March 25, 2014 4:23 pm at 4:23 pm #612435
Whose team are you on?March 25, 2014 5:05 pm at 5:05 pm #1009415nishtdayngesheftParticipant
Whose team? They are both heretics, why would I be on either team?March 25, 2014 5:11 pm at 5:11 pm #1009416
Like the maharsha points out, when an apikores quotes the torah you can be sure he is only talking nonesense and has no idea what the torah means.March 25, 2014 6:15 pm at 6:15 pm #1009417Little FroggieMember
Who’d wanna drink with a sassoon anyway?March 25, 2014 6:25 pm at 6:25 pm #1009418
although i havent seen this explanation anywhere i dont think its unreasonable to conclude that the gemara quoting sasson and simcha as heretics was a typo. i say this because there is nothing heretical in what they say and the very next story is about a heretic with the same name. i think its not unreasonable to conclude that the heretic is only in story two and the identification of these men as heretics in story one is a typo. again, this is not a pshat i have seen anywhere – just personal reflections.March 25, 2014 7:19 pm at 7:19 pm #1009419nishtdayngesheftParticipant
Wow, that is remarkable. And yet the Gr”a did feel that was the case. I think I am in good company being uncomfortable accepting your suggestion.March 25, 2014 7:48 pm at 7:48 pm #1009420
nisht: but, see, the Avnei Nezer who explains that the same sasson in story one as the same sason in story two. this will disprove a portion of my theory (that the first story does not include heretics) but verify a portion of my theory (that there is a typo is the recollection of the story). in any event, neither the marsha or the gra understand the two stories to be talking about the same sasson.March 25, 2014 7:50 pm at 7:50 pm #1009421
Besalel, you aren’t saying a Pshat. You are changing a Girsa without much of a reason.March 25, 2014 8:08 pm at 8:08 pm #1009422
haleivi: it does not trouble me greatly to believe that the gmara wasnt precise in its recollection of a story that does not perform a haluchaic function. i understand that there are some (many) who disagree. i, personally, would need much more “of a reason” (to use your words) to change a girsa which implicates haluchu.March 25, 2014 8:10 pm at 8:10 pm #1009423
while the sasson may have been a different person, the maharsha identifies both as heretics. on what basis are you changing the girsa in the gemara?March 25, 2014 8:11 pm at 8:11 pm #1009424
haleivi: i also agree with you that i am not saying a pshat.March 25, 2014 9:49 pm at 9:49 pm #1009425
In the story of Rebbi Avahu the Gemara can be teaching us how to deal with silly questions. It is an illustration of Anei K’sil Ke’ivalto. But what is the first story about? Is the Gemara trying to add Simcha? Or Sasson?March 25, 2014 11:38 pm at 11:38 pm #1009426mobicoParticipant
From Kollel Iyun Hadaf’s Insights to the Daf (dafyomi.co.il):
The SHEM MI’SHMUEL (Sukos 5672) explains that heretics, who do not acknowledge that Olam ha’Ba exists, believe that the purpose of life is to achieve joy and happiness. The two heretics mentioned in the Gemara disputed which type of joy is greater — the type known as “Simchah,” which refers to a continual, constantly-increasing feeling of happiness, or “Sason,” which refers to sudden, spontaneous joy, the type one feels when stimulated by a surprise. (The VILNA GA’ON says that “Simchah” is an inner joy, while “Sason” is an outward expression of joy. See YA’IR OR, “Gil.”) Each heretic tried to prove that the other form of joy is dispensable.
When Sason debated with Rebbi Avahu, he said that in the World to Come, Rebbi Avahu will fill up water for him, as it says, “u’She’avtem Mayim b’Sason,” which the heretic interpreted to mean, “You will fill up water for Sason.” The heretic asserted that even in the World to Come man has no more noble purpose than the attainment of joy.
Rebbi Avahu responded that the attainment of happiness is not the ultimate purpose in life. Rather, joy is a means to an end; it is a vehicle to help a person serve Hash-m. “U’She’avtem Mayim b’Sason” means that Sason, joy, will help a person draw Torah (which is compared to water) and attain Ru’ach ha’Kodesh (see Tosfos 50b, DH Chad). Joy enables a person to fulfill the ultimate purpose of life — to serve Hash-m and achieve closeness to Him through learning Torah and doing Mitzvos.March 26, 2014 3:20 am at 3:20 am #1009428
Thanks, Mobico. I was also thinking something similar, that the Gemara was using this to illustrate the arguments as to which one is better. In truth, when good times strike, first comes excitement and then when you settle you will be naturally happy. However, the Jews in the time of Mordechai were first and foremost relieved from the Tzara before getting on to being excited about a victory.
