Daf Ditty 10:Mnemonics and Memory

Torah was supposed to be known as follows. The Grandfather opened the book at random and punched a word with a pin. You were supposed to recite the text starting with the word pinned on the opposite page of the sheet."

Mikhail Veller1

1 1993 novelette Ginger (Рыжик) about the fate of a Jewish boy who became a member of spetsnaz

1

2

Summary

Rav Huna discusses the case of a Lechi that was an extension (lengthwise) of the wall of a Mavoy. It was visible only to the people outside the Mavoy. If the Lechi extends less than four Amos beyond the wall, it permits carrying in the Mavoy up to the beginning of the Lechi. If it extends more than four Amos, it is not considered a Lechi but rather part of the wall of the Mavoy. Consequently, in effect, no Lechi there permits carrying.

Rav Yosef derived three laws from 's ruling (#1). Those three laws are: One may carry in the Mavoy only up to the beginning of the Lechi; the minimum size of a Mavoy is four Amos; the Lechi permits carrying even when it is visible only to those outside the Mavoy.

3 Levi quotes a Beraisa which describes a simple way to reduce the size of an entranceway, but he does not rule accordingly. The Beraisa states that if an entranceway is twenty Amos wide (far more than ten Amos wide, the maximum width of a valid entranceway), one may insert a stick in the middle of the entranceway in order to divide the entrance into two smaller entrances, each of which is less than ten Amos wide. He notes that we do not rule this way.

Levi explains how one should reduce such an entranceway. One should build a wall that is at least ten Tefachim high and four Amos long, with one end starting in the middle of the entranceway and the rest extending into the Mavoy (parallel to the two side walls of the Mavoy). This creates two separate entrances to two separate Mavoys, and each entrance is less than ten Amos wide.

The discusses a situation in which the area beneath a portable toilet seat is considered an Ohel with regard to the laws of Tum'ah.

People used to have portable seats, with a hole in the middle and leather straps on the sides. If part of a human corpse was under the seat, together with some vessels, do those vessels become Tamei through Tum'as Ohel? This is the subject of the Gemara's discussion.

4

The Gemara answers: This mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, who said that in order to permit carrying in a courtyard that was breached, we require two upright boards, one on either side of the breach. As it was taught in a : If a courtyard was breached and opens into the public domain, and the width of the breach does not exceed ten cubits, it becomes permitted to carry there, even with only one upright board remaining on one side of the breach. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: It is permitted only with two upright boards remaining, one on each side of the breach.

The Gemara rejects this entire explanation: What is this comparison? Granted, if you say that the legal status of a side post that is visible from the outside but appears to be even with the wall from the inside is not considered like that of a side post; and that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei that a side post or an upright board in a courtyard must be at least three handbreadths wide; and that the explanations of the mishna offered earlier by Rabbi and Ravina are not accepted; that is why there is significance to the fact that the small courtyard is ten cubits wide and the large one is eleven cubits wide. It is due to the fact that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei. Since Rabbi Yosei holds that a side post must be three handbreadths wide, we require that the two upright boards together measure six handbreadths, i.e., one cubit, which is the minimal difference in size between the two courtyards.

However, if you say that the legal status of a side post that is visible from the outside but appears to be even with the wall from the inside is considered like that of a side post; and that Rabbi Zeira’s and Ravina’s explanations are accepted as ; and that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi does not hold in accordance with the opinion Rabbi Yosei, why do I need to explain that the large courtyard measures eleven cubits?

5

Whichever way you look at it, there is a difficulty: If the baraita is coming to permit one to carry in the large courtyard, then a width of ten cubits and two handbreadths suffices.

These two handbreadths can be considered the upright boards that render the courtyard fit for one to carry within it.

And if it is coming to teach a novel halakha according to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi and prohibit one to carry in the small courtyard, it should teach us a case where the walls of the two courtyards are much farther removed from each other, rather than a case where they are only one cubit apart.

Therefore, the second explanation cannot be accepted.

6

Rather, can we not conclude from the baraita that a side post that is visible from the outside but appears to be even with the wall from the inside is not considered to have the legal status of a side post? The Gemara concludes: Indeed, conclude from this.

Rav Yosef said: I did not hear this halakha of Rabba bar Rav Huna from my teachers. Rav Yosef had become ill and forgotten his learning, which is why he could not recall the halakha that a side post that is visible from the outside is considered to have the legal status of a side post.

His student said to him: You yourself told us this halakha, and it was with regard to this that you told it to us. As Rami bar Abba said that Rav Huna said: With regard to a side post that extends along the wall of an alleyway and beyond, in which case it appears from the inside to be a continuation of the wall but due to its narrow width it is clearly visible as a side post from the outside, if that side post is less than four cubits long it is considered to have the legal status of a side post. And one may use the alleyway up to the inner edge of the side post. However, if the side post itself extends four cubits, the alleyway has no side post and it is considered to have the legal status of an alleyway, and it is prohibited to utilize the entire alleyway.

7 And you said to us about this: Learn from this statement three halakhot with regard to eiruvin. Learn from it that in the area between the side posts it is prohibited to carry, as Rav Huna rules that one may use the alleyway only up to the inner edge of the side post. And learn from it that the minimal length of an alleyway is four cubits. And learn from it that a side post that is visible from the outside but appears to be even with the wall of the alleyway from the inside is considered to have the legal status of a side post.

The Gemara concludes: The halakha is that a side post that is visible from the outside but appears to be even with the wall from the inside is considered to have the legal status of a side post. The Gemara asks: It is possible that there is a conclusive refutation of this opinion, and it is also the halakha? This opinion was refuted earlier. Can the halakha then be decided in accordance with it?

Steinzaltz (OBM) writes:

The Gemara introduces a case where the Lehi (side post) – the object that is placed at the entrance to a Mavoy (alleyway) as a reminder that carrying can only be done within the walls of the Mavoy and not in the public domain:

According to the Gemara, aside from the cross beam that has been discussed, carrying in a Mavoy (see daf 2) is also permitted if a “Lehi” (side post) is placed vertically against one of the walls at the entrance to the Mavoy. A Lehi is a pole, plank, or other object that is at least ten tefahim high.

Like the cross beam, it serves as a fourth wall and/or as a “heker” (reminder) to indicate the beginning of the public domain so that people will not transfer objects from the Mavoy to the adjacent Reshut ha’Rabim (= public domain).

The Gemara quotes in the name of Rav Huna as saying that in the event that the Lehi is part of the structure of the Mavoy (i.e. it was not placed there specifically for the purpose of being a Lehi), if it protrudes from the wall into the opening of the Mavoy less than four amot (=cubits), it can function as a working Lehi.

If, however, it is longer than four amot, then it will not work, and a different side post is needed to permit carrying in the Mavoy. The reason for this, according to , is that if the Lehi is longer than four amot – and it was not erected to act as a symbolic Lehi – it is merely part of the Mavoy’s wall, but it is not long enough to be considered a wall to close the Mavoy off from the public domain properly.

8

Rav Huna the son of Rav Yehoshua comments that this is only true if the Mavoy’s entrance is eight amot wide or greater; if it is seven amot, then even if the four ama wall cannot act as a Lehi, nevertheless carrying will be permitted because that side post sufficiently seals off the entrance to the alleyway.

Rav Ashi argues that even if the entrance is exactly eight amot, a protruding side post of four amot will permit carrying in the Mavoy for one of a number of reasons: If the wall is longer than the open space, it is permitted because the majority of the entrance is closed up.

If the wall is shorter than the open space, it is permitted because it can be considered a functioning, symbolic Lehi

If they are exactly the same size, then it falls into the category of an uncertainty with regard to rabbinic law – a doubtful circumstance in a rabbinic situation, where we are lenient.

This halacha (see 5a-b) – appears to be an extension of the wall of the Mavoy, so that it is only apparent from the outside that it is a Lehi.

9

In our daf the amora, Rabba bar Rav Huna, argues that it should be considered a valid Lehi, but, basing itself on a baraita that appears to contradict that position, the conclusion of the Gemara seems to be that such a Lehi is not valid.

Rav Yosef, who was a student of Rav Huna, comments that he had never heard the position taken by Rabba bar Rav Huna that such a Lehi should be valid.

(It should be noted that during an illness, Rav Yosef had forgotten much of his learning (see 41a), so his student, Abaye, reminded him that he had, in fact, quoted Rav Huna as ruling that if the inner wall of the Mavoy extended beyond the Mavoy less that four amot (cubits), then it is considered a valid Lehi).

Furthermore, Rav Yosef himself had concluded from that statement that a Lehi is valid if it can be seen from the outside of the Mavoy, even if it cannot be seen from inside the Mavoy.

Following this exchange, the Gemara concludes that such a Lehi is considered valid, contradicting the earlier supposition of the Gemara. To explain the change of ruling, the Gemara says that they prefer to rely on the baraita that was quoted earlier (9b) in the name of Rabbi Hiyya.

The Jerusalem explains that the baraita upon which the first ruling was based could not be found recorded in the authoritative collections of baraitot, and therefore could not be relied

10 upon. The baraitot quoted in the study halls of Rabbi Hiyya and Rabbi Oshiya, on the other hand, were known to be reliable.

Rabbi Elliot Goldberg writes:

On today’s daf, the rabbis are considering whether a side post that extends from an alleyway into the public domain permits one to carry within the alleyway on . The conclusion is that this sort of side post does permit one to carry within the alleyway on Shabbat.

The Gemara reports that upon hearing this ruling, Rav Yosef exclaims: “I did not hear this teaching.”

Who was Rav Yosef and why should it matter if he remembers this teaching or not?

Rav Yosef was a leading scholar of the third generation of Talmudic rabbis in Babylonia and was known for his ability to remember rabbinic teachings from the time of the . He was an active participant in the deliberations in the academy in for decades, earning the respect of both peers and students. According to rabbinic tradition, Rav Yosef eventually became ill and forgot all that he had learned during his career.

Why would the Gemara feel the need to report a memory lapse of a revered sage? Perhaps, so that it could also share how his students responded.

Abaye, a student of Rav Yosef and a leading sage in his own right, informs his teacher that not only did he know this law, but it was he who had taught it in the first place:

Abaye said to him: You yourself told us this halacha, and it was with regard to this that you told it to us. As Rami bar Abba said that Rav Huna said: With regard to a side post that extends along the wall of an alleyway and beyond, in which case it appears from the inside to be a continuation of the wall but due to its narrow width it is clearly visible as a side post from the outside, if that side post is less than four cubits long it is considered to have the legal status of a side post. And one may use the alleyway up to the inner edge of the side post. However, if the side post itself extends four cubits, the alleyway has no side post and it is considered to have the legal status of an alleyway, and it is prohibited to utilize the entire alleyway.

Abaye goes on to remind Rav Yosef of the three laws that he had taught should be derived from this teaching:

Learn from it that in the area between the side posts it is prohibited to carry, as Rav Huna rules that one may use the alleyway only up to the inner edge of the side post. And learn from it that the minimal length of an alleyway is four cubits. And learn from it that a side post that is visible from the outside but appears to be even with the wall of the alleyway from the inside is considered to have the legal status of a side post.

When Rav Yosef has a moment of confusion, his students do not ignore him. Instead, they take the time to bring him into the conversation, to remind him exactly what the law is and give him credit

11 for his contributions to the rabbinic endeavor. And ultimately, they choose to preserve this moment by including it in the Talmud.

