Daf Ditty Eruvin 43: R.

Gamliel’s Shfoferes

1
Rav Ḥananya raised a dilemma: Does the prohibition of Shabbat limits apply above ten
handbreadths from the ground, or perhaps does the prohibition of Shabbat limits not apply above

2
ten handbreadths? In other words, does the Shabbat limit apply only close to the ground, in which
case walking more than ten handbreadths above the ground, would be permitted?

The Gemara clarifies the case in which this dilemma arises: With regard to a post ten handbreadths
high and four handbreadths wide, partly within the limit and partly outside of it, this case should
not be a dilemma for you. Such a stable post is like solid ground, although it differs from the
surrounding area in height; therefore, it is prohibited to walk from the part within the limit to the
part outside of it.

3
Come and hear a resolution from the mishna: On one occasion on a Shabbat eve, they did not
enter the port until after nightfall, etc. Granted, if you say that the prohibition of Shabbat limits
applies above ten handbreadths, it was well that they asked whether or not they may disembark.
However, if you say that the prohibition of Shabbat limits does not apply above ten handbreadths,
even if Rabban Gamliel had told them: We were not within the city’s limit before nightfall, what
difference would it have made? They could have alighted from the boat, for the boat was above
ten handbreadths, where the prohibition of Shabbat limits does not apply.

The Gemara attempts to bring a different proof: Come and hear that which was taught in a baraita:
With regard to one who said: I will be a nazirite on the day that the son of David comes, i.e.,
upon the arrival of the Messiah, he is permitted to drink wine on Shabbat and Festivals, for the
Messiah will not arrive on one of those days.

4
It was taught in the mishna: On one occasion, they did not enter the port until after nightfall on
Shabbat eve, and they asked Rabban Gamliel whether they were permitted to alight from the boat.
He told them that they were permitted to alight, for he had been watching, and he knew that they
had entered within the city’s limit before nightfall, and therefore they may walk throughout the
city.

In order to clarify this issue, the Gemara cites that which was taught in a baraita: Rabban Gamliel
had a special tube through which he would look and see a distance of two thousand cubits on
land, and also determine a corresponding distance of two thousand cubits at sea.

In general, one who wishes to know the depth of a valley can bring such a tube and look
through it, and he will know the depth of the valley.

The Gemara cites another statement with regard to measurements: One who wishes to know the
height of a palm tree, but does not want to actually climb the tree to measure it, can measure his
own height, and the length of his own shadow, and the length of the shadow of the height of
the palm tree, and calculate the proportions, and he will know the height of the palm tree.

5
Techum above 10 Tefachim
Rav Chananya asks whether the prohibition of leaving the techum applies above 10 tefachim. If a
pillar is 10 tefachim high but 4 tefachim wide, techum does apply, as it is considered a high part
of the landscape, since it is wide enough to easily walk on. The cases in question are when the
pillar is not 4 tefachim wide, or when one used Hashem’s name to fly above 10 tefachim. Some
say the case is a ship which is above 10 tefachim from the ground.

Rav Hoshaya tries to resolve this from Tannaim in the Mishna who didn’t want to walk beyond 4
amos on the boat. Even though the boat was presumably above 10 tefachim, they still applied the
rules of techum. The Gemora deflects this with Rava’s answer (later) that the case is where the
boat was in a shallow area, within 10 tefachim of the ground.

The Gemora tries to prove that techum apply above 10 tefachim from the Mishna which says that
one time they arrived on a boat after Shabbos began. Since they only disembarked because Rabban
Gamliel said that he knew they were within the techum when Shabbos began, this implies that
techum applies in the boat, above 10 tefachim. Rava deflects this by saying that the case was when
the boat was in a shallow area, within 10 tefachim of the ground.

Measuring Distance

The Mishna told the story of when the Tannaim’s boat docked after Shabbos began, and Rabban
Gamliel assured them that he saw they were inside the techum when Shabbos began.

The Gemora cites a braisa which describes Rabban Gamliel’s tube, which was set to allow one to
see a distance of 2000 amos on dry land or from the sea.

The braisa explains that if one wants to measure how deep a valley is, he should first measure on
straight land how far he can see with the tube, and then see how far from the valley he can go and
still see the low area. He can then subtract his distance from the valley from the distance he saw
on dry land, and the remainder is the depth of the valley.

