Pt2 Aggadic Lists of Ten, Seven, Four, and Two Items in Tractate Avot Chapter 5 (Avot 5:1-19)

This is the second and final part of a two-part series. Part 1 is here; the outline of the series can be found there.

Lists of 7

Wise vs. ‘Golem’ (“unrefined”) - 7 traits each - The wise person is orderly, respectful, and honest, The ‘Golem’ is the opposite (5:7)

שבעה דברים בגלם

ושבעה בחכם.

חכם --

1. אינו מדבר בפני מי שהוא גדול ממנו בחכמה ובמנין,

2. ואינו נכנס לתוך דברי חברו,

3. ואינו נבהל להשיב,

4. 1. שואל כענין

   2. ומשיב כהלכה,

5. 1. ואומר על ראשון ראשון,

   2. ועל אחרון אחרון,

6. ועל מה שלא שמע, אומר: לא שמעתי,

7. ומודה על האמת.

וחלופיהן בגלם

[There are] 7 things [characteristic] in an unrefined person,¹

and 7 in a wise man:

A wise man --

1. does not speak before one who is greater than he in wisdom,²

2. And does not break into his fellow’s speech;

3. And is not hasty to answer;

4. 1. He asks what is relevant,

   2. and he answers to the point;

5. 1. And he speaks of the first [point] first,

   2. and of the last [point] last;

6. And concerning that which he has not heard, he says: I have not heard;

7. And he acknowledges the truth.

And the reverse of these [are characteristic] in an unrefined person.

Seven Communal Sins and Their Divine Punishments (5:8)

The Mishnah enumerates seven types of divine punishments that correspond to seven categories (גופי) of (communal) sin.³

שבעה מיני פרעניות באין לעולם

על שבעה גופי עברה.

7 kinds of punishment come to the world

for 7 categories of transgression:

Famine (רעב)

Famine comes in three forms, escalating with severity:

1. If some tithe and others do not, a selective famine strikes⁴

2. If all stop tithing, a broader, chaotic (מהומה) famine follows.

3. If they also neglect separating challah,⁵ a total (כליה) famine arrives.

1. מקצתן מעשרין, ומקצתן אינן מעשרין --

   1. רעב של בצרת באה,

      1. מקצתן רעבים

      2. ומקצתן שבעים.

2. גמרו שלא לעשר --

   1. רעב של מהומה ושל בצרת באה.

3. ושלא לטל את החלה--

   1. רעב של כליה באה.

1. When some of them give tithes, and others do not give tithes --

   1. a famine (רעב) from drought (בצרת) comes,

      1. some go hungry,

      2. and others are satisfied.

2. When they have all decided not to give tithes--

   1. a famine from tumult (מהומה) and drought comes;

3. [When they have, in addition, decided] not to set apart the dough-offering,

   1. an all-consuming famine comes.

Epidemic (דבר)

Epidemic (דבר) comes for unpunished capital crimes and neglect of laws of shemita (שביעית) produce.

דבר --

בא לעולם

1. על מיתות האמורות בתורה שלא נמסרו לבית דין,

2. ועל פרות שביעית.

Pestilence --

comes to the world

1. for sins punishable by death according to the Torah, but which have not been referred to the court,

2. and for neglect of the law regarding the fruits of the sabbatical year (שביעית - shmita).

War (חרב)

War (חרב - literally: “sword") comes for delayed or distorted legal rulings, and for misinstruction in Torah.⁶

חרב --

באה לעולם

1. על ענוי הדין,

2. ועל עוות הדין,

3. ועל המורים בתורה שלא כהלכה

The sword --

comes to the world

1. for the delay of judgment,

2. and for the perversion of judgment,

3. and because of those who teach the Torah not in accordance with the accepted law.

Dangerous animals (חיה רעה)

Dangerous animals⁷ come for false oaths and profanation of God's name.⁸

חיה רעה --

באה לעולם

1. על שבועת שוא,

2. ועל חלול השם.

Wild beasts --

come to the world

1. for swearing in vain,

2. and for the profanation of the Name.

Exile (גלות)

Exile results from idolatry, sexual transgression, murder, and neglect of the sabbatical year.⁹

גלות —

באה לעולם

1. על עובדי עבודה זרה,

2. ועל גלוי עריות,

3. ועל שפיכות דמים,

4. ועל השמטת הארץ.

