Berakhot 28a (כח.) — the Talmud in English

Perhaps they will remove you

from the position of Nasi afterward.

He said to her: Let a person use it,

for it is preferable for a person to use even

one day a precious glass

[a costly glass],

and

even if

tomorrow it will break,

this cup will break. This is an analogy: it is worthwhile to take advantage of the position granted to him today, even though it may soon be taken away from him.

His wife said to him:

How will you become Nasi? After all,

you do not have white hairs

[white hair] indicating old age, and it is fitting for a preacher to be elderly.

On that day, eighteen

[eighteen]

years old was

Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya.

A miracle occurred for him, and eighteen rows of white hair were restored to him

[eighteen rows of gray hair].

And

this is what

Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya meant in the Mishna above [12b]:

“I am like a man of seventy years, and he did not

say

‘a man of seventy years,’

”

because he was young in years, but he appeared “like a man of seventy years.” It was taught:

On the day that Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya was appointed,

they removed the guard from the entrance

to the beit-midrash,

and the students were given permission to enter.

For as long as

Rabban Gamliel was

Nasi, he

would proclaim and say: “Any student whose inside is not like his outside

[who engages in Torah but does not possess fear of Heaven, Yoma 72b],

may not enter the beit-midrash!”

And

on that day

when permission was granted for everyone to enter,

several benches were added

to the beit-midrash.

Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Abba Yosef ben Dostai and the Rabbis disagree

about the number of benches that were added on that day.

One said: Four hundred benches were added!

And one said:

that

seven hundred benches were added!

When Rabban Gamliel saw that many students had been added,

Rabban Gamliel became distressed,

and he feared that he would be punished for having prevented them from entering.

He said: Perhaps, Heaven forbid, I prevented Torah from Israel!?

They showed him

—they showed Rabban Gamliel

in his dream white jugs filled with ashes

[white jugs filled with ashes], thereby hinting to him that he was correct: one whose inside is not like his outside is unfit for the beit-midrash, and he resembles a beautiful jug whose inside contains something lowly, like ashes.

And the Gemara concludes:

That is not so,

for it is not proper to prevent anyone from entering the beit-midrash.

And

that

which they showed him in his dream was so

to settle

[to calm]

his mind; that is why they showed it to him.

It was taught:

The tractate

Eduyot

was arranged on the very day

that Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya was appointed

—it was taught.

And wherever we say

in the Mishnayot

“on that day,”

it refers to that day.

There was no halakhic matter that was pending

[unresolved]

in the beit-midrash that they did not clarify,

because as the number of students increased, so did the acuity and give-and-take of the discussion.

And Rabban Gamliel did not prevent

himself

from the beit-midrash

during Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya’s tenure as Nasi,

even for a single hour.

As we learned

[Yadayim 4:4]:

“On that day Judah came,

who was

an Ammonite convert, before them in the beit-midrash.

He said to them: May I enter the congregation?

Rabban Gamliel said to him: You may not enter the congregation!

Rabbi Yehoshua said to him,

to Judah the Ammonite convert:

You may enter the congregation!

Rabban Gamliel said to him,

to Rabbi Yehoshua:

But was it not already stated

[Deuteronomy 23:4]

“An Ammonite and a Moabite may not enter the congregation of the Lord,”

and how did it occur to you to permit him?

Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: Are Ammon and Moab still dwelling in their places? Was not Sennacherib, king of Assyria, already advanced, and did he not mix up all the nations, as it is stated

in Sennacherib’s words [Isaiah 10:13]:

“I removed the boundaries of nations, and their treasures I plundered

[I looted them], and

I brought down inhabitants like a mighty one,”

meaning that he transferred all the inhabitants of the lands from their places to other places, so that they would not become strong and rebel against him.

Therefore, those who come from the land of Ammon are not presumed to be Ammonites. Rather, every gentile, wherever he may be, is possibly an Ammonite. Nevertheless, he may not be prohibited on that account, since Ammonites are a minority among the inhabitants of the world, and we follow the majority of the world, who are not Ammonites,

and

we rely on the principle that

anything separated from a majority is presumed to have separated from the majority .

Rabban Gamliel said to him: But was it not already stated

[Jeremiah 49:6]

“And afterward I will restore the captivity of the children of Ammon, says the Lord,” and they have already returned

to their place? Therefore, anyone who comes from the land of Ammon is presumed to be an Ammonite and may not enter the congregation.

Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: But was it not already stated

[Amos 9:14]

“And I will restore the captivity of My people Israel”?

Yet this prophecy has still not been fulfilled,

and they have still not returned.

Likewise, the prophecy concerning the return of the children of Ammon has not yet been fulfilled, and they have not yet returned to their land.

Immediately

they acted in accordance with Rabbi Yehoshua’s words, and

they permitted him

—Judah the Ammonite convert—

to enter the congregation.

Rabban Gamliel said: Since this is how it happened,

that the halakha was decided in accordance with him,

I will go and appease Rabbi Yehoshua!

When

Rabban Gamliel

arrived at the house

of Rabbi Yehoshua,

he saw the walls

[walls]

of his house

blackened.

He said to him: You are recognizable from the walls of your house: you are a charcoal maker

[a blacksmith]

!

Rabbi Yehoshua said to him:

Rabbi Yehoshua:

Woe to the generation of which you are the leader,

because

you do not know the suffering of Torah scholars

—how they earn their livelihood and how they are fed!

For until now you did not know from what I supported myself.

Rabban Gamliel said to him:

Rabban Gamliel:

I have offended

and said

to you

things that were not fitting to say.

Forgive me!

He paid him no attention,

Rabbi Yehoshua.

He pressed him:

Do it for the honor of Father

[Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, Nasi of Israel ] and forgive me!

Then

he appeased

Rabbi Yehoshua, and Rabbi Yehoshua forgave him.

Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Yehoshua said:

How shall we go and tell the Sages

Who will go and tell the Sages

that we have been reconciled, and that the position of Nasi should be returned to Rabban Gamliel?

A certain launderer said to them: I will go

and tell this to the Sages!

Rabbi Yehoshua sent word to

the Sages in the

study hall

with the launderer:

Whoever has worn

until now

the robe

[cloak] should continue to

wear the robe,

but

whoever has not worn the robe,

would he

say to the one who has worn the robe, “Remove your robe and I will wear it”?!

This was an analogy: Rabban Gamliel, who was accustomed to the position of Nasi, was the one fit to be Nasi, not Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, who was not accustomed to it.

Rabbi Akiva said to the Sages: Lock the doors

[close the door], so

that the servants of Rabban

Gamliel will not come and trouble the Sages,

for he thought that the launderer was a servant of Rabban Gamliel.

When Rabbi Yehoshua saw this,

he said: It is better that I get up and go to them

to the Sages, and inform them.

Rabbi Yehoshua came

to the study hall and

knocked

[rapped]

on the door.

He said to them,

to the Sages:

One who sprinkles, the son of one who sprinkles

[a priest, the son of a priest, who is fit to sprinkle the water of the red heifer]

shall sprinkle

the water of purification to purify the impure.

And

if someone

is neither one who sprinkles nor the son of one who sprinkles,

would he

say to one who sprinkles, the son of one who sprinkles:

Your sprinkling is not a valid sprinkling, because

your water is cave water

[and not living water]

and your ashes are ordinary ashes

[ordinary ashes from an oven or stove, and not ashes of a red heifer]?! This was an analogy: Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya was not entitled to depose Rabban Gamliel from the position of Nasi.

Rabbi Akiva said to Rabbi Yehoshua:

I see that you

have been reconciled

with Rabban Gamliel, and since that is so, he should be reinstated. After all,

did we do what we did

[remove him from the position of Nasi]

except for your honor?

Therefore,

tomorrow

we will go—

you and I—and rise early at his door

of Rabban Gamliel!

Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yehoshua said:

Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Yehoshua:

What shall we do?

If we reinstate Rabban Gamliel and

remove

Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya from the position of Nasi, this should not be done, because

it is a received halakhic tradition:

the

holy is elevated, and it is not lowered!

And if we establish that

Rabban Gamliel should lecture

[Rabban Gamliel]

one week and the Master

[Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya]

one week—that too is not fitting, because

would also not be proper, because

Rabban Gamliel will come

and

become jealous of him

if he is made his equal.

Rather, Rabban Gamliel should lecture for three weeks

a month,

and Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya for one week.

And this is what the Master said

in connection with a particular halakhic matter stated on Shabbat in the study hall:

“Whose Shabbat was it?

Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya’s!”

And that student

who asked Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Yehoshua whether the evening prayer is optional or obligatory, and through whom that incident occurred,

was Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai.

We learned in the Mishna:

And the additional prayer may be recited throughout the entire day.

