Search

Pesachim 110

Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:

English
עברית
podcast placeholder

0:00
0:00




podcast placeholder

0:00
0:00




Summary

Today’s daf is sponsored by Sarah Robinson in honor of Yehudit Robinson. “I’m so lucky you are my sister and that you showed me how to love the challenge of gemara learning. Wishing you the most amazing day and a stupendous year! Happy birthday!”

The gemara deals with the issue of the dangers of eating and drinking in pairs as it arouses the danger of demons. In what situations is it an issue/not an issue? Is it all pairs? Some say drinking 10 cups is not an issue but less is. Some say the same for 8 and for 6 and for 4. Information is relayed about demons and witchcraft and suggestions are provided for incantations to recite if one encounters one. What types of people are more susceptible to demons? The gemara explains that one who is worried about pairs, the demons will attack them but one who is not concerned about them, the demons will not attack them.

Today’s daily daf tools:

Pesachim 110

מִצְוָה בְּאַפֵּי נַפְשַׁהּ הוּא.

is a distinct mitzva in its own right. In other words, each cup is treated separately and one is not considered to be drinking in pairs.

״לֹא יַעֲשֶׂה צְרָכָיו תְּרֵי״, אַמַּאי? נִמְלָךְ הוּא! אָמַר אַבָּיֵי, הָכִי קָאָמַר: לֹא יֹאכַל תְּרֵי וְיִשְׁתֶּה תְּרֵי, וְלֹא יַעֲשֶׂה צְרָכָיו אֲפִילּוּ פַּעַם אַחַת — דִּילְמָא חָלֵישׁ וּמִיתְּרַע.

The baraita taught that one should not attend to his sexual needs in pairs. The Gemara asks: Why should one be concerned for this; he has changed his mind? One does not plan in advance to engage in marital relations twice, and therefore the two acts should not combine to form a dangerous pair. Abaye said: This is what the tanna is saying, i.e., the baraita should be understood in the following manner: One should not eat in pairs nor drink in pairs, and if he does so he should not attend to his sexual needs right afterward even once, lest he is weakened by the act and will be harmed for having eaten or drunk in pairs.

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: שׁוֹתֶה כִּפְלַיִם — דָּמוֹ בְּרֹאשׁוֹ. אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: אֵימָתַי — בִּזְמַן שֶׁלֹּא רָאָה פְּנֵי הַשּׁוּק, אֲבָל רָאָה פְּנֵי הַשּׁוּק — הָרְשׁוּת בְּיָדוֹ. אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: חֲזֵינָא לֵיהּ לְרַב חֲנַנְיָא בַּר בִּיבִי, דְּאַכֹּל כָּסָא הֲוָה נָפֵיק וְחָזֵי אַפֵּי שׁוּקָא.

The Sages taught in another baraita: If one drinks in pairs his blood is upon his head, i.e., he bears responsibility for his own demise. Rav Yehuda said: When is that the case? When one did not leave the house and view the marketplace between cups. However, if he saw the marketplace after the first cup, he has permission to drink another cup without concern. Likewise, Rav Ashi said: I saw Rav Ḥananya bar Beivai follow this policy: Upon drinking each cup, he would leave the house and view the marketplace.

וְלָא אֲמַרַן אֶלָּא לָצֵאת לַדֶּרֶךְ, אֲבָל בְּבֵיתוֹ — לָא. אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא: וּלְיָשֵׁן — כְּלָצֵאת לַדֶּרֶךְ דָּמֵי. אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: וְלָצֵאת לְבֵית הַכִּסֵּא — כְּלָצֵאת לַדֶּרֶךְ דָּמֵי. וּבְבֵיתוֹ לָא? וְהָא רָבָא מָנֵי כְּשׁוּרֵי.

And we said that there is concern for the safety of one who drinks in pairs only when he intends to set out on the road after drinking, but if he intends to remain in his home there is no need for concern. Rabbi Zeira said: And one who plans to sleep is comparable to one who is setting out on the road. He should be concerned that he might be harmed. Rav Pappa said: And going to the bathroom is comparable to setting out on the road. The Gemara asks: And if one intends to remain in his home, is there no cause for concern? But Rava would count the beams of the house to keep track of the number of cups he had drunk so as to ensure that he would not consume an even number.

וְאַבָּיֵי, כִּי שָׁתֵי חַד כָּסָא, מְנַקֵּיט לֵיהּ אִימֵּיהּ תְּרֵי כָסֵי בִּתְרֵי יְדֵיהּ. וְרַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק, כִּי הֲוָה שָׁתֵי תְּרֵי כָסֵי, מְנַקֵּיט לֵיהּ שַׁמָּעֵיהּ חַד כָּסָא, חַד כָּסָא — מְנַקֵּיט לֵיהּ תְּרֵי כָסֵי בִּתְרֵי יְדֵיהּ! אָדָם חָשׁוּב שָׁאנֵי.

And likewise Abaye, when he would drink one cup, his mother would immediately place two cups in his two hands so that he would not inadvertently drink only one more cup and thereby expose himself to the danger of drinking in pairs. And similarly, when Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak would drink two cups, his attendant would immediately place one more cup in his hand, and if he would drink one cup, the attendant would place two cups in his two hands. These reports indicate that one should be concerned for his safety after drinking an even number of cups, even when he remains at home. The Gemara answers: An important person is different. The demons focus their attention on him, and he must therefore be more careful than the average person.

אָמַר עוּלָּא: עֲשָׂרָה כּוֹסוֹת אֵין בָּהֶם מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת. עוּלָּא לְטַעְמֵיהּ, דְּאָמַר עוּלָּא, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ בְּמַתְנִיתָא תָּנָא: עֲשָׂרָה כּוֹסוֹת תִּיקְּנוּ חֲכָמִים בְּבֵית הָאֵבֶל, וְאִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ עֲשָׂרָה כּוֹסוֹת יֵשׁ בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת, הֵיכִי קָיְימִי רַבָּנַן וְתַקִּנוּ מִילְּתָא דְּאָתֵי לִידֵי סַכָּנָה?! אֲבָל תְּמָנְיָא יֵשׁ בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת.

Ulla said: Ten cups contain no element of the danger associated with pairs. Ulla rules here in accordance with his reasoning stated elsewhere, as Ulla said, and some say it was taught in a baraita: The Sages instituted that one must drink ten cups of wine in the house of a mourner during the meal of comfort. And if it could enter your mind that ten cups do contain the element of danger associated with pairs, how could the Sages arise and institute something that might bring a person to a state of danger? However, eight cups do contain the element of danger associated with pairs.

רַב חִסְדָּא וְרַבָּה בַּר רַב הוּנָא דְּאָמְרִי תַּרְוַיְיהוּ: ״שָׁלוֹם״, לְטוֹבָה — מִצְטָרֵף, לְרָעָה — לֹא מִצְטָרֵף. אֲבָל שִׁיתָּא יֵשׁ בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת.

