Shevuot

‘by Him who is Merciful’. Raba said to him: If so, BY HEAVEN AND EARTH also [let us say] it means; ‘By Him to whom heaven and earth belong’!1 — That is no question! There, since there is nothing else which is called Merciful and Gracious, it is clear that he means, ‘By Him who is Gracious’, ‘By Him who is Merciful’; but here, since there are heaven and earth, he means, ‘By heaven and earth’. Our Sages taught: If he wrote alef lamed of Elohim, yod he of the Tetragrammaton, they may not be erased;2 shin daleth of Shaddai, alef daleth of Adonai, zadi beth of Zebaoth, they may be erased.3 R. Jose said: The whole word Zebaoth may be erased, because Zebaoth refers only to Israel, as it is said: And I will bring forth My hosts, My people the children of Israel, out of the land of Egypt.4 Samuel said: The halachah is not in accordance with R. Jose. Our Sages taught: That which is joined to the Name, whether before it or after it,5 may be erased. Before it; how? To the Lord; the lamed [‘to’] may be erased; in the Lord: the beth [‘in’] may be erased; and the Lord: the vav [‘and’] may be erased; from the Lord; the mem [‘from’] may be erased; that the Lord; the shin [‘that’] may be erased; interrogative he6 before the Lord: the he may be erased; as the Lord: the kaph [‘as’] may be erased. After it: how? Our God: the suffix nu [‘our’] may be erased; their God: the suffix hem [‘their’] may be erased; your God: the suffix kem [‘your’] may be erased. Others say, the suffix may not be erased, for the Name has already hallowed it. R. Huna said: the halachah is in accordance with these others. (Mnemonic:7 Abraham, who cursed, Naboth, in Gibeah of Benjamin, Solomon, Daniel.) All the Names mentioned in Scripture in connection with Abraham are sacred, except this which is secular: it is said; And he said, ‘My lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight’.8 Hanina, the son of R. Joshua's brother, and R. Eleazar b. Azariah in the name of R. Eliezer of Modin, said, this also is sacred.9 With whom will [the following] agree? Rab Judah said that Rab said: Greater is hospitality to wayfarers than receiving the Divine Presence. With whom [will this agree]? With this pair. 10 All the Names mentioned in connection with Lot are secular, except this which is sacred: it is said: And Lot said unto them, ‘Oh, not so, my Lord: behold now, thy servant hath found grace in thy sight, [and thou hast magnified thy mercy which thou hast shown unto me in saving my life]’11 — He in whose power it is to kill and to revive; that is the Holy One blessed be He. All the Names mentioned in connection with Naboth12 are sacred; in connection with Micah13 are secular. R. Eliezer said, in connection with Naboth [all are] sacred; in connection with Micah, some are secular, and some sacred: [the Name beginning] alef lamed is secular,14 yod he15 is sacred; except this which is alef lamed and is sacred: all the time that the house of God was in Shiloh. 16 All the Names mentioned in connection with Gibeah of Benjamin,17 R. Eliezer said, are secular; R. Joshua said, are sacred. R. Eliezer said to him: Does He then promise, and not fulfil?18 — R. Joshua replied to him: What He promised. He fulfilled; but they did not inquire whether [the result would be] victory of defeat;19 later, when they did inquire [of the Urim and Tummim], they approved their action, as it is said; And Phineas, the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron, stood before it in those days — saying: ‘Shall I yet again go out to battle against the children of Benjamin my brother, or shall I cease?’ [And the Lord said: ‘Go up; for to-morrow I will deliver them into thy hand’].20 Every Solomon mentioned in the Song of Songs is sacred: the Song to Him whose is the peace,21 except this: My vineyard, which is mine, is before me; thou, O Solomon, shalt have the thousand22 — Solomon for himself [shall have a thousand]; and two hundred for those that keep the fruit thereof23 — [viz.] Sages. And there are some who say this also is secular: Behold it is the bed of Solomon24 — ‘This also’, [implies] that the other25 is undoubtedly [secular]. But then what of Samuel who said: A Government which kills Only one out of six26 is not punished; for it is said: My vineyard, which is mine, is before me; thou, O Solomon, shalt have the thousand — for the Kingdom of Heaven;27 and two hundred for those