Chagigah 4

כמי שנגח שור חמור וגמל ונעשה מועד לכל אמר רב פפא אי שמיע ליה לרב הונא הא דתניא אי זהו שוטה זה המאבד כל מה שנותנים לו הוה הדר ביה

like the actions of a forewarned ox that gored an ox, a donkey, and a camel. Since this ox gored three different animals on three separate occasions, it is considered predisposed to gore and becomes forewarned for every type of animal. Likewise, if someone performs three different deranged actions, it is assumed that there is no logical reason for his behavior and he is classified as an imbecile. Rav Pappa said: If Rav Huna had heard that which is taught in a baraita: Who is an imbecile? This is one who destroys whatever is given to him, he would have retracted his statement that one is an imbecile only if he performs three deranged actions.

איבעיא להו כי הוה הדר ביה ממקרע כסותו הוא דהוה הדר ביה דדמיא להא או דלמא מכולהו הוה הדר תיקו

A dilemma was raised before the Sages with regard to Rav Pappa’s statement: When Rav Pappa claims that Rav Huna would have retracted his statement, would he have retracted only from the case of one who tears his garments, as this person is similar to one who destroys whatever is given to him? Or perhaps he would have retracted his opinion with regard to all of the signs of an imbecile? The Gemara states that the dilemma shall stand unresolved, as no answer was found.

וטומטום ואנדרוגינוס כו׳ תנו רבנן זכור להוציא את הנשים זכורך להוציא טומטום ואנדרוגינוס כל זכורך לרבות את הקטנים

§ The mishna taught: And a tumtum and a hermaphrodite are exempt from the mitzva of appearance in the Temple. The Sages taught, with regard to the verse: “Three occasions in the year all your males will appear before the Lord God” (Exodus 23:17), had the verse simply said “males,” this would serve to exclude women from this mitzva. By specifying “your males,” it comes to exclude a tumtum and a hermaphrodite as well. Furthermore, when the verse adds “all your males,” this serves to include male minors.

אמר מר זכור להוציא את הנשים הא למה לי קרא מכדי מצות עשה שהזמן גרמא הוא וכל מצות עשה שהזמן גרמא נשים פטורות

The Master said in the baraita: “Males” comes to exclude women. The Gemara asks: Why do I need a verse for this halakha? After all, the obligation of appearance on a Festival is a positive, time-bound mitzva, and women are exempt from any positive, time-bound mitzva.

אצטריך סלקא דעתך אמינא נילף ראייה ראייה מהקהל מה להלן נשים חייבות אף כאן נשים חייבות קא משמע לן

The Gemara answers: This statement was necessary, as otherwise it could enter your mind to say: Let us derive by means of a verbal analogy between the term: Appearance, which appears here, and the term: Appearance, stated with regard to the mitzva of assembly (Deuteronomy 31:11), which is also a positive, time-bound mitzva. Just as there, women are obligated in the mitzva of assembly, so too here, women are obligated in the mitzva of appearance on the Festival. Therefore, the baraita teaches us that women are exempt.

אמר מר זכורך להוציא טומטום ואנדרוגינוס בשלמא אנדרוגינוס אצטריך סלקא דעתך אמינא הואיל ואית ליה צד זכרות ליחייב קא משמע לן דבריה בפני עצמו הוא

The Master said in the baraita: “Your males” comes to exclude a tumtum and a hermaphrodite. The Gemara asks: Granted, the exclusion of a hermaphrodite was necessary, as it could enter your mind to say that since he possesses an aspect of masculinity, i.e., he has a male sexual organ, he should be obligated like a male. Therefore, the baraita teaches us that a hermaphrodite is a being unto itself, which is neither male nor female.

אלא טומטום ספיקא הוא מי אצטריך קרא למעוטי ספיקא אמר אביי כשביציו מבחוץ

However, as the status of a tumtum, who lacks external sexual organs, is a halakhic uncertainty, is a verse necessary to exclude an uncertainty? Abaye said: It is referring to a case when the testicles of a tumtum are on the outside, although his penis is not visible. The verse teaches that this tumtum is not obligated in the mitzva of appearance, despite the fact that he is certainly male.

