Berakhot 20b — the Talmud in English

And tefillin,

because the mitzva of tefillin is also a positive, time-bound mitzva, according to those who hold that night and Shabbat are not a “time for tefillin.” Likewise, the Sages did not institute that young children be trained to put them on, even when they have reached the age at which they are to be trained in mitzvot, because they are not careful to avoid passing gas while the tefillin are on them .

And they are obligated in prayer.

Because prayer is a request for mercy, and its obligation is rabbinic. The Sages therefore instituted it for women as well and instituted the training of young children in it .

And with regard to a mezuzah

and Grace after Meals.

Because these are positive mitzvot that are not time-bound, and women are obligated in them.

Gemara:

The Gemara asks:

Reciting the Shema—

it is obvious

that women are exempt from it, since

it is a positive, time-bound mitzva, and women are exempt from every positive, time-bound mitzva!

The Gemara answers:

It might have been said: Since it contains

within the mitzva of reciting the Shema, acceptance of the yoke of

the kingdom of Heaven,

women should therefore also be obligated.

It teaches us

that nevertheless they are exempt .

We learned in the Mishna:

And tefillin.

The Gemara asks:

It is obvious

that women are exempt from them, since they are a positive, time-bound mitzva, as tefillin are not worn at night or on Shabbat!?

The Gemara answers:

It might have been said: Since tefillin are compared

to

mezuzah

in the verse, “And you shall bind them … and you shall write them,” one might have thought: Just as women are obligated in mezuzah, so women are obligated in tefillin.

It teaches us

that tefillin are compared not to mezuzah but to Torah study: Just as women are exempt from the mitzva of Torah study, so they are exempt from the mitzva of tefillin.

We learned in the Mishna:

And they are obligated in prayer.

The Gemara explains Because

prayer

—

is a request for mercy . [Rashi holds that the exemption of “time-bound” does not apply to a rabbinic mitzva. Therefore, he had the version presented here; see the note.

Tosafot’s version, however, is:

It is obvious

that women are obligated in prayer, since it is not time-bound!?

The Gemara answers:

It might have been said: Since it is written in it

Psalms 55:18],

“Evening, morning, and noon

I pray and cry aloud,”

it is like a positive, time-bound mitzva,

since prayer has distinct times, and women should therefore be exempt from it.

It teaches us—

разве это не очевидно?!

it is a request for mercy,

and therefore they are obligated .

We learned in the Mishna:

And with regard to a mezuzah.

The Gemara asks:

Is this obvious?!

—

The Gemara answers:

It might have been said: Since

mezuzah is compared

to

Torah study,

as it is written, “You shall teach them to your sons,” and immediately afterward it says, “And you shall write them,” one might have thought: Just as women are exempt from Torah study, even though it is not time-bound, because it is written, “You shall teach them to your sons” -

and not your daughters, so women are exempt from the mitzva of mezuzah.

It teaches us

that women are obligated, because it is written with regard to mezuzah, “So that your days may be lengthened.” And they said by logical reasoning: “Do only men want life, while women do not want life?!”

We learned in the Mishna:

And Grace after Meals.

The Gemara asks:

Is this obvious?!

After all, it is a positive mitzva that is not time-bound.

The Gemara answers:

It might have been said: Since it is written,

Exodus 16:8],

“When the Lord gives you meat in the evening

—

one might have thought that it is

like a positive, time-bound mitzva . -

Сказал рав Ада бар Ахава: женщины обязаны в освящении дня Шабата по Торе.

It teaches us

that it is not a positive, time-bound mitzva, and women are obligated.

Rav Adda bar Ahava said: Women are obligated in the sanctification of the day

of

Shabbat by Torah law.

The Gemara asks:

Why

are they obligated? The sanctification of the day—

is a positive, time-bound mitzva,

as it is written, “Remember the day of Shabbat to sanctify it,” and they derived: Remember it over wine.

And women are exempt from every positive, time-bound mitzva?!

The Gemara answers:

Abaye said:

The obligation of women in the sanctification of the day on Shabbat is only

rabbinic.

The Gemara asks:

Rava said to him: But

Rav Adda bar Ahava

said, “by Torah law,”

which implies that they are obligated by Torah law.

Furthermore,

your view raises a difficulty: If so, why are women entirely exempt from

every positive mitzva

that is time-bound? After all,

we should obligate them by rabbinic law, just as they obligated them in the sanctification of the day?!

Но сказал Раба:

Rather, Rava said:

They are obligated in the sanctification of the day by Torah law , because

the verse says

in the first set of the Ten Commandments:

“Remember

the day of Shabbat to sanctify it” [Exodus 20:8].

And

in the latter set it says:

“Observe

the day of Shabbat to sanctify it” [Deuteronomy 5:12]. These two commandments were stated simultaneously, teaching that

everyone included in “observance,”

that is, one upon whom the prohibition “You shall not perform any labor” applies,

is included

and is also obligated

in “remembrance,”

that is, in “Remember the day of Shabbat to sanctify it.”

And these women, since they are included in “observance”

because women are obligated in all negative mitzvot, whether or not they are time-bound, since Scripture equated women with men with regard to all punishments of the Torah],

they are included

also

in the

obligation of

“remembrance.” This is the reason for their obligation in the sanctification of the day .

И это является причиной обязанности освящения дня .

Ravina said to Rava:

Is the obligation of

women in Grace after Meals

from

Torah law,

because it is written, “You shall eat and be satisfied,” and it is a positive mitzva that is not time-bound,

or

is it an obligation

by rabbinic law,

because it is written, “for the good land that He gave you,” and the Land was not given to women?

The Gemara discusses:

What practical difference does it make?

