חושן משפט ל"ג 4

The baraita teaches: In a location where landowners were accustomed to rent out the trees in a field together with the land so that the one cultivating the field receives a share of the fruit despite not needing to care for the trees, the trees are presumed to be rented out. The Gemara asks: Isn’t this obvious? The Gemara answers: No, it is necessary to state this ruling in order to include the case where everyone in that region gives land to sharecroppers to cultivate in return for one-third of the yield, and he, the landowner, went and gave it for one-quarter. Lest you say that the landowner can say to him: This concession on my part, that I reduced my portion of the yield for you, was done with the intention that I would not give you a share of the fruits of the trees in the field, the baraita teaches us that the landowner should have specified this to him in advance.

The Gemara relates another story regarding acknowledgement of the justice of divine punishment: Four hundred barrels of Rav Huna’s wine fermented and turned into vinegar, causing him great financial loss.
Rav Yehuda, the brother of Rav Sala the Pious, along with the Sages, and some say Rav Adda bar Ahava, along with the Sages, entered to visit him, and said: The Master should examine his actions, as perhaps he committed a transgression for which he is being punished.
Rav Huna said to them: Am I suspect in your eyes? Have I committed a transgression on account of which you advise me to examine my behavior?
They said to him: Is the Holy One, Blessed be He, suspect that He exacts punishment without justice? Your loss was certainly just, and you must examine your conduct to find out why. The Sages were aware of a flaw in Rav Huna’s conduct, to which they alluded (Tosafot). Rav Huna said to them: If someone has heard something improper that I have done, let him say so. They said to him: We have heard that the Master does not give a share of his grapevines to his tenant farmers. A tenant farmer is entitled to a portion of the crop grown on his landlord’s property, as well as a share of the vines planted during a given year. Rav Huna said to them: Does this tenant farmer leave me anything from the produce that he grows on my property? He steals it all. Consequently, in denying him his share of the grapevines I am simply recouping that which was stolen from me by this tenant farmer. They said to him: That is the meaning of the folk saying: One who steals from a thief has a taste of theft. Despite the fact that the property was stolen to begin with, one nevertheless engages in theft. Although he did not violate a prohibition per se, it is still a form of theft, and one who is held to a higher standard than others will be punished for it.
He said to them: I accept upon myself to give my tenant farmer his portion in the future.
Thereupon, as a result of Rav Huna’s repentance, God restored his loss. Some say his vinegar turned back into wine, and some say that the price of vinegar rose and it was sold at the price of wine.

He who has no knowledge of Scripture or Mishnah or right conduct is presumed to be sinful, and is therefore disqualified as a witness, on rabbinic grounds. The presumption is that anyone who is on such a low level commits most of the sins that come within his reach.

Accordingly, no evidence is entrusted to a boorish person, nor is his evidence accepted, unless he is known to be an observer of religious duties, or one who practises benevolence, leads an upright life and is courteous. His testimony is accepted, even though he is ignorant and has no knowledge of Scripture or Mishnah.

Hence, you may infer that every scholar is deemed eligible to bear witness unless he becomes disqualified ; every ignoramus is considered ineligible unless it becomes certain that he follows the right paths.

The Sages taught: A person should always be willing to sell all he has in order to marry the daughter of a Torah scholar. If he cannot find the daughter of a Torah scholar, he should marry the daughter of one of the great people of the generation, who are pious although they are not Torah scholars. If he cannot find the daughter of one of the great people of the generation, he should marry the daughter of one of the heads of the congregations. If he cannot find the daughter of one of the heads of the congregations, he should marry the daughter of one of the charity collectors. If he cannot find the daughter of one of the charity collectors, he should marry the daughter of one of the schoolteachers. However, he should not marry the daughter of an ignoramus [am ha’aretz] because they are vermin and their wives are similar to a creeping animal, as their lifestyle involves the violation of numerous prohibitions. And with regard to their daughters the verse states: “Cursed is he who lies with an animal” (Deuteronomy 27:21), as they are similar to animals in that they lack any knowledge or moral sense. The Gemara continues its discussion with regard to an ignoramus. It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: It is prohibited for an ignoramus to eat meat, as it is stated: “This is the law [torah] of the beast and of the fowl” (Leviticus 11:46). He expounds: Anyone who engages in Torah study is permitted to eat the meat of animals and fowl, and anyone who does not engage in Torah study is prohibited to eat the meat of animals or fowl. The Gemara proceeds to mention some sharply negative statements of the Sages in which they overstated their negative sentiments with regard to ignoramuses, although these ignoramuses were wicked in addition to being boors (ge’onim). Rabbi Elazar said: It is permitted to stab an ignoramus to death on Yom Kippur that occurs on Shabbat. His students said to him: Master, at least say that it is permitted to slaughter him. He said to them: I intentionally used the word stab, as this term, slaughtering, requires a blessing when one slaughters an animal, and that term, stabbing, does not require a blessing in any context. Rabbi Elazar said: It is prohibited to accompany an ignoramus while traveling on the road due to concern that the ignoramus might try to harm his traveling partner, as it is stated with regard to Torah: “For it is your life and the length of your days” (Deuteronomy 30:20). An ignoramus has not studied any Torah, indicating that he is not concerned about his own life; with regard to another’s life, all the more so. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is permitted to tear open an ignoramus like a fish. Rabbi Shmuel bar Yitzḥak said: And one may cut him open from his back and thereby cause his immediate death by piercing his spinal cord rather than his stomach. It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Akiva said: When I was an ignoramus I said: Who will give me a Torah scholar so that I will bite him like a donkey? His students said to him: Master, say that you would bite him like a dog! He said to them: I specifically used that wording, as this one, a donkey, bites and breaks bones, and that one, a dog, bites but does not break bones. It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir would say: Anyone who marries off his daughter to an ignoramus is considered as though he binds her and places her before a lion. Why is this so? Just as a lion mauls its prey and eats and has no shame, so too, an ignoramus strikes his wife and then engages in sexual relations with her without appeasing her first, and has no shame. It was taught in a baraita that Rabbi Eliezer says: If we did not need the ignoramuses for business, they would kill us. The Gemara shifts to a discussion of an ignoramus who has some degree of sensitivity (Me’iri). Rabbi Ḥiyya taught: Anyone who engages in Torah study in the presence of an ignoramus, causing the ignoramus embarrassment and anguish over his inability to study Torah, is considered as though he had sexual relations with the ignoramus’s betrothed bride in his presence, as it is stated: “Moses commanded us the Torah, an inheritance [morasha] for the congregation of Jacob” (Deuteronomy 33:4). Do not read it as inheritance [morasha]; rather, read it as betrothed [me’orasa]. The Torah is compared to the betrothed bride of the Jewish people until one studies it and thereby consummates his marriage with it. Similarly, he said: The hatred which ignoramuses have for a Torah scholar is greater than the hatred that the nations of the world have for the Jewish people. And the wives of the ignoramuses hate Torah scholars more than the ignoramuses themselves. It was taught in the Tosefta that one who studied Torah and left his studies hates Torah scholars more than all of them. The Sages taught: Six statements were made with regard to ignoramuses: One may not entrust them with testimony, i.e., one may not appoint them as witnesses to a particular event or transaction. Additionally, one may not accept testimony from them, as they are not considered trustworthy, and one should not reveal a secret to them, as they will reveal it. One may not appoint them as steward [apotropos] over an estate belonging to orphans, due to concern that they might make improper use of the orphans’ property. Likewise, one may not appoint them as guardian over a charity fund. Finally, one should not accompany them while traveling on the road, due to concern for one’s safety. And there are those who say: One does not even announce their lost items, meaning that if one finds a lost article from such a person, he is allowed to keep it without making an effort to locate the owner (Me’iri). The Gemara asks: What is the reasoning of the first tanna, who holds that one must announce having found the lost article of an ignoramus? The Gemara explains: Sometimes upstanding offspring will come from him and will consume the property, as it is stated: “He may prepare it but the just shall put it on” (Job 27:17). It is possible for a wicked person to prepare something for himself that will later be used by a righteous person.

Abaye said, and some say it was Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak who said: Interpret that statement as referring to Neharde’a, as Elijah the Prophet said to Rav Yehuda, brother of Rav Salla Ḥasida: You have said and wondered: Why has the Messiah not come? Why is that surprising? Isn’t today Yom Kippur, and relations were had with several virgins in Neharde’a, as the men and women stayed awake all night and that led to promiscuity? Rav Yehuda said to him: What did the Holy One, Blessed be He, say about those sins committed by the Jewish people? He said: This is what God said: “Sin lies in waiting at the door” (Genesis 4:7), and it is no wonder that men sin. He asked him: And what did Satan the prosecutor say about their sinning? Elijah said to him: Satan, on Yom Kippur, has no license to prosecute. From where is that idea derived? Rami bar Ḥama said: The numerological value of the letters that constitute the word HaSatan is three hundred and sixty four: Heh has a value of five, sin has a value of three hundred, tet has a value of nine, and nun has a value of fifty. Three hundred and sixty-four days of the solar year, which is three hundred and sixty-five days long, Satan has license to prosecute. On the remaining day, Yom Kippur, he has no license to prosecute. Since that day is exalted above all others, there is no room for the accusations of Satan.

One of the Sages said to Rav Kahana: Did you hear what is the reason that the mountain was called Mount Sinai? Rav Kahana said to him: It is because it is a mountain upon which miracles [nissim] were performed for the Jewish people. The Sage said to him: If so, it should have been called Mount Nisai, the mountain of miracles. Rather, Rav Kahana said to him: It is a mountain that was a good omen [siman] for the Jewish people. The Sage said to him: If so, it should have been called Har Simanai, the mountain of omens. Rav Kahana said to him: What is the reason that you do not frequent the school where you can study before Rav Pappa and Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, who study aggada? As Rav Ḥisda and Rabba, son of Rav Huna, both said: What is the reason it is called Mount Sinai? It is because it is a mountain upon which hatred [sina] for the nations of the world descended because they did not accept the Torah. And that is what Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: The desert in which Israel remained for forty years has five names. Each name has a source and a rationale: The Zin Desert, because the Jewish people were commanded [nitztavu] in it; the Kadesh Desert, because the Jewish people were sanctified [nitkadshu] in it. The Kedemot Desert, because the ancient [keduma] Torah, which preceded the world, was given in it. The Paran Desert,

So too, contemptible persons are ineligible to bear witness, on rabbinic grounds. They are men who eat while walking in the street, in front of all the people ; and those who go about undressed in the market, while they are occupied with filthy work; and similar individuals who lack a sense of shame. All these are doggish and will not hesitate to bear false witness.— —