שבועות- מנהגים ומשמעותם- דף מקורות מאת הרב דוד בס - המדרשה בבר- אילן

It is prohibited to fast immediately after the holiday of Shavuot. Ramah: And we do not say Tachanun from the beginning of Rosh Chodesh Sivan until the 8th day, which is after the post-holiday day (Hagahot Maimoni, Hil' Tefillah Umnagim). We have the custom to spread out plants on Shavuot in the synagogue and in houses, as a memory for the happiness of the receiving of the Torah. We have a custom everywhere to eat dairy food on the first day of Shavuot. And it seems to me that the reason is: It is like the two foods that are taken on the evening of Pesach, a reminder of the Korban Pesach and a reminder of the Korban Chagiga, so too we eat a dairy food followed by a meat food, and we bring with them two loaves on the table in place of the Mizbeach, and thus there will be a reminder of the two loaves that were brought on "The day of the Bikkurim."

There are many reasons for eating dairy, I will copy the reason written in the Zohar: the previous seven weeks were in parrallel to the seven clean days a woman counts before immersing in the mikvah, we know that blood becomes milk, this is parallel to the movement from judgement to mercy, and the practice of our fathers is in our hands to fulfill. However, it is important to be careful not to violate any prohibitions (see Yoreh Deah 89)...

In remembrance of the joy of receiving the Torah: for there were grasses around Mount Sinai, as it says "The flocks and cattle shall not graze..." Latter sages wrote that in places where it is the custom to give out fragrant grasses in the synagogue, they should not give them out from Barukh SheAmar until after the Amida, so that one may bless over them (the blessing for fragrant vegetation)-- because during that period it is forbidden to interrupt (the prayer). There is a custom to stand trees in the synagogues and homes in remembrance that on Shavuot judgment takes place for the fruits of the tree. The Gr"a abolished this custom because now it is the ritual of the (non-Jewish) nations to put up trees on their holiday.

Dairy foods - See Magen Avraham and I also heard in the name of a Gadol who said a correct reason for this: that when Bnei Yisrael stood at Har Sinai and accepted the Torah(When the 10 commandments were revealed, and through this all the parts of the Torah were also revealed to them, like that Rav Sadya Gaon writes, that the 10 commandments sustain the whole torah) and they went down from the mountain to their homes they found nothing to eat immediately except for dairy foods because for meat they would need much preparation to slaughter with a checked knife like Hashem commanded... And to clean out the strings of forbidden fats and blood, and to rinse and salt(the meat). Also to cook in new vessels because their previous vessels had been used to cook meat (that they now discovered was actually trief) had been used in the last 24 hrs (which is what is forbidden Biblically) so their old vessels were forbidden to them, therefore they choose on account of the time to eat dairy foods and we do this as a commemoration of this.

....On the first day..." - In some places there is also a custom to eat honey and milk because the Torah is likened to them, as it says "honey and milk under your tongue...".

...Like the two that we cook... What this means to say is that on Passover we make a remembrance of the Koraban passover (on our seder plate with the bone) thus we do on Shavout by remember the "Shtei Halechem" that was brought, and therefore we eat a dairy meal and afterwards we eat a meat meal and we need to bring with the meal 2 different breads because it is forbidden to eat Milk and Meat from the same bread and this serves as our remembrance (having 2 breads we force ourselves to have by having a dairy meal then followed by a meat meal) "Shtei ha lechem

Rabbi Pinhas said in the name of Hoshaya: "While the king sat at his table": while the King of kings, the Holy One, Blessed Be He, sat at the heavens. He arrived early, as it is stated: (Exodus 19:16) "And it came to pass on the third day, when it was morning." This is like a king who decreed, "On such a day, I am going to enter the province." But the people of the province slept all through the night, so that when the king arrived and found them asleep, he set trumpets and horns to get them up. And the minister of that province woke them up and took them to meet the king. And the king walked before them, until he reached his palace. This is like the Holy One, Blessed Be He, as it is written: (Ibid.) "And it came to pass on the third day, when it was morning." And it written: (Ibid.) "For the third day the Lord will come down in the sight of the people." Israel slept all through the night, because the sleep of Shavuot is pleasant and the night is short. Rabbi Yudan said: Not even a flea stung them. When the Holy One, Blessed Be He, came and found them asleep, he started to get them up with trumpets, as it is written: (Exodus 16:16) "And it came to pass on the third day, when it was morning, that there were thunders and lightnings." And Moses roused Israel and took them to meet the King of kings, the Holy One, Blessed Be He, as it is written: (Exodus 19:17) "And Moses brought forth the people [out of the camp] to meet God." And the Holy One, Blessed Be He, went before them, until they reached Mount Sinai, as it is written: (Exodus 19:18): "Now mount Sinai was altogether on smoke." Rabbi Yitzkak said: It was this for which He chided them through [the prophesy of] Isaiah. As it is written: (Isaiah 50:2) "Wherefore, when I came, was there no man? When I called, was there no answer? Is My hand shortened at all, that it cannot redeem?"

...It says in the Zohar that the original pious ones would be awake all the night working in Torah. And already most of those who learn do this. It's possible to give a reason for this according to its simple understanding, that Israel slept all the night, and the Holy One Blessed be He had to wake them, as the midrash says. Therefore, we need to fix this.

that the Torah that we need to learn on this night [Leyl Shavuot] is the Oral Torah, so that they may be purified together from the wellspring of the deep stream. Afterward, on this day [of Shavuot] Written Torah will come join her and they will be as one, as one couple above. Then it is proclaimed about him (Isaiah 59:21) 'And this is for Me My covenant with them said YHVH: My spirit that is upon you and My words I have put in your mouth (will not depart from your mouth, nor from your children's mouths...now and forever)'. Thus, the earlier pious ones did not sleep on this night, and they studied Torah, saying let us acquire a holy inheritance for us and our children in two worlds. And on this night, Keneset Yisrael is crowned above them and comes to intimately join with the King, and both of them are crowned above the heads of those who are worthy of this. Rabbi Shimon would say, when the Hevraya gathered around him this night, "let us array the jewels of the Bride, so tomorrow she will appear before the King suitably adorned and bedecked. Happy is the portion of the Hevraya when the King inquires of the Matronita who has placed her jewels and illuminated her crown, and arranged her adornments? For there is none in the world who know how to array the jewels of the Bride other than the Hevraya. Happy is their portion in this world and the world that is coming. Come and envision! The Hevraya prepare the jewels of the Bride that night, and crown her with Her crowns for the King. But who prepares the King on that night to be with the Bride and partner with the Matronita? The Holy River, deepest of all rivers, the Supernal Mother, as it is written (Shir HaShirim 3:11) Go out and see, O daughters of Jerusalem, the crown with which King Solomon was crowned by his mother on the day of his wedding. And after she has prepared the King and crowned Him, she comes to purify the Matronita and those who are with Her. This is comparable to a king who had an only son whom he united in marriage to a noble lady. What did his mother do? She spent all night in the storeroom, and brought out a noble crown set with 70

precious stones, and crowned him. She brought out royal clothes, and dressed him, and prepared him with a kingly array. Afterwards she went into the house of the bride, saw her maidens, who were fixing her crowns, and clothes, and jewelry, to prepare her. She said to them, I have prepared a bathhouse, a place of flowing waters, and all manner of scents surround that pool, to purify my daugher-in-law. Come my daughter-in-law, Matronita of my son, and her maidens, and be purified in that place I have prepared, in that bathing place of flowing waters. Afterwards, prepare her in her jewelry, dress her in her clothes, crown her in her crown. Tomorrow, when my son comes to unite with Matronita, he will prepare a palace for everyone, and he will live with you together. So it is with the Holy King, Matronita, and the companions, in this way, and exalted mother who arranges all. The Exalted King, Matronita, and the companions dwell together, and are never separated. As it's written - "YHVH, who can dwell in your tent... one who walks in innocence and does justice." Who is one who does justice? Those who prepare Matronita with her jewelry, her clothing, and her crown. Each one is called a a doer of justice. Rabbi Hiyya said: if I am merely privileged to hear these words, it is enough. Happy is the portion of those who strive with Torah and know the ways of the Holy king whose desire is for Torah. About them it is written (Psalms 91:14-15) 'Because he desires me, I will deliver him...I will save him and honor him.'

(1) On the third new moon after the Israelites had gone forth from the land of Egypt, on that very day, they entered the wilderness of Sinai. (2) Having journeyed from Rephidim, they entered the wilderness of Sinai and encamped in the wilderness. Israel encamped there in front of the mountain, (3) and Moses went up to God. The LORD called to him from the mountain, saying, “Thus shall you say to the house of Jacob and declare to the children of Israel: (4) ‘You have seen what I did to the Egyptians, how I bore you on eagles’ wings and brought you to Me. (5) Now then, if you will obey Me faithfully and keep My covenant, you shall be My treasured possession among all the peoples. Indeed, all the earth is Mine, (6) but you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words that you shall speak to the children of Israel.” (7) Moses came and summoned the elders of the people and put before them all that the LORD had commanded him. (8) All the people answered as one, saying, “All that the LORD has spoken we will do!” And Moses brought back the people’s words to the LORD. (9) And the LORD said to Moses, “I will come to you in a thick cloud, in order that the people may hear when I speak with you and so trust you ever after.” Then Moses reported the people’s words to the LORD, (10) and the LORD said to Moses, “Go to the people and warn them to stay pure today and tomorrow. Let them wash their clothes. (11) Let them be ready for the third day; for on the third day the LORD will come down, in the sight of all the people, on Mount Sinai. (12) You shall set bounds for the people round about, saying, ‘Beware of going up the mountain or touching the border of it. Whoever touches the mountain shall be put to death: (13) no hand shall touch him, but he shall be either stoned or shot; beast or man, he shall not live.’ When the ram’s horn sounds a long blast, they may go up on the mountain.” (14) Moses came down from the mountain to the people and warned the people to stay pure, and they washed their clothes. (15) And he said to the people, “Be ready for the third day: do not go near a woman.” (16) On the third day, as morning dawned, there was thunder, and lightning, and a dense cloud upon the mountain, and a very loud blast of the horn; and all the people who were in the camp trembled. (17) Moses led the people out of the camp toward God, and they took their places at the foot of the mountain. (18) Now Mount Sinai was all in smoke, for the LORD had come down upon it in fire; the smoke rose like the smoke of a kiln, and the whole mountain trembled violently. (19) The blare of the horn grew louder and louder. As Moses spoke, God answered him in thunder. (20) The LORD came down upon Mount Sinai, on the top of the mountain, and the LORD called Moses to the top of the mountain and Moses went up. (21) The LORD said to Moses, “Go down, warn the people not to break through to the LORD to gaze, lest many of them perish. (22) The priests also, who come near the LORD, must stay pure, lest the LORD break out against them.” (23) But Moses said to the LORD, “The people cannot come up to Mount Sinai, for You warned us saying, ‘Set bounds about the mountain and sanctify it.’” (24) So the LORD said to him, “Go down, and come back together with Aaron; but let not the priests or the people break through to come up to the LORD, lest He break out against them.” (25) And Moses went down to the people and spoke to them.

The baraita continues: One might have thought that I include as an option even a meal offering, which would not be entirely consumed on the altar. Therefore, the verse states: “So he shall do,” to exclude a meal offering. It is taught in another baraita: The verse states: “And if a stranger sojourn with you, or whoever may be among you, throughout your generations, and will offer an offering made by fire, of a pleasing aroma unto the Lord, as you do, so he shall do” (Numbers 15:14).From this verse I would derive that he fulfills his obligation with any offering that is brought on the fire of the altar, even a meal offering. Therefore, to negate that interpretation, the verse states: “As you do, so he shall do,” which teaches that just as you entered the covenant with types of offerings whose blood is sprinkled on the altar, so too must they, converts, bring types of offerings whose blood is sprinkled on the altar. The baraita continues: If so, why not derive similarly: Just as you entered the covenant with a burnt offering and a peace offering, so too, they must enter the covenant with a burnt offering and a peace offering? How is it derived that a convert may fulfill his obligation with a single burnt offering from an animal? The baraita answers that the verse states: “As you are, so shall the stranger be before the Lord” (Numbers 15:15). This serves to emphasize: I compared him to you in order to derive that just like you, he too must bring types of offerings whose blood is sprinkled on the altar, but I did not extend this comparison to another matter, i.e., to insist that his offerings must be identical to all of your offerings. The baraita continues: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: The offering of a convert is derived from the verse: “As you are, so shall the stranger be” (Numbers 15:15), which means as your ancestors were: Just as your ancestors entered the covenant only through circumcision and immersion in a ritual bath and the sprinkling of blood on the altar, so too they may enter the covenant only through circumcision and immersion and the sprinkling of some blood, which requires at least a bird offering. The baraita adds: And it is impossible to bring only one young bird as an offering, as we have not found an offering of a single bird anywhere in the entire Torah. Consequently, if the requirement for the sprinkling of blood is fulfilled with a bird offering, the convert must bring at least two birds. By contrast, if he chooses he may bring a single animal as a burnt offering, because a bird nest was stated in the Torah only in order to be lenient for him. The Gemara challenges Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s statement: And is it true that we have not found an offering of an individual bird anywhere in the Torah? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: The verse states with regard to a bird sacrificed as a burnt offering: “And the priest shall sacrifice it” (Leviticus 1:15). Why must the verse state this? Since it is stated about doves: “And he shall sacrifice his offering of doves” (Leviticus 1:14), in the plural, I might derive from here that the one who says: It is incumbent upon me to bring a bird as a burnt offering, shall not bring less than two young birds. Therefore, the verse states: “And the priest shall sacrifice it” (Leviticus 1:15), in the singular, to teach that one may bring a gift offering of even one single young bird. The Gemara responds: In any event, we have not found an obligatory offering of just one bird. The Gemara challenges this assertion as well: But isn’t there the offering of a woman after childbirth, who brings a single pigeon or dove as a sin offering (Leviticus 12:6)? The Gemara answers: This is not difficult, because in that case there is a lamb with it as part of her offerings; the bird is not brought as a complete offering by itself. The Gemara returns to the main part of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s statement. The Master said: Just as your ancestors entered the covenant only through circumcision, immersion in a ritual bath, and the sprinkling of blood, converts must do the same. The Gemara objects: Granted, they underwent circumcision prior to entering the covenant, as it is written: “For all the nation that left Egypt was circumcised” (Joshua 5:5). Alternatively, it may be derived from here, a verse describing the redemption from Egypt: “And when I passed by you, and saw you wallowing in your blood, I said unto you: In your blood, live; and I said unto you: In your blood, live” (Ezekiel 16:6). The Sages interpret the double mention of blood in this verse as referring to the blood of the Paschal offering and the blood of circumcision. The Gemara continues: And granted as well, they entered the covenant through the sprinkling of blood, as it is written: “And he sent the young men of the children of Israel, and they sacrificed burnt offerings, and they sacrificed peace offerings” (Exodus 24:5). The Gemara asks: But from where do we derive that immersion in a ritual bath was also part of the process of entering the covenant? The Gemara answers: As it is written: “And Moses took half the blood…and sprinkled it on the people” (Exodus 24:6–8), and there is no sprinkling of sacrificial blood without immersion. The Gemara objects: If that is so, that these three rituals are required by Torah law for a convert to enter the congregation, then now, in our time, when there are no offerings, we not should have the ability to accept converts. In response, Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov says that the verse states: “And if a stranger sojourn with you, or whosoever may be among you, throughout your generations” (Numbers 15:14). This teaches that converts may be accepted throughout the generations, even when there is no Temple and sacrificial offerings are therefore impossible. § With regard to the offerings of a convert, the Sages taught in a baraita: A convert in the present time is required to set aside a quarter of a dinar for his bird nest, so that when the Temple is rebuilt he can purchase the offering with this money. Rabbi Shimon says: Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai already assembled a panel of Sages who voted and nullified this ordinance, due to a potential mishap. If one would inadvertently use such money, he would be liable for the misuse of consecrated property. Rav Idi bar Gershom says that Rav Adda bar Ahava says: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, who says that a convert should not set aside money for the purchase of offerings. The Gemara comments: And there are those who teach this statement of Rav Adda bar Ahava with regard to this case, as the Sages taught in a baraita: A gentile who resides in Eretz Yisrael and observes the seven Noahide mitzvot [ger toshav] is permitted to perform labor on Shabbat for himself in the same manner that a Jew is permitted to perform labor on the intermediate days of a Festival, i.e., only for matters that, if unattended, will result in significant loss. The baraita continues: Rabbi Akiva says: A ger toshav may perform labor on Shabbat in the same manner that a Jew is permitted to perform labor on a Festival, i.e., only for the purpose of preparing food. Rabbi Yosei says: A ger toshav may perform labor on Shabbat for himself in the same manner that a Jew is permitted to perform labor on a weekday. Rabbi Shimon says: Both a ger toshav and a resident male or female slave may perform labor on Shabbat for themselves in the same manner that a Jew may perform labor on a weekday. According to this tradition, it is in relation to this baraita that Rav Adda bar Ahava said that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon. MISHNA: These individuals bring an offering for an intentional transgression in the same manner as they do for an unwitting transgression: One who engages in intercourse with an espoused maidservant, who is liable to bring a guilt offering (see Leviticus 19:20–22); and a nazirite who became ritually impure, who is required to bring a sheep as a guilt offering and two doves or two pigeons, one as a sin offering and one as a burnt offering (see Numbers 6:9–12); and one who falsely takes the oath of testimony, asserting that he does not have any testimony to provide on a given issue (see Leviticus 5:1); and one who falsely takes the oath on a deposit, asserting that an item belonging to another is not in his possession (see Leviticus 5:21–26). There are five individuals who bring one offering for several transgressions, i.e., for violating the same transgression several times; and there are five individuals who bring a sliding-scale offering, which is determined based on the financial status of the sinner. These are the five individuals who bring one offering for several transgressions: First, one who engages in several acts of intercourse with an espoused maidservant, and second, a nazirite who became ritually impure due to several instances of contact with ritual impurity. gemara The mishna teaches that one who engages in intercourse with an espoused maidservant brings an offering for an intentional transgression as he does for an unwitting transgression. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this? As the Sages taught in a baraita: The verse states: “And the priest shall make atonement for him with the ram of the guilt offering before the Lord for his sin that he has sinned” (Leviticus 19:22). The superfluous phrase: That he has sinned, teaches that he brings one offering for several transgressions. Furthermore, the verse concludes: “With the ram of the guilt offering before the Lord for his sin that he has sinned; and he shall be forgiven for his sin that he has sinned.” The second occurrence of the phrase “that he has sinned” serves to render the halakha with regard to an unwitting transgression the same as it is with regard to an intentional transgression, that one brings a guilt offering in either case. § The mishna teaches: A nazirite who became ritually impure brings an offering for an intentional transgression as he does for an unwitting transgression. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this? The Gemara answers: It is as it is written with regard to a nazirite: “And if any man die unexpectedly [befeta], suddenly [pitom] beside him” (Numbers 6:9). When the verse states: “Unexpectedly,” this is referring to an unwitting transgression, and similarly, it states: “But if he thrust him unexpectedly without enmity” (Numbers 35:22). And when the verse states: “Suddenly,” this is referring to circumstances beyond his control, and similarly, it states: “And the Lord spoke suddenly to Moses, and to Aaron, and to Miriam: Come out you three to the Tent of Meeting. And they three came out” (Numbers 12:4). The Lord’s speech came to them suddenly, in a manner that was beyond their control. It is taught in another baraita: “Suddenly”; this is referring to an intentional transgression, and similarly the verse states: “A prudent man sees the evil, and hides himself; but the thoughtless pass on, and are punished” (Proverbs 22:3). The tanna interprets the expression “the thoughtless [peta’im]” as related to the word “suddenly [pitom],” and one can be punished, as the thoughtless are punished in the verse, but only for an intentional transgression. The Gemara objects: Let the verse write simply: “Suddenly [pitom],” as this term indicates unwitting transgression, and it also indicates intentional transgression, and it also indicates transgression due to circumstances beyond his control. The Gemara elaborates: “Suddenly” indicates intentional transgression and transgression due to circumstances beyond his control, as the tanna said in the baraitot earlier; and it also indicates unwitting transgression, as it is written: “The thoughtless one [peti] believes every word” (Proverbs 14:15), and because he is misinformed, his transgression is unwitting. And if so, let the verse not write: Unexpected [peta]. The Gemara explains: If the verse had written only “suddenly,” which indicates unwitting transgression, and also indicates intentional transgression, and also indicates transgression due to circumstances beyond his control, I would say: When a nazirite brings an offering, it is in a situation where he transgressed unwittingly, as is the case for all mitzvot in the entire Torah, that one is generally liable to bring an offering for an unwitting transgression; but for a transgression due to circumstances beyond his control or an intentional transgression, I would say the nazirite is not liable to bring an offering. Therefore, the Merciful One wrote: Unexpected, which is a term that indicates unwitting transgression, in order to reveal about the word “suddenly” that it is a term that indicates transgression due to circumstances beyond his control or intentional transgression. Consequently, it teaches that even in this case the Merciful One rendered him liable to bring an offering. § The mishna teaches that one who falsely takes the oath of testimony brings an offering for an intentional transgression in the same manner as he does for an unwitting transgression. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this halakha? The Gemara answers that it is as the Sages taught in a baraita: With regard to all those who are liable to bring a sliding-scale offering, it is stated: “And it be hid from him” (see Leviticus 5:2–4). But here, with regard to the oath of testimony (Leviticus 5:1), it is not stated: And it be hid from him. This omission serves to render him liable for an unwitting transgression in the same manner as an intentional transgression. The mishna teaches that one who falsely takes the oath on a deposit brings an offering for an intentional transgression as he does for an unwitting transgression. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this halakha? The Gemara answers: The tanna derives it from a verbal analogy between the term “shall sin,” stated with regard to an oath on a deposit (Leviticus 5:21), and the term “shall sin,” stated with regard to the oath of testimony (Leviticus 5:1). It is derived from this verbal analogy that just as in the case of the oath of testimony one is liable for committing an intentional transgression in the same manner as an unwitting transgression, the same applies to the oath on a deposit. § The mishna teaches: There are five individuals who bring one offering for several transgressions, i.e., for violating the same transgression several times. Among them, the tanna teaches: One who engages in several acts of intercourse with an espoused maidservant. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this halakha? The Gemara answers: It is as the Sages taught in a baraita: The verse states: “And the priest shall make atonement for him with the ram of the guilt offering before the Lord for his sin that he has sinned” (Leviticus 19:22). The superfluous phrase “that he has sinned” teaches that he brings one offering for several transgressions. Furthermore, the verse concludes: “With the ram of the guilt offering before the Lord for his sin that he has sinned; and he shall be forgiven for his sin that he has sinned.” The second instance of the phrase “that he has sinned” serves to render the halakha with regard to an intentional transgression the same as it is with regard to an unwitting transgression, that one brings a guilt offering in either case. The Gemara objects: But when this verse is written, it is written with regard to an intentional transgression, as the verse states: “There shall be an inspection” (Leviticus 19:20), which indicates a punishment of lashes, and lashes are given only for an intentional transgression. The Gemara responds: Rather, say that the language of the baraita should be reversed, as follows: The phrase “that he has sinned” renders the halakha with regard to an unwitting transgression to be the same as it is with regard to an intentional transgression. Rabbi Ḥanina of Tirna’a raised a dilemma before Rabbi Yoḥanan: If one engages in intercourse with five espoused maidservants [shefaḥot ḥarufot] in one lapse of awareness, meaning that he was not informed of the prohibition in between his unwitting transgressions, what is the halakha? Is he liable to bring an offering for each and every one, or is he liable to bring only one offering? Rabbi Yoḥanan said to him: He is liable to bring an offering for each and every one. Rabbi Ḥanina asked Rabbi Yoḥanan: What is different about this instance compared to the case of five lapses of awareness with regard to one espoused maidservant, when he brings only one offering, as stated in the mishna? Rabbi Yoḥanan said to him: In a case of multiple transgressions with one espoused maidservant, there are not separate bodies, as he committed multiple transgressions with the same individual. By contrast, in a case of separate transgressions with five espoused maidservants, there are five separate bodies, and therefore each one requires a separate offering. Rabbi Ḥanina further asked Rabbi Yoḥanan: And from where do we derive that there is halakhic significance to the separate bodies in the case of an espoused maidservant? Rabbi Yoḥanan said to him: Did you not state with regard to those with whom relations are forbidden that when the verse states: “And you shall not approach unto a woman to uncover her nakedness, as long as she is impure by her uncleanness” (Leviticus 18:19), this serves to require separate offerings for each and every woman with whom one committed unwitting transgressions? With regard to an espoused maidservant it is also similarly written: “And if a man lies carnally with a woman,

(1) There are three ways in which someone enters the covenant: by circumcision, by immersion, and by a Temple offering.

(2) Circumcision as it was in Egypt, as it says, "Every uncircumcised person shall not eat of it (the Passover offering)." Moses our teacher circumcised them and everyone spurned the covenant in Egypt with the exception of the Tribe of Levi. On this it says, "Your covenant was withheld."

(3) Immersion was in the desert before receiving the Torah, as is said, "Sanctify yourselves today and tomorrow; wash your clothes." The offering, as is said, "Send the young ones of Israel to bring elevation offerings" - and everyone in Israel brought them.

(4) Throughout the generations, any non-Jew who wants to enter the covenant and come in under the 'wings of the Presence of God' accepts upon him or herself the yoke of Torah - he needs circumcision, immersion and a Temple offering. If female, she needs only immersion and an offering, as is said "As for you, so for the foreigner." That's to say, just as you (entered via) circumcision, immersion and an offering, so too the foreigner (shall enter via) circumcision, immersion and an offering.

(5) What's a convert's offering? An elevation offering or two doves or two turtledoves (and the two are considered an offering). At this time in history where there are no offerings, one needs (merely) circumcision and immersion. Once the Temple is built, one will bring an offering.

(6) A convert who was circumcised and has not immersed, or has immersed and not circumcised is not a convert until he is circumcised and immersed. And it is necessary to immerse before three (men). And since the matter requires a Beit Din (counsel) - no immersion is done on the Sabbath, nor Yom Tov (holiday) nor at night. And if he was immersed, he is a convert.

(7) A minor convert - is immersed upon the knowledge of Beit Din (counsel), because it is in his interest. A pregnant woman who converts and immerses - her child does not need immersion. If he immersed in front of only himself, and converted to himself, or even in front of two, he is not a convert. If he comes and say "I converted in the Beit Din of so and so and they immersed me" - he is not trusted to come into the community until he brings witnesses.

(8) If he married an Israelite woman or a convert and he has children, and he says “I converted myself”, he is trusted to disqualify himself, but not to disqualify his children. And he immerses again before a beit din.

