Bava Batra 110aבבא בתרא ק״י א
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
110aק״י א

אלא אי אבוה דאמיה מיוסף אמה דאמיה מיתרו אי אבוה דאמיה מיתרו אמה דאמיה מיוסף דיקא נמי דכתיב מבנות פוטיאל תרתי שמע מינה

Rather, this is how the matter should be resolved: If his mother’s father came from the family of Joseph, his mother’s mother came from the family of Yitro, and if his mother’s father came from the family of Yitro, his mother’s mother came from the family of Joseph, so while his mother was descended from Joseph on one side and from Yitro on the other, Pinehas was a more distant relative to Yitro than Jonathan was. Based on this conclusion, the language of the verse is also precise, as it is written: “And Elazar, Aaron’s son, took one of the daughters of Putiel” (Exodus 6:25). Conclude from the wording of the verse that Pinehas was descended from two men who were referred to as Puti: Yitro and Joseph.

אמר רבא הנושא אשה צריך שיבדוק באחיה שנאמר (שמות ו, כג) ויקח אהרן את אלישבע בת עמינדב אחות נחשון ממשמע שנאמר בת עמינדב איני יודע שאחות נחשון היא מה תלמוד לומר אחות נחשון מכאן שהנושא אשה צריך שיבדוק באחיה תנא רוב בנים דומין לאחי האם

Rava says: One who marries a woman needs to first examine her brothers so that he will know in advance what character his children will have, as it is stated: “And Aaron took Elisheva, the daughter of Amminadav, the sister of Nahshon” (Exodus 6:23). By inference from that which is stated: “The daughter of Amminadav,” do I not know that she is the sister of Nahshon, as Nahshon was the son of Amminadav? What is the meaning when the verse states: “The sister of Nahshon”? From here one learns that one who marries a woman needs to examine her brothers. The reason is as the Sages taught: Most sons resemble the mother’s brothers.

(שופטים יח, ג) ויסורו (שמה ויאמר) מי הביאך הלום ומה אתה עושה בזה ומה לך פה אמרו לו לאו ממשה קא אתית דכתיב ביה (שמות ג, ה) אל תקרב הלום לאו ממשה קא אתית דכתיב ביה (שמות ד, ב) מה זה בידך לאו ממשה קא אתית דכתיב ביה (דברים ה, לא) ואתה פה עמוד עמדי תעשה כהן לע"ז

In connection with the Gemara’s mention of Jonathan, who served as a priest for Micah, the Gemara quotes additional statements of the Sages concerning that episode. Describing when the men from the tribe of Dan passed through Micah’s house, the verse states: “And they turned aside there and said to him: Who brought you here [halom], and what [ma] are you doing in this place, and what do you have here [po]?” (Judges 18:3). The Sages interpret their multiple questions. They said to him: Do you not come from Moses, about whom it is written: “Do not draw close to here [halom]” (Exodus 3:5)? Do you not come from Moses, about whom it is written: “What [ma] is that in your hand” (Exodus 4:2)? Do you not come from Moses, about whom it is written: “But as for you, stand here [po] with me” (Deuteronomy 5:27)? Shall you, a descendant of our teacher Moses, become a priest for idol worship?

אמר להן כך מקובלני מבית אבי אבא לעולם ישכיר אדם עצמו לע"ז ואל יצטרך לבריות

Jonathan said to them: This is the tradition that I received from the house of my father’s father: A person should always hire himself out to idol worship and not require the help of people by receiving charity, and I took this position in order to avoid having to take charity.

והוא סבר לע"ז ממש ולא היא אלא ע"ז עבודה שזרה לו כדאמר ליה רב לרב כהנא נטוש נבילתא בשוקא ושקול אגרא ולא תימא גברא רבא אנא וזילא בי מילתא

The Gemara comments: And he, Jonathan, thought that this referred to actual idol worship, but that is not so, that was not the intent of the tradition. Rather, here the term idol worship, literally: Strange service, is referring to service, i.e., labor, that is strange, i.e., unsuitable, for him. In other words, one should be willing to perform labor that is difficult and humiliating in his eyes rather than become a recipient of charity. As Rav said to Rav Kahana, his student: Skin a carcass in the market and take payment, but do not say: I am a great man and this matter is beneath me.

כיון שראה דוד שממון חביב עליו ביותר מינהו על האוצרות שנאמר (דברי הימים א כו, כד) ושבואל בן גרשם בן מנשה נגיד על האוצרות וכי שבואל שמו והלא יהונתן שמו א"ר יוחנן ששב לאל בכל לבו:

The Gemara continues its discussion of that episode. Later, when King David saw that money was excessively precious to Jonathan, he appointed him as director of the treasuries of the Temple, as it is stated: “And Shebuel, the son of Gershom, the son of Moses, was ruler over the treasuries” (I Chronicles 26:24). The Gemara asks: And was his name really Shebuel; but wasn’t his name Jonathan? Rabbi Yoḥanan says: He is called Shebuel in order to allude to the fact that he repented and returned to God [shav la’el ] with all his heart.

והבנים את האב: מנלן דכתיב (במדבר כז, ח) איש כי ימות וגו' טעמא דאין לו בן הא יש לו בן בן קודם אמר ליה רב פפא לאביי אימא אי איכא בן לירות בן איכא בת תירות בת איכא בן ובת לא האי לירות ולא האי לירות

§ The mishna teaches in the list of those who inherit from and bequeath to each other: Sons with regard to their father. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this halakha that sons inherit the entire estate and daughters do not receive a share along with them? As it is written: “If a man dies, and has no son, then you shall pass his inheritance to his daughter” (Numbers 27:8). The reason the inheritance would be passed to a daughter is that he has no son, but if he has a son, the son takes precedence. Rav Pappa said to Abaye: Why not say the following: If there is only a son, let the son inherit the father’s estate; if there is only a daughter, let the daughter inherit the father’s estate; and if there is both a son and a daughter, neither this one should inherit nor that one should inherit.


Abaye asked Rav Pappa: And rather,