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

Most agreements in life are conditional in some way. You get your allowance only if you do your chores, you do your homework you get to go to the party … but what happens when two consenting adults make a conditional agreement where one of the conditions includes violating an aspect of the Torah?

It is that of Rabbi Yehuda, who says that if the condition that runs counter to that which is written in the Torah is referring to monetary matters, his condition is valid. As it is taught in a baraita: With regard to one who says to a woman: You are hereby betrothed to me on the condition that you have no claim against me to give you food, clothing, and conjugal rights, she is betrothed but his condition is void; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And Rabbi Yehuda said: With regard to monetary matters, i.e., her food and clothing, his condition is valid.

So here we learn the only time an agreement can have a condition that is contrary to the teaching of the Torah. It is when somebody willingly gives up something of monetary worth.

So, what is the gem? Everything in life has conditions. What is so vital is figuring out what they are.

You know the serenity prayer: “God grant me the serenity to accept the things I can not change, the courage to change the things I can and the wisdom to know the difference.” The daf reminds me of it today. What do we have control over? What don’t we? In a tractate all about liability, this is an important line to draw.

One wolf that approaches a flock and attacks is not considered a circumstance beyond one’s control, as the shepherd can drive it away, but an attack by two wolves is considered a circumstance beyond one’s control. Rabbi Yehuda says: At a time of wolf attacks, when many wolves come out of hiding and pounce on animals at every corner, even an attack by one wolf is considered a circumstance beyond one’s control. An attack by two dogs is not considered a circumstance beyond one’s control. Yadua the Babylonian says in the name of Rabbi Meir: If the two dogs came and attacked from one direction it is not considered a circumstance beyond one’s control, but if they attacked from two directions, this is considered a circumstance beyond one’s control, as the shepherd cannot protect his flock from both of them at once. If bandits came, this is considered a circumstance beyond one’s control. Likewise, with regard to an attack by a lion, a bear, a leopard, a cheetah, and a snake, these are each considered a circumstance beyond one’s control. When is an attack by one of the above considered beyond his control, which means that a paid bailee is exempt? It is when the dangerous beasts or bandits came of their own accord to the usual grazing spot. But if the shepherd ledhis flock to a place of groups of beasts or bandits, this is not considered a circumstance beyond one’s control, as he is at fault. If the animal died in its normal manner, this is considered a circumstance beyond one’s control; if he afflicted it by overworking it or by negligent treatment and it died, this is not considered a circumstance beyond one’s control. If the animal ascended to the top of a cliff and fell down and died, this is considered a circumstance beyond one’s control. If the shepherd himself brought it up to the top of a cliff and it fell down and died, this is not considered a circumstance beyond one’s control.

We can only control so much. We cannot control what others do to us (or our property). However, we can often control putting ourselves in situations where others have access to those things we don’t want abused.

If only it were so easy to know what we can control and what we can’t and how to protect ourselves from our own vulnerabilities.

A debate is happening on the daf when this little gem pops up:

As Rav says: I found a concealed scroll, a document that lists halakhot in shortened form so that they will not be forgotten. Rav discovered this document in Rabbi Ḥiyya’s house, and it was written in it: Isi ben Yehuda says that with regard to the verse: “When you come into your neighbor’s vineyard then you may eat grapes until you have enough at your own pleasure” (Deuteronomy 23:25), the verse is speaking of the entry of any person who passes alongside a vineyard, not only a laborer.

It’s a cheat-sheet!! There is a secret scroll with easy to access halakhah! How cool is this?

Later, Moses Maimonides writes a code of Jewish law so that we can all more easily wade through the conversations and just know what the rules are. I guess his was not the first.

The Sages taught: One who muzzles a cow and threshes with it is flogged, and in addition he must pay the owner of the cow four kav for a cow, the usual amount it consumes while threshing, and three kav for a donkey. 

This person has now violated two laws: 1) not muzzling an animal while it’s threshing and 2) not feeding the animal (or allowing it to eat) . So, the safes say he gets flogged for the muzzling AND has to pay for the food the animal did not get to eat. But there is a problem:

The Gemara asks: But isn’t there a principle that an offender is not flogged and also punished by death, and likewise he is not flogged and rendered liable to pay? 