The braisa gives more examples of indirect measurements:

If one wants to measure the height of a palm tree, he should measure his own height, the length of
the palm tree’s shadow, and the length of his own shadow. He can then apply the proportion of his
height and his shadow to the shadow of the tree to calculate the height of the tree.

6
The Gemara discusses one who travels by boat and on Shabbos travels beyond the techum. If the
boat anchors in a port, it is permitted for the travelers to walk anywhere on the boat.

This ruling does not follow R’ Yehoshua’s position who maintains that one may only walk within
his four amos which is the halacha that applies to one who walks outside of his techum. Teshuvas
Maharam Alshaker1 cites three opinions regarding the permissibility to disembark from a boat on
Shabbos.

The first opinion maintains that it is prohibited to disembark unless the boat was already in the
port before Shabbos. This position is based on the position that one can establish residence even
higher than ten tefachim off the ground.

Consequently, when Shabbos began, he established his residence on the spot where he was and if
the boat travels more than 2000 amos from that place he has left his techum and becomes confined
to the place where he is, i.e. the boat.

The second opinion contends that when on a boat one does not acquire any residence and thus
when the boat arrives in the port travelers may disembark the boat on Shabbos.

The third opinion writes that if during bein ha’Shemashos the boat was within ten tefachim of the
ground the travelers established residence in that place, and they are given 2000 amos from that
place.

Orach Chayim 404

Shulchan Aruch rules that one who was traveling by boat and reached a port on Shabbos but from
the time that Shabbos began until the boat reached the port the boat was more than ten tefachim
off the ground he may disembark and is given 2000 amos from the place where he first reached
within ten tefachim of the ground.

7
Maharam Alshaker adds that one may be lenient to disembark in accordance with the lenient
position only if that is the local custom. However, if the local custom is that travelers do not
disembark on Shabbos one may not disembark in violation of the local custom.

Steinzaltz (OBM) writes:2

Measuring Distances at Sea

The Mishna (41b) tells of Rabban Gamliel and his comrades whose boat entered the port on Friday
evening after it had already become night. Rabban Gamliel was asked whether they were allowed
to disembark from the boat, or, perhaps they were restricted by the rules of techum (=limits
of) Shabbat to remain on the boat until Shabbat was over, since they were not within the
boundaries of the city when Shabbat began. Rabban Gamliel responded that ordinarily one could
not leave the ship, but that in this case he checked and saw that they had entered the 2,000-
ama boundary of the city prior to the onset of Shabbat.

In order to clarify this issue, our daf cites that which was taught in a baraita: Rabban Gamliel
had a special tube through which he would look and see a distance of two thousand cubits on
land, and also determine a corresponding distance of two thousand cubits at sea.

Maimonides and the Geonim identify this tube (“Shfoferes”) as an engineering instrument similar
to a protractor, which was also used for measuring in astronomy. This sextant – called, in the days
of the Mishna, an astrolabe – allowed accurate measurements to be taken by examining the angle
between two things, or between the instrument itself and a fixed spot. Even today, similar
instruments based on these principles are used for purposes of surveying and mapping.

The Jerusalem Talmud asks why Rabban Gamliel was at all concerned with disembarking from
the boat, since his opinion, as recorded in the Mishna in the case of someone who was transferred
to a different city and put in jail, permits free access to one who enters a new techum area
on Shabbat? They answer that this must have been a situation where the port was not surrounded
by walls, where even Rabban Gamliel would have restricted the travelers to four cubits.

The Ritva and Rashba explain that our Gemara is not concerned with this question. Apparently we
are to understand that while Rabban Gamliel was not concerned about getting off the boat himself,
he recognized that his fellow travelers – Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Akiva – would not disembark
due to their position on this matter. Keeping track of the distance to land was something that
Rabban Gamliel did to accommodate those whose opinion on this halakha differed from his own.

INSIGHTS TO THE DAF 3

2
https://steinsaltz.org/daf/eiruvin43/
3
http://dafnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Eiruvin_43.pdf

8
Traveling on Boats

The Gemora asks whether techum applies above 10 tefachim.

The Gemora doesn’t resolve the question, suggesting that the braisa which implies that Eliyahu
will not arrive on Shabbos is itself unsure about it.

The Rosh (3) rules strictly, while the Rif and Rashba rule leniently.

The Bais Yosef (404) suggests that the Rosh rules strictly since the braisa is strict about this
doubt.

The Rambam (Shabbos 27:3) states that there is a doubt about this, but does not explicitly rule
either way.

