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

Sanhedrin 15

Starting the New Year off with . . . bestiality on the daf! (I wanted to say ” a bang” but it’s funny/gross enough without the jokes.) This may be my favorite bestiality reference so far. The rabbis are fining their proof texts that this act which may be punished with the death penalty (both for the ox and the person involved) requires 23 judges and that it applies both if the man penetrates the animal as well as if the animal penetrates the man.

The Gemara comments: The mishna categorically teaches this halakha, indicating that there is no difference if this was an ox that copulated with a male, and there is no difference if it was an ox that copulated with a female. The Gemara asks: Granted, the source for this halakha is clear in the case where it copulated with a female, as it is written explicitly: “And if a woman approaches any animal and lies down with it, you shall kill the woman and the animal” (Leviticus 20:16). But with regard to an ox that copulated with a male, from where do we derive that the animal is to be killed? The Gemara answers: As it is written: “Whoever lies with an animal shall be put to death” (Exodus 22:18). If this verse is not needed for the matter of the one who actively lies with the animal, i.e., a male who sexually penetrates the animal, apply it to the matter of the one who causes the animal to lie with him, by being penetrated by the animal. There is another verse (Leviticus 20:15) that explicitly addresses a man penetrating the animal sexually; this verse from Exodus is therefore understood to be referring to the case where he causes the animal to penetrate him. And the Merciful One brought this forth using the active term “lies,” to compare one who causes the animal to lie with him to one who actively lies with the animal, in order to teach that just as in a case of one who lies with an animal, he and his animal are to be judged by twenty-three judges, so too, in the case of one who causes an animal to lie with him, he and his animal are to be judged by twenty-three judges.

Oy vey. It’s only disturbing because you don’t tell people not to do things unless someone is doing that thing . . .

Sanhedrin 14

Today, we get a story of martyrdom in order to ensure that Jewish teaching continues. Again, this shows a moment in host when Judaism was banned and the authorities tried to wipe it out.

We learn of this moment in a discussion of a time when it appeared that a rabbi ordained others on his own (instead of the required 3).

The Gemara asks: And is it so that one man alone is not able to ordain a rabbi? But doesn’t Rav Yehuda say that Rav says: Indeed [beram], that man will be remembered favorably, and Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava is his name, as had it not been for him the laws of fines would have been forgotten from among the Jewish people. The Gemara challenges that assertion: Would the laws of fines actually have been forgotten? Let them study them, so they will not be forgotten. Rather, his intention was to say that the laws of fines would have ceased to be implemented from among the Jewish people, as they would not have been able to adjudicate cases involving these laws due to a lack of ordained judges. This is because at one time the wicked kingdom of Rome issued decrees of religious persecution against the Jewish people with the aim of abolishing the chain of ordination and the authority of the Sages. They said that anyone who ordains judges will be killed, and anyone who is ordained will be killed, and the city in which they ordain the judges will be destroyed, and the signs identifying the boundaries of the city in which they ordain judges will be uprooted. These measures were intended to discourage the Sages from performing or receiving ordination due to fear for the welfare of the local population. What did Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava do? He went and sat between two large mountains, between two large cities, and between two Shabbat boundaries: Between Usha and Shefaram, i.e., in a desolate place that was not associated with any particular city so that he not endanger anyone not directly involved, and there he ordained five elders. And they were: Rabbi Meir, and Rabbi Yehuda, and Rabbi Shimon, and Rabbi Yosei, and Rabbi Elazar ben Shammua. Rav Avya adds that Rabbi Neḥemya was also among those ordained. This incident indicates that ordination can be performed by a single Sage. When their enemies discovered them, Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava said to the newly ordained Sages: My sons, run for your lives. They said to him: My teacher, what will be with you? Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava was elderly and unable to run. He said to them: In any case, I am cast before them like a stone that cannot be overturned; even if you attempt to assist me I will not be able to escape due to my frailty, but if you do not escape without me you will also be killed. People say about this incident: The Roman soldiers did not move from there until they had inserted three hundred iron spears [lunkhiyot] into him, making him appear like a sieve pierced with many holes.

Horrific, and beautiful- the sacrifice. It shows how Jews need our own land. How quickly tides turn against us when others are in charge.

It’s also interesting how this is an aside in a conversation about ordination. The history is here as less than important in contrast to keeping Jewish laws and traditions.

Sanhedrin 13

Today the daf continues to discuss inter calculation of the year. The rabbis are trying to make sure the holidays fall in the correct season. For us, this seems easy, but it wasn’t at the time. The secular calendar we use today is the Gregorian calendar, instituted in October of 1582. That was a move from the Julian calendar. They had to cut that first year by 10 days so Easter would be in the spring. Sounds like the rabbis on the daf who are trying to make sure Sukkot is in the fall and Passover in the spring.

Muslims follow the lunar Hijri calendar. Because they do not add in leap days or months, the calendar drifts. The month of Ramadan, where Muslims fast during the day and eat after sundown, also drifts. It’s much easier to keep in winter months when days are short then when it falls in the summer.

So, a lot of calculating may seem boring, but it’s important and we are lucky for it. What if Yom Kippur fell during the summer equinox? That would be a long day…

Sanhedrin 12

Remember speaking in “pig-latin” or “obey-kaybe” or other made up kid languages and thinking the adults didn’t understand? It’s funny to think back on. But, today’s daf includes some coded language from the rabbis that is anything but funny, it reflects a time of terrible persecution from the Romans.

The Gemara asks: Is that so, that intercalation may be determined only after Rosh HaShana? But the Sages of Eretz Yisrael sent the following encoded message to Rava during the time of Roman persecution: A pair came from Rakkath, but the pair was apprehended by the eagle, and in their possession were items made in Luz. And what are those items from Luz? Sky-blue dye. In the merit of divine mercy and in their merit, they emerged in peace. And the offspring of Nahshon sought to establish a pillar. But that Edomite, did not allow them. Nevertheless, the members of the assembly gathered, and they established a pillar, in the month in which Aaron the priest died.

It’s so hard to understand any of this! So, what does it mean? 2 Torah scholars were traveling to the Sanhedrin (the Jewish court) but Roman soldiers intercepted them. They had with them, blue die for the ritual fringes for tallitot, and managed to get out alive but didn’t make it to the Sanhedrin. The Sages wanted to establish an extra month that year, but the Roman governor didn’t let them. They gathered in the month of Av and determined that the next year would be a leap year.

All of this was shared to show that the rabbis can add an extra month if there is severe persecution. But ti really shows what an extent the rabbis went to in order to encode their language and protect themselves from persecution.

Sanhedrin 11

Today’s gem is fabulous. We see to what extent some of the greatest rabbis have gone to prevent someone embarrassment.

When Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was sitting and teaching, and he smelled the odor of garlic. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi was very sensitive and could not tolerate this odor. He said: Whoever ate garlic should leave. Rabbi Ḥiyya stood up and left. Out of respect for Rabbi Ḥiyya, all of those in attendance stood up and left. The next day, in the morning, Rabbi Shimon, son of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, found Rabbi Ḥiyya, and he said to him: Are you the one who disturbed my father by coming to the lecture with the foul smell of garlic? Rabbi Ḥiyya said to him: There should not be such behavior among the Jewish people. I would not do such a thing, but I assumed the blame and left so that the one who did so would not be embarrassed. And from where did Rabbi Ḥiyya learn that characteristic of being willing to implicate himself in order to save someone else from being embarrassed? He learned it from Rabbi Meir, as it is taught in a baraita: There was an incident involving a certain woman who came to the study hall of Rabbi Meir. She said to him: My teacher, one of you, i.e., one of the men studying in this study hall, betrothed me through intercourse. The woman came to Rabbi Meir to appeal for help in identifying the man, so that he would either marry her or grant her a divorce. As he himself was also among those who studied in the study hall, Rabbi Meir arose and wrote her a bill of divorce, and he gave it to her.Following his example, all those in the study hall arose and wrote bills of divorce and gave them to her. In this manner, the right man also gave her a divorce, freeing her to marry someone else.

