Taanit 28

דאית ליה רווחא

as the second reader has space, i.e., he has the option to read from the ensuing paragraph.

פרשה גדולה קורין אותה בשנים בשחרית ובמוסף ובמנחה קורין על פיהן כו׳ איבעיא להו היכי קאמר בשחרית ובמוסף קורין אותה בספר ובמנחה קורין אותה על פה כקורין את שמע או דלמא הכי קתני בשחרית קורין אותה בספר ובמוסף ובמנחה קורין אותה על פה כקורין את שמע

§ The mishna taught: A long passage is read by two people, and they read from the Torah in the morning prayer and in the additional prayer. And in the afternoon prayer they read the daily portion by heart, just as one recites Shema. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: With regard to what case is the tanna speaking? Does he mean that in the morning prayer and in the additional prayer they read the portion from a Torah scroll, but in the afternoon prayer each individual reads by heart, just as one recites Shema? Or perhaps this is what is taught: In the morning prayer they read it from a Torah scroll, but in the additional prayer and in the afternoon prayer they read it by heart, just as one recites Shema.

תא שמע דתניא בשחרית ובמוסף נכנסין לבית הכנסת וקורין כדרך שקורין כל השנה ובמנחה יחיד קורא אותה על פה אמר רבי יוסי וכי יחיד יכול לקרות דברי תורה על פה בציבור אלא כולן נכנסין וקורין אותה על פה כקורין את שמע

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear, as it is taught in a baraita: In the morning prayer and in the additional prayer they would enter the synagogue and read from the Torah in the manner that they read all year. But in the afternoon prayer, a single individual would read the portion for that day by heart. Rabbi Yosei said: But can an individual read matters of Torah by heart in the presence of the community? Rather, they all enter and read that day’s portion together, just as one recites Shema. This baraita clearly indicates that they would read by heart only in the afternoon service.

כל יום שיש בו הלל אין בו מעמד כו׳ מה הפרש בין זה לזה הללו דברי תורה והללו דברי סופרים

The mishna taught: On any day that has the recitation of hallel, but on which the additional offering was not sacrificed, it has no reading of the Torah by the non-priestly watch in the morning service. On days that have both hallel and an additional offering, there was no reading in the afternoon prayer. When a wood offering was brought, there was no reading in the closing prayer. The Gemara asks: What is the difference between this and that, a day on which an additional offering is sacrificed and a day on which a wood offering is brought? The Gemara explains: These days, on which an additional offering is brought, apply by Torah law, but these days, on which a wood offering is brought, apply by rabbinic law, and therefore it overrides only the closing prayer.

זמן עצי כהנים והעם כו׳ תנו רבנן למה הוצרכו לומר זמן עצי כהנים והעם אמרו כשעלו בני הגולה לא מצאו עצים בלשכה ועמדו אלו והתנדבו משלהם

The mishna continues with a list of the times for the wood offering of priests and the people. The Sages taught: Why was it necessary to state the times for the wood offering of priests and the people? They said in response that this is what happened: When the people of the exile ascended to Jerusalem in the beginning of the Second Temple period, they did not find enough wood in the Temple chamber for the needs of the altar. And these families arose and donated from their own wood to the Temple.

וכך התנו נביאים שביניהן שאפילו לשכה מלאה עצים יהיו אלו מתנדבין משלהן שנאמר והגורלות הפלנו על קרבן העצים הכהנים הלוים והעם להביא לבית אלהינו לבית אבותינו לעתים מזמנים שנה בשנה לבער על מזבח ה׳ אלהינו ככתוב בתורה

And the prophets among them stipulated as follows, that even if the entire chamber were full of wood, the descendants of these families would donate wood from their own property on these specific days, as it is stated: “And we cast lots, the priests, the Levites and the people, for the wood offering, to bring it into the house of our God, according to our fathers’ houses, at appointed times year by year, to burn upon the altar of the Lord our God, as it is written in the Torah” (Nehemiah 10:35). Although these donations were not always necessary, it was established that all generations would observe these days.

ועמהם כהנים ולוים וכל מי כו׳ תנו רבנן מה היו בני גונבי עלי ובני קוצעי קציעות

The mishna further taught that on the fifteenth of Av, wood was brought by the descendants of Zattu ben Yehuda, and with this group were other priests and Levites, and anyone who erred with regard to his tribe, i.e., Israelites who did not know which tribe they were from, and the descendants of those who deceived the authorities with a pestle, and the descendants of those who packed dried figs. The Sages taught: Who were the descendants of those who deceived the authorities with a pestle and the descendants of those who packed dried figs?

אמרו פעם אחת גזרה מלכות הרשעה שמד על ישראל שלא יביאו עצים למערכה ושלא יביאו בכורים לירושלים והושיבו פרוזדאות על הדרכים כדרך שהושיב ירבעם בן נבט שלא יעלו ישראל לרגל

They said in explanation: Once, the evil kingdom of Greece issued a decree of apostasy against the Jews, that they may not bring wood for the arrangement of the altar and that they may not bring first fruits to Jerusalem. And they placed guards [prozda’ot] on the roads, in the manner that Jeroboam, son of Nevat, placed guards, so that the Jews could not ascend for the pilgrim Festival.

מה עשו כשרין ויראי חטא שבאותו הדור הביאו סלי בכורים וחיפום בקציעות ונטלום ועלי על כתפיהן וכיון שהגיעו אצל פרוזדאות אמרו להם להיכן אתם הולכין אומרין להם לעשות שני עגולי דבילה במכתשת שלפנינו ובעלי שעל כתפינו כיון שעברו מהן עיטרום בסלים והביאום לירושלים

What did the worthy and sin-fearing individuals of that generation do? They brought baskets of first fruits, and covered them with dried figs, and took them with a pestle on their shoulders. And when they reached the guards, the guards said to them: Where are you going? They said to them: We are going to prepare two round cakes of pressed figs with the mortar that is down the road before us and with the pestle that we are carrying on our shoulders. As soon as they passed the guards, they decorated the baskets of first fruits and brought them to Jerusalem.

תנא הן הן בני סלמאי הנתופתי תנו רבנן מה הן בני סלמאי הנתופתי אמרו פעם אחת גזרה מלכות הרשעה שמד על ישראל שלא יביאו עצים למערכה והושיבו פרוזדאות על הדרכים כדרך שהושיב ירבעם בן נבט על הדרכים שלא יעלו ישראל לרגל

A Sage taught: This was something that was performed in a similar manner by the descendants of Salmai of Netophat. The Gemara explains this comment by quoting a baraita. The Sages taught: Who are the descendants of Salmai of Netophat? They said in explanation: Once, the evil kingdom of Greece issued a decree of apostasy against the Jews, that they may not bring wood for the arrangement of the altar. And they placed guards on the roads, in the manner that Jeroboam, son of Nevat, placed guards, so that the Jews could not ascend for the pilgrim Festival.

מה עשו יראי חטא שבאותו הדור הביאו גזיריהן ועשו סולמות והניחו על כתפיהם והלכו להם כיון שהגיעו אצלן אמרו להם להיכן אתם הולכין אמרו להם להביא גוזלות משובך שלפנינו ובסולמות שעל כתפינו כיון שעברו מהן פירקום והביאום והעלום לירושלים

What did the sin-fearing individuals of that generation do? They brought their pieces of wood and prepared ladders [sulamot], and they placed the ladders on their shoulders and went off to Jerusalem. When they reached the guards, the guards said to them: Where are you going? They said to them: We are going to bring down doves from the dovecote that is located down the road before us and with these ladders that are on our shoulders. As soon as they had passed the guards, they dismantled the ladders and took them up to Jerusalem. The name Salmai alludes to the Hebrew word for ladder, sulam.

ועליהם ועל כיוצא בהם הוא אומר זכר צדיק לברכה ועל ירבעם בן נבט וחבריו נאמר ושם רשעים ירקב

And about these families who provided these donations and others like them, the verse says: “The memory of the righteous shall be for a blessing” (Proverbs 10:7), as they are remembered for the good throughout the generations. And about Jeroboam, son of Nevat, and his ilk, it is stated: “But the name of the wicked shall rot” (Proverbs 10:7).

בעשרים בו בני פחת מואב בן יהודה תנא בני פחת מואב בן יהודה הן הן בני דוד בן יהודה דברי רבי מאיר רבי יוסי אומר הן הן בני יואב בן צרויה

§ The mishna taught: On the twentieth of Av, the wood offering was brought by the descendants of Pahath Moab ben Yehuda. A tanna taught: The descendants of Pahath Moab ben Yehuda are the descendants of David ben Yehuda. He is called Moab because Ruth the Moabite was the grandmother of David’s father, Yishai. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosei says: These are the descendants of Joab, son of Zeruiah, whose mother was the daughter of Yishai and therefore also descended from Ruth.

בעשרים באלול בני עדין בן יהודה וכו׳ תנו רבנן בני עדין בן יהודה הן הן בני דוד בן יהודה דברי רבי יהודה רבי יוסי אומר הן הן בני יואב בן צרויה

The mishna further taught: On the twentieth of Elul, the descendants of Adin ben Yehuda brought their wood offering. The Sages taught: The descendants of Adin ben Yehuda are the descendants of David ben Yehuda, who was called Adin. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yosei says: These are the descendants of Joab, son of Zeruiah.

באחד בטבת שבו בני פרעוש שניה כו׳ מני מתני לא רבי מאיר ולא רבי יהודה ולא רבי יוסי אי רבי מאיר ליתני שבו בני דוד בן יהודה שניה

The mishna taught: On the first of Tevet, the descendants of Parosh returned to bring wood for a second time. The Gemara asks: Who is the author of this opinion of the mishna? It is not the opinion of Rabbi Meir, nor that of Rabbi Yehuda, nor that of Rabbi Yosei. The Gemara elaborates: If it represents the opinion of Rabbi Meir, let him teach, with regard to the twentieth of Av, that the descendants of David ben Yehuda returned for a second time. According to Rabbi Meir, the descendants of Pahath Moab are the descendants of David, and consequently they would return for a second time on that date.

אי רבי יהודה ליתני שבו בני דוד בן יהודה שניה אי רבי יוסי ליתני שבו בני יואב בן צרויה שניה

The Gemara continues: If it represents the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, let him teach that the descendants of David ben Yehuda returned for a second time on a different date, the twentieth of Elul, as he contends that the descendants of Adin ben Yehuda are the descendants of David. And if the mishna represents the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, let him teach that the descendants of Joab, son of Zeruiah, returned for a second time, as he maintains that the descendants of Pahath Moab and the descendants of Adin ben Yehuda are both the descendants of Joab.

לעולם רבי יוסי ותרי תנאי אליבא דרבי יוסי

The Gemara answers: Actually, the mishna represents the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, and there are two tanna’im whose opinion is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei. One tanna maintains that only the descendants of Pahath Moab are the descendants of Joab, while the other claims that only the descendants of Adin ben Yehuda are the descendants of Joab. According to both opinions, neither group was repeated a second time, and therefore the mishna does not pose a difficulty to either of them.

באחד בטבת לא היה בו מעמד כו׳ אמר ליה מר קשישא בריה דרב חסדא לרב אשי

§ The mishna taught that on the first of Tevet there was no non-priestly watch at all, as there was an additional offering, hallel, and a wood offering. Mar Kashisha, son of Rav Ḥisda, said to Rav Ashi:

מאי שנא הלל דדחי דידיה ומאי שנא מוסף דלא דחי דידיה

What is different about hallel that it overrides its own watch, i.e., the watch in the morning service, when hallel is recited; and what is different about the additional offering, that it does not override its own watch, of the morning service, but it does override the watch of the afternoon service and the closing prayer?

אמר ליה רב אשי השתא דלאו דידיה דחי דידיה לא כל שכן אמר ליה הכי קאמינא לך לא לידחי אלא דידיה

Rav Ashi said to him: Now, as the additional offering overrides the watch of the afternoon service, which is not its own, is it not all the more so that it should take precedence over its own watch? Rav Ḥisda said to Rav Ashi: I meant the opposite, as this is what I am saying to you: It should not take precedence over another watch, that of the closing prayer; rather, let it override only its own watch, the one performed in the additional service.

אמר ליה איכא רבי יוסי דקאי כוותך דתניא רבי יוסי אומר כל יום שיש בו מוסף יש בו מעמד מעמד דמאי אילימא מעמד דשחרית הא תנא קמא נמי הכי קאמר אלא מעמד דמוסף דידיה נמי לא דחי

Rav Ashi said to him: There is Rabbi Yosei, who holds in accordance with your opinion, as it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei says: On any day on which there is an additional offering, there is a non-priestly watch. The Gemara clarifies: To which non-priestly watch is he referring? If we say that Rabbi Yosei means the non-priestly watch of the morning prayer, but the first tanna also said this. Rather, Rabbi Yosei must mean the non-priestly watch of the additional prayer. However, this too is problematic; is it possible that the additional offering does not override even its own watch, during the additional service itself?

אלא דמנחה קרבן עצים דחי אלא לאו דנעילה שמע מינה דידיה דחי דלאו דידיה לא דחי שמע מינה

Rather, Rabbi Yosei must be referring to the watch of the afternoon prayer. However, this is also puzzling, for if the wood offering overrides the watch of the afternoon service, the additional offering should certainly take precedence over it. Rather, is it not the case that Rabbi Yosei is speaking of the watch in the closing prayer? One can learn from this that the additional offering overrides its own watch, but it does not override a watch that is not its own. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, learn from this that this is the case.

וליתני נמי באחד בניסן לא היה בו מעמד מפני שיש בו הלל וקרבן מוסף וקרבן עצים אמר רבא זאת אומרת הלילא דבריש ירחא לאו דאורייתא

The Gemara asks: And let the mishna also teach: On the first of Nisan there was no non-priestly watch because it is a day on which hallel is recited, and it is the New Moon, on which an additional offering is sacrificed, and there was also a wood offering. Rava said: That is to say that the hallel recited on a New Moon is not required by Torah law but is a custom.

דאמר רבי יוחנן משום רבי שמעון בן יהוצדק שמונה עשר יום בשנה יחיד גומר בהן את הלל ואלו הן שמונת ימי החג ושמונת ימי חנוכה ויום טוב הראשון של פסח ויום טוב של עצרת ובגולה עשרים ואחד יום ואלו הן תשעת ימי החג ושמונת ימי חנוכה ושני ימים הראשונים של פסח ושני ימים טובים של עצרת

As Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: On eighteen days a year, the individual completes the full hallel. And they are: The eight days of the festival of Sukkot, including the Eighth Day of Assembly; the eight days of Hanukkah; the first Festival day of Passover; and the Festival day of Assembly, i.e., Shavuot. And in the Diaspora, where a second day is added to each Festival due to uncertainty over the correct date, there are twenty-one days, and they are: The nine days of the festival of Sukkot, including the last day, known as the Celebration of the Torah, the eight days of Hanukkah, the first two days of Passover, and the two Festival days of Assembly.

רב איקלע לבבל חזינהו דקא קרו הלילא בריש ירחא סבר לאפסוקינהו כיון דחזא דקא מדלגי דלוגי אמר שמע מינה מנהג אבותיהם בידיהם תנא יחיד לא יתחיל ואם התחיל גומר

On this topic, the Gemara relates: Rav happened to come to Babylonia, where he saw that they were reciting hallel on a New Moon. Unfamiliar with this practice, he thought to stop them, as he assumed that they were reciting hallel unnecessarily. Once he saw that they were omitting portions, he said: I can learn from this that they are maintaining the custom of their forefathers, i.e., they know that it is a custom, not an obligation. It is taught in a baraita: An individual should not begin reciting hallel on a New Moon, but if he has begun he should complete it.

חמשה דברים אירעו את אבותינו בשבעה עשר בתמוז וכו׳ נשתברו הלוחות מנלן דתניא בששה לחדש ניתנו עשרת הדברות לישראל רבי יוסי אומר בשבעה בו מאן דאמר בששה ניתנו בששה ניתנו ובשבעה עלה משה

§ The mishna taught: Five calamitous matters occurred to our forefathers on the seventeenth of Tammuz, one of which was that the tablets were broken. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive that the tablets were broken on this day? As it is taught in a baraita: On the sixth of the month of Sivan the Ten Commandments were given to the Jewish people. Rabbi Yosei says: It was on the seventh of that month. The Gemara comments: According to the one who said that they were given on the sixth of Sivan, they were given on the sixth, and on the seventh Moses ascended to Mount Sinai.

מאן דאמר בשבעה בשבעה ניתנו ובשבעה עלה משה דכתיב ויקרא אל משה ביום השביעי וכתיב ויבא משה בתוך הענן ויעל אל ההר ויהי משה בהר ארבעים יום וארבעים לילה עשרים וארבעה דסיון ושיתסר דתמוז מלו להו ארבעין

According to the one who said that the Ten Commandments were given on the seventh of Sivan, they were given on the seventh, and on the seventh Moses ascended to Mount Sinai, as it is written: “And He called to Moses on the seventh day out of the midst of the cloud” (Exodus 24:16), and it is written: “And Moses entered into the midst of the cloud, and he went up into the mount, and Moses was on the mount forty days and forty nights” (Exodus 24:18). The calculation is as follows: There were twenty-four days remaining in Sivan, plus the first sixteen days of Tammuz, which comes to forty days.

בשיבסר בתמוז נחית אתא ותברינהו ללוחות וכתיב ויהי כאשר קרב אל המחנה וירא את העגל וישלך מידיו את הלחות וישבר אתם תחת ההר

On the seventeenth of Tammuz, Moses descended, came, observed the people worshipping the Golden Calf, and broke the tablets. And it is written: “And it came to pass, as soon as he came near to the camp, that he saw the calf and the dancing, and Moses’ anger burned, and he cast the tablets out of his hands, and broke them beneath the mount” (Exodus 32:19). This shows that the tablets were shattered on the seventeenth of Tammuz.

בטל התמיד גמרא

§ The mishna taught that on the seventeenth of Tammuz the daily offering was nullified. The Gemara explains: It is a tradition that this occurred on that date.

הובקעה העיר בשבעה עשר והכתיב בחדש הרביעי בתשעה לחדש ויחזק הרעב בעיר וכתיב בתריה ותבקע העיר וגו׳

The mishna further taught that on the seventeenth of Tammuz the city walls of Jerusalem were breached. The Gemara asks: Was this tragedy something that occurred on the seventeenth of Tammuz? But isn’t it written: “In the fourth month, on ninth of the month, the famine was severe in the city” (Jeremiah 52:6), and it is written immediately afterward: “Then a breach was made in the city” (Jeremiah 52:7), which clearly indicates that the city was breached on the ninth.

אמר רבא לא קשיא כאן בראשונה כאן בשניה דתניא בראשונה הובקעה העיר בתשעה בתמוז בשניה בשבעה עשר בו

Rava said: This is not difficult, as here the verse is referring to the First Temple, whereas there, in the mishna, it describes the destruction of the Second Temple, as it is taught in a baraita: Upon the destruction of the First Temple, the city walls were breached on the ninth of Tammuz; and at the destruction of the Second Temple they were breached on the seventeenth of Tammuz.

שרף אפוסטמוס את התורה גמרא

The mishna further taught that on the seventeenth of Tammuz Apostemos publicly burned a Torah scroll. The Gemara explains: This, too, is a tradition.

העמיד צלם בהיכל מנלן דכתיב ומעת הוסר התמיד ולתת שקוץ שמם

The mishna also stated that on the seventeenth of Tammuz Manasseh placed an idol in the Sanctuary. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive that this occurred on the seventeenth of Tammuz? As it is written: “And from the time that the daily offering shall be taken away and the abomination that causes appallment is set up” (Daniel 12:11), which indicates that an idol was placed in the Temple on the very day that the daily offering was suspended.

וחד הוה והכתיב ועל כנף שקוצים משמם אמר רבא תרי הוו ונפל חד על חבריה ותבריה ליה לידיה ואשתכח דהוה כתיב

The Gemara asks: And was there only one idol placed there? But isn’t it written: “And upon the wing of detestable things shall be that which causes appallment” (Daniel 9:27)? The plural, “detestable things,” indicates the presence of at least two idols. Rava said: There were initially two idols, but one fell upon the other and broke its hand. Since only one idol was whole, the mishna mentions only that one. Rava continues: And an inscription was found on the broken idol that read: