Small Mindedness, Inherited Wisdom, Uncles and False Omens Bava Basra 107-110

107

Small Minded Thinking

Our Gemara on amud aleph uses a distinctive Hebrew word to describe taking off a piece of land and granting it to another inheritor, “Mekamtzin”, which we can translate as snipping off. The word has a different connotation than other apparent synonyms, such as “chatoch”, to cut, or “lachalok” to divide. The Maharal (Netzach Yisrael 5) explains that the word kometz, means to take a small part of a larger whole, which certainly applies to our Gemara. Also, the section taken from the Mincha offering is also a “kometz”, a small tribute out of the larger meal offering. 

The Aramaic word for grasshopper is Kamtza. Maharal says that the locust come in such large swarms, that in relation to such a giant whole, the single organism is a miniscule entity from the larger mass.  Taking this further, we know the famous story of Kamtza and Bar Kamtza (Gittin 55b) who were considered the catalysts for the destruction of Yerushalayim.  

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. A wealthy man in the 1st century CE sends his servant to invite his friend, Kamtza, to a party. However, the servant accidentally invites Bar Kamtza, the wealthy man’s enemy. The host publicly embarrasses Bar Kamtza, ordering him to leave. Bar Kamtza tries to save face by offering to pay for the food, half the party, and then the entire party, but the host refuses each time. Humiliated, Bar Kamtza seeks revenge against the rabbis who didn’t defend him. He tells the Roman Caesar that the Jews are planning a revolt against the Roman Empire, leading to retaliation from Rome.

Maharal says the Beis Hamikdash central purpose and power is unification.  Unification of God, the Jewish people and the world. Quarrel and dissent is of course the opposite of unity, and the word Kamtza itself, represents the breaking off of the miniscule from the larger entity. Jerusalem was destroyed by this small-mindedness and factionalism. Maharal notes that the language of the Gemara implies that Kamtza and Bar Kamtza are both guilty. We understand that Bar Kamtza was an informant, that is evil, but what did Kamtza do? Maharal explains, there are some people who develop friendships not for intrinsic reasons, but to cut off and isolate others.  Thus, Kamtza’s friendship with the host was itself a cutting off from the whole, because even though his connection to the host was superficially about friendship, it was more to divide and make others feel excluded.

108

A Wealthy Bequest

Our Gemara on amud beis uses a proof  text to teach that if a man has no children to inherit him, the closest next of kin, father, brothers, uncles etc inherit him. The Mikra Mefurash, quoted by Sefer Daf al Daf, raises a question from Avraham’s dialogue with God, where he expresses fear that without an heir, his servant will inherit all his wealth (Bereishis 15:3):

Avram said further, “Since You have granted me no offspring, my steward (Eliezer) will be my heir.”

The Mikra Mefurash asks, why would Avraham mention Eliezer as his successor? Avraham had a brother (Nachor) and a nephew (Lot) who could inherit him. He answers, this is a proof for the Rambam’s position that aside from direct from father, next of kin inheritance does not apply to Gentiles, and is subject to their local custom and law (Nachalos 6:9).  In this regard, Avraham was a gentile and subject to local ordnance. 

However, there are other ways to understand Avraham’s concern. Yismach Moshe explains that Avraham was concerned about his spiritual heir. If he had no son, the man who would carry on his teachings and his philosophy was Eliezer, his servant. While Eliezer was a righteous person and could have done some of the job, no one can carry on the legacy of a father’s teachings as well as a son. 

We see this reflected in the Rambam (Laws of Kings 1:7):

Not only the monarchy, but all other positions of authority and appointments in Israel, are transferred to one’s children and grandchildren as inheritances forever. The above applies if the knowledge and the fear of God of the son is equivalent to that of his ancestors. If his fear of God is equivalent to theirs but not his knowledge, he should be granted his father’s position and given instruction. However, under no circumstance should a person who lacks the fear of God be appointed to any position in Israel, even though he possesses much knowledge.

We see a strong preference for a son to carry on the father’s legacy. When all things are considered equal, the son is preferred for leadership positions.  The most logical explanation is that though a loyal student can absorb his master’s teachings, and we have notable figures such as Yehoshua who took precedence of Moshe’s own sons, a son is able to inherit his father’s teachings in a superior fashion. Factors such as similar temperament, length of exposure time and experience, and many non-verbal cues are subtle parts of Torah.

I write this piece on Erev Rosh Hashanah which is also my father’s Yahrzheit.  I am grateful for the Torah he taught me, much of which could only come from being by his side, shmoozing, joking, crying and observing his conduct. May we all be zocheh to carry Torah to the next generations in the most authentic manner.

