The Rabbis of the Mishnah: Shammai

(טו) שַׁמַּאי אוֹמֵר, עֲשֵׂה תוֹרָתְךָ קֶבַע. אֱמֹר מְעַט וַעֲשֵׂה הַרְבֵּה, וֶהֱוֵי מְקַבֵּל אֶת כָּל הָאָדָם בְּסֵבֶר פָּנִים יָפוֹת:

(15) Shammai says, "Make your Torah fixed, say little and do much, and receive every person with a pleasant countenance."

ואידך הבוצר לגת שמאי אומר הוכשר הלל אומר לא הוכשר א"ל הלל לשמאי מפני מה בוצרין בטהרה ואין מוסקין בטהרה א"ל אם תקניטני. גוזרני טומאה אף על המסיקה נעצו חרב בבית המדרש אמרו הנכנס יכנס והיוצא אל יצא ואותו היום היה הלל כפוף ויושב לפני שמאי כאחד מן התלמידים והיה קשה לישראל כיום שנעשה בו העגל וגזור שמאי והלל ולא קבלו מינייהו ואתו תלמידייהו גזור וקבלו מינייהו

And another of those decrees is the matter of one who harvests grapes in order to take them to the press. Shammai says: It has become susceptible, and Hillel says: It has not become susceptible. Hillel said to Shammai: If so, for what purpose do they harvest grapes in purity, i.e., utilizing pure vessels, as in your opinion, since the grapes are susceptible to impurity by means of the juice that seeps from them, care must be taken to avoid impurity while gathering; and, however, they do not harvest olives in purity? According to your opinion that liquid that seeps out renders the fruit susceptible to impurity, why is there not a similar concern with regard to the liquid that seeps out of olives? Shammai said to him: If you provoke me and insist that there is no difference between gathering olives and grapes, then, in order not to contradict this, I will decree impurity on the gathering of olives as well. They related that since the dispute was so intense, they stuck a sword in the study hall, and they said: One who seeks to enter the study hall, let him enter, and one who seeks to leave may not leave, so that all of the Sages will be assembled to determine the halakha. That day Hillel was bowed and was sitting before Shammai like one of the students. The Gemara said: And that day was as difficult for Israel as the day the Golden Calf was made, as Hillel, who was the Nasi, was forced to sit in submission before Shammai, and the opinion of Beit Shammai prevailed in the vote conducted that day. And Shammai and Hillel issued the decree, and the people did not accept it from them. And their students came and issued the decree, and the people accepted it from them.

תניא אמרו עליו על שמאי הזקן כל ימיו היה אוכל לכבוד שבת מצא בהמה נאה אומר זו לשבת מצא אחרת נאה הימנה מניח את השניה ואוכל את הראשונה אבל הלל הזקן מדה אחרת היתה לו שכל מעשיו לשם שמים שנאמר (תהלים סח, כ) ברוך ה' יום יום תניא נמי הכי בית שמאי אומרים מחד שביך לשבתיך ובית הלל אומרים ברוך ה' יום יום

It is taught in a baraita: They said about Shammai the Elder that all his days he would eat in honor of Shabbat. How so? If he found a choice animal, he would say: This is for Shabbat. If he subsequently found another one choicer than it, he would set aside the second for Shabbat and eat the first. He would eat the first to leave the better-quality animal for Shabbat, which continually rendered his eating an act of honoring Shabbat. However, Hillel the Elder had a different trait, that all his actions, including those on a weekday, were for the sake of Heaven, as it is stated: “Blessed be the Lord, day by day; He bears our burden, our God who is our salvation; Selah” (Psalms 68:20), meaning that God gives a blessing for each and every day. That is also taught in a baraita in more general terms: Beit Shammai say: From the first day of the week, Sunday, start preparing already for your Shabbat. And Beit Hillel say: “Blessed be the Lord, day by day.”

(ח) נָשִׁים וַעֲבָדִים וּקְטַנִּים, פְּטוּרִים מִן הַסֻּכָּה. קָטָן שֶׁאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְאִמּוֹ, חַיָּב בַּסֻּכָּה. מַעֲשֶׂה וְיָלְדָה כַלָּתוֹ שֶׁל שַׁמַּאי הַזָּקֵן וּפִחֵת אֶת הַמַּעֲזִיבָה וְסִכֵּךְ עַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּטָּה בִּשְׁבִיל הַקָּטָן:

(8) Women, slaves, and minors are exempted from [the obligations pertaining to] the sukkah. A minor who no longer needs [to be with] his mother, is obligated in the sukkah. It happened that the daughter-in-law of Shamai the elder gave birth [to a son, around sukkot], and he [Shamai] removed some of the ceiling's plaster and covered [the empty space] with sekhakh over the bed, on behalf of the minor.

