Taanit 3a (ג.) — the Talmud in English

The Gemara raises an objection:

If he holds

that Rabbi Akiva holds in accordance with the opinion of

Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira, let him state it in accordance with his opinion

—that he should say so, since they mention rain beginning on the second day of the festival! The Gemara explains:

He holds

that

Rabbi Akiva,

since

when an additional libation is written

—when an extra libation is written in addition to the regular libation of the other days of the year—

in

the offerings of the sixth day,

it is the sixth that is written,

as the word “and their libations” was stated on the sixth day, its meaning being that there are two libations. Therefore, it is logical to begin mentioning rain on the sixth day.

Nevertheless, the extra letters mem, yod, mem are effective in teaching us that one of the two libations is a water libation.

It was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Natan says:

It is written concerning the daily offering:

“In the sacred place, pour a libation; pour a libation of strong drink to the Lord.”

From the repetition of the expression

“pour a libation; pour a libation,” we learn that

the two

libations

that are poured during the festival of Sukkot

are being referred to by the verse: one is the water libation, and one is the wine libation.

The Gemara asks: How does Rabbi Natan know that the reference is to a water libation and a wine libation?

Perhaps

we should say that

both are wine libations

—that both of them are wine?

The Gemara explains: It is impossible to say this.

If so,

if they are the same type of libation, except that it is brought twice, the verse should have repeated the very same word, and

the verse should have written

that it should write

either

the expression

“pour, pour,” or

the expression

“libation, libation!”

What

is the meaning of the expression

“pour a libation; pour a libation”

that the verse employs?

You can infer from this

that the two libations are different:

one is water

—one is water—

and one is wine

—and one is wine.

The Gemara asks:

But what of that which we learned

in a baraita:

“The water libation is [performed] all seven [days]”

—water is poured on each of the seven days of the festival of Sukkot—

who is [the tanna]

who holds this opinion?

If

if]

Rabbi Yehoshua

is the tanna,

let us say [that it is performed] one day

—let it be stated and repeated in the baraita that the libation is performed on only one day—for he holds that the mention of rain begins only on the seventh day of Sukkot, which is when the time arrives for putting down the lulav!

If it is Rabbi Akiva,

let it be stated that the libation is performed

two days

—two days—for he holds that rain is mentioned only from the sixth day!

If it is Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira,

let it be stated that the libation is performed

six days

—six days—for he holds that the mention of rain begins on the second day of the festival!

The Gemara says:

Actually,

in truth, the baraita follows the opinion of

Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira.

And

do not raise the objection that, if so, the water libation should be performed for only six days!

Because

he holds

that

in accordance with

the approach of

Rabbi Yehuda in the Mishna

in tractate Sukkah.

As we learned

—as we learned in the Mishna in tractate Sukkah:

Rabbi Yehuda says: With a log

of water

he would perform the libation all eight [days].

That is, water was poured upon the altar for eight days.

Indeed, Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion is that the libation is performed for eight days, namely, on the seven days of the festival and also on Shemini Atzeret, contrary to all the opinions cited thus far. Nevertheless, his words indicate that the libation is performed even on Shemini Atzeret.

Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira partially follows this approach:

he removes

the

first

day, for he does not hold that the libation is performed on that day, since the water libation is alluded to only on the second day,

and he brings in

the

eighth

day among the days on which water is poured. Thus, there are seven days on which the libation is performed, from the second day through the eighth day.

The Gemara raises an objection:

And in what way is

the

first

day different, so that the libation is not performed on it? It is because

when

the

water

is alluded to,

it is on the

second day that it is alluded to.

If so, regarding the

eighth day as well,

let us say that the libation is not performed on it, since

when water is alluded to,

it is on the seventh day that it is alluded to

—as stated above, the final letter of the word “water” is alluded to by the word “according to their ordinance,” which is stated concerning the offerings of the seventh day!

And since this is so, it is impossible to say that the baraita follows the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira, for he certainly does not hold that the water libation is performed for seven days.

Rather,

this baraita follows the opinion of

Rabbi Yehoshua,

who holds that rain is mentioned from the seventh day, the time when the lulav is put down.

And

the statement we learned in the baraita, that

the water libation is performed all seven

days, is not because the time for mentioning rain is all seven days, but rather

it is a halakha received

—it is a halakha given to Moses at Sinai.

However, it is impossible to establish the baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira, since he holds that the water libation is alluded to on the second day; therefore, the libation must necessarily have been performed only from the second day onward. And likewise Rabbi Akiva, who holds that the libation is alluded to in the offerings of the sixth day, must necessarily hold that it was performed only from the sixth day onward.

And from where do we know that this is a halakha given to Moses at Sinai?

For Rabbi Ami said that Rabbi Yohanan said in the name of Rabbi Neḥunya, a man of the valley of Beit Ḥortan,

these three matters:

a.

The ten saplings,

.

On the eve of the sabbatical year, one may plow a “white field,” meaning a grain field, only until Shavuot, because plowing afterward serves to prepare it for sowing in the following year, the sabbatical year. And since it is a mitzva to add from the mundane to the sacred, one must refrain from performing during the sixth year any work on the land that serves to prepare it for the seventh year.

By contrast, one may plow an “orchard,” meaning a field planted with trees, until thirty days before Rosh HaShana of the sabbatical year. For plowing it does not prepare it for the needs of the seventh year; rather, it serves the needs of the tree during the sixth year.

