14 (11) And the priest that makes him clean shall present the man that is to be made clean, and those things, before the Lord, at the door of the Tent of Meeting:

(12) and the priest shall take one he lamb, and offer it for a guilt offering, and the log of oil, and wave them for a wave offering before the Lord:

(13) and he shall slaughter the lamb in the place where he shall kill the sin offering and the burnt offering, in the holy place: for as the sin offering is the priest’s, so is the guilt offering: it is most holy:

(14) and the priest shall take some of the blood of the guilt offering, and the priest shall put it upon the tip of the right ear of him that is to be cleansed, and upon the thumb of his right hand, and upon the great toe of his right foot:

(15) and the priest shall take some of the log of oil, and pour it into the palm of his own left hand:

7 (13) And one of his servants answered and said, Let some take, I pray thee, five of the horses that remain, which are left in the city, (behold, they are as all the multitude of Yisra᾽el that are left in it: behold, I say, they are even as all the multitude of Yisra᾽el that are consumed:) and let us send and see.

(14) They took therefore two chariot horses; and the king sent after the camp of Aram, saying, Go and see.

(15) And they went after them to the Yarden: and, lo, all the way was full of garments and vessels, which Aram had cast away in their haste. And the messengers returned, and told the king.

(16) And the people went out, and plundered the camp of Aram. So a measure of fine flour was sold for a shekel, and two measures of barley for a shekel, according to the word of the Lord.

(17) And the king appointed the officer on whose hand he had leaned to have the charge of the gate: and the people trampled upon him in the gate, and he died, as the man of God had said, who spoke when the king came down to him.

24 (34) so shall thy poverty come like a marauder; and thy want like an armed man.

25 (1) These also are proverbs of Shelomo, which the men of Ḥizqiyya, king of Yehuda copied out.

(2) It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: but the honour of kings is to search out a matter.

(3) The heaven for height, and the earth for depth, and the heart of kings is unsearchable.

(4) Take away the dross from the silver, and a vessel emerges for the refiner.

1. One who marries a woman, and she stipulated with him that he would sustain her daughter from another man for five years, is obligated to sustain her daughter for five years. If, in the course of those five years they were divorced and the woman was married to another man, and she stipulated with him that he would sustain her daughter for five years, he too is obligated to sustain her for five years. The first husband may not say: When she comes to me, I will sustain her. Rather, he brings her sustenance to her, to the place where her mother lives. And likewise, both of them may not jointly say: We will sustain the girl as one in a partnership. Rather, one sustains her, providing her with food, while the other gives her the monetary value of the sustenance.

2. If the daughter was married during this period, her husband provides her with the sustenance customarily provided by a husband for his wife, and the two men obligated to sustain her due to agreements with her mother provide her with the monetary value of the sustenance. If the two husbands of the mother died, their daughters are sustained from unsold property, and she, their wife’s daughter, whom they agreed to sustain, is sustained even from liened property that was sold. This is due to the fact that her legal status is like that of a creditor, given that he is contractually obligated to support her. The perspicacious ones would write an explicit stipulation into the agreement: I agree on the condition that I will sustain your daughter for five years only as long as you are with me. Then they would not be obligated to sustain a girl who is not their daughter when they are no longer married to the girl’s mother.

3. In the case of a widow who said: I do not want to move from my husband’s house, but instead I wish to remain there, the heirs are not able to say to her: Go to your father’s house and we will sustain you. Rather, they sustain her in her husband’s house and they give her living quarters befitting her dignity. However, if she said: I do not want to move from my father’s house, and you should bring me my support there, the heirs are able to say to her: If you are living with us, you will have sustenance from us, but if you are not living with us, you will not have sustenance from us. If she argued that she does not wish to live in her deceased husband’s house because she is young, and they, the heirs, are also young, and it is improper for them to be living in the same house together, then they sustain her and she stays in her father’s house.

4. As long as a widow is living in the house of her father and is being supported by her husband’s heirs, she may always collect payment of her marriage contract, even after many years. As long as she is living in the house of her husband, she may collect payment of her marriage contract until twenty-five years later, at which point she may no longer collect the payment. This is because there is enough time in twenty-five years for her to do favors and give to others, thereby spending the resources of the orphans, until what she has spent equals the value of her marriage contract. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir, who said it in the name of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. And the Rabbis say the opposite: As long as she is residing in the house of her husband she may always collect payment of her marriage contract, since during this time the heirs are caring for her and she is therefore embarrassed to sue them for payment of her marriage contract. However, as long as she is in the house of her father she may collect payment of her marriage contract until twenty-five years later, and if by then she has not sued for it, it is assumed that she has waived her rights to it. If she died, her heirs mention her marriage contract up until twenty-five years later.

§ We learned in the mishna that the first husband may not say that he will provide his wife’s daughter with support only when she is with him. Rather, he must bring the sustenance to her in the place where her mother lives. Rav Ḥisda said: That is to say that in a case of divorce, a daughter lives with her mother.

The Gemara asks: From where do we know that we are dealing with a case of an adult woman and there is a general guideline that in cases of divorce, a girl lives with her mother? Perhaps we are dealing with a case of a minor girl, and she lives with her mother because of concern for her safety, due to an incident that occurred.

As it is taught in a baraita: In the case of one who died and left a minor son to the care of his mother, and the heirs of the father say: The son should grow up with us, and his mother says: My son should grow up with me, the halakha is that one leaves the child with his mother, and one does not leave the child with one who is fit to inherit from him, i.e., the father’s heirs. An incident occurred, and the boy lived with his father’s heirs, and they slaughtered him on the eve of Passover. So too, a minor girl is not left in the care of those who are obligated to sustain her and who have a financial interest in her demise.

The Gemara answers: If that is so, let the mishna teach that the husband must bring the sustenance to the place where she, the daughter, is located.

What is the purpose of emphasizing: To the place where her mother lives? Conclude from here that a daughter lives with her mother; it is no different if she is an adult woman, and it is no different if she is a minor girl.

§ It was taught in the mishna that if two men are obligated to support this girl, both of them may not jointly say that they will be partners in her support. Rather, each one fulfills his obligation independently.

The Gemara relates that there was a certain man who rented out a millstone to another for the price of grinding, i.e., the one who rented the millstone was to pay the cost of the rental by grinding whatever the owner needed to be ground. In the end, the owner of the millstone became rich, and he purchased another millstone and a donkey, and he no longer required the services of the renter to grind things for him.

The owner of the millstone said to the renter: Until now I would have what I needed ground by you, and the service that you provided was in place of payment for the rental of the millstone. Now, since I no longer require this service, give me payment for the millstone. The renter said back to him: I will grind for you because that is what I agreed to, but I did not agree to have to pay money.

Ravina thought to say that this is the same as the mishna that states that both of them may not jointly say: We will sustain the girl as one in a partnership. Rather, one sustains her, providing her with food, while the other gives her the monetary value of the sustenance. In that case, although the original condition was to provide the girl with support in the form of food, when circumstances changed, the previous husband became obligated to pay her support in the form of money. So too here, due to the change in circumstances, the renter should pay the owner of the millstone with money.

Rav Avira said to Ravina: Are the two cases comparable? There, in the case of the girl, she has only one stomach; she does not have two stomachs. Therefore, it is impossible for both of them to support her with food. Here, in the case of the millstone, the renter is able to say to him: Grind and sell, grind and store for later use, i.e., the owner of the millstone can use his new millstone to grind for others at a profit, and at the same time the renter will continue grinding the owner’s grain as per their agreement. Therefore, the renter is not obligated to change the terms of the original agreement.

The Gemara notes: We said this only in a case where the renter does not have any other grinding to do with the millstone and without the grinding that the renter does for the owner the mill will remain inoperative. However, if he has other grinding to do with the millstone, i.e., instead of grinding the owner’s grain he can grind the grain of others for a fee and thereby pay money for his rental, in a case such as this one forces him to cease his conduct characteristic of Sodom and to pay his rental fee in the form of money.

