Berakhot 22b — the Talmud in English

When Ravin came, he said: An incident occurred in Usha ![](pamud.bmp "

Exact page location")

in the small chamber,

the room in front of the main hall,

of Rav Oshaya. They came and asked Rav Asi

whether it is sufficient for one who experienced a seminal emission to have nine kav of water poured over him.

He said to them,

Rav Asi:

They taught

that nine kav must be poured over him

only with regard to an ill person whose emission resulted from sexual activity; but an ill person whose emission resulted from an involuntary occurrence is exempt from everything.

Rav Yosef said: The broken pieces have now been joined again,

the fragments of

Rav Naḥman’s water vessel.

That is to say: Since Rav Asi said that nine kav are sufficient for an ill person whose emission resulted from sexual activity, it follows that the water vessel that Rav Naḥman had set up for his students was useful, since they are considered “ill” persons whose emissions result from marital relations, and the pouring of nine kav over them is effective.

The Gemara discusses: Since Ezra’s enactment was a common matter, how could it be that the details of the enactment were not known and were the subject of dispute?

Granted,

then,

all the amoraim and tannaitic sages are disputing Ezra’s

enactment.

And

if so,

let us see how Ezra

himself

enacted it!

Abaye said: Ezra enacted that a healthy person whose emission resulted from sexual activity

through marital relations must immerse in

forty se'a, while a healthy person

who experiences a seminal emission

involuntarily requires

nine kav. But he did not clarify the status of an ill person who experienced a seminal emission.

And the amoraim came,

Rav Dimi and Ravin,

and disputed the status of an ill person,

what his law is.

One master,

Rav Dimi,

held: An ill person whose emission resulted from sexual activity

has the same status

as a healthy person whose emission resulted from sexual activity,

and he requires immersion in forty se'a.

And an ill person whose emission resulted involuntarily has the same status as a healthy person whose emission resulted involuntarily.

It is sufficient for nine kav of water to be poured over him.

And one master,

Ravin,

held: An ill person whose emission resulted from sexual activity has the same status

as a healthy person whose emission resulted involuntarily,

requiring nine kav.

But an ill person whose emission resulted involuntarily is

exempt from everything.

Rava said: Granted that Ezra enacted immersion

in forty se'a,

but who enacted

the pouring of nine kav of water

at all?

!

But the Master said,

in tractate Bava Kamma 82a, with regard to the ten enactments that Ezra enacted:

“Ezra enacted immersion for those who experience seminal emissions!”

This indicates that he enacted immersion alone, and not the pouring of nine kav of water. From where, then, did Abaye derive that Ezra enacted nine kav for a healthy person who experienced a seminal emission involuntarily?

Rather, Rava said: Ezra enacted immersion in forty se'a for a healthy person whose emission resulted from sexual activity.

And the Sages came,

in later generations,

and enacted nine kav for a healthy person whose emission resulted involuntarily.

And the amoraim came,

Rav Dimi and Ravin,

and disputed the status of an ill person:

One master,

Rav Dimi,

held

that Ezra and the Sages did not distinguish between an ill person and a healthy person. Therefore,

an ill person whose emission resulted from sexual activity has the same status

as a healthy person whose emission resulted from sexual activity,

and he requires immersion in forty se'a,

while an ill person whose emission resulted involuntarily has the same status

as a healthy person whose emission resulted involuntarily,

for whom nine kav are sufficient.

And one master,

Ravin,

held

that Ezra and the Sages enacted the rule without distinction. This means that it applied

to a healthy person whose emission resulted from sexual activity: forty se'a. When the Sages of later generations added a rule that also addressed a limited degree of involuntary occurrence, they gave

When the Sages who followed them added an enactment applying also in cases involving a degree of involuntariness, they made

an ill person whose emission resulted from sexual activity the same status

as a healthy person whose emission resulted involuntarily,

for whom

nine kav are sufficient. But an ill person whose emission resulted involuntarily is

exempt from everything.

Rava said: The halakhic ruling concerning one who experienced a seminal emission and came to study Torah is:

concerning a ba'al keri who comes to study Torah is as follows:

a.

A healthy person whose emission resulted from sexual activity and an ill person whose emission resulted from sexual activity

must immerse before

forty se'a.

b.

But a healthy person whose emission resulted involuntarily

need only have

nine kav poured over him.

c.

But an ill person whose emission resulted involuntarily is

exempt from everything.

The Sages taught: If nine kav of water were poured over one who experienced a seminal emission, he is

pure.

When does this statement apply,

that nine kav are sufficient?

When he studies Torah for himself. But to teach Torah to others,

forty se'a are required.

Rabbi Yehuda says: Forty se'a in every case,

even for one who studies for himself.

Rabbi Yoḥanan, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, Rabbi Elazar, and Rabbi Yosei bar Rabbi Ḥanina

were two pairs of amoraim who discussed this beraita.

a.

One

amora

from this pair and one

amora

from that pair

discussed the words of the first tannaitic authority,

at the beginning

of the beraita:

One said: This statement that you said,

the first tannaitic authority,

“When does this statement apply,

to studying Torah

for himself, but for others, forty se'a,” applies only to an ill person whose emission resulted from sexual activity. But for an ill person whose emission was involuntary, nine kav are sufficient

to teach Torah to others; but for studying Torah himself, he is exempt from everything, since his status is more lenient than that of an ill person whose emission resulted from sexual activity, both when he studies for himself and when he teaches others].

And one said: In every case involving teaching others, even an ill person whose emission was involuntary

is forbidden to teach

until there are forty se'a.

With regard to teaching others, the Sages were not more lenient with an ill person whose emission was involuntary than with an ill person whose emission resulted from sexual activity.

b.