Rav Ḥisda and Rabba bar Rav Huna both say that eight is also safe from the dangers of pairs, as the number seven, represented by the word shalom, combines with the previous cups for the good but does not combine for the bad. The final verse of the priestly benediction reads: “The Lord lift His countenance upon you and give you peace [shalom]” (Numbers 6:26). The word shalom, the seventh Hebrew word in this verse, has a purely positive connotation. Rav Ḥisda and Rabba bar Rav Huna therefore maintain that the seventh cup combines with the previous six only for good purposes. After the seventh cup, i.e., from the eighth cup and on, the cups constitute pairs for the good but not for the bad. However, six cups do contain the element of danger associated with pairs.

רַבָּה וְרַב יוֹסֵף דְּאָמְרִי תַּרְוַיְיהוּ: ״וִיחֻנֶּךָּ״, לְטוֹבָה — מִצְטָרֵף. לְרָעָה — לֹא מִצְטָרֵף. אֲבָל אַרְבָּעָה יֵשׁ בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת.

Rabba and Rav Yosef both say that even drinking six cups is not dangerous. The reason is that the fifth cup, represented by the word viḥuneka in the second verse of the priestly benediction: “The Lord make His face to shine upon you, and be gracious to you [viḥuneka]” (Numbers 6:25), combines with the previous cups for the good but does not combine for the bad. However, four cups do contain the element of danger associated with pairs.

אַבָּיֵי וְרָבָא דְּאָמְרִי תַּרְוַיְיהוּ: ״וְיִשְׁמְרֶךָ״, לְטוֹבָה — מִצְטָרֵף, לְרָעָה — לֹא מִצְטָרֵף.

Abaye and Rava both say that even the number four is not dangerous, as veyishmerekha, the third word in the first verse of the priestly benediction, reads: “The Lord bless you and keep you [veyishmerekha]” (Numbers 6:24). It combines for the good but does not combine for the bad.

וְאַזְדָּא רָבָא לְטַעְמֵיהּ, דְּרָבָא אַפְּקִינְהוּ לְרַבָּנַן בְּאַרְבָּעָה כּוֹסוֹת, אַף עַל גַּב דְּאִיתַּזַּק רָבָא בַּר לֵיוַאי, לָא חַשׁ לַהּ לְמִילְּתָא, דְּאָמַר: הָהוּא מִשּׁוּם דְּאוֹתְבַן בְּפִירְקָא הֲוָה.

And Rava follows his standard line of reasoning in this regard, as Rava allowed the Sages to leave after having drunk four cups and was not concerned for their safety. Although Rava bar Livai was injured on one such occasion, Rava was not concerned that the matter had been caused by his consumption of an even number of cups, as he said: That injury occurred because Rava bar Livai challenged me during the public lecture. It is improper for a student to raise difficulties against his rabbi during a public lecture, lest the rabbi be embarrassed by his inability to answer.

אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף, אָמַר לִי יוֹסֵף שֵׁידָא: אַשְׁמְדַאי מַלְכָּא דְשֵׁידֵי — מְמוּנֶּה הוּא אַכּוּלְּהוּ זוּגֵי, וּמַלְכָּא לָא אִיקְּרִי מַזִּיק. אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי לַהּ לְהַאי גִּיסָא: אַדְּרַבָּה, מַלְכָּא [רַתְחָנָא הוּא], מַאי דְּבָעֵי עָבֵיד, שֶׁהַמֶּלֶךְ פּוֹרֵץ גָּדֵר לַעֲשׂוֹת לוֹ דֶּרֶךְ וְאֵין מוֹחִין בְּיָדוֹ.

Rav Yosef said: Yosef the Demon said to me: Ashmedai, the king of the demons, is appointed over all who perform actions in pairs, and a king is not called a harmful spirit. A king would not cause harm. Consequently, there is no reason to fear the harm of demons for having performed an action in pairs. Some say this statement in this manner: On the contrary, he is an angry king who does what he wants, as the halakha is that a king may breach the fence of an individual in order to form a path for himself, and none may protest his action. Similarly, the king of demons has full license to harm people who perform actions in pairs.

אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא, אָמַר לִי יוֹסֵף שֵׁידָא: בִּתְרֵי קָטְלִינַן, בְּאַרְבְּעָה לָא קָטְלִינַן, בְּאַרְבְּעָה מַזְּקִינַן. בִּתְרֵי, בֵּין בְּשׁוֹגֵג בֵּין בְּמֵזִיד. בְּאַרְבְּעָה, בְּמֵזִיד — אִין, בְּשׁוֹגֵג — לָא.

Rav Pappa said: Yosef the Demon said to me: If one drinks two cups, we demons kill him; if he drinks four, we do not kill him. But this person who drank four, we harm him. There is another difference between two and four: With regard to one who drinks two, whether he did so unwittingly or intentionally, we harm him. With regard to one who drinks four, if he does so intentionally, yes, he is harmed; if he does so unwittingly, no, he will not be harmed.

וְאִי אִישְׁתְּלִי וְאִיקְּרִי וּנְפַק, מַאי תַּקַּנְתֵּיהּ? לִינְקוֹט זַקְפָּא דִידֵיהּ דְּיַמִּינֵיהּ בִּידָא דִשְׂמָאלֵיהּ וְזַקְפָּא דִשְׂמָאלֵיהּ בִּידָא דְיַמִּינֵיהּ, וְנֵימָא הָכִי: ״אַתּוּן וַאֲנָא — הָא תְּלָתָא״. וְאִי שְׁמִיעַ לֵיהּ דְּאָמַר: ״אַתּוּן וַאֲנָא — הָא אַרְבְּעָה״, נֵימָא לֵיהּ: ״אַתּוּן וַאֲנָא — הָא חַמְשָׁה״. וְאִי שְׁמִיעַ לֵיהּ דְּאָמַר: ״אַתּוּן וַאֲנָא — הָא שִׁיתָּא״, נֵימָא לֵיהּ: ״אַתּוּן וַאֲנָא — הָא שִׁבְעָה״. הֲוָה עוֹבָדָא עַד מְאָה וְחַד, וּפְקַע שֵׁידָא.

The Gemara asks: And if one forgets and it happens that he goes outside after having drunk an even number of cups, what is his solution? The Gemara answers: He should take his right thumb in his left hand, and his left thumb in his right hand, and say as follows: You, my thumbs, and I are three, which is not a pair. And if he hears a voice that says: You and I are four, which makes a pair, he should say to it: You and I are five. And if he hears it say: You and I are six, he should say to it: You and I are seven. The Gemara relates that there was an incident in which someone kept counting after the demon until he reached a hundred and one, and the demon burst in anger.

