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

Okay! A great day for the daf. We have an entire section about listening to rumors. We have a warning that what we say might come true. We have “The Pharaoh who lived in the days of Moses was a cubit tall, his beard was a cubit long, and his penis [parmashtako] was a cubit and a span.” And we have the ability to bite our nails!

(This is even better than seeing the rabbi who was ostracized for sexual misconduct dying by bee sting to the penis! And yes, think about the bees access to the penis – likely he was publicly exposing himself.)

The piece on being careful what we say as it might come true:

It was related that something unpleasant happened to Pineḥas, brother of Mar Shmuel, that is to say, one of his close relatives died. Shmuel entered to ask him the reason, i.e., to console him. He saw that Pineḥas’s nails were long, and said to him: Why do you not cut them? Pineḥas replied: If it were your relative who died, and you were in mourning, would you treat the matter so lightly and cut your nails?

Pineḥas’s words were: “Like an error that proceeds from a ruler” (Ecclesiastes 10:5). As soon as he uttered them they come true, even though he did not intend them. Shortly after Pineḥas made his comment, something unpleasant happened to Shmuel, and one of his close relatives died. Pineḥas, his brother, entered to ask him the reason, i.e., to offer words of comfort. Shmuel took his nails and cast them in Pineḥas’s face. Shmuel then said to him: Do you not know the principle that a covenant is made with the lips? In other words, do you not know that what one says influences future events?

This is as Rabbi Yoḥanan said: From where is it derived that a covenant is made with the lips, and that one’s speech has the power to change events? For it is stated: “And Abraham said to his young men: Stay here with the donkey, and I and the lad will go onward; and we will worship, and we will come back to you” (Genesis 22:5). Abraham said this even though he thought that he was going to sacrifice his son as an offering and that Isaac would not be returning, yet this had an influence and they both came back.

Wow! Get your manifestation boards out people, because clearly what we say may come true. What we put out into the universe may come to pass. I don’t think Pinhas was wishing Shmuel to experience a loss, but the lesson is there none the less. And it leads to the question about how to trim your nails if you are mourning or during the intermediate days to the festival. It’s a nail biter!

Rav Shemen bar Abba said: I once stood before Rabbi Yoḥanan in the study hall during the intermediate days of a Festival, and he cut his nails with his teeth and threw them down.

The Gemara comments: Learn from this incident of Rabbi Yoḥanan three halakhot: Learn from this that it is permitted to cut one’s nails on the intermediate days of a Festival. And learn from this that nails have no prohibition due to the fact that they are repulsive, i.e., there is no prohibition against biting them on that basis. Inasmuch as one is prohibited from placing something repulsive in his mouth, this incident teaches that nails do not fall into this category. And also learn from this that it is permitted to throw nails away.

When I was living in Israel, my childhood friend was also living there. He had joined Chabad and was studying at the yeshivah in Jerusalem. He told me that there was a bracha for everything. I asked him what the bracha was for biting your nails. He told me that biting your nails is disgusting. Clearly, as a nail biter, I disagreed. I wish I would have had this text to share with him.

Mind you, today, when we are so mindful or germs, I can much better see why biting your nails is gross. Hey, I bit my nails when I lived in NYC! That means I help the rails on the subway and then put my hands in my mouth – yep, disgusting indeed.

When great men aren’t so great.

There was a certain Torah scholar who gained a bad reputation due to rumors about his conduct. Rav Yehuda said: What should be done? To excommunicate him is not an option. The Sages need him, as he is a great Torah authority. Not to excommunicate him is also not an option, as then the name of Heaven would be desecrated.

How much does this question speak to this moment of reckoning?! What do we do with men who are wonderful in one area of their lives, but monsters in another? Can we sing Carlebach music? Do we use Steven A. Cohen’s as teaching tools? (These are both men in the Jewish world who have victimized women) What happens when a rabbi behaves immorally but is still brilliant intellectually?