A special law was stated concerning a field containing ten “saplings,” meaning young trees, evenly dispersed within an area of a beit se’a [fifty by fifty cubits], that one may plow not only around each individual tree, but the entire field, until Rosh HaShana of the sabbatical year. The reason is that when the saplings are dispersed in this manner, they draw nourishment from the entire area of the field.

But if the saplings are not dispersed in this manner, one may plow only around each tree, to the extent of its nourishment from the ground [according to the calculation of ten saplings per beit se’a].

The reason for the special permission regarding saplings is that the plowing is not intended to improve them, but to preserve them. For if one does not plow around them, they will dry out.

b.

The willow,

which is set upright at the sides of the altar on the seventh day of the festival of Sukkot,

c.

And the water libation,

these three matters

are a halakha given to Moses at Sinai

.

We learned in the baraita cited above:

Rabbi Yehuda says in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua: One who passes before the ark on the final Festival day of the festival, the last one mentions rain, and the first one does not mention it. On the first Festival day of Passover, the first one mentions it, and the last one does not mention it.

The Gemara asks:

Which Rabbi Yehoshua

is this—the ruling of which Rabbi Yehoshua did Rabbi Yehuda state in his name?

If you say

that the reference is to

Rabbi Yehoshua of the Mishna

—of our Mishna—

this

is difficult, for

he said

that

on the final Festival day of the festival he mentions rain!

This implies that rain is mentioned in all the prayers of the final Festival day, even in the morning prayer, and not as Rabbi Yehuda says, that only the one praying Musaf mentions it!

And

rather,

perhaps we should say that the reference is to

Rabbi Yehoshua of the baraita

whose words were cited in the baraita above?

For he said

that rain is mentioned

from the time it is put down

—the lulav—that is, on the seventh day of the festival of Sukkot, when they cease taking the lulav!

Furthermore,

there is another matter to ask and clarify:

that which was taught

in another baraita:

Rabbi Yehuda says in the name of ben Beteira: One who passes before the ark on the final Festival day of the festival

of Sukkot,

the

one who passes before the ark,

the last one,

the one praying Musaf,

mentions

rain,

Which ben Beteira

is this—the identity of the ben Beteira mentioned in this baraita?

If you say

that he is the same

Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira

mentioned in the baraita cited above,

this

is difficult, for

he said

that

on the second day of the festival he mentions [rain],

and this is unlike ben Beteira in this baraita, who says that rain is mentioned only on the eighth day of the festival!

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: The two questions we asked—who is the Rabbi Yehoshua in whose name Rabbi Yehuda stated his ruling, and who is the ben Beteira mentioned in the second baraita—are resolved by one answer:

Let both [baraitot] be

the words of a tanna not yet mentioned. Namely, they follow

the

approach of

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Beteira.

That is, the reference is neither to Rabbi Yehoshua of our Mishna nor to Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira, but to another tanna whose name was Rabbi Yehoshua ben Beteira.

However, it remains necessary to understand why Rabbi Yehoshua ben Beteira is called “Rabbi Yehoshua” in one baraita and “ben Beteira” in another.

The Gemara explains:

Sometimes he is called by his own name

—sometimes he is called by his name, “Rabbi Yehoshua”—

and sometimes he is called by his father’s name

—sometimes he is called by his father’s name, “ben Beteira.”

And this—

the fact that he is called by his father’s name—means

before they ordained him

—before they ordained Rabbi Yehoshua to be called “Rabbi”; at that time his father was more prominent, and therefore he was called by his father’s name.

But this,

that he referred to it by its name, means

after they had supported him [

after they had supported him. At that point he already had importance in his own right, and therefore they referred to him by his name].

A tanna [

we learned in a beraita]:

With regard to dew and winds,

meaning, to say, “Who makes the wind blow and brings down the dew” —

the Sages did not obligate one to mention them,

even during the rainy season.

And if one comes to mention them

of his own volition —

he mentions them.

What is the reason?

Why did the Sages not obligate him to mention them?

Rabbi Ḥanina said: Because

dew and winds

are never withheld

forever. For were it not for them, the world could not endure. Therefore, it is unnecessary to mention them and petition for them.

The Gemara now explains how we know that dew and winds are never withheld.

And dew —

from where do we know that it is not withheld [

from where do we know that it is never withheld]?

As it is written: “And Elijah the Tishbite, of the inhabitants of Gilead, said to Ahab:

‘As the Lord, God of Israel, lives, before whom I stand’ [

that is, before whom I am accustomed to stand in prayer],

‘there shall not be dew or rain these years, except by my word’ [

until I come, by the command of the Holy One, blessed be He, to inform you that rain will now fall]”. And indeed, this is what happened, as it is stated afterward: “And it came to pass after many days that the brook dried up, because there had been no rain in the land.”

Thus, Elijah said that the dew and the rain would be withheld.

And

afterward

it is written

that in the third year of the famine, the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Elijah:

“Go, appear before Ahab, and I shall give rain upon the face of the earth.”

Thus, the Holy One, blessed be He, told Elijah that from then on the rain would once again fall upon the face of the earth.

But

with regard to

dew —

the Holy One, blessed be He, did not say to him

that it should now return.

What is the reason?

Why did the Holy One, blessed be He, not say that the dew should once again fall, given that Elijah initially said that the dew would also be withheld, as it is stated: “There shall not be dew or rain these years, except by my word”?