

## Talmudic Storytelling

### Timeless Lessons from the Ancient Sages

### by

### Hershey H. Friedman, PhD

### Copyright 2016 by H.H. Friedman

### Smashwords Edition

### Smashwords Edition, License Notes

Thank you for downloading this ebook. This book remains the copyrighted property of the author, and may not be redistributed to others for commercial or non-commercial purposes. If you enjoyed this book, please encourage your friends to download their own copy from their favorite authorized retailer. Thank you for your support

### Table of Contents

Copyright

Introduction to Talmudic Storytelling

The Oven of Akhnai

God and the Heavenly Academy Ask Rabbah b. Nachmeni to Decide

God Teaches Moses About the Importance of Compassion

Compassion for all of God's Creations

God Teaches Moses Manners

God asks for Blessing from Yishmael b. Elisha

God Laughs at Humankind

Is God a Joker? God and Choni HaMagil

Choni: The Jewish Rip Van Winkle

Rabbi Yehoshua b. Chananiah: Advantage of Being Unattractive

Rabbi Yehoshua b. Chananiah Bested by Young Boy

Outsmarting Highwaymen

The Brilliance of Rabbi Bana'ah: Which is the True Son?

The Ethics of Abba Chilkiyah

God is a Matchmaker

Moses Asks God for a Legal System that is Cut and Dried

Moses Asks God Why Good People Suffer

Moses Teaches God

Moses and Og

Rabbah b. Shila Teaches God

Hillel's Love for Learning

Learning Torah on One Foot

Hillel and the Bet

The Student, the Tzitzit, and the Harlot

Rebbi Wept: How a Harlot Made Someone Repent

Learning for Thirteen Years in a Cave

The Righteous Donkey of Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair

Rabbi Elazar ben Shimon and the Ugly Person

Rabbi Yosi's Prayer in a Ruin: Lessons from Elijah

Hurting Elijah's Feelings by Calling him Hot Tempered

Plimo and Satan: Even Satan's Feelings May be Hurt

Plimo's Strange Question

Lessons About Humility from Satan

Four Entered Pardes: Story of Acher, Teacher of Rabbi Meir

Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Nosson Attempt to Depose the Nasi

Rabbi Meir: Most Brilliant Man in His Generation, but His Halachic Opinions are Rejected

Learning Under a Teacher's Bed

Rabbi Kahana Jumps off Roof

The Fragrant Leaves of Paradise: Rabbah b. Avuhu and Elijah

Rabbi Yehoshua b. Levi and Elijah the Prophet

Why Jesters Get Into Paradise

Topsy Turvy World: The Vision of Rabbi Yosef, son of Rabbi Yehoshua b. Levi

Rebbi Wept: Some Achieve Eternity in a Single Hour

Abba: The Compassionate Surgeon

Never Telling a Lie

The Business Ethics of Shimon ben Shetach: The Hidden Jewel

Shimon ben Shetach and the 80 Sorceresses

King Yannai's Advice to his Wife: Beware of the Hypocrites

King Yannai and Elazar b. Po'irah: Be Careful with Your Words

Mar Zutra the Pious: Simple Test of Honesty

Business Ethics: Story of the Porters and Rabbah bar Bar-Chana

Learning About Business Ethics from Rabbi Huna's Wine that Became Vinegary

The Good Deeds of Rabbi Huna

Wisdom of Beruriah: Praying for the Wicked

Wisdom of Beruriah: Knowing how to Respond to a Sadducee

Wit of Beruriah

Beruriah: How to Study Properly

Allowing Someone to Spit in Your Eye for the Sake of Domestic Harmony

Rabbi Meir Rescues Sister-in-law from Brothel: "O God of Meir Answer Me"

Queen Cleopatra's Question to Rabbi Meir

Importance of Marriage: Ulla's Sarcastic Remark to Rabbi Yitzchak

Yalta and Ulla: Was Yalta a Feminist

The Death of Rabbi Rechumi for Neglecting His Wife

Rabbi Chiya bar Ashi and his Wife Disguised as a Prostitute

Rebbi's Son: Study First or Get Married First?

Kamtza and Bar Kamtza: Why Jerusalem was Destroyed

The Punishment of Titus for Destroying the Second Temple

Danger of Religious Extremism: Ritual Purity More Important than Death of Son

You Can't Escape Death: Appointment in Luz

How to Preserve One's Wealth: Story of Nakdimon b. Gurion's Daughter

Charity Can Change One's Destiny: Story of Rabbi Akiva's Daughter

How to Give Charity: Mar Ukva and his Wife

The Miracle Wheat of Elazar Ish Barta

Being Careful Not to Allow Someone to be Embarrassed

Shmuel and Avleit: Charity Saves from Death

Joseph-Who-Honors-the-Sabbath

Chaninah ben Dosa and the Table with Two Legs

Chaninah ben Dosa and the Lost Chickens

Chaninah ben Dosa and the Deadly Lizard

Chaninah ben Dosa and the Burning Vinegar

Chaninah ben Dosa and the Elongated Beams

Chaninah ben Dosa's Wife and the Bad Neighbor

Nachum ish Gamzu, Eternal Optimist

Nachum ish Gamzu: Dreadful Punishment for Procrastinating with Charity

Foxes Prowling the Temple Mount: Rabbi Akiva's Consolation

Rabbi Akiva's Beginnings

Death of Rabbi Akiva

Death of Rabbi Chanina ben Teradyon

Deeds of Lovingkindness Save Elazar ben Perata from Execution by the Romans

Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi and Satan

Justice in Sodom and Gomorrah

Justice in Katzia

Love of Nature

Concern for the Environment

Rava and Bar Sheishach: Does Paradise Compare to Naked Harlots?

Rava and Chomah, Abaye's Widow

Who Shall Recite the Blessing at God's Feast

Right Amount of Time for Prayer

Constructive Arguing: Resh Lakish and Rabbi Yochanan

Destructive Arguing: Torah Scroll Torn in Heat of Argument

Ilfa and Rabbi Yochanan

Rabbi Shimon ben Chalafta and the Meat from Heaven

Rabbi Zera and the Nasty Butcher

A Nasty Remark that Boomeranged: "Your Neck is Loose"

Shrouds of Rabbi Yannai

Proper Thanks for Public Service

The Wit of Rabbi Yirmiyah: Trying to Get his Teacher to Laugh

Be Careful What You Wish for: Rabbi Mani

Strange Way to Worship an Idol: Sabta b. Alas

Learning About Respect for Parents from Dama ben Nesina

Rabban Gamliel and Proclos in the Bathhouse of Aphrodite

Rabban Gamliel Describes Future in Messianic Times

How to Serve Guests: Rabban Gamliel Acting as Waiter at his Son's Wedding

Concluding Remarks

References

About the Author

### Introduction to Talmudic Storytelling

There is a great deal of interest in the Talmud today (Socken 2009), particularly in much of Asia (Kremer, 2013). South Koreans have developed a fascination with the Talmud and have made it part of their curriculum. Many Korean homes have a version of the Talmud and call it the "Light of Knowledge"; they feel that the secret of Jewish success is hidden in the pages of the Talmud (Savir, 2013). The Talmud is also popular in China; there is a belief that it can give one an edge in conducting business (Fish, 2010). Socken (2009) provides several reasons why the Talmud is relevant today. Friedman and Fischer (2014) demonstrate how Avos (Ethics of the Fathers), one of the 63 tractates of the Talmud, can be used to make the world a better place. The Talmud actually has a great deal to say about living an ethical, rewarding life (Friedman, 2012). What is especially fascinating about the Talmud is that it consists of thousands of arguments. The Talmudic scholars used adversarial collaboration as a way to argue in a productive manner. They recognized that the only way to arrive at the truth is to study with a partner and to argue in a respectful manner where the goal is to find the truth, not win the argument. The Talmudic style of arguing may have contributed to the ability of Jews to be creative thinkers in areas such as science, law, and business (Friedman, 2014).

First, let us examine what the Talmud is supposed to be. Jewish written law is contained in the Pentateuch (the Five Books of Moses, i.e., the Torah). The Talmud, Judaism's Oral Law, is primarily a collection of rabbinical discussions and commentaries on the Torah's written text. The Talmud, compiled separately in academies in Israel and Babylonia, explains, expounds, and elaborates on the Hebrew Bible and consists of the Mishna and Gemara. The Mishna, originally an old oral tradition, was compiled and redacted by Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi (Nasi means President, he was the President of the Sanhedrin), known as Rebbi, about the year 189 C.E. The Gemara, which consists mainly of commentaries and discussions on the Mishna, was completed in approximately 500 C.E. The scholars of the Mishna are called Tannaim and the scholars of the Gemara are called Amoraim. The Amoraim analyzed, explained, and elaborated on the Mishna. By studying the Talmud, we are examining the wisdom of sages who lived during a 500-year period.

The Talmud, mainly concerned with halachah (Jewish law), also provides a detailed record of the beliefs of the Jewish people, their philosophy, traditions, culture, and folklore, i.e., the aggadah (homiletics) and is replete with legal, ethical, and moral questions. The Midrash, a separate scripture, records the views of the Talmudic sages and is mainly devoted to the exposition of Biblical verses. There are two versions of the Talmud: the Jerusalem Talmud, a product of the academies in Israel, and the Babylonian Talmud, a product of the academies in Babylon. The Babylonian Talmud, considerably larger than the Jerusalem Talmud, is more authoritative. Both often use a case-method type of approach to illustrate a particular problem or a proposed solution. The Midrash is essentially devoted to the exposition of Biblical verses. There are two types of Midrash: Halachic Midrash which is mainly concerned with Jewish law and Aggadic Midrash which is homiletic and mainly concerned with morality. The sages quoted and discussed in the Midrash are generally the same sages as in the Talmud.

Z. H. Chajes (2005:195) states that the aim of the homiletic portion of the Talmud (aggadah) was to inspire people to serve the Lord. Also, if the lecturer noticed that the audience was not paying attention or was dozing off, he might tell stories which "sounded strange or terrifying or which went beyond the limits of the natural and so won the attention of his audience for his message." Maimonides (1135 - 1204) describes individuals who take the homiletics of the Talmud literally as simple-minded fools, since there are hidden inner meanings in the stories, riddles, parables, etc. used in aggadah (Maimonides, Sanhedrin, Introduction to the Mishna, Chapter 10). Eisen (2007) notes that many respected scholars viewed aggadah as a parable or "rhetorical invention" for an educational or ethical purpose. Thus, we see that the stories told in the Talmud and Midrash, many of which are cited here, were not necessarily meant to be taken literally. Literal or not, these stories have important messages.

Stories are an important way of teaching people lessons. According to Charlie Rose, "What sets TED talks apart is that the big ideas are wrapped up in personal stories" (Gallo, 2016: 63). This is why founding stories are used as a simple way to connect with stakeholders such as customers, investors, and employees (Bluestein, 2014).

The creation myth is not an asset just for startups. As those businesses grow into established firms and individual founders figure less prominently, the origin story can serve as both a road map and moral compass. Keeping that story alive, keeping it true, and keeping it relevant--these are the challenges more mature businesses must contend with (Bluestein, 2014).

Storytelling skills are important in the business world (Gallo, 2016). Peter Guber, CEO of Mandalay Entertainment Group, was once trying to convince the mayor of Las Vegas to provide funding to support a new baseball stadium. He realized that the PowerPoint presentations filled with numbers were not doing the trick. It occurred to him that if you want to persuade others, a good story is more effective. The trick is to aim for a person's heart and soul, not brain. The following quote from Guber says it all: "Stories have a unique power to move people's hearts, minds, feet, and wallets in the storyteller's intended direction" (Gallo, 2016: 56-57). One firm that discovered how impactful storytelling can be in getting employees to be engaged was KPMG, one of the big four accounting firms that is also into consulting:

KPMG actually came up with a pretty extensive study not too long ago — they found that morale was declining somewhat. They were having all of those issues, especially around young people, that many global companies are having these days. And here's where it saves us all a lot of work. They studied thousands of managers, and they sent out thousands of studies and surveys. And they came to the conclusion that people, young people, especially, wanted to be part of a bigger mission. A purpose. OK. We're starting to understand that. That's fine. Now, how do you teach them about the purpose of your company? Through storytelling.

So they literally took their managers, and helped transform them all into storytellers, so that the managers were constantly telling stories of the history of KPMG — how KPMG has shaped the world; how they continue to shape industries and lives, and make the world a better place. And they said as they got immersed in the storytelling culture, engagement scores went up substantially. Turnover was reduced substantially. And this is a study that is online. They've broken it down. They're showing to you empirically how profits began to soar. So in all of those empirical models that we look at, storytelling helped transform that company in a big way (Knowledge@Wharton, 2016).

Xerox discovered that repair personnel used stories rather than information in manuals as a way of finding out what was wrong with a machine. These stories were collected and are now part of a database (Eureka) that is worth millions to Xerox (Pink, 2006: 108). Medical schools are teaching future physicians to listen empathetically to patients' ailments. These ailments are told in narrative form and the ability to interpret and respond to the stories is crucial if a doctor wants to heal the patient (Pink: 2006: 112).

Friedman, Lynch & Herskovitz (2014) posit that ethics should be taught using a variety of tools ranging from YouTube videos to films to songs. They feel that cases, because they are limited to facts, generally lack the ability to "arouse the passion" of other approaches. Stories, even fiction, provide another method to teach ethics (Singer & Singer, 2005; Brawer, 1998; Kennedy & Lawton, 1992). Stories have the ability to arouse passion and teach important lessons. Aesop's fables are often used by teachers to instruct disciples.

The sages of the Talmud were not historians; they told stories. These stories are an ideal way of communicating important truths ranging from ethics to theology. Rubenstein (2002) makes the point that:

The storytellers were not attempting to document "what actually happened" out of a dispassionate interest in the objective historical record, or to transmit biographical facts in order to provide pure data for posterity. This type of detached, impartial writing of a biography is a distinctly modern approach. Nowadays we distinguish biography from fiction...In pre-modern cultures, however, the distinction between biography and fiction was blurred. Ancient authors saw themselves as teachers, and they were more concerned with the didactic point than historical accuracy (Rubenstein, 2002:12).

Many of the Talmudic stories were redacted hundreds of years after the events in the story took place. There are stories in the Talmud about biblical figures; the Talmud has many stories about Abraham and Moses. Even stories of Tannaim told by Amoraim might have been redacted hundreds of years later. Rubenstein (2002: 14) stresses that the correct question to ask about a Talmudic story is "What lesson did he [the storyteller] wish to impart to his audience?" and "What does the story teach us about rabbinic beliefs, virtues, and ethics?" Those are more important questions than whether the story is completely true, partially true, or a metaphor.

To make it even more difficult to ascertain whether or not a story is literally true, some statements made by the sages were exaggerations. Thus, when Yehuda ben Beseira rises to his feet and makes the statement (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 92b) that "I am one of the descendants of the dried bones resurrected by Ezekiel and these are the tefillin that my father's father left me from them," this was an exaggerated statement made for effect (see commentary of ArtScroll). He was trying to make a point that the story in Ezekiel of the dry bones coming to life (Ezekiel 37) was not a parable, an opinion expressed by other sages. In any case, if his statement was literally true, his tefillin would have been several hundred years old.

This monograph relies heavily on translations by Soncino and ArtScroll. The Soncino translation of the Talmud is available for free on the Internet. They may be found at: http://www.halakhah.com/. Translations of the Talmud may also be found at the Sefaria website, http://www.sefaria.org/. There is a search engine at the Sefaria website that is extremely useful.

The names of the sages usually indicated the father's name; the "b." means ben (Hebrew) or bar (Aramaic) meaning son. For example, Eliezer b. Shimon is Eliezer the son of Shimon.

### The Oven of Akhnai

The Oven of Akhnai is one of the great stories of the Talmud. It is one of six stories examined by Rubenstein (1999) in his book. Rubenstein (1999:34) states: "Philosophers, psychologists, and legal theorists have explicated the story in terms of their disciplines—a rare example of a Talmudic passage entering the general discourse of Western culture." To fully understand this story, one needs to know some of the background. Rabbi Eliezer b. Hyrkanos, who was of the Shammai school, refused to go along with the majority in a dispute regarding an oven of Akhnai, as to whether it could become ritually unclean.

There were two schools of Pharisees: The School of Shammai and the School of Hillel. The disagreements between these schools seems to have eventually resulted in a religious war. The Talmud (Jerusalem Talmud, Shabbat 1:4) states that the Shammaites killed the Hillelites in order to ensure that they were in the majority when they were going to take a vote to decide who was in control. Some commentaries find it difficult to believe that Shammaites actually murdered Hillelites and translate the Talmudic statement as meaning that they only threatened to slaughter. Lau (2010: 223-224), however, cites evidence from the Cairo Geniza that there was an actual war between the two schools. The Shammaites successfully prevented many Hillelites from voting, became the majority, and passed 18 stringent measures.

Falk (1985: 124) says the Shammaites took control of the Jewish religion somewhere between 20 BCE and 10 BCE. According to Falk (1985: 125-127), all the attacks in the Christian Bible directed against Pharisees were meant for the extremist positions of the School of Shammai, not the School of Hillel. In fact, the early Hebrew Christians were great admirers of Hillel and his followers. The apostle Paul was one of Rabban Gamliel's (Hillel's grandson) disciples (Herford, 1962: 35; see Acts 22:3). These 18 measures passed by the Shammaites erected a ritualistic barrier between Jew and Gentile making it difficult for the two groups to socialize (Schmidt, 2001: 140-141).

The Romans destroyed the Second Temple in 70 CE. After the Temple's destruction, the Hillelites took permanent control over the important institution of Nasi (President of the Sanhedrin). This was due to Yochanan ben Zakkai, one of Hillel's disciples, who was smuggled out of Jerusalem in a coffin and was able to meet with Vespasian. Rabbi Yochanan was told that he would be allowed to establish an academy in Jabneh (Jamnia) and that the Gamliel family would be spared. Jabneh was controlled by the followers of Hillel (Adler & Friedman, 2016). Hillel and his descendants served as heads of the Sanhedrin for the next fifteen generations. They had little power but had a profound effect on Rabbinic Judaism and the direction it would take.

Friedman (2015) describes various enactments and ordinances used by the sages as legal remedies to protect society and promote the public welfare. Hillel himself introduced the Prosbul (a document that in effect transfers a loan to the court, which may collect the debt on behalf of the creditor) when he observed that people refused to lend poor people money before the Sabbatical year (Babylonian Talmud, Gittin 36a). According to Torah law (Deuteronomy 15), the creditor is not permitted to ask for his money after the Sabbatical year. A potential creditor who uses a Prosbul, no longer fearing that the debt would be canceled by the Sabbatical year, would therefore be willing to lend money to the needy. Other legal remedies that were instituted include: tikkun olam (using legal remedies to repair the world), darkei shalom (ways of peace), dracheha darkei noam (the ways of the Torah are pleasantness), and kvod habriot (human dignity); it is very unlikely that Shammaites would have approved of many of these legal remedies since they were much more text-based (Friedman, 2015).

There were still disciples of Shammai around who disagreed with the School of Hillel on many points. Rabbi Eliezer was among the foremost followers of Shammai. It was very important for the Hillelites to keep control over the Sanhedrin. Lau (2010: 222) explains the key philosophical difference between the schools. Both schools belonged to the Pharisees, but the differences in how law was decided became insurmountable because of an unwillingness to compromise on the part of the Shammaites.

Hillel's rulings and teaching were based on the rules of logical deduction, whereas Shammai preserved the ancient tradition, transmitted from person to person, with no innovations or upheavals... Shammai lives in a world of tradition and decrees, a world in which there is no room for intellectual argumentation and debate (Lau, 2010: 222-223).

The following argument regarding what is sung before a bride also sheds light on a key difference between the academies of Hillel and Shammai. The Talmud (Babylonian Talmud, Kethubos 16b-17a) asks: What does one recite while dancing before a bride? The School of Shammai does not permit any exaggerating or lying in praising the bride because the Torah (Exodus 23:7) states: "Distance yourself from a false matter." Thus, their opinion is "the bride as she is." The School of Hillel was more concerned with being pleasant with people and said: "A bride of beauty and grace." The Shammaites asked the Hillelites: "If the bride is lame or blind can one praise her beauty and grace?"

To prove his point about the oven of Akhnai, Rabbi Eliezer performed various miracles. He did not want to yield to the Hillelites and conform to majority rule.

On that day, R. Eliezer brought forward every imaginable argument, but the Sages did not accept them. He said to them: If the halachah (Jewish religious law) is in accordance with me, let this carob tree prove it! Immediately, the carob tree was uprooted and moved one hundred cubits from its place -- some say 400 cubits. The Sages responded: No proof can be brought from a carob tree.

He further said to them: If the halachah agrees with me, let the stream of water prove it! Thereupon, the stream of water flowed backwards. The sages responded: No proof can be brought from a stream of water.

Again he said to them: If the halachah agrees with me, let the walls of the house of study prove it! Whereupon, the walls started leaning as if to fall. Rabbi Yehoshua, reprimanded the walls: When scholars are engaged in a halachic dispute, why are you interfering? Out of respect for Rabbi Yehoshua they did not fall, and out of respect for Rabbi Eliezer, they did not straighten out; they are still standing tilted.

Rabbi Eliezer further said: If the halachah is as I say, let it be proven from Heaven. A Heavenly voice then rang out and exclaimed: What do you want with Rabbi Eliezer, since the law is in agreement with him in all areas. Rabbi Yehoshua then got up on his feet and declared: 'It [the Torah] is not in Heaven' (Deuteronomy 30:12). What does 'It is not in Heaven' mean? Rabbi Yirmiyah said: Since the Torah was already given at Sinai, we therefore pay no attention to Heavenly voices. After all, it is written in the Torah itself: 'After the majority one must follow' (Exodus 23:2). Rabbi Nathan met Elijah the Prophet and asked him: What was God doing at that time [when His Heavenly voice was disregarded]? Elijah answered: He laughed and said: My children have triumphed over me. My children have triumphed over me (Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia 59b).

This story makes it quite clear that you cannot win a legal debate by using miracles or even having God agree with your position. One key message of the above story is the importance of following process. Jewish law, as do many legal systems, works with majority rule. This story suggests that even if one individual is wiser than the majority and has the support of God Himself, we still must follow majority rule. Suppose the Sanhedrin would have yielded to Eliezer b. Hyrkanos, then this would establish a new principle that the opinion of a mastermind trumps the majority. This kind of system might work on occasion but it is easy to see how it could fall apart and lead to anarchy or a total breakdown of a legal system. Who decides on who is the greatest legal mind of that generation? We follow the majority, not because it is always right but because that is the ideal way to have a functioning system. One other interesting point this story makes is about God. He has a sense of humor and can laugh. This is a healthy way to understand religion and it brings God close to mankind.
God and the Heavenly Academy Ask Rabbah b. Nachmeni to Decide

The Talmud describes how Rabbah b. Nachmeni died. The government did not like the fact that Rabbah's lectures resulted in thousands of Jewish people not being in their homes during the two months preceding the holidays of Rosh Hashanah and Passover, and thereby making it difficult for the tax collectors to collect the monthly tax. The government sent agents to capture him. He had a difficult time eluding the King's men and finally was captured. He managed to escape and was hiding in a swamp, totally exhausted, sitting on the stump of a tree and studying Torah. Meanwhile:

There was a dispute in the Heavenly Academy regarding laws of leprosy: If the bright spot on the skin precedes the white hair, the person is impure [i.e., it is leprosy]; if the white hair precedes the bright spot, the person is ritually pure. If there is a doubt as to which one came first: God said 'pure' and the entire Heavenly Academy said 'impure.' They decided to ask Rabbah b. Nachmeni to resolve this dispute, since he once said, 'I am unique in my knowledge of leprosy and tents' [both tractates deal with ritual impurity and are quite difficult]. They sent a messenger to get him, but the Angel of Death could not approach him, since Rabbah did not cease his Torah studies [one cannot die while studying Torah]. Meanwhile, a wind began to blow which made the reeds rustle. Rabbah thought it was a company of soldiers that were coming to get him. He said: "It is better that I die than be delivered into the hands of the government." While he was dying he exclaimed, [in response to the Heavenly question]: Pure! Pure! A Heavenly voice declared: "Happy are you Rabbah b. Nachmeni, your body is pure and your soul departed in purity" (Babylonian Talmud, Baba Metzia 86a).

Did Rabbah know more than God? Apparently, this story illustrates that when it comes to a legal dispute, even one between God and the Heavenly Academy, a well-trained expert must be brought in to resolve the dispute. Interestingly, Maimonides, who wrote the encyclopedic compilation of Talmudic law, concluded that when there is uncertainty as to which came first, the white hair or the bright spot, the law is that the person is impure (Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Laws of Leprosy 2:9). Thus, Maimonides disagreed with God.

An important idea conveyed by this story is that no matter how brilliant the person, it is important to consult with others. In the above story, God argues with the Heavenly Academy instead of explaining His own law. This alone is difficult to comprehend but that God and the Heavenly Academy decide to consult with a mortal is even stranger. The lesson is clear: constructive arguing about issues and consulting with others is the only way to arrive at the truth.

A second lesson is that one should not be a strict fundamentalist when it comes to law. As noted above, the Shammai School "lives in a world of tradition and decrees, a world in which there is no room for intellectual argumentation and debate" (Lau, 2010: 223). We have this problem with interpreting the Constitution. There are four approaches according to Kelso (1994):

With regard to constitutional interpretation, the judge must decide, among other things, how much weight to give arguments about the plain meaning of the Constitution's text, the text's purpose or spirit, and historical evidence concerning the intent of the framers and ratifiers of the Constitution.

The late Justice Antonin Scalia believed that the correct way to interpret the Constitution was according to the "public meaning"; He railed against using an approach that saw the Constitution as a "living," morphing, and evolving document. To him, the only good Constitution was a dead one (Murphy, 2016). There are jurists who strongly believe in the originalist approach to interpretation of the Constitution. Some of them are Textualists and give "primary weight to the text and structure of the Constitution"; others are Intentionalists and give primary weight to the "intentions of framers" (Linder, 2016).

This story supports the view that God, the framer of His constitution, the Torah, understood that man was supposed to interpret it using the perspective of a person living hundreds of years later. Rabbah lived about 1,600 years after the Torah was given. This story has a similar message to the Oven of Akhnai in that the "Torah is not in Heaven" and humans have the job of interpreting it considering the intent of the framer but also examining the effects and consequences on human beings. The Hillelites believed that legal consequences such as the effect of law on human dignity, peace, and/or making the world a better place had to be considered when interpreting the law. This is the reason that God must go to mortals to see how the law has been applied, not the other way around.

A final message from the above story is that one must show respect for the opinion of others. In fact, that is the secret of Talmudic debate: respecting the opinion of others. If God can have a constructive argument and even consult with a mortal, all the more so should people have respect for the other party when having a disagreement.
God Teaches Moses About the Importance of Compassion

One of God's attributes (Exodus 34:6) is "erech apayim" which is translated as long suffering or slow to anger. In this story, God, the Omniscient One, teaches Moses about compassion.

When Moses ascended on high [to Heaven in order to receive the Torah], he found God sitting and writing "slow to anger" in the Torah. Moses asked God: Are you slow to anger only to the righteous? God replied: Even for the wicked. Moses said to God: Let the wicked perish. God said to Moses: See now that which you desire [i.e., you will change your mind in the future about this request]. Later when Israel sinned [after the incident involving the spies and Moses prayed to God that He spare them], God said to Moses: Is this not what you said to me to be, be slow to anger but only to the righteous? Moses replied to God: And did You not say to me that you are slow to anger even to the wicked. Hence it is written (Numbers 14:17): "And now, I beseech You, may the power of My Lord be great according as You have spoken, saying" (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 111a-111b).

The true power of God is seen by his forbearance and restraint when dealing with the sinner. By being slow to anger, God gives the wrongdoer plenty of time to repent. Leaders have to be patient with people and slow to anger. There are several research studies that have found that compassion and kindness on the part of leaders are correlated with productivity and profitability (Williams, 2012). Furthermore, employees with compassionate leaders are much more likely to be physically and mentally healthy than those with bad bosses (Williams, 2012).

Seppӓlӓ (2016), author of The Happiness Track, concludes that "compassion is good for the bottom line, it's great for your relationships and it inspires lasting loyalty. In addition, compassion significantly boosts your health."
Compassion for all of God's Creations

The Talmud discusses the tremendous suffering of Rabbi Yehudah HaNasi (Rebbi). He was afflicted with two diseases, kidney stones and thrush. When Rebbi urinated, he would scream in agony and the noise would be heard miles away by seafarers [probably an exaggeration]. The Talmud provides the reason why Rebbi was punished with this much suffering.

There was once a calf they were leading to slaughter. It ran away and hid its head among the folds of Rebbi's garment, and cried. Rebbi told it: "Go! For this you were created." They declared in heaven: "Since he does not show pity upon this calf, let us bring suffering upon him." Rabbi was afflicted with a kidney stone and suffered immensely for thirteen years. And the suffering left as a result of an incident. One day, Rebbi's maidservant was sweeping the house. Seeing a litter of weasels lying there, she was about to sweep them away. Rabbi said to her: "Leave them be; it is written (Psalms 145:9): "And His [God's] compassion is upon all his creations." They then said in heaven: "Since he is now compassionate, let us show compassion to him" (Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia 85a; Based on ArtScroll translation)

This memorable story not only dramatizes the importance of compassion on the part of leaders but also shows that God cares about animal suffering. Animals have to be slaughtered in the most humane way possible. This is why there are strict laws about the knife used for shechitah (Jewish method of slaughter of the animal); it has to be extremely sharp without any nicks.

### God Teaches Moses Manners

Moses spent 40 days and 40 nights learning the Torah from God. Apparently, God also taught him manners.

Rabbi Yehoshua b. Levi said: At the time that Moses ascended to Heaven, he found the Holy One tying crowns on the letters of the Torah. God said to him: "Moses, in your town people do not give greetings?" Moses replied: "Is it then proper for a servant to extend greetings to his master?" God said to him: "You should have wished me success." Moses then said to Him (Numbers 14: 17): "'And now let the power of the Lord be great, as You once declared'" (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbat 89a).

This story may have been a clever way to teach people how to behave. It is not good for society if people forget about the simple courtesies. Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai, the great sage, was always first to greet every person. Despite his prominence, this disciple of Hillel, understood the importance of greeting every human being (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 17a). If God expects a salutation from a mortal, then it is clear how important greetings are.
God asks for Blessing from Yishmael b. Elisha

The high priest entered the innermost chamber of the Temple, the Holy of Holies, once a year on the Day of Atonement (Yom Kippur). Yishmael b. Elisha had an amazing vision.

Rabbi Yishmael b. Elisha said: "I once entered the innermost part of the Temple [the Holy of Holies] to offer incense and I saw that Akatriel, the Lord of Hosts, [i.e., God] was seated on a high and lofty throne." He said to me: "Yishmael, My son, bless me." I said to Him: "May it be Your will that Your compassion should suppress Your anger and that Your compassion prevail over all Your other attributes so that You should treat Your children with the attribute of mercy and You should go above and beyond the strict letter of the law for them. And God nodded to me with His head" (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 7a).

This touching story not only depicts God as asking a mere mortal for a blessing, but this mortal then turns the tables on God because the blessing he gives is one that will benefit the Jewish people. Moreover, God is happy with this blessing. It should also be noted that the expression "lifnim meshurat hadin" (literally, inside the line of the law)-- which is usually translated as going "above and beyond the strict letter of the law" was the term used by Yishmael b. Elisha. Since Jewish law demands that we act this way (see Friedman, 2015), it is appropriate for God Himself to act this way when dealing with us.
God Laughs at Humankind

In the future, the Holy One will take a Torah onto his lap and say: "Anyone who has occupied himself with it should come and take his reward." Immediately, all the nations will gather together and arrive in disorder, as it says (Isaiah 43:9): 'All the nations will gather together.' The Holy One will say to them: "Do not enter in disorder, but allow each nation with its sages to enter separately"  Immediately, Rome will enter first. The Holy One will say: "With what have you occupied yourself?" They will say: "Creator of the Universe, many marketplaces have we established, many bathhouses have we constructed, and much silver and gold have we accumulated. All this we have done only for Israel in order that they should be able to occupy themselves with the study of Torah." The Holy One will say: "Fools of the World, everything that you have done, you have done for yourselves. You established marketplaces in order to place prostitutes there. You constructed bathhouses for your own enjoyment, and the silver and gold is mine..."

The Romans will depart with a disheartened spirit and the Persians will enter. The Holy One will say: "With what have you occupied yourself?" They will say: "Creator of the Universe, many bridges have we erected, many cities have we conquered, and many wars have we waged." The Holy One will say: "Everything that you have done, you have done for yourselves. You erected bridges in order to collect tolls. You conquered cities in order to use them for forced labor; as for wars, I wage them, as it is written (Exodus 15:3): 'The Lord is a Master of war.'"  They too will depart with a disheartened spirit  The same will happen with every nation.

The nations will then say: "Creator of the Universe, give the Torah to us now and we will observe it." The Holy One will say to them: "Fools of the World, one who works hard on the eve of the Sabbath will have something to eat on Sabbath, but one who has not worked hard on the eve of Sabbath, from where will he eat on Sabbath? However, I have one easy commandment by the name of sukkah [the booth covered with twigs that Jews dine in during the holiday of Tabernacles], go and perform this precept"  Immediately, each one will go and make himself a small sukkah on his roof. The Holy One will make the sun blaze and penetrate as it does during the summer solstice. Each one of them will kick contemptuously at his sukkah and go away...

The Holy One will sit and laugh at them, as it is written (Psalms 2:4): 'He who sits in Heaven shall laugh' (Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah, 2b-3b).

In this story, God has the last laugh on all the nations by proving that He made the right choice in giving His Torah to the Jewish people because they are the only ones who follow the commandments, regardless of their personal comfort. This story also demonstrates that God does not want capitalism built on greed. If the nations would have been able to claim that the goal of their industriousness was to provide for all, their explanation would have been accepted by God. Predatory capitalism is not what God wants for His world; he wants moral capitalism.
Is God a Joker? God and Choni HaMagil

The following story of Choni, a Talmudic sage known as HaMagil, the Circle Maker, demonstrates that Choni's relationship with the Creator was very much like that of a son to a father and so God tolerated his backtalk.

One time the majority of the month of Adar had passed and there was still no rainfall. The people sent a message to Choni HaMagil to pray that rain should fall. Choni prayed, but rain did not fall. He drew a circle and stood within it in the same manner as Habakuk the prophet, as it is written (Habakuk 2:1): "I will stand on my watch, and set me on the tower, and will watch to see what he will say to me." He declared: "Master of the Universe, Your children are relying on me because they see me as a member of Your household. I take an oath in Your name not to move from here until you show mercy upon Your children." It rained, but in very small drops. Choni's disciples said to him: "We looked to you to save us from death; however, this rain is only enough to release you from your oath." Choni then exclaimed to God: "This is not what I asked for! I prayed for enough rain fill up the cisterns, ditches, and caves." It began to pour. Every drop of rain was as big as the opening of a barrel. The sages estimated that no single raindrop was smaller than one lug. Choni's disciples said to him: "We looked to you to save us from death; however, we believe that this rain has come down in order to destroy the earth." Choni then exclaimed to God: "It is not for this kind of rain that I have prayed, but for a rain of kindness, blessing, and bounty." It rained normally. However, the rain continued for so long that the people began fleeing to the Temple Mount because of it. They told Choni: "Rabbi, just as you prayed for the rain to fall, please pray for it to cease" (Babylonian Talmud, Taanit 23a; based on translation by Soncino and ArtScroll).

The story continues, and after bringing a sacrifice to God, Choni gets God to make the rain stop. Shimon b. Shetach, the leader of the Jewish people at that time, remarked: "Were you not Choni, I would place you under a ban [for being so disrespectful to God]... But what shall I do to you who misbehaves before God and He fulfills your desire just as a son who misbehaves towards his father and his father fulfills his desire." Telushkin (1992, p. 146) sees this story as proving that God is a "primordial joker." God teases Choni with a light shower and then a deluge before providing the people with the kind of rain they needed.
Choni: The Jewish Rip Van Winkle

Said Rabbi Yochanan:All the righteous one's days, he [Choni] was troubled about this verse (Psalm 126:1), "A Song of Ascents: With the Lord's return of the captivity of Zion, we will be like dreamers." Choni said: "Is there someone who can fall asleep for seventy years with one continuous dream?" One day, he was walking on the road and saw a certain man that was planting a carob tree. Choni said to him: "How many years until this tree will be laden with fruit?" He replied: "Seventy years." Choni said to him: "Is it obvious to you that you will live another seventy years?" He said to him: "This man found a world with carob trees. In the same way as my fathers planted for me, I will also plant for my children." Choni sat and ate his meal. Drowsiness overcame him and he fell asleep. A boulder encircled him and he was shielded from the eye of others and he slept for seventy years. When Choni got up, he saw someone picking the fruits of the carob tree. He said to him: "Are you the one that planted it?" He said to him: 'I am his grandson." Choni said to him: "It is evident from this that I slept for seventy years." He saw that his donkey had given birth to several generations. Choni went to his home and said to the members of his household: "Is the son of Choni the Circle-maker alive?" They said to him: "His son is not alive, but his grandson is." Choni said to them: "I am Choni the Circle-maker." They did not believe him. Choni went to the study hall and he heard the rabbis saying: "Our discussions are as clear to us as in the years of Choni the Circle-maker." For whenever Choni would come to the study hall, he would answer all the questions that the rabbis had." Choni said to them: "I am he." They did not believe him and they therefore did not accord him the honor due him. His feelings were upset and he prayed for divine mercy and died. Said Rava, "That is what is meant by that popular adage, 'Either companionship or death'" (Babylonian Talmud, Taanis 23a; based on Sefaria translation).

There are many lessons in this story. Some feel that one of the messages of this story is to show respect to any person. Had the sages accorded the honor due the stranger claiming to be Choni, he would not have prayed for death. This story also demonstrates how important it is for a person to have friends. To live as a hermit is not a life worth living. Choni was taught an important lesson by the old man who planted the carob tree. Humans must always be productive and build for the next generation; it is not only about taking care of one's own needs. It is so easy for a person to fall into the trap of thinking life is so short so why toil for the next generation. Choni was shown that it is important to be productive in one's lifetime even if the benefits will not be seen for several generations. This is also a message for Jews in exile to continue improving the world and to never give up.

Actually, the verse that bothered Choni in Psalms is not that problematic. The Psalmist is saying that when the people return to Zion, the severity of the exile will seem like a bad dream. People will rejoice so much that they will forget the awful times in exile. This is why "our mouths will be filled with laughter." The Babylonian exile after the destruction of the First Temple lasted seventy years.
Rabbi Yehoshua b. Chananiah: Advantage of Being Unattractive

The emperor's daughter said to Rabbi Yehoshua b. Chananiah [who was quite unattractive]: "Such a magnificent Torah in an ugly vessel." He told her: "Learn from your father's palace. Where is the wine stored?" She replied: "In earthen vessels." He said to her: "The whole world stores their wine in earthen vessels, and you also use earthen vessels. You should store your wine in vessels of silver and gold." She went and transferred the wine into silver and gold vessels and the wine spoiled. He then told her: "The Torah is also like this." She stated: "But there are good looking people who are scholars." Rabbi Yehoshua answered her: "If they would be ugly they would be even more knowledgeable" (Babylonian Talmud, Nedarim 50b).

One of Rabbi Yehoshua's most famous sayings is: " The evil eye [envy, ill will toward others], the evil inclination [lust], and hatred of humankind (beriyyoth) drive a person out of the world (Avos 2:11).
Rabbi Yehoshua b. Chananiah Bested by Young Boy

Once, I was walking along a road and I saw a young boy sitting at the crossroads. I asked him: "Which road do I take to get into the town?" He said to me: "This road is long and short and this other road is short and long." So I took the short and long road. When I reached the town, I found that it was surrounded by gardens and orchards [and was a dead-end]. I turned back and said to the boy: "My son, did you not say to me that this is the short way?" He replied: "Did I not tell you that it was also the long way?" I kissed him on the head and said to him: "Happy are you Israel, for all of you are sagacious, from old to young" (Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin 53b).
Outsmarting Highwaymen

Once the students of Rabbi Akiva were going to Chezib [in Northern Israel]. They were approached by highwaymen who asked them where they were going. They said: "We are going to Acco." When they arrived at Chezib, they departed from them. The highwaymen [realizing that they had been tricked] asked them: "Whose disciples are you?" They answered: "We are the disciples of Rabbi Akiva." The highwaymen said: "Happy are Rabbi Akiva and his disciples for no wicked people will ever be able to harm them." Rabbi Menashe was once traveling to the town of Be Torata [in Babylon]. Some highwaymen approached him and asked him where he was going. He said that he was going to the town of Pumbedisa. When they reached Be Torata, he departed from them. The highwaymen said to Rabbi Menashe: "You are the disciple of Yehuda the deceiver" [they recognized him and knew that his teacher was Rabbi Yehuda]. He said to them: "You know him as a deceiver? May you all be excommunicated." They continued to steal for twenty-two more years but met with no success. When they saw what was happening, they all came and asked that the excommunication be rescinded... Come and note how different the thieves of Babylon are from the robbers of Israel (Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah 25b-26a.)

According to the Talmud, this trick was originally used by Jacob. Jacob told his brother Esau to go ahead and that he would follow him later to Seir. There is, however, no record of Jacob going to Seir (Genesis 33:14).

