Avodah Zarah Mishnah 32 - Overcoming Temptation
Save
Copy
Add to Collection
Export to Google Docs
Shareר' חנינא ור' יונתן הוו קאזלי באורחא מטו להנהו תרי שבילי חד פצי אפיתחא דעבודת כוכבים וחד פצי אפיתחא דבי זונות אמר ליה חד לחבריה ניזיל אפיתחא דעבודת כוכבים דנכיס יצריה א"ל אידך ניזיל אפיתחא דבי זונות ונכפייה ליצרין ונקבל אגרא כי מטו התם חזינהו [לזונות] איתכנעו מקמייהו א"ל מנא לך הא א"ל (משלי ב, יא) מזמה תשמור עלך תבונה תנצרכה א"ל רבנן לרבא מאי מזימה אילימא תורה דכתיב בה זימה ומתרגמינן עצת חטאין וכתיב (ישעיהו כח, כט) הפליא עצה הגדיל תושיה אי הכי זימה מבעי ליה ה"ק מדבר זימה תשמור עליך תורה תנצרכה:
and you derived pleasure from it, and because of this you were held responsible by Heaven. Rabbi Eliezer said to him: Akiva, you are right, as you have reminded me that once I was walking in the upper marketplace of Tzippori, and I found a man who was one of the students of Jesus the Nazarene, and his name was Ya’akov of Kefar Sekhanya. He said to me: It is written in your Torah: “You shall not bring the payment to a prostitute, or the price of a dog, into the house of the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 23:19). What is the halakha: Is it permitted to make from the payment to a prostitute for services rendered a bathroom for a High Priest in the Temple? And I said nothing to him in response. He said to me: Jesus the Nazarene taught me the following: It is permitted, as derived from the verse: “For of the payment to a prostitute she has gathered them, and to the payment to a prostitute they shall return” (Micah 1:7). Since the coins came from a place of filth, let them go to a place of filth and be used to build a bathroom. And I derived pleasure from the statement, and due to this, I was arrested for heresy by the authorities, because I transgressed that which is written in the Torah: “Remove your way far from her, and do not come near the entrance of her house” (Proverbs 5:8). “Remove your way far from her,” this is a reference to heresy; “and do not come near the entrance of her house,” this is a reference to the ruling authority. The Gemara notes: And there are those who say a different interpretation: “Remove your way far from her,” this is a reference to heresy and the ruling authority; “and do not come near the entrance of her house,” this is a reference to a prostitute. And how much distance must one maintain from a prostitute? Rav Ḥisda said: Four cubits. With regard to the derivation of the verse by Jesus the Nazarene, the Gemara asks: And what do the Sages derive from this phrase: “Payment to a prostitute”? The Gemara answers: They explain it in accordance with the opinion of Rav Ḥisda, as Rav Ḥisda says: Any prostitute who hires herself out to others for money will become so attached to this practice that ultimately, when others no longer wish to hire her, she will hire others to engage in intercourse with her. As it is stated: “And in that you gave payment, and no payment is given to you, therefore you are contrary” (Ezekiel 16:34). The Gemara comments: And Rav Ḥisda, who stated above that the Torah requires one to maintain a distance of four cubits from a prostitute, disagrees with the opinion of Rabbi Pedat. As Rabbi Pedat says: The Torah prohibited only intimacy that involves engaging in prohibited sexual relations, as it is stated: “None of you shall approach to any that is near of kin to him, to uncover their nakedness” (Leviticus 18:6). The prohibition against intimacy in the Torah applies exclusively to sexual intercourse, and all other kinds of intimacy that do not include actual intercourse are not included in the prohibition. The Gemara relates: When Ulla would come from the study hall, he would kiss his sisters on their hands. And some say: On their chests. And the Gemara points out that this action of his disagrees with another ruling that Ulla himself issued, as Ulla says: Mere intimacy with a woman with whom one is prohibited from engaging in sexual intercourse is prohibited, due to the maxim: Go, go, we say to a nazirite, go around, go around but do not come near to the vineyard. Just as a nazirite is warned not even to come into close proximity of a vineyard lest he consume a product of the vine, so too one is obligated to distance himself from anyone with whom intercourse is forbidden. § In connection to the earlier mention of heresy and the ruling authorities, the Gemara cites a verse: “The horseleech has two daughters: Give, give” (Proverbs 30:15). What is meant by “give, give”? Mar Ukva says: This is the voice of the two daughters who cry out from Gehenna due to their suffering; and they are the ones who say in this world: Give, give, demanding dues and complete allegiance. And who are they? They are heresy and the ruling authority. There are those who say that Rav Ḥisda says that Mar Ukva says: The voice of Gehenna cries out and says: Bring me two daughters who cry and say in this world: Give, give. The following verse in Proverbs makes reference to a foreign woman, which according to the Sages is a euphemism for heresy: “None that go to her return, neither do they attain the paths of life” (Proverbs 2:19). The Gemara asks: Since those that are drawn to heresy do not return, from where would they attain the path of life? Why is it necessary for the verse to add that they do not attain the paths of life? The Gemara explains that this is what the verse is saying: In general, those who go to her do not return, and even if they return, they do not attain the paths of life, i.e., the pain of their regret will shorten their lives. The Gemara asks: Is this to say that anyone who separates himself from heresy and returns from his mistaken ways must die? But what about that woman who came before Rav Ḥisda to confess to him, and she said to him: The lightest of the light, i.e., the least of the sins that she committed, is that she conceived her younger son from engaging in intercourse with her older son. And Rav Ḥisda said to her: Prepare funeral shrouds for her, i.e., yourself, as you will certainly die soon, but she did not die. The above incident refutes the claim that anyone who repents for the sin of heresy must die, as from the fact that she said that the lightest of the light of her sins was that she conceived one son from engaging in intercourse with another son, by inference one can learn that she was also involved in heresy, and yet she did not die. The Gemara answers: That is a case where the woman did not repent properly, and due to that reason she did not die. There are those who say there is a different version of the objection to the Gemara’s statement that those who repent for the sin of heresy must die: Is that to say that if one repents for the sin of heresy, yes, the result is death, whereas if one repents for the sin of forbidden sexual intercourse he does not die? But what about that woman who came before Rav Ḥisda to confess to him and Rav Ḥisda said to those present: Prepare funeral shrouds for her, and she died? The Gemara answers: From the fact that she said: The lightest of the light, by inference one can learn that she was also involved in heresy. The Gemara asks: And is it correct that one who repents of the sin of forbidden sexual intercourse does not die? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: They said about Rabbi Elazar ben Durdayya that he was so promiscuous that he did not leave one prostitute in the world with whom he did not engage in sexual intercourse. Once, he heard that there was one prostitute in one of the cities overseas who would take a purse full of dinars as her payment. He took a purse full of dinars and went and crossed seven rivers to reach her. When they were engaged in the matters to which they were accustomed, a euphemism for intercourse, she passed wind and said: Just as this passed wind will not return to its place, so too Elazar ben Durdayya will not be accepted in repentance, even if he were to try to repent. This statement deeply shocked Elazar ben Durdayya, and he went and sat between two mountains and hills and said: Mountains and hills, pray for mercy on my behalf, so that my repentance will be accepted. They said to him: Before we pray for mercy on your behalf, we must pray for mercy on our own behalf, as it is stated: “For the mountains may depart, and the hills be removed” (Isaiah 54:10). He said: Heaven and earth, pray for mercy on my behalf. They said to him: Before we pray for mercy on your behalf, we must pray for mercy on our own behalf, as it is stated: “For the heavens shall vanish away like smoke, and the earth shall wax old like a garment” (Isaiah 51:6). He said: Sun and moon, pray for mercy on my behalf. They said to him: Before we pray for mercy on your behalf, we must pray for mercy on our own behalf, as it is stated: “Then the moon shall be confounded, and the sun ashamed” (Isaiah 24:23). He said: Stars and constellations, pray for mercy on my behalf. They said to him: Before we pray for mercy on your behalf, we must pray for mercy on our own behalf, as it is stated: “And all the hosts of heaven shall molder away” (Isaiah 34:4). Elazar ben Durdayya said: Clearly the matter depends on nothing other than myself. He placed his head between his knees and cried loudly until his soul left his body. A Divine Voice emerged and said: Rabbi Elazar ben Durdayya is destined for life in the World-to-Come. The Gemara explains the difficulty presented by this story: And here Elazar ben Durdayya was guilty of the sin of forbidden sexual intercourse, and yet he died once he repented. The Gemara answers: There too, since he was attached so strongly to the sin, to an extent that transcended the physical temptation he felt, it is similar to heresy, as it had become like a form of idol worship for him. When Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi heard this story of Elazar ben Durdayya, he wept and said: There is one who acquires his share in the World-to-Come only after many years of toil, and there is one who acquires his share in the World-to-Come in one moment. And Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi further says: Not only are penitents accepted, but they are even called: Rabbi, as the Divine Voice referred to Elazar ben Durdayya as Rabbi Elazar ben Durdayya. § In relation to the issue of distancing oneself from idol worship and prostitution, the Gemara relates: Rabbi Ḥanina and Rabbi Yonatan were once walking along the road when they came to a certain two paths, one of which branched off toward the entrance of a place of idol worship, and the other one branched off toward the entrance of a brothel. One said to the other: Let us go by the path that leads to the entrance of the place of idol worship, as the inclination to engage in idol worship has been slaughtered and the temptation to sin in this manner no longer exists. The other said to him: Let us go by the path that leads to the entrance of the brothel and overpower our inclination, and thereby receive a reward. When they arrived there, they saw that the prostitutes yielded before their presence, i.e., they entered the building out of respect for the Sages. One said to the other: From where did you know this, that the prostitutes would retreat from us in embarrassment? He said to him: It is written: “From lewdness [mezimma] it shall watch over you; discernment shall guard you” (Proverbs 2:11), i.e., the Torah will serve as a safeguard against lewdness. The Sages said to Rava: What is the meaning of mezimma? If we say that it is referring to the Torah that will guard you, as it is written in it: “Zimma” (Leviticus 18:17), and we translate this term as: The counsel of [atzat] the sinners, demonstrating that zimma is referring to counsel or wisdom, and the term etza is also written with regard to the Torah: “This also comes forth from the Lord of hosts: Wonderful is His counsel [etza], and great is His wisdom” (Isaiah 28:29), this is difficult. The Gemara explains the difficulty: If so, the verse should have said: Zimma, and not mezimma. Rather, this is what the verse is saying: From lewd matters [midevar zimma], it shall watch over you, the Torah shall guard you, i.e., the term discernment is a reference to the Torah. § The Gemara returns to its discussion of the judgments of the Sages by the Roman rulers. The Sages taught: When Rabbi Elazar ben Perata and Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon were arrested by the Romans during the time of the religious persecution of the Jewish people, Rabbi Elazar ben Perata said to Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon: Fortunate are you, as you were arrested on one charge only, of teaching Torah publicly; woe is me, as I have been arrested on five charges. Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon said to him: Fortunate are you, as you were arrested on five charges but you will be saved; woe is me, as I have been arrested on one charge, but I will not be saved. You will be saved because you engaged in Torah study and in acts of charity, and I engaged in Torah study alone. The Gemara comments: And this is in accordance with a statement of Rav Huna, as Rav Huna says: Anyone who occupies himself with Torah study alone is considered like one who does not have a God. As it is stated: “Now for long seasons Israel was without the true God, and without a teaching priest, and without the Torah” (II Chronicles 15:3). What is meant by “without the true God”? This teaches that anyone who engages in Torah study alone is considered like one who does not have a true God. The Gemara asks: And is it true that Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon did not engage in acts of charity? But isn’t it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: A person should not donate his money to the charity purse [le’arnakei] unless a Torah scholar like Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon is appointed as supervisor over it? The Gemara answers: He was trusted to distribute the charity with honesty and integrity, but he himself did not perform charitable acts. The Gemara asks: But isn’t it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon said to Rabbi Yosei ben Kisma: I confused