תלמוד על הוריות 3:10

¹⁴There exists a copy of this paragraph in Horaiot 3:2 (ה). It is missing in the Yerushalmi reproduced in the editio princeps of the Babli. A different version is in Midrash Samuel 7(5). Rebbi Eleazar said, if a High Priest sinned, one whips him but does not remove him from his elevated status¹³This is unknown to the Babli.. Rebbi Mana said, it is written⁵Lev. 21:12.: For the crown of his God’s ointment is on him, I am the Eternal; if one could compare it, just as I am in My Sanctity, so Aaron is in his sanctity¹⁵The two other sources read: I in My Greatness, also Aaron in his greatness. R. Abun said (Lev. 21:8), holy he shall be to you, if one could compare it, as I Am in My Holiness, so Aaron is in his holiness.. Rebbi Ḥanina the scribe, Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: if a High Priest sinned, one whips him¹⁶In the two other sources: by a court of three judges. The sequel requires this text.. If you would say by 23, his elevation would be his degradation¹⁷Since so many people would sit in judgment over him.. And Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, if a patriarch sinned, one whips him by a court of three [judges]. Does one return him? Rebbi Haggai said, by Moses, if one would return him, he would kill them. Rebbi Jehudah the Prince¹⁸R. Jehudah II. heard this and became angry. He sent Goths¹⁹Following the reading of the other two sources. Krauss conjectures that the inserted נ indicates nasal pronunciation, but by the evidence of the other two sources גנתון instead of גותיין seems to be a scribal error. [Instead of Goths they might have been Gaetuli, a people from Northwestern Africa (E. G.).] to catch Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. They beat him. He fled to Magdala, some say to Kefar Ḥiṭṭim²⁰Magdala is on Lake Genezareth, Kefar Hittim in the hills overlooking Tiberias.. The next day, Rebbi Joḥanan went to the assembly hall, when Rebbi Jehudah the Prince also went to the assembly hall. He²¹R. Jehudah the Prince. said to him, why is the master not²²Translated following G. telling us words of instruction? He²³R. Johanan. started clapping with one hand. He²¹R. Jehudah the Prince. asked, does one clap with one? He²³R. Johanan. answered him, no, but without ben Laqish there is nothing²⁴Following the text of the other two sources. The text of the Leiden ms. is unintelligible.. He²¹R. Jehudah the Prince. told him, I shall free him. He²³R. Johanan. said to him, in Magdala. He²¹R. Jehudah the Prince. told him, tomorrow I and you will go out to meet him. Rebbi Joḥanan sent to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, prepare²⁵Translated following G. The text of the other two sources, “get rich”, does not make much sense. for yourself some words of instruction since the Patriarch will go out to meet you. He went out to meet them and said, your example is similar to that of your Creator. For when the Merciful went to liberate Israel [from Egypt]²⁶Added from the other two sources., He sent neither messenger nor angel but He went Himself, as is written: I shall pass through the Land of Egypt²⁷Ex. 12:12., He and all His Court²⁸Translated following Eliahu Fulda and H. L. Fleischer in Levy’s Dictionary. A similar explanation of the verse is found in the Passover Haggadah (Mekhilta dR.Ismael, ed. Horovitz-Rabin, p. 23; cf. H. Guggenheimer, The Scholar’s Haggadah pp. 298–299.)
Here ends the Geniza fragment. The text in Horaiot has additions both at this point and at the end of the paragraph which, while relevant, in the absence of a confirming Genizah text cannot be added here.. He asked him, why did you say these things²⁹About whipping the Patriarch.? He told him, what are you thinking? That for fear of you I would refrain from the teachings of the Merciful? As Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac said, No my sons, because the reputation is not good³⁰1S. 2:24. The explanation of the verse is missing; it is given in Horaiot. The verse about the misdeeds of Eli’s sons ends, מַעֲבִיריִם עַם יי [the information]spread about by the Eternal’s people, which he interprets as being removed by the Eternal’s people, implying that the High Priest has to be removed if he sins..

¹⁴There exists a copy of this paragraph in Horaiot 3:2 (ה). It is missing in the Yerushalmi reproduced in the editio princeps of the Babli. A different version is in Midrash Samuel 7(5). Rebbi Eleazar said, if a High Priest sinned, one whips him but does not remove him from his elevated status¹³This is unknown to the Babli.. Rebbi Mana said, it is written⁵Lev. 21:12.: For the crown of his God’s ointment is on him, I am the Eternal; if one could compare it, just as I am in My Sanctity, so Aaron is in his sanctity¹⁵The two other sources read: I in My Greatness, also Aaron in his greatness. R. Abun said (Lev. 21:8), holy he shall be to you, if one could compare it, as I Am in My Holiness, so Aaron is in his holiness.. Rebbi Ḥanina the scribe, Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: if a High Priest sinned, one whips him¹⁶In the two other sources: by a court of three judges. The sequel requires this text.. If you would say by 23, his elevation would be his degradation¹⁷Since so many people would sit in judgment over him.. And Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, if a patriarch sinned, one whips him by a court of three [judges]. Does one return him? Rebbi Haggai said, by Moses, if one would return him, he would kill them. Rebbi Jehudah the Prince¹⁸R. Jehudah II. heard this and became angry. He sent Goths¹⁹Following the reading of the other two sources. Krauss conjectures that the inserted נ indicates nasal pronunciation, but by the evidence of the other two sources גנתון instead of גותיין seems to be a scribal error. [Instead of Goths they might have been Gaetuli, a people from Northwestern Africa (E. G.).] to catch Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish. They beat him. He fled to Magdala, some say to Kefar Ḥiṭṭim²⁰Magdala is on Lake Genezareth, Kefar Hittim in the hills overlooking Tiberias.. The next day, Rebbi Joḥanan went to the assembly hall, when Rebbi Jehudah the Prince also went to the assembly hall. He²¹R. Jehudah the Prince. said to him, why is the master not²²Translated following G. telling us words of instruction? He²³R. Johanan. started clapping with one hand. He²¹R. Jehudah the Prince. asked, does one clap with one? He²³R. Johanan. answered him, no, but without ben Laqish there is nothing²⁴Following the text of the other two sources. The text of the Leiden ms. is unintelligible.. He²¹R. Jehudah the Prince. told him, I shall free him. He²³R. Johanan. said to him, in Magdala. He²¹R. Jehudah the Prince. told him, tomorrow I and you will go out to meet him. Rebbi Joḥanan sent to Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, prepare²⁵Translated following G. The text of the other two sources, “get rich”, does not make much sense. for yourself some words of instruction since the Patriarch will go out to meet you. He went out to meet them and said, your example is similar to that of your Creator. For when the Merciful went to liberate Israel [from Egypt]²⁶Added from the other two sources., He sent neither messenger nor angel but He went Himself, as is written: I shall pass through the Land of Egypt²⁷Ex. 12:12., He and all His Court²⁸Translated following Eliahu Fulda and H. L. Fleischer in Levy’s Dictionary. A similar explanation of the verse is found in the Passover Haggadah (Mekhilta dR.Ismael, ed. Horovitz-Rabin, p. 23; cf. H. Guggenheimer, The Scholar’s Haggadah pp. 298–299.)
Here ends the Geniza fragment. The text in Horaiot has additions both at this point and at the end of the paragraph which, while relevant, in the absence of a confirming Genizah text cannot be added here.. He asked him, why did you say these things²⁹About whipping the Patriarch.? He told him, what are you thinking? That for fear of you I would refrain from the teachings of the Merciful? As Rebbi Samuel ben Rav Isaac said, No my sons, because the reputation is not good³⁰1S. 2:24. The explanation of the verse is missing; it is given in Horaiot. The verse about the misdeeds of Eli’s sons ends, מַעֲבִיריִם עַם יי [the information]spread about by the Eternal’s people, which he interprets as being removed by the Eternal’s people, implying that the High Priest has to be removed if he sins..

Rebbi Jonah in the name of Bar Qappara understood it from the following. As he did on that day, these are the seven days of initiation. Did the Eternal command, this is burning of the Cow¹¹The priest in charge of burning the Red Cow to produce the ashes which cleanse from the impurity of the dead also had to be separated for seven days (Mishnah Parah 3:1).. It is said here, did the Eternal command, and it is said there¹²Num. 19:2., this is the low of the Torah which the Eternal commanded, saying.” To make, this is the goat of the Day of Atonement¹⁰The dedication ceremony, where Aaron had to bring an atoning sacrifice separate from that for his sons and the people, the other is the Day of Atonement where the same is true.. Or maybe it is the goat of a New Moon? As Rebbi Abba said, to atone for you, an atonement which is like the other. Since the one is atonement valid only through the High Priest, the other also¹³The ceremonies of the Day of Atonement detailed in Lev. 16 refer exclusively to actions by the High Priest. Babli 3b. is atonement through the High Priest.

Rebbi Jeremiah asked: Does this apply even to the remaining actions²⁹If he performed an action which has to be followed by another one and he is notified of his desecrated status in the middle of the first action, can he finish the entire procedure?? If he received [the blood], does he sprinkle [the blood on the walls of the altar]; if he takes a fist full [of the flour offering], can he burn it [on the altar]; if he burned [the red cow], can he sprinkle [water mixed with its ashes, to purify]? Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi in the name of Rebbi Isaac: Since we have stated³⁰This refers to Mishnah Giṭṭin 5:5, in which it is stated, as testimony from Temple times, that the priests have to accept every animal offered as a sacrifice of expiation (which has to be eaten by the priests) and are not permitted to investigate whether it was stolen or robbed, unless such defect was public knowledge. Both Talmudim agree that this arrangement can be justified by biblical verses and that it was strictly enforced since nobody would be able to bring such a sacrifice if the priests were allowed to set their own standards of what is kosher.: “they made it like a purification sacrifice which atones even if obtained by robbery, as long as this fact is unknown to the public;” this means³¹If a questionable sacrifice is valid as a sacrifice, then a questionable Cohen’s actions are counted as valid actions. that if he received, he sprinkles; if he takes a fist full, he burns; if he burned, he sprinkles.

¹⁸This and the following paragraph also are in Horaiot3:3 (ה). Rebbi Jehudah bar Ilay stated: The anointing oil made by Moses in the desert was from the start to the end a work of wonders, since there were only twelve log to start with, as it was said, and olive oil one hin. It would not have been enough to rub the wooden planks with it; so much more since the fire swallows, wood absorbs, and the kettle absorbs! From it the Tabernacles and all its vessels were anointed, the table and its vessels, the candelabrum and all its vessels. From it Aaron and his sons were anointed all of the seven days of induction, from it all high priests and kings were anointed. A king who is first needs anointing, a king who is a king’s son does not need anointing. [What is the reason? Do anoint him, for this one is it¹⁹1S. 17:20., this one needs anointing but his son does not need anointing.]²⁰Corrector’s addition from B. But a High Priest who is the son of a High Priest needs anointing, even for ten generations. Nevertheless, it is all there for the future; that is what is written²¹Ex. 30:31., a holy anointing oil will this be for Me, for all your generations.

It was stated: “Heave of the tithe from demay that returned to its origin makes dema‘²⁷Dema‘ (a word of unclear etymology, Ex.22:28) describes profane produce mixed with heave, which is unfit for human consumption if heave and food are impure, and is food only for Cohanim and their families if both the heave and the food are pure. It can be put in order only if the amount of heave in the total is less than 1 in 101. Since heave from demay is genuinely holy only in a minority of cases, that heave does not necessarily create dema‘. (Maimonides Maäser 12:4 and R. Abraham ben David ad loc.), not to its origin does not make dema‘. Rebbi Simeon from Shezur said, both at its origin and not at its origin it does not make dema‘.” Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya asked before Rebbi Zeïra: For one who says, it makes dema‘, it makes dema‘; for one who says, it does not make dema‘, it does not make dema‘; this is reasonable²⁸That means, I can understand R. Simeon from Shezur, that we always follow the majority of cases and, therefore, heave from demay cannot create dema‘. I also could understand the position that, once the name of heave was attached to any produce, it must be treated like heave in all respects.. But if one says, in its origin it makes dema‘, not in its origin it does not make dema‘; what is the difference between in its origin and not in its origin? Rebbi Ḥaggai came up. They said, this one will say, “by Moses, I shall explain the reason²⁹R. Ḥaggai’s standard answer to questions of this type..” He said, by Moses, I shall explain the reason: He who says, it makes dema‘, because it permits the rest to be eaten³⁰Since without tithing, demay may not be eaten by rabbinic ordinance, it should in this respect be treated like heave taken according to Biblical precept.. He who says, it does not make dema‘, because it does not permit the rest to be eaten³¹For other produce, it simply is food of questionable status.. Rebbi La taught according to that of Rebbi Ḥaggai³²He declares practice to follow the anonymous Tanna in the baraita.. Rebbi Zeïra said: A case came before Rebbi Ḥanina and he taught according to Rebbi Simeon from Shezur. Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Jonathan: Practice does not follow Rebbi Simeon from Shezur³³In Babli Ḥulin 75b, both R. Ḥanina and R. Jonathan endorse the ruling of R. Simeon from Shezur as valid practice..

¹²³From here on there is a parallel in Horaiot 3:3, Notes 146–188 and Megillah1:12.“One arranges for another Cohen as his replacement, maybe a disqualification of his will happen.” How? Does one leave them alone together? Rebbi Haggai said, by Moses⁸Since the Chapter starts with God’s commandment to inaugurate the Tabernacle, the mention here of God’s commandment is redundant and may be interpreted as a new commandment for future generations.! If one would leave them alone together, he would kill him! Him¹²⁴Lev. 6:12; the offering of the High Priest starting with the day he is anointed for his office. Sifra Ṣaw Parašah 3(3). The singular indicates that only one High Priest can be appointed at one time. This implies that the reserve appointee for the day of Atonement cannot have the status of High Priest unless he actually is needed.. One anoints one, one does not anoint two. Rebbi Joḥanan said, because of rivalry¹²⁵He disagrees and holds that while the two could not have been anointed on the same day, they could have been anointed on different days. The rule that the back-up Cohen has lower status is practical, not biblical, as is the entire institution of the back-up..

