DOCSLIB.ORG

The Binding Fragments of Midrash Tanhuma (Buber) from the Municipal Library of Trier

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Binding Fragments of Midrash Tanhuma (Buber) from the Municipal Library of Trier CHAPTER 13 The Binding Fragments of Midrash Tanhuma (Buber) from the Municipal Library of Trier Andreas Lehnardt 1 Introduction Midrash Tanhuma, a rabbinic commentary to the Torah, is regarded as a rather late composition in comparison to the classical works of Midrash, such as the Halachic Midrashim and the Rabbot Midrashim. The manuscript used by Solomon Buber for his edition is no longer assumed to represent the earliest version of Midrash Tanhuma (“Tanhuma ha-qadum we-ha-yashan”). Although this recension seems to preserve early traditions—even from the era of the Second Temple—it is most likely that the main body of this recension has been compiled by Ashkenazic Jews (in Byzantine Italy?) in the Middle Ages.1 As has correctly been summarized by John T. Townsend, whose translations of Midrash Tanhuma are a cornerstone for every scholar interested in this particu- lar field of Jewish literature, the exact place of compilation of the work remains obscure.2 In recent years, however, more and more new textual witnesses have come to light, mainly fragments from the Tanhuma Buber recension that were persevered in book bindings of Christian books and manuscripts from Western and Southern Europe, that have later been opened. All these discoveries sup- port the suggestion that the manuscripts that were used by Buber represent a later Ashkenazic version of that commentary to the Torah and can no longer be treated as early witnesses of a Midrash Tanhuma-Yelamdenu.3 1 For an overview of recent research see, e. g., M. Bregman, “Tanhuma Yelamdenu,” in Encyclopaedia Judaica (2nd ed.: Detroit: Thomson Gale, 2007), vol. 19, pp. 503–504; A. Reizel, Introduction to the Midrashic Literature (Alon Shvut: Tevunot—Mikhlelet Herzog, 2011), pp. 234–243; G. Stemberger, Einleitung in Talmud und Midrasch (9th ed., Munich: C. H. Beck, 2011), pp. 335–339. 2 J. T. Townsend, Midrash Tanhuma. Translated into English with Introduction, Indices, and Brief Notes (S. Buber Recension), Vol. 1: Genesis (Hoboken NJ: Ketav, 1989), p. XII. 3 See G. Stemberger and M. Perani‘, “A New Early Tanhuma Manuscript from the Italian Genizah: The Fragments of Ravenna and their Textual Tradition,” Materia Giudaica 10 (2005), pp. 241–266. © koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���6 | doi ��.��63/97890043�454�_0�4 218 Lehnardt In two previous articles I have published fragments of Midrash Tanchma (Buber) preserved in other German libraries as binding fragments in Christian books.4 These manuscript fragments have been written in an Ashkenazic hand- writing, and they all transmit a recension very similar to the complete manu- scripts used by Buber. In light of the fact that they have been reused for book binding in the Middle Ages in Germany, it is most likely that they all reflect Ashkenazic recensions of this widespread rabbinic commentary to the Torah. Fragments from different manuscripts of this Midrash are known since the 19th century. Jacob Bassfreund (1850–1919) was perhaps the first to describe a fragment of this Midrash identified in a book binding from the Municipal Library (Stadtbibliothek) Trier.5 This fragment however was not studied in light of the more recent evidence. Another piece from a different manu- script in Wolfenbüttel was published by Kurt Wilhelm.6 In addition, a leaf of a different Yelamdenu Midrash discovered in the Heidelberg University library has been published by Ephraim E. Urbach.7 Another fragment of Midrash Tanhuma came to light quite recently in the Russian State Library in Moscow.8 Additional fragments with Tanhuma or Yelamdenu Midrashim, mainly fragments from the Cairo Genizah, were gathered in photocopies and described by Marc Bregman in his doctoral dissertation.9 Only recently a new and complete edition of the so-called ‘Tanhuma Mann’ has been pub- lished and completes the picture of the wide range of Tanhuma materials from the Cairo Genizah.10 The oldest European manuscript fragment of this 4 A. Lehnardt, “Ein neues Einbandfragment des Midrasch Tanchuma in der Stadtbibliothek Mainz,” Judaica 63 (2007), pp. 344–356; idem, “A New Fragment of Midrash Tanhuma from Cologne University Library,” Zutot 7 (2011), pp. 1–16. 5 Cf. J. Bassfreund, “Über ein Midrasch-Fragment in der Stadt-Bibliothek zu Trier,” MGWJ 38 (1894), pp. 167–176, 214–219. Siehe auch M. Steinschneider, Vorlesungen über die Kunde hebräischer Handschriften: deren Sammlungen und Verzeichnisse (Leipzig: Harrassowitz, 1897), p. 8 note 27. 