And Shall You Clear out the Old to Make Way for the New? BIBLICAL RHETORICAL FEATURES in RABBINIC LITERATURE

And shall you clear out the old to make way for the new? BIBLICAL RHETORICAL FEATURES IN RABBINIC LITERATURE

Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of “DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY”

Ariel Ram Pasternak

Submitted to the Senate of Ben-Gurion University of the Negev

16.11.2016

Beer-Sheva

And shall you clear out the old to make way for the new? BIBLICAL RHETORICAL FEATURES IN RABBINIC LITERATURE

Thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of “DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY”

Ariel Ram Pasternak

Submitted to the Senate of Ben-Gurion University of the Negev

Approved by the advisor Approved by the Dean of the Kreitman School of Advanced Graduate Studies ______

16.11.2016

Beer-Sheva

This work was carried out under the supervision of Professor Shamir Yona

The Department of Bible, Archaeology and Ancient Near Eastern Studies

The Faculty of Humanities and Social Science

Research-Student's Affidavit when Submitting the Doctoral Thesis for Judgment

I Ariel Ram Pasternak, whose signature appears below, hereby declare that:

X I have written this Thesis by myself, except for the help and guidance offered by my Thesis Advisors.

X The scientific materials included in this Thesis are products of my own research, culled from the period during which I was a research student.

___ This Thesis incorporates research materials produced in cooperation with others, excluding the technical help commonly received during experimental work. Therefore, I am attaching another affidavit stating the contributions made by myself and the other participants in this research, which has been approved by them and submitted with their approval.

Date: 16.11.2016 Student's name: Ariel Ram Pasternak Signature:

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank my advisor, Prof. Shamir Yona, under whose wings I have sheltered in the last decade. Thank you for your unlimited support, guidance, patience and assistance.

I would like to thank all my teachers and colleagues from the Department of Bible, Archaeology and Ancient Near Eastern Studies at Ben-Gurion University.

I would like to thank my partners from the Kaye Academic College of Education: Orly, Hagit and Nevo.

I would like to thank both the Katz and Haran families: Alex, Rozita, Oshrit and Kalanit, Erez, Netanel and Nili.

I would like to thank Hezi Natanya for his support over the years.

I would like to thank my sister, Yasmin Miriam Vinograd.

I would like to thank Keren, a true woman of valor, who stood beside me every step of the way. Without her, this work would not exist.

I would like to dedicate this work to my beloved daughters, Avigail Sarah and Achinoam Shani, whose smiles accompanied me every day; to my late grandmother, Sarah Rivka Pasternak; to my beloved ones that are not beside me anymore, and to the One who brought me to this day.

Maybe, maybe, if I close my eyes I will surely see such a beautiful dream The moon and the star will send a letter You will see.

Table of Contents

1. Introduction 1 1.1 The Corpus 4 1.2 Methodology 5 1.3 Previous Research 7 2. The Style of Rabbinic Literature 9 3. Paper no. 1: Ariel Ram Pasternak and Shamir Yona: "The "Better" Proverb in 21 Rabbinic Literature", The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17 (2014), pp. 27–40 4. Paper no. 2: 35 Ariel Ram Pasternak and Shamir Yona: "Concatenation in Ancient Near East Literature, Hebrew Scripture, and Rabbinic Literature", The Review of Rabbinic Judaism (2014, Forthcoming) 5. Paper no. 3: 78 Ariel Ram Pasternak and Shamir Yona: "Numerical Sayings in the Literatures of the Ancient Near East, in the Hebrew Bible, in the Book of Ben-Sira and in Rabbinic Literature", The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016), pp. 202-244. 6. Paper no. 4: 121 Ariel Ram Pasternak and Shamir Yona: "The Use of Numbers as an Editing Device in Rabbinic Literature", The Review of Rabbinic Judaism (2015, Forthcoming) 7. Analysis of the first paper: "The "Better" Proverb in Rabbinic Literature" 159 7.1 "Normal" Use of the "Better" Proverb, Similar to Biblical Use 160 7.2 Adaptation of the Pattern 161 7.2.1 Replacement of the Comparative Adjective 161 7.2.2 Structural Changes: Rearrangement and 163 Replacement of the Comparison Word 7.3 Unique Changes to the Basic Pattern 164 7.3.1 Superlative Negative Pattern 164 7.3.2 Multiple Consecutive Comparisons 165 7.3.3 Double Progressive Comparison in a Single 165 Saying 8. Analysis of the second paper: "Concatenation in Ancient Near East Literature, 167 Hebrew Scripture, and Rabbinic Literature" 8.1 Concatenation in Short Units 168 8.2 Concatenation that Does not Affect Syntax 169 8.3 Concatenation that Unifies Different Sayings 170 8.4 Concatenation in Large Units 171 9. Analysis of the third paper: "Numerical Sayings in the Literatures of the Ancient 174 Near East, in the Hebrew Bible, in the Book of Ben-Sira and in Rabbinic Literature" 9.1 Typological Numbers 174 9.2 Graded Numerical Sayings: "Normal" use to specify an unknown 175 or uncertain number or to specify a small number 9.3 Graded Numerical Sayings: Poetic parallelism with a graded pair 175

of numbers 9.4 Graded Numerical Sayings: Graded Numerical Parallelism 177 10. Analysis of the fourth paper: "The Use of Numbers as an Editing Device in 178 Rabbinic Literature" 11. The Results of this Research 184 11.1 Contributions to the Study of Biblical Rhetoric 184 11.2 Contributions to the Study of Rhetoric of Rabbinical Literature 185 11.3 Contribution to the Study of Other Aspects of Rabbinical Literature 186 11.3.1 Textual Criticism 186 11.3.2 Writing, Redaction and Editing Process 189 12. Summary 191 13. Appendix 193 13.1 Abbreviations 193 13.2 Proofreading Confirmation 195 13.3 Letters of Acceptance from Publishers of Forthcoming Papers 196 13.3.1 Letter no. 1: Ariel Ram Pasternak and Shamir 196 Yona: Concatenation in Ancient Near East Literature, Hebrew Scripture, and Rabbinic Literature, The Review of Rabbinic Judaism (2014, Forthcoming) 13.3.2 Letter no. 2: Ariel Ram Pasternak and Shamir 197 Yona: The Use of Numbers as an Editing Device in Rabbinic Literature, The Review of Rabbinic Judaism (2015, Forthcoming) 14. Bibliography 199

Abstract

Since the Second Temple period, there has been a separation between Hebrew Bible (the "written" Torah), and Rabbinic Literature (the "oral" Torah). In our day, this separation has exerted its influence within the walls of academia, and is most clearly expressed by the division between the departments of Bible and Jewish thought. In each of these departments, scholars have researched different aspects of the texts, often without referring to applicable research done in the other department. Thus, stylistic research, which has taken a central place in Biblical studies, is almost completely lacking in textual studies of Rabbinic literature. In the interdisciplinary research presented here, different sayings of the Rabbis, most of which are taken from the Mishnah, Tosefta, and Talmud, are examined according to the research tools developed within the arena of Biblical rhetorical study. These discussions reveal the wide usage of Biblical rhetorical patterns by the rabbis for stylistic embellishment of their texts. In addition, the rabbis cleverly used these patterns within their editing and redacting process, in a manner that is not found in the Hebrew Bible.

This dissertation contains four papers. In each paper I discuss the use of a different Biblical rhetorical pattern in Rabbinic Literature. The first paper in this dissertation discusses the "Better" proverb, which is a well-known comparison pattern in the literature of the Ancient Near East, and in the Hebrew Bible. The second deals with Anadiplosis, also known as Concatenation. The final two articles are related: the first deals with the use of numbers as a rhetoric device, and the last continues this line of thought, discussing the use of numbers as an editing device. In each article, I discuss in detail the use of this pattern in the Hebrew Bible, in the literature of the Ancient Near East and, if needed, in the Book of Ben-Sira, who in many aspects constitutes a bridge between the Bible and Rabbinic Literature , and in Rabbinic Literature.

Different and diverse rhetorical features were deliberately chosen in order to present the wide knowledge of Biblical rhetoric by the Rabbis. Although the papers primarily focus on the use of these various patterns by the Rabbis, which has almost never been discussed in the past, they also contribute a fresh look at these patterns in Biblical research, especially concerning several rhetorical devices that have not received much attention of late. This dissertation is formed, as stated above, by a collection of articles, in each of which are new discoveries and innovations that stand alone. Each article in this work contains tens of unique examples and discussions concerning each one. The conclusions of these discussions are summarized at the end of each article. These conclusions have been brought together in the final section of this work.

The hundreds of examples in this work indisputably prove that the rabbis were not only familiar with Biblical rhetorical patterns, but also adopted them, adapted and altered them at times, and used them for their different needs, which were at times different from the Biblical use. Key words: Rabbinical literature, Biblical rhetoric, Wisdom literature, Rhetorical patterns.

ח.נ. ביאליק, משנה לעם: 1 יש רואים את למוד המשנה כ"יבש", דמיונה בעיניהם כעולם מאובן ודומם... לא המשנה יבשה. יבשה נפשנו. ואם המשנה נראית כיבשה מבחוץ – לחה היא מבפנים.2

S. Sekles, the Poetry of the Talmud:3

In fact, very few efforts appear to have been made during-Talmudical times to express thought in the beautiful form of poetry. The words came forth as a natural result of the feelings; the spirit within the sage urged him to utterance and he did not first ask, "What shall I utter?" but his ideas poured forth, like the water plunging down the cataract, without any visible method, but still sublime and filled with grandeur.

1. Introduction

The common view of Rabbinic Literature is that it is a "pure" prose, devoid of stylistic features, often rather technical, in which the focus is only on the "what" and not on the "how". The dozens of examples in each paper included in this dissertation, and the hundreds of examples which were not discussed due to space limitations, will show that the rabbis pay much attention to rhetoric through the use of varied stylistic patterns. In some cases, this attention is observed in distinctive syntactical structures, both in short and long units, and in other cases, various stylistic features enrich and elevate the Rabbinical texts. Most of these rhetorical patterns are also found in the Hebrew Bible, and the rabbis did not hesitate to adopt them, expand them and adapt them to their own purposes, sometimes even using them for different aims than their original stylistic use found in the Bible. Just as it would be difficult or near impossible to characterize the overarching rhetorical style of the Hebrew Bible, which contains twenty-four books of different genres and from different time periods, it is similarly problematic to attempt to characterize the overarching style of Rabbinic Literature.4 Some of the rabbis' essays

1 H.N. Bialik, "Mishnah la'am", Kol Kitvei H.N. Bialik (Tel Aviv: Dvir, 1939), p. 230 [Heb.]. This text also appears in Bialik's introduction to the Mishnah (Tel Aviv: Dvir, 19362), p.16 [Heb.]. 2 "Some see the study of the Mishnah as boring; in their eyes the Mishnah seems as a fossilized and dry world… But it is not the Mishnah that is dry, it is our spirit. And if the Mishnah seems dry from the outside, it is vivacious from inside." 3 S. Sekles, the Poetry of the Talmud (New York: Sekles, 1880), p. 14. 4 According to Lieberman in his introduction to the Hebrew version of his book: Greek and Hellenism in Jewish Palestine, "Unorthodox" literature that include love songs was in use in the time of the destruction of the second temple. This literature, that might include the rhetorical features common in

1 are in Hebrew, while others mix Hebrew and Aramaic. Some originate in the land of Israel; others were written in Babylon. Some are early, from the Tannaic period, and others are relatively late, from the Amoraic period. They can be halakhic, Aggadic, or a mixture of both. Nevertheless, the style of three eminent Rabbinic texts, the Mishnah, the Tosefta and the Babylonian Talmud, each of which are discussed extensively in this dissertation should be discussed. According to Encyclopedia Judaica: "The style of the Mishnah is deceptively simple. Most individual halakhot consist of little more than a description of some situation and a brief statement of the ruling which applies to that situation. To the undiscerning eye these halakhot seem to lack virtually all of the dialectical and conceptual elements which are so characteristic of the later forms of Talmudic and Rabbinic Literature."5 Maccoby argues: "The Mishnah is written in a very succinct and technical style… its style is full of mnemonic features." The Tosefta, according to Maccoby, is "ancillary to the Mishnah and lacks many of the qualities that make the Mishnah a unitary work, such as unity of style, full subordination of topics within a general design, and unity of aim."6 In other words, the common assessment of both prominent texts of the Tannaic period is that they are unpraiseworthy, stylistically speaking, to say the least. The Babylonian Talmud is often considered verbose,7 and other works of the rabbis, excluding Tractate Avot, usually aren't viewed as literary masterpieces regarding their style and use of stylistic patterns.8

Indeed, in most cases Rabbinic Literature seems inferior when compared to the Song of Songs, the Psalms, the prophecies of Isaiah, or the wisdom sayings in Proverbs and Ecclesiastes. A similar result is seen when compared to the songs of Rabbi Yehuda poetry, was not include in Rabbinic Literature, and so will not be referenced. In other words, this work deals with the most well-known Rabbinic works and the use of stylistic patterns within these texts, although other essays from the same period that were not preserved, and other essays, like parts of the Passover Haggadah and different prayers, could likely illuminate other aspects of the texts from that era. See: S. Lieberman, Greek and Hellenism in Jewish Palestine (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1962), p. xii [Heb.]. 5 S.G. Wald, "Mishnah", Encyclopedia Judaica, Ed. M. Berenbaum and F. Skolnik, Vol. 14, 2nd ed. (Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007), p. 323. 6 H. Maccoby, Early Rabbinic writings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988), pp.34-35. 7 Mo. Waxman, Me. Waxman, and J.C. Frakes. "Literature, Jewish", Encyclopedia Judaica, Ed. M. Berenbaum and F. Skolnik, Vol. 14, 2nd ed. (Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007), p. 91. 8 Saul Lieberman argues that Talmudic literature is close, literally and content-wise, to popular writings that were found in certain excavations. According to Lieberman: "the later [Palestinian Rabbinic Literature] embodies many elements similar to those contained in the so-called documentary papyri…Rabbinic Literature has much in common with the non-literary papyri and the inscriptions". See: S. Lieberman, Greek in Jewish Palestine (New York: The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1942), p. 3.

Ha-Levi or Rabbi Shlomo ibn Gabirol. Unlike the Hebrew Bible, which contains different genres, including poetry, law, prophecy, and prose; and unlike the Jewish medieval works that comprise poetry, including Piyyutim; it is challenging to find poetry in Rabbinic Literature. While the Mishnah, Tosefta and Talmud contain some proverbs, fables and rarely also songs,9 for the most part they are made up of prose of different types, mainly Halakhic and Midrashic, in which the stylistic element is usually decentralized. Nevertheless, this work will show that the prosaic work of the Tannaim and the Amoraim is lavish with tens of noteworthy rhetorical patterns and poetic devices. These patterns elevate the texts, enrich the rabbi's essays and also had a clear impact upon the writing and editing process. Similar to James Kugel's approach to Biblical texts, in Rabbinic Literature we find different levels of elevation between "pure" prose and "pure" poetry, although, admittedly, the Rabbinic texts in general are more prosaic than poetic, especially when compared to the Bible.10

Even though the essays found in Rabbinic Literature may differ in language, contents, and in their time and place of writing, and even though it may not usually be immediately obvious to the casual observer,11 poetic and rhetorical stylistic elements received a central place throughout the Mishnah, the Tosefta and the two Talmuds. For hundreds of years the rabbis took into consideration an almost hidden aspect – style.

9 See, for example, the song by the disciples of Rav Ammi, and according to another opinion by the disciples of Rav Hanina in B. Ber. 17a, or the sayings by Hillel in B. Suk. 53a. For general discussion about Rabbinic Literature and the rabbi's different writing see: Y. Frankel, Darkhei Ha-Aggadah VeHa-Midrash, vol. 1 (Givatayim: Yad la-Talmud, 1991), pp. 3-10 [Heb.]. See also the two introductions (the first one by Avigdor Shinan) to: A. Reizel, Introduction to the Midrashic Literature (Alon Shvut: Tvunot, 2011), pp. 11-35 [Heb.]. 10 See: J.L. Kugel, The Idea of Biblical Poetry (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981), pp.59-95. See also: A. Berlin, The Dynamics of Biblical Parallelism (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985), pp. 3-7. 11 In printed editions of the Bible we find special pagination for songs like Ex. 15 or Dt. 32. This "visual poetry", which can be found also in Ugaritic texts and in some of the Dead Sea scrolls, is usually lacking in Rabbinic Literature manuscripts and prints, and the recognition of the rare poetic or close to poetic units in this prosaic literature is more complex. Exceptional examples in which the copyist wrote in unique way, although the texts were usually prosaic, can be found in MS Munich 95 Ber. 64b, MS Vatican 111 Yeb. 122b, and in several places in MS Vatican 134: Yom. 2a, Hag. 27b, M.Q. 12a-13b, to mention a few. For further discussion and references see: J. Yogev and S. Yona, Visual Poetry in KTU 1.2, Ugarit- Forschungen 46 (2015), pp. 447-453; idem, Visual Poetry in the Ugaritic Tablet KTU 1.4 (forthcoming); E. Tov, the Textual Criticism of the Bible (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 19972), pp. 169- 170 [Heb.].

1.1 The Corpus

Unlike the familiar boundaries of the Biblical canon, i.e. Genesis to Chronicles, which were solidified during the Second Temple period, there is no consensus on the boundaries, especially concerning the upper limit, of Rabbinic Literature. Moreover, other essays from the Tannaic and Amoraic period, such as prayers and Bible translations, are not considered "Rabbinic Literature", so the definition refers not only to the time of the essay but also to the type or genre of the essay.12 There is no dispute that the Tannaic literature, including the Mishnah, Tosefta and Midrashi Ha-Halakha, as well as a portion of the Amoraic literature, with an emphasis on both Talmuds, are an undisputed and integral part of Rabbinic Literature. Regarding to the Midrashi Ha-Aggadah it is more difficult to know for sure when they were written. Some earlier, some later, and some of them, like Avot de-Rabbi Nathan, were probably written and edited for centuries.13 The articles in this work, besides the first article, focused on essays from the time of the Tannaim and on both Talmuds. This is due to the scope of the Rabbinic corpus and the understanding that these key essays should shed light on all the sages' writing as a whole.

The first three papers compare the use of different rhetorical patterns from the Bible and from Rabbinic Literature, also contain examples from Ancient Near East literature, such as the book of Ben-Sira, who in many aspects constitutes a bridge between the Bible and Rabbinic Literature.

