In today’s Daf, we finally come to the law of food fights – and like many Talmudic discussions, the laws are complex and very context specific. We debate which foods can be thrown and which foods we are prohibited from throwing. We debate which seasons we can throw foods and which seasons when food throwing is inappropriate. Interestingly, we also delve into the laws of wine fountains. I obviously wrote the opening of this passage somewhat tongue-in-cheek, but the rules around throwing food illustrate the principle that the Rabbi’s believed that the Torah and its laws were a blueprint for life. When properly illustrated, the Torah’s laws addressed all situations, including food fights, in which we might find ourselves. Following the Torah’s rules allows us to evaluate every one of our actions, no matter how mundane, to the sacred. The notion that the Torah is the blueprint of the world also underlies the modern attempt to apply Torah rules to situations the Rabbis could not have anticipated – laws about when we can separate conjoined twins, driving on Shabbat, etc. The application of Torah laws to novel fact patterns can be found in the responsa of famous Rabbis throughout time. Of course, different Rabbis reach different conclusions, just like in the Talmud, but they all start with a common text and method of debate, just like in the Talmud.

Our Daf opens with continuing discussion around the laws of Zimun – the opening call and response to the Bircas Hamazon that we recite after meals when there are three or more people (depending on who you consider people (e.g., do women, slaves and minors count?). In this discussion, and in the discussion over the last several days, the Rabbis refer to “an ignoramus”. Indeed, the Rabbis refer to an “ignoramus” at least four times in the discussion of the Zimun today. The Hebrew word for “ignoramus” is “bor” which is very close to the English word “boor” – a synonym for “ignoramus”. I did some internet research on the origins of the English word “boor” and the origin is not Hebrew. Nevertheless, the similarity is so striking. I need to ask my daughter, Helen, an amateur linguist, what she thinks. Hopefully she will comment on this post.

Today, we also get a lot of discussion about when we can subdivide into smaller groups for Zimun. Remember, we cannot say Zimun unless there are at least three eligible people sharing the meal. If there are ten eligible people, there is a separate version of the Zimun. Some believe that there are other group sizes with their own Zimun, but I think the modern practice is for three and ten to be the relevant sizes. What if we are at a large banquet, a wedding or a Bar Mitzvah? People may eat at different times or want to leave at different times. The rule is clear that we cannot break into smaller groups if doing so will move us to a lower level of Zimun. A group of twenty could break into two groups of ten, but a group of eighteen could not break into two groups of nine.

We then learn of a charming name the Rabbis threw at each other – “black vessel”. Apparently, some Rabbis were so engrossed in their Torah studies that they neglected to wash their clothing. Interestingly, I would have guessed that this is a complement to the Rabbis, but its usage today suggests that it was an insult.

At this point, we introduce our final Mishnah of Chapter Seven. The Mishnah gives the rule about not splitting into groups that will lower the level of Zimun. The Mishhnah then ends with a debate over whether we say the blessing over wine if we have not diluted the wine first. This rule seems to jump out of nowhere and seems more appropriate to Chapter Six. No explanation is given as to why it appears here. The Rabbis considered the wine of the era to be very strong and the custom was to dilute it with water, bless it and then drink it. This custom is not unique to the Rabbis of the Talmud. You can read similar customs among the Greeks in the Iliad and the Odyssey. Perhaps, the custom was common among Mediterranean cultures at the time.

The discussion of whether we bless undiluted wine or not leads to discussions of proper uses of wine, bread and other foods when we are not consuming them. We get an unresolved discussion of whether we can wash our hands with wine. We learn that we cannot do four things with bread: (i) place raw meet on it, (ii) pass a full cup over it, (iii) throw it, or (iv) support a plate with it. From these four items, we learn that we are not allowed to treat bread in a way that ruins it. Does this rule apply specifically to bread or to all foods? We learn that we can throw pomegranates and walnuts and other hard foods onto a clean plate because such actions will no ruin the foods. We can also throw cooked meat onto a clean plate. However, we are never allowed to throw breads, because we have such high regard for bread. At a wedding in the summer, we can throw toasted grains and walnuts at the bride and groom, but in winter, when the streets are muddy, we cannot throw these foods. (I wonder if the rules are different in hot, dry places). We then learn we can have a flowing waterfall of wine before a bride and groom.

Now that I know the rules of food fights, I plan to referee my next food fight, rather than participate. I will be sure to bring my Tractate Berakhot in case their are any disputed calls.