The Meaning of Suffering – Brachot 5a-5b – Eight Theologically Provocative Talmud Sugyot By Rabbi Mordechai Silverstein

I want to introduce this study sheet with two introductions: one about the Talmud and the other, about the subject.

First, let me say a few words about the Talmud. You will notice that the beginning of our studies this week is not quite about the announced topic. Instead, we will study a bit about the subject of the recitation of the Shma prayer before going to sleep. Only as a digression from this topic to we get to the topic at hand. This tells us something about Talmudic organization. James Joyce did not introduce the idea of “stream of consciousness, the Talmud did. (This is intended to be humorous.) The Talmud moves in an organic way from topic to topic, inspired by associations. I have purposely not extracted the relevant material so that you will get the sense of this characteristic.

This brings us to our topic. Our treatment of this topic will not be systematic. Rather as I noted, it will be associative through Scriptural interpretations, Talmudic arguments (albeit easier ones than last weeks) and anecdotal materials. The answers will not be definitive. We will not come to conclusions. We will ponder and struggle. We will be introduced to interesting concepts, ask questions and debate, be interested and be bothered. Ah, but isn’t that what being Jewish is all about!

ברכות ה:א-ב

#1

1. [מימרא]

אמר רבי יצחק: כל הקורא קריאת שמע על מטתו, כאלו אוחז חרב של שתי פיות בידו

שנאמר (תהלים קמט:ו) רוממות אל בגרונם וחרב פיפיות בידם.

2. [שאלה]

מאי משמע?

3. [תשובה]

אמר מר זוטרא ואיתימא רב אשי: מרישא דענינא,

דכתיב (תהלים קמט:ה) יעלזו חסידים בכבוד ירננו על משכבותם,

וכתיב בתריה: רוממות אל בגרונם וחרב פיפיות בידם.

4. [עוד מימרא]

ואמר רבי יצחק: כל הקורא קריאת שמע על מטתו – מזיקין בדילין הימנו,

שנאמר (איוב ה:ז) ובני רשף יגביהו עוף;

ואין עוף אלא תורה,

שנאמר: (משלי כג:ה) התעיף עיניך בו ואיננו;

ואין רשף אלא מזיקין,

שנאמר (דברים לב:כד) מזי רעב ולחמי רשף וקטב מרירי.

#2

1. [מימרא]

אמר רבי שמעון בן לקיש: כל העוסק בתורה יסורין בדילין הימנו,

שנאמר: (איוב ה:ז) ובני רשף יגביהו עוף;

ואין עוף אלא תורה,

שנאמר: (משלי כג:ה) התעיף עיניך בו ואיננו;

ואין רשף אלא יסורין,

שנאמר: (דברים לב:כד) מזי רעב ולחמי רשף.

2. [ר’ יוחנן חולק על ר’ שמעון בן לקיש]

אמר ליה רבי יוחנן: הא אפילו תינוקות של בית רבן יודעין אותו,

שנאמר: (שמות טו:כו) ויאמר אם שמוע תשמע לקול ה’ אלהיך והישר בעיניו תעשה והאזנת למצותיו ושמרת כל חקיו כל המחלה אשר שמתי במצרים לא אשים עליך כי אני ה’ רופאך!

3. [לימוד אחר בעניין]

אלא: כל שאפשר לו לעסוק בתורה ואינו עוסק – הקדוש ברוך הוא מביא עליו יסורין מכוערין ועוכרין אותו,

שנאמר: (תהלים לט:ג) נאלמתי דומיה החשיתי מטוב וכאבי נעכר,

ואין טוב אלא תורה,

שנאמר: (משלי ד:ב) כי לקח טוב נתתי לכם תורתי אל תעזובו.

#3

1. [עוד דרשה על הפסוק “כי לקח טוב”]

אמר רבי זירא ואיתימא רבי חנינא בר פפא: בא וראה שלא כמדת הקדוש ברוך הוא מדת בשר ודם,

מדת בשר ודם – אדם מוכר חפץ לחבירו, מוכר עצב ולוקח שמח; אבל הקדוש ברוך הוא אינו כן – נתן להם תורה לישראל ושמח,

שנאמר: כי לקח טוב נתתי לכם תורתי אל תעזובו.