We have learned a rule that someone who transgresses a prohibition is liable to receive only one punishment for a single offense – the more severe punishment.

Abaye said: In accordance with whose opinion is this ruling? It is that of Rabbi Meir, who says in general that one can be flogged and be liable to pay. Rava said that there is a difference between the transgression itself, which is between the offender and God, for which he is liable to be flogged, and the loss he caused the owner of the cow, for which he must pay restitution.

I love that line! We have sinned both against God AND the animal and must pay for both.

Rav Pappa stated a different answer: From the time of his pulling of the cow to rent it for threshing he was rendered obligated to provide its sustenance when it threshes, but as for flogging, he is not liable to be flogged until the actual time of muzzling.

(Here the issue is resolved by saying the sins happened at different times so he gets punished for both separately. )

The gem is the consciousness that we commit sins both against God and God’s creation and neither are okay. How often do we do things thinking no one will know or care? God will. But how many times do we do things that hurt God’s creation thinking we are not violating God’s will? Impossible.

I didn’t know what a Shabbat Goy was until I was in college. Apparently, religious Jews would (some still do) hire non-Jews to do things for them on Shabbat. In this way, whatever they needed to happen happened without the Jewish person breaking the halakhah (Jewish law). We have discussed this idea before – and that it’s not so kosher . . . but today’s daf asks if we can hire non-Jews to do things Jews are prohibited from doing EVER, not just on Shabbat.

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear, as they sent to Shmuel’s father a halakhic inquiry with regard to these oxen which gentiles steal and castrate. Since it is prohibited for Jews to castrate animals, they would sometimes arrange for a gentile to pretend to steal the animal and subsequently return it after castrating it, as it is easier to handle a castrated animal. What is the halakha with regard to a case of this kind? Shmuel’s father sent to him: They used artifice; therefore, you should use artifice with them and make them sell it as a punishment. This shows that it is prohibited to instruct a gentile to perform a prohibition on one’s behalf.

So, no. We cannot hire a non-Jew to do something for us that is prohibited for us to do.

The punishment is interesting too – since they were sneaky in their breaking to the rule, be sneaky in the consequences.

The Torah teaches us that we cannot muzzle an ox (or other working animal) while it is working the land. We need to let it eat. This is a firm lesson against animal cruelty.

Today’s daf extends this idea – if we cannot be cruel to animals must let them eat while they work. What is our responsibility to people who work for us? How much are they allowed to eat on the job? Are they allowed to cook the food? What if eating the food takes away from the time they’re supposed to be working?

Again, a valuable lesson about how we are supposed to treat other people and laborers.

Today’s gem is the rabbis proving their interpretation of a verse by showing that a certain members of a town who keep Torah law, but not rabbinic law had their town destroyed three years earlier than the rest of Jerusalem. It reminds us of two thing. The first is that it’s hard to understand Torah without the wisdom of those who have come before us. The second is that the rabbis have a lot of self interest in us believing that their interpretations are the correct ones.

But isn’t it taught in a baraita: For what reason were the shops of Beit Hino, a town near Jerusalem, destroyed three years before the destruction of Jerusalem itself? It was because they based their practices strictly on matters of Torah, i.e., they did not adhere to the rabbinic safeguards. The baraita explains that they would say that a buyer need not tithe the produce he purchases, as derived from the verses: “You shall tithe all the produce of your planting, which is brought forth in the field year by year, and you shall eat before the Lord, your God” (Deuteronomy 14:22–23). They claimed that the phrases “you shall tithe…and you shall eat” indicate that only the one who eats the produce must tithe it, but not the one who sells it. Likewise, the phrase “the produce of your planting” teaches that the one who performs the planting must separate tithes, but not the one who buys it. Rather, the obligation of a buyer to separate tithes applies by rabbinic law, and the verse is cited as a mere support for this halakha. The residents of Beit Hino did not adhere to this rabbinic law and did not observe the halakha requiring the buyer to separate tithes

Great gem today- let your actions speak for you.

The Gemara continues analyzing the same passage. It is written: “And I will fetch a morsel of bread, and satisfy your heart” (Genesis 18:5), and it is written: “And Abraham ran to the herd, and fetched a calf tender and good” (Genesis 18:7). Rabbi Elazar said: From here we learn that the righteous say little and do much, whereas the wicked say much and do not do even a little.

