DOCSLIB.ORG

Daf Ditty Yoma 55: Sprinkling One Up, Seven Down

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Daf Ditty Yoma 55: Sprinkling One Up, Seven Down Daf Ditty Yoma 55: Sprinkling One Up, Seven Down 1 § The mishna taught that the High Priest took the blood of the bull from the one who was stirring it so it would not coagulate, and he entered and sprinkled it like one who whips. The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of: Like one who whips? Rav Yehuda demonstrated the action with his hand, 2 like one who lashes with a whip on the back of another and who occasionally strikes lower down. A Sage taught in the Tosefta: When the High Priest sprinkles the blood, he does not sprinkle on the top of the Ark cover; rather, he does so against the thickness of the Ark cover. When he sprinkles once upward, he turns his hand so that the back of his hand faces downward, and he then sprinkles upward. And when he sprinkles seven times downward, he turns his hand so its back is upward. However, he does not sprinkle on the Ark cover or below it, so that the blood does not actually come into contact with it. § The Sages taught: ,Then shall he kill the goat of the sin-offering 15 וט ְו ַָשׁחטֶאת - ִיהרְשׂﬠ רֲא,אַתשׁטַּח ָ ֶ ָ רֲא,אַתשׁטַּח ִיהרְשׂﬠ that is for the people, and bring his blood within ,תםהָלאﬠו ְָב ֵאֶ ִי - ,וֹמֶלא ָדּ - תבּ ֵיִמ תבּ the veil, and do with his blood as he did with the ה;ֹתֶשׂﬠכָתוראַלפּ ְ ֶָָ - ראכּשׁ ,וֹמֲֶַ ָדּ ,וֹמֲֶַ ראכּשׁ blood of the bullock, and sprinkle it upon the דהָﬠהלשׂ פּםְָ ָ,ורַַ וֹהתִַﬠלזּאְה ָֹ - .ark-cover, and before the ark-cover ַה ,ֹתרַכּפּ ְנִפְלֶו ֵי ֶ.תֹרַפַּהכּ Lev 16:15 “And sprinkle it upon the Ark cover and before the Ark cover”. We have thereby learned how many times the High Priest must sprinkle upward for the goat, that is, one sprinkling, as it states: “And sprinkle.” However, with regard to 3 the sprinkling downward for the goat, before the Ark cover, I do not know how many times he must sprinkle. I therefore derive the halakha from the verses. It states that blood is sprinkled downward in the case of the bull, and it states that blood is sprinkled downward in the case of the goat. Just as the blood that he sprinkles downward in the case of the bull consists of seven sprinklings, as the verse explicitly states: “And before the Ark cover he shall sprinkle seven times” (Leviticus 16:14), so too, the sprinkling of the blood downward in the case of the goat is performed seven times. § The mishna states that the High Priest counted: One; one and one; one and two. The Sages taught in a baraita that when sprinkling, the High Priest counted: One; one and one; one and two; one and three; one and four; one and five; one and six; one and seven. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says that he counted: One; one and one; two and one; three and one; four and one; five and one; six and one; seven and one. The Gemara comments: They do not disagree about the matter itself that the High Priest sprinkles once upward and seven times downward. Rather, this Sage rules in accordance with the norm in his place, and this Sage rules in accordance with the norm in his place. In one place they counted the smaller number first, while in the other place they would count the larger number first. The Gemara asks: In any case, everyone, both Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda, agrees that the first sprinkling upward must be counted together with each and every one of the subsequent 4 sprinklings. What is the reason for this? Why can’t the High Priest count the downward sprinklings separately? The Sages debated this matter. Rabbi Elazar said: The reason is so that he does not err in the sprinklings. If the High Priest were to count downward without including the first upward sprinkling, he might mistakenly think that his calculation includes the first sprinkling, which would lead him to add another one. Rabbi Yoḥanan said that the reason is that the verse states: And he shall take of the blood of the bullock, and 14 די ְֶבְאָצבּעוְֹוַָלקח ְוִָהזּהַָהפּר,ִַמדּם ַָהפּר, ְוִָהזּה ְֶבְאָצבּעוֹ ;sprinkle it with his finger upon the ark-cover on the east ַﬠל - יְפנלו ְִֵ ;ק ְֵָהמד תרפּכּה ַַֹ יְפּנֶ ֵ יְפּנֶ ַַֹ תרפּכּה ְֵָהמד ;ק ְִֵ יְפנלו and before the ark-cover shall he sprinkle of the blood ,תֹרַפַּהכּ ֶי השׁזַּ ֶַעֶב - מﬠם ְָפּי ִ ִמן - ָםַהדּ -- .with his finger seven times ְבּ ָ.