רשב"י

אא

. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״וְאָסַפְתָּ דְגָנֶךָ״ מָה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר? — לְפִי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״לֹא יָמוּשׁ סֵפֶר הַתּוֹרָה הַזֶּה מִפִּיךָ״ — יָכוֹל דְּבָרִים כִּכְתָבָן, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״וְאָסַפְתָּ דְגָנֶךָ״ — הַנְהֵג בָּהֶן מִנְהַג דֶּרֶךְ אֶרֶץ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַאי אוֹמֵר: אֶפְשָׁר אָדָם חוֹרֵשׁ בִּשְׁעַת חֲרִישָׁה, וְזוֹרֵעַ בִּשְׁעַת זְרִיעָה, וְקוֹצֵר בִּשְׁעַת קְצִירָה, וְדָשׁ בִּשְׁעַת דִּישָׁה, וְזוֹרֶה בִּשְׁעַת הָרוּחַ, תּוֹרָה מַה תְּהֵא עָלֶיהָ? אֶלָּא בִּזְמַן שֶׁיִּשְׂרָאֵל עוֹשִׂין רְצוֹנוֹ שֶׁל מָקוֹם — מְלַאכְתָּן נַעֲשֵׂית עַל יְדֵי אֲחֵרִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְעָמְדוּ זָרִים וְרָעוּ צֹאנְכֶם וְגוֹ׳״, וּבִזְמַן שֶׁאֵין יִשְׂרָאֵל עוֹשִׂין רְצוֹנוֹ שֶׁל מָקוֹם — מְלַאכְתָּן נַעֲשֵׂית עַל יְדֵי עַצְמָן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְאָסַפְתָּ דְגָנֶךָ״. וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא שֶׁמְּלֶאכֶת אֲחֵרִים נַעֲשֵׂית עַל יָדָן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְעָבַדְתָּ אֶת אוֹיְבֶךָ וְגוֹ׳״. אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: הַרְבֵּה עָשׂוּ כְּרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל, וְעָלְתָה בְּיָדָן. כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי, וְלֹא עָלְתָה בְּיָדָן.