אמר מר כל זכורך לרבות את הקטנים והתנן חוץ מחרש שוטה וקטן אמר אביי לא קשיא כאן בקטן שהגיע לחינוך כאן בקטן שלא הגיע לחינוך קטן שהגיע לחינוך דרבנן היא אין הכי נמי וקרא אסמכתא בעלמא

The Master said in the baraita: “All your males” comes to include minors. The Gemara asks: Didn’t we learn in the mishna: All are obligated to appear, except for a deaf-mute, an imbecile, and a minor? Abaye said: This is not difficult. Here, the baraita that obligates minors is referring to a minor who has reached the age of training in mitzvot. There, the mishna is referring to a minor who has not yet reached the age of training in mitzvot, and therefore he is exempt from the mitzva of appearance. The Gemara asks: The obligation of a minor who has reached the age of training is one that applies by rabbinic law. How then can the baraita derive this halakha from a verse? The Gemara answers: Yes, it is indeed so, and the verse is a mere support for this rabbinic obligation.

ואלא קרא למאי אתא לכדאחרים דתנן אחרים אומרים המקמץ והמצרף נחשת והבורסי פטורין מן הראייה משום שנאמר כל זכורך מי שיכול לעלות עם כל זכורך יצאו אלו שאינן ראויין לעלות עם כל זכורך

The Gemara asks: Rather, for what purpose does the verse: “All your males,” come? It comes to teach that which Aḥerim taught. As it is taught in a baraita: Aḥerim say that a scrimper, one who gathers dog feces to give them to tanners for the purpose of tanning hides; and a melder of copper, who purifies copper from dross; and a tanner of hides, are all exempt from the mitzva of appearance, as their occupation inflicts upon them a particularly unpleasant odor. This is because it is stated: “All your males,” which indicates that only one who is able to ascend with all your males is obligated, excluding those who are not suited to ascend with all your males, as people avoid their company.

נשים ועבדים שאינן משוחררים וכו׳ בשלמא נשים כדאמרן אלא עבדים מנלן אמר רב הונא אמר קרא אל פני האדון ה׳ מי שאין לו אלא אדון אחד יצא זה שיש לו אדון אחר

§ The mishna taught that women and slaves who are not emancipated are exempt from the mitzva of appearance. The Gemara asks: Granted, women are exempt, as we said earlier that this is derived from the phrase: “Your males.” However, with regard to slaves, from where do we derive that they are exempt? Rav Huna said that the verse states: “Before the Lord God” (Exodus 23:17). This indicates that one who has only one Master is obligated, which excludes this slave, who has another master.

הא למה לי קרא מכדי כל מצוה שהאשה חייבת בה עבד חייב בה כל מצוה שאין האשה חייבת בה אין העבד חייב בה דגמר “לה” “לה” מאשה

The Gemara asks: Why do I need a verse to teach this halakha? After all, with regard to every mitzva in which a woman is obligated, a slave is also obligated in that mitzva; and with regard to every mitzva in which a woman is not obligated, a slave is not obligated in it either. The reason for this principle is that it is derived by means of a verbal analogy between the phrase: “To her” (Leviticus 19:20), written with regard to a designated maidservant, and the phrase: “To her” (Deuteronomy 24:3), written with regard to a divorced woman.

אמר רבינא לא נצרכה אלא למי שחציו עבד וחציו בן חורין דיקא נמי דקתני נשים ועבדים שאינן משוחררין מאי שאינן משוחררין אילימא שאינן משוחררין כלל ליתני עבדים סתמא אלא לאו שאינן משוחררין לגמרי ומאי נינהו מי שחציו עבד וחציו בן חורין שמע מינה

Ravina said: This verse is necessary only to teach the exemption of one who is half-slave half-freeman. The Gemara notes that the language of the mishna is also precise, as it teaches: Women and slaves who are not emancipated. What is the purpose of specifying: Who are not emancipated? If we say that this means that they are not emancipated at all, let it simply teach: Slaves, without any further description. Rather, is it not the case that the mishna is referring to slaves who are not entirely emancipated? And who are these slaves? One who is half-slave half-freeman. The Gemara concludes: Learn from this that this is correct.

והחיגר והסומא וחולה והזקן תנו רבנן רגלים פרט לבעלי קבין דבר אחר רגלים פרט לחיגר ולחולה ולסומא ולזקן ולשאינו יכול לעלות ברגליו ושאינו יכול לעלות ברגליו לאתויי מאי אמר רבא לאתויי

The mishna further taught: And the lame, and the blind, and the sick, and the old are all exempt from the mitzva of appearance. The Sages taught: “Times [regalim]” (Exodus 23:14) alludes to the use of one’s feet [raglayim], and therefore it excludes people with artificial legs. Although they are able to walk, they are exempt from traveling, as they do not have feet. Alternatively, the term “regalim” comes to exclude the lame, the sick, the blind, the old, and one who is unable to ascend on his own feet. The Gemara asks: The last category of one who is unable to ascend on his feet, comes to add what? The baraita already taught that the lame and the sick are exempt. Rava said: It comes to add

מפנקי דכתיב כי תבאו לראות פני מי בקש זאת מידכם רמוס חצרי

a delicate man, who cannot walk without shoes. As it is written: “When you come to appear before Me, who has required this at your hand, to trample My courts?” (Isaiah 1:12). Entering the Temple with shoes is described by the prophet as trampling, and therefore one who cannot enter barefoot is exempt from the mitzva of appearance.

