← 经卷总目·第一章 书卷的诵读
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 8 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）……会幕毁坏以后，可以在临时的私坛上献祭；论耶路撒冷的圣洁，圣殿毁坏以后，却不许在私坛上献祭，因那禁令仍然有效。
……会幕毁坏以后，就许人在临时的私坛上献祭。
after the Tabernacle was destroyed, there is permission to sacrifice offerings on improvised altars.
论耶路撒冷的圣洁，圣殿毁坏以后，却不许人在临时的私坛上献祭，因为那禁令仍然有效。
But with regard to the sanctity of Jerusalem, after the Temple was destroyed, there is no permission to sacrifice offerings on improvised altars, as the prohibition remains intact.
拉比以撒 说：我听说如今人仍在埃及的奥尼亚殿献祭。他认为那殿不是拜偶像的庙，而是事奉神的殿；又认为起初的祝圣只使耶路撒冷在当时成圣，并没有使它永远成圣，所以圣殿毁坏以后，在别处献祭就不再禁止。
拉比以撒 说：我听说，到如今人仍在埃及的奥尼亚殿里献祭。
Rabbi Yitzḥak said: I heard that one sacrifices offerings in the temple of Onias in Egypt at the present time.
注：奥尼亚殿，原文 בית חוניו，大祭司奥尼亚四世在埃及利安托波利所建。
革玛拉说明 拉比以撒 这话的根据。
The Gemara cites the basis for the statement of Rabbi Yitzḥak.
他认为奥尼亚殿不是拜偶像的庙，而是事奉神的殿；他又认为，起初的祝圣只使耶路撒冷在当时成圣，并没有使耶路撒冷永远成圣。
He maintains that the temple of Onias is not a house of idol worship but rather a temple devoted to the service of God, and he maintains that the initial consecration sanctified Jerusalem for its time and did not sanctify Jerusalem forever.
所以圣殿毁坏以后，耶路撒冷的圣洁就失效了，在别处献祭也不再禁止。
Therefore, after the destruction of the Temple, the sanctity of Jerusalem lapsed and the sacrifice of offerings elsewhere was no longer prohibited.
因这些缘故，圣殿毁坏以后，就许人在奥尼亚殿献祭。
For these reasons it was permitted to sacrifice offerings in the temple of Onias after the Temple was destroyed.
这条 哈拉哈 的出处是申命记 12:9「安息地，所得的产业」：「安息」指示罗，「产业」指耶路撒冷。经文把两者并列相比：示罗毁坏以后可在私坛上献祭，耶路撒冷毁坏以后也可以。
革玛拉引出这条 哈拉哈 的出处。
The Gemara cites the source of this halakha.
正如经上写着：「因为你们还没有到……安息地，所得的产业」（申命记 12:9），其解为：「安息」，这是示罗；「产业」，这是耶路撒冷。
It is as it is written: “For you are not as yet come to the rest and to the inheritance” (Deuteronomy 12:9), which is interpreted: “Rest,” this is Shiloh; “inheritance,” this is Jerusalem.
经文把产业与安息并列相比：正如在安息之地示罗，毁坏以后就许人在临时的私坛上献祭，照样在产业之地耶路撒冷，毁坏以后也许人在临时的私坛上献祭。
The verse juxtaposes and likens inheritance to rest: Just as in the place of rest, Shiloh, after its destruction there is permission to sacrifice offerings on improvised altars, so too in the place of inheritance, Jerusalem, after its destruction there is permission to sacrifice offerings on improvised altars.
其他贤者问 拉比以撒：你曾论奥尼亚殿说过这条 哈拉哈 么？他答：没有。拉瓦 起誓说：他确实说过，我亲自从他学来，只是他后来收回了这个裁定。
革玛拉记述：其他贤者对 拉比以撒 说：你曾论到奥尼亚殿说过这条 哈拉哈 么？
The Gemara reports that the other Sages said to Rabbi Yitzḥak: Did you say this halakha with regard to the temple of Onias?
他对他们说：没有，我没有说过。
He said to them: No, I did not say that.
拉瓦 起誓加重他的话说：我指着神起誓！
Rava said, reinforcing his assertion with an oath: By God!
拉比以撒 确实说过这话，我自己就是从他学来的，只是他后来收回了这个裁定。
Rabbi Yitzḥak did in fact say this, and I myself learned it from him, but he later retracted this ruling.
他为什么收回？因 拉夫马里 提出的难处：密释纳说示罗毁坏后许人在私坛上献祭，耶路撒冷毁坏后却不许；另一条密释纳又说，以色列人一到耶路撒冷，私坛就被禁止，再不得许可，耶路撒冷成了永远的产业。
革玛拉问：他收回这个裁定，缘故是什么？
The Gemara asks: And what is the reason he retracted his ruling?
