← 岁首卷总目·第三章 法庭看见了
这不是译本，是辅读层。中文承载文本本身，并逐句标出哪些是塔木德自己的话、 哪些是 施泰因扎尔茨 补入的解释，以及哪些地方翻译必然有所流失。
谢法利亚 的 威廉·戴维森 版用 <b> 标出塔木德原文，其余为
施泰因扎尔茨 补入。下面的比例是逐句从这个标记算出来的，不是判断。
这一面每读 5 句，只有一句以塔木德自己的话为主。把这件事藏起来， 读者会以为自己读的是塔木德；标出来，他才知道自己站在哪里。
（续上）「……你要存心为我吹 羊角号，替我吹。」革玛拉推论：看来 拉比泽拉 以为，替别人吹 羊角号 的人须存心使听者尽本分。
「……你要存心为我吹 羊角号，替我吹。」
Have intent to sound the shofar on my behalf and sound it for me.
革玛拉推论：看来 拉比泽拉 认为，那替别人吹 羊角号 的人，须存心使听者尽他的义务。
The Gemara infers: Apparently, Rabbi Zeira maintains that he who sounds the shofar for others is required to have intent to discharge the hearer’s obligation.
革玛拉从密释纳提出反驳：人若从会堂后面经过，或他的房屋紧挨会堂，听见了 羊角号 的声音或读以斯帖书卷的声音，他若存心尽本分，就尽了本分；若没存心，就没尽。照 拉比泽拉，即便听者存了心又如何？吹的人并没有存心为他吹。若吹者的心意是必需的，那过路的人怎能尽本分？
革玛拉从密释纳提出一个反驳：若一个人正从会堂后面经过，或他的房屋紧挨着会堂，而他听见了 羊角号 的声音，或读以斯帖书卷的声音，他若专心要尽他的义务，他就尽了他的义务；若不然，他就没有尽他的义务。
The Gemara raises an objection from the mishna: If one was passing behind a synagogue, or his house was adjacent to the synagogue, and he heard the sound of the shofar or the sound of the Scroll of Esther being read, if he focused his heart to fulfill his obligation, he has fulfilled his obligation, but if not, he has not fulfilled his obligation.
可以问：照 拉比泽拉，即便听者专了心，那又如何？
It may be asked: And, according to Rabbi Zeira, even if the hearer focused his heart, what of it?
另一个人，就是吹 羊角号 的人，岂不是没有存心为他吹 羊角号 吗？
The other one, i.e., the one sounding the shofar, did not focus his intent to sound the shofar with him in mind?
若吹 羊角号 之人的心意确是必需的，那过路的人怎能尽他的义务？
If indeed the intent of the one sounding the shofar is required, how does the passerby fulfill his obligation?
革玛拉答：这里论的是会众的代表——为全会众吹 羊角号、心里想着众人的人。他不是为某一个人吹，而是代表全会众吹，所以凡听见他吹的都尽了本分。
革玛拉答：我们在这里所处理的，是会众的代表，就是一位为全会众吹 羊角号、心里想着每一个人的人。
The Gemara answers: Here we are dealing with the representative of the community, i.e., one who sounds the shofar for the entire congregation and has everyone in mind.
他不是为某一个人吹，而是代表全会众吹，所以凡听见他吹 羊角号 的人，都尽了他的义务。
He does not sound it for a specific individual, but rather on behalf of the entire community, and therefore anyone who hears him sound the shofar fulfills his obligation.
革玛拉再提反驳，引 《巴拉伊塔》：听 羊角号 的存了心、吹的没存心，或吹的存了心、听的没存心，都没尽本分，须两人都存心。《巴拉伊塔》 把吹者的 哈拉哈 与听者的并列教；由此推知：正如听者为自己听、存心尽自己的本分，吹者也为自己吹、存心尽自己的本分，不是为别人。《巴拉伊塔》 说吹者没存这心，听者就没尽本分；可见吹者若存心为自己吹，就不必存心为别人吹——与 拉比泽拉 相抵。
革玛拉提出另一个反驳：请来听一条 《巴拉伊塔》 里所教的：若听 羊角号 的人存了心，而吹 羊角号 的人没有存心；或者吹 羊角号 的人存了心，而听的人没有存心，他就没有尽他的义务，直到听者与吹者两人都存了心。
The Gemara raises another objection: Come and hear that which was taught in a baraita: If the hearer of the shofar had intent, but the sounder of the shofar did not have intent, or if the sounder of the shofar had intent, but the hearer did not have intent, he has not fulfilled his obligation, until both the hearer and the sounder have intent.
这条 《巴拉伊塔》 以相似的方式，教导论吹 羊角号 之人的 哈拉哈，与论听者的 哈拉哈。
The baraita teaches the halakha governing the sounder of the shofar in similar fashion to the halakha governing the hearer.
由此可以推知：正如听者是为自己而听，存心要尽他自己的义务；同样，吹者也是为自己而吹，存心要尽他自己的义务，而不是别人的。
From this it may be inferred that just as the hearer hears for himself, having intent to fulfill his own obligation, so too, the sounder sounds for himself, having intent to fulfill his own obligation, and not that of others.
而这条 《巴拉伊塔》 教导：若吹者没有这个心意，听者就没有尽他的义务。
And the baraita teaches that if the sounder did not have this intent, the hearer has not fulfilled his obligation.
然而这表明：若吹者存心为自己吹 羊角号，他就不必存心为别人吹它，所以与 拉比泽拉 的意见相抵。
But this indicates that if the sounder had intent to sound the shofar for himself, he need not have intent to sound it for others, therefore contradicting Rabbi Zeira’s opinion.
革玛拉答：这是 坦拿 之争，如 《巴拉伊塔》 所教：听者为自己听，吹者照常吹，不必存心为听者吹。拉比约西 说：这话是在什么情形说的？是在会众代表的情形说的；若是寻常的个人，听者要等听者与吹者都存心使听者尽本分，才尽了本分——正如 拉比泽拉 所主张。
革玛拉答：这是 坦拿 之间争论的主题，正如一条 《巴拉伊塔》 里所教：听者为自己而听，吹者照他平常的方式吹 羊角号，就是说，他不必存心为听者的缘故吹它。
The Gemara answers: This is the subject of a dispute between tanna’im, as it is taught in a baraita: The hearer hears for himself, and the sounder sounds the shofar in his usual way, i.e., he need not intend to sound it for the sake of the hearer.
拉比约西 说：这句话是在什么情形里说的？
Rabbi Yosei said: In what case is this statement said?
它是在会众代表的情形里说的。
It was said in the case of a representative of the community.
然而在一个寻常个人的情形里，听者要等到听者与吹者两人都存心要使听者尽他的义务，他才尽了他的义务，正如 拉比泽拉 所主张的。
But in the case of an ordinary individual, the hearer does not fulfill his obligation until both the hearer and the sounder have intent to discharge the hearer’s obligation, as argued by Rabbi Zeira.
由吹 羊角号 须存心一事，密释纳顺带引经：「摩西何时举手，以色列人就得胜；何时垂手，亚玛力人就得胜」（出埃及记 17:11）。可以问：摩西的手举起就打胜仗、垂下就打败仗吗？其实这节经是要告诉你：以色列民只要举目向上、使心顺服他们在天上的父，就得胜；若不然，就败落。
由论吹 羊角号 时所需之心意的讨论顺带而及，密释纳引这节经：「摩西何时举手，以色列人就得胜；何时垂手，亚玛力人就得胜」（出埃及记 17:11）。
Incidental to the discussion of the required intent when sounding the shofar, the mishna cites the verse: “And it came to pass, when Moses held up his hand, that Israel prevailed; and when he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed” (Exodus 17:11).
可以问：摩西的手是举起时就打仗得胜、垂下时就打仗失败吗？
It may be asked: Did the hands of Moses make war when he raised them or break war when he lowered them?
其实，这节经是来告诉你：只要以色列民举目向上，使他们的心顺服他们在天上的父，他们就得胜；若不然，他们就败落。
Rather, the verse comes to tell you that as long as the Jewish people turned their eyes upward and subjected their hearts to their Father in Heaven, they prevailed, but if not, they fell.
同样可以说：经上说：「你制造一条火蛇，挂在杆子上，凡被咬的，一望这蛇，就必得活」（民数记 21:8）。又可以问：是蛇使人死，还是蛇使人活？其实是以色列民举目向上、使心顺服他们在天上的父时，就得医治；若不然，就因蛇咬而烂死。
同样，你也可以说：经上说：「你制造一条火蛇，挂在杆子上，凡被咬的，一望这蛇，就必得活」（民数记 21:8）。
Similarly, you can say: The verse states: “Make for yourself a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole; and it shall come to pass, that everyone that is bitten, when he sees it, he shall live” (Numbers 21:8).
又可以问：是那蛇使人死，还是那蛇使人活？
Once again it may be asked: Did the serpent kill, or did the serpent preserve life?
其实，当以色列民举目向上，使他们的心顺服他们在天上的父时，他们就得了医治；若不然，他们就因被蛇咬而腐烂。
Rather, when the Jewish people turned their eyes upward and subjected their hearts to their Father in Heaven, they were healed, but if not, they rotted from their snakebites.
回到 哈拉哈 的讨论，密释纳续：聋哑人、心智不全的人或未成年人吹 羊角号，不能替会众尽本分。这类事的原则是：凡本身不负某项义务的，就不能替会众尽那项义务。
回到它 哈拉哈 上的讨论，这条密释纳接着说：一个聋哑人、一个心智不全的人或一个未成年人吹 羊角号，不能代表会众尽这项义务。
Returning to its halakhic discussion, the mishna continues: A deaf-mute, an imbecile, or a minor who sounds the shofar cannot discharge the obligation on behalf of the community.
论相似的事，这是原则：凡不负有做某件事之义务的，就不能代表会众尽那项义务。
This is the principle with regard to similar matters: Whoever is not obligated to do a certain matter cannot discharge the obligation on behalf of the community.
众贤在 《巴拉伊塔》 里教：人人都有吹 羊角号 的义务——祭司、利未人与寻常以色列人；改宗者；释奴；隐性人，即生来生殖器官被遮蔽或未发育、无从断定是男是女的人；阴阳人，即兼有男女生殖器官的人；以及半奴半自由的人。
众贤教导以下这条 《巴拉伊塔》：人人都有吹 羊角号 的义务：祭司、利未人与寻常的以色列人；改宗者；被释放的奴仆；一个 隐性人，就是一个生来性器官被遮蔽、或发育不全到无从断定此人是男是女的人；一个 阴阳人，就是一个兼有男性与女性生殖器官的人；以及一个半为奴仆、半为自由人的人。
The Sages taught the following baraita: All are obligated to sound the shofar: Priests, Levites, and ordinary Israelites; converts; freed slaves; a tumtum, i.e., one whose sexual organs from birth are concealed or are so undeveloped that it is impossible to determine whether the individual is male or female; a hermaphrodite [androginos], i.e., one with both male and female reproductive organs; and a half-slave, half-freeman.
隐性人 吹 羊角号，不能替同类（另一个 隐性人）尽本分——男人负此义务、女人不负，吹者可能是女、听者可能是男；也不能替非同类的寻常男女尽本分。阴阳人 能替同类尽本分，因为吹者若当作女，听者也当作女；却不能替非同类尽本分。半奴半自由的人不能替同类尽本分，因吹者的奴仆部分不能替听者的自由部分尽本分，更不能替非同类即全然自由的人尽本分。
一个 隐性人 吹 羊角号，不能替他的同类，就是另一个 隐性人，尽这项义务，因为男人受这项义务约束，而女人不受，而吹者可能是女的、听者可能是男的；他也不能替不是他同类的人，就是一个寻常的男人或女人，尽这项义务。
A tumtum who sounds the shofar cannot discharge the obligation of one of his kind, i.e., a fellow tumtum, since men are bound by the obligation, whereas women are not, and it is possible that the sounder is female and the hearer is male, nor can he discharge the obligation of one who is not of his kind, an ordinary man or woman.
一个 阴阳人 能替他的同类，就是另一个 阴阳人，尽这项义务，因为吹者若被当作女的，听者也被看作女的；然而他不能替不是他同类的人尽这项义务。
A hermaphrodite can discharge the obligation of one of his kind, a fellow hermaphrodite, since if the sounder is treated as a female, the hearer is also considered a female, but he cannot discharge the obligation of one who is not of his kind.
一个半为奴仆、半为自由人的人，不能替他的同类尽这项义务，因为吹者的奴仆部分，不能替听者的自由部分尽这项义务；他当然更不能替不是他同类的人，就是一个完全自由的人，尽这项义务。
One who is half-slave and half-freeman cannot discharge the obligation of one of his kind, as the slave component of the sounder cannot discharge the obligation of the free component of the hearer, and he certainly cannot discharge the obligation of one who is not of his kind, i.e., a completely free individual.
夫子在上引 《巴拉伊塔》 里说：人人都有吹 羊角号 的义务——祭司、利未人与寻常以色列人。革玛拉诧异：这岂不是显然的？这些人若不负这诫命的义务，还有谁负？
夫子在上面的 《巴拉伊塔》 里说：人人都有吹 羊角号 的义务：祭司、利未人与寻常的以色列人。
The Master said above in the baraita: All are obligated to sound the shofar: Priests, Levites, and ordinary Israelites.
革玛拉诧异地问：那岂不是显然的吗？
The Gemara asks in astonishment: Isn’t that obvious?
