Rabbi Jill Jacobs, Facebook Post on August 1, 2017
Midway (more or less) through Tisha B'Av, I keep thinking about the role of the rabbis in the Bar Kamtza story. As a refresher: The Talmud says that the Temple was destroyed because of an incident in which a guy was holding a banquet & asked his servant to invite his friend Kamtza. The servant accidentally invited the guy's enemy, Bar Kamtza. When the host tells Bar Kamtza to leave, he offers to pay for his own meal, then half the feast, then the whole feast just to avoid being ashamed by getting the boot. No dice. Bar Kamtza responds,
הואיל והוו יתבי רבנן ולא מחו ביה ש"מ קא ניחא להו איזיל איכול בהו קורצא בי מלכא
Since the Sages were sitting there and did not protest, learn from it that [what happened] was fine with them. I will therefore go and inform against them to the king.
So there's an easy drash here about the obligation of rabbis/leaders to speak up against injustice. And I agree with that drash! But the funny thing is that, of course, the rabbis weren't around as a class during the time of the Temple. But anyone who has spent time studying gemara knows that the rabbis love to project themselves back in time, usually to portray themselves as telling the priests what to do, or otherwise fixing things. But here, they put themselves back in time just to criticize themselves.
And it happens again as the story continues! Having heard from Bar Kamtza that the Jews are rebelling, the emperor sets up a test: He sends a calf to see whether the Jews will sacrifice it. On the way, Bar Kamtza blemishes the animal so that it won't be fit for sacrifice. Here come the rabbis again:
סבור רבנן לקרוביה משום שלום
The Sages thought to sacrifice it for the sake of peace with the government.
They're on to the trick & think about violating normal ritual norms for the sake of saving the people. But in the end, a single rabbinic voice prevails & the rest is history.
We're so accustomed to saying "if I had been alive at such and such a time, I would have [been a Freedom Rider, resisted the Nazis, fought slavery, invited Bar Kamtza to dinner.] It's kind of an amazing act of self-reflection and self-admonition to say, "Actually, if I had been there, I wouldn't have done anything." Now, perhaps the rabbis are trying to explain why they didn't manage to save the Temple. And no question, there are hero rabbis as the story progresses. But in this moment, the rabbis don't try to set themselves up as heroes, but rather acknowledge both the importance of bystanders, and the fact that most of us do not and wouldn't have been that bystander who takes the risk of objecting.
S.Z., Facebook Post on August 1, 2017
One of my conclusions from the Bar Kamtza story is that the Temple was destroyed (also) because key actors did not take the full potential consequences of their actions into consideration.Bar Kamtza probably did not expect Jerusalem to be destroyed as the result of his act, more likely a few cohanim to executed (one wonders if the host was a cohen). Furthermore, the war may have been a result of internal Roman considerations (see http://thetorah.com/why-did-vespasian-and-titus-destroy.../) -- which goes to show that we cannot disregard the global political ramifications of local events -- or Roman reaction to Jewish extremists (sicarii, zealots and bandits, which are not synonymous) but it was not necessarily expected. Moreover, R. Zechariah b. Avkulas surely did not expect the destruction to result from his action; he, too, might have expected a smaller-scale Roman reaction or that divine intervention, prompted by his sticking to the details, would save the day.
Yair Rosenberg, Other People’s Sin’at Chinam, Tablet Magazine, July 2013
What’s striking about this tale is that it apportions blames to the people recounting it, namely, the rabbis who did not intervene at the party. The host of the affair, the ostensible culprit, is never even named. While the Talmudic sages could easily have pinned the entire episode on him, they chose instead to share the blame themselves. National tragedy, in the traditional understanding, is not an opportunity to assert our own sense of superiority, but to foster a spirit of self-critique. As the Mussaf prayer every Rosh Chodesh reminds us, “because of our sins, we were exiled from our land.”
On Tisha B’Av, of all days, we are not meant to point to flaws outside ourselves, however apparent they may be, but rather to examine those within. After all, we can never truly know the minds and motivations of others. The only baseless hatred we can diagnose is our own.
In June 2021, we asked various educators on Facebook:
Do you have an interesting take on Kamtza and Bar Kamtza?
And how do you teach it?
Here's what they shared:
D.F., Comment on Facebook, June 22, 2021
The only one who faults the rabbis for remaining silent in the beginning is Bar Kamtza himself, who is not exactly a sympathetic character given everything that happened later. The point, I think, is that assuming negative motivations is part of the sinat chinam. Bar Kamtza could have assumed that maybe the rabbis didn't say anything because they didn't see what happened, or maybe they had some other good reason, or he could have confronted the rabbis directly to inquire as to the cause for their silence. Instead he assumed the worst, and sought revenge, hardly Jewish values.
