Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

February 25, 2022 | 讻状讚 讘讗讚专 讗壮 转砖驻状讘

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Chagigah 16

Today鈥檚 daf is sponsored by Sigal Spitzer in honor of Abby Flamholz. 鈥淗appy big birthday! May this just be the beginning of your Talmud Torah journey!鈥

Today鈥檚 daf is sponsored by Viti Rosenzweig Kuns for the refua shlema of Matityahi ben Rosa and Sarah bat Vita.

How was Rabbi Akiva able to see/identify God? Several verses are brought by various rabbis to try to answer this question. Comparisons are made between angels and demons, and angels and humans – in what ways are humans similar to angels and in what ways to animals? Why can’t one ponder what happened before the creation? Two different explanations are brought to explain the line in the Mishna, whoever doesn’t have concern for his/her Creator, better that he/she had never come into the world. Is it referring to one who looks at a rainbow (what is wrong with that?) or one who sins secretly. Not only should one not look at a rainbow, but also one should not look at a Nasi or at kohanim in the Temple when they are blessing the people. Do not believe the evil inclination if it tells you to sin and you will be pardoned. One who sins in private, who will testify against them that they sinned? Several answers are given. The Mishna brings the earliest debate that spanned all the generations of the zugot, the pairs, regarding whether or not one is allowed to do the mitzva of smicha, leaning on the animal on Yom Tov when offering the chagigah sacrifices. The last pair of rabbis was Hillel and Shamai – but before Shamia came there was Menachem, however, he was removed from his position – why? Rava and Abaye each bring a different explanation. The order the pairs are mentioned in the Mishna demonstrates which served as the Nasi and which as the Av Bet Din. However, there is a debate about one of the pairs – who held which position. A braita is brought which tries to be matched up with one of the opinions, but in the end, it is inconclusive. The braita tells the story of Yehoshua ben Perachia who judged someone to death as an ed zomem (a type of false witness) incorrectly, in an attempt to make a point to the Sadducees, and Shimon ben Shatach corrected him. From then on, he was only willing to rule in the presence of Shimon ben Shatach. Rabbi Yochanan proves from our Mishna that one should not take rabbinic ordinances lightly, such as using animals on Yom Tov/Shabbat. The Gemara tries to better understand why Rabbi Yochanan said that and what he really meant to say. Rami bar Hama infers from Rabbi Yochanan that smicha needs all one’s strength, The Gemara questions this by bringing a braita regarding the exemption of women from smicha and yet they permitted women to do it if they wanted to. If smicha is with all of one’s strength, how could they have permitted women to “use” sanctified animals if they were actually not obligated?

诪讗讬 讚专砖 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讜讗转讗 诪专讘讘讜转 拽讚砖 讗讜转 讛讜讗 讘专讘讘讛 砖诇讜

The Gemara asks: What verse did Rabbi Akiva expound that prevented him from making the same mistake as A岣r? Rabba bar bar 岣na said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: It was the following: 鈥淎nd He came [ve鈥檃ta] from the holy myriads鈥 (Deuteronomy 33:2), which he explained in this manner: He, God, is unique [ot] among His myriads of angels. Therefore, he knew that he had merely seen an angel.

讜专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 讗诪专 讚讙讜诇 诪专讘讘讛 讚讜讙诪讗 讛讜讗 讘专讘讘讛 砖诇讜

And Rabbi Abbahu said: Rabbi Akiva expounded the verse: 鈥淧reeminent above a myriad鈥 (Song of Songs 5:10) to indicate that He is exemplary among His myriad.

讜专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 讗诪专 讛壮 爪讘讗讜转 砖诪讜 讗讚讜谉 讛讜讗 讘爪讘讗 砖诇讜

And Reish Lakish said: He expounded the verse: 鈥淭he Lord of hosts is His name鈥 (Isaiah 48:2); He is the Master in His host.

讜专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诇讗 讘专讜讞 讛壮 讜讗讞专 讛专讜讞 专注砖 诇讗 讘专注砖 讛壮 讜讗讞专 讛专注砖 讗砖 诇讗 讘讗砖 讛壮 讜讗讞专 讛讗砖 拽讜诇 讚诪诪讛 讚拽讛 讜讛谞讛 讛壮 注讜讘专

And Rav 岣yya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: He expounded the verses: 鈥淏ut the Lord was not in the wind. And after the wind, an earthquake; the Lord was not in the earthquake. And after the earthquake, fire; but the Lord was not in the fire. And after the fire, a still, small voice,鈥 and it states in that verse: 鈥淎nd behold, the Lord passed by鈥 (I聽Kings 19:11鈥12). Rabbi Akiva used this verse in order to recognize the place of His presence and refrain from trespassing there.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 砖砖讛 讚讘专讬诐 谞讗诪专讜 讘砖讚讬诐 砖诇砖讛 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 讜砖诇砖讛 讻讘谞讬 讗讚诐 砖诇砖讛 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 讬砖 诇讛诐 讻谞驻讬诐 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 讜讟住讬谉 诪住讜祝 讛注讜诇诐 讜注讚 住讜驻讜 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 讜讬讜讚注讬谉 诪讛 砖注转讬讚 诇讛讬讜转 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转

搂 The Gemara returns to discussing the heavenly beings. The Sages taught: Six statements were said with regard to demons: In three ways they are like ministering angels, and in three ways they are like humans. The baraita specifies: In three ways they are like ministering angels: They have wings like ministering angels; and they fly from one end of the world to the other like ministering angels; and they know what will be in the future like ministering angels.

讬讜讚注讬谉 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讗诇讗 砖讜诪注讬谉 诪讗讞讜专讬 讛驻专讙讜讚 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转

The Gemara is puzzled by this last statement: Should it enter your mind that they know this? Not even the angels are privy to the future. Rather, they hear from behind the curtain when God reveals something of the future, like ministering angels.

讜砖诇砖讛 讻讘谞讬 讗讚诐 讗讜讻诇讬谉 讜砖讜转讬谉 讻讘谞讬 讗讚诐 驻专讬谉 讜专讘讬谉 讻讘谞讬 讗讚诐 讜诪转讬诐 讻讘谞讬 讗讚诐

And in three ways they are similar to humans: They eat and drink like humans; they multiply like humans; and they die like humans.

砖砖讛 讚讘专讬诐 谞讗诪专讜 讘讘谞讬 讗讚诐 砖诇砖讛 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 砖诇砖讛 讻讘讛诪讛 砖诇砖讛 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 讬砖 诇讛诐 讚注转 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 讜诪讛诇讻讬谉 讘拽讜诪讛 讝拽讜驻讛 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 讜诪住驻专讬诐 讘诇砖讜谉 讛拽讚砖 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 砖诇砖讛 讻讘讛诪讛 讗讜讻诇讬谉 讜砖讜转讬谉 讻讘讛诪讛 讜驻专讬谉 讜专讘讬谉 讻讘讛诪讛 讜诪讜爪讬讗讬谉 专注讬 讻讘讛诪讛

Six statements were said with regard to humans: In three ways, they are like ministering angels, and in three ways they are like animals. The baraita explains: In three ways they are like ministering angels: They have intelligence like ministering angels; and they walk upright like ministering angels; and they speak in the holy tongue like ministering angels. In three ways humans are like animals: They eat and drink like animals; and they multiply like animals; and they emit excrement like animals.

讻诇 讛诪住转讻诇 讘讗专讘注讛 讚讘专讬诐 专转讜讬 诇讜 砖诇讗 讘讗 诇注讜诇诐 讻讜壮 讘砖诇诪讗 诪讛 诇诪注诇讛 诪讛 诇诪讟讛 诪讛 诇讗讞讜专 诇讞讬讬 讗诇讗 诇驻谞讬诐 诪讛 讚讛讜讛 讛讜讛

搂 The mishna taught: Whoever looks at four things, it would have been better for him had he never entered the world: Anyone who reflects upon that which is above the firmament; that which is below the earth; what was before the creation of the world; and what will be after the end of the world. The Gemara asks: Granted, it is prohibited to reflect on what is above, what is below, and what is after. This is fine, since one is examining things that are not part of the world but lie beyond it. But before the creation of the world, what has happened has happened. Why is it prohibited to reflect upon this?

专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讜专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讚讗诪专讬 转专讜讬讬讛讜 诪砖诇 诇诪诇讱 讘砖专 讜讚诐 砖讗诪专 诇注讘讚讬讜 讘谞讜 诇讬 驻诇讟讬专讬谉 讙讚讜诇讬谉 注诇 讛讗砖驻讛 讛诇讻讜 讜讘谞讜 诇讜 讗讬谉 专爪讜谞讜 砖诇 诪诇讱 诇讛讝讻讬专 砖诐 讗砖驻讛

The Gemara explains: Rabbi Yo岣nan and Rabbi Elazar both say: This can be demonstrated through a parable with regard to a flesh-and-blood king who said to his servants: Build for me large palaces on a garbage dump. They went and built them for him. Clearly, in that case, the king does not desire that they mention the garbage dump. Here too, God does not want people to concern themselves with the chaos that preceded the world.

