Berakhot 27a (כז.) — the Talmud in English

This is the opinion of the Rabbis.

And over what did they disagree? Rather, it is necessarily the case that wherever Rabbi Yehuda says “until,” the endpoint is not included.

The Gemara rejects this:

But what

did you mean

by “until,” but not

including the endpoint at all?!

If so,

come and hear the latter clause

of our Mishna:

“And the afternoon additional prayers may be recited throughout the day. Rabbi Yehuda says: Until seven hours.”

But if “until” does not include the endpoint, it follows that according to Rabbi Yehuda the time for the additional prayer extends only until the beginning of the seventh hour,

and

this cannot be, for

it was taught in a beraita: If two prayers were before him

that he was required to recite,

one the additional prayer and one the afternoon prayer—

he recites

first the prayer

of the afternoon, and afterward the additional prayer,

because

this one,

the afternoon prayer,

is regular,

as its obligation applies every day,

whereas this one,

the additional prayer,

is not regular,

as it applies only on Shabbatot, Festivals, and New Moons. And when one matter is regular and the other is not regular, the regular one takes precedence.

Rabbi Yehuda says:

He recites first the prayer

of the additional prayer, and afterward the afternoon prayer,

because

this one,

the additional prayer, is a mitzva

whose opportunity passes,

since its time extends only until seven hours,

whereas this one,

the afternoon prayer,

does not

have its opportunity pass

immediately, since there remains time for it until pelag haMinḥa.

Granted, if you say that “until

seven hours”

includes the endpoint, and it follows that the time for the additional prayer extends until the end of the seventh hour,

so that the time for the additional prayer lasts until the end of the seventh hour,

this is how you can find

according to Rabbi Yehuda

two prayers at the same time:

from the middle of the seventh hour—that is, six and a half hours—until its end, it is the appropriate time for both the additional and the afternoon prayers. According to Rabbi Yehuda, he must recite the additional prayer first.

But if you say, “until, but not including the endpoint,”

so that according to Rabbi Yehuda the time for the additional prayer extends only until the beginning of the seventh hour,

how can you find

any time at all in which

these two prayers

are appropriate

at the same time?

But

once its

time,

that of the afternoon prayer,

which begins at six and a half hours, arrives,

its

time has already

gone,

the time of the prayer of the

additional offerings,

which ended at the beginning of the seventh hour?!

It is necessarily the case that “until” includes the endpoint, and Rabbi Yehuda means that the time for the additional prayer extends until the end of the seventh hour [and therefore it can coincide with the afternoon prayer]. If so, with regard to the morning prayer as well, he means “until” including the endpoint—that is, until the end of the fourth hour.

The Gemara resumes its challenge:

But what

did you mean by

“until, including the endpoint”?

If so,

the first clause is difficult,

the first clause of our Mishna, in which we learned: “The afternoon prayer may be recited until pelag haMinḥa.”

And if “until” includes the endpoint, it follows that even according to Rabbi Yehuda the afternoon prayer may be recited until evening. If so, the question returns:

what difference is there between Rabbi Yehuda and the Rabbis?!

The Gemara answers: In fact, “until” includes the endpoint. The time for the morning prayer extends until the end of the fourth hour, and the time for the additional prayer extends until the end of the seventh hour. Therefore Rabbi Yehuda said that during the second half of the seventh hour there is a period belonging to both prayers. One cannot challenge this from his statement that the time for the afternoon prayer is “until pelag haMinḥa,” because:

Do you think that this

“until”

the pelag

of the

afternoon prayer”

means

the latter half

[the second half] of the period of the early afternoon prayer

is what he said?

That is not what he meant. Rather, he said: until

the first half,

namely, the period of one and a quarter hours constituting the first part of the time of the early afternoon prayer is called “pelag haMinḥa.” Until this time, including the endpoint, is the time for the afternoon prayer according to Rabbi Yehuda. The Sages, however, disagree and maintain that its mitzva continues until evening.

And when Rabbi Yehuda said in the beraita that the end of the time for the afternoon prayer is “the latter pelag of the afternoon,” —

he did not mean to include the second period as well, extending until nightfall. Rather,

this is what he said: When does

[the first half]

end,

which is the end of the time for the afternoon prayer,

and does the latter half begin?

Once eleven hours less a quarter have elapsed,

which is the time established as the end of the period for the afternoon prayer.

It follows that “until pelag haMinḥa” in our Mishna refers to the first half, with the endpoint included, meaning that the afternoon prayer may be recited throughout the first half of the period of the early afternoon prayer. Whereas in the beraita I explained that it refers to the end of the time for the afternoon prayer, and concerning this he said that it is at the end of the first half and the beginning of the latter half.

Rav Naḥman said: We too have learned

that “until four hours” means “until, including the endpoint”:

For we learned [Eduyot 6:1]:

Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava testified concerning five matters.

1.

That a minor girl is instructed to perform refusal,

a minor whom her brothers or mother married off after her father’s death. By Torah law, she has no valid betrothal, and only the Sages instituted that a betrothal performed by her mother should be valid. Nevertheless, she leaves her husband’s authority through mi’un, by saying, “I do not want him.” Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava testified that there is a circumstance in which it is a mitzva for the court to teach her to perform refusal.

2.

And

he testified

that a woman may be permitted to remarry on the testimony of one witness

who testifies that her husband died. Although this concerns a matter of forbidden sexual relations and ordinarily requires two witnesses, the Sages were lenient regarding testimony about a woman because of the problem of her being chained to her absent husband.

3.

And

he testified

concerning a rooster that was stoned in Jerusalem because it killed a person

[it pecked the skull of a child at the place where the brain is soft, pierced his brain, and he died]. Its legal status is like that of an ox that killed a person. 4.

And

he testified

concerning wine that had aged forty days—

that it was poured upon the altar.

And it was considered intoxicating wine fit for libation.

5.

And

he testified

concerning the morning daily offering, that it was sacrificed at four hours,

and not later.

The Gemara infers that the wording “at four hours” includes the fourth hour itself. If so,

learn from this

that Rabbi Yehuda’s intention when he said

“until

four hours” is “until,”

including the endpoint.

And we conclude:

Learn from this!

Rav Kahana said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda,

that the time for the morning prayer extends until four hours and no later,

since we learned in the choice selection

[in tractate Eduyot, which is considered “select,” because the halakha follows the testimonies recorded there] that Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava testified

in accordance with him.

We learned above: Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava testified

concerning

the morning daily offering, that it was sacrificed at four hours,

in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda in our Mishna and not in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis, who say that its time extends until midday.

The Gemara discusses:

Who is the tanna

of the following beraita, which is taught in the Mekhilta in the passage concerning the manna?

Concerning the verse [Exodus 16:21],

“And when the sun grew hot, it melted,”

they expounded: The manna melted

at four hours

of the day.

And why

do you say it was at four hours? Or perhaps it was at six hours?!

When it says

concerning Abraham [Genesis 18:1]

“at the heat of the day,”

and it did not say “at the heat of the sun,”

six hours is indicated,

because Scripture changed its wording for this reason: at the sixth hour, “the heat of the day” is the same everywhere, whether in the sun or in the shade, and it is not called “the heat of the sun.”

How, then, shall I understand

the verse concerning the manna,

“And when the sun grew hot, it melted”?

It necessarily refers to the heat of the sun

at four hours,

which is an earlier time; at that point there is heat only in a place facing the sun, whereas a shaded place is still cool.

The Gemara discusses this Mekhilta:

Who

said it? After all, it is

not

in accordance with the opinion of

Rabbi Yehuda, nor

in accordance with the opinion of

the Rabbis!

For it is stated concerning the manna: “They gathered it morning by morning, and when the sun grew hot, the remainder melted.” This implies that the time when it melted was after morning had passed and the time for gathering had already ended.

If it is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda—

then

until

the end of

four hours is also morning,

since we concluded above that “until” includes the endpoint. If so, it is still the time for gathering, and how could it have melted at the fourth hour?

If it is in accordance with the Rabbis—

the difficulty is even greater, because in their view

until midday is also morning. At four hours it is still “morning,” and it is still the time for gathering. How, then, could you say that it melted at that time?

The Gemara answers:

The Gemara explains:

If you wish, say

that this Mekhilta is

Rabbi Yehuda’s

opinion.

And if you wish, say that it is the Rabbis’

opinion.

If you wish, say: It is the Rabbis’ opinion,

and in fact until midday is considered “morning.” But with regard to the manna alone

the verse says:

“They gathered it”

“morning by morning.”

This implies:

divide

the morning

into two mornings. The time for gathering was the first half of the morning, namely, the first three hours. The statement “and when the sun grew hot, it melted” refers to the beginning of the fourth hour.

And if you wish, say: It is Rabbi Yehuda’s

opinion. He inferred from “morning by morning” that although morning ends at the end of four hours, this additional word “morning”

is superfluous

and teaches

that one should advance its

[the end of the time for gathering]

by one hour. Thus, the manna melted at the end of three hours, which is the beginning of the fourth hour.

The Gemara clarifies: It follows that

for

everybody, at least,

“and when the sun grew hot, it melted” means

means

at four hours—

what

[from where]

indicates

from the verse that this is so?

Rav Aḥa bar Yaakov said: The verse says, “And when the sun grew hot, it melted.” At what hour is the place facing

the

sun hot, while

the

shaded place is cool?

You must say: At four hours!

We learned in the Mishna:

The afternoon prayer may be recited until evening.

Rabbi Yehuda says: Until pelag haMinḥa.

Rav Ḥisda said to Rav Yitzḥak: There,

with regard to the time of the morning prayer,

Rav Kahana already said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda,

that its time extends until four hours and no later,

since we learned in the choice selection in accordance with him!

But

here,

with regard to the afternoon prayer—

what

is the halakhic ruling?

Rabbi Yitzḥak was silent

and did not answer him,

and he said

to Rav Ḥisda

nothing at all.

Rav Ḥisda said: Let us examine the matter:

for we find

that Rav

accepted Shabbat upon himself while it was still day, and

recited

the evening prayer

of Shabbat on the eve of Shabbat while it was still day —

derive from this that the halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda,

for only according to his view does the time for the afternoon prayer end at pelag haMinḥa, and the time for the evening prayer begin, even though it is still day.

But according to the Rabbis, since the time for the afternoon prayer lasts until evening, the beginning of the time for the evening prayer is at night and not earlier. For whenever it is still the time for the afternoon prayer, the time for the evening prayer has not begun.

The Gemara rejects this: If you infer from the fact that Rav prayed the evening prayer of Shabbat that the halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda, then

on the contrary,

the opposite should be inferred from those who disagreed with Rav.

For

Rav Huna and the Rabbis did not recite

the evening prayer on any day

until evening

[nightfall]—

derive from this

that

the halakha is not in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda,

but in accordance with the Rabbis, who hold that the time for the afternoon prayer lasts until evening. Therefore, they did not pray the evening prayer before the end of the time for the afternoon prayer, which is at nightfall.

The Gemara concludes:

Now that the halakha has not been stated, neither according to this master

the Rabbis,

nor according to that master

Rabbi Yehuda, since even the amoraim disagreed about this and the matter was not decided—

one who acts according to this master has acted, and one who acts

according to that master has acted!

For permission is granted to each person to adopt one of the views.

Rav happened to come to the house of Geniva, and he recited

the evening prayer

of Shabbat on the eve of Shabbat

while it was still day.

And Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba was praying

And Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba was praying

the weekday afternoon prayer

behind Rav.

And Rav completed

And Rav concluded

the prayer of Shabbat

and did not interrupt Rabbi Yirmeya’s prayer. That is, he did not pass in front of Rabbi Yirmeya to interrupt the space between him and the wall in order to sit in his place . Rather, he remained where he was and waited until Rabbi Yirmeya completed his prayer.

The Gemara derived from this:

derive three conclusions:

derive from this: a person may pray

the evening prayer

of Shabbat on the eve of Shabbat

from pelag haMinḥa.

And derive from this: a student may pray behind his teacher.

And derive from this: it is prohibited

to pass

in front of

those praying the Eighteen Benedictions, within their four cubits.

This incident supports

this incident

the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi.

For Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: It is forbidden to pass in front of those who are praying!

The Gemara raises a difficulty:

And this incident supports

this

for Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi.

For Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: It is prohibited to pass in front of those who are praying! The Gemara raises an objection:

Is that so? But Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi

were

passing

in front of those who were praying.

The Gemara answers: Rabbi Ami and Rabbi Asi— they were passing outside the four cubits of those who were praying that is where they were passing. The Gemara raises an objection:

The Gemara raises a difficulty:

But Rabbi Yirmeya—

And Rabbi Yirmeya—

how could he do this,

praying behind Rav, who was his teacher?