Showing posts with label Purim. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Purim. Show all posts

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

Masechet Purim

I know that Purim is still a long way away, but I just discovered this fact (in the very interesting book Printing the Talmud: From Bomberg To Schottenstein

Nowadays, a spoof of a current event has to be made within a few hours, or at most a few days, otherwise it loses its bite. However, it wasn't always so.

The first complete set of Talmud Bavli was printed by Daniel Bomberg in Venice and completed in 1543 (it took 23 years to put out the entire set)

It was bound in pigskin (which was the best quality leather for binding) and the first printing was of 1500 copies. It was reprinted several times and was a 'best-seller'.


But only 9 years later the first 'spoof tractate' was printed in 1552, also in Venice. It was entitled "Masechet Purim" and was printed together with Sefer Havakbuk Ha-Navi (a parody of Habakuk Ha-Navi - which translates as "The Book of the Bottle Prophet")

You can download a copy from the amazing HebrewBooks.org - save it for Purim and learn it with your friends and family. Or condemn it for being leitzanus.

It just amazes me that someone invested the time and money to create and print a spoof talmudic tractate - especially when printing was so new and still quite rare.


Saturday, March 10, 2012

Achashverosh and Candaules

I am reading Heroditus' history (I'm trying to understand the context of the Purim story, but it will take quite a long time) and have come across several interesting things. I will try to post things as I find them (if for no other reason than to help me remember them).

Since we have just finished with Purim (and since I am still very near the beginning of Heroditus) I thought this was relevant.

We are all familiar with the Megillah, and the beginning where Achashverosh asks Vashti to appear before the assembled guests. We have all heard that she was to appear naked, and that is the reason that she refused, though in fact that does not appear in the text of the Megillah.

1:10 On the seventh day, when the heart of the king was merry with wine, he commanded Mehuman, Bizzetha, Harbona, Bigtha, and Abagtha, Zethar, and Carcas, the seven chamberlains that ministered in the presence of Ahasuerus the king,
1:11 to bring Vashti the queen before the king with the crown royal, to show the peoples and the princes her beauty; for she was fair to look on.


However the gemara (Megillah 12b) tells us the instruction was for her to appear naked.

This always struck me as strange. Perhaps I am a prude, but I couldn't really understand why someone (especially not a king) would want others to see his wife naked. No matter how drunk he was, this seems like a strange request.

So I found it interesting that there is a similar (though quite different) story in Heroditus (Book 1):.

Now it happened that this Candaules was in love with his own wife; and not only so, but thought her the fairest woman in the whole world. This fancy had strange consequences. There was in his bodyguard a man whom he specially favoured, Gyges, the son of Dascylus. All affairs of greatest moment were entrusted by Candaules to this person, and to him he was wont to extol the surpassing beauty of his wife. So matters went on for a while. At length, one day, Candaules, who was fated to end ill, thus addressed his follower: "I see thou dost not credit what I tell thee of my lady's loveliness; but come now, since men's ears are less credulous than their eyes, contrive some means whereby thou mayst behold her naked." At this the other loudly exclaimed, saying, "What most unwise speech is this, master, which thou hast uttered? Wouldst thou have me behold my mistress when she is naked? Bethink thee that a woman, with her clothes, puts off her bashfulness. Our fathers, in time past, distinguished right and wrong plainly enough, and it is our wisdom to submit to be taught by them. There is an old saying, 'Let each look on his own.' I hold thy wife for the fairest of all womankind. Only, I beseech thee, ask me not to do wickedly."

Gyges thus endeavoured to decline the king's proposal, trembling lest some dreadful evil should befall him through it. But the king replied to him, "Courage, friend; suspect me not of the design to prove thee by this discourse; nor dread thy mistress, lest mischief be. thee at her hands. Be sure I will so manage that she shall not even know that thou hast looked upon her. I will place thee behind the open door of the chamber in which we sleep. When I enter to go to rest she will follow me. There stands a chair close to the entrance, on which she will lay her clothes one by one as she takes them off. Thou wilt be able thus at thy leisure to peruse her person. Then, when she is moving from the chair toward the bed, and her back is turned on thee, be it thy care that she see thee not as thou passest through the doorway."

Gyges, unable to escape, could but declare his readiness. Then Candaules, when bedtime came, led Gyges into his sleeping-chamber, and a moment after the queen followed. She entered, and laid her garments on the chair, and Gyges gazed on her. After a while she moved toward the bed, and her back being then turned, he glided stealthily from the apartment. As he was passing out, however, she saw him, and instantly divining what had happened, she neither screamed as her shame impelled her, nor even appeared to have noticed aught, purposing to take vengeance upon the husband who had so affronted her. For among the Lydians, and indeed among the barbarians generally, it is reckoned a deep disgrace, even to a man, to be seen naked.

