yose

One who drew hot bread off the side of an oven and put it upon the mouth of a jar of wine: Rabbi Meir declares it susceptible to uncleanness; But Rabbi Judah declares it insusceptible. Rabbi Yose declares it insusceptible in the case of wheat bread and susceptible in the case of barley bread, because barley absorbs [liquids].

One beats upon a hide: If outside the water, it comes under the law of ‘if water be put’; Inside the water, it does not come under the law of ‘if water be put’. Rabbi Yose says: even inside the water it comes under the law of ‘if water be put’, because his intention was that the water should come off together with the filth.

If a woman whose hands were clean stirred an unclean pot and her hands perspired, they become unclean. If her hands were unclean and she stirred a clean pot and her hands perspired the pot becomes unclean. Rabbi Yose says: only if her hands dripped. One who weighs grapes with a balance, the wine in the scale is clean until it is poured into a vessel. Behold, this is like baskets of olives and grapes when they are dripping [with sap].

The following cause neither uncleanness nor susceptibility to uncleanness: Sweat, rotten secretion, excrement, blood issuing with any of these, liquid [issuing from a child born in the] eight month. Rabbi Yose says: except its blood. [The discharge from the bowels of] one who drinks the water of Tiberias even though it comes out clean. Blood from the slaughtering of cattle and wild animals and birds that are unclean, and blood from bloodletting for healing. Rabbi Eliezer declares these unclean. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: the milk of a male is clean.

If he saw one issue which was as copious as three, lasting as long [as it takes to go] from Gad-Yav to Shiloah, which is the time it would take to bathe and dry twice, he becomes a full zav. If he saw one issue which was as copious as two, he defiles [objects] on which he lies or sits and he must immerse in running water, but he is exempt from bringing a sacrifice. Rabbi Yose said: they have not spoken of "one issue as copious" unless there was sufficient to make up three.

One who had [a discharge of] semen does not defile due to zivah for a period of twenty-four hours. Rabbi Yose says: [only] that day. A non-Jew who had a discharge of semen and then converted, he immediately becomes unclean due to zivah. [A woman] who had [an issue] of blood, or had experienced difficulty [in childbirth], [the time prescribed] is twenty-four hours. One who strikes his slave, the "day or two" is twenty-four hours. A dog that eats a corpse's flesh, for three days from one time of day to the same time of day, it is considered to be in its natural state.

If he knocked against a strong beam, a window-frame, water-pipe, a shelf, even though it was fixed with ropes, or an oven, a flour container, the lower mill-stone, the base of a hand-mill, or the se'ah measure of an olive-grinder, [the loaf remains clean]. Rabbi Yose adds: also [if he knocks] against the beam of the bath-keeper, it remains clean.

If he sat on a bed and there were four cloaks under the four legs of the bed, all become unclean, since the bed cannot stand on three legs; But Rabbi Shimon declares them clean. If he rode on a beast and there were four cloaks under the legs of the beast, they are clean, since the beast can stand upon three legs. If there was one cloak under its two forelegs or its two hindlegs, or under a foreleg and a hindleg, it becomes unclean. Rabbi Yose says: a horse conveys uncleanness through its hindlegs and a donkey through its forelegs, since a horse leans upon its hindlegs and a donkey upon its forelegs. If he sat on a beam of an olive-press, the vessels in the olive-press receptacle are unclean. [If he sat] on a clothing press, the garments beneath it are clean. Rabbi Nehemiah declares them unclean.

The nail shaped knob on the back of the loaf, or the small globule of salt, or the burnt crust less than a finger's breadth: Rabbi Yose says: whatever is eaten with the loaf becomes unclean [when touched by the tevul yom]. And one doesn't need to say, this is so [when touched] by other unclean things.

A pebble in a loaf or a large globule of salt, or a lupine, or a burnt crust larger than a finger's breadth Rabbi Yose says: whatever is not eaten with the loaf remains clean even when touched by a father of impurity; And it isn't even necessary to say [is this so when touched] by a tevul yom.

If a beaten egg was on top of vegetables of terumah, and a tevul yom touches the egg, then he disqualifies only that stalk [of the vegetables] that is opposite the part [of the egg] he touched. Rabbi Yose says: the entire upper layer. But if it was arranged like a cap it does not serve as a connective.

The streak of an egg that had become congealed on the side of a pan and a tevul yom touched it: If within the rim [of the pan] it serves as a connective; But if outside the rim, it does not serve as a connective. Rabbi Yose says that the streak and the part that can be peeled away with it [serves as a connective]. The same applies to beans that had congealed on the rim of the pot.

Dough that had been mixed [with dough of terumah] or that had been leavened with yeast of terumah, is not disqualified by tevul yom. Rabbi Yose and Rabbi Shimon declare it unfit. Dough that had become susceptible [to uncleanness] by a liquid, and it was kneaded with produce juice, and later touched by a tevul yom: Rabbi Elazar ben Judah of Bartota says in the name of Rabbi Joshua: he disqualifies all of it. Rabbi Akiva says in his name: he disqualifies only the part that he touched.

If one was taking terumah from a cistern and said: "Let this be terumah provided it comes up safely," [it is implied that he meant] safely from being broken or spilled, but not from becoming impure; But Rabbi Shimon says: also from impurity. If it were broken, it does not render [the contents of the cistern] subject to the restrictions of terumah. How far away can it be broken and still not make [the contents of the cistern] subject to terumah restrictions? Only so far that if it rolls back, it can reach the cistern. Rabbi Yose says: even if one had the intention of making such a stipulation, but did not do so, and it broke, it does not make the [contents of the cistern] subject to terumah restrictions, for this is a stipulation laid down by the court.

[A minimum of] a quarter [of a log] of water must be poured over the hands for one [person] and even for two. A minimum of half a log must be poured over the hands for three or four persons. A minimum of one log [is sufficient] for five, ten, or one hundred persons. Rabbi Yose says: as long as there is not less than a quarter of a log left for the last person among them. More [water] may be added to the second water, but more may not be added to the first water.

If he cleansed vessels with the water or scrubbed measures with it, [the water] is invalid. If he rinsed with it vessels which had already been rinsed or new vessels, it is valid. Rabbi Yose declares [the water] invalid if they were new vessels.

Water in which the baker dips his loaves is invalid; but if he moistened his hands in the water it is valid. All are fit to pour water over the hands, even a deaf-mute, an imbecile, or a minor. A person may place the jug between his knees and pour out the water, or he may turn the jug on its side and pour it out. A monkey may pour water over the hands. Rabbi Yose declares these [latter] two cases invalid.

If he poured water over one of his hands with a single rinsing his hand becomes clean. If over both his hands with a single rinsing: Rabbi Meir declares them to be unclean until he pours a minimum of a quarter of a log of water over them. If a loaf of terumah fell on the water the loaf is clean. Rabbi Yose declares it to be unclean.

If there was a doubt whether any work has been done with the water or not, a doubt whether the water contains the requisite quantity or not, a doubt whether it is unclean or clean, in these cases the doubt is considered to be clean because they have said in a case of doubt concerning hands as to whether they have become unclean or have conveyed uncleanness or have become clean, they are considered to be clean. Rabbi Yose says: in a case [of doubt as to] whether they have become clean they are considered to be unclean. How so? If his hands were clean and there were two unclean loaves before him and there was a doubt whether he touched them or not; Or if his hands were unclean and there were two clean loaves before him and there was a doubt whether he touched them or not; Or if one of his hands was unclean and the other clean and there were two clean loaves before him and he touched one of them and there was a doubt whether he touched it with the unclean hand or with the clean hand; Or if his hands were clean and there were two loaves before him one of which was unclean and the other clean and he touched one of them and there was a doubt whether he touched the unclean one or the clean one; Or if one of his hands was unclean and the other clean and there were two loaves before him one of which was unclean and the other clean, and he touched both of them, and there is a doubt whether the unclean hand touched the unclean loaf or whether the clean hand touched the clean loaf or whether the clean hand touched the unclean loaf or whether the unclean hand touched the clean loaf The hands remain in the same state as they were before and the loaves remain in the same state as they were before.

