עַל הַיִּיחוּד, וְעַל הַפְּנוּיָה.

about seclusion, that a man should not be secluded with women who are forbidden to him, and about a single woman.

יִחוּד, דְּאוֹרַיְיתָא הוּא, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יְהוֹצָדָק: רֶמֶז לְיִיחוּד מִן הַתּוֹרָה מִנַּיִין? שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״כִּי יְסִיתְךָ אָחִיךָ בֶן אִמֶּךָ״. וְכִי בֶּן אֵם מֵסִית, בֶּן אָב אֵינוֹ מֵסִית? אֶלָּא לוֹמַר לְךָ: בֵּן מִתְיַיחֵד עִם אִמּוֹ, וְאֵין אַחֵר מִתְיַיחֵד עִם כָּל עֲרָיוֹת שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה.

The Gemara objects: Seclusion with a woman forbidden by familial ties is prohibited by Torah law, and was not a rabbinic decree issued in the time of David. As Rabbi Yoḥanan says in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: From where is there an allusion to the halakha that seclusion is forbidden by Torah law? As it is stated: “If your brother, the son of your mother, entices you” (Deuteronomy 13:7). One can ask: But does the son of a mother entice, and does the son of a father not entice? Why mention only the son of a mother? Rather, this verse serves to tell you that only a son may be secluded with his mother. Sons are frequently with their mother, and two half-brothers of one mother consequently have the opportunity to grow close to one another. But another individual may not be secluded with those with whom relations are forbidden by the Torah, including a stepmother. Therefore, half-brothers of one father spend less time together.

אֶלָּא אֵימָא: גָּזְרוּ עַל יִיחוּד דִּפְנוּיָה.

Since seclusion, then, is prohibited by Torah law, how did Rav say that it was prohibited by a decree issued in King David’s time? Rather, say that they decreed against seclusion of a man with a single woman, to prevent occurrences like that of Amnon and Tamar.

״וַאֲדֹנִיָּה בֶן חַגִּית מִתְנַשֵּׂא לֵאמֹר אֲנִי אֶמְלֹךְ״. אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: מְלַמֵּד שֶׁבִּיקֵּשׁ לְהוֹלְמוֹ, וְלֹא הוֹלַמְתּוֹ.

Apropos Amnon, the Gemara cites traditions about another son of David: “Now Adonijah, son of Haggith, exalted himself, saying: I will be king” (I Kings 1:5). Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: The term “exalted himself” teaches that he sought for the monarchy to fit him, but it did not fit him.

״וַיַּעַשׂ לוֹ רֶכֶב וּפָרָשִׁים וַחֲמִשִּׁים אִישׁ רָצִים לְפָנָיו״. מַאי רְבוּתָא? אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: כּוּלָּן נְטוּלֵי טְחוֹל, וַחֲקוּקֵי כַפּוֹת רַגְלַיִם הָיוּ.

The verse continues: “And he prepared for himself chariots and riders and fifty people to run before him” (I Kings 1:5). The Gemara asks: What is the novelty of these actions, since other wealthy people do the same, even if they are not the sons of kings, with designs on the throne? Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: What was unique was that the runners all had their spleens removed and had the soles of their feet hollowed, removing the flesh of their feet, and these two procedures enhanced their speed.

מתני׳ ״לֹא יַרְבֶּה לּוֹ סוּסִים״ – אֶלָּא כְּדֵי מֶרְכַּבְתּוֹ. ״וְכֶסֶף וְזָהָב לֹא יַרְבֶּה לּוֹ מְאֹד״ – אֶלָּא כְּדֵי לִיתֵּן אַסְפַּנְיָא. וְכוֹתֵב לוֹ סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה לִשְׁמוֹ. יוֹצֵא לַמִּלְחָמָה, מוֹצִיאָהּ עִמָּהּ. נִכְנָס, הוּא מַכְנִיסָהּ עִמּוֹ. יוֹשֵׁב בַּדִּין, הִיא עִמּוֹ. מֵיסֵב, הִיא כְּנֶגְדּוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְהָיְתָה עִמּוֹ וְקָרָא בוֹ כָּל יְמֵי חַיָּיו״.

