Daf Ditty Pesachim 68

Ἀπόδοτε οὖν τὰ Καίσαρος Καίσαρι καὶ τὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ τῷ Θεῷ

1
We learned in the mishna that when the eve of Passover occurs on Shabbat, burning the fats of
the Paschal lamb overrides Shabbat. The Gemara notes that it was taught in the Tosefta: Rabbi
Shimon said: Come and see how dear is a mitzva performed in its proper time. For burning the
fats and limbs and inner fats is valid all night and it would have been possible to wait until the
conclusion of Shabbat and burn them at night, but nonetheless we do not wait with them until
nightfall; rather, we burn them immediately, even on Shabbat.

2
The mishna also taught that carrying the Paschal lamb through a public domain, bringing it from
outside the Shabbat limit and cutting off its wart do not override Shabbat. The Gemara raises a
contradiction from another mishna in tractate Eiruvin, which teaches: One may cut off a wart
by hand on Shabbat in the Temple but not in the rest of the country outside the Temple. And if
the wart is to be removed with an instrument, it is forbidden both here, in the Temple, and
there, outside the Temple. From here we see that in the Temple cutting off a wart, at least by hand,
is permitted.

Two amora’im, Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina, disagreed about how to resolve this
contradiction. One of them said: Both this mishna in Pesaḥim and that mishna in Eiruvin speak
of cutting off the wart by hand. This mishna that forbids cutting it off refers to a moist wart,
which is considered like the flesh of the animal. It is therefore prohibited by rabbinic decree to
cut off the wart; and since it could have been removed before Shabbat, the decree applies even
in the Temple, where rabbinic decrees are generally not applicable. That mishna that permits
cutting it off refers to a dry wart, which breaks apart by itself, and so there is no prohibition even
by rabbinic decree to cut it off. And the other one said: Both this mishna and that mishna speak
of cutting off a moist wart, and it is not difficult. This mishna that says it is permitted talks about
removing the wart by hand, which is prohibited only by a rabbinic decree that was not applied
to the Temple; whereas that mishna that says it is prohibited talks about removing the wart with
an instrument, which is prohibited by Torah law and forbidden everywhere.

3
The Gemara asks: And according to the one who says that this mishna speaks about cutting off
the wart by hand and that mishna speaks about cutting it off with an instrument, what is the
reason that he did not state like the other amora that this and that talk about cutting off the wart
by hand, and it is not difficult; this mishna speaks of a moist wart, while that mishna speaks of
a dry wart? The Gemara answers that he could have said to you: A dry wart breaks apart by
itself, and so there would be no need to teach us that it may be removed. Both mishnayot must
therefore refer to a moist wart, and the difference between them is whether the wart is being
removed by hand or with an instrument.

4
We learned in the mishna that Rabbi Eliezer said that if slaughter, which is ordinarily forbidden
on Shabbat as a biblically prohibited labor, nevertheless overrides Shabbat when performed for
the sake of the Paschal lamb, then activities that are prohibited by rabbinic decree should
certainly override Shabbat when performed for that purpose. Rabbi Yehoshua disagreed, arguing
that the law governing a Festival proves otherwise. Rabbi Eliezer countered that the law
governing an optional activity, such as preparing food on a Festival, cannot be brought as proof
with regard to the mitzva of offering the Paschal lamb. The Gemara notes that Rabbi Yehoshua
follows his regular line of reasoning, for he said that rejoicing on a Festival is also a mitzva, and
therefore whatever one does in order to enhance one’s enjoyment of the Festival is considered
an act performed for the sake of a mitzva, just like the offering of a sacrifice.

5
For it was taught in a baraita that these two tanna’im disagreed about this matter: Rabbi Eliezer
says: A person has nothing but to choose on a Festival; he either eats and drinks or sits and
learns the entire day, but there is no specific mitzva to eat on the Festival. Rabbi Yehoshua, on
the other hand, says: Divide the day, half of it for eating and drinking and half of it for the study
hall, for he holds that eating and drinking are obligatory on the Festival.

And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: And both of them derived their opinions from one verse, i.e., the two
of them addressed the same textual difficulty, resolving it in different ways. For one verse says:
“It shall be an assembly for the Lord your God; you shall do no labor” (Deuteronomy 16:8), which
indicates that the day is set aside for Divine service, and another verse says:

-‫ ָכּל‬:‫ ִתְּהֶיה ָלֶכם‬,‫ֲﬠֶצֶרת‬--‫ ַהְשִּׁמי ִני‬,‫לה ַבּיּוֹם‬ 35 On the eighth day ye shall have a solemn assembly: ye
.‫ ל ֹא ַתֲﬠשׂוּ‬,‫ְמֶלאֶכת ֲﬠֹבָדה‬ shall do no manner of servile work;
Num 29:35

“It shall be an assembly for you; you shall do no servile labor”, which indicates a celebratory
assembly for the Jewish people. Rabbi Eliezer holds that the two verses should be understood as
offering a choice: The day is to be either entirely for God or entirely for you. And Rabbi Yehoshua
holds that it is possible to fulfill both verses: Split the day into two, half of it for God and half of
it for you.

6
Ayin, beit, mem is a mnemonic consisting of the first letter of Atzeret, the middle letter of
Shabbat and the final letter of Purim. Rabbi Elazar said: All agree with regard to Atzeret, the
holiday of Shavuot, that we require that it be also “for you,” meaning that it is a mitzva to eat,
drink, and rejoice on that day. What is the reason? It is the day on which the Torah was given,
and one must celebrate the fact that the Torah was given to the Jewish people. Rabba said: All
agree with regard to Shabbat that we require that it be also “for you.” What is the reason?
Because the verse states:

‫ ֲעשׂוֹת‬,5‫שָּׁבּת ַרְגֶל‬ ַ ‫שׁיב ִמ‬ִ ‫ָתּ‬-‫יג ִאם‬ 13 If thou turn away thy foot because of the sabbath, from
‫שָּׁבּת‬ ַ ‫שׁי; ו ְָקָראָת ַל‬ִ ‫ ְבּיוֹם ָקְד‬5‫ֲחָפֶצ‬ pursuing thy business on My holy day; and call the sabbath
‫ ו ְִכַבְּדתּוֹ‬,‫ ִלְקדוֹשׁ י ְהו ָה ְמֻכָבּד‬,‫ענֹ ֶג‬ a delight, and the holy of the LORD honorable; and shalt
5‫ ִמְמּצוֹא ֶחְפְצ‬,5‫ֵמֲעשׂוֹת ְדָּרֶכי‬ honour it, not doing thy wonted ways, nor pursuing thy
.‫ו ְַדֵבּר ָדָּבר‬ business, nor speaking thereof;
Isa 58:13

“If you proclaim Shabbat a delight, the sacred day of God honored”.

