Psychology of the Daf Maseches Eruvin

The Daf from a Psychological Perspective

For Mareh Mekomos Click Below

אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: שְׂפָתוֹ שְׂפַת פֶּרַח שׁוֹשָׁן כְּתִיב בֵּיהּ, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְעׇבְיוֹ טֶפַח וּשְׂפָתוֹ כְּמַעֲשֵׂה כּוֹס פֶּרַח שׁוֹשָׁן אַלְפַּיִם בַּת יָכִיל״.

Rav Pappa said: With regard to its brim, it is written that the brim is as the petals of a lily, as stated in the verse: “And it was a handbreadth thick; and its brim was wrought as the brim of a cup, as the petals of a lily; it contained two thousand bat” (I Kings 7:26). The brim was very thin.

מי השילוח חלק ב קרח

כי כל העדה כלם קדשים ובתוכם ה'. הנה מה שנכתב בתורה דברים האלו על שמו בטח אמר זה מהכרתו ועומק לבו שבתוכם ה', כי אם היה רק משפה ולחוץ לא היה נכתב בתורה לעולמי עד על שמו, ואם כן היה בו קדושה יקרה, ומה היה חסרונו אך חסרונו היה בזה שנדמה לו שכעסו הוא רק רוגזא דרבנן כמו שכתיב (ירמיה כ"ג,כ"ט) הלא כה דברי כאש נאם ה' ואיתא על זה בזה"ק (תצוה קפ"ב:) אורייתא אשא איהו ואורייתא קא מרתחא ליה, לכן היה בדעת קרח שכל דבריו המה אמת גמור, אכן באמת בין רוגזא דרבנן ובין כעס היורד לשאול הוא רק חילוק קטן דקה מן הדקה, שלעיני בשר לא נראה מפורש שום חילוק, רק השי"ת היודע תעלומות לב חשב זאת לחטא וענשו לזכרון לבני ישראל שסביביו נשערה מאוד, כי חילוק זה בשרשו במעשה בראשית הוא דק מאוד כמו פרח שושן שאיתא בגמ' (עירובין י"ד.) והא איכא שפתו א"ר פפא שפתו שפת פרח שושן כתיב ביה וכן חסרונו היה דק מאוד כשנוטה מעט לשמאל יורד לשאול וכשנוטה קצת לימין הוא חיים, ובזה היה טעות קרח, ובני קרח ג"כ מתחלה סברו כן אכן אחר כן ראו שטעו בזה ההבדל דק היורד לשאול שההבדל הוא רק כמו פרח שושן, לכן אמרו אחר כן המזמור (בתהלים מ"ה) למנצח על ששנים לבני קרח משכיל שיר ידידות שזה המזמור הוא כולו מתלמיד חכם. וזה שאיתא בזה"ק (בראשית י"ז.) שטעות קרח היה במעשה בראשית, ויאמר אלהים יהי רקיע, הכא בפרט רזא לאפרשא מיין עלאין לתתאי ברזא דשמאלא הכא מחלוקת ברזא דשמאלא וכו' חכמתא דמשה בהא אסתכל ובעובדא דבראשית אשגא בעובדא דבראשית הוה מחלוקת שמאלא בימינא וכו' יום תליתאי עאל בינייהו ואפריש מחלוקת ואסכים לתרין סטרין וכו' כגוונא דא מחלוקת קרח באהרן שמאלא בימינא אסתכל משה בעובדא דבראשית אמר לי אתחזי לאפרשא מחלוקת בין ימינא לשמאלא וכו'.

The Ishbitzer ties in the concept of the petal of a lilly as the fine line a Torah sage walks when he is in touch with his harshness and anger. If he is on the right side of his outrage, he is on the side of truth, but if he is off by even the smallest degree, he can end up like Korach. He notes that the Torah would not have recorded Korach’s complaints, especially maintaining the holiness of the entire Israel unless his outrage had an aspect of validity. We can easily imagine Korach’s fear that too much power rested in the hands of Moshe and Aharon. I must wonder, even as we assume that Moshe and Aharon did not abuse the power, who said it was good for the Jewish people to be so dependent? Could this not lead to disasters of weakness and panic such as the spies-Meraglim incident? Perhaps this was part of what Korach was concerned about, and there was some justification according to the Ishbitzer, but somehow Korah went to far, and only by hair’s breadth.

