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

FOMO means Fear Of Missing Out. We get it when we miss something where something exciting is happening or happened. Today’s gem? Rabbis playing hooky from the study hall and then having FOMO.

The Gemara relates: One day Rabbi Asi did not go to the study hall. He found Rabbi Zeira and said to him: What was said today in the study hall? Rabbi Zeira said to him: I too did not go, but Rabbi Avin is the one who went, and he said: The entire coterie sided with the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan that there is a difference between betrothal and divorce in the case of a young woman. And Reish Lakish screamed at them like a crane: Doesn’t the verse state: “And she departs out of his house and goes and becomes another man’s wife” (Deuteronomy 24:2), juxtaposing the halakhot of divorce and betrothal? But no one paid any attention to him.

Drama! They skip going to the house of study and learn that everyone ganged up against Reish Lakish in a ruling and that Reish Lakish screamed like a bird at them!!! I bet they won’t skip again anytime soon. But then Rabbi Asi thiks, maybe it dind’t happen and Rabbi Avin is just trying to make me feel bad.

Rabbi Asi said to him: Is Rabbi Avin reliable? Can one be sure that he transmitted an accurate report? Rabbi Zeira said to him: Yes, in this case he can be trusted, since the elapsed time was only like the interval between catching a fish from the sea and bringing it to a frying pan [tignei].

Another gem! Can we trust what he says? His word is as fresh as a fish pulled out of the sea and dropped right onto the frying pan.

(Wasn’t that part of what Sebastian sings in the Little Mermaid?)

The lesson? Don’t cut class – you might miss something.

The Talmud has been discussing who is guilty if someone appoints another person to perform a forbidden act. (For example, is it the hit man guilty of murder or the jilted lover who hired him?) While some argue the person who performed the act while others argue the person who hired the agent – it seems pretty clear that both should be held liable . . . except in this case where Rav says even Shammai can’t say the person who hired the agent is guilty:

One who says to his agent: Go and engage in sexual intercourse with a forbidden relative, or: Go and eat forbidden fat, that the agent is liable and the one who appointed him is exempt, as we have not found in the entire Torah a case where this person physically benefits from the transgression but that one becomes liable.

So, there is a case where the person assigning the agent is not guilty! It’s when they have nothing to gain from it. Is it just me, or does this seem like a dare more than hiring a person? Like they would say “I dare you to eat that cockroach.” And then, when the person does they all yell “ew!” but the rabbis are there debating who is liable for eating something forbidden.

Of course my thoughts go to food. It is Yom Kippur. Not that I’m ready to eat a cockroach or anything . . .

The gem? If you take a dare – that’s on you. You can’t blame anyone else for your actions.

A short gem perfect for the day before Yom Kippur.

When there is a conflict between the words of the Master, i.e., God, and the words of the student, i.e., a human being, whose words should be listened to?

This is a rhetorical question. The answer is God.

For the past 40 days, we should have been working on our making amends for our failures towards other people. Tonight, it’s all about those sins we have committed against God. How many of them were done because we put worrying about what other people think above worrying what God thinks? How many times did we fail because we used human barometers to make decisions instead of going to our Higher Power? Indeed, whose words are listened to?

The rest of the daf talks about fraud and how, even if your error was not large enough for a court to weigh in, you are to fix any injustice because it’s the right thing to do. Again, this goes back to putting God above humanity. Just because it’s okay in the eyes of others, does not men it’s okay in the eyes of Divinity. And just because other people are not watching or may not know, does not mean that no one sees.

G’mar Chatima Tova – may you be sealed for blessings.

Today’s lesson? Do it yourself . . . or, if you can’t, hire someone else.

We get a new Mishna-

MISHNA:A man can betroth a woman by himself or by means of his agent. Similarly, a woman can become betrothed by herself or by means of her agent.

