Pt3 From Donkey Drivers to Doctors, Bloodletters to Tanners: Rabbinic Insights and Guidance on Professions (Mishnah Kiddushin 4:14; Talmud ibid., 82a-b)
This is the third and final part of a three-part series. Previous parts: Part 1; Part 2. the outline can be found at Part 1.
Advice on Trades: Clean and Easy Professions
Bar Kappara advised teaching one's child a "clean and easy profession (אומנות)."
Rav Yehuda suggested needlework for embroidery1 as an ideal example.
דרש בר קפרא: לעולם ילמד אדם את בנו אומנות נקיה וקלה.
מאי היא?
אמר רב יהודה: מחטא דתלמיותא.
Bar Kappara taught: A person should always teach his son a clean and easy trade.
The Gemara asks: What is such a profession?
Rav Yehuda said: Needlework for embroidery is a clean and easy trade.
Fortune and Necessity: Hierarchies in Trades and Gender According to R' Yehuda HaNasi
R' Yehuda HaNasi states that all trades are necessary for the world, but their social and personal implications differ.
One is fortunate to inherit a prestigious2 trade from their parents and unfortunate to inherit a lowly3 one.
For example, society needs both perfumers,4 which is pleasant work, and tanners,5 which is unpleasant, smelly work—yet it is more fortunate to be a perfumer.6
Similarly, the world cannot exist without both males and females, but one is more fortunate to have male children.7
תניא,
רבי אומר:
אין לך אומנות שעוברת מן העולם.
אשרי מי שרואה את הוריו באומנות מעולה,
אוי לו למי שרואה את הוריו באומנות פגומה.
אי אפשר לעולם בלא בסם ובלא בורסקי.
אשרי מי שאומנותו בסם,
ואוי לו [ל]מי שאומנותו בורסקי.
אי אפשר לעולם בלא זכרים ובלא נקבות,
אשרי מי שבניו זכרים
ואוי לו למי שבניו נקיבות.
It is taught in the Tosefta (5:12):
R' Yehuda HaNasi says:
There is no trade that disappears from the world, since all occupations are needed,
but fortunate is he who sees his parents in an elevated trade;
woe is he who sees his parents in a lowly trade and follows them into their trade.
Similarly, it is impossible for the world to continue without a perfumer and without a tanner.
Fortunate is he whose trade is as a perfumer,
and woe is he whose trade is as a tanner, who works with materials that have a foul smell.
Likewise, it is impossible for the world to exist without males and without females,
yet fortunate is he whose children are males,
and woe is he whose children are females.
R’ Meir: A Father Should Teach His Son a Clean and Easy Profession
R' Meir (like Bar Kappara earlier) emphasized teaching one's son a clean and easy profession.
At the same time, he states that wealth and poverty ultimately depend on God, not the profession, since sustenance is a matter of divine providence, as stated in the verse: “Mine is the silver, and Mine the gold” (Haggai 2:8).8
רבי מאיר אומר:
לעולם ילמד אדם לבנו אומנות נקיה וקלה,
ויבקש רחמים למי שהעושר והנכסים שלו,
שאין עניות מן האומנות, ואין עשירות מן האומנות,
אלא – למי שהעושר שלו,
שנאמר: ״לי הכסף, ולי הזהב, נאם ה׳ צבאות״.
[...]
R' Meir says:
A person should always teach his son a clean and easy trade,
and he should request compassion from the One to Whom wealth and property belong,
as poverty does not come from a trade, nor does wealth come from a trade;
rather, they come from the One to Whom wealth belongs,
as it is stated: “Mine is the silver, and Mine the gold, says the Lord of hosts” (Haggai 2:8).
[...]
Human Struggle For Livelihood vs. Animal Ease
R' Shimon ben Elazar reflects on the natural provision of sustenance to animals, such as deer, lions, and foxes, without their engaging in labor: He “never saw a deer work as one who dries figs,9 nor a lion work as a porter (סַבָּל), nor a fox work as a storekeeper (חנוני), and yet they earn their livelihood (מתפרנסים) without pain (צער).”
Humans, who are superior to animals--as animals were created to serve humans--and created to serve God,10 should logically also have their livelihoods provided without hardship (צער).
