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

Today's Daf Yomi

September 12, 2014 | ื™ืดื– ื‘ืืœื•ืœ ืชืฉืขืดื“

  • This monthโ€™s learning is sponsored by Shlomo and Amalia Klapper in honor of the birth of Chiyenna Yochana, named after her great-great-grandmother, Chiyenna Kossovsky.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Elaine Hochberg in honor of her husband, Arie Hochberg, who continues to journey through Daf Yomi with her. โ€œAnd with thanks to Rabbanit Farber and Hadran who have made our learning possible.โ€

Chagigah 4

ื›ืžื™ ืฉื ื’ื— ืฉื•ืจ ื—ืžื•ืจ ื•ื’ืžืœ ื•ื ืขืฉื” ืžื•ืขื“ ืœื›ืœ ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ืคืคื ืื™ ืฉืžื™ืข ืœื™ื” ืœืจื‘ ื”ื•ื ื ื”ื ื“ืชื ื™ื ืื™ ื–ื”ื• ืฉื•ื˜ื” ื–ื” ื”ืžืื‘ื“ ื›ืœ ืžื” ืฉื ื•ืชื ื™ื ืœื• ื”ื•ื” ื”ื“ืจ ื‘ื™ื”

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.

ืื™ื‘ืขื™ื ืœื”ื• ื›ื™ ื”ื•ื” ื”ื“ืจ ื‘ื™ื” ืžืžืงืจืข ื›ืกื•ืชื• ื”ื•ื ื“ื”ื•ื” ื”ื“ืจ ื‘ื™ื” ื“ื“ืžื™ื ืœื”ื ืื• ื“ืœืžื ืžื›ื•ืœื”ื• ื”ื•ื” ื”ื“ืจ ืชื™ืงื•

A dilemma was raised before the Sages with regard to Rav Pappaโ€™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.

ื•ื˜ื•ืžื˜ื•ื ื•ืื ื“ืจื•ื’ื™ื ื•ืก ื›ื•ืณ ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ื–ื›ื•ืจ ืœื”ื•ืฆื™ื ืืช ื”ื ืฉื™ื ื–ื›ื•ืจืš ืœื”ื•ืฆื™ื ื˜ื•ืžื˜ื•ื ื•ืื ื“ืจื•ื’ื™ื ื•ืก ื›ืœ ื–ื›ื•ืจืš ืœืจื‘ื•ืช ืืช ื”ืงื˜ื ื™ื

ยง 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: โ€œThree occasions in the year all your males will appear before the Lord Godโ€ (Exodus 23:17), had the verse simply said โ€œmales,โ€ this would serve to exclude women from this mitzva. By specifying โ€œyour males,โ€ it comes to exclude a tumtum and a hermaphrodite as well. Furthermore, when the verse adds โ€œall your males,โ€ this serves to include male minors.

ืืžืจ ืžืจ ื–ื›ื•ืจ ืœื”ื•ืฆื™ื ืืช ื”ื ืฉื™ื ื”ื ืœืžื” ืœื™ ืงืจื ืžื›ื“ื™ ืžืฆื•ืช ืขืฉื” ืฉื”ื–ืžืŸ ื’ืจืžื ื”ื•ื ื•ื›ืœ ืžืฆื•ืช ืขืฉื” ืฉื”ื–ืžืŸ ื’ืจืžื ื ืฉื™ื ืคื˜ื•ืจื•ืช

The Master said in the baraita: โ€œMalesโ€ 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.

ืืฆื˜ืจื™ืš ืกืœืงื ื“ืขืชืš ืืžื™ื ื ื ื™ืœืฃ ืจืื™ื™ื” ืจืื™ื™ื” ืžื”ืงื”ืœ ืžื” ืœื”ืœืŸ ื ืฉื™ื ื—ื™ื™ื‘ื•ืช ืืฃ ื›ืืŸ ื ืฉื™ื ื—ื™ื™ื‘ื•ืช ืงื ืžืฉืžืข ืœืŸ

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.

ืืžืจ ืžืจ ื–ื›ื•ืจืš ืœื”ื•ืฆื™ื ื˜ื•ืžื˜ื•ื ื•ืื ื“ืจื•ื’ื™ื ื•ืก ื‘ืฉืœืžื ืื ื“ืจื•ื’ื™ื ื•ืก ืืฆื˜ืจื™ืš ืกืœืงื ื“ืขืชืš ืืžื™ื ื ื”ื•ืื™ืœ ื•ืื™ืช ืœื™ื” ืฆื“ ื–ื›ืจื•ืช ืœื™ื—ื™ื™ื‘ ืงื ืžืฉืžืข ืœืŸ ื“ื‘ืจื™ื” ื‘ืคื ื™ ืขืฆืžื• ื”ื•ื

The Master said in the baraita: โ€œYour malesโ€ 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.

ืืœื ื˜ื•ืžื˜ื•ื ืกืคื™ืงื ื”ื•ื ืžื™ ืืฆื˜ืจื™ืš ืงืจื ืœืžืขื•ื˜ื™ ืกืคื™ืงื ืืžืจ ืื‘ื™ื™ ื›ืฉื‘ื™ืฆื™ื• ืžื‘ื—ื•ืฅ

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.

ืืžืจ ืžืจ ื›ืœ ื–ื›ื•ืจืš ืœืจื‘ื•ืช ืืช ื”ืงื˜ื ื™ื ื•ื”ืชื ืŸ ื—ื•ืฅ ืžื—ืจืฉ ืฉื•ื˜ื” ื•ืงื˜ืŸ ืืžืจ ืื‘ื™ื™ ืœื ืงืฉื™ื ื›ืืŸ ื‘ืงื˜ืŸ ืฉื”ื’ื™ืข ืœื—ื™ื ื•ืš ื›ืืŸ ื‘ืงื˜ืŸ ืฉืœื ื”ื’ื™ืข ืœื—ื™ื ื•ืš ืงื˜ืŸ ืฉื”ื’ื™ืข ืœื—ื™ื ื•ืš ื“ืจื‘ื ืŸ ื”ื™ื ืื™ืŸ ื”ื›ื™ ื ืžื™ ื•ืงืจื ืืกืžื›ืชื ื‘ืขืœืžื

The Master said in the baraita: โ€œAll your malesโ€ comes to include minors. The Gemara asks: Didnโ€™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.

ื•ืืœื ืงืจื ืœืžืื™ ืืชื ืœื›ื“ืื—ืจื™ื ื“ืชื ืŸ ืื—ืจื™ื ืื•ืžืจื™ื ื”ืžืงืžืฅ ื•ื”ืžืฆืจืฃ ื ื—ืฉืช ื•ื”ื‘ื•ืจืกื™ ืคื˜ื•ืจื™ืŸ ืžืŸ ื”ืจืื™ื™ื” ืžืฉื•ื ืฉื ืืžืจ ื›ืœ ื–ื›ื•ืจืš ืžื™ ืฉื™ื›ื•ืœ ืœืขืœื•ืช ืขื ื›ืœ ื–ื›ื•ืจืš ื™ืฆืื• ืืœื• ืฉืื™ื ืŸ ืจืื•ื™ื™ืŸ ืœืขืœื•ืช ืขื ื›ืœ ื–ื›ื•ืจืš

The Gemara asks: Rather, for what purpose does the verse: โ€œAll your males,โ€ come? It comes to teach that which Aแธฅerim taught. As it is taught in a baraita: Aแธฅerim 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: โ€œAll your males,โ€ 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.

ื ืฉื™ื ื•ืขื‘ื“ื™ื ืฉืื™ื ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื—ืจืจื™ื ื•ื›ื•ืณ ื‘ืฉืœืžื ื ืฉื™ื ื›ื“ืืžืจืŸ ืืœื ืขื‘ื“ื™ื ืžื ืœืŸ ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื”ื•ื ื ืืžืจ ืงืจื ืืœ ืคื ื™ ื”ืื“ื•ืŸ ื”ืณ ืžื™ ืฉืื™ืŸ ืœื• ืืœื ืื“ื•ืŸ ืื—ื“ ื™ืฆื ื–ื” ืฉื™ืฉ ืœื• ืื“ื•ืŸ ืื—ืจ

ยง 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: โ€œYour males.โ€ However, with regard to slaves, from where do we derive that they are exempt? Rav Huna said that the verse states: โ€œBefore the Lord Godโ€ (Exodus 23:17). This indicates that one who has only one Master is obligated, which excludes this slave, who has another master.

ื”ื ืœืžื” ืœื™ ืงืจื ืžื›ื“ื™ ื›ืœ ืžืฆื•ื” ืฉื”ืืฉื” ื—ื™ื™ื‘ืช ื‘ื” ืขื‘ื“ ื—ื™ื™ื‘ ื‘ื” ื›ืœ ืžืฆื•ื” ืฉืื™ืŸ ื”ืืฉื” ื—ื™ื™ื‘ืช ื‘ื” ืื™ืŸ ื”ืขื‘ื“ ื—ื™ื™ื‘ ื‘ื” ื“ื’ืžืจ “ืœื”” “ืœื”” ืžืืฉื”

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: โ€œTo herโ€ (Leviticus 19:20), written with regard to a designated maidservant, and the phrase: โ€œTo herโ€ (Deuteronomy 24:3), written with regard to a divorced woman.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ื ื ืœื ื ืฆืจื›ื” ืืœื ืœืžื™ ืฉื—ืฆื™ื• ืขื‘ื“ ื•ื—ืฆื™ื• ื‘ืŸ ื—ื•ืจื™ืŸ ื“ื™ืงื ื ืžื™ ื“ืงืชื ื™ ื ืฉื™ื ื•ืขื‘ื“ื™ื ืฉืื™ื ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื—ืจืจื™ืŸ ืžืื™ ืฉืื™ื ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื—ืจืจื™ืŸ ืื™ืœื™ืžื ืฉืื™ื ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื—ืจืจื™ืŸ ื›ืœืœ ืœื™ืชื ื™ ืขื‘ื“ื™ื ืกืชืžื ืืœื ืœืื• ืฉืื™ื ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื—ืจืจื™ืŸ ืœื’ืžืจื™ ื•ืžืื™ ื ื™ื ื”ื• ืžื™ ืฉื—ืฆื™ื• ืขื‘ื“ ื•ื—ืฆื™ื• ื‘ืŸ ื—ื•ืจื™ืŸ ืฉืžืข ืžื™ื ื”

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.

ื•ื”ื—ื™ื’ืจ ื•ื”ืกื•ืžื ื•ื—ื•ืœื” ื•ื”ื–ืงืŸ ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืจื’ืœื™ื ืคืจื˜ ืœื‘ืขืœื™ ืงื‘ื™ืŸ ื“ื‘ืจ ืื—ืจ ืจื’ืœื™ื ืคืจื˜ ืœื—ื™ื’ืจ ื•ืœื—ื•ืœื” ื•ืœืกื•ืžื ื•ืœื–ืงืŸ ื•ืœืฉืื™ื ื• ื™ื›ื•ืœ ืœืขืœื•ืช ื‘ืจื’ืœื™ื• ื•ืฉืื™ื ื• ื™ื›ื•ืœ ืœืขืœื•ืช ื‘ืจื’ืœื™ื• ืœืืชื•ื™ื™ ืžืื™ ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื ืœืืชื•ื™ื™

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: โ€œTimes [regalim]โ€ (Exodus 23:14) alludes to the use of oneโ€™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 โ€œregalimโ€ 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

ืžืคื ืงื™ ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื›ื™ ืชื‘ืื• ืœืจืื•ืช ืคื ื™ ืžื™ ื‘ืงืฉ ื–ืืช ืžื™ื“ื›ื ืจืžื•ืก ื—ืฆืจื™

a delicate man, who cannot walk without shoes. As it is written: โ€œWhen you come to appear before Me, who has required this at your hand, to trample My courts?โ€ (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.

ืชื ื ื”ืขืจืœ ื•ื”ื˜ืžื ืคื˜ื•ืจื™ืŸ ืžืŸ ื”ืจืื™ื™ื” ื‘ืฉืœืžื ื˜ืžื ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ื‘ืืช ืฉืžื” ื•ื”ื‘ืืชื ืฉืžื” ื›ืœ ืฉื™ืฉื ื• ื‘ื‘ื™ืื” ื™ืฉื ื• ื‘ื”ื‘ืื” ื•ื›ืœ ืฉืื™ื ื• ื‘ื‘ื™ืื” ืื™ื ื• ื‘ื”ื‘ืื”

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: โ€œAnd there you shall comeโ€ (Deuteronomy 12:5), followed by: โ€œAnd there you shall bringโ€ (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.

ืืœื ืขืจืœ ืžื ืœืŸ ื”ื ืžื ื™ ืจื‘ื™ ืขืงื™ื‘ื ื”ื™ื ื“ืžืจื‘ื™ ืœืขืจืœ ื›ื˜ืžื ื“ืชื ื™ื ืจื‘ื™ ืขืงื™ื‘ื ืื•ืžืจ ืื™ืฉ ืื™ืฉ ืœืจื‘ื•ืช ืืช ื”ืขืจืœ

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: โ€œAny man [ish ish] of the seed of Aaron that is a leper or has an issue; he shall not eat of the sacred thingsโ€ (Leviticus 22:4), the double use of the term: โ€œIsh,โ€ comes to include the uncircumcised. Like the ritually impure, the uncircumcised may neither eat sacrificial meat nor bring offerings to the Temple.

ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ื˜ืžื ืคื˜ื•ืจ ืžืŸ ื”ืจืื™ื™ื” ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ื‘ืืช ืฉืžื” ื•ื”ื‘ืืชื ืฉืžื” ื›ืœ ืฉื™ืฉื ื• ื‘ื‘ื™ืื” ื™ืฉื ื• ื‘ื”ื‘ืื” ื•ื›ืœ ืฉืื™ื ื• ื‘ื‘ื™ืื” ืื™ื ื• ื‘ื”ื‘ืื”

The Sages taught: A ritually impure person is exempt from the mitzva of appearance, as it is written: โ€œAnd there shall you come,โ€ โ€œand there you shall bring.โ€ 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.

ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ื‘ืŸ ื“ื”ื‘ืื™ ืื•ืžืจ ืžืฉื•ื ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืกื•ืžื ื‘ืื—ืช ืžืขื™ื ื™ื• ืคื˜ื•ืจ ืžืŸ ื”ืจืื™ื™ื” ืฉื ืืžืจ ื™ืจืื” ื™ืจืื” ื›ื“ืจืš ืฉื‘ื ืœืจืื•ืช ื›ืš ื‘ื ืœื™ืจืื•ืช ืžื” ื‘ื ืœืจืื•ืช ื‘ืฉืชื™ ืขื™ื ื™ื• ืืฃ ืœื™ืจืื•ืช ื‘ืฉืชื™ ืขื™ื ื™ื•

Rabbi Yoแธฅanan 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: โ€œThree times a year all your males shall appear [yeraโ€™e] before the Lord Godโ€ (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.

ืจื‘ ื”ื•ื ื ื›ื™ ืžื˜ื™ ืœื”ืื™ ืงืจื ื™ืจืื” ื™ืจืื” ื‘ื›ื™ ืืžืจ ืขื‘ื“ ืฉืจื‘ื• ืžืฆืคื” ืœื• ืœืจืื•ืชื• ื™ืชืจื—ืง ืžืžื ื• ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื›ื™ ืชื‘ื•ืื• ืœืจืื•ืช ืคื ื™ ืžื™ ื‘ืงืฉ ื–ืืช ืžื™ื“ื›ื ืจืžื•ืก ื—ืฆืจื™

The Gemara relates that when Rav Huna reached this verse, which can be read as: โ€œWill seeโ€ [yireh] and โ€œshall appearโ€ [yeraโ€™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: โ€œWhen you come to appear before Me, who has required this at your hand, to trample My courts?โ€ (Isaiah 1:12).

ืจื‘ ื”ื•ื ื ื›ื™ ืžื˜ื™ ืœื”ืื™ ืงืจื ื‘ื›ื™ ื•ื–ื‘ื—ืช ืฉืœืžื™ื ื•ืื›ืœืช ืฉื ืขื‘ื“ ืฉืจื‘ื• ืžืฆืคื” ืœืื›ื•ืœ ืขืœ ืฉืœื—ื ื• ื™ืชืจื—ืง ืžืžื ื• ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ืœืžื” ืœื™ ืจื•ื‘ ื–ื‘ื—ื™ื›ื ื™ืืžืจ ื”ืณ

Similarly, when Rav Huna reached this verse, he cried: โ€œAnd you shall sacrifice peace-offerings, and you shall eat thereโ€ (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: โ€œTo what purpose is the multitude of your offerings to Me? says the Lordโ€ (Isaiah 1:11).

ืจื‘ื™ ืืœืขื–ืจ ื›ื™ ืžื˜ื™ ืœื”ืื™ ืงืจื ื‘ื›ื™ ื•ืœื ื™ื›ืœื• ืื—ื™ื• ืœืขื ื•ืช ืืชื• ื›ื™ ื ื‘ื”ืœื• ืžืคื ื™ื• ื•ืžื” ืชื•ื›ื—ื” ืฉืœ ื‘ืฉืจ ื•ื“ื ื›ืš ืชื•ื›ื—ื” ืฉืœ ื”ืงื“ื•ืฉ ื‘ืจื•ืš ื”ื•ื ืขืœ ืื—ืช ื›ืžื” ื•ื›ืžื” ืจื‘ื™ ืืœืขื–ืจ ื›ื™ ืžื˜ื™ ืœื”ืื™ ืงืจื ื‘ื›ื™ ื•ื™ืืžืจ ืฉืžื•ืืœ ืืœ ืฉืื•ืœ ืœืžื” ื”ืจื’ื–ืชื ื™ ืœื”ืขืœื•ืช ืื•ืชื™ ื•ืžื” ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื”ืฆื“ื™ืง ื”ื™ื” ืžืชื™ื™ืจื ืžืŸ ื”ื“ื™ืŸ ืื ื• ืขืœ ืื—ืช ื›ืžื” ื•ื›ืžื”

The Gemara similarly relates: When Rabbi Elazar reached this verse, he cried: โ€œAnd his brethren could not answer him, for they were affrighted at his presenceโ€ (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: โ€œAnd Samuel said to Saul: Why have you disquieted me, to bring me upโ€ (Iย 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.