The Jewish highwaymen living in Israel were respectful of Rabbi Akiva; the Babylonian highwaymen were disrespectful of Rabbi Yehuda. The sages of the Talmud had a great deal of respect for those who lived in Israel. This story was probably used to illustrate how living in Israel makes even a criminal more refined. The Talmud has the following to say about scholars who lived in Israel:

Abaye remarked to Rava that one Israeli scholar was equal to two Babylonian scholars. Rava replied: "When one of us Babylonians goes to Israel he is better than two of the Israeli scholars. After all, when Rabbi Yirmiyah was here he did not know what the rabbis were talking about, but after he went up to Israel he called us 'Babylonian fools.'" (Babylonian Talmud, Kethubos 75a)

Rabbi Yirmiyah was known for saying: "The Babylonian fools, because they dwell in a dark land, they express dark legal opinions." (Babylonian Talmud, Pesachim 34b). Rabbi Yirmiyah felt that the Babylonian scholars would provide dubious explanations for various laws if they did not know the real reason. He referred to Babylonia as a "dark land" either because of its low altitude (Rashi, Pesachim 34b) or because the Zoroastrians (fire-worshippers) did not allow the Jews to have any light during their festivals (Soncino Pesachim 34b, note 1b). The Talmud also noted that the "The scholars of Israel treated each other pleasantly and respectfully when debating law; the Babylonian scholars hurt each other's feelings when debating" (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 24a). It appears that even the highwaymen living in Israel were more polite than the highwaymen living in Babylonia.
The Brilliance of Rabbi Bana'ah: Which is the True Son?

A certain man overheard his wife say to her daughter: "Why are you not more discreet in your illicit affairs? I have ten sons, and only one is from your father." When the man was on his deathbed, he said: "I leave all my property to one son". They had no idea which of them he meant, so they consulted R. Bana'ah. He said to them: "Go and bang at the grave of your father, until he rises and tells you which one of you he has left his estate." So they all went to do so. The one who was really his son, however, did not go. R. Bana'ah thereupon said: "The entire estate belongs to this one." They then went and slandered him before the king, saying: "There is a man among the Jews who extorts money from people without supporting testimony or anything else." So they took him and threw him in prison. [The wife came up with a strategy to get her husband freed from proson.] His wife came to the Court and said: "I had a slave, and some robbers have cut off his head, skinned him, eaten the flesh, filled the skin with water, and given students to drink from it, and they have not paid me either its worth or its rental!." They did not know what to make of her tale, so they said: "Let us summon the wise man of the Jews and he will tell us the meaning of this woman's complaint." So they summoned Rabbi Bana'ah, and he said to them: "She spoke to you about a goat-skin bottle." [Robbers had stolen her goat, skinned and ate it, and fashioned its hide into a water bottle.] They said: "Since he is so wise, let him sit in the gate and act as judge." (Babylonian Talmud, Bava Bathra 58a).

This story is reminiscent of the famous story of Solomon and cutting the baby in half. Rabbi Bana'ah knew that the real son would instinctively not commit such a despicable act against his father. There are other interesting lessons in this story. Rabbi Bana'ah did not use any tests that were available in those days (today we have DNA tests that can determine this with 100% accuracy) to determine who was the true son. He did not want to make anyone a mamzer (usually translated as bastard but in actuality a child that results from incest or adultery). Jewish law limits who the mamzer is permitted to marry. Even today, rabbinical courts do everything possible to avoid declaring someone a mamzer.

The mamzer has done nothing wrong and is the innocent victim of the wrongdoing of his/her parent(s), yet the Torah limits him as far as marriage The Torah states (Deuteronomy 23:3): "A mamzer shall not enter the congregation of the Lord"; the mamzer may not marry a legitimate Jew or Jewess but marriage between two mamzerim (plural of mamzer) is permitted. Clearly, the purpose of the law was to discourage adultery and incest. The Talmudic sages were not happy about the law and had an interesting interpretation of the following verse (Ecclesiastes 4:1):

I returned and observed all the oppression that take place under the sun; I saw the tears of the oppressed, with none to comfort them; their oppressors have great power, with none to comfort their victims.

Daniel the tailor says that this verse refers to the plight of the mamzer (Midrash, Leviticus Rabbah 32:8) ― he is the "oppressed" person referred to in this verse. After all, the mamzer did nothing wrong; it was his parents that engaged in the illicit sexual relations. The "oppressor" is the Great Sanhedrin that uses the "power" of the Torah ― the verse of "A mamzer shall not enter the congregation of the Lord"― to distance the mamzerim. God himself says that He must comfort them and they may have an impurity in this world but in the world to come they will be of pure gold. The sages of the Talmud looked for every possible legal loophole in order to avoid declaring someone a mamzer. The Talmudists felt that if mamzerim got mixed in with the rest of the population, we leave them alone and do not declare their status (Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 71a). The Talmud even declares that in messianic times, the mamzer will become pure (Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 72b).
The Ethics of Abba Chilkiyah

Abba Chilkiyah was a grandson of Choni the Circle Maker, and whenever the world was in need of rain the Rabbis sent a message to him and he prayed and rain fell. Once there was an urgent need for rain and the Rabbis sent to him a couple of scholars to ask him to pray for rain. They came to his house but they did not find him there. They then proceeded to the fields and they found him there hoeing. They greeted him but he took no notice of them. Towards evening he gathered some wood and placed the wood and the rake on one shoulder and his cloak on the other shoulder. Throughout the journey he walked barefoot but when he reached a stream he put his shoes on to cross it. When he came to an area of thorns and thistles he lifted up his garments thus exposing his legs to the thorns. When he reached the town, his wife adorned with jewelry came out to meet him. When he arrived home, his wife entered the house first, then he, and then the scholars. He sat down to eat but he did not say to the scholars, 'Join me'. He then shared the meal among his children, giving the older son one portion and the younger child two portions. He said to his wife: "I know the scholars have come on account of rain, let us go up to the roof and pray, perhaps the Holy One, Blessed be He, will have mercy and rain will fall; and we will not have to take credit for ourselves for making it rain." They went up to the roof. He stood in one corner and she in another. At first, the clouds appeared over the corner where his wife stood. When he came down from the roof, he said to the scholars: "Why have you come here?" They replied: "The Rabbis have sent us to you, Sir, to ask you to pray for rain." Thereupon he exclaimed: "Blessed be God, who has made you no longer dependent on Abba Chilkiyah." They replied: "We know that the rain has come on your account, but tell us, master, the meaning of these mysterious acts of yours, which are puzzling to us? Why did you not take notice of us when we greeted you?" He answered: "I was a hired as a dayworker, and I said to myself I must not interrupt my work even for a moment to greet you." They then asked: "And why did you, master, carry the wood on one shoulder and the cloak on the other shoulder?" He replied: "It was a borrowed cloak; I borrowed it for the purpose of wearing, and not for any other purpose [to carry wood on it]. They then asked him: "Why did you, master, go barefoot throughout the whole journey but when you came to a stream you put your shoes on?" He replied: "What was on the road I could see but not what was in the water" [he was afraid of stepping on something dangerous]. They asked: "Why did you, master, lift up your garments when you came to a place of thorns and thistles?" He replied: This [the leg] heals itself, but the other [the garment] does not." They asked: "Why did your wife come out adorned in jewelry to meet you, master, when you entered the city?" He replied: "In order that I should have no desire to glance on any other woman." They asked: "Why, master, did she enter the house first, and you after her, and then we?" He replied: "Because I did not know your character" [Abba did not feel it was right to leave his wife outside with two strangers]. They asked: "Why, master, did you not ask us to join you in the meal? He replied: "Because there was not sufficient food for all and you would have declined my invitation. I therefore said that it would not be right to cause the rabbis to give me credit for nothing" [Inviting people to a meal knowing they will refuse is a form of dishonesty.] They asked: "Why did you give one portion to the older son and two portions to the younger?" He replied: "Because the one stays at home [and has access to food] and the other is away in the synagogue studying the whole day." They asked: "Why, master, did the clouds appear first in the corner where your wife stood and then in your corner?" He replied: "Because a wife stays at home and gives bread to the poor which they can immediately enjoy and I give them money which they cannot enjoy immediately. Or perhaps it may have to do with certain robbers in our neighborhood. I prayed that they might die, but she prayed that they might repent; and they did repent (Babylonian Talmud, Taanis 23a-23b; based on translation by Soncino and ArtScroll).

There are many lessons in this story. The importance of being an honest laborer is one of them. Abba Chilkiyah did not waste time since he was paid for the day. We expect employers to be ethical when it comes to paying wages but employees must also be ethical and be productive. Nowadays, with smart phones and the Internet, it is so easy for employees to waste time that technically belongs to the employer. Abba Chilkiyah's ethics extended to a borrowed garment and he would not use it for another purpose. Clearly, he was very careful with the property belonging to others. The relationship between Abba Chilkiyah and his wife is interesting. Women often dress up to go out when being seen by others; for their own husbands, an old bathrobe may be adequate. Abba's wife dressed up for her husband when he came home from work. Abba's great humility is also evident: he did not want to receive credit for making it rain. He also had no issue with admitting that his wife was more compassionate than he was: she was successful in her prayer that the robbers repent.

### God is a Matchmaker

This story is from the Midrash but is a classic. It answers the question as to what God does all day. Apparently, He does more than just debate laws with the Heavenly Academy. The following dialogue, one of many, is reported in the name of R. Yosi ben Chalafta, one of the Mishnah's most prominent sages, and an unnamed Roman woman of rank.

She asked R. Yosi, "In how many days did God create the world?" "In six," he answered. "And since then," she asked, "what has God been doing?" "Matching couples for marriage," responded R. Yosi. "That's it!" she said dismissively. "Even I can do that. I have many slaves, both male and female. In no time at all, I can match them for marriage." To which R. Yosi countered, "Though this may be an easy thing for you to do, for God it is as difficult as splitting the Sea of Reeds." Whereupon, she took her leave. The next day the aristocrat lined up a thousand male and a thousand female slaves and paired them off before nightfall. The morning after, her estate resembled a battlefield. One slave had his head bashed in, another had lost an eye, while a third hobbled because of a broken leg. No one seemed to want his or her assigned mate. Quickly, she summoned R. Yosi and acknowledged. "Your God is unique and your Torah is true, pleasing and praiseworthy. You spoke wisely"(Midrash Bereshit Rabba, 68:4; translation from Sefaria).

This story demonstrates that God cares about mankind and is busy making matches. It also demonstrates the importance of marriage to God. Matchmaking is still important to the Jewish people.
Moses Asks God for a Legal System that is Cut and Dried

If the Torah were handed down cut and dried [so that there were would be no possibility for differences in opinion about the law], the world wouldn't have a leg to stand on [we could not survive such a legal system]. What is the reason? The verse states: "And the Lord spoke to Moses...," Moses said to God: "Lord of the universe! Teach me the precise law [so that there will be no ambiguities or doubts about it]. God said to Moses (Exodus 23:2): "'... follow the majority to decide the law.' If the majority acquit, acquit; if the majority say guilty, then guilty." The Torah may be interpreted in forty-nine ways leading to a decision of uncleanness, and in forty-nine ways leading to a decision of cleanness. And forty-nine is the numerical equivalent of the word v'diglo (Song of Songs 2:4). And it also says (Psalms 12:6): "The words of the Lord are pure words, as purified silver, clear to the world, refined seven times seven" (Jerusalem Talmud, Sanhedrin 4:2).

In Hebrew, the letters of the alphabet have numerical equivalents. Thus, aleph = 1, bais = 2, gimmel = 3, etc. The numerical equivalent (gematria) of the word v'diglo is 4. The sages of the Talmud understood the importance of a flexible legal system, one based on logical arguments. They recognized the dangers of a legal system where everything was defined exactly with no room for legal discussions.
Moses Asks God Why Good People Suffer

Rabbi Yehudah said in the name of Rav: "When Moses ascended to the heavens [to receive the Torah from God], he found the Holy One, blessed be He, [God] engaged in attaching crowns to the letters of the Torah. Moses said to God: "Lord of the Universe! Who is staying Your hand?" [Why are these additions necessary?] God said to him: "There is one man who will arise after many generations, Akiva the son of Yosef is his name, who will in the future expound on every tip [of letter], mounds and mounds of laws." Moses said to God: "Lord of the Universe! Show him to me." God said to him: "Turn around." Moses went and sat down behind eight rows of students in Rabbi Akiva's academy, and he did not know what they were talking about. Moses got upset. As soon as Rabbi Akiva came to a certain subject, his students said to him: "Our teacher, from where do you know this?" Rabbi Akiva said to them: "It is a law that was taught to Moses at Sinai"; he was comforted. Thereupon, Moses returned and came before the Holy One, Blessed be He, and said: "Lord of the Universe! You have a man like this, and You are giving the Torah through me?" God said to Moses: "Be silent, for such is My decree." Moses said to God: "Lord of the Universe! You have shown me his Torah, show me his reward." God said to him: "Turn around." Moses turned around and saw that they were weighing out his flesh at the market stalls [The Romans killed Rabbi Akiva during the Hadrianic persecutions by tearing his flesh with iron combs]. Moses said to God: "Lord of the Universe! Such Torah, and such a reward!" God said to him: "Be silent, for such is My decree." (Babylonian Talmud, Menachos 29b; based on translations by Sefaria and Soncino).

There are many lessons in the above story. One important lesson that some derive deals with the workings of a legal system. Moses understood the basic principles of the law and the rules needed to know how it was to be interpreted. The actual law in the time of Rabbi Akiva was impossible for Moses to comprehend. This story is another one that supports the idea of not taking an originalist approach that is text based. This story also is reminiscent of the Book of Job. Moses asks God to explain the reason for human suffering, in particular, why Rabbi Akiva died such a horrific death. This is a question humankind is always asking: "Why do good people suffer?" God did not provide Job with the answer other than making it clear that mortals were not capable of understanding it.: "Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? (Job 38:4)  Have you ever in your life commanded the morning, or told the dawn its place?" (Job 38:12). Moses also was told to be silent and not ask the question.
Moses Teaches God

The Talmud describes a situation in which God admitted that He made a "mistake." The Talmud explains the meaning of God's reply as to His name to Moses in Exodus (3:14), "I Will Be What I Will Be."

God instructed Moses to tell the Israelites that, I shall be with them in this servitude just as I will be with them in other servitudes. Moses told God: "They have enough troubles now; You do not have to tell them about future troubles." God agreed with Moses and instructed Moses to tell the Israelites (Exodus 3:14): "I Will Be has sent me" (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 9b).

God may be omniscient but he is willing to learn, and he even admits to making mistakes. This is surprising and, of course, humorous, given that He is omniscient. This Midrash relates that Moses "taught" God three things. God is not shy about learning new things; He even said to Moses: "You have taught Me something." If God, who is omniscient, is willing to learn, then mortals should also be open to new ideas.

'Then sang Israel' (Numbers 21:17). This is one of the three things said by Moses to God to which God replied: You have taught Me something. Moses said to God [after the Israelites made the Golden Calf]: Creator of the Universe! How can Israel realize what they have done? Were they not raised in Egypt and all Egyptians are idolaters? Also, when You gave the Torah, You did not give it to them. And they were not even standing nearby; as Scripture (Exodus 20:18) states: 'And the people stood at a distance.' And You only gave the Torah to me; as Scripture states (Exodus 24:1): 'Then He said to Moses: Come up to the Lord.' When You gave the commandments, You did not give it to them. You did not say 'I am the Lord your [plural] God, ' but said (Exodus 20:1): 'I am the Lord thy [singular] God." Did I sin? God said to Moses: By your life, you have spoken well and have taught Me. From now on, I will use the expression 'I am the Lord your [plural] God.'

The second occasion was when God said to Moses (Exodus 20:5): 'punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation.' Moses said to God: Creator of the Universe, Many wicked people begot righteous children. Shall the children be punished for the sins of their fathers? Terach worshipped idols, yet Abraham his son was a righteous person. Similarly, Hezekiah was a righteous person, though Ahaz his father was wicked. So also Josiah was righteous, yet Amon his father was wicked. Is it proper that the righteous should be punished for the sins of their fathers? God said to Moses: You have taught Me something. By your life, I shall nullify My words and uphold yours; as it says (Deuteronomy 24:16): 'Parents are not to be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their parents; each will die for their own sin.' And by your life, I shall record these words in your name; as it says (II Kings 14:6): 'in accordance with what is written in the Book of the Law of Moses where the Lord commanded: 'Parents are not to be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their parents...'

The third occasion was when God said to Moses: Make war with Sichon. Even if he does not seek to interfere with you, you must start a war against him, as it says (Deuteronomy 2:24): 'Set out now and cross the Arnon Gorge. See, I have given into your hand Sichon the Amorite, king of Heshbon, and his country. Begin to take possession of it and engage him in battle.' Moses, however, did not do so but, in accordance with what is written lower down, sent messengers [of peace]. God said to Moses: By your life, I shall nullify My own words and uphold yours; as it says (Deuteronomy 20:10): 'When you approach a city to wage war against it, make its people an offer of peace.' Seeing that Sichon did not accept their peace overtures, God cast him down before them; as it says (Deuteronomy 2:33): 'the Lord our God delivered him over to us and we struck him down' (Midrash Rabbah Numbers 19:33; based on Soncino translation).

The message of these stories is that people have to be willing to admit they are mistaken and thus arrive at the truth, especially when it comes to law. If God can admit to being wrong, then mortals can certainly do so.

### Moses and Og

This has been handed down by tradition. Og said: "How large is the camp of Israel? Three parasangs. I will go and uproot a mountain of the size of three parasangs and cast it upon them and kill them." He went and uprooted a mountain of the size of three parasangs and carried it on his head. But the Holy One, blessed be He, sent ants which bored a hole in it, so that it sank around his neck. He tried to pull it off, but his teeth projected on each side, and he could not pull it off. This is referred to in the text, 'The teeth of the wicked You have broken,' as explained by Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish. For R. Shimon ben Lakish said: "What is the meaning of the text (Psalms 3:8): 'The teeth of the wicked You have broken?' Do not read, shibbarta [You have broken], but shirbabta [You have lengthened]. How tall was Moses? Ten cubits. He took an axe ten cubits long, leapt ten cubits into the air, and struck him on his ankle and killed him." (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 54b; based on translation of Soncino and ArtScroll).

This story is an example of the storytelling style used by the Talmudic sages. The story has been interpreted allegorically by numerous commentaries. Kosman (2002) cites several of them and states:

We will now present these two interpretive directions, and in light of what we propose, the reader will now easily understand why these two directions finely hone the opposing poles of the narrative of the war between Moses and Og: one "blackens" the character of Og and presents this battle as a clear-cut struggle between the forces of impurity and those of sanctity; and the other transforms Og into a total righteous one, on the very same level as that occupied by Moses, but argues that the opposing poles in this war story mark the distinction between the people of Israel, that was chosen by the grace of God to be His children, and the non-Jewish peoples, who were removed from this sphere (Kosman, 2002).

It is also possible to view this story as folklore similar to the Paul Bunyan tales. It seems that Og, King of Bashan, represents a powerful force attempting to eradicate the Israelites that the elderly Moses (he was 120-years old) was able to overcome. The mountain that Og uprooted was 3 parasangs wide (A parasang is 8,000 cubits (a cubit is about 18.9 inches long). Thus, the mountain he uprooted was about 7.2 miles wide. This means that Og was probably taller than that. Moses was puny compared to that. One can say the same for the Jewish population of the world. Jews make up .2% of the world's population and we are insignificant compared to the other major religions. The Talmudic story hints that in the end, the Jewish values of ethical monotheism will prevail. The 10 cubits might hint at the ten commandments that forever changed the world.

The Torah actually states (Deuteronomy 3: 11) that Og's iron bed was nine cubits long and four cubits wide and was kept on display in Rabbah. Billington (2007) posits that Og's bed was exactly 12 feet long since the text states that "ordinary cubits," not royal cubits were being used. This means that he was probably over 8 feet tall. He also states that, based on the text, he estimates that Goliath was over 8 feet tall and possibly 8'7", and probably weighed more than 400 pounds.
Rabbah b. Shila Teaches God

This story from the Talmud also shows God "learning" from a mortal. In fact, God is portrayed as One who studies the law and quotes mortals.

Rabbah b. Shila once encountered Elijah the Prophet [who reveals himself to great people]. He asked him: What is the Holy One doing? Elijah answered: He is quoting legal decisions in the names of all the Rabbis, but not in the name of Rabbi Meir. Rabbah asked: Why? Elijah answered: Because Rabbi Meir studied laws from the mouth of acher [literally, the other, a name given to Rabbi Elisha b. Avuyah who became a heretic]. Rabbah explained: Rabbi Meir found a pomegranate, he ate the fruit on the inside and discarded the peel. Elijah answered: Now God is saying, 'Meir, my son, says ' (Babylonian Talmud, Chagigah 15b).

Who ought to know best what is in the heart of man, God or Rabbah? Yet, when Rabbah explains that Rabbi Meir only culled the good in learning from Acher the heretic and discarded the bad, God accepts this and starts quoting Rabbi Meir along with everyone else. This, despite the fact that God gave the law to the Israelites. An important lesson derived from this story is the importance of learning from everyone. If God is willing to learn from a mortal, mortals should not be arrogant when it comes to acquiring knowledge.

This idea is also expressed in Avos:

There are four types among those who sit before the sages: A sponge, a funnel, a strainer, and a sieve. A sponge absorbs everything; a funnel receives at one end and lets out at the other; a strainer lets out he wine and retains the dregs; a sieve lets out the coarse meal and retains the fine flour (Avos 5:15).

A person has to be like a sieve when learning and knowing what to retain.
Hillel's Love for Learning

The School of Shammai believed that one should only teach those who are wise, humble, of a good family, and wealthy (Babylonian Talmud, Avos D'Rabbi Nosson 2: 9). The School of Hillel, on the other hand, believed in universal education and that everyone should be taught Torah since many wicked people became virtuous and upright through studying, and from them descended righteous, pious people. This story demonstrates how Hillel behaved when he was a poor woodchopper.

It was reported about Hillel the Elder that every day he used to work and earn one tropaik [about half of a dinar], half of which he would give to the guard at the House of Learning, the other half being spent for his food and for that of his family. One day he found nothing to earn and the guard at the House of Learning would not permit him to enter. He climbed up and sat upon the skylight, to hear the words of the living God from the mouth of Shemayah and Abtalion — They say, that day was the eve of Sabbath in the winter solstice and snow fell down upon him from heaven. When the dawn rose, Shemayah said to Abtalion: "Brother Abtalion, on every day this house is light and to-day it is dark, is it perhaps a cloudy day." They looked up and saw the figure of a man in the skylight. They went up and found him covered by three cubits of snow. They removed him, bathed and anointed him and placed him opposite the fire and they said: This man deserves that the Sabbath be profaned on his behalf (Babylonian Talmud, Yuma 35b; based on translation of Soncino).

Hillel was born in Babylonia c. 110 BCE and immigrated to Israel. This story is used by the Talmud to teach that poverty is not an excuse for not studying. His teachers, Shemayah and Abtalion, were famous converts.
Learning Torah on One Foot

What is the most important principle of Judaism? This story answers the question.

There was another incident involving a certain gentile who came before Shammai and said to him: "convert me to Judaism on condition that you will teach me the entire Torah while I stand on one foot." Upon hearing these words, Shammai pushed him away with the [builder's] ruler he was holding in his hand [Shammai was a builder]. The gentile came before Hillel, [and asked Hillel to teach him the entire Torah while standing on one foot] Hillel said to him: "That which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow: this is the entire Torah all the rest is an elaboration of this one, central point; Now, go and learn it." (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbos 31a; ArtScroll translation).

The commentaries have difficulty with this. While it is true that many of the Torah's laws deal with how people should behave with each other (more than 100 of the Torah's 613 precepts deal with business ethics), many deal with the relationship between man and God (e.g., observing the Sabbath, having a mezuzah on the doorpost, etc.). One answer given is that Hillel was referring to the majority of the precepts (see commentary of Rashi). It is quite possible, however, that Hillel was hinting at his approach to law. If the core value of Judaism deals with laws between human and human, then it is reasonable to use legal remedies such as tikkun olam, darkei shalom, dracheha darkei noam and kvod habriot to make adjustments (takanot) when necessary.

In fact, Hillel's Prosbol to encourage providing loans to the poor before a sabbatical year was exactly this kind of legal remedy. A text-based law can sometimes have the opposite effect of the original intent of the lawgiver as circumstances change. The Talmud saw a problem with an absolutist approach to truth. This is the correct way to behave in almost all situations but can cause strife in others. The Talmudists found hints in the Torah that God Himself lied to ensure peace between husband and wife (see Friedman & Weisel (2013) for more about when lying is permissible under Jewish law).

There is a similar question in the Christian Bible (Matthew 22: 36-40). Jesus is asked which is the "greatest commandment." His answer is not the same as Hillel's.

Teacher, which is the greatest commandment in the Law? Jesus replied: "'You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your might.' This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: 'Love your fellow as yourself.' All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments." (Matthew 22: 36-40)

One should note that Hillel used the negative version of the Golden Rule, "You shall love your fellow as yourself" (Leviticus 19:18). The negative Golden Rule is much more practical and doable. One suspects that Hillel purposely did not use the verse "You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all Your might" (Deuteronomy 6: 5) because it can have adverse consequences. People who are too extreme in their religious views often become intolerant of people who have somewhat different views. Many religious wars have taken place because of relatively small differences in how to serve God. Indeed, as discussed above, the followers of Shammai killed the followers of Hillel. Hillel died c. 10 CE, sixty years before the destruction of the Temple, but saw the effects of religious extremism.

### Hillel and the Bet

The following is reminiscent of stories told of founders of organizations. As noted above, the Hillelites controlled the direction of the religion for several hundred years by ensuring that descendants of Hillel were the Presidents (Nasi) of the Sanhedrin. The last Nasi was Rabbi Gamliel VI, who died in 425. In that year, Emperor Theodosius II did not allow the Jews to appoint a successor and thereby ended the office of Nasi (Safrai, 1976: 354-355; Barnavi, 1992: 69).

It once happened that two people made a bet with one another. They said: whoever goes and provokes Hillel to lose his temper, let him take 400 zuz as his prize. Thereupon, one of them said: I will provoke him. That day was Friday afternoon, the eve of the Sabbath, and Hillel was busy washing his head in preparation for the Sabbath. As he was doing so, the man went and passed by the doorway of Hillel's house calling: "Is there a Hillel here? Is there a Hillel here?" Hillel put on his cloak and went out to greet the person and said to him: "My son, what do you seek? He replied to him: "I have a question to ask of you." Hillel said to him: "Ask my son, ask!"

He asked him: "Why are the heads of the Babylonians so round?" [Hillel was originally from Babylonia.] Hillel replied: "You have truly asked a profound question; the reason is because they do not have skillful midwives."

The person then went away and waited a while, and then returned to Hillel's house and called out: "Is there a Hillel here? Is there a Hillel here?" Hillel again put on his cloak and went out to greet the person, and said to him: "My son what do you seek?" The person replied to him: "I have a question to ask of you." Hillel said to him: "Ask my son, ask?" He asked him: "Why is it that the eyes of the Tarmodians are especially round?" Hillel replied: "You have truly asked a profound question; the reason is because they live in sandy terrain."

The person then went away and waited a while, and then returned to Hillel's house and called out: "Is there a Hillel here? Is there a Hillel here?" Hillel once again put on his cloak and went out to greet the person, and said to him: "My son what do you seek?" The person replied to him: "I have a question to ask of you." Hillel said to him: "Ask my son, ask?" He asked him: "Why is it that the feet of Africans are so wide?" Hillel replied: "You have truly asked a profound question; the reason is because they live in swamplands."

The man said to Hillel. I have a great many questions to ask, and I am fearful that you may become angry with me. Hillel wrapped himself up in his cloak, sat down in front of him and said to him: "Every question you have to ask, feel free to ask." The person then said to Hillel: "Are you the great Hillel whom they call the Nasi of the Jewish people? Hillel replied: "Yes." The person then said: "If it is indeed you, then let there not be many like you among the Jewish people." Hillel replied: "My son, why do you say such a thing?" The person responded: "Because on your account, I have lost 400 zuz." After telling Hillel about the bet, Hillel said: "One should always vigilantly guard his temperament. It is far better that you should lose 400 zuz, and 400 zuz more, than that Hillel should lose his temper" (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbos 30b-31a; based on ArtScroll translation).

The previous story contrasts the Hillel and Shammai approaches when dealing with people; Hillel made it a point to always remain calm and never lose his temper. Apparently, his students continued this approach in dealing with people. The Talmud (Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin 13b) explains the reason the law is according to the School of Hillel and not the School of Shammai.

For three years the School of Shammai and the School of Hillel debated each other. These said the halachah is in agreement with our view, and these said the halachah is in agreement with our view. Then, a heavenly voice (bath kol) went forth and announced: both opinions are the words of the living God, but the halachah is in agreement with the School of Hillel... What did the School of Hillel do to merit that the halachah is according to their view? Because they were kindly and modest and they studied their own opinion and those of the School of Shammai. And not only that, but they would mention the opinion of the School of Shammai before their own (Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin 13b).

After this, the Talmudic sages got much stricter about not following the opinions of the School of Shammai. They went so far as stating that Rabbi Tarfon deserved being harmed by highwaymen for following the view of the Shammaites that the prayer of shema should be said while lying down, even when traveling on the road (Babylonian Talmud, Berachot 10b). Rabbi Nachman b. Yitzchak's opinion is even harsher and he clearly states that one who follows the view of the School of Shammai deserves death (Babylonian Talmud, Berachot 11a). Rabbi Dosa b. Harkinas called Yonatan b. Hyrkanos, his brother, a "first-born of Satan" for following the opinion of the School of Shammai (Babylonian Talmud, Yebamoth 16a).
The Student, the Tzitzit, and the Harlot

The Talmud tells the story of a man who was very scrupulous in the observance of the commandment of tzitzit, of wearing ritual fringes on the four corners of one's garment. Once he heard that there was a prostitute in a city by the sea whose fee was four hundred gold pieces. He sent her the four hundred gold pieces, and a time was arranged for him. When the day arrived, he went to the door of her house. Her maid went in and told her: "That man who sent you the four hundred pieces of gold has come and sits at the door." Said she: "Let him enter." He entered. She had prepared for him seven beds, six of silver and one of gold. They were arranged one above the other, and between each there was a ladder made of silver. The highest bed was the one of gold. She climbed up to the top and lay down naked in the golden bed. Then he too climbed up to sit beside her in the nude. At this moment the tzitziot, the four fringes of his garb, came and slapped him across the face. At this, he broke away and sat down on the ground. She too came down and sat on the ground. Said she to him: "By the Capitol of Rome! I shall not let you be until you tell me what blemish you saw in me." Said he to her: "I swear I have never seen a woman as beautiful as you, but there is a commandment that God commanded us, and its name is tzitzit. The words in which it is written contain the phrase 'I am the Eternal your God' twice, meaning: I am the one who calls to account; I am the one who will reward. Now, the tzitziot appeared to me as if they were four witnesses." Said she to him: "I shall not let you off until you tell me your name, the name of your city, the name of your rabbi, and the name of the school where you study Tora." He wrote it all down and placed it into her hand. Then she got up and divided all her property into three parts: A third for the government [so that they would allow her to convert], a third for the poor, and a third she took with her, apart from "that bed linen" (which was included in the division). She proceeded to the study house of R. Hiya and said to him: "Rabbi! Command that I be made a convert." Said he to her: "My daughter, is it perhaps that one of the students appealed to your eyes?" She took the note that the man had given her from her hand and gave it to R. Hiya. After reading it, he said to her: "Go and take possession of what you have acquired."

The story concludes with this moral: "And so the same bed linen that she once spread out for the man to serve his lust, she now spread out for him in consecrated union. This was the reward for the mitzva of tzitzit in this world. How much in the world to come, who can tell?" (Babylonian Talmud, Menachot 44a; based on translation by Eliezer Berkovits).

Eliezer Berkovits (2002) sees many important lessons about sexual ethics in this story. He asserts:

The story begins with a full recognition of the almost irresistible force of the sexual instinct. The young man is a Talmudic scholar, a pious man. As used to be customary, in addition to observing the commandments of the Tora as befits a student of the Tora, he dedicates himself to the strictest observance of one specific commandment. His sexual desire in this case is not a momentary temptation. The prostitute is extremely expensive, and he has to sacrifice a small fortune in order to get to her. He has to wait for the appointed day, and he has to go on a long journey, for she lives in a city "by the sea." When he arrives, he has to undergo the indignity of having to sit at her door until he is admitted. None of this deters him. He is like one possessed. It is not accidental to the story that the young man had chosen the commandment of the fringes for especially conscientious observance. For of this commandment the Bible says (Numbers 15:39): "And it shall be unto you for a fringe, that you may look upon it and remember all the commandments of the Eternal, and do them; and that you go not about after your own heart and after your own eyes, after which you used to go astray" (Berkovits, 2002).

Berkovits (2002) sees this as a story of a woman longing for personalization and not simply being a sex object.

But now, sitting opposite each other on the ground, he recognizes her as the most beautiful woman he ever saw. He acknowledges her in her full feminine dignity and is able to appreciate her beauty without the eyes of lust. When he first appeared at her door, he was nameless. He was "that man who sent her the four hundred pieces of gold." That was enough, nothing else mattered. But now she asks him about names: His name, the name of his city, the name of his rabbi, the name of the house of study where he learns Tora – so many names! Having emerged from the wilderness of impersonality, she is longing for personalization: Who are you, where do you come from, who made you what you are, and how was it achieved? As she meets him as a person, she finds herself as one...It is redemption from impersonality. She comes out of it a changed human being. And so, we assume, does he. Finally, his struggles with the heart and the eyes that lead one astray are over. He has gained himself a new heart and he sees with new eyes. Now, the mitzva of tzitzit is fulfilled, not only in ritual observance, but also in recovered personal dignity (Berkovits, 2002).

The story ends in a way that demonstrates that "possession" can be seen in two different ways:

Strangely, as he gives his blessing to their union, the rabbi uses what one might think is most inappropriate language in the situation: "Go and take possession of what you have acquired." It would seem to us that these words are chosen intentionally to make the point of her transformation. Originally, in her state of impersonality, she wanted possession in its impersonal form. She did not want him, but his gold pieces. But now that the impersonality of their relationship has been redeemed, it is person who takes the place of possession (Berkovits, 2002).

Clothing has numerous purposes such as covering up one's nakedness; protecting one from the elements; identifying one's gender, status, and religion/nationality. What tzitzit are supposed to do is remind one that there is a higher purpose in life and one is supposed to gaze at them so that "you may remember and perform all My commandments and be holy to your God" (Numbers 15: 40). Adding fringes and a thread of blue wool transforms a garment into a constant reminder. Clothing can also be used to titillate and cause one to engage in lewd acts such as adultery. The same can be said of sexual intercourse and gold. The story demonstrates how an object or human body can be used for sacred or profane purposes. This is why the bed linen play an important role in the story.
Rebbi Wept: How a Harlot Made Someone Repent

As noted above, Rebbi is Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi (President of the Sanhedrin). He redacted the Mishna around the year 189 C.E.

It was said of Eleazar ben Dordia that he did not leave out any harlot in the world without cohabiting with her. Once, on hearing that there was a certain harlot in one of the towns overseas who accepted a purse of denarii for her fee. He took a purse of denarii and crossed seven rivers for her sake. As he was with her, she passed wind and said: "As this wind will not return to its place, so will Eleazar ben Dordia never be received in repentance." He thereupon went, sat between two hills and mountains and exclaimed: "O, hills and mountains, plead for mercy for me!" They replied: "How shall we pray for thee? We stand in need of it ourselves, for it is said (Isaiah 54:10), 'For the mountains shall depart and the hills be removed.'" So he exclaimed: "Heaven and earth, plead for mercy for me!" They said to him: "How shall we pray for thee? We stand in need of it ourselves, for it is said (Isaiah 51:6), 'For the heavens shall dissipate like smoke, and the earth will wear out like a garment.'" He then exclaimed: "Sun and moon, plead for mercy for me!" They said to him: "How shall we pray for thee? We stand in need of it ourselves, for it is said (Isaiah 24:23), 'Then the moon shall be humiliated and the sun ashamed.' He exclaimed: "Ye stars and constellations, plead for mercy for me." Said they: How shall we pray for thee? We stand in need of it ourselves, for it is said (Isaiah 34:4), 'And all the hosts of heaven shall dissolve.' Elazar ben Durdia said: "The matter then depends upon me alone!" He thereupon placed his head between his knees and wept aloud until his soul departed. A heavenly voice issued forth and proclaimed: "Rabbi Eleazar ben Dordai is destined for the life of the world to come!"... Rebbi, on hearing of it, wept and said: "There is one who acquires eternity [paradise] in a single hour, and there is another who acquires eternity after many years." Rebbi also said: "It is not enough that penitents are accepted in Heaven, but they are even called 'Rabbi'!" (Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah 17a; based on translation of Soncino and ArtScroll).

This story demonstrates the power of penitence. The inner dialog that Eleazar ben Dordai had with the hills, mountains, heaven, earth, sun, moon, stars, and constellations may symbolize that nothing in this world is permanent, and certainly physical pleasure is not. Once a person understands the impermanence of life, then he or she may understand that the pursuit of pleasure does not provide one with a meaningful life. There might also be a connection between the wind passed by the prostitute and the expression used by Ecclesiastes, hevel. That term is usually translated as vanity or transient or absurd, actually means vapor or breath.

### Learning for Thirteen Years in a Cave

Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai (also spelled Yohai) was a disciple of Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Akiva supported Bar Kokhba in his revolt against the Romans (132 CE to 135 CE) and was tortured to death by them. It is not surprising that Rabbi Shimon hated the Romans.

Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Yosi, and Rabbi Shimon were once sitting, and Yehuda, a son of proselytes, was sitting near them. R. Yehuda commenced the discussion by observing [about the Romans who ruled Israel then]: "How admirable are the works of this people! They have established marketplaces, they have built bridges, they have erected bathhouses.'" Rabbi Yosi was silent. Rabbi Shimon b. Yochai answered and said: "All that they made they made for themselves; they built marketplaces, to set harlots in them; bathhouses, to beautify themselves; bridges, to levy tolls for them." Now, Yehuda the son of proselytes went and related their talk, which reached the Roman government. They decreed: Yehuda, who exalted us shall be exalted; Yosi, who was silent, shall be exiled to Sepphoris; Shimon, who denigrated us, let him be executed. He and his son went and hid themselves in the study hall. Every day, his wife brought him bread and a mug of water and they ate. But when the decree became more severe, Shimon told his son: "The minds of women are easily swayed: she may be tortured and expose us." So they went and hid in a cave. A miracle occurred and a carob-tree and a spring of water were created for them. They would strip their garments and sit up to their necks in sand. The whole day they studied; when it was time for prayers they would dress, covered themselves, and prayed. Then, they would strip off their garments again, so that they should not wear out. Thus they dwelt twelve years in the cave. One day, Elijah came and stood at the entrance to the cave and exclaimed: "Who will inform the son of Yochai that the Emperor is dead and his decree annulled?" So they emerged from the cave. Seeing a man plowing and sowing, they exclaimed: "They forsake life eternal and engage in life temporal!" Whatever they cast their eyes upon was immediately burnt up. Thereupon a Heavenly Voice came forth and cried out, "Have you emerged to destroy My world: Return to your cave!" So they returned and dwelt there twelve months. At that point they said: "The punishment of the wicked in Gehenna is limited to twelve months." A Heavenly Voice then rang out and said, "Emerge from your cave!" They emerged from the cave. Wherever Rabbi Elazar destroyed something [with his fiery gaze], Rabbi Shimon would heal it. Said Rabbi Shimon to him: "My son! The world has enough total devotees to Torah study in you and me alone." On the eve of the Sabbath before sunset, they saw an old man holding two bundles of myrtle and running at twilight. They asked him: "What are these for?" He replied: "They are in honor of the Sabbath," They said: "But one should suffice you?" He replied: One is for zachor (remember) and one for shamor (observe) [The words Shamor and Zachor are used in the Torah regarding the Sabbath]. Said Rabbi Shimon to his son: "See how precious are the commandments to Israel." After this they were comforted. Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair, Rabbi Shimon's son-in-law [some say father-in-law] heard thereof and went out to meet him. He took Rabbi Shimon into the bathhouse and massaged his flesh. Seeing the fissures in his skin, he wept and the tears streamed from his eyes. He cried out: "Woe to me that I see you in such a state!" Rabbi Shimon replied: "On the contrary. Happy are you that you see me thus. For if you did not see me in such a state you would not find me thus [so learned in Torah]. For originally, when R. Shimon ben Yochai raised a difficulty, R. Pinchas ben Yair would give him twelve answers, whereas subsequently [after being in the cave]when R. Phinehas b. Yair raised a difficulty, R. Shimon b. Yochai would give him twenty-four answers.

Rabbi Shimon said: since a miracle has occurred to rescue me, let me go and fix something, for it is written (Genesis 33:18), "and Jacob came whole to the city of Shechem." Rav interpreted this verse to mean, "Bodily whole, financially whole, and whole in his learning." The verse says (Genesis 33:18): "And he encamped [the word for encamped, vayichan. also could mean showed grace] before the city." Rav interpreted this to mean: "He instituted coinage for the city." Shmuel said: "He instituted marketplaces for them." Rabbi Yochanan said: "He instituted bathhouses for them." [This shows that Jacob showed gratitude for the miracle that happened to him – he was not hurt by Esau – by improving the world.] Rabbi Shimon asked: "Is there something that needs improvement? They told him: "There is a place of doubtful uncleanness, and priests have the trouble of going round it." Said Rabbi Shimon: "Does anyone know that there was a presumption of ritual cleanness here?" A certain old man replied: "Here Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai cut down lupines of terumah [thus it was ritually clean]. So he did likewise. Wherever the ground was hard, Rabbi Shimon declared it ritually clean; while wherever it was soft, he marked it as ritually unclean. The old man said sarcastically: "The son of Yochai has purified a cemetery!" Rabbi Shimon replied to him: "Had you not been with us when we set about our task, or even if you have been with us but did not vote, you might have said well. But now that you were with us and voted with us, what you said will have terrible consequences. It will be said, "Even harlots braid one another's hair"; how much more so should scholars treat each other respectfully!" Rabbi Shimon cast his eye upon him, and he died. Then he went out into the street and saw Yehuda, the son of proselytes: "Is this one still in the world!" He cast his eyes upon him and he became a heap of bones (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbos 33b-34a; based on translation of Soncino and ArtScroll).

