The shiurim that we use are integral to proper fulfillment of the commandments. The required size of the matzah, or the amount of wine to use for kiddush, and other measurements in many ways define our Yiddishkeit. It is self understood that changing these hallowed measurements should not be done lightly for showroom are in many ways a symbol and representation of tradition. What does one do, however, when archaeological evidence not only practically forces such a change but also resolves multiple contradictions that many achronim were unable to satisfactorily resolve? What's more, what if the resolution comes from a physics professor, is elegant as well as scientific and us supported by such wealth of evidence that it can hardly be refuted? The halachic and hashkafic challenges are enormous and cannot be ignored?
First a statement of the problem and brief background. For those who wish to explore farther, links are provided at the end of this post.
The measurements in the Talmud are presented based on the size of rochav agodal or in volumes of eggs. These two methods of calculating shiurim are supposed to be equivalent. However, when Noda B'Yehuda compared the two methods, he found them to be widely disparate. In fact, the "egg" method, gave shiurim that were about twice the "agodal" method. To resolve this discrepancy, Noda B'yehuda suggested that eggs have shrunk and the eggs of his time were half the size of the eggs of the Talmudic period. This solution manifests itself in the actual measurements of the shiurim of our times.
Yet, this solution leads us, in ways explained in the links, to also assume that the average man in Talmudic times was 25% wider, had a thumb that was a third longer but of the same width as today, and had arms that reached below his knees, and that the barley of those times was shorter and less dense but of the same length as today. Needless to say, ancient skeletons, painting and sculpture and examples of clothing show nothing of the kind.
Four lines of archeologic evidence contradict the Nodah B'Yehuda's assumption.
1.Eruvin 83a relates that a special vessel called 'modia' was made for Rebbi and that its volume was 207 of eggs of the time of the Jews in the dessert. 'Modia' is known to be one-third of 'amphora', of which many examples remain, and the volume of the egg measured by amphora is the same as the eggs of today.
2.Rambam sates that one egg is equal to 11.7 silver dinars, which was measured by Geonim to be equal to a gold coin shashdang. Many of examples of these coins remain and they yield an egg of the same size as contemporary eggs.
3.An amah is related in the Talmudic sources to the size of the egg. We now have a description in the Chizkaiahu's tunnel that states that its length is 1200 ama. We can measure the tunnel and obtain the exact measurement of an amah. This also yields contemporary size for the size of an egg.
4. If one tabulates the ratios of various measurements mentioned in the Talmud, they only work out appropriately if the Talmudic egg was the same size as our egg.
One must add that the Geonim write in sources not available to Nodah B'Yehuda, that "eggs and olives were chosen to serve as units of measurements because they are found everywhere and do not change".
If we take this to practical conclusion, all of our mitsvah - measurements will shrink by approximately a half.
Now the story.
IN 1982, Professor Greenfeld of Bar Ilan visited the Steipler and showed him an article that presented some of this information. The Steipler told him that it should be published. After it appeared on Megadim, the Steipler and two other rabbonim took the unusual steps of responding to the article. Professor Greenberg responded with more and additional evidence and a reinterpretation of the Talmudic term on which everything was based. This term is rochav agodal.
This term is usually understood as thickness of the thumb at the knuckle; in other words, the distance across the width thumb. Professor Greenfeld argues that it should be taken as the thickness of the thumb from the nail to the opposite surface, which reduces rochav agodal by one half and removes the contradiction of Nodah B'Yehudah.
You may have lost me by now. That's OK, I cannot possible explain it with the same persuasive power and scientific and talmudic acumen that Professor Greenfeld displays in the papers linked below. He marshals a great deal of evidence from the Rishonim for this interpretation of this term.
Where does this leave us? With nothing less than a revolution in the accepted basic and essential set of measurements, and from a professor, no less.
To some, this may be hard to accept. To me, it changes the paradigm of how we relate and compartmentalize various fields of knowledge and presents formidable challenges for the relationship of scientific and Talmudic argumentation in determining Halacha. Thus far, Professor Greenfeld's work has largely been ignored, but it is convincing. Earlier or later, it will have an effect. If archeology can force change, why can't other scientific fields? Should they?
links: Download LinearMeasurementHalacha.pdf
Very interesting even it's not new.
Please look at: http://www.daat.ac.il/daat/toshba/halacha/kama-2.htm that summarize it very nice (in Hebrew)
p.s. This Professor is also Rav
Posted by: Noam | April 30, 2007 at 06:54 AM