Pt2 Rav Yehuda vs. Rav Naḥman: A Talmudic Clash Over Speech, Social Status, and Slavery (Kiddushin 70a-b)
This is the second and final part of a two-part series. Part 1 is here, the outline for the series can be found there.
The Summons and Rav Yehuda’s Document
Rav Naḥman asked Rav Yehuda why he had come. Rav Yehuda responded that Rav Naḥman had sent him a bill (טסקא) of summons (הזמנותא).
Rav Naḥman, surprised, protested that he would not have done so, as Rav Yehuda’s speech (שותא) showed his superiority.
Rav Yehuda then produced the bill (דיסקא) of summons, saying, “Here is the man and here is the document.”
Rav Naḥman accepted Rav Yehuda’s presence and asked him to present his case, emphasizing that this was necessary to avoid the appearance that rabbis show each other favoritism (מחנפי) and fail to judge each other fairly.
אמר ליה: מאי שיאטיה דמר הכא?
אמר ליה: טסקא דהזמנותא שדר מר אבתראי.
אמר ליה:
השתא שותא דמר לא גמירנא,
טסקא דהזמנותא משדרנא למר?!
אפיק דיסקא דהזמנותא מבי חדיה, ואחזי ליה,
אמר ליה: הא גברא, והא דסקא.
אמר ליה:
הואיל ואתא מר להכא,
לישתעי מיליה,
כי היכי דלא לימרו:
"מחנפי רבנן אהדדי"
Desiring to release Rav Yehuda, Rav Naḥman said to him: What is the reason that the Master is here?
Rav Yehuda said to him: The Master sent me a summons.
Rav Naḥman said to him:
Now that I have not even learned the Master’s form of speech, as you have demonstrated your superiority to me by reproving me even over such matters,
could I have sent a summons to the Master?!
Rav Yehuda removed the summons from his bosom and showed it to him.
While doing so, Rav Yehuda said to him: Here is the man and here is the document.
Rav Naḥman said to him:
Since the Master has come here,
let him present his statement,
in order that people should not say:
The Sages flatter one another and do not judge each other according to the letter of the law.
Justifying the Excommunication
Rav Naḥman inquires why Rav Yehuda excommunicated the man. Rav Yehuda explains that the man caused discomfort to a rabbi’s agent, which justifies excommunication.
Rav Naḥman says that he could have flogged him (נגדיה) instead, as this is what Rav would do to someone who harassed a rabbi’s agent. Rav Yehuda says that he preferred the more severe punishment (i.e. excommunication).
אמר ליה: מאי טעמא שמתיה מר לההוא גברא?
ציער שליחא דרבנן.
ונגדיה מר,
דרב מנגיד על מאן דמצער שלוחא דרבנן?!
דעדיף מיניה עבדי ליה.
Rav Naḥman commenced the deliberation, and said to him: What is the reason that the Master excommunicated that man?
Rav Yehuda replied: He caused discomfort to an agent of one of the Sages, and therefore he deserved the punishment of one who causes discomfort to a Torah scholar.
Rav Naḥman challenged this answer: If so, let the Master flog him,
as Rav would flog one who causes discomfort to an agent of the Sages.
Rav Yehuda responded: I punished him more severely than that. R' Yehuda held that excommunication is a more severe punishment than flogging.
The Slave Proclamation
Rav Naḥman questions Rav Yehuda for declaring that a man is a slave.
Rav Yehuda explains that the man frequently accuses others of being slaves, and it is taught that however one who disqualifies others’ lineage, that reflects their own flawed lineage.
Shmuel had similarly ruled: “He disqualifies with his own flaw.”
Rav Naḥman challenges this, saying Shmuel's ruling only justifies suspicion (למיחש), not public proclamation (לאכרוזי).
מאי טעמא אכריז מר עליה דעבדא הוא?
אמר ליה:
דרגיל דקרי אינשי ״עבדי״,
ותני: כל הפוסל – פסול,
ואינו מדבר בשבחא לעולם.
ואמר שמואל: במומו פוסל.
אימר דאמר שמואל למיחש ליה, לאכרוזי עליה מי אמר?!
Rav Naḥman further inquired: What is the reason that the Master proclaimed about him that he is a slave?
Rav Yehuda said to him:
Because he is in the habit of calling people slaves,
and it is taught: Anyone who disqualifies others by stating that their lineage is flawed, that is a sign that he himself is of flawed lineage.
Another indication of his lineage being flawed is that he never speaks in praise of others.
And Shmuel said: He disqualifies with his own flaw.
Rav Naḥman retorted: You can say that Shmuel said this halakha only to the degree that one should suspect him of being of flawed lineage. But did he actually say this to the extent that one could proclaim about him that he is of flawed lineage?
The Claim of Hasmonean Descent
Whereupon (אדהכי והכי), the man in question claims to descend from the Hasmoneans (בית חשמונאי), but Rav Yehuda counters with Shmuel’s statement that anyone claiming Hasmonean descent is in fact a slave because only slaves survived their lineage.
Rav Naḥman challenges Rav Yehuda's reliance on Shmuel's ruling, arguing that his invocation of it only after becoming personally involved undermines the credibility of his testimony. He supports this rule of suspicion by referencing R' Abba, who quotes Rav Huna in the name of Rav to that effect.
Rav Yehuda calls upon Rav Mattana (רב מתנה) as support.
אדהכי והכי (אתא ההוא בר דיניה מנהרדעי).
אמר ליה ההוא בר דיניה לרב יהודה:
לדידי קרית לי ״עבדא״,
דאתינא מבית חשמונאי מלכא?!
אמר ליה: הכי אמר שמואל: כל דאמר מדבית חשמונאי קאתינא – עבדא הוא.
אמר ליה:
לא סבר לה מר להא דאמר רבי אבא, אמר רב הונא, אמר רב:
כל תלמיד חכם שמורה הלכה ובא,
אם קודם מעשה אמרה – שומעין לו,
ואם לאו – אין שומעין לו?!
אמר ליה: הא איכא רב מתנה, דקאי כוותי..
The Gemara continues the story: Meanwhile, that litigant arrived from Neharde’a.
That litigant said to Rav Yehuda:
You call me a slave?!
I, who come from the house of the Hasmonean kings?!
Rav Yehuda said to him: This is what Shmuel says: Anyone who says: I come from the house of the Hasmonean kings, is a slave. As will be explained, only slaves remained of their descendants.
Rav Naḥman, who heard this exchange, said to Rav Yehuda:
Does the Master not hold in accordance with this halakha that R' Abba says that Rav Huna says that Rav says:
With regard to any Torah scholar who proceeds to teach a ruling of halakha with regard to a particular issue,
if he said it before an action that concerns himself occurred, they should listen to him, and his ruling is accepted.
But if not, if he quoted the halakha only after he was involved in an incident related to the halakha he is quoting, they do not listen to him, due to his personal involvement? Your testimony with regard to what Shmuel ruled should be ignored, as you stated it only after the incident.
Rav Yehuda said to Rav Naḥman: There is Rav Mattana, who stands by my report, since he has also heard this ruling of Shmuel.
Rav Mattana’s Fortuitous Appearance in Neharde’a
Fortuitously, Rav Mattana, absent from Neharde’a for thirteen years, arrives that day.
Rav Yehuda asks him if he recalls Shmuel’s teaching made while standing one foot on shore (גודא) and one foot on the ferry (מברא).
Rav Mattana confirms: Shmuel taught that of all the Hasmoneans, only a girl (רביתא) survived, who declared all remaining descendants were slaves before jumping to her death.1 The lineage of true Hasmoneans ended, leaving only slaves (descended from Herod).
With Rav Mattana’s confirmation, the man’s status as a slave is publicized in Neharde’a.2
רב מתנה לא חזייה לנהרדעא תליסר שני.
ההוא יומא אתא.
אמר ליה: דכיר מר מאי אמר שמואל כי קאי חדא כרעא אגודא וחדא כרעא במברא?
אמר ליה:
הכי אמר שמואל:
כל דאמר מדבית חשמונאי מלכא קאתינא – עבדא הוא,
דלא אישתיור מינייהו אלא ההיא רביתא, דסלקא לאיגרא, ורמיא קלא ואמרה:
כל דאמר מבית חשמונאי אנא – עבדא הוא.
נפלה מאיגרא ומיתה.
אכרוז עליה דעבדא הוא
The Gemara continues: Rav Mattana had not seen the city of Neharde’a for thirteen years.
That very day he arrived.
Rav Yehuda said to him: Does the Master remember what Shmuel said when he was standing with one foot on the bank and one foot on the ferry?
Rav Mattana said to him:
This is what Shmuel said at that time:
Anyone who says: I come from the house of the Hasmonean kings, is a slave,
as none remained of them except for that young girl who ascended to the roof and raised her voice and said:
From now on, anyone who says: I come from the house of the Hasmonean kings, is a slave. Other than this girl, the only members of the family who remained were descendants of Herod, and he was an Edomite slave.
The girl then fell from the roof and died, leaving only slaves from the Hasmoneans.
With the confirmation of the report of the statement of Shmuel, they also publicized in Neharde’a about him, i.e., that man who claimed to come from the Hasmonean kings, that he was a slave.
The Aftermath in Neharde’a
The Talmud recounts that subsequently to this case in Neharde’a, due to Rav Yehuda’s compelling halachic arguments, several marriage contracts (כתובתא - ketubah) were annulled, after it was discovered that people had unknowingly married spouses with the technical status of slaves.
When Rav Yehuda, who had publicized their flawed lineage, left Neharde’a, a mob of residents pursued him to stone him (למירגמיה).
Rav Yehuda warned the mob: If they remained silent, all would be fine; otherwise, he would reveal Shmuel's teaching that Neharde’a contained two family lines (זרעייתא):
His threat to reveal widespread flawed lineage in the town led the crowd to drop their stones, fearing further damaging revelations. There were so many discarded stones that they created a dam (אטמא) in the Malka River.5
ההוא יומא אקרען כמה כתובתא בנהרדעא.
כי קא נפיק, נפקי אבתריה למירגמיה.
אמר להו:
אי (שתיקו) [שתקיתו] – שתיקו,
ואי לא, מגלינא עלייכו הא דאמר שמואל:
תרתי זרעייתא איכא בנהרדעא:
חדא מיקריא דבי יונה,
וחדא מיקריא דבי עורבתי.
וסימניך: טמא – טמא, טהור – טהור.
שדיוה לההוא ריגמא מידייהו,
וקם אטמא בנהר מלכא.
The Gemara relates: On that day, several marriage contracts were torn up in Neharde’a, as many had their marriages annulled after having discovered that they had married slaves.
When Rav Yehuda was leaving Neharde’a, they pursued him, seeking to stone him, as because of him it was publicized that their lineage was flawed.
Rav Yehuda said to them:
If you are silent, remain silent.
And if you will not remain silent, I will reveal about you this statement that Shmuel said:
There are two lines of offspring in Neharde’a.
One is called the dove’s house,
and one is called the raven’s house.
And your mnemonic with regard to lineage is: The impure bird, the raven, is impure, meaning flawed, and the pure one, the dove, is pure, meaning unflawed.
Upon hearing this, they threw all those stones that they were intending to stone him with from their hands, as they did not want him to reveal who had a flawed lineage.
And as a result of all of the stones thrown into the river, a dam arose in the Malka River.
Appendix - Proclamations of Rav Yehuda, Rava, and Rav Yosef Regarding Flawed Lineage; and the Legacy of Pashḥur ben Immer’s Slaves (Kiddushin 70b, #10-11)
Rav Yehuda, Rava, and Rav Yosef made public proclamations naming families and individuals of problematic lineage:
Rav Yehuda’s Proclamations in Pumbedita
Rav Yehuda in Pumbedita:
Declared that Adda and Yonatan are slaves.
Proclaimed Yehuda bar Pappa to be a mamzer (illegitimate).
Stated that Bati bar Tuviyya (בטי בר טוביה), out of arrogance (רמות רוחא), refused his manumission document (גיטא דחירותא) and technically remains a slave.6
מכריז רב יהודה בפומבדיתא:
אדא ויונתן – עבדי.
יהודה בר פפא – ממזירא,
בטי בר טוביה -- ברמות רוחא לא שקיל גיטא דחירותא.
The Gemara continues the discussion of those with a flawed lineage:
Rav Yehuda proclaimed in Pumbedita:
Adda and Yonatan, known residents of that town, are slaves;
Yehuda bar Pappa is a mamzer;
Bati bar Tuviyya, in his arrogance, did not accept a bill of manumission and is still a slave.
Rava’s Proclamations in Meḥoza
Rava in Meḥoza announced that the five families Balla’ai, Danna’ai, Talla’ai, Malla’ai, and Zagga’ai have flawed lineage.7
מכריז רבא במחוזא:
בלאי,
דנאי,
טלאי,
מלאי,
זגאי –
כולם לפסול.
Rava proclaimed in his city of Meḥoza:
Balla’ai,
Danna’ai,
Talla’ai,
Malla’ai,
Zagga’ai:
All these families are of flawed lineage.
Rav Yehuda’s Proclamations on Gova’ai and Dorenunita
Rav Yehuda on Gova’ai and Dorenunita:
Stated that the Gova’ai (גובאי) people are Gibeonites.8
The Dorenunita (דורנוניתא) people are also from Gibeonite origins9 and are therefore prohibited from marrying Jews of unflawed lineage.
אמר רב יהודה:
גובאי – גבעונאי,
דורנוניתא – דראי נתינאי.
Rav Yehuda likewise says:
Gova’ai, the inhabitants of a place called Gova, are in fact Gibeonites, and their name has been corrupted.
Similarly, those people known as Dorenunita are from the village of Gibeonites, and they may not marry Jews with unflawed lineage.
Rav Yosef’s Proclamation on Residents of Bei Kuvei in Pumbedita
Rav Yosef asserted that all residents of Bei Kuvei (בי כובי) in Pumbedita are descendants of slaves.
אמר רב יוסף: האי בי כובי דפומבדיתא – כולם דעבדי.
Rav Yosef says: With regard to this place called Bei Kuvei of Pumbedita, its residents are all descendants of slaves.
The Assimilation of the Biblical Pashḥur ben Immer’s Slaves into the Priesthood and Their Legacy in Neharde’a
Rav Yehuda reports Shmuel's statement that the biblical Pashḥur ben Immer,10 owned either 400 or 4,000 slaves who, due to their prominence, assimilated (נטמעו) into the priesthood and became known as priests. (Hence, many priests in fact halachically have the status of slaves.)
Shmuel adds that any priest exhibiting insolence (עזות פנים) descends from them.
Abaye notes that these individuals (purported priests who are in fact slaves) occupy places of honor (שורא) in the city of Neharde’a.
אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל:
ארבע מאות עבדים,
ואמרי לה: ארבעת אלפים עבדים
היו לו לפשחור בן אימר,
וכולם נטמעו בכהונה.
וכל כהן שיש בו עזות פנים, אינו אלא מהם.
אמר אביי: כולהו יתבן בשורא דבנהרדעא.
[...]
Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says:
Four hundred slaves,
and some say four thousand slaves,
were owned by Pashḥur ben Immer, a priest in the time of Jeremiah,
and due to their greatness they were assimilated into the priesthood and became known as priests.
And any priest who has the trait of insolence is only from them.
Abaye said: They all sit in the rows of honor that are in the city of Neharde’a.
[...]
Jumping from a roof is the standard form of suicide in Talmudic stories. See, for example, my piece here, where Haman’s daughter commits suicide in the same way, section “Haman’s daughter threw feces onto her father's head, and then committed suicide“.
The unnamed “girl" in this story is typically understood to refer to the historical Miriam the Hasmonean, who was one of Herod's wives, and was murdered by him.
In halacha, the status of a slave is inherited and remains so unless the owner formally grants manumission.
דבי יונה - “the House of Dove”.
דבי עורבתי - “the House of Raven”.
נהר מלכא. This river name can be translated as “King’s River/Canal”.
It's possible that his patronym—bar Tuviyya—may not mean that his father's name was Tobias, but that he identified as being from the biblical Tobiad clan, which is mentioned in late biblical books.
Linguistically, these family/clan names all appear to be in the form of plurals, with the standard Talmudic Aramaic plural suffix “-a’ai“ (אי).
גבעונאי; based on their name. “Gibeonites” here refers to the biblical Nethinim, one of the ten levels of the lineage status hierarchy listed in the first Mishnah in this chapter. See my note in the previous series.
See a similar kind of wordplay with R’ Yehuda Hanasi’s prophecies, in the final section of my recent series
דראי נתינאי. Another interpretation of the name, this time seeing the family name as related directly to the word “Nethinim”, see previous note.
A priest contemporary with the prophet Jeremiah (c. early 6th century BCE).