and said, who gave Jacob to be booty and Israel to plunderers, is that not the Eternal? The child answered him and told him, it is because we sinned against Him; they did not want to walk in His ways and did not listen to His teaching. Immediately his eyes were flowing with tears and he said, I take as my witnesses heaven and earth that I shall not move from here until I buy his freedom. He bought his freedom for much money, sent him to the Land of Israel, and quoted for him this verse, the dear children of Zion etc.

The king has precedence over the High Priest, as it is written: You shall let my son Solomon ride, etc. The High Priest over the prophet, as it is written: There, Ṣadoq the Priest and Nathan the Prophet shall anoint him as king, etc. He mentioned Ṣadoq before Nathan. Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina: The prophet folds his hands and feet and sits before the High Priest. What is his reason? Listen, Joshua the High Priest, you and your friends who are sitting before you. I could think that they were common people; the verse says, because they are men of miracle, and “miracle” only means prophecy, as you say, and he gave you a sign or a miracle.

If she saw on the bedsheet, is she trustworthy if she says, it looked like such and such? Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Jehudah; Rebbi Ḥelbo, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: if she saw on the bedsheet, she is trustworthy if she says, it looked like such and such. It was stated so: She is trustworthy. I could think that in the same way she shows the looks of her stain so she shows the looks of skin disease, the verse says: “He shall be brought to Aaron the priest or to one of his descendants, the priests.”

What is the meaning of this latter verse?

What is Rabbi's reason [for declaring there are four watches] ? R. Zerika stated that R. Ammi said in the name of R. Joshua b. Levi : One verse states, "At midnight I will rise to give thanks unto Thee because of Thy righteous ordinances" (Ps. cxix. 62) and another verse states, "Mine eyes forestalled the night-watches" (ibid. 5:148). How is this? There must be four watches in the night.

What is Rabbi's reason [for declaring there are four watches] ? R. Zerika stated that R. Ammi said in the name of R. Joshua b. Levi : One verse states, "At midnight I will rise to give thanks unto Thee because of Thy righteous ordinances" (Ps. cxix. 62) and another verse states, "Mine eyes forestalled the night-watches" (ibid. 5:148). How is this? There must be four watches in the night.

Or if thou wilt, I can say [they differ in the interpretation of] a Scriptural passage; and they both expound the same verse, viz. "When thou liest down and when thou risest up" (Deut. vi. 7). R. Johanan holds that

No, the reason is that it contains the verse, "Thou openest Thy hand and satisfiest every living thing with favour" (Ps. cxlv. 16). Then let him say the Great Hallel which includes "Who giveth food to all flesh" (ibid. cxxxvi. 25)!

R. Johanan said: Why is there no verse beginning with the letter N in that Psalm ? Because it would refer to the downfall of Israel's enemies; as it is written, "Fallen (Naphelah) is the virgin of Israel, she shall no more rise" (Amos v. 2).

In the West they interpret the verse thus: "She is fallen, but she shall no more fall; rise, O virgin of Israel." Rab Nahman b. Isaac said : Even so, David refers to it and finds support for Israel in the Holy Spirit; as it is said, "The Lord upholdeth all that fall" (Ps. cxlv. 14).

In the case of a disciple of the wise, this is not necessary. But Abbai said: Even the disciple of the wise should recite a verse of supplication; for instance, "Into Thy hand I commit my spirit. Thou hast redeemed me, O Lord, Thou God of truth" (ibid. xxxi. 6).

R. Levi b. Hamma also said in the name of R. Simeon b. Lakish : What means that which is written, "And I will give thee the tables of stone, and the law and the commandment, which I have written, that thou mayest teach them" (Exod. xxiv. 12)? "Tables of stone," i.e. the Decalogue: "law," i.e. the Pentateuch; "commandment," i.e. the Mishnah ; "which I have written," i.e. the Prophets and Hagiographa; "that thou mayest teach them," i.e. the Gemara. The verse teaches that all of them were given to Moses on Sinai.

What means "and that thought upon His name"? Rab Assi said : If a man contemplated fulfilling a commandment, and through compulsion did not perform it, the verse ascribes it to him as though he had done it.

Rab Pappa asked : How is it between verse and verse [may one go out]?

Rab Pappa asked : How is it between verse and verse [may one go out]?