Rav Yosef said: All agree with regard to Purim that we require that it be also “for you.” What is
the reason? Because it is written:

‫ָנחוּ ָבֶהם ַה ְיּהוִּדים‬-‫ ֲאֶשׁר‬,‫כב ַכָּיִּמים‬ 22 the days wherein the Jews had rest from their enemies,
‫ ָלֶהם ִמָיּגוֹן‬i‫ ְוַהֹחֶדשׁ ֲאֶשׁר ֶנְהַפּ‬,‫ֵמֹא ְיֵביֶהם‬ and the month, which was turned unto them from sorrow
,‫ וֵּמֵאֶבל ְליוֹם טוֹב; ַלֲﬠשׂוֹת אוָֹתם‬,‫ְלִשְׂמָחה‬ to gladness, and from mourning into a good day; that they
‫ַח ָמנוֹת ִאישׁ‬m‫ וִּמְשׁ‬,‫ְיֵמי ִמְשֶׁתּה ְוִשְׂמָחה‬ should make them days of feasting and gladness, and of
.‫ וַּמָתּנוֹת ָלֶאְב ֹי ִנים‬,‫ְלֵרֵﬠהוּ‬ sending portions one to another, and gifts to the poor.
Esther 9:22

“To observe them as days of feasting and gladness”

7
The Gemara relates: Mar, son of Ravina, would spend the entire year fasting during the day
and eating only sparsely at night, except for Shavuot, Purim, and the eve of Yom Kippur.

He made these exceptions for the following reasons: Shavuot because it is the day on which the
Torah was given and there is a mitzva to demonstrate one’s joy on that day; Purim because
“days of feasting and gladness” is written about it; the eve of Yom Kippur, as Ḥiyya bar
Rav of Difti taught:

-‫ ְוִﬠ ִנּיֶתם ֶאת‬,‫לב ַשַׁבּת ַשָׁבּתוֹן הוּא ָלֶכם‬ 32 It shall be unto you a sabbath of solemn rest, and
‫ֵמֶﬠ ֶרב‬--‫ ָבֶּﬠ ֶרב‬,‫שֵׁתיֶכם; ְבִּתְשָׁﬠה ַלֹחֶדשׁ‬
ֹ ‫ַנְפ‬ ye shall afflict your souls; in the ninth day of the
{‫ }פ‬.‫ ִתְּשְׁבּתוּ ַשַׁבְּתֶּכם‬,‫ֶﬠ ֶרב‬-‫ַﬠד‬ month at even, from even unto even, shall ye keep
your sabbath

Lev 23:32

“And you shall afflict your souls on the ninth day of the month in the evening, from evening to
evening you shall keep your Sabbath”

But does one fast on the ninth of Tishrei? Doesn’t one fast on the tenth of Tishrei?

Rather, this comes to tell you: One who eats and drinks on the ninth, the verse ascribes him
credit as if he fasted on both the ninth and the tenth of Tishrei.

8
EATING AND DRINKING ON SHAVUOS
Rav Mordechai Kornfeld writes in name of Rav Kalman Weinreb

The Gemara says that even Rebbi Eliezer -- who maintains that one's activities on Yom Tov may
be dedicated exclusively to Hashem with no personal physical pleasure -- agrees that there are
three days on which one must experience physical pleasure as well: Shavuos, Shabbos, and Purim.
The Gemara explains the reason for each one: Shavuos is the day on which the Torah was given.
Shabbos requires "Oneg Shabbos" as the verse commands.

Purim is a day of "celebration and joy."

The reasons for the requirement to eat and rejoice on Shabbos and Purim are straightforward. Why,
though, does the fact that the Torah was given on Shavuos require one to eat and experience
physical pleasure on that day? On the contrary, the day on which the Torah was given should be a
day completely dedicated to Hashem. It would seem that the appropriate way to show our
appreciation for the Torah would be to spend the entire day immersed in Torah study.

Moreover, the Mishnah in Avos (6:4, 6:6) teaches that "the way of Torah" is for one to eat only
bread with salt and to minimize his physical pleasures.

Why, then, is the festival of Shavuos not completely dedicated to spiritual activities?

The festival of Shavuos is not designated as the day that celebrates learning Torah, but rather the
day that celebrates the receiving of the Torah, Kabalas ha'Torah. In fact, all three days that the
Gemara mentions are days of Kabalas ha'Torah. The Gemara in Shabbos (88a) teaches that on
Purim, the Jewish people renewed their acceptance of the Torah. Shabbos was the day of the week
on which the Torah was given (ibid.), and that is why we mention Kabalas ha'Torah in the
Shemoneh Esreh on Shabbos morning.

On the days that represent Kabalas ha'Torah, we must eat and experience pleasure in order to
show that the Torah is not a burden to us. Fasting, and avoiding physical pleasure on those days,
would show that we feel that observing the Torah is a burden. Therefore, on the day on which we
received the Torah, we must emphasize our joy by celebrating and experiencing pleasure.

This is the same reason why Rav Yosef, who was blind, made a festive meal when he learned that
a blind person is obligated to fulfill the Mitzvos (Kidushin 31a, Bava Kama 87a). He wanted to
show that he was happy to be obligated in Mitzvos. Similarly, a young man's Bar Mitzvah is
celebrated with a festive meal to show his joy in accepting the Torah and Mitzvos.

The Torah was given to man in order to enable him to utilize the physical world in the service of
Hashem. A Jew is not supposed to live an ascetic life, severed entirely from the physical pleasures
of the material world. Hashem placed the Jew's Neshamah into a physical body, fusing the holy
with the mundane and charging him with the obligation to uplift and sanctify his physical existence
and the physical world in which he lives.

9
The Torah enables the Jew to sanctify the physical world, in contrast to the Nochri who does not
have the ability to uplift the physical world and infuse it with spirituality. The Nochri's spirituality
is divorced from the physical world.

For example, the Nochri's spiritual leaders practice celibacy, while the Kohen Gadol is obligated
to be married when he performs the holiest service on the holiest day of the year (Yoma 1:1). It is
therefore logical that on the day on which we received the Torah, which teaches us how to utilize
the physical world in the service of Hashem, we are to partake in physical pleasures of food and
drink.