ืฉืžื•ืืœ ืžืื™ ื”ื™ื ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ืชืืžืจ ื”ืืฉื” ืืœ ืฉืื•ืœ ืืœื”ื™ื ืจืื™ืชื™ ืขื•ืœื™ื ืขื•ืœื™ื ืชืจื™ ืžืฉืžืข ื—ื“ ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื•ืื™ื“ืš ื“ืื–ืœ ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื•ืืชื™ื™ื” ืœืžืฉื” ื‘ื”ื“ื™ื” ืืžืจ ืœื™ื” ื“ืœืžื ื—ืก ื•ืฉืœื•ื ืœื“ื™ื ื ืžืชื‘ืขื™ื ื ืงื•ื ื‘ื”ื“ืื™ ื“ืœื™ื›ื ืžื™ืœืชื ื“ื›ืชื‘ืช ื‘ืื•ืจื™ื™ืชื ื“ืœื ืงื™ื™ืžืชื™ื”

The Gemara asks: In the case of Samuel, what is it that he feared? As it is written: โ€œAnd the woman said to Saul, I see a godlike being coming up [olim] out of the earthโ€ (Iย Samuel 28:13). โ€œOlim,โ€ 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.

ืจื‘ื™ ืืžื™ ื›ื™ ืžื˜ื™ ืœื”ืื™ ืงืจื ื‘ื›ื™ ื™ืชืŸ ื‘ืขืคืจ ืคื™ื”ื• ืื•ืœื™ ื™ืฉ ืชืงื•ื” ืืžืจ ื›ื•ืœื™ ื”ืื™ ื•ืื•ืœื™ ืจื‘ื™ ืืžื™ ื›ื™ ืžื˜ื™ ืœื”ืื™ ืงืจื ื‘ื›ื™ ื‘ืงืฉื• ืฆื“ืง ื‘ืงืฉื• ืขื ื•ื” ืื•ืœื™ ืชืกืชืจื• ื‘ื™ื•ื ืืฃ ื”ืณ ืืžืจ ื›ื•ืœื™ ื”ืื™ ื•ืื•ืœื™ ืจื‘ื™ ืืกื™ ื›ื™ ืžื˜ื™ ืœื”ืื™ ืงืจื ื‘ื›ื™ ืฉื ืื• ืจืข ื•ืื”ื‘ื• ื˜ื•ื‘ ื•ื”ืฆื™ื’ื• ื‘ืฉืขืจ ืžืฉืคื˜ ืื•ืœื™ ื™ื—ื ืŸ ื”ืณ [ืืœื”ื™] ืฆื‘ืื•ืช ื›ื•ืœื™ ื”ืื™ ื•ืื•ืœื™

When Rabbi Ami reached this verse, he cried: โ€œLet him put his mouth in the dust, perhaps there may be hopeโ€ (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: โ€œSeek righteousness, seek humility; perhaps you shall be hidden on the day of the Lordโ€™s angerโ€(Zephaniah 2:3). He said: All of this is expected of each individual, and only perhaps Godโ€™s anger may be hidden? Likewise, when Rabbi Asi reached this verse, he cried: โ€œHate the evil, and love the good, and establish justice in the gate; perhaps the Lord, the God of hosts, will be graciousโ€ (Amos 5:15). He said: All of this, and only perhaps?

ืจื‘ ื™ื•ืกืฃ ื›ื™ ืžื˜ื™ ืœื”ืื™ ืงืจื ื‘ื›ื™ ื•ื™ืฉ ื ืกืคื” ื‘ืœื ืžืฉืคื˜ ืืžืจ ืžื™ ืื™ื›ื ื“ืื–ื™ืœ ื‘ืœื ื–ืžื ื™ื” ืื™ืŸ ื›ื™ ื”ื ื“ืจื‘ ื‘ื™ื‘ื™ ื‘ืจ ืื‘ื™ื™ ื”ื•ื” ืฉื›ื™ื— ื’ื‘ื™ื” ืžืœืืš ื”ืžื•ืช ืืžืจ ืœื™ื” ืœืฉืœื•ื—ื™ื” ื–ื™ืœ ืื™ื™ืชื™ ืœื™ ืžืจื™ื ืžื’ื“ืœื ืฉื™ืขืจ ื ืฉื™ื™ื ืื–ืœ ืื™ื™ืชื™ ืœื™ื” ืžืจื™ื ืžื’ื“ืœื ื“ืจื“ืงื™

When Rav Yosef reached this verse, he cried: โ€œBut there are those swept away without justiceโ€ (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 womenโ€™s hair. He went, but instead brought him Miriam, the raiser of babies.

ืืžืจ ืœื™ื” ืื ื ืžืจื™ื ืžื’ื“ืœื ืฉื™ืขืจ ื ืฉื™ื™ื ืืžืจื™ ืœืš ืืžืจ ืœื™ื” ืื™ ื”ื›ื™ ืื”ื“ืจื” ืืžืจ ืœื™ื” ื”ื•ืื™ืœ ื•ืื™ื™ืชื™ืชื” ืœื™ื”ื•ื™ ืœืžื ื™ื™ื ื ืืœื ื”ื™ื›ื™ ื™ื›ืœืช ืœื” ื”ื•ืช ื ืงื™ื˜ื ืžืชืืจื ื‘ื™ื“ื” ื•ื”ื•ืช ืงื ืฉื’ืจื

The Angel of Death said to him: I told you to bring Miriam, the raiser of womenโ€™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

  • This monthโ€™s learning is sponsored by Shlomo and Amalia Klapper in honor of the birth of Chiyenna Yochana, named after her great-great-grandmother, Chiyenna Kossovsky.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Elaine Hochberg in honor of her husband, Arie Hochberg, who continues to journey through Daf Yomi with her. โ€œAnd with thanks to Rabbanit Farber and Hadran who have made our learning possible.โ€