Since the verse : "Let the words of my mouth be acceptable before Thee" might with equal propriety be said at the conclusion or the commencement [of the Tefillah], why did the Rabbis institute it at the end of the Eighteen Benedictions? Let it be said at the commencement!

R. Judah, the son of R. Simeon b. Pazzi, answered : Since David only says this verse after eighteen Psalms, therefore the Rabbis arranged it at the end of the Eighteen Benedictions.

Glance also at the end of the verse, 'And let the wicked be no more' — i.e. when 'sins will cease,' then 'the wicked will be no more.' Rather shouldest thou pray that they repent and they be no more wicked."

She answered him, "Fool, glance at the end of the verse ; for it is written, 'For more are the children of the desolate than the children of the married wife, saith the Lord.'

How is it understood that this verse speaks of the day of death? Rabbah b. Rab Shela answered : From the continuation ; as it is written, "Thou hidest Thy face, they vanish ; Thou withdrawest their breath, they perish, and return to the dust" (ibid. v. 29).

Then let him say that verse and no more

The Sages explain the verse thus : "The days of thy life" signifies [thy life-time] in this world; "all" is to include the days of the Messiah.

R. Ila b. Rab Samuel b. Marta said in the name of Rab: [If one recited only the verse] "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one" and was then overcome by sleep, he has fulfilled his obligation. Rab Nahman said to Daro his servant : With the first verse worry me [to keep awake], but do not so after that. Rab Joseph asked Rab Joseph b. Raba, "How used thy father to do ?" He replied, "With the first verse he took pains [to keep awake], but he did not so after that."

R. Ila b. Rab Samuel b. Marta said in the name of Rab: [If one recited only the verse] "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one" and was then overcome by sleep, he has fulfilled his obligation. Rab Nahman said to Daro his servant : With the first verse worry me [to keep awake], but do not so after that. Rab Joseph asked Rab Joseph b. Raba, "How used thy father to do ?" He replied, "With the first verse he took pains [to keep awake], but he did not so after that."

R. Ila b. Rab Samuel b. Marta said in the name of Rab: [If one recited only the verse] "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one" and was then overcome by sleep, he has fulfilled his obligation. Rab Nahman said to Daro his servant : With the first verse worry me [to keep awake], but do not so after that. Rab Joseph asked Rab Joseph b. Raba, "How used thy father to do ?" He replied, "With the first verse he took pains [to keep awake], but he did not so after that."

He asked him, "Do they know all that ; for lo, it is written, 'The dead know not anything' (Eccles. ix. 5)?" He answered, "If thou hast read [this verse], thou hast not read it a second time ; if a second time, then not a third time ; and if a third time, its meaning has not been explained to thee. 'For the living know that they shall die' (ibid.) — this refers to the righteous who are called living even in their death ; as it is said, 'And Benaiah the son of Jehoiada, the son of a living man of Kabzeel, who had done mighty deeds, he smote the two altar-hearths of Moab ; he went down also and slew a lion in the midst of a pit in time of snow' (II Sam. xxiii. 20).

Having buried the dead and returned, etc. If they are able to begin and finish the whole, yes ; but if only one paragraph or one verse, are they not [to commence it]? Against this conclusion I quote : Having buried the dead and returned, if they are able to begin and complete even one paragraph or one verse [they should commence it] !

Having buried the dead and returned, etc. If they are able to begin and finish the whole, yes ; but if only one paragraph or one verse, are they not [to commence it]? Against this conclusion I quote : Having buried the dead and returned, if they are able to begin and complete even one paragraph or one verse [they should commence it] !

Here likewise it means that ... if they are able to begin and finish one paragraph or even one verse, before reaching the row, they should begin ; but if not, they should not commence it.

Because it is written in the preceding verse, "The man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver" (ibid. xxii. 29).

how is this? The latter verse refers to the major natural function, the former to the minor. Infer, then, that the Torah forbids [the Shema' to be read] near to urine only when it is by fecal matter ; but if it has fallen upon the ground, it is permitted [by the Torah], but the Rabbis have decreed against it. Have the Rabbis decreed against it ? When it is certain [that urine is there] ; but if there is a doubt, they do not decree against it.

