Daf Ditty Pesachim 87: Dual Loyalties

Children in Camden, N.J., waving Israeli flags after the state was officially
created in 1948.

1
When a woman is in her husband's house and both her husband and her father
slaughtered [the paschal lamb] as her [membership of their subscription group], she should
should eat [of the lamb] of her husband. But if on the first festival she went to celebrate in
her father's house and both her husband and her father slaughtered for her, she should eat
with whichever she chooses. An orphan each of whose guardians slaughtered for him should
eat with whichever he chooses. A servant with two masters in partnership should eat with

2
neither. A servant who is half-servant and half-free should not eat with [the one who is
still] his master.

Rabbi Simchah Roth writes:1

Chapter 8 will be concerned with the status of certain people in connection with the eating of
the paschal lamb. Three kinds of person are mentioned in our present mishnah and they all
have one thing in common: they are not absolutely free. While we accept this fact with a certain
amount of equanimity and understanding as regards the orphan and the servant, we have great
difficulty in understanding and accepting this stance as regards the adult woman.

1
http://www.bmv.org.il/shiurim/pesachim/pes08.html

3
MISHNA: A woman, when she is living in her husband’s house, if her husband slaughtered
the Paschal lamb on her behalf and her father also slaughtered the Paschal lamb on her behalf,
she should eat from her husband’s lamb because it is assumed that the wife intended to be
included in her husband’s group.

However, if, as was often customary, she went on the first Festival following her marriage to
observe the Festival in her father’s house, then, if both her husband slaughtered the Paschal
lamb on her behalf and her father also slaughtered the Paschal lamb on her behalf, she may
eat in whichever place she wishes, since it is not obvious with whose group she intended to be
included.

4
In the case of an orphan with multiple guardians, if each of his guardians [apotropsin]
slaughtered a Paschal lamb on his behalf, intending that he be included in their group, he may
eat in whichever place he wishes. A slave jointly owned by two partners may not eat from the
lamb of either of them, unless it was stipulated beforehand from whose lamb he will partake. One
who is half slave and half free man may not eat from his master’s lamb. It is assumed that the
master did not intend to allow this person’s free half to partake of the lamb, and therefore the
master did not slaughter the lamb with him in mind. Consequently, the half slave is not included
among those registered for his master’s offering unless he was explicitly included.

5
GEMARA: The mishna states that in certain cases one partakes of the lamb of whichever group
he desires. One’s inclusion in a group requires that he be registered with that group from the outset,
before the lamb is slaughtered.

The Gemara suggests: You learn from it that there is retroactive clarification. One’s ultimate
decision as to which group he wishes to be part of retroactively indicates that, from the outset, he
was registered in that group.

This is problematic, as no halakhic conclusion has been reached in the matter of retroactive
clarification.

The Gemara therefore rejects this suggestion: What is the meaning of the phrase: She may eat in
whichever place she wishes? It is referring to a case where a woman has already expressed her
choice before the time of slaughter.

Therefore, this case does not relate to the principle of retroactive clarification, and no conclusion
concerning it may be drawn from it.

6
7
The Gemara raises a contradiction between the ruling in the mishna and a parallel ruling in a
baraita. The baraita states: A woman, on the first Festival following her marriage, eats from
her father’s Paschal lamb. From here on, if she wishes, she eats from her father’s lamb, and if
she wishes, she eats from her husband’s lamb. Whereas the mishna teaches that after the first
Festival, she eats exclusively with her husband, the baraita teaches that she may continue to
choose.

This is not difficult. There, the baraita is referring to the case of a woman who eagerly hurries
as one pursued to go to her father’s house. It is therefore reasonable that, even after the first year
of her marriage, she wishes to be included in her father’s group. However, here the mishna is
referring to the case of a woman who does not eagerly hurry as one pursued to go to her father’s
house, and it is therefore presumed she wishes to be included in her husband’s group.

There is a homiletic interpretation of verses that conveys a similar idea, as it is written:

‫ ְוָשַׁדי ַכִּמְּגָדּלוֹת; ָאז ָה ִייִתי‬,‫י ֲא ִני חוָֹמה‬ 10 I am a wall, and my breasts like the towers thereof;
{‫ }פ‬.‫שׁלוֹם‬ ָ ‫ ְכּמוְֹצֵאת‬,‫ְבֵﬠיָניו‬ then was I in his eyes as one that found peace.
Songs 8:10

“I am a wall, and my breasts are like towers; then I was in his eyes as one who finds peace”

And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: She is like a bride who was found perfect. She was warmly received
in her father-in-law’s house. And she eagerly hurries, as one pursued, to go to tell of her praise,
i.e., her warm welcome, in her father’s house. As it is written:

‫ ִתְּק ְרִאי‬,‫ ְיהָוה‬-‫ַההוּא ְנֻאם‬-‫יח ְוָהָיה ַביּוֹם‬ 18 And it shall be at that day, saith the LORD, that thou
.‫ ַבְּﬠִלי‬,‫ִלי עוֹד‬-‫ִתְק ְרִאי‬-‫ִאיִשׁי; ְול ֹא‬ shalt call Me Ishi, and shalt call Me no more Baali.

Hos 2:18

8
“And it shall be at that day, says the Lord, that you shall call Me: My Husband, and shall call
Me no more: My Master”

of which Rabbi Yoḥanan said: She shall be like a bride in her father-in-law’s house, where
she experiences a close relationship with her husband. And she shall not be like a bride still in
the betrothal period and living in her father’s house, during which time her relationship with her
husband has still not developed.

Apropos the verse from Song of Songs cited previously, the Gemara homiletically interprets an
adjacent verse: “We have a little sister, and she has no breasts” (Song of Songs 8:8). Rabbi
Yoḥanan said: This is an allusion to the Jewish community of Eilam, which was privileged to
study Torah and become Torah scholars, but was not privileged to teach and influence the
masses.

