Tractate Berakhot of the Talmud of Eret—-Israel: 0015

1:
The passage of this shiur is a continuation of the previous shiur. The Mishnah referred to 'the end of the first watch' and the Gemara is trying to establish how many night watches there used to be. Two opinions are offered, that of Rabbi, who holds that there were four night watches and that of Rabbi Natan who holds that there were three. Rabbi bases his opinion of a biblical verse "at midnight do I rise to offer thanks to You for Your righteous judgements" [Psalm 119:62]: If King David arose at midnight to offer thanks to God this must indicate that there were four watches, two before midnight and two after midnight, otherwise how could he rise in the exact middle of the night?

2:
The Gemara now embarks upon an aggadic elaboration of King David's nightly meditations and emphasizes that whatever time he started his meditations David was never asleep when dawn broke! This is indicated in another biblical verse [Psalm 57:9]: "Awake, O my glory! Awake, O harp and lyre! I will wake the dawn."

3:
Our passage in this shiur continues to elaborate on this verse. "I will wake the dawn" means that David woke the dawn and the dawn never woke him because as dawn broke he was already at his meditations! Fancifully, the Gemara imagines David wrestling with his conscience. His baser instincts tell him that it's too early to rise, that it is well known that kings sleep late! David would counter such arguments with the conclusion of the verse: I must rise early "because of your righteous judgments": I must study Torah!

4:
The verse under discussion is [Psalm 57:9]: "Awake, O my glory! Awake, O harp and lyre! I will wake the dawn." One interpretation makes the harp and the lyre instruments by which David sets an example to all the other sages: in the middle of the night he would play his harp so that they would be reminded that they must rise to study Torah: if the king is studying Torah at this hour so must we!

5:
In another interpretation the aggadah even provides David with an alarm clock! According to this fanciful rendering of the verse the harp and lyre, hung in David's window, would start playing automatically as a northerly breeze each night strummed their strings! Another verse — completely unrelated — is quoted to 'prove' this aggadah: the prophet Elisha once called for music to help him enter the prophetic mode. The verse [2Kings 3:15] is taken out of context and quite re-interpreted! A careful reading of the words "When the music started" indicates that the music started of its own accord: no player is indicated. (This is not true of the plain meaning of the verse.) Obviously, it was important to the sages to glorify the religious behaviour of Israel's greatest king: if King David, with all his cares of state could be so religious how much more should mere mortals be so!

6:
Having exhausted these verses for their 'uplift' qualities the Gemara now returns to the main issue: was the night divided into three or into four watches? Rabbi Natan had based his opinion on an episode in the book of Judges which referred to 'the middle watch', which suggests three watches. So how would Rabbi, who holds there were four watches in the night, explain the verse quoted by Rabbi Natan? It is obvious that when there are four watches "the end of the second watch and the start of the third watch split the night in half". Rabbi Mana objects that the verse in Judges will not permit such liberties: 'the middle watch' is not the same as 'the middle watches'! Rabbi's view that there were four night watches can, however, be sustained even according to the verse brought by Rabbi Natan if we assume that the first watch doesn't count because people are still up and around at that time. (If there were four night watches the first would have ended at around 9 pm.)

7:
This concludes the discussion of the number of watches into which the night was divided. When it comes to discuss the next clause of the mishnah the discussion in the Gemara returns to halakhic mode.

At the end of 0013 I gave a brief resumé of the discussion in the first clause of the mishnah. Sherry Fyman writes:

It seems like there was a good bit of material included in the Gemara at this point that was somewhat far afield of the concise summary that you provide — including the discussion of the liturgy in shiur #9. Is the Gemara somewhat of a compendium of folklore? In other words, did the Rabbis include material even if it was exactly pertinent or necessary (to the determination of halakah)? Also, when we speak of "the Gemara" who are we talking about?

I respond:

The Gemara is not really about the determination of halakhah, though that certainly is one of its most essential outcomes. I think it would be best for moderns to imagine the Gemara as a record, not always coherent, of the discussions in a club. The sages would gather in the Bet Midrash in order to discuss one or more mishnahs. The discussion would often move off in unexpected directions as the various sages — in various generations! — each contributed to the discussion. So, yes, it is perfectly correct to suggest, as Sherry does, that the rabbis included material "even if it was exactly pertinent or necessary to the determination of halakah". For example, it seems to me that much of the material that we have encountered concerning the night watches comes from derashot (sermons) that various sages taught to their congregations in order to encourage greater piety and observance.

As to Sherry's second question: the Gemara is, as already mentioned, a record of what was said in the study sessions of the Bet Midrash. So, it is not a person but an edited record. In our very first shiur I wrote that in all probability Rabbi Yosé ben-Bon was the final editor of the Yerushalmi.

I hope this helps.

Some unexpected (pleasant) things are complicating my life and taking up much of my time these days. I shall do my best in the coming weeks to send out as many shiurim as possible. Please be patient.