תנא הערל והטמא פטורין מן הראייה בשלמא טמא דכתיב ובאת שמה והבאתם שמה כל שישנו בביאה ישנו בהבאה וכל שאינו בביאה אינו בהבאה

It is taught: The uncircumcised and the ritually impure are exempt from the mitzva of appearance. The Gemara comments: Granted, a ritually impure person is exempt, as it is written: “And there you shall come” (Deuteronomy 12:5), followed by: “And there you shall bring” (Deuteronomy 12:6). The juxtaposition of these verses teaches: Anyone included in the mitzva of coming, i.e., anyone who may enter the Temple, is also included in the obligation of bringing offerings; and anyone not included in the mitzva of coming is not included in the obligation of bringing either. Since it is prohibited for a person who is ritually impure to enter the Temple, he is also exempt from the obligation to bring a burnt-offering of appearance.

אלא ערל מנלן הא מני רבי עקיבא היא דמרבי לערל כטמא דתניא רבי עקיבא אומר איש איש לרבות את הערל

However, with regard to the uncircumcised, from where do we derive that he is exempt? The Gemara answers: In accordance with whose opinion is this baraita? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, who amplifies the halakha so that the uncircumcised is included in the same category as the ritually impure. As it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Akiva says, with regard to the verse: “Any man [ish ish] of the seed of Aaron that is a leper or has an issue; he shall not eat of the sacred things” (Leviticus 22:4), the double use of the term: “Ish,” comes to include the uncircumcised. Like the ritually impure, the uncircumcised may neither eat sacrificial meat nor bring offerings to the Temple.

תנו רבנן טמא פטור מן הראייה דכתיב ובאת שמה והבאתם שמה כל שישנו בביאה ישנו בהבאה וכל שאינו בביאה אינו בהבאה

The Sages taught: A ritually impure person is exempt from the mitzva of appearance, as it is written: “And there shall you come,” “and there you shall bring.” Anyone included in coming is also included in the obligation of bringing offerings; and anyone not included in coming is not included in the obligation of bringing either.

רבי יוחנן בן דהבאי אומר משום רבי יהודה סומא באחת מעיניו פטור מן הראייה שנאמר יראה יראה כדרך שבא לראות כך בא ליראות מה בא לראות בשתי עיניו אף ליראות בשתי עיניו

Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Dehavai says in the name of Rabbi Yehuda: One who is blind in one of his eyes is exempt from the mitzva of appearance, as it is stated: “Three times a year all your males shall appear [yera’e] before the Lord God” (Exodus 23:17). Since there are no vowels in the text, this can be read as: All your males will see [yireh] the Lord God. This teaches that in the same manner that one comes to see, so he comes to be seen: Just as one comes to see with both his eyes, so too the obligation to be seen applies only to one who comes with both his eyes. Therefore, one who is blind in one eye is exempt from the mitzva of appearance in the Temple.

רב הונא כי מטי להאי קרא יראה יראה בכי אמר עבד שרבו מצפה לו לראותו יתרחק ממנו דכתיב כי תבואו לראות פני מי בקש זאת מידכם רמוס חצרי

The Gemara relates that when Rav Huna reached this verse, which can be read as: “Will see” [yireh] and “shall appear” [yera’e], he cried. He said: Can it happen to a slave whose master expects to see him, that the master will eventually distance himself from him and not want him anymore? As it is written: “When you come to appear before Me, who has required this at your hand, to trample My courts?” (Isaiah 1:12).

רב הונא כי מטי להאי קרא בכי וזבחת שלמים ואכלת שם עבד שרבו מצפה לאכול על שלחנו יתרחק ממנו דכתיב למה לי רוב זבחיכם יאמר ה׳

Similarly, when Rav Huna reached this verse, he cried: “And you shall sacrifice peace-offerings, and you shall eat there” (Deuteronomy 27:7). Can it happen to a slave whose master expects him to eat at his table, that his master will eventually distance himself from him? As it is written: “To what purpose is the multitude of your offerings to Me? says the Lord” (Isaiah 1:11).

