Pesachim 12b - Legal vs. Domestic matters

Abaye answered this on Raba's view: "Testimony is committed to men of care, leaven is committed to all."

The discussion on page 12 of Pesachim is about people making mistakes about the time - how much leeway do we give to witnesses who disagree about the time an act took place? To what extent can we say that they are probably referring to the same event but merely making an error about the time? And at what point do we just say they disagree with one another?

And once we know what the rabbis think about testimony, how does this relate to non-legal settings, such as eating chameitz on the 14th of Nissan? Can the same rules about making mistakes over time apply from the legal field to the domestic?

Abaye suggests that we cannot learn from one area to the other, that in legal matters people take great care to ensure that their testimony is accurate, realising that they will be cross-examined, that there is an enormous amount at stake based on their words.

But in matters of chameitz, the domestic life, it's not just careful people that the law has to account for, all Jews must be able to participate in the ritual of pesach, all Jews must consider themselves as if they had been personally redeemed from Egypt. Therefore the law must be stricter, because it must account for all the people, in a way that laws of testimony do not need to.

There is also a tendency, I think, to take legal matters more seriously than domestic rituals - after all, in a court case there are judges asking you questions, checking the facts. Many of us think of the home as a quite different space, the private sphere in which we are not being judged.

Hence we read in Pirkei Avot 2:1 "Contemplate three things, and you will not come to the hands of transgression: Know what is above you: a seeing eye, a listening ear, and all your deeds being inscribed in a scroll."

And yet people make mistakes, forgetting that there is always a Judge that is watching. The law must accommodate this tendency, making stricter regulations for ritual life at home to help people remember.

You may not be testifying before a court, no human being may see you, but what you do at home matters.

The pleasure of doing mitzvot - Pesachim 4b

"They asked: What if one rents a house to his neighbour in the presumption of its having been searched, and [the tenant] finds that it has not been searched? Is it as a mistaken agreement or not? — Come and hear! For Abaye said: It is unnecessary of a town, where payment is not made [to others] for searching that a person is pleased to fulfil the mitzvah personally; but even in a town where payment is made for searching [it is okay], because one is pleased to fulfil a precept with his money."
-Pesachim 4b

Abaye divides towns into two types - those who do not pay people to fulfil mitzvot for them, and those who do. One could imagine that this is to say that there are those who love doing God's commandments, and those who find it onerous, or too difficult, and would rather just pay and be done with it.

In fact Abaye is not making this distinction - he assumes that all Jews are excited to fulfil God's word, in this case the commandment to search one's house for chametz, and thus even those who pay for other people to do it for them, are still excited to spend their money in this way.

I like that Abaye does not put a value judgement on paying others to do things for you, but recognises that people live in different socio-economic realities, with different cultural norms about how to fulfil one's obligations. Nevertheless these distinctions don't affect what should be at the heart of every Jewish person - a love of God and God's mitzvot.

While I am among the many people that complain that being Jewish is too expensive (and see my post yesterday about the nature of complaining), I hope that I can live up to Abaye's assumption, and be pleased to use my money for the sake of fulfilling the commandments.

What better use could there be?

Fear of God vs Fear of Man - Brakhot 28b

"May it be [God's] will that the fear of heaven shall be upon you like the fear of flesh and blood."

On his deathbed, Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai is visited by his students and begins to cry, explaining that if he were only going to see a human king then he would certainly cry - but he is in fact goign to stand before the King of Kings whose judgements last forever.

But when asked for a blessing, he offers the above blessing, that the fear of heaven should be to his students like the fear of human beings.

So which is primary? Fear of God or fear of mortals? In this story, Rabbi Yochanan seems to switch between the two.

It seems that perhaps we are seeing two perspectives, one when close to death, and one as a way to live one's life. Rabbi Yochanan is on his deathbed, and so from his perspective it's the intangible, wrath of the divine that he most fears.

But for his students, he offers them a more tangible basis for their faith and for their future good behaviour, to be at least as afraid of God as you are of human beings. For earthly life, earthly fear is the proper foundation on which to build ethical action.

God : World :: Soul : Body - Brakhot 10

"Just as the Holy One, blessed be He, fills the whole world, so the soul fills the body. Just as the Holy One, blessed be He, sees, but is not seen, so the soul sees but is not itself seen. Just as the Holy One, blessed be He, feeds the whole world, so the soul feeds the whole body. Just as the Holy One, blessed be He, is pure, so the soul is pure. Just as the Holy One, blessed be He, abides in the innermost precincts, so the soul abides in the innermost precincts."

I just thought this was really beautiful. It's also a great way of affirming the distance of God. It's not that God is so far away that we can't feel God - its that God is so far in everything.