(1) In the days when the chieftains ruled, there was a famine in the land; and a man of Bethlehem in Judah, with his wife and two sons, went to reside in the country of Moab. (2) The man’s name was Elimelech, his wife’s name was Naomi, and his two sons were named Mahlon and Chilion—Ephrathites of Bethlehem in Judah. They came to the country of Moab and remained there. (3) Elimelech, Naomi’s husband, died; and she was left with her two sons. (4) They married Moabite women, one named Orpah and the other Ruth, and they lived there about ten years. (5) Then those two—Mahlon and Chilion—also died; so the woman was left without her two sons and without her husband. (6) She started out with her daughters-in-law to return from the country of Moab; for in the country of Moab she had heard that the LORD had taken note of His people and given them food. (7) Accompanied by her two daughters-in-law, she left the place where she had been living; and they set out on the road back to the land of Judah. (8) But Naomi said to her two daughters-in-law, “Turn back, each of you to her mother’s house. May the LORD deal kindly with you, as you have dealt with the dead and with me! (9) May the LORD grant that each of you find security in the house of a husband!” And she kissed them farewell. They broke into weeping (10) and said to her, “No, we will return with you to your people.” (11) But Naomi replied, “Turn back, my daughters! Why should you go with me? Have I any more sons in my body who might be husbands for you? (12) Turn back, my daughters, for I am too old to be married. Even if I thought there was hope for me, even if I were married tonight and I also bore sons, (13) should you wait for them to grow up? Should you on their account debar yourselves from marriage? Oh no, my daughters! My lot is far more bitter than yours, for the hand of the LORD has struck out against me.” (14) They broke into weeping again, and Orpah kissed her mother-in-law farewell. But Ruth clung to her. (15) So she said, “See, your sister-in-law has returned to her people and her gods. Go follow your sister-in-law.” (16) But Ruth replied, “Do not urge me to leave you, to turn back and not follow you. For wherever you go, I will go; wherever you lodge, I will lodge; your people shall be my people, and your God my God. (17) Where you die, I will die, and there I will be buried. Thus and more may the LORD do to me if anything but death parts me from you.” (18) When [Naomi] saw how determined she was to go with her, she ceased to argue with her; (19) and the two went on until they reached Bethlehem. When they arrived in Bethlehem, the whole city buzzed with excitement over them. The women said, “Can this be Naomi?” (20) “Do not call me Naomi,” she replied. “Call me Mara, for Shaddai has made my lot very bitter. (21) I went away full, and the LORD has brought me back empty. How can you call me Naomi, when the LORD has dealt harshly with me, when Shaddai has brought misfortune upon me!” (22) Thus Naomi returned from the country of Moab; she returned with her daughter-in-law Ruth the Moabite. They arrived in Bethlehem at the beginning of the barley harvest.

they are not able to receive either an abundance of good nor an abundance of calamities, since the primary place for reward and punishment is in the World-to-Come. And they do not overwhelm him with threats, and they are not exacting with him about the details of the mitzvot. If he accepts upon himself all of these ramifications, then they circumcise him immediately. If there still remain on him shreds of flesh from the foreskin that invalidate the circumcision, they circumcise him again a second time to remove them. When he is healed from the circumcision, they immerse him immediately, and two Torah scholars stand over him at the time of his immersion and inform him of some of the lenient mitzvot and some of the stringent mitzvot. Once he has immersed and emerged, he is like a born Jew in every sense. For the immersion of a woman: Women appointed by the court seat her in the water of the ritual bath up to her neck, and two Torah scholars stand outside the bath house so as not to compromise her modesty, and from there they inform her of some of the lenient mitzvot and some of the stringent mitzvot. The procedure applies for both a convert and an emancipated slave who, upon immersion at the time of his emancipation, becomes a Jew in every sense. And in the same place that a menstruating woman immerses, i.e., in a ritual bath of forty se’a of water, there a convert and an emancipated slave also immerse. And anything that interposes between one’s body and the water of the ritual bath with regard to immersion of a ritually impure person, in a manner that would invalidate the immersion, also interposes and invalidates the immersion for a convert, and for an emancipated slave, and for a menstruating woman. The Gemara analyzes the baraita. The Master said in the baraita: With regard to a potential convert who comes to a court in order to convert, the judges of the court say to him: What did you see that motivated you to come to convert? And they inform him of some of the lenient mitzvot and some of the stringent mitzvot. The Gemara asks: What is the reason to say this to him? It is so that if he is going to withdraw from the conversion process, let him withdraw already at this stage. He should not be convinced to continue, as Rabbi Ḥelbo said: Converts are as harmful to the Jewish people as a leprous scab [sappaḥat] on the skin, as it is written: “And the convert shall join himself with them, and they shall cleave [venispeḥu] to the house of Jacob” (Isaiah 14:1). This alludes to the fact that the cleaving of the convert to the Jewish people is like a scab. The baraita continues: And they inform him of the sin of neglecting the mitzva to allow the poor to take gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and produce in the corner of one’s field, and about the poor man’s tithe. The Gemara asks: What is the reason to specifically mention these mitzvot? Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Because a gentile is executed even on account of stealing less than the value of a peruta, since gentiles are particular about even such a small loss, and an item that a gentile steals is not subject to being returned, i.e., he is not obligated to return it to its owner. Since gentiles are unwilling to separate even from items of little value, a potential convert must be made aware that he if converts, he will be required to relinquish some of his property to others. The baraita continues: And they inform him of the sin of neglecting the mitzva to allow the poor to take gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and produce in the corner of one’s field. And they do not overwhelm him with threats, and they are not exacting with him about the details of the mitzvot, i.e., the court should not overly dissuade the convert from converting. Rabbi Elazar said: What is the verse from which this ruling is derived? As it is written: “And when she saw that she was steadfastly minded to go with her, she left off speaking with her” (Ruth 1:18). When Naomi set out to return to Eretz Yisrael, Ruth insisted on joining her. The Gemara understands this to mean that Ruth wished to convert. Naomi attempted to dissuade her, but Ruth persisted. The verse states that once Naomi saw Ruth’s resolve to convert, she desisted from her attempts to dissuade her. The Gemara infers from here that the same approach should be taken by a court in all cases of conversion. The Gemara reconstructs the original dialogue in which Naomi attempted to dissuade Ruth from converting: Naomi said to her: On Shabbat, it is prohibited for us to go beyond the Shabbat limit. Ruth responded: “Where you go, I shall go” (Ruth 1:16), and no further. Naomi said to her: It is forbidden for us to be alone together with a man with whom it is forbidden to engage in relations. Ruth responded: “Where you lodge, I shall lodge” (Ruth 1:16), and in the same manner. Naomi said to her: We are commanded to observe six hundred and thirteen mitzvot. Ruth responded: “Your people are my people” (Ruth 1:16). Naomi said to her: Idolatrous worship is forbidden to us. Ruth responded: “Your God is my God” (Ruth 1:16). Naomi said to her: Four types of capital punishment were handed over to a court with which to punish those who transgress the mitzvot. Ruth responded: “Where you die, I shall die” (Ruth 1:17). Naomi said to her: Two burial grounds were handed over to the court, one for those executed for more severe crimes and another for those executed for less severe crimes. Ruth responded: “And there I shall be buried” (Ruth 1:17). Immediately following this dialogue, the verse states: “And when she saw that she was steadfastly minded she left off speaking with her” (Ruth 1:18). Once Naomi saw Ruth’s resolve to convert, she desisted from her attempts to dissuade her. The baraita continues: If he accepts upon himself all of these ramifications, then they circumcise him immediately. The Gemara asks: What is the reason to act immediately? It is that we do not delay the performance of a mitzva. The baraita continues: If there still remain on him shreds of flesh from the foreskin that invalidate the circumcision, he is circumcised a second time to remove them. The Gemara explains: This is as we learned in a mishna (Shabbat 137a): These are the shreds of flesh that invalidate the circumcision if they are not cut: Any fragments of the flesh that cover the greater part of the corona. If such shreds remain, the child is considered uncircumcised, and he may not partake of teruma. And in explanation of this mishna, Rav Yirmeya bar Abba said that Rav said: This also includes the flesh that covers the greater part of the height of the corona. The baraita continues: When he is healed from the circumcision, they immerse him immediately. The Gemara infers from the precise formulation of the baraita that when he has healed, then yes, he is immersed, but as long as he has not healed, then no, he is not. What is the reason for this? It is because water agitates a wound. The baraita continues: And two Torah scholars stand over him at the time of his immersion. The Gemara asks: But didn’t Rabbi Ḥiyya say that Rabbi Yoḥanan said that a convert requires a court of three to be present at his conversion? The Gemara answers: In fact, Rabbi Yoḥanan said to the tanna reciting the mishna: Do not teach that there are two Torah scholars; rather, teach that there are three. The baraita continues: Once he has immersed and emerged he is a Jew in every sense. The Gemara asks: With regard to what halakha is this said? It is that if he reverts back to behaving as a gentile, he nevertheless remains Jewish, and so if he betroths a Jewish woman, although he is considered to be an apostate Jew, his betrothal is a valid betrothal. The baraita continues: This applies both for a convert and for an emancipated slave. The Gemara considers the meaning of this clause: If it enters your mind to interpret the baraita to mean that a convert and an emancipated slave are the same with regard to accepting upon oneself the yoke of mitzvot, then one could raise a contradiction from that which is taught in another baraita: In what case is this statement that there is a need to accept the yoke of mitzvot said? It is with respect to a convert; however, an emancipated slave does not need to accept upon himself the yoke of mitzvot when he immerses for the sake of emancipation. Rather, the immersion alone is sufficient to emancipate him and thereby render him a Jew. Rav Sheshet said: This is not difficult, as this baraita that states that an emancipated slave is not required to accept the yoke of mitzvot is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar, whereas that baraita that implies he is required to do so is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis, the first tanna of the following baraita. As it is taught in a baraita: The Torah permits a Jewish soldier to take a beautiful female prisoner of war out of her captivity in order to marry her. Before he may do so, she must first undergo the process that the Torah describes: “And she shall shave her head, and do her nails; and she shall remove the raiment of her captivity from upon her, and she shall remain in your house and bewail her father and her mother a month of days” (Deuteronomy 21:12–13). She may then be immersed for the sake of conversion, even though she does not accept upon herself the yoke of mitzvot. At that point it is permitted to marry her. The baraita asks: Under what circumstance are these matters stated? It is when she did not accept upon herself the yoke of mitzvot; however, if she willingly accepted upon herself the yoke of mitzvot, he may immerse her for the sake of conversion, and he is permitted to marry her immediately without the need for her to undergo the process described in the Torah. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: Even if she did not accept upon herself the yoke of mitzvot, the need for the process can still be circumvented if he forces her and immerses her for the sake of slavery, and then he again immerses her for the sake of emancipation and thereby emancipates her, rendering her a Jewess. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar holds that the immersion of a slave for the sake of emancipation is effective even if the slave does not accept upon himself the yoke of mitzvot.

who wagered with each other and said: Anyone who will go and aggravate Hillel to the point that he reprimands him, will take four-hundred zuz. One of them said: I will aggravate him. That day that he chose to bother Hillel was Shabbat eve, and Hillel was washing the hair on his head. He went and passed the entrance to Hillel’s house and in a demeaning manner said: Who here is Hillel, who here is Hillel? Hillel wrapped himself in a dignified garment and went out to greet him. He said to him: My son, what do you seek? He said to him: I have a question to ask. Hillel said to him: Ask, my son, ask. The man asked him: Why are the heads of Babylonians oval? He was alluding to and attempting to insult Hillel, who was Babylonian. He said to him: My son, you have asked a significant question. The reason is because they do not have clever midwives. They do not know how to shape the child’s head at birth. That man went and waited one hour, a short while, returned to look for Hillel, and said: Who here is Hillel, who here is Hillel? Again, Hillel wrapped himself and went out to greet him. Hillel said to him: My son, what do you seek? The man said to him: I have a question to ask. He said to him: Ask, my son, ask. The man asked: Why are the eyes of the residents of Tadmor bleary [terutot]? Hillel said to him: My son, you have asked a significant question. The reason is because they live among the sands and the sand gets into their eyes. Once again the man went, waited one hour, returned, and said: Who here is Hillel, who here is Hillel? Again, he, Hillel, wrapped himself and went out to greet him. He said to him: My son, what do you seek? He said to him: I have a question to ask. He said to him: Ask, my son, ask. The man asked: Why do Africans have wide feet? Hillel said to him: You have asked a significant question. The reason is because they live in marshlands and their feet widened to enable them to walk through those swampy areas. That man said to him: I have many more questions to ask, but I am afraid lest you get angry. Hillel wrapped himself and sat before him, and he said to him: All of the questions that you have to ask, ask them. The man got angry and said to him: Are you Hillel whom they call the Nasi of Israel? He said to him: Yes. He said to him: If it is you, then may there not be many like you in Israel. Hillel said to him: My son, for what reason do you say this? The man said to him: Because I lost four hundred zuz because of you. Hillel said to him: Be vigilant of your spirit and avoid situations of this sort. Hillel is worthy of having you lose four hundred zuz and another four hundred zuz on his account, and Hillel will not get upset. The Sages taught: There was an incident involving one gentile who came before Shammai. The gentile said to Shammai: How many Torahs do you have? He said to him: Two, the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. The gentile said to him: With regard to the Written Torah, I believe you, but with regard to the Oral Torah, I do not believe you. Convert me on condition that you will teach me only the Written Torah. Shammai scolded him and cast him out with reprimand. The same gentile came before Hillel, who converted him and began teaching him Torah. On the first day, he showed him the letters of the alphabet and said to him: Alef, bet, gimmel, dalet. The next day he reversed the order of the letters and told him that an alef is a tav and so on. The convert said to him: But yesterday you did not tell me that. Hillel said to him: You see that it is impossible to learn what is written without relying on an oral tradition. Didn’t you rely on me? Therefore, you should also rely on me with regard to the matter of the Oral Torah, and accept the interpretations that it contains. There was another incident involving one gentile who came before Shammai and said to Shammai: Convert me on condition that you teach me the entire Torah while I am standing on one foot. Shammai pushed him away with the builder’s cubit in his hand. This was a common measuring stick and Shammai was a builder by trade. The same gentile came before Hillel. He converted him and said to him: That which is hateful to you do not do to another; that is the entire Torah, and the rest is its interpretation. Go study. There was another incident involving one gentile who was passing behind the study hall and heard the voice of a teacher who was teaching Torah to his students and saying the verse: “And these are the garments which they shall make: A breastplate, and an efod, and a robe, and a tunic of checkered work, a mitre, and a girdle” (Exodus 28:4). The gentile said: These garments, for whom are they designated? The students said to him: For the High Priest. The gentile said to himself: I will go and convert so that they will install me as High Priest. He came before Shammai and said to him: Convert me on condition that you install me as High Priest. Shammai pushed him with the builder’s cubit in his hand. He came before Hillel; he converted him. Hillel said to him, to the convert: Is it not the way of the world that only one who knows the protocols [takhsisei] of royalty is appointed king? Go and learn the royal protocols by engaging in Torah study. He went and read the Bible. When he reached the verse which says: “And the common man that draws near shall be put to death” (Numbers 1:51), the convert said to Hillel: With regard to whom is the verse speaking? Hillel said to him: Even with regard to David, king of Israel. The convert reasoned an a fortiori inference himself: If the Jewish people are called God’s children, and due to the love that God loved them he called them: “Israel is My son, My firstborn” (Exodus 4:22), and nevertheless it is written about them: And the common man that draws near shall be put to death; a mere convert who came without merit, with nothing more than his staff and traveling bag, all the more so that this applies to him, as well. The convert came before Shammai and told him that he retracts his demand to appoint him High Priest, saying: Am I at all worthy to be High Priest? Is it not written in the Torah: And the common man that draws near shall be put to death? He came before Hillel and said to him: Hillel the patient, may blessings rest upon your head as you brought me under the wings of the Divine Presence. The Gemara relates: Eventually, the three converts gathered together in one place, and they said: Shammai’s impatience sought to drive us from the world; Hillel’s patience brought us beneath the wings of the Divine Presence. The Gemara continues discussing the conduct of the Sages, citing that Reish Lakish said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And the faith of your times shall be a strength of salvation, wisdom, and knowledge, the fear of the Lord is his treasure” (Isaiah 33:6)? Faith; that is the order of Zera’im, Seeds, in the Mishna, because a person has faith in God and plants his seeds (Jerusalem Talmud). Your times; that is the order of Moed, Festival, which deals with the various occasions and Festivals that occur throughout the year. Strength; that is the order of Nashim, Women. Salvations; that is the order of Nezikin, Damages, as one who is being pursued is rescued from the hands of his pursuer. Wisdom; that is the order of Kodashim, Consecrated Items. And knowledge; that is the order of Teharot, Purity, which is particularly difficult to master. And even if a person studies and masters all of these, “the fear of the Lord is his treasure,” it is preeminent. With regard to the same verse, Rava said: After departing from this world, when a person is brought to judgment for the life he lived in this world, they say to him in the order of that verse: Did you conduct business faithfully? Did you designate times for Torah study? Did you engage in procreation? Did you await salvation? Did you engage in the dialectics of wisdom or understand one matter from another? And, nevertheless, beyond all these, if the fear of the Lord is his treasure, yes, he is worthy, and if not, no, none of these accomplishments have any value. There is a parable that illustrates this. A person who said to his emissary: Bring a kor of wheat up to the attic for me to store there. The messenger went and brought it up for him. He said to the emissary: Did you mix a kav of ḥomton, a preservative to keep away worms, into it for me? He said to him: No. He said to him: If so, it would have been preferable had you not brought it up. Of what use is worm-infested wheat? Likewise, Torah and mitzvot without the fear of God are of no value. On a related note, the Gemara cites a halakha that was taught in the school of Rabbi Yishmael: A person who sells wheat may, ab initio, mix a kav of ḥomton into a kor of grain and need not be concerned that by selling it all at the price of grain he will be guilty of theft, as the kav of ḥomton is essential for the preservation of the wheat. Rabba bar Rav Huna said: Any person who has Torah in him but does not have

(1) When the people saw that Moses was so long in coming down from the mountain, the people gathered against Aaron and said to him, “Come, make us a god who shall go before us, for that man Moses, who brought us from the land of Egypt—we do not know what has happened to him.” (2) Aaron said to them, “Take off the gold rings that are on the ears of your wives, your sons, and your daughters, and bring them to me.” (3) And all the people took off the gold rings that were in their ears and brought them to Aaron. (4) This he took from them and cast in a mold, and made it into a molten calf. And they exclaimed, “This is your god, O Israel, who brought you out of the land of Egypt!” (5) When Aaron saw this, he built an altar before it; and Aaron announced: “Tomorrow shall be a festival of the LORD!” (6) Early next day, the people offered up burnt offerings and brought sacrifices of well-being; they sat down to eat and drink, and then rose to dance. (7) The LORD spoke to Moses, “Hurry down, for your people, whom you brought out of the land of Egypt, have acted basely. (8) They have been quick to turn aside from the way that I enjoined upon them. They have made themselves a molten calf and bowed low to it and sacrificed to it, saying: ‘This is your god, O Israel, who brought you out of the land of Egypt!’” (9) The LORD further said to Moses, “I see that this is a stiffnecked people. (10) Now, let Me be, that My anger may blaze forth against them and that I may destroy them, and make of you a great nation.” (11) But Moses implored the LORD his God, saying, “Let not Your anger, O Lord, blaze forth against Your people, whom You delivered from the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand. (12) Let not the Egyptians say, ‘It was with evil intent that He delivered them, only to kill them off in the mountains and annihilate them from the face of the earth.’ Turn from Your blazing anger, and renounce the plan to punish Your people. (13) Remember Your servants, Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, how You swore to them by Your Self and said to them: I will make your offspring as numerous as the stars of heaven, and I will give to your offspring this whole land of which I spoke, to possess forever.” (14) And the LORD renounced the punishment He had planned to bring upon His people. (15) Thereupon Moses turned and went down from the mountain bearing the two tablets of the Pact, tablets inscribed on both their surfaces: they were inscribed on the one side and on the other. (16) The tablets were God’s work, and the writing was God’s writing, incised upon the tablets. (17) When Joshua heard the sound of the people in its boisterousness, he said to Moses, “There is a cry of war in the camp.” (18) But he answered, “It is not the sound of the tune of triumph, Or the sound of the tune of defeat; It is the sound of song that I hear!” (19) As soon as Moses came near the camp and saw the calf and the dancing, he became enraged; and he hurled the tablets from his hands and shattered them at the foot of the mountain. (20) He took the calf that they had made and burned it; he ground it to powder and strewed it upon the water and so made the Israelites drink it. (21) Moses said to Aaron, “What did this people do to you that you have brought such great sin upon them?” (22) Aaron said, “Let not my lord be enraged. You know that this people is bent on evil. (23) They said to me, ‘Make us a god to lead us; for that man Moses, who brought us from the land of Egypt—we do not know what has happened to him.’ (24) So I said to them, ‘Whoever has gold, take it off!’ They gave it to me and I hurled it into the fire and out came this calf!” (25) Moses saw that the people were out of control—since Aaron had let them get out of control—so that they were a menace to any who might oppose them. (26) Moses stood up in the gate of the camp and said, “Whoever is for the LORD, come here!” And all the Levites rallied to him. (27) He said to them, “Thus says the LORD, the God of Israel: Each of you put sword on thigh, go back and forth from gate to gate throughout the camp, and slay brother, neighbor, and kin.” (28) The Levites did as Moses had bidden; and some three thousand of the people fell that day. (29) And Moses said, “Dedicate yourselves to the LORD this day—for each of you has been against son and brother—that He may bestow a blessing upon you today.” (30) The next day Moses said to the people, “You have been guilty of a great sin. Yet I will now go up to the LORD; perhaps I may win forgiveness for your sin.” (31) Moses went back to the LORD and said, “Alas, this people is guilty of a great sin in making for themselves a god of gold. (32) Now, if You will forgive their sin [well and good]; but if not, erase me from the record which You have written!” (33) But the LORD said to Moses, “He who has sinned against Me, him only will I erase from My record. (34) Go now, lead the people where I told you. See, My angel shall go before you. But when I make an accounting, I will bring them to account for their sins.” (35) Then the LORD sent a plague upon the people, for what they did with the calf that Aaron made.

R. Nehemiah declared: When we examine our actions, we are filled with shame. Usually when a man gives his field to a tenant to work, the tenant supplies the seed and the labor, and they share equally in the produce. But the Holy One, blessed be He, of whom it is written: The Earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof (Ps. 24:1), causes the rain and the dew to descend and protects everything, yet He desires only one tenth as tithe and one fiftieth as the priestly offering. Hence, Unto Thee, O Lord, belongeth righteousness, but unto us confusion of face (Dan. 9:7). R. Yosé said: Was there a more shameful act than this? Israel crossed the Red Sea, and the idol Micah (had made) was carried with them when, as it is said: And over the tree affliction shall pass (Zech. 10:11). Nevertheless the sea split asunder for them. Therefore, Unto Thee, O Lord, belongeth righteousness, but unto us confusion of face.

and according to the Rabbis, they established eight months that were lacking. The Gemara cites another objection. Come and hear that which was taught in a baraita in the anthology called Seder Olam: In the month of Nisan during which the Jewish people left Egypt, on the fourteenth they slaughtered their Paschal lambs, on the fifteenth they left Egypt, and that day was Shabbat eve. From the fact that the New Moon of Nisan was on Shabbat eve, we can infer that the New Moon of Iyyar was on the first day of the week, and the New Moon of Sivan was on the second day of the week. This is difficult according to the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, who holds that the New Moon of Sivan was on Sunday. The Gemara answers that Rabbi Yosei could have said to you: Whose is the opinion in this baraita? It is the opinion of the Rabbis. Therefore, this baraita poses no difficulty to the opinion of the Rabbi Yosei. The Gemara cites another objection: Come and hear from that which was taught, that Rabbi Yosei says: On the second day of Sivan, Moses ascended Mount Sinai and descended. On the third day, he ascended and descended. On the fourth day, he descended and did not ascend Mount Sinai again until he was commanded along with all of the Jewish people. And the Gemara asks: How is it possible that he descended on the fourth day? Since he did not ascend, from where did he descend? Rather, this must be emended: On the fourth day, he ascended and descended. On the fifth day, he built an altar and sacrificed an offering. On the sixth day, he had no time. The Gemara asks: Is that not because he received the Torah on the sixth day of the month? Apparently, this baraita supports the opinion of the Rabbis. The Gemara rejects this: No, he had no time due to the burden of preparing for Shabbat. The Gemara adds: A Galilean taught, while standing above Rav Ḥisda: Blessed is the all-Merciful One, Who gave the three-fold Torah: Torah, Prophets, and Writings, to the three-fold nation: Priests, Levites, and Israelites, by means of a third-born: Moses, who followed Aaron and Miriam in birth order, on the third day of the separation of men and women, in the third month: Sivan. On whose opinion is this homily based? It is based on the opinion of the Rabbis, who hold that the Torah was given on the third day of separation and not on the fourth day. The Gemara cites additional homiletic interpretations on the topic of the revelation at Sinai. The Torah says, “And Moses brought forth the people out of the camp to meet God; and they stood at the lowermost part of the mount” (Exodus 19:17). Rabbi Avdimi bar Ḥama bar Ḥasa said: the Jewish people actually stood beneath the mountain, and the verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, overturned the mountain above the Jews like a tub, and said to them: If you accept the Torah, excellent, and if not, there will be your burial. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: From here there is a substantial caveat to the obligation to fulfill the Torah. The Jewish people can claim that they were coerced into accepting the Torah, and it is therefore not binding. Rava said: Even so, they again accepted it willingly in the time of Ahasuerus, as it is written: “The Jews ordained, and took upon them, and upon their seed, and upon all such as joined themselves unto them” (Esther 9:27), and he taught: The Jews ordained what they had already taken upon themselves through coercion at Sinai. Ḥizkiya said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “You caused sentence to be heard from heaven; the earth feared, and was silent” (Psalms 76:9)? If it was afraid, why was it silent; and if it was silent, why was it afraid? Rather, the meaning is: At first, it was afraid, and in the end, it was silent. “You caused sentence to be heard from heaven” refers to the revelation at Sinai. And why was the earth afraid? It is in accordance with the statement of Reish Lakish, as Reish Lakish said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And there was evening and there was morning, the sixth day” (Genesis 1:31)? Why do I require the superfluous letter heh, the definite article, which does not appear on any of the other days? It teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, established a condition with the act of Creation, and said to them: If Israel accepts the Torah on the sixth day of Sivan, you will exist; and if they do not accept it, I will return you to the primordial state of chaos and disorder. Therefore, the earth was afraid until the Torah was given to Israel, lest it be returned to a state of chaos. Once the Jewish people accepted the Torah, the earth was calmed. Rabbi Simai taught: When Israel accorded precedence to the declaration “We will do” over the declaration “We will hear,” 600,000 ministering angels came and tied two crowns to each and every member of the Jewish people, one corresponding to “We will do” and one corresponding to “We will hear.” And when the people sinned with the Golden Calf, 1,200,000 angels of destruction descended and removed them from the people, as it is stated in the wake of the sin of the Golden Calf: “And the children of Israel stripped themselves of their ornaments from Mount Horeb onward” (Exodus 33:6). Rabbi Ḥama, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: At Horeb they put on their ornaments, and at Horeb they removed them. The source for this is: At Horeb they put them on, as we have said; at Horeb they removed them, as it is written: “And the children of Israel stripped themselves of their ornaments from Mount Horeb.” Rabbi Yoḥanan said: And Moses merited all of these crowns and took them. What is the source for this? Because juxtaposed to this verse, it is stated: “And Moses would take the tent [ohel]” (Exodus 33:7). The word ohel is interpreted homiletically as an allusion to an aura or illumination [hila]. Reish Lakish said: In the future, the Holy One, Blessed be He, will return them to us, as it is stated: “And the ransomed of the Lord shall return, and come with singing unto Zion, and everlasting joy shall be upon their heads” (Isaiah 35:10). The joy that they once had will once again be upon their heads. Rabbi Elazar said: When the Jewish people accorded precedence to the declaration “We will do” over “We will hear,” a Divine Voice emerged and said to them: Who revealed to my children this secret that the ministering angels use? As it is written: “Bless the Lord, you angels of His, you mighty in strength, that fulfill His word, hearkening unto the voice of His word” (Psalms 103:20). At first, the angels fulfill His word, and then afterward they hearken. Rabbi Ḥama, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “As an apple tree among the trees of the wood, so is my beloved among the sons. Under its shadow I delighted to sit and its fruit was sweet to my taste” (Song of Songs 2:3)? Why were the Jewish people likened to an apple tree? It is to tell you that just as this apple tree, its fruit grows before its leaves, so too, the Jewish people accorded precedence to “We will do” over “We will hear.” The Gemara relates that a heretic saw that Rava was immersed in studying halakha, and his fingers were beneath his leg and he was squeezing them, and his fingers were spurting blood. Rava did not notice that he was bleeding because he was engrossed in study. The heretic said to Rava: You impulsive nation, who accorded precedence to your mouths over your ears. You still bear your impulsiveness, as you act without thinking. You should listen first. Then, if you are capable of fulfilling the commands, accept them. And if not, do not accept them. He said to him: About us,

(1) God spoke all these words, saying: (2) I the LORD am your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, the house of bondage: (3) You shall have no other gods besides Me. (4) You shall not make for yourself a sculptured image, or any likeness of what is in the heavens above, or on the earth below, or in the waters under the earth. (5) You shall not bow down to them or serve them. For I the LORD your God am an impassioned God, visiting the guilt of the parents upon the children, upon the third and upon the fourth generations of those who reject Me, (6) but showing kindness to the thousandth generation of those who love Me and keep My commandments. (7) You shall not swear falsely by the name of the LORD your God; for the LORD will not clear one who swears falsely by His name. (8) Remember the sabbath day and keep it holy. (9) Six days you shall labor and do all your work, (10) but the seventh day is a sabbath of the LORD your God: you shall not do any work—you, your son or daughter, your male or female slave, or your cattle, or the stranger who is within your settlements. (11) For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth and sea, and all that is in them, and He rested on the seventh day; therefore the LORD blessed the sabbath day and hallowed it. (12) Honor your father and your mother, that you may long endure on the land that the LORD your God is assigning to you. (13) You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not steal. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. (14) You shall not covet your neighbor’s house: you shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female slave, or his ox or his ass, or anything that is your neighbor’s. (15) All the people witnessed the thunder and lightning, the blare of the horn and the mountain smoking; and when the people saw it, they fell back and stood at a distance. (16) “You speak to us,” they said to Moses, “and we will obey; but let not God speak to us, lest we die.” (17) Moses answered the people, “Be not afraid; for God has come only in order to test you, and in order that the fear of Him may be ever with you, so that you do not go astray.” (18) So the people remained at a distance, while Moses approached the thick cloud where God was. (19) The LORD said to Moses: Thus shall you say to the Israelites: You yourselves saw that I spoke to you from the very heavens: (20) With Me, therefore, you shall not make any gods of silver, nor shall you make for yourselves any gods of gold. (21) Make for Me an altar of earth and sacrifice on it your burnt offerings and your sacrifices of well-being, your sheep and your oxen; in every place where I cause My name to be mentioned I will come to you and bless you. (22) And if you make for Me an altar of stones, do not build it of hewn stones; for by wielding your tool upon them you have profaned them. (23) Do not ascend My altar by steps, that your nakedness may not be exposed upon it.

(1) Moses summoned all the Israelites and said to them: Hear, O Israel, the laws and rules that I proclaim to you this day! Study them and observe them faithfully! (2) The LORD our God made a covenant with us at Horeb. (3) It was not with our fathers that the LORD made this covenant, but with us, the living, every one of us who is here today. (4) Face to face the LORD spoke to you on the mountain out of the fire— (5) I stood between the LORD and you at that time to convey the LORD’s words to you, for you were afraid of the fire and did not go up the mountain—saying: (6) I the LORD am your God who brought you out of the land of Egypt, the house of bondage: (7) You shall have no other gods beside Me. (8) You shall not make for yourself a sculptured image, any likeness of what is in the heavens above, or on the earth below, or in the waters below the earth. (9) You shall not bow down to them or serve them. For I the LORD your God am an impassioned God, visiting the guilt of the parents upon the children, upon the third and upon the fourth generations of those who reject Me, (10) but showing kindness to the thousandth generation of those who love Me and keep My commandments. (11) You shall not swear falsely by the name of the LORD your God; for the LORD will not clear one who swears falsely by His name. (12) Observe the sabbath day and keep it holy, as the LORD your God has commanded you. (13) Six days you shall labor and do all your work, (14) but the seventh day is a sabbath of the LORD your God; you shall not do any work—you, your son or your daughter, your male or female slave, your ox or your ass, or any of your cattle, or the stranger in your settlements, so that your male and female slave may rest as you do. (15) Remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt and the LORD your God freed you from there with a mighty hand and an outstretched arm; therefore the LORD your God has commanded you to observe the sabbath day. (16) Honor your father and your mother, as the LORD your God has commanded you, that you may long endure, and that you may fare well, in the land that the LORD your God is assigning to you. (17) You shall not murder. You shall not commit adultery. You shall not steal. You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor. (18) You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife. You shall not crave your neighbor’s house, or his field, or his male or female slave, or his ox, or his ass, or anything that is your neighbor’s. (19) The LORD spoke those words—those and no more—to your whole congregation at the mountain, with a mighty voice out of the fire and the dense clouds. He inscribed them on two tablets of stone, which He gave to me. (20) When you heard the voice out of the darkness, while the mountain was ablaze with fire, you came up to me, all your tribal heads and elders, (21) and said, “The LORD our God has just shown us His majestic Presence, and we have heard His voice out of the fire; we have seen this day that man may live though God has spoken to him. (22) Let us not die, then, for this fearsome fire will consume us; if we hear the voice of the LORD our God any longer, we shall die. (23) For what mortal ever heard the voice of the living God speak out of the fire, as we did, and lived? (24) You go closer and hear all that the LORD our God says, and then you tell us everything that the LORD our God tells you, and we will willingly do it.” (25) The LORD heard the plea that you made to me, and the LORD said to me, “I have heard the plea that this people made to you; they did well to speak thus. (26) May they always be of such mind, to revere Me and follow all My commandments, that it may go well with them and with their children forever! (27) Go, say to them, ‘Return to your tents.’ (28) But you remain here with Me, and I will give you the whole Instruction—the laws and the rules—that you shall impart to them, for them to observe in the land that I am giving them to possess.” (29) Be careful, then, to do as the LORD your God has commanded you. Do not turn aside to the right or to the left: (30) follow only the path that the LORD your God has enjoined upon you, so that you may thrive and that it may go well with you, and that you may long endure in the land you are to possess.

(1) “Vayaanu Kol Haam (All the people answered) as one and said, ‘All that God has spoken, we will do.’ Moshe brought the people’s reply back to God. Then God said to Moshe, ‘Behold, I will come to you in a thick cloud so that the people will hear when I speak to you. Then also in you….’ Moshe related the people’s reply to God.” (Exodus 19:8, 9)

(2) This is quite surprising and amazing: What was the second reply of the people, of which it says, “Moshe related the people’s reply to God”? There is not found in Scripture any response or reply which the people answered him a second time, after the first response: “All that God has spoken….” So why [say] again, “Moshe related the people’s reply to God”?

(3) But know! the Israelites demurred and replied to that which Moshe told them to receive the Torah. They answered: “All that God has spoken”—that is to say, all that God will speak, we are compelled to do. For once the word has been uttered by God that a particular mitzvah be performed, there is no free will; we are compelled in our actions.

(4) This is the meaning of “All that God has spoken, we will do”—certainly. For there is no free will to not do, since it has been uttered by God. And so this is immediately followed with, “Moshe brought the people’s reply back to God.” He brought the Israelites’ objection back to the Holy One.

(5) The Holy One answered him forthwith: “Then God said to Moshe, ‘Behold, I come to you’”—specifically; “‘so that the people will hear when I speak to you’”—specifically. That is, I shall only say the Commandments to you alone. As it is written (Exodus 20:2), “I am God your Lord. You shall not have any….” So, too, all the rest. [I will] not address the Israelites. They will only hear when I speak to you, and therefore have free will to do as they choose.

(6) Concerning this it says, “Moshe related the people’s reply to God.” Moshe stated the reply of the people to God—i.e., that which the people claimed at first, he now claimed to God concerning himself: “By Your speaking exclusively to me, You rectified Israel so that they would have free will, but You did not rectify me. From now on, I will not have free will, since You will be speaking to me.” This is the meaning of, “Moshe related the people’s reply to God”—i.e., that which the people replied and claimed in the beginning, he now claimed to God. “What will be with me, for I will not have free will?”

(7) God answered him (Exodus 19:10): “God said to Moshe, ‘Go to the people and sanctify them today and tomorrow.’” God only commanded him to [prepare them for] two days, and Moshe added one day on his own (Shabbat 87a). He was in tune with the intent of the Holy One, for such was God’s intent—as, in fact, the Torah was only given after three days.

(8) So Moshe’s free will to receive the Torah or not to receive the Torah was contingent on this. For it was only possible to receive the Torah after three days, which is how it in fact happened. Had he not added one day, he would not have received the Torah Shekhinah only descended after three days>. God only told him two days. But he understood on his own. He chose to receive the Torah and added one day; because of which, the Giving of the Torah transpired.

(9) Thus, Moshe’s free will was essentially contingent on this: his adding a day on his own initiative.

However, if you say that they would omit: Who creates light, and would recite: An abounding love, on what basis would you conclude that failure to recite one of the blessings recited before Shema does not prevent one from reciting the other? In that case, one could offer another reason why only a single blessing is recited. Perhaps the fact that they did not recite: Who creates light was because the time for the recitation of: Who creates light, had not yet arrived, as the sun had yet to rise. The blessings of the priestly watch are recited in the early morning hours, long before sunrise. However, afterward, when the time to recite: Who creates light arrived, they would recite it. From the conclusion drawn by Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, that failure to recite one of the blessings recited before Shema does not prevent one from reciting the other, it is clear that the blessing recited by the members of the priestly watch was: Who creates light. As this deductive reasoning seems coherent and convincing, the Gemara asks: And if this halakha is based on inference, and not on an explicit statement, what of it? There seems to be no other way to interpret Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish’s statement. The Gemara answers: If this conclusion were based on an inference, one could say that actually they recited: An abounding love, and when the time to recite: Who creates light arrived, they would recite it. In that case, what is the meaning of: Failure to recite one of the blessings recited before Shema does not prevent one from reciting the other? Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish meant that failure to recite the correct order of the blessings does not prevent one from fulfilling his obligation. Even if one recites: An abounding love before: Who creates light, he fulfills his obligation. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish did not refer to a case where only one of the blessings was recited. Consequently, one cannot infer from his statement his opinion regarding the identity of the single blessing. The Gemara related above that the priests in the Temple read the Ten Commandments, along with the sections of Shema, VeHaya im Shamoa, VaYomer, True and Firm, Avoda, and the priestly benediction. Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: Even in the outlying areas, outside the Temple, they sought to recite the Ten Commandments in this manner every day, as they are the basis of the Torah (Rambam), but they had already abolished recitation of the Ten Commandments due to the grievance of the heretics, who argued that the entire Torah, with the exception of the Ten Commandments, did not emanate from God (Jerusalem Talmud). If the Ten Commandments were recited daily, that would lend credence to their claim, so their recitation was expunged from the daily prayers. That was also taught in a baraita that Rabbi Natan says: In the outlying areas, they sought to recite the Ten Commandments in this manner, but they had already abolished their recitation due to the grievance of the heretics. The Gemara relates that several Sages sought to reinstitute recitation of the Ten Commandments, as Rabba bar bar Ḥana thought to institute this in the city of Sura, but Rav Ḥisda said to him: They already abolished them due to the grievance of the heretics. So too, Ameimar thought to institute this in the city of Neharde’a. Rav Ashi, the most prominent of the Sages in that generation, said to him: They already abolished them due to the grievance of the heretics. We learned in a mishna in tractate Tamid that on Shabbat a single blessing is added to bless the outgoing priestly watch. The Gemara asks: What is that single blessing? Rabbi Ḥelbo said: As they finished their service, the outgoing priestly watch would say to the incoming priestly watch: May He who caused His Name to dwell in this house cause love and brotherhood, peace and camaraderie to dwell among you. We learned in the mishna: Where the Sages said to recite a long blessing, one may not shorten it, and vice-versa. The Gemara proceeds to address a particular problem arising from conclusions drawn from this mishna. Before addressing the primary problem, however, a simpler, secondary issue is raised: Obviously, in a case where one took a cup of wine in his hand and thought it was beer, and began reciting the blessing thinking it was beer, i.e., he intended to recite the appropriate blessing on beer: By Whose word all things came to be, and upon realizing that it was wine, he concluded the blessing with that which is recited over wine: Who creates the fruit of the vine, he fulfilled his obligation. In that case, even had he recited: By Whose word all things came to be, as he originally intended, he would have fulfilled his obligation, as we learned in a mishna: If one recited the general blessing: By Whose word all things came to be, over all food items, he fulfilled his obligation after the fact, even if ab initio another blessing was instituted to recite before eating that food. Therefore, if he reconsidered and concluded the blessing with the ending of the blessing over wine, he fulfilled his obligation. However in a case where one took a cup of beer in his hand and thought it was wine, and began reciting the blessing thinking it was wine, meaning he intended to recite: Who creates the fruit of the vine, and upon realizing that it was beer he concluded the blessing with that which is recited over beer: By Whose word all things came to be, what is the halakha? Ostensibly, this blessing is comprised of two sections. The first section, during which he intended to recite: Who creates the fruit of the vine, cannot fulfill his obligation as it is an inappropriate blessing to recite over beer. However, in the second section he recited: By Whose word all things came to be, the appropriate blessing. The dilemma, then, is: Do we follow the essence of the blessing, the first section, or do we follow the conclusion of the blessing? Come and hear a proof from what was taught in a baraita with regard to a similar case: If, in the morning prayer, one began the blessings prior to the recitation of Shema appropriately with: Who creates light, and concluded with the formula of the evening prayer: Who brings on evenings, he did not fulfill his obligation. However, if one did the opposite, and commenced with: Who brings on evenings, and concluded with: Who creates light, he fulfilled his obligation. Similarly, if, in the evening prayer, one commenced the recitation of Shema with: Who brings on evenings and concluded with: Who creates light, he did not fulfill his obligation. If one commenced with: Who creates light and concluded with: Who brings on evenings, he fulfilled his obligation. The baraita summarizes that the general principle is: Everything follows the conclusion of the blessing. Based on this principle, the question with regard to a blessing recited over food and drink posed above can be resolved. This proof is rejected: There, in the case of the blessing recited over the radiant lights, it is different, as one recites: Blessed…Who forms the radiant lights, and similarly, in the evening one recites: Blessed…Who brings on evenings. Since these are long blessings that conclude with a second blessing summarizing their content, one could assert that everything follows the conclusion. However, in the case of short blessings, such as: By Whose word all things came to be, or: Who creates the fruit of the vine, ostensibly, if there is a problem with the first part of the blessing, the entire blessing is nullified. The distinction between the blessing recited over the radiant lights and the blessings recited over food and drink stems from the assumption that the conclusion: Blessed…Who fashions the radiant lights, is a complete, independent blessing. However, this is not necessarily so. This works out well according to Rav, who said: Any blessing that does not include mention of God’s name is not considered a blessing, and since: Who creates light, includes God’s name, it constitutes a complete, independent blessing. However, according to Rabbi Yoḥanan, who said: Any blessing that does not include mention of God’s sovereignty, i.e., our God, King of the universe, is not considered a blessing, what can be said to distinguish between the conclusion of the blessings over food and drink and the blessing over the radiant lights? Since the conclusion: Who creates light, does not mention God’s sovereignty, it does not constitute a complete, independent blessing. The Gemara responds: Rather, Rabbi Yoḥanan also holds that the blessing over the radiant lights is a complete blessing. Since Rabba bar Ulla said: Who creates darkness, is mentioned during the day and: Rolling away the light before the darkness, is mentioned at night in order to mention the attribute of day at night and the attribute of night in the day, the beginning of the blessing in which God’s sovereignty is mentioned day and night is appropriate to both day and night, and when one recites the blessing with God’s name and mentions God’s sovereignty at the beginning of the blessing, it refers to both day and night. Therefore, no proof can be cited from the blessing over the radiant lights to the blessings recited over food and drink. The Gemara attempts to cite an additional proof: Come and hear another solution based on what we learned in the latter clause of the baraita cited above: The general principle is: Everything follows the conclusion of the blessing. What does the phrase: The general principle is, come to include beyond the detailed example cited in the baraita? Does it not come to include the case that we stated, that both in the case of a long blessing and the case of a short blessing, the conclusion of the blessing is the determining factor? The Gemara rejects this: No, the principle is cited to include a case of bread and dates. The Gemara clarifies: What are the circumstances of the dilemma with regard to the blessings on these food items? If you say that it is a case where one ate bread and thought that he ate dates, and commenced reciting the blessing thinking it was dates; then, upon realizing that it was bread, he concluded the blessing with that which is recited over bread, isn’t that our dilemma, as this case is identical to the one involving wine and beer? The Gemara answers: No; this general principle is only necessary to teach a special case, where one ate dates and thought that he ate bread, and commenced reciting the blessing thinking they were bread. Upon realizing that they were dates, he concluded the blessing with that which is recited over dates. In that case he fulfilled his obligation, as even had he concluded the blessing with that which is recited over bread, he would have fulfilled his obligation. What is the reason that had he concluded with the blessing recited over bread he would have fulfilled his obligation to recite a blessing over dates? This is because dates also provide a person sustenance. While ab initio one should not recite the blessing for bread over dates, after the fact, if one did so, he fulfilled his obligation. It is with regard to this particular situation that the baraita established the principle: Everything follows the conclusion of the blessing. Ultimately, the dilemma regarding a blessing with an inappropriate opening and an appropriate conclusion remains unresolved.The Gemara proceeds to discuss the formula for the blessings recited along with Shema. Rabba bar Ḥinnana Sava said in the name of Rav: One who did not recite: True and Firm [emet veyatziv] at the beginning of the blessing of redemption that follows Shema in the morning prayer, and: True and Trustworthy [emet ve’emuna] in the evening prayer, he did not fulfill his obligation. An allusion to the difference in formulation between morning and evening is, as it is stated: “To declare Your kindness in the morning and Your faith in the nights” (Psalms 92:3). In the morning, one must mention God’s loving-kindness, while in the evening one is required to emphasize the aspect of faith. And Rabba bar Ḥinnana Sava said in the name of Rav: One who is praying, when he bows in the appropriate places, he bows when he says: Blessed, and when he subsequently stands upright, he stands upright when he says God’s name. Shmuel, who was Rav’s colleague and significantly outlived him, said: What is Rav’s reason for saying that one should stand upright at the mention of God’s name? As it is written: “The Lord, who raises the bowed” (Psalms 146:8); one stands upright at the mention of God’s name to recall that it is God who raises the bowed. The Gemara raises an objection based on what we learned in praise of a priest: “And he was afraid before My name” (Malachi 2:5), indicating that one must be humbled and not upright before God’s name. The Gemara responds: Is it written: At My name? Before My name, is written, meaning that one is humbled and bows prior to the mention of God’s name, when he says: Blessed. The Gemara relates: Shmuel said to Ḥiyya bar Rav: Son of Torah, come and I will tell you a great saying that your father said. Your father said the following: When one bows, he bows when he says: Blessed, and when he stands upright, he stands upright when he says God’s name.