Study Shabbat folio 97A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
The Talmud asks: However, didn’t R' Akiva derive this by means of a verbal analogy? The Talmud answers: R' Yehuda ben Beteira did not learn a verbal analogy. R' Yehuda ben Beteira had no tradition of this verbal analogy from his teachers, and therefore he disagreed with R' Akiva’s conclusion. The
On a similar note, R' Akiva revealed an additional matter not explicitly articulated in the Torah. You say that when Aaron and Miriam spoke against Moses, both Aaron and Miriam were struck with tzara'at, as it written: “And God became angry at them and He left, and the cloud departed from above th
The Talmud asks: However, didn’t R' Akiva derive this from the plural pronoun them, meaning that God was angry with both of them? The Talmud answers: God’s anger in that verse was manifest in a mere rebuke, not in tzara'at. A baraita was taught in accordance with the opinion of R' Akiva, who said
On the topic of Miriam’s tzara'at, the Talmud cites that which Reish Lakish said: One who suspects the innocent of indiscretion is afflicted in his body, as it is written: “And Moses answered and said: But they will not believe me and will not hearken to my voice, for they will say, God did not app
They are believers, as it is written: “And the people believed once they heard that God had remembered the children of Israel, and that He saw their affliction, and they bowed and they prostrated” (Exodus 4:31). The children of believers, as it says with regard to Abraham our Patriarch: “And he bel