An unattributed Mishna is connected to a mysterious figure who only appears a few times in Rabbinic literature. He has no first name and is only called “son of,” “ben.” The Mishna deals with redeeming a donkey and is associated with Ben Bag Bag:
MISHNA: “One may not redeem a firstborn donkey, neither with a calf, nor with an undomesticated animal, nor with a slaughtered animal, nor with a tereifa, nor with a hybrid of a sheep and a goat, nor with a koy, . . Whose opinion is expressed in the first clause of the mishna? It is the opinion of Ben Bag Bag” (Bechorot 12a)
Ben Bag Bag is quoted in a few other places in Shas. He comments on the laws of the daily sacrifice in Pesachim (96b) and on how you can spend your maaser sheni money (Eruvin 27b). The fact that he is quoted in these debates seems to be a reflection of his time. Ben Bag Bag was an early scholar, a contemporary (or perhaps a student) of Hillel, who lived when the Temple was standing. It makes sense that he has opinions on Temple service and food eaten by pilgrims.
We also come across Ben Bag Bag’s rather aggressive approach to theft in Bava Kamma:
“Ben Bag Bag says: Do not enter another’s courtyard to take what is yours without permission, lest you appear to him as a thief. Rather, break his teeth, and say to him: I am taking what is mine.” (Bava Kamma 27b)
But his most famous statement is not about law but appears in a collection of maxims for life: Pirkei Avot.
“Ben Bag Bag said: Turn it over, and turn it over, for all is therein. And look into it; And become gray and old therein; And do not move away from it, for you have no better portion than it.” (Pirkei Avot 5:22)
His thoughts about the importance of Torah are followed by another famous phrase, also expressed by someone with a strange name:
“Ben He He said: According to the labor is the reward.” (Pirkei Avot 5:23)
Although today’s Pirkei Avot have six chapters, the book was originally five chapters; the sixth was added later from a different source. In essence these two obscure Jews end Pirkei Avot with their words, one extolling the all encompassing nature of Torah and the other explaining that the more you suffer, the greater your reward will be. Who are these scholars?
The oddness of their names led commentaries to suggest that these are not names but pseudonyms. There is even a suggestion that they are one and the same person. This makes sense when you look at the names: Ben He He is literally son of the letter he ה, numerically equal to five. Ben Bag Bag’s name is composed of the letters bet (2) plus gimmel (3): five. But why call a person son of five? Tosfot in Chagigah (where we have Ben He He asking Hillel questions) offers a fascinating answer:
“Some commentators explain that he was a convert—meaning a son of Abraham and Sarah, to whose names the letter *He* was added—and the same applies to “Bag Bag”; which also totals five” (Tosfot Hagigah 9b Bar He He)
Avraham and Sarah – originally Avram and Sarai – are the first converts to Judaism. God adds the letter “he” to both of their names. Since all converts are considered children of Avraham and Sarah and are called ben Avraham and Sarah, bat Avraham and Sarah, this is another way of saying that, but in shorthand.
But why not just call them Ben Avraham veSarah? Why the nickname? The Tosfot Yom Tov (17th century Bohemia) explains that the times they lived in were dangerous for converts and they had to go undercover:
“However, in Midrash Shmuel, it is recorded that Rashbam heard from his uncle, Rav Yehuda ben HaRosh, that they were converts; they were given these names to shield them from informers. They were considered children of Abraham and Sarah—reflecting the addition of the letter *He* to their names—and as the first converts, all subsequent converts were called their “children.” The numerical value (gematria) of “Bag Bag” is equivalent to “He He” (5 + 5). They are essentially one and the same, yet the name “Bag Bag” is more concealed and obscure; they were given distinct names to allow one to be distinguished from the other.” (Tosfot Yom Tov on Pirkei Avot 5:22)
Monozigote, CC BY-SA 4.0 <https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0>, via Wikimedia Commons
If Ben Bag Bag was indeed a convert and he was a student of Hillel, could it be that he was THE convert who is featured in one of Hillel’s most famous stories? Marcus Jastrow and Wilhelm Bacher suggest this possibility. Here is the tale:
“an incident involving one gentile who came before Shammai. The gentile said to Shammai: How many Torahs do you have? He said to him: Two, the Written Torah and the Oral Torah. The gentile said to him: With regard to the Written Torah, I believe you, but with regard to the Oral Torah, I do not believe you. Convert me on condition that you will teach me only the Written Torah. Shammai scolded him and cast him out with reprimand. The same gentile came before Hillel, who converted him. On the first day, he said to him: Alef, bet, gimmel, dalet. The next day he reversed the order of the letters. The convert said to him: But yesterday you did not tell me that. Hillel said to him: Didn’t you rely on me? Therefore, you should also rely on me with regard to the matter of the Oral Torah,” (Shabbat 31a)
The beauty in identifying Ben Bag Bag with this story is that his name IS the order of the letters – bet comes before gimel!
If these admittedly slightly farfetched ideas are correct, it makes the statements in Pirkei Avot even more powerful. Everything is included in the Torah – only someone who has been exposed to the wider world would know that Torah has everything and more than what is out there. And who but a convert would deeply understand the difficulties and even the pain of joining the Jewish people, and comfort himself (and us) by saying that the reward will be commensurate?
PS For the last Siyum haShas, Hadran made a Ben Bag Bag bag, with his wonderful words:
Photo credit: Rena May Juni