ְוֹעבֶּאצ Lev 16:14 “And he shall sprinkle it with his finger upon the Ark cover, and before the Ark cover he shall sprinkle”. As there is no need for the verse to state: He shall sprinkle” again, what is the meaning when the verse states: “He shall sprinkle”? This teaches with regard to the first sprinkling that it must be counted with each and every subsequent one, i.e., he must mention the first sprinkling every time. The Gemara asks: What is the practical difference between these two explanations? The Gemara answers: The practical difference between them concerns a case where he did not count the first sprinkling and did not err. That is acceptable according to the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, whereas according to Rabbi Yoḥanan the High Priest acted incorrectly, as it is a mitzva to count the first one. 5 "BEREIRAH" PERMITS A FORBIDDEN MIXTURE Rav Mordechai Kornfeld writes:1 The Gemara discusses the case of a Shofar (collection box) of coins which are designated for the purchase of Korbonos Chatas for the owners of the coins. If one of the owners dies, every set of coins in the box becomes a "Safek Chatas she'Meisah Be'aleha," because perhaps the one who died was the owner of that set of coins. According to the opinion that maintains "Yesh Bereirah," the doubt can be resolved simply by removing one set of coins and proclaiming that the owner of that set of coins was the one who died. Those coins then should be thrown into the sea, and all of the other coins become permitted to be used for Korbonos Chatas. How does the removal of one set of coins permit all of the other sets of coins that remain in the box? "Yesh Bereirah" means that although the status of an object is not clear at the present time, a future occurrence can determine its status retroactively. The principle of "Yesh Bereirah" is usually applied in a case in which a condition is stated at the time of the original event and that condition is fulfilled only at a later time. In the case of the Gemara here, however, the removal of one set of coins does not clarify that the owner of that set was the one who died. If, for some reason, the act of removing a set of coins from the rest indeed clarifies that those coins are the ones that belonged to the man who died, then is such an act effective in every other case of a forbidden mixture? Would it suffice to remove one item and declare it as the one that is forbidden, and thereby permit the rest of the mixture? TOSFOS in Temurah (30a, DH v'Idach) answers that in an ordinary case of a forbidden mixture, the forbidden item in the mixture was forbidden before it became mixed with the permitted items. Since it was prohibited when it was alone, its status of Isur cannot be transferred to a different item. In the case of the Gemara here, however, all of the items (coins) were permitted at the time they became mixed together. The Isur of one item took effect only after all of the items became mixed together. In such a case, the status of Isur can be removed by selecting one item and declaring it to be the one that is forbidden. (Perhaps the logic behind this distinction is as follows. In every case of a mixture of a forbidden item with permitted items, the forbidden item should be Batel b'Rov, annulled in the majority. However, in certain cases the Rabanan instituted that the Isur in the mixture is not Batel b'Rov, such as in cases of a "Davar Chashuv," "Davar she'b'Minyan," and "Davar she'Yesh Lo Matirin." In the case of an item that became forbidden only after it fell into the mixture, the Rabanan did not institute that the mixture remain forbidden, even when the forbidden item is included in one of the types of cases mentioned above ("Davar Chashuv," etc.). The Rabanan required only that one remove and designate one item from the mixture as that which is forbidden in order that he not derive benefit from the forbidden item.) 1 https://www.dafyomi.co.il/yoma/insites/yo-dt-055.htm 6 The TOSFOS YESHANIM and RITVA answer that when a person places money in the