Searching for Quotes

First thing that you should do is to limit your search to the church fathers by making a collection with the following parameters:

title:Fathers

Using a number of different techniques I haven't found the quote.

It sure is attributed to him on Google though but not through any primary source citations I've seen: http://www.google.com/search?q="The+scriptures+are+of+little+use+to+those+who+understand+them+as+they+are+written"

Jason Saling said:

I don't like to quote people until I have it verified, don't want to keep passing on false information.

Wikipedia has all the right answers. You can quote me on that. [:S]

logosres:babytalmud;ref=BabTalmudFolio.Menah._29B;off=452

TOPICAL APPENDIX: THE SHAPES OF LETTERS OF THE TORAH; HOW THE LETTERS ARE WRITTEN FOR USE IN THE TORAH

            II.5 A.      Said R. Judah said Rab, “At the time that Moses went up on high, he found the Holy One in session, affixing crowns to the letters [of the words of the Torah]. He said to him, ‘Lord of the universe, who is stopping you [from regarding the document as perfect without these additional crowns on the letters]?’
            B.      “He said to him, ‘There is a man who is going to arrive at the end of many generations, and Aqiba b. Joseph is his name, who is going to interpret on the basis of each point of the crowns heaps and heaps of laws.’
            C.      “He said to him, ‘Lord of the Universe, show him to me.’
            D.      “He said to him, ‘Turn around.’
            E.      “He went and took a seat at the end of eight rows, but he could not grasp what the people were saying. He felt faint. But when the discourse reached a certain matter, and the disciples said, ‘My lord, how do you know this?’ and he answered, ‘It is a law given to Moses from Sinai,’ he regained his composure.
            F.      “He went and came before the Holy One. He said before him, ‘Lord of the Universe, How come you have someone like that and yet you give the Torah through me?’
            G.      “He said to him, ‘Silence! That is how the thought came to me.’
            H.      “He said to him, ‘Lord of the Universe, you have shown me his Torah, now show me his reward.’
            I.      “He said to him, ‘Turn around.’
            J.      “He turned around and saw his flesh being weighed out at the butcher-stalls in the market.
            K.      “He said to him, ‘Lord of the Universe, ‘Such is Torah, such is the reward?’
            L.      “He said to him, ‘Silence! That is how the thought came to me.’ ”
            II.6 A.      Said Raba, “There are seven letters that require the use of three strokes in the writing of them:
            B.      “Shin, ayin, tet, nun, zayin, gimmel, and saddi.”
            II.7 A.      Said R. Ashi, “I have noticed that the most meticulous scribes add a vertical stroke to the roof of the het and suspend the inner leg of the letter H. They add a vertical stroke to the roof of the letter H, with the sense, ‘he lives in the heights of the world.’
            B.      “They suspend the inner leg of the letter H, for the reason that will now be specified.”
            C.      R. Judah Nesiah asked R. Ammi, “What is the meaning of the verse of Scripture, “Trust in the Lord for ever, for in Yah, the Lord, is an everlasting rock’ (Is. 26:4)?”
            D.      He said to him, “Whoever places his trust in the Holy One, blessed be he, lo, he has a refuge in this world and in the world to come.”
            E.      He said to him, “No, this is what was difficult for me: How come the verse says, ‘in Yah,’ but not ‘Yah’?”
            F.      It is in accord with R. Judah bar Ilai’s exposition: “This refers to the two worlds that the Holy One, blessed be he, one using the H of the divine name, the other the Y of the divine name. But I don’t know whether the world to come was with the Y and this world with the H, or the this world with the Y and the world to come with the H.
            G.      “But when Scripture says, ‘These are the generations of the heaven and the earth when they were created,’ do not read the word as though it were written, ‘when they were created,’ but rather, ‘with an H they were created,’ on the basis of which I draw the conclusion that this world was made with the H of the divine name, and the world to come with the Y.
            H.      “And why was this world made with an H? It is because it resembles an area closed on three sides and open on the fourth, meaning, whoever wants to go astray may as well go astray.”
               I.      And how come the left leg of the H is suspended
               J.      It is to say, whoever wants to come back can come back
               K.      And why not come in the way he went out?
               L.      The occasion would not arise.
               M.      And that is in accord with what R. Simeon b. Laqish said, for said R. Simeon b. Laqish, “What is the meaning of the verse of Scripture, ‘As to the scorners, he scorns them, but as to the humble he gives grace’ (Prov. 3:34)? If someone comes wanting to be purified, he is helped to do so; if he comes wanting to be made unclean, they open the way for him.”
               N.      And how come the H has a crown?
               O.      Said the Holy One, blessed be he, “If he comes back, I shall set a crown on him.”
            P.      [Continuing H:] “And how come the world to come was made with a Y? It is because the righteous there are few in number [Cashdan: the letter Y is the smallest in the alphabet and its head droops down].
            Q.      “And why is the Y’s head drooping?
            R.      “Because the righteous in the world hang their heads low, since the good deeds done by the one are not like those of the next” [so that each is ashamed before the other (Cashdan)].
            II.8 A.      Said R. Joseph, “These two rulings that Rab stated with regard to scrolls of the Torah are refuted in each case by a Tannaite formulation.
            B.      “Here is the first: said Rab, ‘A scroll of the Torah that has two errors on each column may be corrected, but if there are three, it must be hidden away.’
            C.      “Here is the refutation on Tannaite authority: If there are three, it may be corrected, if there are four, it must be hidden away.”
            II.9 A.      A Tannaite rule: if there is a single column that is whole and without error, it affords protection for the entirety of the Torah scroll.
            B.      Said R. Isaac bar Samuel bar Marta in the name of Rab, “But that is the case only if most of the scroll is properly written.”
            C.      Said Abbayye to R. Joseph, “If in a column there are three errors, what is the rule?”
            D.      He said to him, “Since it can be corrected, it is as though they were already corrected.”
            II.10 A.      [The rule that a scroll with four mistakes in each column must be put away] pertains, however, if letters are missing, but if there are too many letters, we do not take account of the matter.
            B.      And if letters are missing, why is that not the case?
            C.      Said R. Kahana, “Because it would look speckled” [Cashdan: inserting missing letters above the liens would make the whole look irregular].
            II.11 A.      Agra, father in law of R. Abba, had too many letters in his scroll. He brought it before R. Abba.
            B      He, who said to him, “[The rule that a scroll with four mistakes in each column must be put away] pertains, however, if letters are missing, [30A] but if there are too many letters, we do not take account of the matter.”
            II.12 A.      [Reverting to 8.C:] “Here is the second, for said Rab, ‘He who is writing a scroll of the Torah and reaches the finishing point may finish off even in the middle of a column.’
            B.      “Here is the refutation: He who is writing a scroll of the Torah and reaches the finishing point should not finish off in the middle of a columns one might with other pentateuchs, but he should gradually diminish each line as he goes along until he gets to the bottom of a column.”
            C.      Rab’s statement made reference to other pentateuchs.
            D.      But lo, he explicitly referred to a scroll of the Torah!
            E.      His reference was “pentateuchs within a scroll of the Torah.”
            F.      Is that so! But has not R. Joshua bar Abba said Rab Giddal said Rab said, “ ‘… before the right of all Israel’ (Dt. 34:5) are written in the middle of the column.”
            G.      The meaning is, in the middle of the line [but not at the end of the column].
            II.13 A.      It has been stated:
            B.      Rabbis say, “One may finish even in the middle of the line.”
            C.      R. Ashi said, “In the middle of a line in particular.”
            D.      And the decided law is, “In the middle of a line in particular.”
            II.14 A.      Said R. Joshua bar Abba said R. Giddal said Rab, “The last eight verses of the Torah must be read in the public lection in the synagogue by one person alone.”
            B.      In accord with what authority is this ruling? It cannot be that of R. Simeon, for it has been taught on Tannaite authority:
            C.      “ ‘So Moses the servant of the Lord died there’ (Dt. 34:5)—is it possible that Moses was alive and wrote, ‘So Moses the servant of the Lord died there’? But to this point in the Torah, Moses did the writing, and from that point to the end, Joshua b. Nun did the writing,” the words of R. Judah.
            D.      Others say it was said by R. Nehemiah.
            E.      Said to him R. Simeon, “Is it possible that the scroll of the Torah was lacking a single letter? Is it not written, ‘Take this scroll of the Torah and put it’ (Dt. 31:26)? But up to this point the Holy One, blessed be he, did the speaking, and saying the matter aloud, Moses did the writing. But from this point to the end, the Holy One blessed be he did the speaking, and Moses did the writing, in tears. That is in line with this verse, ‘Then Baruch answered them, he pronounced all these words to me with his own mouth, and I wrote them down with ink in the book’ (Jer. 36:18). [Cashdan: Jeremiah did not repeat the words because of the grief they caused him.]”
            F.      Accordingly, must we not say the statement above cannot accord with R. Simeon?
            G.      You may even maintain that it represents the view of R. Simeon, but since the phrase at hand is exceptional in one aspect, it is exceptional in another as well.
            II.15 A.      And said R. Joshua bar Abba said R. Giddal said Rab, “He who buys a scroll of the Torah in the market is like one who has merely grabbed a religious duty by buying it in the market.
            B.      “But he who writes one out for himself is regarded by Scripture as though he had personally received it at Mount Sinai.”
            C.      Said R. Sheshet, “But if someone corrected even a single letter in it, Scripture regards it as though he had written the whole of the scroll.”
            II.16 A.      Our rabbis have taught on Tannaite authority:
            B.      A person should make use of parchment-sheets of from three to eight columns, less or more than that he should not use.
            C.      He should not put in two many columns, since it would look like a mere letter, nor should he put in too few columns, for the eyes would wander. The width of the column should be sufficient for the word “according to your families” to be written three times [that is, thirty letters in breadth].
            D.      If a sheet nine columns wide should come into one’s possession, he should not divide it into three on the one side and six on the other, but four on the one side and five on the other.
            E.      When is this the case? At the beginning or middle of the scroll, but at the end of a scroll, even a single verse or column [Cashdan: make take up the whole sheet].
            F.      A single verse do you say!? Rather, say, a single verse in a single column.
            G.      The width of the margin below shall be a handbreadth, the margin above should be three fingerbreadths, and between one column and the next the space should be two fingerbreadths.
            H.      In Pentateuchs, the margin below should be three fingerbreadths, two above, a thumb breadth between one column and the next.
            I.      Between one line and the next must be the space of a line, between one word and the next the width of a letter, between each letter a hairbreadth.
            J.      One should not reduce the size of the script on account of the margin above or below or on account of the requisite space between one line and the next or between one section and the next.
            K.      If near the end of a line one has to write a word containing five letters, he must not write two letters inside the column and three outside, but [30B] three in and two outside. [Cashdan: if there is sufficient space for three letters he may write the word allowing two letters to encroach upon the margin, but if there is not sufficient space for three letters he must write the whole word in the next line].
            L.      If near the end of a line one has to write a word containing two letters, he must not write it between the columns but must write the word at the beginning of the following line.
            M.      “He who errs and omits the Name of God [and wrote the next word] should erase what he has written and insert it above the line, and write the Name on the spot that has been erased,” the words of R. Judah.
            N.      R. Yosé says, “He may even insert the Name above the line.”
            O.      R. Isaac says, “He may even wipe away the word that was written and write the Name instead.”
            P.      R. Simeon Shezuri says, “He may write the whole name above the line but not part of the name.”
            Q.      R. Simeon b. Eleazar in the name of R. Meir says, m “He may not write the Name either on an erased spot nor on a word that has been wiped away, nor may he insert it above the line. What dopes he have to do? He has to remove the whole sheet and hide it away.”
            II.17 A.      It has been stated:
            B.      R. Hananel said Rab said, “The decided law is that one may write the Name above the line.”
            C.      Rabbah bar bar Hana said R. Isaac b. Samuel said, “The decided law is that one erases the word that was written and write the Name instead.”
            D.      Why should R. Hananel say that the decided law follows this authority, and Rabbah bar bar Hana say that the decided law follows that authority?
            E.      Because people confuse the names and rulings, if they are not spelled out explicitly.
            II.18 A.      Said Rabin bar Hinena said Ulla said R. Hanina, “The decided law is in accord with Simeon Shezuri, and not only so, but in every passage in which R. Simeon Shezuri has given a teaching, the decided law is in accord with him.”
               B.      In what context was this statement made? Should you say that it is in the context of the statement just now cited, “R. Simeon Shezuri says, ‘He may write the whole name above the line but not part of the name,’ ” since it has been stated, and in that regard it has been stated, “R. Hananel said Rab said, ‘The decided law is that one may write the Name above the line,’ and Rabbah bar bar Hana said R. Isaac b. Samuel said, ‘The decided law is that one erases the word that was written and write the Name instead,’ ” if it were in this connection that R. Hanina’s ruling was stated, he ought to have stated his opinion along with the others.
               C.      Rather, it was in the following setting: He who slaughters a beast and found in it an eight-months’ birth, living or dead, or a dead nine-months’ birth, tears it out and removes its blood. “[If] he found a live nine-months’ birth, it requires slaughtering. And it is liable to the rule concerning it and its young [Lev. 22:28, which are not to be slaughtered on the same day],” the words of R. Meir. And sages say, “The slaughtering of its mother renders it clean.” R. Simeon Shezuri says, “Even if [it grew to the] age of eight years and ploughs a field-the slaughtering of its mother renders it clean.” [If] one cut [into a beast] and found in it a living nine-months’ birth, it requires slaughtering, because its mother has not been slaughtered. [M. Hul. 4:5A–H].
               D.      Lo, since in that regard it has been stated, “Zeiri said R. Hanina said, ‘The decided law accords with R. Simeon Shezuri,’ ” if it were the case, then he should have made the same statement there. [Cashdan: if Hanina’s ruling was stated in this connection, then Rabin b. Hinena should also have stated his tradition of the law alongside Zeiri.]
               E.      Rather it was in the following context: At first they ruled, “He who goes out in chains and said, ‘Write a writ of divorce for my wife,’—lo, these should write and deliver it to her.” They reverted to rule, “Also: He who is taking leave by sea or going forth in a caravan [may give the same valid instructions]. R. Simeon Shezuri says, “Also: he who is dying” [M. Git. 6:5J–L].
               F.      Or it may have been in the following: [Regarding] heave offering of the tithe from demai produce which returned to its place [which fell back into the now-tithed demai produce from which it was originally separated, thus rendering the entire mixture prohibited to a non-priest—R. Simeon of Shezuri says, “Even on a weekday he inquires of him [the vendor] and eats at his word” [M. Demai 4:1A–M].
               G.      But lo, it has been stated in this regard: said R. Yohanan, “The decided law accords with the position of R. Simeon Shezuri in the case of the dying man and in the case of heave offering of the tithe from demai produce which returned to its place [which fell back into the now-tithed demai produce from which it was originally separated,” if it were so, he should have made the statement there.
               H.      Rather, the correct context is the following: R. Simeon Shezuri says, “Egyptian beans that one originally sowed for the sake of their seed and part of them had taken root before the New Year, part afterward, one may not designate heave offering and tithes from one part in behalf of the other, for one may not designated heave offering and tithes from new produce in behalf of the old or from old in behalf of the new. What should one do? He should collect the whole crop into a single heap and then designate the heave offering and tithes from it, so that the new produce in the heave offering or tithe will be deemed to be taken in respect to the new produce left in the heap, and the old for the old” [T. Shebiit 2:13] [M. Sheb. 2:8A: are treated in the same way [as the types of produce mentioned at M. Shebiit 2:7A, and so are subject to the rule of M. 2:7C–G].”
               I.      But lo, it has been stated in this regard: said R. Samuel bar Nahmani said R. Yohanan, “The decided law accords with R. Simeon Shezuri,” if it were so, he should have made the statement there.
               J.      Rather, said R. Pappa, “The correct context concerned the chest.”
               K.      R. Nahman bar Isaac said, “It concerned the wine.”
               L.      R. Pappa said, [31A] “The correct context concerned the chest, as we have learned in the Mishnah:” The chest—The House of Shammai say, “[R] is measured from the inside [to determine its volume.” And the House of Hillel say, “It is measured from the outside.” These and those agree that the thickness of the legs and the thickness of the rims is not measured. R. Yosé says, “They agree that the thickness of the legs and the thickness of the rims is measured. But [the space] between them is not measured.” R. Simeon Shezuri says, “If the legs are a handbreadth high, [that space which is] between them is not measured, and if not, [that space which is] between them is measured [M. Kel. 18:1A–F].”
               M.      R. Nahman bar Isaac said, “It concerned the wine, as we have learned in the Mishnah:” R. Meir says, “Oil is in the first remove of uncleanness under all circumstances.” And sages say, “Also honey.” R. Simeon Shezuri says, “Also: wine” [M. Tohorot 3:2A–C].
               N.      Does it then follow that the initial authority excludes wine from the rule?
               O.      Repeat the rule as: “Only: wine.”
                 II.19 A.      It has been taught on Tannaite authority:
                 B.      Said R. Simeon Shezuri, “There was a case in which untithed produce became mixed with my produce that had already been tithed, so I came and asked R. Tarfon, who instructed me, ‘Go and buy produce from the market and separate tithes from it, newly produced produce for the other” [T. Dem. 5:22L–N].
                 C.      [Tarfon] took as his premise that the majority of common folk tithe their produce, so that here he was in the status of taking tithe from what is exempt from tithe by the law of the Torah in behalf of what also is exempt by the same law.
                 D.      But why did he not instruct him, “Go, buy produce from a gentile”?
                 E.      He held as his premise that there is no valid right of ownership to real estate in the Land of Israel assigned to a gentile, such as entirely to remove from the produce of that land the obligation to tithe [and since there was an obligation to tithe the produce] he would consequently be in the status of taking tithe from what is exempt from tithe by the law of the Torah in behalf of what also is exempt by the same law. Therefore it would be a case of designating tithe from what is liable to tithing in behalf of what is exempt from tithing.
                 II.20 A.      There are those who say that he said to him, “Go and buy produce from a gentile, and separate tithes from it, newly produced produce for the other.”
                 B.      He held as his premise that there is an entirely valid right of ownership to real estate in the Land of Israel assigned to a gentile, such as entirely to remove from the produce of that land the obligation to tithe [and since there was no obligation to tithe the produce] he would consequently be in the status of taking tithe from what is exempt from tithe by the law of the Torah in behalf of what also is exempt by the same law. Therefore it would be a case of designating tithe from what is exempt from tithing in behalf of what is exempt from tithing.
                 C.      But why not say to him, “Go, buy it from the market?
                 D.      [Tarfon] took as his premise that the majority of common folk do not tithe their produce.
                 II.21 A.      R. Yemar bar Shelamayya sent word to R. Pappa, “Does the statement, ‘Said Rabin bar Hinena said Ulla said R. Hanina, “The decided law is in accord with Simeon Shezuri, and not only so, but in every passage in which R. Simeon Shezuri has given a teaching, the decided law is in accord with him,” ’ apply also to the case in which untithed produce became mixed with produce that had already been tithed?”
                 B.      He replied to him, “Yes.”
                   C.      Said R. Ashi, “Said to me Mar Zutra that R. Hanina of Sura found a difficult in the question. It is obvious, [31B] for did he say, ‘Wherever in the Mishnah he has stated …’? What it says is, ‘in every passage in which R. Simeon Shezuri has given a teaching.’ ”
            II.22 A.      Said R. Zeiri said R. Hananel said Rab, “If a tear in a scroll of the Torah extended into two lines, it may be sown together, but if into three lines, it may not be sewn together” [Cashdan: but the whole sheet of parchment must be removed].
            B.      Said Rabbah the Younger to R. Ashi, “This is what R. Jeremiah of Difti said in the name of Raba: ‘As to that which we have said, “but if into three lines, it may not be sewn together,” that rules applies only to old scrolls, but as to new ones, it would not matter [how far the tear went; the parchment may be sewn together]. And when it says, “old,” that is not actually old, and when it says “new,” it is not actually new, but the former means one that was prepared with gall nut juice, the latter, not.’ ”
            C.      And that is the case only with sinews, but not with thread.
            II.23 A.      R. Judah bar Abba raised the question, “As to a tear that ran between the columns, or between one line and another, what is the law? [May the tear be sewn up in these cases?]”
            B.      The question stands.
            II.24 A.      Said R. Zeiri said R. Hananel said Rab, “A doorpost marker containing parchments with verses of the Torah [mezuzah] that was written in lines of two words each is valid.”
            B.      The question was asked: if the lines contained in succession two words, three, then one, what is the rule?
            C.      Said R. Nahman bar Isaac, “All the more so is it valid, for he has arranged the words as in a poem [song].”
            D.      An objection was raised: “If he wrote it out like a poem, or if he wrote out a poem like it, it is invalid”!
            E.      When that law was set forth as a Tannaite statement, it was stated in connection with a scroll of the Torah.
            II.25 A.      So too it has been stated:
            B.      Said Rabbah bar bar Hanah said R. Yohanan,
            C.      and some say, said R. Aha bar bar Hanah said R. Yohanan, “A doorpost marker containing parchments with verses of the Torah [mezuzah] that was written in lines of two words each is valid,
            D.      “so long as it is not in the form of a tent or tail-like” [Cashdan: the words in the consecutive lines must not increase in a regular order, like a tent, narrow above and wide belong; nor decrease in a regular order, like a tail].
            II.26 A.      Said R. Hisda, “ ‘above the earth’ [Dt. 11:21, the final words in the parchment in the doorpost marker containing parchments with verses of the Torah] must be on the last line [by themselves].”
            B.      Others say, “At the end of the line: ‘as the heaven is high above the other’ (Ps. 103:11).” [Cashdan: the penultimate line in the mezuzah ends with ‘the heaven’ sot hat if ‘above the earth’ were written at the end of the last line, it would be seen that ‘the heaven’ is directly above ‘the earth’ in conformity with the expression in Psalms.]
