Daf 6a - Gremlins
Ein Yaakov
- The World of Talmudic Aggada
By Dr.
Moshe Simon-Shoshan
Lecture
20: Daf 6a
Gremlins
The Gemara
presented a series of statements attributed to Abba Binyamin, a mysterious
figure who does not appear elsewhere in the Talmud. With Abba Binyamins second
to last statement, the Gemara returns to its discussion of mazikin, the
invisible demons who the rabbis believed were responsible for much misery and
misfortune in the world. The discussion returns to some of the themes about
demons that we have already encountered in the Gemaras earlier discussion of
demons. Abba Binyamins statement is followed by a similar statement by Abaye:
It has been
taught: Abba Binyamin says,
If the eye
had the power to see them,
no creature
could endure the demons.
Abaye says:
They are more
numerous than we are and
they surround
us like the ridge round a field.
Both rabbis
here express similar sentiments in their statements. The mazikin are
extraordinarily numerous. They surround us constantly like swarms of insects.
The only thing that saves us from being overwhelmed by the very sight of them is
the fact that they are invisible to us. In this view, the world out there is a
terrifying place. We are in constant danger from every side. The only reason we
are not paralyzed by fear and can go about our daily business is that
mercifully, we dont notice all the danger that surrounds us. In many ways, this
concept of mazikin is quite similar to modern sciences notion that we
are constantly surrounded by microscopic germs that threaten our health, and we
are subject to invisible forces that can cause all sorts of damage. On a
theological level, Abaye and Abba Binyamins views imply a worldview that we
have previously attributed to Reish Lakish: The norm in this world is that the
forces of destruction have free reign. Suffering is to be expected, not
explained. Neither Abba Binyamin nor Abaye suggest any way of avoiding the
mazikin. All we can do is be thankful that we cannot see them.
A slightly
more optimistic view is presented by R. Huna:
R. Huna says:
Every one
among us has a thousand on his left hand
and ten
thousand on his right hand.
In and of
itself, this statement does not advance our conversation much. However, the
attentive reader will notice that the phrase, a thousand on his left hand and
ten thousand on his right hand is a clear allusion to Tehillim 91:7,
which is cited here in several textual witnesses, including the Ein Yaakov.
The passage from Tehillim reads as follows:
You need not
fear the terror by night
Or the arrow
that flies by day,
The plague
that stalks in the darkness
Or the
scourge that ravages at noon.
A thousand
may fall at your left side,
Ten thousand
at your right,
But it shall
not reach you
Because you
took the Lord
As your
haven.
Careful
readers of this series will not be surprised that the rabbis interpret this
verse as referring to demons. We have already seen how in the case of Devarim
32:24 in Parashat Ha-azinu, the rabbis interpreted terms for plagues as
the names of demons. In particular, the word ketev was understood as a
type of devil. The term ketev reappears in our passage from Tehillim,
translated as scourge. To the rabbis, it may well have been obvious that these
verses refer to demons.
In recalling
this verse, R. Huna adds two things to our conversation about mazikin. In
previous Talmudic discussions of demons, the emphasis was on the threat of
demons at night. In much of this passage, however, the text implies that demons
are let slip to wreak havoc day and night. The verses in Tehillim
explicitly make reference to dangers that stalk in the darkness and ravage in
the day. This would appear to be a significant expansion of the powers of the
mazikin. Presumably, though, demons reach the height of their destructive
powers at night.
These verses
also bring a new source of optimism to our concerns about demons. Abaye and Abba
Binyamin both tell us that we are constantly surrounded by demons and offer no
hope of escaping their clutches. By referring to this verse, R. Huna reminds us
that ultimately God is in charge, and He will protect us from the mazikin
if only we put our trust in Him.
The next
lines further expand the role of mazikin in our daily lives:
Raba says:
The crushing
in the Kallah lectures comes from them.
Fatigue in
the knees comes from them.
The wearing
out of the clothes of the scholars
is due to
their rubbing against them.
The bruising
of the feet comes from them.
According to
Raba, mazikin are not just responsible for death and extreme suffering.
They also cause the minor annoyances and indignities of daily life. The modern
equivalents of the events Raba attributes to mazikin might include:
crowded subway cars at rush hour, runs in stockings, missing socks and
repetitive stress injuries. If we exclude the first event listed by Raba, all of
these events have something else in common. All of these things are caused by
the gradual accumulation of small, often unperceivable forces. Lacking our
scientific understanding, people in the ancient world would have been most
puzzled as to why these things occur. Raba mentions specifically the clothing of
scholars, who are not involved in manual labor. Since such clothing is not
exposed to the elements or other forms of abuse, they must have wondered, why
does such clothing not last forever? Similarly, why do various parts of the body
give out, even if I have not exerted myself? The only scientific answer that
Raba can come up with is that all these mysterious problems are caused by
invisible demons. Once again, is this really so different from our explanation
that they are caused by tiny, invisible forces?