The Gemara interprets another verse:

‫ ְוָשַׁדי ַכִּמְּגָדּלוֹת; ָאז‬,‫ י ֲא ִני חוָֹמה‬10 I am a wall, and my breasts like the towers
{‫ }פ‬.‫ ְכּמוְֹצֵאת ָשׁלוֹם‬,‫ָה ִייִתי ְבֵﬠיָניו‬ thereof; then was I in his eyes as one that found
peace.
Song 8:10

“I am a wall and my breasts are like towers”

Rabbi Yoḥanan said: “I am a wall”; this is a reference to the Torah. “And my

breasts are like towers”; these are the Torah scholars, who, by disseminating their
Torah and influencing the masses protect them like watchtowers. And Rava said:
“I am a wall”; this is the Congregation of Israel. “And my breasts are like
towers”; these are the synagogues and study halls in which the Congregation of
Israel is nurtured by the Torah, from which it draws its spiritual strength.

9
Rabbi Oshaya said: What is the meaning of that which is written:

‫ }ס{ ָשׁם‬,‫ ֵבּין }ר{ ַמְשַׁאִבּים‬,‫יא ִמקּוֹל ְמַחְצִצים‬ 11 Louder than the voice of archers, by the
‫ }ס{ ִצְדֹקת }ר{ ִפּ ְרזוֹנוֹ‬,‫ְיַתנּוּ ִצְדקוֹת ְיהָוה‬ watering-troughs! there shall they rehearse
,‫ַלְשָּׁﬠ ִרים‬ ‫ָי ְרדוּ‬ ‫ָאז‬ {‫}ס‬ ;‫ְבּ ִיְשׂ ָרֵאל‬ the righteous acts of the LORD, even the
{‫ }ס‬.‫ }ר{ ְיהָוה‬-‫ַﬠם‬ righteous acts of His rulers in Israel. Then the
people of the LORD went down to the gates.
Jud 5:11

“The righteous acts of His rulers [pirzono] in Israel”?

The Holy One, Blessed be He, performed a charitable deed toward Israel in that He scattered
them [pizran] among the nations; had He exiled them to one place, they could have all been
destroyed at once. And this concept is that which a certain apostate said to Rabbi Ḥanina: We
gentiles are superior to you Jews in that we have patience. It is written of you:

Ž‫ ַבֲּﬠלוָֹתם ִמִמְּצ ָר ִים; ַוֵיֶּל‬,‫טז ִכּי‬ 16 But when they came up from Egypt, and Israel walked
‫ ַוָיּב ֹא‬,‫סוּף‬-‫ַים‬-‫ִיְשׂ ָרֵאל ַבִּמְּדָבּר ַﬠד‬ through the wilderness unto the Red Sea, and came to
.‫שׁ ה‬ָ ‫ָקֵד‬ Kadesh;
I Kings 11:16

“For Joab and all Israel remained there six months until he had cut off every male in Edom”

whereas we, although you have been with us for several years, are not doing anything to you.
He said to him: With your consent, let one student deal with your assertion and answer you.

10
Rabbi Oshaya dealt with his assertion and said to him: This is not a sign of your righteousness
but is simply because you do not know how to do it, to destroy us. If you seek to destroy all of
the Jewish people, you cannot because they are not all with you in your kingdom. If you destroy
only those Jews who are with you in your kingdom, you will be called a severed kingdom for
murdering part of its own population. The apostate said to him: I swear by Gappa, god of the
Romans, with this problem we lie down and with this problem we rise up, for we are constantly
struggling with the dilemma of how to eliminate the Jewish people.

RASHI

Steinzaltz

Jastrow

Petach Einayim

11
Rabbi Ḥiyya teaches: What is the meaning of that which is written:

‫ ָיַדע‬,‫ ֵהִבין ַדּ ְרָכּהּ; ְוהוּא‬,‫כג ֱא•ִהים‬ 23 God understandeth the way thereof, and He knoweth
.‫ְמקוָֹמהּ‬-‫ֶאת‬ the place thereof.
Job 28:23

“God understands its ways and He knows its place”

The Holy One, Blessed be He, knows the Jewish people, who are unable to withstand the
harsh decrees of the Romans. Therefore, He exiled them to Babylonia, whose people are less
cruel. And Rabbi Elazar said: The Holy One, Blessed be He, exiled Israel to Babylonia only
due to the fact it is a land as deep as the netherworld, i.e., it is a land of plains and valleys, which
alludes to that which is stated:

‫ ִמָמֶּות‬,‫יד ִמַיּד ְשׁאוֹל ֶאְפֵדּם‬ 14 Shall I ransom them from the power of the nether-world?
‫ ֱאִהי‬,‫ ָמֶות‬š‫ֶאְגָאֵלם; ֱאִהי ְדָב ֶרי‬ Shall I redeem them from death? Ho, thy plagues, O death!
‫ ִיָסֵּתר‬,‫ֹנַחם‬--‫ְשׁאוֹל‬ š‫ָקָטְב‬ Ho, thy destruction, O nether-world! Repentance be hid from
.‫ֵמֵﬠיָני‬ Mine eyes!
Hos 13:14

“I shall ransom them from the power of the netherworld, I shall redeem them from death”

12
Rabbi Ḥanina said: It is due to the fact that their language, Aramaic, is similar to the language
of the Torah, which enables the Jews who live there to study Torah.

Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is due to the fact that He sent them to their mother’s house, i.e., the
birthplace of the forefathers of the Jewish people, who lived in Aram-Nahara’im, which is in
Babylonia. This is comparable to a man who is angry at his wife; to where does he send her?
He sends her to her mother’s house.

RASHI

And Rabbi Elazar said: The Holy One, Blessed be He, exiled Israel among the nations only
so that converts would join them, as it is stated:

‫ ְו ִרַחְמִתּי‬,‫כה וְּז ַרְﬠִתּיָה ִלּי ָבָּא ֶרץ‬
-‫ל ֹא ֻרָחָמה; ְוָאַמ ְרִתּי ְלל ֹא‬-‫ֶאת‬
‫ ְוהוּא י ֹאַמר‬,‫ַאָתּה‬-‫ַﬠִמּי ַﬠִמּי‬
{‫ }פ‬.‫ֱא•ָהי‬
25 And I will sow her unto Me in the land; and I will have
compassion upon her that had not obtained compassion;
and I will say to them that were not My people: ‘Thou art
My people’; and they shall say: ‘Thou art my God.
Hos 2:25

“And I will sow her to Me in the land”

Does a person sow a se’a of grain for any reason other than to bring in several kor of grain
during the harvest? So too, the exile is to enable converts from the nations to join the Jewish
people.

