DOCSLIB.ORG

A Note on the Chronology of the Book of Joel

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
A Note on the Chronology of the Book of Joel zutot 14 (2017) 3-5 ZUTOT: Perspectives on Jewish Culture brill.com/zuto brill.com/zuto A Note on the Chronology of the Book of Joel Israel Netanel Rubin Jerusalem Abstract This short note points to a Talmudic source that supports modern research that locates the prophet Joel in the Second Temple period, contrary to the common orthodox tradi- tion that Joel prophesied in the First Temple period. Keywords Joel – chronology – Bible One of the books of the Bible that is chronologically problematic is the Book of Joel. The book itself does not provide any information on his lifetime, neither at the beginning of the book as is customary, nor elsewhere in the text. The rab- binic tradition tried to fill this gap and offered some suggestions, which Rashi and Radak cite at the start of their commentaries to the book: ‘Some say that this prophet prophesied in the days of Joram son of Ahab, as he states: he pre- dicted there would be famine in the land, as he said: for the Lord hath called for a famine (…) and Seder Olam said that he prophesied in the days of Manasseh, saying: Joel, Nahum and Habakkuk prophesied in the days of Manasseh, and because Manasseh was not honest they were not named after him.’1 Both sug- gestions position Joel in the First Temple period, and the first one even puts him ahead of the first writing prophets known to us. This convention was accepted also by Maimonides in his introduction to his Mishneh Torah, where he places Yoel in his tradition-chain after Isaiah, between Michah and Nahum: 1 Radak, Joel 1, 1 and similarly at Rashi, Joel 1, 1. Chaim Milikowsky tried to explain what moti- vated the Sages and the commentators to these specific speculation; See Ch. Milikowsky, Seder ʿolam: Critical Edition, Commentary and Introduction (in Hebrew) (Jerusalem 2013), vol. 2, 322–323. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���7 | doi �0.��63/�8750��4-�4���Downloaded063 from Brill.com10/01/2021 04:33:55AM via free access 4 Rubin ‘Michah received it from Isaiah and his court, Yoel received it from Michah and his court, Nahum received it from Yoel and his court.’ Ibn Ezra, on the other hand, writes simply in the beginning of his commen- tary to Joel that ‘we have no way of knowing his generation.’ Indeed, the mod- ern study of the Bible is almost unanimous that Joel prophesied during the Second Temple period. In his entry on the book of Joel M.D. Cassuto summa- rizes: ‘Most scholars believe that the book is of a later date, after the Babylonian exile and the return to Zion (…) Though there are still those who try to defend the antiquity of the book, for instance Thiele (1937) and Kaufmann (1948), it seems more likely that it belongs to the Second Temple period (…) as its his- torical, geographical and ideological background can only point to the Second Temple period.’2 Ostensibly, this is more a dispute between traditional and modern Biblical critics, but in this case I found indirect evidence that at least one Talmudic sage, unlike those cited above, was of the same opinion as modern-day schol- ars that Joel belongs to the Second Temple period. This becomes evident from the legend in bSukkah,3 regarding the names of the evil inclination: Rav Avira, or, as some say, Rabbi Joshua son of Levi, made the following exposition: The Evil Inclination has seven names. The Holy One, blessed be He, called it ‘Evil,’ as it is said: ‘For the imagi- nation of man’s heart is evil from his youth.’ Moses called it ‘the Uncircumcised,’ as it is said: ‘Circumcise therefore the foreskin of your heart.’ David called it ‘Unclean,’ as it is said: ‘Create in me a clean heart, O Lord’ – which implies that there is an unclean one. Solomon called it ‘the Enemy,’ as it is said: ‘If thine enemy be hungry, give him bread to eat; and if he be thirsty, give him water to drink, for thou wilt heap coals of fire upon his head, and the Lord will reward thee’ – read not ‘will reward thee’ but ‘will cause it to be at peace with thee.’ Isaiah called it ‘the Stumbling-Block,’ as it is said: ‘Cast ye up, Cast ye up, clear the way, take up the stumbling-block out of the way of my people.’ Ezekiel called it ‘Stone,’ as it is said: ‘And I will take away the heart of stone out of your flesh and I will give you a heart of flesh.’ Joel called it ‘the Hidden One,’ as it is said: ‘But I will remove far off from you the hidden one.’ 2 M.D. Cassuto, ‘Joel, Book of Joel,’ Entziqlopedia miqra ʾit (Jerusalem 1958) vol. 3, 577. 