For many of us (including me), today was our first day back at work after the long holiday. My alarm went off very early this morning telling me it was time to go work out (it’s not easy to look this good!). After working out, I scanned the paper drinking coffee until I looked at my watch and realized I was running late for the office. Many of us have to “clock in” or log hours at the office.

In the days of the Talmud time was less precise and less accurate. The Rabbis had trouble deciding when the proper time for saying the Shema occurred because they did not have watches or any other accurate measure of small increments of time (particularly in the nighttime). Today, I can consult the internet and find the precise time of sunset at any location in the world. I can look at my watch and know the time to the fraction of a second. In the days of the Talmud, I would have needed different, more subjective, markers of time. In today’s Daf, the Rabbis turn to the problem of reliable, knowable segmentation of the night time so that we will know the proper time for fulfilling commandments. Like all earthly matters in the Talmud, the Rabbis also look for the theological reason for this segmentation.

Before turning to the troubling matter of the night, however, the Rabbis have some loose ends to resolve from Berkhot 2. Recall that yesterday the Rabbis debated the proper marker for the start of the time to recite the evening Shema. Today, the Rabbis begin by noting that some contradictory opinions are given in the name of the same authority. For instance, Rabbi Meir was said to believe the time for the evening recitation of the Shema started when people come home to eat their Sabbath meal. He was also said to believe that the time begins when the Kohanim can immerse themselves in the Mikvah, which is much earlier. Similarly, contradictory opinions were attributed to Rabbi Elizeer.

Ultimately, the Rabbi’s conclude that the contradictory opinions must be due to faulty memories of the people reporting the debates. Remember, the Talmud when written was the record of centuries of oral debate about points of law. Memory is very unreliable. We frequently “remember” what we desire as a result. I remember an episode of Gilligan’s Island, which I have not seen in forty plus years. Gilligan and the Skipper were in a horrible fight and would not talk to each other. The rest of the castaways formed a court to decide who was right and who was wrong. Both Gilligan and the Skipper recounted the exact same events, but with completely different points of view, details and conclusions. The Rabbis seem satisfied with this explanation and do not try to discern the actual view of Rabbi Eliezer or Meir.

The Gemara notes that Rabbi Eliezer said that the Shema could be said until the end of the first watch. The Gemara asks how many watches are there in the night and why did Rabbi Elizer not just say until four or three hours after dark. Rabbi Eliezer speaks in terms of watches because he can thus link the nightly phenomenon on earth of watches with its theological analogue – God’s watching over the earth during the night. According to Rabbi Eliezer, God roars like a lion at the end of three watches during the night. As proof, Rabbi Elizer quotes the Jeremiah25:30. Rabbi Eliezer says that the use of “roar” three times in that verse proves that there are three watches and that God roars to indicate the end. (Some English translations do not include “roar” three times in the verse. Rabbi Eliezer is relying the use of the Hebrew term “Shag” three times.)

Rabbi Eliezer provides natural phenomenon that indicate the three watches: ((i) a donkey braying, (ii) dogs howling and (iii) an infant waking to nurse or couples beginning to rise and talk to each other). The Gemara then asks if these signs mark the beginning, end or middle of each watch. If the signs mark the beginning, then you don’t need a sign for the first watch (the donkey braying) because it is just nightfall. Similarly, if the signs mark the end of the watches, then you don’t need a sign for morning. Therefore, the signs must mark the end of the first watch, the beginning of the last watch and the middle of the middle watch (midnight). Alternatively, maybe the signs all mark the end of the watches and the last sign marks the time to say the morning Shema for people in houses without windows.

Continuing with the theological link to earthly phenomenon, Rabbi Yitzchak ben Shmuel notes that the roaring of God reflects the lamentations of the Lord for the sins of the Jews that led to the destruction of the Temple and the exiling of the Jews from Israel. The Talmud was composed and compiled while the memory of the exile was still very fresh.

The Talmud then turns to a story of Rabbi Yose. Yose said he was traveling and decided to go into the ruins of Jerusalem to pray. While he was there, the prophet Elijah came and protected him. When Rabbi Yose finishes praying, Elijah tells him that it is very dangerous to pray in the ruins. Rabbi Yose was scared to pray on the road, so Elijah notes that he could have prayed a shortened service. This story also brings up memories of the pain of exile and punishment for both Rabbi Yose and God, pains which are remembered each day in the synagogue service.

The Talmud concludes there are three reasons not to go into ruins. First, one may arouse suspicion. In one translation, I have read that this is the suspicion that one may be entering a ruin to meet a prostitute. I am not sure where this particular suspicion comes from. Also, there is a danger of collapse and a danger of demons. The Talmud then notes that the danger of collapse is enough. Why do we need the other reasons? If we were only concerned about collapse, then we might be tempted to enter the ruins of a new building. However, then we would be worried about demons and the concern about suspicion would be superfluous. We need suspicion in case two people enter ruins together (apparently we will learn in a month or so that demons do not approach two people together). The Gemara then notes that we should not have suspicion if two men enter together because they would be too embarrassed to sin in front of each other, unless they are of low moral character. If two men are of high moral character, then there is still the fear of collapse and if the ruin is a place frequented by demons, they might be there even in the presence of two men or if we enter ruins in a field and there is no reason for suspicion. That is why we need all three reasons to not enter a ruin. The Hebrew word for “demons” is “Mazikin”. I am not sure what the Talmud means by demons. Perhaps it will be explained later.

After the digression about entering ruins, the Talmud notes a debate as to whether there are three or four watches in a night. The Rabbis base there debate in proof texts from the bible. The group who believe there are three watches point to Judges 7:19, which refers to a “middle watch”. The proponents of four watches refer to Psalm 119 where King David notes he arises at midnight and later that he arose before the “watches” – so at midnight there must still be multiple watches.

One of the proponents of three watches is identified as “Rabbi Zerika said in the name of Rabbi Ami who said in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi”. I am not certain of the purpose of attributions or of string attributions – perhaps they are just artifacts of the oral tradition. Whatever the reason, the Talmud is reminded of a completely different statement of Rabbi Zerkia said in the name of Rabbi Ami who said in the name of Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi and the Talmud now turns to this second statement despite seemingly having nothing to do with the material that precedes it.

The new statement provides that we may not discuss anything in the presence of a dead person except matters that pertain to the dead person. The Talmud notes that there is confusion if the statement only pertains to Torah matters or to both Torah matters and earthly matters. The statement is unclear and there is no resolution.

After this interlude, the Rabbis return to the matter of dividing the night. In particular, Psalm 119 notes that David arose at midnight in verse 62. Verse 147 indicates that King David got up in the early evening. [There is a brief digression to show how we know the Hebrew word “neshef” means early evening. ] The Talmud offers three resolutions of this contradiction. First, David was always awake when midnight came. Second, prior to midnight, David dozed like a horse [short, shallow naps] and then at midnight he became a lion. Third, David did not sleep at all because of his Torah studying and praying. Of course, this need to resolve the contradiction reflects the Talmud’s view that every word in the bible is meant on many levels, including the literal level.

Remember the side note about “neshef” meaning evening. The Talmud now debates whether the Hebrew word “neshef” means evening or morning. The confusion arises because of the use of the word “neshef” in I Samuel 30:17 and then a different Hebrew word for evening. The Talmud concludes that “neshef” refers to a transition period, either between day and evening or between night and morning. Confusion resolved!

Back to that pesky problem of determining exact time before Apple watches. How did David know when it was midnight? After all, in Exodous 11:4, Moses said that the plague of the death of the firstborn would happen “around midnight”. Is it possible that David could tell time more accurately than Moses? David knew the exact moment of midnight because at just that time every night a wind would come and play the harp which hung above his bed. This harp acted as an alarm clock which woke David at midnight to study Torah and praise God.

The Talmud then states that at dawn, the wise men of Israel approached David and said there was not enough food for Israel. David suggested the rich be taxed to support the poor, but the wise men said that there was not enough food. “A handful of food does not satisfy a lion.” and “A pit cannot be filled from its own earth”. He then suggested raiding the foreign armies in Israel. The wise men then went and consulted Achitophel, the Sanhedrin (rabbinic court) and the Urim VeTumim, which were stones on the High Priest’s breast plate that allegedly could predict the future. Rabbi Yosef wants to know how we know that is who was consulted. The Talmud cites I Chronicles 27:34 and II Samuel 16:23 for the proposition that Achitophel was consulted first.

That’s it. Today ranged wide and far in almost frenetic manner, and then we ended mid-thought – but that is Talmud!