No one interpretation TB Shabbat 116

One of the things I love about Torah study is the multitude of interpretations. The commentators across generations and centuries argue with each other. Judaism preserves all these interpretations to teach us that there is no one correct answer or approach. We get to choose which answer and approach we like best after the hearing each commentators interpretation. Today’s daf TB Shabbat 116 provides a wonderful example.

We learned in yesterday’s daf TB Shabbat 115 a Torah scroll needs at least a minimum of 85 letters to maintain its sanctity in order that it should be saved from a burning building. The rabbis based this decision on the smallest complete portion found in the Torah. It is “And when the Ark traveled- ויהי בנסֹע” (Numbers 10:35–36). On Shabbat and holidays at the very beginning of the Torah service when the ark is opened, the congregation stands and sings these verses.

Daf TB Shabbat 116 continues this discussion beginning at the very bottom of daf TB Shabbat 115. “And when the Ark traveled,” the Gemara cites that which the Sages taught in a baraita. It is stated: “And when the Ark traveled and Moses proclaimed: Rise up, God, and Your enemies will scatter and those who hate You will flee from before You.” And The Holy One, Blessed be He, made signs in the Torah for this portion, above and below, i.e., before and after it” (Sefaria.org translation) Look in any Hebrew version of the Torah and you will see that this portion is separated by a backward Hebrew letter “Nun” before and after it. And looks something like this:

נ   לה וַיְהִ֛י בִּנְסֹ֥עַ הָֽאָרֹ֖ן וַיֹּ֣אמֶר מֹשֶׁ֑ה קוּמָ֣ה ׀ יְהֹוָ֗ה וְיָפֻ֨צוּ֙ אֹֽיְבֶ֔יךָ וְיָנֻ֥סוּ מְשַׂנְאֶ֖יךָ מִפָּנֶֽיךָ: לו וּבְנֻחֹ֖ה יֹאמַ֑ר שׁוּבָ֣ה יְהֹוָ֔ה רִֽבֲב֖וֹת אַלְפֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל:   נ   

The Gemara explains why God section off these verses. “…in order to say that this is not its place, as the previous portion does not discuss the nation’s travels. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: It is not for that reason that signs were inserted. Rather, the signs are there because this portion is considered a book unto itself. Who is the tanna who disagrees with Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi? It is Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. As it was taught in a baraita that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: In the future, this portion will be uprooted from here, where it appears, and will be written in its proper place. And why was it written here, even though it discusses the travels of the children of Israel, and the portion before it does not? It is in order to demarcate between the first punishment and the second punishment. What is the second punishment that appears immediately afterward? It is the verse: “And the people complained wickedly in God’s ears, and God heard and became angry, and the fire of God burned in them and it consumed the edge of the camp” (Numbers 11:1). What is the first punishment? It is the verse: “And they traveled from the mountain of God [mehar Hashem] for three days” (Numbers 10:33), and Rabbi Ḥama, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: That they turned from after God [me’aḥarei Hashem] and hurriedly fled Mount Sinai. The Gemara asks: And if so, where is the proper place for this paragraph? Rav Ashi said: In the portion of the flags, where there is a description of the manner in which the Jewish people traveled through the desert.” (Sefaria.org translation)

We now know that this is not the correct spot where “And when the Ark traveled- ויהי בנסֹע” should have been written in the Torah. We also know that it separates the first punishment and the second punishment. There is much disagreement what sins and punishments does “And when the Ark traveled- ויהי בנסֹע” actually separate. I’ll share with you for different interpretations

Rashi explains that the first sin that the Israelites committed three days after they left Mount Sinai was “The riffraff in their midst felt a gluttonous craving; and then the Israelites wept and said ‘If only we had meat to eat!’” (Numbers 11:4) We can accept this interpretation because Rashi holds the principle that there is no “earlier” or “later” (no chronological order) and the events related in the Torah (אין מוקדם ומאוחר בתורה). Even though the verses are placed here, the events described happen much earlier.

Tosefot disagrees saying that Israel fled Mount Sinai like a student flees school. They were fleeing Mount Sinai for three full days because they had learned a lot of Torah (i.e. all the mitzvot with all the prohibitions and they were afraid that there were more still to come). The Holy One Blessed be for He didn’t want one punishment to follow on the heels of another so he demarcated with “And when the Ark traveled- ויהי בנסֹע”

Ramban in his commentary on these verses in the book of Numbers expands Tosefot’s interpretation and gives it a new twist. “But the meaning of this interpretation (of the Rabbis that they set from the mount of the Eternal indicates a punishment, is based on that which) found in the Agadah, that ‘They set forward from Mount Sinai with joy, like a child who runs away from school saying: ‘Perhaps He will give us more commandments if we stay!)’ This then is the sense of the expression, ‘And they set forward from the mount of the Eternal,” meaning that their intention was to remove themselves from there because it was the Mount of the Eternal. This is the first ‘punishment’ (i.e. the first sin, as explained further on), and then He interrupted (with the section of the ark) in order that there should not be three punishments one after the other, so that it would not have established a basis for further punishment. (A repetition of three similar events establishes a legal presumption of recurrence a חזקה) He called the (first) sin ‘punishment’ even though no actual punishment occurred to them because of it, (but since they deserved to have been punished, is called a ‘punishment’). Perhaps were not for the sin of theirs He would have brought them into the Land immediately (and so there was indeed a ‘punishment.’ (Translated by Rabbi Dr. Charles Chavel, page 95) Ramban as a third sin to the mixture to teach us of God’s love of Israel for he did not want to create a presumption of punishment.

The Natziv, Rabbi Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin, in his introduction to the book of Numbers quotes our sugiyah. He says that “And when the Ark traveled- ויהי בנסֹע” separates two periods of Israelite history. In the wilderness Israel was sustained by miracles that were above the laws of nature. Once Israel entered the land of Israel they were subjected to the laws of nature. The second half of Israel history began when the riffraff started their complaints which follows immediately “And when the Ark traveled- ויהי בנסֹע.”

