A Sea-rious Story

The following is a dramatized version of a true story.

Over time, the populace of a certain town noticed that there was something fishy about the price of fish. It kept floating higher, not the typical ebb and flow. Fish is the o-fish-al appetizer of Shabbos. Therefore, the Shabbos shoppers began to loudly carp about the exorbitant prices.

The customers crammed into the Tzemach Tzedek’s house like sardines. They complained that they are at the mercy of fishmongers – hook, line, and sinker. They should not need to seek out a loan shark to afford basic Shabbos staples!

The fish purveyors, for their part, quoted a Ri Migash in Bava Basra. Chazal protected fish sellers. Indeed, they said other fishmongers are not allowed to come down the pike and sell in their pond. The customers retorted that the argument was a red herring. There, the sellers set a reasonable price. In this town, the fish sellers raised the prices off the scales.

The rabbi said that he needed to mullet over for a bit.

The rabbi pointed to a Mishna quoted in Bava Basra (166a). There was a time when birds used for korbanos became exceedingly expensive. Each pair of birds sold for a gold dinar, which at that time represented about a month’s salary for the average person. Women who had recently given birth could hardly afford to purchase birds for the korbanos they were required to bring.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel cried fowl and hatched a plan. “I will not sleep tonight until the price drops dramatically.”

He went to the beis midrash and declared that any woman who hitherto would have brought five pairs of birds is now free as a bird to bring just one; she may bring the others if she so chooses.

The bird purveyors’ feathers were significantly ruffled. The price of the birds swooned dramatically – to a hundredth of the original price. According to Rashi in Kerisus, Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel instituted an emergency, limited-time measure to bring down the cost of the birds. He felt that b’nos Yisrael were being taken advantage of financially and were not getting proper tweetment. Perhaps some would chicken out of buying their korbanos. After the temporary measure, however, they were able to wing it. We can conclude that the rabbis sometimes saw fit to intervene and lower the bill; they didn’t duck the issue.

However, was that measure only for the birds, or can it be parroted for fish as well? The Tzemach Tzedek (the Rishon) pointed out that Jews had the halibut of buying fish for Shabbos. Fish purveyors cod raise the prices without suffering a drop-off in sales. He agreed that the sharp increase in fish prices was not a fluke. A temporary ban on all fish purchases was in order, including fish for Shabbos. This would help the Jews who were floundering and cause the prices to sink.

Others who wanted their Shabbos fish protested. They referred to the Gemara in Beitzah (16a) that says that the money one spends on Shabbos and yom tov is not deducted from one’s yearly allotment. So, they reasoned, what difference does it make if the fish is expensive? Since they are buying it for Shabbos, their money will be returned to them in one way or another through Divine intervention, and they will remain afloat. There’s no need to crab about it.

Still, Tzemach Tzedek ruled that a boycott was in order. Just as Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel curtailed the offering of korbanos, we may temporarily curtail the mitzvah of oneg Shabbos. This would be true even if eating fish on Shabbos is a mitzvah d’Oraysa, as some argue (see such an opinion in the Shulchan Aruch HaRav). However, for halachah l’maaseh, we hold that eating fish is just one manifestation of the mitzvah of oneg Shabbos. One can also fulfill the biblical mitzvah of oneg Shabbos with other dishes. So a boycott is undoubtedly in order to bring the price of fish down.

Regarding the argument that the money spent on Shabbos will be returned, Tzemach Tzedek said that it is fine and good for people with the money to lay out. However, a poor person who does not have the money to spend now will not be able to buy the fish, even though there is a guarantee that the funds will be returned to him later. The fish sellers were being shellfish and harming these poor people. For their sake, he had to institute the boycott.

One interesting point that can be made from the above story is that the Tzemach Tzedek agreed that one should continue buying fancy food for Shabbos even if it is now above one’s means. That money will be returned to him somehow that year. R’ Reuven Feinstein, shlita, concurred. A Shabbos food that suddenly becomes expensive may continue to be purchased without suffering any net loss in his income that year. The fish in the story started as affordable but was then subject to the whims and manipulations of the merchants.

One note: There is no way to tell how each individual’s Shabbos expenditures will be repaid. The individual may be saved from losing his wallet. There may have been a decree that he should sell six cars in one week, and now he will sell seven. But one way or the other, Hashem will pay him back for the money he spends to honor Shabbos. That’s a great net result.