(ב) תינוקות סמוך לפירקן מחנכין אותן בפני שנה ובפני שתים בשביל שיהו רגילין במצות ר"ע היה מפטיר [מבה"מ] בשביל תינוקות שיאכילום אבותיהם מעשה בשמאי הזקן שלא רצה להאכיל את בנו וגזרו עליו חכמים והאכילוהו בידו.

Children you are close to adulthood, we educate them for a year or two beforehand so that it will be regular for them to observe mitzvot (specifically fasting on Yom Kippur) when the time comes. Rabbi Akiva used to say that they were still exempt from having to fast. There is a story about Shammai the elder, that he did not want to feed his son on Yom Kippur, but then the sages commanded him to do so and he did with his own hands.

ת"ר אין צרין על עיירות של נכרים פחות מג' ימים קודם לשבת ואם התחילו אין מפסיקין וכן היה שמאי אומר (דברים כ, כ) עד רדתה אפי' בשבת:

The Sages taught in a Tosefta: One may not lay siege to cities of gentiles fewer than three days before Shabbat, to avoid the need to desecrate Shabbat in establishing the siege. And if they already began establishing the siege fewer than three days before Shabbat, they need not stop all war-related actions even on Shabbat. And so Shammai would say: From that which is written: “And you should build a siege against the city that is waging war with you until it falls” (Deuteronomy 20:20), it is derived that the siege should be sustained “until it falls.” Consequently, the siege must continue even on Shabbat.

ת"ר מעשה באדם אחד שלא היו בניו נוהגין כשורה עמד וכתב נכסיו ליונתן בן עוזיאל מה עשה יונתן בן עוזיאל מכר שליש והקדיש שליש והחזיר לבניו שליש בא עליו שמאי במקלו ותרמילו א"ל שמאי אם אתה יכול להוציא את מה שמכרתי ומה שהקדשתי אתה יכול להוציא מה שהחזרתי אם לאו אי אתה יכול להוציא מה שהחזרתי אמר הטיח עלי בן עוזיאל הטיח עלי בן עוזיאל

§ The Sages taught: There was an incident involving one man whose children did not act properly. He arose and wrote a document transferring all his property to Yonatan ben Uzziel, one of the Sages, as a gift. What did Yonatan ben Uzziel do? He sold a third of the property for his needs, and consecrated a third of the property, and returned the remaining third to the man’s children. Shammai came to Yonatan ben Uzziel with his staff and traveling bag to protest his giving part of the property to the man’s children against the deceased’s wishes. Yonatan ben Uzziel said to him: Shammai, if you can repossess the property that I sold from the purchasers and the property that I consecrated from the Temple treasury, you can repossess what I returned to the man’s children as well; but if not, as the property is mine and I have the right to do with it whatever I want, you cannot repossess what I returned to the man’s children either. Shammai then said: Ben Uzziel reprimanded me; ben Uzziel reprimanded me, and I have no response.

והא דתני האומר לשלוחו צא הרוג את הנפש הוא חייב ושולחיו פטור שמאי הזקן אומר משום חגי הנביא שולחיו חייב שנא' (שמואל ב יב, ט) אותו הרגת בחרב בני עמון מאי טעמיה דשמאי הזקן קסבר שני כתובים הבאים כאחד מלמדין והוא ההוא לא דריש ואיבעית אימא לעולם דריש ומאי חייב חייב בדיני שמים

The Gemara questions the statement that there is no agency for transgressions: But there is that which is taught in a baraita: One who says to his agent: Go kill a person, he, the killer, is liable if he kills, and the one who appointed him is exempt. Shammai the Elder says in the name of Haggai the prophet: The one who appointed him is liable, as it stated with regard to David, who directed Joab to kill Uriah: “Him you have slain with the sword of the children of Ammon” (II Samuel 12:9). David was held responsible for the death of Uriah. The Gemara asks: What is the reason of Shammai the Elder? How can he say that there is agency for transgression? The Gemara answers: He holds that two verses that come as one do teach a precedent, and therefore he learns from the two cases of misuse of consecrated property and slaughter or sale that there is agency for transgression. And as for the derivation from one who slaughters an offering outside the Temple, which teaches that there is no agent for transgression, Shammai does not interpret the variation from “hu” to “hahu.” And if you wish, say instead: Actually it is possible that he does interpret the variation, and he agrees that there is no agent for transgression. And what is the meaning of Shammai’s statement that the one who appoints him is liable? It means he is liable according to the laws of Heaven, although he cannot be punished by a human court.

(א) שַׁמַּאי אוֹמֵר, כָּל הַנָּשִׁים דַּיָּן שְׁעָתָן. וְהִלֵּל אוֹמֵר, מִפְּקִידָה לִפְקִידָה, אֲפִלּוּ לְיָמִים הַרְבֵּה. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, לֹא כְדִבְרֵי זֶה וְלֹא כְדִבְרֵי זֶה, אֶלָּא מֵעֵת לְעֵת מְמַעֶטֶת עַל יַד מִפְּקִידָה לִפְקִידָה, וּמִפְּקִידָה לִפְקִידָה מְמַעֶטֶת עַל יַד מֵעֵת לְעֵת. כָּל אִשָּׁה שֶׁיֶּשׁ לָהּ וֶסֶת, דַּיָּהּ שְׁעָתָהּ. הַמְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת בְּעִדִּים, הֲרֵי זוֹ כִפְקִידָה, מְמַעֶטֶת עַל יַד מֵעֵת לְעֵת וְעַל יַד מִפְּקִידָה לִפְקִידָה:

(ב) שַׁמַּאי אוֹמֵר, מִקַּב לְחַלָּה. וְהִלֵּל אוֹמֵר, מִקַּבָּיִם. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, לֹא כְדִבְרֵי זֶה וְלֹא כְדִבְרֵי זֶה, אֶלָּא קַב וּמֶחֱצָה חַיָּבִים בְּחַלָּה. וּמִשֶּׁהִגְדִּילוּ הַמִּדּוֹת אָמְרוּ, חֲמֵשֶׁת רְבָעִים חַיָּבִין. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר, חֲמִשָּׁה, פְּטוּרִין. חֲמִשָּׁה וָעוֹד, חַיָּבִין:

(ג) הִלֵּל אוֹמֵר, מְלֹא הִין מַיִם שְׁאוּבִין פּוֹסְלִין אֶת הַמִּקְוֶה, אֶלָּא שֶׁאָדָם חַיָּב לוֹמַר בִּלְשׁוֹן רַבּוֹ. וְשַׁמַּאי אוֹמֵר, תִּשְׁעָה קַבִּין. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים, לֹא כְדִבְרֵי זֶה וְלֹא כְדִבְרֵי זֶה, אֶלָּא עַד שֶׁבָּאוּ שְׁנֵי גַרְדִּיִּים מִשַּׁעַר הָאַשְׁפּוֹת שֶׁבִּירוּשָׁלַיִם וְהֵעִידוּ מִשּׁוּם שְׁמַעְיָה וְאַבְטַלְיוֹן, שְׁלֹשֶׁת לֻגִּין מַיִם שְׁאוּבִין פּוֹסְלִין אֶת הַמִּקְוֶה, וְקִיְּמוּ חֲכָמִים אֶת דִּבְרֵיהֶם:

(ד) וְלָמָּה מַזְכִּירִין אֶת דִּבְרֵי שַׁמַּאי וְהִלֵּל לְבַטָּלָה, לְלַמֵּד לַדּוֹרוֹת הַבָּאִים שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא אָדָם עוֹמֵד עַל דְּבָרָיו, שֶׁהֲרֵי אֲבוֹת הָעוֹלָם לֹא עָמְדוּ עַל דִּבְרֵיהֶם:

(1) Shammai says: All women are judged [impure] from the time [they discover that their period has begun]; Hillel says: From the time of [one] examination [to the next] examination, even if [that spans] many days. But the Sages say: Not like the words of [Shammai] and not like the words of [Hillel]; rather, [she is judged impure] from the [day preceding the discovery] if this is less than [the span] between the last examination and the current examination; [she is judged impure] from [the span] between the last examination and the current examination if this is less than [a day preceding the discovery]. [For] all women who have regular periods, the usual onset time of her period is sufficient [to be judged impure]. Using cloth [to clean herself after sexual relations] is considered an examination, and [this act] lessens [either] the preceding day's span or [the span] between the last examination and the current examination.

(2) Shammai says: [Dough] greater than a kav [a measure] [is obligated] in [the law of] challah [setting aside a portion of dough for the priests]. Hillel says: From two kabbim. The Sages say: Not like the words of [Shammai] and not like the words of [Hillel]; rather, one and a half kav is obligated in challah. After they made the measures larger they said: Five quarters are obligated. Rabbi Yossi says: Five are not obligated; five and more are obligated.

(3) Hillel says: A full hin [a measure equal to three kabin] of drawn water renders a ritual bath unfit. One is obligated to transmit [oral traditions] in the language of his master [which explains why Hillel talks of hin and not kav units]. Shammai says: Nine kabin. But the Sages said: Not like the words of [Hillel] and not like the words of [Shammai], until two water drawers came from the dung gate in Jerusalem and testified in the names of Shama'ya and Avtalion: Three logim [a measure equal to a quarter of a hin] of drawn water render a ritual bath unfit; and the Sages upheld [Shama'ya and Avtalion's] words.

(4) Why are the opinions of Hillel and Shammai recorded [only] to be nullified? To teach the generations that one should not be insistent in his/her opinions, for the fathers of the world were not insistent in their opinions.