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: 2-6- Daf Yomi One Week at a Time

Masechet Chagiga discusses the mitzvah of Aliya Lโ€™Regel, going up to the Temple in Jerusalem during the 3 festivals of...
WhatsApp Image 2022-02-09 at 09.02.04

Introduction to Chagigah

https://youtu.be/74Te41XwXKI  

Chagigah 4

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Chagigah 4

ื›ืžื™ ืฉื ื’ื— ืฉื•ืจ ื—ืžื•ืจ ื•ื’ืžืœ ื•ื ืขืฉื” ืžื•ืขื“ ืœื›ืœ ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ืคืคื ืื™ ืฉืžื™ืข ืœื™ื” ืœืจื‘ ื”ื•ื ื ื”ื ื“ืชื ื™ื ืื™ ื–ื”ื• ืฉื•ื˜ื” ื–ื” ื”ืžืื‘ื“ ื›ืœ ืžื” ืฉื ื•ืชื ื™ื ืœื• ื”ื•ื” ื”ื“ืจ ื‘ื™ื”

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.

ืื™ื‘ืขื™ื ืœื”ื• ื›ื™ ื”ื•ื” ื”ื“ืจ ื‘ื™ื” ืžืžืงืจืข ื›ืกื•ืชื• ื”ื•ื ื“ื”ื•ื” ื”ื“ืจ ื‘ื™ื” ื“ื“ืžื™ื ืœื”ื ืื• ื“ืœืžื ืžื›ื•ืœื”ื• ื”ื•ื” ื”ื“ืจ ืชื™ืงื•

A dilemma was raised before the Sages with regard to Rav Pappaโ€™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.

ื•ื˜ื•ืžื˜ื•ื ื•ืื ื“ืจื•ื’ื™ื ื•ืก ื›ื•ืณ ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ื–ื›ื•ืจ ืœื”ื•ืฆื™ื ืืช ื”ื ืฉื™ื ื–ื›ื•ืจืš ืœื”ื•ืฆื™ื ื˜ื•ืžื˜ื•ื ื•ืื ื“ืจื•ื’ื™ื ื•ืก ื›ืœ ื–ื›ื•ืจืš ืœืจื‘ื•ืช ืืช ื”ืงื˜ื ื™ื

ยง 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: โ€œThree occasions in the year all your males will appear before the Lord Godโ€ (Exodus 23:17), had the verse simply said โ€œmales,โ€ this would serve to exclude women from this mitzva. By specifying โ€œyour males,โ€ it comes to exclude a tumtum and a hermaphrodite as well. Furthermore, when the verse adds โ€œall your males,โ€ this serves to include male minors.

ืืžืจ ืžืจ ื–ื›ื•ืจ ืœื”ื•ืฆื™ื ืืช ื”ื ืฉื™ื ื”ื ืœืžื” ืœื™ ืงืจื ืžื›ื“ื™ ืžืฆื•ืช ืขืฉื” ืฉื”ื–ืžืŸ ื’ืจืžื ื”ื•ื ื•ื›ืœ ืžืฆื•ืช ืขืฉื” ืฉื”ื–ืžืŸ ื’ืจืžื ื ืฉื™ื ืคื˜ื•ืจื•ืช

The Master said in the baraita: โ€œMalesโ€ 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.

ืืฆื˜ืจื™ืš ืกืœืงื ื“ืขืชืš ืืžื™ื ื ื ื™ืœืฃ ืจืื™ื™ื” ืจืื™ื™ื” ืžื”ืงื”ืœ ืžื” ืœื”ืœืŸ ื ืฉื™ื ื—ื™ื™ื‘ื•ืช ืืฃ ื›ืืŸ ื ืฉื™ื ื—ื™ื™ื‘ื•ืช ืงื ืžืฉืžืข ืœืŸ

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.

ืืžืจ ืžืจ ื–ื›ื•ืจืš ืœื”ื•ืฆื™ื ื˜ื•ืžื˜ื•ื ื•ืื ื“ืจื•ื’ื™ื ื•ืก ื‘ืฉืœืžื ืื ื“ืจื•ื’ื™ื ื•ืก ืืฆื˜ืจื™ืš ืกืœืงื ื“ืขืชืš ืืžื™ื ื ื”ื•ืื™ืœ ื•ืื™ืช ืœื™ื” ืฆื“ ื–ื›ืจื•ืช ืœื™ื—ื™ื™ื‘ ืงื ืžืฉืžืข ืœืŸ ื“ื‘ืจื™ื” ื‘ืคื ื™ ืขืฆืžื• ื”ื•ื

The Master said in the baraita: โ€œYour malesโ€ 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.

ืืœื ื˜ื•ืžื˜ื•ื ืกืคื™ืงื ื”ื•ื ืžื™ ืืฆื˜ืจื™ืš ืงืจื ืœืžืขื•ื˜ื™ ืกืคื™ืงื ืืžืจ ืื‘ื™ื™ ื›ืฉื‘ื™ืฆื™ื• ืžื‘ื—ื•ืฅ

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.

ืืžืจ ืžืจ ื›ืœ ื–ื›ื•ืจืš ืœืจื‘ื•ืช ืืช ื”ืงื˜ื ื™ื ื•ื”ืชื ืŸ ื—ื•ืฅ ืžื—ืจืฉ ืฉื•ื˜ื” ื•ืงื˜ืŸ ืืžืจ ืื‘ื™ื™ ืœื ืงืฉื™ื ื›ืืŸ ื‘ืงื˜ืŸ ืฉื”ื’ื™ืข ืœื—ื™ื ื•ืš ื›ืืŸ ื‘ืงื˜ืŸ ืฉืœื ื”ื’ื™ืข ืœื—ื™ื ื•ืš ืงื˜ืŸ ืฉื”ื’ื™ืข ืœื—ื™ื ื•ืš ื“ืจื‘ื ืŸ ื”ื™ื ืื™ืŸ ื”ื›ื™ ื ืžื™ ื•ืงืจื ืืกืžื›ืชื ื‘ืขืœืžื

The Master said in the baraita: โ€œAll your malesโ€ comes to include minors. The Gemara asks: Didnโ€™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.

