Avodah Zarah 030

17:
Rabbi Yehoshu'a was confronted by two questions asked by Rabbi Yishma'el. The two questions were, in fact, on the same topic: why had the sages made a blanket prohibition against non-Jewish cheeses? When Rabbi Yehoshu'a had responded that the reason was because the non-Jews use sour milk taken from the carcass of another animal as a solidifying catalyst Rabbi Yishma'el had retorted that there was nothing in that to disqualify such cheeses. [See AZ 028, explanation #9.] So Rabbi Yehoshu'a had given a second reason: because the non-Jews create their cheese in the stomachs of a dead animal. Rabbi Yishma'el indicates that this cannot be the reason why the sages forbade such cheeses because if this were the reason they should have prohibited not only the cheeses themselves but also deriving any material benefit from them, as does Rabbi Me'ir in the mishnah.

18:
Rabbi Yehoshu'a does not answer this second rebuttal. Instead, he changes the subject, obviously seeking to distract the attention of his younger colleague from the topic. (The preamble to the mishnah specifically says that this conversation took place casually and informally: they were "strolling along". Had it taken place in the Bet Midrash Rabbi Yehoshu'a would not have been able to brush off the rebuttal.

19:
Rabbi Yehoshu'a asks Rabbi Yishma'el how he reads a certain phrase in the Song of Songs. When we remember that the present text of the Hebrew bible was only settled by the work of the Massoretes quite some time after the end of the Talmudic era, we can understand how some words might be construed differently, depending on what vocalisation we give them. (The Massoretes also instituted the system we now use for indicating how a word is to be pronounced, by introducing as system of signs that can be appended to the consonantal text.)

20:
Rabbi Yehoshu'a asks Rabbi Yishma'el how he reads the Hebrew words of a phrase in the Song of Songs 1:2. The text seems to be a rather erotic dialogue between an man and a woman. The woman says:

The verse now continues (as we read it today):

The operative word is vocalised in Hebrew dodekha – "your [masculine] love-making". Thus in the second half of the verse the woman explains why she said what she said in the first half of the verse.

21:
However, from his response, it seems that Rabbi Yishma'el gave the word a different vocalisation: dodayikh – "your [feminine] love-making". This reading would make the first half of the verse the woman's yearning and the second half of the verse the man's response to that.

22:
Rabbi Yehoshu'a now indicates to Rabbi Yishma'el that his reading of the text cannot be correct. This is because the text now continues in verse 3:

where the Hebrew word for "your ointments" is masculine. Our mishnah does not record whether Rabbi Yishma'el countered this, as he so easily could have done, so there is no point in us continuing the argument for him. Apparently, Rabbi Yehoshu'a had achieved his objective: he had successfully diverted the conversation away from something he did not want to discuss.

23:
We do not know why Rabbi Yehoshu'a did not want to discuss with Rabbi Yishma'el the prohibition of non-Jewish cheeses. One suggestion that has been put forward is that the prohibition was too recent to permit a questioning of its halakhic basis. The prohibition had not been derived from any biblical text: it was simply a new ruling issued by the sages as part of their efforts to separate Jews from non-Jews socially. Since it was a gezerah, a promulgation of the sages, it could easily be refuted by young rabbis such as Rabbi Yishma'el. Rabbi Yehoshu'a did not want to discuss the gezerah, but let the people accept it so that it becomes unquestioned halakhah. If this explanation is correct – and we really don't know if that is the case or not, Rabbi Yishma'el apparently accepts the situation because he discontinues his argument.

In mishnah 3 of this chapter [AZ 026] we saw that Meat before it enters a place of idolatry is permitted, but that which comes out from there is forbidden.

Tamar Dar, with justifiable indignation writes:

I am stupefied! How can one buy meat from an idolater whose mode of slaughtering is not kosher?

This same question was also asked by Derek Fields. He, however, also tries to deal with the question. He writes:

I immediately wondered why the issue of Kashrut of the meat wasn't an issue. Should we assume that the "meat" is in fact a live animal, so it wasn't an issue of buying a slaughtered animal? Was the problem specifically associated with a pagan living in a Jewish community in which he might purchase meat from the local Jewish butcher for the purpose of offering it as a sacrifice (in which case wouldn't selling it to him have been problematic?) Or am I dealing in an anachronism?

I respond:

Bravo to Derek for his first answer, which is obviously the correct one. 'Meat' in the mishnah refers to a live animal, otherwise the mishnah doesn't make sense. A Jew may buy an animal from a non-Jew before it is taken into the pagan temple because the animal has not yet been dedicated for idolatrous purposes; but an animal which comes out from a pagan temple alive may not be bought by a Jew because, as Rabbi Akiva intimates in the mishnah, it has been tainted by association with idolatry. The mishnah is not concerned at all with the issue of kashrut but with the issue of idolatry and the avoidance of any contact, however remote, with it.

Over the next couple of weeks I shall be travelling abroad, so the next shiur in this series will be, God willing, on Thursday December 11th.