אֵ֚לֶּה תּוֹלְדֹ֣ת נֹ֔חַ נֹ֗חַ אִ֥ישׁ צַדִּ֛יק תָּמִ֥ים הָיָ֖ה בְּדֹֽרֹתָ֑יו אֶת־הָֽאֱלֹהִ֖ים הִֽתְהַלֶּךְ־נֹֽחַ׃ וַיּ֥וֹלֶד נֹ֖חַ שְׁלֹשָׁ֣ה בָנִ֑ים אֶת־שֵׁ֖ם אֶת־חָ֥ם וְאֶת־יָֽפֶת׃ וַתִּשָּׁחֵ֥ת הָאָ֖רֶץ לִפְנֵ֣י הָֽאֱלֹהִ֑ים וַתִּמָּלֵ֥א הָאָ֖רֶץ חָמָֽס׃ וַיַּ֧רְא אֱלֹהִ֛ים אֶת־הָאָ֖רֶץ וְהִנֵּ֣ה נִשְׁחָ֑תָה כִּֽי־הִשְׁחִ֧ית כׇּל־בָּשָׂ֛ר אֶת־דַּרְכּ֖וֹ עַל־הָאָֽרֶץ׃ {ס} וַיֹּ֨אמֶר אֱלֹהִ֜ים לְנֹ֗חַ קֵ֤ץ כׇּל־בָּשָׂר֙ בָּ֣א לְפָנַ֔י כִּֽי־מָלְאָ֥ה הָאָ֛רֶץ חָמָ֖ס מִפְּנֵיהֶ֑ם וְהִנְנִ֥י מַשְׁחִיתָ֖ם אֶת־הָאָֽרֶץ׃ עֲשֵׂ֤ה לְךָ֙ תֵּבַ֣ת עֲצֵי־גֹ֔פֶר קִנִּ֖ים תַּֽעֲשֶׂ֣ה אֶת־הַתֵּבָ֑ה וְכָֽפַרְתָּ֥ אֹתָ֛הּ מִבַּ֥יִת וּמִח֖וּץ בַּכֹּֽפֶר׃ וְזֶ֕ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר תַּֽעֲשֶׂ֖ה אֹתָ֑הּ שְׁלֹ֧שׁ מֵא֣וֹת אַמָּ֗ה אֹ֚רֶךְ הַתֵּבָ֔ה חֲמִשִּׁ֤ים אַמָּה֙ רׇחְבָּ֔הּ וּשְׁלֹשִׁ֥ים אַמָּ֖ה קוֹמָתָֽהּ׃ צֹ֣הַר ׀ תַּֽעֲשֶׂ֣ה לַתֵּבָ֗ה וְאֶל־אַמָּה֙ תְּכַלֶּ֣נָּה מִלְמַ֔עְלָה וּפֶ֥תַח הַתֵּבָ֖ה בְּצִדָּ֣הּ תָּשִׂ֑ים תַּחְתִּיִּ֛ם שְׁנִיִּ֥ם וּשְׁלִשִׁ֖ים תַּֽעֲשֶֽׂהָ׃ וַאֲנִ֗י הִנְנִי֩ מֵבִ֨יא אֶת־הַמַּבּ֥וּל מַ֙יִם֙ עַל־הָאָ֔רֶץ לְשַׁחֵ֣ת כׇּל־בָּשָׂ֗ר אֲשֶׁר־בּוֹ֙ ר֣וּחַ חַיִּ֔ים מִתַּ֖חַת הַשָּׁמָ֑יִם כֹּ֥ל אֲשֶׁר־בָּאָ֖רֶץ יִגְוָֽע׃ וַהֲקִמֹתִ֥י אֶת־בְּרִיתִ֖י אִתָּ֑ךְ וּבָאתָ֙ אֶל־הַתֵּבָ֔ה אַתָּ֕ה וּבָנֶ֛יךָ וְאִשְׁתְּךָ֥ וּנְשֵֽׁי־בָנֶ֖יךָ אִתָּֽךְ׃ וּמִכׇּל־הָ֠חַ֠י מִֽכׇּל־בָּשָׂ֞ר שְׁנַ֧יִם מִכֹּ֛ל תָּבִ֥יא אֶל־הַתֵּבָ֖ה לְהַחֲיֹ֣ת אִתָּ֑ךְ זָכָ֥ר וּנְקֵבָ֖ה יִֽהְיֽוּ׃ מֵהָע֣וֹף לְמִינֵ֗הוּ וּמִן־הַבְּהֵמָה֙ לְמִינָ֔הּ מִכֹּ֛ל רֶ֥מֶשׂ הָֽאֲדָמָ֖ה לְמִינֵ֑הוּ שְׁנַ֧יִם מִכֹּ֛ל יָבֹ֥אוּ אֵלֶ֖יךָ לְהַֽחֲיֽוֹת׃ וְאַתָּ֣ה קַח־לְךָ֗ מִכׇּל־מַֽאֲכָל֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר יֵֽאָכֵ֔ל וְאָסַפְתָּ֖ אֵלֶ֑יךָ וְהָיָ֥ה לְךָ֛ וְלָהֶ֖ם לְאׇכְלָֽה׃ וַיַּ֖עַשׂ נֹ֑חַ כְּ֠כֹ֠ל אֲשֶׁ֨ר צִוָּ֥ה אֹת֛וֹ אֱלֹהִ֖ים כֵּ֥ן עָשָֽׂה׃
This is the line of Noah.—Noah was a righteous man; he was blameless in his age; Noah walked with God.— Noah begot three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth. The earth became corrupt before God; the earth was filled with lawlessness. When God saw how corrupt the earth was, for all flesh had corrupted its ways on earth, God said to Noah, “I have decided to put an end to all flesh, for the earth is filled with lawlessness because of them: I am about to destroy them with the earth. Make yourself an ark of gopher wood; make it an ark with compartments, and cover it inside and out with pitch. This is how you shall make it: the length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits. Make an opening for daylight in the ark, and terminate it within a cubit of the top.-c Put the entrance to the ark in its side; make it with bottom, second, and third decks. “For My part, I am about to bring the Flood—waters upon the earth—to destroy all flesh under the sky in which there is breath of life; everything on earth shall perish. But I will establish My covenant with you, and you shall enter the ark, with your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives. And of all that lives, of all flesh, you shall take two of each into the ark to keep alive with you; they shall be male and female. From birds of every kind, cattle of every kind, every kind of creeping thing on earth, two of each shall come to you to stay alive. For your part, take of everything that is eaten and store it away, to serve as food for you and for them.” Noah did so; just as God commanded him, so he did.
וְאָמַר רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר: מִקְצָת שִׁבְחוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם אוֹמְרִים בְּפָנָיו, וְכוּלּוֹ שֶׁלֹּא בְּפָנָיו. מִקְצָת שִׁבְחוֹ בְּפָנָיו, דִּכְתִיב: ״כִּי אוֹתְךָ רָאִיתִי צַדִּיק לְפָנַי בַּדּוֹר הַזֶּה״, כּוּלּוֹ שֶׁלֹּא בְּפָנָיו, דִּכְתִיב: ״נֹחַ אִישׁ צַדִּיק תָּמִים הָיָה בְּדוֹרוֹתָיו״.
And Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar further said: Only some of a person’s praise should be said in his presence, and all of it may be said not in his presence. Only some of his praise should be said in his presence, as it is written: “And the Lord said to Noah, come, you and all your house into the ark, for you have I seen righteous before Me in this generation” (Genesis 7:1). And all of it may be said not in his presence, as it is written: “These are the generations of Noah; Noah was a righteous man, and perfect in his generations, and Noah walked with God” (Genesis 6:9). When not referring to him in his presence, God refers to Noah as a righteous and perfect man.
אומרים מקצת שבחו כו' - כלומר דרך ארץ הוא שאע"פ שאדם משבח את חברו שלא בפניו הרבה אין מרבה בשבחו לפניו מפני שנראה כמחניף:
(בראשית ו, ט) אלה תולדות נח [נח איש צדיק תמים היה בדורותיו] א"ר יוחנן בדורותיו ולא בדורות אחרים וריש לקיש אמר בדורותיו כ"ש בדורות אחרים א"ר חנינא משל דרבי יוחנן למה הדבר דומה לחבית של יין שהיתה מונחת במרתף של חומץ במקומה ריחה נודף שלא במקומה אין ריחה נודף א"ר אושעיא משל דריש לקיש למה הדבר דומה לצלוחית של פלייטון שהיתה מונחת במקום הטנופת במקומה ריחה נודף וכ"ש במקום הבוסם
§ With regard to the verse: “These are the generations of Noah; Noah was a righteous man, and wholehearted in his generations” (Genesis 6:9), Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Relative to the other people of his generation he was righteous and wholehearted, but not relative to those of other generations. And Reish Lakish says: In his generation he was righteous and wholehearted despite being surrounded by bad influences; all the more so would he have been considered righteous and wholehearted in other generations. Rabbi Ḥanina says: There is a parable for the statement of Rabbi Yoḥanan; to what is this matter comparable? It is comparable to a barrel of wine that was placed in a cellar where vinegar is stored; in its place, its fragrance diffuses, i.e., is noticeable, relative to the odor of the vinegar. When it is not in its place surrounded by vinegar, its fragrance does not diffuse, and its pleasant odor is not sensed. Rabbi Oshaya says: There is a parable for the statement of Reish Lakish; to what is this matter comparable? It is comparable to a flask of perfume [palyaton] that was placed in a location of filth. In its place its fragrance diffuses despite the ambient odor, and all the more so is its fragrance noticeable if it is placed in a location where there is perfume.
רבי יהודה אומר אדם הראשון לא נצטווה אלא על ע"ז בלבד שנאמר ויצו ה' אלהים על האדם רבי יהודה בן בתירה אומר אף על ברכת השם ויש אומרים אף על הדינים כמאן אזלא הא דאמר רב יהודה אמר רב אלהים אני לא תקללוני אלהים אני לא תמירוני אלהים אני יהא מוראי עליכם כמאן כיש אומרים תנא דבי מנשה אי דריש ויצו אפילו הנך נמי אי לא דריש ויצו הני מנא ליה לעולם לא דריש ויצו הני כל חדא וחדא באפי נפשיה כתיבא ע"ז וגילוי עריות דכתיב (בראשית ו, יא) ותשחת הארץ לפני האלהים ותנא דבי רבי ישמעאל בכל מקום שנא' השחתה אינו אלא דבר ערוה ועבודת כוכבים
Rabbi Yehuda says: Adam, the first man, was commanded only with regard to the prohibition of idol worship, as it is stated: “And the Lord God commanded the man” (Genesis 2:16). Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: He was also commanded concerning blessing the name of God. And some say that he was also commanded concerning establishing courts of judgment. The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is that which Rav Yehuda says that Rav says, in interpretation of the aforementioned verse: Since I am “God,” do not curse Me; since I am “God,” do not exchange Me with another god; since I am “God,” My fear shall be upon you? The Gemara answers: In accordance with whose opinion? It is in accordance with what some say, i.e., that the phrase “and the Lord God commanded the man” includes the prohibitions against cursing God’s name and idol worship, as well as the mitzva of establishing a system of law and justice, so that the fear of God will be upon the people. The Gemara challenges: If the tanna of the school of Menashe interprets the verse “and the Lord God commanded” homiletically, even these mitzvot, cursing the name of God and establishing courts, should be included. And if he does not interpret the verse “and the Lord God commanded” homiletically, from where does he derive these seven mitzvot in his list? The Gemara answers: Actually, he does not interpret the verse “and the Lord God commanded” homiletically, but with regard to these mitzvot in his list, each and every one of them is written separately in the Torah. The prohibitions of idol worship and forbidden sexual relations are stated, as it is written: “And the earth was corrupt before God” (Genesis 6:11), presumably referring to a transgression, and the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: Anywhere that the term corruption is stated, it is referring to nothing other than a matter of licentiousness and idol worship. The Gemara cites proofs for this claim: Corruption refers to a matter of licentiousness, as it is stated: “For all flesh had corrupted their way upon the earth” (Genesis 6:12); the word “way” alludes to sexual intercourse. And corruption also refers to idol worship, as it is written: “Lest you deal corruptly, and make you a graven image” (Deuteronomy 4:16).
כי השחית כל בשר את דרכו על הארץ א"ר יוחנן מלמד שהרביעו בהמה על חיה וחיה על בהמה והכל על אדם ואדם על הכל א"ר אבא בר כהנא וכולם חזרו חוץ מתושלמי (בראשית ו, ג)
With regard to the verse: “For all flesh had corrupted its way upon the earth” (Genesis 6:12), Rabbi Yoḥanan says: This teaches that the people of the generation of the flood mated male domesticated animals with female undomesticated animals, and male undomesticated animals with female domesticated animals, and all male animals with human females, and human males with all female animals. Rabbi Abba bar Kahana says: And after the flood all of the creatures returned to mate with their own species, except for the bird called tushlami, which continued to mate with other species. With regard to the verse: “And God said to Noah: The end of all flesh is come before Me, for the earth is filled with robbery through them, and behold, I will destroy them with the earth” (Genesis 6:13), Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Come and see how great is the power of robbery, as the generation of the flood violated every precept, but their sentence to be destroyed was not sealed until they extended their hands and engaged in robbery, as it is stated: “For the earth is filled with robbery through them, and behold, I will destroy them with the earth” (Genesis 6:13). And it is written: “Robbery is risen up into a rod of wickedness; nothing comes from them, nor from their multitude, nor from any of them, nor shall there be wailing [no’ah] for them” (Ezekiel 7:11).
חוץ מתושלמי - עוף הוא שאוחז עדיין תרבות רעה שמזדווג עם הכל. תושלמי עוף אחד ובמסכת חולין (דף סב:) גבי שמונה ספיקות איתא והרנוגא תושלמי ומרדא ודרכו של אותו עוף להרביע כל הבריות:
צוהר תעשה לתיבה א"ר יוחנן אמר לו הקב"ה לנח קבע בה אבנים טובות ומרגליות כדי שיהיו מאירות לכם כצהרים
With regard to the verse: “A tzohar you shall make for the ark” (Genesis 6:16), Rabbi Yoḥanan says that the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Noah: Set precious stones and jewels in the ark so that they will shine for you as the afternoon [tzohorayim] sun.
צהר. יֵ"אֹ חַלּוֹן וְיֵ"אֹ אֶבֶן טוֹבָה הַמְּאִירָה לָהֶם (ב"ר שם):
צהר A LIGHT — Some say this was a window; others say that it was a precious stone that gave light to them (Genesis Rabbah 31:11).
דתניא ר' ישמעאל אומר כללות נאמרו בסיני ופרטות באהל מועד ר"ע אומר כללות ופרטות נאמרו בסיני ונשנו באהל מועד ונשתלשו בערבות מואב אמר מר הכל כשירין להקריב מנא הני מילי אמר רב הונא דאמר קרא (בראשית ח, כ) ויבן נח מזבח לה' ויקח מכל הבהמה הטהורה ומכל עוף הטהור בהמה כמשמעו חיה בכלל בהמה זכרים ונקבות תמימין ובעלי מומין (דאמר מר תמות וזכרות בבהמה ואין תמות וזכרות בעופות ואיתקש בהמה לעוף תמימין ובעלי מומין) לאפוקי מחוסר אבר דלא א"ר אלעזר מנין למחוסר אבר שנאסר לבני נח ת"ל (בראשית ו, יט) ומכל החי מכל בשר אמרה תורה הבא בהמה שחיין ראשי איברין שלה ודילמא למעוטי טריפה ההוא מלחיות זרע נפקא הניחא למ"ד טריפה אינה יולדת אלא למ"ד טריפה יולדת מאי איכא למימר האמר קרא אתך בדומין לך ודילמא נח גופיה טריפה הוה תמים כתיב ביה ודילמא תמים בדרכיו צדיק כתיב ביה ודילמא תמים בדרכיו צדיק במעשיו אי סלקא דעתך דנח גופיה טריפה הוה מי קאמר ליה לנח דכוותך עייל שלמים לא תעייל ומאחר דנפקא לן מאתך לחיות זרע למה לי מהו דתימא אתך לצותא בעלמא אפי' זקן אפילו סריס קמשמע לן:
But there is still a difficulty with regard to the burnt offering, as it was stated in the name of Rav Adda bar Ahava that the burnt offering that the Jewish people sacrificed in the wilderness did not require flaying of the skin or cutting into pieces, while the baraita states that it did. The Gemara replies: This is a dispute between the opinions of two tanna’im. As it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yishmael says: The general statements, i.e., the principles of the Torah, were said at Sinai, and the details of the mitzvot that are explicated in Leviticus were said to Moses in the Tent of Meeting. This includes the halakha that the burnt offering must be flayed and cut into pieces. Consequently, it could not have been in effect before the construction of the Tabernacle. Rabbi Akiva says: Both general statements and the details of mitzvot were said at Sinai and later taught again in the Tent of Meeting, and taught a third time by Moses to the Jewish people in the plains of Moab, when he taught the Torah to the people (see Deuteronomy 1:1). According to Rabbi Akiva’s opinion, the halakha of flaying and cutting into pieces was in effect when the Torah was given, even before the construction of the Tabernacle. § The Master said in the baraita: Before the Tabernacle was established, all animals were fit to be sacrificed: A domesticated animal, an undomesticated animal, or a bird. The Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived? Rav Huna said: As the verse states with regard to the offering that was sacrificed after the flood: “And Noah built an altar to the Lord, and took of every pure animal, and of every pure fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar” (Genesis 8:20). The Gemara explains: “Animal [behema],” is understood in accordance with its plain meaning, a domesticated animal, and the same is true of fowl; an undomesticated animal [ḥayya] is included in the term “behema” that is stated in the verse. That which was taught in the baraita: All animals were fit to be sacrificed: Males and females, unblemished and blemished animals, pertains to that which the Master said as a principle concerning the halakhot of sacrifices: The requirements that an offering must have unblemished status and that a burnt offering must have male status apply to animal offerings, but the requirements of unblemished status and male status do not apply to birds. And in the verses that recount Noah’s sacrifices upon exiting the ark, a domesticated animal is juxtaposed with a bird, in the verse: “Of every pure animal, and of every pure fowl” (Genesis 8:20), which teaches that kosher animals had a status identical to that of birds, and could be sacrificed whether male or female, unblemished or blemished. The Gemara adds: That which was taught in the baraita: Unblemished and blemished animals, serves to exclude animals that are lacking a limb, which were not fit for sacrifice. As Rabbi Elazar says: From where is it derived that an animal that is lacking a limb is forbidden to the descendants of Noah, i.e., gentiles, to be used as a sacrifice? The verse states with regard to Noah: “And of every living being of all flesh, two of every sort shall you bring into the ark” (Genesis 6:19). With regard to the phrase: “And of every living being,” which is superfluous, the Torah stated: Bring an animal whose limbs are all living, not one lacking a limb, as that animal is disqualified from sacrifice. The Gemara challenges: But perhaps this phrase: “And of every living being,” serves to exclude an animal with a wound that will cause it to die within twelve months [tereifa] from being fit as a sacrifice. The Gemara explains: The disqualification of a tereifa is derived from the phrase: “To keep seed alive” (Genesis 7:3), as a tereifa cannot propagate. The Gemara challenges: This works out well according to the one who says that a tereifa cannot give birth. In this case the disqualification of the tereifa is derived from the verse: “To keep seed alive,” while the disqualification of the animal lacking a limb is derived from the verse: “And of every living being.” But according to the one who says that a tereifa can give birth, what can be said? According to this opinion, a tereifa cannot be excluded by the phrase: “To keep seed alive.” The Gemara explains: Doesn’t the verse state with regard to the animals that were brought by Noah into the ark: “You shall bring into the ark, to keep them alive with you” (Genesis 6:19)? The term “with you” indicates that the verse is stated with regard to animals that are similar to you, not a tereifa. The Gemara asks: But perhaps Noah himself was a tereifa. If so, one cannot exclude a tereifa from the comparison of animals to Noah. The Gemara answers: It is written about Noah that he was “complete” (Genesis 6:9), which indicates that he was physically whole and unblemished. The Gemara challenges: But perhaps the verse means that his ways were complete, and it is not referring to Noah’s physical attributes. The Gemara explains: It is already written about him that he was “righteous” (Genesis 6:9), which means that his actions were perfect. Consequently, when the verse says that he was also complete, it must be referring to his body. The Gemara challenges: But perhaps the verse means that Noah was complete in his manner, and he was righteous in his good deeds. Accordingly, the verse would not exclude the possibility that Noah himself was a tereifa. The Gemara responds: If it enters your mind to say that Noah himself was a tereifa, would the Merciful One have said to him: Bring in tereifot like you to the ark, but do not bring in whole and perfect animals? It is not reasonable to say that there would be a preference for him to bring tereifot. Rather, Noah was certainly not a tereifa, and the fact that a tereifa is disqualified for sacrifice is derived from “with you.” The Gemara asks: And once we derive the disqualification of a tereifa from the term “with you,” why do I need the phrase “to keep seed alive”? The Gemara answers: If one could derive only from “with you,” you would say that Noah brought the animals to the ark only for the purpose of companionship, and therefore even an animal that is old or even one who is castrated can come into the ark, provided that it is not a tereifa. Therefore, the Merciful One writes: “To keep seed alive,” which teaches us that only animals that can bear offspring were allowed to be brought into the ark.
