Taanit 17a (יז.) — the Talmud in English

Because Zikhronot and Shofarot are not recited

except

at these times:

a.

On Rosh HaShana,

as we find in tractate Rosh HaShana [16a]: “Recite before Me on Rosh HaShana Malkhuyot, Zikhronot, and Shofarot” [and there the Gemara explains the reason for this].

b.

And

Yom Kippur that

falls during the Jubilee

[in the Jubilee year, which occurs once every fifty years], as we find in tractate Rosh HaShana [26b]: “The Jubilee is equivalent to Rosh HaShana with regard to sounding the shofar and the blessings.”

c.

And in a time of war.

As we find in the Torah [Numbers 10]: “When you wage war in your land against the adversary who oppresses you, you shall sound short blasts on the trumpets, and you shall be remembered before the Lord your God and be saved from your enemies” .

We learned in our Mishna:

“For the first, he says: ‘He Who answered Abraham, etc.’”

A tanna taught: There are those who interchange

the order of the matters, assigning the conclusion “Who hears

the cry

” to the blessing “He Who answered

Elijah

on Mount Carmel,”

and

assigning the conclusion “Who hears

prayer”

to

the blessing “He Who answered

Samuel

at Mitzpeh.”

The Gemara asks:

Granted, with regard to Samuel,

it is possible to conclude with “Who hears prayer,” because

it is written concerning him

the expression

“prayer,”

as it is stated: “Gather all Israel to Mitzpeh, and I shall pray on your behalf,”

and it is written concerning him

also the expression

“cry,”

as it is stated: “And it distressed Samuel, and he cried out to the Lord all night” .

But with regard to Elijah,

only the expression

“prayer is written,”

as it is stated: “Answer me, Lord, answer me,” which is an expression of prayer and supplication. Whereas the expression

“cry” is not written!

If so, how is it possible to conclude the blessing “He Who answered Elijah” with the expression “cry”?

The Gemara answers:

“Answer me, Lord, answer me”—

an expression

of crying out.

We learned in our Mishna:

“For the sixth, he says: ‘He Who answered Jonah, etc.’; for the seventh, he says: ‘He Who answered David, etc.’”

The Gemara asks:

“Since Jonah lived after David and Solomon,”

[for according to the order of the generations, Jonah lived after David and Solomon ],

“what is the reason that it mentions him first”

[why is Jonah mentioned for the sixth blessing, while David and Solomon are mentioned only for the seventh]?

The Gemara explains: The reason that David and Solomon are mentioned only at the end of the blessings is

because he wishes to conclude

[they wish to conclude] all the blessings with the conclusion “Blessed are You,

Who has mercy on the Land.”

In that blessing, David and Solomon are mentioned because they prayed concerning the Land of Israel .

A tanna taught: They said in the name of Sumakhos

that one does not conclude “Blessed are You, Who has mercy on the Land,” but rather

“Blessed are You, Who humbles the exalted.”

That is, by withholding the rain, the Holy One, blessed be He, humbled Israel and caused them to repent .

We learned in our Mishna:

“For the first three fasts, the members of the priestly watch fast but do not complete the fast, etc.”

The Sages taught: For what reason did they say

that

the members of the priestly watch are permitted to drink wine

only

at night, but not during the day?

Because those who have drunk wine are prohibited from performing the Temple service. We are concerned

lest the service become too burdensome for the members of the ancestral house

who are serving that day and require assistance,

and

the members of the priestly watch

will come to assist them. Therefore, although that day is not the regular time of service for the members of the priestly watch, they are prohibited from drinking wine during the day. At night, however, they are permitted, since the service is not then burdensome.

Therefore, although that day is not the regular time of service for the members of the priestly watch, they are prohibited from drinking wine during the day. At night, however, they are permitted, since the service is not then burdensome.

For what reason did they say

that

the members of the ancestral house

are not permitted to drink wine,

neither during the day nor at night?

Because they are constantly occupied with the service.

Since those who have drunk wine are prohibited from performing the service, the members of the ancestral house are therefore prohibited from drinking wine at all.

From here,

from the words of our Mishna, it follows that even members of the priestly watch whose service is not scheduled for that day are prohibited from drinking wine.

They said:

Nowadays ,

when the Temple is not standing,

any priest who knows

and knows which

priestly watch and ancestral house are his,

for example, he knows that he belongs to the watch of Jehoiarib or Jedaiah, and knows on which day and during which week their service was scheduled,

and knows that his ancestral houses are established there,

that they were not disqualified or defiled from the service, but are fit to serve in the Temple ,

is prohibited from drinking wine throughout that entire day

that he knows was scheduled for the service of his ancestral house. Perhaps the Temple will be rebuilt, and this priest will then have to serve .

Whereas

a

priest who

knows

his

priestly watch,

during which week they serve,

but does not know the priestly watch of his ancestral house,

and therefore does not know which day of the week is his regular time,

but knows that his ancestral houses are established there, is prohibited from drinking wine throughout that entire week

[the entire week that is the time of his priestly watch], because every day of that week is uncertain; perhaps it is the day of this priest.

But a priest who

does not know

at all his

priestly watch

or the priestly watch of his ancestral house, but knows that his ancestral houses are established there, is prohibited from drinking wine throughout the entire year,

because on every day of the year there is concern that it may be the day assigned to his ancestral house .

Rabbi says: I say

that if we are concerned that the Temple might be rebuilt, the law should be that

every priest is prohibited

from

drinking wine forever,

even if he knows his priestly watch and the priestly watch of his ancestral house, which had been assigned to him in the past.

The reason is that the order of the priestly watches may change in the future. Furthermore, it is possible that all of them will serve together for the dedication of the Temple, and this priest will have to serve .