The king “shall not accumulate many horses for himself” (Deuteronomy 17:16), only enough for his chariot in war and in peace. “Neither shall he greatly accumulate silver and gold for himself” (Deuteronomy 17:17), only enough to provide his soldiers’ sustenance [ aspanya ]. And the king writes himself a Torah scroll for his sake, as stipulated in Deuteronomy 17:18. When he goes out to war, he brings it out with him. When he comes in from war, he brings it in with him. When he sits in judgment, it is with him. When he reclines to eat, it is opposite him, as it is stated: “And it shall be with him and he shall read it all the days of his life” (Deuteronomy 17:19).

גמ׳ תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״׳לֹא יַרְבֶּה לּוֹ סוּסִים׳, יָכוֹל אֲפִילּוּ כְּדֵי מֶרְכַּבְתּוֹ וּפָרָשָׁיו. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ׳לּוֹ׳ – לוֹ אֵינוֹ מַרְבֶּה, אֲבָל מַרְבֶּה הוּא כְּדֵי רִכְבּוֹ וּפָרָשָׁיו. הָא מָה אֲנִי מְקַיֵּים ׳סוּסִים׳? סוּסִים הַבַּטְלָנִין. מִנַּיִין שֶׁאֲפִילּוּ סוּס אֶחָד וְהוּא בָּטֵל שֶׁהוּא בְּ׳לֹא יַרְבֶּה׳? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ׳לְמַעַן הַרְבּוֹת סוּס׳״.

The Sages taught in a baraita with regard to the verse: “He shall not accumulate many horses [ susim ] for himself nor return the people to Egypt for the sake of accumulating horses [ sus ]” (Deuteronomy 17:16): One might have thought that he shall not have even enough horses for his chariot and riders. Therefore, the verse states: “For himself,” teaching that only if the horses are for himself, for personal pleasure, he shall not accumulate them, but he may accumulate horses for his chariot and riders. How, then, do I realize the meaning of “horses [ susim ]” in the verse? It is referring to idle horses, which serve no purpose other than glorifying the king. From where is it derived that even if the king has one horse that is idle, that he transgresses “he shall not accumulate”? The verse states: “For the sake of accumulating horses [ sus ],” with the term for horses written in the singular.

וְכִי מֵאַחַר דַּאֲפִילּוּ סוּס אֶחָד וְהוּא בָּטֵל, קָאֵי בְּ״לֹא יַרְבֶּה״, ״סוּסִים״ לָמָּה לִי? לַעֲבוֹר בְּלֹא תַּעֲשֶׂה עַל כָּל סוּס וְסוּס.

The Gemara asks: But once the verse taught that even one horse that is idle stands to be included in the prohibition of “he shall not accumulate,” why do I need the plural form “horses” in the first clause of the verse? The Gemara responds: Its purpose is to teach that a king would transgress the prohibition an additional time for each and every idle horse.

טַעְמָא דְּכָתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״לּוֹ״. הָא לָאו הָכִי, הֲוָה אָמִינָא אֲפִילּוּ כְּדֵי רִכְבּוֹ וּפָרָשָׁיו נַמִי לָא! לָא, צְרִיכָא לְאַפּוּשֵׁי.

The Gemara questions this ruling: The specific reason for limiting the prohibition to idle horses is that the Merciful One writes: “He shall not accumulate for himself,” which indicates, consequently, that if the Torah had not written this, I would say that even enough horses for his chariot and riders are not permitted; and this is unreasonable, since the king needs an army. The Gemara responds: No, the term “for himself” is necessary to teach that it is permitted for the king to add a reasonable number of horses beyond the necessary minimum, and it is only strictly personal use that is prohibited.