            C.      And there are those who say, “At the beginning, as the heaven is far from the earth.”
            II.27 A.      Said R. Helbo, “I saw R. Huna rolling up the doorpost marker containing parchments with verses of the Torah beginning at ‘one’ and ending at ‘hear.’ He also left the space between the sections closed [beginning the second passage on the same line as the ending of the first].”
            B.      An objection was raised: said R. Simeon b. Eleazar, “R. Meir would write it on a parchment of inferior quality, in the form of a column, [32A] leaving a space above and a space below and leaving the space open between the sections. [He did not leave the space between the sections closed.] I said to him, ‘My lord, why?’ He said to me, ‘Since these passages are not contiguous in the Torah itself.’ ” And said R. Hananel said Rab, “The decided law accords with the statement of R. Simeon b. Eleazar.” Now does this not refer to the law governing leaving space between the sections open?
            C.      No, it refers to leaving a space above and below.
            D.      And how much space above and below?
            E.      Said R. Menassia b. R. Jacob, and some say, said R. Samuel bar Jacob, “The space taken up by the clasps of the scribes” [Cashdan].
            II.28 A.      Said Abbayye to R. Joseph, “And don’t you take the view that Rab’s statement pertained to leaving a space above and below? But Rab affirms the principle that we rely on common practice, and common practice nowadays is to leave the space between the sections closed!”
            B.      “For said Rabbah said R. Kahana said Rab, ‘Should Elijah come and announce, “People carry out with a covered shoe the rite of removing the shoe of the deceased childless brother to end the levirate connection,” people would obey him. But if he announced, “People do not carry out with a sandal the rite of removing the shoe of the deceased childless brother to end the levirate connection,” people would not obey him, for the people now commonly practice the rite with a sandal.’
            C.      “And R. Joseph said R. Kahana said Rab said, ‘Should Elijah come and announce, “People do not carry out with a sandal the rite of removing the shoe of the deceased childless brother to end the levirate connection,” people would obey him. But if he announced, “People do not carry out with a sandal the rite of removing the shoe of the deceased childless brother to end the levirate connection,” people would not obey him, for the people now commonly practice the rite with a sandal.’
            D.      [Abbayye continues,] “And we said in that connection, ‘what is at issue between these two formulations? At issue is the use of a sandal to begin with.’ [Cashdan: according to Rabbah’s version it is not right nowadays to use a covered shoe to begin with, if a sandal is in hand; Joseph has the covered shoe used even though a sandal is available.]
            E.      Does it not follow that the statement of the law that Rab made pertains to leaving space [but as to the general practice, closing the space, Rab follows common practice].
            F.      Indeed it does.
            II.29 A.      R. Nahman bar Isaac said, “The religious duty properly performed is to leave the space between the sections closed, but if it was left open, it is valid. For what is the meaning of R. Simeon b. Eleazar’s saying, ‘open’? It means, ‘even open.’ ”
            B.      May we then say that the following supports his view:
            C.      Along these same lines, a scroll of the Torah that was worn out, or prayerbox [tefillin] that were worn out—people may not make of them door-post markers containing verses of the Torah, for things are not brought down from a more weighty leave of sanctification to a less weighty level of sanctification.
            D.      It then follows that, if it were permitted to bring things down from a more weighty leave of sanctification to a less weighty level of sanctification, it would be allowed make of a scroll of the Torah that was worn out, or prayerbox [tefillin] that were worn out door-post markers containing verses of the Torah. But how is that possible? In the one case the portions are closed, in the other, they are open!
            E.      Perhaps it would have been permitted to do so only to complete the door-post markers containing verses of the Torah.
            F.      Then if it were permitted to bring things down from a more weighty leave of sanctification to a less weighty level of sanctification, it would be allowed make of a scroll of the Torah that was worn out, or prayerbox [tefillin] that were worn out door-post markers containing verses of the Torah. the door-post markers containing verses of the Torah? But lo, has it not been taught on Tannaite authority: The law revealed to Moses from God at Sinai is this: scriptural portions in the prayerbox [tefillin] must be written on parchment of high quality, those for the door-post markers may be written on parchment of lower quality. The former is the side of the hide next to the meat of the animal, the latter, the side of the hide next to the hair.
            G.      That is merely a description of the best possible way to carry out the religious duty [but it is not indispensable].
            H.      But lo, has it not been taught on Tannaite authority: if one changed the correct procedure in either case, it is invalid?
            I.      Both cases speak only of the prayerbox [tefillin], but in the one case, he wrote the portions on the side of the hide nearest to the hair, in the other, [32B] he wrote it on the side nearest to the meat of the beast.
            J.      If you prefer, I shall say, the statement, if one changed the correct procedure in either case, it is invalid, frames a conflict of Tannaite statements. For it has been taught on Tannaite authority: If one changed the correct procedure in either case, it is invalid. R. Ahai declares it valid, in the name of R. Ahai b. R. Hanina, and some say, in the name of R. Jacob b. R. Hanina.
            K.      Then if it were permitted to bring things down from a more weighty leave of sanctification to a less weighty level of sanctification, it would be allowed make of a scroll of the Torah that was worn out, or prayerbox [tefillin] that were worn out door-post markers containing verses of the Torah. the door-post markers containing verses of the Torah? But lo, it must be written on ruled lines [but the scriptural parts of the prayerbox [tefillin] are not, so they cannot serve for the doorpost marker]! For said R. Minyumi bar Hilqiah said R. Hama bar Guria said Rab, “Any doorpost market that is not written on lined parchment is invalid.” And R. Minyamin bar Hilqiah in his own name said, “The requirement that a lined parchment be used in the doorpost market is a law revealed to Moses from Sinai.”
            L.      It is a conflict of Tannaite statements. For it has been taught on Tannaite authority: R. Jeremiah says in the name of Our Rabbi, “Prayerbox [tefillin] and doorpost markers may be written not from a master copy but from memory, and they do not require the use of lined parchment.”
            M.      And the decided law is that prayerbox [tefillin] do not require the use of a lined parchment, and the doorpost marker does require the use of a lined parchment, and both this and that may be written not from a master copy but from memory. How come? Because these are things that people know by heart perfectly well.
            II.30 A.      Said R. Helbo, “I saw R. Huna, planning to take a seat on a couch on which a scroll of the Torah law, invert a utensil on the ground, put the scroll on it, and then take a seat on the couch. He took the position that it is forbidden to sit on a couch on which a scroll of the Torah is lying. And he differs from Rabbah bar bar Hannah.”
            B.      For said Rabbah bar bar Hannah said R. Yohanan, “It is permitted to sit on a couch on which a scroll of the Torah is lying.”
            C.      “And should someone murmur to you [to contradict you], ‘There is the case in which R. Eleazar who was sitting on his bad and remembered that a scroll of the Torah was lying on it, so he slipped off and took a seat on the ground, so it appeared as though he had been bitten by a snake,’ [you may reply to him,] ‘In that case, the scroll of the Torah in fact was lying on the ground.’ ”
            II.31 A.      Said R. Judah said Samuel, “If one wrote the doorpost marker in the form of a letter, it is invalid.”
            B.      How come?
            C.      We appeal to the analogy formed by verbal connection through the use of the word “writing” both here and also in connection with the scroll of the Torah [at Dt. 6:9, Ex. 17:14, respectively].
            II.32 A.      And said R. Judah said Samuel, “If one hung the doorpost marker on a stick [and attached the stick to the doorpost], it is invalid.”
            B.      How come?
            C.      We require that it be “upon your gates” (Dt. 6:9).
               D.      So too it has been taught on Tannaite authority:
               E.      If one hung it on a stick or attached it to the wall behind the door, it brings danger, and no religious duty is accomplished.
               F.      Members of the household of King Munbaz would do it that way when they stayed at an inn as a memorial of the doorpost market.
            II.33 A.      And said R. Judah said Samuel, “The religious duty is to locate it within the contained space of the door [on the side where the door shuts, within the framework of the doorpost (Cashdan)].”
               B.      That’s obvious, for the All-Merciful has said, “upon your gates” (Dt. 6:9).
               C.      It might have entered your mind that, since said Raba, “The religious duty is to place it [33A] in the handbreadth nearest to the street,” the further it is from the house, the better. So we are informed to the contrary.
            II.34 A.      And said R. Judah said Samuel, “If one wrote it in two columns, it is invalid.”
            B.      An objection was raised: If one wrote it in two columns and put it on two doorposts, it is invalid. Lo, if it was placed on a single one, it is valid.
            C.      The sense is, “such that it could be placed on two doorposts.”
            II.35 A.      And said R. Judah said Samuel, “In regard to the doorpost market, be guided by the hinge.”
               B.      What is the “hinge”?
               C.      Said R. Ada, “The sockets [Cashdan: for the pin of the hinge].”
            D.      How so?
            E.      For instance, if there is a door between two rooms, one for men, one for women [Cashdan: the mezuzah must be affixed to the right doorpost as one enters the house; in this case, where one door communicates between two rooms, while each room has its own door leading to the street, it is difficult to establish which room leads into the other, and on which doorpost of this door the mezuzah is to be fixed. The answer is, that side of the door where the sockets for the doorpin are placed is considered to be the inside. Accordingly, the mezuzah must be affixed to the right doorpost as on enters the house on the inside of which the sockets are found.]
               II.36 A.      The exilarch built a house and said to R. Nahman, “Put up the doorpost market for me.”
               B.      Said R. Nahman, “First put the doorposts in place.”
            II.37 A.      Said R. Judah said Rab, “If one affixed it like a bolt [horizontally], it is invalid.
            B.      Is that so? Now lo, when R. Isaac bar Joseph came, he said, “All of the doorpost markets in the household of Rabbi were affixed in the manner of a bolt, and the one on the door through which Rabbi would enter the study hall had no doorpost market at all”!
            C.      No contradiction! In the one case, it was attached horizontally, in the other, it was bent at a right angle.
            D.      Is that so [that the one on the door through which Rabbi would enter the study hall had no doorpost market at all]? Now lo the door through which R. Huna would enter the study hall did have a doorpost marker.
            E.      But that was the door that was used more often than the others, and said R. Judah said Rab, “The rule of the doorpost market is that one has to place it on the door that is most commonly used.”
            II.38 A.      Said R. Zira said R. Mattena said Samuel, “The religious duty of the door marker is to place it at the start of the upper third of the doorpost.”
            B.      And R. Huna said, “One raises it above the ground by a handbreadth and removes it from the lintel by a handbreadth, but otherwise the entire area of the doorpost is suitable for affixing the door marker.”
            C.      An objection was raised: “One raises it above the ground by a handbreadth and removes it from the lintel by a handbreadth, but otherwise the entire area of the doorpost is suitable for affixing the door marker,” the words of R. Judah.
            D.      R. Yosé says, “ ‘And you shall bind them’ (Dt. 6:8), ‘and you shall write them’ (Dt. 6:9)—just as the thing that is bound has to be high up [namely, the prayerbox [tefillin], so the thing that is written must be placed high up.”
            E.      Now, from the perspective of R. Huna, there is no problem, since he has made his ruling in accord with the position of R. Judah. But as for Samuel, in accord with whose position has he made his ruling? It can be neither in accord with R. Judah nor in accord with R. Yosé.
