DOCSLIB.ORG

The External Tractates M.B

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The External Tractates M.B Chapter Nine The External Tractates M.B. Lerner From the Amoraic period onwards, there is evidence that numerous tractates of tradition literature circulated independently of the recognized literary units, i.e. Mishna, Tosefta, Talmud and Tannaic Midrashim. These included the aggadic midrashim, later edited in what we know as the Amoraic midrash collections, and the external or 'minor' tractates which are dealt with here. The fact that these tractates, some of which are certainly not smaller than the everage Tannaic tractate, were not incorporated in the main body of talmudic literature caused them to be referred to as ketanat (i.e. small, minor); 1 taseftat (i.e. supplementary, additional) ,2 or sefarim hitsaniim (i.e. external tractates). 3 Even though they do not seem to have been held in high esteem in Gaonic circles,4 later authorities nevertheless occasionally utilized them for halakhic rulings. 5 From a literary standpoint, it is important to note that most of these tractates are original independent compilations, and that much of their subject matter is not found in any other extant source. On the other hand, there is no denying the fact that the largest of them, A vat de-R. Natan, is a companion text to Masse­ khet Avat, following it closely and elaborating upon it. Furthermore, the enigmatic Kalla Rabbati is actually a pseudo-talmudic elaboration of tractates Kalla, Derekh Erets, and Perek Kinyan Tara. There is no consistency in regard to subject matter. A vat de-R. Natan is purely aggadic, while most of the smaller tracts, e.g. Sefer Tara, Mezuza etc., are purely halakhic. Other large tractates, such as Semahat, Safrim and Kalla, are ostensibly halakhic in content, but numerous aggadic teachings and episo­ des may also be discerned in them. The tractates comprising derekh erets 1 Harkavy, Responsen, no. 15, pp. 6-7; no. 248, pp. 124-5; Iggeret Rav Sherira Gaon, 47 (French rec.). 2 Maimonides, in trod. to Mishne Tara (ed. Lieberman), 9. Individual tractates were thus sometimes referred to as Tosefta, cf. Higger, Semachot, introd., 10; id. 'Ketanot', 92-5. 3 B. T. Ber. 18a, Tosafot s. v. -,nl:l?; R. Eliezer ben Yoel ha-Levi, Sefer Rabiah (ed. Aptowitzer) 2, 333. R. Asher ben Yehiel, Responsa, ketal III, no. 7. Cf. Higger, Semachot, 11-12; also Harkavy, Responsen, no. 218, p. 103. Note that this appellation is also used to denote mystic (Hekhalot) tracts, see Sefer Rabiah 2, 196; Mahzor Vitry, 655. 4 See sources above, n. 1, also Harkavy, Responsen, no. 380, p. 197. 5 See sources above, n. 3; I. Ratzabi in: Kasher, Tara Shelema 29, 99. 367 THE EXTERNAL TRACfA TES literature are decidedly of ethical content, but here too, one frequently finds an admixture of halakhic and aggadic traditions. The exact dimensions of this literature are also uncertain. No official tabula­ tion or complete collection of the various works is extant. A medieval tradition of 'seven minor tractates' apparently included the smallest halakhic tractates but here too, the tractates in this compilation do not seem to have been universally recognized. An alternative tradition of 'nine external tractates' which included Semahot and Kalla, may also be noted. 6 This situation seems to be summed up ironically by the homily on Cant 6:8, ' ... "And damsels without number"- this is the external mishna'. 7 One should therefore not be surprised over the fact that traditional talmudic study has more or less neglected most of these tractates, and that during the course of time, some of them have fallen into oblivion. It is somewhat surprising that no clear-cut criteria for determining the date of these compositions have been offered by ZUNZ and his followers. 8 While A vot de-R. Natan has come to be recognized as an ancient text, bearing very close affinity to the Tannaic period, many of the other tractates have been relegated to the early Gaonic era, i.e. the eight and ninth centuries. 9 A proper approach demands that each ofthese texts be subjected to a searching analysis in order to attempt to define its formative period. Suffice it to say, as a sort of preliminary remark, that many novel conclusions may arise from such an analysis. Owing to the fact that some of these tracts contain halakhic material, they sometimes circulated together with the Talmud. 