Thus spoke David before the Holy One, blessed be He: Master of
the world, am I not pious? All the kings of the East and the West sit with all their pomp among their
company, whereas my hands are soiled with the blood [of menstruation], with the foetus and the
placenta, in order to declare a woman clean for her husband.12 And what is more, in all that I do I
consult my teacher, Mephibosheth, and I say to him: My teacher Mephibosheth, is my decision
right? Did I correctly convict, correctly acquit, correctly declare clean, correctly declare unclean?
And I am not ashamed [to ask]. R. Joshua, the son of R. Iddi, says Which verse [may be cited in
support]? And I recite Thy testimonies before kings and am not ashamed.13 A Tanna taught: His
name was not Mephibosheth. And why then was he called Mephibosheth? Because he humiliated14
David in the Halachah. Therefore was David worthy of the privilege that Kileab15 should issue from
him. R. Johanan said: His name was not Kileab but Daniel. Why then was he called Kileab? Because
he humiliated [maklim] Mephibosheth [ab]16 in the Halachah. And concerning him Solomon said in
his wisdom: My son, if thy heart be wise, my heart will be glad, even mine.17 And he said further:
My son, be wise, and make my heart glad, that I may answer him that taunteth me.18
Torah school for youth
Contact information, map and directions, contact form, opening hours, services, ratings, photos, videos and announcements from Torah school for youth, School, .
The Gemara answers that Rabbi Meir said to Rabbi Yehuda as follows: Do you maintain that I am speaking of your definition of twilight? I am speaking of Rabbi Yosei’s definition of twilight, as Rabbi Yosei said: Twilight is like the blink of an eye; night begins and day ends and the time between them is so brief, it is impossible to quantify. According to this opinion, the priests immerse themselves just before the emergence of the stars, when it is already considered night.
3a
קַשְׁיָא דְּרַבִּי מֵאִיר אַדְּרַבִּי מֵאִיר!
The previous baraita cited Rabbi Meir’s opinion that the time for the recitation of Shema begins when the priests immerse before partaking of their teruma. In the Tosefta, it was taught that Rabbi Meir holds that one begins to recite Shema from when people enter to eat their meal on Shabbat eve. One opinion of Rabbi Meir seems to contradict another opinion of Rabbi Meir. The Gemara responds: Two tanna’im, students of Rabbi Meir, expressed different opinions in accordance with Rabbi Meir’s opinion.
קַשְׁיָא דְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אַדְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר!
So too, the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer cited in the mishna contradicts the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer cited in the baraita. In the mishna, Rabbi Eliezer holds that the time for the recitation of Shema begins with the emergence of the stars: From the time when the priests enter to partake of their teruma, while in the baraita, he states that the time for the recitation of Shema begins when the day becomes sanctified on the eve of Shabbat.
תְּרֵי תַּנָּאֵי אַלִּיבָּא דְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: רֵישָׁא לָאו רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר הִיא.
The Gemara responds: There are two possible resolutions to the apparent contradiction in Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion. Either two tanna’im expressed different opinions in accordance with Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion, or if you wish, say instead that the first clause of the mishna, according to which we begin to recite Shema when the priests enter to partake of their teruma, is not actually Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion. Only the second half of the statement: Until the end of the first watch, was stated by Rabbi Eliezer.
עַד סוֹף הָאַשְׁמוּרָה.
In the mishna, we learned that Rabbi Eliezer establishes that one may recite the evening Shema until the end of the first watch. These watches are mentioned in the Bible as segments of the night, but it must be established: Into precisely how many segments is the night divided, three or four? Moreover, why does Rabbi Eliezer employ such inexact parameters rather than a more precise definition of time (Tosefot HaRosh)?
מַאי קָסָבַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר? אִי קָסָבַר שָׁלֹשׁ מִשְׁמָרוֹת הָוֵי הַלַּיְלָה, לֵימָא ״עַד אַרְבַּע שָׁעוֹת״. וְאִי קָסָבַר אַרְבַּע מִשְׁמָרוֹת הָוֵי הַלַּיְלָה, לֵימָא ״עַד שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁעוֹת״!
What does Rabbi Eliezer actually hold? If he holds that the night consists of three watches, let him say explicitly that one recites the evening Shema until the fourth hour. If he holds that the night consists of four watches, let him say explicitly until the third hour.
לְעוֹלָם קָסָבַר שָׁלֹשׁ מִשְׁמָרוֹת הָוֵי הַלַּיְלָה, וְהָא קָמַשְׁמַע לָן: דְּאִיכָּא מִשְׁמָרוֹת בָּרָקִיעַ וְאִיכָּא מִשְׁמָרוֹת בְּאַרְעָא. דְּתַנְיָא, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: שָׁלֹשׁ מִשְׁמָרוֹת הָוֵי הַלַּיְלָה, וְעַל כָּל מִשְׁמָר וּמִשְׁמָר יוֹשֵׁב הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא וְשׁוֹאֵג כָּאֲרִי, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״ה׳ מִמָּרוֹם יִשְׁאָג, וּמִמְּעוֹן קָדְשׁוֹ יִתֵּן קוֹלוֹ שָׁאֹג יִשְׁאַג עַל נָוֵהוּ״.
The Gemara responds: Actually, Rabbi Eliezer holds that the night consists of three watches, and he employs this particular language of watches in order to teach us: There are watches in heaven and there are watches on earth; just as our night is divided into watches, so too is the night in the upper worlds. As it was taught in a baraita: Rabbi Eliezer says: The night consists of three watches, and over each and every watch, the Holy One, Blessed be He, sits and roars like a lion in pain over the destruction of the Temple. This imagery is derived from a reference in the Bible, as it is stated: “The Lord roars [yishag] from on high, from His holy dwelling He makes His voice heard. He roars mightily [shaog yishag] over His dwelling place, He cries out like those who tread grapes, against all the inhabitants of the earth” (Jeremiah 25:30). The three instances of the root shin-alef-gimmel in this verse correspond to the three watches of the night.
וְסִימָן לַדָּבָר: מִשְׁמָרָה רִאשׁוֹנָה חֲמוֹר נוֹעֵר, שְׁנִיָּה כְּלָבִים צוֹעֲקִים, שְׁלִישִׁית, תִּינוֹק יוֹנֵק מִשְּׁדֵי אִמּוֹ, וְאִשָּׁה מְסַפֶּרֶת עִם בַּעֲלָהּ.
And signs of the transition between each of these watches in the upper world can be sensed in this world: In the first watch, the donkey brays; in the second, dogs bark; and in the third people begin to rise, a baby nurses from its mother’s breast and a wife converses with her husband.
מַאי קָא חָשֵׁיב רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, אִי תְּחִלַּת מִשְׁמָרוֹת קָא חָשֵׁיב — תְּחִלַּת מִשְׁמָרָה רִאשׁוֹנָה סִימָנָא לְמָה לִי? אוּרְתָּא הוּא! אִי סוֹף מִשְׁמָרוֹת קָא חָשֵׁיב, סוֹף מִשְׁמָרָה אַחֲרוֹנָה לְמָה לִי סִימָנָא? יְמָמָא הוּא!
With regard to these earthly manifestations of the three heavenly watches as established in the baraita, the Gemara asks: What did Rabbi Eliezer enumerate? If he enumerated the beginning of the watch, why do I need a sign for the beginning of the first watch? It is when evening begins; an additional sign is superfluous. If he enumerated the end of the watches, why do I need a sign for the end of the last watch? It is when day begins; an additional sign is similarly superfluous.
