Taanit 3b — the Talmud in English

Rather, the reason is

because ![](pamud.bmp "

precise page location")

it is not withheld [that the dew is never withheld from descending] , and therefore the Holy One, blessed is He, did not need to restore it to him.

[the dew never ceases to fall] , and therefore the Holy One, blessed be He, did not need to restore it.

The Gemara asks:

And since it is not withheld [if so, that the dew is never withheld],

[if so, since the dew never ceases],

why did Elijah make an oath concerning it [why did Elijah swear that dew would not descend]?

[that no dew would fall]?

The Gemara explains: Indeed, dew itself is never withheld. But it is possible that dew will descend and will not be effective in causing anything to grow.

And this is what he said to him [and this is what Elijah said to Ahab: not only will the rain not descend, but]

[this is what Elijah said to Ahab: not only would rain not fall, but]

even dew of blessing,

which also causes a little to grow—

it too will not come [it too will not come] .

[it too would not come] .

The Gemara asks: If so, that Elijah indeed withheld dew of blessing,

why should he not restore dew of blessing [so that he would now restore dew of blessing? And why did the Holy One, blessed is He, not say to him, "And I shall give dew and rain"?!

[so that he would now restore the dew that brings blessing! And why did the Holy One, blessed be He, not say to him: “And I will give dew and rain”?!

The Gemara explains: The reason that the Holy One, blessed is He, did not mention the dew is

because the

matter [that dew of blessing had returned]

was not recognizable, for dew descended all the while, and it is impossible to recognize which was dew of blessing and which was not. If so, had Elijah said in the name of the Holy One, blessed is He, "And I shall give dew and rain," Ahab would have taunted him and said that the dew had not been withheld at all, and there was no need to restore it .

Thus it has been explained to us that dew is never withheld.

And now the Gemara comes to explain: From where do we know that the winds are never withheld?

Winds—

from where do we know that they are not withheld [from where do we know that they are not withheld]?

[from where do we know that they do not cease]?

Rabbi Joshua ben Levi said: For the verse says

that the Holy One, blessed is He, said to Israel:

"For as the four winds of the heavens I have scattered you, declares the Lord" .

And it is necessary to understand:

what is he saying to them?

What did the Holy One, blessed is He, intend to say to Israel?

If you say that this is what the Holy One, blessed is He, said to Israel [if we say that this is what the Holy One, blessed is He, said to Israel]:

[if we say that this is what the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel]:

that I scattered you throughout the four winds of the world [that I scattered you throughout the four winds of the world],

[that I scattered you to the four directions of the world],

if so [if so], what is the meaning of the expression

[if so], what is the meaning of the wording

"as the four

winds," which implies that the Holy One, blessed is He, compared Israel to the four winds? Surely

"in the four

winds of the heavens I have scattered [you], etc."

was required [it should have said]! That is, the Holy One, blessed is He, scattered Israel among the four winds of the heavens!

[he should have said]—namely, that the Holy One, blessed be He, scattered Israel to the four winds of the heavens!

Rather, this is what He said

the Holy One, blessed is He:

Just as the world cannot

exist

without

winds,

for it would not endure because of the abundance of vapor and heat,

and it endures only through the winds that cool the world,

So too, the world cannot

exist

without Israel.

For the world exists only for the sake of the people of Israel. As it is stated: "If not for My covenant day and night, I would not have established the statutes of heaven and earth" .

Rabbi Hanina said: Therefore [therefore]:

:

In the days of summer,

that is, from the month of Nisan until the festival of Sukkot, if

a person says

in his prayer

"He makes the wind blow," he is not made to return , for in any event the winds are not withheld, and his words neither add nor detract.

since in any event the winds do not cease, and his words neither add nor detract.

But if

he says

in the days of summer

"He causes the rain to descend," he is made to return.

For there are indeed times when rain is withheld, and there is reason to ask for the descent of rain. And since he asked improperly , for rain in the days of summer is a sign of curse, therefore he is made to return .

Whereas

in the days of rain,

if

he did not say "He makes the wind blow," he is not made to return,

for this neither adds nor detracts, since in any event the winds are not withheld.

But if

he did not say

in the days of rain

"He causes the rain to descend," he is made to return,

for he deviated from the wording that the Sages established in the prayer, to mention the rains in the days of rain.

Moreover, even if he said

in his prayer

"He removes the wind [that it should not blow]

[so that it will not blow]

and makes the dew fly away [that it should not descend],"

[so that it will not fall] ”,

he is not made to return,

for they are never withheld, and there is nothing to his words .

A tanna [we learned in a beraita]:

[we learned in a baraita, a tannaitic source not included in the Mishna]:

For clouds [clouds]

[clouds]

and for winds, the Sages did not obligate one to mention them.

That is, the Sages did not obligate one to mention the clouds and the winds in prayer.

Indeed,

if he comes

of his own accord

to mention

the clouds and the winds,

he mentions them.

What is the reason?

Why did the Sages not obligate one to mention the clouds and the winds?

Because they are not withheld [they are never withheld].

[they never cease].

The Gemara asks:

And are they not withheld [is it really the case that the clouds and the winds are not withheld]?

[is it really true that clouds and winds do not cease]?

But did

[teach]

Rav Yosef

not teach in a beraita: "And the anger of the Lord will flare against you

and He will withhold the heavens,"

that is,

from the clouds and from the winds?

Rav Yosef explains his words, and comes to exclude other possibilities in explaining the verse:

You say [that is, we say] that the intention is that the Lord will withhold the heavens

[that is, we say] that the meaning is that God will shut up the heavens

from the clouds and from the winds.

Or

perhaps

it is not [the intention]

[the meaning]

rather—that the Lord will withhold the heavens

from the rain?

It is impossible to say this, for

when it [the verse]

[the verse]

says

subsequently,

"and there will be no rain," behold,

the withholding of the

rain is already stated

there.

Then what do I establish [if so, how is the verse established and explained]

[how, then, is the verse to be understood]

"and He will withhold the heavens"—

it must be that the intention is

from the clouds and from the winds.

If so,

there is a difficulty with what we learned, that one is not obligated to mention the

with what we learned, that one is not required to mention the

winds, because they are not withheld,

because they do not cease

but with regard to this—that Rav Yosef taught, "And He will withhold the heavens, etc., and from the

this contradicts what Rav Yosef taught: “and He will shut up the heavens, etc., and from the

winds," which implies that the winds are indeed withheld!

which implies that winds do in fact cease!

And likewise

there is a difficulty with what we learned, that one is not obligated to mention the

with what we learned, that one is not required to mention the

clouds, because they are not withheld,

because they do not cease

but with regard to this—that Rav Yosef taught, "And He will withhold the heavens from the

this contradicts what Rav Yosef taught: “and He will shut up the heavens from the

clouds"!

The Gemara answers:

Clouds concerning clouds [what we challenged concerning clouds—that in one place it implies that they are withheld, and in one place it implies that they are not withheld],

[the difficulty concerning clouds—one passage implies that they cease, while another implies that they do not cease]

is not difficult.

For

this,

what we learned, that the clouds are not withheld, refers to

the early ones .

That is, the first and earliest clouds, which come before the rain; they are not withheld.

But

if

this,

what Rav Yosef said, that they are withheld, refers to

the late ones ,

the later clouds ,

which come after the rain ,

they are indeed withheld .

And since not all clouds are withheld, the Sages did not obligate one to mention clouds at all .

And likewise,

the winds [

what we challenged concerning the winds: in one place it implies that they are halted, while in another place it implies that they are not halted ],

it is not difficult.

For

this one,

what we learned—that the winds are not halted—refers to

an ordinary wind.

The regular wind that is constantly present. For such a wind indeed is never halted.

And

if

this one,

what Rav Yosef said—that the winds are halted—refers to

a

strong

wind that is not present

regularly.

In any event, although a wind that is not ordinarily present is halted, the Sages did not obligate one to mention the winds, since the world can exist with an ordinary wind alone.

And the Gemara challenges: Behold,

a wind that is not ordinarily present is suitable for the threshing floor [

suitable for the granary ]! That is to say, behold, it is needed in order to winnow the grain at the threshing floor, to separate the wheat kernels from the straw and chaff that are with it! And since this is so—that it is needed—why did the Sages not obligate one to mention it?

And the Gemara explains: Indeed, a wind that is not ordinarily present is needed in order to winnow the threshing floor, but it is not indispensable even for this matter, because

it is possible

to separate the kernels from the refuse

with a sieve [

by means of a sieve ].

And since it is not indispensable for human existence, they did not obligate one to mention it.

A tanna [

we learned in a beraita ]:

the clouds and the winds are second to rain

They are. That is to say, they are so beneficial, almost like the rain itself. And the expression “second” is an expression of importance and superiority, like “second to the king,” who is second in importance and rank after the king.

The Gemara asks:

What are the circumstances?

What clouds and winds are being discussed, that they are so beneficial?

Ulla said, and some say Rav Yehuda [

and some say that Rav Yehuda said the matter ]: It refers to clouds and winds

that come after rain [

that come after the rain ].

And the Gemara is astonished:

Does this mean that it is an advantage!

It follows from Ulla’s words that winds that come after rain possess advantage and importance!

But it is written [

behold, it is written in the verse ] :

“The Lord will make the rain of your land dust and earth,” and Ulla said, and some say

and some say

Rav Yehuda

said the statement, that the reference is to

a wind that comes after rain [

a wind that comes after the rain ], which is harmful, because the rain that falls and strikes the ground forcefully raises dust from the earth, and the wind blows and causes the dust to adhere to the moist grain, thereby harming it!

And the Gemara answers:

It is not difficult.

For

this one,

what we said—that the wind after the rain is beneficial—refers to

when it came gently [

when the rain falls gently ].

But

this one,

what we said—that that wind is harmful—refers to a situation

when it came violently [

when the rain falls forcefully ].

And the Gemara continues and explains:

This one,

when the rain falls forcefully

, raising dust,

and therefore the wind that comes afterward harms the grain.

But

this one,

when the rain falls gently

, not raising dust.

And then not only does the wind cause no harm, but it also brings benefit.

And Rav Yehuda said: A wind that comes after rain is like rain [

a wind after the rain is beneficial like the rain itself ].

A cloud that comes after rain is like rain [

a cloud after the rain is beneficial like the rain itself ].

Sunshine that comes after rain is like two rains [

sunshine after the rain is like two rainfalls ].

The Gemara asks: If so, it follows that everything that comes after rain is beneficial like the rain itself. For what purpose did Rav Yehuda enumerate all these things—the wind, clouds, and sun—in detail?

To exclude what [

what does he come to exclude, which is not beneficial like rain ]? The Gemara explains: Rav Yehuda came

to exclude

two things:

A.

Flashes of the night [

lightning that comes after the rain. And the Gemara stated “flashes of the night,” the lightning of the night, because lightning generally comes and is seen at night ],

B.

And

by day—

sunshine between bald patches [

sunshine that is seen between the clouds. In one place light is visible, while in another place it is cloudy. Like a bald person, who has hair in one place, while in another place baldness is visible ]. For these things are not beneficial when they come after rain.

Rava said: Snow is beneficial for the mountains like five rains for the land [

snow is beneficial for the mountains like the benefit brought to the land by five rainfalls ].

And the reason is that, on the one hand, rain is not as beneficial for mountains as it is for a valley, because rain falls downward, and the mountain soil does not drink from it. On the other hand, snow is more beneficial for mountains than for a valley, because snow in a valley melts and disappears because of the heat that prevails there. This is not so with snow in the mountains, which does not melt quickly, and therefore it is more beneficial .

Nevertheless, it still needs to be understood. Indeed, it is reasonable that snow is very beneficial for mountains. But from where do we know that it is so beneficial, like five rains are beneficial for the land?

And Rava brings proof for this from the verse.

As it is stated: “For to the snow He says

‘Be on the earth, and rain, a downpour, and rains of His strength’” .

And this is how we expound the verse: When it is said to the snow that it should be on the earth, then: “rain,” “downpour,” “and rain,” “rains”—here are five rainfalls .

And Rava said: Snow—

for the mountains [

snow is beneficial for the mountains ], as was explained above.

Forceful rain—

for the trees [

rain that falls forcefully is beneficial for trees ]. For a tree needs to be watered with abundant water, and forceful rain has abundant water. But for grain it is not beneficial; rather, it is harmful.

Gentle rain—

for the fruit [

rain that falls gently is beneficial for fruit ]. For the produce of the land.