This post is dedicated to the merit of our brothers and sisters in Eretz Yisrael. May they be safe and successful.
Yesterday’s daf yomi brought us the familiar story of Shimon or Nechemia HaAmsuni, who darshened all instances of את in the Torah, but pulled back when he reached “you shall fear et-Hashem You God”. This is the possibly the same person as Nachum Ish Gamzo. That is:
the overlap in the name Nachum / Nechemia
being the teacher, or perhaps student, of Rabbi Akiva for 22 years
both of who darshened et to include
the ayin of Amsuni being pronounced ghayin, bringing us to Gamsuni
and the samech of Amusni vs. the zayin of Gamzu, both sibilants
Just as Rabbi Akiva followed his teacher about darshening instances of et, and even resolved that instance, he also followed his teacher about saying Gam Zo LeTovah about seemingly bad situations, saying לעולם יהא אדם רגיל לומר כל דעביד רחמנא לטב עביד. And Rabbi Akiva witnesses horrible oppression of the Jewish people.
It is all well and good to say “Gam Zu LeTovah” about everything. But it seems rather difficult to say this about the horrific events of the past weak. We have admittedly limited perspective, and Rabbi Akiva / Nachum Ish Gamzo didn’t say כְּשֵׁם שֶׁקִּבַּלְתִּי שָׂכָר עַל הַדְּרִישָׁה, כָּךְ אֲנִי מְקַבֵּל שָׂכָר עַל הַפְּרִישָׁה.
OK, filling in some, though not necessary all, of what I mentioned above.
Our gemara in Kiddushin 57a:
״אֶת״ לָא דָּרֵישׁ. כִּדְתַנְיָא: שִׁמְעוֹן הָעַמְסוֹנִי וְאָמְרִי לַהּ נְחֶמְיָה הָעַמְסוֹנִי הָיָה דּוֹרֵשׁ כׇּל אֶתִּין שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה. כֵּיוָן שֶׁהִגִּיעַ לְ״אֶת ה׳ אֱלֹהֶיךָ תִּירָא״, פֵּירַשׁ.
The Gemara answers: This Sage does not interpret the word “et” as a means to derive new halakhot. He considers the word “et” to be an ordinary part of the sentence structure and not a source for exegetical exposition. As it is taught in a baraita: Shimon HaAmasoni, and some say that it was Neḥemya HaAmasoni, would interpret all occurrences of the word “et” in the Torah, deriving additional halakhot with regard to the particular subject matter. Once he reached the verse: “You shall fear the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 6:13), which is written with the added word “et,” he withdrew from this method of exposition, as whose fear could be an extension of the fear of God?
אָמְרוּ לוֹ תַּלְמִידָיו: רַבִּי, כׇּל אֶתִּין שֶׁדָּרַשְׁתָּ מָה תְּהֵא עֲלֵיהֶם? אָמַר לָהֶם: כְּשֵׁם שֶׁקִּבַּלְתִּי שָׂכָר עַל הַדְּרִישָׁה, כָּךְ קִבַּלְתִּי עַל הַפְּרִישָׁה. עַד שֶׁבָּא רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא וְלִימֵּד: ״אֶת ה׳ אֱלֹהֶיךָ תִּירָא״ – לְרַבּוֹת תַּלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים.
His students said to him: Our teacher, what will be with all the occurrences of the word “et” that you interpreted until now? He said to them: Just as I received reward for the exposition, so I received reward for my withdrawal from using this method of exposition. The word “et” in this verse was not explained until Rabbi Akiva came and expounded: “You shall fear the Lord your God”: The word “et” serves to include Torah scholars, i.e., that one is commanded to fear them just as one fears God. In any event, Shimon HaAmasoni no longer derived additional halakhot from the word et.
Why should “et” be an inclusion, when it is just the object-marker, serving a grammatical function? I have three suggestions, and they might be true simultaneously:
It is, strictly speaking, extraneous and very occasionally does not appear
Et sometimes means with, like kaniti ish, et Elokim; or et HaElokim hithalech Noach; also functions in words like itto, with him
A cross-language pun. “Et” in Greek means “and”
Here is the entry for Nechemiah HaAmsuni is Rav Aharon Hyman’s Toledot Tannaim vaAmorim:
Note he served Rabbi Akiva for 22 years, and darshened the words et and gam as inclusions, and ach and rak as exclusions. Our story, appearing in our gemara in Kiddushin and several others, imply he was a student, but then, one gemara implied that he was prior to Rabbi Akiva. But in Dikdukei Soferim, the words “his students said to him, my teacher” is lacking. Which would fix that problem. And he only darshened the verse et Hashem Elokecha tira after he heard from his teacher, Rabbi Akiva.
The closest we have to this alternative girsa in Kiddushin is Vatican 110-111, which has R’ but not talmidav, so it should nevertheless indicate the same.
But there are other parallel gemaras, and I am not checking all of them right now.
The second figure I mentioned is Nachum Ish Gamzo. Here is his entry in Toledot Tannaim vaAmoraim.
Note how at the beginning of the entry, Chagiga 12a has him as the teacher of Rabbi Akiva for precisely 22 years, in matters of darshening the word et.
שָׁאַל רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אֶת רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא כְּשֶׁהָיוּ מְהַלְּכִין בַּדֶּרֶךְ, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אַתָּה שֶׁשִּׁימַּשְׁתָּ אֶת נַחוּם אִישׁ גַּם זוֹ עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁתַּיִם שָׁנָה, שֶׁהָיָה דּוֹרֵשׁ כׇּל ״אֶתִּין״ שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה, ״אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ״, מָה הָיָה דּוֹרֵשׁ בָּהֶן? אָמַר לוֹ: אִילּוּ נֶאֱמַר ״שָׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ״, הָיִיתִי אוֹמֵר: ״שָׁמַיִם״ — שְׁמוֹ שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא. עַכְשָׁיו שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ״, ״שָׁמַיִם״ — שָׁמַיִם מַמָּשׁ, ״אָרֶץ״ — אֶרֶץ מַמָּשׁ.
§ The Gemara relates: Rabbi Yishmael asked Rabbi Akiva a question when they were walking along the way. He said to him: You who served Naḥum of Gam Zu for twenty-two years, who would expound and learn that every appearance of the word et in the Torah is meant to teach something, what would he expound from the phrase: “The heaven and the earth” [et hashamayim ve’et ha’aretz] (Genesis 1:1)? He said to him: These words should be expounded as follows: Had it stated: In the beginning God created hashamayim veha’aretz, i.e., the heaven and the earth, without the word et, I would have said: Shamayim is the name of the Holy One, Blessed be He, and the same goes for aretz, and the verse would sound as if it meant that God, whose name is Shamayim and Aretz, created the world. Since it states “et hashamayim ve’et ha’aretz,” it is clear that these are created objects and that shamayim means the actual heaven and aretz is the actual earth. It is for this reason that the word et is necessary.
And the tough question they have is regarding the very first instance in the Torah!
So, we might be dealing with a different scribal error. The talmidav is not a problem, for we can have Rabbi Akiva be a student of Nechemia / Shimon HaAmsuni for 22 years. The scribal error / alternative tradition would be the two Yerushalmis that implied the opposite, that he was Rabbi Akiva’s student for 22 years and learned et and gam from him. To cite one of those, Yerushalmi Sotah:
נְחֶמְיָה עֵימֹסוֹנִי שִׁימֵּשׁ אֶת רִבִּי עֲקִיבָא עֶשְׂרִים וּשְׁתַּיִם שָׁנָה. הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר. אִתִּים גַּמִּים רִיבּוּיִין. אַכִין וְרַקִּין מִיעוּטִין. אָמַר לֵיהּ. מַהוּ דֵין דִּכְתִיב אֶת י֙י אֱלֹהֶיךָ תִּירָא וגו׳. אָמַר לֵיהּ. אוֹתוֹ וְאֶת תּוֹרָתוֹ.
Neḥemiah from Emmaus served Rebbi Aqiba for 22 years and he taught him “את and גם mean additions, אך and רק mean exclusions.” He asked him: What means that which is written (Deut. 6:13) “את the Eternal, your God, you must fear.” He said to him, Him and His Torah.