2,711 pages of Talmud. A gem a day.

When I was 15 I went to Israel for the first time on a 6 week program with other teens. For one week of the program, we got to choose where we wanted to volunteer, I chose the army with a program called Gadna. While I was there, I was put on kitchen detail where I was chopping carrots. One of the cooks said I was going too slow and showed me how fast he wanted me to chop. That leads me to our daf today.

This is as Rabbi Yirmeya asked Rabbi Zeira: If the priest was sprinkling the blood, and the hand of the one sprinkling was severed before the blood reached the airspace of the altar, what is the halakha? And Rabbi Zeira said to him: It is not valid.

As Maimonides puts it, “If [a priest] was sprinkling [the blood of a sacrifice on the altar] and his hand was cut off before the blood reached the space above the altar, the sprinkling of the blood is not acceptable.”

Back to the army, the cook was chopping those carrots and . . . cut off the top of his finger.

I did not speed up my chopping.

Just a reminder that these holy priests were also butchers working with knives, and that it wasn’t always so safe for them.

We joke about having to go to school musicals where your kid is playing the third tree from the left. Well, today, on our daf describes a non-priest in the Temple as: a case where the non-priests served as a bench [itztaba].

Our daf is discussing the location of the slaughter of sacrifices (including incense, which I would not use the word “slaughter” to describe”), our intention, how we carry it (do we walk carrying it or pass it from one person to another), and the roll of the non-priest.

Not a shock, but the sages don’t agree. Not only were they not alive when the Temple stood and these sacrifices were offered, they also have different readings/interpretations of the rulings that came before them.

The idea that a non-priest can help, as long as they don’t walk so that they’re essentially being used as a “bench” is an interesting concept. And one borrowed by many teachers throughout the years as they cast the “less talented” students in their musicals.

So, today’s gem is that we have predecessors to both the casting of a child as an inanimate object, and we also have the predecessor of the bucket brigade.

Today’s gem shows that rabbis can make stupid mistakes AND have no compassion. (So, we’re looking good.)

Rabbi Abbahu ridiculed [megaddef ] this interpretation: If so, how can you find a fit Paschal offering according to ben Beteira? If its owner designated an animal now, on the morning of the fourteenth, as a Paschal offering, it is disqualified from the outset, as it cannot be sacrificed at all, either for its sake or not for its sake. And even if its owner designated it the previous day, when it was fit to be sacrificed not for its sake, it was fit and then disqualified the next morning, when it was no longer fit to be sacrificed until the afternoon. Once an offering is disqualified, it can no longer become fit.

This Hebrew word megaddef, ridicule, was not one I had seen on the daf before. Rabbi Abbahu is basically calling his colleague an idiot. This, in and of itself, would have been enough to catch my eye. At this time of year where we all do self-reflection and try and examine the times we missed the mark, the times we have hurt others, the times we were not our best self – there is something almost comforting in seeing a great rabbi immortalized in the Talmud at a less-then-gracious moment. But, he also has a point: the argument makes no sense! Sometimes, even the best of us act like idiots.

So, lets not be afraid to admit when we’ve been idiots and apologize when we are unkind.

Okay, today’s gem is . . . a name. I was struck reading the daf that it kept referring to “Shimon, brother of Azarya.” Now, normally, a rabbi is referred to as “son of” or just by their name. So, why is this guy referred to as “brother of Azarya”?

It turns out that both of these brothers were 9th generation descendants of Ezra (yes, from “the book of Ezra” in the bible), so they both had lineage and importance. They were also both great scholars, however, Azarya had something Shimon didn’t . . . money.

Azarya was very wealthy and so he was able to devote his life to study. It turns out he wanted that for his brother as well and so he completely took on his brother’s financial needs. Because of this Shimon is referred to as “brother of Azarya.”

It is said that, in Judaism, you get credit for birthing the people you educate. (It’s part of why we say kaddish for our teachers, even if they’re not family.) Today, the daf hints that we also get credit for helping someone afford an education.

As it’s the 10 days of teshuvah and we are supposed to give tedakah, perhaps a donaiton to an education fund is in order.

