Talking Talmud

On bloodletting - as a healing practice - and how the practice would dictate restrictions to one's diet for a time. Also, precautions that a Jew must take in a non-Jew's barber shop (or salon), beginning with watching the barber in the mirror. Including the question of how the mirror helps in a private domain. Plus, a story that illustrates the danger of a haircut in a private domain. Also, a new mishnah! With a list of the items from non-Jews that Jews are not permitted to use, from wine to Hadrianic earthenware to fish stew to cheese that is produced in a setting of idolatry (the Gemara explains these details later, of course).

More on healing -- when the healer is an idolater or when the healing is done on Shabbat. With a focus on vinegar and its healing properties and when it is not permitted even for sipping on Shabbat. Also, a focus on a specific treatment of "raising one's ears" on Shabbat - a physical adjustment, which is permitted on Shabbat. Plus, stories of healing on Shabbat with actual medicine too.

Circumcision that wasn't done for the sake of the mitzvah (or for God) was considered invalid. Of course, whether one needs that degree of intent is up for debate. Note also that non-Jew who happens to be circumcised isn't fulfilling the mitzvah of brit milah. Also, a new mishnah: medical or other health treatments by professionals who are non-Jews are largely prohibited, except for when they can sidestep those regulation -- but noting Rabbi Meir's harsher views in general regarding non-Jews, perhaps because of his lived experience. Note the distinction between monetary and personal treatments. Plus, the concern of Jew going to a non-Jewish barber in a private domain. Likewise, what happens when a Jew has business or medical dealings with a heretic - which is harshly cautioned against?

A Jewish woman shouldn't deliver the child of a non-Jewish (pagan) woman, but the reverse is permitted. Plus, the question of being a wet nurse. Or what about being hired for these roles? Plus, some perspective on the negativity toward non-Jews. Also, a shift in focus to renegade or heretical Jews.

On cows singing... and the sun standing still (how long is a key discussion), among other miracles from the Bible. Plus, the story of Nakdimon. Also, working off the mishnah, on seclusion - a Jewish woman is not allowed to seclude herself with a non-Jew. Nor should a Jewish man seclude himself with a non-Jew, with all kinds of complicated thinking regarding what happens if men met while traveling, and so on (to the extent of one's sword side, etc.).

More on the red heifer... and bestiality. Also, the purchase of precious stones Dama ben Netinah, an apparent idolater. Which seems to have been acceptable when it shouldn't have been. And then he is honored by having a red heifer to sell too. Also, the question of viability of animals bought from non-Jews for the sake of offerings. Plus, the question of the role of biblical figures, including Yitro, in providing offerings to the Children of Israel, after Egypt, and also later.

More on the very difficult topic of bestiality. Beginning with the question of birds. Also, a study of the statuses of "lechathilah" and "bediavad" -- when someone acts in an ideal way or after the fact. With key implications for the assumptions that are made under these different statuses (for example, under what conditions one might make an assumption that rape took place or not). Also, the red heifer - with concerns about the possibility of a sodomized cow. With parallels to the sin-offering, and the role or concern of blemishes.

A story about an idolater who works for a Jew -- and works on Shabbat, when the Jew cannot. Was that allowed? It depends on whether that was their original agreement. And the comparable question regarding a tree where the fruit is orlah. Plus, moving on to chapter 2, with a new mishnah - on the measure of negative relationships between Jews and non-Jews, where the Jews are not permitted to stable their animals at the inns of non-Jews/idolaters, because of the concern of bestiality. Note the focus on pagans/idolaters, not non-Jews pere se. Also, a tosefta contradicts the mishnah, in not being concerned about bestiality or even idolatry per se. Plus, the claim that bestiality would make female animals barren, and male animals weak. Plus, a widow cannot have a dog as a pet.