רבי אלעזר כי מטי להאי קרא בכי ולא יכלו אחיו לענות אתו כי נבהלו מפניו ומה תוכחה של בשר ודם כך תוכחה של הקדוש ברוך הוא על אחת כמה וכמה רבי אלעזר כי מטי להאי קרא בכי ויאמר שמואל אל שאול למה הרגזתני להעלות אותי ומה שמואל הצדיק היה מתיירא מן הדין אנו על אחת כמה וכמה

The Gemara similarly relates: When Rabbi Elazar reached this verse, he cried: “And his brethren could not answer him, for they were affrighted at his presence” (Genesis 45:3). He said, in explanation of his emotional reaction: If the rebuke of a man of flesh and blood was such that the brothers were unable to respond, when it comes to the rebuke of the Holy One, Blessed be He, all the more so. When Rabbi Elazar reached this verse, he cried: “And Samuel said to Saul: Why have you disquieted me, to bring me up” (I Samuel 28:15). He said: If Samuel the righteous was afraid of judgment when he was raised by necromancy, as he thought he was being summoned for a Divine judgment, all the more so that we should be afraid.

שמואל מאי היא דכתיב ותאמר האשה אל שאול אלהים ראיתי עולים עולים תרי משמע חד שמואל ואידך דאזל שמואל ואתייה למשה בהדיה אמר ליה דלמא חס ושלום לדינא מתבעינא קום בהדאי דליכא מילתא דכתבת באורייתא דלא קיימתיה

The Gemara asks: In the case of Samuel, what is it that he feared? As it is written: “And the woman said to Saul, I see a godlike being coming up [olim] out of the earth” (I Samuel 28:13). “Olim,” in the plural form, indicates that there were two of them. One of them was Samuel, but the other, who was he? The Gemara explains that Samuel went and brought Moses with him. He said to Moses: Perhaps, Heaven forbid, I was summoned for judgment by God; stand with me and testify on my behalf that there is nothing that you wrote in the Torah that I did not fulfill.

רבי אמי כי מטי להאי קרא בכי יתן בעפר פיהו אולי יש תקוה אמר כולי האי ואולי רבי אמי כי מטי להאי קרא בכי בקשו צדק בקשו ענוה אולי תסתרו ביום אף ה׳ אמר כולי האי ואולי רבי אסי כי מטי להאי קרא בכי שנאו רע ואהבו טוב והציגו בשער משפט אולי יחנן ה׳ [אלהי] צבאות כולי האי ואולי

When Rabbi Ami reached this verse, he cried: “Let him put his mouth in the dust, perhaps there may be hope” (Lamentations 3:29). He said: A sinner suffers through all this punishment and only perhaps there may be hope? When Rabbi Ami reached this verse, he cried: “Seek righteousness, seek humility; perhaps you shall be hidden on the day of the Lord’s anger”(Zephaniah 2:3). He said: All of this is expected of each individual, and only perhaps God’s anger may be hidden? Likewise, when Rabbi Asi reached this verse, he cried: “Hate the evil, and love the good, and establish justice in the gate; perhaps the Lord, the God of hosts, will be gracious” (Amos 5:15). He said: All of this, and only perhaps?

רב יוסף כי מטי להאי קרא בכי ויש נספה בלא משפט אמר מי איכא דאזיל בלא זמניה אין כי הא דרב ביבי בר אביי הוה שכיח גביה מלאך המות אמר ליה לשלוחיה זיל אייתי לי מרים מגדלא שיער נשייא אזל אייתי ליה מרים מגדלא דרדקי

When Rav Yosef reached this verse, he cried: “But there are those swept away without justice” (Proverbs 13:23). He said: Is there one who goes before his time and dies for no reason? The Gemara answers: Yes, like this incident of Rav Beivai bar Abaye, who would be frequented by the company of the Angel of Death and would see how people died at the hands of this angel. The Angel of Death said to his agent: Go and bring me, i.e., kill, Miriam the raiser, i.e., braider, of women’s hair. He went, but instead brought him Miriam, the raiser of babies.

אמר ליה אנא מרים מגדלא שיער נשייא אמרי לך אמר ליה אי הכי אהדרה אמר ליה הואיל ואייתיתה ליהוי למניינא אלא היכי יכלת לה הות נקיטא מתארא בידה והות קא שגרא

The Angel of Death said to him: I told you to bring Miriam, the raiser of women’s hair. His agent said to him: If so, return her to life. He said to him: Since you have already brought her, let her be counted toward the number of deceased people. Apparently, this woman died unintentionally. Rav Beivai asked the agent: But as her time to die had not yet arrived, how were you able to kill her? The agent responded that he had the opportunity, as she was holding a shovel in her hand and with it she was lighting