Berakhot 43b (מג:) — the Talmud in English

Rav Giddel said that Rav said: This samlak

is a species of herb with three rows of leaves, one above the other, and three leaves in each row

—one recites over it: “Who creates fragrant trees”

because it is a species of tree.

Rav Ḥana’el said that Rav said: These ḥalfei de-yama,

a herb resembling flax stalks

—one recites over them: “Who creates fragrant trees.”

For it, too, is a species of tree.

Mar Zutra said: What is the verse

from which it may be learned that these herbs are called “trees”? It is as it is stated: [Joshua 2:6

“And she had brought them up to the roof, and concealed them with the stalks of flax.”

And it is evident that although flax is not called a tree, nevertheless it is called “tree” in the language of Scripture

. Rav Mesharshiyya said: This narkom de-ginunita

—the ḥavatzelet ha-sharon that grows in a garden

one recites

over it: “Who creates fragrant trees.”

But over the fragrance of the ḥavatzelet ha-sharon that grows

in the wild

—in the wilderness—one must recite

“Who creates fragrant herbs.”

Rav Sheshet said: These sigalei,

a species of herb

—one recites over them

when he comes to smell them

“Who creates fragrant herbs.”

Mar Zutra said: One who smells

an etrog or a quince [one who smells the fruit of an etrog or the fruit of a quince]

says: “Blessed

is He Who has given

good fragrance to fruits.”

Rav Yehuda said: One who goes out

during the days of Nisan

and sees

trees

blossoming,

[one who goes out during the days of Nisan and sees blossoming trees]

says: “Blessed is He Who has not left anything lacking in His world,

and Who created within it good creatures and good trees

for human beings to take pleasure

in them.”

Rav Zutra bar Tovia said that Rav said: From where is it derived that one recites a blessing over fragrance? As it is stated:

[Psalms 150:6]

“Let every soul praise the Lord.”

What is a thing

that the soul enjoys, but the body does not enjoy? You must say: This is fragrance.

And Rav Zutra bar Tovia said that Rav said: The young men of Israel will ultimately

who have not tasted the taste of sin

give forth a good fragrance like

the forest of

Lebanon,

whose leaves and blossoms give forth their good fragrance over Israel, as it is stated: [Hosea 14:7

“His young growths shall spread,

[these are the young men of Israel]

and his glory shall be like the olive tree, and his fragrance like Lebanon.”

And Rav Zutra bar Tovia said that Rav said: What is the meaning of that which is written:

[Ecclesiastes 3:11]

“He has made everything beautiful in its time”?

This teaches that each and every one

of the craftsmen

the Holy One, blessed be He, makes his craft beautiful to him.

Even when a person’s craft is not beautiful, the Holy One, blessed be He, makes the craft beautiful in his eyes, so that he finds favor in it and performs it, in order that this craft should not be lacking from the world.

Rav Pappa said: This is what people commonly say

[a proverb that people are accustomed to say]:

Tie a korah to something else, and he

will perform his own task!

Tie to a pig’s neck the tender branch [called korah] that grows on a palm tree, so that it will eat it while it is clean; and it will do its own thing—it will roll it in the refuse! For this is the pig’s craft: to roll everything in refuse, and it sees no deficiency in this.

And Rav Zutra bar Tovia said that Rav said:

Although the Master said that a person should not go out alone at night, nevertheless, he is permitted to go out when he has in his hand

a torch,

because it is considered

like two, and

if the

moon

is shining, this is considered

like three.

[The difference between them will be explained below.]

They raised a dilemma before them:

Does

a torch

count

as two together with him

[together with him],

or perhaps a torch

counts

as two besides him

[without him], in which case together with him there are three?

Come and hear:

from the conclusion of Rav’s statement, who said:

“And the moon

—like three.”

Granted, if you say

that a torch counts as two, this means

together with him; this is well,

and Rav’s statement that “the moon is like three” is understood.

But if you say

that a torch counts as two, this means

besides him.

If so, “the moon is like three” must also mean besides him. And this is difficult:

four

—why do I need it?

What benefit is there in the fact that together with the moon they are considered four!?

But did the Master not say: With one,

the demon

is seen and causes harm; with two,

the demon

is seen but does not cause harm; with three, it is not seen at all.

If so, what benefit is there in counting them as four, since already with three the demon is not seen at all?

Rather, is it not so? Learn from this

that what we say,

“a torch counts as two,”

as Rav said, means

together with him.

Learn from this!

And Rav Zutra bar Tovia said that Rav said—and some say that Rav Ḥana bar Bizna said that Rabbi Shimon Ḥasida said, and some say that Rabbi Yoḥanan said it in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: It is preferable for a person to throw himself into a fiery furnace rather than publicly humiliate another person,

From where do we derive this? From Tamar. As it is stated:

[Genesis 38:25]

“She was taken out,”

although they had taken her out to be burned, she did not reveal that she was pregnant by Judah, so as not to humiliate him. Rather, she sent him the identifying articles so that he would confess on his own. And she said: If he confesses, he will confess; and if not, I will be burned, but I will not humiliate him.

The Sages taught: They brought before him

at the end of the meal

oil

with which to anoint his hands, to remove the grime of the food,

and myrtle

to smell.

The tannaim disagreed regarding the order of precedence for the blessings.

Beit Shammai say:

First,

he recites a blessing over the oil,

“Who creates fragrant oil,”

and afterward he recites a blessing over the myrtle,

“Who creates fragrant trees.”

And Beit Hillel say,

the reverse: first

he recites a blessing over the myrtle, and afterward he recites a blessing over the oil.

Rabban Gamliel said: I will decide

that the halakha is in accordance with Beit Shammai, since

oil

allows two forms of enjoyment, for

we were privileged to enjoy its fragrance and we were privileged to use it for anointing,

whereas

myrtle

allows only one form of enjoyment, for

we were privileged to enjoy its fragrance, but we were not privileged to use it for anointing.

Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The halakha follows the view of the decisive authority,

who decided in accordance with Beit Shammai, that is, in accordance with Rabban Gamliel.

Rav Pappa happened to come

[he happened to come]

to the home of

[to the home of]

Rav Huna, son of Rav Ika. They brought before them

[they brought before them]

oil and myrtle. Rav Pappa took the myrtle, recited the blessing over the myrtle first, and afterward recited the blessing over the oil,

in accordance with Beit Hillel.

He said to him,

Rav Huna: Is it the case that

the Master does not accept

that which Rabbi Yoḥanan said,

“The halakha follows the view of the decisive authority,”

in accordance with Beit Shammai, so that first one recites a blessing over the oil and afterward over the myrtle?

He said to him,

Rav Pappa:

This is what Rava said: The halakha is in accordance with Beit Hillel,

that one recites a blessing over the myrtle and afterward over the oil. Therefore, I too acted in accordance with Beit Hillel, contrary to Rabbi Yoḥanan’s ruling.

The Gemara adds:

That is not so!

Rava never said that the halakha is in accordance with Beit Hillel. And Rav Pappa, who attributed his own reasoning to Rava,

did so merely to extricate himself.

The Sages taught: They brought before them oil

to smell

and wine

to drink—

Beit Shammai say:

He holds the oil in his right hand,

because, ideally, anything over which one recites a blessing in order to eat or smell should be held in one’s right hand while reciting the blessing, so that one will concentrate properly on what one is blessing.

And the wine in his left hand,

since he is not presently reciting a blessing over it.

First

he recites a blessing over the oil,

the blessing “Who creates fragrant oil,”

and

afterward

he again

takes the wine in his right hand

and recites a blessing over the wine.

And

Beit Hillel say: He holds the wine in his right hand,

since he gives precedence to the blessing over wine.

And the oil

he holds

in his left hand,

since at present he is not reciting a blessing over it.

First

he recites a blessing over the wine and again

takes the oil in his right hand

and recites a blessing over the oil.

And

if the diner is a Torah scholar,

he smears

[he wipes it] the oil remaining on his hands

on the head of the attendant.

And if even

the

attendant is a Torah scholar—

he smears

the remaining oil

on the wall.

The reason for wiping it off is

that it is disgraceful for a Torah scholar to go out to the marketplace while perfumed,

as will be explained shortly.

The Sages taught: Six things are disgraceful for a Torah scholar: He should not go out to the marketplace while perfumed, he should not go out alone at night, he should not go out in

patched

[shoes that have patches],

he should not converse with a woman in the marketplace, he should not recline in a group of amei ha-aretz, and he should not enter last

[last]

into the study hall. And some say: He should also not take an excessively large step, and he should not walk with an upright posture.

The Gemara examines these laws one by one:

“He should not go out to the marketplace while perfumed”

what is the reason?

Rabbi Abba, son of Rabbi Chiyya bar Abba, said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said:

This law

was stated with regard to a place where people are suspected of male homosexuality,

for those suspected of this perfume themselves so that others will desire them.

Rav Sheshet said: We said

that it is forbidden to go out to the marketplace while perfumed

only

when the perfume is

on his garment, but

when the perfume is

on his body

it is permitted, since

sweat removes it

from the perfume.

Rav Pappa said: And his hair

is considered like his garment,

since sweat is not common in it, and it is forbidden to apply perfume to it.

And some say

that there are those who say it is permitted to apply perfume to his hair, since with regard to perfume his hair

is considered like his body,

because sweat is also found in the hair.

The second law cited in the beraita is:

“And he should not go out alone at night,”

what is the reason?

Because of suspicion,

as people may suspect him of promiscuity.

And we said this only when he does not have a fixed time

[and they said this only when he does not have a fixed time] to study with his teacher at night,

but

if

he has a fixed time,

when he has a fixed time to go study at night, it is permitted for him to go out alone, because

it is known

to everyone

that he is going because it is his regular time,

and they will not come to suspect him.

The third law cited in the beraita is:

“And he should not go out in patched shoes.” This supports Rabbi Chiyya bar Abba, for Rabbi Chiyya bar Abba said: It is disgraceful for a Torah scholar to go out in patched shoes,

because he must be dignified and appropriate to the honor of his Torah.

The Gemara raises an objection:

Is that so? But Rabbi Chiyya bar Abba

himself

went out

[went out] in patched shoes!?

Mar Zutra, son of Rav Naḥman, said:

They said that this is disgraceful only

when there is one patch over another patch.

And we said

that it is disgraceful

only on the outer surface,

when the patch is on the upper part of the shoe;

but on the sole

[on the sole]

we have no concern,

and it is permitted.

And

even

on the outer surface,

also

we said this only

with regard to going out in them

on the road

[on the road];

but in the house—

we have no concern.

And we said

that it is disgraceful

only during the summer,

because the patch is visible;

but during the rainy season,

when the mud on the shoe covers it—

we have no concern,

and it is permitted.

The fourth law cited in the beraita is:

“And he should not converse with a woman in the marketplace.”

Rav Chisda said: Even if she is his wife,

because not everyone recognizes her, and people may come to suspect him.

It was taught likewise here:

he should not converse with a woman in the marketplace

even if she is his wife, even if she is his daughter, and even if she is his sister, because not everyone is familiar with his female relatives.

The fifth law cited in the beraita is:

“And he should not recline in a group of amei ha-aretz,”

what is the reason?

Perhaps he will come to be drawn after them

[lest he be drawn after them].

The sixth law cited in the beraita is:

“And he should not enter last into the study hall”—

what is the reason?

Because they will call him negligent

[lazy].

The additional law cited in the beraita is:

“And some say: He should also not take an excessively large step,”

what is the reason?

For the Master said: An excessively large step

removes one five-hundredth of a person’s eyesight.

What is his remedy

for one who takes an excessively large step?

He should restore it

[restore it] to his eyesight

through the sanctification of the eve,

by drinking the cup of Kiddush on Friday night.

The final law cited in the beraita is:

“And he should not walk with an upright posture,”

what is the reason?

For the Master said: One who walks with an upright posture, even

for four cubits, is as though he pushes aside the feet of the Divine Presence. As it is written:

[Isaiah 6:3]

“The entire earth is filled with His glory.”