How is it derived from this verse? Perhaps it was different with Hannah since she was very sore of heart !

How is it derived from this verse ? Perhaps it was different with David, since he afflicted his soul exceedingly in prayer ! But said R, Joshua b. Levi : [Derive it] from the following : "Worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness" (ibid. xxix. 2) — read not "beauty" [hadrat] but "trembling" [herdat].

How is it derived from this verse ? Perhaps I may indeed tell thee that "in the beauty of holiness" is to be understood literally, as with Rab Judah who used to adorn himself and then pray ! But said Rab Nahman b. Isaac : [Derive it] from the following : "Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling" (ibid. ii. 11).

He replied : Quite so, in certain circumstances it is great ; and that is what 'Ulla said : Why is "vengeance" mentioned twice in the verse? One for good, the other for evil — for good, as it is written, "He shone forth from Mount Paran" (Deut. xxxiii. 2) ; for evil, as it is written, "O Lord, Thou God, to Whom vengeance belongeth, Thou God, to Whom vengeance belongeth, shine forth" (Ps. xciv. 1).

There is no contradiction. This refers to one who repeats it word by word ; but the former refers to him who repeats it verse by verse.

There is no contradiction. This refers to one who repeats it word by word ; but the former refers to him who repeats it verse by verse.

The Rabbis explain this verse as follows : Thus spake the Holy One, blessed be He, to Israel, "When I bring you forth, I will do that for you whereby you may know that I am He that brought you forth from Egypt; for it is written 'And ye shall know that I am the Lord your God Who brought you out [hammosi']'" (ibid.).

for Rab Joseph (another version : R. Isaac) said : Whatever is given precedence in the Scriptural verse must take precedence for the benediction ; as it is said, "A land of wheat and barley, and vines and fig-trees and pomegranates, a land of olive trees and honey" (Deut. viii. 8).

This teaching, however, conflicts with the statement of R. Hanan who said: This whole verse only speaks of "standards."

"Honey" — one must have eaten as much as a large date on the Day of Atonement [to have incurred the penalty for breaking the fast]. But the other [Rabbi]? [He asks] : Are these standards explicitly stated in this verse ? No, they are ordained by the Rabbis, and this verse serves only as a support.

"Honey" — one must have eaten as much as a large date on the Day of Atonement [to have incurred the penalty for breaking the fast]. But the other [Rabbi]? [He asks] : Are these standards explicitly stated in this verse ? No, they are ordained by the Rabbis, and this verse serves only as a support.

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

What does R. 'Akiba make of the verse quoted by R. Jose of Galilee ? He requires that for the following teaching : R. Meir says : Whence is it derived that even the embryos in their mothers' womb sang the song at the Red Sea? As it is said, "Bless ye God in full assemblies, even the Lord, ye that are from the fountain of Israel" (Ps. Ixviii. 27). And the other? He derives it from the word "fountain".

The next commenced and said : He who enters a town and is afraid of the Evil Eye, let him take his right thumb in his left hand and his left thumb in his right hand and say the following: "I, A the son of B, come from the seed of Joseph against whom the Evil Eye had no power ; as it is said, 'Joseph is a fruitful vine, a fruitful vine by a fountain' (Gen. xlix. 22). Read not 'ale 'ayin 'by a fountain' but 'ole 'ayin 'overcoming the [Evil] Eye'." R. Jose b. R. Hannina said : It may be derived from the verse : "And let them grow [weyidgu] into a multitude in the midst of the earth" (ibid, xlviii. 16) ; i.e. as the fishes [dagim] in the sea are covered by the water and the Evil Eye cannot have power over them, in similar manner the Evil Eye has no power over the seed of Joseph. Should he, however, be afraid of his own Evil Eye, let him gaze upon the wing of his left nostril.

R. Johanan said : If one wakes up and a verse comes to his mouth, it is to be regarded as a minor prophecy.

We were made to read the words "Thou shalt carry much seed out into the field, and shalt gather little in for the locust will consume it" (Deut. xxviii. 38). To Abbai he gave an interpretation from the first half of the verse ; to Raba from the latter half.

We were made to read the words "Thou shalt have olive-trees throughout all thy borders, but thou shalt not anoint thyself with the oil, for thine olives shall drop off" (Deut. xxviii, 40). To Abbai he gave an interpretation from the first half of the verse ; to Raba from the latter half.