若这些人不负有行这条诫命的义务，那么还有谁负有行它的义务呢？
If these people are not obligated to perform the mitzva, who then is obligated to perform it?
革玛拉答：须说祭司也负此义务，因为你或会这样想：经上写着「是你们当守为吹角的日子」（民数记 29:1），可说只须吹一日的人，才有在岁首吹 羊角号 的义务；而祭司终年都要吹——他们在圣殿献祭时吹号，如经上写着「吹号在燔祭和平安祭上」（民数记 10:10）——你或说他们在岁首不负吹 羊角号 的义务。所以 《巴拉伊塔》 教我们：并非如此，连祭司也负此义务。
革玛拉答：须要说祭司负有行这条诫命的义务，因为你心里可能会这样想：既然经上写着：「是你们当守为吹角的日子」（民数记 29:1），你可能会说：论一个只须吹一日的人，他有在 岁首日 吹 羊角号 的义务。
The Gemara answers: It was necessary to say that priests are obligated to fulfill the mitzva, for it may enter your mind to say as follows: Since it is written: “It is a day of sounding the shofar to you” (Numbers 29:1), you might have said that with regard to one who is obligated to sound only one day, he is obligated to sound the shofar on Rosh HaShana.
然而论这些祭司，既然他们终年都须要吹，因为他们在圣殿里献祭时要吹号，正如经上所记：「吹号在燔祭和平安祭上」（民数记 10:10），你可能会说他们在 岁首日 没有吹 羊角号 的义务。
But with regard to these priests, since they are obligated to sound all year long, because they sound trumpets when they offer the sacrifices in the Temple, as it is written: “And you shall sound the trumpets over your burnt-offerings, and over the sacrifices of your peace-offerings” (Numbers 10:10), you might say that they are not obligated to sound the shofar on Rosh HaShana.
所以，这条 《巴拉伊塔》 来教我们：这不是真的，连祭司也负有行这条诫命的义务。
Therefore, the baraita comes to teach us that this is not true, and that even priests are obligated to fulfill the mitzva.
革玛拉问：这两件事可比吗？那里祭司吹的是号，这里论的是吹 羊角号。其实须说祭司负此义务另有理由：你或会想，既然密释纳说禧年的赎罪日在吹 羊角号 与 《立祷》 里加诵的祝祷上都与岁首相同，我或说：凡全然包括在禧年诫命之内的，也包括在岁首的诫命之内；而祭司并不全然包括在禧年的诫命之内——如密释纳所说，祭司与利未人可以永卖他们的田，也可随时赎回，不受禧年诸 哈拉哈 所管——我或说他们也不负岁首的诫命。所以 《巴拉伊塔》 教我们：并非如此，连祭司也负此义务。
革玛拉问：这些事是可比的吗？
The Gemara asks: Are these things comparable?
在那里，祭司吹的是号；而在这里，我们所处理的是吹 羊角号。
There, the priests sound trumpets, and here, we are dealing with the sounding of a shofar.
其实，须要说祭司负有行这条诫命的义务，是为了另一个理由，因为你心里可能会这样想：既然我们在一条密释纳里学过：禧年的赎罪日与 岁首日 相同，无论论 羊角号 的吹声，还是论在 《立祷》 祷告里所诵的附加祝祷，我可能会说：一个全然包括在禧年诫命之内的人，也就包括在 岁首日 的诫命之内。
Rather, it was necessary to say that priests are obligated to fulfill the mitzva for a different reason, for it may enter your mind to say as follows: Since we learned in a mishna: Yom Kippur of the Jubilee Year is the same as Rosh HaShana, with regard to both the shofar blasts and the additional blessings that are recited in the Amida prayer, I might have said: One who is fully included in the mitzva of the Jubilee is also included in the mitzva of Rosh HaShana.
然而这些祭司，既然他们并不全然包括在禧年的诫命之内，正如我们在一条密释纳里学过的：祭司与利未人可以永远卖他们的田地，也可以永远赎回他们的地，而他们不受禧年诸条 哈拉哈 约束，我可能会说：他们也不应当负有行 岁首日 之诫命的义务。
But these priests, since they are not fully included in the mitzva of the Jubilee, as we learned in a mishna: Priests and Levites may sell their fields forever and they may also redeem their lands forever, and they are not bound by the halakhot of the Jubilee Year, I might say that they should also not be obligated to fulfill the mitzva of Rosh HaShana.
