חגיגה 9 — Soncino English Talmud

¹They taught this only [of a case] when it had not ended, but if it had ended, he may offer the rest [on the second day]. What does ‘ended’ mean? Shall one say [it means]: he had ended his sacrifices? What [in that case] should he offer? It must mean, therefore, that the day had not ended, but if the day had ended, he may offer the rest [on the second day]. MISHNAH. HE WHO DID NOT BRING HIS FESTAL-OFFERING ON THE FIRST FESTIVAL, DAY OF THE FEAST [OF TABERNACLES], MAY BRING IT DURING THE WHOLE OF THE FESTIVAL, EVEN ON THE LAST FESTIVAL DAY OF THE FEAST [OF TABERNACLES]. IF THE FESTIVAL, PASSED AND HE DID NOT BRING THE FESTIVAL OFFERING, HE IS NOT BOUND TO MAKE IT GOOD. OF SUCH A PERSON IT IS SAID: HE THAT IS CROOKED CANNOT BE MADE STRAIGHT AND THAT WHICH IS WANTING CANNOT BE RECKONED. R. SIMEON B. MENASYA SAID: WHO IS IT ‘THAT IS CROOKED’ WHO ‘CANNOT BE MADE STRAIGHT’? HE THAT HAS CONNECTION WITH A FORBIDDEN RELATION AND BEGETS BY HER BASTARD ISSUE. SHOULD YOU SAY THAT IT APPLIES TO A THIEF OR ROBBER, BUT THEN HE IS ABLE TO MAKE RESTITUTION AND BE MADE STRAIGHT. R. SIMEON B. YOHAI SAID: ONLY HE CAN BE CALLED ‘CROOKED’ WHO WAS STRAIGHT AT FIRST AND BECAME CROOKED. AND WHO IS THIS? — A DISCIPLE OF THE SAGES WHO FORSAKES THE TORAH. GEMARA. Whence do we know this? — R. Johanan in the name of R. Ishmael said: [The expression] ‘Azereth [‘solemn assembly’] is used of the seventh day of Passover, and [the expression] ‘Azereth is used of the eighth day of the Feast [of Tabernacles]. Just as there it intimates that one can make good [thereon the festal-offering due on the first day] so here it intimates that one can make good [thereon the festal-offering of the first day]. And it is free [for interpretation]; for were it not free one might object: whereas [this applies] to the seventh day of Passover which is not differentiated from the preceding [days], can you say this of the eighth day of the Feast [of Tabernacles] which is differentiated from the preceding [days]. But it is not so; it is quite free [for interpretation]. Consider, what does ‘Azereth mean? [Evidently it means], restrained [‘Azur] in respect of doing work. But behold it is written: Thou shalt do no work; wherefore, then, has the Divine Law written ‘Azereth? You must infer therefrom [that it is] in order to leave it free [for interpretation]. But the Tanna [of the following Baraitha] deduces it from here. For it is taught: And ye shall keep it a feast unto the Lord seven days. One might think that he must go on bringing festal-offerings the whole of the seven days. Scripture, therefore, says, ‘it’: on it [only] are you to offer festal-offerings, but you are not to offer festal-offerings on all the seven days. If so, why does it say, ‘seven’? To intimate that one may make good [the festal-offering during the seven days of the festival]. And whence [do we learn] that if he did not bring the festal-offering on the first festival day of the Feast [of Tabernacles] that he can go on bringing it during the course of the whole Festival, even on the last festival day? Scripture says: Ye shall keep it in the seventh month. If, now, [it is to be kept] in the seventh month, one might think that one can go on bringing the festal-offering throughout the whole month, therefore Scripture says. ‘it’: on ‘it’ [only] are you to offer festal-offerings, but you are not to offer festal-offerings outside it. And what is the nature of this ‘making good’? — R. Johanan says: They make up for the first day; and R. Oshaiah says: They make up for one another. What is the [practical] point at issue between them? — R. Zera said: [The case of] a man who was lame on the first day [of the festival] and became well on the second day is the point of issue between them. R. Johanan says: They make up for the first day; since on the first day he was not qualified [to bring the festal-offering], he is not qualified on the second. And R. Oshaiah says: They make up for one another; although he was not qualified on the first day he is qualified on the second. But could R. Johanan have said this? For behold Hezekiah said: If [a Nazirite] became defiled during the day [of the eighth] he has to bring [a sacrifice], but during the night [preceding the eighth] he does not have to bring [a sacrifice]. But R. Johanan said: Also [if he was defiled] during the night, he must bring [a sacrifice]! — Said R. Jeremiah: The case of uncleanness is different, because it can be made good [as is the case with the sacrifice] on the Second Passover. R. Papa demurred to this: It is right according to the view that the Second Passover^ᵃ^ᵇ^ᶜ^ᵈ^ᵉ^ᶠ^ᵍ^ʰ^ⁱ^ʲ^ᵏ^ˡ^ᵐ^ⁿ^ᵒ^ᵖ^ᵠ^ʳ^ˢ^ᵗ^ᵘ^ᵛ^ʷ^ˣ^ʸ^ᶻ^ᵃᵃ^ᵃᵇ^ᵃᶜ^ᵃᵈ^ᵃᵉ

^ᵃnote:I.e., the Baraitha quoted infra pp. 44-45 which deduces from Lev. XXIII, 41 that the festal-offering is to be offered on the first day only.