The Gemara wonders: Now that the mishna stated that one can betroth a woman by means of his agent, is it necessary to state that a man can betroth a woman by himself? Rav Yosef says: The mishna writes both halakhot to teach that although the betrothal is valid either way, it is more fitting that the mitzva be performed by the man himself than by means of his agent.

Likewise for women: Rav Yosef says: It is more fitting that the mitzva be performed by the woman herself than by means of her agent.

Some things are better done by us. Certainly, engagement is better done in person than through an agent! But apologies, compliments, feedback – really any interpersonal matter is better done by us than by someone we hire.

Now, can I clean my house better than anyone else? Yes. But do I want to? No. Is it a mitzvah to give others work? I think so. I think an agent is very appropriate in this case . . .

Wow, what a phenomenal daf! It starts with three tales of seduction. I gears us up for Yom Kippur with a powerful image. And we get a ruling on if study of action is more important.

The seductions and the rabbis’ efforts to avoid temptation:

Rav Tuvi bar Rav Kisna – If one sits and does not transgress, he receives a reward as one who performs a mitzva, despite the fact that he does not actually perform a mitzva. Rava said to him: There, when it is referring to one who sits and does not transgress, it does not mean that he was merely sitting; rather, it is speaking of a case where an opportunity to commit a sinful act presents itself to him and he is saved from it. This is like an incident involving Rabbi Ḥanina bar Pappi, who was enticed by a certain noblewoman [matronita] to engage in sexual intercourse with her. He said a formula of an incantation and was covered with boils and scabs so as to render himself unattractive to her. She performed an act of magic and he was healed. He fled and hid in a bathhouse that was so dangerous, due to the demons that frequented the place, that when two people entered together even during the day they would be harmed. The next day the Sages said to him: Who protected you in that dangerous place? Rabbi Ḥanina bar Pappi said to them: There were angels who appeared like two soldiers [nosei keisar] who guarded me all night. They said to him: Perhaps a matter of forbidden intercourse presented itself to you and you were saved from it, which is why a miracle occurred for you. As we learned: With regard to anyone to whom a matter of forbidden intercourse presented itself to him and he was saved from it, a miracle is performed for him. As it says: “Mighty in strength who fulfill His word, hearkening to the voice of His word” (Psalms 103:20). This is referring to one such as Rabbi Tzadok and his colleagues. To what is this referring? Rabbi Tzadok was enticed by a certain noblewoman to engage in sexual intercourse with her. He said to her: My heart is weak and I am incapable at present; is there something to eat that can strengthen me? She said to him: There is something non-kosher. He said to her: What difference is there? One who performs such an act eats such food as well. She lit the oven and placed the non-kosher food in it to roast. He climbed and sat in the oven. She said to him: What is the meaning of this? He said to her: One who performs this act falls into this, i.e., the fires of Gehenna. She said to him: If I had known that the matter was so serious for you, I would not have caused you such anguish. The Gemara further relates: Rav Kahana would sell baskets woven from palm leaves to women. He was enticed by a certain noblewoman to engage in intercourse with her. He said to her: Let me go and adorn myself beforehand. He ascended to the roof and fell from the roof toward the ground. Elijah the prophet came and caught him. Elijah the prophet said to Rav Kahana: You have troubled me to travel four hundred parasangs [parsei] to save you. Rav Kahana said to him: What caused me to be in this situation of temptation? Was it not poverty, as I am forced to engage in a trade that leads me to come into contact with women? Elijah gave him a basket [shifa] full of dinars, to spare him from having to work as a salesman.

Wow! Entering a haunted bathhouse, a fiery oven, and even throwing yourself off a roof is better than giving in to temptation (which was clearly very strong as these men could have just said “no thank you”).