13
Summary
Rav Avrohom Adler writes:2

A married woman can only choose which korban pesach she is part of before it is slaughtered. The
Mishna states that if a newly married woman went to her parent’s house for Pesach, but both her
father and her husband included her in their korban pesach, she can eat from either korban.
The Gemora at first assumes that this means that the woman can choose which one to eat from
after they have already been slaughtered. This would mean “yesh bereirah,” that she could choose
retroactively which group she belonged to for the korban pesach. The Gemora concludes that this
is incorrect. She can merely choose before the korban is slaughtered, and say she is part of one of
their groups.

There were four major prophets during the times of the nevi’im who prophesized at the same
time.

The Gemora quotes the verse, “First Hashem spoke to Hoshea.” The Gemora asks, did Hashem
first speak to him? Weren’t there many prophets prior to his days? Rather, the Gemora explains,
he was the first spoken to out of the four major prophets in his time.
They were: Hoshea, Yeshaya, Amos, and Michah.

Hoshea was taught a lesson by Hashem regarding why He will not replace Bnei Yisroel. When
Hoshea questioned Hashem’s keeping Bnei Yisroel as His chosen people, Hashem instructed him
to marry a prostitute, from whom he had three children.

When Hashem then instructed him to separate from them, Hoshea had a hard time doing so.
Hashem said, “If you are attached to these children, who are not even clearly your children,
certainly it is understandable that I should be attached to the children of Avraham, Yitzchak, and
Yaakov etc.”

There were four major prophets during the times of the nevi’im who prophesized at the same time.
The Gemora quotes the verse, “First Hashem spoke to Hoshea.”

The Gemora asks, did Hashem first speak to him? Weren’t there many prophets prior to his days?
Rather, the Gemora explains, he was the first spoken to out of the four major prophets in his time.
They were: Hoshea, Yeshaya, Amos, and Michah.

Hoshea was taught a lesson by Hashem regarding why He will not replace Bnei Yisroel. When
Hoshea questioned Hashem’s keeping Bnei Yisroel as His chosen people, Hashem instructed him
to marry a prostitute, from whom he had three children. When Hashem then instructed him to
separate from them, Hoshea had a hard time doing so.

2
http://dafnotes.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Pesachim_87.pdf

14
Hashem said, “If you are attached to these children, who are not even clearly your children,
certainly it is understandable that I should be attached to the children of Avraham, Yitzchak, and
Yaakov etc.”

BAVEL – OUR MOTHER’S HOME

Rav Mordechai Kornfeld writes:3

When Hashem sent the Jewish people into exile to Bavel, in His mercy He sent them to “Beis
Iman,” their mother’s home. What makes Bavel their “mother’s home”?

RASHI says that Bavel is called their “mother’s home” because Ur Kasdim is in Bavel, and
Avraham Avinu came from Ur Kasdim.

Why, though, is Ur Kasdim considered to be “their mother’s home”? Avraham Avinu originally
came from Charan, which is not in Bavel (see RAMBAN to Gen 11:28). He came to Ur Kasdim
only later.

MAHARSHA writes that since Ur Kasdim is where Avraham dedicated his life to Hashem, it is
called “Beis Iman.”

Why, though, is it called their “mother’s home” and not their “father’s home”? The Maharsha
explains that it was in that place that Avraham developed his Emunah, his faith in Hashem, and
thus it is called “Beis Iman,” from the same root as “Emunah.”

The Maharsha writes further that the Gemara in Sanhedrin (38b) relates that the head of Adam
ha’Rishon was formed from the earth of Eretz Yisrael, and his body from the earth of Bavel. “Their
mother’s home” refers to the place from which Adam ha’Rishon’s body was formed.

RAV YOSEF ENGEL (in Gilyonei ha’Shas) adds that Chavah was taken from the part of Adam’s
body that was formed from the earth of Bavel, and that is why it is called “Beis Iman.”

3
https://www.dafyomi.co.il/pesachim/insites/ps-dt-087.htm

15
Rabbi Eliezer said, “The reason that Hashem sent Yisroel into exile is in order for converts to
join on to them.”

Our Daf explains that the reason for the Jews being sent into exile is in order to gather converts
from among the nations of the world.4

The Beis HaLevi on Parashas Vayishlach points out that the Gemara certainly understands that the
Jewish people was sent into the Diaspora due to their sins, but the truth is that Hashem could have
had them face retribution for their errant ways while still remaining in Eretz Yisroel, and not to
subject them to exile among the nations of the world.

However, in order for the Jews to go and collect those converts throughout the world, they were
sent abroad to find these wandering souls. If the Jews had not sinned at all, and there would not
have been any need for them to suffer the fate of being scattered throughout the globe, the converts
would have come on their own to Eretz Yisroel where the Jews would have been living, and they
would have been impressed and inspired with observing the Jewish nation in their land. Now that
the Jews sinned, and their status had fallen to a low point in the eyes of the nations of the world, it
was unlikely that foreigners would come to visit them in the Holy Land. Therefore, it became
necessary for the Jews to be sent around the world to seek these converts, who due to our sins,
would no longer come to us to be converted.

The Or HaChaim (to Ex 19:5) writes that the Torah has the power of a magnet. It has the ability to
attract those who are scattered throughout the world when they come within its range. The story is
told of the Yismach Moshe that he used to try to find a side road or a route off the beaten path
when he traveled between two destinations. He explained the reason for it was that if he had been
meritorious, he felt that he should have been able to fulfill his mission by staying in one place,
without having to travel about. Had he been more worthy, he felt that he could have achieved his
goals with people coming to him. However, the fact that he was forced to travel about to
accomplish his objectives was an indication of his diminished merits. Therefore, he felt
embarrassed when he traveled about, for this demonstrated that he was lacking in his level from
what it should be. He chose to avoid being seen by traveling along the side roads, and not expose
his disgrace publicly, where he would be seen by more people.

4
https://www.dafdigest.org/masechtos/Pesachim%20087.pdf

16
Jews in the Diaspora
Steinzaltz (OBM) writes:5

As was noted at the end of the last perek, the korban Pesah needs to be eaten by a group of people
who joined together before the holiday for the purpose of participating in the sacrifice as a group
(see Shmot 12:3-5). Perek ha-Isha, the eighth chapter of Massekhet Pesahim focuses on this
group. How and when is it established? Who can participate and who cannot? Under what
circumstances can an individual choose to leave one group and join another? Questions such as
these are the major concern of this perek.

It is not uncommon for the Gemara to segue into a discussion of aggadata after quoting passages
that help clarify a topic of halakha.

On our daf, after quoting pesukim (verses) from Sefer Hoshea as a proof-text for a rule in
the Mishna, the Gemara brings other pesukim from that book, which leads to a discussion about
the place of the Jewish people in the Diaspora.

One of the comments is made by Rabbi Oshaya, who teaches that God was being generous with
the Jewish people when he dispersed them among the nations of the world, since their distribution
around the world guarantees that they cannot all be threatened together.

The Gemara relates that a non-believer told Rabbi Hanina that the non-Jews were better than the
Jews, since the navi tells the story of Yo’av leading the Jewish people in a six-month battle against
the Edomites until they were wiped out (I Kings 11:16), yet the non-Jews had not destroyed the
Jewish people who had been living in their midst for years.

Rabbi Oshaya, who was assigned to discuss the matter with him, argued that there was nothing
they could do against the Jews. Those who were not in the country were out of their reach, and
they could not destroy the Jews who lived amongst them, since then they would develop a
reputation of killing their own citizens. The non-believer responded by swearing gappa d’Romai,
that Rabbi Oshaya was correct.

Many of the commentaries weigh in on the question of defining the oath gappa d’Romai. Some
say that it means a fortress and refers to the capital city of Rome. Others say that the word gappa is
similar to the Hebrew kanaf – wings – and the reference is to a winged idol that “defends the city
with its wings.” Another suggestion is that it is a deliberate mispronunciation of the name of the
central god of the Roman pantheon – Jupiter.

Rabbi Seth Goren writes:6

Much of early modern Zionist throught put a strong emphasis on shelilat hagolah, the “negation
of the diaspora.” Whether motivated by a fear of political vulnerability, assimilation, cultural

5
https://steinsaltz.org/daf/pesahim87/
6
Myjewishlearning.com

17
atrophy, religious anti-Semitism, or physical danger, this concept held life in exile to be inferior
to that which could be had in a Jewish homeland, whatever that homeland might look like. For this
reason, diasporic existence was considered ultimately untenable, and Zionism of one kind or
another the only reasonable and rational response to the Jews’ situation.

And then there’s Rabbi Oshaya (from today’s daf), who stakes out a very different opinion about
diaspora. He offers this interpretation of a verse from Judges:

What is the meaning of that which is written: The righteous acts of his rulers (pirzono) in
Israel? (Judges 5:11) The Holy One, Blessed be He, performed a charitable deed toward
Israel in that He scattered them (pizran) among the nations.

Rabbi Oshaya suggests the scattering of Israel is actually a blessing; gathering all Israel in one
place creates a dangerous vulnerability — making it too easy for an enemy to wipe out the entire
nation.

The Gemara now recounts a story (almost assuredly fictional, as will become obvious from the
way it is told) about a time when Rabbi Oshaya put this argument to good use. In the story, a
gentile mocks the Jewish people for impatience, reflecting that King David wiped out the Edomites
in six months flat, while Rome has bided its time, extending toward Israel relative tolerance
because it is in no hurry to destroy the Jews. (Note: The rabbis identify the Edomites with Rome,
so there’s a symmetry here — both groups trying to destroy the other.) The set up is almost too
obvious; Rabbi Oshaya responds with the same argument we saw above:

This is simply because you (Rome) do not know how to do it (i.e., destroy us). You cannot
destroy all of the Jewish people, because they are not all within your kingdom. And if you
destroy only those Jews who are with you in your kingdom, you will be called a severed
kingdom for murdering part of your own population.

In other words, Rabbi Oshaya retorts, Rome is not patiently biding its time to destroy the Jews —
it wishes very much to wipe them out, but cannot because the spread of the Jewish people presents
too much of a challenge.

While Rabbi Oshaya doesn’t explicitly elevate the general concept of diaspora above Jewish
sovereignty in the Land of Israel, his statement at the least implies that a scattered existence among
many ruling countries is preferable to all Jews living in the Land of Israel under Roman rule.

Perhaps Rabbi Oshaya is making lemons out of lemonade: in contrast to early Zionists, Rabbi
Oshaya wasn’t in a position to recreate Jewish sovereignty or gather Jewish exiles from around
the world, and his goals didn’t include bringing such changes about. Perhaps instead of
complaining about the challenges of diaspora, he sought out a silver lining.

The debate over where Jews should live rages elsewhere in rabbinic and post-rabbinic
literature. Ketubot 110b offers an opposite perspective: “anyone who resides in the Land of
Israel is considered as one who has a God, and anyone who resides outside of the Land of
Israel is considered as one who does not have a God.” But the Tosafot commentary on the same

18
pageholds that going to live in the Land of Israel “is not practiced in our times, as there is danger
on the roads. And Rabbenu Chaim says that today it is not a commandment to live in the Land of
Israel.”

Shelilat hagolah continues to have its advocates and detractors. What sticks with me from this
page, though, is how Rabbi Oshaya is able to highlight the benefits of a challenging state of affairs
and provide a real-life example of that favorite adage: don’t put all your eggs in one basket.

Rabbi Jay Kelman writes:7

We generally tend to view exile from the land of Israel as punishment for our sins, an apparent
truism reinforced during the Yom Tov mussaf that begins, "because of our sins, we were exiled
from the land".

Yet, like all tenets of Judaism, there is much more complexity involved; one cannot simply equate
exile with sin and call the discussion over. "Rabbi Elazar said: The Holy One, blessed be He, did
not exile Israel among the nations save in order that proselytes might join them, for it is said, 'And
I will sow her unto Me in the land' (Hosea 2:25); surely, a man sows a se'ah in order to harvest
many kor8" (Pesachim 87b). This statement not only presents a different perspective on the
condition of exile, it also offers a much different view on proselytization than that to which we are
accustomed.

Exile is—at least, according to Rabbi Elazar—a necessary component of the mission of the Jewish
people. It affords us the opportunity to be a light unto the nations and to inspire others to join the
Jewish people. Such a mission requires that Jewish people be everywhere, demonstrating the
beauty and richness of a Jewish life. Exile is not to be viewed as a punishment, but an opportunity
to strengthen the Jewish people.

During Talmudic times and until very recently, one had to be on the ground to influence others.
While the benefit of 'foot soldiers' is undeniable, with the advent of modern technology, one can
work from almost anywhere. Jews can live in Israel and exert great influence in all corners of the
globe. Most significantly, we can build a state that serves as a model for others to emulate. We

7
https://www.torahinmotion.org/discussions-and-blogs/pesachim-87b-we-want-converts
8
The area of a kor is thirty times larger than that of a se'ah.

19
thus need fewer Jews in the Diaspora, and more working to help shape the direction of the State
of Israel.

Another Talmudic passage just a few lines later adds another dimension to the benefit of having
Jews living the world over. "Rav Osiah said: What is the meaning of the verse 'even the righteous
acts of His rulers in Israel'? (Shoftim 5:11). The Holy One, blessed be He, showed righteousness
[mercy] unto Israel by scattering them among the nations”.9

As Rashi explains, if Jews live the world over, it will help ensure that if—G-d forbid—Jews in one
area of the world are destroyed, there will be remnants elsewhere. With weapons of mass
destruction proliferating, this would seem to be an even more crucial argument today.

As modern warfare has evolved, victory is determined not only on the battlefield, but in the
political and diplomatic halls of power. And here, too, it is essential to have Jews who will exert
influence through the political process in capitals throughout the world.

While Israel is the home of the Jewish people, not all can live there. There is much to be done,
both physically and spiritually, around the globe that requires a worldwide Jewish presence.
Wherever a Jew may choose to reside, he must ask himself, "How can I best serve the Jewish
people?"

Rav Kook on exile10

9
The text uses the word pizrono, leading Rav Osiah to connect it to the word lefazer, to spread.
10
Gold from the Land of Israel. Adapted from Midbar Shur, pp. 233-241

20
Two Purposes to Exile11
We need to analyze the purpose of exile. The Jewish people have spent more years in exile than in
their own land. Why was it necessary to undergo these difficult trials? Could they not be punished
by other means?
In fact, the Midrash states that the Jewish people are particularly suited for exile. They are called
“the daughter of exiles,” since the Avot (forefathers) were sojourners and refugees, subjected to
the whims and jealousies of local tyrants (Midrash Eicha Petichta 1 on Isaiah 10:30).

Exile accomplishes two goals:

The people of Israel were created to serve God.

The nation needs a pure love of God, undiluted by materialistic goals. Clearly, people are more
prone to become absorbed in worldly matters when affluence and prosperity are readily attainable.
In order that the Jewish people should realize their true spiritual potential, God made sure that the
nation would lack material success for long periods of time.

Exile serves to spread the belief in one God throughout the world.

As the Sages wrote in our daf “The Holy One exiled Israel so that converts will join them.”
Similarly, we find that God explained the purpose of exile and redemption in Egypt, “so that Egypt
will know that I am God” (Ex. 7:5).

The major difference between these two objectives lies in the conditions of the exile. If the purpose
of exile is to avoid significant material success over a long period of time — to prepare the Jewish
people for complete dedication to God and His Torah — then such an expulsion by definition must
be devoid of prestige and prosperity.
If, on the other hand, the goal is to influence and uplift the nations of the world, then being honored
and respected in their land of exile will not contradict the intended purpose. On the contrary, such
a state of honor would promote this aim.

Jacob’s Exile
Jacob had spiritually perfected himself to the extent that nothing in this world could dampen his
burning love for God. His dedication was so great that he could interrupt the emotional reunion
with his beloved son Joseph, after an absence of 22 years, and proclaim God’s unity with
the Shema prayer (Rashi on Gen. 46:29). Certainly, for Jacob himself, only the second goal of
exile was applicable.

11
http://ravkooktorah.org/VAYIGA63.htm

21
Jacob’s descendants, however, would require the degrading aspects of exile in order to purify them
and wean them from the negative influences of a materialistic lifestyle. As their father, it was
fitting that Jacob be led to Egypt in iron chains. But since Jacob personally would not be adversely
affected by worldly homage and wealth, he was permitted to be exiled in honor, led by his son,
viceroy of Egypt.

Joseph's pit is a metaphor for Galut, for exile.

Rabbi Chanan Morrison12writes:13

"They took Joseph and threw him into the pit. The pit was empty, without water in it." (Genesis
37:24)

When the brothers threw Joseph into the pit, the exile began. Not just Joseph's personal
from his father's house and the land of Israel. From that dark, empty pit began the exile of the
entire Jewish people to Egypt.

In fact, Joseph's pit is a metaphor for Galut, for each exile of the Jewish people from their land.

Three Types of Pits

There are, of course, different kinds of pits. There are pits filled with water, wells that provide life
to those living near them. One must be careful not to fall in and drown, but these are productive,
useful pits.

Then there are empty pits. They serve no purpose and are dangerous. Nonetheless, even empty pits
have a positive side to them. With energy and skill, they may be filled with water and transformed
into useful pits.

And there is a third type of pit. Rabbi Tanchum explained that Joseph's pit belonged to this third
category. It was empty of water, but it contained other things - snakes and scorpions. Such a pit is
of no use - neither actual nor potential - for humans.

Some mistake the pit of Exile for a well of water. Yes, one must be careful not to drown in it; but
overall, they claim, it is a positive experience. If Jews are careful to act in a manner that will not
arouse anti-Semitism, then they can dwell comfortably in their foreign homes.