my own coins that I needed for the festivities of Purim with coins of charity, and I distributed them all to the poor at my own expense. How then can it be said that he never engaged in charitable acts? The Gemara responds: He did perform acts of charity, but he did not perform as many acts as he should have, in light of his wealth. The Gemara returns to the description of the trial of the Sages. The Romans brought Rabbi Elazar ben Perata for his trial and said: What is the reason that you taught Torah, and what is the reason that you stole, as these were the crimes of which he was accused. Rabbi Elazar ben Perata said to them: If one is an armed robber [sayafa], he is not a scholar [safra], and if one is a scholar he is not an armed robber, i.e., I am accused of two mutually exclusive crimes; and from the fact that this characterization is not true, one may also conclude that that characterization is also not true. They asked him: But if you do not teach Torah, then what is the reason that they call you rabbi? He answered: I am the master [rabban] of weavers [tarsiyyim]. In order to ascertain whether Rabbi Elazar ben Perata was in fact an expert weaver, they brought him two coils of wool and said to him: Which is the warp, and which is the woof? The threads used for each differ in their thickness and strength and would be immediately recognizable to an expert. A miracle occurred, as a female hornet came and sat on the coil of warp, and a male hornet came and sat on the coil of woof. Rabbi Elazar ben Perata said to them: This is a coil of warp, and that is a coil of woof. He realized that the male hornet was a sign that the coil was the woof, as the woof is threaded through the warp, while the warp, which is fixed in the loom and receives the woof, was the one on which the female hornet sat, as the female of a species receives the male. The Romans said to him: And what is the reason that you did not come to the house of Abidan? This was a gathering place where debates on wisdom and faith were conducted. Rabbi Elazar ben Perata said to them: I was old and feared that perhaps I would be trampled under your feet, due to the huge crowds. The Romans said: And until now, how many elders have been trampled there, that you would be worried about such a possibility? The Gemara comments: A miracle occurred, and on that day, one old man was trampled. The Romans asked Rabbi Elazar ben Perata: And what is the reason that you emancipated your slave? Rabbi Elazar ben Perata said to them: This matter never happened. One of them stood to testify against him, and Elijah came disguised as one of the of the Roman noblemen, and he said to that individual: From the fact that miracles occurred for Rabbi Elazar ben Perata in every other case, in this instance as well a miracle will occur for him, and that man, i.e., you, is only demonstrating his wickedness, since you cannot succeed in your aim and are merely showing yourself to be desperate to cause harm. But the man paid him no heed, and he stood to say his testimony to them. At that time there was a written letter that was composed by some of the most important people of the Roman Empire in order to send it to the Emperor’s court, and they had sent it in the possession of that man, i.e., the potential witness. Elijah came and threw it a distance of four hundred parasangs. The man went and did not come back, and therefore all the charges against Rabbi Elazar ben Perata were dropped. The Romans brought Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon for judgment, and they said to him: Why did you occupy yourself with the Torah? Rabbi Ḥanina ben Teradyon said to them, citing a verse: “As the Lord my God commanded me” (Deuteronomy 4:5). They immediately sentenced him to death by means of burning, and they sentenced his wife to execution by decapitation, and his daughter was condemned to sit in a brothel [kubba shel zonot]. The Gemara explains the Divine decree that he should receive this punishment: He was sentenced to death by burning, as he would
אָמַר אַבָּיֵי וּבְתַלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים יוֹתֵר מִכּוּלָּם כִּי הָא דְּאַבָּיֵי שַׁמְעֵיהּ לְהָהוּא גַּבְרָא דְּקָאָמַר לְהַהִיא אִתְּתָא נַקְדֵּים וְנֵיזִיל בְּאוֹרְחָא אֲמַר אֵיזִיל אַפְרְשִׁינְהוּ מֵאִיסּוּרָא אֲזַל בָּתְרַיְיהוּ תְּלָתָא פַּרְסֵי בְּאַגְמָא כִּי הֲווֹ פָּרְשִׁי מֵהֲדָדֵי שַׁמְעִינְהוּ דְּקָא אָמְרִי אוֹרְחִין רַחִיקָא וְצַוְותִּין בְּסִימָא אֲמַר אַבָּיֵי אִי מַאן דְּסָנֵי לִי הֲוָה לָא הֲוָה מָצֵי לְאוֹקוֹמֵי נַפְשֵׁיהּ אֲזַל תְּלָא נַפְשֵׁיהּ בְּעִיבּוּרָא דְּדָשָׁא וּמִצְטַעֵר אֲתָא הָהוּא סָבָא תְּנָא לֵיהּ כׇּל הַגָּדוֹל מֵחֲבֵירוֹ יִצְרוֹ גָּדוֹל הֵימֶנּוּ: (1) אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק יִצְרוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם מִתְגַּבֵּר עָלָיו בְּכׇל יוֹם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר רַק רַע כׇּל הַיּוֹם. (2) אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ יִצְרוֹ שֶׁל אָדָם מִתְגַּבֵּר עָלָיו בְּכׇל יוֹם וּמְבַקֵּשׁ לַהֲמִיתוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר צוֹפֶה רָשָׁע לַצַּדִּיק וּמְבַקֵּשׁ לַהֲמִיתוֹ וְאִלְמָלֵא הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא שֶׁעוֹזֵר לוֹ אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ה׳ לֹא יַעַזְבֶנּוּ בְיָדוֹ וְלֹא יַרְשִׁיעֶנּוּ בְּהִשָּׁפְטוֹ. (3) תָּנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אִם פָּגַע בְּךָ מְנֻוּוֹל זֶה מׇשְׁכֵהוּ לְבֵית הַמִּדְרָשׁ אִם אֶבֶן הוּא נִימּוֹחַ אִם בַּרְזֶל הוּא מִתְפּוֹצֵץ אִם אֶבֶן הוּא נִימּוֹחַ דִּכְתִיב הוֹי כׇּל צָמֵא לְכוּ לַמַּיִם וּכְתִיב אֲבָנִים שָׁחֲקוּ מַיִם אִם בַּרְזֶל הוּא מִתְפּוֹצֵץ דִּכְתִיב הָא כֹה דְבָרִי כָּאֵשׁ נְאֻם ה׳ וּכְפַטִּישׁ יְפוֹצֵץ סָלַע. (4) אָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָנִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן יֵצֶר הָרָע מְסִיתוֹ לָאָדָם בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה וּמֵעִיד עָלָיו לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר מְפַנֵּק מִנּוֹעַר עַבְדּוֹ וְאַחֲרִיתוֹ יִהְיֶה מָנוֹן שֶׁכֵּן בְּאַטְבַּ״ח שֶׁל רַבִּי חִיָּיא קוֹרִין לְסָהֲדָה מָנוֹן. (5) רַב הוּנָא רָמֵי כְּתִיב כִּי רוּחַ זְנוּנִים הִתְעָה וּכְתִיב בְּקִרְבָּם בַּתְּחִלָּה הִתְעָם וּלְבַסּוֹף בְּקִרְבָּם אָמַר רָבָא בַּתְּחִלָּה קְרָאוֹ הֵלֶךְ וּלְבַסּוֹף קְרָאוֹ אוֹרֵחַ וּלְבַסּוֹף קְרָאוֹ אִישׁ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וַיָּבֹא הֵלֶךְ לְאִישׁ הֶעָשִׁיר וַיַּחְמוֹל לָקַחַת מִצֹּאנוֹ וּמִבְּקָרוֹ לַעֲשׂוֹת אוֹרֵחַ וּכְתִיב וַיִּקַּח אֶת כִּבְשַׂת הָאִישׁ הָרָשׁ וַיַּעֲשֶׂהָ לָאִישׁ הַבָּא אֵלָיו. (6) אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אֵבֶר קָטָן יֵשׁ לוֹ לָאָדָם מַרְעִיבוֹ שָׂבֵעַ מַשְׂבִּיעוֹ רָעֵב שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר כְּמַרְעִיתָם וַיִּשְׂבָּעוּ וְגוֹ׳:
