Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Horayot 13
פַּר כֹּהֵן מָשׁוּחַ וּפַר עֵדָה כּוּ׳. מְנָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי? דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״וְשָׂרַף אוֹתוֹ כַּאֲשֶׁר שָׂרַף אֵת הַפָּר הָרִאשׁוֹן״, מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״הָרִאשׁוֹן״? שֶׁיְּהֵא רִאשׁוֹן, קוֹדֵם לְפַר הָעֵדָה בְּכׇל מַעֲשָׂיו.
§ The mishna teaches: If the bull of the anointed priest and the bull of the congregation, which are brought for absence of awareness of the matter, are pending, the bull of the anointed priest precedes the bull of the congregation in all its actions. The Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived? It is as the Sages taught: “And he shall burn it as he burned the first bull” (Leviticus 4:21). Why must the verse state “the first”? The verse could simply state that he shall burn it as he burned the bull. It is in order to establish that the first offering precedes the bull of the congregation in all its actions.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: פַּר כֹּהֵן מָשִׁיחַ וּפַר הָעֵדָה עוֹמְדִים – פַּר כֹּהֵן מָשִׁיחַ קוֹדֵם לְפַר הָעֵדָה בְּכׇל מַעֲשָׂיו. הוֹאִיל וּמָשִׁיחַ מְכַפֵּר, וְעֵדָה מִתְכַּפֶּרֶת – דִּין הוּא שֶׁיַּקְדִּים הַמְכַפֵּר לַמִּתְכַּפֵּר, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״וְכִפֶּר בַּעֲדוֹ וּבְעַד בֵּיתוֹ וּבְעַד כׇּל קְהַל יִשְׂרָאֵל״.
The Sages taught in a baraita: If the bull of the anointed priest and the bull of the congregation are pending, the bull of the anointed priest precedes the bull of the congregation in all its actions. Since the anointed priest atones for the entire Jewish people, and the congregation gains atonement, it is logical that the one who atones will precede the one who gains atonement. And so the verse states: “And he shall atone for himself, and for his household, and for all the congregation of Israel” (Leviticus 16:17).
פַּר הֶעְלֵם דָּבָר שֶׁל צִבּוּר קוֹדֵם לְפַר שֶׁל עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. מַאי טַעְמָא? הַאי חַטָּאת וְהַאי עוֹלָה, וְתַנְיָא: ״וְהִקְרִיב אֶת אֲשֶׁר לְחַטָּאת רִאשׁוֹנָה״, מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר? אִם לְלַמֵּד שֶׁתְּהֵא חַטָּאת רִאשׁוֹנָה, הֲרֵי כְּבָר נֶאֱמַר: ״וְאֶת הַשֵּׁנִי יַעֲשֶׂה עוֹלָה כַּמִּשְׁפָּט״! אֶלָּא זֶה בָּנָה אָב שֶׁיְּהוּ כׇּל חַטָּאוֹת קוֹדְמוֹת לְעוֹלוֹת הַבָּאִים עִמָּהֶם, וְקַיְימָא לַן דַּאֲפִילּוּ חַטַּאת הָעוֹף קוֹדֶמֶת לְעוֹלַת בְּהֵמָה.
The baraita continues: A bull for an unwitting communal sin precedes a bull for idol worship. What is the reason for this halakha? This, i.e., the bull for an unwitting communal sin, is a sin-offering, and that, i.e., the bull for idol worship, is a burnt-offering, and it is taught in a baraita: “And he shall sacrifice that which is for the sin-offering first” (Leviticus 5:8); why must the verse state this? If it is to teach that the sin–offering will be first, it is already stated: “And the second he shall prepare as a burnt-offering according to the ordinance” (Leviticus 5:10). Rather, this established a paradigm from which all similar cases may be derived, teaching that all sin-offerings precede the burnt-offerings that accompany them, and we maintain that even bird sin-offerings precede animal burnt-offerings.
פַּר עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה קוֹדֵם לִשְׂעִיר עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, אַמַּאי? הַאי חַטָּאת, וְהַאי עוֹלָה! אָמְרִי בְּמַעְרְבָא מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרָבָא בַּר מָרִי: חַטַּאת עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה חַסִּירָא אָלֶף, ״לְחַטָּת״ כְּתִיב. רָבָא אָמַר: ״כַּמִּשְׁפָּט״ כְּתִיב בֵּיהּ.
A bull for idol worship brought by the entire congregation precedes a goat for idol worship brought by the entire congregation. The Gemara asks: Why is this so; this, i.e., the goat is a sin-offering, and that, i.e., the bull is a burnt-offering? In the West, Eretz Yisrael, they say in the name of Rava bar Mari: In the verse: “If it is performed unwittingly by the congregation, being hidden from their eyes, the entire congregation shall bring one young bull for a burnt-offering, for a pleasing aroma to the Lord, with its meal-offering, and its libation, according to the ordinance, and one goat as a sin-offering [leḥattat]” (Numbers 15:24), the sin-offering for idol worship is lacking an alef, i.e., “leḥattat” is written without an alef. This indicates that not all the halakhot of sin-offerings apply to it. Rava said: “According to the ordinance” is written concerning it, indicating that the service must be performed in accordance with the order stated in the verse, i.e., the bull is sacrificed before the goat.
שְׂעִיר עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה קוֹדֵם לִשְׂעִיר נָשִׂיא. מַאי טַעְמָא? הַאי צִבּוּר וְהַאי יָחִיד, שְׂעִיר נָשִׂיא קוֹדֵם לִשְׂעִירַת יָחִיד. מַאי טַעְמָא? הַאי מֶלֶךְ וְהַאי הֶדְיוֹט.
The goat for idol worship of the congregation precedes the goat of the king. What is the reason for this? The reason is that this goat is brought by the general public and that goat is brought by an individual, and the communal precedes the individual even if that individual is the king. The male goat of the king precedes the female goat of the individual. What is the reason for this? This male goat is brought by a king, and that female goat is brought by a commoner.
שְׂעִירַת יָחִיד קוֹדֶמֶת לְכִבְשַׂת יָחִיד. וְהָא תַּנְיָא: כִּבְשַׂת יָחִיד קוֹדֶמֶת לִשְׂעִירַת יָחִיד! אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: תַּנָּאֵי הִיא, מָר סָבַר: שְׂעִירָה עֲדִיפָא, שֶׁכֵּן נִתְרַבְּתָה אֵצֶל עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה בְּיָחִיד. וּמָר סָבַר: כִּבְשָׂה עֲדִיפָא, שֶׁכֵּן נִתְרַבְּתָה בְּאַלְיָה.
The female goat of an individual brought as a standard sin-offering precedes the ewe of an individual brought as a standard sin-offering. The Gemara asks: But isn’t it taught in a baraita: The ewe of an individual precedes the female goat of an individual? Abaye said: It is a dispute between tanna’im. One Sage holds that a female goat is preferable and takes precedence, as it has an increased applicability in that it is brought for idol worship by an individual, in which case one must bring a female goat, not a female sheep. And one Sage holds that the ewe is preferable and takes precedence, as it has more sacrificial portions than a female goat, as its tail is also included, which indicates that it is a preferable offering.
עוֹמֶר קוֹדֵם לְכֶבֶשׂ הַבָּא עִמּוֹ, שְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם קוֹדְמִים לִכְבָשִׂים הַבָּאִים עִמָּהֶם. זֶה הַכְּלָל: דָּבָר הַבָּא בְּגִין (לַ)יוֹם קוֹדֵם לְדָבָר הַבָּא בְּגִין לֶחֶם.
The omer offering precedes the lamb that accompanies it; the two loaves, i.e., the public offering on Shavuot of two loaves of bread from the new wheat, precede the sheep that accompany them. This is the principle: A matter that comes due to a mitzva of the day precedes a matter that comes due to the bread. The omer and two loaves are meal-offerings brought due to the day. The accompanying sheep are brought due to the meal-offerings.
מַתְנִי׳ הָאִישׁ קוֹדֵם לָאִשָּׁה לְהַחֲיוֹת וּלְהָשֵׁב אֲבֵדָה. וְהָאִשָּׁה קוֹדֶמֶת לָאִישׁ לִכְסוּת וּלְהוֹצִיא מִבֵּית הַשְּׁבִי. בִּזְמַן שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶם עוֹמְדִים בְּקַלְקָלָה – הָאִישׁ קוֹדֵם לָאִשָּׁה.
MISHNA: The man precedes the woman when there is uncertainty with regard to which of them to rescue or to return a lost item to first. And the woman precedes the man with regard to which of them to provide with a garment first, because her humiliation is great, or to release from captivity first, due to the concern that she will be raped. When they are both subject to degradation, i.e., there is also concern that the man will be raped in captivity, the release of the man precedes the release of the woman.
גְּמָ׳ תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: הָיָה הוּא וְאָבִיו וְרַבּוֹ בַּשֶּׁבִי – הוּא קוֹדֵם לְרַבּוֹ, וְרַבּוֹ קוֹדֵם לְאָבִיו. אִמּוֹ קוֹדֶמֶת לְכוּלָּם.
GEMARA: Apropos precedence, the Sages taught in a baraita: If one and his father and his teacher were in captivity, his release precedes his teacher’s because one’s own life takes precedence, and his teacher’s release precedes his father’s release. His mother’s release precedes the release of all of them.
חָכָם קוֹדֵם לְמֶלֶךְ יִשְׂרָאֵל: חָכָם שֶׁמֵּת – אֵין לָנוּ כַּיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ. מֶלֶךְ יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁמֵּת – כׇּל יִשְׂרָאֵל רְאוּיִם לַמַּלְכוּת.
A Torah scholar precedes the king of Israel, because in the case of a Sage who dies, we have no one like him, but in the case of a king of Israel who dies, all of Israel are fit for royalty.
מֶלֶךְ קוֹדֵם לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיֹּאמֶר הַמֶּלֶךְ (אֲלֵיהֶם) [לָהֶם] קְחוּ עִמָּכֶם (אוֹ מֵעַבְדֵי) [אֶת עַבְדֵי] אֲדֹנֵיכֶם וְגוֹ׳״.
A king precedes a High Priest, as it is stated: “And the king said unto them: Take with you the servants of your lord” (I Kings 1:33). King David was referring to himself as lord when speaking to Zadok the priest.
כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל קוֹדֵם לְנָבִיא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וּמָשַׁח אֹתוֹ שָׁם צָדוֹק הַכֹּהֵן וְנָתָן הַנָּבִיא״. הִקְדִּים צָדוֹק לְנָתָן. וְאוֹמֵר: ״שְׁמַע נָא יְהוֹשֻׁעַ הַכֹּהֵן הַגָּדוֹל אַתָּה וְרֵעֶיךָ וְגוֹ׳״. יָכוֹל הֶדְיוֹטוֹת הָיוּ? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״כִּי אַנְשֵׁי מוֹפֵת הֵמָּה״, וְאֵין ״מוֹפֵת״ אֶלָּא נָבִיא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְנָתַן אֵלֶיךָ אוֹת אוֹ מוֹפֵת״.
A High Priest precedes a prophet, as it is stated: “And let Zadok the priest and Nathan the prophet anoint him there” (I Kings 1:34); Zadok is written before Natan. And similarly, the prophet says: “Hear now, Joshua the High Priest, you and your colleagues who sit before you, for they are men that are a sign; for behold, I will bring forth My servant Zemah” (Zechariah 3:8). One might have thought that these colleagues were laymen. Therefore, the verse states: “For they are men that are a sign,” and “sign” means nothing other than a prophet, as it is stated: “And he gives you a sign or a wonder” (Deuteronomy 13:2).