12
Rabbi Chanan Morrison, of Mitzpeh Yericho, runs ravkooktorah.org, a website dedicated to presenting the Torah commentary
of Rabbi Avraham Yitzchak HaCohen Kook, first Chief Rabbi of Eretz Yisrael, to the English-speaking community. He is also the
author of "Gold from the Land of Israel".
13
https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/7583

22
But the true nature of Exile is like Joseph's pit, full of snakes and scorpions. It is a dangerous and
deadly place for the Jewish people. Such a pit has only one redeeming value, intrinsic to its very
nature: it will never mislead the Jews into mistaking it for their permanent homeland.

Snakes and Scorpions

What is the difference between a snake and a scorpion? A snake bites with its head, while a
scorpion stings with its tail. The snakebite is a planned and intentional act, executed by the
directives of the snake's brain. A scorpion stings from its tail, naturally, instinctively and without
thought.

Exile is accompanied by both of these 'blessings.' There are times of intentional and malevolent
persecution, such as those perpetrated by the Crusaders, Chmielnicki's
Cossacks, Nazi Germany, and other sinister snakes of history. These are dark hours for the Jewish
people, but they are also times of shining heroism and self- sacrifice.

Worse than these intentional snakebites are the continual, unintentional scorpion stings that are a
natural part of Exile. Cultural dissonance, intermarriage and assimilation take their slow,
unintended toll on the Jewish people and their connection to the Torah.

The afflictions of Exile are by Heavenly decree, lest we confuse a temporary resting place in the
Diaspora for a permanent home for the Jewish people.
The only true remedy for these snakebites and scorpion-stings is to rescue the nation from the pit,
and restore them to their proper homeland.

The Torah warns us that if we fail to listen to God and keep His mitzvot, we will be punished with
famine, war, and ultimately, exile.
“I will scatter you among the nations, and keep the sword drawn against you. Your land will remain
desolate, and your cities in ruins.” (Lev. 26:33)

The Purpose of Israel in their Land14

Why should the Jewish people be punished with exile? To answer this question, we must first
understand the true significance of residing in the Land of Israel. If the goal of the Jewish people
is to bring ethical monotheism to the world, would their mission not be more effectively fulfilled
when they are scattered among the nations?
There is, however, a unique reason for the Jewish people to live in the Land of Israel. They need
to dwell together in the Land so that there will be a nation in the world upon whom God’s honor
rests; a nation for whom Divine providence is revealed in its history and circumstances; a nation
that will be a source for all peoples to absorb knowledge of God and His ways. Their goal is to

14
Gold from the Land of Israel, pp. 218-220. Adapted from Ein Eyah vol. IV, p. 2

23
demonstrate that Divine morality can fill an entire nation — a morality that enlightens not only the
private lives of individuals, but also guides the public paths of nations.
For the Jewish people to fulfill their national destiny, God’s seal must be placed on the people as
a whole. The nation must recognize its special mission as God’s people living in His land. When
the Jewish people as a whole abandoned God, even though many individuals still kept some of the
mitzvot, the nation had lost their distinctive mark. The land was no longer recognizable as God’s
land, and the nation was no longer recognizable as God’s nation. They saw themselves as a people
like all others.
At that point, the Jewish people required exile. They needed to wander among the nations, stripped
of all national assets. During this exile, they discovered that they are different and distinct from all
other peoples. They realized that the essence of their nationhood contains a special quality; and
that special quality is God’s Name that is associated with them.

Staying in Babylonia
We find in the Talmud (Shabbat 41a) a startling opinion regarding the nature of exile. When
fourth-century scholar Rabbi Zeira wished to ascend to the Land of Israel, he needed to evade his
teacher, Rabbi Yehudah. For Rabbi Yehudah taught that anyone leaving Babylonia for the Land
of Israel transgresses the positive command, “They will be carried to Babylon, and there they shall
stay, until the day that I remember them” (Jeremiah 27:22). (Rabbi Zeira, however, disagreed with
this interpretation. He held that the prophecy only referred to vessels of the holy Temple.)1
Why did Rabbi Yehudah think that moving to the Land of Israel was so improper?
Babylonia at that time was the world center of Torah study. Great academies were established in
Neharde'a, Sura and Pumbeditha. Jewish life in Babylonia was centered around the holiness of
Torah. This great revival of Torah learning instilled a profound recognition of the true essence of
the Jewish people. As such, Babylonia was the key to the redemption of Israel and their return to
their land. Only when the Jewish people fully assimilate this lesson will the exile have fulfilled its
purpose, and the Jewish people will be able to return to their land.
Rabbi Yehudah felt that individuals, even if they have already prepared themselves sufficiently for
the holiness of the Land of Israel, should nonetheless remain in Babylonia. Why? The object of
exile is not to correct the individual, but to correct the nation. The true significance of the Jewish
people living in the Land of Israel — as an entire nation bearing the banner of the Rock of Israel
— must not be obscured by the return of righteous individuals to the Land.
For Rabbi Yehudah, each individual Jew is like a Temple vessel. A vessel cannot fulfill its true
purpose by itself, without the overall framework of a functioning Temple. So too, an individual
can only join in the renascence of Israel in their Holy Land when the entire nation has been restored
in its Land, via divine redemption.

Dual Loyalty

24
Rabbi Dovid Rozenfeld writes:15

“Rabbi Chanina the deputy [High] Priest said: Pray for the welfare of the government (lit.,
monarchy), for if not for its fear, a person would swallow his fellow live.”
Avot 3:2

We are obligated to pray for and concern ourselves with the welfare of our country and
government. Without authority, without law and order, people would literally swallow each other
whole. We’ve all seen footage of such events as blackouts and natural disasters. When such events
occur, we’re on our own. No one’s in control and nothing’s stopping us — and both the best and
the worst in people come to the fore. (A heart-warming exception to this was 9-11, in which the
civilized world felt under attack — and we united and stood together in a way only tragedy can
bring about.) And while some rise to the occasion to help others in need — for no other reason
than their G-d-given sense of responsibility to help mankind, others see nothing other than an
opportunity to ignore all rules of justice and fair play.

Such times test a person’s true worth: Do I truly fear G-d or do I behave because of the constraints
of civilized society? But, advises R. Chanina, let us not wait and see who passes such a test. A
civilized and ordered society is the best guarantee we will all live happy and productive lives.
R. Samson Raphael Hirsch notes that our mishna goes so far as to advise that we pray for the
welfare of the government. Many synagogues recite such a prayer during Sabbath morning
services. There is a specially-composed prayer which asks for the well-being of the ruler and that
he be well-disposed towards his Jewish subjects. (And today some add prayers for the State of
Israel and the IDF.)

There lies, however, a significant dilemma in this. For most of the past 2,000 years Jews have
resided in adopted — and usually less-than-welcoming — host countries. Even to this day the
majority of Jews live outside the Land of Israel. And we have often been suspected by our fellow
countrymen of being foreign nationals — of not being good Germans, good Russians, or good
Frenchmen — because of our acknowledged devotion to Judaism and to Israel.

(For this reason many Jews who had managed to have obtain high and influential government
positions were apprehensive of appearing too pro-Jewish, and therefore bent over backwards in
the interest of “evenhandedness”. Many unfortunate examples of this in recent history.)

And in fact the question is a very serious one — and a very valid one: Are such suspicions justified?
Isn’t it true that our primary devotion is to G-d’s Torah and the Jewish people — over and above
our host the country and its laws? If we are devout Jews and quite likely supporters of the State of
Israel, can we truly be patriotic Americans?

(When I was in elementary school we used to challenge ourselves with the difficult thought
question: What if America and Israel go to war? Whose side would we be on? Would the
Americans be justified in putting us in concentration camps (as they did to many Japanese-

15
https://torah.org/learning/pirkei-avos-chapter3-2/

25
Americans during WWII) to keep us from making trouble?).16 In retrospect I realized that the
question was moot. America and Israel would only go to war if one of the two countries had a
fundamental shift in values and attitude — one drastically different from the values dear to us
today. And if that would occur, the question would presumably be a very different one.)

(It’s also interesting to note that a great European rabbi who visited America in the early 20th
Century (I believe it was R. Baruch Epstein, author of the Torah Temimah), noted with curiosity
that American Jews were unique among Jews of the Diaspora to feel a sense of patriotism towards
their host country. Jews in America certainly had and still have a lot to be thankful for; the Jews
of Poland, Russia, the Ukraine, the Levant etc. were at best lucky to settle for undisturbed, second-
class citizenship. Yet it is interesting to realize that the concept of feeling any sort of loyalty to our
country of residence is a relatively new phenomenon in Israel.)

So, what of our question? Are our enemies justified in viewing us as foreign nationals?

At first blush, we would have to answer yes. Certainly, our highest calling is to G-d. Our mission
is eternal and unchanging; it knows no geographical boundaries. We might be good and law-
abiding citizens in our host country, but far above all, we are obligated to be loyal to our G-d —
regardless of whether of not we have the support or even the permission of the temporal authorities.
The inescapable conclusion would therefore seem to be that we identify with Judaism and our
fellow Jews first, and our places of residence a far second.
However, the truth is hardly so simple. The Torah places great emphasis on our being good, law-
abiding citizens. When the Jews were exiled to Babylon at the destruction of the First Temple, G-
d, speaking through the prophet Jeremiah, exhorts the people: “Seek the peace of the city to which
I have exiled you, and pray to G-d for its sake” (Jeremiah 29:7). The Jews of the time were
departing for a mere 70 years, yet they were instructed to make themselves quite at home. As far
as we’re concerned, the Exile is here to stay. This is where G-d wants us to reside, and from our
perspective it is home — and its natives are our hosts. The Torah goes so far as to instruct us not
to hold an Egyptian in contempt, “for you were resident in his land” (Deut. 23:8). We honor our
hosts, we support them, and we “seek their peace.”

The Talmud further asserts a principle known as “the law of the land is binding” (Gittin 10b). This
means that there is a Torah obligation that we observe the laws of the country in which we reside
— unless they outright contradict our own laws. (One reason for this, as offered by the
commentators, is that since the territory of, say, the United States belongs to the U.S. government,
the government has the right to state the conditions upon which we are permitted to dwell there.)

But it is far deeper than this. We must ever be conscious of the purpose for which G-d exiled us
literally to every corner of the globe. G-d did not spread us out so far and wide to stir up discontent,
to oppose or even to ignore our surroundings. He did so in order that we spread the truth of His
existence and set an example of holiness and virtuousness for the world to see.

16
In fact one of the lame excuses offered by the State Department for refusing to accept more Jews at the start of the Holocaust
was because they might be German spies in disguise.

26
Our Daf states, “G-d exiled the Jewish People among the nations of the world only in order that
converts join them” The world over must come to recognize the great divine potential of the human
being.

In fact, the commentator Rabbeinu Yonah extends our mishna’s theme. He deals with the
following question: Are we concerned with the welfare of our own host nation alone? What of the
rest of the world? True, we must occupy ourselves first with the needs of our own, as the Talmud
says, “The poor of your own city take precedence” (Bava Metsiah 33a), and of course we have a
vested interest in the social well-being and economic prosperity of our own place of residence.
But, explains R. Yonah, this should not be taken to imply a lack of concern for the rest of the
world. Our mishna in part stems from the interest and concern we must have for all members of
the human race.

So yes, in the final analysis we are good citizens. But we are much more. We must be devoted and
caring towards our countries, our neighbors, and the world at large. Patriotism may not be our end
goal, but within the framework of Judaism, we are given the leeway — and the obligation — to be
decent, devoted, and prominent citizens wherever G-d’s exile leads us. We hope to return to our
own homeland, but in the meanwhile we can and should devote ourselves to our provisional
homelands — to humanity as a whole, but in particular to our benevolent host country.

Those of us fortunate to live in western democracies are at the same time able to benefit from the
constitutionally-backed notions of freedom of religion and expression — and for that too we must
be eternally grateful. Very rarely today do religion and state clash (in really fundamental ways). If
they do, we will be left with no choice. But barring that, we constitute the most devoted, law-
abiding — and patriotic — segments of our host countries.
And so, in short, we do not suffer from dual loyalty. We have a single loyalty — to God alone. He
just happens to be a God who wants us to be caring and gracious to all.

