Oven of Achnai and the Talmudum Pauperum
Yesterday’s daf, Bava Metzia 59, had the famous story of the Tanur shel Achnai. It is aggadic enough, that we should just reread the first part of the story before proceeding (cutting off before the burning of the things ruled impure, the cherem, telling him of the cherem, and Rabban Gamliel’s death). The first part reads:
תְּנַן הָתָם: חֲתָכוֹ חוּלְיוֹת, וְנָתַן חוֹל בֵּין חוּלְיָא לְחוּלְיָא – רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְטַהֵר, וַחֲכָמִים מְטַמְּאִין.
§ Apropos the topic of verbal mistreatment, we learned in a mishna there (Kelim 5:10): If one cut an earthenware oven widthwise into segments, and placed sand between each and every segment, Rabbi Eliezer deems it ritually pure. Because of the sand, its legal status is not that of a complete vessel, and therefore it is not susceptible to ritual impurity. And the Rabbis deem it ritually impure, as it is functionally a complete oven.
וְזֶה הוּא תַּנּוּר שֶׁל עַכְנַאי. מַאי עַכְנַאי? אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: שֶׁהִקִּיפוּ[הוּ] דְּבָרִים כְּעַכְנָא זוֹ, וְטִמְּאוּהוּ. תָּנָא: בְּאוֹתוֹ הַיּוֹם הֵשִׁיב רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר כׇּל תְּשׁוּבוֹת שֶׁבָּעוֹלָם, וְלֹא קִיבְּלוּ הֵימֶנּוּ.
And this is known as the oven of akhnai. The Gemara asks: What is the relevance of akhnai, a snake, in this context? Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: It is characterized in that manner due to the fact that the Rabbis surrounded it with their statements like this snake, which often forms a coil when at rest, and deemed it impure. The Sages taught: On that day, when they discussed this matter, Rabbi Eliezer answered all possible answers in the world to support his opinion, but the Rabbis did not accept his explanations from him.
אָמַר לָהֶם: אִם הֲלָכָה כְּמוֹתִי – חָרוּב זֶה יוֹכִיחַ. נֶעֱקַר חָרוּב מִמְּקוֹמוֹ מֵאָה אַמָּה, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ: אַרְבַּע מֵאוֹת אַמָּה. אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אֵין מְבִיאִין רְאָיָה מִן הֶחָרוּב. חָזַר וְאָמַר לָהֶם: אִם הֲלָכָה כְּמוֹתִי – אַמַּת הַמַּיִם יוֹכִיחוּ. חָזְרוּ אַמַּת הַמַּיִם לַאֲחוֹרֵיהֶם. אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אֵין מְבִיאִין רְאָיָה מֵאַמַּת הַמַּיִם.
After failing to convince the Rabbis logically, Rabbi Eliezer said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, this carob tree will prove it. The carob tree was uprooted from its place one hundred cubits, and some say four hundred cubits. The Rabbis said to him: One does not cite halakhic proof from the carob tree. Rabbi Eliezer then said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, the stream will prove it. The water in the stream turned backward and began flowing in the opposite direction. They said to him: One does not cite halakhic proof from a stream.
חָזַר וְאָמַר לָהֶם: אִם הֲלָכָה כְּמוֹתִי – כּוֹתְלֵי בֵּית הַמִּדְרָשׁ יוֹכִיחוּ. הִטּוּ כּוֹתְלֵי בֵּית הַמִּדְרָשׁ לִיפּוֹל. גָּעַר בָּהֶם רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, אָמַר לָהֶם: אִם תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים מְנַצְּחִים זֶה אֶת זֶה בַּהֲלָכָה, אַתֶּם מָה טִיבְכֶם? לֹא נָפְלוּ מִפְּנֵי כְבוֹדוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, וְלֹא זָקְפוּ מִפְּנֵי כְבוֹדוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, וַעֲדַיִן מַטִּין וְעוֹמְדִין.
Rabbi Eliezer then said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, the walls of the study hall will prove it. The walls of the study hall leaned inward and began to fall. Rabbi Yehoshua scolded the walls and said to them: If Torah scholars are contending with each other in matters of halakha, what is the nature of your involvement in this dispute? The Gemara relates: The walls did not fall because of the deference due Rabbi Yehoshua, but they did not straighten because of the deference due Rabbi Eliezer, and they still remain leaning.