Zion (2014) sees this story as a way of teaching us which road to take: tikkun olam (repairing the world) vs. vita contemplativa (contemplative life). There are several arguments about this in the Talmud. In fact, Rabbi Shimon b. Yochai is the proponent of the view "If a man plows at the time of plowing, sows at the time of sowing, harvests at the time of harvesting, threshes at the time of threshing, and winnows at the time of the blowing wind, what will become of the study of Torah? (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 35b). Rabbi Shimon felt that the ideal life was one in which the people merit that their work is done by others and the entire day is spent studying Torah. Rabbi Yishmael disagrees and asserts that the verse (Deuteronomy 11:14) "And you will gather in your grain" indicates that the ideal life is one in which earning a living is combined with Torah study.

In this story, Rabbi Shimon and his son first spend 12 years in a cave living a monastic existence. When they leave, they cannot comprehend the life of the laborer, the person who plows and sows to make a living. God has no choice but to send them back into the "ivory tower" of the cave. They re-emerge a year later. The father has learned to appreciate the ways of the world; his son has not. The father has to repair everything his son is destroying. The father does teach his son to find comfort in the way the old man observes the Sabbath. Zion (2014) cites a source that says that the cave represents the intellect and contrasts with the way the old man worships God, i.e., with a "delicate and sensuous fragrance." Some see this transformation of Rabbi Shimon similar to the spiritual revolution of the Baal Shem Tov who introduced Chassidism. The Chassid learned to see the possibility of worshipping God in the most commonplace activities. Their opponents believe that the only way to serve God properly is in asceticism, prayer, and studying Torah.

The story ends with Rabbi Shimon in a bathhouse allowing himself to be indulged. Zion (2014) observes: "While Bar Yochai had shown no appreciation of his wife's concern for his physical wellbeing and disdained any dependence on others, now he accepts graciously that kind of loving physical care from his father-in-law." Rabbi Shimon not only enjoys a good bath in a bathhouse made by the Romans, he interprets a verse regarding the Patriarch Jacob to mean fixing a city. Jacob showed gratitude to God by tikkun olam (repairing the world), not studying Torah. In fact, according to one opinion, he established bathhouses.

Zion (2014) concludes:

In summing up the plot trajectory of Bar Yohai, note how he has now been domesticated almost completely, turning from a detractor to a promoter of civilization, from otherworldly Torah scholar to a world-repairing scholar who uses his legal wisdom to make life easier for priests going to market. He heals rather than damages, he feels gratitude for rather than disdain for the material world... However he has not become a milktoast, a nebach peacenik like the rabbinic view of Hillel as the lover of peace always seeking compromise. Bar Yohai still uses his charismatic powers to punish extra-legally, in a vigilante way... Bar Yohai's extremism has not been lost but simply redirected...Bar Yohai believes that forms of worldly corruption can be eradicated and he acts decisively (Zion, 2014).

Incidentally, the most important and famous work of Kabbalah (Jewish mysticism), the Zohar, is attributed to him and said to have been written by him when living in the cave. We have seen the transformation of Rabbi Shimon. What happens to his son, Elazar ben Shimon? He becomes a police officer working for the Roman authorities using his brilliance to capture criminals. He incurred the wrath of some of the sages and his teacher even called him "vinegar son of wine" for being responsible for the execution of so many criminals. What is even more fascinating, he is described in the Talmud as being incredibly obese. He has such a huge stomach that a noblewoman once told him that there was no way he could have intercourse with his wife and that clearly his children were not his (Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia 84a). Apparently, he was no longer living on a simple diet of carob and water (Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia 83b – 84b).
The Righteous Donkey of Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair

The donkey of Rabbi Pinchas b. Yair was stolen by robbers at night. It was hidden by them for three days and refused to eat anything. After the three days the robbers decided to send it back to its owner, since they were afraid that it would die and smell up their cave [their hideout]. They sent it away and it returned to its master's home. When it reached the gate, it began to bray. Rabbi Pinchas said: Open the gate for this poor creature. It has not eaten anything for three days. They opened the gate and let her in. Rabbi Pinchas said: Give her something to eat. They gave her barley but she refused to eat it. They told Rabbi Pinchas that the donkey refused to eat. Rabbi Pinchas asked them whether they observed the laws of tithing? They responded affirmatively. He asked whether they had given the tithe that is due according to the law of demai [demai are produce purchased from ignorant people and thus there is a suspicion that the tithes may not have been given]? They responded: Did you not teach us that one who purchases grain for cattle, flour for tanning hides, oil for lights, and oil for smearing vessels is exempt from the tithe of demai? Rabbi Pinchas said to them: What can we do for the poor creature given that she is so stringent for herself? They tithed the barley and the donkey ate (Jerusalem Talmud, Demai 1:3).

This story is a clever way to teach people the importance of tithing. It also teaches us not to always look for leniencies in law, especially when it comes to tithing.

### Rabbi Elazar ben Shimon and the Ugly Person

This story demonstrates how a scholar can become arrogant and show disrespect for an ordinary person. If it is Elazar ben Shimon of the previous story, it is not surprising that living in a cave for thirteen years made him somewhat insensitive. However, in some texts, the story is told of Shimon ben Elazar.

Once Rabbi Elazar son of R. Shimon was coming from Migdal Gedor, from his teacher's house. He rode on his donkey along the riverbank, and was feeling very happy and proud because he had studied much Torah. There chanced his way an exceedingly ugly person, who greeted him: "Peace be upon you, my teacher!" R. Elazar did not return the greeting to him but instead replied: "Empty one! How ugly is that man! Are all the people of your city perhaps as ugly as you?" The man replied: "I do not know. But go and tell the craftsman who made me, 'How ugly is the vessel which you have made!'" Realizing that he had sinned, R. Elazar dismounted from his donkey, prostrated himself before the man, and said to him: "I have spoken out of turn to you. Forgive me!" But the man replied, "I will not forgive you until you go to the craftsman who made me and say to him, 'How ugly is the vessel which you have made.'" R. Elazar kept on walking after him seeking his forgiveness until he reached his city. The residents of his city came out to greet Rabbi Elazar, saying, "Peace be upon you, O Teacher! O Teacher! O Master! O Master" Said the man to them, "Whom are you calling 'Master'?" They said to him: "The person walking behind you." He said to them: "If this is a 'teacher,' may there not be any more like him in Israel." They said to him: "Why so?" The man said to them: He did such-and-such to me. They said to him: "Nevertheless, forgive him, for he is a man greatly learned in the Torah." He said to them: "For your sakes I will forgive him but only if he does not act this way anymore." Soon after this R. Elazar entered the study hall and taught: "A person should always be pliant as the reed, and not as hard like a cedar. And it was for this reason the reed merited that of it should be made a pen for the writing of the Torah scrolls, tefillin and mezuzot." (Babylonian Talmud, Taanit 20a-20b; based on ArtScroll translation).

The commentaries are surprised by the behavior of Rabbi Elazar ben Shimon. It is true that scholars often have little respect for ordinary people but this is highly unusual. Some commentaries believe that Rabbi Elazar mistook this person for a thug based on his appearance. He may have thought that the greeting was meant in a sarcastic tone. In any case, the lesson is an important one about tolerance and not judging people by how they look.

Blau (n.d.) citing various sources points out that there is no other mention of the town of "Migdal Gedor." This suggests that the entire story may be symbolic. The term migdal means tower and gedor means fence. Scholars often find themselves living in towers behind fences (we often complain about the ivory tower of academe). This story teaches us that scholars have to be part of the outside world. Blau concludes: "Torah [i.e., spirituality] was never meant to hide from the world, calling the world ugly from behind a tall boundary. Torah was meant to transform the world."
Rabbi Yosi's Prayer in a Ruin: Lessons from Elijah

This is the same Rabbi Yosi who was punished by the Romans by being exiled to Sepphoris for being quiet as Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai castigated them (see "Thirteen Years in a Cave").

Rabbi Yosi said: I was once traveling on the road, and I entered into one of the ruins of Jerusalem in order to pray. Elijah of blessed memory appeared and waited for me at the door till I finished my prayer. After I finished my prayer, he said to me: "Peace be with you, my teacher!" I replied: "Peace be with you, my teacher and master!" And he said to me: "My son, why did you go into this ruin?" [and place yourself in danger] I replied: "To pray." He said to me: "You should have prayed on the road." I replied: "I feared that passersby might interrupt me." He said to me: "You should have said an abbreviated prayer." At that time, I learned from Elijah the following three things: "One must not go into a ruin; one may say the prayer on the road; and if one does say his prayer on the road, he recites an abbreviated prayer." Elijah further said to me: "My son, what sound did you hear in this ruin?" I replied: "I heard a divine voice, cooing like a dove, and saying: 'Woe to the children, on account of whose sins I destroyed My house and burnt My temple and exiled them among the nations of the world!'" And he said to me: "By your life and by your head! [ancient form of oath] Not only at this moment does the divine voice so exclaim, but three times each day does it exclaim thus! And more than that, whenever the Israelites go into the synagogues and houses of study and respond: 'May His great name be blessed!' the Holy One, blessed be He, shakes His head and says: 'Happy is the king who is thus praised in this house! What is there for the father who has exiled his children, and woe to the children who have been exiled from the table of their father!' (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 3a; based on translation by Soncino and ArtScroll)

Rabbi Yosi ben Chalafta was one of the five students of Rabbi Akiva who was ordained by Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava. Rabbi Yehuda ben Bava was killed by the Romans for doing this since it was prohibited by the Romans (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 14a). This story probably occurred after the Bar Kochba rebellion which ended with the death of many Jews and the destruction of numerous towns. Circumcision was prohibited. Jerusalem was renamed Aelia Capitolina and became a Roman town; Jews were not permitted to enter the city. Many Jews abandoned Judaism and adopted a Roman-Hellenistic way of life (Ben-Sasson, 1976: 334-335).

According to Rabbi Yaakov ibn Chaviv, author of Ein Yaakov, a collection of the aggadic materials in the Talmud, this story also has a hidden meaning. It was told after the Bar Kochba rebellion and the message Rabbi Yosi was given by Elijah was not to delve too much into the reasons for the brutal and lengthy exile. Jews should only pray a short prayer regarding the struggles of the exile. This story also hints that God is upset about the destruction of the Temple which was a punishment and still refers to the Jews as his "children." This is a message of hope that there will be a time when the Jews will go back to a rebuilt Israel. For now, however, they have to pray in their houses of study and synagogues which serve as "mikdash me'at (a small temple). God dwells in the holy places we establish in exile (Babylonian Talmud, Megillah 29a).

God coos like a dove in the above story. Normally, he is compared to a lion. Simon- Shoshan (n.d.) states:

This new metaphor even further humanizes God. He appears even more weak and vulnerable, as he yearns for the redemption of His people and His Holy City. Furthermore, the dove is consistently portrayed in aggadic literature as a metaphor for Israel. Thus, God cooing like a dove also suggests that He identifies strongly with His people.

This scene also transforms the nature of the ruin in which R. Yosi prays. In the halakhic section of the story, this ruin appears as an inappropriate place for prayer, due to its marginality, instability, and uncivilized nature. Now, it appears as a place where R. Yosi is privileged to overhear the most intimate goings-on in Heaven. "It is not but the house of God; this is the gate of Heaven." This validates our initial intuition that the story specifies that these ruins are the ruins of Jerusalem because of its significance, and R. Yosi chooses to pray in them, not simply as a way of avoiding the hustle and bustle of the road, but because they are a positive destination. It seems that these ruins are haunted, not by ghosts or demons, but by God Himself. In this view, ruins are not only a place of danger, but a place of spiritual opportunity.
Hurting Elijah's Feelings by Calling him Hot Tempered

Rabbi Yosi lectured in Sepphoris that Elijah the Prophet was hot tempered. Elijah used to visit him regularly, but after this, he did not appear for three days. When he came, Rabbi Yosi asked him: "Why did the master not appear?" Elijah responded: "Because you called me hot tempered." Rabbi Yosi said: "Well, does this incident not prove that the master is hot tempered" [by getting upset over such a small matter] (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 113b).

Elijah was the prophet in the time of King Ahab and Queen Jezebel. He prayed for a major famine because of the evil deeds of the king and queen. According to legend, since Elijah never actually died, he visits the supremely righteous; Rabbi Yosi was extremely pious. This humorous story was probably placed in the Talmud to teach us that even great people may have a temper. The story of Hillel and the Bet teaches us about the importance of not losing one's temper. This is especially true of leaders.
Plimo and Satan: Even Satan's Feelings May be Hurt

The Talmud contains several stories of Satan. He is a trickster but also is used to teach people valuable lessons.

Plimo used to say every day, "an arrow in Satan's eyes." One afternoon, before the Day of Atonement, Satan appeared to Plimo disguised as a poor man. He came to beg at Plimo's door and was brought some bread. He said: "On a day like today when everyone is inside, should I be outside?" He was brought into the house and given some bread. He said: "On a day like today when everyone is eating at a table, should I be eating alone?" They brought him in and sat him at the table. As he sat, he caused his body to be covered with boils and ulcers, and proceeded to behave in a most disgusting manner. Plimo told him to sit properly. He then asked for a cup of wine. When it was given to him, he coughed and spat his phlegm into the cup. They scolded him, so he pretended to die. Satan then made Plimo hear voices outside saying: Plimo killed someone. Plimo ran away and hid in an outhouse. Satan followed him there and Plimo (not realizing who it was) fell down before him. When Satan saw how much Plimo was suffering, he revealed his identity. Satan then said to Plimo: "Why do you say this prayer?" What should I say, asked Plimo? Say: "May the Merciful Lord rebuke Satan." (Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 81a-81b)

One obvious lesson: the Angel of Death / Satan also has feelings and we should be careful not to hurt anyone's feelings. The Talmud (Babylonian Talmud, Berachot 43b) states: "It is better to throw oneself into a fiery furnace than to publicly shame another person." This is derived by the Talmud from the fact that Tamar was ready to die a horrible death by being burnt alive rather than publicly shaming, Judah, her father-in-law, as the father of her baby (see Genesis 38). The Talmudic sages based a law against taunting the stranger with words (ona'at devarim) on a verse in the Torah (Leviticus 19:33-34): "When a stranger dwells among you in your land, you are not to mistreat him." The stranger must be treated with dignity and one is not permitted to hurt the feelings of the stranger by mocking him, e.g., by reminding him of his past deeds (Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia 58b).
Plimo's Strange Question

Plimo asked Rebbi: If one has two heads, on which one should he place his phylacteries? Rebbi responded: Either go into exile or accept excommunication. Meanwhile, a man came to the academy saying that he just begotten a two-headed son and wanted to know how much must be given to the priest for the redemption of the first-born (Babylonian Talmud, Menachos 37a)

Rebbi thought that Plimo asked this question in order to ridicule him. This story illustrates the importance of allowing theoretical questions. Many theoretical questions may seem ludicrous at the time they are asked but may have serious implications in the future (Friedman, 2004).

Plimo was the sage whose prayer was not appreciated by the Angel of Death.
Lessons About Humility from Satan

Satan appears to be a good teacher.

Rabbi Meir used to scoff at sinners for giving in to their desires. One day, Satan appeared to him in the guise of a beautiful woman on the other side of the river. There was no ferry, so Rabbi Meir grasped the rope-bridge and proceeded across. When he reached halfway, Satan left him saying: Had they not declared in Heaven, "Beware of Rabbi Meir and his Torah," your life would not have been worth two maahs [a maah is a small coin].

Rabbi Akiva used to scoff at sinners for giving in to their desires. One day, Satan appeared to him in the guise of a beautiful woman on a tree. Rabbi Akiva grabbed the tree and began climbing it, but when he reached halfway, Satan left him saying: Had they not declared in Heaven, "Beware of Rabbi Akiva and his Torah" your life would not have been worth two maahs. (Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 81a).

Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Akiva were respected leaders and scholars who lived in Israel approximately 1,800 years ago. This story demonstrates the danger of arrogance. It is reminiscent of the above story with the ugly person. A leader has to understand that people make mistakes and be understanding and compassionate. There is a growing body of research that demonstrates the importance of humility as a trait for leaders (Mayberry, 2015; Prime & Salib, 2014; Nielsen, Marrone & Slay, 2010).
Amram the Pious: Great Man, Weak Moment

This story illustrates that great people may have a weak moment and do something foolish. This is why it is important for leaders to be compassionate and understanding. Any human being can be tempted to sin.

There were these redeemed captives that were brought to the town of Nehardea. They were taken to the house of Rabbi Amram the Pious, lodged in the upper story of his house, and the ladder leading to it was taken away. As one of the women passed by, her face was illuminated by a light shining through the skylight. Rabbi Amram took the ladder, which ten could not lift, and set it up single-handedly and started ascending it. When Rabbi Amram reached the half-way point, he stemmed his feet. He raised his voice and started yelling: "There is a fire in Amram's house." When the rabbis came and saw him on the ladder they said: "You have shamed us." He told them: "It is better that you be ashamed of Amram in this world than be ashamed of Amram in the world to come" (Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 81a-81b).

He probably was called "the pious" because he publicly shamed himself rather than commit a sin.
Four Entered Pardes: Story of Acher, Teacher of Rabbi Meir

It is not clear what is meant by Pardes in this story (It is probably related to the word Paradise). The word pardes actually means orchard or garden. Soncino Talmud cites sources that claim that it is the mystical realm of theosophy. Most believe that the four scholars were studying some mystical aspects of Kabbalah. It is not even clear how they entered the Pardes. One opinion is that they used a secret name of God and actually made into Heaven (Rashi). Another opinion is that it appeared to them that they were in Heaven (Tosafot). This story follow rules that the limit the teaching of maaseh merkaveh ("Account of the Divine Chariot") to the most worthy of students who meet certain criteria. The maaseh merkaveh is described in the first chapter of Ezekiel.

Acher's real name was Elisha ben Avuyah. Acher means "the other"; this name was used to indicate that he had transformed himself into another person and left the sages to live a hedonistic lifestyle as a heretic.

Our rabbis taught: four entered the "Orchard" (Pardes), namely Ben Azzai, Ben Zomah, Acher, and Rabbi Akiva. Rabbi Akiva said: "When you arrive at the stones of pure marble, do not say, 'water, water!' For it says (Psalms 51:7): 'He that speaks falsehood shall not be established before My eyes.'" [This is very kabbalistic and difficult to interpret]. Ben Azzai looked and died... Ben Zoma looked and became demented... Acher cut off the shoots [he became a heretic]... Rabbi Akiva left in peace."...

Once, Acher was riding on a horse on the Sabbath [this is prohibited on the Sabbath], and Rabbi Meir was walking behind him to learn Torah at his mouth. Elisha ben Avuyah said to him: "Meir, turn back and return from whence you came, as I have already measured by the paces of my horse that only until here is the techum shabbat [the 2,000 cubits outside city limits that one is permitted to walk on Shabbat]." Rabbi Meir said to him: "You too go back [repent]." Acher replied: "Have I not already told you that I heard may from behind the curtain, 'Return you backsliding children' [verse from Jeremiah 3:22]-- except for Acher." Rabbi Meir prevailed upon Acher and took him to the study hall. Acher said to a child: "Recite for me the verse you learned today." The child responded (Isaiah 48:22): "There is no peace for the wicked, says the Lord." (Babylonian Talmud, Chagigah 14b-15a).

The story continues and Acher (this means "the other") asked 13 children to recite the verse they learned that day and every child quotes a verse that indicates that God is not pleased with Acher. Kahn (2009) explains the mysterious warning about the "water, water."

This may have been the meaning of Rabbi Akiva's cryptic warning: "R. Akiva said to them: When you arrive at the stones of pure marble, do not say, 'water, water!' For it is said: He that speaks falsehood shall not be established before my eyes.(Tehilim 101:7.)" Rabbi Akiva warns them against superficiality ; seeing the gleam of the marble and thinking it is water means that one sees the surface and assumes they know what lies below. The mystical path is fraught with danger, and the greatest danger of all is one's own superficiality. Mystical experience will not solve one's crises in faith, perhaps only heighten it (Kahn, 2009).

It appears that Rabbi Meir was the only scholar who was willing to still learn with Acher. Rabbi Elisha ben Avuyah is actually quoted in Avos. Rebbi, the compiler of Avot, evidently felt that Elisha's saying was of great value and included it.

Elisha ben Avuyah says: "One who studies as a child, what is he like? Like ink written on new paper; one who studies as an old person, what is he like? Like ink written on blotted paper" (Avos 4:20).

Rabbi Elisha ben Avuyah is also quoted in Avos D'Rabbi Nosson. The entire chapter 24 is devoted to his sayings. Several of his sayings deal with the importance of combining good deeds with Torah study. These sayings may hint at what happened to Elisha ben Avuyah, his entire life was overturned when he became a heretic.

Elisha ben Avuyah says: "One who has good deeds to his credit and has also studied much Torah, to what may he be compared? To one who builds a structure and lays stones below for the foundation and afterwards bricks above, so that however much water may collect at the side it will not wash away. But one who has no good deeds to his credit, though he has studied Torah, to what may he be compared? To one who builds a structure and lays bricks first for the foundation and then stones above, so that even if only a little water collects it at once overturns it" (Avos D'Rabbi Noson 24:1-2; based on translation by Soncino).

Elisha ben Avuyah says: "One who has good deeds to his credit and has also studied much Torah may be compared to a horse with a bridle; but one who has no good deeds to his credit, though he has studied much Torah, is like a horse without a bridle, and as soon as the person attempts to mount it he immediately thrown (Avos D'Rabbi Noson 24:4; based on translation by Soncino).

Rabbi Meir's saying in Avos hints at the importance of looking at what the vessel contains. He was mainly referring to learning from young and old people and not assume that wisdom is only with the old. It may also suggest that there may be great wisdom even in a heretic. As we know, Rabbi Meir discarded the peel and ate the fruit inside the pomegranate (see "Rabbah b. Shila Teaches God").

Rabbi Meir says: Do not look at the vessel, but at what it contains. There may be a new vessel filled with old wine and an old vessel that does not even contain new wine (Avot 4:20).

Kelman (2014) suggests that Rabbi Meir learned to accept everyone from his wife, Beruriah. She taught him to distinguish between the sin and sinner. In fact, she rebuked her husband for praying that evil people living in their neighborhood be punished by God. One must pray that sinners repent, not that God punish them (see "Wisdom of Beruriah: Praying for the Wicked"). Kelman (2014) asserts:

This is truly amazing. Rav Meir wanted to learn Torah from the greatest of heretics--even as this teacher/heretic was violating Shabbat. And what was the first lesson Rabbi Meir learned? " This discussion went well beyond the intricacies of the laws of Shabbat. Acher urged Rabbi Meir to shun him. He had apostatized and Rabbi Meir would do much better to study with his more pious colleagues. Rabbi Meir urged Acher to return to his roots, to replant the trees. There is so much you have to offer. Please come back--it's never too late.

Kelman (2014) concludes:

I already told you, Acher responded, I heard from beyond the curtain, 'return, my children, return,' with the exception of Acher." It is this that, to my mind, is the most tragic part of the story. Acher gave up, believing he had strayed so far that he could never return. He may have heard so, but no one else heard such. It is never too late to return. Such is the gift of teshuva, such is the gift of Yom Kippur.

McSweeney (2004) takes a different approach to the Pardes story. He feels that the lesson has to do with demonstrating that only Rabbi Akiva was the right person to study these mystical texts.

In contrast, Simeon ben Azzai, Simeon ben Zoma, and Aher or Elisha ben Abuyah all violate Jewish tradition in way or another, and therefore do not understand it or apply it properly. In each case, a verse of scripture, properly interpreted, is applied to express their respective shortcomings. The association of scriptural verses with each Rabbi to express an outstanding characteristic that disqualifies him from entering pardes, therefore, highlights the issue of scriptural interpretation, and suggests that the original meaning of the expression, "to enter pardes," relates to the proper exposition of scripture. Given the potentially heretical character of much of the mystical, theurgical, and hekhalot literature of the early Talmudic period, this suggests that the purpose of the legend concerning the four who entered pardes is to attempt to gain some control over the proper exposition of the mystical texts, the account of creation in Genesis 1 (Ma'aseh Bereshit) and the account of Ezekiel's vision of G-d in Ezekiel 1 (Ma'aseh Merkavah). By defining R. Akiba as the epitome of one qualified to expound upon these texts, the legend attempts to insure that they will be interpreted in accordance with Rabbinic tradition. When considered in relation to the Mishnah's statement that one who would expound the mystical texts be "a sage that understands his own knowledge," i.e., a Rabbi fully versed in Jewish tradition, the story of the four who attempted to enter pardes indicates that R. Akiba is the example of the person who is qualified to undertake such an exposition (McSweeney, 2004).

The following comments about the Heavenly voice that said that indicated that anyone could repent except for Acher are interesting. They are cited by Kahn (2009):

Rabbi Yosef Soloveitchik says that Acher misunderstood the voice: Acher could not return, but Elisha could. See "The Rav Speaks," page 193 ff.

The Shl"a HaKadosh suggests that had Acher really repented, his Teshuva would have been accepted. This idea is echoed by Rabbi Levi Yitzchak of Berditchev. See Kedushat Levi, commentary to Pirkie Avot Chapter 2.

The Tiferet Shlomo, Moadim-Rrimzei Purim, reports that his teacher, the Maggid of Mezritch, once prayed so much for a sick person, that he was told from Heaven that he had gone too far and had forfeited his share in the World to Come. Despite his initial shock, he immediately consoled himself and said - "Now I can really pray, with no holds barred". Likewise, the Maggid said, Acher should conducted himself: he had the unique opportunity to serve God with absolutely nothing to gain, which is the purest form of devotion. Of course, the pragmatic Acher would have found the suggestion repulsive. A similar idea is taught in the name of the Baal Shem Tov; see Kol Mevaser volume 2 Chagiga.

Kahn (2009) concludes:

But God did not abandon him altogether: God did engage Acher in dialogue, even if to say "you cannot return". God wanted even the teshuva of Acher, but true teshuva, not a perfunctory repentance. What God wanted from Elisha/Acher was repentance that would go to the very core of his existence, and jar him to the point of transformation. The core of his sin was pragmatism; therefore God led him on a path of complete rehabilitation; He removed any possible cost-benefit calculation that would have flawed Acher's teshuva, by saying "Return, my mischievous children - except Acher," and removing any hope of reward from the equation. Had Elisha repented, he would surely have been accepted.
Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Nosson Attempt to Depose the Nasi

The rule referred to in the story below was the following:When the Nasi (President of the Sanhedrin) enters, all the people rise and do not resume their seats until he requests them to sit; When the Av Bais Din (literally, the "father of the court' and the second in rank) enters, one row rises on one side and another row on the other and they remain standing until he has sat down in his place; and when the Chakham (literally, wise man and third in rank) enters, every one whom he passes rises and sits down as soon as he passed until the sage has sat down in his place.

Whenever Rabban Shimon b. Gamliel entered all the people stood up for him; when Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Nosson entered all the people stood up for them also. Said R. Shimon b. Gamliel: "Should there be no distinction between my office and theirs?" And so he instituted the above-mentioned rule. Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Nosson were not present on that day when the rule was instituted. Coming on the following day and seeing that the people did not rise for them as usual, they inquired as to what had happened. On being told that Rabban Shimon b. Gamliel had issued that ordinance, Rabbi Meir said to Rabbi Nathan, "I am the Chakham and you are the Av Bais Din, let us initiate something against him. Now, how are we to proceed against him? Let us request him to lecture upon the tractate of Uktzin, a tractate with which he is unfamiliar [it is the last tractate and quite difficult]. Since he will be unable to lecture upon it, we shall tell him (Psalms 106:2): "Who can express the mighty acts of the Lord; who can make all of His praise heard." For whom is it fitting to express the mighty acts of the Lord? For him who can make all of His praise heard. [since Rabban Shimon b. Gamliel does not know all the tractates, he should not serve as Nasi.] We shall then depose him and I shall become Av Bais Din and you the Nasi. Rabbi Yaakov b. Karshi on overhearing this conversation said to himself: "This plot might, God forbid, lead to the Nasi's disgrace." So he went and sat down behind Rabban Shimon b. Gamliel's study, expounding the tractate of Uktzin, and repeating it again and again. Rabban Shimon b. Gamliel asked himself: "What could this unusual behavior mean? Perhaps, God forbid, something happened at the study hall!" Rabban Shimon b. Gamliel paid close attention and familiarized himself with the tractate. On the following day when they said to him: "Will the Master come and lecture on Uktzin," he began and discoursed upon it. After he had finished he said to them: "Had I not familiarized myself with that tractate, you would have disgraced me publicly!" Rabban Shimon b. Gamliel gave the order and they were removed from the college. After that, Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Nosson would write down scholastic difficulties on slips of paper which they threw into the study hall. That which was answered by the scholars was answered and as for those difficulties that were not answered, Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Nosson would write down the answers and throw them into the study hall. Rabban Yosi said to the sages: "The Torah is outside but we are inside!" Rabban Shimon b. Gamliel said to the sages: "We shall re-admit them but impose upon them this penalty, that no Torah teaching shall be reported in their names. As a result, thereafter, Rabbi Meir was referred to as "Others say," and Rabbi Nosson was referred to as "Some say." In their dreams Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Nosson received a message to go and appease Rabban Shimon b. Gamliel. Rabbi Nosson went and Rabbi Meir did not. For Rabbi Meir said: "Dreams are meaningless." When Rabbi Nosson came, Rabbi Shimon b. Gamliel remarked to him: "Granted the honorable position [literally "golden belt"] of your father has indeed helped you to become Av Bais Din; shall we therefore make you also Nasi? (Babylonian Talmud, Horayos 13b; based on translation of Soncino and ArtScroll).

This story is about Rabban Shimon b. Gamliel II, the father of Rebbi who edited and redacted the Mishnah. Wein (2000: 52) notes that he was extremely humble: He stated that Rabbi Shimon b. Yochai was vastly superior when it came to knowledge and compared Rabbi Shimon to a lion, he was like a fox (Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia 84b-85a). Wein (2000: 52), however, points out that "in matters relating to the honor of the Torah and the prestige of the position of Nasi, he took a very strong position, in order to defend the prestige of the office."

The Talmud does not hide the weak moments of great people. Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Nosson were definitely wrong in attempting to humiliate and depose Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel II. The commentaries try to explain this by saying that Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Nosson accepted that there should be some distinction between the three positions, but felt that R. Gamliel should have come up with a solution that increased his own prestige without diminishing theirs (see Iyun Yaakov). This is actually good advice when it is necessary to have gradations of prestige; it is better to elevate the person of the highest rank rather than diminishing the prestige of those below him/her. Note that the strategy of referring to Rabbi Meir as "Others say," in plural (and "Some say" for Rabbi Nosson) was purposely done so that no one should ask which person. By making it plural, the assumption would be that there were several people involved.

Rabbi Meir had a turbulent life and was forced to leave Israel (see "Rabbi Meir Rescues Sister-in-law from Brothel: "O God of Meir Answer Me"). Wein (2008) has the following to say about Rabbi Meir:

...it seems clear that Rabi Meir never returned to the Land of Israel after his flight from the Romans. He died in Asia Minor (probably in what is today's Turkey) and asked to be buried near the sea so that the waters of the Mediterranean that had washed the shores of the Land of Israel would touch his bones as well, thus connecting him to his beloved homeland. (So it is unlikely that the tomb of Rabi Meir Baal Haness in Tiberias is the grave of our Rabi Meir, all legend to the contrary notwithstanding.) As mentioned above, the probable reason for Rabi Meir's flight was that he was a wanted fugitive from the Romans, due to his part in the rescue of his sister-in-law from degradation at their hands. And yet another reason advance for his departure from the Land of Israel (and from his students) was an aborted revolution that he and Rabbi Nosson attempted against the authority of Raban Shimon ben Gamliel II, Nasi of the Sanhedrin(Wein, 2008).

One of the most memorable statements of Rabban Shimon b. Gamiliel II is recorded in Avos 1:18): "The world endures on three things – justice, truth, and peace, as it says (Zechariah 8:16): 'Truth and peace are you to adjudicate in your gates.'"
Rabbi Meir: Most Brilliant Man in His Generation, but His Halachic Opinions are Rejected

Rabbi Acha b. Chaninah said: "It is revealed and known before Him Who spoke and the world came into existence, that in the generation of R. Meir there was none equal to him. If so, why was the halachah [Jewish law] not fixed in agreement with his views? Because his colleagues could not fathom the full depths of his mind (sof daato), for he would declare that which was ritually unclean to be clean and supply plausible proof; and he would likewise declare the ritually clean to be unclean and also supply plausible proof. It was taught: His name was not Rabb Meir but Rabbi Nehorai. Then why was he called 'Meir'? Because he enlightened [meir in Hebrew means to give light] the Sages in the Halachah. His name in fact was not even Nehorai but Rabbi Nechemiah or, as others say, Rabbi Elazar ben Arach. Then why was he called 'Nehorai'? Because he enlightened [Nehoria means to shine Hebrew] the Sages in the Halachah.

Rebbi [Rabbi Judah the Nasi] declared: "The only reason why I am sharper than my colleagues is that I saw the back of R. Meir [while sitting in a crowded lecture hall]; but had I had a front view of him I would have been keener still, for it is written in Scripture (Isaiah 30:20): 'Your eyes shall see your teacher'" Rabbi Avuhu stated in the name of Rabbi Yochanan: "Rabbi Meir had a disciple of the name of Sumchus who, for every rule concerning ritual uncleanness, supplied forty-eight reasons in support of its uncleanness, and for every rule concerning ritual cleanness, forty-eight reasons in support of its cleanness. One taught: There was an assiduous student at Yavneh who proved by a hundred and fifty reasons that a [dead] creeping thing was ritually clean {The Torah explicitly states that it is ritually unclean] [Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin 13b; based on translation of Soncino].

There appears to be a contradiction here. The above story indicates that there was no one as brilliant as Rabbi Meir and that "he enlightened the Sages in the halachah." Yet, the Talmud reports that his colleagues could not fathom the "full depths" of Rabbi Meir's mind. The term used by the Talmud is "sof daato" which literally means the end/conclusion of his mind/reason. In Sanhedrin (Babylonian Talmud, 72a) the term is used as a way to explain why the ben sorer umoreh (rebellious and wayward son) is executed for what seems to be simply extreme gluttony. The Talmud indicates that we can foresee the outcome/conclusion of where this lifestyle is leading. Eventually, the ben sorer umoreh will have to become a robber and killer to maintain this extravagant, hedonistic lifestyle. Thus, "sof daato" indicates a conclusion. Rabbi Meir was brilliant and could argue either side of a controversy. This helped enlighten others since he provided the rationale for the two sides. Where he was relatively weak was in helping others come to a firm conclusion. This is why the law does not always follow his opinion.

Berger takes this approach in explaining the above problem

The resolution of this apparent contradiction may lie in our reconsidering the type of enlightenment which R. Meir did provide. The person who is able to propose compelling arguments in support of two conflicting opinions does not necessarily possess the ability to adjudicate between them. The ideal rosh yeshiva [head of the academy] is thus usually not the ideal posek [decider of law] Often, quite the contrary. Consider, for example, the dynamics of psak among the great Brisker roshei yeshiva: they often tend to advocate fulfilling a law according to the requirements of all opinions - even minority ones - precisely because their method of Torah study requires them to find the most compelling argument imaginable for the defense of each conflicting opinion. After properly analyzing both sides of a controversy, favoring one over the other should be daunting if not impossible! R. Meir was endowed with the gift of empathy; he was able to sympathize with, and evoke sympathy for, differing points of view. This ability extended even into the ideological realm; witness his sustained relationship with the heretic Elisha ben Avuyia! As a teacher of Torah, R. Meir enlightened his colleagues not by giving them practical direction, but by helping them understand the limitations of rational analysis for the process of obtaining a definitive halachic decision (Berger, 2016 ).

There is another problem with the above Talmudic statement as to the true name of Rabbi Meir pointed out by Kelman (2015).

Who exactly was Rav Meir? "His name was not Rav Meir but Rav Nehorai...His name was not Nehorai but Rav Nechemia or others say Rav Elazar ben Arach" (Eiruvin 13b). This is not a debate about a name but rather about a legacy. Nehorai is Aramaic for light and Nechemia means comfort. Historically it is not possible to identify Rav Meir with Rav Elazar ben Arach. Yet just as light and comfort attest to his greatness such identification is a great compliment as Rav Elazar ben Arach was the greatest of the students of Rav Yochanan ben Zackai. "Abba Shaul said in his [Rav Yochanan ben Zackai's] name that if all the sages of Israel...were on one side of a balance scale, and Rabbi Elazar son of Arach were on the other side, he [Rabbi Elazar] would outweigh them all" (Avot 2:8).He was as the Mishna describes an "ever-flowing well" to go along with having "none equal to him." Yet if one scratches a little deeper - especially in the context of the Gemara in Eiruvin \- being identified as Rav Elazar ben Arach may be far less than complimentary. The Gemara describes how Rav Elazar ben Arach moved away from the Beit Midrash dwelling in a city full of luxury but devoid of sages. His alienation from Torah was so thorough that upon his return he could barely read. We need not identify Rav Meir with Rav Elazar ben Arach to extol his greatness as the Talmud has just done that - it rather appears as a veiled critique of Rav Meir and a wish that his Torah should be forgotten.

With this background perhaps we can understand the following. "Our Rabbis taught: After the death of Rav Meir, Rav Yehudah said to his disciples, 'Do not allow the disciples of Rav Meir to enter here, for they are disputatious and do not come to learn Torah, but come to overwhelm me with citations from tradition" (Nazir 49b). The students of Rav Meir apparently could also bring sources to overturn the consensus. Sumchus [a student of Rav Meir] forced his way through and entered. He said to them, 'Thus did R. Meir teach me... Rav Yeudah became angry and said to them, 'did I not tell you not to allow the pupils of Rav Meir to enter here, because they are disputatious?... Rav Yossi commented: People will say, 'Meir is dead, Yeudah is angry, Yossi is silent, what is to become of the Torah?' When a great rabbinic leader dies, especially one who was somewhat controversial, great debate is likely to ensue. While the leader may have been begrudgingly accepted the same may not be true of his students (Kelman, 2015).

It should be noted that the law may not follow the view of Rabbi Meir when he has a dispute with his colleagues. Yet, he had a profound impact on Jewish law. Rebbi (Rabbi Yehuda the Nasi who edited the Mishna) would indicate the opinion of Rabbi Meir without attribution. The Talmud often states the principle that "stam Mishna Rabbi Meir." Thus, hundreds of Mishnas that are anonymous are the views of Rabbi Meir.
Learning Under a Teacher's Bed

The next selection shows the great lengths the students of the Talmudists would go to in order to learn everyday manners from their teachers.

Ben Azzai said: Once I followed Rabbi Akiva into the bathroom and learned three things from him ... Rabbi Yehuda told him: Is that how much effrontery you displayed towards your teacher? He answered: It is Torah and I need to learn... Rabbi Kahana once hid under Rav's bed. He heard him chitchatting and bantering with his wife and then engaging in sexual intercourse and said to him[from under the bed]: It would seem that the mouth of Abba [Rav's real name] has not sipped of this broth before [i.e., Rav is acting like one who is having intercourse for the first time]. He responded: Kahana is that you here? Get out, this is not the proper way. Rabbi Kahana replied: It is Torah, and I need to learn. (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 62a)

There are numerous laws in the Talmud dealing with conjugal manners and personal hygiene. We often forget that education also has a moral purpose. Fischer & Friedman (2015) discuss the three views as to the raison d'être of higher education. They cite Brooks (2014) who states that there are three conflicting views: the commercial purpose (acquiring skills for a career); the cognitive/intellectual purpose (acquiring information to form a comprehensive philosophy of life); and the moral purpose (acquiring values to build an integrated self).

Tough (2012) is a big proponent of the view that if we want students to succeed, educators have to do considerably more than just building up their cognitive skills (intelligence that can be measured by IQ tests). What really matters when it comes to accomplishing something in life is possessing character traits such as ambition, conscientiousness, curiosity, grit, integrity, persistence, resilience, and self-confidence; these values should be taught to students in K-12 as well as college. A number of educators agree with Tough that we have to start as early as possible to instill the optimum character traits in young people. For example, Wilce (2013) believes that six essential traits that must be taught to students are: joie de vivre, resilience, self-discipline, honesty, courage, and kindness.

The sages of the Talmud felt that the purpose of higher education was to learn character and values. Perhaps Rabbi Kahana went a little too far with his need to learn "everything" from his teacher. However, the idea of learning character and values from the right teacher is an idea with merit. The correct way to learn it is by observing one's instructor. This is why it is so important for teachers of ethics to "walk the talk." Finally, ethics is not only important when it comes to business matters, it is just as relevant in sexual relations between husband and wife.
Rabbi Kahana Jumps Off Roof

Rabbi Kahana learned his lesson well. In this story we will see how far he went not to sin with an important woman trying to seduce him.

Rabbi Kahana was selling baskets [used by women for their weaving tools], when a certain noblewoman propositioned him. Rabbi Kahana said: "I will first go and adorn myself." He went up to the roof and hurled himself from it to the ground. Elijah the prophet came and caught him. Elijah said: "You have troubled me to come from a distance of four hundred parasangs to rescue you." Rabbi Kahana replied: "What caused me to do it? Is it not my poverty?" [the only job he could find was selling baskets to women]. Elijah thereupon gave him a chest full of dinars (Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 40a; based on translation by Soncino and ArtScroll).

Elijah the prophet did not die; he ascended to Heaven in a chariot of fire (II Kings 2:11). He is a prominent figure in many stories. According to tradition, great people are privileged to speak to him and even learn with him. This humorous story presents many halachic problems. Is one required to die to avoid relations in private with a gentile woman (see ArtScroll commentary). As a role model, Rabbi Kahana needed to set an example for others and this may be the reason for his decision to sacrifice his life. One who is willing to climb under his teacher's bed, must surely act as a good role model for others. I am not sure about the reason for Elijah's complaint. It certainly makes the story more memorable. Note the importance of working for a living. The chest full of dinars was given to Rabbi Kahana to start a different business, one where he would not find himself being alone with women. This hints at another important lesson in life. One should not work at a job where the culture is to do something wrong. Today, it is more about being tempted to be dishonest (think of the financial industry and the toxic mortgages) than immorality. A good person tries to find a job in a firm where honesty and decency are the norm and there is no temptation to act in an immoral way.
The Fragrant Leaves of Paradise: Rabbah b. Avuhu and Elijah

Rabbah bar Avuha met Elijah standing in a non-Jewish cemetery.... Rabbah said to Elijah: "Are you not a Kohen [priest]? Why then is the master standing here, in a cemetery? [priests are not permitted to make themselves ritually impure [tamei] by coming into contact with corpses]. Elijah replied: "It seems as though the master has not studied the laws of purity. For it was taught there in a baraisa that Rabbi Shimon b. Yohai states that the graves of non-Jews do not transmit tumah [ritual impurity]..." Rabbah replied: "Alas, I cannot even make the time to properly study the four most relevant orders [that deal with everyday matters], am I then able to study all six orders?" Elijah asked: "And why are you unable to study all six orders properly?" Rabbah replied: "I am in dire financial straits." Elijah then took Rabbah and brought him into Gan Eden [Paradise] and said to him: "Remove your cloak and gather and take some of these leaves." So he gathered the leaves of Paradise. As he was leaving, he heard it being said: "Who is consuming his portion in the World to Come as Rabbah b. Abbuha?" When Rabbah heard this, he shook the leaves out of his cloak and threw them away. Yet, even so, when he brought his cloak back he discovered that it had absorbed the fragrance of the leaves of Paradise. He sold the cloak for twelve thousand dinars which he distributed to his sons-in-law (Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia 114b; based on translation of ArtScroll).

This story is similar to a story with Rabbi Chaninan b. Dosa's wife ("Chaninah b. Dosa and the Table with Two Legs"). The Talmudic sages felt that not everyone is worthy to do well in this world as well as the World to Come. Gan Eden is used to mean Paradise; the term "gan' means garden. This story shows that the leaves are so fragrant that they are worth 12,000 dinars. Certainly, living an eternity there is priceless. In this world, the most succulent of fruits have ordinary leaves.
Rabbi Yehoshua b. Levi and Elijah the Prophet

Rabbi Yehoshua b. Levi found Elijah the prophet standing by the entrance of Rabbi Shimon b. Yochai's burial cave and asked him: "Will I be allowed to enter the world to come (Paradise)?" Elijah replied: "If this Master here desires it." Rabbi Yehoshua said: "I saw two [Elijah and myself] but heard the voice of a third [the Divine Presence]." Rabbi Yehoshua then asked Elijah: "When will the Messiah come?" He replied: "Go ask him yourself." Rabbi Yehoshua asked: "Where does he abide?" He replied: "At the entrance of Rome." Rabbi Yehoshua asked: "By what sign will I be able to recognize him." He replied: "He sits among the poor who suffer from various ailments; all of them untie and then retie all their bandages at once." The Messiah unties and ties his bandages one at a time, saying to himself: 'Should I be needed, I must not be delayed.'

Rabbi Yehoshua went to him and said: "Peace on you, my master and teacher." The Messiah replied: "Peace on you, son of Levi." Rabbi Yehoshua asked: "When are you coming, master?" He said: "Today."

When Rabbi Yehoshua returned to Elijah, Elijah asked him what the Messiah said to him. Rabbi Yehoshua replied that he said "Peace on you, son of Levi." Elijah told him that this meant that both Rabbi Yehoshua and his father were assured of a share in the World to Come." Rabbi Yehoshua said to Elijah: "He lied to me. He said he was going to come today and he did not come." Elijah replied: "What he meant was (Psalms 95:7), 'Today, if you will heed His voice'" (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 98a).

A somewhat humorous way of emphasizing that the Messiah will come if everyone will be good.

This story was used in the famous Disputation in Barcelona (1263) that took place before the king of Spain and his advisors in 1263. Nachmanides had to debate Friar Paul who was attempting to use the above story as well as a Midrash to prove that Jesus was the Messiah. Friar Paul (or Pablo Christiani) was a converted Jew who had become a Dominican Friar. In 1269, Christiani was able to influence King Louis IX of France to enforce a canonical edict that required Jews to wear distinct badges.

This is part of the response of Nachmanides:

Friar Paul then said that, in the Talmud, it is indicated that R. Joshua b. Levi asked Elijah when the messiah would come. He answered him: "Ask the messiah himself. " He said "Where is he?" He said: "At the gate of Rome, among the sick." He went there and found him. He asked him ... Thus the messiah has already come, is in Rome, and is in fact Jesus who rules in Rome. I said to him: "Isn't it clear from this that he has not come? For he asked Elijah when the messiah would come. Likewise he asked the messiah himself: 'When will you come? Thus he has not yet come. Rather, according to the simple meaning of these stories, he was born already. But I do not believe this" (http://www.israel613.com/books/ramban_dispute_e.pdf)

Friar Paul had earlier in the debate mentioned a Midrash (Midrash Rabbah, Lamenations 1:51) that states that the Messiah was "born" on the day the Temple was destroyed. That would mean that the Messiah was born in the year 70 CE. This is how Nachmanides responded to that assertion:

I said: "Truly I do not believe that the messiah was born on the day of the destruction of the Temple. Thus this story is not true or else it has another meaning drawn from the secrets of the sages. However I shall accept it at its simple meaning as you claim, for it is a proof for my case. Behold it says that on the day of destruction, after the Temple was destroyed, the messiah was born. Thus Jesus was not the messiah, as you claim. For he was born and killed prior to the destruction of the Temple. In fact he was born about two hundred years prior to the destruction of the Temple. According to your reckoning, he was born seventy-three years prior to the destruction of the Temple." Then he was silent. Master William, the royal judge, then said: "The dispute does not now concern Jesus. The question is whether the messiah has come or not. You say that he has not come, and this book of yours says that he has come." (http://www.israel613.com/books/ramban_dispute_e.pdf)

Nachmanides, Rabbi Moses ben Nachman, is known by his acronym Ramban. He was born in Girona Spain in 1194 and died in 1270 in Acre, Israel. He was a major medieval scholar, biblical commentator, philosopher, kabbalist and physician.
Why Jesters Get Into Paradise

When people are taught about what it takes to get into Paradise, it is usually people who live extremely ascetic lives totally devoted to helping others such as Mother Teresa. This story has a different approach to attaining Paradise.

Rabbi Beroka Hozaah asked Elijah the Prophet: "Is there any person in this market who is destined for Paradise?" He replied, no. ...While they were conversing, two people passed by. Elijah said: "These two are destined for the world to come." Rabbi Beroka approached them and asked them what they did. They replied: "We are jesters, and we cheer up people who are depressed. Also when we see two people who are quarreling, we work hard to make peace between them" (Babylonian Talmud, Taanis 22a).

This story almost sounds like a Chassidic tale. The philosophy of the Chassidic movement as taught by Israel Baal Shem Tov (also known as the Besht; c. 1700 - 1760) was that even the simplest person could achieve spiritual growth by helping others and loving God. It was not necessary to be a great scholar since "God desires the heart" (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 106b). The Besht was also opposed to asceticism and felt that one should be joyous. The Chassidic philosophy was extremely unpopular with the Mitnagdim (literally, those opposed); their leader, Elijah of Vilna, excommunicated the Chassidim (Jewish Virtual Library, 2016). In the above story, the simplest people earn Paradise not because of their great scholarship, but because of their deeds. This story is reminiscent of the following Chassidic story told of the Besht:

It is told of the Besht that one Yom Kippur [Day of Atonement] a poor Jewish boy, an illiterate shepherd, entered the synagogue where he was praying. The boy was deeply moved by the service, but frustrated that he could not read the prayers. He started to whistle, the one thing he knew he could do beautifully; he wanted to offer his whistling as a gift to God. The congregation was horrified at the desecration of their service. Some people yelled at the boy, and others wanted to throw him out. The Ba'al Shem Tov immediately stopped them. "Until now," he said, "I could feel our prayers being blocked as they tried to reach the heavenly court. This young shepherd's whistling was so pure, however, that it broke through the blockage and brought all of our prayers straight up to God" (Jewish Virtual Library, 2016).
Topsy Turvy World: The Vision of Rabbi Yosef, son of Rabbi Yehoshua b. Levi

Rabbi Yosef, the son of Rabbi Yehoshua b. Levi, once took ill and became unconscious. When he revived, his father asked him: "What did you see when you were unconscious?" He replied: "I saw a topsy-turvy world: the people who are high here [i.e., the elite who are treated with respect in this world], are low there in the next world, and the people who are low here are high there." Rabbi Yehoshua said: "My son, you saw a clear world. And how are we [the scholars] there?" He replied: "Just as we are here, so are we there. Also, I heard them saying: Happy is he who comes here with his learning in his hand" (Babylonian Talmud, Pesachim 50a).

In this world, people are respected for the wrong reasons. In the next world, the respect you receive is based solely on merit. This story suggests that the wrong people get respect in this world. We tend to honor people who are financially successful, but money has no value in the World to Come. Poor people, on the other hand, who focus on doing good are held in great esteem. All that matters in the Afterlife are the good deeds one has performed.
Rebbi Wept: Some Achieve Eternity in a Single Hour

There was a certain Caesar who hated the Jews. He asked the dignitaries of his kingdom: "If a wart develops on someone's foot, should he cut it off and be healed, or should he leave it to suffer? [He was asking whether to destroy the Jews]. They responded to him: "He should cut it off and be healed." Ketiah bar Shallum, however, advised them against doing this for two reasons: "First, you will not be able to overcome them all since they are scattered around the world... Furthermore, if you eliminate the Jews in your kingdom, you will be called the ruler of a genocidal kingdom." The Caesar said to Ketiah: "You have indeed spoken well. However, the law dictates that whoever prevails against the king is cast into a circular furnace [Rashi asserts that it was a chamber full of earth where the prisoner is buried alive]. As the Caesar's men were taking him and going to the chamber, a certain matron called out to Ketiah: "Woe to the ship that goes without having paid the taxes." [You are dying for the Jews but you are not circumcised like them.] So Ketiah fell on the top of his foreskin and cut it off. He said: "I have paid my tax and I shall leave the world and pass into the World to Come." As they were throwing him into the chamber, he said: "All my possessions to Rabbi Akiva and his colleagues."... [Rabbi Akiva was in charge of the charity fund]. A heavenly voice emanated and proclaimed: "Ketiah bar Shallum is ready for the life of the World to Come." Rebbi wept and said: "There is one who acquires eternity [paradise] in a single hour, and there is another who acquires eternity after many years" (Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah 10b; based on translation by ArtScroll and Soncino).

Sometimes, one good deed is all it takes for one to achieve eternity. This became the defining moment of Ketiah's life. Others, struggle an entire lifetime to do good before earning paradise.
The Business Ethics of Shimon ben Shetach: The Hidden Jewel

Shimon ben Shetach (c. 120 – 40 BCE) was the Nasi (President) of the Sanhedrin during the reign of Alexander Jannaeus. His sister, Salome Alexandra, was the wife of Alexander Jannaeus, and succeeded her husband to the throne.

It is told of Rabbi Shimon ben Shetah that he once purchased a donkey from an Arab. When the rabbi's disciples came, they discovered a valuable jewel was hanging from the donkey's neck, hidden from view. They said to Rabbi Shimon: "Master, 'It is the blessing of the Lord that makes one rich'" (Proverbs 10:22). Rabbi Shimon replied: "I purchased a donkey; I did not purchase a precious stone." He went and returned the jewel to the Arab, who thereupon said: "Blessed be the Lord God of Shimon ben Shetach" (Jerusalem Talmud, Bava Mezia 2:5; based on translation by Bialik & Ravnitzky).

Proverbs 10 also states that "A deceitful scale makes one a pauper" (Proverbs 10:4) and "Charity saves from death" (Proverbs 10:2). Rabbi Shimon's students felt that God was rewarding their teacher with the precious jewel that was hidden on the donkey's neck. Rabbi Shimon knew better: Taking money that one is not entitled to is not the way of the righteous person of which it is said (Proverbs 11: 23): "The desire of the righteous is only for the good."
Shimon ben Shetach and the 80 Sorceresses

Shimon ben Shetach lived at a time when there was great turmoil in ancient Israel.

There were two pious individuals in Ashkelon, Who ate together like one, drank together like one [they shared resources], and occupied themselves with Torah like one. One of them died and the townspeople did not provide him with the proper eulogy or burial [befitting a pious person]. The son of Maon the tax collector died and the entire town took off from work to eulogize him. The surviving pious individual was distressed and exclaimed: "For the Haters of Israel [euphemism; he meant the townspeople] there is no merit! His deceased pious friend appeared to him in a dream and said: "Do not loathe the sons of your Lord [the Jewish people]. I did one sin and got punished for it in this world; the son of the tax collector did one god deed and got rewarded for it in this world." And what sin did pious individual commit? Heaven forbid that he ever committed a sin from which he had pleasure. One time he first put on the Tefillin of the head and then the Tefillin of the hands. And what good deed did the son of Maon the tax collector do? Heaven forbid that he ever committed a good deed. However, he once made a banquet for the officials, but they did not come to eat. He said: "Let the impoverished ones eat it so that the food does not go to waste." Some say that this is what happened. He was once walking in the marketplace with a loaf of bread in his hand. It fell from him and a poor person picked it up. He saw this and did not say anything because he did not want to embarrass the poor person. Several days later, the pious person saw [in a dream] his dead friend taking a walk among gardens, orchards, and streams. He also saw the son of Maon the tax collector [who was exceedingly thirsty] attempting to drink the water in a river with his tongue, but not being able to reach it. He also saw Miriam the daughter of Leaves of Onions. Rabbi Lazar bar Yosi said: "She was hanging by the nipples of her breasts." Rabbi Yosi ben Chanina said: "The hinge of the door of Gehinnom [hell] was resting in her ear." The pious individual asked them: "What is the reason for this punishment?" They said to him: "Since she fasted and publicized it." Some say what they said to him was: "Since she fasted one day and publicized that she had fasted two days." The pious individual asked them: "How long will she be punished like this?" They said to him: "Until Shimon ben Shetach comes; we will then take the hinge from Miriam's ear and place it in Shimon's ear." He asked them the reason for this. They replied: "Because he said that when he becomes the Nasi [President of the Sanhedrin], he will kill all the sorceresses. He is the Nasi now and did not kill the sorceresses. There are 80 sorceresses living in the caves of Ashkelon and they are destroying the world. You should go and tell Shimon ben Shetach about the sorceresses and his awaiting punishment. The pious person said to them: "I am afraid; he is the Nasi and will not believe me." They said to him: "If he believes you, then all is well. If he does not believe you, prove this with the following sign. Take your eye out of its socket and then put it back in its socket and it will be returned [back to normal]." He went and he told the story to Shimon ben Shetach. He was ready to make the sign for him, but Shimon ben Shetach did not let him. Shimon said to him: "I know that you are a pious person and can even do more than that. Moreover, if you did not hear this from Heaven, how would you know that I was supposed to kill the sorceresses when I became Nasi. I never said this out loud with my mouth, I only thought it."

Immediately, Shimon ben Shetach went on a day when there was a heavy rainstorm. He took with him eighty young men, and he gave them eighty clean garments; each garment was placed in a new pot. The pots were turned upside down on their heads [so that the rain would not make the garments wet]. Rabbi Shimon said to them: "When I whistle the first time, put on your garments. When I whistle a second time, all of you enter the cave together. After you enter, each of you is to take one of the sorceresses into his arms and lift her off the ground. For such is the way of a sorceress; once you lift her off the ground, she can do nothing at all." Rabbi Shimon then went and stationed himself at the entrance of the cave and called to the sorceresses: "Oyim, Oyim, [According to Bialik & Ravnitzky, 1992, it is "a cry used by sorcerers to summon their creations" ] open for me for I am one of you." They asked him: How did you come here dry on such a rainy day?" He replied: "I [magically] walked between the raindrops." They asked: What did you come here to do?" He replied: "To study and to teach. Each of you should do what she knows." So one sorceress intoned whatever she intoned and produced a loaf of bread. Another sorceress intoned whatever she intoned and produced a cut of meat. A third sorceress intoned whatever she intoned and produced a cooked dish; and a fourth intoned whatever she intoned and produced a bottle of wine. The sorceresses said to him: "What can you do?" He replied: "I can whistle twice and produce for you eighty young men wearing dry garments. They will find joy in you and give joy to you." They said: "Yes, this is what we desire." He whistled once, and the young men put on the dry garments. He whistled a second time, and all of them entered the cave together. Rabbi Shimon said: "Let each select his mate." They picked the sorceresses up, went out, and hanged them. (Jerusalem Talmud, Chagigah 2:2; based on translation by Bialik & Ravnitzky).

This story did not end well for Rabbi Shimon. The relatives of the sorceresses got two witnesses to testify falsely against Shimon's son. His son received the death penalty and was executed. It should be noted that normal Jewish law does not allow two capital cases on the same day. The story of Shimon ben Shetach and his execution of the 80 sorceresses was an extralegal measure that was needed in this particular situation to maintain order when there has been a total breakdown of law (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 45b). Several biblical commentaries make a point that the Torah states (Exodus 22: 17), "Do not allow a sorceress to live"; this is different from the typical wording used by the Torah in capital cases "put to death." Thus the Torah states (Exodus 21:12): "Anyone who strikes a person with a fatal blow is to be put to death." The story of Shimon ben Shetach is cited as an example where it is impossible to bring them to a regular trial – e.g., where they can use sorcery to escape or frighten witnesses – then we are permitted to use extralegal measures to execute them (e.g., Bechor Shor, Hadar Zekenim, Moshav Zekenim)

Silverberg (n.d.) discusses the unique name and punishment of Miriam daughter of Onion Leaves. He observes that this story is the source for the law that an individual who observes a voluntary fast should not reveal it to anyone. Bragging about fasting or any religious stringency (chumra) leads to arrogance and perhaps a loss of respect for others who are not that stringent. Silverberg (n.d.), quotes Rabbi Yehuda Amital, who explains the reason this woman had this strange name.

Most fruits, nuts and vegetables have a peel or shell which is removed to access the fruit in the interior. Onions are unique in that it is a series of peels layered one on top of another. When we remove one peel, we arrive at another; and when we remove that layer, we get to another, and so on, without ever reaching a fruit inside the peels. As opposed to a banana, for example, whose peel conceals the tasty fruit inside, the onion consists entirely of peels. The Yerushalmi [Jerusalem Talmud] thus enlists the onion as a metaphor for one whose religiosity is nothing more than an outward, external display bereft of any true substance. Just as the onion has nothing but peels, Miriam's religious observance was external to herself. Her displays of piety were only displays, and not a reflection of genuine, internal devotion to God. She had no "fruit" – meaning and substance – beneath the "peels," the outward expressions of piety (Silverberg, n.d.).

The story hints that she was not only guilty of bragging about how religious she was but may imply that she was a hypocrite. The Talmud was very concerned with religious hypocrisy. There is a Mishna (Babylonian Talmud, Sotah 20a) that states that "female Pharisees and the plague of Pharisees" bring destruction upon the world. The Talmudic sages were Pharisees who followed the School of Hillel and were concerned about people who were outwardly religious but committed evil acts. They were critical of those who "separated themselves from the rest of society to show that they were superior in piety and more devoted to the precepts of God" (Zeitlin, 1961).

The story of Miriam above is reminiscent of a story told in the Talmud about Yochani the daughter of Retivi. She was a sorceress and used magic to prevent pregnant women from giving birth. She would then visit the woman and "pray" for her; what she did is remove the spell. In this manner, she was able to convince people of her great piety (Babylonian Talmud, Sotah 22a). The problem of religious hypocrites who use religion to commit the most horrible crimes ranging from adultery to pedophilia to theft to murder has not disappeared.

The punishment of the pious person who did not receive the kind of eulogy that is fitting for a great person may seem excessive. This could be explained by the Talmudic view that "God deals strictly with His close ones even to a hair's breadth?" (Babylonian Talmud, Yevamos 121b). In other words, God is much more exacting of righteous people. Apparently, the punishment for mixing up the order of the Tefillin did seem too harsh to some. Rashi, in his commentary, on a reference to the story in the Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 44b), indicates that the pious person was punished for listening to someone saying something humiliating about a scholar and not speaking up in his defense.

The most important lesson of this story is the importance of using the legal system to improve the world. The extremely harsh punishment waiting for Rabbi Shimon for not doing his job as Nasi is a warning to all leaders and judges about not doing their jobs. One can only imagine what punishment awaits the members of Congress who are posturing rather than working on legislation to help the unfortunates of society and strengthen the country. Unfortunately, many of them hide behind religion to justify what they are doing.
King Yannai's Advice to his Wife: Beware of the Hypocrites

King Yannai said to his wife: "Fear not the Pharisees or those who are not Pharisees. Rather, fear only the hypocrites who appear as if they are Pharisees [but in reality they are not pious]. Because their deeds are like the deeds of Zimri but they request a reward like Pinchas (Babylonian Talmud, Sotah 22b; based on translation of ArtScroll and Liebowitz, 2014).

Zimri was killed by Pinchas for publicly sinning with a Midianite (see Numbers 25: 1-15). Alexander Jannaeus (103–76 BCE), known in the Talmud as King Yannai, was of the Hasmonean dynasty and served as king and high priest. He was married to Salome Alexandra, sister of Rabbi Shimon ben Shetach. He killed many of the Pharisees and was hated by them. In fact, in 88 BCE, he crucified 800 of the Pharisees (Cook, 2014: 238). Alexandra succeeded him to the throne (76 – 67 BCE), and while she was queen, the Pharisees were able to become the ruling class. She was very successful as queen. Ahuvia (2015) has the following to say about Salome Alexandra's (also known as Shlomtzion or Shelamzion) reign:

Typical of his time period, Josephus was uncomfortable with the idea of a woman in charge of political affairs but admits that "she proved to be a shrewd and capable administrator, and by regular recruiting doubled the size of the army... besides strengthening her own country, she inspired in foreign monarchs a healthy respect" (Josephus, Jewish War 1:110). Notably, Shelamzion maintained peace through defensive measures and diplomatic outreach rather than outright acts of aggression. Josephus tells us that she was loved by the masses of the Jewish people (Jewish Antiquities13:407). Immediately upon her death, her sons fought over the throne, eventually inviting in Rome, and Judea never regained full independence until the modern state of Israel. Josephus' final words about Shelamzion are that despite her deviation from proper feminine behavior, she "had kept the nation at peace" (Jewish Antiquities 13:432).

After Salome Alexandra died, there was a civil war between her two sons, Aristobulus II and Hyrcanus II. Pompey conquered Jerusalem in 63 BCE and reinstated Hyrcanus II. He, however, dismembered the Kingdom of Judea and made it pay tribute; it lost its independence.

The scholars of the Talmud were Pharisees of the Hillel school and were critical of phonies. The righteous Pharisee admired by the Talmud was one who observed the precepts sincerely -- without exaggerated piety and falsehearted humility -- because of a love of God. The Talmud (Babylonian Talmud, Sotah 22b) states that there are seven types of Pharisees ― Pharisees they did not approve of:

(i) The Shechem Pharisee, who observes the precepts for personal gain [as did the inhabitants of Shechem who circumcised themselves in order to intermarry with the family of Jacob. An alternative explanation of the Shechem Pharisee is the shoulder Pharisee, who carries his good deeds on his shoulders, i.e., ostentatiously.]

(ii) The bruised Pharisee, who walks without lifting his feet from the ground in exaggerated piety and thereby knocks his feet against stones.

(iii) The bloodletting Pharisee, who is afraid to look at women and walks with his eyes shut and thereby bangs his head against the wall.

(iv) The pestle Pharisee, who walks so bent over, because of exaggerated humility, that he looks like a pestle [he walks with his head perpendicular to his body so that he looks like a hammer-shaped pestle].

(v) The Pharisee who says: What else am I obliged to do and I will do it [implying that he has fulfilled all the precepts].

(vi) The Pharisee from love, who observes the precepts because he loves the reward.

(vii) The Pharisee from fear, who observes the precepts because he fears the punishment.

Abaye and Rava disagreed with the inclusion of (vi) and (vii), since they were of the opinion that, "occupying oneself with Torah and precepts for improper motives will ultimately to proper motives." The proper way, however, to observe the precepts is to do so from because of a love for God.

Ahuvia (2015) connects Salome Alexandra's reign with the story of Esther.

Torah and history converge in a remarkable way in the life of Shelamzion. If her queenship was unprecedented in the second temple period, it was not unprecedented in the Jewish imagination—Queen Esther had made it possible to imagine a Jewish queen positively. Decades ago, the historian Elias Bickerman drew attention to a marvelous coincidence: a postscript in the Greek translation of Esther tells us that in 78 or 77 BCE, just one year before Queen Shelamzion began to rule by herself, Megillat Esther was translated into Greek and sent to the Jewish communities of ancient Alexandria. According to the colophon to Greek Esther, a delegation of Jews from Jerusalem went to Egypt with the translation of the story of Megillat Esther and asked the Jews of Alexandria to begin celebrating the festival of Purim. It is a remarkable moment in Jewish history, in which we can see one of the times when Jews were connecting to each other from Jerusalem to the Diaspora and establishing the holidays that we take for granted today. As Tal Ilan has suggested, this moment is also crucial because it shows us that "the decision to promote the book of Esther could well be associated with the coronation of Shelamzion Alexandria" and that it may "have been part of a larger literary campaign designed to promote the leadership of women through dialogue with other contemporary points of view... which were hostile to the idea of women in power" (as Josephus was, for example). Queen Shelamzion Alexandra certainly stood to benefit from Esther's precedent. Esther may or may not have reflected the historical reality of the Persian period, but her story provided a model for a new reality in Shelamzion's lifetime (Ahuvia, 2015).
King Yannai and Elazar b. Po'irah: Be Careful with Your Words

It once happened that King Yannai went to Kochalith in the wilderness and conquered sixty towns there. On his return he rejoiced exceedingly and invited all the Sages of Israel. He said to them: "Our forefathers ate mallows when they were engaged on the building of the [second] Temple; let us too eat mallows in memory of our forefathers." So mallows were served on golden tables, and they ate. Now, there was a man there, a scoffer, evil hearted and worthless, named Elazar son of Po'irah, who said to King Yannai: "O King Yannai, the hearts of the Pharisees are against you."King Yannai replied to him: "Then what shall I do?" He said: "Test them by placing the tzitz [golden plate worn by the High Priest] between your eyes." So he tested them by placing the tzitz between his eyes. Now, an elder, named Yehudah son of Gedidyah, was present there. He said to King Yannai: "O King Yannai! let the royal crown suffice you, and leave the priestly crown to the progeny of Aaron." For it was rumored that the king's mother had been taken captive by idolators in Modi'im. [If this was true, the presumption would be that she had been raped and Yannai would be disqualified from the priesthood.] Accordingly, the charge was investigated, but not sustained, and the Sages of Israel departed in anger [king was angry at them – Rashi]. Then said Elazar b. Po'irah to King Yannai: "O King Yannai! If an ordinary Jew were treated this way, it would be his lot to swallow the insult. However, you are a king and a High Priest, shall that be your lot too!" King Yannai asked: "Then what shall I do?" Elazar said: "If you will take my advice, trample then, down [kill them].' King Yannai asked: "But what shall happen with the Torah?" Elazar replied: "Behold, the Torah scroll is rolled up and lying in the corner; whoever wishes to study. Let him go and study!" Said Rabbi Nachman b. Yitzchak: "Immediately a spirit of heresy was instilled into him, for he should have replied: 'That is well for the Written Law; but what of the Oral Law?'" Straightway, the evil burst forth through Elazar son of Po'irah and all the sages of Israel were massacred. The world was desolate until Shimon ben Shetach came and restored the Torah to its pristine glory (Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 66a; based on translation by Soncino and ArtScroll).

The tzitz is a headplate made of gold that was worn on the High Priest's forehead (see Exodus 28: 36-38). The words Kodesh L'Hashem (Holy to God) were engraved on it. The commentaries discuss whether the High Priest was allowed to wear the tzitz when not performing the Temple service.

There was a great deal of strife between the Pharisees and Sadducees. King Yannai was told by Elazar to join the Sadducees who only accepted the written law and did not accept the oral law. There is no question that Elazar b. Po'irah was an evil person and wanted King Yannai to eradicate the Pharisees. This story resembles the story of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza. In this story, King Yannai was humiliated and the sages did not stand up to Yehuda b. Gedidyah. It seems that Yehuda b. Gedidyah spoke very disrespectfully to the king in saying "let the royal crown suffice you, and leave the priestly crown to the progeny of Aaron." Based on a false rumor, he made up his mind that King Yannai was not suitable for the position of High Priest. It is not surprising that King Yannai killed the sages.

According to the Soncino translation (see b10, p. 66a), Yehuda ben Gedidyah was sentenced to flagellation after it was ascertained that he had committed slander. The name Yedidyah means beloved (or friend) of the Lord. Gedidyah might be related to the word Geday which means cut off or excommunicated. The Talmud might have changed the father's name to mock Yehuda and indicate that he was cut off from the Lord. An important lesson to be learned from this story of how important it is to be careful with your words. Had Yehuda spoken in a more respectful manner the King might have remained a friend of the Pharisees. In Avos (1:11), Avtalyon says: "Scholars, be careful with your words."

It is not clear who King Yannai is in this story. Some believe that it is Alexander Jannaeus, husband of Salome Alexandra. He was a Sadducee as noted above. It is more likely (see Soncino), however, that the King Yannai in this story is John Hyrcanus I who lived c. 175 BCE – 104 BCE (Hyman, 1987: 766). John Hyrcanus became a Sadducee at the end of his life; Alexander Jannaeus was always a Sadducee (Hyman, 1987: 766). After John Hyrcanus died, his son Aristoblus I ruled for one year and then died. Alexander Jannaeus succeeded him and married his widow, Salome Alexandra.

Nachamanides (see Genesis 49:10) believes that the Hasmoneans were punished because they were priests and not supposed to be rulers. He notes that four of the pious sons of Mattithiah, the elder Hasmonean, were killed by the sword of their enemies. Nachamanides states that there are two reasons for the punishment: (1) The patriarch Jacob crowned the tribe of Judah as king over the tribes when he said (Genesis 49:10): "The scepter shall not depart from Judah"; and (2) there is a special law prohibiting kohanim (priests) from serving as rulers. It appears that the patriarch Jacob wanted to separate the two institutions of priesthood and monarchy. The monarchy was supposed to be in the hands of someone from the Davidic line, i.e., the tribe of Judah. This story demonstrates very clearly the danger of merging the two institutions. Indeed, many countries have adopted the idea of separation of church and state.
Mar Zutra the Pious: Simple Test of Honesty

Mar Zutra the Pious was once involved in an incident in which a silver cup was stolen from his host. Later, he saw a disciple wash his hands and dry them on someone else's garment. Mar Zutra said: "This is the person who stole the cup, as he has no consideration for the property of his neighbor." The disciple was then bound, and he confessed to the crime (Bava Metzia 24a; based on translation of Soncino and ArtScroll).

This follows a Talmudic discussion of returning lost objects. When it comes to righteous scholars known to only tell the truth, lost objects may be returned to them based solely on visual recognition. Anyone else has to provide an identifying mark before the object is returned. Otherwise, anyone can claim to have lost the object. The Talmud has a discussion when scholars are permitted to lie (see Friedman & Wiesel, 2013). Any scholar who is known to be inconsiderate of other people's property is also disqualified from being able to reclaim a lost object on the basis of visual recognition; this means that he will have to provide an identifying mark (Meiri). Apparently, we only trust people to claim lost objects on the basis of visual recognition alone if they are known to never lie (except in the special cases where white lies are permitted) and are considerate of other people's property.
Business Ethics: Story of the Porters and Rabbah bar Bar-Chana

The following story demonstrates how Rabbah bar Bar-Chana was asked to follow "the way of the pious," probably because he was one of the Talmudic sages and therefore a role model for the other members of society. He was told to practice the highest form of ethics.

Some porters negligently broke a barrel of wine belonging to Rabbah bar Bar-Chana who then confiscated the porters' garments as restitution. Rav, the judge, advised Rabbah to return the property belonging to the porters. Rabbah asked Rav whether this was indeed the law and was quoted the following verse from Proverbs (2:20): "In order that you may walk in the way of the good..." The porters then complained to Rav that they were poor, had worked all day without earning anything, and were in need. Rav told Rabbah to pay them. Rabbah again asked whether this was the law. Rav responded with the conclusion of the verse from Proverbs: "... and keep the paths of the righteous" (Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia, 83a).

The Talmud sees going beyond the requirements of the law — lifnim mishurat hadin (literally, inside the line of the law) — as a Torah requirement; obeying the strict letter of the law is not enough. According to the Talmud (Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia 30b), Jerusalem was destroyed for following the strict letter of Torah law and not doing more than the law required. This principle of Jewish law, that demands that one go beyond the basic requirements of the law, is actually derived from the verse (Exodus 18:20) "And you shall instruct them about the statutes and the laws, and you shall make known to them the path in which they should go and the work that they should do" [note the redundancies] and (Deuteronomy 6:18): "You shall do that which is fair and good in the sight of the Lord" (Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia 30b, 16b).

The concept of doing what is "fair and good" provides the Talmudic sages with the legal ability to use their judgment and demand more than the strict letter of the law demands. This is reminiscent of the system in old English law known as "equity." Courts of equity, as compared to courts of common-law, dealt with the unfairness and injustices that arose because of the strict application of traditional law.
Learning About Business Ethics from Rabbi Huna's Wine that Became Vinegary

When a business deal mysteriously goes bad, many people take it is a sign that they have to be more deceptive and sneaky. Some people check their mezuzot when something bad happens. This story takes a different approach.

Rabbi Huna had 400 barrels of wine that turned into vinegar. Rabbi Yehuda the brother of Rabbi Salla Chasida, as well as other sages came to see him. And some say that it was Rabbi Adda bar Ahavah and other sages who went to see him. They said to him: "Let the master [Rabbi Huna] examine his deeds" [to determine the reason for his loss]. Rabbi Huna was taken aback and said: "Do you suspect me of wrongdoing?" The sages replied to him: " Do you think that God would punish someone without cause?" Rabbi Huna asked if anyone had heard of something wrong that he had done that must be rectified. They said to him: "This is what we heard about you: master did not give his sharecropper the grapevines that were due him" [sharecroppers are also entitled to a portion of the branches pruned off the grapevines]. Rabbi Huna responded: Did he leave me any of them? He stole all of them from me! [i.e., the sharecropper had cheated him by taking more than his due.] The sages did not accept this explanation telling him: "This is an example of the popular saying: 'Steal from a thief and you also feel the taste of stealing.'" [In other words, Rabbi Huna was wrong in taking the law into his own hands by "stealing" the vines despite the fact that he actually had a legitimate claim against the dishonest sharecropper.] Rabbi Huna agreed to give the sharecropper the vines coming to him. Some say that a miracle then occurred and the vinegar reverted to wine. And others say that the price of vinegar rose, so that his vinegar sold at the price of wine. (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 5b; based on ArtScroll translation).

Either way, this story demonstrates that one who behaves ethically is successful, and one who commits an injustice ―even one that can be rationalized― may be punished by God. The Talmud believes that if something bad happens to a person, that individual should examine his/her deeds and see if an injustice was committed by the person. Incidentally, the number 400 in the story may be symbolic. In the Torah, Abraham pays the outrageous sum of 400 shekels when purchasing the cave of Machpelah from Ephron the Hittite (Genesis 23:16). Ephron is considered a wicked person by the Talmud for taking advantage of Abraham who desperately needed a burial plot for Sarah, his wife, when she passed away (Genesis 23). Ephron's behavior is reminiscent of the way many pharmaceutical companies act by overcharging for drugs. Martin Shkreli, CEO of Turing Pharmaceuticals, is a modern day Ephron. He raised the price of Daraprim, a 62-year old drug, from $13.50 a tablet to $750. Valeant Pharmaceuticals has also been criticized for raising the price of several old drugs; the price of Isuprel, a heart medication, increased by 500% (Pollack & Huetteman, 2016).
The Good Deeds of Rabbi Huna

Rava said to Rafram b. Papa: "Tell me some of the good deeds which Rabbi Huna has done. He replied: "Of his childhood I do not recollect anything, but from his old age I do." On cloudy and windy days they would carry him about in a golden palanquin and he would inspect every part of the city and he would order the demolition of any wall that was unsafe. If the owner was in a position to do so, he had to rebuild it himself; but if not, then Rabbi Huna would have it rebuilt at his own expense. Every Friday afternoon, he would send a messenger to the market when it was about to close and any vegetables that the growers had left over he would buy and had them thrown into the river.

The Talmud asks: "Why throw them away? Let him give the vegetables to the poor." He was afraid the poor would then at times be led to rely upon Rabbi Huna and would not trouble to buy any for themselves [then they would have no vegetables for the Sabbath if there were no leftover vegetables]. Why did he not give the vegetables to the domestic animals? Rabbi Huna was of the opinion that food fit for human consumption may not be given to animals. Then why did he purchase them at all? This would cause the growers to refrain in the future from providing an adequate supply of vegetables so he purchased the leftovers

Whenever Rabbi Huna discovered some new medicine not available to the public, he would fill a water jug with it and suspend it from the doorframe of the house and proclaim: "Whoever desires it let him come and take of it."... When he had a meal, he would open the door wide and declare, "Whoever is in need of food, let him come and eat." Rava said: "All these things I could myself carry out except the last one because the troops of poor people in Mechuzah are too numerous" (Babylonian Talmud, Taanis 20b; based on translation of Soncino and ArtScroll)

One reading the above two stories about Rabbi Huna (c. 212 – c. 297) would surmise that he was very wealthy. He actually started out extremely poor, so impoverished that he had to borrow money in order to purchase wine to use for Kiddush on the Sabbath. He used his belt as collateral and had to replace it with a belt made out of grass. When Rav, his teacher, saw him dressed like that and found out what he had done, he blessed him as follows: "May it be the will of God that you be totally covered in silk." The blessing must have worked because Rabbi Huna became very wealthy. In fact, one time, Rabbi Huna, who was extremely short, was lying on a bed [it seems that he was not noticed] and his daughter and daughters-in-law came to the house and threw their expensive silk garments on the bed so that he was literally covered in silk (Babylonian Talmud, Megillah 27b). The Talmud adds that when Rav found out how well his blessing worked, he was upset with Rabbi Huna. He told him that after he had been blessed, he should have replied, "Any you too should be similarly blessed." It is polite to say to someone who blesses you, "the same to you."

The above story demonstrates that wealthy people have to use their wealth to help their communities, i.e., social responsibility. Rabbi Huna was concerned with repairing dilapidated structures. In the United States, more than one out of nine bridges are rated as being structurally deficient. The average age of the 607,380 bridges in the United States in 2013 was 42 years (American Society of Civil Engineers, 2015). It is only a matter of time before people die when bridges start collapsing; indeed, a few bridges have already collapsed. On August 1, 2007, the I-35W bridge in Minneapolis buckled and 13 people died as a result. Note how concerned Rabbi Huna was with making medications available to everyone. This story demonstrates his great love for the Sabbath. He wanted to ensure that everyone would have vegetables to enjoy on the holiest day of the week. Any person who walks around with a belt made of grass in order to have wine for the Sabbath Kiddush clearly loves the Sabbath. His strategy of dumping the vegetables in the river is explained by the commentaries as dumping them into the river in a way that the currents would carry them off to another town. The vegetables would not go to waste (baal tashchit, wanton destruction and waste, is prohibited by Jewish law; see http://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/bal-tashhit-the-torah-prohibits-wasteful-destruction/) but would be consumed by people living downstream.
Abba: The Compassionate Surgeon

According to the Talmud, "The best of doctors are destined for Hell" (Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 82a).Several reasons are provided including the fact that doctors are often arrogant and will not consult with other physicians and thus cause a patient to die. Also, many refuse to treat the indigent. Here is a story of one who did things right.

Abba Umna was a surgeon/bloodletter (umna) and would receive greetings from the Heavenly Academy every day. Abaye received greetings on every Sabbath eve, Raba on the eve of every Day of Atonement. Abaye felt dejected because of the special honor shown to Abba Umna. People said to Abaye: "You are not able to perform deeds such as his." What was the special merit of Abba Umna? When he performed his operations he would separate men from women [for modesty reasons]. He had a garment which had a cup for receiving the blood and which was slit at the shoulder to accommodate the surgeon's knife. Whenever a woman patient came to him he would put the garment on her shoulder in order not to see her exposed body. He also had a private place where the patients deposited their fees which he would charge; those that could afford it put their fees there, and thus those who could not pay were not embarrassed. Whenever a young scholar happened to consult him, he would not accept any fee from him. When the scholar would leave, he would give him money and tell him: "Go and regain your health."

One day Abaye sent to him two scholars in order to test him. He received them and gave them food and drink and in the evening he prepared woolen mattresses for them to sleep on. In the morning the scholars rolled these together and took them to the marketplace for sale. There they met Abba and they said to him: "Sir, value these, how much are they worth?" Abba replied: "Such-and-such." They said to him: "Perhaps they are worth more?" Abba replied: "This is what I paid for them." They then said to him, They are yours, we took them away from you; tell us, pray, of what did you suspect us. He replied: "I said to myself, perhaps the rabbis needed money to redeem captives and they were ashamed to tell me." They replied, Sir, take them back. He answered: "From the moment I missed them I dismissed them from my mind and assigned them to charity." Raba was dejected because of the special honor shown to Abaye and he was therefore told: "Be content that through your merit the whole city is protected" (Babylonian Talmud, Taanis 21b-22a; based on translation by Soncino and ArtScroll).

This is a story used to teach business ethics. Abba Umna was concerned with the health of his patients and was not interested in becoming wealthy. Moreover, he was even concerned about such issues as patient modesty. He was also very charitable.
Never Telling a Lie

The following story/parable demonstrates the harm that may result from a lie told for the sake of decency.

Rava said: At first I used to say that there is no truth in the world [i.e., that no person speaks the truth all the time]. Whereupon one of the Rabbis said to me, and Rabbi Tavus was his name, and some say Rabbi Tavyome was his name, that even if he would be given all the wealth in the world, he would not tell a lie. He related the following story: Once, I came to a certain town called Kushta [this name means truth in Aramaic] whose inhabitants would never tell a lie and no person ever died before his time.

He married a woman from among them and had two sons from her. One day his wife was sitting and washing her hair when a neighbor came and knocked on the door. Thinking to himself that it was not proper [to tell the neighbor that his wife was washing her hair], he said to the neighbor, "she is not here." His two sons died [as a punishment for his lying]. The people of the town came to him and asked, "What is the cause of this?" He related to them what had happened. They said to him: "We beg you to leave our town and do not incite death against us" (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 97a)

Rabbi Yaakov Emden explains why Rabbi Tavus was punished if one is permitted to lie for the sake of decency. In this case, Rabbi Tavus could have simply told the truth to the neighbor who would have understood and left; the white lie was totally unnecessary (Hagahos Yaakov Emden). Not all commentaries take the above story literally (e.g., Maharal). One study found that trust may be used to predict the prosperity of a society. Countries where people tend to trust each other are more successful economically than those where people do not trust each other (Shermer, 2008). Capitalism needs trust to function well.
Wisdom of Beruriah: Praying for the Wicked

There were certain boors in Rabbi Meir's neighborhood, and they caused him great distress. Once, Rabbi Meir was praying for mercy regarding them, so that they would die. His wife, Beruriah said to him: How do you justify saying such a prayer [that evil people should die]? Because it is written (Psalms 104: 35), Let sinners cease from the earth.' The verse does not say , "chotim " [sinners] but "chattaim " [sins]. Furthermore, look at the end of the verse, 'And let the wicked be no more.' If the sins will cease, there will be no more wicked people. Rather pray that they repent and then the wicked will be no more. He prayed for them and they repented (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 10a; based on translation of ArtScroll).

Rabbi Meir thought that the most "merciful" solution for society was the elimination of sinners. Needless to say, violent criminals can do great harm to the world. However, the verse uses the word "chattaim" which can mean either sinners (the usual translation) or sins. Beruriah felt that there are situations where one must pray and do everything possible to change people. The world is not always better off eliminating sinners. In many cases, the optimal solution is to help people. The simplest solution is to find people meaningful work. There is a great deal of research on unemployment that shows how losing a job affects one's physical and mental health (Leahy, 2013).

The attitude of Rabbi Meir hints at what is going on in America today. Research by Susan Fiske indicates that Americans have a huge hatred for the poor, much of it based on false stereotypes. She says that "Americans react to the poor with disgust" and "It's the most negative prejudice people report" even worse than racism. Her studies are based on neuroimaging tests that examine the response of the brain after being shown photos of the poor (Lubrano, 2013). Actually, the majority of poor people in the United States are working poor. According to the Economic Policy Institute, the majority (63%) of poor people who are eligible to work actually work (Gould, 2015). This is what they have to say about poverty:

Despite what some policymakers and pundits might have us believe, a significant share of the poor work. This means that policies that boost employment and wages are important and underappreciated tools for reducing poverty. To boost wage-growth and reduce poverty rates, a policy agenda must include provisions to raise the minimum wage, raise the overtime threshold, eliminate wage theft, and strengthen workers' collective bargaining rights (Gould, 2015).
Wisdom of Beruriah: Knowing how to Respond to a Sadducee

The next selection demonstrates that Beruriah could be quite sarcastic, especially when asked to answer a foolish question posed by a Sadducee. The Sadducees only believed in the written law expressly stated in the Torah and refused to accept the oral law.

A certain Sadducee said to Beruriah: "It is written in Isaiah (54:1), 'Sing you barren woman that has not given birth.' Because she did not give birth, she should rejoice?" She replied: "Fool, look at the end of the verse where it is written: 'For the children of the desolate one shall be more than the children of the married wife, says the Lord.'" What then is the meaning of 'Sing you barren woman that has not given birth?' Rejoice Jewish people, who are compared to a barren woman, for not having born children like you who are destined for Hell" (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 10a).

Beruriah was definitely being sarcastic. Isaiah was comparing desolate Jerusalem (after the destruction of the Temple) to a barren woman but was reassuring the people that one day (the Babylonian exile lasted for 70 years), the Jews would return and the desolate city of Jerusalem would be rebuilt and filled with people again. It is surprising that the Sadducee did not even complete the first verse which answers his question (Isaiah 54:1): "Sing you barren woman that has not given birth; burst into song and be jubilant, you who have never been in labor; because more are the children of the desolate woman [Jerusalem] than of her who has a husband, says the Lord."
Wit of Beruriah

Rabbi Yosi of Galilee was once going on the road and met Beruriah. He asked her: Which road do I take to the city of Lod. She responded: Foolish Galilean, did our sages not state (Avot 1:5) that "one should not gossip excessively with a woman." You should have asked: Which way to Lod? (Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin 53b).

One suspects that Beruriah was joking with Rabbi Yosi. She was teasing him and showing how the statement in Avos could be misconstrued. Actually, according to most commentaries, it is a statement about idle talk. Back in ancient times, in their society, there was a fear that such frivolous talk could lead to immorality. Incidentally, the Talmud states that "Beruriah, wife of Rabbi Meir and daughter of Rabbi Chananyah ben Teradyon (one of the 10 martyrs killed by the Romans), "would learn three hundred rulings a day from three hundred different teachers" (Babylonian Talmud, Pesachim 62b). Clearly, there was no problem speaking with male teachers.
Beruriah: How to Study Properly

Beruriah discovered a student learning silently. She sneered at him and said: "Is it not written (II Samuel 23: 5), 'Ordered in all things and preserved,' if it is ordered in all two hundred and forty eight organs of a person it will be preserved in the heart" (Babylonian Talmud, Eruvin 53b-54a).

The secret of remembering what you study is to be active. One who reads aloud and takes notes will remember what s/he has learned. Simply looking at a text with one's eyes is not conducive to long-term retention since you need active learning. To this very day, yeshiva students are taught to study by saying the words out loud.
Allowing Someone to Spit in Your Eye for the Sake of Domestic Harmony

In this story, Rabbi Meir takes a different approach to a boorish individual.

Rabbi Meir would teach Torah on Friday nights in the synagogue in Chamat. There was a woman who would come regularly to listen to his lectures. One time, Rabbi Meir spoke for longer than usual. She rushed home but when she got there the candles had already burned down. Her husband said to her: "Where were you?" She replied: "I was listening to a Torah lecture." Her husband said to her: "May God do so-and-so [he was swearing not to let her back home] if this woman enters my house unless you go spit in the face of the rabbi who was lecturing." Rabbi Meir miraculously saw with divine insight what happened and pretended to have a pain in the eye. Rabbi Meir asked: "Is there Any woman among you skilled in whispering a charm for eye pain, let her come and cure me." [Rabbi Meir knew that charmers also spat when whispering their incantations.] Her neighbors said to her: "The time has come for you to return home. Pretend to be a charmer and spit lightly in his eyes, and you will be able to live with your husband again." She came to Rabbi Meir. He asked her: Do you know how to cure a sick eye through a charm?" Because she was so overawed by his presence, she said No! Rabbi Meir told her: "Nevertheless, spit in my eye seven times without the charm and I will be cured." After she spat in his eye, he told her: "Go home and tell your husband, 'You said I should spit once, but I spat seven times!'"

His disciples were horrified, and said: "Rabbi, you condone this disgraceful behavior towards the Torah! If you had only mentioned it to us, would we not have brought her husband, flogged him at the post until he consented to be reconciled with his wife and let her come home!" Rabbi Meir replied: "The honor of Meir should not be greater than the honor of God! If the Torah tells us to erase the name of God which is written in holiness in order to bring about peace between a husband and wife [See Numbers 5: 23 -- the case of a sotah (wife suspected of infidelity)], all the more so may Meir's dignity be disregarded for the same reason!" (Jerusalem Talmud, Sotah 1:4; Midrash Leviticus Rabbah 9:9; partially based on translation by Lipnik, 2013 and Bialik & Ravnitzky, 1992).

This story is clearly about the importance of domestic peace. God allowed his name to be erased for the sake of peace between husband and wife and Rabbi Meir allowed himself to be spat upon for the same reason. It is interesting to note that the woman was interested in scholarship and her husband was a boor. The way he treated his wife who came home late from a lecture makes it clear what kind of person we are dealing with. Rabbi Meir's lectures were meant to be interesting to all. Apparently, even women came to his lectures. His lectures were divided into three parts: one third consisted of halachah (Jewish law), one-third of aggadah (homiletics), and one-third of parables. Rabbi Meir knew 300 fox parables (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 38b).

As far as being spat upon seven times, there is another lesson here. Rabbi Meir wanted to show students how a leader had to behave. A leader must have humility and even allow himself to be spat upon if it is to help his flock. Rabbi Meir found a clever solution that resulted in domestic peace. Rabbi Meir could have allowed the woman to spit in his eye twice to make the same point. There has to be a deeper reason that he allowed her to spit in his eye seven times. The number seven is a mystical number and is used a great deal in the Torah, starting with the creation story. This may be the way Rabbi Meir hinted to his students the importance of marriage and domestic peace.

Frand (2007) has the following to say about why God's name must be erased as part of the sotah ritual:

The answer must be that the Almighty is teaching us a lesson that is vital for Shalom Bayis (domestic tranquility). The lesson is that when it comes to making peace it is sometimes necessary to bend the rules. One cannot stand on principle all the time. One must not always be yelling "the law is the law!" The Master of the Universe is teaching us that to preserve domestic tranquility, it is even sometimes permissible to erase the Name of G-d. True this miracle could have been accomplished with ashes or with dirt, but the symbolism would be lacking (Frand, 2007).
Rabbi Meir Rescues Sister-in-law from Brothel: "O God of Meir Answer Me"

Rabbi Chaninah ben Teradyon was sentenced to death for teaching Torah and his daughter was sentenced to live in a brothel (see "Death of Rabbi Chanina ben Teradyon").

Beruriah, the wife of Rabbi Meir, was a daughter of Rabbi Chaninah ben Teradyon She said to her husband: "I am ashamed that my sister dwells in a brothel." So Rabbi Meir took a tarkab-full of denarii and went to the brothel. He thought to himself: "If she has not been subjected to any immoral act, a miracle will be wrought for her; but if she has committed an immoral act, no miracle will happen to her." Rabbi Meir went and disguised himself as a Roman horseman. He came to her and said: "Submit yourself to me." She replied: "The manner of women is upon me [she is menstruating]" He said: "I am prepared to wait." She said: "But there are very many girls here prettier than me." He said to himself: "This proves that she has not committed any wrong; she no doubt says thus to every man that comes to the brothel." He then went to her guard and said: "Hand her over to me." He replied: "I am afraid of the government." Rabbi Meir said: "Take the tarkab of dinars; distribute one half as bribes to the government and the other half shall be yours." He asked: "And what shall I do when these funds are exhausted?" Rabbi Meir replied: "Say, 'O God of Meir, answer me!' and you will be saved." The guard asked: "But who can assure me that that will be the case?' He replied, "You will see now." There were some dogs there who bit anyone who incited them. Rabbi Meir took a stone and threw it at them, and when they were about to bite him he exclaimed: 'O God of Meir answer me!' and they let him alone. The guard then handed her over to him. Ultimately, the matter became known to the government, and the guard on being brought to the gallows exclaimed: 'O God of Meir answer me.' [A miracle occurred and they could not hang him.] They took him down and asked him what is the meaning of this? He told them the incident that had happened. They then engraved Rabbi Meir's likeness on the gates of Rome and proclaimed that anyone seeing a person resembling it should bring him there. One day some Romans saw him and ran after him, so he ran away from them and entered a brothel. Others say he happened just then to see food cooked by idol worshippers and he dipped in one finger and then sucked the other finger. Others again say that Elijah the Prophet appeared to them as a harlot who embraced him [thus giving the impression that he was a regular client at the brothel.] The Romans exclaimed: "Heaven forbid! If this were Rabbi Meir, he would not have acted in this manner! [and they left him]. Rabbi Meir then arose and ran away eventually coming to Babylon (Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah 18a-18b; based on translation of Soncino and ArtScroll).

The Talmud (Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah 18a) provides a reason that Rabbi Chaninah ben Teradyon's daughter was punished in this manner. She was once walking in front of Roman officials who remarked, "How beautiful are the steps of this maiden!" She overheard them and starting paying attention to how she walked. Walking in a provocative manner is wrong so she was punished "measure for measure." She would have to live in a brothel and work to be unprovocative. This is consistent with the Talmudic approach where one tries to learn a moral lesson from stories. If the punishment seems too harsh, the Talmud often uses the principle of: "God deals strictly with His close ones even to a hair's breadth?" (Babylonian Talmud, Yevamos 121b). In other words, God is much more exacting of righteous people. It is not always this easy to explain why bad things happen to good people; this is obvious from the Book of Job. Rabbi Yannai says (Avos 4:15): "We do not have the ability to explain either the tranquility of the wicked or the suffering of the righteous." However, where possible, the Talmud does seek to find explanations for punishment.

Rabbi Meir is of the opinion that "Just as one recites a blessing for the good, so too, one recites a blessing for the bad" (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 48b). He may have learned this from his brilliant wife Beruriah. Beruriah's mother was executed by the Romans, her father was burnt alive, and her sister was sent to live in a brothel. If that was not enough, she lost two of her children. The Midrash relates that her two sons died on the Sabbath. Beruriah, wife of Rabbi Meir, fibbed to her husband when he asked where they were, and said the two boys were at the house of study. She waited until he made Havdalah, the prayer signaling the end of the Sabbath, and had to deceive him a second time about his son's whereabouts. After Rabbi Meir ate something she broke the news to him very gently by comparing their children's lives to an object deposited with someone for safekeeping. The owner took back what belonged to him. She concluded by citing the verse (Job 1:21): "The Lord has given, the Lord has taken, May the name of the Lord be blessed" (Midrash Yalkut Shimoni, Proverbs 31).
Queen Cleopatra's Question to Rabbi Meir

This is not the famous Cleopatra who lived in the time of Marc Anthony, but must be a descendent. In any case, this question is quite absurd and it is not clear whether Cleopatra was serious or not. Rabbi Meir's answer was clever. As noted above, Rabbi Meir was a great lecturer and an expert in fox fables. This story may illustrate what is said in Proverbs (26:5), "Answer a fool according to his folly."

Queen Cleopatra asked Rabbi Meir: "I know that the dead will be resurrected, as it is written (Psalms 72:16), 'And they will blossom out of the city [Jerusalem] like grass of the earth.' However, when they rise, will they be naked or clothed." He answered: "This can be deduced a fortiori from a grain of wheat; if a grain of wheat which is buried naked sprouts forth with many coverings, how much more so the righteous, who are buried in their clothing" (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 90b).
Importance of Marriage: Ulla's Sarcastic Remark to Rabbi Yitzchak

The next selection will show how sarcastic Ulla was to a fellow sage who was somewhat obsessed with ensuring that his son would marry a woman of proper lineage. In Jewish law, there are various genealogical classes. For example, the priests are the highest class and foundlings and bastards among the lowest. However, an unmarried woman having an affair will not produce a bastard; a bastard is produced when a married woman commits adultery.

Ulla visited the house of Rabbi Yehuda in Pumbedisa. He noticed that Rabbi Yitzchak the son of Rabbi Yehuda was unmarried. Ulla asked Rabbi Yehuda: "Why did you not find a wife for your son?" He answered: "Who knows where I can find a genealogically suitable wife for my son?" Ulla said: "Do you know from whom you are descended? Perhaps, from those regarding whom it is written (Lamentations 5:11): 'They ravished women in Zion, maidens in the cities of Judah.' And even if you wish to say that if an idolater or a slave rapes a Jewish woman, the resulting offspring are legitimate. Then, perhaps we are descended from those regarding whom it is written (Amos 6:4): 'Those who lie upon ivory beds and stretch out on their couches' ... This verse was interpreted by Rabbi Avuhu as referring to the people [living in Israel prior to the Temple's destruction] who ate and drank together, attached their beds, swapped wives, and fouled their beds with semen that was not theirs.'" (Kiddushin 71b)

Ulla was essentially telling Rabbi Yehuda not to obsess about finding a woman of "proper" lineage for his son, since it is not inconceivable that he himself (or indeed anyone) may be a descendent of wife-swappers and is thus a bastard. Marriage, as noted above, was very important to the Talmudic sages. Ulla may have also felt that it was arrogant of Rabbi Yitzchak to insist on finding a girl that was "genealogically suitable." Many of the greatest sages were descendants of proselytes.
Yalta and Ulla: Was Yalta a Feminist?

Ulla, was a scholar who traveled frequently between Israel and Babylon, possibly to collect funds to help the poor of Israel. He was quite sarcastic at times and did not appreciate the Babylon ways as the next selections show. Ulla, though quite adept with verbal repartees gets a good tongue-lashing from Yalta, the brilliant wife of Rabbi Nachman. The cup of benediction (kos shel berachah) used to recite the grace after meal (Birkas HaMazon) is shared with the participants in the meal so that everyone has a chance to be blessed.

Ulla visited the house of Rabbi Nachman. They had a meal and Ulla said the grace after the meal. He handed the cup of benediction [the grace after the meal was made over a cup of wine] to Rabbi Nachman so that he should also drink from it. Rabbi Nachman said to Ulla: "Send the cup of benediction to my wife, Yalta." Ulla replied: "Thus taught Rabbi Yochanan: The fruit of a woman's body (i.e., womb) is blessed only from the fruit of a man's body, since it says (Deuteronomy 7:13), 'He will bless the fruit of your body.' It does not state the 'fruit of her body' but the 'fruit of your body.'" [Therefore it is not necessary to send the cup of benediction to the wife if it is given to the husband since if the husband gets blessed by drinking from the wine, the wife is automatically included in the blessing]... Meanwhile, Yalta heard that Ulla did not wish to send her the cup of benediction. She rose in anger, went to the wine-storage room, and broke four hundred barrels of wine. Rabbi Nachman said to Ulla: "Send her another cup." Ulla sent her the cup with following message: "All the wine from the jug can be used for the cup of benediction" [Ulla tried to mollify Yalta by saying that another cup of wine from the jug can also be used as a cup of benediction if the original cup has already been drunk]. She sent back the following message to Ulla: "Gossip comes from peddlers and lice from rags" (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 51b; based on translation by Soncino and ArtScroll).

Yalta was referring to the fact that Ulla was constantly traveling between Israel and Babylon. She was implying that words that come from a vagabond such as Ulla are as the lice in old clothing, i.e., useless. Perhaps, she was also making fun of his clothing. A bigger problem is that Yalta broke 400 barrels of wine. One commentary feels that she did this to demonstrate that it was not the wine she cared about; it was the blessing. She was standing up for a principle.

Kosman (2011) sees her as an early feminist standing up to Ulla for her rights.

This narrative, with all its strangeness and the discrepancy it presents between the social world of the Amoraim and our own world, is not especially complimentary to women, and could also be read as disparaging towards women like Yaltha, who so vigorously fought for their honor; but it also patently directs a critique against men such as Ulla who are incapable of understanding women's hearts and their distress, and who are insensitive to the other. In our case, in his joust with Yaltha, Ulla even draws the sword of the "Torah" that he brings from the study hall.

Yaltha might not be portrayed in laudatory terms as a spiritual figure, and she certainly does not present the ideal role model according to which generations of Jewish women were educated, but we can understand her and see her, in modern terms, as one of the first advocates for women's honor recorded in the Jewish sources (Kosman, 2011).
Rabbi Nachman and Rabbi Yehuda: Speaking in an Arrogant or Pretentious Manner

The next story is used in the Talmud to support the opinion of the great scholar Shmuel who stated: Whatever genealogical blemish one accuses others of having, he himself has. This is similar to the concept of projection, in psychology.

There was once a person from the town of Nehardea who entered a butcher shop in Pumbedisa. He asked for some meat and was told to wait until the attendant of Rabbi Yehuda b. Yechezkel was served and then he would be served. He said: "Who is Rabbi Yehuda b. Sheviskel [purposely mispronouncing the name so that it now means Yehuda the Glutton] that he should be ahead of me and be served before me?" Rabbi Yehuda was told of the incident and excommunicated the Nehardean man. Rabbi Yehuda was then told that the man often called people slaves [i.e., he questioned their authentic Jewish lineage and claimed that they were descendants of slaves]. Rabbi Yehuda then had him declared a descendent of slaves. Thereupon, the Nehardean went and summoned Rabbi Yehuda to a lawsuit before Rabbi Nachman. When the summons arrived, Rabbi Yehuda asked Rabbi Huna whether or not he should go. Rabbi Huna told him that he was not obligated to go because he was a great man [and more knowledgeable than Rabbi Nachman] but should go out of respect for the Nasi's house [Rabbi Nachman was the son-in-law of the exilarch, the leader of Babylonian Jewry].

Rabbi Yehuda came to Rabbi Nachman's house and found him building a fence. He said: "Do you not agree with the opinion of Rabbi Huna b. Idi in the name of Shmuel that once a person has been appointed a community leader, he is prohibited to do menial labor in the presence of three people" [because of the dignity of his position]. Rabbi Nachman answered: "I am simply making a small gundrita." Rabbi Yehuda said: "Is the word maakeh used in the Bible or the word mechitzah used by the Rabbis repugnant to you [all three words mean fence, but Rabbi Nachman was using the more pretentious word]?"

Rabbi Nachman then asked Rabbi Yehuda to sit on the karpita. He replied: "Is the word safsal used by the Rabbis or the word itztaba used by the people repugnant to you [all three mean bench/couch]?" Rabbi Nachman then asked Rabbi Yehuda to eat some ethronga. He replied: "This is what Shmuel stated: Whoever says ethronga is one-third supercilious. Either call it ethrog, the word used by the Rabbis or ethroga, the word used by the people [all mean citron]." Rabbi Nachman then asked Rabbi Yehuda to drink some anbaga. He replied: "Is the word isparagus used by the Rabbis or the word anpak used by the people repugnant to you [all three mean a small cup of wine]?" Rabbi Nachman then said: "Let my daughter, Donag, come and serve us some wine." He replied: "Thus stated Shmuel: 'One should not be waited on by a women' [to serve men as it may encourage the mingling of the sexes, especially when wine is served]." Rabbi Nachman said: "But she is a minor?" He replied: "Shmuel stated explicitly whether she is a an adult or minor, one should not be waited on by a woman."

Rabbi Nachman then said: "Do you wish to send a greeting to my wife, Yalta?' He replied: "Thus stated Shmuel: 'Hearing the voice of a woman is indecency'" [in their society, greeting a woman directly was immodest]. Rabbi Nachman said: "You can send a greeting to her through a messenger." He replied: "Thus stated Shmuel: 'One should not send a greeting to a woman.'" Rabbi Nachman said: "You can send a greeting to her through her husband [i.e., himself]." He replied: "Thus stated Shmuel: One should not send a greeting to a woman at all." Rabbi Nachman's wife, who overheard the whole conversation, sent a message to her husband: "Resolve this dispute expeditiously. Otherwise, he will make you appear to be like just another ignoramus" (Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 70a-70b).

The story continues and at the end it was discovered that the Nehardean was indeed a descendent of slaves. This story demonstrates the importance of speaking in a proper manner. The Nehardean clearly had a problem with people. In their society, calling people "slave" was similar to calling someone a "bastard" or using an ethnic slur. The Talmud is warning people to speak in a warm manner. Insulting terms used in speech can come back to haunt us.

The Talmud is also advising people to avoid speaking in a pretentious, arrogant manner. Yalta makes an appearance in this story and demonstrates her brilliance. Rabbi Nachman was lucky to have such an intelligent wife.
The Death of Rabbi Rechumi for Neglecting His Wife

This story follows a Talmudic discussion regarding the biblical obligation of husbands to be intimate with their wives. The frequency of intimacy depended on one's occupation. Thus, sailors, who travel a great deal, must be intimate with their wives at least once in six months; laborers should be intimate twice a week. Abaye is of the opinion that a man may not change to an occupation that means he will not be home very much (e.g., laborer to sailor) without the consent of his wife. Rabbi Adda bar Ahava states that students of Torah may leave their homes for two or three years without their wives' permission. Rava warns students that those who follow those words and leave home for long periods of time to study are risking their lives. The story of Rabbi Rechumi is used to prove this.

Rabbi Rechumi was always found studying before Rava in Mechoza. He would come home to his wife every eve of Yom Kippur. One day, his studies engrossed him. His wife was looking for him saying: "Now he is coming!... Now he is coming!..." When he did not come, she became disheartened and a tear descended from her eye. At that moment, Rabbi Rechumi was sitting on the roof. The roof gave way beneath him and he died (Babylonian Talmud, Kehtubos 62b; based on ArtScroll and Soncino translation).

There are many problems with this story. Yom Kippur is the one holiday during the year when sexual intimacy is prohibited. Why did Rabbi Rechumi choose that day to come home? Moreover, Rava sent his students home during the months of Nissan and Tishrei so they could do the planting and harvesting and make a living and not worry about their sustenance (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 35b). If the students went home for Tishrei, Rabbi Rechumi should have been home for Rosh Hashonah, ten days before Yom Kippur. It is also interesting to note that the name Rechumi is related to the Hebrew word rechem meaning womb and rachamim meaning compassion.

This story about a famous Chassidic rabbi may have the same moral message as the story of Rabbi Rechumi:

The future second Lubavitcher Rebbe (the Mitteler' Rebbe) who was once so intent on his studies that he failed to hear the cries of his baby son. His father (Reb Shneor Zalman of Lyadi) heard, and went down and took the baby in his arms until he went to sleep again. Then he went into his son, still intent on his books, and said, "My son, I do not know what you are studying, but it is not the study of Torah if it makes you deaf to the cry of a child" (Sacks, 2005: 82-83).

If Torah education does not make one understand the importance of hearing these cries, then it is not a worthwhile education.

One question that is asked about this story is that the punishment of Rabbi Rechumi made things even worse for the wife. With his death, she would never see him again so how did this help her? This question is answered by Rabbi Chaim Shmulevitz (2002: 41) who says that the punishment for interpersonal sins such as transpired in the above story is not for the purpose of correcting an injustice that occurred. He compares the punishment for causing another human being pain to playing with fire.

The death of R' Rachumi cannot be described as punishment; no one was more affected by his death than his wife, on whose account he was punished. If she had been hurt by his tardiness, surely his permanent absence would be unbearable. To understand the reason of R' Rachumi's death we must view the punishment meted out for interpersonal offenses in a different manner. It is not retribution in the sense of reward and punishment, rather it is part and parcel of the reality of our existence. As surely one must be hurt by a collision with another object, so too must one be harmed when one has hurt another person's feelings. When one puts his hand into fire it will be burned, countless good reasons for doing so notwithstanding! (Shmulevitz, 2002: 41).

Ruth Calderon discussed this story from the Talmud in her maiden Knesset speech. The story is discussed in her book (Calderon, 2014). She made the following points at the Knesset:

First, Calderon explains, "He who forgets that he is sitting on the shoulders of the other, will fall." Furthermore, "being righteous is not sticking to the Torah at the cost of insensitivity to fellow human beings." Then, Calderon continued with an important message: "In a dispute, both sides can be right... both the woman and Rabbi Rechumi feel that they are doing the right thing and are being responsible for their home. Often, we feel like the woman - waiting, serving in the army, [and] doing all the work, while others sit on the roof studying Torah. And sometimes those others feel that they bear the entire weight of tradition, the culture, and Torah, while we go to the beach and have a blast. Both I and my disputant feel solely responsible for the home. Until I understand this, I will not perceive the problem properly and will not be able to find a solution. I invite all of us to years of action rooted in thought, and dispute rooted in understanding and mutual respect (Looks, 2013).

Her speech is available on YouTube with English subtitles (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8nNpTf7tNo).
Rabbi Chiya bar Ashi and his Wife Disguised as a Prostitute

Whenever Rabbi Chiyya bar Ashi would fall on his face when praying the tachanun [a prayer said even today while covering the face], he would say: "May the Merciful One save me us from the Evil Inclination [i.e., sexual transgression]." One day his wife overheard heard him. She said to herself: "Now let us see, it is so many years that he has withdrawn from having relations with me. What reason then for this prayer?" One day, he was studying in his garden. She adorned herself and repeatedly passed back and forth in front of him. He said to her: "Who are you?" She replied: "I am Charuta [a prostitute that was well known to the people living in that town], and have returned today from my travels." He propositioned her. She said to him: "Bring me that pomegranate from the uppermost branch of the tree." He jumped up, went, brought it to her, and had relations with her [The Talmud does not actually state that he had relations with her but it is strongly implied]. When he came into the house, his wife was firing the oven. He went up and sat in it. She said to him: "What is the meaning of this?" He told her what had happened. She said to him: "It was I pretending to be the prostitute." He paid no attention to her until she provided proof that it was indeed her [probably the pomegranate]. He said to her: "Nevertheless, I am culpable since my intention was to do something sinful." He fasted in penance for this sin until he died by that very death [excessive fasting] (Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 81b; based on ArtScroll translation).

The Talmud discusses whether someone who thought he was committing a sin but did not actually do anything wrong needs atonement. The conclusion is that a person is considered a sinner – and needs atonement – even for this kind of transgression. This story has other messages. Had Rabbi Chiya b. Ashi had relations with his wife and not said this prayer, he would never have sinned. Abstaining from his wife was not the way to save himself from committing a sexual transgression. Judaism does not ask for ascetism and celibacy. One is supposed to channel ones energy towards a positive goal. The sexual act between husband and wife is an act of love and a mitzvah. Rabbi Chiya tried to extinguish his sexual desire rather than turn it into something wonderful.

It is amazing that Rabbi Chiya's wife was able to pretend that she was a famous prostitute. It seems that Rabbi Chiya barely knew his own wife. How many wives can fool their husbands by pretending to be someone else? Certainly not wives who have a healthy marriage. Several scholars note that the real tragedy in this story is that the relationship between Rabbi Chiya b. Ashi and his wife was not restored after this incident. This story could have had a happy ending with the rekindling of the romance between Rabbi Chiya and his wife.

Feintuch (n.d.) compares this story to the biblical story of Yehuda and Tamar (Genesis 38). In the latter story, Tamar disguises herself as a prostitute and seduces her father-in-law, Yehuda. Yehuda thought he was having relations with a prostitute. Tamar had good intentions; she desired children and saw that Yehuda was not keeping his word and giving her Shelah in levirate marriage. Note that fire plays an important role in both stories. Yehuda was ready to burn Tamar alive for her "transgression" of becoming pregnant out of wedlock. Rabbi Chiya b. Ashi was prepared to burn himself alive for his supposed sin.

Alongside the similarities, attention should also be paid to the considerable differences that exist between the stories. Firstly, in the story of Yehuda and Tamar, a sin does apparently take place – sexual relations between a father-in-law and daughter-in-law. In the story of R. Chiya b. Ashi, in contrast, there is actually no sin at all. On the other hand, one of the most conspicuous differences is the manner in which the story concludes. The episode involving Yehuda and Tamar has a positive ending: Yehuda acknowledges that Tamar was right and he was wrong, Tamar is delivered from being burned, and their union results in the birth of two children who are ultimately the foundations of the tribe of Yehuda. Among their descendants are David and his dynasty. The story of R. Chiya b. Ashi, in contrast, ends on a sad note (Feintuch, n.d.).

Yehuda is considered by the Talmud to be the ultimate baal teshuva (penitent). He goes back to his family and becomes its leader. Rabbi Chiya's story ends differently:

R. Chiya b. Ashi is horrified by what has happened, and seeks an immediate and radical repair. He sees only his fall, his terrible personal failure that requires atonement, and not the potential for rebuilding. His wife is certain that when she tells him that she was the woman with whom he engaged in relations, not only will he be spared a terrible death, but he will also view her differently, and they will become closer. The information that the woman involved had in fact been his wife could have eased his mind considerably, since it turns out that no sin occurred. This sense of relief could have led to a more constructive view, as in the case of Yehuda. Yehuda ceases to focus on the sin that he turns out to have committed, preferring to focus on building the family and his progeny. R. Chiya b. Ashi, for some reason, reacts differently. Even when his wife manages to convince him that his encounter was indeed with her, he does not accede to her "invitation" to rebuild their bond. He remains focused on his sin, his submission to the evil inclination, and the terrible punishment that appears to him as the only possibility for repair and atonement (Feintuch, n.d.).
Rebbi's Son: Study First or Get Married First?

Rebbi was occupied in the preparations of his son's marriage into the family of Yosi b. Zimra. It was agreed that Rebbi's son would study for twelve years at the academy and then get married. The girl was passed in front of the boy. He said: "Let it be six years." They passed the girl in front of him again and he said: "Let me be married first and then I will go and study." He felt ashamed in front of his father. Rebbi said to him: "My son, you have the temperament of your Creator. First it says (Exodus 15:17): 'You will bring them in and plant them;' then it says (Exodus 25:8): 'They shall make Me a sanctuary and I will dwell among them.'" (Kethubos 62b)

Originally, the sanctuary was not going to be built until the Jewish people had conquered the Holy Land. God reconsidered and decided that it should be built in the wilderness. It is interesting that Rebbi compared his son's desire to get married first to God's desire for a sanctuary. This is not blasphemous given that the sages saw God as a matchmaker and marriage as a spiritual act.
Kamtza and Bar Kamtza: Why Jerusalem was Destroyed

This story is known as "Kamtza and Bar Kamtza"; the Talmud (Babylonian Talmud, Gittin 55b-56a) attributes the destruction of the Second Temple to what happened in this incident.

There was a person whose friend's name was Kamtza and his enemy's name was Bar Kamtza. He made a big banquet and told his servant to invite Kamtza; the servant inadvertently invited Bar Kamtza. When the host saw Bar Kamtza sitting at the party, he told him: "Look here, that man [you] is the enemy of that man [me]. What do you want here? Get up and leave.!" Bar Kamtza replied: "Since I have come, let me stay and I will give you the value of whatever I eat and drink." The host replied: "No! I will not let you stay." Bar Kamtza replied: "I will give you the value of half your banquet ." The host said: "No!" Bar Kamtza said: I will give you the value of your entire banquet." The host said: "No!" and grabbed hold of Bar Kamtza with his hand, stood him up, and threw him out. Bar Kamtza said to himself: Since the rabbis were seated at the banquet and did not rebuke the host for how he treated me, it is evident that what he did was acceptable to them. I will go and spread slander against the rabbis in the royal palace. Bar Kamtza went and told Caesar that the Jews were rebelling against him. Caesar said to him: "Who says so?" Bar Kamtza said: "Send them an animal as a sacrifice and see whether they will offer it in their Temple." Caesar went and sent a fine calf with Bar Kamtza. As he was going to Jerusalem, Bar Kamtza maimed the calf and caused a blemish in its upper lip. Some say he caused a cataract in the eye. Either way, he ensured that the blemish was in a place where it is considered a blemish for us [disqualifying it as a sacrifice in the Temple] but is not considered a blemish for them when offering pagan sacrifices. Although the animal was unfit to be offered in the Temple, the rabbis considered offering it for the sake of peaceful relations with the Roman Government. Rabbi Zechariah b. Avkulas asserted: "People will then say that blemished animals are permitted as sacrifices on the altar." [Actually, most Jewish laws are suspended when a human life is at stake]. The rabbis then considered killing Bar Kamtza so that he would not go back to the emperor and denounce them [Jewish law allows this even in a case where one person is at risk, e.g., when an individual is pursuing another with intent to kill and there is no other way to prevent the murder]. Rabbi Zechariah remarked: "People will then say that one who makes a blemish on animal that is consecrated for the altar is punished with death."

Rabbi Yochanan (c. 200 CE – C. 279 CE; Temple was destroyed 70 CE) interrupts the narrative with the following observation. "The meekness of Rabbi Zechariah b. Avkulas destroyed our house, burnt our Temple, and caused us to be exiled from our land." According to the Midrash (Lamentations Rabbah 4:3), Rabbi Zechariah b. Avkulas was one of the sages present at the party when Bar Kamtza was publicly humiliated by being ejected. Rabbi Yochanan may be sarcastically referring to his "meekness" in not reprimanding the host for publicly humiliating another person.

They let Bar Kamtza go and he informed on the Jewish people to the emperor who then sent an army against them. (Babylonian Talmud, Gittin 55b-56a).

There are three major lessons in this story. First, it points out a distorted value system. Rabbi Zechariah was extremely scrupulous when it came to offering sacrifices. As noted, Jewish law allows many laws to be set aside in cases where life is at stake. Thus, the Sabbath may be desecrated to save someone even if the probability of success is infinitesimal. Jewish law would obligate that the sacrifice be made in order to preserve the peace. There are those who claim Rabbi Zechariah b. Avkulas was the extremist Zealot, Zacharias son of Phalek, described by Josephus in Wars 4.4.1 (Urbach, 1994: 595). This would explain why he would be quite happy to offend the Roman emperor.

Moshe Chaim Luzzatto (1707-1746), mystic and author of the classic work, Mesillas Yesharim (Path of the Upright), uses this story to prove that halachic stringencies are often leniencies. He asserts that one has to examine every possible consequence of a law and not simply take the stringent view and thereby cause a negative outcome (Messilas Yesharim, Chapter 20 on saintliness). Rabbi Zechariah's stringencies resulted in the death of a huge number of innocent people and the destruction of the Temple.

A second lesson is one for leaders. The other rabbis that were present when Bar Kamtza was being ejected from the banquet also behaved inappropriately. Ethical leaders are supposed to speak up when they witness a misdeed. These leaders sat by passively probably because they did not want to offend their rich host. As Edmund Burke said: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

The third lesson is that what destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple was baseless hatred. The host had so much hatred in him that he had to publicly humiliate his enemy despite the fact that it was the host's servant's mistake that caused Bar Kamtza to attend the banquet. Moreover, Bar Kamtza was ready to pay for the entire banquet. He was not really an uninvited guest who crashed the party. The story does not give us the reason for this intense hatred shown by the host. In fact, the host remains nameless. We are not told the reason the wealthy host was so filled with hate because it does not matter. Nothing justifies this kind of behavior (Simmons, 2016). Weinbach (2016) suggests that the reason Kamtza's name is mentioned when he had nothing to do with what transpired is because "Kamtza probably heard about the party but refused to come because he had not received an invitation." A good friend should have given his host the benefit of the doubt when he did not receive an invitation and attempted to find out what happened. By not giving his friend the benefit of the doubt that some mistake had been made, Kamtza also played a role in the tragedy that unfolded.
The Punishment of Titus for Destroying the Second Temple

What did Titus do? He took a harlot by the hand and entered the Holy of Holies [in the Temple] and spread out a Torah scroll and committed a sin on it. He then took a sword and slashed the paroches [curtain that separates the Holy of Holies from the rest of the Temple]. Miraculously blood spurted out, and he thought that he had slain himself, {euphemism for God] as it says (Psalms 74:4), 'Your enemies have roared amidst Your meeting place; they have set up their signs for signs.' Abba Chanan said : "Who is like You, strong and firm, for You hear the insult and blasphemy of that evil man [Titus] and yet you remain silent?" In the academy of Rabbi Ishmael it was taught; "Who is like You among the mighty ones, God [Elim]?" Who is like You among the muted ones [Illemim]. [These verses are interpreted homiletically to refer to God remaining silent while Titus blasphemed]

What did Titus do next? He took the curtain and shaped it like a basket and brought all the vessels of the Sanctuary and put them in it, and then put them on board ship to go and triumph with them in his city... A gale sprang up at sea which threatened to drown him. He said: "Apparently the power of the God of these people is only over water. When Pharaoh came He drowned him in water; when Sisera came He drowned him [his army] in water. He is also trying to drown me in water. If he is really mighty, let him come up on the dry land and wage war with me." A Heavenly voice emanated saying: "Sinner, son of sinner, descendant of Esau the sinner, I have a tiny creature in my world called a gnat... Go up on the dry land and wage war with it." When he landed the gnat came and entered his nose, and it picked at his brain for seven years. One day as he was passing a blacksmith's the gnat heard the noise of the hammer and stopped. Titus said: "I see there is a remedy." So every day they brought a blacksmith who hammered before him. If he was a non-Jew they gave him four zuz, if he was a Jew they said, it is enough that you see the suffering of your enemy. This went on for thirty days, but then the creature got used to it. It has been taught: R. Phineas ben Aruva said: "I was among the nobles of Rome, and when Titus died they split open his skull and found there a gnat that was like a sparrow weighing two selas. A Tanna taught: " The gnat was like a one-year-old dove weighing two litras." Abaye said: "We have a tradition that its beak was of copper and its claws of iron." When Titus was dying, he said: "Burn me and scatter my ashes over the seven seas so that the God of the Jews should not find me and bring me to judgment" (Babylonian Talmud, Gittin 56b).

Historians note that there were three great tragedies during Titus's brief reign as emperor; he was only emperor for 2 years and 2 months: (1) Mt. Vesuvius erupted and destroyed the cities of Pompeii and Herculaneum in 79 CE; (2) There was a huge fire in Rome that destroyed a significant portion of the city. Cassius Dio said the fire was of "divine origin"; and (3) there was a severe plague that killed many people. All kinds of solutions ranging from sacrifices to medications were tried. Titus himself died mysteriously at the age of 42 of a fever according to historians (some believe that he was poisoned) on September 13, 81 CE (Wasson, 2013). Titus's final words were "I have made only one mistake." It is not clear what he meant by this enigmatic statement. Was he referring to the destruction of the Temple or not killing his brother? (Wasson, 2013).

This story with the gnat could very well have been used as a way to comfort the Jews (Eisenstein, 1935). It is reassuring to know that the person who destroyed the Temple was punished by God. A similar story is told in a Midrash about Nebuchadnezzar who destroyed the First Temple (Eisenstein, 1935). Preusz (1978: 205) cites sources that state this is a "moral poem to illustrate the teaching that the Lord can destroy even the mightiest ruler with one of His smallest creatures." Indeed, we know how deadly mosquitos can be. In fact, there are smaller creatures that can wreak havoc with mortals, i.e., deadly bacteria ranging from flesh-eating ones to MRSA. Preusz (1978: 205-206) also suggests that this could have been a brain tumor. The "copper beak" might refer to dried blood and the "iron claws" to lime deposits. By the way, people using neti pots to clear their sinuses have been known to die from Naegleria fowleri, brain-eating amoeba. This is why there are warnings on neti pots to first boil the water. In any case, whether one wants to take the story literally or as a moral message, it is important for people to have some humility. It does not take much to kill a human being.
Danger of Religious Extremism: Ritual Purity More Important than Death of Son

The story told in the Talmud (Babylonian Talmud, Yuma 23a) regarding an incident that happened during the period of the Second Temple is a good illustration of what happens when priorities get mixed up. It was considered a mitzvah (good deed) to clear the ashes (terumas ha'deshen) from the altar; the one who was first to come within four cubits of the altar was given the privilege. The priests would run up the ramp – its length was 32 cubits -- to be first.

Our Rabbis taught: It once happened that two priests were equal as they ran to mount the ramp and when one of them came first within four cubits of the altar, the other took a knife and thrust it into his heart. R. Zadok stood on the steps of the Hall and said: Our brethren of the house of Israel, hear ye! Behold it says: If one be found slain in the land... then thy elders and judges shall come forth.... On whose behalf shall we offer the heifer whose neck is to be broken, on behalf of the city or on behalf of the Temple Courts? All the people burst out weeping. The father of the young man came and found him still in convulsions. He said: "May he be an atonement for you. My son is still in convulsions so the knife has not become tamei (ritually impure)." His remark comes to teach you that the ritual purity of the Temple's vessels was of greater concern to them even than the shedding of blood (Babylonian Talmud, Yuma 23b).

This incident happened before the destruction of the Second Temple. A society that is more concerned about the ritual purity of vessels than the death of children is in deep trouble. One can say the same of suicide bombers who think they are engaged in a religious act and are willing to kill innocent people. This story reminds one of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza, another story where the religious authorities have their priorities all wrong. This is why the followers of Hillel put so much emphasis on human relations, even in halachah (Jewish law). Concepts such as human dignity, ways of peace, improving the world became priorities in halachah.
You Can't Escape Death: Appointment in Luz

This seems to be a Talmudic version of the Appointment in Sammara story. W. Somerset Maugham retold this ancient Middle Eastern tale and made it famous. Some scholars believe that the origin of the Maugham tale is "When Death Came to Baghdad," a ninth century Arabian Sufi story in Fudail ibn Ayad's Hikayat-I-Naqshia. This story in the Talmud is several hundred years older (Friedman & Lipman, 1999).

There were two Cushites that attended on King Solomon, Elichoreph and Achiyah sons of Shisha, who were scribes of Solomon. One day, Solomon noticed that the Angel of Death looked sad. Solomon asked him: Why are you sad? He replied: Because they have demanded from me the two Cushites that dwell here. Solomon had demons take them to the city of Luz (a legendary city where no one dies). However, as soon as they reached Luz, they died. The next day, Solomon noticed that the Angel of Death was happy. He asked him: Why are you so happy? He replied: Because you sent them to the very place where they were supposed to die. (Babylonian Talmud, Sukkah 53a)

The moral of this story is quite obvious. It demonstrates that an individual cannot escape his or her destiny and must inevitably die. Even the wisest person who ever lived, Solomon, could not find a way to cheat the Angel of Death.
How to Preserve One's Wealth: Story of Nakdimon b. Gurion's Daughter

Rabbi Yochanan b. Zakkai was once riding on a donkey leaving Jerusalem, and his disciples were walking behind him. He saw a young woman picking kernels of barley out of the dung of cattle belonging to Arabs. When she saw him, she covered her face with her hair and stood before him. She said to Rabbi Yochanan: "My master, feed me." He replied: "My daughter, who are you?" She replied: "I am the daughter of Nakdimon b. Guryon." He asked her: "My daughter, what became of your father's wealth?" She replied: "Is there not a proverb in Jerusalem: The The salt [way to preserve it] of wealth is its diminution [by charity] and some say the "salt of money is benevolence." Rabbi Yochanan asked her: "And what of your father-in-law's money?" She replied: "one destroyed the other." [the combining of the money from the two sources resulted in the loss of both]. She said to him: "Rabbi, do you remember when you signed on my marriage contract (kesubah)?" He said to his students: "I remember when I signed her marriage contract and I read in it that her father gave her a dowry of one million golden denars besides that which she was promised by her father-in-law." R. Yochanan b. Zakkai then burst into tears and said: "Happy are you, O Israel. As long as you perform the will of God, no nation or people can rule over you; but when you fail to perform the will of God you are delivered into the hands of a lowly nation. And not into the hands of the lowly nation itself, but also into the hands of the animals of the lowly nation!"

Is it true that Nakdimon b. Guryon did not give sufficient charity? Behold we are taught in a Baraitha: "It was said of Nakdimon b. Guryon that when he left his house to go to the house of study, the entire path on which he walked on would be spread out with fine woolens and the poor people would come and fold them up behind him [for their own use]. If you prefer, I will say that he did it only for his own honor, and if you prefer, I will explain that he did not give a sufficient amount of charity. As people say: "According to the strength of the camel is the load" [the wealthier the man the greater the responsibility].

We are taught in a Baraitha that R. Elazar b. Tzadok said: "May I so live to see the consolation [a form of oath], if I did not see her in Acco picking barley from between the hoofs of the horses (Babylonian Talmud, Kethubos 66a-67b; based on translations by ArtScroll and Sefaria).

This probably happened after the destruction of the Temple by the Romans. Nakdimon ben Gurion was one of the three extremely affluent people living in Jerusalem before the destruction of the Second Temple (Babylonian Talmud, Gittin 56a). The lessons of this story are obvious. Rich people have an obligation to help the poor. Ideally, charity should be given anonymously and not for the purpose of being honored. The Hebrew word for charity, tzedaka, actually means righteousness and justice. One is obligated to give charity and should not see as a kindness which is optional.

This story also hints at the fact that one may be rich today but that does not guarantee that s/he will always be wealthy. If people help each other, then we can have a society where there is very little poverty. Recent studies indicate that the chance of experiencing poverty at some point in one's life is more than 50%. The good news is that poverty usually lasts between one and three years and only a small number of people remain poor for an extended period of time (Mui, 2016). Marriage and education can change these probabilities. If is, however, clear that the risk of becoming poor is much higher than people think.

Tamari (2002) has the following to say about charity:

All the Codes rank the types of charity in a descending order, one that has much significance for present -day welfare issues. At the highest level is the charity that provides employment, makes available funds or knowledge enabling the unemployed or the poor to establish a business, or that in any way prevents people from sinking into poverty and enables them to break the poverty cycle. At the macro economic level this would be translated into public policy of providing employment, technical education and appropriate funding for new business, rather than a continuation of handouts of basic necessities that only perpetuates poverty. If it is not possible for the individual to fund the needs of the poor they are obligated to bring it to the notice of the authorities so they may then use tax money to solve the problem (Ramah, Yoreh Deah, section 250, subsection 1).

It is interesting to observe that the poorest Americans are more generous than the wealthiest Americans; the wealthiest donate 1.3% of their income and the poorest, 3.2% (Stern, 2013)

Paul Piff, a psychologist at UC Berkeley, published research that correlated wealth with an increase in unethical behavior: "While having money doesn't necessarily make anybody anything," Piff later told New York magazine, "the rich are way more likely to prioritize their own self-interests above the interests of other people." They are, he continued, "more likely to exhibit characteristics that we would stereotypically associate with, say, a_holes."... In a series of controlled experiments, lower-income people and people who identified themselves as being on a relatively low social rung were consistently more generous with limited goods than upper-class participants were. Notably, though, when both groups were exposed to a sympathy-eliciting video on child poverty, the compassion of the wealthier group began to rise, and the groups' willingness to help others became almost identical (Stern, 2013).
Charity Can Change One's Destiny: Story of Rabbi Akiva's Daughter

The previous story demonstrates that one cannot escape his or her destiny. However, the Talmudic sages believed that charity could prolong one's life regardless of what the stars had to say.

From R. Akiba too we learn that Israel is free from planetary influence. For R. Akiba had a daughter about whom the astrologers told him that on the day she enters her bridal chamber a snake will bite her and she will die. He was very worried about this. On the day of her wedding she took her brooch and stuck it into the wall and by chance it penetrated into the eye of a snake killing it. The following morning, when she took the brooch out, the dead snake came trailing after it. Her father asked her: "What did you do?" She replied: "A poor man came to our door in the evening but everybody was busy at the banquet and there was none to attend to him. So I stood up and took the portion which was given to me and gave it to him. Rabbi Akiva said to her: "You have done a good deed." Thereupon R. Akiba went out and lectured: "Charity saves one from death" (Proverbs 10:2); and not just from an unnatural death, but even from death itself (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbos 156b; based on translation by Soncino and ArtScroll).

In Talmudic times, almost everyone believed in astrology and it was seen as a science. This story and several others of this type convinced Jews not to worry about the stars. What matters are one's deeds and even if one's destiny is to die an early death, charity can save one. It is probably a lot easier to convince ignorant people that charity is stronger than the influence of celestial bodies on human affairs than teaching them that astrology is nonsense.
How to Give Charity: Mar Ukva and his Wife

Mar Ukva had a poor man in his neighborhood into whose door-socket he used to throw four zuz every day [this was done anonymously]. Once the poor man thought: "I will go and see who is doing me this kindness." On that day it happened that Mar Ukva was delayed at the house of study and his wife was accompanying him. As soon as the poor man saw them moving the door to put the money in the socket, he went out after them. They fled from him and ran into a furnace from which the coals had just been swept. Mar Ukva's feet were getting burnt and his wife said to him: "Raise your feet and place them on my feet." [Her feet were not getting burnt.] Mar Ukva felt dejected as it appeared that her merits were greater than his. His wife said to him: "I am usually at home so the poor people find me easily and also the benefit they derive from my charity is immediate." [She gives the poor people food and her husband provides money.]

And what was the reason for all that? Because Mar Zutra b. Tobiah said in the name of Rav (others state: Rabbi Huna b. Bizna said in the name of R. Shimon the Pious; and others again state, R. Yochanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon b. Yochai): "It is better to throw oneself into a fiery furnace than to publicly shame another person" (Babylonian Talmud, Kethubos 67b; based on Soncino and ArtScroll translation).

Maimonides (Mishna Torah, Laws of Gifts to the Poor, 10:7) states that the highest form of charity involves providing the poor person with the tools necessary to become self-sufficient ― a gift or loan enabling one to start a business, a partnership in a business, or a job. If this is not possible, then, to protect the dignity of the poor, it is best to give charity anonymously. Ideally, the donor and the donee should not know each other. This story is a perfect example of how to teach an important lesson using a story.
The Miracle Wheat of Elazar Ish Birta

When the administrators of charity funds would see Elazar Ish Birta [some texts read Eliezer of Bartusa], they would go and hide themselves from him, because he would always give everything he had for tzedaka (charity). One day, he came to the market to buy a trousseau for his daughter's upcoming marriage. The administrators of the charity saw him and hid from him. However, he saw them and ran after them. He said to them: "I adjure you to tell me what are you collecting for today." They replied: "We are arranging a wedding between an orphaned boy and an orphaned girl." He said to them: "By the Temple service [I swear], the orphans come before my daughter." He gave them his money and was left with one zuz [small coin] with which he bought a little wheat. He brought the wheat home and threw it into his granary. His wife came and asked the daughter: "What did your father bring home?" She told her mother: "Whatever he brought home, he threw in the granary." The daughter went to open the door of the granary and saw that the granary was filled with wheat; the door would not open because of all the wheat that was pressing against it. The daughter went to the house of study to find her father. She said to her father: "Come and see what the One who loves you has done for you." He said to his daughter: "By the Temple service, this wheat shall be for you like consecrated property, and you have no more share in it than any other poor person" (Babylonian Talmud, Taanis 24a)

Some of the commentaries have a problem with this story. Normally, a person's obligations to his family come first. However, in this case, where two orphans were involved, they took precedence over his own daughter. There are also rules in the Talmud about charity giving because of generous people like Elazar. People are supposed to give 10% and not more than 20%.The fear was that people might impoverish themselves. It seems that Elazar did not want his daughter to use the wheat supplied by a miracle to be used for an extravagant wedding. He wanted her to have a simple, unostentatious wedding.
Being Careful Not to Allow Someone to be Embarrassed

It once happened that Rabban Gamaliel said: "Send me up seven scholars early in the morning to the upper chamber to proclaim a leap year" [back then, a rabbinical court was needed to do this]. When he came in the morning and found eight, he asked: "Who is he who has come up without permission? Let him go down." Thereupon, Shmuel HaKatan [the Little] arose and said: "It was I who came up without permission; my object was not to join in the intercalation, but because I felt the necessity of learning the practical application of the law." Rabban Gamaliel then answered: Sit down, my son, sit down; you are worthy of intercalating all years in need of such, but it is a decision of the Rabbis that it should be done only by those who have been specially appointed for the purpose." But in reality it was not Shmuel Hakatan who was the uninvited member but another; he only wished to save the intruder from humiliation.

Similarly it once happened that while Rebbi was delivering a lecture, he noticed a smell of garlic. Thereupon he said: "Let him who has eaten garlic go out." Rabbi Chiya arose and left; then all the other disciples rose in turn and went out. In the morning Rabbi Shimon, Rebbi's son, met and asked Rabbi Chiya: "Was it you who caused annoyance to my father yesterday? [with your garlic breath]" Rabbi Chiya replied: "Heaven forbid! I would not eat garlic before coming to the study hall. There should be nothing like that [it is quite rude to eat garlic before a lecture] among the Jewish people."

And from whom did Rabbi Chiya learn such conduct? From Rabbi Meir. For it was taught: There was an incident with a woman who appeared at the Study Hall of Rabbi Meir and said to him: "Rabbi, one of you has betrothed me by cohabitation." [Marriage is completed in two stages: kiddushin (betrothal) followed at a later date by nisuin (completion of the marriage done under a chuppah). One may technically betroth a women by sleeping with her for this purpose but it was frowned upon by the Talmud since it was so undignified. This women could not remember which student did this and was asking that he step forward and either complete the marriage, i.e., perform nisuin or divorce her.] Thereupon Rabbi Meir rose up and gave her a bill of divorce, after which every one of his disciples stood up in turn and did likewise.

And from whom did Rabbi Meir learn this? [to allow himself to be embarrassed in order to spare the student from shame].From Shmuel HaKatan. And Shmuel HaKatan? From Shechaniah son of Yechiel. For it is written (Ezra 10:2): "And Shechaniah son of Yechiel, one of the sons of Elam answered and said unto Ezra: We have transgressed against our God and have married foreign women of the peoples of the land; but now there is hope in Israel concerning this thing." [Shechaniah had not transgressed against God by marrying a non-Jewish women yet used "we" in order not to embarrass the others]. And from whom did Shechaniah learnt this? From the story told of Joshua. As it is written (Joshua 7: 10-11): "The Lord said unto Joshua, 'Raise yourself up, why, now, do you fall on your face? Israel has sinned..." Joshua asked: "Master of the Universe, who are the sinners?" God replied: "Am I an informer?; Go and cast lots to find out" [one person sinned, yet God did not want to embarrass the transgressor so he said "Israel has sinned."]. Or, if you like, I might say that Shechaniah learnt it from the incident with Moses, as we read: And the Lord said unto Moses, "How long shall you all refuse to keep My commandments and My laws?" [God rebuked the entire nation for gathering the manna on the Sabbath yet only two people violated this law. God did not want to embarrass the two transgressors.] (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 11a; based on translation by Soncino and ArtScroll).

The mark of a good leader is being careful not to humiliate others. A smart leader includes himself when there are difficulties. Unfortunately, many leaders look for a scapegoat when things go wrong.
Shmuel and Avleit: Charity Saves From Death

Shmuel and Avleit [Avleit was an astrologer] were once sitting together watching people go to the swamp to cut reeds. Avleit said to Shmuel, "That man over there is going to go to the swamp, but he won't return because a snake is going to bite him and he will die." Shmuel said: "If he is a Jew, he will return." While they were sitting, the man returned. Avleit stood up and threw off the man's pack of reeds. He found among the reeds a snake that had been cut in two pieces. Shmuel said to the man: "What did you do to be saved from death like that?" The man replied: "Every day, all of us pool all our bread together and then share it. Today, one man had nothing to contribute and he was ashamed. I therefore told everyone: "Today I am going to collect the bread." When I got to him, I pretended to take something from him so that he would not be ashamed." Shmuel said to him: "You have done a good deed." Shmuel went out and lectured: "Charity saves one from death" (Proverbs 10:2); and not just from an unnatural death, but even from death itself (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbos 156b).

Shmuel was actually an expert in astronomy/astrology (back then the two were not separate disciplines). It was important to teach people about free choice and not to believe that the stars controlled their fate. This story, together with the story of Rabbi Akiva, also emphasized the importance of charity.
Joseph-Who-Honors-the-Sabbath

Joseph-Who-Honors-the-Sabbath had in his vicinity a certain gentile who owned much property. Astrologers told him: "Joseph-Who-Honors-the-Sabbath will consume all your possessions." He therefore went and sold all his property. He bought a precious stone with the proceeds and placed it in his turban. As he was crossing a bridge, a gust of wind blew it off, cast it into the water, and a fish swallowed it. Subsequently, the fish was hauled up by fisherman and brought to the market late on Friday before sunset. The fisherman said: "Who will buy it now?" People said to the fishermen: "Go and take them to Joseph-Who-Honors-the-Sabbath as he is accustomed to buy delicacies for the Sabbath." So they took it to him and he bought it. He opened it, found the jewel therein, and sold it for thirteen containers of gold denarii. A certain old man met Joseph and said: "He who borrows for the sake of the Sabbath, the Sabbath repays him." (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbos 119a; based on translation of Soncino and ArtScroll).

This story also demonstrates how Jews can overcome their destiny. In this story, observing the Sabbath is what made Joseph wealthy. It also teaches one how easy it is for one to lose his wealth. The Talmudic sages taught the public that you could not take your wealth with you to the afterlife but good deeds live on both in this world and the world to come.
Chaninah b. Dosa and the Table with Two Legs

Once the wife of Rabbi Chaninah b. Dosa told her husband: "How long will we go on and suffer so much [in poverty]?" He told her: "What should we do?" She replied: "Go and pray that you should be given from the good that is reserved for the righteous in the world to come." He prayed and something that resembled the palm of a hand emerged from Heaven and gave him one leg of a golden table. Subsequently, he said to his wife [in some versions the wife has the dream]: "I saw in a dream that in the future [the World to Come] all the righteous will sit at a golden table of three legs but you will be eating at a golden table of two legs. Is it acceptable to you that all the righteous will eat at a whole table and we at a defective table?" She said to him: "What should we do? Pray that the leg should be taken away from you." He prayed and it was taken away (Babylonian Talmud, Taanis 25a).

The message of this story is evident. We have to make sacrifices in this world if we desire the rewards in the World to Come. The table is a metaphor since the sages did not believe that the souls in the World to Come actually eat. The Talmud states (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 17a): "The World to Come is not like this world. In the World to Come there is no eating, no drinking, no propagation, no business, no jealousy, no hatred and no rivalry. Rather, the righteous sit with their crowns on their heads, and delight in the radiance of the Divine Presence (ziv haShechinah)." A two-legged table is not stable and collapses. What this story illustrates is that wealth can change someone's personality and make him or her less righteous. While it is true that a poor person cannot give as much charity as a rich person, this does not matter as much to God as the effort. The Talmud notes: "Whether you give a lot or a little, what matters is that your heart is directed towards Heaven" (Babylonian Talmud, Menachos 110a). The Talmud derives this since the terms used by sacrifices are the same for a large ox, a small bird, and a meal offering ("sweet savour"). God does not need these offerings for Himself as it says (Psalms 50: 13): "Do I eat the flesh of bulls or drink the blood of goats?"

The Talmud notes that performing gemillas chasadim (deeds of lovingkindness) is better than charity. Gemillas chasadim can be done for poor and rich people, living and dead people, and does not require money (Babylonian Talmud, Sukkah 49b). Some examples of gemillas chasadim include: visiting a sick person, attending a funeral, helping with a burial, or comforting a mourner. The message to Chaninah ben Dosa's wife was very clear. Poor people can do much to improve the world.
Chaninah ben Dosa and the Lost Chickens

It happened that a person passed by the doorway of Rabbi Chaninah's house and accidentally left some chickens there. Rabbi Chaninah's wife found them. Rabbi Chaninah told her: "Do not eat their eggs." Eventually, they produced numerous eggs and chickens which became a nuisance for Rabbi Chaninah and his wife. They, therefore, sold the chickens and eggs and purchased goats with the proceeds. One time, the man who had lost the chickens, passed by Rabbi Chaninah's house and said to his friend: "I once left chickens here." Rabbi Chaninah overheard this conversation and said to the person: "Do you have any identifying marks on those chickens?" He said: "Yes." He provided Rabbi Chaninah with the identifying marks and was given the goats (Babylonian Talmud, Taanis 25a; based on translation by ArtScroll).

This story demonstrates the importance of returning lost property. What is interesting is how these few eggs became a flock of goats. It seems that Rabbi Chaninah was so strict about returning the lost objects that he swallowed the expense of all his work. One would think that returning a few eggs would have been sufficient to satisfy the law of returning a found object.
Chaninah ben Dosa and the Deadly Lizard

Once, in a certain place, there was a lizard which used to harm people. They went and informed Rabbi Chaninah b. Dosa. He said to them: "Show me its hole." They showed him its hole. He went and placed his heel over the hole's opening. It came out and bit Rabbi Chaninah and immediately died. He then placed it on his shoulder and brought it to the academy. He said to them: "My children, see, it is not the scorpion that kills but the sins that kill." On that occasion they said: "Woe to a person that encounters the lizard, but woe to the lizard that encounters Rabbi Chaninah" (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 32a).

Chaninah ben Dosa's philosophy in life might be summarized by his saying in Avos: "If the spirit of one's fellows is pleased with him, then God is pleased with him; but if the spirit of one's fellows is not pleased with him, then God is not pleased with him" (Avos 3: 10). He cared about other people and lived in extreme poverty. The Talmud notes that "Every day a Heavenly Voice goes forth and proclaims, 'The whole world is provided with food only on account of my son Chaninah, while my son Chaninah is satisfied with one kav of carob fruit from one Sabbath eve to the other'" (Babylonian Talmud, Chullin 86a-b). Apparently, he was a person of very simple needs and this helped him reach such a great spiritual height.
Chaninah ben Dosa and the Burning Vinegar

One Friday evening at twilight, Rabbi Chaninah noticed that his daughter was upset. He said to her: "My daughter, why are you sad?" She replied: "I mistook a container of vinegar for a container of oil, and poured the latter into the Sabbath lamp and lit it." He said: "My daughter! Why should that matter to you? He who has commanded that oil should burn can also command that vinegar should burn." A Tanna taught: "The lamp burned all night and all day, until they took from it the flame that used for the Havdalah prayer" (Babylonian Talmud, Taanis 25a; based on translation of ArtScroll).

This story teaches us that what we considered mundane and usual is also a miracle. We have to be grateful for the "small" things in life as well as the extraordinary. This may explain why Judaism has blessings for almost everything, including going to the bathroom. Who thinks of relieving oneself as a miracle? Only someone who knows what happens when there is a problem.
Chaninah ben Dosa and the Elongated Beams

Once a woman neighbor of R. Chaninah was building a house but the beams would not reach the walls. She thereupon came to him and said: "I have built a house but the beams will not reach the walls." He asked her: "What is your name?" She replied: "Aiku." He thereupon exclaimed: "Aiku, may your beams elongate and reach from wall to wall". A Tanna taught: "They projected one cubit on either side." Some say: "The beams were made longer by means of new pieces that miraculously joined themselves to the beams." It has been taught: Plimo says: "I saw that house and its beams protruded one cubit on either side, and people told me: 'This is the house which R. Chanina b. Dosa covered with beams, through his prayer.'" (Babylonian Talmud, Taanis 25a; based on translation by Soncino and ArtScroll).

Another story indicating that Chanina ben Dosa was able to perform miracles.
Chaninah ben Dosa's Wife and the Bad Neighbor

Chaninah ben Dosa's wife was in the habit of heating the oven every Friday, and throwing in a smoke-causing substance [twigs] because of embarrassment [she did not want her neighbors to know that she had nothing to bake because of her extreme poverty]. She had this bad neighbor who said to herself: "Now, I know that these people have nothing. What is producing all this smoke?" She went and knocked on the door. Rabbi Chaninah's wife felt embarrassed [she realized that the neighbor would see that there was no food in the oven] and withdrew to the inner room. A miracle happened and the neighbor saw an oven filled with loaves of bread and the kneading trough full of dough. The neighbor called out to her: "Bring a baker's shovel because your bread is getting charred." Rabbi Chaninah's wife replied to her: "Indeed, it was for this reason that I went into the inner room." A Tanna taught: "She did indeed enter the inner room to bring a baker's shovel, for she was accustomed to miracles being done for her (Babylonian Talmud, Taanis 24b-25a; based on translation by ArtScroll and Soncino).
Nachum ish Gamzu, Eternal Optimist

This story from the Talmud is about Nachum Ish Gamzu who was the perpetual optimist and always showed gratitude for everything. He was from a town called Gizmo but was called Gam Zu for the reason given in the story. The word ish means man.

Nachum ish Gamzu was called gamzu because no matter what happened to him he would say gam zu latovah [this too is for the good]. One time the Jews desired to send a gift to the emperor. They decided that Nachum of Gamzu should go because miracles often happened to him. They sent him with a chest full of precious stones and jewels. On the way, he spent the night in a certain inn. During the night the innkeepers emptied the chest and filled it with earth. In the morning, when Nachum discovered what had happened he exclaimed: This too is for the good.

When he arrived at the palace and they saw that he had brought a chest filled with earth, the emperor wanted to have all the Jews killed. They are mocking me, he declared. Nachum exclaimed: This too is for the good.

Elijah appeared in the guise of one of the officers, and said: Perhaps, this earth is the miraculous earth used by their patriarch Abraham; when he threw earth at his enemies it changed into swords and when he threw straw it changed into arrows. Indeed, it is written (Isaiah 41:2): 'He made his sword like dust, his bow as the driven straw.' Now, here was a country which they were unable to conquer but when they used this earth against it they prevailed. They took Rabbi Nachum to the treasury, filled his chest with precious stones and jewels and sent him home with great honor.

On his return journey, he spent the night in the same inn. The innkeepers asked Rabbi Nachum what he brought to the emperor that so much honor was shown to him. He replied: What I took from here, I brought there. They tore down their inn and brought the earth to the emperor and stated: The earth that was brought to you came from us. They tested the earth and found it to be ordinary earth and they executed the innkeepers (Babylonian Talmud, Taanis 21a).

Friedman, Birnbaum & Gloger (2014) examine the importance of gratitude and happiness in Judaism. They point out that the Talmud (Avos D'Rabbi Nosson 34:9) states that there are ten words in Hebrew that mean happiness: simcha, sasson, gilah, rinah, ditzah, tzahala, ahliza, chedvah, tiferet, and ahlitza. The first word in Psalms ashrei is translated as praiseworthy, happy, or blessed; all are correct translations of this word. The Psalmist believes that true happiness comes from being a pious person and not "walking in the counsel of the wicked" (Psalms 1:1).

The most commonly-used word in Hebrew to mean happiness/gladness/joy is simcha. There is a law in the Torah dealing with rejoicing on the festivals (Deuteronomy 16:14): "You shall rejoice on your festival — you, your son, your daughter, your servant, your maid, the Levite, the stranger, the orphan, and the widow that are within your gates." Maimonides, medieval philosopher and codifier of Jewish law, observes that the law of being happy on a festival can only be fulfilled by taking care of the four categories of people that tend to be poor and despondent: "the Levite, the stranger, the orphan, and the widow" (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Yom Tov 6:18). Levites tended to be poor since they did not own land in ancient Israel but were given 48 cities in which to dwell (Numbers 35:1-8; Deuteronomy 14:27). These Levites, besides having various duties in the Temple, were responsible for teaching biblical values to the people (Deuteronomy 33:10).

Maimonides goes so far as saying that a person who does not provide for the indigent on the festival is participating in the "joy of his own stomach." The verses Maimonides applies to such people are (Hosea 9:4): "such sacrifices will be to them like the bread of mourners; all who eat of them will become unclean, for their bread is for themselves alone" and "I will smear on your faces the dung of your festival sacrifices, and you will be carried off with it" (Malachi 2:3). True joy is not only physical but also has a spiritual dimension.

The Talmud (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbos 30b) declares that the Divine Presence (Shechinah) will only dwell upon individuals who are joyous from performing a precept. The type of happiness that is praiseworthy is one that comes from doing good and helping others. Many of the happiness scholars would agree with this statement. This type of happiness is very similar to Aristotle's eudaimonia. On the other hand, the happiness that results from indulging one's self and pleasure-seeking can ultimately be very harmful; think of the pleasure that one might get from committing adultery. The pleasure provided from this kind of happiness is ephemeral and can even result in the destruction of the family. The kind of happiness and optimism experienced by Nachum Ish Gamzu came from spirituality and faith.

Friedman, Birnbaum & Gloger (2014) conclude that from the numerous Hebrew words for joy we see that there is a strong psychological component to happiness. In fact, expectations and optimism play an important role in happiness. This is why Ben Zoma stated: "Who is wealthy? One who rejoices with his portion." (Avos 4:1). Thus, a poor person who is grateful for what s/he has is happier than a billionaire who constantly needs more. There is a great deal of research that supports the Talmudic view that using one's wealth to help others also brings a great deal of joy to the giver.

Nachum's disciple, Rabbi Akiva, also learned to use an optimistic expression. He said: "Whatever the Merciful One does is for the good." This is somewhat different from the expression used by Nachum Ish Gamzu that "This too is for the good." Scholars discuss the reason for the two different expressions. One difference is that Rabbi Akiva's expression clearly states that God is behind everything and this is why one must be optimistic. Blau suggests a different approach (http://etzion.org.il/vbm/english/archive/aggada72/27aggada.htm):

Frequently, our responses to the vicissitudes of life generate their own reality. A negative response encourages a bad outcome, whereas a more positive response helps create a better ending. This has nothing to do with Divine involvement or escaping the natural order, and everything to do with the immense significance of attitude. Of course, it is easier to have a positive attitude about a rainy day than about a serious illness. Nonetheless, we see heroic people who somehow remain upbeat despite serious difficulties, and their very attitude changes the impact of their suffering.

From this perspective, the two phrases teach distinct messages. One instructs us to believe that things will eventually turn out for the good as a result of Divine providence. The other emphasizes the importance of attitude and how our response to what we experience influences the outcome of that experience. While admittedly this latter idea is not the simple interpretation of Nachum Ish Gam Zu, it certainly seems true to life.

The story of Nachum Ish Gamzu's dreadful punishment in the next story – he is blind, without hands and feet, and full of boils – supports this view. Nachum was able to see something positive in all of his suffering and even says to his students: "Woe to me did had you not seen me like this."
Nachum ish Gamzu: Dreadful Punishment for Procrastinating with Charity

It is related of Nachum ish Gamzu that he was blind in both his eyes, his two hands and legs were missing, and his whole body was covered with boils. He was lying in a dilapidated house, and the legs of the were placed in bowls of water in order to prevent the ants from crawling on to him. On one occasion, his disciples desired to remove the bed and then clear the things out of the house. He said to them: "My children, first clear out the things from the house and then remove my bed for I am confident that so long as I am in the house it will not collapse." They first cleared out the things, then they removed his bed, and the house immediately collapsed. Thereupon his disciples said to him: "Our teacher! Since you are a completely righteous person, why has all this befallen you?" He replied: "My children! I have brought it all upon myself. Once I was traveling on the road to the house of my father-in-law and I had with me three donkeys: one laden with food, one with drink, and one with all kinds of delicacies. A poor man came and stood before me and said: 'My teacher, give me something to eat.' I replied to him: 'Wait until I have unloaded some food from the donkey.' I had hardly managed to unload something from the donkey when the man died from hunger. I then went and fell on his face and exclaimed: "May my eyes which had no pity upon your eyes become blind; may my hands which had no pity upon your hands be cut off; may my legs which had no pity upon your legs be amputated. My mind was not at rest until I added: 'May my whole body be covered with boils.'" Thereupon his pupils exclaimed: "Woe to us that we see you like this." To this he replied: "Woe to me did had you not seen me like this." (Babylonian Talmud, Taanis 21a; based on translation by Soncino and Artscroll).

The message of this powerful story is obvious. When it comes to assisting the indigent, one should not procrastinate. Unfortunately, many people holding office take their time when passing legislation to assist the unfortunates of society. Nachum ish Gamzu wanted to be punished in this world for his "sin" rather than in the afterlife. Wertheimer (2011) points out:

Rabbi Yosef Caro (1488-1575) does not usually mention stories in his universally accepted codification of Jewish law, the Shulchan Aruch, this poignant story appears in his laws of Tzedakah, or charity. He writes that one "must be very cautious [with giving charity] because it is possible that one could come to spill blood, that a pauper could die if you don't give him immediately, like in the case of Nahum of Gam Zu" (Y.D. 247:1).

An alternative way of understanding this story is that this occurred when Nachum was very old. Like many elderly people, he had lost use of his limbs (he might have become a quadriplegic because of poor health; "missing" might refer to paralysis), was blind, and had bed sores. If his hands and legs were amputated by the Romans, this would have been mentioned in the story. Nachum was old and given that his philosophy in life was to say "This too is for the good," he found an explanation for his suffering. The only "transgression" he could come up with was delaying in feeding a poor person. He found a way to give his illness a positive spin by treating it as a punishment from God. Incidentally, he must have been a very pious person if that was his only sin.

Nachum was Rabbi Akiva's teacher for 22 years.
Foxes Prowling the Temple Mount: Consolation of Rabbi Akiva

Rabbi Akiva was a disciple of Nachum Ish Gamzu and also believed in being an optimist.

On another occasion, Rabban Gamliel, Rabbi Elazar ben Azaria, Rabbi Joshua and Rabbi Akiva went up to Jerusalem. When they came to Mt. Scopus, they tore their garments. When they came to the Temple Mount, they saw a fox emerging from the place of the Holy of Holies. The others started weeping; Rabbi Akiva laughed. They said to him: "Why are you laughing?" He replied to them: "Why are you weeping?" They said to him: "A place so holy that about which it is written (Numbers 1:51), 'the non-priest that approaches it shall die,' and now foxes prowl over it, and we should not weep?" He replied: "That is why I laugh. For it is written (Isaiah 8:2), 'I appointed trustworthy witnesses for Myself, Uriah the Priest and Zechariah the son of Jeberechiah.' Now what is the connection between Uriah and Zechariah? Uriah prophesied in the time of the First Temple, whereas Zechariah prophesied in the time of the Second Temple! Rather, by connecting them, Scripture makes Zachariah's prophecy dependent upon Uriah's prophecy. In the prophecy of Uriah, it is written (Micah 3:12) : 'Therefore, because of you, Zion shall be plowed as a field; Jerusalem shall become heaps, and the Temple Mount like stone heaps in the forest.' In the prophecy of Zachariah it is written (Zechariah 8:4), 'Old men and women shall yet sit in the streets of Jerusalem.' "As long as Uriah's prophecy had not been fulfilled, I feared that Zechariah's prophecy may not be fulfilled either. But now that Uriah's prophecy has been fulfilled, it is certain that Zechariah's prophecy will be fulfilled." With these words they replied to him: "Akiva, you have consoled us! Akiva, you have consoled us!" (Babylonian Talmud, Maakos 24b; based on translations of Soncino and ArtScroll).
Rabbi Akiva's Beginnings

What were Akiva's beginnings? It is said: Up to the age of forty, he had not yet studied a thing. One time, while standing by the mouth of a well in Lydda, he inquired, "Who hollowed out this stone?" and was told, "Akiva, haven't you read that 'water wears away stone' (Job 14:19)? - it was water falling upon it constantly, day after day." At that, Rabbi Akiva asked himself: Is my mind harder than this stone? I will go and study at least one section of Torah. He went directly to a schoolhouse, and he and his son began reading from a child's tablet. Rabbi Akiva took hold of one end of the tablet, and his son of the other end. The teacher wrote down alef and bet for him, and he learned them; alef to tav, and he learned them; the book of Leviticus, and he learned it. He went on studying until he learned the whole Torah. Then he went and sat before Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Joshua. "My masters," he said, "reveal the sense of Mishnah to me." When they told him one halakhah, he went off to reason with himself. This alef, he wondered, what was it written for? That bet - what was it written for? This teaching - what was it uttered for? He kept coming back, kept inquiring of Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Joshua, until he reduced his teachers to silence. (Avos D'Rabbi Nosson 4:2; based on translation of Bialik & Ravnitzky, 1992).

This story demonstrates that persistence pays off even if one starts learning at the age of 40. Rabbi Akiva became one of the greatest scholars of his generation and had 24,000 disciples. Wein (2011) points out that Rabbi Akiva had several strikes against him. He started studying at the age of 40 and also came from an undistinguished lineage:

He did not descend from Jewish aristocracy or nobility (see Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 27a). He came from a family of converts. There is an opinion that his father was a convert. If not his father, then certainly his grandfather was. Not only that, but he descended from the evil general Sisera, who was the persecutor of the Jews at the time of Deborah. The rabbis tell us that the descendants of Sisera, Nebuchadnezzar and even Haman studied Torah and became prominent Jews. In our time also there are descendants of German officers and SS, as well as descendants of Communists, whose found their way to the Jewish people, and even in areas of prominence in the Torah world.

...While still illiterate, Akiva became chief shepherd to one of the wealthiest men in Israel, Kalba Savuah (so named because anyone who entered his house hungry like a dog, kalba, went out satiated, savua). Once, he chanced to meet Kalba Savua's daughter, Rachel, who was so impressed with his character that she consented to marry him — on the condition that he would devote himself to Torah study. When the wealthy father-in-law learned of their marriage he disinherited them, and the couple lived in dire poverty (Babylonian Talmud, Nedarim 50a). However, Rachel continued to believe in him and encouraged him to leave home to study Torah, as was the custom. He left for 12 years and then returned. Before greeting his wife, he overheard her say to a neighbor, "If he wants to go back for another twelve years I would gladly agree to it." He then returned to his studies for another 12 years. In those 24 years he studied under great men like Rabbi Eliezer ben Horkenus and Rabbi Joshua ben Hannaniah. Even Rabbi Tarfon, whom we meet all the time in the Talmud with Rabbi Akiva, originally was his teacher. Nevertheless, Rabbi Akiva rose to become a colleague with them. He rose because of his great tenacity... because water wears down rock. After 24 years, he returned home with 24,000 students, head of the largest yeshiva in the land of Israel. Although his reputation preceded him, Kalba Savua did not know that the great man coming to town was his son-in-law, Akiva (Wein, 2011)

Rabbi Akiva's 24,000 students died in the period between Passover and Shavuos (Babylonian Talmud, Yevamos 62b). This has become a period of semi-mourning. The Talmud provides a reason they were punished: "They all of them died at the same time because they did not treat each other with respect. It is surprising that Rabbi Akiva's students did not treat each other with respect given that their teacher was famous for teaching: "'Love your fellow as yourself' is a cardinal principle in the Torah" (Sifra on verse in Leviticus 19:18).

The Talmud says that they all died a cruel death, askera (usually translated as croup or suffocation). One interesting theory is that they were crucified by the Romans and crucifixion causes one to suffocate to death (Kiger, 2015).

Some suggest that they joined the army of Bar Kochba since Rabbi Akiva was one of Bar Kochba's supporters (Lau, 2011: 411). They may not have been actual students, but people inspired by Rabbi Akiva to fight with Bar Kochba. Rabbi Akiva thought that Bar Kochba was the Messiah who would free Israel from Roman persecution. Despite some initial successes, Bar Kochba was unable to defeat the Romans and this third rebellion against the Romans ended in a huge catastrophe for the Jewish people.
Death of Rabbi Akiva

Rabbi Akiva was one of the Ten Martyrs killed by the Romans.

Our Rabbis taught: Once the wicked Government [Romans] issued a decree forbidding the Jews to study and practice the Torah. Pappus ben Yehudah came and found R. Akiva publicly convening gatherings and engaging in the study of Torah with them. Pappus said to him: "Akiva, are you not afraid of the Government?" Rabbi Akiva replied: "I will explain to you with a parable. A fox was once walking alongside of a river, and he saw fishes going in swarms from one place to another. He said to them: 'From what are you fleeing?' They replied: 'From the nets cast for us by men.' The fox said to them: 'Would you like to come up on to the dry land so that you and I can live together in the way that my ancestors lived with your ancestors?' The fish replied: 'Are you the one that they call the cleverest of animals? You art not clever but foolish. If we are afraid in the element in which we live, how much more in the element in which we would die!' So too it is with us. If such is our condition when we sit and study the Torah, of which it is written (Deuteronomy 30:20), For it is your life and the length of your days,' if we go and neglect it how much worse off we shall be!"

It is related that soon afterwards R. Akiva was arrested and thrown into prison, and Pappus b. Judah was also arrested and imprisoned next to him. Rabbi Akiva said to him: "Pappus, who brought you here?" He replied: "Happy are you, Rabbi Akiva, that you have been seized for busying yourself with the Torah! Woe is to Pappus who has been seized for busying himself with meaningless things!"

When R. Akiva was taken out for execution, it was the time for the recital of the Shema, and while they combed his flesh with iron combs, he was accepting upon himself the kingship of heaven. His disciples said to him: "Our teacher, even to this extent?" He said to them: "All my days I have been troubled by this verse, 'with all your soul', which I interpret to mean, 'even if He takes your soul'. I said: "When shall I have the opportunity of fulfilling this? Now that I have the opportunity shall I not fulfill it?" Rabbi Akiva prolonged the word echad [meaning one] until he expired while saying it. A Heavenly voice [bath kol] went forth and proclaimed: "Happy art you, Rabbi Akiva, that your soul has departed with the word echad!" The ministering angels said before the Holy One, blessed be He: "This is the Torah, and this is the reward? [He should have been] from those that die by Your hand, O Lord." [i.e., die of old age; the angels were quoting Psalms 17:14]. God replied to them: "Their portion is eternal life." A Heavenly voice proclaimed: "Happy are you, R. Akiva, that you are destined for the life in the World to Come" (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 61b; based on translation by Soncino and ArtScroll).

The verse states (Deuteronomy 6:5): "And you shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your resources." The verse that ends with echad is in Deuteronomy (6:4): "Hear O Israel: The Lord our God, the Lord is one [echad]." Rabbi Akiva died around 136 CE. teaching monotheism so it was appropriate that he died with this verse on his lips. However, Rabbi Akiva's legacy would live on through his five great disciples: Rabbi Meir, Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Yosi, Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Elazar b. Shamua (Babylonian Talmud, Yevamos 62b). Rabbi Akiva died with the word echad (one); Rome renounced paganism in 312 CE when Constantine declared that he was a Christian.
Death of Rabbi Chaninah ben Teradyon

When Rabbi Yosi ben Kisma was ill, Rabbi Chaninah ben Teradyon went to visit him. He said to him: "Chaninah, my brother, do you not know that it is Heaven that has ordained this [Roman] nation to reign? For though she destroyed His House, burnt His Temple, slew His pious ones and caused His best ones to perish, still she is firmly established! Yet, I have heard about you that you sit and occupy yourself with the Torah, publicly convene assemblies to teach Torah, and you keep a Torah in your lap." He replied: "Heaven will show mercy." Rabbi Yosi remonstrated: "I am telling you plain facts, and you say "Heaven will show mercy"! It will surprise me if they do not burn both you and the scroll of the Law with fire." Rabbi Chaninah said to Rabbi Yosi: "Rabbi, How do I stand with regard to the world to come?" Rabbi Yosi asked: "Is there any particular act that you have done?" He replied: "I once mistook my own Purim money [to be used so that the poor could have the Purim meal] for general charity funds, and I distributed of my own to the poor." Rabbi Yosi said to Rabbi Chaninah: "If so, would that your portion be my portion and your lot my lot." It was said that within but a few days Rabbi Yosi b. Kisma died and all the great men of Rome went to his burial and made great lamentation for him. On their return, they found Rabbi Chaninah b. Teradyon sitting and occupying himself with the Torah, publicly convening assemblies, and keeping a Torah scroll in his lap. They brought him and wrapped him in the Torah scroll, placed bundles of branches round him and set them on fire. They then brought tufts of wool, which they had soaked in water, and placed them over his heart, so that he should not expire quickly. His daughter exclaimed: "Father, that I should see you in this state!" Rabbi Chaninah replied: "If it were I alone being burnt it would have been a thing hard to bear; but now that I am burning together with the Torah scroll, He who will have regard for the insult of the Torah will also have regard for my insult." His disciples called out: 'Rabbi, what do you see?' He answered them: "The blank parchment is being burnt but the letters are soaring on high." The students said to him: "Open then your mouth that the fire enter into you." Rabbi Chaninah replied: "It is better that He who gave me my soul should take it away, but a person should not injure one's self." The Executioner then said to Rabbi Chaninah: "Rabbi, if I raise the flame and take away the tufts of wool from over your heart, will you bring me into the World to Come?" Rabbi Chanina replied to him: "Yes." He said to Rabbi Chaninah: "Then swear to me." Rabbi Chaninah swore to him. The executioner thereupon raised the flame and removed the tufts of wool from over his heart, and his soul departed speedily. The Executioner then jumped and threw himself into the fire. Wherupon, a Heavenly voice exclaimed: "Rabbi Chaninah b. Teradyon and the executioner have been assigned to the World to Come." Rebbi, on hearing of it, wept and said: "There is one who acquires eternity [paradise] in a single hour, and there is another who acquires eternity after many years." (Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah 18a; based on translations of Soncino and ArtScroll).

Rabbi Chaninah ben Teradyon is one of the "Ten Martyrs" executed by the Romans. As with many aggadic stories, there are many lessons embedded into the story. Jewish law tends to be strict when it comes to euthanasia. However, when it comes to removing a device that hinders the departure of the soul, removal of the impediment that prevents death is permitted by many authorities. Rabbi Chaninah did not allow himself to hasten his own death by opening his mouth, he however allowed the executioner to remove the impediment (the wet tufts of wool) that was placed there by the executioner for the purpose of making him suffer. This story also makes it very clear that Paradise is not only for Jews.

The most amazing lesson of the above story is that Rabbi Chaninah needed assurance that he was destined for Paradise. Teaching Torah was not enough. Once he demonstrated that he "walked the talk" and was extremely honest when it came to money (using his own money in order that the money for Purim meals not be mixed up with regular charity funds), that was absolute proof to Rabbi Yosi that he would merit a share in the World to Come. This is consistent with the view that the first question one is asked in the afterlife at the final judgment is: "Were you honest in your business dealings?" (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbos 31a).

The phrase used by Rabbi Chaninah ben Teradyon, "The blank parchment is being burnt but the letters are soaring on high," means that the ideas of the Torah live on. You can kill people and destroy the books, but you cannot eradicate an idea.
Deeds of Lovingkindness Save Elazar ben Perata from Execution by the Romans

When Rabbi Elazar b. Perata and Rabbi Chaninah b. Teradyon were arrested by the Romans [Emperor Hadrian banned the study of Torah as well as circumcision and other Jewish rituals], Rabbi Elazar b. Perata said to Rabbi Chaninah b. Teradyon: "Happy are you for you were only arrested on one charge; woe is me, for I was arrested on five charges." R. Chaninah replied: "Happy are you, who was arrested on five charges, but will be saved from execution; woe is me who, though having been arrested on one charge, will not be saved from execution. [The reason you will be saved] For you occupied yourself with the study of Torah as well as with deeds of lovingkindness, whereas I occupied myself with Torah alone."

This accords with the opinion of Rabbi Huna. For Rabbi Huna said: "He who only occupies himself with the study of the Torah, it is as if he has no God, for it is said (II Chronicles 15:3): 'Many days passed by for Israel was without the true God... and without Torah.' [they worshipped idols]. What is meant by 'without the true God'? — It means that he who only occupies himself with the study of the Torah it is as if he had no God." But did Rabbi Chaninah not occupy himself with deeds of lovingkindness? Surely it has been taught: R. Eliezer b. Jacob says: "One should not put his money into a charity-bag, unless it is supervised by a learned man such as Rabbi Chaninah b. Teradyon! He was indeed very trustworthy, but he did not practice benevolence. But has it not been taught: He said to Rabbi Yosi b. Kisma: "I mistook Purim-money for ordinary charity money, so I distributed of my own to the poor!" The Talmud answers: He did indeed practice charity, but not as much as he might have done.

When they brought up Rabbi Elazar b. Perata for his trial they asked him: "Why have you been studying the Torah and why have you been stealing?" He answered: "If one is a scholar he is not a robber, if a robber he is not a scholar, and as I am not the one I am neither the other" The Romans asked: "Why then are you called Master [ordination was punishable by death]?" He replied: "I am a Master of Weavers." The Romans theyn brought him two coils and asked: "Which is for the warp and which for the woof?" A miracle occurred and a female-bee came and sat on the warp and a male-bee came and sat on the woof. He thereupon said to the Romans: "This is of the warp and that of the woof." The Romans then asked him: "Why did you not go to the Meeting-House of Avidan? [Hadrian decreed that they had to attend this meeting place for idolators as part of his attempt to eradicate Judaism]" He replied: "I am old and afraid that I might be trampled under your feet." They asked: "And how many old people have been trampled till now?" A miracle [again] happened; for on that very day an old man had been trampled. They asked: "And why did you let your slave go free?" [he did this using a procedure in accordance with Jewish law]. He replied: "No such thing ever happened." One of them then was rising to give evidence against him, when Elijah came disguised as one of the dignitaries of Rome and said to that man: "As miracles were worked for him in all the other matters, a miracle will also happen in this one, and you will only be shown up as wicked." He, however, disregarded him and stood up to address them, when a written communication from important members of the government had to be sent to the Emperor in Rome and it was sent by that man who wanted to testify against Rabbi Elazar. On the road, Elijah came and hurled him a distance of four hundred parasangs. [One opinion is that the letter that had to get to the Emperor in Rome caused this man to travel 400 hundred parasangs.] So that he went and did not return to testify against Rabbi Elazar. The Romans then brought up Rabbi Chaninah b. Teradyon and asked him: 'Why have you occupied yourself with the Torah?" He replied: "Thus the Lord my God commanded me." At once they sentenced him to be burnt, his wife to be slain, and his daughter to be consigned to a brothel (Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah 17b; based on translation by Soncino and ArtScroll).

What is fascinating about this story is that a key lesson derived from it is that teaching Torah is not enough. In fact, if all someone does is engage in studying Torah (this is reminiscent of what Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai did in a cave for thirteen years) it is as though he has no God. There is no question that the purpose of this study is to encourage people to study and use their knowledge to engage in gemillas chasadim. One of the commentaries (Tosafot) makes the point that the story seems to use charity and gemillas chasadim interchangeably, yet the two are different. As noted in a previous story, the Talmud states that performing gemillas chasadim (deeds of lovingkindness) is better than charity. Gemillas chasadim can be done for poor and rich people, living and dead people, and does not require money (Babylonian Talmud, Sukkah 49b). Tosafot answers that the two are very highly related and one who gives charity generally is involved in performing deeds of lovingkindness.
Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi and Satan

In the next selection, the Talmud demonstrates that good people do not have to fear Satan. It also shows how easy it is to fool Satan. Henry Wadsworth Longfellow used the story of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi as the basis of the poem "The Spanish Jew's Tale: The Legend of Rabbi Ben Levi" in Tales of a Wayside Inn.

When Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi was about to die, the Angel of Death was instructed to carry out his will [before taking his soul]. He appeared before Rabbi Yehoshua and revealed himself. Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: "Show me my place in the world to come." He replied: "All right." Rabbi Yehoshua said: "Give me your slaughtering knife since you might frighten me with it on the way." He gave him his knife. Upon arriving in Paradise, the Angel of Death lifted up Rabbi Yehoshua and showed him his place. Rabbi Yehoshua jumped over to the other side but the Angel of Death grabbed him by the hem of his garment and was about to pull him back. Rabbi Yehoshua swore that he was not going to return. Thereupon, the Holy One said: "If he has ever had an oath annulled [while on earth] then he must go back; if not, he can remain here" [since Rabbi Yehoshua never had a vow annulled he was allowed to stay]. The Angel of Death then said: "Give my knife back to me." Rabbi Yehoshua refused to return it. A Heavenly voice declared: "Return it to him for it is needed for mortals" (Babylonian Talmud, Kethubos 77b).

A lesson to be learned from the story is that death is necessary for mortals. Only in a world where everyone is good and no one lies can there be immortality. A world without death is not the blessing we think it is, especially if there is old age. Even a world with eternal youth presents problems for humankind. There would be little desire for anyone to accomplish anything. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi did not waste his time. He states that the Angel of Death taught him three things (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 51a). Apparently, one can even quote Satan.
Justice in Sodom and Gomorrah

Sodom was known as an evil place that did everything to discourage strangers from living there.

There were four judges in Sodom and their names were Liar, Falsifier, Forger, and Justice Perverter. In Sodom, if one struck his friend's wife and caused her to miscarry, the husband was told to give her to the perpetrator so that he could make her pregnant again. If one cut off the ear of his friend's donkey, the donkey's owner was told to give the donkey to the perpetrator until the ear grew back. If one struck his friend, the victim was told to pay the assaulter a fee for bloodletting. One who crossed the river [into Sodom] by using the bridge had to pay a toll of four zuz [ancient currency]; one who crossed through the water, paid eight zuz.

A fuller once came to Sodom and was asked to pay the four zuz fee. He claimed that he crossed through the water. He was then asked to pay eight zuz. He refused to pay so he was assaulted. He went to the judge and was required to pay the fee for bloodletting and the eight zuz toll.

Eliezer, the servant of Abraham, came to Sodom and was assaulted. He went to the judge and was told to pay the bloodletting fee. He took a stone and struck the judge. The judge asked: " Why did you do this?" Eliezer responded: "Take the money you now owe me for bloodletting and pay the plaintiff and my money will stay with me." In Sodom, there was a bed on which guests had to sleep. If one was too tall, his legs were cut, and if one was too short, he was stretched out. Eliezer, Abraham's servant, happened to go there. They invited him to lie down on the bed. Eliezer said: "Since the day my mother died, I vowed not to sleep on a bed."

When a poor person came to Sodom, every one gave him a dinar but wrote his name on it. However, no one would give or sell the poor person any food. When he died of starvation, each of the Sodomites would come and take back his money. The Sodomites had an agreement: Whoever invites a guest to a wedding, must be stripped of his clothes. There was a wedding and Eliezer happened to go there, but they did not serve him any food. When Eliezer wanted to eat, he sat at the very end. When he was asked who invited him, Eliezer would say to the individual sitting next to him, you invited me. This individual became afraid that if the others would believe that he invited someone to the feast, that he would be stripped of his clothes, so he ran outside. Eliezer kept doing this until eventually all the guests ran out and he ate the feast (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 109b)

The following story uses humor as a clever way to illustrate how depraved and corrupt a xenophobic country can become. This story also demonstrates how even the servant of a wise and good person could outwit the evildoers of Sodom. The story may be funny but the consequences of hating strangers can result in a calamity for a country. Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed by God. A country that uses hate and injustice as tools to remain prosperous, will not survive even without divine punishment.

One of Will Durant's famous quotes about the reason for the decline of Rome is consistent with the view that a country can only thrive when it is built on a foundation of justice, virtue, and compassion for others:

A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself within. The essential causes of Rome's decline lay in her people, her morals, her class struggle, her failing trade, her bureaucratic despotism, her stifling taxes, her consuming wars (Will Durant).
Justice in Katzia

Alexander of Macedon once paid a visit to the King of Katzia [some translate Katzia as end of the world] who showed him much silver and gold. Alexander said: "I do not need your silver or gold. I have only come to observe your legal system and see how you dispense justice." As Alexander and the king were conversing, two people came before the king for judgment. One said: "I purchased a dunghill from this man and found a treasure in it." The other party said: "I bought a dunghill, I did not buy a treasure. Therefore, the treasure is yours." The first party replied: "I sold you the dunghill and everything in it, therefore the treasure is yours." While the two were arguing, the king asked one of them: "Do you have a son?" He answered in the affirmative. The king asked the other party: "Do you have a daughter? He also answered in the affirmative." The king said to them: "Marry your children to each other and give them the treasure." Alexander started to laugh. The king asked Alexander: "Why are you laughing. Did I not judge correctly? If this case had come before you, how would you have judged?" Alexander replied: "We would have killed both of them and the treasure would have gone to the king." The king said: "Is that how much you love gold and silver?" The king ordered that a feast be prepared for Alexander consisting of meat of gold and chicken of gold. The "food" was brought before Alexander. Alexander said: "Do I then eat gold?" The king retorted: "Woe to thee! You do not eat gold, so why do you love gold so much?" The king asked: "Does the sun shine in your country?" Alexander said 'yes.' The king asked: "Does rain fall in your country?" Alexander said 'yes.' The king asked: "Do you have small cattle in your country?" Alexander said 'yes.' The king said: "Woe to thee! It is not for your sake but for the sake of the cattle that the sun shines and the rain falls for you" (Jerusalem Talmud, Bava Metzia 2:5).

This story has a powerful message about the importance of justice. Alexander the Great is used in a number of Talmudic stories to represent a powerful ruler who sought wisdom. Note how this story contrasts with the story of justice in Sodom and Gomorrah.
Love of Nature

The following parable in the Talmud demonstrates the great love and appreciation one should have for nature:

A man was journeying in the desert and was hungry, tired, and thirsty. He found a tree with sweet fruits, pleasant shade, and a stream of water flowing beneath it. He ate from its fruit, drank from its stream, and sat in its shade. When he was ready to leave, he said: Tree, tree, with what shall I bless you? Should I say to you, 'May your fruits be sweet?' Your fruits are already sweet; 'That your shade be pleasant?' Your shade is already pleasant. 'That a stream of water flow beneath you?' A stream already flows beneath you. Therefore, 'May it be God's will that all shoots planted from you should be just like you' (Babylonian Talmud, Taanis 5b-6a).
Concern for the Environment

A certain man was clearing his field and clearing stones from his property onto the neighboring public domain. A pious man found him doing so and said to him: "Empty one! Why do you remove stones from property which is not yours to property which is yours?" The man laughed at him. Some days later, he had to sell his field, and when he was walking in that public domain he tripped over those stones. He said: "How well did that pious man say to me, 'Why do you remove stones from property which is not yours to property which is yours?"' (Babylonian Talmud, Bava Kama 50b)

This story is used to illustrate the law that "A person should not remove stones from his ground on to public ground." In many countries, there are problems with companies that dispose of pollutants into the atmosphere or rivers. Since 2009, General Electric has been removing PCBs from the Upper Hudson River. They removed 300,000 pounds of PCBs. Air pollution kills 3.3 million people a year. Ramsey (2015) provides a list of the 10 cities with the worst air pollution. Pollution is an example of what economists refer to a negative externality. Externalities are spillover effects which adversely affect a third party. Economists have come up with all kinds of solutions to solve the problem of negative externalities.
Rava and Bar Sheishach: Does Paradise Compare to Naked Harlots?

What is the reward like in the World to Come? The term "World to Come" is used to refer to Messianic times as well as the afterlife. Here it is probably referring to Messianic times. This story sheds light on the difference between physical and spiritual pleasure.

Raba once sent a gift to Bar Sheishach on a heathen feast-day. He said: "I know that he does not worship idols" Rava went and visited him. He found him sitting up to his neck in a bath of rosewater while naked harlots were standing before him. Bar Sheishach said to Rava: "Have you Jews anything as pleasurable as this in the World to Come?" Rava replied: "Ours is much better than this." He asked: "Is there anything better than this?" Rava replied: "There is upon you the fear of the ruling power, but for us there will be no fear of the ruling power." Bar Sheishach said: "What fear have I of the ruling power!" While they were sitting together, the royal emissary arrived with the message: "Arise, the king requires your presence." As he was about to depart, Bar Sheishach said to Rava: "May the eye burst that wishes to see evil of you!" [Bar Sheishach was impressed that immediately after making the point how easy it was for ruling authorities to take away one's possessions, the point was validated.] Rava responded to him: "Amen," and Bar Sheishach's eye burst. R. Pappi said: Rava should have answered him by quoting the verse (Psalms 45:10), "Daughters of kings will honor you, the queen stands erect at your right bedecked in the gold of Ophir." R. Nahman bar Yitzchak said: Rava should have answered him by quoting the verse (Isaiah 64:3): "No eye except Yours, O God, has seen that which He will do for one who awaits Him." (Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah 65a; based on translation of ArtScroll and Soncino).

There are different explanations as to why Bar Sheishach's eye burst. One theory is that wishing that Jews pursue and enjoy physical pleasures rather than spiritual pleasures would cause great harm to the Jewish people. This is why when Rava responded 'Amen,' Bar Sheishach's eye burst. It is not a blessing for a people to pursue this kind of happiness; in fact, it leads to their ultimate destruction (see commentary of ArtScroll). Bar Sheishach was smart enough to reject idolatry. However, he felt that there can be no greater pleasure than the physical ones. Rava's response is quite simplistic and states that any physical joy in this world can be taken away by the ruling powers. He could have also made the point that physical pleasures can be taken away by illness. Rabbi Pappi went a bit further than Rava in trying to explain the limitations of physical pleasures in this world. The pleasure that Bar Sheishach experienced was with prostitutes. Prostitutes will do virtually anything for money so there is no true joy. The joy that comes from being served by people who truly care about someone and are not doing it for the money (the princess and queen) is at a much higher level. Rabbi Nachman b. Yitzchak is probably the closest to the truth. Spiritual bliss cannot be described in terms of physical pleasures. The Talmud tries to do it elsewhere in comparing hell to fire.

Five things are one-sixtieth of something else: Fire, honey, the Sabbath, sleep, and dreams. Fire is one-sixtieth of hell, honey is one-sixtieth of manna, the Sabbath is one-sixtieth of the world -to-come, sleep is one-sixtieth of death, and dreams are one-sixtieth of prophecy (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 57b).

The expression "one-sixtieth" is probably an idiomatic way of describing the concept of a small fraction.

Mistaking physical pleasure with other kinds of joy has been noted by modern psychologists. Seligman (2004), who is considered the founder of positive psychology, makes a distinction between gratification and pleasure. Eating a tasty steak or taking a bath in rose water with gorgeous prostitutes may provide one with a feeling of pleasure. It is doubtful, however, that someone will talk about this great pleasure 20 years later. On the other hand, saving the lives of several people, say, during a fire, does not produce the same kind of pleasure one gets from a tasty meal. According to Seligman, this is "gratification." Gratification results from an accomplishment such as having written a best-selling book, saving the lives of many people, or finding the cure for cancer. Short-term pleasures do not provide the meaning and purpose that people seek. According to Seligman (2004), it is important for people to understand the difference between "pleasure" and "gratification" in order to comprehend the difference between the "Good Life" and the "Pleasant Life." The "Good Life" is based on virtue and is similar to Aristotle's concept of eudaimonia described in his Nicomachean Ethics, which is usually translated as happiness and flourishing, and can be achieved through virtue.

Aldous Huxley describes a pleasure-seeking society that has no family or spirituality in his novel, Brave New World. In this dehumanized world, clone-like people are raised in test tubes and get their pleasure from soma, the ultimate pleasure drug, and sex. This is reminiscent of Robert Nozick's (1974: 42-45), renowned Experience Machine argument:

Suppose there were an experience machine that would give you any experience you desired. Superduper neuropsychologists could stimulate your brain so that you would think and feel you were writing a great novel, or making a friend, or reading an interesting book. All the time you would be floating in a tank, with electrodes attached to your brain. Should you plug into this machine for life, preprogramming your life experiences? [...] Of course, while in the tank you won't know that you're there; you'll think that it's all actually happening [...] Would you plug in?." (Nozick, 1974: 42-43).

The answer for most of us is that we would not plug into the Experience Machine because we want more from life than pleasure. Bar Sheishach, would probably not agree.
Rava and Chomah, Abaye's Widow

The next story is used to illustrate the laws regarding how much maintenance is provided for a widow out of her late husband's estate. Abaye, also known as Nachmeni, had just died and his widow Chomah was asking Rava to determine a proper amount for her support.

Chomah, Abaye's wife, came before Rava asking that the estate provide her an allowance for food. Rava granted it to her. She then said: "Grant me an allowance for wine." Rava replied: "I know that Nachmeni did not drink wine." Choma responded: "By your life, master, he gave me to drink from goblets [some translate the Aramaic word as used here as a drinking horn] as long as my arm." As she was showing her arm, it became exposed and its beauty radiated through the courtroom. Rava rose, went home, and had intercourse with his wife, Rabbi Chisda's daughter. His wife [surprised by her husband's unusual behavior] asked him: "Who was at court today?" Rava answered: "Chomah, the wife of Abaye." Rava's wife then chased after Chomah, hitting her with the straps of a chest and drove her out of the town of Machuza saying: You already killed three men [she had lost two other husbands] and now you have come to kill another (Babylonian Talmud, Kethubos 65a).

In Talmudic times, women's arms were covered completely. Rava's wife felt that Choma was flirting with her husband. This story besides being humorous illustrates that the sages were normal human beings and could be aroused like anyone else. Actually, the Talmud believed that the greater the man, the stronger the desire.

This story is analyzed by Calderon in her book:

In retelling the story of Homa, the wife of Abaye, who appears before Rava asking for her ketuba money, Calderon explores the tensions and inevitable rivalry between the closeness of two study partners and the intimacy of a marital couple. She sees the subtext of the story in B. Ketubot 65a, observed from the point of view of the woman, as being, "It should be clear which of the two of us was closer to Abaye." Suddenly, a story that seemed to be about ketuba money ignites with the sparks of relational jealousy (Bell, 2014).

Kosman (2016) has the following to say about this story. He also connects it to a painting by Edward Hopper, Office at Night.

While she seemingly comes to the hearing in all the seriousness befitting a litigant, all of her behavior expresses what the court fears the most. And even her name "Homa" that is mentioned here, which is uncommon in the Talmud, might teach something about her "hot" nature (hamimutah); but even without this allusion, we learn that Homa's suit is not a regular civil suit, over money - rather, she demands an allocation of wine for drinking. This demand puts the sages sitting on her case in a quandary, for in their world a woman who imbibes wine is regarded as having unbridled appetites...

His attempt to deny her an allowance of wine should therefore be understood as based on the following argument: since "wine" becomes transformed in their conversation to a sort of hidden code word for lustfulness, Raba tells her that he knows that during his lifetime her husband Abbaye refrained from "drinking wine," and thereby alludes to her of his disguised assumption, which is a sort of logical inference: if Abbaye restrained himself during his lifetime, we may assume that he also restrained his wife's outbursts of passion. Consequently, what Raba says to Homa is a sort of sermon: if, during your husband's lifetime, when you were under his dominion, you were required to act with restraint, after his death, we in the court will not assist you to cast off this restraint and act in such a "free" fashion.
The Greater the Man, the Greater is His Evil Inclination

This story follows a discussion regarding the Evil Inclination and the strength of the desire to sin. In Judaism, Satan is seen as more than an angel who tempts one to sin. Friedman & Lipman (1999) observe: "

Satan is often identified as a person's evil inclination in Jewish thought -- an internal counterbalance to one's good inclination, both of which are under a person's control. Satan is also the Angel of Death (Bava Bathra 16a), an angel whose duty is to take the souls of individuals whose time has come. Finally, Satan is the angel who tests individuals, tempts them into sin, and then testifies against them in the Heavenly tribunal, hence the name "accuser."

Abaye explains that Satan works harder to get scholars to sin than anyone else. The story below is proof of this assertion.

Abaye heard a certain man saying to a woman: "Let's get up early and go on our way." Abaye said to himself: "I will follow them in order to keep them away from transgression." He followed them for three parasangs across the meadows. When they parted company he heard them say: "Our company is pleasant, the way is long."Abaye said: "If that had been me, I could not have restrained myself [i.e., he would have succumbed to his sexual desire]. Abaye went and leaned in deep anguish against a doorpost, when a certain old man came up to him and taught him: "The greater the man, the greater his Evil Inclination" (Babylonian Talmud, Sukkah 52b; based on translation by Soncino).

Great people have much stronger desire to sin and thus need to be especially careful. One can attribute this to a feeling of arrogance that comes from power. In modern times, it is amazing how many great people have been caught committing adultery. Abaye is not providing an excuse but a warning for scholars not to be egotistical and to be especially cautious not to sin. This story demonstrates the great modesty of the Talmudic sages who recognized that it is so easy for people to succumb to their desires. See stories above dealing with how Satan taught several sages that he could get them to sin ("Lessons About Humility from Satan").
Right Amount of Time for Prayer

A certain student once went down to the reader's desk in the synagogue to lead everyone in prayer in the presence of Rabbi Elazar. He prolonged the prayer too much and the students complained to their teacher, Rabbi Elazar: "Teacher, how great a lengthener is this student?" Rabbi Elazar responded: "Is he a greater lengthener than Moses, our teacher, of whom it is written (Deuteronomy 9:25): 'the forty days and the forty nights that I prostrated myself [before the Lord].'" On another occasion, a certain student went down to the reader's desk in the synagogue to lead the congregation in prayer in the presence of Rabbi Elazar. He shortened the prayer too much and the students complained to their teacher, Rabbi Elazar: "Teacher, how curt is this student?" Rabbi Elazar responded: "Is he curter than Moses, our teacher, of whom it is written (Numbers 12:13): 'O Lord I beseech you, please heal her.'" (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 34a)

Moses prayer for his sister, Miriam, who was punished for leprosy was a five word prayer (in Hebrew), with four of the five words being of two letters. The above story demonstrates that perception is in the eyes of the beholder. This story illustrates that sincerity is more important than the length of the prayer: "Whether you give a lot or a little, what matters is that your heart is directed towards Heaven" (Babylonian Talmud, Menachos 110a).
Who Shall Recite the Blessing at God's Feast

Rabbi Avira expounded the following and sometimes he said it in the name of Rabbi Ami and sometimes he said it in the name of Rabbi Assi. What's the meaning of that which is written (Gen. 21:8), "The child grew up and was weaned, [and Abraham held a great feast on the day that Isaac was weaned]?" In the future, the Holy One [God], Blessed is He, will make a feast for the righteous ones on the day that he displays kindness to the children of Isaac [this homiletic explanation is based on redundancies in the text]. After they eat and drink, they will give a cup of blessing [for saying grace] to Abraham. He says to them, "I am not reciting the blessing, for Ishmael issued from me." He will then give the cup to Isaac, saying, "Take the cup and recite the blessing." Isaac says to them, "I am not reciting the blessing, for Esau issued from me." He will then give the cup to Jacob saying, "Take the cup and recite the blessing." Jacob will say to them, "I am not reciting the blessing, for I married two sisters in their lifetimes, and the Torah came and forbid this to me." He will then give the cup to Moses saying, "Take the cup and recite the blessing." Moses will say to them, I am not reciting the blessing for I did not merit entering the land of Israel, neither in my lifetime nor in my death." He will then say to Joshua, "Take the cup and recite the blessing." Joshua will say to them, "I am not reciting the blessing, for I did not merit a son."... He will then say to David, "Take the cup and recite the blessing." David will say to them, "I am reciting the blessing, and it is fitting for me to recite it."

The Talmud then uses this verse from Psalms (116:13) as proof that David is the one who recites the blessing. It says: "I raise the cup of salvations and the name of the Lord I invoke." (Babylonian Talmud, Pesachim 119b; based on translation by ArtScroll and Diamond, 2007)

There are many problems with this story. Diamond (2007) sees the story as ironic parody. He points out that

none of the liabilities admitted to by each biblical protagonist is a fault of his own doing, Abraham and Isaac each have a black-sheep child; Jacob violates a law that has not yet been enacted; Moses has never set foot in Israel, and Joshua has no sons to perpetuate the hereditary line.

David's transgressions, in particular with his committing of adultery with Bath Sheba and then sending her husband, Uriah the Hittite, to the front to get killed are much more serious. Moroever, David had more problematic children than Abraham or Isaac: "Amnon, his son, rapes his sister. Avshalom, his son, overthrows his father and publicly rapes his father's wives; and Adoniyah stages a rebellion and declares himself king while his father still sits on the throne." Diamond (2007) also highlights the fact that everyone in the story shows humility in refusing the cup of blessing. David, on the other hand, does not show any humbleness and says that it is appropriate that he recite the blessing, i.e., he is more worthy than Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, and Joshua. It is not enough that David is the "youngest" of the group but one doubts that he was more worthy than the others. Diamond (2007) feels that "David's boastful self-appraisal exudes a particularly acerbic sense of irony in light of the rabbinic association of adultery with pride and haughtiness, rather than mere sexual lust." The Talmud (Babylonian Talmud, Sotah 4b) states: "Any person in whom there is haughtiness of spirit will in the end stumble and commit a sin [adultery] with a married woman." "Cup" also has a sexual connotation in the Talmud. For example, the Talmud (Babylonian Talmud, Nedarim 20b) states: "one should not drink from one cup and have his eyes on another cup" (i.e., have relations with his wife and think of another woman). In any case, Diamond (2007) sees this story as a "conscious use of irony and satire" that transforms admiration and respect into its opposite.
Importance of Constructive Arguing: Resh Lakish and Rabbi Yochanan

Resh Lakish whose actual name was Rabbi Shimon ben (son of) Lakish appears to have been a scholar who left his studies and became a robber. Some believe that he worked for the Roman Government as a "thief-catcher" (see Soncino) similar to Rabbi Elazar ben Shimon and was not a criminal. Either way, he was no longer a Torah scholar and became familiar with all kinds of weapons. After he returned to his studies, he became the bar-plugta, the debating partner, of Rabbi Yochanan. Hundreds of arguments about Jewish law between the two are noted in the Talmud so they had a very productive relationship. Friedman (2014) makes the point that one's debating partner was usually your closest friend. Thus Abaye and Rava argue about Jewish law on almost every other page of the Talmud yet were close friends and are even buried together in the same cave in Israel. Friedman (2014) maintains: "Talmudic arguments did not lead to ugly battles but were seen as the way to clarify the law as well as philosophical questions." This was possibly due to the Hillel influence. The Hillelites were known to argue in a very respectful manner.

One day R. Yochanan was bathing in the Jordan, when Resh Lakish saw him and leapt into the Jordan after him. R. Yochanan said to him: "Your strength should be for the Torah." Resh Lakish replied: "Your beauty should be for women." [Rabbi Yochanan was extremely handsome.] Rabbi Yochanan said: "If you will repent, I will give you my sister in marriage, who is more beautiful than I." Resh Lakish undertook to repent. He then wished to return and collect his clothing, but could not [The mere decision to accept the yoke of the Torah made him too weak to leap across the Jordan River]. Subsequently, Rabbi Yochanan taught him Scripture and Mishnah, and made him into a great man. [This part of the story takes place many years later.]

One day there was a dispute in the study hall with respect to the following. Regarding a sword, knife, dagger, spear, hand-saw, and a scythe — at what stage of their manufacture can they become ritually unclean? At the time of the completion of the production. And when is their production complete? Rabbi Yochanan says: When they are tempered in a furnace. Resh Lakish says: "When they have been polished with water. Said Rabbi Yochanan to Resh Lakish: "A robber understands the tools of his trade." Resh Lakish replied: "And how have you benefited me? There [as a robber] I was called Master, and here [as a Torah scholar] I am called Master." Rabbi Yochanan said: "I benefitted you by bringing you under the wings of the Divine Presence." Rabbi Yochanan therefore felt himself deeply hurt. As a result of which Resh Lakish became seriously ill. Rabbi Yochanan's sister [the wife of Resh Lakish] came and pleaded before him to pray for his recovery. She said: "Forgive him for the sake of my son" Rabbi Yochanan replied quoting a verse (Jeremiah 49:11): "Leave your orphans, I will sustain them." She said to him: "For the sake of my widowhood then!" Rabbi Yochanan replied (with the end of the same verse): "your widows can depend in me." Resh Lakish died, and R. Yochanan was plunged into deep grief. The Rabbis said: "Who shall go to bring comfort to his mind? Let R. Elazar b. Pedas go since his scholarship is sharp-minded." So Rabbi Elazar went and sat before Rabbi Yochanan. For every statement uttered by R. Yochanan, Rabbi Elazar observed: "There is a Baraitha which supports you." Rabbi Yochanan eventually said in frustration: "Are you like the son of Lakisha [i.e., Resh Lakish]? When I stated a law, the son of Lakisha used to raise twenty-four objections, to which I gave twenty-four answers, which consequently led to a fuller comprehension of the law. You, however, say, 'A Baraitha has been taught which supports you.' Do I not already know that I have spoken well?'" Thus he went on rending his garments and weeping: "Where are you, O son of Lakisha, where are you, O son of Lakisha" He screamed thus until he became insane. Thereupon the Rabbis prayed for mercy for him, and he died (Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia 84a; Based on translation of Soncino and ArtScroll).

The style of arguing which is very popular in the Talmud, i.e., where one's debating partner tries to refute him rather than support him, is reminiscent of adversarial collaboration made famous by Daniel Kahneman. With adversarial collaboration, the goal is to discover the truth, not win the argument (Kahneman, 2012). Adversarial collaboration involves bringing together two researchers who disagree and having them conduct an experiment jointly (there may be a third person serving as an arbiter); this often results in better research and new hypotheses that can be tested (Matzke et al., 2013). A key advantage of adversarial collaboration is that it may eliminate confirmation bias where a researcher may unconsciously or consciously design an experiment in such a way so as to provide support for his/her position (Matzke et al., 2013).

This story in the Talmud shows that this system can result in a negative outcome. Rabbi Yochanan may have been too sarcastic in his comment alluding to Resh Lakish's past (this is actually prohibited by Jewish law). Rabbi Yochanan says in the name of Rabbi Shimon b. Yochais that "The wrong you do by means of words [hurting someone's feelings] is worse than monetary wrongs" (Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia 58b). The reason given is that monetary wrongs are subject to restitution, verbal wrongs cannot be "returned."

Rabbi Yochanan's remark caused Resh Lakish to make a remark that hints at blasphemy and demeans his makeover from robber to scholar. Many commentaries believe that Rabbi Yochanan was not being sarcastic and insulting but was actually admitting that Resh Lakish was right and was not insulting him (Rabbi Chananel, Etz Yosef). This explanation is difficult to accept since he did call him a "robber." Even a remark indicating that he was a "robber" in the past would have been wrong. Resh Lakish's remark also seems surprising from one so pious. One opinion is that Rabbi Yochanan misunderstood what he said (Etz Yosef). Blau (2016) asserts the following about this story:

Rabbi Yochanan instructs us that the ideal chavruta [study partner] is not the person who quickly endorses everything his study partner says. On the contrary! The ideal chavruta challenges one's ideas. This process generates growth in learning. We should add that the same principle applies to other forms of friendship as well. Instead of looking for the friends who will always agree with us, we should seek out those willing to tell us when they think we err on intellectual, ethical or religious grounds. Assuming that the preceding idea reflects the essential theme of the story, we can now understand the harsh exchange. If the ideal study partnership involves argument, then the constant danger lurks that such argument will get out of hand. In the heat of verbal battle, people will say things that they will later regret but can no longer take back. Thus, the very strength of the Rabbi Yochanan - Reish Lakish partnership was the source of its downfall, as they temporarily lost themselves in the passion of Talmudic debate (Blau, n.d.).

Another possibility is that the Talmud is teaching us about the dangers of not being careful what is said in the heat of a scholarly debate. Rabbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish were both known to be sages who believed that one was not supposed to "fill his mouth with levity in this world" (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 31a). These sages felt that humor was not appropriate after the destruction of the Temple and people should not be happy until the Messiah came. These two never laughed and were extremely serious individuals. Needless to say, many sages disagreed with this point of view. Rabbi Yirmiyah, for example, was a sage known to ask humorous questions (Babylonian Talmud, Niddah 23a). He was always trying to get his teacher, Rabbi Zera (another scholar who did not believe in laughter), to laugh. It is obvious that Resh Lakish did not regret becoming a good person. He probably also tried to be sarcastic. Unfortunately, neither he nor Rabbi Yochanan believed in humor in this world and took things very seriously. Thus, it is easy to see why Rabbi Yochanan made the mistake of thinking that Resh Lakish was serious about there being no difference between a pious and dissolute life. This wordplay on "master" may have been the only joke Resh Lakish made as a scholar. If you are going to believe in adversarial collaboration, it is good to have a sense of humor. Finally, the assumption when reading the story is that Resh Lakish was being punished. Perhaps his allotted time on this planet was up and he was going to die anyway. He lived about 75 years (c. 200 CE to c. 275 CE). The person being punished could very well have been Rabbi Yochanan himself.
Ilfa and Rabbi Yochanan

Ilfa and R. Yochanan studied together the Torah and they found themselves in dire financial straits and said one to the other, "Let us go and engage in business so that of us may be fulfilled the verse (Deuteronomy 15:4), 'However, may there be no destitute among you.'" They went and sat down under a dilapidated wall and while they were having their meal two ministering angels came. Rabbi Yochanan overheard one saying to the other: "Let us topple this wall upon these people and kill them, because they forsake eternal life and occupy themselves with the concerns of temporal life." The other angel replied: "Leave them alone because one of them his time has come and he still has much to achieve." R. Yochanan heard this but Ilfa did not. Whereupon R. Yochanan said to Ilfa: "Master, have you heard anything?" Ilfa replied: "No." Thereupon R. Yochanan said to himself: "Seeing that I heard this and Ilfa did not, it is evident that I am the one who still has much to achieve. R. Yochanan then said to Ilfa: "I will go back, so that of me may be fulfilled (Deuteronomy 15:11), 'For the poor shall never cease out of the land.'" Thereupon R. Yochanan went back but Ilfa did not return. When at last Ilfa returned, R. Yochanan was already presiding over the academy, and the scholars said to Ilfa: "Had you remained here and studied the Torah the other master would not have been selected and you would have been appointed in his place." Ilfa then suspended himself from the mast of a ship and exclaimed: "If there is anyone who will ask me a question from the Baraithas of Rabbi Chiya and R. Oshiyah and I fail to elucidate it from the Mishnah, I will throw myself from the mast and drown. An old man came forward and cited the following Baraitha: If a man in his last will and testament declares: "Give a shekel weekly to my sons, but actually they needed a sela [one sela equals two shekels], then they should be given a sela'; but if he declared, Give them a shekel only, then they should be given a shekel. If, however, he declared, On their death others should inherit their allowance in their stead, then whether he has declared 'give' or 'give only' they are given only a shekel." Ilfa replied: "This is in accordance with the view of Rabbi Meir who said: "It is a duty to carry out the will of a dying man." (Babylonian Talmud, Taanis 21a; based on translation of Soncino and ArtScroll).