Shofar, he gives it with intent to grant the Kohanim the authority to use the money to buy a Chatas for anyone they choose. Therefore, according to the opinion that maintains "Yesh Bereirah," the Kohanim may determine retroactively which set of coins is the money of the person who died. (According to the opinion that maintains "Ein Bereirah," every time the Kohanim purchase a Korban from the money of that Shofar they must stipulate that the Korban they purchase is "for whoever put this set of coins into the Shofar." This is because they are unable to determine retroactively through Bereirah that this set of coins was deposited in the Shofar by a particular person.) Steinzaltz (OBM) writes:2 The general principle that the Gemara works with is that kohanim zerizin hem – that kohanim in the Temple are always careful and efficient in their work.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Stolen Talmud
    History of Jewish Publishing, Week 3: Modern Forgeries R' Mordechai Torczyner – [email protected] Pseudepigraphy 1. Avot 6:6 One who makes a statement in the name of its original source brings redemption to the world, as Esther 2:22 says, "And Esther told the king, in the name of Mordechai." 2. Jerusalem Talmud, Shabbat 6:1 Rabbi Avahu cited Rabbi Yochanan: One may teach his daughter Greek; this is ornamental for her. Shimon bar Abba heard this and said, "Because Rabbi Avahu wants to teach his daughter Greek, he hung this upon Rabbi Yochanan." Rabbi Avahu heard this and said, "May terrible things happen to me, if I did not hear this from Rabbi Yochanan!" 3. Talmud, Pesachim 112a If you wish to be strangled, hang yourself by a tall tree. Besamim Rosh 4. Responsa of Rabbeinu Asher ("Rosh") 55:9 The wisdom of philosophy and the wisdom of Torah and its laws do not follow the same path. The wisdom of Torah is a tradition received by Moses from Sinai, and the scholar will analyze it via the methods assigned for its analysis, comparing one matter and another. Even where this does not match natural wisdom, we follow the tradition. Philosophical wisdom is natural, with great scholars who established natural arguments, and in their great wisdom they dug deeper and corrupted (Hosea 9:9) and needed to deny the Torah of Moses, for the Torah is entirely unnatural and revelatory. Regarding this it is stated, 'You shall be pure with HaShem your Gd,' meaning that even if something is outside of natural logic, you should not doubt the received tradition, but walk before Him in purity.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Beginning the Conversation
    NOTES 1 Beginning the Conversation 1. Jacob Katz, Exclusiveness and Tolerance: Jewish-Gentile Relations in Medieval and Modern Times (New York: Schocken, 1969). 2. John Micklethwait, “In God’s Name: A Special Report on Religion and Public Life,” The Economist, London November 3–9, 2007. 3. Mark Lila, “Earthly Powers,” NYT, April 2, 2006. 4. When we mention the clash of civilizations, we think of either the Spengler battle, or a more benign interplay between cultures in individual lives. For the Spengler battle, see Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996). For a more benign interplay in individual lives, see Thomas L. Friedman, The Lexus and the Olive Tree (New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1999). 5. Micklethwait, “In God’s Name.” 6. Robert Wuthnow, America and the Challenges of Religious Diversity (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2005). “Interview with Robert Wuthnow” Religion and Ethics Newsweekly April 26, 2002. Episode no. 534 http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics/week534/ rwuthnow.html 7. Wuthnow, America and the Challenges of Religious Diversity, 291. 8. Eric Sharpe, “Dialogue,” in Mircea Eliade and Charles J. Adams, The Encyclopedia of Religion, first edition, volume 4 (New York: Macmillan, 1987), 345–8. 9. Archbishop Michael L. Fitzgerald and John Borelli, Interfaith Dialogue: A Catholic View (London: SPCK, 2006). 10. Lily Edelman, Face to Face: A Primer in Dialogue (Washington, DC: B’nai B’rith, Adult Jewish Education, 1967). 11. Ben Zion Bokser, Judaism and the Christian Predicament (New York: Knopf, 1967), 5, 11. 12. Ibid., 375.