And one

amora

from this pair and one

amora

from that pair

discussed

the end,

the statement of Rabbi Yehuda:

One said: This statement of Rabbi Yehuda, “Forty se'a in every case,”

applies only when the water is gathered in the ground; but if it is in vessels, it does not

even make immersion effective if the vessels contain forty se'a.

And one said: Even when the water is in vessels, immersion is effective,

provided that they contain forty se'a.

The Gemara raises a difficulty:

It is understandable according to the one who says that even when the water is in vessels,

immersion in forty se'a is effective according to Rabbi Yehuda;

this is why it teaches

in the beraita:

“Rabbi Yehuda says: Forty se'a ‘in every case.’”

But according to the one who says that the water must be in the ground, yes, and in vessels, no, what does the additional phrase

what does the addition by Rabbi Yehuda of

“in every case”

come to include?

The Gemara answers:

It comes to include

the possibility of immersing in

drawn water

that is gathered in the ground.

Rav Pappa, Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, and Rava bar Shmuel broke bread

and the three of them ate bread

together,

in one meal, and became obligated to recite the invitation to Grace after Meals, whereby one person recites the blessing after the meal on behalf of the others and fulfills their obligation.

Rav Pappa said to them: Let me recite the blessing,

and fulfill your obligation, since I am more qualified than you, because

nine kav fell upon me.

Rava bar Shmuel said to them:

Behold,

we learned: “When does this statement apply,

that nine kav of water are sufficient?

For himself, but for others

forty se'a.”

Here you are attempting to fulfill the obligation of others.

Rather, let me recite the blessing,

since I am more qualified for this,

because it fell upon me

—that is, I immersed — in

forty se'a.

Rav Huna said to them: Let me recite the blessing, since neither this nor that applies to me

—because I am pure, as I did not experience a seminal emission at all today.

Rav Ḥama immersed on the eve of Passover,

as he would immerse on Passover eve in forty se'a in order

to fulfill

the obligation of the masses

on the night of the Seder.

And the halakhic ruling is not in accordance with him.

This is either because even for teaching others nine kav are sufficient, or because the halakha follows Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira, who held that Ezra’s enactment is not practiced [Rashi].

Mishna:

a. One who

was standing in prayer and remembered that he had experienced a seminal emission

must not interrupt

his prayer,

but he should shorten

the wording of the blessings.

b.

If he descended to immerse,

and the time for reciting the morning Shema arrived,

if he can ascend, cover himself, and recite it before sunrise,

he should ascend, cover himself, and recite it.

But if not,

he should cover himself with the water

[he should remove his head from the water while keeping his body in the water, so that the water covers his body in relation to his head, which is outside the water],

and recite it.

: ]

The Gemara presents and explains the Mishna as follows:

c.

He may not cover himself either with foul water

[putrid water]

or with water in which flax was soaked

at all, because of their foul odor. They cannot be rendered fit by adding water to them, since they are present in a large quantity.

d.

If he finds a vessel containing urine opposite him, he may not recite the Shema facing it

until he pours into it

water to dilute the urine

.

Since the urine is relatively small in quantity, it can be nullified by adding water to it.

e.

How far must he distance himself from them,

from urine when he does not add water to it,

and from excrement,

in order to be permitted to recite the Shema?

Four cubits.

Gemara:

The Sages taught: One who was standing in prayer and remembered that he had experienced a seminal emission

must not interrupt, but he should shorten

the blessings.

If he was reading

in the synagogue

from the Torah and remembered that he had experienced a seminal emission,

he does not interrupt

his reading

and go up; rather, he reads haltingly,

hurriedly, so that because of the speed of his reading he sounds as though he is stammering.

Rabbi Meir says: One who has experienced a seminal emission

who was called up to read from the Torah in the synagogue

may not read more than three verses from the Torah.

However, he must read three verses, since we learned [Megilla 23b] that in a public reading it is forbidden to read fewer than three verses.

It was taught in another beraita: If one was standing in prayer and saw excrement in front of him,

he should walk forward until he throws it away,

meaning that he distances himself from it until it is

four

cubits behind him.

The Gemara raises a difficulty:

But it was taught:

It is sufficient that the excrement be

four cubits to the side,

and it is unnecessary to distance it behind him!?

The Gemara answers:

This is not difficult. This

statement, that he should distance it behind him, refers to a situation in which

it is possible

for him to walk forward and distance himself from it, whereas

this

statement, that he should move to the side, refers to a situation in which

it is not possible

for him to walk forward, for example, because there is a river in front of him.

Another law:

If one was praying and found excrement in his place,

Rabba said: Even though he sinned

by failing to check whether the place was suitable for prayer and free of excrement within four cubits, nevertheless,

his prayer is a prayer.

Rava raised an objection to him: But

since he was required to check that the place of prayer was clean and failed to do so, how can his prayer be considered a prayer? Is it not stated [Proverbs 21:27]:

“The sacrifice of the wicked

is an abomination!”

If a sinner has not repented of his sin, his offering does not find favor; the same should apply to one who sins by failing to ensure that the place of prayer is clean, since the prayers were instituted in place of the offerings.

Rather, Rava said: Since he sinned, even though he prayed -

his prayer is an abomination.

Our Rabbis taught: He was standing in prayer and

there were

water

urine

trickling onto his knees -

he interrupts until the water has ceased, and returns and prays .

The Gemara discussed:

To where does he return?

Rav Hisda and Rav Hamnuna—one said: He returns to the beginning

of the prayer.

And one said:

He returns

to the place where he interrupted .

Let us say that they disagree about this: