![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Hunh. This is weird.
Oct. 22nd, 2012 07:33 amAccording to the particular Daf Yomi bit on LJ I read:
This is supposedly somewhere in Shabbat 16, and I'm trying to find it, because it strikes me as weird. This suggests that the Sages knew about how glass was made, and, if so, it suggests that educated Jews throughout history ought to have know how glass was made, or, at least, to have had a really good clue, from reading that passage.
But, for centuries in the Middle Ages, Venice managed to maintain a monopoly on the secret of making glass -- a secret that there would have been a lot of money to be made in breaking. So how was it that that piece of information wasn't used to figure out that trade secret?
In connection with the preceding discussion of the laws of purity, the Talmud mentions the purity of glassware. Since glassware is not mentioned anywhere in the Torah, it should not be susceptible to ritual impurity. However, the Sages did decree such impurity. Why? Rabbi Yochanan quoted his favorite student Resh Lakish: "Since its formation is from sand, the Sages placed it in the same category as earthenware – which is mentioned in the Torah and is susceptible to impurity, though only from the inside."
This is supposedly somewhere in Shabbat 16, and I'm trying to find it, because it strikes me as weird. This suggests that the Sages knew about how glass was made, and, if so, it suggests that educated Jews throughout history ought to have know how glass was made, or, at least, to have had a really good clue, from reading that passage.
But, for centuries in the Middle Ages, Venice managed to maintain a monopoly on the secret of making glass -- a secret that there would have been a lot of money to be made in breaking. So how was it that that piece of information wasn't used to figure out that trade secret?