讻诇 砖诇讗 讞住 注诇 讻讘讜讚 拽讜谞讜 专转讜讬 诇讜 砖诇讗 讘讗 诇注讜诇诐 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讗诪专 讝讛 讛诪住转讻诇 讘拽砖转 专讘 讬讜住祝 讗诪专 讝讛 讛注讜讘专 注讘讬专讛 讘住转专 诪住转讻诇 讘拽砖转 讚讻转讬讘 讻诪专讗讛 讛拽砖转 讗砖专 讬讛讬讛 讘注谞谉 讘讬讜诐 讛讙砖诐 讻谉 诪专讗讛 讛谞讙讛 住讘讬讘 讛讜讗 诪专讗讛 讚诪讜转 讻讘讜讚 讛壮

It is taught in the mishna: Whoever has no concern for the honor of his Maker deserves to have never come to the world. The Gemara asks: What is lack of concern for the honor of one鈥檚 Maker? Rabbi Abba said: This is one who looks at a rainbow. Rav Yosef said: This is one who commits a transgression in private. They proceed to clarify their opinions: Looking at a rainbow constitutes an act of disrespect toward the Divine Presence, as it is written: 鈥淎s the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord鈥 (Ezekiel 1:28), and it is a dishonor to God to stare at His likeness.

专讘 讬讜住祝 讗诪专 讝讛 讛注讜讘专 注讘讬专讛 讘住转专 讻讚专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 讻诇 讛注讜讘专 注讘讬专讛 讘住转专 讻讗讬诇讜 讚讜讞拽 专讙诇讬 砖讻讬谞讛 砖谞讗诪专 讻讛 讗诪专 讛壮 讛砖诪讬诐 讻住讗讬 讜讛讗专抓 讛讚讜诐 专讙诇讬

Rav Yosef said: This is one who commits a transgression in private, in accordance with Rabbi Yitz岣k, as Rabbi Yitz岣k said: Whoever commits a transgression in private, it is as though he pushed away the feet of the Divine Presence, as it is stated: 鈥淭hus said the Lord: The heavens are My seat, and the earth My footstool鈥 (Isaiah 66:1). If one believes that no one can see what he is doing in private, it is as though he said that God is absent from that place. He is therefore compared to one who attempts to remove God from His footstool.

讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讗 讛讝拽谉 讗诐 专讜讗讛 讗讚诐 砖讬爪专讜 诪转讙讘专 注诇讬讜 讬诇讱 诇诪拽讜诐 砖讗讬谉 诪讻讬专讬谉 讗讜转讜 讜讬诇讘砖 砖讞讜专讬谉 讜讬转注讟祝 砖讞讜专讬谉 讜讬注砖讛 诪讛 砖诇讘讜 讞驻抓 讜讗诇 讬讞诇诇 砖诐 砖诪讬诐 讘驻专讛住讬讗 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 讚诪爪讬 讻讬讬祝 诇讬讛 诇讬爪专讬讛 讛讗 讚诇讗 诪爪讬 讻讬讬祝 诇讬爪专讬讛

The Gemara raises a difficulty: And is that so? But didn鈥檛 Rabbi Ela the Elder say: If a person sees that his inclination is overcoming him, he should go to a place where he is unknown, and wear black, and wrap himself in black, in the manner of mourners, because he should be ashamed of his weakness, and do there what his heart desires, but let him not desecrate the Name of Heaven in public. This shows that sinning in private is sometimes preferable to the public performance of a transgression. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This case, where one who commits a transgression in public has no concern for the honor of his Maker, occurs when one is capable of overcoming his inclination and fails to do so. That case, where it is preferable to sin in private, occurs when one is incapable of overcoming his inclination. He is therefore advised to, at the very least, refrain from desecrating God鈥檚 name in public.

讚专砖 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘专讘讬 谞讞诪谞讬 诪转讜专讙诪谞讬讛 讚专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 讻诇 讛诪住转讻诇 讘砖诇砖讛 讚讘专讬诐 注讬谞讬讜 讻讛讜转 讘拽砖转 讜讘谞砖讬讗 讜讘讻讛谞讬诐 讘拽砖转 讚讻转讬讘 讻诪专讗讛 讛拽砖转 讗砖专 讬讛讬讛 讘注谞谉 讘讬讜诐 讛讙砖诐 讛讜讗 诪专讗讛 讚诪讜转 讻讘讜讚 讛壮 讘谞砖讬讗 讚讻转讬讘 讜谞转转 诪讛讜讚讱 注诇讬讜 讛诪住转讻诇 讘讻讛谞讬诐 讘讝诪谉 砖讘讬转 讛诪拽讚砖 拽讬讬诐 砖讛讬讜 注讜诪讚讬谉 注诇 讚讜讻谞谉 讜诪讘专讻讬谉 讗转 讬砖专讗诇 讘砖诐 讛诪驻讜专砖

Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Na岣ani, the disseminator of Reish Lakish, interpreted a verse homiletically: Whoever looks at the following three things, his eyes will grow dim: One who looks at a rainbow, at a Nasi, and at the priests. He explains: At a rainbow, as it is written: 鈥淎s the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud on the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about, this was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord鈥 (Ezekiel 1:28). At a Nasi, as it is written: 鈥淎nd you shall put of your splendor upon him鈥 (Numbers 27:20), which indicates that the splendor of the Divine Presence rested upon Moses, who was the Nasi of Israel. The third item, looking at priests, is referring to one who looks at the priests when the Temple is standing, as they would stand on their platform and bless Israel with the ineffable name, at which point the Divine Presence would rest above the joints of their fingers.

讚专砖 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘专讘讬 谞讞诪谞讬 诪转讜专讙诪谞讬讛 讚专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 诪讗讬 讚讻转讬讘 讗诇 转讗诪讬谞讜 讘专注 讗诇 转讘讟讞讜 讘讗诇讜祝 讗诐 讬讗诪专 诇讱 讬爪专 讛专注 讞讟讜讗 讜讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 诪讜讞诇 讗诇 转讗诪谉 砖谞讗诪专 讗诇 转讗诪讬谞讜 讘专注 讜讗讬谉 专注 讗诇讗 讬爪专 讛专注 砖谞讗诪专 讻讬 讬爪专 诇讘 讛讗讚诐 专注

Apropos this Sage, the Gemara cites another statement of his: Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Na岣ani, the disseminator of Reish Lakish, interpreted a verse homiletically: What is the meaning of that which is written: 鈥淭rust not in a companion, do not put your confidence in an intimate friend鈥 (Micah 7:5)? If the evil inclination says to you: Sin, and the Holy One, Blessed be He, will forgive, do not trust it, since it is stated: 鈥淭rust not in a companion [rei鈥檃].鈥 And rei鈥檃 is referring to none other than the evil [ra] inclination, as it is stated: 鈥淔or the inclination of the heart of man is evil [ra]鈥 (Genesis 8:21).

讜讗讬谉 讗诇讜祝 讗诇讗 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 砖谞讗诪专 讗诇讜祝 谞注讜专讬 讗转讛 砖诪讗 转讗诪专 诪讬 诪注讬讚 讘讬 讗讘谞讬 讘讬转讜 讜拽讜专讜转 讘讬转讜 砖诇 讗讚诐 讛诐 诪注讬讚讬谉 讘讜 砖谞讗诪专 讻讬 讗讘谉 诪拽讬专 转讝注拽 讜讻驻讬住 诪注抓 讬注谞谞讛

And 鈥渋ntimate friend鈥 is referring to none other than the Holy One, Blessed be He, as it is stated: 鈥淵ou are the intimate friend of my youth鈥 (Jeremiah 3:4). Lest you say: Since I am acting in private, who will testify against me? The stones of the house and the beams of the house of each person testify against him, as it is stated: 鈥淔or the stone shall cry out of the wall, and the beam out of the timber shall answer it鈥 (Habakkuk 2:11).

讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 谞砖诪转讜 砖诇 讗讚诐 诪注讬讚讛 讘讜 砖谞讗诪专 诪砖讻讘转 讞讬拽讱 砖诪讜专 驻转讞讬 驻讬讱 讗讬 讝讜 讛讬讗 讚讘专 砖砖讜讻讘转 讘讞讬拽讜 砖诇 讗讚诐 讛讜讬 讗讜诪专 讝讜 谞砖诪讛 专讘讬 讝专讬拽讗 讗诪专 砖谞讬 诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 讛诪诇讜讬谉 讗讜转讜 讛谉 诪注讬讚讬谉 讘讜 砖谞讗诪专 讻讬 诪诇讗讻讬讜 讬爪讜讛 诇讱 诇砖诪专讱 讘讻诇 讚专讻讬讱 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗讘专讬讜 砖诇 讗讚诐 诪注讬讚讬谉 讘讜 砖谞讗诪专 讜讗转诐 注讚讬 谞讗诐 讛壮 讜讗谞讬 讗诇

And the Sages say: A person鈥檚 soul shall itself testify against him, as it is stated: 鈥淕uard the doors of your mouth from she who lies in your bosom鈥 (Micah 7:5). What thing lies in a person鈥檚 bosom? You must say it is his soul. Rabbi Zerika said: The two ministering angels who accompany him, i.e., each individual, they testify against him, as it is stated: 鈥淔or He will command his angels over you, to guard you in all your ways鈥 (Psalms 91:11). And the Sages say: A person鈥檚 limbs testify against him, as it is stated: 鈥淭herefore you are My witnesses, says the Lord, and I am God鈥 (Isaiah 43:12), which indicates that each individual becomes his own witness and testifies against himself on the Day of Judgment.

诪转谞讬壮 讬讜住讬 讘谉 讬讜注讝专 讗讜诪专 砖诇讗 诇住诪讜讱 讬讜住祝 讘谉 讬讜讞谞谉 讗讜诪专 诇住诪讜讱 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 驻专讞讬讛 讗讜诪专 砖诇讗 诇住诪讜讱 谞讬转讗讬 讛讗专讘诇讬 讗讜诪专 诇住诪讜讱 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讟讘讗讬 讗讜诪专 砖诇讗 诇住诪讜讱 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 砖讟讞 讗讜诪专 诇住诪讜讱 砖诪注讬讛 讗讜诪专 诇住诪讜讱 讗讘讟诇讬讜谉 讗讜诪专 砖诇讗 诇住诪讜讱 讛诇诇 讜诪谞讞诐 诇讗 谞讞诇拽讜 讬爪讗 诪谞讞诐 谞讻谞住 砖诪讗讬 砖诪讗讬 讗讜诪专 砖诇讗 诇住诪讜讱 讛诇诇 讗讜诪专 诇住诪讜讱

MISHNA: Yosei ben Yo鈥檈zer says not to place one鈥檚 hands on offerings before slaughtering them on a Festival because this is considered performing labor with an animal on a Festival. His colleague, Yosef ben Yo岣nan, says to place them; Yehoshua ben Pera岣a says not to place them; Nitai HaArbeli says to place them; Yehuda ben Tabbai says not to place them; Shimon ben Shata岣 says to place them; Shemaya says to place them; Avtalyon says not to place them. Hillel and Mena岣m did not disagree with regard to this issue. Mena岣m departed from his post, and Shammai entered in his stead. Shammai says not to place them; Hillel says to place them.

讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐 讛讬讜 谞砖讬讗讬诐 讜砖谞讬讬诐 诇讛诐 讗讘讜转 讘讬转 讚讬谉

The first members of each pair served as Nasi, and their counterparts served as deputy Nasi.

讙诪壮 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 砖诇砖讛 诪讝讜讙讜转 讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐 砖讗诪专讜 砖诇讗 诇住诪讜讱 讜砖谞讬诐 诪讝讜讙讜转 讛讗讞专讜谞讬诐 砖讗诪专讜 诇住诪讜讱 (讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐) 讛讬讜 谞砖讬讗讬诐 讜砖谞讬讬诐 诇讛诐 讗讘讜转 讘讬转 讚讬谉 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讟讘讗讬 讗讘 讘讬转 讚讬谉 讜砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 砖讟讞 谞砖讬讗

GEMARA: The Sages taught: Three of the first pairs who say not to place hands and two of the last pairs who say to place hands served as Nasi, and their counterparts served as deputy Nasi; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say the opposite: Yehuda ben Tabbai was deputy Nasi and Shimon ben Shata岣 was the Nasi.

诪讗谉 转谞讗 诇讛讗 讚转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讟讘讗讬 讗专讗讛 讘谞讞诪讛 讗诐 诇讗 讛专讙转讬 注讚 讝讜诪诐 诇讛讜爪讬讗 诪诇讘谉 砖诇 爪讚讜拽讬谉 砖讛讬讜 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗讬谉 注讚讬诐 讝讜诪诪讬谉 谞讛专讙讬谉 注讚 砖讬讛专讙 讛谞讬讚讜谉

The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who taught that which the Sages taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda ben Tabbai said: I swear that I will not see the consolation of Israel if I did not kill a conspiring witness. This means that Rabbi Yehuda ben Tabbai sentenced a conspiring witness to death, in order to counter the views of the Sadducees, who would say: Conspiring witnesses are not executed unless the sentenced one has been executed. Their views opposed the traditional view, which maintains that conspiring witnesses are executed only if the one sentenced by their testimony has not yet been executed.

讗诪专 诇讜 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 砖讟讞 讗专讗讛 讘谞讞诪讛 讗诐 诇讗 砖驻讻转 讚诐 谞拽讬 砖讛专讬 讗诪专讜 讞讻诪讬诐 讗讬谉 注讚讬诐 讝讜诪诪讬谉 谞讛专讙讬谉 注讚 砖讬讝讜诪讜 砖谞讬讛诐 讜讗讬谉 诇讜拽讬谉 注讚 砖讬讝讜诪讜 砖谞讬讛诐 讜讗讬谉 诪砖诇诪讬谉 诪诪讜谉 注讚 砖讬讝讜诪讜 砖谞讬讛诐

Shimon ben Shata岣 said to him: I swear that I will not see the consolation of Israel if you did not shed innocent blood, as the Sages said: Conspiring witnesses are not executed unless they are both found to be conspirators; if only one is found to be a conspirator, he is not executed. And they are not flogged if they are liable to such a penalty, unless they are both found to be conspirators. And if they testified falsely that someone owed money, they do not pay money unless they are both found to be conspirators.

诪讬讚 拽讘诇 注诇讬讜 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讟讘讗讬 砖讗讬谞讜 诪讜专讛 讛诇讻讛 讗诇讗 讘驻谞讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 砖讟讞

Hearing this, Yehuda ben Tabbai immediately accepted upon himself not to rule on any matter of law unless he was in the presence of Shimon ben Shata岣, as he realized he could not rely on his own judgment.

讻诇 讬诪讬讜 砖诇 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讟讘讗讬 讛讬讛 诪砖转讟讞 注诇 拽讘专讜 砖诇 讗讜转讜 讛专讜讙 讜讛讬讛 拽讜诇讜 谞砖诪注 讻住讘讜专讬谉 讛注诐 诇讜诪专 砖拽讜诇讜 砖诇 讛专讜讙 讛讜讗 讗诪专 诇讛诐 拽讜诇讬 讛讜讗 转讚注讜 砖诇诪讞专 讛讜讗 诪转 讜讗讬谉 拽讜诇讜 谞砖诪注

The baraita further relates: All of Yehuda ben Tabbai鈥檚 days, he would prostrate himself on the grave of that executed individual, to request forgiveness, and his voice was heard weeping. The people thought that it was the voice of that executed person, rising from his grave. Yehuda ben Tabbai said to them: It is my voice, and you shall know that it is so, for tomorrow, i.e., sometime in the future, he will die, and his voice will no longer be heard. Yehuda ben Tabbai was referring to himself, but he did not want to mention something negative about himself in direct terms.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 诇专讘 讗砖讬 讜讚诇诪讗 驻讬讜住讬 驻讬讬住讬讛 讗讜 讘讚讬谞讗 转讘注讬讛

Rav A岣, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi: This provides no conclusive proof that the voice was not that of the executed man, as perhaps ben Tabbai appeased the executed individual in the World-to-Come. Or, alternatively, the latter may have prosecuted him by the law of Heaven, and that is why his voice can no longer be heard.

诪谞讬 讛讗 讗讬 讗诪专转 讘砖诇诪讗 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讚讗诪专 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 砖讟讞 讗讘 讘讬转 讚讬谉 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讟讘讗讬 谞砖讬讗 讛讬讬谞讜 讚拽讗 诪讜专讬 讛诇讻讛 讘驻谞讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 砖讟讞 讗诇讗 讗讬 讗诪专转 专讘谞谉 讚讗诪专讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讟讘讗讬 讗讘 讘讬转 讚讬谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 砖讟讞 谞砖讬讗 讗讘 讘讬转 讚讬谉 讘驻谞讬 谞砖讬讗 诪讬 诪讜专讛 讛诇讻讛

The Gemara returns to its original question: Whose opinion does this baraita follow? Granted, if you say it is in accordance with that of Rabbi Meir, who said that Shimon ben Shata岣 was deputy Nasi while Rabbi Yehuda ben Tabbai was Nasi, that explains why he had previously issued a halakhic ruling in the presence of Shimon ben Shata岣 to execute the conspiring witness, and only after that unfortunate incident did he undertake to issue rulings only in the presence of his colleague. But if you say that the baraita is in accordance with the Sages, who said: Yehuda ben Tabbai was deputy Nasi and Shimon ben Shata岣 the Nasi, why did he need to make such a commitment? May the deputy Nasi issue a halakhic ruling in the presence of the Nasi?

诇讗 诪讗讬 拽讘诇 注诇讬讜 讚拽讗诪专 诇讗爪讟专讜驻讬 讚讗驻讬诇讜 讗爪讟专讜驻讬 谞诪讬 诇讗 诪爪讟专讬驻谞讗

The Gemara refutes this: No; what did he mean by accepting upon himself not to rule on his own? He spoke with regard to joining the ruling of others: Even with regard to joining the ruling of others, I will also not join until I have first heard the view of Shimon ben Shata岣.

讬爪讗 诪谞讞诐 讜谞讻谞住 砖诪讗讬 讻讜壮 诇讛讬讻谉 讬爪讗 讗讘讬讬 讗诪专 讬爪讗 诇转专讘讜转 专注讛 专讘讗 讗诪专 讬爪讗 诇注讘讜讚转 讛诪诇讱 转谞讬讗 谞诪讬 讛讻讬 讬爪讗 诪谞讞诐 诇注讘讜讚转 讛诪诇讱 讜讬爪讗讜 注诪讜 砖诪讜谞讬诐 讝讜讙讜转 转诇诪讬讚讬诐 诇讘讜砖讬谉 住讬专讬拽讜谉

搂 It is taught in the mishna: Mena岣m departed and Shammai entered. The Gemara asks: To where did Mena岣m depart? Abaye said: He departed and went astray. Therefore, the mishna did not wish to delve into the details of his case. Rava said: He departed for the king鈥檚 service. He received a post from the king and had to leave the court. This is also taught in a baraita: Mena岣m departed for the king鈥檚 service, and eighty pairs of students dressed in silk robes left with him to work for the king, and that they no longer studied Torah.

讗诪专 专讘 砖诪谉 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诇注讜诇诐 讗诇 转讛讗 砖讘讜转 拽诇讛 讘注讬谞讬讱 砖讛专讬 住诪讬讻讛 讗讬谞讛 讗诇讗 诪砖讜诐 砖讘讜转 讜谞讞诇拽讜 讘讛 讙讚讜诇讬 讛讚讜专

Rav Shemen bar Abba said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: A rabbinic decree [shevut] should never be taken lightly in your eyes, since placing hands on the head of an offering on a Festival is prohibited only as a rabbinic decree because it is considered making use of an animal, which is not considered a prohibited labor but merely resembles one, and yet the greatest scholars of each generation disputed it.

驻砖讬讟讗 砖讘讜转 诪爪讜讛 讗爪讟专讬讻讗 诇讬讛

The Gemara is puzzled by this statement: This is obvious. Since it is an accepted rabbinic decree, why should people take it lightly? The Gemara answers: It was necessary for him to state it because it is a rabbinic decree related to a mitzva. In other words, although this rabbinic decree of placing the hands on an animal is not performed for one鈥檚 own sake but for the purpose of a mitzva, it was nevertheless a serious matter in the eyes of the Sages.

讛讗 谞诪讬 驻砖讬讟讗 诇讗驻讜拽讬 诪诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讘住诪讬讻讛 讙讜驻讛 驻诇讬讙讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讘砖讘讜转 讛讜讗 讚驻诇讬讙讬

The Gemara remains puzzled: This too is obvious. In that case as well, the act is prohibited by the Sages. The Gemara responds: Rabbi Yo岣nan鈥檚 statement comes to exclude the opinion of the one who said that they disagree with regard to the actual obligation of placing hands, i.e., whether or not obligatory peace-offerings require placing the hands. He therefore teaches us that it is a rabbinic decree that is the subject of their dispute, not the requirement itself.

讗诪专 专诪讬 讘专 讞诪讗 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 住诪讬讻讛 讘讻诇 讻讞讜 讘注讬谞谉 讚讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 诇讗 讘注讬谞谉 讘讻诇 讻讞讜 诪讗讬 拽讗 注讘讬讚 诇讬住诪讜讱

Rami bar 岣ma said: You can learn from here, from this dispute, that the mitzva of placing hands requires not only placing one鈥檚 hands on the animal鈥檚 head, but we also require that one places his hands with all his strength. For if it enters your mind that we do not require all his strength, what prohibition does one violate by placing his hands? Let him place them on a Festival as well, as this does not resemble a prohibited action at all.

诪讬转讬讘讬 讚讘专 讗诇 讘谞讬 讬砖专讗诇 讜住诪讱 讘谞讬 讬砖专讗诇 住讜诪讻讬谉 讜讗讬谉 讘谞讜转 讬砖专讗诇 住讜诪讻讜转 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讜专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讗讜诪专讬诐 讘谞讜转 讬砖专讗诇 住讜诪讻讜转 专砖讜转

The Gemara raises an objection to this from a baraita: 鈥淪peak to the children of [benei] Israel鈥 (Leviticus 1:2). The word benei literally means: Sons of. And it states nearby: 鈥淎nd he shall place his hand on the head of the burnt-offering鈥 (Leviticus 1:4), from which we learn that the sons of Israel place their hands, but the daughters of Israel do not place them. Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Yishmael say: It is optional for the daughters of Israel to place their hands. They may place their hands if they so choose, although they are not obligated to do so.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 住讞 诇讬 讗讘讗 讗诇注讝专 驻注诐 讗讞转 讛讬讛 诇谞讜 注讙诇 砖诇 讝讘讞讬 砖诇诪讬诐 讜讛讘讬讗谞讜讛讜 诇注讝专转 谞砖讬诐 讜住诪讻讜 注诇讬讜 谞砖讬诐 诇讗 诪驻谞讬 砖住诪讬讻讛 讘谞砖讬诐 讗诇讗 讻讚讬 诇注砖讜转 谞讞转 专讜讞 诇谞砖讬诐 讜讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 住诪讬讻讛 讘讻诇 讻讞讜 讘注讬谞谉 诪砖讜诐 谞讞转 专讜讞 讚谞砖讬诐 注讘讚讬谞谉 注讘讜讚讛 讘拽讚砖讬诐 讗诇讗 诇讗讜 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 诇讗 讘注讬谞谉 讘讻诇 讻讞讜

Rabbi Yosei said: The Sage Abba Elazar related to me the following incident: On one occasion, we had a calf for a peace-offering, and we brought it to the Women鈥檚 Courtyard, and women placed their hands on it. We did this not because there is an obligation of placing hands in the case of women, but in order to please the women, by allowing them to sacrifice an offering, in all of its particulars, as men do. Now, if it enters your mind that we require placing hands with all one鈥檚 strength, would we perform work with consecrated offerings in order to please the women? Placing one鈥檚 hands forcefully on an animal is considered performing work with it, and if one does it without being obligated to do so, he has thereby performed work with an offering. Rather, isn鈥檛 it correct to conclude from this that we do not require placing hands with all one鈥檚 strength?

诇注讜诇诐 讗讬诪讗 诇讱 讘注讬谞谉 讘讻诇 讻讞讜 讚讗诪专 诇讛讜 讗拽驻讜 讬讚讬讬讻讜 讗讬 讛讻讬 诇讗 诪驻谞讬 砖住诪讬讻讛 讘谞砖讬诐 转讬驻讜拽 诇讬讛 讚讗讬谞讛 诇住诪讬讻讛 讻诇诇

The Gemara rejects this: Actually, I could say to you that we do require placing hands with all one鈥檚 strength, but here they allowed women to place their hands by saying to them: Ease your hands and do not press forcefully, so that their hand placing should not constitute work. The Gemara retorts: If so, then the reason formulated as: Not because there is an obligation to place hands in the case of women, is irrelevant to this law. Let him derive the permission for women to do so from the reason that it is not considered placing hands at all. If placing hands must be performed with all one鈥檚 strength, this action the women are performing does not constitute placing hands.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讞讚讗 讜注讜讚 拽讗诪专 讞讚讗 讚诇讬转讗 诇住诪讬讻讛 讻诇诇 讜注讜讚 讻讚讬 诇注砖讜转 谞讞转 专讜讞 诇谞砖讬诐

Rabbi Ami said: He stated one reason and another. One reason is that it is not considered placing hands at all, as it is not performed with all of one鈥檚 strength; and another reason is that they allowed it in order to please the women.

讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 爪讚讚讬谉 讗住讜专讬谉 讚讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 爪讚讚讬谉 诪讜转专讬谉 诇住诪讜讱 诇爪讚讚讬谉 讗诇讗 诇讗讜 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 爪讚讚讬谉 讗住讜专讬谉

Rav Pappa said: Learn from this that anything upon which one may not place objects or upon which one may not sit on Shabbat, its sides are likewise prohibited, for if it enters your mind to say that the sides are permitted, they could have told the women to place their hands on the sides, i.e., on the head of the animal rather than on its back, as the head of the animal is considered as if it were one of its sides. Rather, must one not conclude from this that the sides are prohibited?

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

learn daf yomi one week at a time with tamara spitz

Chagigah: 14-20- Daf Yomi One Week at a Time

The Gemara continues discussing details of the Heavenly Chariot, Ma鈥檃se Merkava. We will learn the famous story of the four...
talking talmud_square

Chagigah 16: It Was What It Was

On demons, angels, human beings, and animals. Also, on how people should not attempt to look in the prohibited 4...
Gefet with Rabbanit Yael Shimoni

Where Can You Find the Divine Presence? – Gefet 27

https://youtu.be/ucqgDOpwkfc 讘注讝专转 讛' The second chapter of Tractate Hagiga is one of the most fascinating chapters in the Gemara in...
Deracheha

Voluntary Mitzva Performance and Nachat Ruach Shel Nashim

Adapted from deracheha.org by Deracheha: Women and Mitzvot May a woman perform mitzvot voluntarily? The test case is semicha, leaning...

Chagigah 16

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Chagigah 16

诪讗讬 讚专砖 讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讜讗转讗 诪专讘讘讜转 拽讚砖 讗讜转 讛讜讗 讘专讘讘讛 砖诇讜

The Gemara asks: What verse did Rabbi Akiva expound that prevented him from making the same mistake as A岣r? Rabba bar bar 岣na said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: It was the following: 鈥淎nd He came [ve鈥檃ta] from the holy myriads鈥 (Deuteronomy 33:2), which he explained in this manner: He, God, is unique [ot] among His myriads of angels. Therefore, he knew that he had merely seen an angel.

讜专讘讬 讗讘讛讜 讗诪专 讚讙讜诇 诪专讘讘讛 讚讜讙诪讗 讛讜讗 讘专讘讘讛 砖诇讜

And Rabbi Abbahu said: Rabbi Akiva expounded the verse: 鈥淧reeminent above a myriad鈥 (Song of Songs 5:10) to indicate that He is exemplary among His myriad.

讜专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 讗诪专 讛壮 爪讘讗讜转 砖诪讜 讗讚讜谉 讛讜讗 讘爪讘讗 砖诇讜

And Reish Lakish said: He expounded the verse: 鈥淭he Lord of hosts is His name鈥 (Isaiah 48:2); He is the Master in His host.

讜专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诇讗 讘专讜讞 讛壮 讜讗讞专 讛专讜讞 专注砖 诇讗 讘专注砖 讛壮 讜讗讞专 讛专注砖 讗砖 诇讗 讘讗砖 讛壮 讜讗讞专 讛讗砖 拽讜诇 讚诪诪讛 讚拽讛 讜讛谞讛 讛壮 注讜讘专

And Rav 岣yya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: He expounded the verses: 鈥淏ut the Lord was not in the wind. And after the wind, an earthquake; the Lord was not in the earthquake. And after the earthquake, fire; but the Lord was not in the fire. And after the fire, a still, small voice,鈥 and it states in that verse: 鈥淎nd behold, the Lord passed by鈥 (I聽Kings 19:11鈥12). Rabbi Akiva used this verse in order to recognize the place of His presence and refrain from trespassing there.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 砖砖讛 讚讘专讬诐 谞讗诪专讜 讘砖讚讬诐 砖诇砖讛 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 讜砖诇砖讛 讻讘谞讬 讗讚诐 砖诇砖讛 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 讬砖 诇讛诐 讻谞驻讬诐 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 讜讟住讬谉 诪住讜祝 讛注讜诇诐 讜注讚 住讜驻讜 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 讜讬讜讚注讬谉 诪讛 砖注转讬讚 诇讛讬讜转 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转

搂 The Gemara returns to discussing the heavenly beings. The Sages taught: Six statements were said with regard to demons: In three ways they are like ministering angels, and in three ways they are like humans. The baraita specifies: In three ways they are like ministering angels: They have wings like ministering angels; and they fly from one end of the world to the other like ministering angels; and they know what will be in the future like ministering angels.

讬讜讚注讬谉 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讗诇讗 砖讜诪注讬谉 诪讗讞讜专讬 讛驻专讙讜讚 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转

The Gemara is puzzled by this last statement: Should it enter your mind that they know this? Not even the angels are privy to the future. Rather, they hear from behind the curtain when God reveals something of the future, like ministering angels.

讜砖诇砖讛 讻讘谞讬 讗讚诐 讗讜讻诇讬谉 讜砖讜转讬谉 讻讘谞讬 讗讚诐 驻专讬谉 讜专讘讬谉 讻讘谞讬 讗讚诐 讜诪转讬诐 讻讘谞讬 讗讚诐

And in three ways they are similar to humans: They eat and drink like humans; they multiply like humans; and they die like humans.

砖砖讛 讚讘专讬诐 谞讗诪专讜 讘讘谞讬 讗讚诐 砖诇砖讛 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 砖诇砖讛 讻讘讛诪讛 砖诇砖讛 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 讬砖 诇讛诐 讚注转 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 讜诪讛诇讻讬谉 讘拽讜诪讛 讝拽讜驻讛 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 讜诪住驻专讬诐 讘诇砖讜谉 讛拽讚砖 讻诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 砖诇砖讛 讻讘讛诪讛 讗讜讻诇讬谉 讜砖讜转讬谉 讻讘讛诪讛 讜驻专讬谉 讜专讘讬谉 讻讘讛诪讛 讜诪讜爪讬讗讬谉 专注讬 讻讘讛诪讛

Six statements were said with regard to humans: In three ways, they are like ministering angels, and in three ways they are like animals. The baraita explains: In three ways they are like ministering angels: They have intelligence like ministering angels; and they walk upright like ministering angels; and they speak in the holy tongue like ministering angels. In three ways humans are like animals: They eat and drink like animals; and they multiply like animals; and they emit excrement like animals.

讻诇 讛诪住转讻诇 讘讗专讘注讛 讚讘专讬诐 专转讜讬 诇讜 砖诇讗 讘讗 诇注讜诇诐 讻讜壮 讘砖诇诪讗 诪讛 诇诪注诇讛 诪讛 诇诪讟讛 诪讛 诇讗讞讜专 诇讞讬讬 讗诇讗 诇驻谞讬诐 诪讛 讚讛讜讛 讛讜讛

搂 The mishna taught: Whoever looks at four things, it would have been better for him had he never entered the world: Anyone who reflects upon that which is above the firmament; that which is below the earth; what was before the creation of the world; and what will be after the end of the world. The Gemara asks: Granted, it is prohibited to reflect on what is above, what is below, and what is after. This is fine, since one is examining things that are not part of the world but lie beyond it. But before the creation of the world, what has happened has happened. Why is it prohibited to reflect upon this?

专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讜专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讚讗诪专讬 转专讜讬讬讛讜 诪砖诇 诇诪诇讱 讘砖专 讜讚诐 砖讗诪专 诇注讘讚讬讜 讘谞讜 诇讬 驻诇讟讬专讬谉 讙讚讜诇讬谉 注诇 讛讗砖驻讛 讛诇讻讜 讜讘谞讜 诇讜 讗讬谉 专爪讜谞讜 砖诇 诪诇讱 诇讛讝讻讬专 砖诐 讗砖驻讛

The Gemara explains: Rabbi Yo岣nan and Rabbi Elazar both say: This can be demonstrated through a parable with regard to a flesh-and-blood king who said to his servants: Build for me large palaces on a garbage dump. They went and built them for him. Clearly, in that case, the king does not desire that they mention the garbage dump. Here too, God does not want people to concern themselves with the chaos that preceded the world.

讻诇 砖诇讗 讞住 注诇 讻讘讜讚 拽讜谞讜 专转讜讬 诇讜 砖诇讗 讘讗 诇注讜诇诐 诪讗讬 讛讬讗 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讗诪专 讝讛 讛诪住转讻诇 讘拽砖转 专讘 讬讜住祝 讗诪专 讝讛 讛注讜讘专 注讘讬专讛 讘住转专 诪住转讻诇 讘拽砖转 讚讻转讬讘 讻诪专讗讛 讛拽砖转 讗砖专 讬讛讬讛 讘注谞谉 讘讬讜诐 讛讙砖诐 讻谉 诪专讗讛 讛谞讙讛 住讘讬讘 讛讜讗 诪专讗讛 讚诪讜转 讻讘讜讚 讛壮

It is taught in the mishna: Whoever has no concern for the honor of his Maker deserves to have never come to the world. The Gemara asks: What is lack of concern for the honor of one鈥檚 Maker? Rabbi Abba said: This is one who looks at a rainbow. Rav Yosef said: This is one who commits a transgression in private. They proceed to clarify their opinions: Looking at a rainbow constitutes an act of disrespect toward the Divine Presence, as it is written: 鈥淎s the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud in the day of rain so was the appearance of the brightness round about. This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord鈥 (Ezekiel 1:28), and it is a dishonor to God to stare at His likeness.

专讘 讬讜住祝 讗诪专 讝讛 讛注讜讘专 注讘讬专讛 讘住转专 讻讚专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 讻诇 讛注讜讘专 注讘讬专讛 讘住转专 讻讗讬诇讜 讚讜讞拽 专讙诇讬 砖讻讬谞讛 砖谞讗诪专 讻讛 讗诪专 讛壮 讛砖诪讬诐 讻住讗讬 讜讛讗专抓 讛讚讜诐 专讙诇讬

Rav Yosef said: This is one who commits a transgression in private, in accordance with Rabbi Yitz岣k, as Rabbi Yitz岣k said: Whoever commits a transgression in private, it is as though he pushed away the feet of the Divine Presence, as it is stated: 鈥淭hus said the Lord: The heavens are My seat, and the earth My footstool鈥 (Isaiah 66:1). If one believes that no one can see what he is doing in private, it is as though he said that God is absent from that place. He is therefore compared to one who attempts to remove God from His footstool.

讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讗 讛讝拽谉 讗诐 专讜讗讛 讗讚诐 砖讬爪专讜 诪转讙讘专 注诇讬讜 讬诇讱 诇诪拽讜诐 砖讗讬谉 诪讻讬专讬谉 讗讜转讜 讜讬诇讘砖 砖讞讜专讬谉 讜讬转注讟祝 砖讞讜专讬谉 讜讬注砖讛 诪讛 砖诇讘讜 讞驻抓 讜讗诇 讬讞诇诇 砖诐 砖诪讬诐 讘驻专讛住讬讗 诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 讚诪爪讬 讻讬讬祝 诇讬讛 诇讬爪专讬讛 讛讗 讚诇讗 诪爪讬 讻讬讬祝 诇讬爪专讬讛

The Gemara raises a difficulty: And is that so? But didn鈥檛 Rabbi Ela the Elder say: If a person sees that his inclination is overcoming him, he should go to a place where he is unknown, and wear black, and wrap himself in black, in the manner of mourners, because he should be ashamed of his weakness, and do there what his heart desires, but let him not desecrate the Name of Heaven in public. This shows that sinning in private is sometimes preferable to the public performance of a transgression. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This case, where one who commits a transgression in public has no concern for the honor of his Maker, occurs when one is capable of overcoming his inclination and fails to do so. That case, where it is preferable to sin in private, occurs when one is incapable of overcoming his inclination. He is therefore advised to, at the very least, refrain from desecrating God鈥檚 name in public.

讚专砖 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘专讘讬 谞讞诪谞讬 诪转讜专讙诪谞讬讛 讚专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 讻诇 讛诪住转讻诇 讘砖诇砖讛 讚讘专讬诐 注讬谞讬讜 讻讛讜转 讘拽砖转 讜讘谞砖讬讗 讜讘讻讛谞讬诐 讘拽砖转 讚讻转讬讘 讻诪专讗讛 讛拽砖转 讗砖专 讬讛讬讛 讘注谞谉 讘讬讜诐 讛讙砖诐 讛讜讗 诪专讗讛 讚诪讜转 讻讘讜讚 讛壮 讘谞砖讬讗 讚讻转讬讘 讜谞转转 诪讛讜讚讱 注诇讬讜 讛诪住转讻诇 讘讻讛谞讬诐 讘讝诪谉 砖讘讬转 讛诪拽讚砖 拽讬讬诐 砖讛讬讜 注讜诪讚讬谉 注诇 讚讜讻谞谉 讜诪讘专讻讬谉 讗转 讬砖专讗诇 讘砖诐 讛诪驻讜专砖

Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Na岣ani, the disseminator of Reish Lakish, interpreted a verse homiletically: Whoever looks at the following three things, his eyes will grow dim: One who looks at a rainbow, at a Nasi, and at the priests. He explains: At a rainbow, as it is written: 鈥淎s the appearance of the bow that is in the cloud on the day of rain, so was the appearance of the brightness round about, this was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord鈥 (Ezekiel 1:28). At a Nasi, as it is written: 鈥淎nd you shall put of your splendor upon him鈥 (Numbers 27:20), which indicates that the splendor of the Divine Presence rested upon Moses, who was the Nasi of Israel. The third item, looking at priests, is referring to one who looks at the priests when the Temple is standing, as they would stand on their platform and bless Israel with the ineffable name, at which point the Divine Presence would rest above the joints of their fingers.

讚专砖 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘专讘讬 谞讞诪谞讬 诪转讜专讙诪谞讬讛 讚专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 诪讗讬 讚讻转讬讘 讗诇 转讗诪讬谞讜 讘专注 讗诇 转讘讟讞讜 讘讗诇讜祝 讗诐 讬讗诪专 诇讱 讬爪专 讛专注 讞讟讜讗 讜讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 诪讜讞诇 讗诇 转讗诪谉 砖谞讗诪专 讗诇 转讗诪讬谞讜 讘专注 讜讗讬谉 专注 讗诇讗 讬爪专 讛专注 砖谞讗诪专 讻讬 讬爪专 诇讘 讛讗讚诐 专注

Apropos this Sage, the Gemara cites another statement of his: Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi Na岣ani, the disseminator of Reish Lakish, interpreted a verse homiletically: What is the meaning of that which is written: 鈥淭rust not in a companion, do not put your confidence in an intimate friend鈥 (Micah 7:5)? If the evil inclination says to you: Sin, and the Holy One, Blessed be He, will forgive, do not trust it, since it is stated: 鈥淭rust not in a companion [rei鈥檃].鈥 And rei鈥檃 is referring to none other than the evil [ra] inclination, as it is stated: 鈥淔or the inclination of the heart of man is evil [ra]鈥 (Genesis 8:21).

讜讗讬谉 讗诇讜祝 讗诇讗 讛拽讚讜砖 讘专讜讱 讛讜讗 砖谞讗诪专 讗诇讜祝 谞注讜专讬 讗转讛 砖诪讗 转讗诪专 诪讬 诪注讬讚 讘讬 讗讘谞讬 讘讬转讜 讜拽讜专讜转 讘讬转讜 砖诇 讗讚诐 讛诐 诪注讬讚讬谉 讘讜 砖谞讗诪专 讻讬 讗讘谉 诪拽讬专 转讝注拽 讜讻驻讬住 诪注抓 讬注谞谞讛

And 鈥渋ntimate friend鈥 is referring to none other than the Holy One, Blessed be He, as it is stated: 鈥淵ou are the intimate friend of my youth鈥 (Jeremiah 3:4). Lest you say: Since I am acting in private, who will testify against me? The stones of the house and the beams of the house of each person testify against him, as it is stated: 鈥淔or the stone shall cry out of the wall, and the beam out of the timber shall answer it鈥 (Habakkuk 2:11).

讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 谞砖诪转讜 砖诇 讗讚诐 诪注讬讚讛 讘讜 砖谞讗诪专 诪砖讻讘转 讞讬拽讱 砖诪讜专 驻转讞讬 驻讬讱 讗讬 讝讜 讛讬讗 讚讘专 砖砖讜讻讘转 讘讞讬拽讜 砖诇 讗讚诐 讛讜讬 讗讜诪专 讝讜 谞砖诪讛 专讘讬 讝专讬拽讗 讗诪专 砖谞讬 诪诇讗讻讬 讛砖专转 讛诪诇讜讬谉 讗讜转讜 讛谉 诪注讬讚讬谉 讘讜 砖谞讗诪专 讻讬 诪诇讗讻讬讜 讬爪讜讛 诇讱 诇砖诪专讱 讘讻诇 讚专讻讬讱 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗讘专讬讜 砖诇 讗讚诐 诪注讬讚讬谉 讘讜 砖谞讗诪专 讜讗转诐 注讚讬 谞讗诐 讛壮 讜讗谞讬 讗诇

And the Sages say: A person鈥檚 soul shall itself testify against him, as it is stated: 鈥淕uard the doors of your mouth from she who lies in your bosom鈥 (Micah 7:5). What thing lies in a person鈥檚 bosom? You must say it is his soul. Rabbi Zerika said: The two ministering angels who accompany him, i.e., each individual, they testify against him, as it is stated: 鈥淔or He will command his angels over you, to guard you in all your ways鈥 (Psalms 91:11). And the Sages say: A person鈥檚 limbs testify against him, as it is stated: 鈥淭herefore you are My witnesses, says the Lord, and I am God鈥 (Isaiah 43:12), which indicates that each individual becomes his own witness and testifies against himself on the Day of Judgment.