6 K. Wilhelm, “Ein Jelamdenu-Fragment,” MGWJ 75 (1931), pp. 135–143. 7 E. E. Urbach, “Seride Tanhuma-Yelamdenu,” Qovetz al Yad NS 8 (1976), pp. 3–54; idem, Studies in Judaica II (ed. M. D. Herr and J. Fraenkel; Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1998), pp. 574–625. 8 Cf. A. Lisitsina, “A Newly Discovered Fragment from Midrash Tanhuma in the Collection of Western European Manuscripts in the Russian State Library (Moscow),” in A. Lehnardt and J. Olszowy-Schlanger (eds.), Books within Books. New Discoveries in Old Book Bindings (Boston and Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2014), pp. 69–82. 9 M. Bregman, The Tanhuma-Yelammedenu Literature. Studies in the Evolution of the Versions (Piscataway NJ: Gorgias Press, 2003). 10 Cf. G. Vachman (ed.), Midrash Ḥadash al Hatorah also known as Tanḥuma Mann Based on JTS Rab. 1671 with an Introduction, References, and Notes (Jerusalem: Schechter Institute, 2013)..
Load more

Recommended publications
  • David C. Flatto
    THE TIKVAH CENTER FOR LAW & JEWISH CIVILIZATION Professor Moshe Halbertal Professor J.H.H. Weiler Directors of The Tikvah Center Tikvah Working Paper 08/12 David C. Flatto Justice Retold: The Trial of the Judean King, and the Narration of Legal Myths NYU School of Law • New York, NY 10011 The Tikvah Center Working Paper Series can be found at http://www.nyutikvah.org/publications.html All rights reserved. No part of this paper may be reproduced in any form without permission of the author. ISSN 2160‐8229 (print) ISSN 2160‐8253 (online) Copy Editor: Danielle Leeds Kim © David C. Flatto 2012 New York University School of Law New York, NY 10011 USA Publications in the Series should be cited as: AUTHOR, TITLE, TIKVAH CENTER WORKING PAPER NO./YEAR [URL] Justice Retold JUSTICE RETOLD: THE TRIAL OF THE JUDEAN KING, AND THE NARRATION OF LEGAL MYTHS By David C. Flatto INTRODUCTION Over two decades ago the legal community lost Robert Cover, one of its most creative minds, at the far too young age of forty-two. A champion of civil rights (who became widely known with his first book “Justice Accused: Antislavery and the Judicial Process”), and a brilliant constitutional theorist, Cover’s final years yielded a flourishing of seminal articles on legal narratives.1 His “Nomos and Narrative,” “Obligation: A Jewish Jurisprudence of the Social Order,” and especially his “Folktales of Justice: Tales of Jurisdiction” focused renewed attention on the profound nature and formative role of law’s stories.2 Heeding Cover’s appeal to expand the legal canon by examining rich literary texts from the past, this article analyzes several different renditions of a profound early legal myth involving a fundamental clash between law and power (which Cover briefly studied in his “Folktales of Justice”).3 After introducing a crucial distinction between primary and secondary legal myths, this article demonstrates how the latter are especially prone to being adapted and transformed in the very process of their narration.
    [Show full text]
  • Torah Portion – Vayera
    AVODAH: The Jewish Service Corps Torah Portion – Vayera Justice and Prayer SOURCE: Teach us rabbi: If I am riding along on a donkey and the time for prayer arrives, what should I do? This is what the Sages taught: If you are riding along on a donkey and the time for prayer arrives, dismount [and pray]. And if you cannot dismount because you are distracted by worries about the safety of the money you have in your baggage, or you are afraid for your safety, pray while you are riding. Rabbi Yohanan said: We learn from this teaching that a person should be mindful and undistracted during prayer before God. Abba Shaul said when a person prays with concentration and direction (kavanah), that person’s prayers will surely be answered, as it says, You will direct their mind and You will listen to their prayer… (Psalms 10:17) And nobody had kavanah in their prayer like our Father Abraham, which we see from the fact that he said: Far be it from you to do a thing like that! (Genesis 18:25) [Midrash Tanhuma, Hayyei Sarah #1] COMMENTARY: The prooftext for Abraham’s exemplary concentration and intention during prayer – his kavanah – is unusual, since it is not a verse from a prayer, but a verse from an argument that Abraham is having with God! Here is the full context: Then God said, “The outrage of Sodom and Gomorrah is so great, and their sin is so grave! I will go down and see whether they have acted altogether according to the outcry that has reached Me; if not, I will take note.” Then the men [who were visiting Abraham] went on from there to Sodom, while Abraham remained standing before God.