Which one makes the most sense to you?

I better check my fire insurance TB Shabbat 115

We begin chapter 16 with today’s daf TB Shabbat 115. The Gemara leaves the topic of explaining the 39 prohibited labors that were introduced in chapter 7 on daf TB Shabbat 73a and begins exploring other Shabbat related laws. We already know that we are forbidden to extinguish a fire because it is one of the 39 prohibited labors. We also know that were allowed to extinguish a fire when people’s lives are at risk. The sages understood the urge to extinguish a fire to save one’s possessions when no life is in danger. They sought to find a balance between what you may remove from a burning house and what you may not to assuage urge to extinguish the fire.

Everybody agrees that one may save sacred scrolls, Torah, Prophets, and Writings, written in the original Hebrew. There is a disagreement whether one is permitted to translate sacred scrolls into other languages. If these sacred scrolls are already translated into another language, Rav Huna and Rav Hisda disagree whether one is allowed to save them from a burning building.

“GEMARA: It was stated that amora’im debated the status of sacred writings written in Aramaic translation or in any other language. Rav Huna said: One may not rescue them from the fire on Shabbat. And Rav Ḥisda said: One may rescue them from the fire on Shabbat. The Gemara adds: According to the one who said that sacred writings written in other languages may be read, everybody agrees that one may rescue them. Where they argue is according to the one who said that they may not be read. Rav Huna said: One may not rescue them, as they may not be read. Whereas Rav Ḥisda said: One may rescue them due to disgrace to sacred writings that will result.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The rabbis did not extend this leniency beyond scrolls of our Bible. “The Sages taught in a baraita: The blessings (think of this as a siddur like we use-gg) that are written and the amulets, even though there are the letters of the Name of God in them and matters that appear in the Torah are mentioned in them, they are not rescued from the fire; rather, they burn in their place, they and the names of God contained therein.” (Sefaria.org translation) At this time the Oral Torah, תורה שבעל פה, was still memorized and not written down. So this injunction didn’t apply. Books like we enjoy also didn’t exist.

Obviously times have changed and the Rishonim recognized this. Rishonim were the leading rabbis and poskim who lived approximately during the 11^th to 15^th centuries, and the era before the writing of the Shulkhan Arukh. They knew that because of the urgency of a particular moment in history, The Oral Torah was published first in scroll form and later in book form. Since these scrolls/books were read, the Rishonim permitted the saving of their books from a fire.

All sacred writings in any language and in any script are saved from a fire on Shabbat. In our generation there is an absolute permission to write Torah and all of the Oral Torah in any language. These books are considered important and are saved from a fire. The argument of Rav Hisda and Rav Huna were during a time when one did not write, read, and study from these kind of books, ספרים (the Hebrew word for books has a connotation of those that are holy). See Tosefot, Rabbeinu Asher (רא"ש), and Nissim of Gerona (ר"ן). Codified in the Shulkhan Arukh, Orekh Khayyim, 334:12) “In these days, all holy scriptures are saved from a fire and read from [publicly], even if they are written in any language and even if they are written with dye or red paint (meaning types of paint) or anything else. Similarly, a set of blessings that the Sages established [i.e., a siddur] should be saved from a fire or from any "turpah" (meaning an open and vulernable place). Similarly, a translation written in Hebrew like "Yagar Shahaduta" [Genesis 31:47] or "Thus shall you say to them" [Jeremiah 10:11, in Aramaic], or Hebrew written in Aramaic or in another language that the people are proficient in, or a Torah scroll that has 85 letters part of full words or has the name of God; all of these are saved.”(Sefaria.org translation)

When I was in rabbinical school, one of my teachers exhorted us to buy books. Who knew where we would ultimately end up and perhaps we would have the best and/or only Jewish library in town. If the book we needed was not on our bookshelf, we would never be able to reference it. (Remember this was a time before Amazon prime!) Since that time, I hardly met a book I didn’t like and didn’t want to own. So I bought it. My library has grown to over flowing. There is no way I would be able to save all my holy scriptures from a fire, God forbid, in my house or in my office. I should check my fire insurance to make sure that I could replace the books in my library I could save from the fire.

Which is holier, Yom Kippur or Shabbat? TB Shabbat 114

If you asked the common person on the street which day is holier, Yom Kippur or Shabbat, I am willing to bet that 11 out of 10 people will say that Yom Kippur is the holiest day in our calendar year. Today’s daf TB Shabbat 114 will be quite a shock to them. The Mishnah back on daf TB Shabbat 113a records a disagreement between Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Yishmael holds that Shabbat is holier and Rabbi Akiva says Yom Kippur is on par with Shabbat, but not holier.

“Rabbi Yishmael says: …And the fats of the offerings that were sacrificed on Shabbat are offered on Yom Kippur, but not those of Yom Kippur on Shabbat, because the sanctity of Shabbat is greater than the sanctity of Yom Kippur. Rabbi Akiva says: Neither are the fats of the offerings sacrificed on Shabbat offered on Yom Kippur, nor are those of Yom Kippur offered on Shabbat.” (Sefaria.org translation) The priests offered up the daily fats and limbs during the night which technically begins the new day (Think for example, Shabbat begins Friday night and not Saturday morning). Before the calendar was set Yom Kippur could fall on a Friday and then Shabbat would automatically follow or Yom Kippur could fall on a Sunday immediately after Shabbat. According to Rabbi Yishmael one is permitted to offer up the Yom Kippur fats and limbs on a Shabbat, but not from Shabbat on Yom Kippur because Shabbat sanctity is greater. Rabbi Akiva disagrees because their sanctities are equal.

Today’s daf explains the reasoning behind both Rabbi Yishmael and Rabbi Akiva. It all revolves around the meaning of a seemingly extraneous word “on its Shabbat- בְּשַׁבַּתּ֑וֹ”)

“We learned in the mishna that Rabbi Yishmael says: One may fold clothes and make beds on Yom Kippur for Shabbat if Yom Kippur occurs on Friday, and the fats of the sacrifices that were brought on Shabbat were offered on Yom Kippur that occurs on Sunday. The verse “The burnt-offering of Shabbat on its Shabbat, besides the daily offering and its libation” (Numbers 28:10) taught, with regard to the fats of Shabbat, that they are offered on Yom Kippur, because Yom Kippur is also called Shabbat, and the verse indicates that the Shabbat offering is offered on another Shabbat. I might have thought even the fats from Yom Kippur offerings could be sacrificed on Shabbat; therefore, the verse states “on its Shabbat” to specify that it is not so; this is the statement of Rabbi Yishmael.

“Rabbi Akiva says that when the verse says: “The burnt-offering of Shabbat on its Shabbat,” it teaches that the fats of Shabbat are offered on a Festival that occurs on the following day. I might have thought that they could even be offered on Yom Kippur that occurred on the day after Shabbat. Therefore, the verse states “on its Shabbat” and not on another one.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Rambam poskins according to Rabbi Akiva’s understanding. When you have left over fats from Shabbat one is not permitted offer them up on Yom Kippur which begins immediately on Motzai Shabbat, Saturday night. (Mishneh Torah, Sefer Korbanot, Hilkhot Temidim and Musafim, Chapter 1, Halakhah 7)

I have a different understanding why Shabbat is holier than Yom Kippur. I base it on how many people are called up to the Torah for aliyot. The more people who are called to the Torah, the holier the day.

On Monday and Thursday three people are called up for aliyot.

On Rosh Hodesh, the new month, four people are called up for aliyot.

On three pilgrimage holidays Passover, Shavuot, and Sukkot and Rosh Hashanah five people are called up for aliyot.

On Yom Kippur six people are called up for aliyot.

On Shabbat seven people are called up for aliyot.

Mah y’didut: Making your beloved rest mine TB Shabbat 113

From an objective standpoint there is no difference between one day and the next. Each day has 24 hours, 1440 minutes, and 86,400 seconds. But from a subjective point of view each day is different. Monday has a completely different feel to it because it is the first day of the workweek. Wednesday is hump day and Friday signals the end of work and the beginning of the weekend. If we want Shabbat to be a special day we have to make it so. Daf TB Shabbat 113 provides us with some guidelines how to make Shabbat special by commenting on a verse from Isaiah 58:13.

“On a related note, the Gemara cites what we learned with regard to the following passage: “If you keep your feet from breaking, from pursuing your affairs on My holy day, and you call Shabbat a delight, the Lord’s holy day honorable, and you honor it by not going your own way, from attending to your affairs and speaking idle words” (Isaiah 58:13). The Rabbis derived from the words “and you honor it” that your dress on Shabbat should not be like your dress during the week, as Rabbi Yoḥanan would refer to his clothing as my honor, indicating that appropriate clothing is a form of deference. The words “going your own way” mean that your walking on Shabbat should not be like your walking during the week. “From attending to your affairs” means it is prohibited to deal with your weekday affairs and to speak about them on Shabbat. However, affairs of Heaven, i.e., those pertaining to mitzvot, are permitted. “And speaking idle words” means that your speech on Shabbat should not be like your speech during the week, i.e., one should not discuss his weekday affairs on Shabbat. However, it is only speech that they said is prohibited, whereas merely contemplating weekday affairs is permitted.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The choice of clothing helps make Shabbat special. What we choose to wear to a wedding, bar/bat mitzvah, or any other formal affair helps to add or subtract to the atmosphere of the occasion. I’m not advocating a person should wear a tux or a formal gown to Shabbat services. The choice of clothing though should be deliberate so as to enhance the spirit of Shabbat. Although the Gemara says that one should slow down and not use large steps on Shabbat, I would interpret Shabbat walking to mean something quite different. During the weekdays our steps leads us everywhere, but the synagogue. On Shabbat our feet should take us the synagogue for prayer, study, and community (after the COBIT 19 pandemic, of course). The Tosefot quoting a Midrash says when comes to speech on Shabbat that we shouldn’t talk too much. Some even say we should not weary others with a lot of Torah study (My fellow rabbis please take note!). Still others define Shabbat speech as speaking to each other in Hebrew instead of the vernacular. I’ve already written how much I love Hebrew so even if you can’t speak Hebrew, I would encourage you to use Shabbat as an opportunity to learn a new Hebrew word or two.

By the way, daf TB Shabbat 113 is the source for one of the stanzas of the Sabbath song Mah y’didut.

“Honor Shabbat,” God says, “and be my treasured choice.

Six days shall you work, but on the seventh, rejoice.

Business is forbidden, as is figuring accounts.

What is permissible, in generous amounts,

to make shiddochs, teach children, sing a Shabbat song;

to speak words of Torah everywhere, all day long.

Walk at a slow pace and make Shabbat joy your goal…”

(Siddur Sim Shalom for Shabbat and Festivals, page 321)

A knotty problem TB Shabbat 112

The 15^th chapter of massechet Shabbat deals with the prohibition of tying and untying knots. The two mishnayot on yesterday’s daf TB Shabbat 111 defines three different categories of knots. Of course they are knots that are prohibited by Torah law on Shabbat (אסור דאורייתא וחייב), knots that are prohibited by rabbinic law on Shabbat (אסור דרבנן ואסור אבל פטור), and knots that are completely permitted on Shabbat (מותר להתחילה). Rashi and Rambam define these three categories differently.

For Rashi the determining factor is duration. A forbidden knot is one that is permanent and the person has no intention of ever untying it. An example of this kind of knot is the knot that secures the nose ring on the camel itself.  A completely permitted knot is one that is tied and untied daily. An example of this kind of knot would involve tying your shoelaces. The duration of a knot prohibited by the rabbis would fall in between a permanent knot and one that is tied and untied on a daily basis. An example of this kind of knot would be the knot the ties a rope to the camel’s nose ring.

For Rambam there are only two considerations, the permanence of the knot and whether the knot was tied by a professional. If both considerations apply, the knot is prohibited by the Torah. If only one of the two (and it doesn’t matter which one), the knot is prohibited by the rabbis. If neither considerations factor in, the knot is permitted to be tied and untied and Shabbat.

Today’s daf TB Shabbat 112 solves apparent contradictions between different baraitot by applying the three different levels of knot tying. The Gemara sets up the question. “We learned in the mishna: And it is permitted to tie the straps of a shoe or a sandal on Shabbat. It was stated with regard to one who untied the straps of a shoe or a sandal: One baraita taught that one who did so on Shabbat is liable to bring a sin-offering; and it was taught in another baraita that one is exempt by Torah law, and it is prohibited to untie those straps ab initio; and it was taught in another baraita that it is permitted to untie these knots ab initio. This is difficult, as there is a contradiction between one statement with regard to a shoe and another statement with regard to the straps of a shoe; and this is difficult, as there is a contradiction between one statement with regard to the straps of a sandal and another statement with regard to the straps of a sandal.

“The Gemara explains: The apparent contradiction between one statement with regard to a shoe and the other statement with regard to a shoe is not difficult, as that baraita, which teaches that one is liable to bring a sin-offering, is referring to a shoemaker’s knot, which is permanent as it holds the shoe together. The baraita that states that he is exempt by Torah law and it is prohibited by rabbinic decree is referring to the shoe worn by Sages, as they often tie their shoes loosely so they can easily put on and remove their shoes. The baraita that teaches that it is permitted to tie shoes ab initio is referring to such knots used by the residents of the city of Meḥoza, who are meticulous in their dress and who tie and untie their shoes every day.”(Sefaria.org translation)

Based on the resolution of this difficulty, we can conclude that Rambam’s definition works just a little bit better within the context of our Gemara because the text introduces a shoemaker’s knot (i.e. a professional knot) as the one prohibited by the Torah.

You are royalty TB Shabbat 111

How do you feel about being Jewish? Are you proud or embarrassed? Do you have a good Jewish self-image or poor self-image one? I teach Jewish short stories in my adult education classes. Recently two of them have much to say on this topic. The first story is Sholom Aleichem’s “On Account of a Hat.” The second story is Aharon Megged’s “The Name.”

The hero of the “On Account of a Hat” is Sholem Shachnah. He is a typical Jew of the Pale of Settlement eking out a livelihood. He falls asleep next to some petty Russian official waiting for his train to take him home erev Passover. Awakened, he reaches underneath the bench for his hat that fell off only to pick up and put on the sleeping Russian official’s hat with the red band and visor. Because of that hat everybody treats him respectfully and calls him “Your Excellency.” Sholem can’t believe his ears and thinks everybody is mocking him. “He has no idea why all these honors have suddenly been heaped upon him-first class, salutes, Your Excellency. Can it be an account of the real estate deal he just closed? That’s it! But wait a minute. His own people, Jews, that is, honored him for this, it would be understandable. The Gentiles! The conductor! The ticket agent! What is it to them? Maybe he’s dreaming.” After the porter takes him to the first class carriage, he sees himself for the first time in the mirror wearing that hat with the red band and visor. He doesn’t see himself, but that Russian official. He concludes the porter who was supposed to wake him up to catch the train woke up the wrong person! Before the train moves out of the station Sholem disembarks. Since this is the last train home before Passover, he has to spend the seders with strangers. Sholom Aleichem is trying to tell his Jews that they have forgotten their own self-worth.

In the story “The Name” Grandfather Zisskind’s son’s family was murdered by the Nazis in the Holocaust. Grandfather Zisskind’s sabra granddaughter Raya is pregnant and absolutely refuses to name her future son after his grandson Mendele who was murdered by the Nazis. Speaking to her mother “What are you talking about, Mother”-Raya rebelled against the thought-“a Ghetto name, ugly, horrible! I wouldn’t even be capable of letting it cross my lips. Do you want me to hate my child?” The new parents hate the name Mendele because they were born in Israel. Grandfather Zisskind rails against this low self-image of their fellow Jews Israelis have. “You were born here. Very nice…” said Grandfather Zisskind with emotion. “So what of it? Was so remarkable about that? Are you clever than they? More cultured? Are you greater than they in Torah good deeds is your blood better than theirs?” Aharon Meged is trying to tell Israelis that they become orphans in history if they denigrate their ancestors’self-worth.

We have been studying the laws of healing on Shabbat in chapter 14 of massechet Shabbat. I believe that Rabbi Shimon on today’s daf TB Shabbat 111 provides the antidote for low self-esteem. “One who is concerned about pain in his loins may not smear wine and vinegar on them on Shabbat because that is a medical treatment. However, one may smear oil on them. However, one may not use rose oil, which is very expensive and used exclusively as a cure. However, princes may smear with rose oil on their wounds on Shabbat because it is their usual manner to smear rose oil on themselves during the week for pleasure. Rabbi Shimon says: All of the Jewish people are princes, and it is permitted for them to smear rose oil on themselves on Shabbat.” (Sefaria.org translation) We have a tremendous past to be proud of and a wonderful future to look forward to. So the next time you look at yourself in the mirror and don’t like what you see, remember you are descended from “royalty.”

By the way, with this daf we finish our chapter and begin the 15^th chapter of massechet Shabbat with deals with the prohibition of tying and untying knots.

Does the snake still lust after the daughters of Eve? TB Shabbat 110

Today’s daf TB Shabbat continues to discuss different cures for constipation, jaundice, and a woman (זָבָה) who is suffering from a discharge well beyond her period. These cures are pretty outlandish from our modern point of view. Rabbi Akiva Eiger (1761-1838) in his commentary on the Shulchan Aruch basically says that these cures don’t work and now we are forbidden to use them. In other words, if you check them out at https://www.sefaria.org/Shabbat.110a?lang=bi, don’t try them at home!

The daf begins with a series of snake problems like what you should do if a snake wraps itself around your legs. I hope I never have to find out whether these strategies work are not because I have my doubts. This sugiyah ends with a very strange case of a snake violating a woman. “A woman whom a snake has entered, let them spread her legs and place her on two barrels, and let them bring fatty meat and throw it onto coals. And let them bring her a bowl of cress and fragrant wine and place them there and mix them together. And she should take tongs in her hand, as when the snake smells the fragrance it emerges. And then one should take the snake and burn it in the fire, as if it is not burned, it will come back onto her.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Could the background of this case harken back to the snake, Eve, and Adam in the minds of the rabbis? According to the midrash the snake lusted after Eve and was jealous of her relationship with Adam. “In the midrashic expansion, the serpent, ‘who was the shrewdest of all the wild beasts’ (Gen. 3:1), cast his eyes on what was not fit for him. The serpent saw Adam and Eve naked, engaging in intercourse in plain sight, and he lusted after Eve. He wanted to kill Adam and then marry Eve. When he was punished, God told him: I intended that you would reign over all cattle and beasts, but now ‘more cursed shall you be than all cattle and all the wild beasts’ (Gen. 3:14); you desired to kill Adam and marry Eve, now “I will put enmity between you and the woman” (Gen. 3:15). What the serpent wanted was not given him, and what he had was taken from him (T Sotah [ed. Lieberman] 4:17–18; Gen. Rabbah 18:6). According to another tradition, the serpent did indeed engage in intercourse with Eve, who became pregnant and gave birth to Cain (see below, ‘Now the Man Knew His Wife Eve’).” https://jwa.org/encyclopedia/article/eve-midrash-and-aggadah

To say the least our rabbis had a vivid imagination.

For some interesting insights that I didn't know when I wrote this reflection see: https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/shabbat-110/

Pass the hyssop please TB Shabbat 109

Today’s daf TB Shabbat 109 discusses the prohibition of healing on Shabbat. Healing on Shabbat is prohibited because back in Talmudic days one had to grind the ingredients to make the potion and grinding (הטוחן) is one of the 39 prohibited labors. This prohibition only applies when the person is discomforted. If a person’s life is at stake and in danger one may not only override any rabbinic prohibition but also any Torah prohibition. A bedridden person is in the same category as one whose life is in danger. Obviously to save a person’s life one may prepare any medicine and administer it on Shabbat.

There are even exceptions to the general prohibition according to the Mishnah on TB Shabbat 109b. Sick people may eat food that cures when healthy people eat it as well. For example, every Jewish mother knows that chicken soup helps heal the common cold and administers it to those in need. Since healthy people eats chicken soup all the time, a person may eat it as well when ill for its curative powers. Secondly, if the potion only provides some comfort to what ails a person, but does not have a strong curative effect, a person may take advantage of the potion as well.

Finally the Hatam Sofer (1762-1839) ruled since modern medicine is premade and premixed, there is no Shabbat violation in using our syrups or pills to cure us for what ails us on Shabbat.

“Mishnah: One may not eat eizoveyon on Shabbat because healthy people do not eat it, and therefore it is clear that anyone eating it is doing so for its medicinal value. However, one may eat a plant called yo’ezer and may drink abuvro’e. Furthermore, all types of food that healthy people eat may be eaten by a person even for medicinal purposes. And one may drink all drinks except for water from palm trees and a kos ikarin because they are known as a remedy for jaundice. Therefore, it is prohibited to drink them on Shabbat for curative purposes. However, one may drink palm tree water on Shabbat in order to quench his thirst, and one may smear ikarin oil on himself for non-medical purposes.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The Gemara defines eizoveyon as hyssop (אֵזוֹב). “The hyssop (Majornana syriaca (L.) Rafin. or Origanum syriacum (L.) Is a grayish shrub within woody branches; neither its leaves nor its flowers are outstanding in any way. It makes due with very little sometimes even growing out of the smallest cracks in the stone (‘in the rock’), yet is highly valued for its fragrance and flavor. The hyssop is an important spice medicinal plant, while his dry branches are excellent kindling. The best known food made from the hyssop in the Middle East is a powder known by its Arabic name, za’tar. It is a mixture of crushed or powdered hyssop leaves, sesame seeds, ground sumac fruit, salt, and pepper.” (Nogah Hareuveni, Tree and Shrub in Our Biblical Heritage, page 108) Hyssop belongs to the oregano family. Times have changed and now everybody uses hyssop on their food. I highly recommend you stock your pantry with za’tar (aka za’atar). Here is a website with lots of different recipes using za’tar for your perusal: https://www.themediterraneandish.com/what-is-zaatar-and-how-to-use-it-11-best-zaatar-recipes/

I am at a loss to define some of the other terms in the Mishnah because the Gemara only provides the Aramaic name which is as unclear as the Hebrew term. “However, one may eat the yo’ezer plant. The Gemara asks: What is yo’ezer? The Gemara answers: It is the vegetable known as potnak. For what is it eaten? It is eaten to cure liver worms…

What is abuvro’e? The Gemara answers: It is the plant known as ḥumtareya. The Gemara asks: What is ḥumtareya? It is that which is called the lonely staff. The Gemara asks: For what purpose is it used? It is used for one who drank exposed water from which we suspect a snake drank and left behind its venom” (Sefaia.org translation)

This is the last bit of my advice today. Don’t try the any of the cures on this daf, consult your doctor for good medical advice.

