Every source recorded in his entry, with the quoted wording where it is preserved, and a backlink to that very passage in our own reader — so you can check each reference at its source.
Summary: Ravina [the Last] cites Bava Metzia 86a. Read the exact wording below with its English translation, then open the passage in our own reader.
English translation
shall be called a wise [ ḥakim ] physician, but he shall not be called rabbi, and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s convalescence shall be through him. I also saw written there: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and Rabbi Natan are the end of the Mishna, i.e., the last of the tanna’im , the redactors of the Mishna. Rav Ashi and Ravina are the end of instruction, i.e., the end of the period of the amora’im , the redacting of the Talmud, which occurred after the period of the tanna’im . And your mnemonic to remember that Rav Ashi and Ravina redacted the Talmud is the verse: “Until I entered into the sanctuary [ mikdashei ] of God, and considered [ avina ] their end” (Psalms 73:17). The sanctuary, mikdashei , alludes to Rav Ashi, while the term avina alludes to Ravina, which is a contraction of Rav Avina. The phrase: Their end, is interpreted as a reference to the redacting of the Talmud. § The Gemara relates anothe…
Summary: Ravina [the Last] cites Eruvin 63a. Read the exact wording below with its English translation, then open the passage in our own reader.
English translation
Rav Hamnuna issued halakhic rulings in the town of Ḥarta De’argez during the years of Rav Ḥisda’s life, even though Rav Ḥisda was his teacher. The Gemara relates that Ravina once examined a slaughterer’s knife in Babylonia to check if it was fit for slaughtering, during the lifetime of his teacher, Rav Ashi, who also lived in Babylonia. Rav Ashi said to him: What is the reason that the Master acted in this manner? Isn’t it prohibited for a disciple to issue rulings while his teacher is still alive? Ravina said to him: Didn’t Rav Hamnuna issue halakhic rulings in Ḥarta De’argez during the years of Rav Ḥisda’s life, as they were not in the same town, even though they were both located in Babylonia? Since I do not live in the same town as you, it stands to reason that I would be permitted to issue rulings as well. Rav Ashi said to Ravina: It was actually stated that Rav Hamnuna did not issu…
Summary: Ravina [the Last] cites Avodah Zarah 50b. Read the exact wording below with its English translation, then open the passage in our own reader.
English translation
they are permitted, as the gentile nullified their prohibited status. In the case of a Jew who brought stones from a pile dedicated to Mercury and paved paths and streets with them, they are prohibited. And there is neither a carpenter [ naggar ] nor a son of a carpenter who can resolve this, i.e., no one can resolve the difficulty inherent in this statement, not a Torah scholar, and not even a scholar who is the son of a scholar. Rav Sheshet said: As for me, I am not a carpenter, nor am I the son of a carpenter, and yet I will resolve the difficulty. What is the difficulty that Rabba bar Yirmeya finds in the baraita ? The baraita is difficult because of the statement of Rav Giddel, that the prohibited status of offerings brought in idol worship can never be revoked. This is not difficult, as in order for idol worship to prohibit an offering I require the offering to be like those offeri…
Summary: Ravina [the Last] cites Berakhot 15a. Read the exact wording below with its English translation, then open the passage in our own reader.
English translation
should relieve himself, wash his hands, don phylacteries, recite Shema , and pray, and that is acceptance of the complete Kingdom of Heaven. On a similar note, Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Anyone who relieves himself, washes his hands, dons phylacteries, recites Shema , and prays, the verse ascribes credit to him as if he built an altar and offered a sacrifice upon it, as it is written: “I will wash in purity my hands, and I will encircle the altar of the Lord” (Psalms 26:6). Rava said to him: Do you not maintain, Master, that one who does so, it is as if he immersed his entire body, as it is written: “I will wash in purity,” and it is not written: “I will wash my hands”? Ravina said to Rava: My Master, look at this Torah scholar [ tzurva merabbanan ] who came from Eretz Yisrael and said something astonishing: One who has no water with which to wash his hands, it is…
Summary: Ravina [the Last] cites Bava Batra 16b. Read the exact wording below with its English translation, then open the passage in our own reader.
English translation
to give birth she ascends to the top of a mountain so that the kid should fall down from her and die. And I summon her an eagle that receives it with his wings and places it before her; and if the eagle reached her one moment early or was one moment late, the kid would immediately die. Now, if I do not confuse one moment with another moment, would I confuse Iyov with oyev ? Similarly: “Can you mark when the hinds do calve?” (Job 39:1). The womb of this hind is narrow, which makes for a difficult delivery. When she squats to give birth, I summon her a snake [ derakon ] that bites her at the opening of the womb, which then becomes loose, and she gives birth, and if the snake reached her one moment early or was one moment late, she would immediately die. Now, if I do not confuse one moment with another moment, would I confuse Iyov with oyev ? The Gemara comments: On the one hand, the text s…
Summary: Ravina [the Last] cites Avodah Zarah 22a. Read the exact wording below with its English translation, then open the passage in our own reader.