Exile --

comes to the world

1. for idolatry,

2. for sexual sins

3. and for bloodshed,

4. and for [transgressing the commandment of] the [year of the] release of the land.

Lists of 4

Epidemics (דבר) occur at 4 points of the Seven-Year Sabbatical Cycle (5:9)

Epidemics occur more frequently at 4 points (פרקים) of the seven-year Sabbatical cycle:

1. Year 4: due to failure to give the third-year tithe for the poor

2. Year 7: due to failure to give the sixth-year poor tithe

3. Post–sabbatical year:¹⁰ due to violations (in the previous year) of the laws of shemita produce

4. Post–Sukkot annually: for theft of the halachic “gifts to the poor” ( מתנות עניים)

בארבעה פרקים הדבר מתרבה:

1. ברביעית,

2. ובשביעית,

3. ובמוצאי שביעית,

4. ובמוצאי החג שבכל שנה ושנה.

At 4 times pestilence increases:

1. in the 4th year,

2. in the 7th year

3. and at the conclusion of the 7th year,

4. and at the conclusion of the Feast (חג - i.e. Sukkot) in every year.

1. ברביעית,

   1. מפני מעשר עני שבשלישית.

2. בשביעית,

   1. מפני מעשר עני שבששית.

3. ובמוצאי שביעית,

   1. מפני פרות שביעית.

4. ובמוצאי החג שבכל שנה ושנה,

   1. מפני גזל מתנות עניים

1. In the 4th year,

   1. on account of the tithe of the poor which is due in the 3rd year.

2. In the 7th year,

   1. on account of the tithe of the poor which is due in the 6th year;

3. At the conclusion of the 7th year,

   1. on account of the produce of the 7th year;

4. And at the conclusion of the Feast (חג - i.e. Sukkot) in every year,

   1. for robbing the gifts to the poor.

4 character types in Attitudes toward property ownership (5:10)

(See footnote.)¹¹

ארבע מדות באדם:

1. האומר:

   1. שלי שלי

   2. ושלך שלך,

      1. זו מדה בינונית.

      2. ויש אומרים: זו מדת סדום.

2. 1. שלי שלך

   2. ושלך שלי,

      1. עם הארץ.

3. 1. שלי שלך

   2. ושלך שלך,

      1. חסיד.

4. 1. שלי שלי

   2. ושלך שלי,

      1. רשע

There are 4 dispositions¹² in human beings [regarding property ownership]:

1. One that says:

   1. “mine is mine,

   2. and yours is yours”:

      1. this is an average type (מדה בינונית);

      2. and some say this is a Sodom-type of character.

2. 1. “mine is yours

   2. and yours is mine”:

      1. an unlearned person (am haaretz);

3. 1. “mine is yours

   2. and yours is [also] yours”

      1. pious (hasid).

4. 1. “mine is mine,

   2. and yours is [also] mine”

      1. wicked.

4 kinds of temperaments - anger and appeasement (5:11)

ארבע מדות בדעות:

1. 1. נוח לכעס

   2. ונוח לרצות,

      1. יצא שכרו בהפסדו.

2. 1. קשה לכעס

   2. וקשה לרצות,

      1. יצא הפסדו בשכרו.

3. 1. קשה לכעס

   2. ונוח לרצות,

      1. חסיד.

4. 1. נוח לכעס

   2. וקשה לרצות,

      1. רשע

There are 4 dispositions (מדות) of temperaments¹³ [regarding anger and appeasement]:

1. 1. Easy to become angry (לכעס),

   2. and [also] easy to be appeased (לרצות):

      1. his gain disappears in his loss;¹⁴

2. 1. Hard to become angry,

   2. and [also] hard to be appeased:

      1. his loss disappears in his gain;

3. 1. Hard to become angry

   2. [but] easy to be appeased:

      1. pious;

4. 1. Easy to become angry

   2. [but] hard to be appeased:

      1. wicked

4 types of students - speed of comprehension and forgetting (5:12)

ארבע מדות בתלמידים:

1. 1. מהר לשמע

   2. ומהר לאבד,

      1. יצא שכרו בהפסדו.

2. 1. קשה לשמע

   2. וקשה לאבד,

      1. יצא הפסדו בשכרו.

3. 1. מהר לשמע

   2. וקשה לאבד,

      1. חכם.

