More Discussions for this daf
1. Ma'aser Kesafim; the blessing of rain 2. Tithing one's profits 3. Aser v'Te'asher
4. Parnasah Through An Individual 5. Ananei ha'Kovod in the Zechus of Aharon 6. Where Does Rain Come From...
DAF DISCUSSIONS - TA'ANIS 9

alex lebovits asked:

I would like to ask you a number of questions regarding the 2 stories of R' Yochonan and Reysh Lakish's young son.

1. R' Yochonan darshens "Aser T'Aser as "Aser Bishvil Shetisasher" the word bishvil seems to connote that a person should be mekayem the mitzvah of Maaser in order to get rich which goes against the axiom of serving Hash-m for personal gain.

It might have been nice to Darshen the Limud as "Asher Bishvil Sh'Tisaser" with the dots reversed, giving a valid reason for pursuing wealth.

2. The Gem starts off by R'Yochonan asking the boy what posuk he's learning, the boy answers "Aser Teaser" and the next "Amar Leh" again refers to the boy speaking and asking R' Yochonan what "Aser Teaser" means. Rashi says this, and in order for the Gem to make sense one must learn this way. But if one asks a boy what posuk he's learning and the boy answers with the posuk, shouldn't the next question be "tell me little boy, what does the posuk mean?!

3. After R' Yochanan brings a proof from Malachi that one is allowed to test Hash-m regarding this matter; the little boy answers (rather chutzpadikly it seems to me) that if I would have reached Malachi in my learning "I wouldn't need you or Hayshia your Rebbi.

Well.... in the next story the little boy himself states 'That everything is merumaz in the Torah! So why does he have to wait for Malachi?! "Otu Hu Mi Lo Remizi"?!

5. The little boy brings the remez from Ber 42:28 that the brothers blamed Hash-m for problems that they themselves caused. Similar to what it says in Mishlei 19:3 that man blames Hash-m after the man himself subverted his ways. But the little boy is learning wrong peshat by saying that the shevotim blamed Hash-m. Quite the contrary! The shevotim were moyde that they were deserving of Hash-m doing this to them.

You see this from a few posukim before,in Ber 42:21 where it says "....avul ashemim anachnu al achinu asher roinu tzoras nafsho.....al ken ba'ah eylenu hatzorah hazos.

5. Rashi DH Leyenuka d'Resh LAkish says that this story (referrring to the first one) happended after Resh Lakish died as it is shown from later on. The second story definitely happened after Resh LAkish died, because it says that the mother took the little boy away so he should not get harmed like his father. But that is a second story and obviously happened much later on because by this time the little boy was learning Mishlei and not Devarim! How does Rashi know that the first story happened after his father died as well?

6. Is it right of me to spend so much time on learning this Agadeta, and is it right of me to ask you to answer all these questions as well?

Thank you for your patience.

alex lebovits, toronto, canada

The Kollel replies:

1. It is not for nothing that the Gemara cites the Pasuk "Aser Te'aser" in the very same context as it permits giving Tzedakah in order to test Hash-m (though of course this is not the ideal way of performing the Mitzvah). In fact, it too, hints at this concession (hints, because the Pasuk writes "Aser" with a 'Sin', and not with a 'Shin'.

Your suggestion ('Asher Bishvil she'Tis'asher') is a nice idea, but I do not think that it is correct Hashkafah-wise, as there is no such Mitzvah to become rich in order to give more Tzedakah. A person must give Tzedakah according to the means that Hash-m places at his disposal. And besides, why should a person need to become rich in order to give a tenth of his harvest?

Interestingly, Rabeinu Chananel has the text "Aser" 'bi'Shevil she'Te'aser'. In other words, Give a tenth this year, in order to be able to give a tenth again next year. This goes beautifully with the story cited by Tosfos, and also solves your problem.

2. I also had a problem with the sequence of statements, though from a slightly different angle. 'Amar Lei, "u'Mai Aser Te'aser" ' implies that Rebbi Yochanan was the one to ask this question. If that were so, it would mean that the child answered 'Aser bi'Shevil ... ', R. Yochanan queried him, and when he replied 'Try it out', R. Yochanan asked him where he knew it from ... which is unacceptable because the end of the story will not fit.

3. As I wrote earlier, the hint in the Torah lies in the very Pasuk under discussion. But as long as the child had not learned the Pasuk in Malachi, he would not have searched for the hint. Perhaps one might even explain the child's statement to mean that had he learned the Pasuk in Malachi, he would have known, not only R. Hoshaya's P'shat there, but also, R. Yochanan's P'shat in "Aser Te'aser".

As for the sharp answer, bear in mind that not only was he a super precocious child, but he was probably angry with R. Yochanan for having caused his father's death.

4. The Maharsha in Agados asks your Kashya from Pasuk 42:21. Nevertheless he explains, the Lashon "What is this that Hash-m has done to us?" implies that on this occasion, they were actually querying Hash-m. According to him, they saw the Hand of Hash-m in that they were accused of being spies (just as they had accused Yosef of spying on them), and in that Shimon was jailed, and the money was found in Levi's sack, since Shimon and Levi who were mainly responsible for Yosef's troubles. He does not however, explain why on this occasion, the brothers queried Hash-m more than on the others. A number of commentaries in the Ein Ya'akov grapple with the problem too, as does the Torah Temimah, but none of them seem to fill in all the gaps.

5. I guess that the title 'Yenuka de'Resh Lakish' has connotations of 'the child that Resh Lakish left behind after he died'. According to Rashi, I would add that it either pertains to the child before his father died or to the child after he died, and now that we see from the second episode that it is the latter, that will also be the case in the first episode.

6. On the one hand, I don't know whether you spent five minutes on the above questions, or five hours. On the other, you are obviously learning Daf ha'Yomi and keeping up with the Daf. So what can be wrong with getting a little involved, as long as you stick to your schedule.

The G'ra in Even Sheimah writes that Agadta helps to dampen the fire of the Yeitzer ha'Ra, in which case one should certainly learn it. And whatever one learn, one should learn properly (as superficial learning is meaningless).

As for disturbing us, we are here to answer your questions. At the same time, we reserve the right to decline to answer, should we find it necessary to do so. So you keep on asking, and we will keep on trying to oblige with the answers to the best of our ability.

Be'Virchas Kol Tuv

Eliezer Chrysler.