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

In our tractate on divorce, our rabbis now get into an interesting (again, good for a drama) situation. What if a couple divorces and then they are alone together? What if they have “break up” sex? You may think – weird, but who cares? Well, the rabbis do because sex can be an act of betrothal. And believe it or not they are more concerned that they not become re-married than they just have sex for fun, or even as an act of prostitution!

The Sages taught in a baraita (Tosefta 7:4): If, after the giving of this bill of divorce witnesses saw that she secluded herself with her husband in the dark, or that she slept with him under the foot of the bed, one is not concerned that perhaps they were engaged in another matter, i.e., sexual intercourse. And one is concerned due to their action of licentiousness but one is not concerned that due to their actions they performed a betrothal. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: One is also concerned that due to their actions they performed a betrothal. The Gemara asks: What is the baraitasaying? Rav Naḥman said that Rabba bar Avuh said: This is what the baraitais saying: If they saw that she engaged in sexual intercourse with her husband, then there one is concerned that due to their actions there was a betrothal and perhaps through this act he intended to remarry her. If he gave her money immediately following the sexual intercourse one is concerned due to licentiousness, wherein we say: He gave this money as hire for a prostitute, but one is not concerned that due to their actions they performed a betrothal. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: Even in this case one is concerned that due to their actions they performed a betrothal, i.e., one is concerned that he gave her the money as betrothal.

Oh wow. They are doing all they can to prevent sex, but if it’s gonna happen, it just better not be that they’re getting back together.

Today is Tisha B’Av, a day of mourning for the Jewish people where we remember the destructions of the first and second Temples as well as Jewish persecution throughout our history. Today’s gem ties in:

We learned in the mishna: If a man said: This is your bill of divorce from today if I die from this illness, and he recovered, and he arose and walked in the market, but then became ill again and died, the court assesses him. If he died because of the first illness then this is a valid bill of divorce, but if not then it is not a valid bill of divorce. And if you say that if he arose and was cured of his illness the bill of divorce is retracted, then why do I need assessment at all? He arose from his sickbed, so the bill of divorce should automatically be nullified. Mar, son of Rav Yosef, says in the name of Rava: This is referring to a case where, instead of recovering completely, he proceeded from one illness immediately to another illness, and the assessment is to ascertain whether he died from the first illness or from the second one.

Rabbi Shmuel Herzfeld points out that, when we look back at our history, we think that the different persecutions of our people are separate incidences, but they are all really symptoms of the same thing. While he doesn’t go on to name antisemitic conspiracy theories that have been used by politicians and others hoping to gain popularity, wield control, scapegoat, dehumanize and eventually persecute the Jews (easy to bond over a common enemy and to point to others instead of taking ownership for your own failures) – I will.

But I believe we can “recover” from this once we recognize that this is what antisemitism is – a conspiracy theory used by individuals/groups to gain control.

There is this idea in Jewish law that you go beyond what the law asks of you when it comes to issues of taking care of your fellow. Today we get a rabbinic law that goes beyond what the Torah asks of us in order to protect a very vulnerable part of society.

Rabbi Yitzḥak says: By Torah law a woman who is an imbecile may be divorced even though she is unable to give her consent, just as it is permitted to divorce a halakhically competent woman against her will.

That is the Torah law, but the Rabbis say she cannot be divorced.

And what is the reason that the Rabbis said she may not be divorced? So that she will not be treated as ownerless property. Steinsaltz adds, “If she has no husband to protect her, and she is unable to protect herself, she may be treated as ownerless property by anyone who wishes to engage in sexual intercourse with her.”

Even in our world today, it is not safe for a woman who doesn’t have the mental capacity to protect herself to be alone with no one looking out for her. All the more so, in the world of the Talmud she would need someone to look out for her, provide for her, and protect her.

Where else in society are there people who need our protection? How can we adjust the law to give more saftely, dignity, and humanity to include them?

Today’s daf finishes the aside discussion of remedies for various illnesses and tells you how NOT to have sex if you want to avoid having weak children. (This too is Torah?) My gem is that, at the end of this riveting discussion where we learn just how very far we have come in terms of what we know about medicine, basic health, and sex – we get this wonderful line that made me laugh:

there is no remedy in our possession that can cure an imbecile.

Made me laugh out loud.