诪转谞讬壮 讬讜住讬 讘谉 讬讜注讝专 讗讜诪专 砖诇讗 诇住诪讜讱 讬讜住祝 讘谉 讬讜讞谞谉 讗讜诪专 诇住诪讜讱 讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 驻专讞讬讛 讗讜诪专 砖诇讗 诇住诪讜讱 谞讬转讗讬 讛讗专讘诇讬 讗讜诪专 诇住诪讜讱 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讟讘讗讬 讗讜诪专 砖诇讗 诇住诪讜讱 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 砖讟讞 讗讜诪专 诇住诪讜讱 砖诪注讬讛 讗讜诪专 诇住诪讜讱 讗讘讟诇讬讜谉 讗讜诪专 砖诇讗 诇住诪讜讱 讛诇诇 讜诪谞讞诐 诇讗 谞讞诇拽讜 讬爪讗 诪谞讞诐 谞讻谞住 砖诪讗讬 砖诪讗讬 讗讜诪专 砖诇讗 诇住诪讜讱 讛诇诇 讗讜诪专 诇住诪讜讱

MISHNA: Yosei ben Yo鈥檈zer says not to place one鈥檚 hands on offerings before slaughtering them on a Festival because this is considered performing labor with an animal on a Festival. His colleague, Yosef ben Yo岣nan, says to place them; Yehoshua ben Pera岣a says not to place them; Nitai HaArbeli says to place them; Yehuda ben Tabbai says not to place them; Shimon ben Shata岣 says to place them; Shemaya says to place them; Avtalyon says not to place them. Hillel and Mena岣m did not disagree with regard to this issue. Mena岣m departed from his post, and Shammai entered in his stead. Shammai says not to place them; Hillel says to place them.

讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐 讛讬讜 谞砖讬讗讬诐 讜砖谞讬讬诐 诇讛诐 讗讘讜转 讘讬转 讚讬谉

The first members of each pair served as Nasi, and their counterparts served as deputy Nasi.

讙诪壮 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 砖诇砖讛 诪讝讜讙讜转 讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐 砖讗诪专讜 砖诇讗 诇住诪讜讱 讜砖谞讬诐 诪讝讜讙讜转 讛讗讞专讜谞讬诐 砖讗诪专讜 诇住诪讜讱 (讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐) 讛讬讜 谞砖讬讗讬诐 讜砖谞讬讬诐 诇讛诐 讗讘讜转 讘讬转 讚讬谉 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讜讞讻诪讬诐 讗讜诪专讬诐 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讟讘讗讬 讗讘 讘讬转 讚讬谉 讜砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 砖讟讞 谞砖讬讗

GEMARA: The Sages taught: Three of the first pairs who say not to place hands and two of the last pairs who say to place hands served as Nasi, and their counterparts served as deputy Nasi; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say the opposite: Yehuda ben Tabbai was deputy Nasi and Shimon ben Shata岣 was the Nasi.

诪讗谉 转谞讗 诇讛讗 讚转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讟讘讗讬 讗专讗讛 讘谞讞诪讛 讗诐 诇讗 讛专讙转讬 注讚 讝讜诪诐 诇讛讜爪讬讗 诪诇讘谉 砖诇 爪讚讜拽讬谉 砖讛讬讜 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗讬谉 注讚讬诐 讝讜诪诪讬谉 谞讛专讙讬谉 注讚 砖讬讛专讙 讛谞讬讚讜谉

The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna who taught that which the Sages taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda ben Tabbai said: I swear that I will not see the consolation of Israel if I did not kill a conspiring witness. This means that Rabbi Yehuda ben Tabbai sentenced a conspiring witness to death, in order to counter the views of the Sadducees, who would say: Conspiring witnesses are not executed unless the sentenced one has been executed. Their views opposed the traditional view, which maintains that conspiring witnesses are executed only if the one sentenced by their testimony has not yet been executed.

讗诪专 诇讜 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 砖讟讞 讗专讗讛 讘谞讞诪讛 讗诐 诇讗 砖驻讻转 讚诐 谞拽讬 砖讛专讬 讗诪专讜 讞讻诪讬诐 讗讬谉 注讚讬诐 讝讜诪诪讬谉 谞讛专讙讬谉 注讚 砖讬讝讜诪讜 砖谞讬讛诐 讜讗讬谉 诇讜拽讬谉 注讚 砖讬讝讜诪讜 砖谞讬讛诐 讜讗讬谉 诪砖诇诪讬谉 诪诪讜谉 注讚 砖讬讝讜诪讜 砖谞讬讛诐

Shimon ben Shata岣 said to him: I swear that I will not see the consolation of Israel if you did not shed innocent blood, as the Sages said: Conspiring witnesses are not executed unless they are both found to be conspirators; if only one is found to be a conspirator, he is not executed. And they are not flogged if they are liable to such a penalty, unless they are both found to be conspirators. And if they testified falsely that someone owed money, they do not pay money unless they are both found to be conspirators.

诪讬讚 拽讘诇 注诇讬讜 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讟讘讗讬 砖讗讬谞讜 诪讜专讛 讛诇讻讛 讗诇讗 讘驻谞讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 砖讟讞

Hearing this, Yehuda ben Tabbai immediately accepted upon himself not to rule on any matter of law unless he was in the presence of Shimon ben Shata岣, as he realized he could not rely on his own judgment.

讻诇 讬诪讬讜 砖诇 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讟讘讗讬 讛讬讛 诪砖转讟讞 注诇 拽讘专讜 砖诇 讗讜转讜 讛专讜讙 讜讛讬讛 拽讜诇讜 谞砖诪注 讻住讘讜专讬谉 讛注诐 诇讜诪专 砖拽讜诇讜 砖诇 讛专讜讙 讛讜讗 讗诪专 诇讛诐 拽讜诇讬 讛讜讗 转讚注讜 砖诇诪讞专 讛讜讗 诪转 讜讗讬谉 拽讜诇讜 谞砖诪注

The baraita further relates: All of Yehuda ben Tabbai鈥檚 days, he would prostrate himself on the grave of that executed individual, to request forgiveness, and his voice was heard weeping. The people thought that it was the voice of that executed person, rising from his grave. Yehuda ben Tabbai said to them: It is my voice, and you shall know that it is so, for tomorrow, i.e., sometime in the future, he will die, and his voice will no longer be heard. Yehuda ben Tabbai was referring to himself, but he did not want to mention something negative about himself in direct terms.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 诇专讘 讗砖讬 讜讚诇诪讗 驻讬讜住讬 驻讬讬住讬讛 讗讜 讘讚讬谞讗 转讘注讬讛

Rav A岣, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi: This provides no conclusive proof that the voice was not that of the executed man, as perhaps ben Tabbai appeased the executed individual in the World-to-Come. Or, alternatively, the latter may have prosecuted him by the law of Heaven, and that is why his voice can no longer be heard.

诪谞讬 讛讗 讗讬 讗诪专转 讘砖诇诪讗 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讚讗诪专 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 砖讟讞 讗讘 讘讬转 讚讬谉 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讟讘讗讬 谞砖讬讗 讛讬讬谞讜 讚拽讗 诪讜专讬 讛诇讻讛 讘驻谞讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 砖讟讞 讗诇讗 讗讬 讗诪专转 专讘谞谉 讚讗诪专讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讟讘讗讬 讗讘 讘讬转 讚讬谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 砖讟讞 谞砖讬讗 讗讘 讘讬转 讚讬谉 讘驻谞讬 谞砖讬讗 诪讬 诪讜专讛 讛诇讻讛

The Gemara returns to its original question: Whose opinion does this baraita follow? Granted, if you say it is in accordance with that of Rabbi Meir, who said that Shimon ben Shata岣 was deputy Nasi while Rabbi Yehuda ben Tabbai was Nasi, that explains why he had previously issued a halakhic ruling in the presence of Shimon ben Shata岣 to execute the conspiring witness, and only after that unfortunate incident did he undertake to issue rulings only in the presence of his colleague. But if you say that the baraita is in accordance with the Sages, who said: Yehuda ben Tabbai was deputy Nasi and Shimon ben Shata岣 the Nasi, why did he need to make such a commitment? May the deputy Nasi issue a halakhic ruling in the presence of the Nasi?

