DOCSLIB.ORG

Perek II Daf 26 Amud A

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Perek II Daf 26 Amud A Perek II Daf 26 Amud a NOTES -and removed the reeds, as he maintained that they were unneces שַׁלְ׳ִינְהוּד אֲזַל רַ ב ַּ׳ּ׳ָא וְרַ ב הוּנָא According to : אֵ י תִ י בֵ י ּה רָ בִ י ָ נ א – sary; he regarded the entire orchard as having been enclosed for the Ravina raised an objection Rabbeinu Ĥananel’s reading of the text, Ravina’s argument ְבּ רֵ י ּה ּ רַד ְ ב י ה ְ ֹו שׁ ֻ עַ ָנ ְ טִ י ְ נ ה ּו מִ ַבּ תְ רֵ י ּה ד purpose of residence, owing to the banqueting pavilion. Rav Pappa constitutes an objection against Rava, rather than support, and Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, went after him and collected as claimed by Rashi in his first explanation. Rav Pappa and the reeds, so as to prevent Rav Huna bar Ĥinnana from restoring the Rav Huna, son of Rabbi Yehoshua, attempt to answer the . כו .partitions, as they were Rava’s students and wanted to enforce his objection מְ חִ י ּצָה הָ עֲ שׂ וּיָה – [ruling. A partition made for resting [naĥat Some commentaries explain that a partition made for : לְ נַ חַ ת N On the following day, on Shabbat, Ravina raised an objection to resting is referring to a partition on which people generally לְמָחָ ר אֵ יתִ ּיבֵיה רָבִינָא לְרָבָ א: עִיר Rava’s opinion from a baraita which states: In the case of a new town, walk; its status as a partition is then nullified (Ra’avad). Other ָ החֲדָשׁ מֹודְדִ ין לָ ּה מִ ישׁ ִ יבָתָ ּה, וִ ישׁ ָ נָה we measure the Shabbat limit from its settledarea, from where it is authorities read: A partition that is not made for naĥat, and ח מֵ ֹו מָ תָ ּה ד actually inhabited; and in the case of an old town, we measure the state that it is referring to a partition that was intended to H be moved, rather than one made to be fixed in one spot Shabbat limit from its wall, even if it is not inhabited up to its wall. (Rambam and others). The Arukh explains that this : ּ ִ ׳ירָ א ְ ּ ד בֵ י ּת ֹו רֵ י – What is a new town, and what is an old town? A new town is one Cattle ditches אֵ יזֹו הִ יא חֲדָשָׁ ה וְאֵ יזֹו הִ יא יְשָׁנָה? that was first surrounded by a wall, and only afterward settled, is a pit in which oxen rest. According to the explanation that a partition made for naĥat is referring to a partition on חֲדָשָׁ ה – שֶׁ הוּ ְּ ָה׳ וּלְבַסּ ֹוב יָשְׁבָ ה, meaning that the town’s residents arrived after the wall had already which people walk, the reference in this context is to a pit ָ יְשׁ נָה – יָשׁ הְבָ וּלְבַסּ ֹוב הוּ ְּ ָ ׳הד וְהַ אי been erected; an old town is one that was first settled, and only af- that does not have real partitions. Rather, it is partitioned off נַמִ י, ְ ּכהוּ ְּ ָ ה׳ וּלְבַסּ ֹוב יָשׁ ְבָ ה דָּמֵ יד terward surrounded by a wall. Ravina raised his objection: And this by being lower than its surroundings. However, the people orchard should also be considered like a town that was first sur- tending the animals continually walk on this partition and rounded by a wall and only afterward settled, as it had not been trample it down (see Me’iri). enclosed from the outset for the purpose of residence. Even if a dwelling was later erected there, this should not turn it into a place HALAKHA In the case of a : ִ ע י ר ֲ ח דָ שׁ ָ ה ִ ו י שׁ ָ ָ נ ה – that had been enclosed for the purpose of residence. New and old towns new town, one that was first surrounded by a wall and only Seeing that an additional objection could be raised against his teach- afterward settled, the Shabbat limit is measured from its אָמַ ר לֵ ּיה רַ ב ַּ׳ ָּ ׳א לְרָבָ א; וְהָאָמַ ר רַ ב er’s position, Rav Pappa said to Rava: Didn’t Rav Asi say that the settled area, rather than from its wall. However, in the case of an old town, which was first settled and only afterward אַסִי: ּמְחִיצֹות אַדְרְכָלִין לֹא שְׁמָ ּה temporary screens erected by architectsH to serve as protection ,surrounded by a wall, the limit is measured from the wall מְחִ ָ ּיצהד אַלְמָ א: ּכֵיוָ ן דְּ לִצְנִיעוּתָ א against the sun and the like are not deemed valid partitions? Ap- as stated in the baraita (Shulĥan Arukh, Oraĥ Ĥayyim 398:11). parently, since it was erected only for privacy, and not for the עֲבִ ידָ א לָ ּה – לָ א הָ וְ יָא מְחִ ָ ּיצהד הָכָ א A partition that : מְ חִ י ּצ ֹו ת אַ דְ רְ כָ לִ י ן – purpose of permanent dwelling, it is not considered a valid parti- Screens of architects נַמִ י, ּכֵיוָן דְּלִצְנִיעוּתָ א עֲבִ ידָ א – לָא was constructed for a purpose other than to establish an tion. Here too, then, with regard to the fence around the orchard, enclosure for residence, such as a partition erected by a הָ וְ ָ י א מְ חִ י ָ ּצה ד since it was erected only for privacy, it should not be considered builder to rest objects against it, serves as a partition to a valid partition. permit one to carry, but does not render a place enclosed for the purpose of residence (based on the Rosh; Shulĥan .(And Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, said to Rava: Didn’t Rav Arukh, Oraĥ Ĥayyim 362:1 וְאָמַ ר רַ ב הוּנָא בְּרֵ ּ יה בדְּרַ יְהֹושֻׁעַ N Huna say that a partition made for resting objects alongside it and לְרָבָא, וְהָאָמַר רַב הוּנָא: ּמְחִיצָה thereby providing them with protection is not considered a valid BACKGROUND הָעֲשׂ וּיָה לְ נַחַ ת – לֹא שׁ ְמָ ּה מְחִ ָ ּיצה, -Rows of houses sepa :עֵ ירוּב מְ חֹוזָא – partition? The eiruv of Meĥoza rated by cattle ditches require a separate joining of court- .This is as Rabba bar Avuh did, when he constructed an eiruv sepa- yards [eiruv] for each row דְּ הָ א רַ בָּ ה בַּ ר אֲ ּבוּה מְעָרֵ ב לָ ּה לְ ָ ּכוּל ּה rately for each row of houses in the whole town of Meĥoza, due to ח מְ ֹו ָ ז א עַ רְ סִ ָ י י תָ א עַ רְ סִ ָ י י תָ א מִ ׁ ּש ּ ו ם the ditches from which the cattlewould feed that separated the rows ִּ ׳ירָ א דְּבֵ י ּתֹורֵ י; וְהָ א ִּ ׳ירָ א דְּבֵ י ּתֹורֵ י of houses from one another.B Shouldn’t such cattle ditchesN be ?considered like a partition made for resting objects alongside it ּכִמְחִ ָ ּיצה הָעֲשׂ וּיָה לְנַחַ ת דָּמְ יָא! Such a partition is invalid. All these proofs indicate that Rava was wrong to remove the reed fences erected by Rav Huna bar Ĥinnana, for those fences were indeed necessary. With regard to the resolution of this incident, the Exilarch recited ָרֵי עֲלַיְיהוּ רֵישׁ ּגָלוּתָא: ״חֲכָמִים ,the following verse about these Rabbis: “They are wise to do evil הֵ ָּ מה לְהָרַ ע וּלְהֵ יטִ יב לֹא יָדָ עוּ״ד but to do good they have no knowledge” (Jeremiah 4:22), as on Friday they ruined the arrangement that Rav Huna bar Ĥinnana had made to permit carrying from the house to the pavilion, and the next day all they could do was prove that they had acted improperly the day before and that it was prohibited to carry in the orchard. We learned in the mishna: Rabbi Elai said: I heard from Rabbi Rows of houses separated by cattle ditches אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעַאי: ּשָׁמַעְתִי מֵרַבִּי Eliezer that one is permitted to carry in a garden or karpef, even if אֱלִיעֶ זֶר וַאֲ ִ ׳ ּילוּ בֵּ ית ּכֹור״ד מַתְ נִיתִ ין the garden is the size of a beit kor, thirty times larger than a beit se’a. דְּ לָ א ַ ּכחֲ נַ נְ יָ ה ד דְּ תַ נְ יָ א , חֲ נַ נְ יָ ה The Gemara notes that all agree that what the mishna taught wasnot in accordance with the opinion of Ĥananya, as it was taught in a אֹומֵ ר: וַאֲ ׳ ִּילוּ הִ יא אַרְבָּעִים סְאָ ה baraita that Ĥananya says: One is permitted to carryeven if it is the ְ ּכאִ סְ טְ רַ טִ יָ א שׁ ֶ ל מֶ לֶ ךְ ד size of of forty beit se’a, like the court of a king. Perek II . 26a 137 . ׳ר קרפ .וכ ףד Rabbi Yoĥanan said: Both Rabbi Elai and Ĥananya derived their ראָמַ ירַבִּ יֹוחָ נָן: וּשׁ ְ נֵיהֶ ם מִ ְרָ א אֶחָ ד N ,opinion from the same verse, as it is stated: “And it came to pass דָּרְשׁ וּ, שׁ ֶ ּנֶאֱמַ ר: ״וַ יְהִ י יְשׁ ַ עְ יָהוּ לֹא יָצָ א Rows of houses separated by cattle :עֵ ירוּב מְ חֹוזָא – how it is read. In addition, the way the word is read does not come The eiruv of Meĥoza to correct the way it is written; both the written version and the way ditches require a separate joining of courtyards [eiruv] for each row. before Isaiah was gone out into the middle courtyard, that the אֶ ל חָצֵר הַ ִ ּתיכֹונָה״, ּכְתִ יב ״הָעִיר״ NOTES the word is read teach a particular idea, and each teaches something word of the Lord came to him, saying” (ii Kings 20:4).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 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 Theological Problems with Our Sounding of the Shofar Rav Jared Anstandig
    The Theological Problems with our Sounding of the Shofar Rav Jared Anstandig Why 30? 1. Bemidbar 29:1 ּובַחֹדֶׁשהַשְּׁבִיעִי בְּׁאֶחָד לַחֹדֶ ׁשמִ קְּׁרָ א־קֹדֶ ׁש יִהְּׁ יֶה לָכֶם כָל־מְּׁ לֶאכֶת העֲבֹדָ לֹא תַ עֲׂשּו יֹום תְּׁ רּועָהיִהְּׁ יֶה לָכֶם׃ In the seventh month, on the first day of the month, you shall observe a sacred occasion: you shall not work at your occupations. You shall observe it as a day when the horn is sounded. 2. Rosh Hashana 34a אתקין רבי אבהו בקסרי תקיעה שלשה שברים תרועה תקיעה מה נפשך אי ילולי יליל לעביד תקיעה תרועה ותקיעה ואי גנוחי גנח לעביד תקיעה שלשה שברים ותקיעה Rabbi Abbahu instituted in Caesarea the following order of sounding of the shofar: First a tekia, a simple uninterrupted sound; next three shevarim, broken sounds; followed by a terua, a series of short blasts; and, finally, another tekia. The Gemara asks: Whichever way you look at it, this is difficult. If, according to the opinion of Rabbi Abbahu, the sound the Torah calls a terua is a whimpering, i.e., short, consecutive sounds, one should perform tekia-terua-tekia set. And if he holds that a terua is moaning, i.e., longer, broken sounds, he should sound a set as follows: Tekia, followed by three shevarim, and then another tekia. Why include both a terua and a shevarim? מספקא ליה אי גנוחי גנח אי ילולי יליל מתקיף לה רב עוירא ודלמא ילולי הוה וקא מפסיק שלשה שברים בין תרועה לתקיעה דהדר עביד תקיעה תרועה ותקיעה מתקיף לה רבינא ודלמא גנוחי הוה וקא מפסקא תרועה בין שברים לתקיעה דהדר עביד תש"ת The Gemara answers: Rabbi Abbahu was uncertain whether a terua means moaning or whimpering, and he therefore instituted that both types of sound should be included, to ensure that one fulfills his obligation.
    [Show full text]
  • Kesuvos 057.Pub
    "י א ניס תשע”ה Tuesday, March 31 2015 כתובות נ ז” OVERVIEW of the Daf Distinctive INSIGHT 1) Reducing the value of the kesubah (cont.) Defining the dispute מאי קא משמע ל ? הא קא משמע ל דפליגי תרי אמוראי אטעמא An incident related to reducing the value of a woman’s דנפשייהו ולא פליגי תרי אמוראי אליבא דחד אמורא kesubah is presented. R’ Dimi presents two statements which appear contra- n general, when an argument in the Gemara can be ex- dictory, one from R’ Yochanan and one from R’ Yehoshua I plained in one of two ways, Rav Pappa notes that there is a ben Levi, related to reducing the value of the kesubah. preference to explain it in a manner which avoids saying that R’ Avahu quotes R’ Yochanan as claiming that there is one of the opinions is outright mistaken. In this case, the no dispute between R’ Yochanan and R’ Yehoshua ben Mishnah discusses a case where a woman forgoes the full Levi. amount of her kesubah, but she does so only verbally, and not Ravin reports a second version of this discussion. in writing. At what point can she retract her willingness to R’ Pappa comments that were it not for R’ Avahu’s release the husband from paying the entire kesubah, if at all? statement he would assume that there is a dispute between The Baraisa (56b) featured three opinions. Rabbi Meir stated R’ Yochanan and R’ Yehoshua ben Levi rather than con- that no reductions are allowed at all. Rabbi Yose allowed the clude that there is a dispute between R’ Dimi and Ravin.
    [Show full text]
  • Daf Ditty Pesachim 113: Kaldiyyim, Kalda'ei
    Daf Ditty Pesachim 113: kaldiyyim, kalda'ei, The countries around Chaldea The fame of the Chaldeans was still solid at the time of Cicero (106–43 BC), who in one of his speeches mentions "Chaldean astrologers", and speaks of them more than once in his De divinatione. Other classical Latin writers who speak of them as distinguished for their knowledge of astronomy and astrology are Pliny, Valerius Maximus, Aulus Gellius, Cato, Lucretius, Juvenal. Horace in his Carpe diem ode speaks of the "Babylonian calculations" (Babylonii numeri), the horoscopes of astrologers consulted regarding the future. In the late antiquity, a variant of Aramaic language that was used in some books of the Bible was misnamed as Chaldean by Jerome of Stridon. That usage continued down the centuries, and it was still customary during the nineteenth century, until the misnomer was corrected by the scholars. 1 Rabbi Yoḥanan further said: The Holy One, blessed be He, proclaims about the goodness of three kinds of people every day, as exceptional and noteworthy individuals: About a bachelor who lives in a city and does not sin with women; about a poor person who returns a lost object to its owners despite his poverty; and about a wealthy person who tithes his produce in private, without publicizing his behavior. The Gemara reports: Rav Safra was a bachelor living in a city. 2 When the tanna taught this baraita before Rava and Rav Safra, Rav Safra’s face lit up with joy, as he was listed among those praised by God. Rava said to him: This does not refer to someone like the Master.
    [Show full text]
  • Source Sheet
    Real Messiahs, False Messiahs, and Half-Messiahs: Apocalypticism and Messianism in Early Judaism Dr. Malka Z. Simkovich SVAJ Intellectual History Series April 29, 2018 Timeline 587-586 BCE Babylonians destroy the Jerusalem Temple; Babylonian Exile complete 539-538 Persia destroys the Babylonian Empire; allows Judeans to return 515 Building of the Second Temple is complete 334-333 Persian Period ends; Alexander the Great defeats Persia and the Hellenist Period begins 200 Judea has been mainly controlled by Ptolemies (Egyptian Greeks); it now comes under the control of Seleucids (Syrian Greeks) 175-164 Hasmonean Rebellion 103–76 Alexander Jannaeus rules Judea 99–93 Civil war in Judea between rebels against Alexander Jannaeus and his supporters; as many as 50,000 people are killed; Jannaeus finally suppresses this rebellion and crucifies 800 Pharisees (Josephus) 76–67 Salome Alexandra reigns as Queen of Judea 63 Hasmonean period ends; Judea becomes a client kingdom of Rome c.37–4 Herod reigns Judea c. 20 Philo of Alexandria is born 6 CE Judea becomes a province of Rome c. 32 Jesus is crucified by the Romans 38–41 Riots against the Jews in Alexandria, supported by Flaccus, the governor, and largely ignored by Gaius Caligula, the emperor c. 40 Philo of Alexandria writes Embassy to Gaius 66–73 The Jews rebel against Rome; the Jerusalem Temple is destroyed by the Romans in 70 CE; the rebellion is fully quelled three years later 115–118 Jewish rebellions against Roman rule crop up throughout the empire, leaving Jewish communities, particularly those in the vicinity of Alexandria, devastated 132–135 The Bar Kokhba revolt, which results in the Jews’ expulsion from Jerusalem; Rabbinic community moves to Yavneh and the Galilee c.
    [Show full text]
  • Daf Yomi Summary August 10Th 2020!!
    ?"? ? 152 PAGES UNTIL OUR NEXT SIYUM DAF YOMI SUMMARY AUGUST 10TH 2020!! ?? ? ?? ?? ?? If you want to contribute in any way or have any feedback, ? ??? - ?? ????? please email [email protected] IT'S ALL OUT OF ORDER..... not written down but memorized. THANKS TO RUSSEL LEVY M ay we continue to learn more ????? ? and Orders (????? ), and understand both the patterns within and order chosen to further In compiling the ????? ?, Rebbi, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi generally understand the content! kept to a set of systematized rules in the composition of individual ????? ?, the order of ????? ? inside a ???? ?, and the organization of the ????? ? inside the various ????? . A surprise lies at the PINAT HALACHA beginning of our 7th chapter, with a ??? ? that would serve as an THANKS TO RAV DANI SCHREIBER excellent introduction to our ???? ?. There are 39 categories of Question: I accidentally left the window open overnight on Friday ?????: one who plants, plows, harvests... hits with the hammer, night, and I ended up with a bunch of flies flitting around my and removes item from one domain to another. kitchen while I was preparing Shabbos lunch! I really wanted to swat them away, but I wasn?t sure if I could. Is there any heter? Two questions jump out of the page. Even though most ?????? are only introduced after the 7th chapter, why did Rebbi decide to Answer: One of the prohibited ?????? of ??? is shochait have six chapters that discuss only a subset of ????? of three (slaughtering), which includes taking the life of any animal, or even ??????? Additionally, why were the ????? of hotza?ah split and making a living creature bleed.
    [Show full text]
  • Nature Et Obligations Du Mariage Selon La Doctrine Juive Traditionnelle
    6/6 R3iX SOPHIE RÉGNIÈRE UNE UNION PROCLAMÉE AU CIEL : NATURE ET OBLIGATIONS DU MARIAGE SELON LA DOCTRINE JUIVE TRADITIONNELLE Mémoire présenté à la Faculté des études supérieures de Γ Université Laval pour Γ obtention du grade de maître ès arts (M,A.) FACULTÉ DE THÉOLOGIE ET DE SCIENCES RELIGIEUSES UNIVERSITÉ LAVAL OCTOBRE 2000 © Sophie Régnière, 2000 RÉSUMÉ Cette recherche traite de l’étude de la nature et des obligations du mariage juif à partir d ’un point de doctrine traditionnelle du Talmud de Babylone voulant que D’ieu ait uni l’homme et la femme quarante jours avant leur stade embryonnaire. S’ensuit une séparation nécessaire de ces âmes dans leur vie terrestre avant de renouer contact par le mariage, appelé kiddushin, impliquant une union par et avec D’ieu. Cette sanctification, le mariage, répond à deux buts précis : la compagnie et la procréation. Une attention particulière sera portée au récit du tout premier mariage de la Création : celui de Adam et de Hava. Il est impossible de passer sous silence le récit de la création de la femme, puisque l’existence même des kiddushin en fut conditionnée. Nous situerons la place et l’influence que la femme peut avoir au sein du mariage, ainsi que les qualités morales que doit rechercher un homme chez une femme. AVANT-PROPOS Un travail d ’une telle envergure ne peut être réalisé sans s’assurer la collaboration et le soutien de nombreuses personnes. Je souhaite donc leur exprimer mes plus sincères remerciements. Au Grand Rabbin David Sabbah et Monsieur Jean-Claude Filteau, directeur et co- directeur de mémoire, pour leur assistance, leur encadrement, leurs encouragements constants.
    [Show full text]
  • Levinas Emmanuel in the Tim
    In the Time of the Nations EMMANUEL LEVINAS Translated by Michael B. Smith Indiana University Press Bloomington and Indianapolis First published in the USA, 1994, by Indiana University Press, Bloomington, Indiana First published in France 1988 by Les Editions de Minuit, Paris as A L'Heure des Nations © 1988, Les Editions de Minuit English translation © 1994 The Athlone Press Originating publisher of the English edition: The Athlone Press, London Publisher's Note The publishers wish to record their thanks to the French Ministry of Culture for a grant toward the cost of translation. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying and recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. The Association of American University Presses' Resolution on Permissions constitutes the only exception to this prohibition. Manufactured in Great Britain Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Levinas, Emmanuel. [A l'heure des nations. English] In the time of the nations/Emmanuel Levinas; translated by Michael B. Smith. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-253-33295-8 1. Talmud—Criticism, interpretation, etc. 2. Judaism. 3. Philosophy, Jewish. I. Title. BM504.2.L43513 1994 181'.06—dc20 94-8617 1 2 3 4 5 00 99 98 97 96 95 94 To Professor Bemhard Casper, theologian and philosopher, a friend of great heart and lofty thought CONTENTS Translator's Note viii Glossary
    [Show full text]
  • Download File
    Halevy, Halivni and The Oral Formation of the Babylonian Talmud Ari Bergmann Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 2014 © 2014 Ari Bergmann All rights reserved ABSTRACT Halevy, Halivni and The Oral Formation of the Babylonian Talmud Ari Bergmann This dissertation is dedicated to a detailed analysis and comparison of the theories on the process of the formation of the Babylonian Talmud by Yitzhak Isaac Halevy and David Weiss Halivni. These two scholars exhibited a similar mastery of the talmudic corpus and were able to combine the roles of historian and literary critic to provide a full construct of the formation of the Bavli with supporting internal evidence to support their claims. However, their historical construct and findings are diametrically opposed. Yitzhak Isaac Halevy presented a comprehensive theory of the process of the formation of the Talmud in his magnum opus Dorot Harishonim. The scope of his work was unprecedented and his construct on the formation of the Talmud encompassed the entire process of the formation of the Bavli, from the Amoraim in the 4th century to the end of the saboraic era (which he argued closed in the end of the 6th century). Halevy was the ultimate guardian of tradition and argued that the process of the formation of the Bavli took place entirely within the amoraic academy by a highly structured and coordinated process and was sealed by an international rabbinical assembly. While Halevy was primarily a historian, David Weiss Halivni is primarily a talmudist and commentator on the Talmud itself.
    [Show full text]
  • 15), 177-178 and 187-188
    LAW, ETHICS, AND HERMENEUTICS: A LITERARY APPROACH TO LIFNIM MI- SHURAT HA-DIN Deborah Barer Towson University The rabbinic phrase lifnim mi-shurat ha-din sits at the center of contemporary debates over how to understand the relationship between Jewish ethics and Jewish law. The phrase, which literally translates as “within the line of the law,”1 is quite rare in rabbinic literature, occurring in only eight independent textual traditions.2 It became a touchstone in current debates largely due to a 1975 essay by Rabbi Aharon Lichtenstein, in which he uses the idea of lifnim mi- shurat ha-din as a site to interrogate and clarify the nature of Jewish law and its relationship to Jewish ethics.3 This conceptual framing has been adopted by numerous other scholars, yielding two prominent—and competing—understandings of this phrase. One side argues for what I will call the “supererogation model.”4 They claim that lifnim mi-shurat ha-din points to supererogatory behavior, often translating it (against the literal meaning of the Hebrew) as “beyond the line of the law.” The phrase therefore shows that law and ethics are independent (if closely related) systems within rabbinic thought. The other side argues for what I will call the 1 Some prefer to translate this phrase as either “before the line of the law” or “facing the line of the law.” Both “within” and “before” fall within the linguistic range of the term lifnim. For further discussion of this spatial metaphor, see Rachel Adelman, "Seduction and Recognition in the Story of Judah and Tamar and the Book of Ruth," Nashim: A Journal of Jewish Women's Studies & Gender Issues 23 (2012): 102, or my own discussion in “A Judge with No Courtroom: Law, Ethics and the Rabbinic Idea of Lifnim Mi-Shurat Ha-Din” (Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • Scarcity in Halakha כא טבת התשפא | Rabbanit Leah Sarna | Drisha | Winter Zman
    Scarcity in Halakha כא טבת התשפא | Rabbanit Leah Sarna | Drisha | Winter Zman I: The Torah Assumes Scarcity חולין מט: Hullin 49b .1 ההוא נקב דסתמה חלב טמא דאתא לקמיה The Gemara relates: There was a certain perforation that was דרבא אמר רבא למאי ניחוש לה חדא דהא אמר :sealed by non-kosher fat that came before Rava. Rava said רב ששת חלב טמא נמי סותם ועוד התורה חסה With regard to what need we be concerned? First, doesn’t Rav על ממונם של ישראל א"ל רב פפא לרבא רב ?Sheshet say: Non-kosher fat also effectively seals a perforation ואיסורא דאורייתא ואת אמרת התורה חסה על And furthermore, in general, the Torah spares the money of the ממונן של ישראל Jewish people, and it is appropriate to rule leniently in this מניומין כנדוקא איגלי ליה בסתקא דדובשא אתא regard. Rav Pappa said to Rava: But there is also the opinion of לקמיה דרבא אמר רבא למאי ניחוש לה חדא Rav that non-kosher fat does not seal a perforation, and this דתנן שלשה משקים אסורים משום גילוי היין dispute concerns a prohibition by Torah law, and yet you say והמים והחלב ושאר כל המשקים מותרים ועוד that the Torah spares the money of the Jewish people? One התורה חסה על ממונם של ישראל א"ל רב נחמן cannot rely on this principle to rule in accordance with the בר יצחק לרבא ר' שמעון וסכנת נפשות ואת .lenient opinion with regard to such matters אמרת התורה חסה על ממונם של ישראל The Gemara relates a similar episode: Manyumin the jug maker רבי שמעון מאי היא דתניא חמשה אין בהם had a jug [bisteka] full of honey that was left uncovered, and he משום גילוי ציר וחומץ שמן ודבש ומורייס ר"ש was concerned it might have been contaminated by snake אומר אף הן יש בהן משום גילוי וא"ר שמעון אני venom.
    [Show full text]
  • Egalitarian Kiddushin and Ketubbah
    Rabbi Pamela Barmash E.H. 27:6.2020 Egalitarian Kiddushin and Ketubbah Approved on February 19, 2020 by a vote of 14-4-2. Voting in favor: Rabbis Aaron Alexander, Pamela Barmash, Elliot Dorff, Susan Grossman, Judith Hauptman, Jeremy Kalmanofsky, Steven Kane, Jan Kaufman, Amy Levin, Daniel Nevins, Micah Peltz, Robert Scheinberg, Deborah Silver, and Iscah Waldman. Voting against: Rabbis Baruch Frydman-Kohl, Joshua Heller, David Hoffman, and Avram Reisner. Abstaining: Rabbis Gail Labovitz and Ariel Stofenmacher. (She’eilah -- Question) שאלה May kiddushin, the traditional form of Jewish marriage, and the Jewish marriage ceremony, be made into an egalitarian form for a male-female Jewish couple? Is there an egalitarian form for the ketubbah? (Teshuvah -- Answer) תשובה 1. Introduction: The Spiritual Resonance of Jewish Marriage The form of Jewish marriage, effectuated by means of kiddushin and manifested in a ketubbah, has traditionally not been egalitarian. The groom takes on the active role, and the bride assumes a mostly passive role. Those seeking egalitarian marriage have followed two paths. One path is to determine that kiddushin cannot be molded in an egalitarian manner because of how it has operated historically, and a number of proposals for Jewish marriage by other means have been presented to the Jewish community.1 The other way is to maintain our tradition by —————————————————————————————————— The Committee on Jewish Law and Standards of the Rabbinical Assembly provides guidance in matters of halakhah for the Conservative movement.
    [Show full text]