4. 1. קשה לשמע

   2. ומהר לאבד,

      1. זה חלק רע

There are 4 dispositions of students (תלמידים) [regarding speed of comprehension and forgetting]:

1. 1. Quick to comprehend,¹⁵

   2. and [also] quick to forget:¹⁶

      1. his gain disappears in his loss;

2. 1. Slow to comprehend,

   2. and [also] slow to forget:

      1. his loss disappears in his gain;

3. 1. Quick to comprehend,

   2. [but] slow to forget:

      1. wise;

4. 1. Slow to comprehend,

   2. [but] quick to forget,

      1. an evil portion.

4 types of attitudes in charity-givers (5:13)

ארבע מדות בנותני צדקה:

1. 1. הרוצה שיתן

   2. ולא יתנו אחרים,

      1. עינו רעה בשל אחרים.

2. 1. יתנו אחרים

   2. והוא לא יתן,

      1. עינו רעה בשלו.

3. 1. יתן

   2. ויתנו אחרים,

      1. חסיד.

4. 1. לא יתן

   2. ולא יתנו אחרים,

      1. רשע

There are 4 dispositions of charity (צדקה) givers:

1. 1. He who wishes to give,

   2. [but] others shouldn’t give:

      1. his eye is evil to that which belongs to others;

2. 1. others should give,

   2. [but] he [himself] shouldn't give:

      1. his eye is evil towards that which is his own;

3. 1. he [himself] should give,

   2. and others should [also] give:

      1. pious;

4. 1. he [himself] shouldn't give

   2. and others [also] shouldn't give:

      1. wicked.

4 types among those who frequent the study-house (‘bet midrash’) (5:13)

ארבע מדות בהולכי לבית המדרש:

1. 1. הולך

   2. ואינו עושה,

      1. שכר הליכה בידו.

2. 1. עושה

   2. ואינו הולך,

      1. שכר מעשה בידו.

3. 1. הולך

   2. ועושה,

      1. חסיד.

4. 1. לא הולך

   2. ולא עושה,

      1. רשע

There are 4 dispositions among those who frequent the study-house (bet midrash):

1. 1. attends

   2. [but] doesn't practice:

      1. [receives] a reward for attendance.

2. 1. practices

   2. [but] doesn't attend:

      1. [receives] a reward for practice.

3. 1. attends

   2. and [also] practices:

      1. pious;

4. 1. Doesn't attend

   2. And [also] doesn't practice:

      1. wicked.

4 types of learners - extended metaphor of utensils used for filtering/channeling liquids/solids—Sponge (absorbs all), funnel (forgets all), strainer (keeps the bad), sieve (keeps the good) (5:15)

(See footnote.)¹⁷

ארבע מדות ביושבים לפני חכמים:

1. ספוג,

2. ומשפך,

3. משמרת,

4. ונפה.

There are 4 dispositions among those who sit before the sages:

1. a sponge¹⁸

2. a funnel (משפך)

3. a strainer (משמרת)

4. and a sieve (נפה)

1. ספוג,

   1. שהוא סופג את הכל.

2. משפך,

   1. שמכניס בזו

   2. ומוציא בזו.

3. משמרת,

   1. שמוציאה את היין

   2. וקולטת את השמרים.

4. ונפה,

   1. שמוציאה את הקמח

   2. וקולטת את הסלת

1. A sponge,

   1. soaks up everything;

2. A funnel,

   1. takes in at one end

   2. and lets out at the other;¹⁹

3. A strainer,

   1. which lets out the wine²⁰

   2. and retains the dregs (שמרים);

4. A sieve,

   1. which lets out the coarse flour (קמח)

   2. and retains the choice flour (סלת)

Lists of 2 (Parallel Contrasts)

Love - 2 types - Love dependent on external factors (Amnon-Tamar) versus intrinsic love (David-Jonathan) (5:16)

(See footnote.)²¹

• כל אהבה שהיא תלויה בדבר --

  • בטל דבר, בטלה אהבה.

• ושאינה תלויה בדבר --

  • אינה בטלה לעולם.

• איזו היא אהבה התלויה בדבר?

  • זו אהבת אמנון ותמר.

• ושאינה תלויה בדבר?

  • זו אהבת דוד ויהונתן

• All love that depends on a something,

  • [when the] thing ceases (בטל), [the] love ceases;

• [but] [all love] that does not depend on anything,

  • will never cease.

• What is an example of love that depends on a something?

  • Such was the love of Amnon for Tamar²²

• And what is an example of love that doesn’t depend on anything?

  • Such was the love of David and Jonathan²³

Disputes - 2 types - For the sake of Heaven (Hillel–Shammai) vs not (Korah) Only the former is sustainable (5:17)

• כל מחלקת שהיא לשם שמים --

  • סופה להתקים.

• ושאינה לשם שמים --

  • אין סופה להתקים.

• איזו היא מחלקת שהיא לשם שמים?

  • זו מחלקת הלל ושמאי.

• ושאינה לשם שמים?

  • זו מחלקת קרח וכל עדתו

• Every dispute²⁴ that is for the sake of Heaven,

  • will in the end endure;

• [But] one that is not for the sake of Heaven,

  • will not endure.

• Which is the controversy that is for the sake of Heaven?

  • Such was the controversy of Hillel and Shammai.²⁵

• And which is the controversy that is not for the sake of Heaven?

  • Such was the controversy of Korah and all his congregation²⁶

Influence - 2 outcomes - One who benefits the public is protected from sin (Moses - Deut. 33:21); one who causes others to sin is denied repentance (Jeroboam - I Kings 15:30) (5:18)

• כל המזכה את הרבים --

  • אין חטא בא על ידו.

• וכל המחטיא את הרבים --

  • אין מספיקין בידו לעשות תשובה.

• משה --

  • זכה וזכה את הרבים,

  • זכות הרבים תלוי בו,

  • שנאמר (דברים לג)

    • צדקת ה' עשה

    • ומשפטיו עם ישראל.

• ירבעם --

  • חטא והחטיא את הרבים,

  • חטא הרבים תלוי בו,

  • שנאמר (מלכים א טו)

    • על חטאות ירבעם (בן נבט)

    • אשר חטא ואשר החטיא את ישראל

• Whoever causes the multitudes to be righteous,²⁷

  • sin will not occur on his account;

• [but] whoever causes the multitudes to sin,

  • they do not give him the ability to repent.

• Moses --

  • was righteous and caused the multitudes to be righteous,

  • [therefore] the righteousness of the multitudes is hung on him,

  • as it is said,

    • “He executed YHWH’s righteousness

    • and His decisions with Israel” (Deut. 33:21).

• Jeroboam —

  • sinned and caused the multitudes to sin,

  • [therefore] the sin of the multitudes is hung on him,

  • as it is said,

    • “For the sins of Jeroboam

    • which he sinned, and which he caused Israel to sin [thereby]” (I Kings 15:30).

Generosity & Humility - 2 archetypes - Abraham (generosity, humility) vs Balaam (greed, arrogance), each with differing fates in this world and the next (5:19)

• כל מי שיש בידו שלשה דברים הללו --

  • מתלמידיו של אברהם אבינו.

• ושלשה דברים אחרים --

  • מתלמידיו של בלעם הרשע.

• Whoever possesses these three things --

  • he is of the disciples of Abraham, our father;

• [but] [whoever possesses] three other things --

  • he is of the disciples of Balaam, the wicked.

1. עין טובה,

2. ורוח נמוכה,

3. ונפש שפלה --

מתלמידיו של אברהם אבינו.

1. עין רעה,

2. ורוח גבוהה,

3. ונפש רחבה --

מתלמידיו של בלעם הרשע.

1. A good eye,²⁸

2. a humble spirit

3. and a moderate appetite --

he is of the disciples of Abraham, our father.

1. An evil eye,

2. a haughty spirit

3. and a limitless appetite --

he is of the disciples of Balaam, the wicked.

מה בין

• תלמידיו של אברהם אבינו

• לתלמידיו של בלעם הרשע?

What is the difference between

• the disciples of Abraham, our father,

• and the disciples of Balaam, the wicked?

• תלמידיו של אברהם אבינו --

  • אוכלין בעולם הזה

  • ונוחלין בעולם הבא,

  • שנאמר (משלי ח)

    • להנחיל אהבי יש,

    • ואצרתיהם אמלא.

• אבל תלמידיו של בלעם הרשע --

  • יורשין גיהנם

  • ויורדין לבאר שחת,

  • שנאמר (תהלים נה)

    • ואתה אלהים תורידם לבאר שחת,

    • אנשי דמים ומרמה לא יחצו ימיהם,

    • ואני אבטח בך

• The disciples of Abraham, our father --

  • enjoy this world,

  • and inherit the World-to-Come,

  • as it is said:

    • “I will endow those who love me with substance,

    • I will fill their treasuries” (Proverbs 8:21).

• But the disciples of Balaam, the wicked --

  • inherit Gehinnom,

  • and descend into the nethermost pit (באר שחת),

  • as it is said:

    • “For you, O God, will bring them down to the nethermost pit

    • those murderous and treacherous men; they shall not live out half their days;

    • but I trust in You” (Psalms 55:24).

1. גלם - golem.

See Wikipedia, “Golem“, section “Etymology“:

The word golem occurs once in the Bible, in Psalm 139:16, which uses the word גלמי (golmi; 'my golem', 'my light form', 'raw material') to connote the unfinished human being before God's eyes.

The Mishnah uses the term to refer to someone who is unsophisticated: "Seven characteristics are in an uncultivated person, and seven in a learned one" (שבעה דברים בגולם).

And see Jastrow: “uneducated, unrefined“.

2. בחכמה ובמנין - literally: “in knowledge and number”.

This is a common idiom. Compare its usage also in my “Pt3 Prayer, Poetry, and Ethics: A Journey Through Seventeen Talmudic Prayers and Ethical Teachings (Berakhot 16b-17a; Eruvin 54a)“, section “Rava:

מרגלא בפומיה דרבא:

1. תכלית חכמה —

   1. תשובה

   2. ומעשים טובים,

2. שלא יהא אדם

   1. קורא,

   2. ושונה,

   3. ובועט

      1. באביו

      2. ובאמו

      3. וברבו

      4. ובמי שהוא גדול ממנו בחכמה ובמנין,

Rava was wont to say:

1. The objective of Torah wisdom (חכמה) is to achieve

   1. repentance

   2. and good deeds;

2. that one should not

   1. read (קורא) Bible

   2. and study (שונה) Mishnah

   3. and thereby become arrogant and spurn (בועט - literally: “kick”)

      1. his father

      2. and his mother

      3. and his teacher (רבו)

      4. and one who is greater than he in wisdom or in number

Steinsaltz there explains “number” as “number of students who study before him”. However, it’s more likely that the idiom stems from the earlier usage of “wisdom and number” to refer to a court, describing the overall wisdom of the court and the number of its members. See the programmatic statement in Mishnah_Eduyot.1.5:

ולמה מזכירין דברי היחיד בין המרבין,

הואיל ואין הלכה אלא כדברי המרבין?

שאם יראה בית דין את דברי היחיד, ויסמך עליו

And why do they record the opinion of a single person among the many,

when the halakhah must be according to the opinion of the many?

So that if a court prefers the opinion of the single person — it may depend on him.

שאין בית דין יכול לבטל דברי בית דין חברו

עד שיהיה גדול ממנו בחכמה ובמנין

For no court may annul (לבטל) the decision of another court

unless it is greater than it [both] in wisdom (חכמה) and in number (מנין)

היה גדול ממנו

• בחכמה אבל לא במנין,

• במנין אבל לא בחכמה,

אינו יכול לבטל דבריו,

עד שיהיה גדול ממנו בחכמה ובמנין

If it was greater than it

• in wisdom but not in number,

• in number but not in wisdom,

it may not annul its decision,

unless it is greater than it [both] in wisdom and in number.

On the general judicial rule of following the majority opinion, see Hebrew Wikipedia, “יחיד ורבים הלכה כרבים“ and “הכרעת רוב בדיינים“.

3. The structure is formulaic, emphasizing collective guilt and calibrated consequences. The logic presupposes a covenantal relationship in which economic, legal, and ritual misconduct trigger specific, traceable outcomes.

Compare my series on the Talmudic sugya of “due to sin X, consequence Y happens”: “‘Due to Sin [X], Occurs [Y]’: Divine Justice and Human Responsibility for Suffering and Death (Shabbat 32b-33a)“, final part here. Much of the sugya there parallels the statements here; I note parallel sections in upcoming footnotes, see there in that piece for full hyperlinks of technical terms. And see there for extensive biblical prooftexts, and many more pairings of type of sin → consequence.

And see also my “Pt2 Mourning Rituals and Communal Practices: Blessings, Wine, and Rabban Gamliel’s Burial Reform (Ketubot 8b)”, section “Speech 5: Blessing for the Jewish People”, and note there, and Appendix there: “Appendix - The Divine Punishments of “Epidemic” (דבר ), “Sword” (חרב), and “Famine” (רעב) at the time of the Destruction of the First Temple in Jeremiah 21:7”

4. מקצתן רעבים, ומקצתן שבעים - “some go hungry, some are satisfied”, paralleling the מקצתן מעשרין, ומקצתן אינן מעשרין -”some tithe, some don’t tithe”.

For divine punishment for neglecting to give tithes (מעשר), compare the sugya in tractate Shabbat, cited in a previous footnote, Part 2, section “Consequence for the failure to give tithes is Drought and economic hardship (Job 24:19)“.

5. For divine punishment for neglecting to separate ḥalla (dough offering), compare the sugya in tractate Shabbat, cited in a previous footnote, Part 2, section “Consequence for the failure to separate Ḥallah is Financial curses and famine (Leviticus 26:16)“.

And see also ibid., Part 1, section “Life and Death in a Woman’s Ritual Duties: Niddah, Ḥalla, and Shabbat Candles“.

6. See a similar list in ibid., Part 3, section “Divine Consequence of Judicial corruption & neglect of Torah is War, disease, famine, and weighed bread portions“.

7. חיה רעה - literally: “bad/evil beasts".

8. Chillul hashem.

See a similar list in ibid., Part 3, section “Divine Consequence of False oaths & desecration of Shabbat is Wild animals, reduced population, desolate roads“.

9. See a similar list in ibid., Part 3, section “Divine Consequence of Idolatry & neglect of Sabbatical/Jubilee years is Exile, with foreigners taking their land“.

10. מוצאי שביעית - i.e. Year 1 of the cycle.

11. The next five Mishnah sections in this broader section—”Lists of 4”—share a rigid binary structure and a four-part typology, built around two opposing axes per case. Each axis presents a dichotomy (e.g., “quick” vs. “slow,” “gives” vs. “doesn’t give”), and the combinations yield four possible personality types or behaviors. The result can be sketched as a 2×2 grid (which I do for each, at the beginning of each section).

Common Literary Structure:

• Opening formula: "ארבע מדות ב..." (“There are four types regarding X”).

• Two binary traits define the typology (e.g., comprehension/retention, anger/appeasement).

• Each type is named by combining one value from each axis (e.g., “quick to comprehend, slow to forget”).

• Each entry concludes with a label or evaluation: either neutral, positive (חסיד, חכם), or negative (רשע, חלק רע).

Structural Formula (Abstract), 2×2 grid structure:

This pattern is didactic and schematic. It categorizes behavioral taxonomies as fixed types. The use of consistent phrasing and binary logic makes the structure easy to remember and to apply across diverse domains: ethics, learning, charity, temperament, and religious practice.

12. מדות.

On this word in the sense of “dispositions, character, temperament”, see Jastrow, sense #3 (modernized):

manner, ways, character, nature, condition.

• Berakhot 40a: "לא כמדת הקב"ה וכ׳" - "the nature of divine (intellectual) affairs is not like the nature of human (material) affairs."

• Ibid. 11b: "להזכיר מדת יום וכ׳" - "to mention the nature of the day (light) at night."

• Tanhuma Balak 3: "מה מדתו" - "what is the nature of his power."

• Bava Metzia 33a: "מדת ואינה מדת" - "it is a (meritorious) way (of studying) and is not, i.e. you might do better."

• Yerushalmi Horayot 3:48c top: "מדת שאינה מדת"; and frequently.

Plural as above:

• Avot 5:10: "ארבע מדת באדם" - "there are four different dispositions of men (as to treating one's fellowman)."

• Ibid. 5:11: "ארבע מדת בדעות" - "four characters (temperaments)."

• Ibid. 5:12: "ארבע מדת בתלמידים" - "four natures of students (with regard to receptive and retentive faculties)."

• Yerushalmi Sanhedrin 11:30a bottom: "כל שבע מדת וכ׳" - "all the seven characteristic features of righteous men which the scholars have defined have been realized in Rabbi."

• Nedarim 20b: "בני תשע מדת" - "children conceived under nine (abnormal mental) conditions."

On the example from Nedarim 20b, see my “Pt2 Talmudic Perspectives on Marital Sex: Behaviors, Consequences, and Ethics (Nedarim 20a-b)“, section “Ten Problematic Circumstances for Sex“, where I summarize:

R' Levi homiletically interprets Ezekiel 20:38 as referring to children conceived under problematic circumstances, first giving an acronym of the nine conditions (מדות), then listing them.

13. דעות.

On this word in the sense of “temperament”, see Jastrow (modernized):

דעה, דיעה f. (biblical Hebrew; ידע) knowledge, understanding, reason; view; taste.

[…]

• Yerushalmi Sotah 1:17a; Tosefta ibid. 5:9; and elsewhere כשם שיש דעות וכו׳ "as men differ in tastes (sensibilities) as regards food and drink, so do husbands differ" etc.

• Pesachim 112a ארבע דעות וכו׳ "there are four thoughts" etc. (the husband thinking of his 1st wife and the wife of her 1st husband)

On the latter example, see my piece here, section “R' Akiva's advice to R' Shimon ben Yoḥai: Attribute teachings to reputable authorities; teach from accurate texts; don’t marry a divorcee or widow, to avoid negative sexual comparisons; lend money with land collateral; marry and have children for purity and mitzva fulfillment“, sub-section “Pt2”, list item #3, which I summarize there as follows:

“Don’t cook in a pot in which your friend cooked". The Talmud interprets this as a warning against marrying a divorcee or a widow, for reasons related to comparing sex with their new partner with sex with their previous partner:

Divorcee: A divorced man marrying a divorced woman leads to "four minds (דעות) in the bed" (meaning, that during sex, each will inevitably compare the experience to their previous experiences with their previous partners).

Widow: “not all fingers are equal”. (“Finger” is a euphemism for penis; meaning, she’ll compare his penis to her deceased husband’s, and potentially find it to be inferior.)

14. יצא שכרו בהפסדו.

This is an idiom, equivalent to Modern English “negative on net”.

The converse idiom is used in the next statement—”his loss disappears in his gain” (יצא הפסדו בשכרו), where it means the converse: “positive on net“.

These parallel idioms are used another two times in the next sections.

Compare also earlier in the tractate, here, section “R’ Yehuda HaNasi (2:1)“, sub-section “Choose the path that brings personal and public honor; weigh mitzvah loss/gain“, for a similar contrasting of these terms—“benefit” (שכר) vs. “loss” (הפסד), for doing a cost-benefit analysis of performing a mitzva versus committing an aveirah:

1. והוי מחשב

   1. הפסד מצוה כנגד שכרה,

   2. ושכר עברה כנגד הפסדה.

1. Also, reckon (מחשב)

   1. the loss (הפסד) [that may be sustained through the fulfillment] of a commandment against the reward (שכרה) [accruing] thereby,

   2. and the gain [that may be obtained through the committing] of a transgression against the loss [entailed] thereby.

15. לשמע - literally: “to hear”.

16. לאבד - literally: “to lose”, i.e. to lose what he learned.

17. The extended metaphor compares four types of learners to utensils used for filtering or channeling liquids and solids, each representing a distinct mode of intellectual processing:

All four metaphors belong to the semantic field of kitchen or winemaking tools, evoking everyday rabbinic-period material culture. Each tool is defined by how it processes input—whether it absorbs, discards, filters, or selects—and thus maps onto cognitive behaviors.

The metaphor presupposes that learning is not just about taking in material but also about processing, retaining, and filtering—and that proper learning requires both intake and discrimination. The ideal learner is not the sponge but the sieve: someone who can sort, evaluate, and preserve only the most valuable content.

Notably, the Mishnah here doesn’t explicitly explain the learner type being described by the metaphor (the “target”). The explanation is likely as follows:

Compare also the previous section: “4 types of students - speed of comprehension and forgetting (5:12)“.

And compare the related metaphor earlier in the tractate, here, section “R' Yohanan ben Zakkai’s five students: R' Eliezer, R' Yehoshua, R' Yose ha-Kohen, R' Shimon ben Netanel, and R' Elazar ben Arach“, in R' Yohanan ben Zakkai’s description of his student R' Eliezer ben Hyrcanus as “a plastered cistern that doesn’t lose a drop”.

And compare the metaphor used in my “The Legitimacy of Learning from Flawed Teachers: The Dilemma of R’ Meir Learning from Aḥer (Chagigah 15b)“, section “Rav Dimi“, where I summarize:

Rav Dimi cites a saying from Eretz Yisrael likens R' Meir to one who eats a half-ripe date (תחלא) but discards the peel.

