Pesachim - Chapter Ten

MISHNA: the eve of Passover, adjacent to minḥa, a person does not eat until dark, Even the poorest of Jews do not eat until reclining, and do not give to him less than four cups of wine - And even from the charity plate.

one should not eat -- So that you will be hungry when eating matzah, which is a better way of performing the mitzvah.

Even a poor person should not eat -- on Pesach evening until he reclines like a free person, to remember going free, by reclining on a couch [with] table.

GEMARA: The Gemara expresses surprise at the mishna’s statement that one may not eat on Passover eve from the time that is adjacent to minḥa. Why discuss this halakha particularly with regard to the eves of Passover? Even on the eves of Shabbat and other Festivals it is also prohibited to eat in the late afternoon, as it was taught in a baraita: A person should not eat on the eves of Shabbat and Festivals from minḥa time onward, so that he will enter Shabbat when he has a desire to eat and he will enjoy the Shabbat meal; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda.

Rabbi Yosei says: One may continue eating until dark.

Rav Huna said: The mishna was necessary only according to the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, who said that one may continue eating until dark. According to his opinion, the mishna is necessary to emphasize that this applies only on the eves of Shabbat and Festivals. But on the eve of Passover, due to the obligation to eat matza, Rabbi Yosei concedes that one must refrain from eating in the afternoon, so that he will eat matza with a good appetite.

Rav Pappa said: Even if you say that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, there is still a difference between the eves of Shabbat and other Festivals, as compared with the eve of Passover. There, on the eves of Shabbat and other Festivals, it is only from minḥa time onward that it is prohibited to eat, but adjacent to minḥa time it is permitted. However, on the eve of Passover, even adjacent to minḥa time, it is also prohibited to eat. For this reason, the mishna is referring specifically to the eve of Passover.

(Now the Gemara takes issue with Rav Pappa's reading that accepts R. Yehuda's position but challenges Rav Pappa's suggestion that something is different about Erev Pesach vs. Erev Shabbat)

The Gemara asks: And on the eve of Shabbat adjacent to minḥa time, is it permitted to eat? But wasn’t the following taught in a baraita (different baraita from the previous one)? A person may not eat on the eve of Shabbat and Festivals from nine hours (a half-hour before mincha ketanah) onward, so that he will enter Shabbat when he is filled with the desire to eat; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Yosei says: One may continue eating until dark. According to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, even on Shabbat eve one may not eat from before the time of the lesser minḥa, which is at nine and a half hours of the day.

The baraita is corrupted - And so the baraita should have taught, 'from 9.5 hours onwards'

Mareimar said to him, and some say it was Rav Yeimar: I happened to come to the Festival lecture of Rav Pineḥas, son of Rav Ami, and the tanna who recited mishnayot stood up and taught this baraita before him, and he accepted it. This incident proves that the above version of the baraita is accepted and considered accurate.

If so, the aforementioned objection to Rav Pappa’s opinion on the basis of the baraita remains difficult. Rather, Rav Pappa’s answer is insufficient, and it is clear that the mishna must be understood in accordance with the explanation of Rav Huna. In other words, the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, who maintains that although one may eat until dark on the eves of Shabbat and other Festivals, it is prohibited to eat on Passover eve from shortly before the lesser minḥa until nightfall.

The Gemara asks: And according to the explanation of Rav Huna, does it work out well?

But didn’t Rabbi Yirmeya say that Rabbi Yoḥanan said, and some say that Rabbi Abbahu said that Rabbi Yosei bar Rabbi Ḥanina said:

The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda with regard to the eve of Passover, and the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei with regard to the eve of Shabbat?

The Gemara infers from the above statement: From the fact that it was necessary to say that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda with regard to the eve of Passover, this proves by inference that Rabbi Yosei disagrees with regard to both cases, both the eves of Shabbat and other Festivals, as well as Passover eve. Consequently, it is impossible to ascribe to the opinion of Rabbi Yosei the mishna’s prohibition against eating on the eve of Passover, as he evidently permits one to eat until dark even on Passover eve.

The Gemara continues to discuss the halakhot of kiddush: With regard to those people who recited kiddush in the synagogue, as was customarily done at the conclusion of the prayer service on Shabbat night, Rav said: They have not fulfilled their obligation to recite a blessing over wine. That is, the blessing over the wine in the synagogue does not enable them to drink wine at home without an additional blessing. However, they have fulfilled their obligation of reciting kiddush.

But Shmuel said: Even the obligation of kiddush they have not fulfilled, and they must recite kiddush again at home.

The Gemara asks: But according to the opinion of Rav, why should one have to recite kiddush a second time at home if he has already fulfilled his obligation in the synagogue? The Gemara answers: He must repeat kiddush to fulfill the obligations of his children and the members of his household, who did not come to the synagogue.

With regard to this halakha, the Gemara notes: And Rav Huna also maintains that there is no kiddush except in the place of one’s Shabbat meal. The proof of this is that Rav Huna once recited kiddush and his lamp was extinguished. And as it was difficult to eat in the dark, he brought his belongings to the wedding home of his son Rabba, where there was a lamp, and he recited kiddush there and tasted some food. Apparently, Rav Huna maintains that there is no kiddush except in the place of one’s Shabbat meal. The Gemara further comments: And Rabba also maintains that there is no kiddush except in the place of one’s Shabbat meal, as Abaye said: When I was in the house of my Master, Rabba, when he would recite kiddush he would say to us: Taste some food here, lest by the time you get to your place of lodging your lamp be extinguished, and you will not be able to recite kiddush in the place where you will eat. And with the kiddush you heard here you do not fulfill the mitzva, as there is no kiddush except in the place of one’s Shabbat meal.

The Gemara expresses surprise at this statement: Is that so? But didn’t Abaye say: With regard to all the customs of my Master, Rabba, he would act in accordance with the opinion of Rav (who ruled that Kiddush in synagogue COUNTS), except for these three instances, in which he acted in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel (who said Kiddush in synagogue DOESN'T COUNT): Rabba maintained that one may untie ritual fringes [tzitzit] from one garment and tie them to another garment, contrary to Rav’s opinion that this constitutes a disgrace of the mitzva. He also maintained that on Hanukkah one may light from one lamp to another lamp, despite Rav’s opinion that this is prohibited as a mundane usage of the lamp of the mitzva. In addition, Rabba maintained that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon in the case of dragging. As it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon says: A person may drag a bed, chair, or stool on Shabbat if it is difficult for him to lift them, provided that he does not intend to dig a furrow in the ground. In the event that he does create a furrow, he has not violated a prohibition, as an unintentional act does not constitute a prohibited act of labor on Shabbat. In light of Abaye’s statement that with the exception of those three rulings Rabba always acted in accordance with Rav, why didn’t Rabba follow the opinion of Rav with regard to kiddush, as Rav maintains that one fulfills the mitzva of kiddush even if he does not eat his Shabbat meal in the same location? The Gemara answers: He would act in accordance with Rav’s stringencies, but he would not act in accordance with Rav’s leniencies. In the three cases listed above, Rabba was lenient despite Rav’s stringent ruling. However, with regard to kiddush, Rabba did not follow Rav’s lenient opinion.

We learned in the mishna that even the poorest of Jews should not eat until he reclines. It was stated that amora’im discussed the requirement to recline. Everyone agrees that matza requires reclining, i.e., one must recline when eating matza, and bitter herbs do not require reclining.

With regard to wine, it was stated in the name of Rav Naḥman that wine requires reclining, and it was also stated in the name of Rav Naḥman that wine does not require reclining.

The Gemara explains: And these two statements do not disagree with each other: This statement is referring to the first two cups, and that statement is referring to the last two cups. However, it was not clear which two cups require reclining according to Rav Naḥman.

Some say the explanation in this manner and some say it in that manner. The Gemara elaborates: Some say it in this manner, that the first two cups require reclining, as it is now that freedom begins. Since reclining is a sign of freedom, while discussing the exodus from Egypt it is appropriate to drink while reclining. By contrast, the last two cups do not require reclining, because what was already was. In other words, by this point one has completed the discussion of the Exodus and has reached the latter stages of the seder. And some say it in that manner and claim that on the contrary, the last two cups require reclining, as it is at that time that there is freedom. However, the first two cups do not require reclining, as one still says: We were slaves.

The Gemara concludes: Now that it was stated so, and it was stated so, i.e., there are two conflicting opinions and it cannot be proven which two cups require reclining, both these sets of cups and those require reclining.

The Gemara continues to discuss the halakha of reclining. Lying on one’s back is not called reclining. Reclining to the right is not called reclining, as free men do not recline in this manner. People prefer to recline on their left and use their right hand to eat, whereas they find it more difficult to eat the other way. And not only that, but if one reclines to the right, perhaps the windpipe will precede the esophagus. The food will enter the windpipe, and one will come into danger of choking.

A woman who is with her husband is not required to recline, but if she is an important woman, she is required to recline. A son who is with his father is required to recline. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: What is the halakha with regard to a student who is with his teacher? Perhaps he is not obligated to recline, as he is in awe of his rabbi, and reclining is a sign of complete freedom and independence.

Come and hear a proof that Abaye said: When we were in the house of my Master, Rabba, there was not enough room for everyone to recline on Passover, so we reclined on each other’s knees, to fulfill the obligation to recline. When we came to the house of Rav Yosef, he said to us: You need not recline, as the fear of your teacher is like the fear of Heaven. A student is subject to the authority of his teacher and may not display freedom in his presence.

The Gemara raises an objection: A person must recline in the presence of anyone, and even a student who is with his teacher must do so. This baraita directly contradicts the statement of Rav Yosef. The Gemara answers: When that baraita was taught, it was with regard to a craftsman’s apprentice, not a student of Torah in the company of his rabbi. One who is in the presence of a person teaching him a trade is not in awe of his instructor, and he is therefore obligated to recline.

They were in that miracle -- It says in Sotah: The Exodus came as a reward for righteous women of that generation...and similarly with the Megillah and the Chanukah story.

...However, a woman certainly may light, as Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: Women are obligated in lighting the Hanukkah light, as they too were included in that miracle of being saved from the decree of persecution.

It is important to know that philosophers...do not believe in images...meaning talismans, rather they denounce them...some people think these are effective...but I say I know most people are tricked greatly by these and similar things, and they believe these bring truthful results, but this is not correct...but clearly some of our Jewish faithful believe they are real but they are forbidden from the Torah, and these people do not realize these items are ineffective, undependable, and we are commanded by the Torah not to make them...

We learned in the mishna that even with regard to the poorest of Jews, the charity distributors should not give him less than four cups of wine. The Gemara asks: How could the Sages establish a matter through which one will come to expose himself to danger? But wasn’t it taught in a baraita: A person should not eat pairs, i.e., an even number of food items; and he should not drink pairs of cups...The concern was that one who uses pairs exposes himself to sorcery or demons. Why would the Sages require one to drink an even number of cups and thereby place himself in a position of danger?

Rav Naḥman said that the verse said: “It was a night of watching to the Lord” (Exodus 12:42), which indicates that Passover night is a night that remains guarded from demons and harmful spirits of all kinds. Therefore, there is no cause for concern about this form of danger on this particular night.

Rava said a different answer: The cup of blessing for Grace after Meals on Passover night is used in the performance of an additional mitzva and is not simply an expression of freedom. Therefore, it combines with the other cups for the good, i.e., to fulfill the mitzva to drink four cups, and it does not combine for the bad. With regard to the danger of drinking pairs of cups, it is as though one drinks only three cups.

Ravina said: The Sages instituted four separate cups, each of which is consumed in a manner that demonstrates freedom. Therefore, each and every one

Is a mitzvah on its own - and they do not combine with one another.

The Sages taught in another baraita: If one drinks in pairs his blood is upon his head, i.e., he bears responsibility for his own demise. Rav Yehuda said: When is that the case? When one did not leave the house and view the marketplace between cups. However, if he saw the marketplace after the first cup, he has permission to drink another cup without concern.

Likewise, Rav Ashi said: I saw Rav Ḥananya bar Beivai follow this policy: Upon drinking each cup, he would leave the house and view the marketplace. And we said that there is concern for the safety of one who drinks in pairs only when he intends to set out on the road after drinking, but if he intends to remain in his home there is no need for concern.

Rabbi Zeira said: And one who plans to sleep is comparable to one who is setting out on the road. He should be concerned that he might be harmed.

Rav Pappa said: And going to the bathroom is comparable to setting out on the road. The Gemara asks: And if one intends to remain in his home, is there no cause for concern?

But Rava would count the beams of the house to keep track of the number of cups he had drunk so as to ensure that he would not consume an even number.

And likewise Abaye, when he would drink one cup, his mother would immediately place two cups in his two hands so that he would not inadvertently drink only one more cup and thereby expose himself to the danger of drinking in pairs.

And similarly, when Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak would drink two cups, his attendant would immediately place one more cup in his hand, and if he would drink one cup, the attendant would place two cups in his two hands. These reports indicate that one should be concerned for his safety after drinking an even number of cups, even when he remains at home.

The Gemara answers: An important person is different. The demons focus their attention on him, and he must therefore be more careful than the average person. Ulla said: Ten cups contain no element of the danger associated with pairs. Ulla rules here in accordance with his reasoning stated elsewhere, as Ulla said, and some say it was taught in a baraita: The Sages instituted that one must drink ten cups of wine in the house of a mourner during the meal of comfort. And if it could enter your mind that ten cups do contain the element of danger associated with pairs, how could the Sages arise and institute something that might bring a person to a state of danger? However, eight cups do contain the element of danger associated with pairs.

According to Rashi, an 'evil spirit' adheres to the hands when we do not wash them in the morning...And in our world today we are not careful in this since there is no evil spirit in the time of these nations just as we are not careful about the law forbidding the use of liquids left uncovered and on pairs.

(2) Four entered the orchard: Ben Azzai, Ben Zoma, another, and Rabbi Akiva. One looked and died. One looked and was harmed. One looked and cut down the trees. And one went up in peace and went down in peace. Ben Azzai looked and died. Scripture says about him (Psalms 116, 15): "Precious in the sight of the LORD Is the death of His saints". Ben Zoma looked and was harmed. Scripture says about him (Proverbs 25, 16): "Hast thou found honey? eat so much as is sufficient for thee" and the continuation. [Cont. of the verse: "Lest thou be filled therewith, and vomit it." Elisha looked and cut down the trees. Scripture says about him (Ecclesiastes 5, 5): "Suffer not thy mouth to bring thy flesh into guilt" etc. Rabbi Akiva went up in peace and went down in peace. Scripture says about him (Song of Songs 1, 4): "Draw me, we will run after thee" etc. They gave a parable: What is this similar to? To the orchard of a king and there is an attic above it. It is upon [the man] to look so long as he does not move [his eyes] from it. Another parable was given. What is this similar tp? To [a street] that passes between two paths, one of fire, and one of snow. If it leans one way, it gets burned [by the fire]. If it leans the other way it gets burned by the snow. A man must walk in the middle and not lean to or fro. A story of Rabbi Yehoshua [Who was walkin in the street and Ben Zoma came opposite him] he reached him and did not greet him. He said to him [from where and to where] Ben Zoma? He said to him: I was watching the creation, and there is not between the upper waters and the lower waters even a handbreadth. As it is written (Genesis 1, 2) "and the spirit of God hovered over the face of the waters". And it says (Deuteronomy 32, 11): "As a vulture that stirreth up her nest" etc. Just as the vulture flies over the nest, touching and not touching, so too there is not even a handbreadth between the upper waters and lower waters. Rabbi Yehoshua said to his students: Ben Zoma is already outside. In a few days, Ben Zoma passed away.

...Here the son asks his father - Here at the pouring of the second cup the son asks his father, if the son is wise, what is different now that we are pouring a second cup of wine before eating? And our teacher received the teaching from R. Yakov ben Yakar, and the son asks as in the case of the daughters of Zelophchad...

...This night we eat only roasted meat - during the days of the Holy Temple this question was asked...

According to the child's intelligence the parent teaches - if he understands a lot, the father teaches him about everything (re: Passover)

(2) It is one's duty to inform the children even if they ask no questions, as it is written: "You shall tell your son" (Exodus 13:8). The father should instruct his son according to the child's understanding. For example, he should say to one small or foolish: "My son, all of us were slaves in Egypt, like this maidservant or like this manservant, and on this night God redeemed and liberated us." If the son is grown up and intelligent, he should inform him about everything that happened to us in Egypt, and about the miracles that were wrought for us by our teacher Moses; all in accordance with the son's understanding.

...he begins with degradation and ends with glory - the fulfillment of the exile in Egypt and redemption was the receiving of Torah, as it says, 'In freeing the people from Egypt you will worship your God on this mountain.' This is the receiving of Torah. The Torah is 'servitude' given by God, and the yoke of the Torah's greatness is wisdom that weakens human beings

...Why is the Torah called 'too-shyah'? Because it mateshet (weakens) the strength of those who study it....or because this word is a substitute word so that Satan will not accuse Israel of not being unworthy of Torah. Or, too-shyah is a reminder of tohu-shyah, meaning things that seem like 'tohu' (unformed, chaos), even so the word is meshotet, established, on them.

(1) When God began to create heaven and earth— (2) the earth being unformed and void, with darkness over the surface of the deep and a wind from God sweeping over the water—

Rabban Gamliel was accustomed to say, Anyone who has not said these three things on Pesach has not fulfilled his obligation, and these are them: the Pesach sacrifice, matsa and marror.

The Pesach [passover] sacrifice that our ancestors were accustomed to eating when the Temple existed, for the sake of what [was it]? For the sake [to commemorate] that the Holy One, blessed be He, passed over the homes of our ancestors in Egypt, as it is stated (Exodus 12:27); "And you shall say: 'It is the passover sacrifice to the Lord, for that He passed over the homes of the Children of Israel in Egypt, when He smote the Egyptians, and our homes he saved.’ And the people bowed the head and bowed."

He holds the matsa in his hand and shows it to the others there.

This matsa that we are eating, for the sake of what [is it]? For the sake [to commemorate] that our ancestors' dough was not yet able to rise, before the King of the kings of kings, the Holy One, blessed be He, revealed [Himself] to them and redeemed them, as it is stated (Exodus 12:39); "And they baked the dough which they brought out of Egypt into matsa cakes, since it did not rise; because they were expelled from Egypt, and could not tarry, neither had they made for themselves provisions."

He holds the marror in his hand and shows it to the others there.

This marror [bitter greens] that we are eating, for the sake of what [is it]? For the sake [to commemorate] that the Egyptians embittered the lives of our ancestors in Egypt, as it is stated (Exodus 1:14); "And they made their lives bitter with hard service, in mortar and in brick, and in all manner of service in the field; in all their service, wherein they made them serve with rigor."

In each and every generation, a person is obligated to see himself as if he left Egypt, as it is stated (Exodus 13:8); "And you shall explain to your son on that day: For the sake of this, did the Lord do [this] for me in my going out of Egypt." Not only our ancestors did the Holy One, blessed be He, redeem, but rather also us [together] with them did He redeem, as it is stated (Deuteronomy 6:23); "And He took us out from there, in order to bring us in, to give us the land which He swore unto our fathers."

It is not necessary to lift up the meat - and not only that, if we were to lift up the meat it would look as though we are pledging our animal as a holy animal to the Temple - and we do not lift up the meat since we cannot say 'This Pesach' (it is only a commemoration of the Pesach sacrifice)...

(6) When they came to Shiloh, bamot were forbidden. [The Tabernacle] there had no roof, but [consisted of] a base of stones with a ceiling of curtains, and that was the “resting place” [referred to in the Torah]. Most holy sacrifices were eaten within the curtains, and less holy sacrifices and second tithe [were eaten] wherever [Shiloh] could be seen.

MISHNA: They poured for the leader of the seder the third cup of wine, and he recites the blessing over his food, Grace After Meals. Next, they pour him the fourth cup. He completes hallel over it, as he already recited the first part of hallel before the meal. And he also recites the blessing of the song at the end of hallel over the fourth cup. During the period between these cups, i.e., the first three cups established by the Sages, if one wishes to drink more he may drink; however, between the third cup and the fourth cup one should not drink. GEMARA: Rav Ḥanan said to Rava: Since the mishna states that Grace After Meals must be recited over the third cup, learn from it that Grace After Meals requires a cup of wine. Rava said to him: This is no proof, for although the Sages instituted the drinking of four cups in the manner of freedom, once the four cups are in place, with each and every one of them we will perform a mitzva, despite the fact that they were not originally instituted for this purpose. After the Sages instituted these four cups, they attached a special mitzva to each one. However, this does not prove that there is an obligation to recite Grace After Meals over a cup of wine during the rest of the year.

MISHNA: One does not conclude after the Paschal lamb with an afikoman. GEMARA: The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of afikoman?

Rav said: It means that a member of a group that ate the Paschal lamb together should not leave that group to join another group. One who joined one group for the Paschal lamb may not leave and take food with him. According to this interpretation, afikoman is derived from the phrase afiku mani, take out the vessels. The reason for this prohibition is that people might remove the Paschal lamb to another location after they had begun to eat it elsewhere. This is prohibited, as the Paschal lamb must be eaten in a single location by one group.

And Shmuel said: It means that one may not eat dessert after the meal, like mushrooms [urdila’ei] for me, and chicks for Abba, Rav. It was customary for them to eat delicacies after the meal.

And Rav Ḥanina bar Sheila and Rabbi Yoḥanan say: Afikoman refers to foods such as dates, roasted grains, and nuts, which are eaten during the meal. It was taught in a baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan: One does not conclude by eating after the Paschal lamb foods such as dates, roasted grains, and nuts.

Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said an additional halakha: Nowadays, when we have no Paschal lamb, one does not conclude after matza with an afikoman.

The Gemara asks: We learned in the mishna that one does not conclude after the Paschal lamb with an afikoman.

The Gemara infers from the mishna: It is after the Paschal lamb that one may not conclude with an afikoman; however, after matza one may conclude with an afikoman. This statement of the mishna apparently contradicts Shmuel’s ruling.(Shmuel = no dessert)

The Gemara rejects this contention: That is an incorrect inference, as the mishna is stated in the style of: Needless to say. (The Mishnah teaches the novel ruling on Pesach since the less novel ruling on matzah is assumed.) The mishna should be understood as follows: Needless to say that one may not conclude with an afikoman after eating matza, as the taste of matza is slight. If one eats anything else afterward, the taste of the matza will dissipate.

However, after the Paschal lamb, which has a strong taste that is not easily removed, one might think that we have no problem with it. Therefore, the mishna teaches us that it is prohibited to conclude with an afikoman after the Paschal lamb as well.

The Gemara proposes: Let us say that the Tosefta supports Shmuel’s ruling: With regard to unleavened sponge cakes, cakes fried in oil and honey, and honey cakes, a person may fill his stomach with them on Passover night, provided that he eats an olive-bulk of matza after all that food. The Gemara infers from here that if he eats the matza after those cakes, yes, this is acceptable, as the matza is eaten last.

(1) We will return to you, Tractate ____ [fill in the name of the tractate], and you will return to us; our mind is on you, Tractate ____, and your mind is on us; we will not forget you, Tractate ____, and you will not forget us – not in this world and not in the next world.

(2) May it be Your will, our G-d, and the G-d of our fathers, that we should be loyal to Your Torah in this world, and it should be with us in the next world. Chaninah bar Pappa, Rami bar Pappa, Nachman bar Pappa, Achai bar Pappa, Aba bar Pappa, Rafram bar Pappa, Rachish bar Pappa, Sorchav bar Pappa, Ada bar Pappa, Daro bar Pappa.

(3) Please make it sweet, G-d our G-d, the words of Your Torah. In our mouths, and in the mouths of your nation the House of Israel. And it should be that we, all of us, our children and the children of your nation the House of Israel, that we should all know Your name and learn Your Torah. [Psalms 119:98] "Your commandment makes me wiser than my enemies, for it is ever with me." [Psalms 119:80] "Let my heart be complete in Your statutes, in order that I may not be put to shame." [Psalms 119:93] "I will never forget Your precepts; for with them You have quickened me." [Psalms 119:12] "Blessed are You O G-d, teach me Your statutes."

(4) We give thanks before You, Lord, our G-d and G-d of our fathers, for you gave us a share among those who sit in the study hall, and not among those who sit on street corners. For we arise early, and they arise early; we arise for words of Torah, and they arise for words of emptiness. We work, and they work; we work and receive a reward, and they work and do not receive a reward. We run, and they run; we run towards eternal life, and they run to a pit of desolation. As it says: (Psalms 55:24) "And You, O Lord, bring them down into a pit of desolation, people of blood and deceit will not live out half of their days; and I, I will trust in You."

(5) May it be your will, Lord my G-d, just as You have helped me to complete tractate _____, so too may you help me to start other tractates and books, and to complete them, to learn and to teach, to observe and to enact and to fulfill all the words of the teaching of your Torah with love. And may the merit of all of the Tannaim and Amoraim and Torah scholars be present for me and for my descendants, to ensure that the Torah does not depart from my mouth and from the mouths of my descendants for all eternity. And may the following be fulfilled for me: (Proverbs 6:22) "When you walk, it will lead you, when you lie down, it will watch over you. When you awake, it will speak with you." (Proverbs 9:11) "For through me your days will be multiplied, and the years of your life will be increased." (Proverbs 3:16) "Length of days is in her right hand; in her left, riches and honor." (Psalms 29:11) "G-d will give strength to his nation, G-d will bless his nation with peace."

(6) ...May your great name be made holier and greater, in this world that he is destined to renew and to give life to the dead and raise them to eternal life, to build the city of Yerushalayim, and complete the Beis HaMikdosh in its midst. And to uproot idol worship from the Land, return the service of the Heaven to its place, and the Holy One Blessed Be He shall rule in his majesty and splendor in our lives, and in the lifetime of the entire household of Israel, swiftly and in the near future; and say, Amen. May his great name be blessed, forever and ever. Blessed, praised, glorified, exalted, extolled, honored elevated and lauded be the Name of the holy one, Blessed is he- above and beyond any blessings and hymns, Praises and consolations which are uttered in the world; and say Amen. May there be abundant peace from Heaven, and life, upon us and upon all Israel; and say, Amen.