Wow, it’s rare that the sad have so much aggadah (story telling). But today’s dad talks about Rabbi bar Nahmani and the miracles that happen because of his righteous. We see a man’s face turn backward, God and the rabbis in heaven seek him out for the answer to a debate, birds create an umbrella to protect his body, Heavenly voices talking to make sure he is respected and finally, unreal weather threatening to destroy the earth because he has died.

It reminds us how unfair the world is in that bad things often happen to good people. It reminds us of how the world feels upside down when we experience a senseless loss. And it reminds us that, for the rabbis, heaven is a place where you get to debate matters of Torah with God.

The Gemara relates another story discussing the greatness of the Sages. Rav Kahana said: Rav Ḥama, son of the daughter of Ḥasa, told me that Rabba bar Naḥmani died due to the fear of a decree of religious persecution. The Gemara explains: His enemies accused him [akhalu beih kurtza] of disloyalty in the king’s palace, as they said: There is one man from among the Jews who exempts twelve thousand Jewish men from the king’s head tax two months a year, one month in the summer and one month in the winter. Since many people would study in Rabba’s study hall during the months of Adar and Elul, he was being blamed for preventing those people from working during those months. They sent a messenger [peristaka] of the king after him, but he was not able to find him. Rabba bar Naḥmani fled and went from Pumbedita to Akra, from Akra to Agma, from Agma to Shiḥin, from Shiḥin to Tzerifa, from Tzerifa to Eina Demayim, and from Eina Demayim back to Pumbedita. Ultimately, he was found in Pumbedita, as the king’s messenger arrived by chance at that same inn where Rabba bar Naḥmani was hiding. The inn attendants placed a tray before the messenger and gave him two cups to drink. They then removed the tray from before him and his face wasmiraculously turned backward. The attendants said to Rabba bar Naḥmani: What should we do with him? He is the king’s man, and we cannot leave him like this. Rabba bar Naḥmani said to them: Place a tray before him and give him one cup to drink, and then remove the tray from before him and he will be healed. They did this, and he was healed. The messenger said: I am certain that the man I seek is here, as this unnatural event must have befallen me on his account. He searched for Rabba bar Naḥmani and found out where he was. The messenger said that they should tell Rabba bar Naḥmani: I will leave this inn and will not disclose your location. Even if they will kill that man, i.e., me, I will not disclose your location. But if they will beat him, me, I will disclose your whereabouts, as I cannot bear being tortured. With that guarantee, they brought Rabba bar Naḥmani before the messenger. They took him into a small vestibule [le’idrona] and closed the door before him. Rabba bar Naḥmani prayed for mercy, and the wall crumbled. He fled and went to hide in a swamp. He was sitting on the stump of a palm tree and studying Torah alone. At that moment, the Sages in the heavenly academy were disagreeing with regard to a halakha of leprosy. In general, a leprous spot includes two signs of impurity, a bright white spot and a white hair. The basic halakha is that if the snow-white leprous sore [baheret] preceded the white hair then the afflicted person is ritually impure, but if the white hair preceded the baheret, he is pure. The heavenly debate concerned a case of uncertainty as to which came first, the spot or the hair. The Holy One, Blessed be He, says: The individual is pure, but every other member of the heavenly academy says: He is impure. And they said: Who can arbitrate in this dispute? They agreed that Rabba bar Naḥmanishould arbitrate, as Rabba bar Naḥmani once said: I am preeminent in the halakhot of leprosy and I am preeminent in the halakhot of ritual impurity imparted by tents. They sent a messenger from heaven after him to take his soul up to the heavenly academy, but the Angel of Death was unable to approach Rabba bar Naḥmani, as his mouth did not cease from his Torah study. In the meantime, a wind blew and howled between the branches. Rabba bar Naḥmani thought that the noise was due to an infantry battalion [gunda] about to capture him. He said: Let that man, i.e., me, die and not be given over to the hands of the government. The Angel of Death was therefore able to take his soul. As he was dying, he said in response to the dispute in heaven: It is pure; it is pure. A Divine Voice emerged from heaven and said: Happy are you, Rabba bar Naḥmani, as your body is pure and your soul left you with the word: Pure. A note [pitka] fell from heaven and landed in the academy of Pumbedita. The note read: Rabba bar Naḥmani was summoned to the heavenly academy, i.e., he has died. Abaye and Rava and all of the other Rabbis went out to tend to his burial; however, they did not know the location of his body. They went to the swamp and saw birds forming a shade and hovering over a certain spot. The Rabbis said: We can conclude from this that he is there. The Rabbis lamented him for three days and three nights. A note fell from heaven, upon which was written: Anyone who removes himself from the lamentations shall be ostracized. Accordingly, they lamented him for seven days. Another note fell from heaven, stating: Go to your homes in peace.