            F.      Said R. Huna b. R. Nathan, “In point of fact, his position accords with that of R. Yosé. [33B] And what is the meaning of, to place it at the start of the upper third of the doorpost? It is that one should not put it lower than a third of the doorpost away from the lintel.”
            II.39 A.      Said Raba, “The religious duty is to place it in the handbreadth nearest to the street.”
            B.      What is the operative consideration here?
            C.      Rabbis say, “So that one will meet a religious duty as soon as one returns home.”
            D.      R. Hanina of Sura says, “So that it will afford protection to the whole of the house.”
            II.40 A.      Said R. Hanina, “Come and take note that the trait of the Holy One, blessed be he, is not the same as the trait of a mortal. The mortal trait is that the king is seated on the throne inside, and the people guard him outside.
            B.      “But the trait of the Holy One, blessed be he, is not the same. His servants take up their seats inside, and he guards them from the outside, as it is said, ‘The Lord your keeper, the Lord is the shade on your right hand’ (Ps. 121:5).”
            II.41 A.      R. Joseph b. Raba in the name of Raba expounded, “If one set the doorpost market within the doorpost to the depth of a handbreadth, it is invalid.”
            B.      May we say that the following supports that view:
            C.      if one put it in the post of the door or added another frame, and it was a depth of a handbreadth, another doorpost marker is necessary, but if the depth is less, no other one is required.
            D.      When that Tannaite formulation was set forth, it concerned a door behind a door.
            E.      Lo, that matter has been dealt with explicitly: if there was a door behind a door to a depth of a handbreadth, another doorpost marker is necessary, but if the depth is less, no other one is required.
            F.      The purpose was to spell out, “how so?” [That is, to provide an example.]
            II.42 A.      A Tannaite formulation: if one set up a doorframe of hollow reeds, he may cut away a length of reed and put the mezuzah in the hole.”
            B.      Said R. Aha bar Raba, “That rule applies only in a case in which one set up the doorframe and only then cut away the hole and left the market therein. But if to begin with one cut the hole and put the market therein and only then set up the reed as a door post, it is invalid. Scripture is clear: ‘you will make,’ but not use what is ready-made.”
            II.43 A.      And said Raba, “Doors that are faulty are exempt from the requirement of having a doorpost marker.”
               B.      What is the definition of doors that are faulty?
               C.      There was a disagreement on that matter between R. Rihumi and Abba Yosé.
               D.      One said, “The ones that have no lintel.”
               E.      The other said, “The ones that have no side posts.”
            II.44 A.      Said Rabbah bar Shila said R. Hisda, “A hall closed on three sides and open on the fourth is exempt from the requirement of a doorpost marker, because it does not have doorposts.”
            B.      Then if it has doorposts, it would require one. But is it not the fact that the posts are made only to help hold up the ceiling!
            C.      This is the sense of the statement at hand: A hall closed on three sides and open on the fourth, even though it has door posts, is exempt from the requirement of a doorpost marker, because the doorposts are made only to support the ceiling.”
            D.      Said Abbayye, “I myself have seen that while the halls in the master’s house have posts, they have no doorpost markers. That is clearly because he holds that the posts are serving only as supports for the ceiling.”
            E.      An objection was raised: A lodge, a room with three walls and open at the fourth side, and a balcony, all require a doorpost marker.
            F.      At issue here is a room with three walls and open at the fourth side of a school house.
            G.      But a room with three walls and open at the fourth side of a school house is a perfectly proper room!
            H.      At issue is a Roman a room with three walls and open at the fourth side.
            II.45 A.      Said Rahbah said R. Judah, “An entrance lodge has to have two door post markers.”
               B.      What is the meaning of an entrance lodge?
               C.      Said R. Pappa the elder in the name of Rab, “It is a gate house with one door opening onto to a courtyard, the other on to dwelling houses.”
            II.46 A.      Our rabbis have taught on Tannaite authority:
            B.      A gatehouse that leads into a garden and thence to an out house
            C.      R. Yosé says, “It is classified as an outhouse.”
            D.      And sages say, “It is classified as the gatehouse [and requires a doorpost marker].”
            E.      Both Rab and Samuel say, “If the door opens from the garden to the house, all parties concur that it is liable. How come? It obviously forms the entry into the house. Where there is a difference, it concerns a door that opens from the house into the garden. One master holds that the outhouse is principal, the other, the garden is principal. [Thus sages treat it as exempt.]” ”
            F.      Both Rabbah and R. Joseph say, “If the door opens from the house into the garden, all parties concur that it is exempt. How come? It obviously forms the entry into the garden. Where there is a difference, it concerns a door that opens from the garden into the house. One master holds that the it serves for going into the house, the other, that it is there wholly for the sake of the garden, [34A] and that is the intention in making it.”
            G.      Abbayye and Raba acted in accord with Rabbah and R. Joseph, and R. Ashi acted in accord with Rab and Samuel, imposing the more strict view.
            H.      The decided law is in accord with Rab and Samuel, imposing the more strict view.
            II.47 A.      It has been stated:
            B.      A staircase open from a downstairs room to the upper chamber [with a door closing the foot of the stairs]—
            C.      Said R. Huna, “If it has only a single door, it has to have a single doorpost market, but if it has two doors [bottom and top floors], it has to have two of them.”
            D.      Said R. Pappa, “That statement of R. Huna’s leads to the inference a room that has four doors has to have four doorpost markers.”
            E.      So what else is new?
            F.      It is necessary to make that observation to make the point that even though only one of the doors is ordinarily used, all four of them have to be marked.
            II.48 A.      Said Amemar, “A door in the corner has to have a doorpost marker.”
            B.      Said R. Ashi to Amemar, “But lo, it has no posts!”
            C.      He said to him, “[The extremities of the two walls to which the door is attached (Cashdan)] form the doorposts.”
            II.49 A.      R. Pappa came to the house of Mar Samuel and saw a door that had only one door post on the left side, to which a doorpost marker was affixed. He said to him, “In accord with what authority is the arrangement made? It is in accord with R. Meir. Now I should readily concede that R. Meir held that a doorpost marker was required at the right side, but has he said that it is required at the left side?”
            B.      What is the source of the ruling? It is as has been taught on Tannaite authority:
            C.      “Upon the doorposts of your house” (Dt. 6:9)—on the right side as you enter the house.
            D.      You say that it is to be at the right side. But perhaps it is only at the left side?
            E.      Scripture states, “[Upon the doorposts of] your house” (Dt. 6:9).
            F.      So how does the cited clause yield the besought proposition?
            G.      Said Rabbah, “ ‘As you enter’ bears the sense of the right side, for when someone walks into a house, it is with the right foot first.”
            H.      R. Samuel bar Aha before R. Pappa in the name of Raba bar Ulla said, “It is from the following: ‘And Jehoiada the priest took a chest and bored a holy in the lid of it and put it beside the altar on the right side as one comes into the house of the Lord, and the priests that kept the threshold put therein all the money that was brought into the house of the Lord’ (2 Kgs. 10:12).”
               II.50 A.      And how in fact do we know R. Meir’s position? It is as has been taught on Tannaite authority:
               B.      A house that has only one doorpost is liable to the placement of a doorpost marker—
               C.      R. Meir. declares liable.
               D.      And sages exempt.
                 E.      What is the scriptural basis for the position of sages?
                 F.      Scripture refers to “doorposts.”
                 G.      What is the scriptural basis for the position of R. Meir?
                 H.      It is in line with the following, which has been taught on Tannaite authority:
                 I.      “ ‘… doorposts …’—I infer that the smallest number of doorposts, in the plural, can be only two. Then when Scripture refers to ‘doorposts’ in the second reference to the same matter [at Dt. 11:20], for which there is no obvious necessity, what we come up with is an augmentative clause following another augmentative clause, and where there is an augmentative clause following another augmentative clause, the sole upshot is to impose a limitation. [Cashdan: for here each expression by itself indicates plurality, and since it is repeated, Scripture thereby intimates that the condition of plurality is no longer essential.] Accordingly, Scripture has imposed a limitation on the requirement of the doorpost marker,” the words of R. Ishmael.
                 J.      R. Aqiba says, “That is hardly required, for it is written, ‘upon the lintel and the two sideposts’ (Ex. 12:23)—there is hardly need for Scripture to refer to ‘two.…’ So why does Scripture refer to ‘two …’? This serves as the generative analogy for every passage in which reference is made to doorposts. It bears the meaning that only one is subject to discussion, unless Scripture explicitly says, ‘two.’ ”
            II.51 A.      Our rabbis have taught on Tannaite authority:
            B.      “And you shall write them” (Dt. 6:9)—
            C.      is it possible to suppose that one should write the scriptural portions that go into the doormarkers on the stones of the house?
            D.      Here we find a reference to “writing,” and elsewhere we find a usage of the word “writing.” Just as elsewhere, the writing is to be on a scroll, so here too it is to be on a scroll.
            E.      Maybe you should take this route:
            F.      Here we find a reference to “writing,” and elsewhere we find a usage of the word “writing.” Just as elsewhere, the writing is to be on stones, so here too it is to be on stones.
            G.      Now let us see which is the correct base-analogy? We should derive the meaning of “writing” from a reference to “writing” that pertains to all generations to come for the sense of a reference to “writing” that pertains to all generations to come, and we should not derive the meaning of “writing” from a reference to “writing” that does not pertain to all generations to come for the sense of a reference to “writing” that pertains to all generations to come.
            H.      And the scroll must be written with ink: “Then Baruch answered them, He pronounced all these words to me with his mouth, and I wrote them with ink in the book” (Jer. 36:18).
            II.52 A.      Said R. Aha b. Raba to R. Ashi, “Scripture has said, ‘upon the doorposts,’ and you maintain that we derive the sense of the word ‘writing’ here from the meaning of the word ‘writing’ there [that it should be on a scroll]?”
            B.      “Scripture has said, ‘and you shall write them,’ meaning, writing that is flawless, and then, put it ‘on your doorposts.’ Now since Scripture has said, ‘and you shall write them’ [with the sense: on a scroll], what need do I have to go looking for verbal analogies such as have been proposed? Were it not for the availability of the verbal analogy, I might have suppose that one may write it on a stone and then set up the stone on the threshold as the doorpost. So we are informed that is not the case.”
            III.1 A.      The four portions [of Scripture] which are in prayerbox [tefillin] [Dt. 6:4A, 11:13–21, Ex. 13:1–10, 11–16] impair the validity of one another, and even [the shape of] one letter impairs their validity.
            B.      That’s self-evident! What else is new!
            C.      Said R. Judah said Rab, “The law was required, specifically, to deal with the case of the tittle of the letter Y.”
            D.      So What else is new!
            E.      Rather, it is in accord with this other statement that said R. Judah said Rab. For said R. Judah said Rab, “Any letter that is not surrounded on all four sides by a space of parchment has been invalidly incised.”


Jacob Neusner, vol. 19, The Babylonian Talmud: A Translation and Commentary, 170-90 (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2011).

Thank you, Beloved.