MISHNAH: If someone was reading in the Torah at the time of recital¹., if he read with intention². he fulfilled his duty, otherwise he did not fulfill his duty. Between the sections³, one greets people out of respect and answers their greetings. In the middle of a section one may greet because of fear and answer, the words of Rebbi Meïr. Rebbi Yehudah says: in the middle of a section one may greet out of fear and answer for respect, between sections one greets for respect and answers greetings from everybody.

footnotes: ¹ Time of the obligatory recital of Shema‘ ² The intention of fulfilling the commandment of reading the Shema‘ ³ Of the Shema‘.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Abba said: This means that benedictions do not prevent⁴ without requiring an interruption for recitations of the benedictions, it follows that benedictions are a separate obligation. In a number of prayer texts from the Genizah, the recitation of the Shema‘ has a separate benediction: “Praised be You, o Eternal, King of the Universe, Who sanctified us through His commandments and commanded us about the recitation of Shema‘, with a full heart to declare Him King over us, and willingly to declare His Unity.” While these texts are from a period about 500 years later than the text of the Yerushalmi, they show that recitation of Shema‘ was then still considered an obligation separate from the benedictions mentioned in the Mishnah. The latter benedictions could then be recited before the Amidah. See Ezra Fleischer,תפילה ומנהגי תפילה ,ארץ־ישראליים בתקופת הגניזה Jerusalem 1988. The paragraph has been explained as parallel to the Babli (11b–12a) by R. Solomon ben Adrat (Rashba) in his responsa, vol. 1, no 319..

footnotes: ⁴ . Since the Mishnah allows one to concentrate on reading the Torah text as Shema‘

Rebbi Yose said: If you say that one needs to recite the benedictions; when he recited them he must focus his attention for the entire *Shema‘*⁵ certainly one requires total attention during the recitation of Shema‘. As seen at the end of this paragraph, this is not the rule.. They objected: Does he not interrupt and it does not appear in our statement?⁶ separately since they are written at different places in the Torah scroll. Since the Mishnah does not mention the necessary interruptions in the recital, it might be possible that the Mishnah contemplates interruptions for the recitation of the benedictions before and after Shema‘; hence, the inference of Rebbi Abba is not justified. So here also, even though it has not been stated he must recite the benedictions. That means⁷, one must focus one’s attention for the entire Shema‘. We may hear it from the following: Rebbi Aḥai⁸, in the Yeshivah of Rebbi Ḥiyya. He belongs to the generation between Tannaïm and Amoraïm. His statement, Tosephta Berakhot2:2 (Babli Berakhot 13a), shows that Rebbi Yose’s argument is correct and that Rebbi Abba stated the practice correctly. (In the printed editions of the Babli, the name is Rebbi Aḥa, but in the Munich manuscript, and in all manuscripts of the Tosephta, the name is correctly Rebbi Aḥai. Rebbi Aḥa is an Amora of the fourth generation.) said in the name of Rebbi Yehudah: “He has fulfilled his obligation if he focussed his attention for the first paragraph, even though he did not focus his attention during recitation of the second paragraph”¹⁰.

footnotes: ⁵ Rebbi Yose supports the statement of Rebbi Abba: If one would require concentration on what one recites for benedictions before and after Shema‘, ⁶ In the Mishnah, it is assumed that one may recite the several sections of the Shema‘ ⁷ The argument would be good only if the statement of Rebbi Yose were true. ⁸ Rebbi Aḥai was “Tanna”, collector of baraitot ¹⁰ A natural question following the Tosephta of Rebbi Yehudah.

What is the difference between the first and second paragraphs?¹⁰ Rebbi Ḥanina said: Everything mentioned in the first paragraph is mentioned in the second. In that case, should one have to recite only one of them? Rebbi Illa said: The first one is directed to the individual, the second one to the community; the first one concentrates on learning, the second one on doing¹¹.

footnotes: ¹⁰ A natural question following the Tosephta of Rebbi Yehudah. ¹¹ The first paragraph is formulated in the singular, the second one in the plural. In addition, while the essence of the first paragraph is repeated in the second as a communal obligation, there are many topics in the second paragraph that are not mentioned in the first. In the language of the Babli (14b), the first paragraph is the acceptance of the acceptance of Heaven, the second one the acceptance of the commandments of the Torah.

Bar Qappara said: One has to focus his attention only during the first three verses¹² 6:4, must be recited with focussed attention. Another difference between the more demanding Yerushalmi and the Babli is that the Yerushalmi requires the rest of Shema‘ to be “repeated”, i.e., memorized, whereas in the Babli it has only to be read.. It was stated thus: (Deut. 6:7) “You should repeat”¹³ until there is the obligation of focussed attention; from there starts the obligation of repetition.

footnotes: ¹² This is the accepted practice for the Yerushalmi with no one objecting. In the Babli (13b), the statement is given in the name of an otherwise unknown Tanna Rebbi Zutra, and, even though it exemplifies the attitude of Rebbi Aqiba, it is later replaced by the statement of Rebbi Meïr that only the first verse, Deut. ¹³ Meaning, "memorize".

Rebbi Ḥunah, Rebbi Uri¹⁴ since he follows the ruling of Rebbi Aḥai in the name of Rebbi Yehudah that the entire first paragraph requires concentrated attention., Rav Joseph, Rav Yehudah¹⁵ in the name of Samuel: One has to accept the Kingdom of Heaven standing. Does this mean that one has to get up when one is sitting? No, if one is walking he has to stand still.

footnotes: ¹⁴ Rebbi Uri is not known from any other source. The Rome manuscript of the Yerushalmi reads “Rebbi Ammi”; this might be a better reading but Rebbi Ammi was a student of Rebbi Yoḥanan who in the parallel in the Babli (13b) is reported to require that a person walking has to stand still during recitation of the entire first paragraph of Shema‘, ¹⁵ The most influential of all students of Samuel.

It was stated: One has to prolong “is One”.¹⁶. The composition here is difficult to understand since one starts with a tannaïtic statement (“It was stated”), continues with the opinion of an Amora (Rav Naḥman bar Jacob), and then returns to a Tanna (Symmachos, an outstanding student of Rebbi Meïr). The parallel Babli (13b) starts with the statement of Symmachos and then continues with the statement of Rav Naḥman bar Jacob which is quoted there in the name of Rav Aḥa bar Jacob. It is possible that “Aḥa”, a name without meaning, is simply a form of endearment of the formal name “Naḥman”, and that in the Babli it is necessary to use the form of endearment to distinguish this Amora from Rav Naḥman, quoted without his father’s name because of his exalted status, whose full name seems to have been Rav Naḥman bar Jacob. Rav Naḥman bar Jacob said: But only at the daleth.¹⁷, was pronounced like an Arabic ذ, or a voiced English th, a sibilant sometimes close to ז. For example, the Aramaic די appears in the Elephantine papyri as זי. Hence, it really was possible to prolong the consonant daleth since it was not a plosive sound as it is today. In the Babli (13b), Rav Ashi adds that one should not omit to pronounce the ח. This was because in Babylonia, as in Medieval Ashkenaz, a ח was pronounced like a stronger ה and therefore tended to be silent in the middle of a word, as ה is mostly silent in the middle of a word in modern Hebrew. (Even the masters of the Massorah tried to counteract this tendency, e. g. by punctuating יִֽהְיֶה, to make the Sheva heard when it should be silent by grammatical rules, so that the Torah reader should be forced to pronounce the ה, but obviously to no avail.) Symmachos bar Joseph¹⁸ said: Anyone who prolongs “is One” has his days and years prolonged in wellbeing. Rebbi Jeremiah was prolonging very much. Rebbi Zeïra said to him: So much is unnecessary, only so long that you should think of Him as King of Heaven and Earth and the four directions of the world.

footnotes: ¹⁶ The last word of the first sentence of Shema‘ ¹⁷ The soft ד, without dagesh ¹⁸ A Tanna, student of Rebbi Meïr.

Rav asked Rebbi Ḥiyya: But I never see that Rebbi accepts upon himself the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven. He answered him: When you will see him cover his face with his hand, at that moment he accepts the yoke of the Kingdom of Heaven.¹⁹ 13b. It seems that Rebbi started his Yeshivah classes early in the morning, before one could recite Shema‘, and continued until it was too late to recite Shema‘ as “acceptance of the yoke of heaven”, but only as “reading from the Torah.” He asked him back: Is it not necessary also to mention the Exodus? He answered him: It is impossible that he should not turn his words²⁰. Rebbi Tavyome²¹ asked Rebbi Ḥizkiah: Does this not mean that one has to focus attention only for the first verse?²² while covering his face with his hand during his morning classses, he could not have spent much time on it and, therefore, Rebbi does not accept the opinion of Bar Qappara that the first three verses have to be recited with focussed attention. He said to him: With that²³ he might recite until “You shall repeat.”

footnotes: ¹⁹ The parallel is in Babli, Berakhot ²⁰ Turn his words to the Exodus. In the Babli, Bar Qappara reports that Rebbi never gave a class in which he did not mention the Exodus. ²¹ An Israeli Amora of the fourth generation who otherwise is quoted only in Midrashim. ²² If Rebbi recited the relevant portion of Shema‘ ²³ While he was covering his face he could have recited all three verses and there is no proof that he disagreed with the ruling that requires concentration for the first three verses.

²⁴. The parallel in the Babli, Megillah 18b, quotes both Rebbi Muna and Rav, but from a discussion of the rules of blowing the shofar, given below; they change the statement of Rav to “practice does not follow” and consider the statement here to be the opinion of Rebbi Yehudah only. Rebbi Muna²⁵ said in the name of Rebbi Yehudah who said in the name of Rebbi Yose the Galilean: If one interrupted so that he would have been able to read all of it, he did not fulfill his duty. Rebbi Abba, Rav Jeremiah in the name of Rav: The practice follows Rebbi Muna who said in the name of Rebbi Yehudah who said in the name of Rebbi Yose the Galilean.

footnotes: ²⁴ Here starts the discussion of the second part of the Mishnah, about the permitted interruptions in the recitation of Shema‘ ²⁵ This author, whose name appears in several forms here in print and in manuscripts, is Rebbi Muna, student of Rebbi Yehudah (Judah) and Tanna of the last generation.

Rebbi Yoḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Jehozadak: The same rule²⁶ 34b) quotes the same statement and declares that this is only the opinion of Rebbi Yoḥanan’s teacher but not his own, and, therefore, is not followed in practice, since arbitrary interruptions are allowed for blowing the shofar. The Yerushalmi differs from the Babli in that the principle of time limitation of interruptions in recitals is accepted without reservation; the blowing of shofar on Rosh Hashanah is not a recitation and, therefore, can follow different rules. applies to Hallel and the reading of the Esther scroll.

footnotes: ²⁶ That one has to start again if the interruption is so long that one could have finished the entire text in the meantime. The Babli (Rosh Hashanah

Abba bar Rav Huna²⁷ and Rav Ḥisda sat together and said, the same rule applies to blowing the Shofar²⁸. They went up to Rav’s Yeshivah and heard Rav Ḥuna in the name of Rav²⁹: Even if one heard it in up to nine hours he fulfilled his obligation³⁰. Rebbi Zeiïa said: When I was there, this was a problem for me³¹ or not. This shows that Rav Ḥuna’s ruling was not widely accepted in Babylonia in his time.. When I came here, I heard Rebbi Yasa³² in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan: Even if one heard it during an entire day, one has fulfilled one’s obligation³³18b, Rosh Hashanah 34b).. But only if one heard it in the correct order³⁴. Rebbi Yose investigated: If one needed to hear the first simple tone and another one the final simple tone, one blow of the Shofar serves the requirements of both of them³⁵” but “to listen to the sound of the Shofar”; hence, it is the personal obligation of each listener and does not depend on the intention of the blower..

footnotes: ²⁷ He appears in the Babli as Rabba bar Rav Huna; he and Rav Ḥisda were the leaders of the third generation of Amoraïm in Babylonia. ²⁸ That no interruption is allowed longer than what is needed to complete the entire ritual. ²⁹ This must have been after the death of Rav when Rav Ḥuna was the head of the Academy. The text given here is from the Rome manuscript; the Venice print and Leyden manuscript have רַב חוּנָא בְשֵׁם רַב הוּנָא “Rav Ḥuna in the name of Rav Huna”, which certainly is a scribal error. ³⁰ If one heard the nine sounds precribed for Rosh Hashanah on nine different occasions during the day (but in the correct order), then he has done his duty. ³¹ Whether the rule of interruptions applies to the blowing of the Shofar ³² He is called Rebbi Assi in the Babli, student of R. Yoḥanan, and co-head of the Academy of Tiberias with Rebbi Immi (Ammi) after R. Yoḥanan. Both were Cohanim. ³³ As mentioned earlier, this is the statement quoted in the Babli (Megillah ³⁴ The basic obligation is to hear three times a straight note (תקיעה), followed by a broken sound, followed by a straight note. [Since there was diasgreement in practice whether the broken sound should be in three waves or in nine small variations, Rebbi Abbahu in the administrative center of Caesarea, where Jews from many different places came together, instituted the rule that one blows three times, each one of the two kinds of modulated sound and the third time the two sounds together.] ³⁵ In fact, the benediction on Rosh Hashanah is not “to blow the Shofar

Rebbi Abin bar Ḥiyya³⁶ investigated: The recitation of Shema‘ with its benedictions, it (the recitation of Shema‘) without its benedictions, its benedictions without it³⁷ with its benedictions, or without benedictions, and does the rule of interruptions apply at all to the benedictions? The question remains unanswered.? If he interrupted after a third, interrupted after a second third³⁸? Does one estimate by the reader’s speed or by the average speed of all men? Rebbi Mattaniah³⁹(2:2), the reading is: Rebbi Mattaniah said: Is it not reasonable that …, with a rhetorical negation [interpretation of Rashba (Rebbi Shelomo ben Adrat) in his commentary to the Mishnah in Berakhot.] said, it seems reasonable by the reader’s.

footnotes: ³⁶ An outstanding student of Rebbis Yoḥanan and Zeïra who died young. ³⁷ Since we have decided that one has to start anew if he interrupted long enough to have finished the entire recitation during the interruption, does he count the time for Shema‘ ³⁸ Do separate interruptions count as one or is every interruption a separate count of time? The question remains unanswered. ³⁹ A Galilean Amora of the last generation. In the parallel in Megillah

Rebbi Abbahu⁴⁰ asked Rebbi Yoḥanan: Assuming that I am reciting Shema‘ and interrupting while passing by stinking passage ways⁴¹ 34b, where, according to the theory of the Babli mentioned above, R. Yoḥanan answers only according to the opinion of those who think that after a longer interruption one has to start anew., do I fulfill my obligation? He answered him: Abbahu my son, if you interrupt enough that you could have finished all of it, you did not fulfill your obligation.

footnotes: ⁴⁰ A student of R. Yoḥanan who became the principal defender of the Jews in Israel before the Roman authorities. His father’s name is unknown. His school was at Caesarea Philippi [C. Paneas], seat of the Roman prefect for Galilee. ⁴¹ Where it is forbidden to study Torah or recite prayers, cf. Mishnah 5:3. This section is also discussed in Babli Rosh Hashanah

Rebbi Eleazar⁴² 34b, accepts as the re-interpreted position of Rebbi Yoḥanan. went to pay a sick-bed visit to Rebbi Simeon bar Abba⁴³. He said to him: Since I am weak, when I am reciting Shema‘ I tend to slumber; do I fulfill my obligation? He said to him: yes. Rebbi Jeremiah asked before Rebbi Zeïra: Did Rebbi Eleazar give this ruling since he knew that Rebbi Simeon bar Abba is very scrupulous in the execution of his religious duties⁴⁴, or because he was so weak⁴⁵? He answered him: They⁴⁶ disagree explicitly; Rebbi Eleazar said he fulfilled his obligation, Rebbi Yoḥanan said he did not fulfill his obligation. They disagree for the recitation of Shema‘ since that is composed of separate chapters, but for the recitation of Hallel and the Esther scroll, Rebbi Eleazar will agree⁴⁷.

footnotes: ⁴² A Babylonian who first was a student and then became a colleague of Rebbi Yoḥanan. Even though he was the greatest of his generation after Rebbi Yoḥanan, he never became head of a Yeshivah since he died shortly before Rebbi Yoḥanan. He often follows Babylonian positions like the one presented here, where the position of Rebbi Eleazar is that which the Babli, Rosh Hashanah ⁴³ A fellow Babylonian who was a student of the great Amoraïm of the first generation, thus much older than Rebbi Eleazar. ⁴⁴ Therefore, will make an effort that his slumber periods will not be too long. ⁴⁵ Since there is no other way he could fulfill his obligation he could claim an exemption from the general rule because of אוֹנס, an act of God. ⁴⁶ Rebbis Yoḥanan and Eleazar, concerning whether a person who interrupted a recitation for a longer period and then continued where he interrupted, did fulfill his religious duty. ⁴⁷ That after a long interruption one has to start from the beginning again. This sentence is a comment by the editors of the Yerushalmi; it is not the Babylonian position.

It was stated: If someone wants to greet his teacher or anybody who his greater than himself in Torah, he is permitted to do so⁴⁸. That implies that a person has to greet anybody who is greater than himself in Torah. And also from the following⁴⁹ is found in Babli Nedarim 87a. A person stands at the deathbed of someone for whom he would be required to mourn. He must tear his clothes after the person’s death. In the case discussed here, he tore his clothes, thinking that the patient was dead but then the dying person showed signs of life. If the final death occurs within the time needed for “speech”, the first tear is sufficient. The baraita is quoted here only to introduce the standard for greeting, which is that the student is required to say: “Peace be with you, my teacher.” This is the standard of behavior for a student.: If one tore his clothes and the soul returned, if it is instantaneous he does not have to tear again. If it is later, he has to tear again. How much is instantaneous? The time for speech. How much is time of speech? Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said: the time one needs to greet his friend⁵⁰ 73b), no names are given but it is stated that there are two measurements of “speech”, one from teacher to student, the same as a person to a friend, and the longer one from student to teacher.. Abba bar bar Ḥana⁵¹ in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan: the time for greeting between teacher and student, when he says “Peace be with you, my teacher.⁵²) has the longer sentence שלום עליך מורי ורבי, “peace be with you, my instructor and teacher.””

footnotes: ⁴⁸ To continue the discussion of the Mishnah, we now turn to the definition of what it means to interrupt “to greet somebody out of respect.” ⁴⁹ A similar but more explicit baraita ⁵⁰ The greeting of a person to his friend is שלום עליכם “Peace be with you.” In the main parallel in the Babli (Baba qama ⁵¹ He appears in the Babli as Rabba bar bar Ḥana; his father Rabba bar Ḥana was a nephew of Rav. ⁵² The Babli (loc. cit.