A scroll on which the writing has become erased and eighty-five letters remain, as many as are in the section beginning, "And it came to pass when the ark set forward" (Numbers 10:35-36) defiles the hands. A single sheet on which there are written eighty-five letters, as many as are in the section beginning, "And it came to pass when the ark set forward", defiles the hands. All the Holy Scriptures defile the hands. The Song of Songs and Kohelet (Ecclesiastes) defile the hands. Rabbi Judah says: the Song of Songs defiles the hands, but there is a dispute about Kohelet. Rabbi Yose says: Kohelet does not defile the hands, but there is a dispute about the Song of Songs. Rabbi Shimon says: [the ruling about] Kohelet is one of the leniencies of Bet Shammai and one of the stringencies of Bet Hillel. Rabbi Shimon ben Azzai said: I have received a tradition from the seventy-two elders on the day when they appointed Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah head of the academy that the Song of Songs and Kohelet defile the hands. Rabbi Akiba said: Far be it! No man in Israel disputed that the Song of Songs [saying] that it does not defile the hands. For the whole world is not as worthy as the day on which the Song of Songs was given to Israel; for all the writings are holy but the Song of Songs is the holy of holies. If they had a dispute, they had a dispute only about Kohelet. Rabbi Yohanan ben Joshua the son of the father-in-law of Rabbi Akiva said in accordance with the words of Ben Azzai: so they disputed and so they reached a decision.

On that day they said: what is the law applying to Ammon and Moab in the seventh year? Rabbi Tarfon decreed tithe for the poor. And Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah decreed second tithe. Rabbi Ishmael said: Elazar ben Azariah, you must produce your proof because you are expressing the stricter view and whoever expresses a stricter view has the burden to produce the proof. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah said to him: Ishmael, my brother, I have not deviated from the sequence of years, Tarfon, my brother, has deviated from it and the burden is upon him to produce the proof. Rabbi Tarfon answered: Egypt is outside the land of Israel, Ammon and Moab are outside the land of Israel: just as Egypt must give tithe for the poor in the seventh year, so must Ammon and Moab give tithe for the poor in the seventh year. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah answered: Babylon is outside the land of Israel, Ammon and Moab are outside the land of Israel: just as Babylon must give second tithe in the seventh year, so must Ammon and Moab give second tithe in the seventh year. Rabbi Tarfon said: on Egypt which is near, they imposed tithe for the poor so that the poor of Israel might be supported by it during the seventh year; so on Ammon and Moab which are near, we should impose tithe for the poor so that the poor of Israel may be supported by it during the seventh year. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah said to him: Behold, you are like one who would benefit them with gain, yet you are really as one who causes them to perish. Would you rob the heavens so that dew or rain should not descend? As it is said, "Will a man rob God? Yet you rob me. But you: How have we robbed You? In tithes and heave-offerings" (Malakhi 3:8). Rabbi Joshua said: Behold, I shall be as one who replies on behalf of Tarfon, my brother, but not in accordance with the substance of his arguments. The law regarding Egypt is a new act and the law regarding Babylon is an old act, and the law which is being argued before us is a new act. A new act should be argued from [another] new act, but a new act should not be argued from an old act. The law regarding Egypt is the act of the elders and the law regarding Babylon is the act of the prophets, and the law which is being argued before us is the act of the elders. Let one act of the elders be argued from [another] act of the elders, but let not an act of the elders be argued from an act of the prophets. The votes were counted and they decided that Ammon and Moab should give tithe for the poor in the seventh year. And when Rabbi Yose ben Durmaskit visited Rabbi Eliezer in Lod he said to him: what new thing did you have in the house of study today? He said to him: their votes were counted and they decided that Ammon and Moab must give tithe for the poor in the seventh year. Rabbi Eliezer wept and said: "The counsel of the Lord is with them that fear him: and his covenant, to make them know it" (Psalms 25:14). Go and tell them: Don't worry about your voting. I received a tradition from Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai who heard it from his teacher, and his teacher from his teacher, and so back to a halachah given to Moses from Sinai, that Ammon and Moab must give tithe for the poor in the seventh year.

The following neither defile nor can they be defiled and they do not join together: The roots of cabbage-stalks, Young shoots of beet growing out of the root, and [similar] such turnip-heads, [And produce whose roots] that are ordinarily cut off but in this case were pulled up [with their roots]. Rabbi Yose declares them all susceptible to contract uncleanness, but he declares insusceptible cabbage-stalks and turnip-heads.

Stalks of all foods that have been threshed on the threshing-floor are clean. Rabbi Yose declares them unclean. A sprig of a vine when stripped of its grapes is clean, but if one grape alone is left on it, it is unclean. A twig of a date-tree stripped of its dates is clean, but if one date remains on it, it is unclean. Similarly, with beans, if the pods were stripped from the stem it is clean, but if even one pod alone remains, it is unclean. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah declares [the stalk] of the broad bean clean, but declares unclean the stalk of other beans, since it is of use when [the pulse] is handled.

Stems of figs and dried figs, kelusim, and carobs are both defiled and defile, and they join together. Rabbi Yose says: also the stalks of the gourd. The stems of pears and krutumelin pears, quinces, and crab-apples, the stalks of the gourd and the artichoke [to the length of] one handbreadth. Rabbi Elazar bar Zadok says: two handbreadths; [All] these are defiled and defile; but do not join together. As for other stems, they are neither defiled nor do they defile.

That which has been severed from a human, beast, wild animal, bird, or from the carrion of an unclean bird, and the fat in villages. And all kinds of wild vegetables, except for truffles and mushrooms; Rabbi Judah says, except for field-leeks, purslane and ornithagolum. And Rabbi Shimon says: except for cynara sycaria. Rabbi Yose says: except for muscari comusum. Behold all these need both intention and to be rendered susceptible [to uncleanness].

HALAKHAH: When does one start to read the Shema in the evening?. We have stated: “From the time that the priests enter to eat their Terumah”. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: “From the time that people enter their houses Friday evening to eat their meal.” We have stated: “Their opinions are almost identical.” Come and see: “From the time that the priests enter to eat their Terumah” is still daylight and the stars start to appear, “from the time that people enter their houses Friday evening to eat their meal” is one or two hours into the night. You want to say that the two opinions are almost identical? Rebbi Yose said: Explain it by people in hamlets who usually leave the roads when there still is some daylight because they are afraid of wild beasts.

It was stated: “He who recites (the Shema‘) before that time did not fulfill his duty.” If that is so, why does one recite (the Shema‘) in the synagogue? Rebbi Yose said: one does not recite it to fulfill one’s duty but only to stand in prayer after the study of Torah.

Rebbi Yose bar Abun investigated: If you say that two (stars) present a doubt, if someone saw two stars on Friday night, was warned, and did forbidden work, he also saw two stars on Saturday night, was warned, and did forbidden work, then it is logical to assert that if the first period was daytime the last period was also daytime and he would be guilty for the later work; if the last period was nighttime then the first period was also nighttime and he would be guilty for the first work. If someone saw two stars on Friday night and harvested about (the volume of) half a fig, in the morning he harvested about half a fig, and he saw two stars on Saturday night and harvested about half a fig, then it is logical to assert that if the first period was daytime the last period was also daytime and one would combine daytime with Saturday night and he would be guilty for his last work; if the last period was nighttime then the first period was also nighttime and one would combine daytime with Friday night and he would be guilty for his first work.