And yet Jewish tradition is clear-eyed and compassionate about the very real toll that aging exacts. While the path of renewal may remain open always, Jewish tradition likewise wrestles and reckons with the reality that our bodies and minds are frail and that, in the end, they will fail us.

Benjamin Resnick writes:2 Consider the case of the broken tablets: At the climax of one of the Torah’s most dramatic and fraught narratives —the story of the Israelites worshipping the golden calf — Moses shatters the first copy of the Ten Commandments in anger. Shortly thereafter God instructs Moses to re-create the tablets. In recounting this episode, the ancient rabbis suggest that both the intact tablets and the broken tablets were ultimately stored in the Ark of the Covenant, effectively equally sacred objects. In a striking passage from the Babylonian Talmud, Rav Yosef likens the broken tablets to a Torah scholar who forgets what he has learned in sickness or old age. Just as the broken tablets were kept in a place of great honor, so too must we treat the rabbi as a great sage (see below).

In a touching narrative turn, we later discover that Rav Yosef himself suffers from dementia as an old man and that whenever he would encounter a halachic idea he would say, “I’ve never heard of such a thing before.” BT Nedarim, 41a His prize student, Abaye, would then gently remind him, “Master, it was you who taught it to us in the first place.”

בר י ו ףס [Rav Yosef [b. Chiyya

A contemporary of Rabbah, Rav Yosef became the head of the academy in Pumpedita after Rabbah's death.

He was a student of Judah bar Ezekiel and was Abaye's teacher, and a scholarly disputant (bar plugata) of Rabbah. When his teacher Judah died, Yosef was expected to take Judah's place as head of the Pumbedita , due to his excellent knowledge of rabbinic law (as opposed to Rabbah, who excelled in analysis rather than knowledge). Yosef, however, refused to take the position. Rabbah took it instead, at the age of 18, and held it until his death at the age of 40. At this point Yosef agreed to become head of the yeshiva. He held this position for two years, until his own death.

Yosef was accustomed to recite a sermon on Shabbat before the Mussaf prayer.(Berachot 28).

Despite being blind, (Kiddushin 31). Yosef managed to accumulate an exceptional knowledge of both written and . When some of the canonical Biblical translations were forgotten, he managed to restore them from his memory. (Erchei veAmoraim, Rav Yosef).

2 https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/the-possibilities-and-the-rigors-of-old-age/

12 However, at one point he contracted a disease which caused him to forget his studies. With the help of his main student, Abaye, he was then able to reconstruct his knowledge (see below Nedarim 41).

He was greatly respected by his students and Abaye. ( 53a; Kiddushin 33a)

He is recorded as speaking, paradoxically, of his own humility: "[A tanna recited:] Since Rabbi died, there is no more humility or fear of sin [in the world]. Rav Yosef said to him: Do not teach this regarding humility, for there is still me." (Sotah 26a)

He was known for his humility and for his mastery of the corpus of Jewish law. While wealthy, Rav Yosef had health issues which brought him blindness and the loss of memory.

The Gemara relates: Rav Yosef himself fell ill and his studies were forgotten. Abaye restored his studies by reviewing what he had learned from Rav Yosef before him. This is the background for that which we say everywhere throughout the Talmud, that Rav Yosef said: I did not learn this halakha, and Abaye said to him in response: You said this to us and it was from this baraita that you said it to us.

Nedarim 41

Commenting on the verse Deut 10:2, the gemoro in Menachos 99a expounds a touching comparison between memory loss and brokenness:

§ Having mentioned the principle that one does not downgrade in matters of sanctity, the Gemara cites a related issue. The verse states: At that time the LORD said unto me: 'Hew 1 א תֵﬠָבּ אוִהַה ָא רַמ הָוהְי ,יַלֵא לָסְפּ - ְל יֵנְשׁ - חוּל תֹ ֲ א ָ ב ִ נ םי םי ִ נ ָ ב ֲ א תֹ חוּל ,thee two tables of stone like unto the first נֹשׁאִרָכּ ,םיִ הֵלֲﬠַו ,יַלֵא ;הָרָהָה ָתיִשָׂﬠְו ,ְלּ ןוֹרֲא .ץֵﬠ ןוֹרֲא ,ְלּ ָתיִשָׂﬠְו ;הָרָהָה ,יַלֵא הֵלֲﬠַו ,םיִ נֹשׁאִרָכּ

13 and come up unto Me into the mount; and make thee an ark of wood.

And I will write on the tables the words 2 ב ,בֹתְּכֶאְו לַﬠ - ,תֹחֻלַּה תֶא - ,םיִרָבְדַּה רֶשֲׁא וּיָה לַﬠ - תֹחֻלַּה תֹחֻלַּה that were on the first tables which thou didst נֹשׁאִרָה םיִ רֶשֲׁא ָתְּרַבִּשׁ ; מַשְׂ ו ,םָתְּ אָבּ .ןוֹרָאבּ,ְָמשׂ break, and thou shalt put them in the ark.' Deut 10:1-2

“At that time the Lord said to me: Hew for yourself two tablets of stone like the first…And I will write on the tablets the words that were on the first tablets, which you broke, and you shall put them in the Ark”

Rav Yosef teaches a baraita: This verse teaches that both the tablets of the Covenant and the pieces of the broken tablets are placed in the Ark. One should learn from here that with regard to a Torah scholar who has forgotten his Torah knowledge due to circumstances beyond his control, e.g., illness, one may not behave toward him in a degrading manner.

Although the first tablets were broken it is prohibited to treat them with disrespect, due to their sanctity. A Torah scholar who forgot the Torah knowledge he once possessed is likened to these broken tablets.

I think Rav Yosef has the proverbs verse in mind connecting the tablets with the heart:

Bind them upon thy fingers, write them upon the table 3 ג םֵרְשָׁק לַﬠ - ;יֶתֹעְבְּצֶא ,םֵבְתָכּ לַﬠ - חוּל ַ וּ .of thy heart .ֶבִּל Prov 7:3

Similar sentiments were made in Eruvin 54a

Rabbi Eliezer said: Why is it written:

And He gave unto Moses, when He had made an end of 18 חי יַּו ִ ןֵתּ ֶאל- ,הֶשֹׁמ ְכּ וֹתַכ רֵבַּדְל וֹתִּא וֹתִּא רֵבַּדְל וֹתַכ speaking with him upon mount Sinai, the two tables of the רַהְבּ ,יַניִס ,יֵנְשׁ תֹחֻל תֻדֵﬠָה -- תֹחֻל תֹחֻל .testimony, tables of stone, written with the finger of God ,ןֶבֶא םיִבֻתְכּ עַבְּצֶאְבּ .םיִהֱא עַבְּצֶאְבּ םיִבֻתְכּ ,ןֶבֶא

14 Ex 31:18

“Tablets [luḥot] of stone” If a person makes her cheeks [leḥayav] like a stone that does not wear away, her Torah study will endure. But if not, her study will not endure.

Rabbi Eliezer also said: What is the meaning of that which is written:

And the tables were the work of God, and the 16 זט תֹחֻלַּהְו -- הֵשֲׂﬠַמ ,םיִהֱא ;הָמֵּה ,בָתְּכִמַּהְו ,בָתְּכִמַּהְו ;הָמֵּה ,םיִהֱא הֵשֲׂﬠַמ writing was the writing of God, graven upon the בַתְּכִמ םיִהֱא אוּה -- ,תוּרָח לַﬠ - .תֹחֻלַּה tables.

Ex 32:16

“engraved upon the tablets” This teaches that had the first tablets not been broken, the Torah would never have been forgotten from the .

Eruvin 54a:18-19

Rav Yosef

AFTER RABAH BAR NACHMANI’S death Rav Joseph bar Chiya had to accept the position of head of the academy in Pumbeditha. For a long time they had been considered the two greatest scholars, and, as we have said, Rabah was called the “uprooter of mountains” meaning that he could tear up hills and grind them into dust by the power of his reasoning and Rav Joseph bar Chiya was called “Sinai” because all the laws of the Torah were as systematically arranged in his head as if he had heard them directly from the mouth of God on Mount Sinai.

(A similar epithet was used in Volozhyn yeshiva for the Netziv vs Reb Chaim Brisker!)

When the scholars wanted to appoint him head of the academy in Pumbeditha before they chose Rabah bar Nachmani, he went to consult an astrologer.

This Rav Joseph bar Chiya, who is always called simply Rav Joseph without a patronymic, was born about 270 C. E. and died 333 C. E. He was a sick man, always ailing, and very irritable. He would say, “There are three kinds of people whose life is not worth living; merciful people, angry חספּ י ם ג״יק ׳ב . (”.people and sensitive people, and I have inherited all these qualities

It is related that later he grew even sicker and even became blind. He was not pained by the fact that he had to live in the darkness, but because he was exempt from all those commandments which require vision.

15 Then Rav Joseph again suffered from a very severe illness, through which he lost his memory and all his learning. It then happened several times that some of Rav Joseph’s own laws came up in study and he said that he had never heard of them, and had to be reminded that they were his ןיבורע י ׳ ׳א , םירדנ א״מ ׳א . (.own

Then he would say that just as the whole and the broken tablets of the Mosaic law lay side by side in the Holy Ark, so we must infer that when a scholar has forgotten his learning he must not be וחנמ ת ט״צ ׳א . (.humiliated

Concerning his blindness it is not known whether this occurred before his last sickness and whether he remained blind until the end.

Unlike Rabah bar Nachmani, Rav Joseph bar Chiya was a wealthy man, who owned gold and silver, fields and vineyards of such excellent quality that his wine could be diluted with twice as תוחנמ ז״פ ׳א . (.much water as could be mixed with ordinary wine

It sounds somewhat strange therefore when he says that “poverty suits a Jew like a red גח י הג ׳ט ב ׳ . (”.accoutrement suits a white horse

On his sixtieth birthday, when he invited other scholars to a feast he said, in a similar whimsical דעומ ןטק ח״כ ׳א . (”.vein: “No matter how I misbehave I can no longer die young

Rav Joseph was different from his colleague Rabah in all his ways, in his private conduct as well as in his manner of studying. Though he was modest, he said “a teacher who has no regard for his דק ישו ן ב״ל ב ׳ . (”.dignity, has no dignity

The difference between the scholarship of Rabah and that of Rav Joseph was many-sided. Rabah would usually depend upon his own reason and never hesitated if his opinion was that in the minority, and when he brought proof of his contentions they ordinarily were of a very complex תבש ג״כ ׳ב , יבורע ן ט״י ׳ב , אבב ארתב א״ל ׳א , (.sort and at first sight subject to objections of various sorts בע ו הד ז הר א״מ א ׳ .

Rav Joseph’s sayings were based, on the other hand, upon simple declarations and did not require complex reasoning, because he always kept the Mishnah and the Boraitha in mind, and avoided תבש ח״י ׳א , יבורע ן ט״כ ׳ב , תובותכ א״פ ׳ב , תוחנמ ה״ע ׳ב . (refinements and interpretations.10

Since it was known that Rav Joseph was acquainted with metaphysics and cosmology, he was often asked to teach these subjects to his students. He would never agree to do so, however, and when they pressed him hard he evaded them with a quotation, interpreting the verse “honey and milk under your tongue” to mean that when some subject is as good as honey and milk it should גח י הג י ג״ ׳א . (.be kept under the tongue and not expressed

Rav Joseph bar Chiya also paid much attention to the Aramaic translation of the Bible and especially to the “Haftaroth”. Since the masses understood very little Hebrew, the biblical portions that had to be read on Sabbath and holidays were to be read in the Babylonian tongue. Rav Joseph tried to prepare a correct translation of these readings in the Chaldean

16 language, following the Greek translation of Aquilas (or Onkelos the convert) and this became the basis of our “Targum Onkelos.”