The Toxic Back Story to the Charge That Jews Have a Dual Loyalty

Julie Hirschfeld Davis writes:17

When President Trump said this week (Aug. 21, 2019) that American Jews who chose to vote for
Democrats were being disloyal, he was flirting with a notion that has fueled anti-Semitism for
generations and has been at the root of some of the most brutal violence inflicted upon Jews in
their history.

The accusation that Jews have a “dual loyalty” — that they are not to be trusted because their true
allegiance is to their religion, rather than to the country in which they live — dates back thousands
of years. It animated the Nazis in 1930s Germany, when they accused Jewish people of being
traitors and used charges of disloyalty to justify their arrests, persecutions and mass killings.

17
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/21/us/politics/jews-disloyal-trump.html

27
After the founding of Israel, the charge was that Jews were more loyal to Israel, the Jewish state,
than to their own countries. The smear persists in various forms to this day: It is a common refrain
of white supremacists who claim there is a secret plot orchestrated by Jews to replace white people
through mass migration and racial integration.

“The Jews have been a persistent minority for thousands of years, living in exile, living in
diasporas, and the Jews have been made convenient scapegoats for various purposes,’’ said
Jonathan Greenblatt, the chief executive of the Anti-Defamation League. “That’s why they often
call anti-Semitism the oldest hatred.”

On Tuesday, Mr. Trump drew a barrage of criticism from Jewish organizations and anti-hate
groups when he said, as he assailed a pair of Democratic congresswomen who are harshly critical
of Israel, that Jews who vote for Democrats show “either a total lack of knowledge or great
disloyalty.” On Wednesday, as he retweeted a conspiracy theorist saying that Jews in Israel loved
the president “like he’s the king of Israel,” Mr. Trump used the same language, telling reporters
that “if you want to vote Democrat, you are being very disloyal to Jewish people and very disloyal
to Israel.”

A look at the long and ugly history of the dual loyalty canard helps explain why Jewish leaders
and anti-hate groups have reacted so strongly to Mr. Trump’s comments.
“This has got a very bad, toxic back story to it,” said Aaron David Miller, a veteran Middle East
peace negotiator who served in administrations of both political parties. “The words ‘disloyalty’
or ‘dual loyalty’ cannot appear within the same sentence as the words ‘Jews’ or ‘American Jews’
without legitimately raising the question of whether or not what is intended is to level that
pernicious charge.”

How the Charge Was Born

As far back as the Middle Ages, Jews were tagged in their communities as inherently untrustworthy
and suspect, incapable of being loyal to their ruler because of their ties to other Jews around the
world. They were also viewed as a threat to the church because of their religious beliefs.

Christian leaders promoted the idea that Jews crucified Jesus Christ, and several myths took hold
about Jewish people, including the so-called blood libel, a myth that Jews used the blood of
Christian children in rituals. Those slanders fueled riots against Jews, sometimes referred to as
pogroms.

A Stereotype Festers and Flourishes

Later, as Jews settled throughout Europe, their loyalty was often in question. When Napoleon
emancipated the Jews in France after the revolution, he said he would grant them full equality if
they would reaffirm that they were subject to French law and would no longer consider themselves
“a nation within a nation.” Jews agreed.

28
But the suspicions festered. In 1894, Alfred Dreyfus, a French military captain who was Jewish,
was falsely accused of passing military secrets to the Germans and was convicted in a French
military court.

“People were willing to believe it, even though the evidence from the very outset was shaky,
because it made sense to them,” said Deborah E. Lipstadt, a professor of modern Jewish history
and Holocaust studies at Emory University. “They had been so exposed to this stereotype, it had
become so much the pivot point and the central element of anti-Semitism that Jews have other
loyalties, that it seemed like it must be true, and they were ready to believe the worst.”

Nazi soldiers listening to Hitler during a Nazi Party convention

September 1936, Berlin.

Professor Lipstadt said that was why when the Nazis began denigrating Jews, falsely accusing
them of having betrayed their country and undermined its security, people were willing to believe
it. “The dual loyalty canard that has plagued Jews is the fertile soil in which centuries of these
stereotypes have taken root and grown,” she said.

Stalin played on the same notion in 1946 during a speech in Moscow attacking Jewish writers as
“rootless cosmopolitans” who were not fully loyal to the Soviet Union.

Nation vs. Religion

One reason that Jews have struggled to shake accusations of having dual loyalty is rooted in their
own history. For centuries, Jews were regarded as a nation with their own distinct culture and laws,
rather than merely a religious group.

29
“The tension within Judaism is, are we a people, a nation, a tribe, a religion?” said Steven R.
Weisman, the author of “The Chosen Wars: How Judaism Became an American Religion” and a
former New York Times reporter. “Jews have been uncomfortable seeing themselves as a people
— even the ‘chosen people’ — and through various episodes throughout history, worked to show
that they were just as patriotic and loyal as anyone else.”

During the Civil War, for instance, Mr. Weisman said, Jews joined the military in disproportionate
numbers on both sides, in part to demonstrate their devotion to their country in the face of
stereotypes that their allegiances were suspect.
As recently as 2000, when former Senator Joseph I. Lieberman became the first Jewish person to
run for vice president, he faced questions about how his religion might affect his policy positions
and leadership.

Trump Stirs the Pot

This week was not the first time that Mr. Trump has appeared to question Jews’ loyalties. This
past spring, speaking to American Jews at an event sponsored by the Republican Jewish Coalition,
he referred to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel as “your prime minister.”
His comments this week were meant to target Representatives Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and
Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, both Democrats and outspoken critics of Israel who have both made
their own remarks appearing to question Jews’ loyalty.

Ms. Omar apologized in February for saying that support for Israel was “all about the Benjamins
baby,” a reference to hundred-dollar bills, but then ignited further controversy when she argued
that she was being tagged as anti-Semitic merely for criticizing Israel.

“I want to talk about the political influence in this country that says it is O.K. for people to push
for allegiance to a foreign country,” Ms. Omar said then.

Ms. Tlaib was roundly criticized in January for saying that lawmakers supporting a Republican
bill protecting states and cities that sever ties with companies boycotting Israel “forgot what
country they represent.”

She later said she was referring to senators, not Jewish people.

30