Rav Yehuda said to Rabba bar bar Ḥana: Have you heard anything with regard to this issue? He said to him: Rabbi Yoḥanan said as follows: What is the meaning of that which is written: “For the priest’s lips should keep knowledge, and they should seek Torah at his mouth; for he is a messenger [malakh] of the Lord of hosts” (Malachi 2:7)? This verse teaches: If the teacher is similar to an angel [malakh] of the Lord, then seek Torah from his mouth, but if he is not pure and upright, then do not seek Torah from his mouth; even if he is knowledgeable about Torah, do not learn from him.

Based on this statement, Rav Yehuda ostracized that Torah scholar.

So, we learn that it’s not enough to be brilliant, you have to do more than talk the talk, you have to walk the walk. It is a horrible reflection of what it means to be religious when the leaders of religion don’t live moral lives.

Consequently, Rabbi Ami did not release him from the ostracism, and the ostracized scholar left in tears.

I am sure you’re now wondering what it is that the scholar did wrong. One can be ostracized for insulting someone else, which seems a pale offense when compared to stealing or sexual misconduct. Well, be curious no more. The offending scholar, in this case, seeks to be released from his ostracism. The rabbis who cast him out dies, and other rabbis have to decide what to do. In the end, they decide not to let him back into the fold. But, before you feel bad for him, we read:

A wasp came and stung the ostracized scholar on his penis and he died. This is the spot that he sinned from.

So, now there is no doubt that this man sinned sexually. And if you think they overreacted, it seems heaven sends them the message that ousting him was the right thing to do:

Because he was a great Torah scholar, they took him into the caves in which the pious are interred in order to bury him there, but the caves did not accept him. A snake stood at the entrance of the caves and did not let them pass.

Clearly, the man was not pious. But, since he was ostracized, he was unable to victimize anyone else. The commentaries say that he dressed in all black and stayed away from everyone else and did not let anyone know he was a scholar. Since he did this we are told:

They then took him into the caves of the judges, and they accepted him.

This brings up so many questions about what behaviors we allow and how we react to them as a society. It reminds us too, that to be a leader of a people, you are, and should be , held to a higher standard.

Black is beautiful. . . or should I say “distinguished”? On today’s daf, we have a series of references where a person is called a Cushite, Cush being an African Kingdom because their actions are as distinguished as a Cushite’s skin. . . or, we can say as beautiful as black skin.

As it is written: “Shiggaion of David, which he sang to the Lord, concerning the words of Cush the Benjaminite” (Psalms 7:1). Is Cush his name? Saul is his name. Rather, this is a designation that indicates: Just as a Cushite, a native of the ancient kingdom of Cush in eastern Africa, is distinguished by his dark skin, so too, Saul was distinguished by his actions, as he was absolutely righteous and performed many good deeds.

The Gemara notes: Similarly, you can explain the verse: “And Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moses due to the Cushite woman whom he had married, for he had taken a Cushite woman” (Numbers 12:1). But is her name Cushite? Zipporah is her name. Rather, just as a Cushite is distinguished by his dark skin, so too, Zipporah was distinguished by her actions. The Gemara continues: Similarly, you can explain the verse: “Now when Ebed-Melech the Cushite heard” (Jeremiah 38:7). Is his name Cushite? Zedekiah is his name. Rather, just as a Cushite is distinguished by his dark skin, so too, Zedekiah was distinguished by his righteous actions.

Okay, so this is my gem for many reasons. One, black is beautiful. all these people whose behavior is exemplary are called black as a compliment.

Two, something interesting is happening with the rabbis who are changing the plain meaning of the text which speaks to racism. The plain meaning of the text, that Moses married a Cushite woman, is that Moses married a Cushite woman a.k.a. a black woman. So, why must they change the text? Are they uncomfortable with the idea that Moses married a black woman? Are they uncomfortable with Miriam being upset about her brother marrying a black woman and therefore Miriam appearing to be racist in this moment? (Remember, her punishment is that her skin turns so white she looks like a corpse. A very fitting punishment for someone with racist beliefs. )

Something strange is going on. And I love a daf that forces us to confront our racism. Both the racism of today and that which has been inherited.

I want to end with Song of Songs 1:5

 I am black and beautiful,
    O daughters of Jerusalem,
like the tents of Kedar,
    like the curtains of Solomon.

Today’s daf gives us many of our mourning rituals. It tells us not to bathe, study Torah, work, wear leather shoes, send gifts to the Temple, and more. While a few of the rituals (like overturning your bed and sleeping on the wrong side of the mattress) are no longer practiced, most of these rituals hold true today.

Mourning during Covid has been hard. On the one hand, we have cumulative grief, loss upon loss, on the other hand, some of our regular mourning rituals have not been practiced. This is a huge loss.

I spoke yesterday of the gift that Jewish mourning rituals give to the mourner. There is a confrontation with death, physical rituals like tearing and burying which help us confront our emotions that we may try to suppress. We are taken care of by others, surrounded by love and community. It has been hard to lose some of those things (although now people are returning to having shiva and other customs). the loss of these rituals has ben very hard for the community and very hard for the mourner’s ability to process loss and return to life.

So, if you experience a loss, turn to tradition. It is ancient, and it is therapeutic.

Jewish practices around death and mourning are so good, so cathartic, I really wish everyone would use them. They help you confront loss and be surrounded by community. They push you through a cycle of mourning that lets you process your grief and turn to life.

That’s why I am so upset by the rule that comes on today’s daf:

A mourner does not practice the halakhot of his mourning on a Festival, as it is stated: “And you shall rejoice in your Festival” (Deuteronomy 16:14).

The Gemara explains: If it is a mourning period that had already begun at the outset of the Festival, the positive mitzva of rejoicing on the Festival, which is incumbent upon the community, comes and overrides the positive mitzva of the individual, i.e., the mourning. And if the mourning period began only now, i.e., the deceased died during the Festival, the positive mitzva of the individual does not come and override the positive mitzva of the community.

The Festival overrides the mourning. I get it. But, on the other hand, I was with a family whose 23 year old son died of cancer on ever Sukkot. They were robbed of the ability to practice traditional Jewish mourning practices. And were they able to rejoice on the festival? No!

In this area, I think we really miss the boat.

We have been learning that we should not buy and sell in the usual manner during the intermediate days of the festival, but that it’s permitted for certain reasons including if the item is needed for the festival itself. Today, we get an additional reason and it’s a great one. The Mishnah states:

One may not purchase houses, slaves, and cattle on the intermediate days of a Festival unless it is for the sake of the Festival, or to provide for the needs of the seller who does not have anything to eat.

So, we can sell and purchase items (I am just ignoring the slave issue for now) for the Festival AND if the person selling needs the money!

GEMARA: Rava asked Rav Naḥman: What is the halakha with regard to wages for a worker who does not have anything to eat? Is it permitted to provide a poor worker with work on the intermediate days of the Festival? Rav Naḥman said to him: We learned this in the mishna: Or to provide for the needs of the seller, if he has nothing to eat. What is added by mentioning the condition that he has nothing to eat? Does it not add the case of wages and not only the case of one selling items he owns? Rava said to him: No, it is merely explaining what is meant by the needs of the seller.

This expands the ruling to being able to pay workers during the intermediate days, being able to give people work who need it. You can spend money if the person receiving it is hungry and needs the money.

I love this. It’s an interesting extension of pikuach nefesh (the rule that saving a life has priority over other mitzvot).

There is a family that sells fruit on the corner of US1 and 80th. When I am at that light, I always try and buy what they’re selling. My husband thinks I am ridiculous, especially when I come how with a bag of limes. But they are hungry and in need of work and buying from them is giving them dignity and cash. Now I can show him that the daf is on my side.

Good gem for the day, having integrity and not asking others to do what you would not. (Remember that “one law for you and the stranger” from the Torah? Well, God meant it.)

The principle of the matter is: Any action that a Jew may perform himself, he may tell a gentile to perform, and any action that he may not perform himself, he may not tell a gentile to perform.

