The sources cited by the sages of the Gemara

and the lungs draw all kinds of liquids, the liver becomes angry, the gall bladder injects a drop of gall into the liver and allays anger, the spleen laughs, the maw grinds the food, and the stomach brings sleep, and the nose awakens. If they reversed roles such that the organ which brings on sleep were to awaken, or the organ which awakens were to bring on sleep, the individual would gradually deteriorate. It was taught: If both bring on sleep or both awaken, the person immediately dies. With regard to one’s inclinations, it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei HaGelili says: The good inclination rules the righteous, as it is stated: “And my heart is dead within me” (Psalms 109:22); the evil inclination has been completely banished from his heart. The evil inclination rules the wicked, as it is stated: “Transgression speaks to the wicked, there is no fear of God before his eyes” (Psalms 36:2). Middling people are ruled by both the good and evil inclinations, as it is stated: “Because He stands at the right hand of the needy, to save him from them that rule his soul” (Psalms 109:31). Rabba said: People like us are middling. Abaye, his student and nephew, said to him: If the Master claims that he is merely middling, he does not leave room for any creature to live. If a person like you is middling, what of the rest of us? And Rava said: The world was created only for the sake…

The Rock!—whose deeds are perfect, Yea, all of whose ways are just; A faithful God, never false, True and upright indeed.

You shall love the E TERNAL your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might.

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 another story discussing the greatness of the Sages. Rav Kahana said: Rav Ḥama, son of the daughter of Ḥasa, told me that Rabba bar Naḥmani died due to the fear of a decree of religious persecution. The Gemara explains: His enemies accused him [ akhalu beih kurtza ] of disloyalty in the king’s palace, as they said: There is one man from among the Jews who exempts twelve thousand Jewish men from the king’s head tax two months a year, one month in the summer and one month in the winter. Since many peopl…

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 issue halakhic rulings during Rav Ḥisda’s lifetime, and that is the correct tradition. Ravina said to Rav Ashi: In fact, it was stated that Rav Hamnuna issued rulings, and it was also stated that he did not issue rulings, and both traditions are correct. During the years of the life of Rav Huna, Rav Hamnuna’s principal teacher, Rav Hamnuna did not issue rulings at all, but he did issue rulings during the years of Rav Ḥisda’s life, for Rav Hamnuna was Rav Ḥisda’s disciple - colleague. And since I, to…

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 offerings sacrificed inside the Temple, and there is not a parallel offering of stones in the Temple. § Rav Yosef bar Abba said: Rabba bar Yirmeya happened to come to our locale, and when he came he brought the following baraita with him: One may remove worms from a tree and place manure on a cut in a tree during the Sabbatical Year, but one may not remove worms or place manure on a cut during the intermediate days of the Festival. The baraita continues: Both here, in the case of the Sabbatical Year,…

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 sufficient that he wipes his hands with earth, a rock, or a sliver of wood. Rava replied to Ravina: He spoke well, as, is it written: I will wash with water? In purity, is written referring to anything that cleans, as Rav Ḥisda would curse one who went out of his way to seek water at the time of prayer. With regard to seeking water, the Gemara comments: This applies only to the recitation of Shema , as the time for its recitation is limited, and if one goes seeking water he may run out of time.…

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 partitions and the protection that they provide you. Even if it were only a goat that entered your field, wouldn’t the field need safeguarding, to prevent the goat from eating the dates? Ronya said to him: If it were only a goat, doesn’t one need merely to chase it away [ le’akhluyei ]? No partition is required. Ravina said to him: But wouldn’t you need a man to chase the goat away? Pay me then at least the wage of a watchman. Ravina came before Rava to adjudicate the matter. Rava said to Ronya: Go a…

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, love and brotherhood, and peace and friendship. Soon, Lord our God, may there be heard in the cities of Judea and in the streets of Jerusalem the sound of joy and the sound of gladness, the sound of the groom and the sound of the bride, the joyous sound of grooms from their wedding canopy and of young people from their feast of song (see Jeremiah 33:11). Blessed are You, Lord, Who makes the groom rejoice with the bride. Together with the blessing over the wine, these are the seven wedding blessing…

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 due to engaging in intercourse, and therefore she may not engage in intercourse or marry someone else until she examines herself. How does she examine herself? She brings a tube, inside of which she places a cosmetic brush so that it is long enough to reach deeply into her vagina, and an absorbent cloth is placed on the tip of the brush. She inserts the tube with the brush and cloth within herself and then removes it. If blood is found on the top of the absorbent cloth, it is known that the blo…

However, the Gemara states: And the halakha is not in accordance with that opinion. Instead, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel. The Gemara relates: Ulla happened to come to Pumbedita. Rav Yehuda said to his son, Rav Yitzḥak: Go and bring him a basket of fruit as a gift, and while you are there, observe how he recites havdala . Rav Yitzḥak himself did not go. In his place, he sent to him Abaye, who was a young student at the time. When Abaye came back, Rav Yitzḥak said to him: How did Ulla recite the blessing of havdala ? Abaye said to him that Ulla said: Blessed is He Who distinguishes between sacred and profane, but he did not say anything further. Rav Yitzḥak came before his father, Rav Yehuda, who said to him: How did Ulla recite havdala ? He said to him: I myself did not go. Instead, I sent Abaye, who said to me that Ulla recited: Who distinguishes between sacred and profane. Rav Yehuda grew angry and said to him: The Master’s haughtiness and the Master’s pride caused the Master to act in a way that ensured that the halakha will not be said in his name. In other words, had you gone yourself, this halakha would have been attributed to you, but due to your haughtiness and pride, it will be transmitted in the name of Abaye. The Gemara raises an objection to Ulla’s practice from a baraita : With regard to all blessings, one begins their recitation with: Bl…

and served Torah scholars extensively, why did he die at half his days? Where is the length of days promised him in the verse? No one would respond to her astonishment at all. Eliyahu said: One time I was a guest in her house, and she was relating that entire event with regard to the death of her husband. And I said to her: My daughter, during the period of your menstruation, how did he act toward you? She said to me: Heaven forbid, he did not touch me even with his little finger. And I asked her: In the days of your white garments, after the menstrual flow ended, and you were just counting clean days, how did he act toward you then? She said to me: He ate with me, and drank with me, and slept with me with bodily contact and, however, it did not enter his mind about something else, i.e., conjugal relations. And I said to her: Blessed is the Omnipresent who killed him for this sin, as your husband did not show respect to the Torah. The Torah said: “And to a woman in the separation of her impurity you should not approach” (Leviticus 18:19), even mere affectionate contact is prohibited. The Gemara relates that when Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said: That student did not actually sleep with her with bodily contact; rather, it was in one bed that they slept without contact. In the West, in Eretz Yisrael, they say that Rav Yitzḥak bar Yosef said: When they would…

are increasingly diminished, and none ask and none seek. Upon whom is there to rely? Only upon our Father in Heaven. He also said: In the times of the approach of the Messiah, impudence will increase and high costs will pile up. Although the vine shall bring forth its fruit, wine will nevertheless be expensive. And the monarchy shall turn to heresy, and there will be no one to give reproof about this. The meeting place of the Sages will become a place of promiscuity, and the Galilee shall be destroyed, and the Gavlan will be desolate, and the men of the border shall go round from city to city to seek charity, but they will find no mercy. And the wisdom of scribes will putrefy, and people who fear sin will be held in disgust, and the truth will be absent. The youth will shame the face of elders, elders will stand before minors. Normal family relations will be ruined: A son will disgrace a father; a daughter will rise up against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. A man’s enemies will be the members of his household. The face of the generation will be like the face of a dog; a son will no longer be ashamed before his father. And upon what is there for us to rely? Only upon our Father in heaven. § Rav says concerning the decree banning the wearing of crowns that they taught this halakha only with regard to crowns of salt and sulfur, but those of myrtle and ros…

§ After this digression, the Gemara returns to the story of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon. And although his flesh did not putrefy, even so Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, still did not rely on his own opinion, as he was worried that he may have erred in one of his decisions. He accepted afflictions upon himself as atonement for his possible sins. At night his attendants would spread out sixty felt bed coverings for him. In the morning, despite the bed coverings, they would remove sixty basins of blood and pus from underneath him. The following day, i.e., every morning, his wife would prepare for him sixty types of relish [ lifda ] made from figs, and he would eat them and become healthy. His wife, concerned for his health, would not allow him to go to the study hall, so that the Rabbis would not push him beyond his limits. In the evening, he would say to his pains: My brothers and my friends, come! In the morning he would say to them: Go away, due to the dereliction of Torah study that you cause me. One day his wife heard him inviting his pains. She said to him: You are bringing the pains upon yourself. You have diminished the money of my father’s home due to the costs of treating your self-imposed afflictions. She rebelled against him and went back to her father’s home, and he was left with no one to care for him. Meanwhile, there were these sixty sailors who came and e…

For what great nation is there that has a god so close at hand as is the E TERNAL our God whenever we call?

i.e., Mar Yenuka and Mar Kashisha, sons of Rav Ḥisda, said to Rav Ashi: The Sages of Neharde’a follow their usual line of reasoning, as Rav Ḥama, who was from Neharde’a, issued his ruling in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel, who was also from that city. As Rav Naḥman says that Shmuel says: In the case of brothers who divided their father’s estate, they do not have a right-of- way against each other. Although the father would traverse the outer field from the inner field to access the public domain, the brother who received the inner field as an inheritance does not have the right to traverse his brother’s outer field. Shmuel continues: Nor do they have the right of windows against each other, i.e., the right to prevent the other from building a wall facing his windows; nor do they have the right of ladders against each other, i.e., the right to set up a ladder in the other’s property in order to get to his own; nor do they have the right of a water channel against each other, i.e., the right to pass a water channel through the other’s property. And be careful with these, since they are established halakhot . Rava says: The brothers do have all of the aforementioned rights. Rav Ḥama agrees with Shmuel’s opinion, that each brother can do as he pleases on his own property without the other one preventing him from doing so. Since Rav Ḥama’s rulings were mentioned, the Gemara c…

We are dealing with a case when he injured her in her face, and therefore he must also pay for the loss of her value, a sum that belongs to her father. Rav Zeira said that Rav Mattana said that Rav said, and some say Rabbi Zeira said that Rav Mattana said that Rav said: With regard to a daughter who is sustained by the brothers, her earnings belong to her, as it is written: “And you may make them an inheritance for your sons after you” (Leviticus 25:46), which indicates: It is them, slaves, that you bequeath to your sons, and not your daughters to your sons. This verse teaches that a man does not bequeath a right that he has over his daughter to his son. Avimi bar Pappi said to Rabbi Zeira: Shakud said this halakha . The Gemara asks: Who is Shakud? This is a nickname for Shmuel. The Gemara asks: Didn’t Rav say it? The Gemara answers: One should say that Avimi bar Pappi meant that even Shakud said it, i.e., Shmuel also agreed with this ruling. Mar bar Ameimar said to Rav Ashi: The Sages of Neharde’a say as follows: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rav Sheshet, that brothers who are sustaining their sister are entitled to her earnings. Rav Ashi said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rav, that her earnings belong to her. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rav. MISHNA: One who betroths his minor daughter to a m…

and sweeping the oven. She took the fire and set it on her foot; she was scalded and her luck suffered, which gave me the opportunity, and I brought her. Rav Beivai bar Abaye said to the Angel of Death: Do you have the right to act in this manner, to take someone before his time? The Angel of Death said to him: And is it not written: “But there are those swept away without justice” (Proverbs 13:23)? Rav Beivai said to him: And isn’t it written: “One generation passes away, and another generation comes” (Ecclesiastes 1:4), which indicates that there is a predetermined amount of time for the life of every generation. He said to him: I shepherd them, not releasing them until the years of the generation are completed, and then I pass them on to the angel Duma who oversees the souls of the dead. Rav Beivai said to him: Ultimately, what do you do with his extra years, those taken away from this individual? The Angel of Death said to him: If there is a Torah scholar who disregards his personal matters, i.e., who overlooks the insults of those who wrong him, I add those years to him and he becomes the deceased’s replacement for that time. § The Gemara returns to the previous topic. When Rabbi Yoḥanan reached this verse, he cried, as God said to the Satan about Job: “Although you did incite Me against him, to destroy him without cause” (Job 2:3). Rabbi Yoḥanan said: With regard to a sla…

was stated by the Sages, i.e., the wise man mentioned in the verse, and yet they could not explain it. It was stated by the prophets, i.e., those to whom the mouth of the Lord has spoken, and yet they could not explain it, until the Holy One, Blessed be He, Himself explained it, as it is stated in the next verse: “And the Lord says: Because they have forsaken My Torah which I set before them” (Jeremiah 9:12). Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: This does not mean that the Jewish people ceased Torah study altogether; rather, they did not recite a blessing on the Torah prior to its study, as they did not regard Torah study as a sacred endeavor. Rav Ḥama says: What is the meaning of that which is written: “In the heart of him that has discernment wisdom rests; but in the inward part of fools it makes itself known” (Proverbs 14:33)? “In the heart of him who has discernment wisdom rests”; this is a Torah scholar, son of a Torah scholar. “But in the inward part of fools it makes itself known”; this is a Torah scholar, son of an ignoramus, as his wisdom stands out in contrast to the foolishness of the rest of his family. Ulla said: This explains the adage that people say: A small coin in an empty barrel calls: Kish , kish , i.e., it rattles loudly, whereas a coin in a barrel full of coins is not heard. Rabbi Yirmeya said to Rabbi Zeira: What is the meaning of that which is written with reg…