Now, our High Holiday metaphor makes an appearance on the daf:

The Sages taught: Always a person should view himself as though he were exactly half-liable and half-meritorious. In other words he should act as though the plates of his scale are balanced, so that if he performs one mitzva he is fortunate, as he tilts his balance to the scale of merit. If he transgresses one prohibition, woe to him, as he tilts his balance to the scale of liability, as it is stated: “But one sin destroys much good” (Ecclesiastes 9:18), which means that due to one sin that a person transgresses he squanders much good. Rabbi Elazar, son of Rabbi Shimon, says: Since the world is judged by its majority, i.e., depending on whether people have performed a majority of mitzvot or a majority of sins, and an individual is likewise judged by his majority, each person must consider that if he performs one mitzva he is praiseworthy, as he tilts the balance of himself and the entire world to the scale of merit. Conversely, if he transgresses one prohibition, woe to him, as he tilts the balance for himself and the entire world to the scale of liability, as it is stated: “But one sin destroys much good,” i.e., due to one sin that this individual commits, he squanders much goodness from himself and from the entire world.

Love that this extends the metaphor to the world and reminds us that our actions affect more than just ourselves.

Finally, what’s more important, Torah study or action?

And there already was an incident in which Rabbi Tarfon and the Elders were reclining in the loft of the house of Nit’za in Lod, when this question was asked of them: Is study greater or is action greater? Rabbi Tarfon answered and said: Action is greater. Rabbi Akiva answered and said: Study is greater. Everyone answered and said: Study is greater, but not as an independent value; rather, it is greater as study leads to action.

So, study is great ONLY when it leads to action. Knowing and doing nothing is a sin indeed.

A fabulous daf – I hope it made you laugh, think, and inspired you. That’s what it did for me.

How do we explain when bad things happen to good people? That is the struggle of our daf (and a brilliant book by Rabbi Harold Kushner).

Rabbi Ya’akov, who says: There is no reward for performance of a mitzva in this world, as one is rewarded for mitzvot only World-to-Come.

So, here is one answer. We are rewarded for every mitzvah, just not in this world. Now, we get an example of how we know the reward must be i the world to come.

With regard to honoring one’s father and mother it is written: “That your days may be long, and that it may go well with you” (Deuteronomy 5:16). With regard to the dispatch of the mother bird from the nest it is written: “That it may be well with you, and that you may prolong your days” (Deuteronomy 22:7). Despite this, it occurred that there was one whose father said to him: Climb to the top of the building and fetch me chicks. And he climbed to the top of the building and dispatched the mother bird and took the young, thereby simultaneously fulfilling the mitzva to dispatch the mother bird from the nest and the mitzva to honor one’s parents, but upon his return he fell and died. Where is the goodness of the days of this one, and where is the length of days of this one? Rather, the verse “that it may be well with you” means in the world where all is well, and “that your days may be long” is referring to the world that is entirely long.

So, a young man was requested by his father to get chicks form a nest and shooed away the mother bird – both mitzvah that guarantee long life – and yet, on his way down from taking the chicks, he fell and died. How do we explain it?

The Gemara asks: But perhaps that man was contemplating sin at the time, and he was punished for his thoughts? The Gemara answers that there is a principle that the Holy One, Blessed be He, does not link a bad thought to an action, i.e., one is not punished for thoughts alone. The Gemara asks: But perhaps he was contemplating idol worship at the time, and it is written with regard to idol worship: “So I may take the house of Israel in their own heart” (Ezekiel 14:5), which indicates that one is punished for idolatrous thoughts. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Ya’akov was saying this as well: If it enters your mind that there is reward for performing a mitzva in this world, why didn’t these mitzvot protect him so that he should not come to contemplate idol worship? Since that man was not protected from thoughts of idol worship at the time, this indicates that the performance of mitzvot does not entitle one to merit reward in this world.

So, it doesn’t matter what he was thinking about. He is rewarded for the mitzvah – so the fact that he died instead of being rewarded with long life means he must have a long life in the world-to-come.

Now we have another problem:

The Gemara asks: But didn’t Rabbi Elazar say that those on the path to perform a mitzva are not susceptible to harm? How is it possible that this individual, who was sent by his father to perform a mitzva, could have died? The Gemara answers: There, Rabbi Elazar is referring those on their way to perform a mitzva, which is different, as one is not susceptible to harm when he is on his way to fulfill a mitzva. In this case the individual was harmed on his return, and one is not afforded protection after having performed a mitzva. The Gemara asks: But didn’t Rabbi Elazar say that those on the path to perform a mitzva are not susceptible to harm, neither when they are on their way to perform the mitzva nor when they are returning from performing the mitzva?

We have this teaching, it’s why we give people tzedakah when they are traveling – so that they will be messengers of a mitzvah. So, how do we explain this theological problem as this young man was doing a mitzvah?!

The Gemara answers: In that case it was a rickety ladder, and therefore the danger was established; and anywhere that the danger is established one may not rely on a miracle.

LOVE this. You can’t rely on a miracle if you see that something is dangerous.

But there are more gems! The Sage Elisha ben Avuya was an admired Torah scholar, but something happened to make him lose faith in God and become a heritic. He is referred to as “Aher” “other.”

Rav Yosef said: Had Aḥer, interpreted this verse: “That it may go well with you” (Deuteronomy 5:16), homiletically, as referring to the World-to-Come, as did Rabbi Ya’akov, son of his daughter, he would not have sinned. The Gemara asks: And what caused Aḥer to sin? There are those who say he saw a case like this, where a son went up to the roof on his father’s command, dispatched the mother bird, and then died. It was witnessing this episode that led Elisha ben Avuya astray. And there are those who say that he saw the tongue of Ḥutzpit the disseminator after the latter was executed by the government, thrown in the street, and dragged along by something else, a euphemism for a pig. He said: Shall a mouth that produced pearls lap up dirt? For this reason he went out and sinned.

What caused this great man who knew and loved Torah to lose faith in God? The unfairness of this world. Rav Yosef thinks that if he had known his grandson’s teaching – that no deed is rewarded or punished in this life, but in the next life, then maybe he wouldn’t have lost faith.

I don’t know that he would have.

But I love the grappling with this question. Perhaps the problem is thinking that God made this world a fair place. Clearly it’s not. But God did give us Torah and morality which compel us to make the world more fair, more moral. Perhaps the problem is, that just like the ladder may have been rickety, living with other people is a dangerous venture. We are powerful, and self-centered. We hurt one another. We form societies, but like to advantage ourselves. We are the ones who are unfair and immoral. So, perhaps the problem is not losing faith in God or Torah – but losing faith in one another. We need to believe in our ability to change the world. Believe in our ability to make this world the kind of place where good is rewarded and evil punished – instead of hoping for it to happen in the next.

What do Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Ingrid Bergman, Shakespeare and Moses have in common?

They all died on their birthdays.

The baraita continues: And from where is it derived that Moses was born on the seventh of Adar? It is as it is stated: “And he said to them, I am one hundred and twenty years old today; I can no more go out and come in” (Deuteronomy 31:2). As there is no need for the verse to state “today,” since Moses could have said simply: I am one hundred and twenty years old. What is the meaning when the verse states “today”? One can learn from it that Moses was born on that date, i.e., he was exactly one hundred and twenty years old. This teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, sits and completes the years of the righteous from day to day and from month to month, as it is stated: “The number of your days I will fulfill” (Exodus 23:26).

The midrash proves that Moses was born on seventh of Adar (that date is proven elsewhere on the daf) from the word “this day.” What is the message? The righteous live a full life—they are not cheated out of a single day. To this day, it is considered a good sign when a person dies on his birthday.

However, Moses lived till 120. Shakespeare was only 52. Renowned Renaissance painter Raphael died on his 37th birthday. I bet they would have taken a few more years – even if they weren’t perfect.

“Oooooooooooohhhhhhhhhhh we’re halfway there!” That’s right kiddoes – we have made it half way through the Talmud!

This is very exciting. My gem is not so exciting.

Our daf is discussing the different mitzvot that we only keep when living in the land of Israel and those that we keep no matter where we happen to be living. What’s the rule-of-thumb?

Rav Yehuda said that this is what the mishna is saying: Any mitzva that is an obligation of the body, i.e., an obligation upon the person, applies both in Eretz Yisrael and outside of Eretz Yisrael. Conversely, an obligation of the land, that is, a mitzva that applies specifically to the earth and its growths, applies only in Eretz Yisrael.

My gem of a take away? I like that the daf uses “obligation of the body” instead of saying a person’s obligation. When I first began teaching religious school, I remember having the kids lay on butcher paper and have a friend trace their bodies. they then labeled all the mitzvahs they could do with different parts of their bodies. Their mouths could speak up for justice, their hands could give food to the hungry, their feet could march in protest or take them to people in need, etc.

Many faiths separate the body and soul. But we actually say the dead are jealous of our bodies because a body is needed to perform a mitzvah. We traditionally say blessings over our bodies every day.

So, the gem? Love your body. No matter what shape it is in. It is a blessing and through it you can make this world a better place.

My Bubby’s sister and husband sat shivah when their grandson married a Catholic girl. We just read, at Rosh haShana services, about Abraham sacrificing Isaac (almost). We think and say to ourselves that we love our kids unconditionally and that there is nothing they can do and nothing that could happen to make that’s love stop, or that we would hurt them – but we do.
Our daf reminds us that, while our love is human and imperfect, God’s love is truly unconditional.

The Gemara asks: And both Abaye and Rava, what do they derive from this verse: “You are the sons to the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 14:1)? The Gemara answers: This verse is necessary for that which is taught in a baraita: The verse: “You are the sons to the Lord your God,” indicates that when you act like sons and cleave to the Holy One, Blessed be He, you are called sons, but when you do not act like sons you are not called sons. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda.

And Rabbi Meir says: Either way you are still called sons, as it is stated: “They are foolish sons” (Jeremiah 4:22). And it also states: “Sons in whom there is no faithfulness” (Deuteronomy 32:20). And it states: “A seed of evildoers, sons who deal corruptly” (Isaiah 1:4). And it states: “And it shall come to pass that, instead of what was said to them: You are not My people, it shall be said to them: Sons of the living God” (Hosea 2:1).

May you feel unconditional love from your Higher Power.

Did you know that lazar hair removal doesn’t work on redheads? Our body hair is too light and apparently the razor hates the red tinge. As a kid, having light body hair was a great thing. I had many girl friends who couldn’t go a day without shaving and also, many who had facial hair they didn’t want. I was thinking of them as I read today’s daf:

The mishna teaches that women are obligated in all prohibitions except for the prohibitions of: Do not round the corners of one’s head, and: Do not destroy the corners of your beard. . . The Gemara asks: And from where do we derive that women are not obligated in the prohibition against destroying the corners of one’s beard? The Gemara answers: If you wish, propose a logical reason, as ordinarily women do not have a beard. And if you wish, cite a verse that teaches this point, as the verse states: “You shall not round the corners of your head [roshekhem] and you shall not destroy the corners of your beard [zekanekha]” (Leviticus 19:27). . .

The daf continues to debate women’s beards. (It’s treated like a mans when it comes to leprosy, but not with payus (those curls on the side of the head).)

Allison Landa wrote a book, Bearded Lady: When You’re a Woman with a Beard, Your Secret is Written All Over Your Face . She talks about her life as a hairy woman. The shaving, the waxing, the embarrassment the names – the horrible self esteem. And she is funny and lovable.

Women have struggled with body/facial hair issues for millennia – just look at the daf.

Ironically, now the only hairless women are women who have dark body hair, as they can get it permanently removed.

Oh, and the rabbis have no rules against that (meaning women having permanent hair removal). None at all.