daf bit: Avodah Zarah 23

[cellio]

We learn in the mishna: one should not place cattle in heathens' inns, because they are suspected of immoral practice with them. The g'mara responds: but according to a baraita we can buy their cattle for sacrifices, so shouldn't we be concerned there too? The g'mara then answers: the heathen surely won't sell an animal he has dedicated to idolatry, and for other immoral uses he won't put his profit at risk, so it's ok to buy their animals. After further discussion, there appears to be a dispute between R' Eliezer, who forbids buying a red heifer from heathens, and the sages, who permit it. The sages follow the baraita while R' Eliezer follows the mishna. Final answer? I don't know. (22b-23a.)

They're talking about the red heifer because, among animals offered in the temple, it's super-important.

Today's daf is 24.

Comments

[conuly]

What the heck immoral practice were they concerned would happen to a cow in a barn?

[siderea]

...

[cellio]

Initially I assumed it meant beastiality, but then I got to the part about dedicating them to idolatry. So I'm not sure now. In Judaism you can (well, could in the past) dedicate an animal to the temple and that makes it unavailable for other uses, but that doesn't seem kosher if you *stole* the animal. So were they worried about the heathens dedicating their livestock to heathen gods and thus tainting them somehow?

[conuly]

That makes even less sense than bestiality, to be honest.

"Ah! Come, my fellow heathens! A Jew has left a cow with us! We must sneakily dedicate it to Ba'al and not inform the owner! Hijinks will ensue!"

[cellio]

Maybe the idolaters think that by doing that, they'll make the cow unacceptable to God, so God will punish the Jew for bringing an unfit offering. Or maybe (more likely) the rabbis worry that the idolaters will think that...

I'm finding Avodah Zarah to be a challenging tractate to understand.

[siderea]

the heathen surely won't sell an animal he has dedicated to idolatry, and for other immoral uses he won't put his profit at risk

That is so touchingly naïve. It's like they believe in idolatry, but not idiocy.

ETA: Reasoning from enlightened self-interest only works on individuals known to one as having having it, and never applies to the general public. Given a large enough population – and it's not that large – there's always someone that stupid, for any value of "that".

[cellio]

Indeed. There's always somebody. Which might be why R' Eliezer says don't buy from them, at least for the red heifer (I'll have to disentangle the g'mara more carefully to know if he says that for other purchases too).

[conuly]

Well, I've heard naiver sentiments about economics. Everybody thinks that when it comes to money, we're suddenly clear eyed rationalists.