When I First Started Reading the Tractate, I Was Confused Because of the Wording. Some
When I first started reading the Tractate, I was confused because of the wording. Some of what I was reading seemed more like people’s opinions rather than the laws of God. When I got to Chapter 2, I saw that I was right. In Chapter 2, many different opinions on a subject were given, differing from each other.
I looked this up on the internet and learned that this is part of the Hebrew Talmud, their book of learned opinions on how a Godly man should live his life and be a member of his community. An example of this from the Tractate is the following:
“He said to them: Go forth and see which is the right road for a man to choose? Rabbi Eliezer says: A good eye. Rabbi Joshua says: A good companion. Rabbi Yosi says: A good neighbor. Rabbi Simon says: He that can foresee the outcome of things. Rabbi Eleazer says: A good heart.” (This, by the way, is something I agree with and find useful.)
We are meant to look at these opinions and use them to shape our own opinions. We are meant to question these opinions and learn from them, which is how Jewish people use them. When Jews seek help from their rabbis (learned teachers), they are often presented with these opinions in the Talmud and helped to fit them to their own contemporary life.
This is the way I finally read them.
Most of the ideas in the first three chapters I found easy to believe and some particularly useful. Some were useful because they confirmed what I already felt; they made me feel stronger in my opinions. An example of this is Hillel’s assertion that we should “love peace and pursue peace, love humanity and bring them nearer to the Law.” And I felt very strongly about this statement by Rabbi Simon ben Gamaliel: The world exists because of three things: truth, justice, and peace
Some of these “aphorisms” made me think more or deeper. Shamai said “Make of your study a permanent habit. Say little and do much, and receive every person with courtesy.” We are not living in a time when people say little and do much, but as I thought about this, I realized how important this philosophy is. If every were studious, courteous, and quietly helping others, this couldn’t help but be a better world.
“Rabbi Akiba says: All is foreseen but freedom of choice is granted, and the world is judged with charity and all is measured by the number of good deeds.” This I really needed to think about. If God already knew what we were going to do, then where is freedom of choice. But I think this means that we still get to be ourselves, but God alone knows how we will live our lives. It is important that we have the choice to be wrong or right – only then will God know who we are.
o o o
There many things I found confusing. When “Rabbi Eliezer ben Hisma says: Nests, and the onset of menstruation: those are the essentials of law; calculations of the calendar and geometry are the sweetmeats of wisdom,” I do not understand what he is getting at.
Likewise, when Rabbi Haninah ben Hachinai comments that a person “that awakens in the night, who walketh on the road alone and turns his heart to vanity, he is liable with his life,” I am not sure what he means by “awakens in the night.” Maybe he means a man who is insecure, too worried about his own self-interest; or perhaps Rabbi Hachinai means a man who already feels guilty. It’s just not clear. And it’s not clear to me how this man would be “liable with his life.” Does he mean that the man will feel the wrath of God, which argues against freedom of choice; or does he mean the after-life?
Rabbi Yosi said “… set thyself to learn the Law which is not thy heritage, and all thy deeds shall be for the sake of Heaven. Does he mean that we should learn the laws of other people, other cultures, other faiths? Perhaps he means that it is not enough for the Hebrews to follow their own laws; they need to understand the laws of others.
The greatest confusion I had was with two assertions of Hillel. One was where he said “If I be not for myself, who shall be for me; and if I am by myself what am I? and if not now—when?” This could be interpreted a thousand ways – it is too difficult for me to interpret this without forcing my own opinion on it. That opinion would be that it is every person’s responsibility to look out for their own Salvation, and to do so without including the Lord would be to be nothing, and that each person must be doing so constantly.
The other confusing statement was “he saw a skull floating upon the surface of the water and exclaimed to it: Since thou hast drowned, someone has drowned thee, and those who are responsible for thy drowning shall be drowned in turn.” I probably need help understanding this.
I also found confusion in this comment by Yehuda ben Tabai says: Do not constitute thyself an advocate and when litigants appear before thee let them be in thine eyes as evil men, but when they leave let them be in thine eyes as blameless, inasmuch as they have accepted the verdict. My confusion is because I am troubled. Why would we start out thinking someone was guilty? Why would that be good? And I am equally confused where Simon ben Shetah says “Cross-examine the witnesses thoroughly and be cautious with thy words, because from them they may learn to speak falsely.” How can witnesses learn to speak falsely from the words of the cross examiner?
Last, the following passage seems to mean one thing then something else:
“Rabbi Halafta from the village of Haniniah says: Ten that sit and study the Torah, the spirit of the Lord hovers among them, as was spoken: (Psalms lxxii, 1) God standeth in the congregation of the mighty; And even if five, as was said: (Amos lx, 6) And hath founded his troops in the earth; and even if three, as is said: (Psalms lxxxii, 1) He judgeth among the gods; and even if two, as is said: (Malachi iii, 16) Then they that feared the Lord spoke often to one another and the Lord hearkened and heard it; and even if one, as is said: (Exodus xx, 24) In all places where I record my name I will come unto thee and I will bless thee.”
My final interpretation is that God is everywhere. And even if we study or worship as a group because that is our tradition, nonetheless God will be wherever I am, even when I am alone. And that when I am alone, I should be worshiping Him in my heart.
o o o
There were passages that I found disturbing in some way.
Hillel said thata “man who misuses his name shall soon lose his reputation. He who does not increase his knowledge shall lose it. He who abandons learning deserves death. He who curries favor of the Crown shall vanish.” Why is the punishment so severe that he deserves death? Is this person that dangerous or evil?
Yosi ben Yohanan of Jerusalem said “… hold not lengthy discourse with the woman: this is said of one's own woman; so much the more does it apply to the woman of another man. Therefore the sages said: All of the time that a man spends in lengthy discourse with a woman, he causes evil unto himself and idles away precious time from the study of the Law, and his end shall be that he shall inherit Hell.” This is so strongly anti-woman that I am forced to re-examine it. I think it is not talking about actual conversation with women, but in flirtatious behavior, distracting behavior. The Bible is filled with strong women who contributed to the Jewish community’s faith and well-being: Esther is just one example, a whole book of the Bible being dedicated to her. If Yohanan’s words mean something else, then I choose not to accept that. And that seems appropriate because these are only opinions, not law.
The Tractate also says “Rabbi Haninah ben Dosa … used to say: He that gives satisfaction to men, satisfied the Lord, but he with whom mankind is not satisfied, does not satisfy the Lord.” I am greatly troubled by the idea that a person’s worthiness is based on the opinions of others. That certainly didn’t about to Jesus and shouldn’t apply to anyone. Elsewhere, we are told that our worthiness comes from ourselves and that we shouldn’t try to be accepted by everyone, particularly not “authorities.” That is the opinion that resonates the most with me.
o o o
Overall, I found much that I agreed with and was helpful, much that made me think and grow. I can see how the Jewish culture and religion could use the Talmud as a tool of their faith.