English translation
The Gemara answers: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar does not accept the principle that a sharecropper works for his tenancy, rather than as the Jew’s employee. The Gemara asks: But if so, with regard to a gentile, what is the reason that it is permitted to rent to him? The Gemara answers that we say to him that he may not perform labor on certain days, and he complies. The Gemara asks: If that is so, then in the case of a Samaritan as well, we can say to him that he may not perform labor on certain days, and he will comply. The Gemara answers: A Samaritan will not comply, as he says: I am more learned than you, and I know that it is permitted to work on these days. The Gemara asks: If that is so, why does Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar state specifically that the reason for the prohibition is because the field is called by the name of the owner? Let him derive this halakha due to the fact that the Sama…
Summary: Ravina [the Last] cites Eruvin 40a. Read the exact wording below with its English translation, then open the passage in our own reader.
English translation
rather, it had already been caught beforehand, but it came to the Exilarch’s house on the Festival from outside the Shabbat limit and was slaughtered on that day. The one who ate from it, namely, Rav Naḥman and Rav Ḥisda, holds: Something that comes from outside the Shabbat limit for one Jew is permitted to another Jew. Since the deer was brought for the Exilarch, the Sages at his table were permitted to eat from it, and we do not prohibit them to derive benefit from something that a gentile did for another Jew. And the one who did not eat from it, Rav Sheshet, holds: Anything that comes to the house of the Exilarch comes with all the Sages in mind, as it is known that the Exilarch invites them to dine with him on Festivals. Therefore, just as it was prohibited to the Exilarch himself, as it was brought from outside the Shabbat limit, so too, it was prohibited to all his guests. The Gema…
Summary: Ravina [the Last] cites Gittin 77a. Read the exact wording below with its English translation, then open the passage in our own reader.
English translation
he is saying to her that it will be valid once the sun comes out in the morning. And if the husband dies during the night, before sunrise, then this will be a bill of divorce after his death and is therefore invalid. But if he said to her: On the condition that the sun will emerge from its sheath, then he is saying to his wife that the bill of divorce will take effect retroactively from now once the sun emerges. As Rav Huna says that Rav says: Anyone who states a condition employing the language: On the condition, is like one who states: The agreement will take effect retroactively from now. The tanna’im disagreed only in the case of one who said to his wife: This will be your bill of divorce if the sun emerges from its sheath, and the husband died during the night. One Sage, referred to as: Our Rabbis, holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, who says that the date written i…
Summary: Ravina [the Last] cites Pesachim 89b. Read the exact wording below with its English translation, then open the passage in our own reader.
English translation
MISHNA: If one who is registered for a Paschal lamb unilaterally registers another person with him in his portion of the Paschal lamb, the other members of his group are permitted to give him, i.e., the one who included the additional person, only his portion, which was originally allotted to him. And he, the additional person, eats from his portion, i.e., the portion of he who added him; and they, the other members of the group, eat from theirs. This is because they did not agree to the inclusion of the additional person. GEMARA: A dilemma was raised before the Sages: If there is among the members of a group one of them who has fine hands, a euphemism for one who always hastens to take a large quantity of food, what is the halakha concerning whether they can say to him: Take your allotted portion to eat and leave; and don’t take any more from the other’s members portions? Do we say that…
Summary: Ravina [the Last] cites Bava Metzia 49a. Read the exact wording below with its English translation, then open the passage in our own reader.
English translation
If that half is canceled as well, then why does he need the collateral that he is holding? The lender clearly took the collateral to enable him to collect at least part of his debt after the Sabbatical Year. Rather, do we not conclude from it: What is the meaning of the statement: The Sabbatical Year does not abrogate the loan, that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel is saying? It means that the Sabbatical Year does not abrogate the entire loan. And what is the meaning of: The Sabbatical Year abrogates the loan, that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi is saying? It is referring to that half of the loan that he did not take on the basis of collateral. And they disagree with regard to this: As Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel holds that a down payment effects acquisition of merchandise commensurate with the entire amount of the transaction, and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi holds that a down payment effects acquisition of merchan…
Summary: Ravina [the Last] cites Berakhot 50a. Read the exact wording below with its English translation, then open the passage in our own reader.
English translation
He may even say: Bless; nevertheless: Let us bless, is preferable as Rav Adda bar Ahava said that they said in the school of Rav: We learned: A group of six to ten people may divide into two groups, each forming its own zimmun . However, a group of ten, which invokes God’s name in the zimmun , may not divide into two groups as that would negate the opportunity to invoke God’s name. The Gemara proceeds: Granted, if you say: Let us bless is preferable, that is why six people who ate together may divide into two groups. However, if you say: Bless is preferable, why are they permitted to divide into two groups? Neither group would be able to say: Bless. Rather, mustn’t one conclude from this: Let us bless is preferable as the one reciting the zimmun does not exclude himself from the group? The Gemara sums up the discussion: Indeed, conclude from this that that is the case. That was also taug…
Summary: Ravina [the Last] cites Beitzah 6a. Read the exact wording below with its English translation, then open the passage in our own reader.