He was very fond of using folk-proverbs in his scholarly statements, as for instance: “A master or “even חספּ י ם ח״כ א ׳ . (”,who makes a spoon may still burn his tongue with it when it is full of broth דעומ ןטק ז״י ׳א . (”.if you utter curses upon a dog’s tail, he will continue to do the same thing

Since Rav Joseph was very rich he fed his students at his own table, stating their number as about תכ ו ב ו ת ״ק ו א ׳ . .four hundred

It is said that he was very modest and was aware of it himself and when people said that since the death of Rabbi Judah Hanasi modesty had died out among the Jews, he said: “Do not say that, for הטוס ט״מ (”.I am here

Along with Rabah bar Abahu, Rav Joseph held that just as Jews should not leave Palestine to come to , so Babylonians should not leave their homes to go to another country, even not so far as from Pumbeditha to Be-Kobi, which was the nearest city. When someone left Pumbeditha for Be-Kobi, Rav Joseph excommunicated him. Another person left Pumbeditha for Asthonia, which תכ ו ב ו ת ק י א״ א ׳ . .is located in southern Mesopotamia, and he died at once

Bava Metzia 85a

When he was nearing his end, Rav Joseph wanted assurance that the Torah would remain in his family and he fasted forty days until he saw in a dream the verse:

And as for Me, this is My covenant with them, saith the 21 אכ ,יִנֲאַו תאֹז יִתיִרְבּ םָתוֹא רַמָא הָוהְי - LORD; My spirit that is upon thee, and My words which I -ר חוּ ִ י שֲׁ א רֶ ָ ﬠ ֶ ל ,י דוּ בְ רָ ַ י שֲׁ א רֶ - יִתְּמַשׂ יִתְּמַשׂ have put in thy mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor יִפְבּ : ֹל א - וּשׁוּמָי יִפִּמ ִפִּמוּ י רַז ֲﬠְ ֲﬠְ רַז י out of the mouth of thy seed, nor out of the mouth of thy מוּ פִּ ִ י ֶ ז עַ ר ַ ז ﬠְ ר ֲ , רַמָא ,הָוהְ י תַּﬠֵמ ,הָ ,הָ תַּﬠֵמ ,הָוהְ י רַמָא , seed's seed, saith the LORD, from henceforth and for ever דַﬠְו - לוֹע ָ .ם }ס{ Isa 59:21 “my words which I have placed in thy mouth will not pass from out of thy mouth”.

Not being satisfied with this he fasted forty more days until he was shown the verse “they shall not pass from thy mouth and from the mouth of thy seed.” When he fasted another hundred days he was shown the verse “they shall not pass from thy mouth and from the mouth of thy seed and from the mouth of the seed of thy seed.”

With this he was satisfied, for knowing that his grandchildren would be scholars also, he believed אבב צמ י אע ה״פ א ׳ . .that the Torah would remain in his family

17

I was interested in how scholars used memory differently in the ancient world compared with recent times.

Shas Pollak While the innateness of mnemonists' skills is debated, the methods that mnemonists use to memorize are well-documented. Many mnemonists have been studied in psychology labs over the last century, and most have been found to use mnemonic devices.3 Currently, all memory champions at the World Memory Championships have said that they use mnemonic strategies, such as the method of loci, to perform their memory feats.

Skilled memory theory was proposed by K. Anders Ericsson and Bill Chase to explain the effectiveness of mnemonic devices in memory expertise. Generally, short-term memory has a capacity of seven items;[1] however, in order to memorize long strings of unrelated information,

3 Miller, G. A. (1956). "The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information". Psychological Review. 63 (2): 343–355

18 this constraint must be overcome. Skilled memory theory involves three steps: meaningful encoding, retrieval structure, and speed-up.4

Shas Pollak were Jewish mnemonists who, according to the 1917 report of George Stratton 5in the Psychological Review, memorized the exact layout of words in more than 5,000 pages of the 12 books of the standard edition of the Babylonian Talmud. Stratton's report consists of accounts of and comments on testimonials of three eyewitnesses. Two of the eyewitnesses stated that the memorizing was related to the Talmud part, printed in the centers of the pages, and not the surrounding commentary.

"Shas" is a Hebrew acronym for the words shishah sedarim, "six orders", or Mishnah; "shas" is also a colloquial reference to the Talmud. "Pollak" means "Pole" in Yiddish, referring to a Polish Jew, so the term literally means "The Talmud-Pole" or the "Polish Talmudist."

G.M. Stratton quotes a letter from a Reverend Dr. David Phillipson of Cincinnati who described the so-called "pin test":

...A pin would be placed on a word, let us say, the fourth word in line eight; the memory sharp would then be asked what word is in the same spot on page thirty-eight or fifty or any other page; the pin would be pressed through the volume until it reached page thirty eight or page fifty or any other page designated; the memory sharp would then mention the word and it was found invariably correct. He had visualized in his brain the whole Talmud; in other words, the pages of the Talmud were photographed on his brain. It was one of the most stupendous feats of memory I have ever witnessed and there was no fake about it.

4 Chase, W. G., and Ericsson, K. A. (1982). G. H. Bower (ed.). Skill and working memory. Psychology of Learning and Motivation. 16. pp. 1–58.

5 George M. Stratton: The mnemonic feat of the 'Shass Pollak', Psychological Review 24 (1917) 244-247, reprinted in Memory Observed: Remembering in Natural Contexts, eds. Ulric. Neisser, Ira Hyman, 1978

19

Simanim as aids to memory6 Certain sentences, words, or letters used to assist the memory. Such aids are employed in the Mishnah, in both , and in the Masorah, as well as by the and by the teachers of the Law during the Middle Ages. Talmudic mnemonics will be discussed, together with those employed by the later teachers of the Law.. The mnemonics employed in the Talmud may be divided into the following two groups: Formed of Sentences.

