Wednesday 6 August 2014

Megilla 27 Sanctity, Change of Ownership, and Prayer

We have been discussing whether the sanctity of a place or object is changed when that place or object is sold.  Today's daf begins with that conversation.  We are reminded that a study hall is considered to be of greater sanctity than a synagogue.  This means that a study hall should not be sold so that it will be used as a synagogue.

To further this exploration of levels of sanctity, the rabbis discuss which scrolls may be place on top of other scrolls when they are stored in the arc.  After debating some of the options, the rabbis note that often there is no choice but to place one scroll on another.  In fact, when we furl the scroll, we are similarly placing words of greater and lesser sanctity beside each other.  

Before beginning another Mishna, the rabbis speak about what to do when we are asked to give charity while visiting another town.  There is a line of thought about taking care of people who are needy.  However, those who are in our own villages should take priority.  It will be interesting to see if this line of thought continues on through my reading of the Talmud.

A short Mishna teaches us about individuals versus communities when it comes to the sanctity of items.   A comparison is made between communities and cities; individuals and villages.

Another Mishna is introduced.  We move into the topic of purchases, interest, permanent sales, and other financial transactions.  The rabbis explore when we might be allowed to reverse a sale.  We also learn that only four uses are prohibited in a former synagogue after its sale: as a bathhouse, tannery, mikvah, and lavatory (because nakedness and offensive odours would insult the previous sanctity of that place).  

Our daf also touches upon two more ideas.  First, the rabbis consider the implications of urinating in the same place where one prays (within four cubits).  Second, the rabbis boast about their prayer and the ways in which they are rewarded for those prayers.  

I continue to be fascinated by the discussion of 'levels of sanctity'.  The concept of sanctity seems to be similar to that of ritual impurity.  It is a state that may or may not be reversed given specific circumstances, actions and intentions.  Although sanctity seems 'positive' and impurity seems 'negative', in fact they are simply two states of being.


No comments:

Post a Comment