We learned from a mishnah at the bottom of yesterday’s daf that when a person is survived by both adult and minor children and the adult children quietly invest a portion of the estate, the profits are divided evenly with the minor heirs when they come of age. However, if the adult heirs declare in advance that they are making an investment from their own share of the inheritance, they are not required to share the proceeds with their siblings.
On today’s daf, we read about a related incident:
Rav Safra’s father left dinars. Rav Safra took them and entered into a business venture with them. His brothers came and charged him in a court of law before Rava.
A shrewd investor, Rav Safra used his inheritance to turn a profit on his business venture. His brothers then went to court to claim a share of the earnings as, apparently, the investment was made using shared funds. Given that Rav Safra made no declaration in advance of using the inherited dinars, we might have expected the courts to rule in favor of the brothers, but Rava rules differently:
Rava said to them: Rav Safra is a great person; he does not abandon his studies and toil for others.
Rav Safra had the reputation for being a great person. In the Talmud, that means not only that he was wise and knowledgeable but also that he immersed himself in the study of Torah. According to Rava, the only way that Rav Safra would pause his studies to attend to business matters was to attend to his own affairs. As a result, he rules that even though Rav Safra did not make a declaration in advance, he does not have to share the profits with his siblings.
One might reasonably object to Rava’s ruling on the grounds that Rav Safra’s brothers deserve the protection that the mishnah seeks to provide. Why should the fact that their brother is a leading rabbinic figure allow him to skirt the rules and deprive them of a share of the profits?
Rava’s ruling, however, follows a different logic: Maximizing the time that Rav Safra spends studying is a good thing. By exempting Rav Safra from the requirement to make a declaration of his intention, and arranging to do so before witnesses, Rav Safra is able to take care of his financial needs and return quickly to the house of study.
This is not the first time we’ve seen the rabbis carve out legal exemptions for themselves. I am left wondering: Was Rava’s intervention on behalf of his colleague really necessary? Wouldn’t Rav Safra have been an even greater person if he followed the rules that applied to others? Or if he found a way to settle the disagreement before his brothers felt the need to bring the matter to court? Or if he was inclined to share the proceeds of his investments with his brothers in the first place? Was his dedication to Torah really worth making this exemption? I’m open to the argument that there are circumstances in which rabbinic law might make accommodations for those who are dedicated to the study of Torah. At the same, I’m troubled by this one.
Perhaps this story is balanced by another one found in a later geonic work, Sheiltot (Parashat Vayechi). There we learn that once, while Rav Safra was praying, a stranger approached him and offered to buy his donkey. Rav Safra didn’t interrupt his prayers to respond to the offer, so the stranger upped his price. When Rav Safra still didn’t respond, the price went higher. This continued until Rav Safra concluded his prayers and then sold the donkey at the original offered price — refusing to accept any more money. In this case, at least, his piety was not an excuse for profit.
Read all of Bava Batra 144 on Sefaria.
This piece originally appeared in a My Jewish Learning Daf Yomi email newsletter sent on November 16, 2024. If you are interested in receiving the newsletter, sign up here.
Help us keep Jewish knowledge accessible to millions of people around the world.
Your donation to My Jewish Learning fuels endless journeys of Jewish discovery. With your help, My Jewish Learning can continue to provide nonstop opportunities for learning, connection and growth.