R. Joshua b. Levi said : Who dreams of a river should on rising say, "Behold I will extend peace to her like a river" (Is. Ixvi. 12), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "For distress will come in like a river" (ibid. lix. 19). Who dreams of a bird should on rising say, "As birds hovering so will the Lord of hosts protect" (ibid. xxxi. 5), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "As a bird that wandereth from her nest, so is a man that wandereth from his place" (Prov. xxvii. 8). Who dreams of a pot should on rising say, "Lord, Thou wilt establish [shapat] peace for us" (Is. xxvi. 12), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "Set on [shapat] the pot, set it on" (Ezek. xxiv. 3).

R. Joshua b. Levi said : Who dreams of a river should on rising say, "Behold I will extend peace to her like a river" (Is. Ixvi. 12), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "For distress will come in like a river" (ibid. lix. 19). Who dreams of a bird should on rising say, "As birds hovering so will the Lord of hosts protect" (ibid. xxxi. 5), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "As a bird that wandereth from her nest, so is a man that wandereth from his place" (Prov. xxvii. 8). Who dreams of a pot should on rising say, "Lord, Thou wilt establish [shapat] peace for us" (Is. xxvi. 12), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "Set on [shapat] the pot, set it on" (Ezek. xxiv. 3).

R. Joshua b. Levi said : Who dreams of a river should on rising say, "Behold I will extend peace to her like a river" (Is. Ixvi. 12), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "For distress will come in like a river" (ibid. lix. 19). Who dreams of a bird should on rising say, "As birds hovering so will the Lord of hosts protect" (ibid. xxxi. 5), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "As a bird that wandereth from her nest, so is a man that wandereth from his place" (Prov. xxvii. 8). Who dreams of a pot should on rising say, "Lord, Thou wilt establish [shapat] peace for us" (Is. xxvi. 12), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "Set on [shapat] the pot, set it on" (Ezek. xxiv. 3).

Who dreams of grapes should on rising say, "I found Israel like grapes in the wilderness" (Hos. ix. 10) before another verse occurs to him, viz.: "Their grapes are grapes of gall" (Deut. xxxii. 32). Who dreams of a mountain should on rising say, "How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of the messenger of good things" (Is. lii. 7), before another verse occurs to him, viz.: "For the mountains will I take up a weeping and wailing" (Jer. ix. 9).

Who dreams of grapes should on rising say, "I found Israel like grapes in the wilderness" (Hos. ix. 10) before another verse occurs to him, viz.: "Their grapes are grapes of gall" (Deut. xxxii. 32). Who dreams of a mountain should on rising say, "How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of the messenger of good things" (Is. lii. 7), before another verse occurs to him, viz.: "For the mountains will I take up a weeping and wailing" (Jer. ix. 9).

Who dreams of a horn should on rising say, "And it shall come to pass in that day, that a great horn shall be blown" (Is. xxvii. 13), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "Blow ye the horn of Gibeah" (Hos. 5:8).

Who dreams of a dog should on rising say, "But against any of the children of Israel shall not a dog whet his tongue" (Exod. xi. 7), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "Yea, the dogs are greedy" (Is. Ivi. 11). Who dreams of a lion should on rising say, "The lion hath roared, who will not fear?" (Amos iii. 8), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "A lion is gone up from his thicket" (Jer. iv. 7) [is gone up] [a lion from his thicket].

Who dreams of a dog should on rising say, "But against any of the children of Israel shall not a dog whet his tongue" (Exod. xi. 7), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "Yea, the dogs are greedy" (Is. Ivi. 11). Who dreams of a lion should on rising say, "The lion hath roared, who will not fear?" (Amos iii. 8), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "A lion is gone up from his thicket" (Jer. iv. 7) [is gone up] [a lion from his thicket].

Who dreams of shaving should on rising say, "And [Joseph] shaved himself and changed his raiment" (Gen. xli. 14), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "If I be shaven, then my strength will go from me" (Judges xvi. 17). Who dreams of a well should on rising say, "A well of living waters" (Cant. iv. 15), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "As a cistern welleth with her waters, so she welleth with her wickedness" (Jer. vi. 7). Who dreams of a reed should on rising say, "A bruised reed shall he not break" (Is. xlii. 3), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "Behold, thou trustest upon the staff of this bruised reed" (ibid, xxxvi. 6).

