1 I will not take a thread or a shoe-strap, his descendants were worthy to receive two commandments: the thread of blue, and the strap of the tefillin. Now as for the strap of the tefillin, [the blessing bestowed on its account] is clear, for it is written: And all the peoples of the earth shall see that the name of the Lord is called upon thee; and they shall be afraid of thee,’ and it has been taught: R. Eliezer the Great says: This refers to the tefillin worn upon the head. But what [is the blessing bestowed on account] of the thread of blue? — It has been taught: R. Meir says. Why is blue singled out from all the varieties of colours? Because blue resembles the colour of the sea, and the sea resembles the colour of the sky, and the sky resembles the colour of a sapphire, and a sapphire resembles the colour of the Throne of Glory, as it is said: And they saw the God of Israel and there was under His feet as it were a paved work of sapphire stone; and it is also written: The likeness of a throne as the appearance of a sapphire stone. R. Abba said: Grave indeed is theft that has been consumed, for even the perfect righteous cannot make amends for it, as it is said: Save only that which the young men have eaten. R. Johanan said in the name of R. Eleazar son of R. Simeon. Wherever you find the words of R. Eleazar the son of R. Jose the Galilean in an Aggadah make your ear like a funnel. [For he said: It is written,] It was not because you were greater than any people that the Lord set His love upon you and chose you. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel, I love you because even when I bestow greatness upon you, you humble yourselves before me. I bestowed greatness upon Abraham, yet he said to Me, I am but dust and ashes; Upon Moses and Aaron, yet they said: And we are nothing; upon David, yet he said: But I am a worm and no man. But with the heathens it is not so. I bestowed greatness upon Nimrod, and he said: Come, let us build us a city; upon Pharaoh, and he said: Who is the Lord? Upon Sennacherib, and he said: Who are they among all the gods of the countries? upon Nebuchadnezzar, and he said: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; upon Hiram king of Tyre, and he said: I sit in the seat of God, in the heart of the seas. Raba, others say R. Johanan, said: More significant is that which is said of Moses and Aaron than that which is said of Abraham. Of Abraham it is said: I am but dust and ashes, whereas of Moses and Aaron it is said: And we are nothing. Raba, others say R. Johanan, also said: The world exists only on account of [the merit of] Moses and Aaron; for it is written here: And we are nothing, and it is written there [of the world]: He hangeth the earth upon nothing. R. Ila'a said: The world exists only on account of [the merit of] him who restrains himself in strife, for it is written: He hangeth the earth upon belimah. R. Abbahu said: On account of [the merit of] him who abases himself, for it is written: And underneath are the everlasting arms. R. Isaac said: What is the meaning of the verse: Indeed in silence speak righteousness; judge uprightly the sons of men? What should be a man's pursuit in this world? He should be silent. Perhaps he should be so with regard to the words of the Torah? It says therefore, ‘Speak righteousness’. Perhaps then he is to become arrogant? It says therefore, ‘Judge uprightly the sons of men. R. Ze'ira, others say Rabbah b. Jeremiah, said: One may cover up [the blood] with the dust of a ‘condemned city’. Why is this? Is it not forbidden for all uses? — Ze'iri answered: It can only refer to the earth of its soil; for the verse. And thou shalt gather all the spoil of it into the midst of the broad place thereof and shalt burn with fire, applies only to that which requires to be gathered and burned; but that which requires to be dug up and then gathered and burned is excluded. Raba said: The [performance of] precepts is not accounted