Berakhot 35b

and here, where it says that He gave the earth to mankind refers to after a blessing is recited. Rabbi Ḥanina bar Pappa said: Anyone who derives benefit from this world without a blessing, it is as if he stole from God and the community of Israel, as it is stated: “Whoever robs his father and his mother and says: It is no transgression, he is the companion of a destroyer” (Proverbs 28:24). The phrase, his father, refers to none other than God, as it is stated: “Is He not your Father Who created you, Who made you and established you” (Deuteronomy 32:6). The phrase his mother refers to none other than the community of Israel, as it is stated: “Hear, my son, the discipline of your father, and do not forsake the Torah of your mother” (Proverbs 1:8). The mention of the Torah as emanating from the mouth of the mother, apparently means that your mother is the community of Israel. What is the meaning of the continuation of the verse: He is the companion of a destroyer? Rabbi Ḥanina bar Pappa said: He is a companion of Jeroboam ben Nevat, who corrupted Israel before their Father in heaven by sinning and causing others to sin. On a similar note, the Gemara cites that Rabbi Ḥanina bar Pappa raised a contradiction: It is written, “I will take back My grain at its time and wine in its season” (Hosea 2:11), and it is written: “And you shall gather your grain, your wine and your oil” (Deuteronomy 11:14). To whom does the grain belong: To God, or to the people? The Gemara responds: This is not difficult. Here, where God promises Israel that they will gather their grain, the verse refers to a time when they perform God’s will. Here, where the verse indicates that the grain belongs to God, it refers to a time when they do not perform God’s will, as then He will take back the grain, demonstrating that it belongs to Him. The Sages taught: What is the meaning of that which the verse states: “And you shall gather your grain”? Because it is stated: “This Torah shall not depart from your mouths, and you shall contemplate in it day and night” (Joshua 1:8), I might have thought that these matters are to be understood as they are written; one is to literally spend his days immersed exclusively in Torah study. Therefore, the verse states: “And you shall gather your grain, your wine and your oil,” assume in their regard, the way of the world; set aside time not only for Torah, but also for work. This is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says: Is it possible that a person plows in the plowing season and sows in the sowing season and harvests in the harvest season and threshes in the threshing season and winnows in the windy season, as grain is separated from the chaff by means of the wind, and is constantly busy; what will become of Torah? Rather, one must dedicate himself exclusively to Torah at the expense of other endeavors; as when Israel performs God’s will, their work is performed by others, as it is stated: “And strangers will stand and feed your flocks, and foreigners will be your plowmen and your vinedressers” (Isaiah 61:5). When Israel does not perform God’s will, their work is performed by them themselves, as it is stated: “And you shall gather your grain.” Moreover, if Israel fails to perform God’s will, others’ work will be performed by them, as it is stated: “You shall serve your enemy whom God shall send against you, in hunger, in thirst, in nakedness and in want of all things” (Deuteronomy 28:48). Summing up this dispute, Abaye said: Although there is room for both opinions, many have acted in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael, and combined working for a living and learning Torah, and although they engaged in activities other than the study of Torah, were successful in their Torah study. Many have acted in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai and were not successful in their Torah study. They were ultimately forced to abandon their Torah study altogether. Similarly, Rava said to the Sages who would attend his study hall: I implore you; during the months of Nisan and Tishrei, the crucial agricultural periods, do not appear before me. Engage in your agricultural work then so that you will not be preoccupied with your sustenance all year. Summarizing these statements, Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of the tanna Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi El’ai: Come and see that the latter generations are not like the earlier generations; rather they are their inferiors. The earlier generations made their Torah permanent and their work occasional, and this, Torah study, and that, their work, were successful for them. However, the latter generations who made their work permanent and their Torah occasional, neither this nor that was successful for them. Along these lines, Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Yehuda, son of Rabbi El’ai: Come and see that the latter generations are not like the earlier generations. In the earlier generations, people would bring their fruits into their courtyards through the main gate in order to obligate them in tithes. However, the latter generations bring their fruits through roofs, through courtyards and through enclosed courtyards, avoiding the main gate in order to exempt them from the mitzva of tithing. As Rabbi Yannai said: Untithed produce is not obligated in the mitzva of tithing until it sees the front of the house through which people enter and exit, and it is brought into the house that way as it is stated in the formula of the confession of the tithes: “I have removed the consecrated from the house” (Deuteronomy 26:13), as the obligation to tithe produce whose purpose has not yet been designated takes effect only when it is brought into the house. And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Even bringing it into the courtyard determines its status as having completed the production process and obligates the produce to be tithed, as it is written in the confession of the tithes: “And I have given to the Levite, the stranger, the orphan and the widow, and they shall eat in your gates and be satisfied” (Deuteronomy 26:12). We learned in our mishna: Over fruits that grow on a tree one recites: Who creates fruit of the tree, with the exception of wine that even though it originates from fruit of the tree, a separate blessing was established for it: Who creates the fruit of the vine. The Gemara asks: What is different about wine, that a separate blessing was established for it? If you say that because the fruit changed for the better into wine, therefore, the blessing changed. Olive oil changed for the better and nevertheless, its blessing did not change. As Rabbi Yehuda said that Shmuel said, and so too Rabbi Yitzḥak said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Over olive oil, one recites: Who creates fruit of the tree, just as he does over the fruit itself. The Sages said: There, in the case of oil, it is because it is impossible to find an appropriate blessing, as how shall we recite the blessing? If we recite the blessing: Who creates fruit of the olive, the fruit itself is called olive and that is what was created. The oil is a man-made product of that fruit, rendering that formula inappropriate. Similarly, reciting a formula parallel to the blessing on wine: Who creates the fruit of the vine, is inappropriate as the grapes themselves are the fruit that was created, as opposed to oil which was not. The Gemara challenges: Nevertheless, it is still possible to formulate a blessing, as we may recite the blessing: Who creates fruit of the olive tree, which would be parallel to the blessing recited over wine. Rather, Mar Zutra offered a different rationale: The reason that no separate blessing was established over oil is because, as opposed to wine that nourishes, oil does not nourish. The Gemara asks: And oil does not nourish? Didn’t we learn in a mishna: One who vows that nourishment is forbidden to him is permitted to eat water and salt, as they are not considered nourishment. And we discussed this halakha: By inference, water and salt are not considered nourishment, but all other edible items are considered nourishment. Let us say that this is a conclusive refutation of Rav and Shmuel, who said: One only recites: Who creates various kinds of nourishment, over the five species of grain alone, as they alone are considered nourishing. And Rav Huna said as a solution that this mishna referred to a case where he vows and says: Anything that nourishes is prohibited to me. That formula includes anything that is at all nourishing and therefore only water and salt are excluded. Olive oil is not excluded. Apparently, oil nourishes. Rather, there is another distinction between wine and oil: Wine satisfies, oil does not satisfy. Wine not only nourishes, but it is also filling. The Gemara asks: And does wine satisfy? Wouldn’t Rava drink wine all day on the eve of Passover in order to stimulate his heart, i.e., whet his appetite so that he might eat more matza at the seder? Wine does not satisfy, it whets the appetite. The Gemara answers: A lot of wine stimulates, a little satisfies. Again, the Gemara asks: Does wine satisfy at all? Isn’t it written: “Wine gladdens the heart of man, making the face brighter than oil, and bread fills man’s heart” (Psalms 104:15); bread is that which satisfies, wine does not satisfy. Rather, this verse is not a proof; wine has two advantages, it satisfies and gladdens. Bread, however, satisfies but does not gladden. Since wine possesses all of these virtues, the Gemara asks: If so, let us recite the three blessings of Grace after Meals over it after drinking, just as we do after eating bread. The Gemara answers: People do not base their meals on wine. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said to Rava: If one based his meal on it, what is the ruling? Must he recite the Grace after Meals as he does after bread? He replied: When Elijah comes and says whether or not it can serve as the basis for a meal, this will be resolved. Nevertheless, now, until then, his intention is rendered irrelevant by the opinions of all other men and he is not required to recite the complete Grace after Meals. Previously, the Gemara cited the halakha that one recites the blessing: Who creates fruit of the tree, over olive oil. The Gemara discusses the matter itself. Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said, and so too Rabbi Yitzḥak said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: One recites the blessing: Who creates fruit of the tree, over olive oil just as he does over the fruit itself. What are the circumstances? If you say that he drank it plain, it causes damage to the drinker. As it was taught in a baraita: One who drinks oil of teruma, while unaware that it was teruma, pays the principal and does not pay the additional fifth which is the typical penalty for unintentional misuse of consecrated property, as in that case the individual is considered to have only damaged consecrated property without deriving benefit from it. One who anoints his body with the oil of teruma pays the principal and pays the fifth, as he derived benefit from it. Apparently, one who drinks oil derives no benefit and it even causes him damage. Rather, it is referring to a case where he eats the oil by dipping bread into it. If so, the bread is primary and the oil secondary, and we learned in a mishna: This is the principle: Any food that is primary, and is eaten with food that is secondary, one recites a blessing over the primary food, and that blessing exempts the secondary from the requirement to recite a blessing before eating it. A blessing need only be recited over the bread, not over the oil. Rather, it is referring to a case where he is drinking it by means of an anigeron, as Rabba bar Shmuel said: Anigeron is water in which a beet was boiled, ansigeron is the water