12 See: I.M. Ta-Shma, "Rabbinical Literature", Encyclopedia Judaica, Ed. M. Berenbaum and F. Skolnik, Vol. 17, 2nd ed. (Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007), p. 22. Representative examples of the different opinions between the scholars is in the literature referred to in the book Hosea in Talmud and Midrash by Jacob Neusner, and in the book The Bible in Rabbinic Interpretation (Vol. 1): Hosea. Neusner's book refers to the Mishnah, the Tosefta, the two Talmuds and twelve more Midrashim, whose time is not later than the sixth century A.D., excluding Avot de-Rabbi Nathan which is difficult to date (see n.13). The other book refers to sixty-four essays, some of which are usually dated to the medieval era. See: J. Neusner, Hosea in Talmud and Midrash (Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 2007); M. Ben-Yashar, I.B. Gottlieb and J.S. Pankower, The Bible in Rabbinic Interpretation (Vol. 1): Hosea (Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan University Press, 2003) [Heb.]. 13 Concerning the time of writing and editing, Avot de-Rabbi Nathan is an unusual essay. This unique text was processed and redacted for centuries, in some opinions up until the ninth century, although it concludes with Tannaic materials. For further reading and a summary of the different opinions see: M. Kister, Studies in Avot de-Rabbi Nathen (Jerusalem: the Hebrew University, 1998), pp. 3-9 [Heb.]; J.W. Schofer, The Making of a Sage (Madison, Wis.: University of Wisconsin Press, 2005), pp. 26-30.

It is important to note that from time to time examples from Rabbinic Literature were discussed whose time of writing remains uncertain, like Avot de-Rabbi Nathan, and other examples from later essays, but these were mostly used to highlight auxiliary points in the discussion.

Lastly, in some cases (for example B. Yeb. 63) a group of Rabbinical sayings that contain many rhetorical patterns have been gathered together into one single essay. In other essays, however, we find hardly any use of these rhetorical features. Thus, an overview of several texts is often preferable to focusing on a single essay, and therefore this work is not limited to any specific essay or tractate.

1.2 Methodology

This dissertation contains four papers. In each paper I discuss the use of a different Biblical rhetorical pattern in Rabbinic Literature, while also highlighting unique changes and alterations to the pattern from its original use in the Bible. This interdisciplinary work attempts to bridge the long-standing academic gap which has existed for centuries between Biblical studies and Rabbinic Literature studies, which has for the most part been constrained to the realm of Jewish thought studies. Although in the last years a few essays that deal with both literatures have been written,14 most scholars deal only with one or the other. This separation, whose roots date back to the Tannaic period, 15 has become a permanent barrier, with each field of research developing its own separate approaches and disciplines.

In the Bible, tens of rhetorical features have been identified, which can be categorized in different ways. For example, Anaphora, Epiphora, Concatenation and Inclusio (or "Envelope Figure"), are all built upon some type of repetition. Whether it be the repetition of a word, several words, or of a full sentence; or repetition at the beginning of a line; or repetition at the end of a line; or repetition of the end of one line at the beginning of the next, etc.; limiting the discussion to these and other similar patterns

14 For example: S. Yona, "Rhetorical features in Talmudic literature", Hebrew Union College Annual 77 (2006), pp. 67-101; S. Fogel, "Samson's shoulders were sixty cubits": Three issues about Samson's image in the eyes of the rabbis (Heb.; M.A. Thesis, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, 2009); A.R. Pasternak, "New Jar Full of Old": Biblical Rhetorical Features in Rabbinic Literature (Heb.; M.A. Thesis, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, 2010); S. Kim, Continuity and discontinuity between Biblical and post-Biblical wisdom texts (PhD Diss. Bar-Ilan University, Ramat- Gan, 2014); the two books on Hosea mentioned above in n. 12, and several other works by Jacob Neusner, to mention a few. 15 See: I.B. Gottlieb, "Qohelet, Pirqe Abot, and Wisdom of Torah", Shnaton: An Annual for Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies 11 (1997), pp. 46-47, n. 3 [Heb.], for further reading.

5 could not encompass the use of stylistic rhetorical patterns in Rabbinic Literature. Therefore, in this dissertation different and distinct rhetorical features were chosen. The first feature is the "Better" Proverb (A is better than B), which is a type of "comparison pattern". The second feature is Concatenation, which is a type of repetition pattern. The third and fourth papers deal with the numerical sayings and the use of numbers as an editing device. In this way this work covers a broad selection of the different aspects of rhetoric and style found in Rabbinic Literature.

In each article, I first survey the previous studies about the rhetorical pattern under consideration; after which I discuss in detail the use of this pattern in the Hebrew Bible, in the literature of the Ancient Near East and, if needed, in the Book of Ben- Sira, who in many aspects constitutes a bridge between the Bible and Rabbinic Literature.

Each paper contains many examples, each of which are discussed separately. When necessary, relevant textual differences between the manuscripts are mentioned and discussed.16

The results of these discussions are examined throughout the articles, and then are summarized at the end of each article. My conclusions from all of the articles will be presented later on. At this point, suffice it to say that clearly the rabbis were not only familiar with the style and rhetoric of the Bible but also used the same patterns, while adapting and adjusting them to their own purposes.

Many of the rhetorical patterns in Rabbinic Literature are found in sayings that are reminiscent of the language and style of Biblical wisdom literature. Due to this similarity, I refer many times to the wisdom books of the Bible, as well as to the book of Ben-Sira.17

16 I should note that before every discussion, a philological comparison between the different manuscripts was made, but only noteworthy differences were mentioned. 17 Several interdisciplinary works that refer to Biblical wisdom and to Rabbinic Literature, especially to tractate Avot, have been written over the years. See for example: I.B. Gottlieb, Pirqe Abot and Biblical Wisdom, Vetus Testamentum 40, 2 (1990), pp. 152-164 and lately: S. Kim (n. 14); I. Rosen-Zvi, The Wisdom Tradition in Rabbinic Literature and Mishnah Avot, in: J-S Rey, H. Najman and E. Tigchelaar (eds.) Rethinking the Boundaries of Sapiential Tradition, (forthcoming).

1.3 Previous Research

As previously discussed by Yona,18 the study of Biblical poetry, and the phenomena that are common in poetry, i.e. parallelism, types of repetition, and rhythm, were awarded a central location in the study of various Biblical genres.19 However, concerning the rhetorical style of Rabbinic Literature there have been only a few studies, most of which deal with tractate Avot,20 or with only a single tractate,21 or part of a tractate, 22 or with a single rhetorical feature.23 Some of these discussions are only parenthetical to the main discussion in the study.24 No comprehensive study concerning the style and use of rhetorical features in Rabbinic Literature has ever been done, and most of the related scholarly studies are limited. 25 This dissertation, unlike the above-mentioned works, observes the use of rhetorical features in the Bible and the Ancient Near East literature up till the period of the Amoraim. Thus, this kind of interdisciplinary research reveals the changes and sometimes even the evolution of some patterns, while also contributing to our understanding of each of the texts separately.

18 S. Yona, (n. 14), pp. 67-69. 19 Idem, idem, pp. 68-69, n. 6; idem, The Many Faces of Repetition (Beer Sheva: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press, 2013), pp. 19-29 [Heb.]. Although Yona’s book deals mainly with repetition, one can find in his book extensive discussion and many references to scholars from the medieval days to our era concerning different types of rhetorical features. 20 E.Z. Melammed, "Text, Number, and Meter in tractate Avot", Sinai 50 (1962), pp.154-165 [Heb.]; M.B. Lerner, "The Tractate Avot", in S. Safrai (ed.), The Literature of the Sages (Assan: Van Gorcum, 1987), pp. 263-276; I.B. Gottlieb (n. 17), pp. 152-164, idem, (n. 15), pp. 46-55; idem, Pirqe Avot as Wisdom Literature, Beer Sheva 20 (2011), pp. 91-107 [Heb.]; A.D. Tropper, Wisdom, Politics, and Historiography: Tractate Avot in the context of the Graeco-Roman Near East (Oxford [England]: Oxford University Press, 2004); S. Sharvit, Language and Style of Tractate Avoth Through the Ages (Beer-Sheva: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press, 2006) [Heb.]. 21 A. Walfish, The literary method of redaction in Mishnah based on tractate Rosh Hashanah (Heb. PhD Diss. Hebrew University, Jerusalem, 2001). 22 S. Friedman, A critical study of Yevamot X with a methodological introduction (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1977), pp. 316-319, 346-351 [Heb.]; 23 R. Margolies, Mechkarim Bedarkei Hatalmud Vechidotav (Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Ḳooḳ, 1967), pp.102-104 [Heb.] ;S. Friedman, The "Law of Increasing Members" in Mishnaic Hebrew, Lĕšonénu 35, 3-4 (1971), pp. 117-129, 192-206 [Heb.]; idem, Some Structural Patterns in Talmudic Sugiot, in: A. Shinan (ed.), Proceedings of the Sixth World Congress of Jewish Studies, vol. 3, (Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 1977), pp. 389-402 [Heb.]; S. Valler, "The number fourteen as a literary device in the Babylonian Talmud," Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Period 26, 2 (1995), pp. 169-184; Y. Breuer, Word Play in Rabbinic Literature, Leshonenu La'am 44, 4 (1998), pp. 155-167 [Heb.]; A. Rosenfeld, Haruzim ba-Aggadah ve-ba-Halakhah, Sinai 126-127 (2001), pp.303-304 [Heb.] ; A. Walfish (n. 21), p.5, n.23-26. 24 Z. Amar, Bamme Madlikin, (Elkana: Eretz Hefetz Institute, 2003), pp. 34-36 [Heb.]. 25 S. Sekles' book (n. 2) deals with the different genres found in the Talmud, and also quotes sayings that used different stylistic patterns. Unfortunately, he rarely discusses the rhetorical features in those sayings. It should be noted that some of the rhetorical patterns in use in the Talmud did not even have a name yet in his day, so of course no one discussed them at that time. Nevertheless, Sekles’ pioneering work is important because of his identification and differentiation of the genres in the Talmud.

Finally, although the articles in this work deal mostly with rhetoric and style, at times I also refer to other relevant areas of research fields, such as textual criticism, editing processes, textual formatting (with respect to the order of the lines in individual literary units), the order of literary units on a Talmudic page, and other textual aspects. Most of these, however, have already been discussed in past by many scholars.26

26 A survey of previous discussions about the editing process of the Mishnah can be found in: A. Walfish, (n. 21), pp. 1-31. See also: A .Goldberg, Literary form and composition in classical Rabbinic Literature (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 2011) [Heb.]; N. Zohar, Secrets of the Rabbinic Workshop: Redaction as a Key to Meaning (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 2007) [Heb.]. In his book, Zohar deals mostly with the arrangement process and with the redaction process of large units, e.g. an entire chapter of the Mishnah or the Tosefta. In some cases Zohar attributes different parts of the texts to different sages. Likewise, Walfish deals with the editing process of large units in his dissertation. In this work, however, I mainly discuss smaller units, which sometimes contain only one or two sentences, and in most cases I don’t distinguish between the different "layers" of the text. For example, in his discussion concerning M. Qid. 1, 1, Zohar urged that the numerical part of the first line of this Mishnah is by the hand of the editor. In my article "The use of numbers as an editing device in Rabbinic Literature", I advise not to try to track down "owner" of this line, and additionally, for the purposes of this work it does not matter who wrote it. Our focus here is on the use of the numbers. In other words, there are different aspects to the editing process (and see pp. 4-6 at Zohar's book), and this work deals primarily with one of them – the arrangement of the text.

2. The Style of Rabbinic Literature

Generally, there is no fixed order concerning the use of rhetorical patterns in the Bible and in Rabbinic Literature. The stylistic patterns found in these extended literatures, whether parallelism, repetition, comparison sentences, or word plays, can be discussed in any desirable order. As mentioned earlier, this work deals with various rhetorical patterns. This diversity proves that the sages were familiar with Biblical rhetoric and embraced it, although they also adapted it, sometimes so much so that the original stylistic pattern is nearly unrecognizable. The first paper in this dissertation discusses the "Better" proverb, and the second deals with Anadiplosis, also known as Concatenation. The final two articles are related: the first deals with the use of numbers as a rhetoric device, and the last continues this line of thought, discussing the use of numbers as an editing device.

Before I present the articles that constitute the heart of this work, I would like to discuss several examples which either were not discussed or were only mentioned briefly in my articles. These will help demonstrate some additional uses of rhetorical patterns by the rabbis to elevate and beautify their writings.

B. Yeb. 62b-63a:27

תנו רבנן האוהב את אשתו כגופו והמכבדה יותר מגופו והמדריך בניו ובנותיו בדרך ישר' והמשיאן סמוך לפירקן עליו הכתו' או' וידעת כי שלום אהלך האוהב את שכיניו והמקרב את קרוביו והנושא את בת אחותו והמלוה סלע לעני בשעת דוחקו עליו הכתו' או' אז תקרא ויי' יענה תשוע ויאמר הנני

27 The Hebrew text and reference in this discussion are according to MS Munich 59. An almost identical version can be found in B. San. 76b, and there the first saying is used by the rabbis to disagree with the saying of Rav Judah by the name of Rav concerning child marriage. The second saying appears after the Talmud reconciles the dispute, proving that these two sayings typically appear together, even when only one of them is relevant.

Our rabbis have taught [on Tannaite authority]: He who loves his wife as he loves himself, He who honors her more than he honors himself, He who raises up his sons and daughters in the right path, And he who marries them off close to the time of their puberty Of such a one the Scripture says: "And you shall know that your tabernacle shall be in peace…" He who loves his neighbors, He who draws his relatives near, He who marries his sister’s daughter, And he who lends a sela to a poor person when he needs it Of such a one the Scripture says: "Then you will call, and the Lord will Answer, you will cry for help, and he will say: Here I am".

Here, the Babylonian Talmud quotes two juxtaposed sayings, which both contain four parts followed by a quote from the Hebrew Bible. The first saying deals with the feelings and deeds of the husband and the father toward his wife and children, and the reward he should expect – peace in his house. The first two lines deal with the husband and his wife, and the next two lines deal with the father and his children. It seems that the order of these four lines is chronological. The wife precedes the children, and the children's education precedes the arrangement of their marriage. The second and fourth lines use pronominal he who honors") as a") והמכבד her") was added to the word") ה suffixes: the letter was added to the word ן his wife"); and the letter") את אשתו substitute for the words his sons and") ,בניו ובנותיו he who marries") as a substitute for the words") והמשיא daughters").

he who loves"), but in contrast to the") האוהב The second unit opens with the word first saying, each of its four lines could be placed anywhere inside the literary unit, without harming the message of the entire saying. In other words, the order of this unit is not chronological; neither is it ordered from the severe to the lenient, from the lenient to the severe, from the close family to the general population, or the opposite.28

saw a connection between the words of ,"תקרא וה' יענה" .Rashi, in his commentary to B. San. 76a, s.v 28 הֲלֹוא :Isaiah and this saying, and argues that neighbors can be consider as relatives, based on Is. 58:7

If this is so, why did the rabbis decided to arrange this saying in the present order? It seems that the rhetorical patterns in this unit had some influence upon the order of the he who loves"), exactly like the first") האוהב lines. The first line starts with the word line of the first saying. It seems that the next three lines were ordered according to their length and rhythm. Each line in this unit is a little longer than the preceding line, and the unit was built in a trapezoid pattern.29In addition, lines two, three and four start in the same way, creating an opening alliteration.30

.את In lines one, two, and three, there is also a mesophora 31 by repetition of the word Lastly, lines one and two share the same ending, as do lines three and four; each pair of lines uses the same pronominal suffix to create a rhyme. The combination of these stylistic patterns elevates this unit from pure prose to a more refined poetic level. To illustrate this further, I will compare this saying in its original form with another version, in which the order of the lines has been deliberately changed.

Altered Order Original Order האוהב את שכיניו המלוה סלע לעני בשעת דוחקו והמקרב את קרוביו והאוהב את שכיניו והנושא את בת אחותו והנושא את בת אחותו והמלוה סלע לעני בשעת דוחקו והמקרב את קרוביו עליו הכתו' או' אז תקרא ויי' יענה עליו הכתו' או' אז תקרא ויי' יענה תשוע ויאמר הנני תשוע ויאמר הנני

He who lends a sela to a poor He who loves his neighbors, person when he needs it, He who draws his relatives near, He who loves his neighbors, He who marries his sister’s He who marries his sister’s daughter, daughter, And he who lends a sela to a He who draws his relatives near, poor person when he needs it

Is it not to share your bread") פָרֹס לָרָ עֵבלַחְמֶָך וַעֲנִיִים מְרּודִים תָבִיא בָיִת כִי תִרְ אֶה עָרֹםוְכִסִיתֹו ּומִבְשָרְ ָך ֹלא תִתְעַלָם with the hungry, and bring the homeless poor into your house; when you see the naked, to cover them, and not to hide yourself from your own kin?").,. 29 See: Yona (n. 14), pp. 98-100. 30 See: S. Yona and J. Yogev, Opening Alliteration in Biblical and Ugaritic Poetry, Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 127, 1 (2015), pp. 108-113. See also: W. G. E. Watson, Traditional Techniques in Classical Hebrew Verse, (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994), pp. 431–434. 31 Mesophora, also known as meta-phora, is a repetition of word, words or phrases in the middle of successive clauses or stiches. See: S. Yona (n. 14), pp. 78-79 and especially n. 27.

Of such a one the Scripture says: Of such a one the Scripture says: "Then you will call, and the "Then you will call, and the Lord will Lord will Answer, you will cry for help, Answer, you will cry for help, and he will say: Here I am". and he will say: Here I am".

Unmistakably, the language and the rhythm of the original text are more fluent, and the text is more mnemonic and feels closer to poetry than in the altered version. Is this poetic order only a coincidence? Or, did the rabbis intentionally write their sayings in a particular order? The next examples in this introduction, as well as the discussions in the articles in this dissertation, will endeavor to answer this question.

B. Pes. 113a:32

אמ' ליה רב לר' חייא בני לא תעקור ככא ולא תשתה סמא ולא תישוור נגרא ולא תקני בארמא ולא תקני בחויא

Said Rav to R. Hiyya, his son: "Don’t have a tooth pulled, Don’t drink drugs [medicine], Don’t jump over a canal [take big steps], Don’t vex an Aramaic [gentile], And don't vex a serpent."

This unit contains five recommendations from Rav to his son, R. Hiyya, and is placed immediately after two more sayings with advice attributed to the same name. In this unit Rav told his son not to pull his tooth without a reason; not to drink medicine regularly (this may cause him to become addicted); not to jump over a water canal (or possibly, "not to take big steps", because this may damage his eyesight33); and not to provoke either a gentile or a snake.

