אימא שלום דביתהו דר"א אחתיה דר"ג הואי מההוא מעשה ואילך לא הוה שבקה ליה לר"א למיפל על אפיה ההוא יומא ריש ירחא הוה ואיחלף לה בין מלא לחסר איכא דאמרי אתא עניא וקאי אבבא אפיקא ליה ריפתא
[On her return] she found him fallen on his face. 'Arise,' she cried out to him, 'thou hast slain my brother.' In the meanwhile an announcement was made from the house of Rabban Gamaliel that he had died. 'Whence dost thou know it?' he questioned her. 'I have this tradition from my father's house: All gates are locked, excepting the gates of wounded feelings.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'wrong', v. p. 354, n. 4. She felt sure that R. Eliezer had seized the opportunity of her absence or error to cry out to God about the ban.
');"><sup>17</sup></span> Our Rabbis taught: He who wounds the feelings of a proselyte transgresses three negative injunctions, and he who oppresses him infringes two. Wherein does wronging differ? Because three negative injunctions are stated: Viz., <i>Thou shalt not wrong a stranger</i> [i.e., a proselyte],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXII, 20.
');"><sup>18</sup></span>
Rashi on Bava Metzia
Imma Shalom: That was her name.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Rashi on Bava Metzia
A full [month] and a deficient [month]: She reasoned that it would be a deficient month and the ratification [of the incoming month] would be on the thirtieth day, so that he would not lower his head. But it was full and they did not ratify it until the thirty-first day; so she was not careful about him on the thirtieth day and he lowered his head.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Chidushei Agadot on Bava Metzia
A certain day [was the day of] the New Moon, etc.: Rashi explained, "She reasoned that it would be a deficient month and the ratification [of the incoming month] would be on the thirtieth day, so that he would not lower, etc." And this was possible in their time when they would sanctify [the New Moon] by a sighting, so they would not also treat the thirtieth day in a full month [as] the day of the New Moon, but rather only the thirty-first day. But we are accustomed also in a full month to treat the thirtieth day [as] the New Moon as well. And it is a little difficult according to his explanation - since, "A certain day was the day of the New Moon," implies that it was truly the New Moon on that day. So the [correct] explanation appears to be the opposite: That that thirtieth day was the New Moon, and she mixed up the full month and the deficient month. As she reasoned that it would be a full month and it would also be the New Moon on the next day on the thirty-first day, so he would not lower [his head]. But the month was deficient, so he did lower his head on the thirty-first day. And if you will be exacting, you will find it simple.