However, due to humanity's sins and misdeeds,11 this natural ease has been forfeited, as illustrated by the verse from Jeremiah 5:25, which attributes the withholding of good to human iniquity.12
תניא,
רבי שמעון בן אלעזר אומר:
מימי לא ראיתי
צבי קייץ,
וארי סבל,
ושועל חנוני,
והם מתפרנסים שלא בצער.
והם לא נבראו אלא לשמשני, ואני נבראתי לשמש את קוני.
מה אלו שלא נבראו אלא לשמשני, מתפרנסים שלא בצער,
ואני שנבראתי לשמש את קוני – אינו דין שאתפרנס שלא בצער?!
אלא שהרעותי את מעשי, וקיפחתי את פרנסתי,
שנאמר: ״עונותיכם הטו״.
It is taught in the Tosefta (5:13):
R' Shimon ben Elazar says:
I never saw
a deer work as one who dries figs,
nor a lion work as a porter,
nor a fox work as a storekeeper.
And yet they earn their livelihood without anguish.
But all these were created only to serve me, and I, a human being, was created to serve the One Who formed me.
If these, who were created only to serve me, earn their livelihood without anguish,
then is it not right that I, who was created to serve the One Who formed me, should earn my livelihood without anguish?!
But I, i.e., humanity, have committed evil actions and have lost my livelihood,
as it is stated: “Your iniquities have turned away these things, and your sins have held back good from you” (Jeremiah 5:25).
Appendix #1 - List of Occupations Mentioned In the Text (Twenty)
Intro
As mentioned in a note in Part 1, many of these are in mishkal “qatal”:
ספר
בלן
גרע
טבח
גמל
חמר
קייץ
בסם
סבל
ספן
The next most common is “qotel” (see Hebrew Wiktionary category here), specifically these:
רופא
כובס
צורף
רוכל
רועה
List
Barber - סַפָּר
Bathhouse Attendant - בלן
Bloodletter - גָּרָע
Butchers - טבחים
Camel Driver - גַּמָּל
Doctors - רופאים
Donkey Driver - חַמָּר
Dries Figs - קייץ
Launderers - כובסים
Metalsmiths - צורפים
Millwrights - נקורות
Needlework - מחטא דתלמיותא
Peddlers - רוכלין
Perfumers - בסם
Porter - סַבָּל
Sailor - סַפָּן
Shepherd - רועה
Shopkeeper - חנוני
Tanner - בורסקי
Weavers - גרדיים
Appendix #2 - Ritual Impurity of Professional Tools (Mishnah Keilim 16:6-7)
The Mishnah in Keilim 16:6-7 explores the principles of ritual impurity in relation to various items, emphasizing their function, usage, and purpose. The discussion highlights a general rule: objects designed to hold or receive items are susceptible to impurity, while those made solely for protection or specific work-related purposes are not.
Key Points:
Leather Gloves:
Impure: Gloves used by winnowers, travelers, and flax workers—designed for handling items.
Pure: Gloves for dyers, blacksmiths, and grist dealers (per R' Yose)—meant for protection from perspiration.
General Rule:
Items made for holding or receiving are susceptible to impurity.
Items made solely for protection (e.g., against sweat) remain pure.
Covers and Containers:
Pure: Dung bags, cattle muzzles, bee shelves, fans, and clothes chest covers—objects with minimal receptacle-like features.
Impure: Covers for smaller, more vessel-like items (e.g., boxes).
Eighteen Items Deemed Pure:
Functional covers (e.g., for boxes or baskets), tools (e.g., carpenter’s vise, turban-maker's block), musical instrument cases (e.g., lyre, violin), ritual implements (e.g., mezuzah case, tefillin mould), and personal or work-related objects lacking the characteristics of a receptacle.
R' Yose's General Rule:
Items serving to protect objects both during and outside work are impure.
Items serving only during work remain pure.
Nine Professions Mentioned
I find this series of Mishnah sections especially interesting, due to the large number of occupations mentioned. (See my three-part series on a Mishnah and ensuing Talmud sugya which focuses on professions.)
A variety of occupations are mentioned, highlighting the practical concerns of different professions. Here is the list of occupations mentioned, with their original Hebrew terms:
Winnowers (זורי גרנות)
Travelers (הולכי דרכים)
Flax workers (עושי פשתן)
Dyers (צבעין)
Blacksmiths (נפחין)
Grist dealers (גרוסות)
Carpenters (חרש)
Turban makers (גודלי מצנפות)
String makers (עושה סותות)
This list underscores the diversity of trades considered in the Mishnah, reflecting its concern with the practical realities of daily life and their implications for ritual law.
Outline
Gloves
A list of 18 items (e.g., carpenter’s vice, lyre and violin cases, turban-making blocks, tefillin moulds) deemed pure
General Rule by R' Yose
The Passage
Gloves
Leather gloves (קסיה) for winnowers (זורי גרנות), travelers (הולכי דרכים), or flax workers: (עושי פשתן) Impure (susceptible to uncleanness).
Gloves for dyers (צבעין) or blacksmiths (נפחין): Pure (not susceptible).
R' Yose adds: Gloves for grist dealers (גרוסות) are also pure.
General Rule:
Items made to hold or receive (קבלה) things: Impure.
Items used only for protection against perspiration (זעה): Pure.
קסיה
של זורי גרנות,
של הולכי דרכים,
של עושי פשתן
טמאה.
אבל
של צבעין
ושל נפחין
[…]
טהורה.
רבי יוסי אומר: אף של גרוסות כיוצא בהן.
זה הכלל:
העשוי לקבלה -- טמא.
מפני הזעה -- טהור
The leather glove
of winnowers,
travelers,
or flax workers
is susceptible to uncleanness.
But
the one for dyers
or blacksmiths
is clean.
R' Yose says: the same law applies to the glove of grist dealers.
This is the general rule:
that which is made for holding anything is susceptible to uncleanness,
but that which only affords protection against perspiration is clean.
[…]
A list of 18 items (e.g., carpenter’s vice, lyre and violin cases, turban-making blocks, tefillin moulds) deemed pure
The following items are considered clean (not susceptible to ritual impurity):
Various functional covers (e.g., box - תבה, basket - טני), tools (e.g., carpenter's vise - מכבש של חרש), supports (e.g., cushion - כסת, lectern - אנגלין - from Greek analógio), specific sockets (e.g., bolt - בית הנגר, lock - בית המנעול), cases (e.g., for mezuzah, lyre - נבלין, violin - כנורת), craft tools (e.g., turbaner’s (גודלי מצנפות) block (אמום), tefillin mould, string makers' mould), a toy horse, wailing clappers, a poor man's parasol, and bed posts.
(These objects likely lack the requisite vessel-like characteristics to contract impurity.)
כסוי תבה,
כסוי טני,
והמכבש של חרש,
והכסת שתחת התבה,
והקמרון שלה,
ואנגלין של ספר,
בית הנגר,
בית המנעול,
ובית המזוזה,
ותיק נבלין,
ותיק כנורת,
והאמום של גודלי מצנפות,
והמרכוף של זמר,
ורביעית של אלית,
וגנוגנית העני,
וסמוכות המטה,
וטפוס של תפלה,
ואמום של עושה סותות --
הרי אלו טהורים.
The cover of a box,
the cover of a basket,
a carpenter's vise,
a cushion under a box
or its arched cover,
a reading-desk for a book,
a bolt-socket,
a lock-socket,
a mezuzah case,
a lyre case,
a violin case,
the block of the turban-makers,
a wooden musical toy horse,
the clappers of a wailing woman,
a poor man's parasol,
bed posts,
a tefillin mould,
and the mould of string makers
all these are clean.
General Rule by R' Yose
Objects protecting items used both during and outside work: Impure.
Objects used only during work: Pure.
זה הכלל, אמר רבי יוסי:
כל משמשי משמשיו של אדם, בשעת מלאכה ושלא בשעת מלאכה -- טמא.
וכל שאינו אלא בשעת מלאכה -- טהור
This is the general rule which R' Yose stated:
all objects that serve as a protection to objects that a man uses, both when the latter are in use and when they are not in use, are susceptible to uncleanness;
but those that serve them as a protection only when the latter are in use are clean.
מחטא דתלמיותא - literally: “needle of furrows”.
Jastrow: “stitching in lines or furrows (quilting)”.
Compare Needlework - Wikipedia and Embroidery - Wikipedia.
בסם.
Jastrow: “dealer in, or manufacturer of, spices, perfumes [etc.]; druggist”.
Compare Apothecary - Wikipedia and pharmacopola - Wiktionary.
בורסקי - mentioned also earlier.
For a similar contrasting of more prestigious and less prestigious professions, where the same point is made that both are necessary, see my piece on the ethical sugya in Tractate Brakhot, Part 3, from the “Rabbis of Yavne (רבנן דיבנה)”.
This baraita is marked by a tightly structured and highly rhetorical style, featuring literary language and antithetical parallelism (“where […] the first part of the couplet contrasts with an opposite […] contained in the second part“).
Its literary structure emphasizes contrasts and cyclical repetition, which reinforce its moral and existential themes.
Here's a breakdown of the structure:
1. Introductory Universal Statement
The opening line, "אין לך אומנות שעוברת מן העולם" ("There is no trade that ceases from the world"), sets a universal and absolute tone. This establishes the framework for the discussion: all professions persist and are necessary for society, irrespective of their perceived status.
2. Binary Ethical Judgment on Parents' Trades
"אשרי מי שרואה את הוריו באומנות מעולה" ("Fortunate is one who sees their parents in a distinguished trade").
"אוי לו למי שרואה את הוריו באומנות פגומה" ("Woe to one who sees their parents in a degraded trade").
This pair contrasts blessedness and woe, with "fortunate" (אשרי) and "woe" (אוי לו) as refrains. It evaluates trades not only by their utility but also by their perceived social status and how they reflect on the individual's lineage and identity.
3. The Necessity of All Professions
"אי אפשר לעולם בלא בסם ובלא בורסקי" ("The world cannot exist without a perfumer and without a tanner").
This line reaffirms the theme of universal necessity: all trades, regardless of their perceived dignity, are indispensable. The perfumer (בסם) symbolizes refinement and desirability, while the tanner (בורסקי) symbolizes lowliness and unpleasantness.
4. Blessing and Woe Based on Trade
"אשרי מי שאומנותו בסם" ("Fortunate is one whose trade is in perfume").
"ואוי לו [ל]מי שאומנותו בורסקי" ("And woe to one whose trade is in tanning").
This pair mirrors the earlier ethical judgment but shifts focus to the individual’s trade, rather than their parents’. The contrast between perfumer and tanner reflects the dichotomy between high-status and low-status professions.
5. The Necessity of Both Genders
"אי אפשר לעולם בלא זכרים ובלא נקבות" ("The world cannot exist without males and without females").
This statement extends the theme of universal necessity to human reproduction and societal continuation, stating that both genders are essential components of the world.
6. Blessing and Woe Based on Children’s Gender
"אשרי מי שבניו זכרים" ("Fortunate is one whose children are males").
"ואוי לו למי שבניו נקיבות" ("And woe to one whose children are females").
This final pair parallels the structure of the earlier blessings and woes but applies it to gender preferences in children, reflecting societal values that prioritized male offspring.
On this concluding line—”fortunate is one whose children are males, and woe to one whose children are females”—compare Bava_Batra.16b.9:
רבי שמעון ברבי איתילידא ליה ברתא,
הוה קא חלש דעתיה.
אמר ליה אבוה: רביה באה לעולם.
אמר ליה בר קפרא: תנחומין של הבל ניחמך אבוך
[…]
It is reported that a daughter was born to R’ Shimon son of R’ Yehuda HaNasi,
and he was upset that he did not have a son.
His father said to him: Propagation (רביה - Be fruitful and multiply) has come to the world through the birth of a daughter.
Bar Kappara said to R’ Shimon: Your father has consoled you with meaningless (הבל) consolation
[…]
And the line from our baraita is adduced as proof that that it’s better to have male children.
The line from our baraita is also adduced to support the message in this passage in Sanhedrin.100b.5, with adjustments to Steinsaltz translation:
: דכתיב
בת לאביה מטמונת שוא
מפחדה לא יישן בלילה
בקטנותה — שמא תתפתה
בנערותה — שמא תזנה
בגרה — שמא לא תינשא
נישאת — שמא לא יהיו לה בנים
הזקינה — שמא תעשה כשפים
it is written there (Ben Sira 42:11–14):
A daughter is for her father [a] false treasure (מטמונת שוא);
due to fear for her he will not sleep at night:
During her minority (i.e. youth) — perhaps she will be seduced;
during her young womanhood (i.e. adolescence) — perhaps she will engage in promiscuity;
once she has reached her majority (i.e. adulthood) — perhaps she will not get married;
once she marries — perhaps she will have no children;
once she grows old — perhaps she will practice witchcraft.
(Steinsaltz translates the recurring word שמא as "lest," which I believe is not correct here, as it implies a preventative stance. However, the point here is that the father is anxious/fearful (פחד), with no indication that he has any ability to prevent the listed fears from occurring. Hence I adjusted the translation of this word to “perhaps“. See the various possible senses of this word at Hebrew Wiktionary.)
Compare Wikipedia, Sexism, section “Ancient civilizations“:
After the adoption of agriculture and sedentary cultures, the concept that one gender was inferior to the other was established; most often this was imposed upon women and girls.
For another talmudic passage where this biblical verse is quoted, see here, section “Jehoiakim’s Insolence Against God“:
אמרו לו:
והלא כסף וזהב שלו הוא?!
שנאמר (חגי ב, ח):
"לי הכסף, ולי הזהב
נאם ה' צבאות"
They said to him:
Aren’t the silver and the gold His?!
as it is stated:
“The silver is mine and the gold is mine
says the Lord of hosts” (Haggai 2:8)?
קוני - a literary word meaning “my Creator”.
See Hebrew Wiktionary, “קָנָה“, sense #3, and the etymology there.
This likely refers to the biblical story of Adam's primordial sin, which resulted in the punishment of needing to labor. (See the Hebrew Wikipedia entry on “The curse of Adam and Eve“, specifically the section titled "By the sweat of your brow, you shall eat bread" (בזעת אפיך תאכל לחם).
This baraita is an interesting example of rabbinic didactic literature, rich in rhetorical and literary devices aimed at conveying moral and theological ideas. Below is an analysis of its literary structure:
1. Opening Formula
The passage begins with the phrase "מימי לא ראיתי" ("In all my days, I have never seen"), which establishes a contemplative tone. This formula sets the stage for an anecdotal or observational insight, inviting the reader to reflect on a phenomenon of the natural world.
Compare my piece “Fifteen Sequential Reflections of Rabbi Yosei on His Life and Values (Shabbat 118b): Aspirations and Personal Conduct in His Own Words“, where items #11-15 start with the same phrase “In all my days, I never….“ (מימי, לא)
2. Parallelism
The animals mentioned—צבי קייץ (a deer harvesting fruits), ארי סבל (a lion as a porter), שועל חנוני (a fox as a shopkeeper)—create a vivid and imaginative tableau. The use of three animals in parallel reinforces the structure through repetition, a common rhetorical technique in rabbinic literature. Each clause follows a similar pattern:
Animal + Activity (an unusual anthropomorphic behavior).
This draws attention to the absurdity of imagining animals performing human labor and underscores the lesson: even animals, without engaging in human-like toil, are sustained by God.
3. Contrasting Themes
The structure pivots on contrasts:
The animals: "והם מתפרנסים שלא בצער" ("They are sustained without hardship").
Humans: "ואני שנבראתי לשמש את קוני – אינו דין שאתפרנס שלא בצער?!" ("And I, who was created to serve my Creator—does it not follow that I should be sustained without hardship?!").
The contrast between the animals, who fulfill their purpose effortlessly, and humans, who struggle despite their higher purpose, heightens the rhetorical tension.
4. Rhetorical Question
The phrase "אינו דין" ("Does it not follow?") introduces a rhetorical question, a common technique in rabbinic argumentation. (Technically, it’s an a fortiori argument, which is a very common one in rabbinic literature, see my piece “Ancient Interpretations: Talmudic Hermeneutics and Drashot Revisited“.)
This invites the audience to agree with the seemingly self-evident logic that human beings, created for divine service, should be entitled to divine sustenance without hardship.
5. Shift to Self-Reflection
The rhetorical flow shifts abruptly with the phrase "אלא שהרעותי את מעשי, וקיפחתי את פרנסתי" ("But I have ruined my deeds and diminished my sustenance"). This marks a turn from theological musing to introspective self-blame, introducing an ethical dimension. The speaker acknowledges human responsibility for hardship, tying it to moral failings.
6. Biblical Citation
The conclusion cites "שנאמר: עונותיכם הטו" ("as it says: 'Your iniquities have turned [these things away]'"), grounding the moral in scripture (Isaiah 59:2). This technique, known as prooftexting, reinforces the authority of the argument by linking it to a divine source.