Pesachim 94b — the Talmud in English

A wicked man, son of a wicked man ![](pamud.bmp "

Exact page location")

the grandson of Nimrod the wicked

king of Babylon,

who rebelled against the entire world against Me with his kingship

in the generation of the Dispersion, for he gave the people of his generation the counsel to build a tower in order to wage war against the army of Heaven!

How can you say, “I shall ascend upon the high places of thick cloud; I shall resemble the Most High”?

For

how many are a person’s years?

Seventy years. And if with strength, eighty years.

As it is stated: “The days of our years among them are seventy years, and if with strength, eighty years”

[Psalms 90].

And

from the earth to the firmament is a journey of five hundred years, and the thickness of the firmament is a journey of five hundred years, and between one firmament and another is a journey of five hundred years. And likewise between every firmament and firmament

among the seven firmaments.

Therefore the prophet Isaiah answered Nebuchadnezzar

“But to the netherworld you shall be brought down, to the recesses of the pit.”

that he would die and not manage to reach the uppermost firmament.

And from here there is a contradiction to the words of Rava: for Rabbi Yohanan ben Zakkai said that from the earth to the firmament is a journey of 500 years. And the length of the world is equal to the measure of its height [for thus the Gemara expounds in tractate Hagiga, folio 12a, from the verse “From the day that God created man upon the earth, and from the end of the heavens to the end of the heavens”]. It follows that the length of the world is a journey of 500 years.

And a person’s journey is 10 parasangs per day; it follows that the length of the world is many thousands of parasangs. [365 days per year 10 parasangs per day, which is 3650 parasangs per year. 500 years, which is 1,825,000 parasangs].

And we conclude: from here

a tiyuvta

against Rava.

The Sages taught:

To understand this beraita, one must first state that the stars and the constellations [groups of stars arranged in the form of constellations] stand upon a sphere above the earth. And this sphere is called “firmament” and “heavens.” [Maimonides, in the third chapter of the Laws of the Foundations of the Torah] .

And one must investigate: when we see the stars and the constellations moving, how does this occur? Do the stars sit upon the sphere without movement, and the sphere revolves and turns them? Or does the sphere stand in its place without movement, and the stars are the ones that move and revolve upon the sphere? And this is what the beraita discusses:

The Jewish Sages say: The sphere is fixed

in its place.

And the constellations revolve

revolving upon the sphere.

And the Sages of the nations of the world say: The sphere revolves

revolves,

and the constellations are fixed

in their places.

Rabbi said: An answer

a refutation

to their words

of the Sages of the nations of the world:

We have never found the Bear in the south and Scorpio in the north. And if it were as they say, that the sphere revolves, we should have to see that the Bear and Scorpio revolve from north to south, just as the sun and the planets revolve. For the sphere moves all of them together, and how is it possible that the sun revolves, whereas Scorpio and the Bear do not complete an entire revolution but move slightly and return to their places?

If their view were correct, that the sphere revolves, we should see the Great Bear and Scorpio revolving from north to south, just as the sun and the planets revolve. For the sphere moves them all together. How, then, can it be that the sun revolves, while Scorpio and the Great Bear do not complete a full revolution but move slightly and return to their places?

Rav Aha bar Yaakov challenged it:

What is the proof? One may always say that the sphere is fixed and the constellations revolve, as the Sages of the nations of the world maintain. And as for what we challenged—why does the sun encircle the earth in a complete revolution from north to south, whereas the constellations move only slightly—regarding this one can answer:

Or perhaps

perhaps the sun and the constellations are not fixed in the same sphere, but rather they are fixed in two spheres, one inside the other.

Text missing!

And the form of the spheres is

like the pin

the iron

of a millstone.

Like a millstone, which is made of two parts: a. a stone base, with a hole in it. b. something resembling a plate.

An iron projection extends from it and enters into the hole in the base, and the base of the millstone remains in its place. And the iron, fixed in the base, revolves above it inside the hole.

And likewise one can say that the sphere in which the constellations are fixed remains in its place, and above it there is a sphere in which the sun is fixed, and it revolves.

And likewise conversely: if we revolve the lower base of the millstone, the base will revolve by itself, whereas the iron above it will remain in its place. And likewise one can say that the sphere in which the sun is found is below and revolves by itself. And the sphere in which the constellations are fixed remains above it and does not move.

Alternatively,

there is another way to compare this:

like the peg of a door.

A hole in the threshold of the door in which the hinge is fixed [the door in the time of the Sages was made with projections above and below, and holes were made in the threshold above and below. And in these holes they fixed the door].

And when we revolve the door, the door revolves and the upper hole of the threshold remains in its place. And likewise one can say that the sphere in which the sun is fixed revolves below. Whereas the sphere in which the constellations are fixed remains in its place above the sphere of the sun.

And likewise conversely: if we revolve the doorframe into which the hinge enters, the doorframe will revolve and the door will remain in its place. And likewise one can say that the sphere of the sun is the upper sphere and it revolves from above, while beneath it is the lower sphere, which remains in its place and in which the constellations are fixed.

And now the Gemara returns to the continuation of the words of the beraita above, for the beraita brings another matter concerning which the Jewish Sages and the Sages of the nations of the world dispute:

The Jewish Sages say: During the day the sun travels below the firmament

[from east to west] and illuminates the world.

And at night

the sun travels

above the firmament

[from west to east], and the firmament conceals it from our eyes.

And the Sages of the nations of the world say: During the day the sun travels below the firmament

and illuminates the world.

And at night, below the ground

and is not visible to our eyes.

Rabbi said: And their words appear

more correct

than our words.

For

indeed

during the day springs are cold, and at night they are boiling.

And why is this so? From here it appears according to the Sages of the nations of the world, that the sun travels at night beneath the ground and warms the springs close to it, which flow from the depth of the ground. Whereas during the day, when the sun is beneath the firmament, the springs are cold.

It was taught

we learned in a beraita:

Rabbi Natan says: During the days of the sun, the sun travels at the height of the firmament

in the center of the heavens.

Therefore the entire world

is hotter than in winter, because the sun stands opposite the face of the earth,

and

if so

the springs are cold

more than in winter, because the sun is distant from the place of their emergence.

But

during the rainy season, the sun travels in the lower parts of the firmament

on the southern side of the firmament, close to the ground.

Therefore the entire world is cold

more than in summer, because the sun does not stand opposite the face of the earth,

and

if so

the springs are boiling,

because the sun is found near the place of their emergence.

The Sages taught:

Along four paths

[sides of the firmament, called “paths”]

the sun travels: In Nisan, Iyar, and Sivan it travels over the mountains

[above the mountains]

in order to melt the snows.

In Tammuz, Av, and Elul it travels over inhabited land

above a place inhabited by human beings,

in order to cook the fruits

for human consumption.

In Tishrei, Marheshvan, and Kislev it travels over the seas in order to settle the rivers.

In Tevet, Shevat, and Adar it travels through the desert, so as not to dry the seeds

that were sown in an inhabited place.

We learned in the Mishna:

And Rabbi Eliezer says: From the threshold of

the Temple courtyard and outward [this is the distant way].

And we raised the question concerning it: One who stands outside the threshold of the Temple courtyard and did not enter,

and

because he is exempt from karet

even though he can enter

for he is able to enter,

and

because

we do not say to him, “Get up and enter”

enter?!

But it was taught

and indeed we learned in a beraita:

An uncircumcised Jew who did not circumcise himself

and nullified the mitzva of the Pesach

is liable for karet, the words of Rabbi Eliezer.

And an uncircumcised person who did not circumcise himself is, at the time of slaughter, unfit to slaughter, and nevertheless Rabbi Eliezer said that he is liable for karet, because we say to him, “Get up and circumcise yourself!” If so, regarding the distant way as well, let us say to him, “Get up and enter the Temple courtyard”!

Abaye said

a resolution: The exemption of

the distant way

is not because of compulsion; rather, the Torah exempted every person who is on a distant way, even if he can enter the Temple courtyard. And this applies specifically

to one who is pure

who is found on a distant way.

And there is no

exemption resembling

the distant way, for one who is impure. For the Torah exempted one who is impure only because he is compelled and cannot eat the Pesach. And likewise, regarding an uncircumcised person, the Torah exempted him only because he is compelled. It is not the fact itself that he is uncircumcised or impure that causes the exemption. Therefore, if he can circumcise himself, he is not exempt from offering the Pesach. [For he is not compelled].

The Torah exempted a ritually impure person only because he is under duress and cannot eat the Paschal offering. Likewise, the Torah exempted an uncircumcised person only because he is under duress. The fact that he is uncircumcised or ritually impure in itself does not cause the exemption. Therefore, if he can circumcise himself, he is not exempt from offering the Paschal sacrifice [because he is not under duress].

And why did Abaye state in his words, “And there is no distant way for one who is impure,” and not state “for an uncircumcised person,” concerning whom we were speaking? Rashi explained that Abaye used the language of the Gemara above, 93b, which speaks concerning one who is impure, and the same must be said regarding an uncircumcised person.

Rava said

another resolution:

It is a dispute of tannaim.

The tannaim disputed Rabbi Eliezer’s view: the tanna in our Mishna holds, according to Rabbi Eliezer, that a person who could enter the Temple courtyard but did not enter is exempt from karet, and likewise an uncircumcised person who did not circumcise himself is exempt from karet.

Whereas the tanna in the beraita, who said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer that an uncircumcised person who did not circumcise himself is liable for karet, disputes the tanna in our Mishna, and holds according to Rabbi Eliezer that even if he could enter the Temple courtyard but did not enter, he is liable for karet. And the distant way is called only from Modi’in and outward, where he cannot enter at the time of slaughter.

And we find that tannaim already disputed Rabbi Eliezer’s view.

For it was taught

that they taught in a beraita:

Rabbi Eliezer says: Distance of place is stated concerning the Pesach

[Numbers 9] “Or is on a distant way.”

And distance of place is stated concerning

the matter of redemption of

second tithe

[Deuteronomy 14] “For the place is far from you.” And we learn a gzera shava:

Just as there

with regard to distance of place concerning the redemption of second tithe, the matter is speaking of one who is distant

outside the

place

of its eating,

for if a person has produce of second tithe and is outside Jerusalem—where its place of eating is—the Torah permitted him to redeem the produce and bring its money to Jerusalem.

So too here

distance of place concerning the Pesach is speaking of one who is distant

outside its eating,

and the eating of the Pesach is throughout Jerusalem; therefore, only if he is distant outside the wall of Jerusalem is he exempt from karet.

Rabbi Yosei son of Rabbi Yehuda says in the name of Rabbi Eliezer:

We learn the Pesach from the redemption of second tithe in another manner. Just as distance of place concerning tithe means outside the place of its fitness, so distance of place concerning the Pesach means outside the place of its fitness. That is

outside its making,

[its offering], for the fitness of the Pesach is its offering.

And where is it offered? In the Temple courtyard. It follows that distance of place, according to [Rabbi Yosei son of Rabbi Yehuda’s understanding of] Rabbi Eliezer, is from the threshold of the Temple courtyard and outward [in accordance with the tanna in our Mishna].

And since we have found that tannaim already disputed in a beraita Rabbi Eliezer’s view of what distance of place is—whether outside Jerusalem or outside the Temple courtyard—if so, one may say that the tanna who said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer that an uncircumcised person who did not circumcise himself is liable for karet has a third position regarding Rabbi Eliezer: that distance of place is from Modi’in and outward, where he cannot enter at the time of slaughter.

According to whom

according to which of the tannaim about whom we spoke

does this

this statement

of Rabbi Yitzhak son of Rav Yosef

follow? If the majority of the community is impure, the Pesach comes in impurity. And how is it determined whether the majority of the community is impure? [Rabbi Yitzhak son of Rav Yosef said concerning this:]

Regarding the impure, follow the majority of those standing in the Temple courtyard.

And if most of them are impure, they offer the Pesach in impurity, even though most of Israel outside are pure.

And we raised the question concerning it:

According to whom,

according to whose view does Rabbi Yitzhak son of Rav Yosef hold?

And we answer:

According to Rabbi Yosei son of Rabbi Yehuda, who said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer

that those outside the Temple courtyard are considered “on a distant way” and are exempt from offering the Pesach. And since they are exempt from the Pesach, they are not counted among the community obligated to offer the Pesach.

We learned in the Mishna:

Rabbi Yosei said to him: Therefore

a dot is placed over the letter he, to say that it is not because he is certainly distant, but rather from the threshold of the Temple courtyard and outward.

It was taught: Rabbi Yosei the Galilean says:

It is stated [Numbers 9]

“A way

distant.”

I would understand

from the simple meaning of the verse that the distant way is

a journey of two years

or

three days.

But later in the passage it is stated: “And the man who is pure and was not on a way, and refrained from offering the Pesach, that soul shall be cut off from among his people.”

And when it says, “And was not on a way”

and it did not say, “And was not on a distant way”—

it teaches

the verse that it is not necessary that the way actually be “distant,” but rather

from the threshold of the Temple courtyard and outward is called “a way”

and he is exempt from karet.