(Rabbi) Yeshoshua ben Gamla
(1) In today’s daf (Bava Batra 21), we hear of Yehoshua ben Gamla, who set up an educational system for children.
דְּאָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: בְּרַם, זָכוּר אוֹתוֹ הָאִישׁ לַטּוֹב – וִיהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן גַּמְלָא שְׁמוֹ, שֶׁאִלְמָלֵא הוּא, נִשְׁתַּכַּח תּוֹרָה מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל. שֶׁבִּתְחִלָּה, מִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ אָב – מְלַמְּדוֹ תּוֹרָה, מִי שֶׁאֵין לוֹ אָב – לֹא הָיָה לָמֵד תּוֹרָה. מַאי דְּרוּשׁ? ״וְלִמַּדְתֶּם אֹתָם״ – וְלִמַּדְתֶּם אַתֶּם.
What was this ordinance? As Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: Truly, that man is remembered for the good, and his name is Yehoshua ben Gamla. If not for him the Torah would have been forgotten from the Jewish people. Initially, whoever had a father would have his father teach him Torah, and whoever did not have a father would not learn Torah at all. The Gemara explains: What verse did they interpret homiletically that allowed them to conduct themselves in this manner? They interpreted the verse that states: “And you shall teach them [otam] to your sons” (Deuteronomy 11:19), to mean: And you yourselves [atem] shall teach, i.e., you fathers shall teach your sons.
I usually use the Artscroll app, but I left it at home this morning and used one of the shul’s gemaras. That volume had a footnote that some manuscripts had Rabbi Yehoshua ben Gamla here and elsewhere.
So, I looked at Hachi Garsinan and only one of their manuscripts has it, namely Florence 8-9, has the title.
My inclination is that the title “Rabbi” is not original. A scribe would be more pious and add the honorific than the repeatedly strip the title, all times it occurs.
We probably also know who he is, that is Yehoshua ben Gamla Kohen Gadol, whose wife purchased the Kehuna Gedola for him from Yannai HaMelech. See the writeup on Wikipedia, and how Josephus mentions him.
Joshua ben Gamla (Hebrew: יהושע בן גמלא), also called Jesus the son of Gamala (Greek: Ἰησοῦς υἱὸς Γαμάλα), was a Jewish high priest in about 64-65 CE. He was killed during the First Jewish–Roman War. While the Talmud refers to Joshua ben Gamla, the earlier Greek works of Josephus Flavius call him Γαμάλα μὲν υἱὸς Ἰησοῦς (Gamala men huios Iesous) a semitism for: The son of Gamala, Jesus.
(2) Not exactly a scribal error, but a major topic in today’s daf is a pronunciation error. Nikkud is post-Talmudic, so Yoav’s childhood teacher read the consonantal text of the chumash incorrectly, of timcheh et zachar, or perhaps zechar Amalek, since it should be the construct form. Thus Yoav thought that only males were targeted, leading to עַד הִכְרִית כׇּל זָכָר בֶּאֱדוֹם. At the top of 21b:
מַאי טַעְמָא עֲבַדְתְּ הָכִי? אֲמַר לֵיהּ, דִּכְתִיב: ״תִּמְחֶה אֶת זְכַר עֲמָלֵק״. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: וְהָא אֲנַן ״זֵכֶר״ קָרֵינַן! אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֲנָא ״זְכַר״ אַקְרְיוּן. אֲזַל שַׁיְילֵיהּ לְרַבֵּיהּ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הֵיאַךְ אַקְרִיתַן? אֲמַר לֵיהּ: ״זֵכֶר״.
What is the reason that you did that? Why did you kill only the males? Joab said to him: As it is written: You shall blot out the males [zakhar] of Amalek, i.e., the male descendants of Amalek, who descend from Edom. David said to him: But we read the verse as stating: “You shall blot out the remembrance [zekher] of Amalek” (Deuteronomy 25:19). Joab said to him: I was taught to read it as zakhar. Joab went and asked his childhood Bible teacher. Joab said to him: How did you read this word to us? The teacher said to him: I read it as zekher. The teacher had read it the proper way, but he failed to notice that his student had learned it incorrectly.
I wrote a parshablog post many years back — actually seven years, since it was a daf yomi post. I’ll quote myself, that maybe it isn’t zechar, but this is the difference between zeicher and zecher!
Rabbi Dr. Shlomo Goldberg told me of an interesting explanation from Rav Meshulam Roth (see here) that the difference is between zecher (segol segol) and zeicher (tzeirei segol). With the improper segol segol, it is parallel to eshen hakivshan, a construct form, where the absolute form is ashan. So with segol segol, Yoav believes that it was the construct form of zachar, males.