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

We are still skating around what is and is not interest. Loved this little ruling:

And Abaye said: In the case of this one, who was owed four dinars of interest by another, and the borrower gave him a cloak as payment for it, when we take the interest from the lender we take four dinars from him, but we do not take the actual cloak from him, as the giving of the cloak is considered a sale. Rava said: We take the cloak from him. What is the reason for this? So that people should not say that the cloak so-and-so is wearing is a cloak procured as interest.

It’s one thing to sin, and another thing to “wear it” proudly. This normalizes the sin and we all see what normalizing bad behavior does to the world.

If you lend someone money, you can’t charge interest. Today we learn you can’t even accept a gift! Not even letting the lender stay the night.

One who lends another money may not reside in the borrower’s courtyard free of charge, nor may he rent living quarters from him at less than the going rate, because this is interest.

I think so much about predatory lenders reading these pages and how far our rabbis go to make sure no one is taken advantage of just because they need a loan. If only we could learn from them. (Think of all the student debt that would actually be paid off instead of endlessly paying interest!)

When we were trying to sell our house, many buyers came offering WAY below asking price but offering to pay cash for the house. I didn’t get it. Why would we be willing to take 20% less for cash? We get the same amount of money from bank as if we took cash without that huge cut.

Our daf deals with the same phenomenon.

And Rav Naḥman also said: In the case of this one who gives money to a wax seller to purchase loaves of wax from him, and loaves of wax go at the current rate of one dinar for four loaves, and the seller said to him: I will give you wax in the future at the rate of five loaves for each dinar if you pay me now in advance, if the seller has wax with him at the time of the transaction, it is permitted to sell at a discounted rate because he is in need of cash. But if the seller does not have wax with him, it is forbidden, as the extra loaf given is interest

Adin Steinsaltz explains, “If the wax merchant has the merchandise in his possession at the time of the agreed upon sale, the agreement is valid, since the merchant is simply giving a discount in exchange for pre-payment. If, however, the wax merchant did not have an inventory of wax, he is effectively borrowing money from the purchaser, and in exchange is repaying him with more wax than was paid for – which is considered a case of paying interest on the loan.”

The idea here is that you can’t charge someone interest, and you can’t rip them off. Yet – they know that sometimes we need cash now and can’t wait.

And yes, if we would have taken a cash deal we would have sold quicker. But it was worth the wait!

Today’s daf has one of my favorite conundrums. If two people are in a desert and there is only enough water for one person to drink before reaching safety, what do you do?

“And your brother shall live with you” (Leviticus 25:36), from which it is derived: Return the interest to him so that he may live. The Gemara asks: And Rabbi Yoḥanan, what does he do with this verse: “And your brother shall live with you”? The Gemara answers: He requires the verse for that which is taught in a baraita: If two people were walking on a desolate path and there was a jug [kiton] of water in the possession of one of them, and the situation was such that if both drink from the jug, both will die, as there is not enough water, but if only one of them drinks, he will reach a settled area, there is a dispute as to the halakha. Ben Petora taught: It is preferable that both of them drink and die, and let neither one of them see the death of the other. This was the accepted opinion until Rabbi Akiva came and taught that the verse states: “And your brother shall live with you,” indicating that your life takes precedence over the life of the other.

So, we learn that preserving our own life comes before others. While you can imagine the person who did not share would need a TON of therapy, it’s also comforting for the person to know that the choice was not theirs to make – the law is that they alone drink.

The Talmud makes notice of something I have often noticed! That some of our Torah commandments end with mentioning the exodus from Egypt.

Rava says: Why do I need the mention of the exodus from Egypt that the Merciful One wrote in the context of the halakhot of the prohibition against interest (see Leviticus 25:37–38), and the mention of the exodus from Egypt with regard to the mitzva to wear ritual fringes (see Numbers 15:39–41), and the mention of the exodus from Egypt in the context of the prohibition concerning weights (see Leviticus 19:35–36)? Rava explains: The Holy One, Blessed be He, said: I am He Who distinguished in Egypt between the drop of seed that became a firstborn and the drop of seed that did not become a firstborn, and I killed only the firstborn. I am also He Who is destined to exact punishment from one who attributes ownership of his money to a gentile and thereby lends it to a Jew with interest. Even if he is successful in deceiving the court, God knows the truth. And I am also He Who is destined to exact punishment from one who buries his weights in salt, as this changes their weight in a manner not visible to the eye. And I am also He Who is destined to exact punishment from one who hangs ritual fringes dyed with indigo [kala ilan] dye on his garment and says it is dyed with the sky-blue dye required in ritual fringes. The allusion to God’s ability to distinguish between two apparently like entities is why the exodus is mentioned in all of these contexts.

