.ה In the Right Time

ואם חוזר בו נאסף בזמנו כאברהם אבינו שנאמר והומכו ככל יקפצון כאברהם יצחק ויעקב דכתיב בהו בכל מכל כל

I am somewhat puzzled as to the exact meaning of נאסף בזמנו. Does it mean they will die in their proper time? If so, that is slightly troubling per the well-known רש"י in next week's  פרשה (כ"ה:כ"ט) which states that אברהם passed 5 years before his time so as not to see his grandchild stray from the path. Regarding יעקב as well, we are told that years were taken off his life. What, then, is the meaning?

.ה An 1/8 of an 1/8

א״ר חייא בר אשי אמר רב ת״ח צריך שיהא בו אחד משמונה בשמינית א״ר הונא בריה דרב יהושע ומעטרא ליה כי םאםא לשבולתא

The גר”א asks why the גמרא chose that specific number. Doubling up the number has a certain poetic effect. But why not a seventh of a seventh, or a ninth of a ninth? (Indeed, the number 7 is more commonly used in Talmudic hyperbole.) He answers that an eighth of an eighth is 1/64, just less than 1/60. In other words, the גאווה should be בטל בשישים. It should be there but not even noticeable. I have used this approach to understand .גמרא ברכות לד.

It is also intriguing that the imagery of a םאםא לשבולתא is used here in a positive context. Just above on this very עמוד, it is used to portray the downfall of the haughty. רש"י there, however, indicates that the metaphor is in reference to how this part of the שבולת falls off on his own. This later reference is not to the behaviour of this "beard" but rather to its stately appearance when it is still intact.

:ד How did he know?

והאיכא בן עזאי דלא נסיב איבעית אימא נסיב ופירש הוה ואיבעית אימא מרביה שמיע ליה ואיבעית אימא סוד ה' ליראיו

תוספות ד. ד"ה בן עזאי אומר. האי דמקדים בן עזאי לרבי עקיבא אע"ג דרבי עקיבא היה רבו כדאמר בפרק הרואה

The first difficulty here is that, as תוספות clearly states, בן עזאי's rebbe was in fact רבי עקיבא. But רבי עקיבא was one of the other תנאים who weighed in on this matter. So how could their opinions differ? One must be forced to say that בן עזאי had yet another רב from whom he received this tradition.

The last answer is also puzzling. It must be that the סוד ה' ליראיו in this case is what the שיעור would have been had בן עזאי married. It could not be a transmission that this is the true measure for if so, what does that mean for all the other opinions?

שוב מצאתי that the Artscroll makes both these points.

I'm back

Unfortunately, with the last bunch of מסכתות being somewhat unfamiliar to me as well as more difficult, I haven't found the time to be able to post any significant thoughts in quite a while. I have been anxiously awaiting סוטה since it is slightly easier and I have learned it a number of times before. Not sure how many out there are still getting this but I hope to have a bunch to say on סוטה.

.ב Did you see that?

דתניא רבי אומר למה נסמכה פרשת נזיר לפרשת סוטה לומר לך שכל הרואה סוטה בקלקולה יזיר עצמו מן היין

רש"י ד"ה בקלקולה. בניוולה ובבשתה שמנוולין אותה כדקתני מתני' (לקמן דף ז:) קושר חבל למעלה מדדיה:

This is just a minor pet peeve but I have encountered a number of individuals who seem to misunderstand the גמרא to be referring to someone who has seen a סוטה who fails the test and all the frightening consequences that follow. According to רש"י, at least, that is clearly not the case. This suggestion applies even to someone who witnesses an innocent סוטה who successfully drinks the water and survives. The exposure and public humiliation she endures is enough to suggest that the onlooker should withdraw himself from drinking wine.

.ב Bashert

אמר רב יהודה אמר רב ארבעים יום קודם יצירת הולד בת קול יוצאת ואומרת בת פלוני לפלוני

רש"י ד"ה מזווגין אשה לפי מעשיו. צנועה לצדיק ופרוצה לרשע:
תוספות ד"ה קודם יצירת הולד. נראה לרבי קודם יצירת הזכר בין אם לא נולדה הנקיבה עדיין בין אם נולדה:

A number of interesting observations here. First, it is interesting that the בת קול does not say פלונית לפלוני but rather בת פלוני לפלוני. One might suggest that the male is predestined to marry into a specific family but the exact identity of the daughter is not predestined. I find that to be kind of a stretch. I had thought, perhaps this is an indication that the husband should be older than the wife. In other words, the female is not identified directly because she is not yet conceived. תוספות here would seem to indicate otherwise. It is also intriguing, especially considering תוספות's approach that this declaration seems to be tied to the male. In a biblical world where males may marry more than one woman, the idea of destiny would seem more applicable to the female.

רש"י's comment, in its subtlety, is also quite telling. He does not say צנועה לצנוע or צדקת לצדיק. This would seem to be prime fodder for a schmooze on the relative roles of men and women. I don't think any elaboration is necessary at this point.