革玛拉说明：是因 拉夫马里 提出的难处，因为 拉夫马里 从密释纳提出质疑：论示罗的圣洁，会幕毁坏以后，就许人在临时的私坛上献祭。
The Gemara explains: It is due to the difficulty raised by Rav Mari, as Rav Mari raised an objection from the mishna: With regard to the sanctity of Shiloh, after the Tabernacle was destroyed there is permission to sacrifice offerings on improvised altars.
论耶路撒冷的圣洁，圣殿毁坏以后，却不许人在临时的私坛上献祭。
But with regard to the sanctity of Jerusalem, after the Temple was destroyed there is no permission to sacrifice offerings on improvised altars.
再者，我们在一条密释纳里学过（《牺牲卷》叶一百一十二背）：他们一到耶路撒冷，私坛就被禁止，以后再也没有得到许可，耶路撒冷就成了永远的产业。
And furthermore, we learned in a mishna (Zevaḥim 112b): Once they came to Jerusalem, improvised altars were prohibited, and they did not again have permission to do so, and Jerusalem became the everlasting inheritance.
革玛拉评说：这件事是 坦拿 之间的争议。一条密释纳记 拉比以利以谢 说：我听说第二圣殿建造圣所时，给圣所和院子都做了临时的帷子作隔断，直到石墙建成；分别只在于建圣所时，工人在帷子外面砌墙，建院子时，在帷子里面砌墙。
革玛拉评说：这件事是 坦拿 之间的争议，因为一条密释纳（《证言卷》8:6）教导说：拉比以利以谢 说：我听说，他们在第二圣殿时期建造圣所的时候，给圣所做了临时的帷子，也给院子做了临时的帷子，作为隔断，直到石墙建成为止。
The Gemara comments: This matter is subject to a dispute between tanna’im, as it is taught in a mishna (Eduyyot 8:6): Rabbi Eliezer said: I heard that when they were building the Sanctuary in the Second Temple, they fashioned temporary hangings for the Sanctuary and temporary hangings for the courtyard to serve as partitions until construction of the stone walls was completed.
分别只在于：建造圣所时，工人不进到里面，在帷子外面砌墙；建造院子时，工人在帷子里面砌墙。
The difference was only that in building the Sanctuary, the workers built the walls outside the hangings, without entering, and in the courtyard, the workers built the walls inside the hangings.
拉比约书亚 说：我听说没有圣殿也可在坛上献祭，没有帷子也可在院子里吃至圣之祭，没有城墙也可在耶路撒冷吃次圣之祭与第二什一，因为起初的祝圣使它在当时成圣，也使它永远成圣。革玛拉推断：由此可知 拉比以利以谢 认为没有永远成圣，可见这是 坦拿 之间的争议。
拉比约书亚 说：我听说，即便没有圣殿，人也在祭坛上献祭；即便没有帷子，人也在圣殿院子里吃至圣之祭；即便没有城墙环绕，人也在耶路撒冷吃次圣之祭与第二什一的出产；因为起初的祝圣使耶路撒冷在当时成圣，也使耶路撒冷永远成圣。
And Rabbi Yehoshua said: I heard that one sacrifices offerings on the altar even though there is no Temple, one eats offerings of the most sacred order in the Temple courtyard even if there are no hangings, and one eats offerings of lesser sanctity and second tithe produce in Jerusalem even if there is no wall surrounding the city, due to the fact that the initial consecration sanctified Jerusalem for its time and also sanctified Jerusalem forever.
即便墙垣不存，圣洁仍然有效。
Even if the walls do not exist, the sanctity remains intact.
革玛拉推断：既然 拉比约书亚 以起初的祝圣使耶路撒冷永远成圣为立论的根据，由此可以推知，拉比以利以谢 认为：起初的祝圣并没有使耶路撒冷永远成圣。
The Gemara concludes: From the fact that Rabbi Yehoshua based his opinion on the principle that the initial sanctification sanctified Jerusalem forever, by inference one can conclude that Rabbi Eliezer holds: It did not sanctify Jerusalem forever.
看来这个问题是 坦拿 之间的争议。
Apparently, this issue is subject to a dispute between tanna’im.
拉维纳 驳 拉夫阿施：你从哪里推出这一点？或许两位都认为起初的祝圣也使耶路撒冷永远成圣，各人只是传述师长的传统，彼此并无争议。若问照 拉比以利以谢 何须帷子，答：帷子只是为遮蔽，因这至圣之处的事若人人看得见，就不合宜。
拉维纳 对 拉夫阿施 说：你从哪里推出这一点呢？
Ravina said to Rav Ashi: From where do you draw this inference?
