Heder Riddles and Puzzles among Lithuanian Jews

2

A peasant was transporting a large cart of hay. He had to pass through a low gateway, but the cart couldn’t pass under it. People advised the peasant to wear glasses with magnifying lenses, so that the gate would become larger, and the cartful of hay could easily pass through.

Even a small child can fully understand that this advice would lead to nothing and will, of course, explain that the growth is only an appearance. Meanwhile a quick-witted solver will immediately rebut the riddle teller with a more apt answer: “But the cartful of hay will also be magnified through the glasses!”

3

At the start of the Sabbath, a Jewish woman was in despair: what to do? She was supposed to say a blessing, as usual, over two burning candles, but she only had one. But she quickly regained her bearings with this solution: she put a mirror next to the burning candle and then two candles appeared before her eyes. Did she act wisely? asks the riddle teller.

Even a small child will understand that the woman’s attempt is completely pointless, since the doubling is imagined, not real. However, a child who is presented with the riddle is still perplexed, for two candles are apparent to the eye. A bright child answers—or the adults lead him to answer—that if there are two candles thanks to the mirror, then simultaneously there will also be two women, so that each one of them will still have only one candle and the woman’s predicament will not be reduced at all.

8

If the High Priest alone was allowed to enter the Temple’s Holy of Holies, and if even he was allowed to enter only on Yom Kippur, then the question arises: what would people do on “Tishebov” (the Ninth of Av, the anniversary of the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem)? According to the custom of this mournful day, one had to take off the luxurious covering hanging in front of the ark of the covenant. The answer is clear: while the Temple was still in existence, there could of course be no “Tishebov” day of mourning, and therefore there was no need to remove the covering.

9

If Rosh-khoydesh (the first of the month, a half-holiday) coincides with the fast of “Tishebov,” is it necessary to read the portion of the festive psalms, Hallel, assigned for Rosh-khoydesh?

An attentive child will immediately point out to you the pointlessness of such a question. Rosh-khoydesh means the beginning of the month, while “Tishebov” literally means “the ninth day of the month of Av”; therefore, such an alignment is unthinkable.

11

Three travelers came to an inn. They had a shared treasure, which they gave to the innkeeper for safekeeping, with the condition that he return it to them when demanded not by one, but by all of them. Having given over the treasure, they sat down to eat. During dinner, they sent one of the companions to the innkeeper to ask for wine on behalf of all of them. But the sent man asked for the treasure instead of the wine, as if on behalf of the rest. The innkeeper, to make sure that he may give over the treasure, yelled to the other two companions a short question: “Gentlemen, may I?” They answered, “Yes, you may,” assuming that he was speaking about the bottle of wine. The companion disappeared once the treasure was in his hands. When the other travelers learned of the hoax, they turned to a judge, with a complaint against the innkeeper, demanding he give them the treasure. Question: how could he have shielded himself from this responsibility? Answer: “Your Honor!” the innkeeper could have said, “we had an agreement about the return of the treasure upon the consensus and demand of all three companions. Let them, according to this agreement, bring to me their third companion. Then, I will give them the treasure.”¹

31

On one riverbank, there are three Jews and three muzhiks (peasants) with a boat, which can fit no more than two people at a time. They all had to go to the other side of the river, with the necessary condition that there would be no more muzhiks than Jews on either side of the river. That is, there shouldn’t be on either riverbank two peasants with one Jew, three peasants with two Jews, etc., so as to avoid violence or insult from the “goyim.” But, there can be on either riverbank an equal number of peasants and Jews, or more Jews than peasants, since there is no expectation of Jewish violence and insult against the “goyim.”

One should do as follows. Two peasants take the boat to the other bank, one of them gets out, and the other comes back to the first bank and takes the third peasant. In this way, all three peasants are on the other bank. One peasant takes the boat to the first bank, and two Jews take the boat to the second bank, so that there are two Jews and two muzhiks there. Then, one Jew and one peasant go from the second bank to the first, so that there are two Jews and two peasants on the first riverbank. Then, two Jews take the boat from the first bank to the second bank, so that there are all three Jews and one peasant. The peasant takes the boat back to the first bank, so that all three peasants are back on the first riverbank with the boat, and all three Jews are on the second riverbank. Two peasants take the boat to the second bank and one of them comes back with the boat to get the third peasant from the first bank, and they both get off on the second bank.

This procedure can be simplified. From the beginning, one Jew and one muzhik can leave the first riverbank, the Jew comes back with the boat, two muzhiks take it to the second riverbank, and then one can proceed in the way already stated.²