That means (we judge) by those stars that are not usually seen during the day. But by those stars that are usually seen during the day we do not estimate. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said: There must be three stars not counting Venus.

What is dusk? Rebbi Tanḥuma said (it is comparable) to a drop of blood on the tip of a sword. The drop splits here and there, that is dusk. What is dusk? From after sundown the time a man needs to walk half a mil, the words of Rebbi Neḥemiah. Rebbi Yose said: dusk is a moment and the sages could not determine it.

Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Aḥa were sitting together. Rebbi Yose said to Rebbi Aḥa: Is it not reasonable that the end of the half a mil of Rebbi Neḥemiah is the moment (of Rebbi Yose)? He answered: I also am of that opinion. Rebbi Ḥizqiah does not say so but every single moment in the half a mil of Rebbi Neḥemiah is in doubt. Rebbi Mana said: I pointed out the difficulty before Rebbi Ḥizqiah from what we have taught (Zabim I,6): “He saw one emission during daytime and one at dusk or one at dusk and the next one the next day; if he knows that the emission at dusk was partially during daytime and partially during nighttime, he certainly is impure and needs a sacrifice but if it is questionable whether the emission occurred partially during daytime and partially during nighttime he certainly is impure but it is questionable whether he owes a sacrifice.” Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Josef asked before Rebbi Yoḥanan: Who is the Tanna who will split an emission into two? Rebbi Yose! I said to him: Here is your problem since you say that every single moment in the half a mil of Rebbi Neḥemiah is in doubt. What is his question good for? For the time when Elijah will come and say: that is dusk.

Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Aḥa were sitting together. Rebbi Yose said to Rebbi Aḥa: Is it not reasonable that the end of the half a mil of Rebbi Neḥemiah is the moment (of Rebbi Yose)? He answered: I also am of that opinion. Rebbi Ḥizqiah does not say so but every single moment in the half a mil of Rebbi Neḥemiah is in doubt. Rebbi Mana said: I pointed out the difficulty before Rebbi Ḥizqiah from what we have taught (Zabim I,6): “He saw one emission during daytime and one at dusk or one at dusk and the next one the next day; if he knows that the emission at dusk was partially during daytime and partially during nighttime, he certainly is impure and needs a sacrifice but if it is questionable whether the emission occurred partially during daytime and partially during nighttime he certainly is impure but it is questionable whether he owes a sacrifice.” Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Josef asked before Rebbi Yoḥanan: Who is the Tanna who will split an emission into two? Rebbi Yose! I said to him: Here is your problem since you say that every single moment in the half a mil of Rebbi Neḥemiah is in doubt. What is his question good for? For the time when Elijah will come and say: that is dusk.

Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Aḥa were sitting together. Rebbi Yose said to Rebbi Aḥa: Is it not reasonable that the end of the half a mil of Rebbi Neḥemiah is the moment (of Rebbi Yose)? He answered: I also am of that opinion. Rebbi Ḥizqiah does not say so but every single moment in the half a mil of Rebbi Neḥemiah is in doubt. Rebbi Mana said: I pointed out the difficulty before Rebbi Ḥizqiah from what we have taught (Zabim I,6): “He saw one emission during daytime and one at dusk or one at dusk and the next one the next day; if he knows that the emission at dusk was partially during daytime and partially during nighttime, he certainly is impure and needs a sacrifice but if it is questionable whether the emission occurred partially during daytime and partially during nighttime he certainly is impure but it is questionable whether he owes a sacrifice.” Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Josef asked before Rebbi Yoḥanan: Who is the Tanna who will split an emission into two? Rebbi Yose! I said to him: Here is your problem since you say that every single moment in the half a mil of Rebbi Neḥemiah is in doubt. What is his question good for? For the time when Elijah will come and say: that is dusk.

Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Aḥa were sitting together. Rebbi Yose said to Rebbi Aḥa: Is it not reasonable that the end of the half a mil of Rebbi Neḥemiah is the moment (of Rebbi Yose)? He answered: I also am of that opinion. Rebbi Ḥizqiah does not say so but every single moment in the half a mil of Rebbi Neḥemiah is in doubt. Rebbi Mana said: I pointed out the difficulty before Rebbi Ḥizqiah from what we have taught (Zabim I,6): “He saw one emission during daytime and one at dusk or one at dusk and the next one the next day; if he knows that the emission at dusk was partially during daytime and partially during nighttime, he certainly is impure and needs a sacrifice but if it is questionable whether the emission occurred partially during daytime and partially during nighttime he certainly is impure but it is questionable whether he owes a sacrifice.” Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Josef asked before Rebbi Yoḥanan: Who is the Tanna who will split an emission into two? Rebbi Yose! I said to him: Here is your problem since you say that every single moment in the half a mil of Rebbi Neḥemiah is in doubt. What is his question good for? For the time when Elijah will come and say: that is dusk.

Rebbi Yose bar Abun said: If you say to give the thickness of the sky to the night both in the evening and in the morning then you must say that day and night are not of equal length; but we have stated: On the days of the vernal and autumnal equinoxes, day and night have equal length. Rebbi Huna said: We may learn from the ways of the world since if the king leaves [his palace] one already states that he left before he left but when he returns one does not say that he did return until he actually entered [the palace].

Rebbi Yose bar Abun said: Anybody who identifies the “morning hind” with the planet Venus is in error; that planet sometimes is too early and sometimes too late. What is it? It is like two double horns of light that arise from the East and give light. Explanation: The great Rebbi Ḥiyya and Rebbi Simeon ben Ḥalaphta were walking in the valley of Arbela before morning and saw “the morning hind” that started radiating. The great Rebbi Ḥiyya said to Rebbi Simeon ben Ḥalaphta, the great man: so will be the deliverance of Israel; it starts out very little and grows and longer as it goes on. What is the reason (Micha 7:8): “When I shall dwell in darkness, the Lord is my light.” So also at the start (Esther 2:21): “Mordocai was sitting at the king’s gate.” After that (6:11): “Haman took the garment and the horse.” After that (6:12): “Mordocai returned to the king’s gate.” After that (8:15): “Mordocai left the king’s presence in royal garb.” After that (8:16): “The Jews had light and joy.”

The behavior of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi disagrees since Rebbi Joshua ben Levi read psalms afterwards. But have we not stated: One does not say words after Emet Weyaẓiv? He explains that as relating to Emet Weyaẓiv of the morning prayers, since Rebbi Zeïra said in the name of Rav Abba bar Jeremiah: There are three immediacies: immediately after leaning comes slaughtering, immediately after hand-washing comes benediction, immediately after redemption comes prayer. Immediately after leaning comes slaughtering: “He shall lean … he shall slaughter” (Lev. 1:4–5). Immediately after hand-washing comes benediction, (Ps. 134:2) “Lift your hands in holiness and bless the Lord.” Immediately after redemption comes prayer, (Ps. 19:15) “May the words of my mouth be for goodwill” and it is written after that (Ps. 20:2) “May the Lord answer you on the day of worry.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said: For anyone who immediately slaughters after leaning, no disqualification will appear regarding his sacrifice. For anyone who immediately pronounces the benediction after washing his hands, Satan will not find anything to accuse about at that meal. For anyone who immediately prays after mentioning redemption, Satan will not find anything to accuse him of the entire day. Rebbi Zeïra said, I am used to immediately pray after mentioning redemption and I was conscripted to forced labor, to bring myrrh to the Palace. They said to him: our teacher, that is an honor. There are people who pay money to see the inside of the Palace. Rebbi Immi said: Anyone who does not immediately pray after mentioning redemption, whom is he to be likened to? To an acquaintance of the king who comes from afar to the king’s door. When the king comes to see what he wants, he finds that the person left. Hence, the king also leaves.

