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

Yes Shekalim! Bringing on the gems! I will give you a quick taste of three, yes three, gems. . .

Gem #1 comes as the Mishna lists the proper names of Priests who held certain functions in the Temple, one is Petahya. The mishna states that Petaḥya was responsible for the pairs of birds. The Gemara mentions some of the talents of this Petaḥya. Come and see how great was the skill of that man! He could open, (play on the Hebrew word petach) i.e., elucidate, difficult topics and interpret them. As mentioned in the mishna, he understood all seventy languages. So, who is this magical man who understands every language (including understanding the deaf and mute)? The Gemara exclaims: Petaḥya is Mordecai from the book of Esther. And why was he named called Petaḥya, which resembles the word for opening [petaḥ]? The reason is that he would open, i.e., elucidate, difficult topics and interpret them to the people, and because he knew all seventy languages known at the time.

That’s right! Mordecai from the book of Esther is imagined to be 1) sitting on the Sanhedrin and 2) having had served in the Temple in Jerusalem! That means he would have been exiled from the Temple, made a life and strategically risen (himself and his niece) to power in Persia, then returned to ISrael to help rebuild the state and sat on the Sanhedrin. What a guy!

Gem #2 is an exercise in humility. Whereas we live in a society that worships youth and the young think they are so much smarter than the old, the Talmud values the opposite:

Rabbi Ḥaggai said in the name of Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman: The former Sages, i.e., the scholars of earlier generations, metaphorically plowed and planted, weeded, cleared thorns, hoed, harvested, gathered sheaves into a pile, threshed the sheaves, winnowed the threshed grain, separated the bad grain form the good, ground the remainder into flour, sifted the flour in a sieve, kneaded the dough, smoothed the surface of the unbaked loaves with liquid, and baked the bread. They prepared everything so that we should be able to grasp Torah concepts; and yet, after all that, we have nothing to eat, as we are still unable to understand the Torah properly.

Dope metaphor – those who came before us did all the work! they served us Torah on a platter – and we still don’t know what they’re saying!

Rabbi Abba bar Zemina said in the name of Rabbi Ze’eira: If the former generations were akin to angels, we are akin to humans; and if they were akin to humans, we are akin to donkeys. Rabbi Mana said: At that hour, when the previous statement was issued, they also said: We are not even comparable to the female donkey of Rabbi Pineḥas ben Yair.

So, now we have to ask ourselves – who is this donkey? Gem #3 – the most machmir (stringent) donkey in history:

§ The Gemara explains the reference to this particular donkey. The donkey of Rabbi Pineḥas ben Yair was stolen by robbers one night. It was kept hidden by them for three days, and yet it did not eat anything. After three days, they reconsidered and decided to return it. They said: Let’s get it out of here, so that it shouldn’t die in our possession and leave a stench in our cave. When they set it free it went and stood by its master’s gate and began braying. Rabbi Pineḥas said to the members of his household: Open up for that poor creature, which has gone three days without eating anything. They opened the gate for it, and it entered Rabbi Pineḥas’ courtyard. He told them: Give it something to eat. They placed barley before it, but it would not eat. They said to him: Rabbi, it will not eat. He said to them: Has the barley been tithed so that it is fit to eat? They replied: Yes. He then asked them: And have you separated their doubtfully tithed produce? Did you tithe the grain about which there is doubt as to whether it has been tithed properly? They replied: Didn’t you teach us the following, Rabbi: One who purchases grain for feeding an animal, or flour for processing animal hides, or oil for lighting a lamp, is exempt from separating doubtfully tithed produce? There is no need to separate tithes from doubtfully tithed produce to feed a donkey. He said to them: What can we do for that poor creature, which is very strict with itself and will not eat even from doubtfully tithed produce, despite this exemption? And they therefore separated tithes from the doubtfully tithed produce, and the donkey finally ate the barley grains.

YES!!!!!!!! Tell your children this story. Amazing. The donkey who refused to eat, not only unkosher food, not only untitled foods, but needed his food to be doubly tithed. The clear lesson? If a jackass is so careful with what she eats and following the laws – you should be too!

It’s raining gems. . .

We don’t often think about to whom/where we would like to leave our property when we die. It’s very rarely that we even take the time to go through what we have and decide what we want, what should be given away, and what trashed or recycled. Very often I see congregants overwhelmed when they have to figure out what to do with all of a loved-one’s things after a death. It’s hard.

Today’s daf has a case that seems clear-cut. The Mishnah discusses a case in which a person consecrated all of his possessions to The Temple. Simple – the Temple gets everything, but not so simple as not everything can be used in Temple service . . . Included among this person’s possessions were both male and female animals. Now we have to figure out what to do? Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua adiscuss/disagree about what is done with the animals. Rabbi Eliezer says that males should be sold for the needs of burnt-offerings, i.e., to individuals who will sacrifice them as such. And any females, since they cannot be brought as burnt-offerings, should be sold for the needs of peace-offerings, i.e., to individuals who will sacrifice them as such. And their monetary value that is received from their sale is allocated with the rest of his property for Temple maintenance.

Rabbi Yehoshua holds that males should themselves be sacrificed as burnt-offerings, and any females, since they cannot be brought as burnt-offerings, should be sold for the needs of peace-offerings, i.e., to individuals who will sacrifice them as such, and their monetary value that is received from their sale should be used to purchase and bring burnt-offerings.

According to both opinions, the rest of the possessions, which are not suitable for sacrificial use, are allocated for Temple maintenance.

(So the difference is Rabbi Eliezer say the males need to be sold as well as the females whereas Rabbi Yehoshua says only females need to be sold.

I think the reason I like this is because of what happens to everything else – all the items that cannot be used towards the Temple – they are sold and the money is used to offset Temple expenses. I think I like this because the knee-jerk reaction might be to say – what good is all this stuff? To assume the Temple would not want it. Here we see how a gift, even one that may not be a perfect fit, can still be used for good.

Today’s gem is that the daf deals with something I have often wondered – can you invest money that has been dedicated to the Temple? I think about investing in stocks – isn’t that a glorified form of gambling? Yet, money does make money – and more money for the Temple seems a good thing . . .

R. Akiva does not permit it, fearing losses to the Temple but says, if someone were to give only profits from an investment to the Temple, and would personally absorb any loss – well, that’s okay!

R. Mana issues a similar ruling regarding the funds of orphans. Then we get R. Chiyya who is entrusted with the funds of orphans and absorbs any losses personally, while giving any profits to the orphans.

so, we learn that we cannot invest funds given to the Temple in the market or another kind of venture, however, we can give profits from such ventures toward the Temple and towards tzedakah and other acts of gemilut hasadim.

To those who think this gives the green light to gamble – just know that even if you lost the money, you would still owe your half shekel! So, my lesson is not to gamble with money used for holy purposes, and no matter how you earn your money – you should always be looking for ways to have it do good in the world.

One of the beautiful things about the half shekel is that every person donates the exact same amount. It’s an equalizer – everyone has an equal claim to the Temple. But, anyone who works in a congregation or non-for-profit knows that we cannot survive on membership dues alone. So, what of those who have the means and desire to go above and beyond?

In the Mishnah on the top of today’s daf (bottom of yesterdays), Rabbi Yosei and the Sages argue over whether an individual is allowed to donate an item for use as a public offering, such as for the public Minchah offering of the Korban ha’Omer (which we are counting right now, and will be until Shavuot). Rabbi Yosei argues that an individual may donate a public offering. The Sages hold that the public offering must come from the property of the public and not from an individual. The Gemara cites the Mishnah in Ta’anit (4:4) that says that people used to give private donations of wood for use with the sacrifices: And these families took the initiative and donated wood from their own property and gave it to the community; and they offered communal offerings with it. And the prophets among them stipulated with them that, in the future, even if the chamber were full of wood, if these families took the initiative and donated wood from their own property, the offerings would be brought using only theirs first.

. . . Rabbi Yosei says: One who so desires may even volunteer his services and guard the grain as an unpaid bailee.

. . . It was taught in a baraita: In the case of a woman who made a tunic, one of the priestly vestments, for her son to wear while he serves in the Temple, the tunic is valid provided that she completely transfers ownership of the tunic to the community.

So, can we give more than is asked? The ruling goes with Rabbi Yosei – so yes. However, when we give, it needs to be without strings. We don’t give to receive payment, to receive credit, or to somehow maintain ownership – if we give, we must give fully and freely.

It’s a great lesson in how to still allow others to give more, so we can properly maintain sacred spaces (and non-for-profits) but that we should not let someone’s purse strings control what happens in the sacred space. Gifts should be that – gifts, not bargaining tools.

Oh what a gem on today’s page! If you have ever misplaced your emotions, this one is for you. If you have ever had someone blow up at you, only to learn that their anger had nothing to do with you – but that other things were going on in their life – this is for you as well.

Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Kahana wished to clarify the issue and said to him ( Rav Beivai ) : Up to a quarter-log of blood is pure, but more than that is impure? Or did the Sages rule that the blood of a carcass is never ritually impure, whatever the measure may be?

Here comes Rabbi Yitzḥak bar Kahana, asking an innocent question, something Jews are encouraged to do. Now see the response:

Rav Beivai kicked him! Rabbi Zerika said to him, i.e., to Rav Beivai: You kicked him because he asked you a question? He said to him: I kicked him because my mind was unsettled.

Oh! How often does this happen in life! Someone reacts inappropriately because their mind is preoccupied with something else! So, what could have Rav Beivai so upset?

Rav Beivai tries to explain his conduct: As Rabbi Ḥanan said: “And your life shall hang in doubt before you” (Deuteronomy 28:66); this is one who buys wheat for a year, who has no financial security with regard to the following year. “And you shall fear night and day”; this is one who buys small amounts of wheat from a vendor, with the attendant concern that he might not have enough for the morrow. “And you shall have no assurance of your life”; this is one who buys bread from the baker [paltor] and cannot afford to buy wheat in advance to assure even one future meal.

Rav Beivai concluded: And I rely on the baker.

He is hungry, food insecure. He is poor and does not knw where his next mal will come from – so, he was distracted, angry, and misplaced his emotions by kicking someone who just came to learn from him.

Wow. Two phenomenal lessons – 1) when you are reacting inappropriately to what is happening, you need to step back and ask yourself what is going on. Along with that, when someone over reacts to your own actions, perhaps they have other things going on that you don’t know about. And 2) Ein Kemach, ein Torah – with no bread there is no Torah. Hunger and food insecurity are huge problems, especially now, and when people are hungry, their minds are not clear. They are certainly in no state to learn or teach Torah.

So, I hope this daf inspires you to check your own reactions, and to feed the hungry.

Well, we are in a new book of Talmud, but we have the treat of discussing Pesach again on today’s daf! In response to a fabulous Mishna that says that the collectors of taxes (half shekels) cannot wear clothing items with pockets or hems, etc. where they might be suspected of stealing away a few shekels for themselves, the question of quantities comes up – and the rabbis debate what counts for the four cups of wine: What if it’s sweet wine? What if it’s spiced wine? What if it’s cooked? Diluted? Undiluted?

They all count, as long as it’s 4 glasses.

A modern reader may wonder what those who cannot drink alcohol should do – well, it’s not a new phenomenon! Today’s gem comes when a woman sees a rabbi whose face is glowing from learning and having a good time at the Seder and she assumes he is drunk . . not so:

Rabbi Yona said: One fulfills his obligation with cooked wine (weaker wine where the alcohol may have burned off). The Gemara notes that Rabbi Yona conforms to his own reasoning, since when Rabbi Yona would drink four cups of wine for Passover he would have to wrap his head with a bandage until the festival of Shavuot, in order to relieve the headache that the wine caused him. It gave him migraines! He had a bad reaction, and so he did not drink 4 cups of alcoholic wine (I also get a headache from too much wine – so we all had grape juice at second Seder – I hear you Rabbi Yona).

The Gemara relates that it once happened that a certain Roman matron [matronita] saw that Rabbi Yona’s face was shining. She said: Old man, old man, one of three things must apply to you. You are either drunk with wine, or else you lend money at interest, and owing to your comfortable income your face shines, or else you raise pigs, which provides you with large profits for little work. He cursed her and said to her: Let despair come upon that woman, as none of these three things apply to me. Rather, my face shines because my learning is with me and it lights my face, as this is what is written: “A man’s wisdom makes his face shine” (Ecclesiastes 8:1).

She thought he looked drunk, or that he swindled some money, because he looked so joyful, but the rabbi teaches us that we can achieve joy through learning – we don’t need anything bad for our bodies or bad for others to give us happiness.

I love this because 1) we don’t all need to drink 4 glasses of wine, especially if we would have a bad reaction. And 2) it reminds us that real joy comes from company and what you’re doing – not what you’re drinking.

I know I can be a square, but when my mom worried that I might do drugs because I was being pressured by my friends back in high school, I would say to her – if I need to be high to make my friends seem like fun, then maybe I need new friends and not drugs.

We don’t need to be judgemental of those who partake – but we also don’t need to partake so as not to be judged.

Today’s Mishnah discusses how, if we collect money for any reason (to bury the dead, to free a captive, the give to the poor) we have to use that money for the specified reason. They questions becomes, what do we do if we have extra money?

This is a great lesson in and of itself, but my gem is the Gemara’s comment to this part of the Mishna: The leftover money collected for burying the dead must be allocated to burying the dead. The leftover money collected to bury or provide burial shrouds for a particular deceased person is given to his heirs. Rabbi Meir says: It is uncertain what should be done, and therefore the leftover money for the deceased should be placed in a safe place until Elijah comes and teaches what should be done. Rabbi Natan says: With the leftover money collected for a deceased person they build a monument [nefesh] on his grave for him.

The Gemara states: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: One does not construct monuments for the graves of righteous people. The purpose of a monument is to remember the dead person, and Torah scholars do not need a monument, as their words of Torah that continue to be taught are their memorial.

I love this. what is the monument you are leaving behind? I am someone who frequents graveyards (it’s part of the job). But they are not crowded places. Even those with large headstones or monuments built in their honor are not likely to have many people see the monument and know who they were. But he lessons we teach, the lives we touch, the “Torah” we leave behind, that carries on.

Our Mishna discusses how, instead of giving a half shekel, there were times that people would give half of other coins – coins that were the local currency and still had worth of greater to that of a shekel. This works if one has plenty of money, but what if you didn’t? What if you have to save up penny by penny?

GEMARA: It is taught in the mishna: One who gathers together coins and says: These are for my shekel, if he finds that he has more than a half-shekel, then according to the opinion of Beit Shammai, the remainder is designated for a free-will offering, and according to Beit Hillel the remainder is non-sacred property.

The debate is, if I am going to pay the equivalent of a half shekel in small coins, what if I bring more than I am supposed to? Do I get my change back? Or is it considered consecrated?

Rabbi Yosei said in the name of Rabbi Elazar: With regard to what do they disagree? With regard to one who gathers coin by coin [peroterot], adding small coins bit by bit until they amount to a large sum. It is assumed that he intended to contribute only a half-shekel but did not pay attention to the fact that a larger sum had accumulated. According to Beit Hillel, an item that was consecrated by mistake does not become consecrated, and thus the leftover money is non-sacred property. However, with regard to one who takes a stack of coins and says: These are for my shekel, everyone agrees that he must have intended to consecrate the entire sum. Therefore, the leftover coins are designated for a free-will offering.

What is the difference here? In the first case, I am imagining a poor man with a coin jar (remember those? remember when we had pocket change?) – each day, at the end of the day, he takes the coins from his pocket and adds them to the jar in hopes of saving up enough to give his half shekel along with his fellow Jews.

The other person is one who simply has wealth, and grabs stacks of coins to pay. The first person likely needs allt he change he can get, while the second might not miss it.

Which is perhaps why the gemara goes on to discuss that we should make sure to give charity at least 3 times a year, but try not to ask for charity more than three times a year. If this is how we want to hold, then we will likely need to be lenient, as Hillel discribes, for those who are saving every penny in order to do this mitzvah.

It fascinates me that while most prisoners lost everything in the Holocaust, some people managed to hold onto a small item – a photo hidden in a shoe, a piece of jewelry sown into a hemline.

It wasn’t just survivors who did this. Henry Winkler (Happy Days) shared how his father was creative in smuggling jewels out of Nazi Germany when they immigrated. “My father asked his mother for her jewelry and he bought a box of chocolates, melted the chocolate down and covered all of the pieces of jewelry in chocolate, put it in the box, put the box under his arm,” Winkler recalls. In that way he was able to bring the jewels to the United States, pawn them, and start a new life.

Today’s daf made me think of this – how something so small can be so precious.

MISHNA When people who live far from Jerusalem wish to send to Jerusalem the shekels that have been levied from their community, they may combine their shekels and exchange them for darics [darkonot], which are large gold coins, due to the burden of the way.

So, we see that we can exchange shekels for bigger coins. If so, the Gemara wonders, let them make them, i.e., exchange them with, gems [margaliot], which are more valuable than darics and much lighter to carry.

While the halakhah does not allow for them to be exchanged for gems “due to concern lest the price/value of the gems decrease, and the Temple treasury of consecrated property will lose” it does make me think about, if we had to suddenly go, what could we, would we take?

What is precious to us? What is small enough that it can be easily hidden?

Tomorrow we begin Passover. Our ancestors too had to take only a few items that they could carry with them as they left – and yet when it came time to build the mishkan, the traveling sanctuary, there was gold, silver, gems . . . may we never have reason to need to run with only what we can carry ever again.

Today’s gem – the Kalbon.

What is the Kalbon? Glad I asked. The kalban is a “bit extra.” On today’s daf, we see the kalbon being added to the half shekel tax. Why do we need extra? Well, there was no mint, and a shekel might be a little light now and then. So, we give a little extra in case in the process of collecting the Shekalim, some are worn down of damaged etc. This daf teaches us that when one gives a half-Shekel, one must add a little extra.

I love this as a lesson in life. When in doubt, do more.

I had a business school professor who asked us to do a presentation where we would market a product to a particular country. We had to include 3 fact about the product, 3 about the country, and then 3 reasons why the product is right for the country. Here’s the catch – those people who did exactly 3 for each category GOT A C!! They did just what was asked, no more, so why wouldn’t they get a C? A C means your work is sufficient. (Oh there were a LOT of freakouts when we got our grades, but it was a great life lesson.)

Do a little extra. Put in a little more effort then is required. Push a little bit. It will make your contributions better, the community better, and you will feel better about yourself.