Kiddushin 30

Kiddushin 30

הֲוָה אָמֵינָא לְשָׂטָן: גִּירָא בְּעֵינָיךְ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא לְרַבִּי נָתָן בַּר אַמֵּי: אַדִּידָךְ עַל צַוְּארֵי דִּבְרָיךְ. מִשִּׁיתְּסַר וְעַד עֶשְׂרִים וְתַרְתֵּי וְאָמְרִי לַהּ: מִתַּמְנֵי סְרֵי עַד עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבָּעָה.

I would say to the Satan: An arrow in your eye, i.e., I would not be afraid of the evil inclination at all. Rava said to Rabbi Natan bar Ami: While your hand is still on your son’s neck, i.e., while you still have authority and control over him, find him a wife. What is the appropriate age? From sixteen until twenty-two, and some say from eighteen until twenty-four.

כְּתַנָּאֵי: ״חֲנֹךְ לַנַּעַר עַל פִּי דַרְכּוֹ״, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה, חַד אָמַר: מִשִּׁיתְּסַר וְעַד עֶשְׂרִים וְתַרְתֵּין, וְחַד אָמַר: מִתַּמְנֵי סְרֵי וְעַד עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבְּעָה.

The Gemara notes that this is like a dispute between tanna’im, based on the verse: “Train a child in the way that he should go” (Proverbs 22:6). Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Neḥemya disagreed about the age in which the verse instructs the parent to educate his child: One said that the verse is referring to the ages from sixteen until twenty-two, and one said it is referring to the ages from eighteen until twenty-four. The dispute concerning the correct age for marriage and the dispute about educating a child are the same, as while a father still has a large measure of influence over his son, he must both teach him and find him a wife.

עַד הֵיכָן חַיָּיב אָדָם לְלַמֵּד אֶת בְּנוֹ תּוֹרָה? אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: כְּגוֹן זְבוּלוּן בֶּן דָּן, שֶׁלִּימְּדוֹ אֲבִי אָבִיו מִקְרָא וּמִשְׁנָה וְתַלְמוּד הֲלָכוֹת וְאַגָּדוֹת. מֵיתִיבִי: לִמְּדוֹ מִקְרָא – אֵין מְלַמְּדוֹ מִשְׁנָה, וְאָמַר רָבָא: מִקְרָא – זוֹ תּוֹרָה!

§ The Gemara continues its discussion of a father’s obligation to teach his son Torah. To what extent is a person obligated to teach his son Torah? Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: One should emulate the education of, for example, Zevulun ben Dan, a contemporary of Shmuel, whose father’s father taught him Bible, Mishna, Talmud, halakhot, and aggadot. The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: If a father taught his son Bible, he is not required to teach him Mishna. And Rava said in explanation of this baraita: Bible is the Torah, not the Prophets or Writings, i.e., he is not required to teach him anything else, including Mishna.

כִּזְבוּלוּן בֶּן דָּן, וְלֹא כִּזְבוּלוּן בֶּן דָּן. כִּזְבוּלוּן בֶּן דָּן – שֶׁלִּמְּדוֹ אֲבִי אָבִיו, וְלֹא כִּזְבוּלוּן בֶּן דָּן, דְּאִילּוּ הָתָם מִקְרָא מִשְׁנָה וְתַלְמוּד הֲלָכוֹת וְאַגָּדוֹת, וְאִילּוּ הָכָא – מִקְרָא לְבַד.

The Gemara answers that Shmuel’s statement should be understood as follows: One should teach his son like Zevulun ben Dan was taught in certain aspects, but not like Zevulun ben Dan in other respects. One should teach his son like Zevulun ben Dan in that his father’s father taught him; but not like Zevulun ben Dan, as there he was taught Bible, Mishna, Talmud, halakhot, and aggadot, while here, in this baraita, one is required to teach his son Bible alone.

וַאֲבִי אָבִיו מִי מִיחַיַּיב? וְהָתַנְיָא: ״וְלִמַּדְתֶּם אֹתָם אֶת בְּנֵיכֶם״ – וְלֹא בְּנֵי בְנֵיכֶם. וּמָה אֲנִי מְקַיֵּים: ״וְהוֹדַעְתָּם לְבָנֶיךָ וְלִבְנֵי בָנֶיךָ״, לוֹמַר לָךְ: שֶׁכׇּל הַמְלַמֵּד אֶת בְּנוֹ תּוֹרָה – מַעֲלֶה עָלָיו הַכָּתוּב כְּאִילּוּ לִמְּדוֹ לוֹ וְלִבְנוֹ וּלְבֶן בְּנוֹ, עַד סוֹף כׇּל הַדּוֹרוֹת!