There is some laxity on what we can and cannot do on the intermediate days of the festival, and many things are permitted if we might suffer financial loss that are prohibited on Shabbat or the festivals. (Remember – the rabbis and Jewish community during the Talmudic period were largely poor, and largely agrarian and if they missed a harvest it might mean they have no food for the season.) So, one might think, that for a non-Jew, these intermediate days of the festival are just like nay other day – so why not ask them to do the work we, as Jews, are refraining from doing?

The Gemara warns us not to ask anyone to do what we ourselves would not do. While others may not share our faith, the rabbis seem to already know that we need to be careful with how we treat the non-Jew and how others might perceive us.

I love this teaching in thinking about everything in life – if you wouldn’t do it – don’t ask someone else to. Don’t make others do your dirty work. Don’t make others violate the law on your behalf (even if it’s not a big deal to them).

Of course the halakhah gives exceptions, but not any that would compromise the integrity of the worker. And integrity is what this rule is all about.

Here are some readings from the Mishnah Torah, Rambam’s Code of Law ,based on today’s daf:

Mishneh Torah, Rest on a Holiday 7:24

One may not tell a gentile to do anything that is forbidden to do on the festival. But if [a Jew] does not have what to eat, he may surely do what is forbidden to do on the festival—enough to suffice for his sustenance. And he may also engage in enough trade to suffice for his sustenance. And it is permissible for a wealthy person to hire a poor worker who does not have what to eat, to do work that is forbidden on a festival—so that [the worker] can take his wage in order to sustain himself from it. And we may likewise purchase things that are not for the needs of the festival, on account of the needs of a seller who does not have what to eat.

We may hire a wage-worker on the festival to do work after the festival. And [that is] so long as he does not weigh and does not measure and does not count [what he will need to do] in the way that he does on [weekdays]. An Israelite may not allow a gentile who received contract work from him to do it on the festival—even [if] he was outside of the perimeter. For all know that this work is the Israelite’s and they will suspect him, that he hired the gentile to do the work for him [then]—as not everyone knows the difference between a wage-worker and a contractor. And hence it is forbidden.

We have been discussing what work can be done on the intermediate days of the festival. A new Mishna discusses how certain prohibited work can be done on those intermediate days if someone had experienced a death the week before the festival and could not properly prepare for the week. This begins a conversation about what work can be done during a week of mourning. That’s where we get our gem:

The Gemara relates that Maryon, son of Ravin, and Mar, son of Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, held a team of two oxen in partnership between them, one ox apiece. An event, i.e., a death in the family, befell Mar, son of Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, and he detached his ox from the team, preventing any work from being performed by the team, because he did not want work performed with his animal during his days of mourning. Rav Ashi said: A distinguished man like Mar, son of Rav Aḥa, is behaving this way? Granted, he is not concerned about his own loss, but is he not concerned about the loss of others, i.e., his partner? Isn’t it taught in the baraita cited above: If they or their animals were hired out or leased to others, then they may perform their work? In that case, why not allow the partner to work with the animal of Mar, son of Rav Aḥa? The Gemara explains: But Mar, son of Rav Aḥa, maintains: An important person is different. Even if strictly speaking something is permitted, an important person must be more rigorous with himself, so that people learn not to take the halakha lightly.

We have heard this lesson before (with a different example) but it’s one that we, as a society, have still not learned. Those in positions of leadership should be held to a higher standard. They need to color far within the lines.

Clearly, this is a lesson that is hard for people to learn as our politicians and representatives should be the cream of the crop, the best we have. They should be beyond reproach. But so many do so many things that are base. So many lack integrity. So, the lesson is one we still need to learn.

Today we get one of the principles used to guide what can and cannot be done on the intermediate days of the holiday – that if there will be significant financial loss without the action, then usually the action is permitted. But, there is also incentive to wait . . .

And Rava also said: Any commerce is prohibited on the intermediate days of a Festival. Rabbi Yosei bar Avin said: But with regard to a matter that, if left unattended, will result in significant loss, it is permitted. The Gemara relates that Ravina once had a joint business venture that could have been sold for six thousand dinars, but he delayed selling it until after the intermediate days of a Festival, and he sold it then for twelve thousand dinars.

It is further related that Ravina had lent money to the residents of the fortress of Shanvata. He came before Rav Ashi and said to him: What is the halakha with regard to going to them now, on the intermediate days of the Festival, to collect my debt? Rav Ashi said to him: Since it is now that you will find them, whereas on other days you will not find them, as during the year these people would travel from place to place to earn their livelihood, this is treated like merchandise that will be lost, and it is therefore permitted.

There is an old Jewish story based on this. In it, a man wants to purchase something (I don’t remember what it is) and offers a good sum of money. The owner says, “I cannot sell.” The buyer keeps offering more and more money and the buyer keeps refusing. Finally, the buyer walks away frustrated.

Meanwhile, the man who owned the item really needed the money and it took all his willpower not to sell – but he didn’t sell because it was a day that Jews do not do commerce (Shabbat, festivals, and some way intermediate days of the festival) – but he didn’t explain that to the buyer – he just said no. He wondered if his keeping of the law was going to result in a huge financial loss.

Then, a few days later, there is a knock on the door with the buyer offering a ridiculous amount of money for the item, and now the owner could sell.

Clearly the moral is that, while many break the law to try and make money, those who stay within the law are the ones who will be rewarded.

Today’s daf is packed with goodies! We get the derivation of the principle that one may not mix one joy with another joy. We get this fabulous line: There is no complete rejoicing without eating and drinking. We get God pardoning David and all of Israel who are celebrating the returning of the Ark of the Covenant and so feast for a week (over Yom Kippur) being pardoned by a Divine voice: The words “for all the goodness” indicate that a Divine Voice issued forth and said to them: All of you are designated for life in the World-to-Come, which is the ultimate good.

We get God forgiving Solomon in this wonderful story: Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: When Solomon sought to bring the Ark into the Temple the gates clung together and could not be opened. Solomon uttered twenty-four songs of praise, and his prayer was not answered. He began and said: “Lift up your heads, O you gates, and be lifted up, you everlasting doors; and the King of glory shall come in” (Psalms 24:7), but once again his prayer was not answered, and the Temple gates remained closed. Once he said: “Now therefore arise, O Lord God, into your resting place, You, and the Ark of Your strength; Let your priests, O Lord God, be clothed with victory and let Your pious ones rejoice in goodness. O Lord God, do not turn away the face of Your anointed; remember the faithful love of David Your servant” (II Chronicles 6:41–42), he was immediately answered. At that moment the faces of David’s enemies turned dark like the charred bottom of a pot, and all knew that the Holy One, Blessed be He, forgave him for that sin involving Bathsheba, as they saw that it was only in his merit that the gates of the Temple opened.

I love this because he had to try 24 different Psalms and another blessing before he was answered – and all that teaches us about perseverance and what real success looks like (trying and failing and trying again and again).

But this one might be my favorite. In a discussion about how women are allowed to put on make up and wear jewelry during the intermediate days of the festival we get Rav Hisda’s hot wife:

The Gemara relates that Rav Ḥisda’s wife would adorn herself on the intermediate days of a Festival in the presence of her daughter-in-law, i.e., when she already had a married son. Rav Huna bar Ḥinnana sat before Rav Ḥisda, and he sat and said: They taught only that a woman is permitted to engage in cosmetic treatments on the intermediate days of a Festival only with regard to a young woman, as such treatments bring her joy, but in the case of an old woman, no, the treatments are not permitted, as she does not need them.

Rav Ḥisda said to him: By God! Even your mother, and even your mother’s mother, and even a woman so old that she is standing at the edge of her grave are all permitted to adorn themselves. As people say in the popular adage: A woman of sixty years, like one of six, runs at the sound of the timbrel [tavla], implying that women of all ages are young in spirit; since they all take pleasure in their adornments, they are allowed to adorn themselves, regardless of age.

Ladies should be allowed to dress how they want throughout their lives. They should be able to wear what makes them feel good.

Go get ‘um Rav Hisda’s wife.