Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 101a
They have not done their duty in respect of kiddush either. Then according to Rab, why he [the Reader] recite kiddush at home? — In order to acquit his children and his household [of their duty]. And [according to] Samuel, why must he recite kiddush in the synagogue?1 — In order to acquit travellers of their obligation, for they eat, drink, and sleep in the synagogue.2 Now Samuel is consistent with his view, for Samuel said: Kiddush is [valid] only where the meal is eaten. From this it was understood [by the disciples] that only [to adjourn] from one house to another [is forbidden],3 but [to adjourn] from one place to another in the same house is not [forbidden]. Said R. ‘Anan b. Tahlifa to them: On many occasions I was standing before Samuel, when he descended from the roof to the ground and then recited [again] kiddush.4
Now R. Huna too holds that kiddush is [valid] only where the meal is eaten. For [on one occasion] R. Huna recited kiddush and [then] his lamp was upset, whereupon he carried his utensils into the marriage chamber [baldachin] of his son Rabbah, where a lamp was [burning] recited kiddush [again], and then ate something, which proves that he holds: kiddush is [valid] only where the meal is eaten.
Now Rabbah too holds: kiddish is [valid] only where the meal is eaten. For Abaye said: When I was at the Master's [sc. Rabbah's] house,5 and he recited kiddush, he would say to us: ‘Eat a little [here], lest by the time you reach your lodgings your lamps become upset, and you do not recite kiddush in the house where you eat, while you will not have discharged [your duty] with the kiddush of this place, because kiddush is [valid] only where the meal is eaten. But that is not so, for surely Abaye said: In all matters the Master [sc. Rabbah] acted in accordance with Rab, except these three, where he did as Samuel: [viz.,] one may light from lamp to lamp;6 one can detach [the fringes] from one garment for [insertion in] another garment;7 and the halachah is as R. Simeon in respect to dragging. For it was taught, R. Simeon said: A man may drag a bed, seat, or bench,8 providing that he does not intend to make a rut!9 — He acted upon Rab's stringent rulings,10 but he did not act upon Rab's lenient rulings.
But R. Johanan maintained: They have done their duty in respect of wine too.11 Now R. Johanan is consistent with his view, for R. Hanin b. Abaye said in the name of R. Pedath in R. Johanan's name: Both for a change of wine
(1) Seeing that one's duty is not fulfilled thereby in any case.
(2) Not actually in the synagogue, but in adjoining rooms (Tosaf. on the basis of Meg. 28a). Hence the synagogue is like home to them.
(3) After kiddush, since the meal must be eaten in the same place.
(4) V. R. Hananel. Proving that you must not adjourn from one place to another even in the same house.
(5) Abaye was an orphan, and brought up in Rabbah's house.
(6) One may kindle one Hanukkah lamp from another.
(7) V. Num. XV, 38.
(8) Over an earthen floor on the Sabbath or festival.
(9) Though the dragging will possibly make one. — Why then does he rule as Samuel in respect to kiddush?
(10) That was the general rule stated by Abaye, the three exceptions all being leniencies, where he acted as Samuel.
(11) This refers back to 100b bottom. Having heard the benediction for wine in the synagogue, they do not repeat the benediction at home, for in R. Johanan's view their departure from the synagogue does not break the continuity, as they are regarded as having had their mind set upon the meal and the wine from when they heard kiddush.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 101b
and for a change of place, he need not recite the benediction [again].1
An objection is raised: [For] a change of place, he must recite the benediction [again]; for a change of wine, he need not recite the benediction [again]? This refutation of R. Johanan is [indeed] a refutation.
R. Idi b. Abin sat before R. Hisda, while R. Hisda sat and said in R. Huna's name: As to what you said, [for] a change of place he must recite the benediction [again], they taught this only [of a change] from one house to another, but not from one place to another place.2 Said R. Idi b. Abin to him: We have learnt it thus in the Baraitha of the School of R. Henak — others state, in the School of Bar Henak — in accordance with your ruling. Does then R. Huna teach us a Baraitha?3 — R. Huna had not heard the Baraitha.4
Furthermore, R. Hisda sat and said in his own name: As to what you said: For a change of place he must recite the benediction [again], we said this only of things which do not require a benediction after them in the same place;5 but for the things which demand a blessing after them in the same place, he need not recite the benediction [again]. What is the reason? He [mentally] returns to the first appointed place.6 But R. Shesheth maintained: Both for the one and the other he must recite the benediction [again].
An objection is raised: If the members of a company were reclining to drink, and they [precipitately] arose7 to go out to welcome a bridegroom or a bride, when they go out, they do not need [to recite] a benediction beforehand;8 when they return, they do not need [to recite] a benediction at the beginning.9 When is that? If they left an old man or an invalid there;10 but if they did not leave an old man or an invalid there, when they go out they need [to recite] a benediction beforehand, [and] when they return they need a benediction at the beginning. Now since he teaches, ‘they [precipitately] arose,’ it follows that we are treating of things which require a blessing after them in the same place,11 and it is only because they left an old man or an invalid there that when they go out they do not need a benediction beforehand, and when they return they do not need a benediction at the beginning. But if they did not leave an old man or an invalid there, when they go out they need a blessing beforehand and when they return they need a blessing at the beginning: this is a difficulty according to R. Hisda?-Said R. Nahman b. Isaac:
(1) If a man recites a blessing for wine and drinks, and the more wine is brought from a different barrel, even if the second is of a different quality, he does not repeat the blessing; similarly, if he recites a blessing over food or drink and then continues his meal elsewhere. Hence the same applies here. — Where a man need not recite a blessing, he may not recite, as a blessing must not be recited where there is no obligation.
(2) In the same house, e.g., from one room to another.
(3) Surely it is superfluous!
(4) Rashbam deletes both the question and the answer, as it is quite usual for an amora to state what is taught in the Baraitha.
(5) Where they are eaten, Rashbam: sc. water or fruit. After everything else, however,
(i.e., wine, the seven species enumerated in Deut. VIII, 8, bread, and the five species of grain enumerated in the Mishnah Supra 35a) a blessing in the nature of grace must be recited where it is consumed. Tosaf.: after everything except bread and perhaps also the five species of grain a blessing need not be recited where they are eaten.
(6) Since these things must be followed by a blessing in the place where they are consumed, even when he changes his place he keeps the first in mind, so that his eating in both places should be as one act of eating, the subsequent blessing being for what he ate in both. Consequently, he does not recite a blessing before eating in the second place either.
(7) Lit., ‘detached their feet’.
(8) I.e., the blessing after wine, since it is their Intention to return.
(9) When they drink afresh.
(10) Which assures that their departure is only an interruption.
(11) ‘They detached their feet’ implies that they hurried, on account of the bridegroom or bride, but otherwise they would have remained there, in order to recite the benediction before leaving. — According to Tosaf.
(p. 538, n. 3) ‘to drink must be omitted from the Baraitha, since in their view no beverage, not even wine, is subject to this rule.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 102a
Which Tanna [rules thus on precipitate] rising? R. Judah. For it was taught: If companions were reclining, and they [precipitately] arose to go to the synagogue or to the Beth Hamidrash, when they go out they do not need a blessing beforehand, and when they return they do not need a blessing at the beginning. Said R. Judah: When is that said? When they left some of their companions behind. But if they did not leave some of their companions behind, when they go out they need a blessing beforehand, and when they return they need a blessing at the beginning.
Then [make an opposite deduction]: it is only because they are things which need a blessing in the same place that when they go out they do not need a blessing beforehand and when they return they do not need a blessing at the beginning. But for things which do not need a blessing in the same place, even on the view of the Rabbis, when they go out they need a blessing beforehand and when they return they need a blessing at the beginning: shall we say that this is a refutation of R. Johanan[‘s ruling]?1 — But have we not [already] refuted him once? Shall we [then] say that from this too there is a refutation?-[No:] R. Johanan can answer you: The same law holds good that even for things which do not require a blessing after them in the same place it is unnecessary to recite a blessing [afresh], but as to why he teaches, ‘They [precipitately] arose,’ that is to inform you the extent2 of R. Judah[‘s view], [viz.,] that even for things which require a blessing after them in the same place, it is only because they left some companions behind [that these additional blessings are not recited]; but if they did not leave some companions behind, when they go out they need a blessing beforehand, and when they return they need a blessing at the beginning.
It was taught in accordance with R. Hisda: If companions were reclining to drink wine and they arose [departed] and returned, they need not recite a blessing [anew].3
Our Rabbis taught: If members of a company were reclining when the day became holy upon them,4 a cup of wine is brought to one of them and he recites over it the sanctity of the day [i.e., kiddush], and a second [cup is brought] over which he recites the Grace after meals:5 these are the words of R. Judah. R. Jose said: he goes on eating until nightfall.6
(1) V. supra 101b top that for a change of place no fresh blessing is required under any circumstances.
(2) Lit., ‘strength’.
(3) V. supra p. 538, n. 3. According to Rashbam the proof is obvious. On the view of Tosaf. ‘to drink wine’ must be deleted, the reference being to bread or the five pieces of grain.
(4) I.e., the sun set ushering in the Sabbath or Festival.
(5) Immediately, without waiting to finish the meal. Nevertheless, since the Sabbath has commenced, he must first recite the kiddush and then Grace. Hence if he wishes to eat more after Grace, he must begin a new meal.
(6) He need not interrupt his meal but may continue until the end.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 102b
When they finish [their meal], he recites the Grace after meals over the first cup and the sanctity of the day over the second. Yet why so: let us recite both over one cup?1 — Said R. Huna in R. Shesheth's name: One may not recite two sanctities over the same cup.2 What is the reason? Said R. Nahman b. Isaac: Because you may not perform religious duties in wholesale fashion.3 Yet [may you] not? Surely it was taught: He who enters his house at the termination of the Sabbath, recites blessings over the wine, the light and the spices,4 and then recites habdalah over the cup [of wine].5 But if he has one cup only, he leaves it until after the meal6 and he recites them all together after it?7 — Where he has not [enough,] it is different. But on the Festival which falls after the Sabbath, though he has [wine] ,8 yet Rab said: [The order is] Yaknah.9 — I will tell you: Since he [Rab] did not include ‘the season’ [zeman],10 it follows that we are discussing the seventh day of Passover,11 by which time he has consumed all that he had and has one more. But on the first day of the Festival he has [wine], yet Abaye said: [The order is] Yakzanah; while Raba said: [The order is] Yaknehaz?12 — But habdalah and kiddush constitute one observance],13 [whereas] the Grace after meals and kiddush are two [distinct observances].
[To turn to] the [main] text: When a Festival falls after the Sabbath, Rab said: [The order is] Yaknah;14 Samuel said: [The order is] Yanhak;15
(1) The difficulty is on R. Jose's view only. But on R. Judah's, since the meal must be interrupted and the table removed, it is natural that two separate cups should be required for kiddush and Grace.
(2) Grace is here designated a ‘sanctity’: i.e., Grace and kiddush are two distinct religious duties, and therefore they require separate cups.
(3) Lit. , ‘bundles’. I.e. , each requires separate attention.
(4) As is done at the termination of the Sabbath. Kiddush and habdalah are both recited over wine; a blessing is pronounced over light because it is then that light was created, v. Supra 54a; spices are inhaled on the termination of the Sabbath to compensate for the loss of the superior (‘additional’) soul with which man is endowed on the Sabbath, Rashbam and Tosaf. a.l. and in Bez. 33b.
(5) Habdalah, being longer, is left to the last.
(6) Or perhaps, ‘until after grace’, מזון being elliptical for ברכת המזון
(7) Lit., ‘he chains them together after it’. Thus two religious acts are combined.
(8) This is assumed to refer to the first evening of Passover, when, as stated supra 99b, even the poorest man was provided with four cups of wine.
(9) This is a mnemonic: Y == Yayin (wine); K == kiddush; N == Ner (light, i.e., a blessing over light); and H == Habdalah thus kiddush and habdalah are both recited over the same cup.
(10) The benediction ‘who hast kept us alive and preserved us and enabled us to reach this season’. This is recited on the first night (in the Diaspora on the first two nights) of every Festival, as well is in certain other occasions.
(11) Kiddush must be recited then too, as it follows the Intermediate Days, which are only semi-sacred; v. p. 16, n. 4; again, if it follows the Sabbath, Habdalah also is recited.
(12) V.n. 6. Z == zeman (‘season’).
(13) Both being recited on account of the sanctity of the Festival,to which reference is made even in the habdalah
(14) Wine is first, in accordance with Beth Hillel's view in Ber. 51b that since wine is more constant it takes precedence. Kiddush precedes habdalah because it is regarded as more important; also, if he recited habdalah first, it might appear that the Sabbath were a burden to him, which he desired to end at the earliest possible moment. After kiddush the order is NH (‘light’ and habdalah), this being the usual order at the conclusion of the Sabbath.
(15) Samuel gives precedence to habdalah over kiddush; the reason is stated infra 103a in the illustration on the ruling of R. Joshua b. Hananiah.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 103a
Rabbah said: Yahnak;1 Levi said: Kanyah;2 the Rabbis said: Kiynah;3 ‘ Mar the son of Rabina said: Nakyah;4 Martha said in R. Joshua's name: Niyhak.5
Samuel's father sent to Rabbi: Let our Master teach us what is the order of habdaloth.6 He sent [back] to him: Thus did R. Ishmael b. R. Jose say, speaking in the name of his father who said it on the authority of R. Joshua b. Hananiah: [The order is] Nahiyk.7 R. Hanina said: R. Joshua b. Hananiah's [ruling] may be compared to a king who departs [from a place] and governor who enters: [first] you escort the king [out], and then you go forth to greet the governor.8 What is our decision thereon? — Abaye said: [The order is] Yakaznah;9 while Raba maintained: Yaknehaz.10 And the law is as Raba.
R. Huna b. Judah visited Raba's home. Light and spices were brought before them, [whereupon] Raba recited a blessing over the spices first and then one over the light. Said he to him: But both Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel [agree that] light comes first and then spices? And to what is this [allusion]?For we learned: Beth Shammai maintain. Light and Grace [after meals], spices and habdalah;11 while Beth Hillel rule: Light and spices, Grace and habdalah!12 Thereat Raba answered: These are the words of R. Meir; but R. Judah said: Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel did not differ about Grace, [agreeing] that it comes at the beginning and about habdalah, that it comes at the end. About what do they differ? About light and spices. Beth Shammai maintain: Light [first] and then spices; while Beth Hillel rule: Spices [first] and then light; and R. Johanan said [thereon]: The people act in accordance with Beth Hillel as interpreted by R. Judah.
R. Jacob b. Abba visited Raba's home. He saw him recite the blessings ‘who createst the fruit of the vine over the first cup, and then he recited a blessing over the cup of Grace13 and drank it. Said he to him: ‘Why do you need all this? Surely, sir, you have [already] recited a blessing for us once?’ ‘When we were at the Resh Galutha's14 we did thus,’ replied he. ‘It is well that we did this at the Resh Galutha's,’ said he, ‘because there was a doubt whether they would bring us [more wine] or they would not bring us [more].15 But here, surely the [second] cup stands before us and we have it in mind?’ ‘I acted in accordance with Rab's disciples ‘ he replied. For R. Beruna and R. Hananel, disciples of Rab, were sitting at a meal,
(1) He agrees with Rab that Ner (light) interposes between kiddush and habdalah, because it is illogical to recite them consecutively, since they are mutually contradictory, as it were, kiddush declaring that the day is sacred, whereas habdalah declares that it is not as sacred as the Sabbath. He also agrees with Samuel that habdalah comes before kiddush, and he places wine (Yayin) at the head of all, for the reason stated on p. 541, n. 10.
(2) He too puts kiddush before habdalah, but holds that if wine is put at the beginning, the interval between it and habdalah will be so great that it may appear that the habdalah is not being recited over wine, which is essential. But kiddush need not be in immediate proximity to the wine, since it may be recited over bread too. For that reason too Ner
(light) precedes the wine, so that the latter may be nearer to habdalah than to kiddush. — Rashbam transposes these last two views, mainly on the basis of J.T.
(3) They too place kiddush before habdalah. Hence we commence with kiddush, and then recite habdalah in its usual order, which is yayin (wine), Ner (light) and habdalah.
(4) He too places kiddush before habdalah, and also holds that wine must come near habdalah. But just as Ner generally precedes habdalah, because he enjoys the light first, so must it precede kiddush. Again, it cannot be recited between wine and habdalah, so that the wine should precede it, in accordance with the usual practice, because that would cause an interruption between the wine and the habdalah.
(5) He places habdalah before kiddush for the reason stated anon. He then puts wine before habdalah, for since that is immediately followed by kiddush, the wine is accounted for both, which is as it should be. For both kiddush and habdalah should be recited over wine in the first place, though the former is permitted over bread where wine is not available. Again, he puts wine before habdalah and kiddush instead of between them, since wine generally precedes. Furthermore, since Ner generally precedes habdalah, for the reason stated in the last note, it must now come at the very beginning.
(6) The pl. of habdalah employed generically.
(7) V. preceding note. He however places wine between habdalah and kiddush, so that it should really be near to both.
(8) The Sabbath, whose sanctity is greater, is the king; the Festival is the governor. Hence we first bid farewell to the Sabbath with habdalah and then welcome the Festival with kiddush.
(9) Yayin (wine), Kiddush, Zeman (season), Ner (light) and Habdalah.
(10) Yayin, Kiddush, Ner, Habdalah, and Zeman.
(11) This order is followed at the conclusion of the Sabbath if there is sufficient for one cup only.
(12) V. Ber. 51b.
(13) He recited Grace after meals over a second cup, and after Grace he recited the blessing for wine over it. — This is the present practice.
(14) V. Glos.
(15) Hence when we recited a blessing over the first cup we did not think of a second, which therefore constituted a fresh act of drinking, and so the blessing had to be repeated.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 103b
[and] R. Yeba Saba1 waited on them. Said they to him, ‘Give us [wine] and we will say Grace.’ Subsequently2 they said, ‘Give us [wine] and we will drink.’3 Said he to them, ‘Thus did Rab say: Once you have said, "Give us [wine] and we will say Grace, It is forbidden to you to drink.4 What is the reason? Because you let it pass out of your minds.’5
Amemar and Mar Zutra and R. Ashi were sitting at a meal and R. Aha the son of Raba waited on them. Amemar recited a separate blessing for each cup; Mar Zutra recited a blessing over the first cup and over the last cup;6 [but] R. Ashi recited a blessing over the first cup and no more. Said R. Aha b. Raba to them: in accordance with whom are we to act?-Amemar replied: I made a [fresh] decision [each time] .7 Mar Zutra replied: I acted in accordance with Rab's disciples. But R. Ashi maintained: The law is not as Rab's disciples for surely when a Festival falls after the Sabbath, Rab ruled: [The order is] Yaknah.8 But that is not so: there9 he had detached his mind from drinking;10 [whereas] here he had not detached his mind from drinking.
When he came to perform habdalah,11 his attendant arose and kindled a torch at a lamp.12 Said he to him, ‘Why take all this trouble? Surely the lamp is standing before us!’13 ‘My servant has acted of his own accord,’ replied he. ‘Had he not heard it thus from you,’14 he retorted, ‘he would not have done it.’ Said he to him: ‘Do you then not hold, [To employ] a torch for habdalah is the best way of performing the precept?’
Then he commenced [habdalah] and recited: ‘He who makes a distinction between holy and non-holy, between light and darkness, between Israel and the nations, between the seventh day and the six working days.’ Said he to him: ‘Why do you need all this? Surely Rab Judah said in Rab's name: “He who makes a distinction between holy and non-holy," was the formula of habdalah as recited by R. Judah ha-Nasi?’ ‘I hold with the following,’ answered he. ‘For R. Eleazar said in R. Oshaia's name: He who would recite but few [distinctions] must recite not less than three; while he who would add, must not add beyond seven.15 Said he to him:
(1) The elder; or, aged.
(2) Before reciting Grace.
(3) They changed their mind and did not wish to recite Grace yet.
(4) Until after grace.
(5) This proves that Grace constitutes an interruption, and so the blessing over the wine must be repeated after Grace; and Raba acted in accordance with this ruling.
(6) I.e., after Grace, as Raba did.
(7) After each cup I intended drinking, no more. Hence when I did drink another it was a new act of drinking, and so I repeated the blessing each time. Consequently my action does not involve a general ruling.
(8) V. supra p. 541, n. 10. Thus the benediction for wine is not recited twice, one on account of kiddush and again on account of habdalah. Hence the same applies to two cups in general.
(9) Where Rab ruled that once they had declared their intention of saying Grace they might not drink again without blessing.
(10) His decision to say Grace proved that.
(11) This is a continuation of the passage narrating .R. Jacob b. Aha's visit to Raba, which had been parenthetically interrupted by the somewhat similar story about Amemar and his companions. The meal in question took place toward the end of the Sabbath, and at the termination of the Sabbath Raba performed habdalah.
(12) For the blessing over light.
(13) Then let the blessing for light be said over the lamp itself.
(14) ‘The Master’.
(15) I.e., not less than three points of distinction and not more than seven must be recited in the habdalah.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 104a
‘But you said neither three nor seven?’1
‘It is true,’ answered he, ‘"between the seventh day and the six working days" is of the nature of the conclusion,2 and Rab Judah said Samuel's name: He who recites habdalah must say [something] in the nature of the conclusion near to its conclusion. While the Pumbeditheans maintain: [He must say something] in the nature of the commencement just before its conclusion. Wherein do they differ?3 — They differ in respect of a Festival which falls after the Sabbath [i.e., Sunday], when we conclude with ‘[Who makest a distinction] between holy and holy.’4 On the view that something in the nature of the commencement [must be repeated] immediately before the conclusion, it will be unnecessary to say, ‘Thou didst make a distinction between the sanctity of the Sabbath and the sanctity of the Festival’;5 but on the view that [a formula] in the nature of the conclusion [must be said] immediately before the conclusion, it is necessary to say, ‘Thou didst make a distinction between the sanctity of the Sabbath and the sanctity of the Festival.’
The [above] text [stated]: ‘R. Eleazer said in R. Oshaia's name: He who would recite but few [distinctions] must recite not less than three; while he who would add must not add beyond seven.’ An objection is raised: Habdalah is recited at the conclusion of the Sabbath, at the conclusion of Festivals, at the conclusion of the Day of Atonement, at the conclusion of the Sabbath [giving place] to a Festival, and at the conclusion of a Festival [giving place] to the Intermediary Days,6 but not at the conclusion of a Festival [leading] to the Sabbath.’7 He who is well-versed recites many [points of distinction], while he who is not well-versed recites one? — It is [dependent on] Tannaim. For R. Johanan said: The son of holy men recited one, but the people are accustomed to recite three.8 Who is the son of holy men? — R. Menahem b. Simai; and why did they call him the son of holy men? Because he did not look at the effigy of a coin.9 R. Samuel b. Idi sent [word] to him:10 ‘My brother Hanania recites one.’ But the law does not agree with him. R. Joshua b. Levi said: he who recites habdalah must recite [formulas] in the nature of the distinctions mentioned in the Torah.11 An objection is raised: What is the order of the distinctions [recited in the habdalah]? He recites, ‘Who makest a distinction between holy and profane, between light and darkness, between Israel and the nations, between the seventh day and the six working days, between unclean and clean, between the sea and dry land, between the upper waters and the nether waters, between Priests, Levites and Israelites’; and the concludes with the order of Creation.12 Others say, with ‘he who formed the Creation.’ R. Jose b. R. Judah said: He concludes, ‘Who sanctifiest Israel.’ Now if this is correct, surely no distinction is mentioned [in the Torah] between the sea and the dry land?13 — Delete ‘between the sea and the dry land’ from this. If so, [you must] also [delete] ‘between the seventh day and the six working days’?14 — That corresponds to the conclusion,15 Then there is one less’ so there are not seven?16 -I will tell you: [who made a distinction between] Priests, Levites and Israelites is two formulas. between Levites and Israelites [is one], as it is written, At that time the lord made distinct the tribe of Levi.17 Between Priests and Levites [is another], as It is written, The sons of Amram: Aaron and Moses; and Aaron was made distinct that he should be sanctified as most holy.18
How does he conclude it? — Rab said: ‘Who sanctifiest Israel.’ While Samuel said: ‘Who makest a distinction, between holy and non-holy,’ Abaye, — others state, R. Joseph — denounced19 this [ruling] of Rab. It was taught in the name of R. Joshua b. Hanania: When one concludes, ‘Who sanctifiest Israel and makest a distinction between holy and non-holy,’ his days and years are prolonged.
(1) But four.
(2) Habdalah ends with, ‘Blessed art thou, O Lord, who makest a division between holy and non-holy’. This phrase, ‘between the seventh day’ etc. is similar in meaning, and forms a natural bridge to the conclusion, as it were; hence it is not counted. — All benedictions commence with the formula, ‘Blessed art thou, O Lord, our God, King of the universe’; if lengthy, they conclude with the formula, ‘Blessed art thou, O Lord, who ‘etc. It is this latter formula which is referred to as the conclusion.
(3) Seeing that in most blessings the’ opening and the conclusion are similar in subject. Habdalah itself commences with ‘He who maketh a distinction between holy and non.holy’, while the passage preceding the conclusion is likewise ‘who makest a division between the seventh day (i.e., holy) and the six working days (non-holy)’.
(4) Since both are holy, save that the holiness of the Sabbath is greater.
(5) Since the opening phrase is ‘Who makest a distinction between holy and non-holy’.
(6) V. p. 16, n. 4. — Most of these phrases are in the plural in the original.
(7) thus habdalah is recited only to mark the passing of a day of higher sanctity than that which follows, but not the reverse.
(8) This ‘son of holy men was a Tanna, while the common practice was likewise based on the ruling of a Tanna. Thus we have a controversy of Tannaim.
(9) V. A.Z. 50a. ‘Son’ is probably used attributively, R. Menahem himself being holy (v. M.K. 25b on the effect of his death); nevertheless this mode of expression is employed because this father too was holy. — Tosaf.
(10) [It is not clear to whom this refers.]
(11) As explained anon.
(12) I.e., ‘Blessed art thou, O Lord, who settest the Creation in order’.
(13) I.e., no phrase with the express term ‘distinction
(14) For no phrase states that God made a ‘distinction’ between the seventh day etc.
(15) And is therefore not counted.
(16) Whereas the purpose of this Baraitha is to enumerate the seven formulas of distinction referred to above.
(17) Deut. X, 8.
(18) I Chron. XXIII, 13.
(19) Lit., ‘cursed’.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 104b
But the law is not as he.1 ‘Ulla visited Pumbeditha. Said Rab Judah to R. Isaac his son, ‘Go and offer him a basket of fruit, and observe how he recites habdalah.2 He did not go, [however, but] sent Abaye. When Abaye returned, he [R. Isaac] asked him, ‘What did he say [in the habdalah]?’ ‘Blessed is He who maketh a distinction between holy and profane,’ replied he, ‘and nothing else.’ When he came before his father he asked him, ‘How did he recite it?’ ‘I did not go myself,’ replied he, ‘[but] I sent Abaye, and he told me [that he recited] " ‘ . . who makest a distinction between holy and profane".’ Said he to him, ‘Your pride and your haughtiness are the cause that you are unable to state the law from his own mouth.’
An objection is raised: In all blessings you commence with ‘blessed [art Thou’] and conclude with ‘blessed [art Thou],’ except in the blessings over precepts,3 the blessings over fruits,4 a blessing immediately preceding5 another, and the last blessing of the reading of the Shema’;6 in some of these you commence with ‘Blessed’ but do not conclude with ‘Blessed’, while in others you conclude with ‘Blessed’ but do not commence with ‘Blessed’; and [in the blessing] ‘Who is good and doeth good [unto all]’7 you commence with ‘Blessed’ but do not conclude with ‘Blessed’.8
(1) A double ending is not employed, and the law is as Samuel.
(2) Make this an excuse for staying with him, so that you observe him reciting habdalah.
(3) A blessing is recited before the fulfilment of every precept.
(4) I.e., which are recited before eating or drinking; ‘fruits’ is employed generically and includes such items as bread, water, vegetables etc.
(5) Lit., ‘near to’.
(6) The morning Shema’ (v. Glos.) is preceded by two long benedictions and followed by one; the evening Shema’ is followed by two.
(7) This is the third blessing (if the three which constitute Grace after Meals; v. Singer's Prayer Book pp. 280-285 for the whole, and p. 283 for the blessing immediately proceeding
(8) The blessings for precepts and fruits are generally short, and therefore ‘Blessed’ is not repeated at the conclusion. Blessings immediately ‘preceding others: e.g., those of the Amidah (the ‘Eighteen Benedictions’). As each ends with the formula, ‘Blessed art Thou, O Lord, who’ etc., the following does not commence with ‘Blessed’. Similarly, the blessing immediately preceding the Shema’ concludes with ‘Blessed’ etc., and the Shema’ together with the blessing which follows it is regarded as one long blessing; hence that too does not commence with ‘Blessed’. (That benediction itself ends with ‘Blessed art Thou’, etc.; hence the fourth one recited in the evening — v. n. 5 — which follows immediately after, likewise does not commence with ‘blessed’.) The third blessing of Grace after meals, though immediately following a conclusion containing the formula, ‘Blessed art Thou, O Lord’, etc., commence with ‘Blessed’, notwithstanding the above general rule, because it was instituted in memory of the Jews slain at Bethar in 135 C.E. which marked the ‘disastrous end of the Bar Cochba revolt; hence it was regarded as quite distinct and apart from the rest. It is indeed a lengthy benediction, but as much of it consists of synonyms for God it would be unfitting to repeat ‘Blessed art Thou’ in the conclusion.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 105a
Now this raises a difficulty according to ‘Ulla?1 — ‘Ulla can answer you: This too is like a blessing for precepts. [For] what is the reason in the case of a blessing over precepts?2 Because It is [mere] praise;3 this too is praise.4
R. Hanania b. Shelemia and the disciples of Rab were sitting at a meal, and R. Hamnuna Saba5 was waiting on them. Said they to him, ‘Go and see if the day has become holy,6 in which case we will interrupt [the meal]7 and appoint it for the Sabbath.’8 ‘You do not need it,’ he replied; ‘the Sabbath itself makes it an appointed [meal].9 For Rab said: Just as the Sabbath makes [it an] appointed [meal] in respect of tithe,10 so does the Sabbath make [it an] appointed [meal] in respect of kiddush.’11 Now they understood from him: just as it makes [it an] appointed [meal] in respect of kiddush, so does it make [it an] appointed [meal] in respect of habdalah.12 Said R. Amram to them, thus did Rab say: It makes [it an] appointed [meal] in respect of kiddush, but it does not make [it an] appointed [meal] in respect of habdalah.13 But that is only in respect of interrupting [the meal], viz., that we do not interrupt [it]; we may not however commence [one].;14 And even about interrupting we said this with respect to eating only, but not with respect to drinking.15 And with respect to drinking too we said this only of wine and beer: but as for water, it does not matter.16
Now he differs from R. Huna. For R. Huna saw a certain man drinking water before habdalah, [whereupon] he observed to him Are you not afraid of choking?17 For it was taught in R. Akiba's name: He who tastes anything before reciting habdalah shall die through choking.18 The Rabbis of R. Ashi's academy were not particular about water.
Rabina asked R. Nahman b. Isaac: He who did not recite kiddush on the eve of the Sabbath,19 can he proceed to recite kiddush at any time of the day?20 — Said he to him: Since the sons of R. Hiyya said, he who did not recite habdalah at the termination of the Sabbath can proceed to recite habdalah the whole week, [it follows that] there too, he who did not recite kiddush on the eve of the Sabbath can proceed to recite kiddush at any time of the day. He raised an objection to him: On the nights of the Sabbath and on the nights of a Festival there is sanctification [kiddush] over the cup [of wine] and a reference [to the Sabbath or Festival] in the Grace after meals.21 On the Sabbath and a Festival22 there is no sanctification over a cup [of wine], but there is a reference in the Grace after meals. Now if you should think that he who did not recite kiddush on the eve of the Sabbath can proceed to recite kiddush the whole day, then on the Sabbath and festival [during the day] too there may be sanctification over the cup, ‘or if he did not recite kiddush in the evening, he recites kiddush on the morrow?-Said he to him: He [the Tanna] does not teach a case of ‘if’.
He raised an objection to him: [If a man must choose between] the honour of the day and the honour of the night,23 the honour of the day takes precedence; and if he has only one cup [of wine], he recites
(1) Why did he not conclude habdalah with blessed’ etc.?
(2) That we do not conclude with ‘blessed.’
(3) It contains nothing else, and is consequently short.
(4) To God, for having made a distinction between holy and profane, and it does not treat of any other subject.
(5) The aged, or the Elder.
(6) I.e. if the Sabbath has commenced.
(7) By removing the tables; v. supra p. 533, n. 7.
(8) By removing the table and then bringing it back the meal would be specially appointed as being one account of the Sabbath. (Three meals must be eaten on the Sabbath, and probably they wished to signify that this, though started before, should count as one.)
(9) Since you must pause to recite kiddush, that itself gives it the character of an appointed meal for the Sabbath.
(10) A man may make a light meal, but not a full (‘appointed’) meal of untithed produce before it is completely ready and subject to tithe. (Produce is not subject to tithe until it has been harvested, threshed and carried in through the front of the house, v. B.M., Sonc. ed. p. 507f.) But the Sabbath, confers upon every meal, even if light, the character of a full, appointed meal, so that untithed produce is then forbidden.
(11) Nothing whatsoever may be eaten before kiddush; thus we see that the Sabbath automatically makes it a Sabbath meal.
(12) One must not eat at the conclusion of the Sabbath before habdalah. They understood that if a man commences during the day, the conclusion of the Sabbath automatically renders what follows an appointed meal, which is forbidden before habdalah, hence habdalah must be recited in the middle of the meal.
(13) For having commenced the meal on the Sabbath, he honours the Sabbath by concluding it without interruption, even if it continues beyond nightfall.
(14) Even a light meal before habdalah.
(15) Drinking must be interrupted for habdalah.
(16) Drinking water is of such slight consequence that it is permitted before habdalah. Drinking wine and beer however, occupies an intermediate position: it is sufficiently unimportant to be interrupted for habdalah, but too important to start after nightfall before habdalah.
(17) This was a rebuke.
(18) Through being unable to catch his breath.
(19) I.e., at the very commencement of the Sabbath’ immediately after nightfall. Perhaps the phrase, eve of the Sabbath’ indicates that the kiddush was slightly advanced, so as to avert the possibility of commencing the Sabbath too late; cf. O.H. 271, 1 and אברהם מגן a.l.
(20) Sc. the Sabbath.
(21) Special passages are inserted.
(22) I.e., during the daytime.
(23) The Sabbath is honoured by indulging in more drink and special dainties; here he lacks sufficient for additions at all meals, and must choose between them.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 105b
the kiddush of the day over it,1 because the kiddush of the day takes precedence over the honour of the day. Now if this is correct,2 let him leave it until the morrow and do both with it?3 -A religious duty is [more] precious [when performed] at the proper time.
Yet do we say, A religious duty is [more] precious [when performed] at the proper time?4 Surely it was taught: He who enters his house on the termination of the Sabbath recites blessings over the while, the light and the spices, and then he recites habdalah over the cup [of wine]. But if he has one cup only, he leaves it until after the meal and recites then all together after it.5 Thus we do not say, A religious duty is [more] precious at the proper time? — Said he to him, ‘I am neither a self-pretended scholar6 nor a visionary [i.e., story-teller] nor unique [in this ruling], but I am a teacher and systematizer of traditions,7 and they rule thus in the Beth Hamidrash as I do; we draw a distinction between ushering the day in and ushering the day out: as for ushering the day in, the more we advance it the better, as we thereby show our love for it; but as for ushering the day out, we delay it, so that it may not be [appear] a burden upon us.8
You may infer eight things from this Baraitha: [i] He who recites habdalah during the prayer9 must [also] recite habdalah over the cup [of wine];10 [ii] Grace [after meals] requires a cup [of wine]; [iii] the cup [of wine] for Grace demands a [minimum] standard;11 [iv] he who says a blessing [over anything] must partake thereof;12 [v] if he tastes it he renders it defective;13 [vi] even when one has tasted [food] he recites habdalah;14
(1) I.e., kiddush on Friday evenings, which marks the sanctification of the whole day. But he must not leave it for drinking during the meal.
(2) Viz., R. Nahman's ruling.
(3) Kiddush, and pay honour to the day by drinking some of it during a meal.
(4) Even in such a case, where by postponing it an additional purpose is served.
(5) V. supra 102b notes.
(6) I have not said this on my own authority.
(7) The translation follows Jast. V.
(8) Hence kiddush is said as early as possible, and it may not be deferred for the morrow. But we willingly delay the habdalah.
(9) To Amidah or the Eighteen Benedictions, which constitute the Prayer par excellence; a habdalah formula is inserted in the fourth benediction.
(10) For ‘he who enters his house’ implies that he has seen away from home, presumably at the synagogue, where he would already have recited habdalah in the Amidah of the evening service.
(11) Viz., a quarter of log (rebi'ith). Otherwise, he could use half for habdalah and half for Grace.
(12) Either he or one of the listeners. For otherwise he could recite habdalah over the cup of wine and leave it untouched for Grace.
(13) it is now assumed that he had more than one rebi'ith, but not two. Hence he could perform habdalah, drink the excess, and leave a rebi'ith for Grace. Since this is not done, it follows that merely by drinking a little of the whole cup it becomes unfit for Grace.
(14) There is a contrary view infra 106b, q.v. Here we see that when there is insufficient wine, he has his meal and then recites habdalah.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 106a
[vii] you may recite two sanctities over the same cup;1 and [viii] this is [the ruling of] Beth Shammai as interpreted by R. Judah.2 R. Ashi said: [The deductions that] if he tastes it he renders it defective, and that the cup of Grace requires a [minimum] standard, are the same thing,3 and this is what he Says: What is the reason that once he tastes of it he renders it defective? Because the cup of Grace requires a [minimum] standard. R. Jacob b. Idi objected to a defective pitcher. R. Idi b. Shisha objected to a defective cup. Mar b. R. Ashi objected even to a defective barrel.4
Our Rabbis taught: Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy:5 remember it over wine.6 I know it only of the day; whence do we know it of the night?7 Because it is stated, ‘remember the Sabbath day, to keep; it holy.’ [You ask], ‘Whence do we know it of the night?’ — on the contrary, the principal kiddush is recited at night, for when he sanctifies, he must sanctify [from] the beginning of the day. Moreover, [you say,] ‘whence do we know it of the night? Because it is stated, "remember the sabbath day to keep it holy"- the Tanna seeks [proof] for the night, while he adduces a verse relating to the day[time]? — This is what he means: ‘Remember the Sabbath, day, to keep it holy’: remember it over the wine at its commencement.8 I know it only of the night: whence do we know it of the day? Because it is said, ‘Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
What blessing does he recite by day?9 -Said Rab Judah: ...who createst the fruit of the vine.10 R. Ashi visited Mahuza.11 Said they [the Mahuzaeans] to him, let the master recite the Great kiddush for us.’ They gave him [the cup of wine]. Now he pondered, What is the Great kiddush? Let us see, he reasoned, for all blessings [of kiddush] we first say ‘. . . who createst the fruit of the vine’12 [So] he recited’. . .who createst the fruit of the vine,’ and tarried over it,13 [and then] he saw an old man bend [his head] and drink. Thereupon he applied to himself [the verse], The wise man, his eyes are in his head.14
The sons of R. Hiyya Said: He who did not recite habdalah at the termination of the Sabbath proceeds to recite habdalah anytime during the week. And, until when?-Said R. Zera: Until the fourth day of the week.15 Even as R. Zera sat before R. Assi — others state, R. Assi sat before R. Johanan — and he sat and stated: In respect to divorces the first day of the week, the second, and the third [are defined as] after the Sabbath; the fourth, the fifth, and the eve of the [Sabbath] day [rank as] before the Sabbath.16 R. Jacob b. Idi said: But [he does] not [recite a blessing] over the light.17 R. Beruna said in Rab's name:
(1) habdalah and Grace are two separate sanctities. i.e., religious duties.
(2) That the blessing for light precedes that of spices, for Beth Hillel reverse it (supra 103a). It cannot be the ruling of Beth Hillel as interpreted by R.Meir, for on that view the blessing for light precedes Grace, whereas this Baraitha states that the blessings are recited after Grace.
(3) I.e., tasting it renders it unfit only when less than the minimum quantity is thereby left; otherwise it would remain fit.
(4) A small barrel is meant. If kiddush or habdalah was recited over wine contained in one of these, they insisted that it should be full.
(5) Ex. XX, 8.
(6) Kiddush, whereby the Sabbath is remembered,’ must be recited over wine.
(7) That kiddush must be recited Friday evening over wine.
(8) ‘To keep it holy’ implies that it is to be ‘remembered,’ i.e,, sanctified, by kiddush, when the holiness of the day commences, which is in the evening.
(9) It is stated Supra 105a that kiddush (‘sanctification) is not recited by day.
(10) I.e., no special benediction apart from the usual one recited over wine.
(11) V. p. 20 ,n. 5.
(12) Hence it would be fitting for that to be called the Great kiddush, since it is recited on every occasion.
(13) He paused before drinking it in order to see whether this was deemed sufficient for the kiddush by day.
(14) Eccl. II, 14.
(15) Exclusive. From the fourth day onward the days are counted with the following Sabbath, and it would be inappropriate to recite habdalah then for the preceding Sabbath.
(16) E.g., if a man divorces his wife on condition that she performs a certain acton after a particular Sabbath, it must be done not later than the third day following; if he stipulates, before the Sabbath, Wednesday, Thursday, or Friday are meant.
(17) When he recites habdalah later in the week. Rashbam: the reason is presumably because the blessing for light can be recited only at the termination of the Sabbath (v. supra 54a), since it was then created for the first time.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 106b
He who washes his hands [before eating]1 must not recite kiddush.2 Said R. Isaac b. Samuel b. Martha to them: Rab has not yet died3 and we have [already] forgotten his ruling! I stood many times before Rab: sometimes he preferred bread [and] recited kiddush over bread; at others he preferred wine [and] recited kiddush over wine.4
R. Huna said in Rab's name: Once he has tasted [food] he must not recite kiddush.5 R. Hana b. Hinena asked R. Huna: May he who has tasted [food] recite habdalah?6 I maintain, replied he, [that] he who has tasted [food] recites habdalah. But R. Assi said: He who has tasted [food] may not recite habdalah.
R. Jeremiah b. Abba visited R. Assi. He forgot himself and ate something. [ Then] they gave him a cup [of wine] and he recited habdalah. Said his [R. Assi's] wife to him [R. Assi]: But you7 do not act thus? Leave him, replied he; he holds as his teacher.8
R. Joseph said in Samuel's name: He who has tasted [food] may not recite kiddush; he who has tasted [food] may not recite habdalah. But Rabbah said in R. Nahman's name in Samuel's name: He who has tasted [food] does recite kiddush; and he who has tasted [food] does recite habdalah ‘
(1) The hands must be washed before partaking of a meal at which bread is eaten, and there must be no interruption between the washing and the eating of some bread.
(2) Before breaking bread-kiddush, of course, comes first — , as it constitutes an interruption, and he discharges his own duty thereby. If he does recite kiddush, he must wash again before eating.
(3) Lit., Rab's soul has not yet gone to rest.’ — Or perhaps: Rab has only just died.
(4) Rashi and Rashbam: if he was very hungry he would wash and recite kiddush over the bread and immediately eat it. This proves that the reciting of kiddush is not an interruption and does not necessitate washing again. R. Tam: sometimes he preferred bread (being very hungry) and recited kiddush (over wine) with the intention of eating bread immediately after it (על can bear this meaning); hence he must have washed before kiddush, and as we see, another washing is unnecessary.
(5) In the evening, but just wait for the morrow.
(6) That evening — sc. at the termination of the Sabbath — , or must he to wait for the morrow.
(7) Lit., ‘the Master.’
(8) Sc. Rab, in whose name R. Huna gave his ruling.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 107a
Raba said: The law is: He who has tasted [food] recites kiddush, and he who has tasted [food] recites habdalah Again, he who does not recite kiddush on the eve of the Sabbath proceeds to recite kiddush any time during the Sabbath, until the termination of the Sabbath. He who did not recite habdalah at the termination of the Sabbath proceeds to recite habdalah and time during the week.1 Amemar commenced this ruling of a Raba in the following version: The law is: He who has tasted [food] recites kiddush, he who has tasted [food] recites habdalah; he who did not recite kiddush on the eve of the Sabbath proceeds to recite kiddush at any time of the day. He who did not recite habdalah proceeds to recite habdalah the whole day.2 Mar Yanuka and Mar Kashisha the sons of R. Hisda3 said to R. Ashi: Amemar once visited our town: lacking wine, we brought him beer [for habdalah], but he would not recite habdalah [over it], ‘and passed the night fasting.’4 The next day we took trouble to procure wine for him, whereupon he recited habdalah and ate something. The following year he again visited our town, [and] we offered him beer. Said he, ‘If so, it is the wine of the country’;5 [so] he recited habdalah and ate a little. This proves three things; [i] [Even] he who recites habdalah in the Prayer must recite habdalah over a cup [of wine];6 [ii] a man must not eat until he has recited habdalah; and [iii] he who did not recite habdalah at the termination of the Sabbath proceeds to recite habdalah any time during the week.
R. Hisda asked R. Huna:7 Is it permitted to recite kiddush over beer? Said he to him, Seeing that I asked Rab, and Rab asked R. Hiyya, and R. Hiyya asked Rabbi about pirzuma,8 fig [-beverage], and asne,9 and he could not resolve it for him, can there be a question about [barley] beer! Now it was understood from him: kiddush indeed may not be recited over it, yet we can recite habdalah over it. Said R. Hisda to them, Thus did Rab say: Just as you may not recite kiddush over it, so may you not recite habdalah over it. It was stated too’ R. Tahlifa b. Abdimi said in Samuel's name: Just as you may not recite kiddush over it, so may you not recite habdalah over it. Levi sent to Rabbi beer strained thirteenfold.10 On tasting it he found it well-flavoured. Said he: ‘Over such as this it is fitting to recite kiddush and to utter all the psalms and praises in the world.’ At night it caused him pains. Said he: ‘Seeing that it chastises us, shall it propitiate!’11
R. Joseph said: I will vow in the presence of a multitude12 not to drink beer. Raba said: I would drink flaxwater,13 yet I would not drink beer. Raba also said: His drink shall be but beer who recites kiddush over beer.14 Rab found R. Huna15 reciting kiddush over beer. Said he to him: ‘Abba16 has begun to acquire istiri17 with beer. ‘18
Our Rabbis taught: You recite kiddush over wine only, and you say a blessing over wine only. Do we then not recite the blessing, ‘by whose word all things exist’ over beer and water? — Said Abaye, this is what he means: You do not say, ‘bring a cup of blessing to say Grace [after meals],’ over aught except wine.
Our Rabbis taught: You do not recite kiddush over beer. On the authority of R. Eleazar son of R. Simeon they said: You can recite kiddush [over it]. The tasting of wine [demands] but a small quantity.19 R. Jose b. Judah said: [At least] a mouthful. R. Huna said in Rab's name, an thus did R. Gidal of Naresh20 learn: He who recites kiddush and drinks a mouthful [of the wine] as discharged [his duty]; if not, he has not discharged [his duty]. it. Nahman b. Isaac said: I recite this [name] neither [as] Gidal b. Menassia nor Gidal b. Manyomi, but simply Gidal. What difference does that make? — In respect of opposing [one statement] of his to [another statement] of his.21
CLOSE TO MINHAH. The scholars asked: Did we learn, CLOSE TO the great MINHAH, or perhaps we learned, CLOSE TO the lesser "MINHAH?22 Did we learn, CLOSE to the great MINHAH, the reason being on account of the Passover-offering, lest he come to prolong [the meal]
(1) V. supra 106a.
(2) Viz., Sunday, but not the whole week.
(3) Yanuka means youth; Kashisha, old age. Some accordingly translate: the younger add the elder sons of R. Hisda respectively. Others however translate: The son born to R. Hisda in his youth and the son born in his old age, i.e., the elder and the younger sons of R. Hisda respectively. Rashi and Keth. 89b s.v. מר and Tosaf. in B.B. 7b s.v. מר
(4) Dan. VI, 19. He would not eat without reciting (habdalah.
(5) Beer is evidently a popular drink and occupies the same place here that wine generally occupies elsewhere.
(6) V. Supra p. 552, n. 4.
(7) Text as emended (Bah).
(8) Jast. A beer brewed from figs,in that case it must differ from תאיני which is also a beverage made from figs, while ordinary beer is from barley. Rashi however regards pirzuma as barley beer, while ordinary beer is made from dates.
(9) Jast.: a drink made of shrubbery fruit(.?) — All these are superior to the ordinary barley beer about which R. Hisda asked.
(10) R. Han.: repeatedly strained for clarity — thirteen merely indicates many. Rashbam: beer made by pouring water on dates, then pouring the same water with its date infusion over other dates, this operation being repeated many times.
(11) Rashbam: i.e., it causes pain — is it fit to propitiate God therewith, i.e., to recite kiddush over it — surely not! Others: first it entices (by its pleasant flavour) and then it causes pain.
(12) A vow made in the presence of a multitude cannot be annulled, v. Git. 36a.
(13) I.e., water in which flax is steeped.
(14) If he grudges the money for wine, there will come a time when he can afford only beer for his general drinking.
(15) Var. lec., Rabbah b. Bar Hanah.
(16) Lit., ‘father’ — a title of respect.
(18) I.e., you have begun trading with beer, so it has become sufficiently valuable in your eyes to recite kiddush over it.
(19) He who says a blessing over wine must taste some of it (supra 105b bottom); the smallest quantity suffices.