The Gemara asks: But is one’s father’s father obligated to teach him Torah? But isn’t it taught in a baraita, that the verse: “And you shall teach them to your sons” (Deuteronomy 11:19), indicates: But not your sons’ sons? And how do I realize, i.e., understand, the meaning of the verse: “But make them known to your sons and to your sons’ sons” (Deuteronomy 4:9)? This serves to say to you that whoever teaches his son Torah, the verse ascribes him credit as though he taught him, and his son, and his son’s son, until the end of all generations.

הוּא דְּאָמַר כִּי הַאי תַּנָּא, דְּתַנְיָא: ״וְלִמַּדְתֶּם אֹתָם אֶת בְּנֵיכֶם״ – אֵין לִי אֶלָּא בְּנֵיכֶם, בְּנֵי בְנֵיכֶם מִנַּיִן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְהוֹדַעְתָּם לְבָנֶיךָ וְלִבְנֵי בָנֶיךָ״. אִם כֵּן מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״בְּנֵיכֶם״ – בְּנֵיכֶם וְלֹא בְּנוֹתֵיכֶם.

The Gemara answers that the tanna of this baraita stated his opinion in accordance with the opinion of that tanna, as it is taught in another baraita: From the verse “And you shall teach them to your sons” I have derived only that you must teach your sons. From where do I derive that there is an obligation to teach your sons’ sons? The verse states: “But make them known to your sons and to your sons’ sons.” If so, what is the meaning when the verse states: “Your sons” (Deuteronomy 11:19), which implies only sons? This limitation teaches: Your sons, but not your daughters.

אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי: כׇּל הַמְלַמֵּד אֶת בֶּן בְּנוֹ תּוֹרָה מַעֲלֶה עָלָיו הַכָּתוּב כְּאִילּוּ קִבְּלָהּ מֵהַר סִינַי, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְהוֹדַעְתָּם לְבָנֶיךָ וְלִבְנֵי בָנֶיךָ״, וּסְמִיךְ לֵיהּ: ״יוֹם אֲשֶׁר עָמַדְתָּ לִפְנֵי ה׳ אֱלֹקֶיךָ בְּחֹרֵב״.

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: Anyone who teaches his son’s son Torah, the verse ascribes him credit as though he received it from Mount Sinai, as it is stated: “But make them known to your sons and to your sons’ sons,” and juxtaposed to it is the phrase in the verse: “The day when you stood before the Lord your God in Horeb” (Deuteronomy 4:10), as Horeb is Mount Sinai.

רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא אַשְׁכְּחֵיהּ לְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי דְּשָׁדֵי דִּיסְנָא אַרֵישֵׁיהּ וְקָא מַמְטֵי לֵיהּ לְיָנוֹקָא לְבֵי כְנִישְׁתָּא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מַאי כּוּלֵּי הַאי? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מִי זוּטַר מַאי דִּכְתִיב: ״וְהוֹדַעְתָּם לְבָנֶיךָ״ וּסְמִיךְ לֵיהּ: ״יוֹם אֲשֶׁר עָמַדְתָּ לִפְנֵי ה׳ אֱלֹקֶיךָ בְּחֹרֵב״? מִכָּאן וְאֵילָךְ, רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא לָא טָעֵים אוּמְצָא עַד דְּמַקְרֵי לְיָנוֹקָא וּמוֹסְפֵיהּ. רַבָּה בַּר רַב הוּנָא לָא טָעֵים אוּמְצָא עַד דְּמַיְיתֵי לְיָנוֹקָא לְבֵית מִדְרְשָׁא.

The Gemara relates: Once Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba encountered Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, and saw that he had placed an inexpensive covering on his head and brought his child to the synagogue to study. Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said to him: What is the reason for all this fuss, as you are in such a hurry that you do not have time to dress yourself properly? Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said to him: Is it insignificant, that which is written: “But make them known to your sons,” and juxtaposed to it is the phrase in the verse that states: “The day when you stood before the Lord your God in Horeb”? The Gemara comments: From this moment onward, Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba would not taste meat [umtza], meaning he would not eat breakfast, before he had read to his child and added to the child’s studies from the day before. Similarly, Rabba bar Rav Huna would not taste meat before he had brought his child to the study hall.

אָמַר רַב סָפְרָא מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן חֲנַנְיָא: מַאי דִּכְתִיב ״וְשִׁנַּנְתָּם לְבָנֶיךָ״ – אַל תִּקְרֵי ״וְשִׁנַּנְתָּם״, אֶלָּא ״וְשִׁלַּשְׁתָּם״.