English translation
§ Rava said: If one died on the first day of a Festival, gentiles should attend to his burial. If he died on the second day of a Festival, Jews should attend to his burial. And even with regard to the two Festival days of Rosh HaShana, the halakha is that the legal status of the two days is like that of the two days of the Festivals; however, that is not so with regard to an egg that was laid on the first day of Rosh HaShana, as it remains prohibited on the second day. The Sages of Neharde’a say: Even with regard to an egg, Rosh HaShana is no different from other Festivals, as an egg laid on the first day is permitted on the second. As what do you think i.e., what is your concern; perhaps witnesses will fail to arrive, and the court will proclaim the month of Elul full, i.e., thirty days long, and begin counting the year only from the following day? In that case, both days are kept as sa…
Summary: Ravina [the Last] cites Yoma 18a. Read the exact wording below with its English translation, then open the passage in our own reader.
English translation
And what is the meaning of four or five; i.e., when does the High Priest take four loaves and when does he take five? According to the Rabbis, who say: The priestly watch that is incoming on Shabbat takes six of the loaves, and the outgoing watch takes six, and the incoming watch receives no greater portion as payment for closing the doors, it is from twelve loaves that the High Priest must divide and take his share, but he receives half of the loaves less one, meaning that he takes five. According to the Rabbis, the High Priest receives less than half; however, since it is inappropriate to give him a piece of a loaf, less than half is five whole loaves. According to Rabbi Yehuda, who said: The priestly watch that is incoming on Shabbat takes seven of the loaves, two of which are payment for closing the doors; and the outgoing watch takes five loaves, it is from ten that he must divide t…
Summary: Ravina [the Last] cites Bava Kamma 119a. Read the exact wording below with its English translation, then open the passage in our own reader.
English translation
From the fact that he stated that four or five animals may always be purchased, conclude from it that Rabbi Yehuda’s statement is referring to the latter clause, and his statement is a leniency. The Gemara affirms: Conclude from it that Rabbi Yehuda intended his statement as a leniency. § The mishna teaches: And similarly, one may not purchase wood and produce from produce watchmen. The Gemara relates that Rava purchased grapevine branches from a sharecropper. Abaye said to him: But didn’t we learn in the mishna: And similarly, one may not purchase wood and produce from produce watchmen? The same halakha should apply with regard to a sharecropper, who, like a watchman, is not the owner of the produce. Rav said to him: This statement applies only with regard to a watchman, as he has no share at all in the land itself. But with regard to a sharecropper, who does have a share in it, say: He…
Summary: Ravina [the Last] cites Bava Batra 5a. Read the exact wording below with its English translation, then open the passage in our own reader.
English translation
It is related that a man named Ronya had a field that was surrounded by fields belonging to Ravina on all four sides. Ravina built partitions around his fields and said to him: Give me your share of the expense in accordance with what I actually spent when I built the partitions, i.e., half the cost of the partitions. Ronya did not give it to him. Ravina said to him: Give me then at least your share of the expense in accordance with a reduced assessment of the price of reeds. Ronya did not give it to him. Ravina said to him: Give me then at least the wage of a watchman. But he did not give even this to him. One day, Ronya was harvesting dates. Ravina said to his sharecropper: Go take a cluster [ kibbura ] of dates from him. The sharecropper went to bring them, but Ronya raised his voice at him in protest, whereupon Ravina said to him: You have revealed that you are pleased with the parti…
Summary: Ravina [the Last] cites Ketubot 8a. Read the exact wording below with its English translation, then open the passage in our own reader.
English translation
Who has created all for His glory. And the second blessing is: Blessed are You… Creator of mankind. And the third blessing is: Blessed are You… Who made humanity in His image, in the image of the likeness of His form, and out of His very self formed a building (see Genesis 2:22) for eternity. Blessed are You, Lord, Creator of mankind. The fourth blessing is: May the barren city of Jerusalem greatly rejoice and delight with the ingathering of her children within her in joy. Blessed are You, Lord, Who gladdens Zion through her children. The fifth blessing is: Bring great joy to these loving friends, as You gave joy to Your creations in Eden in ancient times. Blessed are You, Lord, Who brings joy to the groom and bride. The sixth blessing is: Blessed are You, Lord our God, King of the universe, Who has created joy and gladness, groom and bride, delight, exultation, happiness, jubilation, lo…
Summary: Ravina [the Last] cites Niddah 66a. Read the exact wording below with its English translation, then open the passage in our own reader.
English translation
and is married to another man. She is permitted to engage in intercourse with her second husband because it is possible that the bleeding was caused by engaging in intercourse with her first husband, and the issue will not reoccur when she engages in intercourse with a different man. If she married another man and again saw blood due to sexual intercourse, she may engage in intercourse before the first time this occurs, before the second time this occurs, and before the third time this occurs. From this point forward she may not engage in intercourse until she is divorced from her second husband and is married to yet another man. If she married another man and again saw blood due to sexual intercourse, she may engage in intercourse the first time this occurs, the second time this occurs, and the third time this occurs. From this point forward there is a presumption that she always bleeds…