״׳וְכֶסֶף וְזָהָב לֹא יַרְבֶּה לּוֹ׳ – אֶלָּא כְּדֵי לִיתֵּן אַסְפַּנְיָא״. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״׳וְכֶסֶף וְזָהָב לֹא יַרְבֶּה לּוֹ׳. יָכוֹל אֲפִילּוּ כְּדֵי לִיתֵּן אַסְפַּנְיָא. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ׳לּוֹ׳ – לוֹ אֵינוֹ מַרְבֶּה, אֲבָל מַרְבֶּה הוּא כְּדֵי לִיתֵּן אַסְפַּנְיָא״.

The mishna teaches: “Neither shall he greatly accumulate silver and gold for himself” (Deuteronomy 17:17), only enough to provide his soldiers’ sustenance. The Sages taught in a baraita : From the command “neither shall he greatly accumulate silver and gold for himself,” one might have thought that he should not have even enough to provide his soldiers’ sustenance. To counter this, the verse states: “For himself,” teaching that only if the silver and gold is for himself, for personal pleasure, he shall not accumulate it, but he may accumulate enough silver and gold to provide his soldiers’ sustenance.

טַעְמָא דְּכָתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״לּוֹ״. הָא לָאו הָכִי הֲוָה אָמִינָא אֲפִילּוּ כְּדֵי לִיתֵּן אַסְפַּנְיָא נַמִי לָא! לָא, צְרִיכָא לְהַרְוָוחָה.

The Gemara questions this ruling: The specific reason for limiting the prohibition to personal wealth accumulation is that the Merciful One writes: “Neither shall he greatly accumulate silver and gold for himself,” which indicates, consequently, that if the Torah had not written this, I would say that it is not permitted for the king to accumulate even enough silver and gold to provide his soldiers’ sustenance; this is unreasonable, since the king needs an army. The Gemara responds: No, the term “for himself” is necessary to teach that the king is permitted to allow for a liberal appropriation to the military budget, so that the army has a comfortable financial cushion.

הָשְׁתָּא, דְּאָמְרַתְּ ״לּוֹ״ לִדְרָשָׁה, ״לֹא יַרְבֶּה לּוֹ נָשִׁים״, מַאי דָּרְשַׁתְּ בֵּיהּ? לְמַעוּטֵי הֶדְיוֹטוֹת.

The Gemara asks: Now that you have said that the term “for himself” in the verse is stated for the purpose of a derivation for practical halakha , which limits and narrows the verse’s scope, what do you derive from the next phrase in the verse: “He shall not add many wives for himself”? The Gemara answers: That usage of “for himself” serves to exclude ordinary people, to specify that only the king is restricted from having many wives, but a civilian may marry as many women as he wants, provided he can support them financially.

רַב יְהוּדָה רָמֵי: כְּתִיב: ״וַיְהִי לִשְׁלֹמֹה אַרְבָּעִים אֶלֶף אֻרְוֹת סוּסִים לְמֶרְכַּבְתּוֹ״. וּכְתִיב: ״וַיְהִי לִשְׁלֹמֹה אַרְבַּעַת אֲלָפִים אֻרְווֹת סוּסִים״. הָא כֵּיצַד? אִם אַרְבָּעִים אֶלֶף אִיצְטַבְּלָאוֹת הָיוּ – כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד הָיוּ בּוֹ אַרְבַּעַת אֲלָפִים אֻרְווֹת סוּסִים. וְאִם אַרְבַּעַת אֲלָפִים אִיצְטַבְּלָאוֹת הָיוּ – כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד הָיוּ בּוֹ אַרְבָּעִים אֶלֶף אֻרְווֹת סוּסִים.

§ Rav Yehuda raises a contradiction: It is written in one verse: “And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots” (I Kings 5:6), and it is written in another verse: “And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots” (II Chronicles 9:25). How can these texts be reconciled? If there were forty thousand large stables [ itztablaot ], each and every one of them had in it four thousand stalls, or rows, for horses. And alternatively, if there were four thousand large stables, each and every one had in it forty thousand stalls for horses. Therefore the two verses are reconciled.

רַבִּי יִצְחָק רָמֵי: כְּתִיב: ״אֵין כֶּסֶף נֶחְשָׁב בִּימֵי שְׁלֹמֹה לִמְאוּמָה״. וּכְתִיב: ״וַיִּתֵּן שְׁלֹמֹה אֶת הַכֶּסֶף בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם כַּאֲבָנִים״! לָא קַשְׁיָא. כָּאן, קוֹדֶם שֶׁנָּשָׂא שְׁלֹמֹה אֶת בַּת פַּרְעֹה. כָּאן, לְאַחַר שֶׁנָּשָׂא שְׁלֹמֹה אֶת בַּת פַּרְעֹה.

Rabbi Yitzḥak raises a contradiction: It is written in one verse: “Silver was not worth anything in the days of Solomon” (II Chronicles 9:20), and it is written in another verse: “And the king made silver in Jerusalem as stones” (I Kings 10:27), i.e., gems. The Gemara responds: It is not difficult: Here, where silver was worthless, this was before Solomon sinfully married Pharaoh’s daughter. There, where the silver was valuable, this was after Solomon married Pharaoh’s daughter.

אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק: בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁנָּשָׂא שְׁלֹמֹה אֶת בַּת פַּרְעֹה, יָרַד גַּבְרִיאֵל וְנָעַץ קָנֶה בַּיָּם, וְהֶעֱלָה שִׂירְטוֹן, וְעָלָיו נִבְנָה כְּרַךְ גָּדוֹל שֶׁבְּרוֹמִי.

Rabbi Yitzḥak says: When Solomon married Pharaoh’s daughter, the angel Gabriel descended from Heaven and implanted a pole in the sea. And it gradually raised up a sandbar [ sirton ] around it, creating new, dry land, and on it the great city of Rome was built. This shows that the beginning of the Jewish people’s downfall to Rome came with Solomon’s marriage to Pharaoh’s daughter.

וְאָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק: מִפְּנֵי מָה לֹא נִתְגַּלּוּ טַעֲמֵי תוֹרָה? שֶׁהֲרֵי שְׁתֵּי מִקְרָאוֹת נִתְגַּלּוּ טַעְמָן, נִכְשָׁל בָּהֶן גְּדוֹל הָעוֹלָם. כְּתִיב: ״לֹא יַרְבֶּה לּוֹ נָשִׁים״. אָמַר שְׁלֹמֹה: אֲנִי אַרְבֶּה וְלֹא אָסוּר. וּכְתִיב: ״וַיְהִי לְעֵת זִקְנַת שְׁלֹמֹה נָשָׁיו הִטּוּ אֶת לְבָבוֹ״.

And Rabbi Yitzḥak says: For what reason were the rationales of Torah commandments not revealed? It was because the rationales of two verses were revealed, and the greatest in the world, King Solomon, failed in those matters. It is written with regard to a king: “He shall not add many wives for himself, that his heart should not turn away” (Deuteronomy 17:17). Solomon said: I will add many, but I will not turn away, as he thought that it is permitted to have many wives if one is otherwise meticulous not to stray. And later, it is written: “For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods” (I Kings 11:4).

וּכְתִיב: ״לֹא יַרְבֶּה לּוֹ סוּסִים״. וְאָמַר שְׁלֹמֹה: ״אֲנִי אַרְבֶּה וְלֹא אָשִׁיב״. וּכְתִיב: ״וַתֵּצֵא מֶרְכָּבָה מִמִּצְרַיִם בְּשֵׁשׁ״ וגו׳.

And it is also written: “Only he shall not accumulate many horses for himself nor return the people to Egypt for the sake of accumulating horses” (Deuteronomy 17:16), and Solomon said: I will accumulate many, but I will not return. And it is written: “And a chariot came up and went out of Egypt for six hundred shekels of silver” (I Kings 10:29), teaching that not only did Solomon violate the Torah, but he also failed in applying the rationale given for its commandments. This demonstrates the wisdom in the Torah’s usual silence as to the rationale for its mitzvot, as individuals will not mistakenly rely on their own wisdom to reason that the mitzvot are inapplicable in some circumstances.

״וְכוֹתֵב סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה לִשְׁמוֹ״. תָּנָא: ״וּבִלְבַד שֶׁלֹּא יִתְנָאֶה בְּשֶׁל אֲבוֹתָיו״.

§ The mishna teaches that the king writes a Torah scroll for his sake. The Sages taught in a baraita ( Tosefta 4:4): The king fulfills the mitzva provided that he does not beautify himself with the Torah scroll of his ancestors for this purpose, i.e., he must write his own scroll.

אָמַר רָבָא: אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִנִּיחוּ לוֹ אֲבוֹתָיו לְאָדָם סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה, מִצְוָה לִכְתּוֹב מִשֶּׁלּוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְעַתָּה כִּתְבוּ לָכֶם אֶת הַשִּׁירָה״. אֵיתִיבֵיהּ אַבַּיֵי: ״וְכוֹתֵב לוֹ סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה לִשְׁמוֹ, שֶׁלֹּא יִתְנָאֶה בְּשֶׁל אֲחֵרִים״. מֶלֶךְ – אִין, הֶדְיוֹט – לָא!

Rava says: With regard to the mitzva for every Jew to write himself a Torah scroll, even if a person’s ancestors left him a Torah scroll, it is a mitzva to write a scroll of one’s own, as it is stated: “Now, therefore, write for yourselves this song and teach it to the children of Israel” (Deuteronomy 31:19). Abaye raised an objection to him from a baraita concerning the king’s Torah scroll: And he writes himself a Torah scroll for his sake, so that he does not beautify himself with the Torah scroll of others. Read precisely, this indicates that a king, yes, he is included in the halakha not to have a scroll inherited from his ancestors suffice, but an ordinary person is not.

לָא, צְרִיכָא לִשְׁתֵּי תוֹרוֹת, וְכִדְתַנְיָא: ״׳וְכָתַב לוֹ אֶת מִשְׁנֵה׳ וגו׳ – כּוֹתֵב לִשְׁמוֹ שְׁתֵּי תוֹרוֹת, אַחַת שֶׁהִיא יוֹצְאָה וְנִכְנֶסֶת עִמּוֹ, וְאַחַת שֶׁמּוּנַּחַת לוֹ בְּבֵית גְּנָזָיו.

The Gemara dismisses Abaye’s objection: No, the ruling of that baraita is necessary to teach that the king is commanded to write two Torah scrolls; he writes one scroll as does any Jew, and he writes an additional scroll because he is king. And this is as it is taught in a baraita : The verse states: “That he shall write for himself a second Torah in a scroll, out of that which is before the priests the Levites” (Deuteronomy 17:18). This teaches that he writes for his sake two Torah scrolls, one that goes out and comes in with him at all times, and one that is placed in his treasury.

אוֹתָהּ שֶׁיּוֹצְאָה וְנִכְנֶסֶת עִמּוֹ – עוֹשֶׂה אוֹתָהּ כְּמִין קָמֵיעַ, וְתוֹלֶה בִּזְרוֹעוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ׳שִׁוִּיתִי ה׳ לְנֶגְדִּי תָמִיד כִּי מִימִינִי בַּל אֶמּוֹט׳. אֵינוֹ נִכְנָס בָּהּ לֹא לְבֵית הַמֶּרְחָץ וְלֹא לְבֵית הַכִּסֵּא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ׳וְהָיְתָה עִמּוֹ וְקָרָא בוֹ׳ – מָקוֹם הָרָאוּי לִקְרֹאת בּוֹ״.

The baraita continues: With regard to the one that goes out and comes in with him, he makes it very small, like an amulet, and he hangs it on his arm, as it is stated: “I have set the Lord always before me; He is at my right hand, that I shall not be moved” (Psalms 16:8). This alludes to the small Torah scroll that is always on his right hand. He does not go into the bathhouse with it, nor into the bathroom, as it is stated: “And it shall be with him and he shall read from it” (Deuteronomy 17:19), meaning, it shall remain in a place that is appropriate for reading from it.

