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

Murder! (Hope that got your attention.) who ever thought Talmud was boring?

It was taught in the mishna: An incident occurred where both of the priests were equal as they were running and ascending on the ramp, and one of them shoved the other and he fell and his leg was broken.

This is bad enough. We read in the Mishnah that two priests were racing up the ramp because each wanted to be the one to clean the ashes from the midnight offering. One tripped the other and broke his leg! From this, we get a reform in Jewish law, they decide from then on by lottery. But we learn today, that this was not the only incident of injury in pursuing this honor (which, by the way, is basically the honor of waking in the middle of the night to take out the trash . . . ):

The Sages taught in the Tosefta: An incident occurred where there were two priests who were equal as they were running and ascending the ramp. One of them reached the four cubits before his colleague, who then, out of anger, took a knife and stabbed him in the heart.

What!!!!?

The Tosefta continues: Rabbi Tzadok then stood up on the steps of the Entrance Hall of the Sanctuary and said: Hear this, my brothers of the house of Israel. The verse states: “If one be found slain in the land… and it be not known who had smitten him; then your Elders and your judges shall come forth and they shall measure…and it shall be that the city which is nearest to the slain man…shall take a heifer” (Deuteronomy 21:1–3). And the Elders of that city took that heifer and broke its neck in a ritual of atonement. But what of us, in our situation? Upon whom is the obligation to bring the heifer whose neck is broken? Does the obligation fall on the city, Jerusalem, so that its Sages must bring the calf, or does the obligation fall upon the Temple courtyards, so that the priests must bring it? At that point the entire assembly of people burst into tears.

Wow wow wow. Okay, a priest was stabbed in the heart by another priest, so Rabbi Tzadok rightly shames them all for allowing this kind of behavior to happen int he Temple. But the drama is far from over:

The father of the boy, i.e., the young priest who was stabbed, came and found that he was still convulsing. Okay, so his dad comes and sees he is still alive. So, what do we expect? We expect him to yell for help, to cry for his son, to try and staunch the blood. But no.

He said: May my son’s death be an atonement for you. But my son is still convulsing and has not yet died and so the knife, which is in his body, has not become ritually impure through contact with a corpse. Meaning, he is saying that since his son isn’t dead yet, they shoudl pull the knife to keep it’s ritual purity, and then, when the boy dies, it will atone for their sins.

I repeat, what!!!!?

The Tosefta comments: This incident comes to teach you that the ritual purity of utensils was of more concern to them than the shedding of blood. Even the boy’s father voiced more concern over the purity of the knife than over the death of his child. And similarly, it says: “Furthermore, Manasseh spilled innocent blood very much, till he had filled Jerusalem from one end to another” (II Kings 21:16), which shows that in his day as well people paid little attention to bloodshed.

The Gemara then discusses two things, the first being if this was the real reason they switched to a lottery or if they thought this was a freak occurrence and then the tripping and breaking of the leg was yet another incident and proof this was a persistent problem. Them other thing they discuss is, if they are prioritising the purity of the knife over the taking of a life – is it because the taking of a life means so little to them? Or is it because the purity of a knife means so much to them?

The rabbis conclude that the spilling of blood had become trivial to them.

It reminds me of our world today. We hear of Covid deaths in numbers, not as names of individuals, we become numb. There was a killing of a citizen by a police officer every day during the Derek Chauvin trial, yet we become numb to it, they remain nameless to us unless we seek out the information, or they were our family member. Mass shootings in the US have become common place. . . how are we any different in our indifference?

At least the priests had the wisdom to change the laws, to put in protections, while we continue to make laws even more lax . . . our priorities are so out of wack. We are focusing on the right to bare arms instead of the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. We are just like the dad focusing on the purity of the knife and not the bleeding child on the floor.

(Okay, you can tell I am bitter about the Florida legislature. I am.)

Don’t count.

Today’s daf has many gems, including Priests tripping one another to be the first to reach the alter to offer the midnight sacrifice, David and Saul’s sins being listed (ah so good) but there is one piece that talks to a practice Jews still have today: not counting individuals.

