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

A second gem for today, the famous case of trapping the Yetzer haRah and almost destroying the evil inclination forever . . .

The Gemara recounts the event described in the verses: The verse states: And they cried with a loud voice to the Lord their God (Nehemiah 9:4). What was said? Rav said, and some say it was Rabbi Yoḥanan who said: Woe, woe. It is this, i.e., the evil inclination for idol worship, that destroyed the Temple, and burned its Sanctuary, and murdered all the righteous ones, and caused the Jewish people to be exiled from their land. And it still dances among us, i.e., it still affects us. Didn’t You gave it to us solely for the purpose of our receiving reward for overcoming it. We do not want it, and we do not want its reward. We are prepared to forgo the potential rewards for overcoming the evil inclination as long as it departs from us.

The people have seen the Temple destroyed over giving in to their evil inclination. They decide – we don’t want it anymore (this reminds me of when I got a speeding ticket at 16 and trying to give my license to my parents – because in my head I could not handle the responsibility, but my parents said that making them drive me around was punishing them and not me . . . )

In response to their prayer a note fell to them from the heavens upon which was written: Truth, indicating that God accepted their request. (The Gemara makes a parenthetical observation. Rav Ḥanina said: Learn from this that the seal of the Holy One, Blessed be He, is truth.)

In response to the indication of divine acceptance, they observed a fast for three days and three nights, and God delivered the evil inclination to them. A form of a fiery lion cub came forth from the chamber of the Holy of Holies. Zechariah the prophet said to the Jewish people: This is the evil inclination for idol worship, as it is stated in the verse that refers to this event: “And he said: This is the evil one” (Zechariah 5:8).

So, the people say they don’t want the Evil inclination anymore, and God sends it to them! And it’s a lion cub.

When they caught hold of it one of its hairs fell, and it let out a shriek of pain that was heard for four hundred parasangs. They said: What should we do to kill it? Perhaps, Heaven forfend, they will have mercy upon him from Heaven, since it cries out so much. The prophet said to them: Throw it into a container made of lead and seal the opening with lead, since lead absorbs sound. As it is stated: “And he said: This is the evil one. And he cast it down into the midst of the measure, and he cast a stone of lead upon its opening” (Zechariah 5:8). They followed this advice and were freed of the evil inclination for idol worship.

When they saw that the evil inclination for idol worship was delivered into their hands as they requested, the Sages said: Since it is an auspicious time, let us pray also concerning the evil inclination for sin in the area of sexual relationships. They prayed, and it was also delivered into their hands.

Zechariah the prophet said to them: See and understand that if you kill this evil inclination the world will be destroyed because as a result there will also no longer be any desire to procreate. They followed his warning, and instead of killing the evil inclination they imprisoned it for three days. At that time, people searched for a fresh egg throughout all of Eretz Yisrael and could not find one. They said: What should we do? If we kill it, the world will be destroyed. If we pray for half, i.e., that only half its power be annulled, nothing will be achieved because Heaven does not grant half gifts, only whole gifts. What did they do? They gouged out its eyes, effectively limiting its power, and set it free.

Love this story. The lesson is clear, while we may struggle and wonder how God could have created a world where people have the desire and ability to sin, without that desire and ability, we lose what makes us human. Without sexual desire, we would not procreate. Without the sin of pride, we would not build buildings or aspire to greatness. And without the possibility of doing wrong, then going right is really nothing special at all. Maybe we should be more amazed at how well we are doing as a species considering our potential for destruction . . .

There are some weeks where the gems are hard to mine. And then, sometimes we come upon a daf that is PACKEd with gems! So today, I will be posting multiple posts, because the gems are just too many and if I skip the two after this first one, well, you would have missed two very big ideas from the Talmud.

So, gem #1: Don’t ever call the Talmud boring because it’s bloodier than any Tarantino film.

The Talmud is trying to decide if a Priest can derive benefit from his vestments outside of the Temple (like, can he use it for a pillow at night?). To argue in the positive, we get this CRAZY side story:

Wasn’t it taught in another baraita, in Megillat Ta’anit: The twenty-fifth of Tevet is known as the day of Mount Gerizim, which was established as a joyful day, and therefore eulogizing is not permitted.

I am sure you are wondering: What is this joyous Mount Gerizim day? Is it like Purim? What occurred on that date? Get ready . . . It was on that day that the Samaritans [kutim] requested the House of our Lord from Alexander the Macedonian in order to destroy it, and he gave it to them. So, here’s the backstory, the Samaritans ask Alexander the Great for the Temple in Jerusalem and he says, “sure, go take it, knock yourselves out.”

But word gets out, people came and informed the High Priest, Shimon HaTzaddik, of what the Samaritans are planning. What did he do? He donned the priestly vestments and wrapped himself in the priestly vestments. He puts on his Priestly clothes (so yes, this is an argument that priests can wear the outfit outside the Temple – but I am imagining the hero of a movie getting dressed up before the big bloody takedown.) And the nobles of the Jewish People were with him, with torches of fire in their hands. (The posse is all there.) And all that night, these, the representatives of the Jewish people, approached from this side, and those, the armies of Alexander and the Samaritans, approached from the other side, until dawn, when they finally saw one another.

Showdown! They meet, ready for a bloody battle.

When dawn arrived, Alexander said to the Samaritans: Who are these people coming to meet us? They said to him: These are the Jews who rebelled against you. When he reached Antipatris, the sun shone and the two camps met each other. When Alexander saw Shimon HaTzaddik, he descended from his chariot and bowed before him.

What?! Alexander the Great bowing before the High Priest!!

Alexander’s escorts said to him: Should an important king such as you bow to this Jew? He said to them: I do so because the image of this man’s face is victorious before me on my battlefields, i.e., when I fight I see his image going before me as a sign of victory, and therefore I know that he has supreme sanctity.

He said to the representatives of the Jewish people: Why have you come? They said to him: How can it be that we would be silent when the Temple, the house in which we pray for you and for your kingdom is to be destroyed, and the gentiles are trying to mislead you into destroying it? He said to them: Who are these people who want to destroy it? The Jews said to him: They are these Samaritans who stand before you. He said to them: If so, they are delivered into your hands to deal with them as you please.

Wow! It’s such a Purim moment, when Esther says that someone wants to kill he and her people and the King asks who and she says: That man, Haman! Here Alexander sees Shimon haTzaddik and says, I know you, you pray for my success, you’re the reason I keep winning in battle, what are you doing here? And Shimon haTzaddik says, these people want to destroy me and the Temple where I pray for you! And in both cases, the tale quickly changes:

Immediately, they stabbed the Samaritans in their heels and hung them from their horses’ tails and continued to drag them over the thorns and thistles until they reached Mount Gerizim. When they arrived at Mount Gerizim, where the Samaritans had their temple, they plowed it over and seeded the area with leeks, a symbol of total destruction. This was just as they had sought to do to the House of our Lord. And they made that day a festival to celebrate the salvation of the Temple and the defeat of the Samaritans.

Wowzers! A bloody and disturbing story. And, amusingly, a story used as an aside to argue that the High Priest can wear his special priestly clothes outside of the Temple. Wow.

The lesson? The Talmud is awesome.

The gem? There is definitely something here about the importance of building relationships. The Samaritans are trying to destroy the Temple and the Jewish people and they are using someone more powerful than they, Alexander the Great, as their pawn. However, they are not anticipating that the Jewish people already have a firm relationship with Alexander the Great.

I can’t help but think of how important this lesson is today when we have so many people spreading Anti-Semitism and hate. We cannot let them get in the ears of our allies, we have to be there first. We have to build relationship so that, if the time ever comes, we find that those who would try and destroy us have no one to turn to who is not already our friend.

A rabbi once told me that he could “teach a parrot to chant Torah perfectly” but the parrot would never learn how to read. He was emphasizing why it was so important to him that his B. Mitzvah students learn to read Torah and not simply memorize their piece. Yet, that is often what people do, memorize the reading.

Personally, there are some parts of the Torah I too have memorized as I have chanted them so many times . . . but unlike other some other faiths where memorization of the verses is the ideal, for us, as Jews, reading is the goal. In fact, even though we often do have pieces memorized, we are to read along, using the pointer to show where we are in the Torah at each step (hey, we even have to read along in the prayer book).

So, this verse from the Mishnah caught my attention when it is describing the Torah reading on Yom Kippur: ” . . . the High Priest stands and receives the scroll. And he reads from the scroll the Torah portion beginning with the verse: “After the death” (Leviticus 16:1) and the portion beginning with the verse: “But on the tenth” (Leviticus 23:26), and furls the Torah scroll and places it on his bosom and says: More than what I have read before you is written here. The Torah portion beginning with the verse: “And on the tenth,” from the book of Numbers (29:7), he then reads by heart.

Reads by heart? What?

According to Gittin 60b, we are prohibited from reciting Torah by heart. So, what’s happening?

To answer that question, we have to go to the edges of the page of Talmud.

The RITVA (1260-1330, Spain) explains, based on the Yerushalmi, that the prohibition against reading verses of the Torah by heart applies only to verses which must be read publicly. The prohibition does not apply to verses read for the sake of reviewing the Torah. He explains that the high Priest was permitted to read verses of the Torah by heart on Yom Kippur because there was no obligation to read these verses publicly, they were just a way for him to review what he was doing.

The TOSFOS YESHANIM goes further by saying that, there is in fact, no prohibition to read verses of the Torah by heart; rather, it just preferable to read the verses from the Torah scroll itself.

My favorite excuse is from Nachmanides who permitted the High Priest to read part of the Torah by heart on Yom Kippur in order not to trouble the people to wait as he rolled the Torah scroll to the proper place. For those of us who have had to roll a Torah scroll mid reading – you can really appreciate how thoughtful he is of the experience of the congregation.

But there are definately times where we all say verses from Torah without looking at a Torah scroll. Take reciting the shema twice a day. Here, not only do we not look in a Torah scroll, we often close our eyes.

As a rabbi, when I say the priestly benediction (also found in the Torah), I too will close my eyes and focus on the power of that moment. I do not, nor do other clergy, open a Torah scroll.

So, what do we learn?

There is something different about reading than reciting. When we recite, we parrot what we have learned. It’s those words and those words alone. And, if we can recite them perfectly than apparently we have rabbinic support for saying these verses without opening a book. But when we read a verse, when we look at it on a page, we are no longer reciting, we are not parroting, we are looking, reading, and therefore, we are open to seeing and receiving more than we might have previously.

I am always amazed at how a prayer that I have said hundreds of times can suddenly take on new meaning. How a verse of Torah that I have read repeatedly can reveal meanings I have never seen before. But those things only happen when I look at hem anew. When we take out a book, when we force ourselves to look, we may see things we never have before.

So, we may be able to teach parrots to recite, but never to find hidden meanings.

When the daf and the parshah collide . . .

The Sages taught with regard to the verse: “You shall do My ordinances, and you shall keep My statutes to follow them, I am the Lord your God” (Leviticus 18:4), that the phrase: My ordinances, is a reference to matters that, even had they not been written, it would have been logical that they be written. They are the prohibitions against idol worship, prohibited sexual relations, bloodshed, theft, and blessing God, a euphemism for cursing the Name of God.

The phrase: And you shall keep my statutes, ״אֶת חוּקּוֹתַי תִּשְׁמְרוּ״ is a reference to matters that Satan and the nations of the world challenge because the reason for these mitzvot are not known. They are: The prohibitions against eating pork; wearing garments that are made from diverse kinds of material, i.e., wool and linen; performing the ḥalitza ceremony with a yevama, a widow who must participate in a levirate marriage or ḥalitza; the purification ceremony of the leper; and the scapegoat. And lest you say these have no reason and are meaningless acts, therefore the verse states: “I am the Lord” (Leviticus 18:4), to indicate: I am the Lord, I decreed these statutes and you have no right to doubt them.

I love this passage because it talks about how some of our mitzvot are obvious – they are rules that all nations and societies would eventually figure out – but some are really mind boggling. This Gemara lists the prohibition on pork, the prohibition on mixing materials (and yet the priest wears the mix), the prohibition that says you cannot sleep with your sister in law (and the law that if you brothers dies without giving an heir you DO sleep with your sister in law), the laws of the Red Cow (this week’s Torah portion) and the scapegoat.

The rabbis point to the word chok, or the plural chukkotai, as an indicator that we are dealing with a law where the logic behind the law is not so apparent, so we need a biblical “because I said so” to encourage us to follow this law. The rabbis worry, and I would say, rightfully so, that if we do not understand the reasoning behind a law, that we may not follow it.

What is fascinating is how many laws my movement, the Reform movement, has tossed into the illogical bin and therefore the “you don’t have to do it” bin, that, as I grow older, have so much meaning and logic behind them.

Take the examples listed. The rituals may seem strange but they all ask very modern questions: (kashrut) how do I honor my body, the planet, and nature through my eating decisions? (mixing of diverse kinds) how do I honor my body, the planet, and nature through my clothing decisions? (halitzah) When a man dies and leaves his wife childless, how does his family (or does his family) continue to support her? Make her feel included? (Red cow) How do we separate lie and death? How do we honor those who have passed while holding on to life? (scapegoat) How do we move on from our mistakes? How do we forgive ourselves?

The laws might not make sense, but the questions they ask really do.

My freshman year of college my roommate asked me where I was from, I said, “Indiana, I’m a hoosier.” She laughed and said, “You can’t call yourself a Hoosier, we are in Missouri.” Apparently, people is Missouri use the term “hoosier” like someone else might say “redneck” or “cracker.” I pointed out that people from Missouri do not even pronounce the name of their state correctly (they say “Mizzeruh”) in defence of my home state. Well, apparently, after reading today’s daf – we learn that people have been using locations as insults for millenia (remember all those Polish jokes? apparently for Jerusalemites, it was referring to someone as a Babylonian).

The Mishna states: And they made a ramp for the goat due to the Babylonian Jews who were in Jerusalem, who would pluck at the goat’s hair and would say to the goat: Take our sins and go, take our sins and go, and do not leave them with us.

The Gemara elaborates: Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: They were not actually Babylonians, rather they were Alexandrians from Egypt. And since in Eretz Yisrael they hate the Babylonians, they would call all foreigners who acted inappropriately by their name as an insult. Similarly, it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda says: They were not Babylonians, rather they were Alexandrians. Rabbi Yosei, whose family was from Babylonia, said to him: May your mind be at ease, since you have put my mind at ease.

I love Rabbi Yehuda defending the Babylonians and Rabi Yosei thanking him for getting his back. I feel like this is a beautiful example of calling out injustice and prejudice when you see it. We (as a society) often let things go because it’s popular parlance or we don’t want to offend the person we are correcting when they use terms that might offend a certain group of people. Here we are faced with that example FROM A MISHNAH! But instead of letting it go, Rabbi Yehudah does the right thing and calls out the offensive behavior.

May we follow his example and correct people when they use terms that offend us or others.

Today’s gem: learning to trust people to tell the truth.

Today’s we grapple with a situation where money collected for the Temple is stolen from the collectors. Depending on where they are when they are robbed, the money (which never belongs to the collectors themselves) is either stolen from the Temple or from the residents who donated the money. In either case, it’s up to the collectors to make oaths to the wronged party that they did not somehow benefit from the stolen money.

We learned in a mishna there (Shekalim 2:1): If residents of a city sent their shekels to the Temple with a messenger, and the shekels were stolen or were lost along the way; if the funds were already collected, i.e., the coins for the new year’s offerings were taken from the chamber before the money was stolen, the messengers take an oath to the treasurers of the Temple that they did not unlawfully use the shekels, but that they were taken unbeknownst to them or by force. And if the funds were not yet collected when these coins were stolen, the coins are still considered the property of those who dedicated them to the Temple, and therefore the messengers take an oath to the residents of the city, and the residents of the city donate other shekels to the Temple in their stead.

Why do I love this? Two reasons. One, we are very skeptical and untrusting of others with our money, or even governments with tax money (and that is similar to what this is). The beauty of being able to trust what the collectors say is a gem in and or itself.

The second reason I love this is precisely because it also serves as a warning against corruption and trying to “get your piece of the pie” as a middleman. That money is not yours. It belongs to God or to the people and therefore is perhaps the most offensive money to pilfer.

Lacking time? I can relate.

That is the subject of today’s daf (and yesterday’s), but it doesn’t mean that we just need more hours in the day – it means that things need to be done in their proper time, and sometimes, timing can get a bit screwy. We have a cool case of that on the top of today’s daf:

Rava said: It (the ruling that the scapegoat may not be lacking time) is referring to a case where the one who sold the two goats had a critically ill person in his household, and he slaughtered the mother of the scapegoat in order to save the ill person’s life on Yom Kippur.

Okay! We need a lot of background to understand the problem. First, you have to know that a mother and her offspring CANNOT legally be killed on the same day (it’s a Torah law that I LOVE! It’s all about preservation of species and empathy). Second, you need to understand that one might sacrifice an animal when someone is sick in an attempt to save their life. Third, just reading this, you have to realize that the person who sold the scape goat may not have known he would then slaughter the mother later that day, but that the High Priest may not know that the Priest, by slaughtering the animal, would then have the potential of violating a commandment.

What do we do? It’s such a fabulous logic puzzle.

While the solution is less exciting (get a second pair of goats) – the teaching in the question is very exciting. It tells us that the life of a person is more important than this ritual (as the slaughtering to save a life is put above slaughtering the scapegoat), it emphasizes the importance of the mitzvah not to kill a mother and child in the same day (and therefore preservation of the species), and it points out how our actions can affect others who are far from the action and society in general (in this case, the cow owner slaughtering the mother affects the sanctuary service, and therefore, all the Jewish people)!

Today’s gem: Every word holds meaning.

Just read this passage to see the rabbis breaking their teeth to interpret any seemingly superfluous word or repetition of a word:

GEMARA: The Sages taught: It states: “He shall take two goats” (Leviticus 16:5). The minimum number indicated by a plural term “goats” is two. So, what is the meaning when the verse states: Two? Since it seems redundant. It teaches that the two should be identical. And from where do we derive that even if the two goats are not identical they are nevertheless valid? The verses state and repeat the word goat, goat (Leviticus 16:9–10) to amplify and indicate that the goats are valid even if they are not identical. . . The Gemara answers: It could enter your mind to say that since the word two, two, two, is written three times in the relevant passage, the repetition indicates that the goats are disqualified if they are not identical. Therefore, the Torah had to indicate that the goats are valid even if they are not identical. The Gemara asks: And now that the Merciful One has amplified by repeating the word goat, goat, why do I need the threefold repetition of two, two, two?

I love this gem, because in something really beautifully written every word carries meaning, each is necessary. I love watching the rabbis struggle to make sure they understand every single word of the Torah and the Mishnah – because every single word is there for a reason – just like each of us is here for a reason, it just might take a little digging.

Today’s gem: Those who don’t fit the norm can still fit in.

Today’s daf continues the conversation about ritual practice and has a very interesting aside:

The Gemara teaches: it was taught in a baraita: With regard to a totally bald nazirite, who cannot shave his hair with a razor as required, Beit Shammai say: He must perform the act of the passing of a razor anyway, and Beit Hillel say: He need not perform the act of the passing of a razor. And Rabbi Avina said that when Beit Shammai say: Must, they mean he must do so, but since it is impossible, he has no remedy.

So, the question is – can a bald person become a Nazarite if one of the requirements is to shave your hair?

Hillel says – yes. Shammai seems to say yes, but he needs to pass a razor over his head “as if” he were shaving. However, RAbbi Avina interprets Bet Shammia to be saying that he “must” shave his head and if he cannot do so, well then, he can’t be a Nazarite.

The Gemara comments: And Rabbi Avina, in his interpretation of this matter, disagrees with Rabbi Pedat. As Rabbi Pedat said: Beit Shammai and Rabbi Elazar said the same thing, i.e., they have the same opinion in this regard. The opinion of Beit Shammai is that which we said, that a bald nazirite must pass a razor over his head.

Now we get a second example of someone for whom a ceremony is done (or not) who does not fit the “norm.”

The opinion of Rabbi Elazar is as it was taught in a mishna: A leper who has no thumb or big toe on which to sprinkle can never attain ritual purity. Rabbi Elazar says: The priest puts it on the spot where the thumb was, and he thereby fulfills his obligation. Rabbi Shimon says: If he put it on the left hand or foot, he has fulfilled his obligation.

Meaning that both agree this person can be purified through the ceremony either by putting the blood where the thumb and ear would have been, or by putting it on the opposite side (assuming they have a thumb and/or ear on the other side).

What I love about this is the way that our rabbis realize that not everyone fits the box, or the norm, for which these rituals were written. So, what do they do they figure out a way (or even two ways) to include this person.

May we all feel included in Judaism and Jewish practice.

Today’s gem: Order matters.

On today’s daf, Rabbi Yehudah and Rebbi Nechemyah argue about which sacrifices are disqualified if done out of their proper order. Rabbi Nechemyah says that any sacrifice which the High Priest performs while he wears the white clothing, whether in the Holy of Holies or outside of the Holy of Holies, is disqualified when done out of order. Rabbi Yehudah says that only a sacrifice which the High Priest performs in the Holy of Holies is disqualified if done out of order. Rabbi Chanina adds that if the High Priest performs the sprinkling of the blood of the goat before he slaughters the bull (which is the wrong order), the sacrifice is disqualified. Even though the sprinkling of the blood of the goat are sacrifices that are performed outside of the Holy of Holies, the Gemara says that even Rabbi Yehudah agrees that the sprinkling of the blood of the goat are disqualified when performed out of order.

When you’re working out, order might not be that important – if you do pushups and then sit ups, or situps and then pushups – it’s not such a big deal.

But, if you’re getting dressed, or making a sandwich, order matters. If you put on your shoes before your sox – and both before your pants – you’re in trouble. If you put the turkey before the bread, the sandwich is not going to work.

In holy things, part of what makes them so special is the care we take in doing things in the “right” order and the right way with the right intention.

Order matters.