Being right is easy for smart people who are often right. Not getting angry, arrogant or being too aggressive is much harder. What is the difference between the arguments of Beis Shammai and Bais Hillel versus the arguments of Korach and Moshe? As it turns out, according to the Ishbitzer, not much.

The Daf from a Psychological Perspective

For Mareh Mekomos Click Below

אָמַר רַבִּי אַבָּא אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים נֶחְלְקוּ בֵּית שַׁמַּאי וּבֵית הִלֵּל, הַלָּלוּ אוֹמְרִים: הֲלָכָה כְּמוֹתֵנוּ, וְהַלָּלוּ אוֹמְרִים: הֲלָכָה כְּמוֹתֵנוּ. יָצְאָה בַּת קוֹל וְאָמְרָה: אֵלּוּ וָאֵלּוּ דִּבְרֵי אֱלֹהִים חַיִּים הֵן, וַהֲלָכָה כְּבֵית הִלֵּל.

What does “these and those are the words of the living God” mean?

Maharal (Be’er Hagolah 1) adds an interesting twist in regard to the arguments of Shammai and Hillel.

They chose this phrase to demonstrate that it is precisely this quality of G-d that explains how to understand the multi-dimensional quality of Torah. G-d has created all matter, and within the world, physical matter consists of compounds. These compounds that constitute physical matter have opposing substances within. So too with the matters of halakha and matters of the physical world; there is nothing that is simple essence without opposing aspects within. Therefore, the one who ruled that an object is impure and likewise the one who ruled than an object is pure have both studied Torah. Each side has its own aspect. G-d created all that is, and He created the object that has both aspects.

Rather in regard to practical halakha, there is no doubt that one aspect has dominance.

But one must not say that the lesser aspects are as if they are nothing. Because as one studies even the lesser aspects he is studying a part of the Torah, because the opposing aspects are part of the totality. The halakha is merely the ruling coming about from the dominant aspect.

Thus, according to Maharal, Torah consists of multiple layers. The halakhic layer is decided in accordance with the dominant aspect or aspects as seen by the rabbis, commonly with the majority determining what is the dominant aspect, and or as in the case of Shammai and Hillel, either side equally dominant. The other layer to Torah study is delving into any aspect of a halakhic discussion, and even if post-facto one opinion by majority rule is determined to have ascertained the correct dominant aspect, the other opinions can still be studied and considered legitimate Torah as even minor aspects of a compound are still part of a compound. The halakha though will never be determined in accordance with a minor aspect, even if it is still true Torah.

But we must wonder, why so often are the rulings of the House of Shammai more strict than the rulings of the House of Hillel? Common sense shows a pattern which then indicates some degree of subjective process. Malbim Numbers (19:1) suggests that The House of Shammai represents a spiritual ideal. Namely, the intellect can be elevated through engagement in spiritual matters and abstention from physicality to an extent that it can attain an Edenic state of Adam prior to eating from the Tree of Knowledge.

Thus as one example, the dispute between the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel in Mishna Succah (2:7) can be understood on a halakhic level as well as metaphysical:

One whose head and the greater part of his body were within the succah and his table within the house: Beis Shammai say: it is invalid and Beis Hillel say it valid.

Here we find typically the House of Hillel choosing the more lenient position. Malbim adds a thematic meaning to this Mishna. The House of Shammai allows for no compromise; one must completely disengage from the comforts of this world (the home) and dwell on the spiritual plane (the Succah). However, the House of Hillel advocates moderation. One may have his head and the greater part of his body in the Succah (spiritual sphere) but still stay partially engaged in the physical world (the lower part of his body resides in the home).

This idea is also reflected in a teaching of the Arizal, that in the World to Come, the halakha will be in accordance with the House of Shammai (Sefas Emmes, Korach 5647). Meaning, in a post-Messianic world, people can live on this ideal plane of disengagement from physicality, in accordance with the principles of the House of Shammai.

The Daf from a Psychological Perspective

For Mareh Mekomos Click Below

The Daf from a Psychological Perspective

For Mareh Mekomos Click Below

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אִי מַשְׁכַּחַתְּ לְהוּ — לָא תֵּימָא לְהוּ לְבֵי רֵישׁ גָּלוּתָא וְלָא מִידֵּי מֵהָא מַתְנִיתָא דְכִיפָּה.

Rav Sheshet said to Rabba bar Shmuel: If you find them, do not say to the members of the Exilarch’s household anything with regard to this baraita of an arched gateway, as it is proof against my opinion.

How could Rav Sheshet suppress information?

בבא בתרא קנג, א

ההיא דאתאי לקמיה דרבא עבד לה רבא כשמעתיה הוה קא טרדא ליה

אמר ליה לרב פפא בריה דרב חנן ספריה זיל כתוב לה וכתוב בה שוכר עליהן או מטען אמרה ליטבע ארביה אטעויי קא מטעית לי אמשינהו למניה דרבא במיא ואפי' הכי לא איפרק מטיבעא:

Rava said to Rav Pappa, his scribe, son of Rav Ḥanan: Go, write for her a ruling in her favor, and write in the ruling the phrase: He may hire replacements at their expense, or deceive them to get them to return to work. This is a phrase from the mishna (Bava Metzia 75b) that discusses the ruling in the case of one who hired laborers to perform a task that cannot be delayed, and they quit. Rava intended this phrase to indicate to the court that the ruling was merely a ruse in order to persuade the woman to leave.

So here Rava lied in a judgement in order to be relieved from from this woman who was stalking him.

בבא מציעא צא, ב

אמר רב אשי הא מילתא בעו מינאי דבי רב נחמיה ריש גלותא מהו להכניס מין ומינו ושאינו מינו לדיר כיון דאיכא מיניה בתר מיניה גריר או דלמא אפילו הכי לא ופשטי להו לאיסורא דלא כהלכתא משום פריצותא דעבדיI resolved it for them by saying that there is a prohibition, but this was not in accordance with the halakha. The reason for my decision was due to the immorality of the slaves. I reasoned that if they are permitted to engage in this practice, they will intentionally crossbreed and claim that it occurred without their intervention.

מנחות צט, ב

אמר רבי יוחנן משום רבי שמעון בן יוחי אפילו לא קרא אדם אלא קרית שמע שחרית וערבית קיים לא ימוש ודבר זה אסור לאומרו בפני עמי הארץ ורבא אמר מצוה לאומרו בפני עמי הארץ

Rabbi Yoḥanan says in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: Even if a person recited only the recitation of Shema in the morning and in the evening, he has fulfilled the mitzva of: “This Torah scroll shall not depart from your mouth.” And it is prohibited to state this matter in the presence of ignoramuses [amei ha’aretz], as they are likely to get the impression that there is no need to study Torah beyond this. And Rava says: On the contrary, it is a mitzva to state this matter in the presence of ignoramuses, as they will realize that if merely reciting the Shema leads to such a great reward, all the more so how great is the reward of those who study Torah all day and night.

We see from these sources that rabbanim can suppress information, even at times mislead, if the situation and overall benefit calls for it. This is a concept that ought to make us uncomfortable. In our culture, transparency is a valued virtue. We expect our leaders to be honest with us, and if they must keep certain information a secret, at the very least, we expect disclosure as to why this is necessary. Therefore, it is advisable that a teacher or rabbi in today’s times not engage in such tactics, even with good intention, as overall credibility can be destroyed. However, in ancient times, there was a different attitude toward information. Not just amongst Jewish sages, but even amongst many mystical and or philosophical schools, there was a notion of keeping information out of the hands of the immature and uninitiated. Just as one example, the ancient School of Pythagoras kept their mathematical proofs secret, because they believed it contained divine codes and ideas, which the layperson could misuse. It often would require years of development and proving oneself to gain admission to certain intellectual or philosophical schools.

The upshot of all this is, that we often have difficulty understanding certain behaviors of sages from different cultures and times because our ideas, basic assumptions and standards can be dramatically different. It is good to keep in mind that we cannot easily stuff our 21st Century notions back into cultures and groups who thrived in times where different ways of relating to people may have been more helpful in promoting societal function than might work for us.

A powerful quote from the Magid Mishne (Laws of Neighbors 14:5) which speaks to this idea:

לפי שמצות התורה הם בכל עת ובכל זמן ובכל ענין ובהכרח חייב לעשות כן ומדות האדם והנהגתו מתחלפת לפי הזמן והאישים והחכמים ז''ל כתבו קצת פרטים מועילים נופלים תחת כללים אלו ומהם שעשו אותם בדין גמור ומהם לכתחילה ודרך חסידות והכל מדבריהם ז''ל ולזה אמרו חביבין דברי דודים יותר מיינה של תורה שנאמר כי טובים דודיך מיין

The Magid Mishnes is saying that the Torah doesn’t change, but people do change, and it is up to the sages of each generation to determine how to apply certain concepts of middos and derech eretz.

The Daf from a Psychological Perspective

For Mareh Mekomos Click Below

אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: לָא שְׁמִיעַ לִי הָא שְׁמַעְתְּתָא.

Rav Yosef said: I did not hear this halakha of Rabba bar Rav Huna from my teachers. Rav Yosef had become ill and forgotten his learning, which is why he could not recall the halakha that a side post that is visible from the outside is considered to have the legal status of a side post.

Nedarim 41a

רב יוסף חלש איעקר ליה תלמודיה אהדריה אביי קמיה היינו דבכל דוכתא אמרינן אמר רב יוסף לא שמיע לי הדא שמעתא אמר ליה אביי את אמריתה ניהלן ומהא מתניתא אמריתה ניהלן

The Gemara relates: Rav Yosef himself fell ill and his studies were forgotten. Abaye restored his studies by reviewing what he had learned from Rav Yosef before him. This is the background for that which we say everywhere throughout the Talmud, that Rav Yosef said: I did not learn this halakha, and Abaye said to him in response: You said this to us and it was from this baraita that you said it to us.

Rabbenu Chananel Eruvin

כד חלש רב יוסף איעקר תלמודיה ואנשייה מצעריה ועד איתפח אהדרי ליה אביי.

He seems to explain her forgot his learning from the distress of the illness

Ran Nedarim

אייקר ליה לימודיה - הכביד עליו למודו ששכחו:

He seems to have a different text, and that his learning was “too heavy”, and he forgot it. This sounds more like burnout.

The following is excerpted and summarized from a study, conducted by Daphne Norez, Fort Hays State University. (Norez, Daphne, "Academic Burnout In College Students: The Impact of Personality Characteristics and Academic Term on Burnout" (2017). Master's Theses. 502. https://scholars.fhsu.edu/theses/502):

Burnout is a condition which can affect people in a variety of settings. It is associated with reduced productivity and satisfaction; increased rates of mood disorders such as depression and anxiety ...Burnout has primarily been studied as an occupational hazard, but there is increasing evidence that it is a condition that can be experienced in other settings, such as school.

Theoretical Approaches Research on the topic of burnout tends to take one of three primary approaches. ...The demands-control model is based on this basic perspective. It proposes the most stressful situations are ones where the individual has high demands placed on him/her, but has little control over how the work is done or how the organization functions. Other models which fall into this category are the job demands-resource model and the effort-reward-imbalance models of burnout. While each has its own point to make, they are all similar in that they suggest job strain, and ultimately burnout, is caused by an imbalance in the performance demanded of the individual versus the ability of the individual to meet the demands. A second approach to the study of burnout looks at the interaction between the individual and his/her work environment/occupation to determine the degree of fit or misfit in that dynamic. In this model, the chronic strain which leads to burnout is caused by the accumulation of psycho-mental/psycho-social stress paired with lower levels of stress tolerance (Weber & Jaekel-Reinhard, 2000). ...The third major approach taken by researchers studying burnout is to look at it from an individual perspective.

Burnout is influenced by many factors; some of which are within the individual’s power to change, and some of which are not. Personality factors are relatively stable across the lifespan. Those who report higher levels of personality traits such as introversion, lack of direction or neuroticism appear to be more susceptible to burnout and other negative emotional states. Identifying these individuals could make it possible to intervene and teach more adaptive coping skills in order to reduce the likelihood they will experience burnout in the future.

When it comes to Torah study, the aspects of academic burnout and occupational burnout merge. For many, learning is an occupation. “Torah is the bester sechoireh”. In learning, the challenge is that without defining success, there is no definition. No matter how smart you are, you come face to face with the most brilliant minds of the two millenia of lomdus. Some people, may never feel successful in learning even if they learned successfully for years. Therefore, success cannot be defined by knowledge attainment. There are different ways to look at success. Success might be defined as learning with hasmoda and keeping a seder. Success may be defined as making a siyum. Success may be defined as achieving a certain level of dvekus and yiras shamayim during the learning. Whatever the case may be, to avoid burnout, the criteria for success must be challenging enough to feel satisfaction, but realistic and not too perfectionistic to make it all but attainable.

