Rabbi Yochanan's Beard
First, I’ll take note of an announcement from Sefaria that they added RAMBI to the Web Pages connections.
Their hyperlinked example goes to a pasuk in Tanach:
Very nice! So far someone kvetched (and I haven’t seen) that they don’t appear to have any links on Mishnah or Talmud, only Tanach, despite the announcement, but we will have to see. Something to keep an eye out, and a great development. I wonder what the criteria are for getting a web page or blog listed there… After all, the web is huge.
On yesterday’s daf (Nazir 59), a few points.
1] The Talmudic Narrator’s conception of the prohibition of cross-dressing. The Torah says to’evah, abomination and this couldn’t possibly refer to the actual mere act of cross-dressing. Instead, the concern is of using that as a means of entering female-exclusive spaces (and male-exclusive spaces. This seems to parallel a very modern argument / concern. I wonder about the Biblical conception of toevah, and whether it has to do with trespassing boundaries within society or the natural order.
2] Despite himself voicing the prohibition, Rabbi Yochanan lacked armpit hair, perhaps pubic hair in general.
אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ רַבָּנַן לְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בַּר אַבָּא: חֲזֵינָא לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן דְּלֵית לֵיהּ! אֲמַר לְהוֹן: מֵחֲמַת זִקְנָה נָשְׁרוּ.
The Gemara reports that the Sages said to Rabbi Shimon bar Abba: We have observed that Rabbi Yoḥanan does not have armpit hairs, despite his own ruling that it is prohibited to shave them. He said to them: They fell out due to old age.
We should observe a related sugya in Bava Metzia 84a, that Rabbi Yochanan lacked a beard:
אמר רבי יוחנן אנא אישתיירי משפירי ירושלים האי מאן דבעי מחזי שופריה דרבי יוחנן נייתי כסא דכספא מבי סלקי ונמלייה פרצידיא דרומנא סומקא ונהדר ליה כלילא דוורדא סומקא לפומיה ונותביה בין שמשא לטולא ההוא זהרורי מעין שופריה דר' יוחנן
With regard to Rabbi Yoḥanan’s physical features, the Gemara adds that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: I alone remain of the beautiful people of Jerusalem. The Gemara continues: One who wishes to see something resembling the beauty of Rabbi Yoḥanan should bring a new, shiny silver goblet from the smithy and fill it with red pomegranate seeds [partzidaya] and place a diadem of red roses upon the lip of the goblet, and position it between the sunlight and shade. That luster is a semblance of Rabbi Yoḥanan’s beauty.
איני והאמר מר שופריה דרב כהנא מעין שופריה דרבי אבהו שופריה דר' אבהו מעין שופריה דיעקב אבינו שופריה דיעקב אבינו מעין שופריה דאדם הראשון ואילו ר' יוחנן לא קא חשיב ליה שאני ר' יוחנן דהדרת פנים לא הויא ליה
The Gemara asks: Is that so? Was Rabbi Yoḥanan so beautiful? But doesn’t the Master say: The beauty of Rav Kahana is a semblance of the beauty of Rabbi Abbahu; the beauty of Rabbi Abbahu is a semblance of the beauty of Jacob, our forefather; and the beauty of Jacob, our forefather, is a semblance of the beauty of Adam the first man, who was created in the image of God. And yet Rabbi Yoḥanan is not included in this list. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yoḥanan is different from these other men, as he did not have a beauty of countenance, i.e., he did not have a beard.
Indeed, on the same amud, Resh Lakish tells Rabbi Yochanan that his beauty is that of women.
יומא חד הוה קא סחי ר' יוחנן בירדנא חזייה ריש לקיש ושוור לירדנא אבתריה אמר ליה חילך לאורייתא אמר ליה שופרך לנשי א"ל אי הדרת בך יהיבנא לך אחותי דשפירא מינאי קביל עליה בעי למיהדר לאתויי מאניה ולא מצי הדר
The Gemara relates: One day, Rabbi Yoḥanan was bathing in the Jordan River. Reish Lakish saw him and jumped into the Jordan, pursuing him. At that time, Reish Lakish was the leader of a band of marauders. Rabbi Yoḥanan said to Reish Lakish: Your strength is fit for Torah study. Reish Lakish said to him: Your beauty is fit for women. Rabbi Yoḥanan said to him: If you return to the pursuit of Torah, I will give you my sister in marriage, who is more beautiful than I am. Reish Lakish accepted upon himself to study Torah. Subsequently, Reish Lakish wanted to jump back out of the river to bring back his clothes, but he was unable to return, as he had lost his physical strength as soon as he accepted the responsibility to study Torah upon himself.
So perhaps there was something else going on, e.g. due to hormones.
3] The gemara contrasts two braytot, one which claims that the prohibition of men shaving their underarms is midivrei Soferim and another which gives a pasuk or lo yilbash gever. The gemara refers to the first brayta as “Tanna Kamma”, even though typically that would be the first (anonymous) Tanna in a single Tannaitic source:
וְתַנָּא קַמָּא, הַאי ״לֹא יִלְבַּשׁ גֶּבֶר״, מַאי דָּרֵישׁ בֵּיהּ? מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְכִדְתַנְיָא: ״לֹא יִהְיֶה כְלִי גֶבֶר עַל אִשָּׁה״. מַאי תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר? אִם שֶׁלֹּא יִלְבַּשׁ אִישׁ שִׂמְלַת אִשָּׁה וְאִשָּׁה שִׂמְלַת אִישׁ, הֲרֵי כְּבָר נֶאֱמַר ״תּוֹעֵבָה הִיא״, וְאֵין כָּאן תּוֹעֵבָה.
This would be another instance of the unique language of Nedarim and Nazir, as discussed here:
4] But considering the contrast for a moment. The gemara begins by attributing each of these positions (verse of divrei Soferim) to Rabbi Yochanan, in which case a brayta would either agree with or contradict Rabbi Yochanan, and so the gemara records the variant versions of whether it is a contradiction (איכא דאמרי at the top of Nazir 59b).
But do they need to contradict one another? The definition of divrei Soferim is fluid across Shas. And there is a famous difficulty in the Rambam resolved based on these different usages. Divrei Soferim can mean :
that a law is entirely rabbinic in nature
that it is not the plain peshat in a verse but derived via hermeneutical principles
that the law has Biblical basis, but the specific means of carrying it out, or the acts encompassed by the law, was left up to the Sages to determine for themselves, with the force of Biblical law.
How shall we conceive of kiddushei kesef, betrothal via money or goods worth money?
But, for (3), I’ve heard this idea brought up by sheniyot la’arayot, secondarily prohibited incest based on more distant relationships. See Yevamot 21a. Admittedly, Rava discusses it as a remez from the Torah:
אָמַר רָבָא: רֶמֶז לִשְׁנִיּוֹת מִן הַתּוֹרָה מִנַּיִן — שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״כִּי אֶת כׇּל הַתּוֹעֵבוֹת הָאֵל עָשׂוּ אַנְשֵׁי הָאָרֶץ״, ״הָאֵל״ — קָשׁוֹת, מִכְּלָל דְּאִיכָּא רַכּוֹת, וּמַאי נִינְהוּ — שְׁנִיּוֹת.
§ Rava said: Where is the prohibition against secondary forbidden relationships hinted at in the Torah? As it is stated at the end of the portion discussing forbidden incestuous relations: “For all these abominations have the men of the land done” (Leviticus 18:27). “These” must be understood to mean the harsh ones, i.e., the severe transgressions. This proves by inference that there are also lesser transgressions that are, as it were, soft ones. And what are those soft ones? They are secondary forbidden relationships.
and that implies that this is non-Biblical, but just an allusion to what the rabbis would institute.
On the previous daf, Yevamot 20, Abaye and Rava grapple with the Mishnah referring to shniyot as issur mitzvah, for what Biblical commandment is there? But this might be an answer.
Running with idea #3, perhaps Rabbi Yochanan may maintain that shaving underarm and pubic hair could fall under lo yilbash gever, but the parameters (or perimeters) of the prohibition was given over to the soferim to define, such that it may be in flux.
5] Related, last week on Shabbos, I read an article in Hakira by Steven Adams, Male Body Hair Depilation in Jewish Law, which traced how this prohibition of shaving underarm and pubic hair was relaxed by the Geonim, in reaction to societal development and Islamic hygienic practices, something which Ashkenazic communities were not exposed to. A fascinating read.
I wonder, though, whether even in Talmudic times, in some social circles it was already acceptable to shave one’s underarms, and this was not considered emulating female practices. After all, consider this, from 59a:
הָהוּא דְּאִיתְחַיַּיב נְגִידָא קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אַמֵּי. אִיגַּלַּאי בֵּית הַשֶּׁחִי, חַזְיֵיהּ דְּלָא מְגַלַּח, אֲמַר לְהוֹן רַבִּי אַמֵּי: שִׁיבְקוּהּ, דֵּין מִן חַבְרַיָּא הוּא.
The Gemara relates: There was a certain person who committed a transgression and was found liable to receive lashes before Rabbi Ami. When they removed his clothes to flog him, his armpit was exposed, and Rabbi Ami saw that he had not shaved his armpit hair. Rabbi Ami said to his attendants: Leave him; this is one of those who are meticulous in observance of mitzvot. We can see this is so, as he is particular about prohibitions that ordinary people do not observe.
This was Rabbi Ami, who was Rabbi Yochanan’s student! And possession of underarm hair was something considered meticulous. Or, you could say min chavraya hu means that he is of the Sages, knowledgeable about the prohibition. As Rav Steinsaltz said, רואים שנוהג כמנהג חברים, שאינו עובר על איסור אף שאחרים אינם מקפידים עליו.
That this is out of the ordinary suggests that many normal males would do so in those days, even if they were not trying to emulate females. I wonder how that plays into the idea developed by the geonim, that it was obvious that talmidei chachamim could remove the hair from those areas, because it did not carry that social implication. Maybe the fact that during Talmudic times, talmidei chachamim still refrained gave it some aspect of something one shouldn’t do.