xxii

(But concerning Metatron) it is written, Gen. v. 22: “And Enoch walked with the Elohim” (because out of Enoch, Metatron is formed). And it is written, Prov. xxii. 6: “Enoch hath been made into a boy, according to his path.” (That is, “hath been changed into”) the boy (namely, Metatron, who is spoken of under his name NOR, Nour, which meaneth a “boy”).

“But concerning him who is firm in spirit it is written: ‘But the faithful in spirit concealeth the word.’ (But this phrase) ‘faithful in spirit’ denoteth firmness of spirit; like as it is said, Isa. xxii. 23: ‘And I will fasten him as a nail in a sure place.’ Matter dependeth upon Spirit.

And concerning it, is it written, Prov. xxii. 9, “The bountiful eye;” thou shalt not read “the blessed eye,” but “it blesseth,” for it is called “the bountiful eye,” and by it are all things blessed.

Also it is written, Prov. xxii. 9: “The bountiful eye shall be blessed.” Why? Because it giveth its bread unto the poor.

And concerning this certainly it is written, Prov. xxii. 9: “The good eye is to be blessed.” And it is written, Isa. ii. 5: “Be ye present, O house of Jacob, and let us walk in the light of Tetragrammaton!”

Like as it is written, Gen. xxii. 16: “By Myself have I sworn, saith Tetragrammaton.” (Understand) that this is said concerning Microprosopus.

For wheresoever any name is repeated twice over, a distinction is made (between them), as when it is said, Gen. xxii. 11, “Abraham, Abraham;” also, Gen. xlvi. 2, “Jacob, Jacob;” also, 1 Sam. iii. 10, “Samuel, Samuel;” where, by the Psig accent, these pairs of names are distinguished; excepting that place, Exod. iii. 4, “Moses, Moses,” where no accent interveneth.

For what reason? “Abraham, Abraham,” Gen. xxii. 11 (herein therefore is an accent introduced because that) the latter (of these two names) denoteth that which is perfect, but the former that which is not as yet perfect; for at this time he is perfected with ten temptations, and therefore is the (Psiq) accent interpolated, for at this time he can hardly be said to be the same man as he was before.

And for that cause is it written, Exod. iv. 14: “And the anger of Tetragrammaton was kindled.” Deut. vii. 4: “And the anger of Tetragrammaton will be kindled. Exod. xxii. 24:” And My wrath is kindled. Deut. vi. 15: “Lest the wrath of Tetragrammaton be kindled.” Which are all to be understood concerning Zauir Anpin, or Microprosopus.

And since this Brain radiateth into the three white brilliances of the eye (of Microprosopus), hence is that called the “good eye,” concerning which it is said, Prov. xxii. 9: “It shall be blessed,” or rather that from it dependeth blessing.

Also it is written, Prov. xxii. 18: “For it is a pleasant thing if thou keep (Däath) within thee.”

At the SECOND HouR of Friday the wild beasts, and the cattle, and the feathered fowl gathered themselves together to Adam, and he gave names to them as they bowed their heads before him. And at the second hour of Friday the Jews gathered themselves together against Christ, and they gnashed their teeth at Him, even as the blessed David said, “ Many bulls have gathered together round about me, bulls of Bashan have beset me round ” (Ps. xxii. 12).

He wishes to tell us something incidentally : When do the priests partake of their Terumah ? From the time the stars appear. He thereby informs us that [the omission of] the sin-offering does not prevent [the priest from partaking of the Terumah]. This is in agreement with the teaching : "When the sun is down and it is clean" (Lev. xxii. 7) — i.e. the setting of the sun prevents him from partaking of the Terumah, but not [his failure to bring] his sin-offering.

What is the reason ? Are we to suppose it is because it is written, "There is none of you that is sorry for me or discloseth unto me" (ibid. xxii. 8)? Perhaps it is different in the case of a king! Nay, [derive the reason] from the following : "But as for me, when they were sick, my clothing was sackcloth, I afflicted my soul with fasting ; and my prayer, may it return into mine own bosom" (Ps. xxxv. 13).

Come and hear: [It is written :] "And hide thyself from them" (ibid. xxii. 1); i.e. there are times when thou mayest hide thyself from them, and times when thou must not hide thyself from them.

And similarly said Rab Adda b. Ahabah : Whence is it that the individual does not say the "Sanctification"? As it is said, "But I will be hallowed among the children of Israel" (Lev. xxii. 32) — i.e. anything which comes under the heading of "Sanctification" cannot be without a minimum of ten.

How do we know that he does not use this method in any other part of the Torah ? For there is a teaching : Ben 'Azzai said : It is stated, "Thou shalt not suffer a sorceress to live" (Exod. xxii. 17) and it continues, "Whosoever lieth with a beast shall surely be put to death" (ibid. v. 18); [the Rabbis] connect the two laws to infer that as the one who lieth with a beast is put to death by stoning, so also is the sorceress put to death by stoning.

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).

According to him who teaches "the vineyard of the fourth year" it is quite right if he argues by analogy of expression ; for there is a teaching : Rabbi says : It is stated here, "That it may yield unto you more richly the increase thereof" (Lev. xix. 25), and it is stated elsewhere, "the increase of the vineyard" (Deut. xxii. 9) — as in the latter passage "increase" refers to the vineyard, so also in the former passage it refers to the vineyard ; and there thus remains over one hillul to be interpreted as meaning that a benediction is required [when partaking of fruits].

Rab said : He beheld our father Jacob ; for it is written, "And Jacob said when he beheld them" (Gen. xxxii. 3). Samuel said : He beheld the ashes of [the sacrifice substituted for] Isaac ; as it is said, "God will provide Himself the lamb" (ibid. xxii. 8).

R. Isaac the Smith said : He beheld the money of the atonement; as it is said, "And thou shalt take the atonement money from the children of Israel" etc. (Exod. xxx. 16). R. Johanan said: He beheld the Temple ; for it is written, "In the mount where the Lord is seen" (Gen. xxii. 14).

Rab Huna b. Berekiah said in the name of R. Eleazar ha-Kappar : Whoever associates the name of Heaven with his trouble, his substance will be doubled for him ; as it is said, "And the Almighty be thy treasure, and precious silver unto thee" (Job xxii. 25).

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.

"But if ye will not hear it, my soul shall weep in secret places for your pride" (Jer. xiii. 17). R. Samuel bar Inia in the name of Rab said, The Holy One, blessed be He, has a place, and its name is "secret places." What is the meaning of "for your pride"? R. Samuel bar Isaac said, For the glory of Israel, because it was taken away from them and given to the peoples of the world. R. Samuel bar Nachmani said, On account of the glory of the kingdom of heaven. And how is there weeping in the presence of the Holy One, blessed be He, seeing that R. Papa said, There is no tribulation in the presence of the Holy One, blessed be He. For it is said "Honour and majesty are before him, strength and beauty are in his sanctuary" (Ps. xcvi. 6). There is no difficulty. The one has to do with the inner, the other with the outer side of the Divine Being. Is there then no weeping on the outer side? And yet it is written, "And in that day did the Lord, the LORD of hosts, call to weeping and to mourning and to baldness and to girding with sackcloth" (Is. xxii. 12). That is a different matter, viz., the destruction of the Temple, for for this even the angels of peace wept, as it is said, "Behold, their valiant ones cry without: the angels of peace weep bitterly" (Is. xxxiii. 7).

There is a certain passage which says, "Thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him" (Dan. vii. 10), and there is a certain passage which says, "Is there any number of his armies?" (Job xxv. 3) There is no difficulty. The one was at the time when the Holy House was standing, and the other was at the time when the Holy House was not standing. As though it were possible to say that the family of the Most High was diminished. There is a Baraitha, Rabbi says in the name of Abba Jose ben Dosai, "Thousand thousands ministered unto him," this is the number of one troop, but of His troops there is no number. And R. Jeremiah bar Abba said, Thousand thousands ministered unto him at the fiery stream, as it is said, "A fiery stream issued and came forth from before him: thousand thousands ministered unto him, and ten thousand times ten thousand stood before him" (Dan. vii. 10). Whence does it come forth? From the perspiration of the living creatures. And upon what is it poured? R. Zot'ra bar Tobiah said that Rab said, Upon the heads of wicked men in Gehenna, as it is said, "Behold the tempest of the LORD, even his fury, is gone forth, yea, a whirling tempest; it shall burst upon the head of the wicked" (Jer. xxiii. 19). And R. Acha bar Jacob said, Upon those who were held back, as it is said, "Who were held back before their time, whose foundation was poured out as a stream" (Job xxii. 16). There is a Baraitha to the effect that R. Simeon the Holy said, These are nine hundred and seventy-four generations, which were held back from being created

