What a difference are some ultra-Orthodox Jews from Abba Shaul ben Botnit (and not in a good way) TB Beitzah 29

There is a tension between what is permitted on the Festival in order to increase joy and what is forbidden to retain its special sanctity by not treating it as a weekday. Generally speaking what is impossible to do before the holiday when it comes to preparing food is permitted on the Festival. Whatever preparation is possible to be done before the onset of the holiday and is not prepared, may not be done on Yom Tov. TB daf TB Beitzah 29 provides us with worthy role models of truly religious and observant Jews.

“The mishna recounted an incident involving Abba Shaul ben Botnit, a Sage who was also a grocer, who would fill his measures on the eve of a Festival and give them to his customers on the Festival. A tanna taught in a baraita: He would do this even on the intermediate days of a Festival, in order to prevent dereliction of Torah study in the study hall. Since he wanted to spend most of his day in the study hall and not have to interrupt his study to carry out measurements, he would measure for his customers at night, when it was not a time of study.

“The Sages taught in a baraita: Abba Shaul ben Botnit collected three hundred earthenware jugs of wine, to which he thought he was not entitled due to the clarity of the measures, as he thought that he had unfairly profited from the foam at the top of the liquid he measured. And his colleagues, similarly God-fearing grocers, collected three hundred earthenware jugs of oil, which they thought were not rightly theirs due to the draining of the measures; they were concerned that because they had measured for their customers using their own vessels, they might not have drained the entire measure from their containers into the customers’ vessels. And they brought these jugs of wine and oil to Jerusalem before the Temple treasurers, as they did not want to benefit from possibly stolen goods.

“The treasurers said to them: You need not do this, as all buyers take into account the foam and what is left in the sellers’ vessels and pay with this in mind. They said to them: Just like the buyers give up their claim to it, we too do not wish to benefit from this, even if strictly speaking it is not considered stolen property.

“The treasurers said to them: Since you are so stringent with yourselves, use the wine and oil for communal needs. As it is taught in a baraita: If one stole and does not know from whom he stole, he should use the stolen items for communal needs, thereby repaying all of the Jewish people. The Gemara asks: What are communal needs? Rav Ḥisda said: He should finance the digging of cisterns, ditches, and caves, for storing water for travelers.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Unfortunately we have too many cases of Jews who would do well to follow the example of those God-fearing people mentioned in today’s daf. I remember reading in the Jewish Week and expose of ultra-Orthodox yeshivot receiving millions of dollars of grant money earmarked for Internet and other telecommunications technology, but not one penny was used for those purposes! Not only did they cheat their students out of necessary skills needed for the modern world, the schools stole money from the government. This fraud is a real desecration of God’s name, a Hillul Hashem! To read the full article follow this link: withhttps://jewishweek.timesofisrael.com/part-i-haredi-schools-reap-millions-in-federal-tech-funds/

 

When to reprove someone and when not to TB Beitzah 30

Although the Torah commands us to reprove the behavior of others as it is written “Reprove your kinsman but incur no guilt because of him. (Lev. 19:17),” we have to recognize that reproving is not as easy as it sounds. Rabbi Zelig Pliskin writes in his book Love Your Neighbor “It must be kept in mind that the goal of rebuke is to correct the wrong door. Therefore, a person must weigh each situation very carefully to see what will be the most effective method in that particular instance. It is especially important to exercise caution and tact… Tactless reprove can ruin the chances of influencing such a person. Very often a person should not reprove someone immediately, but should wait for an opportune moment. This takes much skill and practice, as well as patience. It is a good idea for person to consult more experienced people to find out which methods are most effective. As a rule, if someone admonishes is harsh, stern manner and with the comment such as ‘Why did you do this?’ or ‘What is the matter with you?’ it will not prove effective.” (Page 279)

Today’s daf TB Beitzah 30 goes one step further. If you know that the person will not listen to you at all, then it is better not to say anything so that he would transgress unwittingly as opposed to intentionally.

“Rava bar Rav Ḥanin said to Abaye: We learned in a mishna: The Rabbis decreed that one may not clap, nor strike a hand on his thigh, nor dance on a Festival, lest he come to repair musical instruments. But nowadays we see that women do so, and yet we do not say anything to them.

He said to him: And according to your reasoning, how do you explain that which Rava said: A person should not sit at the entrance to an alleyway, next to the side post that has been placed at the edge of an alleyway in order for it to be considered a private domain, as perhaps an object will roll away from him and he will come to carry it four cubits in the public domain, thereby transgressing a biblical prohibition? But don’t these women take their jugs, and go, and sit at the entrance to an alleyway, and we do not say anything to them?