So, here we learn that every time the Torah mentions that God let us out of Egypt after mentioning a law – it’s because violating that law might not be something that others will notice – but GOD knows!

My favorite ending for a Torah commandment is when God throws in “I am Adonai your God.” That happens when God is explicitly telling us how to treat other people, in particular those who have little protection in society (the poor, the orphan, the widow, the stranger). It’s like saying, “they might not have powerful relatives who will hold you accountable, but I, God, will hold you accountable!”

So, watch what you’re doing, because God is.

No false advertising! That’s today’s gem.

The mishna taught: One may neither adorn a person, nor an animal, nor vessels. The Sages taught: One may neither stiffen the hair of an animal to create the impression that it is more voluminous than it is, nor inflate innards sold as meat to create the impression that it is a more substantial piece of meat, nor soak meat in water in order to change its color and create the impression that it is a choice cut. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of: One may not stiffen the hair of an animal? Here, in Babylonia, they explained that it means to feed the animal bran water, which inflates its intestines and causes its hair to stand on end. Ze’eiri said in the name of Rav Kahana: It means scrubbing the hair clean to increase its volume.

This makes me think of salmon. . . and how 70% of salmon is not pink, but dyed! (You can read more here.) But it’s not just salmon, I make challah (exempting Pesach) and have to make sure to buy non-bleached wheat (because, you know, bleach is a poison). There are lots of other examples, but we should just be weary that the FDA apparently does not have the same standards as the Talmud.

One of the most famous stories from the Talmud happens to be on our dad today. it’s a story of two famous and powerful rabbis disagreeing over if an oven is kosher or not miracles happen proving a point a voice comes from heaven, and even that is not enough to overrule the Rabbis

On that day, when they discussed this matter, Rabbi Eliezer answered all possible answers in the world to support his opinion, but the Rabbis did not accept his explanations from him. After failing to convince the Rabbis logically, Rabbi Eliezer said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, this carob tree will prove it. The carob tree was uprooted from its place one hundred cubits, and some say four hundred cubits. The Rabbis said to him: One does not cite halakhic proof from the carob tree. Rabbi Eliezer then said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with myopinion, the stream will prove it. The water in the stream turned backward and began flowing in the opposite direction. They said to him: One does not cite halakhic proof from a stream. Rabbi Eliezer then said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, the walls of the study hall will prove it. The walls of the study hall leanedinward and began to fall. Rabbi Yehoshua scolded the walls and said to them: If Torah scholars are contending with each other in matters of halakha, what is the nature of your involvement in this dispute? The Gemara relates: The walls did not fall because of the deference due Rabbi Yehoshua, but they did not straighten because of the deference due Rabbi Eliezer, and they still remain leaning. Rabbi Eliezer then said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, Heaven will prove it. A Divine Voice emerged from Heaven and said: Why are you differing with Rabbi Eliezer, as the halakha is in accordance with his opinion in every place that he expresses an opinion? Rabbi Yehoshua stood on his feet and said: It is written: “It is not in heaven” (Deuteronomy 30:12). The Gemara asks: What is the relevance of the phrase “It is not in heaven” in this context? Rabbi Yirmeya says: Since the Torah was already given at Mount Sinai, we do not regard a Divine Voice, as You already wrote at Mount Sinai, in the Torah: “After a majority to incline” (Exodus 23:2). Since the majority of Rabbis disagreed with Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion, the halakha is not ruled in accordance with his opinion. The Gemara relates: Years after, Rabbi Natan encountered Elijah the prophet and said to him: What did the Holy One, Blessed be He, do at that time, when Rabbi Yehoshua issued his declaration? Elijah said to him: The Holy One, Blessed be He, smiled and said: My children have triumphed over Me; My children have triumphed over Me.

The story reminds us that we are one community, and that we have to work together to decide what’s best for society. But the story doesn’t end here… they ostracize Rabbi Eliezer. Even though God in heaven said he was right they kick him out. And what does he do?  

Rabbi Eliezer too, rent his garments and removed his shoes, as is the custom of an ostracized person, and he droppedfrom his seat and sat upon the ground. The Gemara relates: His eyes shed tears, and as a result the entire world was afflicted: One-third of its olives were afflicted, and one-third of its wheat, and one-third of its barley. And some saythat even dough kneaded in a woman’s hands spoiled. The Sages taught: There was great anger on that day, as any place that Rabbi Eliezer fixed his gaze was burned. And even Rabban Gamliel, the Nasi of the Sanhedrin at Yavne, the head of the Sages who were responsible for the decision to ostracize Rabbi Eliezer, was coming on a boat at the time, and a large wave swelled over him and threatened to drown him. Rabban Gamliel said: It seems to me that this is only for the sake of Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, as God punishes those who mistreat others. Rabban Gamliel stood on his feet and said: Master of the Universe, it is revealed and known before You that neither was it for my honor that I acted when ostracizing him, nor was it for the honor of the house of my father that I acted; rather, it was for Your honor, so that disputes will not proliferate in Israel. In response, the sea calmed from its raging.

What a beautiful story. Magic, miracle, pain, empowerment… all to teach us that 1) it’s up to us to make this world a better place and no one else; and 2) the danger of humiliating someone.

So many wonderful lines on todays daf, but this is my gem:

If torments are afflicting a person, if illnesses are afflicting him, or if he is burying his children, one may not speak to him in the manner that the friends of Job spoke to him: “Is not your fear of God your confidence, and your hope the integrity of your ways? Remember, I beseech you, whoever perished, being innocent?” (Job 4:6–7). Certainly you sinned, as otherwise you would not have suffered misfortune.

I was just visiting a woman at the hospital who has cancer. She asked me how I thought about cancer when I was diagnosed (10 years clear!!) in terms of God and why it happened to me.

This Talmudic teaching reminds us that we can’t understand why things happen, but that telling someone (even ourselves) that tragedy has befallen us because of something we did is wrong, unhelpful and also hurtful.

I remember my mom getting a birthday card one year and laughing so hard she was crying. I asked what was so funny and she said that the card was for a 30 year old and she was laughing because her friend said “I know you’re not 30 but it’s what the store had and what’s a few years between friends?”

I didn’t get why it was so funny, but my mom was always generous with her laughter.

We have been learning that a little overpaying or underpaying, as long as it’s not more than 1/6 the worth, is forgiven and no one sues or counts as being exploited. What’s a few dollars between friends?

On today’s daf though, we learn that any amount or overcharge or underpayment, no matter how small, is acceptable when it comes to the Temple.

According to the Rosh, in regard to property owned by the Temple, there is no one in a position to “forgive” a small overcharge, so even a small amount would be considered exploitation.

If you’ve even gotten a tax bill, or hospital bill, for a few dollars because your calculations were only slightly off, then you get it. A few dollars between friends is nothing. But between you and the government? Expect to be reminded and maybe even threatened until it’s paid.

I am not a big fan of wrapping paper. It’s beautiful and makes gifts seem very special – that I admit. But it’s wasteful, bad for the planet and a pain. So, when I do wrap gifts, I like to use old newspapers. Now that we don’t have so many newspapers as the news is on line, I try to reuse other things. That’s why I liked hearing this on the daf.

Documents are excluded, as they are not sold themselves and they are not acquired themselves. They have no intrinsic value, and they exist only for the proof therein.

Papers have no value, it’s the ideas in them that are valuable. And…

From here the Sages said: In the case of one who sells his documents that are no longer in use to a perfumer for use in packaging his wares, they are subject to the halakhot of exploitation because he is selling the paper itself.

Yes!! The papers are reused to wrap goods!!! My reusing is from the Talmud!

So, besides feeling vindicated for using old newspaper and paper to wrap gifts, I do think that there’s a beautiful message in the idea that the real value of a piece of paper is what is written on it, and the ideas contained within it. Maybe that’s true for us as well.