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

When, in life, would it be a good time to find out your dad has a secret child you never knew about? Never. But after you and your brother divided the estate after his death is probably the least ideal.

If two brothers divided their father’s estate between them, and then later a third brother, of whose existence they had previously been unaware, arrived from a country overseas, Rav says: The original division of the property is void, and the brothers must now redivide the property among the three of them. And Shmuel says: The original division is still valid, but the two brothers must each take off a share from their portion and give it to the third brother.

Not much of a gem here, but again, fodder for a book full of drama based on the Talmud . . .

Today’s daf continues the struggle to understand confusing language around purchasing. Here the example is, if a seller says you can rent the apartment for 12 dinar a year, one dinar a month. What do we do when it’s a leap year and there are 13 months?! (This is what happens on the Jewish calendar.)

The entire daf debates this question. At the end we learn that the deal always favors the owner, not the renter.

Again, thinking of the High Holy Days, our souls are just lent to us, they belong to God.So, we owe it all to God.

A great gem for this moment. Please ignore what I said before and only hold me accountable to what I am saying now.

MISHNA: If the seller says to the buyer: I am selling you a plot of land of a certain size measured precisely with a rope more or less, thereby attaching to the sale two contradictory stipulations; in this case, the words: More or less, nullify the words: Measured precisely with a rope. Accordingly, if the surplus did not exceed a quarter-kav per se’a, the sale is valid as is. Similarly, if the seller says to the buyer: I am selling you a plot of land of a certain size more or less measured precisely with a rope, the words: Measured precisely with a rope, nullify the words: More or less, since the principle is that in all cases, one should attend to the final expression; this is the statement of ben Nanas.

We see that a person is held liable for what they have said the most recently, not what they said before. It’s so perfect for this time as we approach Yom Kippur. Please, God, don’t hold us accountable for what we did and said before, only hold us accountable for what we do and say now. Forgive the past . . . don’t judge us based on then.

This text is a text for a growth mindset, that we may change our minds! We can and should be growing and doing better than we had before.

How precise are we with our words?

MISHNA: If one says to another: I am selling you a plot of earth the size of a beit kor, measured precisely with a rope, and he gave him even the slightest amount less than what was stipulated, the seller must deduct the difference from the purchase price of the field and return money to the buyer. If he gave him even the slightest amount more than what was stipulated, the buyer must return the difference to the seller. And if the seller said to the buyer that he is selling him a beit kor of land more or less, then even if he gave him a quarter-kav per se’a less than what was stipulated, or he gave him a quarter-kav per se’a more that what was stipulated, i.e., he gave him one twenty-fourth more or less than what was required, it is his. The sale is valid, since the seller told the buyer in advance that he was not committing himself to precise measurements. If the difference is greater than that amount, he must make a calculation, and the party that suffered a loss must be compensated.

Here we see how important our language is. The rabbis prefer that we be precise so there is no confusion between the two parties. However, the addition of “more or less” or “about” allows some wiggle room.

As we are in the days of awe, we hope that God won’t be so precise in judgement, but will give us a little wiggle room.

Today, on the daf, a burial chamber is found that doesn’t match either the measurements given by the Tanna Kamma (the anonymous voice in the daf) or Rabbi Shimon’s opinions. And one possibility is that “here we are dealing with a case where the corpses found were of non-viable newborns buried in a smaller chamber only six cubits long.”

How sad and yet powerful. Losing a newborn, or having a stillborn, is horrifically painful. There is contradiction in Jewish law about burial practices around the loss of a baby that does not live beyond 30 days. But here we see that parents did bury their children. They did get to mourn. They did, at least, have the gift of saying goodbye with Jewish ritual. (evidence of this is found explicitly in the Talmud Yerushalmi)

Very interesting daf! Today is all about the proper spacing of bodies in catacombs… that’s right! Catacombs!

Jewish catacombs were underground burial sites used by Jewish communities in the late Roman Empire. They were popular amongst early Christians as well and those a better known. They were a way for Jews to bury their dead while adhering to Jewish burial traditions and accommodating the limitations of our religious practices. It was also cheaper and safer than public burials. In Rome today you can still visit two quite large Jewish catacombs- perhaps those described on the daf!

But the practice actually goes back to Abraham and Sarah who were buried (along with Isaac, Rebecca, Jacob and Leah) in machpelah – a cave which served as a catacomb.

Personally, I find them creepy. But being scared to bury your dead publicly is a creepy thing. May our people live in times where we don’t have to hide our religious practices or conform to look like other faiths for our own safety.

In the discussions about selling part of your land to another person, the daf has talked previously about needing to purchase a path through that land so you can still access you own. The daf today is discussing purchasing land that has a public thoroughfare and how we need to still have space for people to pass through (meaning we can’t make it so the public can no longer pass). The gem is the size of the thoroughfare:

The mishna teaches: A king’s thoroughfare has no maximum measure. The Gemara explains: This is because the halakha is that a king may breach the fence of an individual in order to create a thoroughfare for himself, and none may protest his actions.

This makes sense! If it’s for a king, forget about it, he can pass through your public property. What makes it beautiful?

The mishna teaches: The path for those accompanying a deceased person to a grave has no maximum measure. The Gemara explains: This is due to the honor of the deceased.

The body of the deceased is treated like a king. How beautiful. We all stop what we are doing, we accompany the dead, we say prayers, and treat the dead as we would a king. Each of us is made in the image of God, so we are the image of not just a king, but the King of kings.

Discussing the cherubs over the holy of holies, the Gemara asks: How were the cherubs standing? Rabbi Yoḥanan and Rabbi Elazar disagree about this. One says: Their faces were turned one toward the other. And one says: Their faces were turned toward the House, i.e., the Sanctuary. The Gemara asks: But according to the one who says that their faceswere turned one toward the other, isn’t it written: “And their faces were toward the House” (II Chronicles 3:13)? How does he explain the meaning of this verse? The Gemara answers: This is not difficult, as their faces miraculously changed directions in reflection of the Jewish people’s relationship to God. Here, when it states that the cherubs faced each other, it was when the Jewish people do the will of God. There, the verse that describes that the cherubs faced the Sanctuary and not toward each other, was when the Jewish people do not do the will of God. 

May we turn toward one another – seeing and supporting each other in this year to come, and in doing so, do God’s will.

The Gemara asks: And according to the one who says they stood as described in the verse: “And their faces were toward the House,” isn’t it written: “With their faces one toward the other” (Exodus 25:20). How does he explain the meaning of this verse? The Gemara answers: They were angled sideways so that they turned both to each other and toward the Sanctuary, as it is taught in a baraita: Onkelos the Convert said that the cherubs were of the form of children, as the verse states: “And in the Holy of Holies he made two cherubim of the form of children; and they overlaid them with gold” (II Chronicles 3:10), and their faces were angled sideways toward the Ark of the Covenant, like a student taking leave of his teacher.

May we always learn from Torah and never abandon our responsibilities to God’s creation.

Amazing gems on the daf!

Rav Mari said: One who is haughty is not accepted even by the members of his household, as it is stated: “The haughty man abides not” (Habakkuk 2:5). What does the phrase “abides [yinveh] not” mean? It means that even in his abode [naveh], he is not accepted.

Don’t be so full of yourself that there is no room for anyone else – even your family! But the gems keep coming. This next passage comes from this ancient book of wisdom that was lost but is referred to often in rabbinic literature.

Support for this is as it is written in the book of ben Sira: I have weighed everything in the pan of a balance scale and I have not found anything inferior to bran; but inferior to bran is a son-in-law who lives in his father-in-law’s house; and inferior to a son-in-law is a guest who brings in a guest; and inferior to a guest is one who answers a matter before he listens. As it is stated: “He that gives an answer before he listens, it is folly for him and a disgrace” (Proverbs 18:13).

Snap! Bran is the cheapest of grains, but worse than that is a son in law who is a mooch; but still worse then that is someone who is a guest who invites other guests (love this, make yourself at home does not mean that now you’re master of the house and can invite whomever you want – be polite and respect others and receive with grace). But worst of all? Those who answer before they even listen, who give their opinions before they even have learned about the topic.

Hello internet? Social media? Do you hear? Don’t talk without knowing. It is the worst of the worst and we all suffer for it.

Todays gem is that, just like you wouldn’t bring a king or someone you would want to impress a subpar bottle of wine – don’t bring watered down dregs to the Temple as an offering to God.

Makes me think of when I was in high school and I thought of a friend was working at a restaurant that I didn’t have to tip them. In reality – I should have tipped them more. God deserves the best and so do others.