Rebbi Yoḥanan was leaning on Rebbi Jacob bar Idi when Rebbi Eleazar saw him and hid himself before him⁵³. He said, these two things the Babylonian does to me: First, that he does not greet me, and second, that he does not teach the traditions in my name. He said to him, thus they behave among themselves; Zeïra did not greet Rabba⁵⁴ since they observe (Job 29:8) “Boys see me and hide themselves.” As they were walking, he⁵⁵ saw a Bet Midrash. He⁵⁵ said to him: Here Rebbi Meïr sat and reported traditions in the name of Rebbi Ismaël but he never reported traditions in the name of Rebbi Aqiba. He⁵⁶ answered: Everybody knows that Rebbi Meïr was the student of Rebbi Aqiba. He⁵⁵ retorted, everybody knows that Rebbi Eleazar is the student of Rebbi Yoḥanan. May one pass by a cursed⁵⁷ 2:6, Moëd qaṭan 3:2, the word is ארורי “cursed”. statue? He⁵⁸ 3:8. said to him, do you want to honor it? Pass it by and blind its eyes! He⁵⁹ said to him, Rebbi Eleazar did well that he did not pass before you. He said: Rebbi⁶⁰ Jacob bar Idi, you know how to pacify.

footnotes: ⁵³ This story is inserted here to show that the obligation to greet one’s teacher was accepted in Babylonia only when the student could not hide from his teacher. Rebbi Yoḥanan also insists that all his teachings be reported in his own name; this is discussed in the next section. A psalm is quoted there to support Rebbi Yoḥanan’s position mentioning the Temple; the rôle of David in the building of the Temple is discussed in the third part of this aggadic insert. ⁵⁴ The names here do not seem to be correctly transmitted. Rabba belongs to the generation after Rebbi Yoḥanan and Rebbi Zeïra studied under Rav Huna and Rav Yehudah in Babylonia. Therefore, it seems that the name is Zeïri, a Babylonian who studied under Rav and them emigrated to Israel where he became famous but did not acquire any rabbinic title. The second name, therefore, is Rav. ⁵⁵ Rebbi Jacob bar Idi. ⁵⁵ Rebbi Jacob bar Idi. ⁵⁶ Rebbi Yoḥanan. ⁵⁵ Rebbi Jacob bar Idi. ⁵⁷ The word אהדורי makes no sense. In the parallel sources in the Yerushalmi, Sheqalim ⁵⁸ Rebbi Yoḥanan; the person who asks is Rebbi Jacob bar Idi who already knew the answer from Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, Avodah zarah ⁵⁹ Rebbi Jacob bar Idi points out that one avoids only important people or circumstances. One “blinds the eyes” of the idol if one passes by it without taking any notice of it and the idol sees that it is not taken seriously. ⁶⁰ The title “Rebbi” is missing in the Rome ms.; this is the better reading since the teacher will not adress his student (nor his equal) by his title.

But Rebbi Yoḥanan required that traditions should be reported in his name. Also David begged for divine mercy in this respect, (Ps. 61:5) “may I dwell in Your tent forever!”⁶¹ Rebbi Phineas⁶², Rebbi Jeremiah, in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan; Could David think of living forever? Rather, David meant: May I have the merit that my words will be mentioned in my name in synagogues and houses of study. What good does that do to him? Levi, the son of the Nazir⁶³ 96b, Sanhedrin 90b, Bekhorot 31b) the statement is R. Yoḥanan’s in the name of R. Simeon (either ben Yoḥai or ben Yehoẓadaq) and the verse is quoted in the name of several authors, one of them Simeon Nazira who probably was the father of Levi, the son of the Nazir who is quoted here. (The Nazir may not cut his hair, drink wine, or become impure by a dead body. Since the destruction of the Temple, any vow of nezirut is permanent.) said: If someone mentions a tradition in the name of its author, the latter’s lips whisper with him in the grave. What is the reason? (Cant. 7:10) “Dripping from the lips of the sleeping ones.” Like that bunch of grapes which drips by itself. Rebbi Ḥanina bar Pappai⁶⁴. (“Spiced wine” from Latin conditura “condiment, spice.”) and Rebbi Simon, one said, like one who drinks spiced wine, the other said, like one who drinks old wine, even though he consumed it, its taste remains in his mouth.

footnotes: ⁶¹ The context of the Psalm excludes an interpretation that would refer the verse to the Future World since it directly refers to the earthly Temple. ⁶² R. Pinḥas bar Ḥama Hacohen, leading preacher of the fourth generation of Galilean Amoraïm. ⁶³ An author who is not otherwise mentioned in the Talmudim. In the parallels in the Babli (Yebamot ⁶⁴ A colleague of Rebbi Simon and Rebbi Abbahu, equally outstanding in practice and in aggadah

There is no generation without scoffers. What did the hooligans of that generation do? They went to David’s windows and said to him: David, when will the Temple be built, when will we go to the Lord’s house? But he said, even though they intend to enrage me, it comes over me that I am happy, (Ps. 122:1) “I enjoy it when they say to me: let us go to the Lord’s house.”⁶⁵ (2Sam. 7:12) “⁶⁶; the quote starts with the second word. When your days will be complete”; Rebbi Samuel bar Naḥmani said, the Holy One, praise to Him, said to David: ‘I am counting full days for you, I am not counting missing days for you⁶⁷ 23:26, that the Just will live complete years; as in fact Moses died on his 120th birthday. It is asserted here that David also lived complete years; his age is never indicated in Tanakh.. Will not your son Solomon build the Temple to sacrifice? Law and justice that you are upholding is more to my liking than sacrifices.’ What is the reason? (Prov. 21:3) “Upholding justice and law is preferred by the Lord to sacrifice”.

footnotes: ⁶⁵ Knowing that he would not build the Temple and not see it. ⁶⁶ The word והיה given here is not in 2Samuel ⁶⁷ This is one of the blessings bestowed at Mount Sinai on the Jewish people, Ex.

New Section. “Between the sections one greets people out of respect, and answers them.”⁶⁹ that one may answer”, they seem to assume that it is obvious that the rules of answering cannot be stricter than those for starting. Also, the Babli takes the two parts together; it is possible that the unnecessary length in the statement of Rebbi Meïr is considered simply as a parallel to the necessary length of the statement of Rebbi Yehudah while for the Yerushalmi the two parallel statements of Rebbi Meïr represent two parallel problems which have to be solved separately. Hence the seemingly repetitous arrangement of the Yerushalmi here; but the first quote of Rebbi Meïr is in support of an argument while the second one presents the topic for further discussion; the two quotes of the identical text are of different status. Why does one answer, out of fear or to show respect? We may hear it from this: “In the middle of a section one may greet because of fear and answer (for respect), the words of Rebbi Meïr.” Hence, in the prior case one may ask because of respect and answer out of respect.⁷¹ “In the middle of a section one may greet because of fear and answer, the words of Rebbi Meïr.” For what does one answer, out of fear or to show respect? We may hear it from this: “Rebbi Yehudah says: in the middle of a section one may greet out of fear and answer for respect.” Hence⁷², in the first case one asks because of fear and answers because of fear.

footnotes: ⁶⁹ This is a quote from the Mishnah. The problem is that Rebbi Meïr does not indicate why one should answer. Since for Rebbi Yehudah the rules for answering are more lenient than for initiating the exchange, it follows that for Rebbi Meïr the rules for answering are not more lenient, but it is unclear whether answering and initiating have identical status or that the rules for answering are more restrictive than those for initiating a verbal exchange. The Babli (13b) explains the words of Rebbi Meïr as meaning “one may start an exchange and it goes without saying ⁷¹ Since in the middle of a section certainly more restrictive rules apply than between sections. ⁷² Since Rebbi Meïr disagrees with Rebbi Yehudah, and from the previous discussion we know that answering does not have more restrictive rules than starting the conversation, it follows that Rebbi Meïr must hold in all cases that answering and starting have the same status.

So far in the middle of a section. Or even in the middle of a verse⁷³? Rebbi Jeremiah gave hints⁷⁴ Chap. 2 and the authorities depending on him (Rashba and Rosh on Babli Berakhot 14a), the text reads מרמז. The meaning is in both cases that Rebbi Jeremiah did not talk but give greetings or instructions by pantomime.. Rebbi Jonah made himself understood⁷⁵. Rebbi Ḥuna, Rav Joseph: (Deut. 6:7) “You may talk in them”, from here that one is authorized to talk between them⁷⁶ is translated “you must talk about them” (The Divine commandments), but Rebbi Ḥuna takes it to mean “you may talk in them”, i. e., while reciting the verses..

footnotes: ⁷³ Do the rules given in the Mishnah apply only between verses in the middle of a section or even in the middle of a verse? ⁷⁴ The text here is not uniform. The Leyden manuscript and the Genizah text are as the Venice print, מדמה, but in the quotes of this passage by Ramban, Milḥamot Hashem, Berakhot ⁷⁵ I. e., he talked. ⁷⁶ In Hebrew, future, imperative, and subjunctive may have the same form. In general, the passage ודברת בם in Shema‘

MISHNAH: The following are “between the sections”: between the first benediction and the second, between the second and Shema‘, between Shema‘ and (Deut. 11:13) “it shall be when you will really listen”, between “it shall be when you will really listen” and (Num. 15:37) “the Eternal spoke”. Between “the Eternal spoke” and “true and outstanding⁷⁷ starting with a series of epithets of the Torah.”. Rebbi Yehudah said, between “the Eternal spoke” and “true and outstanding” one may not interrupt.

footnotes: ⁷⁷ The benediction after Shema‘,

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Levi said⁷⁸ and “true”. Hence, the question asked in the Babli, whether after reciting “the Eternal, your God. True!” one stops and starts again “true and outstanding”, is irrelevant for the Yerushalmi. The question in the Babli is whether Rebbi Yehudah disagrees with the first Tanna in principle, that ‘between “the Eternal spoke” and “true and outstanding” ’ there is no interruption allowed or whether he simply moves the end of technical Shema‘ by one word and then allows the regular interruptions there., the reason of Rebbi Yehudah: (Num. 15:41) “I am the Eternal, your God⁷⁹.”, and it is written (Jer. 10:10) “But the Eternal is the true God”.

footnotes: ⁷⁸ In the parallel in the Babli (14a), the explanation is by R. Abbahu in the name of R. Yoḥanan. Since Rebbi Levi was preacher in the Yeshivah of Rebbi Yoḥanan, the explanation originated in that Yeshivah. In addition, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan in the Babli declares that the practice follows Rebbi Yehudah; this decision is missing in the Yerushalmi and, hence, it seems that in Israel one used to follow the majority opinion that an interruption is permitted between the last words of the Shema‘ ⁷⁹ These are the concluding words of Shema‘

MISHNAH: Ribbi Joshua ben Qorḥah⁹⁰ the entire day in the Land of Israel was not unheard-of. said: Why does Shema‘ precede “it shall be when you will really listen”? In order that one should accept the Kingdom of Heaven before he accepts the yoke of the commandments. And “it shall be when you will really listen” to “The Eternal said”? Because “it shall be when you will really listen” is applicable day and night⁸¹ on one’s garment, expressed in the third section of Shema‘, is applicable only during daytime according to most opinions., “the Eternal said” is applicable only during daytime.

footnotes: ⁹⁰ This shows that before the war of Bar Kokhba, the wearing of tefillin ⁸¹ The obligation to study the Torah and keep its commandments applies everywhere and at all times; the obligation to have ẓiẓit

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Ḥiyya⁸⁰ in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan: Why did they say, a man puts on tefillin, recites the Shema‘ and prays? So that he first should accept upon himself the Kingdom of Heaven completely. Rav said, one reads the Shema‘, puts on tefillin, and prays⁸¹ on one’s garment, expressed in the third section of Shema‘, is applicable only during daytime according to most opinions.. A baraita of Rav himself⁸², tannaïtic statements not made part of the Mishnah. disagrees with him: “If somebody was occupied with a dead person in his grave and the time for the recital of Shema‘ arrived, he should move to a pure place⁸³ that praying in a graveyard would violate the verse (Prov. 17:5): “He who makes fun of the poor blasphemes his Maker”; hence one has to leave the graveyard if he wants to pray. The order of prayer given in the baraita is the one adopted by Rebbi Yoḥanan., put on tefillin, recite the Shema‘, and pray”. Does not the Mishnah support Rav: “In order that one should accept the Kingdom of Heaven before he accepts the yoke of the commandments”⁸⁴, while mentioned in the first paragraph, belong to the execution of commandments. It follows that, in the opinion of the Yerushalmi, Rav recommended to put on tefillin between the first and second sections of Shema‘; otherwise, the Mishnah would not support his position. This contradicts the opinion of the Babli as quoted above; it eliminates the objection of the Babli that certainly Rav would not put off fulfilling the obligation of tefillin until after the recital of Shema‘.?

footnotes: ⁸⁰ A Tanna who lived from the times, of R. Aqiba to those of Rebbi; he is mostly known for his aggadic interpretations. ⁸¹ The obligation to study the Torah and keep its commandments applies everywhere and at all times; the obligation to have ẓiẓit ⁸² This is the reading of the Leyden manuscript. In both Talmudim we hear that Rav and Samuel collected baraitot ⁸³ Since a dead person can no longer pray, it is explained later in this Halakhah ⁸⁴ Tefillin

Rebbi Yannai⁸⁵ said: Tefillin need a clean body⁸⁶ 49a, 130a); there Abbai and Rava explain that one may not break wind while wearing tefillin and so may not sleep while wearing them. The Yerushalmi does not go into details. The connection with the previous text probably is the quote that one may not wear tefillin in a graveyard. This also counts as having an unclean body since on leaving the graveyard one has to wash his hands. A Mishnah in the next Chapter also implies that one may not wear tefillin when his body is not cleansed from an emission of semen. Some Medieval authorities imply from the statement of R. Yannai that while wearing tefillin one may not have unclean thoughts..

footnotes: ⁸⁵ The most important Amora of the first generation in Galilea, student of Rebbi and teacher of Rebbi Yoḥanan. ⁸⁶ The same rule is quoted in Rebbi Yannai’s name in the Babli (Sabbath

Why does one not hold on⁸⁷ the entire day but takes them off after praying? Tosaphot [Šabbat 49a] explain: Why does one not consider a person wearing tefillin automatically as a trustworthy Jew who may be trusted to keep all miẓwot? The explanation of Tosaphot is easier to fit into our text but the explanation of Rabbenu Yeruḥam seems to have the correct historical background. Both the Roman and the Byzantine governments from time to time forbade the wearing of tefillin. Therefore, from the start of the reconstruction of Jewish life after the war of Bar Kokhba, tefillin were not worn publicly in the Land of Israel. The reading of the Rome manuscript, “Why does one not hold on to them in the Land of Israel?” seems to explain the situation from a Babylonian point of view where tefillin never were a problem with the government and where, in R. Sherira Gaon’s time at least, tefillin were worn by scholars all day long. But even in Babylonia in the first generations of Amoraïm Rav Sheshet is reported (Babli Šabbat 118b) of being proud that he wore tefillin the entire day, not just for a minimal time. to them? Because of the impostors⁸⁸ outside of times of prayer may make a person suspect of being a gangster impersonating a pious person.. It happened that a man deposited something with another, and the latter then reneged on it. He said to him: Not you I thought trustworthy but those on your head I thought trustworthy.

footnotes: ⁸⁷ There are two interpretations of this sentence. Rabbenu Yeruḥam [path 19, part 5] explains: Why does one not keep on his tefillin ⁸⁸ Hence, wearing tefillin

Rebbi Yannai was wearing them after his sickness for three days, to show that sickness cleanses⁸⁹ is a body cleansed from sinful thoughts, since a person recovered from sickness is a person all whose sins have been forgiven. It is spelled out in Midrash Tehillim 103 that the first three days, R. Yannai wore his tefillin the entire day but after that he was putting them on only for prayer.. What is the reason? (Ps. 103:2): “He Who forgives all my sins, He Who heals all my sicknesses.” Rebbi Yoḥanan ben Zakkai’s tefillin were not coming off from him either in summer or in winter. And so did his student Rebbi Eliezer after him.⁹⁰ the entire day in the Land of Israel was not unheard-of.

footnotes: ⁸⁹ This statement supports the interpretation that the “clean body” required from a wearer of tefillin ⁹⁰ This shows that before the war of Bar Kokhba, the wearing of tefillin

Rebbi Yoḥanan was wearing both of them⁹¹. in winter when his head was healthy. But in sommer when his head was not healthy he put on only that of the arm. But is not that forbidden because of nakedness⁹² on the arm are worn under the coat or shirt, there is the possibility that no garment separates the holy tefillin from his genitals and that is forbidden as we shall see later. [Only in recent times have tefillin become so large that they cannot be covered by the coat sleeves and the bad habit of praying with the left arm uncovered has taken over Ashkenazic congregations.]? Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said: He wore an undershirt⁹³ under his clothes. When he went to bathe, he was taking them off when he came to the oil sellers⁹⁴.. Rebbi Isaac said, he was wearing them up to Jacob, the bath master⁹⁵ only into the hands of a reliable Jewish man.. When he exited the bath, they brought them to him. When they were bringing them, he used to say: ⁹⁶ appears several times: Tosephta Soṭa 4:7, Mekhilta Beshallaḥ 1, Babli Soṭa 13a. The Hebrew verb קנתר, a few times also קנטר, is probably from Greek κεντρόω “to sting, vex, goad”. Two caskets were travelling with Israel in the wilderness, the ark of Him, Who is the Life of the Universe, and the casket of Joseph. The Gentiles were saying: What is the purpose of these two caskets? Israel was answering them, that is the casket of Joseph with the ark of Him, Who is the Life of the Universe. The Gentiles were taunting Israel and saying, how is it possible that the casket of a dead person is travelling with the ark of Him, Who is the Life of the Universe? But Israel were answering, because this one kept all that is written in that one. Why did he say that? Rebbi Ḥanania⁹⁷ said, in order to speak some words of learning. Rebbi Mana said to him: Did he have no other word of learning to say but that⁹⁸? But that was sarcasm, to say that Joseph did only attain kingdom by keeping the commandments of the Holy One, praise to Him, and we received all that glory only because we kept the commandments of the Holy One, praise to Him, but you⁹⁹ want to remove His commandments from us!

footnotes: ⁹¹ Both tefillin ⁹² Since the tefillin ⁹³ ἐπικάρσιον, τό, “striped garment”. This must have been a large undershirt reaching at least to the upper parts of his legs. ⁹⁴ Latin olearii ⁹⁵ Cf. Greek θερμασία, ἡ, “warmth, heat.”. Rebbi Yoḥanan would trust his tefillin ⁹⁶ This aggadah ⁹⁷ A late Galilean Amora from Sepphoris (Ẓipporin), colleague of R. Mana. ⁹⁸ Since he went frequently, why did he have to repeat the same text over and over again? ⁹⁹ For R. Yoḥanan, the Roman government under Diocletian; for R. Mana, the Roman government under the Christian emperors.