3 bSukkah 52a. Downloadedzutot from Brill.com10/01/2021 14 (2017) 3-5 04:33:55AM via free access A NOTE ON THE CHRONOLOGY OF THE BOOK OF JOEL 5 It is clear that the legend’s narrator, either Rav Avira or Rabbi Joshua son of Levi, listed the seven names of the ‘callers’ in a chronological order,4 so that by his locating the Book of Joel after Ezekiel it is understood he believed, as most modern scholars do, that Joel prophesied after Ezekiel, that is, in the Second Temple period. Apparently, one could argue that the order of the ‘callers’ is not chronological, but merely reflecting the interior order of the Bible; there are few variations of this order but in all of them the Book of Ezekiel precedes the Minor Prophets. If that were the case, the quotes from Isaiah, Ezekiel and Joel should have preceded those from David and Solomon, which are taken from Psalms and Proverbs that according to the interior order of Bible are located after the Prophets. It therefore appears that this legend’s narrator arranged the seven names in a chronological order, from which we can derive that he believed Joel was the last and prophesied in the Second Temple period.5 It should be mentioned that Pesikta de-Rav Kahana, in the piska of Nahamu, indeed speaks clearly about ‘eight prophets who prophesied after the destruc- tion of the Temple, and these are: Joel, Amos, Zephaniah, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, Ezekiel and Jeremiah.’ But by including Amos and Zephaniah Pesikta denies conclusions about its opinion about Joel. It seems probably, however, that Pesikta has in mind the prophecies of destruction that appear in those books and applies them to the destruction of the Temple, regardless the lifetime of the prophet himself. However, the evidence provided in bSukkah, although indirect, is quite strong in my opinion. 4 Most Talmudical lists of this type are arranged in a chronological order, and the Talmud itself notes about deviation from this order; see bTa ʾanit 23a: ‘Let us see, Did not Jonah live after David and Solomon, why then is he placed first?’ See also N. Elyakim, ‘Matters in Talmud That Were Not Brought by a Chronological Order or Not as Their Order in the Bible,’ Shmaʿatin 45, no. 170 (2007), 75–99. 5 As one of the reviewers of this article kindly pointed out bTaʾanit 5a provides additional evidence that according to the Talmudists Joel lived in the Second Temple period: ‘This verse was fulfilled in the days of Joel, the son of Petuʾel, That which the palmerworm hath left hath the locust eaten (…) To that generation was applied the scriptural verses, “They that sow in tears shall reap in joy” ’; but the verse ‘They that sow in tears shall reap in joy’ is from Ps 126:4, the chapter that relates, according to Ta ʾanit itself, to the generation of the return to Zion after the Babylonian exile (see there bTa ʾanit 23a: ‘A Song of Ascents, When the Lord brought back those that returned to Zion, we were like unto them that dream. Is it possible for a man to dream continuously for seventy years?,’ and Rashi interprets: ‘We were like unto them that dream – Babylonian exile, which has lasted seventy years, seemed like a dream’). I agree that this addition provides credible evidence for our purpose, but I would not start just with that proof by itself, since ‘to that generation was applied the scriptural verses’ might also be inter- preted in the sense of: this verse can in retrospect be applied to the events of that generation; in other words the verse may not speak of real-time events. zutot 14 (2017) 3-5 Downloaded from Brill.com10/01/2021 04:33:55AM via free access.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Mary Hytken Dumont University @ASBEE Presents.. from the Liturgical Department
    The Mary Hytken Dumont University @ASBEE presents.. From the liturgical department... Prayer Unlocked What we will look at today; What is a blessing? A look at the quintessential blessing, the Birkat Hamazon What does each blessing mean? What does this tell us about blessings? The only time it says to bless G-d... ְוַאָכְל ָ֖תְּוָשׂ ָ֑בְעָתֵּוּבַֽרְכ ָ֙תֶּאת־יְהָֹ֣וֱה א ֶ֔הַי עָל־ה ָ֥אֶרַץ הטּ ָֹ֖בֲה א ֶ֥שָׁר נַֽתָן־לֽ׃ You shall eat and be full, and you shall bless Hashem your God for the good land which He has given you. What does it mean to bless? Praise Bless We can bless G-d??? Berachot 7a Similarly, it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yishmael ben Elisha, the High Priest, said: Once, on Yom Kippur, I entered the innermost sanctum, the Holy of Holies, to offer incense, and in a vision I saw Akatriel Ya, the Lord of Hosts, one of the names of God expressing His ultimate authority, seated upon a high and exalted throne (see Isaiah 6). And He said to me: Yishmael, My son, bless Me. I said to Him the prayer that God prays: “May it be Your will that Your mercy overcome Your anger, and may Your mercy prevail over Your other attributes, and may You act toward Your children with the attribute of mercy, and may You enter before them beyond the letter of the law.” Rekanati, Taamei Hamitzvot pg. 11 What is the context? Remember the long way that the LORD your God has made you travel in the wilderness these past forty years, that He might test you by hardships to learn what was in your hearts: whether you would keep His commandments or not.
    [Show full text]
  • Perek X Daf 110 Amud A
    NOTES Rav Naĥman said that the verse said: “It was a night of watching ָא ַמר ַרב ַנ ְח ָמן: ָא ַמר ְקָרא: ֵ״ליל Some com- to the Lord” (Exodus :), which indicates that Passover night : ֵליל ַה ְמ ׁש ּו ָּמר ּו ָבא – A night that remains guarded ׁ ִש ּמוִרים״ – ֵליל ַה ְמ ׁש ּו ָּמר ּו ָבא ִמן mentaries explain that this night remains guarded throughout is a night that remains guardedN from demons and harmful H ַה ַּמִזּ ִיקין. history, as it is set aside as the time of redemption for the Jewish people. Therefore, there is no concern for danger on spirits of all kinds. Th erefore, there is no cause for concern about this night (see Rashi tractate Rosh HaShana 12b). Alternatively, this form of danger on this particular night. the verse states with regard to this night: “The night shines Rava said a diff erent answer: Th e cup of blessing for Grace aft er ָר ָבא ָא ַמר: ּכוֹס ׁ ֶשל ְּבָר ָכה ִמ ְצ ָטֵרף like the day” (Psalms 139:12), i.e., demons have no power at -Meals on Passover night is used in the performance of an addi ְל ָטוֹבה, ְו ֵאינוֹ ִמ ְצ ָטֵרף ְלָר ָﬠה. ָר ִב ָינא .(that time (Iyyun Ya’akov Because safety is guaranteed on this night, the custom in -tional mitzva and is not simply an expression of freedom. Th ere ָא ַמר: ַאְר ָּב ָﬠה ָּכ ֵסי ַּת ִּק ּינו ַר ָּב ַנן ֶ ּדֶר ְך many communities was to leave one’s doors unlocked as an fore, it combines with the other cups for the good, i.e., to fulfi ll ֵח ּירות, ָּכל ַחד ְו ַחד expression of trust in God, as the Jews were redeemed due the mitzva to drink four cups, and it does not combine for the to their faith (ge’onim).
    [Show full text]
  • The Theological Problems with Our Sounding of the Shofar Rav Jared Anstandig
    The Theological Problems with our Sounding of the Shofar Rav Jared Anstandig Why 30? 1. Bemidbar 29:1 ּובַחֹדֶׁשהַשְּׁבִיעִי בְּׁאֶחָד לַחֹדֶ ׁשמִ קְּׁרָ א־קֹדֶ ׁש יִהְּׁ יֶה לָכֶם כָל־מְּׁ לֶאכֶת העֲבֹדָ לֹא תַ עֲׂשּו יֹום תְּׁ רּועָהיִהְּׁ יֶה לָכֶם׃ In the seventh month, on the first day of the month, you shall observe a sacred occasion: you shall not work at your occupations. You shall observe it as a day when the horn is sounded. 2. Rosh Hashana 34a אתקין רבי אבהו בקסרי תקיעה שלשה שברים תרועה תקיעה מה נפשך אי ילולי יליל לעביד תקיעה תרועה ותקיעה ואי גנוחי גנח לעביד תקיעה שלשה שברים ותקיעה Rabbi Abbahu instituted in Caesarea the following order of sounding of the shofar: First a tekia, a simple uninterrupted sound; next three shevarim, broken sounds; followed by a terua, a series of short blasts; and, finally, another tekia. The Gemara asks: Whichever way you look at it, this is difficult. If, according to the opinion of Rabbi Abbahu, the sound the Torah calls a terua is a whimpering, i.e., short, consecutive sounds, one should perform tekia-terua-tekia set. And if he holds that a terua is moaning, i.e., longer, broken sounds, he should sound a set as follows: Tekia, followed by three shevarim, and then another tekia. Why include both a terua and a shevarim? מספקא ליה אי גנוחי גנח אי ילולי יליל מתקיף לה רב עוירא ודלמא ילולי הוה וקא מפסיק שלשה שברים בין תרועה לתקיעה דהדר עביד תקיעה תרועה ותקיעה מתקיף לה רבינא ודלמא גנוחי הוה וקא מפסקא תרועה בין שברים לתקיעה דהדר עביד תש"ת The Gemara answers: Rabbi Abbahu was uncertain whether a terua means moaning or whimpering, and he therefore instituted that both types of sound should be included, to ensure that one fulfills his obligation.
    [Show full text]
  • JCYF Text Collection
    Jewish Community Youth Foundation TEXTS: Draft Aug 24, 2007 Contents: 1. General Texts about Giving a. Not Teaching Your Children to Earn is to Teach them to Rob b. Tzedakah is Equivalent to all other Mitzvot c. Giving Will Not Make You Poor 2. We Don’t Really Own What We Give Away Anyway a. The Sabbatical Year b. Do Not Reap the Corners of your Land 3. Should the Poor Also Give? Two Perspectives a. Even Those Who Receive Tzedakah Should Give b. One’s Own Sustenance Comes First 4. Types of Giving a. Eight Categories of Giving Tzedakah, a.k.a Maimonides Ladder b. The Difference Between Tzedkah and Gemilut Hasadim c. Emergency Versus Ongoing Needs 5. Who Should We Give to? Texts about Allocating a. Allocating is Painful b. Give to Family First, then to the Neighbors c. Giving to Non-Jews d. How to Compare the Poor in your town to the Poor around the World 6. How Much Should We Give? a. Sufficient for his Needs (Day Machsoro) b. Defining ‘Sufficient for his Needs’ c. How Much to Give: 20%? 10%? 7. Tzedakah Midrash a. Midrash of the Sheep Crossing the River b. God Stands at the Right Side of a Poor Person 1. General Texts about Giving Not Teaching Your Children to Earn is to Teach them to Rob T. Kiddushin 29a Anyone who does not teach their child a skill or profession may be regarded as teaching their child to rob. Discussion: Do you think your parents have a responsibility to teach you a skill or profession? How does this teaching change your understanding of people who steal things? Tzedakah is Equivalent to all other Mitzvot B.
    [Show full text]
  • Daf Ditty Eruvin 17
    Daf Ditty: Eruvin 17: Salt 1 We learned in the mishna that in a military camp one is exempt from ritual washing of the hands. Abaye said: They taught this exemption only with regard to first waters, i.e., hand-washing before eating. However, final waters, i.e., hand-washing after eating and before reciting Grace after Meals, is an obligation even in a military camp. Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi said: For what reason did the Sages say that the final waters are an obligation? It is due to the fact that there is the presence of Sodomite salt, which blinds the eyes even in a small amount. Since Sodomite salt could remain on one’s hands, one must wash them after eating. This obligation is binding even in a camp because soldiers are also obligated to maintain their health. Abaye said: And this type of dangerous salt is present in the proportion of a single grain [korta] in an entire kor of innocuous salt. Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi: If one measured salt and came into contact with Sodomite salt not during mealtime, what is the halakha? Is there an obligation to wash his hands afterward? He said to him: It was unnecessary to say this, as he is certainly obligated to do so. RASHI 2 Tosafos DH MAYIM ACHARONIM CHOVAH תופסות ה"ד םימ ורחא נ םי הבוח םי נ ורחא םימ ה"ד תופסות Tosfos explains why we do not wash Mayim Acharonim. ישכע ו אל וגהנ םימב ורחא םינ ןיאד חלמ תימודס וצמ י ניניב וננב צ יוסחמ ידםנוח יב גנא ויכ Nowadays our custom is not to wash Mayim Acharonim, became Sodom salt is not found among us; יא ימנ יפל ןיאש נא ו גר םילי לבטל יתועבצא נ ו חלמב רחא הליכא רחא חלמב ו נ יתועבצא לבטל םילי גר ו נא ןיאש יפל ימנ יא Alternatively, it is because we do not normally dip our fingers in salt after eating.
    [Show full text]
  • Sota Book.Indb
    Perek I Daf 4 Amud a HALAKHA Th e baraita clarifi es: And what is the measure of seclusion,H ְו ַכ ָּמה ׁ ִש ּיעור ְס ִת ָירה? ְּכֵדי ּטו ְמ ָאה, ְּכֵדי The seclusion of a sota : ׁ ִש ּיעור ְס ִת ָירה – i.e., how is the seclusion of a sota defi ned? Th e measure of seclu- Measure of seclusion is defined as when witnesses see a woman secluded with ִּב ָיאה, ְּכֵדי ַה ֲﬠָר ָאה, sion is equivalent to the time needed for defi lement, which is a man with whom her husband had warned her not to be equivalent to the time needed to perform intercourse, which secluded. The duration of the seclusion is the time needed is equivalent to the time needed to perform the initial stage of for defilement, which is equivalent to the time required for intercourse.N roasting and swallowing an egg. This ruling is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, whose opinion is accepted Th e baraita quotes several practical examples of this period of time. when he is involved in a dispute with others (Rambam Sefer ְּכֵדי ַה ָּק ַפת ֶ ּד ֶקל, ִ ּד ְבֵרי ַר ִּבי ִי ׁ ְש ָמ ֵﬠאל; .(Th is is equivalent to the time needed for circling a palm tree; this Nashim, Hilkhot Sota 1:2; Shulĥan Arukh, Even HaEzer 178:4 ַר ִּבי ֱא ִל ֶיﬠֶזר ֵאוֹמר: ְּכֵדי ְמִז ַיגת ַה ּכוֹס; ַר ִּבי is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Eliezer says: Th is is ְי ׁ ֻהוֹשﬠ ֵאוֹמר: ְּכֵדי ִל ׁ ְש ּתוֹתוֹ; equivalent to the time needed for mixing a cup of wine with water, NOTES with the total volume of a quarter-log.
    [Show full text]
  • Daf 110 March 11, 2021
    27 Adar 5781 Pesachim Daf 110 March 11, 2021 Daf Notes is currently being dedicated to the neshamah of Tzvi Gershon Ben Yoel (Harvey Felsen) o”h May the studying of the Daf Notes be a zechus for his neshamah and may his soul find peace in Gan Eden and be bound up in the Bond of life ‘He must not perform his requirements twice.’ Why? Has he not [newly] decided?1 - Said Abaye, This is what he [the Ulla said: Ten cups are not subject to [the danger of] pairs. Tanna] means: He must not eat in pairs and drink in pairs and Ulla is consistent with his view, for Ulla said, while others he must not perform his needs even once [after eating or maintain, it was taught in a Baraisa: The Sages instituted ten drinking in pairs], lest he be weakened2 and be affected.3 cups in a mourner's house. Now if you should think that ten cups are subject to [the danger of] pairs, how could our Our Rabbis taught: He who drinks in pairs, his blood is upon Rabbis arise and enact a regulation whereby one is led into his own head. Said Rav Yehudah: When is that? If he had not danger! But eight are subject to ‘pairs.’ Rav Chisda and seen the street;4 but if he has seen the street, he is at liberty Rabbah son of Rav Huna both maintained: ‘Shalom’ [peace] [to drink a second cup]. Rav Ashi said: I saw that Rav combines [with others] for good, but does not combine for Chananya bar Bibi used to go out and see the street at each evil;9 but six is subject to ‘pairs’.
    [Show full text]
  • Sota Book.Indb
    NOTES Having interpreted the phrase: “Everyone who is proud in heart is ַמאי ״יָד ְלָיד לֹא ָ ּיִנֶקה״? ָאַמר ַרב: ָ ּכל -an abomination to the Lord” (Proverbs :), the Gemara inter ְ ּכַאְבָרָהם ָאִב ּינו – .Just as Abraham our forefather, etc ַה ָּבא ַﬠל ֵא ֶׁשת ִא ׁיש, ֲאִפ ּילוּ ִהְקָנ ּהו The reference to Abraham is interpreted by the Meiri :וכו׳ prets the continuation of the verse. What is the meaning of: “Hand ְָּלַהק ׁדוֹש ָּברוּךְ הוּא ָׁשַמִים ָוָאֶרץ as referring to one who does great deeds and publicly to hand, he shall not be unpunished” (Proverbs :)? Rav says: ְ ּכַאְבָרָהם ָאִב ּינו, ִּדְכִתיב ֵּב ּיה: ֲ ״הִרימִֹתי spreads the message of God’s greatness, as was done by Abraham. Anyone who engages in sexual intercourse with an adulteress, even if he were to have att ributed possession of heaven and earth ָיִדי ֶאל ה' ֵאל ֶﬠְליוֹן קֹנֵה ָׁשַמִים ָוָאֶרץ״, to the Holy One, Blessed be He, just as Abraham our forefatherN לֹא ָ ּיִנֶקה ִמִּדינ ָּה ֶׁשל ֵּג ִ יה ָ ּנם. did, that it is writt en with regard to him: “I have lift ed up my hand to the Lord, God Most High, Maker of heaven and earth” (Genesis :), he will not be unpunished from the judgment of Gehenna. Abraham is described as one whose hands were lift ed to declare the glory of God, yet this verse declares that even if one who engaged in forbidden sexual intercourse were to use his hands in the same way, still, due to his sin, the verse says: “He shall not be unpunished.” Th is interpretation poses a diffi culty to the Sages of the school ַק ְׁשָיא ְל ּהו ִלְדֵבי ַר ִּבי ֵׁש ָ ילא: ַהאי ״יָד of Rabbi Sheila: Th is phrase: “Hand to hand, he shall not be ְלָיד לֹא ָ ּיִנֶקה״, ָ ״יִדי״ ִמ ָּ יבֵﬠי ֵל ּיה! unpunished,” is not how the verse would present this idea.
    [Show full text]
  • Daf 119 March 20, 2021
    7 Nissan 5781 Pesachim Daf 119 March 20, 2021 Daf Notes is currently being dedicated to the neshamah of Tzvi Gershon Ben Yoel (Harvey Felsen) o”h May the studying of the Daf Notes be a zechus for his neshamah and may his soul find peace in Gan Eden and be bound up in the Bond of life Rav Kahana said on the authority of Rabbi Yishmael ben countries? Because it is stated, And all the countries Rabbi Yosi: What is meant by, ‘For the leader [la- came unto Egypt [to Yosef to buy grain]. And when the menatzeach]: a Psalm of David? Sing praises to Him who Israelites migrated from Egypt they carried it away with rejoices when they conquer Him.1 Come and see how them, for it is said, and they despoiled the Egyptians. the character of the Holy One, Blessed be He, is not like Rav Assi said: They made it like a trap in which there is that of mortal man. The character of mortal man is such no grain;3 Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: Like a pond that when he is conquered he is unhappy, but when the without fish. Thus it [the treasure] lay until Rechovoam, Holy One is conquered He rejoices, for it is said, when Shishak king of Egypt came and seized it from Therefore He said that He would destroy them, had not Rechovoam, for it is said, And it came to pass in the fifth Moshe His chosen stood before Him in the breach, [to year of king Rechovoam, that Shishak king of Egypt turn back His wrath].
    [Show full text]
  • Ep,.I,I,I,Ptt!
    KE]TZAD MEVARCHIN CHAPTER SIX BERACHOS 44a] Misfi)1qfr nEr]P B.?P ll!g? lJtl]P -Iftheybrought before him a salted food to be eaten first,P] iby nil - and breed was brought with it,[2] nga n¥ lpim tr.+xpa b¥ ||]p - he recites a blessing on the salted food and this discharges his blessing obligation for the bread as well, 1b I+9p n!apEP - for the bread is subordinate to [the salted food]. b??I h! -This is the rule: I?9¥ irap] lR.y Jt)np b? -In whatever caseyou have a food that is primary and a subordinate food is eaten with it, h!9VB n¥ lt?im lRlyB b¥ ll!P - one recites the blessing on the primary food and this discharges his blessing obligation for the subordinate food as well.[3] Ge~tt=?:pG:FT;,#,:Ep,.I,i,i,ptt!i*im-Buttshad not eaten "sustenance."19] The Gemara relates further: there such a thing that the salted food is the primary food and FIln]9i5ra Raim iiib pli¥ nHi i¥ bi]S ina# .ai - R' Abahu ate the bread is the subordinate one?[4] the fuiits. of Genosar until a fly would slip off his forehead.[L°] The Gemara answers: ]n].!@ l]n!| ly tb?¥ llE IP* ]1+ lpts ]|] -And Raw Ami and Raw ltyS ]1 lB¥ tt|.1¥ ill n.i? ttpg ]| lpS - Rev Acha the son of Assi would eat them until their hair would fall out. Tlypv.?I. Rav Avira said in the name ofRavAshi: igl]a mll9.b]tN? Illpi ly bl]S rl!5 V/.P? T? - R' Shimon ben Laldsh would eat ]]¥ - The Mishnah refers to those who are eating the fruits of them until he became delirious, H$7try! 1a|7 T!Pin?I.
    [Show full text]
  • Moshe Raphael Ben Yehoshua (Morris Stadtmauer) O”H Tzvi Gershon Ben Yoel (Harvey Felsen) O”H
    21 Shevat 5780 Brachos Daf 44 Feb. 16, 2020 Daf Notes is currently being dedicated to the neshamot of Moshe Raphael ben Yehoshua (Morris Stadtmauer) o”h Tzvi Gershon ben Yoel (Harvey Felsen) o”h May the studying of the Daf Notes be a zechus for their neshamot and may their souls find peace in Gan Eden and be bound up in the Bond of life If salted food is brought before him first, and bread was The Gemora relates that Rabbi Avahu used to eat (so much) brought with it, he recites a blessing over the salted food and of these fruits that a fly would slip off his forehead (for his this discharges his obligation for the bread, since the bread is skin glowed and became smooth). Rav Ami and Rav Assi used subordinate to it. This is the general rule: Whenever with one to eat (so much) of these fruits until their hair would fall out. kind of food another is taken as a subordinate, a blessing is Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish used to eat (so much) of these fruits said over the primary food and this discharges his obligation that he would become delirious. Rabbi Yochanan informed for the subordinate one. the household of the Nasi, and Rabbi Yehudah Nesiah sent a band of men for him and they brought him to his house. The Gemora asks: But is it ever possible for salted food to be the primary item and the bread subordinate to it? When Rav Dimi came (from Eretz Yisroel to Bavel), he said that King Yannai had a city in Har Hamelech where they used Rav Acha the son of Rav Avira said in the name of Rav Ashi: to take out six hundred thousand dishes of salted tuna for the This applies to one who eats the fruits of Genosar (fruits from men picking the figs from one Friday to the next (for there the Kinneret which were extremely sweet; they were so sweet were so many workers picking the figs, they therefore needed that it was necessary for something salty to be eaten with a tremendous amount of food to feed all of them).
    [Show full text]
  • Chavruta Shabbat – Daf Kuf Mem Zayin
    CChhaavvrruuttaa Shabbat – Daf Kuf Mem Zayin Translated by: Chavruta staff of scholars Edited by: R. Shmuel Globus Said Rav Huna: One who shakes out his garment on Shabbat from the dust that is on it is liable for a sin-offering, for the melachah of “Laundering”, as this is the way that the garment is cleaned. And we only said that he is liable for a new garment. But for shaking out an old garment, we have no objection to it. Since it is not the normal way of people to be particular about shaking out old garments from their dust, it is not considered a significant enough improvement of the garment to be judged as “Laundering”. And we only said that he is liable for a black i.e. a dark-colored garment, because he is particular about it since the dust detracts from its appearance. But for a white or red garment that he is not particular about, we have no objection to it. And even for a black one, he is liable for “Laundering” only when he is particular about it that it not be dusty. But if he is not particular about it, it is not considered “Laundering”. * Ula visited Pumpedita. He saw that the scholars were shaking out the dust from their cloaks. He said: The scholars are desecrating Shabbat. Rav Yehudah said to them: Shake out your cloaks in front of him and do not be concerned about his words, as we are not particular at all about dust on our clothing. Therefore, it is not considered “Laundering”.
    [Show full text]