Sukkah 49b — the Talmud in English

And we derive:

just as its pouring is in sanctity—

so its burning is in sanctity.

What indication is there?

How did we learn from here the law of burning in sanctity concerning wine that remained in the shittin?

Ravina said: It is derived

by a gzera shava of

“holy, holy.”

It is written here, [Numbers 28,] concerning the wine libation:

“with a holy libation,”

pour a libation in the holy place.

And it is written there, [Exodus 29:]

“

And you shall burn the remainder in fire; it shall not be eaten, for it is holy.”

And we raised a difficulty concerning it:

According to whom does this statement that we learned in the Mishna go: The libations, at first,

before their pouring,

one misuses them?

But once they

descended into the shittin—

one does not misuse them,

because they are no longer needed for the Most High.

Let us say that it is Rabbi Elazar bar Tzadok.

For according to his words, the floor at the bottom of the shittin was paved, and congealed wine from the libations would remain there.

For if it is the Rabbis—

there was no wine at all to burn, because

they descended

the libations

to the abyss!

And we answer:

Even if you say that it is the Rabbis,

it is speaking

of what was caught,

if it happened that the wine was caught inside a vessel that had been placed inside the shittin.

And some say: Let us say

that our Mishna, which says that from the time they descended into the shittin one does not misuse them,

is the Rabbis and not Rabbi Elazar bar Tzadok.

For if it is Rabbi Elazar—

they still remain in their sanctity,

for he obligates one to burn them!

And we answer:

Even if you say that it is Rabbi Elazar,

it is nevertheless not permitted to misuse them, since

you have no thing whose mitzva has been performed and which one misuses.

For here, its essential mitzva was performed through the pouring, while the burning of the wine afterward is not part of the essential mitzva; therefore one does not misuse it from the time of the pouring.

Reish Lakish said: At the time when they pour wine upon the altar, they stop up the shittin,

placing a stopper in the opening at the top of the altar, so that the wine would appear upon it “like a full and satisfied throat” [the wording of Rashi],

to fulfill what is stated,

“In the holy place pour a libation of strong drink to the Lord.”

What indication is there?

How is it indicated by this verse that one must make it appear as though the altar is full and satisfied?

Rav Pappa said:

“Strong drink”

is

an expression of drinking, an expression of satiety, an expression of drunkenness.

Rav Pappa said: Learn from this: When a person is satiated by wine,

a person who becomes satiated from drinking wine is not satiated from filling his belly, but

from his throat,

from drinking large gulps that satisfy the desire of his throat, he is

satiated.

Rava said: A Torah scholar

who

does not have much wine

—who does not have much wine—

should drink in large gulps

the wine that he has, in large gulps, and thereby refresh himself with it.

Rava: With the cup of blessing—

drink in large gulps,

drink the wine of the cup of blessing in large gulps, in order to show the preciousness of the mitzva.

Rava expounded: What is the meaning of that which is written, [Song of Songs 7,]

[Песнь песней 7]:

“How beautiful are your footsteps in sandals, daughter of a nobleman”?

“How beautiful are the footsteps of Israel

in sandals”—

when they go up for the pilgrimage festival.

“Daughter of a nobleman”—

the daughter

of the nation

of Abraham our father, who was called a nobleman,

because his heart volunteered to recognize his Creator [Rashi].

As it is stated, [Psalms 47,]

[Псалмы 47]:

“The noblemen of the peoples have gathered, the people of the God of Abraham.”

And is He only

the God of Abraham, and not the God of Isaac and Jacob?

Rather,

He is called

the God of Abraham

because

he was the first of the converts.

He was the first whose heart volunteered to convert.

The tanna of the school of Rav Anan said: What is the meaning of that which is written, [Song of Songs 7,]

[Песнь песней 7]:

“The hidden parts of your thighs”?

Why were words of Torah compared to a thigh—

To tell you: Just as a thigh is in concealment—

so too words of Torah

are learned

in concealment,

in a modest place, without pride, and not in a high place or in the marketplace.

And this is what Rabbi Elazar said: What is the meaning of that which is written, [Micah 6,]

[Миха 6]:

“He has told you, man, what is good and what the Lord demands of you—

only to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk modestly with your God”?

“To do justice”—

this is judgment.

“And to love kindness”—

this is acts of kindness.

“And to walk modestly with your God”—

this is taking out the dead and bringing in a bride beneath the wedding canopy. [See the two explanations of Rashi.]