The fifth principle is worry: As he will worry and fear from the punishment of his iniquities. For there are iniquities for which the repentance has the atonement depend upon cleansing afflictions, as it is stated (Psalms 38:19), "I acknowledge my iniquity; I am fearful over my sin." The content of grief is about the past, whereas the content of worry is about the future. And he will also doubly worry - maybe he is falling short in his obligation of repentance with pain, bitterness, fasting and crying. And even if he has multiplied the pain and multiplied the crying, he should crawl and fear - maybe corresponding to this had he multiplied his guilt; so that all of his affliction and having his soul cry in its fast did not fill his measure. And one who examines the greatness of the service to the Creator upon his creatures and that there is no end to the evil of one who rebels against His word [will know that even with] all of what he adds to his service and in the ways of repentance, is it not small? Behold it is like a little in his eyes. And King Solomon, peace be upon him, said (Proverbs 14:16), "A wise man is afraid and turns away from evil." And its explanation is that even though a wise man turns away from evil with all of the efforts of his ability, he should crawl and fear - maybe he did not complete his measure, and he was not careful according to the standard of what needs to be done. And like this is (Proverbs 28:6), "than a rich man whose ways are crooked" - even though he is rich. And likewise did our Rabbis, may their memory be blessed, say in Yilamdeinu (Tanchuma, Lech Lecha, 15), "Do not explain [it as] 'A wise man is afraid and turns away from evil'; but rather, 'A wise man turns away from evil and is afraid.'" And the end of the verse (Proverbs 14:16) proves this - "but a fool rushes and is confident." He states abut the traits of a fool, that they are the opposite of the traits of a wise man. For a fool rushes, but is nevertheless confident that iniquity and damage will not come to him. Yet the angry person is given to sins and open to damages, as it is stated (Proverbs 29:22), "A hot-tempered man commits many offenses." And it is [also] stated (Proverbs 25:28), "Like an open city without walls is a man whose temper is uncurbed."

And the penitent should also worry lest his impulse overpower him. [It is] like they, may their memory be blessed, said (Avot 2:4), "Do not trust in yourself until the day of your death" - all the more so, a man whose heart has already vanquished him. For it is fitting to guard oneself every instant from the ambushing impulse; and to add fear of God to himself every day. And it will [then] be a fortress when all of the breakers of the impulse that renew themselves in the future pass upon him.

And King Solomon, peace be upon him, spoke about the matter of repentance and specified this topic. And he surely opened his words and said (Proverbs 28:12), "When the righteous exult there is great glory, but when the wicked rise up, men will be sought." The explanation [of this] is that the righteous will exalt and honor people about all the good traits that are found with them; but the wicked seek peoples' blemishes and their mistakes, to put them down - even when they have already left these actions and returned in repentance. Afterwards he said (Proverbs 28:13), "He who covers up his faults will not succeed; but he who confesses and gives them up will find mercy." For even though a penitent should not reveal his iniquities to people - as is to be understood from that which is stated, "but when the wicked rise up, men will be sought" - he is obligated to confess them [privately], like the matter that is stated (Psalms 32:5), "Then I acknowledged my sin to You; I did not cover up my guilt." And it is [also] stated (Jeremiah 2:35), "Lo, I will bring you to judgment for saying, 'I have not sinned.'" But the Sages of Israel, may their memory blessed, explained (Yoma 86b) [that] there are times when he who covers up his faults will not succeed - like with sins between a man and his fellow. As he does not attain atonement until he returns what was stolen, extorted or taken unjustly; and until he asks to be pardoned for that which he annoyed him, embarrassed him or spoke evil speech about him. [Likewise must he not cover up his] sins between a man and the Omnipresent that have become known to people. For one who sins publicly desecrates [God's] name (but Rashi, may his memory be blessed, in the Chapter [entitled] Yom HaKippurim, understands it in a different way. See there.) So he is obligated to grieve and mourn about it in front of people to sanctify [God's] name. And this is [the meaning of] that which is written (Jeremiah 31:19), "Now that I have turned back, I am filled with remorse; now that I am made aware, I strike my thigh." The meaning of, "I am filled with remorse," is regret and pain. For the essence of repentance is bitterness of the heart, as we have explained. And [the meaning of,] "now that I am made aware, I strike my thigh," is after people have been made aware and my iniquities have been publicized, I mourned with actions that were visible to people. [This is] like (Ezekiel 21:17), "strike the thigh"; and it is [also] stated (Job 33:27), "He declares to men, 'I have sinned; I have perverted what was right.'"