§ Rav Safra says in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥananya: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And you shall teach them diligently [veshinnantam] to your sons” (Deuteronomy 6:7)? Do not read this as “veshinnantam,” with the root shin, nun, nun, which indicates a repetition. Rather, read it as veshillashtam, with the root shin, lamed, shin, related to the word three, shalosh. This means that one must study, review, and study again, thereby dividing one’s studies into three parts.

לְעוֹלָם יְשַׁלֵּשׁ אָדָם שְׁנוֹתָיו: שְׁלִישׁ בַּמִּקְרָא, שְׁלִישׁ בַּמִּשְׁנָה, שְׁלִישׁ בַּתַּלְמוּד. מִי יוֹדֵעַ כַּמָּה חָיֵי? לָא צְרִיכָא לְיוֹמֵי.

In light of this statement, the Sages said that a person should always divide his years into three parts, as follows: A third for Bible, a third for Mishna, and a third for Talmud. The Gemara asks: How can a person divide his life this way? Who knows the length of his life, so that he can calculate how long a third will be? The Gemara answers: No, it is necessary for one’s days, i.e., one should divide each day of his life in this manner.

לְפִיכָךְ נִקְרְאוּ רִאשׁוֹנִים ״סוֹפְרִים״, שֶׁהָיוּ סוֹפְרִים כׇּל הָאוֹתִיּוֹת שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה, שֶׁהָיוּ אוֹמְרִים: וָא״ו דְּ״גָחוֹן״– חֶצְיָין שֶׁל אוֹתִיּוֹת שֶׁל סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה. ״דָּרֹשׁ דָּרַשׁ״ – חֶצְיָין שֶׁל תֵּיבוֹת. ״וְהִתְגַּלָּח״ – שֶׁל פְּסוּקִים. ״יְכַרְסְמֶנָּה חֲזִיר מִיָּעַר״ – עַיִ״ן דְּיַעַר חֶצְיָין שֶׁל תְּהִלִּים. ״וְהוּא רַחוּם יְכַפֵּר עָוֹן״ – חֶצְיוֹ דִּפְסוּקִים.

Therefore, because they devoted so much time to the Bible, the first Sages were called: Those who count [soferim], because they would count all the letters in the Torah, as they would say that the letter vav in the word “belly [gaḥon]” (Leviticus 11:42) is the midpoint of the letters in a Torah scroll. The words: “Diligently inquired [darosh darash]” (Leviticus 10:16), are the midpoint of the words in a Torah scroll. And the verse that begins with: “Then he shall be shaven” (Leviticus 13:33), is the midpoint of the verses. Similarly, in the expression: “The boar out of the wood [miya’ar] ravages it” (Psalms 80:14), the ayin in the word wood [ya’ar] is the midpoint of Psalms, with regard to its number of letters. The verse: “But He, being full of compassion, forgives iniquity” (Psalms 78:38), is the midpoint of verses in the book of Psalms.

בָּעֵי רַב יוֹסֵף: וָא״ו ״דְּגָחוֹן״, מֵהַאי גִּיסָא אוֹ מֵהַאי גִּיסָא? אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: נֵיתֵי סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה וְנִימְנִינְהוּ, מִי לָא אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר בַּר חָנָה: לֹא זָזוּ מִשָּׁם עַד שֶׁהֵבִיאוּ סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה וּמְנָאוּם? אֲמַר לְהוּ: אִינְהוּ בְּקִיאִי בַּחֲסֵירוֹת וִיתֵרוֹת, אֲנַן לָא בְּקִיאִינַן.

Rav Yosef raises a dilemma: Does the vav of the word “belly [gaḥon]” belong to this side or to this side? Is it part of the first or second half of the Torah? The Sages said to him: Let us bring a Torah scroll and count the letters. Didn’t Rabba bar bar Ḥana say with regard to a different issue: They did not move from there until they brought a Torah scroll and counted the letters? Therefore we can do the same. Rav Yosef said to them: They were experts in the deficient and plene forms of words and therefore could count the letters precisely. We are not experts in this regard, and therefore we would be unable to resolve the question even if we were to count the letters.

בָּעֵי רַב יוֹסֵף: ״וְהִתְגַּלָּח״, מֵהַאי גִּיסָא אוֹ מֵהַאי גִּיסָא? אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: פְּסוּקֵי מִיהָא לַיְתוֹ לִימְנִינְהוּ! בִּפְסוּקֵי נָמֵי לָא בְּקִיאִינַן, דְּכִי אֲתָא רַב אַחָא בַּר אַדָּא, אָמַר: בְּמַעְרְבָא פָּסְקִי לֵיהּ לְהַאי קְרָא לִתְלָתָא פְּסוּקֵי: ״וַיֹּאמֶר ה׳ אֶל מֹשֶׁה הִנֵּה אָנֹכִי בָּא אֵלֶיךָ בְּעַב הֶעָנָן״.

Similarly, Rav Yosef raises a dilemma: Does the midpoint of the verses in the Torah, which is “then he shall be shaven,” belong to this side or to this side? Abaye said to him: Even if we cannot count the letters, we can at least bring a Torah scroll to count the verses. Rav Yosef explained: We are not experts about verses either, as when Rav Aḥa bar Adda came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia he said: In the West, i.e., Eretz Yisrael, they divide this following verse into three separate verses: “And the Lord said to Moses, behold I come to you in a thick cloud, that the people may hear when I speak with you, and may also believe you forever; And Moses told the words of the people to the Lord” (Exodus 19:9). Perhaps there are other verses that we do not know how to divide properly.

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: חֲמֵשֶׁת אֲלָפִים וּשְׁמוֹנֶה מֵאוֹת וּשְׁמוֹנִים וּשְׁמוֹנָה פְּסוּקִים הָווּ פְּסוּקֵי סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה, יָתֵר עָלָיו תְּהִלִּים שְׁמוֹנָה, חָסֵר מִמֶּנּוּ דִּבְרֵי הַיָּמִים שְׁמוֹנָה.

The Sages taught: Five thousand eight hundred and eighty-eight verses are the verses in a Torah scroll. Psalms has eight more verses than that, and Chronicles has eight fewer verses than that.

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״וְשִׁנַּנְתָּם״, שֶׁיְּהוּ דִּבְרֵי תוֹרָה מְחוּדָּדִים בְּפִיךְ, שֶׁאִם יִשְׁאַל לְךָ אָדָם דָּבָר אַל תְּגַמְגֵּם וְתֹאמַר לוֹ, אֶלָּא אֱמוֹר לוֹ מִיָּד, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר:

§ The Sages taught: The verse states: “And you shall teach them diligently [veshinnantam]” (Deuteronomy 6:7). The root shin, nun, nun, of veshinnantam should be understood as meaning sharp, i.e., that matters of Torah should be sharp and clear in your mouth, so that if a person asks you something, do not stutter in uncertainty and say an uncertain response to him. Rather, answer him immediately, as it is stated:

״אֱמֹר לַחׇכְמָה אֲחֹתִי אָתְּ וְגוֹ׳״ וְאוֹמֵר: ״קׇשְׁרֵם עַל אֶצְבְּעֹתֶיךָ כׇּתְבֵם עַל לוּחַ לִבֶּךָ״, וְאוֹמֵר: ״כְּחִצִּים בְּיַד גִּבּוֹר כֵּן בְּנֵי הַנְּעוּרִים״, וְאוֹמֵר: ״חִצֵּי גִבּוֹר שְׁנוּנִים״, וְאוֹמֵר: ״חִצֶּיךָ שְׁנוּנִים עַמִּים תַּחְתֶּיךָ יִפְּלוּ״, וְאוֹמֵר: ״אַשְׁרֵי הַגֶּבֶר אֲשֶׁר מִלֵּא אֶת אַשְׁפָּתוֹ מֵהֶם לֹא יֵבֹשׁוּ כִּי יְדַבְּרוּ אֶת אוֹיְבִים בַּשָּׁעַר״.

“Say to wisdom: You are my sister, and call understanding your kinswoman” (Proverbs 7:4), which indicates that one should be as knowledgeable in the Torah as in the identity of his sister. And it states: “Bind them upon your fingers, you shall write them upon the tablet of your heart” (Proverbs 7:3). And it states: “As arrows in the hand of a mighty man, so are the children of one’s youth” (Psalms 127:4). And it states: “Sharp arrows of the mighty” (Psalms 120:4). And it states: “Your arrows are sharp, the peoples fall under you” (Psalms 45:6). And it states: “Happy is the man who has his quiver full of them; they shall not be put to shame when they speak with their enemies in the gate” (Psalms 127:5).

מַאי ״אֶת אוֹיְבִים בַּשָּׁעַר״? אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא בַּר אַבָּא: אֲפִילּוּ הָאָב וּבְנוֹ, הָרַב וְתַלְמִידוֹ שֶׁעוֹסְקִין בַּתּוֹרָה בַּשָּׁעַר אֶחָד – נַעֲשִׂים אוֹיְבִים זֶה אֶת זֶה. וְאֵינָם זָזִים מִשָּׁם עַד שֶׁנַּעֲשִׂים אוֹהֲבִים זֶה אֶת זֶה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אֶת וָהֵב בְּסוּפָה״, אַל תִּקְרֵי ״בְּסוּפָה״ אֶלָּא ״בְּסוֹפָהּ״.

The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the phrase “enemies in the gate” with regard to Torah study? Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba says: Even a father and his son, or a rabbi and his student, who are engaged in Torah together in one gate become enemies with each other due to the intensity of their studies. But they do not leave there until they love each other, as it is stated in the verse discussing the places the Jewish people engaged in battle in the wilderness: “Therefore it is said in the book of the wars of the Lord, Vahev in Suphah [beSufa], and the valleys of Arnon” (Numbers 21:14). The word “vahev” is interpreted as related to the word for love, ahava. Additionally, do not read this as “in Suphah [beSufa]”; rather, read it as “at its end [besofa],” i.e., at the conclusion of their dispute they are beloved to each other.

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״וְשַׂמְתֶּם״ – סַם תָּם, נִמְשְׁלָה תּוֹרָה כְּסַם חַיִּים. מָשָׁל לְאָדָם שֶׁהִכָּה אֶת בְּנוֹ מַכָּה גְּדוֹלָה וְהִנִּיחַ לוֹ רְטִיָּה עַל מַכָּתוֹ, וְאָמַר לוֹ: בְּנִי, כׇּל זְמַן שֶׁהָרְטִיָּה זוֹ עַל מַכָּתְךָ אֱכוֹל מַה שֶּׁהֲנָאָתֶךָ, וּשְׁתֵה מַה שֶּׁהֲנָאָתֶךָ, וּרְחוֹץ בֵּין בְּחַמִּין בֵּין בְּצוֹנֵן וְאֵין אַתָּה מִתְיָירֵא. וְאִם אַתָּה מַעֲבִירָהּ הֲרֵי הִיא מַעֲלָה נוֹמֵי.

The Sages taught: “And you shall place [vesamtem] these words of Mine in your hearts” (Deuteronomy 11:18). Read this as though it stated sam tam, a perfect elixir. The Torah is compared to an elixir of life. There is a parable that illustrates this: A person hit his son with a strong blow and placed a bandage on his wound. And he said to him: My son, as long as this bandage is on your wound and is healing you, eat what you enjoy and drink what you enjoy, and bathe in either hot water or cold water, and you do not need to be afraid, as it will heal your wound. But if you take it off, the wound will become gangrenous.

כָּךְ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא אָמַר לָהֶם לְיִשְׂרָאֵל: בָּנַי, בָּרָאתִי יֵצֶר הָרָע וּבָרָאתִי לוֹ תּוֹרָה תַּבְלִין. וְאִם אַתֶּם עוֹסְקִים בַּתּוֹרָה – אֵין אַתֶּם נִמְסָרִים בְּיָדוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״הֲלוֹא אִם תֵּיטִיב שְׂאֵת״,

So too the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Israel: My children, I created an evil inclination, which is the wound, and I created Torah as its antidote. If you are engaged in Torah study you will not be given over into the hand of the evil inclination, as it is stated: “If you do well, shall it not be lifted up?” (Genesis 4:7). One who engages in Torah study lifts himself above the evil inclination.

וְאִם אֵין אַתֶּם עוֹסְקִין בַּתּוֹרָה – אַתֶּם נִמְסָרִים בְּיָדוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״לַפֶּתַח חַטָּאת רֹבֵץ״, וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא שֶׁכׇּל מַשָּׂאוֹ וּמַתָּנוֹ בְּךָ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְאֵלֶיךָ תְּשׁוּקָתוֹ״. וְאִם אַתָּה רוֹצֶה אַתָּה מוֹשֵׁל בּוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְאַתָּה תִּמְשׇׁל בּוֹ״.

And if you do not engage in Torah study, you are given over to its power, as it is stated: “Sin crouches at the door” (Genesis 4:7). Moreover, all of the evil inclination’s deliberations will be concerning you, as it is stated in the same verse: “And to you is its desire.” And if you wish you shall rule over it, as it is stated in the conclusion of the verse: “But you may rule over it” (Genesis 4:7).

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: קָשֶׁה יֵצֶר הָרָע, שֶׁאֲפִילּוּ יוֹצְרוֹ קְרָאוֹ רַע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כִּי יֵצֶר לֵב הָאָדָם רַע מִנְּעֻרָיו״. אָמַר רַב יִצְחָק: יִצְרוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם מִתְחַדֵּשׁ עָלָיו בְּכׇל יוֹם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״רַק רַע כׇּל הַיּוֹם״.