Who dreams of shaving should on rising say, "And [Joseph] shaved himself and changed his raiment" (Gen. xli. 14), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "If I be shaven, then my strength will go from me" (Judges xvi. 17). Who dreams of a well should on rising say, "A well of living waters" (Cant. iv. 15), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "As a cistern welleth with her waters, so she welleth with her wickedness" (Jer. vi. 7). Who dreams of a reed should on rising say, "A bruised reed shall he not break" (Is. xlii. 3), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "Behold, thou trustest upon the staff of this bruised reed" (ibid, xxxvi. 6).

Who dreams of shaving should on rising say, "And [Joseph] shaved himself and changed his raiment" (Gen. xli. 14), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "If I be shaven, then my strength will go from me" (Judges xvi. 17). Who dreams of a well should on rising say, "A well of living waters" (Cant. iv. 15), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "As a cistern welleth with her waters, so she welleth with her wickedness" (Jer. vi. 7). Who dreams of a reed should on rising say, "A bruised reed shall he not break" (Is. xlii. 3), before another verse occurs to him, viz. : "Behold, thou trustest upon the staff of this bruised reed" (ibid, xxxvi. 6).

R. Johanan said : If one wakes up and a verse comes to his mouth, it is to be regarded as a minor prophecy. Our Rabbis have taught : There are three kings [to dream of whom has significance]. Who dreams of David may hope for piety ; of Solomon, may hope for wisdom ; of Ahab, he should be concerned about punishment.

He then said, "Since a miracle was wrought for me with this verse, I will expound it." [He went to the House of Study and expounded]: "Thine, O Lord, is the greatness" — that refers to the work of Creation ; for so it is stated, "Who doeth great things past finding out" (Job ix. 10). "And the power" — that refers to the Exodus from Egypt ; as it is said, "And Israel saw the great work" etc. (Exod. xiv. 31). "And the glory" — that refers to the sun and moon which stood still for Joshua; as it is said, "And the sun stood still, and the moon stayed" (Josh. x. 13). "And the victory" [nesah] — that refers to the overthrow of Rome; for so it is stated, "And their life-blood [nesah] is dashed against My garments" (Is. Ixiii. 3). "And the majesty" — that refers to the battle at the valleys of Arnon ; as it is said, "Wherefore it is said in the book of the Wars of the Lord : Vaheb in Suphah, and the valleys of Arnon" (Num. xxi. 14). "For all that is in heaven and earth" — that refers to the war of Sisera ; as it is said, "They fought from heaven, the stars in their courses fought against Sisera" (Judges 5:20). "Thine is the kingdom, O Lord" — that refers to the war of Amalek ; for so it is stated, "The hand upon the throne of the Lord, the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation" (Exod. xvii. 16). "And Thou art exalted" — that refers to the war of Gog and Magog ; for so it is stated, "Behold I am against thee, O Gog, chief prince of Meshech and Tubal" (Ezek. xxxviii. 3). "As head above all" — Rab Hanan b. Raba said in the name of Rab : Even the waterman is appointed by Heaven.

Our Rabbis have taught : It happened that Hillel the Elder was returning from a journey and heard a cry of lamentation in the city and said, "I am confident that it is not in my house" ; and to him the Scriptural verse applies, "He shall not be afraid of evil tidings ; his heart is steadfast, trusting in the Lord" (Ps cxii. 7). Raba said : Whenever thou expoundest this verse, it is to be explained from the first clause to the second and from the second to the first. It is to be explained from the first clause to the second, thus : "He shall not be afraid of evil tidings." Why? "His heart is steadfast, trusting in the Lord." It is to be explained from the second clause to the first, thus : "His heart is steadfast, trusting in the Lord"; [therefore] "he shall not be afraid of evil tidings."

