Megillah, Daf Kaf Het, Part 6

 

Introduction

This section begins with another eulogy.

 

ריש לקיש ספדיה לההוא צורבא מרבנן דשכיח בארעא דישראל, דהוי תני הלכתא בעשרים וארבע שורתא, אמר: ווי, חסרא ארעא דישראל גברא רבה.

 

Resh Lakish eulogized a certain rabbinical student who was frequently in the Land of Israel and who used to repeat halakhoth before twenty-four rows [of disciples].

He said: Alas! The Land of Israel has lost a great man.

 

This is an example of a short eulogy, offered for a rabbinical student who would repeat halakhot in front of a large number of students.

 

ההוא דהוי תני הלכתא סיפרא וספרי ותוספתא, ושכיב. אתו ואמרו ליה לרב נחמן: ליספדיה מר! – אמר: היכי נספדיה? הי צנא דמלי סיפרי דחסר! תא חזי מה בין תקיפי דארעא דישראל לחסידי דבבל.

There was a certain man who used to repeat halakhot, Sifra and Sifre and Tosefta, and when he died they came and said to R. Nahman: Let the master eulogize him.

He said: How are we to eulogize him: Alas! A bag full of books has been lost!

Observe now the difference between the rigorous scholars of the Land of Israel and the saints of Babylon.

 

This story is brought here as a contrast between the sages of the Land of Israel and those in Babylonia. The person who died was a professional reciter of rabbinic traditions. His memory was enormous and he knew all of the rabbinic compositions. "Halakhot" refers to the Mishnah. Sifra and Sifre are midrashic compositions and the Tosefta is a collection of material supplementary to the Mishnah. This man knew them all. And yet when they ask R. Nahman to say a eulogy for him, he responds by calling him a "bag of books." This is a disparaging remark. Just as a book can’t understand its content, so too a professional memorizer, according to R. Nahman.

Now the Talmud notes how much more respectful Resh Lakish was than R. Nahman. Rashi explains that Resh Lakish was such a great person that he wouldn’t even talk to another rabbi in public because anyone seen talking to Resh Lakish would be considered so trustworthy that business matters could be conducted with him without witnesses. Resh Lakish was modest and did not want others to risk money based merely on their having spoken to Resh Lakish. On the other hand, R. Nahman was known elsewhere for being extremely arrogant, as we can see in this tradition as well.

 

תנן התם: ודאשתמש בתגא חלף, תני ריש לקיש: זה המשתמש במי ששונה הלכות, כתרה של תורה, ואמר עולא: לשתמש איניש במאן דתני ארבעה ולא לשתמש במאן דמתני ארבעה.

 

We have learned in another place: Whoever makes use of a crown, passes away [from the world] and Resh Lakish taught: This applies to one who accepts service from one who can repeat halakhoth, the crown of Torah.

And Ulla said: One may accept service from one who can repeat the four [orders of the Mishnah] but not from one who can [also] teach them.

 

The Mishnah teaches that if someone uses the "crown" he will pass away. This refers to the "crown of the Torah" condemning one who uses Torah for personal gain. Resh Lakish interprets it to mean that one cannot "accept service" from a person who knows enough to repeat halakhot. One must treat such a person with a high degree of respect, and not allow him to act as a servant. Ulla says that one does not owe such a high amount of respect to someone just because they can repeat Torah. To earn such a high level of respect the person must also be able to teach it.

Ulla refers to "four orders of the Mishnah." By the amoraic period two orders of the original six were not being learned. In Israel they taught: Zeraim, Moed, Nashim and Nezikin. In Babylonia they taught: Moed, Nashim, Nezikin and Kodashim. In neither place was Toharot taught. I think I can understand why.

כי הא דריש לקיש הוה אזיל באורחא, מטא עורקמא דמיא, אתא ההוא גברא ארכביה אכתפיה, וקא מעבר ליה. אמר ליה: קרית? – אמר ליה: קרינא. – תנית? – תנינא ארבעה סידרי משנה. – אמר ליה: פסלת לך ארבעה טורי, וטענת בר לקיש אכתפך? שדי בר לקישא במיא! – אמר ליה: ניחא לי דאשמעינן למר.

 

As in the following story of Resh Lakish, who was once traveling along a road when he came to a pool of water, and a man came up and put him on his shoulders and began taking him across. He said to the man: Can you read the Scriptures? He answered: I can read. Can you recite the Mishnah? [He replied]: I can recite four orders of the Mishnah. Resh Lakish thereupon said: You have hewn four rocks, and you carry the son of Lakish on your shoulder? Throw the son of Lakish into the water! He replied: I would rather you teach me something.

 

This story illustrates Resh Lakish’s principle that one must honor someone even if the best they can do is recite Mishnah. The person carrying Resh Lakish across the river turns out to be one who can recite four full orders of the Mishnah. Upon hearing this, Resh Lakish refuses to receive any more service from him and orders him to cast him back into the river. The man has "hewn four rocks" learned four full orders of Mishnah and now he lowers himself to carry Resh Lakish. Disraceful.

The man refuses to throw Resh Lakish into the water, asking instead that Resh Lakish teach him something.

 

אי הכי גמור מיני הא מלתא דאמר רבי זירא: בנות ישראל הן החמירו על עצמן, שאפילו רואות טיפת דם כחרדל יושבות עליו שבעה נקיים.

 

If so learn from me this statement that was said by R. Zera: The daughters of Israel were stringent upon themselves that even if they saw [on their garments] a spot of blood no bigger than a mustard seed, they waited for seven clean days [before taking a ritual bath].

 

The particular halakhah that Resh Lakish teaches the man has to do with the laws of menstrual purity. According to Toraitic law a woman who menstruates does not need to wait seven days without blood before going to the mikvah. When a woman menstruates, she counts seven days from the start, and as long as she is no longer menstruating by the time the week is over, she goes the mikveh and she is clean immediately. Jewish women were strict however, treating any blood as if it may be non-menstrual blood. Furthermore, non-menstrual blood requires seven clean days only if the woman bleeds three days in a row. Jewish women treated one issue of blood as if it were three days of non-menstrual blood. They were doubly strict.

I’m not sure why Resh Lakish chose to teach the man this particular halakhah. Perhaps it illustrates the problem of relying on the mishnah alone to rule in matters of halakhah.

תנא דבי אליהו: כל השונה הלכות מובטח לו שהוא בן עולם הבא, שנאמר +חבקוק ג+ הליכות עולם לו, אל תקרי הליכות אלא הלכות.

 

It was taught in the house of Eliyahu: Whoever repeats halakhoth is assured of the world to come, as it says, "His goings [halikoth] are to eternity" (Habbakuk 3:6). Read not halikkot but halakhoth.

 

The sugya concludes with this teaching from the house of Eliyahu whoever repeats halakhot is guaranteed a place in the world to come.