The first
example that Raba gives does not fit into this category. He talks of the
crowding at the Kalla, the semi-annual conclaves in which Jews from all over
Babylonia would gather in the great yeshivot to study Torah. Surely Raba
understood that the crowding at these Torah lectures was caused by the large
number of people there? I do not understand why one would need to attribute such
phenomena to demons.
The Gemara
now moves on to give some more concrete advice:
If one wants
to discover them,
let him take
sifted ashes and sprinkle around his bed,
and in the
morning he will see something like the footprints of a cock.
If one wishes
to see them,
let him take
the after-birth of a black she-cat,
the offspring
of a black she-cat,
the
first-born of a first-born,
let him roast
it in fire and grind it to powder,
and then let
him put some into his eye,
and he will
see them.
This passage
presents instructions of the sort one might expect to find in a potions textbook
available in Diagon alley rather than in the Babylonian Talmud. It is important
to note that most demon-oriented spells and potions claim to give protection
from, or even control, over demons. The procedures described here are of a more
academic nature. They allow the individual to observe mazikin, or at
least their movements. The first suggestion, of placing ashes around ones bed
and looking for footprints in the morning, almost recalls a childs home science
experiment meant to demonstrate basic phenomena like evaporation. This experiment also emphasizes the
nocturnal nature of demons, in apparent contradiction to the previous lines.
As the Gemara
continues, it becomes apparent that there are real dangers involved in the
pastime of demon watching:
Let him also
pour it into an iron tube
and seal it
with an iron signet
that they
should not steal it from him.
Let him also
close his mouth, lest he come to harm.
R. Bibi b.
Abaye did so, saw them and came to harm.
The scholars,
however, prayed for him and he recovered.
It seems that
the demons do not want to be seen.
They will attempt to steal the visibility potion from its owner. Moreover, they
will attempt to harm the person who has gained the ability to see them, by
attacking him through the mouth. One is thus advised to keep ones mouth shut
during such an encounter.
Finally, we
learn of a case in which R. Bibi b. Abaye was actually harmed in the course of
viewing mazikin. The story does not say how or why he was harmed. From
the context, it would seem that R. Bibi failed to shut his mouth while he was
watching the demons. But this is never stated explicitly. The simplest reading
of this line is that viewing demons is, in and of itself, dangerous. This would
give new meaning to the opening lines of our passage, that if humans could see
all the demons around them, they could not withstand it. Perhaps the very sight
of demons can be bad for your health.
The story of
R. Bibi thus far is a simple cautionary tale. After a discussion of how to see
demons, the Gemara concludes by telling us dont try this at home, relating a
story of someone who got hurt doing it. However, the Gemara continues the story
and tells us that whatever happened to R. Bibi (perhaps they turned him into a
newt!), he did get better as a result of the rabbis prayers.
Why is this detail important? Would not
this cautionary tale be even more effective if R. Bibi was not cured? I am not
sure, but perhaps this is to reassure the readers that ultimately we are not at
the mercy of the demons. The rabbis prayers directly to God can undo whatever
damage the demons have done.
Holiness
in numbers
Finally we
come to Abba Binyamins last statement:
It has been
taught: Abba Binyamin says:
A man's
prayer is heard [by God] only in the Synagogue.
For it is
said:
To hearken
unto the song and to the prayer (I Melakhim 8:28).
The prayer is
to be recited where there is song.
Ravin b. R.
Adda says in the name of R. Yitzchak:
How do you
know that the Holy One, blessed be He,
is to be
found in the Synagogue?
For it is
said:
God standeth
in the Divine assembly (Tehillim 82:1).
Abba Binyamin
now argues that prayers are only heard when recited in the synagogue. We have
already cited this position in our attempts to understand Abba Binyamins
previous discussion of the case in which two individuals enter a synagogue to
pray. This discussion suggests that praying in the synagogue has value even when
there is no communal prayer going on. However, even if we read this text
minimally, as simply saying that it is better to pray in a synagogue,
Abba Binyamins final statement seems to flatly contradict his first reported
statement. In that statement, Abba Binyamin stressed the importance of praying
before ones bed, presumably at home. I do not know how to reconcile his
advocacy of praying at home and his stress on praying in the synagogue.
I am also not
clear on how he derives this principle from the verse cited. In the verse, King
Shlomo talks of the Temple, which he has just built, as a place for prayer. The
verse makes no mention of the synagogue. I also do not understand the phrase,
The prayer is to be recited where there is song.
Ravin b. Ada
offers a complimentary statement whose source is more understandable. He
declares that the reason prayers are heard in the synagogue is that God Himself
dwells in the synagogue. He cites the verse, God stands in the Divine
assembly. In this midrash, Ravin seems to take the word assembly,
edah/adat, as referring to the gathering together of worshipers to praise
God. This understanding works nicely since the peshat (simple meaning) of
the verse is that God stands among His angels. This midrash thus
substitutes Gods heavenly servants with his human ones. Furthermore, the word
edah is understood in other midrashim as referring to a minyan.
If this reading is correct, Ravin does not mean that God dwells in the physical
structure of the synagogue, but rather that He dwells among those who have
gathered for communal prayer. This is different from Abba Binyamins statement
which apparently refers to the synagogue building even when no services are
going on.
Rashi,
however, interprets this midrash as playing on the proposed relationship
between the words edah and moed. He
states that according to Ravin, the verse means that God dwells in his beit
moed, his appointed place. Rashi thus understands Ravin as
referring to the physical location of the synagogue, like Abba Binyamins
statement. The term beit moed, which has its roots in Iyov 30:23,
seems here to be a combination of the terms Beit Ha-mikdash and Ohel
Moed. Just as God dwelt in the Mishkan and the Beit Ha-mikdash
at all times, God also dwells in the synagogue at all times.
One factor
militating against Rashis interpretation is that the very next line in the
Gemara takes up the question of Gods presence among those who are engaged in
prayer:
And how do
you know that
if ten people
pray together
the Divine
presence is with them?
For it is
said:
'God standeth
in the assembly of the Divine (Tehillim 82:1).
And how do
you know that
if three are
sitting as a court of judges
the Divine
Presence is with them?
For it is
said:
In the midst
of the judges He judgeth (Ibid.).
And how do
you know that
if two are
sitting and studying the Torah together
the Divine
Presence is with them?
For it is
said:
Then they
that feared the Lord spoke one with another;
and the Lord
hearkened and heard,
and a book of
remembrance was written before Him,
for them that
feared the Lord and that thought upon His name (Malakhi 3:16). (What
does it mean:
'And that
thought upon His name'?
R. Ashi says:
If a man
thought to fulfill a commandment
and he did
not do it,
because he
was prevented by force or accident,
then the
Scripture credits it to him
as if he had
performed it.)
And how do
you know that
even if one
man sits and studies the Torah
the Divine
Presence is with him?
For it is
said:
In every
place where I cause My name to be mentioned
I will come
unto thee and bless thee (Shemot 20:20).
With the
exception of the lines placed in parentheses here, which are a late Amoraic
gloss, this entire passage appears in slightly different versions in Pirkei
Avot 3:6 and in the Mekhilta. It is therefore clear that these lines
are not part of Ravins statement, but a citation of an earlier source brought
by the Gemara to complement Ravins statement.
Notably, the
sources in the Mishna and the Mekhilta refer only to groups of
people studying Torah, whereas our source refers to ten people praying together
and the rest studying Torah. Once again we find in this chapter the theme of
Torah study and prayer as complementary and even interchangeable activities.
This passage
has a sort of dramatic framework. It starts out by making the striking claim
that God Himself is present when even ten people assemble to engage in His
service. The passage then engages in a process of one-upmanship, producing a
succession of verses that prove that God is present in even smaller gatherings,
until finally, we learn that no human community is even necessary in order to
merit the Divine presence. Even an individual studying on his own brings God
into his company. The Gemara, however, does not think in such literary terms:
Now, since
[the Divine presence is] even with one man,
why is it
necessary to mention two?
The words of
two are written down
in the book
of remembrance,
the words of
one are not written down
in the book
of remembrance.
Since this is
the case with two,
why mention
three?
I might think
[the dispensing of] justice is only for making peace,
and the
Divine Presence does not come [to participate].
Therefore he
teaches us that justice also is Torah.
Since it is
the case with three,
why mention
ten?
To [a
gathering of] ten the Divine Presence comes first,
to three, it
comes only after they sit down.
In its
characteristically mathematical fashion, the Gemara notes that once we have
found a verse that proves that God is present even with a single individual, the
previous verses proving that He is present with greater numbers are redundant.
Once I show that water boils at one hundred degrees centigrade, there is no
longer any need to prove that water also boils at 110 degrees and 120 degrees.
For the Gemara, each and every verse in the Tanakh is needed to prove a specific
thing. The idea that two
verses might teach the same thing is highly problematic for
the Gemara. The Gemara takes two approaches to this problem. In two of the
instances, the Gemara argues that while God is present even with smaller numbers
of people, the level of Divine involvement goes up as the numbers increase. In
the case of three individuals that sit in judgment, the Gemara uses this as an
opportunity to teach that meting out justice according to the halakha is
itself a form of Torah study.
This entire passage encapsulates a fundamental tension in Judaism. On the one
hand, we believe that God is everywhere and available to all. No matter where or
with whom one studies or prays, one can always establish a relationship with
God. On the other hand, Judaism
teaches that God is associated with certain places, especially the Temple, but
also the synagogue. In the same way, God dwells among the assembly of His
people, not among scattered individuals. This passage seeks to balance the
tension between these two concepts. On the one hand, it states that God dwells
specifically in the synagogue, especially among an assembled community of prayer
or study. However, it also emphasizes that while such a geographically and
communally centered spiritual life may be preferable, any individual who seeks
out God can find Him.
This website is constantly being improved. We would appreciate hearing from you. Questions and comments on the classes are welcome, as is help in tagging, categorizing, and creating brief summaries of the classes. Thank you for being part of the Torat Har Etzion community!