18a.1
引密释纳
——把板从井往外挪、把所围之地放宽多少都可,只须他在双板之间多添几片竖板。拉比犹大 说:所围之地放宽以二 塞亚之地 为止,就是五千平方肘。
-
——把板从井往外挪、把所围之地放宽多少都可,只须他在双板之间多添几片竖板。
to distance the boards from the well and expand the enclosed area by any amount, i.e., as much as one wishes, provided that he increases the number of upright boards between the double posts.
-
拉比犹大 说:所围之地放宽以二 塞亚之地 为止,就是五千平方肘。
Rabbi Yehuda says: The partitioned area may be expanded up to an area of two beit se’a, which is an area of five thousand square cubits.
18a.2
引密释纳
众拉比对他说:他们说二 塞亚之地 之限,单是就园子、或就那存柴存杂物的 围场 说的。若是 牲栏、或 牛棚、或后院、或门前的院子,纵有五 歌珥之地、甚至十 歌珥之地,也是许的。板也可以往外挪、把所围之地放宽多少都可,只须在双板之间多添几片竖板。
-
众拉比对他说:他们说二 塞亚之地 之限,单是就园子、或就那存柴存杂物的 围场 说的。
The Rabbis said to him: They only spoke of an area of two beit se’a with regard to a garden or an enclosure used for storing wood, scrap, and the like [karpef].
-
若是 牲栏、或 牛棚、或后院、或门前的院子,纵有五 歌珥之地、甚至十 歌珥之地,也是许的。
But if it was a pen [dir], or a stable [sahar], or a backyard, or a courtyard in front of the house, even if it had an area of five beit kor or even ten beit kor, it is permitted.
-
板也可以往外挪、把所围之地放宽多少都可,只须在双板之间多添几片竖板。
And it is permitted to distance the boards and expand the enclosed area by any amount, provided that one increases the upright boards between the double posts.
18a.3
引证
革玛拉 提说:我们要说这条密释纳不依 哈纳尼亚 的意思,因为有一条 《巴拉伊塔》 教说:人可以在旱井四围立竖板,在商旅四围拉绳;哈纳尼亚 却说:旱井可以拉绳,不可立竖板。
-
革玛拉 提说:我们要说这条密释纳不依 哈纳尼亚 的意思,因为有一条 《巴拉伊塔》 教说:人可以在旱井四围立竖板,在商旅四围拉绳;哈纳尼亚 却说:旱井可以拉绳,不可立竖板。
The Gemara suggests: Let us say that the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of Ḥananya, as it was taught in a baraita: One may arrange upright boards around a water cistern and ropes around a caravan. Ḥananya disagrees and says: One may set up ropes for a cistern, but not upright boards.
18a.4
反驳
革玛拉 驳这一说:你纵说这条密释纳是依 哈纳尼亚 的意思教的,蓄雨水的旱井有它自己的律——那水到底要用尽,竖板就成了无用的;泉井又有它自己的律——那水源源不断,竖板一直用得着。
-
革玛拉 驳这一说:你纵说这条密释纳是依 哈纳尼亚 的意思教的,蓄雨水的旱井有它自己的律——那水到底要用尽,竖板就成了无用的;泉井又有它自己的律——那水源源不断,竖板一直用得着。
The Gemara rejects this suggestion: Even if you say that the mishna was taught in accordance with the opinion of Ḥananya, a cistern of collected rain water has a discrete law, as the water will eventually be consumed and the upright boards will become unnecessary; and a well of spring water has a discrete law, as the water is constantly renewed and the upright boards will remain useful.
18a.5
引证
有人把上头那一段传作另一样:那条 《巴拉伊塔》 既不教说「哈纳尼亚 说:旱井四围可以拉绳,泉井四围可以立竖板」,可见依 哈纳尼亚 的意思,旱井与泉井并无分别。两样都是绳可以,竖板不可以。我们要说这条密释纳不依 哈纳尼亚 的意思。
-
有人把上头那一段传作另一样:那条 《巴拉伊塔》 既不教说「哈纳尼亚 说:旱井四围可以拉绳,泉井四围可以立竖板」,可见依 哈纳尼亚 的意思,旱井与泉井并无分别。
Some say a different version of the previous passage: From the fact that the baraita does not teach: Ḥananya says: One may set up ropes around a water cistern and boards around a well, by inference, according to the opinion of Ḥananya, there is no difference between a cistern and a well.