There (Šabbat 1:2) we have stated: “One interrupts for the recitation of Shema‘ but one does not interrupt for prayer.” Rebbi Aḥa said: The recitation of Shema‘ is a Biblical obligation; prayer is not a Biblical obligation. Rebbi Abba said: The time for the recitation of the Shema‘ is fixed, the time for prayer is not fixed. Rebbi Yose said: The recitation of Shema‘ does not need concentration, prayer needs concentration. Rebbi Mana said: I objected before Rebbi Yose: Even if you say that the recitation of the Shema‘ does not need concentration, the first three verses need concentration. Since they are so few, one will concentrate upon their meaning.

There (Šabbat 1:2) we have stated: “One interrupts for the recitation of Shema‘ but one does not interrupt for prayer.” Rebbi Aḥa said: The recitation of Shema‘ is a Biblical obligation; prayer is not a Biblical obligation. Rebbi Abba said: The time for the recitation of the Shema‘ is fixed, the time for prayer is not fixed. Rebbi Yose said: The recitation of Shema‘ does not need concentration, prayer needs concentration. Rebbi Mana said: I objected before Rebbi Yose: Even if you say that the recitation of the Shema‘ does not need concentration, the first three verses need concentration. Since they are so few, one will concentrate upon their meaning.

Rebbi Yoḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai: “For example we, who are engaged in the study of Torah, we do not interrupt even for the recitation of Shema‘.” Rebbi Yoḥanan used to say about himself: “For example we, who are not engaged in the study of Torah, we do interrupt even for prayer.” This one follows his own opinion and that one follows his own opinion. Rebbi Yoḥanan follows his own opinion since Rebbi Yoḥanan says: “if only a man would pray the entire day. Why? Because prayer is never in vain!” Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai follows his own opinion since Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai said: “If I had stood at Mount Sinai at the moment that the Torah was given to Israel, I would have implored the All-Merciful that he should create two mouths for man; one for him to exert himself in Torah and the other one for his other needs.” But he changed his mind and said: “With one mouth already the world almost cannot exist because of its denunciations; if there were two how much more would there be? Rebbi Yose said before Rebbi Jeremiah: The position of Rebbi Yoḥanan is identical with that of Rebbi Ḥanina ben Aqabiah, as we have stated: “The scribes of Torah scrolls, Tefillin, and Mezuzot, do interrupt for the recitation of Shema‘ but do not interrupt for prayer. Rebbi Ḥanina ben Aqabiah said: just as they interrupt for Shema‘, so they interrupt for prayer, tefillin, and all other commandments of the Torah”. Would not Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai agree that one interrupts to make a sukkah or a lulav? Does not Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai make the distinction between one who studies in order to do and one who studies in order not to do? Because he who studies in order not to do would have been better off had he not been born. And did not Rebbi Yoḥanan say, he who studies in order not to do would have been better off if the afterbirth he was in was twisted around and he never would have entered the world? The reason of Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai is that this one is repeated study and that one is repeated study and he does not push aside one study for the other study. But did we not formulate: “He is like a man reading in the Torah.” Hence, at the right time it is preferred to Torah. One is like the other. Rebbi Yudan said that Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai, since he was permanently studying Torah, did not prefer Shema‘ to the study of Torah. Rebbi Abba Mari said, did we not formulate: “He who reads (Shema‘) after that did not lose, he is only like a man reading in the Torah”? Hence, at the right time it is like Mishnah. Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai follows his own opinion since Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai said: He who studies the written Torah does himself good that is not so good. But the rabbis equate the study of the Bible with that of the oral law.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman: Because of (Jos. 1:8): “You should think about it day and night”, that the thinking of day and night should be equal. Rebbi Yose bar Rebbi Abin in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Because of (Ps. 119:164): “Seven times a day I praise You for Your just laws.” Rebbi Nachman in the name of Rebbi Mani: Everybody who keeps “seven times a day I praise you” is as if he kept also “you should think about it day and night”.

Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Yehudah bar Zebida: It would have been logical that one also would have to recite the chapter of Balaq and Balaam every day. Why does one not recite it? Not to incommodate the public too much. Rebbi Ḥuna said, because it mentions lying down and standing up. Rebbi Yose bar Abun said, because it contains the Exodus and God’s kingdom. Rebbi Eleazar said, because it is written in the Torah, in the Prophets, and in the Hagiographs.

It was stated: He who recites with the men of Maämad has not done his duty since they were too late. Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Ammi: In the days of Rebbi Yoḥanan we went out for a fast-day and recited Shema‘ after three hours and he did not oppose us. Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Aḥa went out for a fast-day. The public came and recited Shema‘ after three hours. Rebbi Aḥa wanted to oppose them. Rebbi Yose said to him: Did they not recite at its due time, now they only recite it in order to stand in prayer after words of the Torah. He answered back: It is because of the uneducated, who should not say that the recitation was in its correct time.

It was stated: He who recites with the men of Maämad has not done his duty since they were too late. Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Ammi: In the days of Rebbi Yoḥanan we went out for a fast-day and recited Shema‘ after three hours and he did not oppose us. Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Aḥa went out for a fast-day. The public came and recited Shema‘ after three hours. Rebbi Aḥa wanted to oppose them. Rebbi Yose said to him: Did they not recite at its due time, now they only recite it in order to stand in prayer after words of the Torah. He answered back: It is because of the uneducated, who should not say that the recitation was in its correct time.

These are the benedictions that one makes long: the benedictions for Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, and the benedictions for a public fast day. From his benedictions one can tell whether someone is a scholar or is uneducated. These are the benedictions that one makes short: He who makes a benediction over a commandment and on fruits, the introductory paragraph of Grace, and the last benediction in Grace after the meal. Hence, all other benedictions one should make long. Ḥizqiah said: From what we have stated: He who makes it long is despicable, he who makes is short is praiseworthy, which means that this is not a principle. We have stated: One has to make long the benediction “Who saves Israel” on a fast day. Hence, the six additional benedictions he should not make long. Rebbi Yose said: You should not say: because this is part of Shemoneh Esreh one should not make it long, therefore it is necessary to say: One has to make long the benediction “Who saves Israel” on a fast day.

Rebbi Ḥalaphta ben Shaül stated: Everybody bows down with the cantor for the benediction of thanksgiving. Rebbi Zeïra said: But only for the word modim. Rebbi Zeïra was attentive to the Qeroba to bow his head at the beginning and at the end. Rebbi Yose when he came up here saw them bowing down and whispering. He said to them: What is this whispering? He had not heard what Rebbi Ḥelbo, Rebbi Simeon said in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan, in the name of Rebbi Jeremiah, Rebbi Ḥanina in the name of Rebbi Miasha, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Simai, and some say, the colleagues in the name of Rebbi Simai: We thank You, Master of all creatures, God of praises, eternal Rock, Life of the Universe, Creator, Who resurrects the dead, that You have made us alive, kept us, gave us merit, supported us, and brought us near to give thanks to Your name; praised be You, o Eternal, God of thanksgiving. Rebbi Abba bar Zavda in the name of Rav: We thank You since we are obliged to give thanks; may my lips sing, for I shall sing to You with my soul that You have redeemed; praised are You, o Eternal, God of thanksgiving. Rebbi Samuel bar Inia in the name of Rebbi Aḥa: Thanksgiving and praise to Your name, Yours is greatness, Yours is strength, Yours is glory! May it please You, o Eternal, our God and God of our fathers, that You may support us in our fall, straighten us up from our bent state, because You support the falling and straighten up the bent ones, You are full of mercy and nothing exists except You; praised are You, o Eternal, God of thanksgiving. Bar Qappara said: For You we fall down, for You we bend down, for You we prostrate ourselves, for You we kneel, to You every knee should fall down and every tongue swears. (1Chr. 29:11–13): Yours, o Eternal, is greatness, strength, glory, victory, and majesty, truly all that is in heaven and on earth; Yours, o Eternal, is the kingdom, and You lift Yourself over all as head. Riches and honor are before You, You rule over all; in Your hand is power and strength, it is in Your hand to make great and strengthen everything. And now, our God, we thank You and praise Your glorious name; with all our heart and soul we prostrate ourselves before You. (Ps. 35:10) My entire self shall say: O Eternal, who is like You, Who saves the destitute from one who is stronger than he is, the destitute and poor from the one who robs him. Praised are You, o Eternal, God of thanksgiving. Rebbi Yudan said: the rabbis used to say all of these. But some say, either one or the other.