So beautiful. These rabbis were willing to take the fall to protect others from embarrassment. And how beautiful that everyone else joined in as well.

Reminds me of another great Jewish man… Adam Sandler.

Billy Madison saves friend from embarrassment

Sanhedrin 10

We tend to dehumanize criminals. We call them by their crime, “robber,” “murderer,” “crook.” But we are all better than our worst moments. Today’s gem is a pause in the rabbis’ conversation about how many lashes one might receive for a crime. That we must make sure to both preserve the life of the person being lashed and remind ours that after the punishment is over, they remain our brother.

Rav Ashi said to him: The verse states: “Then your brother will be dishonored before your eyes.” The verse means: Even after he is hit, I need him to remain your brother; and if he dies, he is no longer your brother

Sanhedrin 9

A beautiful gem today that encourages us to help others to do mitzvot.

Rabbi Akiva elaborates upon the implications of this halakha. If so, the Torah punishes the one who acts as an accessory to transgressors with the same punishment as the primary transgressors. All the more so, God will grant the reward to an individual who acts as an accessory to one who performs a mitzva like the primary one who performs a mitzva, for the measure of good is always greater than the measure of suffering (see Sota 11a).

What a great text! We can get credit for encouraging others to do the right thing. It’s also a great text for those who raise money for non-for-profits and other good causes.

So give! Or tell others to 🙂

Sanhedrin 8

If we all lived our lives as if someone was watching, we would all behave better. That’s what it is to believe in Hod. Someone is watching. So be careful.

Rabbi Ḥama, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says: The Holy One, Blessed be He, says: It is not enough for the wicked judges, that they take money from this person and they give it to that person unlawfully, but they even trouble Me to return the money to its rightful owners. As proper justice is ultimately in the hands of God, He takes responsibility to bring about the rectification of the errors of unfit judges.

Sounds like karma… or just like divine justice.

Sanhedrin 7

So many gems on today’s daf! But, by far, this is my favorite, and the gem for today:

There was a certain man who was saying about his marriage as he walked: When our love was strong, we could have slept on a bed that was the width of a sword. Now that our love is not strong, a bed of sixty cubits is not sufficient for us.

So many beautiful layers. First, it’s true that we might sleep closer to our partner when we are feeling the love. When we aren’t feeling it – it doesn’t matter how big the bed, someone’s heading to the couch.

It also makes me think back to my husband and I sharing a twin bed 🙂 or falling asleep on the couch spooning. I also think about how we were financially struggling back then. As you have more money, you tend to upgrade the size of your bed. So, when I read this, I feel both the message of love and space (the more the love the less space you need in bed) – and the second message that money can’t compensate for lack of time and love.

Sanhedrin 6

What does it mean to do justice and charity? In this book written for judges, we get three answers on our daf:

Mediation is justice and charity: And similarly, with regard to David, it says: “And David executed justice and charity to all his people” (II Samuel 8:15). And is it not that wherever there is strict justice, there is no charity, and wherever there is charity, there is no strict justice? Rather, which is the justice that has within it charity? You must say: This is mediation.
Do what’s just, then give to charity: If a judge adjudicated a case of monetary law, and he correctly exonerated the party who was exempt from payment and deemed liable the party who was liable to pay, if he then saw that due to his ruling a poor person became liable to pay an amount of money that is beyond his means and therefore the judge himself paid for him from his own house, this is justice and also charity.
Just make the right judgement as a judge: It is justice for this one and charity for that one. It is justice for this one, because the judge restored his money to him, and charity for that one, because the judge removed the stolen item from his possession. By adjudicating the case correctly and compelling the liable party to pay his debt, the judge thereby ensures that the liable party does not illegitimately maintain property to which he is not entitled.

This is today’s gem because we see that what is just and what is charitable is different depending on the person, the time, and the situation. We need to constantly be negotiating what is the right thing to do in order to be as just and as charitable as possible.