How does one make the benedictions on them? Rebbi Zeriqan¹⁰⁰ in the name of Rebbi Jacob ben Rebbi Idi: When he puts tefillin on his arm, what does he say:¹⁰¹ 60b, Menaḥot 36a) the order of the first two benedictions is inverted; the third benediction never was recited in Babylonia (Babli Berakhot 44b). There is a disagreement in principle between the two Talmudim. It is clear that the Yerushalmi requires two separate benedictions for the two tefillin; therefore, the second one which completes the action is the important and complete one. In the Babli (Menaḥot 36a) it seems that if both tefillin are put on together then only one benediction is needed; the first benediction is the one that counts and has to be recited. [This is Sephardic and Oriental practice today; Ashkenazim recite the second benediction, which is strictly required only if no tefillin are available for one’s arm, out of doubt about the situation. In any case, in the Babylonian style, the second benediction is the minor one. Ashkenazic practice is an uneasy adaptation of Yerushalmi practice to Babylonian rules.] “Praised¹⁰² Who sanctified us by His commandments and commanded us about the obligation of tefillin.” When he puts them on his head, what does he say? “Praised Who sanctified us by His commandments and commanded us about the obligation of putting on tefillin.” When he takes them off, what does he say? “Praised Who sanctified us by His commandments and commanded us to obey His laws.” That follows the opinion that the verse¹⁰³ 13:10. In that chapter, verses 1–8 speak of the laws of Passover, v. 9 introduces the commandment of tefillin. V. 10, the last in that paragraph, reads: “You shall keep this law in its time, מימים ימימה.” If the “law” is that of tefillin, one has to translate “from day to day”, meaning that at nighttime the law is either inoperative or that it is forbidden to wear tefillin. If the “law” is that of Passover, one has to translate “from year to year.” The latter meaning is the usual one for the Hebrew expression, but then it would have been rational to expect that verses 9 and 10 traded places. The Yerushalmi refrains from attaching names to the different interpretations. In the Babylonian Talmud (Erubin 96a), the first interpretation is that of R. Yose the Galilean, the second one that of R. Aqiba. In the Yerushalmi source Mekhilta deR. Simeon bar Yoḥai (p. 41), the first interpretation is that of R. Aqiba and the second one of R. Eliezer. Since R. Aqiba belongs to the following generation, the basic disagreement can be attributed to Rebbis Yose the Galilean and Eliezer. speaks about the law of tefillin. However, according to those who say that the verse speaks about the law of Passover, that does not apply.

footnotes: ¹⁰⁰ An Amora in the generation after R. Yoḥanan and R. Jacob bar Idi. The parallels in the Babylonian Talmud are all anonymous. ¹⁰¹ In the Babli (Berakhot ¹⁰² In all formulas of benedictions, one has to add after “praised”: “are You, o Eternal, our God, King of the Universe”. ¹⁰³ Ex.

Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Eleazar¹⁰⁴: He who puts on tefillin in the night transgresses a positive commandment. What is the reason? (Ex. 13:10) “ “You shall keep this law in its time, from day to day;” “days” not night, “to days”¹⁰⁵ to exclude Sabbaths and holidays. But Rebbi Abbahu sat studying at night with his tefillin on his head!¹⁰⁶ He put them on the side¹⁰⁷, as holy objects, have to be deposited in safe places.; they were like a deposit in his keeping. Some want to say, he only meant not to put them on, but when they were on him during daytime it would be permitted. Some want to say, let us hear it from there (Ex. 13:9): “It shall be for you a sign,” when you need it for a sign, but not holiday or Sabbaths that are all sign. But is it not written “to days”¹⁰⁸? You have only what Rebbi Yoḥanan said: Everything that is not clear one supports from many places¹⁰⁹ 13:10 may apply to Passover, any derivation from that verse is not clear. In Mekhilta deR. Simeon bar Yoḥai, the first derivation is anonymous, the second one is attributed to Rebbi Aqiba. While the discussion here is of Amoraïm, the entire material is tannaïtic..

footnotes: ¹⁰⁴ Probably the Amora, student of Rebbi Yoḥanan, and not one of the Tannaïm. ¹⁰⁵ Meaning certain days, but not all days. ¹⁰⁶ How can he transgress his own statement? ¹⁰⁷ Not between his eyes, so that he was not fulfilling the commandment of wearing them, but he had them on his head to keep them since tefillin ¹⁰⁸ We do not expect the Torah to repeat commandments needlessly. ¹⁰⁹ Since Ex.

Women from where? (Deut. 11:19) “And you should teach them to your sons”, and not to your daughters.¹¹⁰ Anyone who is obliged to study Torah is obliged for tefillin, women who are not obliged to study Torah are not obliged for tefillin.¹¹¹, is really from Ex. 13:9: “It shall be a sign on your hand and a remembrance between your eyes, so that the Torah of the Eternal shall be in your mouth, because with a strong hand the Eternal led you out of Egypt.” Hence, only one who is obliged to study is obliged to wear tefillin. Naturally, for those who declare that Ex. 13:10 speaks of tefillin and nights are not a time for tefillin, it follows that tefillin is a positive commandment bound to stated times and, as a general principle, women are not obligated. However, since that interpretation of v. 10 is in doubt, it is not used here. They objected, but did not Michal, the daughter of the Kushi¹¹², wear tefillin, and did not the wife of Jonah make the pilgrimage to the Temple¹¹³, and the sages did not object. Rebbi Ḥisqiah in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: Jonah’s wife was turned back¹¹⁴, the sages forbade it to Michal the daughter of Kushi.¹¹⁵ and that the wife of Jonah made the pilgrimage, is a tannaïtic statement in the Babli (Erubin 96a), and the Babli concludes from it that women may exercise all obligations that are bound to a fixed time from which women are freed. The Yerushalmi Amoraïm and later Yerushalmi sources (Pesiqta rabbati Chap. 22) disagree. This disagreement is not mentioned in the Babli; i. e., the argument is rejected.

footnotes: ¹¹⁰ The main discussion of this point appears in Chapter 3:3. ¹¹¹ The proof, explicit in the Mekhiltot ¹¹² Saul, addressed as “Kush” in the heading of Psalm 7. ¹¹³ Obviously, everybody can go to Jerusalem anytime he wishes, and we know from many sources that entire families made the pilgrimage, in particular for Passover. What is meant here is that Jonah’s wife went to Jerusalem to bring the obligatory sacrifices in her own name, either additional to those of her husband or for herself when her husband was away at sea or at Nineveh. She may bring עוֹלת ראייה, the holocaust of appearance, as a voluntary offering, but if she insists on presenting the offering as obligatory for her pilgrimage, then there is a question of the legality of the offering and doubtful sacrifices should not be offered. ¹¹⁴ Not from Jerusalem, but from presenting her pilgrimage sacrifice in the Temple separately from her husband. ¹¹⁵ The first statement, that Michal wore tefillin

It was stated¹¹⁶ 2:20; a slightly different version is Babli Šabbat 10a. One returns to the problem discussed earlier that tefillin, as objects of holiness, cannot be worn on an arm that is not separated from one’s genitals by some clothing. Hence, tefillin cannot be worn when one is naked, or in the presence of naked people. Prayer and religious study go by the same rules, following the verse (Amos 4:12) “Israel, prepare yourself for your God”.: “Entering a bathhouse, in the room where everybody is fully clothed¹¹⁷, and putting on one’s clothes. The outer rooms were used for social affairs, especially in large cities. one may read the Bible, pray¹¹⁸”; but these are separately mentioned later., and needless to say, one may greet people¹¹⁹ 6:24; hence, greeting somebody with שָּׁלוֹם עֲלֵיכֶם is permitted only under circumstances that would allow prayer. The prohibition does not include greetings in other languages if the name of God is not invoked.. One may put on tefillin, and needless to say, one does not remove them. In the room where most people are naked one may not exchange greetings and needless to say, there is no Bible reading or prayer; one removes one’s tefillin and needless to say, one does not put them on. Where some are naked and some are clothed there is greeting, no Bible reading and no prayer, one does not remove tefillin and one does not put them on. But one does not put them on again until he has completely left the grounds of that bathhouse.” This supports what Rebbi Isaac said about Rebbi Yoḥanan, that he wore them until he came to Jacob, the bath master.

footnotes: ¹¹⁶ Tosephta Berakhot ¹¹⁷ A Roman bathhouse was essentially a sauna. In the hot room, everybody was naked. In the anteroom, one was cooling down after the hot steam, getting massaged by the olearii ¹¹⁸ This is the reading of the Rome manuscript, the Tosephta and R. Solomon Cirillo; the Leyden manuscript and the Venice print have תפילין “tefillin ¹¹⁹ The problem with the greeting formula “peace with you” is that Peace is one of the names of God, Jud.

Rebbi Jeremiah asked before Rebbi Zeïra: If it was used as bath house in summer but not in the rainy season, what is the rule¹²⁰? He said to him, a bath house even if it is not in use, a toilet even if it does not contain excrement¹²¹ 26a).. Mar Uqba¹²²(Head of the Diaspora) in the time of Rav. The author of the statement is either Rabbana Uqba, grandson of Mar Uqba and Rav, or, more likely, Rav Uqba bar Ḥama, student and son-in-law of Rav Ḥisda. In the Babli (Berakhot25a), the statement is attributed to Rav Papa, student of Rav Ḥisda’s student Rava (brother-in-law of Rav Uqba bar Ḥama). said: a pig is a moving toilet. Rebbi Jonah¹²³ investigated: A pebble on the sea shore, what is the rule?¹²⁴ Rebbi Ammi the physician¹²⁵ said: Rebbi Jeremiah taught that one may pass it by pylyvs¹²⁶, “bonnet, felt hat”, also Greek πίλινος “of felt”, πιλίον “a bandage” (E. G.). The reading of the Rome manuscript is פיליונס. The word appears as פיליוס in Mishnah Niddah 8:1; Rashi there explains the word by old French orel, a scarf; Arukh, in its Italian translation ossi, means a scarf used to cover the mouth. The meaningtherefore is that Rebbi Jeremiah counsels to cover one’s face with a scarf. (Musaphia reads pallium, “coverlet, gown.”), but one does not trust this ruling¹²⁷.

footnotes: ¹²⁰ May one pray in the room in which people are naked if the installation is in use? ¹²¹ The rules of toilets, in which all religious acts are forbidden, are explained in Chapter 3, both in Yerushalmi (fol. 6d) and Babli (Berakhot ¹²² It is questionable whether this is a statement of Mar Uqba, Resh Galuta ¹²³ Head of the Yeshivah of Tiberias together with the Amora Rebbi Yose, of the fourth generation of Amoraïm, and a student of Rebbi Jeremiah. ¹²⁴ May one pray next to a pebble on the seashore covered with excrement, when one has to assume that some human used the pebble to cleanse himself after defecating, but in the meantime waves covered the pebble many times and it does not smell any more? ¹²⁵ An Amora about whom nothing more is known. ¹²⁶ Perhaps compare פיליוס to Latin pileus, pilleus ¹²⁷ It is not clear whether the rejection of Rebbi Jeremiah’s statement is from Rebbi Ammi the physician or from the editor of the Talmud.

Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Abba bar Jeremiah¹²⁸ 23b, Sukkah 41b), the second part of his statement, about sleeping, is introduced as an anonymous tannaitic statement (תנו רבנן).: One may eat a snack while wearing them¹²⁹. A snack is a meal which does not involve bread. The rule about eating is not mentioned in the Babli; hence, the Babli agrees with it., but one may not eat a regular meal while wearing them; one may doze¹³⁰ while wearing them, but one may not sleep while wearing them. Some Tannaïm formulate: One says the benediction once; some Tannaïm formulate: One says the benediction twice¹³¹, R. Zeïra then reports that some Tannaïm require that one recite the benediction over tefillin once a day, but some others say that the benediction is recited (at least) two times a day. The objection is that (except for a fast day) one has to eat, hence one has to take off one’s tefillin and put them on again, certainly with a benediction. The anwer is that some people eat only snacks during daytime; hence, it is proved that the Tanna agrees with Abba bar Jeremiah that for a snack one does not have to remove his tefillin.. He who says one says the benediction once, how can he be right? He who says, one says the benediction twice, because he ate and then they are not on him. Rebbi Zeïra said, Abba bar Jeremiah talks about one who eats only snacks.

footnotes: ¹²⁸ A Babylonian Amora (in the Babli he has a title and is called Rabba bar Jeremiah, short for Rav Abba bar Jeremiah), a student of Rav and possibly the son of Rav’s companion Rav Jeremiah bar Abba. From the following it is clear that Rabba bar Jeremiah quotes the ruling as a traditional one from Tannaïm, not a new amoraic ruling. In the Babli (Berakhot ¹²⁹ The tefillin ¹³⁰ Dozing is defined as “sleeping and not sleeping.” The Babli forbids both dozing and sleeping. ¹³¹ It is also possible to read פְּעָמִין“several times” but the discussion in the next sentence mentions “two times”. The entire sentence is a continuation of the first statement of Abba bar Jeremiah; he is reported by Rebbi Zeïra to have said that one may eat a snack and doze while wearing tefillin

Rebbi Zeïra in the name of (Rebbi) Abba [bar Jeremiah]¹³²: A person should not enter a urinal¹³³) wants to identify the “house of water” with a toilet since in Arabic a toilet is called בַּית אַלמַא “house of water”, but L. Ginzburg already noted that this is impossible; in the Yerushalmi as in the Babli a toilet is called בית הכסא. In the Tosephta (Sanhedrin 4:8) it is stated that a king, who has to write for himself a Torah that has to accompany him everywhere (Deut. 17:19), may not take the Torah with him to the “house of water”. This rule is quoted in Babli Sanhedrin 21b, in the reading of R. Ḥananel and ms. ק, in the formulation that he takes the Torah with him neither to the bathhouse, nor to the toilet, nor to urinate. Hence, the toilet and the “house of water” are two different things. with his books or tefillin in his hands. Rebbi Yoḥanan, when he had a book¹³⁴ 23a), a book of sermons. in his hand he gave it to somebody else. When his tefillin were on him, he stood in them¹³⁵) reports that Rebbi Yoḥanan put the tefillin in a pouch which he kept in his hand, not that he was wearing them. But the Babli does not speak about a urinal (with canalization, after the Roman fashion) but of a toilet, i. e., an outhouse. Roman canalization was unknown in Babylonia. Hence, the seemingly parallel passages in reality deal with different subjects.. A baraita disagrees with Abba bar Jeremiah: A man may enter a urinal with his books or tefillin in his hand. Rebbi Zeïra said: Abba bar Jeremiah refers to one case where he can wear them, and to another case where he cannot wear them¹³⁶) in the name of Rebbi Zera (Zeïra). If one takes off the tefillin in the evening, when there is not time anymore to put them on afterwards, one must put the tefillin in a designated bag or chest so as to treat them with respect. Temporary disrespect is only authorized if tefillin have to be ready for immediate use.. For if he cannot perform a mitzwah with them, why should he degrade them?

footnotes: ¹³² While all sources have here “Rebbi Abba”, the continuation shows that one must read “(Rav) Abba bar Jeremiah”. This is also required since the next statement of Rebbi Zeïra, unrelated to the subject under discussion, is only quoted because it also is in the name of Abba bar Jeremiah. ¹³³ R. Eleazar Askari (followed by Pene Moshe ¹³⁴ In the Babli (Berakhot ¹³⁵ The Babli (loc. cit. ¹³⁶ This distinction is also reported in the Babli (loc. cit.

First they were giving them¹³⁷, when somebody was entering a toilet. In the parallel in the Babli (Berakhot 23a), it is not mentioned that first one had to hand the tefillin, which represent a considerable monetary worth, to other people. to others; these were taking them and fleeing. They decreed that one should put them in holes in the wall. When that incident¹³⁸): A prostitute found a pair of tefillin in a hole near a public toilet, took them, and bragged publicly that she had received them for her services from a certain holy man who then committed suicide as a consequence of the public scandal. happened, they decreed that a person should enter and keep them in his hand. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa¹³⁹ in the name of Rebbi Zeïra said: but only if there is time left during the day to put them on again. But if there is no time left in the day to put them on, it is forbidden. For if he cannot perform a mitzwah with them, why should he degrade them? Maisha (Moses), grandson of R. Joshua ben Levi, said: He who wants to do it right, makes for them a pouch the size of a hand-breadth and puts them on his heart¹⁴⁰ in the pouch and carry them hanging under his outer garment, the strap going around his neck. Since one needs the pouch anyhow for storing the tefillin during nighttime, the counsel of Rebbi Maishe is only to put the straps on so that the pouch can be used also during daytime. The Babli (24a) forbids expressly to have the tefillin hanging on its own straps (not those of a pouch).. What is the reason? (Ps. 16:8): “I put the Eternal always before me.” There¹⁴¹ 49a) reads: “Rebbi Yannai said: Tefillin need a clean body, like Elisha of the bird’s wings.” R. Z. Frankel points out that at the start of fol. 4c, the Yerushalmi quotes that “Rebbi Yannai said: Tefillin need a clean body”; hence, the reference to Elisha of the bird-wings is really a Babylonian addition. The story is told only in the Babli, loc. cit., that Elisha was wearing tefillin when, in the aftermath of the war of Bar Kokhba, wearing tefillin was a capital crime. But he took them off when he saw a policeman and kept them in his hands. When the policeman asked him what he held in his hands, he said: “a couple of bird’s wings.” When he was ordered to open his hands, two birds flew away and his life was saved. (This story shows again that tefillin cases were not supposed to be larger than about 3/8th of an inch square.) The implication of this Babylonian ruling is that nobody can be expected to keep his body perfectly clean for very long; hence, tefillin should be removed after prayers. they say: He who is not like Elisha of the bird’s wings should not put on tefillin.

footnotes: ¹³⁷ The tefillin ¹³⁸ The incident is decribed in detail in the Babli (loc. cit. ¹³⁹ A colleague of Rebbi Zeïra. The argument here, relating to a toilet, is parallel to the preceding one, relating to a urinal. ¹⁴⁰ A pouch with straps so that in case of need one can put the tefillin ¹⁴¹ In Babylonia. The parallel in the Babli (Šabbat

Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rav Abba bar Jeremiah: A person may not enter a cemetery and relieve himself there.¹⁴² When he did it anyway, about him the verse says (Prov. 17:5) “He who makes fun of the poor blasphemes his Maker.”¹⁴³ Clarification: The great Rebbi Ḥiyya and Rebbi Jonathan¹⁴⁴ were walking before the bier of Rebbi Simeon bar Yose bar Laqonia when Rebbi Jonathan stepped over his grave. The great Rebbi Ḥiyya said to him: About that they will say, tomorrow they will be with us but they hurt us. He answered him, do they know anything? Is it not written: (Prov. 9:5) “But the dead do not know anything.” He told him: you know how to read, you do not know how to preach. (Prov. 9:5) “The living know that they will die”, these are the Just who even in death are considered living; “but the dead do not know anything;” these are the wicked who even in life are called dead. From where that the wicked even in life are called dead? It is said (Ez. 18:32) “For I have no pleasure in the death of the dead;” how can a dead person die? But these are the wicked who even in life are called dead. And from where that the Just even in death are considered living? It is written (Deut. 34:4) “And He said to him: This is the land I had sworn to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to tell.” Why does the verse say “to tell”? He said to him: go and tell the patriarchs that all I had promised I fulfilled to your descendants after you.

footnotes: ¹⁴² The connection with the preceding section is that this is a statement of Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rav Abba bar Jeremiah, and it speaks about relieving oneself. ¹⁴³ He who relieves himself in the cemetery makes fun of the dead two-fold; first he shows his contempt for the dead and then he does something that the dead can do no more. Even graveside sermons are unacceptable in Judaism since the dead can no longer have any Torah thoughts. ¹⁴⁴ The greatest of the preachers of the first generation of Amoraïm, student of R. Simeon bar Yose bar Laqonia, a preacher of the last generation of Tannaïm who was the brother-in-law of the son of R. Simeon bar Yoḥai.

