Horayot 14
Share this shiur:
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Summary
To view today’s daf in Sefaria, click here.
A braita outlines the protocols for showing respect to the Nasi, the Av Beit Din, and the Chacham—each accorded honor in a distinct manner. This differentiation was instituted by Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel (the Nasi) on a day when Rabbi Natan (Av Beit Din) and Rabbi Meir (the Chacham) were absent from the Beit Midrash. Feeling slighted, they conspired to remove Rabban Shimon from his position. However, their plan was overheard by Rabbi Yaakov ben Karshi and ultimately thwarted.
Upon discovering their plot, Rabban Shimon expelled them from the Beit Midrash. In response, they began submitting challenging questions into the study hall. When the students inside couldn’t answer, they would send in the correct answers. Rabbi Yosi eventually intervened, arguing that it was absurd for Torah to remain outside while the students sat within. Rabban Shimon agreed to reinstate them—but imposed a penalty: the Torah they taught would no longer be attributed to them by name. Thus, Rabbi Meir’s teachings were transmitted as “acherim” (“others”), and Rabbi Natan’s as “yesh omrim” (“some say”).
Later, they both dreamt that they should seek reconciliation with Rabban Shimon. Only Rabbi Natan acted on the dream. But Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel was not exactly willing to reconcile.
A generation later, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was teaching his son, Rabbi Shimon, a teaching of Rabbi Meir, referring to it as “acherim omrim.” When his son asked why he didn’t cite Rabbi Meir directly, Rabbi Yehuda explained that these sages had once tried to undermine their family’s honor. Rabbi Shimon replied that they were long deceased and had failed in their attempt. Rabbi Yehuda relented and agreed to cite Rabbi Meir—though still indirectly, saying “They say in the name of Rabbi Meir.”
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel and other sages also debated a broader question: is it better to be a sinai—one with vast Torah knowledge – or an oker harim – one with powerful analytical skills who can “uproot mountains”? Rav Yosef was a sinai, while Raba was an oker harim. Although the scholars in Israel recommended Rav Yosef for leadership, he humbly deferred to Raba. Raba led the yeshiva for 22 years, and only after his passing did Rav Yosef assume the role. During Raba’s tenure, Rav Yosef refrained from receiving honor out of respect.
In another case, Abaye, Rava, Rabbi Zeira, and Raba bar Matna were studying together and needed a leader. Abaye was chosen, as his teachings remained unrefuted, unlike the others.
The Gemara concludes with a question: Who was greater—Rabbi Zeira or Raba bar Rav Matna? Each had unique strengths, and the matter is left unresolved with the classic Talmudic closure: teiku.
Today’s daily daf tools:
Siyum Masechet Horayot and Seder Nezikin is sponsored by the Tannenbaum family in loving memory of their beloved mother/grandmother Ruth Zemsky z”l, Raizel bat Chaya Kayla, on her 9th yahrzeit on 23rd of Elul. “Marking the completion of Nezikin, a seder that is focused on bein adam l’chavero- both in the building and healing of society, aptly reflects the life she lead. She was a paragon of sensitivity and taking care of “the other”, often those unseen, in community, work and home. Her example continues to inspire us all. Yehi zichra baruch.”
Horayot 14
לֹא הָיָה קָרֵב. אָמַר לוֹ: מִי הֵם הַלָּלוּ שֶׁמֵּימֵיהֶם אָנוּ שׁוֹתִים וּשְׁמוֹתָם אֵין אָנוּ מַזְכִּירִים? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: בְּנֵי אָדָם שֶׁבִּקְּשׁוּ לַעֲקוֹר כְּבוֹדְךָ וּכְבוֹד בֵּית אָבִיךָ.
it would not be sacrificed. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s son said to him: Who are these Sages whose water we drink but whose names we do not mention? Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to him: They are people who sought to abolish your honor and the honor of your father’s house.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״גַּם אַהֲבָתָם גַּם שִׂנְאָתָם גַּם קִנְאָתָם כְּבָר אָבָדָה״! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״הָאוֹיֵב תַּמּוּ חֳרָבוֹת לָנֶצַח״. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָנֵי מִלֵּי הֵיכָא דְּאַהֲנוֹ מַעֲשַׂיְיהוּ, רַבָּנַן לָא אַהֲנוֹ מַעֲשַׂיְיהוּ! הֲדַר אַתְנִי לֵיהּ, אָמְרוּ מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר: אִילּוּ הָיָה תְּמוּרָה לֹא הָיָה קָרֵב. אָמַר רָבָא: אֲפִילּוּ רַבִּי דְּעִנְוְותָנָא הוּא (תְּנָא), ״אָמְרוּ מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר״. ״אָמַר רַבִּי מֵאִיר״ לָא אָמַר.