109

False Omens

Our Gemara on amud beis discusses the famous incident of the Pesel Micha, as described in Shoftim 17. In those anarchic times, a fellow made a sanctuary and appointed his own priest. From our Gemara’s exposition of the story, the man met a person named Levi, and took it as a sign that he was to be HIS Levite, that is, a man to serve as his Cohen in his fabricated temple.

Indeed we find in our tradition an idea that certain successes or lack thereof can indicate divine will.  For example, Mishna Berachos (5:5) states about Rabbi Chanina Ben Dosa:

Rabbi Ḥanina ben Dosa that he would pray on behalf of the sick and immediately after his prayer he would say: This one shall recover from his illness and live and this one shall die. When they said to him: From where do you know? He said to them: If my prayer is fluent in my mouth as I recite it and there are no errors, I know that my prayer is accepted. And if not, I know that my prayer is rejected.

Likewise, sometimes a sage will notice he is not successful in an endeavor, and treat it as a sign that it was not meant to be, such as Rabbi Yehuda Hanasi’s failed attempt to give Yehuda Yarchina’ah semicha (see Bava Metzia 85b and Rashi.)

However, Tzidkas Hatzadik (39) cautions that even when we think that we are receiving divine assistance, we should be careful not to put too much stock in it:

Sometimes a person might think that they have divine assistance (siyata diShmaya) in something they are doing, but they should not rely on this to claim that the matter is inherently good…at times, divine help is granted for the sake of a test or trial. An example of this is in the book of Micha, where it is stated, “Now I know that Hashem will do good to me, for I have a Levite as a priest.” Micha thought that he had siyata diShmaya and divine help, as Hashem provided him with a Levite to serve as a priest, believing that this was for his benefit.

But who among us can truly know from where the success comes (as stated in Kiddushin 71a)? The solution to this dilemma is prayer and supplication for heavenly mercy, which can help transform even the root, as I explained elsewhere on the verse “Create for me a pure heart” (Tehillim 51:12). The word “create” always refers to something brought into being from nothing (yesh me’ayin), as is well known. 

Tzidkas Hatzadik is saying that we must pray for divine guidance that we not be misled, and we be appropriately humble in understanding that wisdom is ultimately a miraculous creation that comes from God.

110

Causation, Not Correlation 

Our Gemara on amud aleph offers advice on how to determine a suitable mate based on lineage:

Rava says: One who marries a woman needs to first examine her brothers so that he will know in advance what character his children will have, as it is stated: “And Aaron took Elisheva, the daughter of Amminadav, the sister of Nahshon” (Exodus 6:23). By inference from that which is stated: “The daughter of Amminadav,” do I not know that she is the sister of Nahshon, as Nahshon was the son of Amminadav? What is the meaning when the verse states: “The sister of Nahshon”? From here one learns that one who marries a woman needs to examine her brothers. The reason is as the Sages taught: Most sons resemble the mother’s brothers.

I have always assumed that the dynamic described was a combination of genetics, personal qualities, and family middos. For example, a strict parental attitude could be helpful for one child and harmful to another. So, the brother of one’s wife, who has her genetics and his gender, might be a crystal ball to determine what his sons will be like.

Sefer Daf al Daf discusses an observation from Agra Dekallah (Toldos). Yitschok married Rivkah despite knowing the sinister qualities of her brother Lavan. However, this is because it was determined via divine signs that they were meant for each other. Yet, how could Yaakov marry Rachel and Leah, whose kin were presumably nefarious? The answer given is that based on Rashi and the Midrash (Bereishis 30:27), Lavan did not have sons before Yaakov’s arrival. Therefore there were no brothers, and Yaakov could be free of this concern.  

If this answer is true though, it adds a different dimension to this Chazal.  The brothers are not correlation, but causation. Meaning, virtuous or evil brothers will influence their nephews.  This idea is supported from a story of the Chazon Ish (Maa’seh Ish 6) who told a student of his who was visiting with his nephew to be a proper role model, and he quoted our Gemara.  Assuming that it was not meant as merely a melitzah, we see the Chazon Ish also believed this to be causation and not correlation.

Uncles have important work to do. Indeed, sometimes an uncle has a special way to connect to his nephew because he is at once paternal enough, but still not as strict or complicated as a parent.  Uncles can offer a unique kind of nurturance and acceptance that is both parental and separate. It is kind of half-way between the spoiling of a grandparent, and the heaviness of a parent.  Family is a good thing.