Does This Feel Like Exile? And More Bava Basra 58-61

Biting Words

Our Gemara on Amud Aleph uses an Aramaic idiom to describe slander and libel, “ochel kurtza”, for now we can translate it as “nibbling” a metaphor for gossip. This Aramaic idiom is used generally for any type of gossip, and often specifically in the Gemara, to the act of slandering the Jews to the secular government. Actually, the first use of this phrase can be found in Daniel (3:8), which speaks of the Jews being slandered as disloyal to the king (“achlu kurtzeihon”.) We also find this phrase in the famous Kamtza and bar Kamtza Gemara in Gittin (56a), which was fortunate for me because it allowed me to write this piece on Tisha B’Av, and I needed a topic of Torah study whose the subject was the destruction of the Temple, as per Shulchan Aruch OC 554:1.)

What is the etymology and meaning of this phrase? Rashi (Vayikra 19:16) translate the phrase as eating while winking (see Mishle 6:13 “Koretz B’eynav”), hinting at the slanderous content which is often communicated via innuendo instead of directly. The eating part of the metaphor is because when people share a meal, it lends a sense of authenticity and gravity. This increases the acceptance and focus on the content.

Other interpret the word “koretz” as to nibble and bite, because pieces of gossip sometimes are like little bites, each one only a minor sting, but ultimately add up to mortal injury (Ibn Ezra, Daniel 3:8.)

It is important to reflect on the way in which hurtful speech is frequently composed of relatively minor and innocuous comments. Each one by itself is just a nibble, but like piranhas, they can still eat you alive.

People get comfortable and lazy in their speech patterns between parent to child or spouse to spouse. We might passive aggressively vent off frustrations, by chronically being nasty or hurtful in tiny ways. Subtle inflection of voice, rolling eyes, and harping critical comments can become a predominant mode of expression. Because it creeps up slowly over the years, the participants might not even fully realize how bad it is, just as the lobster does not realize that the pot is boiling until it’s too late. It’s a good idea to review speech patterns and notice how you speak to the people you love and how they are speaking to you. If you notice your tone of voice irritable, snappy, or sharp, try to correct it. If you notice that it is coming from a spouse or loved one, don’t merely correct it, but wonder and and ask yourself what might be the source of resentment and frustration that is being expressed in their tone and choice of words? Though it is hard, there’s much to be gained by reviewing and considering what other people find annoying or hurtful about you.

I will end with a lovely thought from the Shem MiShmuel (Shemini Atzeres and Simchas Torah 1), based on Rashi’s explanation of the idiom. When people eat together, it validates and authenticates the subject matter. It is like two close friends conspirationally sharing their intimate secrets. He borrows from this to add meaning to the Midrashic explanation of Shemini Atzeres, that it is the last day of a series of holidays with a single Bullock sacrifice being offered. Just as after a major national celebration, the king may have an intimate meal with his closest advisors, so to the holiday of Shemini Atzeres is the intimate gathering after the high holiday season in which the entire world is judged (Succah 55b). Just as slander and gossip is authenticated by the intimate gathering, even more so our prayers and connection to God after the Yamim

Noraim our authenticated and validated through a private meal for only close confidants.

Observant Judaism Or Is It Absorbent Judaism?

Our Gemara on Amud Aleph quotes verse in Koheles (4:12):

“A threefold twine does not quickly snap.”

The basic idea is that something threefold and intertwined has tensile strength that is beyond any single strand. There are numerous aggados that utilize this truth about material and physical properties and apply them to the spiritual. Our Gemara suggests that when there are three generations of Torah study in a family, it becomes securely embedded within the lineage, and there will always be Torah study within that bloodline. Likewise, Gemara Menachos (53b) states:

Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says: Anyone who has phylacteries on his head, phylacteries on his arm, ritual fringes on his garment, and a mezuza on his doorway is strengthened from all sides so that he will not sin, as it is stated in the verse: “And a threefold cord is not quickly broken” (Ecclesiastes 4:12). This is interpreted as an allusion to the three mitzvos of phylacteries, ritual fringes, and mezuzah. And the verse states: “The angel of the Lord encamps round about them that fear Him, and delivers them” (Psalms 34:8). This is interpreted to mean that the angel of the Lord surrounds those who fulfill the mitzvos and saves them from sin.

When a pattern repeats itself, both within nature and the physical world and spirituality, it must be an extremely deep and fundamental truth which resonates across the dimensions. Elsewhere, I commented that the risk/reward ratio is a constant truth in every aspect of life from the spiritual to the physical. That is, the more you risk the greater chance you are to receive, and the less you risk the lesser your chances. It doesn’t matter if you’re talking about emotional vulnerability in relationships, spiritual striving, or investing in the stock market, the risk/reward ratio holds constant. Similarly, the principle of something threefold being more durable than any of the individual components is one of those truths that run across all dimensions of existence

Be’er Mayim Chaim, (Shemos 23:26) makes a beautiful point about the teaching from Gemara Menachos above. How could the sages sweepingly assert that anyone who has Talis, Tefilin and Mezuzah will be saved from sin? Don’t we see every day people who religiously observe these commandments and other ways can still be transgressors and morally deficient? he says, if you pay attention to the literal, Hebrew phrase, the answer is evident. It does not say, “tefilin, mezuzah and tzitzis ON the head, doorway, and garment.” It actually uses the Hebrew prefix “Bais”, which means literally inside (the actual Hebrew letter Beis is a pictograph of a bayis, which is a house. That is to say, something that has an inside.) Therefore one can translate the statement from the Gemara as, “Anyone who has tefilin, mezuzah and tzitzis IN the head, doorway, and garment.” He says, wearing tefilin, tzitzis or mezuzah without the intent of actually taking in the meaning of accepting the yoke of heaven and the commandments is as useless as having them sit in your drawer. These items are not described as “on”, but instead “in“. Because the person who internalizes the messages is the one who is saved from sin.

Does This Feel Like Exile?

Our Gemara on Amud Beis discusses various customs of abstention from demonstrations of joy, pleasure and material wealth in order to honor and internalize being contrite over our exile.

One of the challenges in our a time of relative prosperity is to honestly feel a sense of mourning and loss. We have to recall events from the Holocaust, or more recently October 7, and the general rise of antisemitism to arouse a mood of dread. It is important to be humbled and not let prosperity go to our heads so we not lose sight of our vulnerability and need to rely on God. This is a theme which was predicted prophetically in Devarim (32:15):

So Jeshurun grew fat and kicked—You grew fat and gross and coarse —They forsook the God who made themAnd spurned the Rock of their support.

At the risk of being disrespectful, I would like to emphasize a different point in the name of rationality and psychological honesty. Of course the ideas above of remaining appropriately contrite and affected by our exile are worthy, yet I think there is another side. We cannot completely delude ourselves and pretend we are just so sad and suffering without a Temple and Jewish monarchy. In many respects, life in the 21st Century is good, even Jewish life. Some try to reframe the mourning along the lines that, “We are so lost in exile, that like a pig in mud, we are oblivious to what we do not have.” I think that it is a helpful approach but still lacking in the fullest authenticity, because well, to be honest it just doesn’t feel that sad, and we have great spiritual opportunities because of our prosperity and freedoms. It’s hard to deny it.

Let’s look at an interesting source from Rosh Hashanah (18b) referring to the Four Fasts: Tzom Gedaliah, Asara B’Teves, Shiva Asar B’Tammuz and Tisha B’Av.

When there is peace in the world and the Temple is standing, these days will be times of joy and gladness; when there is persecution and troubles for the Jewish people, they are days of fasting; and when there is no persecution but still no peace, neither particular troubles nor consolation for Israel, the halakha is as follows: If people wish, they fast, and if they wish, they do not fast. Since there is no absolute obligation to fast, messengers are not sent out for these months.

In actual Halacha, the longstanding custom for generations, is to keep these fasts (Shulchan Aruch 550:1) no matter how prosperous the social and economic conditions are. Even when something is true in the technical Halacha, despite the custom being contrary, it still has ethical implications. The fact that there is an idea, albeit never followed, that during times of prosperity engaging in certain abstentions and morning processes were voluntary shows that there is some ethical merit to the notion that it is not the simplest thing to mourn and feel sad when there is prosperity.

The upshot is, that of course we must pay respect to the idea that in fact, we are still only by the grace of God in some degree of prosperity. Therefore it is incumbent upon us to remember the suffering of the past as well as the subtle indignities of current exile. At the same time, we can be honest with ourselves and realize that there is prosperity and that it can affect the degree and ability for us to realistically experience a sense of tragedy and grief.

Efron’s Emptiness

Our Gemara on Amud Beis discusses various implied conditions and additions in the sale of property. Within that discussion Rashbam notes that one cannot use a price as indicator of how much or how few extras were included in the property, because we have a general principle that there’s no such thing as overcharging or undercharging when it comes to real estate. Unlike chattel, real estate varies in price greatly and what is considered overcharging or undercharging has a significantly greater variance.

Yamin Yosef (Chaye Sarah) offer a logical reason as to why the standard rules of overcharging do not apply to real estate. He says, because real estate is generally involving land that generates produce, the variance is broad. A small parcel of land might generate bountiful crops and a large parcel of land might hardly produce. Arguably, the value of land is based on what it is able to produce. He then observes, based on “natural law“ principle, we can have insight into Efron’s surprising behavior. Avraham requested to purchase the Machpela cave as a burial site. However, the verse relates that Efron sold Avraham the field as well. Yamin Yosef says that Efron realized that he was charging a hideously large amount of money (400 shekels) and was afraid that Avraham would be able to claim that he was overcharged. But by selling him a field along with the cave, this could camouflage the price differential because he could argue that the field had an unusually high yield potential in terms of produce.

While we are discussing Efron, based on the Baal Haturim and Bereishis Rabbah (58:7) we can observe that Efron‘s name is written in Hebrew several times in the narrative as maleh (with the vav vowel), except once, when Avraham painstakingly doles out the full 400 shekel for Efron. In that version, the spelling of his name chaser missing, and is without the Vav. We saw earlier Efron’s obsession regarding the purchase price and fear that Avraham would renege. The greedy man who has little trust, never feels full or secure. Hence his name is literally written incompletely.