מָשׁוּחַ בְּשֶׁמֶן הַמִּשְׁחָה קוֹדֵם לִמְרוּבֵּה בְגָדִים. מְרוּבֵּה בְגָדִים קוֹדֵם לְמָשִׁיחַ שֶׁעָבַר מֵחֲמַת קִרְיוֹ. מָשִׁיחַ שֶׁעָבַר מֵחֲמַת קִרְיוֹ קוֹדֵם לְעָבַר מֵחֲמַת מוּמוֹ. עָבַר מֵחֲמַת מוּמוֹ קוֹדֵם לִמְשׁוּחַ מִלְחָמָה. מְשׁוּחַ מִלְחָמָה קוֹדֵם לִסְגָן.
A High Priest anointed with anointing oil precedes a priest consecrated by donning multiple garments. A High Priest consecrated by donning multiple garments precedes an anointed High Priest who stepped down, even if he did so due to his seminal emission. An anointed High Priest who stepped down due to his seminal emission precedes an anointed High Priest who stepped down due to his blemish. An anointed High Priest who stepped down due to his blemish precedes a priest anointed for war. A priest anointed for war precedes a deputy High Priest, who replaces the High Priest when he is unable to serve in the Temple.
סְגָן קוֹדֵם לַאֲמַרְכָּל. מַאי אֲמַרְכָּל? אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: אָמַר כּוֹלָּא. אֲמַרְכָּל קוֹדֵם לְגִזְבָּר, גִּזְבָּר קוֹדֵם לְרֹאשׁ מִשְׁמָר, רֹאשׁ מִשְׁמָר קוֹדֵם לְרֹאשׁ בֵּית אָב, רֹאשׁ בֵּית אָב קוֹדֵם לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט.
The baraita concludes: A deputy High Priest precedes the overseer [la’amarkal], one of the seven appointed officials in the Temple. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of amarkal? Rav Ḥisda said: Amarkal is a contraction for amar kulla, meaning: He says it all. The overseer of the Temple has the final word in matters concerning the administration of the Temple. The overseer precedes the Temple treasurer. The treasurer precedes the head of the priestly watch that would serve in the Temple for a period of one week at a time. The head of the priestly watch precedes the head of the patrilineal family. Each patrilineal family performed the Temple service for one day during the week of its priestly watch. The head of the patrilineal family precedes an ordinary priest.
אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: לְעִנְיַן טוּמְאָה, סְגָן וּמְשׁוּחַ מִלְחָמָה אֵיזֶה מֵהֶם קוֹדֵם?
A dilemma was raised before the Sages: With regard to the matter of ritual impurity, when there is a corpse with no one to bury it [met mitzva], which even a priest and a nazirite are commanded to bury, and the deputy High Priest and the priest anointed for war are available to bury it, which of them precedes the other and becomes impure?
אָמַר מָר זוּטְרָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן: תָּא שְׁמַע, דְּתַנְיָא: סְגָן וּמְשׁוּחַ מִלְחָמָה שֶׁהָיוּ מְהַלְּכִים בַּדֶּרֶךְ וּפָגַע בָּהֶם מֵת מִצְוָה, מוּטָב שֶׁיִּטַּמֵּא מְשׁוּחַ מִלְחָמָה וְאַל יִטַּמֵּא סְגָן, שֶׁאִם יֶאֱרַע בּוֹ פְּסוּל בְּכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל, נִכְנָס הַסְּגָן וּמְשַׁמֵּשׁ תַּחְתָּיו. וְהָתַנְיָא: מְשׁוּחַ מִלְחָמָה קוֹדֵם לַסְּגָן! אָמַר רָבִינָא, כִּי תַּנְיָא הָהִיא לְהַחְיוֹתוֹ.
Mar Zutra, son of Rav Naḥman, said: Come and hear a resolution, as it is taught in a baraita: In the case of a deputy High Priest and a priest anointed for war who were walking along the path and they encountered a met mitzva and one of them must bury him and become ritually impure, it is preferable that the priest anointed for war will become ritually impure and the deputy High Priest will not become ritually impure. The reason is that if disqualification befalls the High Priest, the deputy enters and performs the Temple service in his stead. Therefore, one must ensure to every possible extent that the deputy High Priest remain ritually pure. The Gemara asks: But isn’t it taught in a baraita: A priest anointed for war precedes a deputy High Priest? Ravina said: When that baraita is taught, it is not with regard to ritual impurity; rather, it is taught with regard to rescuing him, as the standing of the priest anointed for war is higher than that of the deputy High Priest.
מַתְנִי׳ כֹּהֵן קוֹדֵם לְלֵוִי, לֵוִי לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, יִשְׂרָאֵל לְמַמְזֵר, וּמַמְזֵר לְנָתִין, וְנָתִין לְגֵר, וְגֵר לְעֶבֶד מְשׁוּחְרָר. אֵימָתַי? בִּזְמַן שֶׁכּוּלָּם שָׁוִים. אֲבָל אִם הָיָה מַמְזֵר תַּלְמִיד חָכָם וְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל עַם הָאָרֶץ – מַמְזֵר תַּלְמִיד חָכָם קוֹדֵם לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל עַם הָאָרֶץ.
MISHNA: A priest precedes a Levite. A Levite precedes an Israelite. An Israelite precedes a son born from an incestuous or adulterous relationship [mamzer], and a mamzer precedes a Gibeonite, and a Gibeonite precedes a convert, and a convert precedes an emancipated slave. When do these halakhot of precedence take effect? In circumstances when they are all equal in terms of wisdom. But if there were a mamzer who is a Torah scholar and a High Priest who is an ignoramus, a mamzer who is a Torah scholar precedes a High Priest who is an ignoramus, as Torah wisdom surpasses all else.
גְּמָ׳ כֹּהֵן קוֹדֵם לְלֵוִי – שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״(וּבְנֵי) [בְּנֵי] עַמְרָם אַהֲרֹן וּמֹשֶׁה וַיִּבָּדֵל אַהֲרֹן (לְהַקְרִיב) [לְהַקְדִּישׁוֹ] קֹדֶשׁ (הַקֳּדָשִׁים) [קָדָשִׁים]״. לֵוִי קוֹדֵם לְיִשְׂרָאֵל – שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״בָּעֵת הַהִיא הִבְדִּיל ה׳ אֶת שֵׁבֶט הַלֵּוִי (מִתּוֹךְ) וְגוֹ׳״.
GEMARA: A priest precedes a Levite, as it is stated: “The sons of Amram: Aaron and Moses, and Aaron was separated that he should be sanctified as the most sacred” (I Chronicles 23:13). A Levite precedes an Israelite, as it is stated: “At that time the Lord separated the tribe of Levi, to bear the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord, to stand before the Lord to minister unto Him, and to bless in His name, unto this day” (Deuteronomy 10:8).
יִשְׂרָאֵל קוֹדֵם לְמַמְזֵר – שֶׁזֶּה מְיוּחָס, וְזֶה אֵינוֹ מְיוּחָס. מַמְזֵר קוֹדֵם לְנָתִין – זֶה בָּא מִטִּפָּה כְּשֵׁרָה, וְזֶה בָּא מִטִּפָּה פְּסוּלָה. נָתִין קוֹדֵם לְגֵר – זֶה גָּדַל עִמָּנוּ בִּקְדוּשָּׁה, וְזֶה לֹא גָּדַל עִמָּנוּ בִּקְדוּשָּׁה. גֵּר קוֹדֵם לְעֶבֶד מְשׁוּחְרָר – זֶה הָיָה בִּכְלַל אָרוּר, וְזֶה לֹא הָיָה בִּכְלַל אָרוּר.
An Israelite precedes a mamzer because this Israelite is of legitimate lineage and that mamzer is not of legitimate lineage and is disqualified from entering into the congregation of Israel. A mamzer precedes a Gibeonite because this mamzer comes from a fit drop of semen, i.e., from Jewish parentage, and that Gibeonite comes from an unfit drop of semen, from gentile parentage. A Gibeonite precedes a convert, as this Gibeonite grew among us in sanctity and conducted his life as a Jew, and that convert did not grow among us in sanctity. A convert precedes an emancipated Canaanite slave as this emancipated Canaanite slave was included in the category of the curse while he was enslaved, and that convert was not included in the category of the curse.
אֵימָתַי? בִּזְמַן שֶׁכּוּלָּן שָׁוִין כּוּ׳. מְנָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי? אָמַר רַב אַחָא בְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא, דְּאָמַר קְרָא: ״יְקָרָה הִיא מִפְּנִינִים״, מִכֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל שֶׁנִּכְנָס לִפְנַי וְלִפְנִים.
The mishna teaches: When do these halakhot of precedence take effect? In circumstances when they are all equal in terms of wisdom. The Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived? Rav Aḥa, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: This is derived from a verse, as the verse states: “She is more precious than rubies [mipeninim]” (Proverbs 3:15). The Torah is more precious than the High Priest who enters the innermost sanctum [lifnai velifnim], the Holy of Holies.
תַּנְיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר יוֹחַאי אוֹמֵר: בַּדִּין הוּא שֶׁיַּקְדִּים עֶבֶד מְשׁוּחְרָר לְגֵר, שֶׁזֶּה גָּדַל עִמָּנוּ בִּקְדוּשָּׁה, וְזֶה לֹא גָּדַל עִמָּנוּ בִּקְדוּשָּׁה. אֶלָּא זֶה הָיָה בִּכְלַל אָרוּר, וְזֶה לֹא הָיָה בִּכְלַל אָרוּר.
It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai says: By right, an emancipated Canaanite slave should have preceded a convert, because this emancipated Canaanite slave grew among us in sanctity, and that convert did not grow among us in sanctity. But the convert precedes the Canaanite slave because this Canaanite slave was in the category of the curse, and that convert was not in the category of the curse.
שָׁאֲלוּ תַּלְמִידָיו אֶת רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי צָדוֹק: מִפְּנֵי מָה הַכֹּל רָצִין לִישָּׂא גִּיּוֹרֶת, וְאֵין הַכֹּל רָצִין לִישָּׂא מְשׁוּחְרֶרֶת? אָמַר לָהֶם: זוֹ הָיְתָה בִּכְלַל אָרוּר, וְזוֹ לֹא הָיְתָה בִּכְלַל אָרוּר. דָּבָר אַחֵר: זוֹ הָיְתָה בְּחֶזְקַת שָׁמוּר, וְזוֹ לֹא הָיְתָה בְּחֶזְקַת שָׁמוּר.
The students of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, asked him: For what reason does everyone, i.e., do many people, run to marry a female convert, and not everyone runs to marry an emancipated Canaanite maidservant? He said to them: This Canaanite maidservant was in the category of the curse, and that convert was not in the category of the curse. Alternatively, the reason is that this convert has the presumptive status of chastity, and that Canaanite maidservant does not have the presumptive status of chastity.
שָׁאֲלוּ תַּלְמִידָיו אֶת רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: מִפְּנֵי מָה הַכֶּלֶב מַכִּיר אֶת קוֹנוֹ, וְחָתוּל אֵינוֹ מַכִּיר אֶת קוֹנוֹ? אָמַר לָהֶם: וּמָה הָאוֹכֵל מִמַּה שֶּׁעַכְבָּר אוֹכֵל – מְשַׁכֵּחַ, הָאוֹכֵל עַכְבָּר עַצְמוֹ – עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה.
The students of Rabbi Elazar asked him: For what reason does a dog recognize its master, while a cat does not recognize its master? Rabbi Elazar said to them: If it is established that with regard to one who eats from that which a mouse eats, eating that item causes him to forget, with regard to the cat, who eats the mouse itself, all the more so does eating it cause it to forget.
שָׁאֲלוּ תַּלְמִידָיו אֶת רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: מִפְּנֵי מָה הַכֹּל מוֹשְׁלִים בָּעַכְבָּרִים? מִפְּנֵי שֶׁסּוּרַן רַע. מַאי הִיא? רָבָא אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ גְּלִימֵי גָּיְיצִי.
The students of Rabbi Eliezer asked him: For what reason do all predators dominate mice and prey on them? He said to them: Because concerning mice, their inclination [shesuran] is evil. The Gemara asks: What is the indication of this? Rava said: They gnaw even at cloaks, despite the fact that cloaks do not provide nourishment for them.
רַב פָּפָּא אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ שׁוּפְתָּא [דְּ]מָרָא גָּיְיצִי.
Rav Pappa said: They gnaw even on the handle of a hoe.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן. חֲמִשָּׁה דְּבָרִים מְשַׁכְּחִים אֶת הַתַּלְמוּד: הָאוֹכֵל מִמַּה שֶּׁאוֹכֵל עַכְבָּר וּמִמַּה שֶּׁאוֹכֵל חָתוּל, וְהָאוֹכֵל לֵב שֶׁל בְּהֵמָה, וְהָרָגִיל בְּזֵיתִים, וְהַשּׁוֹתֶה מַיִם שֶׁל שִׁיּוּרֵי רְחִיצָה, וְהָרוֹחֵץ רַגְלָיו זוֹ עַל גַּבֵּי זוֹ. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים: אַף הַמַּנִּיחַ כֵּלָיו תַּחַת מְרַאֲשׁוֹתָיו. חֲמִשָּׁה דְּבָרִים מְשִׁיבִים אֶת הַתַּלְמוּד: פַּת פֶּחָמִין וְכׇל שֶׁכֵּן פֶּחָמִין עַצְמָן, וְהָאוֹכֵל בֵּיצָה מְגוּלְגֶּלֶת בְּלֹא מֶלַח, וְהָרָגִיל בְּשֶׁמֶן זַיִת, וְהָרָגִיל בְּיַיִן וּבְשָׂמִים, וְהַשּׁוֹתֶה מַיִם שֶׁל שִׁיּוּרֵי עִיסָּה. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים: אַף הַטּוֹבֵל אֶצְבָּעוֹ בְּמֶלַח וְאוֹכֵל.
§ The Sages taught in a baraita: There are five factors that cause one to forget his Torah study: One who eats from that which a mouse eats and from that which a cat eats, and one who eats the heart of an animal, and one who is accustomed to eating olives, and one who drinks water that remains from washing, and one who washes his feet with this foot atop that foot. And some say: Also one who places his garments under his head. Correspondingly, there are five factors that restore forgotten Torah study: Eating bread baked on coals and all the more so one who warms himself with the heat of the coals themselves, and one who eats a hard-boiled egg [beitza megulgelet] without salt, and one who is accustomed to eating olive oil, and one who is accustomed to drinking wine and smelling spices, and one who drinks water that remains from kneading dough. And some say: Also one who dips his finger in salt and eats it.
״הָרָגִיל בְּשֶׁמֶן זַיִת״. מְסַיַּיע לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהַזַּיִת מְשַׁכֵּחַ תַּלְמוּד שֶׁל שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה, כָּךְ שֶׁמֶן זַיִת מֵשִׁיב תַּלְמוּד שֶׁל שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה.
The Gemara elaborates on the baraita: One who is accustomed to eating olive oil restores forgotten Torah study. The Gemara notes: This supports the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan, as Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Just as eating an olive causes one to forget seventy years’ worth of Torah study, olive oil restores seventy years’ worth of Torah study.
״וְהָרָגִיל בְּיַיִן וּבְשָׂמִים״. מְסַיַּיע לֵיהּ לְרָבָא, דְּאָמַר רָבָא: חַמְרָא וְרֵיחָנֵי פַּקַּחִין.
The baraita continues: And one who is accustomed to drinking wine and smelling spices restores forgotten Torah study. The Gemara notes: This supports the opinion of Rava, as Rava said: Wine and spices rendered me wise.
״וְהַטּוֹבֵל אֶצְבָּעוֹ בְּמֶלַח״, אָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: וּבְאַחַת. כְּתַנָּאֵי, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אַחַת וְלֹא שְׁתַּיִם, רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: שְׁתַּיִם וְלֹא שָׁלֹשׁ. וְסִימָנָיךְ: קְמִיצָה.
The baraita continues: One who dips his finger in salt and eats it restores forgotten Torah study. Reish Lakish says: And that is the case with regard to one finger. The Gemara notes: This is parallel to a dispute between tanna’im. Rabbi Yehuda says: One finger but not two. Rabbi Yosei says: Two fingers but not three. And your mnemonic for the fact that the dispute is between one and two fingers is kemitza, i.e., the ring finger. When one presses his ring finger to his palm, there remain two straight fingers on one side and one on the other.
עֲשָׂרָה דְּבָרִים קָשִׁים לַתַּלְמוּד: הָעוֹבֵר תַּחַת הָאַפְסָר [הַגָּמָל] וְכׇל שֶׁכֵּן תַּחַת גָּמָל [עַצְמוֹ], וְהָעוֹבֵר בֵּין שְׁנֵי גְּמַלִּים, וְהָעוֹבֵר בֵּין שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים, וְהָאִשָּׁה הָעוֹבֶרֶת בֵּין שְׁנֵי אֲנָשִׁים, וְהָעוֹבֵר מִתַּחַת רֵיחַ רַע שֶׁל נְבֵילָה, וְהָעוֹבֵר תַּחַת הַגֶּשֶׁר שֶׁלֹּא עָבְרוּ תַּחְתָּיו מַיִם אַרְבָּעִים יוֹם, וְהָאוֹכֵל פַּת שֶׁלֹּא בָּשַׁל כׇּל צָרְכּוֹ, וְהָאוֹכֵל בָּשָׂר מִזּוּהֲמָא לִיסְטְרוֹן, וְהַשּׁוֹתֶה מֵאַמַּת הַמַּיִם הָעוֹבֶרֶת בְּבֵית הַקְּבָרוֹת, וְהַמִּסְתַּכֵּל בִּפְנֵי הַמֵּת. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים: אַף הַקּוֹרֵא כְּתָב שֶׁעַל גַּבֵּי הַקֶּבֶר.
Ten factors are detrimental for Torah study: One who passes beneath the bit of the camel, and all the more so one who passes beneath a camel itself; and one who passes between two camels; and one who passes between two women; and a woman who passes between two men; and one who passes beneath a place where there is the foul odor of an animal carcass; and one who passes under a bridge beneath which water has not passed for forty days; and one who eats bread that was not sufficiently baked; and one who eats meat from zuhama listeron, a utensil consisting of a spoon and a fork, used to remove the film on the surface of soup; and one who drinks from an aqueduct that passes through a cemetery; and one who gazes at the face of the dead. And some say: Also one who reads the writing that is on the stone of a grave.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: כְּשֶׁהַנָּשִׂיא נִכְנָס, כׇּל הָעָם עוֹמְדִים, וְאֵין יוֹשְׁבִים עַד שֶׁאוֹמֵר לָהֶם: שֵׁבוּ. כְּשֶׁאַב בֵּית דִּין נִכְנָס, עוֹשִׂים לוֹ שׁוּרָה אַחַת מִכָּאן וְשׁוּרָה אַחַת מִכָּאן, עַד שֶׁיֵּשֵׁב בִּמְקוֹמוֹ. כְּשֶׁחָכָם נִכְנָס, אֶחָד עוֹמֵד וְאֶחָד יוֹשֵׁב, עַד שֶׁיֵּשֵׁב בִּמְקוֹמוֹ. בְּנֵי חֲכָמִים וְתַלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים, בִּזְמַן שֶׁרַבִּים צְרִיכִים לָהֶם – מַפְסִיעִין עַל רָאשֵׁי הָעָם. יָצָא לְצוֹרֶךְ – יִכָּנֵס וְיֵשֵׁב בִּמְקוֹמוֹ.
§ The Sages taught in a baraita: When the Nasi of the Sanhedrin enters, all the people stand and they do not sit until he says to them: Sit. When the deputy Nasi of the Sanhedrin enters, the people form for him one row from here, on this side of the path that he takes, and one row from there, on the other side of it, in a display of deference, until he sits in his place, and then they may be seated. When the Ḥakham, who is ranked third among the members of the Sanhedrin, enters, one person stands when he is within four cubits of the Ḥakham, and another sits, i.e., when one is no longer within four cubits of the Ḥakham he may sit. And all those whom the Ḥakham passes do this, until he sits in his place. When the multitudes require their services, i.e., they serve a public role, sons of the Sages and Torah scholars may step over the heads of the people seated on the ground in order to reach their places in the Sanhedrin. If one of the Sages left for the purpose of relieving himself, when he is finished he may enter and sit in his place in the Sanhedrin, and he need not be concerned that he is imposing upon those assembled.
בְּנֵי תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים שֶׁמְּמוּנִּים אֲבִיהֶם פַּרְנָס עַל הַצִּבּוּר, בִּזְמַן שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם דַּעַת לִשְׁמוֹעַ – נִכְנָסִים וְיוֹשְׁבִים לִפְנֵי אֲבִיהֶם וַאֲחוֹרֵיהֶם כְּלַפֵּי הָעָם. בִּזְמַן שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם דַּעַת לִשְׁמוֹעַ – נִכְנָסִים וְיוֹשְׁבִים לִפְנֵי אֲבִיהֶם וּפְנֵיהֶם כְּלַפֵּי הַעָם. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בַּר רַבִּי [צָדוֹק] אוֹמֵר: אַף בְּבֵית הַמִּשְׁתֶּה עוֹשִׂים אוֹתָם סְנִיפִין.
When they have the wisdom to hear and to study, the sons of Torah scholars, whose fathers are appointed as leaders of the congregation, enter and sit before their fathers, and their backs are directed toward the people. When they do not have the wisdom to hear and to study they enter and sit before their fathers, and their faces are directed toward the people, so everyone sees that they are seated there in deference to their fathers but not as students. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says: Even at a wedding party one renders them attachments [senifin] and seats them adjacent to their fathers.
[אָמַר מָר] יָצָא לְצוֹרֶךְ – נִכְנָס וְיוֹשֵׁב בִּמְקוֹמוֹ. אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: לֹא אָמְרוּ אֶלָּא לִקְטַנִּים, אֲבָל לִגְדוֹלִים – לָא, הֲוָה לֵיהּ לְמִבְדַּק נַפְשֵׁיהּ מֵעִיקָּרָא. דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: לְעוֹלָם יְלַמֵּד אָדָם עַצְמוֹ לְהַשְׁכִּים וּלְהַעֲרִיב, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִתְרַחֵק. אָמַר רָבָא: הָאִידָּנָא דַּחֲלַשׁא עָלְמָא – אֲפִילּוּ לִגְדוֹלִים נָמֵי.
The Master said: If one of the Sages left for the purpose of relieving himself, when he is finished he may enter and sit in his place. Rav Pappa said: The Sages said this only with regard to one who leaves for minor bodily functions, i.e., to urinate. But with regard to one who leaves for major bodily functions, i.e., to defecate, no, he may not return to his place, because he should have examined himself initially so that he would not need to leave. His failure to do so constitutes negligence and he may not impose upon others when he returns, as Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: A person should always accustom himself to relieving himself in the morning and in the evening so that he will not need to distance himself during the daylight hours to find an appropriate place. Rava said: Today, when the world is weak and people are not as healthy as they once were, one may even return after he leaves for major bodily functions.
רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בַּר רַבִּי [צָדוֹק] אוֹמֵר: אַף בְּבֵית הַמִּשְׁתֶּה עוֹשִׂים אוֹתָם סְנִיפִים. אָמַר רָבָא: בְּחַיֵּי אֲבִיהֶם בִּפְנֵי אֲבִיהֶם.
Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says: Even at a wedding party one renders them attachments. Rava said: This applies during the lifetime of their fathers and in the presence of their fathers.
אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: בִּימֵי רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל נִישְׁנֵית מִשְׁנָה זוֹ. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל נָשִׂיא, רַבִּי מֵאִיר חָכָם, רַבִּי נָתָן אַב בֵּית דִּין. כִּי הֲוָה רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הָתָם, הֲווֹ קָיְימִי כּוּלֵּי עָלְמָא מִקַּמֵּיהּ. כִּי הֲווֹ עָיְילִי רַבִּי מֵאִיר וְרַבִּי נָתָן, הֲווֹ קָיְימִי כּוּלֵּי עָלְמָא מִקַּמַּיְיהוּ. אָמַר רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: לָא בָּעוּ לְמִיהְוֵי הֶיכֵּרָא בֵּין דִּילִי לְדִידְהוּ? תַּקֵּין הָא מַתְנִיתָא.
§ Rabbi Yoḥanan says: This mishna, i.e., the preceding baraita, was taught during the days of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel was the Nasi, Rabbi Meir was the Ḥakham, and Rabbi Natan was the deputy Nasi. When Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel was there, everyone would arise before him. When Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan would enter, everyone would arise before them. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: Shouldn’t there be a conspicuous distinction between me and them in terms of the manner in which deference is shown? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel instituted the provisions delineated in this baraita that distinguish between the Nasi and his subordinates with regard to the deference shown them.
הָהוּא יוֹמָא לָא הֲווֹ רַבִּי מֵאִיר וְרַבִּי נָתָן הָתָם, לִמְחַר כִּי אֲתוֹ חֲזוֹ דְּלָא קָמוּ מִקַּמַּיְיהוּ כְּדִרְגִילָא מִילְּתָא, אָמְרִי: מַאי הַאי? אֲמַרוּ לְהוּ: הָכִי תַּקֵּין רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל.
That day, when Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel instituted these provisions, Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan were not there. The following day when they came to the study hall, they saw that the people did not stand before them as the matter was typically done. They said: What is this? The people said to them: This is what Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel instituted.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי מֵאִיר לְרַבִּי נָתָן: אֲנָא חָכָם וְאַתְּ אַב בֵּית דִּין, נְתַקֵּין מִילְּתָא כִּי לְדִידַן. מַאי נַעֲבֵיד לֵיהּ? נֵימָא לֵיהּ: גַּלִּי עוּקְצִים, דְּלֵית לֵיהּ. וְכֵיוָן דְּלָא גְּמִר, נֵימָא לֵיהּ: ״מִי יְמַלֵּל גְּבוּרוֹת ה׳ יַשְׁמִיעַ כׇּל תְּהִלָּתוֹ״, לְמִי נָאֶה לְמַלֵּל גְּבוּרוֹת ה׳ – מִי שֶׁיָּכוֹל לְהַשְׁמִיעַ כׇּל תְּהִלּוֹתָיו. נְעַבְּרֵיהּ, וְהָוֵי אֲנָא אַב בֵּית דִּין וְאַתְּ נָשִׂיא.
Rabbi Meir said to Rabbi Natan: I am the Ḥakham and you are the deputy Nasi. Let us devise a matter and do to him as he did to us. What shall we do to him? Let us say to him: Reveal to us tractate Okatzim, which he does not know. And once it is clear to all that he did not learn, he will not have anything to say. Then we will say to him: “Who can express the mighty acts of the Lord, shall make all His praises heard?” (Psalms 106:2), indicating: For whom is it becoming to express the mighty acts of the Lord? It is becoming for one who is capable of making all His praises heard, and not for one who does not know one of the tractates. We will remove him from his position as Nasi, and I will be deputy Nasi and you will be Nasi.
שַׁמְעִינְהוּ רַבִּי יַעֲקֹב בֶּן קֻדְשַׁי, אֲמַר: דִּלְמָא חַס וְשָׁלוֹם אָתְיָא מִלְּתָא לִידֵי כִּיסּוּפָא, אֲזַל יְתֵיב אֲחוֹרֵי עִילִּיתֵיהּ דְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, פְּשַׁט, גְּרַס וּתְנָא, גְּרַס וּתְנָא.
Rabbi Ya’akov ben Korshei heard them talking, and said: Perhaps, Heaven forfend, this matter will come to a situation of humiliation for Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. He did not wish to speak criticism or gossip about Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan, so he went and sat behind the upper story where Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel lived. He explained tractate Okatzin; he studied it aloud and repeated it, and studied it aloud and repeated it.
אָמַר: מַאי דְּקַמָּא? דִּלְמָא חַס וְשָׁלוֹם אִיכָּא בֵּי מִדְרְשָׁא מִידֵּי, יְהַב דַּעְתֵּיהּ וְגַרְסַהּ. לִמְחַר אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: נֵיתֵי מָר וְנִיתְנֵי בְּעוּקְצִין, פְּתַח וַאֲמַר. בָּתַר דְּאוֹקֵים, אֲמַר לְהוּ: אִי לָא גְּמִירְנָא, כַּסֵּיפְיתֻּנַן.
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said to himself: What is this that is transpiring before us? Perhaps, Heaven forfend, there is something transpiring in the study hall. He suspected that Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan were planning something. He concentrated and studied tractate Okatzin. The following day Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan said to him: Let the Master come and teach a lesson in tractate Okatzin. He began and stated the lesson he had prepared. After he completed teaching the tractate, he said to them: If I had not studied the tractate, you would have humiliated me.
פַּקֵּיד וְאַפְּקִינְהוּ מִבֵּי מִדְרְשָׁא. הֲווֹ כָּתְבִי קוּשְׁיָיתָא [בְּפִתְקָא] וְשָׁדוּ הָתָם. דַּהֲוָה מִיפְּרִיק – מִיפְּרִיק, דְּלָא הֲווֹ מִיפְּרִיק – כָּתְבִי פֵּירוּקֵי וְשָׁדוּ. אֲמַר לְהוּ רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: תּוֹרָה מִבַּחוּץ וְאָנוּ מִבִּפְנִים?
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel commanded those present and they expelled Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan from the study hall as punishment. Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan would write difficulties on a scrap of paper [pitka] and would throw them there into the study hall. Those difficulties that were resolved were resolved; as for those that were not resolved, Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan wrote resolutions on a scrap of paper and threw them into the study hall. Rabbi Yosei said to the Sages: How is it that the Torah, embodied in the preeminent Torah scholars, is outside and we are inside?
אָמַר לָהֶן רַבָּן [שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן] גַּמְלִיאֵל: נִיעַיְּילִינְהוּ, מִיהוּ נִיקְנְסִינְהוּ דְּלָא נֵימְרוּ שְׁמַעְתָּא מִשְּׁמַיְיהוּ. אַסִּיקוּ לְרַבִּי מֵאִיר אֲחֵרִים, וּלְרַבִּי נָתָן יֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים. אַחְווֹ לְהוּ בְּחֶלְמַיְיהוּ: זִילוּ פַּיְּיסוּהוּ [לְרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל], רַבִּי נָתָן אֲזַל, רַבִּי מֵאִיר לָא אֲזַל, אֲמַר: דִּבְרֵי חֲלוֹמוֹת לֹא מַעֲלִין וְלֹא מוֹרִידִין. כִּי אֲזַל רַבִּי נָתָן, אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: נְהִי דְּאַהֲנִי לָךְ קַמְרָא דַּאֲבוּךְ לְמֶהֱוֵי אַב בֵּית דִּין, שַׁוִּינָיךְ נָמֵי נָשִׂיא?!
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said to them: Let us admit them into the study hall. But we will penalize them in that we will not cite halakha in their names. They cited statements of Rabbi Meir in the name of Aḥerim, meaning: Others, and they cited statements of Rabbi Natan in the name of yesh omerim, meaning: Some say. Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan were shown a message in their dreams: Go, appease Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. Rabbi Natan went. Rabbi Meir did not go. He said in his heart: Matters of dreams are insignificant. When Rabbi Natan went, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said to him: Although the ornate belt, i.e., the importance, of your father was effective in enabling you to become deputy Nasi, as Rabbi Natan’s father was the Babylonian Exilarch, will it render you Nasi as well?
מַתְנֵי לֵיהּ רַבִּי לְרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בְּרֵיהּ, אֲחֵרִים אוֹמְרִים: אִילּוּ הָיָה תְּמוּרָה
Years later, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi taught Rabban Shimon his son that Aḥerim say: If it was considered a substitute,
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 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!
Zichron Yaakov, Israel
I started learning Daf in Jan 2020 with Brachot b/c I had never seen the Jewish people united around something so positive, and I wanted to be a part of it. Also, I wanted to broaden my background in Torah Shebal Peh- Maayanot gave me a great gemara education, but I knew that I could hold a conversation in most parts of tanach but almost no TSB. I’m so thankful for Daf and have gained immensely.
NJ, United States
Margo
I started my Talmud journey in 7th grade at Akiba Jewish Day School in Chicago. I started my Daf Yomi journey after hearing Erica Brown speak at the Hadran Siyum about marking the passage of time through Daf Yomi.
Carolyn
I started my Talmud journey post-college in NY with a few classes. I started my Daf Yomi journey after the Hadran Siyum, which inspired both my son and myself.
Merion Station, USA
Beit Shemesh, Israel
Hearing and reading about the siyumim at the completion of the 13 th cycle Daf Yomi asked our shul rabbi about starting the Daf – he directed me to another shiur in town he thought would allow a woman to join, and so I did! Love seeing the sources for the Divrei Torah I’ve been hearing for the past decades of living an observant life and raising 5 children .
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States
After all the hype on the 2020 siyum I became inspired by a friend to begin learning as the new cycle began.with no background in studying Talmud it was a bit daunting in the beginning. my husband began at the same time so we decided to study on shabbat together. The reaction from my 3 daughters has been fantastic. They are very proud. It’s been a great challenge for my brain which is so healthy!
Modi’in, 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.
Virginia, United States
I started at the beginning of this cycle. No 1 reason, but here’s 5.
In 2019 I read about the upcoming siyum hashas.
There was a sermon at shul about how anyone can learn Talmud.
Talmud references come up when I am studying. I wanted to know more.
Yentl was on telly. Not a great movie but it’s about studying Talmud.
I went to the Hadran website: A new cycle is starting. I’m gonna do this
Cambridge, United Kingdom
In July, 2012 I wrote for Tablet about the first all women’s siyum at Matan in Jerusalem, with 100 women. At the time, I thought, I would like to start with the next cycle – listening to a podcast at different times of day makes it possible. It is incredible that after 10 years, so many women are so engaged!
Pittsburgh, United States
I started learning at the start of this cycle, and quickly fell in love. It has become such an important part of my day, enriching every part of my life.
Toronto, Canada
It happened without intent (so am I yotzei?!) – I watched the women’s siyum live and was so moved by it that the next morning, I tuned in to Rabbanit Michelle’s shiur, and here I am, still learning every day, over 2 years later. Some days it all goes over my head, but others I grasp onto an idea or a story, and I ‘get it’ and that’s the best feeling in the world. So proud to be a Hadran learner.
Zichron Yaakov, Israel
A few years back, after reading Ilana Kurshan’s book, “If All The Seas Were Ink,” I began pondering the crazy, outlandish idea of beginning the Daf Yomi cycle. Beginning in December, 2019, a month before the previous cycle ended, I “auditioned” 30 different podcasts in 30 days, and ultimately chose to take the plunge with Hadran and Rabbanit Michelle. Such joy!
HUNTINGTON, United States
Margo
I started my Talmud journey in 7th grade at Akiba Jewish Day School in Chicago. I started my Daf Yomi journey after hearing Erica Brown speak at the Hadran Siyum about marking the passage of time through Daf Yomi.
Carolyn
I started my Talmud journey post-college in NY with a few classes. I started my Daf Yomi journey after the Hadran Siyum, which inspired both my son and myself.
Merion Station, USA
Beit Shemesh, Israel
With Rabbanit Dr. Naomi Cohen in the Women’s Talmud class, over 30 years ago. It was a “known” class and it was accepted, because of who taught. Since then I have also studied with Avigail Gross-Gelman and Dr. Gabriel Hazut for about a year). Years ago, in a shiur in my shul, I did know about Persians doing 3 things with their clothes on. They opened the shiur to woman after that!
Haifa, Israel
A Gemara shiur previous to the Hadran Siyum, was the impetus to attend it.It was highly inspirational and I was smitten. The message for me was התלמוד בידינו. I had decided along with my Chahsmonaim group to to do the daf and take it one daf at time- without any expectations at all. There has been a wealth of information, insights and halachik ideas. It is truly exercise of the mind, heart & Soul
Hashmonaim, Israel
I had no formal learning in Talmud until I began my studies in the Joint Program where in 1976 I was one of the few, if not the only, woman talmud major. It was superior training for law school and enabled me to approach my legal studies with a foundation . In 2018, I began daf yomi listening to Rabbanit MIchelle’s pod cast and my daily talmud studies are one of the highlights of my life.
Minneapolis, United States
In January 2020, my chevruta suggested that we “up our game. Let’s do Daf Yomi” – and she sent me the Hadran link. I lost my job (and went freelance), there was a pandemic, and I am still opening the podcast with my breakfast coffee, or after Shabbat with popcorn. My Aramaic is improving. I will need a new bookcase, though.
Atlanta, Georgia, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
When I started studying Hebrew at Brown University’s Hillel, I had no idea that almost 38 years later, I’m doing Daf Yomi. My Shabbat haburah is led by Rabbanit Leah Sarna. The women are a hoot. I’m tracking the completion of each tractate by reading Ilana Kurshan’s memoir, If All the Seas Were Ink.
Pennsylvania, United States
Mamaroneck, NY, United States
In early 2020, I began the process of a stem cell transplant. The required extreme isolation forced me to leave work and normal life but gave me time to delve into Jewish text study. I did not feel isolated. I began Daf Yomi at the start of this cycle, with family members joining me online from my hospital room. I’ve used my newly granted time to to engage, grow and connect through this learning.
Worcester, United States
Horayot 13
פַּר כֹּהֵן מָשׁוּחַ וּפַר עֵדָה כּוּ׳. מְנָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי? דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״וְשָׂרַף אוֹתוֹ כַּאֲשֶׁר שָׂרַף אֵת הַפָּר הָרִאשׁוֹן״, מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״הָרִאשׁוֹן״? שֶׁיְּהֵא רִאשׁוֹן, קוֹדֵם לְפַר הָעֵדָה בְּכׇל מַעֲשָׂיו.
§ The mishna teaches: If the bull of the anointed priest and the bull of the congregation, which are brought for absence of awareness of the matter, are pending, the bull of the anointed priest precedes the bull of the congregation in all its actions. The Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived? It is as the Sages taught: “And he shall burn it as he burned the first bull” (Leviticus 4:21). Why must the verse state “the first”? The verse could simply state that he shall burn it as he burned the bull. It is in order to establish that the first offering precedes the bull of the congregation in all its actions.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: פַּר כֹּהֵן מָשִׁיחַ וּפַר הָעֵדָה עוֹמְדִים – פַּר כֹּהֵן מָשִׁיחַ קוֹדֵם לְפַר הָעֵדָה בְּכׇל מַעֲשָׂיו. הוֹאִיל וּמָשִׁיחַ מְכַפֵּר, וְעֵדָה מִתְכַּפֶּרֶת – דִּין הוּא שֶׁיַּקְדִּים הַמְכַפֵּר לַמִּתְכַּפֵּר, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״וְכִפֶּר בַּעֲדוֹ וּבְעַד בֵּיתוֹ וּבְעַד כׇּל קְהַל יִשְׂרָאֵל״.
The Sages taught in a baraita: If the bull of the anointed priest and the bull of the congregation are pending, the bull of the anointed priest precedes the bull of the congregation in all its actions. Since the anointed priest atones for the entire Jewish people, and the congregation gains atonement, it is logical that the one who atones will precede the one who gains atonement. And so the verse states: “And he shall atone for himself, and for his household, and for all the congregation of Israel” (Leviticus 16:17).
פַּר הֶעְלֵם דָּבָר שֶׁל צִבּוּר קוֹדֵם לְפַר שֶׁל עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. מַאי טַעְמָא? הַאי חַטָּאת וְהַאי עוֹלָה, וְתַנְיָא: ״וְהִקְרִיב אֶת אֲשֶׁר לְחַטָּאת רִאשׁוֹנָה״, מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר? אִם לְלַמֵּד שֶׁתְּהֵא חַטָּאת רִאשׁוֹנָה, הֲרֵי כְּבָר נֶאֱמַר: ״וְאֶת הַשֵּׁנִי יַעֲשֶׂה עוֹלָה כַּמִּשְׁפָּט״! אֶלָּא זֶה בָּנָה אָב שֶׁיְּהוּ כׇּל חַטָּאוֹת קוֹדְמוֹת לְעוֹלוֹת הַבָּאִים עִמָּהֶם, וְקַיְימָא לַן דַּאֲפִילּוּ חַטַּאת הָעוֹף קוֹדֶמֶת לְעוֹלַת בְּהֵמָה.
The baraita continues: A bull for an unwitting communal sin precedes a bull for idol worship. What is the reason for this halakha? This, i.e., the bull for an unwitting communal sin, is a sin-offering, and that, i.e., the bull for idol worship, is a burnt-offering, and it is taught in a baraita: “And he shall sacrifice that which is for the sin-offering first” (Leviticus 5:8); why must the verse state this? If it is to teach that the sin–offering will be first, it is already stated: “And the second he shall prepare as a burnt-offering according to the ordinance” (Leviticus 5:10). Rather, this established a paradigm from which all similar cases may be derived, teaching that all sin-offerings precede the burnt-offerings that accompany them, and we maintain that even bird sin-offerings precede animal burnt-offerings.
פַּר עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה קוֹדֵם לִשְׂעִיר עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, אַמַּאי? הַאי חַטָּאת, וְהַאי עוֹלָה! אָמְרִי בְּמַעְרְבָא מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרָבָא בַּר מָרִי: חַטַּאת עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה חַסִּירָא אָלֶף, ״לְחַטָּת״ כְּתִיב. רָבָא אָמַר: ״כַּמִּשְׁפָּט״ כְּתִיב בֵּיהּ.
A bull for idol worship brought by the entire congregation precedes a goat for idol worship brought by the entire congregation. The Gemara asks: Why is this so; this, i.e., the goat is a sin-offering, and that, i.e., the bull is a burnt-offering? In the West, Eretz Yisrael, they say in the name of Rava bar Mari: In the verse: “If it is performed unwittingly by the congregation, being hidden from their eyes, the entire congregation shall bring one young bull for a burnt-offering, for a pleasing aroma to the Lord, with its meal-offering, and its libation, according to the ordinance, and one goat as a sin-offering [leḥattat]” (Numbers 15:24), the sin-offering for idol worship is lacking an alef, i.e., “leḥattat” is written without an alef. This indicates that not all the halakhot of sin-offerings apply to it. Rava said: “According to the ordinance” is written concerning it, indicating that the service must be performed in accordance with the order stated in the verse, i.e., the bull is sacrificed before the goat.
שְׂעִיר עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה קוֹדֵם לִשְׂעִיר נָשִׂיא. מַאי טַעְמָא? הַאי צִבּוּר וְהַאי יָחִיד, שְׂעִיר נָשִׂיא קוֹדֵם לִשְׂעִירַת יָחִיד. מַאי טַעְמָא? הַאי מֶלֶךְ וְהַאי הֶדְיוֹט.
The goat for idol worship of the congregation precedes the goat of the king. What is the reason for this? The reason is that this goat is brought by the general public and that goat is brought by an individual, and the communal precedes the individual even if that individual is the king. The male goat of the king precedes the female goat of the individual. What is the reason for this? This male goat is brought by a king, and that female goat is brought by a commoner.
שְׂעִירַת יָחִיד קוֹדֶמֶת לְכִבְשַׂת יָחִיד. וְהָא תַּנְיָא: כִּבְשַׂת יָחִיד קוֹדֶמֶת לִשְׂעִירַת יָחִיד! אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: תַּנָּאֵי הִיא, מָר סָבַר: שְׂעִירָה עֲדִיפָא, שֶׁכֵּן נִתְרַבְּתָה אֵצֶל עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה בְּיָחִיד. וּמָר סָבַר: כִּבְשָׂה עֲדִיפָא, שֶׁכֵּן נִתְרַבְּתָה בְּאַלְיָה.
The female goat of an individual brought as a standard sin-offering precedes the ewe of an individual brought as a standard sin-offering. The Gemara asks: But isn’t it taught in a baraita: The ewe of an individual precedes the female goat of an individual? Abaye said: It is a dispute between tanna’im. One Sage holds that a female goat is preferable and takes precedence, as it has an increased applicability in that it is brought for idol worship by an individual, in which case one must bring a female goat, not a female sheep. And one Sage holds that the ewe is preferable and takes precedence, as it has more sacrificial portions than a female goat, as its tail is also included, which indicates that it is a preferable offering.
עוֹמֶר קוֹדֵם לְכֶבֶשׂ הַבָּא עִמּוֹ, שְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם קוֹדְמִים לִכְבָשִׂים הַבָּאִים עִמָּהֶם. זֶה הַכְּלָל: דָּבָר הַבָּא בְּגִין (לַ)יוֹם קוֹדֵם לְדָבָר הַבָּא בְּגִין לֶחֶם.
The omer offering precedes the lamb that accompanies it; the two loaves, i.e., the public offering on Shavuot of two loaves of bread from the new wheat, precede the sheep that accompany them. This is the principle: A matter that comes due to a mitzva of the day precedes a matter that comes due to the bread. The omer and two loaves are meal-offerings brought due to the day. The accompanying sheep are brought due to the meal-offerings.
מַתְנִי׳ הָאִישׁ קוֹדֵם לָאִשָּׁה לְהַחֲיוֹת וּלְהָשֵׁב אֲבֵדָה. וְהָאִשָּׁה קוֹדֶמֶת לָאִישׁ לִכְסוּת וּלְהוֹצִיא מִבֵּית הַשְּׁבִי. בִּזְמַן שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶם עוֹמְדִים בְּקַלְקָלָה – הָאִישׁ קוֹדֵם לָאִשָּׁה.
MISHNA: The man precedes the woman when there is uncertainty with regard to which of them to rescue or to return a lost item to first. And the woman precedes the man with regard to which of them to provide with a garment first, because her humiliation is great, or to release from captivity first, due to the concern that she will be raped. When they are both subject to degradation, i.e., there is also concern that the man will be raped in captivity, the release of the man precedes the release of the woman.
גְּמָ׳ תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: הָיָה הוּא וְאָבִיו וְרַבּוֹ בַּשֶּׁבִי – הוּא קוֹדֵם לְרַבּוֹ, וְרַבּוֹ קוֹדֵם לְאָבִיו. אִמּוֹ קוֹדֶמֶת לְכוּלָּם.
GEMARA: Apropos precedence, the Sages taught in a baraita: If one and his father and his teacher were in captivity, his release precedes his teacher’s because one’s own life takes precedence, and his teacher’s release precedes his father’s release. His mother’s release precedes the release of all of them.
חָכָם קוֹדֵם לְמֶלֶךְ יִשְׂרָאֵל: חָכָם שֶׁמֵּת – אֵין לָנוּ כַּיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ. מֶלֶךְ יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁמֵּת – כׇּל יִשְׂרָאֵל רְאוּיִם לַמַּלְכוּת.
A Torah scholar precedes the king of Israel, because in the case of a Sage who dies, we have no one like him, but in the case of a king of Israel who dies, all of Israel are fit for royalty.
מֶלֶךְ קוֹדֵם לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיֹּאמֶר הַמֶּלֶךְ (אֲלֵיהֶם) [לָהֶם] קְחוּ עִמָּכֶם (אוֹ מֵעַבְדֵי) [אֶת עַבְדֵי] אֲדֹנֵיכֶם וְגוֹ׳״.
A king precedes a High Priest, as it is stated: “And the king said unto them: Take with you the servants of your lord” (I Kings 1:33). King David was referring to himself as lord when speaking to Zadok the priest.
כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל קוֹדֵם לְנָבִיא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וּמָשַׁח אֹתוֹ שָׁם צָדוֹק הַכֹּהֵן וְנָתָן הַנָּבִיא״. הִקְדִּים צָדוֹק לְנָתָן. וְאוֹמֵר: ״שְׁמַע נָא יְהוֹשֻׁעַ הַכֹּהֵן הַגָּדוֹל אַתָּה וְרֵעֶיךָ וְגוֹ׳״. יָכוֹל הֶדְיוֹטוֹת הָיוּ? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״כִּי אַנְשֵׁי מוֹפֵת הֵמָּה״, וְאֵין ״מוֹפֵת״ אֶלָּא נָבִיא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְנָתַן אֵלֶיךָ אוֹת אוֹ מוֹפֵת״.
A High Priest precedes a prophet, as it is stated: “And let Zadok the priest and Nathan the prophet anoint him there” (I Kings 1:34); Zadok is written before Natan. And similarly, the prophet says: “Hear now, Joshua the High Priest, you and your colleagues who sit before you, for they are men that are a sign; for behold, I will bring forth My servant Zemah” (Zechariah 3:8). One might have thought that these colleagues were laymen. Therefore, the verse states: “For they are men that are a sign,” and “sign” means nothing other than a prophet, as it is stated: “And he gives you a sign or a wonder” (Deuteronomy 13:2).
מָשׁוּחַ בְּשֶׁמֶן הַמִּשְׁחָה קוֹדֵם לִמְרוּבֵּה בְגָדִים. מְרוּבֵּה בְגָדִים קוֹדֵם לְמָשִׁיחַ שֶׁעָבַר מֵחֲמַת קִרְיוֹ. מָשִׁיחַ שֶׁעָבַר מֵחֲמַת קִרְיוֹ קוֹדֵם לְעָבַר מֵחֲמַת מוּמוֹ. עָבַר מֵחֲמַת מוּמוֹ קוֹדֵם לִמְשׁוּחַ מִלְחָמָה. מְשׁוּחַ מִלְחָמָה קוֹדֵם לִסְגָן.
A High Priest anointed with anointing oil precedes a priest consecrated by donning multiple garments. A High Priest consecrated by donning multiple garments precedes an anointed High Priest who stepped down, even if he did so due to his seminal emission. An anointed High Priest who stepped down due to his seminal emission precedes an anointed High Priest who stepped down due to his blemish. An anointed High Priest who stepped down due to his blemish precedes a priest anointed for war. A priest anointed for war precedes a deputy High Priest, who replaces the High Priest when he is unable to serve in the Temple.
סְגָן קוֹדֵם לַאֲמַרְכָּל. מַאי אֲמַרְכָּל? אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: אָמַר כּוֹלָּא. אֲמַרְכָּל קוֹדֵם לְגִזְבָּר, גִּזְבָּר קוֹדֵם לְרֹאשׁ מִשְׁמָר, רֹאשׁ מִשְׁמָר קוֹדֵם לְרֹאשׁ בֵּית אָב, רֹאשׁ בֵּית אָב קוֹדֵם לְכֹהֵן הֶדְיוֹט.
The baraita concludes: A deputy High Priest precedes the overseer [la’amarkal], one of the seven appointed officials in the Temple. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of amarkal? Rav Ḥisda said: Amarkal is a contraction for amar kulla, meaning: He says it all. The overseer of the Temple has the final word in matters concerning the administration of the Temple. The overseer precedes the Temple treasurer. The treasurer precedes the head of the priestly watch that would serve in the Temple for a period of one week at a time. The head of the priestly watch precedes the head of the patrilineal family. Each patrilineal family performed the Temple service for one day during the week of its priestly watch. The head of the patrilineal family precedes an ordinary priest.
אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: לְעִנְיַן טוּמְאָה, סְגָן וּמְשׁוּחַ מִלְחָמָה אֵיזֶה מֵהֶם קוֹדֵם?
A dilemma was raised before the Sages: With regard to the matter of ritual impurity, when there is a corpse with no one to bury it [met mitzva], which even a priest and a nazirite are commanded to bury, and the deputy High Priest and the priest anointed for war are available to bury it, which of them precedes the other and becomes impure?
אָמַר מָר זוּטְרָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן: תָּא שְׁמַע, דְּתַנְיָא: סְגָן וּמְשׁוּחַ מִלְחָמָה שֶׁהָיוּ מְהַלְּכִים בַּדֶּרֶךְ וּפָגַע בָּהֶם מֵת מִצְוָה, מוּטָב שֶׁיִּטַּמֵּא מְשׁוּחַ מִלְחָמָה וְאַל יִטַּמֵּא סְגָן, שֶׁאִם יֶאֱרַע בּוֹ פְּסוּל בְּכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל, נִכְנָס הַסְּגָן וּמְשַׁמֵּשׁ תַּחְתָּיו. וְהָתַנְיָא: מְשׁוּחַ מִלְחָמָה קוֹדֵם לַסְּגָן! אָמַר רָבִינָא, כִּי תַּנְיָא הָהִיא לְהַחְיוֹתוֹ.
Mar Zutra, son of Rav Naḥman, said: Come and hear a resolution, as it is taught in a baraita: In the case of a deputy High Priest and a priest anointed for war who were walking along the path and they encountered a met mitzva and one of them must bury him and become ritually impure, it is preferable that the priest anointed for war will become ritually impure and the deputy High Priest will not become ritually impure. The reason is that if disqualification befalls the High Priest, the deputy enters and performs the Temple service in his stead. Therefore, one must ensure to every possible extent that the deputy High Priest remain ritually pure. The Gemara asks: But isn’t it taught in a baraita: A priest anointed for war precedes a deputy High Priest? Ravina said: When that baraita is taught, it is not with regard to ritual impurity; rather, it is taught with regard to rescuing him, as the standing of the priest anointed for war is higher than that of the deputy High Priest.
מַתְנִי׳ כֹּהֵן קוֹדֵם לְלֵוִי, לֵוִי לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, יִשְׂרָאֵל לְמַמְזֵר, וּמַמְזֵר לְנָתִין, וְנָתִין לְגֵר, וְגֵר לְעֶבֶד מְשׁוּחְרָר. אֵימָתַי? בִּזְמַן שֶׁכּוּלָּם שָׁוִים. אֲבָל אִם הָיָה מַמְזֵר תַּלְמִיד חָכָם וְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל עַם הָאָרֶץ – מַמְזֵר תַּלְמִיד חָכָם קוֹדֵם לְכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל עַם הָאָרֶץ.
MISHNA: A priest precedes a Levite. A Levite precedes an Israelite. An Israelite precedes a son born from an incestuous or adulterous relationship [mamzer], and a mamzer precedes a Gibeonite, and a Gibeonite precedes a convert, and a convert precedes an emancipated slave. When do these halakhot of precedence take effect? In circumstances when they are all equal in terms of wisdom. But if there were a mamzer who is a Torah scholar and a High Priest who is an ignoramus, a mamzer who is a Torah scholar precedes a High Priest who is an ignoramus, as Torah wisdom surpasses all else.
גְּמָ׳ כֹּהֵן קוֹדֵם לְלֵוִי – שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״(וּבְנֵי) [בְּנֵי] עַמְרָם אַהֲרֹן וּמֹשֶׁה וַיִּבָּדֵל אַהֲרֹן (לְהַקְרִיב) [לְהַקְדִּישׁוֹ] קֹדֶשׁ (הַקֳּדָשִׁים) [קָדָשִׁים]״. לֵוִי קוֹדֵם לְיִשְׂרָאֵל – שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״בָּעֵת הַהִיא הִבְדִּיל ה׳ אֶת שֵׁבֶט הַלֵּוִי (מִתּוֹךְ) וְגוֹ׳״.
GEMARA: A priest precedes a Levite, as it is stated: “The sons of Amram: Aaron and Moses, and Aaron was separated that he should be sanctified as the most sacred” (I Chronicles 23:13). A Levite precedes an Israelite, as it is stated: “At that time the Lord separated the tribe of Levi, to bear the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord, to stand before the Lord to minister unto Him, and to bless in His name, unto this day” (Deuteronomy 10:8).
יִשְׂרָאֵל קוֹדֵם לְמַמְזֵר – שֶׁזֶּה מְיוּחָס, וְזֶה אֵינוֹ מְיוּחָס. מַמְזֵר קוֹדֵם לְנָתִין – זֶה בָּא מִטִּפָּה כְּשֵׁרָה, וְזֶה בָּא מִטִּפָּה פְּסוּלָה. נָתִין קוֹדֵם לְגֵר – זֶה גָּדַל עִמָּנוּ בִּקְדוּשָּׁה, וְזֶה לֹא גָּדַל עִמָּנוּ בִּקְדוּשָּׁה. גֵּר קוֹדֵם לְעֶבֶד מְשׁוּחְרָר – זֶה הָיָה בִּכְלַל אָרוּר, וְזֶה לֹא הָיָה בִּכְלַל אָרוּר.
An Israelite precedes a mamzer because this Israelite is of legitimate lineage and that mamzer is not of legitimate lineage and is disqualified from entering into the congregation of Israel. A mamzer precedes a Gibeonite because this mamzer comes from a fit drop of semen, i.e., from Jewish parentage, and that Gibeonite comes from an unfit drop of semen, from gentile parentage. A Gibeonite precedes a convert, as this Gibeonite grew among us in sanctity and conducted his life as a Jew, and that convert did not grow among us in sanctity. A convert precedes an emancipated Canaanite slave as this emancipated Canaanite slave was included in the category of the curse while he was enslaved, and that convert was not included in the category of the curse.
אֵימָתַי? בִּזְמַן שֶׁכּוּלָּן שָׁוִין כּוּ׳. מְנָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי? אָמַר רַב אַחָא בְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא, דְּאָמַר קְרָא: ״יְקָרָה הִיא מִפְּנִינִים״, מִכֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל שֶׁנִּכְנָס לִפְנַי וְלִפְנִים.
The mishna teaches: When do these halakhot of precedence take effect? In circumstances when they are all equal in terms of wisdom. The Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived? Rav Aḥa, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: This is derived from a verse, as the verse states: “She is more precious than rubies [mipeninim]” (Proverbs 3:15). The Torah is more precious than the High Priest who enters the innermost sanctum [lifnai velifnim], the Holy of Holies.
תַּנְיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר יוֹחַאי אוֹמֵר: בַּדִּין הוּא שֶׁיַּקְדִּים עֶבֶד מְשׁוּחְרָר לְגֵר, שֶׁזֶּה גָּדַל עִמָּנוּ בִּקְדוּשָּׁה, וְזֶה לֹא גָּדַל עִמָּנוּ בִּקְדוּשָּׁה. אֶלָּא זֶה הָיָה בִּכְלַל אָרוּר, וְזֶה לֹא הָיָה בִּכְלַל אָרוּר.
It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai says: By right, an emancipated Canaanite slave should have preceded a convert, because this emancipated Canaanite slave grew among us in sanctity, and that convert did not grow among us in sanctity. But the convert precedes the Canaanite slave because this Canaanite slave was in the category of the curse, and that convert was not in the category of the curse.
שָׁאֲלוּ תַּלְמִידָיו אֶת רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בְּרַבִּי צָדוֹק: מִפְּנֵי מָה הַכֹּל רָצִין לִישָּׂא גִּיּוֹרֶת, וְאֵין הַכֹּל רָצִין לִישָּׂא מְשׁוּחְרֶרֶת? אָמַר לָהֶם: זוֹ הָיְתָה בִּכְלַל אָרוּר, וְזוֹ לֹא הָיְתָה בִּכְלַל אָרוּר. דָּבָר אַחֵר: זוֹ הָיְתָה בְּחֶזְקַת שָׁמוּר, וְזוֹ לֹא הָיְתָה בְּחֶזְקַת שָׁמוּר.
The students of Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, asked him: For what reason does everyone, i.e., do many people, run to marry a female convert, and not everyone runs to marry an emancipated Canaanite maidservant? He said to them: This Canaanite maidservant was in the category of the curse, and that convert was not in the category of the curse. Alternatively, the reason is that this convert has the presumptive status of chastity, and that Canaanite maidservant does not have the presumptive status of chastity.
שָׁאֲלוּ תַּלְמִידָיו אֶת רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: מִפְּנֵי מָה הַכֶּלֶב מַכִּיר אֶת קוֹנוֹ, וְחָתוּל אֵינוֹ מַכִּיר אֶת קוֹנוֹ? אָמַר לָהֶם: וּמָה הָאוֹכֵל מִמַּה שֶּׁעַכְבָּר אוֹכֵל – מְשַׁכֵּחַ, הָאוֹכֵל עַכְבָּר עַצְמוֹ – עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה.
The students of Rabbi Elazar asked him: For what reason does a dog recognize its master, while a cat does not recognize its master? Rabbi Elazar said to them: If it is established that with regard to one who eats from that which a mouse eats, eating that item causes him to forget, with regard to the cat, who eats the mouse itself, all the more so does eating it cause it to forget.
שָׁאֲלוּ תַּלְמִידָיו אֶת רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: מִפְּנֵי מָה הַכֹּל מוֹשְׁלִים בָּעַכְבָּרִים? מִפְּנֵי שֶׁסּוּרַן רַע. מַאי הִיא? רָבָא אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ גְּלִימֵי גָּיְיצִי.
The students of Rabbi Eliezer asked him: For what reason do all predators dominate mice and prey on them? He said to them: Because concerning mice, their inclination [shesuran] is evil. The Gemara asks: What is the indication of this? Rava said: They gnaw even at cloaks, despite the fact that cloaks do not provide nourishment for them.
רַב פָּפָּא אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ שׁוּפְתָּא [דְּ]מָרָא גָּיְיצִי.
Rav Pappa said: They gnaw even on the handle of a hoe.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן. חֲמִשָּׁה דְּבָרִים מְשַׁכְּחִים אֶת הַתַּלְמוּד: הָאוֹכֵל מִמַּה שֶּׁאוֹכֵל עַכְבָּר וּמִמַּה שֶּׁאוֹכֵל חָתוּל, וְהָאוֹכֵל לֵב שֶׁל בְּהֵמָה, וְהָרָגִיל בְּזֵיתִים, וְהַשּׁוֹתֶה מַיִם שֶׁל שִׁיּוּרֵי רְחִיצָה, וְהָרוֹחֵץ רַגְלָיו זוֹ עַל גַּבֵּי זוֹ. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים: אַף הַמַּנִּיחַ כֵּלָיו תַּחַת מְרַאֲשׁוֹתָיו. חֲמִשָּׁה דְּבָרִים מְשִׁיבִים אֶת הַתַּלְמוּד: פַּת פֶּחָמִין וְכׇל שֶׁכֵּן פֶּחָמִין עַצְמָן, וְהָאוֹכֵל בֵּיצָה מְגוּלְגֶּלֶת בְּלֹא מֶלַח, וְהָרָגִיל בְּשֶׁמֶן זַיִת, וְהָרָגִיל בְּיַיִן וּבְשָׂמִים, וְהַשּׁוֹתֶה מַיִם שֶׁל שִׁיּוּרֵי עִיסָּה. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים: אַף הַטּוֹבֵל אֶצְבָּעוֹ בְּמֶלַח וְאוֹכֵל.
§ The Sages taught in a baraita: There are five factors that cause one to forget his Torah study: One who eats from that which a mouse eats and from that which a cat eats, and one who eats the heart of an animal, and one who is accustomed to eating olives, and one who drinks water that remains from washing, and one who washes his feet with this foot atop that foot. And some say: Also one who places his garments under his head. Correspondingly, there are five factors that restore forgotten Torah study: Eating bread baked on coals and all the more so one who warms himself with the heat of the coals themselves, and one who eats a hard-boiled egg [beitza megulgelet] without salt, and one who is accustomed to eating olive oil, and one who is accustomed to drinking wine and smelling spices, and one who drinks water that remains from kneading dough. And some say: Also one who dips his finger in salt and eats it.
״הָרָגִיל בְּשֶׁמֶן זַיִת״. מְסַיַּיע לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהַזַּיִת מְשַׁכֵּחַ תַּלְמוּד שֶׁל שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה, כָּךְ שֶׁמֶן זַיִת מֵשִׁיב תַּלְמוּד שֶׁל שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה.
The Gemara elaborates on the baraita: One who is accustomed to eating olive oil restores forgotten Torah study. The Gemara notes: This supports the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan, as Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Just as eating an olive causes one to forget seventy years’ worth of Torah study, olive oil restores seventy years’ worth of Torah study.
״וְהָרָגִיל בְּיַיִן וּבְשָׂמִים״. מְסַיַּיע לֵיהּ לְרָבָא, דְּאָמַר רָבָא: חַמְרָא וְרֵיחָנֵי פַּקַּחִין.
The baraita continues: And one who is accustomed to drinking wine and smelling spices restores forgotten Torah study. The Gemara notes: This supports the opinion of Rava, as Rava said: Wine and spices rendered me wise.
״וְהַטּוֹבֵל אֶצְבָּעוֹ בְּמֶלַח״, אָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: וּבְאַחַת. כְּתַנָּאֵי, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אַחַת וְלֹא שְׁתַּיִם, רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: שְׁתַּיִם וְלֹא שָׁלֹשׁ. וְסִימָנָיךְ: קְמִיצָה.
The baraita continues: One who dips his finger in salt and eats it restores forgotten Torah study. Reish Lakish says: And that is the case with regard to one finger. The Gemara notes: This is parallel to a dispute between tanna’im. Rabbi Yehuda says: One finger but not two. Rabbi Yosei says: Two fingers but not three. And your mnemonic for the fact that the dispute is between one and two fingers is kemitza, i.e., the ring finger. When one presses his ring finger to his palm, there remain two straight fingers on one side and one on the other.
עֲשָׂרָה דְּבָרִים קָשִׁים לַתַּלְמוּד: הָעוֹבֵר תַּחַת הָאַפְסָר [הַגָּמָל] וְכׇל שֶׁכֵּן תַּחַת גָּמָל [עַצְמוֹ], וְהָעוֹבֵר בֵּין שְׁנֵי גְּמַלִּים, וְהָעוֹבֵר בֵּין שְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים, וְהָאִשָּׁה הָעוֹבֶרֶת בֵּין שְׁנֵי אֲנָשִׁים, וְהָעוֹבֵר מִתַּחַת רֵיחַ רַע שֶׁל נְבֵילָה, וְהָעוֹבֵר תַּחַת הַגֶּשֶׁר שֶׁלֹּא עָבְרוּ תַּחְתָּיו מַיִם אַרְבָּעִים יוֹם, וְהָאוֹכֵל פַּת שֶׁלֹּא בָּשַׁל כׇּל צָרְכּוֹ, וְהָאוֹכֵל בָּשָׂר מִזּוּהֲמָא לִיסְטְרוֹן, וְהַשּׁוֹתֶה מֵאַמַּת הַמַּיִם הָעוֹבֶרֶת בְּבֵית הַקְּבָרוֹת, וְהַמִּסְתַּכֵּל בִּפְנֵי הַמֵּת. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים: אַף הַקּוֹרֵא כְּתָב שֶׁעַל גַּבֵּי הַקֶּבֶר.
Ten factors are detrimental for Torah study: One who passes beneath the bit of the camel, and all the more so one who passes beneath a camel itself; and one who passes between two camels; and one who passes between two women; and a woman who passes between two men; and one who passes beneath a place where there is the foul odor of an animal carcass; and one who passes under a bridge beneath which water has not passed for forty days; and one who eats bread that was not sufficiently baked; and one who eats meat from zuhama listeron, a utensil consisting of a spoon and a fork, used to remove the film on the surface of soup; and one who drinks from an aqueduct that passes through a cemetery; and one who gazes at the face of the dead. And some say: Also one who reads the writing that is on the stone of a grave.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: כְּשֶׁהַנָּשִׂיא נִכְנָס, כׇּל הָעָם עוֹמְדִים, וְאֵין יוֹשְׁבִים עַד שֶׁאוֹמֵר לָהֶם: שֵׁבוּ. כְּשֶׁאַב בֵּית דִּין נִכְנָס, עוֹשִׂים לוֹ שׁוּרָה אַחַת מִכָּאן וְשׁוּרָה אַחַת מִכָּאן, עַד שֶׁיֵּשֵׁב בִּמְקוֹמוֹ. כְּשֶׁחָכָם נִכְנָס, אֶחָד עוֹמֵד וְאֶחָד יוֹשֵׁב, עַד שֶׁיֵּשֵׁב בִּמְקוֹמוֹ. בְּנֵי חֲכָמִים וְתַלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים, בִּזְמַן שֶׁרַבִּים צְרִיכִים לָהֶם – מַפְסִיעִין עַל רָאשֵׁי הָעָם. יָצָא לְצוֹרֶךְ – יִכָּנֵס וְיֵשֵׁב בִּמְקוֹמוֹ.
§ The Sages taught in a baraita: When the Nasi of the Sanhedrin enters, all the people stand and they do not sit until he says to them: Sit. When the deputy Nasi of the Sanhedrin enters, the people form for him one row from here, on this side of the path that he takes, and one row from there, on the other side of it, in a display of deference, until he sits in his place, and then they may be seated. When the Ḥakham, who is ranked third among the members of the Sanhedrin, enters, one person stands when he is within four cubits of the Ḥakham, and another sits, i.e., when one is no longer within four cubits of the Ḥakham he may sit. And all those whom the Ḥakham passes do this, until he sits in his place. When the multitudes require their services, i.e., they serve a public role, sons of the Sages and Torah scholars may step over the heads of the people seated on the ground in order to reach their places in the Sanhedrin. If one of the Sages left for the purpose of relieving himself, when he is finished he may enter and sit in his place in the Sanhedrin, and he need not be concerned that he is imposing upon those assembled.
בְּנֵי תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים שֶׁמְּמוּנִּים אֲבִיהֶם פַּרְנָס עַל הַצִּבּוּר, בִּזְמַן שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶם דַּעַת לִשְׁמוֹעַ – נִכְנָסִים וְיוֹשְׁבִים לִפְנֵי אֲבִיהֶם וַאֲחוֹרֵיהֶם כְּלַפֵּי הָעָם. בִּזְמַן שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם דַּעַת לִשְׁמוֹעַ – נִכְנָסִים וְיוֹשְׁבִים לִפְנֵי אֲבִיהֶם וּפְנֵיהֶם כְּלַפֵּי הַעָם. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בַּר רַבִּי [צָדוֹק] אוֹמֵר: אַף בְּבֵית הַמִּשְׁתֶּה עוֹשִׂים אוֹתָם סְנִיפִין.
When they have the wisdom to hear and to study, the sons of Torah scholars, whose fathers are appointed as leaders of the congregation, enter and sit before their fathers, and their backs are directed toward the people. When they do not have the wisdom to hear and to study they enter and sit before their fathers, and their faces are directed toward the people, so everyone sees that they are seated there in deference to their fathers but not as students. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says: Even at a wedding party one renders them attachments [senifin] and seats them adjacent to their fathers.
[אָמַר מָר] יָצָא לְצוֹרֶךְ – נִכְנָס וְיוֹשֵׁב בִּמְקוֹמוֹ. אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: לֹא אָמְרוּ אֶלָּא לִקְטַנִּים, אֲבָל לִגְדוֹלִים – לָא, הֲוָה לֵיהּ לְמִבְדַּק נַפְשֵׁיהּ מֵעִיקָּרָא. דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: לְעוֹלָם יְלַמֵּד אָדָם עַצְמוֹ לְהַשְׁכִּים וּלְהַעֲרִיב, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִתְרַחֵק. אָמַר רָבָא: הָאִידָּנָא דַּחֲלַשׁא עָלְמָא – אֲפִילּוּ לִגְדוֹלִים נָמֵי.
The Master said: If one of the Sages left for the purpose of relieving himself, when he is finished he may enter and sit in his place. Rav Pappa said: The Sages said this only with regard to one who leaves for minor bodily functions, i.e., to urinate. But with regard to one who leaves for major bodily functions, i.e., to defecate, no, he may not return to his place, because he should have examined himself initially so that he would not need to leave. His failure to do so constitutes negligence and he may not impose upon others when he returns, as Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: A person should always accustom himself to relieving himself in the morning and in the evening so that he will not need to distance himself during the daylight hours to find an appropriate place. Rava said: Today, when the world is weak and people are not as healthy as they once were, one may even return after he leaves for major bodily functions.
רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בַּר רַבִּי [צָדוֹק] אוֹמֵר: אַף בְּבֵית הַמִּשְׁתֶּה עוֹשִׂים אוֹתָם סְנִיפִים. אָמַר רָבָא: בְּחַיֵּי אֲבִיהֶם בִּפְנֵי אֲבִיהֶם.
Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Tzadok, says: Even at a wedding party one renders them attachments. Rava said: This applies during the lifetime of their fathers and in the presence of their fathers.
אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: בִּימֵי רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל נִישְׁנֵית מִשְׁנָה זוֹ. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל נָשִׂיא, רַבִּי מֵאִיר חָכָם, רַבִּי נָתָן אַב בֵּית דִּין. כִּי הֲוָה רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל הָתָם, הֲווֹ קָיְימִי כּוּלֵּי עָלְמָא מִקַּמֵּיהּ. כִּי הֲווֹ עָיְילִי רַבִּי מֵאִיר וְרַבִּי נָתָן, הֲווֹ קָיְימִי כּוּלֵּי עָלְמָא מִקַּמַּיְיהוּ. אָמַר רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: לָא בָּעוּ לְמִיהְוֵי הֶיכֵּרָא בֵּין דִּילִי לְדִידְהוּ? תַּקֵּין הָא מַתְנִיתָא.
§ Rabbi Yoḥanan says: This mishna, i.e., the preceding baraita, was taught during the days of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel was the Nasi, Rabbi Meir was the Ḥakham, and Rabbi Natan was the deputy Nasi. When Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel was there, everyone would arise before him. When Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan would enter, everyone would arise before them. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: Shouldn’t there be a conspicuous distinction between me and them in terms of the manner in which deference is shown? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel instituted the provisions delineated in this baraita that distinguish between the Nasi and his subordinates with regard to the deference shown them.
הָהוּא יוֹמָא לָא הֲווֹ רַבִּי מֵאִיר וְרַבִּי נָתָן הָתָם, לִמְחַר כִּי אֲתוֹ חֲזוֹ דְּלָא קָמוּ מִקַּמַּיְיהוּ כְּדִרְגִילָא מִילְּתָא, אָמְרִי: מַאי הַאי? אֲמַרוּ לְהוּ: הָכִי תַּקֵּין רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל.
That day, when Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel instituted these provisions, Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan were not there. The following day when they came to the study hall, they saw that the people did not stand before them as the matter was typically done. They said: What is this? The people said to them: This is what Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel instituted.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי מֵאִיר לְרַבִּי נָתָן: אֲנָא חָכָם וְאַתְּ אַב בֵּית דִּין, נְתַקֵּין מִילְּתָא כִּי לְדִידַן. מַאי נַעֲבֵיד לֵיהּ? נֵימָא לֵיהּ: גַּלִּי עוּקְצִים, דְּלֵית לֵיהּ. וְכֵיוָן דְּלָא גְּמִר, נֵימָא לֵיהּ: ״מִי יְמַלֵּל גְּבוּרוֹת ה׳ יַשְׁמִיעַ כׇּל תְּהִלָּתוֹ״, לְמִי נָאֶה לְמַלֵּל גְּבוּרוֹת ה׳ – מִי שֶׁיָּכוֹל לְהַשְׁמִיעַ כׇּל תְּהִלּוֹתָיו. נְעַבְּרֵיהּ, וְהָוֵי אֲנָא אַב בֵּית דִּין וְאַתְּ נָשִׂיא.
Rabbi Meir said to Rabbi Natan: I am the Ḥakham and you are the deputy Nasi. Let us devise a matter and do to him as he did to us. What shall we do to him? Let us say to him: Reveal to us tractate Okatzim, which he does not know. And once it is clear to all that he did not learn, he will not have anything to say. Then we will say to him: “Who can express the mighty acts of the Lord, shall make all His praises heard?” (Psalms 106:2), indicating: For whom is it becoming to express the mighty acts of the Lord? It is becoming for one who is capable of making all His praises heard, and not for one who does not know one of the tractates. We will remove him from his position as Nasi, and I will be deputy Nasi and you will be Nasi.
שַׁמְעִינְהוּ רַבִּי יַעֲקֹב בֶּן קֻדְשַׁי, אֲמַר: דִּלְמָא חַס וְשָׁלוֹם אָתְיָא מִלְּתָא לִידֵי כִּיסּוּפָא, אֲזַל יְתֵיב אֲחוֹרֵי עִילִּיתֵיהּ דְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, פְּשַׁט, גְּרַס וּתְנָא, גְּרַס וּתְנָא.
Rabbi Ya’akov ben Korshei heard them talking, and said: Perhaps, Heaven forfend, this matter will come to a situation of humiliation for Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. He did not wish to speak criticism or gossip about Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan, so he went and sat behind the upper story where Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel lived. He explained tractate Okatzin; he studied it aloud and repeated it, and studied it aloud and repeated it.
אָמַר: מַאי דְּקַמָּא? דִּלְמָא חַס וְשָׁלוֹם אִיכָּא בֵּי מִדְרְשָׁא מִידֵּי, יְהַב דַּעְתֵּיהּ וְגַרְסַהּ. לִמְחַר אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ: נֵיתֵי מָר וְנִיתְנֵי בְּעוּקְצִין, פְּתַח וַאֲמַר. בָּתַר דְּאוֹקֵים, אֲמַר לְהוּ: אִי לָא גְּמִירְנָא, כַּסֵּיפְיתֻּנַן.
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said to himself: What is this that is transpiring before us? Perhaps, Heaven forfend, there is something transpiring in the study hall. He suspected that Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan were planning something. He concentrated and studied tractate Okatzin. The following day Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan said to him: Let the Master come and teach a lesson in tractate Okatzin. He began and stated the lesson he had prepared. After he completed teaching the tractate, he said to them: If I had not studied the tractate, you would have humiliated me.
פַּקֵּיד וְאַפְּקִינְהוּ מִבֵּי מִדְרְשָׁא. הֲווֹ כָּתְבִי קוּשְׁיָיתָא [בְּפִתְקָא] וְשָׁדוּ הָתָם. דַּהֲוָה מִיפְּרִיק – מִיפְּרִיק, דְּלָא הֲווֹ מִיפְּרִיק – כָּתְבִי פֵּירוּקֵי וְשָׁדוּ. אֲמַר לְהוּ רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: תּוֹרָה מִבַּחוּץ וְאָנוּ מִבִּפְנִים?
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel commanded those present and they expelled Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan from the study hall as punishment. Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan would write difficulties on a scrap of paper [pitka] and would throw them there into the study hall. Those difficulties that were resolved were resolved; as for those that were not resolved, Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan wrote resolutions on a scrap of paper and threw them into the study hall. Rabbi Yosei said to the Sages: How is it that the Torah, embodied in the preeminent Torah scholars, is outside and we are inside?
אָמַר לָהֶן רַבָּן [שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן] גַּמְלִיאֵל: נִיעַיְּילִינְהוּ, מִיהוּ נִיקְנְסִינְהוּ דְּלָא נֵימְרוּ שְׁמַעְתָּא מִשְּׁמַיְיהוּ. אַסִּיקוּ לְרַבִּי מֵאִיר אֲחֵרִים, וּלְרַבִּי נָתָן יֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים. אַחְווֹ לְהוּ בְּחֶלְמַיְיהוּ: זִילוּ פַּיְּיסוּהוּ [לְרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל], רַבִּי נָתָן אֲזַל, רַבִּי מֵאִיר לָא אֲזַל, אֲמַר: דִּבְרֵי חֲלוֹמוֹת לֹא מַעֲלִין וְלֹא מוֹרִידִין. כִּי אֲזַל רַבִּי נָתָן, אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: נְהִי דְּאַהֲנִי לָךְ קַמְרָא דַּאֲבוּךְ לְמֶהֱוֵי אַב בֵּית דִּין, שַׁוִּינָיךְ נָמֵי נָשִׂיא?!
Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said to them: Let us admit them into the study hall. But we will penalize them in that we will not cite halakha in their names. They cited statements of Rabbi Meir in the name of Aḥerim, meaning: Others, and they cited statements of Rabbi Natan in the name of yesh omerim, meaning: Some say. Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Natan were shown a message in their dreams: Go, appease Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. Rabbi Natan went. Rabbi Meir did not go. He said in his heart: Matters of dreams are insignificant. When Rabbi Natan went, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said to him: Although the ornate belt, i.e., the importance, of your father was effective in enabling you to become deputy Nasi, as Rabbi Natan’s father was the Babylonian Exilarch, will it render you Nasi as well?
מַתְנֵי לֵיהּ רַבִּי לְרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בְּרֵיהּ, אֲחֵרִים אוֹמְרִים: אִילּוּ הָיָה תְּמוּרָה
Years later, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi taught Rabban Shimon his son that Aḥerim say: If it was considered a substitute,
