| Shabbat
One of the inspiring things we see in the many stories found in the Talmud is the realistic portrayal of our great sages. We see not only much greatness, but also the occasional lapses. Our sages were not averse to displaying their feelings, and were unafraid to both heap praise and scorn upon their colleagues.
“Rav Avia visited Rava's home. His feet were full of mud, [yet] he sat down on a bed before Rava. Rava was annoyed and wanted to bother him” (Shabbat 46a).
The Talmud does not explain this seemingly rude behavior. We are left wondering if Rav Avia was unaware of the dirt on his shoes, absentmindedly did not realize what he was doing, or if he possibly realized full well, but had, shall we say, a different standard of cleanliness. It seem rather obvious that the Gemarah’s silence is not that of acquiescence.
Yet, what qualifies as “bothering someone” amongst our Talmudic sages is likely much different than our own definition of bothering someone.
“Said he [Rava] to him [Rav Avia]: What is the reason that Rabbah and Rav Yoseph both maintain that a naphtha lamp may be handled [on Shabbat]?” Rava’s definition of bothering someone was to ask some obscure question regarding the details of the laws of muktza. What he hoped to accomplish is evident from the comment made by Rav Nachman, “Blessed is the Merciful One; Rava did not embarrass Rav Aviah”; and to the apparent surprise of Rava, he was able to answer the question. And so concludes this Talmudic passage, with the discussion moving on to other aspects of the laws of muktza.
Our Talmudic rabbis were not “saints”. They could be unaware of the upset they were causing others, and they were not always willing to ignore a personal hurt.
We can now appreciate how truly remarkable—and difficult to maintain—was the patience displayed by the great sage Hillel.
“A person should always be modest like Hillel, and not strict like Shammai…whoever can make Hillel angry makes 400 shekels”. Yet, despite numerous attempts by a guy looking for easy money, angering Hillel proved to be impossible.
Not only didn’t Hillel display anger, he had tremendous patience for the most idiotic questions—on a Friday afternoon, no less. Questions such as why the heads of the Babylonians are round, or why Africans have wide feet. Hillel patiently answered this person, even encouraging further questions, despite having to constantly get out of the bath to answer them. When the poor fellow blurted out, “Let there not be many like Hillel…because of you, I lost 400 zuz,” Hillel’s simple retort was, “It is worth it that you should lose 400 zuz and 400 zuz because of Hillel, and Hillel should not get upset” (Shabbat 31a).
Hillel was truly exceptional. It is much easier to follow in the footsteps of Shammai. It is most fitting that it was Hillel who summarized the Torah on one foot: “What is hateful to you, do not do unto others; all the rest is commentary. Now go and learn”.