[См. два толкования Раши.]

And are these not matters that follow by a kal va-chomer: What

taking out the dead and bringing in a bride, which are

matters customarily performed in public—

the Torah said, “walk modestly”

with them

to walk.

Matters customarily performed in private,

such as giving charity, where the giving to the poor person must be concealed so that he will not be ashamed of it, and likewise words of Torah—

all the more so

that one must conduct oneself with them modestly.

Rabbi Elazar said: One who performs charity is greater than

one who offers

all the offerings.

As it is stated, [Proverbs 21,]

[Притчи 21]:

“To perform charity and justice—

is more chosen to the Lord than an altar.”

And Rabbi Elazar said: Acts of kindness are greater than charity.

As it is stated, [Hosea 10,]

[Осия 10]:

“Sow for yourselves for charity, and reap according to kindness.”

But surely harvesting is preferable to the time of sowing, because

if a person sows—

it is uncertain whether he will eat or whether he will not eat.

But when

a person harvests—

he will certainly eat.

And Rabbi Elazar said: Charity is not rewarded

according to the amount given,

but according to

the act of

kindness in it,

such as the effort and the attention devoted to ensuring that the poor person does not lose his money.

As it is stated:

“Sow for yourselves for charity, and reap according to kindness.”

As stated, harvesting is preferable to sowing.

The Sages taught: In three respects acts of kindness are greater than charity:

Charity—

with one’s money; acts of kindness—

both with one’s body and with one’s money.

Charity—

for the poor; acts of kindness—

both for the poor and for the wealthy.

Charity—

for the living; acts of kindness—

both for the living and for the dead.

And Rabbi Elazar said: Anyone who performs charity and justice—

it is as though he filled the entire world with kindness.

As it is stated, [Psalms 33,]

[Псалмы 33]:

“He loves charity and justice—

the kindness of the Lord fills the earth.”

Lest you say: Anyone who comes to leap forward

to give charity

leaps forward

and merits giving to suitable poor people?

The verse teaches, [Psalms 36,]

[Псалмы 36]:

“How precious is Your kindness, O God.”

Could it be that even one who fears Heaven is likewise,

so that he too does not merit giving charity to suitable poor people?

The verse teaches, [Psalms 103,]

[Псалмы 103]:

“And the kindness of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon those who fear Him.”

Rabbi Hama bar Pappa said: Any person upon whom there is grace—

it is known that he fears Heaven.

As it is stated:

“The kindness of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting upon those who fear Him.”

And Rabbi Elazar said: What is the meaning of that which is written, [Proverbs 31,]

[Притчи 31]:

“She opened her mouth with wisdom, and a teaching of kindness is upon her tongue”?

Is there a Torah of kindness, and a Torah that is not of kindness?

Rather: Torah for its own sake—

this is Torah of kindness.

Not for its own sake—

this is Torah that is not of kindness.

Some say:

One who learns

Torah

in order

to teach it—

this is Torah of kindness,

not to teach it—

this is Torah that is not of kindness.

We learned in the Mishna:

Like its procedure

of the water libation

on an ordinary day,

so is its procedure on Shabbat. Except that on the eve of Shabbat he would fill a golden barrel that was not consecrated.

And we raised a difficulty concerning it:

But why

does he fill an unconsecrated barrel?

Let him bring,

let him fill the water

in a

barrel

that is consecrated

on the eve of Shabbat, and leave it there until morning, and then pour the water from the consecrated barrel!

And the Gemara now assumed that the water is not disqualified by “overnight,” even though it was left in a service vessel, and even though anything consecrated by the sanctity of a service vessel is disqualified by “overnight.”

And the reason for the matter is due to one of the following reasons:

Either because a service vessel consecrates what was placed in it with sanctity of the body only when it was placed in it with the intention of consecrating it. Therefore, if they place the water in a service vessel without intending to consecrate it, it will not become consecrated, and consequently it will not be disqualified by “overnight.”

Or because service vessels consecrate only when the object being consecrated contains the measure fit for consecration, and not more.

But here they would fill the barrel with water in an amount greater than three log, which is the measure of water poured upon the altar; therefore the water was not consecrated.

He said

he answered

Ze'iri: He holds

that the tanna of our Mishna holds: a.

There is no measure for the water,

and it is possible to pour more than three log; therefore the water becomes consecrated even if it contains more than three log.

b.

And service vessels consecrate

also

without intention!