Our Gemara on Amud Beis relates a story where the great Amora Rabbah, based on arguments from his student Abaye, conceded that he made a halachic error. Upon this realization, the Gemara reports that he ran after the party involved to try to correct his actions—but he could not catch up to them. The Gemara adds an interesting detail:
He ran three parsa’os after the buyer who purchased his donkey to revoke the sale… and some say that he ran one parsa through sand. But he did not succeed in overtaking him.
A similar story is reported in Kesuvos (60b), where Abaye is corrected by his rebbe, Rav Yosef, and he too ran after people to correct his ruling:
He ran three parsa’os after his tenant farmer, and some say he ran one parsa through sand… but did not succeed in catching up.
Why this recurring, peculiar phrasing—three parsa’os on straight ground versus one parsa on sand? I believe the Talmud is offering a mild rebuke via a literary device. Let’s take a closer look:
We have a triangle of the same students, rabbis, and colleagues. Abaye was a student of both Rabbah and Rav Yosef. Rabbah and Rav Yosef were colleagues. There was a longstanding dispute among them about which approach in learning is superior: broad, surface-level knowledge (Sinai) or deep analytical reasoning (oker harim, uprooter of mountains) (Berachos 64a).
Rav Yosef was known as a Sinai, and Rabbah as one who uproots mountains. The Gemara there reports that officially, the sages endorsed Rav Yosef’s approach as generally superior, though in practice, since as the Gemara relates that both seemed to share the position of Rosh Yeshiva in overlapping ways, it wasn’t so clear cut.
Apparently, the debate is never fully resolved. The phrase of running three parsa’os on flat ground versus one parsa in slippery sand is a metaphor for these two styles. Broad knowledge covers more ground—like the three parsa’os—but is less deep. In contrast, the analytic path is slow and deliberate, like one difficult parsa through sand.
By noting mistakes by both Rabbah and Abaye, and their unsuccessful attempts to correct them, the Gemara might be hinting that these errors stemmed from failing to integrate both styles properly. Out of deference to these sages, it is only hinted at subtly, without direct censure.
By paying close attention to the sages’ language, we can appreciate their brilliance, humility, and ethical refinement.
Translations Courtesy of Sefaria, except when, sometimes, I disagree with the translation
Free resource for couples/families:
Over 80 lectures on heathy communication, marriage and sexuality from a Torah perspective Click here
If you liked this, you might enjoy my Relationship Communications Guide. Click on the link above.
Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, LCSW-R, LMFT, DHL is a psychotherapist who works with high conflict couples and families. He can be reached via email at simchafeuerman@gmail.com