ื•ืืœื ืงืจื ืœืžืื™ ืืชื ืœื›ื“ืื—ืจื™ื ื“ืชื ืŸ ืื—ืจื™ื ืื•ืžืจื™ื ื”ืžืงืžืฅ ื•ื”ืžืฆืจืฃ ื ื—ืฉืช ื•ื”ื‘ื•ืจืกื™ ืคื˜ื•ืจื™ืŸ ืžืŸ ื”ืจืื™ื™ื” ืžืฉื•ื ืฉื ืืžืจ ื›ืœ ื–ื›ื•ืจืš ืžื™ ืฉื™ื›ื•ืœ ืœืขืœื•ืช ืขื ื›ืœ ื–ื›ื•ืจืš ื™ืฆืื• ืืœื• ืฉืื™ื ืŸ ืจืื•ื™ื™ืŸ ืœืขืœื•ืช ืขื ื›ืœ ื–ื›ื•ืจืš

The Gemara asks: Rather, for what purpose does the verse: โ€œAll your males,โ€ come? It comes to teach that which Aแธฅerim taught. As it is taught in a baraita: Aแธฅerim 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: โ€œAll your males,โ€ 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.

ื ืฉื™ื ื•ืขื‘ื“ื™ื ืฉืื™ื ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื—ืจืจื™ื ื•ื›ื•ืณ ื‘ืฉืœืžื ื ืฉื™ื ื›ื“ืืžืจืŸ ืืœื ืขื‘ื“ื™ื ืžื ืœืŸ ืืžืจ ืจื‘ ื”ื•ื ื ืืžืจ ืงืจื ืืœ ืคื ื™ ื”ืื“ื•ืŸ ื”ืณ ืžื™ ืฉืื™ืŸ ืœื• ืืœื ืื“ื•ืŸ ืื—ื“ ื™ืฆื ื–ื” ืฉื™ืฉ ืœื• ืื“ื•ืŸ ืื—ืจ

ยง 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: โ€œYour males.โ€ However, with regard to slaves, from where do we derive that they are exempt? Rav Huna said that the verse states: โ€œBefore the Lord Godโ€ (Exodus 23:17). This indicates that one who has only one Master is obligated, which excludes this slave, who has another master.

ื”ื ืœืžื” ืœื™ ืงืจื ืžื›ื“ื™ ื›ืœ ืžืฆื•ื” ืฉื”ืืฉื” ื—ื™ื™ื‘ืช ื‘ื” ืขื‘ื“ ื—ื™ื™ื‘ ื‘ื” ื›ืœ ืžืฆื•ื” ืฉืื™ืŸ ื”ืืฉื” ื—ื™ื™ื‘ืช ื‘ื” ืื™ืŸ ื”ืขื‘ื“ ื—ื™ื™ื‘ ื‘ื” ื“ื’ืžืจ “ืœื”” “ืœื”” ืžืืฉื”

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: โ€œTo herโ€ (Leviticus 19:20), written with regard to a designated maidservant, and the phrase: โ€œTo herโ€ (Deuteronomy 24:3), written with regard to a divorced woman.

ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื™ื ื ืœื ื ืฆืจื›ื” ืืœื ืœืžื™ ืฉื—ืฆื™ื• ืขื‘ื“ ื•ื—ืฆื™ื• ื‘ืŸ ื—ื•ืจื™ืŸ ื“ื™ืงื ื ืžื™ ื“ืงืชื ื™ ื ืฉื™ื ื•ืขื‘ื“ื™ื ืฉืื™ื ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื—ืจืจื™ืŸ ืžืื™ ืฉืื™ื ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื—ืจืจื™ืŸ ืื™ืœื™ืžื ืฉืื™ื ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื—ืจืจื™ืŸ ื›ืœืœ ืœื™ืชื ื™ ืขื‘ื“ื™ื ืกืชืžื ืืœื ืœืื• ืฉืื™ื ืŸ ืžืฉื•ื—ืจืจื™ืŸ ืœื’ืžืจื™ ื•ืžืื™ ื ื™ื ื”ื• ืžื™ ืฉื—ืฆื™ื• ืขื‘ื“ ื•ื—ืฆื™ื• ื‘ืŸ ื—ื•ืจื™ืŸ ืฉืžืข ืžื™ื ื”

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.

ื•ื”ื—ื™ื’ืจ ื•ื”ืกื•ืžื ื•ื—ื•ืœื” ื•ื”ื–ืงืŸ ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ืจื’ืœื™ื ืคืจื˜ ืœื‘ืขืœื™ ืงื‘ื™ืŸ ื“ื‘ืจ ืื—ืจ ืจื’ืœื™ื ืคืจื˜ ืœื—ื™ื’ืจ ื•ืœื—ื•ืœื” ื•ืœืกื•ืžื ื•ืœื–ืงืŸ ื•ืœืฉืื™ื ื• ื™ื›ื•ืœ ืœืขืœื•ืช ื‘ืจื’ืœื™ื• ื•ืฉืื™ื ื• ื™ื›ื•ืœ ืœืขืœื•ืช ื‘ืจื’ืœื™ื• ืœืืชื•ื™ื™ ืžืื™ ืืžืจ ืจื‘ื ืœืืชื•ื™ื™

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: โ€œTimes [regalim]โ€ (Exodus 23:14) alludes to the use of oneโ€™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 โ€œregalimโ€ 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

ืžืคื ืงื™ ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื›ื™ ืชื‘ืื• ืœืจืื•ืช ืคื ื™ ืžื™ ื‘ืงืฉ ื–ืืช ืžื™ื“ื›ื ืจืžื•ืก ื—ืฆืจื™

a delicate man, who cannot walk without shoes. As it is written: โ€œWhen you come to appear before Me, who has required this at your hand, to trample My courts?โ€ (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.

ืชื ื ื”ืขืจืœ ื•ื”ื˜ืžื ืคื˜ื•ืจื™ืŸ ืžืŸ ื”ืจืื™ื™ื” ื‘ืฉืœืžื ื˜ืžื ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ื‘ืืช ืฉืžื” ื•ื”ื‘ืืชื ืฉืžื” ื›ืœ ืฉื™ืฉื ื• ื‘ื‘ื™ืื” ื™ืฉื ื• ื‘ื”ื‘ืื” ื•ื›ืœ ืฉืื™ื ื• ื‘ื‘ื™ืื” ืื™ื ื• ื‘ื”ื‘ืื”

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: โ€œAnd there you shall comeโ€ (Deuteronomy 12:5), followed by: โ€œAnd there you shall bringโ€ (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.

ืืœื ืขืจืœ ืžื ืœืŸ ื”ื ืžื ื™ ืจื‘ื™ ืขืงื™ื‘ื ื”ื™ื ื“ืžืจื‘ื™ ืœืขืจืœ ื›ื˜ืžื ื“ืชื ื™ื ืจื‘ื™ ืขืงื™ื‘ื ืื•ืžืจ ืื™ืฉ ืื™ืฉ ืœืจื‘ื•ืช ืืช ื”ืขืจืœ

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: โ€œAny man [ish ish] of the seed of Aaron that is a leper or has an issue; he shall not eat of the sacred thingsโ€ (Leviticus 22:4), the double use of the term: โ€œIsh,โ€ comes to include the uncircumcised. Like the ritually impure, the uncircumcised may neither eat sacrificial meat nor bring offerings to the Temple.

ืชื ื• ืจื‘ื ืŸ ื˜ืžื ืคื˜ื•ืจ ืžืŸ ื”ืจืื™ื™ื” ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ื‘ืืช ืฉืžื” ื•ื”ื‘ืืชื ืฉืžื” ื›ืœ ืฉื™ืฉื ื• ื‘ื‘ื™ืื” ื™ืฉื ื• ื‘ื”ื‘ืื” ื•ื›ืœ ืฉืื™ื ื• ื‘ื‘ื™ืื” ืื™ื ื• ื‘ื”ื‘ืื”

The Sages taught: A ritually impure person is exempt from the mitzva of appearance, as it is written: โ€œAnd there shall you come,โ€ โ€œand there you shall bring.โ€ 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.

ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื•ื—ื ืŸ ื‘ืŸ ื“ื”ื‘ืื™ ืื•ืžืจ ืžืฉื•ื ืจื‘ื™ ื™ื”ื•ื“ื” ืกื•ืžื ื‘ืื—ืช ืžืขื™ื ื™ื• ืคื˜ื•ืจ ืžืŸ ื”ืจืื™ื™ื” ืฉื ืืžืจ ื™ืจืื” ื™ืจืื” ื›ื“ืจืš ืฉื‘ื ืœืจืื•ืช ื›ืš ื‘ื ืœื™ืจืื•ืช ืžื” ื‘ื ืœืจืื•ืช ื‘ืฉืชื™ ืขื™ื ื™ื• ืืฃ ืœื™ืจืื•ืช ื‘ืฉืชื™ ืขื™ื ื™ื•

Rabbi Yoแธฅanan 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: โ€œThree times a year all your males shall appear [yeraโ€™e] before the Lord Godโ€ (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.

ืจื‘ ื”ื•ื ื ื›ื™ ืžื˜ื™ ืœื”ืื™ ืงืจื ื™ืจืื” ื™ืจืื” ื‘ื›ื™ ืืžืจ ืขื‘ื“ ืฉืจื‘ื• ืžืฆืคื” ืœื• ืœืจืื•ืชื• ื™ืชืจื—ืง ืžืžื ื• ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื›ื™ ืชื‘ื•ืื• ืœืจืื•ืช ืคื ื™ ืžื™ ื‘ืงืฉ ื–ืืช ืžื™ื“ื›ื ืจืžื•ืก ื—ืฆืจื™

The Gemara relates that when Rav Huna reached this verse, which can be read as: โ€œWill seeโ€ [yireh] and โ€œshall appearโ€ [yeraโ€™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: โ€œWhen you come to appear before Me, who has required this at your hand, to trample My courts?โ€ (Isaiah 1:12).

ืจื‘ ื”ื•ื ื ื›ื™ ืžื˜ื™ ืœื”ืื™ ืงืจื ื‘ื›ื™ ื•ื–ื‘ื—ืช ืฉืœืžื™ื ื•ืื›ืœืช ืฉื ืขื‘ื“ ืฉืจื‘ื• ืžืฆืคื” ืœืื›ื•ืœ ืขืœ ืฉืœื—ื ื• ื™ืชืจื—ืง ืžืžื ื• ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ืœืžื” ืœื™ ืจื•ื‘ ื–ื‘ื—ื™ื›ื ื™ืืžืจ ื”ืณ

Similarly, when Rav Huna reached this verse, he cried: โ€œAnd you shall sacrifice peace-offerings, and you shall eat thereโ€ (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: โ€œTo what purpose is the multitude of your offerings to Me? says the Lordโ€ (Isaiah 1:11).

ืจื‘ื™ ืืœืขื–ืจ ื›ื™ ืžื˜ื™ ืœื”ืื™ ืงืจื ื‘ื›ื™ ื•ืœื ื™ื›ืœื• ืื—ื™ื• ืœืขื ื•ืช ืืชื• ื›ื™ ื ื‘ื”ืœื• ืžืคื ื™ื• ื•ืžื” ืชื•ื›ื—ื” ืฉืœ ื‘ืฉืจ ื•ื“ื ื›ืš ืชื•ื›ื—ื” ืฉืœ ื”ืงื“ื•ืฉ ื‘ืจื•ืš ื”ื•ื ืขืœ ืื—ืช ื›ืžื” ื•ื›ืžื” ืจื‘ื™ ืืœืขื–ืจ ื›ื™ ืžื˜ื™ ืœื”ืื™ ืงืจื ื‘ื›ื™ ื•ื™ืืžืจ ืฉืžื•ืืœ ืืœ ืฉืื•ืœ ืœืžื” ื”ืจื’ื–ืชื ื™ ืœื”ืขืœื•ืช ืื•ืชื™ ื•ืžื” ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื”ืฆื“ื™ืง ื”ื™ื” ืžืชื™ื™ืจื ืžืŸ ื”ื“ื™ืŸ ืื ื• ืขืœ ืื—ืช ื›ืžื” ื•ื›ืžื”

The Gemara similarly relates: When Rabbi Elazar reached this verse, he cried: โ€œAnd his brethren could not answer him, for they were affrighted at his presenceโ€ (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: โ€œAnd Samuel said to Saul: Why have you disquieted me, to bring me upโ€ (Iย 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.

