Search

Shabbat 55

Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:

English
עברית
podcast placeholder

0:00
0:00




podcast placeholder

0:00
0:00




Summary

The gemara explains the importance of trying to prevent others from sinning, even if you know they won’t listen to you. We have a communal responsibility to others – both leaders and individuals are responsible for others. Rav Ami says that people only die or are punished for their own sins, not the sins of others. The gemara brings several braitot that seem to contradict. Rav Shmuel bar Nachmani says in the name of Rabbi Yonatan that Reuven did not actually sleep with Bilhah – if so, why does it say he did? The sons of Ely didn’t really sleep with other women – if so, why does it say they did?

Today’s daily daf tools:

Shabbat 55

זְקֵנִים מֶה חָטְאוּ? אֶלָּא אֵימָא: עַל זְקֵנִים, שֶׁלֹּא מִיחוּ בַּשָּׂרִים.

what did the Elders, i.e., the Sages of that generation, do that was considered a sin? Rather, say: God will enter into judgment with the Elders because they did not protest the sinful conduct of the princes.

רַב יְהוּדָה הֲוָה יָתֵיב קַמֵּיהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל. אֲתַאי הַהִיא אִיתְּתָא קָא צָוְוחָה קַמֵּיהּ, וְלָא הֲוָה מַשְׁגַּח בַּהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא סָבַר לֵיהּ מָר: ״אוֹטֵם אׇזְנוֹ מִזַּעֲקַת דָּל גַּם הוּא יִקְרָא וְלֹא יֵעָנֶה״? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: שִׁינָּנָא, רֵישָׁךְ בְּקָרִירֵי, רֵישָׁא דְרֵישָׁיךְ בְּחַמִּימֵי. הָא יָתֵיב מָר עוּקְבָא אַב בֵּית דִּין.

The Gemara relates: Rav Yehuda was sitting before Shmuel when this woman came and cried before Shmuel about an injustice that had been committed against her, and Shmuel paid no attention to her. Rav Yehuda said to Shmuel: Doesn’t the Master hold in accordance with the verse: “Whoever stops his ears at the cry of the poor, he also shall cry himself, but shall not be heard” (Proverbs 21:13)? He said to him: Big-toothed one, your superior, i.e., I, your teacher, will be punished in cold water. The superior of your superior will be punished in hot water. Mar Ukva, who sits as president of the court, is responsible for those matters.

דִּכְתִיב: ״בֵּית דָּוִד כֹּה אָמַר ה׳ דִּינוּ לַבֹּקֶר מִשְׁפָּט וְהַצִּילוּ גָזוּל מִיַּד עוֹשֵׁק פֶּן תֵּצֵא כָאֵשׁ חֲמָתִי וּבָעֲרָה וְאֵין מְכַבֶּה מִפְּנֵי רוֹעַ מַעַלְלֵיהֶם וְגוֹ׳״.

And from where is it derived that this responsibility is incumbent upon the house of the Exilarch? As it is written: “House of David, so says the Lord: Execute judgment in the morning, and deliver him that is robbed out of the hand of the oppressor, lest My fury go forth like fire, and burn so that none can quench it because of the evil of your doings” (Jeremiah 21:12). The Exilarch is a direct descendant of the house of David.

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי זֵירָא לְרַבִּי סִימוֹן: לוֹכְחִינְהוּ מָר לְהָנֵי דְּבֵי רֵישׁ גָּלוּתָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא מְקַבְּלִי מִינַּאי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אַף עַל גַּב דְּלָא מְקַבְּלִי לוֹכְחִינְהוּ מָר.

With regard to the issue of reprimand, it was related that Rabbi Zeira said to Rabbi Simon: Let the Master reprimand the members of the house of the Exilarch, as Rabbi Simon had some influence over them. Rabbi Simon said to him: They will not accept reprimand from me. Rabbi Zeira said to him: Let my master reprimand them even if they do not accept it.

דְּאָמַר רַבִּי אַחָא בְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא: מֵעוֹלָם לֹא יָצְתָה מִדָּה טוֹבָה מִפִּי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא וְחָזַר בָּהּ לְרָעָה חוּץ מִדָּבָר זֶה, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיֹּאמֶר ה׳ אֵלָיו עֲבוֹר בְּתוֹךְ הָעִיר בְּתוֹךְ יְרוּשָׁלִָים וְהִתְוִיתָ תָּו עַל מִצְחוֹת הָאֲנָשִׁים הַנֶּאֱנָחִים וְהַנֶּאֱנָקִים עַל כׇּל הַתּוֹעֵבוֹת הַנַּעֲשׂוֹת בְּתוֹכָהּ וְגוֹ׳״.

As Rabbi Aḥa, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: Never did a promise manifesting a good attribute emerge from the mouth of the Holy One, Blessed be He, and He later retracted it and rendered it evil, except with regard to this matter, as it is written: “And the Lord said to him: Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and set a mark [tav] upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry on account of all the abominations that are done in her midst” (Ezekiel 9:4).

אָמַר לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְגַבְרִיאֵל: לֵךְ וּרְשׁוֹם עַל מִצְחָן שֶׁל צַדִּיקִים תָּיו שֶׁל דְּיוֹ שֶׁלֹּא יִשְׁלְטוּ בָּהֶם מַלְאֲכֵי חַבָּלָה. וְעַל מִצְחָם שֶׁל רְשָׁעִים תָּיו שֶׁל דָּם כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּשְׁלְטוּ בָּהֶן מַלְאֲכֵי חַבָּלָה.

The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to the angel Gabriel: Go and inscribe a tav of ink on the foreheads of the righteous as a sign so that the angels of destruction will not have dominion over them. And inscribe a tav of blood on the foreheads of the wicked as a sign so that the angels of destruction will have dominion over them.

אָמְרָה מִדַּת הַדִּין לִפְנֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא: רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם! מַה נִּשְׁתַּנּוּ אֵלּוּ מֵאֵלּוּ? אָמַר לָהּ: הַלָּלוּ צַדִּיקִים גְּמוּרִים וְהַלָּלוּ רְשָׁעִים גְּמוּרִים. אָמְרָה לְפָנָיו: רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם! הָיָה בְּיָדָם לִמְחוֹת וְלֹא מִיחוּ!

The attribute of justice said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, how are these different from those? He said to that attribute: These are full-fledged righteous people and those are full-fledged wicked people. The attribute of justice said to Him: Master of the Universe, it was in the hands of the righteous to protest the conduct of the wicked, and they did not protest.

אָמַר לָהּ: גָּלוּי וְיָדוּעַ לְפָנַי שֶׁאִם מִיחוּ בָּהֶם לֹא יְקַבְּלוּ מֵהֶם. (אָמַר) [אָמְרָה] לְפָנָיו: רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם! אִם לְפָנֶיךָ גָּלוּי, לָהֶם מִי גָּלוּי?

He said to that attribute: It is revealed and known before Me that even had they protested the conduct of the wicked, they would not have accepted the reprimand from them. They would have continued in their wicked ways. The attribute of justice said before Him: Master of the Universe, if it is revealed before You that their reprimand would have been ineffective, is it revealed to them? The Holy One, Blessed be He, retracted His promise to protect the righteous and decided that those who failed to protest would also be punished.

וְהַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״זָקֵן בָּחוּר וּבְתוּלָה טַף וְנָשִׁים תַּהַרְגוּ לְמַשְׁחִית וְעַל כׇּל אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר עָלָיו הַתָּו אַל תִּגַּשׁוּ וּמִמִּקְדָּשִׁי תָּחֵלּוּ״. וּכְתִיב: ״וַיָּחֵלּוּ בָּאֲנָשִׁים הַזְּקֵנִים אֲשֶׁר לִפְנֵי הַבָּיִת״. תָּנֵי רַב יוֹסֵף: אַל תִּקְרֵי ״מִקְדָּשִׁי״ אֶלָּא ״מְקוּדָּשַׁי״ — אֵלּוּ בְּנֵי אָדָם שֶׁקִּיְּמוּ אֶת הַתּוֹרָה כֻּלָּהּ מֵאָלֶף וְעַד תָּיו. וּמִיָּד: ״וְהִנֵּה שִׁשָּׁה אֲנָשִׁים בָּאִים מִדֶּרֶךְ שַׁעַר הָעֶלְיוֹן אֲשֶׁר מׇפְנֶה צָפוֹנָה וְאִישׁ כְּלִי מַפָּצוֹ בְּיָדוֹ וְאִישׁ אֶחָד בְּתוֹכָם לָבֻשׁ הַבַּדִּים וְקֶסֶת הַסּוֹפֵר בְּמׇתְנָיו וַיָּבֹאוּ וַיַּעַמְדוּ אֵצֶל מִזְבַּח הַנְּחוֹשֶׁת״.

And that is the meaning of that which is written: “Slay utterly old and young, both maid, and little children, and women; but come not near any man upon whom is the mark; and begin at My Sanctuary” (Ezekiel 9:6). And it is written in that same verse: “Then they began with the elderly men who were before the house.” Rav Yosef taught: Read not: My Sanctuary [mikdashi], rather: Those sanctified to Me [mekudashai]. These are people who observed the whole Torah in its entirety from alef through tav. And immediately: “And, behold, six men came from the way of the higher gate, which lies toward the north, and every man with his weapon of destruction in his hand; and one man among them was clothed in linen, with a writer’s inkwell by his side; and they went in and stood beside the bronze altar” (Ezekiel 9:2).

מִזְבֵּחַ הַנְּחוֹשֶׁת מִי הֲוָה? אָמַר לָהֶם הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא: הַתְחִילוּ מִמְּקוֹם שֶׁאוֹמְרִים שִׁירָה לְפָנַי. וּמַאן נִינְהוּ שִׁשָּׁה אֲנָשִׁים? אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: קֶצֶף, אַף, וְחֵימָה, וּמַשְׁחִית, וּמְשַׁבֵּר, וּמְכַלֶּה.

The Gemara asks: Was there a bronze altar in the Temple in the time of Ezekiel? Already in the days of Solomon there was only a stone altar. Rather, this should be understood as a figure of speech. The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to them: Begin from the place where they recite songs of praise before Me. This is a reference to the Levites in the Temple whose musical instruments are made of bronze. And who are the six men mentioned here? Rav Ḥisda said: Fury, Wrath, and Rage, and Destroyer, and Breaker, and Annihilator, six angels of destruction.

וּמַאי שְׁנָא ״תָּיו״? אָמַר רַב: ״תָּיו״ — תִּחְיֶה, ״תָּיו״ — תָּמוּת. וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: תַּמָּה זְכוּת אָבוֹת. וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: תָּחוֹן זְכוּת אָבוֹת.

The Gemara asks further: And what is different about the letter tav, that it was inscribed on the foreheads of the righteous? Rav said: Tav is the first letter of the word tiḥye, you shall live, indicating that the righteous shall live. Tav is also the first letter of the word tamut, you shall die, indicating that the wicked shall die. And Shmuel said: The letter tav is the first letter of the word tama, ceased, indicating that the merit of the Patriarchs has ceased and will not help the wicked. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The letter tav is the first letter of the word taḥon, will have mercy, indicating that due to the merit of the Patriarchs God will have mercy on the righteous.

וְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אָמַר: ״תָּיו״ — סוֹף חוֹתָמוֹ שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא: חוֹתָמוֹ שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא ״אֱמֶת״. (אָמַר) רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָנִי [אָמַר]: אֵלּוּ בְּנֵי אָדָם שֶׁקִּיְּמוּ אֶת הַתּוֹרָה כֻּלָּהּ מֵאָלֶף וְעַד תָּיו.

And Reish Lakish said: The letter tav is the last letter of the seal of the Holy One, Blessed be He, as Rabbi Ḥanina said: The seal of the Holy One, Blessed be He, is truth [emet], which ends with the letter tav. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: The letter tav teaches that these are people who observed the entire Torah from alef through tav.

מֵאֵימָתַי תַּמָּה זְכוּת אָבוֹת? אָמַר רַב: מִימוֹת הוֹשֵׁעַ בֶּן בְּאֵרִי, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אֲגַלֶּה אֶת נַבְלֻתָהּ לְעֵינֵי מְאַהֲבֶיהָ וְאִישׁ לֹא יַצִּילֶנָּה מִיָּדִי״.

With regard to the statement that the merit of the Patriarchs has ceased, the Gemara asks: From when did the merit of the Patriarchs cease? Rav said: From the days of the prophet Hosea, son of Beeri, as it is stated: “And now I will uncover her lewdness in the sight of her lovers, and none shall deliver her out of My hand” (Hosea 2:12). Israel will no longer be saved by the merit of the Patriarchs.

וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: מִימֵי חֲזָאֵל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַחֲזָאֵל מֶלֶךְ אֲרָם לָחַץ אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל כֹּל יְמֵי יְהוֹאָחָז״. וּכְתִיב: ״וַיָּחׇן ה׳ אוֹתָם וַיְרַחֲמֵם וַיִּפֶן אֲלֵיהֶם לְמַעַן בְּרִיתוֹ אֶת אַבְרָהָם יִצְחָק וְיַעֲקֹב וְלֹא אָבָה הַשְׁחִיתָם וְלֹא הִשְׁלִיכָם מֵעַל פָּנָיו עַד עָתָּה״.

And Shmuel said: The merit of the Patriarchs ceased since the days of Hazael, as it is stated: “And Hazael, king of Aram, oppressed Israel all the days of Jehoahaz” (II Kings 13:22). And it is written there: “And the Lord was gracious to them, and had compassion on them, and turned toward them because of His covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and would not destroy them; neither has He till now cast them away from His presence” (II Kings 13:23). That was the last time that the merit of the Patriarchs was mentioned.

רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי אָמַר: מִימֵי אֵלִיָּהוּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיְהִי בַּעֲלוֹת הַמִּנְחָה וַיִּגַּשׁ אֵלִיָּהוּ הַנָּבִיא וַיֹּאמַר ה׳ אֱלֹהֵי אַבְרָהָם יִצְחָק וְיִשְׂרָאֵל הַיּוֹם יִוָּדַע כִּי אַתָּה אֱלֹהִים בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל וַאֲנִי עַבְדֶּךָ וּבִדְבָרְךָ עָשִׂיתִי [אֵת] כׇּל הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה וְגוֹ׳״.

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: The merit of the Patriarchs ceased since the days of Elijah the Prophet, as it is stated: “And it came to pass at the time of the evening sacrifice, that Elijah the Prophet came near and said, Lord, God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, let it be known this day that you are God in Israel, and that I am Your servant, and that I have done all these things at Your word” (I Kings 18:36). By inference: Let it be known this day and not afterward because the merit of the Patriarchs will cease today.

וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: מִימֵי חִזְקִיָּהוּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״לְמַרְבֵּה הַמִּשְׂרָה וּלְשָׁלוֹם אֵין קֵץ עַל כִּסֵּא דָוִד וְעַל מַמְלַכְתּוֹ לְהָכִין אוֹתָהּ וּלְסַעֲדָהּ בְּמִשְׁפָּט וּבִצְדָקָה מֵעַתָּה וְעַד עוֹלָם קִנְאַת ה׳ צְבָאוֹת תַּעֲשֶׂה זֹּאת וְגוֹ׳״.

And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The merit of the Patriarchs ceased since the days of Hezekiah, as it is stated: “For the increase of the realm and for peace without end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice; from now and forever the zeal of the Lord of hosts performs this” (Isaiah 9:6). That is to say, from this point on, the merit of the Patriarchs will not protect Israel, leaving only the zeal of the Lord.

אָמַר רַב אַמֵּי: אֵין מִיתָה בְּלֹא חֵטְא, וְאֵין יִסּוּרִין בְּלֹא עָוֹן.

The Gemara continues its discussion of punishment in general and the relationship between a person’s actions and the punishments meted out against him in particular: Rav Ami said: There is no death without sin; were a person not to sin, he would not die. And there is no suffering without iniquity.

אֵין מִיתָה בְּלֹא חֵטְא — דִּכְתִיב: ״הַנֶּפֶשׁ הַחוֹטֵאת הִיא תָמוּת בֵּן לֹא יִשָּׂא בַּעֲוֹן הָאָב וְאָב לֹא יִשָּׂא בַּעֲוֹן הַבֵּן צִדְקַת הַצַּדִּיק עָלָיו תִּהְיֶה וְרִשְׁעַת הָרָשָׁע עָלָיו תִּהְיֶה וְגוֹ׳״. אֵין יִסּוּרִין בְּלֹא עָוֹן — דִּכְתִיב: ״וּפָקַדְתִּי בְשֵׁבֶט פִּשְׁעָם וּבִנְגָעִים עֲוֹנָם״.

The Gemara adduces proof to these assertions: There is no death without sin, as it is written: “The soul that sins, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him” (Ezekiel 18:20). A person dies only because of his own sins and not because of some preexistent sin. And there is no suffering without iniquity, as it is written: “Then I will punish their transgression with the rod and their iniquity with strokes” (Psalms 89:33).

מֵיתִיבִי: אָמְרוּ מַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת לִפְנֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא: רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם! מִפְּנֵי מָה קָנַסְתָּ מִיתָה עַל אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן? אָמַר לָהֶם: מִצְוָה קַלָּה צִוִּיתִיו וְעָבַר עָלֶיהָ. אָמְרוּ לוֹ: וַהֲלֹא מֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן שֶׁקִּיְּמוּ כׇּל הַתּוֹרָה כֻּלָּהּ, וּמֵתוּ! אָמַר לָהֶם: ״מִקְרֶה אֶחָד לַצַּדִּיק וְלָרָשָׁע לַטּוֹב וְגוֹ׳״!

The Gemara raises an objection from the following baraita: The ministering angels said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, why did You penalize Adam, the first man, with the death penalty? He said to them: I gave him a simple mitzva, and he violated it. They said to Him: Didn’t Moses and Aaron, who observed the whole Torah in its entirety, nevertheless die? The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to them, citing the verse: “All things come alike to all; there is one event to the righteous and to the wicked; to the good and to the clean, and to the unclean; to him who sacrifices, and to him who does not sacrifice; as is the good, so is the sinner; and he who swears, as he who fears an oath” (Ecclesiastes 9:2). Apparently, death is not dependent upon one’s actions. Everyone dies.

הוּא דְּאָמַר כִּי הַאי תַּנָּא, דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: אַף מֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן בְּחֶטְאָם מֵתוּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״יַעַן לֹא הֶאֱמַנְתֶּם בִּי״. הָא הֶאֱמַנְתֶּם בִּי — עֲדַיִן לֹא הִגִּיעַ זְמַנְּכֶם לִיפָּטֵר מִן הָעוֹלָם.

The Gemara answers: Rav Ami stated his position in accordance with this tanna, as it was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said: Even Moses and Aaron died due to their sin, as it is stated: “And the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron: Because you did not believe in Me, to sanctify Me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore you shall not bring this congregation in to the land which I have given them” (Numbers 20:12). Had you believed in Me and spoken to the rock as commanded, your time would not yet have come to leave the world. Apparently, even Moses and Aaron died due to their sins.

מֵיתִיבִי: אַרְבָּעָה מֵתוּ בְּעֶטְיוֹ שֶׁל נָחָשׁ, וְאֵלּוּ הֵן: בִּנְיָמִין בֶּן יַעֲקֹב, וְעַמְרָם אֲבִי מֹשֶׁה, וְיִשַׁי אֲבִי דָוִד, וְכִלְאָב בֶּן דָּוִד. וְכוּלְּהוּ גְּמָרָא, לְבַר מִיִּשַׁי אֲבִי דָוִד דִּמְפָרֵשׁ בָּהּ קְרָא, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְאֶת עֲמָשָׂא שָׂם אַבְשָׁלוֹם תַּחַת יוֹאָב (שַׂר) [עַל] הַצָּבָא וַעֲמָשָׂא בֶן אִישׁ וּשְׁמוֹ יִתְרָא הַיִּשְׂרְאֵלִי אֲשֶׁר בָּא אֶל אֲבִיגַיִל בַּת נָחָשׁ אֲחוֹת צְרוּיָה אֵם יוֹאָב״.

The Gemara raises an objection from what was taught in the following baraita: Four people died due to Adam’s sin with the serpent, in the wake of which death was decreed upon all of mankind, although they themselves were free of sin. And they are: Benjamin, son of Jacob; Amram, father of Moses; Yishai, father of David; and Kilab, son of David. And all of them were learned through tradition, except for Yishai, father of David, with regard to whom there is an explicit verse interpreted homiletically, as it is written: “And Absalom placed Amasa in charge of the army in place of Joab, and Amasa was the son of a man named Ithra the Israelite, who had taken to himself Abigail the daughter of Nahash, sister of Zeruiah, the mother of Joab (II Samuel 17:25).

וְכִי בַּת נָחָשׁ הֲוַאי? וַהֲלֹא בַּת יִשַׁי הֲוַאי, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְאַחְיוֹתֵיהֶן צְרוּיָה וַאֲבִיגַיִל״. אֶלָּא: בַּת מִי שֶׁמֵּת בְּעֶטְיוֹ שֶׁל נָחָשׁ.

The Gemara asks: And was Abigail the daughter of Nahash? Wasn’t she the daughter of Yishai, as it is written: “And Yishai begot his firstborn Eliab, and Abinadab the second, and Shimea the third, Nethanel the fourth, Raddai the fifth, Ozem the sixth, David the seventh: and their sisters were Zeruiah and Abigail. And the sons of Zeruiah: Abishai, and Joab, and Asahel, three. And Abigail bore Amasa; and the father of Amasa was Jether the Ishmaelite” (I Chronicles 2:13–17)? Apparently, Abigail was the daughter of Yishai. Rather, the verse states that Abigail was the daughter of Nahash in order to teach us that she was the daughter of one who died on account of Adam’s sin with the serpent [naḥash], though he himself was free of sin.

מַנִּי? אִילֵּימָא תַּנָּא דְמַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת, וְהָא אִיכָּא מֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן! אֶלָּא לָאו, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר הִיא. וּשְׁמַע מִינַּהּ יֵשׁ מִיתָה בְּלֹא חֵטְא וְיֵשׁ יִסּוּרִין בְּלֹא עָוֹן, וּתְיוּבְתָּא דְרַב אַמֵּי — תְּיוּבְתָּא.

The Gemara now clarifies the matter: Who is the tanna of the baraita that states that four people did not die due to their own sins? If you say that it is the tanna who taught the conversation between the ministering angels and God, it is difficult, as weren’t there also Moses and Aaron who did not die due to their own sins? Rather, it must be Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar, who holds that even Moses and Aaron died because of their own sins. Learn from it then that, in principle, he agrees that there is death without sin and there is suffering without iniquity, and this is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Ami. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, it is a conclusive refutation.

אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָנִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: כׇּל הָאוֹמֵר רְאוּבֵן חָטָא אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא טוֹעֶה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיִּהְיוּ בְנֵי יַעֲקֹב שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר״ — מְלַמֵּד שֶׁכּוּלָּן שְׁקוּלִים כְּאֶחָד. אֶלָּא מָה אֲנִי מְקַיֵּים ״וַיִּשְׁכַּב אֶת בִּלְהָה פִּילֶגֶשׁ אָבִיו״ — מְלַמֵּד שֶׁבִּלְבֵּל מַצָּעוֹ שֶׁל אָבִיו, וּמַעֲלֶה עָלָיו הַכָּתוּב כְּאִילּוּ שָׁכַב עִמָּהּ.

Having mentioned the sins of some of the significant ancestors of the Jewish people, the Gemara now addresses several additional ancestors. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan said: Anyone who says that Reuben sinned with Bilhah is nothing other than mistaken, as it is stated: “And it came to pass, when Israel dwelt in that land, that Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine; and Israel heard of it. Now the sons of Jacob were twelve” (Genesis 35:22). The fact that the Torah stated the number of Jacob’s sons at that point in the narrative teaches that, even after the incident involving Bilhah, all of the brothers were equal in righteousness. Apparently, Reuben did not sin. How then do I establish the meaning of the verse: “And he lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine”? The plain understanding of the verse indicates sin. This verse teaches that Reuben rearranged his father’s bed in protest of Jacob’s placement of his bed in the tent of Bilhah and not in the tent of his mother Leah after the death of Rachel. And the verse ascribes to him liability for his action as if he had actually lain with Bilhah.

תַּנְיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: מוּצָּל אוֹתוֹ צַדִּיק מֵאוֹתוֹ עָוֹן, וְלֹא בָּא מַעֲשֶׂה זֶה לְיָדוֹ. אֶפְשָׁר עָתִיד זַרְעוֹ לַעֲמוֹד עַל הַר עֵיבָל וְלוֹמַר: ״אָרוּר שֹׁכֵב עִם אֵשֶׁת אָבִיו״ וְיָבֹא חֵטְא זֶה לְיָדוֹ? אֶלָּא מָה אֲנִי מְקַיֵּים ״וַיִּשְׁכַּב אֶת בִּלְהָה פִּילֶגֶשׁ אָבִיו״ — עֶלְבּוֹן אִמּוֹ תָּבַע. אָמַר: אִם אֲחוֹת אִמִּי הָיְתָה צָרָה לְאִמִּי, שִׁפְחַת אֲחוֹת אִמִּי תְּהֵא צָרָה לְאִמִּי? עָמַד וּבִלְבֵּל אֶת מַצָּעָהּ.

It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: This righteous person, Reuben, was saved from that sin of adultery, and that action did not come to be performed by him? Is it possible that his descendants are destined to stand on Mount Eival and say: “Cursed be he that lies with his father’s wife; because he uncovers his father’s skirt. And all the people shall say, amen” (Deuteronomy 27:20), and this sin will come to be performed by him? Is it conceivable that the members of a tribe would curse their ancestor? How then do I establish the meaning of the verse: “And he lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine”? It is understood as follows: He protested the affront to his mother. He said: If my mother’s sister Rachel was a rival to my mother, will my mother’s sister’s concubine be a rival to my mother? He immediately stood and rearranged her bed so that Jacob would enter Leah’s tent.

אֲחֵרִים אוֹמְרִים: שְׁתֵּי מַצָּעוֹת בִּלְבֵּל, אַחַת שֶׁל שְׁכִינָה וְאַחַת שֶׁל אָבִיו. וְהַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״אָז חִלַּלְתָּ יְצוּעִי עָלָה״ — אַל תִּקְרֵי ״יְצוּעִי״ אֶלָּא ״יְצוּעַיי״.

Aḥerim say: He rearranged two beds, one of the Divine Presence and one of his father. And that is the meaning of that which is written: “Unstable as water, you shall not excel; because you went up to your father’s bed; then you did defile it; he went up to my bed [yetzui]” (Genesis 49:4). Do not read it as yetzu’i, in the singular; rather, read it as yetzuai, my beds, in the plural, referring to both the bed of his father and to the bed of the Divine Presence, which rests in the tents of the righteous.

כְּתַנָּאֵי. ״פַּחַז כַּמַּיִם אַל תּוֹתַר״. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר ״פַּזֹּתָה״, ״חַבְתָּה״, ״זַלְתָּה״. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר: ״פָּסַעְתָּה עַל דָּת״, ״חָטָאתָ״, ״זָנִיתָ״. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: ״פִּילַּלְתָּה״, ״חַלְתָּה״, ״זָרְחָה תְּפִלָּתֶךָ״.

The Gemara notes that the matter of Reuben’s innocence is parallel to a dispute between tanna’im. As it was taught in a baraita: The verse states: “Unstable [paḥaz] as water, you shall not excel.” The Sages understood paḥaz as an acronym. Rabbi Eliezer says that it means: You were impulsive [pazta], you were liable [ḥavta], and you acted contemptuously [zalta]. Rabbi Yehoshua says that it means: You trampled the law [pasata al dat], you sinned [ḥatata], and you were promiscuous [zanita]. Rabban Gamliel says: The acronym does not refer to Reuben’s sin. It refers to his repentance: You prayed [pilalta], you trembled in fear [ḥalta], and your prayer shone forth [zarḥa].

אָמַר רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: עֲדַיִן צְרִיכִין אָנוּ לַמּוֹדָעִי. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר הַמּוֹדָעִי אוֹמֵר: הֲפוֹךְ אֶת הַתֵּיבָה וְדוֹרְשָׁהּ: ״זִעְזַעְתָּה״, ״הִרְתַּעְתָּה״, ״פָּרַח חֵטְא מִמְּךָ״. רָבָא אָמַר, וְאָמְרִי לֵהּ רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה בַּר אַבָּא: ״זָכַרְתָּ עוֹנְשׁוֹ שֶׁל דָּבָר״, ״חִלִּיתָ עַצְמְךָ חוֹלִי גָּדוֹל״, ״פֵּירַשְׁתָּ מִלַּחְטוֹא״.

Rabban Gamliel said: We still need the explanation of the Modaite, as Rabbi Elazar HaModa’i said: Reverse the order of the letters in the word paḥaz and then interpret it homiletically: You shook [zizata], you recoiled [hirtata]; the ḥet in paḥaz is interchanged with the letter heh, so that you would not sin, and the sin flew [parḥa] from you. Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Elazar HaModa’i are of the opinion that Reuben did not sin. Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua held that he did. Rava said, and some say that Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba said: Reverse the letters in paḥaz and interpret: You remembered [zakharta] the punishment for that offense, you made yourself gravely ill [ḥalita] in order to refrain from sinning, and you successfully withdrew [peirashta] from sinning.

רְאוּבֵן. בְּנֵי עֵלִי. בְּנֵי שְׁמוּאֵל. דָּוִד וּשְׁלֹמֹה. וְיוֹאָשׁ. סִימָן.

The Gemara prefaces the following statements of Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani with a mnemonic: Reuben, the sons of Eli, the sons of Samuel, David, Solomon, and Josiah.

אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָנִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: כׇּל הָאוֹמֵר בְּנֵי עֵלִי חָטְאוּ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא טוֹעֶה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְשָׁם שְׁנֵי בְנֵי עֵלִי עִם אֲרוֹן בְּרִית הָאֱלֹהִים חׇפְנִי וּפִנְחָס כֹּהֲנִים לַה׳״.

Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan said: Anyone who says that the sons of Eli sinned is nothing other than mistaken, as it is written: “And the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Pinehas, were there priests of the Lord” (I Samuel 1:3).

סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַב, דְּאָמַר רַב: פִּנְחָס לֹא חָטָא. מַקִּישׁ חָפְנִי לְפִנְחָס: מַה פִּנְחָס לֹא חָטָא — אַף חָפְנִי לֹא חָטָא. אֶלָּא מָה אֲנִי מְקַיֵּים ״אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁכְּבֻן אֶת הַנָּשִׁים״ — מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁשִּׁהוּ אֶת קִינֵּיהֶן, שֶׁלֹּא הָלְכוּ אֵצֶל בַּעֲלֵיהֶן, מַעֲלֶה עֲלֵיהֶן הַכָּתוּב כְּאִילּוּ שְׁכָבוּם.

The Gemara explains: Rabbi Yonatan holds in accordance with the opinion of Rav, as Rav said: Pinehas did not sin. And the verse juxtaposes Hophni to Pinehas; just as Pinehas did not sin, so too Hophni did not sin. The Gemara asks: How, then, do I establish the meaning of the verse: “Now Eli was very old, and heard all that his sons did to all Israel; and how they lay with the women that assembled at the door of the Tent of Meeting” (I Samuel 2:22), which indicates otherwise? The Gemara answers: Since the sons of Eli delayed sacrificing the bird-offerings of women who had given birth, a pair of doves brought as part of the purification process, and this delay caused the women not to go to their husbands in timely fashion, the verse ascribes to Hophni and Pinehas liability as if they had lain with them. They were guilty of nothing more than negligence and carelessness.

גּוּפָא, אָמַר רַב: פִּנְחָס לֹא חָטָא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַאֲחִיָּה בֶן אֲחִטוּב אֲחִי אִי כָבוֹד בֶּן פִּנְחָס בֶּן עֵלִי כֹּהֵן ה׳ וְגוֹ׳״ — אֶפְשָׁר חֵטְא בָּא לְיָדוֹ וְהַכָּתוּב מְיַיחֲסוֹ?

The Gemara now examines the matter itself of Rav’s statement cited in the course of the previous discussion. Rav said: Pinehas did not sin, as it is stated: “And Ahijah, the son of Ahitub, Ichabod’s brother, the son of Pinehas, the son of Eli, was the Lord’s priest in Shiloh, wearing an ephod” (I Samuel 14:3). Is it possible that sin came to Pinehashand and, nevertheless, the verse traces the lineage of his grandson, Ahijah, back to him?

וַהֲלֹא כְּבָר נֶאֱמַר: ״יַכְרֵת ה׳ לָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשֶׂנָּה עֵר וְעֹנֶה מֵאׇהֳלֵי יַעֲקֹב וּמַגִּישׁ מִנְחָה לַה׳ צְבָאוֹת״. אִם יִשְׂרָאֵל הוּא — לֹא יִהְיֶה לוֹ עֵר בַּחֲכָמִים וְלֹא עוֹנֶה בַּתַּלְמִידִים. וְאִם כֹּהֵן הוּא — לֹא יִהְיֶה לוֹ בֵּן מַגִּישׁ מִנְחָה. אֶלָּא לָאו שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: פִּנְחָס לֹא חָטָא.

Wasn’t it was already stated with regard to those who engage in promiscuous relations: “The Lord will cut off from the man that does this, him that is awake and him that answers from the tents of Jacob, or any to present an offering to the Lord of hosts” (Malachi 2:12). The Sages interpreted the verse homiletically: If the sinner is an Israelite, he will not have among his descendants one who is sharp and awake among the Sages, or even one among their disciples who can answer questions. And if he is a priest, he will not have a son who will present a meal-offering. If Pinehas had sons and grandsons serving as priests, conclude from it that Pinehas did not sin.

אֶלָּא הָא כְתִיב ״אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁכְּבֻן״! — ״יִשְׁכָּבֵן״ כְּתִיב.

The Gemara asks: However, isn’t it written: “And how they lay [yishkevun] with the women.” The verb yishkevun is in the plural, indicating that both sons were guilty. The Gemara answers: It is written without a vav so that it can be read as yishkeven in the singular, i.e., how he lay, indicating that only one of them sinned.

וְהָכְתִיב: ״אַל בָּנָי כִּי לֹא טוֹבָה הַשְּׁמֻעָה״! אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: ״בְּנִי״ כְּתִיב.

The Gemara asks further: Isn’t it written that Eli said: “No, my sons [banai]; for it is not a good report that I hear; you make the Lord’s people to transgress” (I Samuel 2:24). The fact that Eli referred to his sons in the plural indicates that they both sinned. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: It is written in a manner that can be read as my son [beni] in the singular.

וְהָכְתִיב ״מַעֲבִרִים״! אָמַר רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: ״מַעֲבִירָם״ כְּתִיב.

The Gemara raises another question: Isn’t it written: “You make the Lord’s people to transgress [ma’avirim] in the plural, indicating that both sons were guilty. Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said: Here too, the word is written without a yod so that it can be read as: You cause the Lord’s people to transgress [ma’aviram] in the singular, indicating that only one of them sinned.

וְהָכְתִיב ״בְּנֵי בְלִיָּעַל״! מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁהָיָה לוֹ לְפִנְחָס לְמַחוֹת לְחׇפְנִי וְלֹא מִיחָה, מַעֲלֶה עָלָיו הַכָּתוּב כְּאִלּוּ חָטָא.

The Gemara raises one last challenge: Isn’t it written: “Now the sons of Eli were scoundrels; they knew not the Lord” (I Samuel 2:12), indicating that they were both sinners. The Gemara answers: Since Pinehas should have protested Hophni’s conduct, but he did not protest, the verse ascribes to him liability as if he too had sinned.

אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָנִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: כׇּל הָאוֹמֵר

Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan said: Anyone who says

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 started learning Daf Yomi to fill what I saw as a large gap in my Jewish education. I also hope to inspire my three daughters to ensure that they do not allow the same Talmud-sized gap to form in their own educations. I am so proud to be a part of the Hadran community, and I have loved learning so many of the stories and halachot that we have seen so far. I look forward to continuing!
Dora Chana Haar
Dora Chana Haar

Oceanside NY, United States

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!

Catriella-Freedman-jpeg
Catriella Freedman

Zichron Yaakov, Israel

After reading the book, “ If All The Seas Were Ink “ by Ileana Kurshan I started studying Talmud. I searched and studied with several teachers until I found Michelle Farber. I have been studying with her for two years. I look forward every day to learn from her.

Janine Rubens
Janine Rubens

Virginia, United States

Having never learned Talmud before, I started Daf Yomi in hopes of connecting to the Rabbinic tradition, sharing a daily idea on Instagram (@dafyomiadventures). With Hadran and Sefaria, I slowly gained confidence in my skills and understanding. Now, part of the Pardes Jewish Educators Program, I can’t wait to bring this love of learning with me as I continue to pass it on to my future students.

Hannah-G-pic
Hannah Greenberg

Pennsylvania, United States

I was exposed to Talmud in high school, but I was truly inspired after my daughter and I decided to attend the Women’s Siyum Shas in 2020. We knew that this was a historic moment. We were blown away, overcome with emotion at the euphoria of the revolution. Right then, I knew I would continue. My commitment deepened with the every-morning Virtual Beit Midrash on Zoom with R. Michelle.

Adina Hagege
Adina Hagege

Zichron Yaakov, Israel

Last cycle, I listened to parts of various מסכתות. When the הדרן סיום was advertised, I listened to Michelle on נידה. I knew that בע”ה with the next cycle I was in (ב”נ). As I entered the סיום (early), I saw the signs and was overcome with emotion. I was randomly seated in the front row, and I cried many times that night. My choice to learn דף יומי was affirmed. It is one of the best I have made!

Miriam Tannenbaum
Miriam Tannenbaum

אפרת, Israel

As Jewish educator and as a woman, I’m mindful that Talmud has been kept from women for many centuries. Now that we are privileged to learn, and learning is so accessible, it’s my intent to complete Daf Yomi. I am so excited to keep learning with my Hadran community.

Sue Parker Gerson
Sue Parker Gerson

Denver, United States

Attending the Siyyum in Jerusalem 26 months ago inspired me to become part of this community of learners. So many aspects of Jewish life have been illuminated by what we have learned in Seder Moed. My day is not complete without daf Yomi. I am so grateful to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Community.

Nancy Kolodny
Nancy Kolodny

Newton, United States

I’ve been studying Talmud since the ’90s, and decided to take on Daf Yomi two years ago. I wanted to attempt the challenge of a day-to-day, very Jewish activity. Some days are so interesting and some days are so boring. But I’m still here.
Wendy Rozov
Wendy Rozov

Phoenix, AZ, 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.

Rookie Billet
Rookie Billet

Jerusalem, Israel

I began Daf Yomi with the last cycle. I was inspired by the Hadran Siyum in Yerushalayim to continue with this cycle. I have learned Daf Yomi with Rabanit Michelle in over 25 countries on 6 continents ( missing Australia)

Barbara-Goldschlag
Barbara Goldschlag

Silver Spring, MD, United States

I had dreamed of doing daf yomi since I had my first serious Talmud class 18 years ago at Pardes with Rahel Berkovitz, and then a couple of summers with Leah Rosenthal. There is no way I would be able to do it without another wonderful teacher, Michelle, and the Hadran organization. I wake up and am excited to start each day with the next daf.

Beth Elster
Beth Elster

Irvine, United States

I’ve been wanting to do Daf Yomi for years, but always wanted to start at the beginning and not in the middle of things. When the opportunity came in 2020, I decided: “this is now the time!” I’ve been posting my journey daily on social media, tracking my progress (#DafYomi); now it’s fully integrated into my daily routines. I’ve also inspired my partner to join, too!

Joséphine Altzman
Joséphine Altzman

Teaneck, United States

I started Daf during the pandemic. I listened to a number of podcasts by various Rebbeim until one day, I discovered Rabbanit Farbers podcast. Subsequently I joined the Hadran family in Eruvin. Not the easiest place to begin, Rabbanit Farber made it all understandable and fun. The online live group has bonded together and have really become a supportive, encouraging family.

Leah Goldford
Leah Goldford

Edmonton, Alberta, Canada

About a year into learning more about Judaism on a path to potential conversion, I saw an article about the upcoming Siyum HaShas in January of 2020. My curiosity was piqued and I immediately started investigating what learning the Daf actually meant. Daily learning? Just what I wanted. Seven and a half years? I love a challenge! So I dove in head first and I’ve enjoyed every moment!!
Nickie Matthews
Nickie Matthews

Blacksburg, United States

I started learning with rabbis. I needed to know more than the stories. My first teacher to show me “the way of the Talmud” as well as the stories was Samara Schwartz.
Michelle Farber started the new cycle 2 yrs ago and I jumped on for the ride.
I do not look back.

Jenifer Nech
Jenifer Nech

Houston, United States

I had tried to start after being inspired by the hadran siyum, but did not manage to stick to it. However, just before masechet taanit, our rav wrote a message to the shul WhatsApp encouraging people to start with masechet taanit, so I did! And this time, I’m hooked! I listen to the shiur every day , and am also trying to improve my skills.

Laura Major
Laura Major

Yad Binyamin, Israel

I was moved to tears by the Hadran Siyyum HaShas. I have learned Torah all my life, but never connected to learning Gemara on a regular basis until then. Seeing the sheer joy Talmud Torah at the siyyum, I felt compelled to be part of it, and I haven’t missed a day!
It’s not always easy, but it is so worthwhile, and it has strengthened my love of learning. It is part of my life now.

Michelle Lewis
Michelle Lewis

Beit Shemesh, Israel

When we heard that R. Michelle was starting daf yomi, my 11-year-old suggested that I go. Little did she know that she would lose me every morning from then on. I remember standing at the Farbers’ door, almost too shy to enter. After that first class, I said that I would come the next day but couldn’t commit to more. A decade later, I still look forward to learning from R. Michelle every morning.

Ruth Leah Kahan
Ruth Leah Kahan

Ra’anana, Israel

I learned Mishnayot more than twenty years ago and started with Gemara much later in life. Although I never managed to learn Daf Yomi consistently, I am learning since some years Gemara in depth and with much joy. Since last year I am studying at the International Halakha Scholars Program at the WIHL. I often listen to Rabbanit Farbers Gemara shiurim to understand better a specific sugyiah. I am grateful for the help and inspiration!

Shoshana Ruerup
Shoshana Ruerup

Berlin, Germany

Shabbat 55

זְקֵנִים מֶה חָטְאוּ? אֶלָּא אֵימָא: עַל זְקֵנִים, שֶׁלֹּא מִיחוּ בַּשָּׂרִים.

what did the Elders, i.e., the Sages of that generation, do that was considered a sin? Rather, say: God will enter into judgment with the Elders because they did not protest the sinful conduct of the princes.

רַב יְהוּדָה הֲוָה יָתֵיב קַמֵּיהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל. אֲתַאי הַהִיא אִיתְּתָא קָא צָוְוחָה קַמֵּיהּ, וְלָא הֲוָה מַשְׁגַּח בַּהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא סָבַר לֵיהּ מָר: ״אוֹטֵם אׇזְנוֹ מִזַּעֲקַת דָּל גַּם הוּא יִקְרָא וְלֹא יֵעָנֶה״? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: שִׁינָּנָא, רֵישָׁךְ בְּקָרִירֵי, רֵישָׁא דְרֵישָׁיךְ בְּחַמִּימֵי. הָא יָתֵיב מָר עוּקְבָא אַב בֵּית דִּין.

The Gemara relates: Rav Yehuda was sitting before Shmuel when this woman came and cried before Shmuel about an injustice that had been committed against her, and Shmuel paid no attention to her. Rav Yehuda said to Shmuel: Doesn’t the Master hold in accordance with the verse: “Whoever stops his ears at the cry of the poor, he also shall cry himself, but shall not be heard” (Proverbs 21:13)? He said to him: Big-toothed one, your superior, i.e., I, your teacher, will be punished in cold water. The superior of your superior will be punished in hot water. Mar Ukva, who sits as president of the court, is responsible for those matters.

דִּכְתִיב: ״בֵּית דָּוִד כֹּה אָמַר ה׳ דִּינוּ לַבֹּקֶר מִשְׁפָּט וְהַצִּילוּ גָזוּל מִיַּד עוֹשֵׁק פֶּן תֵּצֵא כָאֵשׁ חֲמָתִי וּבָעֲרָה וְאֵין מְכַבֶּה מִפְּנֵי רוֹעַ מַעַלְלֵיהֶם וְגוֹ׳״.

And from where is it derived that this responsibility is incumbent upon the house of the Exilarch? As it is written: “House of David, so says the Lord: Execute judgment in the morning, and deliver him that is robbed out of the hand of the oppressor, lest My fury go forth like fire, and burn so that none can quench it because of the evil of your doings” (Jeremiah 21:12). The Exilarch is a direct descendant of the house of David.

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי זֵירָא לְרַבִּי סִימוֹן: לוֹכְחִינְהוּ מָר לְהָנֵי דְּבֵי רֵישׁ גָּלוּתָא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא מְקַבְּלִי מִינַּאי. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אַף עַל גַּב דְּלָא מְקַבְּלִי לוֹכְחִינְהוּ מָר.

With regard to the issue of reprimand, it was related that Rabbi Zeira said to Rabbi Simon: Let the Master reprimand the members of the house of the Exilarch, as Rabbi Simon had some influence over them. Rabbi Simon said to him: They will not accept reprimand from me. Rabbi Zeira said to him: Let my master reprimand them even if they do not accept it.

דְּאָמַר רַבִּי אַחָא בְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא: מֵעוֹלָם לֹא יָצְתָה מִדָּה טוֹבָה מִפִּי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא וְחָזַר בָּהּ לְרָעָה חוּץ מִדָּבָר זֶה, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיֹּאמֶר ה׳ אֵלָיו עֲבוֹר בְּתוֹךְ הָעִיר בְּתוֹךְ יְרוּשָׁלִָים וְהִתְוִיתָ תָּו עַל מִצְחוֹת הָאֲנָשִׁים הַנֶּאֱנָחִים וְהַנֶּאֱנָקִים עַל כׇּל הַתּוֹעֵבוֹת הַנַּעֲשׂוֹת בְּתוֹכָהּ וְגוֹ׳״.

As Rabbi Aḥa, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: Never did a promise manifesting a good attribute emerge from the mouth of the Holy One, Blessed be He, and He later retracted it and rendered it evil, except with regard to this matter, as it is written: “And the Lord said to him: Go through the midst of the city, through the midst of Jerusalem, and set a mark [tav] upon the foreheads of the men that sigh and that cry on account of all the abominations that are done in her midst” (Ezekiel 9:4).

אָמַר לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְגַבְרִיאֵל: לֵךְ וּרְשׁוֹם עַל מִצְחָן שֶׁל צַדִּיקִים תָּיו שֶׁל דְּיוֹ שֶׁלֹּא יִשְׁלְטוּ בָּהֶם מַלְאֲכֵי חַבָּלָה. וְעַל מִצְחָם שֶׁל רְשָׁעִים תָּיו שֶׁל דָּם כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּשְׁלְטוּ בָּהֶן מַלְאֲכֵי חַבָּלָה.

The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to the angel Gabriel: Go and inscribe a tav of ink on the foreheads of the righteous as a sign so that the angels of destruction will not have dominion over them. And inscribe a tav of blood on the foreheads of the wicked as a sign so that the angels of destruction will have dominion over them.

אָמְרָה מִדַּת הַדִּין לִפְנֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא: רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם! מַה נִּשְׁתַּנּוּ אֵלּוּ מֵאֵלּוּ? אָמַר לָהּ: הַלָּלוּ צַדִּיקִים גְּמוּרִים וְהַלָּלוּ רְשָׁעִים גְּמוּרִים. אָמְרָה לְפָנָיו: רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם! הָיָה בְּיָדָם לִמְחוֹת וְלֹא מִיחוּ!

The attribute of justice said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, how are these different from those? He said to that attribute: These are full-fledged righteous people and those are full-fledged wicked people. The attribute of justice said to Him: Master of the Universe, it was in the hands of the righteous to protest the conduct of the wicked, and they did not protest.

אָמַר לָהּ: גָּלוּי וְיָדוּעַ לְפָנַי שֶׁאִם מִיחוּ בָּהֶם לֹא יְקַבְּלוּ מֵהֶם. (אָמַר) [אָמְרָה] לְפָנָיו: רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם! אִם לְפָנֶיךָ גָּלוּי, לָהֶם מִי גָּלוּי?

He said to that attribute: It is revealed and known before Me that even had they protested the conduct of the wicked, they would not have accepted the reprimand from them. They would have continued in their wicked ways. The attribute of justice said before Him: Master of the Universe, if it is revealed before You that their reprimand would have been ineffective, is it revealed to them? The Holy One, Blessed be He, retracted His promise to protect the righteous and decided that those who failed to protest would also be punished.

וְהַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״זָקֵן בָּחוּר וּבְתוּלָה טַף וְנָשִׁים תַּהַרְגוּ לְמַשְׁחִית וְעַל כׇּל אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר עָלָיו הַתָּו אַל תִּגַּשׁוּ וּמִמִּקְדָּשִׁי תָּחֵלּוּ״. וּכְתִיב: ״וַיָּחֵלּוּ בָּאֲנָשִׁים הַזְּקֵנִים אֲשֶׁר לִפְנֵי הַבָּיִת״. תָּנֵי רַב יוֹסֵף: אַל תִּקְרֵי ״מִקְדָּשִׁי״ אֶלָּא ״מְקוּדָּשַׁי״ — אֵלּוּ בְּנֵי אָדָם שֶׁקִּיְּמוּ אֶת הַתּוֹרָה כֻּלָּהּ מֵאָלֶף וְעַד תָּיו. וּמִיָּד: ״וְהִנֵּה שִׁשָּׁה אֲנָשִׁים בָּאִים מִדֶּרֶךְ שַׁעַר הָעֶלְיוֹן אֲשֶׁר מׇפְנֶה צָפוֹנָה וְאִישׁ כְּלִי מַפָּצוֹ בְּיָדוֹ וְאִישׁ אֶחָד בְּתוֹכָם לָבֻשׁ הַבַּדִּים וְקֶסֶת הַסּוֹפֵר בְּמׇתְנָיו וַיָּבֹאוּ וַיַּעַמְדוּ אֵצֶל מִזְבַּח הַנְּחוֹשֶׁת״.

And that is the meaning of that which is written: “Slay utterly old and young, both maid, and little children, and women; but come not near any man upon whom is the mark; and begin at My Sanctuary” (Ezekiel 9:6). And it is written in that same verse: “Then they began with the elderly men who were before the house.” Rav Yosef taught: Read not: My Sanctuary [mikdashi], rather: Those sanctified to Me [mekudashai]. These are people who observed the whole Torah in its entirety from alef through tav. And immediately: “And, behold, six men came from the way of the higher gate, which lies toward the north, and every man with his weapon of destruction in his hand; and one man among them was clothed in linen, with a writer’s inkwell by his side; and they went in and stood beside the bronze altar” (Ezekiel 9:2).

מִזְבֵּחַ הַנְּחוֹשֶׁת מִי הֲוָה? אָמַר לָהֶם הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא: הַתְחִילוּ מִמְּקוֹם שֶׁאוֹמְרִים שִׁירָה לְפָנַי. וּמַאן נִינְהוּ שִׁשָּׁה אֲנָשִׁים? אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: קֶצֶף, אַף, וְחֵימָה, וּמַשְׁחִית, וּמְשַׁבֵּר, וּמְכַלֶּה.

The Gemara asks: Was there a bronze altar in the Temple in the time of Ezekiel? Already in the days of Solomon there was only a stone altar. Rather, this should be understood as a figure of speech. The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to them: Begin from the place where they recite songs of praise before Me. This is a reference to the Levites in the Temple whose musical instruments are made of bronze. And who are the six men mentioned here? Rav Ḥisda said: Fury, Wrath, and Rage, and Destroyer, and Breaker, and Annihilator, six angels of destruction.

וּמַאי שְׁנָא ״תָּיו״? אָמַר רַב: ״תָּיו״ — תִּחְיֶה, ״תָּיו״ — תָּמוּת. וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: תַּמָּה זְכוּת אָבוֹת. וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: תָּחוֹן זְכוּת אָבוֹת.

The Gemara asks further: And what is different about the letter tav, that it was inscribed on the foreheads of the righteous? Rav said: Tav is the first letter of the word tiḥye, you shall live, indicating that the righteous shall live. Tav is also the first letter of the word tamut, you shall die, indicating that the wicked shall die. And Shmuel said: The letter tav is the first letter of the word tama, ceased, indicating that the merit of the Patriarchs has ceased and will not help the wicked. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The letter tav is the first letter of the word taḥon, will have mercy, indicating that due to the merit of the Patriarchs God will have mercy on the righteous.

וְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אָמַר: ״תָּיו״ — סוֹף חוֹתָמוֹ שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא: חוֹתָמוֹ שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא ״אֱמֶת״. (אָמַר) רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָנִי [אָמַר]: אֵלּוּ בְּנֵי אָדָם שֶׁקִּיְּמוּ אֶת הַתּוֹרָה כֻּלָּהּ מֵאָלֶף וְעַד תָּיו.

And Reish Lakish said: The letter tav is the last letter of the seal of the Holy One, Blessed be He, as Rabbi Ḥanina said: The seal of the Holy One, Blessed be He, is truth [emet], which ends with the letter tav. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said: The letter tav teaches that these are people who observed the entire Torah from alef through tav.

מֵאֵימָתַי תַּמָּה זְכוּת אָבוֹת? אָמַר רַב: מִימוֹת הוֹשֵׁעַ בֶּן בְּאֵרִי, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אֲגַלֶּה אֶת נַבְלֻתָהּ לְעֵינֵי מְאַהֲבֶיהָ וְאִישׁ לֹא יַצִּילֶנָּה מִיָּדִי״.

With regard to the statement that the merit of the Patriarchs has ceased, the Gemara asks: From when did the merit of the Patriarchs cease? Rav said: From the days of the prophet Hosea, son of Beeri, as it is stated: “And now I will uncover her lewdness in the sight of her lovers, and none shall deliver her out of My hand” (Hosea 2:12). Israel will no longer be saved by the merit of the Patriarchs.

וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: מִימֵי חֲזָאֵל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַחֲזָאֵל מֶלֶךְ אֲרָם לָחַץ אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל כֹּל יְמֵי יְהוֹאָחָז״. וּכְתִיב: ״וַיָּחׇן ה׳ אוֹתָם וַיְרַחֲמֵם וַיִּפֶן אֲלֵיהֶם לְמַעַן בְּרִיתוֹ אֶת אַבְרָהָם יִצְחָק וְיַעֲקֹב וְלֹא אָבָה הַשְׁחִיתָם וְלֹא הִשְׁלִיכָם מֵעַל פָּנָיו עַד עָתָּה״.

And Shmuel said: The merit of the Patriarchs ceased since the days of Hazael, as it is stated: “And Hazael, king of Aram, oppressed Israel all the days of Jehoahaz” (II Kings 13:22). And it is written there: “And the Lord was gracious to them, and had compassion on them, and turned toward them because of His covenant with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and would not destroy them; neither has He till now cast them away from His presence” (II Kings 13:23). That was the last time that the merit of the Patriarchs was mentioned.

רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי אָמַר: מִימֵי אֵלִיָּהוּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיְהִי בַּעֲלוֹת הַמִּנְחָה וַיִּגַּשׁ אֵלִיָּהוּ הַנָּבִיא וַיֹּאמַר ה׳ אֱלֹהֵי אַבְרָהָם יִצְחָק וְיִשְׂרָאֵל הַיּוֹם יִוָּדַע כִּי אַתָּה אֱלֹהִים בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל וַאֲנִי עַבְדֶּךָ וּבִדְבָרְךָ עָשִׂיתִי [אֵת] כׇּל הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה וְגוֹ׳״.

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: The merit of the Patriarchs ceased since the days of Elijah the Prophet, as it is stated: “And it came to pass at the time of the evening sacrifice, that Elijah the Prophet came near and said, Lord, God of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, let it be known this day that you are God in Israel, and that I am Your servant, and that I have done all these things at Your word” (I Kings 18:36). By inference: Let it be known this day and not afterward because the merit of the Patriarchs will cease today.

וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: מִימֵי חִזְקִיָּהוּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״לְמַרְבֵּה הַמִּשְׂרָה וּלְשָׁלוֹם אֵין קֵץ עַל כִּסֵּא דָוִד וְעַל מַמְלַכְתּוֹ לְהָכִין אוֹתָהּ וּלְסַעֲדָהּ בְּמִשְׁפָּט וּבִצְדָקָה מֵעַתָּה וְעַד עוֹלָם קִנְאַת ה׳ צְבָאוֹת תַּעֲשֶׂה זֹּאת וְגוֹ׳״.

And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The merit of the Patriarchs ceased since the days of Hezekiah, as it is stated: “For the increase of the realm and for peace without end, upon the throne of David, and upon his kingdom to order it, and to establish it with judgment and with justice; from now and forever the zeal of the Lord of hosts performs this” (Isaiah 9:6). That is to say, from this point on, the merit of the Patriarchs will not protect Israel, leaving only the zeal of the Lord.

אָמַר רַב אַמֵּי: אֵין מִיתָה בְּלֹא חֵטְא, וְאֵין יִסּוּרִין בְּלֹא עָוֹן.

The Gemara continues its discussion of punishment in general and the relationship between a person’s actions and the punishments meted out against him in particular: Rav Ami said: There is no death without sin; were a person not to sin, he would not die. And there is no suffering without iniquity.

אֵין מִיתָה בְּלֹא חֵטְא — דִּכְתִיב: ״הַנֶּפֶשׁ הַחוֹטֵאת הִיא תָמוּת בֵּן לֹא יִשָּׂא בַּעֲוֹן הָאָב וְאָב לֹא יִשָּׂא בַּעֲוֹן הַבֵּן צִדְקַת הַצַּדִּיק עָלָיו תִּהְיֶה וְרִשְׁעַת הָרָשָׁע עָלָיו תִּהְיֶה וְגוֹ׳״. אֵין יִסּוּרִין בְּלֹא עָוֹן — דִּכְתִיב: ״וּפָקַדְתִּי בְשֵׁבֶט פִּשְׁעָם וּבִנְגָעִים עֲוֹנָם״.

The Gemara adduces proof to these assertions: There is no death without sin, as it is written: “The soul that sins, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son; the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him” (Ezekiel 18:20). A person dies only because of his own sins and not because of some preexistent sin. And there is no suffering without iniquity, as it is written: “Then I will punish their transgression with the rod and their iniquity with strokes” (Psalms 89:33).

מֵיתִיבִי: אָמְרוּ מַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת לִפְנֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא: רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם! מִפְּנֵי מָה קָנַסְתָּ מִיתָה עַל אָדָם הָרִאשׁוֹן? אָמַר לָהֶם: מִצְוָה קַלָּה צִוִּיתִיו וְעָבַר עָלֶיהָ. אָמְרוּ לוֹ: וַהֲלֹא מֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן שֶׁקִּיְּמוּ כׇּל הַתּוֹרָה כֻּלָּהּ, וּמֵתוּ! אָמַר לָהֶם: ״מִקְרֶה אֶחָד לַצַּדִּיק וְלָרָשָׁע לַטּוֹב וְגוֹ׳״!

The Gemara raises an objection from the following baraita: The ministering angels said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, why did You penalize Adam, the first man, with the death penalty? He said to them: I gave him a simple mitzva, and he violated it. They said to Him: Didn’t Moses and Aaron, who observed the whole Torah in its entirety, nevertheless die? The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to them, citing the verse: “All things come alike to all; there is one event to the righteous and to the wicked; to the good and to the clean, and to the unclean; to him who sacrifices, and to him who does not sacrifice; as is the good, so is the sinner; and he who swears, as he who fears an oath” (Ecclesiastes 9:2). Apparently, death is not dependent upon one’s actions. Everyone dies.

הוּא דְּאָמַר כִּי הַאי תַּנָּא, דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: אַף מֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן בְּחֶטְאָם מֵתוּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״יַעַן לֹא הֶאֱמַנְתֶּם בִּי״. הָא הֶאֱמַנְתֶּם בִּי — עֲדַיִן לֹא הִגִּיעַ זְמַנְּכֶם לִיפָּטֵר מִן הָעוֹלָם.

The Gemara answers: Rav Ami stated his position in accordance with this tanna, as it was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar said: Even Moses and Aaron died due to their sin, as it is stated: “And the Lord spoke to Moses and Aaron: Because you did not believe in Me, to sanctify Me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore you shall not bring this congregation in to the land which I have given them” (Numbers 20:12). Had you believed in Me and spoken to the rock as commanded, your time would not yet have come to leave the world. Apparently, even Moses and Aaron died due to their sins.

מֵיתִיבִי: אַרְבָּעָה מֵתוּ בְּעֶטְיוֹ שֶׁל נָחָשׁ, וְאֵלּוּ הֵן: בִּנְיָמִין בֶּן יַעֲקֹב, וְעַמְרָם אֲבִי מֹשֶׁה, וְיִשַׁי אֲבִי דָוִד, וְכִלְאָב בֶּן דָּוִד. וְכוּלְּהוּ גְּמָרָא, לְבַר מִיִּשַׁי אֲבִי דָוִד דִּמְפָרֵשׁ בָּהּ קְרָא, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְאֶת עֲמָשָׂא שָׂם אַבְשָׁלוֹם תַּחַת יוֹאָב (שַׂר) [עַל] הַצָּבָא וַעֲמָשָׂא בֶן אִישׁ וּשְׁמוֹ יִתְרָא הַיִּשְׂרְאֵלִי אֲשֶׁר בָּא אֶל אֲבִיגַיִל בַּת נָחָשׁ אֲחוֹת צְרוּיָה אֵם יוֹאָב״.

The Gemara raises an objection from what was taught in the following baraita: Four people died due to Adam’s sin with the serpent, in the wake of which death was decreed upon all of mankind, although they themselves were free of sin. And they are: Benjamin, son of Jacob; Amram, father of Moses; Yishai, father of David; and Kilab, son of David. And all of them were learned through tradition, except for Yishai, father of David, with regard to whom there is an explicit verse interpreted homiletically, as it is written: “And Absalom placed Amasa in charge of the army in place of Joab, and Amasa was the son of a man named Ithra the Israelite, who had taken to himself Abigail the daughter of Nahash, sister of Zeruiah, the mother of Joab (II Samuel 17:25).

וְכִי בַּת נָחָשׁ הֲוַאי? וַהֲלֹא בַּת יִשַׁי הֲוַאי, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְאַחְיוֹתֵיהֶן צְרוּיָה וַאֲבִיגַיִל״. אֶלָּא: בַּת מִי שֶׁמֵּת בְּעֶטְיוֹ שֶׁל נָחָשׁ.

The Gemara asks: And was Abigail the daughter of Nahash? Wasn’t she the daughter of Yishai, as it is written: “And Yishai begot his firstborn Eliab, and Abinadab the second, and Shimea the third, Nethanel the fourth, Raddai the fifth, Ozem the sixth, David the seventh: and their sisters were Zeruiah and Abigail. And the sons of Zeruiah: Abishai, and Joab, and Asahel, three. And Abigail bore Amasa; and the father of Amasa was Jether the Ishmaelite” (I Chronicles 2:13–17)? Apparently, Abigail was the daughter of Yishai. Rather, the verse states that Abigail was the daughter of Nahash in order to teach us that she was the daughter of one who died on account of Adam’s sin with the serpent [naḥash], though he himself was free of sin.

מַנִּי? אִילֵּימָא תַּנָּא דְמַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת, וְהָא אִיכָּא מֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן! אֶלָּא לָאו, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר הִיא. וּשְׁמַע מִינַּהּ יֵשׁ מִיתָה בְּלֹא חֵטְא וְיֵשׁ יִסּוּרִין בְּלֹא עָוֹן, וּתְיוּבְתָּא דְרַב אַמֵּי — תְּיוּבְתָּא.

The Gemara now clarifies the matter: Who is the tanna of the baraita that states that four people did not die due to their own sins? If you say that it is the tanna who taught the conversation between the ministering angels and God, it is difficult, as weren’t there also Moses and Aaron who did not die due to their own sins? Rather, it must be Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar, who holds that even Moses and Aaron died because of their own sins. Learn from it then that, in principle, he agrees that there is death without sin and there is suffering without iniquity, and this is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rav Ami. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, it is a conclusive refutation.

אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָנִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: כׇּל הָאוֹמֵר רְאוּבֵן חָטָא אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא טוֹעֶה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיִּהְיוּ בְנֵי יַעֲקֹב שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר״ — מְלַמֵּד שֶׁכּוּלָּן שְׁקוּלִים כְּאֶחָד. אֶלָּא מָה אֲנִי מְקַיֵּים ״וַיִּשְׁכַּב אֶת בִּלְהָה פִּילֶגֶשׁ אָבִיו״ — מְלַמֵּד שֶׁבִּלְבֵּל מַצָּעוֹ שֶׁל אָבִיו, וּמַעֲלֶה עָלָיו הַכָּתוּב כְּאִילּוּ שָׁכַב עִמָּהּ.

Having mentioned the sins of some of the significant ancestors of the Jewish people, the Gemara now addresses several additional ancestors. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan said: Anyone who says that Reuben sinned with Bilhah is nothing other than mistaken, as it is stated: “And it came to pass, when Israel dwelt in that land, that Reuben went and lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine; and Israel heard of it. Now the sons of Jacob were twelve” (Genesis 35:22). The fact that the Torah stated the number of Jacob’s sons at that point in the narrative teaches that, even after the incident involving Bilhah, all of the brothers were equal in righteousness. Apparently, Reuben did not sin. How then do I establish the meaning of the verse: “And he lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine”? The plain understanding of the verse indicates sin. This verse teaches that Reuben rearranged his father’s bed in protest of Jacob’s placement of his bed in the tent of Bilhah and not in the tent of his mother Leah after the death of Rachel. And the verse ascribes to him liability for his action as if he had actually lain with Bilhah.

תַּנְיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: מוּצָּל אוֹתוֹ צַדִּיק מֵאוֹתוֹ עָוֹן, וְלֹא בָּא מַעֲשֶׂה זֶה לְיָדוֹ. אֶפְשָׁר עָתִיד זַרְעוֹ לַעֲמוֹד עַל הַר עֵיבָל וְלוֹמַר: ״אָרוּר שֹׁכֵב עִם אֵשֶׁת אָבִיו״ וְיָבֹא חֵטְא זֶה לְיָדוֹ? אֶלָּא מָה אֲנִי מְקַיֵּים ״וַיִּשְׁכַּב אֶת בִּלְהָה פִּילֶגֶשׁ אָבִיו״ — עֶלְבּוֹן אִמּוֹ תָּבַע. אָמַר: אִם אֲחוֹת אִמִּי הָיְתָה צָרָה לְאִמִּי, שִׁפְחַת אֲחוֹת אִמִּי תְּהֵא צָרָה לְאִמִּי? עָמַד וּבִלְבֵּל אֶת מַצָּעָהּ.

It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: This righteous person, Reuben, was saved from that sin of adultery, and that action did not come to be performed by him? Is it possible that his descendants are destined to stand on Mount Eival and say: “Cursed be he that lies with his father’s wife; because he uncovers his father’s skirt. And all the people shall say, amen” (Deuteronomy 27:20), and this sin will come to be performed by him? Is it conceivable that the members of a tribe would curse their ancestor? How then do I establish the meaning of the verse: “And he lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine”? It is understood as follows: He protested the affront to his mother. He said: If my mother’s sister Rachel was a rival to my mother, will my mother’s sister’s concubine be a rival to my mother? He immediately stood and rearranged her bed so that Jacob would enter Leah’s tent.

אֲחֵרִים אוֹמְרִים: שְׁתֵּי מַצָּעוֹת בִּלְבֵּל, אַחַת שֶׁל שְׁכִינָה וְאַחַת שֶׁל אָבִיו. וְהַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״אָז חִלַּלְתָּ יְצוּעִי עָלָה״ — אַל תִּקְרֵי ״יְצוּעִי״ אֶלָּא ״יְצוּעַיי״.

Aḥerim say: He rearranged two beds, one of the Divine Presence and one of his father. And that is the meaning of that which is written: “Unstable as water, you shall not excel; because you went up to your father’s bed; then you did defile it; he went up to my bed [yetzui]” (Genesis 49:4). Do not read it as yetzu’i, in the singular; rather, read it as yetzuai, my beds, in the plural, referring to both the bed of his father and to the bed of the Divine Presence, which rests in the tents of the righteous.

כְּתַנָּאֵי. ״פַּחַז כַּמַּיִם אַל תּוֹתַר״. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר ״פַּזֹּתָה״, ״חַבְתָּה״, ״זַלְתָּה״. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר: ״פָּסַעְתָּה עַל דָּת״, ״חָטָאתָ״, ״זָנִיתָ״. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: ״פִּילַּלְתָּה״, ״חַלְתָּה״, ״זָרְחָה תְּפִלָּתֶךָ״.

The Gemara notes that the matter of Reuben’s innocence is parallel to a dispute between tanna’im. As it was taught in a baraita: The verse states: “Unstable [paḥaz] as water, you shall not excel.” The Sages understood paḥaz as an acronym. Rabbi Eliezer says that it means: You were impulsive [pazta], you were liable [ḥavta], and you acted contemptuously [zalta]. Rabbi Yehoshua says that it means: You trampled the law [pasata al dat], you sinned [ḥatata], and you were promiscuous [zanita]. Rabban Gamliel says: The acronym does not refer to Reuben’s sin. It refers to his repentance: You prayed [pilalta], you trembled in fear [ḥalta], and your prayer shone forth [zarḥa].

אָמַר רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: עֲדַיִן צְרִיכִין אָנוּ לַמּוֹדָעִי. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר הַמּוֹדָעִי אוֹמֵר: הֲפוֹךְ אֶת הַתֵּיבָה וְדוֹרְשָׁהּ: ״זִעְזַעְתָּה״, ״הִרְתַּעְתָּה״, ״פָּרַח חֵטְא מִמְּךָ״. רָבָא אָמַר, וְאָמְרִי לֵהּ רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה בַּר אַבָּא: ״זָכַרְתָּ עוֹנְשׁוֹ שֶׁל דָּבָר״, ״חִלִּיתָ עַצְמְךָ חוֹלִי גָּדוֹל״, ״פֵּירַשְׁתָּ מִלַּחְטוֹא״.

Rabban Gamliel said: We still need the explanation of the Modaite, as Rabbi Elazar HaModa’i said: Reverse the order of the letters in the word paḥaz and then interpret it homiletically: You shook [zizata], you recoiled [hirtata]; the ḥet in paḥaz is interchanged with the letter heh, so that you would not sin, and the sin flew [parḥa] from you. Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Elazar HaModa’i are of the opinion that Reuben did not sin. Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua held that he did. Rava said, and some say that Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba said: Reverse the letters in paḥaz and interpret: You remembered [zakharta] the punishment for that offense, you made yourself gravely ill [ḥalita] in order to refrain from sinning, and you successfully withdrew [peirashta] from sinning.

רְאוּבֵן. בְּנֵי עֵלִי. בְּנֵי שְׁמוּאֵל. דָּוִד וּשְׁלֹמֹה. וְיוֹאָשׁ. סִימָן.

The Gemara prefaces the following statements of Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani with a mnemonic: Reuben, the sons of Eli, the sons of Samuel, David, Solomon, and Josiah.

אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָנִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: כׇּל הָאוֹמֵר בְּנֵי עֵלִי חָטְאוּ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא טוֹעֶה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְשָׁם שְׁנֵי בְנֵי עֵלִי עִם אֲרוֹן בְּרִית הָאֱלֹהִים חׇפְנִי וּפִנְחָס כֹּהֲנִים לַה׳״.

Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan said: Anyone who says that the sons of Eli sinned is nothing other than mistaken, as it is written: “And the two sons of Eli, Hophni and Pinehas, were there priests of the Lord” (I Samuel 1:3).

סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַב, דְּאָמַר רַב: פִּנְחָס לֹא חָטָא. מַקִּישׁ חָפְנִי לְפִנְחָס: מַה פִּנְחָס לֹא חָטָא — אַף חָפְנִי לֹא חָטָא. אֶלָּא מָה אֲנִי מְקַיֵּים ״אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁכְּבֻן אֶת הַנָּשִׁים״ — מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁשִּׁהוּ אֶת קִינֵּיהֶן, שֶׁלֹּא הָלְכוּ אֵצֶל בַּעֲלֵיהֶן, מַעֲלֶה עֲלֵיהֶן הַכָּתוּב כְּאִילּוּ שְׁכָבוּם.

The Gemara explains: Rabbi Yonatan holds in accordance with the opinion of Rav, as Rav said: Pinehas did not sin. And the verse juxtaposes Hophni to Pinehas; just as Pinehas did not sin, so too Hophni did not sin. The Gemara asks: How, then, do I establish the meaning of the verse: “Now Eli was very old, and heard all that his sons did to all Israel; and how they lay with the women that assembled at the door of the Tent of Meeting” (I Samuel 2:22), which indicates otherwise? The Gemara answers: Since the sons of Eli delayed sacrificing the bird-offerings of women who had given birth, a pair of doves brought as part of the purification process, and this delay caused the women not to go to their husbands in timely fashion, the verse ascribes to Hophni and Pinehas liability as if they had lain with them. They were guilty of nothing more than negligence and carelessness.

גּוּפָא, אָמַר רַב: פִּנְחָס לֹא חָטָא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַאֲחִיָּה בֶן אֲחִטוּב אֲחִי אִי כָבוֹד בֶּן פִּנְחָס בֶּן עֵלִי כֹּהֵן ה׳ וְגוֹ׳״ — אֶפְשָׁר חֵטְא בָּא לְיָדוֹ וְהַכָּתוּב מְיַיחֲסוֹ?

The Gemara now examines the matter itself of Rav’s statement cited in the course of the previous discussion. Rav said: Pinehas did not sin, as it is stated: “And Ahijah, the son of Ahitub, Ichabod’s brother, the son of Pinehas, the son of Eli, was the Lord’s priest in Shiloh, wearing an ephod” (I Samuel 14:3). Is it possible that sin came to Pinehashand and, nevertheless, the verse traces the lineage of his grandson, Ahijah, back to him?

וַהֲלֹא כְּבָר נֶאֱמַר: ״יַכְרֵת ה׳ לָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יַעֲשֶׂנָּה עֵר וְעֹנֶה מֵאׇהֳלֵי יַעֲקֹב וּמַגִּישׁ מִנְחָה לַה׳ צְבָאוֹת״. אִם יִשְׂרָאֵל הוּא — לֹא יִהְיֶה לוֹ עֵר בַּחֲכָמִים וְלֹא עוֹנֶה בַּתַּלְמִידִים. וְאִם כֹּהֵן הוּא — לֹא יִהְיֶה לוֹ בֵּן מַגִּישׁ מִנְחָה. אֶלָּא לָאו שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: פִּנְחָס לֹא חָטָא.

Wasn’t it was already stated with regard to those who engage in promiscuous relations: “The Lord will cut off from the man that does this, him that is awake and him that answers from the tents of Jacob, or any to present an offering to the Lord of hosts” (Malachi 2:12). The Sages interpreted the verse homiletically: If the sinner is an Israelite, he will not have among his descendants one who is sharp and awake among the Sages, or even one among their disciples who can answer questions. And if he is a priest, he will not have a son who will present a meal-offering. If Pinehas had sons and grandsons serving as priests, conclude from it that Pinehas did not sin.

אֶלָּא הָא כְתִיב ״אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁכְּבֻן״! — ״יִשְׁכָּבֵן״ כְּתִיב.

The Gemara asks: However, isn’t it written: “And how they lay [yishkevun] with the women.” The verb yishkevun is in the plural, indicating that both sons were guilty. The Gemara answers: It is written without a vav so that it can be read as yishkeven in the singular, i.e., how he lay, indicating that only one of them sinned.

וְהָכְתִיב: ״אַל בָּנָי כִּי לֹא טוֹבָה הַשְּׁמֻעָה״! אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: ״בְּנִי״ כְּתִיב.

The Gemara asks further: Isn’t it written that Eli said: “No, my sons [banai]; for it is not a good report that I hear; you make the Lord’s people to transgress” (I Samuel 2:24). The fact that Eli referred to his sons in the plural indicates that they both sinned. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: It is written in a manner that can be read as my son [beni] in the singular.

וְהָכְתִיב ״מַעֲבִרִים״! אָמַר רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: ״מַעֲבִירָם״ כְּתִיב.

The Gemara raises another question: Isn’t it written: “You make the Lord’s people to transgress [ma’avirim] in the plural, indicating that both sons were guilty. Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said: Here too, the word is written without a yod so that it can be read as: You cause the Lord’s people to transgress [ma’aviram] in the singular, indicating that only one of them sinned.

וְהָכְתִיב ״בְּנֵי בְלִיָּעַל״! מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁהָיָה לוֹ לְפִנְחָס לְמַחוֹת לְחׇפְנִי וְלֹא מִיחָה, מַעֲלֶה עָלָיו הַכָּתוּב כְּאִלּוּ חָטָא.

The Gemara raises one last challenge: Isn’t it written: “Now the sons of Eli were scoundrels; they knew not the Lord” (I Samuel 2:12), indicating that they were both sinners. The Gemara answers: Since Pinehas should have protested Hophni’s conduct, but he did not protest, the verse ascribes to him liability as if he too had sinned.

אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָנִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: כׇּל הָאוֹמֵר

Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan said: Anyone who says

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