Zevachim Daf 116 (זבחים דף קט״ז)
Daf: 116 | Amudim: 116a – 116b | Date: Loading...
📖 Breakdown
Amud Aleph (116a)
Segment 1
TYPE: גמרא
Continuation of baraita about pre-Tabernacle sacrifices
Hebrew/Aramaic:
זְכָרִים וּנְקֵבוֹת, תְּמִימִין וּבַעֲלֵי מוּמִין – דְּאָמַר מָר: תַּמּוּת וְזַכְרוּת בִּבְהֵמָה, וְאֵין תַּמּוּת וְזַכְרוּת בְּעוֹפוֹת.
English Translation:
That which was taught: Males and females, unblemished and blemished animals, pertains to that which the Master said: The requirements of unblemished status and male status apply to animal offerings, but not to birds.
קלאוד על הדף:
The daf opens by continuing the baraita from the previous page about what types of offerings were permitted before the Tabernacle was erected. The baraita taught that both male and female animals, and both unblemished and blemished animals, were acceptable. The Gemara explains this refers to the principle that certain requirements (being male, being unblemished) apply to animal sacrifices but not to bird offerings.
Key Terms:
- תמות = Unblemished status (requirement for sacrifices)
- זכרות = Male status (requirement for certain offerings)
- עופות = Bird offerings
Segment 2
TYPE: גמרא
Juxtaposition of animals and birds
Hebrew/Aramaic:
וְאִיתַּקַּשׁ בְּהֵמָה לְעוֹף.
English Translation:
And a domesticated animal is juxtaposed with a bird.
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara notes that in the verse describing Noah’s sacrifices (Genesis 8:20), animals and birds are mentioned together, creating a textual juxtaposition (hekesh) that allows us to derive laws from one to the other.
Segment 3
TYPE: גמרא
Excluding animals missing limbs
Hebrew/Aramaic:
תְּמִימִין וּבַעֲלֵי מוּמִין – לְאַפּוֹקֵי מְחוּסַּר אֵבֶר, דְּלָא.
English Translation:
Unblemished and blemished animals serves to exclude animals lacking a limb, which were not fit for sacrifice.
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara clarifies that while blemished animals were permitted for sacrifice before the Tabernacle, animals missing an entire limb (mechusar ever) were not. This distinction separates cosmetic blemishes from fundamental physical incompleteness.
Key Terms:
- מחוסר איבר = An animal missing a limb
- בעלי מומין = Blemished animals
Segment 4
TYPE: גמרא
Scriptural derivation for excluding animals missing limbs
Hebrew/Aramaic:
אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: מִנַּיִן לִמְחוּסַּר אֵבֶר שֶׁנֶּאֱסַר לִבְנֵי נֹחַ? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וּמִכׇּל הָחַי מִכׇּל בָּשָׂר״ – אָמְרָה תּוֹרָה: הָבֵא בְּהֵמָה שֶׁחַיִּין רָאשֵׁי אֵיבָרִין שֶׁלָּהּ.
English Translation:
Rabbi Elazar says: From where is it derived that an animal lacking a limb is forbidden to the descendants of Noah for sacrifice? The verse states: “And of every living being of all flesh” (Genesis 6:19) – the Torah stated: Bring an animal whose limbs are all living.
קלאוד על הדף:
Rabbi Elazar derives from the phrase “every living being” that the animal must be completely alive – i.e., all its limbs must be present and functional. This excludes animals missing limbs from being offered by Noahides.
Key Terms:
- בני נח = Descendants of Noah (all humanity before Sinai)
- ראשי איברין = The primary limbs
Segment 5
TYPE: גמרא – קושיא ותירוץ
Perhaps the verse excludes tereifa instead?
Hebrew/Aramaic:
וְדִילְמָא לְמַעוֹטֵי טְרֵיפָה? הָהוּא מִ״לְּחַיּוֹת זֶרַע״ נָפְקָא.
English Translation:
But perhaps this phrase serves to exclude a tereifa from being fit as a sacrifice? The disqualification of a tereifa is derived from “To keep seed alive” (Genesis 7:3).
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara challenges: maybe “every living being” excludes tereifa (mortally wounded animals) rather than animals missing limbs? The response: tereifa is excluded from a different verse – “to keep seed alive” – implying animals that can reproduce, which a tereifa cannot.
Key Terms:
- טריפה = Tereifa (an animal with a mortal wound or defect)
- לחיות זרע = “To keep seed alive” (Genesis 7:3)
Segment 6
TYPE: גמרא – מחלוקת
Dispute about whether a tereifa can give birth
Hebrew/Aramaic:
הָנִיחָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר טְרֵיפָה אֵינָהּ יוֹלֶדֶת, אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר טְרֵיפָה יוֹלֶדֶת – מַאי אִיכָּא לְמֵימַר? הָאָמַר קְרָא: ״אִתָּךְ״ – בְּדוֹמִין לָךְ.
English Translation:
This works well for the one who says a tereifa cannot give birth. But according to the one who says a tereifa can give birth, what can be said? The verse states “with you” (Genesis 6:19), indicating animals similar to you [Noah].
קלאוד על הדף:
The derivation from “to keep seed alive” only works if we hold that a tereifa cannot reproduce. For the opinion that a tereifa can give birth, a different source is needed: the word “with you” – meaning similar to Noah, who was physically whole.
Key Terms:
- אינה יולדת = Cannot give birth
- אתך = “With you” (Genesis 6:19)
Segment 7
TYPE: גמרא – קושיא
Perhaps Noah himself was a tereifa?
Hebrew/Aramaic:
וְדִילְמָא נֹחַ גּוּפֵיהּ טְרֵיפָה הֲוָה? ״תָּמִים״ כְּתִיב בֵּיהּ.
English Translation:
But perhaps Noah himself was a tereifa? It is written about him that he was “tamim” [complete/perfect].
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara raises a fascinating challenge: if “with you” means similar to Noah, maybe Noah was himself a tereifa! The answer: the Torah explicitly describes Noah as “tamim” (complete), proving he was physically whole.
