פסחים 3

¹ If a woman miscarries on the evening [or] of the eighty-first day; Beth Shammai exempt her from a sacrifice, whereas Beth Hillel declare her liable. Said Beth Hillel to Beth Shammai: Wherein does the evening [‘or’] of the eighty-first differ from the day of the eighty-first; seeing that it was assimilated thereto in respect of uncleanness, shall one not assimilate it thereto in respect of sacrifice? Now since Beth Hillel say to Beth Shammai, ‘Wherein does the evening [or] of the eighty-first differ from the day of the eighty-first,’ it follows that ‘or’ is evening. This proves it. New Moon was fixed by direct observation, not calculation, and communities at a distance from Jerusalem were informed by bonfires. These were lit only if the New Moon appeared ‘in its (due) time,’ i.e.,it was fixed for the thirtieth day, the previous month thus consisting of twenty-nine days only; in that case too Beth Din formally sanctified this day. But if observation fixed it for the thirty-first day, no bonfires were lit, since the absence of bonfires on the previous day would be a sufficient signal; further, New Moon was not formally sanctified by Beth Din (Rashi). An objection is raised: one might think that it may be eaten on the evening [‘or’] of the third day [from sacrifice], and it is logical: Sacrifices are eaten on one day, while peace-offerings are eaten on two days: just as there the night follows the day, so here too the night should follow the day. Therefore it is stated, It shall be eaten the same day ye offer it, and on the morrow: and if aught remain until the third day [it shall be burnt with fire]: teaching, it may be eaten only during the day, but it may not be eaten during the evening [‘or’] of the third day. One might think that it must be burnt immediately; and this is logical: Sacrifices may be eaten one day and one [sc. the following) night, while peace-offerings may be eaten two days and one [sc. the intermediate] night: just as there, immediately after [the time allowed for] eating there is burning, so here too immediately after [the time allowed for] eating there is burning. Therefore it is stated, But that which remaineth of the flesh of the sacrifice, on the third day it shall be burnt with fire: teaching, you must burn it by day, but you must not burn it by night. Since he states, . . .it may be eaten in the evening [‘or’] of the third day,’ it follows that or is evening. This proves it. Come and hear: on the evening [‘or’] of the Day of Atonement one recites seven [benedictions] and confesses; in the morning service he recites seven and confesses; in the additional service he recites seven and confesses; at minhah he recites seven and confesses; (at ne'ilah — the concluding service — he recites seven and confesses); in the evening service he recites [one benediction] embodying the eighteen; R. Hanina b. Gamaliel said on the authority of his fathers: He must recite the eighteen [benedictions] in full, because he must pronounce habdalah in [the benediction] ‘Thou dost graciously grant knowledge’. This proves that ‘or’ is evening. This proves it. Come and hear: For the School of Samuel learned: ‘In the evening of the fourteenth leaven is searched for by the light of a lamp’; thus proving that ‘or’ is evening! The fact is both R. Huna and Rab Judah are alike, agreeing that ‘or’ is evening, and there is no controversy: each Master [speaks] in accordance with his locality. In R. Huna's town they called it naghe, while in Rab Judah's town it is called night [lele]. And our Tanna, why does he not employ lele? — He employs a refined expression, and in accordance with R. Joshua b. Levi. For R. Joshua b. Levi said: one should not utter a gross expression with his mouth, for lo! the Writ employs a circumlocution of eight letters rather than utter a gross expression, for it is said, of every clean beast . . . and of the beasts that are not clean. R. Papa said: Nine, for it is said, If there be among you any man, that is not clean by reason of that which chanceth by night. Rabina said: Ten, [including] the waw of tahor. R. Aha b. Jacob said: Sixteen, for it is said, for he thought, Something hath befallen him he is not clean; surely he is not clean. The School of R. Ishmael taught: one should always discourse in decent language, for lo!, the case of a zab it is called riding, while in connection with a woman it is called sitting; and it is said, and thou shalt choose the tongue of the subtle; and it is said, and that which my lips know they shall speak purely. Why [quote] ‘and it is said [etc.]’