No sound or sign of intelligence escaped her at the time. But in the morning, as soon as day broke, she hastened to choose from among her retinue such as she knew to be most faithful to her, and preparing them for what was to ensue, summoned Gyges into her presence. Now it had often happened before that the queen had desired to confer with him, and he was accustomed to come to her at her call. He therefore obeyed the summons, not suspecting that she knew aught of what had occurred. Then she addressed these words to him: "Take thy choice, Gyges, of two courses which are open to thee. Slay Candaules, and thereby become my lord, and obtain the Lydian throne, or die this moment in his room. So wilt thou not again, obeying all behests of thy master, behold what is not lawful for thee. It must needs be that either he perish by whose counsel this thing was done, or thou, who sawest me naked, and so didst break our usages." At these words Gyges stood awhile in mute astonishment; recovering after a time, he earnestly besought the queen that she would not compel him to so hard a choice. But finding he implored in vain, and that necessity was indeed laid on him to kill or to be killed, he made choice of life for himself, and replied by this inquiry: "If it must be so, and thou compellest me against my will to put my lord to death, come, let me hear how thou wilt have me set on him." "Let him be attacked," she answered, "on the spot where I was by him shown naked to you, and let the assault be made when he is asleep."

All was then prepared for the attack, and when night fell, Gyges, seeing that he had no retreat or escape, but must absolutely either slay Candaules, or himself be slain, followed his mistress into the sleeping-room. She placed a dagger in his hand and hid him carefully behind the self-same door. Then Gyges, when the king was fallen asleep, entered privily into the chamber and struck him dead. Thus did the wife and kingdom of Candaules pass into the possession of Gyges, of whom Archilochus the Parian, who lived about the same time, made mention in a poem written in iambic trimeter verse.


The same pride in the most beautiful wife, the similarity that neither wife wanted to be seen naked, and in both cases someone was killed (though the Megillah does not specifically state that Vashti was killed). But the differences between the stories are also clear - Achashverosh wanted to show off his wife in public, Candaules wanted to show only one trusted servant in private; Achashverosh retained his kingdom despite this event, Candaules lost both his kingdom and his life.

Still, I thought it was interesting.

Tuesday, March 06, 2012

Rav Tzadok on Purim

Last week I said I was going to speak this week about the historical context of Purim. I think it is important to understand the context to get the real meaning of Purim. But I failed to keep my promise. It was too difficult for me (and Micha Berger suggested that a shiur should be meaningful, not history - which is a fair point).

So instead I take an idea of Rav Tzadok and develop it. He points out that unlike Shabbat (which is sanctified by G-d) and festivals/Rosh Chodesh (which is sanctified by Yisrael) Purim was chosen (and thus sanctified) by Haman and his lottery.

He discusses the meaning of lottery, and explains that someone who perceives G-d as acting randomly with the world will in return have G-d act with him in that way. (This is similar to someone who does not believe in the resurection of the dead who will therefore miss out on the resurrection of the dead.)

I look forward to your comments.

Here is the audio shiur (and the pdf sheets to download if you want).

Rav Tzadok on Purim

(Right click and then 'download as')

Rav Tzadok on Purim

Your feedback is welcome and appreciated. If anyone is interested in sponsoring a shiur (either l'ilui nishmat someone, or just for no reason) please contact me.

Wednesday, February 03, 2010

I'm giving a shiur on Tuesday

I know that I haven't blogged in a really long time. There are many reasons, but not for now.

But here is an important announcement. I will be giving a shiur this coming Tuesday evening in Nachlaot on the laws of Purim and the Four Parshiyos. It is for women only (sorry boys), but provided you have two X chromosomes you are welcome to come. I look forward to seeing you there.

Here is the poster, with the details. (You can contact me directly if you want more details, or just to say 'hi').

Friday, March 02, 2007

Short vort Parshat Zachor

I gave the short vort this week for Shapell's. It is about Parshat Zachor. The midrash (Pesikta d'Rabbi Yishmael end of Beshalach)says that Amalek's descendents are not accepted as converts. On the other hand the Gemara in Gittin (57b) says that Haman's grandsons taught and learnt Torah in B'nei Brak. The short vort tries to resolve this contradiction. You can access it here:
http://www.torahmedia.com/streamlink.php?fid=23232&bw=low
http://www.torahmedia.com/downloadlink.php?fid=23232&bw=low

Or through the Shapell's web page: http://www.darchenoam.org/articles/audio/au_home.htm

Shabbat Shalom and Wishing you all a very happy Purim

Rabbi Sedley