It is stated: “The land will eulogize, each family separately; the family of the house of David separately, and their women separately, the family of the house of Nathan separately, and their women separately” (Zechariah 12:12). This indicates that at the end of days a great eulogy will be organized during which men and women will be separate. They said: And are these matters not inferred a fortiori? If in the future, at the end of days referred to in this prophecy, when people are involved in a great eulogy and consequently the evil inclination does not dominate them, as typically during mourning inappropriate thoughts and conduct are less likely, and nevertheless the Torah says: Men separately and women separately; then now that they are involved in the Celebration of the Drawing of the Water, and as such the evil inclination dominates them, since celebration lends itself to levity, all the more so should men and women be separate. Apropos the eulogy at the end of days, the Gemara asks: For what is the nature of this eulogy? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Dosa and the Rabbis disagree concerning this matter. One said that this eulogy is for Messiah ben Yosef who was killed in the war of Gog from the land of Magog prior to the ultimate redemption with the coming of Messiah ben David. And one said that this eulogy is for the evil inclination that was killed. The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that the lament is for Messiah ben Yosef who was killed, this would be the meaning of that which is written in that context: “And they shall look unto Me because they have thrust him through; and they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for his only son” (Zechariah 12:10). However, according to the one who said that the eulogy is for the evil inclination that was killed, does one need to conduct a eulogy for this? On the contrary, one should conduct a celebration. Why, then, did they cry? The Gemara answers: This can be understood as Rabbi Yehuda taught: In the future, at the end of days, God will bring the evil inclination and slaughter it in the presence of the righteous and in the presence of the wicked. For the righteous the evil inclination appears to them as a high mountain, and for the wicked it appears to them as a mere strand of hair. These weep and those weep. The righteous weep and say: How were we able to overcome so high a mountain? And the wicked weep and say: How were we unable to overcome this strand of hair? And even the Holy One, Blessed be He, will wonder with them, as it is stated with regard to the eulogy: “So says the Lord of hosts: If it be wondrous in the eyes of the remnant of this people in those days, it should also be wondrous in My eyes” (Zechariah 8:6). Apropos the evil inclination and the battle against it, the Gemara cites that which Rav Asi said: Initially, when it begins to entice someone, the evil inclination is like a strand of a spider’s web [bukhya]; and ultimately it is like the thick ropes of a wagon, as it is stated: “Woe unto them that draw iniquity with cords of vanity, and sin as if it were with a wagon rope” (Isaiah 5:18). Initially, the enticement is almost imperceptible, like a thin strand; however, after one sins, it is like wagon ropes tied tightly around him. The Sages taught: To Messiah ben David, who is destined to be revealed swiftly in our time, the Holy One, Blessed be He, says: Ask of Me anything and I will give you whatever you wish, as it is stated: “I will tell of the decree; the Lord said unto me: You are My son, this day have I begotten you, ask of Me, and I will give the nations for your inheritance, and the ends of the earth for your possession” (Psalms 2:7–8). Once the Messiah ben David saw Messiah ben Yosef, who was killed, he says to the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, I ask of you only life; that I will not suffer the same fate. The Holy One, Blessed be He, says to him: Life? Even before you stated this request, your father, David, already prophesied about you with regard to this matter precisely, as it is stated: “He asked life of You, You gave it to him; even length of days for ever and ever” (Psalms 21:5). § Rabbi Avira, and some say Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi, taught: The evil inclination has seven names. The Holy One, Blessed be He, called it evil, as it is stated: “For the inclination of a man’s heart is evil from his youth” (Genesis 8:21). Moses called it uncircumcised, as it is stated: “And circumcise the foreskin of your hearts” (Deuteronomy 10:16). David called it impure, as it is stated: “Create for me a pure heart, O God” (Psalms 51:12); by inference, there is an impure heart that is the evil inclination. Solomon called it enemy, as it is stated: “If your enemy is hungry, give him bread to eat, and if he is thirsty, give him water to drink; for you will heap coals of fire upon his head, and the Lord will reward you” (Proverbs 25:21–22). Do not read it as: And the Lord will reward you [yeshalem lakh]; rather read it as: And the Lord will reconcile it to you [yashlimenu lakh]. God will cause the evil inclination to love you and no longer seek to entice you to sin. Isaiah called it a stumbling block, as it is stated: “And He will say: Cast you up, cast you up, clear the way, take up the stumbling block out of the way of My people” (Isaiah 57:14). Ezekiel called it stone, as it is stated: “And I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you a heart of flesh” (Ezekiel 36:26). Joel called it hidden one, as it says: “But I will remove the northern one [hatzefoni] far off from you” (Joel 2:20). The Sages taught concerning the verse: “But I will remove the northern one [hatzefoni] far off from you,” that this is referring to the evil inclination. And why is the evil inclination referred to as tzefoni? It is due to the fact that it is always hidden [tzafun] in the heart of man. The baraita continues interpreting the verse in the book of Joel. “And will drive it to a land barren and desolate” (Joel 2:20), where there are no people for the evil inclination to incite. And what damage does the evil inclination cause? “With its face toward the eastern [hakadmoni] sea” (Joel 2:20), as it set its eyes on the First [mukdam] Temple and destroyed it, and killed the Torah scholars that were in it; “and its end toward the western [ha’aḥaron] sea” (Joel 2:20), as it set its eyes on the Second [aḥaron] Temple and destroyed it, and killed the Torah scholars that were in it; “its foulness may come up, and its ill odor may come up” (Joel 2:20), as it forsakes the nations of the world and incites the enemies of the Jewish people: In this context, the term the nations is a euphemism for the Jewish people. The evil inclination seeks to corrupt the Jews more than it does the members of any other nation. “Because it has done greatly” (Joel 2:20): Abaye said: And it provokes Torah scholars more than it provokes everyone else. The Gemara illustrates that point. It is like this incident, as Abaye once heard a certain man say to a certain woman: Let us rise early and go on the road. Upon hearing this, Abaye said to himself: I will go and accompany them and prevent them from violating the prohibition that they certainly intend to violate. He went after them for a distance of three parasangs in a marsh among the reeds, while they walked on the road, and they did not engage in any wrongful activity. When they were taking leave of each other, he heard that they were saying: We traveled a long distance together, and the company was pleasant company. Abaye said: In that situation, if instead of that man it had been one whom I hate, a euphemism for himself, he would not have been able to restrain himself from sinning. After becoming aware of so great a shortcoming he went and leaned against the doorpost, thinking and feeling regret. A certain Elder came and taught him: Anyone who is greater than another, his evil inclination is greater than his. Therefore, Abaye should not feel regret, as his realization is a consequence of his greatness. Rabbi Yitzḥak said: A person’s inclination overcomes him each day, as it is stated: “Only
א"ל מזמה תשמור וגו' ה"ק מדבר זמה תשמור עליך כו'. אין זה סותר מ"ש פ' החליל דאביי הוה מצטער ואמר על עצמו אי מאן דסני לי הוה לא הוה מצי לאוקמי נפשיה עד דתני ליה ההוא סבא כל הגדול מחברו יצרו גדול הימנו דהכא איירי בשעה שעוסק בתורה כפרש"י מזמה תשמור עליך מכל דבר רע והרהור חטא ואנו הולכין הלוך ודבר בדברי תורה ועוד דהתם יחיד הוה וק"ל:
ניזיל אפיתחא דבי זונות - מכאן יש ללמוד שדרך להרחיק מפתח עבודת כוכבים כל מה שיכול משום דכתיב אל תקרב אל פתח ביתה ומוקמי לעיל בעבודת כוכבים שהרי היה רוצה ללכת יותר אפיתחא דבי זונות:
קשה יצה"ר שאפילו יוצרו קראו רע כו'. דד"א שהפועל הדבר לא יגנה מלאכתו ואפי' הכי קאמר בו שיוצרו גינהו וקראו רע וכמ"ש אוי לו לעיסה כו' ועי"ל שאפילו יוצרו שבראו לטובת האדם כדי שיזכה על ידו אם ינצחהו כמ"ש כי טוב מאד זה יצה"ר מ"מ קראו רע ע"ש שמחשבתו של היצה"ר הוא להרע כמ"ש הוא השטן הוא היצה"ר הוא מלאך המות ודו"ק: יצרו של אדם מתחדש כו' ויצרו של אדם מתגבר כו'. הכונה בזה דלגבי כח הנשמה שהוא שכל העיוני אמר שיצרו מתחדש עליו בכל יום להחטיאו בהרהור הלב מה שאין דרכו בכך במעי אמו כדאמרינן פרק המפלת ולכך מקרי דבר חדש ומייתי רק רע כל היום כדאמרינן דאין אדם ניצול מהרהור עבירה אבל לגבי כח הגופני שדרכו בכך אמר שמתגבר עליו להוסיף על חומר שלו ולזה אמר מבקש להמיתו דבגוף שייך מיתה ודבר הנלמד מענינו הוא דהאי קרא צופה רשע גו' בשטן איירי ולא ברשע אדם מדכתיב לעיל מיניה פי צדיק יהגה גו' תורת אלקיו בלבו גו' וע"ז אמר צופה רשע לצדיק להחטיאו ולהמיתו כמ"ש הוא השטן הוא היצה"ר הוא מלאך המות ואמר שהקב"ה עוזרו מלהחטיאו דאע"ג דהכל בידי שמים חוץ מיראת שמים מ"מ הבא ליטהר מסייעין אותו:
אמר רב יהודה אמר רב לעולם אל יביא אדם עצמו לידי נסיון שהרי דוד מלך ישראל הביא עצמו לידי נסיון ונכשל אמר לפניו רבש"ע מפני מה אומרים אלקי אברהם אלקי יצחק ואלקי יעקב ואין אומרים אלקי דוד אמר אינהו מינסו לי ואת לא מינסית לי אמר לפניו רבש"ע בחנני ונסני שנאמר (תהלים כו, ב) בחנני יקוק ונסני וגו' אמר מינסנא לך ועבידנא מילתא בהדך דלדידהו לא הודעתינהו ואילו אנא קא מודענא לך דמנסינא לך בדבר ערוה מיד (שמואל ב יא, ב) ויהי לעת הערב ויקם דוד מעל משכבו וגו' אמר רב יהודה שהפך משכבו של לילה למשכבו של יום ונתעלמה ממנו הלכה אבר קטן יש באדם משביעו רעב ומרעיבו שבע:
who did eat of my bread, has lifted his heel against me” (Psalms 41:10). Bread is a metaphor for Torah knowledge. § Apropos Ahithophel, the Gemara relates the events that led to his death. Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: A person should never bring himself to undergo an ordeal, as David, king of Israel, brought himself to undergo an ordeal and failed. David said before God: Master of the Universe, for what reason does one say in prayer: God of Abraham, God of Isaac, and God of Jacob, and one does not say: God of David? God said to David: They have undergone ordeals before Me, and you have not undergone an ordeal before Me. David said before Him: Examine me and subject me to an ordeal, as it is stated: “Examine me, Lord, and subject me to an ordeal; try my kidneys and my heart” (Psalms 26:2). God said to him: I will subject you to an ordeal, and I will perform a matter for you that I did not perform for the Patriarchs, as for them, I did not inform them of the nature of the ordeal, while I am informing you that I will subject you to an ordeal involving a matter of a married woman, with whom relations are forbidden. Immediately, it is written: “And it came to pass one evening that David rose from his bed” (II Samuel 11:2). Rav Yehuda says: Once David heard the nature of his ordeal, he sought to prevent himself from experiencing lust. He transformed his nighttime bed into his daytime bed, i.e., he engaged in intercourse with his wives during the day, in an attempt to quell his lust. But a halakha, i.e., a Torah statement, escaped him: There is a small limb in man that he employs in sexual intercourse. If he starves the limb, and does not overindulge, it is satiated; but if he satiates the limb and overindulges in sexual intercourse, it is starving, and desires more. Therefore, his plan had the opposite effect. The verse states: “And he walked upon the roof of the king’s house; from the roof he saw a woman bathing, and the woman was very fair to look upon” (II Samuel 11:2). Bathsheba was shampooing her head behind a beehive, which concealed her from sight. Satan came and appeared to David as a bird. David shot an arrow at the bird, the arrow severed the beehive, Bathsheba was exposed, and David saw her. Immediately, it is written: “And David sent and inquired after the woman. And one said: Is not this Bathsheba, daughter of Eliam, the wife of Uriah the Hittite? And David sent messengers, and took her, and she came to him, and he lay with her, for she was purified from her impurity, and then she returned to her house” (II Samuel 11:3–4). And that is the meaning of that which is written: “You have proved my heart; You have visited me in the night: You have tried me, but You find nothing; let no presumptuous thought pass my lips” (Psalms 17:3). David said: Oh, that a muzzle would have fallen upon the mouth of the one who hates me, a euphemism for his own mouth, and I would not have said anything like that and I would have withstood the ordeal. Rava taught: What is the meaning of that which is written: “To the leader, of David. In the Lord I put my trust; how can you say to my soul: Flee like a bird to your mountain” (Psalms 11:1)? David said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, pardon me for that sin with Bathsheba so that the wicked people will not say: The mountain that is among you, i.e., the luminary of the generation, David, was driven from the world due to a bird that led to his transgression. Rava taught: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Against You, only You, have I sinned, and done what is evil in Your eyes; that You are justified when You speak, and right when You judge” (Psalms 51:6)? David said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: It is revealed and known before You that if I sought to suppress my evil inclination, I would have suppressed it; but I said: I will sin, so that they will not say a servant overcame his master and withstood the ordeal even though God said that he would not. Rava taught: What is the meaning of that which is written: “For I am ready to stumble [letzela] and my pain is always before me” (Psalms 38:18)? Bathsheba, daughter of Eliam, was designated as fit for David from the six days of Creation. Rava interprets that the term letzela is referring