חָזַר וְאָמַר לָהֶם: אִם הֲלָכָה כְּמוֹתִי – מִן הַשָּׁמַיִם יוֹכִיחוּ. יָצָאתָה בַּת קוֹל וְאָמְרָה: מָה לָכֶם אֵצֶל רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, שֶׁהֲלָכָה כְּמוֹתוֹ בְּכׇל מָקוֹם.
Rabbi Eliezer then said to them: If the halakha is in accordance with my opinion, Heaven will prove it. A Divine Voice emerged from Heaven and said: Why are you differing with Rabbi Eliezer, as the halakha is in accordance with his opinion in every place that he expresses an opinion?
עָמַד רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ עַל רַגְלָיו וְאָמַר: ״לֹא בַשָּׁמַיִם הִיא!״ מַאי ״לֹא בַּשָּׁמַיִם הִיא״? אָמַר רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה: שֶׁכְּבָר נִתְּנָה תּוֹרָה מֵהַר סִינַי, אֵין אָנוּ מַשְׁגִּיחִין בְּבַת קוֹל, שֶׁכְּבָר כָּתַבְתָּ בְּהַר סִינַי בַּתּוֹרָה ״אַחֲרֵי רַבִּים לְהַטֹּת״. אַשְׁכְּחֵיהּ רַבִּי נָתָן לְאֵלִיָּהוּ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מַאי עָבֵיד קוּדְשָׁא בְּרִיךְ הוּא בְּהַהִיא שַׁעְתָּא? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: קָא חָיֵיךְ וְאָמַר, ״נִצְּחוּנִי בָּנַי! נִצְּחוּנִי בָּנַי!״
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.
The rest is also important, so feel free to follow the link and keep reading. It also pays to know the biography of Rabbi Eliezer ben Hyrcanus, his traits of preserving the tradition from his teachers rather than innovating, the impact of the Temple’s destruction, and his association with Bet Shammai, while Rabbi Yehoshua (ben Chanania) associates more with Bet Hillel.
A few years back, R’ Gil Student (Hirhurim) posted this on Twitter:
and there’s this idea from R’ Elli Fischer (Adderabbi) about the Talmudum Pauperum (instead of the Biblia Pauperum) including the Tanur shel Achnai.
Here, by the way, is his Down the Rabbi Hole episode on Spotify about Tanur Shel Achnai.
Anyway, I decided to focus on this because I’m thinking of a recent rather ignorant tweet by an anti-Zionist Jew, who writes as if he knows something.
Regarding the first tweet, really? The Sanhedrin never decided anything by majority? We’ve never had the principle of yachid vs. rabbim, halacha kerabbim? There’s no principle of acharei rabbim lehatot? Of course, there are exceptions, and there is a value in delving into the arguments and perhaps being persuaded by them. But to say that we never follow a majority is just astonishingly ignorant.
The way Twitter works, people can sometimes just view and respond to the first tweet and not even see the continuation of the thread. Naturally, many people dunked on the tweet by pointing out the Tanur shel Achnai.
But of course, the thread already had culminated with a mistaken impression of the story.
In this telling, it is an argument between two rabbis (which would be Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua) and one invokes God’s support, whereupon the other rabbi says that the Torah is not in Heaven. And I suppose that he’s thinking of a kal vachomer — if “Judaism” and the right to argue won’t even care about what God says, then certainly we won’t rely on what the many say.
[Of course, “polling” isn’t the same as majority of people who are educated enough to have an opinion, and if we were being charitable, we could make such a distinction.]
I don’t know that this person saw the story inside, to realize that it is Rabbi Eliezer against the majority, and he is trying to persuade the majority, first with arguments, then with miracles, and then with a bat kol. And that “the Torah is not in Heaven” is interpreted in that very source to be that the majority has the right to determine halachah.
Somewhat related, I saw the following today, about the outdoor Seder Plate made by “Jewish” Voice for “Peace”, of whom my impression is people with little or no Jewish identity or Jewish knowledge cosplaying as Jews in order to undermine Jewish interests and support Hamas.
Naturally, they don’t know enough to know which direction Hebrew goes, so it is ספרכ instead of כרפס and רורמ instead of maror.
They defended themselves, saying that who says knowing how to read and write Hebrew speaks to the legitimacy of one’s Jewish identity? That is a “zionist” belief:
