(Fol. 44) It was taught: R. Jochanan and R. Joshua b. Levi differ. One says that the basis for [the combination with] the willow is a tradition from the prophets, and one says that it is only a custom of the prophets. From the following we infer that R. Jochanan is the one who said that the basis is a tradition from the prophets, because R. Abahu said in the name of R. Juchanan that the willow is a tradition from the prophets. The inference is sustained.
(Fol. 45b) Hezekiah said, in the name of R. Jeremiah, who quoted R. Simon b. Jochai: "I could exempt the entire world from judgment from the time I was born until now (during my lifetime); and if Eliezer, my son, would be with me, I could do it for all men from the time the world was created till now. And if King Jotham ben Uzziah were with us, we could do it for all men from the time of the creation until the end of the world." Hezekiah said again, in the name of R. Jeremiah, who quoted R. Simon b. Jochai: "I see that the greatest men in the world are very few. If they are a thousand, I and my son are of them; if they are a hundred, I and my son are of them; and if they are only two, they are my son and I." Is this so? Has not the master said that eighteen thousand miles extends the first line of those who come to greet the Holy One, praised be He!, as it is said (Ezek. 45, 35) All around it shall he eighteen rods. This is not difficult to explain; the former refers to such who contemplate [Deity] through a lucid speculum, but the latter refers to such who contemplate [Deity] through a dim speculum. Are really those who contemplate [Deity] such a small number? Has not Abaye said: "There are no less than thirty-six upright men in the world who are greeting the Divine Presence every day, as it is said (Is. 30, 18) Happy are all those that wait for Him; and Him is expressed by the word Lo, whose numerical value is thirty-six. This is not difficult to explain; the latter refers to such that enter only when permitted, but the former refers to such that enter even without permission.
(Fol. 46) R. Zera, and according to others, R. Chanina b. Chalafta, said: "Come, see how the custom of the Holy One, praised be He! differs from the custom of frail man! The custom of frail man is for an empty vessel to be receptive, for one filled not to be receptive [of more]. But the custom of the Holy, One, praised be He! is that a filled vessel is receptive and an empty [vessel] is not receptive, as it is written (Deut. 28, 1) If thou wilt hearken diligently; i.e., if you did not hear it once, you can hear nothing." Another interpretation of this verse is: If you have given your attention to what you have learned before, you can learn new things from it; but if you have turned away your heart from the old teachings, you cannot learn anything new.
(Fol.48) MISHNAH: How was the libation of water performed? A golden pitcher that held three Logs was filled with water from the brook, Siloah. When they came with it to the water-gate of the Temple they sounded a plain note, a tremolo, and again a plain note. The priest then ascended the stair [of the altar], and turned to his left. Two silver basins stood there. R. Juda says: "They were of gypsum, and they become black only from the wine." Each was perforated [at the bottom] (Ib. b) with a small hole, like a nostril, the one [for wine] somewhat wider, the other [for water] narrower in order that both might promptly become empty. The western one [basin] was used for water; the eastern one, for wine. But if the water was poured into the wine basin, or the wine into the water basin, it was considered legal. R. Juda says: "They poured out one Log on each of the eight days. And they said to him who offered the libation [of the water]: 'Raise thy hand;' for once it happened that a priest poured out the libation on his feet, and all the people pelted him with their Ethrogin."
(Fol. 49) GEMARA: R. Jochanan said: "The Shittin have existed since the six days of creation, as it is said (Songs 7, 2) The roundings of thy thighs are like the links of a chain, the work of the hands of a skilled workman. [This implies that] the roundings of thy thighs, refers to the Shittin; like the links of a chain which, perforating, reaches until the depth; the work of the hands of the artificer; i.e., which are the skilled workmanship of the Holy One, praised be He!" In the college of R. Ishmael it was taught (Gen. 1, 1) Breshith (In the beginning). Do not read Breshith, but Bra-Sith. (He created the Sith)." We are taught that R. Jose says: "The Shittin extend way down to the bottom, and upon them did David begin to dig [the pits of the Temple] sixteen thousand cubits in depth, as it is said (Is. 5, 1) I will sing now for my beloved, etc. And He fenced it in, and cleared it of stones, and planted it with the choicest vines, and built a tower in its midst, and also a wine press he hewed out therein; i.e., He planted it with the choicest of vines, refers to the Temple; and built a tower in its midst, refers to the altar; and also a wine-press He hewed out therein, refers to the Shittin."
(Fol. 49b) Raba expounded: "What is the meaning of the passage (Songs 6, 2) How beautiful are thy steps in sandals. It means, How beautiful were the steps of Israel, when they made a pilgrimage to celebrate the festival. The prince's daughter, daughter of Abraham, our father, who was called a prince; as it is said (Ps. 47, 10) The princes of the people are gathered together, the people of the God of Abraham. [Why is] the God of Abraham [mentioned], and "not the God of Isaac or Jacob? The God of Abraham [is mentioned, because Abraham] was the first proselyte." R. Aman lectured: (Songs 7, 2) The rounding of thy thighs are like the links of a chain. "Why are the words of the Law likened unto thighs? Just as the thighs are in a hidden place, so the words of the Law must also be hidden." This was also interpreted by R. Elazar who said: "What is the meaning of the passage (Micah 6, 8) He hath told thee, O man, what is good, and what the Lord doth require of thee: nothing but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with thy God; i.e. To do justice, refers to judgment; to love kindness, refers to loving kindness; and to walk humbly with thy God, refers to dowering the bride and escorting the dead to the grave." Is this conclusion not proved a fortiori? If things usually done publicly are to be done decorously, so much the more should things usually done privately.
R. Elazar said: "Great is charity, even more so than sacrifices; as it is said (Prov. 21, 3) To exercise righteousness and justice is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifice." R. Elazar said again: "Loving kindness is worth more than alms giving; as it is said (Hos. 10, 12) Sow then for yourselves righteousness, that you may reap the fruit of kindness. If a man sows, it is doubtful whether or not he will eat from his sowing; but if a man reaps, he is sure to eat of it." R. Elazar said again: "Charity is rewarded only according to the kindness with which it is done; as it is said Sow for yourselves righteousness, that you may reap kindness."
Our Rabbis were taught: "In three respects is loving kindness greater than charity: Charity is done at the mere sacrifice of money, while loving kindness is performed both with one's money and with one's person; charity is only for the poor, while loving kindness is for both the living and the dead." R. Elazar said: "One who does charity and justice is as if he filled the whole world with kindness; as it is said (Ps. 33, 50) He loveth righteousness and justice; the earth is full of the kindness of the Lord. You might then say that every one who desires [to do charity] is given the opportunity [to do real charity]; it is therefore said (Ib. 36, 8) How precious is Thy kindness O Lord! One may think that even a man who fears God is [given the opportunity]. It is therefore said (Ib. 103, 17) But the kindness of the Lord is from everlasting to everlasting over those that fear Him. Again said R. Elazar: "What is the meaning of the passage (Prov. 31, 26) She openeth her mouth with wisdom, and the law of kindness is on her tongue? Are there then two sets of laws, one of kindness, and one of unkindness? But this means that, if one studies law for its own sake, it becomes a law of kindness; but if one studies the law for his own interest, it becomes a law of unkindness." According to others: "If he studies the law to teach others, it becomes a law of kindness; but if he studies it for himself, it becomes a law of unkindness."
(Fol. 50) We have been taught in a Baraitha: "Even if the water was strained, the law concerning uncovered water still applies to it." R. Nechemiah, however, said: "This applies only when the lower vessel was uncovered; but when the lower vessel was covered, though the upper one was uncovered, the law of uncovered water does not apply to it, because the snake's venom rises, like a sponge, which floats in its place."