The Mishna is more authoritative and was redacted by Rebbi. The baraisas, also the statements of Tannaim, were redacted by Rabbi Chiya and Rabbi Oshiyah.

Ilfa was trying to prove that even though he left the academy to embark on a career in business, his knowledge was still intact. Needless to say, people came and asked him questions. Rabbi Yochanan was a disciple of Rabbi Shimon b. Yochai who stated: "If a man plows at the time of plowing, sows at the time of sowing, harvests at the time of harvesting, threshes at the time of threshing, and winnows at the time of the blowing wind, what will become of the study of Torah? (Babylonian Talmud, Berachos 35b). His teacher lived in a cave for thirteen years.

To understand this story it is important to note that ilfa means ship in Aramaic. Ilfa was not going to commit suicide. The "old man" in the story would not have asked questions had he known that the sage was ready to die if he could not answer them. Ilfa was demonstrating that his approach combining Torah with a livelihood (Torah im Derech Eretz) did not affect his knowledge. Had someone been able to ask him a question that he could not answer, he would have jumped off the mast, i.e., abandon his business and "drowned himself" in the sea of Torah learning (Kornfeld, n.d.). A question that everyone asks is why did Ilfa not hear the angels talking. He was as great or even greater in knowledge than Rabbi Yochanan. One possible answer is that the angels knew that Ilfa would succeed in business and it would not affect his knowledge. Not everyone is capable of becoming a businessperson and finding time to study. In any case, the story ended well for both of them. Rabbi Yochanan found success heading the academy and Ilfa was a successful businessperson. Rabbi Yochanan's name is mentioned countless times in the Talmud; Ilfa is barely mentioned at all.

Another important point in the story is that the angels remark -- "Leave them alone because one of them his time has come and he still has much to achieve." – did not indicate which of the two would find success in the academy. It is quite possible that the message was for both of them, but only one really "listened."

Cohen (2016) has the following to say about this story:

From the Talmudic narrative, the message to R' Yochanan seemed crystal clear; but when we are in the driver's seat, too often we avoid the handwriting on the wall and come up with alternative understandings. And what about Ilfa – why didn't he hear the angels' conversation? Maybe he just wasn't listening hard enough; maybe he was already so invested in their new road venture, the spiritual 'reception' afforded R' Yochanan was not made available to him. In fact, when Ilfa saw that R' Yochanan had changed his mind and was going to return to Yeshiva (despite not having heard the 'message' directly), he also could have resolved to return together with his friend – but he did not. Conversely, maybe R' Yochanan was already thinking that this trip didn't sit well with him (despite their poverty), and he was listening just a little bit harder for a heavenly message that would lend him insight as to which path to follow.
Rabbi Shimon ben Chalafta and the Meat from Heaven

Rabbi Shimon b. Chalafta was walking on the path when he encountered lions. They roared at him. He quoted the verse (Psalms 104:21), "The young lions roar for their prey," and two pieces of meat miraculously fell from heaven. The lions ate one of the pieces and left over the other piece. Rabbi Shimon took the piece of meat to the academy and asked whether it was clean or unclean [i.e., is it kosher and allowed to be eaten]. He was told: Nothing unkosher descends from heaven. Rabbi Zera asked Rabbi Avuhu: "If a piece of meat resembling a donkey [an unkosher animal] falls from heaven, may it be eaten?" Rabbi Avuhu replied: "Foolish yarod [a desert bird possibly related to an ostrich], they already told you that nothing unkosher descends from heaven" (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 59b).

Rabbi Zera did not believe in laughing in this world since he was of the opinion that one should not laugh until the Messiah comes and creates a world of peace and justice. He, therefore, must have been serious when asking the following question. In the next story, we will see what happens when Rabbi Zera attempts to purchase meat from a nasty butcher.
Rabbi Zera and the Nasty Butcher

Rabbi Zera came to Israel and he went to a bloodletter to be bled. Afterwards, he went to a butcher to purchase a litra [approximately a pound] of meat. He asked the butcher: "How much for the litra of meat?" The butcher said: "Fifty coins and one blow from an iron bar" [the butcher probably did not like Babylonians]. Rabbi Zera said: "Take sixty coins and do not strike me." The butcher refused. Rabbi Zera said: "Take seventy and do not strike me." He still refused. Take eighty, Take ninety, until Rabbi Zera reached one hundred, but the butcher continued to refuse. Finally, Rabbi Zera said: "Do what is your custom."

That evening, Rabbi Zera went to the academy. He said to the rabbis: "What an evil custom you have here in Israel that you do not let a person eat a litra of meat until you strike him one blow." They said to him: "What are you talking about? Who told you this?" He said: "so-and-so the butcher." They sent for the butcher and were going to punish him, but found that his coffin was already being taken out with the butcher's corpse inside. The rabbis said to Rabbi Zera: "Did you get so angry at him that you caused him to be punished so severely [by God]?" Rabbi Zera said: "May the same fate befall me if I asked for his punishment. I was not even angry at him. I thought that this was actually your custom here in Israel" (Jerusalem Talmud, Berachos 2:8).

Rabbi Zera was a very unattractive person and originally came from Babylonia. This butcher apparently did not like Babylonians and wanted to play a nasty joke on Rabbi Zera. The lesson is obvious: Mean-spirited jokes can boomerang. As noted earlier, Rabbi Zera did not believe in laughing. If he had a sense of humor, he might have realized that the butcher was a vicious person and was playing a barbaric joke on him. He would have left the store and gone elsewhere.
A Nasty Remark that Boomeranged: "Your Neck is Loose"

When Rabbi Yassa [Rabbi Assi] came to Israel, he went to the barber. Afterwards, He went to the baths of Tiberias, when a scorner approached him and gave him a blow on the neck saying: Your neck is loose and has to be tightened. An official happened to be nearby and was interrogating a robber and asking him who was his accomplice. He looked up and noticed that the scorner was laughing at him. The robber said: This one, who is laughing at me was my accomplice. The scorner was taken and interrogated. He confessed to having once killed someone. The two were taken away to be hanged and each of them was carrying a beam [that was going to be used to hang them]. Meanwhile, Rabbi Yassa emerged from the bathhouse. The scorner said to Rabbi Yassa: My neck which was loose will now become tightened. Rabbi Yassa said to him: Your luck is bad. Did you not know that it is written (Isaiah 28:22): "And now do not scorn, lest your bonds become strong" (Jerusalem Talmud, Berachos 2:8).

Another story to illustrate the dangers of being a nasty joker and also how one's own words can come back and haunt one's self. Many of the sages appreciated humor but were against disparaging remarks meant to hurt others.
Shrouds of Rabbi Yannai

My sons, do not bury me in white shrouds or black shrouds. White, because I may not merit [being with the righteous in Paradise]and I will be as a groom among mourners. Black, because I may merit and I will be as a mourner among grooms. Rather, bury me in olayrin [a gray robe]. (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbos 114b)

Rabbi Yannai's request of his sons is quite funny and indicates that Rabbi Yannai, besides being quite humble, had a good sense of humor.
Proper Thanks for Public Service

Rabbi Elazar was the charity administrator. Once he came home and asked his family: "What did you do today while I was out?" They said: "A group of people came and they ate, drank, and offered prayers on your behalf." Rabbi Elazar said: "This is not the proper thanks for me." On another occasion, he came to the house and asked: "What did you do today?" They said: "A group of people came and they ate, drank, and cursed you out." He said: "This is the proper thanks for me" (Jerusalem Talmud, Peah 8:6).

One should not expect to be thanked for community work, on the contrary, you are not doing your job well if you are not being insulted.
The Wit of Rabbi Yirmiyah: Trying to Get his Teacher to Laugh

The following is an example of one of the absurd questions asked by Rabbi Yirmiyah in his attempt to get his teacher to laugh.

Rabbi Yirmiyah asked Rabbi Zera: "According to Rabbi Meir, who says that if a woman aborts a fetus that looks like an animal it is considered a valid abortion [and the woman becomes ritually unclean just as if she had aborted a human], what is the law if the father receives for the "animal" born from a woman a token of betrothal. Is the person considered married to the "animal?" ...To such an extent did Rabbi Yirmiyah try to make Rabbi Zera laugh, but he would not laugh (Babylonian Talmud, Niddah 23a).

The Talmud states that this is clearly an absurd question because it is impossible for an animal-like fetus born to a human being to survive. Rabbi Yirmiyah was temporarily expelled from the academy for one of his questions (Babylonian Talmud, Bava Bathra 23b). He was reinstated when his colleagues became aware of his great humility after sending him a difficult question. Many of the sages believed that laughter that was not used to mock was good for the soul.
Be Careful What you Wish For: Rabbi Mani

Rabbi Mani used to attend the lectures of Rabbi Yitzchak b. Eliashav. Rabbi Mani said to him: "The wealthy members of my father-in-law's house are harassing me." He said: "Let them become poor" [this would make them humble and they would stop bothering Rabbi Mani]; and they became poor. Subsequently, Rabbi Mani complained that they were now bothering him to support them. Rabbi Yitzchak said: "Let them become rich"; and they became rich.

Rabbi Mani once complained that his wife was not becoming to him anymore. Rabbi Yitzchak asked him for her name. Rabbi Mani said that her name was Chana. Rabbi Yitzchak then said: "Let Chana become beautiful"; and she became beautiful. Rabbi Mani then said that his wife was now acting too haughty and scornful towards him because of her beauty. Rabbi Yitzchak said, if that is so, "Let her become ugly again"; and she reverted to her former ugliness (Babylonian Talmud, Taanis 23b; based on translation of ArtScroll)

This story illustrates the idea of "Be careful what you wish for..." Many of the things we desire and even pray for can harm us.
Strange Way to Worship an Idol: Story of Sabta of Allas

Sabta of Allas once rented his donkey to a heathen woman. When they reached the idol Baal Peor, she said to Sabta: "Wait until I enter and come out." When she returned, he told her to wait until he had a chance to enter and leave. She said to Sabta: "But are you not a Jew?" He replied: "What does it matter to you?" He entered, defecated on the idol's face, and wiped himself on the idol's nose. The idol's attendants seeing this praised him saying: "No man has ever served this idol in such a manner" (Babylonian Talmud, Sanhedrin 64a).

The Talmud concludes that even if one's intention is to disgrace Baal Peor by defecating before it, he has actually worshipped it. Thus, Sabta, who was trying to make fun of the idol inadvertently ended up "worshipping" the idol. The point of this story is to show how ludicrous paganism can be. It is easy to laugh at the pagans in the above story. However, the sages also saw the absurdity of a life built on temporal pleasures as opposed to spirituality.
Destructive Arguing: Torah Scroll Torn in Heat of Argument

This story demonstrates what can happen when arguing gets out of hand. Rabbi Yochanan of the previous story was told not to be upset that Rabbi Elazar b. Pedas stated something he said without reporting it in his name. He was told the story about what happened at the Synagogue of Tiberias so that he could see the effect of taking umbrage against his student, Rabbi Elazar b. Pedas.

Did it not happen at the Synagogue of Tiberias that Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Yosi argued so heatedly [regarding a door bolt which has on its top a fastening contrivance which may also be used as a pestle, whether it can be used on the Sabbath] that they tore a Torah scroll in their anger? The Talmud exclaims: "They tore? Could this be imagined! Say rather that a Torah scroll was accidentally torn in their anger. Rabbi Yosi ben Kisma was present when this happened and declared: "I wonder if this synagogue will not become a house of idolatry" [because such strife was allowed to take place], and this is what happened (Babylonian Talmud, Yebamoth 96b; based on translation by Soncino).

Rabbi Yochanan got even more upset since he felt that the situation was not the same as Rabbi Elazar b. Pedas was not his colleague (Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Yosi ben Chalafta in the story above were colleagues and lived in the 2nd century CE. Both were disciples of Rabbi Akiva), but his student. Students should always provide proper attribution when conveying a statement made by a teacher. In fact, attributions to the source should even be made after the death of the scholar making the statement. Rabbi Yochanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon b. Yochai that "The lips of a deceased scholar in whose name a traditional statement is reported in this world, move gently in the grave" (Babylonian Talmud, Yevamos 97a). This is probably a poetic way of describing the joy a teacher has when his students quote him after death. By quoting a teacher, his legacy lives on (Bieler, 2016).

It is amazing that the punishment for such heated arguing is that a synagogue becomes a house of idolatry. This may be a way to warn scholars that this kind of arguing in the name of God's law is exactly what God does not want. As we all know the ugliest wars are often religious wars based on slight differences. Indeed, Rabbi Yirmiyah said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish: "When two scholars are amiable to each other in their debating of Jewish law, the Holy One, blessed be He, listens to them (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbos 63a). God is with them because they are pleasant to each other. Note that this statement was made by Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish who did not do well in his debate with Rabbi Yochanan regarding weapons.
Learning About Respect for Parents from Dama ben Nesinah

The fifth of the Ten Commandments is "Honor thy father and thy mother." The Talmud discusses what this entails.

R. Eliezer was asked: "How far does the precept of honoring one's parents extend?" He answered: Go forth and see what a certain idolator, Dama son of Nesinah by name, did for his father in Ashkelon. The Sages sought jewels for the ephod, at a profit of six hundred thousand gold dinars — R. Kahana taught that the potential profit was eight hundred thousand gold dinars — but as the key to the chest that contained the precious stones was lying under his father's pillow and his father was sleeping, he did not disturb him. The following year the Holy One, blessed be He, gave Dama his reward. A red heifer was born to him in his herd. When the Sages of Israel went to him to buy it, Dama said to them, "I know you, that even if I would ask you for all the money in the world you would give it to me. But I ask of you only the money which I lost through my father's honor." (Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 31a; based on translations of Soncino and ArtScroll).

The ephod was a garment worn by the Kohen Gadol (High Priest) at the time of the Temple (Exodus 28:6-12). The Parah Adumah (red heifer) is a cow that is completely red and very rare; two black hairs and it could not be used (Numbers 19: 1-22). It was needed for purifying people who had become ritually impure because of contact with a corpse. It is interesting that the Talmud uses an idolator as an exemplar of the precept of honoring one's parents. Moreover, he lived at a time when the Temple still existed (it was destroyed in 70 CE). The Talmud had enough examples of Jews who lived in that time period who went to extraordinary lengths to show respect for parents. There is another lesson in this story about business ethics. Dama did not want to take advantage of the Jews who desperately needed a red heifer.
Rabban Gamliel and Proclos in the Bathhouse of Aphrodite

Proclos, son of Philosophos, asked Rabban Gamliel in Acco while he was bathing in the bathhouse of Aphrodite the following: "It is written in your Torah (Deuteronomy 13: 18), 'Nothing that has been declared taboo should cleave to your hands.' Why are you then bathing in the bathhouse of Aphrodite?" Rabbi Gamliel replied that it is forbidden to answer in a bathhouse [i.e., one is not permitted to speak Torah in an impure place such as a bathhouse or bathroom]. When he came out he answered: "I did not come into her [i.e., Aphrodites'] boundary, she came into my boundary. People do not say let us make a bathhouse as an adornment for Aphrodite but say let us make Aphrodite an adornment for the bathhouse. Furthermore, even if you were given much money, you would not appear before your idol naked and having experienced a nocturnal emission; neither would you urinate before it. This one stands by a gutter and all urinate before it. It says in the Torah 'their Gods,' that which is treated as a God is prohibited, that which is not treated as a God is permitted" (Babylonian Talmud, Avodah Zarah 44b).

Rabban Gamliel provides good proof that the statue of Aphrodite in the bathhouse was not worshipped as a goddess. Otherwise, Rabbi Gamliel would not have been allowed to be there. Rabban Gamliel II (also known as Gamliel of Yavneh) and was known to have debates with heretics. Many of the commentaries believe that Proclos was non-Jewish philosopher who wanted to needle Rabban Gamliel.
Rabban Gamliel Describes Future in Messianic Times

Rabban Gamliel sat and lectured: "In the future, women will give birth every day, as it says (Jeremiah 31: 7), 'the woman who has conceived and the woman who has given birth together.'" A certain student sneered at this and said it is written (Ecclesiastes 1:9), 'There is nothing new under the sun.'" Rabban Gamliel responded: "Come and I will show you something similar in this world." He went out and showed him a chicken [which lays eggs every day]. On a different occasion, Rabban Gamliel sat and lectured: "In the future, trees will produce fruit every day, as it says (Ezekiel 17: 23), 'And it will bring forth branches and produce fruit,' just as the branches are there every day, so too will the fruit be there every day." A certain student sneered at this and said, 'There is nothing new under the sun.' Rabban Gamliel responded: "Come and I will show you something similar in this world. He went out and showed him a caper bush [which produces three different kinds of fruit- -Rashi]." On a different occasion, Rabban Gamliel sat and lectured: "In the future, the Land of Israel will bring forth loaves and clothing of fine wool, as it says (Psalms 72: 16), 'There will be an abundance of corn in the land' [the Hebrew word pis is similar to the Hebrew word which means woolen coat- - Rashi]." A certain student sneered at this and said, 'There is nothing new under the sun.' Rabban Gamliel responded: "Come and I will show you something similar in this world." He went out and showed him mushrooms and truffles, and for the woolen clothing he showed him the outside of the palm tree (Babylonian Talmud, Shabbos 30b).

This story is cited in order to prove the point that when it comes to matters of learning one should allow discussion, even if the question seems foolish. The verse (Proverbs 26: 4), "Do not answer a fool according to his folly" refers to general matters. For example, when an evil person told Rebbi: "your wife is my wife and your children are my children." Regarding Torah matters, it is written (Proverbs 26: 5), "Answer a fool according to his folly (or skepticism)."

The future that Rabban Gamliel is referring to is probably Messianic times. Shmuel's opinion regarding Messianic times is: "There is no difference between this world and the days of the Messiah except for subjugation by foreign kingdoms (Babylonain Talmud, Berachos 34b). It is quite possible that technology will make much of the above possible. In any case, Rabban Gamliel demonstrated a great deal of patience as a lecturer.
How to Serve Guests: Rabban Gamliel Acting as Waiter at his Son's Wedding

Hospitality to strangers is a core value of the Abrahamic religions. The Torah describes how Abraham personally served three strangers who later turn out to be Ministering Angels (Genesis 18). In this story, we see how Rabban Gamliel II, Nasi (President) of the Sanhedrin, acted at the wedding feast of his son.

It once happened that Rabbi Eliezer, Rabbi Yehoshua, and Rabbi Tzadok were reclining [in ancient times, people reclined on a couch while eating] at the wedding feast of Rabban Gamliel's son, while Rabban Gamliel was standing over them and serving drink. Rabban Gamliel offered a cup to R. Eliezer, but he did not accept it; but when he offered it to R. Yehoshua, he did. Said R. Eliezer to R. Yehoshua: "What is this, Yehoshua: we are sitting, while Rabban Gamaliel is standing over us and serving drink!" Rabbi Yehoshua replied: "We find that someone even greater than Rabban Gamliel served others at a meal. Abraham was the greatest man of his age, yet it is written of him (Genesis 18:8), 'and he stood over them' [the three guests] while they ate. And should you say that they appeared to him as Ministering Angels, they appeared to him only as Arabs. Therfore, shall not the eminent R. Gamliel stand over us and serve drink!" Said R. Zadok to them: "How long will you disregard the honor of the Omnipresent and occupy yourselves with the honor of men! The Holy One, blessed be He, causes the winds to blow, the clouds to ascend, the rain to fall, the ground to sprout with vegetation, and sets a table before every single person; and we should not allow the eminent R. Gamaliel to stand over us and serve drink'?" (Babylonian Talmud, Kiddushin 32b; based on translation by Soncino and ArtScroll).

This is a story of Gamliel II who headed the Sanhedrin after the destruction of the Temple. He was also known as Gamliel of Yavneh. The Sanhedrin had to relocate to the city of Yavneh since the Temple was destroyed. He showed great modesty here in serving his guests. He also asked that he be buried in the simplest shrouds made of linen so others would do the same rather than going into debt (many abandoned the corpse because of the great expense) to bury the deceased in expensive garments (Babylonian Talmud, Kethubos 8b). The custom today is to keep funerals simple and use the simplest pine box.

However, Rabban Gamliel II was somewhat controversial and excommunicated his brother-in-law, Rabbi Eliezer [ben Hyrkanos] during the famous Oven of Akhnai incident described above. He also shamed Rabbi Yehoshua in a dispute about the calendar. There was a disagreement between the two about the exact date of Yom Kippur. He made Rabbi Yehoshua show up with his staff and money purse on the day he claimed was Yom Kippur. This was done to establish the authority of the Nasi (Babylonian Talmud, Rosh Hashana 25a). In fact, when R. Gamliel saw R. Yehoshua he rose and kissed him on the head saying: "Come in peace my master and my disciple; my master in wisdom and my disciple because you have accepted my decision." Rabban Gamliel did not purposely set out to humiliate Rabbi Yehoshua; this was about the principle of obeying majority rule.

There was another incident involving the evening prayer (Maariv) and whether it was mandatory. Rabban Gamliel humiliated Rabbi Yehoshua and was therefore deposed from his position as Nasi. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah was installed as the new Nasi. There was a reconciliation between Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabban Gamliel and it was decided to rotate the job with Rabbi Elazar serving as Nasi every third week (Babylonain Talmud, Berachot 27b-28a).

The above story demonstrates that Rabban Gamliel had great humility in his everyday life but took a tough position when it came to following the majority. The majority had to be followed whether it was right or wrong in order to avoid total anarchy. Even Rabbi Yehoshua in the story of the Oven of Akhnai "stands and insists that the majority must be followed; it was a lesson which he himself had learned in his conflict with Rabban Gamliel" (Kahn, 2001).
Concluding Remarks

The Talmud uses many techniques to teach ethics and other valuable lessons; storytelling is one of them. These stories involved God, Biblical figures such as Abraham and Moses, Satan, animals, and nature. What mattered to the Talmudic sages was the lesson to be learned. There are many more stories in the Talmud. Those interested in reading additional stories, should read The Book of Legends: Sefer Ha-Aggadah by Bialik & Ravnitzky. The most important lesson to be derived from the Talmudic stories is that humankind has an obligation to take care of the weak and improve the world. This is the only way to have a meaningful existence. The Talmudic stories are designed to teach us to hear "the silent cry of the afflicted, the lonely and marginal, the poor, the sick and the disempowered, and to respond." (Sacks, 2005:83). If the Talmud only consisted of halachah (Jewish law), it would not have the ability to stir the heart; this is why there is so much aggadah (homiletics). The following story is a clever way of describing the difference between the two approaches of teaching morality.

Rabbi Avuhu and Rabbi Chiya b. Abba once came to a place. Rabbi Avuhu gave an aggadic [homiletics] sermon and Rabbi Chiya b. Abba gave a halachic sermon. Everyone left Rabbi Chiya to hear Rabbi Avuhu's lecture. Rabbi Chiya felt hurt. Rabbi AvBavauhu said to him: "I will give you a parable to describe what this situation is like. There were two salespeople: One was selling precious stones and the other was selling trinkets. To whom will the public flock? Obviously, to the seller of the trinkets?" (Babylonian Talmud, Sotah 40a)

It is true that more people shop at Macys than at Tiffany & Co. What the humble Rabbi Avuhu did not say was that aggadah not only attracts bigger crowds, it also has the ability to sway people. Nothing moves the soul more than a powerful story. Rabbi Avuhu was such a master of homiletics that he used a parable to mollify his friend.

Many of the scholars were experts in halachah and others in aggadah. Some, such as Rabbi Meir, were proficient in both. This story illustrates the problems of one sage who had to teach both.

Rabbi Ammi and Rabbi Assi sat before Rabbi Yitzchak Naphcha. One asked him to speak on halachah and the other asked him to speak on aggadah. When he started to discuss halachah, one did not let him continue and when he started to discuss aggadah, the other did not let him continue. Rabbi Yitzchak Naphcha told them: "I will give you a parable to describe what my situation is like. It is like that of the man with two wives: one young and one old." The young wife plucked out his gray hairs to make him look younger and the old wife plucked out his black hairs to make him look older. Eventually, the man became bald. (Babylonian Talmud, Bava Kama 60b)

XXX

Thank you for reading our book. If you enjoyed it, won't you please take a moment to leave a review at your favorite retailer?

Thanks!

### References

Adler, W. D. & Friedman, H. H. (2016). Administrative leader as hero: Yochanan ben Zakkai and the rebuilding of post- Temple Jewish organizational structure, Management & Organizational History, DOI: 10.1080/17449359.2016.1141691

Ahuvia, D. (2015). Jewish queens: From the Story of Esther to the history of Shelamzion. TheTorah.com. Retrieved from http://thetorah.com/jewish-queens-from-the-story-of-esther-to-the-history-of-shelamzion/

Barnavi, E. (Ed.). (1992). A historical atlas of the Jewish people. New York: Schocken Books.

Bell, R. (2014, Spring). A bride for one night: Talmudic tales. [Review of the book A Bride for One Night: Talmudic Tales, by R. Calderon]. JOFA Journal, 12(1), 30.

Ben-Sasson, H. H. (1976). A history of the Jewish people. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Berger, M. (2016). Rabbi Meir: His teaching and learning style. TorahFountain.com. Retrieved from http://www.torahfountain.com/talmud/educational-values-in-the-talmud/46-rabbi-meir-unedited.html

Berkovits, E. (2002). A Jewish sexual ethics. In Hazon, D. (Ed.), Essential essays on Judaism (103-128). Jerusalem: Shalem Center. Available at http://www.divreinavon.com/shiurim/BerkovitsOnMenachotMD1.pdf

Bialik, H. N. & Ravnitzky, Y. H. (Eds.) (1992). The book of legends: Sefer Ha-aggadah. New York: Schocken Books.

Bieler, D. (2016). Creative solutions to educational challenges: Educational units based on Rav Aharon Lichtenstein's published essays. Virtual Beit Midrash. Retrieved from http://ftp.vbm-torah.org/en/creative-solutions-educational-challenges-educational-units-based-rav-aharon-lichtensteins-published

Billington, C. E. (2007). Goliath and the Exodus giants: how tall were they? Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 50(3), 489-508.

Blau, Y. (n.d.). Torah and seeing ugliness. Yeshivat Har Etzion. Retrieved from http://etzion.org.il/vbm/english/archive/aggada/05aggada.htm

Blau, Y. (2016). Shiur #5: The ideal chavruta (study partner). Yeshivat Har Etzion. Retrieved from http://etzion.org.il/vbm/english/archive/aggada66/05aggada.htm

Brawer, R. A. (1998). Fictions of business: insights on management from great literature. New York: John Wiley.

Brooks, D. (2014, September 9). Becoming a real person. New York Times, A29.

Calderon, R. (2014). A bride for one night: Talmud tales. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press

Chajes, Z. H. (2005). The student's guide through the Talmud. Translated by Jacob Schachter. New York: Yashar Books.

Cohen, A (2016, January 28). Parshas Yisro ¬ Listening to your messages – and acting upon them. Baltimore Jewish Life. Retrieved from http://baltimorejewishlife.com/torah/print.php?ARTICLE_ID=69891

Cook, J. G. (2014). Crucifixion in the Mediterranean world. Tubingen, Germany: Mohr Siebeck.

Diamond, J. A. (2007). King David of the Sages: Rabbinic rehabilitation or ironic parody? Prooftexts, 27, 273-426.

Eisen, C. (2007). Maharal's Be'er ha-Golah and his revolution in aggadic scholarship — in their context and on his terms. Hakirah, 4, Winter, 137-193.

Eisenstein, J. D. (Editor) (1935). Ozar Yisrael: An encyclopedia of all matters concerning Jews and Judaism. Jerusalem: Shiloh

Falk, H. (1985). Jesus the Pharisee. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.

Feintuch, Y. (n.d.). Shiur #17: Disguise and disaster – The story of R. Chiya b. Ashi and his wife. Virtual Beit Midrash. Retrieved from http://etzion.org.il/en/shiur-17-disguise-and-disaster-%E2%80%93-story-r-chiya-b-ashi-and-his-wife

Fischer, D. & Friedman, H. H.(2015, August 20). Make yourself indispensable: Skills employers desperately need to succeed in the knowledge economy. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2648691 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2648691

Fish, I. S. (2010, December 29). In China, pushing the Talmud as a business guide. Newsweek. Retrieved from http://www.newsweek.com/china-pushing-talmud-business-guide-69075

Frand, Y. (2007). The connection between the chapters of sotah and nazir. Torah.org. Retrieved from http://www.torah.org/learning/ravfrand/5770/naso.html#

Friedman, H. H. (2015, June 2). 'Let justice pierce the mountain': Morality, ethics, and law in the Talmud. SSRN. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2613759 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2613759

Friedman, H. H. (2014, July 27). The art of constructive arguing: Lessons from the Talmud. SSRN. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2472735 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2472735

Friedman, H. H. (2012). The Talmud as a business guide. Multidisciplinary Journal for Applied Ethics, 1(1), 38-48. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2134472

Friedman, H. H. (2004). Talmudic humor and the establishment of legal principles: Strange questions, impossible scenarios, and legalistic brainteasers. Thalia: Studies in Literary Humor, 21, 14-28. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2236456

Friedman, H. H., Birnbaum, T. H. & Gloger, M. F. (2014, March 9). One hundred quintillion ways to say thanks: A Jewish perspective on happiness and gratitude. SSRN.com. Available at SSRN:http://ssrn.com/abstract=2406651 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2406651

Friedman, H. H. & Fischer, D. (2014). Learning about leadership, trust and benevolence from Ethics of the Fathers (Avos). Journal of Religion and Business Ethics, 3(1), Article 8. Available at: http://via.library.depaul.edu/jrbe/vol3/iss1/8

Friedman, H. H. & Lipman, S. (1999). Satan the accuser: Trickster in Talmudic and Midrashic Literature. Thalia: Studies in Literary Humor, 18, March, 31-41.

Friedman, H. H. and Lynch, J. A. and Herskovitz, P. J. (2013, March 1). Using a comprehensive multi-modal approach to teach values and ethics. SS International Journal of Business and Management Research. 3(2), 124-143. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2395634

Friedman, H. H. & Weisel, A. C. (2013, August 28). Should moral individuals ever lie? Insights from Jewish law Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2317563 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2317563. Originally published in JLAW.com.

Gallo, C. (2016). The storyteller's secret. New York: St. Martin's Press.

Gould, E. (2015, May 19 ). Poor people work: A majority of poor people who can work do. Economic Policy Institute. Retrieved from http://www.epi.org/publication/poor-people-work-a-majority-of-poor-people-who-can-work-do/

Hyman, A. (1987). Toldoth Tannaim ve'Amoraim. In Hebrew. Jerusalem, Israel: Machon Pri Ha'aretz.

Jewish Virtual Library (2016). Hasidim and mitnagdim. Retrieved from https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/hasidim_&_mitnagdim.html

Kahn, A. (2001, August 18). From left to right. Aish.com. Retrieved from http://www.aish.com/tp/i/moha/48915687.html

Kahn, A. (2009, September 9). A scholar gone astray. Aish.com. Retrieved from http://www.aish.com/tp/i/moha/57606397.html

Kahneman, D. (2012). The human side of decision making: Thinking things through with Daniel Kahneman. Journal of Investment Consulting, 13(1), 5-14.

Kelman, J. (2015, October 13). Rav Meir's legacy. Torah in Motion. Retrieved from http://www.torahinmotion.org/discussions-and-blogs/rav-meirs-legacy-nazir-49

Kelman, J. (2014, September 29). Acher, please return. Torah in Motion. Retrieved from http://www.torahinmotion.org/discussions-and-blogs/chagigah-14-acher-please-return

Kelso, R. R. (1994). Styles of Constitutional interpretation and the four main approaches to Constitutional interpretation in American legal history, Valparaiso University Law Review , 29 (1,2), 121-233. Available at: http://scholar.valpo.edu/vulr/vol29/iss1/2

Kennedy, E.J. & Lawton, L. (1992). Business ethics in fiction. Journal of Business Ethics 11(3), 187-195.

Kiger, P. J. (2015, February 17). How did crucifixion kill a person. National Geographic Channel. Retrieved from http://channel.nationalgeographic.com/killing-jesus/articles/how-did-crucifixion-kill-a-person/

Knowledge@Wharton (2016, March 26). How storytelling can grow a business. Retrieved from http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/how-storytelling-can-move-a-business/?utm_source=kw_newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=2016-03-31

Kornfeld, M. (n.d.). The story of Ilfa and Rabbi Yochanan. Retrieved from http://www.dafyomi.co.il/taanis/insites/tn-dt-021.htm

Kosman, A. (2016). Homa, Abbaye's wife, in the Talmudic narrative and in a painting by Edward Hopper. Academia. Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/23488929/Homa_Abbayes_Wife_in_the_Talmudic_Narrative_and_in_a_Painting_by_Edward_Hopper

Kosman, A. (2011). A cup of affront and anger: Yaltha as an early feminist in the Talmud. Journal of Textual Reasoning, 6(2), March, 35- 40.

Kosman A. (2002). The story of a giant story: The winding way of Og King of Bashan in the Jewish haggadic tradition. Hebrew Union College Annual. 73, 157-190.

Kremer, W. (2013, November 8). Why has a Jewish law book become so popular? BBC.com. Retrieved from http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-24367959

Lau, B. (2010). The sages: Character, context, and creativity: The Second Temple period. Volume I. Translated by Michael Prawer. Jerusalem: Maggid Books.

Lau, B. (2011). The sages: Character, context, and creativity: From Yavneh to the Bar Kochba revolt. Volume II. Translated by Ilana Kurshan. Jerusalem:Maggid Books.

Leahy, R. (2013, April 7). Unemployment is bad for your health. Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-leahy-phd/unemployment-health_b_2616430.html

Liebowitz, E. (2014). Hypocrites or pious scholars? The image of the Pharisees in Second Temple period texts and Rabbinic literature. Melilah: Manchester Journal of Jewish Studies, 11, 53-67.

Linder, D. O. (2016). Theories of Constitutional interpretation. Exploring Constitutional law. Retrieved from http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/conlaw/interp.html

Lipnik, J. (2013, December). Even rabbi Meir was spat upon. Retrieved from http://www.jonathanlipnick.com/blog/even-rabbi-meir-got-spit-at

Looks, Y. (2013, February 25). The Knesset as beit midrash: A model of hope for a better Israel Haaretz. Retrieved from http://www.haaretz.com/the-knesset-as-beit-midrash-a-model-of-hope-for-a-better-israel-1.505685

Lubrano, A. (2013, August 6). Reacting to the poor—negatively. Philly.com. Retrieved from http://articles.philly.com/2013-08-06/news/41096922_1_west-philadelphia-neuroimaging-psychology

Matzke, D., Nieuwenhuis, S., van Rijn, H., Slagter, H. A, van der Molen, M. W. and Wagenmakers, E. J. (2013). Two birds with one stone: A preregistered adversarial collaboration on horizontal eye movements in free recall. Retrieved from http://dora.erbe-matzke.com/papers/DMatzke_EyeMovements.pdf

Mayberry, M. (2015). 3 traits all effective leaders possess. Entrepreneur.com. Retrieved from http://www.entrepreneur.com/article/251859

McSweeney, M. A. (2004). Pardes revisited once again: A reassessment of the rabbinic legend concerning the four who entered the pardes. Shofar, 22(4), 43-56.

Mui, Y. Q. (2016, March 8). Your chances of becoming poor may be higher than you think. Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/03/08/your-chances-of-becoming-poor-may-be-higher-than-you-think/

Murphy, B. A. (2016, February 15). Scalia and the 'dead' Constitution. New York Times, A19.

Nielsen, R., Marrone, J. A. & Slay, H. S. (2010). A new look at humility: Exploring the humility concept and its role in socialized charismatic leadership. Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, 17, February, 33-43

Nozick, Robert (1974). Anarchy, state, and utopia. New York: Basic Books.

Pink, D. H. (2006). A whole new mind. New York: Riverhead Books.

Pollack, A. & Huetteman, E. (2016, February 5). Hearing on pricing delivers spectacle but few answers. New York Times, B1, B7.

Preusz, Julius (1978). Biblical and Talmudic medicine. Translated by Fred Rosner. New York: Sanhedrin Press.

Prime, J. & Salib, E. (2014, May 12). The best leaders are humble leaders. Harvard Business Review. Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2014/05/the-best-leaders-are-humble-leaders

Ramsey, L. (2015, Sept. 19). These 10 cities have the worst air pollution in the world, and it is up to 15 times dirtier than what is considered healthy. Business Insider. Retrieved from http://www.businessinsider.com/these-are-the-cities-with-the-worst-air-pollution-in-the-world-2015-9

Rubenstein, J. L. (1999). Talmudic stories: Narrative art, composition and culture. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.

Rubenstein, J. L. (2002). Rabbinic stories. Mahwah, NJ: Paulist Press.

Sacks, J. (2005). To heal a fractured world: The ethics of responsibility. New York: Schocken Books.

Safrai, S. (1976). The era of the Mishnah and Talmud (70 - 640). In H. H. Sasson (Ed.), A history of the Jewish people. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Savir, A. (2013, April 24). Samsung Korea VP visits yeshiva to help Koreans learn Talmud. Matzav.com. Retrieved from http://matzav.com/samsung-korea-vp-visits-yeshiva-to-help-koreans-learn-talmud

Schmidt, F. (2001). How the temple thinks: Identity and social cohesion in ancient Judaism. Sheffield, England: Sheffield Academic Press.

Seligman, M. E. P. (2004). Can happiness be taught? Daedalus. 133 (2), 80-87

Seppӓlӓ, E. (2016, January 25). Why compassion serves you better than self-interest. Knowledge@Wharton. Retrieved from http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/compassion-serves-better-self-interest/

Shermer, M. (2008). Evolution, compassion, and the corporation. In Character, Spring, 22-27.

Shmulevitz, C. (2002). Sichos mussar. Brooklyn, NY: ArtScroll/Mesorah Publications.

Silverberg, D. (n.d.). S.A.L.T. – Parashat Nitzavim. VBM. Retrieved from http://etzion.org.il/vbm/english/archive/salt-devarim/51-15nitzavim.htm

Simmons, S. (2016). Kamtza and Bar Kamtza. Aish.com. Retrieved from http://www.aish.com/h/9av/ju/48949336.html

Simon-Shoshan, M. (n.d.). Whispering winds. VBM. Retrieved from http://etzion.org.il/vbm/english/archive/taggada/07taggada.htm

Singer, P. & Singer, R. (2005). The moral of the story: An anthology of ethics through literature. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

Socken, P. (Ed.) (2009). Why study Talmud in the twenty-first century: The relevance of the ancient Jewish text to our world. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.

Stern, K. (2013, April). Why the rich don't give to charity. Atlantic. Retrieved from http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/04/why-the-rich-dont-give/309254/

Tamari, M. (2002). The challenge of wealth. Torah.org. Retrieved from http://www.torah.org/learning/business-ethics/vayigash.html

Telushkin, J. 1992. Jewish Humor: What the Best Jewish Jokes Say About the Jews. New York: William Morrow.

Tough, P. (2012). How children succeed: Grit, curiosity, and the hidden power of character. New York: Houghton Mifflin.

Wasson, D. L. (2013, June 4). Titus. Ancient History Encyclopedia. Retrieved from http://www.ancient.eu/titus/

Wein, B. (2011). Rabbi Akiva. JewishHistory.org. Retrieved from http://www.jewishhistory.org/rabbi-akiva-2/

Wein, B. (2008). The oral law of Sinai. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Wein, B. (2000). Pirkei Avos: Ethics of the Fathers. Brooklyn, NY: Mesorah Publications.

Weinbach, M. (2016, February 6). The hated sin of hatred. Ohr Somayach. Retrieved from http://ohr.edu/417

Wertheimer, S. (2011, January 30). Nachum of Gamzu and the ark. Chabad on Campus: Queens College. Retrieved from http://www.qchabad.org/nachum-of-gamzu-the-ark/

Wilce (2013, February 5). Six of the best traits your child needs to succeed. Independent. Retrieved from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/education/schools/six-of-the-best-the-traits-your-child-needs-to-succeed-8899903.html

Williams, R. (2012). Why we need kind and compassionate leaders. Psychology Today. Retrieved from https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/wired-success/201208/why-we-need-kind-and-compassionate-leaders

Zeitlin, S. (1961). The Pharisees: A Historical Study. Jewish Quarterly Review, 52(2), 97-129.

Zion, N. (2014). Back to the cave! Rabbi Shimon bar Yohai's dilemma: Torah or tikkun olam? Academia.edu. Retrieved from tps://www.academia.edu/8357261/Back_to_the_Cave_Shimon_Bar_Yochais_Dilemma_-_Tikkun_Olam_or_Talmud_Torah
About the Author

Hershey H. Friedman is professor of business management at Brooklyn College of the City University of New York. His research and teaching interests include business statistics, marketing, humor studies, Jewish business ethics, Biblical leadership, and online education. Many of his papers are available at the following sites:

SSRN: <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/AbsByAuth.cfm?per_id=638928>

Researchgate:  https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Hershey_Friedman/publications

Email him at x.friedman@att.net.

Also by the author:

_God Laughed: Sources of Jewish Humor_ by Hershey H. Friedman and Linda Weiser Friedman, Transaction Press 2014.