#4

1. [עוד מימרא בעניין ייסורים]

אמר רבא ואיתימא רב חסדא: אם רואה אדם שיסורין באין עליו – יפשפש במעשיו,

שנאמר (איכה ג:מ) נחפשה דרכינו ונחקורה ונשובה עד ה’;

פשפש ולא מצא – יתלה בבטול תורה,

שנאמר: (תהלים צד:יב) אשרי הגבר אשר תיסרנו יה ומתורתך תלמדנו.

ואם תלה ולא מצא – בידוע שיסורין של אהבה הם,

שנאמר: (משלי ג:יב) כי את אשר יאהב ה’ יוכיח.

2. [עוד מימרא בעניין ייסורים של אהבה]

אמר רבא אמר רב סחורה אמר רב הונא: כל שהקדוש ברוך הוא חפץ בו – מדכאו ביסורין,

שנאמר: (ישעיהו נג:י) וה’ חפץ דכאו החלי;

יכול אפילו לא קבלם מאהבה

תלמוד לומר (שם שם שם) אם תשים אשם נפשו,

מה אשם לדעת – אף יסורין לדעת.

ואם קבלם מה שכרו

(שם שם שם) יראה זרע יאריך ימים;

ולא עוד אלא שתלמודו מתקיים בידו,

שנאמר: (שם שם שם) וחפץ ה’ בידו יצלח.

3. [מחלוקת בעניין ייסורים של אהבה]

פליגי בה רבי יעקב בר אידי ורבי אחא בר חנינא,

– חד אמר: אלו הם יסורין של אהבה – כל שאין בהן בטול תורה,

שנאמר: (תהלים צד:יב) אשרי הגבר אשר תיסרנו יה ומתורתך תלמדנו;

– וחד אמר: אלו הן יסורין של אהבה – כל שאין בהן בטול תפלה,

שנאמר: (תהלים סו:כ) ברוך אלהים אשר לא הסיר תפלתי וחסדו מאתי.

4. [עוד דעה בעניין ייסורים של אהבה]

אמר להו רבי אבא בריה דרבי חייא בר אבא, הכי אמר רבי חייא בר אבא אמר רבי יוחנן:

אלו ואלו יסורין של אהבה הן,

שנאמר: (משלי ג:יב) כי את אשר יאהב ה’ יוכיח;

אלא מה תלמוד לומר ומתורתך תלמדנו?

– אל תקרי תלמדנו אלא תלמדנו;

דבר זה מתורתך תלמדנו; קל וחומר משן ועין: מה שן ועין שהן אחד מאבריו של אדם – עבד יוצא בהן לחרות, יסורין שממרקין כל גופו של אדם – על אחת כמה וכמה,

והיינו דרבי שמעון בן לקיש,

דאמר רבי שמעון בן לקיש: נאמר ברית במלח ונאמר ברית ביסורין;

נאמר ברית במלח,

דכתיב (ויקרא ב:יג) ולא תשבית מלח ברית,

ונאמר ברית ביסורין,

דכתיב: (דברים כח:סט) אלה דברי הברית.

מה ברית – האמור במלח – מלח ממתקת את הבשר, אף ברית האמור ביסורין – יסורין ממרקין כל עונותיו של אדם.

#5

1. [ברייתא בעניין ייסורים]

תניא, רבי שמעון בן יוחאי אומר: שלש מתנות טובות נתן הקדוש ברוך הוא לישראל, וכולן לא נתנן אלא על – ידי יסורין. אלו הן: תורה וארץ ישראל והעולם הבא.

תורה מנין – שנאמר: אשרי הגבר אשר תיסרנו יה ומתורתך תלמדנו.

ארץ ישראל – דכתיב (דברים ח:ה) כי כאשר ייסר איש את בנו ה’ אלהיך מיסרך,

וכתיב בתריה: כי ה’ אלהיך מביאך אל ארץ טובה.

העולם הבא – דכתיב (משלי ו:כג) כי נר מצוה ותורה אור ודרך חיים תוכחות מוסר.

#6

1. [עוד ברייתא בעניין ייסורים של אהבה]

תני תנא קמיה דרבי יוחנן: כל העוסק בתורה ובגמילות חסדים וקובר את בניו – מוחלין לו על כל עונותיו.

