MISHNAH: On the Day of Atonement eating, drinking, washing, anointing, wearing shoes [Leather shoes.] , and sexual relations, are forbidden. The king and the bride [The newlywed, who should appear beautiful in her husband’s eyes, just as the king always should look handsome in public.] wash their heads, and the woman recovering after childbirth wears shoes, the words of Rebbi Eliezer, but the Sages forbid it.
HALAKHAH: “On the Day of Atonement eating, drinking, etc., are forbidden.” They are punishable by extirpation and you are saying so [In Mishnaic terminology, “forbidden” either means forbidden rabbinically or biblically with no specified punishment. The term for severe biblical prohibitions, subject to extirpation or execution is “liable” (for a purification sacrifice in the case of inadvertent transgression.)] ? Rebbi Hila said, it was needed for less than the minimal quantities [If someone eats or drinks less than the quantities specified in Mishnah 2, the transgression is not liable for a purification sacrifice. Babli 73b.] .
[Babli 74b, Sifra Aḥare Pereq 7(1–4).] “You shall deprive yourselves [.Lev. 15:29.] . I could think that one should sit in the sun or in the cold to make himself feel badly, the verse says, do not do any work. The work which I forbade you elsewhere [All Sabbath prohibitions apply to the Day of Atonement.] . And the deprivation of what I forbade you elsewhere. Since the work which I forbade you elsewhere is work for which one would be liable to extirpation, so also deprivation which I forbade you elsewhere is deprivation from which one would be liable to extirpation, and the following are those: piggul and leftovers [For piggul, cf. Chapter 5 Note 154. Eating sacrificial meat after the allotted time is sinful, Lev. 19:7.] . From where to add ṭevel [Produce from which heave and tithes have not been taken] ? The verse says, you shall deprive yourselves; it added. [I am adding ṭevel which is a deadly sin, but would not add carcass meat which is not a deadly sin; the verse says, you shall deprive yourselves; it added.] [Corrector’s addition, necessary by the context.] I am adding carcass meat which is prohibited, but would not add profane meat which is not prohibited; the verse says, you shall deprive yourselves; it added. I am adding profane meat which is not under a commandment to be eaten, but would not add heave and Second Tithe which is under a commandment to be eaten [Heave must be eaten by Cohanim in purity, and Second Tithe by the farmer’s family in Jerusalem in purity. It is sinful to let pure heave and tithes go to waste. One could have thought that food for which there is a biblical commandment that it be eaten would be exempt from the prohibition.] ; the verse says, you shall deprive yourselves; it added. I am adding heave and tithe of which leftovers are not prohibited, but would not add sacrificial meat for which leftovers are prohibited, the verse says, you shall deprive yourselves; it added. Another explanation: You shall deprive yourselves, something which is a deprivation (father house) {which diminishes} [The incomprehensible אב בית has been emended to עֲבֵידת (Qorban ha-Edah).] the spirit/ What is this? Eating and drinking. In the name of Rebbi Ismael they said, it is said here you shall deprive yourselves, and it says there, He deprived you and made you hungry [Deut. 8:3.] . Since deprivation there is one of hunger, also deprivation here is one of hunger.”
And why six kinds? Corresponding to the six quotes of “deprivation” in the Chapter. But there are only five? Rebbi Tanḥuma said, one is with musaf [Deprivation is mentioned in Lev.16:29, 31 and 23:27, 29, 32. In addition it is mentioned in the paragraph on musaf sacrifices for the Day of Atonement, Num.29:7.] .
[A parallel is in Taaniot 1:6 (64c line 37), ו. The Taaniot text is reproduced by Tosaphoti Taanit 13a, s. v. אמר.] “Washing”. Rebbi Zeˋurah bar Ḥama, [Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina.] in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: On a public fast day [A fast day called to pray for rain in a year of drought.] one washes as usual his face, hands, and feet. On the Ninth of Av [The fast instituted to mourn the destruction of the Temple.] one washes his hands and moves them over his face. On the day of Atonement one washes his hands, dries them with a towel, and moves the towel over his face. Rebbi Jonah moistened a rag and put it under the water pitcher [He soaked the rag before the start of the Day of Atonement, squeezed it and let it dry somewhat during the night so that the next morning it should be somewhat moist but not dripping.] . But did we not state that there is no difference between a public fast and the Ninth of Av except the prohibition of work at places where they were used to it [There were places where the community had adopted the rule that one did not work on the Ninth of Av. Nowhere was this extended to fast days in years of drought.] ? If somebody was going [On a day where washing was rabbinically forbidden. Babli 77b; Tosephta 4:5,] to his teacher or to his daughter and crossed a lake or a river he does not worry [No rabbinic prohibition was violated..] . If his feet were dirtied he immerses them in water and does not worry. Rebbi Abba instructed following this Tanna. Rebbi Aḥa instructed that one who comes from the road and his feet are dulled, he may wash them in water. It was stated: A mourner and one in the ban [Any weekday of the year, the mourner and the person in the ban are forbidden to wear leather shoes. The person in the ban has to follow these rules if he ever wants to have the ban lifted. Babli Moˋed qaṭan 15b.] on a trip are permitted leather shoes. When they come to the town they shall take them off. The same applies to a public fast and the Ninth of Av [For everybody.] .
[This text is shortened from Maˋaser Šeni2:1 (Notes 28–35), Šabbat 9, Notes 122–127 and Taˋanit 1:6.] “Anointing.” As it was stated: On the Sabbath both anointing for pleasure and anointing not for pleasure are permitted. On the Day of Atonement, both anointing for pleasure and anointing not for pleasure are forbidden. On the Ninth of Av and public fasts, anointing for pleasure is forbidden but anointing not for pleasure is permitted. But it was stated: Anointing is equal to drinking regarding prohibition and reparation but not punishment [Referring to illegal use of heave and dedicated food by non-Cohanim and its replacement by 5/4 of the value taken.] . On the Day of Atonement regarding prohibition but not punishment [The only biblical prohibitions on the Day of Atonement are eating, drinking, and working. The other two, anointing and sexual relations, are rabbinic and not subject to biblical punishment.] But was it not stated, they shall not desecrate [Lev. 22:15. The verse refers to the non-Cohen who “eats” holy food in error. Babli Niddah 32a.] , to include him who anoints or drinks? Rebbi Joḥanan said, there is no “anoints” there. Rebbi Abba Mari said, if there is no “anoints” there is no “drinks”. For if it were not so, do matters combine which come from two different prohibitions [If the verse in Lev. is needed to subsume drinking under eating, it is incomprehensible that for inadvertently eating and drinking together on the Day of Atonement one should be responsible only for one sacrifice since in that case, one infringes on two separate biblical prohibitions and should be liable for two separate sacrifices. Similarly, if one illegitimately ate and drank heave he should be liable for two separate fifths. Since in both cases the Mishnah treats eating and drinking together, the verse cannot express a separate status for drinking; the addition of anointing and drinking is rabbinic interpretation but not biblical law and there is no reason to exclude anointing.] ?