אָמַר מָר זוּטְרָא וְאִיתֵימָא מָר עוּקְבָא: בַּתְּחִלָּה נִיתְּנָה תּוֹרָה לְיִשְׂרָאֵל בִּכְתָב עִבְרִי וּלְשׁוֹן הַקּוֹדֶשׁ. חָזְרָה וְנִיתְּנָה לָהֶם בִּימֵי עֶזְרָא בִּכְתָב אַשּׁוּרִית וּלְשׁוֹן אֲרַמִּי. בֵּירְרוּ לָהֶן לְיִשְׂרָאֵל כְּתָב אַשּׁוּרִית וּלְשׁוֹן הַקּוֹדֶשׁ, וְהִנִּיחוּ לַהֶדְיוֹטוֹת כְּתָב עִבְרִית וּלְשׁוֹן אֲרַמִּי.

§ Mar Zutra says, and some say that it is Mar Ukva who says: Initially, the Torah was given to the Jewish people in Ivrit script, the original form of the written language, and the sacred tongue, Hebrew. It was given to them again in the days of Ezra in Ashurit script and the Aramaic tongue. The Jewish people selected Ashurit script and the sacred tongue for the Torah scroll and left Ivrit script and the Aramaic tongue for the commoners.

מַאן הֶדְיוֹטוֹת? אֲמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: כּוּתָאֵי. מַאי כְּתָב עִבְרִית? אֲמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: כְּתָב לִיבּוֹנָאָה.

The Gemara asks: Who are these commoners? Rav Ḥisda said: The Samaritans [ Kutim ]. The Gemara asks: What is Ivrit script? Rav Ḥisda says: Libona’a script.

תַּנְיָא: ״רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: רָאוּי הָיָה עֶזְרָא שֶׁתִּינָּתֵן תּוֹרָה עַל יָדוֹ לְיִשְׂרָאֵל, אִילְמָלֵא לֹא קְדָמוֹ מֹשֶׁה. בְּמֹשֶׁה הוּא אוֹמֵר: ׳וּמֹשֶׁה עָלָה אֶל הָאֱלֹהִים׳. בְּעֶזְרָא הוּא אוֹמֵר: ׳הוּא עֶזְרָא עָלָה מִבָּבֶל׳. מָה עֲלִיָּיה הָאָמוּר כָּאן תּוֹרָה, אַף עֲלִיָּיה הָאָמוּר לְהַלָּן תּוֹרָה.

It is taught in a baraita ( Tosefta 4:5): Rabbi Yosei says: Ezra was suitable, given his greatness, for the Torah to be given by him to the Jewish people, had Moses not come first and received the Torah already. With regard to Moses the verse states: “And Moses went up to God” (Exodus 19:3), and with regard to Ezra the verse states: “This Ezra went up from Babylon and he was a ready scribe in the Torah of Moses, which the Lord, the God of Israel, had given” (Ezra 7:6). Just as the going up stated here, with regard to Moses, is for the Torah, which he received from God and transmitted to the Jewish people, so too, the going up stated there, with regard to Ezra, is for the Torah, as he taught Torah to the Jewish people and was suitable to have originally merited to give it.

בְּמֹשֶׁה הוּא אוֹמֵר: ׳וְאֹתִי צִוָּה ה׳ בָּעֵת הַהִיא לְלַמֵּד אֶתְכֶם חֻקִּים וּמִשְׁפָּטִים׳. בְּעֶזְרָא הוּא אוֹמֵר: ׳כִּי עֶזְרָא הֵכִין לְבָבוֹ לִדְרֹשׁ אֶת תּוֹרַת ה׳ אֱלֹהָיו וְלַעֲשֹׂת וּלְלַמֵּד בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל חֹק וּמִשְׁפָּט׳. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִיתְּנָה תּוֹרָה עַל יָדוֹ, נִשְׁתַּנָּה עַל יָדוֹ הַכְּתָב, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר

The baraita continues: With regard to Moses the verse states: “And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and ordinances” (Deuteronomy 4:14), and with regard to Ezra the verse states: “For Ezra had set his heart to seek the Torah of the Lord his God and to do it and to teach in Israel statutes and ordinances” (Ezra 7:10). And even though the Torah was not given literally by him, the script of the Torah was changed by him, as it is stated: