Berachot #2: Heh or Chet?

Rav Schachter opened his second shiur on masechet Berachot

with a discussion of the particulars of a derasha. To remind you, we had this on Berachot 35a:

וְהַאי ״קֹדֶשׁ הִלּוּלִים״ לְהָכִי הוּא דַּאֲתָא? הַאי מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ חַד דְּאָמַר רַחֲמָנָא אַחֲלֵיהּ וַהֲדַר אִכְלֵיהּ.

The Gemara asks: And did this verse: “Sanctified for praises,” come for that purpose? This verse is necessary to derive other matters. One being that the Merciful One said: Redeem it and then eat it. This midrash interprets hillul, praise, as ḥillul, redemption.

He explains by citing Rabbi Akiva Eiger, that twice in the Yerushalmi they darshen a heh as if it were a chet.

To digress and expand upon this citation, this is found in Gilyon HaShas, so we can actually look up those two Yerushalmis:

גמ' אחליה והדר אכליה. בירושלמי פ"ז דפאה אמר אהך דרשה דהכא לא מתמנעי רבנן בין ה' לח'. וכן הוא בירושלמי פ"ה דשבת על דרשה דאלה הדברים אלו ל"ט מלאכות:

The first is on this very derasha, as it appears in the Peah 7:5:

רִבִּי זְעִירָה בְּעִי קוֹמֵי רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ מְנַיִין שֶׁהוּא טָעוּן פִּדְיוֹן קוֹדֶשׁ הִילּוּלִים קוֹדֶשׁ חִילּוּלִים לָא מִתְמַנְעִין רַבָּנִין בֵּין הֵ״א לְחֵי״ת.

Rebbi Zeïra asked before Rebbi Abbahu: From where that it needs redemption? (Lev. 19:24) “Holy for praises,” holy for redemption. The rabbis never refrain from identifying ה and ח.

The other had to do with deriving the 39 melachot of Shabbat, from the gematria of אלה, these. Aleph = 1, Lamed = 30, and Chet = 8, so the sum is 39. Thus, in Shabbat 7:2:

אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן חֲנִינָא. זֶה הַדָּבָר אֵין כָּתוּב כָּאן. אֶלָּא אֵ֤לֶּה הַדְּבָרִ֔ים. דָּבָר דִּבְרֵי דְּבָרִים. מִכָּן לָאָבוֹת וּלְתוֹלְדוֹת. רִבִּי חֲנִינָא דְצִיפּוֹרִין בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ. אל״ף חַד. למ״ד תַּלְתִּין. ה״א חֲמִשָּׁה. דָּבָר חַד. דְּבָרִים תְּרֵי. מִיכָּן לְאַרְבָּעִים חָסֵר אַחַת מְלָאכוֹת שֶׁכְּתוּבוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה. רַבָּנִן דְּקַיסָרִין אָֽמְרִין. מִן אַתְרָהּ לָא חָֽסְרָה כְלוּם. א׳ חַד. ל׳ תַּלְתִּין. ח׳ תְּמַנְיָא. לֹא מִתְמַנְעִין רַבָּנִן דָּֽרְשִׁין בֵּין ה״א לְחי״ת.

Rebbi Yose ben Ḥanina said, it does not say “this is the word” but these are the words.” “Word”, “words,” “words”. From here about categories and derivatives. Rebbi Ḥanina of Sepphoris in the name of Rebbi Abbahu. Alef is one, Lamed is 30, He is five, “word” is one, “words” are two. From here the 39 “works” written in the Torah. The rabbis of Caesarea say, at its place nothing is missing, א is one, ל 30 , ח 8. The rabbis never hesitate to identify ה and ח.

Rav Schachter goes on to explain that the derasha is based on orthographic similarity. In old manuscripts, they used to write a heh in connected fashion, like a chet but with a thinner leg connecting them. I’d add that the position at which the leg connects for the chet is different.

Thus:

Here is a snippet of the Leningrad Codex, with a few words underlined in red:

The top word is תהיה and has two hehs. Notice how the leg is attached on the left side, but not all the way at the end. Rather, it is a bit before the end of the roof. On the next like, לשלחה, the connection of the chet is a bit thicker, and all the way at the left side of the letter. See also והוציאו a few lines lower.

Another possibility, which Rav Schachter didn’t mention here, is that we are dealing not with orthographic similarity but with phonological similarity. Consonants which sound similar can take each other’s place in a derasha. Thus, ayin and aleph don’t look alike, but they are both gutturals, and we see that Chazal darshened them by allowing interchange. For instance, Berachot 32a:

וְאָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: מֹשֶׁה הֵטִיחַ דְּבָרִים כְּלַפֵּי מַעְלָה. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיִּתְפַּלֵּל מֹשֶׁה אֶל ה׳״ אַל תִּקְרֵי ״אֶל ה׳״, אֶלָּא ״עַל ה׳״.

And Rabbi Elazar said: Moses also spoke impertinently toward God on High, as it is stated in the verse following the sin of those who murmured against God in the desert: “And Moses prayed to the Lord and the fire subsided” (Numbers 11:2), and this verse is interpreted homiletically: Do not read to [el] the Lord, but rather onto [al] the Lord, which indicates that he spoke impertinently.

שֶׁכֵּן דְּבֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב קוֹרִין לָאַלְפִין עַיְינִין, וְלָעַיְינִין אַלְפִין.

The Gemara explains the basis for this interpretation: As the Sages of the school of Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov would indiscriminately read alef as ayin and ayin as alef and in this case transforming el into al.

We see in Galilean Aramaic (as found in Yerushalmi and Bereishit Rabba) a general relaxation of guttural letters, to the extent of dropping them. So, chet and heh are both gutturals, so can be swapped. Other letters also can swap, in creating new word forms, e.g. one sibilant for another. We saw one recently in daf yomi, about chamatz as being equivalent to chamas in terms of grabbing.

I’m reminded of a fairly recent incident, a few years back, where Rav Ovadia Yosef referred to a certain group as donkeys, saying שמעו נא חמורים instead of Moshe Rabbeinu’s המורים.