32 The Hebrew text and reference in this discussion are according to MS Vatican 109 and includes the copyist's margins with corrections to the text. לא ' The meaning here is not entirely clear. See Rashi and Rashbam commentaries on B. Pes. 113a, s.v 33 .'תשוור ניגרא

The order of these five recommendations is different from one manuscript to another, however, all the manuscripts contain a five-line parallel structure, in which each line don't"), creating anaphora.34 In most manuscripts, each line") לא starts with the word creating ,(א also ends with the same vowel - ā (kamatz followed by the Hebrew letter rhyme. Moreover, in all manuscripts the snake and the gentile appear at the end, although sometimes in reverse order. This establishes an associative connection with the next unit, which deals with three that one should not vex: a young gentile, a little snake and a humble disciple, as these may take revenge in the future.35 The typological number of recommendations (five), and the identical opening and ending of each line imply that the author or redactor of this well-organized unit was familiar with rhetorical patterns that are also in use in the Bible. Instead of quoting Rav's recommendations one by one, the rabbis arranged them into a single saying, as a synthetic parallelism of five lines.36

Finally, I would like to discuss several examples that combine two rhetorical features: wordplay (paronomasia) and chiastic parallelism. Actually, in this unique type of chiastic parallelism, the second line repeats the words of the first line, but in a different order, and sometimes includes some needed changes.37 This phenomenon is quite distinctive due to the interaction between these two different rhetorical features. The use of wordplay in the Bible is relatively common, and had been discussed by scholars in the past.38 A well-known example is found in the prophecy of Amos for Gilgal shall surely go into exile and") , כִי הַגִלְגָל גָֹלה יִגְלֶה ּובֵית-אֵל יִהְיֶה לְָאוֶן:(5:5b) ("GaLoh yiGLeh: "go into exile) גָֹלה יִגְלֶה Bethel shall come to nothing"). The verbs GiLGaL"), which provides poetic") גלגל are placed immediately following the name

34 S. Yona, The Many Faces of Repetition (n. 19), pp. 19-20, n. 5 for further reading. 35 For further discussion concerning the "Associative Anadiplosis" see: A.R. Pasternak and S. Yona, "Concatenation in Ancient Near East literature, in Hebrew Scripture and in Rabbinic Literature" (in print), n. 12 for more bibliography. 36 This unit is a good example of the evolution of Biblical rhetorical features in Rabbinic Literature. In the Bible it is very rare to find parallelism with more than two parts; unusual examples can be found in Is. 1:8, 6:10; Ps. 18:8; and Joel 1:10. Conversely, this unit contains several lines that were bound together, like many more examples in Rabbinic Literature. 37 For former discussions concerning this unique pattern see: Lerner (n. 20), p. 270; Yona (n. 14), pp. 92-94 who calls this phenomenon chiastic structure in small units, and Pasternak (n. 14), pp. 30, 87-90, 105-106. 38 D. Yellin, David Yellin Writings (vol. 6): Hikrei Mikra (Jerusalem: R. Mass, 1983), pp. 269-288 [Heb.]; W.G.E. Watson, Classical Hebrew Poetry (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1984), pp. 237-250 for further reading. See also the discussion by Yona (n. 14), pp. 84-91 concerning the use of wordplay in Rabbinic Literature.

("the thorns") הַסִירִ ים emphasis to Amos' message.39 Likewise, the use of the words כִי כְקֹול הַסִירִ ים תַחַת הַסִיר כֵן the pot") creates a clever word play in Ecc. 7:6:40") הַסִיר and For like the crackling of thorns under a pot, so is the laughter of") שְחֹק הַכְסִיל וְגַם זֶה הָבֶל ,סירים fools, this also is vanity"). The author creatively uses the ambiguous meaning of which is pots but also thorns, to create a paronomasia that enhances the text. Similar examples can be found in Jer. 6:1, Mic. 1:10, in several verses in Is. 24, and in many other Biblical books. Chiastic parallelism, which has also been discussed in the past by different scholars,41 is widely found in the Bible, as seen in these various examples: Am. 7:9a:42 וְנָשַּמּו בָמֹות יִשְחָק ּומִקְדְשֵי יִשְרָ אֵל יֶחֱרָ בּו

The high places of Isaac shall be made desolate, And the sanctuaries of Israel shall be laid waste.

Ps. 26:4: ֹלא יָשַבְתִי עִם מְתֵי שָוְא וְעִם נַעֲלָמִיםֹלא ָאבֹוא I do not sit with the worthless, Nor do I consort with hypocrites. Is. 11:1: וְיָצָא חֹטֶר מִגֵזַע יִשָי וְנֵצֶר מִשָרָ שָיו יִפְרֶ ה

A shoot shall come out from the stump of Jesse, And a branch shall grow out of his roots.

Rashi discussed the connection between the name of ,'הגלגל גלה יגלה' .In his commentary to Amos, s.v 39 the curse [of") לפי שמו קללתו the city and the punishment it will suffer in the future, or in Rashi's words exile] is connected to its name"). See also: S.M. Paul, Amos (Mikra le-Israel) (Tel Aviv: Am Oved, 1994), pp. 85-86 [Heb.]. See also the commentary by Hayes concerning the unique religious statues of these two cities: J.H. Hayes, Amos, the eighth-century prophet (Nashville, TN.: Abingdon Press, 1988), pp. 157-159. 40 C.L. Seow, Ecclesiastes (Anchor Bible) (New York: Doubleday, 1997), pp.236-267. 41 M. O'Connor, Hebrew Verse Structure (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1980), pp. 391-400; W.G.E. Watson (n. 37), pp. 201-208; S. Yona, Exegetical and Stylistic Analysis of a Number of Aphorisms in the Book of Proverbs: Mitigation of Monotony in Repetitions in Parallel Texts, in: R.L. Troxel, K.G. Friebel, and D.R. Magary (eds.) Seeking Out the Wisdom of the Ancients: Essays Offered to Honor Michael V. Fox on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday, (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2005), pp.155-156, n.1. 42 In most cases, the common English translations of the Bible do not reflect the chiastic structures of these parallelisms.

Many more examples like these can be found in poetry, prophecy, prose and other Biblical genres. Notably, in all of the examples above the second line does not make use of most or all of the words in the first line, as is the case in most Biblical chiastic parallelisms.

Only in rare verses do we find chiastic parallelism that also contains wordplay. Perhaps the most well-known example is Gn. 9:6a:

שֹפְֵך דַם הָָאדָם בָָאדָםדָמֹו יִשָפְֵך Whoever sheds the blood of a human, By a human shall that person's blood be shed.43

In this stich we find the classic chiastic parallel structure: A B C C` B` A` Some other remarkable examples can be found in Ecclesiastes and in some of the prophecies of Ezekiel. For example: Ecc. 7:1a:

טֹוב שֵם מִשֶמֶן טֹוב

A good name is better, Than precious ointment.44

Ezek. 5:10a:

לָכֵן ָאבֹות יֹאכְלּו בָנִים בְתֹוכְֵך ּובָנִים יֹאכְלּו אֲבֹותָם

Surely, parents shall eat their children in your midst, And children shall eat their parents. Ezek. 7:6: קֵץ בָא בָא הַקֵץהֵקִיץ אֵלָיְִך הִנֵה בָָאה

43 In this verse, the words are only slightly changed. See also: Yona (n.14), pp. 93-94, n.73. 44 See also the commentary by Seow (n.40), pp. 234-235.

An end has come, The end has come. It has awakened against you; see, it comes!

Ezek. 17:24a:45 וְ יָדְעּו כָל עֲצֵי הַשָדֶה כִי אֲנִי יְהוָה הִשְפַלְתִי עֵץ גָבֹהַ הִגְבַהְתִי עֵץ שָפָל הֹובַשְתִי עֵץ לָח וְהִפְרַ חְתִי עֵץ יָבֵש

All the trees of the field shall know that I am the Lord. I bring low the high tree, I make high the low tree; I dry up the green tree And make the dry tree flourish

Ezek. 21:31b: זֹאת ֹלא זֹאת הַשָפָלָה הַגְבֵהַ וְהַגָבֹהַ הַשְפִיל Things shall not remain as they are. Exalt that which is low, Abase that which is high.

In Rabbinic Literature, this unique type of chiastic parallelism is present in several essays. For example:

45 In this verse there are two chiastic parallelisms. The first one uses the same three words in both והפרחתי moist" or "green"), was changed to") לח stiches, while in the second parallelism the word as a לח"ח made the tree flourish"). This change is probably because the Bible does not use the root") verb, and so is the case in Rabbinic Literature, except in rare cases like Bereshit Rabbah, Noah, 36, 3 which actually use ,יבישין שנתלחלחו and Y. Sha. 4, 1 that reads ,נתלחלחה האדמה Vilna print) that reads) .לחל"ח the root

M. Avot 2, 4:46

עשה רצונו כרצונך שיעשה רצונך כרצונו

Do his will as if it were your will, So that he may do your will as if it were his will.

M. Avot 3, 17:

אם אין תורה אין דרך ארץ אם אין דרך ארץ אין תורה אם אין חכמה אין יראה אם אין יראה אין חכמה אם אין דעת אין בינה אם אין בינה אין דעת אם אין קמח אין תורה אם אין תורה אין קמח

If there is no Torah, there is no worldly occupation, If there is no worldly occupation, there is no Torah. If there is no wisdom, there is no fear [of god], If there is no fear [of god], there is no wisdom. If there is no knowledge, there is no understanding, If there is no understanding, there is no knowledge. If there is no flour, there is no Torah, If there is no Torah, there is no flour.

M. Mak. 2, 3: 47

האב גולה על ידי הבן והבן גולה על ידי האב

The father goes into exile because of the son, And the son goes into exile because of the father.

46 The Hebrew texts and references from tractate Avot in this dissertation are according to: S. Sharvit, Tractate Avoth Through the Ages: A Critical Edition, Prolegomena and Appendices (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 2004) [Heb.]. 47 The Hebrew text is according to MS Kaufmann.

Y. Sha. 14, 4:48

טב לבישתא וביש לטבתא

[Vinegar is] good for bad [teeth], And bad for good [teeth].

Y. San 3, 10:49

לא יומתו אבות בעדות בנים ובנים לא יומתו בעדות אבות

Fathers shall not be put to death on the testimony of their sons, And sons shall not be put to death on the testimony of their fathers.

B. Suk. 52b:50

אמ' ר' יוחנן אבר קטן יש בו באדם משביעו רעב מרעיבו שבע

Said R. Johanan: There is a small organ in man When he satisfies it, it is hungry When he starves it, it is satisfied.

Genesis Rabbah, Toledot, 63, 2:51

האבות עטרה לבנים והבנים עטרה לאבות

Fathers are a crown for children, Children are a crown for fathers.

48 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Leiden. 49 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Leiden. A similar version can be found in B. San. 27b. 50 The Hebrew text and reference in this discussion are according to MS Munich 140. A similar version can be found in B. San. 107a and in Y. Ket. 5, 8. For further discussion, see also: I. C. Tawiow, Otzar Ha-Mashalim Ve-Ha-Pitgamim, (Odesa: Moriah, 1919), p. 18, n. 1; S. Yona, (n. 14), p. 93; A.R. Pasternak (n.14), p .106. 51 The Hebrew text and reference are according to J. Theodor and C. Albeck, Bereschit Rabba, (Jerusalem: Shalem Books, 19962) [Heb.].

Leviticus Rabbah, Vayyikra, 1, 6:52

דיעה קנית מה חסרת דעה חסרת מה קנית

If you have gotten knowledge, what do you lack? [But] if you lack knowledge, what have you gotten?

The examples above deal with different subjects, but their chiastic structure creates resemblance between them. In all of these sayings, the message of the first line by itself and the message of the second line by itself are joined together by a literary rhetorical connection that unifies both messages into one idea. For example, the saying by R. Johanan in B. Suk 52b is structured as an antithetic chiastic parallelism that deals with male sexual behavior. In his opinion, a man's sexual behavior will influence his sexual desire. If a man is sexually active, his sexual desire will increase, and if a man is sexually inactive, his sexual desire will decrease.53 Each of these sentences describes an abnormal situation. Normally, a satisfied man will not feel hunger, and hungry man will not feel satisfied. According to R. Johanan, sexual desire acts in an inverse manner to hunger. Without the first line or the second line, it would be impossible to understand the full message of this saying. On the other hand, the saying of R. Elazar ben Azariah in Avot 3, 17 is structured as a synthetic parallelism in which every stich stands by itself, but together the stiches show an internal interdependence. A person without flour (i.e. food) cannot learn Torah, and a person that abandon God's ways and does not learn Torah might lose all if his fields and agricultural products.54

52 The Hebrew text and reference are according to M. Margulies, Midrash Wayyikra Rabbah, (New York and Jerusalem: the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 19533) [Heb.]. A similar idea can במערב' אמרי: דדא ביה כול' ביה ודלא דא ביה מה ביה דא קני מה חסר דלא דא קני מה קני :be found in B. Ned. 41a ("In the West they say: 'One who has this has it all, one who does not have this, so what does he have? One who has this – so what does he not have? One who does not have this, so what does he have?" suggests that the effect of the increased sexual ,"רעב" .Rashi, in his commentary to B. Suk. s.v 53 activity will be expressed in the person's old age. This is contrary to his commentary in B. San. 107a, in which he suggests that a person who is involved in increased sexual activity ,"ונתעלמה ממנו" .s.v strengthens his sexual drive. 54 For further discussion about the rewards of obedience see: C.A. Briggs and E.G. Briggs, Psalms (ICC), (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1906), pp. 328-329; M. Weinfeld, "The Dependence of Deuteronomy upon the Wisdom literature", in: M. Haran (ed.) Yehezkel Kaufmann jubilee volume (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1960), pp. 104-106 [Heb.]; Pasternak (n. 14), pp. 47-51. See also: M. Weiss, "These days and the days to come according to Amos 9:13", Eretz-Israel 14 (1978), pp. 69- 73 [Heb.].

The two stiches are not opposing but rather complementary, and together they relay a message of interdependence between the material world (the flour), and the spiritual world (the Torah). The repetition of the same words in each of the examples above helps the readers or listeners to remember and memorize the texts, while also elevating these sayings from "pure" prose to a more poetic language. This intentional repetition also clearly contributed to the structuring of the messages and the ideas of the rabbis at the time of their composition.55

Similar discussions in my papers concerning the saying of the rabbis, which I didn't refer to in this introduction due to space limitations, show again and again that the rabbis used Biblical rhetorical features frequently. This use has three major reasons, which will be discussed in the last part of this dissertation.

55 For further reading see: Yona, (n. 14), pp. 92-94; Pasternak, (n. 14), pp. 106-107.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17 (2014) 27–40

brill.com/rrj

The “Better” Proverb in Rabbinic Literature

Ariel Ram Pasternak Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva 84105, Israel [email protected]

Shamir Yona Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva 84105, Israel [email protected]

Abstract

The “Better Proverb” is a rhetorical form found in ancient Near Eastern literatures, including the Bible, and in Rabbinic literature. In this paper we discuss the use of this form in Rabbinic literature, focusing on the developments and changes that occurred in the later literature. We will show that the rabbis were familiar with biblical rhetorical features, used them, and changed them if needed to meet their own rhetorical purposes and goals.

Keywords

Rabbinic Literature – Better Proverb – Rhetorical Devices

“Better” Proverbs valorize one action or thing over a diffferent action or thing. As the designation implies, this type of aphorism, which is found widely in the literatures of the ancient Near East, asserts that one thing is better than some other thing. In Egyptian wisdom literature, the pattern frequently appears in the Proverbs of Amenemope,1 whose close relationship to biblical wisdom has

1 Amenemope 9.5–8 [cf. Miriam Lichtheim, Ancient Egyptian Literature (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1973), vol. 2, p. 152, (hereinafter AEL)]: “Better is poverty in the land of the god than wealth in the storehouse. Better are (mere) loaves of bread when the heart is pleasant than wealth with vexation.” Other examples can be found in 16.11–14 [cf. AEL vol. 2, p. 156]: “Better to be praised when loved by people than to have wealth in the storehouse.

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2014 | doi 10.1163/15700704-12341260 21 28 pasternak and yona been discussed extensively in modern research.2 The pattern occurs also in the Aramaic Proverbs of Ahiqar3 and, frequently, in the Syriac version of Ahiqar.4 In the Hebrew Ben-Sira, which relies heavily upon the style and the rhetoric of biblical wisdom literature, we fĳind several examples.5 In biblical wisdom literature the pattern is attested in scores of aphorisms, most of them in the Book of Proverbs and the Scroll of Ecclesiastes.6 But beyond the wisdom writings, it is attested also in a number of other biblical books, sometimes in prosaic units. For example in Judg. 8:2 we fĳind: 4 4 2 0 2 . 2 2 5. 4 . 8 8 0

Better is bread when the heart is pleasant than wealth with vexation,” and in Amenemope 22.15–16 [cf. AEL vol. 2, p. 159]: “Better offf is the man whose speech remains in his belly than one who speaks it to (his) harm.” 2 M.V. Fox, Proverbs 10–31 (AB), (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008), pp. 596–597, 671– 672, 705–733, 753–767; N. Shupak, “Some Common Idioms in the Biblical and the Egyptian Wisdom Literatures,” in Shnaton, An Annual for Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies, 1977, pp. 233–236 [Heb.]; N. Shupak, “The Instruction of Amenemope and Proverbs 22:17– 24:22 from the perspective of contemporary research”, in R.L. Troxel, et al., eds. Seeking Out the Wisdom of the Ancients (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns, 2005), pp. 203–220; V.A. Hurowitz, Proverbs (Tel Aviv: Am Oved, 2012), vol. 1, pp. 441–448 [Heb.]. See also N. Shupak, “Ancient Egyptian Literature,” in Z. Talshir, ed., The Literature of the Hebrew Bible (Jerusalem: Yad Ben- Zvi Press, 2005), pp. 605–656 [Heb.]. 3 In one case (B. Porten and A. Yardeni, Textbook of Aramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt (Jerusalem: Hebrew University Press, 1993), vol. 3, p. 36, line 83b), the word ‘tov’, meaning, better, is replaced by the word mighty: “(for) mightier is ambush of mouth than ambush of battle.” On this aphorism see S. Yona, The Aramaic Words of Ahiqar and Biblical Wisdom Literature: Context, Structure and Style (Heb.; unpublished M.A. Thesis; Hebrew University of Jerusalem, 1990), pp. 74–76. The second case (ibid., p. 44, line 152) is incomplete: “Better he who masters . . .” Three more examples, all using the same unique pattern A is better than B, C, and anything else, can be found in (ibid.) p. 39, line 89; p. 46, lines 159–160, and see also Prov. 27:3. See also S. Yona, “Shared stylistic patterns in the Aramaic proverbs of Ahiqar and Hebrew wisdom,” in ANES 44 (2007), pp. 29–49. 4 In the Syriac version of Ahiqar (translated into English in 1913 and into Hebrew in 1937; see n. 22), there is a group of ten “better” proverbs, which are similar in content and structure to “better” proverbs from Ecclesiastes and Proverbs; a few of them will be mention below. 5 For example (20:31, all examples are taken from: P.S. Skehan and A.A. di Lella, The Wisdom of Ben Sira (AB) (New York: Doubleday, 1987): “Better the one who hides his folly than the one who hides his wisdom.” In Sir. 40:18–26 we fĳind 10 consecutive verses which use the “better” pattern. 6 Prov. 3:14, 8:10, 8:11, 8:19a, 12:9, 15:16, 15:17, 16:8, 16:16a, 17:1, 19:1, 21:9, 21:19, 25:7, 25:24, 27:5, 27:10, 28:6 and 8:10b, 8:19b, 16:16b; Eccl. 3:22a, 4:6, 4:9, 4:13, 5:4, 6:3b, 6:9, 7:1, 7:2, 7:3, 7:5, 7;8, 7:10. In Prov. 21:3 and 22:1 word ‘better’ is replaced with the words ‘rather than’. In Prov. 3:15a the word ‘better’ is replaced with the word ‘precious’. In Eccl. 10:1a the word ‘better’ is replaced with the word ‘precious’, and in Eccl. 2:24, 3:12, 3:22, 8:15 we fĳind diffferent types of the “better” pattern that use the words ‘not/nothing better’. Some of the variations will be discussed further on.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17 (2014) 27–40 22 the “better” proverb in rabbinic literature 29

