The Mishna states: There is no difference between the Books of Scripture and tefillin and mezuzos, except that the Books of Scripture may be written in any language, and tefillin and mezuzos are written only in Ashurit (the Hebrew script that is used in our Torah scrolls). Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: The Books of Scripture may be written only in Greek (not any foreign language).

 

The Gemora infers from the Mishna that with regard to sewing them with sinews and rendering the hands tamei, they are both identical. (8b)

 

The Mishna had stated that the Books of Scripture can be written in any language. The Gemora asks from a braisa which states: If one wrote a Hebrew text in Aramaic or an Aramaic text (certain words in the Torah that are Aramaic) in Hebrew (from any Scripture Book) or he used the Ivri script (instead of Ashuris), the scroll is not sacred and does not render the hands tamei. The scrolls must be written with the Ashuris script on parchment and with ink. It is evident from this braisa that a Book of Scripture must be written in Ashuris.

 

Rava answers: Our Mishna is referring to a case where the Scriptures were written in a different language but it was transliterated in the Ashuris script; that is why the Book is sacred. The braisa is referring to a case where the Scriptures were written using the Ivri script; this is why the Book is not sacred.

 

Abaye questions Rava’s answer: If the reason the braisa states that the Scripture scrolls are not sacred is because they were not written in Ashuris script, why does the braisa mention cases of writing Hebrew texts in Aramaic or vice versa? Even a Hebrew text written in Hebrew or an Aramaic text written in Aramaic will not be sacred if it is not written with the Ashuris script!?

 

The Gemora answers that the braisa is following the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel of the Mishna, who maintains that the Scriptures can be sacred even if they are not written in Ashuris.

 

The Gemora asks: The braisa states that the scrolls must be written with the Ashuris script on parchment and with ink. According to Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, it will be sacred even if it is written in Greek!?

 

The Gemora offers another answer. The braisa is referring to tefillin and mezuzos, which everyone agrees, must be written in Hebrew and with the Ashuris script. This is learned from the verse [Devarim 6:6]: and they shall be, which means that they should stay as they are; their language and script should not be changed.

 

The Gemora questions this: The braisa states a case where Aramaic text was written in Hebrew; this is understandable if it is referring to the Torah, where there are Aramaic words (yegar sahadusaBreishis 8:48), but there are no Aramaic words mentioned in tefillin and mezuzos!?

 

The Gemora answers: The braisa is referring specifically to a Megillah and that must be written in Hebrew and with Ashuris script. (8b – 9a)

 

Rav Ashi answers that the braisa is referring to the other Books of Scripture (the Prophets and the Writings, not the Torah), and it is following the opinion of Rabbi Yehudah who explains the viewpoint of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel. Rabbi Yehudah said: Although Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel permitted using Greek, this is only in regards to the Torah, but not for the other books of Scripture; they must be written in Hebrew and in Ashuris.

 

The Gemora explains: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel permitted a Torah scroll to be written in Greek based on the incident that occurred with King Talmai, an Egyptian king. Talmai gathered the seventy-two Elders of Israel and placed them in seventy-two chambers, each of them in a separate one, without revealing to them why they were summoned. He entered each one’s room and said: “Write for me a Greek translation of the Torah.” Hashem put it in the heart of each one to translate identically as all the others did.

 

The Gemora proceeds to illustrate the changes that these Elders made in the Torah in order not to anger Talmai or to prevent a denigration of the Torah, Heaven forbid.

God created in the beginning (instead of ‘In the beginning God created’; the purpose of this change was to prevent the idea that another diety, referred to as ‘In the beginning’ created ‘God’).

I shall make man in image and likeness (instead of ‘Let us make,’ for then it would appear as if there were two deities).

And he finished on the sixth day, and He rested on the seventh day (instead of ‘and he finished on the seventh day’, which might be taken to imply that some work was done

on the seventh day).

Male and female he created him, but they did not write ‘created them’ (which could be taken to mean that they were separate from the first).

Come, let Me descend and I will confound their tongues.

And Sarah laughed among her relatives (instead of ‘in herself,’ in order to make a distinction between Sarah and Avraham, who also laughed inwardly; this way, it indicated that Sarah laughed in public and that is why God rebuked her and not Avraham).

For in their anger they killed an ox, and at their whim they uprooted the manger (to save our ancestors from being called murderers).

And Moshe took his wife and his children, and made them ride on a carrier of men (instead of a donkey; so they wouldn’t mock Moshe for not having a horse or a camel at his disposal).

And the abode of the children of Israel which they stayed in Egypt and in other lands, was four hundred years. [The words ‘and in other lands’ are inserted because, according to the Biblical record, the Israelites were at the utmost 210 years in Egypt.]