E.F., Comment on Facebook, June 24, 2021
The fate of a community lies in the texture of the fabric of relationships. Is there trust, mutuality, care, tolerance, kindness? That’s where it all begins and, sadly, ends.
A.S., Comment on Facebook, June 22, 2021
There is an inherent critique of the role of the rabbis in the story - the fact that they remain silent as all of this is going on and the fact that they are indecisive when it comes to deciding what to do with the korban. Seems like a critique against inaction.
P.J., Comment on Facebook, June 22, 2021
I actually see a lot of issues of communal responsibility & במקום שאין אנשים תשתדל להיות איש. I like to have people read the complete story and then (similar to bibliodrama) ask the students who are the characters in the story (more than just kamtza & bar kamtza) & then questions they have about the story & then have the students take a perspective that is difficult for them - either in creative writing assignment or bibliodrama or debate and tell the story from that perspective. Then think about what they learned from that perspective or any news ideas or questions that came up. Happy to discuss this more if you want.
E.L., Comment on Facebook, June 22, 2021
To add to the midrashim: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R6t3Zm7nMTg
R.Z., Comment on Facebook, June 22, 2021
When I teach this I like to ask “who is at fault, and who/at what point could the course of the story have been changed?”. I use those questions to show that fault and complicity are often shared by many; and to point out that there were numerous points throughout the story when the trajectory of the story could have changed and we could have had a happy(/happier) ending.
D.M., Comment on Facebook, June 22, 2021
I really like that this story is one of several whose genre could be called, "Stories the Rabbis Tell on Themselves." The story emphasizes both their silence as one Jew shames another; and their midapplied stringency in rejecting the Emperor's sacrifice. Both have disastrous results.
E.S., Comment on Facebook, June 22, 2021
For primary school we looked at baseless hatred and what it meant in the reality of that age group.
Then we flipped it and looked at baseless love - what that meant and what that could achieve in the world
S.N., Comment on Facebook, June 22, 2021
I usually use it to challenge folks to do ahavat chinam.
B.D., Comment on Facebook, June 22, 2021
Kamtza had nothing to do with any of this, and it's not fair that he always gets dragged in.
A.R., Comment on Facebook, June 22, 2021
I have long read this somewhat metaphorically as a parable about the dangers of perfectionism - I know that’s not the pshat, but I love to read it that way. If they had been able to accept an imperfect sacrifice, the larger practice could have continued, but because they could not, the entire system of sacrifices was destroyed. The same way, if we can’t accept ourselves even with our perceived imperfections, we risk missing the opportunity to simply be fully alive, as ourselves...it’s explicitly against the basic rules of the sacrificial system, and my gut is that the interpersonal betrayal is a little more on the surface of the narrative than the perfectionism reading. But still, I really love reading the midrash this way!
Y.N., Comment on Facebook, June 22, 2021
The series of stories in M. Gittin seem to be highlighting the point that temple had to be destroyed. A common thread in all the stories are the Leaders were blind and inattentive to the extreme that the romans were more enlightened than the Jewish leadership.
E.G., Comment on Facebook, June 22, 2021
I would argue that the story is as much about the responsibility to speak up when someone is being wronged as it is about sinat hinam.
If we imagine that the story has a traditional three act structure, the inciting event at the end of the first act is the rabbis' collective silence as the host embarrasses BK for something that BK had nothing to do with.
This precipitating event leads to the second act in which BK escalates by forcing those same leaders into a no-win situation with the Romans.
The climax happens due to a lack of action by the rabbis, again; they won't give the sacrifice but they ALSO won't hold anyone responsible for the situation. The third act, of course, is the destruction of Jerusalem.
You could also make the argument that ANY action by the rabbis, at both the precipitating event and at the climax, would have been better than the choice not to act at all.
While the story is referred to as being about sinat hinam it is, arguably, more a story about the responsibility of leaders to actually lead.