והקמתי את בריתי. בְּרִית הָיָה צָרִיךְ עַל הַפֵּרוֹת שֶׁלֹּא יִרְקְבוּ וִיעַפְּשׁוּ וְשֶׁלֹּא יַהַרְגוּהוּ רְשָׁעִים שֶׁבַּדּוֹר (ב"ר):
והקמתי את בריתי BUT I WILL ESTABLISH MY COVENANT — A covenant was necessary for the sake of the fruits that they should not rot or decay; and also that the wicked people of that generation should not kill him (Genesis Rabbah 31:12)
וַיֹּ֤אמֶר יְהֹוָה֙ לְנֹ֔חַ בֹּֽא־אַתָּ֥ה וְכׇל־בֵּיתְךָ֖ אֶל־הַתֵּבָ֑ה כִּֽי־אֹתְךָ֥ רָאִ֛יתִי צַדִּ֥יק לְפָנַ֖י בַּדּ֥וֹר הַזֶּֽה׃ מִכֹּ֣ל ׀ הַבְּהֵמָ֣ה הַטְּהוֹרָ֗ה תִּֽקַּח־לְךָ֛ שִׁבְעָ֥ה שִׁבְעָ֖ה אִ֣ישׁ וְאִשְׁתּ֑וֹ וּמִן־הַבְּהֵמָ֡ה אֲ֠שֶׁ֠ר לֹ֣א טְהֹרָ֥ה הִ֛וא שְׁנַ֖יִם אִ֥ישׁ וְאִשְׁתּֽוֹ׃ גַּ֣ם מֵע֧וֹף הַשָּׁמַ֛יִם שִׁבְעָ֥ה שִׁבְעָ֖ה זָכָ֣ר וּנְקֵבָ֑ה לְחַיּ֥וֹת זֶ֖רַע עַל־פְּנֵ֥י כׇל־הָאָֽרֶץ׃ כִּי֩ לְיָמִ֨ים ע֜וֹד שִׁבְעָ֗ה אָֽנֹכִי֙ מַמְטִ֣יר עַל־הָאָ֔רֶץ אַרְבָּעִ֣ים י֔וֹם וְאַרְבָּעִ֖ים לָ֑יְלָה וּמָחִ֗יתִי אֶֽת־כׇּל־הַיְקוּם֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר עָשִׂ֔יתִי מֵעַ֖ל פְּנֵ֥י הָֽאֲדָמָֽה׃ וַיַּ֖עַשׂ נֹ֑חַ כְּכֹ֥ל אֲשֶׁר־צִוָּ֖הוּ יְהֹוָֽה׃ וְנֹ֕חַ בֶּן־שֵׁ֥שׁ מֵא֖וֹת שָׁנָ֑ה וְהַמַּבּ֣וּל הָיָ֔ה מַ֖יִם עַל־הָאָֽרֶץ׃ וַיָּ֣בֹא נֹ֗חַ וּ֠בָנָ֠יו וְאִשְׁתּ֧וֹ וּנְשֵֽׁי־בָנָ֛יו אִתּ֖וֹ אֶל־הַתֵּבָ֑ה מִפְּנֵ֖י מֵ֥י הַמַּבּֽוּל׃ מִן־הַבְּהֵמָה֙ הַטְּהוֹרָ֔ה וּמִ֨ן־הַבְּהֵמָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר אֵינֶ֖נָּה טְהֹרָ֑ה וּמִ֨ן־הָע֔וֹף וְכֹ֥ל אֲשֶׁר־רֹמֵ֖שׂ עַל־הָֽאֲדָמָֽה׃ שְׁנַ֨יִם שְׁנַ֜יִם בָּ֧אוּ אֶל־נֹ֛חַ אֶל־הַתֵּבָ֖ה זָכָ֣ר וּנְקֵבָ֑ה כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֛ר צִוָּ֥ה אֱלֹהִ֖ים אֶת־נֹֽחַ׃ וַֽיְהִ֖י לְשִׁבְעַ֣ת הַיָּמִ֑ים וּמֵ֣י הַמַּבּ֔וּל הָי֖וּ עַל־הָאָֽרֶץ׃ בִּשְׁנַ֨ת שֵׁשׁ־מֵא֤וֹת שָׁנָה֙ לְחַיֵּי־נֹ֔חַ בַּחֹ֙דֶשׁ֙ הַשֵּׁנִ֔י בְּשִׁבְעָֽה־עָשָׂ֥ר י֖וֹם לַחֹ֑דֶשׁ בַּיּ֣וֹם הַזֶּ֗ה נִבְקְעוּ֙ כׇּֽל־מַעְיְנֹת֙*(בספרי ספרד ואשכנז מַעְיְנוֹת֙) תְּה֣וֹם רַבָּ֔ה וַאֲרֻבֹּ֥ת הַשָּׁמַ֖יִם נִפְתָּֽחוּ׃ וַֽיְהִ֥י הַגֶּ֖שֶׁם עַל־הָאָ֑רֶץ אַרְבָּעִ֣ים י֔וֹם וְאַרְבָּעִ֖ים לָֽיְלָה׃ בְּעֶ֨צֶם הַיּ֤וֹם הַזֶּה֙ בָּ֣א נֹ֔חַ וְשֵׁם־וְחָ֥ם וָיֶ֖פֶת בְּנֵי־נֹ֑חַ וְאֵ֣שֶׁת נֹ֗חַ וּשְׁלֹ֧שֶׁת נְשֵֽׁי־בָנָ֛יו אִתָּ֖ם אֶל־הַתֵּבָֽה׃ הֵ֜מָּה וְכׇל־הַֽחַיָּ֣ה לְמִינָ֗הּ וְכׇל־הַבְּהֵמָה֙ לְמִינָ֔הּ וְכׇל־הָרֶ֛מֶשׂ הָרֹמֵ֥שׂ עַל־הָאָ֖רֶץ לְמִינֵ֑הוּ וְכׇל־הָע֣וֹף לְמִינֵ֔הוּ כֹּ֖ל צִפּ֥וֹר כׇּל־כָּנָֽף׃ וַיָּבֹ֥אוּ אֶל־נֹ֖חַ אֶל־הַתֵּבָ֑ה שְׁנַ֤יִם שְׁנַ֙יִם֙ מִכׇּל־הַבָּשָׂ֔ר אֲשֶׁר־בּ֖וֹ ר֥וּחַ חַיִּֽים׃ וְהַבָּאִ֗ים זָכָ֨ר וּנְקֵבָ֤ה מִכׇּל־בָּשָׂר֙ בָּ֔אוּ כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֛ר צִוָּ֥ה אֹת֖וֹ אֱלֹהִ֑ים וַיִּסְגֹּ֥ר יְהֹוָ֖ה בַּֽעֲדֽוֹ׃
Thus they that entered comprised male and female of all flesh, as God had commanded him. And the LORD shut him in.
(בראשית ז, ב) מכל הבהמה הטהורה תקח לך שבעה שבעה איש ואשתו אישות לבהמה מי אית לה א"ר שמואל בר נחמני א"ר יונתן מאותם שלא נעבדה בהם עבירה מנא ידע אמר רב חסדא שהעבירן לפני התיבה כל שהתיבה קולטתו בידוע שלא נעבדה בהם עבירה וכל שאין התיבה קולטתו בידוע שנעבדה בה עבירה רבי אבהו אמר מאותן הבאין מאיליהן (בראשית ו, יד)
§ With regard to the verse: “Of every kosher animal you shall take to you by sevens, husband and wife” (Genesis 7:2), the Gemara asks: Is there marriage for animals? Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani says that Rabbi Yonatan says: The reference is to those animals with which the transgression of relations with another species was not performed. Therefore, the Torah underscores that the animals that entered the ark were husband and wife. The Gemara asks: From where did Noah know which animals were not involved in that transgression? Rav Ḥisda says: He passed them before the ark. All animals that the ark accepted, it was known that a transgression had not been performed with them. And any animal that the ark did not accept, it was known that a transgression had been performed with it. Rabbi Abbahu says: Noah took onto the ark only from those animals that came on their own, as it appeared that they were sent from Heaven, and they were certainly fit for this purpose. With regard to the verse: “Make you an ark of gopher wood” (Genesis 6:14), the Gemara asks: What is gopher wood? Rav Adda says that they say in the school of Rabbi Sheila: This is wood from the mavliga tree; and some say that it is wood from the willow [gulamish] tree.
ומי הוו טמאין וטהורין בההיא שעתא א"ר שמואל בר נחמני א"ר יונתן מאותן שלא נעבדה בהן עבירה מנא הוו ידעי כדרב חסדא דאמר רב חסדא העבירן לפני התיבה כל שהתיבה קולטתן בידוע שהוא טהור אין התיבה קולטתן בידוע שהן טמאין רבי אבהו אמר אמר קרא (בראשית ז, טז) והבאים זכר ונקבה הבאין מאיליהן
§ The baraita also teaches that before the Tabernacle was constructed, sacrifices were brought from animals and birds that were kosher, but not from non-kosher species. This is based on the verse that describes what Noah sacrificed when he exited the ark: “And he took of every pure animal and of every pure fowl and offered burnt offerings on the altar” (Genesis 8:20). The Gemara asks: And were there pure and impure species at that time, during the period of Noah? The distinction between pure, i.e., kosher species, and impure, i.e., non-kosher species, was introduced only after the Torah was given (see Leviticus, chapter 11). Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani says that Rabbi Yonatan says: The pure animals that Noah took were from those that had not been used in the performance of sin. The Gemara asks: From where did Noah and his sons know which animals had been used in the performance of a sin, in order to prevent them from entering the ark? The Gemara answers that it is in accordance with the statement of Rav Ḥisda. As Rav Ḥisda says: Noah caused all of the animals to pass before the ark. All animals that the ark accepted, i.e., drew in, was known to be pure; if the ark did not accept them, it was known that they were impure. Rabbi Abbahu says there is a different explanation as to how Noah knew which animals were pure or impure. The verse states: “And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh” (Genesis 7:16), which means: Those that went in on their own. Consequently, Noah did not need to distinguish between pure and impure animals, as only the pure ones approached.
וְתַנָּא דִּידַן מַאי טַעְמָא לָא קָתָנֵי ״לֵילֵי״? לִישָּׁנָא מְעַלְּיָא הוּא דְּנָקֵט. וְכִדְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי. דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי: לְעוֹלָם אַל יוֹצִיא אָדָם דָּבָר מְגוּנֶּה מִפִּיו, שֶׁהֲרֵי עִקֵּם הַכָּתוּב שְׁמוֹנֶה אוֹתִיּוֹת, וְלֹא הוֹצִיא דָּבָר מְגוּנֶּה מִפִּיו. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״מִן הַבְּהֵמָה הַטְּהוֹרָה וּמִן הַבְּהֵמָה אֲשֶׁר אֵינֶנָּה טְהֹרָה״. רַב פָּפָּא אָמַר: תֵּשַׁע, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כִּי יִהְיֶה בְךָ אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר לֹא יִהְיֶה טָהוֹר מִקְּרֵה לָיְלָה״. רָבִינָא אָמַר: עֶשֶׂר, וָיו דְּ״טָהוֹר״. רַב אַחָא בַּר יַעֲקֹב אָמַר: שֵׁשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כִּי אָמַר מִקְרֶה הוּא בִּלְתִּי טָהוֹר הוּא כִּי לֹא טָהוֹר״. תַּנְיָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל: לְעוֹלָם יְסַפֵּר אָדָם בְּלָשׁוֹן נְקִיָּה, שֶׁהֲרֵי בַּזָּב קְרָאוֹ ״מֶרְכָּב״, וּבָאִשָּׁה קְרָאוֹ ״מוֹשָׁב״. וְאוֹמֵר: ״וְתִבְחַר לְשׁוֹן עֲרוּמִים״. וְאוֹמֵר: ״וְדַעַת שְׂפָתַי בָּרוּר מִלֵּלוּ״. מַאי ״וְאוֹמֵר״? וְכִי תֵּימָא: הָנֵי מִילֵּי בִּדְאוֹרָיְיתָא, אֲבָל בִּדְרַבָּנַן לָא — תָּא שְׁמַע: וְאוֹמֵר ״וְתִבְחַר לְשׁוֹן עֲרוּמִים״. וְכִי תֵּימָא: הָנֵי מִילֵּי בִּדְרַבָּנַן, אֲבָל בְּמִילֵּי דְעָלְמָא לָא — וְאוֹמֵר ״וְדַעַת שְׂפָתַי בָּרוּר מִלֵּלוּ״. וּבְאִשָּׁה לָא כְּתִיב בָּהּ ״מֶרְכָּב״?! וְהָכְתִיב: ״וַתָּקׇם רִבְקָה וְנַעֲרֹתֶיהָ וַתִּרְכַּבְנָה עַל הַגְּמַלִּים״! הָתָם, מִשּׁוּם בִּיעֲתוּתָא דִגְמַלִּים — אוֹרְחָא הִיא. וְהָכְתִיב: ״וַיִּקַּח מֹשֶׁה אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ וְאֶת בָּנָיו וַיַּרְכִּיבֵם עַל הַחֲמֹר״! הָתָם, מִשּׁוּם בָּנָיו — אוֹרְחָא הוּא. וְהָכְתִיב: ״וְהִיא רֹכֶבֶת עַל הַחֲמוֹר״! הָתָם, מִשּׁוּם בִּיעֲתוּתָא דְלֵילְיָא — אוֹרְחָא הוּא. וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: מִשּׁוּם בִּיעֲתוּתָא דְלֵילְיָא — לֵיכָּא, מִשּׁוּם בִּיעֲתוּתָא דְּדָוִד — אִיכָּא. וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: בִּיעֲתוּתָא דְּדָוִד — נָמֵי לֵיכָּא, מִשּׁוּם בִּיעֲתוּתָא דְהַר — אִיכָּא. וּבְאוֹרָיְיתָא מִי לָא כְּתִיב ״טָמֵא״? אֶלָּא: כֹּל הֵיכָא דְּכִי הֲדָדֵי נִינְהוּ — מִשְׁתַּעֵי בְּלָשׁוֹן נְקִיָּה, כֹּל הֵיכָא דִּנְפִישִׁין מִילֵּי — מִשְׁתַּעֵי בְּלָשׁוֹן קְצָרָה. כִּדְאָמַר רַב הוּנָא אָמַר רַב, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ, אָמַר רַב הוּנָא אָמַר רַב מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר: לְעוֹלָם יִשְׁנֶה אָדָם לְתַלְמִידוֹ דֶּרֶךְ קְצָרָה. וְכׇל הֵיכָא דְּכִי הֲדָדֵי נִינְהוּ מִשְׁתַּעֵי בִּלְשׁוֹן כָּבוֹד? וְהָא ״רוֹכֶבֶת״ וְ״יוֹשֶׁבֶת״ דְּכִי הֲדָדֵי נִינְהוּ, וְקָאָמַר ״רוֹכֶבֶת״! ״רֹכֶבֶת״ כְּתִיב. הָנְהוּ תְּרֵי תַלְמִידֵי דַּהֲווֹ יָתְבִי קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב. חַד אָמַר: שַׁוִּיתִינַּן הַאי שְׁמַעְתָּא כְּדָבָר אַחֵר מְסַנְּקָן, וְחַד אָמַר: שַׁוִּיתִינַּן הַאי שְׁמַעְתָּא כִּגְדִי מְסַנְּקָן, וְלָא אִישְׁתַּעִי רַב בַּהֲדֵי דְּהַאיְךְ.