If one connected the letters¹⁴⁵, mezuzot and Torah scrolls, not about wearing them. The main discussion is in Yerushalmi Megillah 1:9; here it is quoted since it is somehow connected with the topic of tefillin but mainly because it belongs to a sequence of statements by Rebbi Idi in the name of Rebbi Simeon in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan, which belong to the topic of prayer. The explanation of this paragraph follows the interpretation of Rashba (Solomon ben Adrat, Responsa, vol. 1, #711). The problem is the legal status of a holy text in which two letters touch one another. The Babli states (Menaḥot 49a) that every letter must be surrounded by white parchment. The Yerushalmi has no equivalent statement but one may assume that it subscribes to the same standard. It is also required that a letter should be written, not carved out. Hence, if a letter is completely written and its foot accidentally touches the following letter, as with a slightly too long foot of נ in נו, one may scratch off the superfluous length and has a complete acceptable letter. But when a letter has its head elongated, so that from the start the letter was not standing free, then the entire letter has to be scratched out and the writing has to start anew. The questionable case is a situation with a letter that is hanging down below the line, as in the combination תך when the small foot of ת meets the downward stroke of ך. In that case, the ת was complete but the ך was not; this case remains unsettled (i. e., for practical rulings both letters have to be erased and rewritten.); there is a Tanna who stated: it is valid, and there is a Tanna who stated: it is invalid. Rebbi Idi¹⁴⁶ in the name of Rebbi Simeon in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan: He who says it is valid, below; he who said it is invalid, on top. For example, ארצך .ארצנו, תפארתנוּ is questionable, תפארתך is questionable.

footnotes: ¹⁴⁵ One speaks here about writing tefillin ¹⁴⁶ A Babylonian who became a Galilean Amora in the Yeshivah of Rebbi Ammi. The Rebbi Simeon here is Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish.

Rebbi Idi in the name of Rebbi Simeon in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan¹⁴⁷ 1:9 and in the Rome ms. here. The parallel in the Babli (Berakhot 10) is aatributed to Rebbi Yose ben R. Ḥanina in the name of the Tanna Rebbi Eliëzer ben Jacob. Venice print: ר׳ אידי בר׳ שמעון בשם ר׳ יוסה.: No man should stand at an elevated place and pray. What is the reason? Rebbi Abba the son of R. Pappai¹⁴⁸ Pappai”; the Galilean Amora Rebbi Abba lived a generation before the Babylonian Amora Rav Pappi, one of the successors of Rava. said: (Ps. 130:1) “From the depth I call on You, o Eternal!”

footnotes: ¹⁴⁷ These are the correct names, appearing in the parallel in Megillah ¹⁴⁸ It seems that the name must be “son of Rebbi

Rebbi Idi in the name of Rebbi Simeon in the name of Rebbi Yoḥanan said: No man should pray when he has an urge to go to the bathroom¹⁴⁹ 23a) this appears as a statement of R. Samuel ben Naḥmani in the name of Rebbi Jonathan. It is really a Tosephta (Berakhot 2:18).. What is the reason? (Amos 4:12) “Prepare yourself before Your God, o Israel!” Rebbi Alexandri said: (Eccl. 4:17) “Watch you feet when you go to God’s house”; watch yourself from the drops that drip from between your feet. That means, for urine. But for defecation, if he can bear it, let him bear it¹⁵⁰ without going to the bathroom (about a 70 minutes’ walk)..

footnotes: ¹⁴⁹ In the Babli (Berakhot ¹⁵⁰ The Babli disagrees and states that prayer is only permitted when one is able to walk 4 mil

Rebbi Jacob bar Abbai¹⁵¹) this is also a statement of R. Samuel bar Naḥmani in the name of Rebbi Jonathan, i. e., of the first generations of Israeli Amoraïm. in the name of Rebbi Aḥa: (Eccl. 4:17) “Watch you feet when you go to God’s house”; watch yourself when you are called to God’s house¹⁵² that you should be pure and innocent. Rebbi Abba said: (Prov. 5:18) “Your fountain shall be blessed”, your being called to the grave shall be blessed. Rebbi Berekhiah said (Eccl. 3:1): “A time to be born and a time to die”, hail to the man whose hour of death is like the hour of his birth; just as at the hour of his birth he was innocent so at the hour of his death may he be innocent.

footnotes: ¹⁵¹ An Israeli Amora of the last generation. His statement is placed here since it gives a different interpretation of the last verse quoted before. In the Babli (loc. cit. ¹⁵² I. e., when you die.

MISHNAH: He who recited the Shema‘ and did not make his ear hear, (Rebbi Yehudah says that)¹⁵³ that the editors of the Yerushalmi did not read the words in parenthesis and, maybe, considered the full text as a baraita. A similar instance appears in the Babli (15a) where the Mishnah is presented in this form: He who recited the Shema‘ and did not make his ear hear has fulfilled his obligation, and the Gemara two lines later treats this as anonymous statement, but five lines further down quotes the Mishnah (דתנן) as: ‘He who recited the Shema‘ and did not make his ear hear has fulfilled his obligation, these are the words of Rebbi Yehudah.’ One of the editors of 18th Cent. editions of the Talmud, R. Joel Sirkes known as Baḥ, wants to cross out the last part of the quote, but the Yerushalmi shows that two versions of the Mishnah did exist and, since it is impossible to write two versions at the same place, one is quoted as a separate Mishnah and the other in the text. he has fulfilled his obligation, Rebbi Yose says that he has not fulfilled his obligation. If he recited and was not exact in its letters¹⁵⁴, Rebbi Yose says that he has fulfilled his obligation, Rebbi Yehudah says that he has not fulfilled his obligation. He who reads backwards has not fulfilled his obligation. If he recited and made a mistake then he should return to the place of the mistake.

footnotes: ¹⁵³ In the separate Mishnah at the start of the chapter (fol. 4a), as well as in most Mishnah and Babli manuscripts, the words in parenthesis are missing. However, in some manuscripts both of Mishnah and Babli, the words appear. It seems from the Halakhah ¹⁵⁴ I. e., he mispronounced or slurred.

HALAKHAH: Rav said: practice follows both of them for leniency¹⁵⁵ 15b), this is a statement of Rebbi Ṭabi in the name of Rebbi Josiah; the latter was a student of Rebbi Yoḥanan. The statement in the Babli is accepted without discussion because, as Rav Haï Gaon points out in his commentary, the Talmud previously did establish that the first statement is Rebbi Yehudah’s and, therefore, the question asked in the Yerushalmi has no place in the Babli. One may assume that the fact that the ruling is attributed to a Babylonian in the Yerushalmi and to a Galilean in the Babli is intentional, to show that this is the universally accepted practice [necessary, because in general borrowing leniencies from opposing points of view is frowned upon.]. If it were not so, what could one say? An anonymous statement and Rebbi Yose, practice follows the anonymous¹⁵⁶. Rebbi Yose and Rebbi Yehudah, practice follows Rebbi Yose¹⁵⁷ 46b. It follows that the statement of Rav seems superfluous.. So why does Rav have to say, practice follows both of them for leniency? Because he had heard Rebbi Ḥiyya formulating it in the name of Rebbi Meïr¹⁵⁸), Rebbi Meïr states that the obligation of reciting Shema‘ “is in the mind”; this implies that one does not have to hear what he himself is saying. Since the Mishnah or an equivalent is never quoted in the name of Rebbi Meïr, R. Zachariah Frankel wants to correct “Rebbi Meïr” to “Rebbi Yehudah” and considers the second version of the Mishnah in both Talmudim as the Mishnah of Rebbi Ḥiyya, in contrast to the Mishnah of Rebbi that is formulated anonymously. However, there is no textual support for such a theory. Practice follows Rebbi Yose even against Rebbi Meïr; hence, the statement of Rav is necessary for the first part of the Mishnah., he has to say that practice follows both of them for leniency.

footnotes: ¹⁵⁵ In the Babli (Berakhot ¹⁵⁶ Here, the Yerushalmi uses the Mishnah without the clause which identifies Rebbi Yehudah as the author. An anonymous statement in the Mishnah gives the consensus of the Sages and therefore has the force of law. ¹⁵⁷ This is also the position of the Babli, Erubin ¹⁵⁸ In the Babli (loc. cit.

It was stated: “He who did pray¹⁵⁹ prayer. and did not make his ear hear did fulfill his obligation.” For whom do we need that? For Rebbi Yose! For which statement of Rebbi Yose? For that which we have stated: “He who recites the Shema‘ and did not make his ear hear has fulfilled his obligation, Rebbi Yose says that he has not fulfilled his obligation.” Rav Mattanah¹⁶⁰ 2:4: “The insane, the deaf and dumb, and minors cannot read the Megillah (for others)”. Rav Mattanah notes that, obviously, one does not mean a deaf and dumb person who cannot talk, but a deaf person who cannot hear. Since the Mishnah is anonymous, it must be the consensus of the Sages that one cannot fulfill the obligation of reading the Megillah if one does not hear what he himself is saying. Hence, the general consensus in Megillah is identical with the opinion of Rebbi Yose in Berakhot. The practice, therefore, should follow Rebbi Yose for stringency, in contrast to Rav’s statement in the preceding paragraph. said: That formulation is Rebbi Yose’s. Rebbi Yose¹⁶¹ said: We could be of the opinion that the rabbis and Rebbi Yose disagree only about Shema‘ since there it is written: “hear!”, but not about any other obligations. Since Rav Mattanah said “that formulation is Rebbi Yose’s”, it is the same for all obligations. What is the reason of Rebbi Yose? (Ex. 15:26) “Bend your ear to His commandments”, your ears should hear what your mouth says.

footnotes: ¹⁵⁹ The thrice daily Amidah ¹⁶⁰ This paragraph and the following do not really belong here, they refer to the Mishnah Megillah ¹⁶¹ The Amora, one of the compilers of the Jerusalem Talmud.

Rav Ḥisda said: The deaf and dumb person is not mentioned, it is a formula.¹⁶² may well be Rebbi Yehudah’s. Then the Mishnah might be Rebbi Yehudah’s. Rebbi Yose¹⁶³ said: It is reasonable to think that Rav Ḥisda concedes that the statement from Terumot is from Rebbi Yose¹⁶⁴, the heave, is the first gift of grain to the Cohen from the new harvest. There is no amount fixed for terumah in the Pentateuch; it must be consecrated explicitly. Only a person of sound mind can consecrate terumah. The first Mishnah in tractate Terumot reads: “Five categories of people cannot consecrate terumah and if they did it anyhow, their actions are null and void: the deaf and dumb, the insane, minors, one who is not the owner, and a non-Jew.” The sixth Mishnah then reads: “Five categories of people should not consecrate terumah (since a priori it requires the recitation of a benediction) but if they did it anyhow their actions are valid: the speechless, the drunk, the naked, the blind, those impure by emission of semen.” In between it is explained that חרש means a deaf and dumb person who is not legally capable of acting but that the deaf who can talk belongs to the same category as the second group of five.. Rabbi Ḥanina said in the name of Rav Ḥisda, this one is by Rebbi Yose. Rebbi Yose bar Rebbi Abun said: It must be said that that one is Rebbi Yose’s since we have stated the first five cases and did not include it¹⁶⁵, because their terumah is no terumah. Then we have stated the five later ones and did not include it. So in the end you must say, that one is by Rebbi Yose¹⁶⁶, explaining that the deaf who is able to speak can give terumah, has to be formulated separately and could not be included in the sixth Mishnah since the first and sixths Mishnayot are Rebbi Yose’s who will object to the inclusion of the deaf-but-not-speechless in the second group..

footnotes: ¹⁶² Since in all legal matters the insane, the deaf and dumb, and minors are equally incapacitated, the people who had to memorize “insane and minors” automatically changed the phrase in their memories to “insane, deaf and dumb, and minors”. After this correction, the Mishnah in Megillah ¹⁶³ The Amora. ¹⁶⁴ Terumah ¹⁶⁵ The case of the deaf who is able to speak. ¹⁶⁶ Hence, the second Mishnah in Terumot

These need careful attention: al-lĕvāvĕkhā, al-lĕvavkhem, ēśev bĕśādĕkhā, waăvadt̂em mĕh̃ēr̄āh, hakkānāph pĕt́īl, etkhem mēereẓ¹⁶⁷ 15b) this list is an appendix by Rava to a baraita stating that in reciting the Shema‘ one has to differentiate between identical sounds. There is no problem with the words in Shema‘ where final and initial 1 and m clash. More of a problem is the clash of soft and hard ב, פ. The late Prof. Y. Kutscher pointed out that in classical Arabic there is a tendency to pronounce fb as bb [Contemporary Studies in North-Western Semitic, Journal of Semitic Studies 10(1965) pp. 21–51, see p. 30] but it seems clear at least for ב which, under the influence of the Greek that was the common vernacular, in Galilee both ב and בּ were pronounced “v”. For example, the technical term מחוור “logically consistent” in the Babli appears as מְחוּבָּר “connected” in Yerushalmi Peah 2:1, fol.l6d. It does not make any sense to derive מחוור from Aramaic חוור “pale”. Hence, Galilean מחבר sounded מחוור in Babylonian ears. (Possibly both ב and בּ were pronounced as “b” in Babylonia, as they still are today in dialects of Jews from Arabic speaking countries.) It is less certain but still possible that פ was pronounced “p-h” rather than “f”.. Rebbi Ḥanina in the name of Rebbi Aḥa: ăšer nišb̀a’ ădonay¹⁶⁸.

footnotes: ¹⁶⁷ In the Babli (Berakhot ¹⁶⁸ In Biblical times, ע (‘) was a hard glottal sound similar to Arabian Arabic ع but in Talmudic times it was either silent (see the next paragraph) or very weak so that there was (almost) a double vowel a.

Rebbi Samuel bar Ḥanina in the name of Rebbi Hoshaiah¹⁶⁹: “He Who forms light and creates darkness¹⁷⁰, it appears here in the context of the recitation of Shema‘. The language is that of the verse (Is. 45:7) “He Who forms light and creates darkness, makes peace and creates evil.” In prayer, the verse is changed to “He Who forms light and creates darkness, makes peace and creates all” to soften the language. Rebbi Hoshaiah notes that one may not go so far as to eliminate the mention of darkness, in the words of the Babli (12a) “to mention night at day and day at night”, to negate any Zoroastrian dualism.”; one should not say: “He Who forms light and creates radiance.” Rebbi Ḥaggai¹⁷¹ in the name of Rebbi Abba bar Zavda¹⁷²: “There they sang for You¹⁷³: “We thank You that You took us out of Egypt and redeemed us from the house of slavery to thank Your Name”. The Babli (14b) has the corresponding Galilean version: “We thank You that You took us out of Egypt and redeemed us from the house of slavery, did for us wonders and great deeds on the sea, and we sang for You”. The version “There they praised You” seems to be an alternative Babylonian form that is rejected here (since it is not a proper introduction to the required recitation of Ex. 15:11,19. In later times, the Israeli standard introduction to these verses was בגילה ברנה בשמחה רבה ואמרו כולם, retained in the Ashkenazic service on holiday nights.)”, one should not say: “There they praised You”. Rebbi Levi, Rebbi Eudaimon¹⁷⁴ of Haifa, in the name of Rebbi Levi bar Sisi¹⁷⁵: one has to pronounce tizkeru voiced¹⁷⁶ 15:40) “you shall remember” and תסכרו “you shall dam up”, תשׂכרו “you shall hire”, and even, under the influence of Greek, which knows no sh sound, תשׁכרו “you will get drunk”.. Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rav Ḥisda: one has to pronounce ki lĕ‘ôlām ḥasdȏ voiced¹⁷⁷ R. Zachariah Frankel notes that the two Aramaic verbs חֲסַד ḥăsad “to be loving” and חַסַּד ḥassad “to insult, degrade” differ in the quality of its s sound; hence, one has to take care that “truly, His kindness is forever” should not sound as “truly, His insulting is forever”. It seems that while s should not really sound like z, care has to be taken not to make it sound like ss. Maybe the same difference was once heard between Hebrew חסד I “to show kindness” and חסד II “to insult.”. It was stated: One does not take as reader anyone from Haifa, Beth Sheän or Tiv‘on since they read ח like ¹⁷⁸ until the middle of the sixteenth Century. Under the influence of Polish, which in contrast to German has only one ch- sound, Ashkenazic pronunciation lost the difference between ח (ḥ) and כ (kh). In all other Jewish dialects, the problem is not the identification of כ,ח but of ע . ח,ה is lost in all Ashkenazic pronunciations; it is retained in Italian and Portuguese Hebrew as ng.ה and ע like א. If his pronunciation was orderly, it would be permitted¹⁷⁹.

footnotes: ¹⁶⁹ A Babylonian, student of Rav Yehudah and Rav Huna, who later emigrated to Israel and became student of Rebbi Yoḥanan. ¹⁷⁰ This is the beginning of the first benediction before the Shema‘ ¹⁷¹ A Babylonian who went to study in Tiberias. ¹⁷² A Galilean who went to study temporarily in Babylonia; he was a chief authority in Galilee after the death of Rebbi Yoḥanan. Both authors mentioned here were familiar with the Babylonian prayer ritual. ¹⁷³ In Halakhah 1:9, the Yerushalmi quotes the Babylonian version of a short benediction after Shema‘ ¹⁷⁴ An Amora of the second generation. His name Εὐδαίμων “fortunate” shows that the pronounciation of Greek in his time was as today, that υ = f = ב. ¹⁷⁵ Levi who usually is quoted without title or patronymic. ¹⁷⁶ Since voiced z (ז) and voiceless s (שׂ,ס) are similar sounds, care is needed to distinguish between תזכרו (Num. ¹⁷⁷ It is not clear why one should pronounce חַסְדּוֹ with a soft s. ¹⁷⁸ Western Ashkenazic pronunciation treated ח like hh ¹⁷⁹ If he makes an effort and tries to realize the difference, even if he does not quite succeed.

**New Section.**He who reads backwards¹⁸⁰ has not fulfilled his obligation. Rebbi Jonah said that Rav Naḥman bar Ada¹⁸¹ stated, Rebbi Yose said that Naḥman the Old stated, (Deut. 6:6) “They shall be”, they shall be unaltered¹⁸². We have stated: The same holds for Hallel and the reading of the Esther scroll.

footnotes: ¹⁸⁰ Reading sentences out of order; reading words out of order is clearly useless since it makes no sense. ¹⁸¹ A Babylonian, student of Samuel. He probably is identical with “Naḥman the Old”, to distinguish him from later Amoraïm also called Naḥman. ¹⁸² Taking the verb היה “to be” in the sense of “to exist”.

This is fine for the Esther scroll since it is written there (Esther 9:27): “As they are written”¹⁸³ and it its time, every single year.” Hence, the scroll must be read as it is written.. But for Hallel, since it is written (Ps. 113:3): “From sunrise to sunset, may the name of the Eternal be praised?”¹⁸⁴ What can you understand from that? Rebbi Abun said: It also is written in order. (Ps. 114:1) “When Israel left Egypt” in the past. (Ps. 115:1) “Not for us, o Eternal, not for us” in the present¹⁸⁵ 118a), this sentence is applied by Rebbi Yoḥanan either to the oppression by hostile governments or to the sufferings preceding the coming of the Messiah. That may be the meaning of the sentence here also. Alternatively, the psalm is interpreted there as the song of Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah in the fiery oven.. (Ps. 116:1) “I loved, truly the Eternal listened to my voice” in the days of the Messiah. (Ps. 118:27) “Bind the holiday sacrifice with ropes” in the days of Gog and Magog¹⁸⁶, Ps. 118:24 “This is the day the Eternal made, let us rejoice and be happy on it” is taken to describe the time when one can be sure that the deliverance will not be followed by another oppression.. (Ps. 118:28) “You are my God” in the future world.

footnotes: ¹⁸³ The verse reads: “The Jews confirmed and accepted for themselves, not to be cancelled, that they would observe these two days as they are written ¹⁸⁴ Since there is no difference between East and West, there should be no difference between before and after. ¹⁸⁵ In the much more detailed parallel passage in the Babli (Pesaḥim ¹⁸⁶ In the celebration after the final defeat of the forces of evil. In Midrash Tehillim

Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Also he who composed this prayer¹⁸⁷. Another derivation is given in the following paragraph. composed it in good order. The first three and the last three are the praise of the Omnipresent, the middle ones are the needs of the creatures. Give us knowledge. You gave us knowledge¹⁸⁸, accept our repentance. You accepted our repentance, forgive us. You forgave us, save us. You saved us, heal our diseases. You healed our diseases, bless our years. You blessed our years, gather us in. You gathered us in, judge us in justice. You judged us in justice, subdue those who arise against us.¹⁸⁹ is an institution of the Men of the Great Assembly, its place was chosen in the spirit of those who first formulated the prayer. You subdued those who arise against us, justify us¹⁹⁰. You justified us, build Your house, listen to our supplications, be pleased with us in it. Is it necessary after “build Your house,” listen to our supplications, be pleased with us in it¹⁹¹? But as the verse is, so is the tradition (Is. 56:7): “I shall bring them to My holy mountain, make them happy in My house of prayer.¹⁹³ 17b–18a.”

footnotes: ¹⁸⁷ The week-day 18 benedictions of the Amidah ¹⁸⁸ The entire list should be read as a conditional: Assuming that You gave us knowledge (fourth benediction), please accept our repentance (fifth benediction). This is particularly evident in the second part, starting from the prayer for good years, which is a prayer for redemption and therefore future oriented even though the formulation here is in the past tense. ¹⁸⁹ While the benediction against apostates was introduced at Jabneh and the rest of the Amidah ¹⁹⁰ This is the text of the Rome and Genizah manuscripts, not like the Leyden manuscript and the Venice print which have צדקנו במשפט “justify us in law” that belongs to the benediction before the previous one, not to the one for the elders (and all) of Israel and the converts which follows after the imprecation against apostates. ¹⁹¹ After a prayer for the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the Temple, the prayers for acceptance of the prayer and the hope that our service be for God’s pleasure may seem superfluous since acceptance of prayer and God’s pleasure are guaranteed in the Temple. ¹⁹³ A parallel with slightly different treatment of the entire paragraph appears in Babli Megillah

¹⁹³ 17b–18a. Rebbi Jeremiah said: 120 elders, among them more than 80 prophets, instituted this prayer. Why did they follow “the holy God”¹⁹⁴. What follows is a description of the benedictions of the week-day Amidah. by “He Who favors with knowledge”? Because (Is. 29:23–24) “they sanctify the Holy One of Jacob” is followed by “and those of erring spirit will know insight.” “Knowledge” followed by “Repentance”, (Is. 6:10) “Makefat the heart of this people, make it hard of hearing and its eyes sticky, that it should not see with its eyes, nor hear with its ears, nor understand with its heart, because if it would repent then it would be healed.” “Repentance” by “Forgiveness”, (Is. 55:7) “He should return to the Lord that He would have mercy on him, and to our God because He forgives much.” “Forgiveness” by “Redemption”, (Ps. 103:2–3) “He Who forgives all your sins, He Who hears all your maladies, He Who redeems your soul from destruction.” Then he should say “Healer of the sick” before that¹⁹⁵. Rebbi Aḥa said: why did they institute “Redeemer of Israel” as the seventh benediction? To teach you that Israel will be redeemed only in a Seventh Year¹⁹⁶) in a Jubilee cycle. The “seventh song” in the next sentence is the seventh of the songs of ascent.. Rebbi Jonah in the name of Rebbi Aḥa: (Ps. 126) “A song of ascent. When the Eternal will return the returnees of Zion” is the seventh song, to show you that Israel will be redeemed only in a Seventh Year. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said: Why did they institute “Healer of the sick” as the eighth benediction? That is for circumcision which is done on the eighth, following (Maleachi 2:5) “My covenant was with him: Life”¹⁹⁷ Covenant refers to circumcision.. Rebbi Alexander said: Why did they institute “He Who blesses the years” as the ninth benediction? Corresponding to (Ps. 29:5) “The sound of the Eternal breaks cedars”, since in the future He will break all market manipulators¹⁹⁸ 10:15, which in Babylonian (and Rashi’s) count was Ps. 9:36 and, therefore, is appropriate for the Ninth benediction. Our texts of Psalms which split an alphabetic acrostich between Psalms 9 and 10 is the Yerushalmi tradition which, therefore, cannot use the verse quoted in the Babli.. Rebbi Levi in the name of Rebbi Aḥa bar Ḥanina: Why did they follow “He Who blesses the years” by “Ingatherer of the dispersed of Israel”? Because of (Ez. 36:8) “you, mountains of Israel, sprout your branches and carry your fruits for my people Israel”, why? “because they will soon come.” When the dispersed are gathered in then justice will be done, the evildoers will succumb, and the just will be happy¹⁹⁹. It was stated: One includes the apostates and the wicked in “He Who subdues the evildoers”, the converts and the elders in “refuge of the just”, David in “Builder of Jerusalem”²⁰⁰. (Hosea 3:5) “Then the children of Israel will repent, seek the Eternal, their God, and their king David.²⁰¹”

footnotes: ¹⁹³ A parallel with slightly different treatment of the entire paragraph appears in Babli Megillah ¹⁹⁴ The third benediction of the Amidah ¹⁹⁵ Since in the verse redemption comes after healing. (Redemption here is personal redemption; redemption of the people is described by benedictions 9–14). ¹⁹⁶ A Seventh Year (shemiṭṭah ¹⁹⁷ The ¹⁹⁸ Manipulators of prices of basic commodities who are compared to cedars for their (financial) strength. In the Babli, R. Alexander quotes Ps. ¹⁹⁹ This describes benedictions 10–13. The wicked are Gentile governments that oppress the Jews. The evildoers are Jewish evildoers. ²⁰⁰ This is today the practice of Ashkenazic and Sephardic Jews. The Babylonian practice was not to mention the restoration of the Davidic dynasty in the benediction for Jerusalem, but to make it a separate benediction preceding the final benediction “He Who hears prayer”. Only the Yemenite ritual follows the strict Babylonian style; the other Jewish groups pray twice for the Davidic dynasty, once in the Yerushalmi form of “Builder of Jerusalem” and then in the Babylonian form “He Who makes sprout the horn of salvation”. ²⁰¹ The verse concludes: “They will tremble for the Eternal and His Goodness at the End of Days”, referring to Messianic times.

The Rebbis say: This King Messiah, if he is from the living, his name is David. If he is from the dead, his name is David. Rebbi Tanḥuma said: I am declaring the reason (Ps. 18:51) “He gives kindness to His anointed, to David.²⁰² 98b, where for the first case a verse in Jeremiah (30:9) is cited: “They shall serve the Eternal, their God, and their king David whom I shall raise for them” which also is written in the future tense. The second case, that the original David will be resurrected as Messiah, is based on a verse in Ezechiel (34:24) “I, the Eternal, shall be for them their God, and My servant David prince in their midst”, seems to refer to the historical David in Messianic times. The Babylonian Talmud points out that a prince is less than a king and, therefore, the new King Messiah will have the status of a Roman Augustus whereas the resurrected David will occupy the position of Caesar, or Crown Prince. In any case, the next paragraph makes is quite clear that the Messiah was born on the day of the destruction of the Temple and that, therefore, nobody with a recorded date of birth can ever be considered as Messiah. There is no reason to believe that the Babli would disagree with this conclusion. In addition, Maimonides in his Letter to Yemen is quite adamant that the Messiah can only appear in the Land of Israel and must be a political figure.’

footnotes: ²⁰² The previous discussion ended with the verse from Hosea, which indicates that in Messianic times all twelve tribes will seek their king David; it is clear that Hosea talks about the Messiah and calls him David. This gives rise to an insertion about the Messiah in this and the next paragraph.The second argument is more explicit in the Babli, Sanhedrin

Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, his name is Ẓemaḥ. Rebbi Yudan, the son of Rebbi Aivu, said his name is Menaḥem²⁰³ 1(57). The verse of R. Joshua ben Levi is Zach. 6:12: “Behold, a man of the name of Ẓemaḥ, he will sprout from below and build the Eternal’s temple.” The verse of Rebbi Yudan is Threni 1:16: “Behold, far from me is Menaḥem who will restore my spirit.”. Ḥanina the son of Rebbi Abbahu said: they have no disagreement since the numerical value of one is the numerical value of the other: Ẓemaḥ is equal to Menaḥem²⁰⁴. Since Rebbi Yudan the son of Rebbi Aivu said, it happened to a Jew who was plowing in the valley of Arbel²⁰⁵ that his ox was bellowing. An Arab passed by and heard the bellowing of the ox. He said to him: Jew, Jew, unharness your ox, unharness your plow²⁰⁶ “small vessel”. However, this קנקן appears several times also in the Babli (noted in the Rabbinic dictionary ‘Arukh under קנקן ב׳) and seems to mean the central peg by which the motion of the plow is controlled; possibly from old Persian gan, “plow”. because the Temple was destroyed. The ox bellowed a second time. He said: Jew, Jew, harness your ox, fix your plow because King Messiah has been born. He said to him: What is his name? Menaḥem. He said to him: What is his father’s name? Ḥizqiah. He said to him: Where is he? He said to him: At the king’s palace in Bethlehem in Judea. He went and sold his ox and plow and made himself a vendor of baby linens. He went to towns and left towns until he came to that town. All the women bought from him but the mother of Menaḥem did not buy. He heard the women say: Menaḥem’s mother, Menaḥem’s mother, come and buy for your son! She said: I would rather strangle him like a hater of Israel because he was born on the day the Temple was destroyed. He said to her: I like him, because for him it was destroyed and for him it will be rebuilt. She said to him, I have no money. He said to her, that does not bother me, come and buy for him! If you have nothing with you today, I shall return another day and I will take it then. After some time he went up to that town and said to her: How is your baby doing? She said to him: After you had seen me there came storms and raised him and tore him from my hands²⁰⁷ (II, 7b–8b) improves on the story and asserts that the Messiah is living in Paradise at a place known as “bird’s nest”.. Rebbi Abun said: We do not need to learn from that Arab, is it not a full verse (Is. 10:35): “The Lebanon will fall through a noble one”?²⁰⁸ 3:25, where Moses begs to see “this good mountain and the Lebanon.” Since God later showed Moses all he wanted to see, but nothing North of the city of Dan, it follows that “Lebanon” here cannot mean the mountain range. The verse here was used by Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai to predict to Vespasian that he would be emperor before he could conquer Jerusalem because the Temple could fall only to a noble one (Ekha rabbati 1(32)). In Isaiah, the verse is the introduction to a description of Messianic times. And the next verse is (11:1) “A sprout will come from the stem of Jesse.”

footnotes: ²⁰³ The parallel to the entire paragraph is in Midrash Ekha rabbati ²⁰⁴ 138. צ̇מ̇ח̇ = 90+40+8, מ̇נ̇ח̇ם̇ = 40+50+8+40. ²⁰⁵ This is the reading of the Rome ms. and Genizah fragments; the valley of Arbel is West of Tiberias. The place name is missing in the Leyden ms. and the Venice print. ²⁰⁶ קנקן usually means a pitcher or a bottle, from late Latin canna ²⁰⁷ The Zohar ²⁰⁸ The use of Lebanon as a figure of speech for the Temple can be traced to the interpretation of Deut.

²⁰⁹ Rebbi Tanḥuma said: Why did they institute “He Who listens to prayer” as the fifteenth benediction? Corresponding to (Ps. 29:10) “The Eternal throned over the Deluge”, that He avert the catastrophy, that it should not come over the world²¹⁰.

footnotes: ²⁰⁹ After the digression about the Messiah, one returs to the main theme; the final benediction of the weekday insertion is the fifteenth in the Galilean count, and the mention of God’s name in the verse is the fifteenth in the Psalm. ²¹⁰ God has sworn that no future Deluge will engulf the entire globe, but one has to pray that partial deluges will be averted.

Temple service (precedes) Thanksgiving²¹¹. The 16th (Israeli count) prays for restoration of the Temple service and acceptance of our prayer as if performed in the Temple. The 17th benediction is Thanksgiving, the 18th is for Peace, following (in the Morning Service) the Priestly Blessings that end in “peace”.: (Ps. 50:23) “He who brings a sacrifice of thanksgiving honors Me and shows a path; I shall make him see God’s help.” One finishes with Peace, since all benedictions end with peace²¹². Rebbi Simeon bar Ḥalaphta²¹³ 3:12). said: There is no vessel that contains more blessing than peace. What is the reason? (Ps. 29:11) “The Eternal gives strength to His people, the Eternal blesses His people with peace.”

footnotes: ²¹¹ Now we are back to the explanation of the sequence of benedictions in the Amidah ²¹² The Priestly Blessings end in “peace”, and all other services, prayers and grace, end with “He Who makes peace in His heights, may He give peace to us and all of Israel, Amen.” ²¹³ A great preacher of the last generation of Tannaïm; his statement here is the last statement of the Mishnah (Uqeẓin

“If he recited and made a mistake then he should return to the place of the mistake.”²¹⁴ 16a. If he made a mistake between the first and second mention of “writing” he must return to the first “writing”²¹⁵ 6:9, 11:20, read: “You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and your gates.” Since the verses are identical, a person who recited Shema‘ mechanically has no way of deciding between the two but must start anew from the first verse.. If he made a mistake and does not know where he made the mistake, he returns to the start, to any place that he is sure about²¹⁶ 2:5) that one has to return to the start of the section he remembers. Since the language from the start of the paragraph to here is in pure Hebrew, it probably represents an Israeli version of that Tosephta.. An explanation: Rebbi Ḥiyya, Rebbi Yasa, Rebbi Ammi were preparing the wedding canopy²¹⁷, ium (n., plur.) “marriage bed, marriage” (E. G.). Rebbi Ḥiyya mentioned here is R. Ḥiyya bar Abba; his name is missing in the Babli. for Rebbi Eleazar. They heard the voice of Rebbi Joḥanan when he explained something new. They said: Who is going down to hear that from him? They said, let Rebbi Eleazar go down since he is very careful. He descended, ascended, and said to them: So says Rebbi Joḥanan, if he recited and found himself at למען²¹⁸ one can be sure that he had the right intention.

footnotes: ²¹⁴ Quote from the last part of the Mishnah that now will be discussed. The entire paragraph is repeated in Babli Berakhot ²¹⁵ Both verses Deut. ²¹⁶ In the Babli, this is quoted in the language of the Tosephta (Berakhot ²¹⁷ Probably Latin genialia ²¹⁸ In the last verse of the second section of Shema. Since the third section is completely different in wording and style, one may assume that he recited the first two parts correctly.

Rebbi Lia²¹⁹, Rebbi Yasa in the name of the great Rebbi Aḥa²²⁰: If he prayed and he found himself in “He Who hears prayer”, he may assume that he prayed with intent²²¹ is a long prayer, it is probable that he lost concentration on what he was saying somewhere in between but when he realizes that he recited the last of the intermediary benedictions he may assume that he said all others in the required order.. Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: If he prayed without intent and he knows that the second time he will pray with intent, he may pray a second time; otherwise he should not pray²²² 34b, a statement of Rebbi Ḥiyya (bar Abba) in the name of the Babylonian Rav Safra] requires total concentration only during the first benediction; hence, for the Babli someone who did not concentrate during the first benediction has to repeat the Amidah. {In the Shulḥan Arukh (Sec. 101,1), R. Josef Qaro follows the Babli but R. Moshe Isserles decides Ashkenazic practice according to the Yerushalmi.]. The great Rebbi Ḥiyya said: I never managed to pray with intent, but one time I made an effort to concentrate and I started to think and said to myself, who enters first before the king, the ἀργαπέτης²²³ “citadel”, پد pad (old Persian pat) “master, overseer”. So the title seems to designate the person who overseas the royal castle (Fleischer) or “commandant of a fort” (Liddell Scott). or the Resh Galuta²²⁴? Samuel said: I counted chicks²²⁵.. Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said: I counted stone rows²²⁶. Rebbi Mattaniah said: I an thankful to my head that when I come to modim it bends down by itself.

footnotes: ²¹⁹ Rebbi La or Illaï, Galilean Amora of the third generation. ²²⁰ He cannot be the Amora Rebbi Aḥa since the latter belongs to the fourth generation. Probably he is the Tanna Rebbi Aḥa of the last generation of Tannaïm. ²²¹ Since the weekday Amidah ²²² It seems that the Yerushalmi requires total concentration for all 18 benedictions for somebody who is not satisfied with the quality of his prayer. The following examples show that such a total concentration over a lengthy period of time is impossible and, hence, repetition of an imperfect prayer is excluded. The Babli [Berakhot ²²³ This Greek form was found in a Palmyrenian inscription. Following Fleischer, the title is a composition of Persian ارك ark ²²⁴ The Davidic head of Babylonian Jewry, who was a hereditary Noble under the Parthian and Persian rulers and still an important official in Moslem times. ²²⁵ When I consciously attempted total concentration for all the 19 (Babylonian) benedictions of the Amidah ²²⁶ Greek δόμος, “building; rows of stones or bricks in a building.” At other places in the Yerushalmi, the spelling דומדס is found; in the Babli it always is דימוס (which, however, might mean another word, δῆμος).

MISHNAH: Professional workers²²⁶ read²²⁷; since this recitation needs concentration only for the first verse, we may assume that the professional can concentrate for that short time span without fear of falling down. The rest of Shema‘ can be recited by rote from memory. In contrast, prayer (the Amidah) needs concentration from beginning to end and can be recited only on the ground. on top of a tree or on top of a wall in construction; they are not permitted to do this for prayer.

footnotes: ²²⁶ Greek δόμος, “building; rows of stones or bricks in a building.” At other places in the Yerushalmi, the spelling דומדס is found; in the Babli it always is דימוס (which, however, might mean another word, δῆμος). ²²⁷ The Shema‘

HALAKHAH: So²²⁸ read כיני as given here. is the Mishnah: The hourly workers read on top of a tree²²⁹ and the professionals on top of a wall in construction.

footnotes: ²²⁸ The Venice edition has מני which is an interrogatory particle referring to persons and does not make sense here. The Genizah fragments and the commentator of Sefer Ḥaredim ²²⁹ The Babli does not mention hourly workers at all. It is not clear whether the Yerushalmi is of the opinion that work on a tree is unskilled work and, therefore, a careful construction of the Mishnah requires the mention of hourly workers here or that this rule is contrary to the opinion prevalent in Babylonia.

It was stated²³⁰ 2:8: “Hourly workers read on top of a tree and on top of a wall in construction; they pray on top of an olive tree and a fig tree but for all other trees they have to descend and pray. The owner descends in any case for prayer. “A similar text, only with “professionals” instead of “hourly workers”. is quoted in Babli Berakhot 16a.: “They pray on top of an olive tree or on top of a fig tree.” Hence²³¹, on all other trees he descends and prays on the ground. “The owner descends in all cases and prays on the ground.” And why on top of an olive tree or on top of a fig tree? Rebbi Abba and Rebbi Simon say both, because those are very laborious²³².

footnotes: ²³⁰ This is a fragment from a text similar to Tosephta Berakhot ²³¹ This looks like an inference since הא is not a tannaïtic technical term. However, given the parallels in Tosephta and Babli, the word הא “therefore”, may be an interpolation and the rest of the sentence may belong to the Tosephta. ²³² It is not clear whether it is very troublesome to come down from these trees and, therefore, too much time would be spent at the expense of the owner, or that olive and fig trees need great care and there is danger that the trees or their fruits would be damaged if the hourly worker would try to go down and up quickly, again to the detriment of the owner. Both explanations are found in the commentaries. Rashi in the Babli (16a) explains that these trees have so many branches that one can stand there securely and may concentrate on prayer without fear; it may be that he agrees that because of the many branches it is very troublesome to come down from the trees.

It was stated²³³(Berakhot 2:7) where, however, the exemption for the carrier of a large load is not mentioned.: “The porter may recite the Shema‘ even with his load on his shoulders²³⁴, the porter is mentioned before the worker. but he should start neither when he unloads nor when he loads because he cannot then concentrate. In any case he may not pray until he unloads, but if he was carrying a load of 4 qab²³⁵ is 4 log, about 2.17 liters. 4 qab are a Roman modius, about a British peck, a fourth of a bushel. The Babli, Baba meẓi‘a 105b, quotes a baraita which states that the porter may pray with his load on his back if the load is less than 4 qab, but not if the load is 4 qab or more. Therefore, it seems that in the Yerushalmi the meaning is that the porter may pray without unloading if his load does not exceed 4 qab, on condition that it be balanced. The two differences between Yerushalmi and Babylonian practice are that for the Babli, the load has to be strictly less than 4 qab, for the Yerushalmi it may reach 4 qab, and for the Babli the load has to be all on the back and not distributed fore and aft. it is permitted.” Rebbi Joḥanan said: only if he is in equilibrium. What means that he is in equilibrium? Two parts on his back and one part in front.

footnotes: ²³³ This statement is a Tosephta ²³⁴ For the same reason as that given for the workman. In the Tosephta ²³⁵ A qab

It was stated²³⁶ is given in the Babli, Yoma 19b, in the name of the early Babylonian Amora Rav Isaac bar Samuel Bar Martha. However, the Biblical justification of the prohibition is there given in the name of the early Tanna Rebbi Eleazar Ḥisma. Hence, the statement of the Yerushalmi is a genuine tannïtic one.: “Nobody should give messages with his eyes while reciting.”

footnotes: ²³⁶ An extended prohibition to communicate with others by movements of eyes, lips, or hands while reciting the Shema‘

It was stated: “The hourly workers who worked for an employer have to recite the first benediction of Grace and subsume that of Jerusalem in the benediction for the Land and close with the benediction for the Land²³⁷ on Ṭur Oraḥ Ḥayyim 191). In order to reduce the expense for the employer (and, hence, increase employment for the poor), the hourly workers whose lunchbreak is paid for by their employer recite an abbreviated version of Grace that still contains all required elements. Since the Yerushalmi does not mention the benedictions before the meal it seems that the hourly workers are required to recite these [this is also the reading of the Tosephta (5:24) and most of the manuscripts of the Babli, against the Venice text of the Babli (16a)].. But if they were working for him for their meals ²³⁸ or if the employer was eating with them, then they recite all four benedictions.” Rebbi Mana said: This means that one may not work while reciting Grace. Otherwise, why do we have to say this²³⁹? Let him work and recite the benedictions!

footnotes: ²³⁷ The obligation of reciting Grace is biblical but the number of benedictions is a rabbinical ordinance (Beth Yosef ²³⁸ For the food only, without cash payment to them. ²³⁹ The abbreviated version of Grace; it is necessary only if it profits the employer.

Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac²⁴⁰ in the name of Rav Ḥuna: One should not stand and pray while he keeps a coin in his hand²⁴¹; (having the coin) in front of him is forbidden, at his back it is allowed. Rebbi Yasa used to bind them together and grab them in his hand²⁴². And for money matters, (Deut. 14:25) “you shall bind the money together in your hand”, only in your hand²⁴³. Rebbi Yose bar Abun thus taught his son-in-law Rebbi Hillel²⁴⁴.

footnotes: ²⁴⁰ An Israeli Amora of Babylonian origin who in his youth was a student of Rav Huna, the student of Rav. ²⁴¹ That one should not come to examine it while praying; having the coin where it cannot be seen is no impediment to prayer. ²⁴² Since bound together they cannot be examined. ²⁴³ The verse deals with money that has to be spent in Jerusalem, for which the owner is a kind of trustee. The inference, which is not a strict derivation, is that anybody who is trustee for other people’s money can discharge his obligation of prudent care only by having the money tied together and in his personal control all the time. ²⁴⁴ Probably referring to both prayer and trusteeship.

Rebbi Ḥizqiah and Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa were sitting at one place and Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa had coins on him. There came the time for prayer, he unbound them and gave them to Rebbi Ḥizqiah. He bound them together little by little. They became untied and lost. He asked: What have you left?²⁴⁵

footnotes: ²⁴⁵ This story is a counterexample to the prescription given before. Since coins are shown to come untied sometimes, binding them together is no remedy for the worry. Hence, the practical conclusion would be that coins have to be put in a safe place before the start of prayer.

Rebbi Ḥanina²⁴⁶ that allowed praying if the carrier’s load did not exceed 4 qab. The statement is introduced here since it is explained on the authority of R. Jacob ben Aḥa who was the main person in the preceding section. The water referred to here is water used for the sprinkling with the ashes of the red heifer to cleanse from impurity caused by contact or closeness to the body of a dead Jew, as explained in Num. 19 and the Mishnah tractate Parah. The ashes of the red heifer have to be given into מים חיים אל כלי, virgin fresh water in a vessel. This means that after being drawn from flowing water, the water has to be watched so that no kind of work is done with it. A lapse of attention to the water makes it unfit for use in cleansing from impurity. Nevertheless, Rebbi Ḥanina states that one may recite Shema‘ and even pray while carrying such water. This statement is obviously difficult to accept. Rav Ḥuna (the second) dismisses Rebbi Ḥanina’s statement as in obvious contradiction to generally accepted principles. said: Also one who has his water on his shoulder may recite Shema‘ and pray. Rav Ḥuna said: So the reciting of Shema‘ and praying do not require concentration? Rebbi Mana said: I pointed out the difficulty before Rebbi Phineas that even if you say that the recitation of Shema‘ does not need concentration, does prayer not need concentration²⁴⁷, its reference to prayer must be a mistake even though it refers to a prior statement about prayer only. The sentence is a rhetorical question. In a text from the Cairo Genizah, it is formulated as a declarative sentence: “recitation of Shema‘ does not need concentration; prayer needs concentration”. The meaning is the same in both versions.? Rebbi Yose²⁴⁸ said: I confirmed it following what Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: You got it, the completion of the works of water²⁴⁹ nor pray while guarding it. that are not clear from the words of the Torah.

footnotes: ²⁴⁶ He refers back to the Tosephta ²⁴⁷ Even if one accepts Rebbi Ḥanina’s statement for Shema‘ ²⁴⁸ The Amora, one of the editors of the Yerushalmi. ²⁴⁹ After the ashes have already been given into the water, when it is clear that the term “living water” no longer applies and there is no indication in the Torah that it has to be guarded as strictly as before. This also explains R. Ḥanina’s expression “his water”, not מי חטאת “the water of sprinkling” that is the technical term used for fresh water guarded for the ashes. It follows that as long as the ashes have not been given into the water, one may neither recite Shema‘

MISHNAH: The bridegroom is free from reciting the Shema‘ in the first night²⁵⁰ since this is a positive commandment occurring at stated times and does not apply to women.; until the end of Sabbath if he did not do the act²⁵¹, ed. I. Zimer, I. M. Peles, vol. 2, p. 47; there the editor gives several conjectural reasons in note 16. He also indicates that this is a possible reflection of old usages from the Land of Israel, never followed in Babylonia. It seems to me that the usage is quite understandable if it is noted that bride and bridegroom were in their low teens, the girl possibly even a pre-teen. The marriage was arranged by the parents, with minimal involvement of the parties to the wedding. Some time was needed for the parties to get acquainted enough to get intimate.. An action: Rabban Gamliël married and recited in the first night²⁵². His students said to him: Our teacher, did you not teach us that the bridegroom is free? He said to them: I will not listen to you to lift from me the Kingdom of Heaven even for one hour.

footnotes: ²⁵⁰ Since he is unable to concentrate in anticipation of his first night with his bride. The bride, as a woman, has no obligation to recite Shema‘ ²⁵¹ It was common usage even in seventeenth Century Germany that couples who married Wednesday night had their first sexual relations the night following the Sabbath, cf. Minhagim of the Community of Worms by R. Yospe Shamash ²⁵² Since he already had the title “Rabban” and had students of his own, it is obvious that he was not a teenager and the marriage was not his first. Hence, his level of anxiety was low.

HALAKHAH: Rebbi Eleazar ben Antigonos²⁵³ in the name of Rebbi Eleazar the son of Rebbi Yannai: This means that it is permitted to start sexual relations on the Sabbath²⁵⁴ Friday evening if he did not yet have intercourse with his wife, it follows that we expect him to be anxious about it also Friday night. If he were not allowed to have intercourse, then he could defer his anxiety for a day and recite Shema‘. The problem is that he will make a wound in deflowering his wife and, in the normal case of a very young girl, the making of the wound is automatic. Now, the making of a wound is forbidden on the Sabbath but, according to Rebbi Simeon (bar Yoḥai), any work not done for its own sake is not forbidden, except in the case of an automatic consequence (פסיק רישא “cut off its head, will it not die?’). For the very young girls discussed here, the wound might be an automatic consequence. The entire discussion belongs more to Niddah X:1 where all the parallels in the Babli are found. The second part of the Yerushalmi Niddah is lost and it cannot be ascertained anymore whether the entire discussion of our Mishnah is taken from there.. Rebbi Ḥaggai said before Rebbi Yose: Explain it for a widow where he does not make a wound. He answered him: Did we not formulate “Four nights?²⁵⁵: “About a young girl who marries before puberty, the House of Shammai say that one allows four nights and the House of Hillel say until the wound is healed” (one does not suspect any blood to be menstrual). While it is quite possible that a very young girl can already be a widow, the Mishnah cannot apply to her since the marriage festivities of a widow are only three days (Thursday, Friday, Sabbath) while those of a virgin are seven days (Ketubot 1:1). Hence, we cannot talk here about a widow.” Can you say four nights for a widow?

footnotes: ²⁵³ An Israeli Amora of the second generation who always reports in the name of R. Eleazar, son of R. Yannai. ²⁵⁴ Since the groom is free from reciting the Shema‘ ²⁵⁵ This refers to the first Mishnah in the last chapter of tractate Niddah

Rebbi Jacob bar Savdi²⁵⁶ said: I asked the question before Rebbi Yose: What is the difference between her and him who breaks a clay amphora in order to eat a dried fig from it²⁵⁷ XXII:3: “One may break a clay amphora (whose top has been closed off by solid clay) in order to eat a dried fig from its contents, but he may not have the intent to make it into a permanent vessel,” i. e., he may not break the seal open in such a way that it needs no more action after the Sabbath to make the opening a permanent one that is easy to use. This follows the principle quoted before that according to R. Simeon, work not needed for its own sake is not forbidden on the Sabbath. Even R. Yehudah, who disagrees and states that any complete work is forbidden on Sabbath irrespective of intent, will agree that breaking off an irregular piece of the covering does not constitute complete work since it needs further regularization after the Sabbath. Rebbi Yose’s answer is that breaking the hymen is a complete action in itself and, therefore, both R. Simeon and R. Yehudah will forbid it: R. Simeon because of his intent and R. Yehudah because it is a complete action. In the Babli, the deflowered woman is called a vessel; the Yerushalmi only compares her to a vessel.? He said to me: But it says afterwards, “only he should have no intent to make it into a usable vessel.” And here when he has the intention of making her a married woman it is as if he had the intention of making her into a vessel. Rav Isaac bar Rav Meshirshia²⁵⁸ 6b), the same question is asked by Rebbi Ammi, the Galilean authority two generations earlier. said similarly: What is the difference between her and him who opens a boil on the Sabbath²⁵⁹ 107a) for the same reason as why the top of an amphora may be broken, with the same restriction as to intent.? He said to him, but it says afterwards: “only he should have no intention of making a permanent opening.” And here when he has the intention of making her a married woman it is as if he had the intention of making her into a vessel²⁶⁰.

footnotes: ²⁵⁶ An Amora of the fourth generation, probably somewhat older than Rebbi Yose. ²⁵⁷ This refers to Mishnah Šabbat ²⁵⁸ In the Babli, the name is Mesharshia. He is a Babylonian who was associated with the last editors of the Yerushalmi and the first editor of the Babli. In the Babli (Ketubot ²⁵⁹ Which is allowed (Babli Šabbat ²⁶⁰ In the Rome ms. and Geniza fragments, the last statement reads: לעשות לה פה “(He has the intention) to make her a permanent opening.” Our text probably is dittography.

It was stated²⁶¹ is also quoted in Babli Ketubot 5b, where it is determined that “others” means R. Simeon who states that an action not expressly intended is not forbidden on the Sabbath. It is explained there, that even though R. Simeon forbids actions which automatically imply some other action that desecrates the Sabbath, here he allows a first sex act on Sabbath since splitting the hymen is not a necessary consequence if the male partner is considerate (and, consequently, an intact hymen is no guarantee of virginity.) Since we decide on the Sabbath according to the opinion of Rebbi Simeon and since the medical statement is by Samuel, the greatest medical authority in the Babli, it is clear that the Babli decides that first sex relations on Friday night are permitted. (In the Middle Ages, poor people married on Friday afternoon in order to save expenses for a separate wedding meal.) It is seen here that the Yerushalmi is strictly of the opposite opinion; hence, the identity of “others” is not determined here.: “A man should not have first sexual relations on the Sabbath because he makes a wound; but others allow it.” Rebbi Yose bar Abun said: The reason of the others is that he is intent on his job; the wound results automatically²⁶². Assi²⁶³ said, it is forbidden. Benjamin from Ginzak²⁶⁴ 65a. According to the version which allows first sex acts on the Sabbath, Benjamin, called there “from Saqasan”, tried to follow a ruling attributed to Rav to the effect that a second sex act would be permitted even without waiting the seven days of a cleansing period regularly required of a menstruating women, and applied to the newlyweds since blood from the breaking of the hymen is indistinguishable from menstrual blood, as discussed in the following section. In the Babylonian version, Benjamin tried to act according to this ruling but he died before he could do so. went out and said in the name of Rab, it is allowed. Samuel heard it and resented it, he [Benjamin] died, he [Samuel] recited for him: praised be He Who smote him²⁶⁵ 25:39.. About Rav, he [Samuel] recited: (Prov. 12:21) “The just will cause no wrong.”

footnotes: ²⁶¹ This baraita ²⁶² Hence, the act is permitted according to R. Simeon. ²⁶³ His alter ego, Ammi, is quoted in the Babli as the first authority who allows it. ²⁶⁴ Ginzak (“city of the treasury”) is the capital of Media, called Gazaka by Ptolemy. Another version is told in the Babli, Niddah ²⁶⁵ “קרי” means “recited a Biblical verse”. There is no such verse but its intent is close to 1Sam.

Samuel said: All the rules spelled out at the start of the last chapter of Niddah are theoretical and not for practical application²⁶⁶ 65a.. Rebbi Yannai fled even from married pre-puberty girls²⁶⁷. They asked before Rebbi Yoḥanan: What about a second sex act? They said, he did not teach to take all for blood of the wound, how could he rule for a second sex act²⁶⁸? What we are asking about is the case when there were days of interruption, days of purity, in between²⁶⁹. Rebbi Abbahu said: I was the best man of Rebbi Simeon bar Abba and I asked Rebbi Eleazar: is it possible to have the second sex act? He permitted it, since he holds like Samuel, and Samuel said: One may enter a narrow gap²⁷⁰ 6b and is used there for the same argument as here. on the Sabbath, even if one rubs off some pebbles. Rebbi Ḥaggai said: I was the best man of Rebbi Samuel the Cappadocian²⁷¹; I asked Rebbi Josiah and he shrank from it²⁷². I asked Rebbi Samuel bar Isaac; he said: now, what is blood of a period and what is blood of virginity²⁷³? It was stated²⁷⁴ in Massekhet Kallah 1 (a collection in the Yerushalmi tradition.) At any meal during all seven days after the wedding, seven benedictions are said over a cup of wine for the newlyweds after grace is recited. The bride is required to drink from the cup of which her husband drank, as a fertility rite. Rebbi Eliezer notes that the groom is not allowed to take the cup back from the bride since she has to follow all the rules of the menstruating woman.: “The bride is forbidden for her house all seven days and he may not take from her the cup of blessings, the words of Rebbi Eliezer.” What is the reason of Rebbi Eliezer? It is impossible that not some menstrual blood be mixed in the blood of virginity.

footnotes: ²⁶⁶ The rules allowing more than one sex act with newlywed virgins while either the wound is not healed or seven days had not passed since the wedding night. The same statement of Samuel is in Babli Niddah ²⁶⁷ He refrained from touching them, just as it is forbidden to touch a married woman after puberty. ²⁶⁸ In the wedding night, where according to him only one sex act is allowed. “He” is R. Yoḥanan. ²⁶⁹ That means that when a man married a virgin and the required time has passed since the wedding night it turns out that the first night in which a second sex act is permissible would be a Sabbath. This is a valid question for the Yerushalmi which forbids a first act on the Sabbath; there is some chance that a second act will again produce some minor lesion and some drops of blood. ²⁷⁰ In a dirt wall. The statement of Samuel is also in Babli Ketubot ²⁷¹ Like all other authorities quoted here, an Amora of the third generation, of the circle of students of Rebbi Yoḥanan. ²⁷² He refused to give an opinion. It is not 100% clear what Rebbi Ḥaggai asked, but we may assume that his question was identical with that of Rebbi Abbahu. ²⁷³ It seems impossible to decide, since on the one hand we allow an occasional rubbing off, and, hence, in our case an occasional drop of blood, following Samuel, but on the other hand we treat every drop of blood on female genitals as menstrual and necessitating seven days of cleansing when all bodily contact between spouses is forbidden. ²⁷⁴ In a slightly different wording this is a baraita

MISHNAH: He²⁷⁵ took a bath in the first night after his wife died. His students said to him: Did you, our teacher, not teach us that the mourner may not take a bath. He said to them: I am not like most other people, I am asthenic²⁷⁶.

footnotes: ²⁷⁵ Rabban Gamliel. ²⁷⁶ Greek ἀσθενής. Medical considerations, even if no life-threatening situation is involved, always have precedence over the rules of mourning.

HALAKHAH: Who²⁷⁷ (Halakhah 5, fol. 62d). There are some textual differences between the two texts, an occurrence rare in the Yerushalmi. But in fact the deviations of the text here from its original in Moëd Qaṭan are all scribal or printer’s errors, as is shown from the Rome ms. and the Genizah fragments. Therefore, the text here follows the Moëd Qaṭan text wherever there is manuscript evidence from Berakhot to support that version. stated that the mourner is forbidden to take a bath during the entire seven days? Rebbi Nathan²⁷⁸. Something happened to Rebbi Ammi²⁷⁹, he asked Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba who instructed him “all seven days following Rebbi Nathan”. Something happened to Rebbi Yose²⁸⁰; he sent Rebbi Abba bar Cohen to Rebbi Aḥa; he said to him: Rebbi, did you not so teach us that something happened to Rebbi Ammi, he asked Resh Laqish²⁸¹ who instructed him “all seven days following Rebbi Nathan”. He said to him²⁸², maybe these were two separate incidents, we say it in the name of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, you say it in the name of Resh Laqish. And also from the following²⁸³: Something happened to Rebbi Ḥama²⁸⁴, father of Rebbi Oshaya, he asked the rabbis and they forbade it.

footnotes: ²⁷⁷ This entire discussion belongs to the third chapter of tractate Moëd Qaṭan ²⁷⁸ Usually known as Nathan the Babylonian, a Babylonian from the Davidic family, second in the Synhedrion under Rabban Simeon ben Gamliël. ²⁷⁹ A close relative of Rebbi Ammi died, for whom he had to mourn for seven days. ²⁸⁰ The fourth generation Amora. It seems that Rebbi Yose felt uncomfortable with the prohibition of bathing; he sent one of his students to ask Rebbi Aḥa, the greatest authority in Lydda, in Judea. In the next section, it will be seen that in the South, in Judea, one did not follow Rebbi Nathan and allowed bathing for the mourner. Nevertheless, Rebbi Aḥa did not want to interfere with the prohibition accepted in Galilee and answered not with his own opinion but with a note that Rebbi Yose himself had taught about two cases where the question had come up in Galilee and was answered in the sense of Rebbi Nathan. ²⁸¹ Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish; the abbreviation “Resh Laqish” is standard in the Babli but very infrequent in the Yerushalmi. The abbreviation probably is that of a lazy copyist. ²⁸² Rebbi Yose to Rebbi Aḥa, that maybe this was only one occasion reported under two different names and, therefore, represents only the opinion of one teacher and not a generally accepted rule that would need at least two supporting authorities. ²⁸³ This is Rebbi Aḥa’s answer: Even if you do not agree that Rebbi Ammi asked twice, for two different cases of mourning, and was given the same answer by two different authorities, I have a completely independent occurrence in which Galilean rabbis gave the same ruling and, therefore, you have to accept it. ²⁸⁴ He is the third generation Amora, father of Rebbi Oshaya the second.

Rebbi Yose asked, which rabbis²⁸⁵? The rabbis here or the rabbis in the South? If you say the rabbis of here, it is fine²⁸⁶. If you would say the rabbis from the South, would he have asked minor authorities when greater ones were before him? If you say the rabbis of the South, some of them would allow and some of them would forbid, as we have stated: “At a place where it is customary to bathe after a funeral, one may bathe; in the South one bathes.” Rebbi Yose bar Abun said: He who permits that bath makes it like eating and drinking²⁸⁷, ed. Chavel, p. 175–176), Rebbi Yose bar Abun restricts the bathing to the aftermath of the funeral and says that in the same way that the mourner must have his first meal prepared for him by his relatives and friends, so his relatives and friends must cleanse him after the funeral from dust and germs (שיבתא). Hence, where it is customary, e. g. in the South, the mourner can have one bath, prepared by others, just after the funeral but is forbidden to have another one for the rest of the period of mourning. It then is difficult to understand the question of Rabban Gamliel’s students. Ramban writes that either he lived in a community where that bath was not customary or he was not satisfied with the cold bath prepared for him but took a full warm bath with following rubbing with oil for his asthenic condition..

footnotes: ²⁸⁵ Rebbi Yose is not satisfied with the second source of Rebbi Aḥa since it speaks of unspecified “rabbis” whose place and importance, as a precedent in Galilee, is indeterminate. ²⁸⁶ This is Rebbi Aḥa’s answer: Since the questioner is Galilean and all the important Academies were in Galilee at his time, it is unreasonable to assume that “the rabbis” were Southerners whose opinion, as a minority opinion, would not count as precedent. ²⁸⁷ According to Ramban (Writings

That means, about a bath for pleasure. But a bath that is not for pleasure is permitted²⁸⁸. An example is the case of Samuel bar Abba who developed scab. They came and asked Rebbi Yose, what is the rule, may he bathe? He said to them: If he does not bathe, would he not die²⁸⁹ takes this as hyperbole since in case of danger to life everything is permitted except murder, incest, and idolatry; he does not consider the remark of Rebbi Yose a restriction on the use of any medically indicated bath.? If he needs it, even on the Ninth of Av. If he needs it, even on Yom Kippur²⁹⁰ 77b..

footnotes: ²⁸⁸ This is in keeping with Rabban Gamliel’s ruling, that every medically indicated bath is permitted. ²⁸⁹ The author of Sepher Ḥaredim ²⁹⁰ On both days, formal washing is forbidden. The rule is quoted in Babli Yoma

They saw Rebbi Yose, son of Rebbi Ḥanina²⁹¹, immersing himself. They did not know whether it was for his emission²⁹², they did not know whether it was to cool down because bathing in cold water is not called bathing²⁹³ 13a) declare that a cold bath is forbidden to a mourner (and, therefore, on the Ninth of Av) but is allowed on fast days (in a year of draught) when the emphasis is on deprivation..

footnotes: ²⁹¹ One of the first students of Rebbi Yoḥanan, preceding the other authorities mentioned up to now. ²⁹² An emission of semen which requires immersion in a ritual bath as explained in the next chapter. Marital relations are forbidden for the mourner during the entire seven days of mourning. ²⁹³ It remains undecided whether taking a cold bath during the mourning period is permitted or not. The Babylonian authorities in the Babli (Taänit

Rebbi Abba taught like that which was stated²⁹⁴ (fol. 44d) or the first chapter of Taäniot: “When somebody goes (on the Ninth of Av or Yom Kippur) to see his teacher and has to pass a river on the way, he crosses it without compunction.” The statement is given here to show that, in fact, taking a cold bath by walking through the ford of a river, is no infringement of the prohibition of taking a bath on these fast days.. Rebbi Aḥa taught about him who comes from the road²⁹⁵ and his feet ache that he is permitted to wash them with water.

footnotes: ²⁹⁴ This statement does not belong here but either in the last chapter of Yoma ²⁹⁵ A family member who comes to observe the period of mourning with the family but arrives only after the funeral when the rest of the family already is in full mourning. This ruling of Rebbi Aḥa is not restricted to the place where one allows a bath for the mourner but falls under the heading of medical necessity.This ruling introduces subsequent statements concerning a mourner on a trip, or people on a trip who meet mourners.

It has been stated: “A mourner and one banned²⁹⁶ on a trip are permitted to wear sandals²⁹⁷. When they come to town they should remove them. The same holds for the Ninth of Av and public fasts²⁹⁸.”

footnotes: ²⁹⁶ One put in the ban by rabbinical authority for improper behavior, who should show the signs of mourning. ²⁹⁷ Even though mourners are not allowed to wear leather shoes or sandals. This again is a medical exemption. ²⁹⁸ The fast days proclaimed in the Land of Israel during a draught, when all the deprivations of Yom Kippur are also in force. The only fast day in the diaspora where these rules also apply is the Ninth of Av.

It is stated: “In a place where one is used to greet mourners²⁹⁹ on the Sabbath one may do so. In the South one does greet.” The great Rebbi Oshaya³⁰⁰ went to some place, saw there mourners on the Sabbath and greeted them. He said to them: “I do not know the custom of your place, but be greeted according the custom of our place.” Rebbi Yose, son of Rebbi Ḥalaphta, praised Rebbi Meïr before the people of Sepphoris: A great, holy, and meek man. At some time, he saw mourners on the Sabbath and greeted them. They said to him³⁰¹ 23a,b); according to that source the dispute was only settled in favor of the Southern stance in the days of Rebbi Yoḥanan.: Is that the one whose praise you proclaim³⁰²? He said to them, what are his works? They said to him, he saw mourners on the Sabbath and greeted them. He said to them: you have to recognize his strength; he comes to make you aware that there is no mourning on the Sabbath. That is what is written (Prov. 10:22): “The blessing of the Lord makes rich,” that is the blessing of Sabbath, “He will not add grief to it,” that is mourning, as it is said (2Sam. 19:3): “The king is grieving about his son.”³⁰³ is translated by “labor”, but the explanation here substitutes the more common meaning “grief”.

footnotes: ²⁹⁹ Wishing them well. ³⁰⁰ One of the foremost students of Rebbi, the compiler of the Mishnah, and of Rebbi Ḥiyya. He was from the region of Lod in the South, but he studied in Galilee. In his story, the Aramaic verb for “to see” is חזי in Southern (and Babylonian) Aramaic. In the following story about Rebbi Yose from Galilee, the corresponding verb is Galilean Aramaic חמי. ³⁰¹ In this entire story, the singular refers to Rebbi Yose (the Tanna) and the plural to the people of Sepphoris. We learn that in the region of Sepphoris, lower Galilee, is was not customary to console mourners on the Sabbath. From the conclusion we may infer that under the influence of Rabbis Yose and Meïr the custom of the South was adopted also in Galilee. The disagreement between the people in the South (Judea) and North (Galilee) is also discussed in the Babli (Megillah ³⁰² Because he seems to be an ignoramus. ³⁰³ This is a lexicographical note about the meaning of the root עצב, which as a verb either means “to grieve, to be pained”, connected with Arabic ע̇צ̇ב, or “to form, create”, close to Arabic עצ̇ב. As a noun, one usually distinguishes עֶצֶב “pain, grief; labor, gain; vessel”, עַצָּב “worker”, and עֹצֶב “idol, pain”. Usually, the noun in the verse in Proverbs

MISHNAH: And when his³⁰⁴ slave Tevi died, he received condolences about him. They said to him: Our teacher, did you not teach us that one does not accept condolences for slaves? He said to them: My slave Tevi was not like other slaves, he was honest³⁰⁵.

footnotes: ³⁰⁴ Rabban Gamliel’s. ³⁰⁵ Since slaves were not liable in civil law, they could not be sued for damages of any kind, and neither could their master for their misdeeds; it was assumed that slaves were thieves, confidence men, and careless with anybody’s property and, when freed, had trouble establishing themselves as trustworthy witnesses.

HALAKHAH: Hence, about unrelated freed men one accepts condolences? So is the Mishnah: one does not accept condolences for slaves.³⁰⁶ 16b: Since the slave is not related to his master, even if he were free the master would not accept formal condolences for him since these are restricted to those close relatives for which one has to keep a period of formal mourning. The answer is that the Mishnah has to declare explicitly that one does not accept formal condolences since the slave is a member of the household and, presumably, is treated like a family member, parallel to the case of a student for whom the teacher may accept condolences; see the section after the next.

footnotes: ³⁰⁶ There are several different explanations of this cryptic piece. The most reasonable is by R. Abraham ben Adrat (Rashba) in his commentary on Babli Berakhot

It happened that Rebbi Eliezer’s maidservant died³⁰⁷ 16b and, in the Yerushalmi version, in Evel Rabbati 1:9,10. and his students came to him for condolences but he did not accept. He entered the courtyard, they followed him there. He entered the house, they followed him there. He told them: I was thinking that you would be burned by lukewarm water but you are not burned even by boiling water. Did they not say that one does not accept condolences for slaves because slaves are in this like animals? If one does not accept condolences for unrelated free persons, so much more for slaves³⁰⁸ one does not accept condolences for slaves”, meaning that this is a rule that cannot be waved. In the Babli, his attitude is directly contradicted by Rebbi Yose, the most authoritative of the Tannaïm of the fourth generation. Rebbi Yose even recommends eulogies for honest slaves; this represents the Galilean attitude (not shared in Babylonia) and, while not spelled out in the Yerushalmi, is taken for granted in this passage which immediately after the present story gives examples of model eulogies for rabbis.. If one’s slave or animal died, people say to him: The Omnipresent may replace your loss.

footnotes: ³⁰⁷ She must have been his personal maidservant. The story is repeated in an enlarged version in Babli Berakhot ³⁰⁸ Rebbi Eliezer disagrees with his brother-in-law Rabban Gamliel and with the statement of the previous section in the Talmud. He will read in the Mishnah “because

When Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada³⁰⁹ on 6:2, Ecclesiastes on 5:11., the nephew of Bar Qappara, died did Resh Laqish accept for him since he was his teacher and a student is beloved as a son³¹⁰ 26b), only a student may formally mourn a teacher.. He went and eulogized him: (Song of Songs 6:2) “My friend descended to his garden, to the spice patch³¹¹, to shepherd in the gardens.”³¹² It would have been necessary only to say “ “My friend descended to shepherd in the gardens.” But “my friend” is the Holy One, praise to Him. “He descended to His garden”, that is the world. “To the spice patch”, that is Israel. “To shepherd in the gardens”, these are the peoples of the world. “And to collect lilies”, these are the just ones whom He removes from their midst. They gave a parable, to what can this be compared? To a king who had a son whom he loved very much. What did the king do? He planted a garden for him. When the son did the will of his father, the father searched in the entire world for a nice plant and planted it in his garden. When the son was making him angry, he cut down all his plants. So when Israel does the will of the Holy One, praise to Him, he searches the entire world and observes the just person, brings him and attaches him to Israel, like Jethro and Rahab. And when they are making him angry he removes the just ones from amongst them³¹³.

footnotes: ³⁰⁹ A second generation Amora in Galilee. He had the reputation of a saintly man. He might have been a student of the young Rav in the Academy of Rebbi, but his main teacher was R. Simeon ben Laqish.Since the topic of condolences and eulogies is implied in the previous text, a list of sample eulogies follows. Most of these are found (with some change in names) in Midrash Rabba, Song of Songs ³¹⁰ Hence, a teacher may formally mourn a student. In the Babli (Moëd Qaṭan ³¹¹ While the masoretic text has “spice patches”, the consonantal spelling here seems to prefer the singular which also is appropriate to the sermon based on this verse. This does not imply that the verse in Resh Laqish’s Bible had here a singular, only that the interpretation as singular is more convenient for his sermon. ³¹² As with most Scriptural quotes in the Talmud, the main inference is to be drawn from the part of the verse that is not quoted; the student is expected to recognize the verse and to complete it himself. The spelling is left as in the manuscripts and is not edited to conform to our masoretic texts. ³¹³ Implying that Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada was collected because of the sins of his generation.

A clarification. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba³¹⁴ identified this R. Ḥiyya bar Abba as a Tanna of the fourth generation, contemporary of Rebbi Yose, Rebbi Jacob, and, therefore, Rebbi Simeon bar Yoḥai, since he appears there as a major partner in dialogues with the latter. and his group, some say Rebbi Yose bar Ḥalaphta and his group, and some say Rebbi Jacob and his group, were sitting to study Torah under a fig tree. The owner of the fig tree was coming every morning at sunrise and collected figs. They said, maybe he mistrusts us³¹⁵, let us change place. The next day, the owner of the fig tree came to them³¹⁶; he said to them: the one miẓwah that you used to do with me you are withholding from me³¹⁷. They said to him: We thought that maybe you mistrust us. During the morning he came and informed them that if the sun shines on ripe figs they get wormy³¹⁸. At that time they said, the owner of the fig tree knows the best time to collect figs and he collects them. Likewise, the Holy One, praise to Him, knows the time of the just ones to be removed from the world and He removes them³¹⁹.

footnotes: ³¹⁴ In the Rome manuscript, he is identified as the Great Rebbi Ḥiyya (whose full name was Ḥiyya bar Abba bar Aḥa Karsala from Kufra in Iraq), who otherwise is never referred to as “bar Abba” in the Yerushalmi. The sage here cannot be the third generation Amora R. Ḥiyya bar Abba, student of R. Yoḥanan, since not only are the alternate authors Tannaïm of the fourth generation but the story is very explicit in showing that the scholars among themselves are speaking Hebrew and only with the unlearned farmer they speak Aramaic. The Great Rebbi Ḥiyya belongs to the generation of transition between Tannaïm and Amoraïm; even his inclusion is a little late compared to the other two possible sources. This, as noted by Levi Ginzberg (following Eliezer ben Yehudah) is characteristic of Tannaïtic times.It is possible that the author of theZohar ³¹⁵ Since he comes early every morning to check on us. (In the Leyden manuscript and the Venice print, the text is “mistrusts me” but the Rome manuscript can be read as “mistrusts us”). ³¹⁶ In the Midrash, it is explained that he went on a systematic search to find his scholars. ³¹⁷ Since the one who provides the physical means for Torah study, not the scholar, acquires the greater merit from the study, you are depriving me of the merit of Torah study that I cannot acquire on my own. ³¹⁸ Hence, he has to come early every morning to harvest all figs that are ripe because later they become worthless. ³¹⁹ In contrast to the Amora Resh Laqish, the Tannaïm do not see in the premature death of a saintly man a consequence of the sins of his contemporaries.

When Rebbi Abun bar Rebbi Ḥiyya³²⁰ died, Rebbi Zeïra ascended his pulpit and eulogized him: (Eccl. 5:11) “Sweet is the year of the worker.” It does not say here “sleeps” but “whether he eats little or much.” To what can Rebbi Bun bar Ḥiyya be likened? To a king who hired many workers and there was one worker who was exceptionally productive in his work. What did the king do? He took him and walked with him the long and the short. In the evening, the workers came to receive their wages and he gave him his total wages with them. The workers complained and said: we were toiling the entire day and this one did toil only for two hours and he gave him his total wages with us! The king told them: This one produced in two hours more than what you produced all day long. So Rebbi Bun produced in Torah in 28 years what an outstanding³²¹ student cannot learn in a hundred years.

footnotes: ³²⁰ One of the frequently quoted authorities of the Jerusalem Talmud, a student of Rebbi Yoḥanan and Rebbi Zeïra; he died young as his eulogy shows. ³²¹ Or, with the Arabic ותֹיק “constant, resolute”.

When Rebbi Simon bar Zevid³²² died, Rebbi Illai ascended and eulogized him: Four things are used in the world and if they are lost, they have replacement, (Job 28:1,2) “But silver has a source, and a place is where gold is refined; iron is taken from dust, and stone is smelted into copper.” Those, if they are lost, have replacement. But a scholar who died, who can bring us his replacement, who can bring us his substitute? (Job 28:12³²³,21) “Wisdom, where can it be found, where is the place of understanding? It is hidden from the eyes of all living!” Rebbi Levi³²⁴3:8 (fol. 38b) also has Rebbi Levi. said: If the brothers of Joseph lost their spirit because they found something, as it is written (Gen. 42:28) “they lost their spirit”, we, who lost Rebbi Simon bar Zevid, so much more!

footnotes: ³²² A Galilean Amora of the third generation, also quoted as Rebbi Simon bar Savdi, whose discussions with Rebbi Illaï (Lai) are recorded several times in the Yerushalmi. He was a teacher of the leaders of the fourth generation of Amoraïm, Rebbis Ḥizkiah, Jonah, and Phineas. ³²³ It seems that the preacher wanted to refer to verse 20: “Wisdom, from where does it come?” ³²⁴ Probably a scribal error for Lai. But the parallel in Yerushalmi Horaiot

When Rebbi Levi bar Sisi³²⁵); his collection became the foundation of study in Nahardea. died, the father of Samuel came and eulogized him: (Eccl. 12:13) “Final word: Everything has been heard, fear God.” To what can Rebbi Levi ben Sisi be compared? To a king who had a vineyard with a hundred vines which gave him every year a hundred barrels of wine. He reduced them to 50, to 40, to 30, to 20, to ten, to one, and this one gave him a hundred barrels of wine. This one vine was as dear to him as the entire vineyard. So Rebbi Levi bar Sisi was beloved before the Holy One, praise to Him, like all mankind. This is what is written (loc. cit.) “Because that is all of man,” that one is like all of mankind³²⁶ 6b) this is a sermon of Rebbi Abba bar Kahana, a Babylonian who became preacher of the third generation of Amoraïm in Galilee..

footnotes: ³²⁵ One of the outstanding students of Rebbi, in the generation of transition between Tannaïm and Amoraïm. Some time after Rebbi’s death he emigrated to Nahardea in Babylonia where he became an associate of Abba bar Abba, the father of Samuel, a descendant of Ḥananiah, the nephew of Rebbi Joshua, who founded the first Talmudic academy in Babylonia at the outbreak of the war of Bar Kokhba. He, like the Great Rebbi Ḥiyya, was a collector of mishnaic material (baraitot ³²⁶ A kind of pun on the possible interpretations of כל as “all” or “entire”. In the Babli (Berakhot

Cahana³²⁷117a,b; the interpretation is Rashi’s (117b). Rav Cahana was a young member of the Academy of Rav when Rav unsuccessfully tried to dissuade a Jew from informing against another Jew before the Persian authorities. Rav Cahana was so outraged that he slapped the would-be informer and broke his neck. Rav pointed out to him that under the new Sassanid regime the Jews had lost the criminal jurisdiction they had under the Parthians and that, therefore, he was liable to be prosecuted. Rav told him to go (“ascend”) to the Land of Israel, to the Academy of Rebbi Yoḥanan, but he warned him not to ask difficult questions from Rebbi Yoḥanan for seven years. This must have happened between the Sassanid victory in 226 C.E. and Rav’s death in 247 C.E. (Since the organization of the new Persian empire must have taken some time, the earliest time for Rav Cahana’s flight is probably around 235 C.E. When Rav Cahana returned to Babylonia, he became a student of Rav’s successors Rav Yehudah and Rav Huna; hence, he returned after 247 C.E.) In Tiberias, Cahana (whose rabbinical title is not recognized in the Yerushalmi) first kept Rav’s injunction but in the end he found a way to get around it and was recognized by Rebbi Yoḥanan as a great scholar. Unfortunately, by a birth defect or an accident, Cahana had unsymmetric lips which gave his face the look of a permanent smirk and Rebbi Yoḥanan got offended. He gave him an evil eye so that Cahana died. When informed that the smirk was no smirk but a bodily feature of Cahana, he went to the cave where Cahana was buried. The entrance to the cave was guarded by a poisonous snake which let Rebbi Yoḥanan enter only after he had publicly acknowledged that he had been a student of Cahana. Then he prayed in the cave and Cahana was resurrected from the dead. This is the basis of the questions asked here by the hoodlums. According to the Babli, Rav Cahana found the presence of R. Yoḥanan too dangerous. This will explain the roundabout way in which he asked for leave from the Academy in the Yerushalmi version. was very young when he came up here. A person in rags saw him and asked him, what is new in Heaven? He answered: The judgment over this man has been sealed. This happened to him and he was stricken. Another one in rags saw him and asked, what is new in Heaven? He answered: The judgment over this man has been sealed. This happened to him. He said: Did I not go up to gain merit, but I am sinning! Did I come up to kill the people of the Land of Israel? I shall go and step down the way I came up. He came to Rebbi Yoḥanan and said to him: A man whose mother wishes him well and whose step mother³²⁸ honors him, should he go there? He said to him, he should go there where he is honored. Cahana descended the way he came up. They came and told Rebbi Yoḥanan that Cahana had descended to Babylonia. He said, how could he go without asking permission? They told him: that question, that he asked of you, was his request for permission.

footnotes: ³²⁷ While the previous section dealt with a Galilean emigrating to Babylonia, we now deal with Babylonians immigrating into Israel. Cahana here is Rav Cahana II; his story can be understood only in connection with the remarks in Babli Bava Qama ³²⁸ The land of Babylonia.

Rebbi Zeïra went to have himself bled when he ascended here³²⁹. He went and wanted to buy a pound³³⁰, λίτρα) of twelve Roman ounces, slightly more than 12 avoirdupois ounces. It seems that Rebbi Zeïra incurred the wrath of the butcher by using the correct feminine form litrĕta for the Greek litra, while common usage was litra which in Aramaic really should be masculine (but was not taken as such in popular use). of red meat from a butcher. He asked him: How much is that pound? He said to him, 50 minas and one slap³³¹. He said to him: Take 60, but he did not accept. Take 70, but he did not accept. Take 80, take 90, until he came to 100 and he did not accept. Then he said: Do what is your routine. The next morning he went to the Academy and said to them: Rabbis, what is this bad practice here that nobody can eat a pound of red meat unless they slap him! They said to him: Who is that? He said, the butcher so-and-so. They sent to him to bring him but they found that his coffin was being carried out. They said to him: Our teacher, all that³³²? He said to them: That should happen to me, but I was not angry about him³³³; did I not think that this was general practice?

footnotes: ³²⁹ This used to be the general method to heal minor illnesses and also served as a prophylactic. Bleeding required that one must eat enough red meat afterwards to replace the lost substance. ³³⁰ A Roman pound (libra ³³¹ The price of meat can be taken to determine the time of R. Zeïra’s arrival in Israel. A Mina (Μνᾶ͂) was 100 Denar. In old times, a Mina was an enormous sum. But the inflation in the later part of the military anarchy, from the failed currency reform of Aurelianus to the reorganization of the Roman state under Diocletianus, was extreme. All Midrashim telling about exorbitant sums being paid for simple objects of daily use must be dated to that period, from 274–284 C.E. Diocletian introduced new gold coinage based on a price of 50’000 old gold Denars for a Roman pound of gold. This makes one pound of gold (345 g) the equivalent of 1’250’000 old silver denars. At that time, 50 Minas, or 5’000 silver Denars, would therefore be 1.38 g = 0.04 oz of gold or at today’s gold prices, $14.45. This is a very high price but not out of line in a time of extreme decline of farming and ranching. It is quite clear from this and other stories that the obligation to eat meat on holidays was a serious monetary obligation. (The so-called silver coins of that period were copper coins dipped for a second in a silver solution.)קורסם is Greek κρουσμός, ὁ, “striking, smiting, collision”. ³³² Rebbi Zeïra really had acquired a Babylonian title, “Rav”, before he immigrated to Galilee but, being dissatisfied with the style of Talmudic study in Babylonia, he never used it. Seeing that Heaven was giving him special protection, the members of the academy of Tiberias started giving him the Palestinian title, Rebbi, right away. They wondered that Heaven was so quick in punishing a man who had offended him. ³³³ Hence, I did not wish him dead and I am innocent of his death. This remark connects to the next story.

When Rebbi Yasa ascended here, he went to a barber. He wanted to bathe in a public bath of Tiberias. He met a scoffer who hit him once on his neck and said: The noose³³⁴ of this man is loose. There was an admistrator³³⁵. sitting who was interrogating³³⁶ a robber³³⁷. He³³⁸ went and stood there all laughing opposite him. The administrator asked him: Who was with you? He looked around and said: The one who is laughing here was with me. He³³⁹ fetched him, interrogated him, and he confessed about one murder. When they both went out, carrying two beams³⁴⁰, Rebbi Yasa passed by going to the bath. He³⁴¹ said to him: That noose which was loose you already tightened. He answered him: That is the bad luck of this man, is it not written (Is. 28:22): “Now do not scoff, that your fetters should not be tightened.”³⁴² Rebbi Phineas, Rebbi Jeremiah, in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac³⁴³: Scoffing is hard since its start is pain and its end destruction. Its start is pain since it is written “Now do not scoff, that your fetters should not be tightened,” and its end is destruction as it is written (loc. cit.) “For destruction and finality I heard from the Lord of Hosts³⁴⁴ over the entire earth.”

footnotes: ³³⁴ This is the reading of the Rome manuscript. The Venice print has ענוקא “neck” which cannot be loose or tight, but the noose around the neck can. ³³⁵ Ἄρχων, “ruler”; in Imperial Rome a local administrator, praefectus ³³⁶ Under threat or by the use of judicial torture. (Referring to a Jewish court, the word would mean “punish”.) ³³⁷ Greek λῃστής (also a collateral form ληιστής). The word appears in the Babylonian tradition as לִסְטִים. ³³⁸ The scoffer. The next “he, him, he” refer to the robber. ³³⁹ The archon, who fetched the scoffer who then confessed to a murder under the threat of torture. ³⁴⁰ The beams used for their own crucifixion. ³⁴¹ The scoffer who might have laughed about the trick he played on the scholar but who was caught because the robber thought that he was laughing about the pain inflicted on himself and who took revenge by denouncing the scoffer. ³⁴² And, therefore, Rebbi Yasa was not guilty of the scoffer’s death. ³⁴³ Since he was a contemporary of Rebbis Zeïra and Yasa, it is not clear whether this is an independent aggadic interpretation, appended here because it uses the same verse that R. Yasa used, or as the source of Rebbi Yasa/Assi’s interpretation. ³⁴⁴ The Divine Names are not correctly quoted; this relieves the scribe from the necessity of writing down a name which cannot be erased.

MISHNAH: The bridegroom may recite the Shema‘ in his first night if he wishes. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliël says, not everyone who wants to grab a reputation³⁴⁵ can do so.

footnotes: ³⁴⁵ Asserting that he is such a holy man that he can concentrate on his prayers under any circumstances.

HALAKHAH: It was stated³⁴⁶ 1:7) refers to the Mishnah (Taänit 1:4) that if there was no rain by the middle of the month of Ḥeshwan, distinguished people start fasting; public fasts because of the draught start only in Kislev. Rabban Simeon ben Gamliel states that in matters that bring pain, everybody can join with the distinguished persons; only in matters that bring prestige, not everyone can join and a scholar cannot join if he has been duly appointed to a position of authority since in that case he has to avoid even the appearance of being better than the people under his authority. The Yerushalmi quotes this Tosephta anonymously, hence it accepts it as valid ruling.: In anything that gives pain, everyone who wants to distinguish himself may do so. A scholar does and may blessing come to him. In anything that gives praise, not everyone who wants to distinguish himself may do so. A scholar does except if he has been appointed to a position of public authority.

footnotes: ³⁴⁶ This Tosephta (Taäniot

It was stated: One may step to one side because of obstacles on the road³⁴⁷ 81b, Yerushalmi Bava Batra 5:1). If a road is impassable, one may walk on the shoulder even if the field is planted up to the roadbed.. And when one sinks³⁴⁸, even into a field full of saffron. Rebbi Abbahu said³⁴⁹ 81b) concerning Rebbi, Rebbi Ḥiyya, and Rebbi Yehudah ben Qanosa. The disapproving conclusion, given here in the name of the late Amora R. Zeïra, an immigrant from Babylonia, in the Babli is attributed to Rebbi. This shows that the note of Rebbi Zeïra is a belated accomodation of Galilean practice to Babylonian standards.: It happened that Rabban Gamliel and Rebbi Joshua were on the road and stepped on the side because of obstacles on the road when they saw Rebbi Yehudah ben Pappos, who was sinking, coming towards them. Rabban Gamliël said to Rebbi Joshua: Who is this one who makes an exhibition of himself³⁵⁰? He answered: This is Yehudah ben Pappos, all whose deeds are done for Heaven’s sake. He said to him³⁵¹, R. Astorre Parḥi gives the name as Pappos ben Yehudah, a man known for his extreme habits, cf. Tosephta Soṭa 5:9. However, of the two men of this name mentioned in Talmudic literature, one is too early, in Temple times, and the other one is mentioned in the prehistory of the revolt of Bar Kokhba, too late).: Did we not formulate “In anything that gives praise, not everyone who wants to distinguish himself may do so. A scholar does except if he has been appointed to a position of public authority.” He answered him³⁵²: Did we not also formulate, “In anything that gives pain, everyone who wants to distinguish himself may do so. A scholar does and may blessing come to him.” Rebbi Zeïra said, but only if he does not shame others³⁵³.

footnotes: ³⁴⁷ This is one of the conditions of public use of private land which Joshua imposed on the land distributed to the Israelite tribes (Babli Bava Qama ³⁴⁸ In the rainy season on an unpaved road. ³⁴⁹ A parallel to this story is quoted in the Babli (Bava Qama ³⁵⁰ Showing overly great care not to infringe on other people’s property. Since the possession of land is a gift of God, any property rights are from the start subject to the liens enacted by Joshua, and use of the shoulders is no infringement of other people’s property. R. Yehudah ben Pappos’ piety therefore is quite misplaced. ³⁵¹ Rabban Gamliel to Rebbi Joshua. The implication is that R. Yehudah ben Pappos, who otherwise is unknown, held a public position and, therefore, was prohibited from exhibiting his piety. (In Kafṭor waperaḥ ³⁵² Rebbi Joshua to Rabban Gamliel. Since walking on a wet dirt road is exhausting and very slow, even the holder of public office is permitted to walk on the road. ³⁵³ And here, the leaders of the generation were embarrassed by his unnecessary exhibition of piety.

Clarification. Rebbi Miasha³⁵⁴ and Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac were sitting and eating in one of the upper synagogues³⁵⁵. There came the time of prayer and Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac got up to pray. Rebbi Miasha said to him: Teacher, did you not teach us that once one started one does not interrupt³⁵⁶ 1:5. If the speaker is Rebbi Yasa, one would have to translate: “Did not Rebbi (the editor of the Mishnah) teach us …”.. And Ḥizkiah stated: Every one who is free from an obligation and does it anyway is called uneducated³⁵⁷. He answered him: Did we not state³⁵⁸ but that he may do so if he wishes.: “The bridegroom is free?” The bridegroom, if he wants. He³⁵⁹ answered him: Is that not from Rabban Gamliël³⁶⁰? He said to him, I can free myself as Rabban Gamliel did; Rabban Gamliel said: I shall not listen to you to lift from me the Kingdom of Heaven.

footnotes: ³⁵⁴ This is the reading of ms. Rome. The Venice print has “Rebbi Yasa”. The Venice reading explains why R. Samuel is mentioned in second place, since Rebbi Miasha was a student of Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac. Maybe there existed a version in which Rebbi Yasa was mentioned both times. ³⁵⁵ Of Tiberias. Most commentators invert the word order and explain: On the upper floor of a synagogue (since in the synagogue itself one may not eat). ³⁵⁶ Mishnah Šabbat ³⁵⁷ Greek ἰδιώτης “private person, individual” (as opposed to the State). ³⁵⁸ The two Mishnayot from this chapter, that the groom is absolved from reciting Sheina‘ ³⁵⁹ Rebbi Miasha. ³⁶⁰ Mishnah 9, even though formulated anonymously, is only acceptable to Rabban Gamliel, not to those who disagree with the him. The answer is that the Mishnah is acceptable to all.