-
两样都是绳可以,竖板不可以。
In both cases, ropes are indeed permitted, whereas upright boards are not.
-
我们要说这条密释纳不依 哈纳尼亚 的意思。
Let us say the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of Ḥananya.
18a.6
反驳
革玛拉 驳这个讲法:你纵说这条密释纳是依 哈纳尼亚 的意思教的,他不过是答头一位 坦拿 所说的话;头一位 坦拿 既只说了旱井,哈纳尼亚 也就不必把自己的意思讲全、分出旱井与泉井来。
-
革玛拉 驳这个讲法:你纵说这条密释纳是依 哈纳尼亚 的意思教的,他不过是答头一位 坦拿 所说的话;头一位 坦拿 既只说了旱井,哈纳尼亚 也就不必把自己的意思讲全、分出旱井与泉井来。
The Gemara rejects this argument: Even if you say that the mishna was taught in accordance with the opinion of Ḥananya, he was only replying to that which the first tanna had said; since the first tanna had spoken only of a cistern, there was no need for Ḥananya to fully clarify his own position and distinguish between a cistern and a well.
18a.7
引证
革玛拉 又提说:我们要说这条密释纳不依 拉比阿奇瓦 的意思。因为我们在一条密释纳里学过:众人共用的泉井、众人共用的旱井、并私人的泉井,人都可以为它们立竖板;至于私人的旱井,就须为它立一道十掌高的合式隔断:这是 拉比阿奇瓦 的话。
-
革玛拉 又提说:我们要说这条密释纳不依 拉比阿奇瓦 的意思。
The Gemara further suggests: Let us say the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva.
-
因为我们在一条密释纳里学过:众人共用的泉井、众人共用的旱井、并私人的泉井,人都可以为它们立竖板;至于私人的旱井,就须为它立一道十掌高的合式隔断:这是 拉比阿奇瓦 的话。
As we learned in a mishna: In each of the cases of a public well, a public cistern, and a private well, one may arrange upright boards for them, but in the case of a private cistern, one must establish a proper partition for it ten handbreadths high; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva.
18a.8
引证
这里密释纳却教说:人可以为泉井立竖板——由此可推:泉井,是许的;旱井,就不许。这与 拉比阿奇瓦 的意思相反——他以为众人共用的旱井也可以立竖板。
-
这里密释纳却教说:人可以为泉井立竖板——由此可推:泉井,是许的;旱井,就不许。
Whereas here in the mishna it teaches: One may arrange upright boards for a well, from which one may infer that for a well, yes, it is permitted to use posts, but for a cistern, no, it is not permitted.
-
这与 拉比阿奇瓦 的意思相反——他以为众人共用的旱井也可以立竖板。
This is opposed to Rabbi Akiva’s opinion, which maintains that posts may be arranged for a public cistern.
18a.9
反驳
革玛拉 也驳这个讲法:你纵说这条密释纳是依 拉比阿奇瓦 的意思,密释纳里那位 坦拿 所教的是泉井那一样——那一样他可以单举,因为不拘是众人共用的、还是私人的,一概都许。至于蓄雨水的旱井那一样,他不曾单举,因为那一样单举不得:众人共用的旱井与私人的旱井有分别。所以从这里证不出他与 拉比阿奇瓦 相争。
-
革玛拉 也驳这个讲法:你纵说这条密释纳是依 拉比阿奇瓦 的意思,密释纳里那位 坦拿 所教的是泉井那一样——那一样他可以单举,因为不拘是众人共用的、还是私人的,一概都许。
The Gemara rejects this argument as well: Even if you say that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, the tanna of the mishna teaches the case of a well of spring water, which he can teach in a distinct manner because there is no difference whether it belongs to the public and there is no difference whether it belongs to an individual, as it is always permitted.
-
至于蓄雨水的旱井那一样,他不曾单举,因为那一样单举不得:众人共用的旱井与私人的旱井有分别。
However, he did not teach the case of a cistern containing collected rain water, which he could not teach in a distinct manner because there is a difference between a public cistern and a private one.
-
所以从这里证不出他与 拉比阿奇瓦 相争。
However, it cannot be proven from here that he disagrees with Rabbi Akiva.
18a.10
引证
革玛拉 又提说:我们要说这条密释纳不依 拉比犹大·本·巴巴 的意思,因为我们在一条密释纳里学过:拉比犹大·本·巴巴 说:人只可为众人共用的泉井立竖板;这里密释纳却说「为诸井」。用了多数,就含着说:不拘那井是众人共用的,还是私人的。
-
革玛拉 又提说:我们要说这条密释纳不依 拉比犹大·本·巴巴 的意思,因为我们在一条密释纳里学过:拉比犹大·本·巴巴 说:人只可为众人共用的泉井立竖板;这里密释纳却说「为诸井」。
The Gemara further suggests: Let us say the mishna is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava, as we learned in a mishna: Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava says: One may only arrange upright boards for a public well, whereas here the mishna states: For wells.
-
用了多数,就含着说:不拘那井是众人共用的,还是私人的。
The plural term implies that there is no difference if the well belongs to the public, and there is no difference if the well belongs to an individual.
18a.11
反驳
革玛拉 也驳这一路的推法:你纵说这条密释纳是依 拉比犹大·本·巴巴 的意思,它说「诸井」是指什么呢?是泛说诸井,那位 坦拿 的意思却只把众人共用的井包在内。
-
革玛拉 也驳这一路的推法:你纵说这条密释纳是依 拉比犹大·本·巴巴 的意思,它说「诸井」是指什么呢?
The Gemara also rejects this line of reasoning: Even if you say that the mishna is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava, to what is the mishna referring when it says wells?
-
是泛说诸井,那位 坦拿 的意思却只把众人共用的井包在内。
It is referring to wells in general, but the tanna means to include only public wells.
18a.12
解答
密释纳里提过 双板 一语。革玛拉 问:那是什么呢?拉比耶利米·本·以利亚撒 说:是「דְּיוֹ עַמּוּדִין」——两根柱子合在一处,成一副角板。
-
密释纳里提过 双板 一语。革玛拉 问:那是什么呢?
The mishna had mentioned double posts [deyomadin]: The Gemara asks: What are deyomadin?
-
拉比耶利米·本·以利亚撒 说:是「דְּיוֹ עַמּוּדִין」——两根柱子合在一处,成一副角板。
Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar said: Two [deyo] posts [amudin], which are put together to create a single corner piece.
18a.13
引证
革玛拉 既引了 拉比耶利米·本·以利亚撒 论「דְּיוֹ」这前缀的话,就接着引他别的几句。「两、给受绝罚的人、称赞、养、毁、属性、三」——这几个字是下头 拉比耶利米·本·以利亚撒 那几句话的记诵之词。
-
革玛拉 既引了 拉比耶利米·本·以利亚撒 论「דְּיוֹ」这前缀的话,就接着引他别的几句。
Having cited Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar’s statement with reference to the prefix deyo, the Gemara cites other statements of his.
-
「两、给受绝罚的人、称赞、养、毁、属性、三」——这几个字是下头 拉比耶利米·本·以利亚撒 那几句话的记诵之词。
Two, to one who was ostracized, praise, nourishment, ruin, attribute, three, are mnemonics for the following statements by Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar.
18a.14
引证
我们在那边一条密释纳里学过:拉比犹大 说:凡劣等的无花果都免分什一,纵是 未净什一税食物 也免——因为卖的人纵是 地之民,也断然早已从其中分过什一了,所分的既极少,损失有限;惟 两熟之树 不在此例。革玛拉 问:两熟之树 是什么呢?乌拉 说:是一年结两次 果子 的树——「דְּיוֹ」就是「两」。
-
我们在那边一条密释纳里学过:拉比犹大 说:凡劣等的无花果都免分什一,纵是 未净什一税食物 也免——因为卖的人纵是 地之民,也断然早已从其中分过什一了,所分的既极少,损失有限;惟 两熟之树 不在此例。
We learned there in a mishna: Rabbi Yehuda says: All inferior figs are exempt from being tithed, even if they are of doubtfully tithed produce [demai], as even if the seller is an am ha’aretz, he must certainly have already separated tithes from them, since the loss incurred by tithing is negligible, except for deyufra.
-
革玛拉 问:两熟之树 是什么呢?
The Gemara asks: What is deyufra?
-
乌拉 说:是一年结两次 果子 的树——「דְּיוֹ」就是「两」。
Ulla said: A tree that yields two [deyo] harvests of fruit [peirot] each year.
