Q&A: The Authority of the Babylonian Talmud
The Authority of the Babylonian Talmud
Question
Hello Rabbi Michael!
Since I know your view—that the reason one must accept the view of the Babylonian Talmud is not because that is necessarily the truth, but because of its authority—I would like to ask you the following: in a case where we know with certainty that the Babylonian Talmud made a mistake, must we still accept what it says?
For example, I am currently studying the passage in tractate Pesachim 46a, where it says regarding the measure of the leavening time of dough: “If there is no similar dough there, what is the law? Rabbi Abbahu said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish: enough time for a person to walk from Migdal Nunya to Tiberias, one mil. Why not simply say: one mil? This teaches us that the measure of a mil is like the distance from Migdal Nunya to Tiberias.”
That is, according to the Babylonian Talmud, the measure for leavening is one mil. But as is known today, the distance between Migdal Nunya and ancient Tiberias is four mil; there are clear findings on the matter, and Josephus writes this as well. And indeed, in the Jerusalem Talmud on the passage in Pesachim it says that the measure for leavening is four mil. Granted, it does not mention there the distance from Migdal Nunya to Tiberias, but if we put two and two together, it is clear that this was also the original intent of Resh Lakish. The measure of one mil mentioned in the Babylonian Talmud is a later Babylonian addition by those who did not know the distance from Migdal Nunya to Tiberias. It is not at all clear what the Babylonian Talmud relied on when it established the measure as one mil.
In addition, based on experience, it is not possible for dough to leaven within the time of one mil; even four mil is barely plausible.
And this raises another point: in several manuscripts of the Babylonian Talmud, the entire section from the word “mil” until the end of the passage is absent altogether. That is, there is reason to assume this is a later addition from after the time of the Talmud. And it would seem that this addition is based on the Talmud in Megillah 2b: “How far? Rabbi Yirmiyah, and some say Rabbi Chiyya bar Abba, said: from Hamatan to Tiberias, one mil. Why not simply say: one mil? This teaches us how much the measure of a mil is—from Hamatan to Tiberias.”
Notice that there is a complete parallel between the passage in Megillah and the passage in Pesachim (from the word “mil” until the end of the passage).
However, all the medieval authorities brought the Babylonian Talmud with the version that says “one mil.”
So the question is this: assuming we accept that this indeed is the correct version in the Babylonian Talmud, but it contradicts reality in several respects, and even contradicts the Jerusalem Talmud—must we still accept the authority of the Babylonian Talmud in such a case? It should be noted that the error here is not one of judgment, but something closer to a factual mistake.
Answer
In principle, if you have concluded that there is a factual mistake in the Babylonian Talmud, you may—in fact should—act differently. With regard to a halakhic mistake, the situation may be different. Perhaps it depends on whether the person making the mistake falls under the commandment to heed the words of the Sages (though that applies more to “do not deviate” with respect to the Sanhedrin than to the Babylonian Talmud).
But you need to check whether it is really clear that this is indeed a mistake. I was not persuaded by your example regarding leavening. Maybe that is because of my skepticism about archaeology and so on. Beyond that, the measure of leavening depends on how much leavening we are talking about. After all, there are different degrees, and so it is hard to determine what level of leavening is being discussed.
Discussion on Answer
Scientifically speaking, there is no leavening without microbes that come from outside. The microbes that cause leavening were present in the past, and to a certain extent still are today, in the atmosphere. The same is true of the microbes that cause wine fermentation. Louis Pasteur proved this when he grew grapevines in glass chambers sealed off from the outside, and also wrapped the grapes in sterile cotton wool immediately after fruit set (at that stage one can see tiny clusters on the vine with berries about a millimeter in diameter or less, which are destined to grow into grapes). He then prepared juice from the grapes in a closed place, and the juice did not ferment. But a jug of juice into which a grape grown outside was thrown immediately began the fermentation process.
Today as well, the air—at least in urban areas—is cleaner of those microbes, and the flour made from the varieties commonly used nowadays is also less prone to becoming infected by those microbes. (I seem to recall that Professor Meir Schwartz once lectured about this and raised the question whether our matzot are really protected from leavening!!!)
Reuven, I’d be glad to know how dough could even leaven in 4 mil when it is only flour and water.
Maybe the physicist rabbi has an answer. Because as far as I know, it takes much, much longer when there are no accelerants of any kind. But maybe I’m mistaken.