How many times have you asked about a Gemara …

How many times have you asked about a Gemara… This could never happen?! What a farfetched case?! This can’t be real?!

…but really did Gemaras that never happened Prepared by Rabbi Yossi Bennett, MesivtaAteres Yaakov

Menachos 37a • בעא מיניה פלימו מרבי, מי שיש לו שני ראשים, באיזה מהן מניח תפילין? א"ל, או קום גלי או קבל עלך שמתא! אדהכי, אתא ההוא גברא, א"ל, "איתיליד לי ינוקא דאית ליה תרי רישי! כמה בעינן למיתב לכהן?" אתא ההוא סבא, תנא ליה, חייב ליתן לו י' סלעים.

Medrash(brought in Tosfos, Menachos 37a) • There was a man who had two heads. He married and had seven sons, one of whom also had two heads. When the two-headed father died, the two-headed son claimed a double share of the inheritance, but the other six brothers thought he should only get one. The Sanhedrin couldn't decide the case, so ShlomoHaMelech prayed for wisdom and finally decided to cover up one head and pour hot water on the other head. When he did, both heads flinched and cried out in pain. From this Shlomo deduced that they were one person not two and should only have one share of the inheritance.

The Herrin Twins

The Galyon Twins Oldest Living Conjoined Twins- 57 years old

Conjoined Twins in Manila

Chulin 109b אמרה ליה ילתא לרב נחמן, מכדי כל דאסר לן רחמנא, שרא לן כוותיה, אסר לן דמא שרא לן כבדא... חזיר- מוחא דשיבוטא

The Tambaqui Fish Maloney & Porcelli, a steak house opening in New York City next month, will feature a food most people can’t pronounce, let alone describe: Tambaqui. “We want some signature dishes,” says David Burke, the chef behind the project, “things that will set this apart as a New Age steak house.” Tambaqui- pronounced tam-bah-key- will certainly do that. A vegetarian cousin of the piranha, Tambaqui comes from the Amazon River and tastes more like pork than fish. “tastes more like pork than fish”

Okay, so maybe they’re real, But why do we need to learn about such far-out cases?

Why We Learn Gemara • At the 1994 annual awards dinner given by the American Association for Forensic Science, AAFS president, Don Harper Mills, astounded his audience in San Diego with the legal complications of a bizarre death. Here’s the story:

On March 23, 1994, a medical examiner viewed the body of Ronald Opus and concluded that he died from a shotgun wound to the head. The decedent had jumped from the top of a ten-story building intending to commit suicide (he left a note indicating his despondency). As he fell past the ninth floor, his life was interrupted by a shotgun blast through a window, which killed him instantly. Neither the shooter nor the decedent was aware that a safety net had been erected at the eighth floor level to protect some window washers, and that Opus would not have been able to complete his suicide in any case because of this.

Ordinarily, Dr. Mills continued, a person who sets out to commit suicide ultimately succeeds, even though the mechanism might not be what he intended. That Opus was shot on the way to certain death nine stories below probably would not have changed his mode of death from suicide to homicide. But the fact that his suicidal intent would not have been successful due to the safety net, caused the medical examiner to feel that he had a homicide on his hands.

Now, the room on the ninth floor from whence the shotgun blast emanated was occupied by an elderly man and his wife. At the time of the event, they were arguing, and he was threatening her with the shotgun. He was so upset that, when he pulled the trigger, he completely missed his wife and pellets went through the window striking Opus. When one intends to kill subject A, but kills subject B in the attempt, one is guilty of the murder of subject B. Thus the investigation turned to the old man as the killer of Ronald Opus.

BUT WAIT… There’s more…

When confronted with this charge, the old man and his wife were both adamant that neither knew that the shotgun was loaded. The old man said that it was his long standing habit to threaten his wife with the unloaded shotgun. He had no intention to murder her - therefore, the killing of Opus appeared to be an accident. That is, the gun had been accidentally loaded. The continuing investigation turned up a witness who saw the old couple's son loading the shotgun approximately six weeks prior to the fatal incident. It transpired that the old lady had cut off her son's financial support and the son, knowing the propensity of his father to use the shotgun threateningly, loaded the gun with the expectation that his father would shoot his mother. The case now becomes one of murder on the part of the son for the death of Ronald Opus.

BUT WAIT… There’s more…

There was an exquisite twist. Further investigation revealed that the son, one Ronald Opus, had become increasingly despondent over the failure of his attempt to engineer his mother's murder. This led him to jump off the ten- story building on March 23, only to be killed by a shotgun blast through a ninth story window. The medical examiner closed the case as a suicide.

I first read about this case back in the late nineties, somewhere online, and couldn't believe it! I printed it, folded up, carried it with me everywhere, and constantly took it out and read it to people, who were as astounded as I. Recently, while reading something entirely unrelated, I remembered this story. I researched it on the net and found out that the story never happened. The truth is that the story was told by Dr. Mills at the dinner, not as a true story, but as a hypothetical one. The purpose was to take people to the extreme reaches of possibility (way past the realms of probability), in order to flesh out the truest parameters of the law. Regular cases don't test the boundaries because they can be defined too easily. Only when going to the extreme can we discern the essence of each law, and where it begins and ends. With this knowledge, a person gets a feel for what underlies the law, and what the lawmaker really wanted to achieve. So while the average Joe doesn't need to know these cases, the American Association for Forensic Science, a group of people intensely interested in the inner workings of the law, have a strong desire to study this type of case.

Why am I telling you all this? Because this story explains the way in which hundreds of thousands of frum people occupy themselves for hours every day. They study Gemara. People often have a difficulty understanding why Jews devote so much time to tomes full of scenarios that are never going to come their way. Besides all the laws involving livestock, Temple sacrifices, and ritual purity, which don't seem relevant to us in our day and age, there are also cases which seem so farfetched as to border on impossibility. Such as the case of a weasel climbing into a cow's womb, swallowing a fetus, coming out, going back in, and regurgitating the fetus. The question the Gemara was grappling with in that scenario was whether or not the animal was considered born. Or the case of a person who knew he had a rock on his lap, then forgot and got up, and the rock rolled off and killed someone.

So why are we devoting thousands of hours a year to studying these things? Because Jews, like the American Association for Forensic Science, have an intense desire to understand the Lawmaker's desire, and to comprehend the principles that lie beneath all the laws of the Torah. Studying only pertinent laws such as the laws of Kashrus, Tzitzis, and Shabbos, wouldn't necessarily allow them to plumb the depths of Torah understanding, or the boundaries of its wisdom. To get to the greatest understanding of the Torah and its Writer, we need to go to the furthest reaches, and analyze things at the edge!

Nice meeting all of you… Enjoy the rest of your day!

2. How many pairs of tefillin do conjoined twins need to wear? HALACHIC RAMIFICATIONS 1. Does a father have to pay a double portion to redeem a conjoined twin first born? 3. Do conjoined twins receive a double portion for their inheritance?

The Hensel Twins

How many times have you asked about a Gemara …