(20) identical ‘with Nahras or Nahr-sar, on the canal of the same name, on the east bank of the Euphrates; Obermeyer, p. 307.
(21) If a statement by one of these two is found to contradict the present one, there is no difficulty, as he is not identical with either. Or perhaps: he may be identical with one of them, so that a contrary statement by the other does not prove a self-contradiction.
(22) The time for the great minhah is six and a half hours (i.e., half an hour after midday) and onwards. This is the earliest hour for the sacrificing of the evening amid (v. supra 58a). The lesser minhah is two and a half hours before nightfall.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 107b
and refrain from performing the Passover [-offering]; or perhaps we learned CLOSE TO the lesser ‘MINHAH, the reason being on account of the unleavened bread, lest he merely gorge himself with the unleavened bread?1 Said Rabina, Come and hear: Even King Agrippa2 who was accustomed to eat at nine hours, might not eat on that day until night. fall. Now it is well if you say that we learned, CLOSE TO the lesser MINHAH, Hence it is that which is noteworthy about Agrippa;3 but if you say [that] we learned, CLOSE TO the great MINHAH, what is there noteworthy about Agrippa, seeing that the interdict has [already] fallen upon him from before?4 What then? We learned, CLOSE TO the lesser MINHAH? Yet after all what is there remarkable about Agrippa: surely the the of the interdict has come!5 -You might say: Nine hours6 to Agrippa is like four hours7 to us;8 Hence he informs us [otherwise]. R. Jose9 Said: But he may make a meal10 with various sweet-meats.11 R. Isaac would make a meal with vegetables. It was taught likewise: The attendant may make a meal with the inwards,12 and he may [also] offer them to the guests. And though there is no proof of this, yet there is a hint thereof, for it is said, Break up for you a fallow ground, and sow not among thorns.13
Raba used to drink wine the whole of Passover eve, so as to whet his appetite’14 to eat more unleavened bread in the evening. Raba said: How do I know that wine whets the appetite? Because we learned:
(1) Lit., ‘.a gross eating,’ having eaten his fill beforehand.
(2) A king of the Hasmonean dynasty, who followed Rabbinical teaching.
(3) I.e., though he did not eat earlier, and at nine hours interdict has not yet commenced (for it commences just before nine and a half hours), he might nevertheless not start then, as he would probably prolong it.
(4) Surely we would not think him exempt from the interdict merely because he had not yet eaten.
(5) I.e. , about three p.m.
(6) I.e., about ten a.m.
(7) Before he finishes his meal. For even R Jose, who maintains that a man needs not interrupt the meal once he has commenced (supra 99b), admits that he must not commence a meal knowing that he will prolong it beyond the forbidden period.
(8) Since the latter hour is the general mealtime, while Agrippa did not breakfast until three p.m.
(9) Alfasi reads: Assi.
(10) Lit., ‘dip.’
(11) Fruit or meat, without bread: these were generally dipped into a relish. — The time meant is from minhah and onwards.
(12) Of an animal which he is preparing for the festival meals.
(13) Jer. IV, 3. Rashi: i.e., do not work without profit; so if a man is engaged on preparing food and is forbidden to eat thereof it causes him mental suffering. [Rashi did not seem to read: ‘and he may offer them to the guest. Rashbam and Tosaf. explain the reference to a relish prepared for whetting the appetite and the verse is quoted in illustration that the stomach must be prepared to receive food as the ground for seeds].
(14) Lit., ‘draw his heart’.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 108a
Between these cups,1 if he wishes to drink [more] he may drink; between the third and the fourth he must not drink.2 Now if you say that it [wine] satisfies, why may he drink? Surely he will merely gorge on the unleavened bread! Hence this proves that it sharpens the appetite.
R. Shesheth used to fast3 the whole of the eve of passover. Shall we say that R. Shesheth holds [that] we learned, Close TO the great MINHAH, the reason being on account of the Passover [sacrifice], lest he prolong [the meal] and refrain from performing the Passover [-offering]; and he [also] holds as R. Oshaia, who said: ‘The son of Bathyra used to declare valid the Passover [-offering] which one slaughtered in its own name4 on the morning of the fourteenth’; and from the morning it is the time for the Passover, for the whole day is the time for the Passover, as he holds, [and the whole assembly . . . shall kill it] between the evenings5 [means any time] between yesterday evening and this evening?6 — I will tell you [that is] not [so]. R. Shesheth was different, for he was delicate, and if he ate anything in the morning his food would not benefit him in the evening.7
EVEN THE POOREST MAN IN ISRAEL MUST NOT EAT UNTIL HE RECLINES. It was stated: [For the eating of] the unleavened bread reclining is necessary; for the bitter herbs reclining is not necessary.8 [As for the drinking of] the wine, — It was stated in R. Nahman's name [that] reclining is necessary, and it was stated in R. Nahman's name that reclining is not necessary. Yet they do not disagree: one [ruling] refers to the first two cups, and the other ruling refers to the last two cups. Some explain it in one direction, others explain it in the other direction. [Thus:] some explain it in one direction: for the first two cups reclining is necessary, because it is at this point that freedom commences; for the last two cups reclining is necessary, [because] what has been has been.9 Others explain it in the contrary direction: on the contrary, the last two cups necessitate reclining, [because] it is precisely then that there is freedom; the first two cups do not necessitate reclining, [because] he is still reciting ‘we were slaves.’10 Now that it was stated thus and it was stated thus, both [the first and the last ones]11 necessitate reclining. Lying on the back is not reclining; reclining on the right side is not reclining.12 Moreover he may put [his food] into the windpipe before the gullet,13 and thus endanger himself.
A woman in her husbands [house] need not recline,14 but if she is a woman of importance she must recline.15 A son in his father's [house] must recline.16 The scholars asked: What about a disciple in his teacher's presence? — Come and hear, for Abaye said: When we were at the Master's [Rabbah b. Nahman's] house, we used to recline on each other's knees. When we came to R. Joseph's house he remarked to us, ‘You do not need it: the fear of your teacher is as the fear of Heaven.’
An objection is raised: A man must recline with all [people], and even a disciple in his master's presence? — That was taught of a craftsman's apprentice.
The scholars asked: What about an attendant? — Come and hear, [or R. Joshua b. Levi said: A attendant, who ate as much as an olive of unleavened bread while reclining has discharged [his duty]. Thus, only while reclining, but not if he was not reclining. This proves that he must recline. This proves it.
R. Joshua b. Levi also said: Women are subject to [the law of] these four cups
(1) The first and second, and the second and third.
(2) The third cup is drunk in connection with grace after meals. Having died already, he has no need to drink for his appetite, and if he now drinks more he will appear to be adding to the statutory number (four) of cups. T.J. states that drink after the meal (apart from the two which are still to be drunk to make up the four) intoxicates and makes the person unfit to recite the hallel.
(3) Lit., sit in a fast’.
(4) i.e., as a Passover, and not as a different sacrifice.
(5) Ex. XII, 6 (E.V. (at dusk).
(6) I.e., the evenings commencing the fourteenth and the fifteenth. The night must be omitted, since offerings cannot be sacrifices at night. — Though of course sacrifices lead altogether ceased by the time of R. Shesheth, yet if on this view one had to fast when the temple stood, it would still be necessary, because the interdict had never formally been rescinded.
(7) I.e., he would have no appetite in the evening.
(8) the former symbolizes freedom; the latter, bondage. Bitter herbs may not be eaten while reclining.
(9) The last two cups come after the meal, by which time the whole narrative of Israel's liberation has been completed. Hence there is no need then to emphasize the theme of freedom.
(10) V. infra 116a.
(11) var. lec.: all.
(12) Since he must eat with his right hand.
(13) if he eats lying on his back may go down the wrong way.
(14) Because she stands under his authority.
(15) Isserles (O.H. 472, 4 Gloss) remarks that women nowadays are of high worth.
(16) He does not sense his father's authority so strongly.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 108b
because they too were included in that miracle.1
Rab Judah said in Samuel's name: These four cups must contain sufficient for the mixing of a generous cup.2 if he drank them raw [undiluted], he has discharged [his duty].3 If he drank them [all] at once,4 he has discharged [his duty]. If he gave his sons and household to drink of them,5 he has discharged [his duty].
‘If he drank them raw [undiluted]. he has discharged [his duty].’ Raba observed: He has discharged [his duty] of wine, but he has not discharged [his duty] of [symbolizing his] freedom.6 If he drank them [all] at once, Rab said:7 He has discharged [his duty of drinking] wine,8 [but] he has not discharged [his duty of] four cups.9 ‘If he gave his sons and household to drink of them, he has discharged [his duty]’: Said R. Nahman b. Isaac: Providing that he [himself] drank the greater part of [each] cup.
An objection is raised: These four cups must contain the standard of a rebi'ith, whether neat or diluted, whether new [wine] or old; R. Judah said: It must possess the taste and the appearance of wine. Thus it is incidentally taught.’the standard of a rebi'ith,’ whereas you say, ‘a generous cup’? — I will answer you: Both are the same standard, [for] what does he mean by ‘sufficient for the mixing of a generous cup? For each one separately [of the four cups]. which is a rebi'ith for all of them together.10
‘R. Judah said: It must possess the taste and appearance of wine. Said Raba, What is R. Judah's reason? Because it is written, Look not thou upon the wine when it is red.11
Our Rabbis taught: All are bound to [drink] the four cups, men, women, and children. Said R. Judah: Of what benefit then is wine to children? But we distribute to them
(1) Of liberation; v. Sot. 11b, where it is stated that the Israelites were redeemed as a reward to the righteous women of that generation.
(2) Their wine was too strong to be drunk neat. ‘A generous cup’ is one of sufficient quantity for Grace, viz., a rebi'ith (quarter of a log), and Rab Judah said that each of these four cups must contain enough undiluted wine to make up to a rebi'ith of diluted wine. — The usual mixture was one Part wine to three parts water.
(3) Providing that he drank a rebi'ith on each, occasion (Rashbam).
(4) Without following the order prescribed infra 114a and 116a-b.
(5) Possibly separate cups were not set for each member of the household. as is done nowadays; v. supra 99b Tosaf. s.v. לא יפחתו לו מארבע כוסות
(6) I.e., he has discharged his duty in a poor way, since drinking undiluted wine is hardly drinking at all — This does not refer to wine nowadays, which is not so strong and does not require dilution.
(7) Alfasi and Asheri omit: Rab said.
(8) V. infra 109: a man must rejoice on a Festival by drinking wine; this duty he has now discharged.
(9) But all count as one cup. and another three are necessary.
(10) I.e. , a rebi'ith of the raw wine, which when diluted will make four rebi'ith of drinkable wine, a rebi'ith for each cup.
(11) Prov. XXIII, 31. Thus it does not merit the name wine unless it has its appearance too.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 109a
parched ears of corn and nuts on the eve of Passover, so that they should not fall asleep, and ask [the ‘questions’].1 It was related of R. Akiba that he used to distribute parched ears and nuts to children on the eve of Passover, so that they might not fall asleep but ask [the ‘questions’]. It was taught, R. Eliezer said: The mazzoth are eaten hastily2 on the night of Passover, on account of the children, so that they should not fall asleep.3 It was taught: it was related of R. Akiba4 [that] never did he say in the Beth Hamidrash, ‘It is time to rise [cease study]’, except on the eve of Passover and the eve of the Day of Atonement. On the eve of Passover, because of the children, so that they might not fall asleep. On the eve of the Day of Atonement,in order that they should give food to their children.
Our Rabbis taught: A man is in duty bound to make his children and his household rejoice on a Festival, for it is said, And thou shalt rejoice it, thy feast, [thou and thy son, and thy daughter, etc.]5 Wherewith does he make them rejoice? With wine. R. Judah said: Men with what is suitable for them, and women with, what is suitable for them. ‘Men with what is suitable for them’: with wine. And women with what? R. Joseph recited: in Babylonia, with coloured garments; in Eretz Yisrael, with ironed lined garments.
It was taught, R. Judah b. Bathyra said: When the temple was in existence there could be no rejoicing save with meat, as it is said, And thou shalt sacrifice peace-offerings, and shalt eat there; and thou shalt rejoice before the Lord thy God.6 But now that the Temple is no longer in existence, there is no rejoicing save with wine, as it is said, and wine that maketh glad the heart of man.7 R. Isaac said: The xestes8 for muries in Sepphoris was about equal to the Temple log, and thereby we gauge the rebi'ith of [wine for] Passover.9 R. Johanan said: The ancient tomanta which was in Tiberias exceeded this by a quarter, and thereby we gauge the rebi'ith of [wine for] Passover. R. Hisda said: The rebi'ith of the Torah10 is [the cubic content of a vessel] two fingerbreadths square by two and seven-tenths11 fingerbreadths in depth.12 As it was taught: Then he shall bathe all his flesh in water:13 [this intimates] that nothing must interpose between his flesh and the water; ‘in water’ [means] in the water of a mikweh; ‘all his flesh’ [implies sufficient] water for his whole body to be covered therein. And how much is that?
(1) v. infra 116a Mishnah.
(2) Others: the plate containing the mazzoth is lifted, to draw the attention of the children to the unusual fare; others, the mazzoth are taken away from the children before they have eaten their fill, as a heavy meal conduces to sleep.
(3) Var. lec.: so that they should ask ‘questions’. This agrees with the first alternative translation in the preceding note. R. Han. reads both: so that they should not fall asleep but ask.
(4) In Suk. 28a this is attributed to R. Johanan b. Zakkai.
(5) Deut. XVI, 14. Presumably the proof lies in the bracketed passage, which is absent in the text. Possibly too he reads: we-Simmakta (pi'el) ‘and thou shalt cause to rejoice’ instead of we-Samakta ‘and thou shalt rejoice. Tosaf.’s reading, however, and Maharsha emends text accordingly, is: and thou shalt rejoice, thou and thy household (ib. XIV 26). This refers to the eating of the second tithe in Jerusalem, and its teaching is applied here to Festivals.
(6) Deut. XXVII, 7.
(7) Ps. CIV, 15.
(8) A measure kept as a standard; it was somewhat less than a pint.
(9) Required for the four cups.
(10) In respect to several Biblical laws a rebi'ith is specified by the Rabbis.
(11) Lit., ‘ two and a half and a fifth.’
(12) Hence the volume of a rebi'ith is 2 X 2 X 27 == 108 cubic fingerbreadths.
(13) Lev. XV, 16.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 109b
A square cubit by three cubits’ depth, and the Sages estimated the standard of the water of a mikweh at forty se'ahs.1
R. Ashi said: Rabin b. Hinena told me, The Table in the Sanctuary was jointed.2 For if you should think that it was [permanently] fastened, how could one immerse a cubit in a cubit?3 What difficulty is this! Perhaps it was immersed in the sea which Solomon made. For R. Hiyya taught: The sea which Solomon made held one hundred and fifty clean [i.e., regulation-sized] mikwoth.
AND THEY SHOULD GIVE HIM NOT LESS THAN FOUR [CUPS]. How could our Rabbis enact something whereby one is led into danger: Surely it was taught: A man must not eat in pairs, nor drink in pairs,4 nor cleanse [himself] twice nor perform his requirements5 twice? — Said R. Nahman: Scripture said, [it is] a night of guarding [unto the lord]:6 [i.e.,] it is a night that is guarded for all time7 from harmful spirits. Raba said: The cup of Grace [after meals] combines [with the others] for good, but does not combine for evil.8 Rabina said: Our Rabbis instituted four cups as symbolizing liberty: each one
(1) 1 se'ah == 6 kabs; 1 kab == 4 logs; 1 log == 4 rebi'ith; 1 cubit == 6 handbreadths; 1 handbreadth = 4 fingerbreadths. On this basis R. Hisda arrives at his estimate. Thus:1 Se'ah == 96 rebi'ith; 40 se'as == 96 X 40 == 3840 rebi'ith. Hence cubic capacity of mikweh is 3840 X 108 == 41472 fingerbreadths which is the equivalent of cubic capacity of 3 cubic cubits, 1 cubic cubit being equal to 243 ( == 13824 fingerbreadths), and 3 cubic cubits being equal to 3 X 13824 == 41472].
(2) And the joints could be taken apart.
(3) The Table was a cubit square, while a mikweh, as stated here, was likewise a cubit square; hence it would be impossible to immerse the Table in the mikweh if it became unclean and needed a ritual bath.
(4) I.e., he must not eat or drink two or a multiple of two of anything, a malignant potency being ascribed to twos.
(5) A euphemism for intimacy.
(6) Ex. XII, 42.
(7) Lit., ‘that is guarded and comes on.’
(8) The third cup, which is drunk in collection with Grace after meals, combines with others to break the spell of evil which, might be caused by drinking the first two, but is not counted in the four for harm.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 110a
is a separate obligation.1
‘He must not perform his requirements twice.’ Why? Has he not [newly] decided?2 -Said Abaye, This is what he [the Tanna] means: He must not eat in pairs and drink in pairs and he must not perform his needs even once [after eating or drinking in pairs], lest he be weakened3 and be affected.4
Our Rabbis taught: He who drinks in pairs, his blood is upon his own head. Said Rab Judah: When is that? If he had not seen the street;5 but if he has seen the street, he is at liberty [to drink a second cup]. R. Ashi said: I saw that R. Hanania b. Bibi used to go out and see the street at each cup. Now we have said [this]6 only [if he intends] to set out on a journey [after drinking]; but [if he intends to stay] at home, it is not [harmful]. R. Zera observed: And going to sleep is like setting out on a journey. R. Papa said: And going to the privy is like setting out on a journey. Now [if [he intends to stay] at home it is not [dangerous]? Yet surely Raba counted the beams,7 while when Abaye had drunk one cup, his mother would offer him two cups in her two hands;8 again, when R. Nahman b. Isaac had drunk two cups, his attendant would offer him one cup; [if he had drunk] one cup, he would offer him two cups in his two hands?9 — An important person is different.10
‘Ulla said: Ten cups are not subject to [the danger of] pairs. ‘Ulla is consistent with his view, for ‘Ulla said, while others maintain, it was taught in a Baraitha: The Sages instituted ten cups in a mourner's house. Now if you should think that ten cups are subject to [the danger of] pairs, how could our Rabbis arise and enact a regulation whereby one is led into danger! But eight are subject to ‘pairs.’ R. Hisda and Rabbah son of R. Huna both maintained: ‘Shalom’ [peace] combines [with others] for good, but does not combine for evil;11 but six is subject to ‘pairs’. Rabbah and R. Joseph both maintained: Wiyhuneka [‘and be gracious unto thee’] combines [with others] for good, but does not combine for evil;12 but four is subject to ‘pairs.’ Abaye and Raba both maintained: We-yishmereka [‘and keep thee’] combines [with others] for good, but does not combine for evil.13 Now Raba is consistent with his view, for Raba allowed the Rabbis to depart [from his house] after four cups, [and] though Raba b. Liwai14 came to harm, he paid no heed to the matter, saying, ‘That was [his punishment] because he raises difficulties at the public session.15
R. Joseph said: The demon Joseph told me [that] Ashmedai the king of the demons is appointed over all pairs.’16 and a king is not designated a harmful spirit.17 Others explain it in the opposite sense: On the contrary, a king is quick-tempered [and] does whatever he wishes, for a king can break through a wall to make a pathway for himself and none may stay him.18
R. Papa said, Joseph the demon told me: For two we kill; for four we do not kill, [but] for four we harm [the drinker]. For two [we hurt] whether [they are drunk] unwittingly or deliberately; for four, only if it is deliberate, but not if it is unwitting. And if a man forgot himself and happened to go out,19 what is his remedy? Let him take his right-hand thumb in his left hand and his left-hand thumb in his right hand and say thus: ‘Ye [two thumbs] and I, surely that is three!20 But if he hears one saying, ‘Ye and I, surely that is four!’ let him retort to him, ‘Ye and I are surely five!’ And if he hears one saying, ‘Ye and I are six,’ let him retort to him, ‘Ye and I are seven.21 This once happened until a hundred and one , and the demon burst [with mortification].
Amemar said: The chief of the sorceresses told me: He who meets sorceresses should say thus: ‘Hot dung in perforated baskets for your mouths, o ye witches! may your heads become bald,22 the wind carry off your crumbs,23
(1) Hence they do not combine.
(2) The second is occasioned by a new desire, and does not combine with, the first.
(3) Through intimacy.
(4) Since eating or drinking in pairs has already made him more susceptible to hurt than he would otherwise have been.
(5) i.e., if he does not go out between the drinks.
(6) That pairs is harmful.
(7) At each cup he mentally counted one beam, to ensure not drinking in pairs.
(8) Likewise that he should not drink in pairs.
(9) Though in a these cases they were remaining at home.
(10) The demons are at greater pains to hurt him; hence he is endangered even when staying at home.
(11) ‘Shalom’ (peace) is the seventh word (in Heb.) of the verse The Lord lift up His countenance upon tee, and give thee peace (Num. VI, 26). Hence the seventh cup combines with others for good etc. as on p. 565, n. 5.
(12) Wiyhuneka is the fifth Hebrew word of the verse, The Lord make His face to shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee (ibid. 25).
(13) This is the third word of the verse, The Lord bless thee, and keep thee (ibid. 24).
(14) Or, the Levite.
(15) He would raise difficulties in the course of my public lectures, thereby putting me to shame.
(16) Those who drink in pairs are at his mercy.
(17) It is beneath his dignity to cause hurt. Hence there is generally no danger in pairs (though occasionally he may disregard his dignity — Rashbam).
(18) Hence the danger is all the greater.
(19) After drinking ‘pairs.’
(20) Thus breaking the spell of pairs.
(21) And so on.
(22) Lit., ‘bald be your baldness’ — they practised witchcraft with their hair.
(23) Likewise used in the practice of witchcraft. Rashbam holds that this is an allusion to Ezek. XIII, 18f, q.v.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 110b
your spices be scattered, the wind carry off the new saffron which ye are holding, ye sorceresses; as long as He showed grace to me and to you, I had not come among [you]; how that I have come among you, your grace and my grace have cooled.’1
In the West [Palestine] they were not particular about ‘pairs. R. Dimi of Nehardea was particular even about the marks on a [wine-] barrel:2 it once happened that a barrel burst.3 This is the position in general: when one is particular, they [the demons] are particular about him,4 while when one is not particular,5 they are not particular about him. Nevertheless one should take heed. When R. Dimi came,6 he said: Two eggs, two nuts, two cucumbers and something else — [these are] halachah from Moses at Sinai;7 but the Rabbis were doubtful what this something else was, and so the Rabbis forbid a ‘pairs’ on account of the ‘something else.’ And as to what we have said, Ten, eight, six and four are not subject to ‘pairs,’ that was said only in respect to the harmful spirits [mazzikin], but where witchcraft is concerned we fear even many.8 As [it once happened in] the case of a certain man who divorced his wife, [whereupon] she went and married a shopkeeper. Every day he [her first husband] used to go and drink wine, [and though] she exercised her witchcraft against him, she could avail nought, because he was heedful of ‘pairs.’ One day he drank to excess and did not know how much he drank; until sixteen [cups] he was clear-headed and on is guard; after that he was not clear-headed and took no care, [and] she turned him out at an even [number of drinks]. As he was going along an Arab met him and observed to him: A corpse is walking here!9 He went and clasped a palm tree; the palm tree cried out10 and he burst.
R. ‘Awira said: Plates and loaves are not subject to even numbers. This is the general rule: That which is completed by man is not subject to even numbers; [but in the case of] that which is completed by Heaven, such as various kinds of eatables, we fear [even numbers]. A shop is not subject to even numbers.11 If a man changes his mind,12 it is not subject to even numbers. A guest is not subject to even numbers.13 A woman is not subject to even numbers; but if she is an important woman, we take heed. R. Hinena son of R. Joshua said: Asparagus [-wine] combines [with other liquors] for good, but does not combine for harm.14
Rabina said in Raba's name: [A doubt concerning] even numbers [is resolved] stringently;15 others state: [A doubt concerning] even numbers [is resolved] leniently.16
R. Joseph said: Two [cups] of wine and one of beer do not combine; two of beer and one of wine combine, and your token [is this]: ‘This is the general principle: Whatever is joined thereto of a material more stringent than itself is unclean; of a material more lenient than itself, is clean.’17
R. Nahman said in Rab's name: Two [cups] before the meal18 and one during the meal combine; one before the meal and two during the meal do not combine. R. Mesharsheya demurred: Do we then desire to effect a remedy for the meal: we desire to effect a remedy for the person, and surely the person stands remedied!19 Yet all agree that two during the meal and one after the meal do not combine, in accordance with the story of Rabbah b. Nahmani.20
Rab Judah said in Samuel's name: All mixed drinks combine,21
(1) I have not taken sufficient care of myself.
(2) Indicating the quantities sold. He took care that there should not be an even number of these.
(3) When an even number of marks had bee made on it.
(4) They are more anxious to injure him.
(5) Takes no great pains to save himself from demons.
(6) From Palestine to Babylonia.
(7) It is a tradition dating back from Moses that even numbers of these and of another unnamed commodity are harmful.
(8) A large multiple of two, such as six, eight, etc.
(9) He recognized that he was doomed.
(10) Probably, made a rustling noise. [Var. lec., ‘withered’]
(11) I.e., if one drinks in two shops. Others: if one drinks an even number of glasses in one shop, for these are harmful at home only. The incident related above, however, took place in a tavern.
(12) He drank one glass, not intending to drink more; then decided to drink another.
(13) He does not know how much will be offered him, therefore at each he is regarded as having decided afresh.
(14) Cf. p. 565, n. 5.
(15) If a man does not know whether he has drunk an even number or not, he Should drink another. This turns an even number into odd, not an odd into even, because in the latter case this glass represents a fresh decision (cf. p. 568, n. 8), and does not combine with the others.
(16) Thus showing that he is not particular about it and thereby removing the hostility of the demons (cf. supra).
(17) Materials, to become unclean, must be of a certain minimum size, which varies according to the value of the material: the greater the value, the more stringent it is, i.e., the smaller its minimum. If the material is less than the minimum and a piece of another material is joined to it, making it up to the minimum, the rule is as stated. Thus here too, wine, being more valuable than beer, combines with it; beer being less valuable than wine, it is disregarded.
(18) Lit., ‘tray.’
(19) Since he has drunk three.
(20) V. B.M. 86a.
(21) If a man drinks mixed (i.e., diluted) wine and then any other mixed drink
(so Rashbam), they combine.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 111a
except water;1 while R. Johanan maintained: Even water. R. Papa said: This was said only of hot [water] mixed with cold or cold mixed with hot; but not [if it is] hot mixed with hot or cold with cold.2
Resh Lakish said: There are four actions for which he who does them has his blood on his own head and forfeits his life,3 viz.: easing oneself between a palm tree and the wall passing between two palm trees; drinking borrowed water, and passing over spilt water, even if his wife poured it out in his presence. ‘Easing oneself between a palm tree and the wall’: this was said only if there is not four cubits,4 but if he leaves four cubits it does not matter. And even if he does not leave four cubits [space], it was said only where there is no other path;5 but if there is another path, it does not matter.
‘Passing between two palm-trees.’ This was said only where a public thoroughfare does not cross between them; but if a public thoroughfare crosses between them, it does not matter.
‘Drinking borrowed water.’ That was said only if a child borrowed it; but [if] an adult, it does not matter. And even if a child borrowed it, this was said only in respect to the countryside, where it is not found [in abundance]; but in the town, where it is found in abundance, it does not matter. And even in respect to the countryside, this was said only of water, but there is no objection against [borrowed] wine and beer.
‘And passing over spilt water.’ This was said only if he did not interpose dust6 or spit into it; but if he interposed dust or spit into it, it does not matter. Again, this was said only if the sun had not passed over it nor did he walk sixty steps over it; but if the sun had passed over it and he walked sixty steps over it, it does not matter. Again, this was said only if he was not riding an ass and was not wearing shoes; but if he was riding an ass and was wearing shoes, it does not matter. Yet that is only where there is nought to fear of witchcraft; but where there is aught to fear of witchcraft, even if there are all these [safeguards], we still fear, as in the case of a certain man who rode on a ass and was wearing his shoes; his shoes shrank, and his feet withered.
Our Rabbis taught: There are three who must not pass between [two men], nor may [others] pass between them, viz.: a dog, a palm tree, and a woman. Some say: a swine too; some say, a snake too. And if they pass between, what is the remedy? — Said R. Papa: Let them commence [a verse] with el [God] and end with el.7 Others say: Let them commence [a Scriptural passage] with lo [not] and finish with lo.8 If a Menstruant woman passes between two [men], if it is at the beginning of her menses she will slay one of them9 and if it is at the end of her menses she will cause strife between them. What is the remedy? Let them commence [a verse] with el and end with el. When two women sit at a crossroad , one on one side of the road and one on the other side of the road, facing each other, they are certainly engaged in witchcraft. What is the remedy? If there is another road [available], let one go through it. While if there is no other road, [then] if another man is with him, let them clasp hands and pass through; while if there is no other man, let him say thus: ‘Igrath Izlath, Asya, Belusia10 have been slain with arrows.’11
When one meets a woman coming up from her statutory tebillah,12 if [subsequently] he is the first to have intercourse, a spirit of immortality will infect him; while if she is the first to have intercourse, a spirit of immortality will infect her. What is the remedy? Let him say thus : ‘He poureth contempt upon princess, and causeth them to wander in the waste, where there is no way.’13 R. Isaac said: What is meant by the verse, Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for Thou art with me?14 This refers to him who sleeps in the shadow of a single palm-tree or in the shadow of the moon. Now in respect to the shadow of a single palm-tree this holds good only where the shadow of the neighbouring [tree] does not fall upon it; but if the shadow of the neighbouring tree falls upon it, it does not matter. Then when it was taught: He who sleeps in the shadow of a single palm-tree in a courtyard and he who sleeps in the shadow of the moon, has is blood on is own head, how is it meant? Shall we say that the shadow of the neighbouring tree does not fall upon it, — then even in a field too [it is dangerous]? Hence you may surely infer from this that in a courtyard [there is danger] even if the shadow of the neighbouring tree fall on it. This proves it. And in respect to the shadow of the moon too, this holds good only when [it falls] in the west,15 but when it is in the east it does not matter.
(1) Cold water mixed with hot water is not regarded as a mixed drink and does not combine with other mixed drinks.
(2) R. Johanan too admits that this is not a mixture, and it does not combine with other mixed drinks.
(3) I.e., whatever happens, he has only himself to blame.
(4) Between tem: this leaves no room for the evil spirits to pass comfortably and so they injure him.
(5) For the demon to pass through.
(6) I.e., he did not scatter dust upon the water before passing over it.
(7) Rashbam: Num. XXIII, 22f, which commence and finish with el in Heb.
(8) Ibid. 19.
(9) I.e., cause perjury to one of them (Rashbam).
(10) The demons by whose aid you seek to work witchcraft.
(11) The text is obscure.
(12) After her period of menstruation.
(13) Ps. CVII, 40.
(14) Ps. XXIII, 4.
(15) I.e., at the end of the month when the moon is in the east and casts its shadow in the west.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 111b
If one eases oneself on the stump of a palm-tree, the demon Palga1 will seize him, and if one leans one's head on the stump of a palm-tree, the demon Zerada2 will seize him. He who steps over a palm-tree, if it had been cut down, he will be cut down [killed]; if it had been uprooted, he will be uprooted and die. But that is only if he does not place his foot upon it; but if he places his foot upon it, it does not matter.
There are five shades:3 the shade of a single palm-tree, the shade of a kanda-tree,4 the shade of a caper-tree, [and] the shade of sorb bushes.5 Some say: Also the shade of a ship and the shade of a willow. This is the general rule: Whatever has many branches, its shade is harmful, and whatever has hard prickles [or, wood], its shade is harmful, except the service-tree, whose shade is not harmful although its wood is hard, because Shida [the demon] said to her son, ‘Fly from the service-tree, because it is that which killed your father’; and, it also killed him. R. Ashi said: I saw R. Kahana avoid all shades.
[The demons] of caper-trees are [called] Ruhe [spirits]: those of sorb-bushes are [called] Shide [demons]: those which haunt roofs are [called] Rishpe [fiery-bolts]. In respect of what does it matter? In respect of amulets.6 [The demon] of caper-trees is a creature without eyes. What does it matter? In respect of fleeing from it.7 A scholar was once about to ease himself among the caper-trees, when he heard it advancing upon him so he fled from it. Well he had gone, it embraced a palm-tree,8 whereupon the palm-tree cried out9 and it [the demon] burst.
[The demons] of sorb-bushes are [called] Shide. A sorb-bush which is near a town has not less than sixty Shide [demons] [haunting it]. How does this matter? In respect of writing an amulet. A certain town-officer went and stood by a sorb-bush near a town, whereupon he was set upon by sixty demons and his life was in danger. He then went to a scholar who did not know that it was a sorb-bush haunted by sixty demons, and so he wrote a one-demon amulet for it . Then he heard how they suspended a hinga10 on it [the tree]11 and sing thus: ‘The man's turban is like a scholar's, [yet] we have examined the man [and find] that he does not know "Blessed art Thou".’12 Then a certain scholar came who knew that it was a sorb-bush of sixty demons and wrote a sixty-demon amulet for it. Then he heard them saying, ‘Clear away your vessels from here.’
Keteb Meriri:13 there are two Ketebs, one before noon and one after noon; the one before noon is called Ketheb Meriri, and looks like a ladle turning in the jug of kamka.14 That of the afternoon is called Keteb Yashud Zaharaim [‘Destruction that wasteth at noonday’ ];15 it looks like a goat's horn, and wings compass it about.
Abaye was walking along, with R. Papa on his right and R. Huna, son of R. Joshua on his left. Seeing a Keteb Meriri approaching him on the left, he transferred R. Papa to his left and R. Huna son of R. Joshua to his right. Said R. Papa to him: ‘Wherein am I different that you were not afraid on my behalf?’ ‘The time is in your favour,’ replied he.16
From, the first of Tammuz17 until the sixteenth they are certainly to be found; henceforth it is doubtful whether they are about or not, and they are found in the shadow of hazabe18 which have not grown a cubit, and in the morning and evening shadows when these are less than a cubit [in length], but mainly in the shadow of a privy.
R. Joseph said: The following three things cause defective eyesight: combing one's head [when it is] dry, drinking the drip-drop [of wine], and putting on shoes while the feet are still damp.
[Eatables] suspended in a house lead19 to poverty, as people say, ‘He who suspends a basket [of food] puts his food in suspense.’ Yet this relates only to bread, but it does not matter about meat and fish, [since] that is the usual way [of keeping them]. Bran20 in a house leads to poverty. Crumbs in a house lead to poverty: the demons rest upon them on the nights of Sabbaths and on the nights of the fourth days.
The genius appointed over sustenance is called Neki'ah [Cleanliness]; the genius appointed over poverty is called Nabal [Folly or Filth] . Dirt on the spout of a pitcher leads to poverty. He who drinks water out of a plate is liable to a cataract. He who eats cress without [first] washing his hands will suffer fear thirty days.
(1) Jast. conjectures paralysis. [Aruch: ‘headache on one side of the head’, megrim, connecting it with rt. meaning ‘to divide’].
(2) Perhaps vertigo; Rashi: megrim.
(3) Involving danger on account of the demons that inhabit them.
(4) MS.M.: kinura, the name of a shrubby tree, Christ's-thorn or lote (Jast.).
(5) [Var. lec.: add as fifth ‘the shade of the willow-tree].
(6) Charms to counteract them, in which their names are written.
(7) As it is sightless it cannot follow.
(8) In error. Rashi and Rashbam read נפקא אדקלא, it tripped over a palm-tree.
(9) [Or, withered v. supra p. 568, n. 5.]
(10) A musical instrument.
(11) Jast. Perhaps: they danced in chorus about it.
(12) He does not know which benediction to recite when he puts it on ridiculed his pretentions to scholarship.
(13) ‘Bitter destruction’ (v. Deut. XXXII, 24). Regarded here as the name of a demon.
(14) A kind of sauce made of milk and bread-crumbs. — The translation follows the reading of Rashi and Rashbam, which differs from cur. edd.
(15) Ps. XCI, 6.
(16) You have been blessed with good fortune, so the demon will not harm you.
(17) The fourth month of the Jewish year, roughly corresponding to July.
(18) A species of shrub.
(19) Lit., ‘are harmful.’
(20) So Rashbam.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 112a
He who lets blood without washing his hands will be afraid seven days. He who trims his hair and does not wash his hands will be afraid three days. He who pares his nails and does not wash his hands will be afraid one day without knowing what affrights him.
[Putting] one's hand to one's nostrils is a step to fear; [putting] one's hand to one's forehead is a step to sleep. It was taught: If food and drink [are kept] under the bed, even if they are covered in iron vessels, an evil spirit rests upon them.
Our Rabbis taught: A man must not drink water either on the nights of the fourth days [Wednesdays] or on the nights of Sabbath,1 and if he does drink, his blood is on his own head, because of the danger. What is the danger? An evil spirit. Yet if he is thirsty what is his remedy? Let him recite the seven ‘voices’ which David uttered over the water and then drink, as it is said: The voice of the Lord is upon the waters; the God of glory thundereth, even the Lord is upon many water. The voice of the Lord is powerful; the voice of the Lord is full of majesty. The voice of the Lord breaketh the cedars; yea, the Lord breaketh in pieces the cedars of the Lebanon ... The voice of the Lord heweth out flames of fire. The voice of the Lord shaketh the wilderness; the Lord shaketh the wilderness of Kadesh. The voice of the Lord maketh the hinds to calve, and strippeth the forests bare; and in His temple all say: ‘Glory.’2 But if [he does] not [say this], let him say thus: ‘Lul shafan anigron anirdafin,3 I dwell among the stars, I walk among lean and fat people.’ But if [he does] not [say this], if there is a man with him he should rouse him and say to him, ‘So-and-so the son of So-and-so, I am thirsty for water,’ and then he can drink. But if not, he knocks the lid against the pitcher, and then he can drink. But if not, let him throw something into it and then drink.
Our Rabbis taught: A man should not drink water from rivers or pools at night, and if he drinks, his blood is on his own head, because of the danger. What is the danger? The danger of blindness.4 But if he is thirsty, what is his remedy? If a man is with him he should say to him, ‘So-and-so the son of So-and-so, I am thirsty for water.’ But if not, let him say to himself, ‘O So-and-so,5 my mother told me, "Beware of shabrire" : Shabrire, berire, rire, ire re,6 I am thirsty for water in a white glass.’
AND EVEN [IF HE RECEIVES RELIEF] FROM THE CHARITY PLATE ETC. That is obvious? — It is necessary only even according to R. Akiba who said: Treat your Sabbath like a weekday7 rather than be dependent on man; yet here, in order to advertise the miracle, he agrees.8
Tanna debe Eliyahu [taught]:9 Though R. Akiba said, ‘Treat your Sabbath like a weekday rather than be dependent on men,’ yet one must prepare something trifling at home.10 What is it? Said R. Papa: Fish hash. As we learned, R. Judah b. Tema said: Be strong as the leopard and swift as the eagle, fleet as the deer and valiant as a lion to do the will of thy Father in heaven.11
Our Rabbis taught: Seven things did R. Akiba charge his son R. Joshua: My son, do not sit and study at the highest point of the town;12 do not dwell in a town whose leaders are scholars;13 do not enter your own house suddenly, and a the more your neighbour's house; and do not withhold shoes from your feet.14 Arise early and eat, in summer on account of the sun [i.e., heat] and in winter on account of the cold; treat your Sabbath like a weekday rather than be dependent on man , and strive to be on good terms with the man upon whom the hour smiles. R. Papa observed: [That does] not [mean] to buy from or to sell to him, but to enter into partnership with him. But now that R. Samuel b. Isaac said: What is meant by the verse, Thou hast blessed the work of his hands?15 Whoever took a farthing [perutah] from Job was blessed; even to buy from and to sell to him is advisable.
Five things did R. Akiba charge R. Simeon b. Yohai when he was immured in prison.16 He [the latter] said to him, ‘Master, teach me Torah.’ ‘I will not teach you,’ he replied.17 ‘If thou wilt not teach me, ‘ said he, ‘I will tell my father Yohai and he will deliver thee to the state.’ ‘My son,’ answered he, ‘more than the calf wishes to suck does the cow desire to suckle.’ Said he to him, ‘Yet who is in danger: surely the calf is in danger!’18 Said he to him: ‘If you wish to be strangled, be hanged on a large tree,19 and when you teach your son, teach him from a corrected scroll.’ (What is that? Said Raba, — others state, R. Mesharsheya: A new one, for once an error has entered, it remains.)20 ‘Do not cook in a pot in which your neighbour has cooked.’ (What does that mean? [Do not marry] a divorced woman during her husband's lifetime. For a Master said: When a divorced man marries a divorced woman, there are four minds in the bed. Alternatively, [it refers] even to a widow, for
(1) Rashbam: without a light.
(2) Ps. XXIX, 3-5, 7-9.
(3) This is an incantation.
(4) Shabrire, v. Git., Sonc. ed. p. 327, n. 4.
(5) Addressing himself thus.
(6) [An incantation against the demon of blindness resembling an Abracadabra amulet, in which each succeeding line is reduced by one letter].
(7) In the matter of food and drink.
(8) That he must take from charity.
(9) V. p. 504, n. 1.
(10) In honour of the Sabbath.
(11) Thus even the poorest must make an effort to honour the Sabbath.
(12) Many pass there, and they will disturb your studies.
(13) Intent on their studies, they neglect the affairs of the town!
(14) Cf. Shab. 129a.
(15) Job I, 10.
(16) R. Akiba was kept in prison several years and then martyred for defying Hadrian's edict against practising and teaching Judaism, Ber. 61b; v. J.E. I, 3051.
(17) He did not wish to endanger him.
(18) He pleaded to be allowed to take the risk.
(19) If you must depend on an authority, see that he is a great one.
(20) A error learned in childhood is difficult to dispel.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 112b
not all fingers1 are alike). Enjoying the produce without interest2 is a good deed and profitable investment.3 A religious deed which leaves the body pure is marrying a woman when one [already] has children.
Four things did our holy Teacher4 command his children: Do not dwell in Shekanzib,5 because [its inhabitants] are scoffers and will corrupt you to disbelief. And do not sit upon the bed of a Syrian woman. Some say, [that means: ] do not lie down to sleep without reading the shema’; while others explain: do not marry a proselyte. But others explain ‘Syrian’ literally, [the reason being] on account of what happened to R. Papa.6 And do not seek to evade toll tax, lest they discover you and deprive you of a that you possess. And do not stand in front of an ox when he comes up from the meadow, because Satan dances between his horns.7 Said R. Samuel: this refers to a black ox and in the month of Nisan.8 R. Oshaia recited: One must remove a distance of fifty cubits from an ox that is a tam9 [and] as far as the eye can see from an ox that is a mu'ad. A Tanna taught in R. Meir's name: [Even] when the ox's head is in the feeding-bag, climb up to the roof and throw away the ladder from under you.
Rab said: The cry for an ox10 is ‘hen, hen’; for a lion, ‘zeh zeh’; for a camel, ‘da da’; a ship's cry is ‘helani hayya hela we-hiluk hulia.’11
Abaye said: Skin, a fish, a cup, hot water, eggs, and the vermin in linen are all injurious to ‘something else’.12 Skin: [that means] he who sleeps on a tanner's hide.13 A fish: [viz.,] shibuta14 during Nisan. A cup: the residue of fish hash. Hot water: pouring extremely hot water over oneself.15 Eggs: [i.e.,] he who treads on [their] shells. Vermin in linen: if one launders his garment and does not wait eight days before putting it on, the vermin16 are produced and harmful for ‘something else’.
R. Papa said: A man should not enter a house in which there is a cat, without shoes. What is the reason? Because the cat may kill a snake and eat it; now the snake has little bones, and if a bone sticks into his foot it will not come out, and will endanger him. Others say: A man should not enter a house where there is no cat, in the dark.17 What is the reason? Lest a snake wind itself about him without his knowing, and he come to danger. Three things did R. Ishmael son of R. Jose charge Rabbi:
(Mnemonic: Makash).18 Do not inflict a blemish upon yourself. (What does that mean? Do not engage in a lawsuit with three, for one will be your opponent and the other two witnesses [against you] .) And do not feign interest in19 a purchase when you have no money.20 When your wife as performed tebillah, do not be intimate with her the first night. Said Rab: That refers to a niddah by Scriptural law,21 [for] since there is the presumption of an open well,22 she may continue with gonorrhoeic discharge.23
Three things did R. Jose son of R. Judah charge Rabbi. Do not go out alone at night, and do not stand naked in front of a lamp, and do not enter a new bath-house, lest it [the floor] split.24 How long [is it regarded as new]? — Said R. Joshua b. Levi: For twelve months. ‘And do not stand naked in front of a lamp,’ for it was taught: He who stands naked in front of a lamp will be a epileptic, and he who cohabits by the light of a lamp will have epileptic children.
Our Rabbis taught: If one cohabits in a bed where an infant is sleeping, that infant [will be] an epileptic. Now that was said only if he is less than one year old; but if he is a year old, it does not matter. Again, this was said only if he is sleeping at [their] feet; but if he is sleeping at [their] head, it does not matter. Again, this was said only if he does not lay his hand upon him; but if he lays his hand upon him, it does not matter.
‘And do not go out alone at night’, for it was taught: One should not go out alone at night, i.e., on the nights of neither Wednesday nor Sabbaths, because Igrath the daughter of Mahalath,25 she and one hundred eighty thousand destroying angels go forth, and each has permission to wreak destruction independently. Originally they were about a day. On one occasion she met R. Hanina b. Dosa [and] said to him, ‘Had they not made an announcement concerning you in Heaven, "Take heed of Hanina and his learning," I would have put you in danger.’ ‘If I am of account in Heaven,’ replied he, ‘I order you never to pass through settled regions.’ ‘I beg you,’ she pleaded, ‘leave me a little room.’ So he left her the nights of Sabbaths and the nights of Wednesdays. On another occasion she met Abaye. Said she to him, ‘Had they not made an announcement about you in Heaven, "Take heed of Nahmani26 and his learning," I would have put you in danger.’ ‘If I am of account in Heaven,’ replied he, ‘I order you never to pass through settled regions.’ But we see that she does pass through? — I will tell you: Those are
(1) Euphemism: The wife thinks always of her first husband.
(2) Lit., ‘hire.’
(3) Lit., ‘a large body’. The passage is a difficult one, particularly with the reading of the ed. לא, but it would seem to refer to lending money on a field and receiving some of its produce in part repayment. But as its value is probably calculated at less than market price, this is a profitable investment, yet at the same time there is no actual interest. Such a transaction is permitted (B.M. 67b). ‘Ar. and MS.M. read: ולו, and Jast. accordingly translates: An act of charity and at the same time a good investment is the act of him who helps to produce fruits, while he has the reward (e.g. , one who loans money to a husbandman on security, allowing payment in small instalments).
(4) I.e., R. Judah ha-Nasi.
(5) A town in Babylonia, on the cast side of the Tigris; v. Obermeyer, Landschaft, pp. 190f. It is there (p. 191, n. 4) pointed out, however, that R. Judah, a Palestinian, would have had no occasion to warn his children against living in a town in Babylonia, nor could he have known the character of its inhabitants well enough to justify this warning; hence it is conjectured that ‘Raba’ should be read here instead.
(6) V. Ber. 8b.
(7) Rashbam: the ox is mad, as explained infra.
(8) The first month-about April.
(9) The technical name of an ox that has not yet gored three times. When it has, it is called mu'ad.
(10) With which to chase it away or to urge it to work.
(11) Perhaps the ancient equivalent of ‘yo heave ho’. [MS.M. reads simply: ‘hayya, hayya’].
(13) Rashi and Rashbam. I.e., before it is completely dressed.
(14) Probably mullet (Jast.).
(15) At a bath.
(16) Which it may still contain.
(17) MS.M.: Without shoes.
(18) V. p. 348, n. 8. M == Mum (blemish); K == mekah (a purchase); SH == ishteka (your wife).
(19) Lit., ‘stand over.’
(20) V. B.M. 58b and notes a.l. in Sonc. ed.
(21) By which a woman performs tebillah seven days after the beginning of menstruation, even if menstruation lasted all the seven days. Subsequently, however, it was enacted that she must wait seven days from the end of menstruation. Rab observes that R. Ishmael's charge held good only when the more lenient Scriptural law was practised.
(22) I.e., her blood-flow has continued almost until tebillah.
(23) During intimacy.
(24) Through the heat.
(25) The queen of demons.
(26) Abaye was so called because he was brought up in the house of Rabbah b. Nahman.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 113a
the narrow paths [which they frequent], whence their horses bolt and come [into civilized places] bringing them along.
Rab said to R. Assi: Do not dwell in a town in which no horses neigh or dogs bark.1 And do not dwell in a town where the leader of the community is a physician.2 And do not marry two [women],3 [but] if you do marry two, marry a third.4
Rab said to R. Kahana: Deal in carcases, but do not deal in words;5 flay carcases in the market place and earn wages and do not say, ‘I am a priest and a great man and it is beneath my dignity.’6 [Even] if you [merely] ascend the roof, [take] victuals with you.7 [Even] if a hundred pumpkins cost but a zuz in town, let them, be under your skirts.8 Rab said to his son Hiyya: Do not take drugs9 and do not leap in great jumps;10 do not have a tooth extracted,11 and do not provoke serpents and do not provoke a Syrian woman.
Our Rabbis taught: Three must not be provoked, viz.: an insignificant Gentile,12 a little snake, and a humble pupil. What is the reason? Because their kingdom stands behind their ears.13
Rab said to his son Aibu: I have laboured over your studies but without success, [so] come and I will teach you worldly wisdom. Sell your wares while the sand is still on your feet.14 Everything you may sell and regret,15 except wine, which you can sell without regrets.16 Untie your purse and [then] open your sacks.17 Better a kab from the ground than a kor from the roof.18 When the dates are in your bag run to the brewery [beth sudna].19 And to what extent? — Said Raba: Up to three se'ahs. R. Papa said: If I were not a beer manufacturer I would not have become wealthy. Others say, R. Hisda said: If I were not a beer manufacturer, I would not have become wealthy. What is [the meaning of] sudna?20 Said R. Hisda: A pleasant secret [sod na'eh] and the exercise of charity.21
R. Papa said: Every bill22 requires collecting;23 in every credit sale it is doubtful whether it [payment] will be forthcoming or not, and when it is forthcoming it may be bad money.24
Three things did R. Johanan say in the name of the men of Jerusalem: when you go out to battle, do not go out among the first but among the last, So that you may return among the first; and treat your Sabbath like a weekday rather than be dependent on your fellow-beings, and strive to be on good terms with him upon whom the hour smiles.
Three things did R. Joshua b. Levi say in the name of the men of Jerusalem. Do not practise immodesty25 on account of the incident which occurred;26 if your daughter has attained puberty, free your slave and give [him] to her;27 and beware of your wife with her first son-in-law. What is the reason?-R. Hisda said: On account of immorality: R . Kahana said: On account of money.28 And [in fact] both are correct.
R. Johanan said: Three are of those who will inherit the world to come, viz.: he who dwells in Eretz Yisrael; and he who brings up his sons to the Study of the Torah; and he who recites habdalah over wine at the termination of the Sabbath. Who is that? He who leaves over [wine] from kiddush for habdalah.29
R. Johanan said: Concerning three does the Holy one, blessed be He, make proclamation every day:30 a bachelor who lives in a large town without sinning, a poor man who returns lost property to its owner, and a wealthy man who tithes his produce in secret.31 R. Safra was a bachelor living in a large town.
(1) These guard the town: the dogs raise the alarm and the marauders are pursued on horseback.
(2) There seems to be no adequate reason for this. Possibly a doctor would be too busy to give proper attention to communal matters. R. Tam in B.B. 110a s.v. לא תומא reads אסי instead of אסיא, i.e., do not dwell in a town whose head is (R.) Assi — a playful warning against the cares of office, which leave but little time for study.
(3) Lest they devise plots against you.
(4) She will reveal their designs.
(5) Gossip or quibbling.
(6) The greatest man is not degraded by honest work.
(7) Do not undertake the least journey without provisions.
(8) Keep them in stock and do not wait to buy until you actually need them.
(9) Even as a medicine, as they are habit forming.
(10) Or: do not jump over a brook — the strain affects the eyesight.
(11) When you have toothache — it will eventually cease in any case. [R. Hananel refers it to a molar tooth, the extraction of which affects the eyesight. Preuss, Biblisch — talmudische Medizin, p. 330, quotes Celsus: majore periculo in superioribus dentibus fit (extractio), quia potest tempora oculosque concutere].
(12) Lit., ‘a little Gentile’.
(13) They will grow up and take revenge. The particular expression may have been occasioned by Diocletian's rise to be Emperor of Rome though born of slaves — according to the Rabbis he was a swineherd originally. When Emperor he tried to avenge insults offered to him in his lowly position.
(14) Immediately you return from buying, sell.
(15) If the price advances — you might have received more.
(16) Had you waited it might have turned to vinegar.
(17) Pocket the money for a purchase before delivering it.
(18) Rather earn little near home than much far away.
(19) To brew beer of them — otherwise you may eat them.
(20) That it is employed to denote a brewery.
(21) It is a pleasant secret — it is profitable and affords the means of charity.
(22) Lit., ‘everything on account (of which a bill or bond must be indited).’
(23) Do not be certain of the money until you have actually collected it.
(24) If payment is made in small instalments the money may be frittered away.
(25) Do not frequent places where immodest sights are to be seen. Var. lec.: do not frequent roofs.
(26) Viz. , David's sin with Bath Sheba.
(27) Marry her at the earliest possible moment.
(28) She is likely to spend your money on him.
(29) He has only a little wine and specially reserves for habdalah that which remains over from kiddush.
(30) As having earned His special approval.
(31) I.e., without ostentation.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 113b
Now a tanna recited [R. Johanan's dictum] before Raba and R. Safra, [whereupon] R. Safra's face lit up. Said Raba to him: it does not mean such as you, but such as R. Hanina and R. Oshaia, who were cobblers in Eretz Yisrael and dwelt in a street of harlots and made shoes for harlots and went in to them:1 they [the harlots] looked at them, but they [these scholars] would not lift their eyes to look at them, and their [the harlots’] oath was ‘by the life of the holy Rabbis of Eretz Yisrael.’2
Three the Holy One, blessed be He, loves: he who does not display temper, he who does not become intoxicated, and he who does not insist on his [full] rights.3
Three the Holy One, blessed be He, hates: he who speaks one thing with his mouth and another thing in his heart; and he who possesses evidence concerning is neighbour and does not testify for him; and he who sees something indecent in his neighbour and testifies against him alone.4 As it once happened that Tobias sinned and Zigud alone came and testified against him before R. Papa, [whereupon] he had Zigud punished. ‘Tobias sinned and Zigud is punished!’ exclaimed he, ‘Even so,’ said he to him, ‘for it is written, one witness shall not rise up against a man,5 whereas you have testified against him alone: you merely bring him into ill repute.’6 R. Samuel son of R. Isaac said in Rab's name: Yet he may hate him,7 for it is said , If thou see the ass of thine enemy lying under’ its burden.8 Now which enemy [is meant]: Shall we say, a Gentile enemy, — but it was taught: The enemy of whom they spoke is an Israelite enemy, not a Gentile enemy? Hence it obviously means an Israelite enemy. But is it permitted to hate him? Surely it is written , Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thy heart?9 Again if there are witnesses that he had committed wrong, the all indeed hate him! why particularly this person? Hence it must surely apply to such a case where he had seen something indecent in him. R. Nahman b. Isaac said: it is a duty to hate him, as it is said, The fear of the Lord is to hate evil.10 R. Aha son of Raba asked R. Ashi: What about telling his teacher, that he should hate him?-Said he to him: If he knows that his teacher regards him as trustworthy as two [witnesses], he should tell him; but if not, he must not tell him.
Our Rabbis taught: There are three whose life is not life; the [over.] compassionate, the hot-tempered, and the [too] fastidious; whereon R. Joseph observed: And a these [qualities] are found in me.
Our Rabbis taught: Three hate one another, viz.: dogs, fowls, and Parsee priests;11 some say, harlots too; some say, scholars in Babylonia too.
Our Rabbis taught: Three love each other, viz.: proselytes, slaves , and ravens. Four are too impossible for words:12 a poor man who is arrogant, the wealthy man who flatters,13 a lecherous old man, and a leader who lords it over the community without cause. Some say: Also he who divorces his wife a first and a second time and takes her back. And the first Tanna?14 — it may be that her kethubah15 is large,16 or else he has children from her and cannot divorce her.17
Five things did Canaan charge his sons: Love one another, love robbery, love lewdness , hate your masters and do not speak the truth . Six things were said of a horse: it loves promiscuity, it loves battle, it has a proud spirit ‘ it despises sleep, eats much and excretes little. Some say: it also seeks to slay its master in battle. Seven are banned18 by Heaven; these are they: A Jew who has no wife; he who has a wife but no children;19 and he who has children but does not bring them up.to the study of the Torah; and he who has no phylacteries on his head and on his arm ‘ no fringes on his garment and no mezuzah on his door, and he who denies his feet shoes. And some say: Also he who never sits in a company assembled for a religious purpose.20 Rabbah b. Bar Hanah said in the name of R. Samuel b. Martha in Rab's name on the authority of it. Jose of Huzal: How do we know that you must not consult astrologers?21 Because it is said: Thou shalt be whole-hearted with the lord thy God.22 And how do we know that one who knows that his neighbour is greater than himself even in one thing must show him honour? Because it is said, because a surpassing [superior] spirit was in him, and the king thought to set him over’ the whole realm.23 And she [a woman] who sits over clean blood is forbidden intercourse;24 for how long? Said Rab: A ‘onah.25
A Tanna taught: Joseph of Huzal is identical with Joseph the Babylonian with Issi b. Gur Aryeh, with Issi b. Judah, with Issi b. Gamaliel and with Issi b. Mahallallel, and what was his [real] name? Issi b. ‘Akabia.26 it. Isaac b. Tabla is identical with R. Isaac b. Hakla, and with R. Isaac b. Ila'a.27
(1) To deliver the shoes.
(2) Thus by their chastity in face of great temptation they sanctified the Divine Name.
(3) In the sense that he does not retaliate.
(4) Being the only person who has seen it.
(5) Deut. XIX, 15.
(6) Since no action can follow your unsupported testimoy.
(7) As an evildoer-hate is morally wrong otherwise.
(8) Ex. XXIII, 5.
(9) Lev. XIX, 17.
(10) Prov. VIII,13.
(11) והחברין Guebers, [Aliter: ‘partners’ v. Strashun].
(12) Lit., ‘the mind does not tolerate them’.
(13) I.e., who denies his true feelings.
(14) Why does he not include the last?
(15) Marriage settlement, which she can claim from him on divorce.
(16) So that he must take her back, as he cannot pay it.
(17) I.e., he cannot remain constant to the divorce.
(18) Var. lec. : as banned.
(19) By his own volition.
(20) E.g., at a circumcision feast.
(21) Lit., ‘Chaldeans,’ who were we versed in astrological arts.
(22) Deut. XVIII, 13.
(23) Dan. VI, 4.
(24) This is based on the Scriptural law that for a period of thirty-three or sixty-six days beginning respectively on the eighth or the fifteenth day after childbirth a woman's blood is clean (v. Lev. XII, 1-5), i.e. ‘ it does not defile her and cohabitation is permitted. When this period is ended, she is designated ‘a woman sitting over clean blood,’ and cohabitation is forbidden, lest she have a blood discharge and think that just as her blood did not defile before, it does not defile her now either.
(25) Lit. , ‘a period’ — Rashi: one night. — Thus the law applies to the forty-first or the eighty-first night only.
(26) [Issi (a variant of Joseph) was the son of ‘Akabia b. Mahallallel, the story of whose excommunication is told in ‘Ed. V, 6, and it was in order to be spared the tragic memories associated with the name of ‘Akabia that Issi did not describe himself as the son of ‘Akabia; v. Derenbourg, Essai p. 484].
(27) In the edd. there follows ‘hu R. Isaac b. Aha’: the same is R. Isaac b. Aha; Bah however deletes hu, in which case another person is now referred to.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 114a
R. Isaac b. Aha mentioned in legal discussions is the same as R. Isaac b. Phineas mentioned in homilies, and the token is ‘Hear ‘me [shema'uni], — my brethren [ahay] , and my people.’1 Rabbah b. Bar Hanah said in R. Johanan's name in the name of R. Judah b. R. Il'ai: Eat onions [bazel] and dwell in the protection [bezel] [of your house],2 and do not eat geese and fowls lest your heart pursue you;3 reduce your food and drink and increase [expenditure] on your house. When ‘Ulla came, he said: In the West [Palestine] a proverb is current: he who eats the fat tail [allitha] must hide in the loft [‘alitha],4 but he who eats cress [kakule] may lie by the dunghill [kikle]5 of the town.6
MISHNAH. THEY FILLED7 THE FIRST CUP FOR HIM; BETH SHAMMAI MAINTAIN: HE RECITES A BLESSING FOR THE DAY [FIRST],8 AND THEN RECITES A BLESSING OVER THE WINE; WHILE BETH HILLEL RULE: HE RECITES A BLESSING OVER THE WINE [FIRST], AND THEN RECITES A BLESSING FOR THE DAY.
GEMARA. Our Rabbis taught: [These are] the matters which are disputed by Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel in respect to the meal: Beth Shammai maintain: He recites a blessing for the day [first] and then recites a blessing over the wine, because the day is responsible for the presence of the wine;9 moreover, the day has already become sanctified while the wine has not yet come.10 But Beth Hillel maintain: He recites a blessing over the wine and then recites a blessing for the day, because the wine enables the kiddush to be recited.11 Another reason: the blessing for wine is constant, while the blessing for the day is not constant ,12 [and of] that which is constant and that which is not constant, that which is constant comes first. Now the law13 is as the ruling of Beth Hillel. Why state [another reason]?14 — [This:] for should you argue: there we have two [reasons], whereas here there is [only] one,15 [I answer that] here also there are two, [for of] that which is constant and that which is not constant, that which is constant comes first. ‘Now the law is as the ruling of Beth Hillel’: that is obvious, since there issued a Bath Kol?16 — If you wish I can answer that this was before the Bath Kol. Alternatively, it was after the Bath Kol, and this is [in accordance with] R. Joshua who maintained We disregard a Bath Kol.17
MISHNAH. THEY THEN18 SET [IT] BEFORE HIM.19 HE DIPS THE LETTUCE20 BEFORE YET HE HAS REACHED THE AFTERCOURSE OF THE BREAD.21 THEY SET BEFORE HIM MAZZAH, LETTUCE [HAZERETH], AND HAROSETH22 AND TWO DISHES, THOUGH THE HAROSETH IS NOT COMPULSORY. R. ELEAZAR SON OF R. ZADOK SAID: IT IS COMPULSORY. AND IN THE TEMPLE THEY USED TO BRING THE BODY OF THE PASSOVER-OFFERING BEFORE HIM.
(1) I Chron. XXVIII, 2. Thus in legal discussions (shema'ta, connected with shema'uni) his name appears as b. Aha
(connected with ahay).
(2) Do not spend overmuch on food, then you will be able to afford your house.
(3) Do not cultivate a greedy appetite so that you are always wanting to eat.
(4) He who squanders his money on costly dishes must hide from his creditors.
(5) [Aliter: ‘place of assembly’ from Grk.**,a circle].
(6) Afraid of none — not being in debt.
(7) Lit. , ‘mixed. ,
(8) I.e. , the blessing on the sanctity of the Festival.
(9) If it were not a festival no wine would be required.
(10) The festival automatically commences with the appearance of the stars, even if no wine as yet been brought to the table. Thus it is first in time, and therefore first in respect to a blessing too.
(11) without wine or bread kiddush cannot be said. Bread is the equivalent of wine in this respect, and the blessing for bread precedes the blessing for the day.
(12) Whenever ‘wine is drunk a blessing over it is required, whereas the blessing of sanctification is confined to festivals.
(13) [MS.M.: the halachah].
(14) Is not the first sufficient?
(15) Beth Shammai give two reasons for their view, whereas only one supports beth Hillel's
(16) Proclaiming the law always to be as Beth Hillel; v. Er. 13b.
(17) V. B.M. 59b.
(18) After having recited the kiddush over the wine.
(19) Rashi and Rashbam: vegetables. R. Han.: the table with the food, which was brought after kiddush.
(20) Tosaf.: into water or vinegar, and eats it. This is to stimulate the child's wonder, as it Is unusual to commence the meal thus.
(21) Viz., the bitter herbs, which are eaten after the unleavened bread. Bertinoro reads: before he has reached the breaking (i.e., the distribution) of the bread.
(22) V. Glos.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 114b
Resh Lakish said: This1 proves that precepts require intention, [for] since he does not eat it2 the stage when bitter herbs are compulsory, he eats it with [the blessing,] ‘Who createst the fruit of the ground,’ and perhaps he did not intend [to fulfil the obligation of] bitter herbs; therefore he must dip it again with the express purpose of [eating] bitter herbs. For if you should think [that] precepts do not require intention, why two dippings: surely he has [already] dipped it once?3 But whence [does this food]? Perhaps after a precepts do not require intention, and as to what you argue, why two dippings, [the answer is,] that there may be a distinction for [the sake of] the children.4 And should you say, if so, we should be informed about other vegetables:5 If we were informed about other vegetables I would say: Only where other vegetables [are eaten first] do we require two dippings, but lettuce alone6 does not require two dippings:7 hence he informs us that even lettuce [alone] requires two dippings, so that there may be a distinction [shown] therewith for the children. Moreover, it was taught: If he ate them [the bitter herbs] while demai,8 he has discharged [his duty]; if he ate them without intention, he has discharged [his duty]; if he ate them, in half quantities,9 he has discharged [his duty], providing that he does not wait between one eating and the next more than is required for the eating of half [a loaf]?10 -it is [dependent on] Tannaim. For it was taught, R. Jose said: Though he has [already] dipped the lettuce [hazereth], it is a religious requirement to bring lettuce and haroseth and two dishes before him.11 Yet still, whence [does this food]: perhaps R. Jose holds [that] precepts do not require intention and the reason that we require two dippings is that there may be a distinction [shown] for the children?- If so, what is the ‘religious requirement?’12
What are the two dishes?-Said R. Huna: Beet and rice.13 Raba used to be particular for14 beet and rice, since it had [thus] issued from the mouth of R. Huna. R. Ashi said: From R. Huna you may infer that none pay heed to the following [ruling] of R. Johanan b. Nuri. For it was taught, R. Johanan b. Nuri said: Rice is a species of corn and kareth is incurred for [eating it in] its leavened state, and a man discharges his duty with it on Passover.15 Hezekiah said: Even a fish and the egg on it.16 R. Joseph said: Two kinds of meat are necessary, one in memory of the Passover-offering and the second in memory of the hagigah.17 Rabina said: Even a bone and [its] broth.
It is obvious that where other vegetables are present, he recites18 the blessing, ‘who createst the fruit of the ground’ over the other vegetables and eats, and then19 recites the blessing, ‘[Who hast commanded us] concerning the eating of bitter herbs,’ and eats.20 But what if he has lettuce only? Said R. Huna: First he recites a blessing over the bitter herbs, ‘Who createst the fruit of the ground,’ and eats, and then [later] he recites over it ‘concerning the eating of bitter herbs’ and eats.
(1) The fact that he dips lettuce twice.
(2) The first lettuce.
(3) The first lettuce is eaten before it is obligatory (v. n. 8 in Mishnah); hence the ordinary blessing for vegetables is recited, not ‘who hast commanded us concerning the eating (If bitter herbs,’ though later it will be eaten as an obligation. This he did not discharge his duty of eating bitter herbs with the first lettuce, because that was not his intention, which proves that one does not discharge one's duty unless it is expressly done with that intention.
(4) v.p. 587, n. 8.
(5) The Mishnah should state that a vegetable is dipped into water and eaten Why specify hazereth
(lettuce), which is one of the vegetables which may be eaten as bitter herbs (v. supra 39a)?
(6) I.e., where lettuce alone is eaten.
(7) for once he has eaten it he has done his duty in respect of bitter herbs.
(8) V. Glos.
(9) I.e., as much as half an olive the first time and the same the second time, as much as an olive being the minimum quantity which must be eaten.
(10) V. supra p. 208, n. 9. — This distinctly contradicts Resh Lakish.
(11) And Resh Lakish maintains that R. Jose's reason is because precepts require intention.
(12) mizwah implies that it is an essential obligation.
(13) Even these constitute two dishes, and of course two kinds of meat all the more
(Rashbam and Tosaf.)
(14) Lit., ‘go in search of.’
(15) Tabshil denotes a boiled dish: hence if it were a species of corn, boiling would make it leaven.
(16) I.e.,the egg with which it is smeared before it is prepared. Though it becomes all one, yet it counts as two dishes.
(17) v. Mishnah supra 69b.
(18) At the first dipping.
(19) At the second dipping.
(20) Each blessing being over a different vegetable.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 115a
To this R. Hisda demurred: After filling his stomach with it he returns and recites a blessing over it! — Rather, said R. Hisda: On the first occasion he recites over it, ‘Who createst the fruit of the ground,’ and, ‘concerning the eating of bitter herbs,’ and eats, while subsequently he eats the lettuce without a blessing. In Syria they acted in accordance with R. Huna, while R. Shesheth the son of R. Joshua acted according to R. Hisda. And the law is in accordance with R. Hisda. R. Aha the son of Raba used to go in search of other vegetables, so as to avoid controversy.1
Rabina said, R. Mesharsheya son of R. Nathan told me: Thus did Hillel2 say on the authority of tradition:3 A man must not make a sandwich of mazzah and bitter herbs together and eat them, because we hold that mazzah nowadays4 is a Biblical obligation, whereas bitter herbs are a Rabbinical requirement and thus the bitter herbs, which are Rabbinical, will come and nullify the mazzah, which is Biblical. And even on the view that precepts cannot nullify each other, that applies only to a Biblical [precept] with a Biblical [precept], or a Rabbinical [precept] with a Rabbinical [precept], but in the case of a Scriptural and a Rabbinical [precept], the Rabbinical [one] comes and nullifies the Scriptural [one]. Which Tanna do you know [to hold] that precepts do not nullify each other? — it is Hillel.5 For it was taught, it was related of Hillel that he used to wrap them together,6 for it is said, they shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs.7 R. Johanan observed: Hillel's colleagues disagreed with him. For it was taught: You might think that he should wrap them together and eat them, in the manner that Hillel ate it, therefore it is stated, they shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs, [intimating] even each separately.8 To this R. Ashi demurred: If so, what is [the meaning of] ‘even’?9 Rather, said R. Ashi, this Tanna teaches thus: You might think that he does not discharge his duty unless he wraps them together and eats them, in the manner of Hillel therefore it is stated, they shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs, [intimating] even each separately. Now that the law was not stated either as Hillel or as the Rabbis,10 one recites the blessing. ‘[Who hast commanded us] concerning the eating of unleavened bread’ and eats; then he recites the blessing, ‘concerning the eating of bitter herbs,’ and eats; and then he eats unleavened bread and lettuce together without a blessing. in memory of the Temple, as Hillel [did].11
R. Eleazar said in R. Oshaia's name: Whatever is dipped in a liquid12 requires the washing of the hands.13 Said R. Papa: Infer from this that the lettuce
(1) Lit., ‘to exclude himself from a controversy’.
(2) The reference is to R. Hillel, the fourth century Babylonian amora, and not to Hillel, the great Nasi who flourished in the first century B.C.E.
(3) I.e., it came to him anonymously; Kaplan, Redaction of the Talmud, p. 227.
(4) I.e., after the destruction of the Temple and the cessation of sacrifices.
(5) Hillel 1.
(6) Place the paschal meat of bitter herbs between mazzah.
(7) Num. IX, 11.
(8) This is deduced from the sing. ‘it.’
(9) ‘Even’ shows that they may certainly be eaten together.
(10) Though the aforementioned Tanna does not disagree with Hillel, as R. Ashi has shown, it was nevertheless held that some Rabbis did disagree.
(11) This he acts on both views, by eating them first separately and then together.
(12) Vegetables, which are dipped into vinegar.
(13) Unwashed hands are, unclean in the second degree and therefore disqualify terumah (v. Mishnah supra 14a and note a.l.), and whatever disqualifies teruma defiles liquids in the first degree (supra 14b). Therefore the hands must be washed.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 115b
must be plunged right into the haroseth1 to counteract the kappa.2 For if you should think that it need not be sunk into it, why is the washing of the hands required?3 Surely he does not touche [the haroseth]?4 Yet perhaps I may maintain that in truth it need not be sunk [into the haroseth], the kappa dying from its smell; yet why is washing of the hands required? In case he plunges it in.
R. Papa also said: A man must not keep the bitter herbs [an appreciable time] in the haroseth, because the sweetness of its ingredients [sc. the haroseth] my neutralize its bitterness, whereas the taste of bitter herbs is essential, but it is then absent.
R. Hisda brought5 Rabbana ‘Ukba6 and he lectured: If he washed his hands at the first dipping- he must wash his hands at the second dipping [too]. The Rabbis discussed this before R. Papa: This was stated in general,7 for if you should think that it was stated here [in connection with Passover], why must he wash is hands twice? Surely he has [already] washed his hands once?8 Said R. Papa to them: On the contrary, it was stated here, for if you should think that it was stated in general, why two dippings?9 What then? it was stated here? Then why must he wash his hands twice: surely he has [already] washed his hands once? — I will tell you: since he is to recite the Haggadah10 and Hallel,11 he may let his thoughts wander12 and touch [something unclean].
Raba said: If he swallows ,unleavened bread, he discharges his duty;13 if he swallows bitter herbs, he does not discharge his duty.14 If he swallows unleavened bread and bitter herbs [together], he discharges his duty of unleavened bread, [but] not his duty of bitter herbs. If he wraps them in bast and swallows them, he does not discharge his duty of unleavened bread either.
R. Simi b. Ashi said: unleavened bread [must be set] before each person [of the company]. bitter herbs before each person. and haroseth before each person, but we remove the table15 only from before him who recites the Haggadah. R. Huna said: All these too [are Set only] before him who recites the Haggadah.16 And the law is as R. Huna.
Why do we remove the table? — The School of R. Jannai said: So that the children may perceive [the unusual proceeding] and enquire [its reasons]. Abaye was sitting before Rabbah, [when] he saw the tray taken up from before him. Said he to then: We have not yet eaten, and they have [already] come [and] removed the tray from before us! Said Rabbah to him: You have exempted us from reciting, ‘Why [is this night] different?’17
Samuel said: Bread of [‘oni]18 [means] bread over which we recite [‘onin] many words.19 It was taught likewise: ‘Bread of [‘oni]’ means bread over which we recite [‘onin] many words. Another interpretation: ‘Bread of [‘oni]’: ‘ani [poverty] is written:20 just as a beggar generally has a piece,
(1) which is a liquid.