R. Eliezar said, “One has two options on Yom Tov: He may either eat and drink or sit and learn.”
R. Yehoshua said, “One should divide his day--half for Hashem and half for himself. Mar bar
Ravina used to fast the entire year except Shavuos, Purim, and erev Yom Kippur.

The Baal HaMaor (1) explains that Mar Bar Ravina holds like R. Eliezer that it is permitted to fast
on Yom Tov. He therefore permitted himself to fast on Yom Tov (except Shavuos (2), Purim, and
erev Yom Kippur). The Ba’al HaMaor therefore rules according to R. Eliezer. Tosafos (3),
however, explain that no one permits fasting on Yom Tov. They hold that even R. Eliezer who
says one can designate the entire day towards serving Hashem does not mean one should fast.

Rather, the main focus of the day is the drashah, and afterwards one should eat and drink (to enjoy
a little (4) to fulfill simchas Yom Tov. According to this (5), the reason why Mar bar Ravina fasted
on Yom Tov was that he was so accustomed to fasting, he enjoyed it more than eating. Based on
this we do not have to say that Mar bar Ravina held like R. Eliezer (6).

And indeed, the halachah is like R. Yehoshua [not like R. Eliezer] and one who enjoys fasting may
do so on Yom Tov (7). Similarly, we find that although there is a mitzvah to have animal (beef)
meat (8) and wine on Yom Tov, one who enjoys chicken (9) more can eat chicken instead. Also,
one who does not enjoy (10) wine does not have to drink it

10
How to Spend One’s Holiday
Steinzaltz (OBM) writes:1

Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua disagree about how to interpret two seemingly contradictory
passages in the Torah:

-‫ ָכּל‬:‫ ִתְּהֶיה ָלֶכם‬,‫ֲﬠֶצֶרת‬--‫ ַהְשִּׁמי ִני‬,‫לה ַבּיּוֹם‬ 35 On the eighth day ye shall have a solemn assembly: ye
.‫ ל ֹא ַתֲﬠשׂוּ‬,‫ְמֶלאֶכת ֲﬠֹבָדה‬ shall do no manner of servile work;
Num 29:35

Atzeret te-hiyeh lakhem – a holiday it should be for you

‫ תּ ֹאַכל ַמצּוֹת; וַּביּוֹם‬,‫ח ֵשֶׁשׁת ָיִמים‬ 8 Six days thou shalt eat unleavened bread; and on the
‫ל ֹא‬--m‫ֶהי‬l‫ ֲﬠֶצ ֶרת ַליהָוה ֱא‬,‫ַהְשִּׁביִﬠי‬ seventh day shall be a solemn assembly to the LORD thy
{‫ }ס‬.‫ ְמָלאָכה‬,‫ַתֲﬠֶשׂה‬ God; thou shalt do no work therein. {S}

Deut 16:8

1
https://steinsaltz.org/daf/pesahim68/

11
Atzeret la-shem Elokekha – a holiday for God

According to Rabbi Eliezer, a person must decide whether he wants to devote yom tov to his
personal pleasures like eating and drinking or to God by spending the day learning Torah. Rabbi
Yehoshua understands that a person is to divide his holiday in half – part for his own physical
pleasure and part devoted to spiritual matters.

The Gemara teaches that there are some days where all agree that an aspect of personal joy and
pleasure must play a role.

The amora, Rabbi Elazar says that Shavu’ot is one such day, since we are obligated to show our
happiness on the day that the Torah was given.

Rabba teaches that Shabbat is such a day, since we find that the navi teaches ve-karata la-Shabbat
oneg (Yeshayahu 58:13) that we must consider Shabbat a delight.

According to Rav Yosef, Purim is another such day, since we are commanded in
Megilat Esther (9:22) to celebrate Purim as yemei mishteh vesimha – days of feasting and
gladness.

The Gemara then relates that Mar brei d’Ravina (Mar, the son of Ravina) fasted all year, except
for Shavu’ot, Purim and erev Yom Kippur. While the Gemara goes on to investigate the
importance of eating prior to Yom Kippur, Mar’s behavior demands some explanation. How did
he fast on the other days when there is a mitzva to eat?

Some commentaries argue that this story can only be explained if we accept that Mar brei d’Ravina
followed the ruling of Rabbi Eliezer and chose to devote his holidays to Godly service, indicating
that his is the position that the halakha follows. (We should note that the Shulhan Arukh, Orah
Hayyim 529:1, rules like Rabbi Yehoshua.)

The Ba’al ha-Ma’or explains that we must distinguish between different fasts. A mourning fast
can never be taken on Shabbat or holidays, including Rosh Hodesh and Hannukah. An incidental
fast, when someone is too busy with other affairs and forgets to eat, would only be forbidden
on Shabbat and Yom Tov. A fast that is connected with Torah study is forbidden
on Shabbat, Shavu’ot, Purim and erev Yom Kippur.

The Ge’onim rejected this explanation entirely, explaining that Mar brei d’Ravina accepted upon
himself to fast for an entire year, excluding specific days. Thus, this out-of-the-ordinary behavior
cannot be used as a basis for comparison to any other situation.

12
Eating Out

Rabbi Jay Kelman writes:2

How should one celebrate the receiving of the Torah? Our Daf quotes a seemingly strange
argument as to how to properly celebrate Yom Tov in general, and Shavuot in particular. "Rav
Eliezer says, a person on Yom Tov either eats and drinks or sits and learns". One may choose how
to celebrate, but that choice must be performed with full dedication. Apparently, he felt that trying
to celebrate Yom Tov in two different ways gives neither its proper due.

The opinion of Rav Yehoshua, which is the accepted one in Jewish law, is that one should "split
the day, half for eating and drinking and half for the study hall". Yom Tov celebrates the
combination and culmination of God and man acting together in history and is thus divided
between Godly activities and the merely human. The Talmud then continues with the rather
startling statement that on Shavuot, all agree that one must celebrate by eating and drinking, as it
is the day we received the Torah.

On the face of it, one would have thought the exact opposite. Should not the day we received our
spiritual heritage be marked by studying Torah? This reasoning is the basis for the custom of many
to stay up the entire night of Shavuot, engrossed in the study of Torah. Why, then, this emphasis
on eating? It is especially strange when one considers that when he was receiving the Torah from
God, Moshe "remained on the mountain forty days and forty nights; bread I did not eat and water
I did not drink" (Devarim 9:9).

The Beit Halevi (Rav Yosef Dov HaLevi Soloveitchik, the "founder" of the Soloveitchik
"dynasty") explains that our insistence on food for Shavuot is rooted in a midrashic passage
relating to Matan Torah. The Talmud (Shabbat 88b) relates that, as Moshe ascended to Sinai, the
angels pleaded with God not to give the Torah to man. After all, they argued, man is a deceitful
sinner; and it would be better to "bury" the Torah than to give it to people who will often ignore
its teachings. The Talmud records that the Almighty made Moshe answer this cogent argument of
the angels; apparently, only a good rebuttal would allow the risk of entrusting the Torah to human
beings.

Moshe fired off a series of responses pointing out the many mitzvoth that relate to our physical
existence. Torah is not meant for the spiritual elite; were that the case, it could have remained in
heaven. Rather, Torah is meant for those who live in the physical world, teaching man how to turn

2
https://www.torahinmotion.org/discussions-and-blogs/shavuot-eating-out

13
eating into a seudat mitzvah, or marriage into an act of holiness. Torah is meant to refine our
character, challenging us to live up to our potential. It is precisely because man is a natural sinner
that we need Torah.

What better way to demonstrate this than by taking the most animalistic of acts, eating, and turning
our meals into vehicles for the service of God and man? Eating allows us to show gratitude to our
Creator, and to share our bounty with the less fortunate, including the animals that must be fed
before we sit down to eat. It teaches man discipline and restraint. It helps to form friendships; it
preserves the integrity of the Jewish community by forcing us to eat amongst those who share our
laws. The custom to eat dairy products on Shavuot, the Bait Halevi explains, originated to
demonstrate our fidelity to these laws of kashrut. Yom Tov requires one to eat a meat meal, but
we purposely eat a separate dairy meal first, demonstrating our acceptance of the laws of kashrut.

It is not only on Shavuot that we celebrate the receiving of the Torah. The Torah that we have
today was actually given on Yom Kippur, the covenant established on Shavuot having been broken
by the building of the golden calf. While the seriousness of Yom Kippur precludes eating, Jewish
law actually requires one to eat on the 9th of Tishrei; receiving the Torah requires food. Yom
Kippur is the date of forgiveness, of pleading before God that we will do our best to do better.
Moshe Rabbeinu's efforts on the first Yom Kippur enabled God to re-establish the covenant with
us, and the Torah was received anew. These two motifs, repentance and acceptance of the Torah,
require two modes of observance: fasting and feasting.

Approximately 900 years later on Purim, the Jewish people reaccepted the Torah, a Torah that
would be centered in the Diaspora. The Sages would guide us now, as the period of prophecy had
come to an end. The Midrash Tanchuma goes so far as to claim that at Sinai, the Jewish people
accepted only the written Torah, and that it was only at Purim that the Jewish people willingly
accepted the Oral Law. This re-acceptance of Torah requires eating and drinking, something we
are required to do in abundance on Purim. And there, too, we have a fast day right next to the
celebration, reminding us of the real threat faced by the Jewish people. It was this threat that led
to national repentance, highlighted by a three-day fast on Pesach of that year, as we reaffirmed
what we received at Sinai.

Torah is a wonderful gift from God to man. It allows us, even obligates us, to enjoy the physical
world before us. Torah also demands that we seek out God, and that we reflect on our
shortcomings; a process that, at times, requires withdrawal from the physical pleasures of this
world. On Shavuot, the Jewish people—if only for a few, fleeting moments—reached such
spiritual heights that there was no need for fasting. It is the day of pure celebration.

14
The Celebration of Yom Tov
Rav David Brofsky writes:3

Simchat Yom Tov

The Torah commands in three places that one should “rejoice” on Yom Tov.
Regarding Chag Ha-Shavuot, the Torah says:

And you shall rejoice before the Lord your God, you, and your son, and your daughter,
and your manservant, and your maidservant, and the Levite that is within your gates, and
the stranger, and the fatherless, and the widow who are in your midst, in the place which
the Lord your God shall choose to cause His name to dwell there.

Deut 16:14

Regarding Chag Ha-Sukkot, the Torah mentions the obligation to rejoice twice:

And you should rejoice in your festival, you, and your son, and your daughter, and your
manservant, and your maidservant, and the Levite, and the stranger, and the fatherless, and
the widow who are within your gates. Seven days you should keep a feast unto the Lord
your God in the place which the Lord shall choose; because the Lord your God shall bless
you in all your increase, and in all the work of your hands, and you shall be altogether
joyful.

Deut 16:14-15

The Rishonim offer different suggestions for the source of the obligation of simcha on Pesach.4

In the days of the Beit Ha-Mikdash, the mitzva of Simchat Yom Tov was fulfilled through
eating the meat of the various Korbanot offered on the festival:

Our Rabbis taught: [It is written,] “And you shall rejoice in your feast.” This includes all
kinds of rejoicings as [festival] rejoicing. Hence the Sages said: Israelites may fulfill their
obligation with Nedarim, nedavot, and ma’aser behema; and the kohanim [fulfill their
obligation with] the chatat and asham, the bekhor, and the breast and the shoulder [given
to the kohanim]. One might [think] also with bird-offerings and meal-offerings, [therefore]
Scripture teaches: “And you shall rejoice in your feast” - only with those [offerings] from

3
https://www.etzion.org.il/en/celebration-yom-tov
4
see Pesachim 108b and Tosafot s.v. yedei yayin; see also Yereim 227 and Tosafot, Chagiga 8a, s.v. ve-samachta

15
 which the chagiga can be brought. These [bird and meal offerings], then, are excluded
since the chagiga cannot be brought from them. R. Ashi said: It is to be deduced from [the
expression]. “And you shall rejoice;”; these, then, are excluded because there is no
[festive] joy in them.

Does the mitzva of Simchat Yom Tov apply nowadays, after the destruction of the Beit Ha-
Mikdash, and if so, in what way? Tosafot (Moed Katan 14b) asserts that nowadays, when the
festival sacrifices (shalmei simcha) are no longer offered, the mitzva of simcha on Yom Tov is
only mi-d’Rabanan.

Indeed, this is most likely the intention of the gemara, which teaches:

We learned in a beraita: R. Yehuda ben Beteira said: When the Beit Ha-Mikdash is
standing, simcha is only with meat, as the verse says, “And you shall slaughter peace
offerings and eat them there and be joyous before the Lord your God,” and when the Beit
Ha-Mikdash is not standing, simcha is only with wine, as the verse says, “And wine shall
gladden the hearts of man.”