Key Terms:
- תמים = Complete, perfect, whole
Segment 8
TYPE: גמרא – קושיא
Perhaps “tamim” refers to his character?
Hebrew/Aramaic:
וְדִילְמָא תָּמִים בִּדְרָכָיו? ״צַדִּיק״ כְּתִיב בֵּיהּ.
English Translation:
But perhaps “tamim” means his ways were complete, not his physical attributes? It is already written about him that he was “righteous.”
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara presses: perhaps “tamim” describes Noah’s moral perfection, not physical wholeness? The response: the Torah already calls Noah “tzaddik” (righteous), so “tamim” must add something new – namely, physical completeness.
Segment 9
TYPE: גמרא – תירוץ
Final proof that Noah was not a tereifa
Hebrew/Aramaic:
וְדִילְמָא ״תָּמִים״ – בִּדְרָכָיו, ״צַדִּיק״ – בְּמַעֲשָׂיו? אִי סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ דְּנֹחַ גּוּפֵיהּ טְרֵיפָה הֲוָה, מִי קָאָמַר לֵיהּ לְנֹחַ: דִּכְוָתָךְ עַיֵּיל, שְׁלֵמִים לָא תְּעַיֵּיל?!
English Translation:
But perhaps “tamim” refers to his ways and “tzaddik” to his deeds? If Noah were a tereifa, would God have told him: Bring in animals like you, but do not bring in whole animals?!
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara delivers a compelling logical argument: it would be absurd for God to instruct Noah to bring tereifot while excluding whole animals. The very premise of the ark was to preserve life, not exclude healthy creatures.
Segment 10
TYPE: גמרא
Why do we need both derivations?
Hebrew/Aramaic:
וּמֵאַחַר דְּנָפְקָא לַן מֵ״אִתָּךְ״, ״לְחַיּוֹת זֶרַע״ לְמָה לִי?
English Translation:
And once we derive the disqualification of a tereifa from “with you,” why do I need “to keep seed alive”?
קלאוד על הדף:
Having established that “with you” excludes tereifot, the Gemara asks why the Torah also says “to keep seed alive.” This sets up an explanation of what each phrase teaches uniquely.
Segment 11
TYPE: גמרא – תירוץ
“With you” might only mean companionship
Hebrew/Aramaic:
מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא: ״אִתָּךְ״ – לְצַוְתָּא בְּעָלְמָא, אֲפִילּוּ זָקֵן אֲפִילּוּ סָרִיס; קָמַשְׁמַע לַן.
English Translation:
If one could derive only from “with you,” you would say animals were brought only for companionship, even if old or castrated; therefore the verse teaches “to keep seed alive.”
קלאוד על הדף:
“With you” alone might mean any animal that could be Noah’s companion, including sterile ones. “To keep seed alive” specifies that the animals must be capable of reproduction, excluding the old and castrated.
Key Terms:
- צותא = Companionship
- סריס = Castrated animal
Segment 12
TYPE: גמרא
How did Noah know which animals were pure?
Hebrew/Aramaic:
טְהוֹרִין אֲבָל לֹא טְמֵאִין. וּמִי הֲווֹ טְמֵאִין וּטְהוֹרִין בְּהַהִיא שַׁעְתָּא?! אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָנִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: מֵאוֹתָן שֶׁלֹּא נֶעֶבְדָה בָּהֶן עֲבֵירָה.
English Translation:
Sacrifices were brought from kosher species, not non-kosher. But were there categories of pure and impure at that time?! Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachmani said in the name of Rabbi Yonatan: From animals that had not been used in performing sin.
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara raises a fundamental question: the Torah’s classification of pure and impure animals came at Sinai – how could Noah know the difference? Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachmani offers one answer: “pure” meant animals that had not been used for bestial relations.
Key Terms:
- טהורין = Pure/kosher animals
- טמאין = Impure/non-kosher animals
- עבירה = Sin, transgression
Segment 13
TYPE: גמרא
Rav Chisda’s explanation – the ark’s miraculous selection
Hebrew/Aramaic:
מְנָא הֲווֹ יָדְעִי? כִּדְרַב חִסְדָּא. דְּאָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: הֶעֱבִירָן לִפְנֵי הַתֵּיבָה; כֹּל שֶׁהַתֵּיבָה קוֹלַטְתָּן – בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁהוּא טָהוֹר, אֵין הַתֵּיבָה קוֹלַטְתָּן – בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁהֵן טְמֵאִין.
English Translation:
From where did they know? In accordance with Rav Chisda, who says: Noah caused all animals to pass before the ark. All that the ark accepted were known to be pure; those it did not accept were known to be impure.
קלאוד על הדף:
Rav Chisda offers a miraculous explanation: the ark itself had divine discernment. Animals that the ark “accepted” (in groups of seven) were pure; those it only accepted in pairs were impure. This supernatural sorting revealed each species’ status.
Segment 14
TYPE: גמרא
Rabbi Abbahu’s explanation – animals came on their own
Hebrew/Aramaic:
רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ אָמַר, אָמַר קְרָא: ״וְהַבָּאִים זָכָר וּנְקֵבָה״ – הַבָּאִין מֵאֲלֵיהֶן.
English Translation:
Rabbi Abbahu says the verse states: “And they that went in, male and female” (Genesis 7:16), meaning those that went in on their own.
קלאוד על הדף:
Rabbi Abbahu provides another answer: the animals came to the ark on their own initiative, divinely guided. The ones that came naturally in groups of seven revealed themselves as pure species; those that came in pairs were impure.
Segment 15
TYPE: גמרא
Did the descendants of Noah offer peace offerings?
Hebrew/Aramaic:
אָמַר מָר: וְהַכֹּל קָרְבוּ עוֹלוֹת. עוֹלוֹת אִין, שְׁלָמִים לָא.
English Translation:
The Master said: And all offerings sacrificed before the Tabernacle were burnt offerings. Burnt offerings, yes, but peace offerings were not.