2. [ר’ יוחנן תמה על הברייתא]

אמר ליה רבי יוחנן: בשלמא תורה וגמילות חסדים

– דכתיב (משלי טז:ו) בחסד ואמת יכפר עון;

חסד – זו גמילות חסדים,

שנאמר (משלי כא כא) רודף צדקה וחסד ימצא חיים צדקה וכבוד,

אמת – זו תורה,

שנאמר: (משלי כג:כג) אמת קנה ואל תמכר;

אלא קובר את בניו – מנין?

3. [תשובה]

תנא ליה ההוא סבא משום רבי שמעון בן יוחאי: אתיא עון, עון,

כתיב הכא: בחסד ואמת יכפר עון,

וכתיב התם: (ירמיהו לב:יח) ומשלם עון אבות אל חיק בניהם.

#7

1. [עוד מימרא בעניין ייסורים של אהבה]

אמר רבי יוחנן: נגעים ובנים אינן יסורין של אהבה.

2. [קושיא]

ונגעים לא?

והתניא: כל מי שיש בו אחד מארבעה מראות נגעים הללו – אינן אלא מזבח כפרה!

3. [תירוץ]

מזבח כפרה הוו, יסורין של אהבה לא הוו.

4. [תירוץ אחר]

ואי בעית אימא: הא לן והא להו.

5. [תירוץ אחר]

ואי בעית אימא: הא בצנעא, הא בפרהסיא,

6. [קושיא על ר’ יוחנן]

ובנים לא? היכי דמי?

אילימא דהוו להו ומתו – והא אמר רבי יוחנן: דין גרמא דעשיראה ביר.

7. [תירוץ]

אלא: הא – דלא הוו ליה כלל, והא – דהוו ליה ומתו.

#8

1. [מעשה]

רבי חייא בר אבא חלש, על לגביה רבי יוחנן. אמר ליה: חביבין עליך יסורין?

אמר ליה: לא הן ולא שכרן.

אמר ליה: הב לי ידך!

יהב ליה ידיה ואוקמיה.

2. [מעשה]

רבי יוחנן חלש, על לגביה רבי חנינא.

אמר ליה: חביבין עליך יסורין?

אמר ליה: לא הן ולא שכרן.

אמר ליה: הב לי ידך! יהב ליה ידיה ואוקמיה.

3. [קושיא]

אמאי? לוקים רבי יוחנן לנפשיה!

4. [תירוץ]

אמרי: אין חבוש מתיר עצמו מבית האסורים.

5. [מעשה]

רבי אלעזר חלש, על לגביה רבי יוחנן.

חזא דהוה קא גני בבית אפל, גלייה לדרעיה ונפל נהורא.

חזייה דהוה קא בכי רבי אלעזר.

אמר ליה: אמאי קא בכית? אי משום תורה דלא אפשת – שנינו: אחד המרבה ואחד הממעיט ובלבד שיכוין לבו לשמים! ואי משום מזוני – לא כל אדם זוכה לשתי שלחנות! ואי משום בני – דין גרמא דעשיראה ביר. אמר ליה: להאי שופרא דבלי בעפרא קא בכינא.

אמר ליה: על דא ודאי קא בכית, ובכו תרוייהו.

אדהכי והכי, אמר ליה: חביבין עליך יסורין? אמר ליה: לא הן ולא שכרן.

אמר ליה: הב לי ידך, יהב ליה ידיה ואוקמיה.

#9

1. [עוד מעשה בעניין ייסורין]

רב הונא תקיפו ליה ארבע מאה דני דחמרא, על לגביה רב יהודה אחוה דרב סלא חסידא ורבנן, ואמרי לה: רב אדא בר אהבה ורבנן, ואמרו ליה: לעיין מר במיליה.

אמר להו: ומי חשידנא בעינייכו?

אמרו ליה: מי חשיד קודשא בריך הוא דעביד דינא בלא דינא?

אמר להו: אי איכא מאן דשמיע עלי מלתא – לימא.

אמרו ליה: הכי שמיע לן דלא יהיב מר שבישא לאריסיה.

אמר להו: מי קא שביק לי מידי מיניה? הא קא גניב ליה כוליה!