Kosher parchment TB Shabbat 108

Have you ever seen the scrolls that are inside the tefillin? Written on the parchment are verses from the Torah commanding the mitzvah of tefillin, Deuteronomy 6:4-9, Deuteronomy 11:13-21, Exodus 13:1-10, and Exodus 13:11-16. One probably assumes that all parchment is made out of cowhide, but that is not correct. Today’s daf TB Shabbat discusses which animals may be used to make the parchment.

“The Sages taught: One may write phylacteries on the hide of a kosher domesticated animal, and on the hide of a kosher non-domesticated animal, and on the hides of their unslaughtered carcasses [neveilot], and on the hides of animals with a condition that will cause them to die within twelve months [tereifot]. And one may wrap the parchment with the hair of these animals and sew them with their sinews; and it is a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai that the parchment of phylacteries may be wrapped with the hair of these animals and sewn with their sinews. But one may not write on the hide of a non-kosher animal, or on the hide of a non-kosher undomesticated animal, and it goes without saying that one may not write on their skins when they are neveilot or tereifot. And one may not wrap the parchment with the hair of non-kosher animals, nor may one sew them with their sinews.” (Sefaria.org translation) Any kosher animal no matter how it died may be used! I have seen a Torah made out of parchment from a deer’s hide. The color of the parchment was much darker than what we are used to seeing.

The Gemara teaches that other types of animals’ hides would be permissible as well. Although we don’t think of bird’s skin as hide, the khalakhah does. Consequently, one may use a bird’s hide to make parchment for tefillin. “Rav Huna said: One may write phylacteries on the skin of a kosher bird. Rav Yosef said: What is he teaching us with this statement? If he is teaching us that a bird has skin, we already learned that: One who wounds an animal or a bird is liable. Since there is liability only if a wound forms beneath the skin, apparently a bird has skin. Abaye said to him: He is teaching us many things, for if I had only learned from the mishna, I would have said the following: Since the skin of a bird has many holes from which the feathers grow, one should not be allowed to write sacred matters on it. Therefore, he teaches us as they say in the West, i.e., in Eretz Yisrael: Any hole over which ink passes and does not penetrate it, is not considered a hole that invalidates the writing.” (Sefaria.org translation) I’m guessing that we don’t use bird skin as parchment because it is not as durable as animal hides and writing on something that is so thin would almost be impossible and not worth the effort.

We might as well finish off the animal kingdom by asking “What about fish?” The answer is a qualified yes. Although the sages have determined that one could use the “hide” of the fish, writing tefillin on something that had such a strong foul odor was inappropriate. They wondered whether this order would pass are not. Since they could not come to a conclusion they said they would have to wait until Elijah the prophet will come and teach whether the foul odor of the fish ceases or not.

What does that exactly mean? TB Shabbat 107

With today’s daf TB Shabbat 107 we finish the 13^th chapter of our massechet and start the 14^th chapter. The 14^th chapter continues the discussion of trapping. It discusses the unique case of eight creeping animals explicitly mentioned in the Torah. “MISHNA: With regard to any of the eight creeping animals mentioned in the Torah, one who traps them or wounds them on Shabbat is liable. The Torah states: “The following shall be impure for you among the creeping animals that swarm upon the earth: The weasel, and the mouse, and the dab lizard of every variety; and the gecko, and the land-crocodile, and the lizard, and the skink, and the chameleon” (Leviticus 11:29–30)” (Sefaria.org translation) Later on in this chapter the Gemara discusses issues surrounding healing on Shabbat.

At the very end of the 13^th chapter the Gemara clarifies the terms obligated (khayyav-חייב) and exempt (patur-פטור) we’ve been using all along. Obviously when somebody violates a Shabbat prohibition he is khayyav and must face the music accepting the appropriate punishment. When the Mishna uses the term patur it means that the action is prohibited only by the rabbis. Since the violation is prohibited by the rabbis alone, the person is freed from the appropriate punishment. Nevertheless, one is still forbidden to do that rabbinically prohibited action. In the words of the Talmud it is exempt but forbidden (patur aval asur-פטור אבל אסור). Today’s daf will teach us three exceptions where the person is not only exempt from all punishment the action itself is completely permissible (patur umutar-פטור ומותר)

“With regard to this issue Shmuel said: With regard to all exempt rulings in the halakhot of Shabbat, although one who performs the action is exempt by Torah law, his action is prohibited by rabbinic law, with the exception of these three for which he is exempt and it is permitted to perform the action.
One is this case of the deer. And from what source do we conclude that one is exempt and it is permitted? From the fact that it was taught in the latter clause of the mishna: To what is this second person’s action similar? To one who locks his house to secure it and it turns out a deer that was trapped before Shabbat is also secured inside.

“And another example where he is exempt and it is permitted is: One who drains an abscess containing pus on Shabbat, if he did so to create a permanent opening in it, he is liable. However, if he did so to drain fluid from it, he is exempt. And from what source do we conclude that one is exempt and it is permitted? As we learned in a mishna: A hand needle used for sewing clothes may be moved on Shabbat to remove a thorn. Apparently, removing a thorn on Shabbat is permitted ab initio to the extent that one is even permitted to move a needle for that purpose.

“And another case is: One who traps a snake on Shabbat, if he deals with it so that it will not bite him and in doing so traps it, he is exempt. However, if he traps it for medicinal purposes, he is liable. And from what source do we conclude that one is exempt and it is permitted? As we learned in a mishna: One may overturn a bowl on top of a lamp ab initio on Shabbat so that the fire will not take hold in the ceiling beam; and similarly, one may overturn a bowl on top of a child’s feces so that he will not touch it and dirty himself, and on top of a scorpion so it will not bite, and the ruling is the same with regard to a snake.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Rocky Raccoon TB Shabbat 106

Many of the prohibited labors are not relevant to my life. I don’t weave, dye material, nor sew. I certainly don’t hunt, but a Mishna on daf 106b resonated. “MISHNA: If a deer entered a house on its own and one locked the door before it, he is liable for trapping. If two people locked the door, they are exempt, because neither performed a complete labor. If one person is incapable of locking the door and two people locked it, they are liable because that is the typical manner of performing that labor. And Rabbi Shimon deems them exempt as he holds that two people who perform a single labor are never liable by Torah law.” (Sefaria.org translation)

My house has a “Harry Potter bedroom” underneath the stairwell leading to the basement. That’s where we store all our Passover dishes, pots and pans. One day close to Passover my job was to bring up all those Passover boxes. I opened the door and saw a raccoon. I don’t know who was more afraid, me or the raccoon because I immediately shut the door and locked it while the raccoon scampered somewhere. We had to call wildlife affairs to get somebody to trap that raccoon. He brought a one way trap where the raccoon could enter, but not leave. He baited it with cat food since raccoons love the stuff. A couple days later we caught the raccoon, and it was taken far away and released into the wild unharmed. It had entered the house through an old vent which we immediately closed in and made raccoon proof.

While none of this ever happen on a Shabbat, I wondered whether I would have violated the prohibition of trapping if my initial discovery had happened on Saturday. I don’t think so for two reasons. In the Gemara commenting on the Mishna “Rabbi Yirmeya bar Abba said that Shmuel said: One who traps a lion on Shabbat is not liable for trapping unless he traps it in its cage, and until that point it is not considered trapped.” (Sefaria.org translation) In my mind a rabid raccoon can be as dangerous as a lion. Consequently, he would not be considered trapped until he entered that trap. I have no idea whether it was rabid are not but, I didn’t want take any chances. Secondly, I think we can apply the rule that it was a labor that is not necessary for its own sake (מלאכה שאינה צריכה לגופה), i.e., a person performs the labor for a purpose other than the direct result of that action. I certainly did not want to trap the raccoon when I first saw it. I just didn’t want it to enter the rest of the house. It had free reign to go wherever it went inside the walls or even leave our home the same way it entered.

I’m glad that I would not have violated Shabbat if I discovered that pesky raccoon on Shabbat and closed the door on it thanks to my daf yomi journey.

Anger is only one letter away from danger TB Shabbat 105

With today’s daf TB Shabbat 105 we conclude the 12^th chapter our massechet and begin the 13^th chapter. Since there are 24 chapters in massechet Shabbat we have officially finished half of the tractate! However, we must note that we have finished 78.5% of this massechet by the number of pages we have studied.

This new chapter deals with the prohibitions of weaving and sewing. When it comes to sewing the Mishnah qualifies this prohibition by teaching “And one who sews is liable if he sews two stitches. And one who tears is liable if he tears enough fabric in order to sew two stitches to repair it.” (Sefaria.org translation) The halakha makes a distinction between a constructive tear and a completely destructive tear. If you have a shirt that is shoddily put together and you tear the stitches in order to sew the seam better is an example of a constructive tearing and is forbidden. Tearing your shirt in a fit of rage is an example of a destructive tear and you are exempt from bringing a sin offering.

We have to be careful of such destructive anger. Anger is one letter shy of the word danger! To make this point Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri taught the following. “Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says in the name of Ḥilfa bar Agra, who said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri: One who rends his garments in his anger, or who breaks his vessels in his anger, or who scatters his money in his anger, should be like an idol worshipper in your eyes, as that is the craft of the evil inclination. Today it tells him do this, and tomorrow it tells him do that, until eventually, when he no longer controls himself, it tells him worship idols and he goes and worships idols. Rabbi Avin said: What verse alludes to this? “There shall not be a strange god within you, and you shall not bow to a foreign god” (Psalms 81:10). What is the strange god that is within a person’s body? Say that it is the evil inclination. One may not rend his garments in anger, because in doing so he is deriving pleasure from satisfying the evil inclination.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Today there is an outpouring of righteous anger by our citizens throughout our country because of the systemic racism in our midst. People are taking to the streets and demonstrating against police brutality when confronting the black and people of color communities. Because of the outpouring of this righteous anger, small but positive steps are being made to change the racist nature in our country. Communities are beginning to ban the choke holds used by police. Statues of Confederate traitors are coming down. Companies are rebranding their products which use racist stereotypes. This is only the beginning and we shouldn’t be satisfied with what has been accomplished. As we continue down this road to perfect our country, we must not allow the evil inclination to persuade us to vent destructive anger in our communities.

Rabbi Sidney Greenberg wrote:

“Long ago a Hebrew Sage taught that ‘he who conquers his anger is more to be admired than he who conquers a city.’ (Ben Zoma, Avot 4:1-gg) to conquer anger does not mean to try to suppress it, to be ashamed of it, to deny its legitimacy. To conquer anger means to express it at the appropriate time, in the appropriate manner.

“Aristotle anticipated modern psychology when he wrote: ‘anybody can become angry-that is easy; but to be angry with the right person, and to the right degree, and at the right time and for the right purpose and in the right way-that is not within everybody’s power and is not easy.” (Say yes to life, page 27)

The Holiness of Hebrew TB Shabbat 104

I fell in love with the Hebrew language when I was 16 years old. My parents sent me to Israel for the very first time on the Cleveland Israel study tour in 1968. When I returned home I enrolled in Akiva High School, the communitywide afterschool Hebrew program, to study Hebrew.  This has been a lifelong love affair. Every Shabbat I take time to read at least one chapter of a book in Hebrew. Sometimes the books are nonfiction and sometimes they are novels. Right now I’m in the middle of Amos Oz’s book A Tale of Love and Darkness.