The Bais Yosef cites a responsum of the Rambam in which he explains that since it is a doubt,
we rule strictly in any case which is from the Torah, while we rule leniently in any Rabbinic
case.

The Shulchan Aruch rules like the Rambam, and therefore states that in the context of the sea or
rivers, where techum is definitely only Rabbinic (as these are unlike the camp of the Jews in the
desert), one can be lenient, while traveling on land more than 12 mil is a case where we would be
strict, as this may be from the Torah.

Therefore, if one was on a boat on Shabbos, which was more than 10 tefachim above the sea
floor, he only acquires his habitat whenever the boat enters 10 tefachim off the floor.

When the boat docks, he may disembark and go 2000 amos from where the boat entered 10
tefachim.

The Rama adds that even if he is unsure if it entered 10 tefachim while it was traveling, he can
be lenient. If the boat has gone more than 2000 amos from where it entered 10 tefachim, he must
remain on the boat, as he has effectively left his techum.

However, if he had to exit the boat to within the city (e.g., to avoid rain, or to relieve himself), he
may then walk anywhere in the city The Rishonim discuss the parameters for entering a boat on
or before Shabbos.

The braisa (Shabbos 19a) states that one may not embark on a ship within 3 days of Shabbos.

Rabbeinu Chananel and Rabbeinu Tam say that this restriction is due to the ship leaving the
techum, which would only apply to bodies of water less than 10 tefachim deep.

The Rif and Rosh say that the restriction is due to oneg Shabbos, since people get seasick during
the first three days.

9
The Behag says that if one dwelled in the boat before Shabbos, making it his habitat, this
removes the issue of techum, and he may embark on his journey on Shabbos.
Tosfos (43a halacha) cites the R”i, who disputes this, as going on a boat on Shabbos is prohibited
just like swimming is, lest one build a structure.

Tosfos also cites the Rashbam, who allows one to embark, as long as he entered the boat before
Shabbos and remained there.

The Shulchan Aruch (248:1-2) rules like the Rif, and the Rama even permits one to enter a boat
which will be below 10 tefachim, as long as he entered before Wednesday.

The Shulchan Aruch therefore rules that if one isn’t going in salty seawater, which induces
seasickness, then he may even leave on Erev Shabbos, as long as we don’t know that it will go in
an area less than 10 tefachim deep.

The Shulchan Aruch (3) rules like the Rashbam, allowing one to embark on a boat if he entered
before Shabbos and remained there, while the Rama cites the Behag, and states that we need not
protest those who rely on him.

Objects resembling lenses date back 4000 years although it is unknown if they were used for their
optical properties or just as decoration. Greek accounts of the optical properties of water filled
spheres (5th century BC) followed by many centuries of writings on optics,
including Ptolemy (2nd century) in his Optics, who wrote about the properties of light
including reflection, refraction, and color, followed by Ibn Sahl (10th century) and Ibn Al-
Haytham (11th century).
Actual use of lenses dates back to the widespread manufacture and use of eyeglasses in Northern
Italy beginning in the late 13th century.
The invention of the use of concave lenses to correct near-sightedness is ascribed to Nicholas of
Cusa in 1451.

10
The history of the telescope can be traced to before the invention of the earliest known telescope,
which appeared in 1608 in the Netherlands, when a patent was submitted by Hans Lippershey,
an eyeglass maker.
Although Lippershey did not receive his patent, news of the invention soon spread across Europe.
The design of these early refracting telescopes consisted of a convex objective lens and a
concave eyepiece. Galileo improved on this design the following year and applied it to astronomy.
In 1611, Johannes Kepler described how a far more useful telescope could be made with a convex
objective lens and a convex eyepiece lens. By 1655, astronomers such as Christiaan Huygens were
building powerful but unwieldy Keplerian telescopes with compound eyepieces.
Isaac Newton is credited with building the first reflector in 1668 with a design that incorporated a
small flat diagonal mirror to reflect the light to an eyepiece mounted on the side of the
telescope. Laurent Cassegrain in 1672 described the design of a reflector with a small convex
secondary mirror to reflect light through a central hole in the main mirror.
The achromatic lens, which greatly reduced color aberrations in objective lenses and allowed for
shorter and more functional telescopes, first appeared in a 1733 telescope made by Chester Moore
Hall, who did not publicize it. John Dollond learned of Hall's invention and began producing
telescopes using it in commercial quantities, starting in 1758.

11
This tractate we are currently studying deals with the prohibition of traveling more than 2,000
amot (about 3,600 feet or just over a kilometer) in any direction on Shabbat unless an eruv, a legal
boundary, had been built.

Now what happens if you are on a ship that docks on Friday night, after Shabbat has begun?

May you disembark? If the ship was within 2,000 amot of the port then you may leave, but if it
was a greater distance than this you must remain on the boat until the end of Shabbat.4

The Mishnah relates an incident when this question arose. Rabban Gamliel came to the rescue, and
announced that he had determined that the ship was indeed within 2,000 amot of the port prior to
the beginning of Shabbat.

‫ א‬,‫ערובין מא‬

‫פעם אחת לא נכנסו לנמל עד שחשיכה אמרו לו לרבן גמליאל מה אנו לירד? אמר להם מותרים אתם שכבר הייתי‬
‫מסתכל והיינו בתוך התחום עד שלא חשיכה‬

Once a ship did not enter the port until after nightfall on Shabbat eve. The passengers asked
Rabban Gamliel, “what is the halakha with regard to alighting from the boat at this time? [In
other words, were we already within the city’s limit before Shabbat commenced?]

4
http://www.talmudology.com/

12
He said to them: You are permitted to alight, as I was watching, and I observed that we
were already within the city’s limit before nightfall. [The port is therefore within the area on
which we may walk on Shabbat.]

But how exactly did Rabban Gamliel know this? The Mishnah is silent on the issue, but the Talmud
fills in some details.

‫ב‬,‫ערובין מג‬

‫תנא שפופרת היתה לו לרבן גמליאל שהיה מביט וצופה בה אלפים אמה ביבשה וכנגדה אלפים בים‬

Rabban Gamliel had a special tube through which he would look and see a distance of two
thousand cubits on land, and also determine a corresponding distance of two thousand cubits at
sea.

SIDEBAR - WHICH RABBAN GAMLIEL WAS IT?

There are several people in the Talmud who used the title of Rabban Gamliel. Given the context
of the Mishnah, the one we are talking about here is Rabban Gamliel of Yavneh, also known as
Rabban Gamliel the Second, the one who led the Sanhedrin immediately after the destruction of
Jerusalem in 70 C.E.

And this is not the only time Rabban Gamliel was on a ship with Rabbi Yehoshua, Rabbi Akiva
and others.

In the tractate Horayot (10a) we read that Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Yehoshua were sailing
together when the latter demonstrated his navigational skills which involved a comet known today
as Halley’s Comet.

Rabban Gamliel seemed to know nothing of this comet, and yet here he is described as owning an
instrument that allowed the precise measurement of distances. Perhaps Rabban Gamliel’s interests
were only terrestrial.

“Rabban Gamliel’s tube is “one of the most puzzling scientific passages in the Talmud.”

RABBAN GAMLIEL’S MEASURING DEVICE - ACCORDING TO

RASHI

What then, was the nature of this special tube? According to the medieval exegete Rashi, who
lived over one thousand years after Rabban Gamliel, the tube worked like this:

‫שפופרת‬. ‫קנה חלול וכשהוא ארוך אין צופין בו למרחוק וכשהוא קצר צופין בו יותר והיתה שפופרת של רבן גמליאל‬
‫מתוקנת למדת צפיית אלפים או בים או ביבשה‬

13
A tube: It was a hollow tube that when it is long you cannot see far though it and when it is short
you can see farther. The tube of Rabban Gamliel was calibrated to measure 2,000 amot whether
on land or sea.

That sounds rather like a simple telescope in which the focal length may be changed. However,
telescopes which use lenses to focus were invented (at least in Europe) only around 1608.

We do not know the name of the inventor, though in October of that year a Dutchman by the name
of Hans Lipperhey had submitted a patent for a telescope.

Did Rabban Gamliel really use a telescope over 1,500 years prior to this patent?

The Koren English Talmud suggests in a note that the tube was “a kind of precise protractor,
similar to those used for astronomical measurements, i.e a type of sextant, the early form of which
is known as an astrolabe.” The ArtScroll Schottenstein Talmud notes that Rabban Gamliel’s tube
“operated without lenses, which were not invented until some fourteen centuries later.” It is
challenging to figure out what exactly this tube was.

14
THE PROBLEM WITH RASHI

The mathematician and President of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem Selig Brodetsky (1888-
1954) wrote a lengthy essay titled Astronomy in the Babylonian Talmud, which was published in
English in 1979. Brodetsky calls the description of Rabban Gamliel’s tube “one of the most
puzzling scientific passage in the Talmud.” And he describes Rashi’s interpretation as “even more
puzzling.”

Rashi’s explanation can point to nothing else than a telescope. Are we then, to conclude that the
Rabbis invented such an instrument fifteen centuries before European scientists became aware of
its construction and capabilities? Or shall we baldly assert that someone has tampered with Rashi,
and substituted an explanation in terms of instruments known to modern science? The second
alternative is even more difficult to accept than the first, for no other reading of the Rashi is known.

THE NIMRUD LENS

The Nimrud Lens on display at The British Museum in London. It is 38 mm (1.5 in) in diameter
and 23 mm (0.9 in) thick. And it is 3,000 years old.

15
Brodetsky wondered how Rabban Gamliel could have used a telescope with lenses so long before
it was “invented” in Europe. What he didn’t mention was that there is some controversial evidence
that lenses were used millennia ago. The Nimrud Lens, discovered in Iraq in 1850, is a piece of
crystal about 3,000 years old that appears to have been used to focus the rays of the sun, and
perhaps even as a magnifying glass. Its function is, however, a matter of academic dispute. Some
have suggested that it was part of an ancient telescope. A curator at the The British Museum, where
the lens is displayed, disagreed disagreed:

When it was found by Layard this oval piece of ground quartz or rock crystal was immediately
identified as a lens, and it has come to be known as the 'Nimrud lens'. It could certainly have been
used as a crude magnifying glass, with a focal length of 12 centimetres from the plane surface.
Over the years it has been examined by a number of opticians, many of whom believe that it was
deliberately manufactured as a lens. However, although this piece of rock crystal has been
carefully ground and polished, and undoubtedly has optical properties, these are probably
accidental. There is no evidence that the Assyrians used lenses, either for magnification or for
making fire, and it is much more likely that this is a piece of inlay, perhaps for furniture. This is
supported by Layard's statement that this object 'was buried beneath a heap of fragments of

16
beautiful blue opaque glass, apparently the enamel of some object in ivory or wood, which had
perished

Whether or not the glass was merely decorative or was used to magnify will never be known. But
it raises at least the possibility that people were using lenses long before the time of Galileo.

BENJAMIN OF TUDELA AND THE MIRROR OF ALEXANDRIA

Benjamin of Tudela (1130-1173) was a traveller who visited Africa and Asia, and wrote about his
adventures in his Sefer Hamasaot (The Book of Travels). In the port city of Alexandria he described
a tower or lighthouse, on the top of which

…there is a glass mirror. Any ships that attempted to attack or molest the city, coming from Greece
or from the Western lands, could be seen by means of this mirror of glass at a distance of twenty
days' journey, and the inhabitants could thereupon put themselves on their guard.

This is certainly not a telescope, but just what this mirror did (and how it did it) is not clear. Other
texts mention this famous mirror, and many of them build on the description given by Benjamin.
Now let’s jump forward by four-hundred years.

AZARIAH FIGO ON THE MESSAGE OF THE TELESCOPE

Azariah Figo (1579-1647) was a rabbi who served in both Pisa and Venice during the era of the
Italian ghetto. A year after his death his sermons were published in a work titled Binah Le’ittim,
and since then they have been reprinted some fifty times. In a sermon delivered on Rosh Hashanah
that happened to fall on Shabbat (like it does this year) he reminded his congregation about the
wondrous ability of human creativity.

Azariah Figo. Binah Le’ittim. Benai Berak. Mishor 1994. p54. (In the original but less legible 1648
edition it appears on page 24b.)

17
The human being was given intelligence by the Source of all Wisdom and was given great
strength…until He filled his heart on numerous occasions with the capacity to make artificial
inventions which replicate that which is found in nature. Because of his weakness of matter or the
deficiency in its preparation…man tries to correct and replace it by some discovery or invention
drawn from his intelligence to the point where he will overcome what he naturally lacked.

We have seen people with poor sight, who because of a deficiency cannot see with their eyes things
that are far away or even that which is close. But human intelligence was able to invent reading
glasses that are placed on the bridge of the nose in front of the eyes. This improves their vision
either a little or a lot, depending on the circumstances.

This was the case for the hollow tube of Rabban Gamliel, cited in the fourth chapter of Eruvin
(43b), who said “I have already seen through it and I can verify that we are inside the boundary
for Shabbat.

