Pt2 Torah As Text, the Status of Moses, and the Wealth of Biblical Prophets (Nedarim 37b-38a)

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

R’ Ḥama b. Ḥanina - Moses became wealthy from the leftover shards of the hewn Tablets - Exodus 34:1

אמר רבי חמא ברבי חנינא:

לא העשיר משה אלא מפסולתן של לוחות,

שנאמר: ״פסל לך שני לחת אבנים כראשנים״ —

פסולתן שלך יהא.

§ R’ Ḥama, son of R’ Ḥanina, said:

Moses became wealthy only from the waste¹ remaining from hewing the Tablets of the Covenant,

as it is stated: “Hew (פסל) for you two tablets of stone like the first” (Exodus 34:1).

“Hew for you” means that their waste shall be yours.²

R’ Yosei b. Ḥanina - Torah was originally given only to Moses and his descendants- Exodus 34:27, 34:1

אמר רבי יוסי ברבי חנינא:

לא ניתנה תורה אלא למשה ולזרעו,

שנאמר:

• ״כתב לך״,

• ״פסל לך״:

• מה פסולתן

  • שלך

• אף כתבן

  • שלך

R’ Yosei, son of R’ Ḥanina, said:

The Torah was given initially only to Moses and his descendants,

as it is stated:

• “Write for you” (Exodus 34:27),

• and it is also stated: “Hew for you” (Exodus 34:1),

meaning:

• Just as their waste

  • is yours,

• so too their writing

  • is yours.

... but Moses generously shared it with Israel - Proverbs 22:9

משה נהג בה טובת עין

ונתנה לישראל,

ועליו הכתוב אומר:

״טוב עין —

הוא יברך וגו׳״.

[...]

However, Moses acted (נהג) with it (=the Torah) with generosity³

and gave it to the Jewish people.

And about him, the verse says:

“He that has a bountiful eye (טוב עין) —

shall be blessed,

as he gives of his bread to the poor” (Proverbs 22:9).

[...]

R’ Yoḥanan - Shekhina rests only on one who is mighty, wealthy, wise, and humble

אמר רבי יוחנן:

אין הקדוש ברוך הוא משרה שכינתו אלא על

1. גבור

2. ועשיר

3. וחכם

4. ועניו,

R’ Yoḥanan said:

God rests His Shekhina⁴ only upon one who is

1. mighty,

2. and wealthy,

3. and wise,

4. and humble.

Prooftexts - from Moses - Exodus 40:19, 26:16; Deuteronomy 9:17; Exodus 34:1; Psalms 8:6; Numbers 12:3

:וכולן ממשה.

1. גבור,

   1. דכתיב: ״ויפרש את האהל על המשכן״,

   2. ואמר מר: משה רבינו פרסו,

   3. וכתיב: ״עשר אמות ארך הקרש וגו׳״ [...]

2. עשיר —

   1. ״פסל לך״ —

   2. פסולתן שלך יהא.

3. חכם —

   1. רב ושמואל דאמרי תרוייהו:

      1. חמשים שערי בינה נבראו בעולם,

      2. וכולם נתנו למשה, חסר אחת,

      3. שנאמר: ״ותחסרהו מעט מאלהים״.

4. עניו —

   1. דכתיב: ״והאיש משה ענו מאד״

And all of these qualities are derived from Moses:

1. He was mighty,

   1. as it is written: “And he spread the tent over the Tabernacle” (Exodus 40:19),

   2. and the Master said: Moses, our teacher, spread it himself.

   3. And it is written: “10 cubits shall be the length of a board, and a cubit and a half the breadth of each board” (Exodus 26:16)⁵ [...]

2. Moses was wealthy,

   1. as it is written: “Hew for you” (Exodus 34:1) —

   2. from which it was derived (in the previous section): The waste of the Tablets of the Covenant shall be yours, and that waste consisted of precious stones.

3. Moses was wise

   1. This is derived from the statement of Rav and Shmuel, who both say:

      1. 50 measures of understanding (בינה) were created in the world,

      2. and all were given to Moses, except one,

      3. as it is stated: “Yet you have deprived him of little, of God” (Psalms 8:6). He lacked only complete knowledge of God.

4. Moses was humble,

   1. as it is written: “Now the man Moses was very humble” (Numbers 12:3).

R’ Yoḥanan - All prophets were wealthy

אמר רבי יוחנן:

כל הנביאים עשירים היו,

§ R’ Yoḥanan said:

All the prophets were wealthy.

... Derived from Moses, Samuel, Amos, and Jonah, who were all wealthy

מנלן?

1. ממשה

2. ומשמואל

3. מעמוס

4. ומיונה.

From where do we derive this?

It is derived

1. from Moses,

2. and from Samuel,

3. and from Amos,

4. and from Jonah,

who were all wealthy.

#1 - Prooftext that Moses was wealthy - Numbers 16:15

משה —

דכתיב: ״לא חמור אחד מהם נשאתי״.

— אי בלא אגרא,

לאפוקי מאן דשקל בלא אגרא?

אלא דאפילו באגרא.

[...]

Moses was wealthy,

as it is written: “I have not taken one donkey from them” (Numbers 16:15).

The Talmud analyzes the statement of Moses:

If he said that he did not take a donkey without payment —

was his intent to exclude himself from the category of one who takes items that belong to others without paying?! That is obvious, as one who does so is a thief.

Rather, he said that even with payment he did not take a donkey.

Apparently, he was wealthy and did not need to purchase anything.

[...]

#2 - Prooftext that Samuel was wealthy - I Samuel 12:3

שמואל --

דכתיב:

״הנני ענו בי נגד ה׳ ונגד משיחו:

את שור מי לקחתי

וחמור מי לקחתי״.

— אי בחנם,

לאפוקי מאן דשקל בחנם?!

אלא, דאפילו בשכר.

[...]

Samuel was wealthy,

as it is written:

“Here I am; witness against me before YHWH, and before His anointed:

Whose ox have I taken,

or whose donkey have I taken?” (I Samuel 12:3).

If he is saying that he did not take an ox or a donkey for free —

was his intent to exclude himself from the category of one who takes items that belong to others for free?!

Rather, he is saying that even with payment he did not take a donkey or an ox.

Apparently, he was wealthy.

[...]

Rava - Samuel’s integrity was greater than Moses’, he didn’t take even with owner’s consent - Numbers 16:15; I Samuel 12:4

אמר רבא:

• גדול מה שנאמר בשמואל

• יותר משנאמר במשה,

• דאילו במשה רבינו

  • כתיב ״לא חמור אחד מהם נשאתי״,

  • דאפילו בשכר,

• ואילו גבי שמואל

  • אפילו ברצון לא שכרו,

  • דכתיב: ״ויאמרו לא עשקתנו, ולא רצותנו וגו׳״.

Rava said:

• Greater is that which is stated with regard to Samuel

• than that which is stated with regard to Moses,

• as with regard to Moses our teacher

  • it is written: “I have not taken one donkey from them” (Numbers 16:15),

  • meaning that he did not take an item from another against his will even with payment.

• Whereas with regard to Samuel,

  • even with the consent of the owner, he would not rent an item from him,

  • as it is written: “And they said: You have not defrauded us, nor oppressed us [ratzotanu], neither have you taken anything from any man’s hand” (I Samuel 12:4), even with his consent [ratzon].

#3 - Prooftext that Amos was wealthy - Amos 7:14

עמוס --

דכתיב:

״ויען עמוס ויאמר אל אמציה:

לא נביא אנכי

ולא בן נביא אנכי

כי בוקר אנכי

ובולס שקמים״,

כדמתרגם רב יוסף:

ארי מרי גיתי אנא

ושקמין לי בשפלתא וגו׳.

Amos was wealthy, as it is written:

“Then answered Amos, and said to Amaziah:

I am neither a prophet,

nor son of a prophet,

but I am a herdsman (בוקר),

and a dresser of sycamore-trees” (Amos 7:14).

Amos is saying, as Rav Yosef translates:

Because I am the owner of flocks⁶

and I have sycamores in the lowland,

and I do not come to prophesy for financial gain. Apparently, Amos was wealthy.

#4 - Prooftext that Jonah was wealthy - Jonah 1:3

יונה --

דכתיב: ״ויתן שכרה וירד בה״,

ואמר רבי יוחנן: שנתן שכרה של ספינה כולה.

אמר רבי רומנוס: שכרה של ספינה הויא ארבעת אלפים דינרי דהבא.

Jonah was wealthy,

as it is written: “And he went down to Jaffa, and found a ship going to Tarshish, so he paid its cost and went down into it” (Jonah 1:3),

and R’ Yoḥanan said: He paid the cost of the entire ship.

R’ Romanus said: The cost for the entire ship was 4,000 gold dinars.

R’ Yoḥanan - Moses initially learned Torah and forgot, until it was given as a permanent gift - Exodus 31:18

ואמר רבי יוחנן:

בתחלה היה משה למד תורה ומשכחה,

עד שניתנה לו במתנה,

שנאמר: ״ויתן אל משה ככלתו לדבר אתו״.

