Talmud Bavli
Talmud Bavli

Midrash for Shabbat 69:9

אמר רבה בר בר חנה א"ר יוחנן הלכה כר' יהודה לענין שבת והלכה כר' יוסי לענין תרומה בשלמא הלכה כר' יהודה לענין שבת לחומרא אבל לענין תרומה מאי היא אילימא לטבילה ספקא היא

According to whom? Shall we say, according to R. Judah [himself]? but it is doubtful!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whether it is day or night. It may be night already, in which case the tebillah is not followed by sunset. ');"><sup>16</sup></span> But if it means twilight, as defined by R. Judah, according to R. Jose; [why state] priests may perform tebillah then-it is obvious!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Judah's twilight period is certainly earlier than that of R. Jose which is but the twinkling of an eye. ');"><sup>17</sup></span> — I might think that twilight, as defined by R. Jose, is a continuation of R. Judah's; [therefore] we are told that R. Judah's twilight ends and then R. Jose's commences. Rabbah b. Bar Hanah said in R. Johanan's name: The <i>halachah</i> is as R. Judah in respect to the Sabbath, and the <i>halachah</i> is as R. Jose in respect to <i>terumah</i>. Now, as for the <i>halachah</i> being as R. Judah in respect to the Sabbath, it is well: this is in the direction of stringency.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' All those things which are forbidden Friday at twilight are forbidden at the earlier time stated by R. Judah. ');"><sup>18</sup></span> But in respect of <i>terumah</i>, what is it? Shall we say, for tebillah?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That priests may perform tebillah during twilight as defined by R. Judah, because the halachah is as R. Jose that it is still day then. ');"><sup>19</sup></span> it is doubtful!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since he rules that the halachah is as R. Judah in respect to the Sabbath, he must regard R. Judah's view as possibly correct. ');"><sup>20</sup></span>

Sifrei Bamidbar

One verse states (Ibid. 3) "Is there any number to His angelic hosts?" and another (Daniel 7:10) "A thousand thousands were serving Him, and myriad myriads were standing before Him." How are these two verses to be reconciled? Before they were exiled from their land — "Is there any number to His angelic hosts?" After they were exiled from their land — "A thousand thousands were serving Him." As it were, the celestial retinue was diminished. Rebbi says in the name of Abba b. Yossi: One verse states: "Is there any number to His angelic hosts?" and another, "A thousand thousands were serving Him." How are these two verses to be reconciled? "A thousand thousands were serving Him" — this is one host. And how many hosts are there? — "Is there any number to His angelic hosts?" One verse states (Psalms 147:4) "He counts the number of the stars, (which implies that He calls each by name), and another (Isaiah 40:26) "Raise your eyes on high and see who created these. He brings forth their legions by number; he calls to all of them by name," (which implies that He calls all of them as one). (How is this to be understood?) When the Holy One Blessed be He calls, all answer, something impossible for flesh and blood, to call two names at the same time. Similarly, (Shemot 20:1) "And G-d spoke all of these things (in one utterance) saying, etc.", and (Psalms 62:12) "One thing has G-d spoken; these two have I heard," and (Jeremiah 23:29) "Is My word not like fire, says the L-rd, and like a hammer shattering rock?" Rebbi says in the name of Abba Yossi b. Dostai: One verse states "He brings forth their legions by number, etc.", and another "He counts the number of the stars." How are these two verses to be reconciled? We are hereby taught there is no changing of the (essential) name there. The name that it is called by now is not the name that it will be called by later, (but its "name" is simply a function of its embassy.) And thus is it written (Judges 12:18) "And the angel of the L-rd said to him: Why do you ask my name? It is hidden." I do not know what "name" I will be converted to (in the future). One verse states (II Samuel 24:24) "And David bought the threshing floor and the cattle for fifty silver shekels," and another (I Chronicles 21:25) "And David gave Arnon for the place gold shekels weighing six hundred." How are these two verses to be reconciled? For the place of the threshing floor, six hundred; for the place of the altar, fifty. Rebbi says, in the name of Abba Yossi b. Dostai: One verse states "And David bought the threshing floor, etc." and another verse states "And David gave Arnon for the place gold shekels weighing six hundred." How are these two verses to be reconciled? There were twelve tribes, and he took from each fifty shekels, six hundred shekels in all. R. Elazar says "And David bought the threshing floor," as explained elsewhere. Where? "And David gave Arnon for the place, etc." But the cattle for the burnt-offering and the threshing sledges and the cattle gear for the wood for fifty shekalim. One verse states (I Kings 5:6) "And Solomon had forty thousand stables of horses for his chariots," and another, (II Chronicles 9:28) "four thousand stables of horses." How are these two verses to be reconciled? Four thousand stables for forty thousand (horses). One verse states (Ibid. 4:5) "Its capacity was three thousand bath measures," and another (I Kings 7:26) "Its capacity was two thousand bath measures." How are these two verses to be reconciled? Two thousand in wet measure, which are three thousand in dry measure — whence the sages ruled: Forty sa'ah in wet measure is equal to two kor in dry measure.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Previous VerseFull ChapterNext Verse