Avot214

16:
Gematria: This is a term used to designate the process of using the Hebrew alphabet as a numerical indicator. Each letter of the Hebrew alphabet not only denotes a phoneme but also it has a numerical value. (While the term gematria clearly is derived from the Greek for geometry, it does not have that designation in Jewish thought.) The sages often used gematria for the exposition of the bible. The use of gematria for exposition was almost entirely in the aggadic realm; it was almost never used for halakhic exposition – which no doubt indicates that the sages were aware that the system was a delightful intellectual pursuit, but hardly a tool for determining halakhah.

17:
One example will suffice to show the absurdities to which the application of gematria can lead biblical exposition. In a well-known story in Genesis we read how Abraham's nephew was caught up in a war and captured. We then read [Genesis 14:14-15] that

In the Gemara [Nedarim 32a] Rabbi Ami bar-Abba tries to increase the greatness of the miracle. He claims that just two people defeated the enemy! Those two people were Abraham and his servant Eli'ezer. And how do we know that? Because Eli'ezer in gematria equals 318!

18:
The calculation of the solstices and equinoxes must have been a delightful way for the sages to exercise their minds; and playing at gematria too. But, it seems to me, that in our mishnah Rabbi Eli'ezer ben-Ĥisma is chiding those who spend much time at such games. Those intellectual activities are just 'the dessert' in the halakhic feast. The real meat is halakhah, and the sages would be spending their time in a much more positive way when they seek halakhic ways of alleviating the halakhic plight of our womenfolk rather than playing with astronomic and numeric calculations.

This brings to a conclusion our study of Chapter Three of Tractate Avot.

In Avot 211 I quoted the account from the Mishnah how Rabban Shim'on ben-Gamli'el managed to bring down the cost of birds to help the women coming to Jerusalem. This account prompted the following messages:

Ed Frankel writes:

To me, the type of approach generated by Raban Shimon ben Gamliel regarding the costs of sacrifices is indeed the very spirit of Conservative Judaism. It is a fervent attempt to harmonize our current realities with the demands of Torah and halacha, as it has been passed down. Rashbag did not decree anything that was counter to the spirit of the letter of the law nor its spirit. What he did do was find a means to make the practice of observance more practical and affordable. I believe that this is similar to the approaches that our Sages utilized in condemnation of ostentation with funerals, with Hillel's innovation of Prozbut, and with the consensus that there never truly has been a rebellious son. I only wish that similar strides could be made today, particularly in North America, to allow people to live nearer to synagogues without driving, to maintain kosher homes without going broke, and to live fully Jewish lives in general, that are affordable and more easily achieved.

Josh Greenfield writes:

I think it may be unfair to blame unscrupulous businessmen for the high price of pigeons and turtle-doves around the holidays – prices in a free market are determined by supply and demand, and sellers do not always have the ability to set prices independently in a free market. Basic economics tells us that for a given supply of a good, prices rise when demand is higher, as you'd expect during the festival season when many more people than usual are interested in buying birds in Jerusalem. By ruling as he does, Rabban Shim'on ben Gamli'el simply causes the demand to drop precipitously, and for a fixed supply, that means prices have to fall for the market to be restored to equilibrium. This adjustment thus takes place through the natural functioning of a market system, not because unscrupulous businessmen are shamed by Rabban Shim'on ben Gamli'el. Ideally, more bird-sellers than normal would set up shop in Jerusalem before each of the festivals, and the increased supply would have the countervailing effect of lowering prices (although this might still not fully offset the natural increase in price due to increased demand).