Our sages have always considered Hebrew “The Sacred Language (Lashon hakodesh-לשון הקודש)” (see TB Sotah 32a). Moses Nachmanidies explains why in his commentary on Exodus 30:13. “Our Rabbi’s call the language of the Torah “The Sacred Language,” because the words of the Torah, and the prophecies, and all the words of holiness were all expressed in that language. It is thus the language in which the Holy One, blessed be He, spoke with his prophets and with his congregation… And that tongue He created his world, and call the names shamayim (heavens), eretz (earth) and all that is in them, His angels and all His hosts-He called them all by name (Isaiah 40:26)….”(Rabbi Dr. Charles B Chavel’s translation, Shilo publications, page 518-519)

 Even every Hebrew letter with its inherent holiness can teach us important lessons. Today’s daf TB Shabbat 104 explains the moral lessons each letter teaches. Let me share with you two examples.

“Gimmel dalet means give to the poor [gemol dalim]. Why is the leg of the gimmel extended toward the dalet (גד)? Because it is the manner of one who bestows loving-kindness to pursue the poor. And why is the leg of the dalet extended toward the gimmel? It is so that a poor person will make himself available to him who wants to give him charity. And why does the dalet face away from the gimmel? It is to teach that one should give charity discreetly so that the poor person will not be embarrassed by him.

“They further taught:
Shin: Falsehood [sheker]. Tav: Truth [emet].
Why are the letters of the word sheker adjacent (שקר) to one another in the alphabet, while the letters of emet are distant from one another (אמת)? That is because while falsehood is easily found, truth is found only with great difficulty. And why do the letters that comprise the word sheker all stand on one foot, and the letters that comprise the word emet stand on bases that are wide like bricks? Because the truth stands eternal and falsehood does not stand eternal.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Do you need further proof that every letter conveys important life lessons? Then, I recommend that you begin studying Hebrew. It’s never too late!

How does your garden grow? TB Shabbat 103

Today’s daf TB Shabbat 103 introduces and discusses two new avot melakhah, plowing and writing two consecutive letters. Since tomorrow’s daf continues the discussion about writing two letters until the end of the chapter, I thought I will concentrate on the prohibited labor of plowing and its subcategories.

“MISHNA: One who plows is liable for plowing any amount of land on Shabbat. One who weeds and removes grass on Shabbat, and one who removes dry branches and who prunes any amount is liable. With regard to one who gathers wood, if he did so to enhance the tree or the land, he is liable for any amount; if he did so for fuel, he is liable for collecting a measure equivalent to that which is used to cook an easily cooked egg. With regard to one who gathers grass, if he did so to enhance the plants or the land, he is liable for any amount; if he did so to feed an animal, he is liable for collecting a measure equivalent to a goat’s mouthful.” (Sefaria.org translation)

As we have learned in a previous chapter, the tipping point measurement when a person is obligated to bring a sin offering if he accidentally transgresses depends on the person’s intention. We see how this intentionality plays out in our Mishna. If a person weeds his garden to enhance it, he is liable for any amount of grass he pulled. But if a person plucks the grass to feed an animal, the amount must be equivalent to a goat’s mouthful.

When it comes to plowing why does our tradition demands such an absolute measurement of “any amount?” Norman E. Frimer answers our question in his article “Law as Living Discipline: the Sabbath as Paradigm.”

“The stark fact is that for six-sevenths of every week man struggles to master his natural environment, to draw substance from its resources, and to bended to his will for his enjoyment or advantage. This is good, for creative labor is good. It is a mitzvah commanded by God Himself[1].

“Yet several dangers work in the shadows of human productivity. First, man paradoxically tends to become dependent upon the very instruments he has fashioned to free and serve him. Gilbert Murray emphasizes this point in his analysis of Five Stages of Greek Religion ‘On us the power of the material world has, through our very mastery of it, and the dependence which results from the mastery, both inwardly and outwardly increases its hold. Capta ferit victorem cepit. We have taken possession of it and now we cannot move without it.’[2] Second, the danger is very real in modern industrial society that man, as worker, becomes depersonalized and functions merely as a human cog in a vast assembly line. (This has to be true too when comes to industrial farming that provides most of the food on our tables.gg) above all, however, there is the opposite danger-the danger that man, aware of his power and success in dominating nature will begin to regard himself as the measure of what is right and the artistic of the good. ‘Beware,’ warned Moses 30 centuries ago, ‘… Last when thou hast eaten an art satisfied, and has built goodly homes (probably split-level ones), and dwelt therein and thy silver and my gold is multiplied (when thy industrial plants and commercial enterprises have multiplied)… Then the heart be lifted up, and thou forget the Lord thy God… and thou say in thy heart: My power and the might of my hand had gotten me this wealth.’[3] Men are singularly susceptible to the spiritual foibles.

“Consequently, Jewish law stepped in with boldness and uncompromising demand… Make the whole machine community come to a dead stop. Let inner man take over. Only the safety, security, and survival of an individual or the group can justify an exemption.

“… Close down the assembly line. This is Shabbat! Even if you represent management, you too must cease and desist. From this day there are no employers and no employees. There are none to be exploited and no exploited, no manipulators and no manipulated, no freeman and no slaves, no citizens and no strangers. On the Shabbat all are to stand equal in one human family before their one divine parent.” (From A Shabbat Reader: Universe of Cosmic Joy edited by Dov Peretz Elkins, pages 54-55)

As my friend Bonnie Cramer has taught me, we stop being a human doer on Shabbat so we can become a human being.

---

[1] M.M. Kasher, TorahSheleymah, 16:69, section 240Cf. also note 240 an addendum, pp. 242 ff.

[2] Page 114

[3] Deuteronomy 8:11ff