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara returns to the baraita’s statement that all pre-Tabernacle offerings were olot (burnt offerings). This implies shelamim (peace offerings) were not offered by the descendants of Noah. This will be disputed.
Key Terms:
- עולות = Burnt offerings (entirely consumed on the altar)
- שלמים = Peace offerings (shared between altar, priests, and owner)
Segment 16
TYPE: גמרא – קושיא
Proof that peace offerings were brought
Hebrew/Aramaic:
וְהָא כְּתִיב: ״וַיִּזְבְּחוּ זְבָחִים שְׁלָמִים לַה׳ פָּרִים״! אֶלָּא אֵימָא: הַכֹּל קָרְבוּ עוֹלוֹת [וּשְׁלָמִים].
English Translation:
But it is written: “And they sacrificed peace offerings of oxen to the Lord” (Exodus 24:5)! Rather, say: All sacrificed were burnt offerings or peace offerings.
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara challenges from the verse describing the covenant ceremony at Sinai, where peace offerings were explicitly brought. This leads to a modified reading: both burnt offerings and peace offerings were permitted.
Segment 17
TYPE: גמרא – מחלוקת
Tannaitic dispute about Noahide peace offerings
Hebrew/Aramaic:
וְהָתַנְיָא: אֲבָל שְׁלָמִים לָא, כִּי אִם עוֹלוֹת. עוֹלוֹת אִין, שְׁלָמִים לָא! כְּמַאן דְּאָמַר לֹא קֵרְבוּ שְׁלָמִים בְּנֵי נֹחַ – דְּאִיתְּמַר: רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר חֲנִינָא, חַד אָמַר: קֵרְבוּ שְׁלָמִים בְּנֵי נֹחַ, וְחַד אָמַר: לֹא קֵרְבוּ.
English Translation:
But it is taught in another baraita: Peace offerings were not sacrificed before the Tabernacle; only burnt offerings. This baraita is in accordance with the one who says the descendants of Noah did not sacrifice peace offerings, as it was disputed between Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Yosei bar Chanina – one says they did sacrifice peace offerings, and one says they did not.
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara identifies a tannaitic dispute. One baraita says only olot were offered; another implies shelamim too. This reflects a dispute between Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Yosei bar Chanina about whether Noahides offered peace offerings.
Segment 18
TYPE: גמרא
Proof from Abel that peace offerings were offered
Hebrew/Aramaic:
מַאי טַעְמָא דְּמַאן דְּאָמַר קֵרְבוּ שְׁלָמִים בְּנֵי נֹחַ? דִּכְתִיב: ״וְהֶבֶל הֵבִיא גַם הוּא מִבְּכוֹרוֹת צֹאנוֹ וּמֵחֶלְבֵהֶן״ – אֵיזֶהוּ דָּבָר שֶׁחֶלְבּוֹ קָרֵב לְגַבֵּי מִזְבֵּחַ, וְאֵין כּוּלּוֹ קָרֵב לְגַבֵּי מִזְבֵּחַ? הֱוֵי אוֹמֵר: זֶה שְׁלָמִים.
English Translation:
What is the reasoning of the one who says the descendants of Noah sacrificed peace offerings? As it is written: “And Abel brought of the firstborn of his flock and of the fat thereof” (Genesis 4:4). What offering has only its fat sacrificed on the altar but not its entirety? You must say: This is the peace offering.
קלאוד על הדף:
The opinion that Noahides offered shelamim derives proof from Abel’s sacrifice. The verse mentions Abel brought “from the fat” – implying only the fat went on the altar while the rest was eaten. This is the defining characteristic of a peace offering.
Key Terms:
- הבל = Abel
- מחלביהן = “From the fat thereof”
Segment 19
TYPE: גמרא
Proof from Song of Songs that only burnt offerings were offered
Hebrew/Aramaic:
מַאי טַעְמָא דְּמַאן דְּאָמַר לֹא קֵרְבוּ? דִּכְתִיב: ״עוּרִי צָפוֹן וּבוֹאִי תֵימָן״ – תִּתְנַעֵר אוּמָּה שֶׁמַּעֲשֶׂיהָ בַּצָּפוֹן, וְתָבוֹא אוּמָּה שֶׁמַּעֲשֶׂיהָ בַּצָּפוֹן וּבַדָּרוֹם.
English Translation:
What is the reasoning of the one who says they did not sacrifice peace offerings? As it is written: “Awake, O north; and come, O south” (Song of Songs 4:16). The nation whose offerings are only in the north shall depart, and the nation whose offerings are in both the north and the south shall come.
קלאוד על הדף:
The opposing view derives from Song of Songs. “Awake, O north” refers to nations who only offer burnt offerings (slaughtered in the north); “come, O south” refers to Israel, who also offers peace offerings (slaughtered in the south). This implies gentiles were limited to burnt offerings.
Key Terms:
- צפון = North (where olot are slaughtered)
- דרום = South (where shelamim may be slaughtered)
Segment 20
TYPE: גמרא
Response about Abel’s offering
Hebrew/Aramaic:
וּמָר נָמֵי, הָכְתִיב: ״וּמֵחֶלְבֵיהֶן״! מִשַּׁמִּנֵיהוֹן [דִּידְהוּ].
English Translation:
And according to the Master [who says no peace offerings], isn’t it written: “And of the fat thereof”? It means the fattest of his animals.
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara resolves the Abel proof: “from the fat” doesn’t mean Abel offered only the fat (as in shelamim). Rather, it means he brought the fattest, choicest animals – a description of quality, not offering type.
Segment 21
TYPE: גמרא
Response about “Awake, O north”
Hebrew/Aramaic:
וּמָר נָמֵי, הָכְתִיב: ״עוּרִי צָפוֹן״! [הָהוּא] בְּקִיבּוּץ גָּלִיּוֹת הוּא דִּכְתִיב.
