What is Talmud Tweets?

What is Talmud Tweets? A short, personal take on a page of Talmud - every day!

For several years now, I have been following the tradition of "Daf Yomi" - reading a set page of Talmud daily. With the start of a new 7 1/2 year cycle, I thought I would share a taste of what the Talmud offers, with a bit of personal commentary included. The idea is not to give a scholarly explanation. Rather, it is for those new to Talmud to give a little taste - a tweet, as it were - of the richness of this text and dialogue it contains. The Talmud is a window into a style of thinking as well as the world as it changed over the centuries of its compilation.

These are not literal "tweets" - I don't limit myself to 140 characters. Rather, these are intended to be short, quick takes - focusing in on one part of a much richer discussion. Hopefully, I will pique your interest. As Hillel says: "Go and study it!" (Shabbat 31a)

Friday, January 4, 2013

Shabbat 93 – Two By Two

The discussion up until now has been one person moving one object from one domain to another (between public and private) on Shabbat. But what if TWO people move one object?

IF ONE CARRIES OUT A LOAF INTO THE STREET, HE IS CULPABLE; IF TWO CARRY IT OUT, THEY ARE NOT CULPABLE. IF ONE COULD NOT CARRY IT OUT AND TWO CARRY IT OUT, THEY ARE CULPABLE; BUT R. SIMEON EXEMPTS [THEM]

How so? The rabbis interpret this through the biblical verse: And if one person of the common people shall sin unwittingly, in his doing. . . (Lev. 4:27)

Rabbi Simon reads the sentence to list 3 limitations based on: “person”, “one shall sin” and “in his doing”

1.  excludes the case where one person moves an article from one domain and a second person puts it in the other domain
2.  excludes the case whereby each of these two individuals has the ability to perform the action
3. excludes where neither of them is able to perform the action alone.

And yet, they don’t agree! Rabbi Judah, reading the same text see different limitations

1. excludes [the case where] one [person] removes and another deposits
2. excludes [the case of] each being able
3.  excludes [the case of] an individual who acts on the ruling of Beth din (Rabbinic court)

And Rabbi Meir sees only two limitations from the same text but reading only “one person” and “in his doing”:

1. excludes [the case where] one removes and another deposits
2. excludes [the case of] an individual who acts on the ruling of Beth din

All from the same text. This is the fun of close reading!

No comments:

Post a Comment