Pt1 Rabbinic Elitism and the Am Ha’aretz: Hierarchy, Hostility, Hatred, and Distrust (Pesachim 49b)

This is the first part of a three-part series. The outline for the series is below.

Intro

Wikipedia, Am ha'aretz (with slight adjustments):

ʽAm haʼaretz (Hebrew: עם הארץ, romanized: ʿam hāʾareṣ, lit. 'people of the Land') is a term found in the Hebrew Bible and (with a different meaning) in rabbinic literature.

In Biblical Hebrew the word usually is a collective noun, but occasionally is pluralized as עמי הארץ amei ha-aretz "peoples of the land" or (in Late Biblical Hebrew) super-pluralized as עמי הארצות amei ha-aratzot "peoples of the lands".

In Mishnaic Hebrew and later, the term refers to a single person: one such person is called an am ha-aretz, and multiple are amei ha-aretz.

In Modern Hebrew the usual plurals are am ha-aretz and amei ha-aretz, but the super-plural amei ha-aratzot is occasionally used.

In Yiddish and Yeshivish, it is often pluralized עמי הארצים amei ha-aratzim or עמרצים amaratzim [...]

Usage of the term am ha'aretz in the Hebrew Bible has little connection to usage in the Hasmonean period and hence in the Mishnah.

The Talmud applies "the people of Land" to uneducated Jews, who were deemed likely to be negligent in their observance of the commandments due to their ignorance [of halacha] [...]

The am ha'aretz are denounced in Talmud Bavli Pesahim 49 (=our sugya), where they are contrasted with the chachamim ("wise") and talmidei chachamim.

• The [sugya] contains the rabbinical teaching that no man should marry the daughter of an am ha'aretz because if he should die or be exiled, his sons will then also be ammei ha'aretz.

• A man should rather sell all his possessions in order to afford marriage to a daughter of a talmid chacham.

• Marriage of a talmid chacham to a daughter of an am ha'aretz is compared to the crossbreeding of grapevine with wild wine, which is "unseemly and disagreeable".¹

The am ha'aretz is often contrasted with the ḥaver (חבר) - a term used to describe someone scrupulous enough in Jewish law (namely laws of ritual purity and tithes) for an observant Jews of Second temple times to eat at their house.

It too later evolved into a term to describe Torah knowledge - in this case a high degree of it.

Hebrew Wikipedia, עם הארץ, my translation:

The Term Am Ha’aretz
Am Ha’aretz (עם הארץ) is a designation from the Second Temple period referring to a social class of Jews who were not well-versed in Jewish law (halakha) and regulations, as opposed to the ḥaverim, who were knowledgeable in such matters.

The origin of the term is rooted in the description of "the people living in the land," specifically in rural areas rather than cities. Due to their geographical distance and the burdens of daily life, they were less familiar with halakha than urban residents [...]

In modern times, this term is primarily used as a derogatory expression to denote ignorance in various fields, such as a lack of knowledge of Torah or observance of its commandments [...]

Toward the end of the Second Temple period, the term am ha’aretz evolved to refer to Jews who were not meticulous in observing the laws of the Torah, particularly in matters of purity, tithes, and offerings.

It also came to describe individuals who were not knowledgeable in Torah and, at times, those who challenged the religious authority of the rabbis.

Throughout the sugya, ed. Steinsaltz consistently translates am ha’aretz as "ignoramus". More broadly, Steinsaltz often incorporates glosses and interpretations that soften the sugya's harsh stance toward the am ha’aretz.

While this approach is commendable from a normative perspective, as it seeks to align the sugya's tone with contemporary values and avoid alienating modern readers, my focus here lies in uncovering the historical meaning of the text.

From a historical and philological standpoint, the term am ha’aretz carries a more nuanced connotation that isn’t captured well by the pejorative "ignoramus". Rather than implying sheer ignorance or intellectual deficiency, it denotes a "commoner" or "layperson"—an individual who, while not formally educated in halacha or the intricacies of rabbinic discourse, is not necessarily devoid of knowledge or societal standing. This is clear from a number of places.²

This interpretation better captures the sociocultural context of the term as it was used in Talmudic literature, reflecting a distinction between scholarly elites and the broader populace rather than a simple dichotomy of knowledgeable versus ignorant. By understanding am ha’aretz in this light, we gain a more precise appreciation of the dynamics at play in the sugya, which may otherwise be obscured by an excessively harsh translation.

Therefore I decided to leave the term untranslated, retaining the transliteration am ha’aretz. I’ve done this across the board, including in ed. Steinsaltz translation and interpretation.

Outline

1. Intro

2. Rabbinic Elitism and the Am Ha’aretz: Hierarchy, Hostility, Hatred, and Distrust (Pesachim 49b)

   1. Guidelines for Choosing a Spouse: Prioritizing Torah Scholarship, Piety, and Communal Service; Contrasted with the Am Ha’aretz and His Family, Who Are Compared to Vermin and Animals

   2. An Am Ha’aretz is Prohibited from Eating Meat Because He Does Not Study Torah (Leviticus 11:46)

   3. It Is Permitted to Stab an Am Ha’aretz to Death on Yom Kippur That Falls on Shabbat, With No Blessing on the Slaughtering Required

   4. One Should Not Travel with an Am Ha’aretz Due to the Potential Risk to Life (Deuteronomy 30:20)

   5. It Is Permissible to Kill an Am Ha’aretz by "Tearing Them as One Would a Fish"

   6. Rabbi Akiva's Early Hostility as an Am Ha’aretz: Wishing to Bite Torah Scholars "Like a Donkey", Breaking His Bones

   7. Marrying One's Daughter to an Am Ha’aretz Is Like Tying Her Up and Placing Her Before a Lion: The Am Ha’aretz Shamelessly Beats Her Then Has Sex With Her

   8. If Torah Scholars Did Not Use Am Ha’aretz for Business, the Am Ha’aretz Would Kill Them

   9. Studying Torah in Front of an Am Ha’aretz Is Comparable to Having Sex with Another's Betrothed (Deuteronomy 33:4)

   10. The Hierarchy of Animosity Toward Torah Scholars: Am Ha’aretz, Their Wives, and Those Who Studied Torah but Later Abandoned It

   11. Seven Rules: Avoiding Trust and Responsibility with Am Ha’aretz in Legal, Financial, and Social Matters

3. Appendix 1: Definitions of Am Ha’aretz; Rami bar Ḥama’s Assessment of Rav Menashya bar Taḥlifa as an Am Ha’aretz and Its Deadly Consequences (Berakhot 47b)

   1. Definitions of Am Ha’aretz: Six Opinions – Lacking Shema, Tefillin, Tzitzit, Mezuzah, or Torah

   2. Rami bar Ḥama's Assessment of Rav Menashya bar Taḥlifa as an Am Ha’aretz and Its Fatal Outcome

4. Appendix 2: Accepting Ḥaver Status—Requirements for Wives, Daughters, and Slaves Transitioning Between Am Ha’aretz and Ḥaver Households; From Tying Tefillin to Tying Tax Seals: The Husband's Decisive Role in His Wife's Behavior (Bekhorot 30b)

   1. Accepting Ḥaver Status: Requirements for Wives, Daughters, and Slaves Moving Between Am Ha’aretz and Ḥaver Households

   2. From Tying His Tefillin to Tying His Tax Seals: The Husband's Decisive Influence on His Wife

5. Appendix 3 - Treatment of Outsiders and Transgressors: Rules for Rescuing Non-Jews, Shepherds, Heretics, Informers, and Apostates (Avodah Zarah 26a-b = Tosefta Bava Metzia 2:13)

The Passage

Pesachim.49b.2-12

Guidelines for Choosing a Spouse: Prioritizing Torah Scholarship, Piety, and Communal Service; Contrasted with the Am Ha’aretz and His Family, Who Are Compared to Vermin and Animals

A baraita prioritizes choosing a spouse based on familial connection to Torah study, piety, or communal service, and warns strongly against marrying into families disconnected from Torah.

It prescribes a hierarchy for selecting a wife:

Daughter of a Torah scholar (תלמיד חכם) – Ideal match, worth selling all one owns to marry.

1. Daughter of a leader of the generation³

2. Daughter of a congregation/synagogue (כנסיות) leader – Respected community figures.

3. Daughter of a charity (צדקה) collector (גבאי) – (Valued for their involvement in communal welfare).

4. Daughter of a schoolteacher (מלמדי תינוקות) – (Recognized for their role in education).

The baraita vehemently discourages marrying the daughter of an am ha’aretz, using harsh language and biblical imagery to stress the prohibition, stating that:

“They are vermin (שקץ) and their wives are “a creeping animal” (שרץ).⁴

And with regard to their daughters the verse states: “Cursed is he who lies with an animal” (Deuteronomy 27:21).”

תנו רבנן:

לעולם ימכור אדם כל מה שיש לו, וישא בת תלמיד חכם.

1. לא מצא בת תלמיד חכם — ישא בת גדולי הדור.

2. לא מצא בת גדולי הדור — ישא בת ראשי כנסיות.

3. לא מצא בת ראשי כנסיות — ישא בת גבאי צדקה.

4. לא מצא בת גבאי צדקה — ישא בת מלמדי תינוקות.

ולא ישא בת עמי הארץ,

מפני שהן -- שקץ,

ונשותיהן -- שרץ,

ועל בנותיהן הוא אומר: ״ארור שוכב עם כל בהמה״.

The Sages taught:

A person should always be willing to sell all he has in order to marry the daughter of a Torah scholar.

1. If he cannot find the daughter of a Torah scholar, he should marry the daughter of one of the great people of the generation, who are pious although they are not Torah scholars.

2. If he cannot find the daughter of one of the great people of the generation, he should marry the daughter of one of the heads of the congregations.

3. If he cannot find the daughter of one of the heads of the congregations, he should marry the daughter of one of the charity collectors.

4. If he cannot find the daughter of one of the charity collectors, he should marry the daughter of one of the schoolteachers.

However, he should not marry the daughter of an am ha’aretz

because they are vermin

and their wives are similar to a creeping animal, as their lifestyle involves the violation of numerous prohibitions.

And with regard to their daughters the verse states: “Cursed is he who lies with an animal” (Deuteronomy 27:21), as they are similar to animals in that they lack any knowledge or moral sense.

1. See Pesachim.49a.22-49b.1 (the section immediately before the section that I discuss in this series; with slight adjustments to ed. Steinsaltz interpretation):

תנו רבנן:

לעולם ימכור אדם כל מה שיש לו

וישא בת תלמיד חכם,

וישיא בתו לתלמיד חכם,

משל לענבי הגפן בענבי הגפן,

דבר נאה ומתקבל.

ולא ישא בת עם הארץ,

משל לענבי הגפן בענבי הסנה,

דבר כעור ואינו מתקבל.

Furthermore, the Sages taught:

One should always be willing to sell all he has

[in order to] marry (ישא) the daughter of a Torah scholar

and [in order to] marry off (ישיא) his daughter to a Torah scholar.

This type of marriage can be compared to (מָשָׁל) grapes of a vine that become crossbred (E.B. not “intertwined”, which ed. Steinsaltz interprets) with grapes of a vine (ענבי הגפן בענבי הגפן)

something which is beautiful (נאה) and acceptable (מתקבל).

And one should not marry the daughter of an ignoramus.

This type of marriage can be compared to grapes of a vine that have become crossbred with berries of a bramble (ענבי הסנה - literally: “grapes of the bush”; alternative translation: “wild grapes")

which is something unseemly (כעור - literally: “ugly”) and unacceptable.

See Hebrew Wikipedia on the line “grapes of the vine with grapes of the vine" (ענבי הגפן בענבי הגפן), my translation:

The literal meaning of the expression is the grafting of a vine shoot from a superior grapevine ("ענבי הגפן") onto a rootstock from another superior grapevine.

The saying indicates that this hybrid produces a successful result—"something pleasing and well-received."

The metaphor is thus that purebred breeding is pleasing, while crossbreeds are not.

2. It’s especially clear in the definitions of am ha’aretz, in Berakhot 47b, quoted at the end of this series, “Appendix #1 - Definitions of am ha’aretz; Rami bar Ḥama's Assessment of Rav Menashya bar Taḥlifa as an am ha’aretz and Its Fatal Outcome (Berakhot 47b)”.

See also the section in this sugya, citing R’ Yehuda Hanasi, that an am ha’aretz is prohibited to eat meat because he does not “engage in Torah” (עוסק בתורה).

A useful analogy might be drawn from the distinctions in Greco-Roman society between idiotēs (ἰδιώτης) and the educated elite. In classical Athens, an idiotēs (this term is borrowed into talmudic literature as well, as hedyot - הדיוט) referred to a private individual who did not participate in public or civic life—not necessarily someone ignorant or unintelligent, but someone lacking the specialized training or engagement expected of the active citizens of the polis.

Similarly, in Talmudic literature, the am ha’aretz is not necessarily a derogatory term implying ignorance in a broad sense, but rather refers to someone outside the scholarly or halachic elite—someone who has not undergone the rigorous education and training required to fully participate in rabbinic discourse.

Interestingly, the Greek word idiotes underwent a semantic shift, evolving from meaning "layperson" to "ignoramus", and eventually to "idiot" in modern English usage. The semantic shift of the Greek word idiotes from "layperson" to "ignoramus" and eventually to "idiot" in modern English illustrates a common linguistic dynamic where terms for non-specialists or outsiders take on negative connotations over time.

This process, known as pejoration, often occurs when distinctions between social or intellectual classes are emphasized and the term for the less privileged group comes to be associated with deficiency or inferiority.

(Another example: villain, which originally simply meant something like “villager”.)

Another parallel might be found in medieval European distinctions between the clergy and the laity. Just as the clergy were seen as custodians of sacred knowledge, distinct from the "common" faithful, the Talmudic dichotomy between the chacham (scholar) and the am ha’aretz reflects a societal divide grounded in education and religious authority rather than in intellectual capability alone.

For more sources on the am ha’aretz in the Talmud and other classical literature, see the Sefaria sourcesheet, “Ignorant People”.

For further notable examples of rabbinic scholarly elitism, especially by Ben Zoma, see my recent footnote here.

3. גדולי הדור - Gedolei HaDor – literally, “great ones of the generation.” Their daughters are regarded as the next best choice for marriage, as their fathers are valued for their righteousness, even though they are not Torah scholars.

See Hebrew Wikipedia, גדול הדור, section “משמעות התואר בתלמוד“, my translation:

The Meaning of the Title in the Talmud

The Talmud uses the title Gadol HaDor (“Great One of the Generation”) to refer to Amoraim (Talmudic sages) as well as biblical figures, including Abraham ("Abraham was the Gadol HaDor"), Amram (“Amram was the Gadol HaDor, and everyone heeded his words"), Joshua bin Nun, Eleazar the Priest, Eli the Priest, Elimelech and his sons, and Boaz.

The Talmud also uses the title Gedolei HaDor (“Great Ones of the Generation”) when referring to Tannaim (Mishnaic sages), such as Shemaiah and Avtalyon.

However, regarding figures from the Amoraic period, the title "Gadol HaDor" is applied only to the Amoraim of Eretz Yisrael, not to those of Babylonia.

For example, the Talmud states:

"Abaye said: 'R’ [Yehuda Hanasi] is the Gadol HaDor, and the Gadol HaDor with him is R’ Yaakov bar Acha.'

Some say: 'R’ Yaakov bar Acha is the Gadol HaDor, and the Gadol HaDor with him is R’ [Yehuda Hanasi]'”

Similarly, figures such as R’ Yehoshua ben Levi, R’ Yaakov bar Idi, R’ Shmuel bar Nachmani, R’ Zeira, and Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak were also given this title.

According to Abraham Ornstein (אברהם אורנשטיין), during the Amoraic period, the title Gadol HaDor described public activity and influence, rather than Torah scholarship.

He supports this conclusion with the following evidence:

• Rabbinic literature refers to non-Jews as Gedolei HaDor: "Abraham invited all the Gedolei HaDor."

• Elisha ben Avuya mentions R’ Eliezer and R’ Yehoshua separately from the Gedolei HaDor who attended his circumcision.

• The Talmud states: "A man should sell everything he owns to marry the daughter of a Torah scholar. If he cannot find the daughter of a Torah scholar, he should marry the daughter of the Gedolei HaDor.” (E.B. our sugya)

Much later, the term came to mean the greatest rabbis of the generation, and this is the current usage in the ultra-Orthodox Jewish community, see Wikipedia, Gadol:

Gadol or godol (גדול‎, plural: gedolim גדולים‎) (literally "big" or "great" in Hebrew) is used by religious Jews to refer to the most revered rabbis of the generation.

The term gadol hador refers to the "great/est (one of) the generation" denoting one rabbi who is presumed to be even greater than the others. Other variations of the term are Gadol Yisrael or a Gadol BeYisrael (plural: Gedolei Yisrael), meaning "great one of the Jewish people" […]

The title gadol hador is usually only given to one Jewish Sage at a time, while the title "Rashkebahag" can be given to a few, and the term Gedolei Yisrael collectively refers to all leading rabbis in the Haredi community.

The term is generally applied to rabbinic leaders since World War I […]

Often, a gadol functions as a rosh yeshiva (the head of a yeshiva Talmudical school), and/or can be a Hasidic Rebbe. A gadol is quite often also a posek (a decisor of Halakha - Jewish law) and may be the author of rabbinic literature and responsa.

Adherents of Haredi Judaism often presume that a gadol has some degree of ruach hakodesh ("divine spirit"); the gadol's teachings and statements therefore become the crux of Daas Torah.

4. On the term “creeping [animal]” (singular sheretz, plural sh’ratzim - שרץ/שרצים), see my extended footnote here.