Kiddushin 72a — the Talmud in English

And nowadays the Persians are the ones who moved it.

Only in our time did the Persians move this bridge and shift it from the north of “Akra de-Tulbaknei.”

The Gemara did not discuss the lower side of the Euphrates, because the Euphrates flows diagonally and connects at its lower end to the Tigris. Rather, the Gemara discussed how far the boundaries of Babylonia extend on its western side, beyond the Euphrates [apart from the northwestern point, which was clarified above].

Abaye said to Rav Yosef: On this side of the Euphrates, how far?!

How far does the breadth of Babylonia extend, west of the Euphrates?

He said to him

Rav Yosef:

What is your reasoning [A00010]why have you come to ask about this side], if you are asking

Почему ты пришёл спросить об этой стороне? Если ты спрашиваешь

because of Biream

which sits west of the Euphrates—whether it is included among the lineage of Babylonia—

Indeed, the people of Biream are fit, for

those of established lineage from Pumbedita took wives from Biream.

The families of Pumbedita who were of established lineage [for it sits between the Euphrates and the Tigris, and it is certainly from Babylonia] married women from Biream.

The Sages instituted that an agent bringing a bill of divorce from all countries outside the Land of Israel to the Land of Israel must say at the time of delivering the bill of divorce, “Before me it was written and before me it was signed,” because those outside the Land of Israel are not expert in the law of “for her sake” [that the bill of divorce must be written and signed for the sake of divorcing this woman]. Through this he testifies that the bill of divorce was made for her sake.

But Babylonia is considered like the Land of Israel with regard to this. And one who brings a bill of divorce from Babylonia to the Land of Israel, or from the Land of Israel to Babylonia, need not say, “Before me it was written and before me it was signed,” because the people of Babylonia are as learned as the people of the Land of Israel, and know that the bill of divorce must be written and signed for her sake.

Rav Pappa said: The

same

dispute

in which Rav, Shmuel, and Rabbi Yohanan disagreed concerning the boundaries of Babylonia

with

regard to

lineage

is

with

regard to

bills of divorce.

For a bill of divorce that comes from within the stated boundaries of Babylonia—according to each one’s position—the agent need not say concerning it, “Before me it was written and before me it was signed.”

And Rav Yosef said:

The

dispute

mentioned is

with regard to

lineage

only.

alone.

But with regard to

bills of

divorce,

with

the agreement of all

the boundary of Babylonia is

until the second lake of the bridge [A0045]the second lake from the bridge.

второго озера от моста].

There were two lakes below the bridge of Babylonia, and the one farther from the bridge is the boundary of Babylonia with regard to bills of divorce, because until there the local people were expert in the law of “for her sake.”

Rami bar Abba said: “

Havil Yama” [A0049]is a place]

is the glory

[its splendor]

of Babylonia!

That is to say, the most distinguished place in Babylonia with regard to lineage.

Shunya and Govya [A0055]are names of places located in “Havil Yama”] are

the glory [A0057]its splendor]

краса

of Havil Yama

with regard to lineage.

Ravina said: Tzitzura as well

is among the splendor of “Havil Yama.”

It was taught likewise: Hanan ben Pinhas says: Havil Yama

is

the glory of Babylonia; Shunya, Govya, and Tzitzura

are

the glory of Havil Yama.

Rav Pappa said:

In the past, Havil Yama was of established lineage. But

nowadays

it is no longer presumed fit, because

Kutim became mixed among them [A0072]Kutim became mixed among them.

And we conclude:

It is not so,

rather, it is still in its state of fitness. And the bad reputation that went out concerning it was because

it was a woman that

the Kuti

asked from them [A0079]a Kuti sought to marry a woman from them]. But in practice

they did not give it to him

what he requested, and therefore he spread slander concerning them.

And we inquire into it:

What is “

Havil Yama”?

Rav Pappa said: This is the Euphrates of Daborsei.

A certain man said to them

the Sages:

I am from “

Shut Mishot”!

And he wanted them to declare him fit on account of this, like the families of Babylonia.

Rabbi Yitzhak Nappaha stood on his feet and said: Shut Mishot stands between the rivers,

therefore it is like Babylonia.

And we inquire into it:

Is it so that

because it

stands between the rivers,

it is

standing, what of it?!

And what reason is that to declare it fit?

Abaye said that Rabbi Hama bar Ukva said that Rabbi Yosei bar Hanina said:

Every area of Babylonia that

is between the rivers is fit like “

Gola”

with regard to lineage.

And “Gola” means Pumbedita.

And we inquire into it:

And where does “

Shut Mishot”

stand?

Rabbi Yohanan said: From Aihei de-Kira and above [and above, toward the north]. And “Aihei de-Kira” sits on the Euphrates, north of all the boundaries of Babylonia mentioned above.

And we raise an objection:

But Rabbi Yohanan said:

Babylonia extends along the Euphrates on its western side

until the crossing of Gizma,

and no further! And how does he say that Shut Mishot is from Babylonia, when it is above the boundary?

Abaye said: A strip [the term for a narrow tract of land]

extends,

going out from the northern boundary and encircling all the disqualified places, and at its end is Shut Mishot. And this strip is included in Babylonia.

Rav Ika bar Avin said that Rav Hananel said that Rav said: Halzon Nehardea [A0123]the name of a river]

it is

fit

like Gola with

regard to

lineage.

Abaye said to them: Do not listen to him [A0131]do not obey him]. And in any event it is not like Babylonia with regard to lineage. And Rav Ika said this only because

his yevama fell to him there,

and in order that he would be able to perform levirate marriage with her, he said this.

He said to him

Rav Ika:

Is it so,

that

this is mine

this is my

own

law? But this halakha was stated in the name

of Rav Hananel,

he said it.

They went and asked

Rav Hananel,

whether he had said so.

He said to them: This is what Rav said: Halzon Nehardea is like Gola with

regard to

lineage!

And Rav disagrees

with what

that

said

Rabbi Abba bar Kahana.

For Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: What is written concerning the Ten Tribes [II Kings 18:11], “And the king of Assyria exiled Israel to Assyria,

and settled them in Halah and Habor, the river of Gozan, and the cities of Media”— “

and he settled them in Halaḥ, Habor, the river of Gozan, and the cities of Media”? “

Halah”—

this is Halzon. “

Habor”—

this is Hadayav. “

The river of Gozan”—

this is Ginzak. “

The cities of Media”—

this is Hamadan and its associates.

And some say: “

The cities of Media”—

this is Nehardea and its associates.

What are its associates,

which are the cities that are the associates of Nehardea?

Shmuel said: The city

called

Mushki,

and also

Huski, and

also

Rumki.

And Rabbi Yohanan said: And all of them,

all these places,

are for disqualification.

For in every place to which the Ten Tribes were exiled, idolaters became assimilated among their daughters, and therefore their lineage was blemished.

And even according to the one who says, “An idolater who has intercourse with a daughter of Israel produces a fit child,” he is fit only for entry into the congregation, but he is nevertheless blemished; and if she is female, she is disqualified from marrying a kohen.

And it is demonstrated that “Halzon Nehardea” is not fit like Gola with regard to lineage, and not in accordance with Rav.

And now the Gemara raises a contradiction in Shmuel’s statements, for above he said that “Mushki” is among the places to which the Ten Tribes were exiled.

It enters your mind that “

«

Mushki”

is “

Mushkani.”

And if so, it is presumed disqualified, for Rabbi Yohanan said: And all of them are for disqualification.

And we raise an objection:

But Rabbi Hiyya bar Avin said that Shmuel said: Mushkani is

fit

like “

Gola” [A0198]Pumbedita]

for lineage!

And we answer:

Rather, Mushki is by itself, and Mushkani is by itself,

they are two different places; this one is fit and that one is disqualified.

In the Book of Daniel [7:5], it is described that he saw in a nighttime vision four beasts, corresponding to the four kingdoms that ruled in the world and enslaved the Jewish people. And the second beast in the vision corresponds to Persia, and it is said concerning it:

“

And three ribs were in its mouth, between its teeth.” Three ribs in its mouth, between its teeth.

And this verse requires explanation, for from the word “in its mouth” it is implied that the three ribs were inside its mouth, whereas from “between its teeth” it is implied that they protruded outward between its teeth.

Rabbi Yohanan said:

These three ribs are an allegory for places—

this is Halzon, Hadayav, and Netzivin.

Sometimes

Persia

swallows them

within its domain and rules over them,

and sometimes it spits them out

outside. For, as stated, “mouth” implies inside, while “between its teeth” implies that they protrude outward.

And the Gemara explains the beginning of the verse:

“

And behold

a beast

” [a beast]

after another [another, second], which

was similar to a bear.”

And behold another beast, second to it, and it was similar to a bear.

Rav Yosef taught: These are the Persians, who eat and drink like a bear, and are bulky [possessors of flesh]

like a bear, and grow hair like a bear, and have no rest like a bear,

for even when it is tied, it circles around its place.

When Rabbi Ami would see a Persian riding [when he would see a Persian riding],

he would say: A wandering bear [a wandering bear]

is he.

Rabbi said to Levi: Show me Persians.

Levi was a master of allegories, and Rabbi asked him to make an allegory for him concerning the Persians: to what are they similar?

He said to him

Levi:

They are similar

to

the troops of the House of David,

for they are mighty like them.

Rabbi said to him:

Show me [make an allegory for me]

the Habrin,

who are a nation neighboring the Persians, and are more corrupt and predatory than the Persians.

Levi said to him:

They are similar

to

the destructive angels.

Rabbi said to him:

Show me Ishmaelites.

Levi said to him:

They are similar

to

the satyrs of a privy,

because they are dressed in black and resemble demons.

Rabbi said to him:

Show me the Torah scholars of Babylonia.

Levi said to him:

They are similar

to

the ministering angels,

because they are dressed in white garments and wrapped like the ministering angels, as it is said above, “And the man was clothed in linen garments.”

When Rabbi’s soul was departing [at the time of his death], prophecy was cast into his mouth, and

he said:

There is a city called

Humnia in Babylonia, and all of it is Ammonite

all its inhabitants are descendants of the Ammonites.

There is a city called

Masgeria in Babylonia, and all of it is mamzerim

all its inhabitants are mamzerim.

There is a city called

Birka in Babylonia, and there are two brothers in it who exchange their wives with one another.

There is a city called

Birta de-Setya in Babylonia, and today they have strayed

its people

from following the Omnipresent [the Holy One, blessed is He], and therefore it is called “Setya,” after the fact that they strayed and turned aside from the straight path.

[святого, благословен Он], и поэтому он называется «Сатия» — от слова «отступили», поскольку они уклонились и отошли от прямого пути.

And in what did they stray?—

The

[pool]

was flooded

and the

fishpond

was flooded

with fish on Shabbat, and they went and hunted them on Shabbat,

for the enclosure was flooded with many fish, and they went and hunted some of them on Shabbat.

And Rabbi excommunicated them [A0292]placed them under a ban]

Rabbi Aḥai bar Rabbi Yoshiah,

because they desecrated Shabbat.

And

as a result,

they apostatized [they changed their religion]—those people.