Pesachim 109a

This passage implies that although nowadays one cannot fulfill the mitzva of simcha through
eating the meat of the Korbanot, one may still fulfill the mitzva of simcha, although in a different
manner. Furthermore, the gemara says:

The Rabbis taught: A person is obligated to make his children and the members of his
household happy on Yom Tov, as the verse says, “And you shall be joyous in your holiday.”
And how does he make them happy? With wine. R. Yehuda said: Men with what is
appropriate for them and women with what is appropriate for them. Men with what is
appropriate for them - with wine. And women with what? R. Yosef taught: In Bavel, with
colored clothing and in Eretz Yisrael, with pressed flax clothing.

This passage, once again, describes how one may fulfill the mitzva of simcha through drinking
wine and buying gifts for one’s spouse. Tosafot seemingly maintains that this passage refers to the
rabbinic obligation.

The Rambam (Hilkhot Yom Tov 6:17-18), however, disagrees. He rules that even
nowadays, one fulfills the Biblical mitzva of Simchat Yom Tov, he writes:

16
 Even though the simcha mentioned here refers to the korban Shelamim, as we explain
in Hilkhot Chagiga, included in this simcha is to make his children and members of his
household joyous, each one according to his means. How? For children one gives roasted
kernels and walnuts and candies. For women one buys clothing and pleasant jewelry based
on what one can afford. And men eat meat and drink wine, for simcha is only with meat
and wine.

R. Aryeh Pomeronchik, in his Emek Berakha (p. 108), cites R. Chayim Soloveitchik, who
explained that according to the Rambam, there are actually two types of simcha: and objective and
subjective simcha. One fulfills the objective mitzva of simcha through eating the Korbanot.
However, the subjective form of simcha, which applied during the time of the Beit Ha-
Mikdash and nowadays as well, is fulfilled in the manner described by the Rambam.

Similarly, R. Aryeh Leib Gunzberg (1695–1785) explains in his Sha’agat Aryeh (65):

It seems to me that since the mitzva of simcha which we were commanded to fulfill on the
festival isn’t a specific mitzva, but rather a general mitzva that one is obligated to be happy
on Yom Tov in all ways that he is able to rejoice, it is not similar to other mitzvot, regarding
which all people are equal, i.e., the rich person should not increase, and the poor person
should not reduce. For this simcha, each and every person is obligated to rejoice according
to his means.

Furthermore, he notes that according to many Rishonim, the permissibility of cooking on Yom Tov,
and the extension of this permissibility to other activities through the concept of mi-tokh, is due to
the mitzva of simchat Yom Tov.5

Although we demonstrated that one may fulfill the mitzva of simchat Yom Tov nowadays
through various other means, we might still ask whether one must eat meat or drink wine on the
festivals.

5
see also Torat Refael, 92

17
 As mentioned above, the gemara states that “when the Beit Ha-Mikdash is not
standing, simcha is only with wine, as the verse says, ‘And wine shall gladden the hearts of
man’” (Pesachim 109a). Although some question whether one who achieves simcha through other
means must still drink wine (see Yereim, ibid., Sha’agat Aryeh, ibid.), other sources indicate that
one should drink wine on Yom Tov.6 Some Torah scholars were accustomed to drink wine even
on Chol Ha-Moed!

The Rambam writes that one should “eat meat and drink wine,” as “simcha is only with
meat and wine” (6:18). This ruling is somewhat troubling, given that the gemara cited above refers
only to wine!

R. Shlomo Luria (1510–1573), known as the Maharshal (Yam Shel Shlomo, Beitza 2:5)
defends this position, and explains that nowadays, when one cannot visit the Beit Ha-Mikdash and
partake of the meat of the Korbanot, one should supplement his Yom Tov meal, during which one
eats meat, with wine as well. R. Yoel Sirkis (1561-1640), in his commentary to the Tur,
the Bayit Chadash (Bach 529), as well as R. Barukh Ha-Levi Epstein (1860-1941), in his Torah
Temima (Devarim 16:14) concur.

R. Yosef Karo, however, disagrees (Beit Yosef 529), and in his Shulchan Arukh, he does
not mention an obligation to eat meat on Yom Tov (Shulchan Arukh 529). Many Acharonim write
that one should preferably eat meat on Yom Tov.7

Some even discuss whether one may fulfill this mitzva with fowl (see, for example, Leket
Yosher 157:3, Chavot Yair 178; Torah Temima ibid. See Shevet Ha-Levi 3:18, who records that it
is not customary to insist upon eating beef on Yom Tov). This question arises in particular regarding
the custom of eating dairy foods on Shavuot (see Darkei Teshuva, 89:19).

In addition to the mitzva of simcha, the mitzvot of kavod and oneg apply to Yom Tov as
well (Shabbat 118; Rambam, Hilkhot Yom Tov 6:1; Shulchan Arukh 529:1). Therefore, the
Rambam (Hilkhot Shabbat 30:9) implies that one must eat three meals on Yom Tov, just as one
eats three meals on Shabbat. The Tur disagrees, and the Shulchan Arukh (529:1) writes that it is
not customary to eat three meals on Yom Tov. One should, however, recite the blessing of ha-
motzi on two loaves, fulfilling the mitzva of lechem mishne, at each meal.

The Shulchan Arukh adds that one’s clothing for Yom Tov should be even nicer than one’s
clothing on Shabbat (see Hagahot Maimoniyot, Hilkhot Yom Tov 6:20).

In analyzing the nature of simchat Yom Tov, R. Soloveitchik adds two additional points
(Shiurim Le-Zekher Abba Mari v. 2). First, he explains that the mitzva of simcha, according to the
Rambam, is fundamentally an internal experience. Therefore, he suggests, one cannot
observe aveilut (mourning) during a festival, because the internal happiness of simchat Yom
Tov contradicts the internal anguish that a mourner feels. Second, he explains that the joy of Yom
Tov emerges from “standing before God,” as the Torah describes:

6
Tosafot Pesachim 109a, s.v. ba-me; Maharshal ibid.; Bach 529; see also Nimukei Orach Chayim 529
7
Bi’ur Halakha 529, s.v. keitzad; Yechavveh Da’at 6:33; Iggerot Moshe, Orach Chayim 3:68, et. al.

18
 And you shall take you on the first day the fruit of goodly trees, branches of palm-trees,
and boughs of thick trees, and willows of the brook, and you shall rejoice before the Lord
your God seven days.

Lev 24:40

While simcha has an external expression, fulfilled through eating, drinking and merriment, the
source of this joy emerges from one’s closeness to God. Similarly, R. Pomeronchik (ibid.) also
explains that while wine and meat may arouse one to be joyful, the real simcha of Yom Tov is
rejoicing with God. He even insists that those who rejoice with the Torah on Simchat Torah but to
not rejoice in the festival itself may not fulfill the mitzva of simchat Yom Tov!

Chetzyo Lachem

In addition to the joy derived from dining on meat and wine and participating in festive Yom
Tov meals, the Talmud discusses another element of the simchat Yom Tov – joy that comes from
focusing on spiritual matters.

The gemara (Beitza 15b) cites R. Eliezer and R. Yehoshua, who disagree as to whether one
may choose to spend one’s day on Yom Tov focusing upon spiritual or personal pleasures, or
whether one must divide one’s time.

For it was taught: R. Eliezer says: On a Festival, a man has should either eat and drink or
sit and learn. R. Yehoshua says: Divide it – half of it for the Lord [and] half of it for
yourselves. R. Yochanan said: Both drew their inference from the same Scriptural verse[s].
One verse states: A solemn assembly to the Lord your God (Devarim 16:8) and another
verse reads: You shall have a solemn assembly (Bamidbar 29:35). How is this [to be
reconciled]? R. Eliezer is of the opinion: Either the whole of it is for the Lord or the whole
of it is for yourselves; while R. Yehoshua is of the opinion: Divide it – half of it is for the
Lord and half of it is for yourselves.

While according to R. Eliezer, one may choose how to spend one’s time, R. Yehoshua argues that
one must divide one’s time between personal and spiritual enjoyment. The halakha is in
accordance with R. Yehoshua.

Interestingly, the Rambam (Hilkhot Yom Tov 6:19) implies that R. Yehoshua was speaking
of Chol Ha-Moed as well. Furthermore, the Rambam describes how one should divide one’s time
evenly between these activities.

19
 Although eating and drinking on the holidays are included in the positive commandment
[to rejoice], one should not devote the entire day to food and drink. The following is the
desired practice:
In the morning, the entire people should get up and attend the synagogues and the houses
of study where they pray and read a portion of the Torah pertaining to the holiday.
Afterwards, they should return home and eat. Then they should go to the house of study,
where they read [from the Written Law] and review [the Oral Law] until noon. After noon,
they should recite the afternoon service and return home to eat and drink for the remainder
of the day until nightfall

The Tur (529) limits this principle to Yom Tov itself. Furthermore, he writes that one should divide
one’s time between one’s personal (lachem) and spiritual (lashem) activities. He implies that one
must simply spend a significant or meaningful portion of the day on each type activity.

Interestingly, the gemara (Pesachim 68b) insists that all agree that on Shavuot, the day
upon which we celebrate the giving of the Torah, one must dedicate at least part of the day to
personal/physical enjoyment (lachem).

The Shulchan Arukh (529:1) cites the Tur and omits the Yom Tov program described by
the Rambam. Some Acharonim (see, for example, Magen Avraham 569, and Mishna Berura 1)
cite the Maharshal (Chullin 1:50), who criticizes chazanim who unnecessarily lengthen the
service. He comments that their singing is not to be considered a fulfillment of “lachem”!

Before concluding our discussion of simchat Yom Tov, it behooves us to cite the Rambam,
who discusses two additional aspects of simcha. First, he notes that rejoicing on Yom Tov does not
mean that one falls into frivolity.

20
 When a person eats, drinks, and celebrates on a festival, he should not let himself become
overly drawn to drinking wine, mirth, and levity, saying, "Whoever indulges in these
activities more is increasing [his observance of] the mitzva of rejoicing." For drunkenness,
profuse mirth, and levity are not rejoicing; they are frivolity and foolishness.
And we were not commanded to indulge in frivolity or foolishness, but rather in rejoicing
that involves the service of the Creator of all existence. Thus, [Devarim 28:47] states,
"Because you did not serve God, Your Lord, with happiness and a glad heart with an
abundance of prosperity." This teaches us that service [of God] involves joy. And it is
impossible to serve God while in the midst of levity, frivolity, or drunkenness.

Second, he reminds us that one’s celebration must not only include his family but must also include
those who are in need of support on Yom Tov.

When a person eats and drinks [in celebration of a holiday], he is obligated to feed
converts, orphans, widows, and others who are destitute and poor. In contrast, a person
who locks the gates of his courtyard and eats and drinks with his children and his wife,
without feeding the poor and the embittered, is [not indulging in] rejoicing associated with
a mitzva, but rather the rejoicing of his gut.

21
 And with regard to such a person [the verse, Hoshea 9:4] is applied: "Their sacrifices will
be like the bread of mourners, all that partake thereof shall become impure, for they [kept]
their bread for themselves alone." This happiness is a disgrace for them, as [implied
by Malakhi 2:3]: "I will spread dung on your faces, the dung of your festival celebrations."

These beautiful passages place the obligation of rejoicing into its proper context and perspective.

The Torah tells us to devote half our time on Yom Tov to spiritual pursuits -- davening and
learning, and half our time to physical pursuits -- eating and drinking in celebration. The Mishna
Brura notes that while on other Yamim Tovim one may fast (if that gives him more pleasure or is
a ta'anis chalom), that is not an option on Shavuos; at least not preferred.

R' Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Minchas Shlomo on P'sachim, Vol 2, 68, 2) explains the reason:
we have to show to all that we are excited to celebrate the day on which the Torah was given;
celebration means food and drink. Even if you personally get more geshmack out of learning than
eating, not everyone sees things that way. So... turns out there is an obligation to bentch on
Shavuos also.

Berachos 35b cites a machlokes between Rabbi Yishmael and Rav Shimon Bar Yochai in terms
of how to reconcile the pasuk of v'asafta d'ganecha (implying one should work to earn a living)
with the pasuk of lo yamush sefer hatorah hazeh (implying one should always be learning torah).

Rav Shimon Bar Yochai says that the answer to the contradiction is that when klal yisroel is doing
the will of Hashem there work is done by others. Otherwise, they have to work for themselves.
Rav Yishmael says that derech eretz and learning should work together hand in hand.

So whom do we pasken like?

It is pretty clear that we pasken like Rav Yishmael. However, Rav Hershel Schachter brings what
seems to be a totally novel reason as to why this is.8

He explains that there is a general rule of shnei kesuvim hamachishim zeh es zeh, that if you have
two pesukim that contradict one another, so we use the pasuk hashlishi, a third pasuk, to answer
the contradiction.

What do we do if we have no third pasuk?

Rav Schachter explains that in such a case it is a machlokes between Rav Eliezer and Rav
Yehoshua in our daf. There the issue is that one pasuk implies Yom Tov is "kulo lashem" and the
other implies it is "kulo lachem". Rav Yehoshua says that it's therefore either/or whereas Rav

8
http://elomdus.blogspot.com/2007/11/shnei-kesuvim-hamachishim-zeh-es-zeh.html

22
‫‪Eliezer says that we "kvetch" a pshat that it is chatzi lachem and chatzi lashem. We pasken like‬‬
‫‪Rav Eliezer.‬‬

‫‪Rav Schachter explains that from here we see a yesod that if we have two pesukim that contradict‬‬
‫‪each other with no third pasuk we are supposed to "kvetch" a pshat. That is exactly what Rav‬‬
‫!‪Yishmael is doing in Berachos! Therefore, the halacha is like Rav Yishmael‬‬

‫‪The Reception of Torah‬‬

‫בית הלוי על התורה‪ ,‬משפטים א׳‬

‫מסכת שבת )פ"ח( דרש ר' סימאי ‪.‬ויקח ספר הברית ויקרא באזני העם ויאמרו כל אשר דבר ה' נעשה ונשמע )א(‬
‫בשעה שהקדימו ישראל נעשה לנשמע ירדו ס' ריבוא של מה"ש וקשרו לכל אחד מישראל שני כתרים אחד כנגד נעשה‬
‫ואחד כנגד נשמע‪ .‬ויש להבין אומרו בשעה שהקדימו ולא אמר בשעה שאמרו ישראל נעשה ונשמע ומוכח דרק ע"י‬
‫ההקדמה זכו להני שני כתרים ויש להבין היאך תלוי בההקדמה‪ .‬והנראה לי ויובן ג"כ למה אמרו ישראל נעשה ונשמע‬
‫דהנה איתא בזוה"ק נעשה בעובדין טבין ונשמע בפתגמין דאורייתא‪ ,‬הרי דנעשה הוי קבלה ‪.‬ולא נשמע ונעשה‬
‫על קיום המצות ונשמע הוי קבלת לימוד התוה"ק‪.‬‬

‫והנה ידוע דלימוד התורה הוא משני פנים‪ ,‬אחד כדי לידע היאך ומה לעשות ואם לא ילמוד היאך יקיים ולא ע"ה‬
‫חסיד וגם הנשים שאינם מחויבות בלימוד התורה מ"מ מחוייבות ללמוד במצות הנוהגות בהן וכמו דאיתא בב"י סי'‬
‫מ"ז בשם הרוקח דמש"ה מברכות בה"ת‪ .‬אמנם באנשים יש עוד מעלה א' על הנשים דנשים בלימודם אינם מקיימות‬
‫שום מ"ע רק הוי מבוא לקיום המצות ונמצא דהלימוד אצלם הוי מבוא להתכלית שהוא קיים המצות ולא הוי תכלית‬
‫בעצמו אבל באנשים הוי הלימוד גם מ"ע לעצמו וכמו הנחת תפילין וכדומה ונמצא הוו ב' בחינות מבוא להמצות וגם‬
‫תכלית בפני עצמו‪ .‬וזהו דאיתא במנחות דף צ"ט שאל ב"ד ב"א של ר"י את ר"י כגון אני שלמדתי כל התורה כולה מהו‬
‫שאלמוד חכמת יונית א"ל צא ובדוק שעה שאינו לא יום ולא לילה‪ ,‬דהחיוב דהוי משום קיום המצות הא כבר יצא בו‬
‫כיון שיודע כל התורה כולה היאך לעשות דדבר הנעשה לאיזה תכלית אין לו להמשך יותר מכפי הצורך לאותו התכלית‬
‫המבוקש ורק מ"מ חייב מצד עצם המצוה של הלימוד תורה‪ .‬והנה אם היו אומרים ישראל נשמע ונעשה לא היה‬
‫במשמעות קבלתם רק עול מצות אלא שמוכרחין ללמוד קודם כדי שידעו היאך לעשות והיה נשמע נמשך ומבוא לנעשה‬
‫ונעשה הוי התכלית והיה רק קבלה אחת ומש"ה אמרו נעשה ומובן מאליו שמוכרחין ללמוד מקודם ואח"כ אמרו נשמע‬
‫ונמצא דהוי נשמע תכלית מצד עצמו ג"כ דגם שלא יצטרכו ללמוד משום עשיה ג"כ ילמדו מצד עצמה ונמצא ע"י‬
‫ההקדמה נעשה ב' קבלות של ב' תכליתים עול מצות ועול תורה וזהו שאמרו בשעה שהקדימו והוו ב' קבלות עול מצות‬
‫ועול תורה ירדו ס"ר מה"ש וקשרו לכל א' מישראל ב' כתרים א' כנגד נעשה וא' כנגד נשמע דע"י ההקדמה זכו לב' כ‬

‫‪In Parshat Mishpatim, we read (24:7) that when Bnei Yisrael were offered the Torah – literally‬‬
‫– ”‪“And Moshe took the ‘Sefer HaBrit’ etc.” - the people famously replied, “Na’aseh V’Nishma‬‬
‫‪“everything that HaShem will say we will do and we will listen”.‬‬
‫‪The Gemara (Shabbat 88a) says that when Bnei Yisrael said Na’aseh before Nishma, 600,000‬‬
‫‪Melachim came down and placed two crowns on every person; one in honour of “Na’aseh” and‬‬
‫‪one in honour of “Nishma.” Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveitchik in the Beis HaLevi asks why the‬‬
‫‪Melachim specifically descended when Bnei Yisrael said Na’aseh before Nishma as opposed to‬‬
‫‪simply when they said “Na’aseh V’Nishma”.‬‬

‫‪The Beis HaLevi explains that there are two levels of Torah learning. The first is learning in order‬‬
‫‪to know the Mitzvot and how to perform them. The second is learning Torah for the sake of‬‬

‫‪23‬‬
learning. For example, while women may be exempt from the Mitzvah of Talmud Torah, this is
only an exemption from learning for the sake of learning.

However, argues the Beis HaLevi, they are most certainly obligated to learn the parts of the Torah
that they need for Mitzvah observance. Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveitchik continues that, had Bnei
Yisrael replied to Moshe the other way round, saying “Nishma V’Na’aseh,” – “we will listen and
we will do”, it would have seemed as though they were only going to be learning Torah in order
to know how to perform the Mitzvot.

By saying Na’aseh first, the Bnei Yisrael were saying that not only would they accept the Mitzvot
(and any learning needed to perform them) but they would also undertake learning Torah for the
sake of Talmud Torah. Hence, by placing the Na’aseh before the Nishma, Bnei Yisrael merited
two crowns.