    [Show full text]
  • A Tree in the Garden
    MAIER BECKER A Tree in the Garden The Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge are one and the same tree. When the verse states ‘God caused to sprout the Tree of Life and the Tree of Knowledge’ (Gen. 2:9) it should be understood to mean, God caused to 1 sprout the Tree of Life which is also the Tree of Knowledge . R. J OSEPH KIMHI THIS COMMENT SEEMS to fly in the face of the basic details of the creation story in the Bible. In fact, it appears to contradict outright an explicit Biblical verse where God says “now (that man has eaten from the Tree of Knowledge), lest he partake from the Tree of Life as well” (3:22). 2 If the trees are one and the same, then by eating from the Tree of Knowledge man had already partaken of the Tree of Life! This essay proposes a reading of the Genesis story which provides a textual and conceptual basis for R. Kimhi’s explication, based on midrashic sources. I will suggest that R. Kimhi’s com - mentary sheds light on fundamental issues relating to man’s mortality and his relationship with God. 3 The Textual Starting Point The Bible introduces the Tree of Life stating; “God caused to sprout from the ground every tree that was pleasing to the sight and the Tree of Life betokh— within, the garden” (2:9). The text could have simply stated “the Tree of Life bagan —in the garden.” What does the word betokh , come to add? Onkelos translates the word betokh in this verse to mean bemitsiut— in the middle of the garden.
    [Show full text]
  • THE TANHUMA-YELAMMEDENU LITERATURE Studies in The
    THE TANHUMA-YELAMMEDENU LITERATURE The Tanhuma-Yelammedenu literature includes the two versions of Midrash Tanhuma, Exodus Rabbah (II), Numbers Rabbah (II), the two versions of Deuteronomy Rabbah, large parts of Pesiqta Rabbati and additional fragmentary versions of this popular type of homiletic midrash. The studies in this volume include a survey of previous research, a catalogue of some 200 textual witnesses and a synoptic analysis of four versions of midrashic material to the triennial lection beginning with Exodus 7:8. The final chapter draws general conclusions about the date and provenance of the versions and presents a stratigraphic approach to the multifaceted evolution of this important genre of midrashic literature. "At last—an excellent exposition of the nature of the Tanhuma literature which takes into account all the textual and historical aspects of the problem" — Prof. Chaim Milikowsky. "Bregman's book is undoubtedly the best research ever done about the most complicated issue in the study of rabbinic literature: the Tanhuma-type Midrashim. Based on a vast knowledge of the history of rabbinic literature, an admirable power of innovation and impressive capability of synthesis, this book lays the foundations for all future scholarship of a very important stratum in the literature of ancient Judaism." — Prof. Avigdor Shinan. Marc Bregman received his PhD from The Hebrew University in Jerusalem in 1991. Since 1978, he has been teaching at the Jerusalem campus of the Hebrew Union College. Prof. Bregman has published academic research and belles lettres in Hebrew and English on a wide variety of topics in both scholarly and popular journals.
    [Show full text]
  • Studies in Rabbinic Hebrew
    Cambridge Semitic Languages and Cultures Heijmans Studies in Rabbinic Hebrew Studies in Rabbinic Hebrew Shai Heijmans (ed.) EDITED BY SHAI HEIJMANS This volume presents a collec� on of ar� cles centring on the language of the Mishnah and the Talmud — the most important Jewish texts (a� er the Bible), which were compiled in Pales� ne and Babylonia in the la� er centuries of Late An� quity. Despite the fact that Rabbinic Hebrew has been the subject of growing academic interest across the past Studies in Rabbinic Hebrew century, very li� le scholarship has been wri� en on it in English. Studies in Rabbinic Hebrew addresses this lacuna, with eight lucid but technically rigorous ar� cles wri� en in English by a range of experienced scholars, focusing on various aspects of Rabbinic Hebrew: its phonology, morphology, syntax, pragma� cs and lexicon. This volume is essen� al reading for students and scholars of Rabbinic studies alike, and appears in a new series, Studies in Semi� c Languages and Cultures, in collabora� on with the Faculty of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies at the University of Cambridge. As with all Open Book publica� ons, this en� re book is available to read for free on the publisher’s website. Printed and digital edi� ons, together with supplementary digital material, can also be found here: www.openbookpublishers.com Cover image: A fragment from the Cairo Genizah, containing Mishnah Shabbat 9:7-11:2 with Babylonian vocalisati on (Cambridge University Library, T-S E1.47). Courtesy of the Syndics of Cambridge University Library. Cover design: Luca Baff a book 2 ebooke and OA edi� ons also available OPEN ACCESS OBP STUDIES IN RABBINIC HEBREW Studies in Rabbinic Hebrew Edited by Shai Heijmans https://www.openbookpublishers.com © 2020 Shai Heijmans.
    [Show full text]
  • Graphic Symbols for God's Name in an Unknown Recension of the Tanhuma from the Cairo Genizah •
    Oqimta 7 (2021) [135-173] Graphic Symbols for God's Name in an Unknown Recension of the Tanhuma from the Cairo Genizah • Tova Sacher and Moshe Lavee Introduction Samples of Hebrew manuscripts and codices from the tenth and eleventh centuries are rare, making the Cairo Genizah an important resource for study of Hebrew paleography.1 In addition to preserving unique texts and versions, Genizah fragments include some of the earliest examples of Hebrew manuscripts, predating European medieval manuscripts, and thus contributing greatly to the understanding of book history from the perspective of material culture. They are also the source of many innovations and insights regarding the earlier forms of Hebrew texts and the development of scribal practices.2 One of the more curious examples of this can be seen when examining the various conventions employed for rendering God's name. In this paper, we will describe the incidence of two * The The authors would like to thank Prof. Judith Schlanger, Prof. Marina Rustow, Prof. Gideon Bohak, Prof. Nathan James-Ford, Dr. Ohad Abudraham and Rivka Elitzur-Leiman for their advice and help. We are grateful for the permission of the Syndics of Cambridge University Library for the publication of the images. This article was written under the auspices of the “Midrash in the Communities of the Genizah” Project at the University of Haifa and with the generous support of the Granchamp fund. 1 Edna Engel, “Styles of Hebrew Script in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries in the Light of Dated and Datable Genizah Documents” Te'uda, XV (1999): p. 366.
    [Show full text]
  • The Nuances of TRGM(” to Translate ”) in the Rabbinic Writings
    JISMOR 6 Etsuko Katsumata The Nuances of TRGM (“to translate”) in the Rabbinic Writings1) Etsuko Katsumata Abstract This paper analyzes examples of the terms rooted in the word “TRGM” in rabbinic writing from the periods of Tannaim and Amoraim and clarifies the changing nuances of TRGM. The analysis of about 350 examples shows changes in the usage of the terms from Tannaitic materials to Amoraic materials, and more changes from Palestinian materials to Babylonian materials among the Amoraic materials. Most of the examples from the Tannaitic period are related to the public reading of the Hebrew Bible at synagogues. As for the Amoraic period, there are a significant number of examples of formulas quoted from Aramaic translations of the Bible, and derivatives of TRGM are found to be used for more common interpretation activities. In the Babylonian materials, the word “TRGM” was used to describe a rabbi’s interpretation activity. On the contrary, the Palestinian materials imply a certain kind of scorn for TRGM, which was considered separate from a rabbi’s orthodox interpretation activity, expressed by other verbs such as PTḤ (“to open, start”) and PTR (“to interpret”). This analysis of TRGM usages provides evidence of a skeptical attitude by the rabbis in Palestine toward TRGM. Keywords: Aramaic language, targum (the Aramaic translation of the Bible), rabbinic writings, interpretation of the Bible, formality 1. Introduction 1) Position of the targumim in Jewish studies The word “targum” refers to “translation” in a broad sense and an Aramaic translation of the Hebrew Bible in a more limited sense. It is said that public readings of the Torah were given on Sabbaths in Aramaic, which was current and understandable to those with difficulty in understanding Hebrew after their return from captivity.2) A targum (hereinafter meaning “an Aramaic translation of the Bible) goes beyond literal translation and is regarded as literature that contains various original commentaries and amplifications; however, its identity has not yet received much attention.
    [Show full text]
  • From Palestine to Babylonia and Back: the Place of the Bavli and the Tanhuma on the Rabbinic Cultural Continuum
    From Palestine to Babylonia and Back: The Place of the Bavli and the Tanhuma on the Rabbinic Cultural Continuum Ronit Nikolsky One can almost say that as the number of scholars, so the numbers of con- structed images of rabbinic culture; on the basis of a relatively small number of literary sources (talmudim and midrashim), with a limited amount of his- torical information (names of rabbis, place names, elements belonging to the beit-midrash, choice of proof-texts, halakhot etc.), each scholar constructs her or his own picture of rabbinic society, its social classes, its economy, the study institutions and so forth. I am no exception. Shifting my focus away from the external reality, I address rabbinic culture first and foremost as a semiosphere, a constructed reality, or world of meaning. Thus, without claiming to know the socio-historical circum- stances in great detail, I can still study the culture by studying the exogram (that is, the literature which is extant).1 The model that I use to envisage rabbinic culture—polysystem2—explains that although the elements of the cultural cannon—cultural knowledge and customs—are common to all parts of society, each group adapts it to fit its own narrative, resulting in the canon being active in the semiosphere of this group. Thus, although any particular group within the culture creates its own exogram to fit its point of view, this particular exogram is not oblivious to other groups, and traces of the exogram of one group can be found in the lit- erature of another. Except for the social or geographical differences between groups within one culture, the polysystem model also talks about how cultures develop and change through time.
    [Show full text]
  • Article Full Text
    PAST AND PRESENT IN MIDRASHIC LITERATURE* By MARC BREGMAN Hebrew Union College, Jerusalem MIDRASH AGGADAH, the rabbinic exposition and elaboration of the biblical text, is a literature that deals with the past. The Darshan, 1 in common with other creative artists who attempt to present past or fictional events in a compelling way, may attempt to shift the temporal perspective of his audi­ ence. The narrative artist seeks to lure those whom he addresses out of their own time frame, what we may call the "actual present," into a new time frame in which the events described take place. This projected time frame has been called the "fictive present" in analyzing the technique of the novel (Mendilow, 1965, pp. 94ff), but I shall call it the "narrative present" in analyzing the rhetorical technique of the Midrash. The problem of achieving this mental shift in temporal perspectives is in some ways more difficult and in other ways easier for the Darshan than for his counterparts, the storyteller, dramatist, novelist and modem film-maker: more difficult in that neither he nor his audience, be it a congregation listening to a sermon in Talmudic times or the contemporary reader of Midrash, accept that the events to be described, the biblical narrative on which the Darshan elaborates, are imaginary; less *In working on this study, I was fortunate in having the comment and criticism of my teacher, Prof. Joseph Heinemann?"!. What should have been an opportunity to thank him for this help, must now, sadly, be a humble tribute to his memory. I. I use this term to refer not only to the "preacher" who delivered his oral homily in the synagogue, but also, more generally, to the often anonymous creators of the Midrash at all its stages, oral and literary.
    [Show full text]
  • The Rebellion at the Reed Sea: Observations on the Nature of Midrash
    THE REBELLION AT THE REED SEA: OBSERVATIONS ON THE NATURE OF MIDRASH By IRA CHERNUS University of Colorado AMONG ALL THE genres of Hebrew literature, perhaps the most distinctive and original is Midrash. While much work has already been done in elucidating the specific characteristics of Midrash, further exploration of those characteristics may help us to gain a more precise definition and understanding of this genre. I want to offer here a brief discussion of one principal feature of Midrash: its harmonization of concern for the historically unique and concern for the supra-historical. In creating Midrash, the rabbis were of course developing a literary form which would speak effectively to their specific historical situation. But to accomplish this, they searched into (drs) the written Scripture and found there what I. Heinemann has called "supra-historical principles ... which transcend the truth of 'how it actually happened'" (1954, pp. 10-11). They could then enunciate these paradigmatic and eternally valid truths, show how they were exemplified in the historical particularities of the biblical past, and apply them to the historical particularities of their present. Many scholars have pointed to this ''supra-historical'' approach to the biblical text as a key feature of Midrash. But less attention has been given to the similar attitude often taken by the rabbis to Midrash itself. An important source of new midrash was the explication and development of "supra-historical" meanings implicit in existing midrashim. This similarity in the use of biblical text and midrashic tradition points to a stylistic similarity which may have made this dynamic possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Fragments of Midrash Sifra on Leviticus in the Baden State Library in Karlsruhe
    chapter 4 Fragments of Midrash Sifra on Leviticus in the Baden State Library in Karlsruhe Andreas Lehnardt As has been emphasized in several articles already, fragments containing Mi- drashic texts preserved in bindings of books, registers and notarial files in Ger- man libraries and archives are very rare. Whereas in Italy several dozen frag- ments with parts of several known Midrashic works from late antiquity have been discovered,1 in Germany and several adjacent European countries only a very few pieces with remnants of these works had been identified. Most of these Midrashic fragments preserve well-known texts or versions of texts which transmit only small variances in comparison with other com- plete manuscripts or early printed editions of the same texts. Many of these remains—sometimes only tiny pieces of manuscript—are therefore consid- ered to be more of statistical value and do not much change our general under- standing of certain passages. In light of the rather small number of Midrash fragments discovered in Germany, however, these fragments clearly point to the fact that at the end of the Middle Ages the study of this particular rab- binic literary genre was—at least among Ashkenazic Jews—not so widespread as it might seem in light of today’s enormous research interest in Midrashic literature. The great number of fragments from other rabbinic works such as the Babylonian Talmud (Bavli), Mahzorim (with commentaries) or Halakhic codices even among the fragments from Italy are ample proof of the fact that manuscripts of Midrashim might have been less common.2 During the research undertaken by me in Germany in the last decade, for instance, I could iden- tify only very few fragments and pieces of fragments with parts from the great 1 See, for example, Mauro Perani and Enrica Sagradini (eds.), Talmudic and Midrashic Frag- ments from the ‘Italian Genizah’: Reunification of the Manuscripts and Catalogue (Florence: Giuntina, 2004).
    [Show full text]
  • Marketing Fragment 6 X 10.5.T65
    Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-84390-4 - The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Edited by Charlotte Elisheva Fonrobert and Martin S. Jaffee Index More information Index Abaye, 30, 67–9, 72, 186, 189, 331, as recension, 25 335 refusal of responsibility for, 21, Abbahu, 64, 228, 357 25 Acts, 77 versus anthology, 32–34 1:12, 142 versus transmission, 22, 24, 25 22:3, 119 Avesta, 167, 178 26:5, 119 ‘Avot de-Rabbi Natan, 317 Adurb¯ ad¯ ı¯ Mahraspandan¯ , 172 Aggadah, xvii, 47 Bar Kokhba, 77, 80, 141 Aher. See Elisha ben Abuya Baraita (ot), xvii Akavya ben Mehalalel, Rabbi, Bava’ Kama’ 58b, 186, 193 323–26, 334 ben Azai, Shimon, 73, 201, 202, 276 Akiba, Rabbi, 23, 25, 60, 201, 203, ben Zoma, Shimon, 201, 202 208, 210, 216, 219, 224, 276, Bet Midrash, xvii, 59, 62 348 assembly house (bet va’ad, be Akiva, Rabbi, 42–44 va’ada), 63 Alon, G., 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, of Eliezer HaQappar, 63 93, 94, 95, 248, 263 hall (sdar, sdara rabba), 63 Am ha’arez. , xvii, 260–62 Biblical interpretation, 99–119 Amora(‘im), xvii, 7 in Book of Jubilees, 110–13 Amoraic literature, 6–9 in Dead Sea Scrolls, 99, 113 Amoraic Period in Babylonia, 66– in Philo, 104 70 rewritten Bible, 106–07, 113, 117 Amoraic Period in the Land of Israel, in Sifrei to Deuteronomy, 117 62–65 Biography, rabbinic and Aramaic, 7 lack of, 2 Amulets, 88 Body. See purity Antiquities, 295 aylonit, 280 Aptowitzer, V., 307 and ethics, 314 Archaeology, 87, 89, 132 eunuch (saris), 280 Artavan V, 175 evil inclination (yez.er ha-ra’), Ashi, Rav, 25, 66, 72, 181, 361 328–29 Asia Minor, 224, 229, 359, 360 female, 274–78 Authorship, rabbinic, 2, 4, 17–35 hermaphrodite collective, 35 rabbinic (androginos), 280–84, and editorial shaping, 23 285–88 393 © Cambridge University Press www.cambridge.org Cambridge University Press 978-0-521-84390-4 - The Cambridge Companion to the Talmud and Rabbinic Literature Edited by Charlotte Elisheva Fonrobert and Martin S.
    [Show full text]