Kiddushin, Daf Ayin Aleph, Part 2

 

בימי רבי פנחס בקשו לעשות בבל עיסה לארץ ישראל אמר להם לעבדיו כשאני אומר שני דברים בבית המדרש טלוני בעריסה ורוצו

כי עייל אמר להם אין שחיטה לעוף מן התורה אדיתבי וקמעייני בה אמר להו כל ארצות עיסה לארץ ישראל וארץ ישראל עיסה לבבל נטלוהו בעריסה ורצו רצו אחריו ולא הגיעוהו ישבו ובדקו עד שהגיעו לסכנה ופירשו

 

In the days of R. Pinchas they wanted to declare Babylonia as dough vis a vis Eretz Yisrael. He said to his slaves, When I have made two statements in the Beth Hamidrash, pick me up in my litter and run away.

When he entered he said to them, Birds do not require slaughter by Biblical law.

While they were still sitting and looking into this matter, he said to them, All countries are as dough in comparison with Eretz Yisrael, and Eretz Yisrael is as dough in comparison with Babylonia.

They [his slaves] took him up in his litter and ran away.

They ran after him, but could not overtake him.

Then they sat and examined [their lineage], until they came to danger and then they stopped.

 

In this fascinating story a rabbi realizes that his statement is not going to be popular, so he tells his slaves that as soon as he issues the statement, they should help him flee. Evidently, the slaves can run faster carrying him than he can run on his own (R. Pinchas really needs to get in shape).

To catch the students in the bet midrash off guard, he first issues a puzzling statement. The Torah does not mandate the ritual slaughtering of fowl. One who eats fowl not properly slaughtered has not transgressed a biblical commandment. Note that while there is someone who holds this in the Talmud, this is not the accepted halakhic opinion. In any case, while the other rabbis are looking into this puzzling law, R. Pinchas slips in that the lineage of Jews from Eretz Yisrael is dough in comparison to Babylonian Jews.

The students end up confirming his statement once they look into his opinion.

 

א"ר יוחנן היכלא בידינו היא אבל מה אעשה שהרי גדולי הדור נטמעו בה

סבר לה כר’ יצחק דאמר ר’ יצחק משפחה שנטמעה נטמעה

 

R. Yohanan said: By the Temple! It is in our power; but what shall I do, seeing that the greatest men of our time are mixed up with them.

He holds like R. Yitzchak, who said: Once a family becomes mixed up, it remains mixed up.

 

R. Yohanan swears by the Temple that the rabbis can reveal who has poor lineage. The problem is that some of the greatest men of their time are already mixed up with them and do not want to have their genealogical flaws revealed. R. Yohanan agrees with R. Yitzchak that once a family has their lineage mixed up, there is nothing anyone should do about it.

 

אמר אביי אף אנן נמי תנינא משפחת בית הצריפה היתה בעבר הירדן וריחקה בן ציון בזרוע

עוד אחרת היתה וקירבה בן ציון בזרוע

כגון אלו אליהו בא לטמא ולטהר לרחק ולקרב כגון אלו דידעין אבל משפחה שנטמעה נטמעה

 

Abaye said: We have also taught in a tannaitic source: The clan of Bet Hatzerifa, was in Transjordan and Ben Zion forcibly distanced them.

There was another, and Ben Zion forcibly brought them near.

Such as these, Elijah will come to declare unclean or clean, to distance or draw near.

But only families such as these, who are known; but once a family becomes mixed up, it remains mixed up.

 

Abaye cites a tannaitic source that describes a strong man named Ben Zion who decided which family had improper lineage and which did not. In the future, Elijah will come and clarify the status of these families. But he will not look into the status of families who have been mixed up, whose lineage is not known.

As I ve said before, statements like these express an ambivalence towards the reality of lineage. Is a genealogical flaw something real that manifests itself in the family in some way perhaps moral, perhaps personal, social or religious? This might be similar to our asking today is race real? [I know, this is a very controversial question]. Or is it more nominal, meaning that it is a social construct that is at times best left unknown? I think the rabbis waver on this issue and are able to see it in both ways. At least we are presented with both opinions in the Bavli.

 

תאנא עוד אחרת היתה ולא רצו חכמים לגלותה אבל חכמים מוסרים אותו לבניהם ולתלמידיהן פעם אחת בשבוע ואמרי לה פעמים בשבוע

אמר רב נחמן בר יצחק מסתברא כמאן דאמר פעם אחת בשבוע כדתניא הריני נזיר אם לא אגלה משפחות יהיה נזיר ולא יגלה משפחות

It was taught: There was yet another, which the Sages declined to reveal, but the Sages passed [the knowledge] down to their children and their disciples once every seven years, and some say once twice every seven years.

R. Nahman b. Yitzchak said: It makes sense that that it was once every seven years, as it was taught: [If one vows,] Behold, I will be a nazir if I do not reveal the families [which are impure], he must be a nazir, and not reveal the families.

 

While the sages have information about which families have flawed lineage, they should preserve it but not reveal it. At most, they reveal it twice every seven years. Even one who takes a nazirite vow if he does not reveal which families are impure, should rather be a nazirite than reveal these impurities. This shows that the less such information is revealed, the better.

Again, rabbis realize the danger of people going around and revealing which families have poor lineage. Social harmony seems more important than being adamant at revealing the truth about who people are.