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

When someone asks you to do something, and you are unsuccessful on the first attempt, are you obligated to keep trying?

The Gemara relates: There was a certain woman who was named Nefata whose husband instructed witnesses to write and sign a bill of divorce and to divorce her. The witnesses went and mistakenly wrote Tefata in the bill of divorce. Rav Yitzḥak bar Shmuel bar Marta says in the name of Rav: The bill of divorce is invalid because the name is wrong. However, the witnesses cannot write another bill of divorce in the correct manner because the witnesses already performed their agency and are no longer agents of the husband.

Okay, so here the witnesses were hired to write and deliver divorce papers, but they wrote the wrong name. Rav Yitzḥak bar Shmuel bar Marta beleives that the rule is that they do not need to write a new divorce document. They were hired for one attempt, it didn’t work, and now they’re no longer obligated. But –

Rabba objects to this ruling. Does the husband say to them: Write a worthless earthenware shard and give it to her? He instructed them to write a valid bill of divorce; as long as they did not write a valid bill of divorce they did not perform their agency.

He hired them to do a job and they need to do it! He didn’t hire them to mess it up!

However, Rabba does say that if it was a valid divorce document but they lost it then they’ve done their job. (Weird, right?)

Rather, Rabba said: Certainly, if the witnesses wrote a proper bill of divorce and it was lost, one would say that the witnesses performed their agency, and they are not authorized to write another bill of divorce. That is not the case if they wrote an invalid bill of divorce.

But –

Rav Naḥman objects to this ruling of Rabba. Does the husband say to them: Write it and place it in your pockets? He instructed them to write the document and divorce her with it. They did not perform their agency by merely writing a valid bill of divorce. Rather, Rav Naḥman said: In every case of this type, the witnesses write a bill of divorce and give it to the wife even one hundred times.

What did the husband hire them for? To do the job! They must keep trying until they get it done and get it done right.

What a lesson for us all. I know I have attempted things and then given up when I was initially unsuccessful. We need to keep trying, even up to 100 times, especially when what we are attempting is to make this world a better place, do a mitzvah, fight for human rights.

Very inspiring.

Today’s gem is a beautiful lesson on tza’ar baalei chayim, protecting animals and preventing any unnecessary harm to them.

And . . .

I also think that maybe Steinsaltz is reading the Sage Geneiva too generously and maybe he is being a total jerk . . . let me know what you think. Remember, the bold words are direct translations of the Talmud. The words that are not bold are Rabbi Stensaltz’s commentary.

Rav Huna and Rav Ḥisda were once sitting when the Sage Geneiva passed by alongside them. One of them said to the other: We should stand before him, in his honor, for he is a son of Torah. The other one said to him: But should we stand before an argumentative person? . . . (He comes over to them and they have a conversation, then . . . )

Rav Huna and Rav Ḥisda said to Geneiva: Does the Master wish to taste something? Geneiva said to them: So says Rav Yehuda that Rav says: It is prohibited for a person to taste anything until he gives food to his animal, as it is stated in the verse: “And I will give grass in the field for your animals” (Deuteronomy 11:15), and only afterward is it written in that verse: “And you shall eat and be satisfied.” I have yet to feed my animal, so I may not eat.

Okay. What do we know about this guy? He is a brilliant Sage and he is “an argumentative person.” So, when these other rabbis offer him food and he says “a person can’t eat until he has fed his animals” is it possible that he is NOT talking about his animals but insisting that they eat first and is being a total jerk?

All that aside, I love this rule that you have to feed your animals before you can eat. It makes sure that we take care of our animals . . . as long as we are not the kind of people who forget to eat. (Never understood that, I wake up hungry.)