(2) A poisonous substance in the hazereth.
(3) For the first dipping, v. infra.
(4) With his hand, if the lettuce is only dipped lightly in it.
(6) ‘Rabbana’ is a Babylonian title, probably the equivalent of the Palestinian ‘Rabban’ lit., ‘our teacher,’ which is a peculiar title of honour, higher than ‘Rabbi.’
(7) When a man eats vegetables at other times of the year. Since the eating of vegetables then is not statutory, each time he eats them (after dipping) even at the same meal counts as a separate act, for when he ate the first time he did not intend eating them again; hence he must wash his hands at each.
(8) Knowing that he would eat vegetables a second time; hence once should suffice.
(9) The vegetable having been dipped once into vinegar, it need not be dipped again.
(10) The narrative of the exodus, which is an essential part of the ritual.
(11) ‘Praise,’ i.e., Ps. CXIII-CXVIII.
(12) I.e., not think about keeping is hands clean.
(13) Of eating unleavened bread, though he has not chewed it.
(14) Because he has not tasted its bitterness, which is essential. Rashi reads: if he swallows bitter herbs, he has discharged his duty because even then he cannot altogether avoid tasting its bitterness.
(15) V. p. 535, n. 7.
(16) Since the meal has not yet commenced it is sufficient to place the food before one.
(17) V. Mishnah infra 116a. By your observation you have in fact asked that question.
(18) E.V. ‘affliction’. Deut. XVI, 3.
(19) v. supra p. 166, n. 10.
(20) Defective, though it is read plene, denoting ‘reciting’.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 116a
so here too a piece [is taken].1 Another interpretation: just as a poor man fires [the oven] and his wife bakes,2 so here too, he heats and she bakes.3
THOUGH HAROSETH IS NOT A RELIGIOUS REQUIREMENT. Then if it is not a religious requirement, on what account does he bring it? — Said R. Ammi: On account of the kappa.4 R. Assi said: The kappa of lettuce [is counteracted by] radishes; the kappa of radishes, [by] leeks; the kappa of leeks, [by] hot water; the kappa of a these, [by] hot water. And in the meanwhile5 let him say thus: ‘Kappa kappa, I remember you and your seven daughters and your eight daughters.in.law.’
R. ELEAZAR SON OF R. ZADOK SAID: IT IS A RELIGIOUS REQUIREMENT. Why is it a religious requirement? R. Levi said: In memory of the apple-tree;6 R. Johanan said: In memory of the day.7 Abaye observed: Therefore one must make it acrid and thicken it: make it acrid, in memory of the apple-tree; and thicken it, in memory of the day. It was taught in accordance with R. Johanan: The condiments8 are in memory of the straw;9 [and] the haroseth [itself] is a reminder of the day. R. Eleazar son of R. Zadok said: Thus did the grocers10 cry, ‘Come and buy ingredients for your religious requirements.
MISHNAH. THEY FILLED A SECOND CUP FOR HIM. AT THIS STAGE11 THE SON QUESTIONS HIS FATHER;12 IF THE SON IS UNINTELLIGENT, HIS FATHER INSTRUCTS HIM [TO ASK]: ‘WHY IS THIS NIGHT DIFFERENT FROM ALL [OTHER] NIGHTS. FOR ON ALL [OTHER] NIGHTS WE EAT LEAVENED AND UNLEAVENED BREAD, WHEREAS ON THIS NIGHT [WE EAT] ONLY LEAVENED BREAD; ON ALL OTHER NIGHTS WE EAT ALL KINDS OF HERBS, ON THIS NIGHT BITTER HERBS; ON ALL OTHER NIGHTS WE EAT MEAT ROAST, STEWED OR BOILED, ON THIS NIGHT, ROAST ONLY.13 ON ALL OTHER NIGHTS WE DIP14 ONCE, BUT ON THIS NIGHT WE DIP TWICE.’ AND ACCORDING TO THE SON'S INTELLIGENCE HIS FATHER INSTRUCTS HIM.15 HE COMMENCES WITH SHAME AND CONCLUDES WITH PRAISE; AND EXPOUNDS FROM ‘A WANDERING ARAMEAN WAS MY FATHER’16 UNTIL HE COMPLETES THE WHOLE SECTION.
GEMARA. Our Rabbis taught: If his son is intelligent asks him, while if he is not intelligent his wife asks him; but if not,17 he asks himself. And even two scholars who know the laws of Passover ask one another.
WHY IS THIS NIGHT DIFFERENT FROM ALL OTHER NIGHTS? FOR ON ALL OTHER NIGHTS WE DIP ONCE, WHILE ON THIS NIGHT WE DIP TWICE. To this Raba demurred: Is then dipping once indispensable all other days? Rather, said Raba, It was thus taught: For on all other nights we are not obliged to dip even once, whereas on this night, twice. To this R. Safra demurred: A statutory obligation on account of children!18 Rather, said R. Safra, He teaches thus: We do not dip even once, whereas this night [we dip] twice. HE COMMENCES WITH SHAME AND CONCLUDES WITH PRAISE. What is ‘WITH SHAME’? Rab said: ‘Aforetime our fathers were idolaters’; while Samuel said: ‘We were slaves.’19 R. Nahman asked his slave Daru: ‘When a master liberates his slave and gives him gold and silver, what should he say to him?’ ‘He should thank and praise him,’ replied he. ‘You have excused us from saying "Why [is this night] different?"’ observed he. [Thereupon] he commenced by reciting, ‘We were slaves.’
MISHNAH. R. GAMALIEL USED TO SAY: WHOEVER DOES NOT MAKE MENTION OF20
(1) The blessing for the unleavened bread must be said over a piece of mazzah only, not over a whole one, to emphasize Israel's poverty in Egypt. (Hence three mazzoth are required, two because every festival and the Sabbath require two loaves, and a third which is broken, so that the blessing may be recited over the piece.)
(2) Without delay, as they’ cannot afford more fuel should the oven cool.
(3) Even wealthy people must bake the unleavened bread without unnecessary delay, lest it turn leaven.
(4) V. supra 115b.
(5) While waiting for the cure to take effect-or perhaps, until he takes these.
(6) Under which the Israelitish women in Egypt gave birth to their children; v. Sot,. 11b.
(7) Wit which they made bricks.
(8) Which are mixed in the haroseth.
(9) Just as the straw was kneaded into the clay.
(10) Lit., ‘parched.grain merchants’ — such would sell spices etc. too. Rashi and Rashbam: vendors who sat behind latticed windows.
(11) Lit. , ‘and here’.
(12) Why all this unusual procedure?
(13) I.e., in Temple times, v. supra 70a.
(14) So the text as emended, and it is thus quoted in the GEMARA; v. O.H. 473. 7 and ט״ז 9 a.l.
(15) The answer must be intelligible to the child.
(16) Deut. XXVI, 5.
(17) If he has no wife.
(18) ‘Obliged’ (hayyabin) connotes a religious precept, whereas as stated supra 114b the first dipping is merely to stimulate the children's wonder.
(19) The modern liturgy combines both, commencing however with the latter.
(20) Perhaps better: ‘explain.’ as R. Gamaliel's main point is that their purpose must be explained; v. Kaplan, Redaction of the Talmud, p. 203.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 116b
THESE THREE THINGS ON PASSOVER DOES NOT DISCHARGE HIS DUTY, AND THESE ARE THEY: THE PASSOVER-OFFERING. UNLEAVENED BREAD, AND BITTER HERBS. THE PASSOVER-OFFERING IS [SACRIFICED] BECAUSE THE OMNIPRESENT PASSED OVER THE HOUSES OF OUR FATHERS IN EGYPT, AS IT IS SAID, THEN YE SHALL SAY: IT IS THE SACRIFICE OF THE LORD'S PASSOVER, FOR THAT HE PASSED OVER etc.1 THE UNLEAVENED BREAD IS [EATEN] BECAUSE OUR FATHERS WERE REDEEMED FROM EGYPT, AS IT IS SAID, AND THEY BAKED UNLEAVENED CAKES OF THE DOUGH WHICH THEY BROUGHT FORTH OUT OF EGYPT etc.2 THE BITTER HERB IS [EATEN] BECAUSE THE EGYPTIANS EMBITTERED THE LIVES OF OUR FATHERS IN EGYPT, AS IT IS SAID, AND THEY MADE THEIR LIVES BITTER etc.3 IN EVERY GENERATION A MAN IS BOUND TO REGARD HIMSELF AS THOUGH HE PERSONALLY HAD GONE FORTH FROM EGYPT, BECAUSE IT IS SAID, AND THOU SHALT TELL THY SON IN THAT DAY, SAYING: IT IS BECAUSE OF THAT WHICH THE LORD DID FOR ME WHEN I CAME FORTH OUT OF EGYPT.4 THEREFORE IT IS OUR DUTY TO THANK, PRAISE, LAUD, GLORIFY, EXALT, HONOUR, BLESS, EXTOL, AND ADORE HIM WHO WROUGHT ALL THESE MIRACLES FOR OUR FATHERS AND OURSELVES; HE BROUGHT US FORTH FROM BONDAGE INTO FREEDOM, FROM SORROW INTO JOY, FROM MOURNING INTO FESTIVITY, FROM DARKNESS INTO GREAT LIGHT, AND FROM SERVITUDE INTO REDEMPTION. THEREFORE LET US SAY BEFORE HIM, HALLELUJAH!5 HOW FAR DOES ONE RECITE IT? BETH SHAMMAI MAINTAIN: UNTIL ‘AS A JOYOUS MOTHER OF CHILDREN,’6 WHILE BETH HILLEL SAY: UNTIL ‘THE FLINT INTO A FOUNTAIN OF WATERS,’7 AND HE CONCLUDES WITH [A FORMULA OF] REDEMPTION. R. TARFON USED TO SAY WHO REDEEMED US AND REDEEMED OUR FATHERS FROM EGYPT, BUT HE DID NOT CONCLUDE [WITH A BLESSING].8 R. AKIBA SAID: ‘SO MAY THE LORD OUR GOD AND THE GOD OF OUR FATHER SUFFER US TO REACH OTHER SEASONS AND FESTIVALS WHICH COME TOWARDS US FOR PEACE, REJOICING IN THE REBUILDING OF THY CITY AND GLAD IN THY SERVICE, AND THERE WE WILL PARTAKE OF THE SACRIFICES AND THE PASSOVER-OFFERINGS9 etc. AS FAR AS BLESSED ART THOU, O LORD, WHO HAST REDEEMED ISRAEL.’
GEMARA. Raba said: He must say ‘and us did he bring forth from there.’ Raba said: He must lift up the unleavened bread, and he must lift up the bitter herb,10 but he need not lift up the meat;11 moreover, it would appear as though he ate sacrifices without [the Temple].12 R. Aha b. Jacob said: A blind person is exempt from reciting the Haggadah. [For] here it is written, it is because of that [zeh],13 while elsewhere it is written, This our son [zeh]:14 just as there the blind are excluded,15 so here to the blind are excluded. But that is not so, for Meremar said: I asked the scholars of the School of R. Joseph, who recites the Aggadah16 at R. Joseph's? And they told me, R. Joseph; Who recites the Aggadah at R. Shesheth's? And they told me, R. Shesheth.17 — These Rabbis held that un-leavened bread nowadays is a Rabbinical obligation.18 Hence it follows that R. Aha b. Jacob holds that unleavened bread nowadays is a Scriptural obligation?19 But Surely it was R. Aha b. Jacob himself who said: [The obligation of eating] unleavened bread nowadays is Rabbinical! — He holds, Whatever our Rabbis enacted, they enacted it similar to the Scriptural Jaw.20 But according to R. Shesheth and R. Joseph too, surely it is certain that whatever our Rabbis enacted, they enacted similar to a Scriptural law? — How compare!21 As for there, it is we: since it should have been written, ‘He is our son,’ whereas it is written, ‘This our son,’22 you may infer that it comes to exclude blind persons. But here, if not ‘for the sake of this’ what should be written? Hence it comes [to intimate], ‘for the sake of the unleavened bread and bitter herbs.’23
THEREFORE IT IS OUR DUTY.
(1) Ex. XII, 27.
(2) Ibid. 39.
(3) Ex. I, 14.
(4) Ibid. XIII, 8.
(5) ‘Praise ye the Lord,’ with which Hallel commences.
(6) Ps. CXIII, 9.
(7) Ibid. CXIV, 8.
(8) Hatham is the technical term meaning to round off a liturgical passage with a blessing formula, ‘Blessed art Thou, O Lord.’
(9) So the text as emended, ‘sacrifices’ referring to the hagigah of the fourteenth, which was eaten before the Passover-offering (v. supra 70a); hence it is mentioned before too.
(10) When saying, ‘This unleavened bread’ ‘ . . ‘this bitter herb.’
(11) Which is set in memory of the Passover-offering; v. R. Joseph's dictum supra 114b.
(12) If he lifted up the meat as he said ‘This Passover-offering,’ it would look as if he had actually consecrated it as a sacrifice, which is forbid den, Since sacrifices may not be offered without the Temple (Raba refers to post-Temple times). Hence he must not lift up the meat.
(13) Lit., ‘this’.
(14) Deut. XXI, 20.
(15) For ‘this our son’ implies that his parents see and point at him.
(17) R. Joseph and R. Shesheth were both blind.
(18) Sc. that unleavened bread must he eaten on the first night of Passover (the interdict of leavened bread of course is Biblical). Hence the reciting of the Haggadah is likewise Rabbinical, and therefore ‘unaffected by R. Aha b. Jacob's deduction.
(19) For he states his law generally, and therefore meant it for post-Temple times too.
(20) On which it is based. Hence since the blind were exempt from reciting the Haggadah when it was a Scriptural obligation, they are still exempt now that it is only Rabbinical.
(21) They reject the law entirely, together with the analogy on which it is based.
(22) v. Sanh., Sonc. ed. p. 486, n. 2 and 3.
(23) I.e., it does not intimate that he who recites must see it, but simply means: it is for this reason that I eat unleavened bread and bitter herbs viz., because of what the Lord did for me etc.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 117a
R. Hisda said in R. Johanan's name: Hallelujah, Kesjah1 and Jedidjah2 are single words.3 Rab said: Kesjah and merhabjah4 are single words. Rabbah5 said merhabjah alone [is a single word]. The scholars asked: What about merhab Jah in R. Hisda's view?6 The question stands. The scholars asked: What about Jedidjah in Rab's view? — Come and hear: Jedidjah is divisible into two, therefore Jedid is non-sacred while Jah [the Lord] is sacred.7 The scholars asked: What about Hallelujah in Rab's view? Come and hear, for Rab said: I saw [a copy of] the Psalms in my friend's college,8 wherein ‘Hallalu’ was written on one line and ‘jah’ on the following.9 Now he disagrees with R. Joshua b. Levi, for R. Joshua b. Levi said: What is the meaning of ‘Hallelujah? Praise him with many praises.10 Further, he [R. Joshua b. Levi] is self-contradictory. For R. Joshua b. Levi said: The Book of Psalms was uttered with ten synonyms of praise, viz.: nizzuah [victory], niggun [melody], maskil,11 mizmor [psalm], shir [song], ashre [happy], tehillah [praise], tefillah [prayer], hodayah [thanksgiving] [and] hallelujah. The greatest of all is ‘hallelujah,’ because it embraces the [Divine] Name and praise simultaneously.12
Rab Judah said in Samuel's name: The Song in the Torah13 was uttered by Moses and Israel when they ascended from the [Red] Sea. And who recited this Hallel?14 The prophets among them ordained that Israel should recite it at every important epoch and at every misfortune — may it not come upon them! and when they are redeemed they recite [in gratitude] for their redemption.
It was taught, R. Meir used to say: All the praises which are stated in the Book of psalms, David uttered all of them, for it is said, The prayers of David the son of Jesse are ended [kallu]:15 read not kallu but kol ellu [all these].16 Who recited this Hallel? R. Jose said: My son Eleazar maintains [that] Moses and Israel said it when they ascended from the [Red] Sea, but his college disagree with him, averring that David said it. But is view is prefer able to theirs: Is it possible that Israel slaughtered their Passover-offerings or took their palm-branches without uttering song!17 Another argument: Micah's image18 stands at Beki19 and Israel recites the Hallel!20
Our Rabbis taught: As for all the songs and praises to which David gave utterance in the Book of Psalms, R. Joshua said: He spoke them in reference to himself; R. Joshua said: He spoke them with reference to the [Jewish] community; while the Sages maintain: Some of them refer to the community, while others refer to himself. [Thus:] those which are couched in the singular bear upon himself, while those which are couched in the plural allude to the community. Nizzuah and niggun21 [introduce psalms] relating to the future; maskil [indicates that it was spoken] through a meturgeman [interpreter]; [the superscription] To David, a psalm’ intimates that the Shechinah rested upon him and then he uttered [that] song; ‘a psalm of david’ intimates that he [first] uttered [that particular] psalm and then the Shechinah rested upon him. This teaches you that the Shechinah rests [upon man] neither in indolence nor in gloom nor in frivolity nor in levity, nor in vain pursuits,22 but only in rejoicing connected with a religious act, for it is said, ‘but now bring me a minstrel.’ And it came to pass, when the minstrel played, that he hand of the lord came upon him.23 Rab Judah said in Rab's name: And it is likewise so in a matter of halachah.24 R. Nahman said: And it is likewise so for a good dream.25 But that is not so, for R. Giddal said in Rab's name: If a scholar sits before his teacher and his lips do not drip anxiety.26 they shall be burnt, for it is said, His lips are as lilies [shoshanim], dropping with flowing myrrh [mor ‘ober]:27 read not shoshanim but sheshonim [that study]; read not mor'ober but mar ‘ober [dropping anxiety]? — There is no difficulty: One applies to the teacher, the other to the disciple. Alternatively, both refer to the teacher, yet there is no difficulty: the one holds good before he commences; the other, after he commences. Even as Rabbah used to say something humorous to his scholars before he commenced [his discourse], in order to amuse them;28 after that he sat in awe and commenced the lecture.
Our Rabbis taught: Who uttered this Hallel? R. Eleazar said: Moses ad Israel uttered it when they stood by the [Red] Sea. They exclaimed, ‘Not unto us, not unto us,’29 and the Holy Spirit responded. ‘For mine own sake, for mine own sake, will I do it.’30 R. Judah said: Joshua and Israel uttered it when the kings of Canaan attacked them. They exclaimed, ‘Not unto us [etc.]’ and the Holy Spirit responded etc. R. Eleazar the Modiite said: Deborah and Barak uttered it when Sisera attacked them. They exclaimed, ‘Not unto us [etc.].’ and the Holy Spirit responded. ‘For Mine own sake, for Mine own sake, will I do it.’ R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah said: Hezekiah and his companions uttered it when Sennacherib attacked them. They exclaimed, ‘Not unto us [etc.]’ and the Holy Spirit responded etc. R. Akiba said: Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah uttered it when the wicked Nebuchadnezzar rose against them. They exclaimed, ‘Not unto us etc.,’ and the Holy Spirit responded etc. R. Jose the Galilean said: Mordecai and Esther uttered it when the wicked Haman rose against them. They supplicated, ‘Not unto us etc.’, and the Holy Spirit responded etc. But the Sages maintain: The prophets among them enacted that the Israelites should recite at every epoch and at every trouble — may it not come to them! — and when they are redeemed, they recite it [in thankfulness] for their delivery.
R. Hisda Said: Hallelujah marks the end of a chapter; Rabbah b. R. Huna said: Hallelujah marks the beginning of a chapter.31 R. Hisda observed: I saw that in the copies of the Psalms used in the college of R. Hanin b. Rab, ‘Hallelujah’ was written in the middle of the chapter,32 which proves that he was in doubt.
R. Hanin b. Raba said: A agree that in the case of, ‘My mouth shall speak the praise of the Lord, and let all flesh bless His holy name for ever and ever.’33 ‘Hallelujah which follows it is the beginning of the [next] psalm. In the wicked shall see, and be vexed; he shall gnash with his teeth, and melt away, the desire of the wicked shall perish:34 the ‘Hallelujah’ which follows it commences the [next] psalm. Again, in the passage. ‘that stated in the house of the lord in the night seasons,35 the following ‘Hallelujah commences the [next] psalm.36 Bible scholars37 add the following: He will drink of the brook by the way, therefore will he lift up the head:38 Hallelujah which follows it is the beginning of the next psalm. The fear of the lord is the be ginning of wisdom; a good understanding have a they that do thereafter; His praise endureth for ever.39 ‘Hallelujah which follows it is the beginning of the [next] psalm.
Shall we say that this is dependent on Tannaim? [For we learned:] HOW FAR DOES HE RECITE IT? BETH SHAMMAI MAINTAIN: UNTIL AS A JOYOUS MOTHER OF CHILDREN, WHILE BETH HILLEL. SAY: UNTIl. THE FLINT INTO A FOUNTAIN OF WATERS.’ But another [Baraitha] taught: How far does he recite it? Beth Shammai maintain: Until ‘when Israel came forth out of Egypt.’40 while Beth Hillel say: Until, ‘Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us.’41
(1) In Ex. XVII, 16: The hand upon kesjah (E.V.: the throne of the Lord).
(2) II Sam. XII, 25: and he called his name jedidjah (E.V. Jedidiah).
(3) Though Jah means the ‘Lord,’ it combines to form a single word.
(4) Ps CXVIII, 5: He answered me ba-merhabjah (E.V.: with great enlargement]; lit., ‘with the Lord's enlargement.
(5) Rashal reads: Raba:
(6) Is it one word or two?
(7) This would affect e.g., the manner of its writing. If ‘Jedid’ is written incorrectly, it can be erased and rewritten. But Jah, being sacred (i.e., God's name), must not be erased and would have to be cut out entirely, together with its parchment.
(8) I.e., at the college of R. Hiyya.
(9) Thus he evidently regards it as two words.
(10) Since he interprets the whole word thus, he evidently regards it as one.
(11) V. e.g., superscriptions to Ps. XLII, XLIV, and XLV; perhaps lit., ‘a psalm giving instruction.’
(12) Thus he interprets ‘Jah’ separately.
(13) ‘Torah’ bears here its narrower connotation of Pentateuch. The ‘Song’ referred to is that contained in Ex. XV.
(14) Ps. CXIII-CXVIII. [MS.M. (gloss) inserts: Moses and Israel recited it].
(15) Ps. LXXII, 20.
(16) The verse thus reads: All these are prayers etc.
(17) Until the time of David — surely not.
(18) V. Judg. XVII.
(19) [Probably a variant of Bochin, v. judg. II, 1].
(20) Rashbam: Hallel, which contains a sweeping condemnation of idolatry (v. Ps. CXV, 5-8), could not have been composed in the days of David while Micah's idolatrous image was still in existence; hence it must have been composed at the Red Sea.
(21) V. supra.
(22) Lit., ‘idle words’ or chatter.
(23) II Kings III, 15. Maharsha in Shab. 30a observes that the verse is quoted to show that the Shechinah does not rest on a man who is plunged in gloom, Elisha requiring the minstrel to dissipate the gloom occasioned by Jehoram's visit.
(24) Serious study should be preceded by light-hearted conversation.
(25) Going to sleep in good spirits promotes happy dreams.
(26) Lit., ‘bitterness’. To show due reverence.
(27) Cant. V, 13.
(28) Lit., ‘and the scholars rejoiced’.
(29) Ps. CXV, 1.
(30) Isa. XLVIII, 11.
(31) Where a single ‘Hallelujah separates two psalms (e.g., Ps. CXXXIV and CXXXV), R. Hisda maintains that it ends the first, while Rabbah b. R. Huna places it at the beginning of the second.
(32) I.e., the two men were into one with ‘Hallelujah’ in the middle.
(33) Ps. CXLV, 21.
(34) Ps. CXII, 10.
(35) Ibid. CXXXIV, 1.
(36) This is somewhat difficult as ‘Hallelujah’ does not immediately follow. Possibly the phrase is quoted loosely to indicate which psalm is meant, viz., CXXXIV, ‘Hallelujah,’ the commencing the next. Tosaf. however quotes ‘Ye that stand in the house of the Lord, in the courts of the house of our God’. In our edd. this is Ps. CXXXV, 2, and does not end the psalm; but according to Tosaf. it does, while v. 3, which begins with ‘Hallelujah,’ (E.V. praise ye the lord) is the beginning of another psalm.
(37) Presumably scholars who specialized in the study of the Bible.
(38) Ps. CX, 7.
(39) Ps. CXI, 10.
(40) Ibid. CXIV, 1.
(41) Ibid. CXV, 1. In each case whereas the Mishnah quotes the ending of the chapters according to our edd., the Baraitha quotes the beginning of the following chapters.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 117b
Surely then they differ in this: he who says, until ‘as a joyous mother of children’, holds that [the following] ‘Hallelujah’ [praise ye lord] is the beginning of the [next] psalm; while he who says until, ‘,when Israel came forth out of Egypt’, holds that ‘Hallelujah is the end of the [previous] psalm!1 — R. Hisda reconciles it with his view. All agree that ‘Hallelujah is the end of the psalm. Hence the statement, until ‘when Israel came forth out of Egypt is well. While he who says, until ‘a joyous mother of children is meant inclusively. Then let him say, ‘up to "hallelujah”’? And should you answer, because we would not know which ‘Hallelujah,’ then let him say, ‘up to the "Hallelujah” of “as a joyous mother of children"’? This is a difficulty . Rabbah b. R. Huna reconciles it with his view. All agree that ‘Hallelujah is the beginning of the psalm. Hence the statement, until ‘as a joyous mother of children’ is well. While he who says, until ‘when Israel came forth’ does not mean it inclusively. Then let him say, ‘until the Halelujah? And should you answer, because we would not know which ‘Hallelujah is meant, then let him say, ‘until the Hallelujah of "when Israel came forth"’? This is a difficulty.
AND HE CONCLUDES WITH [A FORMULA OF] REDEMPTION. Raba said: [The ending of the benediction following] the reciting of the shema’2 and Hallel is ‘who redeemed Israel’;3 that of prayer4 is ‘the redeemer of Israel’.5 What is the reason? Because it is a petition.6 R. Zera said: [The formula] in kiddush is ‘who did sanctify us with His commandments and did command us’; that of prayer is ‘sanctify us with Thy Commandments.’ What is the reason? Because it is supplication. R. Aha b. Jacob said: And he must refer to the Egyptian exodus in the kiddush of the day. [For] here it is written, that thou mayest remember the day [when thou camest forth out of the land of Egypt],7 while there it is written, Remember the sabbath day, to hallow it [by reciting kiddush].8
Rabbah b. Shila said: [The formula] in Prayer is ‘who causest the horn of Salvation to spring forth,’9 while that of the haftarah10 is ‘the shield of David.’ And I will make thee a great man, like unto the name of the great ones [that are in the earth the earth].11 R, Joseph taught: that alludes to the fact that we say ‘the shield of David.’12
R. Simeon b. Lakish said: And I will make thee a great nation:13 that means that we say’, ‘the God of Abraham’; and I will bless thee — that we say, ‘the God of Isaac’; and make thy name great, — that we say, ‘the God of Jacob.’ You might think that we conclude with [a reference to] all of them: therefore it is said, and be thou a blessing: with thee do we conclude, but we do not conclude with all of them.
Raba said: I found the elders of Pumbeditha14 sitting and stating: On the Sabbath, both in Prayer15 and in kiddush [we conclude the benediction with] ‘who sanctifiest the Sabbath.’ On a festival, both in Prayer and in kiddush [we conclude with] ‘who sanctifiest Israel and the [festive] seasons.’ Said I to them, On the contrary, [the formula] of Prayer both on the Sabbath and on a festival is ‘who sanctifiest Israel.’ In the kiddush of the Sabbath [the formula is] ‘who sanctifiest the Sabbath’; On a festival, ‘who sanctifiest Israel and the seasons.’ Now I will state my reason and your reason. Your reason is: the Sabbath is permanently fixed, hence both in Prayer and in kiddush ‘who sanctifiest the Sabbath’ [is said].16 On festivals, which are fixed by Israel, for they intercalate the months17 and fix [the beginnings of] the years,18 ‘who sanctifiest Israel and the seasons’ [is said].19 My reason: Prayer, which is [carried on] in public, [requires] ‘who sanctifiest Israel’;20 as for kiddush, which is [recited] privately [at home], on the Sabbath [the formula is] ‘who sanctifiest the Sabbath,’ while on festivals it is ‘who sanctifiest Israel and the seasons21 That [argument] however is Incorrect: is not prayer [recited] privately [too], and is not kiddush recited pubiicly?-Raba however, holds: Follow the main [practice].22
‘Ulla b. Rab visited Raba. he recited [kiddush] in accordance with the elders of Pumbeditha, and he said nothing to him [in protest]. This proves that Raba retracted. R. Nathan the father of R. Hune the son of R. Nathan23 visited R. Papa. He recited it in accordance with the elders of Pumbeditha, whereupon R. Papa praised him. Rabina said: I visited Meremar at Sura, when the reader24 went down [to the reading desk]25 and recited it as the elders of Pumbeditha. Everybody made to silence him, but he said to them, ‘Leave him alone: the law is as the elders of Pumbeditha.’ Then they did not silence him.26
MISHNAH. THEY FILLED THE THIRD CUP FOR HIM. HE THEN RECITES GRACE AFTER MEALS. OVER THE FOURTH [CUP] HE CONCLUDES THE HALLEL, AND RECITES THE GRACE OF SONG.27 BETWEEN THESE CUPS28 HE MAY DRINK IF HE WISHES; BETWEEN THE THIRD AND THE FOURTH HE MAY NOT DRINK.
GEMARA. R. Hanan said to Raba: This proves that Grace after meals requires a cup [of wine]. Said he to him: Our Rabbis instituted four cups as symbolizing freedom:29 let us perform a religious act with each.30
OVER THE FOURTH [CUP] HE CONCLUDES THE HALLEL, AND RECITES THE GRACE OF SONG.
(1) This of course is on the view of Beth Shammai. The differences in the view of Beth Hillel are then stated for the sake of parallelism (Rashbam).
(2) This is followed by one benediction in the morning and two in the evening, before the ‘Prayer,’ i.e. the Eighteen benedictions.
(3) In the past tense.
(4) The Amidah on weekdays. It consists of the Eighteen Benedictions, the fifth of which is a prayer for redemption.
(5) In the present tense.
(6) For the future. Hence the past tense would be inappropriate.
(7) Deut. XVI, 3.
(8) Ex. XX, 8. ‘Remember’ in the second verse, I.e., the reciting of kiddush (and the Sabbath is an example of a holy days, including Festivals). must include the ‘remember," of the first verse, vi., the Egyptian exodus.
(9) That is the ending of the fifteenth benediction.
(10) V. Glos. It is followed by four benedictions. The reference here is to the third, whose subject-matter is the same as the fifteenth benediction mentioned in the preceding note.
(11) II Sam. VII, 9.
(12) it is a great honour to David that God is designated ‘the shield of David’ in the conclusion of a benediction.
(13) Ex. XII, 2.
(14) Rab Judah and R. ‘Ena, v. Sanh. 17b.
(15) The ‘Amidah on Sabbath and Festivals consists of seven benedictions.
(16) Because its sanctification depends entirely on God.
(17) The Jewish month consists of either 29 or 30 days, the length of each month being fixed by the Jewish authorities.
(18) Thereby fixing the dates of festivals too.
(19) Thus Israel must be mentioned, because through Israel the festivals are sanctified.
(20) I.e., a reference to the whole community.
(21) The emphasis being on the sacred nature of the day, ‘Israel’ must be mentioned in the latter case because the sanctification (If the seasons is dependant thereon (supra).
(22) Prayer is essentially intended for the community,not withstanding that private prayer too is possible. Again, kiddush is chiefly intended for the home (‘in the place of the meal’), though it is also recited in the synagogue on account of the wayfarers.
(23) ‘The son of R. Nathan’ should probably be deleted.
(24) Lit., ‘the deputy of the congregation.’ In the Talmud this is the name of the reader who leads the congregation in prayer; the modern title ‘hazzan’ dates from the post-Talmudic period.
(25) In Talmudic times this was on a lower level than the rest of the synagogue building, in accordance with Ps. CXXX, 1: out of the depths have I called Thee O Lord.
(26) Omitted in MS. M. var. lec. add: And the law is as the elders of Pumbeditha.
(27) The phrase is explained in the GEMARA.
(28) Viz., first, second and third.
(29) This is omitted in Rashbam.
(30) Hence Grace is recited over the third. But on other occasions a cup may not be required for Grace after meals.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 118a
What is ‘THE GRACE OF SONG’? Rab Judah said: ‘They shall praise Thee, O Lord our God’; while R. Johanan said: ‘The breath of a living [etc.]’1
Our Rabbis taught: At the fourth he concludes the Hallel and recites the great Hallel this is the view of R. Tarfon. Others say: The Lord is my shepherd; I shall not want.’2 What comprises the great Hallel? Rab3 Judah said: From ‘O give thanks’ until ‘the rivers of Babylon.’4 While R. Johanan said: From ‘A song of ascents’ until ‘the rivers of Babylon.’5 R. Aha b. Jacob said: From ‘for the Lord hath chosen Jacob unto himself’6 until ‘the rivers of Babylon.’ And why is it called the great Hallel? — Said R. Johanan: Because the Holy One, blessed be He, sits in the heights of the universe and distributes food to all creatures.7
R. Joshua b. Levi said: To what do these twenty-six [verses of] ‘Give thanks’8 correspond? To the twenty-six generations which the Holy One, blessed be He, created in His world; though He did not give them the Torah, He sustained them by His love.9
R. Hisda said:10 What is meant by the verse, O give thanks unto the Lord, for He is good?11 Give thanks unto the Lord who exacts man's debts by means of His goodness:12 the wealthy man through his ox and the poor man through his sheep,13 the fatherless through his egg and the widow through her fowl.
R. Johanan said: Man's sustenance involves twice as much suffering as [that of] a woman in childbirth. For of a woman in childbirth it is written, in pain [be-’ezeb — thou shalt bring forth children],14 whereas of sustenance it is written, in toil [be-’izzabon — shalt thou eat].15 R. Johanan also said: Man's sustenance is more difficult [to come by] than the redemption, for of redemption it is written, the angel who hath redeemed me from all evil,16 thus a mere angel [sufficed], whereas of sustenance it is written, the God who hath fed [shepherded] me.17 R. Joshua b. Levi said: When the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Adam, ‘Thorns also and thistles shall it bring forth to thee,’18 tears flowed from his eyes, and he pleaded before Him, ‘Sovereign of the Universe! Shall I and my ass eat out of the same crib!’ But as soon as He said to him, ‘In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread,’19 his mind was set at rest. R. Simeon b. Lakish said: Happy are we that we did not remain subject to the first! Abaye observed: Yet we have still not [altogether] escaped from it, for we eat herbs of the field.20
R. Shizbi said in the name of R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah: A man's sustenance is as difficult [to provide] as the dividing of the Red Sea, for it is written, Who giveth food to a flesh,21 and near it, To Him who divided the Red Sea in sunder.22
R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah said: A man's excretory organs [when blocked up] are as painful as the day of death and [as difficult to overcome]23 as the dividing of the Red Sea, for it is said, The prisoner hasteneth to be loosed; [and he shall not go down dying into the pit, neither shall his bread fail];24 and that is followed by [For I am the Lord thy God,] who stirreth tip the sea, that the waves thereof roar.25
Again. R. Shesheth said on the authority of R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah: He who despises the Festivals26 is as though he engaged in idolatry, for it is said, Thou shalt make thee no molten gods,27 which is followed by, The feast of unleavened bread shalt thou keep.28
R. Shesheth also said on the authority of R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah: Whoever relates slander, and whoever accepts slander, and whoever gives false testimony against his neighbour, deserve to be cast to dogs, for it is said, ye shall cast to the dogs,29 which is followed by, Thou shalt not take up a false report,30 which may be read tashshi.31
Now since there is the great Hallel, why do we recite this one?32 Because it includes [a mention of] the following five things: The exodus from Egypt, the dividing of the Red Sea, the giving of the Torah [Revelation], the resurrection of the dead, and the pangs of Messiah.33 The exodus from Egypt, as it is written, When Israel came forth out of Egypt;34 as the dividing of the Red Sea: The sea saw it, and fled;35 the giving of the Torah: The mountains skipped like rams;36 resurrection of the dead: I shall walk before the Lord [in the land of the living];37 the pangs of Messiah: Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us.38
R. Johanan also said: ‘Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us’ refers to the servitude to [foreign] powers. Others state, R. Johanan said: ‘Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us’ refers to the war of Gog and Magog.39 R. Nahman b. Isaac said: [Hallel is recited] because it contains [an allusion to] the deliverance of the souls of the righteous from the Gehenna, as it is said, I beseech Thee, O Lord, deliver my soul.40 Hezekiah said: Because it alludes to the descent of the righteous41 into the fiery furnace and their ascent from it. ‘Their descent,’ for it is written, Not unto us, O Lord, not unto us: [this] Hananiah said; ‘But unto Thy name give glory’ was said by Mishael; For Thy mercy, a rid for Thy truth's sake, by Azariah; Wherefore should the nations say?42 by all of them. ‘Their ascent from the fiery furnace,’ for it is written, O praise the Lord, all ye nations;43 [this] Hananiah said; Laud Him, all ye peoples, was said by Mishael; For His mercy is great toward us,44 by Azariah; ‘And the truth of the Lord endureth for ever,’ by all of them. Others maintain [that] it was Gabriel who said, ‘And the truth of the Lord endureth for ever.’ [For] when the wicked Nimrod cast our father Abraham into the fiery furnace, Gabriel said to the Holy One, blessed be He: ‘Sovereign of the Universe! Let me go down, cool [it], and deliver that righteous man from the fiery furnace.’ Said the Holy One, blessed be He, to him: ‘I am unique in My world, and he is unique in his world: it is fitting for Him who is unique to deliver him who is unique. But because the Holy One, blessed be He, does not withhold the [merited] reward of any creature, he said to him, ‘Thou shalt be privileged to deliver three of his descendants.’45
R. Simeon the Shilonite lectured: When the wicked Nebuchadnezzar cast Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah into the fiery furnace, Yurkami, Prince of hail,46 rose before the Holy One, blessed be He, and said to Him: ‘Sovereign of the Universe! Let me go down and cool the furnace and save these righteous men from the fiery furnace.’ Said Gabriel to him, ‘The might of the Holy One, blessed be He, is not thus [manifested], for thou art the Prince of hail, and all know that water extinguishes fire. But I, the Prince of fire, will go down and cool it within
(1) V. P. B. p. 125.
(2) Ps. XXIII.
(3) Text as read by Asheri.
(4) I.e., Ps. CXXXVII.
(5) Ps. CXX-CXXXIV all bear the superscription ‘A song of ascents.’ Hence he probably means Ps. CXX-CXXXVI.
(6) Ps. CXXXV. 4
(7) The subject matter of Ps. CXXXVI, 25-26. Which is a great thing indeed, and for that He is praised by the reciting of the great Hallel.
(8) Ps. CXXXVI contains twenty-six verses, each of which expresses gratitude to God.
(9) There were twenty-six generations from Adam until Moses. These, lacking the Torah, could not be sustained trough their own merit but only through God's love.
(10) Var. lec.: R. Joshua b. Levi also said.
(11) Ps. CXXXVI, 1 .
(12) I.e., from what He has granted to man.
(13) When people must suffer loss in expiation of wrong, the loss is regulated according to their means.
(14) Gen. III, 16.
(15) Ibid. 17 ‘Izzabon is more emphatic than ‘ezeb (both belong to the same root), and therefore denotes greater suffering.
(16) Gen. XLVIII, 16.
(17) Ibid. 15.
(18) Gen. III, 18.
(19) Ibid. 19.
(20) Wild herbs. The translation is that of the amended text given in the margin. [Cur. edd.: ‘Happy were we had we remained subject to the first,’ that is, and thus been spared the sweat of the brow in search for a livelihood. Thereupon Abaye observes — we still retain part of this advantage in that there are wild herbs which provide food without toil.]
(21) Ps. CXXXVI, 25.
(22) Ibid. 13.
(23) The Heb. קשה has both meanings.
(24) Isa. LI, 14.
(25) Ibid. 15. This is understood as an allusion to the dividing of the Red Sea.
(26) The Intermediate Days of the Festival, doing unnecessary work thereon (Rashi).
(27) Ex. XXXIV, 17.
(28) Ibid. 18.
(29) Ex. XXII, 30.
(30) Ex. XXIII, 1.
(31) [תשיא from rt. meaning ‘to entice’, ‘induce’, ‘mislead’, hence attempting to influence the judge to one side by bearing false testimony against another person. v. Sanh., Sonc. ed. p. 31 n. 10]. Rashbam deletes this phrase, holding that the whole follows from the verse as it stands.
(32) Viz., Ps. CXIII-CXVIII.
(33) I.e,, the suffering which must precede his coming.
(34) Ibid. CXIV, 1.
(35) Ibid. 3.
(36) Ibid. 4; cf. Judg. V. 4f.
(37) Ps. CXVI, 9.
(38) Ibid. CXV, 1. This is now interpreted as a prayer to be spared the great distress of that time; cf. Sanh. 97a.
(39) V. Ezek. XXXVIII and Sanh., Sonc, ed. p. 630. n. 7.
(40) Ps. CXVI, 4.
(41) Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah.
(42) Ps. CXV, 2.
(43) Ps. CXVII, 1.
(44) Ibid. 2.
(45) And when that promise was fulfilled, Gabriel said ‘and the truth’ etc.
(46) The presiding genius over hail-storms.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 118b
and heat it without,1 and will thus perform a double miracle.2 Said the Holy One, blessed be He, to him, ‘Go down.’ It was then that Gabriel commenced [with praise] and said, ‘And the truth of the Lord endureth for ever.’
R. Nathan said: it was the fish in the sea who said, ‘and the truth of the Lord endureth for ever,’ this being in accordance with R. Huna. For R. Huna said: The Israelites of that generation [sc. of the Egyptian exodus] were men of little faith, and as Rabbah b. Mari expounded: What is taught by the verse, But they were rebellious at the sea, even at the Red Sea?3 This teaches that in that moment the Israelites were rebellious and said: Just as we ascend at one side [of the sea] so do the Egyptians ascend from another. Whereupon the Holy One, blessed be He, ordered the Prince of the Sea,4 ‘Spue them forth on to the dry land.’ Said he to Him, ‘Sovereign of the Universe! Does a master make a gift to his servant and then take it back from him!’ ‘I will give you one and a half times their number,’ He replied. ‘Sovereign of the Universe, he pleaded, ‘can a servant claim [a debt] from his Master!’ ‘Let the brook of Kishon be surety for Me,’ He answered. Straightway he spewed them forth on to the dry land, and Israel came and saw them, as it is said, and Israel saw the Egyptians dead on the sea-shore.5
What is [this allusion to] ‘one and a half times their number’? For in the case of Pharaoh it is written, [and he took] six hundred chosen chariots,6 whereas in the case of Sisera it is written, [And Sisera gathered . . . ] nine hundred chariots of iron.7 When Sisera came [to fight Israel] he advanced against them with iron staves. Thereupon the Holy One, blessed be He, brought forth the stars out of their orbits against them, as it is written, The stars in their courses fought against Sisera.8 As soon as the stars of heaven descended upon them they heated those iron staves . So they went down to cool them and to refresh themselves in the brook of Kishon. Said the Holy One, blessed be He, to the brook of Kishon, ‘Go and deliver your pledge.’ Straightway the brook of Kishon swept them out and cast them into the sea, as it is said, The brook Kishon swept them away, that ancient brook.9 What does ‘that ancient brook’ mean? The brook that became a surety in ancient times. In that hour the fish in the sea opened [their mouths] and exclaimed, ‘and the truth of the Lord endureth for ever.’
R. Simeon b. Lakish said, What means ‘Who maketh the barren woman [‘akereth ] to dwell in her house’?10 The congregation of Israel said before the Holy One, blessed be He, ‘Sovereign of the Universe! Thy sons have made me like a weasel that dwells in the vaults [‘ikare]11 of houses.’12
Raba lectured, What means, I love that the Lord should hear [my voice and my supplications]?13 The congregation of Israel said: Sovereign of the Universe! When am I loved by Thee? When Thou hearest the voice of my supplications. I was brought low [dallothi], and He saved me.14 The congregation of Israel spoke before the Holy One, blessed be He, Sovereign of the Universe! Though I am poor [dallah] in religious deeds, yet I am Thine, and it is fitting that I should be saved.
R. Kahana said: When R. Ishmael son of R. Jose fell sick, Rabbi sent to him: Tell us two or three things which you have said to us in your father's name. He sent back to him, Thus did my father say: What is meant by the verse, O praise the Lord, all ye nations:15 What business have the nations of the world here?16 This is its meaning: ‘O praise the Lord, all ye nations’ for the mighty and wondrous deeds which He wrought for them; all the more we, since ‘His mercy is great toward us.’ Furthermore [he sent word to him]: Egypt is destined to bring a gift to the Messiah. He will think not to accept it from them, but the Holy One, blessed be He, will instruct him, ‘Accept it from them: they furnished hospitality to My children in Egypt.’ Immediately, ‘Nobles shall come out of Egypt [bringing gifts].17 Then Ethiopia shall argue with herself: If those [the Egyptians] who enslaved them are thus [treated], how much the more we, who did not enslave them! At that the Holy One, blessed be He, shall bid him: ‘Accept it from then,.’ Straightway, ‘Ethiopia shall hasten to stretch out her hands unto God.’18 Then shall the wicked Roman State argue with herself: If those who are not their brethren are thus [accepted], how much the more we, their brethren.19 But the Holy One, blessed be He, will say to Gabriel: Rebuke the wild beast of the reeds [kaneh]; the multitude of [‘adath] the bulls:20 rebuke the wild beast [Rome] and take thee possession [keneh] of the congregation [‘edah].21 Another interpretation: rebuke the wild beast of the reeds, i.e.. that dwells among the reeds, as it is written, The boar out of the wood doth ravage it, that which moveth in the field feedeth on it.22 R. Hiyya b. Abba interpreted it in R. Johanan's name: Rebuke the wild beast all of whose actions may be recorded with the same pen.23 ‘The multitude of the bulls [abbirim], with the calves of the people’:24 that means that they slaughtered the valiant [abbirim] like calves which have no owners.25 ‘Everyone opening his hand with the desire of money’:26 they stretch out their hand to accept the money, but do not carry out its owners’ wishes. ‘He hath scattered the people that delight in approaches’: what caused Israel to be scattered among the nations? The approaches [to the nations] which they desired.27
He also sent to him: There are three hundred and sixty five thoroughfares in the great city of Rome, and in each there were three hundred and sixty five palaces; and in each palace there were three hundred and sixty five storeys,28 and each storey contained sufficient to provide the whole world with food.29 R. Simeon b. Rabbi asked Rabbi — others say, R. Ishmael son of R. Jose asked Rabbi — For whom are all these [other storeys]? — For you, your companions and acquaintances, as it is said, And her gain and her hire shall be holiness to the Lord,’ it shall not be stored nor treasured; for her gain shall be for them that dwell before the Lord.30 What does ‘it shall not be stored’ mean? — R. Joseph learned: ‘It shall not be stored’ refers to a storehouse [granary]; ‘nor treasured,’ to a treasure house.31 What means ‘for them that dwell before the Lord’? — Said R. Eleazar:
(1) To burn those who threw them into it; cf. Dan. III, 22.
(2) Lit., ‘a miracle within a miracle.’
(3) Ps. CVI, 7.
(4) According to ancient beliefs the sea, like the elements in general, were in charge of particular angels.
(5) Ex. XIV, 30.
(6) Ibid. 7.
(7) Judg. IV, 13.
(8) Ibid. V, 20.
(9) Ibid. 21.
(10) Ps. CXIII, 9.
(11) Lit., ‘root’, ‘foundations’ hence ‘vaults’.
(12) The congregation of Israel is personified here as a woman, as often, and she complains that through the sins of her less worthy children she is ashamed of the daylight but must hide like the weasels in the dark vaults of houses.
(13) Ps. CXVI, 1.
(14) Ibid. 6.
(15) Ibid. CXVII 1.
(16) Why should they praise God because ‘His mercy is great toward us’ (ibid. 2)?
(17) Ps, LXVIII, 32.
(19) Rome was always identified with Edom, the state built by Esau's descendants; v. Gen. XXXV, 1.
(20) Ps. LXVIII, 31.
(21) I.e., Israel.
(22) Ps. LXXX, 14. Kaneh is now interpreted as the cane reeds of the forest, the boar (or, swine) being Rome. This interpretation is probably connected with the midrash that when Solomon married Pharaoh's daughter an angel planted a large reed in the sea whereon Rome was built (Midrash Rabbah on Cant. 1, 6).
(23) Kaneh is now connected with the same word meaning feather, quill. — All their activities are of the same nature — evil to Israel.
(24) Ps. LXVIII, 31.
(25) To protect them.
(26) Reading mithrapes as mattir pas — the letters are almost the same — opening the hand, and connecting raze with razon, desire; the money that is given to ensure the fulfilment of one's wishes. E.V.: Every one submitting himself with pieces of silver.
(27) Maharsha retains the natural translation ‘war’: had they submitted to Nebuchadnezzar and Titus at the first and second Temples respectively, instead of desiring war, they would not have gone into exile.
(28) מעלה means a stairway, and is probably to be understood as in the text.
(29) Maharsha: The number three hundred and sixty five is symbolic, because the Gentiles depend on the solar year of three hundred and sixty five days.
(30) Isa. XXIII, 18.
(31) I.e., of gold and silver.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 119a
They who recognize their colleagues’ place in the academy. Others state, R. Eleazar said: They who welcome their colleagues in the academy.1 What does ‘and for stately clothing’ [li-mekasseh ‘athik]2 mean? That refers to him who ‘conceals’ [mekasseh] the things which the Ancient [‘athik] of days3 concealed. And what is that? The secrets of the Torah.4 Others explain: That refers to him who reveals the things which the Ancient of days concealed [kissah]. And what is it ? The reasons of the Torah.5
R. Kahana said on the authority of R. Ishmael b. R. Jose: What is meant by, ‘For the leader [la-menazzeah]: a Psalm of David?6 Sing praises to Him who rejoices when they conquer Him.7 Come and see how the character of the Holy One, blessed be He, is not like that of mortal man. The character of mortal man is such that when he is conquered he is unhappy, but when the Holy One is conquered He rejoices,for it is said, Therefore He said that He would destroy them, had not Moses His chosen stood before Him in the breach, [to turn back His wrath].8
R. Kahana said on the authority of R. Ishmael son of R. Jose, and our Rabbis said in the name of R. Judah Nisi'ah:9 What is implied by the verse, And they had the hands of a man under their wings?10 Yado [his hand] is written:11 this refers to the Hand of the Holy One, blessed be He, which is spread out under the wings of the Hayyoth,12 in order to accept penitents [and shield them] from13 the Attribute of Justice.14 Rab Judah said in Samuel's name: All the gold and silver in the world Joseph gathered in and brought to Egypt, for it is said, And Joseph gathered up all the money that was found [in the land of Egypt, and in the land of Canaan].15 Now I know it only about that of Egypt and Canaan; whence do we know it about that of other countries? Because it is stated, And all the countries came unto Egypt [to Joseph to buy corn].16 And when the Israelites migrated from Egypt they carried it away with them, for it is said, and they despoiled the Egyptians.17 R. Assi said: They made it like a trap in which there is no corn;18 R. Simeon b. Lakish said: Like a pond without fish.19 Thus it [the treasure] lay until Rehoboam, when Shishak king of Egypt came and seized it from Rehoboam, for it is said, And it came to pass in the fifth year of king Rehoboam, that Shishak king of Egypt came up against Jerusalem; and he took away the treasures of the house of the Lord, and the treasures of the king's house.20 Then Zerah, king of Ethiopia, came and seized it from Shishak; then Assa came and seized it from Zerah king of Ethiopia and sent it to Hadrimon the son of Tabrimon. The Ammonites came and seized it from Hadrimon the son of Tabrimon. Jehoshaphat came and seized it from the Ammonites, and it remained so until Ahaz, when Sennacherib came and took it from Ahaz. Then Hezekiah came and took it from Sennacherib, and it remained thus until Zedekiah, when the Babylonians [Chaldeans] came and seized it from Zedekiah. The Persians came and took it from the Chaldeans; the Greeks came and took it from the Persians . the Romans came and took it from the Greeks, and it is still lying in Rome.
R. Hama son of R. Hanina said: Three treasures did Joseph hide in Egypt: one was revealed to Korah; one to Antoninus the son of Severus;21 and the third is stored up for the righteous for the future time.
Riches kept by the owner thereof to his hurt:22 R. Simeon b. Lakish said: This refers to Korah's wealth. And a the substance that was at their feet.23 R. Eleazar said: This refers to a man's wealth, which puts him on his feet. R. Levi said: The keys of Korah's treasure-house were a load for three hundred white mules,24 though all the keys and locks were of leather.25
(Mnemonic: Diyash, ADYish, Kashdek, me-Odeka)26 R. Samuel b. Nahmani said in R. Jonathan's name: I will give thanks unto Thee, for Thou hast answered me27 was said by David; The stone which the builders rejected is become the chief corner-stone;28 by Yishai [Jesse]; This is the Lord's doing,29 by his brothers; This is the day which the Lord hath made30 by Samuel. We beseech ‘Thee, O Lord, save now!31 was said by his brothers: We beseech Thee, O Lord, make us now to prosper! by David; Blessed be he that cometh in the name of the Lord,32 by Jesse; We bless you out of the house of the Lord,32 by Samuel; The Lord is God, and hath given us light,33 by all of them; Order the festival procession with boughs, by Samuel; Thou art my God, and I will give thanks unto Thee,34 by David; Thou art my God, I will exalt Thee, by all of them.
We learned elsewhere: Where it is the practice
(1) I.e.. who treat them in a friendly fashion. Maharsha: who are among the earliest, so that they can greet their colleagues who arrive latter.
(2) This completes the verse.
(3) God; v. Dan. VII, 13.
(4) Esoteric teaching, which was to be confined to the few.
(5) It is meritorious to investigate the reasons of Scriptural laws.
(6) This is the superscription of a number of psalms; ‘menazzeah is derived from nazzeah, to be victorious.
(7) I.e., prevail upon Him to rescind intended punishment. La-menazzeah is now understood in a causative sense: to Him who makes men victorious.
(8) Ps. CVI, 23.
(9) The Prince. I.e., R. Judah II, — The text is as emended in the margin.
(10) Ezek. I, 8.
(11) Instead of yede, the hands of.
(12) Lit., ‘living creatures’ — the angels that bore the Divine Chariot, as described in Ezek. I.
(13) Var. lec.: on account of.
(14) Justice, Mercy. etc., are often hypostasized.
(15) Gen. XLVII, 14.
(16) Ibid. XLI, 57.
(17) Ex. XII, 36.
(18) To attract the birds. Bird-traps were set with corn. [Aliter: Like a fortress without corn
(pro. visions). Var. lec.: like a net without fish.]
(19) Var. lec.
(v. D.S.): like husks without grain.
(20) I Kings XIV, 25f.
(21) On his identity v. Sanh., Sonc. ed. p. 610 n.7.
(22) Eccl. V, 12.
(23) Deut. XI, 6.
(24) This of course is not to be taken literally.
(25) Instead of metal, so as to be light in weight, yet they were such a load.
(26) D == David; Y == Yishay (Jesse); A ==Ehaw (his brothers); Sh == Shemuel (Samuel), K == kulan (all of them); me-Odeka == on the passage commencing Odeka, ‘I will give thanks unto Thee’.
(27) Ps. CXVIII, 21.
(28) Ibid. 22.
(29) Ibid. 23.
(30) Ibid. 24.
(31) Ibid. 25.
(32) Ibid. 26.
(33) Ibid. 27.
(34) Ibid. 28.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 119b
to repeat,1 he must repeat; to recite it once only,2 he must recite them once only; to pronounce a blessing after it [sc. the Hallel], he must pronounce a blessing upon it: it all depends on local custom. Abaye observed: This was taught only [about a blessing] after it, but a blessing before it is obligatory, for Rab Judah said in Samuel's name: A blessing must be recited for a religious duties before [‘ober] they are performed. How is it implied that ‘ober connotes priority? — Said R. Nahman b. Isaac: Because it is written, Then Ahimaaz ran by the way of the Plain, and overran [wa-ya'abor, i.e., ran before] the Cushite.3 Abaye said: [It follows] from this: And he himself passed over [‘abar] before them.4 Others quote the following: And their king is passed on [wa-ya'abor] before them, and the Lord at the head of them.5
It was taught: Rabbi repeated [certain] verses of it6 [sc. Hallel]; R. Eleazar b. Perata added passages7 to it. What did he add? Said Abaye: He added [passages] for repetition from ‘I will give thanks to thee’ and onwards.
R. ‘Awira lectured, Sometimes stating it in R. Ammi's, Sometimes in R. Assi's name: What is meant by. And the child grew, and was weaned [wa-yiggamel]?8 The Holy One, blessed be He, will make a great banquet for the righteous on the day He manifests [yigmol] His love to the seed of Isaac.9 After they have eaten and drunk, the cup of Grace10 will be offered to our father Abraham, that he should recite Grace, but he will answer them, ‘I cannot say Grace, because Ishmael issued from me. Then Isaac will be asked, ‘Take it and say Grace.’ ‘I cannot say Grace,’ he will reply, ‘because Esau issued from me.’ Then Jacob will be asked: ‘Take it and say Grace.’ ‘I cannot say Grace,’ he will reply. ‘because I married two sisters during [both] their lifetimes, whereas the Torah was destined to forbid them to me. Then Moses will be asked, ‘Take it and say Grace.’ ‘I cannot say Grace, because I was not privileged to enter Eretz Yisrael either in life or in death.’ Then Joshua will be asked: ‘Take it and say Grace.’ ‘I cannot say Grace,’ he will reply, ‘because I was not privileged to have a son,’ for it is written, Joshua the son of Nun;11 Nun his son, Joshua his son.12 Then David will be asked: ‘Take it and say Grace.’ ‘I will say Grace, and it is fitting for me to say Grace,’ he will reply, as it is said, I will lift up the cup of salvation, and call upon the name of the Lord.13 MISHNAH. ONE MAY NOT CONCLUDE AFTER THE PASCHAL MEAL [BY SAYING]. ‘NOW TO THE ENTERTAINMENT! [APIKOMAN].’14
GEMARA. What does APIKOMAN mean? Said Rab: That they must not remove from one company to another.15 Samuel said: E.g., mushrooms for myself and pigeons for Abba.16 R. Hanina b. Shila and R. Johanan said: E.g., dates, parched ears of corn, and nuts. It was taught as R. Johanan: You must not conclude after the Paschal meal with e.g., dates, parched ears, and nuts.
Rab Judah said: One may not conclude after the [last] unleavened bread [is eaten]17 by saying, ‘Now to the entertainment!’ We learned: YOU MAY NOT CONCLUDE AFTER THE PASCHAL, MEAL [BY SAYING], ‘NOW TO THE ENTERTAINMENT!’ Thus it is forbidden only after the Paschal meal, but you may conclude [thus] after the unleavened bread? — He proceeds to a climax:18 After the unleavened bread it need not be stated, since its taste is not substantial;19 but [I might think] that there is no objection after the Paschal lamb, whose taste is substantial and cannot [easily] be wiped out. Hence he [the Tanna] informs us [otherwise].
Shall we say that this supports him: [As for] sponge cakes, honey-cakes and iskeritin,20 a man may fill his stomach with them, providing that he eats as much as an olive of unleavened bread at the end. [This implies], only at the end,
(1) Certain verses at the end of Hallel, viz., Ps. CXVIII, 21-29. Every verse of the rest of the Psalm is repeated in the text, either actually or by parallelism, and therefore these four verses are repeated when they are recited.
(2) Lit., ‘to (say it) straight off.’
(3) II Sam. XVIII, 23.
(4) Gen. XXXIII, 3.
(5) Mic. II, 13.
(6) [Rashi(Suk. 39a): ‘from "We beseech thee, O Lord, etc." onwards.’]
(7) [I.e., to those repeated by Rabbi (Rashi loc. cit.)].
(8) Gen. XXI, 8: the verse continues: And Abraham made a great feast on the day that Isaac was weaned.
(9) I.e., when Israel is vindicated and his glories restored.
(10) The cup of wine over which Grace after meals is recited.
(11) Num. XIV, 38 et passim.
(12) I Chron. VII, 27. This occurs in the genealogical lists, and since it is not carried beyond Joshua, we must assume that he was not blessed with a son.
(13) Ps. CXVI, 13.
(14) Gr. **.
(15) V. Supra 86a for notes.
(16) I.e., Rab. Rab and Samuel used to eat pigeons and mushrooms respectively after the meal, as desert, and Samuel says that this must not be done after the Paschal meal. Thus his interpretation (and R. Johanan's which follows) is stricter than Rab's. For Rab only forbids further eating elsewhere, whereas Samuel forbids it in the same place.
(17) I. e., nowadays at the end of the meal in memory of the Paschal lamb.
(18) Lit., ‘he says, it is unnecessary".’
(19) He must finish the meal with the taste of the Paschal lamb and the unleavened bread predominant in his mouth. Now the taste of the latter is not substantial and enduring, and therefore it is superfluous to teach that nothing may be eaten after it.
(20) V. Supra 37a. These are regarded as ‘rich mazzah’ and therefore the duty of eating mazzah, which must be ‘bread of affliction (poverty)’ cannot be discharged with them.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 120a
but not at the beginning!1 — [No:] He proceeds to a climax. [If he eats it] at the beginning it goes without saying [that his duty is discharged], since he eats it with an appetite; but at the end, [where] he may come to eat it as mere gorging, I might say that he does not [do his duty]. Hence he [the Tanna] informs us [otherwise].
Mar Zutra recited it thus: R. Joseph said in Rab Judah's name in Samuel's name: One may conclude after the unleavened bread [by saying] ‘Now to the entertainment.’ Shall we say that this supports him: ONE MAY NOT CONCLUDE AFTER THE PASCHAL MEAL. [BY SAYING], ‘NOW TO THE ENTERTAINMENT’; hence one may not conclude thus [only] after the Paschal lamb, yet one may conclude thus after the unleavened bread? — [No:] — He proceeds to a climax. After the unleavened bread it need not be stated, seeing that its taste is not substantial; but I would say [that it is] not so after the Paschal lamb; hence [the Tanna] informs us [otherwise]. An objection is raised: [As for] sponge-cakes, honey-cakes, and iskeritin, a man may fill his stomach therewith, providing that he eats as much as an olive of unleavened bread at the end. Thus it is only at the end, but not at the beginning? He proceeds to a climax: at the beginning, when he eats with an appetite, it is unnecessary [to teach it]; but at the end, where he may merely gorge, I might say [that it is] not [permitted]; hence [the Tanna] informs us [that it is].
Raba said: [The eating of] unleavened bread nowadays is a Scriptural obligation, whereas [that of] bitter herbs is Rabbinical. Yet wherein do bitter herbs differ? Because it is written, they shall eat it [the Passover-offering] with unleavened bread and bitter herbs,2 [which implies], when [the law of] the Passover-offering is in force, [that of] bitter herbs is in force, and when the Passover-offering is not in force, bitter herbs are not required either! Then in the case of unleavened bread too, surely it is written, ‘they shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs’? — Scripture indeed repeated [the precept] in the case of unleavened bread: at even ye shall eat unleavened bread.3 But R. Aha b. Jacob maintained: Both the one and the other are [only] Rabbinical. But surely it is written, ‘at even ye shall eat unleavened bread’? — That is required in respect of an unclean person and one who was on a journey afar off.4 For you might argue: Since they cannot eat of the Passover-offering, they need not eat unleavened bread or bitter herbs either; hence [the verse] informs us [otherwise]. And Raba?5 — He can answer you: In respect of an unclean person and one who was on a journey afar off a verse is not required, for they are no worse than an uncircumcised person and an alien.6 For it was taught: No uncircumcised person shall eat thereof:7 ‘thereof’ he may not eat, but he must eat unleavened bread and bitter herbs. And the other?8 — It is written in the case of the one [the uncircumcised etc.] and it is written in the case of the other [the unclean etc.], and they are both necessary.9
It was taught in accordance with Raba: Six days thou shalt eat unleavened bread, and on the seventh day shall be a solemn assembly to the Lord thy God:10 just as [on] the seventh day [the eating of unleavened bread] is voluntary,11 so [on] the six days it is voluntary. What is the reason?12 Because it is something which was included in the general law and then excluded from the general law, in order to illumine [other cases], [which means that] it was excluded not in order to throw light upon itself, but in order to throw light upon the entire general law.13 You might think that on the first night too it is [merely] voluntary; therefore it is stated, ‘they shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs.’ I know this only when the Temple is in existence; whence do we know it when the Temple is not in existence? From the verse, ‘at even ye shall eat unleavened bread’: thus the Writ made it a permanent obligation.
MISHNAH. IF SOME OF THEM14 FELL ASLEEP, THEY MAY EAT [WHEN THEY AWAKE]; IF ALL OF THEM FELL ASLEEP THEY MUST NOT EAT.15
(1) And the presumed reason is because nothing may be eaten after the last unleavened bread.
(2) Num. IX, 11.
(3) Ex. XII, 18. Bah (on the basis of Tosaf. in Kid. 37b) suggests that the following verse should be quoted instead: in all your habitations shall ye eat unleavened bread (ibid. 20).
(4) But who will be fit by the evening.
(5) Does he not admit this? and if he does, on what grounds does he differentiate between unleavened bread and bitter herbs?
(6) I.e., one who does not observe Jewish law; v. supra, p. 131, n. 5.
(7) Ex. XII, 48.
(8) R. Aha b. Jacob: how does he answer this?
(9) An unclean person etc. cannot be deduced from an ‘alien,’ for since the former will observe the second Passover a month hence, I would argue that he can then discharge his obligation of eating unleavened bread and bitter herbs too. But an ‘alien’ will not have that opportunity, and therefore he is naturally bound to eat the unleavened bread and the bitter herbs now. By the same reasoning, if there were only one verse, I would apply it to the latter, but not to the former.
(10) Deut. XVI, 8.
(11) But not obligatory.
(12) Why do I interpret it thus, seemingly in contradiction to the literal meaning?
(13) This is a principle of exegesis. Now the general rule is stated: seven days shall ye eat unleavened bread (Ex. XII, 15); when the seventh is excluded by the verse, ‘six days’ etc, this throws light not on the seventh alone, but upon the whole period, teaching that the eating of unleavened bread therein is voluntary.
(14) Sc. of a company at a Passover meal.
(15) In the latter case they have a ceased to think about the Paschal lamb; when they awake it is as though they would eat in two different places, sleep breaking the continuity of action and place, and thus it is forbidden.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 120b
R. JOSE SAID: IF THEY FELL, INTO A LIGHT SLEEP, THEY MAY EAT; IF THEY FELL FAST ASLEEP, THEY MUST NOT EAT.1 THE PASSOVER-OFFERING DEFILES ONE'S HANDS AFTER MIDNIGHT;2 PIGGUL AND NOTHAR DEFILE ONE'S HANDS.
GEMARA. R. JOSE SAID: IF THEY FELL INTO A LIGHT SLEEP, THEY MAY EAT; IF THEY FELL FAST ASLEEP, THEY MUST NOT EAT. What condition is meant by ‘A LIGHT SLEEP’? Said R. Ashi: A sleep which is not sleep, a wakefulness which is not wakefulness. E.g., if he answers when called, cannot make a reasoned statement, yet recollects when reminded. Abaye was sitting [at the Passover meal] before Rabbah. Seeing him dozing he remarked to him, ‘You, sir, are sleeping.’3 ‘I was merely dozing.’ replied he, ‘and we have learnt: ‘IF THEY FELL INTO A LIGHT SLEEP, THEY MAY EAT; IF THEY FELL, FAST ASLEEP’, THEY MUST NOT EAT.’
THE PASSOVER-OFFERING DEFILES ONE'S HANDS AFTER MIDNIGHT etc. This proves that from midnight it is nothar. Which Tanna [holds thus]? — Said R. Joseph. It is R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah. For it was taught: And they shall eat the flesh in that night.’4 R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah said: ‘In that night’ is stated here, while elsewhere it is stated, For I will go through the land of Egypt in that night:5 just as there it means midnight, so here too [they may eat the Passover-offering] until midnight.6 Said R. Akiba to him: Yet surely it is already stated, [and ye shall eat it] in haste,7 [implying] until the time of haste.8 If so, what is taught by ‘in [that] night?’ You might think that it can be eaten like [other] sacrifices, [viz.,] by day: therefore it is stated, ‘in [that] night’: it is eaten by night, but it may not be eaten by day. Now how does R. Akiba employ ‘that [night]’? He utilizes it as excluding a second night. For I might argue. Since the Passover-offering is a sacrifice of lesser sanctity,9 and the peace-offering is a sacrifice of lesser sanctity, the just as the peace-offering is to be eaten two days and one night, so in the case of the Passover-offering, I will substitute nights for days,10 and it may be eaten two nights and one day. Therefore the Divine Law wrote ‘that [night]’. And R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah?11 — He can answer you: That is deduced from, and ye shall let nothing of it remain until the morning.12 And R. Akiba?13 — He can answer you: Had not the Divine Law written ‘that [night]’. I would have said, what does ‘morning’ mean? the second morning. Then what of R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah? — He can answer you: Wherever ‘morning’ is written, It means the first morning.14
Raba said: If a man eats unleavened bread after midnight nowadays, according to R. Eleazar b. ‘Azariah he does not discharge his duty.15 That is obvious, [for] since it is assimilated to the Passover-offering, it is like the Passover-offering? — You might say, surely the Writ16 excluded it from the analogy;17 hence he informs us that when the Writ restores it, it restores it to its original state.18
PIGGUL AND NOTHAR DEFILE ONE'S HANDS. R. Huna and R. Hisda — one maintains: It is on account of suspected priests; while the other said: It is on account of the lazy priests. One maintained: As much as an olive [defiles]; while the other said: [At least] as much as an egg.
(1) This distinction refers to the first clause, when only some of them fell asleep.
(2) Because it is then nothar, q.v. Glos.
(3) This happened while he was eating the unleavened bread at the end of the meal, and Abaye meant that he might not continue now.
(4) Ex. XII, 8.
(5) Ibid. 12.
(6) After which it is nothar.
(7) Ibid. 11.
(8) I.e., when they had to make haste to leave Egypt, which was in the morning.
(9) V. p. 108, n. 2.
(10) This is necessary, since its main eating is at night.
(11) How does he refute this argument?
(12) Ex. XII, 10.
(13) Does he not admit this?
(14) Cf. supra 71a and b.
(15) Since he holds that the Passover-offering may not be eaten after midnight, while as stated supra 120a unleavened bread is assimilated to the Passover-offering.
(16) I.e., the verse ‘at even ye shall eat unleavened bread’.
(17) In that unleavened bread is declared obligatory nowadays despite the absence of the paschal lamb, v. supra 120a.
(18) V. supra 120a. I.e., once the Writ teaches that unleavened bread nowadays is obligatory, notwithstanding the analogy, it becomes assimilated to the paschal-offering in respect of the hours during which the obligation can he discharged.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 121a
One taught in reference to piggul, while the other taught in reference to nothar. He who taught in reference to piggul [gave the reason as being] on account of the suspected priests. While he who taught in reference to nothar [gave the reason as being] on account of the lazy priests. One said: As much as an olive [defiles]; while the other said: [At least] as much as an egg. He who maintained, as much as an olive, [accepts the standard] as its prohibition; while he who rules, as much as an egg, [holds that the standard is the same as its uncleanness.1
MISHNAH. IF HE RECITED THE BLESSING FOR THE PASSOVER-OFFERING, HE THEREBY EXEMPTS THE [FESTIVAL] SACRIFICE; [BUT] IF HE RECITED THE BLESSING FOR THE SACRIFICE, HE DOES NOT EXEMPT THE PASSOVER-OFFERING: THIS IS THE VIEW OF R. ISHMAEL. R. AKIBA SAID: THE FORMER DOES NOT EXEMPT THE LATTER, NOR DOES THE LATTER EXEMPT THE FORMER.2
GEMARA. When you examine the matter, [you must conclude] that in R. Ishmael's opinion sprinkling [zerikah] is included in pouring [shefikah], but pouring is not included in sprinkling. Whereas in R. Akiba's opinion pouring is not included in Sprinkling, nor is sprinkling included in pouring.3
(1) V. supra 85b for notes on the whole passage.
(2) The ‘sacrifice’ referred to is the hagigah of the fourteenth (v. supra 69b). An appropriate blessing was recited before each.
(3) Rashbam: both R. Ishmael and R. Akiba hold that the blood of the Passover-offering must be poured out, i.e., the priest must stand quite close to the altar and gently pour the blood on to its base. But the blood of the hagigah requires sprinkling, i.e., from a distance and with some force’. Now R. Ishmael holds that if the blood of the hagigah is poured out instead of sprinkled, the obligation of sprinkling has nevertheless been discharged. Consequently, the blessing for the Passover-offering includes that of the hagigah, since in both the blood may be poured on to the base of the altar. But if the blood of the Passover-offering is sprinkled, the obligation has not been discharged: consequently the blessing for the hagigah, whose blood is normally sprinkled, does not exempt the Passover-offering. By the same reasoning we infer that in R. Akiba's view neither includes the other.
Talmud - Mas. Pesachim 121b
R. Simlai was present at a Redemption of the Firstborn,1 He was asked: It is obvious that for the redemption of the firstborn it is the father who must recite the blessing, ‘who hast sanctified us with Thy commandments and hast given us command concerning the redemption of the first born.’ But as for the blessing, ‘Blessed . . . who hast kept us alive and preserved us and enabled us to reach this season,’ does the priest2 recite it or the child's father? Does the priest recite the blessing, since the benefit redounds to him; or does the child's father recite it, since it is he who carries out a religious duty?3 He could not answer it, so he went and asked it at the schoolhouse, and he was told: The child's father recites both blessings. And the law is that the child's father recites both blessings.4
(1) V. Ex. XIII, 13; Num. XVIII, 16.
(2) Who receives the five shekels of redemption.
(3) The religious duty is primarily his, since any priest could receive the redemption money.
(4) Rashbam: this story is quoted here because the Mishnah too treats of two blessings.