Growing as a young boy one of my favorite TV shows was Leave it to Beaver. Wally was Beaver’s big brother. Today’s daf TB Pesakhim 63 reminded me of Wally’s friend Eddie Haskell.
Several attempts were made to make sense of the following Rabbi Meir’s statement. This Rabba’s explaination. "It was taught in a baraita that Akherim (Rabbi Meir) say: If one sacrifices a Paschal lamb for both circumcised and uncircumcised people and had in mind first the circumcised people and then the uncircumcised people, the offering is valid. But if he had in mind first the uncircumcised people and then the circumcised people, it is disqualified.” (Sefaria.org translation) One explanation really troubled the Gemara. It couldn’t believe that Rabbi Meir would hold the position the heart and the mouth need not be the same.
“We are dealing with a case where one decided in his mind to slaughter the offering for both of them, both circumcised and uncircumcised people, and he verbally expressed his intention with the phrase: For uncircumcised people, but did not have a chance to say: For circumcised people, before the slaughter was already finished as he was saying: For uncircumcised people. And it is with regard to this point that they disagree: Rabbi Meir, who is Akherim, holds that we do not require that one’s mouth and heart be the same; what is legally significant is his verbal expression. Since he said: For uncircumcised people, he has disqualified the offering. And the Rabbis hold that we require that his mouth and heart be the same. Since he wanted to express his intent for both circumcised and uncircumcised people, he has not disqualified the offering.
The Gemara expresses surprise: But does Rabbi Meir hold that we require that his mouth and heart be the same? The Gemara raises a contradiction based on a mishna in tractate Terumot that states: With regard to one who intended to say that the produce he has designated should be teruma, but he mistakenly said the word tithe; or he intended to say tithe but mistakenly said teruma; or he intended to vow: I will not enter this house, but mistakenly said: That house, i.e., he mistakenly referred to a different house; or he intended to vow: I will not derive benefit from this person, but he said: From that person, i.e., he mistakenly referred to someone else; he has not said anything until his mouth and heart are the same. This is an unattributed mishna, and unattributed mishnayot are presumed to be authored by Rabbi Meir.“ (Sefaria.org translation)
God commands that when the ark is constructed it should be overlaid with gold both on the inside and on the outside. (Exodus 25:11) The need to cover the outside of the Ark with gold is understandable: The centerpiece of the Mishkan should certainly be majestic and regal. But what need is there to cover the wood on the inside of the box as well? “The verse states concerning the Ark: “From within and from without you shall cover it” (Exodus 25:11). Rava said: This alludes to the idea that any Torah scholar whose inside is not like his outside, i.e., whose outward expression of righteousness is insincere, is not to be considered a Torah scholar.” (TB Yoma 72b, Sefaria.org translation) The Talmud explains that we should not be a hypocrite.
Which brings me back to Eddie Haskell. His character was a negative role model. When speaking to Beaver and Wally’s parents, he sounded like a perfect angel. But his actions always got him in trouble. His words and his heart were not the same. He is someone we definitely should not follow. Of course, Rabbi Meir holds that the person’s mouth and heart needs to be the same.
No comments:
Post a Comment