Oh, but rabbis, there is. Just taking the time to learn every day. Like you are all doing. 🙂

I remember being in elementary school and someone saying we had to avoid eating watermelon seeds or a watermelon would grow in your stomach. So funny! Who would really believe that? Well, apparently the rabbis. On today’s daf, we get to see just how rediculous and horrible medicine used to be as it lists cures for all kinds of ailment. Such as:

As a remedy for pain of the intestines, let him bring three hundred long peppers, and every day let him drink one hundred of them with wine.

Really? Your stomach hurts so lets drink pepper juice and wine?

Of this little gem: As a remedy for a bladder stone [litzmireta], let him bring three drops of tar oil, which is oil that emerges from burning wood, three drops from the squeezing [itzra] of leeks, and three drops of clean wine, and place this mixture, for a man on the penis, and for a woman on that place, i.e., her genital area. And if he is not able to do this, let him bring the ear, i.e., handle, of a wine sac and suspend it, for a man from his penis, and for a woman from her breasts.

Really? Her breasts? For a bladder stone? Oy these men.

And if he is not able to do this, let him bring a crimson string spun by a woman suspected of prostitution who is also the daughter of a suspected woman, and let him suspend it, for a man from his penis and for a woman from her breasts.And if not, let him bring a louse from a male and a louse from a female, and suspend it, for a man from his penis, and for a woman on that place, i.e., her genital area.

There are many that are much more ridiculous and only one that might even work (that’s when they suggest chamomile tea for diarrhea) but the one that takes me back to eating watermelon is the cure for white worm.

let him bring cress and tie it with a piece of woven cloth. And let him soak it in water and drink it. And let him be careful with the seed, as if he is not careful enough there is a danger that it will grow inside him and puncture his intestines.

Thank God for modern medicine and a little common sense. (Although some anti-vax propaganda sounds a bit like the daf . . . )

I don’t know what to write about . . . because the entire daf is wildly entertaining!

It starts with the Exilarch inviting Rav Sheshet to his house for a meal. Things do not go well for the Exilarch’s servants! Rav Sheshet proves that they are stealing, then that they tried to cover it up by serving a limb from a living animal (not kosher – not kosher at all). Then when they try to trick him to make the Exilarch turn on him, they just keep diggnit hemselves deeper and deeper into trouble until the servants decide there is only one thing to do – get rid of Rav Sheshet! What do they do?

When Rav Sheshet was exiting the house of the Exilarch the servants dug a pit and placed a reed mat [tzifta] on top of it so that the pit would not be noticed. And they said to Rav Sheshet: The Master, i.e., Rav Sheshet, should come and rest for a short time, and they intended for him to fall and be hurt.

Rav Sheshet, even though he is blind, manages to thwart their plan once again!

But that’s not even the best story on the daf! (I am so tempted just to past the entire page!) Next, King Solomon enters the scene, wanting to know how to build the Temple – and things go where you will never guess:

As it is written with regard to the building of the Temple: “For the house, when it was being built, was built of stone made ready at the quarry; and there was neither hammer nor axe nor any tool of iron heard in the house, while it was being built” (I Kings 6:7). Solomon said to the sages: How shall I make it so that the stone will be precisely cut without using iron? They said to him: There is a creature called a shamir that can cut the stones, which Moses brought and used to cut the stones of the ephod. Solomon said to them: Where is it found? They said to him: Bring a male demon and a female demon and torment them together. It is possible that they know where, and due to the suffering they will reveal the place to you. Solomon brought a male demon and a female demon and tormented them together, and they said: We do not know where to find the shamir. Perhaps Ashmedai, king of the demons, knows.

Okay, so we already have demons being tortured, but then we get the king of demons! Plus a magic worm that cuts through anything . . . Already so exciting. The quest to find the king of the demons and then the shamir, is fascinating. But the daf takes an unimaginable turn after Solomon’s work is done.

Solomon kept Ashmedai with him until he completed building the Temple. One day he stood with Ashmedai alone. He said to Ashmedai: It is written: “For him like the lofty horns of the wild ox” (Numbers 24:8), and the Sages say in explanation of the verse: “Like the lofty horns”; these are the ministering angels. “The wild ox”; these are the demons. In what way are you greater than us? Why does the verse praise your abilities and powers over those of human beings? Ashmedai said to him: Take the chain engraved with God’s name off me and give me your ring with God’s name engraved on it, and I will show you my strength. Solomon took the chain off him and he gave him his ring. Ashmedai swallowed the ring and grew until he placed one wing in the heaven and one wing on the earth. He threw Solomon a distance of four hundred parasangs.

So, now King Solomon has been deposed and what happens next? Ashmedai disguises himself as King Solomon and takes his place. Okay, warning – x rated content coming, and disturbing:

Solomon circulated from door to door collecting charity, and wherever he arrived he would say: “I, Ecclesiastes, was king over Israel in Jerusalem” (Ecclesiastes 1:12). When he finally arrived at the Sanhedrin in Jerusalem the sages said: Now, an imbecile does not fixate on one matter all of the time, so what is this matter? Is this man perhaps telling the truth that he is Solomon? The sages said to Benayahu: Does the king require you to be with him? Benayahu said to them: No. They sent to the queens and asked: Does the king come to be with you? The queens sent a response to them: Yes, he comes. They sent a request to the queens: Check his feet to see if they are human feet. The queens sent a response to the sages: He always comes in socks [bemokei], and it is not possible to see his feet. The queens continued discussing the king’s behavior: And he demands of them, i.e., the queens, to engage in sexual inter-course when they are menstruating.

What! Sex in socks – must be a demon. Just kidding, but it gets worse. Much worse.

And he also demands that Bathsheba his mother engage in sexual intercourse with him.

What did you say daf? Oh so disturbing. So when she learns it’s really a demon she can be relieved? The imagination on these guys.

Once the Sanhedrin heard this they understood that this was an imposter and not actually Solomon. They brought Solomon, gave him a ring and the chain on which the name of God was carved. When Solomon entered, Ashmedai saw him and fled.

A happy ending. Also, a very strange, disturbing, and entertaining daf. Enjoy!

Who do you admire? Why? How would you describe them? On today’s daf, we get a little love fest where some of the sages are described and celebrated for their unique gifts.

Isi ben Yehuda would recount the praise of the Sages by characterizing each of them: Rabbi Meir, a scholar and scribe; Rabbi Yehuda, a scholar when he chooses to be one; Rabbi Tarfon, a pile of nuts, as, just as when one removes a nut from a pile all the other nuts fall, so too, when a student would ask Rabbi Tarfon with regard to one matter, he would cite sources from all the disciplines of the Torah; Rabbi Yishmael, a well-stocked store; Rabbi Akiva, a full storehouse; Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri, a peddler’s basket, in which there is a small amount of each product – read a little bit of everything; Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, a basket of fragrant spices, as everything he says is reasonable; the mishna of Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov is measured [kav] and immaculate; Rabbi Yosei, his reasoning accompanies his statements; Rabbi Shimon grinds much and removes little. It is taught in explanation: Rabbi Shimon would forget little of his studies, and what he removed from his memory, he removed only chaff. And likewise, Rabbi Shimon said to his students: My sons, accept my halakhic rulings, as my rulings are the finest rulings of the finest rulings of Rabbi Akiva.

All different, all admirable.

Oh daf, how do I love thee? Let me count the ways . . . well, after you read this gem:

MISHNA: With regard to one who was thrown into a pit and thought that he would die there, and he said that anyone who hears his voice should write a bill of divorce for his wife, and he specified his name, her name, and all relevant details, those who hear him should write this bill of divorce and give it to his wife, even though they do not see the man and do not know him. GEMARA: The Gemara asks: But let us be concerned that perhaps the source of the voice in the pit is a demon, as no one saw the person in the pit. Rav Yehuda says: It is referring to a case where they saw that the being in the pit has human form. The Gemara objects: Demons too can appear in human form. The Gemara explains: It is a case where they saw that he has a shadow [bavua]. The Gemara objects: Demons also have a shadow. The Gemara explains: It is a case where they saw that he has the shadow of a shadow. The Gemara objects: And perhaps demons too have the shadow of a shadow? Rabbi Ḥanina says: Yonatan my son taught me that demons have a shadow but they do not have the shadow of a shadow.

1. I love the drama of this scene and how the rabbis are so casual about it. Yeah, when a guy is in a pit and yelling to divorce his wife . . . zero questions about – why is this guy in a pit? Is he okay? Why is he yelling about divorcing his wife instead of yelling about helping him get out of the pit? Did this kind of thing happen all the time? (It must have, because they don’t rule about things that are not common – right?)
2. I love how our rabbis are so evolved but still believe in demons. I love that there are demons in the Talmud. I love that they don’t argue about it – just accept it as fact.
3. I love that Rabbi Ḥanina relies on his sons wisdom to know how to recognize a demon.
4. I love how later rabbis parse out this idea that only people have shadows of shadows to mean something beautiful and profound.

Rabbi Shmuel Herzfeld teaches: What is the shadow? The shadow is the ramifications of our actions. The demon inside all of us does not see the ramifications, it just wants to act. But a righteous person needs to see the shadow – the ramifications of what they are doing. But not only that, the shadow of the shadow – How might this to play out?

Love that he made this so relevant. May we act in ways that are righteous, that take ramifications for our actions serious, in ways that are kind to our future selves and to others.

Is this Torah? Yes, I am aware we are reading Talmud and not the 5 Books of Moses, but rabbinic legend has it that the Mishna’s were communicated to Moses on Sinai, the Gemara helps us to unpack and apply the Mishna – so, is all this Torah? Does it all have the weight of having been transmitted on Mt. Sinai? The answer is a huge chasm between Orthodoxy and Reform. The Orthodox say yes, this too is the word of God. Reform says, no this is a bunch a our rabbis talking over a thousand + years.

Enter today’s gem. They are trying to determine if a minor can be an agent that acquires property on someone else’s behalf. They bring a proof that not everyone thinks has the weight of Torah law.

Apparently, a minor can acquire property on behalf of other people. The Gemara rejects this proof: The merging of alleyways is different, as it is an ordinance by rabbinic law. The Sages ruled leniently with regard to this rabbinic ordinance and allowed a minor to acquire property on behalf of others. Rav Ḥisda said: Rav Ḥinnana of Vardonia was silent and had no response. The Gemara asks: What could he have said in response? The Gemara answers that he could have responded: All ordinances that the Sages instituted, they instituted parallel to Torah law, and they did not innovate novel halakhic models.

He should have said – this too is Torah! It doesn’t matter if it’s the words of a sage -it’s the oral Torah straight from Sinai! It’s rooted in Torah! But instead, he says nothing.

And the other Sage, Rav Ḥinnana of Vardonia, why was he silent? He holds that when we say: All ordinances that the Sages instituted, they instituted parallel to Torah law, it is with regard to a matter that is rooted in the Torah, and upon which the Sages instituted an ordinance. However, with regard to a matter that is not rooted in the Torah, e.g., the halakhot of joining courtyards and merging alleyways, no, they did not institute the ordinances parallel to Torah law.

Reformers? Not at all. But those of us who say that this beautiful document called the Talmud was written by men, smart even brilliant men, but men like us today – have some basis in this text to feel that just maybe we are right.

In Rabbinical school, we learn about all the life cycle events. We usually only get a chance to see them by shadowing a Rabbi in the field, then, when we get to our pulpits we perform them (I want to say the training wheels come off, but training wheels implies I have ridden a bike – this is more like seeing someone else ride a bike and then it being your turn.) But we have mentors and resources and even a guide book and we all figure it out.

Except when it comes to divorce.

Divorce documents are tricky. They have to be written for the couple, use any and all names they’ve ever gone by, be in Hebrew and English, be witnessed and (here is the weird part) torn in the right place.

Torn? you ask. Yes, torn. Why? you ask. See the daf:

We learned in the mishna that a woman who said to an agent: Receive my bill of divorce for me, requires two sets of witnesses to confirm that she was divorced when the agent received the bill of divorce. She requires two witnesses who say: In our presence she said to the agent: Receive my bill of divorce on my behalf, and two others who say: In our presence the agent received the bill of divorce and tore it. . .

Why do I need the witnesses to testify that the third party tore the bill of divorce? Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: The Sages taught the mishna during a period of religious persecution, when the government decreed that it is prohibited to write bills of divorce. Therefore, immediately after the divorce took effect they would destroy any evidence that a bill of divorce had been written by tearing it.

Now, we are not being religiously persecuted by the government, but we still tear our gettin! It is the one part of performing a Jewish Divorce that I ALWAYS need to check and double check how to do.

Or, at least I did. Recently I learned that the Reform Movement put out our very own standard get where the rabbi will only have to fill in the blanks and tear along a dotted line.

I ordered a dozen.

Hopefully I never have to use them. But, if I do, I will no longer feel incompetent and rue my alma mater for never teaching me where to tear.