The Gemara asks: And the tanna of our mishna, what is the reason that he didn’t explicitly teach: The night of the fourteenth, as it was taught in the school of Shmuel? The Gemara answers: He employed a euphemism. Since the tanna of our mishna did not want to mention darkness, he preferred the term or to refer to the night of the fourteenth. And this is in accordance with a statement of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi. As Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: A person should never express a crude matter, as the formulation of a verse was distorted by the addition of eight letters rather than have it express a crude matter, as it is stated: “From the pure animals and from the animals that are not pure [asher einena tehora]” (Genesis 7:8). To avoid using the Hebrew term for impure [teme’a], which is four letters: Tet, mem, alef, heh, the verse replaced the term with the euphemism meaning “that are not pure,” which is spelled with twelve letters: Alef, shin, reish; alef, yod, nun, nun, heh; tet, heh, reish, heh. Rav Pappa said: A different verse added nine letters, as it is stated: “If there be among you any man who is not ritually pure [asher lo yihye tahor] by reason of that which happened to him by night” (Deuteronomy 23:11). To avoid using the three-letter Hebrew word for impure, tameh, spelled tet, mem, alef, the verse employs the twelve-letter phrase “who is not ritually pure,” spelled: Alef, shin, reish; lamed, alef; yod, heh, yod, heh; tet, heh, reish. Ravina said: The verse actually adds ten letters because of the letter vav of the word tahor, as the word is spelled in its plene form. Rav Aḥa bar Ya’akov said: Yet another verse adds sixteen letters, as it is stated: “For he said, something has happened to him, he is not ritually pure; surely he is not ritually pure [bilti tahor hu ki lo tahor]” (I Samuel 20:26). To avoid using the three-letter word tameh, the verse employs the nineteen-letter phrase “he is not ritually pure; surely he is not ritually pure,” spelled: Beit, lamed, tav, yod; tet, heh, vav, reish; heh, vav, alef; kaf, yod; lamed, alef; tet, heh, vav, reish. Likewise, a baraita was taught in the school of Rabbi Yishmael: A person should always converse euphemistically, as one finds in the following verses. The first: “And whichever saddle that the zav rides upon shall be ritually impure” (Leviticus 15:9), which discusses the impurity imparted by a zav to an object on which he sits, calls this action riding. And the verse: “And anyone who touches anything on which she sat” (Leviticus 15:22), which discusses the parallel ritual impurity of a woman, a zava, calls the action sitting. Since riding is slightly demeaning for a woman, as it involves an immodest splaying of the legs, the verse avoids the term riding and opts to convey the more modest image of sitting. And it says in another verse: “And you choose the language of the crafty” (Job 15:5), meaning that one should be clever when speaking and avoid inappropriate phrases. And it says in another verse: “My words shall utter the uprightness of my heart; and that which my lips know they shall speak sincerely” (Job 33:3). The Gemara asks: What is the need for the proofs from the two additional verses introduced by the phrase: And it says? The baraita already proved its point from the verses with regard to zav and zava. The Gemara answers: The additional verses are necessary, lest you say: This requirement to use clean language applies only in the language written in the Torah, but in rabbinic formulations, no, there is no obligation to use clean language. To counter this argument, the tanna says, come and hear: And it says: “And you choose the language of the crafty,” which indicates that this principle extends beyond the language of the Torah. And lest you say that this requirement applies only to rabbinic language, but when it comes to ordinary speech, no, one need not speak euphemistically, the baraita adds: And it says: “And that which my lips know they shall speak sincerely,” i.e., one must speak euphemistically in every situation. With regard to the above baraita taught in the school of Rabbi Yishmael, the Gemara asks: And with regard to a woman, is the term riding not written in the Torah? But isn’t it written: “And Rebecca and her damsels arose and they rode upon camels” (Genesis 24:61)? The Gemara answers: There, due to fear of camels, that is standard conduct. Since a camel’s back is high off the ground, a woman cannot sit on it sidesaddle; consequently, she may ride on it without being considered immodest. The Gemara cites another relevant verse. But isn’t it written: “And Moses took his wife and his children and rode them upon his donkey” (Exodus 4:20)? The Gemara answers: There, despite the fact that his wife was also on the donkey, the verse employs the language of riding due to his children, as it is standard practice for children to ride. The Gemara raises another difficulty. But isn’t it written with regard to Abigail: “And it was so, as she rode on her donkey and came down by the covert of the mountain” (I Samuel 25:20). This verse employs the language of riding in reference to a woman on a donkey. The Gemara answers: There, due to the fear of the night, it is standard practice for a woman to ride and not merely sit on the donkey. And if you wish, say instead: There is no consideration due to the fear of the night that would explain why she was permitted to ride in the regular manner; rather, there is a consideration due to fear of David. And if you wish, say instead: There is no consideration due to fear of David either; however, there is a consideration due to the fear of the incline when riding down the mountain. The Gemara asks: But isn’t the word impure written in the Torah? Apparently, the Torah does not consistently employ euphemisms, and indeed the word impure appears regularly. Rather, anywhere that two phrases are equal in length, the verse speaks employing a euphemism. Anywhere that the words of the euphemism are more numerous, requiring a lengthier description, the Torah speaks employing concise language, in accordance with that which Rav Huna said that Rav said, and some say it was Rav Huna who said that Rav said in the name of Rabbi Meir: A person should always teach his student in a concise manner. The Gemara asks: And anywhere that the phrases are equal in length, does the verse always speak employing dignified language? Aren’t the Hebrew words for rides [rokhevet], spelled: Reish, vav, kaf, beit, tav; and sits [yoshevet], spelled: Yod, vav, shin, beit, tav, of equal length, and yet the verse states: Rides (I Samuel 25:20). The Gemara answers: The Hebrew word for rides is written without a vav in the defective form, rendering it shorter than the term for sits. Brevity takes precedence over dignified language. The Gemara relates an incident involving the use of appropriate language: There were these two students who were sitting before Rav and were weary from studying a complex issue. One of them said: This halakha we are studying is rendering us as tired as a tired [mesankan] something else, a euphemism for a pig. And the other one said: This halakha is rendering us as tired as a tired kid. Rav would not speak with that student who made reference to a pig, as one who speaks inappropriately is undoubtedly flawed in character.
מאי טעמא לא תני לילי - כדתנא דבי שמואל ומשני אלישנא מעליא קא מיהדר שמצוה ודרך נקיי הדעת לספר בלשון נקיה:
גמ' שהרי עקם הכתוב. עי' מדרש רבה ריש פ' אמור:
אֱמֹר אֶל הַכֹּהֲנִים בְּנֵי אַהֲרֹן (ויקרא כא, א), רַבִּי תַּנְחוּם בְּרַבִּי חֲנִילָאי פָּתַח (תהלים יב, ז): אִמְרוֹת ה' אֲמָרוֹת טְהֹרוֹת, אִמְרוֹת ה' אֲמָרוֹת טְהוֹרוֹת אִמְרוֹת בָּשָׂר וָדָם אֵינָן אֲמָרוֹת טְהוֹרוֹת, בְּנֹהַג שֶׁבָּעוֹלָם מֶלֶךְ בָּשָׂר וָדָם נִכְנַס לִמְדִינָה כָּל בְּנֵי הַמְּדִינָה מְקַלְּסִין אוֹתוֹ וְעָרַב לוֹ קִלּוּסָן, אָמַר לָהֶם לְמָחָר אֲנִי בּוֹנֶה לָכֶם דִּימוֹסִיאוֹת וּמֶרְחֲצָאוֹת, לְמָחָר אֲנִי מַכְנִיס לָכֶם אַמָּה שֶׁל מַיִם, יָשַׁן לוֹ וְלֹא עָמַד, הֵיכָן הוּא וְהֵיכָן אִמְרוֹתָיו, אֲבָל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא אֵינוֹ כֵן, אֶלָּא (ירמיה י, י): וַה' אֱלֹהִים אֱמֶת, לָמָּה הוּא אֱמֶת אָמַר רַבִּי אָבִין (ירמיה י, י): שֶׁהוּא אֱלֹהִים חַיִּים וּמֶלֶךְ עוֹלָם, אֲמָרוֹת טְהֹרוֹת רַבִּי יוּדָן בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, וְרַבִּי בֶּרֶכְיָה בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר, וְרַבִּי יַעֲקֹב דִּכְפַר חָנִין, וְאָמְרִין לָהּ בְּשֵׁם רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי, מָצִינוּ שֶׁעִקֵּם הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא שְׁמוֹנֶה אוֹתִיּוֹת וְלֹא הוֹצִיא דָּבָר מְגֻנֶּה מִפִּיו, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית ז, ח): מִן הַבְּהֵמָה הַטְּהוֹרָה וּמִן הַבְּהֵמָה אֲשֶׁר אֵינֶנָּה טְהֹרָה, וּבְמָקוֹם אַחֵר עִקֵּם שְׁתַּיִם וְשָׁלשׁ תֵּבוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא לְהוֹצִיא דָּבָר שֶׁל טֻמְאָה מִתּוֹךְ פִּיו, הֲדָא הוּא דִכְתִיב (בראשית ז, ב): מִכֹּל הַבְּהֵמָה אֲשֶׁר לֹא טְהֹרָה, [הטמאה] [אשר טמאה היא] אֵינוֹ אוֹמֵר, אֶלָּא אֲשֶׁר לֹא טְהֹרָה הִוא, אָמַר רַבִּי יוּדָן בֶּן מְנַשֶּׁה אַף כְּשֶׁבָּא לִפְתֹּחַ לָהֶם בְּסִימָנֵי בְּהֵמָה טְמֵאָה, לֹא פָּתַח אֶלָּא בְּטַהֲרָה, (ויקרא יא, ד): אֶת הַגָּמָל כִּי לֹא מַפְרִיס פַּרְסָה הוּא, אֵין כְּתִיב כָּאן, אֶלָּא כִּי מַעֲלֵה גֵרָה, (ויקרא יא, ה): אֶת הַשָּׁפָן כִּי לֹא מַפְרִיס פַּרְסָה הוּא אֵינוֹ אוֹמֵר, אֶלָּא כִּי מַעֲלֵה גֵרָה, וְכֵן הָאַרְנֶבֶת וְכֵן הַחֲזִיר.
בחודש השני. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר זֶה מַרְחֶשְׁוָן; רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר זֶה אִיָּר (ר"ה י"א):
בחדש השני IN THE SECOND MONTH — Rabbi Eliezer said, “This is the month Marcheshvan”; Rabbi Joshua said, “This is the month Eyar (Rosh Hashanah 11b).
(בראשית ז, י) ויהי לשבעת הימים ומי המבול היו על הארץ מה טיבם של שבעת הימים אמר רב אלו ימי אבילות של מתושלח ללמדך שהספדן של צדיקים מעכבין את הפורענות לבא דבר אחר לשבעת ששינה עליהם הקב"ה סדר בראשית שהיתה חמה יוצאת ממערב ושוקעת במזרח דבר אחר שקבע להם הקב"ה זמן גדול ואח"כ זמן קטן ד"א לשבעת הימים שהטעימם מעין העולם הבא כדי שידעו מה טובה מנעו מהן
With regard to the verse: “And it came to pass that after seven days the waters of the flood were upon the earth” (Genesis 7:10), the Gemara asks: What is the nature of these seven additional days? Rav says: These were the days of mourning for the death of Methuselah; and this is to teach you that eulogies for the righteous prevent calamities from ensuing. Alternatively, “after seven days” means that the Holy One, Blessed be He, altered the order of Creation for that generation, i.e., in seven days He reversed the process of Creation, so that the sun would emerge in the west and set in the east. Alternatively, it means that the Holy One, Blessed be He, designated a substantial period for them, one hundred and twenty years, to repent, and thereafter designated a brief period for them, an additional seven days, as a final opportunity for them to repent. Alternatively, “after seven days” means that during those seven days, God gave them a foretaste of the delights of the World-to-Come, which will be actualized during the seventh millennium, so that they would know what munificence their sins prevented them from receiving. § With regard to the verse: “Of every kosher animal you shall take to you by sevens, husband and wife” (Genesis 7:2), the Gemara asks: Is there marriage for animals? Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani says that Rabbi Yonatan says: The reference is to those animals with which the transgression of relations with another species was not performed. Therefore, the Torah underscores that the animals that entered the ark were husband and wife.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן שְׁלֹשָׁה הִטְעִימָן הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה מֵעֵין הָעוֹלָם הַבָּא אֵלּוּ הֵן אַבְרָהָם יִצְחָק וְיַעֲקֹב אַבְרָהָם דִּכְתִיב בֵּיהּ בַּכֹּל יִצְחָק דִּכְתִיב בֵּיהּ מִכֹּל יַעֲקֹב דִּכְתִיב בֵּיהּ כֹּל
Incidental to the discussion of the verse “And God blessed Abraham with everything” (Genesis 24:1), the Gemara states that the Sages taught: There were three people to whom the Holy One, Blessed be He, gave already in this world a taste of the World-to-Come. They are: Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Abraham, as it is written with regard to him: “And the Lord blessed Abraham with everything” (Genesis 24:1). Isaac, as it is written with regard to him: “And I have eaten from everything” (Genesis 27:33). Jacob, as it is written with regard to him: “Because I have everything” (Genesis 33:11). This teaches that already in their lifetimes they merited everything, i.e., perfection.
שלשה כו' מעין העולם הבא. תימה לרשב"א אמאי לא חשיב נמי איוב דאמר לעיל (בבא בתרא דף טו:) והאתונות רועות על ידיהם מלמד שהטעימו הקב"ה מעין עולם הבא וי"ל דאיוב לא היה אלא בחד מילתא ואברהם ויצחק ויעקב נהנו מעין עוה"ב מכל וכל:
וְאָזְדוּ לְטַעְמַיְיהוּ דְּתַנְיָא בִּשְׁנַת שֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה לְחַיֵּי נֹחַ בַּחֹדֶשׁ הַשֵּׁנִי בְּשִׁבְעָה עָשָׂר יוֹם לַחֹדֶשׁ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר אוֹתוֹ הַיּוֹם שִׁבְעָה עָשָׂר בְּאִיָּיר הָיָה יוֹם שֶׁמַּזַּל כִּימָה שׁוֹקֵעַ בַּיּוֹם וּמַעְיָנוֹת מִתְמַעֲטִין וּמִתּוֹךְ שֶׁשִּׁינּוּ מַעֲשֵׂיהֶן שִׁינָּה הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא עֲלֵיהֶם מַעֲשֵׂה בְרֵאשִׁית וְהֶעֱלָה מַזַּל כִּימָה בַּיּוֹם וְנָטַל שְׁנֵי כּוֹכָבִים מִכִּימָה וְהֵבִיא מַבּוּל לָעוֹלָם רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר אוֹתוֹ הַיּוֹם שִׁבְעָה עָשָׂר בְּמַרְחֶשְׁוָן הָיָה יוֹם שֶׁמַּזַּל כִּימָה עוֹלֶה בַּיּוֹם וּמַעְיָנוֹת מִתְגַּבְּרִים וּמִתּוֹךְ שֶׁשִּׁינּוּ מַעֲשֵׂיהֶם שִׁינָּה הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא עֲלֵיהֶם מַעֲשֵׂה בְרֵאשִׁית וְהֶעֱלָה מַזַּל כִּימָה בַּיּוֹם וְנָטַל שְׁנֵי כּוֹכָבִים וְהֵבִיא מַבּוּל לָעוֹלָם בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ הַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב שֵׁנִי אֶלָּא לְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מַאי שֵׁנִי שֵׁנִי לְדִין בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ הַיְינוּ דְּשִׁינָּה אֶלָּא לְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מַאי שִׁינָּה כִּדְרַב חִסְדָּא דְּאָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא בְּרוֹתְחִין קִלְקְלוּ וּבְרוֹתְחִין נִידּוֹנוּ בְּרוֹתְחִין קִלְקְלוּ בַּעֲבֵירָה וּבְרוֹתְחִין נִידּוֹנוּ כְּתִיב הָכָא וַיָּשֹׁכּוּ הַמָּיִם וּכְתִיב הָתָם וַחֲמַת הַמֶּלֶךְ שָׁכָכָה תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן חַכְמֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מוֹנִין לַמַּבּוּל כְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר וְלַתְּקוּפָה כְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ חַכְמֵי אוּמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם מוֹנִין אַף לַמַּבּוּל כְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ:
And Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua follow their lines of reasoning, as they disagreed about this same issue in another context as well. As it is taught in a baraita: “In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on that day were all the fountains of the great deep broken open, and the windows of heaven were opened” (Genesis 7:11). Rabbi Yehoshua says: That day was the seventeenth of Iyyar, the second month of the year counting from Nisan, which is the day that the constellation of Kima sets during the day and the season that the springs diminish with the increased heat. But because the people of the generation of the flood changed their actions for the worse, the Holy One, Blessed be He, changed for them the acts of Creation, and instead of Kima setting, He caused the constellation of Kima to rise during the day and He removed two stars from Kima, and in this way He brought a flood to the world. Rabbi Eliezer disagrees and says: That day was the seventeenth of Marḥeshvan, the second month counting from Tishrei, which is the day that the constellation of Kima rises during the day and the season that the springs increase. But because the people changed their actions for the worse, the Holy One, Blessed be He, changed for them the acts of Creation and He caused the constellation of Kima to rise during the day, and He removed two stars from it and He brought a flood to the world. The Gemara asks: Granted, according to Rabbi Yehoshua, who holds that the flood began in the month of Iyyar, this is as it is written: “In the second month,” which is referring to the month of Iyyar, the second month from Nisan. But according to Rabbi Eliezer, who holds that the flood began in the month of Marḥeshvan, what is the meaning of “the second month”? The Gemara answers: It means second to the month that includes the day of judgment, which is the month of Tishrei. The Gemara asks further: Granted, according to Rabbi Yehoshua, who holds that the flood began in the month of Iyyar, this is what it means that He changed the acts of Creation with a flood, as rain does not usually fall in Iyyar. But according to Rabbi Eliezer, who holds that the flood began in Marḥeshvan, what did He change? The Gemara answers: Even according to Rabbi Eliezer a change was made, in accordance with the statement of Rav Ḥisda, as Rav Ḥisda said: They sinned with boiling heat, and they were punished with boiling heat; they sinned with the boiling heat of the sin of forbidden sexual relations, and they were punished with the boiling heat of scalding waters. This is derived from a verbal analogy. It is written here, with regard to the flood: “And the waters abated” (Genesis 8:1), and it is written elsewhere, with regard to King Ahasuerus: “And the heated anger of the king abated” (Esther 7:10), which implies that the word “abated” means cooled. This indicates that at first the waters of the flood had been scalding hot. The Sages taught in a baraita: The Jewish Sages count the years from Creation and the flood in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, from Tishrei, and they calculate the cycles of the sun and the moon in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua, from Nisan. The sages of the gentile nations of the world, on the other hand, count both the years from Creation and the flood in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua, from Nisan.
תניא ר' מאיר אומר במדה שאדם מודד מודדין לו דכתיב (ישעיהו כז, ח) בסאסאה בשלחה תריבנה אמר ר' יהושע וכי אפשר לומר כן אדם נותן מלא עומסו לעני בעולם הזה הקב"ה נותן לו מלא עומסו לעולם הבא והכתיב (ישעיהו מ, יב) שמים בזרת תכן ואתה אי אומר כן איזו היא מדה מרובה מדת טובה מרובה או מדת פורענות הוי אומר מדה טובה מרובה ממדת פורענות במדה טובה כתיב (תהלים עח, כג) ויצו שחקים ממעל ודלתי שמים פתח וימטר עליהם מן לאכול ובמידת פורענות הוא אומר (בראשית ז, יא) וארובות השמים נפתחו במידת פורענות כתיב (ישעיהו סו, כד) ויצאו וראו בפגרי האנשים הפושעים בי כי תולעתם לא תמות ואשם לא תכבה והיו דראון לכל בשר והלא אדם מושיט אצבעו באור בעולם הזה מיד נכוה אלא כשם שנותן הקב"ה כח ברשעים לקבל פורענותם כך נותן הקב"ה כח בצדיקים לקבל טובתן:
In a related matter, it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir says: In accordance with the measure that a person metes out for others the heavenly court metes out for him, i.e., the response is commensurate with the action, as it is written: “In full measure [besasse’a] when You send her away do You contend with her” (Isaiah 27:8). The term besasse’a is interpreted as bese’a se’a, meaning that one receives a measure [se’a] commensurate with the measure [bese’a] that he meted out. Rabbi Yehoshua said to Rabbi Meir: And is it possible to say that if a person gives his handful to a pauper in this world, the Holy One, Blessed be He, gives him His handful in the World-to-Come? But isn’t it written: “And meted out heaven with the span” (Isaiah 40:12)? He asked how one can receive so bountiful a reward. Rabbi Meir answered him: And you do not say so? Which of God’s attributes is greater? Is the attribute of reward greater or is the attribute of punishment greater? You must say that the attribute of reward is greater than the attribute of punishment, as with regard to the attribute of reward it is written: “He commanded the clouds from above, and opened the doors of heaven, and rained upon them manna to eat” (Psalms 78:23–24). And with regard to the attribute of punishment at the time of the flood the verse says: “And the windows of the heavens were opened” (Genesis 7:11). To mete out punishment, God opened only windows, which are considerably smaller openings than doors, indicating that the attribute of reward is greater. With regard to the attribute of punishment it is written: “And they shall go forth, and look upon the carcasses of the men who have rebelled against Me; for their worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched; and they shall be an abhorrence to all flesh” (Isaiah 66:24). The Gemara asks: Is it not so that when a person extends his finger into the fire in this world, he is immediately burned? How, then, can one withstand the fire of Gehenna, which is never extinguished? Rather, just as the Holy One, Blessed be He, provides strength to the wicked to receive their punishment, so too, the Holy One, Blessed be He, provides strength to the righteous to receive their reward, His handful.