אמרו ליה: היינו דאמרי אינשי: בתר גנבא גנוב, וטעמא טעים.

אמר להו: קבילנא עלי דיהיבנא ליה.

2. [סיום אפשרי לסיפור]

איכא דאמרי: הדר חלא והוה חמרא;

3. [סיום אחר לסיפור]

ואיכא דאמרי: אייקר חלא ואיזדבן בדמי דחמרא.

Berachot 5a-b

Section 1

1. [Meimra]

R. Isaac says: If one recites the Shema’ upon his bed, it is as though he held a two-edged sword in his hand. For it is said: Let the high praises of God be in their mouth, and a two-edged sword in their hand. (Psalm 149:6)

2. [Shealah]

How does it indicate this?

3. [Teshuva]

Mar Zutra, (some say, R. Ashi) says: [The lesson is] from the preceding verse. For it is written: Let the saints exult in glory, let them sing for joy upon their beds, (Psalm 149:5) and then it is written: Let the high praises of God be in their mouth, and a two-edged sword in their hand.

4. [Another meimra]

R. Isaac says further: If one recites the Shema’ upon his bed, the demons keep away from him. For it is said: And the sons of reshef fly [‘uf] upward. (Job 5:7) The word ‘uf refers only to the Torah, as it is written: Wilt thou cause thine eyes to close [hata’if] upon it? It is gone. (Proverbs 23:5) And ‘reshef’ refers only to the demons, as it is said: The wasting of hunger, and the devouring of the reshef [fiery bolt] and bitter destruction. (Deut. 32:24)

Section 2

1. [Meimra]

R. Simeon b. Lakish says: If one studies the Torah, painful sufferings are kept away from him. For it is said: And the sons of reshef fly upward. The word ‘uf refers only to the Torah, as it is written: ‘Wilt thou cause thine eyes to close upon it? It is gone’. And ‘reshef’ refers only to painful sufferings, as it is said: ‘The wasting of hunger, and the devouring of the reshef [fiery bolt].

2. [Rabbi Yochanan disagrees with Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish]

R. Johanan said to him: This is known even to school children. For it is said: And He said: If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the Lord thy God, and wilt do that which is right in His eyes, and wilt give ear to His commandments, and keep all His statutes, I will put none of the diseases upon thee which I have put upon the Egyptians; for I am the Lord that healeth thee. (Exodus 15:26)

3. [Another interpretation]

Rather [should you say]: If one has the opportunity to study the Torah and does not study it, the Holy One, blessed be He, visits him with ugly and painful sufferings which stir him up. For it is said: I was dumb with silence, I kept silence from the good thing, and my pain was stirred up. (Psalm 39:3) ‘The good thing’ refers only to the Torah, as it is said: For I give you good doctrine; forsake ye not My teaching. (Proverbs 4:2)

Section 3

1. [Another interpretation of Proverbs 4:2]

R. Zera (some say, R. Hanina b. Papa) says: Come and see how the way of human beings differs from the way of the Holy One, blessed be He. It is the way of human beings that when a man sells a valuable object to his fellow, the seller grieves and the buyer rejoices. The Holy One, blessed be He, however, is different. He gave the Torah to Israel and rejoiced. For it is said: For I give you good doctrine; forsake ye not My teaching.

Section 4

1. [Another meimra regarding suffering]

Raba (some say, R. Hisda) says: If a man sees that painful sufferings visit him, let him examine his conduct. For it is said: Let us search and try our ways, and return unto the Lord. (Lamentations 3:40) If he examines and finds nothing [objectionable], let him attribute it to the neglect of the study of the Torah. For it is said: Happy is the man whom Thou chastenest, O Lord, and teachest out of Thy law. (Psalm 94:12) If he did attribute it [thus], and still did not find [this to be the cause], let him be sure that these are chastenings of love. For it is said: For whom the Lord loveth He correcteth. (Proverbs 3:12)

2. [Another meimra regarding “afflictions of love”]

Raba, in the name of R. Sahorah, in the name of R. Huna, says: If the Holy One, blessed be He, is pleased with a man, he crushes him with painful sufferings. For it is said: And the Lord was pleased with [him, hence] he crushed him by disease. (Isaiah 53:10) Now, you might think that this is so even if he did not accept them with love. Therefore it is said: To see if his soul would offer itself in restitution. (Ibid.) Even as the trespass-offering must be brought by consent, so also the sufferings must be endured with consent. And if he did accept them, what is his reward? He will see his seed, prolong his days. (Ibid.) And more than that, his knowledge [of the Torah] will endure with him. For it is said: The purpose of the Lord will prosper in his hand. (Ibid.)

3. [Dispute over the issue of ‘chastenings of love’]

R. Jacob b. Idi and R. Aha b. Hanina differ with regard to the following: – The one says: Chastenings of love are such as do not involve the intermission of study of the Torah. For it is said: Happy is the man whom Thou chastenest, O Lord, and teachest out of Thy law. (Psalm 94:12) – And the other one says: Chastenings of love are such as do not involve the intermission of prayer. For it is said: Blessed be God, Who hath not turned away my prayer, nor His mercy from me. (Psalm 66:20)

4. [Another opinion regarding “chastenings of love”]

R. Abba the son of R. Hiyya b. Abba said to them: Thus said R. Hiyya b. Abba in the name of R. Johanan: Both of them are chastenings of love. For it is said: For whom the Lord loveth He correcteth. (Proverbs 3:12) Why then does it say: ‘And teachest him out of Thy law’? Do not read telammedennu, [Thou teachest him] but telammedenu, [Thou teachest us]. Thou teachest us this thing out of Thy law as a conclusion a fortiori from the law concerning tooth and eye. Tooth and eye are only one limb of the man, and still [if they are hurt], the slave obtains thereby his freedom. How much more so with painful sufferings which torment the whole body of a man! And this agrees with a saying of R. Simeon b. Lakish. For R. Simeon b. Lakish said: The word ‘covenant’ is mentioned in connection with salt, and the word ‘covenant’ is mentioned in connection with sufferings: the word ‘covenant’ is mentioned in connection with salt, as it is written: Neither shalt thou suffer the salt of the covenant of thy God to be lacking. (Leviticus 2:13) And the word ‘covenant’ is mentioned in connection with sufferings, as it is written: These are the words of the covenant. (Deuteronomy 28:69) Even as in the covenant mentioned in connection with salt, the salt lends a sweet taste to the meat, so also in the covenant mentioned in connection with sufferings, the sufferings wash away all the sins of a man.

Section 5

1. [Baraita regarding suffering]

It has been taught: R. Simeon b. Yohai says: The Holy One, blessed be He, gave Israel three precious gifts, and all of them were given only through sufferings. These are: The Torah, the Land of Israel and the world to come. Whence do we know this of the Torah? — Because it is said: Happy is the man whom Thou chastenest, o Lord, and teachest him out of Thy law. (Psalm 94:12) Whence of the Land of Israel? — Because it is written: As a man chasteneth his son, so the Lord thy God chasteneth thee, (Deuteronomy 8:5) and after that it is written: For the Lord thy God bringeth thee into a good land. Whence of the world to come? — Because it is written: For the commandment is a lamp, and the teaching is light, and reproofs of sufferings are the way of life. (Proverbs 6:23)

Section 6

1. [Another baraita regarding afflictions]

A Tanna recited before R. Johanan the following: If a man busies himself in the study of the Torah and in acts of charity and [nonetheless] buries his children, all his sins are forgiven him.

2. [Rabbi Yochanan (an Amora) shows astonishment and asks a shealah]

R. Johanan said to him: I grant you Torah and acts of charity, for it is written: By mercy and truth iniquity is expiated. (Proverbs 16:6) ‘Mercy’ is acts of charity, for it is said: He that followeth after righteousness and mercy findeth life, prosperity and honor. (Proverbs 21:21) ‘Truth’ is Torah, for it is said: Buy the truth and sell it not. (Proverbs 23:23) But how do you know [what you say about] the one who buries his children?

3. [Teshuva]

A certain Elder [thereupon] recited to him in the name of R. Simeon b. Yohai: It is concluded from the analogy in the use of the word ‘iniquity’. Here it is written: By mercy and truth iniquity is expiated. And elsewhere it is written: And who recompenseth the iniquity of the fathers into the bosom of their children. (Jeremiah 32:18)

Section 7

1. [Another meimra on the subject of “Chastisements of love”]

R. Johanan says: Leprosy and [the lack of] children are not chastisements of love.

2. [Kushya from a baraita]

But is leprosy not a chastisement of love? Is it not taught: If a man has one of these four symptoms of leprosy, it is nothing else but an altar of atonement?