Gittin has a list of things we do “for the sake of peace.” On today’s daf, we find one of my favorite passages. In North America, Jews have experienced more acceptance and economic prosperity than in the past. We mingle regularly with non-Jews and support “non-Jewish” causes all the time. Go to an art gallery and look at the donor wall, or any museum, and you will see Jewish donors. It’s something we now take for granted. But, tzedakah is supposed to start at home. We give to our family first, then, if we have more, we give to our neighbors, etc. So, our beautiful rules about tzedakah and giving to the poor, the rules about burying and visiting the sick – could apply exclusively to Jews. In the ancient world, we would not necessarily know non-Jews or see their need – and if we did, we might say that we only have enough for our own people. But today we are told that our laws about taking care of others does not only apply to other Jews – it applies to everyone.

The mishna teaches: One does not protest against poor gentiles who come to take gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and the produce in the corner of the field, which is given to the poor [pe’a] on account of the ways of peace. Similarly, the Sages taught in a baraita (Tosefta 5:4): One sustains poor gentiles along with poor Jews, and one visits sick gentiles along with sick Jews, and one buries dead gentiles along with dead Jews. All this is done on account of the ways of peace, to foster peaceful relations between Jews and gentiles.

Radical idea on the daf!

And Rabba and Rav Yosef both say: It is prohibited to publicly read the haftara, the portion from the Prophets that is read after the weekly Torah portion, on Shabbat, from a scroll containing only the haftarot. What is the reason for this? It is because this type of scroll may not be written, as the words of the Prophets must also be written as complete books. Mar bar Rav Ashi said: To handle such a scroll on Shabbat is also prohibited. What is the reason for this? It is because it is not fit to be read. Consequently, it is treated as set-aside [muktze] on Shabbat. The Gemara rejects this argument: But that is not so; rather, it is permitted to handle such a scroll and it is permitted to read from it. And a proof for this is that Rabbi Yoḥanan and Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish used to read from a scroll of aggada containing the words of the Sages on Shabbat. But such a scroll may not be written, for in principle, the statements of the Oral Law may not be committed to writing. Rather, since it is not possible to remember the Oral Law without writing it down, it is permitted to violate the halakha, as indicated by the verse: “It is time to act for the Lord; they have nullified your Torah” (Psalms 119:126). Here too, in the case of a haftara scroll, since it is not always possible to write complete books of the Bible, due to the expense, it is permitted to apply the reasoning of “It is time to act for the Lord; they have nullified your Torah.”

So here they first say that you cannot read the haftarah on Shabbat. Why? Because you’re not supposed to write just part of a book of the Torah (the haftarah is a few verses or maybe two chapters from either the prophets or the writings) and so isolating just haftarah verses and having it in it’s own book violates this law. Mar bar Rav Ashi goes so far as to say that you can’t even touch this kind of a scroll on Shabbat! Then it points our that Rabbi Yohanan and ben Lakish used to read aggadah (like we are right now) on Shabbat – but you’re forbidden to write down the Oral Torah! Wait?! If that’s true, how can we even be reading this page of Talmud?

That’s the gem.

What do they do? They interpret this verse from Psalms, “It is time to act for the Lord; they have nullified your Torah” to say that you can break the law – break Torah law – in order to serve God. So, we can write a book of just haftorot so that it’s not unweildy to find the haftarah reading (and therefore we might skip it). We can write the Talmud so that it can be studied and passed on. But this law has even bigger implications. It tells us to always think of what is truly giving honor to God. And if there seems to be a law – even a Torah law – that goes against God’s honor, then that law is wrong.

I was recently on a trip to Israel. One of the highlights for most visitors is the opportunity to bargain in the shuk and in the old city market, to try and get prices lower. My son wanted a Jewish Star for his Bar Mitzvah and so I went to bargain with the seller of the one he liked. I felt pretty good as I was able to get him down to half the original asking price. That is, until a few days later when the gold chain turned a tinny silver.

I would much rather live in a world where I know I am getting a good deal and not have to haggle.

