Singing Your Flaws
Sometimes I just can’t drop a daf. Such is the case for Sotah 32. At the end of yesterday’s post, I discussed the idea of someone with a problem bringing it to the attention of the community, and I believe I translated the verse, tamei tamei yikra, appropriately according to the way it was interpreted — “and the impure should call out impure.” If something is wrong, let other people know.
This reminded of a story I posted from Meiri al haTorah, on parshablog in 2009.
And the Chachmei Geonei Sefarad, in some of their writings, relate that there was a stranger (non-resident) Jew who had a lawsuit with one of the wealthy men of the city, and the stranger saw that the judge wished to judge the case to its truthful conclusion {such that the stranger would win}, and the wealthy man winked with his eye and bribed him secretly, and he tilted the judgement and ruled in favor of the wealthy man.
And on the Shabbat day, they were all in the synagogue, and the Chazan {=baal korei} read {Devarim 1}:
יז לֹא-תַכִּירוּ פָנִים בַּמִּשְׁפָּט, כַּקָּטֹן כַּגָּדֹל תִּשְׁמָעוּן--לֹא תָגוּרוּ מִפְּנֵי-אִישׁ, כִּי הַמִּשְׁפָּט לֵאלֹהִים הוּא; וְהַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר יִקְשֶׁה מִכֶּם, תַּקְרִבוּן אֵלַי וּשְׁמַעְתִּיו.17 Ye shall not respect persons in judgment; ye shall hear the small and the great alike; ye shall not be afraid of the face of any man; for the judgment is God's; and the cause that is too hard for you ye shall bring unto me, and I will hear it.'
and this victim arose furiously before the congregation and cried out a great and bitter cry, "the Chazan is lying, he is lying! For the judgement is the wealthy's." Until the heads of the community sought after the matter and found it out, removed the judge, and returned the law to its true state. And this is what the Scriptures states that "justice, justice shalt thou follow." The intent being that it is incumbent upon the important people {of the city} to pursue and investigate after justice, in order to make the judgement come out in its truth.
That isn’t something in my nature to do, because I am a very shy person.
Sotah 32b, a bit earlier, had a similar idea:
תַּנְיָא, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי אוֹמֵר: אָדָם אוֹמֵר שִׁבְחוֹ בְּקוֹל נָמוּךְ וּגְנוּתוֹ בְּקוֹל רָם.
The distinction between merely saying, and speaking and saying, is significant, as it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says: A person should say his own praise in a soft voice, and say that which is to his discredit in a loud voice.
שִׁבְחוֹ בְּקוֹל נָמוּךְ — מִן וִידּוּי הַמַּעֲשֵׂר. גְּנוּתוֹ בְּקוֹל רָם — מִמִּקְרָא בִּיכּוּרִים.
That one should say his praise in a soft voice is derived from the portion of the declaration of tithes, where one declares that he has acted appropriately, and the verse does not state: And you shall speak. That one should say that which is to his discredit in a loud voice is derived from the recitation of the first fruits, concerning which the verse states: “And you shall speak and say” (Deuteronomy 26:5), i.e., it should be recited loudly. The portion recited when bringing the first fruits details the hardships that the Jewish people suffered and denigrates Laban the Aramean, who is a progenitor of the Jewish
Thus, Rashbi says this, that one should sing his own criticisms loudly, not his own praises. The gemara immediately attacks this.
וּגְנוּתוֹ בְּקוֹל רָם?! וְהָאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי: מִפְּנֵי מָה תִּקְּנוּ תְּפִלָּה בְּלַחַשׁ, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא לְבַיֵּישׁ אֶת עוֹבְרֵי עֲבֵירָה. שֶׁהֲרֵי לֹא חָלַק הַכָּתוּב מָקוֹם בֵּין חַטָּאת לְעוֹלָה!
The Gemara asks: But should one really say that which is to his discredit in a loud voice? But didn’t Rabbi Yoḥanan say in the name of Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai himself: For what reason did the Sages institute that the Amida prayer should be recited in a whisper? So as not to embarrass transgressors who confess their transgressions during their prayer. There is proof that transgressors should not be embarrassed, as the verse detailing where different offerings are slaughtered does not differentiate between the place where a sin-offering is slaughtered and the place where a burnt-offering is slaughtered, so that it will not be recognized when one is bringing a sin-offering and the sinner will not be embarrassed. This shows that one should also say that which is to his discredit quietly.
Though not strictly necessary to establish a contradiction, it certainly is helpful that the contrast is between Rashbi and Rabbi Yochanan citing Rashbi. Without the same author, we could establish the contradiction because the brayta with the derasha about chatat and olah locations is taken as absolute and uncontested.
The reason I mention this is that I’m not entirely convinced that Rabbi Yochanan is citing Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai. Across the Talmudic corpus, we find Rabbi Yochanan mishum three or four different people:
Rabbi Shimon, or Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai
Rabbi Shimon bar Yehotzadak
Rabbi Yishmael
Rabbi Yishmael bar Yehotzadak
Because of the orthographic similarities between all these, and Yochai and Yehotzadak, I’m not convinced that they are not all really Rabbi Shimon or Yishmael bar Yehotzadak.
I’ve touched on this point in articles, and on Scribal Error here and here.
As to the conflict between the two statements of Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai, singing your flaws vs. hiding the sinner status in the Temple, I think there is an easy resolution, without the Talmudic Narrator’s emendation or reframing (that it is calling our one’s pain, not flaws).
The easy resolution is: there is a difference the two. The former is inspirational ethical guidance about what you should choose to do for yourself, how to present yourself, not to make your Facebook and Instagram some polished version of yourself where you are perfect, but to be self critical even in what you present to the public.
The latter is how people outside of the sinner should relate to that (repentant) sinner. You shouldn’t sing others’ flaws in public! When creating a Beit Hamikdash, you want to encourage people to seek atonement, by means of a chatat offering, so you do not humiliate them, and do not discourage them from attending.
By the way, there is a hidden derasha in what Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai is saying. He isn’t just randomly tagging one aspect of the preparation of the olah and the chatat, saying “Hey, these two are equal!”
Rather, the very idea that these details are equal, and emphatically so, comes from the pasuk in Vayikra 6:18:
דַּבֵּ֤ר אֶֽל־אַהֲרֹן֙ וְאֶל־בָּנָ֣יו לֵאמֹ֔ר זֹ֥את תּוֹרַ֖ת הַֽחַטָּ֑את בִּמְק֡וֹם אֲשֶׁר֩ תִּשָּׁחֵ֨ט הָעֹלָ֜ה תִּשָּׁחֵ֤ט הַֽחַטָּאת֙ לִפְנֵ֣י יְהוָ֔ה קֹ֥דֶשׁ קָֽדָשִׁ֖ים הִֽוא׃
Speak to Aaron and his sons thus: This is the ritual of the sin offering: the sin offering shall be slaughtered before the LORD, at the spot where the burnt offering is slaughtered: it is most holy.
So, Rashbi is not making a mere observation. He is darshening the Torah’s going out of its way to connect the two. Instead of saying batzafon, in the North, it states “in the place you slaughter the olah.”
This might also answer the Talmudic Narrator’s objections. Yes, other aspects will may still expose his sinner status, but this aspect was proposed by the Torah to teach this homiletic lesson, about how to not embarrass the sinner, or generally not to embarrass.