18a.15
引证
拉比耶利米·本·以利亚撒 又说:亚当 起初受造时有两个面,一为男,一为女。正如经上说:「你在我前后环绕我,按手在我身上」(诗篇 139:5)。照样,经上又写着:「耶和华神就用那 胁侧——他从那人身上所取的——造成一个女人,带她到那人跟前」(创世记 2:22)。拉夫 与 撒母耳 为 胁侧 一字之义相争:一位说,那是女子的面,神就从那面造了夏娃;一位说,亚当 受造时带着一条 尾,神把它从他身上取下来,从它造了夏娃。
-
拉比耶利米·本·以利亚撒 又说:亚当 起初受造时有两个面,一为男,一为女。
Rabbi Yirmeya ben Elazar also said: Adam was first created with two [deyo] faces, one male and the other female.
-
正如经上说:「你在我前后环绕我,按手在我身上」(诗篇 139:5)。
As it is stated: “You have formed me behind and before, and laid Your hand upon me” (Psalms 139:5).
-
照样,经上又写着:「耶和华神就用那 胁侧——他从那人身上所取的——造成一个女人,带她到那人跟前」(创世记 2:22)。
Similarly, it is written: “And the tzela, which the Lord, God, had taken from the man, He made a woman, and brought her unto the man” (Genesis 2:22).
-
拉夫 与 撒母耳 为 胁侧 一字之义相争:一位说,那是女子的面,神就从那面造了夏娃;一位说,亚当 受造时带着一条 尾,神把它从他身上取下来,从它造了夏娃。
Rav and Shmuel disagree over the meaning of the word tzela: One said: It means a female face, from which God created Eve; and one said: Adam was created with a tail [zanav], which God removed from him and from which He created Eve.
18a.16
反驳
革玛拉 问:依那说 胁侧 是「面」的,经上写「你在我前后环绕我(צַרְתָּנִי)」讲得通;然而依那说 胁侧 是「尾」的,「你在我前后环绕我」这一句又是什么意思呢?
-
革玛拉 问:依那说 胁侧 是「面」的,经上写「你在我前后环绕我(צַרְתָּנִי)」讲得通;然而依那说 胁侧 是「尾」的,「你在我前后环绕我」这一句又是什么意思呢?
The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who says that tzela means face; it is understandable that it is written: “You have formed me [tzartani] behind and before.” However, according to the one who says that tzela means tail, what is meant by the verse: “You have formed me [tzartani] behind and before”?
18a.17
解答
革玛拉 答:那一句当作训诲的话来解,正如 拉比阿米 的意思——拉比阿米 说:「在后」是说 亚当 在创造之工的末后才造;「在前」是说他在受罚上是头一个。
-
革玛拉 答:那一句当作训诲的话来解,正如 拉比阿米 的意思——拉比阿米 说:「在后」是说 亚当 在创造之工的末后才造;「在前」是说他在受罚上是头一个。
The Gemara answers that this verse is to be understood as bearing a moral message, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Ami, as Rabbi Ami said: Behind means Adam was created at the end of the act of creation; and before means that he was first for punishment.
18a.18
反驳
革玛拉 问:亚当「在后」、就是在创造之工上末后,这讲得通——他到第六日、安息日前夕才造。然而「在前」、就是在受罚上是头一个,这是什么意思呢?你若说他因知识树那一罪所受的咒诅是头一个,那就难了。岂不是蛇先受咒诅,随后夏娃受咒诅,末了才是 亚当 受咒诅么?
-
革玛拉 问:亚当「在后」、就是在创造之工上末后,这讲得通——他到第六日、安息日前夕才造。
The Gemara asks: Granted, it is understandable that Adam was behind, or last, in the act of creation, meaning that he was not created until the sixth day, Shabbat eve.
-
然而「在前」、就是在受罚上是头一个,这是什么意思呢?
However, before, or first, for punishment, what does this mean?
-
你若说他因知识树那一罪所受的咒诅是头一个,那就难了。
If you say that he was punished first because of the curse pronounced in the wake of the sin involving the Tree of Knowledge, there is a difficulty.
-
岂不是蛇先受咒诅,随后夏娃受咒诅,末了才是 亚当 受咒诅么?
Wasn’t the snake was cursed first, and afterward Eve was cursed, and only at the end was Adam cursed?
18a.19
解答
所以那是指洪水之罚说的,因为经上写着:「凡地上各类的活物,连人带牲畜、昆虫,以及空中的飞鸟,都从地上除灭了」(创世记 7:23)。这就见得那一罚是从人起头的。
-
所以那是指洪水之罚说的,因为经上写着:「凡地上各类的活物,连人带牲畜、昆虫,以及空中的飞鸟,都从地上除灭了」(创世记 7:23)。
Rather, this refers to the punishment of the Flood, as it is written: “And He blotted out every living substance which was upon the face of the ground, both man and cattle, creeping things and fowl of the heaven” (Genesis 7:23).
-
这就见得那一罚是从人起头的。
This indicates that the punishment began with man.
18a.20
反驳
革玛拉 问:依那说夏娃本是 亚当 的一面、一侧的,经上写「耶和华神就造(וַיִּיצֶר)了人」(创世记 2:7)讲得通。那「造」字里连写两个 י,一为 亚当,一为夏娃。然而依那说夏娃是从一条尾造的,「造」字连写两个 י 又要说明什么呢?
-
革玛拉 问:依那说夏娃本是 亚当 的一面、一侧的,经上写「耶和华神就造(וַיִּיצֶר)了人」(创世记 2:7)讲得通。
The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was originally a face or side of Adam; it is understandable that it is written: “Then the Lord God formed [vayyitzer] man” (Genesis 2:7).
-
那「造」字里连写两个 י,一为 亚当,一为夏娃。
Vayyitzer is written with a double yod, one for Adam and one for Eve.
-
然而依那说夏娃是从一条尾造的,「造」字连写两个 י 又要说明什么呢?
However, according to the one who said that Eve was created from a tail, what is conveyed by spelling vayyitzer with a double yod?
18a.21
解答
革玛拉 答:这一句当作训诲的话来解,正如 拉比西缅·本·帕齐 的意思——拉比西缅·本·帕齐 说:这是要人时时对自己说的一句话:我若行造我者的旨意,我因我的私欲(יִצְרִי)有祸;我若行私欲的旨意,我因造我的(יוֹצְרִי)有祸。
-
革玛拉 答:这一句当作训诲的话来解,正如 拉比西缅·本·帕齐 的意思——拉比西缅·本·帕齐 说:这是要人时时对自己说的一句话:我若行造我者的旨意,我因我的私欲(יִצְרִי)有祸;我若行私欲的旨意,我因造我的(יוֹצְרִי)有祸。
The Gemara responds: This is interpreted homiletically, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi, as Rabbi Shimon ben Pazi said: This comes to emphasize that which one says to himself in every circumstance: Woe unto me from my evil inclination [yetzer] if I perform the will of my Maker, and woe to me from my Maker [Yotzri] if I perform the will of my inclination.
18a.22
反驳
革玛拉 问:依那说夏娃是一个面的,经上写「他造男造女,赐福给他们,在他们受造的日子称他们为人」(创世记 5:2)讲得通——这就见得从起初受造之时,神就给他造了两个面,一为男,一为女。然而依那说夏娃是从一条尾造的,「他造男造女」这一句又是什么意思呢?
-
革玛拉 问:依那说夏娃是一个面的,经上写「他造男造女,赐福给他们,在他们受造的日子称他们为人」(创世记 5:2)讲得通——这就见得从起初受造之时,神就给他造了两个面,一为男,一为女。
The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was a face, it is understandable that it is written: “Male and female, He created them, and blessed them, and called their name Man in the day when they were created” (Genesis 5:2), which indicates that from the very beginning of their creation, He fashioned two faces, one for the male and the other for the female.
-
然而依那说夏娃是从一条尾造的,「他造男造女」这一句又是什么意思呢?
However, according to the one who said that Eve was created from a tail, what is the meaning of the verse: “Male and female, He created them”?
18a.23
解答
革玛拉 答:这可以照 拉比阿巴胡 的意思来解,因为 拉比阿巴胡 把两处经文相较:一处写着「他造男造女」,是多数;一处又写着「神就照着自己的形像造人,就是照着神的形像造他」(创世记 1:27),是单数。起初神心里所想的是造两个,末了实在只造了一个。
-
革玛拉 答:这可以照 拉比阿巴胡 的意思来解,因为 拉比阿巴胡 把两处经文相较:一处写着「他造男造女」,是多数;一处又写着「神就照着自己的形像造人,就是照着神的形像造他」(创世记 1:27),是单数。
The Gemara answers: It can be explained in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Abbahu, as Rabbi Abbahu raised a contradiction between the verses: On the one hand it is written: “Male and female, He created them,” in the plural, and on the other hand it is written: “So God created man in His own image, for in the image of God He created him” (Genesis 1:27), in the singular.
-
起初神心里所想的是造两个,末了实在只造了一个。
At first, the thought entered God’s mind to create two, and ultimately, only one was actually created.
18a.24
反驳
革玛拉 问:依那说夏娃是一个面的,经上写「他取了他的一侧,又在原处把肉合起来」(创世记 2:21)讲得通。然而依那说夏娃是从一条尾造的,「又在原处把肉合起来」这一句又是什么意思呢?
-
革玛拉 问:依那说夏娃是一个面的,经上写「他取了他的一侧,又在原处把肉合起来」(创世记 2:21)讲得通。
The Gemara asks: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was a face, it is understandable that it is written: “And He took one of his sides and closed up the flesh in its place” (Genesis 2:21).
-
然而依那说夏娃是从一条尾造的,「又在原处把肉合起来」这一句又是什么意思呢?
However, according to the one who said that Eve was created from a tail, what is meant by the verse: “And He closed up the flesh in its place”?
18a.25
解答
拉夫泽维德 说——有人说是 拉比耶利米 说的,有人说是 拉夫纳赫曼·巴尔·以撒 说的:那一句所要说的,单是就割开之处说:那里的肉合起来了。
-
拉夫泽维德 说——有人说是 拉比耶利米 说的,有人说是 拉夫纳赫曼·巴尔·以撒 说的:那一句所要说的,单是就割开之处说:那里的肉合起来了。
Rav Zevid said, and some say it was Rabbi Yirmeya, and some say it was Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak: It was necessary to say that the fleshed closed up only with regard to the place of the incision.
18a.26
反驳
革玛拉 又难那一说:依那说夏娃是从一条尾造的,经上写「耶和华神就把那 胁侧 建造起来」(创世记 2:22)讲得通,因为那是全新造起来的。然而依那说夏娃本是一个完全的面、一侧的,「建造」又是什么意思呢?有什么可建造的呢?
-
革玛拉 又难那一说:依那说夏娃是从一条尾造的,经上写「耶和华神就把那 胁侧 建造起来」(创世记 2:22)讲得通,因为那是全新造起来的。
The Gemara challenges the other opinion: Granted, according to the one who said that Eve was created from a tail; it is understandable that it is written: “And the Lord God built the tzela” (Genesis 2:22), as it was a completely new building.
-
然而依那说夏娃本是一个完全的面、一侧的,「建造」又是什么意思呢?
However, according to the one who said that Eve was a complete face or side, what is the meaning of: “And He built”?
-
有什么可建造的呢?
What needed to be built?
18a.27
解答
革玛拉 答:这一句当作训诲的话来解,正如 拉比西缅·本·梅纳西亚 的意思——拉比西缅·本·梅纳西亚 解「耶和华神就把那 胁侧 建造起来」一句说:这是教人,圣者(愿他受颂赞)为夏娃编好了头发,然后带她到 亚当 跟前;因为在沿海诸城,人把编头发叫作「建造」。
-
革玛拉 答:这一句当作训诲的话来解,正如 拉比西缅·本·梅纳西亚 的意思——拉比西缅·本·梅纳西亚 解「耶和华神就把那 胁侧 建造起来」一句说:这是教人,圣者(愿他受颂赞)为夏娃编好了头发,然后带她到 亚当 跟前;因为在沿海诸城,人把编头发叫作「建造」。
The Gemara responds: This must be interpreted homiletically, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Menasya, as Rabbi Shimon ben Menasya interpreted homiletically the verse: “And the Lord God built the tzela.” This verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, braided for Eve her hair, and then brought her to Adam, as in the coastal towns, they call braiding hair building.
18a.28
引证
或者这样解:「耶和华神就建造」一句也可讲作说明夏娃身体的样式,正如 拉夫希斯达 所说——有人说这是一条 《巴拉伊塔》 所教的:这是教人,圣者(愿他受颂赞)造夏娃的身架,如同——
-
或者这样解:「耶和华神就建造」一句也可讲作说明夏娃身体的样式,正如 拉夫希斯达 所说——有人说这是一条 《巴拉伊塔》 所教的:这是教人,圣者(愿他受颂赞)造夏娃的身架,如同——
Alternatively, the verse: “And the Lord God built,” can be understood as a description of Eve’s basic shape, as Rav Ḥisda said, and some say it is taught in a baraita: This verse teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, built Eve like the structure