Rather, the accepted principle is: Leave the Jews alone; it is better that they be unwitting sinners and not be intentional sinners. If people engage in a certain behavior that cannot be corrected, it is better not to reprove them, as they are likely to continue regardless of the reproof, and then they will be sinning intentionally. It is therefore preferable for them to be unaware that they are violating a prohibition and remain merely unwitting sinners. Here, too, with regard to clapping and dancing, leave the Jews alone; it is better that they be unwitting sinners and not be intentional sinners.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Just yesterday we celebrated Simkhat Torah and I am willing to bet the every Jew who attended services clapped his or her hands and those who are able danced. How could all these observant Jews violate the observance of the Festival according to a Mishna?! Tosefot ד"ה אֵין מְטַפְּחִין וְאֵין מְסַפְּקִין gives a completely different reason why this prohibition is no longer in effect. They quote Rashi’s explanation why originally clapping hands and dancing were forbidden. The rabbis were afraid that people would play instruments on Yom Tov to enhance the festivity and if the instrument would break, the owner would fix it. Fixing anything on Shabbat and on a Festival is a forbidden category work; consequently, they enacted an ordinance against clapping and dancing to prevent a more serious violation. Tosefot says that we are no longer experts in fixing broken musical instruments; consequently, we would not even try to fix them. This rabbinic ordinance is no longer applicable. Clapping and dancing are now permitted.

This is just another example how the rabbis in the past were not afraid to assert their authority and make changes in Jewish law as they deemed fit. Halakha has never been static and unchanging.

 

Don't trust second hand testimony TB Beitzah 27

The Case: "§ The Gemara returns to the issue of permitting firstborn animals. Rabbi Yehuda Nesia had a firstborn animal that acquired a blemish on a Festival, and he wished to serve it to priests staying at his house. He sent it to be presented before Rabbi Ami for examination, and Rabbi Ami thought that he should not examine it, in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon. Rabbi Zerika said to him, and some say it was Rabbi Yirmeya: The principle is that in cases of dispute between Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who in this case permits examination of the firstborn. Rabbi Yehuda Nesia then sent the firstborn to be presented before Rabbi Yitzḥak Nappaḥa, who likewise thought that he should not examine it. Rabbi Yirmeya said to him, and some say it was Rabbi Zerika: The principle is that in cases where Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon disagree, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda.

"Rabbi Abba said to Rabbi Yirmeya: What is the reason that you did not allow the Sages to act in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon? He said to him: And you, what do you have? Do you have a tradition that the halakha is in accordance with” the opinion of Rabbi Shimon? Rabbi Abba said to him that Rabbi Zeira said as follows: The halakha in this case is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon.

“The Gemara relates that a certain unidentified person in Babylonia said: May it be His will that I merit to go up there to Eretz Yisrael, and that I learn this teaching from the mouth of its Master; I will ask Rabbi Zeira himself for his opinion on this matter. When he went up there to Eretz Yisrael, he found Rabbi Zeira and said to him: Did the Master say that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon? Rabbi Zeira said to him: No, that is not what I said; rather, I said: It stands to reason that this is so. It is reasonable to rule in accordance with Rabbi Shimon on this issue, although I do not have a definitive tradition to this effect.” (Sefaria.org translation)

I don't know about you, but I have regrettably reposted false information on Facebook without checking to see whether it was true or not. I know I am not alone. With so much misinformation, lies, and conspiracy theories circulating, we have to be very careful about what we post and repost. We need to do the legwork like that unidentified Babylonian who did not rely on secondhand information, but went to the source itself to ascertain the truth. Here is a good article to help you ascertain whether you are reading fake news or not.

https://www.factcheck.org/2016/11/how-to-spot-fake-news/

Rashi’s problem with the mishnah TB Beitzah 26

 To appreciate the Mishnah beginning at the very bottom of TB Beitzah 25b and continues on TB Beitzah 26, let me introduce some laws concerning the bekhor (בְּכוֹר ) a male firstborn of cattle, sheep, or goats. The bekhor is one of the 24 gifts given to the priests, kohanim.  The bekhor is sanctified at birth. The owner gives the bekhor to a priest and the priests offers it as a shelamim, peace offering. After he offers those require parts on the altar, the rest belongs to him. If the bekhor has a permanent blemish (מוּם קָבוּעַ), it cannot be offered up on the altar. In this case, the priest lets it graze until it becomes blemished. He may not actively nor passively allow the animal to become blemished as we see the proof text on BT Beitzah 27b. “The Gemara comments: And from where do you say that causing a blemish to an offering is prohibited? As it is taught in a baraita: It is written with regard to offerings: “There must not be any blemish in it” (Leviticus 22:21). I have only an explicit prohibition that it may not have a blemish; from where is it derived that one may not cause a blemish to it by means of something else, e.g., that he does not bring dough or a dried fig and place it on its ear so that a dog will come and take it, thereby biting off part of the animal’s ear and leaving it blemished? Therefore the verse states “any blemish.” It says “blemish” and it says “any blemish”; the word “any” comes to teach that one may not cause a blemish.” (Sefaria.org translation) Once the bekhor has a disqualifying blemish and the priests redeems it, the priest may slaughter it and eat it as non-sacred meat.

Mishnah “If a firstborn animal fell into a cistern on a Festival, and there is concern that it might die there, Rabbi Yehuda says: An expert in these matters goes down into the cistern and examines the animal.

If it has a permanent blemish, owing to which it may be slaughtered and eaten, he may raise it from the cistern and slaughter it; but if it does not have a blemish, or if its blemish is temporary, he may not slaughter it. Rabbi Shimon says: Even if it has a blemish, it is prohibited to slaughter it, as any firstborn animal whose blemish is not perceptible while it is still day, i.e., on the day before the Festival, is not considered to be among the animals prepared prior to the Festival for use on the Festival.” (Sefaria.org translation)

A major topic discussed in massekhet Beitzah is the concept of muktseh. Muktseh is essentially a restriction on objects that were not “prepared” before the Sabbath. The absence of preparedness in this sense means that when Shabbat began, the vast majority of people would not have expected to use this particular item or substance on Shabbat. Because all throughout the rest of the Talmud Rabbi Yehuda has a more limited definition of what qualifies as muktseh and Rabbi Shimon has a more expansive definition of what qualifies as muktseh, Rashi has a problem. If the Mishnah is discussing whether the fallen bekhor in the cistern is or isn’t muktseh, we would expect that Rabbi Yehuda would hold the strict position and forbid this unfortunate animal and Rabbi Shimon would permit it. Rashi’s problem is the Mishnah presents Rabbi Yehuda’s position as the lenient one and Rabbi Shimon’s position as the strict one.

Consequently, Rashi is forced to interpret the Mishnah’s case that goes against a simple reading of the text and has nothing to do with muktseh. Rashi explains that Rabbi Yehuda holds that muktseh is not applicable because the priest always had this animal in mind for some permitted use before the onset of the Festival. The only thing that has changed is the animal fell in a pit. Rashi explains that Rabbi Shimon forbids this animal because the person is either changing the status of the animal for the better (תיקון) which is prohibited on Shabbat or one is forbidden to adjudicate the status of the animal on Shabbat.

This is admittedly a difficult interpretation because the Mishnah.

 

Could this be the real reason God gave the Torah to Israel? TB Beitzah 25

Thanks to Rami bar Abba, the second half of today's daf TB Beitzah goes on a tangent about appropriate etiquette according to the rabbis. "Rami bar Abba said: The mitzva of flaying and cutting the animal into pieces is mentioned in the Torah with regard to the burnt-offering, and the same is true for butchers. That is to say, we learn from the halakhot of the burnt offering that a butcher should first remove the hide and cut the animal into pieces. From here the Torah taught proper etiquette, that a person should not eat meat before flaying and cutting the animal into pieces." (Sefaria.org translation) 

"The Sages teach proper manners unconnected to any prohibition, as it is taught in a baraita: A person should not eat garlic or onions from the side of its head, i.e., its roots, but rather from the side of its leaves. And if he did eat in that manner, he gives the appearance of being a glutton. Similarly, a person should not drink his cup of wine all at once, and if he did drink in this manner, he gives the appearance of being a greedy drinker. The Sages taught in this regard: One who drinks his cup all at once is a greedy drinker; if he does so in two swallows, this is proper etiquette; in three swallows, he is of haughty spirit, as he presents himself as overly delicate and refined." (Sefaria.org translation) 

You might think God gave the Torah to Israel as a reward for our righteous behavior. Rabbi Meir taught just the opposite. We needed the Torah and commandments in order to curb our natural unethical behavior. "The Gemara considers another aspect of the character of the Jewish people. It is taught in a baraita in the name of Rabbi Meir: For what reason was the Torah given to the Jewish people? It is because they are impudent, and Torah study will weaken and humble them. A Sage of the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught the following with regard to the verse: “From His right hand went a fiery law for them” (Deuteronomy 33:2); The Holy One, Blessed be He, said: Based on their nature and character, these people, the Jews, are fit to be given a fiery law, a hard and scorching faith. Some say a different version of this baraita: The ways and nature of these people, the Jews, are like fire, as, were it not for the fact that the Torah was given to the Jewish people, whose study and observance restrains them, no nation or tongue could withstand them.

"And this is the same as what Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish said: There are three impudent ones: The Jewish people among the nations; the dog among animals; and the rooster among birds. And some say: Also the goat among small cattle. And some say: Also the caper bush among trees." (Sefaia.org translation)

As you can see, one of the major purposes of the commandments is to refine and perfect our human nature. I like to believe that through our study of Torah and the observance of the mitzvot throughout the millennia, we have succeeded in becoming the ethical people that God has envisioned for us.

For more on this reason and other rabbinic reasons for the mitzvot you can file this link for a short essay. https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/rabbinic-reasons-for-the-mitzvot/ 

The Rosh’s vs Rambam’s understanding of Rashi

With daf TB Beitzah 23b we begin the third chapter of our massekhet. We have previously learned that the 39 different categories of work are prohibited on the Festival as well as on Shabbat with one major difference. Food preparation (אוכל נפש) is permitted on Yom Tov and forbidden on Shabbat. Nevertheless, the two mishnayot on our daf TB Beitzah 24 teaches us that not all food preparation is permitted because trapping animals on the Festival is forbidden. “One may not trap fish from their ponds on a Festival even with the intention of eating them, as this falls into the category of hunting, a type of labor that is not permitted on a Festival.” and “If traps for animals, birds, and fish were set on the eve of a Festival, one may not take anything from them on the Festival, unless he knows that the animals found in the traps had already been caught on the eve of the Festival.” (Sefaria.org translation) Obviously the traps under discussion are nets because if the trap purposefully or inadvertently kills the animal, the animal is not kosher and can’t be eaten because it wasn’t slaughtered according to Jewish law.

Rashi explains why trapping is forbidden on Yom Tov, but slaughtering animal, cooking the animal, and baking is permitted. He writes: “Even though slaughtering, baking, and cooking, are major categories of forbidden work (אבות מלאכות), they are permitted for the Festival needs. The reason is because it is impossible (אי אפשר) to do them on the eve of the Festival. When it comes to slaughtering (the animal on the day before the Festival-gg), there is the fear that the meat will be heated by the sun and begin to stink. (Remember, refrigeration did not exist. gg) However concerning trapping, it is possible (אפשר) to trap the fish the day before the Festival and put it in a trap submerged in water. The fish won’t die and tomorrow you may take it.” (My translation-gg)

The Rosh teaches that trapping animals on the festival is forbidden according to the Torah (אסור דאורייתא) based on Rashi’s use of the terms possible and impossible. Although Rambam agrees with Rashi’s explanation, he comes to the conclusion that trapping is only forbidden according to the sages (אסור דרבנן).

“The Sages prohibited any work on a holiday —even though it is for the sake of eating—if it can be done on the day preceding the holiday without a loss or a lack to it. And why did they forbid this thing? [As a] decree, lest one postpone the performance of work that it is possible to do from the eve of the holiday until the holiday; and it would [then] come out that the whole holiday would be spent in performing this work—so he would be prevented from enjoyment of the holiday, and he would have no free time to eat.” (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Yom Tov 1:5) Anybody who has ever gone fishing knows there’s no guarantee no matter how long the fisherman spends fishing that he will be successful. He could spend all day and catch nothing. Consequently, to ensure that he have the time to enjoy the holiday, he must trap the fish or the animal the day before the Festival.

With this interpretation we see that the sages drew a line in the sand declaring that trapping is out of bounds because it would take up so much time he would be prevented from enjoying the holiday. 

Three short observations TB Beitzah 21, 22, and 23

Combining the dappim I studied on the first two days of Sukkot with today’s daf TB Beitzah 23, we finished the second chapter of our massekhet. I like to share three short observations, one per daf. 

TB Beitzah 21 Look, Haley's Comet!"

I think the following story has an ancient form of “Look, there’s Haley’s Comet!” “Rav Avya the Elder raised the following dilemma before Rav Huna: If an animal is owned in partnership, half of it belonging to a gentile and half of it to a Jew, what is the halakha with regard to slaughtering it on a Festival? Rav Huna said to him: It is permitted. Rav Avya said to him: And what is the difference between this case and that of vow-offerings and gift-offerings? Vow-offerings and gift-offerings are similar to jointly owned animals, as part of the animal is sacrificed upon the altar while the other part is eaten by the owner and the priest. Why, then, is it not similarly permitted to slaughter them on a Festival? Seeking to distract Rav Avya so that he need not answer his question, Rav Huna said to him: Look, a raven flies in the sky (עוֹרְבָא פָּרַח).

“When Rav Avya left, Rabba, son of Rav Huna, said to his father: Was this not Rav Avya the Elder, whom Master would recommend to us, saying that he is a great man? If so, why did you treat him in that manner and evade his question? Rav Huna said to him: What should I have done for him? Today I am in a state best described by the verse: “Let me lean against the stout trunks; let me couch among the apple trees” (Song of Songs 2:5), meaning I am worn out and exhausted from all the communal responsibility that has fallen upon me, and he asked me about something that requires reasoning and careful examination, and therefore I could not provide an immediate answer.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Rashi explains the expression “Look, a raven flies in the sky” that a real raven actually flew overhead and Rav Huna wanted to distract the conversation concerning the question and hint that he did not want to answer it immediately. According to the Geonim, this was a common expression when a person says something that was completely off the topic. People would say, “Look, a raven flies in the sky.”

TB Beitzah 22 "Everybody"

Burning incense on the Festival was one of the three things that Rabban Gamliel permitted and the sages forbad. Based on the ensuing discussion the Gemara emends Rav Asi’s original statement. “Rather, the Gemara retracts its previous statement and says that if this was stated, it was stated as follows: Rav Asi said that the dispute with regard to incense applies only to a case where one burns the incense in order to enjoy the smell. However, if he burns the incense in order to perfume his garments, all agree that it is prohibited.” (Sefaria.org translation) Rashi explains why the principal “Since carrying out was permitted on a Festival for the purpose of food preparation, it was also permitted not for that purpose (מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁהוּתְּרָה שְׁחִיטָה לְצוֹרֶךְ הוּתְּרָה נָמֵי שֶׁלֹּא לְצוֹרֶךְ.)” doesn’t apply to perfuming one’s garments. For this rule to apply it has to apply equally to everybody and not just for some. Since only extremely sensitive people perfume their garments and this is not a common practice amongst everybody, the rule does not apply. Consequently, the rabbis forbid it.

TB Beitzah 23 "Some things never change"

Now that Rosh Hashanah is behind us, Passover is only six months away. Today’s daf TB Beitzah talks about another thing (this time concerning Passover) Rabban Gamliel permitted and sages forbad. “And one may prepare a whole kid (גְּדִי מְקוּלָּס) goat, meaning a kid goat roasted whole, with its entrails over its head, on the night of Passover, as was the custom when they roasted the Paschal lamb in the Temple.” (Sefaria.org translation) Rabban Gamliel lived after the destruction of the Temple by the Romans in the year 70 CE. Many customs were created to remember the Temple service and Rabban Gamliel believed that roasting a whole goat was an appropriate way to remember how the Jewish people observed Passover when the Temple stood. The rabbis disagreed with him for fear that people will draw the conclusion that you could offer up sacrifices even when the Temple no longer is in existence. The Gemara repeats of a story found in massekhet Pesakhim daf 53a.

“It is taught in a baraita in this regard that Rabbi Yosei says: Theodosius [Todos] of Rome, leader of the Jewish community there, instituted the custom for the Roman Jews to eat whole kids on the night of Passover, in commemoration of the practice followed in the Temple. The Sages sent a message to him: Were you not Theodosius, an important person, we would have decreed ostracism upon you, as you are feeding the Jewish people consecrated food, which may be eaten only in and around the Temple itself, outside the Temple.

“The Gemara expresses surprise: Can it enter your mind that the Sages really meant that Theodosius was feeding the Jewish people consecrated food outside the Temple? These goats are certainly not consecrated animals. Rather, say that he was feeding the Jewish people something similar to consecrated food, which people might mistake for a Paschal offering.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Amoraim are divided in their opinion who was this Theodosius. Some hold that he was a Sage and others say that he was a powerful connected Jew in Rome. The Gemara does cite aggadah in his name. According to the Talmud Yerushalmi he used to send money to support the sages in the land of Israel. Being well-connected and an important donor not only has its privileges today, but also all throughout history as the story Theodosius proves.

Bava ben Buta, a man of integrity TB Beitzah 20

Per instruction of the Torah, all personal sacrifices require the owner of the sacrifice to lay his hands on the head of the animal and press down hard. In Hebrew this is called semikha-סְמִיכָה. On a Festival a person brings three different sacrifices, a burnt-offering for appearing in the Temple (olah re-eyah-עולה ראיה), a holiday shelamim (hagigah-חגיגה), and apeace offerings to increase joy (shalmay simkha -שלמי שמחה). Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai agree that one is allowed to offer the hagigah and the shalmay simkha and perform the act of semikha on Yom Tov because some parts of the sacrifice are eaten by the priests and the owner of the sacrifice and thus falls under the category of okhel nefesh (אוכל נפש), permission to prepare food on the Festival. They disagree whether one may offer the olah re-eyah on the Festival because it is a complete burnt offering on the altar. Since nobody eats it and it cannot be considered okhel nefesh, Bet Shammai says it may not be offered up on the Festival itself. Beit Hillel disagrees and says that not only may one offer up the olah re-eyah, he may perform semikha on Yom Tov.

Today’s daf TB Beitzah 20 tells an outrageous story about Hillel himself and the students of Shammai concerning the olah re-eyah. “The Sages taught in a baraita: There was an incident involving Hillel the Elder, who brought his burnt-offering to the Temple courtyard in order to place his hands on the animal’s head on a Festival. The students of Shammai the Elder gathered around him and said to him: What is the nature of this animal that you are bringing? Hillel, being humble and meek, did not want to quarrel with them in the Temple and therefore concealed the truth from them for the sake of peace. He said to them: It is a female, and I have brought it as a peace-offering, as burnt-offerings are always male. He swung its tail for them so that they would not be able to properly discern whether the animal was male or female, and they departed.

“On that day, when the incident became known, suggesting that even Hillel had accepted Shammai’s view, Beit Shammai gained the upper hand over Beit Hillel, and they sought to establish the halakha in this regard in accordance with their opinion.” (Sefaria.org translation) Shammai’s students certainly acted with great chutzpah to interrogate and treat Hillel thusly.

But as Paul Harvey would say “Now for the rest of the story.” “But a certain Elder of the disciples of Shammai the Elder was there, and Bava ben Buta was his name, who knew that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel in this matter. And he sent for and brought all the high-quality sheep of Kedar that were in Jerusalem, and he stood them in the Temple courtyard and said: Anyone who wishes to place his hands on the head of an animal should come and place his hands there. And on that day Beit Hillel gained the upper hand over Beit Shammai, and they established the halakha in this case in accordance with their opinion, and there was no one there who disputed the matter in any way.”(Sefaria.org translation)

One should admire Bava ben Buta for his integrity. Bava ben Buta is mentioned several times as one of the importance students of Shammai. He was famous in his generation for his righteousness and for his wisdom. Many stories describe his extraordinary humility and how he cared more for peace than his own honor (כבוד). He was known for his fear of heaven (יראת שמים). From all accounts he was a judge in Jerusalem and famous for his great wisdom not only in Jewish law, but also in secular matters. It is told that when Herod murder many scholars in Israel, he blinded Bava ben Buta but allowed him to live so he may rule with Bava ben Buta’s advice. It is also told that because of Bava ben Buta counsel, Herod refurbished the Temple and made it a magnificent building. Remember we learned that one who had not seen Herod’s Temple has not seen a beautiful building! (TB Sukkah 51b)

Going to the mikvah before and after the Temple’s destruction TB Beitzah 18

The Mishnah on TB Beitzah 17b records a disagreement between Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai concerning immersing utensils and human beings to become ritually ready when the Festival begins immediately after Shabbat. “If a Festival occurs directly after Shabbat, i.e., on a Sunday, and one wishes to behave in a proper manner and purify himself and his vessels in honor of the Festival, Beit Shammai say: One must immerse everything before Shabbat, and Beit Hillel say: Vessels must be immersed before Shabbat, but a person may immerse himself even on Shabbat.” (Sefaria.org translation) Repairing an object (תיקון הכלי), which is one of the 39 forbidden categories of work on Shabbat and Festivals, is the reason why people may not immerse their utensils on the Festival. By immersing the ritually unready (טמא) utensil in the mikvah, the person “repairs” its status by making it ritually ready (טהור).

At the very end of the discussion on TB Beitzah 18 the Gemara quotes a baraita. “All who are obligated in immersions immerse in their usual manner, both on the Ninth of Av (Tisha B’Av) and on Yom Kippur, even though it is prohibited to wash on these days.” (Sefaia.org translation) Tosefot ד"ה כׇּל חַיָּיבֵי טְבִילוֹת טוֹבְלִין כְּדַרְכָּן explains why we do not immerse ourselves in a mikvah on Tisha B’Av and Yom Kippur. When the Temple stood the issue was one of being eligible to offer a sacrifice. One had to be in the state of ritual readiness. Ritual readiness (טהורה) and ritual unreadiness (טומאה) was an everyday occurrence and needed to be addressed even on Tisha B’Av and Yom Kippur since sacrifices were offered up on these days as well. Consequently, people were allowed to go to the mikvah on Tisha b’Av and Yom Kippur.

Today now that the Temple no longer stands, we are all in the state of ritual unreadiness. The only person who needs to go to the mikvah according to tradition is a woman after her menstrual cycle so that the husband and wife may return to have sexual relations. Sex is forbidden on Tisha b’Av and Yom Kippur; consequently, immersion in the mikvah is off the table. There is just no need for an immersion.

What do you say when Shabbat and the Festival coincide TB Beitza 17

Every weekday Amidah, whether it is shakharit (morning), minkha (afternoon), or ma’ariv (evening), follows the same formula. Altogether there are 19 blessings. The first three blessings are praise. The middle 13 blessings are requests. The final three blessings are thanksgiving. The Shabbat or Festival Amidah contains the first and the last set of blessings. The middle 13 are removed and a blessing sanctifying the specific day takes its place. What should we say when Shabbat and the festival coincide since we have a blessing sanctifying Shabbat and a different blessing sanctifying the Festival? That is the discussion between Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai on today’s daf TB Beitza 17.

“The Sages taught the following baraita: In the case of a Festival that occurs on Shabbat, Beit Shammai say: One must recite an Amida prayer that includes eight blessings, inserting two additional blessings between the standard opening three and concluding three. As for the two middle blessings, one recites one for Shabbat as an independent blessing and a second for the Festival as an independent blessing. And Beit Hillel say: One must pray an Amida comprising only seven blessings, i.e., the three opening ones, the three concluding ones, and one in between. One begins the middle blessing with Shabbat and concludes it with Shabbat, and he recites a passage referring to the sanctity of the day of the Festival in the middle. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: He even concludes this blessing with mention of both Shabbat and the Festival, saying: Who sanctifies Shabbat, the Jewish people, and the seasons.

“A tanna taught a baraita before Ravina with a slightly different reading: He concludes the blessing with: Who sanctifies the Jewish people, Shabbat, and the seasons. Ravina said to that tanna: Is that to say that the Jewish people sanctify Shabbat? Isn’t Shabbat already sanctified from the six days of Creation? Every seventh day is automatically Shabbat, without the need for any declaration on the part of the Jewish people. Rather, amend it and say as follows: Who sanctifies Shabbat, the Jewish people, and the seasons (מְקַדֵּשׁ הַשַּׁבָּת, יִשְׂרָאֵל וְהַזְּמַנִּים), as the Jewish people indeed sanctify the New Moon and the Festival days. Rav Yosef said: The halakha with regard to the conclusion of the blessing is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and as the difficulty was resolved by Ravina.” (Sefaria.org translation) When you check your prayer book, you’ll see that the Gemara’s conclusion was accepted as the right formulation of the blessing.

As long as the Gemara was talking about what is the correct procedure when Yom Tov coincides with Shabbat, it continues to discuss what happens when Rosh Hodesh, the new month, coincides with Shabbat.

“The Sages taught the following baraita: In the case of Shabbat that occurs on a New Moon or on one of the intermediate days of a Festival, for the evening, morning, and afternoon prayers, one prays in his usual manner, reciting seven blessings in the Amida, and recites a passage pertaining to the event of the day, i.e.: May there rise and come [יַעֲלֶה וְיָבֹא-ya’aleh veyavo], during the blessing of the Temple service, known as retze; and if he did not recite it, he is required to return to the beginning of the Amida prayer and repeat it. Rabbi Eliezer disagrees and says: This passage is recited during the blessing of thanksgiving, known as modim (just as the prayers for Hanukkah and program are placed-Rashi). And in the additional prayer one begins the fourth blessing, the special blessing for the additional service, with Shabbat, and concludes it with Shabbat, and recites a passage pertaining to the sanctity of the day of the New Moon or the Festival in the middle.  Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel and Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Beroka, disagree and say: Wherever one is required to recite seven blessings, whether in the evening, morning, or afternoon prayers, he begins the fourth blessing with Shabbat and concludes it with Shabbat, and recites a passage referring to the sanctity of the day of the New Moon or the Festival in the middle. Rav Huna said: The halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of that pair of scholars; rather, it is in accordance with the opinion of the first tanna, that in the evening, morning, and afternoon prayers one recites the usual seven blessings and recites a passage pertaining to the event of the day during the blessing of the Temple service.” (Sefaria.org translation)

To place the prayer -ya’aleh veyavo in the section concerning the Temple service because of the special Rosh Hodesh sacrifice that was offered in the Temple just like all the other sacrifices.

  

When you’re livelihood is decided TB Beitza 16

The placement of the massekhtot in the Seder, Order i.e. the general topic of all the tractates, is based on length. The longer massekhtot appear before the shorter ones. That’s why massekhtot Yoma and Sukkah comes before massekhet Rosh Hashana and why our massekhet Beitza that deals with the general laws of festivals comes before massekhet Rosh Hashanah. When we study these massekhtot, they don’t line up with the actual observance of the holiday

Sometimes coincidences are God working his miracles incognito. Yesterday was Yom Kippur and the very first topic covered on TB Beitza 16 concerns Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. I’m really sorry I do not have time to explain how might we moderns understand or disagree with the theological approach of Rav Taḥlifa, brother of Ravnai Ḥoza’a. I hope maybe sometime in the future I can return and fill in more of the details.

“Rav Taḥlifa, brother of Ravnai Ḥoza’a, taught: A person’s entire livelihood is allocated to him during the period from Rosh HaShana to Yom Kippur. During that time, as each individual is judged, it is decreed exactly how much money he will earn for all his expenditures of the coming year, except for expenditures for Shabbatot, and expenditures for Festivals, and expenditures for the school fees of his sons’ Torah study. In these areas, no exact amount is determined at the beginning of the year; rather, if he reduced the amount he spends for these purposes, his income is reduced and he earns that much less money in that year, and if he increased his expenditures in these areas, his income is increased to ensure that he can cover the expense. Therefore, one may borrow for these purposes, since he is guaranteed to have enough income to cover whatever he spends for them.

“Rabbi Abbahu said: What is the verse from which this dictum is derived? The source is: “Blow the shofar at the New Moon, at the concealed time for our Festival day” (Psalms 81:4). On which Festival is the new moon concealed? You must say that it is Rosh HaShana, which occurs on the first of the month, when the moon is not yet visible, while the moon is visible during the other Festivals, which occur in the middle of the month. And it is written in the next verse: “For it is a statute [ḥok] for Israel, a judgment of the God of Jacob” (Psalms 81:5).

“The Gemara explains: From where may it be inferred that this word “statute [ḥok]” is a term relating to food? As it is written: “And they ate their allotment [ḥukkam], which Pharaoh gave them” (Genesis 47:22). Mar Zutra said: One can learn that ḥok is referring to food from here: “Feed me with my allotted [ḥukki] bread” (Proverbs 30:8).” (Sefaria.org translation)

The immediate next sugiyah is a classic discussion about Shabbat; consequently, I’m going to share with you without commentary as well.

“It is taught in a baraita: They said about Shammai the Elder that all his days he would eat in honor of Shabbat. How so? If he found a choice animal, he would say: This is for Shabbat. If he subsequently found another one choicer than it, he would set aside the second for Shabbat and eat the first. He would eat the first to leave the better-quality animal for Shabbat, which continually rendered his eating an act of honoring Shabbat.

“However, Hillel the Elder had a different trait, that all his actions, including those on a weekday, were for the sake of Heaven, as it is stated: ‘Blessed be the Lord, day by day; He bears our burden, our God who is our salvation; Selah’ (Psalms 68:20), meaning that God gives a blessing for each and every day. That is also taught in a baraita in more general terms: Beit Shammai say: From the first day of the week, Sunday, start preparing already for your Shabbat. And Beit Hillel say: ‘Blessed be the Lord, day by day.’”

Now that Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur are behind us, I hope you have a wonderful Shabbat with delicious meals in honor of this holy day.

Eiruv tavshilin-cooking on the Festival for Shabbat TB Beitzah 15

 Today we finished the first chapter of our massekhet and began the second chapter. Eiruv tavshilin (עֶרב תַּבְשִׁילִן) is the first major topic under discussion. The rabbis forbad cooking on the Festival for Shabbat unless you make an eiruv tavshilin. Our chapter describes the mechanism while back on TB Pesakhim 46 presents two different rationales for it. The first understanding believes that one is not permitted to cook on the Festival for Shabbat just like one is forbidden to cook on the Festival for the weekday. Nevertheless, the principle of ho-il (הוֹאִיל-since) provides the solution. Since guests may come late in the day on the Festival, you may cook for this contingency even if guests never show up and use the “leftover” food for Shabbat meals. The second understanding holds that the Festival and Shabbat are considered one long sanctity (קְדוּשַׁה אָחַת); consequently, there’s no problem cooking from one day for the next.

The Mishnah on TB Beitzah 15 begins to describe what constitutes an eiruv tavshilin. “With regard to a Festival that occurs on Shabbat eve, one may not cook on the Festival with the initial intent to cook for Shabbat. However, he may cook on that day for the Festival itself, and if he left over any food, he left it over for Shabbat. The early Sages also instituted an ordinance: The joining of cooked foods [eiruv tavshilin], which the mishna explains. One may prepare a cooked dish designated for Shabbat on a Festival eve and rely on it to cook on the Festival for Shabbat.

“The tanna’im disagreed with regard to the details of this ordinance: Beit Shammai say: For the purpose of the joining of cooked foods one must prepare two cooked dishes, and Beit Hillel say: One dish is sufficient. And they both agree with regard to a fish and the egg that is fried on it that these are considered two dishes for this purpose.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The Gemara asks what verse in the Torah inspired such a rabbinic injunction. Shmuel and Rav Ashi derived from two different sources.

“The Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived? What is the source of the halakha of the joining of cooked foods and of the halakha that one who failed to prepare such an eiruv may not cook on a Festival for Shabbat? Shmuel said that the source is as the verse states: “Remember the Shabbat day, to keep it holy” (Exodus 20:8); from which he infers: Remember it and safeguard it from another day that comes to make it forgotten. When a Festival occurs on Friday, preoccupation with the Festival and the preparation and enjoyment of its meals could lead one to overlook Shabbat. Therefore, the Sages instituted an ordinance to ensure that Shabbat will be remembered even then.

“The Gemara asks: What is the reason that the Sages instituted this ordinance in particular to ensure that Shabbat would not be overlooked? Rava said: The Sages did so in deference to Shabbat, and they instituted an eiruv so that one will select a choice portion for Shabbat and a choice portion for the Festival. If one fails to prepare a dish specifically for Shabbat before the Festival, it could lead to failure to show the appropriate deference to Shabbat.

Rav Ashi stated a different reason: The Sages did so in deference to the Festival, so that people will say: One may not bake on a Festival for Shabbat unless he began to bake the day before; all the more so, one may not bake on a Festival for a weekday.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The eiruv tavshilin serves as a reminder that Shabbat should not be lost and forgotten about in the midst of celebrating the Festival or as a reminder not to treat the Festival lightly and bake on it for a weekday.

Two qualifications so we can better enjoy Yom Tov TB Beitah 14

We have learned already that the only difference between the observance of Shabbat and the Festival is okhel nefesh-אוֹכֵל נֶפֶשׁ. One is allowed to cook on Yom Tov. Today’s daf TB Beitzah 14 qualifies some of the preparations.

The first qualification is we don’t want the Festival become just like every other ordinary day (עוּבְדָא דחוֹל) because of our preparations. The first Mishnah on our daf discusses the differences between preparing spices and salt on Yom Tov.

“Beit Shammai say: Spices may be pounded on a Festival in a slightly unusual manner, with a wooden pestle, and salt may be pounded only with an earthenware flask or with a wooden pot ladle, in a manner very different from that of a weekday. And Beit Hillel say: Spices may be pounded in their usual manner, even with a stone pestle, and as for salt, although it must be pounded in an irregular manner, a slight modification such as pounding it with a wooden pestle is enough to render the act permitted.” “Sefaria.org translation)

The Gemara explains the different attitude between spices and salt. “In any event, everyone, both Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel, agrees that the pounding of salt requires a change; it may not be performed in the regular weekday manner. What is the reason for this? Rav Huna and Rav Ḥisda disputed this issue. One of them said: Everyone knows that all dishes require salt, and therefore one should prepare salt the day before the Festival. Since he failed to do so, this task may be performed on the Festival only in an unusual manner. But not all dishes require spices, and therefore it is possible that on the day prior to the Festival, one was not aware that he would require spices on the Festival. And the other one said a different reason: All spices lose their flavor and cannot be prepared ahead of time, and salt does not lose its flavor, which means one could have prepared it the day before. Since he neglected to do so, he may prepare salt on the Festival only in an unusual manner.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Later in the Gemara Shmuel teaches a far-reaching leniency by sharing a baraita in which Beit Hillel permits the pounding of salt in the ordinary way no matter whether the person pounds a small amount or a large amount of salt. Rav Aḥa modifies Shmuel’s leniency. “Rav Aḥa Bardela said to his son: When you pound salt, tilt it a little to the side and then pound, so that it will at least be performed in a slightly different manner on a Festival.” (Sefaria.org translation) To fully enjoy Yom Tov, we need to prepare in advance. If we grind salt on the Festival because of our lack of preparation, we are treating it just like every other day. The halakha follows Beit Hillel with Rav Aha’s modification (Shulkhan Arukh, Orekh Hayim, 504:1).

The second qualification is extra exertion. The holiday is made for enjoyment. If we have to exert ourselves a lot, our joy will decrease as demonstrated with the next example.

“Rabban Gamliel said: In what case is this statement said? Under what circumstances did Beit Hillel permit the removal of the refuse (separating the edible and inedible portions of the legumes under discussion-gg) in the weekday manner of selecting? In a case where the quantity of the food is greater than the quantity of the refuse. However, if the quantity of refuse is greater than the quantity of food, everyone agrees that one must remove the food and leave the refuse.

“The Gemara asks: If the quantity of refuse is greater than the quantity of food, is there an opinion that permits it? Since the smaller amount of food is nullified by the refuse, the entire mixture is considered muktze and may not be moved. The Gemara answers: No, it is necessary to state this halakha in a case where the removal of the refuse is greater in terms of effort, and yet it is smaller in size. In other words, there is actually more food than refuse, but since greater effort (טִרְחָה יְתֵרָה) is required to remove the refuse, it is preferable to remove the food.” (Sefaria.org translation).