Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Kethuboth

Folio 110a

MISHNAH. IF A MAN PRODUCED A BOND OF INDEBTEDNESS AGAINST ANOTHER, AND THE LATTER PRO DUCED [A DEED OF SALE,¹  SHEWING] THAT THE FORMER HAD SOLD HIM A FIELD,²  ADMON RULED; [THE OTHER] CAN SAY, HAD I OWED YOU [ANYTHING] YOU WOULD HAVE RECOVERED IT WHEN YOU SOLD ME THE FIELD'.³  THE SAGES, HOWEVER, SAY; THIS [SELLER] MAY HAVE BEEN A PRUDENT MAN, SINCE HE MAY HAVE SOLD HIM THE LAND IN ORDER TO BE ABLE TO TAKE IT FROM HIM AS A PLEDGE.⁴

GEMARA. What is the reason of the Rabbis? Does not Admon speak well? — Where [the purchase] money is paid first and the deed is written afterwards, no one disputes that the [defendant] may well say [to the claimant], 'You should have recovered your debt when you sold me the field'.³  They only differ where the deed is written first and the purchase money is paid afterwards. Admon is of the opinion that [the claimant] should have made a declaration [of his motive],⁵  while the Rabbis⁶  maintain [that the claimant can retort,] 'Your friend has a friend, and the friend of your friend has a friend'.⁷

MISHNAH. IF TWO MEN PRODUCED BONDS OF INDEBTEDNESS AGAINST ONE ANOTHER,⁸  ADMON RULED; [THE HOLDER OF THE LATER BOND CAN SAY TO THE OTHER,] 'HAD I OWED YOU [ANY MONEY] HOW IS IT THAT YOU BORROWED FROM ME?'⁹  THE SAGES, HOWEVER, RULED: THE ONE RECOVERS HIS DEBT¹⁰  AND THE OTHER RECOVERS HIS DEBT.¹¹

GEMARA. It was stated: If two men produced bonds of indebtedness against one another, R. Nahman ruled: The one recovers his debt and the other recovers his debt.¹²  R. Shesheth said: What is the point¹³  in exchanging bags?¹⁴  The one rather retains his own [money]¹⁵  and the other retains his.

All agree¹⁶  that if both [litigants possess land of the] best,¹⁷  medium or worst quality [distraint for each on the other is] undoubtedly a case of changing bags.¹⁴  They differ only where one [of the litigants] has land of medium quality and the other of the worst quality. R. Nahman is of the opinion that 'the one recovers his debt and the other recovers his debt' because in his view an assessment¹⁸  is made on the basis of the debtor's¹⁹  possessions,²⁰  [so that] the owner of the land of the worst quality proceeds to distrain on the medium quality [of the other]²¹  which then becomes with him the best; and the other can then proceed to take from him the worst only.²²  R. Shesheth, however, said, 'What is the point in exchanging bags?' because he is of the opinion that an assessment²³  is made on a general basis,²⁴  [so that] eventually when the original owner of the medium land²⁵  proceeds [to distrain on the property of the other]²⁶  he will only take back his own medium land. But what [reason can] you see, according to R. Nahman, that the owner of the worst quality of land should proceed [to distrain] first? Why should not rather the owner of the medium quality come first and distrain on the worst [of the other] and then let him distrain on it?²⁷  — [But this ruling] applies only²⁸  where the [holder of the worst land] submitted his claim first. But after all when they come to distrain, do they not come simultaneously?²⁹  The fact, however, [is that the ruling] applies only²⁸  where one [of the litigants] has best and medium land, and the other has only of the worst. One Master³⁰  is of the opinion that an assessment³¹  is made on the basis of the debtor's³²  possessions,³³  while the other Master³⁴  is of the opinion that an assessments is made on a general basis.³⁵

We have learned: THE SAGES, HOWEVER, RULED: THE ONE RECOVERS HIS DEBT AND THE OTHER RECOVERS HIS DEBT!³⁶  R. Nahman explained this, according to R. Shesheth, [as referring to a case,] for instance, where one borrowed for a period often, and the other for one of five years.³⁷  But how exactly are we to understand this? If it be suggested that the first [bond]³⁸  was for ten years and the second for five, would Admon [it may be objected] have ruled [that the second can say to the first:] 'HAD OWED YOU [ANY MONEY] HOW IS IT THAT YOU BORROWED FROM ME?' The time for payment³⁹  surely, had not yet arrived.⁴⁰  If, however, [it be suggested that] the first was for five years and the second for ten, how [it may again be objected] is this to be understood? If the time for payment³⁹  had arrived,⁴⁰  what [it may be asked] could be the reason of the Rabbis?⁴¹  And if the time for payment³⁹  had not yet arrived,⁴⁰  well, payment was not yet due and what [it may again be asked] is Admon's reason? — [This ruling was] required [in that case] only where [the holder of the earlier bond]⁴²  came [to borrow] on the day on which the five years had terminated.⁴³  The Masters⁴⁴  are of the opinion that it is usual to borrow money for one day⁴⁵  and the Master⁴⁶  is of the opinion that one does not borrow money for one day.⁴⁷

Rama b. Mama explained: We are here⁴⁸  dealing with [a case where one of the bonds was presented by] orphans⁴⁹  who are themselves entitled to recover a debt but from whom no debt may be recovered.⁵⁰

Was it not, however, stated, THE ONE RECOVERS HIS DEBT AND THE OTHER RECOVERS HIS DEBT?⁵¹  — [The meaning is:] The one recovers his debt, and the other is entitled to recover it but gets nothing. Said Raba: Two objections [may be advanced] against this explanation. Firstly, it was stated, 'THE ONE RECOVERS HIS DEBT AND THE OTHER RECOVERS⁵¹  HIS DEBT'; and, secondly, could not [the other party] allow the orphans to distrain on a plot of land [of his] and then recover it from them,⁵²  in accordance with [a ruling of] R. Nahman, for R. Nahman said in the name of Rabbah b. Abbuha: If orphans collected a plot of land for their father's debt⁵³  the creditor⁵⁴  may re-collect it from them?⁵⁵  — This is a difficulty.

Why could it not be explained [that this is a case] where the orphans owned land of the worst quality and the other owned best⁵⁶  and medium quality, so that the orphans proceed to distrain on his medium land⁵⁷  and allow him to distrain on their worst only? For, even though⁵⁸  an assessment⁵⁹  is made on a general basis⁶⁰  is not payment from orphans' property recovered from their worst land only?⁶¹  — This applies only where [the creditor] has not yet seized [their property] but where⁶²  he had seized it⁶³  he may lawfully retain it.⁶⁴

MISHNAH. [THE FOLLOWING REGIONS ARE REGARDED AS] THREE COUNTRIES IN RESPECT OF MATRIMONY:⁶⁵  JUDAEA, TRANSJORDAN AND GALILEE. [A MAN] MAY NOT TAKE OUT [HIS WIFE WITH HIM]⁶⁶  FROM ONE TOWN⁶⁷  TO ANOTHER⁶⁸  OR FROM ONE CITY⁶⁹  TO AN OTHER. WITHIN THE SAME COUNTRY, HOWEVER, HE MAY TAKE HER OUT WITH HIM FROM ONE TOWN INTO ANOTHER OR FROM ONE CITY INTO AN OTHER⁷⁰

1. Bearing a later date than that of the bond.
2. And thereby he seeks to prove that either he never borrowed the sum claimed or that he repaid It prior to his purchase of the field.
3. By seizing the purchase price in payment of the debt. Since he did not do it is obvious that he owed bins nothing.
4. Movables can be hidden away.
5. And since he did not do so the defendant may well plead, 'HAD I OWED YOU' etc.
6. THE SAGES.
7. Cf. supra p. 700, n. 3 mutatis mutandis.
8. One bond bearing an earlier date than the other.
9. And this plea exempts him from payment.
10. Lit., 'bond of his debt'.
11. No balancing of amounts or exchange of bonds being allowed by the court. Each bond must be treated on its own merits and orders for distraint are given accordingly.
12. V. p. 703, n. II.
13. If the amounts of the two debts are equal (v. infra).
14. Metaph. If the bags are of equal weight there is no advantage to an animal in changing them from one side to the other (Jast.) or to a human being in changing the burden from one hand to the other (Levy). [H], 'leather bag' (Rashi). Cf. [H] liquid measure', 'cask'.
15. Or property on which the other desires to distrain.
16. Lit., 'all the world', R. Nahman and R. Shesheth.
17. Lit., 'best and best'.
18. On behalf of a creditor who distrains on the debtor's land.
19. Lit., 'of his'.
20. If the debtor, for instance, has only two kinds of land, medium and inferior quality, the former is regarded as 'best' and the creditor can only distrain on the inferior land. A creditor (cf. B.K. 7b) may distrain on the 'medium' land of the debtor if he possesses such, or on the 'worst'. He has no right to distrain on the 'best'.
21. Being in fact the only kind of land the other possesses.
22. He cannot reclaim the medium quality that was taken from him, since it is now regarded as its present owner's 'best' (cf. supra note 9).
23. V.supra note 7.
24. Lit., 'of all men'.
25. Lit., 'that one'.
26. Who had taken possession of his medium land.
27. Cf. p. 704, n. 11. The other could not distrain on the medium which is now his best.
28. Lit., 'is not required but'.
29. Since both presented their bonds at court (v. our Mishnah ab init.). Why then should one be allowed an advantage over the other?
30. R. Nahman.
31. V. supra p. 704, n. 7.
32. Lit., 'of his'.
33. Cf. supra p. 704, n. 9. The owner of the worst land, if allowed to distrain on the other instead of keeping his own. is at an advantage in either case. whether he distrains first or last. If he distrains first he obtains, of course, the other's medium land which, becoming his 'best', cannot be distrained on by the creditor, and the other must consequently recoup himself from his worst. If, on the other hand, the owner of the best and medium land distrains first, it is again the other's worst land (the only kind he possesses) to which he can have recourse, while the other still distrains on his medium.
34. R. Shesheth.
35. Cf. supra p. 704. n. 13. Where, therefore, two bonds are simultaneously presented at court and the order would naturally be made that the owner of the worst land distrains first on the other's 'medium' and that the latter then distrains on the same 'medium', the procedure would be as useless as that of 'exchanging bags'.
36. Is not this an objection against K. Shesheth?
37. So that it is advantageous to the debtor of the loan for the longer period that his bond shall not be balanced against the other's.
38. I.e., the one bearing the earlier date.
39. Lit., 'its time'.
40. When the second bond was written.
41. It should be pretty obvious that the holder of the later bond should be believed mince he might well plead as Admon suggested.
42. The five years' loan.
43. Payment having been due on the following day.
44. The Sages. Lit., 'master'.
45. Hence their ruling that both bonds are valid.
46. Admon.
47. Hence the admissibility of the plea, 'HAD I OWED YOU etc'
48. In our Mishnah.
49. Who inherited it from their father.
50. If they possessed no landed property. Orphans' movables may not be distrained on.
51. Not merely, 'is entitled to recover etc.
52. Cf. supra n. 12 mutatis mutandis.
53. Which someone owed him.
54. To whom their father owed money.
55. Supra 92a, Pes. 31a, B.B. 125a.
56. So cur. edd. and MS.M. R. Nissim and Maharsha omit.
57. To which a creditor is entitled (cf. supra p. 704. n. 9 second clause).
58. Lit., also'.
59. Cf. supra p. 704. n. 7.
60. Lit., 'of all men'.
61. V. Git. 48b.
62. MS.M. 'but here since'.
63. As in the case under discussion where they seek to take it from him.
64. Lit., 'he seized'.
65. Sc. a man who married in one of these cannot compel his wife to go with him to any of the others.
66. Except with her consent.
67. [H].
68. In another country.
69. [H] According to Rashi [H] is larger than [H]. According to Krauss, the former denotes a city (large or small) surrounded by a wall, v. He'atid. III, 1ff.
70. Even if she objects.

BUT NOT FROM A TOWN TO A CITY NOR FROM A CITY TO A TOWN.¹  [A MAN] MAY TAKE OUT [HIS WIFE WITH HIM] FROM AN INFERIOR²  TO A SUPERIOR³  DWELLING, BUT NOT FROM A SUPERIOR³  TO AN INFERIOR²  DWELLING. R. SIMEON B. GAMALIEL RULED: NOT EVEN FROM AN INFERIOR DWELLING TO A SUPERIOR DWELLING, BECAUSE THE [CHANGE TO A] SUPERIOR DWELLING PUTS [THE HUMAN BODY] TO A [SEVERE] TEST.⁴

