Archives for posts with tag: Talmud

Gerald Schroeder in Genesis and the Big Bang has uncovered Jewish traditions that support the Big Bang theory of modern physics. What about something a little more modern, string theory?

Poor string theory. I think it’s been struggling since the Higgs Boson was pretty convincingly discovered in 2013. But we can find a little boost for it right in the Talmud, Tractate Chagigah, page 12a:

ואמר רב יהודה אמר רב בשעה שברא הקב”ה את העולם היה מרחיב והולך כשתי פקעיות של שתי עד שגער בו הקב”ה והעמידו

Rabbi Judah also related that Rav said, “At the time when the Holy One (whom we bless) created the world, it kept on unraveling like two balls of thread for the warp of a weaver’s loom until the Holy One (whom we bless) rebuked it and made it stop.”

This Talmudic passage wouldn’t agree with modern astronomers that the universe is continually expanding. Still, string theorists may find comfort in knowing that the metaphor they use has ancient roots.

Why two balls of thread? I presume that that Rav and his contemporaries thought that there were two substances of creation, one for the extraterrestrial region and a different one for down here. This would be in line with Aristotelian and (if I understand it right) Platonic thinking, but not (so far as I know) with modern physics.

If you look hard enough, I wouldn’t be surprised if you could find support for any number of modern theories right in the Talmud. I doubt, however, that the Talmud tries to teach physics; there are many ways to understand the process of creation, consistent with different Rabbinic opinions and texts in Hebrew scripture, and all of them can leave us amazed at the world we experience, wondering whence it came and whither it goes.

 

How Social Customs Have Changed!

Did it ever occur to you, dear reader, that Macbeth (d. 1057) and Rashi (1040-1105) were contemporaries? And although the great King of Scotland  urged his horse across a blasted heath while Rashi, the great man of Hebrew letters, basked in the gentle climate of central France, the customs of their times have interesting points of contact.

Accordingly, today we can clear up a mystery in Macbeth. After Macbeth murders Duncan, the stage fills with agitated actors, poor Lady Mac swoons, and Banquo says everyone should go away and come back to investigate the crime. “And when we have our naked frailties hid / That suffer in exposure, let us meet / And question this most bloody piece of work.”

Whose Ideas Was Pajamas, Anyway?

The term “naked frailties” has occasioned many a snigger, and many a student has been told to imagine that these medieval Scottish nobles wore something like pajamas beneath a vaguely tartan dressing gown.

In fact, not so. “Since ancient times,” says Eileen Harris in her little book Going to Bed, speaking with the prim authority of the Victoria and Albert Museum, “it has been commonplace to sleep clothed. Only in the Middle Ages, from the eleventh to the fifteenth century, was nudity the rule, and it was a rule included, for example, in a thirteenth-century marriage contract that a wife should not sleep in a chemise without her husband’s consent” (p. 64).

How much more enlightened was medieval Jewry, who ruled the husband must release his wife, with a settlement, if he wanted to sleep clothed.

Rashi notes that under normal circumstances, people sleep naked (B.T.Shabbat 13a אין דרך לישן אלא בקירוב בשר); he refers to B.T.Ketuvot 48a, where R. Huna rules that a man who doesn’t want to be naked for sexual relations has to grant his wife a divorce and pay the settlement. Of course, this custom is not universal; there’s a reference to Persians–presumably, deplorably effete Easterners–who actually wear clothes when busy in bed.

A State of Proper Undress

Now let the student imagination roam. If Shakespeare knew that beneath the kilt was bare skin (well testified in our own day by the famous story of Bridal Dress Skidmarks), then surely he intended his equally knowing audience to suspend their disbelief if they thought the characters rousted from their beds were clothed.

For decades I labored under the misconception that Lady Mac fainted in order to draw attention away from her husband’s lame excuse about killing the witnesses. (O ye who are addicted to puns, say ye that her faint was a feint?)

In fact, I now know that she faints at the sight of a host of naked frailties jiggling before her tender eyes–“What, in our house?” she cries in shock. When the death of Duncan is exposed, to the horror of his loyal subjects, the audience may legitimately imagine some additional exposure.

A Thought to Carry Away

Now, dear reader, you may be surprised to consider the subject of night-clothing, and perhaps a little uncomfortable. But please remember that many of our own customs are not universal, and people whose dress or speech or thought or looks differ from ours are not necessarily stupid, ornery or evil. Let us be slow to judge others, at least until we know ourselves and our own heritage of nighttime nudity!