18
Figo was not giving a lesson in the history of science. Rather he was relating a spiritual parable,
appropriate for Rosh Hashanah, the very day on which the sermon was delivered. Figo explained
that just as we are able to make up for our physical deficiencies with eyeglasses and Rabban
Gamliel’s tube, so too are we able to make up for our spiritual deficiencies with objects such as
the shofar (the ram’s horn blown on Rosh Hashanah,) or the tzitizt, (fringes placed on the corners
of a garment). Here is how the historian David Ruderman summarized the sermon:

Figo…was teaching his Jewish message by appealing directly to the immediate cultural context of
his listeners. He was not teaching contemporary science to his coreligionists; he rather assumed
that this knowledge was a commonplace in their experience with the world around them. As any
wise preacher would do, Figo appropriated that experience to make his point about the religious
message of the Jewish holiday.

And so the telescope became a scientific instrument that taught a religious lesson on Rosh
Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, which we will celebrate again in two days.

LEON OF MODENA ON THE TELESCOPE

Leon of Modena (1571-1648) was a contemporary of Azariah Figo and like him also served as a
rabbi in Venice. Modena wrote at least a dozen books, including a commentary on the Ein Yaakov,
which he called Haboneh (The Builder). In that commentary, Modena claimed that “there is
nothing new under the sun” and that the telescopes of his day had been preceded by Rabban
Gamliel’s tube.

“There is nothing new under the sun (Ecclesiastes 1:9).” The telescope which contains a few
pieces of glass and which can be found today allows one to look many miles into the distance on
land and at sea. It is wondrous to behold. And it had already been invented and used by Rabban
Gamliel using his wide knowledge, which was greater than all his contemporaries…

Leon, like his contemporary, was also using the telescope to make a spiritual point. Modern
inventions were predated by the Jewish sages, whose scientific knowledge eclipsed that of future
generation (‫)וגם חקרו רבן גמליאל בחכמתו הרהבח אשר גדל על כל באלה בתכונה‬.

ABRAHAM YAGEL ON THE TELESCOPE

Abraham ben Hananiah Yagel was born in Italy in 1553. Although he was more interested in
medicine than astronomy, he wrote several works that contain discussions of various astronomical
phenomena. In his unpublished work Be’er Sheva he addresses both Galileo’s discoveries and the
invention of the telescope (Ms. Oxford-Bodi. 1306: Be'er Sheva, Chap. 15, fols. 48a-53b). Here is
what Yagel wrote about the new astronomy revealed by Galileo.

Our words were sincere, that in every generation things will be revealed to humanity which never
were imagined by the ancients ... for behold you have seen among the fruits of the earth and the
animals of the forest what we wrote in previous chapters of our composition, and also now in this
chapter you shall truly see that my witness that is in heaven and my work that is on high will
appear regarding the words of a wise Gentile man who in our day found several stars from the

19
nebula which the ancients never saw and he placed their signs and their markings in a book and
also spoke of the appearances seen on the moon and not in puzzles but the true opinion and what
are the analogous figures to the human face [seen] from above ....

Yagel found two precursors in Jewish history that suggested the telescope’s invention long
preceded Galileo. The first was Rabban Gamliel’s tube mentioned on today’s page of Talmud. The
second is described again, by historian David Ruderman.

…he discovered in the tenth century commentary of the Sefer Yetsirah of the Italian Jewish doctor,
Shabbetai Donnolo. In the introduction to this work, Donnolo describes his teacher in astronomy,
an Arab named Bagdash. whose teaching agreed with that of the ancients and the Jews, especially
the Baraita de-Samuel, and who taught him how to use an instrument which Yagel considered to
be the same as Galileo's spyglass. "And thus this secret of the instrument in which the paths of
heaven are seen was covered up, for our forefathers never imagined it and now it has been
revealed, for there is nothing new under the sun."

Once again, the message is that the rabbis of the Talmud had previously invented the telescope,
long before it began to be used in Europe.

DELMEDIGO LOOKS THROUGH GALILEO’S TELESCOPE

In the annals of Jews and telescopes one of the most remarkable stories is the relationship between
Joseph Delmedio of Candia and his teacher Galileo.

20
Joseph Solomon Delmedigo was born in Candia on the Island of Crete in 1591, where his family
was the island’s most prominent Jewish family. They were wealthy and intellectually gifted, and
both Joseph’s father and grandfather served as rabbis. Joseph received a traditional Jewish
education that was based on the study of Talmud as well as a general secular education, and he
fondly remembered his early years: “ . . . From my youth the study of Talmud was like a father to
me; all of my ancestors studied in yeshivot and later spread Torah learning and raised many
disciples.”