• (1) Mnemonics which are formed from a Scriptural passage, a mishnah, a halakic sentence, or a proverb or maxim taken from life or from nature. These simanim, which are introduced by the word "we-simanak" (= "and let thy sign be"), stand invariably after the halakic sentences for which

6 Crawford Howell Toy, Jacob Zallel Lauterbach: http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/10897-mnemonics

20 they serve as signs; and it is usually stated who invented and used them. Many originated with the Babylonian amora R. Naḥman b. Isaac, who employed them with special frequency. • • They occur very often in 'Abodah Zarah, Ḥullin, and Shabbat, as well as in Bekorot, 'Erubin, Yebamot, Ta'anit, and the remaining treatises. • • Mnemonics are used to prevent confusion where for any reason it might easily occur. Thus:

Thou hast hemmed me in behind and before, and laid Thy 5 •ה רוֹחָא םֶדֶקָו ;יִנָתְּרַצ תֶשָׁתַּו יַלָﬠ • .hand upon me .הָכֶפַּכּ

§ Ps 139:5 • • ("Thou hast set me behind and before") is employed as a mnemonic for 'Ab. Zarah 8a, to show that in the enumeration of heathen feasts the Mishnah "goes from the end toward the beginning," and that the feasts which were celebrated later are mentioned first; it might be supposed that the Mishnah had followed the order of the seasons in which the several festivals occurred. • • In like manner, when there is a difference between two things which are apparently alike, a sign is employed to avoid possible confusion (see several examples in Ḥul. 62b-63a). These simanim are used especially to keep the authors of divergent teachings distinct. Thus, for example, in Ḥul. 46a, where it is said that R. Ḥiyya used to throw away the liver, while R. Simon, the son of R. Judah ha-Nasi, used to eat it, the saying "ashirim meḳammeẓin" (= "the rich are economical") is employed, inasmuch as the rich R. Simon b. R. Judah was frugal and did not wish to throw away the liver. • To Distinguish Authorship.

If two or more scholars bear the same name, a sign is used to show which one of them is meant. Thus in Pes. 114a, where it is said that the R. Isaac who in halakic sentences is called "Shema'ata" is R. Isaac b. Aḥa, the phrase:

Then David the king stood up upon his feet, and said: 'Hear 2 ב םָקָיַּו דיִוָדּ ,ֶלֶמַּה לַﬠ - ,ויָלְגַר ,רֶמאֹיַּו ,רֶמאֹיַּו ,ויָלְגַר me, my brethren, and my people; as for me, it was in my heart יִנוּעָמְשׁ יַחַא :יִמַּﬠְו נֲא יִ םִﬠ - יִבָבְל יִבָבְל to build a house of rest for the ark of the covenant of the תוֹנְבִל תיֵבּ הָחוּנְמ ןוֹרֲאַל תיִרְבּ - ,הָוהְי ,הָוהְי LORD, and for the footstool of our God; and I had made םֹדֲהַלְו יֵלְגַר ,וּניֵהֱא ,יִתוֹניִכֲהַו .תוֹנְבִל ,יִתוֹניִכֲהַו ,וּניֵהֱא יֵלְגַר םֹדֲהַלְו ready for the building. I Chron 28:2 "shema'uni aḥai" is used as a sign, i.e., the son of Aḥa is one of the Shema'ata to whom halakic sentences belong. Single Words.

• (2) A wholly different kind of sign, found in the mnemonic sentences which are composed of single words each of which is a catchword for a halakic sentence, a teaching, or an opinion; or of the names of the authors and together with words made up of single letters either of the authors'

21 names or of the catchwords characteristic of the sentences, or again of both. There are only a few examples of these sentences which have any meaning, most of them making no sense. With one exception (Zeb. 7b), they all stand before the sentences which they are to impress on the memory, and are never introduced by "wesimanak," but by "siman," which word stands sometimes before and sometimes after the mnemonic term. • Means of Preserving Halakot.

These mnemonics, which are nearly all anonymous, designate the order of succession of the sentences which are to follow, or of the transmitters of the sentence about to be given, or even how many times and in what passages the name of the same transmitter occurs in the treatise under discussion. A few examples may be given. In Ḥul. 4a the sayings of R. Manasseh which occur in the treatise are comprised in a single sentence which itself contains a regulation concerning circumcision. In Ḥul. 11a different of various periods give different reasons for one fundamental law. Out of single letters taken from the names of these authors is formed the mnemonic sentence "zeman shebaḥ mekannesh," denoting that time collects that which is good; i.e., in this case time has not caused the excellent sayings of the amoraim of different times to be forgotten. Occasionally these mnemonics show that something is missing in the Talmud (comp. Tos., Men. 20a, s.v. "Sheken"). With the exception of 'Arakin, Beẓah. Ḥagigah, Me'ilah, Rosh ha-Shanah, , Tamid, and Temurah, such simanim are found in all the treatises of the Babylonian Talmud. It is probable, however, that in the treatises just cited there were likewise simanim which were afterward lost, especially since many mnemonics are missing in the present editions of the Talmud which were to be found in earlier copies .7These mnemonics were used by students as early as the period in which the Halakah was still handed down only orally. The prohibition against committing halakot to writing did not apply to these simanim; and they thus furnished aids to the memory. Most of the mnemonics, however, appear to have originated after the Talmud had been collected and arranged, but was not yet reduced to writing. Many of them presuppose the order of succession of the sentences, and contain the entire Talmud in stenographic signs. When the Talmud was written down these mnemonic notes were used as a basis for the work. After its completion the signs were retained, since they were of great assistance to many pupils who still had to memorize the Talmud, owing to the lack of written copies. They were inserted in the text likewise because they were very useful as superscriptions and indexes, since a passage in the Talmud could be more precisely referred to by means of them . Similarly the Geonim and employed such sentences to formulate their legal decisions Mnemonics were also invented to indicate the order of succession of the treatises, or of the chapters of individual tractates, as well as of the weekly readings from the Pentateuch (see R. Bezaleel Ashkenazi at the end of the "Shiṭṭah Meḳubbeẓet" on Men., and Judah of Modena in "Leb ha- Aryeh," ii. 2). Such is the sign "zeman naḳaṭ," employed by Maimonides in his introduction to the Mishnah to indicate the sequence of the six mishnaic orders, and which means "time has preserved," i.e., "has preserved the literary products of ancient times." Furthermore, each letter of