English Translation:
And according to the Master [who says peace offerings were offered], isn’t it written: “Awake, O north”? That verse is written with regard to the ingathering of the exiles.
קלאוד על הדף:
The other side resolves the Song of Songs proof: that verse isn’t about sacrifices at all – it’s a prophecy about the future ingathering of exiles from all directions.
Key Terms:
- קיבוץ גליות = Ingathering of the exiles
Segment 22
TYPE: גמרא
Proof from Moses’s statement to Pharaoh
Hebrew/Aramaic:
וְהָא כְּתִיב: ״וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה גַּם אַתָּה תִּתֵּן בְּיָדֵינוּ זְבָחִים וְעֹלֹת וְעָשִׂינוּ לַה׳ אֱלֹהֵינוּ״! זְבָחִים לַאֲכִילָה, וְעוֹלוֹת לְהַקְרָבָה.
English Translation:
But isn’t it written: “And Moses said: You must also give into our hand sacrifices and burnt offerings” (Exodus 10:25)? “Sacrifices” refers to animals for consumption, and “burnt offerings” to animals for sacrifice.
קלאוד על הדף:
Another proof is brought from Moses’s words to Pharaoh. The Gemara resolves: “zevachim” (sacrifices) here means animals for eating, not peace offerings. “Olot” were the actual sacrifices.
Segment 23
TYPE: גמרא
Proof from Yitro’s sacrifice
Hebrew/Aramaic:
וְהָא כְּתִיב: ״וַיִּקַּח יִתְרוֹ [חֹתֵן מֹשֶׁה] עוֹלָה וּזְבָחִים״! הַהוּא לְאַחַר מַתַּן תּוֹרָה הוּא דִּכְתִיב.
English Translation:
But isn’t it written: “And Yitro took a burnt offering and sacrifices for God” (Exodus 18:12)? That verse was written after the giving of the Torah.
קלאוד על הדף:
The strongest proof comes from Yitro, who brought both olah and zevachim. The resolution: Yitro’s sacrifice occurred after Sinai, when peace offerings were already permitted to Israel.
Key Terms:
- יתרו = Yitro (Moses’s father-in-law)
Segment 24
TYPE: גמרא – מחלוקת
Dispute about when Yitro came
Hebrew/Aramaic:
הָנִיחָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר: [יִתְרוֹ] אַחַר מַתַּן תּוֹרָה הָיָה; אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר: [יִתְרוֹ] קוֹדֶם מַתַּן תּוֹרָה הָיָה – מַאי אִיכָּא לְמֵימַר? דְּאִיתְּמַר: בְּנֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי; חַד אָמַר: יִתְרוֹ קוֹדֶם מַתַּן תּוֹרָה הָיָה, וְחַד אָמַר: יִתְרוֹ אַחַר מַתַּן תּוֹרָה הָיָה. לְמַאן דְּאָמַר יִתְרוֹ קוֹדֶם מַתַּן תּוֹרָה הָיָה – קָסָבַר שְׁלָמִים הִקְרִיבוּ בְּנֵי נֹחַ.
English Translation:
This works well for the one who says Yitro came after the giving of the Torah. But according to the one who says Yitro came before the giving of the Torah, what can be said? As it was stated: The sons of Rabbi Chiyya and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi disputed this – one says Yitro came before the giving of the Torah, and one says Yitro came after. The one who says Yitro came before maintains that the descendants of Noah did sacrifice peace offerings.
קלאוד על הדף:
This is a pivotal passage. The timing of Yitro’s visit is disputed between the sons of Rabbi Chiyya and Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi. If Yitro came before Sinai and brought shelamim, this proves Noahides could offer peace offerings. If he came after, no proof.
Key Terms:
- קודם מתן תורה = Before the giving of the Torah
- אחר מתן תורה = After the giving of the Torah
Segment 25
TYPE: גמרא – ברייתא
What news did Yitro hear?
Hebrew/Aramaic:
כְּתַנָּאֵי: ״וַיִּשְׁמַע יִתְרוֹ כֹהֵן מִדְיָן״ – מָה שְׁמוּעָה שָׁמַע, וּבָא וְנִתְגַּיֵּיר? רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר: מִלְחֶמֶת עֲמָלֵק שָׁמַע, שֶׁהֲרֵי כְּתִיב בְּצִדּוֹ: ״וַיַּחֲלֹשׁ יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אֶת עֲמָלֵק וְאֶת עַמּוֹ לְפִי חָרֶב״.
English Translation:
This is like a dispute between Tannaim: “Now Yitro, the priest of Midian, heard” (Exodus 18:1) – what report did he hear that he came and converted? Rabbi Yehoshua says: He heard about the war with Amalek, as it is written adjacent: “And Joshua weakened Amalek and his people with the edge of the sword” (Exodus 17:13).
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara introduces a tannaitic dispute about what motivated Yitro. Rabbi Yehoshua says he heard about Israel’s victory over Amalek. The proximity of the Amalek narrative to Yitro’s arrival supports this view.
Key Terms:
- מלחמת עמלק = The war with Amalek
- נתגייר = Converted
Segment 26
TYPE: גמרא – Aggadeta
Rabbi Elazar HaModa’i – Yitro heard about Matan Torah
Hebrew/Aramaic:
רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר הַמּוֹדָעִי אוֹמֵר: מַתַּן תּוֹרָה שָׁמַע [וּבָא], שֶׁכְּשֶׁנִּיתְּנָה תּוֹרָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל הָיָה קוֹלוֹ הוֹלֵךְ מִסּוֹף הָעוֹלָם וְעַד סוֹפוֹ, וְכׇל [מַלְכֵי] אוּמּוֹת הָעוֹלָם אֲחָזָתַן רְעָדָה בְּהֵיכְלֵיהֶן וְאָמְרוּ שִׁירָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמָר: ״וּבְהֵיכָלוֹ כּוּלּוֹ אוֹמֵר כָּבוֹד״.
English Translation:
Rabbi Elazar HaModa’i says: He heard about the giving of the Torah and came. When the Torah was given to Israel, God’s voice traveled from one end of the world to the other, and all the kings of the nations trembled in their palaces and recited song, as it is stated: “And in His palace all say: Glory” (Psalms 29:9).
קלאוד על הדף:
Rabbi Elazar HaModa’i offers a dramatic interpretation: when the Torah was given, God’s voice reverberated across the entire world. All nations’ kings trembled and sang praise. This universal event is what Yitro heard.
Key Terms:
- מתן תורה = The giving of the Torah
- קולו הולך = His voice traveled
- רעדה = Trembling
Segment 27
TYPE: גמרא – Aggadeta
The nations gathered to Bilaam
Hebrew/Aramaic:
נִתְקַבְּצוּ כּוּלָּם אֵצֶל בִּלְעָם הָרָשָׁע, וְאָמְרוּ לוֹ: מָה קוֹל הֶהָמוֹן אֲשֶׁר שָׁמַעְנוּ? שֶׁמָּא מַבּוּל בָּא לָעוֹלָם (אָמַר לָהֶם) – ״ה׳ לַמַּבּוּל יָשָׁב״?
English Translation:
All the kings gathered around Bilaam the wicked and said to him: What is this tumultuous sound we have heard? Perhaps a flood is coming to the world, as it states: “The Lord sat enthroned at the flood” (Psalms 29:10)?
קלאוד על הדף:
A famous aggadic passage begins. The world’s kings, terrified by the thunderous sound at Sinai, gathered to the prophet Bilaam asking if God was bringing another flood. They quoted Psalms 29, which describes God’s powerful voice.
Key Terms:
- בלעם הרשע = Bilaam the wicked
- מבול = The Flood
- קול ההמון = The tumultuous sound
Segment 28
TYPE: גמרא – Aggadeta
Bilaam reassures them – no more floods
Hebrew/Aramaic:
[אָמַר לָהֶם]: ״וַיֵּשֶׁב ה׳ מֶלֶךְ לְעוֹלָם״ – כְּבָר נִשְׁבַּע הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא שֶׁאֵינוֹ מֵבִיא מַבּוּל לָעוֹלָם.
English Translation:
Bilaam said to them: “The Lord sits as King forever” (Psalms 29:10) – the Holy One, Blessed be He, already took an oath that He will never bring a flood to the world.
קלאוד על הדף:
Bilaam calms their fears by citing God’s post-flood promise (Genesis 9). The verse “The Lord sits as King forever” indicates God’s eternal, unchanging commitment – He will not destroy the world again by flood.
Segment 29
TYPE: גמרא – Aggadeta
Perhaps a flood of fire?
Hebrew/Aramaic:
אָמְרוּ לוֹ: מַבּוּל שֶׁל מַיִם אֵינוֹ מֵבִיא, אֲבָל מַבּוּל שֶׁל אֵשׁ מֵבִיא – שֶׁנֶּאֱמָר: ״כִּי (הִנֵּה) בָּאֵשׁ ה׳ נִשְׁפָּט״. אָמַר לָהֶן: כְּבָר נִשְׁבַּע שֶׁאֵינוֹ מַשְׁחִית כׇּל בָּשָׂר.
English Translation:
They said to him: He will not bring a flood of water, but perhaps a flood of fire, as stated: “For by fire will the Lord contend” (Isaiah 66:16). Bilaam said to them: He already took an oath not to destroy all flesh.
קלאוד על הדף:
The kings press: maybe God will destroy the world by fire instead! Bilaam responds that God’s oath was not to destroy “all flesh” – covering any form of total destruction, not just water.
Key Terms:
- מבול של אש = A flood of fire
Segment 30
TYPE: גמרא – Aggadeta
The Torah – God’s hidden treasure
Hebrew/Aramaic:
וּמֶה קוֹל הֶהָמוֹן הַזֶּה שֶׁשָּׁמַעְנוּ? אָמַר לָהֶם: חֶמְדָּה טוֹבָה יֵשׁ לוֹ בְּבֵית גְּנָזָיו, שֶׁהָיְתָה גְּנוּזָה אֶצְלוֹ תְּשַׁע מֵאוֹת שִׁבְעִים וְאַרְבָּעָה דּוֹרוֹת קוֹדֶם שֶׁנִּבְרָא הָעוֹלָם; וּבִיקֵּשׁ לִיתְּנָהּ לְבָנָיו, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״ה׳ עוֹז לְעַמּוֹ יִתֵּן״.
English Translation:
They asked: What then is this tumultuous sound we heard? Bilaam said to them: He has a good and precious treasure in His treasury, which was hidden away with Him for 974 generations before the world was created, and He seeks to give it to His children, as stated: “The Lord will give strength to His people” (Psalms 29:11).
קלאוד על הדף:
Bilaam explains the sound: God is giving the Torah – described as a “precious treasure” hidden for 974 generations before Creation. “Strength” (oz) is interpreted as Torah, which God now gives to Israel.
Key Terms:
- חמדה טובה = A good, precious treasure
- בית גנזיו = His treasury
- 974 דורות = 974 generations (before Creation)
- עוז = Strength (interpreted as Torah)
Segment 31
TYPE: גמרא – Aggadeta
The nations’ blessing
Hebrew/Aramaic:
[מִיָּד] פָּתְחוּ כּוּלָּם וְאָמְרוּ: ״ה׳ יְבָרֵךְ אֶת עַמּוֹ בַשָּׁלוֹם״.
English Translation:
Immediately, they all began to say: “The Lord will bless His people with peace” (Psalms 29:11).
קלאוד על הדף:
Upon learning that God was not bringing destruction but giving the Torah, the nations responded with blessing. They quoted the continuation of Psalms 29: may God’s people be blessed with peace. This conclusion transforms fear into acceptance.