A Cohen and a Levite, the Levite shall defile himself⁴⁶Since a Levite is not forbidden to defile himself.. A Levite and an Israel, the Israel shall defile himself. No, is not the Levite like the Israel⁴⁷In matters of impurity, the Levite has no more obligations than the Israel.? Rebbi Abin said, it was taught in the time of the platform⁴⁸The platform in the Temple for the levitic singers. If the Levite was engaged in the Temple service, he must be careful not to become disabled by impurity.. The Sages agree with Rebbi Eliezer that between a High Priest and a nazir, the nazir shall defile himself but not the High Priest⁴⁹This is the position of the Sages in the Mishnah.. Rebbi Eliezer agrees with the Sages that between a High Priest and a nazir, the nazir shall defile himself but not the High Priest⁵⁰R. Eliezer holds to his position in the Mishnah only for a common priest, not the High Priest.. Think of it, if his father sanctified him from birth⁵¹Like Samson or Samuel. The reference is to the argument of the Sages that the nazir has to defile himself because his holiness is temporary. If the nazir is nazir from birth, that argument does not hold but the formulation of the Sages in the first sentence of the Mishnah does not admit of any exception.. The one⁵²The holiness of the Cohen. is from the Torah, the other is not from the Torah⁵³The possibility of a nazir from birth is only given in the Prophets.. Rebbi Huna in the name of Rav Joseph: Rebbi Eliezer parallels the House of Shammai. As the House of Shammai say, between holy and frequent the holy has precedence⁵⁴In Mishnah Berakhot 8:1, the House of Shammai require that on Friday nights, the benediction for the Sanctification of the Sabbath (the holy) precede the benediction for the wine (the frequent)., so Rebbi Eliezer says, between holy and frequent the holy has precedence⁵⁵For him, the nazir who must bring a sacrifice for his defilement is holier than the Cohen who brings no sacrifice.. A nazir for 30 days and a nazir for 100, the nazir for 30 days shall defile himself. A nazir for 100 days and a nazir forever, the nazir for 100 days shall defile himself. A nazir forever⁵⁶He cuts his hair (but does not shave it off) once a year and brings three sacrifices; Halakhah 1:2., and a nazir of neziriot⁵⁷Similar to one described in Mishnah 1:4; from the argument it seems that the nazir referred to here has vowed many periods of more than one year., some Tannaïm state, the nazir forever shall defile himself; but some Tannaïm state, the nazir of neziriot shall defile himself. He who says, the nazir forever shall defile himself but not the nazir of neziriot, since he⁵⁸The nazir forever shall defile himself since he never shaves. shaves more frequently. He who says, the nazir of neziriot shall defile himself but not the nazir forever, since he brings more sacrifices⁵⁹If the basic period of the nazir of neziriot is more than one year, the nazir forever brings more sacrifices.. If he switched, it should be as Rebbi Immi said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: He transgressed “do not defile your land⁴⁵Deut. 21:23..” Here it is the same.

They wanted to ordain Rebbi Zeïra but he did not want to take it upon himself. When he heard a Tanna stating: “For an ordained person, a bridegroom, a patriarch, the dignity deletes [his sins],” he accepted being ordained. An ordained person: (Lev. 19:32): “Before a white head you shall rise, give respect to an Elder, and fear your God, I am the Eternal.” What is written after that (v. 33): “If a proselyte lives in your land, you shall not trick him.” Just as all his sins are forgiven to the proselyte, so all sins are forgiven to one being ordained. The bridegroom: (Gen. 28:9) “Esaw went to Ismael and married Maḥalat⁵⁸“The one being forgiven.” bat Ismael.” But was her name Maḥalat, was it not Basemat⁵⁹“The perfumed.” The verse would prove only that prior sins of the bride are forgiven.? But all his sins were forgiven him. The president: (1S. 13:1) “Saul was one year old when he became king.” Was he one year old when he became king? But all his sins were forgiven him as to a baby of one year.

“He shall not marry an adult; Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Simeon enable the adult.” They agree that he shall not marry one injured by a piece of wood. What is the difference between the adult and the one injured by a piece of wood? The hymen of an adult dissolved in her body. The hymen of one injured by a piece of wood came outside⁷⁸In the Babli, 59b, the disagreement between the majority and rabbis Eleazar and Simeon is described as one of the interpretation of Lev. 21:13; parallel to the discussion here in the next paragraph. The switched version is not found elsewhere.. Some switch: He shall not marry one injured by a piece of wood; Rebbi Eleazar and Rebbi Simeon enable one injured by a piece of wood.” They agree that he shall not marry an adult. What is the difference between the adult and the one injured by a piece of wood? An adult is no longer young. The one injured by a piece of wood is still young.

MISHNAH: Rebbi Joḥanan ben Gudguedah testified about a deaf-mute girl¹⁴⁰She is presumed not to be able to read and write. Since she has no means of communication with the outside world, she is incompetent in law. She herself could not conclude a marriage valid by biblical standards, but her father can marry her off when underage in a biblically valid marriage. Cf. Yebamot, Mishnah 14:3, Notes 20–24.
“Testified” usually means a statement of practice from Temple times accepted by the Jabneh Academy as binding. who was married off by her father, that she must be divorced by a bill of divorce¹⁴¹Since a divorce is a unilateral act by the husband as long as she is able to receive the bill. An insane woman, who cannot keep her bill of divorce, cannot be divorced., and about an underage girl who was married to a Cohen¹⁴²Even if the father had died and she was married in a rabbinically valid marriage by her mother or brothers, from which she may walk out without formality before she reaches adulthood (cf. Yebamot 1:2, Note 38)., that she may eat heave and her husband inherits from her if she dies, and about a stolen log which was used to build a house¹⁴³In Babylonian versions of the Mishnah, it is added “for the benefit of repentant sinners”, as explained in the Halakhah., that [the owner] has to take the value¹⁴⁴He cannot sue the robber for restitution of the original log., and about a purification sacrifice of a stolen animal¹⁴⁵It is a sinful act to use any stolen or robbed animal as a sacrifice. If such a sacrifice would be declared invalid, no Cohen would volunteer to serve in the Temple for fear of unwittingly committing the sin of eating from an invalid sacrifice. Therefore, a sacrifice can be rejected only if it is known that it was obtained by illegal means. which was not known in public, that it atones because of the order of the altar.

¹²¹This also is in Sanhedrin 2:1 (Notes 52–55), Horaiot 3:2. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: “Deep sorrow”¹²⁵In its legal implications, that the person not only be forbidden to eat sanctified food but also cannot be counted in a quorum for religious services; cf. Berakhot3:1, Note 42. is only for the dead, for it is written¹²⁶Is. 3:26. The gates of Jerusalem are in sorrow because all its men are dead.: Its gates are in deep sorrow and mourning.Ḥiyya bar Ada objected: Is it not written¹²⁷Is. 19:8. The fishermen are in deep sorrow (and they mourn as quoted in the two parallel texts) because the Nile dried up. This proves that both terms used for the religious obligations of a person whose close relative died are used in the Bible also to describe other situations.: the fishermen are in deep sorrow, and mourning all who throw a fishing hook into the Nile? Rebbi Ḥanina said, so is the baraita: there is no deep sorrow in impurity except for the dead.

Rebbi Joḥanan followed Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Joḥanan was climbing from Tiberias to Sepphoris when he saw a man descending from there. He asked him, what is new in the big city? He told him, one of the great rabbis died and everbody was running to occupy themselves with him¹³⁸For the burial.. Rebbi Joḥanan understood that it was Rebbi Ḥanina. He sent and brought his good Sabbath clothes and tore them¹³⁹In the Babli, Mo‘ed Qaṭan 25a, “13 silk stolas.”. But did we not state: Any tear which is not in panic is not a tear¹⁴⁰Since really it is forbidden to destroy usable things, tearing one’s clothes in mourning is acceptable only as an expression of acute pain. How could R. Joḥanan make an elaborate ceremony out of it? In the Babli, Mo‘ed Qaṭan 25a, the statement is amoraic, attributed to Samuel.? Rebbi Joḥanan wanted to do more and show his appreciation. But we do not know whether it was because he was his teacher or because of bad news. There is the case of Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Abba in Sepphoris¹⁴¹This sentence seems to be incomplete. In the Horaiot text: “R. Ḥananiah (read: R. Ḥanina) was leaning on R. Ḥiyya bar Abba in Sepphoris.”. He saw that everybody was running. He asked, why is everybody running? They told him, Rebbi Joḥanan is preaching in Rebbi Banaia’s study house and everybody is running to hear him. He said, praised be the Merciful Who showed me people running while I am alive. In Agadah I explained him everything except Proverbs and Ecclesiastes¹⁴²This proves that R. Ḥanina was a teacher of R. Joḥanan, even though in legal matters R. Joḥanan was the student of R. Hoshaia.. This means every single student¹⁴³Even if he is a student only in homiletics..