Enter my gem for the day. In this text, they are explaining that a minor is allowed to go and by and sell things in the market. It asks:

And up to how much is their mistake? Meaning, what is the maximum amount a child can underpay or overcharge without the mistake canceling the sale? Rabbi Yona says that Rabbi Zeira says: Up to one-sixth of the article’s value, like the mistake of an adult. If the buyer or seller underpaid or overcharged up to one-sixth of the article’s true value, the wronged party can demand reimbursement. If the error in price was greater than one-sixth, the transaction is annulled.

Wouldn’t that be amazing? It you knew you were only ever possibly being overcharged by 1/6?

I feel bad that the seller took advantage of me. But I feel even worse for the others who didn’t bargain at all. I wonder if they know that they’re breaking Jewish law and not just our trust . . .

Again, a dramatic sage unfolds on the pages of the Talmud. In a sea of guesses as to what the Jewish people could have done to warrant the slaughter at Beitar (lots of gore about how bad that slaughter was is also on this page) – we get a dramatic story, ripe for a movie.

Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And they covet fields, and take them by violence; and houses, and take them away; so they oppress a man and his house, even a man and his heritage” (Micah 2:2)? There was an incident involving a certain man who set his eyes on his master’s wife, and he was a carpenter’s apprentice [shulya]. One time his master needed to borrow some money, and his apprentice said to him: Send your wife to me and I will lend her the money. He sent his wife to him, and the apprentice stayed with her for three days. He then went back to his master before she did, and the master said to him: Where is my wife whom I sent to you? The apprentice said to him: I sent her back immediately, but I heard that the youth abused and raped her on the way. The master said to his apprentice: What shall I do? The apprentice said to him: If you listen to my advice, divorce her. He said to him: But her marriage contract is large and I do not have the money to pay it. The apprentice said to him: I will lend you the money, and you will give her payment of her marriage contract. The master arose and divorced her, and the apprentice went and married her.When the time came that the debt was due, and he did not have the means with which to repay it, the apprentice said to his master: Come and work off your debt with me. And they, the apprentice and his wife, would sit and eat and drink, while he, the woman’s first husband, would stand over them and serve them their drinks. And tears would drop from his eyes and fall into their cups, and at that time the Jewish people’s sentence was sealed, for remaining silent in the face of this injustice.

Wow wow wow. Drama!

It’s amazing to me that anyone ever thought the Talmud boring . . .

Another amazing daf! There is the famous story of the mother and her 7 sons who martyr themselves rather than bow to idolatry. There are two stories that teach about the importance of understanding cultural differences, one where Roman’s take a rooster and a chicken, not knowing they were part of that towns wedding celebration, and when the people get upset Rome thinks they’re trying to rebel (a similar thing happens with a ceder tree in a different town). There are children who drown themselves in the ocean rather than be sexually trafficked. There are horrible mass murdering leaders who convert to Judaism! I Lelia talks to the dead and finds out what’s happening to people in the next life including being burned to death daily, boiled in semen, and boiled in excrement.

It’s an amazing daf. So, what to pick? The one that is the least important but made me laugh:

There was an incident there involving a man who set his eyes upon his wife to divorce her, but her marriage contract was large and he wished to avoid having to pay it. What did he do? He went and invited his friends, gave them food and drink, made them drunk, and lay his friends and his wife in one bed. He then brought the white of an egg, which has the appearance of semen, and placed it on the sheet between them. He then stood witnesses over themso that they could offer testimony, and went to court claiming that his wife had committed adultery.
Not the funny part – but necessary to understand what is happening. A guy wants to divorce his wife without paying her Ketubah so he sets her up to look like she committed adultery.
Who can tell the difference between egg whites and semen?

A certain Elder of the disciples of Shammai the Elder was there, and Bava ben Buta was his name. He said to them: This is the tradition that I received from Shammai the Elder: Egg white on a bedsheet contracts and hardens when heated by fire, whereas semen is absorbed into the sheet by the fire. They checked the matter and found in accordance with his statement that the substance on the sheet was not semen but egg white. They then brought the husband to court, administered lashes to him, and made him pay his wife’s marriage contract in full.

Love it. Great day for the daf.

Today’s daf is perhaps the most important daf in the Talmud. Why? It’s the origin story of all oral Torah (which includes the Mishnah and Talmud). How did it survive the destruction of the second Temple? How was it written down? How did Judaism survive such a catastrophe? Amidst destruction, who had the ability to see another way? to adapt?

Before we begin to read, you need a little background. Around the year 69CE, zealots wanted to fight against the Roman while Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Zakkai and the sages argued for peace. The daf describes how three wealthy members of the community stepped forward to donate what they had in order to sustain the entire community for over 20 years so that they would not enter into battle. So, what did the zealots do? They set fire to the donated food and wares so that famine spread and people had nothing to lose (as they would die anyway) and they entered into the war.

The Gemara relates: Abba Sikkara was the leader of the zealots [biryonei] of Jerusalem and the son of the sister of Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai.

So, he is the leader of the zealots – so Yoḥanan ben Zakkai must hate him. BUT, he is also Yoḥanan ben Zakkai’s nephew.

Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai sent a message to him: Come to me in secret. He came, and Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai said to him: Until when will you do this and kill everyone through starvation? Abba Sikkara said to him: What can I do, for if I say something to them they will kill me.

so, first he tries to make him fight against what the zealots are doing. When that doesn’t work, Yoḥanan ben Zakkai asks his enemy to help HIM escape.

Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai said to him: Show me a method so that I will be able to leave the city, and it is possible that through this there will be some small salvation.

So, save your uncle.

Abba Sikkara said to him: This is what you should do: Pretend to be sick, and have everyone come and ask about your welfare, so that word will spread about your ailing condition. Afterward bring something putrid and place it near you, so that people will say that you have died and are decomposing. And then, have your students enter to bring you to burial, and let no one else come in so that the zealots not notice that you are still light. As the zealots know that a living person is lighter than a dead person.

So, it’s his nephew/enemy who helps him to come up with the idea to pretend to be dead and then escape from Jerusalem in a coffin.

Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai did this. Rabbi Eliezer entered from one side and Rabbi Yehoshua from the other side to take him out. When they arrived at the entrance of the city on the inside, the guards, who were of the faction of the zealots, wanted to pierce him with their swords in order to ascertain that he was actually dead, as was the common practice. Abba Sikkara said to them: The Romans will say that they pierce even their teacher. The guards then wanted at least to push him to see whether he was still alive, in which case he would cry out on account of the pushing. Abba Sikkara said to them: They will say that they push even their teacher. The guards then opened the gate and he was taken out.

This is how Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai made it out of Jerusalem – in a coffin pretending to be dead. Lots to unpack here – but there is so much more.

When Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai reached there, i.e., the Roman camp, he said: Greetings to you, the king; greetings to you, the king. Vespasian said to him: You are liable for two death penalties, one because I am not a king and yet you call me king, and furthermore, if I am a king, why didn’t you come to me until now?

More background. Vespasian is the Roman general at this time and he is currently the one waging the war against the Jews and Jerusalem. When Yoḥanan ben Zakkai meets him, he is not yet the Emperor.

Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai said to him: As for what you said about yourself: I am not a king, in truth, you are a king, if not now, then in the future. As if you are not a king, Jerusalem will not be handed over into your hand, as it is written: “And the Lebanon shall fall by a mighty one” (Isaiah 10:34). And “mighty one” means only a king, as it is written: “And their mighty one shall be of themselves, and their ruler shall proceed from the midst of them” (Jeremiah 30:21), indicating that “mighty one” parallels “ruler.” And “Lebanon” means only the Temple, as it is stated: “That good mountain and the Lebanon” (Deuteronomy 3:25). And as for what you said with your second comment: If I am a king why didn’t you come to me until now, there are zealots among us who did not allow us to do this.

