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

Today's Daf Yomi

November 26, 2021 | 讻状讘 讘讻住诇讜 转砖驻状讘

This month's shiurim are dedicated by the Hadran Women of Minneapolis in memory of Monica Howell z"l.

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Taanit 14

The question against Rav Yitzchak’s opinion regarding an individual who says the ‘aneinu‘ prayer adds it in the blessing of ‘shomea tefilla‘ is resolved. Do we hold like Rav Yitzchak? Do pregnant and nursing women fast on public fasts? When it says in the Mishna that on the third set of fasts, ‘matri’in‘ – does that mean to blow the shofar or to pray ‘aneinu‘? In the time of Rabbi Yehuda Nesi’a there was no rain and even after the third set of fasts there was still no rain. He instituted more fasts. Rabbi Ami disagreed with this. Would one distinguish in this regard between rains and other calamities? If so, how and why? People who need rain in times that are opposite the ones where rain is needed in Israel, how should they add the prayer for rain – in the regular place or in the middle of the blessing of ‘shomea tefilla‘. What did the Mishna mean exactly regarding how and when stores are opened on Thursdays? If all the fasts pass and there is still no rain, the Mishna described a number of things that people do not do such as build, plant, etc. What type of building/planting is prohibited? One should not greet another. What if someone greets you who doesn’t know this law, can you respond and if so, in what manner? Not everyone can fall on their faces in prayer and not everyone can tear their clothes. Who can and who cannot and what are the issues with these actions?

讜讛讗 砖讬讬专 转讬讘讛 讗讬 诪砖讜诐 转讬讘讛 诇讗讜 砖讬讜专讗 讛讜讗 诪讬诇讬 讚爪讬谞注讗 拽转谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讚讘驻专讛住讬讗 诇讗 拽转谞讬

But he omitted any mention of the ark and the halakha that during the last seven fast days the ark was brought into the streets of the city. The Gemara rejects this argument: If the omission is due to the ark, that is not a real omission. The reason is that the tanna teaches only matters that are performed in private, whereas he does not teach matters that are performed in public [parhesya].

讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 诪转谞讬转讬谉 谞诪讬 讚讬拽讗 讚拽转谞讬 诪讛 讗诇讜 讬转讬专讜转 注诇 讛专讗砖讜谞讜转 讗诇讗 砖讘讗诇讜 诪转专讬注讬谉 讜谞讜注诇讬谉 讗转 讛讞谞讜讬讜转 讗讘诇 讘讻诇 讚讘专讬讛谉 讝讛 讜讝讛 砖讜讬谉 讜讻讬 转讬诪讗 讛讻讗 谞诪讬 转谞讗 讜砖讬讬专 讜讛讗 诪讛 讗诇讜 拽转谞讬

Rav Ashi said: The wording of the mishna is also precise, according to this explanation, as it teaches: How are these seven fast days more stringent than the first ones? Rather, the difference is that on these days, in addition to all the earlier stringencies, they sound the alarm and they lock the stores. However, in regard to all their other matters, both this and that are identical. And if you say that here too he taught and omitted, but it teaches: How are these more stringent, an expression that indicates that the mishna states the only difference.

讜转住讘专讗 诪讛 讗诇讜 讚讜讜拽讗 讛讜讗 讜讛讗 砖讬讬专 诇讛 转讬讘讛 讗讬 诪砖讜诐 转讬讘讛 诇讗讜 砖讬讜专讗 讛讜讗 诪砖讜诐 讚拽讗 讞砖讬讘 诇讛 讘讗讬讚讱 驻专拽讗 讛砖转讗 讚讗转讬转 诇讛讻讬 注砖专讬诐 讜讗专讘注讛 谞诪讬 诇讗讜 砖讬讜专讗 讛讜讗 讚拽转谞讬 诇讛 讘讗讬讚讱 驻讬专拽讗

The Gemara asks: And how can you understand the phrase: How are these, specifically, as indicating that there is only one difference between the cases? But he omitted the ark. The Gemara responds: If the omission is due to the ark, that is not a real omission, because the tanna includes it in another chapter (15a). The Gemara comments: Now that you have arrived at this solution, a similar answer can be applied to the earlier difficulties. The matter of the twenty-four blessings is also not an omission, as he teaches this halakha in another chapter, also on 15a, where the mishna provides further details of the blessings. Here, however, the tanna lists only those matters that are not discussed later.

诪讗讬 讛讜讬 注诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪讜讗诇 讘专 住住专讟讗讬 讜讻谉 讗诪专 专讘 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗砖讬 讗诪专 专讘 讘讬谉 讙讜讗诇 诇专讜驻讗 讜专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讘砖讜诪注 转驻讬诇讛 讜讛诇讻转讗 讘砖讜诪注 转驻讬诇讛

Since no decisive proof was offered in support of any of the opinions as to where an individual inserts the Aneinu prayer, the Gemara asks: What halakhic conclusion was reached about this matter? Rabbi Shmuel bar Sasretai said, and similarly Rav 岣yya bar Ashi said that Rav said: One inserts it between the seventh blessing of the Amida: Who redeems, and the eighth blessing: Who heals. And Rav Ashi said in the name of Rabbi Yannai, son of Rabbi Yishmael: One inserts it in the blessing: Who listens to prayer. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is that one includes it in the blessing: Who listens to prayer.

转谞讬 讞讚讗 注讜讘专讜转 讜诪讬谞讬拽讜转 诪转注谞讜转 讘专讗砖讜谞讜转 讜讗讬谉 诪转注谞讜转 讘讗讞专讜谞讜转 讜转谞讬讗 讗讬讚讱 诪转注谞讜转 讘讗讞专讜谞讜转 讜讗讬谉 诪转注谞讜转 讘专讗砖讜谞讜转 讜转谞讬讗 讗讬讚讱 讗讬谉 诪转注谞讜转 诇讗 讘专讗砖讜谞讜转 讜诇讗 讘讗讞专讜谞讜转

搂 It is taught in one baraita: Pregnant and nursing women fast with the community on the first fasts, but they do not fast on the last fasts. And it was taught in another baraita: Pregnant and nursing women fast on the last set of fasts but they do not fast on the first set of fasts. And it was taught in yet another baraita: They do not fast either on the first fast days or on the last fast days.

讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 谞拽讜讟 讗诪爪注讬讬转讗 讘讬讚讱 讚诪讬转专爪讜谉 讻讜诇讛讜

Rav Ashi said: Take the mention of the middle fasts in your hand as the decisive matter, as this resolves all three baraitot. The halakha is that pregnant and nursing women fast only on the middle fasts, as they are stricter than the first fasts but less taxing than the last seven fasts. Consequently, when the first baraita is referring to the first fasts, it in fact means the middle set, which is the first of the last two sets. Similarly, when the second baraita mentions the last fasts, it means the middle set, which is the last of the two sets. In the third baraita, the first and last fasts are literally the first three and last seven fasts, respectively. In this manner all three baraitot follow the same halakha.