10 As a matter of fact, three of these tractates, Semahot, Kalla and Sofrim, were printed together with the first edition ofthe Babylonian Talmud, Venice 1523. In the third Venetian printing (1550), three more tractates were added: Derekh Erets Rabba; Derekh Erets Zutta and Avot de-R. Natan. In the subsequent complete Talmud editions, the minor tractates were placed at the end of the fourth Order following Massekhet A vot, since the largest of these tractates, A vot de-R. Natan, relates directly to A vot. The remaining tractates (Kalla Rabbati; Seven Minor Tracts) were added to the Talmud by the publishers of the Romm edition, Wilna 1883. It is most fortunate that all of the minor tractates have been subjected to critical editions, which, in spite of their inadequacies, are vital for scholarly study. SCHECHTER's edition of A vot de-R. Natan (Vienna 1887) was actually the first rabbinic text to be edited on the basis of all existing manuscripts. Special mention should be made of the indefatigable efforts of Michael HIGGER (1898- 1952), who within the course of nine years (1929-1937) published six scholarly 6 R. Jacob Sikily in the Introduction to Yalkut Talmud Tara, see Higger, Semachot, introd. 12. 7 Num. R. 18:21 and parallels, see Higger, Semachot, introd., 9. 8 See Zunz-Albeck, Derashot, 45 and notes. 9 Cf. the remarks of Assaf, Tekufat ha-Geonim, 174. 10 MS. Munich 95 includes the Derekh Erets tractates and Massekhet Kalla. The latter is also part of the talmudic collection Extractiones de Talmud in MS. Paris 16558; see Merchavia, The Church, 293, 418. 368 .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Of Bibliographic References to Talmudic Literature
    H-Judaic Internet Resource: Index of Bibliographic References to Talmudic Literature Discussion published by Moshe Feifer on Thursday, March 19, 2015 THE SAUL LIEBERMAN INSTITUTE OF TALMUDIC RESEARCH THE JEWISH THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY The Index of Bibliographic References to Talmudic Literature We are pleased to announce that the Lieberman Institute'sIndex of References Dealing with Talmudic Literature is available at http://lieberman-index.org. Introduction What is the Index? The Index is a comprehensive online research tool directing the user to discussions and interpretations of Talmudic passages found in both modern academic research and medieval Talmudic scholarship (Geonim and Rishonim). By clicking any Talmudic passage, the user will receive a list of specific books and page numbers within them discussing the selected passage. The Index is revolutionizing Talmudic research by supplying scholars with quick and easy access to pertinent information. Preceding the establishment of the index project, the task of finding specific bibliographical references that today takes minutes would take many hours or even days of work. The Index radically alters old methods of bibliographical searching and brings Talmudic research up to par with contemporary standards. In addition to those involved in Talmudic studies per se, the index is a vital aid to those engaged in all Judaic, ancient near east, or comparative religion studies to the extent that they relate at times to Talmudic texts. Thus, the database already makes an extremely significant contribution to all associated fields of research and study by enabling scholars, students or lay audience to quickly and comprehensively access relevant scholarship. Description Citation: Moshe Feifer.
    [Show full text]
  • When Rabbi Eliezer Was Arrested for Heresy
    JSIJ 10 (2012) 145-181 WHEN RABBI ELIEZER WAS ARRESTED FOR HERESY JOSHUA SCHWARTZ and PETER J. TOMSON Introduction: A Shared History This study is part of a larger project the ultimate aim of which is to write a shared, twin or intertwined history of Jews and Christians in the first and second centuries CE. The first stage of the project will be to select relevant sources, to describe their literary and historical characteristics, and to read and reread them in view of their significance vis-à-vis other sources. The second stage will encompass the writing of a historical synthesis of the shared history. We stress the shared aspect of the history because Judaism and Christianity in the ancient world are usually studied separately, as though involving not just two distinct histories, but also two separate sets of sources, two frameworks of interpretation and reflection, two programs of academic teaching, research, and writing, and two canons of judgment and review. While Jewish and Christian history can be considered separately in the Middle Ages and later, including modern times, this is not the case for Antiquity, and particularly not regarding the first two centuries CE, before what is known as the “parting of the ways.” Although there was some movement toward separation during the first two centuries CE, as evinced, for instance, in such sources as the Didache, the Gospel of Matthew, and the Epistle of Barnabas, 1 this was by no means a “parting of the ways” and certainly does not justify separating the history of early Christianity from Jewish history.
    [Show full text]
  • Is There an Authentic Triennial Cycle of Torah Readings? RABBI LIONEL E
    Is there an Authentic Triennial Cycle of Torah Readings? RABBI LIONEL E. MOSES This paper is an appendix to the paper "Annual and Triennial Systems For Reading The Torah" by Rabbi Elliot Dorff, and was approved together with it on April 29, 1987 by a vote of seven in favor, four opposed, and two abstaining. Members voting in favor: Rabbis Isidoro Aizenberg, Ben Zion Bergman, Elliot N. Dorff, Richard L. Eisenberg, Mayer E. Rabinowitz, Seymour Siegel and Gordon Tucker. Members voting in opposition: Rabbis David H. Lincoln, Lionel E. Moses, Joel Roth and Steven Saltzman. Members abstaining: Rabbis David M. Feldman and George Pollak. Abstract In light of questions addressed to the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards from as early as 1961 and the preliminary answers given to these queries by the committee (Section I), this paper endeavors to review the sources (Section II), both talmudic and post-talmudic (Section Ila) and manuscript lists of sedarim (Section lib) to set the triennial cycle in its historical perspective. Section III of the paper establishes a list of seven halakhic parameters, based on Mishnah and Tosefta,for the reading of the Torah. The parameters are limited to these two authentically Palestinian sources because all data for a triennial cycle is Palestinian in origin and predates even the earliest post-Geonic law codices. It would thus be unfair, to say nothing of impossible, to try to fit a Palestinian triennial reading cycle to halakhic parameters which were both later in origin and developed outside its geographical sphere of influence. Finally in Section IV, six questions are asked regarding the institution of a triennial cycle in our day and in a short postscript, several desiderata are listed in order to put such a cycle into practice today.
    [Show full text]
  • Female Homoerotic Sexual Activity – Sources
    Feminist Sexual Ethics Project Gail Labovitz Senior Research Analyst, Feminist Sexual Ethics Project Female Homoerotic Sexual Activity – Sources: The sources addressing female homoerotic sexual activity in rabbinic literature (link to glossary) are very few, and far less clear than those regarding sexual activity between men. There is a great deal of ambiguity in these texts as to what activities are forbidden, the consequences for women who engage in them, and the nature (that is, the source and/or the authority) of whatever prohibition does exist. Reading these sources suggests several potential reasons why rabbinic thinking on female homoerotic sexual activity is less developed than regarding male homoeroticism; these possibilities will be discussed in the course of the analysis of the texts below. Tannaitic Midrash There is no direct prohibition on female homoerotic sexual activity in the Hebrew bible, indeed, no explicit discussion of such activity at all. Biblical laws of forbidden sexual couplings (notably Leviticus 18 and 20) are generally addressed to male listeners/readers. With the exception of the prohibition against bestiality (Leviticus 18:23 and 20:15-16), in which the prohibition against women committing this act follows on the prohibition to men,1 sexual acts which do not involve male participants are not discussed. Nor do the Mishnah (link to glossary) or the Tosefta (link to glossary) discuss sexual acts between women in any way. Only one midrashic (link to glossary) text from this period addresses any form of homoeroticism between women. As midrash, that is, as a form of exegesis of scriptural text, to Leviticus 18:3, this passage thus invokes the authority of scripture for its discourse on female homoeroticism; it links marriage between two women to the practices of the Canaanites and Egyptians, which this verse and numerous others explicitly forbid, as well as to a number of other sexual/marital connections explicitly or implicitly forbidden in scripture [cite the verse?].