Rebbi Jeremiah objected: But there is “redemption”. There is a difference since Rebbi Yoḥanan said: If he heard Hallel in the synagogue he has fulfilled his obligation. Rebbi Eleazar, the son of Rebbi Yose, objected before Rebbi Yose, but there is its ending. He said to him: there are two, one for the future and one for the past.

Rebbi Jeremiah objected: But there is “redemption”. There is a difference since Rebbi Yoḥanan said: If he heard Hallel in the synagogue he has fulfilled his obligation. Rebbi Eleazar, the son of Rebbi Yose, objected before Rebbi Yose, but there is its ending. He said to him: there are two, one for the future and one for the past.

All benedictions after their seals; one does not say a verse as benediction. Rebbi Isaac ben Rebbi Eleazar objected before Rebbi Yose: Because you say after their seals, one does not say a verse as benediction? They said, that young man is intelligent because he thinks! What is the meaning of “after their seals”? It is that when he was standing in the morning prayer and forgot and mentioned the text of evening prayers but he caught himself and finished with the text of morning prayers, then he did his duty. Rebbi Aḥa said, all benedictions in the kind of their seals. But those who say (Is. 12:6): “Jubilate and sing, inhabitant of Zion …” do not violate the rule that no benediction is a verse.

They asked before Rebbi Aḥiyya ben Rebbi Zeïra: How did your father do in practice, like the teachers here or the teachers there. Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, like the teachers here. Rebbi Yose said, like the teachers there. Rebbi Ḥanina said, it is reasonable like R. Yose, since R. Zeïra always chose the harder way and they chose the harder way, so he did what he was used to, like them.

They asked before Rebbi Aḥiyya ben Rebbi Zeïra: How did your father do in practice, like the teachers here or the teachers there. Rebbi Ḥizqiah said, like the teachers here. Rebbi Yose said, like the teachers there. Rebbi Ḥanina said, it is reasonable like R. Yose, since R. Zeïra always chose the harder way and they chose the harder way, so he did what he was used to, like them.

Rebbi Yose said: If you say that one needs to recite the benedictions; when he recited them he must focus his attention for the entire Shema‘. They objected: Does he not interrupt and it does not appear in our statement? So here also, even though it has not been stated he must recite the benedictions. That means, one must focus one’s attention for the entire Shema‘. We may hear it from the following: Rebbi Aḥai said in the name of Rebbi Yehudah: “He has fulfilled his obligation if he focussed his attention for the first paragraph, even though he did not focus his attention during recitation of the second paragraph”.

Rebbi Muna said in the name of Rebbi Yehudah who said in the name of Rebbi Yose the Galilean: If one interrupted so that he would have been able to read all of it, he did not fulfill his duty. Rebbi Abba, Rav Jeremiah in the name of Rav: The practice follows Rebbi Muna who said in the name of Rebbi Yehudah who said in the name of Rebbi Yose the Galilean.

Rebbi Muna said in the name of Rebbi Yehudah who said in the name of Rebbi Yose the Galilean: If one interrupted so that he would have been able to read all of it, he did not fulfill his duty. Rebbi Abba, Rav Jeremiah in the name of Rav: The practice follows Rebbi Muna who said in the name of Rebbi Yehudah who said in the name of Rebbi Yose the Galilean.

Abba bar Rav Huna and Rav Ḥisda sat together and said, the same rule applies to blowing the Shofar. They went up to Rav’s Yeshivah and heard Rav Ḥuna in the name of Rav: Even if one heard it in up to nine hours he fulfilled his obligation. Rebbi Zeiïa said: When I was there, this was a problem for me. When I came here, I heard Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan: Even if one heard it during an entire day, one has fulfilled one’s obligation. But only if one heard it in the correct order. Rebbi Yose investigated: If one needed to hear the first simple tone and another one the final simple tone, one blow of the Shofar serves the requirements of both of them.

Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rav Abba bar Jeremiah: A person may not enter a cemetery and relieve himself there. When he did it anyway, about him the verse says (Prov. 17:5) “He who makes fun of the poor blasphemes his Maker.” Clarification: The great Rebbi Ḥiyya and Rebbi Jonathan were walking before the bier of Rebbi Simeon bar Yose bar Laqonia when Rebbi Jonathan stepped over his grave. The great Rebbi Ḥiyya said to him: About that they will say, tomorrow they will be with us but they hurt us. He answered him, do they know anything? Is it not written: (Prov. 9:5) “But the dead do not know anything.” He told him: you know how to read, you do not know how to preach. (Prov. 9:5) “The living know that they will die”, these are the Just who even in death are considered living; “but the dead do not know anything;” these are the wicked who even in life are called dead. From where that the wicked even in life are called dead? It is said (Ez. 18:32) “For I have no pleasure in the death of the dead;” how can a dead person die? But these are the wicked who even in life are called dead. And from where that the Just even in death are considered living? It is written (Deut. 34:4) “And He said to him: This is the land I had sworn to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to tell.” Why does the verse say “to tell”? He said to him: go and tell the patriarchs that all I had promised I fulfilled to your descendants after you.

MISHNAH: He who recited the Shema‘ and did not make his ear hear, (Rebbi Yehudah says that) he has fulfilled his obligation, Rebbi Yose says that he has not fulfilled his obligation. If he recited and was not exact in its letters, Rebbi Yose says that he has fulfilled his obligation, Rebbi Yehudah says that he has not fulfilled his obligation. He who reads backwards has not fulfilled his obligation. If he recited and made a mistake then he should return to the place of the mistake.

MISHNAH: He who recited the Shema‘ and did not make his ear hear, (Rebbi Yehudah says that) he has fulfilled his obligation, Rebbi Yose says that he has not fulfilled his obligation. If he recited and was not exact in its letters, Rebbi Yose says that he has fulfilled his obligation, Rebbi Yehudah says that he has not fulfilled his obligation. He who reads backwards has not fulfilled his obligation. If he recited and made a mistake then he should return to the place of the mistake.

HALAKHAH: Rav said: practice follows both of them for leniency. If it were not so, what could one say? An anonymous statement and Rebbi Yose, practice follows the anonymous. Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Yehudah, practice follows Rebbi Yose. So why does Rav have to say, practice follows both of them for leniency? Because he had heard Rebbi Ḥiyya formulating it in the name of Rebbi Meïr, he has to say that practice follows both of them for leniency.

HALAKHAH: Rav said: practice follows both of them for leniency. If it were not so, what could one say? An anonymous statement and Rebbi Yose, practice follows the anonymous. Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Yehudah, practice follows Rebbi Yose. So why does Rav have to say, practice follows both of them for leniency? Because he had heard Rebbi Ḥiyya formulating it in the name of Rebbi Meïr, he has to say that practice follows both of them for leniency.

HALAKHAH: Rav said: practice follows both of them for leniency. If it were not so, what could one say? An anonymous statement and Rebbi Yose, practice follows the anonymous. Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Yehudah, practice follows Rebbi Yose. So why does Rav have to say, practice follows both of them for leniency? Because he had heard Rebbi Ḥiyya formulating it in the name of Rebbi Meïr, he has to say that practice follows both of them for leniency.

It was stated: “He who did pray and did not make his ear hear did fulfill his obligation.” For whom do we need that? For Rebbi Yose! For which statement of Rebbi Yose? For that which we have stated: “He who recites the Shema‘ and did not make his ear hear has fulfilled his obligation, Rebbi Yose says that he has not fulfilled his obligation.” Rav Mattanah said: That formulation is Rebbi Yose’s. Rebbi Yose said: We could be of the opinion that the rabbis and Rebbi Yose disagree only about Shema‘ since there it is written: “hear!”, but not about any other obligations. Since Rav Mattanah said “that formulation is Rebbi Yose’s”, it is the same for all obligations. What is the reason of Rebbi Yose? (Ex. 15:26) “Bend your ear to His commandments”, your ears should hear what your mouth says.

It was stated: “He who did pray and did not make his ear hear did fulfill his obligation.” For whom do we need that? For Rebbi Yose! For which statement of Rebbi Yose? For that which we have stated: “He who recites the Shema‘ and did not make his ear hear has fulfilled his obligation, Rebbi Yose says that he has not fulfilled his obligation.” Rav Mattanah said: That formulation is Rebbi Yose’s. Rebbi Yose said: We could be of the opinion that the rabbis and Rebbi Yose disagree only about Shema‘ since there it is written: “hear!”, but not about any other obligations. Since Rav Mattanah said “that formulation is Rebbi Yose’s”, it is the same for all obligations. What is the reason of Rebbi Yose? (Ex. 15:26) “Bend your ear to His commandments”, your ears should hear what your mouth says.

It was stated: “He who did pray and did not make his ear hear did fulfill his obligation.” For whom do we need that? For Rebbi Yose! For which statement of Rebbi Yose? For that which we have stated: “He who recites the Shema‘ and did not make his ear hear has fulfilled his obligation, Rebbi Yose says that he has not fulfilled his obligation.” Rav Mattanah said: That formulation is Rebbi Yose’s. Rebbi Yose said: We could be of the opinion that the rabbis and Rebbi Yose disagree only about Shema‘ since there it is written: “hear!”, but not about any other obligations. Since Rav Mattanah said “that formulation is Rebbi Yose’s”, it is the same for all obligations. What is the reason of Rebbi Yose? (Ex. 15:26) “Bend your ear to His commandments”, your ears should hear what your mouth says.

It was stated: “He who did pray and did not make his ear hear did fulfill his obligation.” For whom do we need that? For Rebbi Yose! For which statement of Rebbi Yose? For that which we have stated: “He who recites the Shema‘ and did not make his ear hear has fulfilled his obligation, Rebbi Yose says that he has not fulfilled his obligation.” Rav Mattanah said: That formulation is Rebbi Yose’s. Rebbi Yose said: We could be of the opinion that the rabbis and Rebbi Yose disagree only about Shema‘ since there it is written: “hear!”, but not about any other obligations. Since Rav Mattanah said “that formulation is Rebbi Yose’s”, it is the same for all obligations. What is the reason of Rebbi Yose? (Ex. 15:26) “Bend your ear to His commandments”, your ears should hear what your mouth says.

It was stated: “He who did pray and did not make his ear hear did fulfill his obligation.” For whom do we need that? For Rebbi Yose! For which statement of Rebbi Yose? For that which we have stated: “He who recites the Shema‘ and did not make his ear hear has fulfilled his obligation, Rebbi Yose says that he has not fulfilled his obligation.” Rav Mattanah said: That formulation is Rebbi Yose’s. Rebbi Yose said: We could be of the opinion that the rabbis and Rebbi Yose disagree only about Shema‘ since there it is written: “hear!”, but not about any other obligations. Since Rav Mattanah said “that formulation is Rebbi Yose’s”, it is the same for all obligations. What is the reason of Rebbi Yose? (Ex. 15:26) “Bend your ear to His commandments”, your ears should hear what your mouth says.

It was stated: “He who did pray and did not make his ear hear did fulfill his obligation.” For whom do we need that? For Rebbi Yose! For which statement of Rebbi Yose? For that which we have stated: “He who recites the Shema‘ and did not make his ear hear has fulfilled his obligation, Rebbi Yose says that he has not fulfilled his obligation.” Rav Mattanah said: That formulation is Rebbi Yose’s. Rebbi Yose said: We could be of the opinion that the rabbis and Rebbi Yose disagree only about Shema‘ since there it is written: “hear!”, but not about any other obligations. Since Rav Mattanah said “that formulation is Rebbi Yose’s”, it is the same for all obligations. What is the reason of Rebbi Yose? (Ex. 15:26) “Bend your ear to His commandments”, your ears should hear what your mouth says.

It was stated: “He who did pray and did not make his ear hear did fulfill his obligation.” For whom do we need that? For Rebbi Yose! For which statement of Rebbi Yose? For that which we have stated: “He who recites the Shema‘ and did not make his ear hear has fulfilled his obligation, Rebbi Yose says that he has not fulfilled his obligation.” Rav Mattanah said: That formulation is Rebbi Yose’s. Rebbi Yose said: We could be of the opinion that the rabbis and Rebbi Yose disagree only about Shema‘ since there it is written: “hear!”, but not about any other obligations. Since Rav Mattanah said “that formulation is Rebbi Yose’s”, it is the same for all obligations. What is the reason of Rebbi Yose? (Ex. 15:26) “Bend your ear to His commandments”, your ears should hear what your mouth says.

It was stated: “He who did pray and did not make his ear hear did fulfill his obligation.” For whom do we need that? For Rebbi Yose! For which statement of Rebbi Yose? For that which we have stated: “He who recites the Shema‘ and did not make his ear hear has fulfilled his obligation, Rebbi Yose says that he has not fulfilled his obligation.” Rav Mattanah said: That formulation is Rebbi Yose’s. Rebbi Yose said: We could be of the opinion that the rabbis and Rebbi Yose disagree only about Shema‘ since there it is written: “hear!”, but not about any other obligations. Since Rav Mattanah said “that formulation is Rebbi Yose’s”, it is the same for all obligations. What is the reason of Rebbi Yose? (Ex. 15:26) “Bend your ear to His commandments”, your ears should hear what your mouth says.

Rav Ḥisda said: The deaf and dumb person is not mentioned, it is a formula. Then the Mishnah might be Rebbi Yehudah’s. Rebbi Yose said: It is reasonable to think that Rav Ḥisda concedes that the statement from Terumot is from Rebbi Yose. Rabbi Ḥanina said in the name of Rav Ḥisda, this one is by Rebbi Yose. Rebbi Yose bar Rebbi Abun said: It must be said that that one is Rebbi Yose’s since we have stated the first five cases and did not include it, because their terumah is no terumah. Then we have stated the five later ones and did not include it. So in the end you must say, that one is by Rebbi Yose.

Rav Ḥisda said: The deaf and dumb person is not mentioned, it is a formula. Then the Mishnah might be Rebbi Yehudah’s. Rebbi Yose said: It is reasonable to think that Rav Ḥisda concedes that the statement from Terumot is from Rebbi Yose. Rabbi Ḥanina said in the name of Rav Ḥisda, this one is by Rebbi Yose. Rebbi Yose bar Rebbi Abun said: It must be said that that one is Rebbi Yose’s since we have stated the first five cases and did not include it, because their terumah is no terumah. Then we have stated the five later ones and did not include it. So in the end you must say, that one is by Rebbi Yose.

Rav Ḥisda said: The deaf and dumb person is not mentioned, it is a formula. Then the Mishnah might be Rebbi Yehudah’s. Rebbi Yose said: It is reasonable to think that Rav Ḥisda concedes that the statement from Terumot is from Rebbi Yose. Rabbi Ḥanina said in the name of Rav Ḥisda, this one is by Rebbi Yose. Rebbi Yose bar Rebbi Abun said: It must be said that that one is Rebbi Yose’s since we have stated the first five cases and did not include it, because their terumah is no terumah. Then we have stated the five later ones and did not include it. So in the end you must say, that one is by Rebbi Yose.

Rav Ḥisda said: The deaf and dumb person is not mentioned, it is a formula. Then the Mishnah might be Rebbi Yehudah’s. Rebbi Yose said: It is reasonable to think that Rav Ḥisda concedes that the statement from Terumot is from Rebbi Yose. Rabbi Ḥanina said in the name of Rav Ḥisda, this one is by Rebbi Yose. Rebbi Yose bar Rebbi Abun said: It must be said that that one is Rebbi Yose’s since we have stated the first five cases and did not include it, because their terumah is no terumah. Then we have stated the five later ones and did not include it. So in the end you must say, that one is by Rebbi Yose.

Rav Ḥisda said: The deaf and dumb person is not mentioned, it is a formula. Then the Mishnah might be Rebbi Yehudah’s. Rebbi Yose said: It is reasonable to think that Rav Ḥisda concedes that the statement from Terumot is from Rebbi Yose. Rabbi Ḥanina said in the name of Rav Ḥisda, this one is by Rebbi Yose. Rebbi Yose bar Rebbi Abun said: It must be said that that one is Rebbi Yose’s since we have stated the first five cases and did not include it, because their terumah is no terumah. Then we have stated the five later ones and did not include it. So in the end you must say, that one is by Rebbi Yose.

Rav Ḥisda said: The deaf and dumb person is not mentioned, it is a formula. Then the Mishnah might be Rebbi Yehudah’s. Rebbi Yose said: It is reasonable to think that Rav Ḥisda concedes that the statement from Terumot is from Rebbi Yose. Rabbi Ḥanina said in the name of Rav Ḥisda, this one is by Rebbi Yose. Rebbi Yose bar Rebbi Abun said: It must be said that that one is Rebbi Yose’s since we have stated the first five cases and did not include it, because their terumah is no terumah. Then we have stated the five later ones and did not include it. So in the end you must say, that one is by Rebbi Yose.

New Section.He who reads backwards has not fulfilled his obligation. Rebbi Jonah said that Rav Naḥman bar Ada stated, Rebbi Yose said that Naḥman the Old stated, (Deut. 6:6) “They shall be”, they shall be unaltered. We have stated: The same holds for Hallel and the reading of the Esther scroll.

Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac in the name of Rav Ḥuna: One should not stand and pray while he keeps a coin in his hand; (having the coin) in front of him is forbidden, at his back it is allowed. Rebbi Yasa used to bind them together and grab them in his hand. And for money matters, (Deut. 14:25) “you shall bind the money together in your hand”, only in your hand. Rebbi Yose bar Abun thus taught his son-in-law Rebbi Hillel.

Rebbi Ḥanina said: Also one who has his water on his shoulder may recite Shema‘ and pray. Rav Ḥuna said: So the reciting of Shema‘ and praying do not require concentration? Rebbi Mana said: I pointed out the difficulty before Rebbi Phineas that even if you say that the recitation of Shema‘ does not need concentration, does prayer not need concentration? Rebbi Yose said: I confirmed it following what Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: You got it, the completion of the works of water that are not clear from the words of the Torah.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Eleazar ben Antigonos in the name of Rebbi Eleazar the son of Rebbi Yannai: This means that it is permitted to start sexual relations on the Sabbath. Rebbi Ḥaggai said before Rebbi Yose: Explain it for a widow where he does not make a wound. He answered him: Did we not formulate “Four nights?” Can you say four nights for a widow?

Rebbi Jacob bar Savdi said: I asked the question before Rebbi Yose: What is the difference between her and him who breaks a clay amphora in order to eat a dried fig from it? He said to me: But it says afterwards, “only he should have no intent to make it into a usable vessel.” And here when he has the intention of making her a married woman it is as if he had the intention of making her into a vessel. Rav Isaac bar Rav Meshirshia said similarly: What is the difference between her and him who opens a boil on the Sabbath? He said to him, but it says afterwards: “only he should have no intention of making a permanent opening.” And here when he has the intention of making her a married woman it is as if he had the intention of making her into a vessel.

It was stated: “A man should not have first sexual relations on the Sabbath because he makes a wound; but others allow it.” Rebbi Yose bar Abun said: The reason of the others is that he is intent on his job; the wound results automatically. Assi said, it is forbidden. Benjamin from Ginzak went out and said in the name of Rab, it is allowed. Samuel heard it and resented it, he [Benjamin] died, he [Samuel] recited for him: praised be He Who smote him. About Rav, he [Samuel] recited: (Prov. 12:21) “The just will cause no wrong.”

HALAKHAH: Who stated that the mourner is forbidden to take a bath during the entire seven days? Rebbi Nathan. Something happened to Rebbi Ammi, he asked Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba who instructed him “all seven days following Rebbi Nathan”. Something happened to Rebbi Yose; he sent Rebbi Abba bar Cohen to Rebbi Aḥa; he said to him: Rebbi, did you not so teach us that something happened to Rebbi Ammi, he asked Resh Laqish who instructed him “all seven days following Rebbi Nathan”. He said to him, maybe these were two separate incidents, we say it in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, you say it in the name of Resh Laqish. And also from the following: Something happened to Rebbi Ḥama, father of Rebbi Oshaya, he asked the rabbis and they forbade it.

Rebbi Yose asked, which rabbis? The rabbis here or the rabbis in the South? If you say the rabbis of here, it is fine. If you would say the rabbis from the South, would he have asked minor authorities when greater ones were before him? If you say the rabbis of the South, some of them would allow and some of them would forbid, as we have stated: “At a place where it is customary to bathe after a funeral, one may bathe; in the South one bathes.” Rebbi Yose bar Abun said: He who permits that bath makes it like eating and drinking.

Rebbi Yose asked, which rabbis? The rabbis here or the rabbis in the South? If you say the rabbis of here, it is fine. If you would say the rabbis from the South, would he have asked minor authorities when greater ones were before him? If you say the rabbis of the South, some of them would allow and some of them would forbid, as we have stated: “At a place where it is customary to bathe after a funeral, one may bathe; in the South one bathes.” Rebbi Yose bar Abun said: He who permits that bath makes it like eating and drinking.

That means, about a bath for pleasure. But a bath that is not for pleasure is permitted. An example is the case of Samuel bar Abba who developed scab. They came and asked Rebbi Yose, what is the rule, may he bathe? He said to them: If he does not bathe, would he not die? If he needs it, even on the Ninth of Av. If he needs it, even on Yom Kippur.

They saw Rebbi Yose, son of Rebbi Ḥanina, immersing himself. They did not know whether it was for his emission, they did not know whether it was to cool down because bathing in cold water is not called bathing.

It is stated: “In a place where one is used to greet mourners on the Sabbath one may do so. In the South one does greet.” The great Rebbi Oshaya went to some place, saw there mourners on the Sabbath and greeted them. He said to them: “I do not know the custom of your place, but be greeted according the custom of our place.” Rebbi Yose, son of Rebbi Ḥalaphta, praised Rebbi Meïr before the people of Sepphoris: A great, holy, and meek man. At some time, he saw mourners on the Sabbath and greeted them. They said to him: Is that the one whose praise you proclaim? He said to them, what are his works? They said to him, he saw mourners on the Sabbath and greeted them. He said to them: you have to recognize his strength; he comes to make you aware that there is no mourning on the Sabbath. That is what is written (Prov. 10:22): “The blessing of the Lord makes rich,” that is the blessing of Sabbath, “He will not add grief to it,” that is mourning, as it is said (2Sam. 19:3): “The king is grieving about his son.”

A clarification. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba and his group, some say Rebbi Yose bar Ḥalaphta and his group, and some say Rebbi Jacob and his group, were sitting to study Torah under a fig tree. The owner of the fig tree was coming every morning at sunrise and collected figs. They said, maybe he mistrusts us, let us change place. The next day, the owner of the fig tree came to them; he said to them: the one miẓwah that you used to do with me you are withholding from me. They said to him: We thought that maybe you mistrust us. During the morning he came and informed them that if the sun shines on ripe figs they get wormy. At that time they said, the owner of the fig tree knows the best time to collect figs and he collects them. Likewise, the Holy One, praise to Him, knows the time of the just ones to be removed from the world and He removes them.

Rebbi Zeïra, Rav Jeremiah in the name of Rav: Practice follows Rebbi Eliezer in putting on and Rebbi Joshua in taking off. Rebbi Zeïra inquired: If he put them on on the second day, following Rebbi Eliezer, would Rebbi Eliezer act like Rebbi Joshua, not to take them off? Rebbi Yose bar Abun said: Is it so that Rebbi Eliezer would act like Rebbi Joshua, not to take them off? If it were so, we should say “practice follows Rebbi Eliezer.”

It was stated: “A dargesh is put upright and is not turned over. Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar says, he removes its qlbnṭryn and that is enough.” Rebbi Yosa in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: practice follows Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Yose, a couch whose posts are upright and removed together with it, he takes them off and that is enough.

From where the overturning of beds? Rebbi Crispus in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: (Job 2:13) “They sat with him towards the ground.” It does not say here “on the ground” but “they sat with him towards the ground,” on something close to the ground. It follows that they were sleeping on overturned couches. Bar Qappara said: A beautiful form I had in your house and you caused me to overturn it, you also overturn your bed! Some quote it by the expression “let him overturn; overturn the agent!” Rebbi Jonah and Rebbi Yose, both in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. One said, why does he sleep on an overturned coach? So that he should wake up in the night and realize that he is a mourner. The other one said, since he sleeps on an overturned bed he wakes up in the night and realizes that he is a mourner.

May a Cohen defile himself for the honor of his teacher? The father-in-law of Rebbi Yannai the younger died. He was both his father-in-law and his teacher. He asked Rebbi Yose who forbade it. Rebbi Aḥa heard it and said: His students should defile themselves for him. The students of Rebbi Yose defiled themselves for him but ate meat and drank wine. Rebbi Mana told them: One of two things you cannot escape. If you are mourners, why did you eat meat and drink wine; if you are not mourners, why did you defile yourselves?

May a Cohen defile himself for the honor of his teacher? The father-in-law of Rebbi Yannai the younger died. He was both his father-in-law and his teacher. He asked Rebbi Yose who forbade it. Rebbi Aḥa heard it and said: His students should defile themselves for him. The students of Rebbi Yose defiled themselves for him but ate meat and drank wine. Rebbi Mana told them: One of two things you cannot escape. If you are mourners, why did you eat meat and drink wine; if you are not mourners, why did you defile yourselves?

May a Cohen defile himself for the honor of Torah? Rebbi Yose was sitting and teaching when a dead body was brought in. He did not say anything either to those who left or to those who remained sitting.

It is stated: A Cohen may defile himself by leaving the Land for civil and criminal suits, for the consecration of the New Moon and intercalation of a year, to save a field from a Gentile, and he even may leave and lodge a complaint about it, to study Torah and to marry a wife. Rebbi Judah says, if he has a place to study, he should not defile himself. Rebbi Yose says, even if he has a place to study, he may defile himself, since a man may not have the luck to learn from every teacher. They said about Joseph the Cohen that he defiled himself and followed his teacher to Sidon. In truth, they said a priest should not go abroad unless one promised him a wife.

May a Cohen defile himself for the lifting of hands? Gedilah, the brother of Rebbi Abba bar Cohen said before Rebbi Yose in the name of Rebbi Aḥa: A Cohen defiles himself for the lifting of hands. Rebbi Aḥa heard it and said: I never told him anything. On second thoughts he said, maybe he heard from me that which Rebbi Jehudah ben Pazi said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: Every Cohen who stays in the synagogue and does not lift his hands transgresses a positive commandment, and he wanted to say that a positive commandment supersedes a negative commandment. I never told him anything. Bring him in and I will cause him to be flogged!

Rebbi Jonah, Rebbi Yose the Galilean, Rebbi Yasa bar Ḥanina: One does not ask rulings on practice before the bier of a deceased. But Rebbi Yoḥanan asked Rebbi Yannai before the bier of Rebbi Simeon ben Yoẓadaq about him who dedicated his holocaust sacrifice for the upkeep of the Temple, and he answered him! Let us say when he was far away or when they were bringing him to the study hall. But Rebbi Jeremiah asked Rebbi Zeïra before the bier of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac! Let us say that he answered him when he was far away; when he was close he did not answer him.

It is stated (Tosephta Berakhot 2:11): “Rebbi Judah says, if they all are standing in one row, those who are standing because of honor are obliged, those because of mourning are exempt. When they descend for a eulogy, those who see inside are exempt, those who do not see inside are obliged.” It would be that what we stated: “Those who stand in the row, the innermost are exempt and the outer ones are obliged” is the last teaching, and what is stated: “Those who are standing because of honor are obliged, those because of mourning are exempt”, is the first teaching. And what we have stated there (Mishnah Sanhedrin 2:2): “When he consoles others, all the people stand one behind the other and the executive officer becomes a partition between himself and the people”, the last teaching. (Another opinion: the first.) Rebbi Ḥanina said: Originally, all families were standing still and the mourners passed between them. When competition increased in Sepphoris, Rebbi Yose ben Ḥalaphta decreed that the families should pass by and the mourners stand still. Rebbi Samuel Tosephta said: Matters returned to their original state.

It is stated: “For every obligation that a man is free of, he may help the congregation to fulfill their obligation, except for Grace.” But have we not stated: “Anybody who is not obligated may not help the congregation to fulfill their obligation”? If he were obligated, he could help them to fulfill even if he himself already fulfilled it! Rebbi Lia said: There is a difference about Grace since it is written (Deut. 8:10): “You will eat and be satiated, then you must praise the Eternal, your God;” he who ate must give praise. Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Judah ben Pazi were sitting together and saying: It would be reasonable for reciting the Shema‘ that every single person should repeat it aloud. It would be reasonable for prayer that every single person should pray for mercy by himself.

What is the difference between sukkah and lulab? Sukkah does not need a benediction after the first night of the holiday, lulab needs a benediction all seven days. Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Aḥa were sitting and saying, what is the difference between sukkah and lulab? Sukkah applies both nights and days, lulab applies only during daytime. Rebbi Jacob the Southerner objected: But the study of Torah applies by night as by day? How is this? Sukkah will end; the study of Torah, it is impossible that it should ever end.