3. [Teirutz]

They are an altar of atonement, but they are not chastisements of love.

4. [Alternative teirutz]

If you like, I can say: This [teaching of the Baraitha] is ours [in Babylonia], and that [saying of R. Johanan] is theirs [in Palestine].

5. [Alternative teirutz]

If you like, I can say: This [teaching of the Baraitha] refers to hidden [leprosy], that [saying of R. Johanan] refers to a case of visible [leprosy].

6. [Another kushya of Rabbi Yochanan]

But is [the lack of] children not a chastisement of love? How is this to be understood? Shall I say that he had children and they died? Did not R. Johanan himself say: This is the bone of my tenth son?

7. [Teirutz]

Rather [say then] that the former saying refers to one who never had children, the latter to one who had children and lost them.

Section 8

1. [A Maaseh – anecdotal evidence]

R. Hiyya b. Abba fell ill and R. Johanan went in to visit him. He said to him: Are your sufferings welcome to you? He replied: Neither they nor their reward. He said to him: Give me your hand. He gave him his hand and he raised him.

2. [Another maaseh]

R. Johanan once fell ill and R. Hanina went in to visit him. He said to him: Are your sufferings welcome to you? He replied: Neither they nor their reward. He said to him: Give me your hand. He gave him his hand and he raised him.

3. [Kushya]

Why could not R. Johanan raise himself?

4. [Teirutz]

They replied: The prisoner cannot free himself from jail.

5. [Another maaseh]

R. Eleazar fell ill and R. Johanan went in to visit him. He noticed that he was lying in a dark room, and he bared his arm and light radiated from it. Thereupon he noticed that R. Eleazar was weeping, and he said to him: Why do you weep? Is it because you did not study enough Torah? Surely we learnt: The one who sacrifices much and the one who sacrifices little have the same merit, provided that the heart is directed to heaven. Is it perhaps lack of sustenance? Not everybody has the privilege to enjoy two tables.Is it perhaps because of [the lack of] children? This is the bone of my tenth son! — He replied to him: I am weeping on account of this beauty that is going to rot in the earth. He said to him: On that account you surely have a reason to weep; and they both wept. In the meanwhile he said to him: Are your sufferings welcome to you? — He replied: Neither they nor their reward. He said to him: Give me your hand, and he gave him his hand and he raised him.

Section 9

1. [Another maaseh on the subject of afflictions]

Once four hundred jars of wine belonging to R. Huna turned sour. Rab Judah, the brother of R. Sala the Pious, and the other scholars (some say: R. Adda b. Ahaba and the other scholars) went in to visit him and said to him: The master ought to examine his actions. He said to them: Am I suspect in your eyes? They replied: Is the Holy One, blessed be He, suspect of punishing without justice? — He said to them: If somebody has heard of anything against me, let him speak out. They replied: We have heard that the master does not give his tenant his [lawful share in the] vine twigs. He replied: Does he leave me any? He steals them all! They said to him: That is exactly what the proverb says: If you steal from a thief you also have a taste of it! He said to them: I pledge myself to give it to him [in the future].

2. [Possible ending of the story]

Some report that thereupon the vinegar became wine again;

3. [Another possible ending of the story]

Others that the vinegar went up so high that it was sold for the same price as wine.

Guide Questions and Issues

Section 1 – Bedtime Kriyat Shma

1. This Amora states his justification for saying Shma before going to sleep. What is it? How is it justified from the verses of the Psalm? See steps 1-3.

4. This step brings a different sage’s justification for saying the Shma before

bedtime. What is the reason and how is it justified from Scripture?

In earlier generations, saying Shma before going to bed was to meet one’s obligation to recite Shma in the evening. After the recitation of the Shma became an established part of the evening service, a different rationale was offered for saying Shma before sleep.

What special role is offered for Torah study in this first discussion?