A new mishnah! A Jew may not rent a house to a non-Jew in the land of Israel, and clearly not a field. In Syria, a Jew may rent a house to the non-Jew, but not the field. And in the Diaspora, a Jew may indeed sell a house to a non-Jew and rent out the fields. (All according to Rabbi Meir). Rabbi Yossi's response is more generous. The Gemara notes that even where one may rent out a house to a non-Jews, there is no permit to do so for purpose of using the space as residential. Plus, the questions that arise (including mezuzah) when a Jew wants to rent to the non-Jew, for example. But for the one who sells in the land of Israel, he would still have puzzlement over what is leftover as a concern of idolatry, for example. Note the extra caution of not selling houses to the Syrians (regardless of the fields). Plus, no bathhouses...

Beginning with a new mishnah that opens on the bottom of daf 19: One may not make jewelry for an object of idolatry -- but you can be hired to do such things, as an artist. Also, note that Jews may not sell that which is attached to the ground to non-Jews. The Gemara will investigate the source of this prohibition - lo techanem - don't do them any mercy - which demands a great deal of investigation, and several possible meanings. But the meaning of the text and the term itself don't quite line up nicely enough - which gives the Gemara more fodder to interpret. Also, a story in the context of this injunction: about Turnus Rufus and Rabbi Akiva, during the Hadrianic Persecutions. The story includes praising the beauty of a woman who worshipped idols, so isn't that an example of a violation of the prohibition - except that we also appreciate the beauty God brings into the world. But men aren't supposed to be gazing on women and contacting on them, regardless of whether they are beautiful.

Avoiding wickedness and wrong-doing: Interpreting the first psalm in the Book of Psalms (Tehilim) - happy is one who does not walk in the counsel of the wicked - as in the generation of the Tower of Babel, or the people of Sodom. Plus, one should learn Torah according to what is a delight -- only that which one's heart desires. Also, if one builds beyond the part that a Jew should build (unto a host section for idolatry), the Jew should still receive his wages -- it's only an accessory to idolatry, not straight up benefit from idol worship. Indeed, under the right terms, the Jew could make the idol itself!

More on Rabbi Hanina ben Teradyon - his trial and interrogation about why he engaged in Torah study. Plus, his daughter who ended up sentenced to a brothel, and why his wife and daughter were punished on account of him. Yet, they all accepted the judgements as deserved, which raises theological questions about reward and punishment. Plus, those who worked alongside Rome and those who defied them, and the difference in their deaths (Rabbi Yossi ben Kismah and Rabbi Haninah ben Teradyon) - including the piety of Rabbi Haninah ben Teradyon, burned with the Torah scroll. With inquiries to him from his daughter, his students, and the Roman executioner. Also, recognition of Beruriah, and her mission for Rabbi Meir to go get her sister out of the brothel. Plus, the question of the "incident with Beruriah."

Jesus! Literally. An appearance in some versions of the Talmud, but not all, as these passages were excised by the Jews -- in this case, as the known teacher of a student who has an encounter with Rabbi Eliezer -- which becomes relevant as he tries to figure out why he suffered arrest for heresy by the Romans. Also, the story of Hanina ben Teradyon (more than a Who's Who) - the passage that recounts what happened to him when he was arrested by the Romans and then killed by them.

Selling horses to idolaters: Because the horse can be used for labor that isn't subject to violation of Jewish law. Also, a new mishnah prohibiting the sale of wild animals that might cause public injury -- with exceptions when the animal wasn't a risk, for whatever reason. Plus, a prohibition against building structures that would house idolatry, though other building may be acceptable.

Another "previous page" mishnah! In a place where they had the practice to sell "small" domesticated animals - sheep and goats - to non-Jews, they were permitted to do so. And in places where they didn't have the practice - they were not allowed to. But large livestock was not permitted in either place. Though some allowed the sale in the event of some damage to the large animals. Plus, the concern of these work-animals working on Shabbat. Also, a Jew cannot keep their own large animals in the stable of a non-Jew's inn, because of concerns of bestiality - an uncomfortable concern to be sure. Also, the question of selling a cow via a broker vs. selling directly (which seems like it should be prohibited). To what extent must the Jew be conscientious about selling things to non-Jews who might use those same things in ways that are objectionable in Judaism (eg - animals that would work the land during a sabbatical year). With many permutations that seem to depend on the seller's clear assumptions about the buyer.

Another mishnah placed on the previous daf: Commercial prohibitions when attempting business with idolaters - but specifically all year long, and not just at the time of their festivals. Among the prohibited items to sell to these non-Jews is a white rooster - though if sold among other roosters, and with a clipped toe (so not perfect for sacrifice), then they may be sold. Plus, the question of selling a damaged white rooster to one who asks for it. Does that mean the non-Jews don't want to make this offering, or are they putting one over on the seller? Also, a much longer, more detailed tractate of Avodah Zarah in Abraham's time (Note: of the 400 chapters mentioned - "400" is generally understood in the Gemara as being the language of exaggeration).

Again, with the relevant mishnah on the previous daf: Buying from shops that are adorned for the non-Jewish pagan holiday was prohibited. Especially when the decorations were scented (eg - roses). Which leads to defining "benefit" - as deriving benefit is what is prohibited, while causing benefit is acceptable, or at least it can be. The concern isn't that of funding idolatry, but the Jew's benefit from idolatry. Plus, those who wore a wreath of roses - an idolatrous practice - received a reduced tax rate, but if you declined, then the extra tax would cover more idolatrous practice. Also, a discussion about not cutting the tendons of a sacred animal because it looks like you're inflicting a blemish on the animal -- but it doesn't just appear like you are; you really are! That prohibition against harming the animal is even - and specifically - in the case of an animal that can't be offered to begin with.

Starting with a new mishnah from the previous daf.... A festival for the non-Jews in the next town can allow for business if the celebration is not right there. Unless heading for the city is the only possible path, in which case, observing the festival seems to be the destination. Plus, there's a lack of concern that the Jews and non-Jews might intermingle their cooking utensils - a rabbinic prohibition, in an case -- for kashrut as a parallel case to the idolatry. Also, a traveler to a place where the festival is taking place - with various concerns about appearing to bow before an idol. Plus, a concern of "danger" - so drinking, for example, directly from the water source is not recommened.

On Onkelos the convert, who is known for translating the Torah, and also for his ability to convert Romans to Judaism, as his "gift of gab" shows on this daf. Also, the particulars of another pagan festival - with several component parts - as an example of the tension between the Jews and non-Jews over their holidays.

More on the festivals of the non-Jews, including, specifically, the coronation of their kings. With specific focus on the coronation of a king born of a king - except that the Romans didn't really function that way. So perhaps it was the king's birthday, not his coronation day? The Gemara attempts to unravel the terms. Also, Antoninus, about whom there are many stories with Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi, a caesar who hated the Jews, and the role of circumcision in defining the Jewish community. The link Yardaena mentions towards the end of the episode: https://thelehrhaus.com/scholarship/cutting-a-peace-the-story-of-ketiah-bar-shalom/

On the idea that the world's entirety is said to last 6,000 words. Also, if you aren't sure which year of the 7 years of the sabbatical cycle is current, the Gemara explains how to do the math to figure it out. Plus, the question of ushering in the messianic era.

A new mishnah! Listing the non-Jewish holidays, by name. Plus, other more local celebrations, based on the locale or a given family's rejoicing. Also, the story of Adam's first year, when the days were increasing in dark before the winter solstice, and his fear that it was a punishment - until the days started getting longer again. Also, with regard to Rome - and an allegiance with Israel for 26 years. Plus, the laws of penalties and R. Yehudah ben Bava's success in keeping those halakhot alive during the Hadrianic persecutions.

Organizing the halakhah from the mishnah, in accord with its various opinions. Including the principle of a single unattributed view that follows a machloket (dispute) - when is that view followed and when discarded? How significant is the order? And how close in terms of proximity do these statements need to be? Perhaps there's no "sequence" to the Mishnah... at least not from tractate to tractate... [Who's Who: Nachum the Mede]. Plus, dill and tithing.

Are the "3 days before the non-Jews' holidays" inclusive of the day of the holiday itself? Or really not? What about Sundays? Other holidays are named explicitly too. Also, what if you did do business with the non-Jews on these days? How temporary must a thing be? How guilty is the one who does this? Plus, Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi, consulting Resh Lakish on what to do with regard to this kind of case.

On sin and the purpose of sin! God allows sin to happen so that future sinners can repent. Consider the story of King David with Batsheva, with the implication that David wouldn't have done the sin were it not for his later repentance. Comparably, the sin of the Golden Calf. When an individual sin, we encourage reflection, repentance, and atonement. A group sin is a little more complicated, but the same principle stands. Plus, the differences between humans and angels, including, or especially, progeny. Plus, the harsh punishments for sin (for example, Rabbi Akiva). Also, a return to halakhah, with the question of why 3 days of not selling to non-Jews before their holidays (why not more or less)?

More on Jews and non-Jews -- how does God anger and how does He mete out punishment? Also, God's indignance during the day, which only Balaam the prophet knew how it was timed. Plus, the donkey gets the better of Balaam when he wants to hide the degree to which he relied on the donkey.

On the special relationship between God and the Jewish people, there's a recognition of the Jews as having kept the Torah -- and criticism by the non-Jews that perhaps the Jews hadn't actually been keeping the Torah. God is willing to testify on their part, but His testimony isn't considered legitimate because of God's bias, as it were, for treating Israel as a son. So God calls the heavens and earth as witnesses -- but they are also considered suspect. Finally, God points to the non-Jewish nations of the world themselves. Plus, a reference back to preparation for Shabbat from Shabbat eve... and the granting of one small mitzvah for the non-Jews, who apparently now want in on God's command. Also, converts to join the Jewish people were not accepted during the time of King David and King Solomon -- when things are so good that the likelihood of sincerity is that much diminished. At least, until they heard of the travails of the Children of Israel... and the war of Gog and Magog. Plus, God's laughter -- rare, hopeful, or limited in some ways? Plus, remembering Jerusalem.

A new tractate! A lot of material that is relevant when Jews live among non-Jews -- without delving into idolatry necessarily per se (though it will come up in the tractate, certainly). A new mishnah: For 3 days before the festivals of non-Jews, Jews are not supposed to do certain things that would make the non-Jews happy, lest they express gratitude to their pagan gods as part of the holiday. Which opens the question of whether a Jew could collect money - which might be painful, but also joyous down the road, for being rid of the debt. Plus, the Gemara delves into the spelling of the word that means their "holidays." Plus, there's no polity without a king -- a monarchy. Also, Rome as the most important of the non-Jewish nations (certainly at that time).

The last daf of the masekhet! And, interestingly enough, a new chapter (8)! With a new mishnah delineating the levels of responsibility for each of the 4 guardians, depending on the potential conflict (and need for an oath) with the original owner. Also, Gemara on the cases of the mishnah, including the disputes about how and when the guardians would take an oath.

Cases from the mishnah - when a customer asks the shopkeeper for X amount of produce. And then they dispute whether the customer every actually paid for the produce. Plus, a similar case with a money-changer and smaller coins for a dinar -- but did the customer hand over the dinar? Both cases are necessary. Also, orphans inheriting debt/payback from... orphans, instead of the original lender/borrower -- that is, pay close attention to who dies in which order.

If one or both parties to litigation are suspect with regard to oaths, they can't take oaths, so they divide the funds and carry on. But Rav Nachman said he didn't know the halakhah in this case - which was surprising, perhaps, but when push came to shove, he did determine this to be the practice too. Also, contradictory witnesses - 2 pairs - which are understand differently by Rav Huna and Rav Hisda.

Rabbi Yehudah's opinion is that a worker could take an oath for an employer (and collect the funds), and the Gemara works to figure out the source for this halakhah. But that kind of dispute can't be about wages... Also, in the name of Rabbi Yehudah - when someone leaves another home with objects concealed beneath his clothes - that's suspect (when he says he bought the items), unless it's actually not suspect for a whole host of potential reasons.

A very long mishnah beginning on the previous daf to open chapter 7 -- about oaths that are rabbinic in nature. Also, some Gemara on the mishnah - that on who takes the oath gets out of paying - with a sourcetext in Exodus 22.

What happens to a loan on collateral if the collateral is lost? A discussion that leads into an application of Rabbi Akiva and Rabbi Eliezer to Shmuel's position - which seems counter-historical in terms of how the Gemara is put together. Also, does the shemitah year cancel the debt that is loaned on collateral? Perhaps that depends on whether it's symbolic or covering the loan.

In the interest of catching up, we're foregoing the description here... (this daf was (is!) for Friday, and we appreciate your cooperation and forbearance at this complicated time)

In the interest of catching up, we're foregoing the description here... (this daf was for Thursday, and we appreciate your cooperation and forbearance at this complicated time)

NOTE: We are still dedicating our study of daf yomi to the speedy and complete recovery of בילא פריידא בת העניא מינא - Baila Freyda bat Henya Minna (with apologies for any mis-transliteration).NOTE: The app we use to record has updated itself and is blocking the recording of some of the Hebrew/reading from the Talmud. We apologize for this and are looking for a solution in the next few days.Biblically mandated oaths vs. rabbinically mandated oaths - which leads into the question whether the defendant can kick it back to the plaintiff. For a deaf-mute, cognitively impaired person, or a minor - they have the protections against theft. But the reversal of oaths remains possible, and flips on its head, when you know an oath-taker is likely to be unreliable in doing so. Also, a mnemonic to help remember the halakhah. Plus, looking to keep those who are expected to swear falsely from swearing at all.

When person A claims that person B owes him 2 things, and person B agrees that he owes part of the claim, but not both parts - which brings us to the claim of "modeh be-miktzat," and the need to take an oath to avoid having to pay back. With variations on the theme in trying to determine the way to put this kind of law into practice. Also, 3 related rulings, including regarding intention.

This episode and our future learning for the time being are dedicated to the speedy recovery of בילא פריידא בת העניא מינא - Baila Freyda bat Henya Minna (with apologies for any mis-transliteration). Beginning with some words of explanation for our recent delays.... and moving on to further discussion of false oaths, wicked people, lying, the punishments that take place, and why the courts administer oaths the way they do. Plus, the insidious "reed of Rava."

The end of chapter 5: Someone says: Give me my deposit that is in your possession - and the response is one oath that seems to stand for 5 separate denials. With 4 tannaitic opinions as to when the oath counts for a single oath vs. a group of them -- with 2 different methodologies. And starting chapter 6: with a new mishnah, and a new oath -- issued by the judges. The mishnah is long, reviewing the cases of the chapter... many of which are "modeh be-miktzat" - agreeing to part of the claim, and therefore requiring the oath.

An oath on a deposit - to make it clear that it's not in the person's possession, for example. A deliberate false oath of deposit means a korban asham - a guilt-offering. Back when they were studying Shevuot in yeshiva in the time of the Gemara - witnesses warn the person not to swear falsely. Note - the korban asham is fairly unusual, in that it is itself the punishment, or the guilt, and not for the sake of atoning. Plus, Rav Kahana's question about witnesses warning against false testimony - but is that warning a halakhic warning for all sins, in general? It would seem not. Also, a refinement - the guilt-offering only is incumbent when the false oath is intentional - and without witnesses. Plus, the way the oath for the deposit has more stringent halakhot than those for the oath of testimony.

Finishing chapter 4 and beginning chapter 5! The term "Amen" has an element of an oath to it. As does "No." And "Yes." With support from God's promise to never destroy the earth via water again. Plus, what happens when an oath is in the form a curse, swearing to the negative? When would the Ineffable Name of God be required - if one is going to curse "in the name of God"? A new mishnah! (with the new chapter) - An oath over a deposit or collateral. How aware does the oath-taker need to be of a violation, in order to be liable for a false oath? Plus, the penalties and liabilities...including personal injury - as a monetary issue.

2 mishnayot and a good amount of Gemara! 1 - Administering an oath to one who could testify about a plaintiff, but instead denies that he saw anything - the false-oath-maker would still be exempt from the korban. One who asks a whole congregation to come forward - that's not even an oath. Plus, several other cases where the oath-taking would not be sufficient to make a false oath incur the need to bring a korban. 2 - If one insists one take the stand, but not with the language of oath - the commitment is implicit. But taking an oath in the name of the heavens and earth - no, because they are not in the Name of God. Likewise, cursing in the Name of God needs God's name. Also, the Gemara: The question of whether erasing partials of God's name counts as erasing God's name. Plus, interpretation of verses to God's power, not angels. Plus, the vineyard of Navot. When are the texts talking to God, as compared to referring to something other than God?

Different opinions about the oath of testimony on monetary matters and monetary matters only. Note the example of camels and their propensity to bump into each other and even kill other animals, apparently during the mating process. Plus, the question of the degree to which circumstantial evidence would be accepted. Also, the question of liability for a false oath - in monetary claims. And Rabbi Shimon was mocked in the land of Israel - for his view that a case of false oath regarding a deposit (pikadon) can inform the case of an intentional false oath.

2 mishnayot! The administration of witnesses taking a false oath of testimony, apparently along with an oath that they know nothing about what they're being asked to testify about - perhaps swearing falsely, which may or may not entail an offering to atone for it. That requirement may depend on the specifics of the oath. Also, what about testimony about one's status -- and the oath taken in that context. Plus, the significant difference between a case of status that involves a kohen to adjudicate and administer an oath - as compared to murder (for example), in court.

When 2 potential witnesses deny any knowledge of the event(s) they're asked to testify about, the claim is that they need to deny at exactly the same time. And since that precise of a time is not possible, perhaps they weren't really liable... (this is the view of R. Yosi HaGlili, who says they could have spoken at "the same time," with a certain amount of time to make a short utterance. Also, the case of one witness -- when that would be acceptable, and when insufficient. Note the eye to the protection of women.

After 4 ways to keep yourself away from falsehood on yesterday's daf, we have another 9 ways here (13 in total) - and all of them fall under this category. Also, who is intended in the category of "those who are not fit to testify" when there's already been a list of those who are not fit to testify!?! Perhaps a king. Perhaps the one who plays with dice. Also, a new mishnah: defining the oath of testimony (swearing that they have nothing to say on behalf of the plaintiff). Including the concern that one denies having anything to say about several cases - that will mean a liability for each false oath taken.

Chapter 4! On the "oath of testimony" - the witness swears on the Bible that his testimony is correct, as rooted in a verse in Vayikra/Leviticus, as formal court proceedings. A new mishnah: This oath of testimony is only issued to men. An other points of trustworthiness. But how valid is that testimony? Also, note that this "men" is specific - to exclude women, as compared to other more generic uses. Of course, there are other circumstances where women's testimony is acceptable. Plus, the formality of witnesses standing while giving testimony.

2 mishnayot! 1 - If someone swears that something is factually incorrect is in fact true, or if someone swears about something that is impossible to have seen. But what if he's swearing to something as he understands it? There's concern about the plain meaning of words as people understand them. 2 - Oaths that one takes to confirm that one's statement is true - shevuat bitui - in contrast to the one taken in court. Plus, one who says "Amen" to a formulation of an oath without uttering all the words of the oath is akin to one who did utter all of the words. It amounts to taking an oath.

What about conditional oaths? That means one oath forbids something, but the second may not. Unless he engineered the events of the first one, and neglected the second one. Also, the story of the brothers Eifa and Avimi, and their learning of Shevuot in the beit midrash.

A new Mishnah! With exceptions to the basic laws of oaths - for example, if one swears not to fulfill a mitzvah. Rabbi Yehudah ben Beterah says that one who makes an oath that you're not allowed to make would still entail a violation, but the Tanna Kama seems to think that it wouldn't count as violating. Likewise, an issue to swear on a mitzvah to keep it. Plus, another new mishnah! Different wordings of swearing off something, though in the end, he would only be held accountable or on punishment. This "shevuot bitui" - risks the false oath in the intentional breaking of the oath - and needing lashes.. And an oath in vain?