When the author of the first Book of Maccabees, our main source for the term Maccabi, wishes

to characterize the wicked Jewish accomplices of Antiochos' Hellenization program, the first
act he sees fit to describe (I:14) is how the traitors "built a gymnasium in Jerusalem in the
heathen fashion, and submitted to circumcision, and disowned the holy covenant; they allied
themselves with the heathen and became the slaves of wrongdoing (Flavius, 1996).

Among other things, Josephus also reports that Herod established his own five-yearly games
on an international scale in honour of Caesar, to be held in Jerusalem and elsewhere. He even
named one of his daughters Olympia.
The "theatres and circuses" are frequently identified and condemned in the Old Testament as
places of idolatry and evil, though the Talmud writes that Jews were permitted to attend these
events even on the sabbath, because they might be able to save the lives of victims--by
indicating through the "thumbs up" gesture their wish that the victim's life be spared.
There is even reported the story of Rabbi Simeon ben Lakish, who was forced by economic
difficulties to take up the life of a gladiator. The Talmud describes how his eventual opting for
the life of Torah was at the expense of his athletic prowess since the two worlds--sports and
Judaism--were perceived as inherently antithetical (Bickerman, 1979).
1mac 1
In those days lawless men came forth from Israel, and misled many, saying, "Let
us go and make a covenant with the Gentiles round about us, for since we
separated from them many evils have come upon us."

[12] This proposal pleased them,
[13] and some of the people eagerly went to the king. He authorized them to
observe the ordinances of the Gentiles.
[14] So they built a gymnasium in Jerusalem, according to Gentile custom,
[15] and removed the marks of circumcision, and abandoned the holy covenant.
They joined with the Gentiles and sold themselves to do evil.
[16]
When Antiochus saw that his kingdom was established, he determined to become
king of the land of Egypt, that he might reign over both kingdoms.
2mac4
[9] In addition to this he promised to pay one hundred and fifty more if
permission were given to establish by his authority a gymnasium and a body of
youth for it, and to enrol the men of Jerusalem as citizens of Antioch.
[10] When the king assented and Jason came to office, he at once shifted his
countrymen over to the Greek way of life.
[11] He set aside the existing royal concessions to the Jews, secured through
John the father of Eupolemus, who went on the mission to establish friendship
and alliance with the Romans; and he destroyed the lawful ways of living and
introduced new customs contrary to the law.
[12] For with alacrity he founded a gymnasium right under the citadel, and he
induced the noblest of the young men to wear the Greek hat.

The Talmud Yerushalmi (Avodah Zorah 3:1) tells us that an eagle carried Alexander the
Great into the heavens. From there, the world looked to him like a ball. Similarly, the
Zohar (3:10) comments "the entire world revolves in a circle like a ball."

We also know from medieval rabbinic responsa that Jews inquired about the permissibility of
ball games, and sometimes received permissive answers.
It is not surprising that tannaim and amoraim were quite aware of various forms of ball playing.
The mishna already debates the question of whether the leather outer shell of a ball is a vessel
that is capable of becoming tameh. (3) The gemara discusses the question of liability for
homicide in a situation in which death occurred when the victim was struck by a rebounding ball
during a sport similar to handball. (4)