סוכה מ״ה ב

וְאָמַר חִזְקִיָּה אָמַר רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי: יָכוֹל אֲנִי לִפְטוֹר אֶת כׇּל הָעוֹלָם כּוּלּוֹ מִן הַדִּין — מִיּוֹם שֶׁנִּבְרֵאתִי עַד עַתָּה, וְאִילְמָלֵי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּנִי עִמִּי — מִיּוֹם שֶׁנִּבְרָא הָעוֹלָם וְעַד עַכְשָׁיו, וְאִילְמָלֵי יוֹתָם בֶּן עוּזִּיָּהוּ עִמָּנוּ — מִיּוֹם שֶׁנִּבְרָא הָעוֹלָם עַד סוֹפוֹ. וְאָמַר חִזְקִיָּה אָמַר רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי: רָאִיתִי בְּנֵי עֲלִיָּיה וְהֵן מוּעָטִין. אִם אֶלֶף הֵן — אֲנִי וּבְנִי מֵהֶן, אִם מֵאָה הֵם — אֲנִי וּבְנִי מֵהֶן, אִם שְׁנַיִם הֵן — אֲנִי וּבְנִי הֵן. וּמִי זוּטְרֵי כּוּלֵּי הַאי? וְהָא אָמַר רָבָא: תַּמְנֵי סְרֵי אַלְפֵי הָוֵה דָּרָא דְּקַמֵּיהּ קוּדְשָׁא בְּרִיךְ הוּא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״סָבִיב שְׁמֹנָה עָשָׂר אָלֶף״! לָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא דְּמִסְתַּכְּלִי בְּאַסְפַּקְלַרְיָא הַמְּאִירָה, הָא דְּלָא מִסְתַּכְּלִי בְּאַסְפַּקְלַרְיָא הַמְּאִירָה. וּדְמִסְתַּכְּלִי בְּאַסְפַּקְלַרְיָא הַמְּאִירָה, מִי זוּטְרֵי כּוּלֵּי הַאי? וְהָא אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: לָא פָּחֵית עָלְמָא מִתְּלָתִין וְשִׁיתָּא צַדִּיקֵי דִּמְקַבְּלִי אַפֵּי שְׁכִינָה בְּכׇל יוֹם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אַשְׁרֵי כׇּל חוֹכֵי לוֹ״, ״לוֹ״ בְּגִימַטְרִיָּא תְּלָתִין וְשִׁיתָּא הָווּ! לָא קַשְׁיָא: הָא דְּעָיְילִי בְּבַר, הָא דְּעָיְילִי בְּלָא בַּר.

Sukkah 45b

“Bind [isru] with dense-leaved branches [ba’avotim] on the Festival until the horns of the altar” (Psalms 118:27), which alludes to both the binding of the lulav and to the myrtle branch, referred to in the Torah as the branch of a dense-leaved tree [anaf etz avot]. Rabbi Yirmeya said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai, and Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon HaMeḥozi, who said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan HaMakkoti: With regard to anyone who establishes an addition [issur] to the Festival on the day after the Festival by eating and drinking, the verse ascribes him credit as though he built an altar and sacrificed an offering upon it, as it is stated: “Add [isru] to the Festival with fattened animals [ba’avotim] until the horns of the altar.” § Apropos the halakha cited by Rabbi Yirmeya in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai, the Gemara cites additional halakhot. Ḥizkiya said that Rabbi Yirmeya said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: With regard to all objects used in performance of each and every one of the mitzvot, a person fulfills his obligation only when the objects are positioned in the manner of their growth. One must take the lulav with the bottom of the branch facing down, as it is stated with regard to the beams of the Tabernacle: “Acacia wood, standing” (Exodus 26:15), indicating that the beams stood in the manner of their growth. That was also taught in a baraita: “Acacia wood, standing,” indicating that they stand in the Tabernacle in the manner of their growth in nature. Alternatively, standing means that the beams support their gold plating that is affixed to the beams with nails. Alternatively, standing teaches: Lest you say that after the destruction of the Tabernacle their hope is lost and their prospect is abolished, and they will never serve a sacred purpose again, therefore the verse states: “Acacia wood, standing,” meaning that they stand forever and for all time and will yet be revealed and utilized again. And Ḥizkiya said that Rabbi Yirmeya said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: I am able to absolve the entire world from judgment for sins committed from the day I was created until now. The merit that he accrued through his righteousness and the suffering that he endured atone for the sins of the entire world. And were the merit accrued by Eliezer, my son, calculated along with my own, we would absolve the world from judgment for sins committed from the day that the world was created until now. And were the merit accrued by the righteous king, Jotham ben Uzziah, calculated with our own, we would absolve the world from judgment for sins committed from the day that the world was created until its end. The righteousness of these three serves as a counterbalance to all the evil deeds committed throughout the generations, and it validates the ongoing existence of the world. And Ḥizkiya said that Rabbi Yirmeya said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: I have seen members of the caste of the spiritually prominent, who are truly righteous, and they are few. If they number one thousand, I and my son are among them. If they number one hundred, I and my son are among them; and if they number two, I and my son are they. The Gemara asks: Are they so few? But didn’t Rava say: There are eighteen thousand righteous individuals in a row before the Holy One, Blessed be He, as it is stated: “Surrounding are eighteen thousand” (Ezekiel 48:35)? Apparently, the righteous are numerous. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This statement of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai is referring to the very few who view the Divine Presence through a bright, mirror-like partition, while that statement of Rava is referring to those who do not view the Divine Presence through a bright partition. The Gemara asks further: And are those who view the Divine Presence through a bright partition so few? But didn’t Abaye say: The world has no fewer than thirty-six righteous people in each generation who greet the Divine Presence every day, as it is stated: “Happy are all they that wait for Him [lo]” (Isaiah 30:18)? The numerological value of lo, spelled lamed vav, is thirty-six, alluding to the fact that there are at least thirty-six full-fledged righteous individuals in each generation. The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This statement of Abaye is referring to those who enter to greet the Divine Presence by requesting and being granted permission, while that statement of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai is referring to those who enter even without requesting permission, for whom the gates of Heaven are open at all times. They are very few indeed. § The mishna asks: At the time of their departure at the end of the Festival, what would they say? The mishna answers that they would praise the altar and glorify God. The Gemara challenges this: But in doing so aren’t they joining the name of Heaven and another entity, and it was taught in a baraita: Anyone who joins the name of Heaven and another entity is uprooted from the world, as it is stated: “He that sacrifices unto the gods, save unto the Lord only, shall be utterly destroyed” (Exodus 22:19)? The Gemara answers that this is what the people are saying when they depart the Temple: To the Lord, we acknowledge that He is our God, and to you, the altar, we give praise; to the Lord, we acknowledge that He is our God, and to you, the altar, we give acclaim. The praise to God and the praise to the altar are clearly distinct. § The mishna continues: As its performance during the week, so is its performance on Shabbat. And according to Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, on the seventh day of the Festival they would bring palm branches to the Temple. Rav Huna said: What is the rationale for the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka? It is as it is written: “And you shall take for yourselves on the first day the fruit of a beautiful tree, branches of a date palm” (Leviticus 23:40). Branches in the plural indicates that two branches must be taken, one for the lulav and one for placement around the altar. And the Rabbis say: Although the word is vocalized in the plural, based on tradition it is written kappot, without the letter vav. Therefore, it is interpreted as if it were written kappat, indicating that only one palm branch need be taken. Rabbi Levi says: The rationale for the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka is not based on a verse. Rather, it is a custom that developed to express praise for the Jewish people, likening them to a date palm. Just as the date palm has only one heart, as branches do not grow from its trunk but rather the trunk rises and branches emerge only at the top, so too, the Jewish people have only one heart directed toward their Father in Heaven. § Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: The blessing over the mitzva of lulav is recited seven days and the blessing over the mitzva of sukka is recited one day. What is the rationale for this distinction? It is written explicitly in the Torah that the mitzva to sit in the sukka applies all seven days. The Gemara explains: With regard to the lulav, where the nights are distinct from the days, as the mitzva of lulav is not in effect at night, each day is a mitzva in and of itself. A separate blessing is recited over each mitzva. However, with regard to sukka, where the nights are not distinct from the days, as the mitzva of sukka is in effect at night just as it is during the day, the legal status of all seven days of the Festival is like that of one long day. But Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The blessing over the mitzva of sukka is recited seven days and the blessing over the mitzva of lulav is recited one day. What is the rationale for this distinction? The Gemara explains: The mitzva of sukka is a mitzva by Torah law all seven days of the Festival. Therefore, a blessing is recited for seven days. However, the mitzva of lulav, other than on the first day, is a mitzva by rabbinic law, as the Sages instituted an ordinance to take the lulav for all seven days to commemorate the practice in the Temple. Therefore, it is enough to recite the blessing one day, on the first day. When Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: One recites a blessing over both this, the mitzva of sukka, and over that, the mitzva of lulav, all seven days. Rav Yosef said: Take the statement of Rabba bar bar Ḥana in your hand, as all the amora’im who transmitted statements of Rabbi Yoḥanan hold in accordance with his opinion in matters related to sukka. The Gemara raises an objection based on a baraita:

והנה בדרושים פרשתי בס"ד המאמר הזה על פי מאמר רז"ל בסנהדרין (סנהדרין צא:) בענין חשבון עונש הגוף והנפש דמשלו משל לחגר וסומא דעולה מדבריהם על פי המשל ההוא דבכל המעשים הנעשים בעולם הזה מהנפש והגוף יש לכל אחד דין זה אינו יכול לבדו לעשות וזה אינו יכול, וידוע פלוגתא דרשב"י ורבנן בגמרא דשבת (שבת צב:) דרבנן סברי בשנים שעשו דבר אחד וזה אינו יכול לבדו וזה אינו יכול לבדו שניהם חייבין, ורשב"י סבירא ליה שניהם פטורין כיון דזה אינו יכול וזה אינו יכול כל חד חשיב מסייע ואין בו ממש עיין שם.
ולפי זה לסברת רשב"י גוף ונפש יהיו פטורים מן העונש של העונות כיון דחשיבי על פי המשל הנזכר 'זה אינו יכול וזה אינו יכול' נמצא כל חד הוא מסייע דוקא ופטור, ולכן אמר רשב"י יָכוֹל אֲנִי לִפְטֹר אֶת כָּל הָעוֹלָם כֻּלּוֹ מִן הַדִּין על פי סברתי ד'זה אינו יכול וזה אינו יכול שניהם פטורים' אך דבר זה קשה להיות משתי סיבות חדא דאין למידין דיני שמים מדיני אדם ואני לא אמרתי כן אלא בדיני אדם, ועוד גם בדיני אדם איכא רבים דפליגי עלי ויחיד ורבים הלכה כרבים, לכן אפשר שיגין זכותי דוקא על בני דורי שיעשה הקב"ה חסד זה עמהם לדון אותם על פי סברתי בדיני שמים גם כן ואף על פי דרבים פליגי עלי כל זה אפשר להיות על ידי זכותי ותפלתי ובקשתי על בני דורי דוקא.
אך אם יצטרף רבי אֶלְעָזָר בְּנִי עִמִּי בזכותו ותפלתו ובקשתו אפשר שיעשה הקב"ה חסד זה לבני אדם מִיּוֹם שֶׁנִּבְרָא הָעוֹלָם וְעַד עַכְשָׁיו דלא יבצר מהיות בני אדם מדורות הראשונים שעדיין לא פרעו מהם כל העונש שחייבים בו דעתה בזכות שנינו יפטרו אותם לדון אותם על פי סברה שלי, ואם יצטרף זכות ותפלה ובקשה של יותם בן עוזיהו עמנו אפשר שיעשה הקב"ה חסד זה לדון העולם על פי סברתי גם לדורות הבאים מיום שנברא העולם ועד סופו.
מיהו לא בקש והתפלל על דבר זה שיעשה הקב"ה חסד זה לדון את בני דורו על פי סברתו מפני דנפיק להו פסידא מצד אחר דהן אמת שיהיו ניצולים מן העונש על פי סברתו דחשיבי גוף ונפש כל חד מסייע הנה לפי זה יפסידו שכר מצות דאז גם לגבי המצות יהיה להם דין מסייע שאין בו ממש ואין להם שכר מצוה שלימה ממש אלא שכר מסייע, לכך לא בקש על זאת שידין הקב"ה את העולם בדיני שמים על פי סברתו אלא ידון דיני שמים על פי סברת חכמים שסוברין בדיני אדם זה אינו יכול וזה אינו יכול כל חד חשיב עביד מעשה גמורה ושלימה כדי שבזה ירויחו בשכר מצות ולא יפסידו.

בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיָה כָל־אֶחָד וְאֶחָד מְמַנֶּה אֶת תַּלְמִידָיו. כְּגוֹן רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּיי מִינֶּה אֶת רִבִּי לִיעֶזֶר וְאֶת רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ. וְרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אֶת רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. וְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אֶת רִבִּי מֵאִיר וְאֶת רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. אָמַר. יֵשֵׁב רִבִּי מֵאִיר תְּחִילָּה. נִתְכַּרְכְּמוּ פְנֵי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. אָמַר לוֹ רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. דַּייֶךָ שֶׁאֲנִי וּבוֹרְאֲךָ מַכִּירִין כּוֹחֲךָ.

תלמוד ירושלמי ברכות א׳:ב׳

רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי כְּגוֹן אָנוּ שֶׁעוֹסְקִין בְּתַלְמוּד תּוֹרָה אֲפִילוּ לְקִרְיַת שְׁמַע אֵין אָנוּ מַפְסִיקִין. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָֽמְרָהּ עַל גַּרְמֵיהּ כְּגוֹן אָנוּ שֶׁאֵין אָנוּ עוֹסְקִין בְּתַלְמוּד תּוֹרָה וַאֲפִילוּ לִתְפִילָּה אָנוּ מַפְסִיקִין. דֵּין כְּדַעֲתֵיהּ וְדֵין כְּדַעֲתֵיהּ. רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן כְּדַעֲתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אוֹמֵר וּלְוַאִי שֶׁמִּתְפַּלֵּל אָדָם כָּל־הַיּוֹם. לָמָּה שֶׁאֵין תְּפִילָּה מַפְסֶדֶת. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי כְדַעֲתֵיהּ דְּרִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחָי אָמַר אִילּוּ הֲוֵינָא קָאִים עַל טוּרָא דְסִינַי בְּשַעְתָּא דְאִיתְיָהִיבַת תּוֹרָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל הֲוִינָא מִתְבָּעֵי קוֹמוֹי רַחֲמָנָא דְּיִתְבְּרֵי לְבַר נָשָׁא תְּרֵין פּוּמִין חַד דַּהֲוָה לָעֵי בְאוֹרָֽיְתָא וְחַד דְּעָבִיד לֵיהּ כָּל־צוֹרְכֵיהּ. חָזַר וָמַר וּמַה אִין חַד הוּא לֵית עָֽלְמָא יָכִיל קָאִים בֵּיהּ מִן דֵּלַטוֹרִיָּה דִילֵיהּ. אִילּוּ הַוּוּ תְּרֵין עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה.

Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot 1:2

MISHNAH: From when on does one read the Shema‘ in the morning? From when one can distinguish between dark blue and white; Rebbi Eliezer says, between dark blue and the color of leeks; (he may read it) until sunrise. Rebbi Yehoshua says, until three hours of the day since it is the rule of (sons of) kings to rise at three hours. He who reads after that did not lose, he is like a man reading in the Torah. HALAKHAH: So is the Mishnah: Between its dark blue and its white. What is the reason of the Rabbis? (Num. 15:39) “You shall see it”, from what is close to it. What is the reason of Rebbi Eliezer? “You shall see it”, that it should be recognizable among colors. We have stated in the name of Rebbi Meïr: It does not say “you shall see it” but “you shall see Him”. This tells you that anyone who keeps the obligation of tzitzit is as if he were admitted to the presence of God’s glory. This tells that tĕkhelet is similar to the sea. But the sea is similar to grasses, grasses are similar to the sky, the sky is similar to the Throne of Glory, and the Throne is similar to sapphire, as it is written (Ez. 10:1): “I saw, and here by the spread that was on top of the Cherubim like sapphire stone, the looks of the form of the Throne.” Others say: “ ‘You shall see it’, that a man should be four ammot distant from another man and recognize him.” Rav Ḥisda says: (the practice follows) the statement of “Others”. What are we talking about? If he knows the other person, even at a great distance he will recognize him. If he does not know him, even close by he will not recognize him. We must talk about an occasional acquaintance, like a man who visits a hostelry at intervals. Some Tannaïm formulate: “Between wolf and dog, between domesticated and wild donkey.” But some Tannaïm formulate: “That a man should be four ammot distant from another man and recognize him”. That is what we have to say that he who says between wolf and dog, between domesticated and wild donkey is parallel to him who says between dark blue and the color of leeks; he who says that a man should be four ammot distant from another man and recognize him is parallel to him who says between dark blue and white. But they said that its preferred obligation is at sunrise so that one may join the mention of redemption to prayer and pray at daytime. Rebbi Zeïra said: I found the reason (Ps. 72:5): “They will fear You with the sun.” Mar Uqba said: The very religious were getting up early and reading the Shema‘ so that they could follow it directly at sunrise with the Amidah prayer. We have stated: Rebbi Yehudah said: It happened that once I was walking behind Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah and Rebbi Aqiba when they were occupied with duties and time came to recite the Shema‘ and I got the opinion that maybe they had given up on reciting the Shema‘, so I recited it and went over my studies; but after that they started and the sun was already over the mountain tops. “Until sunrise.” Rebbi Zabida the son of Rebbi Jacob bar Zabdi in the name of Rebbi Jonah: until the sun starts to appear at the mountain tops. “Rebbi Joshua says, until three hours of the day.” Rebbi Idi, Rav Hamnuna, and Rav Ada bar Aḥava in the name of Rav: The practice follows Rebbi Joshua for one who forgets. Rebbi Ḥuna told of two Amoraïm of whom one said ‘for one who forgot.’ His colleague responded: Do you ever fix practice for one who forgets? In fact, it is the practice. Why did they say, for one who forgot? That everybody should make an effort and read it at its best time. There (Šabbat 1:2) we have stated: “One interrupts for the recitation of Shema‘ but one does not interrupt for prayer.” Rebbi Aḥa said: The recitation of Shema‘ is a Biblical obligation; prayer is not a Biblical obligation. Rebbi Abba said: The time for the recitation of the Shema‘ is fixed, the time for prayer is not fixed. Rebbi Yose said: The recitation of Shema‘ does not need concentration, prayer needs concentration. Rebbi Mana said: I objected before Rebbi Yose: Even if you say that the recitation of the Shema‘ does not need concentration, the first three verses need concentration. Since they are so few, one will concentrate upon their meaning. Rebbi Yoḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai: “For example we, who are engaged in the study of Torah, we do not interrupt even for the recitation of Shema‘.” Rebbi Yoḥanan used to say about himself: “For example we, who are not engaged in the study of Torah, we do interrupt even for prayer.” This one follows his own opinion and that one follows his own opinion. Rebbi Yoḥanan follows his own opinion since Rebbi Yoḥanan says: “if only a man would pray the entire day. Why? Because prayer is never in vain!” Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai follows his own opinion since Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai said: “If I had stood at Mount Sinai at the moment that the Torah was given to Israel, I would have implored the All-Merciful that he should create two mouths for man; one for him to exert himself in Torah and the other one for his other needs.” But he changed his mind and said: “With one mouth already the world almost cannot exist because of its denunciations; if there were two how much more would there be? Rebbi Yose said before Rebbi Jeremiah: The position of Rebbi Yoḥanan is identical with that of Rebbi Ḥanina ben Aqabiah, as we have stated: “The scribes of Torah scrolls, Tefillin, and Mezuzot, do interrupt for the recitation of Shema‘ but do not interrupt for prayer. Rebbi Ḥanina ben Aqabiah said: just as they interrupt for Shema‘, so they interrupt for prayer, tefillin, and all other commandments of the Torah”. Would not Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai agree that one interrupts to make a sukkah or a lulav? Does not Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai make the distinction between one who studies in order to do and one who studies in order not to do? Because he who studies in order not to do would have been better off had he not been born. And did not Rebbi Yoḥanan say, he who studies in order not to do would have been better off if the afterbirth he was in was twisted around and he never would have entered the world? The reason of Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai is that this one is repeated study and that one is repeated study and he does not push aside one study for the other study. But did we not formulate: “He is like a man reading in the Torah.” Hence, at the right time it is preferred to Torah. One is like the other. Rebbi Yudan said that Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai, since he was permanently studying Torah, did not prefer Shema‘ to the study of Torah. Rebbi Abba Mari said, did we not formulate: “He who reads (Shema‘) after that did not lose, he is only like a man reading in the Torah”? Hence, at the right time it is like Mishnah. Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai follows his own opinion since Rebbi Simeon ben Yoḥai said: He who studies the written Torah does himself good that is not so good. But the rabbis equate the study of the Bible with that of the oral law.