to Eve, who was taken from the side [tzela] of Adam, the first man, and explains that she was destined for him, just as Eve was destined for Adam. But she came to him through pain. And likewise, the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: Bathsheba, daughter of Eliam, was designated as fit for David, but he partook of her unripe, before the appointed time. David would have ultimately married her in a permitted manner after the death of Uriah. Rava taught: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And when I limped they rejoiced and gathered, the wretched gather themselves together against me, and those whom I know not; they tore and did not cease [dammu]” (Psalms 35:15)? David said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe. It is revealed and known before you that if my enemies were to tear my flesh, my blood [dami] would not flow to the ground, due to excessive fasting (see II Samuel 12:16–17). David continued: Moreover, my enemies torment me to the extent that at the time when they are engaged in the public study of the halakhot of the four court-imposed death penalties they interrupt their study and say to me: David, concerning one who engages in intercourse with a married woman, his death is effected with what form of execution? And I said to them: Concerning one who engages in intercourse with a married woman before witnesses and with forewarning, his death is by strangulation, and he has a share in the World-to-Come. But one who humiliates another before the multitudes has no share in the World-to-Come. The transgression of those who humiliated David is clearly more severe than the transgression of David himself. Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: Even during the time of his illness he fulfilled the mitzva of conjugal rights for eighteen wives, as it is stated: “I am weary with my groaning; every night I speak in my bed; I melt away my couch with tears” (Psalms 6:7). Even when he was weary and groaning he still spoke in his bed, a euphemism for sexual intercourse. And Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: David sought to engage in idol worship during Absalom’s coup, as it is stated: “And it came to pass when David was at the top [rosh] of the ascent, where he would bow to God” (II Samuel 15:32), and rosh means nothing other than idol worship, as it is stated: “As for that image, its head [reishei] was of fine gold” (Daniel 2:32). It is written: “Behold Hushai the Archite came to meet him with his coat rent and earth upon his head” (II Samuel 15:32). Hushai said to David: Shall they say a king like you will engage in idol worship? David said to him: Is it preferable that they say with regard to a king like me, known to be righteous, that his son will kill him? David continued, referring to himself in third person: It is preferable that he shall engage in idol worship and the name of Heaven shall not be desecrated in public through the murder of a righteous king in this manner. Hushai said to him: What is the reason that you married a beautiful woman, the mother of Absalom? David said to him: With regard to a beautiful woman, the Merciful One permitted marrying her. Hushai said to him: But you did not interpret the juxtaposed verses, as juxtaposed to the portion of the beautiful woman is the portion beginning: “If a man has a stubborn and rebellious son” (Deuteronomy 21:18). From that juxtaposition it is derived: Anyone who marries a beautiful woman has a stubborn and rebellious son. Therefore, even if Absalom kills you, there will be no desecration of God’s name, as the people will attribute his actions to his mother. Rabbi Dostai from Biri taught: To what is David comparable? He is comparable to a Samaritan merchant, who incrementally lowers the price until the buyer agrees to purchase the merchandise. David said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe: “Who can discern his errors” (Psalms 19:13), i.e., forgive me for the unwitting sins that I committed. God said to him: They are forgiven for you. David asked more: “Cleanse me from hidden faults” (Psalms 19:13), i.e., pardon me for transgressions that I committed in private, even if I performed them intentionally. God said to him: They are forgiven for you. David requested: “Keep back your servant also from intentional sins” (Psalms 19:14). God said to him: They are forgiven for you. David requested: “Let them not have dominion over me, then I shall be faultless” (Psalms 19:14), and I further request that the Sages will not speak of me and condemn me. God said to him: They are forgiven for you. David requested: “And I shall be clear from great transgression” (Psalms 19:14), meaning that my transgression with Bathsheba and Uriah will not be written in the Bible. God said to him: That is impossible. And just as the letter yod that I removed from the name of Sarai, wife of Abraham, when I changed her name to Sarah, was standing and screaming several years over its omission from the Bible until Joshua came and I added the yod to his name, as it is stated: “And Moses called Hosea, son of Nun, Joshua [Yehoshua]” (Numbers 13:16); the entire portion of your transgression, which is fit to be included in the Bible, all the more so it cannot be omitted. The verse states: “And I shall be clear from great transgression” (Psalms 19:14). David said before God: Master of the Universe, pardon me for that entire sin. God said to him: Your son Solomon is already destined to say with his wisdom: “Can a man take fire in his lap and his garments not be burned? Can one walk on hot coals and his feet not be scorched? So too one who lies with his neighbor’s wife; anyone who touches her shall not go unpunished” (Proverbs 6:27–29). David said to Him: Will that man, David, be expelled for that entire transgression, with no remedy? God said to David: Accept upon yourself afflictions, and that will atone for your sins. He accepted afflictions upon himself. Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: For six months David was afflicted with leprosy and the Divine Presence abandoned him and the members of the Sanhedrin dissociated themselves from him. He was afflicted with leprosy, as it is stated: “Purge me with hyssop and I shall be clean; wash me, and I shall be whiter than snow” (Psalms 51:9), indicating that he required purification like a leper. The Divine Presence abandoned him, as it is stated: “Restore me to joy of Your salvation; and uphold me with a willing spirit” (Psalms 51:14). And the members of the Sanhedrin dissociated themselves from him, as it is stated: “Let those who fear You turn to me, and those who have known Your testimonies” (Psalms 119:79). From where do we derive that this lasted for six months? It is derived as it is written: “And the days that David reigned over Israel were forty years;
