Kiddushin

[that he sowed] four [species] on the four sides of the bed and one [species] in the middle.1 Here, however,2 he did so on account of beauty, or [to save] the attendant trouble. 3 MISHNAH. HE WHO PERFORMS ONE PRECEPT IS WELL REWARDED,4 HIS DAYS ARE PROLONGED, AND HE INHERITS THE LAND,5 BUT HE WHO DOES NOT PERFORM ONE PRECEPT, GOOD IS NOT DONE TO HIM, HIS DAYS ARE NOT PROLONGED, AND HE DOES NOT INHERIT THE LAND.6 GEMARA. But a contradiction is shewn: These are the things the fruit of which man eats in this world,7 while the principal remains for him for the future world. Viz., honouring one's parents, the practice of loving deeds, hospitality to wayfarers,8 and making peace between man and his neighbour; and the study of the Torah surpasses them all.9 — Said Rab Judah: This is its meaning: HE WHO PERFORMS ONE PRECEPT in addition to his [equally balanced] merits10 IS WELL REWARDED, and he is as though he had fulfilled the whole Torah. Hence it follows that for these others [one is rewarded] even for a single one!11 — Said R. Shemaiah: That teaches that if there is an equal balance, it tips the scale.12 Yet is it a fact that he who performs one precept in addition to his [equally balanced] merits is rewarded? But the following contradicts it: He whose good deeds outnumber his iniquities is punished,13 and is as though he had burnt the whole Torah, not leaving even a single letter;14 while he whose iniquities outnumber his good deeds is rewarded,15 and is as though he had fulfilled the whole Torah, not omitting even a single letter! — Said Abaye: Our Mishnah means that a festive day and an evil day are prepared for him,16 Raba said: This latter agrees with R. Jacob, who said: There is no reward for precepts in this world.17 For it was taught: R. Jacob said: There is not a single precept in the Torah whose reward is [stated] at its side which is not dependent on the resurrection of the dead.18 [Thus:] in connection with honouring parents it is written, that thy days may be prolonged, and that it may go well with thee.19 In reference to the dismissal of the nest20 it is written, that it may be well with thee, and that thou mayest prolong thy days.21 Now, if one's father said to him, ‘Ascend to the loft and bring me young birds,’ and he ascends to the loft, dismisses the dam and takes the young, and on his return falls and is killed — where is this man's happiness22 and where is this man's prolonging of days? But ‘in order that it may be well with thee’, means on the day that is wholly good; and ‘in order that thy days may be long’, on the day that is wholly long. 23 Yet perhaps there was no such happening?24 — R. Jacob saw an actual occurrence. Then perhaps he25 was meditating upon a transgression? — The Holy One, blessed be He, does not combine an evil thought with an [evil] act.26 Yet perhaps he was meditating idolatry, and it is written, that I may take the house of Israel in their own heart?27 — That too was precisely his point: should you think that precepts are rewarded in this world, why did the [fulfilment of these] precepts not shield him from being led to [such] meditation?28 Yet R. Eleazar said: Those who are engaged29 on a precept are never harmed?30 — There, when they are going [to fulfil the precept], it is different.31 But R. Eleazar said: Those who are engaged on a precept are never harmed, either when going or returning? — It was a rickety ladder, so that injury was likely,32 and where injury is likely one must not rely on a miracle, for it is written, and Samuel said: How can I go? if Saul hear it, he will kill me.33 R. Joseph said: Had Aher34 interpreted this verse35 as R. Jacob, his daughter's son, he would not have sinned.36 Now, what happened with Aher? Some say, he saw something of this nature.37 Others say, he saw the tongue of Huzpith the Interpreter dragged along by a swine.38 ‘The mouth that uttered pearls licks the dust!’ he exclaimed. [Thereupon] he went forth and sinned. 39 R. Tobi son of R. Kisna pointed out a contradiction to Raba: We learnt: HE WHO PERFORMS ONE PRECEPT IS WELL REWARDED; hence, only if he [actively] performs it, but not otherwise. But the following contradicts this: If he sits and commits no transgression he is rewarded as though he has fulfilled a precept! — Said he to him: There it means, e.g., that he was tempted40 and successfully resisted.41 As in the case of R. Hanina b. Pappi, whom a certain matron urged [to immorality]. He pronounced a certain [magical] formula, whereupon his body was covered with boils and scabs;42 but she did something and he was healed. So he fled and hid himself in a bath-house in which when [even] two entered, even in daytime, they would suffer harm.43 The next morning the Rabbis asked him, ‘Who guarded you?’ Said he to them, ‘Two between each for their roots not to intertwine; v. Shab. 84b. The only possible reason would then be that kil'ayim are forbidden outside Palestine. study was not only a means to religious observance (cf. infra 40b: study is great, as it leads to action), but a religious act in itself, — indeed, one of the most important, as is shewn by this and numerous other passages in the Talmud. Nevertheless, they were far from believing that religious sincerity might be replaced by mere intellectualism; v. M. Joseph, Judaism as Creed and Life, p. 360. the former to preponderate. festive day for him, since he thereby wholly enjoys the next. Conversely the second half of the Mishnah. resurrection; v. Sanh. (Sonc. ed.) p. 601, n. 3. world. intention of idolatry is punished. precept draws precept and transgression draws transgression’. Aher, a different man, a stranger. the Hadrianic persecution, after the fall of Bethar; v. Dor. II, 119. The Interpreter was a functionary who interpreted the public readings of the Torah to the people. Moses (Ber. 7a), which led him to religious apostasy. For other conjectures v. J.E. s.v. Elishah ben Abuyah. Talmud was strongly opposed to it, as ‘impairing the Divine Agencies’ (Sanh. 67b; cf. Tosef. Sotah, XIV, 3; Sotah, IX, 3), and being bound up with idolatry. Nevertheless, in case of need it was resorted to and permitted, so long as pagan means were not employed. Thus healing by means of an amulet was permitted and its use regulated by law (Shab. 61a-b). Here, on the other hand, a Rabbi uses magic to cover himself with boils in order to resist immoral demands, and it is obviously permitted. The most potent means was an incantation, as here, particularly one which employed the name of God. V. Blau, Das altjudische Zauberwesen, pp. 117-146.