The Daf from a Psychological Perspective

For Mareh Mekomos Click Below

מצא מין את מינו וניעור

A metaphysical reality

שפת אמת בהעלותך תרל״ג

ברש"י שתהי' שלהבת עולה מאלי' כי בכל דבר יש נקודה חיות מהשי"ת רק שהכל תלוי בעבודת האדם לעורר התלהבות להטות הכל להשי"ת. כי כפי רצון וחשק האדם מעורר רצון בכל הדברים שכפוים ת"י והם ברשותו. ובמד' בחצוצרות ירא ה' בני ומלך המליכהו עליך כו' מלוך על יצרך כו' שיהיו תוקעין לעניך כמלך כו'. כי בודאי כל עניני עוה"ז לכבודו ברא וכפי מה שהאדם מקבל עליו מלכות שמים כראוי כן כפיים הכל אליו. כי מלכות שמים חל ע"י לכל הנבראים. וכל נברא נמשך בטבעו אחר מי שיוכל להמשיכו לחול עליו מלכות שמים. וגם היצה"ר עצמו מבקש להיות נכנע בע"כ תחת הצדיק. ולזאת [*הי'] יכול מרע"ה להשתמש במלכות בעוה"ז כי הי' בטל

לגמרי להשי"ת. ולא הי' שום דבר נפרד אצלו. וז"ש ועם שונים אל תתערב. וכשאין שינוי אצל האדם ומתאחדים אצלו תחתונים ועליונים כי הכל לכבודו ברא ורק שלמטה אינו ניכר כבודו ית' בכל דבר והאדם צריך לברר מלכותו ית' בכל דבר בדרך אמת ואמונה. וכשהאדם עושה מעשה לשם שמים שכוונתו שיהי' נעשה כבוד שמים עי"ז מתעורר האמת כי מצא מין את מינו וניעור. וזהו בהעלותך כי כל דבר נק' נר שהוא כלי לאור הדולק בו שיש נקודה אש ואור בכל דבר והאדם יכול להעלותו במה שמכוון להיות עולה וכן בימי השבוע מכוונים נגד שבת קודש כמ"ש ששת ימים עשה כו' השמים כו' הארץ וביום השביעי שבת וינפש. פי' עליונים נק' שמים ותחתונים נק' ארץ ובשבת יש עלי' ואחדות בין שמים וארץ שנתברר שהכל אחד:

The Daf from a Psychological Perspective

For Mareh Mekomos Click Below

ספק טומאה גמרינן מסוטה

Rashi here mentions the reason why a חצר that has many people passing through is considered a private domain for Shabbos but a public domain for questions about if an object became impure is because it is learned out from the law of Sotah.

The Sotah who was warned to not be alone with a certain man, and then it was proven that indeed she was alone with him, already becomes forbidden even if there is no proof of an adulterous affair. So too, with any question about vessels or objects exposed to contamination, if this occurs in an enclosed private place it is forbidden but if the same questionable exposure occurs In a public space it is permitted.

This is a difficult to understand derasha. Technically, it is true that the word “Tumah” Is used by both objects and to imply sexual contamination, however it is a weak logic to use the same principles from an object to a sexual liaison. Think about it, obviously one would have more doubts about two people engaging in a meeting in a private space as opposed to a public space. But the same question as to whether or not a vessel became contaminated by an accidental touch seems relevant and active in a public space or a private space. If anything, The chances of exposure which seem to be much higher in a public space.

The commentaries do try to understand the exact nature of this derivation. Some understand it as principally an oral law from Moses halakha le-Moshe Misinai and only certain aspects are actually derived from the Sotah rules. Regardless, it is reasonable to puzzle over the apparent connection between these two truly unconnected ideas despite the fact that they bear a homonym of Tumah.

Reflecting on this a bit more, perhaps we might say that is precisely the point that Torah is trying to make about sexual immorality. That is, a person would like to say that it’s not going to happen to me “by accident“. It requires a lot of pre-meditation. And thus, there’s nothing comparable to that and an unintended encounter with a contaminated object such as a dead rodent. However, is the implication of the underlying logic of this comparison through this derivation is that it is not that much different. When it comes to sexuality, the line between will and premeditation, accidental or sudden trespass, is a lot more blurry than we would like to think. Anyone who has ever been tested and felt the endorphin rush of a sudden sexual thrill, if he or she is honest, will agree that it is opium, speed and cocaine all wrapped up in one. As one person put it, “the body’s in-house pharmacy”. So we think we have control, but maybe we have to be much more careful because it could come and hit you right out of the blue.

The Daf from a Psychological Perspective

For Mareh Mekomos Click Below

וּמִי עָבְדִינַן כִּתְרֵי חוּמְרֵי? וְהָא תַּנְיָא: לְעוֹלָם הֲלָכָה כְּבֵית הִלֵּל, וְהָרוֹצֶה לַעֲשׂוֹת כְּדִבְרֵי בֵּית שַׁמַּאי עוֹשֶׂה, כְּדִבְרֵי בֵּית הִלֵּל עוֹשֶׂה. מִקּוּלֵּי בֵּית שַׁמַּאי וּמִקּוּלֵּי בֵּית הִלֵּל — רָשָׁע. מֵחוּמְרֵי בֵּית שַׁמַּאי וּמֵחוּמְרֵי בֵּית הִלֵּל — עָלָיו הַכָּתוּב אוֹמֵר: ״הַכְּסִיל בְּחֹשֶׁךְ הוֹלֵךְ״. אֶלָּא, אִי כְּבֵית שַׁמַּאי כְּקוּלֵּיהוֹן וּכְחוּמְרֵיהוֹן, אִי כְּבֵית הִלֵּל כְּקוּלֵּיהוֹן וּכְחוּמְרֵיהוֹן.

The Gemara poses a question: But do we adopt the respective stringencies of two authorities who disagree on a series of issues? Wasn’t it taught in a baraita: The halakha is always in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel, but one who wishes to act in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai may do so, and one who wishes to act in accordance with the opinion of Beit Hillel may do so. If he wishes to adopt both the leniencies of Beit Shammai and also the leniencies of Beit Hillel, he is a wicked person. And if he wishes to adopt both the stringencies of Beit Shammai and also the stringencies of Beit Hillel, with regard to him the verse states: “The fool walks in darkness” (Ecclesiastes 2:14). Rather, he should act either in accordance with Beit Shammai, following both their leniencies and their stringencies, or in accordance with Beit Hillel, following both their leniencies and their stringencies.

ערבי נחל כי תשא א:כג

David Solomon Eibeschutz 1751-1813

והנה ארז"ל (עירובין ו:) מקולי בית שמאי ומקולי בית הלל רשע מחומרי בית שמאי ומחומרי בית הלל עליו הכתוב אומר (קהלת ב) הכסיל כו' ופירושו דאף שעושה מצד דקדוק שמחמיר על עצמו אפילו הכי אין לעשות כן דפעמים חומרא בא לידי קולא.

It is implied from the Gemara that the reason for it to be considered foolish to follow both stringencies is that sometimes, in various halakhic circumstances, what appears to be a stringency actually will be a leniency, as the Gemara illustrates later on Daf 7 in regarding to the missing amount of vertebrae needed to make the animal a tereifa versus needed to make a body a corpse.

But perhaps the Gemara is hinting at another idea, which is that while technically it may be possible to always err on the side of safety and follow all strict opinions, when one does not choose a teacher or school of thought to consistently follow, then one is following neither. Meaning to say, ideologically each path in Torah offers more than just permitted and forbidden. Torah is a way of life, and the fulfillment or abstention from every act influences character and outlook. Therefore, one cannot truly follow both opinions by being machmir, because the experience is also to live inside the boundaries of that particular opinion, and to experience the permitted as well as the forbidden.

In a broader sense, a colleague of mine, Dr. Nachum Klafter once pointed out, there is no chumrah that does not involve a kulah in the sense that it always entail a loss of something else. Not to say one shouldn’t do it, just to say that one must be realistic about the consequences.

Examples:

You decide to make Shabbos early. Of course that is a good thing. However, perhaps you will be irritable because you rushed. Or you are a machmir regarding some food or drink and abstain because some opinions say you should not eat or drink it. You will likely come to a wedding or gathering of friends and family where your distance will be felt because you will not be able to participate fully. It is not that the chumrah is unworthy, it is just that one should not be naive about any potential effects or losses from the Chumrah.

The Daf from a Psychological Perspective

For Mareh Mekomos Click Below

תורה לא בשמים היא

Rashi References the Gemara in Bava Metzia 59b

עמד רבי יהושע על רגליו ואמר (דברים ל, יב) לא בשמים היא מאי לא בשמים היא אמר רבי ירמיה שכבר נתנה תורה מהר סיני אין אנו משגיחין בבת קול שכבר כתבת בהר סיני בתורה (שמות כג, ב) אחרי רבים להטות אשכחיה רבי נתן לאליהו א"ל מאי עביד קוב"ה בההיא שעתא א"ל קא חייך ואמר נצחוני בני נצחוני בני

Rabbi Yehoshua stood on his feet and said: It is written: “It is not in heaven” (Deuteronomy 30:12). The Gemara asks: What is the relevance of the phrase “It is not in heaven” in this context? Rabbi Yirmeya says: Since the Torah was already given at Mount Sinai, we do not regard a Divine Voice, as You already wrote at Mount Sinai, in the Torah: “After a majority to incline” (Exodus 23:2). Since the majority of Rabbis disagreed with Rabbi Eliezer’s opinion, the halakha is not ruled in accordance with his opinion. The Gemara relates: Years after, Rabbi Natan encountered Elijah the prophet and said to him: What did the Holy One, Blessed be He, do at that time, when Rabbi Yehoshua issued his declaration? Elijah said to him: The Holy One, Blessed be He, smiled and said: My children have triumphed over Me; My children have triumphed over Me.

First a Mass revelation to an entire people (“Kuzari Principle” Kuzari Book 1:9-80, actually first articulated by Rav Saadia Gaon in Emunos V’Deos, Book 3:4-5), then the intellectual apprehension. This is similar to what we have been seeing earlier in Daf 4’s Shiur, that G-d respects human boundaries. So there is this one time revelation to everyone, and then it is followed by G-d stepping back and letting us process and decide from here. This is such a beautiful and wonderful concept both in parenting and in religion, which we probably do not give enough thought. The importance of a moment of guidance, literally Deus Ex Machina, and then leaving the rest for the person or society to work out and grow through.

The Daf from a Psychological Perspective

For Mareh Mekomos Click Below

רש״י ד, ב

ארון תשעה וכפורת טפח - ארון גובהו תשעה טפחים דכתיב (שמות כ״ה:כ״ב) ואמה וחצי קומתו וכפורת טפח הרי עשרה וכתיב ודברתי אתך מעל הכפורת ותניא בפ"ק דסוכה (ד' ה.) רבי יוסי אומר לעולם לא ירדה שכינה למטה מעשרה דכתיב השמים שמים לה' והארץ נתן לבני אדם ולמטה מעשרה טפחים חשיב ארץ דכתיב ודברתי אתך מעל הכפורת אלמא עשרה הוי מחיצה דלמעלה מעשרה לא חשיב ליה רשות תחתית אלא רשותא אחריתי:

סוכה ה,א

ותניא ר' יוסי אומר מעולם לא ירדה שכינה למטה ולא עלו משה ואליהו למרום שנאמר (תהלים קטו, טז) השמים שמים לה' והארץ נתן לבני אדם

and it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yosei says: The Divine Presence never actually descended below, and Moses and Elijah never actually ascended to heaven on high, as it is stated: “The heavens are the heavens of the Lord, and the earth He gave to the children of man” (Psalms 115:16), indicating that these are two distinct domains. Apparently, from ten handbreadths upward is considered a separate domain. Consequently, any sukka that is not at least ten handbreadths high is not considered an independent domain and is unfit.

Boundaries are about respect for both sides. Not just respect but a deep acknowledgement that the other must be in its space and have its space to exist. The heavens cannot come to earth without subverting either’s identity.

You see your child’s diary on the kitchen table. Do you look at it ? What will you will find out? Does it matter if the other person doesn’t know?

You see your spouse's phone flashes momentarily with a text, do you turn your eye away or do you crane your neck to seek?

You can tell yourself you have a “right to know”. Maybe you do. However, when a boundary is crossed both sides are damaged and lose a part of their identity. What is seen cannot be unseen. If there was mistrust, checking up on the other rarely if ever restores trust. There is a mitzvah of v’halachta bedrachav, to emulate G-d’s ways. Even G-d respects boundaries.