שמות רבה נ״ב

( מַעֲשֶׂה בְּתַלְמִיד אֶחָד שֶׁל רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחָאי שֶׁיָּצָא חוּצָה לָאָרֶץ וּבָא עָשִׁיר, וְהָיוּ הַתַּלְמִידִים רוֹאִין אוֹתוֹ וּמְקַנְּאִין בּוֹ וְהָיוּ מְבַקְּשִׁים הֵן לָצֵאת לְחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ, וְיָדַע רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן וְהוֹצִיאָן לְבִקְעָה אַחַת שֶׁל פְּנֵי מֵרוֹן, וְנִתְפַּלֵּל וְאָמַר בִּקְעָה בִּקְעָה מִלְּאִי דִּינָרֵי זָהָב, הִתְחִילָה מוֹשֶׁכֶת דִּינָרֵי זָהָב לִפְנֵיהֶן. אָמַר לָהֶם אִם זָהָב אַתֶּם מְבַקְּשִׁים הֲרֵי זָהָב, טְלוּ לָכֶם, אֶלָּא הֱיוּ יוֹדְעִין כָּל מִי שֶׁהוּא נוֹטֵל עַכְשָׁו חֶלְקוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם הַבָּא הוּא נוֹטֵל, שֶׁאֵין מַתַּן שְׂכַר הַתּוֹרָה אֶלָּא לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא, הֱוֵי: וַתִּשְׂחַק לְיוֹם אַחֲרוֹן. מַעֲשֶׂה בְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן חֲלַפְתָּא שֶׁבָּא עֶרֶב שַׁבָּת וְלֹא הָיָה לוֹ מֵאָן לְהִתְפַּרְנֵס, יָצָא לוֹ חוּץ מִן הָעִיר וְהִתְפַּלֵּל לִפְנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים, וְנִתַּן לוֹ אֶבֶן טוֹבָה מִן הַשָּׁמַיִם, נְתָנָהּ לְשֻׁלְחָנִי וּפִרְנֵס אוֹתָהּ שַׁבָּת, אָמְרָה אִשְׁתּוֹ מֵהֵיכָן אֵלּוּ, אָמַר לָהּ מִמַּה שֶּׁפִּרְנֵס הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, אָמְרָה אִם אֵין אַתָּה אוֹמֵר לִי מֵהֵיכָן הֵן אֵינִי טוֹעֶמֶת כְּלוּם. הִתְחִיל מְסַפֵּר לָהּ, אָמַר לָהּ כָּךְ נִתְפַּלַּלְתִּי לִפְנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים וְנִתַּן לִי מִן הַשָּׁמַיִם. אָמְרָה לוֹ אֵינִי טוֹעֶמֶת כְּלוּם עַד שֶׁתֹּאמַר לִי שֶׁתַּחֲזִירָהּ מוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת. אָמַר לָהּ לָמָּה, אָמְרָה לוֹ אַתָּה רוֹצֶה שֶׁיְהֵא שֻׁלְחָנְךָ חָסֵר וְשֻׁלְחַן חֲבֵירֶךָ מָלֵא. וְהָלַךְ רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן וְהוֹדִיעַ מַעֲשֶׂה לְרַבִּי. אָמַר לוֹ לֵךְ אֱמֹר לָהּ אִם שֻׁלְחָנֵךְ חָסֵר אֲנִי אֲמַלְּאֶנּוּ מִשֶּׁלִּי. הָלַךְ וְאָמַר לָהּ. אָמְרָה לוֹ לֵךְ עִמִּי לְמִי שֶׁלִּמֶּדְךָ תּוֹרָה, אָמְרָה לוֹ רַבִּי וְכִי רוֹאֶה אָדָם לַחֲבֵרוֹ לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא, לֹא כָּל צַדִּיק וְצַדִּיק הֲוָה לֵיהּ עוֹלָם בְּעַצְמוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (קהלת יב, ה): כִּי הֹלֵךְ הָאָדָם אֶל בֵּית עֹלָמוֹ וְסָבְבוּ בַשּׁוּק הַסּוֹפְדִים, עוֹלָמִים אֵין כְּתִיב אֶלָּא עֹלָמוֹ. כֵּיוָן שֶׁשָּׁמַע כֵּן הָלַךְ וְהֶחֱזִיר. רַבּוֹתֵינוּ אָמְרוּ הַנֵּס הָאַחֲרוֹן הָיָה קָשֶׁה מֵהָרִאשׁוֹן, כֵּיוָן שֶׁפָּשַׁט יָדוֹ לְהַחֲזִירוֹ מִיָּד יָרַד הַמַּלְאָךְ וּנְטָלָהּ הֵימֶנּוּ, לָמָּה שֶׁאֵין מַתַּן שְׂכָרָהּ שֶׁל תּוֹרָה אֶלָּא לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא, לְיוֹם אַחֲרוֹן, הֱוֵי: וַתִּשְׂחַק לְיוֹם אַחֲרוֹן.

Shemot Rabbah 52

(5) Another explanation. “Now they brought the Tabernacle…” (Exodus 39:33) This is what is written “Go out, O daughters of Zion, and gaze upon King Solomon, upon the crown with which his mother crowned him on the day of his nuptials and on the day of the joy of his heart.” (Song of Songs 3:11) When was this verse said? On the day that the Tabernacle was erected, when there was great joy in Israel because the Holy One dwelled among them. ‘Daughters of Zion’ (bnot tzion), meaning children who are distinguishable (metuzyanin) by the idolators through their dedication to me. Just as a marker (tziyun) can be identified by pointing, so too Israel can be identified by pointing and thus they are ‘daughters of Zion’ – who are distinguishable (metuzyanin). ‘upon King Solomon’ Upon the King to whom peace (shalom) belongs, who is the King, King of Kings the Holy One blessed be He. ‘upon the crown with which his mother crowned him’ This refers to the Tabernacle. Why did they called it a crown? Just as a crown is decorated, so too the Tabernacle was decorated, as it says “…and an embroiderer with blue, purple, and crimson wool, and linen and [of] weavers, those who do every [manner of] work, and master weavers.” (Exodus 25:35) This is the crown with which his mother crowned him. R’ Yitzchak said: I went over all of the Scriptures, and I did not find anywhere that Batsheva made a crown for Shlomo. R’ Shimon bar Yochai asked R’ Elazar bar R’ Yosi: is it possible that you heard from your father what is this crown with which his mother crowned him? He replied: Yes. It is like a king who had an only daughter. He loved her too much and would call her ‘my daughter.’ He kept loving her until he called her ‘my sister’ and until he called her ‘my mother.’ So too, at first the Holy One call Israel daughter, as it says “Hearken, daughter, and see, and incline your ear, and forget your people and your father's house.” (Psalms 45:11) He kept loving them to the point of calling them ‘my sister,’ as it says “…Open for me, my sister, my beloved, my dove, my perfect one, for my head is full of dew, my locks with the drops of the night.” (Song of Songs 5:2) He did not cease to love them to the point of calling them ‘my mother,’ (imi) as it says “Hearken to Me, My people, and My nation (u’lumi), bend your ears to Me, when Torah shall emanate from Me, and My judgment shall be for the light of the peoples, I will give them rest.” (Isaiah 51:4) R’ Shimon bar Yochai stood up and kissed him on his head. ‘on the day of his nuptials’ This was at Sinai. ‘on the day of the joy of his heart’ This is in Jerusalem... Another explanation: On the day of his wedding, in the tabernacle. On the day of his heart's joy, in the Holy Temple. So too David said, "The fairest of branches, the joy of the entire earth- Mount Zion, by the north side, the city of a great king." (Tehillim 48:3) R' Yochanan be Elazar said: There was once a peddler who went to Jerusalem to sell his wares, he went and sat there and made no sales. He said: this is the place about which they say 'joy of the entire earth?!' After one hour he had sold his entire stock. He said 'the fairest of branches, the joy of the entire earth.' R' Yochanan said: there was a chamber of accounting outside of Jerusalem, and anyone who wanted to think about such things would go there. Why? In order that they shouldn't do their calculations in Jerusalem and be troubled by them, because she is called 'joy of the entire earth.' And why all this praise? Because she was 'the city of a great king.' Once she was destroyed, rejoicing passed and the joy of all the earth was exiled. What does the language of ar'va (passed on) mean? It was darkened, obscured, as it says "...it was evening and it was morning, one day." (Bereshit 1:5) In this world the joy of all the earth has ceased, and when the Holy One rebuilds Jerusalem He will return all the joy to her, as it says "For the Lord shall console Zion, He shall console all its ruins, and He shall make its desert like a paradise and its wasteland like the garden of the Lord; joy and happiness shall be found therein, thanksgiving and a voice of song." (Yeshayahu 51:3)