The Sages taught: So difficult is the evil inclination that even its Creator calls it evil, as it is stated: “For the inclination of a man’s heart is evil from his youth” (Genesis 8:21). Rav Yitzḥak says: A person’s evil inclination renews itself to him every day, as it is stated: “And that every inclination of the thoughts in his heart was only evil all day [kol hayyom]” (Genesis 6:5). “Kol hayyom” can also be understood as: Every day.

וְאָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לֵוִי: יִצְרוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם מִתְגַּבֵּר עָלָיו בְּכׇל יוֹם וּמְבַקֵּשׁ הֲמִיתוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״צוֹפֶה רָשָׁע לַצַּדִּיק וּמְבַקֵּשׁ לַהֲמִיתוֹ״, וְאִלְמָלֵא הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא עוֹזְרוֹ אֵין יָכוֹל לוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אֱלֹהִים לֹא יַעַזְבֶנּוּ בְיָדוֹ״.

And Rabbi Shimon ben Levi says: A person’s inclination overpowers him every day, and seeks to kill him, as it is stated: “The wicked watches the righteous and seeks to slay him” (Psalms 37:32). And if not for the fact that the Holy One, Blessed be He, assists each person in battling his evil inclination, he could not overcome it, as it is stated: “The Lord will not leave him in his hand” (Psalms 37:33).

תָּנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל: בְּנִי אִם פָּגַע בְּךָ מְנֻוּוֹל זֶה – מׇשְׁכֵהוּ לְבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ. אִם אֶבֶן הוּא – נִימּוֹחַ, וְאִם בַּרְזֶל הוּא – מִתְפּוֹצֵץ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״הֲלוֹא כֹה דְבָרִי כָּאֵשׁ נְאֻם ה׳ וּכְפַטִּישׁ יְפֹצֵץ סָלַע״. אִם אֶבֶן הוּא – נִימּוֹחַ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״הוֹי כׇּל צָמֵא לְכוּ לַמַּיִם״ וְאוֹמֵר: ״אֲבָנִים שָׁחֲקוּ מַיִם״.

A Sage from the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: My son, if this wretched one, the evil inclination, encounters you, pull it into the study hall, i.e., go and study Torah. If it is a stone it will melt, and if it is iron it will break, as it is stated with regard to the Torah: “Is not My word like fire, says the Lord, and like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces?” (Jeremiah 23:29). Just as a stone shatters a hammer, so too one can overcome his evil inclination, which is as strong as iron, through Torah study. With regard to the second part of the statement: If it is a stone it will melt, this is as it is stated with regard to the Torah: “Ho, everyone who thirsts, come for water” (Isaiah 55:1), and it states: “The water wears the stones” (Job 14:19), indicating that water is stronger than stone.

לְהַשִּׂיאוֹ אִשָּׁה. מְנָלַן? דִּכְתִיב: ״קְחוּ נָשִׁים וְהוֹלִידוּ בָּנִים וּבָנוֹת וּקְחוּ לִבְנֵיכֶם נָשִׁים וְאֶת בְּנוֹתֵיכֶם תְּנוּ לַאֲנָשִׁים״.

§ The baraita (29a) teaches that a father is commanded to marry his son to a woman. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this matter? As it is written: “Take wives and bear sons and daughters, and take wives for your sons and give your daughters to men” (Jeremiah 29:6).

בִּשְׁלָמָא בְּנוֹ – בְּיָדוֹ, אֶלָּא בִּתּוֹ – בְּיָדוֹ הִיא? הָכִי קָאָמַר לְהוּ: נִיתֵּן לַהּ מִידֵּי וְ[נַ]לְבְּשַׁיהּ וּנְכַסְּיַיהּ כִּי הֵיכִי דִּ[לְ]קִפְצוּ עֲלַהּ אִינָשֵׁי.

The Gemara analyzes this verse: Granted with regard to his son, this is in his power, i.e., he can instruct him to marry a woman, as a man is the active agent in a marriage. But with regard to his daughter, is this in his power? She must wait for a man to marry her. The Gemara answers: This is what Jeremiah was saying to them in the aforementioned verse: Her father should give her something for her dowry, and he should dress and cover her with suitable clothing so that men will leap to marry her.

לְלַמְּדוֹ אוּמָּנוּת. מְנָלַן? אָמַר חִזְקִיָּה: דְּאָמַר קְרָא: ״רְאֵה חַיִּים עִם אִשָּׁה אֲשֶׁר אָהַבְתָּ״. אִם ״אִשָּׁה״ מַמָּשׁ הִיא: כְּשֵׁם שֶׁחַיָּיב לְהַשִּׂיאוֹ אִשָּׁה – כָּךְ חַיָּיב לְלַמְּדוֹ אוּמָּנוּת. אִם תּוֹרָה הִיא: כְּשֵׁם שֶׁחַיָּיב לְלַמְּדוֹ תּוֹרָה – כָּךְ חַיָּיב לְלַמְּדוֹ אוּמָּנוּת.

§ The baraita further states that a father is commanded to teach his son a trade. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this? Ḥizkiyya said: As the verse states: “Enjoy life with the wife whom you love” (Ecclesiastes 9:9). If this verse is interpreted literally, and it is referring to an actual woman, then one can derive as follows: Just as a father is obligated to marry his son to a woman, so too, he is obligated to teach him a trade, as indicated by the term: Life. And if the wife mentioned in this verse is allegorical, and it is the Torah, then one should explain the verse in the following manner: Just as he is obligated to teach him Torah, so too, he is obligated to teach him a trade.

וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים אַף לַהֲשִׁיטוֹ בַּנָּהָר. מַאי טַעְמָא? חַיּוּתֵיהּ הוּא.

§ The baraita adds: And some say that a father is also obligated to teach his son to swim in a river. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? It is necessary for his life, i.e., this is potentially a lifesaving skill.

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: כֹּל שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְלַמְּדוֹ אוּמָּנוּת – מְלַמְּדוֹ לִיסְטוּת. לִיסְטוּת סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ! אֶלָּא, כְּאִילּוּ מְלַמְּדוֹ לִיסְטוּת.

§ The baraita further teaches that Rabbi Yehuda says: Any father who does not teach his son a trade teaches him banditry. The Gemara asks: Can it enter your mind that he actually teaches him banditry? Rather, the baraita means that it is as though he taught him banditry.

מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ? אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ דְּאַגְמְרֵיהּ עִיסְקָא.

The Gemara asks: What is the difference between the opinion of the first tanna and that of Rabbi Yehuda? Both state that a father must teach his son a trade. The Gemara answers: There is a difference between them in a case where the father teaches him to engage in business. According to the first tanna this is sufficient, whereas Rabbi Yehuda maintains that he must teach him an actual trade.

כׇּל מִצְוֹת הָאָב עַל הַבֵּן וְכוּ׳. מַאי כׇּל מִצְוֹת הָאָב עַל הַבֵּן? אִילֵּימָא כֹּל מִצְוָתָא דְּמִיחַיַּיב אַבָּא לְמִיעְבַּד לִבְרֵיהּ נָשִׁים חַיָּיבוֹת – וְהָתַנְיָא: הָאָב חַיָּיב בִּבְנוֹ לְמוּלוֹ וְלִפְדוֹתוֹ. אָבִיו – אֵין, אִמּוֹ – לֹא!

§ The mishna teaches: With regard to all mitzvot of a father with regard to his son, both men and women are obligated to perform them. The Gemara inquires: What is the meaning of the expression: All mitzvot of a father with regard to his son? If we say that this is referring to all of the mitzvot that a father is required to perform for his son, are women obligated in these? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: A father is obligated with regard to his son to circumcise him, and to redeem him? This indicates that his father, yes, he is obligated to do these, but his mother, no, she is not obligated to perform these mitzvot for her son.

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה, הָכִי קָאָמַר: כׇּל מִצְוֹת הָאָב הַמּוּטָּלֹת עַל הַבֵּן לַעֲשׂוֹת לְאָבִיו, אֶחָד אֲנָשִׁים וְאֶחָד נָשִׁים חַיָּיבִין. תְּנֵינָא לְהָא דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״אִישׁ״ – אֵין לִי אֶלָּא אִישׁ, אִשָּׁה מִנַּיִן? כְּשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר ״תִּירָאוּ״ – הֲרֵי כָּאן שְׁנַיִם.

Rav Yehuda said that this is what the mishna is saying: With regard to each mitzva for the father that is incumbent upon the son to perform for his father, both men and women are obligated in them. The Gemara comments: We already learned this, as the Sages taught in a baraita, with regard to the verse: “A man shall fear [tira’u] his mother and his father” (Leviticus 19:3). I have derived only that a man is obligated in this mitzva; from where do I derive that a woman is also obligated? When it says in the same verse: “A man shall fear [tira’u] his mother and his father” (Leviticus 19:3), employing the plural form of the verb, this indicates that there are two that are obligated here, both a man and a woman.

