(1) The whole community broke into loud cries, and the people wept that night.

(20) And ה׳ said, “I pardon, as you have asked. (21) Nevertheless, as I live and as ה׳’s Presence fills the whole world, (22) none of those involved—who have seen My Presence and the signs that I have performed in Egypt and in the wilderness, and who have tried Me these many times and have disobeyed Me— (23) shall see the land that I promised on oath to their fathers; none of those who spurn Me shall see it.

...On the Ninth of Av it was decreed upon our ancestors that they would all die in the wilderness and not enter Eretz Yisrael; and the Temple was destroyed the first time, in the days of Nebuchadnezzar, and the second time, by the Romans; and Beitar was captured; and the city of Jerusalem was plowed, as a sign that it would never be rebuilt. Not only does one fast on the Ninth of Av, but from when the month of Av begins, one decreases acts of rejoicing.

...it iswritten: “And all the congregation lifted up their voice and cried and the people wept that night” (Numbers 14:1). Rabba said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: That night was the night of the Ninth of Av. The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to them: You wept needlessly that night, and I will therefore establish for you a true tragedy over which there will be weeping in future generations.

Happy is the man who is anxious always, But he who hardens his heart falls into misfortune.

(6) The law of Sicarii [Sikarikon] did not apply in Judea in the time that people were being killed in the war. From the time that people were being killed in the war and onward, the law of Sicarii did apply there. What is this law of Sicarii? If one first purchased land from a Sicarius, who extorted the field from its prior owners with threats, and afterward the buyer returned and purchased the same field a second time from the prior landowner, his purchase is void. The prior owner of the field can say that he did not actually mean to sell him the field. By contrast, if he first acquired the field from the prior owner and afterward he returned and purchased the same field from a Sicarius, his purchase stands. Similarly, if one first purchased from the husband the rights to use a field belonging to his wife, and afterward he returned and purchased the same field from the wife, so that if the husband were to predecease or divorce her, the purchaser would then own it fully, his purchase is void. The woman can claim that she did not wish to quarrel with her husband and to object to the transaction but that in truth she did not agree to the sale. By contrast, if he first acquired the field from the wife, and afterward he returned and purchased the same field from the husband, his purchase stands. This is the initial version of this mishna. Later, the court of those who came after the Sages who composed that mishna said: With regard to one who purchased a field from a Sicarius, he must give the prior owner one-fourth of the field’s value. When does this apply? At a time when the prior owner is unable to purchase the field himself. But if he is able to purchase it himself, he precedes anyone else. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi later convened a court, and they counted their votes and determined that if the field remained before, i.e., in the possession of, the Sicarius for twelve months, whoever first purchases the field acquires possession of it, but he must give the prior owner one-fourth of the field’s value.

§ Apropos the war that led to the destruction of the Second Temple, the Gemara examines several aspects of the destruction of that Temple in greater detail: Rabbi Yoḥanan said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Happy is the man who fears always, but he who hardens his heart shall fall into mischief” (Proverbs 28:14)? Jerusalem was destroyed on account of Kamtza and bar Kamtza. The place known as the King’s Mountain was destroyed on account of a rooster and a hen. The city of Beitar was destroyed on account of a shaft from a chariot [rispak]. The Gemara explains: Jerusalem was destroyed on account of Kamtza and bar Kamtza. This is as there was a certain man whose friend was named Kamtza and whose enemy was named bar Kamtza. He once made a large feast and said to his servant: Go bring me my friend Kamtza. The servant went and mistakenly brought him his enemy bar Kamtza. The man who was hosting the feast came and foundbar Kamtzasitting at the feast. The host said tobar Kamtza. That man is the enemy [ba’al devava] of that man, that is, you are my enemy. What then do you want here? Arise and leave.Bar Kamtzasaid to him: Since I have already come, let me stay and I will give you money for whatever I eat and drink. Just do not embarrass me by sending me out.

The host said to him: No, you must leave. Bar Kamtzasaid to him: I will give you money for half of the feast; just do not send me away. The host said to him: No, you must leave. Bar Kamtza then said to him: I will give you money for the entire feast; just let me stay. The host said to him: No, you must leave. Finally, the host tookbar Kamtzaby his hand, stood him up, and took him out. After having been cast out from the feast, bar Kamtzasaid to himself: Since the Sages were sitting there and did not protest the actions of the host, although they saw how he humiliated me, learn from it that they were content with what he did. I will therefore go and inform [eikhul kurtza] against them to the king. He went and said to the emperor: The Jews have rebelled against you. The emperor said to him: Who says that this is the case? Bar Kamtzasaid to him: Go and test them; send them an offering to be brought in honor of the government, and see whether they will sacrifice it. The emperor went and sent with him a choice three-year-old calf. Whilebar Kamtzawas coming with the calf to the Temple, he made a blemish on the calf’s upper lip. And some say he made the blemish on its eyelids, a place where according to us, i.e., halakha, it is a blemish, but according to them, gentile rules for their offerings, it is not a blemish. Therefore, when bar Kamtza brought the animal to the Temple, the priests would not sacrifice it on the altar since it was blemished, but they also could not explain this satisfactorily to the gentile authorities, who did not consider it to be blemished. The blemish notwithstanding, the Sages thought to sacrifice the animal as an offering due to the imperative to maintain peace with the government. Rabbi Zekharya ben Avkolas said to them: If the priests do that, people will say that blemished animals may be sacrificed as offerings on the altar. The Sages said: If we do not sacrifice it, then we must prevent bar Kamtza from reporting this to the emperor. The Sages thought to kill him so that he would not go and speak against them. Rabbi Zekharya said to them: If you kill him, people will say that one who makes a blemish on sacrificial animals is to be killed. As a result, they did nothing, bar Kamtza’s slander was accepted by the authorities, and consequently the war between the Jews and the Romans began. Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The excessive humility of Rabbi Zekharya ben Avkolas destroyed our Temple, burned our Sanctuary, and exiled us from our land.

It was taught in the baraita: “That they must perform”; that is referring to acting beyond the letter of the law, as Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Jerusalem was destroyed only for the fact that they adjudicated cases on the basis of Torah law in the city. The Gemara asks: Rather, what else should they have done? Should they rather have adjudicated cases on the basis of arbitrary decisions [demagizeta]? Rather, say: That they established their rulings on the basis of Torah law and did not go beyond the letter of the law.

He went and brought him bar Kamtza, etc.: It was possible that this was a father and his son, and the messenger erred about them. And also that which bar Kamtza came even as he knew that he was his enemy, was because he reasoned that since his father was his friend, he certainly wants his friendship also, to make peace with him through this invitation. And it is as it is written in Eruvin (65a), "Whoever is appeased by his wine has in him the mind-set of his Creator, as it is stated (Genesis 8:21), 'And the Lord smelled the pleasing savor.'" And it is understood: One who has hatred against his fellow because he did something improper to him, and is appeased by his own wine - meaning he invited him to a drinking party that he made - has in him the mind-set of his Creator. For also the Holy One, blessed be He, was appeased to man who sinned towards Him with something that was His, since the whole world is His - as it is stated, "And the Lord smelled the savor, etc." - the pleasantness that he did His will, as the Re'em (R. Eliyahu Mizrachi) wrote. But the master of this feast did not have the mind-set of his Creator in him. So even after [bar Kamtza came by mistake, he said, "How is this; that man is the enemy, etc. And how did you err to think that I would invite you, since you are my enemy?" And he did not pay attention to any of his requests, as it concludes - until he took him with his hand and removed him by force.

(2) The precious children of Zion; Once valued as gold— Alas, they are accounted as earthen pots, Work of a potter’s hands!

(2)“The precious sons of Zion, who were valued in gold, how are they considered earthenware jugs, the handiwork of the hands of the potter?” (Lamentations 4:2). “The precious sons of Zion,” in what way was their preciousness manifest? A resident of a [different] town who would marry a Jerusalemite woman would give her her weight in gold. Likewise, a Jerusalemite man who married a woman from a [different] town, they would give him his weight in gold. Another matter, in what way was their preciousness manifest? When one of them would marry a woman of more elevated status than he was, he would spend more to prepare tables for the wedding feast than he would for the household expenses; [if she was] of inferior status than he was, he would spend more on household expenses than he would on tables for the wedding feast. Another matter, in what way was their preciousness manifest? None of them would attend a feast until he was invited twice.

(3) There was an incident involving a certain man in Jerusalem, who made a feast. He said to a member of his household: ‘Go and bring me my friend, Kamtza.’ He went and brought his enemy, bar Kamtza. He entered and sat among the guests. [The host] entered and found him among those invited to the feast. He said to him: ‘You are my enemy, and you are sitting in my house? Get up and leave my house.’ He said to him: ‘Do not shame me, and I will give you the cost of my meal.’ He said to him: ‘You will not recline [at the feast].’ He said to him: ‘Do not shame me and I will sit, but I will not eat and I will not drink.’ He said to him: ‘You will not recline [at the feast].’ He said to him: ‘Do not shame me and I will give the cost of this entire feast.’ He said to him: ‘Get up [ and leave].’ Rabbi Zekharya ben Avkulas was there and it was within his ability to protest, but he did not protest. Immediately, [bar Kamtza] left. He said to himself: ‘These who are reclining at the feast are sitting in serenity; I will slander them.’ What did he do? He went to the ruler and said to him: ‘Those offerings that you send to the Jews for them to sacrifice, they eat them and sacrifice others in their stead.’ [The ruler] reprimanded him. He went to him again and said to him: ‘All those offerings that you send to the Jews for them to sacrifice, they eat them and sacrifice others in their stead. If you do not believe me, send with me one official and offerings, and you will immediately know that I am not a liar.’ While they were traveling on the way, the official fell asleep. [Bar Kamtza] arose during the night and rendered them all blemished animals in a discreet manner. When the priest saw them, he sacrificed others in their stead. The emissary of the king said: ‘Why did you not sacrifice these offerings?’ He said to him: ‘[I will sacrifice them] tomorrow.’ The third day arrived and he did not sacrifice them. He sent and said to the ruler: ‘The matter that the Jew said, he spoke the truth.’ Immediately, [the ruler] ascended to the Temple and destroyed it. That is what the people say: ‘Because of the differences between Kamtza and bar Kamtza the Temple was destroyed.’ Rabbi Yosei said: ‘The humility of Rabbi Zekharya ben Avkulas burned the Sanctuary.’ Alternatively, in what way was their preciousness manifest? Not one of them would bear a child missing a limb or blemished.

Having mentioned the haftara read on Yom Kippur, the Gemara cites that which Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Wherever you find a reference in the Bible to the might of the Holy One, Blessed be He, you also find a reference to His humility adjacent to it. Evidence of this fact is written in the Torah, repeated in the Prophets, and stated a third time in the Writings.It is written in the Torah: “For the Lord your God is the God of gods and the Lord of lords” (Deuteronomy 10:17), and it is written immediately afterward: “He executes the judgment of the fatherless and widow” (Deuteronomy 10:18), displaying his humility in caring for even the weakest parts of society. It is repeated in the Prophets: “For thus says the High and Lofty One that inhabits eternity, Whose name is sacred” (Isaiah 57:15), and it is written immediately afterward: “In the high and holy place I dwell with him that is of a contrite and humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the heart of the contrite ones” (Isaiah 57:15). It is stated a third time in the Writings, as it is written: “Extol Him Who rides upon the clouds, Whose name is the Lord” (Psalms 68:5), and it is written immediately afterward: “A father of the fatherless, and a judge of widows” (Psalms 68:6).

(17) For your God ה׳ is God supreme and Lord supreme, the great, the mighty, and the awesome God, who shows no favor and takes no bribe, (18) but upholds the cause of the fatherless and the widow, and befriends the stranger, providing food and clothing.—

(15) For thus said the One who high aloft Forever dwells, whose name is holy: I dwell on high, in holiness; Yet with the contrite and the lowly in spirit— Reviving the spirits of the lowly, Reviving the hearts of the contrite.

(5) Sing to God, chant hymns to His name; extol Him who rides the clouds; the LORD is His name. Exult in His presence— (6) the father of orphans, the champion of widows, God, in His holy habitation.

The School of Hillel said: One may take bones and peels off the table. The School of Shammai said: One moves the entire table and shakes it. Zekharia ben Avkulos did not comply with either the School of Shammai nor the School of Hillel. Rather, he would take [the refuse] as he ate and throw it behind the couch. Rabbi Yosi said: The humility of Rabbi Zekharia ben Avkulos is what burned the sanctuary [of the Temple]

(3)Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disputed the proper way to recite Shema. Beit Shammai say: One should recite Shema in the manner indicated in the text of Shema itself. Therefore, in the evening every person must recline on his side and recite Shema, in fulfillment of the verse: “When you lie down,” and in the morning he must stand and recite Shema, in fulfillment of the verse: When you rise, as it is stated: “When you lie down, and when you rise.”And Beit Hillel say: Every person recitesShemaas he is, and he may do so in whatever position is most comfortable for him, both day and night, as it is stated: “And when you walk along the way,” when one is neither standing nor reclining (Me’iri). If so, according to Beit Hillel, why was it stated: “When you lie down, and when you rise”? This is merely to denote time; at the time when people lie down and the time when people rise. With regard to this halakha, Rabbi Tarfon said: Once, I was coming on the road when I stopped and reclined to reciteShemain accordance with the statement of Beit Shammai. Although Rabbi Tarfon was a disciple of Beit Hillel, he thought that fulfilling the mitzva in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai would be a more meticulous fulfillment of the mitzva, acceptable to all opinions. Yet in so doing, I endangered myself due to the highwaymen [listim] who accost travelers. The Sages said to him: You deserved to be in a position where you were liable to pay with your life, as you transgressed the statement of Beit Hillel. This statement will be explained in the Gemara.