(3) Mishna Qelim 28:1. For other tumah issues related to balls see Mishna Qelim 10:4, and
23:1.
(4) Sanhedrin 77b.
The sole condemnatory passage related to ball playing in the Talmudic period, appears in
the Talmud Yerushalmi, (9) and in slightly different form in Midrash Eikhah Rabbati, (10)
passages to which we will now turn.
(9) Talmud Yerushalmi (Venice edition) Taaniyot 4:8, 69a, lines 3839; (Vilna edition, Mifal
Yerushalayim, 1960) Taanit 4:5, 24b, lines 4446.
(10) Midrash Eikhah Rabbati 2:5 , Lewin-Epstein edition, Israel, 1962, vol. 2, part 2 (Meggilot),
p. 92a, end of second column.
The relevant passage in the Talmud Yerushalmi arises in the midst of a discussion of the fall of
Betar, to which the mishna had referred as one of the events commemorated on Tisha BAv.
The gemara then records:
"Tur Shimon (11) used to provide three hundred loaves of bread (for the poor) every eve
of shabbat. Why then was it destroyed? One says, due to licentiousness. Another says, because
they used to play ball."
The Talmud Yerushalmi provides us with no further clarification on this matter. What was the
nature of the sin of playing ball? Why was that act of such severity as to warrant the destruction
of an otherwise extremely righteous city? What is the nature of the balance between the two
proposed reasonslicentiousness and playing ball?
The simplest solution to all of these problems would be to suggest that the wrongfulness of ball
playing had to do with the idolatrous context of Hellenistic athletic activities. General Rabbinic
opposition to athletics never had to do with the activity itself, but with the fact that the activity
usually took place either in the nude, and or within the context of worship of some foreign deity.
(12) This explanation would certainly account for the gravity of the crime, and for the particular
association with licentiousness. The combination of idolatry and licentiousness is a common
combination in explaining destruction. (13)
However, the second version of this aggadah, found in Midrash Rabbah to the Book of
Lamentations, seems to propound an alternative solution to the disparity between the crime and
the punishment. The account has other interesting variants and is therefore worth looking at in
its entirety.
Mount Simeon used to distribute three hundred barrels [of thin cakes among the poor every
Friday]. Why were these places destroyed? If you answer that it was on account of the harlots,
is it not a fact that there was only one girl there [who was a harlot] and they expelled her? R.
Huna said: The reason was because they used to play a game with ball on the sabbath. (14)
This reworking of the aggadah contains two prominent elements. Firstly, the sexual integrity of
the town is defended by the fascinating proposal that there had only been one prostitute to
begin with and that she had been driven out. This sustains the credibility of the original
accusation, but credits the town with having dealt with the problem in an appropriate fashion.
Which however, leaves only a single explanation for the destruction, and the weaker one at that.
The second element of the reworking, in the name of Rav Huna, then proposed that the sin of
playing ball had to do with the activity taking place on the sabbath.
The midrash offers no further explanation as to the nature of the sabbath violation that was
involved. However, the reference to sabbath violation in and of itself was sufficient, since in the
rabbinic mind there was already a powerful awareness of the connection between violation
of shabbat and destruction. The Talmud had already asserted that "Jerusalem was destroyed
because of the violation of the shabbat." (15) Secondly, there had always been a powerful
connection between violation of shabbat and idolatry, (16) so that the mere suggestion
of shabbat violation would be sufficient grounds for punishment even in the absence of detailed
indication of sinfulness. (17)
So the matter apparently remained for hundreds of years. No specific indication existed of the
impermissible nature of the act of playing ball on shabbat. Yet some hesitancy about the activity
had clearly existed, either related to the association with idolatry and licentiousness, or related
to some amorphous notion of breach of shabbat spirit sufficient to warrant Divine retribution. No
more detailed deliberation on the question seems to have been offered until the period of
the rishonim.

This pattern has carried into contemporary times, as outstanding Ashkenazik decisors of this
generation have confirmed the permissibility of ball playing within reasonable limits. Rabbi
Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, as cited by Rabbi Yehoshua Y. Neuwirth in his Shemirat Shabbat
Kehilkhatah, permits ball playing, (56) but forcefully prohibits soccer, generally playing on grass
or earth fields, and the use of inflated balls that are tied to keep the air in (such as balloons and
some beach balls). (57) In like fashion, Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, is quoted as having resolved
simply the question that agitated the rishonim, in contending that playing balls are definitely
"utensils"; and, in accordance with the whole of Ashkenazik tradition, are not muktsah.58
Most interesting, however, is to observe the progression of three versions of the language of
Rabbi Neuwirth, in Shemirat Shabbat Kehilkhatah. In the first edition, published in 1964, he
states:
Ball playingexcept for the game of soccerinvolves no prohibition, even outside of the house (in
a place where there is an eruv), as the law is likewise in regard to the game of table tennis (ping
pong). (59)
In the second, revised and expanded edition, published in 1978, the language is slightly more
tentative:
Ball playing should not be [declared to be] prohibitedexcept for the game of soccereven
outside of the house (in a place where there is an eruv). (60)
An English translation of the second edition, done "in close collaboration with the author," and
including "modifications as are felt to be appropriate for an English edition," was published in
1984. (61) It expands the paragraph by including the constraints, both directly and by cross
reference:
A. Subject to the restrictions referred to in paragraphs 7, 8 and 9 below, there is no reason to
forbid ball games played on a hard surface, such as an asphalt or concrete court or a ping-pong
(table-tennis) table, whether indoors or out, provided that, where necessary,
an eruv hatseirot has been made properly, as described in Chapter 17.
B. Ball games should not be played on earth or grass. (62)
The subtle, but clear progression in these three presentations; moving from "involves no
prohibition", to "should not be prohibited", to "there is no reason to forbid" conjoined with
detailed restrictive specifications, is indicative of a growing sense of discomfort with the
permissive position. (63) Nevertheless, Rabbi Neuwirth does not attempt to deny the clarity of
the tradition of pesak halakhah in the Ashkenazic tradition. (64)
The call to limit ball playing on shabbat and yom tov does not, then, derive from a valid place in
the literature of halakhah. Where then does it come from? Why has it been so recurrent?
Further, what response ought to be made to this concern? To deal with these questions we need
to turn to an entirely separate discussion of the spiritual condition of our community.
There is a difference of opinion amongst the poskim (Jewish law arbiters) about whether
playing games on Shabbat is permitted. Some say that seeing as Shabbat is intended for
Torah study, it is forbidden to play any type of game on Shabbat, and consequently, game
accessories are mukzteh. Accordingly, we have learned from the destruction of the city Tur
Shimon, of whom our Sages asked: the people living there gave plenty of charity and honored
the Shabbat with choice meals (Jerusalem Talmud, Taanit 4:5). Why was it destroyed? Some
explained that the city was destroyed because of prostitution; others explained it was because
they played with balls on Shabbat. Rabbi Eleazar of Worms (Rokeach), explained that by
playing with balls, they were btaylim min haTorah (idle from Torah study) on Shabbat
(paragraph 55). And since it is forbidden to play, the ball is considered mukzteh (Shibolei
Haleket, 121; Shulchan Aruch 308:45). True, we have testimony of some rabbis who played
chess on Shabbat; however, according to the opinion of the machmerim (stringent), they
apparently suffered from depression, and by playing chess, relieved their anxieties. However,
devoid of such a great need, it is forbidden to play games, and thus, they are mukzteh
(Mahara Sasson; Birkei Yosef (338:1).
Those Who Permit Playing Games on Shabbat
On the other hand, other authorities hold that there is no prohibition of playing games on
Shabbat, for as long as no money or other benefits are involved, they are not prohibited (Rma,
338:5), and the games are not mukzteh (Rma 308:45). Concerning what our Sages said in
regards to Tur Shimon being destroyed because they played ball on Shabbat, the reason was
that they carried the ball in the reshut harabim (public domain) (Gra).
However, it is clear that even according to this opinion, it is appropriate not to engage in
playing games on Shabbat because of bitul Torah (neglect of Torah study), since the main
purpose of Shabbat is to study Torah and enjoy meals and sleep time. As our Sages said:
Shabbat and Yamim Tovim (holidays) were given[to Israel] only to engage on them in the
words of Torah (Jerusalem Talmud, Shabbat 15:3). In addition, they said that a person should
divide the Shabbat half for physical oneg (pleasure) by eating and sleeping, and half for
spiritual oneg in Torah study and prayer (Pesachim 68b; Ohr Zarua; Smag; Rabbeinu
Yerucham; Yam Shel Shlomo, and others). And, as I have written several times, the words of
these Sages necessitate dedicating a minimum of six hours of Torah study every Shabbat. Yet,
according to the lenient opinion, as long as one is careful to devote at least half of the Shabbat
to Torah study, it is not forbidden to play games in ones spare time.
The Practical Halacha
According to the majority of Sephardic poskim, one should be stringent and not play games
on Shabbat at all, and the games themselves are mukzteh (Knesset HaGedolah, Chida, Ben
Ish Chai. This can also be implied from Shulchan Aruch 308:45). The opinion of most
Ashkenazi poskim is that there is no prohibition, but lchatchila (initially), it is preferable not to
play games on Shabbat, both because spare time on Shabbat should be devoted to Torah
study, and because it is proper to take into consideration the opinion that all games are
forbidden on Shabbat (Magen Avraham 308:5; Mishna Berura 308:21).
All this relates to games played at home; but concerning games played with a lot of fanfare,
such as soccer, basketball, and tennis, even according to most lenient poskim, it is forbidden
to play them on Shabbat because of uvdin dchol (weekday activities).
Answer about the Wayward Ball
Since in the opinion of almost all poskim, it is forbidden to play soccer on Shabbat, the ball is
mukzteh. Although, some authorities hold that it is forbidden to play soccer specifically on a
playing field because of uvdin dchol, but at home it is permissible, and in their opinion, the
ball is not mukzteh. Since this is the practice of your neighbors whose ball fell into your yard,
you should tell them that according to your practice the ball is mukzteh and therefore, you
cannot return it on Shabbat, but if they want, they can come get it themselves.
Thoughts on Games and Newspapers on Shabbat
According to numerous testimonies from various communities throughout the Diaspora, it was
customary for Jews to dedicate many hours to Torah study on Shabbat, in accordance with the
instruction of our Sages: Half [of Shabbat] to the Beit Midrash (study hall).
We see now that in recent generations, this mitzvah has been weakened. It occurred to me
that perhaps the position permitting playing games on Shabbat and reading newspapers and
secular books is what caused it. True, in the past, this position did not affect Torah study on
Shabbat because games were relatively few and far between, as were books and newspapers;
consequently, those who held by the lenient opinion, did not spend much time participating in
these activities on Shabbat. But today, when there are so many games for children and
teenagers to play, and so much reading material those who follow the lenient opinion are
drawn after them, and find it difficult to devote the Shabbat to Torah study. Perhaps this is why
Torah study in Ashkenazi communities has weakened more than amongst Sephardic Jews,
who were inclined to be stringent about playing games and reading secular books on Shabbat.
True, it cannot be determined from this that there is an obligation lhachmir (be stringent), but
it must definitely be said that if we see that engaging in playing games and reading secular
material violates the mitzvah of Torah study on Shabbat which should be at least six hours
it is necessary to be stringent in order to remedy the situation.
Young men who derive pleasure from jumping and running are permitted to do so on the
Sabbath (Orach Chayyim 301:2).
Though Moses Isserles, in his glosses to the Shulchan Aruch,takes a lenient view of ball games
on Shabbat and says, yesh mattirin, vnahagu lhakel some authorities permit it, and the
custom is to be lenient (Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayyim 308:45 and 518:1), other authorities
disagree. Karo, the author of the Shulchan Aruch itself, says, Asur lischok bShabbat vyomtov
bakkadur it is forbidden to play with a ball on Shabbat and festivals (Orah Chayyim 308:45).
Yet they were not debating a new problem. There is evidence that ball playing was already
known and not regarded with great rabbinic favour two millennia ago. Rabbinic sources indeed
aver that the Palestinian town of Tur Shimon was destroyed shemsachkim bakkadur, because
its inhabitants played ball on the Sabbath (Jerusalem Talmud, Taanit 14:5). Another source
suggests that the Jewish community of Alexandria perished for the same reason.
Football, entailing kicking a ball, generally produced strict rabbinic responses. Rabbinic sources
in the Middle Ages also knew of other ball games in which a bat was used, possibly similar to
cricket and tennis, though of course without these names. These sports must have been popular
even before medieval times since they also figured in rabbinic debate about Shabbat laws
(Babylonian Talmud and Tosafot, Betzah 12a).
A calf was being taken to the slaughter, when it broke away, hidits head under the robes of
Rabbi Judah the Prince (Yehudah Hanassi, referred to throughout the Talmud simply as
Rabbi), and cried. Go, said Rabbi, for this you were created. Thereupon they said [in
Heaven], Since he has no pity, let us bring suffering upon him. [He subsequently suffered
from physical pain for thirteen years.]
And [the suffering] departed likewise. How so? One day, Rabbis maidservant was sweeping
the house; [seeing] some young weasels lying there, she began to sweep them away. Let
them be, said Rabbi to her; It is written (Psalms 145:9), His mercies extend to all His
creatures. Said they [in Heaven], Since he is compassionate, let us be compassionate to
him.[At which point his physical pain dissipated.]
8

Beyond that, Jewish law prohibits causing any unnecessary pain to animals. This is derived
from the injunction in Deuteronomy (22:4),
9
You shall not see your brothers donkey or his ox
fallen [under its load] on the road, and ignore them.
10
Here, the Torah requires a Jew to help
unload an overburdened pack animal as quickly as possible, even if the animal belongs to a
wicked person.
11
Similarly, kosher slaughter is done in a way that causes the animal the least
amount of pain.
12

The Talmud states that neither did he stand in the way of sinners refers to one who does not
attend kenigyon.
17
Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki, the foremost commentator of the Talmud (known
as Rashi), explains that kenigyon means hunting animals, using dogs, and their entire intent is
for play and fun.
18

Accordingly, it is ruled in the Code of Jewish Law that it is forbidden to hunt with dogs,
because this constitutes the company of scorners.
19