And he sent the elect of the children of Israel.

And against the elect of the children of Israel he did not put forth his hand.

I have not taken one valuable of theirs (instead of a donkey, so it shouldn’t be said that Moshe took other things).

Which Hashem, your God distributed to give light to all the peoples (so that it shouldn’t be said that the other nations are permitted to worship idols).

And he went and served other gods which I commanded should not be served.

They also wrote for him ‘the beast with small legs’ and they did not write ‘the hare,’ because the name of Ptolemy’s wife was hare, lest he should say, “The Jews have mocked me and put the name of my wife

in the Torah.” (9a – 9b)

 

The Mishna had stated: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: The Books of Scripture may be written only in Greek (not any foreign language).

 

Rabbi Avahu says in the name of Rabbi Yochanan that the halacha is in accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel.

 

Rabbi Yochanan offers a reason explaining Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel’s viewpoint. It is written [Breishis 9:27]: May Hashem extend Yefes and He will dwell in the tents of Shem. We can interpret these words as follows: The language of Yefes (Greek) will be in the tents of Shem (the Torah). (9b)

 

The Mishna states: There is no difference between a Kohen Gadol who is anointed with the oil of anointing (shemen hamishchah) and the Kohen Gadol whose dignity was marked with a larger number of garments (ribuy begadim, when the oil was lacking), except the bull which comes for all the mitzvos (a Kohen Gadol that was anointed will bring a bull chatas if he issued an erroneous ruling, however, a kohen gadol appointed through the extra garments will bring a regular chatas).

 

The Mishna continues: There is no difference between a serving Kohen Gadol and one who has retired except for the bull of Yom Kippur and the tenth of the efah (which is offered every day).

 

The Gemora states that the first part of our Mishna does not subscribe to Rabbi Meir’s viewpoint for he states in a braisa that a kohen gadol appointed through the extra garments will bring the bull which comes for all the mitzvos.

 

The Gemora infers from the end of the Mishna that a serving Kohen Gadol and a retired Kohen Gadol are identical and both would be permitted to perform the service in the Beis Hamikdosh while wearing the eight garments (reserved for the Kohen Gadol ). This would be in accordance with the viewpoint of Rabbi Meir cited in the following braisa. The braisa states: Rabbi Meir maintains that if the Kohen Gadol became temporarily disqualified and another Kohen Gadol was appointed to replace him, when the first Kohen Gadol becomes fit again, he returns to his service, but the second Kohen Gadol still has all the mitzvos of a Kohen Gadol upon him i.e. he cannot let his hair grow very long, he cannot tear his garments in mourning, he cannot become tamei to deceased relatives, he cannot marry a widow, and when he performs the service in the Beis Hamikdosh, he must wear the eight vestments of a Kohen Gadol. Rabbi Yosi, however, maintains that the first Kohen Gadol returns to his service when he becomes fit again, but the substitute Kohen Gadol can no longer serve in the Beis Hamikdosh as a Kohen Gadol wearing eight vestments or as an ordinary Kohen wearing four vestments. He cannot serve as a Kohen Gadol because this will cause hard feelings for the first Kohen Gadol, and he cannot serve even as an ordinary Kohen because there is a rule that one can ascend in matters of sanctity but one cannot descend in matters of sanctity.

 

The Gemora asks: It emerges that the first part of the Mishna does not follow Rabbi Meir’s opinion and the end part of the Mishna follows his view? Rav Chisda states that indeed, this is the explanation of the Mishna. Rav Yosef says that the Mishna is actually the opinion of Rebbe; he agrees with the Chachamim in the first part and with Rabbi Meir in the end part. (9b)

 

INSIGHTS TO THE DAF

GREEK TRANSLATION

• The Gemora relates that when the Greek king Ptolemy ordered the Sages to translate the Torah into Greek, they made a number of changes, including changing the name of the hare mentioned (14:7) as one of the four forbidden animals which possess one sign of kashrus but not the other. Because Ptolemy’s wife was named “Arneves,” the word the Torah uses for the hare, the Sages changed the wording so as not to offend him. Reb Oizer Alpert cites the Taam V’Daas in Parshas Shemini who asks: How were they permitted to do so in light of the ruling of the Yam Shel Shlomo (Bava Kamma 4:9) that one is required to give up his life rather than alter a single word or ruling of the Torah to appease others?

 

He answers that by the fact that Hashem put it in the heart of each one to translate identically as all the others did, this is similar to a Divine spirit and therefore it was permitted. Furthermore, they didn’t change the meaning of the words, only the language.

Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld of Har Nof, Jerusalem discusses our Gemora in an article.

 

GREEKS & DARKNESS

The world was chaos and void, with darkness over the face of the deep; and the spirit of Hashem hovered over the water. (Bereishit 1:2)

 

“The world was chaos” — this is an allusion to the Babylonian exile… “And void” — this refers to the Medean exile… “With darkness” — this is an allusion to the exile imposed by the Greeks, who darkened the eyes of Israel with their decrees. They would tell the Jews, “Write on the horns of an ox that you have no more to do with the G-d of Israel!” (Bereishit Rabba 2:4)

 

Why is specifically the Greek exile represented by the word “darkness?” Didn’t other nations also persecute the Jewish People through their anti-religious decrees? What, then, is unique about the Greek exile that it is likened to darkness?

 

Rav David Cohen of Cong. G’vul Yaavetz in Flatbush, N.Y., suggests a novel explanation for this Midrash based on the following selection from Massechet Sofrim:

Five elders translated the Torah into Greek for King Ptolemy (a successor to Alexander the Great). The day this was accomplished was as unfortunate for Israel as the day that the Golden Calf was worshipped, because it is impossible to present a truly adequate translation of the Torah in any foreign language.

 

On another occasion, Ptolemy gathered together seventy-two elders and placed them in seventy-two separate rooms, not informing any of them the purpose of their summons. He approached each of them and said, “Write down the Torah of your teacher Moses for me.” Hashem arranged that the same thoughts occurred to all of them and they made the same thirteen modifications in their translations. [This translation is commonly known as Targum Shiv’im, or the Septuagint.] (Sofrim 1:7-8; Megillah 9a)

 

The Tur (Orach Chayim 580; see also Shulchan Aruch ad loc.) quoting the opinion of the Halachot Gedolot, tells us that one should observe a fast day on the eighth day of Tevet because that is the anniversary of the day that Ptolemy commissioned his translation of the Torah. On the day that the translation commenced, adds the Tur, “A three-day long period of darkness descended upon the world.” This, Rav Cohen suggests, is the “darkness” of the Greek exile.

THE LIGHT OF THE ORAL TORAH

It remains to be explained why the translation of the Torah should cause a global darkness. What was the great tragedy of translating the Torah into another language, and why should it cause the world to become dark?

 

The tragedy, Rav Cohen explains, is implicit in the words of Massechet Sofrim — “because the Torah could not be translated adequately.” Although the written text of the Torah can be translated with reasonable accuracy into another language, all the nuances of meaning — the double-entendres and the various implicit insinuations in the words of the Torah — are lost in the process. Gematrias, acrostics and other word-based analyses are impossible to carry over from one language to another. The entire body of the Oral Torah which lies beneath the surface of the written text was thus severed — and deleted — from the Torah.

 

It is interesting to note that, as Rav Cohen points out, the Sadducees (a sect that believed in the literal interpretation of the written Torah and denied the existence of an oral tradition) were a powerful force in Israel only until the Hasmonean uprising which culminated in the Chanukah miracle (Megillat Ta’anit, Ch. 5). Once the Hasmoneans succeeded in uprooting Greek culture from the hearts of the Jewish people, the Sadducees also submitted to the Halachic renderings of the Torah-true elders of the generation. The Greek influence on Torah analysis that caused the Sadducees to give credibility to the written word alone was done away with along with the Greek culture.

 

The Oral Torah is compared in the Midrash to a light that illuminates the darkness:

 

The Oral Torah is difficult to learn and its mastery involves great hardship. It is therefore compared to darkness in the verse “the people who walked in darkness saw a great light,” (Yeshayahu 9:1). The “great light” is a reference to the great light that is seen by the Talmudic sages [i.e. they understand matters with great clarity], for Hashem enlightens their eyes in matters of ritual law and laws of purity. In the future it is said of them, “those who love Him will shine as bright as the sun when it rises with its full intensity” (Shoftim 5:31)….

 

Reward for the study of the Oral Torah is to be received in the Next World, as it says, “The people who walk in darkness saw a great light.” “Great light” is a reference to the primeval light which was hidden away by Hashem during Creation as a reward for those who toil over the Oral Torah day and night. (Midrash Tanchuma, Noach #3)

 

Those who “shed a great light” on the Oral Torah are allowed, in return, to benefit from the “great light” of Creation. It is now clear why translating the Torah into Greek caused a darkness to descend upon the world. The darkness was caused by the obstruction of the “great light” of the Oral Torah that resulted from the translation of the Torah into a foreign language. It is this “great light” that shines true once again in our Chanukah candles, in which we celebrate the Hasmonean victory over Greek culture and its destructive effects! (Rav David Cohen in “Bircat Yaavetz,” p. 14