A perfect gem to Rosh haShana:

The mishna teaches: Rabbi Eliezer says: The guilt offering, too, is unfit when sacrificed not for its sake. With regard to this it is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Eliezer said: A sin offering is brought for committing a transgression and a guilt offering is brought for committing a transgression. Just as a sin offering sacrificed not for its sake is unfit, so too, a guilt offering sacrificed not for its sake is unfit.

Yesterday, we were throwing bread crumbs into the water to “toss away” our sins. This text reminds us that we really should have intention. When we apologize, we need to name what we are apologizing for. When we admit our sins, we should really examine ourselves and ask what we did wrong. What are we trying to change? To rid ourselves of? For what are we holding guilt?

Okay, my gem today if that the rabbis decide which sacrifices can be accidentally replace by others and it be “fit” by if the same people can eat them.

Rather, the answer should be emended: Offerings that are eaten by every Jewish person are diverted to serve as offerings eaten by every Jewish person, i.e., peace offerings. But offerings eaten by every Jewish person are not diverted to serve as offerings not eaten by every Jewish person, i.e., sin offerings and guilt offerings, which are eaten only by priests.

Bon appatite!

Why do we only eat turkey on Thanksgiving? (Or tofurkey for the vegetarians.) Only latkes at Chanukah? And the biggest question of all, why do we only have hamantaschen at Purim (when by far, it’s the best cookie)?

Our daf has an insight.

The Sages taught: When a Paschal offering is sacrificed at its appointed time, on Passover eve after noon, if it is sacrificed for its sake, it is fit; if it is sacrificed not for its sake, it is unfit, as stated in the mishna. And when an offering consecrated as a Paschal offering is sacrificed during the rest of the days of the year, if it is sacrificed for its sake, it is unfit; if it is sacrificed not for its sake, it is fit.

The Gemara goes on to discusses the source for this law that the pascal lamb slaughtered at any time other than Erev Pesach is a valid Korban Shelamim/ peace offering, as long as it was not slaughtered with intent that it serve as a Korban Pesach/Passover offering. 

So, we can eat these things “not in their time.” Plenty of people eat turkey meat in their lunch, hashbrowns are eaten all the time, and apparently, you can always go for a jelly tart after either.

The holidays make a food special, it’s something to look forward to, but you can go ahead and eat matzaball soup, even when it’s not Passover, as long as you don’t say it’s Passover when it’s not.

Enjoy your apples and honey, honey cakes, and round Challah. Sure, you can eat those at other times of the year – but today, it’s special, it’s holy.

A perfect passage as we celebrate Rosh Hashanah tomorrow and we admit our failures and ask God for forgiveness. It talks about the burnt offering we give for atonement.

And Rava says: A burnt offering is a gift [doron] to God; its essential purpose is not atonement. Rava supports his assertion: What are the circumstances under which a burnt offering atones for violating a positive mitzva? If one brings a burnt offering without repentance for his transgression, he may not sacrifice it at all, as “the sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination” (Proverbs 21:27). And if there is repentance, isn’t it taught in a baraita that if one violates a positive mitzva and repents, God forgives him before he even moves from his place? If so, why is he required to bring an offering? Rather, conclude from it that a burnt offering is a gift that one brings in order to appease God even after he is forgiven.

If we repent God forgives us before we even move from our place.

The best gem yet.

You know how our technology spies on us, so that when you’re talking about taking a trip to Hawaii, suddenly adds for Hawaiian style shirts and swim suits pop up? I feel like maybe the Talmud was listening to my conversation last night . . .

A dilemma was raised before the Sages: When one brings a burnt offering, which atones for violations of positive mitzvot, does it atone even for a violation of a positive mitzva that one committed after designating the animal as an offering, or does it not atone for such a violation?

Last night, a congregant said some lashon hara (gossip) in front of me. Then they said sorry. I said, “Don’t worry, Rosh haShana is coming up so now you have something to confess.” Then we joked that now is the time to sin – because it’ll soon be forgiven. Well, clearly the daf knows that people might think this way. Today is teaches us, just because we have designated our sacrifice, does not mean we can go and commit other sins. . . (so I have something to confess on Rosh haShaha haha)