    [Show full text]
  • Why Did Moses Break the Tablets (Ekev)
    Thu 6 Aug 2020 / 16 Av 5780 B”H Dr Maurice M. Mizrahi Congregation Adat Reyim Torah discussion on Ekev Why Did Moses Break the Tablets? Introduction In this week's portion, Ekev, Moses recounts to the Israelites how he broke the first set of tablets of the Law once he saw that they had engaged in idolatry by building and worshiping a golden calf: And I saw, and behold, you had sinned against the Lord, your God. You had made yourselves a molten calf. You had deviated quickly from the way which the Lord had commanded you. So I gripped the two tablets, flung them away with both my hands, and smashed them before your eyes. [Deut. 9:16-17] This parallels the account in Exodus: As soon as Moses came near the camp and saw the calf and the dancing, he became enraged; and he hurled the tablets from his hands and shattered them at the foot of the mountain. [Exodus 32:19] Why did he do that? What purpose did it accomplish? -Wasn’t it an affront to God, since the tablets were holy? -Didn't it shatter the authority of the very commandments that told the Israelites not to worship idols? -Was it just a spontaneous reaction, a public display of anger, a temper tantrum? Did Moses just forget himself? -Why didn’t he just return them to God, or at least get God’s approval before smashing them? Yet he was not admonished! Six explanations in the Sources 1-Because God told him to do it 1 The Talmud reports that four prominent rabbis said that God told Moses to break the tablets.
    [Show full text]
  • Sukkot Potpourri
    Sukkot Potpourri [note: This document was created from a selection of uncited study handouts and academic texts that were freely quoted and organized only for discussion purposes.] Byron Kolitz 30 September 2020; 12 Tishrei 5781 Midrash Tehillim 17, Part 5 - Why is Sukkot so soon after Yom Kippur? (Also referred to as Midrash Shocher Tov; its beginning words are from Proverbs 11:27. The work is known since the 11th century; it covers only Psalms 1-118.) In your right hand there are pleasures (Tehillim 16:11). What is meant by the word pleasures? Rabbi Abin taught, it refers to the myrtle, the palm-branch, and the willow which give pleasure. These are held in the right hand, for according to the rabbis, the festive wreath (lulav) should be held in the right hand, and the citron in the left. What kind of victory is meant in the phrase? As it appears in the Aramaic Bible: ‘the sweetness of the victory of your right hand’. That kind of victory is one in which the victor receives a wreath. For according to the custom of the world, when two charioteers race in the hippodrome, which of them receives a wreath? The victor. On Rosh Hashanah all the people of the world come forth like contestants on parade and pass before G-d; the children of Israel among all the people of the world also pass before Him. Then, the guardian angels of the nations of the world declare: ‘We were victorious, and in the judgment will be found righteous.’ But actually no one knows who was victorious, whether the children of Israel or the nations of the world were victorious.
    [Show full text]
  • Humor in Talmud and Midrash
    Tue 14, 21, 28 Apr 2015 B”H Dr Maurice M. Mizrahi Jewish Community Center of Northern Virginia Adult Learning Institute Jewish Humor Through the Sages Contents Introduction Warning Humor in Tanach Humor in Talmud and Midrash Desire for accuracy Humor in the phrasing The A-Fortiori argument Stories of the rabbis Not for ladies The Jewish Sherlock Holmes Checks and balances Trying to fault the Torah Fervor Dreams Lying How many infractions? Conclusion Introduction -Not general presentation on Jewish humor: Just humor in Tanach, Talmud, Midrash, and other ancient Jewish sources. -Far from exhaustive. -Tanach mentions “laughter” 50 times (root: tz-cho-q) [excluding Yitzhaq] -Talmud: Records teachings of more than 1,000 rabbis spanning 7 centuries (2nd BCE to 5th CE). Basis of all Jewish law. -Savoraim improved style in 6th-7th centuries CE. -Rabbis dream up hypothetical situations that are strange, farfetched, improbable, or even impossible. -To illustrate legal issues, entertain to make study less boring, and sharpen the mind with brainteasers. 1 -Going to extremes helps to understand difficult concepts. (E.g., Einstein's “thought experiments”.) -Some commentators say humor is not intentional: -Maybe sometimes, but one cannot avoid the feeling it is. -Reason for humor not always clear. -Rabbah (4th century CE) always began his lectures with a joke: Before he began his lecture to the scholars, [Rabbah] used to say something funny, and the scholars were cheered. After that, he sat in awe and began the lecture. [Shabbat 30b] -Laughing and entertaining are important. Talmud: -Rabbi Beroka Hoza'ah often went to the marketplace at Be Lapat, where [the prophet] Elijah often appeared to him.
    [Show full text]
  • High Holy Days Q&A Full Sheet.Indd
    The High Holy Days Questions and Answers to help you more fully experience and enjoy these Holy Days What do the words Rosh Hashanah mean? Rosh Hashanah is Hebrew for “head of the year” (literally) or “beginning of the year” (figuratively). In the Torah, we read, “In the seventh month, on the first day of the month, there shall be a sacred assembly, a cessation from work, a day of commemoration proclaimed by the sound of the Shofar.” Therefore, we celebrate Rosh Hashanah on the first and second days of Tishrei, the seventh month of the Jewish calendar. Why is the New Year in the Fall? Why do we start the New Year in the seventh month? Our ancestors had several dates in the calendar marking the beginning of important seasons of the year. The first month of the Hebrew calendar was Nisan, in the spring. The fifteenth day of the month of Shevat was considered the New Year of the Trees. But the first of Tishrei was the beginning of the economic year, when the old harvest year ended and the new one began. Around the month of Tishrei, the first rains came in the Land of Israel, and the soil was plowed for the winter grain. Eventually, the first of Tishrei became not only the beginning of the economic year, but the beginning of the spiritual year as well. What are the “Days of Awe?” Rosh Hashanah is the first of the “High Holy Days,” and begins the most spiritually intense part of the Jewish year – the yamin nora’im, the Days of Awe.
    [Show full text]
  • Of the Mishnah, Bavli & Yerushalmi
    0 Learning at SVARA SVARA’s learning happens in the bet midrash, a space for study partners (​chevrutas​) to build a relationship with the Talmud text, with one another, and with the tradition—all in community and a queer-normative, loving culture. The learning is rigorous, yet the bet midrash environment is warm and supportive. Learning at SVARA focuses on skill-building (learning how to learn), foregrounding the radical roots of the Jewish tradition, empowering learners to become “players” in it, cultivating Talmud study as a spiritual practice, and with the ultimate goal of nurturing human beings shaped by one of the central spiritual, moral, and intellectual technologies of our tradition: ​Talmud Torah​ (the study of Torah). The SVARA method is a simple, step-by-step process in which the teacher is always an authentic co-learner with their students, teaching the Talmud not so much as a ​normative​ document prescribing specific behaviors, but as a ​formative​ document, shaping us into a certain kind of human being. We believe the Talmud itself is a handbook for how to, sometimes even radically, upgrade our tradition when it no longer functions to create the most liberatory world possible. All SVARA learning begins with the CRASH Talk. Here we lay out our philosophy of the Talmud and the rabbinic revolution that gave rise to it—along with important vocabulary and concepts for anyone learning Jewish texts. This talk is both an overview of the ultimate goals of the Jewish enterprise, as well as a crash course in ​halachic​ (Jewish legal) jurisprudence. Beyond its application to Judaism, CRASH Theory is a simple but elegant model of how all change happens—whether societal, religious, organizational, or personal.
    [Show full text]
  • Hebcal 5779H Portland.Pdf
    September 2018 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Erev Rosh Hashana Rosh Hashana 5779 Rosh Hashana II 5:15a Fast begins Menachot 34 Menachot 35 Shabbat Shuva Menachot 30 Menachot 31 Menachot 32 Tzom Gedaliah 7:05p Candle lighting Parashat Vayeilech 7:15p Candle lighting 8:21p Candle lighting 8:19p Havdalah (50 min) 8:03p Fast ends Menachot 36 Menachot 33 8:12p Havdalah (50 min) 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Menachot 37 Menachot 38 Erev Yom Kippur Yom Kippur Menachot 41 Menachot 42 Parashat Ha'Azinu Menachot 39 Menachot 40 6:51p Candle lighting Menachot 43 6:57p Candle lighting 8:04p Havdalah (50 min) 7:58p Havdalah (50 min) 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Erev Sukkot Sukkot I Sukkot II Sukkot III (CH''M) Sukkot IV (CH''M) Sukkot V (CH''M) Sukkot VI (CH''M) Menachot 44 Menachot 45 Menachot 46 Menachot 47 Menachot 48 Menachot 49 Menachot 50 6:48p Candle lighting 7:54p Candle lighting 7:52p Havdalah (50 min) 6:38p Candle lighting 7:45p Havdalah (50 min) 30 Sukkot VII (Hoshana Raba) Menachot 51 6:34p Candle lighting Candle lighting times for Portland, Oregon, USA Provided by Hebcal.com with a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License October 2018 Sunday Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday Saturday 1 2 3 4 5 6 Shmini Atzeret Simchat Torah Menachot 54 Menachot 55 Menachot 56 Mevarchim Chodesh Cheshvan Menachot 52 Menachot 53 6:25p Candle lighting Parashat Bereshit 7:41p Candle lighting 7:39p Havdalah (50 min) Menachot 57 7:31p Havdalah (50 min) 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Menachot 58 Menachot 59
    [Show full text]
  • Menachot 2: Addendum to the Last 8 Pesukim
    Menachot 2: Addendum to the Last 8 Pesukim I. Yehoshua a. Why does the Gemara think that if the last eight pesukim were not written by Moshe, they were written by Yehoshua? i. See the authorship issues on Bava Batra 15a after our sugya. ii. Read chapter 24 in Yehoshua. What does pasuk 26 mean in context? .there ערוך לנר iii. See what the Gemara in Makkot does with that passage, and see the תלמוד בבלי מסכת מכות דף יא עמוד א ויכתוב יהושע את הדברים האלה בספר תורת אלהים - פליגי בה ר' יהודה ור' נחמיה, חד אומר: שמנה פסוקים, וחד אומר: ערי מקלט. בשלמא למ"ד ח' פסוקים, היינו דכתיב בספר תורת אלהים; אלא למ"ד ערי מקלט, מאי בספר תורת אלהים? ה"ק: ויכתוב יהושע בספרו את הדברים האלה הכתובים בספר תורת אלהים. ערוך לנר מסכת מכות דף יא עמוד א בגמרא חד אמר שמנה פסוקים. ק"ק, דא"כ איך שייך זה בסוף יהושע, בתחלת הספר ה"ל לכתוב כן. וגם למ"ד ערי מקלט, ה"ל לכתוב כן שם )פרשה כ'( ולא בסוף הספר. ועוד, דפשטות הכתובים ודאי מורה ברור דקאי אהדברים שדבר שם יהושע אל העם וכרת ברית עמהם. ועיין במהרש"א ח"א שנראה שהרגיש בזה ונדחק ליישב. ונלענ"ד דודאי עיקר הפסוק קאי לכ"ע אהדברים שדבר יהושע אל העם, אכן האי בספר תורת אלקים אין לו פירוש שם, ולכן ס"ל להני מ"ד דזה מרבה שכתב ג"כ ח' פסוקים למר ולמר ערי מקלט, וקאי האי ויכתוב יהושע ג"כ אהני, וכיון דעיקר הפסוק קאי אדברי ברית לכן שפיר כתוב פסוק זה במקומו הראוי: תר גום יונתן יהושע פרק כד פסוק כו )כו( ְּוכַתב ְיֹהוֻׁשַע ַית ִּפְתָגַמָיא ָהִּאֵלין ְוְַאצְנִּעינּון ְבֵסֶפר ֹאוַרְיָתא ַדָיי ּוְנִּסיב ַאְבָנא ַרְבָתא ַוֲאִּק י ָמּה ַתָמן ְתֹחות ְַאלָתא ִּדי ְבֵבית ַמְקְדָשא ַדָיי : רש"י יהושע פרק כד פסוק כו )כו( ויכתב יהושע וגומר - תרגום יונתן וכתב יהושע ית פתגמיא האלין ואצנעינון בספר אורייתא דה' ובמסכת מכות נחלקו אמוראי' חד אמר אלו ח' פסוקים מן וימת משה עד לעיני כל ישראל שהרי ס"ת חסר והשלימו וחד אמר פרשה זו של ערי מקלט כתב בספרו כמו שהיו כתובי' בספר התור' : II.
    [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]
  • Beginners Guide for the Major Jewish Texts: Torah, Mishnah, Talmud
    August 2001, Av 5761 The World Union of Jewish Students (WUJS) 9 Alkalai St., POB 4498 Jerusalem, 91045, Israel Tel: +972 2 561 0133 Fax: +972 2 561 0741 E-mail: [email protected] Web-site: www.wujs.org.il Originally produced by AJ6 (UK) ©1998 This edition ©2001 WUJS – All Rights Reserved The Guide To Texts Published and produced by WUJS, the World Union of Jewish Students. From the Chairperson Dear Reader Welcome to the Guide to Texts. This introductory guide to Jewish texts is written for students who want to know the difference between the Midrash and Mishna, Shulchan Aruch and Kitzur Shulchan Aruch. By taking a systematic approach to the obvious questions that students might ask, the Guide to Texts hopes to quickly and clearly give students the information they are after. Unfortunately, many Jewish students feel alienated from traditional texts due to unfamiliarity and a feeling that Jewish sources don’t ‘belong’ to them. We feel that Jewish texts ought to be accessible to all of us. We ought to be able to talk about them, to grapple with them, and to engage with them. Jewish texts are our heritage, and we can’t afford to give it up. Jewish leaders ought to have certain skills, and ethical values, but they also need a certain commitment to obtaining the knowledge necessary to ensure that they aren’t just leaders, but Jewish leaders. This Guide will ensure that this is the case. Learning, and then leading, are the keys to Jewish student leadership. Lead on! Peleg Reshef WUJS Chairperson How to Use The Guide to Jewish Texts Many Jewish students, and even Jewish student leaders, don’t know the basics of Judaism and Jewish texts.
    [Show full text]
  • Torah She-Ba'al
    SHALOM HARTMAN INSTITUTE Elu v'Elu: Two Schools of Halakha Face Off On Issues of Human Autonomy, Majority Rule And Divine Voice of Authority By Noam Zion Contents Copyright © 2008 Shalom Hartman Institute, Jerusalem, Israel 1 hartman.org.il | [email protected] Elu v'Elu: Two Schools of Halakha Face Off On Issues of Human Autonomy, Majority Rule And Divine Voice of Authority1 By: Noam Zion Table of Contents Introduction – the Rabbinic Revolution – the Rule of the Interpreters 3 A. Two Great Debates of the Schools of Hillel / Shammai and the Bat Kol: Comparing TB Eruvin 13b and TB Baba Metzia 59a-b 7 B. Can Later Rabbinic Creativity Transcend Its Origins? Moshe Struggles to Understand his Spiritual Heir, Akiva (TB Menachot 29b) 16 C. The Power to Exclude from the Debate: Why Do the Rabbis Excommunicate Eliezer? 20 D. What is the Divine Perspective on the Eliezer / Yehoshua Debate? 21 E. Bat Kol: What is the Relationship between God’s Revelation and Halachic Decision-making? (TB Baba Metzia 59 and Eruvin 13b) 24 F. What is the Significance of Hillel’s Moral Virtues? Granting Priority to Hillel’s School over Shammai’s (TB Eruvin 13a) 26 G. Pluralism versus Monism in the Search for Truth and the Relationship to the Other’s View 29 H. Eliezer’s Crisis of Conscience: How Can We Be Obligated to Follow a “Wrong” Decision Made by the Rabbis because They Constitute the Majority? 40 I. Living with Disagreement: The Culture of Controversy – What are the Limits of Unity and of Diversity within a Common Community? Three Theories of Tolerance 43 1 Summarized based on Moshe Halbertal lectures to TICHON on Interpretation, Avi Sagi’s Elu vElu, and on Aviezer Ravitsky, “The Question of Toleration in Jewish Tradition: Between Pluralism and Paternalism” in Bein Samchut l’Autonomia, edited by Avi Sagi, Zeev Safrai p.
    [Show full text]