What do you mean? you may be asking. Don’t we need to have ten for a service? Don’t we do Jewish census work? Don’t we count our synagogue members?

Rabbi Yitzḥak said: It is prohibited to count Jews directly, even for the purposes of a mitzva, as it is written concerning King Saul and his count of his soldiers: “And he numbered them with bezek”(I Samuel 11:8), meaning that he counted them through shards, one shard representing each man, rather than counting them directly. We did this too with the half shekel tax – that was a way for us to know how many people we had in the community without directly counting.

Rabbi Elazar said: Whoever counts a group of Jews violates a negative mitzva, as it is stated: “And the number of the children of Israel will be like the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured” (Hosea 2:1). Rabbi Elazar interprets the verse to be saying: Which may not be measured. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: One who counts a group of Jews in fact violates two negative mitzvot, as it is stated in that verse: “Which cannot be measured and cannot be counted” (Hosea 2:1).

So, there is a Jewish tradition to say verse with ten words (Hoshia et Amcha . . ) to determine if 10 are present. What is going on here?

Rabbi Brad Hirschfeld has a nice explanation in his book, “You Don’t Have to be Wrong for ME to Be Right” that teaches: “When the existence of the members becomes more important than their experience of membership, something is wrong.”

“Real damage happens when we use demography instead of biography to understand each other. . . When we imagine that the best way to understand one another is by figuring our which category in our lives a person fits into, instead of asking how integrating that person into our lives will redefine the categories that we use, everyone suffers.”

Only God can really see all of us. Only God can really count us. So we learn that David was punished for taking a census God did not ordain. Rav Huna stated above that David failed with two sins. What were they? One was the incident in which he had Uriah killed. The other was the matter of the incitement of David to conduct a census of the Jewish people (see II Samuel 24:1), which led to many deaths in a plague. And that the priests do not count one naother for the mitzvah of fulfilling the midnight service, they take a lottery instead.

And we should learn that each of us counts, but that counting us by putting us into categories robs us of our full persona. We are impossible to be kept into boxes.

What is considered a miracle? Today’s daf deals with just that. The conversation is started with the following miracle – that of having enough space:

Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: When the Jewish people ascend to Jerusalem for the pilgrimage Festivals they stand crowded, but when they bow during confession they are spaced so that no one hears the confession of another. And due to the large crowd they extend eleven cubits behind the Hall of the Ark Cover, the Holy of Holies. The Gemara asks: What is he saying in the reference to eleven cubits behind the Holy of Holies? The Gemara explains that this is what he is saying: Even though the crowd is so large that the people extend eleven cubits behind the Hall of the Ark Cover and people stand crowded, still, when they bow, they bow spaced.

This is beautiful. Space for everyone to be present, and yet, space for everyone to have privacy. I can’t help but think of the tragedy of the Lag BaOmer trampling that left at least 45 dead, as there was a huge crowd, but apparently, not enough space. It really emphasises the marvellousness of the miracle described in this piece of Gemara.

The daf continues:

And that is one of the ten miracles that were performed in the Temple. As we learned in a mishna: Ten miracles were performed in the Temple.

Then it goes on to list more than ten. And that is my gem: That when we look to find miracles in our lives, we will often be surprised by how many there are if we only take the time to look.

Try it. Try to find 10. See how it helps you to open up your eyes to the miracles that surround us.

Since I did a double post, a high gem comes in this fabulous one liner. First let’s set the stage:

Rav happened to come to the place (Neharde’a) where Rabbi Sheila was the most prominent local Torah scholar and Rav was not yet known. There was no disseminator to stand before Rabbi Sheila to disseminate his lecture to the public.

So, what happens? Rav, a much more esteemed rabbi, stands in as Sheila’s interpreter (a much lower role). But Rav can’t help but teach what he believes, which contradicts an interpretation of Sheila’s, which gives him away.

He (Sheila) said to him (Rav): Is the Master Rav? Let the Master rest and cease disseminating my lecture, as it is beneath your dignity to serve as my assistant.

Now the good one liners: Rav said to him: People say this aphorism: If you hired yourself to him, comb his wool. Once one agrees to perform a task, he should bear its less pleasing aspects and complete the job. Love this!!!!

Some say, this is what Rav said to him: One elevates to a higher level in matters of sanctity and one does not downgrade. Yes, that’s right, Rav is using the same rule we apply to how we light the Channukah lights . . . to himself! He essentially says, “since the task of interpreting was undertaken by a man of my stature, it is not fitting that a lesser man will replace me. That would be a display of contempt for the Torah.”

Love these rabbis, and their egos.

This gem starts on the bottom of 19b and continues onto the top of 20.

The Gemara is discussing the need to keep the High Priest awake all night prior to Yom Kippur day service (so that, you guessed it, he will not have a nocternal emission). They suggest that the Priest be told to walk around barefoot and that the cold on his feet will keep him up. They describe snapping in his face (and how to snap). And then we get this little gem:

The Gemara relates that the prominent men of Jerusalem would not sleep the entire night but instead engaged in Torah study, so that the High Priest would hear the sound of noise in the city and sleep would not overcome him. (Reminds me of trying to sleep at night in college . . . it’s when I began to speel with earplugs – students were playing music all night.) It was taught in a baraita that Abba Shaul said: They would do so even in the outlying areas and stay awake all night in acknowledgment of the Temple; however, the result was that they would sin, as the men and women would participate in games together to pass the time, leading to transgression.

That’s right!!! People even far from the High Priest would stay up all night in support of the effort. But you can imagine the men and women in their HHD new clothes, looking good, it’s late at night, you lock eyes with someone . . . and transgress. Aparently this happened in a specific place, Neharde’a:

Abaye said, and some say it was Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak who said: Interpret that statement as referring to Neharde’a, as Elijah the Prophet said to Rav Yehuda, brother of Rav Salla Ḥasida: You have said and wondered: Why has the Messiah not come? Why is that surprising? Isn’t today Yom Kippur, and relations were had with several virgins in Neharde’a! As the men and women stayed awake all night and that led to promiscuity?

Rav Yehuda said to him: What did the Holy One, Blessed be He, say about those sins committed by the Jewish people? He said: This is what God said: “Sin lies in waiting at the door” (Genesis 4:7), and it is no wonder that men sin. He asked him: And what did Satan the prosecutor say about their sinning? Elijah said to him: Satan, on Yom Kippur, has no license to prosecute. From where is that idea derived? Rami bar Ḥama said: The numerological value of the letters that constitute the word HaSatan is three hundred and sixty four: Heh has a value of five, sin has a value of three hundred, tet has a value of nine, and nun has a value of fifty. Three hundred and sixty-four days of the solar year, which is three hundred and sixty-five days long, Satan has license to prosecute. On the remaining day, Yom Kippur, he has no license to prosecute. Since that day is exalted above all others, there is no room for the accusations of Satan.

So we get this story of sinning in Neharde’a on Yom Kippur, all in an attempt to keep the High Priest awake. And then we get this wonderful gem – that Satan takes one day off a year: Yom Kippur.

Now, I have said before, Satan is different in Judaism, he is simply an angel who serves as prosecutor of humanity. So, why would Yom Kippur be a good day off? Well, the High Holy Days are times when man serves that role. We, instead of denying or minimalizing our sins, admit to everything we have done, we even list sins we didn’t do! (That acrostic of sins that starts with Ashamnu . . . ) It’s the one day of the year where we really serve as our own prosecutor. We look inside and allow ourselves to feel guilt, remorse, and punish ourselves. No Satan necessary.

It’s a good and healthy thing to do once a year. And at the end of the day, we let all that go . . . might even be better than a night in Neharde’a.

Spicy daf today! In response to the Mishnah teaching that the secluded High Priest can eat anything he wants until prior to Yom Kippur, we get a list of foods that the rabbis insist he should not eat, as they may cause him to have a seminal emission at night and render him impure. This takes them down a tangent road about not eating these foods when you’re traveling to avoid embarrassing messes in hotels. And then we get the most shocking piece of all . . .

When Rav would happen to come to Darshish he would declare: Who will be married to me for the day? Similarly, when Rav Naḥman would come to Shekhantziv he would declare: Who will be married to me for the day that I am here?

That’s right. These rabbis would ask for a bride, just for the night they are in town. Have question? The Gemara does too:

But wasn’t it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: A man should not marry a woman in one state and go and marry another woman in a different state, lest a match be arranged between the child of this wife with the child of that wife who are unaware of their relationship.

It’s the modern conundrum of sperm donors falling in love with people they don’t realize are siblings!!! We get a rule that we can still apply today:

This would lead to a brother marrying his sister or a father marrying his daughter, filling the whole world in its entirety with mamzerim. And concerning this it is stated: “And the land became filled with lewdness” (Leviticus 19:29). The Sages say in response: The Sages generate publicity. Since they were well-known, the identity of their children was also undoubtedly known. Therefore, there was no concern that errors of this kind would befall their children.

But there are other problems with the idea of these rabbis taking a wife just for the night, isn’t there?

But didn’t Rava say: With regard to one who proposed marriage to a woman and she agreed, she is required to sit seven clean days, as perhaps due to the anticipatory desire she might not notice that she experienced menstrual bleeding and she is therefore impure. How, then, could these amora’im marry a woman on the day that they proposed? The Gemara answers: The Sages would inform them by sending messengers before their arrival. The messenger would announce that the amora sought to marry a local woman. The woman who agreed would in fact wait seven clean days before marrying him.

And if you wish, say instead that these Sages were not actually proposing marriage; rather, they proposed so that they could be in seclusion with the women, without consummating the relationship. Since the women knew that the marriage would not be consummated, they did not experience anticipatory desire. There is no similarity between one who has bread in his basket and one who does not have bread in his basket.

Okay, so we have the possibility that these rabbis are “marrying” women for the night so that they will not have seminal emissions. Basically, it sounds, on the surface, like a kosher way to stay with a prostitute . . . or have a one night stand (but I assume she is getting paid a bride price).

Alternatively, the Gemara suggests (always defending rabbis’ honor) that it’s merely the fact that they know there is a woman they can go to and sleep with that’s enough for them not to need to have sex.

There is no similarity between one who has bread in his basket and one who does not have bread in his basket teaches that we have less desire if we know where our next meal is coming from. This is true for food insecurity, as well as in our physical relationships.

It makes me think of couples who are not living together verses those who are. When you don’t know when you will have the opportunity to have sex, you are more likely to take it when you can. Your desire is higher. But when the possibility is there all the time, well, the bread may stay in the breadbox . . .

So, we have a short daf today, and at first glance, not so interesting . . . but of course there is a gem. The Gemara addresses a contradiction between the Mishnah in Tamid (3:3) and the Mishnah in Midot (1:6). The Mishnah in Tamid says that the Chamber of Lambs was on the northwest side, while the Mishnah in Midot says that it was on the southwest side. And we resolve the contradiction based on what Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said: The Master in tractate Middot envisions the chambers as one coming via the right, from the south to the east, then to the north and then to the west. And the Master in tractate Tamid envisions the chambers as one coming via the left, from the south to the west, then to the north and then to the east.

And there is your gem – it looks like they are disagreeing, and they are both confident they are correct . . . and they both are! They are just looking at the same thing from a different angel, one is entering the room from one side, and the other from the opposite side. Oh how we would do well to learn this lesson – so often our disagreements are merely a matter of differing perspectives. So ask, where are you coming from? Show me how you see things?

Today’s daf is an architect’s dream. It gives exact dimensions of different chambers, stairways, positioning of items in relation to other items. I loved this passage: “And we learned in a mishna: All the entrances that were there in the Temple were twenty cubits high and ten cubits wide. And we learned in a different mishna describing the layout of the Temple: Inside the eastern wall of the Temple Mount was a latticed gate. And we learned in a different mishna: Inside the latticed gate was the rampart, which was an elevated area ten cubits wide. In that area there were twelve stairs; each stair was half a cubit high and half a cubit deep, for a total ascent of six cubits.” It demonstrates how important the Gemara is, in that it brings information from all over the Mishna together to get a coherent picture. This is a gem in that it reminds us that we need to gather information from varying sources to really see the full picture.

I also loved this little throw away line: “The northeast chamber was the chamber in which the Hasmoneans sequestered the altar stones that were desecrated by the gentile kings when they sacrificed idolatrous offerings.” There is something about the fact that the stones, even though they were defiled, are kept in a special holy place in the Temple. They are sequestered, just as the High Priest was, just as one who is experiencing a temporary impurity is, so that they can heal and then return to their holy spot. These stones were violated, something happened to them. This reminds us that, even if something happens to us, that makes us feel impure, that our holiness comes from within, and there is nothing that anyone can do to us that can take that away. Yes, we may need to separate from the community, we may need to recover, but our worth is still immeasurable.

We are still holy, even when something unholy is done to us. Nothing can take away our innate holiness.

Today, I just want to cite a Sage who appears on this daf (and is a rare sight) Rabbi Shimon Ish HaMitzpa. Why the special attention? Well, we don’t know a lot about him, but we do know that he lived while the Second Temple was still standing. Today’s daf is very much concerned with the details of how things happened in the Temple. You would think that Rabbi Shimon Ish HaMitzpa would be the final say in what happens, and yet, while the Gemara seems to recognize him as the individual who edited the basic Mishnayot in a given massekhet, the Gemara on today’s daf concludes that Rabbi Shimon Ish HaMitzpa is not the author of Massekhet Tamid, which has to do with offerings (and which is referenced on today’s daf).

Why do we care? Well, I think there is something fascinating in that those who were not there (the later Sages) saying that this man who was there and saw the Temple service with his own eyes might be wrong. Our memory can play tricks on us. For example, I have this firm memory of my sister streaking across the backyards of our neighborhood – but I wasn’t even born yet. I heard the story so much that I have a picture of it in my mind. Likewise, there are many times where I would have sworn I read something in one book, but it’s not there – clearly I was misattributing. Memory is a tricky thing. And, I also kinda love that there may be a possibility within this line of reasoning, that even if it WAS done the was Rabbi Shimon Ish HaMitzpa remembers, maybe there is a better way to do it according to the rabbis understanding of JEwish law as it stands in their time period.

MISHNA: During all seven days of the High Priest’s sequestering before Yom Kippur, he sprinkles the blood of the daily burnt-offering, and he burns the incense, and he removes the ashes of the lamps of the candelabrum, and he sacrifices the head and the hind leg of the daily offering. The High Priest performs these tasks in order to grow accustomed to the services that he will perform on Yom Kippur. On all the other days of the year, if the High Priest wishes to sacrifice any of the offerings, he sacrifices them, as the High Priest sacrifices any portion that he chooses first and takes any portion that he chooses first.

What’s going on? Rashi explains that the High Priest is practicing for the main event. So he will be ready to leadon Yom Kippur. However, the Kol ha-Ramaz gives a very different reason for this saying that the two chambers that the priest would have to perform these daily services were intentionally very far away from each other in order that, wait for it, he gets annoyed by his work. He posits the idea that they purposefully wanted the High Priest to do boring, tedious work, work that would be unattractive.

Why? Really for two reasons that I think we can all learn from: 1) that he doesn’t let his title go to his head (a bit of the idea that we are all worm food at the end of the day); and 2) to see if he really wants this role.

I love this. Each of us has to take the good with the bad. Each of us have aspects of our professions we don’t love. Each parent has aspects of being a parent we don’t love, aspects of being a friend, partner, you name it. But our love for being in that profession, with that person, getting to raise those children, give us the strength to plow on through the bad.

Lord give us strength.