אמר רבי יוחנן מאי דכתיב (משלי כח, יד) אשרי אדם מפחד תמיד ומקשה לבו יפול ברעה אקמצא ובר קמצא חרוב ירושלים אתרנגולא ותרנגולתא חרוב טור מלכא אשקא דריספק חרוב ביתר אקמצא ובר קמצא חרוב ירושלים דההוא גברא דרחמיה קמצא ובעל דבביה בר קמצא עבד סעודתא אמר ליה לשמעיה זיל אייתי לי קמצא אזל אייתי ליה בר קמצא אתא אשכחיה דהוה יתיב אמר ליה מכדי ההוא גברא בעל דבבא דההוא גברא הוא מאי בעית הכא קום פוק אמר ליה הואיל ואתאי שבקן ויהיבנא לך דמי מה דאכילנא ושתינא אמר ליה לא אמר ליה יהיבנא לך דמי פלגא דסעודתיך אמר ליה לא אמר ליה יהיבנא לך דמי כולה סעודתיך א"ל לא נקטיה בידיה ואוקמיה ואפקיה אמר הואיל והוו יתבי רבנן ולא מחו ביה ש"מ קא ניחא להו איזיל איכול בהו קורצא בי מלכא אזל אמר ליה לקיסר מרדו בך יהודאי א"ל מי יימר א"ל שדר להו קורבנא חזית אי מקרבין ליה אזל שדר בידיה עגלא תלתא בהדי דקאתי שדא ביה מומא בניב שפתים ואמרי לה בדוקין שבעין דוכתא דלדידן הוה מומא ולדידהו לאו מומא הוא סבור רבנן לקרוביה משום שלום מלכות אמר להו רבי זכריה בן אבקולס יאמרו בעלי מומין קריבין לגבי מזבח סבור למיקטליה דלא ליזיל ולימא אמר להו רבי זכריה יאמרו מטיל מום בקדשים יהרג אמר רבי יוחנן ענוותנותו של רבי זכריה בן אבקולס החריבה את ביתנו ושרפה את היכלנו והגליתנו מארצנו
§ Apropos the war that led to the destruction of the Second Temple, the Gemara examines several aspects of the destruction of that Temple in greater detail: Rabbi Yoḥanan said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “Happy is the man who fears always, but he who hardens his heart shall fall into mischief” (Proverbs 28:14)? Jerusalem was destroyed on account of Kamtza and bar Kamtza. The place known as the King’s Mountain was destroyed on account of a rooster and a hen. The city of Beitar was destroyed on account of a shaft from a chariot [rispak]. The Gemara explains: Jerusalem was destroyed on account of Kamtza and bar Kamtza. This is as there was a certain man whose friend was named Kamtza and whose enemy was named bar Kamtza. He once made a large feast and said to his servant: Go bring me my friend Kamtza. The servant went and mistakenly brought him his enemy bar Kamtza. The man who was hosting the feast came and found bar Kamtza sitting at the feast. The host said to bar Kamtza. That man is the enemy [ba’al devava] of that man, that is, you are my enemy. What then do you want here? Arise and leave. Bar Kamtza said to him: Since I have already come, let me stay and I will give you money for whatever I eat and drink. Just do not embarrass me by sending me out. The host said to him: No, you must leave. Bar Kamtza said to him: I will give you money for half of the feast; just do not send me away. The host said to him: No, you must leave. Bar Kamtza then said to him: I will give you money for the entire feast; just let me stay. The host said to him: No, you must leave. Finally, the host took bar Kamtza by his hand, stood him up, and took him out. After having been cast out from the feast, bar Kamtza said to himself: Since the Sages were sitting there and did not protest the actions of the host, although they saw how he humiliated me, learn from it that they were content with what he did. I will therefore go and inform [eikhul kurtza] against them to the king. He went and said to the emperor: The Jews have rebelled against you. The emperor said to him: Who says that this is the case? Bar Kamtza said to him: Go and test them; send them an offering to be brought in honor of the government, and see whether they will sacrifice it. The emperor went and sent with him a choice three-year-old calf. While bar Kamtza was coming with the calf to the Temple, he made a blemish on the calf’s upper lip. And some say he made the blemish on its eyelids, a place where according to us, i.e., halakha, it is a blemish, but according to them, gentile rules for their offerings, it is not a blemish. Therefore, when bar Kamtza brought the animal to the Temple, the priests would not sacrifice it on the altar since it was blemished, but they also could not explain this satisfactorily to the gentile authorities, who did not consider it to be blemished. The blemish notwithstanding, the Sages thought to sacrifice the animal as an offering due to the imperative to maintain peace with the government. Rabbi Zekharya ben Avkolas said to them: If the priests do that, people will say that blemished animals may be sacrificed as offerings on the altar. The Sages said: If we do not sacrifice it, then we must prevent bar Kamtza from reporting this to the emperor. The Sages thought to kill him so that he would not go and speak against them. Rabbi Zekharya said to them: If you kill him, people will say that one who makes a blemish on sacrificial animals is to be killed. As a result, they did nothing, bar Kamtza’s slander was accepted by the authorities, and consequently the war between the Jews and the Romans began. Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The excessive humility of Rabbi Zekharya ben Avkolas destroyed our Temple, burned our Sanctuary, and exiled us from our land.