The Gemara explains: This issue determines whether women can

enable many people to fulfill their obligation.

For

if you say that women are obligated in Grace after Meals

by

Torah law, then

a woman who comes

who is obligated by

Torah law can enable

a man whose obligation is

by Torah law.

Rather, if you say

that the obligation of women in the Grace after Meals is only

rabbinic, there is

a woman, in relation to the obligation of a man, in the category of

“one who is not obligated in the matter.” And every “one who is not obligated in the matter” does not enable the public to fulfill their obligation.

And the Gemara discusses:

What

is the legal ruling?

And it resolves it from a beraita:

Come and hear: They truly said

[as the halakha]:

A son

who is a minor and has reached the age of education

recites

the Grace after Meals

for his father

if his father does not know how to recite it.

And

likewise,

a slave recites for his master, and a woman recites for her husband. But the Sages said: May a curse come upon a person whose wife and children recite for him,

because he has been compelled to this on account of not having learned to recite it himself.

Granted, if you say

that women are obligated in the Grace after Meals

by Torah law, they come

—women whose obligation is

by Torah law—and enable

their husbands, for their obligation too is

by Torah law.

But if you say

that the obligation of women in the Grace after Meals is only

rabbinic—

how

does

a woman whose obligation is only

rabbinic enable

her husband, whose obligation is

by Torah law?!

And the Gemara objects:

By your reasoning,

is a

minor at all one obligated in the matter

by Torah law, and how does he enable his father to fulfill the obligation of the Grace after Meals?!

Rather, with what are we dealing here? With a case such as the father or the husband ate

only

the measure

of food

which is rabbinic,

such as when he ate the measure of an olive according to Rabbi Meir, or the measure of an egg according to Rabbi Yehuda [and an obligation by Torah law takes effect only when the food is sufficient for satiety].

That

a minor, whose obligation is

rabbinic, enables

the adult to fulfill his obligation

which is rabbinic.

Accordingly, it is possible that the obligation of the woman too is rabbinic, and what we find—that she enables her husband—is in a case in which he is obligated only rabbinically. There is no proof that her obligation is by Torah law .

Rav Avira expounded—sometimes he said it in the name of Rav Ami, and sometimes he said it in the name of Rav Asi: The ministering angels said before the Holy One, blessed be He: Master of the world, it is written in Your Torah

[Deuteronomy 10:17]

“Who does not show favoritism

and does not accept a bribe,” yet do You not show favoritism to Israel, as it is written

[Numbers 6:26]

“May the Lord lift His countenance toward you”?!

He said to them: Would I not show favoritism to Israel, for I wrote to them in the Torah

[Deuteronomy 8:10]

“You shall eat, be satisfied, and bless the Lord your God,”

although they are not obligated in the blessing until they eat to satiety ,

and they

are exacting with themselves

to bless even

for an olive-sized portion

according to Rabbi Meir,

and for an egg-sized portion

according to Rabbi Yehuda [as below, 45a].

Mishna:

Ezra decreed that one who experienced a seminal emission may neither pray nor recite the recitation of Shema, and likewise may not engage in Torah study until he immerses.

One who experienced a seminal emission

who is prohibited from prayer and Torah study, including the recitation of Shema —

contemplates

in his heart

the recitation of Shema, because its obligation is by Torah law;

but he does not recite a blessing

even by contemplation of the heart

neither before it nor after it,

because the obligation of the blessings is only rabbinic, and they did not obligate one who experienced a seminal emission to recite a blessing .

And over the food he recites

the Grace after Meals by contemplation

after it,

because its obligation is by Torah law.

But he does not recite before it

even by contemplation, for the obligation to recite a blessing before food is only rabbinic .

Rabbi Yehuda says: He recites before them and after them!

Its reason will be explained in the Gemara.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: One who experienced a seminal emission contemplates the recitation of Shema in his heart.

Ravina said:

That is to say:

Contemplation—

is considered speech ,

and he thereby fulfills the obligation of reciting Shema.

For if it enters your mind

that contemplation

is not considered speech -

why,

for what purpose,

does he contemplate

the recitation of Shema? And we ask:

Rather, what

do you say—that

contemplation is considered speech,

if so, why does he not

express

the recitation

with his lips? After all, it is no more stringent than contemplation, which was permitted to him?!

ведь оно не строже мысленного произнесения, которое ему разрешено?!

And the Gemara answers: In truth, contemplation is considered speech, and he fulfills his obligation through it; but in order to express it with his lips he requires immersion,

as we find in

the event at Mount

Sinai,

where the Children of Israel were required to immerse and not approach a woman, so that they would be pure from the impurity of a seminal emission. From there Ezra learned to institute immersion for those who experienced a seminal emission before they studied Torah, and since the source of the institution is the immersion in preparation for hearing the word of God at Mount Sinai , Ezra instituted it only for the purpose of speech, and not for the purpose of mere contemplation .

And Rav Ḥisda said: Contemplation is not considered speech.

For if it enters your mind that contemplation is considered speech—

he should express it with his lips!

The Gemara asks:

But what then

you said:

thought is not considered speech,

if so,

why does he think,

when by doing so he is not fulfilling the recitation of the Shema or the Grace after Meals?

Rabbi Elazar said: So that everyone will be engaged in it,

in the recitation of the Shema,

while he sits idle,

and he will appear as one who casts off the yoke.

And the Gemara asks:

And let the person who has experienced a seminal emission study

the

in another chapter,

such as the laws of proper conduct, which he is permitted to study, and not the recitation of the Shema!?

Rav Adda bar Ahava said:

They instituted that he engage

in

that

matter in which the congregation is engaged,

so that it will be evident that he is not separating himself from the congregation.