Commentaire sur Yadayim 4:6
אוֹמְרִים צְדוֹקִים, קוֹבְלִין אָנוּ עֲלֵיכֶם, פְּרוּשִׁים, שֶׁאַתֶּם אוֹמְרִים, כִּתְבֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ מְטַמְּאִין אֶת הַיָּדַיִם, וְסִפְרֵי הוֹמֵרִיס אֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. אָמַר רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, וְכִי אֵין לָנוּ עַל הַפְּרוּשִׁים אֶלָּא זוֹ בִלְבָד. הֲרֵי הֵם אוֹמְרִים, עַצְמוֹת חֲמוֹר טְהוֹרִים וְעַצְמוֹת יוֹחָנָן כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל טְמֵאִים. אָמְרוּ לוֹ, לְפִי חִבָּתָן הִיא טֻמְאָתָן, שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם עַצְמוֹת אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ תַּרְוָדוֹת. אָמַר לָהֶם, אַף כִּתְבֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ לְפִי חִבָּתָן הִיא טֻמְאָתָן, וְסִפְרֵי הוֹמֵרִיס, שֶׁאֵינָן חֲבִיבִין, אֵינָן מְטַמְּאִין אֶת הַיָּדָיִם:
Les sadducéens disent: Nous vous dénonçons, pharisiens! Car vous dites que les Saintes Écritures rendent les mains impures, mais les livres d'Homère [littéralement: Hameiras, c'est-à-dire les livres profanes] ne rendent pas les mains impures. Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai a dit: "Et est-ce seulement tout ce à quoi nous devons nous opposer sur les pharisiens? Car ils disent aussi que les os d'un âne sont purs, mais les os de Yochanan le grand prêtre sont impurs." Ils [les sadducéens] lui dirent: "Leur amour est leur impureté, de sorte qu'on ne façonne pas les os de son père ou de sa mère en cuillères." Il leur dit: "Il en va de même pour les Saintes Écritures; conformément à leur amour est leur impureté; et les livres Homère, qui ne sont pas aimés, ne rendent pas les mains impures."
Bartenura on Mishnah Yadayim
אומרין צדוקין – those who contradict the Oral Torah are called Sadducees, on account of Tzadok and Baitus, students of Antigonos the man of Sokho (see Tractate Avot, Chapter 1, Mishnah 3 and Avot D’Rabbi Nathan, Chapter 5) that they began this disgrace/corruption initially. Because they heard from Antigonos the man of Sokho their Rabbi/Teacher, “Do not be like servants who serve the master in order to receive a reward.” They said, is it possible for a worker who goes to the trouble and engages in work all day long and in the evening, he doesn’t receive a reward? And they interpreted from the words of the Sages, and many sects from Israel joined with them, and until this day, there remains remnants of them in Egypt, in Damascus and in Constantine, and they are like sore in our eyes and a thorn in our sides, and we call them Karaites, because they don’t have anything other than the Bible alone.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yadayim
Introduction
The final three mishnayot of the tractate contain disputes between the Sadducees and the Pharisees. Our knowledge of these groups is quite vague. We know that the rabbis sided with the Pharisees, although the rabbis don't exactly see themselves as Pharisees. Assumedly this is because this division mostly ceased after the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E. Josephus, the first century historian, divides the Jews into three "philosophies" Pharisees, Sadducees and Essenes. The New Testament mentions both the Pharisees and Sadducees. And there is a bitter argument over who the Dead Sea Sect was some believe they were Sadducees, but this is not generally accepted.
In these mishnayot the Sadducees complain against various halakhot of the Pharisees. There is an echo of this in a text called "The Halakhic Letter" found among the Dead Sea Scrolls. In this letter, the Jews living in Qumran write of their halakhic disagreements with those Jews running the show in Jerusalem. There is some affinity between the halakhot of the writers living in Qumran and the Sadducees as presented in rabbinic literature. Rather than conclude that this means that these Jews were "Sadducees" I think it is more appropriate to say that these Jews had a halakhic system similar to the Sadducees. They may indeed have been Essenes (this is the general consensus); the differences between Essenes and Sadducees may be based on other issues besides halakhah.
In any case, these three mishnayot are fascinating because they afford us a glimpse into what kinds of things Second Temple religious leaders were arguing about.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Yadayim
קובלין אנו עליכם – we are discontented/disturbed by your qualities.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yadayim
The Sadducees say: we complain against you, Pharisees, because you say that the Holy Scriptures defile the hands, but the books of Homer do not defile the hands. The reason these complaints against the Pharisees are found in tractate Yadayim is that the first of the Sadducees' complaints is the subject at hand (pun intended). The Sadducees seem to know of two types of books, the works of Homer (not Simpson) and the Holy Scriptures. Clearly the latter are holy while the former are not. So why then do the Pharisees say that the Holy Scriptures defile the hands whereas the works of Homer do not?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Yadayim
פרושים – to the Sages of Israel, they would call Pharisees, because they consume their non-sacred [foods] in ritual purity and separate themselves from contact with the commoners [who are not punctilious in their observance of tithing and Levitical uncleanness], as is taught in the Mishnah (Tractate Hagigah, Chapter 2, Mishnah 7): “The clothing of commoners is in the status of treading/Levitical uncleanness arising from a man who has gonorrhea having immediate contact by treading/leaning against.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yadayim
Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai said: Have we nothing against the Pharisees but this? Behold they say that the bones of a donkey are clean, yet the bones of Yohanan the high priest are unclean. Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai explains by playing devil's advocate. All agree that the bones of a donkey do not defile. Only the flesh of a dead impure animal defiles, not the bones (see Toharot 1:4). Interestingly, Rabbi Yohanan seems to mention the "donkey" because in Hebrew "donkey" is "hamor" which sounds like Homer pun intended! In any case, a donkey's bones do not defile but human bones, even those of one's parents do. Why should this be, he rhetorically asks?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Yadayim
תרוודות (spoon – pointed on top and curved at the end) – spoons that we eat with them. In the language of (see Tractate Nazir, Chapter 7, Mishnah 2 -49b): “a tarvad-full of dust.”
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yadayim
They said to him: according to the affection for them, so is their impurity, so that nobody should make spoons out of the bones of his father or mother. Rabbi Yohanan's words force the Sadducees to admit to a principle. Defilement is a way to force people not to make profane use out of a beloved object. If human bones were ritually clean, people might make spoons out of the bones of their parents (okay, I admit this sounds strange would people really do such a thing?).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Yadayim
אף ספרי הקודש לפי חיבתן היא טומאתן (according to their preciousness is their uncleanness) – that a person should not use them as a mat/cover for beasts. But according to their words, he would respond to the, and not according to the truth. For the reason that the Holy Books defile the hands, is in order that they should not bring the books/scrolls to loss, for the mice that are found near those who eat would ruin the Scrolls, as we explain at the conclusion of [Tractate] Zavim (see the Bartenura commentary to Mishnah 12 of the fifth chapter of the tractate concerning Terumah/heave-offering).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Yadayim
He said to them: so also are the Holy Scriptures according to the affection for them, so is their uncleanness. The books of Homer which are not precious do not defile the hands. Rabban Yohanan ben Zakkai now uses that very principle to respond to the Sadducees. Homer's works are not beloved and therefore they don't defile the hands. But clearly the Holy Scriptures are beloved and therefore they do. This is similar to how I explained the prohibition at the outset of this issue (3:2).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy