Gittin, Daf Zayin, Part 3

 

Introduction

The Talmud discusses the prohibition of a groom wearing a garland after the destruction of the Temple.

 

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רֵישׁ גָּלוּתָא לְרַב הוּנָא כְּלִילָא מְנָא לַן דְּאָסוּר

אֲמַר לֵיהּ מִדְּרַבָּנַן דִּתְנַן בַּפּוּלְמוּס שֶׁל אַסְפַּסְיָינוּס גָּזְרוּ עַל עַטְרוֹת חֲתָנִים וְעַל הָאִירוּס

 

The exilarch asked Rav Huna: How do we know that it is prohibited to put a garland [on a groom s head]?

He said to him: It was prohibited by the rabbis, for it was taught: In the campaign of Vespasian, they decreed against garlands on the heads of grooms and against the irus.

 

Rav Huna explains to the exilarch (the head of the Jewish community in Babylonia) that after the campaign of Vespasian, the Roman emperor who (according to the rabbis) preceded Titus in the Roman battle against Jerusalem, the rabbis decreed that grooms should no longer wear garlands, nor should they use the irus, some sort of drum, at weddings.

 

אַדְּהָכִי קָם רַב הוּנָא לְאִפְּנוֹיֵי

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב חִסְדָּא קְרָא כְּתִיב כֹּה אָמַר ה׳ אֱלֹהִים הָסִר הַמִּצְנֶפֶת וְהָרִם הָעֲטָרָה זֹאת לֹא זֹאת הַשָּׁפָלָה הַגְבֵּהַּ וְהַגָּבוֹהַּ הַשְׁפִּיל וְכִי מָה עִנְיַן מִצְנֶפֶת אֵצֶל עֲטָרָה אֶלָּא לוֹמַר לָךְ בִּזְמַן שֶׁמִּצְנֶפֶת בְּרֹאשׁ כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל עֲטָרָה בְּרֹאשׁ כׇּל אָדָם נִסְתַּלְּקָה מִצְנֶפֶת מֵרֹאשׁ כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל נִסְתַּלְּקָה עֲטָרָה מֵרֹאשׁ כׇּל אָדָם

 

Meanwhile, Rav Huna stood up to go to the bathroom. Rav Hisda said to him: This is in a verse, Thus says the Lord God: The mitre shall be removed, and the garland taken off; this shall no more be the same; that which is low shall be exalted, and that which is high abased (Ezekiel 21:31). What does the mitre have to do with the garland? Rather this teaches us that when the mitre is worn by the High Priest, there should be a garland on the head of every person. When the mitre is removed from the head of the High Priest, the garland is removed from the head of every person.

 

Rav Hisda argues that the decree against wearing the garland is not a rabbinic decree. Rather, it was alluded to by Ezekiel who combined the mitre (the High Priest s head dress) and the garland. Garlands are worn by grooms only so long as there still is a High Priest who wears the mitre.

The argument here seems to be concerning rabbinic innovation. Rav Hisda argues against this being a rabbinic decree. The practice originated in the prophets, those with a more direct connection with God.

 

אַדְּהָכִי אֲתָא רַב הוּנָא אַשְׁכְּחִינְהוּ דַּהֲוֵי יָתְבִי

אֲמַר לֵיהּ הָאֱלֹהִים מִדְּרַבָּנַן אֶלָּא חִסְדָּא שְׁמָךְ וְחִסְדָּאִין מִילָּךְ

 

Meanwhile, Rav Huna came back and he found them sitting. He said to them: By God, this is of rabbinic origin. But since your name is Hisda (favor) your words are favorable.

 

Rav Huna returns from the bathroom to find the people discussing the source of the decree. He insists that it is of rabbinic origin (as it surely is) but appreciates Rav Hisda s nice derashah his creative reading of the verse from Ezekiel to support a rabbinic opinion.

 

רָבִינָא אַשְׁכְּחֵיהּ לְמָר בַּר רַב אָשֵׁי דַּהֲוָה גָּדֵיל כְּלִילָא לִבְרַתֵּיהּ

אֲמַר לֵיהּ לָא סָבַר לַהּ מָר הָסִר הַמִּצְנֶפֶת וְהָרִם הָעֲטָרָה

אֲמַר לֵיהּ דּוּמְיָא דְּכֹהֵן גָּדוֹל בְּגַבְרֵי אֲבָל בִּנְשֵׁי לָא

 

Ravina found Mar bar Rav Ashi weaving a garland for his daughter.

He said to him: Does the master not hold, The mitre shall be removed and the garland taken off ?

He said to him: Just like the High Priest, who is a man, but this prohibition is not applied to women.

 

Mar bar Rav Ashi uses this midrash to create a leniency. Since the prohibition originates in a comparison with the High Priest, a male, the prohibition against the garland applies only to males. His daughter can wear a garland for her wedding.

 

מַאי זֹאת לֹא זֹאת דָּרֵשׁ רַבִּי עַוִּירָא זִימְנִין אָמַר לַהּ מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב אַמֵּי וְזִימְנִין אָמַר לַהּ מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב אַסִּי בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁאָמַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְיִשְׂרָאֵל הָסִר הַמִּצְנֶפֶת וְהָרִם הָעֲטָרָה

אָמְרוּ מַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת לִפְנֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם זֹאת לָהֶן לְיִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁהִקְדִּימוּ לְפָנֶיךָ בְּסִינַי נַעֲשֶׂה לְנִשְׁמָע אָמַר לָהֶן לֹא זֹאת לָהֶן לְיִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁהִשְׁפִּילוּ אֶת הַגָּבוֹהַּ וְהִגְבִּיהוּ אֶת הַשָּׁפֵל וְהֶעֱמִידוּ צֶלֶם בַּהֵיכָל

 

What is the meaning of the phrase, This, no this ? Rav Avira expounded, sometimes attributing it to Rav Ami and sometimes to Rav Asi: When God told Israel to remove the mitre and take off the garland, the ministering angels said to God: Master of the World: This is the fate of Israel who, on Sinai, put we will do in front of we will hear ?

He said to them: No, this is for Israel who lowered that which is high and elevated that which is base by placing an idol in the Sanctuary.

 

Rav Avira offers a different midrash on the unusual syntax of the verse which in its middle has the phrase this, no this (this is a translation meant to facilitate understanding the midrash). The verse alludes to an argument between the angels and God. The angels argue that Israel does not deserve their fate the destruction of the Temple. After all, on Sinai they first agreed to keep the Torah and only after asked to hear what it says. But God argues back the Israelites placed an idol in the Sanctuary, and thereby lost the merit of their words on Sinai.