In yesterday’s Daf, I was disturbed by the Rabbis’ beliefs about the disabled.  Today, we learn something of the Rabbi’s beliefs about labor relations, whether those are a person working for herself, a person working for wages or an enslaved person.  For whatever reason, I am not as bothered by the passages about slavery.  We have abolished slavery as an institution.  The disabled still face a lot of discrimination in our society.  Nevertheless, there is a definite undertone of the ranking of value (economic and spiritual) of individuals that contrasts with our modern notions of individuality.

After briefly discussing the rules regarding what to do if we lose our place while reciting the Shema, a new Mishnah is introduced. This Mishnah discusses whether workers in a high place (fruit pickers or masons on a wall) have to stop work and come down to recite the Shema.  They do not, but they cannot recite the rest of the prayer service in such a situation.  We also go back to a discussion in Berakhot 11 about how long a groom marrying a virgin is exempted from the evening Shema.  We also learn that Rabbi Gamliel married a virgin, but nonetheless continued to recite the Shema even when he was exempted. 

The issue about reciting the Shema while engaged in work comes back to the issue of concentrating while reciting the Shema.  If we are picking fruit in a high tree or perched on a wall, we might be too distracted with our own personal safety to concentrate properly on the commandment to recite the Shema.  Ultimately, the Talmud derives different rules for workers for wages than workers for themselves.  The Rabbis take great pains to allow the performance of the commandment of reciting the Shema without disrupting the economic relationship between an employer and an employee.  If we work for ourselves, however, we do not have this concern and we have to interrupt our work and concentrate properly.  I know what the Marxist amongst you are thinking!  These rules apply not only to the Shema, but also to the prayers after eating (the Berckhot Hamazon) which can be quite lengthy.  Indeed, if we are working for wages, we can abridge the Berckhot Hamozon so as not to interfere too greatly in the employment relationship.  All of this seems to value the rights of the employer more than the spiritual welfare of the worker.

After repeating verbatim the debate about reciting the Shema and marrying a virgin from Berakhot 11, a new Mishnah is introduced.  The story of Rabbi Gamliel reciting Shema the night he married a virgin despite the exemption, leads to other stories where Rabbi Gamliel did not follow halacha as laid out in the Mishnah.  First, Rabbi Gamliel washed with warm water the night after the burial of his wife even though a mourner is prohibited from washing.  Rabbi Gamliel claims that he did not wash for pleasure, but for a medical reason.  Rabbi Gamliel also accepted condolences when his slave Tavi died, despite the rule that one did not accept condolences for the death of slave.  Rabbi Gamliel noted that in this case condolences were ok because Tavi was a Torah scholar.  Rabbi Gamliel then goes back to recitation of the Shema on the night he married a virgin.  Rabbi Gamliel says we can perform a commandment from which we are exempted provided we do not do it out of haughtiness.

An interesting note about the Schottenstein translation I am using.  The Hebrew text refers to “avdi” or slave.  The translation always refers to this as Canaanite (non-Jewish) slave.  (The Bible has different rules for Jewish and non-Jewish slaves).  I am not sure from where this addition originates.  Nevertheless, I find it interesting that the Talmud recognizes Tavi, the Canaanite slave, as a Torah scholar.  The implication seems to be that a different relationship between Jews and non-Jews held in the time of the Mishnah then holds today.  Is it possible that Judaism was a more open religion?  How do we feel about non-Jewish Torah scholars today?

Of course, the sections about not mourning a (Canaanite) slave are difficult to read.  We are told that when someone’s (Canaanite) slave dies, we are to say to them exactly what we would say if they lost a donkey or an ox, “May the omnipresent replace your loss”, reinforcing that slavery was an economic relationship, not a an inter-personal relationship (despite Tavi being a Torah scholar).  I am curious if we mourn a free Canaanite who dies.  This situation is not discussed in today’s Daf.

There is a brief interlude to identify the proper Patriarchs and Matriarchs of the Jewish people.  There are three Patriarchs (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob) and four Matriarchs (Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel and Leah).  Only two of Jacob’s four wives make the cut and none of the Patriarchs’ concubines make the cut.  We pray in the merit of the Patriarchs every day.  I have often wondered why we do not pray in the merit of the Matriarchs. The Daf ends with a listing of the personal prayers certain Rabbis would append to the end of the synagogue service.  For the most part, the order and content of prayers is prescribed by the Rabbis and there is no freestyling.  I previously wondered about the purpose of prayer when it becomes ritual rather than individual.  At the end of the prayer sequence known as the Shemoneh Esrei (literally, the “Eighteen”), we are commanded to offer a short personal prayer.  The Daf ends with the prayers that several sages offered at this time.  My favorite was the prayer of Rav Safra which is also the shortest.  Rav Safra simply requested that God establish peace.  He does not say peace for who, just peace, presumably covering the whole w