...in order to incense the feelings of the Zealots' leaders as well, he accused Ananus of brutality, asserting that their threats were meant particularly for them. These leaders were Eleazar, son of Gion, who seemed to be the most capable of devising suitable measures and of carrying them out, and one Zecharia, son of Amphicalleus, both members of priestly families. When these two heard the personal threats against them, besides the general menaces, and when, moreover, they were told that Ananus and his friends were calling in the Romans in order to secure supreme power for themselves...they were at a loss what to do, as they were so desperately pressed for time, since the people were prepared to attack them quite soon. The suddenness of the design cut short their chances of aid from outside, since all would be over before any of their allies could hear of the situation...

Meanwhile, some of the most ardent promoters of war banded together and made an assault on a stronghold called Masada; and, having captured it by stealth, slew the Roman guards and put a garrison of their own in their place. At the same time another incident occurred in the Temple: Eleazar, son of Ananias the high priest, and a very rash young man then holding the position of captain, persuaded those who officiated at the Temple to accept no gift or sacrifice from a foreigner. This action laid the foundation of the war with Rome; for they renounced in consequence the sacrifices offered for Rome and the emperor. The chief priests and the prominent citizens earnestly appealed to them not to abandon the customary offerings for their rulers, but the priests would not give in. Their numbers gave them great confidence, backed as they were by the stalwarts of the revolutionary party; but they pinned their faith above all on the authority of the captain, Eleazar.

Thereupon the leading citizens assembled with the chief priests and most prominent Pharisees to discuss the position of affairs now that they faced irreparable disaster. They decided to try an appeal to the revolutionaries and summoned the people before the Bronze Gate-the gate of the inner sanctuary facing eastward. They began by denouncing vehemently the recklessness of this revolt and pointed out that such a war would be total; then they proceeded to ridicule the absurdity of pretext. Their ancestors, they said, had adorned the sanctuary mainly at the expense of other peoples and had always accepted gifts of foreign nations and so far from debarring any man from offering sacrifice-for this would be sacrilege-they had set up the votive offerings around the Temple which were still visible and remained there for so long a time. And here were these men provoking Roman arms and courting war with them by an alien innovation in their religion, and, besides endangering the city, laying it open to the charge of impiety, if Jews henceforth were to be the only people to allow no foreigner the right to sacrifice or worship. Should such a law be introduced to debar a single individual, they would be indignant at such an inhumane decree; but they made light of putting the Romans and Caesar outside the pale. There was danger, however, that once they rejected the sacrifices offered for the Romans, they might not be allowed to sacrifice even for themselves, and that their city would be placed outside the pale of the empire unless they quickly recovered their common sense, restored the sacrifices, and wiped out the affront before it was reported to those they had insulted.

While they pleaded thus, they brought forth priests with expert knowledge on the traditions, who testified that all their ancestors had accepted offerings from aliens. But none of the revolutionaries would listen and not even the Temple ministers came forward to support and thus were they instrumental in bringing about war. So, seeing that they could not suppress the insurrection and that the vengeance of Rome would fall on them first, the leading citizens took steps to establish their own innocence. They sent two delegations, one to Florus, headed by Simon, son of Ananias, the other to Agrippa which included such eminent persons as Saul, Antipas and Costobar, all members of the royal family. They begged them to come with troops to the city and suppress the insurrection before it got beyond control. To Florus, the news was splendid, and in his eagerness to kindle the war, he gave the emissaries no reply. But Agrippa, equally concerned for the rebels and for the nation against which they were rising in arms, anxious that the Romans should not lose the Jews, nor the Jews their Temple and mother city, and aware that he himself would gain nothing by troubles, dispatched to the aid of these citizens two thousand horses from Auranitis, Batanaea and Trachonitis under Darius the cavalry commander, and Philip, son of Jacimus, as general.

To conclude the story of Kamtza and bar Kamtza and the destruction of Jerusalem, the Gemara cites a baraita. It is taught: Rabbi Elazar says: Come and see how great is the power of shame, for the Holy One, Blessed be He, assisted bar Kamtza, who had been humiliated, and due to this humiliation and shame He destroyed His Temple and burned His Sanctuary.