before the world was created, and so were not created. The Holy One, blessed be He, stood and scattered them through all the successive generations, and these are the shameless who are in a generation. But R. Nachman bar Isaac said, They are these who are wrinkled for blessing. This is the meaning of that which is written, As for these disciples of the wise, who have become wrinkled over the words of the Law in this world, the Holy One, blessed be He, discloses to them the secret of the world to come, as it is said, "their foundation was overflowed with a stream" (Job xxii. 16).

They asked Ben Zoma, Quid de castratione canis? He said to them, "Neither shall ye do thus in your land" (Lev. xxii. 24), meaning, All the things that are done in your land ye shall not do.

Resh Lakish said, R. Meir was reading the Scriptures. He came upon this passage and expounded thus, "Incline thine ear, and hear the words of the wise, and apply thine heart unto my knowledge" (Prov. xxii. 17). It is not said, unto their knowledge, but "unto my knowledge." R. Chănina said, From this passage we learn it, "Hearken, O daughter, and consider, and incline thine ear; forget also thine own people and thy father's house, etc." (Ps. xlv. 10) It would appear that the passages are difficult to reconcile. But no, there is no difficulty. The one is the case of an adult, the other of a young person.

There is a Baraitha, Be ye clean, lest ye touch the table or the lamp. And yet we have a Baraitha to this effect, viz., What is the reason that we are not taught this with reference to the lamp? It is because the table is called in Holy Writ perpetual, the lamp is not called in Holy Writ perpetual. And another says, Since Holy Writ says, "and the lamp over against the table" (Ex. xxvi. 35), it is as though it were called in Holy Writ perpetual. But another says, It was only to fix its place that it comes. But you may get it out for me in this way. For it is a vessel of wood which is made to rest; and every vessel of wood which is made to rest, is not liable to uncleanness. What is the reason then that it is liable to uncleanness? Because it is like a sack in this respect, and therefore can contract uncleanness. As a sack is moveable, whether empty or full, so also everything which is moveable whether empty or full is liable to cleansing. This also is moveable, whether empty or full. As is the teaching of Resh Lakish; for Resh Lakish said, What is the meaning of the passage, "upon the clean table?" (Lev. xxiv. 6) Undoubtedly it implies that it might be unclean. And why? It is a vessel of wood made to rest, and as such it does not receive uncleanness; but it informs us that they raise it up, and exhibit the shewbread on it to those who come up to the festival, and one says to them, Look at the love of God in giving you food. Its end was like its placing. For R. Joshua ben Levi said, A great miracle was wrought in the shewbread. As its placing was miraculous, so was its end; for it is said, "to put hot bread in the day that it was taken away" (1 Sam. xxi. 6). But you may get it out for me in this way. It is because it is overlaid. For lo, there is a canonical Mishnah, The table or the tripod table, which have had a piece broken off, or have been covered with marble, and there has been left on them a place to rest cups, may become unclean. R. Jehudah says, A place to rest cakes (Kelim, xxii. 1). And if thou sayest, It is a different matter with shittim wood, which is esteemed highly, and is not valueless, this is all right according to what Resh Lakish says. For he said, Their teaching only refers to tables made of woods that come from the province of the sea. But in the case of a vessel of Mismim it is not valueless. This is very good. But according to R. Jochanan who says, Even in the case of a vessel of Mismim also it is valueless, what is there to say? And if thou sayest, The one is the case of an overlaid article which stands, and the other, of an overlaid article which does not stand. Lo, Resh Lakish asks from R. Jochanan, Does the Mishnah treat of an overlaid article which stands, or of an overlaid article which does not stand? of one which has its extremities covered, or of one which has not its extremities covered? And he said to him, There is no difference in this respect between an overlaid article which stands and an overlaid article which does not stand. There is no difference in this respect between one which has its extremities covered, and one which has not its extremities covered. But it is the table itself which makes the difference.