Okay, so sucking up and then saying that the zealots are to blame for the war and he, and others, don’t want it.

Understanding that Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai was prepared to ask him not to destroy the Temple, Vespasian said to him: If there is a barrel of honey and a snake [derakon] is wrapped around it, wouldn’t they break the barrel in order to kill the snake? In similar fashion, I am forced to destroy the city of Jerusalem in order to kill the zealots barricaded within it. Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai was silent and did not answer. In light of this, Rav Yosef later read the following verse about him, and some say that it was Rabbi Akiva who applied the verse to Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai: “I am the Lord…Who turns wise men backward and makes their knowledge foolish” (Isaiah 44:25). As Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai should have said the following to Vespasian in response: In such a case, we take tongs, remove the snake, and kill it, and in this way we leave the barrel intact. So too, you should kill the rebels and leave the city as it is. . .

Okay, this happens a few times. As the Talmud recounts the brilliance of Yoḥanan ben Zakkai and his single-handedly saving Judaism from utter destruction, it criticizes him for not trying to do more or save more.

In the meantime, as they were talking, a messenger [feristaka] arrived from Rome, and said to him: Rise, for the emperor has died, and the noblemen of Rome plan to appoint you as their leader and make you the next emperor.

So, now Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai seems to have predicted this rise to power!

Vespasian then said to Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai: I will be going to Rome to accept my new position, and I will send someone else in my place to continue besieging the city and waging war against it. But before I leave, ask something of me that I can give you.

Here is the moment of truth. Vespasian wants to reward Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai for his prediction. What does he ask for? (To save Jerusalem? to let the Jewish people go?)

Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai said to him: Give me Yavne and its Sages and do not destroy it, and spare the dynasty of Rabban Gamliel and do not kill them as if they were rebels, and lastly give me doctors to heal Rabbi Tzadok.

So, 1) give me a safe place; 2) give me scholars; 3) give me Rabban Gamliel’s family who are descendants of King David from whom the Messiah is supposed to issue; and 4) give me doctors to heal Rabbi Tzadok. Why was he sick? Well, he had fasted for 40 years to try and prevent the destruction of Jerusalem. (By the way the Talmud talks about how to slowly expand a starving persons stomach so they don’t die when they eat.)

It is at Yavneh where rabbinic Judaism is born, where the Mishnah is written. Without Yavneh we have no Talmud. We have no modern Judaism at all. Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai was brilliant. In a world of destruction he sought to create something new. A phoenix from the ashes. I could spend years writing about this. But it’s been long enough.

But where the rabbis happy with what he requested? Well, some were, but others thought he should have asked for more . . .

Rav Yosef read the following verse about him, and some say that it was Rabbi Akiva who applied the verse to Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai: “I am the Lord…Who turns wise men backward and makes their knowledge foolish” (Isaiah 44:25), as he should have said to him to leave the Jews alone this time.And why didn’t Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai make this request? He maintained that Vespasian might not do that much for him, and there would not be even a small amount of salvation. Therefore, he made only a modest request, in the hope that he would receive at least that much.

Ah! Two phenomenal gems. The second goes onto tomorrows daf. It is the origin story of why the second Temple was destroyed – baseless hatred. It’s quite famous. I will just paste it below because the first gem is one we don’t give much attention to.

The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Gudgeda further testified about a stolen beam that was already built into a building and said that the injured party receives the value of the beam but not the beam itself. With regard to this, the Sages taught in a baraita (Tosefta, Bava Kamma 10:5): If one robbed another of a beam and built it into a building, Beit Shammai say: He must destroy the entire building and return the beam to its owners. And Beit Hillel say: The injured party receives only the value of the beam but not the beam itself, due to an ordinance instituted for the sake of the penitent. In order to encourage repentance, the Sages were lenient and required the robber to return only the value of the beam. The mishna was taught in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel.

What do we do if something beautiful has been built from something stolen? Both Hillel and Shammai insist that something must be done to rectify the injury. Tear it down, pay reparations – do something!

What a powerful text for US Citizens to contemplate. Our country was built off of stolen labor. What has been done to repair that damage? To pay for the labor that was stolen? It was built on stolen land. Again, what reparations have there been? And yes, some cry out to tear it down. But we also have the Hillel’s of our time asking for reparations. Is that really so extreme? Or is it the pretending that nothing was stolen that is doing the most harm to our country?

The Second Gem – Baseless Hatred Destroys the Second Temple:

The Gemara explains: Jerusalem was destroyed on account of Kamtza and bar Kamtza. This is as there was a certain man whose friend was named Kamtza and whose enemy was named bar Kamtza. He once made a large feast and said to his servant: Go bring me my friend Kamtza. The servant went and mistakenly brought him his enemy bar Kamtza. The man who was hosting the feast came and found bar Kamtza sitting at the feast. The host said to bar Kamtza. That man is the enemy [ba’al devava] of that man, that is, you are my enemy. What then do you want here? Arise and leave. Bar Kamtza said to him: Since I have already come, let me stay and I will give you money for whatever I eat and drink. Just do not embarrass me by sending me out.

56a

The host said to him: No, you must leave. Bar Kamtza said to him: I will give you money for half of the feast; just do not send me away. The host said to him: No, you must leave. Bar Kamtza then said to him: I will give you money for the entire feast; just let me stay. The host said to him: No, you must leave. Finally, the host took bar Kamtza by his hand, stood him up, and took him out. After having been cast out from the feast, bar Kamtza said to himself: Since the Sages were sitting there and did not protest the actions of the host, although they saw how he humiliated me, learn from it that they were content with what he did. I will therefore go and inform [eikhul kurtza] against them to the king. He went and said to the emperor: The Jews have rebelled against you. The emperor said to him: Who says that this is the case? Bar Kamtza said to him: Go and test them; send them an offering to be brought in honor of the government, and see whether they will sacrifice it. The emperor went and sent with him a choice three-year-old calf. While bar Kamtza was coming with the calf to the Temple, he made a blemish on the calf’s upper lip. And some say he made the blemish on its eyelids, a place where according to us, i.e., halakha, it is a blemish, but according to them, gentile rules for their offerings, it is not a blemish. Therefore, when bar Kamtza brought the animal to the Temple, the priests would not sacrifice it on the altar since it was blemished, but they also could not explain this satisfactorily to the gentile authorities, who did not consider it to be blemished. The blemish notwithstanding, the Sages thought to sacrifice the animal as an offering due to the imperative to maintain peace with the government. Rabbi Zekharya ben Avkolas said to them: If the priests do that, people will say that blemished animals may be sacrificed as offerings on the altar. The Sages said: If we do not sacrifice it, then we must prevent bar Kamtza from reporting this to the emperor. The Sages thought to kill him so that he would not go and speak against them. Rabbi Zekharya said to them: If you kill him, people will say that one who makes a blemish on sacrificial animals is to be killed. As a result, they did nothing, bar Kamtza’s slander was accepted by the authorities, and consequently the war between the Jews and the Romans began. Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The excessive humility of Rabbi Zekharya ben Avkolas destroyed our Temple, burned our Sanctuary, and exiled us from our land.

Today’s gem is one of the dorkiest, and offensive, exchanges of insults – which, by the way, were brought as evidence that people keep the laws of the Sabbatical year.

It once happened that there was a certain person who said to another to insult him: Convert [dayyar], son of a convert. In anger the second person said to the first in response: At least I don’t eat produce of the Sabbatical Year as you do.

Snap!

I love this come back. You’re calling me a convert? As if that’s a bad thing? At least I know what it is to be a Jew! At least I keep the laws of the Sabbatical year!

Take that.

I love that this was brought to prove that people keep the Sabbatical laws. I also love the response of the convert who should never have to defend themselves – but did with some style.