that keep the fruit thereof — for the kingdom on earth.28 Now Samuel is not in agreement with the first Tanna nor with the ‘some who say’!29 — But this is what it means: And some there are who say this30 is sacred, and this is secular — [the verse] about his bed; and Samuel agrees with them. All Kings mentioned in Daniel are secular except this which is sacred: Thou, O king, king of kings, unto whom the God of heaven hath given the kingdom, the power, and the strength, and the glory.31 And some say, this also is sacred; it is said: My Lord, the dream be to them that hate thee, and the interpretation thereof to thine adversaries.32 To whom does he say this? If it should enter your mind that he says it to Nebuchadnezzar — who are those who hate him? Israel! Then he is cursing Israel!33 And the first Tanna?34 — He holds: Are the enemies [of Nebuchadnezzar] only Israelites? Are there not enemies [too] who are heathens? 35 OR BY ANY OF THE SUBSTITUTES [FOR THE NAME], THEY ARE LIABLE, etc. We may cite [the following] in contradiction: The Lord make thee a curse and an oath.36 Why is this stated? Is it not already said: The priest shall cause the woman to swear with the oath of cursing?37 Because it is said: And hear the voice of alah [cursing]:38 here39 it is said ‘alah’, and there40 it is said ‘alah’; just as here it implies an oath,41 so there it implies an oath; just as here it must be by the Name,42 so there it must be by the Name.43 — Abaye said: It is no question. This44 is [the view of] R. Hanina b. Idi, and that45 is [the view of] the Rabbis; for we learnt: R. Hanina b. Idi said: Since the Torah said, ‘Thou shalt swear,’46 and ‘thou shalt not swear’;47 ‘thou shalt curse’,48 and ‘thou shalt not curse’;49 [we deduce:] just as ‘thou shalt swear’ means by the Name, so thou shalt not swear’ means by the Name; and just as ‘thou shalt curse’ means by the Name, so ‘thou shalt not curse’ means by the Name. Now, the Rabbis, if they received on tradition this Gezerah shawah,50 let them require the actual Name;51 and if they did not receive on tradition this Gezerah shawah, how do they know that ‘alah’52 implies an oath?53 — They deduce it front [the Baraitha in] which it was taught. ‘Alah’:52 ‘alah’ is nothing but the expression of an oath; and so it says: And the priest shall cause the woman to swear with the oath of alah.54 But there it is written: the oath of alah!55 — Thus he means: ‘alah’; ‘alah’ can only be an oath,56 and thus it says: ‘and the priest shall cause the woman to swear with the oath of alah.’ the first group, i.e., among the Names that may not be erased, the reason being that st as well as vh and kt were commonly used as abbreviations for a Divine name, which was not the case with sa and cm which out of reference for the Divine Name were never used as abbreviations, the former two letters spelling a ‘demon’ (sa), the latter, a ‘great lizard’ (cm). V. Lauterbach, J.Z American Academy for Jewish Research, Proceedings, 1930-1931, pp. 43ff.] word ‘Lot’ who figures in the second passage.] they were the angels Michael, Gabriel, and Raphael. while he entertained the angels. behold now, Thy servant etc.’ The ordinary interpretation is that Lot is addressing one of the angels. allow them to be defeated? first. have 1,000 men as soldiers out of every 1,200; and 200 shall be left to ‘keep the fruit’, i.e., study the Torah. probably said by him with reference to Shapur's military campaigns in Asia: v. Krochmal, Hechalutz, I, p. 89.] army. Thou, O king (Nebuchadnezzar), unto whom the King of Kings, the God of heaven hath given, etc. heathens. who hated him. the Lord make thy thigh to fill away. 10). sotah (Num. V, 21): the Lord make thee a vkt (curse) and an oath. Just as vkt used in connection with sotah implies oath (for oath is explicitly mentioned in the verse), so vkt used in connection with adjuration means oath. But if we deduce adjuration from sotah we must carry the deduction further: just as in the case of sotah, the oath was by the Name (for the verse states: the Lord make thee a curse and an oath), so in the case of adjuration it should be by the Name, and not by any substitute. [It is a well established principle that no man may draw a conclusion from a Gezerah shawah unless he received it on tradition from his teacher. Pes. 66a; Nid. 19b.] know that an oath without an accompanying ‘alah’ (curse) is an oath? V. n. 7.]