שיר השירים רבה א׳:ד׳:ח׳

(ח) דָּבָר אַחֵר, נָגִילָה וְנִשְׂמְחָה בָּךְ, תַּמָּן תְּנֵינַן, נָשָׂא אָדָם אִשָּׁה וְשָׁהָהּ עִמָּהּ עֶשֶׂר שָׁנִים וְלֹא יָלְדָה, אֵינוֹ רַשַּׁאי לִבָּטֵל, אָמַר רַבִּי אִידֵי מַעֲשֶׂה בְּאִשָּׁה אַחַת בְּצִידוֹן שֶׁשָּׁהֲתָה עֶשֶׂר שָׁנִים עִם בַּעֲלָהּ וְלֹא יָלְדָה, אֲתוֹן גַּבֵּי רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחָאי בָּעַיִן לְמִשְׁתַּבְקָא דֵּין מִדֵּין, אֲמַר לְהוֹן חַיֵּיכוֹן כְּשֵׁם שֶׁנִּזְדַּוַּגְתֶּם זֶה לָזֶה בְּמַאֲכָל וּבְמִשְׁתֶּה, כָּךְ אֵין אַתֶּם מִתְפָּרְשִׁים אֶלָּא מִתּוֹךְ מַאֲכָל וּמִשְׁתֶּה. הָלְכוּ בִּדְרָכָיו וְעָשׂוּ לְעַצְמָן יוֹם טוֹב וְעָשׂוּ סְעוּדָה גְדוֹלָה וְשִׁכְּרַתּוּ יוֹתֵר מִדַּאי, כֵּיוָן שֶׁנִּתְיַשְּׁבָה דַעְתּוֹ עָלָיו אָמַר לָהּ בִּתִּי רְאִי כָּל חֵפֶץ טוֹב שֶׁיֵּשׁ לִי בַּבַּיִת, וּטְלִי אוֹתוֹ וּלְכִי לְבֵית אָבִיךְ, מֶה עָשְׂתָה הִיא, לְאַחַר שֶׁיָּשַׁן רָמְזָה לַעֲבָדֶיהָ וּלְשִׁפְחוֹתֶיהָ וְאָמְרָה לָהֶם, שָׂאוּהוּ בַּמִּטָּה וּקְחוּ אוֹתוֹ וְהוֹלִיכוּהוּ לְבֵית אַבָּא. בַּחֲצִי הַלַּיְלָה נִנְעַר מִשִּׁנְתֵיהּ כֵּיוָן דְּפָג חַמְרֵיהּ, אָמַר לָהּ בִּתִּי הֵיכָן אֲנִי נָתוּן, אָמְרָה לֵיהּ בְּבֵית אַבָּא, אָמַר לָהּ מַה לִּי לְבֵית אָבִיךְ, אָמְרָה לֵיהּ וְלֹא כָךְ אָמַרְתָּ לִי בָּעֶרֶב, כָּל חֵפֶץ טוֹב שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּבֵיתִי טְלִי אוֹתוֹ וּלְכִי לְבֵית אָבִיךְ. אֵין חֵפֶץ טוֹב לִי בָּעוֹלָם יוֹתֵר מִמָּךְ. הָלְכוּ לָהֶם אֵצֶל רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחָאי וְעָמַד וְהִתְפַּלֵּל עֲלֵיהֶם וְנִפְקָדוּ, לְלַמֶּדְךָ מָה הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא פּוֹקֵד עֲקָרוֹת אַף צַדִּיקִים פּוֹקְדִים עֲקָרוֹת, וַהֲרֵי דְבָרִים קַל וָחֹמֶר, וּמָה אִם בָּשָׂר וָדָם עַל שֶׁאָמַר לְבָשָׂר וָדָם שֶׁכְּמוֹתוֹ אֵין לִי חֵפֶץ בָּעוֹלָם טוֹב מִמְךָ נִפְקְדוּ, יִשְׂרָאֵל הַמְחַכִּים לִישׁוּעַת הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא בְּכָל יוֹם וְאוֹמְרִים אֵין לָנוּ חֵפֶץ טוֹב בָּעוֹלָם אֶלָּא אַתָּה, עַל אַחַת כַּמָּה וְכַמָּה, הֱוֵי נָגִילָה וְנִשְׂמְחָה בָּךְ.

Shir HaShirim Rabbah 1:4:8

(8) Another matter, “let us exult and rejoice in you.” We learned there: If a man marries a woman and stays with her ten years and she has not given birth, he may not remain idle. Rabbi Idi said: There was an incident involving a certain woman in Sidon who stayed with her husband ten years and did not give birth. They came to Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai and sought to separate from one another. He said to them: ‘By your lives, just as you came together with food and drink, so too, you shall separate only with food and drink.’ They followed his advice and made a celebration for themselves, made a great feast, and she got him to drink in excess. When he was in good spirits, he said to her: ‘My daughter, see any good item that I have in the house, take it, and go to your father’s house.’ What did she do? After he fell asleep, she motioned to her servants and maidservants and said to them: ‘Carry him in his bed and take him to my father’s house.’ At midnight he awakened from his slumber after his wine had abated. He said to her: ‘My daughter, where am I?’ She said to him: ‘In my father’s house.’ He said to her: ‘What am I doing in your father’s house?’ She said to him: ‘Is this not what you said to me in the evening: See any good item that I have in the house, take it, and go to your father’s house? There is no item in this world better for me than you.’ They went to Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai and he stood and prayed for them and they were remembered, to teach you that just as the Holy One blessed be He remembers the barren, so too, the righteous cause the barren to be remembered. And [additional] matters may be inferred a fortiori: If a flesh and blood [woman], because she said to another of flesh and blood ‘there is no item in this world better for me than you,’ was remembered, Israel, who are waiting for the salvation of the Holy One blessed be He every day, and say: ‘There is nothing good in the world other than You,’ all the more so. That is, “let us exult and rejoice in you.”
[This is analogous] to a noblewoman whose husband the king, her sons, and her sons-in-law went to a country overseas. [Her servants] told her: ‘Your sons have come [home].’ She said: ‘What do I care? Let my daughters-in-law rejoice.’ They said to her: ‘Your sons-in-law have come.’ She said: ‘What do I care? Let my daughters rejoice.’ They said to her: ‘Your husband the king has come.’ She said: ‘This is complete joy, joy compounded by joy.’ So too, in the future, the prophets will come and say to Jerusalem: “Your sons will come from afar” (Isaiah 60:4), and it will say to them: What do I care? “Your daughters are carried on the side” (Isaiah 60:4), and it will say to them: What do I care? When they say to it: “Behold, your king is coming to you, righteous and victorious” (Zechariah 9:9), it says: This is complete joy, as it is written: “Rejoice greatly, daughter of Zion, [behold your king is coming to you]” (Zechariah 9:9), and it is written: “Sing and rejoice, daughter of Zion [for behold I am coming]” (Zechariah 2:14). At that moment, it says: “I will be gladdened in the Lord, my soul will exult in my God” (Isaiah 61:10).

We use cookies to give you the best experience possible on our site. Click OK to continue using Sefaria. Learn More.OKאנחנו משתמשים ב"עוגיות" כדי לתת למשתמשים את חוויית השימוש הטובה ביותר.קראו עוד בנושאלחצו כאן לאישור