No, today is Jumping Elephant Day!
Did I miss it?
Rabbi Natan Slifkin posted about jumping elephants yesterday,
and indeed that is when my Daf Yomi chaburah discussed it. On the other hand, Rabbi Aryeh Lebowitz left off the discussion until today, for several reasons, including that there are many details to discuss, and this would arise at the very end of yesterday’s daf. I think you can start listening about 10 minutes to 14 minutes in.
You see, it appears at the tail end of the sugya, on Kiddushin 26a:
אִי נָמֵי: בַּחֲבִילֵי זְמוֹרוֹת.
Alternatively, the buyer can lift an elephant by using bundles of vines. He leads the elephant to them, and when the elephant stands on the bundles of vines this is considered lifting the elephant.
This is right before a Mishnah.
And the substantive Tosafot, which also is what mentions the jumping elephants, is also on daf 26, not 25.
If you are unfamiliar with the sugya, the Tosafot, and the controversy, follow the link above to Rationalist Judaism.
In brief, in discussing how to acquire a large animal (beheima gasa), one opinion, from the Tanna Rabbi Shimon, is that this is only accomplished by hagbahah (lifting it). Third-generation Rav Yosef, in Pumbedita, objects: But how would one acquire an elephant? Fourth-generation Rabbi Zeira II, also in Pumbedita, answers: by placing vessels underneath the elephant’s four feet. The Talmudic Narrator asks about Rabbi Zeira proposal — can the buyer’s vessels work in the seller’s domain. It suggests an answer. Then, probably the Talmudic Narrator continues: using bundles of vines.
For Rashi, he makes the elephant walk over the vine bundles, which are three tefachim high (or for Rabbeinu Tam, one tefach would suffice). I like this answer, because this “alternatively” should be a way of salvaging Rabbi Zeira’s suggestion. It is an iy nami, not even iy ba’it eima which seems like a stronger, more separate formulation.
Tosafot point out that a gemara in Shabbat 128b has bundles of vines as elephant food.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי נָתָן: אֶלָּא מֵעַתָּה חֲבִילֵי זְמוֹרוֹת יְטַלְטְלוּ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מַאֲכָל לְפִילִין! וְרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל: נַעֲמִיּוֹת — שְׁכִיחִי, פִּילִין — לָא שְׁכִיחִי.
Rabbi Natan said to Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel: If that is so, even bundles of grapevines one should be permitted to move because they are food for elephants. The Gemara answers that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel responded: Ostriches are common, whereas elephants are not common.
Therefore, they suggest that the hagbahah works by dangling it before the elephant, and the elephant jumps!
The problem is that elephants cannot jump. Years back, Rabbi Slifkin responded to an inquiry about this, saying that in France and Germany, the Tosafists probably didn’t see an elephants. Some frummy folks took offense at the idea that Rishonim could be mistaken about a matter of science, and there was a controversy.
Here is Rav Herschel Schachter discussing this sugya last year, in a Hilchot Shabbat shiur at YCQ.
This clip is from approximately the 17 minute mark. In it, Rav Schachter repeatedly says, as a davar pashut, that Tosafot lived in France / Germany and didn’t see an elephant, so their interpretation of the gemara is not correct. Even though on a halachic level, the principles they are discussing are correct. And a website showing pictures of elephants jumping was faked. (It seems clear that Rav Schachter read Rabbi Slifkin’s article, which also mentions the website, though that was a letter about it, not pictures. Unless he was talking about a different website.)
Meanwhile, my own take on the sugya is even more radical. I discussed it back in 2005. I think Tosafot may well be right. After all, we are dealing with the Talmudic Narrator, who regularly will reuse ideas found elsewhere in the gemara by named Tannaim and Amoraim, and repurpose them. This Talmudic Narrator, the Stamma, is both bold and humble. Bold in his initiative in attacking ideas from Amoraim and proposing answers, but humble in drawing those answers from elsewhere.
Tosafot are therefore quite right to point to that distant sugya which involves elephants and vine bundles, functioning as animal food. That should reflect the Talmudic Narrator’s intent!
What about elephants not jumping? Well, who says that the Talmudic Narrator saw an elephant either? Or if he did, who says he owned an elephant, or was a zoologist, to know the scientific reasons an elephant couldn’t possibly jump.