Segment 32
TYPE: גמרא
Rabbi Eliezer – Yitro heard about the splitting of the sea
Hebrew/Aramaic:
רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: קְרִיעַת יַם סוּף שָׁמַע וּבָא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיְהִי כִשְׁמֹעַ כׇּל מַלְכֵי הָאֱמֹרִי״. וְאַף רָחָב הַזּוֹנָה אָמְרָה לִשְׁלוּחֵי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ: ״כִּי שָׁמַעְנוּ אֵת אֲשֶׁר הוֹבִישׁ ה׳ אֶת מֵי יַם סוּף״.
English Translation:
Rabbi Eliezer says: He heard about the splitting of the Red Sea and came, as stated in a similar context: “And it came to pass when all the kings of the Amorites heard” (Joshua 5:1). And even Rahab the prostitute said to Joshua’s messengers: “For we have heard how the Lord dried up the water of the Red Sea” (Joshua 2:10).
קלאוד על הדף:
Rabbi Eliezer offers a third view: Yitro heard about the splitting of the Red Sea. This is supported by the verse about the Amorite kings hearing, and by Rahab’s testimony to Joshua’s spies that the sea splitting was known throughout Canaan.
Key Terms:
- קריעת ים סוף = The splitting of the Red Sea
- רחב הזונה = Rahab the prostitute
Segment 33
TYPE: גמרא
Difference between the verses about fear
Hebrew/Aramaic:
מַאי שְׁנָא הָתָם, דַּאֲמַר (לֵיהּ) ״וְלֹא הָיָה בָם עוֹד רוּחַ״; וּמַאי שְׁנָא הָכָא, דְּקָאָמַר: ״וְלֹא קָמָה עוֹד רוּחַ בְּאִישׁ״?
English Translation:
What is different there, where the verse states: “Neither was there spirit in them anymore” (Joshua 5:1); and what is different here, where the verse states: “Neither did there remain any more spirit in any man” (Joshua 2:11)?
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara notes a textual difference between how the Amorite kings’ fear and how Rahab describes the Canaanites’ fear. This sets up an exploration of the nuance in these phrases, continued on the next amud.
Amud Bet (116b)
Segment 1
TYPE: גמרא – Aggadeta
Rahab’s intimate knowledge
Hebrew/Aramaic:
דַּאֲפִילּוּ אִקַּשּׁוֹיֵי נָמֵי לָא אִקַּשּׁוּ. וּמְנָא יָדְעָה? דְּאָמַר מָר: אֵין לָךְ כׇּל שַׂר וְנָגִיד שֶׁלֹּא בָּא עַל רָחָב הַזּוֹנָה.
English Translation:
The Gemara replies that Rahab used this phrase euphemistically, to say that their fear was so great that their male organs were not even able to become erect. And how did Rahab know this? As the Master said: You do not have any prince or ruler who did not engage in intercourse with Rahab the prostitute.
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara explains Rahab’s unique testimony: “no spirit remained in any man” refers to complete psychological and physical paralysis from fear. Rahab knew this intimately because every ruler and prince had been her client – she had firsthand knowledge of their condition.
Key Terms:
- שר ונגיד = Prince and ruler
- רחב הזונה = Rahab the prostitute
Segment 2
TYPE: גמרא – Aggadeta
Rahab’s conversion and merit
Hebrew/Aramaic:
אָמְרוּ: בַּת עֶשֶׂר שָׁנִים הָיְתָה כְּשֶׁיָּצְאוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל מִמִּצְרַיִם, וְזִנְּתָה [כׇּל] אַרְבָּעִים שָׁנָה שֶׁהָיוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל בַּמִּדְבָּר. אַחַר חֲמִישִּׁים שָׁנָה נִתְגַּיְּירָה, אָמְרָה: ״יְהֵא מָחוּל לִי בִּשְׂכַר חֶבֶל חַלּוֹן וּפִשְׁתִּים״.
English Translation:
The Sages said with regard to Rahab: She was ten years old when the Jewish people left Egypt, and she engaged in prostitution all forty years that the Jewish people were in the wilderness. After fifty years, she converted. She said: May all of my sins be forgiven me as a reward for the rope, window, and flax [by which she saved the spies].
קלאוד על הדף:
A biographical note about Rahab: she began her profession at ten and continued for forty years. At fifty, she converted and requested that her merit in saving Joshua’s spies (using rope, window, and flax – see Joshua 2) atone for her past. This demonstrates the power of teshuva.
Key Terms:
- נתגיירה = She converted
- חבל חלון ופשתים = Rope, window, and flax
Segment 3
TYPE: גמרא
Gentiles may sacrifice outside the Temple
Hebrew/Aramaic:
אָמַר מָר: וְגוֹיִם בִּזְמַן הַזֶּה רַשָּׁאִין לַעֲשׂוֹת כֵּן.
English Translation:
The Master said in the baraita that discussed the sacrifice of offerings before the construction of the Tabernacle: And today, gentiles are permitted to do so [sacrifice outside the Temple].
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara returns to halacha with a significant statement: even today, when Jews are forbidden to sacrifice outside the Temple, gentiles may still offer sacrifices on private altars. The pre-Sinaitic permission for bamot continues to apply to non-Jews.
Key Terms:
- גוים = Gentiles
- בזמן הזה = In this time (i.e., today)
Segment 4
TYPE: גמרא
Scriptural source for gentile permission
Hebrew/Aramaic:
מְנָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי? דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״ – בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מְצוּוִין עַל שְׁחוּטֵי חוּץ, וְאֵין הַגּוֹיִם מְצוּוִין עַל שְׁחוּטֵי חוּץ.
English Translation:
From where are these matters derived? As the Sages taught: “Speak to the children of Israel” (Leviticus 17:2) – the children of Israel are commanded regarding offerings slaughtered outside [the Temple], but gentiles are not commanded regarding offerings slaughtered outside.
קלאוד על הדף:
The source is the verse introducing the prohibition of shechutei chutz (slaughtering offerings outside the Temple). The phrase “speak to the children of Israel” limits the prohibition to Jews, implying gentiles are not bound by it.
Key Terms:
- שחוטי חוץ = Offerings slaughtered outside [the Temple]
Segment 5
TYPE: גמרא
Gentiles may build private altars
Hebrew/Aramaic:
לְפִיכָךְ כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד בּוֹנֶה לוֹ בָּמָה לְעַצְמוֹ, וּמַקְרִיב עָלֶיהָ כׇּל מַה שֶּׁיִּרְצֶה.
English Translation:
Therefore, each and every gentile may construct a private altar for himself, and sacrifice upon it whatever he desires.
קלאוד על הדף:
The practical halacha: any non-Jew who wishes to worship the God of Israel through sacrifice may build a personal altar (bamah) anywhere and offer whatever type of sacrifice he chooses.
Key Terms:
- במה = Private altar
Segment 6
TYPE: גמרא
Restrictions on Jewish assistance
Hebrew/Aramaic:
אָמַר רַבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אַחָא אָמַר רַב אַסִּי: אָסוּר לְסַיְּיעָן וְלַעֲשׂוֹת שְׁלִיחוּתָן. אָמַר רַבָּה: וּלְאוֹרֹיִנְהוּ שְׁרֵי.
English Translation:
Rabbi Ya’akov bar Acha said in the name of Rav Asi: It is prohibited for a Jew to assist them or to fulfill their agency in this matter. Rabba said: But to instruct them is permitted.
קלאוד על הדף:
Although gentiles may sacrifice, Jews face restrictions: they may not actively help perform the sacrifice or serve as the gentile’s agent. However, teaching them how to properly sacrifice is permitted – passive instruction differs from active participation.
Key Terms:
- לסייען = To assist them
- לעשות שליחותן = To fulfill their agency
- לאורינהו = To instruct them
Segment 7
TYPE: גמרא – מעשה
The story of Ifera Hurmiz
Hebrew/Aramaic:
כִּי הָא דְּאִיפְרָה הוֹרְמִיז אִימֵּיהּ דְּשַׁבּוּר מַלְכָּא שַׁדַּרָה קוּרְבָּנָא לְרָבָא, שְׁלַחָה לֵיהּ: ״אַסְּקוּהּ נִיהֲלֵיהּ לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם״.
English Translation:
This is similar to that incident in which Ifera Hurmiz, the mother of King Shapur of Persia, sent an offering to Rava, with which she sent this message to him: Sacrifice this for me, for the sake of Heaven.
קלאוד על הדף:
A remarkable historical narrative: the Persian queen mother sent an animal to the great Amora Rava, requesting he sacrifice it to the God of Israel. This demonstrates that even royalty among the nations recognized the God of the Jews.
Key Terms:
- איפרא הורמיז = Ifera Hurmiz (Persian queen mother)
- שבור מלכא = King Shapur (of Persia)
- לשם שמים = For the sake of Heaven
Segment 8
TYPE: גמרא
Rava’s instructions for the sacrifice
Hebrew/Aramaic:
אֲמַר לְהוּ לְרַב סָפְרָא וּלְרַב אַחָא בַּר הוּנָא: זִילוּ וּדְבַרוּ תְּרֵי עוּלֵמֵי גּוּלָאֵי, וַחֲזוֹ הֵיכָא דְּמַסְּקָא יַמָּא שִׂירְטוֹן; וּשְׁקֻלוּ צִיבֵי חַדְתֵי, וְאַפִּיקוּ נוּרָא מִמָּרָא חַדְתָּא, וְאַסְּקוּהּ נִיהֲלֵיהּ לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם.
English Translation:
Rava said to Rav Safra and to Rav Acha bar Huna: Go, take two gentile youths of the same age, and see where the sea raises silt [an unused location]. Take new wood and bring out fire from new vessels, and have them sacrifice it for her, for the sake of Heaven.
קלאוד על הדף:
Rava provided detailed instructions ensuring the sacrifice was done properly without Jewish active participation: use gentile assistants, find a virgin location (unused shore where the sea deposits silt), use fresh wood and new fire-making implements. This maximized the offering’s purity while respecting halachic boundaries.
Key Terms:
- שירטון = Silt (indicating an unused location)
- עולמי גולאי = Gentile youths
- ציבי חדתי = New wood
Segment 9
TYPE: גמרא – קושיא
Abaye’s question about new wood
Hebrew/Aramaic:
אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: כְּמַאן – כְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן שַׁמּוּעַ.
English Translation:
Abaye said to Rava: In accordance with whose opinion was the instruction to sacrifice exclusively with new wood? It was in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Elazar ben Shamua.
קלאוד על הדף:
Abaye identifies that Rava’s stringency about new wood follows Rabbi Elazar ben Shamua, who requires that altar wood be unused by ordinary people. This leads into a discussion about whether this stringency applies to private altars.
Key Terms:
- רבי אלעזר בן שמוע = Rabbi Elazar ben Shamua
Segment 10
TYPE: גמרא
David’s payment for the Temple site – the contradiction
Hebrew/Aramaic:
דְּתַנְיָא, כָּתוּב אֶחָד אוֹמֵר: ״וַיִּתֵּן דָּוִד לְאׇרְנָן בַּמָּקוֹם שִׁקְלֵי זָהָב מִשְׁקָל שֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת״, וְכָתוּב אֶחָד אוֹמֵר: ״וַיִּקֶן דָּוִד אֶת הַגֹּרֶן וְאֶת הַבָּקָר בְּכֶסֶף שְׁקָלִים חֲמִשִּׁים״.
English Translation:
As it is taught in a baraita: One verse states: “So David gave to Ornan for the place six hundred shekels of gold by weight” (I Chronicles 21:25). And one verse states: “So David bought the threshing floor and the oxen for fifty shekels of silver” (II Samuel 24:24).
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara introduces a famous biblical contradiction: Samuel says David paid 50 silver shekels for the Temple site, while Chronicles says 600 gold shekels. This significant discrepancy requires resolution.