诇讗 诪讗讬 拽讘诇 注诇讬讜 讚拽讗诪专 诇讗爪讟专讜驻讬 讚讗驻讬诇讜 讗爪讟专讜驻讬 谞诪讬 诇讗 诪爪讟专讬驻谞讗

The Gemara refutes this: No; what did he mean by accepting upon himself not to rule on his own? He spoke with regard to joining the ruling of others: Even with regard to joining the ruling of others, I will also not join until I have first heard the view of Shimon ben Shata岣.

讬爪讗 诪谞讞诐 讜谞讻谞住 砖诪讗讬 讻讜壮 诇讛讬讻谉 讬爪讗 讗讘讬讬 讗诪专 讬爪讗 诇转专讘讜转 专注讛 专讘讗 讗诪专 讬爪讗 诇注讘讜讚转 讛诪诇讱 转谞讬讗 谞诪讬 讛讻讬 讬爪讗 诪谞讞诐 诇注讘讜讚转 讛诪诇讱 讜讬爪讗讜 注诪讜 砖诪讜谞讬诐 讝讜讙讜转 转诇诪讬讚讬诐 诇讘讜砖讬谉 住讬专讬拽讜谉

搂 It is taught in the mishna: Mena岣m departed and Shammai entered. The Gemara asks: To where did Mena岣m depart? Abaye said: He departed and went astray. Therefore, the mishna did not wish to delve into the details of his case. Rava said: He departed for the king鈥檚 service. He received a post from the king and had to leave the court. This is also taught in a baraita: Mena岣m departed for the king鈥檚 service, and eighty pairs of students dressed in silk robes left with him to work for the king, and that they no longer studied Torah.

讗诪专 专讘 砖诪谉 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诇注讜诇诐 讗诇 转讛讗 砖讘讜转 拽诇讛 讘注讬谞讬讱 砖讛专讬 住诪讬讻讛 讗讬谞讛 讗诇讗 诪砖讜诐 砖讘讜转 讜谞讞诇拽讜 讘讛 讙讚讜诇讬 讛讚讜专

Rav Shemen bar Abba said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said: A rabbinic decree [shevut] should never be taken lightly in your eyes, since placing hands on the head of an offering on a Festival is prohibited only as a rabbinic decree because it is considered making use of an animal, which is not considered a prohibited labor but merely resembles one, and yet the greatest scholars of each generation disputed it.

驻砖讬讟讗 砖讘讜转 诪爪讜讛 讗爪讟专讬讻讗 诇讬讛

The Gemara is puzzled by this statement: This is obvious. Since it is an accepted rabbinic decree, why should people take it lightly? The Gemara answers: It was necessary for him to state it because it is a rabbinic decree related to a mitzva. In other words, although this rabbinic decree of placing the hands on an animal is not performed for one鈥檚 own sake but for the purpose of a mitzva, it was nevertheless a serious matter in the eyes of the Sages.

讛讗 谞诪讬 驻砖讬讟讗 诇讗驻讜拽讬 诪诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讘住诪讬讻讛 讙讜驻讛 驻诇讬讙讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讘砖讘讜转 讛讜讗 讚驻诇讬讙讬

The Gemara remains puzzled: This too is obvious. In that case as well, the act is prohibited by the Sages. The Gemara responds: Rabbi Yo岣nan鈥檚 statement comes to exclude the opinion of the one who said that they disagree with regard to the actual obligation of placing hands, i.e., whether or not obligatory peace-offerings require placing the hands. He therefore teaches us that it is a rabbinic decree that is the subject of their dispute, not the requirement itself.

讗诪专 专诪讬 讘专 讞诪讗 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 住诪讬讻讛 讘讻诇 讻讞讜 讘注讬谞谉 讚讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 诇讗 讘注讬谞谉 讘讻诇 讻讞讜 诪讗讬 拽讗 注讘讬讚 诇讬住诪讜讱

Rami bar 岣ma said: You can learn from here, from this dispute, that the mitzva of placing hands requires not only placing one鈥檚 hands on the animal鈥檚 head, but we also require that one places his hands with all his strength. For if it enters your mind that we do not require all his strength, what prohibition does one violate by placing his hands? Let him place them on a Festival as well, as this does not resemble a prohibited action at all.

诪讬转讬讘讬 讚讘专 讗诇 讘谞讬 讬砖专讗诇 讜住诪讱 讘谞讬 讬砖专讗诇 住讜诪讻讬谉 讜讗讬谉 讘谞讜转 讬砖专讗诇 住讜诪讻讜转 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讜专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讗讜诪专讬诐 讘谞讜转 讬砖专讗诇 住讜诪讻讜转 专砖讜转

The Gemara raises an objection to this from a baraita: 鈥淪peak to the children of [benei] Israel鈥 (Leviticus 1:2). The word benei literally means: Sons of. And it states nearby: 鈥淎nd he shall place his hand on the head of the burnt-offering鈥 (Leviticus 1:4), from which we learn that the sons of Israel place their hands, but the daughters of Israel do not place them. Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Yishmael say: It is optional for the daughters of Israel to place their hands. They may place their hands if they so choose, although they are not obligated to do so.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 住讞 诇讬 讗讘讗 讗诇注讝专 驻注诐 讗讞转 讛讬讛 诇谞讜 注讙诇 砖诇 讝讘讞讬 砖诇诪讬诐 讜讛讘讬讗谞讜讛讜 诇注讝专转 谞砖讬诐 讜住诪讻讜 注诇讬讜 谞砖讬诐 诇讗 诪驻谞讬 砖住诪讬讻讛 讘谞砖讬诐 讗诇讗 讻讚讬 诇注砖讜转 谞讞转 专讜讞 诇谞砖讬诐 讜讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 住诪讬讻讛 讘讻诇 讻讞讜 讘注讬谞谉 诪砖讜诐 谞讞转 专讜讞 讚谞砖讬诐 注讘讚讬谞谉 注讘讜讚讛 讘拽讚砖讬诐 讗诇讗 诇讗讜 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 诇讗 讘注讬谞谉 讘讻诇 讻讞讜

Rabbi Yosei said: The Sage Abba Elazar related to me the following incident: On one occasion, we had a calf for a peace-offering, and we brought it to the Women鈥檚 Courtyard, and women placed their hands on it. We did this not because there is an obligation of placing hands in the case of women, but in order to please the women, by allowing them to sacrifice an offering, in all of its particulars, as men do. Now, if it enters your mind that we require placing hands with all one鈥檚 strength, would we perform work with consecrated offerings in order to please the women? Placing one鈥檚 hands forcefully on an animal is considered performing work with it, and if one does it without being obligated to do so, he has thereby performed work with an offering. Rather, isn鈥檛 it correct to conclude from this that we do not require placing hands with all one鈥檚 strength?

诇注讜诇诐 讗讬诪讗 诇讱 讘注讬谞谉 讘讻诇 讻讞讜 讚讗诪专 诇讛讜 讗拽驻讜 讬讚讬讬讻讜 讗讬 讛讻讬 诇讗 诪驻谞讬 砖住诪讬讻讛 讘谞砖讬诐 转讬驻讜拽 诇讬讛 讚讗讬谞讛 诇住诪讬讻讛 讻诇诇

The Gemara rejects this: Actually, I could say to you that we do require placing hands with all one鈥檚 strength, but here they allowed women to place their hands by saying to them: Ease your hands and do not press forcefully, so that their hand placing should not constitute work. The Gemara retorts: If so, then the reason formulated as: Not because there is an obligation to place hands in the case of women, is irrelevant to this law. Let him derive the permission for women to do so from the reason that it is not considered placing hands at all. If placing hands must be performed with all one鈥檚 strength, this action the women are performing does not constitute placing hands.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讞讚讗 讜注讜讚 拽讗诪专 讞讚讗 讚诇讬转讗 诇住诪讬讻讛 讻诇诇 讜注讜讚 讻讚讬 诇注砖讜转 谞讞转 专讜讞 诇谞砖讬诐

Rabbi Ami said: He stated one reason and another. One reason is that it is not considered placing hands at all, as it is not performed with all of one鈥檚 strength; and another reason is that they allowed it in order to please the women.

讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 爪讚讚讬谉 讗住讜专讬谉 讚讗讬 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 爪讚讚讬谉 诪讜转专讬谉 诇住诪讜讱 诇爪讚讚讬谉 讗诇讗 诇讗讜 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 爪讚讚讬谉 讗住讜专讬谉

Rav Pappa said: Learn from this that anything upon which one may not place objects or upon which one may not sit on Shabbat, its sides are likewise prohibited, for if it enters your mind to say that the sides are permitted, they could have told the women to place their hands on the sides, i.e., on the head of the animal rather than on its back, as the head of the animal is considered as if it were one of its sides. Rather, must one not conclude from this that the sides are prohibited?

Scroll To Top