And R’ Yoḥanan said:

Initially, Moses would study Torah and forget it,

until it was given to him as a gift,

as it is stated: “And He gave it to Moses when he concluded speaking with him” (Exodus 31:18).

Once the Torah was given him as a gift, it became his and he was able to remember it.

Appendix - The act of offering food and hospitality has significant social and moral consequences (Sanhedrin 103b-104a)

Sanhedrin.103b.17-104a.5⁷

R’ Yoḥanan citing R’ Yosei ben Kisma - Ammon and Moab were excluded from Israel because they failed to provide bread and water to the Israelites - Deuteronomy 23:4–5

אמר רבי יוחנן, משום רבי יוסי בן קסמא:

גדולה לגימה,

שהרחיקה שתי משפחות מישראל,

שנאמר:

״על דבר אשר לא קדמו אתכם בלחם ובמים״

R’ Yoḥanan says in the name of R’ Yosei ben Kisma:

Great is eating⁸

as it distanced two clans from the Jewish people,

as it is stated:

“An Ammonite or a Moabite shall not enter into the assembly of YHWH…because they met you not with bread and with water” (Deuteronomy 23:4–5).

R’ Yoḥanan - hospitality can distance relatives, draw near outsiders, shield wrongdoers from punishment, and even enable prophetic inspiration among otherwise false prophets - A List of 5 items

ורבי יוחנן דידיה אמר:

1. מרחקת את הקרובים,

2. ומקרבת את הרחוקים,

3. ומעלמת עינים מן הרשעים,

4. ומשרה שכינה על נביאי הבעל,

5. ושגגתו עולה זדון.

And R’ Yoḥanan himself says:

1. Food distances the near,

2. and draws near the distant,

3. and averts eyes from the wicked, sparing them from punishment,

4. and causes the Shekhina to rest on the prophets of the Baal;

5. and an unwitting transgression with regard to it is at times considered an intentional transgression.

#1 - Hospitality can distance relatives—Ammon and Moab - Deuteronomy 23:4–5

מרחקת את הקרובים –

מעמון ומואב.

The Talmud elaborates:

The fact that it distances the near

is derived from Ammon and Moab.

Although Ammon and Moab were relatives of the Jewish people, as they descend from Abraham’s nephew Lot (see Genesis 19:36–38), it is prohibited for a Jewish woman to marry a convert from either of those nations, because they failed to provide bread and water to the Jewish people in the wilderness (Deuteronomy 23:4–5, as cited in the previous section).

#2 - Hospitality can draw near outsiders—Yitro, whose descendants joined Israelite leadership - Exodus 2:20; I Chronicles 2:55; Judges 1:16

ומקרבת את הרחוקים –

מיתרו,

דאמר רבי יוחנן:

בשכר ״קראן לו ויאכל לחם״,

זכו בני בניו וישבו בלשכת הגזית

And the fact that it draws near the distant is derived from Yitro,

as R’ Yoḥanan says:

In reward for Yitro telling his daughters: “Call him, that he may eat bread” (Exodus 2:20), inviting Moses to join them for a meal,

Yitro’s descendants were privileged and sat as scribes in session with the Sanhedrin in the Chamber of Hewn Stone.⁹

שנאמר:

״ומשפחות סופרים ישבי יעבץ

1. תרעתים

2. שמעתים

3. שוכתים

המה הקינים הבאים מחמת

אבי בית רכב״

As it is stated:

“And the families of the scribes who dwelt in Jabez;

1. the Tirathites,

2. the Shimeathites,

3. the Sucathites.

These were the Kenites who came of Hammath,

father of the house of Rechab” (I Chronicles 2:55).

וכתיב התם:

״ובני קיני

חתן משה

עלו מעיר התמרים

את בני יהודה

מדבר יהודה

אשר בנגב ערד

וילך וישב את העם״.

And it is written there with regard to the identity of the Kenites:

“And the children of the Kenite,

Moses’ father-in-law,

went up from the city of the palm trees

with the children of Judah

into the wilderness of Judah,

which is in the south of Arad;

and they went and dwelt with the people” (Judges 1:16).

#3 - Hospitality can shield wrongdoers from punishment—Micah, who fed travelers - Judges 17–18

ומעלמת עינים מן הרשעים –

ממיכה.

And the fact that it averts eyes from the wicked

is derived from Micah,

who was not punished, because he provided bread to passersby (see Judges 17–18).

#4 - Hospitality can enable prophetic inspiration among otherwise false prophets (the prophet who hosted Iddo) - I Kings 13:20

ומשרה שכינה על נביאי הבעל –

מחבירו של עדו הנביא,

דכתיב:

״ויהי הם ישבים אל השלחן

ויהי דבר ה׳ אל הנביא אשר השיבו״.

And the fact that it causes the Shekhina to rest on the prophets of the Baal —

is derived from the colleague of Iddo the prophet, the elderly prophet who convinced Iddo to eat with him contrary to the directive of God, when Iddo went to Bethel to prophesy to Jeroboam,

as it is written:

“And it happened as they sat at the table,

that the word of YHWH came to the prophet that brought him back” (I Kings 13:20).¹⁰

Although the elderly prophet was a false prophet, he was rewarded with true prophecy as a reward for hosting Iddo.

#5 - An unwitting transgression with regard to hospitality is considered an intentional transgression - 1 Samuel 21–22

ושגגתה עולה זדון —

דאמר רב יהודה, אמר רב:

אלמלי הלווהו יהונתן לדוד שתי ככרות לחם —

1. לא נהרגה נוב עיר הכהנים,

2. ולא נטרד דואג האדמי,

3. ולא נהרג שאול ושלשת בניו.

And the fact that an unwitting transgression with regard to it is at times considered an intentional transgression —

is derived as Rav Yehuda says that Rav says:

Had Jonathan lent David two loaves of bread when he was fleeing Saul, and thus David would not have sought sustenance from the priests in Nov (see 1 Samuel 21:2–4) —

1. The residents of Nov, city of the priests, would not have been killed (see 1 Samuel 22:18–19),

2. and Doeg the Edomite would not have been banished from the World-to-Come,

3. and Saul and his 3 sons would not have been killed¹¹ as punishment for that massacre

1. פסולתן.

This word typically means “refuse, base metal, worthless matter” (as Steinsaltz translates here), but in this context, it specifically means “chips, stone-dust”, likely based on the verb פסל (“hew”; see next line), see Jastrow (modernized):

פְּסוֹלֶת

(פָּסַל)

1) chips, stone-dust.

• Jerusalem Talmud Shekalim 5:2:5 - פסל לך שתהא הפסולת שלך - “ ‘hew for yourself’ (Exodus 34:1) that the chips be yourself”

• Nedarim 38a:3 - פְּסוֹלְתָּן שלך - “their chips be yours”

• Ibid.; Yerushalmi Shekalim see above - מפסולת של לוחות העשיר וכ׳ - “Moses became rich from the chips of the tablets”

• and elsewhere.

2) refuse, base metal, worthless matter.

[…]

2. Steinsaltz explains:

As the tablets were crafted from valuable gems, their remnants were similarly valuable.

A number of biblical verses (in both Exodus and Deuteronomy) simply state that the tablets were “stone” (אבן). The claim that the tablets were made of valuable gems—specifically sapphire—appears in rabbinic and midrashic sources. See Hebrew Wikipedia, “לוחות הברית“, section “סוג האבן“.

3. טובת עין - literally: “goodness of eye”, an idiom. This idiom is used also in the prooftext subsequently cited (טוב עין).

For another major instance of this idiom, see my “Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai and His Five Disciples: On the Best and Worst Ethical Paths (Avot 2:8-9)”, section “R’ Yohanan ben Zakkai asks his students to identify the most desirable Ethical “Path”“. And see there section “The same exercise is repeated for negative Ethical “Path” (evil eye, bad companion, etc.)“, that it’s contrasted with “evil eye” (עין רעה).

4. משרה שכינתו - a common Talmudic idiom, generally (but not always) referring to prophecy (see search results here). For example, see Sanhedrin.103b.17-104a.4, cited in the appendix at the end of this piece, section “Hospitality can enable prophetic inspiration among otherwise false prophets (the prophet who hosted Iddo) - I Kings 13:20“.

For other prerequisites for prophecy to happen, see my “Pt2 The Biblical Books Nearly Suppressed: Reconciling Contradictions in Ecclesiastes and Proverbs (Shabbat 30b)“, section “Joy as a Prerequisite for Divine Inspiration (II Kings 3:15), Halachic Discussion, and Good Dreams“. And note that the same idiom is used there to refer to prophecy: “Shekhina resting (שורה)”.

5. Steinsaltz explains:

Moses was tall and strong enough to spread the tent over the boards alone.

Relatedly, the Talmud elsewhere notes Moses’ great height, see my “Crushed Amorites, Suspended Hailstones, and the Defeat of the Giant Og: Talmudic Accounts of Biblical Triumphs Over Enemies (Berakhot 54a-b)“, section “Part 3“, where I summarize:

Moses, described as ten cubits [≈ 15 ft.] tall, used a ten-cubit axe (נרגא), leapt (שוור) ten cubits, and struck Og’s ankle (קרסוליה), killing him.

