Daf Yomi - Chagigah 9 - Highlights

(One is obligated to bring a shalmei chagigah offering on the first day of every festival.) The Mishna states: One who did not offer the korban on the first day of the festival may bring it on any day during the festival, including Shmini Atzeres (the last day of Sukkos). If the entire festival passed and the korban was not brought, he is not responsible to bring it any longer. It is written regarding this [Koheles 1:15]: A crooked thing cannot be straightened, and a lack cannot be counted.

Rabbi Shimon ben Menasye interprets this verse differently: A crooked thing cannot be straightened is referring to one who engaged in relations with a woman whom cohabitation is forbidden and produced a mamzer (an illegitimate child born from a union prohibited under penalty of death or kares) through her. He continues: The verse cannot be referring to one who steals because the thief is able to straighten the matter by returning the stolen object.

Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai states: “Crooked” is only if he was straight initially and then became crooked. Who is this? A torah scholar who abandoned the Torah. (9a)

The Gemora cites the source (for the halacha that the shalmei chagigah can be brought on Shmini Atzeres): Rabbi Yochanan says in the name of Rabbi Yishmael: It is derived through a gezeira shavah (one of the thirteen principles of Biblical hermeneutics - it links two similar words from dissimilar verses in the Torah) from the seventh day of Pesach, which the Torah refers to as Atzeres.

A Tanna derives this halacha from a different Scriptural verse. (9a)

The Gemora presents a dispute regarding this compensation: Rabbi Yochanan says: Every day of the festival is regarded as a substitute for the first day (the obligation is to bring the shalmei chagigah on the first day; the other days are opportunities to make reparation for the fact that the korban wasn’t offered on the designated day). Rabbi Oshaya disagrees: Every day of the festival can be regarded as a substitute for any of the ther days.

The Gemora asks: What is the practical difference between the two opinions?

The Gemora answers: One who was lame on the first day of the festival (thus exempting him from the bringing of the korban) and he became healed on the second day would be a difference between them. Rabbi Yochanan would maintain that he does not have an obligation to bring the korban on the second day since the second day is merely a substitute for the first day: if he wasn’t eligible on the first day, he is not eligible on the second day either. Rabbi Oshaya would hold that he is obligated to bring the korban on the second day because each day is independent of the other. (9a)

The Mishna had stated: If the entire festival passed and the korban was not brought, he is not responsible to bring it any longer. It is written regarding this [Koheles 1:15]: A crooked thing cannot be straightened, and a lack cannot be counted.

Bar Hei Hei said to Hillel: If the verse is referring to one who failed to perform a mitzva, “cannot be counted” is an incorrect expression; it should have written, “cannot be filled?”

He interprets the verse differently: It is referring to a case where one’s friends invited him to perform a mitzva together with them and he refused to be counted with them.

The Gemora cites a braisa which supports this interpretation: A crooked thing cannot be straightened is referring to one who did not recite krias shema in the morning, or did not recite krias shema in the evening, or one who failed to recite the morning prayers or the evening prayers. And a lack cannot be counted is referring to a case where one’s friends invited him to perform a mitzva together with them and he refused to be counted with them. (9b)

Bar Hei Hei asked of Hillel: It is written [Malachi 3:18]: You will return and discern between the righteous and the wicked, between one that serves G-d and one that does not serve Him. Is it not true that the one who is righteous is the one who serves G-d; the one who is wicked is the one who does not serve Him?

Hillel answered him: Those who serve Him and those who do not are both completely righteous, nevertheless, there is no comparing one who reviews his learning one hundred times to one who reviews his learning one hundred and one times. (8a)

Bar Hei Hei responded to Hillel: Just because he didn’t review that one extra time, he is referred to as one that does not serve Him?

Hillel answered him: Yes! Go and learn from the market where they hire out donkey drivers. A trip of ten parsahs costs one zuz and one of eleven parsahs costs two zuzim. (9b)

The prophet Eliyahu said: The Holy One, Blessed is He looked at all of the good conditions that might be beneficial to the Jewish people, and concluded that only poverty would be fitting for them.

The Gemora cites a proverb that people would say: Poverty is so fitting for the Jew, like a red strap on a white horse. (9b)

The Mishna had stated: Rabbi Shimon ben Menasye said: A crooked thing cannot be straightened is referring to one who engaged in relations with a woman whom cohabitation is forbidden and produced a mamzer through her.

The Gemora asks from a braisa: Rabbi Shimon ben Menasye said: One who cohabits with a married woman, resulting in the fact that she is now prohibited to her husband, is expelled from this world (he descends to Gehinom) and goes away.

It is evident from this braisa that Rabbi Shimon ben Menasye considered the illicit union itself as a crooked thing that cannot be straightened even if a mamzer is not born; why does he say in our Mishna that it is regarded as a crooked thing that cannot be straightened only if they produced a mamzer?

The Gemora answers: It is considered a crooked thing that cannot be straightened by a married woman (even if a mamzer is not born) because she becomes forbidden to her husband.

An alternative answer: The Mishna is referring to a case where the woman did not consent (and she will not be forbidden to her husband). It is only regarded as a crooked thing that cannot be straightened if a mamzer is born. The braisa is referring to a case where she was a willing partner (and she will be forbidden to her husband).

The Gemora offers a third answer: The braisa is referring to a case where the woman was the wife of a Kohen and will be forbidden to her husband even if she was violated against her will. (9b – 10a)