7 comp. N. Brüll, l.c. ii. 62 et seq.

22 these two words indicates the name of an order of the Mishnah and the place of such order among its fellows; thus, "zayin" = "Zera'im"; "mem" = "Mo'ed"; "nun" = "Nashim"; etc

Amnesia

Les Lancaster 8 has discussed amnesia as part of his project on the talmud using modern psychological theories.

I hope to show that, at least in part, that seductive quality arises through the way in which study of the Talmud uniquely flexes the muscles of the mind. I will argue that the traditional Jewish view that holds Talmud study to be a rigorous training of the mind is true in a deeper sense than generally understood. In view of the way in which the structure of the Talmud mirrors the structure of the mind, including what we tend to label as ‘conscious’ and ‘unconscious’ elements, Talmud study bears comparison with contemporary views of ‘psychotherapy’.

In turning to consciousness and memory he adds:

Scientific psychology has witnessed something of a revolution over the past decade in the relation to the status and nature of unconscious processes. It is primarily this revolution which informs my paper. Clearly, to do justice to this revolution in psychological science would require more time

of Mind July 1993 Conference: British Association of Jewish Studies

23 than is available. It is perhaps an inevitable consequence of the attempt to mount an inter- disciplinary presentation of this kind that one has to compromise on key areas of background. My intention is to present a model of mind which I have developed in relation to a considerable body of work in cognitive, and neuropsychology, and to illustrate how this model parallels the structure of the Talmud.

It is notoriously difficult to define consciousness, not least because different authors frequently have used the term with differing emphases. Thomas Natsoulas, for example, has identified eleven distinct issues in need of clarification in connection with the term.9 I certainly do not want to enter this particular academic debate here. However, it is necessary for me to clarify certain implications of the blindsight, and allied, studies in relation to the way in which I shall use the term consciousness. I have argued elsewhere that the key issue is one of access. In particular, consciousness depends on the cognitive, or neuronal, model of the immediate sense of self - or ‘I’ - being able to gain access to other models generated by perceptual or thought processes. The notion that the cognitive system operates by building and manipulating models of the world is one that has become universally accepted and fully integrated within contemporary psychology. Indeed, recent neurophysiological studies have yielded data which indicate how diverse neurones may resonate harmoniously in relation to given stimulus parameters.10 These data may be interpreted as suggesting the logic whereby neuronal assemblies model environmental features

A second major area of neuropsychological interest to which I shall refer in order to cover sufficient background, is that of amnesia. We have discovered that in at least a large proportion of amnesiac cases, the patient’s problem lies not so much in the consolidation and/or storage of memories per se but in their ability to consciously access the memories.

As is the case with blindsight this is a topic which rests on a substantial body of research. I will convey the critical ideas by reference to just one study.11 Amnesiac patients were presented with lists of words and subsequently tested for their memory of the words. As expected, the patients were impaired relative to normal controls on tests of free recall, recognition, and cued recall. However, a test of word completion revealed normal - performance. The cued recall and word completion tests both employed word ‘stems’ comprising the first three letters of words initially presented. The difference between the two tests lay only in the instructions to subjects. In the cued recall tests, subjects were instructed ;to use the stems to help them remember the words (“Try to think of a word from the [lists] with the same beginning letters”), whereas the word completion test - avoided any reference to the memory aspect of the study, asking subjects simply to write “the first word that comes to mind” in order to complete the stem.

It is evident from this study - and the hundreds of similar ones - that memory is operating at an implicit level in these patients. It is only when explicit memory functions are called for that

9 Basic problems of consciousness, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41 (1981), 132-178.

10 Engel, A.K., König, P., Kreiter, A.K., Schillen, T.B. & Singer, W., Temporal coding in the visual cortex: New vistas on integration in the nervous system. Trends in Neuroscience, 15 (1992), 218-226.

11 Graf, P., Squire, L.R. and Mandler, G., The information that amnesic patients do not forget, Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 10 (1984)

24 impairments become apparent. Considerable debate within the world of neuropsychology is currently attempting to explain these observations. I have suggests that the debate should focus on the relation of memory to self, rather than on other mechanics such as the nature of diverse memory stores. It should be clear from even a cursory consideration of memory that the mechanics of storage is only one of several key issues. As Baroness Warnock has argued, “to count as a memory a cognitive experience, or thought, must contain the conviction that I myself was the person involved in the remembered scene. The image, if there is one, must be labelled not only ‘this belongs to the past’ but also ‘it belongs to my past.”

As well as conveying the essence of the model, these summary statements are effectively a digest of the insights which have arisen over recent years through the scientific study of consciousness.

1. The mind/brain operates by creating and manipulating models.

2. The driving force of perception and thought concerns the attempt to generate matches between models.

3. The model matching process gives rise to reality orientation, and is rooted in our interactions with the physical world. The stored memory models are updated as they are continually re- activated through their relation to current sensory and motor activity.

4. Memory is the cornerstone of perception. As soon as a neuronal model is constructed (for example, in the sensory process), it will automatically influence ongoing, pre-conscious memory activity. Rather than think - as most do - in terms of memory as a function awaiting our need (like a filing cabinet or similarly passive storage medium), it is more accurate to think of memory as the vital central activity of the mind. This pure memory process constantly generates diversification through the associative mechanisms.

5. The intuitive sense of ‘I’ as a unified and continuous agent is illusory. The unified ‘I’ is a moment-to-moment construction functioning to provide a core interpretation of mental events. It masks what is in reality a multiplicity of ‘I’

Like Michael Kramer and Steinzaltz before him (and unlike David Weiss Halivni) the Talmud is a metaphor of mind in that it operates through analogous procedures and stages to those that have been delineated in this model of the mind. I should emphasise at this juncture that the model depicted in figure 1 was developed strictly in relation to psychological data. It represents what I believe to be the most parsimonious approach to explaining the various research findings.

25 Neurobiology of Memory and Mnemonism:12

Neural Evidence of Superior Memory: How to Capture Brain Activities of Encoding Processes Underlying Superior Memory

Relatively little attention has been paid to the neural basis of superior memory despite its potential in providing important insight into efforts to improve memory in the general population or to offset age-related cognitive decline. The current study reports a rare opportunity to reproduce and isolate specific neural activities directly associated with exceptional memory. To capture the brain processes responsible for superior memory, we returned to a laboratory task and analytic approach used to explore the nature of exceptional memory, namely, digit-span task combined with verbal protocol analysis. One participant with average memory received approximately 50 h of digit-span training and the participant’s digit-span increased from normative (8 digits) to exceptional (30 digits). Event-related potentials were recorded while the participant’s digit span increased from 19

12 Jong-Sung Yoon,,* Jeremy Harper, Walter R. Boot, Yanfei Gong and Edward M. Bernat: Front Hum Neurosci. 2019; 13: 310.

26 to 30 digits. Protocol analysis allowed us to identify direct behavioral indices of idiosyncratic encoding processes underlying the superior memory performance. EEG indices directly corresponding to the behavioral indices of encoding processes were identified. The results suggest that the early attention-related encoding processes were reflected in theta and delta whereas the later attention-independent encoding processes were reflected in time-domain slow-wave. This fine-grained approach offers new insights into studying neural mechanism mediating superior memory and the cognitive effort necessary to develop it.

Methods:

In this study, one participant with baseline average memory abilities participated in approximately 50 h of training designed to increase digit-span by applying the mnemonic system developed by the trained participants in Chase and Ericsson (1981, 1982). The basic design of each training session and differences in essential memory processes by blocks are summarized in Figure 1. Each session consisted of two blocks of fixed-presentation rate digit-span task (Fixed- paced test) and a block of self-paced digit-span task (Self-paced test). Employing a self-paced test, where the participant is allowed to regulate the presentation rate of digit sequences, was one of the essential methodological techniques in this study. This is because it would allow us to replicate and capture a direct behavioral evidence of encoding process underlying participant’s idiosyncratic mnemonic skills (i.e., the variation of study times) based on information revealed by a protocol analysis of verbal reports (e.g., Hu et al., 2009; Hu and Ericsson, 2012). Then, we combined the behavioral evidence of encoding process with ERPs in order to assess neural processes associated with superior memory performance (i.e., exceptional digit-span). It was expected that the participant would mostly encode digits into meaningful groups to be stored in LTM during fixed-pace and self-paced tests, with a rote rehearsal strategy for digits presented late in each trial sequence. The encoding processes (for LTM storage) were anticipated to be larger (so it would be easier to capture) in the self-pace test compared to the fixed-pace test because of the additional time available for meaningful digit groups.

27

(A) Averaged stimulus-locked (time = 0) ERP across the first and last lower-level group digits. Dashed lines denote the time window for the slow-wave component (398–648 ms). The spatial map depicts the grand averaged topographic distribution of the slow-wave. The schematic topographic layout of the NeuroScan 128-channel non-standard layout Quik-Cap highlights the clusters of channels used for plotting and statistical analyses (Blue: slow-wave; Red: delta; Green and Red: theta). (B) Averaged time-frequency representation of the ERP across the first and last digits. The black dashed boxes denote the regions of interest for theta (3–8 Hz; 125–156 ms) and low-frequency delta (≤ 1 Hz; 94–406 ms). The spatial maps depict the grand averaged topographic distribution of theta and delta power.

In the current study, we investigated brain processes directly associated with the behavioral evidence of an individual’s unique encoding process underlying superior memory. This novel study demonstrated how ERP measures related to memory encoding can be combined with ideographic behavioral indices of memory processes derived from the participant’s verbal reports of their thought process during encoding.

28 The current study provides an opportunity to go beyond those earlier studies. We first reproduced superior memory performance on digit-span task under a controlled laboratory situation, which allowed us to identify direct behavioral indices of encoding process underlying superior memory performance. Then we successfully found ERP indices corresponding to the behavior indices. We believe that the current paper is the first laboratory study that illustrated how ERPs can successfully be combined with behavioral indices revealed by protocol analysis of one’s verbal reports on thought processes. This fine-grained approach would permit new insights into capturing and studying neural mechanism mediating superior memory. Given the participant’s baseline lack of superior basic memory capacity and the constant state of challenge during the digit-span tasks, we particularly believe that neural mechanisms found in the current study are associated with the participant’s effort to develop superior memory at the limits of current performance rather than exceptional intellectual ability or structural brain differences. The current findings thus also shed light on the study of brain activities occurring while individuals attempts to develop expertise at the limits of their performance

29

Let me end with Rav Yosef’s words that pierced my heart like a knife: (Kiddushin 31b)

When Rav Yosef heard his mother’s footsteps, he would say: I will stand before the arriving Divine Presence.

Esther Ungar (Sargon) OBM

30