DOCSLIB.ORG

Daf Yomi Summary Parashat Noach 5781 ?? - ?? ??????? EDITIO N: 38

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Daf Yomi Summary Parashat Noach 5781 ?? - ?? ??????? EDITIO N: 38 ?''? ? daf yomi summary parashat Noach 5781 ?? - ?? ??????? EDITIO N: 38 that Beis Shamai view ???? as a form of two-way transaction THE LO MDUS O F ?BITTUL RESHUS? whereby the non-participants give over their ?authority? over the courtyard to the participants, effectively leaving the courtyard owned THANKS TO RABBI YO NI ISAACSO N in its entirety by the participants and making the eruv effective. YO NIISAACSO N.CO M Seeing as such transactions are forbidden on shabbos, it may not be The main theme of this daf relates to the concept of ??? ? ???? performed on shabbos. and how and when it applies. We have mentioned before that the In contrast, Beis Hillel view this as simply ???? (removing oneself mechanism of choice for multiple inhabitants of one courtyard is to from authority), a one-way mechanism that achieves the goal of make an ????? ?????, whereby food is set aside on behalf of making the courtyard owned solely by the participants due to his everyone in one of the houses, symbolically joining them all into share being irrelevant, rather than owned by them. Such an residents of the same domain. arrangement is permitted on Shabbos and, at first glance, it might This is, of course, a symbolic mechanism which does not in any appear to be a form of ???? - declaring one?s property to be way affect the actual ownership of the houses and shared ownerless: once his share of the courtyard is ownerless, the others courtyards, and serves merely as a reminder not to carry from a remain its sole owners and their eruv is valid. However, there are private domain to a public domain. Chazal were concerned enough limitations that apply to the rules of ???? that do not seem to apply about this issue that they prohibited carrying from one private here. For example: domain to another owned by different people in the absence of such i. Hefker needs to be declared in front of three people (Nedarim an eruv. This eruv can only be made before Shabbos, as doing it on 45a), yet one person can be ??? ? ???? to 2 people, and there is no Shabbos resembles ????? ??? (commercial activity). If one or more indication here that someone else needs to be present (Tosfos deals of the inhabitants did not participate in the eruv before shabbos, the with this issue in Pesachim 4b) eruv is essentially ineffective. ii. According to the view that one needs to be ??? ? ???? to each This is because although all those who participate in the eruv are one of the owners who were included in the eruv, simply making considered as if they share each other?s houses as well as their share one?s share ???? is clearly not enough in the common courtyard, the courtyard is also owned by those who iii. Hefker removes all legal connection between oneself and the did not participate and therefore subject to different ownership than object, to the point that anyone else can perform a ???? the houses of the participants. This means that no one can transfer (transactional act) on it and acquire it. In addition, the person who items between their houses and the common courtyard or vice versa. declared it ???? would need to perform an official ???? in order to One solution available is the mechanism of ??? ? ???? , also referred reaquire it - doing so in one?s mind would not do the trick. In this to in the M ishna as ??? ? ????? . The relationship between these two case, there does not appear to be any ability on the part of those phrases requires analysis in its own right - for one approach, see who benefit from this ???? to take legal ownership of the property, Rambam Pirush haM ishnayos Eruvin 6/1, 6/3 and 6/4 who seems to but the benefit is limited to symbolic permission to carry within the understand that ??? ? ????? sometimes refers to making the eruv, area ?as if? they owned it. Furthermore, it does not seem that a and sometimes refers to ??? ? ????. Whereas the phrase ??? ? ???? legally valid ???? needs to be made by the original owner in order to seems to indicate a one-way mechanism by which the owner cancel this ????. removes himself from ownership, control or some other connection to his share in the courtyard (or possibly also his house), the phrase iv. It is not at all clear that declaring something ???? on Shabbos is ??? ? ????? seems to indicate a two-way mechanism similar to a gift permitted, as the Ramban points out (Pesachim 4a) it could be where the owner ?gives over? one of the above, at least symbolically, included in the general prohibition of commerce. to the other inhabitants. The concept of ???? can be found in various other areas of There is a debate between Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel as to halacha, for example: ? whether this may be done on Shabbos, and the Gemara explains 1. ??? ???? - one is required to declare any chametz left in one?s ? ? S ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 3 A ? ? 1 3 0 1 6 ? 0 3 ? 1 4 6 ? 5 6 7 2 7 ? ? 1 5 ? 1 2 ? 4 5 2 3 6 5 6 ? ? 0 0 4 ? 3 ? ? ? ? 1 5 ? ? ? ? ? ? 7 0 ? ? 2 ? ? ? ? ? 2 2 ? ? 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ? ? ? 1 2 2 2 2 ? 2 2 ? 2 2 H ? ? ? 2 2 ? ? 2 2 ? ? 2 2 2 ? ? ? ? ? 2 2 ? ? ? 2 2 2 ? 2 ? ? ? 2 2 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 2 ? ? 2 ? ? 0 ? ? ? ? 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 ? ? ? 0 0 0 ? 2 2 0 0 0 ? 0 0 S ? 0 0 0 0 8 ? ? ? ? ? 0 0 ? ? ? ? ? ? 0 0 0 ? ? 0 0 ? 0 0 0 ? ? 0 ? ? ? ? 0 0 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 0 ? 0 ? ? 2 ? ? ? 2 2 2 2 2 ? 2 2 2 2 2 ? ? ? ? ? 0 0 2 2 2 ? ? 2 2 2 2 ? ? 2 2 2 ? ? ? A ? ? 2 2 ? 2 2 2 ? ? ? 2 2 ? ? 2 2 2 2 ? ? ? ? ? ? 2 2 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 2 2 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 2 2 ? ? ? ? ? ) ? 8 ? ) r ? 3 1 ? 3 4 9 ? ? ? 1 4 5 9 6 ) ? H 6 0 1 4 0 3 0 1 7 ? ) ? ? ? ? ) ) ) 7 0 ) 4 5 3 ? 3 2 ? ) ) 8 9 1 ) ? 4 ) ) ) ) ) ? 2 3 ? ? ) ) 7 ) 5 ) ) 1 a 1 6 ) 2 3 ) ) 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 ) 5 ? 9 8 1 2 1 ? 2 2 1 1 ) ) 1 2 ) 7 ) 1 9 2 2 2 9 1 2 ? 1 ) ) 9 9 3 5 8 3 4 0 ? ) r r r y y 1 6 v 0 ? 0 1 4 5 3 3 6 l l ) 3 6 ) M p p r r 2 1 1 8 y 7 t t 2 8 7 ) v v v 1 n r r c c c 1 n 8 0 g g 3 M 2 5 4 3 ) 0 2 ( a a a p p n 8 b b a a 1 ( 2 ( ) ( n n 9 o 3 n n n 3 1 1 6 ( 1 3 ( 8 ( 3 u u ( ( c c 5 a a e e 1 6 a 2 2 ( 1 8 1 e e e o o o a ( 8 ( 4 U u ( ( p p ( 1 ( ( ( u u J J 5 ( 1 1 a e e 1 e e ( ( 1 ( ( 4 J a a a ( ( J u u ( ( 2 S S J 7 ( ( N 1 M M M ( M M 1 J J J J J Y O O A A ( F F S S 7 D D D A A 1 N N N M M ( M 3 I ( 1 ( 1 ( ( ( S ?''? ? ??????? ???? ?????? ???? ? ???? ??? ?????? ? ???? ?"? ???? ???? ?? ????? ????? ??? ? ?????? ? ???? 2 | DAF YOMI SUMMARY possession before midday on erev Pesach is ?nullified like the dust of entire body would shake from Rav Hisda?s sharp analyses." Rav the earth.? According to Rashi (Pesachim 4b) this seems to be a way Sheshet had a prodigious memory, perhaps due to his blindness. He of fulfilling the mitzva of ????? ? (removing chametz from one?s could answer any question by referring to a M ishna or a baraita. Rav possession), and Tosfos seem to understand that it is a form of ???? Hisda was known for his logical reasoning. Some read this passage as that creates a situation where that mitzva is simply not relevant saying the two scholars ?feared? each other?s Talmudic talents(see anymore ? Rashi on this passage). I prefer a different reading; they were in awe of each other. 2. ?"? ???? - an item of idolatry may become permitted if it is nullified by the idol-worshipper - this can done by breaking part of it, That the two scholars held each other in high regard is highlighted possibly a sign of its lack of importance to the owner (see A.Z. 52b.) in M egilla 28b. With reference to a public eulogy the text reads, ?Rav ? isda depicted a case: For example, a eulogy for a Torah scholar at Though all 3 usages of this phrase seem to share the idea that one which Rav Sheshet is present. Owing to his presence, many people is declaring or showing that the item is no longer of importance to will come. Rav Sheshet himself depicted another case: For example, a him, there is no need to assume that the ?lomdus? (logical eulogy at which Rav ? isda is present.? This relationship brings the mechanism) in all three is similar. It is very possible that ??? ???? is a opening of Psalm 133 to mind: ?How good it is when brothers sit in real form of ???? which ??? ????? ???? is certainly not, and that togetherness.? ??? ? ???? is something completely different. After all, the phrase ???? is also used regarding ???? ???? (wasting time when Torah Would that all of us - in our study and in our daily encounters - have could have been studied) and ?? ? ???? (avoiding performing a such awe and respect for each other.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Generic Transformation of the Masoretic Text of Qohelet 9. 7-10 in the Targum Qohelet and Qohelet Midrash Rabbah
    Durham E-Theses Wine, women and work: the generic transformation of the Masoretic text of Qohelet 9. 7-10 in the Targum Qohelet and Qohelet Midrash Rabbah Hardy, John Christopher How to cite: Hardy, John Christopher (1995) Wine, women and work: the generic transformation of the Masoretic text of Qohelet 9. 7-10 in the Targum Qohelet and Qohelet Midrash Rabbah, Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/5403/ Use policy The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that: • a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders. Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details. Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107 http://etheses.dur.ac.uk 2 WINE, WOMEN AND WORK: THE GENERIC TRANSFORMATION OF THE MA50RETIC TEXT OF QOHELET 9. 7-10 IN THE TARGUM QOHELET AND QOHELET MIDRASH RABBAH John Christopher Hardy This tnesis seeks to understand the generic changes wrought oy targum Qonelet and Qoheiet raidrash rabbah upon our home-text, the masoretes' reading ot" woh.
    [Show full text]
  • A Whiteheadian Interpretation of the Zoharic Creation Story
    A WHITEHEADIAN INTERPRETATION OF THE ZOHARIC CREATION STORY by Michael Gold A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of The Dorothy F. Schmidt College of Arts and Letters in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Florida Atlantic University Boca Raton, Florida May 2016 Copyright 2016 by Michael Gold ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to express sincere gratitude to his committee members, Professors Marina Banchetti, Frederick E. Greenspahn, Kristen Lindbeck, and Eitan Fishbane for their encouragement and support throughout this project. iv ABSTRACT Author: Michael Gold Title: A Whiteheadian Interpretation of the Zoharic Creation Story Institution: Florida Atlantic University Dissertation Advisor: Dr. Marina P. Banchetti Degree: Doctor of Philosophy Year: 2016 This dissertation presents a Whiteheadian interpretation of the notions of mind, immanence and process as they are addressed in the Zohar. According to many scholars, this kabbalistic creation story as portrayed in the Zohar is a reaction to the earlier rabbinic concept of God qua creator, which emphasized divine transcendence over divine immanence. The medieval Jewish philosophers, particularly Maimonides influenced by Aristotle, placed particular emphasis on divine transcendence, seeing a radical separation between Creator and creation. With this in mind, these scholars claim that one of the goals of the Zohar’s creation story was to emphasize God’s immanence within creation. Similar to the Zohar, the process metaphysics of Alfred North Whitehead and his followers was reacting to the substance metaphysics that had dominated Western philosophy as far back as ancient Greek thought. Whitehead adopts a very similar narrative to that of the Zohar.
    [Show full text]
  • OF 17Th 2004 Gender Relationships in Marriage and Out.Pdf (1.542Mb)
    Gender Relationships In Marriage and Out Edited by Rivkah Blau Robert S. Hirt, Series Editor THE MICHAEL SCHARF PUBLICATION TRUST of the YESHIVA UNIVERSITY PRESs New York OF 17 r18 CS2ME draft 8 balancediii iii 9/2/2007 11:28:13 AM THE ORTHODOX FORUM The Orthodox Forum, initially convened by Dr. Norman Lamm, Chancellor of Yeshiva University, meets each year to consider major issues of concern to the Jewish community. Forum participants from throughout the world, including academicians in both Jewish and secular fields, rabbis,rashei yeshivah, Jewish educators, and Jewish communal professionals, gather in conference as a think tank to discuss and critique each other’s original papers, examining different aspects of a central theme. The purpose of the Forum is to create and disseminate a new and vibrant Torah literature addressing the critical issues facing Jewry today. The Orthodox Forum gratefully acknowledges the support of the Joseph J. and Bertha K. Green Memorial Fund at the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary established by Morris L. Green, of blessed memory. The Orthodox Forum Series is a project of the Rabbi Isaac Elchanan Theological Seminary, an affiliate of Yeshiva University OF 17 r18 CS2ME draft 8 balancedii ii 9/2/2007 11:28:13 AM Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Orthodox Forum (17th : 2004 : New York, NY) Gender relationships in marriage and out / edited by Rivkah Blau. p. cm. – (Orthodox Forum series) ISBN 978-0-88125-971-1 1. Marriage. 2. Marriage – Religious aspects – Judaism. 3. Marriage (Jewish law) 4. Man-woman relationships – Religious aspects – Judaism. I.
    [Show full text]
  • Daf Ditty Eruvin 46: the Leniency of Grief (And Eruvin)
    Daf Ditty Eruvin 46: The leniency of Grief (and Eruvin) Under the wide and starry sky, Dig the grave and let me lie. Glad did I live and gladly die, And I laid me down with a will. This be the verse you grave for me: Here he lies where he longed to be; Home is the sailor, home from sea, And the hunter home from the hill. Robert Louis Stevenson 1 Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri, that one who was asleep at the beginning of Shabbat may travel two thousand cubits in every direction. Rabbi Zeira said to Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi: Did you hear this halakha explicitly from Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, or did you understand it by inference from some other ruling that he issued? Rabbi Ya’akov bar Idi said to him: I heard it explicitly from him. 2 The Gemara asks: From what other teaching could this ruling be inferred? The Gemara explains: From that which Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: The halakha is in accordance with the lenient opinion with regard to an eiruv. The Gemara asks: Why do I need both? Why was it necessary for Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi to state both the general ruling that the halakha is in accordance with the lenient opinion with regard to an eiruv, and also the specific ruling that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri on this issue? Rabbi Zeira said: Both rulings were necessary, as had he informed us only that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri, I would have said that the 3 halakha is in accordance with him whether this is a leniency, i.e., that a sleeping person acquires residence and may walk two thousand cubits in every direction, or whether it is a stringency, i.e., that ownerless utensils acquire residence and can be carried only two thousand cubits from that place.
    [Show full text]
  • Humor in Talmud and Midrash
    Tue 14, 21, 28 Apr 2015 B”H Dr Maurice M. Mizrahi Jewish Community Center of Northern Virginia Adult Learning Institute Jewish Humor Through the Sages Contents Introduction Warning Humor in Tanach Humor in Talmud and Midrash Desire for accuracy Humor in the phrasing The A-Fortiori argument Stories of the rabbis Not for ladies The Jewish Sherlock Holmes Checks and balances Trying to fault the Torah Fervor Dreams Lying How many infractions? Conclusion Introduction -Not general presentation on Jewish humor: Just humor in Tanach, Talmud, Midrash, and other ancient Jewish sources. -Far from exhaustive. -Tanach mentions “laughter” 50 times (root: tz-cho-q) [excluding Yitzhaq] -Talmud: Records teachings of more than 1,000 rabbis spanning 7 centuries (2nd BCE to 5th CE). Basis of all Jewish law. -Savoraim improved style in 6th-7th centuries CE. -Rabbis dream up hypothetical situations that are strange, farfetched, improbable, or even impossible. -To illustrate legal issues, entertain to make study less boring, and sharpen the mind with brainteasers. 1 -Going to extremes helps to understand difficult concepts. (E.g., Einstein's “thought experiments”.) -Some commentators say humor is not intentional: -Maybe sometimes, but one cannot avoid the feeling it is. -Reason for humor not always clear. -Rabbah (4th century CE) always began his lectures with a joke: Before he began his lecture to the scholars, [Rabbah] used to say something funny, and the scholars were cheered. After that, he sat in awe and began the lecture. [Shabbat 30b] -Laughing and entertaining are important. Talmud: -Rabbi Beroka Hoza'ah often went to the marketplace at Be Lapat, where [the prophet] Elijah often appeared to him.
    [Show full text]
  • Download File
    Halevy, Halivni and The Oral Formation of the Babylonian Talmud Ari Bergmann Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2014 © 2014 Ari Bergmann All rights reserved ABSTRACT Halevy, Halivni and The Oral Formation of the Babylonian Talmud Ari Bergmann This dissertation is dedicated to a detailed analysis and comparison of the theories on the process of the formation of the Babylonian Talmud by Yitzhak Isaac Halevy and David Weiss Halivni. These two scholars exhibited a similar mastery of the talmudic corpus and were able to combine the roles of historian and literary critic to provide a full construct of the formation of the Bavli with supporting internal evidence to support their claims. However, their historical construct and findings are diametrically opposed. Yitzhak Isaac Halevy presented a comprehensive theory of the process of the formation of the Talmud in his magnum opus Dorot Harishonim. The scope of his work was unprecedented and his construct on the formation of the Talmud encompassed the entire process of the formation of the Bavli, from the Amoraim in the 4th century to the end of the saboraic era (which he argued closed in the end of the 6th century). Halevy was the ultimate guardian of tradition and argued that the process of the formation of the Bavli took place entirely within the amoraic academy by a highly structured and coordinated process and was sealed by an international rabbinical assembly. While Halevy was primarily a historian, David Weiss Halivni is primarily a talmudist and commentator on the Talmud itself.
    [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]
  • Yaacov Shavit an Imaginary Trio
    Yaacov Shavit An Imaginary Trio Yaacov Shavit An Imaginary Trio King Solomon, Jesus, and Aristotle Die freie Verfügbarkeit der E-Book-Ausgabe dieser Publikation wurde ermöglicht durch den Fachinformationsdienst Jüdische Studien an der Universitätsbibliothek J. C. Senckenberg Frankfurt am Main und 18 wissenschaftliche Bibliotheken, die die Open-Access-Transformation in den Jüdischen Studien unterstützen. ISBN 978-3-11-067718-8 e-ISBN (PDF) 978-3-11-067726-3 e-ISBN (EPUB) 978-3-11-067730-0 This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International Licence. For details go to http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. Das E-Book ist als Open-Access-Publikation verfügbar über www.degruyter.com, https://www.doabooks.org und https://www.oapen.org Library of Congress Control Number: 2020909307 Bibliographic information published by the Deutsche Nationalbibliothek The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliografie; detailed bibliographic data are available on the Internet at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2020 Yaacov Shavit, published by Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston Cover image: Statue of King Solomon and Christ in the center of the southern portal of the cathedral Notre-Dame of Strasbourg (Bas-Rhin, France), Wikimedia Commons, Public Domain. Printing and binding: CPI books GmbH, Leck www.degruyter.com Open-Access-Transformation in den Jüdischen Studien Open Access für exzellente Publikationen aus den Jüdischen Studien: Dies ist das Ziel der gemeinsamen Initiative des Fachinformationsdiensts Jüdische Studien an der Universitäts- bibliothek J. C. Senckenberg Frankfurt am Main und des Verlags Walter De Gruyter. Unterstützt von 18 Konsortialpartnern können 2020 insgesamt acht Neuerscheinungen im Open Access Goldstandard veröffentlicht werden, darunter auch diese Publikation.
    [Show full text]
  • Daf Ditty Eruvin 54- Healing the Broken Soul
    Daf Ditty Eruvin 54: Healing the Broken Soul Make Yourself a Desert Wilderness Being like a Midbar can also mean developing a sense of openness. Especially in today’s crowded, overstimulating world, how do you clear your mind, open your heart, and find your sense of awe? For me, it can be standing to pray, sitting to breath and meditate, or going outside for a run in nature. It can be taking a few minutes of transition to set my intention or review the last thing I did. Julie Hilton Danan 1 2 The Gemara relates more of Berurya’s wisdom: Berurya came across a certain student who was whispering his studies rather than raising his voice. 3 She kicked him and said to him: Isn’t it written as follows: “Ordered in all things and secure” (ii Samuel 23:5), which indicates that if the Torah is ordered in your 248 limbs, i.e., if you exert your entire body in studying it, it will be secure, and if not, it will not be secure. The Gemara relates that it was similarly taught in a baraita: Rabbi Eliezer had a student who would study quietly, and after three years he forgot his studies. The Gemara cites instructions issued by Shmuel that are similar to those of Berurya. Shmuel said to Rav Yehuda: Keen scholar [shinnana], open your mouth and read from the Torah, open your mouth and study the Talmud, in order that your studies should endure in you and that you should live a long life, as it is stated: “For they are life to those who find them, and health to all their flesh” (Proverbs 4:22).
    [Show full text]
  • Jews and Judaism in the Rabbinic Era
    Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism Edited by Maren Niehoff (Jerusalem) Annette Y. Reed (Philadelphia, PA) Seth Schwartz (New York, NY) Moulie Vidas (Princeton, NJ) 173 Isaiah M. Gafni Jews and Judaism in the Rabbinic Era Image and Reality – History and Historiography Mohr Siebeck Isaiah M. Gafni, born 1944; BA, MA, and PhD from the Hebrew University; 1967–2012 taught Jewish History of the Second Temple and Talmudic Periods (500 BCE – 500 CE) at the Hebrew University; currently Professor Emeritus in Jewish History at the Hebrew University, and President of Shalem College, Jerusalem. ISBN 978-3-16-152731-9 / eISBN 978-3-16-156701-8 DOI 10.1628/978-3-16-156701-8 ISSN 0721-8753 / eISSN 2568-9525 (Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism) The Deutsche Nationalbibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographic data are available at http://dnb.dnb.de. © 2019 Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, Germany. www.mohrsiebeck.com This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher’s written permission. This applies particularly to reproduc- tions, translations and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was printed on non-aging paper by Gulde Druck in Tübingen, and bound by Groß- buchbinderei Spinner in Ottersweier. Printed in Germany. For Naomi Table of Contents Abbreviations.............................................................................................. IX I Introduction .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Abw31 779 Aa by 17717 NOW If One Forgot a Pot" on Shabbat Eve Atop A
    Perek III Daf 38 Amud a NOTES ,If one forgot a potN on Shabbat eve atop a stove and it cooked on Shabbat שָׁכַח ְדֵ יָ אה עַל גַּבֵּ י ִ ּכיָ אה וּבִ ּשְׁלָה This is a case : שׁ ָ ַ כ ח ְ דֵ י ָ אה – what is the ruling in that case? Is one permitted to eat that food, or not?He One forgot a pot where a person placed a pot on top of a stove ּבַּשַׁבָּת, מַהוּ? ֵּ אִישְׁתי וְלָא אָמַא was silent and did not say a thing to him. The next day, he emerged and -with the intention of removing it before night לֵ ּיה וְלָ א מִ ידֵ יד לְמָחָ א נְ ַ׳ דְּ אַשׁ לְ הוּ: publicly taught them the following halakha: With regard to one who cooks fall but forgot to do so. When the Gemara speaks H ּהַמְבַשֵׁל ּבַּשַׁבָּת, בְּשׁ ֹוגֵג – יֹאכַל, on Shabbat, if he did so unwittingly, he may eat it, and if he cooked in- of doing so intentionally, it is a case where one . לח tentionally, he may not eat it; and the halakha is no different. remembered before nightfall and nevertheless בְּמֵ זִיד – לֹא יֹאכַ ל, וְלָ א שׁ ְ נָאד failed to remove the pot from the stove. In either The last part of Rabbi Ĥiyya bar Abba’s statement is unclear. The Gemara case, one did not even perform an act prohibited מַ אי ‘וְלָ א שׁ ְ נָא? ַ אבָּ ה וְ בַ א יֹוסֵ ב דְּ אָ מְ ִ אי .(asks: What is the practical halakhic meaning of the phrase: And it is no by rabbinic law (Rashi ַּתְ אוַויְיהוּ לְהֶ ֵּ יתיָ אא: מְבַ ׁ ֵּ של הוּא דְּ ָ א different? Rabba and Rav Yosef both said to interpret the phrase permis- Permissively – : Permissively means: Had לְ הֶ י ּ ֵ תי ָ אא N עָבֵיד מַעֲשֶׂה, בְּמֵזִיד – לֹא יֹאכַל, sively in the following manner: One who cooks is one who performs an Rabbi Ĥiyya bar Abba sought to prohibit eating ,action.
    [Show full text]
  • The History of Communal Prayer
    The History of our Prayers - OBM June/July 2020 - Sources English The History of Communal Prayer Berakhot 8a:1 What is the meaning of that which is written: “But as for me, let my prayer be unto You, ​ ​ Lord, in a time of favor; O God, in the abundance of Your mercy, answer me with the truth of ​ Your salvation” (Psalms 69:14)? It appears that the individual is praying that his prayers will coincide with a special time of Divine favor. When is a time of favor? It is at the time when ​ ​ ​ the congregation is praying. It is beneficial to pray together with the congregation, for God ​ does not fail to respond to the entreaties of the congregation. Berakhot 2a:1-4 The beginning of tractate Berakhot, the first tractate in the first of the six orders of Mishna, ​ ​ opens with a discussion of the recitation of Shema, as the recitation of Shema encompasses an ​ ​ ​ ​ acceptance of the yoke of Heaven and of the mitzvot, and as such, forms the basis for all subsequent teachings. The Mishna opens with the laws regarding the appropriate time to recite Shema: ​ MISHNA: From when, that is, from what time, does one recite Shema in the evening? From ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ the time when the priests enter to partake of their teruma. Until when does the time for the ​ ​ recitation of the evening Shema extend? Until the end of the first watch. The term used in the ​ ​ ​ ​ Torah (Deuteronomy 6:7) to indicate the time for the recitation of the evening Shema is ​ ​ beshokhbekha, when you lie down, which refers to the time in which individuals go to sleep.
    [Show full text]