Rabbi Yoḥanan said:

If he delayed

and

recited the additional prayer after six hours, although he fulfilled his obligation,

he is called a sinner!

The Sages taught: If two prayers were before him

that he was required to recite,

one the afternoon prayer and one the additional prayer, he recites

first

the afternoon prayer, and afterward he recites the additional prayer .

For the time of the additional prayer does not pass. And if the reason is that one who delays the additional prayer is called a “sinner,” he has already delayed it beyond six hours, and in any event is called a “sinner.” Therefore, he should recite the afternoon prayer first, because

this one,

the afternoon prayer,

is frequent

[it is practiced every day], whereas

this one,

the additional prayer,

is not frequent

[it is recited only on Shabbat, Festivals, and New Moons]. And when one matter is frequent and another is not frequent, the frequent one takes precedence.

Rabbi Yehuda says: He recites

first

the additional prayer, and afterward he recites the afternoon prayer.

And Rabbi Yehuda follows his own view, as he holds that the time for the additional prayer is until the seventh hour. Therefore, it should be recited earlier, because

it is a mitzva whose opportunity passes

and one will not be able to fulfill it after the seventh hour,

whereas

if

this

—the afternoon prayer—

is a mitzva whose opportunity does not immediately pass,

for its time extends until pelag haMinha.

Rabbi Yohanan said:

The halakha is in accordance with the Sages. And

he recites the afternoon prayer, and afterward he recites the additional prayer!

When Rabbi Zeira became weak from his studies

and was unable to engage in Torah study,

he would go and sit at the entrance of the house of study of Rabbi Natan bar Toviy.

He said:

When

the Sages pass by, I will rise before them and receive reward [at least a reward] for this mitzva of honoring Torah scholars.

He went out,

and

Rav Natan bar Toviy came.

He said to him,

Rabbi Zeira:

Who

among the members of the academy

said

that the

halakha

is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda [with regard to the case of “if two prayers were before him”], in the

beit-midrash?

Rav Natan said to him:

Rav Natan

This is what Rabbi Yohanan said: The halakha is not in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda, who said: A person recites the additional prayer and afterward recites the afternoon prayer,

but the halakha is in accordance with the Sages, and he recites the afternoon prayer first.

Rabbi Zeira said to him:

Did

Rabbi Yohanan say it

as a ruling?

He said to him: Yes!

Rabbi Zeira learned it from him

Rav Natan, this matter in the name of Rabbi Yohanan,

forty times.

Rav Natan said to him:

Why do you pursue this ruling so intensely? Is it because

it is the one

[the sole one]

you have,

and you have not heard any other halakhic teaching in the name of Rabbi Yohanan, which is why it is so dear to you?

Or

is it because

it is a novel teaching

[a new insight]

for you,

because you had thought that another Sage had said it?

Rabbi Zeira said to him:

Rabbi Zeira

It is a novel teaching

[a new insight]

for me, because I was uncertain

about who had stated this ruling, and I had thought that

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi

had stated it!

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: Anyone who recites the additional prayer after seven hours—

according to

the view of

Rabbi Yehuda,

for its time has already passed—

the verse says about him [Zephaniah 3:18]:

“Those afflicted by the appointed time I gathered

from you,”

because they caused the appointed times of the prayers to pass, they will be afflicted, gathered together, and brought to an end.

The Gemara discusses:

What

[from where]

indicates that this word “afflicted”

is an expression of breaking

[shattering]

?

The Gemara explains:

As Rav Yosef translated

a verse with regard to another matter:

“Destruction will come upon the enemies of the house of Israel”

[that is, upon Israel, expressed as a euphemism],

“because they delayed the times of the festivals in Jerusalem!”

And they expounded it both with regard to delaying the times of prayer and with regard to delaying the times of the festivals.

Rabbi Elazar said: Anyone who recites the morning prayer after four hours—

according to

the view of

Rabbi Yehuda,

for its time has already passed—

“the verse says about him: ‘Those afflicted by the appointed time I gathered from you.’”

And “afflicted” is an expression of distress: they will be sorrowful because they caused the appointed times of the prayers to pass.

What indicates that this word “afflicted” is an expression of distress?—

As it is written [Psalms 119:28]:

“My soul drips away from grief.”

Rav Nahman bar Yitzhak said: From here—

it is demonstrated that it is an expression of distress—

as it is written [Lamentations 1:4]:

“Her maidens are sorrowful, and she is bitter for her.”