One repeats up to “this holy body that he forgot” [The body of the following is copied by the corrector who prepared the text for the Venice printer from Taaniot 1:6; parts of it are also quoted in other tractates.] .
[From where that there is a clear commandment [While illegitimate use of heave oil for anointing is prohibited, it is mentioned in the framework of the farmer’s declaration in the Temple, which is a positive commandment. Overstepping the prohibition of anointing when it is forbidden legally is overstepping a positive commandment not under the scope of biblical penal law. This paragraph is copied from the parallels (Note 24); there is no connection to the rules of the Day of Atonement.] ? Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Simai: I did not give from it to the dead [Deut. 26:14.] . Where do we hold? If not to bring a casket or shrouds for him, this is forbidden for the living, therefore certainly for the dead. What is permitted for the living but prohibited for the dead? [Cf. Sifry Deut. 302.] I am saying that this is anointing [Second Tithe must be consumed; no other use is authorized..] .
“Wearing shoes”. It was stated: In all cases where they said that one may not wear shoes, when he departs on a trip he puts them on, when he arrives at a walled city he takes them off; this includes the mourner and the person in the ban [Babli Moˋed qaṭan 15b. The Yerushalmi version is quoted by Or zarua§277.] . There are Tannaim who state, one goes in slippers [Latin impilia, -ium (pl/) “felt slippers”.] on the day of Atonement; and there are Tannaim who state, one does not. Rav Ḥisda said, he who said one goes, in textile slippers, and he who said one does not go, in leather slippers [Yebamot 12:1, Note 35, Babli Yebamot 102b.] . Rebbi Isaac bar Nahman visited Rebbi Joshua ben Levi in the night of the Great Fast [The day of Atonement.] ; he came to him wearing laced shoes [A leather sole with a textile upper part held together by laces.] . He asked him, what is this? He answered, I am asthenic [Greek ἀσθενής. Since the rules of not wearing leather shoes are rabbinic, they are waved for health reasons.] . Rebbi Samuel bar Nahman visited Rebbi Joshua ben Levi in the night of a fast day [A rabbinic fast day.] ; he came to him wearing laced shoes. He asked him, what is this? He answered, I am asthenic. They saw Rebbi Simai walking in the night of a fast day in laced shoes. A student of Rebbi Mana permitted to a relative of the Patriarch to wear laced shoes [Without a medical condition which would justify waving the rules.] . He asked him, from where this? He answered, from this of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi. He said to him, in the case of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi it was an asthenic.
“And sexual relations.” Come and see, he is forbidden to wash, not so much more to have sexual relations [Since the Day of Atonement is a day of prayer and by an institution of Ezra prayer was forbidden after sexual relations before immersion in a miqweh, the prohibition of washing should imply the prohibition of sexual relations without the need to spell it out.] ? Explain it that it was a place where one does not immerse oneself, or before Ezra instituted immersion for people having had an emission. [This text to the end of the paragraph is also from Berakhot 3:4 (Notes 167–168) which is the original source.] Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Yasa in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: Qeri is only from sexual intercourse. Rav Ḥuna said, even if he saw himself enjoying in his dream. They wanted to say, only from a woman. Rebbi Jonah and Rebbi Yose both say, even from something else. But did we not state: On the Day of Atonement eating, drinking, washing, anointing, wearing shoes, and sexual relations, are forbidden?. And it was stated in that respect: Men with qeri immerse themselves secretly in their normal way on the day of Atonement [In Tosephta Kippurim 4:5 and Babli 88a the reading is: “Men with qeri (emission of semen) immerse themselves normally on Yom Kippur”; one speaks of a full immersion and “in secret” is not mentioned. The Tosephta is Babylonian formulation.] . Does this not contradict Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, since Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, qeri is only from sexual intercourse? Explain it if he had intercourse on the previous day and forgot and did not immerse himself. But it was stated: It happened that one saw Rebbi Yose bar Halaphta immersing himself secretly on Yom Kippur. Can you say about that holy body that he forgot [Hence, the interpretation of Rav Ḥuna is incorrect and that of rabbis Yose (the Amora) and Jonah is correct.] ?]
“The king,” because your eyes shall see the king in his beauty [Is. 33:17. Babli 78b, bottom.] .
“The bride,” because of bad feelings [That the husband should not feel bad about her. Babli 78b, bottom.] .
“And the woman recovering after childbirth wears shoes, the words of Rebbi Eliezer.” We were thinking to say that this refers to the last statement; it was found stated referring to all of them [The entire sentence is R. Eliezer’s.] .
MISHNAH: He who eats the volume of a big date with its pit or who drinks the volume of a full gulp [Greek λυγμός, ὁ.] on the day of Atonement is liable [Since these are biblical prohibitions, if the infraction was intentional it is a deadly sin punishable by extirpation, if in error it requires a purification sacrifice.] . All foods combine for the volume of a date, and all drinks combine for the mouthful. What he ate and drank does not combine.
HALAKHAH: Rebbi Yose said, this implies that (he) [one] [The scribe wrote שו, which has to be read as שֶׁהוּא “that he”. The corrector, who did not understand the Yerushalmi spelling, replaced it by prefix ש.] has to squeeze its empty space [If the pit is loose in the date, the space between pit and flesh of the fruit is not counted in determining the volume which triggers liability.] since otherwise one should have stated, “it, its pit, and its empty space.” Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar stated, a date from Nimrin [In the printed version and one ms. of Tosephta 4:2 he disagrees with the anonymous Tanna there who restricts the dates considered to those growing West of the Jordan, and therefore increases the possible maximum volume of a date (Mishnah Kelim17:7), but in the Yerushalmi version and 2 Tosephta mss. he restricts the dates allowed as standards to just those of Nimrin and therefore reduces the permitted size. Nimrin is Bet Nimrah(Jos. 13:27) in the plain East of the Jordan.] .
It was stated, “a full gulp.” Does this disagree [In the Mishnah, the expression for solid food is “like (in the volume of) a date”, implying that pieces of food eaten at different times are added together to determine liability. The expression for fluids is “a gulp”, not “like (the volume of) a gulp”, but the statement of the Mishnah that different fluids combine show that “like (the volume of) a gulp” is understood. Is this also the position of the Tanna of the baraita or does he deny that different sips can add to a large gulp?] ? A full gulp, what is possible as one gulp [The baraita also agrees with the Mishnah.] . It was stated in the name of the House of Shammai, a full gulp is equivalent to a quartarius [A quarter of a log, about 133 cm.] . Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Ada asked before Rebbi Mana, why was this not stated as one of the leniencies of the House of Shammai and restrictions of the House of Hillel [A quartarius is the standard size of a cup whose contents normally are consumed in two gulps. Therefore the standard of the House of Shammai seems to be twice that of the House of Hillel.] ? He told him, because of the gulp of Ben Avatiah [He is mentioned in Mishnah Kelim17:12 as largest Cohen on record. In contrast to the House of Shammai who determine the volume for the Day of Atonement as a standard measure, the House of Hillel insist that they vary from person to person (Mishnah Kelim 17:11).] which contained more than a quartarius.
MISHNAH: If one ate and drank in one forgetting he is liable only for one purification sacrifice [Since not eating and drinking are subsumed under fasting, only one biblical commandment was broken.] . If he ate and drank, and worked, he is liable for two purification sacrifices [Since fasting is commanded in Lev,23:27 but work is forbidden in 23:28, two distinct commandments were broken and two sacrifices are due.] . If he ate foods which are not edible or drank drinks which are not drinkable, drank fish sauce [Fluid squeezed out of raw fish.] or muries [A Latin word denoting fish sauce treated with salt, water, and sometimes wine, used to dip one’s bread in but never used as a drink.] , he is not liable. One does not let children fast but one educates them one year of two in advance [One lets girls aged 10 and boys aged 11 fast part of the day and at ages 11, respectively 12, a whole day, as education, not as biblical requirement.] so they should be used to commandments.
HALAKHAH: Why? [This is a partial copy, in places completed by the corrector for the Venice edition and indicated by brackets, of a text in Maˋaser Šeni 2:1 (Notes 7–35), also partially reproduced in Ševuot 3:2 (Notes 26–36). It is clear that the original is in Maˋuser Šeni since the last paragraph has no connection with the rules of the Day of Atonement.] Drinking is subsumed under eating but eating is not subsumed under drinking. From where that drinking is subsumed under eating? Rebbi Jonah understood if from the following: Therefore, I told the Children of Israel, none of you shall eat blood [Lev. 17:12.] . Where do we hold? If about congealed blood, was it not stated that congealed blood is neither food nor drink? But we hold, as it is. And the Torah called it eating. And was it not stated: If one liquefied fat and drank it, or congealed blood and ate it, [if there is the volume of an olive] he is liable. What does Rebbi Jonah do with this? It is not food to become impure in the impurity of food, or fluid to become impure in the impurity of fluids. Rebbi Jonah changed and understood if from the following:: You shall spend the money for anything you desire [Deut. 14:26.] . Where do we hold? If about one who gives the taste of wine into a cooked dish, is that not spoiling the taste of the wine? [But we hold as it is and the Torah called it “eating.”] The rabbis of Caesarea said, explain if about orzaraya and gomnany [Maˋaser Šeni 2:1, Note 16. The first word may denote cedar resin (J. Levy) or a derivative of אוֹרֶז “rice”. The readings for the second word, גמרייה, גמזוזיניה, גומננייא show that the scribe did not know what to do with it; it may be a derivative of “gum” (gummi, κόμμι) (E. G.) used in the preparation of liquors.] , since anything that is ancillary to food is like food.
Rebbi Yose understood all this from the following: “An oath that I shall not eat; when he ate and drank he is liable only once. [Mishnah Ševuot 3:1.] ” The colleagues said before Rebbi Yose, but it is said following this, “an oath that I shall not eat nor drink, when he ate and drank he is liable for two”! Rebbi Yose told them, if somebody had two loaves in front of him said, an oath that I shall not eat this loaf [Here a piece of text is missing, found in the other two sources: “and then he said, an oath that I shall not eat that one.”] , when he ate [both of them] together would he not be guilty on two counts?
Rebbi Ḥanania in the name of Rebbi Phineas understood it from the following: “An oath that I shall not eat; when he ate inedible food and drank undrinkable fluids, he is not liable. [Mishnah Ševuot 3: 5.] ” Because he ate inedible food and drank undrinkable fluids. Therefore if [he ate edible food,] [Corrector’s addition, added in error.] drank drinkable fluids he is liable. Did he not say, an oath that I shall not eat? That is understandable following our Mishnah, where we are saying, “an oath that I shall not eat.” But for Rebbi [Obviously since Rebbi is the editor of the Mishnah, he cannot contradict his own text. With the text in Ševuot one has to read: “those rabbis who say, an oath that I shall not eat and I shall not drink.” These rabbis are quoted in the Babli, Ševuot 23a.] who said, an oath that I shall not eat and shall not drink?
Rebbi Ḥinena understood it from the following [Mishnah 3.] : [“If he ate and drank in one forgetting he is liable only once.”
Rebbi Abba Mari understood it from the following:] I did not eat from it in my mourning, [Deut. 26:14.] but I drank?
It is understandable for him who said, “{I swear} an oath that I shall not eat”, and he drank. Drinking is subsumed under eating. But for him who said, “an oath that I shall not drink”, and he ate? Is eating subsumed under drinking? Eating is not subsumed under drinking [The preceding arguments show that drinking is subsumed under eating. Nobody holds that a mention of drink includes solid food. Babli Ševuot 23a.] .
Some want to understand it from this: You may not eat in your gates [Deut. 12:17.] etc. Your cider’, that is the wine. And your shining oil’ refers to anointing and the Torah called it ‘eating’. But this is not clear. If you could say that it is clear one should be whipped because of it outside the walls [If the verse were a formal identification of anointing and eating as far as Second Tithe is concerned, the use of impure heave oil for anointing should be a criminal offense.] ! Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, one is whipped outside the walls only for pure Second Tithe which entered Jerusalem and left. From where that it is not clear? From what was stated: “On the Sabbath, both anointing for pleasure”, one reads this in Halakhah One [Notes 24 ff.] .
From where that it is clear as a positive commandment [While illegitimate use of Second Tithe oil for anointing is prohibited, it is mentioned in the context of the farmer’s declaration in the Temple, which is a positive commandment. Therefore overstepping the prohibition is violating a positive commandment not under the scope of criminal law.] ? Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Simai: Nor did I give from it to the dead [Deut. 26:14.] . Where do we hold? If it were to bring a casket and shrouds for him, that were also forbidden for a living person [Since only consuming Second Tithe is permitted.] ! If something is forbidden for the living, not so much more for the dead? What is something which is permitted for the living but prohibited for the dead? That is anointing!
[Sifra Emor Pereq 14(3). Babli 81 a.] “Warning about work on the day: Any work you shall not do [Lev. 16:29.] . Punishment, and I shall destroy this person [.Lev. 23:30.] . Warning about deprivation on the day, for any person who will not be deprived [Lev. 23:29.] ; punishment, and this person will be extirpated [Lev. 23:29.] .” There is no warning about work in the night, there is no punishment. There is no warning nor punishment written for deprivation in the night [In both verses quoted from Lev. 23 it is stressed בְּעֶ֖צֶם הַיּ֣וֹם הַזֶּ֑ה which in general in interpreted “in full daylight” (Mekhilta dR. Ismael Bo 9.) Since the night is forbidden as is the day (Lev. 23:32), there is an obvious contradiction to be resolved.] .
Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked, what could He have said instead of will not be deprived? “Shall not eat”? All eating in the Torah is by the volume of an olive, but here by the volume of a date [Since it was established earlier that of the six kinds of deprivation required on the Day of Atonement only not fasting is biblically punishable, the question arises why instead of the generic expression “be deprived” the verse does not directly prescribe “do not eat.” The answer is that in the latter case already eating the volume of an olive would be punishable.] . Rav Hoshaia said, “watch yourself, lest, not be deprived,” would be three warnings [This now addresses the problem from where could one infer that all prohibitions of the Day of Atonement also apply to the preceding night. He suggests that since there are several expressions biblically used to indicate prohibitions, there could have been different expressions used for the warnings which would have been interpreted as applying to different times.] . Rebbi Ḥuna said, watch yourself regarding the saying which I said to you, watch yourself in matters of skin disease to be very careful and act [Deut. 24:8. This is a side remark noting that הִשָּׁמֵר is used only in reference to rules spelled out on other occasions. In this particular case it is noted that the rules of the impurity of skin disease (Lev. 13–14) do not include prohibitions; the prohibition implied by Deut. 24:8 is interpreted (cf. Pseudo-Jonathan ad loc.) to mean that it is forbidden to eliminate the impurity of skin disease by surgically eliminating the diseased tissue.] , etc. Rebbi Ḥiyya stated: Punishment could [not] [Necessary addition by the corrector.] have been said about work since it is unnecessary. I could have inferred it from deprivation. [Since for deprivation] [Corrector’s addition which seems to be unnecessary.] which is minor one is liable to extirpation, for work which is major [“Major” means that prohibitions of work are frequent, applying to the Sabbath as capital crimes and to holidays as misdemeanors; deprivation is “minor” since it applies only to the day of Atonement.] it should be logical that one should be liable for extirpation. Therefore punishment was spelled out for work only to imply a warning preceding it [The argument of Rav Hoshaia is essentially correct but has to be realized differently. Since the warning spelled out for work on the Day of Atonement is shown to be unnecessary, it has to be applied as if it were written twice; supplying the desired additional warning to be read as referring to the preceding night.] . Since the punishment indicated for work is preceded by a warning, also the punishment indicated for deprivation is preceded by a warning. Rebbi Zeˋira said, this implies that one may infer about an “equal cut” even if it is free only on one side [He reads the argument of R. Ḥiyya not as a conclusion de minore ad majus but as “equal cut” meaning that the expression בְּעֶ֖צֶם הַיּ֣וֹם הַזֶּ֑ה appearing in Lev. 23:29,30 implies that the rules indicated in both verses are the same. In general one requires that an expression used for “equal cut” not be used for any other inference; but here the entire v. 29 is needed both for warning and punishment (Note 84). There remains the problem that since now it is shown that בְּעֶ֖צֶם הַיּ֣וֹם הַזֶּ֑ה does not mean “during daylight only”, the expression is not used for any other deduction and therefore the “equal cut” is between two identical expressions not otherwise needed and therefore valid according to everybody, even R. Ismael. One has to say that since the day is defined in Lev. 23:32 as from evening to evening, בְּעֶ֖צֶם הַיּ֣וֹם הַזֶּ֑ה means that while one has to start fasting and refraining from work somewhat earlier and finish sometime after nightfall the next day, the biblical penalties do not apply to these additional periods and therefore one mention of “on this very day” is needed for this legal implication. Noted as opinion in dispute, Babli Šabbat 64a, Niddah 22b.] . Rebbi Yudan said, Is that not Rebbi Aqiba’s? And Rebbi Aqiba said, one infers about an “equal cut” even if it is not free [The Babli would reject the entire argument of R. Zeˋira since it permits the use of “equal cut” only based on an oral tradition. It still would recognize R. Ḥiyya’s argument but it categorically rejects extending the scope of punishments by hermeneutical arguments.] .
It was stated: Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob says, it is said on this very day about work and it is said on this very day about deprivation. Since in regard of on this very day said about work you did not differentiate between day and night [As argued by R. Ḥiyya.] , between punishment and warning [Which are written in one and the same verse.] , so in regard of on this very day said about deprivation we shall not differentiate between day and night, between punishment and warning. So far following Rebbi Aqiba.
Following Rebbi Ismael? It shall be for you an eternal law, in the Seventh Month [Lev. 16:29.] He joined work and deprivation. Since the work which I forbade to you is work for which one is liable to extirpation, also deprivation which I forbade to you is deprivation for which one is liable to extirpation [As required by Rav Hoshaia.] .
[The main source of this paragraph are Terumot 6:1, Notes 16–19, Šabbat 14, Notes 83–89.. Babli Yoma 80b/81a.] Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, he who eats of kilaim in a vineyard [Any non-vine produce in a vineyard is prohibited for usufruct.] is whipped [If there are witnesses to the act, since he broke a biblical commandment. This corresponds to the term “is liable” used for Sabbath violations.] . Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, he who chews wheat grain [A pure Cohen who is entitled to eat heave may not spit out the grain after chewing.] of heave is whipped. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, he who sips vinegar of heave is whipped; he who sips vinegar of heave pays the principal but he does not pay the fifth [The fifth computed from the top which is a quarter from the bottom, due for use of heave by people not entitled to its use.] ; he who chews wheat grain of heave pays the principal but he does not pay the fifth. Rebbi says, I am saying that he pays principal and fifth. Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Immi: The rabbis agree with Rebbi about one who sips heave vinegar from his dipping that he pays principal and fifth since vinegar refreshes [Even though vinegar in itself is neither food nor drink, when it was absorbed by bread it becomes food and stays food. For heave it remains subject to the fine, on the Day of Atonement it remains forbidden drink, but on the Šabbath it may be used for a toothache.] .
“One does not let children fast on the Day of Atonement.” Rav Ḥuna explained the Mishnah: One does not let children fast on the Day of Atonement, and does not train them [One tells them to fast part of the day.] , but one or two years before one trains them [One does not let minor children fast the entire day.] . Rebbi Joḥanan explained the Mishnah: One does not let children fast on the Day of Atonement, but one does train them [Younger than 10 for girls and 11 for boys.] , and one or two years before they complete the fast. Until when? Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Ḥinena, Rebbi Jacob bar Idi in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Halaphta: At age nine or age ten [According to the Babli 82a age nine refers to healthy children and age ten to sickly ones. Since the Yerushalmi gives no indication of this one might read this as 9 for girls, 10 for boys, in each case 3 years before they become obligated to fast as adults] .
MISHNAH: A pregnant woman who smelled [food] [She gets an urgent desire for the food and if she continues to fast there would be a danger of a miscarriage.] one feeds until she is well again. A sick person one feeds according to experts [Medical personnel.] ; if there are no experts one feeds him on his own judgment until he says, enough [Even though fasting is a biblical commandment and breaking the fast is a deadly sin, biblical obligations never should endanger one’s life (Lev. 18:5)] .
HALAKHAH: At first one dips it in sauce [One dips kosher bread in the non-kosher sauce which may be forbidden only rabbinically.] . If she feels well again it is good. Otherwise one gives her of the body of forbidden food [If the woman smells cooking on the day of Atonement, probably it is Gentile non-kosher food. But see the paragraph after the next.] . Two pregnant women came before Rebbi Tarphon. He sent two students to them and told them, go and tell them, it is the Great Fast-day. They said it to the first one and she quieted down. They said about him [Since it is the baby who carves the food, not his mother who simply is the provider. For similar stories Babli 82b/83a.] , from my mother’swomb You are my God [Ps. 22:11.] . They said it to the second, who did not quiet down. They said about him, The wicked are perverts from the womb; they err from the belly, the speakers of lies [Ps.58:4] !
[Babli 83a.] The sick person says, I can [He can fast the entire day.] , but the physician says, he cannot; one listens to the physician. The physician says, he can, but the sick person says, he cannot; one listens to the sick person [He can fast the entire day.] . The only question is if the sick person says, I can, and the physician says, I do not know. Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: It is treated as an uncertainty of a danger to life, and any uncertainty of a danger to life pushes the Sabbath aside [Since the principle is established for the Sabbath, the violation of which is a capital crime, it certainly holds for the day of Atonement, whose violation is a deadly sin.] .
MISHNAH: A person suffering from boulimy [Greek βουλιμία. ἡ. “ravenous hunger”. It is presumed that the attack is life threatening.] one feeds even impure food until his eyes light up. One does not feed the cover of a rabid dog’s liver to a person bitten by a rabid dog [Since this is not a recognized medical procedure.] , but Rebbi Matthew ben Ḥarash permits it [For him it is proven medical practice] . In addition, Rebbi Matthew ben Ḥarash said, if somebody suffers from throat ache, one pours him medicine into it since it is an uncertainty of a danger to life, since any uncertainty of a danger to life pushes the Šabbath aside. If a wall collapsed over somebody [On the Sabbath or the day of Atonement.] , it is uncertain whether he is there or not, whether he is alive or dead, whether he is a Gentile or a Jew, one digs him out [Even though this involves a Sabbath desecration.] . If one finds him alive, one digs him out, if dead one shall leave him [Until after the end of Sabbath or holiday] .
HALAKHAH: [This paragraph should belong to the next Halakhah, discussion of Mishnah 5.] From where that one may feed him fig cake and raisins of heave? From this: They gave him a slice of fig cake and two raisins [1Sam. 30:12. Since the verse reports that the Egyptian recovered from having been without food for 72 hours, this sugary food is proven antidote to boulimy and may be given even from prohibited food.] . Rebbi Ḥuna said, the twenty-four esronot which David ate, he ate in hunger [He implies that Ahimelekh gave to David all shew breads of the Tabernacle (1Sam. 21:7) and he ate all of them. There are 12 breads, each of them 2 esronot(Lev.24:5). 24 esronot are 2.4 epha, or 7.2 seah, a volume of about 92 liter of flour. (Cf. S. Abramson, Sinai 63(1968), pp. 193–197.)] . This happened to Rebbi Joḥanan [An attack of boulimy.] and he ate everything which happened to be before him. They quoted about him, wisdom revives its possessor [Eccl. 7:12.] . It was stated: “One feeds him the least forbidden [If no kosher food is available at the moment. Babli 83a, Tosephta 4:4.] . Carcass meat or heave, one feeds him heave. Ṭevel and sabbatical produce [While illegitimate use of heave oil for anointing is prohibited, it is mentioned in the framework of the farmer’s declaration in the Temple, which is a positive commandment. Overstepping the prohibition of anointing when it is forbidden legally is overstepping a positive commandment not under the scope of biblical penal law.] , one feeds him Šabbatical produce.” Ḥallah and ˋorlah is problematic [Ḥallah as heave is a sanctum, forbidden to non-Cohanim. Its improper ingestion is a deadly sin. Usufruct of ˋorlah is forbidden to everybody as a simple prohibition.] . Rebbi Yose said, I questioned before Rebbi Ba: Heave is a deadly sin, carcass meat a prohibition [Eating non-kosher meat is a simple prohibition punishable by 39 lashes.] , and you are saying so? Following him who said, they accepted the tithes voluntarily [In this opinion, tithes, heave, and Sabbatical produce are biblical obligations only if all 12 tribes are on their ancestral lands; today all these obligations were voluntarily accepted by the returnees from Babylon and have only rabbinic status.; Ševiˋit 6:1, Notes 11–13. But non-kosher food is biblically forbidden.] ..
The characteristics [Greek σημεῖον, τό.] of a rabid dog: His mouth is (closed) [open] [The text is brackets is the corrector’s, corresponding to the text in the Babli, 83b.] , his spittle drips, his ears are badly smelling, he tail is between his hips, he walks at an angle [His body makes a non-zero angle with the direction of his movement.] , the dogs bark at him, and some are saying, also he barks but his voice is not (carried) [heard] [The text is brackets is the corrector’s, corresponding to the text in the Babli, 83b.] .
What is the cause of a dog being rabid? Rav and Samuel. One is saying, a spirit of madness came over him. But the other one said, a woman uses him to try out witchcraft. German, the slave of Rebbi Yudan the Patriarch, was bitten by a rabid dog and he fed him the cover of its liver, but he never recovered. A person could never tell you that he was bitten by a rabid dog and survived, that he was stung by a brightly colored snake [A sign of a poisonous reptile.] and survived, that he was kicked by a mule and survived, but only by a white mule [Babli Ḥulin7b; Yerushalmi Berakhot8:6, Notes 124–125.]
From where that any uncertainty of a danger to life pushes the Sabbath aside? Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Only you shall keep My Sabbaths; [Ex. 31:12.] a diminution. Some want to say, the Torah said, [Since אַךְ everywhere is taken as sign of a diminution, but there is no indication of what is excluded from the observation of the Sabbath, the rabbinic authorities are empowered to determine the exclusion by an argument. Babli 85b, Mekhilta dR. Ismael, Ki Tlssa.] desecrate the Sabbath for him, so he will dwell and keep many Sabbaths.
Rebbi Zeˋira, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If a wall collapsed in a dead-end street populated by Gentiles, but where one Jew lived, one digs there because of the Jew [Also quoted in Ketubot 1:10, Note 269.] . How far [Since in the Mishnah it is stated that a live person has to be dug out completely, the question is how much of a person has to be uncovered in order to determine his death.] ? Two Amoraim. One said, up to his nose; the other said, up to his navel. He who said, up to his nose, about one who was healthy; he who said up to his navel, about one who was intoxicated [Reading רוי for רבי.] .
It was stated: (The one who decided is praiseworthy, one who is asked has to be ready,) [The text in parentheses is the scribe’s. It was not understood by the corrector who partially substituted the Babli text. The original text states that the rabbi who decided in advance to instruct his congregation to act immediately in cases of danger to life is praiseworthy, the one who is asked anyhow has to have his instructions ready without hesitation, and the one who wastes time to ask is a murderer.] [the one who is quick is praiseworthy, the one who is asked is blameworthy,] [Corrector’s text. The first statement is from the Babli, 84b (Tosephta Šabbat15:11). The second clause is difficult to understand; what can a person do if he is asked? He is blameworthy if he does not cut the interrogator short and sends him to help others.] and the one who asks is a spiller of blood.
[This text also is in Nedarim 4:9 Notes 104–113. Šabbat 16, Notes 123–132; partially Tosephta Šabbat 15:15, Babli, Yoma 84b.] It was stated: In any case of danger to life one does not say that the work be done by Gentiles or minors, but even by adult Jewish persons. “It happened that there was a fire in the courtyard of Yose ben Simai in Shihin, and the garrison of the barracks [Latin castra, -orum, n. “military camp, barracks, fortress.”] of Sepphoris came to fight it but he did not let them fight it; he said, let the collector collect his due [Since the fire was on a Sabbath, he took it as divine punishment.] . Immediately there formed a cloud which extinguished it. After the Sabbath he sent to each of them a tetradrachma and to their commander [Greek ἔπαρχος, ὁ, equivalent of Latin praefectus (castrorum). Tosephta Šabbat13:9 (ed. Liebermann).] 50 denarii.” The Sages [For him it is proven medical practice] said, there was no need for him to do that. A Nabatean was a neighbor of Rebbi Jonah. There was a fire in Rebbi Jonah’s neighborhood; the Nabatean wanted to fight it but Rebbi Jonah did not let him. He said to him, because of my property! He said, yes [On the Sabbath or the day of Atonement.] . And everything was saved. Rebbi Jonah from Kefar-Immi spread his garment over the burning grain stack and the fire retreated from it.
MISHNAH: A purification sacrifice and a definitive reparation sacrifice [Any reparation sacrifice (אָשָׁם) except the one for the suspicion of a sin which, if proven, would require a purification sacrifice; Lev. 5:17–19.] atone [Since it is presumed that an impurity which requires a reparation sacrifice is divine punishment for some infraction, atonement applies also to these sacrifices.] . Death or the Day of Atonement atone if accompanied by repentance. Repentance atones for minor infractions, positive commandments, and prohibitions [Biblical prohibitions for which no punishment is indicated in the text.] . But for severe ones [Sins punishable by extirpation or the death penalty.] it suspends until the next Day of Atonement arrives and atones.
HALAKHAH: There we stated: [Mishnah Ševuot 1:9.] Intentional [impurity] [Word missing in the quote.] of the Sanctuary and its sancta is atoned by the he-goat whose blood is brought inside [On the Day of Atonement.] and the Day of Atonement. The remainder of the transgressions mentioned in the Torah, minor or severe ones, intentional and unintentional, [known and unknown, positive commandments and prohibitions, extirpations and capital crimes, the scapegoat atones.] [Corrector’s completion from the Mishnah.]
[The text of the Halakhah is from Ševuot 1:9, Notes 183–210. The present paragraph also in the Babli Ševuot 12b.] Are not minor sins positive commandments and prohibitions; are not serious ones extirpations and capital crimes? Rebbi [With the Ševuot text, read “Rav”.] Jehudah said, so is the Mishnah: “Minor or serious ones. Those minor ones, whether he committed them intentionally or did not commit them intentionally [This must refer either to infractions for which the penalty is not spelled out (Note 158) or to cases where guilt cannot be ascertained. The standard example is that of a person who ate one of two pieces of meat, one of which was kosher, the other one severely forbidden either as forbidden fat or as sacrificial meat· which became impure (Rashi). If it is not possible to ascertain which of the two he ate. then a suspended reparation sacrifice is due; but the obligation to bring a suspended reparation sacrifice is cancelled by the Day of Atonement, as determined in the next paragraph (and Ševuot Halakhah 1:2, Note 69, Horaiot 1:1 Note 18).] . Those severe ones, whether he obtained knowledge of them or did not obtain knowledge of them [This refers to the situation described in the previous Note. If he intended to eat one of the two, knowing that one was severely forbidden, he either committed no sin or he committed a serious crime for which no personal sacrifice can atone.] . The following are minor sins: positive commandments and prohibitions [Biblical prohibitions for which no punishment is indicated in the text.] . Severe ones, extirpations and capital crimes. Just as the he-goat whose blood is brought inside atones for intentional infractions and suspends for the unintentional ones in cases where a sacrifice is required, also the scapegoat atones in the same way [Which carries away “all their iniquities”, Lev. 16:22). This last statement is missing in the Babli Ševuot; it is discussed in Keritut 25b.] .”
It is understandable if it did not come to his knowledge [Then no private sacrifice is due and the public sacrifice must atone for the damage done to the sanctuary.] . If it did come to his knowledge [Did we not imply that the public offering does not relieve the individual of his obligation to bring a sacrifice?] ? Was it not stated: [Parts of Mishnah Keritut 6:4. Purification sacrifices must be brought even after the Day of Atonement but obligations of suspended reparation sacrifices are eliminated.] “From where that those liable for purification sacrifices and certain reparation sacrifices for whom the Day of Atonement had passed, remain liable, but those liable for suspended reparation offerings are no longer liable?” Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, whether it was known to him on it, or not known to him on it [The text from Ševuot is copied here very incompletely, only partially completed by the corrector’s addition [in brackets]. By the omission the text has become unintelligible; cf. Ševuot 1:9, Notes 194–196.] . [Why did he not say, if it was not known to him]. His words imply that even if it was not known to him on the Day of Atonement, the Day of Atonement atones.
There [Mishnah Keritut 1:2.] , we have stated: “For these [The transgressions punishable by extirpation enumerated in Mishnah Keritut1:1.] one is liable for extirpation in case of intentional transgression, or a purification sacrifice for unintentional transgression, and for what was not certainly known in their cases a suspended sacrifice.” But did not the day of Atonement already atone [Does the Day of Atonement not eliminate the possibility of a suspended reparation offering for the possibility of a sin committed before this day?] ? Rebbi Simeon in the name of Rebbi Levi from Sokho: The Mishnah refers to one who rebels on the Day of Atonement.
A positive commandment, even if he did not repent. A prohibition? Rebbi Samuel in the name of Rebbi Zeˋira, only if he repented [While the Mishnah in Rav Jehudah’s interpretation treats positive commandments and simple prohibitions in parallel, there is a difference between the two kinds of sins. The non-performance of a positive commandment is atoned for even without repentance while the atoning for breaching simple prohibitions requires repentance.] . If one said, “the elevation offering does not atone, [The biblical text does not indicate for which kind of sin an elevation offering does atone but Lev. 1:4 indicates that it atones. The next paragraph will investigate for which sins it is atoning.] ” does the elevation offering not atone? It atones even against his will. But if he said, “it is impossible that the elevation offering atone for me,” it does not atone against his will [In the prior formulation, it was simply a false statement. But if somebody said, I am opting out, the atoning power of sacrifices shall not be valid for me, what he offers would be profane. If there is no offering, there cannot be atonement.] . If one said, “the Day of Atonement does not atone,” It atones. “I cannot accept [The scribe wrote איפשי, “it is impossible for me”, which Galilean form the corrector did not recognize (and which the scribe himself in the preceding sentence exchanged for the Babylonian form), and added אי, for Babylonian אִי אֶפְשִׁי, meaning the same.] that it atone for me,” it atones against his will [Since he brings the offering on his own initiative, if it is not brought for atoning it does not atone. But the Day of Atonement is given by God; it is not up to man to say what it can or cannot do. Babli, Keritut 7a.] . Rebbi Ḥanina ben Rebbi Hillel said, it is not up to a person to tell the King, “you are no king.”
MISHNAH: If somebody say, “I shall sin and repent, I shall sin and repent, [Repeatedly] ” one [Heaven] does not let him achieve to repent. “I shall sin and the day of Atonement will atone,” the Day of Atonement does not atone. Transgressions between a person and the Omnipresent the Day of Atonement atones; but those between him and his neighbor the Day of Atonement does not atone unless he placated his neighbor. The following did Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah explain: Of all your unintentional sins before the Eternal you shall be cleansed [Lev. 16:30. The sentence is not parsed as from all your iniquities, before the Eternal you will be cleansed, but as from all your iniquities before the Eternal, you will be cleansed. Sifra Aḥare Pereq 8:1.] . Transgressions between a person and the Omnipresent the Day of Atonement atones; but those between him and his neighbor the Day of Atonement does not atone unless he placated his neighbor. Rebbi Aqiba said, blessed are you, Israel. Before whom do you cleanse yourselves, and who cleanses you? Your Father Who is in Heaven, as it is said [Ez 36:25.] , I shall sprinkle on you pure water, so you shall be pure. And it is said [Jer. 17:13.] Israel’s hope is the Eternal, since a miqweh purifies the impure people [Identifying מקוה “hope” or “ritual bath; pond”.] , so the Holy One, praise to Him, cleanses Israel.
HALAKHAH: [In Lev. rabba 7(3) the paragraph is reproduced and the doctrine is attributed to R. Simeon ben Iohai.] The elevation offering atones for thoughts. What is the reason? What rises in your spirits will not be [Ez. 20:32.] . Rebbi Levi said, What rises in your spirits will not be [This quote is incorrect and makes no sense. The original is in Ševuot 1:9 Note 205.] . And so Job says, he got up early in the morning and brought elevation offerings in the number of all of them, etc. [Job 1:5. Job offered elevation offerings since he was afraid that his children might have had impious thoughts.] [This implies that the elevation offering atones for thoughts. [Corrector’s addition from Ševuot.] ]
[This must refer either to infractions for which the penalty is not spelled out (Note 158) or to cases where guilt cannot be ascertained. The standard example is that of a person who ate one of two pieces of meat, one of which was kosher, the other one severely forbidden either as forbidden fat or as sacrificial meat which became impure (Rashi). If it is not possible to ascertain which of the two he ate, then a suspended reparation sacrifice is due; but the obligation to bring a suspended reparation sacrifice is cancelled by the Day of Atonement, as determined in the next paragraph (and Ševuot Halakhah 1:2, Note 69, Horaiot 1:1 Note 18).] Rebbi says, the Day of Atonement atones for all sins against the Torah except for him who tears away the yoke, or who breaks the Covenant, or who finds aspects in the Torah [This was explained in Peah 1:1 Notes 199–213; cf. also Sanhedrin 10:1, Note 8. One who tears away the yoke is he who recognizes the authority of the Torah but decides to break its laws; one who breaks the covenant is he who tries to reconstruct a prepuce and does not circumcise his sons; one who finds aspects in the Torah is he who denies the divine origin of the Torah.] , where it atones if he repented but does not atone otherwise. Rebbi Zevida said that Rebbi Yasa asked: Does Rebbi think that the Day of Atonement atones without repentance? Rebbi Ashian, Rebbi Jonah, Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Rebbi agrees that the Day of Atonement only atones with repentance; therefore death cleanses without repentance [This is a non-sequitur, but it fits well with the text in Ševuot which has to be considered as the original. The Babli supports the statement there about the Day of Atonement; it has no statement of Rebbi about the power of Death.] . We have stated thus: The day of death equals the day of repentance. Who stated this? Rebbi! Then what we stated, “death and the Day of Atonement atone with repentance,” does not follow Rebbi [Since the Mishnah requires repentance also on the Day of Atonement. Rebbi formulated an anonymous Mishnah, i. e., authoritative doctrine, following the majority against his own opinion.] .
[From here to the end of the Halakhah, the text is not only in Ševuot but also inSanhedrin 10:1, Notes 23–37, 14–22 (and in the Babli Yoma 86b). For part of the text there exists a Geniza fragment (G) edited by L. Ginzberg in his Yerushalmi Fragments (1909) p. 267.] Rebbi Matthew ben Ḥarash asked Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah in the Academy [He asks for an answer on the record.] . He said to him, did you hear the four types of Atonement which Rebbi Ismael explained? He answered him, there are three in addition to repentance. One verse says, return, naughty children [Jer. 3:22.] . But another verse says, for on that day He shall atone for you [Lev. 16:20.] . And another verse says, I shall visit their crime with the rod [Ps. 89:33] , etc. And another verse says, the iniquity of this people shall not be atoned for until you die [Is. 22:14.] . How is this? If somebody violates a positive commandment and repents, before he moves from there it will be forgiven to him. About this one it says, return, naughty children. If one transgresses a prohibition and immediately repents, repentance suspends judgment, and the Day of Atonement atones. About this one it says, for on that day, He shall atone for you. If one intentionally transgressed {sins punishable by} extirpations or death penalties, repentance and the Day of Atonement atone half, and sufferings during the other days of the year atone half. About this one it says, I shall visit their crime with the rod, and their iniquities with plagues. But by whom the Name of Heaven was desecrated, there is no power in repentance to suspend judgment, nor in the Day of Atonement to pardon, nor in sufferings to scour; but repentance and the Day of Atonement atone one third, sufferings atone a third, and death scours with sufferings. About this one it says, the iniquity of this people shall not be atoned for until you die. From this we learn that death scours.
Rebbi Joḥanan said, these are the words of Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah, Rebbi Ismael, and Rebbi Aqiba. But the Sages say that the scapegoat atones. How does it atone? Rebbi Zeˋira said, in small pieces. Rebbi Ḥanania said, at the end. What is the difference between them? If somebody died in-between. In the opinion of Rebbi Zeˋira, he already was pardoned. In the opinion of Rebbi Ḥanina, he was not pardoned. Rebbi Zeˋira said, a baraita supports Rebbi Ḥanina: “There is strength in the ram which is not in the Day of Atonement, and in the Day of Atonement which is not in the ram: The Day of Atonement pardons without a ram, but the ram does not atone without the Day of Atonement. There is strength in the ram since the ram atones immediately but the Day of Atonement only atones at nightfall. [Tosephta 4:16.] ” Rebbi Ḥuna said, the question was raised before Rebbi Jeremiah and he said, explain it if they intended to bring another he-goat but they did not bring it. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun asked, does the Holy One, praise to Him, not see into the future? Then He should pardon immediately
[Cf. Babli 87a] Samuel said, a person who sinned against his neighbor has to tell him, I offended you. If he accepts it, it is good. Otherwise he brings people and appeases him in their presence. That is what is written [Job33:27] , being straight with men, he shall form a row of men, and say, I sinned, and straightforward I acted criminally, and I was careless. If he acts in this manner, the verse says about him [Job33:28] , He delivered his soul from perdition, and his life enjoys light. If he died, one has to appease him on his grave and say, I offended you.
[Babli 86b; Tosephta 4:15.] It was stated: “Sins which he confessed the past Day of Atonement he does not have to confess the next day of Atonement; if he would do this, the verse says about him, like a dog returning to his vomit, so is the silly repeating his foolishness [Prov. 26:11.] . It was stated, Rebbi Eliezer [In Babli and Tosephta: R. Eliezer ben Jacob.] says, he would be clever and be rewarded. What is Rebbi Eliezer’s reason? But my sin is always before me [Ps. 51:5.] .” How does Rebbi Eliezer interpret the rabbis’ reason, like a dog returning to his vomit, so is the silly repeating his foolishness? If he repeats the same sin. How do the rabbis interpret Rebbi Eliezer’s reason, but my sin is always before me? It should not be in his eyes as if he never did it, but that he did it and he was forgiven.
[Tosephta 4:14, Babli 87b.] “It is an obligation to confess on the eve of the Day of Atonement when it gets dark, before he immerses himself in eating and drinking [The text is elliptic; it is understandable only in the Babylonian sources. Since confession is one of the obligations of the day of Atonement, one has to confess immediately after nightfall in the evening prayers (as presupposed in the following sentence.) But as a precaution there is a rabbinic obligation to confess in the preceding afternoon, during afternoon prayers, before taking the big meal before the fast, in case one would be incapacitated during the fast-day because of overeating.] . Even though he confessed in the evening, he has to confess in the morning; though he confessed in the morning, he has to confess at musaf [The additional holiday prayers, parallel to the additional sacrifices required on such days. It is spelled out in the Babylonian sources that all confessions are appended to the prayers of the day.] ; though he confessed at musaf, he has to confess in the afternoon; though he confessed in the afternoon, he has to confess at neˋilah [The additional prayers on fast days (Mishnah Taˋaniot 4:1), shortly before the end of the fast.] , for the entire day is qualified for confession.” How does he confess? [Lev. rabba 3(3), ascribed to another author.] Rebbi Berekhiah in the name of Rebbi Abba bar Binah: My Master, I sinned and did evil, and I was involved in bad thoughts, and acting in aberrant ways. But as I acted I shall not act. May it please You, Eternal, my God, [that You will atone for all my crimes] [Corrector’s addition from Lev. rabba.] , forgive me for all my sins, and pardon (and forgive) [Text of the scribe, deleted by the corrector. Since with this word and with the prior addition by the corrector one also has three requests for forgiveness, the original text of the scribe looks genuine.] all my transgressions.
It was stated [Tosephta 4:14, Babli 86b, Yerushalmi Nedarim 5:4, Note 60.] : It is necessary to detail one’s actions, the words of Rebbi Jehudah ben Bathyra. Rebbi Aqiba says, one does not have to detail his actions. What is Rebbi Jehudah’s reason? Please, this people committed a grave sin, they made themselves golden idols [Ex. 32:31.] . How does Rebbi Aqiba treat this? Who caused it to them? I, for I gave them much silver and gold. Why? For a donkey is not braying [The corrector’s spelling נהק is biblical (Job 6:5, 30:7), but the scribe’s spelling נקק may be the Aramaic form of Accadic nagāgum.. While in Job the verb describes the shout of the hungry, here it is used for the noise of the overbearing; cf. Sifry Deut.308] out of a basket of carob fruit [In the Babli, Berakhot 32a, the argument is that a lion will shout eating a box of meat.] .
It is written, Israel’s miqweh is the Eternal. Just as a miqweh [Identifying מקוה “hope” or “ritual bath; pond”.] purifies the impure, so the Holy One, praise to Him, purifies Israel. And so He says, I shall sprinkle on you pure water and you will be pure; from all your impurities and your abominations I shall purify you [Ez. 36:25] .