The Beis HaLevi also cites the Gemara (Nedarim 81a) that one reason for the destruction of the
Beit HaMikdash was because although the Bnei Yisrael were learning Torah, they were not saying
Birchat HaTorah (properly). How could it be that this generation didn’t say the Brachah before
learning?

The Beis Halevi says that they must have believed that the learning was only a means to understand
the Mitzvot they had to perform. If so, they felt that there was no need to say Birchat HaTorah.
What they failed to realize was that the learning was intrinsically meaningful and not just a way to
better understand how to perform Mitzvot.

The notion of chatzei Lashem is reminiscent of the enigmatic passage: Matthew 22:21

Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's"

24
 Caesar's Coin, by Peter Paul Rubens (1612-1614)

"Render unto Caesar" is the beginning of a phrase attributed to Jesus in the synoptic gospels,
which reads in full, "Render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and unto God the things that
are God's" (Ἀπόδοτε οὖν τὰ Καίσαρος Καίσαρι καὶ τὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ τῷ Θεῷ).
This phrase has become a widely quoted summary of the relationship between Christianity, secular
government, and society. The original message, coming in response to a question of whether it
was lawful for Jews to pay taxes to Caesar, gives rise to multiple possible interpretations about the
circumstances under which it is desirable for Christians to submit to earthly authority.

Rabbinic Rhetoric and the Tribute Passage

David T. Owen-Ball writes:9

The synoptic gospels contain a passage in which Jesus is con- fronted with the question of whether
it is lawful to pay Caesar's tribute tax (Mt. 22:15-22; Mk. 12:13-27; Lk. 20:20-26). The passage
closes with Jesus' familiar yet cryptic command, "Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar's,
and to God the things that are God's" (Mk. 12:17 [RSV]).

Interpreters have disputed the meaning of the tribute passage throughout Christian history. At this
point, disagreement is so widespread as to defy categorization.' The application of principles of

9
Novum Testamentum , Jan., 1993, Vol. 35,

25
modern Biblical criticism to the tribute passage has yielded substantial insight, yet several basic
questions concerning the passage remain largely unanswered: (1) What is the meaning of the
preamble to the tribute tax question? (2) What is the significance of Jesus' request for a coin? (3)
What authority underlies Jesus' cryptic command? (4) What is meant by "the things that are
Caesar's," and, more importantly, by "the things that are God's"?10

I. The Legal, Halakhic Nature of the Tribute Tax Question

In Matthew and Mark, the question regarding the payment of tribute to Caesar is located within a
section containing a series of four questions asked of Jesus (Mt. 22:15-46; Mk. 12:13-37).

The order of the questions is the same in both gospels:

(1) "Is it lawful to pay taxes to Caesar, or not?"

(2) If the first of seven brothers marries a woman and dies before they have children, and the
second does the same, and so on, for all seven brothers, whose wife will she be at the time of the
resurrection?
(3) Which is the greatest commandment?
(4) If David called the Messiah "Lord," how can Jesus be David's son?

The evangelists' gathering of questions on these four topics would seem to call for an explanation,
for the topics appear to be logically unrelated, and there are textual indications that the four
questions were not all posed on the same historical occasion.

The format does, however, closely resemble "a fourfold scheme with which the first-century
Rabbis were familiar." As evidence for the existence of the scheme in the New Testament era,
Daube notes, "[T]he Talmud reports the Alexandrians to have put to R. Joshua ben Hananiah a
leading Rabbi in the half-century following the destruction of the Temple-twelve questions of four
kinds, i.e., three of each kind."

First, the Alexandrians posed "three questions of hokma, 'wisdom.' These are halakhic questions,
concerning points of law." Next were three questions of haggadha. While it is difficult to specify
the precise meaning of haggadha, this category would include historical matters, moral issues,
general religious principles, wisdom, matters of political advice and general rules of piety and
nobility. Third, there were three questions of boruth, or "vulgarity." "They are mocking questions,
designed to ridicule a belief of the Rabbi." Finally, the sequence ended with three questions of
derech eretz or “principles of a moral and successful life”.

Applying the rabbinical scheme to the four questions in Matthew and Mark, Daube contends that
the first question about tribute to Caesar "falls under hokhma. It is halakhic, it has regard to a
point of law.” The second question, about whose wife the seven-time widow will be at the
resurrection, is one of boruth. "It is designed to ridicule a belief held by Jesus; and significantly,
the particular belief attacked in this manner is that which forms the target also in the illustrations

10
David Daube, The New Testament and Rabbinic Judaism, Jordan Lectures in Comparative Religion, vol. 2 (London: Athlone
Press 1956)

26
of 'vulgarity' quoted by the Talmud."' The third question, about which commandment is the
greatest, is a question of derekh 'eres. "It is concerned with the fundamental principles. On which
to base one's conduct, as opposed to detailed ritual."' Finally, the fourth question, about whether
Jesus can possibly be the son of David when David had called the Messiah "Lord" (in Psalm
110:1), is a question of haggadha.

While there are differences between the formats of the Talmudic and the New Testament passages,
notably in the total number of questions (twelve versus four) and in their order (the New Testament
passage moves the question about scriptural contradictions from second to fourth position), the
precise correspondence between the nature of the four types of questions outweighs these
differences in significance. Further, since "The Midrash of the Four Sons," a section of the Jewish
Passover eve liturgy, contains a very similar series of questions of the four types, it seems quite
likely that the gospel writers could have been familiar with-and followed-the fourfold scheme.

The most significant aspect of Daube's argument for present purposes, however, is simply his
position that the tribute tax question raises a fundamentally legal (halakhic) issue. This position
has gained acceptance among New Testament scholars. J. Duncan M. Derrett admits that Daube's
"identification of the [tribute] question [as] one of hochma, and halakhic is obviously right."

What differences does the second phrase make? My thesis is that although the first phrase seems
to suggest that civil obligations are binding, the addition of the second phrase adds another theme
that far transcends the first in significance. This is a halakhic issue, and so it is very significant that
the second phrase enjoys the support of the authority of the Torah not the first.

In addition, since the second phrase emphasizes that one owes one's entire being, in the fullest
sense, to God, one's duty to God would seem all-encompassing and therefore supreme.

Returning, then, to the original question (Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar?) Jesus allowed that
one should render to Caesar what is Caesar's, but what can be said to belong to Caesar when one's
entire life belongs to God? While emphasizing the supremacy of religious duties, the passage does
not specify the precise nature of a Christian's duty regarding civil taxes, or regarding civil
obligations in general. The passage does suggest, however, that Christians ought not to respond to
civil issues without considering, first and foremost, their religious duty in the matter.

27