So each one has precedence at different times. Similarly, each one has a menial application as well. There is nothing exciting about leaving your home but you can be happy nevertheless. On the other hand excitement can be found by small events too, as long as it is a change — such as getting water once a year.
A Min is one who only has Torah Shebichsav. Therefore, like those today who use scripture, it is bound to be shallow. When the Gemara wanted to put down this debate there was no one better to look for than two Minim with such names that will use Pesukim for their own prestige.
There must be a historical bent, Roman fighting, Pshat to all this, no? Like, these were really two legions arguing if they should go out directly to fight or sneak near the water. This whole Gemara is a secret code that Rebbi Avahu sent from his hideout.March 26, 2014 3:25 am at 3:25 am #1009429
Besalel, you seem to be implying that the Amoraim didn’t put much attention to Divrei Aggadah. In Eiruvin 53b you will see the Gemara quoting two versions of Rebbi Avahu’s riddle, with a very small difference between them. So it seems like they did bother to get it right.March 26, 2014 3:56 am at 3:56 am #1009430UtahMember
I am Simcha’s agent and I ask that you refrain from making any comments on this topic until we have our press conference. Until then good day. I said good day.March 26, 2014 10:48 am at 10:48 am #1009431
Haleivi: I believe the purpose of both story one and story two is to be humorous. We have enough instances throughout shas where the purpose is to be humorous or entertaining that I am ok seeing the toast and not the Jesus. Of course there are those that see the Jesus and I am not there to argue with them and tell them I’m right and you’re wrong. I’m just saying I see toast. Of course not all aggaditeh are meant that way but many are.March 26, 2014 1:44 pm at 1:44 pm #1009432
halievi: if i recall correctly the whole sigyeh there in eruvin was about how important it is to be extremely precise with your words so that people understand you correctly. so the gemuruh brought a rayeh from rabbi avahu and demonstrated preciseness of language. but we know, lemayseh, that over the years, typos have indeed creeped into our shas.March 26, 2014 3:18 pm at 3:18 pm #1009433
Are you implying that a joke is better than Mah Na’eh Ilan Zeh? Were they worried that the joke might not survive the generations if they don’t put it in? Is the Gemara just a live recording of whatever was being spoken at the time? Can you make a Birchas Hatorah on this Gemara? Sure, humor is invoked in many statements, but just repeating a Narishkeit during learning because it’s funny is not something my Rebbe would do, although he has a great sense of humor. There is much to be seen in every Agadetta. Even if you don’t have the time to delve into them, you are missing out by dismissing these Gemaros as light-headed babble.
All that aside, this was not my point. My point is that even when the Gemara is quoting something cute that (at least on the face of it) was simply meant to be witty, we were carefull to quote it exactly. If some had heard it with one word different we mentioned that.March 26, 2014 3:24 pm at 3:24 pm #1009434
The Gemara began with that but went on to talk about purposely being cryptic in order to train your family to think. Definitely typos, or writos, crept in. I am responding to what you are implying, that even the Amoraim didn’t put much effort into retaining it.
On this I can agree, that a mistake in Girsa of Aggadeta will be faster to happen since it can’t be crossed-checked with the Halacha as other Gemaros can.March 26, 2014 4:31 pm at 4:31 pm #1009435
haleivi: to support your point, the tiferes yisroel explains a mishna which speaks out against sichas yeludim, as speaking out against humor which is “light headed babble” and that good humor would be one which you can learn something from it.
on the other hand, we have some stories that really do not come to teach any apparent lesson. for example, a gemoro in shabbis which relates a story of a mother in law pulling the ultimate punking of her daughter in law by getting the daughter in law to light herself on fire. seems hard to find a lesson there. or a gemoro in bava kamma which says chanan bija who couldnt find someone to make change for an old zuz in order to pay someone half a zuz which he owed as a penalty to someone he hit so he fixes the problem by hitting the victim a second time in order to pay him a full zuz. lesson? or the story in sota where the gemara says ever since rebbe died there are no anuvim left in the world and rav yosef says “what about me?” looks like a joke for the purpose of a joke. there are other examples.
maybe its a cultural thing. i think if you look at real sfardishe baalei shiyur like rabbi yosef, ztl, there is humor spread out throughout the shiyurim. it plays a big role. seems to me that culturally, that part of the world had humor as a very regular part of life. conversely, rabbi yisroel salant, listed 13 important values in life and did not include humor as one of them. the gaon, who came from lita also refused to see idle humor in shas (and for example, explains rav yosef’s statement to be talking about someone named ‘anna’ and not that rav yosef was trying to be funny. and explains sasson and simcha to be teaching a deeper lesson.)
or maybe there are some that are like this (lesson teaching jokes) and some are like that (just jokes) and some of those that i fail to see a lesson in its because i havent delved into them enough. or maybe all of them have lessons. i am open to the idea that my theory is wrong and that i just need more convincing. i dont pretend that i am always right.March 26, 2014 5:10 pm at 5:10 pm #1009436
well, start with the chiddushei aggados of the maharsha. he explains this gemara and its lessons.March 26, 2014 5:54 pm at 5:54 pm #1009437
I am fine with most of your examples, but I am repulsed at taking a statement of an Amora as a joke. R”L. What’s so funny? Any Drasha that’s above you is a joke? I’ve seen this attitude in the seforim blog and was likewise repulsed by it. If you want a good explanation of Reb Yosef can find one in the Semichas Chachomim. (We can start a new thread here to collect good and/or silly Pshatim.) Do you really think it is a Stira for Moshe Rabbeinu to have written about himself that he was an Anav? Did he really not realize that he was the greatest Navi? In order to be an Anav, do you have to fool yourself? Was Rebbe Shimon bar Yochai violating the requirement for Anivus when he stated his achievements? (Please don’t tell me that was also a joke.) Was the other statement about Yiras Shamayim also a joke?
While I do think there is a point and something to learn from everything you mentioned, either hidden or subtle, that is not so much my point. It was with these examples in mind that I purposely referred to our story of Sason and Simcha as Narishkeit. If there is no point to it then it is just a weird story of two silly people. On the other hand, if you take the story of the mother in law, it is an incident that you can do without but does relate something that happened. It is an illustration of what the gemara just said, that the Plaiton oil is dangerous. Chanan Bisha is likewise an incident about the Din, although there seems to be nothing to take from it. The story in Pesachim about Mayim Shelanu does show you how he used Lashon Rabbo even though it wasn’t what people were accustomed to. It also shows you their Temimus. But none of these are off topic silly stories of silly people, as in three-guys-walk-into-a-bar. This one is.
I understand your point of the style of a Drasha, but that’s what I was referring to by asking if you think the Gemara is a live recording. They might have sprinkled their speeches with humor but the jokes didn’t have to be written down for eternity. The Gemara is not a speech; it is an edited and streamlined edition of the Torah that was taught.March 26, 2014 6:02 pm at 6:02 pm #1009438
apushita: its not that i havent seen explanations is that the explanations dont always seem the most plausible. i see toast.March 26, 2014 8:46 pm at 8:46 pm #1009439
halievi: i am sure you know the meiri on zugos in the end of psuchim. if the gemuru can insert things that they believe are false in order to make the talmud more “user friendly” isnt it less repulsive to believe that they inserted humor in order to make it more user friendly?March 26, 2014 10:35 pm at 10:35 pm #1009440
What in the world are you stringing together?
The Rambam’s approach to most supernatural Gemaros, which the Me’iri followed, is not a secret. They explain the whole Sugya of Kamei’os similarly, that it is to calm the sick person. What has this got to do with the Gemara saying nonsense?
The referenced Shita is that even if Chazal didn’t actually believe in the superstitions they deal with, instead of trying in vane to eradicate the belief they worked within its framework. From this you want to jump seven steps and say that while learning a particular Mishna, an Amora decided to chime in with a joke? Doesn’t this go against Venofes Tetufena?March 26, 2014 10:38 pm at 10:38 pm #1009441
Sofar we have three levels on the table. 1 – Stories like Chanan Bisha, 2 – Stories like that of Sasson and Simcha, and 3 – A regular Maamar Chazal. On the first I can agree to disagree. If you want to learn that a funny story is just that, fine. About the second, I tried to convince you that it doesn’t make sense to say it was put there to be funny. But the third type is beyond.March 26, 2014 11:09 pm at 11:09 pm #1009442LogicianParticipant
Haleivi is doing a fine, although altogether too polite, job. But I’m bored, so I’ll chime in.
1. I’ve lost count on how many times you’ve switched between saying that mistakes in girsos happen, and that they weren’t careful (in the first place) in recording such stories. Are you sure you have a worked-out shita here, or are you just that desperate to give a modern, different, rationalistic approach to every Chazal possible
2. Putting aside the absurdness of your comparison, and of the general mehalchim of Rambam or Meiri, that’s not what he says there.
a)He admits that there actually is an effect due to the belief in them, as the Gemara says about one who is makpid.
b)The gemara isn’t saying something false, its saying that its a safe night (which is true), for the purpose of reassuring those who think there’s a problem, while it may in reality be an UNNECESSARY reason.
3. Sichas Talmidei Chachamim trichim limud. Just because something is said to serve as a mili d’bidichusa does not mean there isn’t what to learn from it.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.