Sanhedrin 93b — the Talmud in English

And

rather

what is meant by saying that he gave her

six seahs

of barley? How is it possible to say this?

Is it the practice of a woman to take six seahs

and carry such a great and heavy load?

Rather,

in truth Boaz gave her six barley grains. And he did not give them to her as leket; rather,

he hinted a hint to her

to Ruth,

that six sons were destined to emerge from her, who would be blessed with six blessings each.

And these are they:

David, and the Messiah, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah.

David,

from where do we know that he was blessed with six blessings?

As it is written

when an evil spirit from the Lord rested upon Saul, and he sought a man skilled at playing music:

“And one of the lads answered and said: Behold, I have seen a son of Jesse the Bethlehemite, who knows how to play, and is a mighty man of valor, and a man of war, and understanding in speech, and a man of comely appearance, and the Lord is with him, etc.”

And these are the six blessings: “who knows how to play,” “a mighty man of valor,” “a man of war,” “understanding in speech,” “a man of comely appearance,” “and the Lord is with him.”

And Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav: This entire verse Doeg said [

who was that “one of the lads”] —

only as evil speech .

That is, he intended evil when he recounted David’s praises, so that Saul would become jealous of him and kill him.

And this is the meaning of the blessings:

“Who knows how to play” —

that he knows how to ask [

to inquire] .

“Mighty” —

that he knows how to answer .

“A man of war” —

that he knows how to debate and negotiate in the war of Torah [

to argue in Talmud].

“And understanding in speech” —

that he understands one matter from another.

“A man of comely appearance” —

that he presents a face in halakha [

that he brings proof for his words].

“And the Lord is with him” —

that the halakha is in accordance with him everywhere.

For all of them,

in all the blessings,

Saul said to them

to his servants: “Even

my son Jonathan is like him.” When Doeg said to him

the final blessing:

“And the Lord is with him,” a matter that was not present even in him [

a thing that he did not possess ] —

his mind was weakened, and he became jealous of him [

Saul’s mind was weakened, and he became jealous of David].

For concerning Saul it is written: “And wherever he turned he did wrong”

195, whereas concerning David it is written: “And wherever he turned he succeeded” .

And now the Gemara discusses Rav Yehuda’s words, who said that Doeg said this verse.

From where do we know that it was Doeg [

from where do we know that the lad who said the words was Doeg]?

It is written here: “And one of the lads answered,”

which implies

the distinguished one among the lads. And it is written there: “And there was a man of the servants of Saul on that day, detained before the Lord [

to study much Torah]

and his name was Doeg the Edomite, chief of the shepherds who belonged to Saul.”

From this designation by which Scripture calls him “chief of the shepherds,” it follows that he was the distinguished one among the lads.

The Messiah —

from where do we know that he was blessed with six blessings?

As it is written: “And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him,”

and what spirit? —

“A spirit of wisdom and understanding, a spirit of counsel and might, a spirit of knowledge and fear of the Lord, etc.”

And these are the six blessings: wisdom, understanding, counsel, might, knowledge, and fear of the Lord.

It is further written concerning the Messiah:

“And he shall sense through the fear of the Lord”

. Rabbi Alexandri said: This teaches that the Holy One, blessed be He, loaded him with

the Holy One, blessed be He,

mitzvot and sufferings

like millstones [

“and he shall sense” is an expression of millstones].

Rava said: That he smells —

and judges [

that he smells and according to the smell judges; that is, through smell alone he can decide between the litigants who is liable and who is innocent ]].

And from where do we know this?

As it is written: “And he shall not judge by the sight of his eyes

and he shall not decide by the hearing of his ears,” and nevertheless, although he does not judge according to the sight of his eyes and not according to the hearing of his ears,

“but with righteousness shall he judge the poor, and decide with equity for the humble of the earth.”

And this is through smelling .

Bar Koziba,

who was among the kings of the house of Herod,

reigned two and a half years [

he reigned for two and a half years].

He said to the Sages: I am the Messiah .

They said to him: It is written concerning the Messiah that he smells and judges [

it is written that the Messiah smells and judges],

let us see whether he smells and judges [

let us see whether Bar Koziba smells and judges] .

Once they saw him [

once they saw]

that he did not smell and judge —

they killed him [

they slew him].

Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah,

from where do we know that they were blessed with six blessings?

For it is written concerning them: “In whom there was no blemish whatsoever, and good-looking, and skilled in all wisdom, and possessing knowledge, and understanding science, and in whom was strength to stand in the king’s palace, and to teach them the writing and language of the Chaldeans.”

And these are the six blessings: “in whom there was no blemish whatsoever,” “and good-looking,” “and skilled in all wisdom,” “and possessing knowledge,” “and understanding science,” and “in whom was strength,” etc.

What is the meaning of “in whom there was no blemish whatsoever”?

Rabbi Hama bar Rabbi Hanina said: Even like the mark of a bloodletter’s cup [

like a hole made by the instrument of the craftsman who lets blood]

was not present in them [

was not in them], for they had no need for bloodletting .

What is the meaning of “and in whom was strength to stand in the king’s palace”?

Rabbi Hama bar Rabbi Hanina said: This teaches that they forced themselves to refrain from laughter, and from conversation [

so that they would not converse in idle matters and disgrace themselves before the king],

and from sleep.

That is, they compelled themselves not to laugh, converse, or sleep.

And

so they would

restrain themselves when they needed to relieve themselves.

And all this —

because of fear of the monarchy.

It is written concerning the men who were brought before Nebuchadnezzar to serve him:

“And among them were of the children of Judah: Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah.”

Rabbi Elazar said: All of them were of the children of Judah.

And Rabbi Shmuel bar Nahmani said:

only

Daniel was of the children of Judah

was. But

Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah —

were from the other tribes

were.

It is written that Isaiah said to Hezekiah in prophecy:

“And of your sons who shall issue from you, whom you shall beget, they shall take, and they shall be eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon.”

And these were Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, who served the king of Babylon.

What is the meaning of “eunuchs”?

Rav said: Literally eunuchs [

who do not beget] were . That is, when they brought Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah to serve King Nebuchadnezzar, they castrated them. For such was the practice of kings: to castrate those who served them, so that they would not marry women and would be free for the service of the king.

And Rabbi Hanina said: That idolatry was emasculated

in their days.

For by the fact that the king of Babylon threw them into the furnace and they were saved, it became known to everyone that there was no substance in idolatry.

And we raise an objection:

Granted, according to the one who says that idolatry was emasculated in their days, this is what is written

concerning Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah, when they were walking inside the fiery furnace, when Nebuchadnezzar said: “Behold, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire,

and no damage is in them” [

and there is no injury in them].

But according to the one who says

that they were

literally eunuchs, what is the meaning of ‘and no damage is in them’?

After all, they had a great blemish, for they had been castrated!?

And we answer: What Nebuchadnezzar said, that there was no injury in them, meant

an injury from fire [

a burn from fire],

for he was astonished that they were not only unburned and had not died, but that there was not even a burn from fire upon them. But they may have had another injury; Nebuchadnezzar was not speaking about that.

But it is written

already:

“And the smell of fire had not passed upon them” [

and the smell of fire had not entered them]. If so, it is certainly unnecessary to say that there was no burn from fire upon them!

Rather, it is necessarily the case that “and no damage is in them” means that there was not even any other injury in them!

And we answer: The intention of Scripture is to say that there was

neither injury

from fire

nor smell

of fire.

And we raise an objection:

Granted, according to the one who says that idolatry was emasculated in their days, this is what is written: “Thus says the Lord to the eunuchs who keep My Sabbaths, etc.

and I shall give them in My house and within My walls a monument and a name better than sons and daughters; I shall give him an everlasting name that shall not be cut off.” According to this view, the expression “eunuchs” is praise, for idolatry was emasculated in their days.

But according to the one who says that they were literally eunuchs,

why did Scripture mention that they were eunuchs? Does

Scripture speak of the disgrace of the righteous [

does Scripture speak of the disgrace of the righteous]? And we answer:

Both were present in them.

That is, the two meanings of “eunuchs” were truly present in them: that idolatry was emasculated in their days, and that they were literally eunuchs .

And we raise an objection:

Granted, according to the one who says

that they were

literally eunuchs, this is what is written: “And I shall give them

in My house

and within My walls a monument and a name

better than sons and daughters.”

Since they had no sons, the Holy One, blessed be He, promised them that He would give them another name.

But according to the one who says that idolatry was emasculated in their days,

and they were not literally eunuchs,

what is the meaning of “better than sons and daughters”?

Rav Nahman bar Yitzhak said:

Indeed, they were not eunuchs, and they begot sons. But the sons born to them did not survive. And what the Holy One, blessed be He, promised them, that He would give them a monument and a name “better than sons and daughters,” means

better than the sons they had already had —

and who died.

What is

the meaning of that which is written later in the same verse:

“I shall give him an everlasting name that shall not be cut off”?

Why is it written in the singular, when Scripture initially spoke in the plural: “to the eunuchs”?

Rabbi Tanhum said: Bar Kappara expounded in Sepphoris:

That everlasting name

is the Book of Daniel, which was called by his name

of Daniel.

And now, since the Book of Daniel was mentioned, the Gemara asks concerning the Book of Ezra.

Now, all the matters of the

book of

Ezra —

Nehemiah son of Hacaliah said them [

Nehemiah said most of the words of the Book of Ezra].

And Nehemiah son of Hacaliah, for what reason was the book not called by his name [

why was his book not called by his name]?

Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba said: Because he claimed

Nehemiah

credit for himself. As it is stated

in the Book of Nehemiah:

“Remember me, my God, for good” .

And we are astonished: Surely

David also said

a similar expression in the Book of Psalms:

“Remember me, Lord, with the favor You show Your people; visit me with Your salvation,”

if so, it is necessarily the case that this expression is not claiming credit!

And we explain: What

David

established was mercy [

he requested mercy] , that the Lord remember him. But Nehemiah claimed credit for himself, for he asked that the Holy One, blessed be He, remember his deeds for good.

Rav Yosef said:

Indeed, in the expression “Remember me, my God, for good,” there is no claiming of credit for oneself, for David too said this expression.

And the reason that the Book of Ezra was not called by Nehemiah’s name is

because he spoke disparagingly of the earlier ones

. As it is stated: “But the earlier governors who were before me laid a burden upon the people, and took from them in bread and wine, after forty silver shekels, etc.”

And even concerning Daniel, who was greater than him, he spoke

disparagingly of him, for he did not exclude him from the group of the earlier ones of whom he spoke disparagingly .

And from where do we know that

Daniel

was greater than him?

For it is written

in the Book of Daniel, concerning a prophetic vision that was revealed to him:

“And I, Daniel, alone saw the vision, while the men who were with me did not see the vision, but a great trembling fell upon them,

and they fled in hiding.”

“And the men who were with me did not see the vision.” And who were they [

and who were they] those

men?

Rabbi Yirmeya said, and some say Rabbi Hiyya bar Abba: They were Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi,

who were with him.

Since he saw and they did not see, it follows that he was greater than they.

And if so, since Daniel was greater than Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, who were prophets, all the more so was he greater than Nehemiah, who was not a prophet .

And since this verse was mentioned, the Gemara discusses this matter further: