THOUGHTS ON THE DAILY DAF
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question about the Daf
Previous daf
Bava Basra, 10
BAVA BASRA 9 & 10 - these Dafim have been dedicated anonymously l'Iluy
Nishmas Tzirel Nechamah bas Tuvya Yehudah.
|
1) THE JEWISH PEOPLE ARE ALWAYS THE CHILDREN OF HASHEM
QUESTION: The wicked Turnusrufus argued that the Jewish practice of
supporting their poor was wrong. He likened the practice to a person who
feeds a king's slave whom the king imprisoned and ordered not to be fed, and
the Jewish people are slaves to the King, Hashem, as it says, "For the
Jewish people are My slaves" (Vayikra 25:55). Rebbi Akiva argued that the
Jewish people are not like slaves, but rather they are like children to the
King, as the verse says, "You are children to Hashem your G-d" (Devarim
14:1), and certainly a king who imprisons his son and orders that his son
not be fed will be happy when someone feeds his son. Turnusrufus rejoined
that only when the Jews are doing the will of Hashem are they considered His
children, but when they are not doing the will, they are considered His
slaves and not His children. Rebbi Akiva answered that, nevertheless, the
verse instructs, "Distribute your bread to the hungry, and bring the poor,
who are cast out, into your house" (Yeshayah 58:7). The verse is teaching
that you are to "distribute your bread to the hungry" when the poor are
"cast out," meaning even when they are not doing the will of Hashem.
How, though, did Rebbi Akiva's response answer the claim of Turnusrufus that
the Jews are called slaves when they are not doing the will of Hashem, and
thus it is not the King's interest that they be fed?
ANSWER: The MAHARSHA explains that Rebbi Akiva was saying that even though
Hashem is angry with them, they are still considered His children, as the
Gemara in Kidushin (36a, according to Rebbi Meir) says: even when they are
acting destructively, they are still called "Banim," as the verse says,
"Banim Mashchisim" (Hoshea 2:1). Rebbi Akiva brought further proof from the
verse of "the poor, who are cast out."
However, it is only the opinion of Rebbi Meir that the Jewish people are
considered the children of Hashem even when they sin. Rebbi Yehudah (in
Kidushin there) argues and says that when they are not acting like the
children of Hashem, they are not called His children. Why did Rebbi Akiva
give an answer that suffices only for the opinion of Rebbi Meir?
The RASHBA (in Teshuvos, cited by Rav Chaim Karelenstein, zt'l) says that
the Halachah follows the view of Rebbi Meir and not that of Rebbi Yehudah in
this regard. Hence, Rebbi Akiva was answering Turnusrufus in accordance with
the Halachah. (I. Alsheich)
2) THE SEVERITY OF WITHHOLDING HELP FROM THE POOR
QUESTION: The Gemara relates that Rav Papa was once ascending some steps and
his foot slipped and he almost fell. He lamented that by nearly falling to
his death, he almost met the fate of a person who is Chayav for desecrating
the Shabbos or for worshipping Avodah Zarah, both of which are punished with
Sekilah (falling to one's death, as in Kesuvos 30b). Chiya bar Rav suggested
to Rav Papa that perhaps a poor person once came to him and Rav Papa did not
support him, for Rebbi Yehoshua ben Karcha taught that one who hides his
eyes from the needs of a poor person and does not support him is considered
as if he worshipped Avodah Zarah. Rebbi Yehoshua ben Karcha derives this
from a Gezeirah Shaveh.
What, though, is the logical comparison between worshipping Avodah Zarah and
not helping a poor person?
ANSWERS:
(a) The MAHARSHA (9a, DH Shekulah) answers that when a person gives
Tzedakah, he suffers no loss of funds as a result, because Hashem
replenishes his funds for him, as the verse states, "The one who is gracious
to the poor is considered to have lent money to Hashem, and He will pay him
back for his kindness" (Mishlei 19:17). Accordingly, one who refrains from
giving to the poor has heretical thoughts, for he says to himself that there
is no one who will replenish his loss of funds. It is as if he is denying
the power of Hashem and is worshipping the power of money.
(b) RAV ELCHANAN WASSERMAN (in KOVETZ SHI'URIM here) writes that one who
worships Avodah Zarah does so because he believes that the idol has the
ability to benefit him or to cause him to suffer. Similarly, one who refuses
to give money to a poor person does so because he believes that money has
the power to benefit him and that if he has less money he will suffer.
Hence, he shows that he makes his welfare depending on money, and not on
Hashem, and he makes money the god in whom he trusts. In truth, though,
"Wealth will not help on the day of wrath" (Mishlei 11:4), and it will not
save him from hardship or punishment if such is decreed upon him. On the
contrary, by "suffering" as a result of giving his money to the poor, he
will be saved from suffering in other ways, as we see from the incident of
the nephews of Rebbi Yochanan ben Zakai. The same applies to doing acts of
Tzedakah with resources other than one's money, such as with one's body; by
toiling and bothering oneself, or by suffering some disgrace, in order to do
an act of Tzedakah or a Mitzvah, one exempts himself from a decree of toil
or shame from another source. (I. Alsheich)
10b
2) THE UNIQUE PLACE IN "OLAM HA'BA" OF THE "HARUGEI MALCHUS"
QUESTION: Rav Yosef brei d'Rav Yehoshua reported that he heard them saying,
in the World of Truth, that "no one can stand in the place [in Olam ha'Ba]
of the Harugei Malchus (those killed Al Kidush Hashem)." The Gemara asks to
whom does "Harugei Malchus" refer. It cannot refer to Rebbi Akiva and the
Chachamim who were murdered by the king, because even if they had not died
Al Kidush Hashem, no one could compare to them. RASHI explains that this
(dying Al Kidush Hashem) certainly was not the only worthy thing that they
did, and that without it they were not otherwise deserving of a unique place
in Olam ha'Ba. Rather, Rebbi Akiva and his colleagues were great in Torah
and Mitzvos, and for that as well they were deserving of a unique place in
Olam ha'Ba.
What, though, is the Gemara's question? Granted, Rebbi Akiva and his
colleagues were great in Torah and Mitzvos, but perhaps this would not
exclude others from being able to reach their place in Olam ha'Ba. Rather,
it was the fact that they died Al Kidush Hashem that gave them the unique
place in Olam ha'ba, which no one else can reach!
ANSWER: The YOSEF DA'AS quotes RAV A. NEVENTZAL who says that this Gemara is
proof that greatness in Torah and Mitzvos is an achievement even greater
than dying Al Kidush Hashem. Indeed, the Gemara in Megilah (16b) teaches
that "Talmud Torah is greater than Hatzalas Nefashos (saving lives)," as we
learn from Mordechai ha'Tzadik who was held accountable even for
interrupting his learning of Torah in order to save the lives of the entire
community. Similarly, the Gemara in Avodah Zarah (18a) relates that Rebbi
Yosi ben Kisma said to Rebbi Chanina ben Teradyon -- who was teaching Torah
even though the Romans had decreed a death sentence against anyone who does
so (and, indeed, Rebbi Chanina ben Teradyon was ultimately tortured and
killed for teaching Torah) -- that "from your share [in Olam ha'Ba] I should
have a part!" implying that Rebbi Chanina ben Teradyon's reward for learning
Torah was greater than that for dying Al Kidush Hashem. (I. Alsheich)
Next daf
|