He was sent to Padua to study medicine, and when he graduated, he traveled to Lublin, Vilna, and
Livona, where he spent much of his time working as a physician. He ultimately settled in
Amsterdam where he published his Sefer Elim.

In this long book book Delmedigo outlined the reasons he accepted the Copernican model of the
universe, and in so doing he became the first Jewish Copernican. In addition to explaining all of
the theoretical support for the heliocentric model, he cited experimental evidence. If the planets
revolved about the Sun and were illuminated by it, the amount of light that they reflect would
depend on their location and distance from the Earth. And this is precisely what Delmedigo and
his famous teacher had observed through the telescope.
“Galileo my Teacher” from Delmedigo, Sefer Elim, Amsterdam 1629. 148.

My teacher Galileo observed Mars when it lay close to the Earth. At this time its light was much
brighter than that of Jupiter, even though Mars is much smaller. Indeed, it appeared too bright to
view through the telescope. I requested to look through the telescope, and Mars appeared to me
to be elongated rather than round. (This is a result of its clarity and the movement of its rays of
light.) In contrast, I found Jupiter to be round and Saturn to be egg-shaped.

This glorious passage reminds us that religiously observant Jews were sometimes at the very
cutting edge of the new astronomy. How many could claim to have been instructed by the great
Galileo himself? And one other thing: unlike his contemporaries, Delmedigo described the
telescope as an object of science, rather than as a means of teaching a spiritual lesson.
Chofetz Chaim Shem Olam. Warsaw 1895. Vol 1 p. 59.

21
CHOFETZ CHAIM ON THE INVENTION OF THE TELESCOPE

Much closer to our own times, Yisrael Meir (HaKohen) Kagan (1838 –1933) also used the
telescope to make a spiritual point. Known popularly as the Chofetz Chaim, he was a giant of the
last century. He authored the Mishnah Berurah, a widely used compendium of Jewish law, as well
as several books of ethics (mussar). It was in one of those works of mussar called Shem Olam that
he made a connection between the invention of the telescope and the decline of religious
observance. Its invention was a way to remind us of God’s providence in the world. Just as we can
use the telescope to see high into the heavens, so too can God look down on us.

To understand properly the significance of the telescope, it is important to know that in the
previous generation faith in providence was very strong. Everybody had perfect faith that even
though God dwells above, nevertheless He supervises from His lofty abode all the inhabitants of
the Earth… In that generation it was not necessary to have such things as telescopes.

22
However now, because of our many sins, we find many people who deny Providence and claim
that God does not see or pay attention to what occurs in the world since He is so far away in
Heaven. To counteract this false claim, God shows us clearly - by giving the inspiration to build
the telescope - that even lowly man has the ability to see at the great distances from the Earth to
the Heaven. So, we realize that surely God has the ability to see from above to below concerning
all matters… It follows from our discussion that all the scientific knowledge and technological
advances that have occurred in our time - is not an indication that we are greater and more
knowledgeable than previous generations. In fact, it is only to validate for us the idea of
Providence.

23
It is not clear to which generation the Chofetz Chaim was see referring. Was it that of Galileo, in
whose era the telescope was perfected, or his own? And was Jewish observance in either of these
times so much weaker than any other? In any event it is inconceivable that he was referring to the
Talmudic times of Rabban Gamliel, which means that the Chofetz Chaim was of the opinion that
Rabban Gamliel’s tube could not have been the telescope as we know it.

AND A TELESCOPE NAMED AFTER A JEWISH FEMALE

ASTRONOMER

Let’s end with a Jewish astronomer who just had an entire observatory named in her honor - Vera
Rubin (1928-2016). She was born to Jewish immigrants in Philadelphia, educated at Vassar,
Cornell and Georgetown, and moved to the Carnegie Institution in Washington in the 1960s. She
studied the rotation of galaxies, and discovered that something other than their matter must be
holding them together. As her obituary in The New York Times noted, “her work helped usher in a
Copernican-scale change in cosmic consciousness, namely the realization that what astronomers

24
always saw and thought was the universe is just the visible tip of a lumbering iceberg of mystery.”
Being a woman in a man’s field had tremendous challenges, and called for ingenuity:

…she still had to battle for access to a 200-inch telescope on Palomar Mountain in California
jointly owned by Carnegie and Caltech. When she did get there, she found that there was no
women’s restroom. …Dr. Rubin taped an outline of a woman’s skirt to the image of a man on a
restroom door, making it a ladies’ room.