Our Rabbis have taught : It happened that Hillel the Elder was returning from a journey and heard a cry of lamentation in the city and said, "I am confident that it is not in my house" ; and to him the Scriptural verse applies, "He shall not be afraid of evil tidings ; his heart is steadfast, trusting in the Lord" (Ps cxii. 7). Raba said : Whenever thou expoundest this verse, it is to be explained from the first clause to the second and from the second to the first. It is to be explained from the first clause to the second, thus : "He shall not be afraid of evil tidings." Why? "His heart is steadfast, trusting in the Lord." It is to be explained from the second clause to the first, thus : "His heart is steadfast, trusting in the Lord"; [therefore] "he shall not be afraid of evil tidings."

When they brought R. 'Akiba out to execution, it was the time for reading the Shema' ; and though they were combing his flesh with iron combs, he kept receiving upon himself the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven. His disciples said to him, "Our master, thus far!" He answered them, "Throughout my life I have been troubled about this verse, '[And thou shalt love the Lord thy God...] and with all thy soul' which means : Even if He take thy life. For said I, 'When will it be in my power to fulfil it?' But now that the opportunity is mine, shall I not fulfil if?" He prolonged the word ehad until his soul left [the body] with the word ehad [on his lips]. A Bat Kol issued forth and announced, "Happy art thou, R. 'Akiba, that thy soul went out with the word ehad!"

R. Eleazar entered a privy ; a certain Roman came and pushed him. R. Eleazar got up and went out ; and a serpent came and tore out the [Roman's] gut. R. Eleazar applied to him the verse : "Therefore will I give a man under thee" (Is. xliii. 4) — read not adam "a man" but Edom "an Edomite."

And it is stated, "It is time for the Lord to work ; they have made void Thy Law" (Ps. cxix. 126). Raba said : This verse is to be explained from the first clause to the second, and from the second to the first.

Rabbi Zera said: From the following verse, "And there shall be a sukkah for shade in the daytime from the heat" (Isaiah 4:6). Up to twenty cubits [high] one sits in the shade of the sukkah; but with one higher than twenty cubits he sits, not in the shade of the sukkah but in the shade of its walls.

Rava replied: From the following verse, "You shall dwell in sukkot for seven days" (Leviticus 23:42) the Torah declared: For seven days leave your permanent dwelling place and dwell in a temporary dwelling place. Up to twenty cubits [high] one makes his home a temporary one; higher than twenty cubits, one does not make his home temporary, but permanent.

R. Aha b. Jacob answered: We have a tradition that the face of the cherubim were not less than a handbreadth and R. Huna too made his deduction from this verse.

But are not the laws relating to minimum measures from the Torah since it is written, "A land of wheat and barley, and vines and fig-trees and pomegranates, a land of olive-trees and honey, (Deuteronomy 8:8) And R. Hanin stated that all this verse was said in allusion to the prescribed minimum measures.

Therefor [the minimum measures] are clearly from the Torah. Do you then imagine that measures were actually written in the Torah? Rather, they are traditions and the verse is merely a support.

R. Matanah said: The reason of R. Shimon is a derivation from the following verse: "And there shall be a Sukkah for shade during the day from the heat, and for a refuge and for a cover from storm and from rain" (Isaiah 4:6).

And Beth Hillel? They need that [verse] for the statement of R. Shesheth, R. Shesheth said in the name of R. Akiba, How do we know that the wood of the Sukkah is forbidden all the seven [days f the Festival]? From Scripture which states, "The festival of Sukkoth, seven days to the Lord."

And Beth Shammai also, do not they need the verse for this deduction? Yes, indeed.

What then is Bet Shammai's reason? -There is another Scriptural verse "You shall make the festival of Sukkoth for seven days" (Deuteronomy 16:13). This implies that we require a sukkah made expressly for the sake of the Festival.

And Bet Hillel? They need this verse to teach that a sukkah may be made in the intermediate days of the Festival.

In that case there is another verse, "And they shall make for themselves" (Numbers 15:38) of their own.

When Ravin came, he said in the name of R. Yohanan: Scripture says, "When you gather in from your threshingfloor and your winepress" (Deuteronomy 16:13). The verse thus speaks of the waste from the threshing-floor and the waste from the wine-press. But perhaps it means the actual threshing-floor product and the actual wine-press product?

Are we not discussing one who is traveling to perform a mizvah, and the Merciful One said that he should read it? If so, then let the verse say "in sitting and in going". What is [the reason for] "in your sitting and in your going?" One who is going for himself is obligated. This one traveling to perform a mitzvah is exempt.