Bava Batra 14a — the Talmud in English

And if he came to cut,

if he wished to separate between the Torah and the Prophets, or between the Prophets themselves,

he cuts!

And the Gemara raises an objection:

What is he saying?

What is the novelty that he can cut? Is it not obvious that he is permitted to separate the books? On the contrary, this is preferable, so that each book will be by itself.

And the Gemara answers:

This is what he is saying:

The intention of the tannai is to explain his earlier ruling: if he finished writing a book at the end of a column, he does not leave a space of four lines at the top of the next column, before the beginning of the next book, but begins the next book immediately at the top of the column. And the reason for this ruling is

that

for

if he comes to cut

and separate between the books,

he cuts.

And if he were to leave a space of four lines at the top of the column, it would result that when he cuts, this column would be different from all the other columns, for its beginning would be only after four empty lines. Therefore the tannai said that one should not leave empty lines at the top of a column.

And now the Gemara discusses what we learned in the beraita, that at the beginning of every book one leaves blank parchment in order to roll it onto a wooden stave, onto which the book is rolled. And likewise, at the end of the book one leaves blank parchment so that this parchment will encircle the entire book when the book is rolled.

And he contrasts it,

for we learned another beraita that contradicts this ruling—

As it was taught: The scribe must leave blank parchment at the

beginning of a book and

at its

end.

And its measure, the blank parchment, is

enough to roll —the Gemara below discusses what “enough to roll” means—and it is explained in this beraita that the measure of the empty parchment that one must leave at the beginning of the book and at its end is equal, and there is no distinction between the beginning of the book and its end.

The Gemara discusses the wording of this beraita:

And the Gemara discusses the words of this beraita:

“Enough to roll”—what is it?

For what must the blank parchment serve, “enough to roll”?

If

it is said that one must leave blank parchment in the measure of

enough to roll,

so that it will be possible to roll it upon a

stave

of wood.

If so,

it is difficult:

the contradiction from the beraita that we learned above, in which it is explained that at the end of the book one must leave parchment in the measure of enough for

encircling,

so that it will encircle the entire book when it is rolled—

And

if

the intention of this beraita is to say that one must leave parchment whose measure is

enough to roll and encircle,

so that the blank parchment will be able to encircle the entire book when it is rolled, if so,

it is difficult:

the contradiction from the earlier beraita, in which a different measure is explained: at the beginning of the book one must leave parchment in a measure that will enable it to be rolled upon a

stave

of wood.

Said

and answered

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak:

What the second beraita said, “enough to roll,”

it teaches with regard to two sides.

It is explained in two ways: when discussing the beginning of the book, the intention is enough to roll this parchment upon a wooden stave, onto which the book will be rolled. And when discussing the end of the book, “enough to roll” is a measure such that, when the book is rolled, the blank parchment will encircle the entire book.

Rav Ashi said

to answer: In reality, the intention of the beraita when it said “enough to roll” is enough to roll this parchment upon a stave, and nevertheless this beraita does not contradict what we learned above, that at the end of the book one must leave “enough for encircling.” For what we learned, “enough for encircling,” applies to the books of the Prophets, but

when that was taught,

this beraita that said that he leaves at the beginning and at the end enough to roll upon a stave, this is

in a Torah scroll.

As it was taught: All the books

are rolled from their beginning to their end.

And for this reason one stave is sufficient for them, so that they can roll the entire book upon it.

But a Torah scroll is rolled

from both its sides

toward its middle,

and

therefore

he makes for it a stave here and a stave there.

One empty stave at its beginning and one empty stave at its end.

Rabbi Eliezer ben Rabbi Tzadok said: This is how the scribes of books in Jerusalem used to make their books.

For their Torah scrolls they made two empty staves, at their two sides, and rolled them toward the middle.

The Sages taught: One does not make a Torah scroll—

not its length,

so that the height of the scroll will not be

greater than its circumference.

And not its circumference greater than its length

—its height.

That is, a scribe who writes a Torah scroll must take care that the circumference of the scroll [when it is rolled] will be equal to its length [height] from top to bottom. That is, if a thread were to encircle the thickness of the Torah scroll, the length of this thread would be like the length of the scroll from top to bottom.

And therefore, if the parchment is thick, the scribe must write in small script, so that the thickness of the book will not be greater than its length.

They asked Rabbi: The measure of a Torah scroll—is it how much?

What is the length [height] of the parchment from top to bottom that one should make for a Torah scroll, in order to reach a state in which its length and circumference will be equal?

He said to them,

if he writes the scroll

on gev il,

thick parchment that has not been processed, then the length [height] must be

six

handbreadths. For one who writes a Torah scroll in medium script upon gev il whose length [height] is six handbreadths will, when he finishes, have a scroll whose circumference is six handbreadths, and it follows that its length and circumference are equal—

And they further asked Rabbi: If he writes the scroll

on parchment

that has been processed, which is thinner than gev il,

how much?

What is the measure of the length of the parchment through which its length and circumference will be equal?

Rabbi said to them:

I do not know .

Rav Huna wrote seventy Torah scrolls,

seventy Torah scrolls,

and it did not happen to him,

it did not happen to him that the length of the scroll and its circumference were equal,

except

in one scroll

one

among the seventy scrolls.

Rav Aḥa bar Yaakov wrote

a Torah scroll

one, from the hide of a calf,

on calfskin,

and

in that one scroll that he wrote

it happened to him.

It happened to him that its length and circumference were equal —

The Sages cast their eyes upon him,

the Sages cast their eyes upon him because he had succeeded on the first attempt in writing a scroll whose length and circumference were equal,

and

because of this,

his soul departed

and Rav Aḥa bar Yaakov died.

The Sages said to Rav Hamnuna—

Rabbi Ami wrote four hundred Torah scrolls.

He said to them,

it is not possible that Rabbi Ami wrote four hundred Torah scrolls, for one person does not have time to write such a large number of Torah scrolls , but

perhaps

he wrote only the verse

“The Torah that Moses commanded us”

[and] wrote it.

And therefore they said that he wrote four hundred Torah scrolls, because this verse is called “Torah,” as they said in tractate Sukkah [42a]: A minor who knows how to speak, his father teaches him “Torah.” And the Gemara explains there that the intention is to the verse “The Torah that Moses commanded us” .

Rava said to Rabbi Zeira: Rabbi Yannai planted four hundred vineyards

s.

He said to him:

This is not possible , but

perhaps,

it is possible that each time, from those four hundred times, he planted only five vines, and this planting was in the form of

two opposite two,

two vines opposite two vines, in a square shape,

and one protruding like a tail

[as in the illustration].

Two opposite two, and one with its tail extending outward 0 0

And what they said, that he planted four hundred vineyards, is because five grapevines planted in this form are called a “vineyard.” And so it is also explained in tractate Sotah [43a]: when the kohanim announce upon going out to war, “Who is the man who planted a vineyard and has not redeemed it? Let him go and return to his house,” even one who has five grapevines planted in this form is considered a “master of a vineyard” and returns to his house.

It was objected:

The Gemara raises an objection against Rabbi, who says that the measure of the length of a Torah scroll written on parchment is six handbreadths.

We learned in a beraita:

the Ark

of the Covenant

that Moses made,

its dimensions were

cubits [

two cubits]

and a half in length, and a cubit and a half in width, and a cubit and a half in height

in its height.

And in tractate Kelim [chapter 17, Mishna 10], Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda disagreed as to the size of the “cubit” stated concerning the vessels of the Temple. Rabbi Meir’s view is that the “cubit” stated concerning the vessels of the Temple was six handbreadths long. And Rabbi Yehuda’s view is that the cubit stated concerning the vessels of the Temple was five handbreadths long. And this beraita is the statement of Rabbi Meir, as explained below; according to his view, Rabbi Meir said that the measure of the cubits stated concerning the Ark was

in a cubit of six handbreadths!

