Sha’ar ha-Gemul is on the rewards and punishments after death, immortality, and resurrection by R. Moses ben Nahman (Nahmanides, Ramban, 1194-1270). Sha’ar ha-Gemul (The Gate of Reward) is the thirtieth chapter of Torat ha-Adam (Constantinople, 1518), Nahmanides’ extensive work on the precepts related to death and mourning. The title page has a decorative border. It informs that it was brought to press by Joseph Kohen Zedek and is dated לפ"ג רבינו משה (5608=1848). The text is in a single column in rabbinic type, excepting headers and initial words. Sha’ar ha-Gemul on reward and punishment, immortality of the soul, and the world to come, discusses these topics in the following order: the nature of judgement, reward and punishment, the purpose of suffering, why the righteous suffer and the wicked prosper, and then discusses these themes in light of the book of Job. Nahmanides next addresses Gehinom and the human soul, Maimonides position on these issues, Gan Eden, the world to come, and his conclusion, ending, in contradistinction to Maimonides, “We, however, declare, that the people of the resurrection will exist forever, from the time of the resurrection of the dead to the world to come, which is an everlasting world.”

Be’er ha-Golah is a defense of rabbinic literature as represented by the Talmud and Midrashim by R. Judah ben Bezalel Loew (Maharal, c. 1525-1609). The title page notes that it is being reprinted because Be’er ha-Golah is no longer to be found and that it has been brought to press by Abraham Judah Leib Blond of Zolkiew. In Be’er ha-Golah Maharal defends the Talmud against a wide gamut of charges and calumnies of the nations, brought over the ages. Maharal is uncompromising in his defense of talmudic sages, brooking no criticism, and of the aggadah in the Talmud, for whomever tampers with (the aggadah) shall surely be stoned (Exodus 19:13) and whomever misreads them need offer his soul in restitution. Be’er ha-Golah contains Maharal’s condemnation of the Me’or Einayim (Mantua, 1573-74) of Azariah ben Moses de Rossi, who questioned talmudic chronology and lore after comparing it to the works of non-Jews. In Be’er vi, for example, Maharal writes, “How is he not afraid to speak out against the sages and to speak of them as if they were his colleagues and contemporaries?”