As in our Mishnah, teachings from a flawed teacher are metaphorically compared to food that needs processing.

And see also essentially the same metaphor ibid., section “Rabba bar Sheila’s Defense of R' Meir and Divine Validation of His Teachings“, where I summarize:

Rabba bar Sheila defends R' Meir, arguing that he discerned the valuable teachings from the flawed ones, like eating the seeds of a pomegranate while discarding the peel.

And see also ibid., section “Rava (Song of Songs 6:11)“, where I summarize:

Rava metaphorically compares Torah scholars to nuts (אגוז), based on the verse in Song of Songs 6:11:

Even if their shell is dirty “with mud (טיט) and excrement (צואה)”, the kernel remains pure, so too a scholar’s sins do not taint their Torah teachings.

18. ספוג - from Greek.

19. Compare student type #1 in the earlier section: quick to learn and to forget.

20. For “wine” as a metaphor for “wisdom”, see also earlier in the tractate, here, these sections:

• “R' Yose bar Yehuda of Kfar Bavli - Learning from youngsters is like eating unripe grapes; from elders, like drinking aged wine (4:20)“

• “R' Yehuda HaNasi - Don’t judge by appearances—some vessels are new but contain wisdom (4:20)“

21. Compare also Wikipedia, “Greek words for love“. Based on that, one could frame the different biblical examples of love cited by the Mishnah here somewhat differently, though with roughly similar outcome:

• The love of Amnon for Tamar - eros (erotic, lust, sexual)

• The love of David and Jonathan - philia (affectionate regard, friendship between equals, loyalty to friends, brotherly love)

22. Referring to II_Samuel.13.1:

ויהי אחרי־כן

ולאבשלום בן־דוד אחות יפה ושמה תמר

ויאהבה אמנון בן־דוד

This happened sometime afterward:

Absalom son of David had a beautiful sister named Tamar,

and Amnon son of David loved her.

23. Referring to I_Samuel.18.1:

ויהי ככלתו לדבר אל־שאול

ונפש יהונתן נקשרה בנפש דוד

(ויאהבו) [ויאהבהו] יהונתן כנפשו

When [David] finished speaking with Saul,

Jonathan’s soul became bound up with the soul of David;

Jonathan loved David as himself.

24. מחלקת - “dispute, controversy”.

25. See Wikipedia, “Houses of Hillel and Shammai“, with slight adjustments:

The House of Hillel (Beit Hillel) and House of Shammai (Beit Shammai) were two schools of thought in Jewish scholarship during the period of the Zugot (translated: 
”pairs”).

The houses were named after the sages Hillel and Shammai (of the last century BCE and the early 1st century CE), who founded them.

These two schools had vigorous debates on matters of ritual practice, ethics, and theology, which were critical for shaping the Oral Torah and, later, Rabbinic Judaism as it is today […]

In most cases (though not always), Hillel's opinion was the more lenient and tolerant of the two. In nearly all cases, Hillel's opinion was accepted as normative by Halakha and remains in effect.

26. עדתו - in the biblical story of Korah in Numbers 16-17, the phrase “Korah and his congregation” appears a number of times.

27. מזכה את הרבים - literally: “causes merit/righteousness (מזכה - transitive, related to zekhut - זכות) to the masses”.

See Jastrow, Pi‘el- זכה, senses #3-4 (modernized):

3) to transfer divine favor, to exercise a protecting influence on.

Sanhedrin 111a: מזכה את כל וכ׳ "protects the entire town."

Yoma 87a: לא דיין שזוכין לעצמן אלא שמזכין וכ׳ Ms. M. "not only do they obtain divine grace for themselves, but they also transfer the same on their children etc."; and frequently.

4) to lead to righteousness, to convert, make better, purer.

Ibid.

Avot 5:18, and elsewhere: כל המזכה את וכ׳ "whoever causes a community to do good."

Makkot 3:16: רצה הקב"ה לזכות וכ׳ "God desired to make Israel pure"; and frequently.

28. עין טובה.

Compare also earlier in the tractate, in my “Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai and His Five Disciples: On the Ethical Paths to Choose and Avoid (Avot 2:8-9)“, section “R' Yohanan ben Zakkai asks his students to identify the most desirable Ethical “Path”“, where R' Eliezer identifies “a good eye” as the fundamental good trait.