Talmud Commentary: Bavli 2/6. bBetsah 23a (mBetsah 2:8)

@Manuscript evidence

@General observations

The Mishnah lists three lenient rulings of Ele‘azar ben Azaryah. The first ruling refers to an animal that may not be allowed to perform any of the 39 acts of labor for its owner’s benefit. This includes transporting objects from a private into a public domain. Rabbi Ele‘azar ben Azaryah holds that a strap between the horns of a cow is an ornament and therefore allows it. Since this strap is not part of the regular paraphernalia of a cow, the sages prohibited it. Furthermore, they discuss more generally the question of whether the prohibition of acts of labor involving animals applies only on Shabbat or for festivals as well. The gemara then inquires whether Rabbi Ele‘azar ben Azaryah had only one cow. This question was raised because, according to the Babylonian sage, Rav, Rabbi Ele‘azar ben Azaryah was very rich, and had many cows, which he tithed according to the biblical commandment. The tithed animals were then brought to the Temple where they were offered as sacrifices, with the meat being eaten by the owner and his guests. According to the tradition transmitted here, Rabbi Ele‘azar ben Azaryah must have had 130,000 calves born each year in his herd.[1]

The gemara therefore asks why the Mishnah speaks of his (one) cow. The gemara answers that it was his (female) neighbor’s cow. Since Rabbi Ele‘azar ben Azaryah observed his neighbor’s practice of allowing her cow to walk out into the public domain with an ornamental strap between its horns and said nothing, it became obvious that Ele‘azar ben Azaryah permitted this practice. The parallel version in the Yerushalmi reports this as being a Babylonian tradition, as it uses the formula תמן אמרינן (there it is taught), “there” pointing to Babylonia.

@Feminist observations

The mention of a rabbi’s female neighbor leads us again to the question of female neighbors (see Bavli 2/2, bBets 17a). Galit Hasan-Rokem has demonstrated that rabbinic stories about neighbors tend to feature women as their protagonists.[1] Ilan has furthermore observed that the Bavli and several rabbinic sources describe female neighbors as particularly evil.[2] In this tradition, a female neighbor is referred to in a discussion about the permissibility of taking out an animal, in this case a cow, into the public domain on a festival day.

While the Bavli states that the cow is the property of Rabbi Ele‘azar’s (male) neighbor (see MSS versions above), the Yerushalmi actually claims that the word “cow” here refers to his wife, alleging that it was his wife who went out on Shabbat in an untoward fashion and whom he failed to reprimand. As an alternative tradition, it refers to what is taught in Babylonia, namely that the actions were those of his female neighbor. This disrespectful comparison between an animal and a woman, the actual wife of a rabbi, or the reference to a female neighbor is striking since the Yerushalmi was obviously aware of the contents of the Babylonian tradition. Although the story is not based on any historical evidence, it demonstrates an underlying principle about the rabbis’ attitude towards women and their roles: First of all: Although the Mishnah does not say anything about a woman, in the Yerushalmi doubtful halakhic behavior is ascribed to women. She (either the wife or the female neighbor who owns the cow) is recorded here as violating halakhic rules or at least adhering to a lenient interpretation of them. Second, in the opinion of the rabbis it did not matter whether the cow was the property of a woman or not. Every action and activity fell under the authority of the male rabbi of the neighborhood. Decisions pertaining to permissions and prohibitions, together with the interpretation of halakhic rules were assigned to men, whereas violations thereof and dubious behavior were ascribed to women. Thus, both a woman’s property and her behavior, were considered to fall under the jurisdiction of the male (preferably rabbinic) authority.

The Babylonian MSS tradition here is fascinating. In all versions, reference is made to a male neighbor and his cow. Thus, if the Yerushalmi knows a Babylonian tradition about Ele‘azar ben Azaryah’s cow, as it claims, it is not the one the Bavli itself reports. It is therefore fascinating that when the Vilna print of this tractate in the Bavli was prepared, the male neighbor of the MSS was transformed into a female neighbor. This was done, I suspect, under the influence of the Yerushalmi parallel, but also because the typesetter must have felt that this story, about an erring neighbor, fitted a woman much more than a man.