Gittin 7a (ז.) — the Talmud in English

Rav Ashi said: I did not hear it -

I did not hear the statement of

Rabba bar bar Ḥana.

And nevertheless,

I fulfilled it

in its entirety

by inference

of my own [i.e., on my own understanding]. And similarly,

Rabbi Abbahu said: A person should never impose excessive fear within his household, for a great man imposed excessive fear within his household, and his servants fed him

his servants

a significant item -

that is,

a limb from a living animal [which had been severed from a live animal without slaughtering it].

And who was he?

And who was that great man?

Rabbi Ḥanina ben Gamliel.

The Gemara asks:

Could it enter your mind that they fed him

that they actually fed him such a thing?

Now

The Gemara asks:

Would it enter your mind that they fed him?

Do you really think that they actually fed him?

Now -

now that we know that even

the animals of the righteous—the Holy One, blessed be He, does not bring about a mishap through them

so that they would eat something prohibited -

the righteous themselves, is it not all the more so?

That is, the Holy One, blessed be He, protects them from mishaps. If so, how could Rabbi Ḥanina ben Gamliel have stumbled? The Gemara answers:

Rather, they sought to feed him -

they intended to feed him -

a significant item. And what was it?

What was it?

A limb from a living animal [

which they had slaughtered an animal for him, but one of its limbs had been lost. And because they were afraid that he might notice

and become angry, they cut such a limb from a live animal and put it in place of the limb that had been lost, so that he would not notice].

The Gemara continues to discuss the matter of ruling paper, and relates:

Mar Ukva sent a letter

to Rabbi Elazar

and asked: There are

people who stand against me -

against me constantly -

to insult and revile me. And I have

the power and ability to inform against them

and hand them over to the government. What

is the law [is this permitted or prohibited]?

‘I will guard my ways from sinning with my tongue; I will guard my mouth with a muzzle while the wicked one is before me.’”

Rabbi Elazar ruled lines

on the paper

and wrote him

a verse from Psalms [as an answer to his question]: “I said,

‘I will guard my ways from sinning with my tongue; I will guard my mouth with a muzzle, while the wicked is before me.’”

Its meaning is:

Even though a wicked person

stands before me,

to quarrel with me and provoke me, nevertheless,

“I will guard my mouth with a muzzle,”

and I will not inform against him.

they are greatly distressing me -

Mar Ukva returned and

sent him

another letter, writing:

“They are causing me great distress” -

they are causing me immense anguish -

“and I cannot withstand them.”

I cannot bear it.

He sent him

Rabbi Elazar sent him another verse:

“Be silent

before the Lord and wait patiently for Him.”

Its meaning is:

“Be silent before the Lord” -

pray to Him,

“and He will cast them down before you” - before you - corpses upon corpses. Rise early and stay late on their account in the beit midrash. And they are those people who trouble you - will perish on their own by themselves [without any counteraction on your part]. And indeed: the matter issued from Rabbi Elazar’s mouth, and at that very moment they placed Geneiva the man who had harassed Mar Ukva - in the collar. [They bound him with an iron chain of the kind used to bind those condemned to death by the government.]

the matter came from Rabbi Elazar’s mouth,

and at that very moment

they placed Giniva -

the person who had harassed Mar Ukva -

in chains.

They bound him with an iron chain, of the kind used to bind those condemned by the government to death].

Another incident concerning ruling lines on writing material:

They sent a letter to Mar Ukva,

and asked him:

Musical singing,

which people customarily sing in drinking houses,

from where do we know that it is prohibited

since the destruction of the Temple]?

And another incident concerning ruling lines:

They sent a letter to Mar Ukva,

and asked him:

Zimra,

which people customarily sang in banquet halls,

from where do we know that it is prohibited -

from where do we know that it is prohibited [since the destruction of the Temple]?

He ruled lines

on the paper,

and wrote them

a verse:

“Do not rejoice, Israel, with exultation like the nations.”

If he had used that verse

The Gemara asks:

Why did he not send them a response from here

-

why did he not send them an answer from this verse

[from this verse]:

“They do not drink wine with song;

bitter

[it will be bitter]

is strong drink to those who drink it.”