אָמַר אַמֵּימָר: אֲמַרָה לִי רֵישָׁתִינְהִי דְּנָשִׁים כַּשְׁפָנִיּוֹת: הַאי מַאן דְּפָגַע בְּהוּ בְּנָשִׁים כַּשְׁפָנִיּוֹת, נֵימָא הָכִי: ״חָרֵי חַמִּימֵי בְּדִיקּוּלָא בַּזְיָיא לְפוּמַּיְיכוּ נְשֵׁי דְּחָרָשַׁיָּיא, קָרַח קָרְחַיְיכִי, פָּרַח פָּרְחַיְיכִי,

Ameimar said: The chief of witches said to me: One who encounters witches should say this incantation: Hot feces in torn date baskets in your mouth, witches; may your hairs fall out because you use them for witchcraft; your crumbs, which you use for witchcraft, should scatter in the wind;

אִיבַּדּוּר תַּבְלוּנַיְיכִי, פָּרְחָא זִיקָא לְמוֹרִיקָא חַדְתָּא דְּנָקְטִיתוּ נָשִׁים כַּשְׁפָנִיּוֹת, אַדְּחַנַּנִּי וְחַנַּנְכִי לָא אֲתֵיתִי לְגוֹ, הַשְׁתָּא דַּאֲתֵיתִי לְגוֹ — קַרְחַנְנִי וַחֲנַנְכִי״.

your spices, which you use for your witchcraft, should scatter; the wind should carry away the fresh saffron that you witches hold to perform your witchcraft. As long as I was shown favor from Heaven and you showed me favor, I did not come here. Now that I have come here, your favor toward me has cooled and you should find favor.

בְּמַעְרְבָא לָא קָפְדִי אַזּוּגֵי. רַב דִּימִי מִנְּהַרְדְּעָא קָפֵיד אֲפִילּוּ אַרוּשְׁמָא דְחָבִיתָא. הֲוָה עוֹבָדָא וּפְקַע חָבִיתָא. כְּלָלָא דְמִילְּתָא, כׇּל דְּקָפֵיד — קָפְדִי בַּהֲדֵיהּ, וּדְלָא קָפֵיד — לָא קָפְדִי בַּהֲדֵיהּ, וּמִיהוּ לְמֵיחַשׁ מִיבְּעֵי.

The Gemara relates that in the West, Eretz Yisrael, they were not particular with regard to pairs. Rav Dimi from Neharde’a was particular about pairs even with regard to the signs on a barrel; he would not write pairs of symbols on a barrel. There was an incident in which there were pairs of symbols on a barrel and the barrel burst. The Gemara concludes: The rule of the matter is that all who are particular about pairs, the demons are particular with him; and if one is not particular, they are not particular with him. However, one is required to be concerned about the harm that might result from purposely performing actions in pairs.

כִּי אֲתָא רַב דִּימִי, אָמַר: שְׁתֵּי בֵיצִים, וּשְׁתֵּי אֱגוֹזִין, שְׁתֵּי קִישּׁוּאִין, וְדָבָר אַחֵר — הֲלָכָה לְמֹשֶׁה מִסִּינַי. וּמִסְתַּפְּקָא לְהוּ לְרַבָּנַן מַאי נִיהוּ דָּבָר אַחֵר, וּגְזוּר רַבָּנַן בְּכוּלְּהוּ זוּגֵי מִשּׁוּם דָּבָר אַחֵר.

When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said: With regard to two eggs, two nuts, two cucumbers, and another matter, there is a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai that they are dangerous in pairs. But the Sages are uncertain about what the other matter is, and therefore the Sages decreed that all pairs are prohibited due to that other matter.

וְהָא דַּאֲמַרַן עֲשָׂרָה, תְּמָנְיָא, שִׁיתָּא, אַרְבְּעָה אֵין בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם זוּגֵי, לָא אֲמַרַן אֶלָּא לְעִנְיַן מַזִּיקִין. אֲבָל לְעִנְיַן כְּשָׁפִים — אֲפִילּוּ טוּבָא נָמֵי חָיְישִׁינַן.

And the Gemara notes that that which we said above, that the numbers ten, eight, six, and four do not cause the danger associated with pairs, we said only with regard to harmful spirits. However, with regard to witchcraft, we are concerned even with regard to one who performed an activity a greater number of times.

כִּי הָא דְּהָהוּא גַּבְרָא דְּגָרְשַׁהּ לִדְבֵיתְהוּ. (אֲזִיל) אִינַּסְבָה לְחַנְוָאָה. כׇּל יוֹמָא הֲוָה אָזֵיל וְשָׁתֵי חַמְרָא. הֲוָה קָא עָבְדָא לֵיהּ כְּשָׁפִים וְלָא קָא מַהְנְיָא לַהּ בֵּיהּ, מִשּׁוּם דַּהֲוָה מִזְדְּהַר בְּנַפְשֵׁיהּ בְּזוּגָא.

This is like that incident involving a certain man who divorced his wife. She went and married a shopkeeper who sold wine in his store. Every day, the first husband would go and drink wine in that shop. His ex-wife would perform witchcraft upon him, and it would not be effective for her in her attempts to harm him because he was careful with regard to pairs.

יוֹמָא חַד אִשְׁתִּי טוּבָא, וְלָא הֲוָה יָדַע כַּמָּה שָׁתֵי. עַד שִׁיתְּסַר הֲוָה צְיִיל וְאִיזְדְּהַר בְּנַפְשֵׁיהּ, מִכָּאן וְאֵילָךְ לָא הֲוָה צְיִיל וְלָא אִיזְדְּהַר בְּנַפְשֵׁיהּ, אַפֵּיקְתֵּיהּ בְּזוּגָא. כִּי הֲוָה אָזֵיל, גָּס בֵּיהּ הָהוּא טַיָּיעָא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: גַּבְרָא קְטִילָא הוּא דְּאָזֵיל הָכָא. אָזֵיל חַבְּקֵיהּ לְדִיקְלָא, צְוַוח דִּיקְלָא וּפְקַע הוּא.

One day he drank a lot, and he did not know how much he drank. Until he drank sixteen cups, he was lucid and was careful with regard to himself, to keep track of how many cups he had drunk. From here onward he was not lucid and was not careful to watch himself, and she caused him to leave after having consumed a pair, i.e., an even number of cups. As he walked, a certain Arab met him and, noticing that he was bewitched, said to him: It is a dead man who walks here. He went and hugged a palm tree for support; the palm tree dried out due to the witchcraft, and he burst.

אָמַר רַב עַוִּירָא: קְעָרוֹת וְכִכָּרוֹת אֵין בָּהֶם מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת. כְּלָלָא דְּמִילְּתָא: כׇּל שֶׁגְּמָרוֹ בִּידֵי אָדָם — אֵין בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת. גְּמָרוֹ בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם — בְּמִילֵּי מִינֵי דְמֵיכַל חָיְישִׁינַן.

Rav Avira said: Plates and loaves do not contain the element of danger associated with pairs. The Gemara elaborates upon this point: The rule of the matter is that anything whose production was completed by people, whether a vessel or food, they do not contain the element of danger associated with pairs. Conversely, if the object was completed by Heaven, e.g., with regard to types of food, we are concerned.

חֲנוּת — אֵין בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת. נִמְלָךְ — אֵין בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת. אוֹרֵחַ — אֵין בּוֹ מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת. אִשָּׁה — אֵין בָּהּ מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת. וְאִי אִשָּׁה חֲשׁוּבָה, חָיְישִׁינַן.

Furthermore, a store does not contain the element of danger associated with pairs. If one eats there, there is no danger, as this is not his regular place. If one changed one’s mind after drinking an odd number of cups and added one more, his drinking does not contain the element of danger associated with pairs, as he did not initially intend to drink an even number. The behavior of a guest who eats or drinks in someone else’s house does not contain the element of danger associated with pairs, as his host determines how much he will eat and drink. The behavior of a woman does not contain the element of danger associated with pairs, as demons are not particular with regard to how much a woman eats or drinks. But if she is an important woman, we are concerned.

אָמַר רַב חִינָּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: אִיסְפָּרָגוֹס — מִצְטָרֵף לְטוֹבָה, וְאֵין מִצְטָרֵף לְרָעָה.

Rav Ḥinnana, son of Rav Yehoshua, said: Isparegus, a wine-based drink with added spices that people would regularly consume in the morning, combines with the number of cups of wine one has already consumed for the good, to raise the total to an odd number, and does not combine for the bad, to bring the sum to an even number.

אָמַר רָבִינָא מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרָבָא: זוּגֵי — לְחוּמְרָא. וְאָמְרִי לֵיהּ: זוּגֵי — לְקוּלָּא. אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: תְּרֵי דְחַמְרָא וְחַד דְּשִׁיכְרָא — לָא מִצְטָרֵף, תְּרֵי דְשִׁיכְרָא וְחַד דְּחַמְרָא — מִצְטָרֵף.

Ravina said in the name of Rava: If one is in doubt as to whether he has drunk in pairs, he should be stringent and drink another cup. And some say that one who is uncertain with regard to pairs should be lenient and not drink an additional cup, lest the additional cup be the even number. Rav Yosef said: Two cups of wine and one cup of beer do not combine; two cups of beer and one cup of wine do combine.

וְסִימָנָיךְ, זֶה הַכְּלָל: כׇּל הַמְחוּבָּר לוֹ מִן הֶחָמוּר מִמֶּנּוּ — טָמֵא, מִן הַקַּל מִמֶּנּוּ — טָהוֹר.

And this is your mnemonic by which to remember this rule is a mishna concerning the halakhot of ritual purity. This is the rule: With regard to anything attached to an object, if the smaller piece is more stringent than the larger one, the combined object is ritually impure; if the attached substance is more lenient than it, the combined object is ritually pure. In other words, if a small piece of a type of fabric that contracts ritual impurity when it is relatively small, which is a stringency, is attached to a larger object comprised of a less valuable fabric that contracts ritual impurity only when it is bigger, the two materials combine to form a unified fabric that contracts ritual impurity if together they amount to the larger requisite size. However, if there is more of the stringent material, the two substances do not combine halakhically to form the amount of the smaller requisite size. Similarly, in the case of pairs, the wine is more significant than the beer. Therefore, the wine combines with the beer but not vice versa.

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר רַב: תְּרֵי קַמֵּי תַּכָּא וְחַד אַתַּכָּא — מִצְטָרְפִי. חַד מִקַּמֵּי תַּכָּא וּתְרֵי אַתַּכָּא — לֹא מִצְטָרְפִין.

Rav Naḥman said that Rav said: If one drinks two cups before the table is brought and the meal begins and one cup over the table they combine, the person is not considered to have drunk a pair of cups. However, if one drinks one cup before the table is brought and two cups over the table they do not combine; the two cups he drank during the meal are considered a pair.

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב מְשַׁרְשְׁיָא: אַטּוּ אֲנַן לְתַקּוֹנֵי תַּכָּא קָא בָּעֵינַן? לְתַקּוֹנֵי גַּבְרָא בָּעֵינַן, וְגַבְרָא קָא מִיתְּקַן וְקָאֵי.

Rav Mesharshiya strongly objects to this ruling: Is that to say that we need to resolve the problem of pairs with regard to the table? Is the presence of the table the decisive factor here? We need to resolve the problem with regard to the person, and with regard to the person it is considered resolved. He began drinking before the table was brought, and he has consumed an odd number of cups.

(אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב מְשַׁרְשְׁיָא): דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא תְּרֵי אַתַּכָּא וְחַד לְבָתַר תַּכָּא — לָא מִצְטָרְפִי. כִּי הַהִיא מַעֲשֶׂה דְּרַבָּה בַּר נַחְמָנִי.

Rather, Rav Mesharshiya said: Everyone agrees that if one drank two cups over the table during the meal and one after the table has been removed, they do not combine. This is like that incident involving Rabba bar Naḥmani, in which someone drank in pairs and was harmed. Rabba instructed them to return the table so that the man could drink an additional cup over the table. This shows that the additional cup counts only if the drinker returns to the table.

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: כׇּל הַמָּזוּג — מִצְטָרֵף,

Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: Any type of drink that is diluted combines to form an even or odd number,

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.

For the Beyond the Daf shiurim offered in Hebrew, see here.

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 heard the new Daf Yomi cycle was starting and I was curious, so I searched online for a women’s class and was pleasently surprised to find Rabanit Michelle’s great class reviews in many online articles. It has been a splendid journey. It is a way to fill my days with Torah, learning so many amazing things I have never heard before during my Tanach learning at High School. Thanks so much .

Martha Tarazi
Martha Tarazi

Panama, Panama

I started learning daf in January, 2020, being inspired by watching the Siyyum Hashas in Binyanei Haumah. I wasn’t sure I would be able to keep up with the task. When I went to school, Gemara was not an option. Fast forward to March, 2022, and each day starts with the daf. The challenge is now learning the intricacies of delving into the actual learning. Hadran community, thank you!

Rochel Cheifetz
Rochel Cheifetz

Riverdale, NY, United States

I began my journey with Rabbanit Michelle more than five years ago. My friend came up with a great idea for about 15 of us to learn the daf and one of us would summarize weekly what we learned.
It was fun but after 2-3 months people began to leave. I have continued. Since the cycle began Again I have joined the Teaneck women.. I find it most rewarding in so many ways. Thank you

Dena Heller
Dena Heller

New Jersey, 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!

Roslyn Jaffe
Roslyn Jaffe

Florida, United States

See video

Susan Fisher
Susan Fisher

Raanana, Israel

I decided to learn one masechet, Brachot, but quickly fell in love and never stopped! It has been great, everyone is always asking how it’s going and chering me on, and my students are always making sure I did the day’s daf.

Yafit Fishbach
Yafit Fishbach

Memphis, Tennessee, United States

Hadran entered my life after the last Siyum Hashaas, January 2020. I was inspired and challenged simultaneously, having never thought of learning Gemara. With my family’s encouragement, I googled “daf yomi for women”. A perfecr fit!
I especially enjoy when Rabbanit Michelle connects the daf to contemporary issues to share at the shabbat table e.g: looking at the Kohen during duchaning. Toda rabba

Marsha Wasserman
Marsha Wasserman

Jerusalem, 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

Denise Neapolitan
Denise Neapolitan

Cambridge, United Kingdom

In early January of 2020, I learned about Siyyum HaShas and Daf Yomi via Tablet Magazine’s brief daily podcast about the Daf. I found it compelling and fascinating. Soon I discovered Hadran; since then I have learned the Daf daily with Rabbanit Michelle Cohen Farber. The Daf has permeated my every hour, and has transformed and magnified my place within the Jewish Universe.

Lisa Berkelhammer
Lisa Berkelhammer

San Francisco, CA , United States

What a great experience to learn with Rabbanit Michelle Farber. I began with this cycle in January 2020 and have been comforted by the consistency and energy of this process throughout the isolation period of Covid. Week by week, I feel like I am exploring a treasure chest with sparkling gems and puzzling antiquities. The hunt is exhilarating.

Marian Frankston
Marian Frankston

Pennsylvania, 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!

Roslyn Jaffe
Roslyn Jaffe

Florida, United States

Michelle has been an inspiration for years, but I only really started this cycle after the moving and uplifting siyum in Jerusalem. It’s been an wonderful to learn and relearn the tenets of our religion and to understand how the extraordinary efforts of a band of people to preserve Judaism after the fall of the beit hamikdash is still bearing fruits today. I’m proud to be part of the chain!

Judith Weil
Judith Weil

Raanana, Israel

I saw an elderly man at the shul kiddush in early March 2020, celebrating the siyyum of masechet brachot which he had been learning with a young yeshiva student. I thought, if he can do it, I can do it! I began to learn masechet Shabbat the next day, Making up masechet brachot myself, which I had missed. I haven’t missed a day since, thanks to the ease of listening to Hadran’s podcast!
Judith Shapiro
Judith Shapiro

Minnesota, United States

I started learning at the beginning of this cycle more than 2 years ago, and I have not missed a day or a daf. It’s been challenging and enlightening and even mind-numbing at times, but the learning and the shared experience have all been worth it. If you are open to it, there’s no telling what might come into your life.

Patti Evans
Patti Evans

Phoenix, Arizona, United States

Robin Zeiger
Robin Zeiger

Tel Aviv, Israel

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.

Emma Rinberg
Emma Rinberg

Raanana, Israel

In early January of 2020, I learned about Siyyum HaShas and Daf Yomi via Tablet Magazine’s brief daily podcast about the Daf. I found it compelling and fascinating. Soon I discovered Hadran; since then I have learned the Daf daily with Rabbanit Michelle Cohen Farber. The Daf has permeated my every hour, and has transformed and magnified my place within the Jewish Universe.

Lisa Berkelhammer
Lisa Berkelhammer

San Francisco, CA , United States

I started learning Daf in Jan 2020 with Brachot b/c I had never seen the Jewish people united around something so positive, and I wanted to be a part of it. Also, I wanted to broaden my background in Torah Shebal Peh- Maayanot gave me a great gemara education, but I knew that I could hold a conversation in most parts of tanach but almost no TSB. I’m so thankful for Daf and have gained immensely.

Meira Shapiro
Meira Shapiro

NJ, United States

My family recently made Aliyah, because we believe the next chapter in the story of the Jewish people is being written here, and we want to be a part of it. Daf Yomi, on the other hand, connects me BACK, to those who wrote earlier chapters thousands of years ago. So, I feel like I’m living in the middle of this epic story. I’m learning how it all began, and looking ahead to see where it goes!
Tina Lamm
Tina Lamm

Jerusalem, Israel

It has been a pleasure keeping pace with this wonderful and scholarly group of women.

Janice Block
Janice Block

Beit Shemesh, Israel

Pesachim 110

מִצְוָה בְּאַפֵּי נַפְשַׁהּ הוּא.

is a distinct mitzva in its own right. In other words, each cup is treated separately and one is not considered to be drinking in pairs.

״לֹא יַעֲשֶׂה צְרָכָיו תְּרֵי״, אַמַּאי? נִמְלָךְ הוּא! אָמַר אַבָּיֵי, הָכִי קָאָמַר: לֹא יֹאכַל תְּרֵי וְיִשְׁתֶּה תְּרֵי, וְלֹא יַעֲשֶׂה צְרָכָיו אֲפִילּוּ פַּעַם אַחַת — דִּילְמָא חָלֵישׁ וּמִיתְּרַע.

The baraita taught that one should not attend to his sexual needs in pairs. The Gemara asks: Why should one be concerned for this; he has changed his mind? One does not plan in advance to engage in marital relations twice, and therefore the two acts should not combine to form a dangerous pair. Abaye said: This is what the tanna is saying, i.e., the baraita should be understood in the following manner: One should not eat in pairs nor drink in pairs, and if he does so he should not attend to his sexual needs right afterward even once, lest he is weakened by the act and will be harmed for having eaten or drunk in pairs.

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: שׁוֹתֶה כִּפְלַיִם — דָּמוֹ בְּרֹאשׁוֹ. אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: אֵימָתַי — בִּזְמַן שֶׁלֹּא רָאָה פְּנֵי הַשּׁוּק, אֲבָל רָאָה פְּנֵי הַשּׁוּק — הָרְשׁוּת בְּיָדוֹ. אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: חֲזֵינָא לֵיהּ לְרַב חֲנַנְיָא בַּר בִּיבִי, דְּאַכֹּל כָּסָא הֲוָה נָפֵיק וְחָזֵי אַפֵּי שׁוּקָא.

The Sages taught in another baraita: If one drinks in pairs his blood is upon his head, i.e., he bears responsibility for his own demise. Rav Yehuda said: When is that the case? When one did not leave the house and view the marketplace between cups. However, if he saw the marketplace after the first cup, he has permission to drink another cup without concern. Likewise, Rav Ashi said: I saw Rav Ḥananya bar Beivai follow this policy: Upon drinking each cup, he would leave the house and view the marketplace.

וְלָא אֲמַרַן אֶלָּא לָצֵאת לַדֶּרֶךְ, אֲבָל בְּבֵיתוֹ — לָא. אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא: וּלְיָשֵׁן — כְּלָצֵאת לַדֶּרֶךְ דָּמֵי. אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: וְלָצֵאת לְבֵית הַכִּסֵּא — כְּלָצֵאת לַדֶּרֶךְ דָּמֵי. וּבְבֵיתוֹ לָא? וְהָא רָבָא מָנֵי כְּשׁוּרֵי.

And we said that there is concern for the safety of one who drinks in pairs only when he intends to set out on the road after drinking, but if he intends to remain in his home there is no need for concern. Rabbi Zeira said: And one who plans to sleep is comparable to one who is setting out on the road. He should be concerned that he might be harmed. Rav Pappa said: And going to the bathroom is comparable to setting out on the road. The Gemara asks: And if one intends to remain in his home, is there no cause for concern? But Rava would count the beams of the house to keep track of the number of cups he had drunk so as to ensure that he would not consume an even number.

וְאַבָּיֵי, כִּי שָׁתֵי חַד כָּסָא, מְנַקֵּיט לֵיהּ אִימֵּיהּ תְּרֵי כָסֵי בִּתְרֵי יְדֵיהּ. וְרַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק, כִּי הֲוָה שָׁתֵי תְּרֵי כָסֵי, מְנַקֵּיט לֵיהּ שַׁמָּעֵיהּ חַד כָּסָא, חַד כָּסָא — מְנַקֵּיט לֵיהּ תְּרֵי כָסֵי בִּתְרֵי יְדֵיהּ! אָדָם חָשׁוּב שָׁאנֵי.

And likewise Abaye, when he would drink one cup, his mother would immediately place two cups in his two hands so that he would not inadvertently drink only one more cup and thereby expose himself to the danger of drinking in pairs. And similarly, when Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak would drink two cups, his attendant would immediately place one more cup in his hand, and if he would drink one cup, the attendant would place two cups in his two hands. These reports indicate that one should be concerned for his safety after drinking an even number of cups, even when he remains at home. The Gemara answers: An important person is different. The demons focus their attention on him, and he must therefore be more careful than the average person.

אָמַר עוּלָּא: עֲשָׂרָה כּוֹסוֹת אֵין בָּהֶם מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת. עוּלָּא לְטַעְמֵיהּ, דְּאָמַר עוּלָּא, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ בְּמַתְנִיתָא תָּנָא: עֲשָׂרָה כּוֹסוֹת תִּיקְּנוּ חֲכָמִים בְּבֵית הָאֵבֶל, וְאִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ עֲשָׂרָה כּוֹסוֹת יֵשׁ בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת, הֵיכִי קָיְימִי רַבָּנַן וְתַקִּנוּ מִילְּתָא דְּאָתֵי לִידֵי סַכָּנָה?! אֲבָל תְּמָנְיָא יֵשׁ בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת.

Ulla said: Ten cups contain no element of the danger associated with pairs. Ulla rules here in accordance with his reasoning stated elsewhere, as Ulla said, and some say it was taught in a baraita: The Sages instituted that one must drink ten cups of wine in the house of a mourner during the meal of comfort. And if it could enter your mind that ten cups do contain the element of danger associated with pairs, how could the Sages arise and institute something that might bring a person to a state of danger? However, eight cups do contain the element of danger associated with pairs.

רַב חִסְדָּא וְרַבָּה בַּר רַב הוּנָא דְּאָמְרִי תַּרְוַיְיהוּ: ״שָׁלוֹם״, לְטוֹבָה — מִצְטָרֵף, לְרָעָה — לֹא מִצְטָרֵף. אֲבָל שִׁיתָּא יֵשׁ בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת.

Rav Ḥisda and Rabba bar Rav Huna both say that eight is also safe from the dangers of pairs, as the number seven, represented by the word shalom, combines with the previous cups for the good but does not combine for the bad. The final verse of the priestly benediction reads: “The Lord lift His countenance upon you and give you peace [shalom]” (Numbers 6:26). The word shalom, the seventh Hebrew word in this verse, has a purely positive connotation. Rav Ḥisda and Rabba bar Rav Huna therefore maintain that the seventh cup combines with the previous six only for good purposes. After the seventh cup, i.e., from the eighth cup and on, the cups constitute pairs for the good but not for the bad. However, six cups do contain the element of danger associated with pairs.

רַבָּה וְרַב יוֹסֵף דְּאָמְרִי תַּרְוַיְיהוּ: ״וִיחֻנֶּךָּ״, לְטוֹבָה — מִצְטָרֵף. לְרָעָה — לֹא מִצְטָרֵף. אֲבָל אַרְבָּעָה יֵשׁ בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת.

Rabba and Rav Yosef both say that even drinking six cups is not dangerous. The reason is that the fifth cup, represented by the word viḥuneka in the second verse of the priestly benediction: “The Lord make His face to shine upon you, and be gracious to you [viḥuneka]” (Numbers 6:25), combines with the previous cups for the good but does not combine for the bad. However, four cups do contain the element of danger associated with pairs.

אַבָּיֵי וְרָבָא דְּאָמְרִי תַּרְוַיְיהוּ: ״וְיִשְׁמְרֶךָ״, לְטוֹבָה — מִצְטָרֵף, לְרָעָה — לֹא מִצְטָרֵף.

Abaye and Rava both say that even the number four is not dangerous, as veyishmerekha, the third word in the first verse of the priestly benediction, reads: “The Lord bless you and keep you [veyishmerekha]” (Numbers 6:24). It combines for the good but does not combine for the bad.

וְאַזְדָּא רָבָא לְטַעְמֵיהּ, דְּרָבָא אַפְּקִינְהוּ לְרַבָּנַן בְּאַרְבָּעָה כּוֹסוֹת, אַף עַל גַּב דְּאִיתַּזַּק רָבָא בַּר לֵיוַאי, לָא חַשׁ לַהּ לְמִילְּתָא, דְּאָמַר: הָהוּא מִשּׁוּם דְּאוֹתְבַן בְּפִירְקָא הֲוָה.

And Rava follows his standard line of reasoning in this regard, as Rava allowed the Sages to leave after having drunk four cups and was not concerned for their safety. Although Rava bar Livai was injured on one such occasion, Rava was not concerned that the matter had been caused by his consumption of an even number of cups, as he said: That injury occurred because Rava bar Livai challenged me during the public lecture. It is improper for a student to raise difficulties against his rabbi during a public lecture, lest the rabbi be embarrassed by his inability to answer.

אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף, אָמַר לִי יוֹסֵף שֵׁידָא: אַשְׁמְדַאי מַלְכָּא דְשֵׁידֵי — מְמוּנֶּה הוּא אַכּוּלְּהוּ זוּגֵי, וּמַלְכָּא לָא אִיקְּרִי מַזִּיק. אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי לַהּ לְהַאי גִּיסָא: אַדְּרַבָּה, מַלְכָּא [רַתְחָנָא הוּא], מַאי דְּבָעֵי עָבֵיד, שֶׁהַמֶּלֶךְ פּוֹרֵץ גָּדֵר לַעֲשׂוֹת לוֹ דֶּרֶךְ וְאֵין מוֹחִין בְּיָדוֹ.

Rav Yosef said: Yosef the Demon said to me: Ashmedai, the king of the demons, is appointed over all who perform actions in pairs, and a king is not called a harmful spirit. A king would not cause harm. Consequently, there is no reason to fear the harm of demons for having performed an action in pairs. Some say this statement in this manner: On the contrary, he is an angry king who does what he wants, as the halakha is that a king may breach the fence of an individual in order to form a path for himself, and none may protest his action. Similarly, the king of demons has full license to harm people who perform actions in pairs.

אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא, אָמַר לִי יוֹסֵף שֵׁידָא: בִּתְרֵי קָטְלִינַן, בְּאַרְבְּעָה לָא קָטְלִינַן, בְּאַרְבְּעָה מַזְּקִינַן. בִּתְרֵי, בֵּין בְּשׁוֹגֵג בֵּין בְּמֵזִיד. בְּאַרְבְּעָה, בְּמֵזִיד — אִין, בְּשׁוֹגֵג — לָא.

Rav Pappa said: Yosef the Demon said to me: If one drinks two cups, we demons kill him; if he drinks four, we do not kill him. But this person who drank four, we harm him. There is another difference between two and four: With regard to one who drinks two, whether he did so unwittingly or intentionally, we harm him. With regard to one who drinks four, if he does so intentionally, yes, he is harmed; if he does so unwittingly, no, he will not be harmed.

וְאִי אִישְׁתְּלִי וְאִיקְּרִי וּנְפַק, מַאי תַּקַּנְתֵּיהּ? לִינְקוֹט זַקְפָּא דִידֵיהּ דְּיַמִּינֵיהּ בִּידָא דִשְׂמָאלֵיהּ וְזַקְפָּא דִשְׂמָאלֵיהּ בִּידָא דְיַמִּינֵיהּ, וְנֵימָא הָכִי: ״אַתּוּן וַאֲנָא — הָא תְּלָתָא״. וְאִי שְׁמִיעַ לֵיהּ דְּאָמַר: ״אַתּוּן וַאֲנָא — הָא אַרְבְּעָה״, נֵימָא לֵיהּ: ״אַתּוּן וַאֲנָא — הָא חַמְשָׁה״. וְאִי שְׁמִיעַ לֵיהּ דְּאָמַר: ״אַתּוּן וַאֲנָא — הָא שִׁיתָּא״, נֵימָא לֵיהּ: ״אַתּוּן וַאֲנָא — הָא שִׁבְעָה״. הֲוָה עוֹבָדָא עַד מְאָה וְחַד, וּפְקַע שֵׁידָא.

The Gemara asks: And if one forgets and it happens that he goes outside after having drunk an even number of cups, what is his solution? The Gemara answers: He should take his right thumb in his left hand, and his left thumb in his right hand, and say as follows: You, my thumbs, and I are three, which is not a pair. And if he hears a voice that says: You and I are four, which makes a pair, he should say to it: You and I are five. And if he hears it say: You and I are six, he should say to it: You and I are seven. The Gemara relates that there was an incident in which someone kept counting after the demon until he reached a hundred and one, and the demon burst in anger.

אָמַר אַמֵּימָר: אֲמַרָה לִי רֵישָׁתִינְהִי דְּנָשִׁים כַּשְׁפָנִיּוֹת: הַאי מַאן דְּפָגַע בְּהוּ בְּנָשִׁים כַּשְׁפָנִיּוֹת, נֵימָא הָכִי: ״חָרֵי חַמִּימֵי בְּדִיקּוּלָא בַּזְיָיא לְפוּמַּיְיכוּ נְשֵׁי דְּחָרָשַׁיָּיא, קָרַח קָרְחַיְיכִי, פָּרַח פָּרְחַיְיכִי,

Ameimar said: The chief of witches said to me: One who encounters witches should say this incantation: Hot feces in torn date baskets in your mouth, witches; may your hairs fall out because you use them for witchcraft; your crumbs, which you use for witchcraft, should scatter in the wind;

אִיבַּדּוּר תַּבְלוּנַיְיכִי, פָּרְחָא זִיקָא לְמוֹרִיקָא חַדְתָּא דְּנָקְטִיתוּ נָשִׁים כַּשְׁפָנִיּוֹת, אַדְּחַנַּנִּי וְחַנַּנְכִי לָא אֲתֵיתִי לְגוֹ, הַשְׁתָּא דַּאֲתֵיתִי לְגוֹ — קַרְחַנְנִי וַחֲנַנְכִי״.

your spices, which you use for your witchcraft, should scatter; the wind should carry away the fresh saffron that you witches hold to perform your witchcraft. As long as I was shown favor from Heaven and you showed me favor, I did not come here. Now that I have come here, your favor toward me has cooled and you should find favor.

בְּמַעְרְבָא לָא קָפְדִי אַזּוּגֵי. רַב דִּימִי מִנְּהַרְדְּעָא קָפֵיד אֲפִילּוּ אַרוּשְׁמָא דְחָבִיתָא. הֲוָה עוֹבָדָא וּפְקַע חָבִיתָא. כְּלָלָא דְמִילְּתָא, כׇּל דְּקָפֵיד — קָפְדִי בַּהֲדֵיהּ, וּדְלָא קָפֵיד — לָא קָפְדִי בַּהֲדֵיהּ, וּמִיהוּ לְמֵיחַשׁ מִיבְּעֵי.

The Gemara relates that in the West, Eretz Yisrael, they were not particular with regard to pairs. Rav Dimi from Neharde’a was particular about pairs even with regard to the signs on a barrel; he would not write pairs of symbols on a barrel. There was an incident in which there were pairs of symbols on a barrel and the barrel burst. The Gemara concludes: The rule of the matter is that all who are particular about pairs, the demons are particular with him; and if one is not particular, they are not particular with him. However, one is required to be concerned about the harm that might result from purposely performing actions in pairs.

כִּי אֲתָא רַב דִּימִי, אָמַר: שְׁתֵּי בֵיצִים, וּשְׁתֵּי אֱגוֹזִין, שְׁתֵּי קִישּׁוּאִין, וְדָבָר אַחֵר — הֲלָכָה לְמֹשֶׁה מִסִּינַי. וּמִסְתַּפְּקָא לְהוּ לְרַבָּנַן מַאי נִיהוּ דָּבָר אַחֵר, וּגְזוּר רַבָּנַן בְּכוּלְּהוּ זוּגֵי מִשּׁוּם דָּבָר אַחֵר.

When Rav Dimi came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said: With regard to two eggs, two nuts, two cucumbers, and another matter, there is a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai that they are dangerous in pairs. But the Sages are uncertain about what the other matter is, and therefore the Sages decreed that all pairs are prohibited due to that other matter.

וְהָא דַּאֲמַרַן עֲשָׂרָה, תְּמָנְיָא, שִׁיתָּא, אַרְבְּעָה אֵין בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם זוּגֵי, לָא אֲמַרַן אֶלָּא לְעִנְיַן מַזִּיקִין. אֲבָל לְעִנְיַן כְּשָׁפִים — אֲפִילּוּ טוּבָא נָמֵי חָיְישִׁינַן.

And the Gemara notes that that which we said above, that the numbers ten, eight, six, and four do not cause the danger associated with pairs, we said only with regard to harmful spirits. However, with regard to witchcraft, we are concerned even with regard to one who performed an activity a greater number of times.

כִּי הָא דְּהָהוּא גַּבְרָא דְּגָרְשַׁהּ לִדְבֵיתְהוּ. (אֲזִיל) אִינַּסְבָה לְחַנְוָאָה. כׇּל יוֹמָא הֲוָה אָזֵיל וְשָׁתֵי חַמְרָא. הֲוָה קָא עָבְדָא לֵיהּ כְּשָׁפִים וְלָא קָא מַהְנְיָא לַהּ בֵּיהּ, מִשּׁוּם דַּהֲוָה מִזְדְּהַר בְּנַפְשֵׁיהּ בְּזוּגָא.

This is like that incident involving a certain man who divorced his wife. She went and married a shopkeeper who sold wine in his store. Every day, the first husband would go and drink wine in that shop. His ex-wife would perform witchcraft upon him, and it would not be effective for her in her attempts to harm him because he was careful with regard to pairs.

יוֹמָא חַד אִשְׁתִּי טוּבָא, וְלָא הֲוָה יָדַע כַּמָּה שָׁתֵי. עַד שִׁיתְּסַר הֲוָה צְיִיל וְאִיזְדְּהַר בְּנַפְשֵׁיהּ, מִכָּאן וְאֵילָךְ לָא הֲוָה צְיִיל וְלָא אִיזְדְּהַר בְּנַפְשֵׁיהּ, אַפֵּיקְתֵּיהּ בְּזוּגָא. כִּי הֲוָה אָזֵיל, גָּס בֵּיהּ הָהוּא טַיָּיעָא, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: גַּבְרָא קְטִילָא הוּא דְּאָזֵיל הָכָא. אָזֵיל חַבְּקֵיהּ לְדִיקְלָא, צְוַוח דִּיקְלָא וּפְקַע הוּא.

One day he drank a lot, and he did not know how much he drank. Until he drank sixteen cups, he was lucid and was careful with regard to himself, to keep track of how many cups he had drunk. From here onward he was not lucid and was not careful to watch himself, and she caused him to leave after having consumed a pair, i.e., an even number of cups. As he walked, a certain Arab met him and, noticing that he was bewitched, said to him: It is a dead man who walks here. He went and hugged a palm tree for support; the palm tree dried out due to the witchcraft, and he burst.

אָמַר רַב עַוִּירָא: קְעָרוֹת וְכִכָּרוֹת אֵין בָּהֶם מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת. כְּלָלָא דְּמִילְּתָא: כׇּל שֶׁגְּמָרוֹ בִּידֵי אָדָם — אֵין בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת. גְּמָרוֹ בִּידֵי שָׁמַיִם — בְּמִילֵּי מִינֵי דְמֵיכַל חָיְישִׁינַן.

Rav Avira said: Plates and loaves do not contain the element of danger associated with pairs. The Gemara elaborates upon this point: The rule of the matter is that anything whose production was completed by people, whether a vessel or food, they do not contain the element of danger associated with pairs. Conversely, if the object was completed by Heaven, e.g., with regard to types of food, we are concerned.

חֲנוּת — אֵין בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת. נִמְלָךְ — אֵין בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת. אוֹרֵחַ — אֵין בּוֹ מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת. אִשָּׁה — אֵין בָּהּ מִשּׁוּם זוּגוֹת. וְאִי אִשָּׁה חֲשׁוּבָה, חָיְישִׁינַן.

Furthermore, a store does not contain the element of danger associated with pairs. If one eats there, there is no danger, as this is not his regular place. If one changed one’s mind after drinking an odd number of cups and added one more, his drinking does not contain the element of danger associated with pairs, as he did not initially intend to drink an even number. The behavior of a guest who eats or drinks in someone else’s house does not contain the element of danger associated with pairs, as his host determines how much he will eat and drink. The behavior of a woman does not contain the element of danger associated with pairs, as demons are not particular with regard to how much a woman eats or drinks. But if she is an important woman, we are concerned.

אָמַר רַב חִינָּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: אִיסְפָּרָגוֹס — מִצְטָרֵף לְטוֹבָה, וְאֵין מִצְטָרֵף לְרָעָה.

Rav Ḥinnana, son of Rav Yehoshua, said: Isparegus, a wine-based drink with added spices that people would regularly consume in the morning, combines with the number of cups of wine one has already consumed for the good, to raise the total to an odd number, and does not combine for the bad, to bring the sum to an even number.

אָמַר רָבִינָא מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרָבָא: זוּגֵי — לְחוּמְרָא. וְאָמְרִי לֵיהּ: זוּגֵי — לְקוּלָּא. אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: תְּרֵי דְחַמְרָא וְחַד דְּשִׁיכְרָא — לָא מִצְטָרֵף, תְּרֵי דְשִׁיכְרָא וְחַד דְּחַמְרָא — מִצְטָרֵף.

Ravina said in the name of Rava: If one is in doubt as to whether he has drunk in pairs, he should be stringent and drink another cup. And some say that one who is uncertain with regard to pairs should be lenient and not drink an additional cup, lest the additional cup be the even number. Rav Yosef said: Two cups of wine and one cup of beer do not combine; two cups of beer and one cup of wine do combine.

וְסִימָנָיךְ, זֶה הַכְּלָל: כׇּל הַמְחוּבָּר לוֹ מִן הֶחָמוּר מִמֶּנּוּ — טָמֵא, מִן הַקַּל מִמֶּנּוּ — טָהוֹר.

And this is your mnemonic by which to remember this rule is a mishna concerning the halakhot of ritual purity. This is the rule: With regard to anything attached to an object, if the smaller piece is more stringent than the larger one, the combined object is ritually impure; if the attached substance is more lenient than it, the combined object is ritually pure. In other words, if a small piece of a type of fabric that contracts ritual impurity when it is relatively small, which is a stringency, is attached to a larger object comprised of a less valuable fabric that contracts ritual impurity only when it is bigger, the two materials combine to form a unified fabric that contracts ritual impurity if together they amount to the larger requisite size. However, if there is more of the stringent material, the two substances do not combine halakhically to form the amount of the smaller requisite size. Similarly, in the case of pairs, the wine is more significant than the beer. Therefore, the wine combines with the beer but not vice versa.

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר רַב: תְּרֵי קַמֵּי תַּכָּא וְחַד אַתַּכָּא — מִצְטָרְפִי. חַד מִקַּמֵּי תַּכָּא וּתְרֵי אַתַּכָּא — לֹא מִצְטָרְפִין.

Rav Naḥman said that Rav said: If one drinks two cups before the table is brought and the meal begins and one cup over the table they combine, the person is not considered to have drunk a pair of cups. However, if one drinks one cup before the table is brought and two cups over the table they do not combine; the two cups he drank during the meal are considered a pair.

מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב מְשַׁרְשְׁיָא: אַטּוּ אֲנַן לְתַקּוֹנֵי תַּכָּא קָא בָּעֵינַן? לְתַקּוֹנֵי גַּבְרָא בָּעֵינַן, וְגַבְרָא קָא מִיתְּקַן וְקָאֵי.

Rav Mesharshiya strongly objects to this ruling: Is that to say that we need to resolve the problem of pairs with regard to the table? Is the presence of the table the decisive factor here? We need to resolve the problem with regard to the person, and with regard to the person it is considered resolved. He began drinking before the table was brought, and he has consumed an odd number of cups.

(אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב מְשַׁרְשְׁיָא): דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא תְּרֵי אַתַּכָּא וְחַד לְבָתַר תַּכָּא — לָא מִצְטָרְפִי. כִּי הַהִיא מַעֲשֶׂה דְּרַבָּה בַּר נַחְמָנִי.

Rather, Rav Mesharshiya said: Everyone agrees that if one drank two cups over the table during the meal and one after the table has been removed, they do not combine. This is like that incident involving Rabba bar Naḥmani, in which someone drank in pairs and was harmed. Rabba instructed them to return the table so that the man could drink an additional cup over the table. This shows that the additional cup counts only if the drinker returns to the table.

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: כׇּל הַמָּזוּג — מִצְטָרֵף,

Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: Any type of drink that is diluted combines to form an even or odd number,

Want to follow content and continue where you left off?

Create an account today to track your progress, mark what you’ve learned, and follow the shiurim that speak to you.

Clear all items from this list?

This will remove ALL the items in this section. You will lose any progress or history connected to them. This is irreversible.

Cancel
Yes, clear all

Are you sure you want to delete this item?

You will lose any progress or history connected to this item.

Cancel
Yes, delete