אֶלָּא: חָשֵׁיב סוֹף מִשְׁמָרָה רִאשׁוֹנָה, וּתְחִלַּת מִשְׁמָרָה אַחֲרוֹנָה, וְאֶמְצָעִית דְּאֶמְצָעִיתָא. וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: כּוּלְּהוּ סוֹף מִשְׁמָרוֹת קָא חָשֵׁיב, וְכִי תֵּימָא אַחֲרוֹנָה לָא צְרִיךְ.
The Gemara answers: Rather, he enumerated the signs for the end of the first watch and the beginning of the last watch, both of which require a sign, as well as the middle of the middle watch. And if you wish, say instead: He enumerated the ends of all of the watches. And if you say that a sign indicating the end of the final watch is unnecessary because it is day, nevertheless, that sign is useful.
לְמַאי נָפְקָא מִינַּהּ — לְמִיקְרֵי קְרִיאַת שְׁמַע לְמַאן דְּגָנֵי בְּבַיִת אָפֵל וְלָא יָדַע זְמַן קְרִיאַת שְׁמַע אֵימַת. כֵּיוָן דְּאִשָּׁה מְסַפֶּרֶת עִם בַּעֲלָהּ וְתִינוֹק יוֹנֵק מִשְּׁדֵי אִמּוֹ, לִיקוּם וְלִיקְרֵי.
What is the practical ramification of this sign? It is relevant to one who recites Shema while lying in a dark house, who cannot see the dawn and who does not know when the time for reciting Shema arrives. That person is provided with a sign that when a woman speaks with her husband and a baby nurses from its mother’s breast, the final watch of the night has ended and he must rise and recite Shema.
אָמַר רַב יִצְחָק בַּר שְׁמוּאֵל מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב: שָׁלֹשׁ מִשְׁמָרוֹת הָוֵי הַלַּיְלָה, וְעַל כָּל מִשְׁמָר וּמִשְׁמָר יוֹשֵׁב הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא וְשׁוֹאֵג כַּאֲרִי, וְאוֹמֵר: ״אוֹי לִי שֶׁחֵרַבְתִּי אֶת בֵּיתִי וְשָׂרַפְתִּי אֶת הֵיכָלִי וְהִגְלִיתִי אֶת בָּנַי לְבֵין אוּמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם״.
Rav Yitzḥak bar Shmuel said in the name of Rav: The night consists of three watches, and over each and every watch the Holy One, Blessed be He sits and roars like a lion, because the Temple service was connected to the changing of these watches (Tosefot HaRosh), and says: “Woe to Me, that due to their sins I destroyed My house, burned My Temple and exiled them among the nations of the world.”
תַּנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי: פַּעַם אַחַת הָיִיתִי מְהַלֵּךְ בַּדֶּרֶךְ וְנִכְנַסְתִּי לְחוּרְבָּה אַחַת מֵחוּרְבוֹת יְרוּשָׁלַיִם לְהִתְפַּלֵּל. בָּא אֵלִיָּהוּ זָכוּר לַטּוֹב וְשָׁמַר לִי עַל הַפֶּתַח, (וְהִמְתִּין לִי) עַד שֶׁסִּייַּמְתִּי תְּפִלָּתִי. לְאַחַר שֶׁסִּייַּמְתִּי תְּפִלָּתִי אָמַר לִי: ״שָׁלוֹם עָלֶיךָ, רַבִּי״. וְאָמַרְתִּי לוֹ: ״שָׁלוֹם עָלֶיךָ, רַבִּי וּמוֹרִי״. וְאָמַר לִי: בְּנִי, מִפְּנֵי מָה נִכְנַסְתָּ לְחוּרְבָּה זוֹ? אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ: לְהִתְפַּלֵּל. וְאָמַר לִי: הָיָה לְךָ לְהִתְפַּלֵּל בַּדֶּרֶךְ. וְאָמַרְתִּי לוֹ: מִתְיָרֵא הָיִיתִי שֶׁמָּא יַפְסִיקוּ בִּי עוֹבְרֵי דְּרָכִים, וְאָמַר לִי הָיָה לְךָ לְהִתְפַּלֵּל תְּפִלָּה קְצָרָה.
Incidental to the mention of the elevated significance of the night watches, the Gemara cites a related story: It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei said: I was once walking along the road when I entered the ruins of an old, abandoned building among the ruins of Jerusalem in order to pray. I noticed that Elijah, of blessed memory, came and guarded the entrance for me and waited at the entrance until I finished my prayer. When I finished praying and exited the ruin, Elijah said to me, deferentially as one would address a Rabbi: Greetings to you, my Rabbi. I answered him: Greetings to you, my Rabbi, my teacher. And Elijah said to me: My son, why did you enter this ruin? I said to him: In order to pray. And Elijah said to me: You should have prayed on the road. And I said to him: I was unable to pray along the road, because I was afraid that I might be interrupted by travelers and would be unable to focus. Elijah said to me: You should have recited the abbreviated prayer instituted for just such circumstances.
בְּאוֹתָהּ שָׁעָה לָמַדְתִּי מִמֶּנּוּ שְׁלֹשָׁה דְּבָרִים: לָמַדְתִּי שֶׁאֵין נִכְנָסִין לְחוּרְבָּה, וְלָמַדְתִּי שֶׁמִּתְפַּלְּלִין בַּדֶּרֶךְ, וְלָמַדְתִּי שֶׁהַמִּתְפַּלֵּל בְּדֶרֶךְ מִתְפַּלֵּל תְּפִלָּה קְצָרָה.
Rabbi Yosei concluded: At that time, from that brief exchange, I learned from him, three things: I learned that one may not enter a ruin; and I learned that one need not enter a building to pray, but he may pray along the road; and I learned that one who prays along the road recites an abbreviated prayer so that he may maintain his focus.
וְאָמַר לִי: בְּנִי, מָה קוֹל שָׁמַעְתָּ בְּחוּרְבָּה זוֹ? וְאָמַרְתִּי לוֹ: שָׁמַעְתִּי בַּת קוֹל שֶׁמְּנַהֶמֶת כְּיוֹנָה וְאוֹמֶרֶת: ״אוֹי לִי שֶׁחֵרַבְתִּי אֶת בֵּיתִי וְשָׂרַפְתִּי אֶת הֵיכָלִי וְהִגְלִיתִי אֶת בָּנַי לְבֵין אוּמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם״. וְאָמַר לִי: חַיֶּיךָ וְחַיֵּי רֹאשְׁךָ, לֹא שָׁעָה זוֹ בִּלְבַד אוֹמֶרֶת כָּךְ, אֶלָּא בְּכָל יוֹם וָיוֹם, שָׁלֹשׁ פְּעָמִים אוֹמֶרֶת כָּךְ. וְלֹא זוֹ בִּלְבַד אֶלָּא, בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁיִּשְׂרָאֵל נִכְנָסִין לְבָתֵּי כְּנֵסִיּוֹת וּלְבָתֵּי מִדְרָשׁוֹת וְעוֹנִין ״יְהֵא שְׁמֵיהּ הַגָּדוֹל מְבֹורָךְ״, הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מְנַעְנֵעַ רֹאשׁוֹ, וְאוֹמֵר: אַשְׁרֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ שֶׁמְּקַלְּסִין אוֹתוֹ בְּבֵיתוֹ כָּךְ, מַה לּוֹ לָאָב שֶׁהִגְלָה אֶת בָּנָיו, וְאוֹי לָהֶם לַבָּנִים שֶׁגָּלוּ מֵעַל שׁוּלְחַן אֲבִיהֶם.
And after this introduction, Elijah said to me: What voice did you hear in that ruin?
I responded: I heard a Heavenly voice, like an echo of that roar of the Holy One, Blessed be He (Maharsha), cooing like a dove and saying: Woe to the children, due to whose sins I destroyed My house, burned My Temple, and exiled them among the nations.
And Elijah said to me: By your life and by your head, not only did that voice cry out in that moment, but it cries out three times each and every day. Moreover, any time that God’s greatness is evoked, such as when Israel enters synagogues and study halls and answers in the kaddish prayer, May His great name be blessed, the Holy One, Blessed be He, shakes His head and says: Happy is the king who is thus praised in his house. When the Temple stood, this praise was recited there, but now: How great is the pain of the father who exiled his children, and woe to the children who were exiled from their father’s table, as their pain only adds to that of their father (Rabbi Shem Tov ibn Shaprut).
תָּנוּ רַבָּנָן, מִפְּנֵי שְׁלֹשָׁה דְּבָרִים אֵין נִכְנָסִין לְחוּרְבָּה: מִפְּנֵי חֲשָׁד, מִפְּנֵי הַמַּפּוֹלֶת, וּמִפְּנֵי הַמַּזִּיקִין. ״מִפְּנֵי חֲשָׁד״, וְתִיפּוֹק לֵיהּ ״מִשּׁוּם מַפּוֹלֶת״?
The Sages taught, for three reasons one may not enter a ruin: Because of suspicion of prostitution, because the ruin is liable to collapse, and because of demons. Three separate reasons seem extraneous, so the Gemara asks: Why was the reason because of suspicion necessary? Let this halakha be derived because of collapse.
3b
בְּחַדְתִּי.
The Gemara answers: This halakha applies even in the case of a new, sturdy ruin, where there is no danger of collapse. Therefore, the reason because of suspicion is cited in order to warn one not to enter a new ruin as well.
וְתִיפּוֹק לֵיהּ מִשּׁוּם מַזִּיקִין? בִּתְרֵי.
The Gemara continues to object: And let this halakha be derived because of demons? The Gemara answers: Demons are only a threat to individuals, so because of demons would not apply to a case where two people enter a ruin together.
אִי בִּתְרֵי — חֲשָׁד נָמֵי לֵיכָּא! בִּתְרֵי וּפְרִיצִי.
The Gemara objects: But if there are two people entering a ruin together, then there is no suspicion either. There is no prohibition against two men to be alone with a woman as, in that case, there is no suspicion of untoward behavior. Consequently, if two men enter a ruin together, there is no room for suspicion. The Gemara answers: If two individuals known to be immoral enter together, there is suspicion even though there are two of them.
״מִפְּנֵי הַמַּפּוֹלֶת״, וְתִיפּוֹק לֵיהּ מִשּׁוּם חֲשָׁד וּמַזִּיקִין!
The Gemara considers why because of collapse is necessary. Let the prohibition be derived from suspicion and demons.
בִּתְרֵי וּכְשֵׁרֵי.
The Gemara responds: There are times when this reason is necessary, e.g., when two upstanding individuals enter a ruin together. Although there is neither concern of suspicion nor of demons, there remains concern lest the ruin collapse.
״מִפְּנֵי הַמַּזִּיקִין״, וְתִיפּוֹק לֵיהּ מִפְּנֵי חֲשָׁד וּמַפּוֹלֶת!
The Gemara considers the third reason, because of demons. Why is it necessary to include: Because of demons? Let the prohibition be derived from suspicion and collapse.
בְּחוּרְבָּה חַדְתִּי, וּבִתְרֵי וּכְשֵׁרֵי.
The Gemara responds: There are cases where this is the only concern, for example where it is a new ruin into which two upstanding individuals enter, so there is neither concern lest it collapse nor of suspicion.
אִי בִּתְרֵי, מַזִּיקִין נָמֵי לֵיכָּא!
The Gemara points out, however, that if there are two people, there is also no concern of demons. As such, the question remains: In what case can demons be the sole cause not to enter a ruin?
בִּמְקוֹמָן חָיְישִׁינַן. וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: לְעוֹלָם בְּחַד, וּבְחוּרְבָּה חַדְתִּי דְּקָאֵי בְּדַבְרָא, דְּהָתָם מִשּׁוּם חֲשָׁד לֵיכָּא דְּהָא אִשָּׁה בְּדַבְרָא לָא שְׁכִיחָא, וּמִשּׁוּם מַזִּיקִין אִיכָּא.
The Gemara responds: Generally speaking, two individuals need not be concerned about demons; but, if they are in their place, i.e., a place known to be haunted by demons (see Isaiah 13:21), we are concerned about demons even with two people. And if you wish, say instead: Actually, this refers to the case of an individual entering a new ruin located in a field. There, there is no suspicion, as finding a woman in the field is uncommon; and since it is a new ruin, there is no danger of collapse. However, there is still concern of demons.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: אַרְבַּע מִשְׁמָרוֹת הָוֵי הַלַּיְלָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי. רַבִּי נָתָן אוֹמֵר: שָׁלֹשׁ.
The Sages taught in a Tosefta: The night is comprised of four watches; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. Rabbi Natan says: The night is comprised of three watches.
מַאי טַעְמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי נָתָן — דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיָּבֹא גִדְעוֹן וּמֵאָה אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר אִתּוֹ בִּקְצֵה הַמַּחֲנֶה רֹאשׁ הָאַשְׁמֹרֶת הַתִּיכוֹנָה״, תָּנָא: אֵין ״תִּיכוֹנָה״ אֶלָּא שֶׁיֵּשׁ לְפָנֶיהָ וּלְאַחֲרֶיהָ.
The Gemara explains: What is Rabbi Natan’s reasoning? As it is written: “And Gideon, and the one hundred men who were with him, came to the edge of camp at the beginning of the middle watch” (Judges 7:19). It was taught in the Tosefta: Middle means nothing other than that there is one before it and one after it. From the fact that the verse refers to a middle watch, the fact that the night is comprised of three watches may be inferred.
וְרַבִּי, מַאי ״תִּיכוֹנָה״ — אַחַת מִן הַתִּיכוֹנָה שֶׁבַּתִּיכוֹנוֹת.
And what does Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi say about this proof? He argues that it is inconclusive, as one could say: To what does middle refer? It refers to one of the two middle watches.
וְרַבִּי נָתָן מִי כְּתִיב ״תִּיכוֹנָה שֶׁבַּתִּיכוֹנוֹת״? ״תִּיכוֹנָה״ כְּתִיב!
And how would Rabbi Natan respond? He would say: Despite Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s objection, is: One of the middle watches, written in the verse? The middle watch is written. This indicates that the night is comprised of only three watches.
מַאי טַעְמֵיהּ דְּרַבִּי? אָמַר רַבִּי זְרִיקָא, אָמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי, אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי: כָּתוּב אֶחָד אוֹמֵר: ״חֲצוֹת לַיְלָה אָקוּם לְהוֹדוֹת לָךְ עַל מִשְׁפְּטֵי צִדְקֶךָ״, וְכָתוּב אֶחָד אוֹמֵר: ״קִדְּמוּ עֵינַי אַשְׁמוּרוֹת״ הָא כֵּיצַד, אַרְבַּע מִשְׁמָרוֹת הָוֵי הַלַּיְלָה.
What is Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s reasoning? Rabbi Zerika said that Rabbi Ami said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s opinion is based on a comparison of two verses. One verse says: “At midnight I rise to give thanks for Your righteous laws” (Psalms 119:62), and the other verse says: “My eyes forestall the watches, that I will speak of Your word” (Psalms 119:148). Taken together, these verses indicate that their author, King David, rose at midnight, two watches before dawn, in order to study Torah. How is it possible to reconcile these two verses? Only if there are four watches in the night does one who rises two watches before dawn rise at midnight.
וְרַבִּי נָתָן, סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ. דִּתְנַן, רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר: עַד שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁעוֹת, שֶׁכֵּן דֶּרֶךְ מְלָכִים לַעֲמֹוד בְּשָׁלֹשׁ שָׁעוֹת. שֵׁית דְּלֵילְיָא, וְתַרְתֵּי דִּימָמָא, הָווּ לְהוּ שְׁתֵּי מִשְׁמָרוֹת.
And how does Rabbi Natan reconcile these two verses? He holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua, for we learned in a mishna that Rabbi Yehoshua says: One is permitted to recite the morning Shema during the time when people rise, until the third hour of the day, as it is the custom of kings to rise during the third hour. Since it is customary for kings to rise during the third hour of the day, if David rose at midnight, he would be awake for six hours of the night and two hours of the day, which amounts to two watches. Therefore King David could say that he “forestalls the watches,” as he rose two watches before the rest of the kings in the world.
רַב אָשֵׁי אָמַר: מִשְׁמָרָה וּפַלְגָא נָמֵי ״מִשְׁמָרוֹת״ קָרוּ לְהוּ.
Rav Ashi said that the verses can be reconciled in accordance with Rabbi Natan’s opinion in another way: One and one-half watches are still called watches in plural. Therefore King David could rise at midnight yet maintain that he “forestalls the watches.”
וְאָמַר רַבִּי זְרִיקָא, אָמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי, אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי: אֵין אוֹמְרִין בִּפְנֵי הַמֵּת אֶלָּא דְּבָרָיו שֶׁל מֵת.
Following this discussion, another halakha that Rabbi Zerika said that Rabbi Ami said that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said is cited: Before the dead, one may speak only of matters relating to the dead, as speaking of other matters appears to be contemptuous of the deceased, underscoring that he is unable to talk while those around him can. Therefore, one must remain fully engaged in matters relating to him.
אָמַר רַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר כָּהֲנָא: לָא אֲמַרַן אֶלָּא בְּדִבְרֵי תוֹרָה, אֲבָל מִילֵּי דְעָלְמָא לֵית לָן בַּהּ.
Two traditions exist with regard to the details of this halakha in the name of Rabbi Abba bar Kahana. According to one version, Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: This halakha was only said with regard to matters of Torah. Speaking of other matters, however, is not prohibited, since no contempt is expressed for the deceased by the fact that he is unable to speak of such topics.
וְאִיכָּא דְאָמְרִי: אָמַר רַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר כָּהֲנָא לָא אֲמַרַן אֶלָּא [אֲפִילּוּ] בְּדִבְרֵי תוֹרָה וְכָל שֶׁכֵּן מִילֵּי דְעָלְמָא.
Others say another version of this halakha in the name of Rabbi Abba bar Kahana: This halakha was said even with regard to matters of Torah, and all the more so with regard to other matters. If one must refrain from speaking of matters of Torah, regarding which one is commanded to speak, and limit himself to matters concerning the deceased, all the more so should he refrain from speaking of other matters, regarding which one is not commanded to speak.
וְדָוִד בְּפַלְגָא דְלֵילְיָא הֲוָה קָאֵי? מֵאוּרְתָּא הֲוָה קָאֵי! דִּכְתִיב: ״קִדַּמְתִּי בַנֶּשֶׁף וָאֲשַׁוֵּעָה״, וּמִמַּאי דְּהַאי ״נֶשֶׁף״ אוּרְתָּא הוּא? — דִּכְתִיב: ״בְּנֶשֶׁף בְּעֶרֶב יוֹם בְּאִישׁוֹן לַיְלָה וַאֲפֵלָה״!
Incidental to the Gemara’s mention of King David, other sources are cited that describe his actions. Regarding that which was cited above, that he would rise in the middle of the night in order to serve his Creator, the Gemara asks: Did David rise at midnight? He rose in the evening. As it is written: “I rose with the neshef and cried, I hoped for Your word” (Psalms 119:147). And how do we know that this neshef is the evening? As it is written: “In the neshef, in the evening of the day, in the blackness of night and the darkness” (Proverbs 7:9). Apparently, King David did indeed rise when it was still evening.
אָמַר רַב אוֹשַׁעְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי אַחָא: הָכִי קָאָמַר (דָּוִד): מֵעוֹלָם לֹא עָבַר עָלַי חֲצוֹת לַיְלָה בְּשֵׁינָה.
The Gemara suggests several ways to resolve this contradiction. Rabbi Oshaya said that Rabbi Aḥa said: David said as follows: Midnight never passed me by in my sleep. Sometimes I fulfilled the verse, “I rose with the neshef and cried,” but I always, at least, fulfilled the verse, “At midnight I rise to give thanks for Your righteous laws.”
רַבִּי זֵירָא אָמַר: עַד חֲצוֹת לַיְלָה הָיָה מִתְנַמְנֵם כְּסוּס, מִכָּאן וְאֵילָךְ הָיָה מִתְגַּבֵּר כַּאֲרִי. רַב אָשֵׁי אָמַר: עַד חֲצוֹת לַיְלָה הָיָה עוֹסֵק בְּדִבְרֵי תוֹרָה, מִכָּאן וְאֵילָךְ בְּשִׁירוֹת וְתִשְׁבָּחוֹת.
Rabbi Zeira said: Until midnight, David would doze like a horse, as a horse dozes, but never sleeps deeply. From midnight on, he would gain the strength of a lion. Rav Ashi said: Until midnight, he would study Torah, as it is written: “I rose with the neshef and cried, I hoped for Your word,” and from midnight on, he would engage in songs and praise, as it is written: “At midnight I rise to give thanks.”
וְ״נֶשֶׁף״ אוּרְתָּא הוּא? הָא ״נֶשֶׁף״ צַפְרָא הוּא! דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיַּכֵּם דָּוִד מֵהַנֶּשֶׁף וְעַד הָעֶרֶב לְמָחֳרָתָם״. מַאי לָאו — מִצַּפְרָא וְעַד לֵילְיָא?
To this point, the discussion has been based on the assumption that neshef means evening. The Gemara asks: Does neshef really mean evening? Doesn’t neshef mean morning? As it is written: “And David slew them from the neshef until the evening of the next day” (I Samuel 30:17). Doesn’t this verse mean from the morning until the night, in which case neshef must mean morning?
לָא, מֵאוּרְתָּא וְעַד אוּרְתָּא.
The Gemara responds: No, this verse means that David slew them from one evening until the next evening.
אִי הָכִי, לִכְתּוֹב ״מֵהַנֶּשֶׁף וְעַד הַנֶּשֶׁף״ אוֹ ״מֵהָעֶרֶב וְעַד הָעֶרֶב״!
The Gemara rejects this response: If so, let the verse be written: From the neshef until the neshef, or from the evening until the evening. Why would the verse employ two different terms for a single concept?
אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: תְּרֵי נִשְׁפֵי הָווּ — נְשַׁף לֵילְיָא וְאָתֵי יְמָמָא, נְשַׁף יְמָמָא וְאָתֵי לֵילְיָא.
Rather, Rava said: There are two times referred to as neshef, and the word can refer to either evening or morning. Neshef must be understood in accordance with its Aramaic root: The night moves past [neshaf ] and the day arrives, and the day moves past [neshaf ] and the night arrives.
וְדָוִד מִי הֲוָה יָדַע פַּלְגָא דְּלֵילְיָא אֵימַת? הַשְׁתָּא מֹשֶׁה רַבֵּינוּ לָא הֲוָה יָדַע, דִּכְתִיב ״כַּחֲצוֹת הַלַּיְלָה אֲנִי יוֹצֵא בְּתוֹךְ מִצְרָיִם״.
When King David said: At midnight I rise, the assumption is that he rose precisely at midnight. The Gemara asks: Did David know exactly when it was midnight? Even Moses our teacher did not know exactly when it was midnight. How do we know this about Moses? As it is written that he said to Pharaoh: “Thus said the Lord: About midnight, I will go out into the midst of Egypt” (Exodus 11:4). The word about indicates that it was only an approximation.
מַאי ״כַּחֲצוֹת״. אִילֵימָא דַּאֲמַר לֵיהּ קוּדְשָׁא בְּרִיךְ הוּא ״כַּחֲצוֹת״ — מִי אִיכָּא סְפֵיקָא קַמֵּי שְׁמַיָּא?! אֶלָּא: דַּאֲמַר לֵיהּ (לִמְחַר) ״בַּחֲצוֹת״ (כִּי הַשְׁתָּא), וַאֲתָא אִיהוּ וַאֲמַר ״כַּחֲצוֹת״, אַלְמָא: מְסַפְּקָא לֵיהּ, וְדָוִד הֲוָה יָדַע?!
The Gemara clarifies: What is the meaning of the expression: About midnight? Did Moses say it or did God say it? If we say that the Holy One, Blessed be He, Himself, said: About midnight, to Moses, is there doubt before God in heaven? Rather, this must be understood as follows: God told Moses: At midnight, but from the fact that when Moses came to Pharaoh he said: About midnight; apparently, Moses was uncertain about the exact moment of midnight. Moses, the greatest of all the prophets, was uncertain, and David knew?
דָּוִד, סִימָנָא הֲוָה לֵיהּ, דְּאָמַר רַב אַחָא בַּר בִּיזְנָא, אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן חֲסִידָא: כִּנּוֹר הָיָה תָּלוּי לְמַעְלָה מִמִּטָּתוֹ שֶׁל דָּוִד, וְכֵיוָן שֶׁהִגִּיעַ חֲצוֹת לַיְלָה, בָּא רוּחַ צְפוֹנִית וְנוֹשֶׁבֶת בּוֹ וּמְנַגֵּן מֵאֵלָיו, מִיָּד הָיָה עוֹמֵד וְעוֹסֵק בַּתּוֹרָה עַד שֶׁעָלָה עַמּוּד הַשַּׁחַר. כֵּיוָן שֶׁעָלָה עַמּוּד הַשַּׁחַר נִכְנְסוּ חַכְמֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶצְלוֹ. אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אֲדוֹנֵינוּ הַמֶּלֶךְ, עַמְּךָ יִשְׂרָאֵל צְרִיכִין פַּרְנָסָה. אָמַר לָהֶם: לְכוּ וְהִתְפַּרְנְסוּ זֶה מִזֶּה. אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אֵין הַקּוֹמֶץ מַשְׂבִּיעַ אֶת הָאֲרִי, וְאֵין הַבּוֹר מִתְמַלֵּא מֵחוּלְיָתוֹ. אָמַר לָהֶם: לְכוּ וּפִשְׁטוּ יְדֵיכֶם בִּגְדוּד.
The Gemara offers several answers to this question:
David had a sign indicating when it was midnight. As Rav Aḥa bar Bizna said that Rabbi Shimon Ḥasida said: A lyre hung over David’s bed, and once midnight arrived, the northern midnight wind would come and cause the lyre to play on its own. David would immediately rise from his bed and study Torah until the first rays of dawn.
Once dawn arrived, the Sages of Israel entered to advise him with regard to the various concerns of the nation and the economy. They said to him: Our master, the king, your nation requires sustenance.
He said: Go and sustain one another, provide each other with whatever is lacking.
The Sages of Israel responded to him with a parable: A single handful of food does not satisfy a lion, and a pit will not be filled merely from the rain that falls directly into its mouth, but other water must be piped in (ge’onim). So too, the nation cannot sustain itself using its own resources.
King David told them: Go and take up arms with the troops in battle in order to expand our borders and provide our people with the opportunity to earn a livelihood.
מִיָּד יוֹעֲצִים בַּאֲחִיתוֹפֶל, וְנִמְלָכִין בְּסַנְהֶדְרִין, וְשׁוֹאֲלִין בְּאוּרִים וְתוּמִּים.
The Sages immediately seek advice from Ahitophel to determine whether or not it was appropriate to go to war at that time and how they should conduct themselves, and they consult the Sanhedrin in order to receive the requisite license to wage a war under those circumstances (Tosefot HaRosh). And they ask the Urim VeTummim whether or not they should go to war, and whether or not they would be successful.
אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: מַאי קְרָא? דִּכְתִיב ״וְאַחֲרֵי אֲחִיתֹפֶל בְּנָיָהוּ בֶּן יְהוֹיָדָע וְאֶבְיָתָר וְשַׂר צָבָא לַמֶּלֶךְ יוֹאָב״.
Rav Yosef said: Upon what verse is this aggada based? As it is written: “And after Ahitophel was Yehoyada son of Benayahu and Evyatar, and the general of the king’s army, Yoav” (I Chronicles 27:34).
אֲחִיתוֹפֶל — זֶה יוֹעֵץ, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״וַעֲצַת אֲחִיתֹפֶל אֲשֶׁר יָעַץ בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם כַּאֲשֶׁר יִשְׁאַל אִישׁ בִּדְבַר הָאֱלֹהִים״.
The individuals named in this verse correspond with the roles in the aggada as follows: Ahitophel is the adviser whose advice they sought first with regard to going to war, and so it says: “Now the counsel of Ahitophel, which he counseled in those days, was as a man who inquires of the word of God; so was the counsel of Ahitophel both with David and with Absalom” (II Samuel 16:23).
4a
״בְּנָיָהוּ בֶּן יְהוֹיָדָע״ זֶה סַנְהֶדְרִין, ״וְאֶבְיָתָר״ אֵלּוּ אוּרִים וְתוּמִּים.
Benayahu ben Yehoyada corresponds to the Sanhedrin, since he was the head of the Sanhedrin, and Evyatar corresponds to the Urim VeTummim, as Evyatar ben Ahimelekh the priest would oversee inquiries directed to the Urim VeTummim (see I Samuel 23:9).
וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״וּבְנָיָהוּ בֶּן יְהוֹיָדָע עַל הַכְּרֵתִי וְעַל הַפְּלֵתִי״. וְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמָם ״כְּרֵתִי״ וּ״פְלֵתִי״? ״כְּרֵתִי״ שֶׁכּוֹרְתִים דִּבְרֵיהֶם, ״פְּלֵתִי״ שֶׁמּוּפְלָאִים בְּדִבְרֵיהֶם. וְאַחַר כָּךְ ״שַׂר צָבָא לַמֶּלֶךְ יוֹאָב״.
And so it says regarding Benayahu ben Yehoyada’s position as head of the Sanhedrin: “And Benayahu ben Yehoyada was over the Kereti and over the Peleti” (II Samuel 20:23). And why was the Sanhedrin called Kereti UPeleti? It was called Kereti because they were decisive [koretim] in their pronouncements. It was called Peleti because their pronouncements and wisdom were wondrous [mufla’im]. The head of the Kereti UPeleti was the head of the Sanhedrin. According to the order of the verse, upon being instructed by King David to go to war, the Sages first consulted with Ahitophel, then with the Sanhedrin, then they would ask the Urim VeTummim, and only thereafter was the general of the king’s army, Yoav, given the command to ready the military for battle.
אָמַר רַב יִצְחָק בַּר אַדָּא, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ אָמַר רַב יִצְחָק בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב אִידִי: מַאי קְרָא ״עוּרָה כְבוֹדִי עוּרָה הַנֵּבֶל וְכִנּוֹר אָעִירָה שָּׁחַר״.
Rav Yitzḥak bar Adda, and some say Rav Yitzḥak, son of Rav Idi, said: From what verse is it derived that David’s lyre would wake him at midnight? “Awake, my glory; awake, harp and lyre; I will wake the dawn” (Psalms 57:9). This means that the playing lyre has already woken, and now I must engage in Torah study until dawn.
רַבִּי זֵירָא אָמַר: מֹשֶׁה לְעוֹלָם הֲוָה יָדַע, וְדָוִד נָמֵי הֲוָה יָדַע.
Rabbi Zeira offered a different solution to the question of whether Moses and David knew exactly when it was midnight and said: Moses certainly knew when it was midnight, and David also knew.
וְכֵיוָן דְּדָוִד הֲוָה יָדַע, כִּנּוֹר לְמָה לֵיהּ? לְאִתְּעוֹרֵי מִשִּׁנְתֵּיהּ.
The Gemara asks: If David knew, then why did he need the lyre? The Gemara answers: He needed the lyre to wake him from his sleep.
וְכֵיוָן דְּמֹשֶׁה הֲוָה יָדַע, לְמָה לֵיהּ לְמֵימַר ״כַּחֲצוֹת״? — מֹשֶׁה קָסָבַר: שֶׁמָּא יִטְעוּ אִצְטַגְנִינֵי פַּרְעֹה, וְיֹאמְרוּ ״מֹשֶׁה בַּדַּאי הוּא״. דְּאָמַר מָר: לַמֵּד לְשׁוֹנְךָ לוֹמַר ״אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ״, שֶׁמָּא תִּתְבַּדֶּה וְתֵאָחֵז.
Similarly with regard to Moses, since Moses knew the precise moment of midnight, why did he say: About midnight, instead of: At midnight? Moses did so because he maintained: Lest Pharaoh’s astrologers err and believe midnight to be earlier. Since no disaster would have occurred, they would say: Moses is a liar. Moses spoke in accordance with the principle articulated by the Master: Accustom your tongue to say: I do not know, lest you become entangled in a web of deceit.
רַב אָשֵׁי אָמַר: בְּפַלְגָא אוּרְתָּא דִתְלֵיסַר נָגְהֵי אַרְבֵּסַר הֲוָה קָאֵי, וְהָכִי קָאָמַר מֹשֶׁה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, אָמַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא: לְמָחָר כַּחֲצוֹת הַלַּיְלָה כִּי הָאִידָּנָא אֲנִי יוֹצֵא בְּתוֹךְ מִצְרָיִם.
Rav Ashi said: This question is unfounded, as Moses was standing at midnight of the thirteenth, leading into the fourteenth, when he pronounced his prophecy, and Moses told Israel that the Holy One, Blessed be He, said that tomorrow, at the exact time like midnight tonight, I will go out into the midst of Egypt. This indicates that the passage should not be understood to mean about midnight, an approximation; but rather, like midnight, as a comparison, likening midnight tomorrow to midnight tonight.
״
The Gemara further explores King David’s character. It is said: “A prayer of David…Keep my soul, for I am pious” (Psalms 86:1–2). Levi and Rabbi Yitzḥak debated the meaning of this verse and how David’s piety is manifest in the fact that he went beyond his fundamental obligations. One said: David’s declaration of piety referred to his awakening during the night to pray, and so said David before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, am I not pious? As all of the kings of the East and the West sleep until the third hour of the day, but although I am a king like them, “At midnight I rise to give thanks” (Psalms 119:62).
And the other Sage said: David said the following before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, am I not pious? For all of the kings of the East and the West sit in groups befitting their honored status, but I sit as a judge who issues rulings for the people. Women come with questions of ritual impurity and my hands become soiled with their blood as I labor to determine whether or not it is blood of impurity and she has menstruating woman status, and with a fetus that miscarried at a stage of development before it was clear whether or not it is considered a birth, and with placenta, which women sometimes discharge unrelated to the birth of a child (see Leviticus 15:19–30 with regard to blood, and 12:1–8 with regard to miscarriage and placenta). King David went to all this trouble in order to render a woman ritually pure and consequently permitted to her husband. If, after examination, a Sage declares the woman ritually pure, she is permitted to be with her husband, which leads to increased love and affection, and ultimately to procreation (Rabbi Yoshiyahu Pinto). And not only do I engage in activity considered to be beneath the station of a king, but I consult my teacher, Mefivoshet, son of King Saul’s son, Jonathan, with regard to everything that I do. I say to him: Mefivoshet, my teacher, did I decide properly? Did I convict properly? Did I acquit properly? Did I rule ritually pure properly? Did I rule ritually impure properly? And I was not embarrassed. Forgoing royal dignity should make me worthy to be called pious.
אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב אִידִי: מַאי קְרָא — ״וַאֲדַבְּרָה בְעֵדֹתֶיךָ נֶגֶד מְלָכִים וְלֹא אֵבוֹשׁ״.
Rav Yehoshua, son of Rav Idi, said: What verse alludes to this? “And I speak Your testimonies before kings and I will not be ashamed” (Psalms 119:46). This verse alludes both to David’s commitment to Torah, in contrast to the kings of the East and the West, as well as to the fact that he was not ashamed to discuss matters of Torah with Mefivoshet, a descendant of kings. David was not afraid to have his mistakes corrected by Mefivoshet.
תָּנָא: לֹא ״מְפִיבֹשֶׁת״ שְׁמוֹ, אֶלָּא ״אִישׁ בּשֶׁת״ שְׁמוֹ, וְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ מְפִיבֹשֶׁת? שֶׁהָיָה מְבַיֵּישׁ פְּנֵי דָּוִד בַּהֲלָכָה, לְפִיכָךְ זָכָה דָּוִד וְיָצָא מִמֶּנּוּ כִּלְאָב.
It was taught in a Tosefta from a tannaitic tradition: His name was not Mefivoshet, but rather Ish Boshet was his name. Why was Ish Boshet referred to as Mefivoshet? Because he would embarrass [mevayesh] David in matters of halakha. According to this approach, Mefivoshet is an abbreviation of boshet panim, embarrassment. Because David was not embarrassed to admit his errors, he merited that Kilav, who, according to tradition, was exceedingly wise, would descend from him.
וְאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: לֹא ״כִּלְאָב״ שְׁמוֹ אֶלָּא ״דָּנִיאֵל״ שְׁמוֹ, וְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ ״כִּלְאָב״ — שֶׁהָיָה מַכְלִים פְּנֵי מְפִיבֹשֶׁת בַּהֲלָכָה.
Rabbi Yoḥanan said: His name was not Kilav; rather, his name was Daniel, as it appears in a different list of David’s descendants. Why was he called Kilav? Because he would embarrass [makhlim] Mefivoshet, the teacher or authority figure [av] in matters of halakha.
וְעָלָיו אָמַר שְׁלֹמֹה בְּחָכְמָתוֹ ״בְּנִי אִם חָכַם לִבֶּךָ יִשְׂמַח לִבִּי גַם אָנִי״, וְאוֹמֵר: ״חֲכַם בְּנִי וְשַׂמַּח לִבִּי וְאָשִׁיבָה חֹרְפִי דָבָר״.
In his book of wisdom, Solomon said about this wise son: “My son, if your heart is wise, my heart will be glad, even mine” (Proverbs 23:15), as David enjoyed witnessing his son Kilav develop into a Torah luminary to the extent that Kilav was able to respond to Mefivoshet. And Solomon says about Kilav: “Be wise, my son, and make my heart glad, that I may respond to those who taunt me” (Proverbs 27:11).
With regard to David’s statement, “Keep my soul, for I am pious,” the Gemara asks: Did David call himself pious? Isn’t it written: “If I had not [luleh] believed to look upon the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living” (Psalms 27:13). The dots that appear over the word luleh in the text indicate doubt and uncertainty of his piety, and whether he was deserving of a place in the land of the living (see Avot DeRabbi Natan 34). In the name of Rabbi Yosei, it was taught in a Tosefta: Why do dots appear over the word luleh, as if there are some reservations? Because David said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe. I have every confidence in You that You grant an excellent reward to the righteous in the World-to-Come since God’s ultimate goodness is manifest in the land of eternal life, but I still harbor uncertainty with regard to myself, and I do not know whether or not I definitely have a portion among them. In any case, apparently David was uncertain whether or not he deserved to receive a portion of God’s reward for the righteous; how, then, could he characterize himself as pious? The Gemara responds: His concern does not prove anything, as King David knew that he was pious. He was simply concerned lest a trans
The Gemara answers: Actually, the Rabbis hold in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Gamliel, and the fact that they say until midnight is in order to distance a person from transgression. As it was taught in a baraita, the Rabbis created a “fence” for their pronouncements with regard to the recitation of Shema in order to prevent a situation where a person comes home from the field in the evening, tired from his day’s work, and knowing that he is permitted to recite Shema until dawn says to himself: I will go home, eat a little, drink a little, sleep a little and then I will recite Shema and recite the evening prayer. In the meantime, he is overcome by sleep and ends up sleeping all night. However, since one is concerned lest he fall asleep and fail to wake up before midnight in order to recite Shema at the appropriate time, he will come from the field in the evening, enter the synagogue, and until it is time to pray, he will immerse himself in Torah. If he is accustomed to reading the Bible, he reads. If he is accustomed to learning mishnayot, a more advanced level of study, he learns. And then he recites Shema and prays as he should. When he arrives home, he eats his meal with a contented heart and recites a blessing.
וְכָל הָעוֹבֵר עַל דִּבְרֵי חֲכָמִים חַיָּיב מִיתָה.
The baraita concludes with a warning: Anyone who transgresses the pronouncements of the Sages is liable to receive the death penalty.
מַאי שְׁנָא בְּכָל דּוּכְתָּא דְּלָא קָתָנֵי ״חַיָּיב מִיתָה״, וּמַאי שְׁנָא הָכָא דְּקָתָנֵי ״חַיָּיב מִיתָה״?
This is a startling conclusion. What is different in all other places that it is not taught that
The Gemara offers two answers, explaining that the conclusion of the baraita essentially stems not from the magnitude of the transgression, but rather from concern that the “fence” created around this particular mitzva may be neglected. If you wish, say that one returning from work is quite anxious to go to sleep, d due to the risk that he will be overcome by sleep, he must be particularly vigilant in the recitation of Shema. And if you wish, say instead that strong language is employed here in order to exclude the opinion of he who says that although the morning prayer and the afternoon prayer are mandatory, the evening prayer is optional. Therefore, it teaches us that the evening prayer is mandatory, and anyone who transgresses the pronouncement of the Sages in this regard is liable to receive the death penalty.
In this baraita, the Master said that when one returns from work in the evening, he enters the synagogue, recites Shema, and prays. From this baraita, we see that at night, just as during the day, one first recites Shema and then prays. This supports the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan, as Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Who is assured of a place in the World-to-Come? It is one who juxtaposes the blessing of redemption, recited after Shema, to the evening prayer. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: The prayers were instituted to be recited between the two recitations of Shema. According to Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, one recites the morning Shema, then recites all of the prayers and only after the recitation of the evening prayer does he recite the evening Shema.
According to Rabbi Yoḥanan, it is a mitzva to recite Shema before the evening prayer. Mar, son of Ravina, raises an objection from a mishna: How can one do that? We learn in a later mishna: In the evening, one recites two blessings prior to the recitation of Shema and two blessings afterward. And if you say that one must juxtapose redemption to prayer, doesn’t he fail to juxtapose redemption to prayer, as he must recite: Help us lie down [hashkivenu], the blessing recited after the blessing of redemption, which constitutes an interruption between redemption and prayer?
They say in response: Since the Sages instituted the practice of reciting: Help us lie down, it is considered one extended blessing of redemption, and therefore does not constitute an interruption. As if you fail to say that the sections added by the Sages are considered no less significant than the original prayers, then can one juxtapose redemption to prayer even in the morning? Didn’t Rabbi Yoḥanan say: Before every prayer one recites the verse: “Lord, open my lips, that my mouth may declare Your glory” (Psalms 51:17) as a prelude to prayer? Afterward, one recites the verse: “May the words of my mouth and the meditations of my heart be acceptable before You” (Psalms 19:15). Doesn’t the verse: Lord, open my lips, constitute an interruption between redemption and prayer?
אֶלָּא הָתָם כֵּיוָן דְּתַקִּינוּ רַבָּנַן לְמֵימַר ״ה׳ שְׂפָתַי תִּפְתָּח״ — כִּתְפִלָּה אֲרִיכְתָּא דָּמְיָא. הָכָא נָמֵי, כֵּיוָן דְּתַקִּינוּ רַבָּנַן לְמֵימַר ״הַשְׁכִּיבֵנוּ״ — כִּגְאוּלָּה אֲרִיכְתָּא דָּמְיָא.
Rather, there, since the Sages instituted that one must recite: Lord, open my lips, it is considered as an extended prayer and not as an interruption. Here, too, with regard to the evening prayer, since the Sages instituted to recite the blessing Help us lie down, it is considered as one extended blessing of redemption.
אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר, אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבִינָא: כָּל הָאוֹמֵר ״תְּהִלָּה לְדָוִד״ בְּכָל יוֹם שָׁלֹשׁ פְּעָמִים — מוּבְטָח לוֹ שֶׁהוּא בֶּן הָעוֹלָם הַבָּא.
Tangential to Rabbi Yoḥanan’s statement that one who juxtaposes redemption and prayer is assured of a place in the World-to-Come, a similar statement is cited. Rabbi Elazar said that Rabbi Avina said: Anyone who recites: “A Psalm of David” (Psalms 145) three times every day is assured of a place in the World-to-Come.
מַאי טַעְמָא?
This statement extolling the significance of this particular chapter of Psalms, usually referred to as ashrei because its recitation is preceded by recitation of the verse, “Happy [ashrei] are those who dwell in Your House, they praise You Selah” (Psalms 84:5), raises the question: What is the reason that such significance is ascribed to this particular chapter?
אִילֵּימָא מִשּׁוּם דְּאָתְיָא בְּאָלֶף בֵּית, נֵימָא ״אַשְׁרֵי תְמִימֵי דָרֶךְ״ דְּאָתְיָא בִּתְמָנְיָא אַפִּין.
If you say that it is because it is arranged alphabetically, then let us say: “Happy are they who are upright in the way” (Psalms 119) where the alphabetical arrangement appears eight times.
אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם דְּאִית בֵּיהּ ״פּוֹתֵחַ אֶת יָדֶךָ״, נֵימָא ״הַלֵּל הַגָּדוֹל״ דִּכְתִיב בֵּיהּ ״נֹתֵן לֶחֶם לְכָל בָּשָׂר״.
Rather, if you suggest that this particular chapter is recited because it contains praise for God’s provision of sustenance to all of creation: “You open Your hand and satisfy every living thing with favor” (Psalms 145:16), then let him recite the great hallel (Psalms 136), in which numerous praises are written, including: “Who provides food to all flesh, Whose kindness endures forever” (Psalms 136:25).
Rather, the reason why tehilla leDavid is accorded preference is because it contains both an alphabetic acrostic as well as mention of God’s provision of sustenance to all creation.
Additionally, with regard to this psalm, Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Why is there no verse beginning with the letter nun in ashrei? Because it contains an allusion to the downfall of the enemies of Israel, a euphemism for Israel itself. As it is written: “The virgin of Israel has fallen and she will rise no more; abandoned in her land, none will raise her up” (Amos 5:2), which begins with the letter nun. Due to this verse, ashrei does not include a verse beginning with the letter nun.
In order to ease the harsh meaning of this verse, in the West, in Eretz Yisrael, they interpreted it with a slight adjustment: “She has fallen but she shall fall no more; rise, virgin of Israel.” Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak adds: Even so, David went and provided support, through divine inspiration. Although King David did not include a verse beginning with the letter nun alluding to Israel’s downfall, he foresaw the verse that would be written by Amos through divine inspiration; and the very next verse, which begins with the letter samekh, reads: “The Lord upholds the fallen and raises up those who are bowed down” (Psalms 145:14). Therefore, through divine inspiration, David offered hope and encouragement; although the virgin of Israel may have fallen, the Lord upholds the fallen.
After this discussion of the statement that Rabbi Elazar said that Rabbi Avina said, another statement of Rabbi Elazar is cited. Rabbi Elazar bar Avina said: What was said about the angel Michael is greater than what was said about the angel Gabriel. As about Michael, it is written: “And one of the seraphim flew to me” (Isaiah 6:6), indicating that with a single flight, the seraph arrived and performed his mission, while regarding Gabriel, it is written: “The man, Gabriel, whom I had seen at the beginning, in a vision, being caused to fly swiftly, approached close to me about the time of the evening offering” (Daniel 9:21). The double language used in the phrase “to fly swiftly [muaf biaf],” indicates that he did not arrive at his destination in a single flight, but rather, that it took him two flights.
To Rabbi Elazar bar Avina, it is clear that “one of the seraphim” refers to Michael, and the Gemara asks: From where is it inferred that the one mentioned in the verse is Michael?
Rabbi Yoḥanan said: This is derived through a verbal analogy between the words one and one. Here, it is written: “And one of the seraphim flew to me” (Isaiah 6:6), and there, it is written: “And behold, Michael, one of the chief ministers of the king, came to my aid” (Daniel 10:13). Since the verse from Daniel refers to Michael as “one,” which aggadic midrash interprets as “the unique one,” so, too, “one of the seraphs” described in Isaiah must also refer to the unique one, Michael.
This discussion in the Gemara concludes with a Tosefta that arrives at a hierarchy of angels based on the number of flights required by each to arrive at his destination. It was taught in a Tosefta: Michael, as stated above, in one flight; Gabriel, in two flights; Elijah the Prophet, in four flights; and the Angel of Death, in eight flights. During a time of plague, however, when the Angel of Death seems ubiquitous, he arrives everywhere in one flight.
Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: Even though one recited Shema in the synagogue, it is a mitzva to recite it upon his bed in fulfillment of the verse: “When you lie down.” Rabbi Yosei said: What verse alludes to the fact that one must recite Shema in the evening, upon his bed, as well? “Tremble, and do not sin; say to your heart upon your bed and be still, Selah” (Psalms 4:5). This is understood to mean: Recite Shema, about which it is written, “on your hearts,” upon your bed, and afterward be still and sleep.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן:
With regard to Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi’s statement, Rabbi Naḥman said:
5a
אִם תַּלְמִיד חָכָם הוּא — אֵין צָרִיךְ. אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: אַף תַּלְמִיד חָכָם מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְמֵימַר חַד פְּסוּקָא דְרַחֲמֵי, כְּגוֹן: ״בְּיָדְךָ אַפְקִיד רוּחִי, פָּדִיתָה אוֹתִי ה׳ אֵל אֱמֶת״.
If one is a Torah scholar, he need not recite Shema on his bed since he is always engaged in the study of Torah and will likely fall asleep engrossed in matters of Torah. Abaye said: Even a Torah scholar must recite at least one verse of prayer, such as: “Into Your hand I trust my spirit; You have redeemed me, Lord, God of truth” (Psalms 31:6).
אָמַר רַבִּי לֵוִי בַּר חָמָא, אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ: לְעוֹלָם יַרְגִּיז אָדָם יֵצֶר טוֹב עַל יֵצֶר הָרַע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״רִגְזוּ וְאַל תֶּחֱטָאוּ״ אִם נִצְּחוֹ — מוּטָב, וְאִם לָאו — יַעֲסוֹק בַּתּוֹרָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אִמְרוּ בִלְבַבְכֶם״. אִם נִצְּחוֹ — מוּטָב, וְאִם לָאו — יִקְרָא קְרִיאַת שְׁמַע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״עַל מִשְׁכַּבְכֶם״. אִם נִצְּחוֹ — מוּטָב, וְאִם לָאו — יִזְכּוֹר לוֹ יוֹם הַמִּיתָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְדֹמּוּ סֶלָה״.
Incidental to the verse, “Tremble, and do not sin,” the Gemara mentions that Rabbi Levi bar Ḥama said that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: One should always incite his good inclination against his evil inclination, i.e., that one must constantly struggle so that his evil inclination does not lead him to transgression, as it is stated: "Tremble, and do not sin."
If one succeeds and subdues his evil inclination, excellent, but if he does not succeed in subduing it, he should study Torah, as alluded to in the verse: “Say to your heart.”
If he subdues his evil inclination, excellent; if not, he should recite Shema, which contains the acceptance of the yoke of God, and the concept of reward and punishment, as it is stated in the verse: “Upon your bed,” which alludes to Shema, where it says: “When you lie down.”
If he subdues his evil inclination, excellent; if not, he should remind himself of the day of death, whose silence is alluded to in the continuation of the verse: “And be still, Selah.”
וְאָמַר רַבִּי לֵוִי בַּר חָמָא, אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ, מַאי דִּכְתִיב ״וְאֶתְּנָה לְךָ אֶת לֻחֹת הָאֶבֶן וְהַתּוֹרָה וְהַמִּצְוָה אֲשֶׁר כָּתַבְתִּי לְהוֹרֹתָם״. ״לֻחֹת״ — אֵלּוּ עֲשֶׂרֶת הַדִּבְּרוֹת, ״תּוֹרָה״ — זֶה מִקְרָא, ״וְהַמִּצְוָה״ — זוֹ מִשְׁנָה, ״אֲשֶׁר כָּתַבְתִּי״ — אֵלּוּ נְבִיאִים וּכְתוּבִים, ״לְהוֹרוֹתָם״ — זֶה תַּלְמוּד, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁכּוּלָּם נִתְּנוּ לְמֹשֶׁה מִסִּינַי.
And Rabbi Levi bar Ḥama said that Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: God said to Moses, “Ascend to me on the mountain and be there, and I will give you the stone tablets and the Torah and the mitzva that I have written that you may teach them” (Exodus 24:12), meaning that God revealed to Moses not only the Written Torah, but all of Torah, as it would be transmitted through the generations.
The “tablets” are the ten commandments that were written on the tablets of the Covenant,
the “Torah” is the five books of Moses.
The “mitzva” is the Mishna, which includes explanations for the mitzvot and how they are to be performed.
“That I have written” refers to the Prophets and Writings, written with divine inspiration.
“That you may teach them” refers to the Talmud, which explains the Mishna.
These explanations are the foundation for the rulings of practical halakha. This verse teaches that all aspects of Torah were given to Moses from Sinai.