Shiva!! It concludes.

On that day when Rabba bar Naḥmani died, a hurricane lifted a certain Arab [taya’a] merchant while he was riding his camel. The hurricane carried him from one side of the Pappa River and threw him onto the other side. He said: What is this? Those present said to him: Rabba bar Naḥmani has died. He said before God: Master of the Universe! The entire world is Yours and Rabba bar Naḥmani is also Yours. You are to Rabba and Rabba is to You,i.e., you are beloved to each other. If so, why are You destroying the world on his account? The storm subsided.

Another beautiful text! One that I wrote about one Shabbat Shuvah (the Shabbat between Rosh haShanna and Yom Kippur). So, I will paste the text, then my sermon below 🙂

The Gemara relates: When Rabbi Ḥanina and Rabbi Ḥiyya would debate matters of Torah, Rabbi Ḥanina would say to Rabbi Ḥiyya: Do you think you can debate with me? Heaven forbid! If the Torah were forgotten from the Jewish people, I could restore it with my powers of analysis and intellectual acumen. Rabbi Ḥiyya said to Rabbi Ḥanina: Do you think you can debate with me? You cannot compare yourself to me, as I am acting to ensure that the Torah will not be forgotten by the Jewish people. Rabbi Ḥiyya elaborated: What do I do to this end? I go and sow flax seeds and twine nets with the flax, and then I hunt deer and feed their meat to orphans. Next I prepare parchment from their hides and I write the five books of the Torah on them. I go to a city and teach five children the five books, one book per child, and I teach six other children the six orders of the Mishna, and I say to them: Until I return and come here, read each other the Torah and teach each other the Mishna. This is how I act to ensure that the Torah will not be forgotten by the Jewish people. The Gemara notes that this is what Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: How great are the deeds of Rabbi Ḥiyya! Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, said to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi: Are his deeds even greater than the Master’s, i.e., yours? Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said to him: Yes.

My sermon:

In his autobiography, Jeff Corwin shares that while filming an episode of The Jeff Corwin Experience in Namibia he was on set when a cheetah popped up in the grass.  The big cat was 15-20 feet away from Jeff and his producer.  It started walking towards them and Jeff’s producer warned, “There is no way we can outrun a cheetah.”  “I don’t need to;”  Jeff responded, “I only need to outrun you.”   

This was a joke cracked in a moment of fear.  But in reality, this is the way so many of us live our lives – believing that in order for us to survive, or thrive, or be appreciated, or special, or loved – others have to serve as cheetah food. 

It’s a false understanding of the idea of scarcity.  Yes, certain things are limited in life, like hours in the day, or m&m’s in a bag.  But the big things in life are not scarce at all.  Love, joy, accomplishment – these things have no bounds. 

To be a Jewishly religious person is to believe that God did not create a single one of us without a purpose.  God wants all of us to thrive – and our success is actually not contingent on looking good compared to others – it’s contingent on everyone succeeding together. 

Rabbi Barras talked about this last week when he highlighted that our HHD prayer book asks us to confess in the plural – ashamnu, bagadnu – al chet shechatanu – we have sinned – this is a group effort. 

Yes, an individual may be righteous in their own acts.  But that is not the ideal. 

A story is shared in the Talmud, Bava Metzia 85b that illustrates this: 

“Rabbi Hanina and Rabbi Hiyya used to quarrel.” This isn’t one of those standard Talmudic arguments where different rabbis give different opinions on a topic. There’s no topic at hand, and these two men are מינצוּ- a word that could equally well describe a fist-fight. This is the clash of two people who could never stand one another and are finally having it out. 

“Rabbi Hanina said to Rabbi Hiyya, ‘How dare you argue with me?! If, God forbid, the Torah were to be entirely forgotten from Israel, I could restore it from my own intelligence!’” 

Rabbi Hanina strikes the first verbal blow. His name means “Rabbi Grace”, has been graced by God with intellectual gifts that surpass anything his teachers and peers could have ever dreamed of.  

Had he gone to Miami public school, he no doubt would have been welcome in the “gifted and talented” program. I imagine he didn’t care much for study groups, and he probably loved being in classes graded on a curve. He dreams up the horrific scenario of the Torah’s being forgotten from Israel, and even though he appends a pious, “God forbid”, we have to wonder whether he doesn’t imagine this mass forgetting with a bit of relish, looking forward to the time when his talents would finally be fully appreciated.  

“Rabbi Hiyya said to Rabbi Hanina, ‘How dare you argue with me?! I devote myself to the Torah so that it not be forgotten from Israel. I plant and raise flax seeds. I then harvest them and weave them into nets, which I you to trap deer. I feed the meat of the deer to orphans, and I make the hides into five scrolls, and write one of the five books of Moses on each. Then I go to a town, and I find five children, and teach each one to read one of the five books. Then I find six more children, and teach each one to recite one of the six orders of the Mishna by heart. And I tell them, “By the time I’ve returned, I want each of you to teach the others to read what you can read, and to recite what you can recite.“’” 

Rabbi Hanina’s opposite is Rabbi Hiyya, “Rabbi Life.” He isn’t necessarily possessed of gifts of particular intelligence or creativity – he’s just got what we all have: life. His work is painstaking and selfless. Each year he plants flax, and harvests students. And not only students: In giving responsibility to his students to teach one another, he makes them experts!  And a team of teachers! 

But the two most exceptional dimensions of Rabbi Hiyya’s teaching go even beyond this. 

First – he takes the meat of the deer and feeds it to orphans – because he knows that study is not enough!  If you are really learning Torah you should be living out it’s principles – like feeding the hungry and protecting the orphan and those others who are out of our normal circle of care.  He fully absorbs and lives out God’s words – reproducing them through action.  

And second, he returns to his students. His parting words are “By the time I’ve returned, I want each of you to teach the others to read what you can read, and to recite what you can recite.” His return trip promises not only a renewal of the contact and care that were there in his first visit, but also renewed and expanded learning – and teaching – for his students.  

We can only imagine how many hundreds of students Rabbi Hiyya taught this way, and how many thousands of students were taught by those students. In the logic of the story (and I don’t care whether this is historically true), we all, if we trace back far enough, are students of Rabbi Hiyya’s. 

His is how to be a person in relation to other people, how to pursue a shared goal together. Rabbi Hiyya’s work is a model of being a parent, a child, and sibling; a neighbor and a co-worker and a boss; a spouse and a friend – a fellow congregant. 

While in many Talmudic passages there is a truth to both sides, this is not one of those passages. Here Rabbi Hiyya is the hero, and Rabbi Hanina is his foil. The bottom line of this story is a call to fight our impulse to be like Rabbi Hanina (and our impulse to reward others for being like Rabbi Hanina!).  To stop lacing up our sneakers trying to outrun the other guy and instead work together so we can both succeed.  To be more like Rabbi Hiyya. The Talmud concludes the story sharing, “This is what Rabbi Yehuda ha-Nasi was referring to when he said, ‘Hiyya’s works are so great!’”. Someone asked Rabbi Yehuda ha-Nasi, ‘Even greater than yours?’ He answered, ‘yes’.” 

While each of us has our own unique items on our cheshbon nefesh – our souls report card – that we need to work on in the year to come.  We should remember that this is not like other report cards – we are not being graded on a curve.  As Rabbi Jason Ruben of Machon Hadar has said, “There is no such thing as reaching redemption alone. If we don’t all get there, none of us will… No one here can arrive at next year’s Rosh Hashana whole and blessed without a host of friends and family and colleagues and neighbors who are also there with us.” 

“You don’t have to unscrew another person’s light bulb in order to shine”. We can all shine. And together- we can light up the whole world.