as a personal benefit. Rabina was sitting and reciting the above statement [of Raba]; whereupon R. Rehumi raised this objection against Rabina. [It was taught:] A man may not blow [on the New Year] a shofar which has been used for idolatrous purposes. Now presumably if he did blow it he will not have fulfilled his obligation! — No. If he did blow it he has fulfilled his obligation. A man may not take [on the Festival] a lulab which has been used for idolatrous purposes. Presumably if he did take it he will not have fulfilled his obligation! — No. If he did take it he has fulfilled his obligation. But it has been taught: If he sounded it he has not fulfilled his obligation; if he took it he has not fulfilled his obligation! — R. Ashi answered: There is no comparison at all. There 37ᵃᵇᶜᵈᵉᶠᵍʰⁱʲᵏˡᵐⁿᵒᵖᵠʳˢᵗᵘᵛʷˣʸᶻᵃᵃᵃᵇᵃᶜᵃᵈᵃᵉᵃᶠᵃᵍᵃʰᵃⁱᵃʲᵃᵏ
2 a minimum size is prescribed, and since it has been used for idolatry it is regarded as though the size were diminished, whereas here the more broken up it is the better it is for covering up. MISHNAH. [THE PROHIBITION OF] THE SCIATIC NERVE IS IN FORCE BOTH WITHIN THE HOLY LAND AND OUTSIDE IT, BOTH DURING THE EXISTENCE OF THE TEMPLE AND AFTER IT, IN RESPECT OF BOTH UNCONSECRATED AND CONSECRATED [ANIMALS]. IT APPLIES TO CATTLE AND TO WILD ANIMALS, TO THE RIGHT AND LEFT HIP, BUT IT DOES NOT APPLY TO BIRDS BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO SPOON-SHAPED HIP. IT ALSO APPLIES TO A FOETUS. R. JUDAH SAYS, IT DOES NOT APPLY TO A FOETUS. AND ITS FAT IS PERMITTED. BUTCHERS ARE NOT TRUSTWORTHY WITH REGARD TO THE [REMOVAL OF THE] SCIATIC NERVE: SO R. MEIR. THE SAGES SAY, THEY ARE TRUSTWORTHY WITH REGARD TO IT AS WELL AS WITH REGARD TO THE [FORBIDDEN] FAT. GEMARA. IN RESPECT OF . . . CONSECRATED [ANIMALS]. But is not this obvious? Surely because one consecrated the animal the prohibition of the nerve has not thereby vanished! And if you were to say that [our Tanna] is of the opinion that nerves impart a taste [to the meat], and [he teaches us] that the prohibition of a consecrated animal can be superimposed upon the prohibition of the nerve, then the Tanna should have said: ‘The prohibition of [eating] consecrated meat applies to the nerve too’! — Rather we must say that he is of the opinion that nerves do not impart a taste, [and he thus teaches us that] in regard to [the sciatic nerve of] a consecrated [animal] there is only the prohibition of the nerve but not the prohibition of consecrated things. But does our Tanna hold that nerves do not impart a taste? Surely we have learnt: If a thigh was cooked together with the sciatic nerve it is forbidden if it imparts a taste [into the thigh]! — Rather we must suppose that he is dealing with the young of consecrated animals. And he is of the opinion that it [sc. the prohibition of the sciatic nerve] applies to a foetus, and also that the young of a consecrated animal is holy even when in its dam's womb; accordingly the prohibition of the nerve and the prohibition of consecrated things come into force simultaneously. But how can you suggest that the Mishnah is dealing with a foetus? Surely since in a subsequent clause it says. IT ALSO APPLIES TO A FOETUS, it is obvious that the first clause is not dealing with a foetus! — This is what he means: This is indeed a matter of dispute between R. Judah and the Rabbis. But how can you say that both [prohibitions] come into force simultaneously? Surely we have learnt: By reason of uncleanness contracted from the following sources the Nazirite must shave [his head]: a corpse, an olive's bulk of [the flesh of] a corpse etc. Now the question was asked: If he must shave [his head] on account of an olive's bulk of [the flesh of] a corpse, then surely he must shave [his head] for the whole corpse! And R. Johanan answered that it was necessary [to mention the corpse itself] only for the case of an abortion whose limbs were not yet knit together by nerves.17ᵃˡᵃᵐᵃⁿᵃᵒᵃᵖᵃᵠᵃʳᵃˢᵃᵗᵃᵘᵃᵛᵃʷᵃˣᵃʸᵃᶻᵇᵃᵇᵇ