Key Terms:
- ארנן / ארונה = Ornan/Araunah (the Jebusite)
- גורן = Threshing floor
Segment 11
TYPE: גמרא – תירוץ
Resolution: Collection from each tribe
Hebrew/Aramaic:
גּוֹבֶה מִכׇּל שֵׁבֶט וָשֵׁבֶט חֲמִשִּׁים, שֶׁהֵן שֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת.
English Translation:
David would collect from each tribe of the twelve tribes fifty shekels, which totals six hundred shekels.
קלאוד על הדף:
First resolution: David collected 50 shekels from each of the 12 tribes, totaling 600. The “50” refers to each tribe’s contribution; the “600” to the grand total.
Segment 12
TYPE: גמרא
Definition of “morigim” (threshing tools)
Hebrew/Aramaic:
מַאי מוֹרִיגִּים? אָמַר עוּלָּא: מִטָּה שֶׁל טוּרְבֵּל.
English Translation:
The Gemara asks: What are “the threshing instruments [morigim]” mentioned in the verse? Ulla said: It is a turbal bed [a threshing sledge].
קלאוד על הדף:
In the context of what Araunah offered David for the altar, the Gemara defines “morigim” – heavy wooden threshing sledges with serrated edges used to separate grain. These were offered as wood for the altar fire.
Key Terms:
- מוריגים = Threshing instruments/sledges
- טורבל = A type of threshing implement
Segment 13
TYPE: גמרא – מעשה
Rava teaching his son
Hebrew/Aramaic:
מַקְרֵי לֵיהּ רָבָא לִבְרֵיהּ, וְרָמֵי לֵיהּ קְרָאֵי אַהֲדָדֵי: כָּתוּב אֶחָד אוֹמֵר: ״וַיִּתֵּן דָּוִד לְאׇרְנָן בַּמָּקוֹם שִׁקְלֵי זָהָב מִשְׁקָל שֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת״, וְכָתוּב אֶחָד אוֹמֵר: ״וַיִּקֶן דָּוִד אֶת הַגֹּרֶן וְאֶת הַבָּקָר בְּכֶסֶף שְׁקָלִים חֲמִשִּׁים״?
English Translation:
Rava was teaching these verses to his son and posed a contradiction between the verses: One verse states that David gave 600 gold shekels, and one verse states that David bought for 50 silver shekels?
קלאוד על הדף:
A pedagogical vignette: Rava used this apparent contradiction as a teaching exercise with his son, demonstrating how to identify and resolve textual difficulties – a fundamental skill in Torah study.
Segment 14
TYPE: גמרא
The gold vs. silver discrepancy
Hebrew/Aramaic:
וְאַכַּתִּי קַשְׁיָין אַהֲדָדֵי: כָּתוּב אֶחָד אוֹמֵר ״זָהָב״, וְכָתוּב אֶחָד אוֹמֵר ״כֶּסֶף״!
English Translation:
But these verses are still difficult, as one verse states gold and one verse states silver!
קלאוד על הדף:
Even after resolving the 50 vs. 600 issue, another problem remains: one verse says gold, the other says silver. These are different currencies with different values.
Segment 15
TYPE: גמרא
Return to Mishna – where were kodashim kalim eaten?
Hebrew/Aramaic:
קָדָשִׁים קַלִּים נֶאֱכָלִים [בְּכׇל מַחֲנֵה יִשְׂרָאֵל].
English Translation:
The mishna teaches that once the Tabernacle was established in the wilderness, offerings of lesser sanctity were eaten throughout the camp of Israel.
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara returns to analyze the Mishna’s statement about where kodashim kalim (offerings of lesser sanctity, like shelamim) could be eaten during the wilderness period.
Key Terms:
- קדשים קלים = Offerings of lesser sanctity
- מחנה ישראל = The camp of Israel
Segment 16
TYPE: גמרא
Rav Huna’s interpretation
Hebrew/Aramaic:
אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: בְּכׇל מְקוֹמוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל.
English Translation:
Rav Huna says: This means that offerings of lesser sanctity were eaten in any of the places where an Israelite would be found.
קלאוד על הדף:
Rav Huna interprets “camp of Israel” broadly: anywhere Israelites happened to be, not a formally demarcated zone with fixed boundaries.
Segment 17
TYPE: גמרא – קושיא
Rav Nachman’s challenge
Hebrew/Aramaic:
אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רַב נַחְמָן לְרַב הוּנָא: וּמַחֲנוֹת בְּמִדְבָּר לָא הֲוַאי?!
English Translation:
Rav Nachman raised an objection to Rav Huna: And were there not camps when the Jews were in the wilderness?!
קלאוד על הדף:
Rav Nachman challenges: the wilderness encampments had clearly defined camps! The Torah describes the arrangement of tribes around the Tabernacle with specific boundaries.
Segment 18
TYPE: גמרא – תירוץ
Corrected interpretation
Hebrew/Aramaic:
אֶלָּא אֵימָא: בְּכׇל מְקוֹם מַחֲנֵה יִשְׂרָאֵל.
English Translation:
Rather, say that Rav Huna meant: wherever the Israelite camp was located, offerings of lesser sanctity could be consumed.
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara reinterprets Rav Huna: he meant that within wherever the camp was situated (even during travel), the kodashim kalim could be eaten. The camp’s status moved with the people.
Segment 19
TYPE: גמרא
Why state this – isn’t it obvious?
Hebrew/Aramaic:
פְּשִׁיטָא! מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא: אִיפְּסִלוּ בְּיוֹצֵא, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.
English Translation:
Isn’t that obvious? You might have thought that during travel, when the camp moved, the offerings would become disqualified as “leaving” [their permitted area]. Therefore, Rav Huna teaches us [they were not disqualified].
קלאוד על הדף:
The Gemara explains the innovation: one might think that when the Israelites broke camp and traveled, the offerings would become pasul (disqualified) for “leaving” the sacred area. Rav Huna teaches that the sanctity traveled with them – no disqualification occurred.
Key Terms:
- יוצא = Leaving (a disqualification for sacrificial meat)
- איפסלו = Became disqualified