דָּוִד בִּשְׁתַּיִם מַאי נִינְהוּ — דְּאוּרִיָּה, וְדַהֲסָתָה. וְהָא אִיכָּא נָמֵי מַעֲשֶׂה דְּבַת שֶׁבַע! הָתָם אִפְּרַעוּ מִינֵּיהּ, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְאֶת הַכִּבְשָׂה יְשַׁלֵּם אַרְבַּעְתָּיִם״, יֶלֶד, אַמְנוֹן, תָּמָר, וְאַבְשָׁלוֹם. הָתָם נָמֵי אִפְּרַעוּ מִינֵּיהּ, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַיִּתֵּן ה׳ דֶּבֶר (בָּעָם מִן הַבּוֹקֶר) וְעַד עֵת מוֹעֵד״! הָתָם לָא אִפְּרַעוּ מִגּוּפֵיהּ. הָתָם נָמֵי לָא אִפְּרַעוּ מִגּוּפֵיהּ! לָאיֵי אִפְּרַעוּ מִגּוּפֵיהּ, דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: שִׁשָּׁה חֳדָשִׁים נִצְטָרַע דָּוִד וּפָרְשׁוּ הֵימֶנּוּ סַנְהֶדְרִין, וְנִסְתַּלְּקָה הֵימֶנּוּ שְׁכִינָה, דִּכְתִיב: ״יָשׁוּבוּ לִי יְרֵאֶיךָ וְיוֹדְעֵי עֵדוֹתֶיךָ״. וּכְתִיב: ״הָשִׁיבָה לִּי שְׂשׂוֹן יִשְׁעֶךָ״:
or are they perhaps calculated excluding the cubit of the base of the altar and the cubit of its ledge? The altar’s edge can be considered to be at the end of the ramp, the point at which it meets the altar, or it can be considered the point on the ramp that is directly over the external base of the altar, which is two cubits away from the point where the ramp meets the altar. Which of these two calculations is the correct one? Rav Pappa’s question remains unanswered, and the Gemara concludes: The dilemma shall stand unresolved. § It was taught in the mishna that if both of them were equal and neither preceded the other, the appointed priest says to all the priests: Extend your fingers [hatzbiu], and a lottery was performed. A tanna taught the meaning of the unusual term hatzbiu: Put out your fingers for a count. The Gemara asks: Let him count the priests themselves directly, rather than counting their fingers. The Gemara answers: This is a support for a teaching of Rabbi Yitzḥak, as Rabbi Yitzḥak said: It is prohibited to count Jews directly, even for the purposes of a mitzva, as it is written concerning King Saul and his count of his soldiers: “And he numbered them with bezek” (I Samuel 11:8), meaning that he counted them through shards, one shard representing each man, rather than counting them directly. Rav Ashi strongly objects to this interpretation of the verse: From where do you derive that this word bezek is a term related to the verb meaning to break apart, so that it means shards? Perhaps it is the name of a town, and it means that Saul counted them in Bezek, as it is written: “And they found Adoni-bezek in Bezek” (Judges 1:5), which shows that Bezek is the name of a place. The Gemara answers: Indeed, the proof is not from that verse but from here, where it says: “And Saul summoned the people and numbered them by sheep” (I Samuel 15:4), meaning that Saul tallied his soldiers by having each one take a sheep and put it aside to represent him in the count. Rabbi Elazar said: Whoever counts a group of Jews violates a negative mitzva, as it is stated: “And the number of the children of Israel will be like the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured” (Hosea 2:1). Rabbi Elazar interprets the verse to be saying: Which may not be measured. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: One who counts a group of Jews in fact violates two negative mitzvot, as it is stated in that verse: “Which cannot be measured and cannot be counted” (Hosea 2:1). Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yonatan raised a contradiction: It is written in this verse: “And the number of the children of Israel will be like the sand of the sea,” suggesting that they will have a specific number, though it will be very large. On the other hand, it continues and says: “Which cannot be measured and cannot be counted,” which means they will not be countable at all. How can these two statements be reconciled? It is not difficult: Here, in the second statement, it is referring to a time when the Jewish people fulfill the will of God; then they will be innumerable. There, in the first statement, it is referring to a time when the Jewish people do not fulfill the will of God; then they will be like the sand of the sea, having a specific number. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said a different resolution in the name of Abba Yosei ben Dostai: It is not difficult: Here, in the second statement, it is referring to counting by the hand of man; the Jewish people will be too numerous to count by man. There, in the first statement, it is referring to counting by the hand of God, and He will find that they are like the number of the grains of the sand of the sea. Rav Nehilai bar Idi said that Shmuel said: Once a man is appointed as a leader of the community, he becomes wealthy. This is derived from the verses cited above. Initially, it is written with regard to Saul: “And he numbered them with bezek,” meaning pottery shards, and in the end it is written: “And he numbered them with sheep,” indicating that he was able to provide enough of his own sheep to use them in counting the people. The Gemara asks: But perhaps the people provided these sheep from their own flocks. The Gemara rejects this: If so, what is the novelty in the matter? Why would the text tell us that the people were counted with sheep if not to illustrate incidentally the great wealth of Saul? § Having mentioned the verse about Saul, the Gemara proceeds to interpret more of that passage: “And Saul came to the city of Amalek and he strove in the valley” (I Samuel 15:5). Rabbi Mani said: This means that Saul strove with God, as it were, concerning the matter of the valley. At the time when the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Saul: “Now go and attack Amalek and proscribe all that belongs to him; do not pity him, but kill men and women alike, infants and sucklings alike, oxen and sheep alike, camel and donkey alike” (I Samuel 15:3), Saul countered and said: Now, if on account of one life that is taken, in a case where a slain person’s body is found and the murderer is unknown, the Torah said to bring a heifer whose neck is broken to a barren valley, in the atonement ritual described in Deuteronomy 6:1–9, all the more so must I have pity and not take all these Amalekite lives. And he further reasoned: If the men have sinned, in what way have the animals sinned? Why, then, should the Amalekites’ livestock be destroyed? And if the adults have sinned, in what way have the children sinned? A Divine Voice then came forth and said to him: “Do not be overly righteous” (Ecclesiastes 7:16). That is to say: Do not be more merciful than the Creator Himself, Who has commanded you to do this, for to do so would not be an indication of righteousness but of weakness. At a later time, when Saul said to Doeg: “Turn around and strike down the priests, and Doeg the Edomite turned around and struck down the priests, and he killed on that day eighty-five men who wore the linen ephod, and he struck Nob the city of priests by the sword, man and woman alike, infants and sucklings alike, oxen and donkeys and sheep, by the sword” (I Samuel 22:18–19), a Divine Voice came forth and said to him: “Do not be overly wicked” (Ecclesiastes 7:17). Apropos Saul’s contravention of God’s command to obliterate Amalek, the Gemara observes that Rav Huna said: How little does a person who has the support of his Lord have to worry or be concerned. The proof for this assertion is a comparison between Saul and David. Saul failed with one single sin and it was counted against him, costing him the throne. David, however, failed with two sins and they were not counted against him, as he retained his position. The Gemara asks: What was Saul’s one sin? The incident with Agag, king of Amalek, whom Saul spared in defiance of God’s command (see I Samuel 15:9). But was this his sole sin? There is also the incident of Nob, the city of priests, in which Saul later slew many innocent people, as cited above. The Gemara answers: It was after the incident with Agag, and even before the incident at Nob, that God said: “I regret that I have crowned Saul to be king” (I Samuel 15:11). Rav Huna stated above that David failed with two sins. What were they? One was the incident in which he had Uriah killed. The other was the matter of the incitement of David to conduct a census of the Jewish people (see II Samuel 24:1), which led to many deaths in a plague. The Gemara asks: But were these his only two sins? There is also the incident of Bathsheba, in which he took another man’s wife as his own. The Gemara answers: There, in that case, punishment was exacted from him separately, so the matter is no longer listed among his sins, as it is written with regard to this incident: “And he shall restore the lamb fourfold” (II Samuel 12:6). The lamb was a metaphor for Bathsheba, and ultimately David was indeed given a fourfold punishment for taking Bathsheba: The first child born to Bathsheba and David died (see II Samuel 12:13–23); David’s son Amnon was killed; Tamar, his daughter, was raped by Amnon (see II Samuel 13); and his son Avshalom rebelled against him and was ultimately killed (see II Samuel 15–18). The Gemara asks: If sins for which David was punished separately are not counted, one could ask: There, too, with regard to the sin of the census, he was punished separately, as it is written: “And the Lord sent a plague against Israel from the morning until the appointed time” (II Samuel 24:15). The Gemara responds: There, David was not punished personally, in his own body; rather, the punishment was inflicted on the Jewish people. The Gemara challenges this: There, too, in the incident with Bathsheba, David was not punished personally, in his own body; rather, it was his children who suffered punishment. The Gemara answers: That is not so; he was punished personally, in his own body, for that sin, as Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: David was stricken with leprosy for six months after that incident, and the Sanhedrin withdrew from him in protest over his behavior, and the Divine Presence also left him. As it is written that David prayed: “May those who fear You return to me, and they who know Your testimonies” (Psalms 119:79). Since he prayed for the return of those who fear God and who know His testimonies, referring to the Sages of the Sanhedrin, it can be inferred that they had withdrawn from him. And it is written as well: “Restore to me the joy of Your salvation, let a vigorous spirit support me” (Psalms 51:14), where David asks for the return of the Divine Spirit, which had left him. The Gemara asks: And didn’t David commit other sins? Didn’t Rav say: David accepted a slanderous report from Ziba about Mephibosheth, son of Jonathan, stating that the latter was pleased with David’s downfall? There was, in that case, this additional sin. The Gemara responds: Consequently, it is necessary to follow the approach of Shmuel, who said: David did not accept a slanderous report, because Ziba’s claim was true. The Gemara continues: And even according to Rav, who said that David accepted a slanderous report, one could answer that that sin is not counted, as was he not punished for it? As Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: At the time when David said to Mephibosheth: “I say that you and Ziba should divide the field” (II Samuel 19:30), a Divine Voice came forth and said to him: Rehoboam and Jeroboam will divide the kingship. Because David believed Ziba’s slanderous report and awarded him half of Mephibosheth’s field, David was punished by having his kingdom divided into two. Following King Solomon’s death the Jewish people split into two kingdoms, Israel to the north and Judea to the south (see I Kings 12). Therefore, David was punished for that sin too. § The Gemara continues its discussion of Saul and David. It is written: “Saul was one year old when he began to reign” (I Samuel 13:1), which cannot be understood literally, as Saul was appointed king when he was a young man. Rav Huna said: The verse means that when he began to reign he was like a one-year–old, in that he had never tasted the taste of sin but was wholly innocent and upright. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak strongly objects to this interpretation of the verse, saying: You could just as well say that he was like a one-year-old in that he was always filthy with mud and excrement. Rav Naḥman was shown a frightful dream that night, and he understood it as a punishment for having disparaged Saul. He said: I humbly submit myself to you, O bones of Saul, son of Kish, and beg your forgiveness. But once again he was shown a frightful dream, and he understood that he had not shown enough deference in his first apology. He therefore said this time: I humbly submit myself to you, O bones of Saul, son of Kish, king of Israel, and beg your forgiveness. Subsequently, the nightmares ceased. Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: Why did the kingship of the house of Saul not continue on to succeeding generations? It is because there was no flaw in his ancestry; he was of impeccable lineage. As Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: One appoints a leader over the community only if he has a box full of creeping animals hanging behind him, i.e., he has something inappropriate in his ancestry that preceded him. Why is that? It is so that if he exhibits a haughty attitude toward the community, one can say to him: Turn and look behind you and be reminded of your humble roots. This is why David’s kingdom lasted while Saul’s did not, as David descended from a family with problematic ancestry, namely Tamar (see Genesis, chapter 38) and Ruth the Moabite (see Ruth 4:18–22). Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: Why was Saul punished in that he was ultimately led to commit the sins described above? Because at the very outset of his reign he inappropriately forwent his royal honor, as it is stated with regard to Saul’s inauguration: “And some base fellows said: How can this man save us? So they disparaged him and brought him no present. But he made himself as if he did not hear” (I Samuel 10:27). And it is stated immediately afterward: “And Nahash the Ammonite marched up and encamped against Jabesh-gilead” (I Samuel 11:1). The implication is that if Saul had forcefully assumed his throne, Nahash would not have dared to attack the people of Jabesh-gilead. In this way, his humility led to the crisis. And Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: Any Torah scholar