His son said to him, citing the verse: “Their love as well as their hatred and their envy is long ago perished” (Ecclesiastes 9:6): That was long ago and they have already died. Therefore, there is no harm in mentioning their names. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to him: But it is also stated: “The enemy are come to an end; the wasted places are forever” (Psalms 9:7). Although the enemies died, the desolation that they created remains. Therefore, although they are dead, their names should not be mentioned. Rabban Shimon said to his father: These matters apply in a case where their actions were effective. In the case of these Sages, their actions were not effective. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi then taught him: The Sages said in the name of Rabbi Meir: If it was considered a substitute, it would not be sacrificed. Rava said: Even Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, who is humble, taught: The Sages said in the name of Rabbi Meir. But he did not say directly: Rabbi Meir said.
אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: פְּלִיגוּ בַּהּ רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְרַבָּנַן, חַד אָמַר: סִינַי עֲדִיף, וְחַד אָמַר: עוֹקֵר הָרִים עֲדִיף.
§ Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel and the Rabbis disagreed with regard to this matter. One said: Sinai, i.e., one who is extremely knowledgeable, is preferable; and one said: One who uproots mountains, i.e., one who is extremely incisive, is preferable.
רַב יוֹסֵף סִינַי, רַבָּה עוֹקֵר הָרִים. שְׁלַחוּ לְתַמָּן: אֵיזֶה מֵהֶם קוֹדֵם? שְׁלַחוּ לְהוּ: סִינַי עֲדִיף, דְּאָמַר מָר: הַכֹּל צְרִיכִין לְמָרֵי חִטַּיָּא, וַאֲפִילּוּ הָכִי לָא קַבֵּיל רַב יוֹסֵף עֲלֵיהּ. מְלַךְ רַבָּה עֶשְׂרִין וְתַרְתֵּי שְׁנִין, וַהֲדַר מְלַךְ רַב יוֹסֵף. וְכֹל שְׁנֵי דִּמְלַךְ רַבָּה, רַב יוֹסֵף אֲפִילּוּ אוּמָּנָא לְבֵיתֵיהּ לָא (חֲלֵיף).
The Gemara relates that this is not merely a theoretical dispute; rather, at one point it had practical ramifications. Rav Yosef was Sinai; Rabba was one who uproots mountains. They sent a message from Babylonia to there, Eretz Yisrael: Which takes precedence? They sent in response: Sinai is preferable, as the Master said: Everyone requires the owner of the wheat, i.e., one who is expert in the sources. And even so, Rav Yosef did not accept upon himself the appointment of head of the yeshiva. Rabba reigned for twenty-two years, and then Rav Yosef reigned. The Gemara relates that in all those years that Rabba presided, Rav Yosef did not even call a bloodletter to his home. Rav Yosef did not assume even the slightest air of authority, in deference to Rabba, and would go to seek out the bloodletter rather than expecting that the bloodletter would accommodate him.
אַבָּיֵי וְרָבָא וְרַבִּי זֵירָא וְרַבָּה בַּר מַתְנָה הֲווֹ יָתְבִי וַהֲווֹ צְרִיכִי רֵישָׁא, אָמְרִי: כֹּל דְּאָמַר מִלְּתָא וְלָא מִפְּרִיךְ, לֶהֱוֵי רֵישָׁא. דְּכוּלְּהוּ אִיפְּרִיךְ, דְּאַבָּיֵי לָא אִיפְּרִיךְ. חַזְיֵיהּ רַבָּה לְאַבָּיֵי דִּגְבַהּ רֵישֵׁאּ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: נַחְמָנִי, פְּתַח וְאֵימָא.
The Gemara relates: Abaye, Rava, Rabbi Zeira, and Rabba bar Mattana were sitting and studying in a group and were in need of a head for their group. They said: Let anyone who will say a matter that is not refuted be the head. Everyone’s statements were refuted, and the statement of Abaye was not refuted. Rabba saw that Abaye raised his head, i.e., he noticed that his statement was not refuted. Rabba said to him: Naḥmani, calling Abaye by his name rather than by his nickname, begin and say your lecture.
אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: רַבִּי זֵירָא וְרַבָּה בַּר רַב מַתְנָה הֵי מִנַּיְיהוּ עֲדִיף? רַבִּי זֵירָא חָרִיף וּמַקְשֶׁה, וְרַבָּה בַּר רַב מַתְנָה מָתוּן וּמַסֵּיק, מַאי? תֵּיקוּ.
A dilemma was raised before the Sages: Between Rabbi Zeira and Rabba bar Rav Mattana, which of them is preferable? Rabbi Zeira is incisive and raises pertinent difficulties, and Rabba bar Rav Mattana is moderate and not so incisive, but ultimately he draws the appropriate conclusions. What is the conclusion? Which is preferable? The Gemara concludes: The dilemma shall stand unresolved.
הֲדַרַן עֲלָךְ כֹּהֵן מָשִׁיחַ, וּסְלִיקָא לַהּ מַסֶּכֶת הוֹרָיוֹת.
Today’s daily daf tools:
Delve Deeper
Broaden your understanding of the topics on this daf with classes and podcasts from top women Talmud scholars.
Horayot 14: Teiku – There’s Always More to Learn
New to Talmud?
Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you.
The Hadran Women’s Tapestry
Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories.
I began my Daf Yomi journey on January 5, 2020. I had never learned Talmud before. Initially it struck me as a bunch of inane and arcane details with mind bending logic. I am now smitten. Rabbanit Farber brings the page to life and I am eager to learn with her every day!
Highland Park, United States
Since I started in January of 2020, Daf Yomi has changed my life. It connects me to Jews all over the world, especially learned women. It makes cooking, gardening, and folding laundry into acts of Torah study. Daf Yomi enables me to participate in a conversation with and about our heritage that has been going on for more than 2000 years.
Skokie, IL, United States
I started the daf at the beginning of this cycle in January 2020. My husband, my children, grandchildren and siblings have been very supportive. As someone who learned and taught Tanach and mefarshim for many years, it has been an amazing adventure to complete the six sedarim of Mishnah, and now to study Talmud on a daily basis along with Rabbanit Michelle and the wonderful women of Hadran.
Jerusalem, Israel
I began to learn this cycle of Daf Yomi after my husband passed away 2 1/2 years ago. It seemed a good way to connect to him. Even though I don’t know whether he would have encouraged women learning Gemara, it would have opened wonderful conversations. It also gives me more depth for understanding my frum children and grandchildren. Thank you Hadran and Rabbanit Michelle Farber!!
Tzur Hadassah, Israel
In January 2020 on a Shabbaton to Baltimore I heard about the new cycle of Daf Yomi after the siyum celebration in NYC stadium. I started to read “ a daily dose of Talmud “ and really enjoyed it . It led me to google “ do Orthodox women study Talmud? “ and found HADRAN! Since then I listen to the podcast every morning, participate in classes and siyum. I love to learn, this is amazing! Thank you
Atlanta, United States
I was inspired to start learning after attending the 2020 siyum in Binyanei Hauma. It has been a great experience for me. It’s amazing to see the origins of stories I’ve heard and rituals I’ve participated in my whole life. Even when I don’t understand the daf itself, I believe that the commitment to learning every day is valuable and has multiple benefits. And there will be another daf tomorrow!
Jerusalem, Israel
Los Angeles, United States
Oceanside NY, United States
I began my journey two years ago at the beginning of this cycle of the daf yomi. It has been an incredible, challenging experience and has given me a new perspective of Torah Sh’baal Peh and the role it plays in our lives
Efrat, Israel
Minnesota, United States
I attended the Siyum so that I could tell my granddaughter that I had been there. Then I decided to listen on Spotify and after the siyum of Brachot, Covid and zoom began. It gave structure to my day. I learn with people from all over the world who are now my friends – yet most of us have never met. I can’t imagine life without it. Thank you Rabbanit Michelle.
Raanana, Israel
I started learning at the start of this cycle, and quickly fell in love. It has become such an important part of my day, enriching every part of my life.
Toronto, Canada
See video
Raanana, Israel
I started at the beginning of this cycle. No 1 reason, but here’s 5.
In 2019 I read about the upcoming siyum hashas.
There was a sermon at shul about how anyone can learn Talmud.
Talmud references come up when I am studying. I wanted to know more.
Yentl was on telly. Not a great movie but it’s about studying Talmud.
I went to the Hadran website: A new cycle is starting. I’m gonna do this
Cambridge, United Kingdom
Los Angeles, United States
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
I started learning Talmud with R’ Haramati in Yeshivah of Flatbush. But after a respite of 60 years, Rabbanit Michelle lit my fire – after attending the last three world siyumim in Miami Beach, Meadowlands and Boca Raton, and now that I’m retired, I decided – “I can do this!” It has been an incredible journey so far, and I look forward to learning Daf everyday – Mazal Tov to everyone!
Florida, United States
Years ago, I attended the local Siyum HaShas with my high school class. It was inspiring! Through that cycle and the next one, I studied masekhtot on my own and then did “daf yomi practice.” The amazing Hadran Siyum HaShas event firmed my resolve to “really do” Daf Yomi this time. It has become a family goal. We’ve supported each other through challenges, and now we’re at the Siyum of Seder Moed!
Jerusalem, Israel
Ontario, Canada
I tried Daf Yomi in the middle of the last cycle after realizing I could listen to Michelle’s shiurim online. It lasted all of 2 days! Then the new cycle started just days before my father’s first yahrzeit and my youngest daughter’s bat mitzvah. It seemed the right time for a new beginning. My family, friends, colleagues are immensely supportive!
Zichron Yaakov, Israel
Horayot 14
לֹא הָיָה קָרֵב. אָמַר לוֹ: מִי הֵם הַלָּלוּ שֶׁמֵּימֵיהֶם אָנוּ שׁוֹתִים וּשְׁמוֹתָם אֵין אָנוּ מַזְכִּירִים? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: בְּנֵי אָדָם שֶׁבִּקְּשׁוּ לַעֲקוֹר כְּבוֹדְךָ וּכְבוֹד בֵּית אָבִיךָ.
it would not be sacrificed. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s son said to him: Who are these Sages whose water we drink but whose names we do not mention? Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to him: They are people who sought to abolish your honor and the honor of your father’s house.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״גַּם אַהֲבָתָם גַּם שִׂנְאָתָם גַּם קִנְאָתָם כְּבָר אָבָדָה״! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״הָאוֹיֵב תַּמּוּ חֳרָבוֹת לָנֶצַח״. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָנֵי מִלֵּי הֵיכָא דְּאַהֲנוֹ מַעֲשַׂיְיהוּ, רַבָּנַן לָא אַהֲנוֹ מַעֲשַׂיְיהוּ! הֲדַר אַתְנִי לֵיהּ, אָמְרוּ מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר: אִילּוּ הָיָה תְּמוּרָה לֹא הָיָה קָרֵב. אָמַר רָבָא: אֲפִילּוּ רַבִּי דְּעִנְוְותָנָא הוּא (תְּנָא), ״אָמְרוּ מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר״. ״אָמַר רַבִּי מֵאִיר״ לָא אָמַר.
His son said to him, citing the verse: “Their love as well as their hatred and their envy is long ago perished” (Ecclesiastes 9:6): That was long ago and they have already died. Therefore, there is no harm in mentioning their names. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to him: But it is also stated: “The enemy are come to an end; the wasted places are forever” (Psalms 9:7). Although the enemies died, the desolation that they created remains. Therefore, although they are dead, their names should not be mentioned. Rabban Shimon said to his father: These matters apply in a case where their actions were effective. In the case of these Sages, their actions were not effective. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi then taught him: The Sages said in the name of Rabbi Meir: If it was considered a substitute, it would not be sacrificed. Rava said: Even Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, who is humble, taught: The Sages said in the name of Rabbi Meir. But he did not say directly: Rabbi Meir said.
אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: פְּלִיגוּ בַּהּ רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְרַבָּנַן, חַד אָמַר: סִינַי עֲדִיף, וְחַד אָמַר: עוֹקֵר הָרִים עֲדִיף.
§ Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel and the Rabbis disagreed with regard to this matter. One said: Sinai, i.e., one who is extremely knowledgeable, is preferable; and one said: One who uproots mountains, i.e., one who is extremely incisive, is preferable.
רַב יוֹסֵף סִינַי, רַבָּה עוֹקֵר הָרִים. שְׁלַחוּ לְתַמָּן: אֵיזֶה מֵהֶם קוֹדֵם? שְׁלַחוּ לְהוּ: סִינַי עֲדִיף, דְּאָמַר מָר: הַכֹּל צְרִיכִין לְמָרֵי חִטַּיָּא, וַאֲפִילּוּ הָכִי לָא קַבֵּיל רַב יוֹסֵף עֲלֵיהּ. מְלַךְ רַבָּה עֶשְׂרִין וְתַרְתֵּי שְׁנִין, וַהֲדַר מְלַךְ רַב יוֹסֵף. וְכֹל שְׁנֵי דִּמְלַךְ רַבָּה, רַב יוֹסֵף אֲפִילּוּ אוּמָּנָא לְבֵיתֵיהּ לָא (חֲלֵיף).
The Gemara relates that this is not merely a theoretical dispute; rather, at one point it had practical ramifications. Rav Yosef was Sinai; Rabba was one who uproots mountains. They sent a message from Babylonia to there, Eretz Yisrael: Which takes precedence? They sent in response: Sinai is preferable, as the Master said: Everyone requires the owner of the wheat, i.e., one who is expert in the sources. And even so, Rav Yosef did not accept upon himself the appointment of head of the yeshiva. Rabba reigned for twenty-two years, and then Rav Yosef reigned. The Gemara relates that in all those years that Rabba presided, Rav Yosef did not even call a bloodletter to his home. Rav Yosef did not assume even the slightest air of authority, in deference to Rabba, and would go to seek out the bloodletter rather than expecting that the bloodletter would accommodate him.
אַבָּיֵי וְרָבָא וְרַבִּי זֵירָא וְרַבָּה בַּר מַתְנָה הֲווֹ יָתְבִי וַהֲווֹ צְרִיכִי רֵישָׁא, אָמְרִי: כֹּל דְּאָמַר מִלְּתָא וְלָא מִפְּרִיךְ, לֶהֱוֵי רֵישָׁא. דְּכוּלְּהוּ אִיפְּרִיךְ, דְּאַבָּיֵי לָא אִיפְּרִיךְ. חַזְיֵיהּ רַבָּה לְאַבָּיֵי דִּגְבַהּ רֵישֵׁאּ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: נַחְמָנִי, פְּתַח וְאֵימָא.
The Gemara relates: Abaye, Rava, Rabbi Zeira, and Rabba bar Mattana were sitting and studying in a group and were in need of a head for their group. They said: Let anyone who will say a matter that is not refuted be the head. Everyone’s statements were refuted, and the statement of Abaye was not refuted. Rabba saw that Abaye raised his head, i.e., he noticed that his statement was not refuted. Rabba said to him: Naḥmani, calling Abaye by his name rather than by his nickname, begin and say your lecture.
אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: רַבִּי זֵירָא וְרַבָּה בַּר רַב מַתְנָה הֵי מִנַּיְיהוּ עֲדִיף? רַבִּי זֵירָא חָרִיף וּמַקְשֶׁה, וְרַבָּה בַּר רַב מַתְנָה מָתוּן וּמַסֵּיק, מַאי? תֵּיקוּ.
A dilemma was raised before the Sages: Between Rabbi Zeira and Rabba bar Rav Mattana, which of them is preferable? Rabbi Zeira is incisive and raises pertinent difficulties, and Rabba bar Rav Mattana is moderate and not so incisive, but ultimately he draws the appropriate conclusions. What is the conclusion? Which is preferable? The Gemara concludes: The dilemma shall stand unresolved.
הֲדַרַן עֲלָךְ כֹּהֵן מָשִׁיחַ, וּסְלִיקָא לַהּ מַסֶּכֶת הוֹרָיוֹת.