Vera Rubin was elected to the National Academy of Sciences, and last year the Large Synoptic
Survey Telescope was renamed the National Science Foundation Vera C. Rubin Observatory in
recognition of her contributions to the study of dark matter and her outspoken advocacy for the
equal treatment and representation of women in science. Dr Rubin now holds the distinction of
being the Jew with the largest telescope named for her.

To sum, telescopes have served a number of different purposes for both rabbis and lay Jews.

• For Rabban Gamliel it was used as a measuring device, (though it likely wasn't a telescope
at all).
• For Benjamin of Tudela is was a wondrous device to see for a distance of twenty days’
journey (though it was not a telescope as we know them today, but some kind of mirror).
• For Azariah Figo it was a device that taught a religious lesson: just as physical weaknesses
may be overcome with human ingenuity, so too might spiritual weaknesses be overcome.
• For Leon of Modena it was a proof of the greatness of Rabban Gamliel, who had used the
device centuries before it was used in Europe.
• For Avraham Yagel, it was a similar message: the rabbis of the Talmud had previously
invented the telescope, long before it began to be used in Europe.
• For Joseph Delmedigo it was a scientific device that demonstrated the truth of the
Copernican model.
• For the Chofetz Chaim its invention reminded us of God’s providence in the world. Just as
we can use the telescope to see high into the heavens, so too can God look down on us.
• And for Vera Rubin, it was used as an object of honor for an extraordinary career.

Regardless of whether it was a telescope (unlikely) or a protractor of some kind (more likely,
but still not certain), the question we will address today is how Rabban Gamliel used the
instrument to determine his distance from the shore.

25
THE JERUSALEM TALMUD COMES TO THE RESCUE

There is nothing in the Babylonian Talmud that would suggest an answer. But the Jerusalem
Talmud goes into a little more detail, and in so doing it provides us with an explanation:

‫ ב‬,‫תלמוד ירושלמי עירובין כח‬

‫מצודות היו לו לרבן גמליאל שהיה משער בה עיניו במישר‬

Rabban Gamliel knew of the heights of some towers (along the coast) which he estimated with his
eyes…

You can only use the trigonometry of a right-angled triangle if you know the length of one of the
sides of the triangle, and one of its angles.

The Yerushalmi provides the key. Rabban Gamliel knew the height of the towers that he was
observing (AB in the diagram below). Here is the explanation provided by W.M. Feldman in his
classic work Rabbinical Mathematics and Astronomy, first published in London in 1931.

26
DID THE RABBIS OF THE TALMUD KNOW THEIR
TRIGONOMETRY?

So Rabban Gamliel could have used some high-school math to determine his distance from the
shore, if he knew the height of the tower (AB) the angle (ACB), and the tan of that angle. So were
sines, cosines and tangents known to the talmudic world?

I had no idea. But I asked a friend who is an Associate Professor of Writing and of Mathematics
at The George Washington University in Washington DC. He pointed me to this book on the
history of mathematics, and made the following observations.

Based on a quick perusal of Boyer's A History of Mathematics, the notions of trigonometric

ratios were well known to Aristarchus (and hence, presumably, to Archimedes). Aristarchus was
doing more complex calculations than for right-angled triangles; it seems likely that he
understood the right-angle case, although I didn't see explicit mention of that. Also, the
Babylonians at the same time had active astronomical investigations going on, and were known
to use ratios of sides of triangles in relation to angles.

27
However, no one had a notion of trigonometric function for more than 1800 years after that.
Trigonometric ratios were just that - individual numerical ratios. This was one of the hang-ups
that Newton and Leibnitz almost, but didn't quite, work through. Trigonometric results were
known, but they weren't necessarily expressed, or interpreted, in the same way as we now do.
So, Rabban Gamliel might not have been calculating tan(x), per se…

However, I think it's safe to say that if R"G did a calculation, it didn't look anything like what the
book shows. First, there was no "tan" function. Second, fractions hadn't been invented. Third,
decimal expansions hadn't been invented. Fourth, calculation of the tangent of that angle would
have required a careful and explicit approximation process, and could not have been done so
handily.

Which means that while Feldman’s math is correct, it wasn't used the math done by Rabban
Gamliel. And so, the question of how Rabban Gamliel calculated the distance to the shore on that
eve of Shabbat must remain a mystery.

28