FIRST GEMARA · 3 OF 4
Why use the priests’ time marker?
A teaching’s wording can do more than answer its opening question. Discover what the mention of priests adds, then follow an alternative interpretation through its reply.
In this lesson
Continue from the opening argument
This reading follows When an explanation meets a challenge. The Mishnah gathers our sages’ teachings; the Gemara discusses the Mishnah and other teachings. Together they form the Talmud. Here we read the Babylonian Talmud’s next discussion in Berakhot, its tractate, or book, called “Blessings.”
The Shema is our morning and evening recitation of three passages from the Torah, the five books of Moshe (Moses). Mishnah Berakhot 1:1 means chapter 1, mishnah 1. Its opening gives the words our new discussion examines:
מאימתי קורין את שמע בערבין משעה שהכהנים נכנסים לאכול בתרומתן
From when do we recite the Shema in the evenings? From the time the priests enter to eat their terumah.
English rendering by Messianic Yeshiva
Kohanim are priests descended from Aharon (Aaron). Terumah is a sacred portion of produce reserved for priestly consumption. The Mishnah uses their eligibility, when they are permitted to eat it, as a time marker. It is not describing each priest’s dinner habits.
A folio is a leaf with two sides. Berakhot 2a–2b means the first and second sides of folio 2. This argument crosses from one side to the other: the printed page break occurs inside a question. We will read through its answer.
Ask what the wording adds
אמר מר, “It was stated above,” returns to the teaching just quoted. מכדי, “Now,” introduces the premise from which the new question proceeds.
אמר מר משעה שהכהנים נכנסים לאכול בתרומתן. מכדי כהנים אימת קא אכלי תרומה משעת צאת הכוכבים לתני משעת צאת הכוכבים.
It was stated above: “From the time the priests enter to eat their terumah.” Now, when do the priests eat terumah? From the emergence of the stars. Let it teach, “From the emergence of the stars.”
English rendering by Messianic Yeshiva
The Mishnah could identify the time by a visible marker, but instead mentions the priests. That makes us ask what the longer wording teaches besides the recitation’s start.
Try the distinction. The Mishnah asks when evening Shema begins. In A, the Gemara already names the emergence of the stars. What still needs an explanation? Say why merely repeating “at nightfall” would not answer it.
1. What is the new question?
The question concerns the choice of wording: if the priests’ eligibility is at the emergence of the stars, why not name stars directly?
Repeating the time does not explain why the Mishnah mentions priests and terumah. The next answer must identify additional work done by that phrase. “Let it teach” is part of the question, not an instruction to change the Mishnah.
Hear the additional teaching
We need one piece of priestly context. Ritual purity is a status governing access to particular sacred things, not a description of dirty skin or automatically of wrongdoing. In this case, a priest has undergone the required immersion in water and awaits the relevant evening boundary.
Some purification processes also require an offering the following day. Kapparah here refers to that required offering, often called an atonement offering. The question concerns whether its absence continues to prevent eating terumah. Rashi, Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki, a later commentator, explains this distinction in his comment on “the offering does not hold them back.”
Context: Leviticus 22:4–7 and 15:13–15; named commentary paraphrased from Rashi on Berakhot 2a.
A baraita is a teaching from the era of the Mishnah’s sages preserved outside the Mishnah. כדתניא, “as it is taught in a baraita,” introduces one below. It quotes the beginning of Leviticus 22:7.
Read the quotation as an open word-gloss: “The sun comes, and [he/it] becomes clean.” This is a word-level aid, not a smooth translation of the whole verse. The bracketed pronouns keep the question open: what happens to the sun, and who or what becomes clean? The discussion will examine those possibilities.
מלתא אגב אורחיה קמשמע לן כהנים אימת קא אכלי בתרומה משעת צאת הכוכבים והא קמשמע לן דכפרה לא מעכבא כדתניא ובא השמש וטהר ביאת שמשו מעכבתו מלאכול בתרומה ואין כפרתו מעכבתו מלאכול בתרומה.
It teaches us something along the way: When do priests eat terumah? From the emergence of the stars. And this is what it teaches us: the atonement offering does not hold them back. As it is taught in a baraita: “The sun comes, and [he/it] becomes clean.” The sun’s setting holds him back from eating terumah, but his atonement offering does not hold him back from eating terumah.
English rendering by Messianic Yeshiva
מלתא אגב אורחיה קמשמע לן means “It teaches us something along the way.” “Holds him back” means prevents him from eating until the condition is met. The passage locates eligibility at the emergence of stars. Rashi calls this the completion of the sun’s setting; keep that actual marker in view rather than replacing it with a clock time.
Complete two sentences in your own words: “Mentioning priests teaches that…”; “That does not mean…”. Include both the emergence of stars and the offering.
2. What does the wording teach, and how far does it reach?
Mentioning priests teaches that, after the required preceding purification, they may eat terumah at the emergence of stars even when the relevant offering is still to be brought the next day.
That does not mean immersion is unnecessary, every kind of sacred food is permitted, or the offering is canceled. B’s repeated “from eating terumah” gives the claim its scope. “Does not hold back” concerns this eligibility, not the existence of an obligation for other purposes.
Give the alternative its full consequence
וממאי, “And how do we know,” asks how the interpretation is established. דילמא, “perhaps,” proposes an alternative. An alternative is a reading to examine, not yet the discussion’s conclusion.
וממאי דהאי ובא השמש ביאת השמש והאי וטהר טהר יומא דילמא ביאת אורו הוא ומאי וטהר טהר גברא
And how do we know that this “the sun comes” means the sun’s setting, and that this “becomes clean” means the day has cleared? Perhaps it means the arrival of its light, and “becomes clean” means the person becomes clean.
English rendering by Messianic Yeshiva
“The day has cleared” means its daylight has departed. It is not about clouds clearing or a day having a person’s ritual impurity. We follow Rashi’s explanation of the proposed alternative, “the arrival of its light”:
שיאור השמש ביום השמיני, ויטהר האיש עצמו בהבאת קרבנותיו, ואחר יאכל
That the sun shines on the eighth day, and the man makes himself clean by bringing his offerings, and afterward he eats.
English rendering by Messianic Yeshiva
The eighth day belongs to the relevant purification process, not the eighth day of a month. Rashi explains an alternative involving the following day’s light and offerings. His explanation is later commentary on C, not an extra sentence of the Gemara.
Make two paired descriptions: what happens to the sun, and who or what becomes clean or clear. If the proposed alternative were accepted, why would it threaten B’s teaching?
3. What would change if this alternative were accepted?
The initial reading concerns the sun’s setting and the day clearing of its light. Rashi understands the alternative as the light of the following eighth day and the person becoming clean through bringing the offerings.
That alternative would make the offering part of what must happen before eating, instead of allowing terumah at the preceding nightfall. It therefore challenges the basis of “the offering does not hold them back.” Simply saying “two different translations” misses the differing consequence.
The Gemara asks how the initial reading is established. It has not announced that the alternative is its final conclusion.
Follow the reply’s evidence
Rabbah bar Rav Sheila is the sage named in the reply. He is not Rashi. His “If so” tests what wording the proposed interpretation would lead us to expect.
The reply contrasts two forms. English is enough to follow the distinction:
- ויטהר, veyit’har: “and let him become clean,” the instruction the reply would expect under the alternative.
- וטהר, vetaher: the verse’s actual form, which the reply reads here as the day “has cleared.”
אמר רבה בר רב שילא א"כ לימא קרא ויטהר מאי וטהר טהר יומא כדאמרי אינשי איערב שמשא ואדכי יומא.
Rabbah bar Rav Sheila said: If so, Scripture should say veyit’har, “and let him become clean.” What does vetaher mean? The day has cleared, as people say, “The sun has set, and the day has cleared.”
English rendering by Messianic Yeshiva
Rashi explains the condition: if the verse were commanding the person’s purification, why does it not use the form that makes that instruction explicit? On “cleared,” he explains the completed departure of the sun. These comments help us connect the wording argument and the ordinary saying.
Named commentary, paraphrased from Rashi on Berakhot 2b, the comments on “If so” and “cleared.”
What wording would the alternative lead Rabbah bar Rav Sheila to expect, and what wording does he actually have? Explain how the ordinary saying helps.
4. Why does this reply answer the challenge?
Under Rashi’s explanation, a command that the person complete purification would lead him to expect veyit’har, “let him become clean.” The verse instead has vetaher, which he reads as the day’s completed clearing.
The ordinary saying illustrates calling the day cleared when the sun has set. The reply gives a reason to prefer the initial reading over the proposed alternative; it does not merely repeat the initial conclusion. “Scripture should say” tests the interpretation, rather than proposing to rewrite Scripture or reporting another manuscript.
Tosafot, a collection of later commentary by our medieval sages, makes the scope precise: vetaher occurs elsewhere, but this argument concerns the possible ambiguity here. We have learned how this reply uses the wording, not a rule that every occurrence must describe a day.
Named commentary, paraphrased from Tosafot on Berakhot 2b, the short comment on “If so, Scripture should say veyit’har.”
Reconstruct the argument
Close the answers. Write four connected sentences:
- The wording question.
- What the wording teaches.
- The alternative that threatens its basis.
- The reply and its evidence.
Put A, B, C or D beside each claim. Explain specifically why C’s alternative would affect B. With a partner, ask, “Which step would fail if the alternative were accepted?” Alone, underline any claim without a textual anchor.
Then repair this note: “The Gemara changes the Mishnah to say stars, rejects every future offering, and proves that vetaher always means a day.”
5. Does your reconstruction preserve the evidence and its scope?
“The Gemara asks why the Mishnah mentions priests eating terumah rather than directly naming the emergence of the stars (A). It answers that this also teaches that the still-outstanding offering does not prevent eating terumah at that point (B). The question then proposes a different reading of the verse, which Rashi understands as next-day light and purification through the offerings (C). Rabbah bar Rav Sheila responds that the proposed command would call for a different form; he reads the actual form as the day having cleared, illustrated by ordinary speech (D).”
The incorrect note must preserve the Mishnah, limit the offering claim to terumah eligibility, and keep the word-form inference within this context. Your wording may differ. A strong answer connects C’s consequence to B, then explains D’s response, rather than merely listing four labels.
Careful study gives each word and each question its due. When an alternative arises, follow what it would change, then listen for the evidence that answers it.
Read in context
Babylonian Talmud, Berakhot 2a–2b: from “It was stated above” through the reply’s ordinary saying. Rashi on 2a and Rashi and Tosafot on 2b: the named explanations used here. Leviticus 22:1–9: the verse and its priestly setting.
A–D are consecutive parts of the Gemara; the letters and punctuation are study aids. The next reading continues immediately with a separately reported inquiry. For the Mishnah’s full opening, revisit When is the evening Shema?