אִם כֵּן מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״אִישׁ״? – אִישׁ סִיפֵּק בְּיָדוֹ לַעֲשׂוֹת, אִשָּׁה אֵין סִיפֵּק בְּיָדָהּ לַעֲשׂוֹת, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁרְשׁוּת אֲחֵרִים עָלֶיהָ. אָמַר רַב אִידִי בַּר אָבִין אָמַר רַב: נִתְגָּרְשָׁה, שְׁנֵיהֶם שָׁוִים.

If so, that both of them are obligated, what is the meaning when the verse states: “Man”? In the case of a man, it is in his power to perform this mitzva; whereas with regard to a woman, it is not always in her power to perform this mitzva, because she is under the authority of another person, i.e., her husband. As she is obligated to her husband to maintain her household, she is not always able to find time for her parents. Rav Idi bar Avin says that Rav says: Consequently, if a woman is divorced, then both of them, a daughter and a son, are equal with regard to honoring and fearing their father and mother.

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: נֶאֱמַר: ״כַּבֵּד אֶת אָבִיךָ וְאֶת אִמֶּךָ״, וְנֶאֱמַר: ״כַּבֵּד אֶת ה׳ מֵהוֹנֶךָ״, הִשְׁוָה הַכָּתוּב כִּבּוּד אָב וָאֵם לִכְבוֹד הַמָּקוֹם.

The Sages taught that it is stated: “Honor your father and your mother” (Exodus 20:11), and it is stated: “Honor the Lord with your wealth” (Proverbs 3:9). In this manner, the verse equates the honor of one’s father and mother to the honor of the Omnipresent, as the term “honor” is used in both cases.

נֶאֱמַר: ״אִישׁ אִמּוֹ וְאָבִיו תִּירָאוּ״, וְנֶאֱמַר: ״אֶת ה׳ אֱלֹהֶיךָ תִּירָא וְאֹתוֹ תַעֲבֹד״, הִשְׁוָה הַכָּתוּב מוֹרָאַת אָב וָאֵם לְמוֹרָאַת הַמָּקוֹם.

Similarly, it is stated: “A man shall fear his mother and his father” (Leviticus 19:3), and it is stated: “You shall fear the Lord your God and Him you shall serve” (Deuteronomy 6:13). The verse equates the fear of one’s father and mother to the fear of the Omnipresent.

נֶאֱמַר: ״מְקַלֵּל אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ מוֹת יוּמָת״, וְנֶאֱמַר: ״אִישׁ אִישׁ כִּי יְקַלֵּל אֱלֹהָיו וְנָשָׂא חֶטְאוֹ״, הִשְׁוָה הַכָּתוּב בִּרְכַּת אָב וָאֵם לְבִרְכַּת הַמָּקוֹם. אֲבָל בְּהַכָּאָה וַדַּאי אִי אֶפְשָׁר.

Likewise, it is stated: “He who curses his father or his mother shall be put to death” (Exodus 21:17), and it is stated: “Whoever curses his God shall bear his sin” (Leviticus 24:15). The verse equates the blessing, a euphemism for cursing, of one’s father and mother to the blessing of the Omnipresent. But with regard to striking, i.e., with regard to the halakha that one who strikes his father or mother is liable to receive court-imposed capital punishment, it is certainly not possible to say the same concerning the Holy One, Blessed be He.

וְכֵן בְּדִין, שֶׁשְּׁלָשְׁתָּן שׁוּתָּפִין בּוֹ. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: שְׁלֹשָׁה שׁוּתָּפִין הֵן בָּאָדָם: הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, וְאָבִיו, וְאִמּוֹ. בִּזְמַן שֶׁאָדָם מְכַבֵּד אֶת אָבִיו וְאֶת אִמּוֹ אָמַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא: מַעֲלֶה אֲנִי עֲלֵיהֶם כְּאִילּוּ דַּרְתִּי בֵּינֵיהֶם, וְכִבְּדוּנִי.

And so too, the equating of one’s attitude toward his parents to his attitude toward God is a logical derivation, as the three of them are partners in his creation. As the Sages taught: There are three partners in the forming of a person: The Holy One, Blessed be He, who provides the soul, and his father and his mother. When a person honors his father and mother, the Holy One, Blessed be He, says: I ascribe credit to them as if I dwelt between them and they honor Me as well.

תַּנְיָא רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: גָּלוּי וְיָדוּעַ לִפְנֵי מִי שֶׁאָמַר וְהָיָה הָעוֹלָם שֶׁבֵּן מְכַבֵּד אֶת אִמּוֹ יוֹתֵר מֵאָבִיו, מִפְּנֵי

It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: It is revealed and known before the One Who spoke and the world came into being that a son honors his mother more than he honors his father, because