    [Show full text]
  • In Search of the Essence of a Talmudic Debate: the Case of Water Used by a Baker
    chapter 4 In Search of the Essence of a Talmudic Debate: the Case of Water Used by a Baker 1 Introduction This chapter discusses a very short sugya about the status of water used by a baker for wetting his hands while making dough for unleavened bread at Passover. What should be done with this water during Passover, when one is forbidden to possess leaven? This very minor Talmudic topic is treated in parallel texts in the Mishnah and Tosefta and is mentioned briefly (2–3 lines) in both Talmudim. This provides us with an opportunity to delve into the ex- plicit and implicit interpretive assumptions of modern scholarly approaches to reading Talmudic literature as well as to demonstrate the advantages of my own approach. The relationship between the corresponding texts in the Mishnah and the Tosefta is debated by two leading scholars, Shamma Friedman and Robert Brody. Their dispute concerning this case study reflects the different approach- es to parallel Tannaitic sources they imbibed in their respective schools, the Hebrew University in Jerusalem (Brody) and the Jewish Theological Seminary in New York (Friedman). In my view, both are overly eager to prove that the differences between parallel texts in the Mishnah and Tosefta do not reflect disagreement between the sources’ authors, but are the result of editorial considerations or of the vicissitudes of oral transmission. I will argue that it is possible to ascribe disagreement to parallel sources without passing judgment either on their chronological order or on whether one of the sources
    [Show full text]
  • Mishnah and Tosefta
    Mishnah and Tosefta RELS2100G CRN: 15529 The Mishnah is a seminal Jewish text. Compiled around the year 200 CE in ancient Palestine, it became the foundation of the two Talmuds and thus, all later Judaism. But it is still in many ways a mystery: Why was it compiled? Who was its intended audience and what was its function? What are its antecedents? This graduate seminar has two interlocked goals. One is to strengthen your ability, both linguistic and conceptual, to read and decode the Mishnah and its “companion volume,” the Tosefta (although we will discuss further the nature of their relationship). The second is to survey and gain some facility with modern scholarly approaches to the Mishnah. In the process we will also discuss the social historical and religious implications of our tractate, Bava Metzia. Instructor Information Michael Satlow, Professor, Program in Judaic Studies and Department of Religious Studies, Brown University Objectives, Approach, Structure The goals of this course are: 1. To improve your technical and linguistic ability to deal with the Mishnah, and by extension, other tannaitic texts; 2. To introduce you to the critical study of rabbinic literature; 3. To apply methods of critical reading to a collaborative and close reading of a single tractate. The capstone of the class is the creation of individual commentaries on a chapter of Mishnah. The commentary will be ongoing throughout the semester and will give you an opportunity to apply the critical principles that we read about to a specific text. This is a bit experimental, and we will work out and adjust the precise mechanics throughout the semester.
    [Show full text]
  • Rabbinic Judaism “Moses Received Torah F
    Feminist Sexual Ethics Project Introduction – Rabbinic Judaism “Moses received Torah from Sinai and handed it down to Joshua; and Joshua to the Elders; and the Elders to the Prophets; and the Prophets handed it down to the Men of the Great Assembly…” Mishnah Avot 1:1 Judaism is often believed to be a religion based primarily in the Hebrew Bible, or even more specifically, the first five books of the Bible, known in Jewish tradition as the Torah. These five books, in the form of a Torah scroll, are found in nearly every Jewish house of worship. “Torah,” however, is a term whose meaning can encompass far more than particular books; for Jews, “Torah” often also means the full scope of Jewish learning, law, practice, and tradition. This conception of Torah derives from the rabbis of late antiquity, who developed the belief that the written Torah was accompanied from its earliest transmission by an equally Divine “Oral Torah,” a body of law and explanations of the written Torah that was passed down by religious leaders and scholars through the ages of Jewish history. Thus, Jewish law and religious practices are based in far more than the biblical text. The rabbis considered themselves an integral link in this chain of transmission, and its heirs. In particular, the works produced by the rabbis of late antiquity, from the beginning of the Common Era to the time of the Muslim Conquest, in Roman Palestine and Sassanian Babylonia (modern day Iran/Iraq), have influenced the shape of Judaism to this day. The Talmud (defined below), for example, is considered the essential starting point for any discussion of Jewish law, even more so than the bible.