And see my note there.

6. גיתי - “livestock”.

On this word, see Jastrow (modernized):

גֵּיתָא

(גאה, compare גֵּו, גֹּוי) [growth, accrued property,] herd, flock (corresponding to Hebrew: מִקְנֶה).

• Targum of I Chronicles 28:1.

Plural: גֵּיתִין, גֵּיתֵי.

• Targum Jonathan on Amos 1:1.

• Onkelos Genesis 46:34;

• and frequently.

• Nedarim 38a:14 (quoted from Targum Amos, see above).

7. On the greatness of hospitality, compare also my “The Four Sermons of the Mid-Second Century Sages in Yavne: On Hospitality (Xenia) and the Honor of Torah Sages (Berakhot 63b)“, final part here: Pt2.

8. לגימה.

On this word, see Jastrow (modernized):

לְגִימָה

(לגם, see לוּגְמָא)

1) quaffing, taking a draught.

• Jerusalem Talmud Sotah 1:2:7 - כדי לְגִימַת שלש וכ׳ (Bavli Sotah 4a:18 - כדי לגמע, see גָּמָא) - “as much time as is required for quaffing three roasted eggs”

2) (in general) eating and drinking, entertainment.

• Sanhedrin 103b:17 גדולה לגימה שהרחיקה וכ׳ - “a little refreshment plays an essential part, for its refusal estranged two tribes from Israel” (Ammon and Moab, see Deuteronomy 23:4 sq.).

• Ibid. 52a (referring to Psalms 35:16) - שהחניפו לקרח על עיסקי לגימה - “they flattered Korah for the sake of entertainments (to which he used to invite them)”

• Yalkut Shimoni on Nach 723.

3) living, support (our ‘bread and butter’).

• Gittin 7a:12 - (play on צ̇ק̇ל̇ג̇ ומד̇מ̇נה וס̇נ̇סנה̇, Joshua 15:31) כל מי שיש לו צ̇עק̇ת ל̇ג̇ימא על חבירו וד̇ומ̇ם שוכן בס̇נ̇ה̇ יעשה לו דין - “if one has cause to complain of being hindered in his livelihood by his neighbor and keeps his peace, He who dwells in the thornbush will take up his cause”

• Bekhorot 35a:18 - ללגימא לא חיישינן - “we do not apprehend that their testimony may be influenced by their bread and butter,” i.e. by their dependence on their employers.

Plural: לְגִימוֹת.

• Rosh Hashanah 18a:12 כנגד עשר לגימות וכ׳ - “corresponding to the ten meals which Nabal gave to David’s servants (I Samuel 25:5)”

9. This line, and subsequent prooftexts, is paralleled elsewhere in the Talmud, see my “Pharaoh’s Deception, the Mechanics of Oppression, and Divine Justice: Talmudic Interpretations of Exodus 1:10-14 (Sotah 11a-b)“, section “Part 2: their fates; Yitro’s Protest and His Descendants’ Honor (I Chronicles 2:55, Judges 1:16); Connection to the Sanhedrin“.

10. See Wikipedia, “Iddo (prophet)“, section “Other mentions“:

A tradition of identifying Iddo with the unnamed prophet of 1 Kings 13 can be found in the Talmud, first-century CE Jewish historian Josephus, the fourth- and fifth-century Christian commentator Jerome, and the medieval Jewish commentator Rashi.

The protagonist of 1 Kings 13 is identified simply as “a man of God” who prophesies against Jeroboam, as Iddo is said to have done elsewhere.

After an unfortunate encounter with an older prophet of Bethel who lies to him, saying that God’s angel has instructed him to provide hospitality to him, the “man of God” is killed by a lion as punishment for disobeying a divine command.

The older prophet then used his own tomb as a burial place for the “man of God” and ordered his heirs to place his body beside that of the prophet when he died and foretold that the prophesies will come true.

11. See 1 Samuel 31:2, 6:

Verse 2:

וידבקו פלשתים

את שאול ואת בניו

ויכו פלשתים

1. את יהונתן

2. ואת אבינדב

3. ואת מלכישוע

בני שאול

The Philistines pursued Saul and his sons,

and the Philistines struck down

1. Jonathan,

2. Abinadab,

3. and Malchi-shua,

sons of Saul.

Verse 6:

וימת

1. שאול

2. ושלשת בניו

3. ונשא כליו

4. גם כל אנשיו

ביום ההוא יחדו

Thus died

1. Saul

2. and his 3 sons

3. and his arms-bearer,

4. as well as all his men,

together on that day.