וכן לענין הטובה מרים וכו' מי דמי התם חדא שעתא הכא שבעה יומי אמר אביי אימא ולענין הטובה אינו כן א"ל רבא הא וכן לענין הטובה קתני אלא אמר רבא הכי קתני וכן לענין הטובה דבאותה מדה ולעולם מדה טובה מרובה ממדת פורענות (שמות ב, ד) ותתצב אחותו מרחוק א"ר יצחק פסוק זה כולו על שם שכינה נאמר ותתצב דכתיב (שמואל א ג, י) ויבא ה' ויתיצב וגו' אחותו דכתיב (משלי ז, ד) אמור לחכמה אחותי את מרחוק דכתיב (ירמיהו לא, ג) מרחוק ה' נראה לי לדעת דכתיב (שמואל א ב, ג) כי אל דעות ה' מה דכתיב (דברים י, יב) מה ה' אלהיך שואל מעמך יעשה דכתיב (עמוס ג, ז) כי לא יעשה [ה'] אלהים דבר לו דכתי' (שופטים ו, כד) ויקרא לו ה' שלום (שמות א, ח)
§ The mishna teaches: And the same is so with regard to the reward for good deeds. Miriam waited for the baby Moses for one hour at the shore of the Nile; therefore, the Jewish people delayed their travels in the desert for seven days to wait for her when she was smitten with leprosy. The Gemara asks: Are these matters comparable? There, Miriam waited one hour, while here, the Jewish people waited for her for seven days. Abaye said: Say this with a slight change: And with regard to the repaying of good it is not so, as a person is not rewarded precisely measure for measure, as the reward may be greater than the good deed. Rava said to him: But the tanna taught in the mishna: And the same is so with regard to the reward of good deeds. Rather, Rava said: This is what the mishna is teaching: And the same is so with regard to the reward of good deeds. It is rewarded with the same measure, i.e., a person is rewarded in the same manner as the good deed, but the measure of good is always greater than the measure of punishment. Therefore, Miriam was rewarded in the same manner as, but in a greater measure than, her deed. With regard to Miriam’s deed the verse states: “And his sister stood afar off, to know what would be done to him” (Exodus 2:4). Rabbi Yitzḥak says: This entire verse is stated in reference to the Divine Presence, i.e., each phrase alludes to the Divine Presence watching over Moses. “And his sister stood”; as it is written: “And the Lord came, and stood” (I Samuel 3:10). “His sister”; as it is written: “Say to wisdom: You are my sister” (Proverbs 7:4). “Afar off”; as it is written: “From afar the Lord appeared to me” (Jeremiah 31:2). “To know”; as it is written: “For the Lord is a God of knowledge” (I Samuel 2:3). “What”; as it is written: “What does the Lord God require of you” (Deuteronomy 10:12). “Would be done”; as it is written: “For the Lord God will do nothing” (Amos 3:7). “To him”; as it is written: “And the Lord said to him: Peace be with you” (Judges 6:23). § The Gemara proceeds to discuss the sojourn of the Jewish people in Egypt. The verse states: “And there arose a new king over Egypt, who knew not Joseph” (Exodus 1:8). Rav and Shmuel disagree about the interpretation of this verse. One says that this means he was actually a new king, and one says that this means that his decrees were transformed as if he were a new king. The one who says that he was actually a new king holds that it is because it is written “new.” And the one who says that his decrees were transformed holds that it is because it is not written: “And the previous king of Egypt died and a new king reigned.” This indicates that the same king remained. According to this interpretation, the words: “Who knew not Joseph” (Exodus 1:8), mean that he was like someone who did not know him at all. Although he certainly knew Joseph and his accomplishments, he acted as if he didn’t.
ולעולם מדה טובה מרובה ממדת פורענות - וא"ת הא מצינו מדת פורענות גדולה ממדת טובה דכתיב איכה ירדוף אחד אלף ושנים יניסו רבבה (דברים ל״ב:ל׳) גבי מדת פורענות וגבי מדה טובה כתיב ורדפו מכם חמשה מאה (ויקרא כ״ו:ח׳) וי"ל דעדיין גבי מדת פורענות מיירי רדיפה ולא הריגה אבל הכא דכתיב ורדפו מכם חמשה סיפא דקרא ונפלו אויביכם לפניכם לחרב. מספר הישר:
וכן לענין הטובה מרים וכו' מי דמי התם חדא שעתא הכא שבעה יומי אמר אביי אימא ולענין הטובה אינו כן א"ל רבא הא וכן לענין הטובה קתני אלא אמר רבא הכי קתני וכן לענין הטובה דבאותה מדה ולעולם מדה טובה מרובה ממדת פורענות (שמות ב, ד) ותתצב אחותו מרחוק א"ר יצחק פסוק זה כולו על שם שכינה נאמר ותתצב דכתיב (שמואל א ג, י) ויבא ה' ויתיצב וגו' אחותו דכתיב (משלי ז, ד) אמור לחכמה אחותי את מרחוק דכתיב (ירמיהו לא, ג) מרחוק ה' נראה לי לדעת דכתיב (שמואל א ב, ג) כי אל דעות ה' מה דכתיב (דברים י, יב) מה ה' אלהיך שואל מעמך יעשה דכתיב (עמוס ג, ז) כי לא יעשה [ה'] אלהים דבר לו דכתי' (שופטים ו, כד) ויקרא לו ה' שלום (שמות א, ח)
The mishna continues: And the same is so with regard to the reward of good deeds; a person is rewarded measure for measure. Miriam waited for the baby Moses for one hour at the shore of the Nile, as it is stated: “And his sister stood afar off, to know what would be done to him” (Exodus 2:4). Therefore the Jewish people delayed their travels in the desert for seven days to wait for her when she was smitten with leprosy, as it is stated: “And Miriam was confined outside of the camp seven days; and the people journeyed not until Miriam was brought in again” (Numbers 12:15).
מרים המתינה למשה שעה אחת - לאו דוקא נקט שעה אלא שליש שעה או רביע דקתני בתוספתא מדה טובה מרובה ממדת פורענות על אחת חמש מאות אבל קשיא לרבי והא במרגלים נפרע מהם יום לשנה יום לשנה אם כן היתה מרובה מדת פורענות ממדה טובה של מרים ועוד בפ"ק דחגיגה (דף ה:) דדרש רבי יוחנן אותי יום יום ידרושון שכל העוסק בתורה אפילו יום אחד כאילו עוסק כל השנה כולה וכן במדת פורענות כתיב (במדבר י״ד:ל״ד) במספר הימים אשר תרתם את הארץ מ' יום וגו' אלמא דכי הדדי נינהו:
בעצם היום הזה. לִמֶּדְךָ הַכָּתוּב שֶׁהָיוּ בְנֵי דוֹרוֹ אוֹמְרִים אִלּוּ אָנוּ רוֹאִים אוֹתוֹ נִכְנָס לַתֵּבָה, אָנוּ שׁוֹבְרִין אוֹתָהּ וְהוֹרְגִין אוֹתוֹ, אָמַר הַקָּבָּ"ה אֲנִי מַכְנִיסוֹ לְעֵינֵי כֻלָּם וְנִרְאֶה דְבַר מִי יָקוּם:
בעצם היום הזה IN THE SELFSAME DAY — Scripture teaches you that the people of his generation said: “If we see him enter the Ark we will smash it up and kill him”. The Holy One, blessed be He, thereupon said, ‘‘I will let him enter before the eyes of everyone and we shall see whose word prevails” (Genesis Rabbah 32:8).
וַֽיְהִ֧י הַמַּבּ֛וּל אַרְבָּעִ֥ים י֖וֹם עַל־הָאָ֑רֶץ וַיִּרְבּ֣וּ הַמַּ֗יִם וַיִּשְׂאוּ֙ אֶת־הַתֵּבָ֔ה וַתָּ֖רׇם מֵעַ֥ל הָאָֽרֶץ׃ וַיִּגְבְּר֥וּ הַמַּ֛יִם וַיִּרְבּ֥וּ מְאֹ֖ד עַל־הָאָ֑רֶץ וַתֵּ֥לֶךְ הַתֵּבָ֖ה עַל־פְּנֵ֥י הַמָּֽיִם׃ וְהַמַּ֗יִם גָּ֥בְר֛וּ מְאֹ֥ד מְאֹ֖ד עַל־הָאָ֑רֶץ וַיְכֻסּ֗וּ כׇּל־הֶֽהָרִים֙ הַגְּבֹהִ֔ים אֲשֶׁר־תַּ֖חַת כׇּל־הַשָּׁמָֽיִם׃ חֲמֵ֨שׁ עֶשְׂרֵ֤ה אַמָּה֙ מִלְמַ֔עְלָה גָּבְר֖וּ הַמָּ֑יִם וַיְכֻסּ֖וּ הֶהָרִֽים׃ וַיִּגְוַ֞ע כׇּל־בָּשָׂ֣ר ׀ הָרֹמֵ֣שׂ עַל־הָאָ֗רֶץ בָּע֤וֹף וּבַבְּהֵמָה֙ וּבַ֣חַיָּ֔ה וּבְכׇל־הַשֶּׁ֖רֶץ הַשֹּׁרֵ֣ץ עַל־הָאָ֑רֶץ וְכֹ֖ל הָאָדָֽם׃ כֹּ֡ל אֲשֶׁר֩ נִשְׁמַת־ר֨וּחַ חַיִּ֜ים בְּאַפָּ֗יו מִכֹּ֛ל אֲשֶׁ֥ר בֶּחָֽרָבָ֖ה מֵֽתוּ׃ וַיִּ֜מַח אֶֽת־כׇּל־הַיְק֣וּם ׀ אֲשֶׁ֣ר ׀ עַל־פְּנֵ֣י הָֽאֲדָמָ֗ה מֵאָדָ֤ם עַד־בְּהֵמָה֙ עַד־רֶ֙מֶשׂ֙ וְעַד־ע֣וֹף הַשָּׁמַ֔יִם וַיִּמָּח֖וּ מִן־הָאָ֑רֶץ וַיִּשָּׁ֧אֶר אַךְ־נֹ֛חַ וַֽאֲשֶׁ֥ר אִתּ֖וֹ בַּתֵּבָֽה׃ וַיִּגְבְּר֥וּ הַמַּ֖יִם עַל־הָאָ֑רֶץ חֲמִשִּׁ֥ים וּמְאַ֖ת יֽוֹם׃ וַיִּזְכֹּ֤ר אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶת־נֹ֔חַ וְאֵ֤ת כׇּל־הַֽחַיָּה֙ וְאֶת־כׇּל־הַבְּהֵמָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר אִתּ֖וֹ בַּתֵּבָ֑ה וַיַּעֲבֵ֨ר אֱלֹהִ֥ים ר֙וּחַ֙ עַל־הָאָ֔רֶץ וַיָּשֹׁ֖כּוּ הַמָּֽיִם׃ וַיִּסָּֽכְרוּ֙ מַעְיְנֹ֣ת תְּה֔וֹם וַֽאֲרֻבֹּ֖ת הַשָּׁמָ֑יִם וַיִּכָּלֵ֥א הַגֶּ֖שֶׁם מִן־הַשָּׁמָֽיִם׃ וַיָּשֻׁ֧בוּ הַמַּ֛יִם מֵעַ֥ל הָאָ֖רֶץ הָל֣וֹךְ וָשׁ֑וֹב וַיַּחְסְר֣וּ הַמַּ֔יִם מִקְצֵ֕ה חֲמִשִּׁ֥ים וּמְאַ֖ת יֽוֹם׃ וַתָּ֤נַח הַתֵּבָה֙ בַּחֹ֣דֶשׁ הַשְּׁבִיעִ֔י בְּשִׁבְעָה־עָשָׂ֥ר י֖וֹם לַחֹ֑דֶשׁ עַ֖ל הָרֵ֥י אֲרָרָֽט׃ וְהַמַּ֗יִם הָיוּ֙ הָל֣וֹךְ וְחָס֔וֹר עַ֖ד הַחֹ֣דֶשׁ הָֽעֲשִׂירִ֑י בָּֽעֲשִׂירִי֙ בְּאֶחָ֣ד לַחֹ֔דֶשׁ נִרְא֖וּ רָאשֵׁ֥י הֶֽהָרִֽים׃ וַֽיְהִ֕י מִקֵּ֖ץ אַרְבָּעִ֣ים י֑וֹם וַיִּפְתַּ֣ח נֹ֔חַ אֶת־חַלּ֥וֹן הַתֵּבָ֖ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר עָשָֽׂה׃ וַיְשַׁלַּ֖ח אֶת־הָֽעֹרֵ֑ב וַיֵּצֵ֤א יָצוֹא֙ וָשׁ֔וֹב עַד־יְבֹ֥שֶׁת הַמַּ֖יִם מֵעַ֥ל הָאָֽרֶץ׃ וַיְשַׁלַּ֥ח אֶת־הַיּוֹנָ֖ה מֵאִתּ֑וֹ לִרְאוֹת֙ הֲקַ֣לּוּ הַמַּ֔יִם מֵעַ֖ל פְּנֵ֥י הָֽאֲדָמָֽה׃ וְלֹֽא־מָצְאָה֩ הַיּוֹנָ֨ה מָנ֜וֹחַ לְכַף־רַגְלָ֗הּ וַתָּ֤שׇׁב אֵלָיו֙ אֶל־הַתֵּבָ֔ה כִּי־מַ֖יִם עַל־פְּנֵ֣י כׇל־הָאָ֑רֶץ וַיִּשְׁלַ֤ח יָדוֹ֙ וַיִּקָּחֶ֔הָ וַיָּבֵ֥א אֹתָ֛הּ אֵלָ֖יו אֶל־הַתֵּבָֽה׃ וַיָּ֣חֶל ע֔וֹד שִׁבְעַ֥ת יָמִ֖ים אֲחֵרִ֑ים וַיֹּ֛סֶף שַׁלַּ֥ח אֶת־הַיּוֹנָ֖ה מִן־הַתֵּבָֽה׃ וַתָּבֹ֨א אֵלָ֤יו הַיּוֹנָה֙ לְעֵ֣ת עֶ֔רֶב וְהִנֵּ֥ה עֲלֵה־זַ֖יִת טָרָ֣ף בְּפִ֑יהָ וַיֵּ֣דַע נֹ֔חַ כִּי־קַ֥לּוּ הַמַּ֖יִם מֵעַ֥ל הָאָֽרֶץ׃ וַיִּיָּ֣חֶל ע֔וֹד שִׁבְעַ֥ת יָמִ֖ים אֲחֵרִ֑ים וַיְשַׁלַּח֙ אֶת־הַיּוֹנָ֔ה וְלֹֽא־יָסְפָ֥ה שׁוּב־אֵלָ֖יו עֽוֹד׃ וַֽ֠יְהִ֠י בְּאַחַ֨ת וְשֵׁשׁ־מֵא֜וֹת שָׁנָ֗ה בָּֽרִאשׁוֹן֙ בְּאֶחָ֣ד לַחֹ֔דֶשׁ חָֽרְב֥וּ הַמַּ֖יִם מֵעַ֣ל הָאָ֑רֶץ וַיָּ֤סַר נֹ֙חַ֙ אֶת־מִכְסֵ֣ה הַתֵּבָ֔ה וַיַּ֕רְא וְהִנֵּ֥ה חָֽרְב֖וּ פְּנֵ֥י הָֽאֲדָמָֽה׃ וּבַחֹ֙דֶשׁ֙ הַשֵּׁנִ֔י בְּשִׁבְעָ֧ה וְעֶשְׂרִ֛ים י֖וֹם לַחֹ֑דֶשׁ יָבְשָׁ֖ה הָאָֽרֶץ׃ {ס}
The Flood continued forty days on the earth, and the waters increased and raised the ark so that it rose above the earth. The waters swelled and increased greatly upon the earth, and the ark drifted upon the waters. When the waters had swelled much more upon the earth, all the highest mountains everywhere under the sky were covered. Fifteen cubits higher did the waters swell, as the mountains were covered. And all flesh that stirred on earth perished—birds, cattle, beasts, and all the things that swarmed upon the earth, and all mankind. All in whose nostrils was the merest breath of life, all that was on dry land, died. All existence on earth was blotted out—man, cattle, creeping things, and birds of the sky; they were blotted out from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark. And when the waters had swelled on the earth one hundred and fifty days, God remembered Noah and all the beasts and all the cattle that were with him in the ark, and God caused a wind to blow across the earth, and the waters subsided. The fountains of the deep and the floodgates of the sky were stopped up, and the rain from the sky was held back; the waters then receded steadily from the earth. At the end of one hundred and fifty days the waters diminished, so that in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat. The waters went on diminishing until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first of the month, the tops of the mountains became visible. At the end of forty days, Noah opened the window of the ark that he had made and sent out the raven; it went to and fro until the waters had dried up from the earth. Then he sent out the dove to see whether the waters had decreased from the surface of the ground. But the dove could not find a resting place for its foot, and returned to him to the ark, for there was water over all the earth. So putting out his hand, he took it into the ark with him. He waited another seven days, and again sent out the dove from the ark. The dove came back to him toward evening, and there in its bill was a plucked-off olive leaf! Then Noah knew that the waters had decreased on the earth. He waited still another seven days and sent the dove forth; and it did not return to him any more. In the six hundred and first year, in the first month, on the first of the month, the waters began to dry from the earth; and when Noah removed the covering of the ark, he saw that the surface of the ground was drying. And in the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the earth was dry. God spoke to Noah, saying,
מאד מאד. פעמים שאין לרוב ממנו. וכן אחר שאמר ויכסו כל ההרים הגבוהים למה אמרו ויכסו ההרים. וכן פי' כל הר גבוה כסה במים וחמש עשרה אמה כסו ההרים הנזכרים ואנחנו נאמין בדברי אלהינו ונעזוב הבלי בני האדם שיאמרו על הר אחד גבוה שהוא במלכות יון:
EXCEEDINGLY. The word me’od (exceedingly) is repeated in the text in order to stress that the waters prevailed to their maximum potential. Why state, and the mountains were covered (v. 20), after having said, and all the high mountains that were under the whole heaven were covered (v. 19)? Its meaning is: All the high mountains were covered with water (v. 19), and these mountains were covered by fifteen cubits of water (v. 20). There are those who maintain that there is a very tall mountain in Greece that the waters did not cover. However, we believe the words of our God and we put aside the foolish nonsense of man.
מִי שֶׁנָּפְלָה עָלָיו מַפּוֹלֶת וְכוּ׳. מַאי קָאָמַר? לָא מִיבַּעְיָא קָאָמַר: לָא מִיבַּעְיָא סָפֵק הוּא שָׁם סָפֵק אֵינוֹ שָׁם, דְּאִי אִיתֵיהּ חַי — הוּא דִּמְפַקְּחִין, אֶלָּא אֲפִילּוּ סָפֵק חַי סָפֵק מֵת — מְפַקְּחִין. וְלָא מִיבַּעְיָא סָפֵק חַי סָפֵק מֵת, דְּיִשְׂרָאֵל, אֶלָּא אֲפִילּוּ סָפֵק גּוֹי סָפֵק יִשְׂרָאֵל — מְפַקְּחִין. מְצָאוּהוּ חַי — מְפַקְּחִין. מְצָאוּהוּ חַי, פְּשִׁיטָא! לָא צְרִיכָא, דַּאֲפִילּוּ לְחַיֵּי שָׁעָה. וְאִם מֵת יַנִּיחוּהוּ. הָא נָמֵי פְּשִׁיטָא? לָא צְרִיכָא, לְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן לָקִישׁ. דְּתַנְיָא: אֵין מַצִּילִין אֶת הַמֵּת מִפְּנֵי הַדְּלֵיקָה, אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן לָקִישׁ: שָׁמַעְתִּי שֶׁמַּצִּילִין אֶת הַמֵּת מִפְּנֵי הַדְּלֵיקָה. וַאֲפִילּוּ רַבִּי יְהוּדָה בֶּן לָקִישׁ לָא קָאָמַר אֶלָּא מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁאָדָם בָּהוּל עַל מֵתוֹ, אִי לָא שָׁרֵית לֵיהּ — אָתֵי לְכַבּוֹיֵי. אֲבָל הָכָא, אִי לָא שָׁרֵית לֵיהּ — מַאי אִית לֵיהּ לְמֶעְבַּד? תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: עַד הֵיכָן הוּא בּוֹדֵק? עַד חוֹטְמוֹ. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים: עַד לִבּוֹ. בָּדַק וּמָצָא עֶלְיוֹנִים מֵתִים, לֹא יֹאמַר: כְּבָר מֵתוּ הַתַּחְתּוֹנִים. מַעֲשֶׂה הָיָה וּמָצְאוּ עֶלְיוֹנִים מֵתִים וְתַחְתּוֹנִים חַיִּים. נֵימָא הָנֵי תַּנָּאֵי כִּי הָנֵי תַּנָּאֵי. דְּתַנְיָא: מֵהֵיכָן הַוָּלָד נוֹצָר — מֵרֹאשׁוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״מִמְּעֵי אִמִּי אַתָּה גוֹזִי״, וְאוֹמֵר: ״גׇּזִּי נִזְרֵךְ וְהַשְׁלִיכִי״. אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר: מִטִּיבּוּרוֹ, וּמְשַׁלֵּחַ שׇׁרָשָׁיו אֵילָךְ וְאֵילָךְ. אֲפִילּוּ תֵּימָא אַבָּא שָׁאוּל, עַד כָּאן לָא קָא אָמַר אַבָּא שָׁאוּל הָתָם אֶלָּא לְעִנְיַן יְצִירָה, דְּכֹל מִידֵּי מִמְּצִיעֲתֵיהּ מִיתְּצַר, אֲבָל לְעִנְיַן פִּקּוּחַ נֶפֶשׁ — אֲפִילּוּ אַבָּא שָׁאוּל מוֹדֵי דְּעִיקַּר חַיּוּתָא בְּאַפֵּיהּ הוּא, דִּכְתִיב: ״כׇּל אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁמַת רוּחַ חַיִּים בְּאַפָּיו״.
§ It was taught in the mishna: With regard to one upon whom a rockslide fell, and there is uncertainty whether he is there under the debris or whether he is not there; and there is uncertainty whether he is still alive or whether he is dead; and there is uncertainty whether the person under the debris is a gentile or whether he is Jew, one clears the pile from atop him. The Gemara asks: What is the mishna saying? Why does it bring three different uncertainties to illustrate the principle that one violates Shabbat to save a life even in a case of uncertainty? The Gemara explains: It is speaking using the style of: Needless to say, and the mishna should be understood as follows: Needless to say, in a case where it is uncertain whether he is there or not there, one removes the debris, since if he is there and he is alive, one must clear the debris. But even if it is uncertain whether he is alive or dead, one must clear the debris. And needless to say, when there is uncertainty whether he is alive or dead, but it is certain that he is a Jew, one must clear the debris. Rather, one must clear the debris even if there is uncertainty whether he is a gentile or a Jew. § The mishna taught: If they found him alive, they continue to remove the debris. The Gemara is surprised at this: If they find him alive, it is obvious that they remove the debris, since that is saving a life. The Gemara answers: No, it is necessary to teach that one must desecrate Shabbat for his sake even if it is clear that he will live only a short while and will die soon after. § The mishna taught: If they found him dead, they should leave him. The Gemara is surprised at this: Isn’t this also obvious? What allowance might there be to desecrate Shabbat for the sake of a corpse? The Gemara answers: No, this ruling is necessary according to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda ben Lakish, as it was taught in a baraita: One may not save a corpse from a fire, since one may not violate Shabbat for the sake of the dead. Rabbi Yehuda ben Lakish said: I heard that one may save a corpse from a fire. The Gemara challenges: Even Rabbi Yehuda ben Lakish said this only with regard to a fire because a person is agitated over his dead relative, whose body might burn in the fire. If you do not permit him to remove the corpse he may come to extinguish the fire and transgress a severe Torah prohibition. However, here, in the case of a rockslide or building collapse, if you do not permit him to remove the debris, what might he do? In this case, there is no concern of Shabbat desecration, and preserving the dignity of the dead does not override Shabbat. The Rabbis taught: If a person is buried under a collapsed building, until what point does one check to clarify whether the victim is still alive? Until what point is he allowed to continue clearing the debris? They said: One clears until the victim’s nose. If there is no sign of life, i.e., if he is not breathing, he is certainly dead. And some say: One clears until the victim’s heart to check for a heartbeat. If several people are buried and one checked and found the upper ones under the debris dead, he should not say: The lower ones are likely also already dead, and there is no point in continuing to search. There was an incident where they found the upper ones dead and the lower ones alive. The Gemara comments: Let us say that the dispute between these tanna’im who disagree about checking for signs of life is like the dispute between these tanna’im who disagree about the formation of the fetus. As it was taught in a baraita: From what point is the fetus created? It is from its head, as it is stated: “You are He Who took me [gozi] out of my mother’s womb” (Psalms 71:6), and it says: “Cut off [gozi] your hair, and cast it away” (Jeremiah 7:29). These verses suggest that one is created from the head, the place of the hair. Abba Shaul says: A person is created from his navel, and he sends his roots in every direction until he attains the image of a person. The tanna who says that the presence of life is determined based on the nose holds in accordance with the opinion of the tanna who maintains that the formation of a fetus begins with its head. Likewise, the tanna who says the presence of life is determined based on the heart holds in accordance with the opinion of the one who thinks the formation of a fetus begins with its navel. The Gemara rejects this: Even if you say that the formation of a fetus from the navel is the opinion of Abba Shaul, he may nevertheless require one to check the nose for signs of life. Until now, Abba Shaul spoke there only about formation, saying that everything is created from its middle; however, as for saving a life, even Abba Shaul admits that the main sign of life is in the nose, as it is written: “All in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life” (Genesis 7:22).
מתני׳ נמצא מכוון בין שתי עיירות שתיהן מביאות שתי עגלות דברי רבי אליעזר ואין ירושלים מביאה עגלה ערופה נמצא ראשו במקום אחד וגופו במקום אחר מוליכין הראש אצל הגוף דברי רבי אליעזר רבי עקיבא אומר הגוף אצל הראש מאין היו מודדין רבי אליעזר אומר מטיבורו רבי עקיבא אומר מחוטמו רבי אליעזר בן יעקב אומר ממקום שנעשה חלל מצוארו גמ׳ מאי טעמא דרבי אליעזר קסבר אפשר לצמצם וקרובה ואפילו קרובות ואין ירושלים מביאה עגלה ערופה דאמר קרא (דברים כא, א) לרשתה וקסבר ירושלים לא נתחלקה לשבטים נמצא ראשו במקום כו' במאי קמפלגי אילימא לענין מדידה קמיפלגי הא מדקתני סיפא מאין היו מודדין מכלל דרישא לא במדידה עסקינן אמר ר' יצחק במת מצוה קנה מקומו קמיפלגי והכי קאמר לקוברו קנה מקומו והיכא דנמצא ראשו במקום אחד וגופו במקום אחר מוליכין הראש אצל הגוף דברי ר' אליעזר ר' עקיבא אומר הגוף אצל הראש במאי קמיפלגי מר סבר גופיה בדוכתיה נפיל רישא דנאדי ונפיל ומר סבר רישא היכא דנפיל נפיל גופא הוא דרהיט אזיל מאין היו מודדין במאי קמיפלגי מר סבר עיקר חיותא באפיה ומר סבר עיקר חיותא בטיבוריה לימא כי הני תנאי מהיכן הולד נוצר מראשו וכן הוא אומר (תהלים עא, ו) ממעי אמי אתה גוזי ואומר (ירמיהו ז, כט) גזי נזרך והשליכי וגו' אבא שאול אומר מטיבורו ומשלח שרשו אילך ואילך אפילו תימא אבא שאול ע"כ לא קאמר אבא שאול אלא לענין יצירה דכי מיתצר ולד ממציעתיה מיתצר אבל לענין חיותא דכולי עלמא באפיה הוא דכתיב (בראשית ז, כב) כל אשר נשמת רוח חיים באפיו וגו'
MISHNA: If the slain person is found precisely between two cities, the inhabitants of the two of them bring two heifers total; this is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. And the inhabitants of Jerusalem do not bring a heifer whose neck is broken, even if Jerusalem is the city closest to the slain victim. If the head of the corpse was found in one place and his body was found in a different place, they bring the head next to the body; this is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Akiva says: They bring the body next to the head. From where on the body would they measure the distance? Rabbi Eliezer says: From his navel. Rabbi Akiva says: From his nose. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: From the place where he became a slain person, which is from the neck. GEMARA: The Gemara explains: What is the reasoning of Rabbi Eliezer, that when a body is found precisely between two cities, the inhabitants of each city bring a heifer? His ruling is based on two factors. First, he holds that it is possible to measure precisely and that it is a real possibility to determine that both cities are exactly the same distance from the corpse. And second, he interprets the term “That is nearest” (Deuteronomy 21:3), to be referring not only to one city. It can even be understood as: That are nearest, so that the halakhot apply to more than one city. The mishna taught: And the inhabitants of Jerusalem do not bring a heifer whose neck is broken. The Gemara explains: This is because the verse states: “If one be found slain in the land which the Lord your God has given you to possess it” (Deuteronomy 21:1), and this tanna holds that Jerusalem was not divided among the tribes in the division of Eretz Yisrael. It was not given as a possession to any particular person but belongs to all; therefore the halakha of the heifer whose neck is broken does not apply to it. § With regard to the halakha of a corpse whose head was found in one place and its body elsewhere, the Gemara asks: With regard to what halakha do they disagree? If we say they disagree with regard to whether the measurement is taken from the head or the body, from the fact that the latter clause teaches: From where would they measure the distance, it may be inferred that in the first clause we are not dealing with measurement. Rabbi Yitzḥak said: They disagree with regard to a different matter, the question of whether a corpse with no one to bury it [met mitzva] acquires its place, meaning if an unattended corpse must be buried where it is found. And this is what the mishna is saying: With regard to burying him, the victim acquires his place, and he is buried there. The mishna continues: And in a case where his head is found in one place and his body is found in a different place, they bring the head next to the body and bury him there; this is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Akiva says: They bring the body next to the head. The Gemara explains: With regard to what do they disagree? They both agree that he should be buried in the place where he was killed, but one Sage, Rabbi Eliezer, holds that his body fell in its place, and it was the head that rolled away and fell. And one Sage, Rabbi Akiva, holds that his head fell where it fell, and it was the body that went and continued onward. Therefore, the body is brought to the head. § The mishna taught that there is a dispute concerning the question: From where on the body would they measure the distance? The Gemara asks: With regard to what do they disagree? One Sage, Rabbi Akiva, holds: A person’s life is sustained mainly in his nose, in his respiratory system. And one Sage, Rabbi Eliezer, holds: His life is mainly in the area of his navel, in his digestive system. The Gemara suggests: Shall we say that these tanna’im are like those tanna’im, who had a dispute as it is taught in a baraita: From where is an embryo formed? From its head, and so the verse states: “Out of my mother’s womb You pulled me [gozi]” (Psalms 71:6). And the proof that “gozi” is referring to the head is from the verse that states: “Cut off [gozi] your hair, and cast it away” (Jeremiah 7:29). In this verse, the term gozi relates to the hair of the head. Abba Shaul says: An embryo is formed from its navel, and it sends its roots forth. This dispute concerning the initial formation of an embryo also appears to depend on where the main source of life in a person is. The Gemara refutes this comparison: You can even say that both tanna’im of the mishna agree with Abba Shaul, as Abba Shaul says his opinion only with regard to the forming of an embryo, that when an embryo is formed, it is formed from its middle. But with regard to life, everyone, i.e., both tanna’im in the baraita, agree that it is in his nose, as it is written: “All in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life” (Genesis 7:22).
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: הָיוּ יוֹשְׁבִין בְּבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ וְהֵבִיאוּ אוּר לִפְנֵיהֶם, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: כׇּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מְבָרֵךְ לְעַצְמוֹ. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: אֶחָד מְבָרֵךְ לְכוּלָּן — מִשּׁוּם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״בְּרׇב עָם הַדְרַת מֶלֶךְ״. בִּשְׁלָמָא בֵּית הִלֵּל מְפָרְשִׁי טַעְמָא, אֶלָּא בֵּית שַׁמַּאי מַאי טַעְמָא? קָסָבְרִי מִפְּנֵי בִּיטּוּל בֵּית הַמִּדְרָשׁ. תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: שֶׁל בֵּית רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל לֹא הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים ״מַרְפֵּא״ בְּבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ, מִפְּנֵי בִּיטּוּל בֵּית הַמִּדְרָשׁ.
The Sages taught in a baraita: People were seated in the study hall and they brought fire before them at the conclusion of Shabbat. Beit Shammai say: Each and every individual recites a blessing for himself; and Beit Hillel say: One recites a blessing on behalf of everyone and the others answer amen. Beit Hillel’s reasoning is as it is stated: “The splendor of the King is in the multitude of the people” (Proverbs 14:28). When everyone joins together to hear the blessing, the name of God is glorified. The Gemara asks: Granted, Beit Hillel, they explain their reasoning, but what is the reason for the opinion of Beit Shammai to prohibit reciting the blessing communally? The Gemara answers: They hold that it is prohibited due to the fact that it will lead to suspension of study in the study hall. Waiting for someone to recite the blessing will interrupt Torah study for several minutes. This concern for disrupting Torah study was also taught in a baraita: The members of the house of Rabban Gamliel would not say good health when someone sneezed in the study hall, due to the fact that it would lead to suspension of study in the study hall.
מפני בטול בית המדרש – שבזמן שאחד מברך לכולם הם צריכים לשתוק מגרסתם כדי שיתכונו כולם וישמעו אליו ויענו אמן:
מרפא – לאדם המתעטש שרגילים לומר אסותא:
רש"י ד"ה מרפא כו' שרגילים לומר כו'. והוא בפרקי דר"א פרק נ"ב מיום שנבראו שמים וארץ לא היה אדם חולה אלא אם היה בדרך או בשוק והיה עוטש ונשמתו יוצא מנחיריו עד שבא יעקב אבינו ובקש רחמים ואמר רבון כל העולמים אל תקח נפשי ממני עד שאצוה את בני ובנותי ונעתר לו לפיכך חייב אדם לומר בעטישתו חיים שנהפך המות הזה לאור שנאמר עטישותיו תהל אור:
מתני׳ פרת חטאת ששרפה חוץ מגתה וכן שעיר המשתלח שהקריב בחוץ פטור שנאמר (ויקרא יז, ד) ואל פתח אהל מועד לא הביאו כל שאין ראוי לבא אל פתח אהל מועד אין חייבין עליו
MISHNA: With regard to the red heifer of purification that one burned outside its pit, the pit being an excavation on the Mount of Olives opposite the entrance to the Sanctuary designated for its slaughter and its burning, and likewise the scapegoat that one sacrificed outside the Temple courtyard rather than casting it off a cliff as prescribed, he is exempt from punishment for violating the transgression of slaughtering and sacrificing outside the Temple courtyard. The source for this is as it is stated with regard to slaughter of sacrificial animals outside the courtyard: “Whatever man…that slaughters outside the camp, and to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting he did not bring it, to present it as an offering to the Lord before the Tabernacle of the Lord” (Leviticus 17:3–4). From that verse it is derived: For any offering that is not fit to come to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting for sacrifice on the altar, e.g., the red heifer and the scapegoat, one is not liable for its slaughter and sacrifice outside its place.
מאי חוץ מגתה אמר ר"ל חוץ ממקום הבדוק לה אמר לו רבי יוחנן והלא כל א"י בדוקה היא אלא א"ר יוחנן כגון ששחטה לפנים מן חומת ירושלים
GEMARA: The mishna teaches that one who burns the red heifer outside its pit is not liable for sacrificing outside the Temple courtyard. The Gemara clarifies: What is the meaning of: Outside its pit? Reish Lakish said: It means outside the place that was inspected to ensure that it is not a gravesite, which would render it impure. Rabbi Yoḥanan said to him: But is not all of Eretz Yisrael inspected for impurity? Therefore, there is no need for the site of the burning of the red heifer to be specially inspected. Rather, Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The term: Outside its pit, is referring to a case where the priest slaughtered the red heifer within the walls of Jerusalem and not in the place outside the walls, as the Torah prescribes: “And it shall be brought outside the camp, and it shall be slaughtered before him” (Numbers 19:3).
איתיבי' רבי יוחנן לריש לקיש פעם אחד מצאו עצמות בלשכת דיר העצים ובקשו לגזור טומאה על ירושלים עמד רבי יהושע על רגליו ואמר לא בושה וכלימה היא לנו שנגזור טומאה על עיר אבותינו איה מתי מבול איה מתי נבוכדנצר מדקאמר הכי לאו למימרא דלא הוו ולטעמיך הרוגי נבוכדנצר הכי נמי דלא הוו אלא הוו ופנינהו הכא נמי הוו ופנינהו ואי אפנו הא איפני נהי דאיפני מירושלים מכולה א"י לא איפני איכא דאמרי איתיביה ר"ל לרבי יוחנן איה מתי מבול איה מתי נבוכדנאצר מאי לאו מדהני הוו הני נמי הוו מידי אירי' הא כדאיתיה והא כדאיתיה איתיביה (בראשית ז, כב) מכל אשר בחרבה מתו בשלמא לדידי דאמינא ירד מבול לא"י משום הכי מתו אלא לדידך אמאי מתו משום הבלא כדרב חסדא דאמר רב חסדא ברותחין קלקלו וברותחין נידונו דכתיב הכא (בראשית ח, א) וישוכו המים וכתיב התם (אסתר ז, י) וחמת המלך שככה איכא דאמרי איתיביה רבי יוחנן לר"ל מכל אשר בחרבה מתו בשלמא לדידי דאמינא לא ירד מבול לא"י משום הכי הוי חרבה אלא לדידך מאי חרבה חרבה שהיתה מעיקרא ואמאי קרי ליה חרבה כדרב חסדא דאמר רב חסדא בדור המבול לא נגזרה גזרה על דגים שבים שנאמר מכל אשר בחרבה מתו ולא דגים שבים בשלמא למ"ד לא ירד מבול לא"י היינו דקם רימא התם אלא למ"ד ירד רימא היכא קם א"ר ינאי גוריות הכניסו בתיבה והאמר רבה בר בר חנה לדידי חזי לי אורזילא דרימא בת יומא והוי כהר תבור והר תבור כמה הויא ארבעין פרסי משכא דצואריה תלתא פרסי מרבעתא דרישא פרסא ופלגא רמא כבא וסכר ירדנא א"ר יוחנן ראשו הכניסו לתיבה והאמר מר מרבעתא דרישא פרסא ופלגא אלא ראש חוטמו הכניסו לתיבה והא א"ר יוחנן לא ירד מבול לא"י לדברי ר"ל קאמר והא קסגיא תיבה אמר ר"ל קרניו קשרו בתיבה והאמר רב חסדא אנשי דור המבול ברותחין קלקלו וברותחין נידונו ולטעמיך תיבה היכי סגיא ועוד עוג מלך הבשן היכא קאי אלא נס נעשה להם שנצטננו בצידי התיבה ולר"ש [בן לקיש] נהי נמי דירד מבול לא"י והא לא פש דאמר ר"ל למה נקרא שמה מצולה שכל מתי מבול נצתללו שם ורבי יוחנן אמר למה נקרא שמה שנער שכל מתי מבול ננערו שם אי אפשר דלא אידבקו א"ר אבהו למה נקרא שמה שנער שמנערת עשיריה והא קחזינן דהוו תלתא דרי לא משכי א"ר אמי כל האוכל מעפרה של בבל כאילו אוכל בשר אבותיו תנ"ה כל האוכל מעפרה של בבל כאילו אוכל בשר אבותיו וי"א כאילו אוכל שקצים ורמשים:
Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said that Rabbi Yoḥanan would reply: The Sages established a higher standard for purity in the case of the red heifer, but generally speaking there is no concern for hidden sources of impurity in Eretz Yisrael caused by those who perished in the flood. Rabbi Yoḥanan raised an objection to Reish Lakish from a baraita (see Tosefta, Eduyyot 3:3): Once, human bones were found in the Chamber of the Woodshed, and the Sages sought to decree impurity upon Jerusalem, i.e., to proclaim all who go there to be impure, as if a corpse can be found in a chamber of the Temple there is reason to be concerned that there are lost graves in other places as well. Rabbi Yehoshua stood upon his feet and said: Is it not a shame and disgrace for us to decree impurity upon the city of our fathers because of this concern? Show me: Where are the dead of the flood, and where are all of the dead killed by Nebuchadnezzar? Rabbi Yoḥanan infers: From the fact that Rabbi Yehoshua said this, is this not to say that there were no lost graves in Jerusalem from the flood, because the flood did not take place there? Reish Lakish responds: And according to your reasoning, so too were there not those killed by Nebuchadnezzar, in and around Jerusalem, who were mentioned by Rabbi Yehoshua? Certainly there were, as Nebuchadnezzar killed many people in Jerusalem. Rather, there were, and others removed the bodies. Here too, with regard to the dead of the flood, there were, and others removed the bodies. And it is possible to ask: If they were removed, why is it necessary to be concerned that there may be impurity in the place of the red heifer, as they were already removed. One can respond: This baraita deals exclusively with Jerusalem. Granted that the bones of those who perished in the flood and at the hands of Nebuchadnezzar were removed from Jerusalem, but they were not removed from all of Eretz Yisrael. Therefore, outside Jerusalem, the red heifer may be slaughtered only in a place that has been inspected. There are those who say the discussion should be inverted, and Reish Lakish raised an objection to Rabbi Yoḥanan, who holds that the flood did not affect Eretz Yisrael, from that baraita, as Rabbi Yehoshua said: Where are the dead of the flood, and where are all of the dead killed by Nebuchadnezzar? Reish Lakish said: What, is it not possible to infer from this question that since those slaughtered by Nebuchadnezzar were in Eretz Yisrael, those who perished in the flood were also there? Rabbi Yoḥanan responds: Are the cases comparable? This is as it is and that is as it is, i.e., the dead of Nebuchadnezzar were indeed in Eretz Yisrael, but the dead of the flood were not, as there was no flood there. Reish Lakish raised an objection to Rabbi Yoḥanan: With regard to the flood, it is stated: “All in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, whatsoever was on the dry land, died” (Genesis 7:22). Granted, according to my opinion, that I say the flood descended upon Eretz Yisrael, due to that reason all living creatures on Earth died, even those in Eretz Yisrael. But according to your opinion that the flood did not descend on Eretz Yisrael, why did they die there? Rabbi Yoḥanan responds: They died due to the heat that accompanied the floodwaters, and that spread to Eretz Yisrael as well. Those corpses were then buried in known locations. The Gemara notes that this is in accordance with the statement of Rav Ḥisda, as Rav Ḥisda says: The generation of the flood sinned with boiling heat, i.e., forbidden sexual intercourse, and they were punished with the boiling heat of the flood waters. As it is written here, with regard to the flood: “And God remembered Noah and every living creature and all the cattle that were with him in the ark; and God made a wind to pass over the earth and the waters calmed [vayashoku hamayim]” (Genesis 8:1); and it is written there, with regard to the execution of Haman: “So they hanged Haman on the gallows that he had prepared for Mordecai. Then the king’s boiling anger was assuaged [shakhakha]” (Esther 7:10). This latter verse indicates that a matter is assuaged from heat; similarly, the flood waters were hot. There are those who say that this discussion should be inverted, and in fact Rabbi Yoḥanan raised an objection to Reish Lakish from that verse: It is stated that “whatsoever was on the dry land, died” (Genesis 7:22). Granted, according to my opinion, that I say that the flood did not descend upon Eretz Yisrael, due to that reason, there was an area of dry land even during the flood, and all living creatures there died from the heat. But according to your opinion that the flood did descend upon Eretz Yisrael, what is the meaning of “dry land”? There was no dry land anywhere. Reish Lakish responds: The verse is referring to land that had been dry initially, before the flood. And why does the Torah call it “dry land” during the flood? There was no dry land during the flood. It is in accordance with the opinion of Rav Ḥisda, as Rav Ḥisda says: During the generation of the flood no decree was decreed upon the fish in the sea, as it is stated: “Whatsoever was on the dry land, died” (Genesis 7:22), i.e., only those creatures that had been on dry land, but not the fish in the sea. The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who says the flood did not descend upon Eretz Yisrael, i.e., Rabbi Yoḥanan, this is the explanation of the fact that the reima remained there, in Eretz Yisrael, and survived the flood. But according to the one who says the flood descended upon Eretz Yisrael, i.e., Reish Lakish, how did the reima remain? Given its large size, it clearly could not have fit into Noah’s ark. Rabbi Yannai says: They brought reima cubs into the ark, and they survived the flood. The Gemara asks: But doesn’t Rabba bar bar Ḥana say: I have seen a day-old offspring of the reima, and it was as large as Mount Tabor. And how large is Mount Tabor? It is forty parasangs. And the length of the cub’s neck was three parasangs, and the place where its head rests, i.e., its neck, was a parasang and a half. It cast feces, and thereby dammed up the Jordan river. Even the cub would have been too large for the ark. Rabbi Yoḥanan says: They brought only the head of the cub into the ark, while its body remained outside. The Gemara asks: But doesn’t the Master, i.e., Rabba bar bar Ḥana, say that the size of the place where its head rests was a parasang and a half? Consequently, even its head alone would not fit into the ark. Rather, they brought the head, i.e., edge, of its nose into the ark, so that it might breathe. The Gemara wonders why Rabbi Yoḥanan was compelled to give this answer: But doesn’t Rabbi Yoḥanan say that the flood did not descend upon Eretz Yisrael? According to his opinion, perhaps the reima survived by remaining there during the flood. The Gemara answers that Rabbi Yoḥanan said his answer in accordance with the statement of Reish Lakish. The Gemara challenges: But the ark was moving upon the water. How it was possible to keep the nose of the reima in the ark? Reish Lakish says: They tied its horns to the ark, so that the reima would move with it. The Gemara asks: But doesn’t Rav Ḥisda say that the people of the generation of the flood sinned with boiling heat and were punished with boiling heat? How could the reima have survived the boiling water? The Gemara replies: And according to your reasoning, that it was impossible to survive the boiling water, how did the ark itself move? It was covered with pitch, which melts in boiling water. Moreover, how did Og, king of the Bashan (see Numbers 21:33–35), who according to tradition was of the generation of the flood, stand, i.e., survive the boiling water? Rather, it must be that a miracle was performed for them, namely that the water on the sides of the ark cooled, allowing the ark, the reima, and Og to survive. The Gemara challenges: But even according to the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, that the flood descended upon Eretz Yisrael and the corpses of those who perished in the flood might impart impurity there, though the flood did indeed descend upon Eretz Yisrael, no trace of the dead remains there. As Reish Lakish says: Why is Babylonia called Metzula (see Isaiah 44:27)? It is because all the dead of the flood, throughout the world, sank [nitztalelu] there. And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Why is Babylonia called Shinar? It is because all the dead of the flood were deposited [ninaru] there. Evidently, even Reish Lakish says that all who died in the flood, including those from Eretz Yisrael, sank in Babylonia. The Gemara responds: It is impossible that the corpses of some of those in Eretz Yisrael who perished in the flood were not stuck in the mud and remained there. Having mentioned some explanations for the names of Babylonia, the Gemara adds: Rabbi Abbahu says: Why is it called Shinar? Because it shakes [shemena’eret] its wealthy people, i.e., they do not remain wealthy. The Gemara asks: But we see that there are wealthy people in Babylonia who remain wealthy. The Gemara responds: Their wealth does not extend for three generations. With regard to the statement that the corpses of those who perished in the flood came to Babylonia, Rabbi Ami says: Concerning anyone who eats the dust of Babylonia, it is as if he eats the flesh of his ancestors, since there is a great deal of dust from the dead there. This is also taught in a baraita: Concerning anyone who eats the dust of Babylonia, it is as if he eats the flesh of his ancestors. And some say: It is as if he eats repugnant creatures and crawling things, which also died in the flood and were absorbed by the ground of Babylonia.
בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַבִּי מֵרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי: מַהוּ לֶאֱכוֹל אֲדָמָה בְּשַׁבָּת? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: וְכִי בַּחוֹל מִי הוּתְּרָה? שֶׁאֲנִי אוֹמֵר: אַף בַּחוֹל אָסוּר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מַלְקֶה. אָמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי: כָּל הָאוֹכֵל מֵעֲפָרָהּ שֶׁל בָּבֶל — כְּאִילּוּ אוֹכֵל מִבְּשַׂר אֲבוֹתָיו. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים: כְּאִילּוּ אוֹכֵל שְׁקָצִים וּרְמָשִׂים, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיִּמַח אֶת כׇּל הַיְקוּם וְגוֹ׳״. אָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: לָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמָהּ ״שִׁנְעָר״ — שֶׁכׇּל מֵתֵי מַבּוּל נִנְעֲרוּ לְשָׁם. אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: לָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמָהּ ״מְצוּלָה״ — שֶׁכׇּל מֵתֵי מַבּוּל נִצְטַלְּלוּ לְשָׁם. [וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים כְּאִילּוּ אוֹכֵל] שְׁקָצִים וּרְמָשִׂים, וְהָא וַדַּאי אִיתְמַחוֹיֵי אִיתְמַחוּ! אָמְרִי כֵּיוָן דְּמַלְקֵי גְּזַרוּ בֵּיהּ רַבָּנַן. דְּהָא הָהוּא גַּבְרָא דַּאֲכַל גַּרְגִּישְׁתָּא וַאֲכַל תַּחְלֵי, וּקְדַחוּ לֵיהּ תַּחְלֵי בְּלִבֵּיהּ, וּמִית.
Rava strongly objects to this: Since we have said that one’s walking on Shabbat should not be like his walking during the week, and jumping constitutes prohibited walking, if one encounters a stream on Shabbat, what should he do to cross to the other side? If he circumvents the stream, he is increasing the distance that he is walking and exerting extra effort on Shabbat. If he walks through the water, sometimes his clothes will absorb water and he will come to wring them out. What then should he do? Rather, in this case, since it is not possible to cross any other way, he may well cross it, i.e., it is permitted for him to jump over the stream. Therefore, rather say that walking that is defined as characteristic of weekday walking involves taking large steps. As Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi raised a dilemma before Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei: What is the ruling with regard to taking large steps on Shabbat? That is what the Gemara meant when it used the phrase: Your walking during the week. Rabbi Yishmael said to him: And during the week are large steps permitted? As I say: A large step takes away one five-hundredth of a person’s eyesight. The Gemara comments: And his eyesight is restored to him during kiddush on Shabbat evening. And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi raised a dilemma before Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei: What is the ruling with regard to eating earth for medicinal purposes on Shabbat? Rabbi Yishmael said to him: And during the week is it permitted to eat soil? As I say: Even during the week it is prohibited because it is harmful. Rabbi Ami said: Anyone who eats the dust of Babylonia, it is as if he is eating the flesh of his ancestors buried there. And some say: It is as if he eats abominations and creeping creatures, as it is written: “And He wiped out all that existed on the face of the earth, from humans to animals, to creeping creatures to the birds in the sky, and they were wiped off the land” (Genesis 7:23). Apropos dead residue in the ground, Reish Lakish said: Why is Babylonia called Shinar? It is because all those who died in the Flood were deposited there [ninaru lesham]. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Why is Babylonia called Metzula? It is because all those who died in the Flood sank there [nitztalelu lesham]. The Gemara asks: We said that some say that if one eats dirt from Babylonia, it is as if he eats abominations and creeping creatures. However, certainly their bodies have putrefied and decomposed, and therefore they are no longer prohibited. Rather, since soil is harmful, the Sages issued a decree not to eat it. The decree was not issued due to the prohibition of eating creeping creatures; rather, it was issued because a certain person ate soil for medicinal purposes and also ate cress. The cress took root in the soil that was inside him and began to grow. And the cress punctured his heart and he died.
מתני׳ דור המבול אין להם חלק לעוה"ב ואין עומדין בדין שנא' (בראשית ו, ג) לא ידון רוחי באדם לעולם לא דין ולא רוח דור הפלגה אין להם חלק לעולם הבא שנאמר (בראשית יא, ח) ויפץ ה' אותם משם על פני כל הארץ (וכתיב ומשם הפיצם) ויפץ ה' אותם בעוה"ז ומשם הפיצם ה' לעולם הבא אנשי סדום אין להם חלק לעולם הבא שנא' (בראשית יג, יג) ואנשי סדום רעים וחטאים לה' מאד רעים בעולם הזה וחטאים לעולם הבא אבל עומדין בדין ר' נחמיה אומר אלו ואלו אין עומדין בדין שנאמר (תהלים א, ה) על כן לא יקומו רשעים במשפט וחטאים בעדת צדיקים על כן לא יקומו רשעים במשפט זה דור המבול וחטאים בעדת צדיקים אלו אנשי סדום אמרו לו אינם עומדין בעדת צדיקים אבל עומדין בעדת רשעים (מרגלים אין להם חלק לעולם הבא שנאמר (במדבר יד, לז) וימותו האנשים מוציאי דבת הארץ רעה במגפה לפני ה' וימותו בעולם הזה במגפה לעולם הבא) דור המדבר אין להם חלק לעולם הבא ואין עומדין בדין שנאמר (במדבר יד, לה) במדבר הזה יתמו ושם ימותו דברי רבי עקיבא ר' אליעזר אומר עליהם הוא אומר (תהלים נ, ה) אספו לי חסידי כורתי בריתי עלי זבח עדת קרח אינה עתידה לעלות שנאמר (במדבר טז, לג) ותכס עליהם הארץ בעולם הזה ויאבדו מתוך הקהל לעולם הבא דברי ר"ע ר"א אומר עליהם הוא אומר (שמואל א ב, ו) ה' ממית ומחיה מוריד שאול ויעל:
Apropos the death of Elisha, the Gemara says: Until the time of Abraham there was no aging, and the old and the young looked the same. Anyone who saw Abraham said: That is Isaac, and anyone who saw Isaac said: That is Abraham. Abraham prayed for mercy, that he would undergo aging, as it is stated: “And Abraham was old, well stricken in age” (Genesis 24:1). There is no mention of aging before that verse. Until the time of Jacob there was no weakness, i.e., illness. Jacob prayed for mercy and there was weakness, as it is stated: “And one said to Joseph: Behold, your father is ill” (Genesis 48:1). Until the time of Elisha, there was no ill person who recovered, and Elisha came and prayed for mercy and recovered, as it is stated: “And Elisha was fallen ill of his illness from which he was to die” (II Kings 13:14). That is the first mention of a person who was ill and who did not die from that illness. mishna The members of the generation of the flood have no share in the World-to-Come and will not stand in judgment at the end of days, as it is stated: “My soul shall not abide [yadon] in man forever” (Genesis 6:3); neither will they stand in judgment [din] nor shall their souls be restored to them. The members of the generation of the dispersion have no share in the World-to-Come, as it is stated: “And the Lord scattered them from there upon the face of all the earth” (Genesis 11:8), and it is written: “And from there did the Lord scatter them upon the face of all the earth” (Genesis 11:9). “And the Lord scattered them” indicates in this world; “and from there did the Lord scatter them” indicates for the World-to-Come. The people of Sodom have no share in the World-to-Come, as it is stated: “And the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners before the Lord exceedingly” (Genesis 13:13). “Wicked” indicates in this world; “and sinners” indicates for the World-to-Come. But they will stand in judgment and they will be sentenced to eternal contempt. Rabbi Neḥemya says: Both these, the people of Sodom, and those, the members of the generation of the flood, will not stand in judgment, as it is stated: “Therefore the wicked shall not stand in judgment, nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous” (Psalms 1:5). “Therefore the wicked shall not stand in judgment”; this is referring to the generation of the flood, about whom it is written: “The wickedness of man was great upon the earth” (Genesis 6:5). “Nor sinners in the congregation of the righteous”; these are the people of Sodom, about whom it is written: “And the men of Sodom were wicked and sinners” (Genesis 13:13). The Sages said to Rabbi Neḥemya: They will not stand in judgment for resurrection in the congregation of the righteous, but they will stand in judgment in the congregation of the wicked. The spies who spread an evil report of their visit to Canaan have no share in the World-to-Come, as it is stated: “And those men who spread the evil report about the land died by plague before the Lord” (Numbers 14:37). “And…died” indicates in this world; “by plague” indicates for the World-to-Come. The members of the generation of the wilderness have no share in the World-to-Come and will not stand in judgment, as it is stated: “In this wilderness they shall be consumed, and there they shall die” (Numbers 14:35). “They shall be consumed” indicates in this world; “and there they shall die” indicates for the World-to-Come; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Eliezer says: The members of the generation of the wilderness were essentially righteous, and about them the verse says: “Gather My pious together to Me, those that have entered into My covenant by offering” (Psalms 50:5). It is they who entered into the covenant with God and they will certainly be rewarded in the future. The assembly of Korah is not destined to arise for resurrection, as it is stated: “And the earth closed upon them” (Numbers 16:33), meaning in this world, and also: “And they perished from among the assembly” (Numbers 16:33), meaning in the World-to-Come; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Eliezer says: About them the verse says: “The Lord kills and makes alive; He lowers to the grave, and raises” (I Samuel 2:6), indicating that the assembly of Korah has a share in the World-to-Come.
(בראשית ז, כג) וימח את כל היקום אשר על פני האדמה אם אדם חטא בהמה מה חטאה תנא משום רבי יהושע בן קרחה משל לאדם שעשה חופה לבנו והתקין מכל מיני סעודה לימים מת בנו עמד (ובלבל) [ופזר] את חופתו אמר כלום עשיתי אלא בשביל בני עכשיו שמת חופה למה לי אף הקב"ה אמר כלום בראתי בהמה וחיה אלא בשביל אדם עכשיו שאדם חוטא בהמה וחיה למה לי
With regard to the verse: “And He obliterated every living thing that was upon the face of the ground, from man to cattle to creeping animal to the birds of the heaven” (Genesis 7:23), the Gemara asks: If man sinned, in what way did the animal kingdom sin that it, too, warranted destruction? The Gemara answers: It was taught in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korḥa: There is a parable for this matter, to a man who fashioned a wedding canopy for his son and prepared all sorts of food for the wedding feast. Sometime later, before the wedding, his son died. What did the man do? He arose and dismantled his son’s wedding canopy. He said: Did I do this for any reason other than for my son? Now that my son has died, why do I need a wedding canopy? So too, the Holy One, Blessed be He, said: Did I create domesticated animals and non-domesticated animals for any reason other than for man? Now that man sins and is sentenced to destruction, why do I need domesticated animals and non-domesticated animals?
וישאר אך נח אין מיעוט אחר מיעוט אלא לרבות לומר שאף עוג נשאר:
אך נח בגימטריא עוג:
(במדבר כא, לד) ויאמר ה' אל משה אל תירא מכדי סיחון ועוג אחי הוו דאמר מר סיחון ועוג בני אחיה בר שמחזאי הוו מאי שנא מעוג דקמסתפי ומאי שנא מסיחון דלא קמסתפי א"ר יוחנן אר"ש בן יוחי מתשובתו של אותו צדיק אתה יודע מה היה בלבו אמר שמא תעמוד לו זכות של אברהם אבינו שנאמר (בראשית יד, יג) ויבא הפליט ויגד לאברם העברי ואמר רבי יוחנן זה עוג שפלט מדור המבול
The Gemara cites another case of a report that caused concern. Before the battle against Og, king of Bashan, it is stated: “And the Lord said to Moses: Do not fear him; for I have delivered him into your hand, and all his people, and his land; and you shall do to him as you did to Sihon king of the Amorites, who dwelt at Heshbon” (Numbers 21:34). The Gemara asks: Now, Sihon and Og were brothers, as the Master said: Sihon and Og were sons of Ahijah, son of Shamhazai. In what way is Sihon different from Og, that God found it necessary to warn Moses not to be afraid of Og, and in what way is Og different from Sihon, that there was no need for a warning not to be afraid of Sihon? Rabbi Yoḥanan says that Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says: From the answer that God gave to that righteous one, Moses, you know what was in his heart, i.e., what gave Moses cause to fear. Moses said to himself: Perhaps the merit of our forefather Abraham will stand for Og and save him. Og was the one who told Abraham that Lot had been taken captive by the four kings, enabling Abraham to rescue Lot. The Gemara cites the source of this claim. As it is stated: “And there came one that was saved, and told Abram the Hebrew, now he dwelt by the terebinths of Mamre the Amorite, brother of Eshkol, and brother of Aner; and these were confederate with Abram. And when Abram heard that his brother was taken captive, he led forth his trained men, born in his house, three hundred and eighteen, and pursued as far as Dan” (Genesis 14:13–14). And Rabbi Yoḥanan said that the term “one that was saved” is referring to Og, who was saved from the punishment of the generation of the flood. For this reason, Moses was more afraid of Og.
אמר להם הוא מביא מבין עקבי רגליכם שנאמר (איוב יב, ה) נכון למועדי רגל תניא מימי המבול קשים כשכבת זרע שנאמר נכון למועדי רגל אמר רב חסדא ברותחין קלקלו בעבירה וברותחין נידונו כתיב הכא (בראשית ח, א) וישכו המים וכתיב התם (אסתר ז, י) וחמת המלך שככה
Noah said to them: If He wishes He will bring the water from between your feet and you can do nothing to prevent it, as it is stated: “For them whose foot slips.” It is taught in a baraita: The waters of the flood were as hard and thick as semen, as it is stated: “For them whose foot slips”; foot is a euphemism. Rav Ḥisda says: With hot semen they sinned, and with hot water they were punished. As it is written here, at the conclusion of the flood: “And the waters assuaged” (Genesis 8:1), and it is written there: “Then the king’s wrath was assuaged” (Esther 7:10). Just as the term “assuaged” there is referring to the heat of Ahasuerus’s wrath, so too, “assuaged” with regard to the flood is referring to the heat of the waters.
(בראשית ח, ח) וישלח את היונה מאתו לראות הקלו המים א"ר ירמיה מכאן שדירתן של עופות טהורים עם הצדיקים
With regard to the verse: “And he sent forth the dove from him, to see if the waters abated” (Genesis 8:8), Rabbi Yirmeya says: From here it is derived that the dwelling place of kosher birds in the ark was with the righteous people, as the verse emphasizes that Noah dispatched the dove from his place.
וְאָמַר רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר, מַאי דִּכְתִיב: ״וְהִנֵּה עֲלֵה זַיִת טָרָף בְּפִיהָ״ — אָמְרָה יוֹנָה לִפְנֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא: רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם, יִהְיוּ מְזוֹנוֹתַי מְרוֹרִין כְּזַיִת וּמְסוּרִין בְּיָדְךָ, וְאַל יִהְיוּ מְתוּקִין כִּדְבַשׁ וּתְלוּיִן בְּיַד בָּשָׂר וָדָם. כְּתִיב הָכָא ״טָרָף״, וּכְתִיב הָתָם ״הַטְרִיפֵנִי לֶחֶם חוּקִּי״.
And Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar also said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And the dove came in to him in the evening, and lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf, plucked off [taraf]; so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth” (Genesis 8:11)? The dove said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, let my food be bitter as an olive but given into Your hand, and let it not be sweet as honey but dependent upon flesh and blood. He adds this explanation: Here it is written: Taraf. And there it is written: “Remove far from me falsehood and lies; give me neither poverty nor riches; feed me [hatrifeni] my allotted portion” (Proverbs 30:8).
אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן וּשְׁנֵיהֶן מִקְרָא אֶחָד דָּרְשׁוּ וַיְהִי בְּאַחַת וְשֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה בָּרִאשׁוֹן בְּאֶחָד לְחֹדֶשׁ רַבִּי מֵאִיר סָבַר מִדְּאַכַּתִּי יוֹם אֶחָד הוּא דְּעָיֵיל בַּשָּׁנָה וְקָא קָרֵי לַהּ שָׁנָה שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ יוֹם אֶחָד בַּשָּׁנָה חָשׁוּב שָׁנָה וְאִידַּךְ אִי כְּתִיב בְּשֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת
The Gemara raises a difficulty: If so, it requires thirty-one days; thirty days for the planting to take root and one more day to count as a year. The Gemara answers: This is theoretically correct, but he holds that the thirtieth day is counted for here and for there, i.e., it counts as both the thirtieth day for taking root and as a day that is counted as a year. Rabbi Yoḥanan said: And both of them, Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Elazar, who disagree about how much time must pass to count as a year, expounded the same verse. As the verse states: “And it came to pass in the one and six hundredth year, in the first month on the first day of the month, that the waters were dried up from off the earth” (Genesis 8:13). Rabbi Meir holds: From the fact that it was only one day into the year, as it was still the first day of the first month, and yet it is called the six hundred and first year, learn from here that one day in a year is already considered a year. And the other tanna, Rabbi Elazar, expounds the verse as follows. If it had written: In the six hundred and first year, it would be as you said. However, now that it is written: “In the one and six hundredth year," I can say that the word “year” relates to “six hundredth,” thereby teaching that it is still considered the six hundredth year. And what is meant by “one”? That it is the beginning of one year, but not that the first day counts as a year.
וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר אֱלֹהִ֖ים אֶל־נֹ֥חַ לֵאמֹֽר׃ צֵ֖א מִן־הַתֵּבָ֑ה אַתָּ֕ה וְאִשְׁתְּךָ֛ וּבָנֶ֥יךָ וּנְשֵֽׁי־בָנֶ֖יךָ אִתָּֽךְ׃ כׇּל־הַחַיָּ֨ה אֲשֶֽׁר־אִתְּךָ֜ מִכׇּל־בָּשָׂ֗ר בָּע֧וֹף וּבַבְּהֵמָ֛ה וּבְכׇל־הָרֶ֛מֶשׂ הָרֹמֵ֥שׂ עַל־הָאָ֖רֶץ (הוצא) [הַיְצֵ֣א] אִתָּ֑ךְ וְשָֽׁרְצ֣וּ בָאָ֔רֶץ וּפָר֥וּ וְרָב֖וּ עַל־הָאָֽרֶץ׃ וַיֵּ֖צֵא־נֹ֑חַ וּבָנָ֛יו וְאִשְׁתּ֥וֹ וּנְשֵֽׁי־בָנָ֖יו אִתּֽוֹ׃ כׇּל־הַֽחַיָּ֗ה כׇּל־הָרֶ֙מֶשׂ֙ וְכׇל־הָע֔וֹף כֹּ֖ל רוֹמֵ֣שׂ עַל־הָאָ֑רֶץ לְמִשְׁפְּחֹ֣תֵיהֶ֔ם יָצְא֖וּ מִן־הַתֵּבָֽה׃ וַיִּ֥בֶן נֹ֛חַ מִזְבֵּ֖חַ לַֽיהֹוָ֑ה וַיִּקַּ֞ח מִכֹּ֣ל ׀ הַבְּהֵמָ֣ה הַטְּהֹרָ֗ה וּמִכֹּל֙ הָע֣וֹף הַטָּה֔וֹר וַיַּ֥עַל עֹלֹ֖ת בַּמִּזְבֵּֽחַ׃ וַיָּ֣רַח יְהֹוָה֮ אֶת־רֵ֣יחַ הַנִּיחֹ֒חַ֒ וַיֹּ֨אמֶר יְהֹוָ֜ה אֶל־לִבּ֗וֹ לֹֽא־אֹ֠סִ֠ף לְקַלֵּ֨ל ע֤וֹד אֶת־הָֽאֲדָמָה֙ בַּעֲב֣וּר הָֽאָדָ֔ם כִּ֠י יֵ֣צֶר לֵ֧ב הָאָדָ֛ם רַ֖ע מִנְּעֻרָ֑יו וְלֹֽא־אֹסִ֥ף ע֛וֹד לְהַכּ֥וֹת אֶת־כׇּל־חַ֖י כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֥ר עָשִֽׂיתִי׃ עֹ֖ד כׇּל־יְמֵ֣י הָאָ֑רֶץ זֶ֡רַע וְ֠קָצִ֠יר וְקֹ֨ר וָחֹ֜ם וְקַ֧יִץ וָחֹ֛רֶף וְי֥וֹם וָלַ֖יְלָה לֹ֥א יִשְׁבֹּֽתוּ׃ וַיְבָ֣רֶךְ אֱלֹהִ֔ים אֶת־נֹ֖חַ וְאֶת־בָּנָ֑יו וַיֹּ֧אמֶר לָהֶ֛ם פְּר֥וּ וּרְב֖וּ וּמִלְא֥וּ אֶת־הָאָֽרֶץ׃ וּמוֹרַאֲכֶ֤ם וְחִתְּכֶם֙ יִֽהְיֶ֔ה עַ֚ל כׇּל־חַיַּ֣ת הָאָ֔רֶץ וְעַ֖ל כׇּל־ע֣וֹף הַשָּׁמָ֑יִם בְּכֹל֩ אֲשֶׁ֨ר תִּרְמֹ֧שׂ הָֽאֲדָמָ֛ה וּֽבְכׇל־דְּגֵ֥י הַיָּ֖ם בְּיֶדְכֶ֥ם נִתָּֽנוּ׃ כׇּל־רֶ֙מֶשׂ֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר הוּא־חַ֔י לָכֶ֥ם יִהְיֶ֖ה לְאׇכְלָ֑ה כְּיֶ֣רֶק עֵ֔שֶׂב נָתַ֥תִּי לָכֶ֖ם אֶת־כֹּֽל׃ אַךְ־בָּשָׂ֕ר בְּנַפְשׁ֥וֹ דָמ֖וֹ לֹ֥א תֹאכֵֽלוּ׃ וְאַ֨ךְ אֶת־דִּמְכֶ֤ם לְנַפְשֹֽׁתֵיכֶם֙ אֶדְרֹ֔שׁ מִיַּ֥ד כׇּל־חַיָּ֖ה אֶדְרְשֶׁ֑נּוּ וּמִיַּ֣ד הָֽאָדָ֗ם מִיַּד֙ אִ֣ישׁ אָחִ֔יו אֶדְרֹ֖שׁ אֶת־נֶ֥פֶשׁ הָֽאָדָֽם׃ שֹׁפֵךְ֙ דַּ֣ם הָֽאָדָ֔ם בָּֽאָדָ֖ם דָּמ֣וֹ יִשָּׁפֵ֑ךְ כִּ֚י בְּצֶ֣לֶם אֱלֹהִ֔ים עָשָׂ֖ה אֶת־הָאָדָֽם׃ וְאַתֶּ֖ם פְּר֣וּ וּרְב֑וּ שִׁרְצ֥וּ בָאָ֖רֶץ וּרְבוּ־בָֽהּ׃ {ס}
“Come out of the ark, together with your wife, your sons, and your sons’ wives.
(בראשית ח, יט) למשפחותיהם יצאו מן התיבה א"ר יוחנן למשפחותם ולא הם
With regard to the verse: “After their kinds [lemishpeḥoteihem], they emerged from the ark” (Genesis 8:19), Rabbi Yoḥanan says: After their kinds [lemishpeḥotam] the animals emerged, but not them [hem] themselves, as some of the animals that entered the ark died during that year and it was their descendants who emerged.
אמר רב חנא בר ביזנא אמר ליה אליעזר לשם רבא כתיב למשפחותיהם יצאו מן התיבה אתון היכן הויתון א"ל צער גדול היה לנו בתיבה בריה שדרכה להאכילה ביום האכלנוה ביום שדרכה להאכילה בלילה האכלנוה בלילה האי זקיתא לא הוה ידע אבא מה אכלה יומא חד הוה יתיב וקא פאלי רמונא נפל תולעתא מינה אכלה מיכן ואילך הוה גביל לה חיזרא כי מתלע אכלה
Rav Ḥana bar Bizna says: Eliezer, servant of Abraham, said to Shem the Great, son of Noah: It is written: “After their kinds, they emerged from the ark,” indicating that the different types of animals were not intermingled while in the ark. Where were you and what did you do to care for them while they were in the ark? Shem said to him: We experienced great suffering in the ark caring for the animals. Where there was a creature that one typically feeds during the day, we fed it during the day, and where there was a creature that one typically feeds at night, we fed it at night. With regard to that chameleon, my father did not know what it eats. One day, my father was sitting and peeling a pomegranate. A worm fell from it and the chameleon ate it. From that point forward my father would knead bran with water, and when it became overrun with worms, the chameleon would eat it.
אמר רב הונא כל בריה שאין בו עצם אינו מתקיים י"ב חדש
The Gemara rules: And with regard to an animal concerning which it is uncertain whether it is a tereifa, the halakha is: In the case of a male, it is prohibited for an entire twelve-month period. After that point, the animal is certainly kosher. In the case of a female, any animal that does not give birth is prohibited. Once it has, it is certainly kosher. § Rav Huna says: Any creature that has no bones cannot last twelve months. Rav Pappa said: One may learn from Rav Huna’s statement about that which Shmuel says: If a serpent melon became infested by worms while attached to the ground [be’ibbeha], the worm is prohibited for consumption, in accordance with the verse: “And every swarming thing that swarms upon the earth is a detestable thing; it shall not be eaten” (Leviticus 11:41).
ואינו חייב עד שיעלה כו': אמר רב הונא מאי טעמא דרבי יוסי דכתיב (בראשית ח, כ) ויבן נח מזבח לה'
§ The mishna teaches: Rabbi Yosei says: And one is liable for offering up an offering outside the courtyard only once he offers it up upon the top of an altar that was erected there. Rabbi Shimon says: Even if he offered it up on a rock or on a stone, not an altar, he is liable. Rav Huna says: What is the reason of Rabbi Yosei? As it is written: “And Noah built an altar to the Lord, and took of every pure animal, and of every pure bird, and offered up burnt offerings on the altar” (Genesis 8:20). Noah was particular to use an altar rather than one of the available rocks. Apparently, this was because placing an item upon an altar is the only act that can be considered offering up.
אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר מִזְבֵּחַ מֵזִיחַ וּמֵזִין מְחַבֵּב מְכַפֵּר הַיְינוּ מְכַפֵּר הַיְינוּ מֵזִיחַ מֵזִיחַ גְּזֵירוֹת וּמְכַפֵּר עֲוֹנוֹת
Apropos the statement of Rav Ḥana of Baghdad, the Gemara cites additional statements of his. And Rav Ḥana of Baghdad said: Rain irrigates, saturates, and fertilizes the land, and refines the fruit and causes it to proliferate. Rava bar Rabbi Yishmael, and some say it was Rav Yeimar bar Shelamya who said: What is the verse that alludes to this? “Watering its ridges abundantly, settling its furrows, You make it soft with showers, You bless its growth” (Psalms 65:11). “Watering its ridges abundantly” indicates that the rain irrigates and saturates the land, “You make it soft with showers” indicates that it fertilizes the land, and “You bless its growth” indicates that it refines the fruit and causes it to proliferate. Rabbi Elazar said: The term mizbe’aḥ, altar, is a rough acrostic representing its qualities. It moves [meziaḥ] sins and sustains [mezin], because as a result of the offerings sacrificed on the altar, sustenance is provided to all. It endears [meḥabev], and atones [mekhapper]. Mizbe’aḥ evokes the letters mem and zayin from the first two qualities, bet from meḥabev and the kaf from mekhapper. The Gemara asks: This quality, that the altar atones, is the same as that quality, that it moves sins. Why are they listed separately? The Gemara answers: The altar moves evil decrees, and atones for sins.
אמר מר הכל כשירין להקריב מנא הני מילי אמר רב הונא דאמר קרא (בראשית ח, כ) ויבן נח מזבח לה' ויקח מכל הבהמה הטהורה ומכל עוף הטהור בהמה כמשמעו חיה בכלל בהמה
§ The Master said in the baraita: Before the Tabernacle was established, all animals were fit to be sacrificed: A domesticated animal, an undomesticated animal, or a bird. The Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived? Rav Huna said: As the verse states with regard to the offering that was sacrificed after the flood: “And Noah built an altar to the Lord, and took of every pure animal, and of every pure fowl, and offered burnt offerings on the altar” (Genesis 8:20). The Gemara explains: “Animal [behema],” is understood in accordance with its plain meaning, a domesticated animal, and the same is true of fowl; an undomesticated animal [ḥayya] is included in the term “behema” that is stated in the verse.
אָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא: כׇּל הַמִּתְפַּתֶּה בְּיֵינוֹ — יֵשׁ בּוֹ מִדַּעַת קוֹנוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיָּרַח ה׳ אֶת רֵיחַ הַנִּיחוֹחַ וְגוֹ׳״. אָמַר רַבִּי חִיָּיא: כׇּל הַמִּתְיַישֵּׁב בְּיֵינוֹ — יֵשׁ בּוֹ דַּעַת שִׁבְעִים זְקֵנִים. ״יַיִן״ נִיתַּן בְּשִׁבְעִים אוֹתִיּוֹת, וְ״סוֹד״ נִיתַּן בְּשִׁבְעִים אוֹתִיּוֹת. נִכְנַס יַיִן — יָצָא סוֹד. אָמַר רַבִּי חָנִין: לֹא נִבְרָא יַיִן אֶלָּא לְנַחֵם אֲבֵלִים וּלְשַׁלֵּם שָׂכָר לָרְשָׁעִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״תְּנוּ שֵׁכָר לְאוֹבֵד וְגוֹ׳״. אָמַר רַבִּי חָנִין בַּר פָּפָּא: כׇּל שֶׁאֵין יַיִן נִשְׁפָּךְ בְּתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ כַּמַּיִם — אֵינוֹ בִּכְלַל בְּרָכָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וּבֵרַךְ אֶת לַחְמְךָ וְאֶת מֵימֶיךָ״. מָה לֶחֶם שֶׁנִּיקָּח בְּכֶסֶף מַעֲשֵׂר — אַף מַיִם שֶׁנִּיקָּח בְּכֶסֶף מַעֲשֵׂר, וּמַאי נִיהוּ — יַיִן, וְקָא קָרֵי לֵיהּ מַיִם. אִי נִשְׁפָּךְ בְּבֵיתוֹ כַּמַּיִם — אִיכָּא בְּרָכָה, וְאִי לָא — לָא. אָמַר רַבִּי אִילְעַאי, בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה דְּבָרִים אָדָם נִיכָּר: בְּכוֹסוֹ, וּבְכִיסוֹ וּבְכַעְסוֹ. וְאָמְרִי לֵיהּ אַף בְּשַׂחֲקוֹ.
Rabbi Ḥanina said: Whoever is appeased by his wine, i.e., whoever becomes more relaxed after drinking, has in him an element of the mind-set of his Creator, who acted in a similar fashion, as it is stated: “And the Lord smelled the sweet savor, and the Lord said in His heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for man’s sake” (Genesis 8:21). As it were, God acted more favorably toward His creatures after He was appeased with the smell of the burnt offerings. Smell can be as potent as drinking or eating itself. Rabbi Ḥiyya said: Anyone who remains settled of mind after drinking wine, and does not become intoxicated, has an element of the mind-set of seventy Elders. The allusion is: Wine [yayin spelled yod, yod, nun] was given in seventy letters, as the numerological value of the letters comprising the word is seventy, as yod equals ten and nun equals fifty. Similarly, the word secret [sod spelled samekh, vav, dalet] was given in seventy letters, as samekh equals sixty, vav equals six, and dalet equals four. Typically, when wine entered the body, a secret emerged. Whoever does not reveal secrets when he drinks is clearly blessed with a firm mind, like that of seventy Elders. Rabbi Ḥanin said: Wine was created only in order to comfort mourners in their distress, and to reward the wicked in this world so they will have no reward left in the World-to-Come, as it is stated: “Give strong drink to him that is ready to perish, and wine to the bitter of soul. Let him drink, and forget his poverty, and remember his misery no more” (Proverbs 31:6). “Him that is ready to perish” refers to the wicked, who will perish from the world, while “the bitter of soul” denotes mourners. Rabbi Ḥanin bar Pappa said: Anyone in whose house wine does not flow like water is not yet included in the Torah’s blessing, as it is stated: “And He shall bless your bread and your water” (Exodus 23:25). The water mentioned in this verse actually refers to wine, as learned in the following manner: Just as bread is something that may be purchased with second-tithe money, i.e., one is permitted to buy bread with money used to redeem second-tithe, so too the word water in the verse is referring to a liquid that may be purchased with second-tithe money. And what is that? It is wine, as one may buy wine with second-tithe money, but one may not buy water; and nevertheless, the verse calls it “water.” This teaches that if wine flows in a person’s house like water, there is a blessing, but if not, there is no blessing. Rabbi Elai said: In three matters a person’s true character is ascertained; in his cup, i.e., his behavior when he drinks; in his pocket, i.e., his conduct in his financial dealings with other people; and in his anger. And some say: A person also reveals his real nature in his laughter.
המתפתה ביין - שמפייסין אותו על דבר ומתרצה כשטוב לבו ביין:
ריח הניחוח - ואמרן לעיל דריחא דומיא דמשתייא הוא וכתיב ויאמר אל לבו לא אוסיף וגו' דאירצי:
המתיישב ביינו - ששותה יין ואין דעתו מטרפתו:
דָּרֵשׁ רַבִּי עַוִּירָא וְאִיתֵּימָא רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי: שִׁבְעָה שֵׁמוֹת יֵשׁ לוֹ לְיֵצֶר הָרָע. הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא קְרָאוֹ ״רַע״, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כִּי יֵצֶר לֵב הָאָדָם רַע מִנְּעוּרָיו״. מֹשֶׁה קְרָאוֹ ״עָרֵל״, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וּמַלְתֶּם אֵת עׇרְלַת לְבַבְכֶם״. דָּוִד קְרָאוֹ ״טָמֵא״, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״לֵב טָהוֹר בְּרָא לִי אֱלֹהִים״, מִכְּלָל דְּאִיכָּא טָמֵא.
§ Rabbi Avira, and some say Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, taught: The evil inclination has seven names. The Holy One, Blessed be He, called it evil, as it is stated: “For the inclination of a man’s heart is evil from his youth” (Genesis 8:21). Moses called it uncircumcised, as it is stated: “And circumcise the foreskin of your hearts” (Deuteronomy 10:16). David called it impure, as it is stated: “Create for me a pure heart, O God” (Psalms 51:12); by inference, there is an impure heart that is the evil inclination.
ת"ר קשה יצר הרע שאפילו יוצרו קראו רע שנאמר (בראשית ח, כא) כי יצר לב האדם רע מנעוריו אמר רב יצחק יצרו של אדם מתחדש עליו בכל יום שנאמר (בראשית ו, ה) רק רע כל היום
The Sages taught: So difficult is the evil inclination that even its Creator calls it evil, as it is stated: “For the inclination of a man’s heart is evil from his youth” (Genesis 8:21). Rav Yitzḥak says: A person’s evil inclination renews itself to him every day, as it is stated: “And that every inclination of the thoughts in his heart was only evil all day [kol hayyom]” (Genesis 6:5). “Kol hayyom” can also be understood as: Every day.
ואר"ל עובד כוכבים ששבת חייב מיתה שנא' (בראשית ח, כב) ויום ולילה לא ישבותו ואמר מר אזהרה שלהן זו היא מיתתן אמר רבינא אפי' שני בשבת
And Reish Lakish says: A gentile who observed Shabbat is liable to receive the death penalty, as it is stated: “And day and night shall not cease” (Genesis 8:23), which literally means: And day and night they shall not rest. This is interpreted homiletically to mean that the descendants of Noah may not take a day of rest. And the Master said (57a) that their prohibition is their death penalty, i.e., the punishment for any prohibition with regard to descendants of Noah is execution. Ravina says: If a descendant of Noah observes a day of rest on any day of the week, even one not set aside for religious worship, e.g., on a Monday, he is liable.
אמר רב הונא כל בריה שאין בו עצם אינו מתקיים י"ב חדש
The Gemara responds: The mishna discusses the question of whether it is permitted to sacrifice the animal as an offering in order to convey to you the far-reaching nature of the lenient opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua that such an animal is permitted even as an offering to the Most High. The Gemara suggests: But let them dispute whether the animal is permitted to an ordinary person, in order to convey to you the far-reaching nature of the stringent opinion of Rabbi Eliezer that such an animal is prohibited even to an ordinary person. The Gemara responds: It is preferable for the tanna to emphasize the power of leniency.
להיות גבור. לְהַמְרִיד כָּל הָעוֹלָם עַל הַקָּבָּ"ה בַּעֲצַת דוֹר הַפַּלָּגָה:
להיות גבור TO BE A MIGHTY ONE — Mighty in causing the whole world to rebel against the Holy One, blessed be He, by the plan he devised for the generation that witnessed the separation of the races (דור הפלגה) to build the Tower of Babel (Genesis Rabbah 23:7).
גבר ציד. צָד דַּעְתָּן שֶׁל בְּרִיוֹת בְּפִיו, וּמַטְעָן לִמְרֹד בַּמָּקוֹם:
גבור ציד A MIGHTY HUNTER — He ensnared the minds of people by his words, misleading them to rebel against the Omnipresent (Genesis Rabbah 37:2).
אמר להם הקדוש ברוך הוא לישראל חושקני בכם שאפילו בשעה שאני משפיע לכם גדולה אתם ממעטין עצמכם לפני נתתי גדולה לאברהם אמר לפני (בראשית יח, כז) ואנכי עפר ואפר למשה ואהרן אמר (שמות טז, ז) ונחנו מה לדוד אמר (תהלים כב, ז) ואנכי תולעת ולא איש אבל עובדי כוכבים אינן כן נתתי גדולה לנמרוד אמר
But the gentile nations of the world are not so. I granted greatness to Nimrod, yet he said: “Come, let us build a city and a tower, with its top in heaven, and let us make for ourselves a name” (Genesis 11:4). I granted greatness to Pharaoh, yet he said: “Who is the Lord” (Exodus 5:2). I granted greatness to Sennacherib, yet he said: “Who are they among all the gods of the countries that have delivered their country out of my hand, that the Lord should deliver Jerusalem out of my hand” (II Kings 18:35). I granted greatness to Nebuchadnezzar, yet he said: “I will ascend above the heights of the clouds” (Isaiah 14:14). I granted greatness to Ḥiram, king of Tyre, yet he said: “I sit in the seat of God, in the heart of the seas” (Ezekiel 28:2).
״וַיְהִי בִּימֵי אַמְרָפֶל״, רַב וּשְׁמוּאֵל, חַד אָמַר: נִמְרוֹד שְׁמוֹ. וְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ אַמְרָפֶל? שֶׁאָמַר וְהִפִּיל לְאַבְרָהָם אָבִינוּ בְּתוֹךְ כִּבְשַׁן הָאֵשׁ, וְחַד אָמַר: אַמְרָפֶל שְׁמוֹ, וְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ נִמְרוֹד? שֶׁהִמְרִיד אֶת כָּל הָעוֹלָם כּוּלּוֹ עָלָיו בְּמַלְכוּתוֹ.
They disagreed about this verse as well: “And it came to pass in the days of Amraphel” (Genesis 14:1). Rav and Shmuel both identified Amraphel with Nimrod. However, one said: Nimrod was his name. And why was his name called Amraphel? It is a contraction of two Hebrew words: As he said [amar] the command and cast [hippil] our father Abraham into the fiery furnace, when Abraham rebelled against and challenged his proclaimed divinity. And one said: Amraphel was his name. And why was his name called Nimrod? Because he caused the entire world to rebel [himrid] against God during his reign.
תַּנְיָא אָמַר רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי מָה תְּשׁוּבָה הֱשִׁיבַתּוּ בַּת קוֹל לְאוֹתוֹ רָשָׁע בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁאָמַר אֶעֱלֶה עַל בָּמֳתֵי עָב אֶדַּמֶּה לְעֶלְיוֹן יָצְתָה בַּת קוֹל וְאָמְרָה לוֹ רָשָׁע בֶּן רָשָׁע בֶּן בְּנוֹ שֶׁל נִמְרוֹד הָרָשָׁע שֶׁהִמְרִיד כָּל הָעוֹלָם כּוּלּוֹ עָלָיו בְּמַלְכוּתוֹ כַּמָּה שְׁנוֹתָיו שֶׁל אָדָם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר יְמֵי שְׁנוֹתֵינוּ בָהֶם שִׁבְעִים שָׁנָה וְאִם בִּגְבוּרוֹת שְׁמוֹנִים שָׁנָה וַהֲלֹא מִן הָאָרֶץ עַד לָרָקִיעַ מַהֲלַךְ חֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה וְעוֹבְיוֹ שֶׁל רָקִיעַ מַהֲלַךְ חֲמֵשׁ מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה וְכֵן בֵּין כׇּל רָקִיעַ וְרָקִיעַ לְמַעְלָה מֵהֶן חַיּוֹת הַקֹּדֶשׁ רַגְלֵי הַחַיּוֹת כְּנֶגֶד כּוּלָּם קַרְסוּלֵי הַחַיּוֹת כְּנֶגֶד כּוּלָּן שׁוֹקֵי הַחַיּוֹת כְּנֶגֶד כּוּלָּן רְכוּבֵּי הַחַיּוֹת כְּנֶגֶד כּוּלָּן יַרְכֵי הַחַיּוֹת כְּנֶגֶד כּוּלָּן גּוּפֵי הַחַיּוֹת כְּנֶגֶד כּוּלָּן צַוְּארֵי הַחַיּוֹת כְּנֶגֶד כּוּלָּן רָאשֵׁי הַחַיּוֹת כְּנֶגֶד כּוּלָּן קַרְנֵי
How many are the years of man? Seventy years, as it is stated: “The span of our life is seventy years, or if we are strong, eighty years” (Psalms 90:10). Now is there not from the earth to the firmament a walking distance of five hundred years, and the thickness of the firmament itself is a walking distance of five hundred years, and a similar distance exists between each and every one of the firmaments?
בן בנו של נמרוד הרשע. לאו דוקא שהרי כוש ילד את נמרוד ולא מצינו אותו רשע מזרע כוש אלא על שם מעשיו שמלך גם הוא בשנער:
לאותו רשע - נבוכדנצר:
תָּא שְׁמַע, דְּאָמַר רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי: מָה תְּשׁוּבָה הֱשִׁיבַתּוּ בַּת קוֹל לְאוֹתוֹ רָשָׁע בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁאָמַר ״אֶעֱלֶה עַל בָּמֳתֵי עָב אֶדַּמֶּה לְעֶלְיוֹן״, יָצְתָה בַּת קוֹל וְאָמְרָה לוֹ: רָשָׁע בֶּן רָשָׁע, בֶּן בְּנוֹ שֶׁל נִמְרוֹד הָרָשָׁע, שֶׁהִמְרִיד אֶת כָּל הָעוֹלָם כּוּלּוֹ עָלַי בְּמַלְכוּתוֹ.
Know that this is correct because at five hours into the day the sun is still in the east, and at seven hours the sun is in the west. During the second half of the sixth hour and the first half of the seventh hour the sun is positioned on top of everyone, as it is in the middle of the sky in every inhabited area during this time. Apparently, the sun travels over the inhabited parts of the world in a single hour while the rest of the day it travels over the uninhabited parts. Therefore, the entire settled portion of the world is equal to one-twelfth of the world. It was established that the settled part of the world itself is several parasangs, so the entire world must be larger than six thousand parasangs. This also serves as a conclusive refutation of Rava’s opinion. Come and hear another challenge, as Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai said: What response did the Divine Voice answer to that wicked man, Nebuchadnezzar, when he said: “I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the Most High” (Isaiah 14:14)? A Divine Voice emerged and said to him: Wicked man, son of a wicked man, the disciple in corruption of Nimrod the wicked, who caused the entire world to rebel against Me during his reign by advising the generation of the dispersion to build a tower in order to fight the Hosts of Heaven, how many are the years of a person altogether? Seventy years, and if he is with strength, eighty years, as it is stated: “The days of our years are seventy years and with strength eighty years” (Psalms 90:10).
ושל סדום נ"ב שנה - כמו שמוכיח בקונ' שהיה אברהם בן מ"ח שנה כשנבנית סדום ושלותה כ"ו שנים משמע שהיה אברהם בן ע"ג כשהרג את המלכים ובסדר עולם משמע שהיה בן ע"ה שנה כשהכה את המלכים דקאמר התם אברהם אבינו כשנדבר עמו בין הבתרים בן ע' שנה היה שנאמר ויהי מקץ שלשים שנה וגו' וחזר לחרן ושהה שם ה' שנים שנאמר ואברם בן חמש שנים ושבעים שנה בצאתו מחרן וגו' ואותה שנה שיצא מחרן שנת רעב היתה ירד למצרים ושהה שם ג' חדשים בא וישב לו באלוני ממרא היא שנה שכבש את המלכים ולפ"ז לא היתה שלותה אלא כ"ד וצריך לומר שהיתה בשלוה ב' שנים בתחלה:
א"ר אלעזר לעולם יקדים אדם תפלה לצרה שאילמלא (לא) הקדים אברהם תפלה לצרה בין בית אל ובין העי לא נשתייר מרשעי ישראל שריד ופליט
The verse states: “Had you prepared your prayers, before your troubles came” (Job 36:19). Rabbi Elazar says: A person should always offer up prayer before trouble actually arrives, as had the patriarch Abraham not anticipated the trouble at Ai with the prayer he offered between Bethel and Ai, there would have been no remnant or refugee remaining among the enemies of Israel, a euphemism for Israel itself, as Israel suffered a defeat at Ai from which there is ordinarily no recovery. Reish Lakish says: The verse should be understood as follows: Anyone who concentrates himself and his energy in prayer in the world below will have no enemies in Heaven above causing him trouble. Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The verse should be understood in a slightly different manner: A person should always pray for mercy that all heavenly beings should strengthen his power of prayer, and that he should have no enemies causing him trouble in Heaven above.
גמ' לעולם יקדים אדם תפלה לצרה. וכ"ה בירושלמי פ"ג דתענית ואיתא שם עוד ארשב"ל אם סדרת תפלה לא תהא מיצר פיך אלא הרחב פיך ואמלאהו:
א"ר אלעזר לעולם יקדים אדם תפלה לצרה שאילמלא (לא) הקדים אברהם תפלה לצרה בין בית אל ובין העי לא נשתייר מרשעי ישראל שריד ופליט
The verse states: “Had you prepared your prayers, before your troubles came” (Job 36:19). Rabbi Elazar says: A person should always offer up prayer before trouble actually arrives, as had the patriarch Abraham not anticipated the trouble at Ai with the prayer he offered between Bethel and Ai, there would have been no remnant or refugee remaining among the enemies of Israel, a euphemism for Israel itself, as Israel suffered a defeat at Ai from which there is ordinarily no recovery. Reish Lakish says: The verse should be understood as follows: Anyone who concentrates himself and his energy in prayer in the world below will have no enemies in Heaven above causing him trouble. Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The verse should be understood in a slightly different manner: A person should always pray for mercy that all heavenly beings should strengthen his power of prayer, and that he should have no enemies causing him trouble in Heaven above.
וְהָיָ֤ה זַרְעֲךָ֙ כַּעֲפַ֣ר הָאָ֔רֶץ וּפָרַצְתָּ֛ יָ֥מָּה וָקֵ֖דְמָה וְצָפֹ֣נָה וָנֶ֑גְבָּה וְנִבְרְכ֥וּ בְךָ֛ כׇּל־מִשְׁפְּחֹ֥ת הָאֲדָמָ֖ה וּבְזַרְעֶֽךָ׃
Your descendants shall be as the dust of the earth; you shall spread out to the west and to the east, to the north and to the south. All the families of the earth shall bless themselves by you and your descendants.