^ᵇnote:rnd (‘he ended’) is both transitive and intransitive.
^ᶜnote:And he refrained from offering the remaining beasts.
^ᵈnote:And he had no opportunity of offering all his sacrifices.
^ᵉnote:Which is regarded as a separate festival, nevertheless one can make good thereon the festal-offering due on the first day of Tabernacles.
^ᶠnote:Eccl. I, 15.
^ᵍnote:V. Lev. XVIII, 6-18.
^ʰnote:I.e., that if the festal-offering was not brought earlier, it can still be offered up on the last day of Tabernacles.
^ⁱnote:Deut. XVI, 8.
^ʲnote:Lev. XXIII, 36; Num. XXIX, 35.
^ᵏnote:I.e., in the case of the seventh day of Passover which is essentially part of the Passover Festival.
^ˡnote:I.e., in the case of the eighth day of Tabernacles, even though it has the status of a separate festival; v. infra 17a.
^ᵐnote:I.e., the word ,rmg is redundant; this makes the inference by analogy irrefutable.
^ⁿnote:That one can make good on the last day the festal-offering of the first.
^ᵒnote:Cf. Yoma 3a.
^ᵖnote:hhtk=hv tk=utk ‘No’, ‘it is not so’.
^ᵠnote:Cf. A.V. Marg. ‘restraint’ in Deut. XVI, 8; Lev. XXIII, 36.
^ʳnote:Deut. XVI, 8.
^ˢnote:V. p. 7, n. 8.
^ᵗnote:An authority quoted in Mishnah and Baraitha in contradistinction to Amora such as R. Johanan above. V. Glos.
^ᵘnote:Lev. XXIII, 41.
^ᵛnote:Ibid. I.e., you can bring the festal-offering on every festival day in the month.
^ʷnote:The second ‘it’ of the verse.
^ˣnote:I.e., the days of the festival following the first.
^ʸnote:I.e.,the first day of the festival is the specific day for the festival-offering. If a man was liable to bring it on the first day but did not, he may make it good on a subsequent day of the festival; but if he was exempt on the first day, he is no longer bound to bring the offering.
^ᶻnote:I.e.. each day makes up for the preceding in the sense that it puts a new liability on the pilgrim; thus on whichever day of the festival he becomes qualified, he is bound to bring his offerings.
^ᵃᵃnote:And therefore exempt; v. p. 1.
^ᵃᵇnote:If a Nazirite (v. Num. VI, 2f) becomes defiled, he must wait seven days, and bring a sacrifice on the eighth, before he again begins to observe the days of his Naziritehood. One sacrifice will suffice for several defilements if the lapse between any two is less than eight days. But if he became defiled on the eighth day, he must bring a sacrifice for the previous defilement, since it was already due, and also for the subsequent defilement, since it occurred in a new period of eight days. If, however, the second defilement occurred on the night preceding the eighth, a second sacrifice has not to be brought, since the first cannot be offered till the morning, (for sacrifices are offered only during the day), the obligation to bring a sacrifice cannot be said to have yet fallen due and consequently the question of making good does not in his view arise. Cf. Ker. II, 3.
^ᵃᶜnote:Because he has already been purified by ritual immersion (vkhcy) on the seventh day, and the sun of that day has set (ana crgv). Now this statement seems to show that R. Johanan holds that though one is not qualified to bring a sacrifice (e.g., the Nazirite on the night preceding the eighth day), one may make up for it later.
^ᵃᵈnote:I.e., a sacrifice which cannot be offered on account of uncleanness is exceptional.
^ᵃᵉnote:Which is offered to make good the nonobservance of the First Passover sacrifice owing to a disqualification of uncleanness. V. Num. 10f. Thus those who are unfit to bring the paschal lamb on the First Passover may bring it on the Second, and similarly in other cases of uncleanness; but in all other cases of disqualification, R. Johanan would hold that an offering which could not be brought on one day cannot be made good.

²makes up for the First; but what is to be said according to the view that the Second [Passover] is a separate festival? — Therefore, said R. Papa, R. Johanan must be of the opinion that the night [before the day on which the sacrifice is due] is not regarded as belonging to the preceding period. But how could R. Johanan have said this? For behold R. Johanan said: If [a zab] had one emission in the night and two in the [following] day, he must bring [a second offering]; but [if he had] two in the night and one in the day, he has not to bring [a second offering]. Now if you imagine that R. Johanan is of the opinion that the night [before the day on which the sacrifice is due] is not regarded as belonging to the preceding period, then even [if he had] two [emissions] at night and one in the day he must bring [a second offering]! — R. Johanan said this only according to the view that the night [before] is regarded as belonging to the preceding period. But according to this view it is surely obvious! — It is required for the case where there are two [emissions] in the day and one the [preceding] night. You might have thought [the decision] to be according to the objection of R. Shisha son of R. Idi, it therefore teaches us that it is according to R. Joseph. IF THE FESTIVAL PASSED AND HE DID NOT BRING THE FESTIVAL OFFERING, HE IS NOT BOUND TO MAKE IT GOOD. OF SUCH A PERSON IT IS SAID: HE THAT IS CROOKED CANNOT BE MADE STRAIGHT AND THAT WHICH IS WANTING CANNOT BE RESTORED. Bar He-He said to Hillel: [Instead of] the [expression] ‘to be reckoned’ it ought to be ‘to be filled’! It must refer, therefore, to one whose fellows reckoned him for [the performance of] a religious act, but he would not be reckoned with them. It has also been taught thus: ‘He that is crooked cannot be made straight’: this refers to one who neglected to read the morning Shema’ or the evening Shema’, or he neglected the morning prayer or the evening prayer. And that which is wanting cannot be reckoned’; this refers to one whose fellows resolved on [the performance of] a religious act and he would not be reckoned with them. Bar He-He said to Hillel: Then shall ye again discern between the righteous and the wicked, between him that serveth God and him that serveth Him not. ‘The righteous’ is the same as ‘he that serveth God’; ‘the wicked’ is the same as ‘he that serveth Him not’! — He answered him: He that serveth Him and he that serveth Him not both refer to such as are perfectly righteous; but he that repeated his chapter a hundred times is not to be compared with him who repeated it a hundred and one times. Said [Bar He-He] to him: And because of once he is called ‘he that serveth Him not’? — He answered: Yes, go and learn from the mule-drivers market; ten parasangs for one zuz, eleven parasangs for two zuz. Elijah said to Bar He-He, and others say, to R. Eleazar: What is the meaning of the verse: Behold I have refined thee but not as silver; I have tried thee in the furnace of affliction? It teaches that the Holy One, blessed be He, went through all the good qualities in order to give [them] to Israel, and He found only poverty. Samuel said, and others say. R. Joseph: This accords with the popular saying: Poverty befits Israel like a red trapping a white horse. R. SIMEON B. MENASYA SAID: WHO IS IT ‘THAT IS CROOKED’ WHO ‘CANNOT BE MADE STRAIGHT’? HE THAT HAS CONNECTION WITH A FORBIDDEN RELATION AND BEGETS BY HER BASTARD ISSUE etc. Only if he begets, but not if he does not beget. But behold it is taught: R. Simeon b. Menasya said: If a man steal, he can return the theft and [so] become straight; but he that has connection with a married woman and makes her prohibited unto her husband is banished from the world and passes away. (R. Simeon b. Yohai said: One does not say: Examine the camel, examine the pig, Only examine the lamb. And who is this? A disciple of the wise who has forsaken the Torah. R. Judah b. Lakish said: Any disciple of the wise who has forsaken the Torah, of him Scripture says: As a bird that wandereth from her nest, so is a man that wandereth from his place. And it further says : What unrighteousness have your fathers found in me, that they are gone far from me?) — There is no contradiction: the one case refers to his unmarried sister, the other refers to a married woman. Or I might say: Both are cases of married women; but there is no contradiction: in the one case^ᵃᶠ^ᵃᵍ^ᵃʰ^ᵃⁱ^ᵃʲ^ᵃᵏ^ᵃˡ^ᵃᵐ^ᵃⁿ^ᵃᵒ^ᵃᵖ^ᵃᵠ^ᵃʳ^ᵃˢ^ᵃᵗ^ᵃᵘ^ᵃᵛ^ᵃʷ^ᵃˣ^ᵃʸ^ᵃᶻ^ᵇᵃ^ᵇᵇ^ᵇᶜ^ᵇᵈ^ᵇᵉ^ᵇᶠ^ᵇᵍ^ᵇʰ^ᵇⁱ

^ᵃᶠnote:V. Pes. 93a.
^ᵃᵍnote:This excludes the explanation that a sacrifice, not offered in time owing to uncleanness, can be made good later.
^ᵃʰnote:[Lit., ‘is not (deemed as) wanting time’. I.e., the fact that one cannot bring an offering on the night preceding the day on which it is due, is not regarded as a disqualifying factor, and consequently in the case of a Nazirite the night preceding the eighth day completes the eight days’ period, so that the sacrifice may be said to fall due thereon, though he is actually prevented from offering it because it is still night. For this reason the sacrifice which was not offered at night can be made good on the following morning, and should he in the meantime suffer a second defilement, he has to bring a second sacrifice, whereas in the case of the festival-offering where he was lame on the first day, there was no obligation whatsoever resting on him to bring a sacrifice and consequently this cannot be made good].
^ᵃⁱnote:I.e., that the night preceding the day on which a sacrifice is due is not regarded as belonging to the preceding period.
^ᵃʲnote:cz, one who suffers from gonorrhoea (v. Lev. XV). After the first emission he is considered a hre kgc and is unclean for the day; after the second, he is tyn, (unclean in the degree of zab), and has to count seven clean days, wash his garments, have ritual immersion and wait for sunset; after the third, he has, in addition, to bring sacrifices on the eighth day (cf. Ned. 43b). This zab had counted seven days and was to bring his offerings on the morrow, and in the meantime he saw further discharges.
^ᵃᵏnote:Because the first emission is counted with the two of the morning.
^ᵃˡnote:Because the two nocturnal emissions make him unclean within the period of the first defilement, i.e., before the eighth day.
^ᵃᵐnote:But his own view is the reverse.
^ᵃⁿnote:As his own opinion the statement would have point in as much as it tells us his personal view; otherwise the teaching is an obvious corollary of the principle that the night before belongs to the preceding period.
^ᵃᵒnote:V. Ker. 8a, where R. Joseph seeks to prove R. Johanan's view that the first emission in the evening is counted with the two of the morning (cf. n. 1). and R. Shisha argues against the former's proof.
^ᵃᵖnote:V. Aboth, Sonc. ed, p. 77, n. 6. (Ch. V, 23).
^ᵃᵠnote:I.e., the expression ‘that which is wanting’ (iurxj) requires as its antonym ‘to be filled’ (,utknvk) not ‘to be reckoned’ ,ubnvk lit., to be numbered’.
^ᵃʳnote:I.e., asked him to join them.
^ᵃˢnote:A biblical reading consisting of Deut. VI, 4-9 and an additional sentence; ibid. XI, 13-21; Num. XV, 37-41; the name is derived from its first word — gna. V. P.B. pp. 40-42.
^ᵃᵗnote:The prayer par excellence, called also ‘Amidah (‘standing prayer’) and the ‘eighteen (really nineteen) blessings’. V. P.B. pp. 44f.
^ᵃᵘnote:Lit., ‘reckoned themselves’.
^ᵃᵛnote:Mal. III, 18.
^ᵃʷnote:Possibly a pun is intended here: the initial letters of rwtk ohvkt scg (‘he that serveth God and he’) = 101; and of uscg tk (‘serveth Him not’) = 100. V. Marginal Gloss. in cur. edd.
^ᵃˣnote:A silver coin, quarter of a shekel, and equal to a denar, v. Glos.
^ᵃʸnote:For Elijah in Rabbinic literature v. J.E. vol. V, pp. 122f, espec. p. 124f. Cf. also supra pp. 17f. regarding the Angel of death.
^ᵃᶻnote:Isa. XLVIII, 10.
^ᵇᵃnote:The word for ‘affliction’ ( hbg) also means poverty.
^ᵇᵇnote:V. Lev. Rab. ss. 13 and 35 for parallel readings.
^ᵇᶜnote:I.e., the wrong they have done is irreparable. This statement of R. Simeon b. Menasya, which declares that connection with a prohibited relation, even if there be no issue, is irreparable, contradicts his statement in the Mishnah. The other dicta are quoted merely because they form part of the Baraitha (Tosef.).
^ᵇᵈnote:I.e., to see if they are without blemish and so fit for sacrifice, for they are unfit to start with. Likewise ‘made crooked’ can only refer to one who was originally worthy and later degenerated. V. R. Simeon b. Yohai's statement in Mishnah.
^ᵇᵉnote:Which is fit for sacrifice unless it becomes blemished.
^ᵇᶠnote:Prov. XXVII, 8.
^ᵇᵍnote:Jer. II, 5.
^ᵇʰnote:The wrong then becomes irreparable only when there is issue.
^ᵇⁱnote:A stranger's connection with her, even if no issue results, makes her prohibited to her husband.