所以，这条 《巴拉伊塔》 来教我们：并不是这样，连祭司也负有行这条诫命的义务。
Therefore, the baraita comes to teach us that this is not so, and that even priests are obligated to fulfill the mitzva.
§ 同一条 《巴拉伊塔》 教：半奴半自由的人不能替同类尽本分，更不能替非同类尽本分。拉夫胡纳 说：他虽不能替别人尽本分，却能替自己尽本分。
在同一条 《巴拉伊塔》 里所教的：一个半为奴仆、半为自由人的人，不能代表他的同类尽这项义务，他当然更不能代表不是他同类的人尽这项义务。
§ It was taught in the same baraita: A half-slave, half-freeman cannot discharge the obligation on behalf of one of his kind, and he certainly cannot discharge the obligation on behalf of one who is not of his kind.
拉夫胡纳 说：尽管他不能代表别人尽这项义务，他却能代表自己尽这项义务。
Rav Huna said: Even though he cannot discharge the obligation on behalf of others, he can discharge the obligation on behalf of himself.
拉夫纳赫曼 对 拉夫胡纳 说：他能替自己尽本分、却不能替别人尽本分，分别何在？是因为他的奴仆部分不能替别人的自由部分尽本分；若是这样，论他自己，他的奴仆部分也不能替他的自由部分尽本分。
拉夫纳赫曼 对 拉夫胡纳 说：他可以代表自己尽这项义务、却不能代表别人，这分别是什么？
Rav Naḥman said to Rav Huna: What is the difference whereby he may discharge the obligation on behalf of himself but not on behalf of others?
是因为他的奴仆部分，不能来代表对方的自由部分尽这项义务。
Because his slave component cannot come and discharge the obligation on behalf of the free component of the other.
若是这样，论他自己也是一样：他的奴仆部分，也不应当能来代表他的自由部分尽这项义务。
If so, with regard to himself as well, his slave component should not be able to come and discharge the obligation on behalf of his free component.
其实 拉夫纳赫曼 说：连替自己也不能尽本分。革玛拉评说：《巴拉伊塔》 也这样教：半奴半自由的人，连替自己也不能尽本分。
其实，拉夫纳赫曼 说：即便代表他自己，他也不能尽这项义务。
Rather, Rav Naḥman said: Even on behalf of himself he cannot discharge the obligation.
革玛拉评说：这在一条 《巴拉伊塔》 里也是这样教的：一个半为奴仆、半为自由人的人，即便为他自己，也不能尽这项义务。
The Gemara comments: This is also taught in a baraita: A half-slave, half-freeman cannot discharge the obligation even for himself.
接着论替别人尽本分，拉比泽拉之子阿哈瓦 教这条 《巴拉伊塔》：一切祝祷，即便人已为自己诵过、尽了本分，仍可为别人诵、使他们尽本分，因为全以色列彼此担保。唯独吃饼前后的祝祷与喝酒前后的祝祷除外：他若还没尽本分，可以替别人尽；若已尽了，就不能——这些祝祷是为身体的享受而诵，只有当时正在享受的人才能诵。
接着论代表别人尽一项义务的讨论，拉比泽拉之子阿哈瓦 教导以下这条 《巴拉伊塔》：论一切祝祷，即便一个人已经为自己诵了祝祷、因而尽了他自己的义务，他仍可以为别人诵祝祷，借此使他们尽他们的义务，因为所有的犹太人都彼此担保。
Continuing the discussion of performing an obligation on behalf of others, Ahava, son of Rabbi Zeira, taught the following baraita: With regard to all the blessings, even if one already recited a blessing for himself and has consequently fulfilled his own obligation, he can still recite a blessing for others and thereby discharge their obligation, as all Jews are responsible for one another.
这适用于一切祝祷，唯独在饼上所诵的祝祷与在酒上所诵的祝祷除外，无论是在吃喝之前还是之后。
This is true with regard to all blessings except for the blessing recited over bread and the blessing recited over wine, both before and after their consumption.
论这些祝祷，他若还没有尽他自己的义务，他也可以使别人尽他们的义务；然而他若已经尽了他自己的义务，他就不能使别人尽他们的义务，因为这些祝祷是为感谢身体上的享受而诵的，只能由那在当时实际得享受的人来诵。
With regard to these blessings, if he has not yet fulfilled his own obligation, he can discharge the obligation of others as well, but if he already fulfilled his own obligation, he cannot discharge the obligation of others, as these blessings are recited in appreciation of physical enjoyment, and can only be recited by one who is actually deriving pleasure at the time.
拉瓦 提出一个疑难：（下接 29之间）
拉瓦 提出一个疑难：
Rava raised a dilemma: