DOCSLIB.ORG

Daf Ditty Eruvin 105: HADRAN

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Daf Ditty Eruvin 105: HADRAN Daf Ditty Eruvin 105: HADRAN 1 2 The Sages taught in a baraita: It is permitted for everyone to enter the Sanctuary to build, to repair, or to remove impurity from inside. However, wherever possible, the mitzva is for these tasks to be performed by priests. If no priests are available, Levites enter; if no Levites are available, Israelites enter. In both cases, if they are ritually pure, yes, they may enter, but if they are impure, no, they may not enter the holy place. 3 Therefore, the verse teaches “only” as an expression of exclusion, which means that there is a distinction here: Although the mitzva should be performed with unblemished priests ab initio, if no unblemished priests are available, blemished ones may enter. Likewise, it is the duty of ritually pure priests; if no pure priests are available, impure ones may enter. In both cases, if they are priests, yes, they may enter, but if they are Israelites, no, they may not enter the holy place. According to Rav Kahana, ritually impure priests take precedence over ritually pure Israelites. A dilemma was raised before the Sages: If one priest is ritually impure and another has a blemish, which of them should enter to perform repairs? Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi said that Rav said: The impure one should enter, as he is permitted to participate in communal service. If the entire community is ritually impure, even impure priests may perform the service, whereas blemished priests may not serve under any circumstances. Rabbi Elazar says: The one with the blemish should enter, as he is permitted to eat consecrated foods, which indicates that he retains the sanctity of the priesthood despite his blemish. The Gemara leaves this question unresolved. 4 5 Mishnah (104b) Rabbi Shimon says that this is the principle: Wherever the Sages permitted something to you, they granted you only from your own, as they permitted to you only activities that are prohibited due to rabbinic decree, not labors prohibited by Torah law. We learned in the mishna that Rabbi Shimon says: Wherever the Sages permitted an action to you, they granted you only from your own. The Gemara asks: With regard to Rabbi Shimon, on the basis of what mishna did he formulate this principle? The Gemara answers: He taught this principle on the basis of the mishna there, as we learned: With regard to one for whom it grew dark while he was outside the Shabbat limit, even if he was only one cubit outside the limit, he may not enter the town. Rabbi Shimon says: Even if he was fifteen cubits outside the limit, he may enter the town, because when the surveyors mark the Shabbat limit, they do not measure precisely. Rather they position the boundary mark within the two-thousand-cubit limit, because of those who err. 6 With regard to that which the first tanna said, i.e., that he may not enter, Rabbi Shimon said to the tanna: He may enter. His reason, as stated, is that the limit does in fact extend that far, as any area the Sages granted to a person was actually permitted to him by Torah law. Rabbi Shimon further said: As they permitted to you only activities prohibited due to rabbinic decree, but not actions prohibited by Torah law. The Gemara asks: On the basis of what teaching did he formulate this principle? The Gemara answers: He taught it on the basis of the mishna there, where the first tanna said with regard to a harp string in the Temple that broke on Shabbat, that one may tie it with a knot, and Rabbi Shimon said: He may form only a bow. 7 The reason why only forming a bow is permitted, is that it cannot lead to liability for a sin- offering, as forming a bow cannot constitute a violation of the category of the prohibited labor of tying. Consequently, the Sages permitted it. However, with regard to tying a knot, which can lead to liability for a sin-offering when performed outside the Temple, the Sages did not permit it, as Rabbi Shimon maintains that the Sages permitted only activities whose prohibition involves a rabbinic decree. TOSAFOS תופסות ה"ד רמא 'ר ועמש ן סנכי ן ועמש 'ר רמא ה"ד תופסות Tosfos explains R. Shimon' words. יהוכ רמאק היל יבר ועמש ן אנתל אמק 'עא פ' לקימש נא י ךישחמב ץוח םוחתל רימחמ נא י נב תמי נכה רו םתהד םתהד רו נכה תמי נב אל ו ק ו אל ה ו א אלא ךלשמ נתנ ו ךל ו נתנ ךלשמ אלא א ו ה אל ו ק ו אל R. Shimon says as follows to the first Tana. Even though I am lenient about one who was outside the Techum when it became dark [on Shabbos night], I am stringent about a harp string, for there (outside the Techum) it is not a leniency, rather, they gave to you what is yours (the Techum is really 15 Amos past where it is marked); גום ןאכ אל ונתנ ךל אלא ךלמש ונייהד הבינע הוהד רבד רתומה רבד הוהד הבינע ונייהד ךלמש אלא ךל ונתנ אל ןאכ גום Also, here, they gave to you only what is yours, i.e., a bow, which is [totally] permitted. הוא רטנד דע אכה דע רטנד הוא Why did he wait until now [to argue with the first Tana? He should have argued in the Mishnah on 102b. There are four Mishnayos in between!] שמ ו ם ד ב ע י אלס יקו ילימ שדקמבד לבא אל ידמב :הנ דבא ב דמד למ ק ל [Rebbi, who codified the Mishnayos,] wanted to teach all of the [Heterim] in the Mikdash, but not outside the Mikdash [before R. Shimon's opinion. We learn that all these Heterim are only for Shevus]. "THEY GAVE YOU WHAT IS ALREADY YOURS..." Rav Mordechai KornFeld writes:1 The Mishnah at the end of Maseches Eruvin records a cryptic statement in the name of Rebbi Shimon: "When the Chachamim permitted something, they merely gave you what was already 1 https://www.dafyomi.co.il/eruvin/insites/ev-dt-105.htm 8 yours (i.e., what was permitted by the Torah), for they permitted only what was prohibited by a Rabbinic injunction." Our Daf explains that Rebbi Shimon's statement is addressed to the Tana of the Mishnah (102b) who permits one to tie a torn harp-string in the Beis ha'Mikdash on Shabbos. Rebbi Shimon argues that one is not allowed to tie a string, even in preparation for the Avodah in the Beis ha'Mikdash, since a Melachah d'Oraisa is involved. Rebbi Shimon's words should have been included in the Mishnah earlier (102b) that discusses one who ties a harp-string. Why does the Mishnah wait until the end of the Maseches to record his statement? TOSFOS (DH Amar) above, explains that the Tana of the Mishnah first wanted to list all of the actions, without interruption, that are permitted in the Beis ha'Mikdash and prohibited outside of the Beis ha'Mikdash. Afterwards, the Tana returned to the subject of the harp-string and recorded Rebbi Shimon's dissenting opinion. MAHARSHA suggests another approach. Rebbi Shimon does not mean to address the specific Halachah of tying a harp-string. Rather, he makes a general statement that applies to many of the laws of Eruvin. Throughout Maseches Eruvin, the Rabanan were lenient with regard to the laws of Eruvin and Reshuyos (for example, an army camp is exempt from certain types of Eruvin, 17b; Pasei Bira'os permit the use of a well in a Reshus ha'Rabim for travelers on their way to Yerushalayim for the festival, ibid.; Mechitzos of horizontal and vertical ropes are acceptable partitions during travel, 16b). Why were the Rabanan lenient with regard to these Halachos? Rebbi Shimon explains that they were lenient because the Eruvin and Mechitzos in these cases satisfy the Torah's regulations. It was the Rabanan who added extra requirements. Since the Rabanan created the additional rules, they have the authority to waive them when circumstances warrant. When the Gemara explains that Rebbi Shimon addresses the specific case of tying a harp-string, this is only because the Gemara understands from his words that he also has a specific case in mind. The Gemara knows, however, that Rebbi Shimon's statement is a general one, and that he means to encompass the entire Maseches in a broader sense. This is why his words make an appropriate ending for Maseches Eruvin. 9 Steinzaltz (OBM) writes:2 The last few Mishnayot in Massekhet Eiruvin deal with halakhot unique to the mikdash. The final Mishna (104b) discusses the best way to remove a ritually unclean animal from the Beit HaMikdash. Rabbi Yohanan in the Gemara quotes a passage in II Divrei Hayamim 29:16, which relates the story about King Hizkiyahu’s refurbishing of the Temple. According to the passage, the kohanim removed all of the impure things that they found in the Temple and passed them to the levi’im in the Temple court, who carried them out to the Kidron Valley. Although it appears that entering the Mikdash to clean it is limited to kohanim and levi’im, a baraita is brought to the contrary. The Sages taught in a baraita: It is permitted for everyone to enter the Sanctuary to build, to repair, or to remove impurity from inside. However, wherever possible, the mitzva is for these tasks to be performed by priests. If no priests are available, Levites enter; if no Levites are available, Israelites enter.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Creation and Composition
    Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism Texte und Studien zum Antiken Judentum Edited by Martin Hengel und Peter Schäfer 114 ARTIBUS ,5*2 Creation and Composition The Contribution of the Bavli Redactors (Stammaim) to the Aggada Edited by Jeffrey L. Rubenstein Mohr Siebeck Jeffrey L. Rubenstein, born 1964. 1985 B.A. at Oberlin College (OH); 1987 M.A. at The Jewish Theological Seminary of America (NY); 1992 Ph.D. at Columbia University (NY). Professor in the Skirball Department of Hebrew and Judaic Studies, New York University. ISBN 3-16-148692-7 ISSN 0721-8753 (Texts and Studies in Ancient Judaism) Die Deutsche Bibliothek lists this publication in the Deutsche Nationalbibliographie; detailed bibliographic data is available in the Internet at http://dnb.ddb.de. © 2005 by 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 repro- ductions, translations, microfilms and storage and processing in electronic systems. The book was typeset by Martin Fischer in Tübingen, printed by Guide-Druck in Tübingen on non-aging paper and bound by Buchbinderei Spinner in Ottersweier. Printed in Germany. Preface The papers collected in this volume were presented at a conference sponsored by the Skirball Department of Hebrew and Judaic Studies of New York University, February 9-10, 2003.1 am grateful to Lawrence Schiffman, chairman of the de- partment, for his support, and to Shayne Figueroa and Diane Leon-Ferdico, the departmental administrators, for all their efforts in logistics and organization.
    [Show full text]
  • The Humanity of the Talmud: Reading for Ethics in Bavli ʿavoda Zara By
    The Humanity of the Talmud: Reading for Ethics in Bavli ʿAvoda Zara By Mira Beth Wasserman A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Joint Doctor of Philosophy with Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley in Jewish Studies in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in charge: Professor Daniel Boyarin, chair Professor Chana Kronfeld Professor Naomi Seidman Professor Kenneth Bamberger Spring 2014 Abstract The Humanity of the Talmud: Reading for Ethics in Bavli ʿAvoda Zara by Mira Beth Wasserman Joint Doctor of Philosophy with Graduate Theological Union, Berkeley University of California, Berkeley Professor Daniel Boyarin, chair In this dissertation, I argue that there is an ethical dimension to the Babylonian Talmud, and that literary analysis is the approach best suited to uncover it. Paying special attention to the discursive forms of the Talmud, I show how juxtapositions of narrative and legal dialectics cooperate in generating the Talmud's distinctive ethics, which I characterize as an attentiveness to the “exceptional particulars” of life. To demonstrate the features and rewards of a literary approach, I offer a sustained reading of a single tractate from the Babylonian Talmud, ʿAvoda Zara (AZ). AZ and other talmudic discussions about non-Jews offer a rich resource for considerations of ethics because they are centrally concerned with constituting social relationships and with examining aspects of human experience that exceed the domain of Jewish law. AZ investigates what distinguishes Jews from non-Jews, what Jews and non- Jews share in common, and what it means to be a human being. I read AZ as a cohesive literary work unified by the overarching project of examining the place of humanity in the cosmos.
    [Show full text]
  • The Decline of the Generations (Haazinu)
    21 Sep 2020 – 3 Tishri 5781 B”H Dr Maurice M. Mizrahi Congregation Adat Reyim Torah discussion on Haazinu The Decline of the Generations Introduction In this week’s Torah portion, Haazinu, Moses tells the Israelites to remember their people’s past: זְכֹר֙יְמֹ֣ות םעֹולָָ֔ ב ִּ֖ ינּו נ֣ שְ ֹותּדֹור־וָד֑ ֹור שְאַַ֤ ל אָב ֙יך֙ וְ יַגֵָ֔דְ ךזְקֵנ ִּ֖יך וְ יֹֹ֥אמְ רּו לְָָֽך Remember the days of old. Consider the years of generation after generation. Ask your father and he will inform you; your elders, and they will tell you. [Deut. 32:7] He then warns them that prosperity (growing “fat, thick and rotund”) and contact with idolaters will cause them to fall away from their faith, so they should keep alive their connection with their past. Yeridat HaDorot Strong rabbinic doctrine: Yeridat HaDorot – the decline of the generations. Successive generations are further and further away from the revelation at Sinai, and so their spirituality and ability to understand the Torah weakens steadily. Also, errors of transmission may have been introduced, especially considering a lot of the Law was oral: מש הק בֵלּתֹורָ ה מ סינַי, ּומְ סָרָ ּהל יהֹושֻׁעַ , ו יהֹושֻׁעַ ל זְקֵנים, ּוזְקֵנים ל נְב יאים, ּונְב יא ים מְ סָ רּוהָ ילְאַנְשֵ נכְ ס ת הַגְדֹולָה Moses received the Torah from Sinai and transmitted it to Joshua, Joshua to the elders, and the elders to the prophets, and the prophets to the Men of the Great Assembly. [Avot 1:1] The Mishnah mourns the Sages of ages past and the fact that they will never be replaced: When Rabbi Meir died, the composers of parables ceased.
    [Show full text]
  • A Clergy Resource Guide
    When Every Need is Special: NAVIGATING SPECIAL NEEDS IN A CONGREGATIONAL SETTING A Clergy Resource Guide For the best in child, family and senior services...Think JSSA Jewish Social Service Agency Rockville (Wood Hill Road), 301.838.4200 • Rockville (Montrose Road), 301.881.3700 • Fairfax, 703.204.9100 www.jssa.org - [email protected] WHEN EVERY NEED IS SPECIAL – NAVIGATING SPECIAL NEEDS IN A CONGREGATIONAL SETTING PREFACE This February, JSSA was privileged to welcome 17 rabbis and cantors to our Clergy Training Program – When Every Need is Special: Navigating Special Needs in the Synagogue Environment. Participants spanned the denominational spectrum, representing communities serving thousands throughout the Washington region. Recognizing that many area clergy who wished to attend were unable to do so, JSSA has made the accompanying Clergy Resource Guide available in a digital format. Inside you will find slides from the presentation made by JSSA social workers, lists of services and contacts selected for their relevance to local clergy, and tachlis items, like an ‘Inclusion Check‐list’, Jewish source material and divrei Torah on Special Needs and Disabilities. The feedback we have received indicates that this has been a valuable resource for all clergy. Please contact Rabbi James Kahn or Natalie Merkur Rose with any questions, comments or for additional resources. L’shalom, Rabbi James Q. Kahn, Director of Jewish Engagement & Chaplaincy Services Email [email protected]; Phone 301.610.8356 Natalie Merkur Rose, LCSW‐C, LICSW, Director of Jewish Community Outreach Email [email protected]; Phone 301.610.8319 WHEN EVERY NEED IS SPECIAL – NAVIGATING SPECIAL NEEDS IN A CONGREGATIONAL SETTING RESOURCE GUIDE: TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1: SESSION MATERIALS FOR REVIEW PAGE Program Agenda .........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Talmudic Metrology IV: Halakhic Currency
    Talmudic Metrology IV: The Halakhic Currency Abstract. In 66 B.C.E. Palestine entered under Roman protection and from 6 C.E. on it would be under Roman administration. This situation persisted until the conquest by the Persians in the beginning of the seventh century. The Jerusalem Talmud was thus completely elaborated under Roman rule. Therefore, as for the other units of measure, the Halakhik coinage and the Jerusalem Talmudic monetary denominations are completely dependent on Roman coinage of the time and Roman economic history. Indeed, during the first century Tyrian coinage was similar to the imperial Roman coinage. Nevertheless, during the third century the debasement of Roman money became significant and the Rabbis had difficulty finding the Roman equivalents of the shekel, in which the Torah obligations are expressed and of the prutah, the least amount in Jewish law. In this article we describe the Halakhik coinage, originally based on the Tyrian coinage, and examine the history of the Shekel and the Prutah. We then examine the exegesis of different Talmudic passages related to monetary problems and to the Halakhic coinage, which cannot be correctly understood without referring to Roman economic history and to numismatic data that was unknown to the traditional commentators of the Talmud. Differences between parallel passages of both the Jerusalem and the Babylonian Talmud can then be explained by referring to the economical situation prevailing in Palestine and Babylonia. For example, the notion of Kessef Medina, worth one eighth of the silver denomination, is a Babylonian reality that was unknown to Palestinian Tanaïm and Amoraïm.
    [Show full text]
  • On Being a Jewish Author: the Trace of the Messiah in Elie Wiesel's Novels
    On Being a Jewish Author: The Trace of the Messiah in Elie Wiesel’s Novels David Patterson University of Texas at Dallas n Somewhere a Master (1982), Elie Wiesel invokes a teaching from Pinchas of Koretz, a disciple of the Baal Shem Tov, founder Iof Hasidism: “To be Jewish is to link one’s fate to that of the Messiah—to that of all who are waiting for the Messiah” (23). To link one’s fate to that of the Messiah is not only to await but also to work for the coming of the Messiah, even though he may tarry— even though, if one may speak such words, he may never come. To be sure: the Messiah is the one who has forever yet to come , so that to be Jewish is to forever be engaged with an eternal yet to be . To live is to live on the edge of the yet to be . Or, for Wiesel, to live is to live in the midst of the and yet . There abides the Messiah: in the and yet . For Wiesel, to link one’s fate to that of the Messiah is to link one’s fate to the and yet , particularly after the Shoah. The Shoah al - tered forever the meaning of the Twelfth of Maimonides’ Thirteen Principles of Faith, the belief in the coming of the Messiah, even though he may tarry—a belief that would recur throughout the works and the life of Elie Wiesel. Bearing witness to the truth and the wisdom of the Jewish mes - sianic tradition was, for Wiesel, the tie that most profoundly bound L&B 38.1 2018 2 / Literature and Belief him to the Jewish tradition and therefore to Jewish life: for Wiesel the tie to Jewish tradition was his post-Holocaust connection to life, and that bond lay most profoundly in his link to the Messiah.
    [Show full text]
  • (Harvey Felsen) O”H May the Studying of the Daf Notes Be a Zechus for His Neshamah and May His Soul Find Peace in Gan Eden and Be Bound up in the Bond of Life
    30 Shevat 5773 Shabbos Daf 130 Feb. 10, 2013 Daf Notes is currently being dedicated to the neshamah of Tzvi Gershon Ben Yoel (Harvey Felsen) o”h May the studying of the Daf Notes be a zechus for his neshamah and may his soul find peace in Gan Eden and be bound up in the Bond of life Rabbi Eliezer said: If one did not bring an instrument (for circumcision) on the eve of the Shabbos, he must bring it on the Rav Ashi said: Our Mishna proves this as well, because it states: Shabbos exposed,1 but in times of danger, he hides it in the but in times of danger, he hides it in the presence of witnesses. presence of witnesses. It is only in times of danger (that he covers it), but not when there is no danger. This proves that it is out of love for the Rabbi Eliezer said further: One may cut trees to make charcoal mitzvah; this indeed proves it. for manufacturing iron (in order to make the knife for circumcision). [R’ Eliezer permits not only circumcision, but even The Gemora cites another braisa: He brings it exposed, but he its preparatory adjuncts, although these could have been must not bring it covered; these are the words of Rabbi Eliezer. prepared before the Shabbos.] Rabbi Yehudah said in the name of Rabbi Eliezer: In times of danger it was the practice to bring it hidden in the presence of Rabbi Akiva stated a general rule: Any work which can be witnesses. performed before Shabbos does not override the Shabbos.
    [Show full text]
  • Barry Wimpfheimer, Ed., Wisdom of Bat Sheva: the Dr
    BARRY SCOTT WIMPFHEIMER curriculum vitae Department of Religious Studies Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences Northwestern University 1860 Campus Drive, 4-140 Evanston, Illinois 60208-2164 [email protected] 847-491-2618 POSITIONS Associate Professor, Northwestern University, Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences, Department of Religious Studies (Fall 2013-Present) Critical Theory, Jewish Studies and Legal Studies Committees Associate Professor, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law (Fall 2013-Present) Director, Crown Family Center for Jewish and Israel Studies & Jewish Studies Program, Northwestern University (Fall 2012-Summer 2016) Fellow, Alice Kaplan Institute for the Humanities, Northwestern University (Fall 2011-Spring 2012) Assistant Professor, Northwestern University, Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences, Department of Religious Studies, (Summer 2007-Spring 2013) Director of Undergraduate Studies, (Fall 2008-Spring 2009) Assistant Professor, Northwestern University Pritzker School of Law (Summer 2007-Spring 2013) College Fellow, Northwestern University, Weinberg College of Arts and Sciences, Department of Religion (Summer 2006-Spring 2007) Assistant Professor. The Pennsylvania State University, Department of History and Religious Studies; Malvin and Lea Bank Early Career Professor of Jewish Studies (Fall 2005- Spring 2006). Harry Starr Fellow. Harvard University Center for Jewish Studies (Spring 2006). Instructor. University of Pennsylvania, Department of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies (Spring 2005). EDUCATION Columbia University, New York, New York. Wimpfheimer cv September 19 p. 1 Ph.D., with Distinction, October 2005. Religion. Committee: Professors David Weiss Halivni, Elizabeth Castelli, Jeffrey Rubenstein, Alan Segal, Michael Stanislawski. M.Phil., October 2004. Religion. M.A., October 2003. Religion. Yeshiva University, New York, New York. 1996-2000. Rabbinic Ordination, June 2000.
    [Show full text]
  • Moshe Raphael Ben Yehoshua (Morris Stadtmauer) O”H Tzvi Gershon Ben Yoel (Harvey Felsen) O”H
    6 Tishrei 5781 Eiruvin Daf 46 Sept. 24, 2020 Daf Notes is currently being dedicated to the neshamot of Moshe Raphael ben Yehoshua (Morris Stadtmauer) o”h Tzvi Gershon ben Yoel (Harvey Felsen) o”h May the studying of the Daf Notes be a zechus for their neshamot and may their souls find peace in Gan Eden and be bound up in the Bond of life Abaye sat at his studies and discoursed on this subject the ocean? — Rabbi Yitzchak replied: Here we are dealing when Rav Safra said to him: Is it not possible that we are with a case where the clouds were formed on the eve of dealing here with a case where the rain fell near a town the festival. But is it not possible that those moved away and the townspeople relied on that rain? — This, the other and these are others? — It is a case where one can replied, cannot be entertained at all. For we learned: A recognize them by some identification mark. And if you cistern belonging to an individual person is on a par with prefer I might reply: This is a matter of doubt in respect of that individual's feet, and one belonging to a town is on a a Rabbinical law and in any such doubt a lenient ruling is par with the feet of the people of that town, and one used adopted. But why shouldn’t the water acquire its place for by the Babylonian pilgrims is on a par with the feet of any the Shabbos in the clouds? May it then be derived from man who draws the water.
    [Show full text]
  • The Eye in the Torah: Ocular Desire in Midrashic Hermeneutic Author(S): Daniel Boyarin Source: Critical Inquiry, Vol
    The Eye in the Torah: Ocular Desire in Midrashic Hermeneutic Author(s): Daniel Boyarin Source: Critical Inquiry, Vol. 16, No. 3 (Spring, 1990), pp. 532-550 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1343638 Accessed: 09/02/2010 04:26 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use. Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ucpress. Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed page of such transmission. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Critical Inquiry. http://www.jstor.org The Eye in the Torah: Ocular Desire in Midrashic Hermeneutic Daniel Boyarin It seems to have become a commonplace of critical discourse that Juda- ism is the religion in which God is heard but not seen.
    [Show full text]
  • English Abstract
    English Abstract Sugya 1: Point of Departure (Berakhot 2a) Sugya 1 has been attributed by scholars to the sabora'im, sixth or seventh century Babylonian sages who added a post-editorial layer to the Talmud, predominantly in the form of introductory sugyot at the beginnings of tractates and chapters. Mishnah Berakhot 1:1, the first in the entire mishnaic corpus, opens with a question: "When do we begin reciting the Shema in the evenings?" Our sugya consists of a series of questions regarding the wording and "missing" context of this question. Close reading indicates an element of artificiality in these questions: they single out our mishnah either because it opens with a question, or because it does not define its terms, and because it assumes that day follows night - phenomena that are not in the least surprising, and in fact reflect standard mishnaic or rabbinic usage. The proposed answers are respectively either obvious or equally artificial, or they make use of selective citation in order to establish a chiastic structure in the mishnayot of the first chapter of Berakhot. Analysis indicates that each and every question and type of answer found in the sugya is found elsewhere in the Talmud, in other sugyot that have been attributed by scholars to the sabora'im. In each and every case the saboraic question or answer or formulation is less artificial and more appropriate in its other locus than it is in our sugya. It would thus seem that this entire sugya is the work of single late saboraic author, who pieced together a collection of typical saboraic comments from other places and applied them to the very first mishnah, in order create a "flagship" saboraic introductory sugya at the very beginning of the Talmud.
    [Show full text]
  • Biography of Lee I. Levine
    Biography of Lee I. Levine Lee Israel Levine was born on Feb. 1, 1939, in Bangor, Maine, to Rabbi Dr. Harry O. H. Levine and Irene R. Levine (née Ginsburgh). He attended the Akiba Academy in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and a public high school in Steubenville, Ohio, where his father served as a congregational rabbi. Summers were spent at Camp Ramah. Lee attended Columbia College in New York, majoring in philosophy. At the same time, he studied in the undergraduate program at the Jewish Theological Semi- nary, majoring in Talmud. He graduated from both institutions in 1961, earning a B.A. from Columbia and a B.H.L. in Talmud from JTS. In June 1961, he married Mira Karp of Buffalo, New York. Lee and Mira spent the 1959–60 academic year at Machon Greenberg (Hayyim Greenberg Institute for Teachers from the Diaspora) and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem. From 1961 to 1965, Lee studied in the rabbinical program at the Jewish Theological Seminary with the distinguished rabbis and scholars Saul Lieberman, David Weiss Halivni, Moshe Zucker, and Gerson Cohen. He received his M.H.L. in Talmud in 1963 and rabbinic ordination from JTS in 1965. In 1963, Lee pursued his graduate studies in Jewish and Ancient History at Co- lumbia University with Professors Gerson Cohen and Morton Smith. After receiving his M.A. in 1966, he continued his doctoral studies under the mentorship of Cohen and Smith and was awarded his Ph.D. in 1970. While researching his dissertation on Caesarea under Roman Rule, he spent the 1968–69 academic year at the Institute of Archaeology of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
    [Show full text]