诪讛 讗诇讜 讬转讬专讜转 注诇 讛专讗砖讜谞讜转 讗诇讗 砖讘讗诇讜 诪转专讬注讬谉 讜谞讜注诇讬谉 讗转 讛讞谞讜讬讜转 讘诪讗讬 诪转专讬注讬谉 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 讘砖讜驻专讜转 讜专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 砖诪讜讗诇 讘专 砖讬诇转 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讗诪专 讘注谞谞讜

搂 The mishna teaches: How are these seven fast days more stringent than the first ones? Rather, the difference is that on these days, in addition to all the earlier stringencies, they sound the alarm and they lock the stores. The Gemara asks: With what do they sound the alarm? Rav Yehuda said: With shofarot. And Rav Yehuda, son of Rav Shmuel bar Sheilat, said in the name of Rav: With the Aneinu prayer.

拽讗 住诇拽讗 讚注转谉 诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讘注谞谞讜 诇讗 讗诪专 讘砖讜驻专讜转 讜诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讘砖讜驻专讜转 诇讗 讗诪专 讘注谞谞讜 讜讛转谞讬讗 讗讬谉 驻讜讞转讬谉 诪砖讘注 转注谞讬讜转 注诇 讛爪讘讜专 砖讘讛谉 砖诪讜谞讛 注砖专讛 讛转专注讜转 讜住讬诪谉 诇讚讘专 讬专讬讞讜 讜讬专讬讞讜 砖讜驻专讜转 讛讜讛 讜转讬讜讘转讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讘注谞谞讜

The Gemara analyzes the dispute: It might enter our mind to say that the one who said that the community sounds the alarm by reciting Aneinu, i.e., Rav, did not say that they cry out with shofarot, and likewise the one who said that they do cry out with shofarot, Rav Yehuda, did not say that they sound the alarm by reciting Aneinu. But isn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita: The court does not decree fewer than seven fasts on the community, which include eighteen acts of sounding the alarm. And a mnemonic for this matter is Jericho. And as there were many episodes of sounding the shofarot in Jericho, this is a conclusive refutation of the one who said that according to the opinion of Rav they sound the alarm only by reciting Aneinu.

讗诇讗 讘砖讜驻专讜转 讚讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讚拽专讬 诇讛 讛转专注讛 讻讬 驻诇讬讙讬 讘注谞谞讜 诪专 住讘专 拽专讬 诇讛 讛转专注讛 讜诪专 住讘专 诇讗 拽专讬 诇讛 讛转专注讛

Rather, the Gemara explains that the dispute must be understood differently: With regard to shofarot, everyone, i.e., Rav and Rav Yehuda, agrees that the mishna calls this: Sounding the alarm. When they disagree, it is with regard to the Aneinu prayer. One Sage, Rav, holds that this too is called sounding the alarm, and one Sage, Rav Yehuda, holds that reciting Aneinu is not called sounding the alarm.

诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讘注谞谞讜 讻诇 砖讻谉 讘砖讜驻专讜转 讜诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讘砖讜驻专讜转 讗讘诇 讘注谞谞讜 诇讗

The Gemara comments: If so, then it follows that according to the one who said that they sound the alarm by reciting Aneinu, all the more so they can do so with shofarot, but according to the one who said that they sound the alarm with shofarot, this is the way they sound the alarm; however, they may not do so with Aneinu, i.e., the community does not sound the alarm by reciting this prayer. This indicates that the Aneinu prayer is recited only in extreme cases, as it is a greater form of petitioning to God than blowing the shofar.

讜讛转谞讬讗 讜砖讗专 讻诇 诪讬谞讬 驻讜专注谞讜讬讜转 讛诪转专讙砖讜转 讻讙讜谉 讞讬讻讜讱 讞讙讘 讝讘讜讘 讜爪讬专注讛 讜讬转讜砖讬谉 讜砖讬诇讜讞 谞讞砖讬诐 讜注拽专讘讬诐 诇讗 讛讬讜 诪转专讬注讬谉 讗诇讗 爪讜注拽讬谉 诪讚爪注拽讛 讘驻讛 讛转专注讛 讘砖讜驻专讜转

The Gemara raises a difficulty against this conclusion. But isn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita: And with regard to all other types of calamities than drought that break out, for example scabs, plagues of locusts, flies, or hornets, or mosquitoes, or infestations of snakes or scorpions, they would not sound the alarm, but they would cry out. From the fact that crying out is, according to all opinions, a prayer recited with one鈥檚 mouth, it follows that sounding an alarm must be with shofarot. This baraita indicates that sounding the alarm with shofarot is the response to a serious situation, whereas the Aneinu prayer is recited on less worrisome occasions.

转谞讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞谉 注诇 讗诇讜 诪转专讬注讬谉 讘砖讘转 注诇 注讬专 砖讛拽讬驻讜讛 讙讬讬住 讗讜 谞讛专 讜注诇 住驻讬谞讛 讛诪讟讜专驻转 讘讬诐 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗诪专 诇注讝专讛 讗讘诇 诇讗 诇爪注拽讛

The Gemara answers: This is a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, as we learned in a mishna: For the following calamities they sound the alarm even on Shabbat: For a city that is surrounded by an enemy army or in danger of being flooded by a river, or for a ship tossed about at sea. Rabbi Yosei said: An alarm may be sounded on Shabbat to summon help, but it may not be sounded for crying out to God.

讘诪讗讬 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讘砖讜驻专讜转 砖讜驻专讜转 讘砖讘转 诪讬 砖专讬 讗诇讗 诇讗讜 讘注谞谞讜 讜拽专讬 诇讛 讛转专注讛 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛

The Gemara clarifies this case. With what do they sound the alarm? If we say with shofarot, is the sounding of shofarot permitted on Shabbat? Even when Rosh HaShana occurs on Shabbat, one must refrain from sounding the shofar on that day. Rather, is it not the case that this is referring to the recitation of the Aneinu prayer, and yet the mishna calls this recitation: Sounding the alarm. Conclude from this that there is a tanna who maintains that sounding of the alarm is in fact performed by prayer, as claimed by Rav Yehuda, son of Rav Shmuel bar Sheilat.

讘砖谞讬 讚专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 谞砖讬讗讛 讛讜讛 爪注专讗

搂 The Gemara relates: During the years of Rabbi Yehuda Nesia there was a trouble that afflicted the community.

讙讝专 转诇转 注砖专讛 转注谞讬讜转 讜诇讗 讗讬注谞讬 住讘专 诇诪讬讙讝专 讟驻讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讛专讬 讗诪专讜 讗讬谉 诪讟专讬讞讬谉 讗转 讛爪讘讜专 讬讜转专 诪讚讗讬

Rabbi Yehuda Nesia decreed thirteen fasts, but he was not answered. He considered decreeing more fasts until they would be answered. Rabbi Ami said to him that they said: One does not trouble the community excessively, and therefore you should not impose more than thirteen fasts.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讚注讘讚 诇讙专诪讬讛 讛讜讗 讚注讘讚 讗诇讗 讛讻讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 诇讙砖诪讬诐 讗讘诇 诇砖讗专 诪讬谞讬 驻讜专注谞讜讬讜转 诪转注谞讬谉 讜讛讜诇讻讬谉 注讚 砖讬注谞讜 诪谉 讛砖诪讬诐 转谞讬讗 谞诪讬 讛讻讬 讻砖讗诪专讜 砖诇砖 讜讻砖讗诪专讜 砖讘注 诇讗 讗诪专讜 讗诇讗 诇讙砖诪讬诐 讗讘诇 诇砖讗专 诪讬谞讬 驻讜专注谞讜讬讜转 诪转注谞讬谉 讜讛讜诇讻讬谉 注讚 砖讬注谞讜

Rabbi Abba, son of Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba, said: When Rabbi Ami acted and issued this ruling, he did so on his own authority, as it went against the majority opinion. Rather, Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said as follows: They taught only that the community observes a maximum of thirteen fasts when they are praying for rain. However, with regard to other types of calamities, they continue to fast until they are answered from Heaven. The Gemara comments: This halakha is also taught in a baraita: When the Sages said three and when they said seven, they spoke only concerning fasts for rain. However, with regard to other types of calamities, they continue to fast until they are answered.