But what can I do, when his remedy

for the priest, on account of which he is permitted to drink wine, is

his deficiency.

And what is that deficiency on account of which the priests are permitted to drink wine?

It is that the Temple has not been rebuilt for so many years .

Therefore, they are permitted to drink wine, because we are not concerned that the Temple might be rebuilt and they would have to serve in it .

Abaye said: In accordance with whose view do the priests drink wine nowadays

[according to whom, and according to which approach, do the priests drink wine in our time]?

In accordance with

the approach of

Rabbi .

We learned in our Mishna:

We learned in our Mishna:

“The members of the priestly watch and the members of the standing men are prohibited from cutting their hair and washing their clothes, but on Thursday they are permitted, for the honor of Shabbat.”

What is the reason,

why are the members of the priestly watch and the members of the standing men prohibited from cutting their hair and washing their clothes?

Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: So that they should not enter their watch while they are unkempt,

with long hair and wearing unwashed clothing.

For if we permitted them to cut their hair and wash their clothes during the days of their watch, they would not be careful to do so before that time, but would rely on one of the days of that week of their watch.

But now that they are prohibited from doing so during the days of their watch, they will be careful to cut their hair and wash their clothes during the preceding week, and they will enter their watch with their hair cut and wearing clean clothing.

The Sages taught:

It is a mitzva for the

king to cut his hair every day.

The High Priest

cuts his hair

from one eve of Shabbat

to the next eve of Shabbat,

that is, once a week.

An ordinary priest

cuts his hair

once every thirty days.

The Gemara now discusses the explanation of the beraita.

“A king cuts his hair every day”—

what is the reason

[what is the reason for this]?

Rabbi Abba bar Zavda said:

Because

the verse says: “Your eyes shall behold the king in his beauty” .

Since the king must appear before the people in his beauty, he must cut his hair every day .

High Priest

shaves

from one eve of Shabbat to the next eve of Shabbat. What is the reason?

Rav Shmuel bar Yitzḥak said: Since the shifts are renewed

and come each and every week [as each shift serves for one week in the Temple, after which another comes and replaces it]. And a shift that has not yet seen the High Priest, and comes to see him, it is fitting that it should see him in his beauty.

An ordinary priest

shaves

once every thirty days—

from where do we derive this [that this is so]?

It is derived [this matter is derived]

by means of a gezerah shavah

“pera”—

“pera,” from the nazirite,

as follows:

It is written here,

regarding the priests:

“They shall not shave their heads, nor let their hair grow wild” ,

so we have the expression “pera” with regard to priests.

And it is written there,

regarding the nazirite:

“He shall be holy; he shall let the hair of his head grow wild,”

so we have the expression “pera” with regard to the nazirite.

Just as there,

in the case of the nazirite, the intention is that he must observe his naziriteship and let the hair of his head grow for

thirty

days,

so too here,

with regard to the priests, what is stated, “nor let their hair grow wild,” means that they may not let the hair of their heads grow for more than

thirty

days.

And the nazirite himself

[himself],

from where do we derive

that the period of a naziriteship is thirty days?

Rav Mattana said:

For

an unspecified naziriteship—

thirty days

it is.

From where do we derive this?

The verse states

with regard to the nazirite: “Holy

shall he be.”

And the word “shall be”

has a numerical value of thirty

[it is thirty]. This indicates that the nazirite must observe his sanctity for thirty days.

Rav Pappa said to Abaye: But perhaps

[perhaps] what is stated with regard to the priests, “nor let their hair grow wild,”

this is what the Merciful One says

[this is what the Torah says]:

they shall not let it grow at all

[the priests shall not let their hair grow at all] , but shall shave every day!

For this is the meaning of the verse: “Pera,” that is, hair grown for thirty days [as we find in the case of a nazirite], “they shall not let it grow,” they shall not let it grow. Rather, they shall shave their hair every day.

He said to him

Abaye:

Had it been written

[had it been written] as follows:

“They shall not let pera grow,”

it would indeed have meant

as you say

[as you said], that they should not let their hair grow until it reached the measure of “pera.”

But

now,

[at present],

since it is written, “nor let their hair grow wild,”

the meaning of the verse is as follows:

“Pera,”

growth of hair for up to thirty days—

shall be

[it shall be; they are permitted to let their hair grow in this manner].

Letting it grow

[to let it grow, to let it grow further]—

that they shall not do

[they shall not do this], but shall shave it.

The Gemara raises an objection:

If so,

if this matter is learned from the verse,

even nowadays

[nowadays, in the present era]

as well

[the priests should likewise be required to shave their hair every thirty days]!

The Gemara explains: The reason this law does not apply nowadays is that the verse “nor let their hair grow wild” is juxtaposed to the verse “nor shall they drink wine.” Therefore, the prohibition against letting the hair grow must be

analogous to the law concerning those who have drunk wine

[similar to the law concerning those who have drunk wine].

Just as those who have drunk wine,

only

when entering

the Temple

is it forbidden,

as it is stated in the Book of Ezekiel: “No priest shall drink wine when they enter the inner court,” but

when not entering—

it is permitted

[a priest is permitted to drink wine],

so too here

[also here, with regard to shaving], the law is that only while the Temple exists is it forbidden to let one’s pera hair grow. But now, when the Temple does not exist, it is permitted.

The Gemara raises an objection:

But it was taught in a beraita: Rabbi says: I say that priests are forbidden to drink wine forever.

But what can I do, since its remedy

for the priest, on account of which he is permitted to drink wine, is due to

the ruin

of the Temple. Since many years have passed without the Temple being rebuilt, we are not concerned that it might be rebuilt, with the result that the priest would be found intoxicated.