The Gemara answers:

If he had sent them that verse - if he had sent them that verse - I would have said: This applies - we would have thought that specifically instrumental zimra - singing with an instrument [such as a violin] is prohibited. But vocal song - singing with the mouth - is permitted. It teaches us this - therefore he sent the verse, “Do not rejoice, Israel, and so on,” to teach us that every kind of zimra [that is not for the sake of a mitzva] was prohibited, even vocal song.

And the Gemara brings additional homiletic interpretations concerning one who is being harassed:

Rav Huna bar Natan said to Rav Ashi: What is

the meaning of what is written -

what is written in the verse:

“And Kinah, and Dimonah, and Adadah” [

mentioned among the cities on the boundary of the inheritance of the children of Judah, in Joshua, chapter 15, verse 22]?

He said to him

Rav Ashi:

They are towns -

cities -

of the Land of Israel .

which are in the Land of Israel -

it is listing -

the verse is enumerating them].

He said to him: Do you think I -

do I -

do not know -

did I not know -

that it is listing the towns of the Land of Israel -

that it is listing the cities of the Land of Israel? [That is, it is clear that I did not intend my question to concern the simple meaning of the verse—for I too know that—but rather the homiletic interpretation derived from this verse!].

Rather,

I will tell you:

Rav Geviha of Argiza explained its rationale -

he interpreted this verse with a meaningful explanation:

Everyone

who

is angry -

with anger -

at his fellow ,

because he causes him distress, and he remains silent and does not answer him.

He who dwells eternally -

the Holy One, blessed be He -

will execute judgment for him -

on his behalf -

.

He said to him -

Rav Ashi asked him:

If so

that you agree that one may expound the names of the cities, then also regarding the names that appear afterward,

“Ziklag, and Madmannah, and Sansannah”—would you say so as well -

would you expound them in this manner as well?

He said to him

Rav Huna bar Natan [answered him]:

If -

if only -

Rav Geviha of the House of Argiza had been here -

here -

he would have explained its rationale [

he would certainly have offered a meaningful homiletic interpretation]!

And the Gemara brings another person who interpreted this:

Rav Aha of the House of Hazeiya explained [

the verse] with the following

interpretation -

as follows:

Anyone who has a cry concerning his livelihood against his fellow [

when the other takes away his means of support by intruding into the sources of his sustenance—his income], and he

remains silent -

he does not answer. He who dwells in the thornbush -

the Holy One, blessed be He -

will execute judgment for him.

“anger,” is it “He who dwells eternally,” whereas regarding one who has a cry concerning his livelihood it is “He who dwells in the thornbush”? The Rif [in Ein Yaakov] explains this homiletically: One whose fellow causes him distress and against whom he is unable to prevail—He who dwells eternally, who lives and endures, will execute judgment for him. For the wicked must know that it is not forever possible to prevail over his fellows . And his day will come, when the Holy One, blessed be He, will exact retribution from him. But regarding one who has a cry concerning his livelihood, since his fellow intrudes upon his means of support, He who dwells in the thornbush executes judgment for him. This means: Even the thornbush, which is a place of thorns, there too the Holy One, blessed be He, is present with him in his distress. As it is written: “I am with him in distress.” And so the Sages expounded. The same applies here. Although it appears to him that he is immersed in his distress, may God, blessed be He, help him and exact retribution from the one who is ruining his livelihood. And the Gemara continues concerning mourning over the Destruction [after this matter was mentioned in the context of the incisions]:

The Exilarch said [

the head of the exile—the Jewish leader of Babylonia]

to Rav Huna: Those ornamental crowns decorated with sulfur or salt, which they would make for grooms out of gold or silver, or from roses and myrtles, called

a kelila. From where do we know -

the kelila—

from where do we know -

that it is forbidden

to place them on the heads of grooms, as a sign of mourning?

He said to him: It is from a rabbinic ordinance -

from an enactment of the Sages. And so we learned in the Mishna [in tractate Sota, page 49a],

as we learned: During the war of Vespasian -

at the time when Vespasian brought his armies up to Jerusalem, before Titus came -

they decreed

the Sages

concerning the crowns

that are placed on the heads of

grooms, and concerning the bell -

a clapper, a bell that they would shake in banqueting houses—which they prohibited people from using.

And the Gemara relates:

Meanwhile -

in the meantime -

Rav Huna rose to relieve himself \-

to attend to his needs.

Rav Hisda said to him [

Rav Huna’s student, who was there and heard the Exilarch’s question but did not wish to answer in the presence of his teacher], to the Exilarch:

A verse is written [

this matter] is written in the verse -

“So said the Lord God: Remove the turban and lift off the crown. This shall not be this. The low shall be exalted and the high shall be brought low.”

And the verse is difficult:

What connection is there between the turban ,

which is one of the garments of the High Priest,

and the crown

of grooms, that the verse mentions them together?

Rather, this comes to tell you: When there is a turban on the head of the High Priest [

when the Temple exists],

there is a crown on the head of every person [

on the day of his wedding and on the day of the joy of his heart].

When the turban is removed from the head of the High Priest [

when the Temple is destroyed],

the

also

crown is removed from the head of every person [

for the joy of all has ceased and their happiness has been lost].

Meanwhile -

in the meantime -

Rav Huna came -

he returned -

and found them sitting -

he found them sitting there and heard the answer of his student Rav Hisda.

He said to him

Rav Huna said to Rav Hisda:

By God -

an oath; there is no Torah prohibition against placing a crown on grooms, as you said. Rather,

it is rabbinic.

And the verse you cited does not refer to crowns of grooms.

Rather,

it refers to the crown of a king. The prophet Ezekiel was prophesying that the priesthood would be abolished and that King Zedekiah would go into exile. Nevertheless -

Hisda is your name, and gracious are your words -

your words are gracious and fine. This is because you were precise in the wording of the verse: “What connection is there between the turban and the crown?”

Another incident concerning mourning:

Ravina found -

he found -

Mar bar Rav Ashi, who was -

who was -

braiding a crown -

weaving and winding a crown -

for his daughter -

for his daughter [who was a bride].

He said to him: Does the Master not accept -

does the Master not accept the interpretation of Rav Hisda [that is, does he not take heed of it], which was stated concerning the verse,

“Remove the turban and lift off the crown”? He said to him -

Mar bar Rav Ashi answered him: The analogy in the verse was stated only

with regard to the High Priest -

in comparison with the High Priest. Specifically

with regard to men -

males.

But with regard to women -

women, who are disqualified from serving as High Priest -

it

was not stated!

The Gemara explains another passage from the verse cited by Rav Hisda:

And the Gemara asks:

What -

what is the meaning of the words -

“This shall not be this,”

in the aforementioned verse?

The Gemara answers:

Rabbi Avira

expounded

an interpretation

concerning this.

Sometimes -

at times -

he would tell us -

us that same teaching -

in the name -

in the name -

of Rav Ami. And sometimes he would tell us in the name of Rav Asi: When the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel, “Remove the turban and lift off the crown,” the ministering angels said before the Holy One, blessed be He: Master of the Universe, is this

the reward

that is due to

Israel

for

having preceded You at Sinai by saying, “We will do” before “We will hear,”

and they did not first ask to hear, as the other nations of the world did?!

He said to them

the Holy One, blessed be He, said to the ministering angels:

No!

Rather,

this is what Israel deserves

as punishment for

having brought low the high, exalted the low, and set up an idol in the Sanctuary.

And the Gemara brings another interpretation of Rabbi Avira:

Rabbi Avira taught another interpretation. Sometimes he said it in the name of Rav Ami, and sometimes he said it in the name of Rav Asi. What is the meaning of what is written -

what is written:

“So said the Lord: If they are full and likewise numerous, and likewise shorn, he will pass away, and so on. If a person sees that his sustenance -

his livelihood -

is meager, he should give charity from it. And all the more so when it is plentiful

and increasing, he must give charity from it. [In order to acknowledge thereby the Lord, for the blessing that He bestows upon the work of his hands].

And the Gemara asks:

What -

what is the meaning of the words in the verse - “

and likewise shorn, and he will pass away, and so on”?

The Gemara answers:

The tanna -

the tanna taught -

of the \-

in the beit-midrash—of

Rabbi Yishmael: Anyone who shears his possessions and gives charity from them is saved from the judgment of Gehenna. This may be compared -

what is the matter comparable to?

to two

ewes -

sheep -

that were crossing through water.

One of them was shorn, and one was not shorn. The shorn one,

which did not absorb the water,

crossed, while the one that was not shorn did not cross.

So too, one who shears his possessions for charity—his possessions will increase. But one who does not shear his possessions for charity—his possessions will not increase.

And the conclusion of the verse is: “And I will afflict you; I will afflict you no more.”