诇讬诪讗 转讬讛讜讬 转讬讜讘转讬讛 讚专讘讬 讗诪讬 讗诪专 诇讱 专讘讬 讗诪讬 转谞讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讗讬谉 讙讜讝专讬谉 讬讜转专 诪砖诇砖 注砖专讛 转注谞讬讜转 注诇 讛爪讘讜专 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谉 诪讟专讬讞讬谉 讗转 讛爪讘讜专 讬讜转专 诪讚讗讬 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 诇讗 诪谉 讛砖诐 讛讜讗 讝讛 讗诇讗 诪驻谞讬 砖讬爪讗 讝诪谞讛 砖诇 专讘讬注讛

The Gemara suggests: Let us say that this baraita is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rabbi Ami. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Ami could have said to you that this is a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, as it is taught in a baraita: One does not decree more than thirteen fasts on the community, as one does not trouble the community excessively. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: This halakha is not for that reason. Rather, it is due to the fact that after thirteen fasts the time of the rainfall has already passed, and there is no reason to fast for rain after the rainy season has ended.

砖诇讞讜 诇讬讛 讘谞讬 谞讬谞讜讛 诇专讘讬 讻讙讜谉 讗谞谉 讚讗驻讬诇讜 讘转拽讜驻转 转诪讜讝 讘注讬谞谉 诪讟专讗 讛讬讻讬 谞注讘讬讚 讻讬讞讬讚讬诐 讚诪讬谞谉 讗讜 讻专讘讬诐 讚诪讬谞谉 讻讬讞讬讚讬诐 讚诪讬谞谉 讜讘砖讜诪注 转驻诇讛 讗讜 讻专讘讬诐 讚诪讬谞谉 讜讘讘专讻转 讛砖谞讬诐 砖诇讞 诇讛讜 讻讬讞讬讚讬诐 讚诪讬转讜 讜讘砖讜诪注 转驻诇讛

The Gemara relates a story on a similar topic: The inhabitants of Nineveh sent a question to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: People such as us, who require rain even during the season of Tammuz, and who live in areas where rain falls all year round, what should we do when there is a drought during the summer? Are we likened to individuals or are we likened to a community? The Gemara explains the practical difference between these two options: Are we likened to individuals and therefore we pray for rain in the blessing: Who listens to prayer? Or are we likened to a community and we pray for rain in the ninth blessing, the blessing of the years? He sent his answer to them: You are likened to individuals and therefore you pray for rain in the blessing: Who listens to prayer.

诪讬转讬讘讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讬诪转讬 讘讝诪谉 砖讛砖谞讬诐 讻转讬拽谞谉 讜讬砖专讗诇 砖专讜讬谉 注诇 讗讚诪转谉 讗讘诇 讘讝诪谉 讛讝讛 讛讻诇 诇驻讬 讛砖谞讬诐 讛讻诇 诇驻讬 讛诪拽讜诪讜转 讛讻诇 诇驻讬 讛讝诪谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪转谞讬转讗 专诪讬转 注诇讬讛 讚专讘讬 专讘讬 转谞讗 讛讜讗 讜驻诇讬讙

The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda said: When do the halakhot concerning the times during which the prayer for rain is recited apply? When the years, i.e., the climate, are as they ought to be and the Jewish people are living in their land. However, nowadays, when the Jewish people are dispersed around the world, and the climate is not always as it ought to be, all is in accordance with the year, i.e., the local climate, all is in accordance with the place in question, and all is in accordance with the particular time, and therefore one prays for rain in the blessing of the years, as necessary for the local climate. He said to him: You raise a contradiction from a baraita against Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi? Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi himself is a tanna, and consequently has the authority to dispute the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda.

诪讗讬 讛讜讬 注诇讛 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗诪专 讘讘专讻转 讛砖谞讬诐 专讘 砖砖转 讗诪专 讘砖讜诪注 转驻诇讛 讜讛诇讻转讗 讘砖讜诪注 转驻诇讛

The Gemara asks: What halakhic conclusion was reached about this matter? Rav Na岣an said: One prays for rain in the blessing of the years, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. Rav Sheshet said: One prays in the blessing: Who listens to prayer, as stated by Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is that if rain is required when it is not the rainy season in Eretz Yisrael, one prays for rain in the blessing: Who listens to prayer.

讘砖谞讬 诪讟讬谉 注诐 讞砖讬讻讛 讜讘讞诪讬砖讬 讻诇 讛讬讜诐 诪驻谞讬 讻讘讜讚 讛砖讘转 讗讬讘注讬讗 诇讛讜 讛讬讻讬 拽转谞讬 讘砖谞讬 诪讟讬谉 注诐 讞砖讬讻讛 讜讘讞诪讬砖讬 讻诇 讛讬讜诐 诪驻谞讬 讻讘讜讚 讛砖讘转 讗讜 讚讬诇诪讗 讘砖谞讬 诪讟讬谉 讜讘讞诪讬砖讬 驻讜转讞讬谉 讻诇 讛讬讜诐 讻讜诇讜

搂 The mishna taught: On Monday they open the stores a little at nightfall, and on Thursday they are permitted to open the stores all day, in deference to Shabbat. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: How is this taught, i.e., what is the meaning of this ruling? Does it mean that on Monday the storeowners open their doors a little at nightfall, and on Thursday they likewise open their doors just a little, but do so all day, in deference to Shabbat? Or perhaps, the mishna means that on Monday they open their doors a little, but all day, and on Thursday they open their doors wide the entire day?

转讗 砖诪注 讚转谞讬讗 讘砖谞讬 诪讟讬谉 注讚 讛注专讘 讜讘讞诪讬砖讬 驻讜转讞讬谉 讻诇 讛讬讜诐 讻讜诇讜 诪驻谞讬 讻讘讜讚 讛砖讘转 讛讬讜 诇讜 砖谞讬 驻转讞讬诐 驻讜转讞 讗讞讚 讜谞讜注诇 讗讞讚 讛讬讛 诇讜 讗爪讟讘讗 讻谞讙讚 驻转讞讜 驻讜转讞 讻讚专讻讜 讜讗讬谞讜 讞讜砖砖

The Gemara answers: Come and hear a resolution of this dilemma, as it is taught in a baraita: On Monday they open their doors a little until the evening, and on Thursday they open them the entire day, in deference to Shabbat. If one鈥檚 shop had two entrances, he opens one and locks one, thereby demonstrating that his store is not open in the normal manner. If he had a platform opposite his entrance which conceals the door to his store, he may open in his usual manner without concern, as it is prohibited to open one鈥檚 store not due to work, but only so that it not appear as though people are eating and drinking on this day.

注讘专讜 讗诇讜 讜诇讗 谞注谞讜 诪诪注讟讬谉 讘诪砖讗 讜诪转谉 讘讘谞讬谉 讜讘谞讟讬注讛 转谞讗 讘讘谞讬谉 讘谞讬谉 砖诇 砖诪讞讛 谞讟讬注讛 谞讟讬注讛 砖诇 砖诪讞讛 讗讬 讝讛讜 讘谞讬谉 砖诇 砖诪讞讛 讝讛 讛讘讜谞讛 讘讬转 讞转谞讜转 诇讘谞讜 讗讬 讝讜 讛讬讗 谞讟讬注讛 砖诇 砖诪讞讛 讝讛 讛谞讜讟注 讗讘讜讜专谞拽讬 砖诇 诪诇讻讬诐

搂 The mishna taught: If these fasts have passed and they have not been answered, they decrease their engagement in business negotiations and in building and planting. It was taught in the Tosefta (Megilla 5:2): Building means joyful building, not building in general. Likewise, planting means joyful planting, not all planting. The Tosefta elaborates: What is joyful building? This is referring to one who builds a wedding chamber for his son. It was customary upon the marriage of a son to build him a small house where the marriage feast was held and where the newlywed couple would live for a certain period of time. What is joyful planting? This is referring to one who plants a splendid, royal garden that does not serve practical purposes, but is only for ornamentation.

讜讘砖讗讬诇转 砖诇讜诐 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讞讘专讬诐 讗讬谉 砖讗讬诇转 砖诇讜诐 讘讬谞讬讛谉 注诪讬 讛讗专抓 砖砖讜讗诇讬谉 诪讞讝讬专讬谉 诇讛诐 讘砖驻讛 专驻讛 讜讘讻讜讘讚 专讗砖 讜讛谉 诪转注讟驻讬谉 讜讬讜砖讘讬谉 讻讗讘诇讬诐 讜讻诪谞讜讚讬谉 讻讘谞讬 讗讚诐 讛谞讝讜驻讬谉 诇诪拽讜诐 注讚 砖讬专讞诪讜 注诇讬讛诐 诪谉 讛砖诪讬诐

And the mishna further taught that they decrease greetings between one another. The Sages taught: 岣verim, members of a group dedicated to the precise observance of mitzvot, do not extend greetings between each other at all. Amei ha鈥檃retz, common, uneducated people, who extend greetings to 岣verim, do so while unaware that this is inappropriate. The 岣verim answer them in an undertone and in a solemn manner. And 岣verim wrap themselves and sit as mourners and as ostracized ones, like people who have been rebuked by God, until they are shown mercy from Heaven.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讗讬谉 讗讚诐 讞砖讜讘 专砖讗讬 诇讬驻讜诇 注诇 驻谞讬讜 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 谞注谞讛 讻讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 谞讜谉 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬讗诪专 讛壮 讗诇 讬讛讜砖注 拽诐 诇讱 诇诪讛 讝讛 讗转讛 谞驻诇 注诇 驻谞讬讱

Rabbi Elazar said: An important person is permitted to fall on his face and humiliate himself in front of the community only if he is certain that he will be answered like Joshua, son of Nun, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd the Lord said to Joshua, Get you up, why are you fallen upon your face?鈥 (Joshua 7:10). One who is not absolutely certain that he will be answered may not fall on his face in public, as if he is unanswered he will become an object of derision.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讗讬谉 讗讚诐 讞砖讜讘 专砖讗讬 诇讞讙讜专 砖拽 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 谞注谞讛 讻讬讛讜专诐 讘谉 讗讞讗讘 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬讛讬 讻砖诪注 讛诪诇讱 讗转 讚讘专讬 讛讗砖讛 讜讬拽专注 讗转 讘讙讚讬讜 讜讛讜讗 注讘专 注诇 讛讞诪讛 讜讬专讗 讛注诐 讜讛谞讛 讛砖拽 注诇 讘砖专讜 讜讙讜壮

And Rabbi Elazar said: An important person is permitted to gird himself in sackcloth as a sign of mourning and to pray for mercy only if he is certain that he will be answered like Jehoram, son of Ahab, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd it came to pass, when the king heard the words of the woman, that he rent his clothes, now he was passing by upon the wall, and the people looked, and, behold, he had sackcloth within upon his flesh鈥 (II聽Kings 6:30). Although he was wicked, Jehoram was later answered and the suffering of the Jews was alleviated.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 诇讗 讛讻诇 讘拽专讬注讛 讜诇讗 讛讻诇 讘谞驻讬诇讛 诪砖讛 讜讗讛专讜谉 讘谞驻讬诇讛 讬讛讜砖注 讜讻诇讘 讘拽专讬注讛 诪砖讛 讜讗讛专谉 讘谞驻讬诇讛 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬驻讜诇 诪砖讛 讜讗讛专谉 注诇 驻谞讬讛诐 讬讛讜砖注 讜讻诇讘 讘拽专讬注讛 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 谞讜谉 讜讻诇讘 讘谉 讬驻谞讛 拽专注讜 讘讙讚讬讛诐

And Rabbi Elazar further said: Not all are worthy to petition God by rending their garments, and not all are worthy of falling on their faces in times of trouble. Moses and Aaron were worthy of petitioning God by falling on their faces, whereas their students Joshua and Caleb prayed by only rending their garments. The Gemara elaborates: Moses and Aaron petitioned God by falling on their faces, as it is written: 鈥淭hen Moses and Aaron fell on their faces鈥 (Numbers 14:5). Joshua and Caleb prayed by rending their garments, as it is written in the next verse: 鈥淎nd Joshua, son of Nun, and Caleb, son of Jephunneh, who were of those who spied out the land, rent their garments鈥 (Numbers 14:6).

诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘讬 讝讬专讗 讜讗讬转讬诪讗 专讘讬 砖诪讜讗诇 讘专 谞讞诪谞讬 讗讬 讛讜讛 讻转讬讘 讬讛讜砖注 讻讚拽讗诪专转 讛砖转讗 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讛讜砖注 讛讗 讜讛讗 注讘讬讚

Rabbi Zeira strongly objects to this interpretation, and some say it was Rabbi Shmuel bar Na岣ani who objected: Had the verse written only: Joshua and Caleb, the meaning would be as you said, that Moses and Aaron fell upon their faces whereas Joshua and Caleb only rent their garments. However, now that it is written: 鈥淎nd Joshua,鈥 it is possible that the connecting word 鈥渁nd鈥 indicates that Moses and Aaron merely fell upon their faces, while Joshua and Caleb did both this and that, i.e., they rent their clothing in addition to falling upon their faces.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 诇讗 讛讻诇 讘拽讬诪讛 讜诇讗 讛讻诇 讘讛砖转讞讜讬讛 诪诇讻讬诐 讘拽讬诪讛 讜砖专讬诐 讘讛砖转讞讜讬讛 诪诇讻讬诐 讘拽讬诪讛 讚讻转讬讘 讻讛 讗诪专 讛壮 讙讗诇 讬砖专讗诇 拽讚讜砖讜

And Rabbi Elazar further said: Not all dignitaries will worship God in the messianic age by rising, and not all will do so by bowing. Rather, kings will serve God by rising, and ministers by bowing. The Gemara elaborates: Kings by rising, as it is written: 鈥淭hus says the Lord, the Redeemer of Israel, his Holy One,

This month's shiurim are dedicated by聽the Hadran Women of Minneapolis in memory of Monica Howell z"l.

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

learn daf yomi one week at a time with tamara spitz

Taanit: 14-18 – Daf Yomi One Week at a Time

This week we will continue learning about the 3 sets of fast days they would institute when it didn鈥檛 rain...

Taanit 14

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Taanit 14

讜讛讗 砖讬讬专 转讬讘讛 讗讬 诪砖讜诐 转讬讘讛 诇讗讜 砖讬讜专讗 讛讜讗 诪讬诇讬 讚爪讬谞注讗 拽转谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讚讘驻专讛住讬讗 诇讗 拽转谞讬

But he omitted any mention of the ark and the halakha that during the last seven fast days the ark was brought into the streets of the city. The Gemara rejects this argument: If the omission is due to the ark, that is not a real omission. The reason is that the tanna teaches only matters that are performed in private, whereas he does not teach matters that are performed in public [parhesya].

讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 诪转谞讬转讬谉 谞诪讬 讚讬拽讗 讚拽转谞讬 诪讛 讗诇讜 讬转讬专讜转 注诇 讛专讗砖讜谞讜转 讗诇讗 砖讘讗诇讜 诪转专讬注讬谉 讜谞讜注诇讬谉 讗转 讛讞谞讜讬讜转 讗讘诇 讘讻诇 讚讘专讬讛谉 讝讛 讜讝讛 砖讜讬谉 讜讻讬 转讬诪讗 讛讻讗 谞诪讬 转谞讗 讜砖讬讬专 讜讛讗 诪讛 讗诇讜 拽转谞讬

Rav Ashi said: The wording of the mishna is also precise, according to this explanation, as it teaches: How are these seven fast days more stringent than the first ones? Rather, the difference is that on these days, in addition to all the earlier stringencies, they sound the alarm and they lock the stores. However, in regard to all their other matters, both this and that are identical. And if you say that here too he taught and omitted, but it teaches: How are these more stringent, an expression that indicates that the mishna states the only difference.

讜转住讘专讗 诪讛 讗诇讜 讚讜讜拽讗 讛讜讗 讜讛讗 砖讬讬专 诇讛 转讬讘讛 讗讬 诪砖讜诐 转讬讘讛 诇讗讜 砖讬讜专讗 讛讜讗 诪砖讜诐 讚拽讗 讞砖讬讘 诇讛 讘讗讬讚讱 驻专拽讗 讛砖转讗 讚讗转讬转 诇讛讻讬 注砖专讬诐 讜讗专讘注讛 谞诪讬 诇讗讜 砖讬讜专讗 讛讜讗 讚拽转谞讬 诇讛 讘讗讬讚讱 驻讬专拽讗

The Gemara asks: And how can you understand the phrase: How are these, specifically, as indicating that there is only one difference between the cases? But he omitted the ark. The Gemara responds: If the omission is due to the ark, that is not a real omission, because the tanna includes it in another chapter (15a). The Gemara comments: Now that you have arrived at this solution, a similar answer can be applied to the earlier difficulties. The matter of the twenty-four blessings is also not an omission, as he teaches this halakha in another chapter, also on 15a, where the mishna provides further details of the blessings. Here, however, the tanna lists only those matters that are not discussed later.

诪讗讬 讛讜讬 注诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪讜讗诇 讘专 住住专讟讗讬 讜讻谉 讗诪专 专讘 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗砖讬 讗诪专 专讘 讘讬谉 讙讜讗诇 诇专讜驻讗 讜专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬谞讗讬 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讬 讬砖诪注讗诇 讘砖讜诪注 转驻讬诇讛 讜讛诇讻转讗 讘砖讜诪注 转驻讬诇讛

Since no decisive proof was offered in support of any of the opinions as to where an individual inserts the Aneinu prayer, the Gemara asks: What halakhic conclusion was reached about this matter? Rabbi Shmuel bar Sasretai said, and similarly Rav 岣yya bar Ashi said that Rav said: One inserts it between the seventh blessing of the Amida: Who redeems, and the eighth blessing: Who heals. And Rav Ashi said in the name of Rabbi Yannai, son of Rabbi Yishmael: One inserts it in the blessing: Who listens to prayer. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is that one includes it in the blessing: Who listens to prayer.

转谞讬 讞讚讗 注讜讘专讜转 讜诪讬谞讬拽讜转 诪转注谞讜转 讘专讗砖讜谞讜转 讜讗讬谉 诪转注谞讜转 讘讗讞专讜谞讜转 讜转谞讬讗 讗讬讚讱 诪转注谞讜转 讘讗讞专讜谞讜转 讜讗讬谉 诪转注谞讜转 讘专讗砖讜谞讜转 讜转谞讬讗 讗讬讚讱 讗讬谉 诪转注谞讜转 诇讗 讘专讗砖讜谞讜转 讜诇讗 讘讗讞专讜谞讜转

搂 It is taught in one baraita: Pregnant and nursing women fast with the community on the first fasts, but they do not fast on the last fasts. And it was taught in another baraita: Pregnant and nursing women fast on the last set of fasts but they do not fast on the first set of fasts. And it was taught in yet another baraita: They do not fast either on the first fast days or on the last fast days.

讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 谞拽讜讟 讗诪爪注讬讬转讗 讘讬讚讱 讚诪讬转专爪讜谉 讻讜诇讛讜

Rav Ashi said: Take the mention of the middle fasts in your hand as the decisive matter, as this resolves all three baraitot. The halakha is that pregnant and nursing women fast only on the middle fasts, as they are stricter than the first fasts but less taxing than the last seven fasts. Consequently, when the first baraita is referring to the first fasts, it in fact means the middle set, which is the first of the last two sets. Similarly, when the second baraita mentions the last fasts, it means the middle set, which is the last of the two sets. In the third baraita, the first and last fasts are literally the first three and last seven fasts, respectively. In this manner all three baraitot follow the same halakha.

诪讛 讗诇讜 讬转讬专讜转 注诇 讛专讗砖讜谞讜转 讗诇讗 砖讘讗诇讜 诪转专讬注讬谉 讜谞讜注诇讬谉 讗转 讛讞谞讜讬讜转 讘诪讗讬 诪转专讬注讬谉 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 讘砖讜驻专讜转 讜专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 砖诪讜讗诇 讘专 砖讬诇转 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讗诪专 讘注谞谞讜

搂 The mishna teaches: How are these seven fast days more stringent than the first ones? Rather, the difference is that on these days, in addition to all the earlier stringencies, they sound the alarm and they lock the stores. The Gemara asks: With what do they sound the alarm? Rav Yehuda said: With shofarot. And Rav Yehuda, son of Rav Shmuel bar Sheilat, said in the name of Rav: With the Aneinu prayer.

拽讗 住诇拽讗 讚注转谉 诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讘注谞谞讜 诇讗 讗诪专 讘砖讜驻专讜转 讜诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讘砖讜驻专讜转 诇讗 讗诪专 讘注谞谞讜 讜讛转谞讬讗 讗讬谉 驻讜讞转讬谉 诪砖讘注 转注谞讬讜转 注诇 讛爪讘讜专 砖讘讛谉 砖诪讜谞讛 注砖专讛 讛转专注讜转 讜住讬诪谉 诇讚讘专 讬专讬讞讜 讜讬专讬讞讜 砖讜驻专讜转 讛讜讛 讜转讬讜讘转讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讘注谞谞讜

The Gemara analyzes the dispute: It might enter our mind to say that the one who said that the community sounds the alarm by reciting Aneinu, i.e., Rav, did not say that they cry out with shofarot, and likewise the one who said that they do cry out with shofarot, Rav Yehuda, did not say that they sound the alarm by reciting Aneinu. But isn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita: The court does not decree fewer than seven fasts on the community, which include eighteen acts of sounding the alarm. And a mnemonic for this matter is Jericho. And as there were many episodes of sounding the shofarot in Jericho, this is a conclusive refutation of the one who said that according to the opinion of Rav they sound the alarm only by reciting Aneinu.

讗诇讗 讘砖讜驻专讜转 讚讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讚拽专讬 诇讛 讛转专注讛 讻讬 驻诇讬讙讬 讘注谞谞讜 诪专 住讘专 拽专讬 诇讛 讛转专注讛 讜诪专 住讘专 诇讗 拽专讬 诇讛 讛转专注讛

Rather, the Gemara explains that the dispute must be understood differently: With regard to shofarot, everyone, i.e., Rav and Rav Yehuda, agrees that the mishna calls this: Sounding the alarm. When they disagree, it is with regard to the Aneinu prayer. One Sage, Rav, holds that this too is called sounding the alarm, and one Sage, Rav Yehuda, holds that reciting Aneinu is not called sounding the alarm.

诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讘注谞谞讜 讻诇 砖讻谉 讘砖讜驻专讜转 讜诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讘砖讜驻专讜转 讗讘诇 讘注谞谞讜 诇讗

The Gemara comments: If so, then it follows that according to the one who said that they sound the alarm by reciting Aneinu, all the more so they can do so with shofarot, but according to the one who said that they sound the alarm with shofarot, this is the way they sound the alarm; however, they may not do so with Aneinu, i.e., the community does not sound the alarm by reciting this prayer. This indicates that the Aneinu prayer is recited only in extreme cases, as it is a greater form of petitioning to God than blowing the shofar.

讜讛转谞讬讗 讜砖讗专 讻诇 诪讬谞讬 驻讜专注谞讜讬讜转 讛诪转专讙砖讜转 讻讙讜谉 讞讬讻讜讱 讞讙讘 讝讘讜讘 讜爪讬专注讛 讜讬转讜砖讬谉 讜砖讬诇讜讞 谞讞砖讬诐 讜注拽专讘讬诐 诇讗 讛讬讜 诪转专讬注讬谉 讗诇讗 爪讜注拽讬谉 诪讚爪注拽讛 讘驻讛 讛转专注讛 讘砖讜驻专讜转

The Gemara raises a difficulty against this conclusion. But isn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita: And with regard to all other types of calamities than drought that break out, for example scabs, plagues of locusts, flies, or hornets, or mosquitoes, or infestations of snakes or scorpions, they would not sound the alarm, but they would cry out. From the fact that crying out is, according to all opinions, a prayer recited with one鈥檚 mouth, it follows that sounding an alarm must be with shofarot. This baraita indicates that sounding the alarm with shofarot is the response to a serious situation, whereas the Aneinu prayer is recited on less worrisome occasions.

转谞讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞谉 注诇 讗诇讜 诪转专讬注讬谉 讘砖讘转 注诇 注讬专 砖讛拽讬驻讜讛 讙讬讬住 讗讜 谞讛专 讜注诇 住驻讬谞讛 讛诪讟讜专驻转 讘讬诐 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗诪专 诇注讝专讛 讗讘诇 诇讗 诇爪注拽讛

The Gemara answers: This is a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, as we learned in a mishna: For the following calamities they sound the alarm even on Shabbat: For a city that is surrounded by an enemy army or in danger of being flooded by a river, or for a ship tossed about at sea. Rabbi Yosei said: An alarm may be sounded on Shabbat to summon help, but it may not be sounded for crying out to God.

讘诪讗讬 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讘砖讜驻专讜转 砖讜驻专讜转 讘砖讘转 诪讬 砖专讬 讗诇讗 诇讗讜 讘注谞谞讜 讜拽专讬 诇讛 讛转专注讛 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛

The Gemara clarifies this case. With what do they sound the alarm? If we say with shofarot, is the sounding of shofarot permitted on Shabbat? Even when Rosh HaShana occurs on Shabbat, one must refrain from sounding the shofar on that day. Rather, is it not the case that this is referring to the recitation of the Aneinu prayer, and yet the mishna calls this recitation: Sounding the alarm. Conclude from this that there is a tanna who maintains that sounding of the alarm is in fact performed by prayer, as claimed by Rav Yehuda, son of Rav Shmuel bar Sheilat.

讘砖谞讬 讚专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 谞砖讬讗讛 讛讜讛 爪注专讗

搂 The Gemara relates: During the years of Rabbi Yehuda Nesia there was a trouble that afflicted the community.

讙讝专 转诇转 注砖专讛 转注谞讬讜转 讜诇讗 讗讬注谞讬 住讘专 诇诪讬讙讝专 讟驻讬 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讛专讬 讗诪专讜 讗讬谉 诪讟专讬讞讬谉 讗转 讛爪讘讜专 讬讜转专 诪讚讗讬

Rabbi Yehuda Nesia decreed thirteen fasts, but he was not answered. He considered decreeing more fasts until they would be answered. Rabbi Ami said to him that they said: One does not trouble the community excessively, and therefore you should not impose more than thirteen fasts.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讚注讘讚 诇讙专诪讬讛 讛讜讗 讚注讘讚 讗诇讗 讛讻讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讗讘讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 诇讙砖诪讬诐 讗讘诇 诇砖讗专 诪讬谞讬 驻讜专注谞讜讬讜转 诪转注谞讬谉 讜讛讜诇讻讬谉 注讚 砖讬注谞讜 诪谉 讛砖诪讬诐 转谞讬讗 谞诪讬 讛讻讬 讻砖讗诪专讜 砖诇砖 讜讻砖讗诪专讜 砖讘注 诇讗 讗诪专讜 讗诇讗 诇讙砖诪讬诐 讗讘诇 诇砖讗专 诪讬谞讬 驻讜专注谞讜讬讜转 诪转注谞讬谉 讜讛讜诇讻讬谉 注讚 砖讬注谞讜

Rabbi Abba, son of Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba, said: When Rabbi Ami acted and issued this ruling, he did so on his own authority, as it went against the majority opinion. Rather, Rabbi 岣yya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yo岣nan said as follows: They taught only that the community observes a maximum of thirteen fasts when they are praying for rain. However, with regard to other types of calamities, they continue to fast until they are answered from Heaven. The Gemara comments: This halakha is also taught in a baraita: When the Sages said three and when they said seven, they spoke only concerning fasts for rain. However, with regard to other types of calamities, they continue to fast until they are answered.

诇讬诪讗 转讬讛讜讬 转讬讜讘转讬讛 讚专讘讬 讗诪讬 讗诪专 诇讱 专讘讬 讗诪讬 转谞讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讗讬谉 讙讜讝专讬谉 讬讜转专 诪砖诇砖 注砖专讛 转注谞讬讜转 注诇 讛爪讘讜专 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谉 诪讟专讬讞讬谉 讗转 讛爪讘讜专 讬讜转专 诪讚讗讬 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 诇讗 诪谉 讛砖诐 讛讜讗 讝讛 讗诇讗 诪驻谞讬 砖讬爪讗 讝诪谞讛 砖诇 专讘讬注讛

The Gemara suggests: Let us say that this baraita is a conclusive refutation of the opinion of Rabbi Ami. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Ami could have said to you that this is a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, as it is taught in a baraita: One does not decree more than thirteen fasts on the community, as one does not trouble the community excessively. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: This halakha is not for that reason. Rather, it is due to the fact that after thirteen fasts the time of the rainfall has already passed, and there is no reason to fast for rain after the rainy season has ended.

砖诇讞讜 诇讬讛 讘谞讬 谞讬谞讜讛 诇专讘讬 讻讙讜谉 讗谞谉 讚讗驻讬诇讜 讘转拽讜驻转 转诪讜讝 讘注讬谞谉 诪讟专讗 讛讬讻讬 谞注讘讬讚 讻讬讞讬讚讬诐 讚诪讬谞谉 讗讜 讻专讘讬诐 讚诪讬谞谉 讻讬讞讬讚讬诐 讚诪讬谞谉 讜讘砖讜诪注 转驻诇讛 讗讜 讻专讘讬诐 讚诪讬谞谉 讜讘讘专讻转 讛砖谞讬诐 砖诇讞 诇讛讜 讻讬讞讬讚讬诐 讚诪讬转讜 讜讘砖讜诪注 转驻诇讛

The Gemara relates a story on a similar topic: The inhabitants of Nineveh sent a question to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: People such as us, who require rain even during the season of Tammuz, and who live in areas where rain falls all year round, what should we do when there is a drought during the summer? Are we likened to individuals or are we likened to a community? The Gemara explains the practical difference between these two options: Are we likened to individuals and therefore we pray for rain in the blessing: Who listens to prayer? Or are we likened to a community and we pray for rain in the ninth blessing, the blessing of the years? He sent his answer to them: You are likened to individuals and therefore you pray for rain in the blessing: Who listens to prayer.

诪讬转讬讘讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讬诪转讬 讘讝诪谉 砖讛砖谞讬诐 讻转讬拽谞谉 讜讬砖专讗诇 砖专讜讬谉 注诇 讗讚诪转谉 讗讘诇 讘讝诪谉 讛讝讛 讛讻诇 诇驻讬 讛砖谞讬诐 讛讻诇 诇驻讬 讛诪拽讜诪讜转 讛讻诇 诇驻讬 讛讝诪谉 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪转谞讬转讗 专诪讬转 注诇讬讛 讚专讘讬 专讘讬 转谞讗 讛讜讗 讜驻诇讬讙

The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda said: When do the halakhot concerning the times during which the prayer for rain is recited apply? When the years, i.e., the climate, are as they ought to be and the Jewish people are living in their land. However, nowadays, when the Jewish people are dispersed around the world, and the climate is not always as it ought to be, all is in accordance with the year, i.e., the local climate, all is in accordance with the place in question, and all is in accordance with the particular time, and therefore one prays for rain in the blessing of the years, as necessary for the local climate. He said to him: You raise a contradiction from a baraita against Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi? Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi himself is a tanna, and consequently has the authority to dispute the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda.

诪讗讬 讛讜讬 注诇讛 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讗诪专 讘讘专讻转 讛砖谞讬诐 专讘 砖砖转 讗诪专 讘砖讜诪注 转驻诇讛 讜讛诇讻转讗 讘砖讜诪注 转驻诇讛

The Gemara asks: What halakhic conclusion was reached about this matter? Rav Na岣an said: One prays for rain in the blessing of the years, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda. Rav Sheshet said: One prays in the blessing: Who listens to prayer, as stated by Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. The Gemara concludes: And the halakha is that if rain is required when it is not the rainy season in Eretz Yisrael, one prays for rain in the blessing: Who listens to prayer.

讘砖谞讬 诪讟讬谉 注诐 讞砖讬讻讛 讜讘讞诪讬砖讬 讻诇 讛讬讜诐 诪驻谞讬 讻讘讜讚 讛砖讘转 讗讬讘注讬讗 诇讛讜 讛讬讻讬 拽转谞讬 讘砖谞讬 诪讟讬谉 注诐 讞砖讬讻讛 讜讘讞诪讬砖讬 讻诇 讛讬讜诐 诪驻谞讬 讻讘讜讚 讛砖讘转 讗讜 讚讬诇诪讗 讘砖谞讬 诪讟讬谉 讜讘讞诪讬砖讬 驻讜转讞讬谉 讻诇 讛讬讜诐 讻讜诇讜

搂 The mishna taught: On Monday they open the stores a little at nightfall, and on Thursday they are permitted to open the stores all day, in deference to Shabbat. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: How is this taught, i.e., what is the meaning of this ruling? Does it mean that on Monday the storeowners open their doors a little at nightfall, and on Thursday they likewise open their doors just a little, but do so all day, in deference to Shabbat? Or perhaps, the mishna means that on Monday they open their doors a little, but all day, and on Thursday they open their doors wide the entire day?

转讗 砖诪注 讚转谞讬讗 讘砖谞讬 诪讟讬谉 注讚 讛注专讘 讜讘讞诪讬砖讬 驻讜转讞讬谉 讻诇 讛讬讜诐 讻讜诇讜 诪驻谞讬 讻讘讜讚 讛砖讘转 讛讬讜 诇讜 砖谞讬 驻转讞讬诐 驻讜转讞 讗讞讚 讜谞讜注诇 讗讞讚 讛讬讛 诇讜 讗爪讟讘讗 讻谞讙讚 驻转讞讜 驻讜转讞 讻讚专讻讜 讜讗讬谞讜 讞讜砖砖

The Gemara answers: Come and hear a resolution of this dilemma, as it is taught in a baraita: On Monday they open their doors a little until the evening, and on Thursday they open them the entire day, in deference to Shabbat. If one鈥檚 shop had two entrances, he opens one and locks one, thereby demonstrating that his store is not open in the normal manner. If he had a platform opposite his entrance which conceals the door to his store, he may open in his usual manner without concern, as it is prohibited to open one鈥檚 store not due to work, but only so that it not appear as though people are eating and drinking on this day.

注讘专讜 讗诇讜 讜诇讗 谞注谞讜 诪诪注讟讬谉 讘诪砖讗 讜诪转谉 讘讘谞讬谉 讜讘谞讟讬注讛 转谞讗 讘讘谞讬谉 讘谞讬谉 砖诇 砖诪讞讛 谞讟讬注讛 谞讟讬注讛 砖诇 砖诪讞讛 讗讬 讝讛讜 讘谞讬谉 砖诇 砖诪讞讛 讝讛 讛讘讜谞讛 讘讬转 讞转谞讜转 诇讘谞讜 讗讬 讝讜 讛讬讗 谞讟讬注讛 砖诇 砖诪讞讛 讝讛 讛谞讜讟注 讗讘讜讜专谞拽讬 砖诇 诪诇讻讬诐

搂 The mishna taught: If these fasts have passed and they have not been answered, they decrease their engagement in business negotiations and in building and planting. It was taught in the Tosefta (Megilla 5:2): Building means joyful building, not building in general. Likewise, planting means joyful planting, not all planting. The Tosefta elaborates: What is joyful building? This is referring to one who builds a wedding chamber for his son. It was customary upon the marriage of a son to build him a small house where the marriage feast was held and where the newlywed couple would live for a certain period of time. What is joyful planting? This is referring to one who plants a splendid, royal garden that does not serve practical purposes, but is only for ornamentation.

讜讘砖讗讬诇转 砖诇讜诐 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讞讘专讬诐 讗讬谉 砖讗讬诇转 砖诇讜诐 讘讬谞讬讛谉 注诪讬 讛讗专抓 砖砖讜讗诇讬谉 诪讞讝讬专讬谉 诇讛诐 讘砖驻讛 专驻讛 讜讘讻讜讘讚 专讗砖 讜讛谉 诪转注讟驻讬谉 讜讬讜砖讘讬谉 讻讗讘诇讬诐 讜讻诪谞讜讚讬谉 讻讘谞讬 讗讚诐 讛谞讝讜驻讬谉 诇诪拽讜诐 注讚 砖讬专讞诪讜 注诇讬讛诐 诪谉 讛砖诪讬诐

And the mishna further taught that they decrease greetings between one another. The Sages taught: 岣verim, members of a group dedicated to the precise observance of mitzvot, do not extend greetings between each other at all. Amei ha鈥檃retz, common, uneducated people, who extend greetings to 岣verim, do so while unaware that this is inappropriate. The 岣verim answer them in an undertone and in a solemn manner. And 岣verim wrap themselves and sit as mourners and as ostracized ones, like people who have been rebuked by God, until they are shown mercy from Heaven.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讗讬谉 讗讚诐 讞砖讜讘 专砖讗讬 诇讬驻讜诇 注诇 驻谞讬讜 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 谞注谞讛 讻讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 谞讜谉 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬讗诪专 讛壮 讗诇 讬讛讜砖注 拽诐 诇讱 诇诪讛 讝讛 讗转讛 谞驻诇 注诇 驻谞讬讱

Rabbi Elazar said: An important person is permitted to fall on his face and humiliate himself in front of the community only if he is certain that he will be answered like Joshua, son of Nun, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd the Lord said to Joshua, Get you up, why are you fallen upon your face?鈥 (Joshua 7:10). One who is not absolutely certain that he will be answered may not fall on his face in public, as if he is unanswered he will become an object of derision.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讗讬谉 讗讚诐 讞砖讜讘 专砖讗讬 诇讞讙讜专 砖拽 讗诇讗 讗诐 讻谉 谞注谞讛 讻讬讛讜专诐 讘谉 讗讞讗讘 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬讛讬 讻砖诪注 讛诪诇讱 讗转 讚讘专讬 讛讗砖讛 讜讬拽专注 讗转 讘讙讚讬讜 讜讛讜讗 注讘专 注诇 讛讞诪讛 讜讬专讗 讛注诐 讜讛谞讛 讛砖拽 注诇 讘砖专讜 讜讙讜壮

And Rabbi Elazar said: An important person is permitted to gird himself in sackcloth as a sign of mourning and to pray for mercy only if he is certain that he will be answered like Jehoram, son of Ahab, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd it came to pass, when the king heard the words of the woman, that he rent his clothes, now he was passing by upon the wall, and the people looked, and, behold, he had sackcloth within upon his flesh鈥 (II聽Kings 6:30). Although he was wicked, Jehoram was later answered and the suffering of the Jews was alleviated.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 诇讗 讛讻诇 讘拽专讬注讛 讜诇讗 讛讻诇 讘谞驻讬诇讛 诪砖讛 讜讗讛专讜谉 讘谞驻讬诇讛 讬讛讜砖注 讜讻诇讘 讘拽专讬注讛 诪砖讛 讜讗讛专谉 讘谞驻讬诇讛 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬驻讜诇 诪砖讛 讜讗讛专谉 注诇 驻谞讬讛诐 讬讛讜砖注 讜讻诇讘 讘拽专讬注讛 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讛讜砖注 讘谉 谞讜谉 讜讻诇讘 讘谉 讬驻谞讛 拽专注讜 讘讙讚讬讛诐

And Rabbi Elazar further said: Not all are worthy to petition God by rending their garments, and not all are worthy of falling on their faces in times of trouble. Moses and Aaron were worthy of petitioning God by falling on their faces, whereas their students Joshua and Caleb prayed by only rending their garments. The Gemara elaborates: Moses and Aaron petitioned God by falling on their faces, as it is written: 鈥淭hen Moses and Aaron fell on their faces鈥 (Numbers 14:5). Joshua and Caleb prayed by rending their garments, as it is written in the next verse: 鈥淎nd Joshua, son of Nun, and Caleb, son of Jephunneh, who were of those who spied out the land, rent their garments鈥 (Numbers 14:6).

诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘讬 讝讬专讗 讜讗讬转讬诪讗 专讘讬 砖诪讜讗诇 讘专 谞讞诪谞讬 讗讬 讛讜讛 讻转讬讘 讬讛讜砖注 讻讚拽讗诪专转 讛砖转讗 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讛讜砖注 讛讗 讜讛讗 注讘讬讚

Rabbi Zeira strongly objects to this interpretation, and some say it was Rabbi Shmuel bar Na岣ani who objected: Had the verse written only: Joshua and Caleb, the meaning would be as you said, that Moses and Aaron fell upon their faces whereas Joshua and Caleb only rent their garments. However, now that it is written: 鈥淎nd Joshua,鈥 it is possible that the connecting word 鈥渁nd鈥 indicates that Moses and Aaron merely fell upon their faces, while Joshua and Caleb did both this and that, i.e., they rent their clothing in addition to falling upon their faces.

讜讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 诇讗 讛讻诇 讘拽讬诪讛 讜诇讗 讛讻诇 讘讛砖转讞讜讬讛 诪诇讻讬诐 讘拽讬诪讛 讜砖专讬诐 讘讛砖转讞讜讬讛 诪诇讻讬诐 讘拽讬诪讛 讚讻转讬讘 讻讛 讗诪专 讛壮 讙讗诇 讬砖专讗诇 拽讚讜砖讜

And Rabbi Elazar further said: Not all dignitaries will worship God in the messianic age by rising, and not all will do so by bowing. Rather, kings will serve God by rising, and ministers by bowing. The Gemara elaborates: Kings by rising, as it is written: 鈥淭hus says the Lord, the Redeemer of Israel, his Holy One,

Scroll To Top