? — [For] should you object, that is only in the case of Scripture, but not in the case of Rabbinical [discussions], then come and hear, ‘and it is said, and thou shalt choose the tongue of the subtle’. Yet should you [still] object, that is only in reference to Rabbinical [discussions] but not secular matters, — then come and hear, ‘and it is said, and that which my lips know they shall speak purely’. Now, is riding not written in connection with a woman, but surely it is written, And Rebekah arose, and her damsels, and they rode upon the camels? — There it was natural through fear of the camels. But it is written, and Moses took his wife and his sons, and made them ride upon an ass? — There^{ᵃᵇᶜᵈᵉᶠᵍʰⁱʲᵏˡᵐⁿᵒᵖᵠʳˢᵗᵘᵛʷˣʸᶻᵃᵃᵃᵇᵃᶜᵃᵈᵃᵉᵃᶠᵃᵍᵃʰ}

² it was natural on account of his sons. But it is written, And it was so, as she rode on her ass? — There it was natural through fear of the night. Alternatively, there was no fear of the night, but there was fear of David. Another alternative: there was no fear of David either, but there was the fear of the mountain. Yet is not ‘unclean’ written in Scripture? Rather wherever they are equal[ly convenient], [Scripture] discourses in a refined language; but wherever more words would be required, the shorter phraseology is employed. As R. Huna said in Rab's name — others say, R. Huna said in Rab's name on R. Meir's authority: one should always teach his pupil in concise terms. And where they are equal he discourses in refined speech? Yet surely ‘riding’ [rokebeth] and ‘sitting’ [yoshebeth] are alike [in length], yet ‘riding’ [rokebeth] is stated? — Rakebeth is stated. Two disciples sat before Rab. one said, This discussion has made us [as tired] as an exhausted swine; while the other said, This discussion has made us [as tired] as an exhausted kid; and Rab would not speak to the former. There were two disciples who sat before Hillel, one of whom was R. Johanan b. Zakkai-others state, before Rabbi, and one of them was R. Johanan: One said, Why must we vintage [grapes] in cleanness, yet need not gather [olives] in cleanness? While the other said: Why must we vintage in cleanness, yet may gather [olives] in uncleanness? I am certain that the latter will be an authorized teacher in Israel, he observed; and it did not take long before he was an authorized teacher in Israel. There were three priests: one said, I received as much as a bean [of the shewbread]; the second said, I received as much as an olive; while the third said, I received as much as a halta'ah's tail. They investigated his pedigree and found a blemish of unfitness in him. But we learned: one must not investigate from the altar and above? — Do not say, a blemish of unfitness, but a baseness which made him unfit. Alternatively, there it was different, because he impaired his status himself. A certain Syrian [i.e., non-Jew] used to go up and partake of the Passover sacrifices in Jerusalem, boasting: It is written, there shall no alien eat thereof. . . no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof, yet I eat of the very best. Said R. Judah b. Bathyra to him: Did they supply you with the fat-tail? No, he replied. [Then] when you journey up thither say to them, Supply me with the fat-tail. When he went up he said to them, Supply me with the fat-tail. But the fat-tail belongs to the Most High! they replied. Who told you [to do] this? they inquired. R. Judah b. Bathyra. answered he. What is this [matter] before us? they wondered. They investigated his pedigree, and discovered that he was a Syrian, and killed him. Then they sent [a message] to R. Judah b. Bathyra: ‘Peace be with thee, R. Judah b. Bathyra, for thou art in Nisibis yet thy net is spread in Jerusalem.’ R. Kahana fell sick. [So] the Rabbis sent R. Joshua son of R. Idi, instructing him, Go and find out what is wrong with him. He went and found him dead. Thereupon he rent his garment and turned the rent behind him and went along weeping. He has died? asked they of him. I have not said it, he answered, ‘for he that uttereth evil tidings is a fool’. Johanan of Hukok went out to some villages. on his return he was asked, ‘Has the wheat crop been successful?’ ‘The barley crop has been successful,’ he replied. ‘Go out and tell it to horses and asses,’ they retorted, ‘for it is written, Barley also and straw for the horses and swift steeds.’ What then should he have said? — Last year the wheat crop was successful; or, the lentil crop is successful.^{ᵃⁱᵃʲᵃᵏᵃˡᵃᵐᵃⁿᵃᵒᵃᵖᵃᵠᵃʳᵃˢᵃᵗᵃᵘᵃᵛᵃʷᵃˣᵃʸᵃᶻᵇᵃᵇᵇᵇᶜᵇᵈᵇᵉᵇᶠᵇᵍᵇʰᵇⁱ}