    [Show full text]
  • A Jewish Woman in the Temple? Megan Nutzman
    Mary in the Protevangelium of James: A Jewish Woman in the Temple? Megan Nutzman INCE THE PROTEVANGELIUM OF JAMES was reintroduced to the West in the middle of the sixteenth century, it has S attracted significant scholarly interest. The bulk of this attention has focused on critical analysis of the text, which was greatly advanced in the last century by the discovery of P. Bodm. V.1 Additional work has examined the date and genre of Prot. Jas., its place in the corpus of early Christian writings, and its role in the development of Mariology. While the pop- ularity and wide distribution of Prot. Jas. in antiquity are clear, its date, authorship, and provenance remain uncertain. Most scholars hold that it was the work of a Christian whose knowl- edge of Judaism was problematic. Questionable descriptions of Jewish practice and Palestinian geography are frequently cat- alogued to argue that the author’s acquaintance with Judaism was limited to the Septuagint.2 In this article I investigate one aspect of Prot. Jas. that is among the most frequently cited errors in the text: the depiction of a young Mary living in the 1 Michel Testuz, Papyrus Bodmer V Nativité de Marie (Geneva 1958). Unless otherwise noted, Greek quotations of Prot. Jas. will follow this text. 2 For example, Emile Amann, La Protévangile de Jacques et ses remaniements latins (Paris 1910) 209; Edouard Cothenet, “Le Protévangile de Jacques: origine, genre et signification d’un premier midrash chrétien sur la nativité de Marie,” ANRW II.25.6 (1988) 4252–4269; Oscar Cullmann, “The Pro- tevangelium of James,” in Wilhelm Schneemelcher (ed.), New Testament Apocrypha (Louisville 1991) 424; J.
    [Show full text]
  • SYNOPSIS the Mishnah and Tosefta Are Two Related Works of Legal
    SYNOPSIS The Mishnah and Tosefta are two related works of legal discourse produced by Jewish sages in Late Roman Palestine. In these works, sages also appear as primary shapers of Jewish law. They are portrayed not only as individuals but also as “the SAGES,” a literary construct that is fleshed out in the context of numerous face-to-face legal disputes with individual sages. Although the historical accuracy of this portrait cannot be verified, it reveals the perceptions or wishes of the Mishnah’s and Tosefta’s redactors about the functioning of authority in the circles. An initial analysis of fourteen parallel Mishnah/Tosefta passages reveals that the authority of the Mishnah’s SAGES is unquestioned while the Tosefta’s SAGES are willing at times to engage in rational argumentation. In one passage, the Tosefta’s SAGES are shown to have ruled hastily and incorrectly on certain legal issues. A broader survey reveals that the Mishnah also contains a modest number of disputes in which the apparently sui generis authority of the SAGES is compromised by their participation in rational argumentation or by literary devices that reveal an occasional weakness of judgment. Since the SAGES are occasionally in error, they are not portrayed in entirely ideal terms. The Tosefta’s literary construct of the SAGES differs in one important respect from the Mishnah’s. In twenty-one passages, the Tosefta describes a later sage reviewing early disputes. Ten of these reviews involve the SAGES. In each of these, the later sage subjects the dispute to further analysis that accords the SAGES’ opinion no more a priori weight than the opinion of individual sages.
    [Show full text]
  • Rereading the Mishnah
    Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum Edited by Martin Hengel and Peter Schäfer 109 Judith Hauptman Rereading the Mishnah A New Approach to Ancient Jewish Texts Mohr Siebeck JUDITH HAUPTMAN: born 1943; BA in Economics at Barnard College (Columbia Univer- sity); BHL, MA, PhD in Talmud and Rabbinics at Jewish Theological Seminary; is currently E. Billy Ivry Professor of Talmud and Rabbinic Culture, Jewish Theological Seminary, NY. ISBN 3-16-148713-3 ISSN 0721-8753 (Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism) Die Deutsche Bibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; de- tailed bibliographic data is available in the Internet at http://dnb.ddb.de. © 2005 by Judith Hauptman / Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, Germany. This book may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, in any form (beyond that permitted by copyright law) without the publisher's written permission. This applies particularly to reproductions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was printed by Guide-Druck in Tiibingen on non-aging paper and bound by Buchbinderei Spinner in Ottersweier. Printed in Germany. •mm i^DH tn In memory of my brother, Philip Jonathan Hauptman, a heroic physician, who died on Rosh Hodesh Nisan 5765 Contents Preface IX Notes to the Reader XII Abbreviations XIII Chapter 1: Rethinking the Relationship between the Mishnah and the Tosefta 1 A. Two Illustrative Sets of Texts 3 B. Theories of the Tosefta's Origins 14 C. New Model 17 D. Challenges and Responses 25 E. This Book 29 Chapter 2: The Tosefta as a Commentary on an Early Mishnah 31 A.
    [Show full text]
  • Crown and Courts Materials
    David C. Flatto on The Crown and the Courts: Separation of Powers in the Early Jewish Im.agination Wednesday February 17, 2021 4 - 5 p.m. Online Register at law.fordham.edu/CrownAndCourts CLE COURSE MATERIALS Table of Contents 1. Speaker Biographies (view in document) 2. CLE Materials The Crown and the Courts: Separation of Powers in the Early Jewish Imagination Panel Discussion Cover, Robert M. THE FOLKTALES OF JUSTICE: TALES OF JURISDICTION (view in document) Cardozo Law Review. Levinson, Bernard M. THE FIRST CONSTITUTION: RETHINKING THE ORIGINS OF RULE OF LAW AND SEPARATION OF POWERS IN LIGHT OF DEUTERONOMY (view in document) Yale Journal of Law & the Humanities. Volume 20. Issue 1 Article 3. The King and I: The Separation of Powers in Early Hebraic Political Theory. (view in document) The Crown and the Courts: Separation of Powers in the Early Jewish Imagination Biographies Moderator: Ethan J. Leib is Professor of Law at Fordham Law School. He teaches in contracts, legislation, and regulation. His most recent book, Friend v. Friend: Friendships and What, If Anything, the Law Should Do About Them, explores the costs and benefits of the legal recognition of and sensitivity to friendship; it was published by Oxford University Press. Leib’s scholarly articles have recently appeared in the Yale Law Journal, Virginia Law Review, Georgetown Law Journal, University of Pennsylvania Law Review, University of Chicago Law Review, California Law Review, and elsewhere. He has also written for a broader audience in the New York Times, USA Today, Policy Review, Washington Post, New York Law Journal, The American Scholar, and The New Republic.
    [Show full text]
  • The Reproduction of Species
    Rachel Neis University of Michigan, USA The Reproduction of Species: Humans, Animals and Species Nonconformity in Early Rabbinic Science* Abstract: Tracing an early rabbinic approach to the human, this article analyzes how the Tannaim of the Mishnah and Tosefta set the human side by side with other species, and embedded their account within broader considerations of reproduc- tion, zoology and species crossings. The human here emerges at the intersection of menstrual purity law and Temple sacrificial law in the tractates of Niddah and Bekhorot and is part of a reproductive biology that sought to determine the bound- aries and overlaps between species. This rabbinic biology ought to be understood amid ancient conversations about what constitutes a proper member of a species, in terms of reproduction, resemblance and variation. The article shows how, even as it disavows genealogical links between humans and animals (and indeed across other species), rabbinic reproductive biology nonetheless implicates humans among and as animals. Key words: Rabbinic science of reproduction; likeness; bodily variation; species. Introduction Delivered by Ingenta Copyright Mohr Siebeck The idea in Gen 1:26 of humans as created “in the image of God” has loomed large in Jewish and Christian discourse. In the realms of theology, philosophy, and politics, the tselem elohim retains its potent ability to under- ? 141.211.4.224 Thu, 22 Nov 2018 14:58:54 pin diverse and contradictory “Judeo-Christian” positions. The divinizing * A fellowship at the Humanities Institute at the University of Michigan in 2014–15 enabled research for an early version of this article. I am grateful to Sid Smith and the fellows for their feedback, particularly Sara Ahbel-Rappe, Holly Hughes, Rostom Mesli, Sarah Linwick, and Melanie Yergeau.
    [Show full text]