GEMARA. One may readily grant [the justice of the ruling that a wife may not be compelled to move] FROM A CITY TO A TOWN, since everything [necessary] is obtainable in a city while not everything is obtainable in a town. On what grounds, however, [can she not be compelled to move] FROM A TOWN TO A CITY? — [This ruling] provides support for R. Jose b. Hanina who stated, 'Whence is it deduced that city⁵  life⁶  is difficult?⁷  [From Scripture] where it is said, And the people blessed all men that willingly offered themselves to dwell in Jerusalem.⁸

R. SIMEON B. GAMALIEL RULED etc. What [is meant by] PUTS [THE HUMAN BODY] TO A [SEVERE] TEST'?⁹  — In agreement [with a saying] of Samuel. For Samuel said: A change of diet is the beginning of bowel trouble.¹⁰

It is written in the Book of Ben Sira: All the days of the poor¹¹  are evil;¹²  but are there not the Sabbaths and festivals?¹³  — [The explanation, however, is] according to Samuel. For Samuel said: A change of diet is the beginning of bowel trouble.¹⁰  Ben Sira said: The nights also.¹⁴  Lower than [all] the roofs is his roof,¹⁵  and on the height of mountains is his vineyard,¹⁶  [so that] the rain of [other] roofs [pours down] upon his roof and the earth of his vineyard [is washed down] into the vineyards [of others].¹⁷

MISHNAH. [A MAN] MAY COMPEL ALL [HIS HOUSEHOLD] TO GO UP¹⁸  [WITH HIM] TO THE LAND OF ISRAEL., BUT NONE MAY BE COMPELLED TO LEAVE IT. ALL [ONE'S HOUSEHOLD] MAY BE COMPELLED TO GO UP¹⁸  TO JERUSALEM,¹⁹  BUT NONE MAY BE COMPELLED TO LEAVE IT. [THIS APPLIES TO] BOTH MEN AND WOMEN.²⁰  IF A MAN MARRIED A WOMAN IN THE LAND OF ISRAEL AND DIVORCED HER IN THE LAND OF ISRAEL, HE MUST PAY HER [HER KETHUBAH] IN THE CURRENCY OF THE LAND OF ISRAEL. IF HE MARRIED A WOMAN IN THE LAND OF ISRAEL AND DIVORCED HER IN CAPPADOCIA HE MUST PAY HER [HER KETHUBAH] IN THE CURRENCY OF THE LAND OF ISRAEL.²¹  IF HE MARRIED A WOMAN IN CAPPADOCIA AND DIVORCED HER IN THE LAND OF ISRAEL, HE MUST A GAIN PAY [HER KETHUBAH] IN THE CURRENCY OF THE LAND OF ISRAEL.²¹  R. SIMEON B. GAMALIEL, HOWEVER, RULED THAT HE MUST PAY HER IN THE CAPPADOCIAN CURRENCY.

IF A MAN MARRIED A WOMAN IN CAPPADOCIA AND DIVORCED HER IN CAPPADOCIA, HE MUST PAY HER [HER KETHUBAH] IN THE CURRENCY OF CAPPADOCIA.

GEMARA. What [was the expression,] 'MAY COMPEL ALL'²²  intended to include? — To include slaves.²³  What, however, [was the expression²²  intended] to include according to him who specifically mentioned 'slaves' [in our Mishnah]? — To include [removal] from a superior dwelling to an inferior one. What [was the expression,] 'BUT NONE²⁴  MAY BE COMPELLED TO LEAVE IT' intended to include? — To include a slave who fled from outside the Land [of Israel] into the Land in which case his master is told,²⁵  'Sell him here, and go', in order to [encourage] settlement in the Land of Israel. What [was the expression] 'ALL²⁶  … MAY BE COMPELLED TO GO UP TO JERUSALEM' intended to include? — To include [removal] from a superior dwelling to an inferior one. What [was the expression,] 'BUT NONE²⁷  MAY BE COMPELLED TO LEAVE IT' intended to include? — To include even [removal] from an inferior dwelling to a superior one; only since as it was stated in the earlier clause,²⁸  'NONE MAY BE COMPELLED TO LEAVE IT it was also stated in the latter clause,²⁹  'NONE MAY BE COMPELLED TO LEAVE IT'.³⁰

Our Rabbis taught: If [the husband] desires³¹  to go up³²  and his wife refuses³¹  she must be pressed³³  to go up; and if [she does] not [consent] she may be divorced³⁴  without a kethubah. If she desires³¹  to go up³²  and be refuses,³¹  he must be pressed to go up; and if [he does] not [consent] he must divorce her and pay her kethubah. If she desires to leave³⁵  and he refuses to leave, she must be pressed not to leave, and if [pressure is of] no [avail] she may be divorced³⁴  without a kethubah. If he desires to leave³⁵  and she refuses he must be pressed not to leave, and if [coercion is of] no [avail] he must divorce her and pay her kethubah.³⁶

IF A MAN MARRIED A WOMAN etc. Is not this self-contradictory? It was stated, IF HE MARRIED A WOMAN IN THE LAND OF ISRAEL AND DIVORCED HER IN CAPPADOCIA HE MUST PAY HER [HER KETHUBAH] IN THE CURRENCY OF THE LAND OF ISRAEL, from which it clearly follows that we are guided by [the currency of the place where the] obligation³⁷  was undertaken.³⁸  Read, however, the concluding clause: IF HE MARRIED A WOMAN IN CAPPADOCIA AND DIVORCED HER IN THE LAND OF ISRAEL HE MUST AGAIN PAY HER [HER KETHUBAH] IN THE CURRENCY OF THE LAND OF ISRAEL, from which it follows, does it not, that we are guided by [the currency of the place] where collection is effected?³⁹  — Rabbah replied: [The rulings] taught here [are among those in which the claims relating to] a kethubah are weaker [than those of other claimants],⁴⁰  for [the author] is of the opinion that the kethubah is a Rabbinical enactment.⁴¹  R. SIMEON B. GAMALIEL, HOWEVER, RULED THAT HE MUST PAY HER IN THE CAPPADOCIAN CURRENCY. He is of the opinion⁴²  that the kethubah is Pentateuchal.⁴³

Our Rabbis taught: If a man produces a bond of indebtedness against another [and the place of issue] entered⁴⁴  therein was Babylon, [the debtor] must allow him to collect it in Babylonian currency. If [the place of issue] entered⁴⁴  therein was the Land of Israel he must allow him to collect it in the currency of the Land of Israel. If no place of issue was entered⁴⁴  he must, if it was presented in Babylon, pay him in Babylonian currency; and, if it was presented in the Land of Israel, he must pay him in the currency of the Land of Israel. If merely [a sum of] 'silver [pieces]'⁴⁵  was entered, the borrower may pay the other whatever he wishes.⁴⁶  [This is a ruling] which does not apply to⁴⁷  a kethubah.⁴⁸  To what [ruling does this⁴⁹  refer]? — R. Mesharsheya replied: To that in the first clause,⁵⁰  thus indicating that the law is not in agreement with⁵¹  R. Simeon b. Gamaliel who ruled that the kethubah is Pentateuchal.

'If merely [a sum of] "silver [pieces]" was entered the borrower may pay the other whatever he wishes'. May not one say that [a 'silver piece' merely signified] a bar [of silver]? — R. Eleazar replied: [This is a case] where 'coin' was mentioned in the bond.⁵²  May not one suggest [that it signified] small change? — R. Papa replied: Small change is not made of silver.⁵³

Our Rabbis taught: One should always live in the Land of Israel, even in a town most of whose inhabitants are idolaters, but let no one live outside the Land, even in a town most of whose inhabitants are Israelites; for whoever lives in the Land of Israel may be considered to have⁵⁴  a God, but whoever lives outside the Land may be regarded as one who has no God. For it is said in Scripture, To give you the Land of Canaan, to be your God.⁵⁵  Has he, then, who does not live in the Land, no God?⁵⁶  But [this is what the text intended] to tell you, that whoever lives outside the Land may be regarded as one who worships idols. Similarly it was said in Scripture in [the story of] David, For they have driven me out this day that I should not cleave to the inheritance of the Lord, saying: Go, serve other gods.⁵⁷  Now, whoever said to David, 'Serve other gods'? But [the text intended] to tell you that whoever lives outside the Land⁵⁸  may be regarded as one who worships idols.⁵⁹

R. Zera was evading Rab Judah because he desired to go up to the Land of Israel while Rab Judah had expressed [the following view:] Whoever goes up from Babylon to the Land of Israel transgresses a positive commandment, for it is said in Scripture,

1. The reason is stated infra.
2. Lit., 'bad'.
3. Lit., 'beautiful'.
4. This is further explained by Samuel infra. [H] rt. esc 'to examine', 'test', 'try'. Aliter ( Jast.): [H] 'to penetrate'; 'the removal to a better residence (and style of living) penetrates (the body and creates disease)'.
5. Lit., 'cities'.
6. [H], rt. [H] 'to sit', 'dwell'.
7. Lit., 'hard', owing to overcrowding, lack of pure country air and an insufficiency of parks and open spaces.
8. Neh. XI, 2.
9. [H] cf. supra note 1.
10. [H], lit., 'disease of the bowels', 'abdominal trouble'. Cf. B.B. 146a, Sonc. ed. p. 628 (where [H] is omitted) and Sanh. 101a, Sonc. ed. p. 683.
11. So A.J.V.; A.V. and R.V. 'afflicted'.
12. Prov. XV, 15, Ben Sira XXXI, 5.
13. During which days, at least, the poor were provided with substantial meals.
14. Ben Sira loc. cit. Not only all the days.
15. As a poor man he is compelled to live in a low-roofed hovel.
16. Since he cannot afford a more costly vineyard in the valley.
17. Ben Sira XXXI, 6-7.
18. Lit., 'cause to go up'.
19. From any other Palestinian place.
20. A wife also may compel her husband to live with her in Jerusalem or the Land of Israel and, if he refuses, she is entitled to demand a divorce and the payment of her kethubah.
21. The Cappadocian coins were dearer than the corresponding ones of the Land of Israel.
22. Emphasis on 'ALL'.
23. Hebrew slaves also may be compelled by their master to follow him to Jerusalem or to the Land of Israel.
24. Emphasis on 'NONE'.
25. Lit., 'we say to him'.
26. Emphasis on 'ALL'.
27. Emphasis on 'NONE'.
28. In reference to the Land of Israel.
29. In respect of Jerusalem.
30. Though the latter clause is, in fact, redundant, it being self-evident that if a person may be compelled to leave a superior dwelling to move to an inferior one, provided the latter is in Jerusalem, he could not a fortiori be compelled to leave Jerusalem even for the sake of a change from an inferior to a superior dwelling.
31. Lit., 'says'.
32. From a country outside the Land, to the Land of Israel, or from a province in the latter to Jerusalem.
33. This law does not apply to the present time owing to the risks of the journey (Tosaf. s.v. [H] a.l.). Rabbenu Hayim also maintains that living in the Land of Israel is now not a religious act owing to the difficulty and impossibility of fulfilling many of the precepts attached to the soil (Tosaf. loc. cit. q.v.).
34. Lit., 'she goes out'.
35. Jerusalem, for a provincial town in the Land of Israel, or the latter for a foreign country.
36. Tosef. Keth. XII.
37. To pay the kethubah.
38. The obligation is undertaken at marriage and collection takes place on divorce (or the man's death).
39. Cf. supra n. 2.
40. Cf. supra p. 709, n. 4, B.B. 132b, Sonc. ed. p. 554, n. 9, Bek. 52a.
41. Non-Pentateuchal (cf. infra n. 6 and text).
42. Contrary to the view of the first Tanna (cf. supra n. 5).
43. [In the Jerusalem Talmud the opinions are reversed: R. Gamaliel holds that the kethubah is Rabbinical, whereas the Sages consider it Biblical, the Palestinian giving preference to the Palestine coinage, v. supra 10a].
44. Lit., 'written'.
45. No mention being made of the exact denomination.
46. Since he may assert that the figure in the bond referred to the smallest silver coin.
47. Lit., 'which is not so in'.
48. Tosef. Keth. XII.
49. The last clause.
50. Sc. unlike a creditor who, according to the first clause, is entitled to collect his due in the currency of the place of issue, a woman collects her kethubah in the cheaper currency only.
51. Lit., 'to bring out from'.
52. Lit., 'written in it'.
53. Lit., 'small change of silver people do not make'. Cf. B.B. 165b f, Sonc. ed. p. 722f.
54. Lit., 'is like as if he has'.
55. Lev. XXV, 38; implying apparently that only in the land of Canaan would He be their God.
56. One surely may serve God anywhere.
57. I Sam. XXVI, 19.
58. David was compelled to seek shelter from Saul in the country of Moab and the land of the Philistines.
59. Tosef. 'A.Z. V.