Section 2

  1. This last idea is carried over into the second discussion with a similar pattern of derivation from Scripture.
  2. R. Yochanan disputes the necessity to learn this reason out as R. Shimon ben Lakish has since as he asserts there is a better place to learn it from. (Just as an aside, these two sages are common sparring partners.)
  3. From this debate is derives a causal relationship between neglect of Torah study and afflictions. How is this learned from the quoted verse?

Things to Consider

  1. We see Torah study and/or recitation of the Shema in a number of different roles in the above passage. Catalogue these roles and comment on them.

Section 3

1. In this passage, God is portrayed as a gift giver. What makes God so happy about giving this gift?

Section 4

Now we enter into our specified subject matter. Before we enter into the material, what is the association with the material found above?

1. What is the purpose of Rava’s behavior program? Does it seem to you to be a worthwhile program?

We are introduced in Rava’s meimra to the concept of “yissurim shel ahava – afflictions of love”? What does this concept come to explain? What is their purpose? What do you make of this concept?

2. This meimra further fleshes out this concept. What attitude is it trying to develop in the believer? What might be the reality behind this attitude? What generalization can you make about theology from Rava’s conceptual framework here?

3. Again a further elaboration of this concept. Notice how all of these statements want to see suffering as a gift. What does suffering do for the sufferer? How do you feel about this? Why does this teaching make an association between suffering and the offering of sacrifices? Why might it have been important to the sages who shaped this concept?

Section 5

This section is a small paean to suffering. It makes an interesting link between suffering and God’s most precious gifts to the Jewish people, citing textual proofs for each. Why do you think Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai linked Torah, Eretz Yisrael and the world to come to suffering?

Section 6

We move back to “yissurim shel ahava –afflictions of love”.

  1. A Tanna teaches a baraita which has at least one outlandish aspect, namely, the idea that burying ones children is an act of atonement. (Some might also be bothered by the idea of drawing a direct correlation between certain good deeds and reward and on that note we can continue the discussions from last week’s sugya.) Again, what might give rise to such an idea?
  2. Rabbi Yochanan challenges this idea. On what is his challenge based?
  3. What is the basis for the answer to this challenge? (Hint: It is textually based on what we call a “gezerah shavah” – an analogy built on same word in two different verses so that you can learn from on e verse to another.

Notice in this section, we have dealt with some controversial statements. The sages here do not challenge them conceptually. They are challenged over whether a textual basis can be found to justify them.

Section 7

1. In this section, Rabbi Yochanan tries to limit the application of the concept of “yissurim shel ahava” so that it does not include “leprosy” or harm to ones children.

2. He is challenged regarding “leprosy”, since a baraita exists which says that “leprosy” is like an altar of atonement.
(Notice here how a baraita is brought to “trump” a meimra.)

3. The Talmud rejects this kushiya. How? – by drawing a distinction – “leprosy” is considered an altar of atonement but it is not an “affliction of love”.

4.-5 The Talmud offers to other resolutions to the kushiya in step 2.

In other words, these twe answers do not accept the answer given in step 3 but prefer to offer their own answers (teirutzim).

In step 4, they also present a “distinction”. In the land of Israel, “leprosy” is an “altar” but not an “affliction of love” since in Israel, the leper had to leave his town. (The suffering was too great to be an affliction of love.) In Babylonia, however, the leper was not forced to leave his town so it could be considered an “affliction of love”. Rabbi Yochanan was the most prominent sage in Israel at the time, so this answer explains why this would not be considered an “affliction of love” by him.

In step 5, a different teirutz is attempted. When the blemishes are in a place hidden by clothing, then they are an “affliction of love” but in they are in plain sight, then the embarrassment makes it so they would not be considered an “affliction of love”.

6. The Talmud challenges Rabbi Yochanan’s statement that “children” are not to be considered an “affliction of love” from his own experience since he had lost all ten of his children. Since his affliction could not be attributed to other things, they must have been an “affliction of love”.

7. This challenge is again met by means of a distinction: where ones children die is considered an “affliction of love” but where one has no children at all is not to be considered an “affliction of love.”

The teirutzim in this section technically answer the challenges. Are you satisfied with the answers? Detail your answer.

Sections 8-9

This section contains a series of anecdotes. Read them carefully and explain what how they are related to the discussion above.

How do you assess the Talmud’s conclusions regarding the whole discussion on afflictions and “afflictions of love”?