ืฉืžื•ืืœ ืžืื™ ื”ื™ื ื“ื›ืชื™ื‘ ื•ืชืืžืจ ื”ืืฉื” ืืœ ืฉืื•ืœ ืืœื”ื™ื ืจืื™ืชื™ ืขื•ืœื™ื ืขื•ืœื™ื ืชืจื™ ืžืฉืžืข ื—ื“ ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื•ืื™ื“ืš ื“ืื–ืœ ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื•ืืชื™ื™ื” ืœืžืฉื” ื‘ื”ื“ื™ื” ืืžืจ ืœื™ื” ื“ืœืžื ื—ืก ื•ืฉืœื•ื ืœื“ื™ื ื ืžืชื‘ืขื™ื ื ืงื•ื ื‘ื”ื“ืื™ ื“ืœื™ื›ื ืžื™ืœืชื ื“ื›ืชื‘ืช ื‘ืื•ืจื™ื™ืชื ื“ืœื ืงื™ื™ืžืชื™ื”

The Gemara asks: In the case of Samuel, what is it that he feared? As it is written: โ€œAnd the woman said to Saul, I see a godlike being coming up [olim] out of the earthโ€ (Iย Samuel 28:13). โ€œOlim,โ€ 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.

ืจื‘ื™ ืืžื™ ื›ื™ ืžื˜ื™ ืœื”ืื™ ืงืจื ื‘ื›ื™ ื™ืชืŸ ื‘ืขืคืจ ืคื™ื”ื• ืื•ืœื™ ื™ืฉ ืชืงื•ื” ืืžืจ ื›ื•ืœื™ ื”ืื™ ื•ืื•ืœื™ ืจื‘ื™ ืืžื™ ื›ื™ ืžื˜ื™ ืœื”ืื™ ืงืจื ื‘ื›ื™ ื‘ืงืฉื• ืฆื“ืง ื‘ืงืฉื• ืขื ื•ื” ืื•ืœื™ ืชืกืชืจื• ื‘ื™ื•ื ืืฃ ื”ืณ ืืžืจ ื›ื•ืœื™ ื”ืื™ ื•ืื•ืœื™ ืจื‘ื™ ืืกื™ ื›ื™ ืžื˜ื™ ืœื”ืื™ ืงืจื ื‘ื›ื™ ืฉื ืื• ืจืข ื•ืื”ื‘ื• ื˜ื•ื‘ ื•ื”ืฆื™ื’ื• ื‘ืฉืขืจ ืžืฉืคื˜ ืื•ืœื™ ื™ื—ื ืŸ ื”ืณ [ืืœื”ื™] ืฆื‘ืื•ืช ื›ื•ืœื™ ื”ืื™ ื•ืื•ืœื™

When Rabbi Ami reached this verse, he cried: โ€œLet him put his mouth in the dust, perhaps there may be hopeโ€ (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: โ€œSeek righteousness, seek humility; perhaps you shall be hidden on the day of the Lordโ€™s angerโ€(Zephaniah 2:3). He said: All of this is expected of each individual, and only perhaps Godโ€™s anger may be hidden? Likewise, when Rabbi Asi reached this verse, he cried: โ€œHate the evil, and love the good, and establish justice in the gate; perhaps the Lord, the God of hosts, will be graciousโ€ (Amos 5:15). He said: All of this, and only perhaps?

ืจื‘ ื™ื•ืกืฃ ื›ื™ ืžื˜ื™ ืœื”ืื™ ืงืจื ื‘ื›ื™ ื•ื™ืฉ ื ืกืคื” ื‘ืœื ืžืฉืคื˜ ืืžืจ ืžื™ ืื™ื›ื ื“ืื–ื™ืœ ื‘ืœื ื–ืžื ื™ื” ืื™ืŸ ื›ื™ ื”ื ื“ืจื‘ ื‘ื™ื‘ื™ ื‘ืจ ืื‘ื™ื™ ื”ื•ื” ืฉื›ื™ื— ื’ื‘ื™ื” ืžืœืืš ื”ืžื•ืช ืืžืจ ืœื™ื” ืœืฉืœื•ื—ื™ื” ื–ื™ืœ ืื™ื™ืชื™ ืœื™ ืžืจื™ื ืžื’ื“ืœื ืฉื™ืขืจ ื ืฉื™ื™ื ืื–ืœ ืื™ื™ืชื™ ืœื™ื” ืžืจื™ื ืžื’ื“ืœื ื“ืจื“ืงื™

When Rav Yosef reached this verse, he cried: โ€œBut there are those swept away without justiceโ€ (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 womenโ€™s hair. He went, but instead brought him Miriam, the raiser of babies.

ืืžืจ ืœื™ื” ืื ื ืžืจื™ื ืžื’ื“ืœื ืฉื™ืขืจ ื ืฉื™ื™ื ืืžืจื™ ืœืš ืืžืจ ืœื™ื” ืื™ ื”ื›ื™ ืื”ื“ืจื” ืืžืจ ืœื™ื” ื”ื•ืื™ืœ ื•ืื™ื™ืชื™ืชื” ืœื™ื”ื•ื™ ืœืžื ื™ื™ื ื ืืœื ื”ื™ื›ื™ ื™ื›ืœืช ืœื” ื”ื•ืช ื ืงื™ื˜ื ืžืชืืจื ื‘ื™ื“ื” ื•ื”ื•ืช ืงื ืฉื’ืจื

The Angel of Death said to him: I told you to bring Miriam, the raiser of womenโ€™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

Scroll To Top