It follows that the Ark’s length was fifteen handbreadths, which are two and a half cubits; its width was nine handbreadths, which are a cubit and a half; and likewise its height was nine handbreadths, which are a cubit and a half.

The beraita now proceeds to explain the size of the tablets of the Covenant and how they were placed in the Ark.

And the tablets, their length

of each of the tablets

was six

handbreadths,

and their width was six

handbreadths,

and their thickness was three

handbreadths.

And the tablets were in the Ark

placed

lying down,

opposite the length of the Ark

with the width of the tablets extending along the length of the Ark, and their length extending across the width of the Ark, [see the illustration].

An illustration should appear here 5

how much

space

do the tablets occupy

do they occupy

of

the length of the

Ark?

That is to say,

twelve handbreadths.

For the width of each tablet is six handbreadths, and when the two tablets are placed one beside the other along the length of the Ark, they occupy twelve handbreadths of the Ark’s length. [See the illustration].

It follows that

there remained there

along the length of the Ark

three handbreadths

empty, for its length was fifteen handbreadths, and the tablets occupied twelve of them. But in practice there were not three empty handbreadths, for

subtract from them one handbreadth

we must subtract from this calculation one handbreadth, which was occupied by the walls of the Ark

half of it

of the handbreadth

for this wall and half of it for that wall.

It follows that

there remained there two handbreadths

empty,

in which the Torah scroll

that Moses our teacher wrote

was placed

with its length alongside the length of the tablets.

And the beraita brings proof that the Torah scroll was placed inside the Ark of the Covenant—

As it is stated

in Kings I [chapter 8, verse 9

]: “There was nothing in the Ark except the two tablets of stone that Moses placed there,”

and we raise the difficulty:

What

is the meaning of what the prophet wrote

“There was nothing” in the Ark “except,”

why are two expressions, “nothing” and “except,” written, to exclude that only the tablets were in the Ark? He should have written, “Only the two tablets were in the Ark,” or, “There was nothing in the Ark except the two tablets” [see the note ]. This is

an exclusion after an exclusion, and

the rule is that

there is no exclusion after an exclusion

that wherever the verse excludes something repeatedly, its intention is

but to include

something additional; and here the verse’s intention is to include

a Torah scroll placed in the Ark

besides the tablets.

The beraita adds—

You have explained

you have explained well why it was necessary for the

Ark in its length

to be fifteen handbreadths, for the tablets occupied twelve handbreadths, the two walls occupied one, and two were for the Torah scroll. Now

go out and explain

to explain why the

Ark in its width

needed to be nine handbreadths.

And we explain:

how much

space

do the tablets occupy

do they occupy

of

the width of the

Ark?

That is to say,

six handbreadths,

for the tablets were six handbreadths long, and the length of the tablets extended across the width of the Ark [see illustration 1]. It follows that

there remained there

in the width of the Ark

three handbreadths

empty—but in practice the three handbreadths were not empty, for

subtract from them one handbreadth

we must subtract from this calculation one handbreadth, which was occupied by the walls of the Ark

half of it

of the handbreadth

for this wall and half of it for that wall,

it follows that

there remained there two handbreadths

empty, whose purpose was

that a Torah scroll should not enter and leave

when it is cramped,

for the length of the Torah scroll was six handbreadths, as explained above, that a scroll written on parchment is six handbreadths long; and it was a received tradition among our Sages that the scroll Moses wrote was on parchment . Therefore, if the Ark’s width had been only six handbreadths, the Torah scroll [whose length was also six handbreadths] would have been pressed against the walls of the Ark when they removed it and inserted it [for the Ark had no door, and they removed the scroll from above]. Therefore the Torah required that two additional handbreadths be added to the width of the Ark, so that a Torah scroll would not enter and leave when it was cramped.

These are the words of Rabbi Meir.

Rabbi Yehuda says Rabbi Yehuda says,

that the measure of the size of the cubit stated concerning the vessels of the Temple is five handbreadths; therefore, the size of the Ark as well was measured

with a cubit of five handbreadths.

It follows that according to his view the Ark’s length was twelve and a half handbreadths, which are two and a half cubits, and its width was seven and a half handbreadths, which are a cubit and a half.

And the tablets were six in length

handbreadths,

and six in width

handbreadths,

and three in thickness

handbreadths—

And the tablets were

placed

lying down

along the length of the Ark

with the width of the tablets extending along the length of the Ark, and their length extending across the width of the Ark, [see the illustration above].

How much

space

do the tablets occupy

do they occupy

of

the length of the

Ark?

That is to say,

twelve handbreadths,

for the width of each tablet is six handbreadths, and when the two tablets are placed one beside the other along the length of the Ark, they occupy twelve handbreadths of the Ark’s length. It follows that

there remained there

along the length of the Ark

half a handbreadth

empty, for the Ark’s length according to Rabbi Yehuda was twelve and a half handbreadths, and the tablets occupied twelve of them—but in practice the half-handbreadth was not empty, because the walls of the Ark occupied space:

a finger [

a quarter of a handbreadth ]

for this wall

of the Ark

and a finger

additional

for this wall . It follows that there was no extra space along the length of the Ark.

It follows that there was no extra space along the length of the Ark.

You have explained

you have explained well why it was necessary for the

Ark in its length,

now

go out and explain

to explain why the

Ark in its width

needed to be seven and a half handbreadths. And we explain:

how much

space

do the tablets hold together

do they occupy

of

the width of the

Ark?

That is to say,

six

handbreadths,

for the tablets were six handbreadths long, and the length of the tablets extended across the width of the Ark [see the illustration above]. It follows that

there remained there

in the width of the Ark

a handbreadth and a half—

but in practice a handbreadth and a half were not empty there, for

subtract from them

we must remove from this calculation

half a handbreadth

on which the walls of the Ark stood:

a finger [

a quarter of a handbreadth]

for this wall and a finger for that wall,

it follows that

there remained there a handbreadth

empty,

in which

there were the two

columns,

the silver columns that Solomon made ,

standing

lying down ; and these columns lay along the Ark, with the tablets between them [ see the illustration]

An illustration should appear here, and where are those columns mentioned?

As it is stated

in the Song of Songs:

“King Solomon made for himself a palanquin from the wood of Lebanon; he made its columns of silver, its covering of gold, its seat of purple,” and so on.

This verse speaks of the Temple that Solomon built [the Temple is called “palanquin” in the verse]. And the Gemara explains that what is stated in the verse, “he made its columns of silver,” refers to the silver columns that Solomon made to place in the Ark of the Covenant.

And now the beraita explains where the Torah scroll that Moses wrote was placed, according to Rabbi Yehuda:

In the Book of Samuel I [chapter 6], it is brought that when the Philistines wished to return the Ark of the Lord that they had captured from the Israelites, they asked the “kohanim and diviners” how to return it, and they advised them to send it together with gifts [specified there]. They were to place the gifts in a chest beside the Ark of the Covenant, and thus send them.

And

it

the chest which the Philistines had sent as a gift to the God of Israel

was

placed at its side

of the Ark in the Holy of Holies.

And the Gemara brings proof that that chest was placed beside the Ark.

As it is stated,

thus said the “priests and diviners” to the Philistines:

“And the gold vessels which you are returning to Him, you shall place as a guilt-offering in the chest beside it, and you shall send it, and it will go.”

And upon it,

atop the chest which was placed in the Holy of Holies, there was

a Torah scroll

which Moses wrote,

placed, as it is stated: ‘

“Take this Torah scroll and place it beside the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord”’

and the Gemara infers from this verse that

beside

the Ark

was

the Torah scroll

placed, and not inside it.

And

if you ask: Is it not so that Rabbi Meir learned from the verse, “There is nothing in the Ark except the two tablets of stone,” that there is here “a limitation after a limitation” which comes to include that the Torah scroll was in the Ark? If so, according to Rabbi Judah, who holds that the Torah scroll was not placed in the Ark, it is difficult:

what do I establish

what do we learn from the inclusion derived from the limitation after a limitation in the verse

“There is nothing in the Ark except”?