或许人人都认为，起初的祝圣使耶路撒冷在当时成圣，也使耶路撒冷永远成圣。
Perhaps everyone maintains that the initial consecration sanctified Jerusalem for its time and also sanctified Jerusalem forever.
一位贤者，就是 拉比以利以谢，说的是他从他师长听来的传统；另一位贤者，就是 拉比约书亚，说的是他从他师长听来的传统；两人之间并没有争议。
And one Sage, Rabbi Eliezer, stated that tradition, which he heard from his teachers, and one Sage, Rabbi Yehoshua, stated that tradition, which he heard from his teachers, and there is no dispute between them.
你若说：那么照 拉比以利以谢，我何必要帷子呢？
And if you would say: Why then do I need hangings at all according to Rabbi Eliezer?
耶路撒冷没有城墙环绕的时候，原来的圣洁仍在，那么有没有帷子也都无关紧要了。
The original sanctity remained when Jerusalem was not surrounded by walls, and the presence or absence of hangings is irrelevant as well.
革玛拉答：设帷子只是为了遮蔽，因为在这至圣之处所行的事若人人都看得见，就不合宜。
The Gemara answers: The hangings were established merely for seclusion, as it would have been unbecoming for the activity in this most sacred venue to be visible to all.
其实这件事是以下 坦拿 之间的争议。一段 《巴拉伊塔》 记 拉比约西之子拉比以实玛利 说：众贤为何在《估价卷》里只列出这九座自约书亚时代就有城墙的城？被掳的人从巴比伦上来时，寻得这些城，就把它们祝圣为有城墙之城；而约书亚书所列最初那些城的圣洁，在百姓被掳、地上不再有人居住时就作废了。可见他认为起初的祝圣只使耶路撒冷在当时成圣。
其实，这件事是以下这些 坦拿 之间的争议，因为有一段 《巴拉伊塔》 教导说：拉比约西之子拉比以实玛利 说：众贤为什么在《估价卷》里，把这九座城列为自嫩的儿子约书亚的时代就有城墙的城呢？
Rather, this matter is subject to the dispute between these tanna’im, as it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, said: Why did the Sages enumerate these nine cities in tractate Arakhin as cities walled since the days of Joshua, son of Nun?
岂不是还有许多别的城么？
Weren’t there many more?
因为被掳的人从巴比伦上到以色列地的时候，寻得这些城，就把它们祝圣为有城墙之城；而约书亚书所列最初那些有城墙之城的圣洁，在地上不再有人居住、犹太民被掳的时候，就作废了。
As, when the exiles ascended to Eretz Yisrael from Babylonia, they discovered these cities and consecrated them as walled cities; but the sanctity of the first walled cities enumerated in the book of Joshua was negated when settlement in the land was negated and the Jewish people were exiled.
看来 拉比约西之子拉比以实玛利 认为：起初的祝圣只使耶路撒冷在当时成圣，并没有使耶路撒冷永远成圣。
Apparently, Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, maintains: The initial consecration sanctified Jerusalem for its time only and did not sanctify Jerusalem forever.
革玛拉从另一段 《巴拉伊塔》 提出矛盾：拉比约西之子拉比以实玛利 说，《估价卷》所列的岂是仅有的有城墙之城？经上已说亚珥歌伯全境有六十座城，都有坚固的高墙。众贤列出这些城，是因被掳的人从巴比伦上来时寻得这些城，把它们祝圣了。
革玛拉从另一段 《巴拉伊塔》 提出矛盾。
The Gemara raises a contradiction from a different baraita.
拉比约西之子拉比以实玛利 说：《估价卷》里所列的这些城，难道是仅有的有城墙之城么？
Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, said: Were these cities that were enumerated in tractate Arakhin the only walled cities?
经上岂不是已经说过：「共有六十座城，就是亚珥歌伯全境」（申命记 3:4），论到这些城又写着：「这些城都有坚固的高墙，有门有闩」（申命记 3:5），可见有城墙的城为数很多？
Wasn’t it already stated: “Sixty cities, all the region of Argov” (Deuteronomy 3:4), and concerning these cities it is written: “All these cities were fortified with high walls, gates and bars” (Deuteronomy 3:5), indicating that there were a great number of walled cities?
那么，众贤为什么偏偏列出这些城呢？
Rather, why then did the Sages enumerate these specific cities?
是因被掳的人从巴比伦上来的时候，寻得这些城，就把它们祝圣为有城墙之城。
It is due to the fact that when the exiles ascended from Babylonia they discovered these and consecrated them as walled cities.
革玛拉问：把它们祝圣？若这些城的圣洁仍在，何必再祝圣？（下接 10之间）
革玛拉问：把它们祝圣？
The Gemara asks: Consecrated them?
若这些城的圣洁仍在，何必再祝圣呢？
If their sanctity remained, why was it necessary to consecrate them?