בימים ההם או בזמן הזה?
הדף מאת: שירה רובינשטיין / מרכז יעקב הרצוג
דף לימוד עוסק במתח שקיים בין שמירה על המסורת לבין הרצון להמציא ולחדש, ועל המחירים שיש לשלם על כל אחת מהגישות.
'. חמישה תלמידים היו לו, לרבן יוחנן בן זכאי; ואלו הן רבי אליעזר בן הורקנוס, ורבי יהושוע בן חנניה, ורבי יוסי הכוהן, ורבי שמעון בן נתנאל, ורבי אלעזר בן ערך.
הוא היה מונה שבחן: רבי אליעזר בן הורקנוס, בור סיד שאינו מאבד טיפה; יהושוע בן חנניה, אשרי יולדתו; יוסי הכוהן, חסיד; שמעון בן נתנאל, ירא חטא; אלעזר בן ערך, מעיין המתגבר.
יא. הוא היה אומר, אם יהיו כל חכמי ישראל בכף מאזניים, ואליעזר בן הורקנוס בכף שנייה - מכריע את כולם.
אבא שאול אומר משמו, אם יהיו כל חכמי ישראל בכף מאזניים ואליעזר בן הורקנוס אף עימהם, ואלעזר בן ערך בכף שנייה -מכריע הוא את כולם.
Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai received [the oral tradition] from Hillel and Shammai.He used to say: if you have learned much Torah, do not claim credit for yourself, because for such a purpose were you created. Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai had five disciples and they were these: Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, Rabbi Joshua ben Hananiah, Rabbi Yose, the priest, Rabbi Shimon ben Nethaneel and Rabbi Eleazar ben Arach. He [Rabbi Johanan] used to list their outstanding virtues: Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus is a plastered cistern which loses not a drop; Rabbi Joshua ben Hananiah happy is the woman that gave birth to him; Rabbi Yose, the priest, is a pious man; Rabbi Simeon ben Nethaneel is one that fears sin, And Rabbi Eleazar ben Arach is like a spring that [ever] gathers force. He [Rabbi Yohanan] used to say: if all the sages of Israel were on one scale of the balance and Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus on the other scale, he would outweigh them all. Abba Shaul said in his name: if all the sages of Israel were on one scale of the balance, and Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus also with them, and Rabbi Eleazar ben Arach on the other scale, he would outweigh them all. He [Rabban Yohanan] said unto them: go forth and observe which is the right way to which a man should cleave? Rabbi Eliezer said, a good eye; Rabbi Joshua said, a good companion; Rabbi Yose said, a good neighbor; Rabbi Shimon said, foresight. Rabbi Elazar said, a good heart. He [Rabban Yohanan] said to them: I prefer the words of Elazar ben Arach, for in his words your words are included. He [Rabban Yohanan] said unto them: go forth and observe which is the evil way which a man should shun? Rabbi Eliezer said, an evil eye; Rabbi Joshua said, an evil companion; Rabbi Yose said, an evil neighbor; Rabbi Shimon said, one who borrows and does not repay for he that borrows from man is as one who borrows from God, blessed be He, as it is said, “the wicked borrow and do not repay, but the righteous deal graciously and give” (Psalms 37:21). Rabbi Elazar said, an evil heart. He [Rabban Yohanan] said to them: I prefer the words of Elazar ben Arach, for in his words your words are included.
דיון
  • איזה תיאור מתיאורי התלמידים של רבן יוחנן בן זכאי מגדיר אתכם באופן אישי?
  • האם בעיניכם יש תלמיד ומורה אידיאלי, ואם כן, מיהו לדעתכם, "בור הסיד שאינו מאבד אף טיפה", או שמא ה"מעיין המתגבר", ומדוע?
  • מה אתם חושבים על האמירה שרבי אלעזר בן ערך היה מכריע את כולם?
"ת"ר מעשה ברבי אליעזר.. אמר להם הזקקתוני לומר דבר שלא שמעתי מפי רבותי מימי לא קדמני אדם בבית המדרש ולא ישנתי בבית המדרש לא שינת קבע ולא שינת עראי ולא הנחתי אדם בבית המדרש ויצאתי ולא שחתי שיחת חולין ולא אמרתי דבר שלא שמעתי מפי רבי מעולם"
The Gemara answers: There is a difference between the case of the shutter and the case of the sheet. There, in the case of the shutter, where he negates it by shuttering the window, it is considered part of the building and it is therefore prohibited. However, here, in the case of the sheet, where he does not negate it, as he plans on removing it, no, it is not necessarily prohibited. The Gemara relates a similar incident. The Sages taught: There was an incident involving Rabbi Eliezer, who stayed in the Upper Galilee, and the people there asked him thirty halakhot in the halakhot of sukka. In response to twelve, he said to them: I heard an answer from my teachers, and he related what he heard. In response to the other eighteen, he said to them: I did not hear an answer. Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says: It was the reverse of these matters. In response to eighteen he said to them: I heard an answer; in response to the other twelve he said to them: I did not hear an answer. They said to him: Are all the matters that you know only from what you heard? Don’t you say any matters on your own? He said to them: Now you forced me to say a matter that I did not hear from my teachers, as I must describe my character traits and the manner in which I conduct myself. In all my days, no person ever preceded me into the study hall, as I am always first to arrive; and I never slept in the study hall, neither substantial sleep nor a brief nap; and I never left anyone in the study hall and exited, as I was always last to leave; and I never engaged in idle conversation; rather, I discussed only necessary matters or matters of Torah; and I never said anything that I did not hear from my teacher. That is why he did not answer those questions that his teacher did not address. Apropos the character traits of Rabbi Eliezer, the Gemara cites character traits of his teacher. The Sages said about Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai, the teacher of Rabbi Eliezer: In all his days he never engaged in idle conversation; and he never walked four cubits without engaging in Torah study and without donning phylacteries; and no person ever preceded him into the study hall; and he never slept in the study hall, neither substantial sleep nor a brief nap; and he never contemplated matters of Torah in alleyways filthy with human excrement, as doing so is a display of contempt for the Torah; and he never left anyone in the study hall and exited; and no person ever found him sitting and silent, i.e., inactive; rather, he was always sitting and studying; and only he opened the door for his students, disregarding his own eminent standing; and he never said anything that he did not hear from his teacher; and he never said to his students that the time has arrived to arise and leave the study hall except on Passover eves, when they were obligated to sacrifice the Paschal lamb, and Yom Kippur eves, when there is a mitzva to eat and drink abundantly. And Rabbi Eliezer, his student, accustomed himself to model his conduct after his example. The Gemara continues to praise the Sages. The Sages taught: Hillel the Elder had eighty students. Thirty of them were sufficiently worthy that the Divine Presence should rest upon them as it did upon Moses our teacher, and thirty of them were sufficiently worthy that the sun should stand still for them as it did for Joshua bin Nun, and twenty were on an intermediate level between the other two. The greatest of all the students was Yonatan ben Uzziel, and the youngest of them was Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai. The Gemara relates: The Sages said about Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai that he did not neglect Bible; Mishna; Gemara; halakhot and aggadot; minutiae of the Torah and minutiae of the scribes; the hermeneutical principles of the Torah with regard to a fortiori inferences and verbal analogies; the calculation of the calendrical seasons; and numerology [gimmatreyaot]. In addition, he did not neglect esoteric matters, including the conversation of ministering angels; the conversation of demons, and the conversation of palm trees; parables of launderers, which are folk tales that can be used to explain the Torah; parables of foxes; and more generally, a great matter and a small matter. The Gemara elaborates: A great matter is referring to the secrets of the Design of the Divine Chariot, the conduct of the transcendent universe. A small matter is, for example, halakhot that were ultimately formulated in the framework of the disputes of Abaye and Rava. He did not neglect any of these disciplines so as to fulfill that which is stated: “That I may cause those that love me to inherit substance and that I may fill their treasuries” (Proverbs 8:21), as Rabban Yoḥanan was filled with the disciplines of Torah and wisdom. And if the youngest of them was so prolific, the greatest of them was all the more so prolific. The Gemara relates that the Sages said of Yonatan ben Uzziel, the greatest of Hillel’s students, that when he sat and was engaged in Torah study, the sanctity that he generated was so intense that any bird that flew over him was immediately incinerated. MISHNA: In the case of one whose head and most of his body were in the sukka and his table was in the house, Beit Shammai deem it unfit, and Beit Hillel deem it fit. Beit Hillel said to Beit Shammai: And wasn’t there an incident where the Elders of Beit Shammai and the Elders of Beit Hillel went to visit Rabbi Yoḥanan ben HaḤoranit and they found him such that he was sitting with his head and most of his body in the sukka and his table in the house, and they said nothing to him? Even Beit Shammai did not object. Beit Shammai said to them: Is there proof from there? That is not what happened; rather, they said to him: If you were accustomed to act in this manner, you have never fulfilled the mitzva of sukka in your life. The mishna continues: Women, slaves, and minors are exempt from the mitzva of sukka. A minor who does not need his mother any longer is obligated in the mitzva. There was an incident where the daughter-in-law of Shammai the Elder gave birth just before Sukkot, and Shammai removed the coat of plaster from the roof, leaving the beams, and roofed with the beams over the bed for the newborn minor. GEMARA: With regard to the halakha that women, slaves, and minors are exempt from the mitzva of sukka, the Gemara asks: From where are these matters derived? The Gemara answers that it is as the Sages taught in a baraita that it is stated: “All the homeborn in Israel shall reside in sukkot” (Leviticus 23:42). Had the verse stated only: Homeborn, it would have been derived that any homeborn member of the Jewish people is obligated to observe this mitzva. However, the term with the addition of the definite article: “The homeborn,” indicates that only certain homeborn members are obligated, i.e., men, to the exclusion of the women. The word “all” in the phrase: “All the homeborn,” comes to include the minors capable of performing this mitzva. § The Gemara analyzes the baraita. The Master said: “The homeborn” is to the exclusion of women. Is that to say that the term homeborn without the definite article indicates both men and women? Isn’t it taught in a baraita with regard to Yom Kippur that it is stated: “And it shall be a statute forever unto you: In the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, you shall afflict your souls and shall do no manner of work, the homeborn, or the stranger that sojourns among you” (Leviticus 16:29). And the term “the homeborn” in that verse comes to include homeborn women, who are obligated in the mitzva of affliction on Yom Kippur. In that case, the definite article comes to include women. Therefore, apparently, the term homeborn, without the definite article, indicates only men. Rabba said: They are each a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai, and the Sages merely supported them with verses as a mnemonic device. Therefore, it is not surprising that the derivations are contradictory. The Gemara asks: Which of them is derived from the verse and which is a halakha transmitted to Moses from Sinai and merely supported by a verse? And furthermore, why do I need the verse and why do I need the halakha? Isn’t sukka a positive, time-bound mitzva, and the principle is that women are exempt from all positive, time-bound mitzvot? There is no need for a special derivation to exempt women from the mitzva of sukka. And there is no need for a derivation with regard to their obligation to fast on Yom Kippur, as that can be derived from that which Rabbi Yehuda said that Rav said, as Rabbi Yehuda said that Rav said, and it was likewise taught in the school of Rabbi Yishmael: The verse says: “When a man or woman shall commit any sin that a person commits, to commit a trespass against the Lord, and that soul be guilty” (Numbers 5:6).
דיון
  • רבי אליעזר: האם זו הגדרה אידיאלית של תלמיד בבית המדרש?
  • מהן היתרונות ומהן החסרונות שנובעות מלמידה כזאת?
מר רבי חלבו: חמרא דפרוגייתא ומיא דדיומסת [היין של פריגיה והמים של דיומסת] קיפחו עשרת השבטים מישראל [שבני אותם שבטים נמשכו אחרי תענוגות השתייה והמרחצאות ולא עסקו בתורה].
רבי אלעזר בן ערך איקלע להתם [הזדמן לשם] אימשיך בתרייהו איעקר תלמודיה [נמשך אחריהם ונשתכח ממנו תלמודו] כי הדר אתא קם למיקרי בספרא. בעא למיקרא [כאשר חזר ובא עמד לקרוא בספר התורה, והיה צריך לקרוא] - (שמות יב) "החדש הזה לכם", אמר: 'החרש היה לבם'. בעו רבנן רחמי עליה והדר תלמודיה [ביקשו חכמים רחמים עליו וחזר תלמודו]. והיינו דתנן, ר' נהוראי אומר: הוי גולה למקום תורה ואל תאמר שהיא תבא אחריך שחבריך יקיימוה בידך ואל בינתך אל תשען.
that rinsing one’s entire body by pouring water on it rather than bathing in the standard fashion may well be done even ab initio. The Gemara asks: According to whose opinion is our mishna? The Gemara answers: It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, as it was taught in a baraita: One may not rinse himself on Shabbat, neither with hot water nor with cold water; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Shimon permits rinsing one’s body even with hot water. Rabbi Yehuda says that there is a distinction: With hot water it is prohibited and with cold water it is permitted. The mishna addressed the permissibility of drying oneself with a towel after bathing on Shabbat, and added the phrase: And dried himself off even with ten towels. The Gemara comments on the formulation of the mishna: The first clause teaches us a novel concept, and the latter clause teaches us a novel concept. The Gemara explains: The first clause: One who…dried himself even with ten towels may not carry them, teaches us a novel concept, that the prohibition applies even to these towels, which do not have much water absorbed in them. The reason for this is that since he is one person, he may come to squeeze them. And the latter clause teaches us a novel concept, that even these ten people may carry the towel that they have all used, despite the fact that they have absorbed much water and the towel is very wet. The reason for this is that since they are many people, they remind each other not to wring the towel. The Sages taught in a baraita: One may dry himself with a towel on Shabbat and leave it in the window of the bathhouse; and one may not give it to the bath attendants, because they are suspect in this matter of wringing out towels. Rabbi Shimon says: One may dry himself with a single towel and carry it in his hand into his home, and there is no concern lest he wring out the water. Abaye said to Rav Yosef: What is the halakha with regard to carrying a towel home after using it to dry himself? Rav Yosef said to him: There is Rabbi Shimon, there is Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, there is Shmuel, and there is Rabbi Yoḥanan, all of whom permit it. The Gemara elaborates: Rabbi Shimon rules leniently, as we have already stated that he permits bathing and drying oneself with a towel and then bringing it home. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi agrees, as it was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: When we would study Torah with Rabbi Shimon in Tekoa, we would carry oil and towels from the courtyard to the roof and from the roof into an enclosure similar to a courtyard until we reached the spring in which we would bathe, without passing through a public domain. In Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s opinion, it is permitted to carry a towel both before and after using it to dry oneself. Shmuel is also lenient, as Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said explicitly: One may dry himself with a towel and carry it in his hand into his home. Rabbi Yoḥanan is also lenient, as Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The halakha is that one may dry himself with a towel and carry it in his hand into his house. The Gemara challenges this last point: And did Rabbi Yoḥanan really say that? Didn’t Rabbi Yoḥanan state a principle that the halakha is in accordance with an unattributed mishna, in which the name of the tanna who issued the rulings does not appear? And we learned explicitly in our mishna, which is unattributed, that if one bathed and dried himself even with ten towels, he may not carry them in his hand. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yoḥanan’s version of the mishna does not teach this halakha unattributed; rather, it teaches it in accordance with the opinion of ben Ḥakhinai, which is the opinion of an individual Sage that is not the accepted halakha. Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Bath attendants may bring women’s bathing garments [balarei] to the bathhouse on Shabbat as long as they cover their heads and the majority of their bodies with them, so that they are being worn rather than carried. With regard to the large scarf that is worn draped over one’s shoulders, one must tie its two ends together below so that it will not fall. Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: This means that one must tie it below the shoulders. In a similar vein, Rava said to the inhabitants of his city, Meḥoza: When you transport clothing for the soldiers who are staying in the city, extend them beneath your shoulders so that you will wear them like a garment and not simply carry them. We learned in the mishna: One may smear oil and rub a person’s body by hand on Shabbat. The Sages taught in a baraita: One may smear oil on and rub his intestinal area on Shabbat, and it is not a prohibited form of healing, provided he does not do so in the manner in which he does during the week. The Gemara asks: How then does one do this on Shabbat? Rabbi Ḥama bar Ḥanina said: One first smears oil and afterward rubs the body. And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: One smears oil and rubs simultaneously. The mishna taught: However, one may not exert himself on Shabbat. Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is prohibited to stand on the floor of the therapeutic bathhouse of Deyomset on Shabbat, because it warms and heals even if one is not bathing or exerting himself. Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: The entire period that bathing in Deyomset is therapeutic is twenty-one days; and Shavuot is included. The Gemara raises a dilemma: Is Shavuot on this side, at the beginning, of the twenty-one-day period, or on this side, at the end, of the twenty-one days? Come and hear a resolution to this dilemma from that which Shmuel said: All medicinal drinks are effective from Passover to Shavuot; apparently, the waters of the Deyomset are therapeutic in the time period leading up to Shavuot. The Gemara rejects this proof: Perhaps there, with regard to medicinal drinks, it is so, because the cooler the world, the better these drinks heal; however, here, with regard to bathing, the therapeutic effect is due to the heat, and therefore the warmer the world, the better. The time period during which bathing is effective would only begin with Shavuot. Apropos Deyomset, the Gemara cites that Rabbi Ḥelbo said: The wine of Phrygia [Perugaita] and the water of the Deyomset deprived Israel of the ten lost tribes. Because the members of these tribes were attracted to the pleasures of wine and bathing and did not occupy themselves with Torah, they were lost to the Jewish people. The Gemara relates that once Rabbi Elazar ben Arakh happened to come there, to Phrygia and Deyomset, and he was drawn after them, and his Torah learning was forgotten. When he returned, he stood to read from a Torah scroll and was supposed to read the verse: “This month shall be for you [haḥodesh hazeh lakhem]” (Exodus 12:2), but he had forgotten so much that he could barely remember how to read the Hebrew letters, and instead he read: Have their hearts become deaf [haḥeresh haya libbam], interchanging the similar letters reish for dalet, yod for zayin, and beit for khaf. The Sages prayed and asked for God to have mercy on him, and his learning was restored. And that is what we learned in a mishna that Rabbi Nehorai says: Exile yourself to a place of Torah and do not say that it will follow you, as if you are in a place of Torah, your colleagues will establish it in your hands, and do not rely on your understanding alone. It was taught: Rabbi Nehorai was not his name, but rather Rabbi Neḥemya was his name; and some say that Rabbi Elazar ben Arakh was his name and his statement was based on the personal experience of forgetting his Torah due to his failure to exile himself to a place of Torah. And why was he called Rabbi Nehorai? It was because he would illuminate [manhir] the eyes of the Sages in halakha. The mishna taught: However, one may not scrape off the oil on Shabbat. The Sages taught in a baraita: One may not scrape his body with a scraper on Shabbat. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: If one’s feet were dirty with mortar and excrement he may scrape them in the usual manner with a scraper and need not be concerned about violating a prohibition. Rav Shmuel bar Yehuda’s mother made him a silver scraper to use on Shabbat to distinguish it from a weekday. The mishna also taught that one may not enter a swampy river full of mud on Shabbat. The Gemara explains: What is the reason for this? Due to the mud, as it is likely that one will slip and fall and come to violate the prohibitions of bathing and wringing out his clothes. We also learned in the mishna that one may not make a drug to induce vomiting on Shabbat. Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: They only taught that this is prohibited with a drug, which is considered a medicine; however, inducing vomiting by hand is permitted. It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Neḥemya says: Even during the week, if one need not vomit for medical reasons, it is prohibited to induce vomiting because it causes loss of food. And we learned in the mishna that one may not align a young infant’s bones in order to straighten them on Shabbat. Rabba bar bar Ḥana said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: With regard to swaddling an infant on Shabbat, one may well do so. The Gemara challenges this statement: Didn’t we learn in the mishna that one may not align an infant’s bones? The Gemara answers: There, the mishna is referring to the bones, vertebrae, of the spine, because straightening them appears like the prohibited labor of building. We also learned in the mishna that one may not reset a break in a bone on Shabbat. Rav Ḥana of Baghdad said that Shmuel said:
חמשה תלמידים היו לו לרבי יוחנן בן זכאי כל זמן שהיה קיים היו יושבין לפניו.
כשנפטר הלכו ליבנה והלך ר' אלעזר בן ערך אצל אשתו לאמאוס, מקום מים יפים ונוה יפה.
המתין להם שיבאו אצלו ולא באו. כיון שלא באו בקש לילך אצלם ולא הניחתו אשתו.
אמרה: מי צריך למי?
אמר לה - הן צריכין לי!
אמרה לו - חמת העכברים, מי דרכו לילך אצל מי העכברים אצל החמת או החמת אצל העכברים?
שמע לה וישב לו עד ששכח תלמודו.
דיון
  • שכחת התלמוד בשני המקורות הנ"ל אנו רואים שהלימוד נשתכח מר' אלעזר. האם שכחה זו נובעת מהיותו 'מעיין המתגבר'?
  • האם משלמים מחיר על מקוריות? ואם כן, האם הוא שווה ?
ברל כצנלסון, מקורות לא אכזב (י"ד באב תרצ"ד – 1934, "דבר")
דור מחדש ויוצר
דור מחדש ויוצר איננו זורק אל גל האשפה את ירושת הדורות. הוא בוחן ובודק, מרחיק ומקרב ויש שהוא נאחז במסורת הקיימת ומוסיף עליה , ויש שהוא יורד לגלי גרוטאות, חושף נשכחות, ממרק אותן מחלודתן, מחזיר לתחייה מסורת קדומה, שיש בה להזין את נפש הדור המחדש.
דיון
  • באיזה אופן אתם חושבים שניתן לבטא בבית המדרש את האיזון בין השמירה על "ירושת הדורות" (בור הסיד) לבין היצירה והחידוש (מעיין המתגבר)?