“Are not Ephraim’s gleanings better than Abiezer’s vintage?” Similarly, Exod. 14:12 states: 6 . 2 5 3 : 2 2 5 . 2 4 8 0 6 !2 “Indeed it is better for us to serve the Egyptians than to die in the wilderness.”7 1 Sam. 15:22b offfers: Q5 8 . $3 2 2 3 4 %3 3 2 &. 5 %. 5 '42 “Certainly, obedience is better than sacrifĳice; com- pliance than the fat of rams.” The deep structure of this proverb is “Obedience is better than the fat of rams.”8 It appears that in the “better” proverb, as with many other rhetorical devices, biblical prose narrative borrowed and made use of rhetorical devices that orig- inated in poetry. This supports the idea, demonstrated on more than one occasion, that biblical prose is closer to biblical poetry than had been thought a few generations ago.9 Most scholars who have considered the “better” proverb, such as Zimmerli, Hermisson, Bryce, Ogden, Paran, Yona, Forti, and Fox,10 have dealt with its two main forms, which will be explained below. However, a deeper examination of the phenomenon suggests that there are other types of “better” proverb that

7 In this verse we fĳind a comparison between death in the desert to slavery in Egypt. Normally death is considered to be worse than slavery. On the other hand, in this verse the desert, representing the freedom and the independence of the Jewish people after long years as slaves, is preferred to Egypt, which represents the suppression of Jacob’s sons. Apparently, the desert was usually preferable to Egypt but the fear of death tilts the scale in this case in favor of slavery in Egypt. In Ozar Midrashim (ed. J.D. Eisenstein, New York: Eisenstein, 1915), p. 513, Rabbeinu HaKadosh, Perek HaShmona, there is a list of eight situations that are worse than death, including exile, poverty and bereavement. This is to say that sometimes death is not considered to be the worst thing. 8 Similar ideas can be found in Hos. 6:1; Ps. 40:7; Prov. 15:8; Eccl. 4:1; Jer. 7:22–23; Amos 5:21–25. 9 See, for example, J.L. Kugel, The Idea of Biblical Poetry (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981); M. Paran, Forms of the Priestly Style in the Pentateuch (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1989) [Heb.]. 10 W. Zimmerli, “Zur Strukter der alttestamentlichen Weisheit”, in ZAW 61 (1933), p. 192; H.J. Hermisson, Studien zur israelitischen Spruchweisheit (WMANT), (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag des Erziehungsvereins, 1968), pp. 155–56; G.E. Bryce, “ ‘Better’- Proverbs: An Historical and Structural Study,” in L.C. McGaughy, ed., SBL Book of Seminar Papers, (Missoula: Scholars Press, 1972), pp. 343–354; idem., A Legacy of Wisdom, (Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press, 1979), pp. 71–75, 223, n. 31; G.S. Ogden, “The “Better”-Proverb (Tôb-Spruch), Rhetorical Criticism, and Qoheleth,” in JBL 96, 4 (1977), pp. 489–505; idem., Qoheleth (Shefffĳield: JSOT Press, 1987), pp. 99–110; Paran (see n. 9); S. Yona, “Rhetorical features in Talmudic literature,” in HUCA 77 (2006), pp. 76–77; T. Forti, Animal Imagery in the Book of Proverbs (Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2008), pp. 152–153; Fox (see n. 2) pp. 488–489, 595–598, 939. See also C.L. Seow, Ecclesiastes (AB) (New York: Doubleday, 1997), pp. 185–192, 240–251.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17 (2014) 27–40 23 30 pasternak and yona developed over the course of time and that are found primarily in Rabbinic literature. What characteristics defĳine the “better” proverb? By-and-large, as noted already by Hermisson and Ogden,11 the pattern is A is better than B and A + B are better than C + D.12 In most cases, the comparative adjective “better” (‘tov’) is followed by the prefĳixed particlem . Most of the time the word “better” appears at the beginning of the fĳirst clause of the aphorism, and the pre- fĳixed particlem at the beginning of the second clause. However, infrequently, as in Eccl. 6:3 and 9:4b, the two elements appear together.13 Moreover, in many examples, such as Prov. 3:15a and 21:3,14 other comparative adjectives appear in place of “better,” while in some cases, for example, Eccl. 8:15, we fĳind the expression ‘eyn tov’ (not better).15 Infrequently, as in Eccl. 4:2,16 the pattern appears without the comparative adjective at all. Notwithstanding all that we have stated, we can fĳind isolated biblical verses in which there are “better” proverbs that deviate slightly from the patterns listed by Hermisson. Thus, for example, the pattern “A is better than something

11 See Hermisson (see n. 10), pp. 155–156; Ogden, “The ‘Better’-Proverb (Tôb-Spruch), Rhetorical Criticism, and Qoheleth” (see n. 10), pp. 490, 492–494. 12 Irregular cases can be found in Eccl. 7:2, 7:5 in the pattern: A + B is better than A + C; in Eccl. 5:4 the article is built in a model of A is better than B + C; in Eccl. 4:3 which refers to the pervious verse which uses the model of A is better than B and C and in Eccl. 6:3 in which the order of presentation has changed to the model of B is better than A. In this example there is a comparison between stillborn, fetus or dead offfspring, and a living human being, while listing fĳive diffferent activities related to the living human. Ogden believes this is a unique example of this structure. In Qoheleth Rabbah 4:1, there are a few comparisons, listings three and four activities accompanying one of the organs or both of them. In Lev. Rab. 3:1, we can fĳind another saying which build upon the “better proverb” pattern with complex comparison: “Better is the one who has a vegetable patch and who fertilizes it and hoes and make a living from it than one who goes and undertakes to share-crop the plot of others for half the harvest.” See Ogden, “The ‘Better’-Proverb (Tôb-Spruch), Rhetorical Criticism, and Qoheleth” (see n. 10), pp. 492–493. 13 Eccl. 6:3: “If a man beget a hundred children, and live many years, so that the days of his years are many, but his soul have not enough of good, and moreover he have no burial; I say, that an untimely birth is better than he;” Eccl. 9:4b: “a living dog is better than a dead lion.” 14 Prov. 3:15a: “She is more precious than rubies.” Prov. 21:3: “To do righteousness and justice is more acceptable to the Lord than sacrifĳice.” 15 See G.S. Ogden, “Qoheleth’s Use of the ‘Nothing Is Better’ Form,” in JBL 98, 3 (1979), pp. 339–350. 16 Eccl. 4:2: “Wherefore I praised the dead that are already dead more than the living that are yet alive.”

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17 (2014) 27–40 24 the “better” proverb in rabbinic literature 31 else” appears in the Bible mostly in the negative form using the expression “Not better,” as in Eccl. 3:22a: (6 0 5 . 6 6 %6 5 . 2 4 0 *3 3 ! 2 2 2 6(. “I saw that there is nothing better for a person than that one should enjoy one’s possessions.” And in the pattern: “A is better than something else,” where the something else belongs to a specifĳic group of objects, we fĳind the following (Prov. 8:11b): +6 (. 2 8 2 6 % 0 ,6 (. “And all possessions cannot be compared to it” where “it,” of course, is wisdom. In the verses in which we fĳind the compound pattern A + B is better than C + D, the aphorism will always begin with the assertion that C is worth more or is more important than A, and it will continue with the assertion that B is worth more or is more important than D. Because of the greater status of B, it will follow that the entities or qualities mentioned in the fĳirst half of the aphorism (A +B) will be better than the entities or qualities mentioned in the second half of the aphorism (C + D).17 This explains the aphorism at Prov. 17:1: - 5 2 %3 . 2 3 6 25 +2 6 (6. 5 ( . 6 3%0 “Better is a dry crust with peace than a house full of feasting with strife.” The dry bread (A) is not by its nature preferable to a large amount (a full house) of choice and fatty meat (C). However, peace (B) is preferable to strife (D). The superiority of peace turns the dry crust, which is accompanied by peace, to something preferable to juicy meat eaten in the midst of strife.18

1 The “Better” Proverb in Rabbinic Literature

In Rabbinic literature in the widest sense the authors of proverbs were not bound by the previously enumerated rhetorical norms. Consequently, the authors of Rabbinic sayings lent to their proverbs greater variety in choice of words, syntax, style, and ideas. In other words, change and variety may be expressed both in the vocabulary of comparison and in the content of the comparison, which deviate dramatically from the fĳixed patterns found in biblical literature. The contents of the sayings also change from the contents of biblical

17 Fox (see n. 2), p. 597. 18 The term ‘ziḇhey riḇ’ (feasting with strife) is likely not related to sacrifĳices, and it contains half of C (house full of sacrifĳice), that is, a large amount of meat, and D which means contention and quarrel. Fox and others pointed out the resemblance between the verse and Amenemope 9.7–8 [cf. AEL vol. 2, p. 152].This resemblance reinforces the hypothesis that the verse does not deal with sacrifĳices. Fox, (see n. 2), pp. 623–624 and there further bibliography.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17 (2014) 27–40 25 32 pasternak and yona proverbs. For instance, we fĳind in Rabbinic literature “better” sayings in which two objects in daily use are contrasted. B. Ber. 44b is typical:

(. .& / 0(0

Better is an egg that is slightly roasted than six measures of semolina.19

This proverb contrasts the nutritional value of a soft boiled egg with that of six measures of semolina. This proverb is built upon the developed pattern A + B is better than C + D. Naturally, it is easier to identify the “better” proverb form in sayings that are based upon one of the two structures of “better” proverbs found in Hebrew Scripture, described above. The more a proverb is nuanced and distanced from the basic biblical structures, the harder it is to identify it. In fact, one often fĳinds in Rabbinic literature “better” sayings that feature not a single one of the characteristics of the biblical “better” proverbs. That is, in some sayings the word tov is replaced by another word, and the structure of the saying is not A is better than B or A + B are better than C + D. Still we can defĳine these sayings as developments of the biblical “better” proverbs. As we will see later on, the rabbis did not hesitate to change the basic patterns of this rhetorical device. They not only duplicate the biblical patterns but also develop and improve them. One of the things we learn from examining this process is that, contrary to widely held notions about Rabbinic literature vis-à-vis Hebrew Scripture, the rabbis contribute not only new ideas but also new literary devices, which inform us of the yet to be explored interest of and contribution of the rabbis to the realm of aesthetics. After discussing the “better” proverb in the Bible and in the Near Eastern literature, we will demonstrate the rabbinic use of this rhetorical device. First we present “better” proverbs that are structurally identical, or almost identical, to their parallels in the Bible, but which are not based upon biblical usages of the “better” proverb.20 Then we shall present “better” aphorisms that exhibit obvious features of stylistic or lexical divergence from the biblical patterns.

19 The text is according to MS Paris 671. On this aphorism see S. Yona (see n. 10), pp. 76–77; A.R. Pasternak, “New Jar Full of Old:” Biblical Rhetorical Features in Rabbinic Literature (Heb.; M.A. Thesis, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, 2010), p. 111. 20 Two aphorisms which are based upon biblical use of the “better” proverb can be found in T. Hul. 2:17: “R. Meir says: ‘It is better that you should not vow, than that you should vow and not pay—best of all is that you should not vow at all’. R. Judah says: ‘It is better that you should not vow, than that you should vow and not pay—Better than either is

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17 (2014) 27–40 26 the “better” proverb in rabbinic literature 33

2 Sophisticated Comparison in a Rabbinic Saying Based upon Models of Comparative Proverbs found in Scripture

The fĳirst example to support our thesis is found in Ecclesiastes Rabbah 4 (Vilna edition):

21*% * , %

Better is one tied bird than a hundred flying birds.

This proverb is based upon the model A (one bird) + B (trapped) is better than C (a hundred birds) + D (flying). The proverb is quoted in the framework of a discussion concerning Eccl. 4:6:

P 5 . 6 6 25 . % 6 8 . 2 %5 26 , 5 8 .

Better is a handful of gratifĳication than two fĳistfuls of labor that is pursuit of wind.

There are many variations on this proverb in Rabbinic literature and beyond it. Midrash Zuta Qoheleth 4 (ed. S. Buber) quotes a slightly diffferent form of this proverb:

*%( % %

Better is one bird in a trap than a hundred flying birds.

he who brings his lamb to the courtyard and lays his hands on it and slaughters it’.” Both aphorisms are based on Eccl. 5:4: “Better is it that thou shouldest not vow, than that thou shouldest vow and not pay.” It is easy to see the development of the pattern from A (do not vow) is better than B (to vow) + C (and not pay), to A (do not vow) is better than B (to vow) + C (and not pay) and D (do not vow at all/to vow and pay your vow) is better than both of them. In R. Judah’s saying there is, probably, en error (omitting of the word ‘pay’, and in some versions of the words ‘it is better that you should not vow, than that you should vow and not pay’). The distorted saying, especially in the fĳirst version without the word ‘pay’, is unreasonable, and in our opinion in this case, like many other cases in the bible and in Rabbinic literature, a rhetorical pattern can help us to identify the original version of the text. 21 The text is according to MS Vatican 291/11. According to Buber the word ‘ ,’, tied, should be replaced by the word ‘ %’, in a trap. See S. Buber, Midrash Zuta (Lvov, 1895), p. 126, n. 12.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17 (2014) 27–40 27 34 pasternak and yona

It appears that the diffference between the two forms of the proverb is purely a matter of style. In the Syriac version of Ahiqar we fĳind a series of aphorisms that express the same message; one of them is identical to our Rabbinic aphorism:

(My son), better is a drumstick in thy hand than a wing [?] in the pot of other people; And better is a sheep that is at hand than a heifer that is far offf . . . And better one sparrow in thy hand than a thousand on the wing.22

The message of these proverbs is identical: better is a small thing (A, one bird) your possession/ trap (B) than a large quantity (C, many birds) that you are not certain will come into your possession (D, they are flying).23 In B. Hag. 10a we fĳind:

24& % %

Better is one spicy pepper than an entire basket of pumpkins.

That is to say, a small amount of a vegetable (A) of high quality (B) is better than a large quantity (C) of poor quality or lacking in distinction (D). In other words, there is an advantage to the pepper because it adds taste to the cooked dish. Other examples appear in Avot de-Rabbi Nathan A, 1:50:

25(( (( % / (

Better a fence ten handbreadths high (A) that stands (B) than one a hundred handbreadths high (C) that falls down (D).

22 The text and translation by F.C. Conybeare, J.R. Harris and A.S. Lewis, The Story of Ahikar (Cambridge: University Press, 1913). A diffferent translation can be found in A. Yellin, The Book of Ahikar the Wise (Jerusalem: Ha-Ma’arav, 1937, 2nd ed.) [Heb.]. Yellin (p. 61) noted the similarity between the words of Ahiqar and the aphorism in Qoheleth Rabbah. 23 One should note the similarity between the aphorisms in discussion and some of Aesop’s Fables, especially the fable about the Lion and the Hare. See S.A. Handford, Fables of Aesop, (Melbourne: Penguin Books, 1954), p. 22; S. Span, Aesopi Fabulae (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1960), pp. 10–11 [Heb.]. 24 The text is according to MS Vatican 134. 25 The text is according to MS Oxford Opp. 95.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17 (2014) 27–40 28 the “better” proverb in rabbinic literature 35

B. B.Q. 111a:

( ( *

It is better [for a woman] to dwell as two than to dwell in widowhood.

Mekhilta according to Rabbi Ishmael, Bahodesh 10:11:

% 00 / ( /0 / / ( ( ( / (

You are more precious to Israel than the sun’s orb. You are more precious to Israel than the gift of rain. You are more precious to Israel than a father or a mother.

There are many more such examples in Rabbinic literature.

3 Development of the Pattern: Changes in the Structure and Change in the Comparative Adjective

3.1 A is Better than B + C Leviticus Rabbah (Margulies) Parashah A (1:16 ; 32:5 in Margulies):

26( ( ( * / (,% ) % ,

As for every disciple of the wise who has no knowledge, the carcass of an animal is better than he.

26 The whole unit is missing in most Lev. Rab. manuscripts, and it is an addition originating at Seder Eliyahu Rab. A version almost identical to this aphorism can be found at Yalkut Shimoni, Lev., 429. A similar version, which may be the original, can be found at Eliyahu Rab., 7 saying: “every disciple of the wise without knowledge, an animal is better offf.” Literally, it seems the statement derives from a discussion in Avot de-Rabbi Nathan (A 13; B 22) recommending “hate offfĳice holding,” in which a disciple of the wise is compared with a carcass. See M. Margulies, Midrash Wayyikra Rabbah (Jerusalem: Ministry of Education and Culture of Israel, 1953), pp. 32–33 [Heb.]; M. Kadushin, A Conceptual Commentary on Midrash Leviticus Rabbah, (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987), p. 8; S. Schechter, Avot de-Rabbi Natan (New York: Feldheim, 1967), p. 46.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17 (2014) 27–40 29 36 pasternak and yona

This saying compares in an unusual manner a disciple of the sages who has no knowledge and the carcass of an animal. The far-reaching conclusion appears to be hyperbolic. In its context, the saying means that a disciple of the Rabbinic sages whose ethical behavior and manners are wanting is not a genuine disciple of the wise. The carcass of an animal has greater merit than he. The saying exhibits a number of innovations with respect to the biblical models of the “better” proverb. First of all, the biblical word tov, which is generally found in Scripture, is replaced by the comparative expression tovah hey- menu. Second is the use of the pattern according to which A (the disciple of the wise) + B (who has no knowledge) is less worthy than C (carcass). Now if we turn around the order of the elements in this Rabbinic aphorism to the norma- tive order of the “better” proverb in Scripture, so that the better thing appears at the beginning of the proverb, we arrive at the pattern A (carcass) is better than B (disciple of the wise) + C (who has no knowledge). Finally, the words of comparison are found in this last Rabbinic aphorism at the end or next to the end, unlike where they appear in the Bible, almost always at the beginning of the verse or in the middle of the verse.

3.2 A is Better than B and Better than C Geneis Rabbati, Lekh Lekha, reads:

27/ *( ( * %

More precious is circumcision than the Torah and the Sabbath.

According to the literal meaning of these words the importance of circumcision is greater than that of the Torah and the Sabbath. The comparison word tov is replaced by havivah, and the preposition min is repeated twice, before each of the items compared to circumcision.28

27 The aphorism is according to C. Albeck’s edition (see n. 28). 28 The saying, relatively new, appears to have been influenced by previous discussion about the deferral of the Shabbat for circumcision (M. Shab. 19, 2; B. Pes. 66a, etc.), and especially from the discussion in the Y. (Vilna), Ned. 3, 9: / (( ( / / 5( %( ( (/ (( , 0, (&/ / 6( ( / ( % (0 ( ( * ( ( 0 ( ( (/ ( (0 %/ ( %. According to the Yerushalmi, the commandment of Shabbat is as important as any other commandment in the Torah and still, it is set aside for the commandment of circumcision. See C. Albeck, Berešit Rabbati, (Jerusalem: Mekize Nirdamim, 1940), p. 74. [Heb.]

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17 (2014) 27–40 30 the “better” proverb in rabbinic literature 37

3.3 A is Better than Any Specifĳic Thing Another development in the “better” proverb in Rabbinic literature is the pattern A is better than anything, sometimes from among a specifĳic group of things and sometimes among all things. This development is sometimes expressed in a positive manner and sometimes in the negative, by means of the word eyn with the addition of the comparative adjective. B. Shab. 23a offfers:

2! ()(4# )(3 2*&)#.#)#*(3&% 2! ()(4# )(3 #&)#.#)#*(3&% 2! ()(4# )(3)3, #&)#.#)#*3,&% 30'& %(.# 29-"*-23 #&)#.#)#.23&%

All types of oil are fĳine for the lamp and olive oil is preferable. All types of oil are fĳine for ink and olive oil is preferable. All types of soot are fĳine for ink and soot of olive oil is preferable. All types of resin are suitable for ink and balsam resin is better than any of them.

In the fĳirst two aphorisms there is a comparison between olive oil and other oils. Using the comparative words min hamuvhar creates a model whereby A (olive oil) is better than any other oil there is. The third aphorism is built in the same way, comparing the smoke of burning olive oil to the smoke of any other burning oils. The fourth and fĳinal aphorism compares the diffferent types of resin. This aphorism, like the three that precede it in the literary unit, is also built upon the model A (resin, balsam) is better than any other resins, using the comparative words yafffe mikkulam.

29 It appears that the nataf, kataf and cheri are all the same (in some manuscripts they are used alternatively), and are all diffferent names for the persimmon fruit growing in the Dead Sea area (not related to the modern persimmon). R. Shimon believes (B. Kritut 6a): “the cheri is nothing but resin from the kataf trees.” Rashi, in his commentary on B. Shab. 23a, s.v. ‘kataf ’, identifĳied the ‘kataf ’ with the wild plum ‘prunil’. Ramban in his commentary on Exod. 30:34, s.v. ‘nataf ’ identifĳied cheri‘ ’ with resin, a kind of oil dripping from the persimmon tree, and called by sages ‘kataf ’. J. Felix, Maroth Hamishnah, (Jerusalem: Midrash Bnei Tzion, 1967), p. 125 [Heb.], identifĳied kataf with the balsam tree, and Z. Amar, The Book of Incense, (Tel Aviv: Eretz, 2002), pp. 58–75 [Heb.], and especially on p. 59, presents a similar opinion. 30 The text is according to MS Munich 95, except “All types of soot are fĳine for ink and soot of olive oil is preferable” (which are missing in MS Munich 95) that are according to MS Vatican 127.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17 (2014) 27–40 31 38 pasternak and yona

We can detect a guiding hand when we look at the entire unit. The order of the sentences in this unit is not random. The author or redactor begins with two sayings that deal with oil, and he attaches to them two additional sayings that deal with ink. The author or redactor could have arranged these four sentences in any order he wanted, but he chose this order, in our opinion, deliberately in order to create a structure, which if written out as poetry has the appearance of a geometric fĳigure as follows:

Oil Oil Ink Ink Ink

The use of graphic images in Rabbinic aphorisms to convey information31 is another piece of evidence that at least some literary structures within Rabbinic literature were created to be read silently and observed, and they were not created orally. As we shall see later, the last sentence in the unit under discussion uses different comparative words that distinguish it from the other sayings. The order of the sayings in this unit could have been diffferent, and we would like to suggest that this order is deliberate. The fĳirst aphorism deals with oils that are suitable for the Hanukkah lights. The following three aphorisms discuss the various components of ink. We can see the same opening formula in all four aphorisms (“All types of X are fĳine for . . .”). Indeed, the repetition of the formula “All types of X are fĳine for . . .” constitutes anaphora, a device by which prosaic information is converted into poetry. In addition, the fourth aphorism exhibits the phenomenon called concluding deviation.32 This refers to the rhetorical device of setting apart the last part of a verse or pericope from the other parts by changing the order of the words,

31 With regard to geometric patterns in Rabbinic sayings, see Yona (see note 10), pp. 98–100. 32 Another example of the concluding deviation, in this case by changing to words order, can be found in Avot 3:13: R. Akiva said: Laughter and levity accustom (a man) to lewdness. Tithes are a fence for Torah Vows are a fence for sanctity A fence for wisdom is silence. For further discussion of this rhetorical feature see Yona (see n. 10), pp. 95–98; Paran (see n. 9) pp. 179–237.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17 (2014) 27–40 32 the “better” proverb in rabbinic literature 39 the number of the words, the place of the verb, etc. In this unit the comparative words min hamuvhar are replaced by the words yafffe mikkulam.

3.4 A is Better than Any Specifĳic Thing (Negative Form) An example of a negative comparison can be found in Mekhilta according to Rabbi Ishmael, Beshalah, Vayehi 6:33

/ ,( (/ / (/ * ( 7&(/( (( 6 *

Nothing is more disgusting and abominable than a bull when he is eating grass.

The saying is structured as “A (bull) + B (when he is eating grass) is good,” or, in this instance specifĳically, “not good,” as indicated by the comparative language: “there is nothing more disgusting and abominable than.” By way of conclusion, we supply an example of a Rabbinic saying that is built upon the pattern of the “better” proverb but that deviates from the biblical usage of this pattern in its purpose. In Sifre Deut. Ekev, 43, we read:34

%&( ( (% ,/( / ( 6 &( 8/ ( 9 ,( ( , , ( ., / ( 6 *,( / (% % , / *& (/(

We learn that the corpse of Jehoiakim king of Judah that was thrown to the heat during the day and to the cold during the night was greater than the life of Jehoiachin the king of Judah whose throne was exalted over the thrones of all the other kings and who ate and drank in the kings’ reception hall.

The aphorism unquestionably was influenced by Jer. 22:10, 36:30b and 2 Kgs. 24:8–25:30. According to the Rabbinic aphorism, the corpse of Jehoiakim (A), which was not buried but thrown to the heat during the day and to the cold

33 The text is cited according to the Venice Edition (1546) with slightly diffference: the word ‘ (/’, he, instead of ‘ /’, she, which is also the version in the Horovitz-Rabin edition. The aphorism, usually within the whole unit, appears in other rabbinical publications such as Shir Ha-Shirim Rab., 1 (Vilna edition); Ruth Rab., 7 (Vilna edition), and frequently. 34 The text is according to the Venice Edition (1546).

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17 (2014) 27–40 33 40 pasternak and yona during the night (B), is better than the life of Jehoiachin (C), who ate in the palace of the king of Babylon (D). It is clear that life (C) is better than death (A), and feasting by kings (D) is better than the abuse that Jehoiakim’s corpse sufffered (B). This is to say that according to the literal meaning of this rabbinic text, A is not better than C, and B is not better than D. Therefore A + B together cannot be of greater value than C + D. As we mentioned earlier, when one uses the compound pattern (A + B is better than C + D), C is always worth more or is more important than A, and B is always worth more or is more important than D. In this case C is worth more or is more important than A, but B isn’t worth more or isn’t more important than D. It seems that the author of this saying tried to illustrate how hard and awful was the exile and for that reason he made an extreme comparison between the suffferings of Jehoiakim’s corpse and the life of Jehoiachin in the palace of the Babylonian king. In other words, the view that the Exile was a punishment greater than any other punishment, including death, led to the prioritization of Jehoiakim’s corpse over Jehoiachin’s life. It seems that the author of this saying was familiar with the “better” proverb’s “rules.” However, in this case he made a deliberate deviation from the common rhetorical pattern in order to express the severity of the exile.35

4 Conclusion

The “better” proverb was fĳirst examined over a century ago. Most of the scholarly attention has been on the use wisdom literature made of this pattern. However, it appears that one should reexamine the pattern in light of its repeated use both in wisdom literature and beyond it in other biblical genres. In respect to the Rabbinic literature, this pattern, like many others found both in Hebrew Scripture and in Rabbinic literature, has not yet been treated to an in-depth study, and we hope that the present discussion may be the tur- tledove that announces the coming of spring. In our discussion we examined some of the forms of the “better” proverb in the Bible, in the ancient Near East, and in Rabbinic literature, emphasizing the variegated uses of the pattern—stylistic, lexical and content—in the course of the long period when Rabbinic sages made use of this and its sub-patterns.

35 See R. Hammer, Sifrei, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986), p. 414, n. 33; J. Neusner, Sifre to Deuteronomy, vol. 1 (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1987), p. 145.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17 (2014) 27–40 34 Concatenation in Ancient Near East literature, in Hebrew Scripture and in Rabbinic literature Ariel-Ram Pasternak Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer- Sheva 84105 Israel [email protected] Shamir Yona Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer- Sheva 84105 Israel [email protected] Abstract: In this paper we follow the development of concatenation, from its early use in Ancient Near Eastern literature, through its use in the Hebrew Bible and in the Hebrew Ben-Sira and ultimately to the use of this rhetorical phenomenon in Rabbinic literature. We demonstrate that the Rabbis adopted this rhetorical pattern for stylistic purposes and also used it as an editing device. The latter use of the rhetorical device in question is only rarely attested in the Hebrew Bible.

Introduction

The Phenomenon

One of the prominent rhetorical patterns of repetition employed in ancient Near East literature, in Hebrew Scripture, and in Rabbinic literature in the widest sense is anadiplosis, which is also known as concatenation, the Terrace Pattern, or Shirshur in Hebrew.1 Indeed, anadiplosis is one of the most widely attested forms of repetition employed in biblical poetry and elsewhere. In this pattern a linguistic element, be it a word or a group of words, appears at the end of a given stich, verset or verse, and it is repeated at the beginning of the following stich, verset, or verse. In some cases the repeated word will appear in construct state, and in some cases a word or two might appear between the repeating words.

is not (’שלשול‘ and his Counterpart Shilshul, in Hebrew) ’שרשור’,1The origin of the Hebrew name Shirshur clear. Rabbi Moses Hayyim Luzzatto (1707-1746) in his book ‘Leshon Limmudim’, Chapter Seven, calls it in Hebrew, or in Latin ‘Reduplicatio’. According to Aloni, Mandelkern was the 'כפל קושר' ,’bound doubling‘ first modern scholar that wrote about Anadiplosis and Zulay, in his book Piyute Yannay, was the first one who to note the connection between the different sentences. However, it is 'שרשר' used the verb ŠŘŠŘ, or in Hebrew in ’שרשרת‘ ,’clear that the word ‘Shirshur’ developed from the biblical word (Exod. 28:14, 39:15) ‘chain Hebrew. These verbs were frequently used in Rabbinic literature (T. Shab. 5:4; M. Yeb. 16:3; B. Shab. 147a etc,) in Rashi’s commentary and later on. See M.H. Luzzatto, Leshon Limmudim (Mantova, 1726), pp. 41a-41b [Heb.]; N. Aloni, “Anadiplosis in the Bible,” in Beit Mikra 7 (1959), pp. 3-13 [Heb.]; S. Mandelkern, “Perek Be-Shir,” in Otsar Ha-Sifrut 2 (1888), pp.365-367 [Heb.]; M. Zulay, Piyute Yannai (Berlin: Shoken, 1938), p. 428 [Heb.].

53 A well-known example of anadiplosis, in this case with precise repetition of the noun “my help,” ‘ezrî, can be found in Ps. 121:1-2:

שִׁיר לַמַעֲלֹות אֶשָּׂא עֵינַי אֶל הֶהָּׂרִׁ ים מֵַאיִׁן יָּׂבֹא עֶזְרִ י עֶזְרִ י מֵעִׁם ה' עֹשֵה שָּׂמַיִׁם וָָּׂארֶ ץ A Song of Ascents I turn my eyes to the mountains from where will my help come My help comes from the LORD, maker of heaven and earth. In some cases, like the previous example, the linguistic element is repeated verbatim, while in others the linguistic element reappears with morphological variations. Sometimes a word intervenes between the repeated elements and slightly impairs the concatenation. Typical of the latter phenomenon is Ps. 72:13: יָּׂחֹס עַל דַל ו אֶבְיוֹן ו נַפְשוֹת אֶבְיוֹנִים יֹושִׁיעַ 2 He cares about the poor and needy He brings the needy deliverance.

Previous Study

Anadiplosis has been studied at great length from the time of Rabbi Moses Hayyim Luzzatto until now. Some of the scholars who have studied the phenomenon in its biblical use in recent times are König,3 Aloni,4 Bendavid,5Yelin,6 Watson,7 O’Connor,8 Sivan,9 Avishur,10 and

2In this verse the Anadiplosis is a part of Construct-State Expression. The repetition in construct-state expressions is a widespread phenomenon in the Bible and in other texts from the Ancient Near East. For further discussion see S. Yona, The Many Faces of Repetition (Beer Sheva: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press, 2013), pp. 75-76 [Heb.] and n. 30 in this paper. 3 E. König, Stilistik, Rhetorik, Poetik in Bezug auf die biblische litteratur (Leipzig: Th. Weicher, 1900), pp. 300- 304. 4Aloni (see n. 1), pp. 6-12. 5 A. Bendavid, Biblical Hebrew and Mishnaic Hebrew, Vol. 2 (Tel Aviv: Dvir, 1971), pp. 866-869 [Heb.] 6D. Yellin, Writings of David Yellin, vol. 6 (Jerusalem: R. Mass, 1983), pp. 215-217[Heb.]. 7W.G.E. Watson, Classical Hebrew Poetry (Sheffield: Journal for the study of the Old Testament Press, 1984), pp. 208-213. 8M. O’Connor, “The Pseudosorites: A type of Paradox in Hebrew Verse,” in (ed. E.R. Follis) Directions in Biblical Hebrew Poetry (Journal for the Study of the Old Testament, Supplement series, 40), 1987, pp.161-172. 9D. Sivan and S. Yona, “Style and syntax: pivotal use of extrapositional syntagms in Biblical Hebrew,” in Ugarit-Forschungen 26 (1994), pp. 443-444; idem., “Pivot words or expressions in Biblical Hebrew and in Ugaritic poetry,” in Vetus Testamentum 48, 3 (1998), pp. 399-401. 10Y. Avishur, The Repetition and the Parallelism in Biblical and Canaanite Poetry (Tel-Aviv: Archeological Center Publication, 2002), pp. 26, 231-239 [Heb.].

53 Yona.11 Unfortunately, some of the aforementioned scholars, and other scholars who dealt with Anadiplosis mixed in different types of repetition and included irrelevant examples from the Bible.12 Here we will discuss only examples that include “pure” Anadiplosis, that is, repetition of a word or a group of words at the end of a verse, stich, etc., and at the beginning of the next verse, stich, etc.13

Most of the scholars mentioned above dealt with the biblical use of this phenomenon, and only few pay attentions to the Rabbinic use of the anadiplosis. Among those few we should mention: Mirski,14 Fischel,15 Walfish,16 Tropper,17 Bar-Ilan,18 Yona19 and Pasternak.20

11Yona (see n. 2), p. 20, n. 9. 12Paul, in his commentary to Amos, argued that there is Concatenation in the first seven oracles against the nations of Aram, Philistia, Tyre, Edom, Ammon, Moab and Judah (Amos 1:3-2:3). Although some words and phrases are repeated twice or more in this unit, while creating a connection between the prophecies, in all the examples mentioned by Paul, we cannot find Anadiplosis. Likewise, Reich recognized, according to her own words, “Associative Anadiplosis” in Eccl.11:2-12:5, where we can find repetition of words in different parts of the verses, and not in the end of a verse and again in the beginning of the next verse. Aloni recognize Anadiplosis in Is. 24:3-20 where the word ‘earth’ repeated fifteen times but does not create Anadiplosis. Walfish includes different types of repetition in is discussion on the Anadiplosis in the Mishnah, and Tropper, based on Walfish, does the same in his discussion about the Anadiplosis in Tractate Avot. In most of the examples mentioned by the scholars we just referred to, we can find different types of repetition that might create resemblance or even, in a way, connections between different verses or pericopae but does not have influence on the syntax or on the style of the text. In the examples that we will discuss later on we will see the contribution of the Anadiplosis to the syntax, style and sometimes on our understanding of the text. That is to say that, literally speaking, not every word repetition creates Anadiplosis, and not every word repetition shows the influence of the Anadiplosis. See M. Paul, “Amos 1:3-2:3: A Concatenous Literary Pattern,” in JBL 90, 4 (1971), pp. 397-403; idem., Amos (Mikra le-Israel) (Tel Aviv: Am Oved, 1994), pp. 28-30 [Heb.]; R. Reich, “literal Anadiplosis in the book of Qoheleth,” Beit Mikra 36, 1 (1990), pp. 94-96 [Heb.]; Aloni (see n.1), p. 9, n.50; A.D. Tropper, Wisdom, politics, and historiography (Oxford [England]: Oxford University Press, 2004), pp. 38-39; A. Walfish, “Literary Phenomena in the Mishnah and their Editorial and Ideological Significance,” (Heb. M.A. Thesis, Hebrew University, Jerusalem, 1994), pp. 101-105; idem., the Literary Method of Redaction in Mishnah based on Tractate Rosh Hashanah (Heb. PhD Diss. Hebrew University, Jerusalem, 2001), pp. 88-85, 337-342, and the discussions at: Avishur (see n.10), pp. 231-233; Yona (see n. 2), p. 72, n. 171. 13In some cases a word or two might interfere between the repeated elements, in most cases as a result of syntax needs, but the connection between the repeating elements will be easy to notice. We can find example or :in Hebrew in Exod. 22:21-22 ”שרשור מופרע“ disturb Anadiplosis,” or“ כָּׂלַאל מָּׂנָּׂהו יָּׂתֹום ֹלא תְעַּנּון אִׁם עַּנֵּה תְעַּנֶה אֹתֹו כִׁי אִׁםצָּׂעֹק יִׁצ עַק אֵלַי שָּׂמֹעַ אֶש מַע צַעֲקָּׂתֹו You shall not ill-treat any widow or orphan If you do mistreat them, I will heed their outcry as soon as they cry out to Me. ',תענון ענה תענה’,’or 'if thou’ in the English translation, stands between the repeated words ‘afflict ,’אם‘ The word in Hebrew. Nevertheless, the Concatenation in these verses is well noticed. The only exception in this paper will be in the last part of our discussion where we will deal with few examples from Rabbinic literature, in which a verse or part of it divide the repeating words while disrupting the Anadiplosis. For the record we have to mention that most translations cannot mimic all the rhetorical devices that are present in the original texts. In our discussion we will deal with the original texts, most of them in Hebrew, and the rhetorical features that had been used in these texts. 14A. Mirsky, “The Origin of the Anadiplosis in Hebrew Literature,” in Tarbiz 28, 2 (1959), pp. 171-178 [Heb.]. In his paper Mirsky discusses the development of the Anadiplosis from the tannaitic period to the medieval period and show that in some cases the editing of units or even entire chapters of the Mishnah was made in chiastic order that sometimes also includes Anadiplosis. Mirsky does not mention in his article the use of

53 The Importance and Purpose of Anadiplosis

The great importance of the phenomenon in question is found both in the realm of phonology, because of the effect of the assonance created by the juxtaposed elements, and in the realm of syntax, especially with respect to the order of words in the respective clauses. It has been long recognized that one of the factors that determines the importance of a word is its place in a sentence. Preference for one word arrangement over another indicates the desire of the author to highlight one or more of the words in a sentence while reducing the importance of the other words. Usually, the word that opens the sentence is considered to be, psychologically speaking, more important than other words in the sentence. Any word that open a sentence can be used as theme, or logical subject, while the other words in the sentence relate to the first word. For ”,The wise man, his eyes are in his head“ ,הֶחָּׂכָּׂם עֵינָּׂיו ב רֹאשֹו :(example, in the verse (Eccl. 2:14 “the wise man” is the logical subject, although its syntactic status is Explanatory Genitive. The rest of the verse, including the subject, the wise man eyes, refers to the opening word, used as a theme. In anadiplosis the theme, or part of the theme, that ends the first stich or verse is also the theme of the next stich or verse. In this way the repeated element receives special attention.21 For example, in Ps. 122:2-3: עֹמ דֹותהָּׂיּו גרַ לֵינּו בִׁש עָּׂרַ יְִׁך יְרּושָׁלָׁ ִם יְרּושָׁלַ ִם הַב נּויָּׂה כעִׁיר שֶחֻב הרָּׂ לָּּׂהיַח דָּׂו Our feet stood inside your gates, O Jerusalem

Anadiplosis in the Bible or in other ancient Near East literature, and, in fact, omits significant and ancient uses of this pattern. 15 In his comprehensive article Fischel discusses one type of Anadiplosis – the Sorite (Climax). According to Fischel: “the sorite is a set of statements which proceed, step by step, through the force of logic or reliance upon a succession of indisputable facts, to the climatic conclusion, each statement picking up the last key word (or key phrase) of the preceding one.” Fischel divided this unique pattern into seven different categories: Transmissional sorite; Catastrophic sorite; Ethical and Ethico-metaphysical sorite; Circular sorite; Defensive sorite; Numerical sorite and Miscellanea, i.e. different types of sorite that can't be divided into particular group. Fischel division based primarily on content and not on structure or style and, as we shall see later, the sorite can be found widely in Rabbinic literature, among other types of Anadiplosis. For further discussion of this phenomenon and the influence of the Greco-Roman literature on this rhetorical pattern see H.A. Fischel, “The Uses of Sorites (“Climax,” “Gradation”) in the Tannaitic Period,” in HUCA 44 (1973), pp. 119-151. 16 Walfish (see n.12). 17 Tropper (see n.12), pp. 38-40. 18 According to Bar-Ilan we should date the Chain of Tradition in the Hekhalot Literature between 320 A.D and 350 A.D., i.e. in the middle of the Rabbinic period. See M. Bar-Ilan, “the Chain of Tradition in the Hekhalot Literature,” in Daat 56(2005), pp. 5-37, and especially pp. 26-27 [Heb.]. 19 S. Yona, “Rhetorical features in Talmudic literature” in HUCA 77 (2006), pp. 33-33. 20A.R. Pasternak, “New Jar Full of Old”: Biblical Rhetorical Features in Rabbinic Literature (Heb.; M.A. Thesis, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, 2010), pp. 78, 125. 21See Sivan and Yona, “Style and Syntax: Pivotal Use of Extrapositional Syntagms in Biblical Hebrew” (see n. 9), pp. 447-448.

53 Jerusalem built up, a city knit together.

If we look at verse two by itself, the word “Jerusalem” is used to describe the place that the people's legs are standing at, and the legs are the subject of the verse. But if we look at verses two and three together, the repetition of the word “Jerusalem” makes it the logical subject of not only these two verses together, but also of the first verse by itself. That is to say, Anadiplosis contributes not only to the style of the text but also to the syntax of the text. We now discuss a few examples from the Ancient Near East and from the book of Ben-Sira and some more examples from the Bible. We divide the examples into categories set out some rules defining the use of the anadiplosis in the Bible. In the following two parts of the paper we discuss the Rabbinic use of this rhetorical device, first in short units and afterwards in long ones, and we compare this use to the biblical use of anadiplosis.

Anadiplosis in Ancient Near Eastern Literature

As mentioned before, the phenomenon of anadiplosis can be found in various literatures from the ancient near east. Typical examples from Akkadian literature appear in YOS (Yale Oriental series) 11, 87:11-14: ba-tu-ul-tum ma-ra-tu a-wi-li-im a-na ri-ig-mi-ia a-nari-ig<-im>ša-gi-mi-ia [i]m-qú-ut. A girl from a good family to my call To my shouting call fall down.

Another example can be found in Atra-ḫasīs, Tablet III, vii 1-2:22 [a]p-pu-naša-lu-uš-tum li-i[b]-ši i-na ni-ši i-na ni-ši a-li-it-tum-ma la a-li-it-tum In addition let there be a third (category) among the peoples (Let there be) among the peoples women who bear and woman who do not bear.

In Ugarit literature we can find many examples. Here are three: Kirta, CAT 1.14, Column 3, lines 38-40:23 pd. in. bbty. ttn

22 The text and translation are according to W.G. Lambert and A.R. Millard, Atra-ḫasīs: The Babylonian Story of the Flood (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1969), pp. 102-103. See also N. Wasserman, Style and Form in Old- Babylonian Literary Texts (Leiden: Brill-Styx, 2003), p. 91. 23 Translated by E.L. Greenstein in S.B. Parker, eds., Ugaritic Narrative Poetry (Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1997), p. 17 (hereinafter UNP.)

53 tn. ly. mtt. ḥry n’mt. špḥ. bkrk What is not in my house you must give me: You must give me Lady Huraya, The Fair One, your firstborn child!

Aqhat, CAT 1.19, Column 3, lines 8-9: 24 Knp nšrm. b’l. ytbr/ b’l. tbr d’iyhmt

Eagles wings Baal will break Baal will break their pinions

The Baal Cycle, CAT 1.3, Column 5, lines 1-3: 25 [’ašhl]k šbth dmn šbt dqnh/[mm’m] [I will ma]ke his gray hair [run] with blood The gray hair of his beard [with gore,]

Common to all of the examples cited here is the author’s poetic language. Also, they are all relatively short units, built from one or two sentences.

Anadiplosis in the Book of Ben-Sira

In the book of Ben-Sira, dated centuries after the Akkadian and Ugaritic examples cited above, we find similar use of anadiplosis. We should mention that Ben Sira relies heavily upon the style and rhetoric of biblical wisdom literature. Indeed, it is easy to notice the poetic language used by the author and the relatively short units, built from one or two sentences, similar to the biblical wisdom literature. Finally we should note that we can identify many biblical rhetorical patterns in his book, and anadiplosis is just one out of many rhetorical feature, which Ben-Sira took over from Hebrew Scripture.22:13 26

24The Translation by S.B. Parker (UNP, p.72) does not reflect the Anadiplosis which exists in the text: When Baal breaks their wings, Breaks the birds’ pinions. The Hebrew translation of this text is more accurate and more similar to the original text. See for example the translation by Avishur (see n. 10), p. 110. 25 Translated by M.S. Smith (UNP, pp. 115-116.) for further discussion about the completion ‘mm’m’ see Avishur (see n. 10), p. 201; Yona (see n. 2), pp. 132-133; M.D. Cassuto, The Goddess Anath (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1965), pp. 70-72 [Heb.]. 26The English translations and references are from: P.S. Skehan and A.A. Di Lella, The Wisdom of Ben Sira (AB) (New York: Doubleday, 1987)

04 טובת יום תשכח הרעה ורעת ]יום[ תשכח טובה... The day's prosperity makes one forget adversity The day's adversity makes one forget prosperity.27

21:26 בפי אוילים לבם ובלב חכמים פיהם Fools’ thoughts are in their mouths, The words of the wise are in their hearts.28

23:14 ואמרת לו לא נולדתי ויום הולדך תקלל By wishing you had never been born Or cursing the day of your birth

24:8 אז צוני יוצר הכל ויוצרי הניח משכני Then the Fashioner of all gave me his command And he who had made me chose the spot for my tent…

10:52 ...והנה היה לי הנחל לנהר ונהרי היה לים And suddenly this rivulet of mine became a river, Then this stream of mine, a sea.29

The Hebrew texts are from M.H. Segal, The Book of Ben-Sira (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1953) [Heb.]. 27It is easy to identify the chiastic structure in this verse, especially in the Hebrew text that was built in this good-evil-evil-good. As we shall see further on, the combination of Anadiplosis and, טובה-רעה-רעה-טובה :order chiastic structure is not very common in the Bible and in other texts form the Ancient Near East but it’s widespread, relatively speaking, in Rabbinic literature. For further discussion, see Skehan, idem., p. 240. 28In this verse, like many other examples in the Bible, the book of Ben-Sira, and in Rabbinic literature, the chiastic structure creates both anadiplosis and inclusio. The inclusio or envelope structure is, essentially, the repetition of word or words, sometimes with slight variations at the beginning of a short or long unit and again at its conclusion. This phenomenon has been examined extensively, and we can only mention a few of the commentators and scholars who discussed inclusio. These include Moshe Ibn Ezra in his book The Poetry of Israel, in his introduction, and afterwards Rabbi Moses Hayyim Luzzatto in his book Leshon Limmudim, Chapter Seven, where he calls it ‘doubling of the boundaries’ or in Latin ‘Condoplicatio’. In modern times we have a long list of scholars who examined the phenomenon of Inclusio including Moulton, Koenig, Dahood, Kessler, Watson, Paran, and others. For further reading, see Yona (see n. 2), p. 28, n.70.

02 Anadiplosis in the Bible

In the Bible, as we will show now, we find anadiplosis in prosaic units, and, comparing them to the examples from Akkadian and Ugarit literature, and examples from the book of Ben Sira, in long units .It appears here in both in prose and in poetry.

In Prose:

Gen. 1:27: וַיִׁב רָּׂ א אֱֹלהִׁים אֶת הָָּׂאדָּׂם ב צַלְמוֹ ב צֶלֶם אֱֹלהִים אבָּׂרָּׂ אֹתֹו זָּׂכָּׂר ונ קֵבָּׂה בָּׂרָּׂ אאֹתָּׂם And God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him male and female He created them.

In this example the word ‘image’, ‘tzelem’in Hebrew, is repeated with a morphological variation. In the first appearance of the word within our literary unit, the word appears with a personal pronominal suffix, while in its second appearance the word appears in the construct form in an adverbial prepositional phrase.30

Gen. 4:18: וַיִּׁוָּׂלֵדלַחֲנֹוְך אֶת עִירָׁ ד וְעִירָׁ ד יָּׂלַד אֶת מְחּויָׁאֵּל ּומְחִיָׁיאֵּל יָּׂלַד אֶת מְתּושָׁאֵּל ּומְתּושָׁאֵּל יָּׂלַד אֶת לָּׂמְֶך To Enoch was born Irad, and Irad begot Mehujael, and Mehujael begot Methusael, and Methusael begot Lamech.

29Once again the English translation does not reflect the continuity which exists in the verse as well as the original Hebrew text. According to Ben Sira wisdom is getting bigger and bigger. From a little rivulet wisdom became a river and from a river it became a wide open sea. According to Segal, Ben-Sira thinks that is wisdom is so big that it can help the wisdom seekers in all generations to come. See Skehan (see n. 26), p. 337; Segal (see n. 26), p. 151. 30See S. Yona, “The Stylistic-Linguistic Strategy of An Explanatory Genitive Joined to a Noun in Repetitive Parallelism,” Eshel Beer Sheva, 8 (2003), pp.302-309 [Heb.]; idem. (see n. 2), pp. 41-174.

01 In this example each of the names, except the first and last names, are repeated twice while making continuation between father and son, grandson and so on.31

Num. 35:11: ו הִׁק רִׁ יתֶםלָּׂכֶם עָׁרִ ים יעָׁרֵּ מִקְלָׁט תִׁה יֶינָּׂה לָּׂכֶם ... You shall provide yourselves with places to serve you as cities of refuge…

Here the word ‘cities’, is repeated, first in the absolute plural and again in the construct plural.32

In Poetry:

Is. 32:15: precise repetition of the noun “fruitful field:” עַדיֵעָּׂרֶה עָּׂלֵינּו רּוחַמִׁמָּׂרֹום ו הָּׂיָּׂה מִׁדבָּׂר לַכַרְ מֶל וכרמל )וְהַכַרְ מֶל( לַיַעַריֵחָּׂשֵב Till a spirit from on high is poured out on us, And wilderness is transformed into farm land while farm land rates as mere brush.

Prov. 29:23 In this verse there is repetition of the words “shall bring him low” and “lowly in spirit.” In the first instance we have a verb while in the second instance we have a phrase in which the first element of the construct genitive chain is a substantive derived from the same root as the verb 'bring low'. גַאֲוַת ָאדָּׂם תַשְ פִילֶּנּו ּושְ פַל רּוחַ יִׁת מְֹך כָּׂבֹוד A man's pride will humiliate him, But a humble man will obtain honor.33

31Other examples of Genealogical lists using Anadiplosis can be found in Gen. 1:27; Ruth 4:18-22; 1Chr. 2:35- 40, 5:30-36, 37-41 and more. Fischel, in his discussion about the Sorites in the Tannaitic period, claimed that although the rabbis were familiar with the biblical use of the Anadiplosis, which appeared in several genealogical lists in the Bible, the main effect on the parallel lists in Rabbinic literature are a reflection of the phenomenon in the Greco-Roman literature. As we shell demonstrates later on, we can find in Rabbinical literature different types of Anadiplosis and not only Sorites, and some of them, at least, were inspired by the biblical use of this phenomenon. That is to say, that the rabbis were influenced not only by the Greco-Roman literature but also by the biblical use of this rhetorical device. See Fischel (see n. 15), pp. 126-129. 32For further discussion at this verse see Yona (see n. 2), p. 118; M. Paran, Forms of the Priestly Style in the Pentateuch (Jerusalem: Magnes, 1989), p.120 [Heb.]

05 In our opinion the phenomenon of anadiplosis should be divided into two types. The first type is “Stylistic Anadiplosis,” in which the repetition is syntactically unnecessary. Consequently, the elimination of the repeated element would not affect the meaning of the clause. In the other kind of Anadiplosis, which we call “Syntactic Anadiplosis,” the repeated expression is syntactically necessary. Without it the sentence will make no sense. A biblical text that includes both kinds of Anadiplosis appears at Song. 2:15. The rhetorical usage in this verse has been discussed frequently. אֶחֱזּולָּׂנּו שֻׁעָׁלִים שֻׁעָׁלִים ק טַנִׁים מ חַב לִׁים כְרָׁ מִים ּוכְרָׁ מֵּינּו ס מָּׂדַר Catch us the foxes, The little foxes that ruin the vineyards For our vineyard is in blossom

“Foxes” appears twice, and either one of the occurrences can be eliminated without affecting the meaning. The repetition thus only serves stylistic ends. On the other hand, the word “vineyards,” which appears first independently and subsequently with the morphological change—in this instance, the addition of a first person plural pronominal suffix—is syntactically necessary. If either instance of the word were eliminated, the sentence would make no sense. Nevertheless, this particular repetition should also be analyzed from the point of view of stylistics. From the Ancient Near Eastern examples, the examples from Ben Sira, and the biblical examples discussed above we can discern some rules for the use of the anadiplosis:  In many cases the repetition is syntactically unnecessary, and anadiplosis is only a matter of style.  In some cases anadiplosis is part of the chiastic structure, which sometimes also includes an envelope figure (inclusio). Most examples that include Anadiplosis and chiastic structure can be found in poetic units.  In most cases the Anadiplosis will be found in poetry units, or in verses and sentences the style and language of which are close to poetry. Excluding genealogical lists, it is not very common to find anadiplosis in “pure” prosaic units.

shall bring him low' is repeated with morphological variation. Some' ,'תשפילנו' 33In this verse the Hebrew word scholars have suggested alternative readings, while ignoring the Anadiplosis and the deliberate contrast between the lowly spirit and the pride man. See Yona (see n. 2), pp. 149-150.

00  In most cases, the units that include anadiplosis are short, containing one or two verses. In rare cases we can find it in larger units. Nevertheless, in most cases we will not find more than one or two concatenations in one unit.34  In most cases there is no difference between the verse or sentence and its “deep structure.” That is to say, there is no deliberate change in word order or deliberate omitting of words to create anadiplosis. We shall now discuss the Rabbinic use of anadiplosis and try to identify the similarities and differences between the uses of this rhetorical pattern.

Anadiplosis in Rabbinic Literature

We now demonstrate the Rabbinic use of this rhetorical device. First we present the use of anadiplosis in short units and then in large ones-, identifying the contribution of this rhetorical pattern to our knowledge of the texts. But first, we discuss one of the most prominent examples of the use the Rabbinic sages made of anadiplosis. M. Avot 1:1: 35 משה קיבל תורה מסיני ומסרה ליהושע ויהושע לזקנים וזקנים לנביאים ונביאים מסרוה לאנשי כנסת הגדולה Moses received the Torah from Sinai and passed it on to Joshua and Joshua to the elders and the elders to the prophets and the prophets passed it on to the Men of the Great Assembly.

This is the first paragraph in the Ethics of the Fathers, and much has been written about its importance and the message(s) it contains.36 It traces the chain of tradition from Moses to the Men of the Great Assembly. Moses and the Men of the Great Assembly, who open and

34Unusual examples can be found in Hos. 2:23-25 where the prophet deliberately omitted two cases of Anadiplosēs; in Ezek. 7:6-7 where we can find four Concatenations and in Is. 26:3-11 where we can find three Concatenations between verses (3-4; 8-9; 10-11) and five more Concatenations inside different verses. 35The Hebrew texts and references from tractate Avot in this paper are according to: S. Sharvit, Tractate Avoth Through the Ages: A Critical Edition, Prolegomena and Appendices (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 2004) [Heb.]. 36This tractate creates a sequence (i.e. the ‘chain of tradition’) between Moses and the Oral Torah. Some scholars argued that this tractate was originally written to strengthen the Pharisaic approach which claims that both the Written Torah and the Oral Torah are from Sinai and have the same importance. Other scholars discuss the differences between the chain of tradition in Avot to its equivalents in both versions of the Fathers according to Rabbi Nathan. See for example: R.T. Herford, The Ethics of the Talmud: Saying of the Fathers (New York: Schocken Books, 1962), pp. 5-6, 12; A.J. Saldarini, Scholastic Rabbinism: A literary Study of the Fathers according to Rabbi Nathan (Chico: Scholars Press, 1982), pp. 67-78; E. Itzchaky, Processes in the Emergence of the Oral Law (Petah-Tikva: E. Itzchaky, 2006), pp. 2-7 [Heb.].

03 conclude the chain, each appear only once. However, each of the intermediate links in the chain—Joshua, the Elders, and the prophets—appears twice. Moreover, in addition to anadiplosis, the passage contains the pattern called gaping, hamshakhah, specifically double hamshakhah.37 First, the forward hamshakhah of the verb “passed it on” from the first to the second member of the Mishnah, and, second, the backward hamshakhah of that same verb from the fourth and final member to the third and penultimate member. The syntactical anadiplosis found in the unit strengthens the connection between the disparate elements and highlights the message of the Mishnah, which claims that there was a smooth transition of the Oral Torah from generation to generation.38

In the Fathers according to Rabbi Nathan, Version B, 1:8, we find a different chain of tradition, which includes in addition to the four tradents mentioned in Mishnah Avot, two others, namely, the judges and the three prophets, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi, who, like the judges, are treated as a unit:39 משה קבל תורה מסיני ומסרה ליהושע ויהושע לזקנים וזקנים לשופטים ושופטים לנביאים ונביאים לחגי ולזכריה ולמלאכי חגי זכריה ומלאכי מסרו לאנשי כנסת הגדול Moses received the Torah from Sinai and passed it on to Joshua and Joshua to the elders and the Elders to the Judge

37The “Gaping” in biblical Hebrew is discussed frequently by medieval commentators and by modern commentators as well. See for example Abraham Ibn Ezra's comments on Gen. 32:12; Num. 17:23; Deut. 32:5; M.H. Segal, “A Contribution to the Study of the forms of Hebrew poetry,” in Tarbiz 18 (1947), pp. 139-142 [Heb.]. A discussion of gaping in Tractate Avot can be found in S. Sharvit, Language and Style of Tractate Avoth Through the Ages (Beer Sheva: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press, 2006), pp. 23-24 [Heb.]. Modern commentators dealt with this phenomenon in other Semitic languages like Ugaritic, Aramaic and Phoenician. See for example: D. Sivan, A Grammar of the Ugaritic language (Brill: Leiden, 2001), pp. 215-216; S. Yona, ”Milestones in the Study of the Style, Structure and Rhetoric of the Proverbs of Ahiqar,” in Beer Sheva 20 (2011), pp.133-136 [Heb.]; Y. Avishur, Phoenician Inscriptions and The Bible (Jerusalem: E. Rubenstein, 1979), pp. 19, 191, 266 [Heb.]. A further bibliography concerning this rhetorical feature can be found in S. Yona (see n. 19), p. 94, n. 75. 38For further discussion see Pasternak (see n. 20), pp. 10, 38, 78. Amram Tropper suggested that the words ‘(and) passed it on’ creates an envelope structure (Inclusio) that bounds the unit. The location of the words at the end of the first sentence (and not at the beginning of sentence) and in the beginning of the last sentence impairs the envelope structure, and to our opinion these words doesn’t create envelope structure at all. See A. Tropper (see n. 12), p. 81. See also some of the examples cited by Walfish (see n. 12), pp. 343-351, which contain repetition but do not contain the distinct envelope figure. 39The Hebrew text is according to MS Vatican 303. All the references from the Fathers according to Rabbi Nathan in this paper are according to: H.J Becker, Avot de-Rabbi Natan,) Tubingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006).

03 and the Judges to the Prophets and the Prophets to Haggai Zechariah and Malachi and Haggai Zechariah and Malachi passed it on to the Men of the Great Assembly.40

The later example from tractate Avot and its equivalent in the Fathers according to Rabbi Nathan recall the use of anadiplosis in biblical genealogical lists mentioned before. These should be categorized as long units, which we will discuss later on.

Anadiplosis in Short Units:

Regular Anadiplosis:

B. Yeb. 63a:41 טום ולא תישפוץ שפיץ ולא תיבני שכל העוסק בבנין מתמסכן42 Seal [a hole] and avoid [expensive] repairs Repair [a house] and you won't have to rebuild.

For whoever gets involved in construction is impoverished/puts himself in danger. The meaning of the first two stiches of this proverb is, apparently, “close up cracks, and do not repair; repair and do not rebuild.” However, the precise meaning of the proverb is unclear. Apparently the basic idea is to give advice to the owner of a building in which there are cracks (maybe as a result of earthquakes). According to Pappa, in whose name the proverb is quoted, if you found a crack in a wall of your house, you should quickly close it up so that you will not need later to repair a larger portion of the wall. According to the interpretation of the proverb found in the Talmud, the several pieces of advice contained here

40For further discussion about the chain of tradition and the differences between the chain of tradition in tractate Avot and the chain of tradition in the Fathers according to Rabbi Nathan see Saldarini (see n. 36), pp. 9-78. See also Fischel (see n. 15), pp. 124-126. For further discussion of the chain of tradition in the Hekhalot Literature, and the differences between it and the chain of tradition in tractate Avot see Bar-Ilan (see n. 18), pp. 6-8. 41The Hebrew text in this discussion is according to MS Munich 202 unless mentioned otherwise. The reading ’ב‘ in this manuscript is uncertain, and it’s probably a correction of the letter ’שפיץ‘ in the word ’פ‘ of the letter that was written by mistake. We would like to thank Dr. Rami Reiner for his illuminating notes about this unit. is unclear and so is the meaning of the entire proverb. This proverb, by’מתמסכן‘ 42The exact meaning of the word himself, can be found in B. Sot. 11a as part of the discussion concerning the hard labor of the people of Israel in is put is life in danger, and according to Samuel the ’מתמסכן‘ Egypt. According to Rav, the meaning of the word meaning is to put one's money in danger (i.e. become poor). In both opinions, the proverb recommends not to and in commentary on ,’נתמכמך בבנין‘ .deal with building activity. Rashi, in his commentary on B. San. 101b, s.v .adopts Samuel opinion and he sees in building activity a catalyst to poverty ’שממסכנות‘ .B. Sot. 11a, s.v

03 are designed to avoid building activity that may either endanger human life or cause the owner of the house to forfeit his property. suggests that the discussion is ,טום ”,Rashi, in his commentary on B. Yeb. 63a, s.v. “seal confined to building. On the other hand Bialik and Ravnitzki saw in the aphorism under discussion references to walls, houses, and building activity as metaphors for dealing with problems faced by all kinds of people in everyday life, not only to the problems of owners of real estate in earthquake zones.43 In other words, the proverb tells us to deal with problems, whatever they may be, while they are still small rather than wait until small problems become big problems that require more extensive solutions. The proverb does not exhibit either synonymous or antithetical parallelism. Consequently, it should be seen as incremental synthetic parallelism. Thus the repetition of the word “repair” creates an anadiplosis that joins together the clauses. If so, then the proverb is built upon incremental parallelism going from the simplest to the most complicated kind of activity. The main idea expressed by the proverb is that one should not procrastinate with respect to a small problem, for the problem may otherwise get bigger. Anadiplosis here employed is syntactic and the words that are repeated are not repeated simply for stylistic reasons. It appears that the aphorism “for whoever gets involved in construction is impoverished/puts himself in danger,” was added through free association, in this case the similarity between the and the common בניין ,תבני words “rebuild” and “construction,” or in Aramaic and Hebrew subject, and it is not directly connected with the original recommendation attributed to Pappa.44 In the larger unit in Yeb., in which Pappa's aforementioned proverb is found, we find additional recommendations also attributed to Pappa: אמ' רב פפא זרע ולא תיזבון ואע'ג דכי הדרי נינהו הני מברכי זבין ולא תידול45 והני מילי בסתרקא אבל גלימא לא מיתרמי ליה כי דבעי

43 H.N. Bialik and Y.H. Ravnitzky, The Book of Legends (Tel-Aviv: Dvir, 2005 (fifth edition) p. 658, n. 1167 [Heb.]. 44There are a couple of reasons for this assumption. First, this proverb was given in Hebrew while the entire unit was given in Aramaic. Second, as mentioned before, this proverb can be found individually in B. Sot. 11a, where it is not brought in the name of Rav Pappa. Later version of this proverb can be found in Exod. Rab. (A. This version .’שכל העוסק בבנין מתמסכן ומסוכן‘ :Shinan ed.), Exodus, Parashah A (1:10) with minor changes ,See A. Shinan .’מתמסכן‘ combines the opinions of Rav and Samuel about the meaning of the word Midrash Exodus Rabbah,(Jerusalem: Dvir, 1984), pp. 50-51 [Heb.]. According to Rashi, the .’תיזול‘ meaning 'to weave' in Syrian, changed to ,’תידול‘ 45In some manuscripts the word is that you better sell your mattresses than become poor. From his ’זבן ולא תיזול‘ meaning of the words and’תיזול‘ commentary we understand that the text before Rashi or the reading by Rashi argued that the word is its meaning is poor or cheap. According to the Tosafists it is unclear why Rashi distinguishes between mattresses and clothes, and the meaning of this word is 'to weave' and not 'to become poor'. i.e., it’s better to buy clothes than to weave them, except of a cloak which you might not find in your size. According to Rashi’s

03 טום ולא תישפוץ שפיץ ולא תיבני שכל העוסק בבנין מתמסכן קפוץ זבון ארעא מתון נסיב איתת' נחות דרגא ונסיב איתתא סק דרגא בחד שושבינא46 Said R. Pappa: Sow but don’t buy grain in the market, even if the price is the same. Buy but don’t weave.47 That applies to mattresses but not a cloak, since you might not always find a good one again. Seal [a hole] and avoid [expensive] repairs repair [a house] and you won't have to rebuild. For whoever gets involved in construction is impoverished/puts himself in danger. Buy land promptly. Choose a wife deliberately. Marry below yourself by a step, climb up a step in selecting your best man.

It appears that at the basis of the unit we have four recommendations, some of which are interrelated. The connection is especially clear with respect to the two final dicta, which deal with marrying a woman. The common element in all of the aphorisms is the person in whose name the aphorisms are quoted, namely Pappa. It appears that all of the recommendations belong to the realm of folk sayings. Moreover, it appears to us that the first two recommendations were originally built, separately or together, as synthetic parallelism in the center of which was anadiplosis. The two final recommendations were constructed as antithetic parallelism. We suggest, with the needed caution, that to the first two dicta there were added at a later stage, perhaps when they were put together in the Talmud, expansions and clarifications exemplified by “For whoever gets involved in construction is impoverished/puts himself in danger.”48 commentary, there isn’t connection between the two recommendations. The first one says: sow but don’t buy and the second say: sell but don’t become poor. According to the Tosafists, there is a connection between these two sayings: sow but don’t buy, buy but don’t weave. 46A different version of this proverb can be found in Y. Qid. 4:4, where it associated with Rav, the father of נחות דרג וסב ‘ :Chiyya. The alternative version contains only the first part of the proverb, with some changes .meaning, you should lower yourself by a step while choosing your wife ,’איתא 47 Our translation is based on the Tosafists commentary. An alternative translation, which probably based on Rashi, can be found, for example, in Jacob Neusner's translation of this saying: “Sow but don’t buy grain in the market, even if the price is the same. Sell out what you own to avoid cheapen yourself.” See J. Neusner, The Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Yebamot (vol. 8) (Peabody: Hendrickson Publishers, 2005), p. 326. 48 To our opinion this suggestion is consistent with Shamma Friedman distinction between the Amoraitic passages, anonymous material, which provides a framework for the Amoraitic passages and late glosses. See S. Friedman, A Critical Study of Yevamot X With A Methodological Introduction (New York: JTS, 1978), pp. 25- 32 [Heb.].

03 In light of all that we have stated, it appears that first were formulated the first two proverbs, either orally or in writing, in a manner similar to that which we shall present further on in our hypothetical reconstruction, which is similar to the proverb found in Ms. Munich 141:

זרע ולא תיזבון זבין ולא תידול טום ולא תישפוץ שפיץ ולא תיבני Sow but don’t buy Buy but don’t weave Repair but don’t repairs Repair but don’t rebuild

Finally, we suggest that the order of these four recommendations is not random, and we detect a guiding hand when we look at the entire unit. The author or redactor of this unit begins with two sayings each of which contains six words and uses anadiplosis. As we mentioned before, the final two recommendations were constructed as antithetic parallelism and both of them deals with marrying a woman. The third recommendation contains six words and the last recommendation contains eight words, and it is longer than the first three recommendations, while creating a concluding deviation.49 In the original Aramaic version (without expansions and clarifications) the recommendations also creates a trapezoid pattern:50

זרע ולא תיזבון זבין ולא תידול טום ולא תישפוץ שפיץ ולא תיבני קפוץ זבון ארעא מתון נסיב איתתא נחות דרגא ונסיב איתתא סק דרגא בחד שושבינא

49For further discussion of this rhetorical feature see Yona (see n. 19), pp. 95-98; Paran (see n. 32), pp. 179-237. 50According to Yona the trapezoid aphorism is an aphorism that consists of several parts, each of which is longer than the one before. If we write each part in different line the text will appear as a trapezoid. See Yona (see n. 19), pp. 98-100.

34 B. B. B. 98b:51 הכל שקלתי בכף מאזנים ולא מצאתי קל מסובין וקל מסובין חתן הדר בבית חמיו וקל מחתן הדר בבית חמיו ארח מכניס ארח וקל מארח משיב דבר טרם ישמע שמשיב דבר טרם ישמע אולת הוא לו וכלימה I have weighed everything in the scales and found nothing lighter than bran, But lighter than bran is the son-in-law, who lives in the household of his father- in-law, Lighter even than a son-in-law who lives in the household of his father-in- law is a guest who brings in another guest, and lighter than a guest who brings a guest along is one who answers before he hears the question: He that gives an answer before he hears it is folly and full of confusion.

This dictum, which is attributed to Ben Sira,52 is quoted in the Babylonian Talmud in the framework of a discussion concerning the passage in M. B.B. 6:4, which deals with a man who builds near his own house a house for either his married son or his widowed daughter. In response to the question why a man should not build a house also for his married daughter, the Talmud responds that it is not customary for a man to live in proximity to the house of his father-in-law. In support of this argument the Talmud quotes the proverb attributed to Ben Sira that, in fact, was taken, from various sources such as Prov. 18:13. The latter aphorism compares various things by means of diverse rhetorical devices. According to the first member of the dictum, bran53 is the lightest object one can imagine.54

51The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Vatican 115. 52 We cannot find in the book of Ben Sira the proverb quoted in the Babylonian Talmud. In two different places in his book we find verses this saying might rely on. The first is 11:8, “before hearing, answer not, and interrupt no one in the middle of his speech,” and the second is 5:9-13, on careful speech and throwing grain in the wind. Like the proverb in Babylonian Talmud, this discussion deals with the light weight of the grain and the duty of man to observe and obey the “rules” of listening and speaking. For further discussion, see Segal's introduction to the book of Ben-Sira (see n. 26), pp. 37-39 and pp. 33-34, 68; Skehan (see n. 26), pp. 183-184. the choosing of bran instead of other light things like ,’קל מסובין‘ .53According to Rashi on this pericope, s.v feathers and wool was made deliberately because the bran is considered as waste, which make its importance even lower than other things that have some importance, although their light weight. 54We should note the resemblance between this sentence and the words of Ahiqar the wise (Porten-Yardeni, line ,meaning: I have lifted straw, and I have carried bran ,’נשאית תבן ונסבת פרן ולא > ולא < איתי זי קליל מן תותב‘ :(160 and there is nothing of lesser weight than a resident alien. In the Syriac version of Ahiqar we founds similar proverb: “My son, I have carried iron and removed stones; and they were not heavier on me than a man who settles in the house of his father-in-law.” For further discussion, see B. Porten and A. Yardeni, Textbook of Aramaic documents from ancient Egypt (Jerusalem: Hebrew University Press, 1993), vol. 3, p. 46, line 160 [Heb.]; S. Yona, “Shared stylistic patterns in the Aramaic proverbs of Ahiqar and Hebrew wisdom,” in Ancient Near Eastern Studies 44 (2007), pp. 39-42; F.C. Conybeare, J. R. Harris and A.S. Lewis, The Story of Ahikar (Cambridge: University Press, 1913), p. 107; A. Yellin, The Book of Ahikar the Wise (Jerusalem: Ha-Ma’arav, 1937, second ed.) [Heb.], pp. 45. Yellin (p. 77) noted the similarity between the words of Ahiqar and the aphorism in B. B.B. 98b.

32 However, lighter than bran, not physically but morally, is the son-in-law who lives in his father-in-law's rather than his own house.55 Such a son-in-law is considered of lesser worth than bran but of greater worth than a person who entertains boarders in a house that does not belong to him. A person who is a guest in someone else's house and who invites a third party to stay there is regarded as of lower in moral worth than a son-in-law who lives in his father- in-law's house.56 However, the latter is regarded as of higher worth than on who supplies an answer before hearing the question. The relative moral worth of the types of persons according to the saying attributed to Ben Sira is as follows: bran, a son-in-law who lives in his father-in-law's house, a guest who invites another guest, a person who answers before having heard the question. This latter category of individual includes both persons who speak too soon in the presence of persons who are greater than they in wisdom or chronological age,57 or, alternatively, a person who responds before having heard all of what the other person had to say. The words “lighter than bran” appear at the end of the first clause and at the beginning of the second clause and create a stylistic anadiplosis, which is not frequent in Rabbinic literature. Indeed, all of the subsequent examples of anadiplosis in the proverb under consideration—the son-in-law who lives in his father-in-law's house, the guest who invites another guest,58 a person who responds before he hears the question—are syntactic. In addition, the second and third instances of anadiplosis are interrupted by the intervention of the expression “lighter than,” which is repeated at the beginning of lines 2, 3, and 4, and which creates anaphora. The incorporation of the saying in the Babylonian Talmud is congruent with the primary message it conveys, namely, that it is not customary or acceptable that a son-in-law should dwell in proximity to the house of his father-in-law. However, the use of the proverb in the context of the Babylonian Talmud to convey that particular message requires one to ignore that climax of the proverb and its primary message, namely, the importance of following the rules with respect to carrying on verbal discourse with other people.

55Another negative reference to a son-in-law who lives in his father-in-law's house can be found in B. Qid. 12b where the son-in-law who lives in his father-in-law's house is in the same dubious group as a man that got .(נידוי) married in the market, a man that got married using intercourse and a person who is under ban 56Another discussion concerning the guest who invites another guest can be found in tractate Derech Eretz Zuta 7:9: “When a scholar is neglectful in the observance of washing his hands for purification, it is not becoming; it is less becoming when one eats in the presence of a guest and fails to invite him to partake; it is still less becoming when one guest invites another; less becoming than all three of these, is when one guest imposes upon another. See M. Higger, The Treatises Derek Erez (New York: Debe Rabanan, 1935) vol. 2, pp. 51-52. 57Compare to M. Avot 5:7. For discussion at this pericope see Pasternak (see n. 20), pp. 70-73. 58These words are partially repeated (in the Hebrew version), and once again there is hamshakhah from one line to another. For further discussion of this phenomenon see n. 37.

31 B. Erub. 13b:59 The controversies and differences between the views of Shammai and Hillel and between the Schools of Shammai and Hillel are among the most famous in Rabbinic literature.60 These controversies are found in the Mishnah, Tosefta, Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds, and elsewhere in Rabbinic literature. The passage in Bavli Erubin opens with the words of R. Abba, according to whom the Schools of Shammai and Hillel argued for three years until a heavenly voice declared, “The views of both schools are the words of the living God, and the halakhah follows the School of Hillel.” Further on in the Talmud it is explained that the view of the School of Hillel was preferred because its authorities were kindly and modest and were in the habit of studying both their own rulings and those of the School of Shammai. Moreover, the Babylonian Talmud continues, the people of the School of Hillel habitually mentioned the views of the School of Shammai before their own views. On the basis of this, one may learn that whoever foregoes his own honor and flees from high status will, in the end, receive high status and honor, while those who are proud of themselves and pursue high status ultimately will be humiliated. At the end of this unit we find three aphorisms. An identical message is conveyed, allegedly,61 by all three. First: כל המשפיל עצמו הקב'ה מגביהו וכל המגביה עצמו הקב'ה משפילו Whoever humbles himself, the Holy One, blessed be He exalts him And whoever exalts himself the Holy One, blessed be He, humbles.

According to this aphorism, humble men will be exalted by God, while braggarts will be humiliated by God. This aphorism is based upon antithetic parallelism of the sub-type called hazarah nuqsha. In this sub-type the second line repeats all or almost all words of the first line.62 In addition, the aphorism is constructed as a chiasm, in which the same identical words are repeated, however in a different word order in each of the two halves of the aphorism. In addition to parallelism, the aphorism exhibits anaphora, in that the word “whoever” appears

59The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Vatican 109. 60 See for example A. Gold, The school of Shammai: Personality, Philosophy and Halakha (Tel-Aviv: Miskal, 2001) [Heb.]; A.Y. Hayoun, The Schools of Shammai and Hillel—A Study of Their Halakhic and Ideological Theories (Heb. PhD Diss. Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, 2003); R. Hidary, “A Rhetorical Reading of the Bavli as a Polemic against the Yerushalmi: Regarding Halakhic Pluralism and the Controversy between the House of Shammai and the House of Hillel,” in Oqimta 2 (2014), pp. 1-42 [Heb.], available at: http://www.oqimta.org.il/oqimta/5774/hidary2.pdf 61As we shall discuss later on, the third aphorism is dissimilar to the first two aphorisms by content and by style. 62Other examples, to name a few, can be found B. B.Q. 60b, B. Yom. 76b and in M. Avot 1:3, 3:17, 4:6, 4:11 and 3:9: ‘R. Haninah ben Dosa (said): Everyone whose fear of sin precedes his wisdom, his wisdom endures; Whose wisdom (precedes) his fear of sin, his wisdom endures not.’

35 at the beginning of each of the two lines. The aphorism also exhibits mesophora in that the two expressions “himself” and “the Holy One blessed be He” appear in the middle of each of the two lines of the aphorism. The use of the word “exalts him” at the end of the first line, followed by the expression “exalts himself” at the beginning of the second line, creates a syntactic anadiplosis between whoever” at the beginning of“ ,כל the two halves of the aphorism. The repetition of the word the second line separates the two elements of the anadiplosis, and it could have been replaced by the conjunctive waw. exalts him,” is composed of an active participle with a direct objective“ ,מגביהו The word third person singular pronominal suffix (the form is a synonym of the clause magbiah oto, in which the participle and the third person singular pronoun direct object are expressed by two distinct lexemes). On the other hand, the direct object of the verb “exalts” at the beginning of the second line of the aphorism is expressed by two distinct lexemes, the participle followed by the expression “himself.” The chiastic structure of the aphorism creates also an inclusio in the form of the verb “humble” found at the beginning of the first line and again at the end of the second line. or in ,משפיל-מגביהו-מגביה-משפילו :Finally, we should note the verb order in this aphorism English, humble-exalt-exalt-humble. This verbs order will help us to see the difference between the first two aphorisms and the third one.63

וכל המחזר על הגדולה הגדולה בורחת ממנווכל הבורח מן הגדולה גדולה מחזרת עליו Whoever goes looking for greatness greatness flees from him, But whoever flees from greatness greatness follows him.64

Like the previously discussed aphorism so also this aphorism is built upon antithetic parallelism of the sub-type hazarah nuqshah, and all the stylistic phenomena found in the

63In Prov. 29:23 we find similar idea: A man's pride will humiliate him, But a humble man will obtain honor גַאֲוַת ָאדָּׂם, תַשְ פִילֶּנּו :and in Hebrew ּושְ פַל-רּוחַ, יִׁת מְֹך כָּׂבֹוד. In the Hebrew text there is syntactic Anadiplosis, and the similarity between the verse in Proverbs and this aphorism is easily noted. Other aphorisms that share the same idea can be found in several Rabbinical texts. 64Again, the common English translation doesn’t match the Hebrew text and doesn't reflect the style of the original aphorism.

30 previously discussed aphorism (anaphora, mesophora, syntactic anadiplosis, inclusio) are found in this aphorism as well. In the anadiplosis “she flees”//”he flees” the form of the verb changes to correspond to the grammatical gender of the grammatical subject of the participle. The anadiplosis is interrupted by the words “from him” and “whoever.” In contrast to the previously discussed aphorism, in this aphorism there is an additional syntactic anadiplosis in the repetition of the term “greatness” twice in the middle of each of the two lines of the aphorism. If we add the word .מחזר-בורחת-בורח-מחזרת :The verb order in this aphorism is as follows It’s easy .מחזר-גדולה-גדולה-בורחת; בורח-גדולה-גדולה-מחזרת :the order will be ,’גדולה‘ ,’greatness‘ to see the sophistication and complexity in this aphorism and its resemblance to the first aphorism. The main message of this aphorism is almost identical to the message of the previous one. If someone chases greatness it will flee from him or even, according to the first aphorism, diminish his current status.65 On the other hand, if someone recedes from greatness it will find him. In both aphorisms, greatness and prestige will come only to modest and lowly people. וכל הדוחק את השעה שעה דוחקתו וכל הנדחה מפני השעה שעה עומדת לו Whoever pushes his hour/the hour the hour/his hour will push him away. Whoever foregoes by his hour/the hour, his hour/the hour will stand by him/stands for him.

Unlike the two previously discussed aphorisms, this one deals not with humility but with patience. The same proverb appears almost verbatim in B. Ber. 64a. The latter aphorism, in its Talmudic context, introduces the narrative concerning the appointment of Rabbah and Rab Joseph as successive heads of the academy of Pumbeditha, and in B. Ber. it is attributed to R. Abin the Levite.66

meaning: when ”,גמלא אזל למיבעיא קרני אוני דהוו להו גזוזינהו מיניה“ :65A similar idea can be found in B. San. 106a the camel went to demand horns, they cut off the ears it had. 66 Literal and Historical Analysis of this story can be found in A. Tropper, Like Clay in the Hands of the Potter: Sage Stories in Rabbinic Literature (Jerusalem: Zalman Shazar Center for Jewish History, 2011), pp. 155-192 [Heb.]. According to Tropper (p. 165, n. 24) the first appearance of this aphorism is in B. Erub. and later on this aphorism was cited by R. Abin in a different context.

33 Similar to the previously discussed aphorisms, this one also contains antithetic parallelism, whoever”), mesophora (of the words “the hour”/”hour”), and“ ,'וכל anaphora (of the word syntactic anadiplosis (again of the words “the hour”/”hour”). On the other hand, this proverb דוחק-דוחקתו- :does not exhibit a chiastic structure nor stylistic inclusio. The verbs order in is דוחק-שעה-שעה-דוחקתו; נדחה- :the order will be ,השעה ”,If we add the word “hour .נדחה-עומדת It appears that in form, and also in respect to content, this dictum is different .שעה-שעה-עומדת. from the two that preceded it in B. Erub. 13b. We propose that the last aphorism was added to the unit to support the attitude of the School of Hillel, which waited three years until God chose their opinion. Regarding its place in the unit, just after the first two aphorisms, it seems to us that the juxtaposition of this aphorism with the two aphorisms that preceded it was prompted primarily by stylistic similarity, especially with respect to the syntactic anadiplosis, which is found in the middle of the dictum and which is similar to the anadiplosis in the middle of the second of the series of aphorisms. This may also explain why this aphorism was added after the two aphorisms that preceded it and not before or between them (although it should be cited before them according to the development of the unit). According to this assumption, we can claim that the anadiplosis also contributes, in a way, to the editing of this unit. In M. Nid. 6:1-9 we find another example in which several sayings were added to a unit even though they discussed different subjects than the main unit. As at B. Erub. 13b, in this case the addition—M. Nid. 6:2-9—is an outcome of the style, in this case, antithetical parallelism, anadiplosis, and inclusio, which appear at M. Nid. 6:1 and are repeated at 6:2-9, and the deduction method of the added sayings: 67 א בא סימן התחתון עד שלא בא העליון או חולצת או מתייבמת בא העליון עד שלא בא התחתון העליון מפני שאיפשר ר' מאיר או' לא חולצת ולא מתייבמת. וחכ' או' או חולצת או מתייבמת מפני שאמרו איפשר לתחתון לבוא עד שלא יבוא העליון אבל אי איפשר לעליון ]לבוא[ עד שלא יבוא התחתון ב כיוצא בו כל כלי חרש מכניס ומוציא ויש שהוא מוציא, ואינו מכניס כל אבר שהוא ציפורן יש בו עצם

In Tan., Vayechi, 6 we found this aphorism in a discussion about Gen. 48:1. According to this discussion the meaning of this aphorism is that in a situation of danger one should wait before acting. And a person who ignores this advice might die as a result. in the second line 'מפני שאיפשר' The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Parma 3173. The words 67 .similar to the version is MS Kaufman ,'אף על פי שאי איפשר' should be change into

33 ויש שיש בו עצם, ואין בו ציפורן כל המטמא מדרס מטמא טמא מת ויש שהוא מטמא טמא מת ואינו מיטמא מדרס ג כל הראוי לדון דיני נפשות ראוי לדון דיני ממונות ויש שהוא ראוי לדון דיני ממונות ואינו ראוי לדון דיני נפשות. כל הכשר לדון כשר להעיד ויש כשר להעיד ואינו כשר לדון. ד כל שהוא חייב במעשרות מטמא טומאת אכלין ויש שהוא מטמא טומאת אכלין ואינו חייב במעשרות. ה כל שהוא חייב בפאה חייב במעשרות ויש חייב במעשר' ואינו חייב בפאה. ו כל שהוא חייב בראשית הגז חייב במתנות ויש חייב במתנ' ואינו חייב בראשית הגז. ז כל שיש לו ביעור יש לו שביעית ויש שיש לו שביע' ואין לו ביעור. ח כל שיש לו קשקשת יש לו סנפיר ויש שיש לו סנפיר ואין לו קשקשת. ט כל שיש לו קרניים יש לו טלפיים ויש שיש לו טלפיים ואין לו קרניים. כל הטעון ברכה לאחריו טעון לפניו ויש שהוא טעון לפניו ואינו טעון לאחריו.

1. [If] the token [of puberty] below appeared before that above, [the girl] either carries out the rite of ḥalitsah or enters levirate marriage. [if] the upper token appeared before the lower one, even though it is [not] possible, R. Meir says: “she does not carry out the rite of ḥalitsah and she does not enter into levirate marriage.” And the sages say: “she either carries out the rite of ḥalitsah or enters into levirate marriage.” Because they have said: “it is possible for lower token to appear before the upper token appears, But it is not possible for upper token to appear before the lower token appears.” 2. Similarly, any clay utensil that will let in a liquid will let it out, But there is one which lets out the liquid and does not let it in. Every limb which has a claw on it has a bone on it

33 But there is that which has a bone on it and not have a claw on it. Whatever is susceptible to madras uncleanness is susceptible to corpse uncleanness, but there is that which is susceptible to corpse uncleanness and is not susceptible to madras uncleanness. 3. Whoever is worthy to judge capital cases is worthy to judge property cases, But there is one who is worthy to judge property cases and is not worthy to judge capital cases. Whoever is suitable to judge is suitable to give testimony, But there is one who is suitable to give testimony but is not suitable to judge. 4. Whatever is liable for tithes is susceptible to the uncleanness pertaining to foods, but there is that which is susceptible to the uncleanness pertaining to foods and is not liable for tithes. 5. Whatever is liable for peʾahis liable for tithes But there is that which is liable for tithes and is not liable for peʾah. 6. Whatever is liable for the law of the first of the fleece is liable for the priestly gifts, but there is that which is liable for the priestly gifts and is not liable for the law of the first of the fleece. 7. Whatever is subject to the requirement of removal is subject to the law of the Seventh Year, but there is that which is subject to the law of the Seventh Year and is not subject to the requirement of removal. 8. Whatever has scales has fins, but there is that which has fins and does not have scales. 9. Whatever has horns has hooves, but there is that which has hooves and does not have horns. Whatever requires a blessing after it requires a blessing before it, But there is that which requires blessing before it and does not require a blessing after it.

To our opinion, this example can give as a glimpse into the editing process and editing methods of the Mishnah. In this case, the editor did not hesitate to combine together various saying about various subjects that are not related at all to Niddah, females or any other subject of this tractate. We shall now survey some more examples, which we shall treat only briefly, to show the wide use of anadiplosis in rabbinic literature.

33 Y. Ter.8, 10: 68 כל האיברין תלויין בלב והלב תלוי בכיס All the origins depends on the heart and the heart depends on the pocket.69

B. Ber. 44b: 70

כל שהוא כביצה ביצה טובה הימנה Any kind of food with the same quantity of egg egg is superior [in food value] than it. B. San. 24b:71 דהוה ליה אסמכתא ואסמכתא לא קניא Because it is an Asmakta, And Asmakta is not legally binding. B. San. 25b:72

והאידנא נכיס אבא לפום ברא וברא לפום אבא And now he will slaughter the father in the presence of the son And the son in the presence of the father.73

M. Avot 4, 12: יהי כבוד תלמידך חביב עליך ככבוד חבירך וכבוד חבירך כמורא רבך ומורא רבך כמורא שמים Let the honor of your disciple be as dear to you as the honor of your comrade And the honor of your comrade as the fear of your master

68 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Leiden. 69 The word ‘pocket’ means the money one has in his pocket. 70The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Munich 95. 71The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Jerusalem – Yad Harav Herzog 1. 72The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Florence II-I-9. 73 From the entire unit in the Talmud we understand that the meaning of this saying is that the ReshNahara, the one who’s in charge of tax collecting in the river area, will collect heavy taxes from the people of the city. The This saying was .’נכיס אבא לפום ברא‘ ,.same explanation can be found in Rashi’s commentary to B. San. 25b, s.v built in chiastic order and is similar to Ezek. 5:10: “Therefore the fathers shall eat the sons in the midst of thee, and the sons shall eat their fathers…”

33 And the fear of your master as the fear of heaven.74

Kallah Rabbati 2:8: 75 נגיעה מביא לידי חימום וחימום לידי יצר החשק Touching leads to excitement/warming and excitement/warming leads to passion.

T. B. Q. 10:14: 76 חמור גזל הרבים מגזל היחיד שהגוזל את היחיד יכול לפייסו ולהחזיר לו גזילו הגוזל את הרבים אין יכול לפייסן ולהחזיר להן גזילן A more strict rule applies to robbing the public than to robbing an individual For he who robs from an individual can appease him and restore to him what he has stolen But he who robs from the public cannot appease all of them and restore to them what he has stolen.

In this example the order of the discussion is as follows: Public-individual-individual-public. Although the opening line start with a person who robs the public and then deals with a person that robs an individual, the expanded, reasoned debate starts with a person that robs an individual and then refer to the person that robs the public.77

74In this passage the order is disciple, comrade, master and heaven, meaning God. In B. Ta. 7a we can find a different saying that remind the saying in Avot but in almost completely reverse order and without Anadiplosis: הרבה למדתי מרבותי ומחבירי יותר מרבותי ומתלמידי יותר מכולן I have learnt much from my teachers, and from my colleagues more than from my teachers, but from my disciples more than from them all. 75The Hebrew text and references from tractate Kallah Rabbati in this paper are according to M. Higger, The Treatises Kallah (New York: Debe Rabanan, 1936), [Heb.] at the ’ו‘ The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Vienna, National Library, Heb. 20. The letter 76 .is hanged above the line and it’s probably added after the copyist unintentionally omits it ’שהגוזל‘ word 77Similar examples can be found in T. Pe. 4:7 and in T. B.Q. 2:2 and many other places in Rabbinic literature. For further discussion see Mirsky (see n. 14), pp. 171-178.

34 Anadiplosis that Does Not Affect Syntax

M. Zab. 1, 8:78 ראה אחת היום ואחת בין השמשות אחת בין השמשות ואחת למחר... [if] he saw one by day and one at twilight One at twilight and one on the following day…

This Mishnah deals with the rules pertaining to a person who experiences an abnormal genital discharge (i.e., gonorrhea, flux), and it deals also with the time period designated as “twilight.” These rules are determined, inter alia, by the number of times the individual experienced the abnormal genital discharge. According to the Mishnah, “twilight” divides one day from another. Consequently a genital discharge that began before twilight and continued into twilight is regarded as a discharge that took place on two successive days. Consequently, a person who experienced a discharge before at twilight and another discharge on the day before or the day after that twilight period is regarded as having experienced three זב discharges. He is designated a severe sufferer of abnormal genital discharge or in Hebrew .גמור Mishnah Tractate Zabim opens with the words: “A person who experienced one abnormal genital discharge.” These words are understood as referring to sections M. Zab. 1:4-5. In each subsequent section of the chapter, the Mishnah simply employs the verb ra’â, “he/she experienced” instead of repeating the entire sentence with which the tractate begins. Moreover, with regard to 1:8 and the saying under discussion, the word ra’â, meaning. “he/she experienced” and literally “he/she saw,” is missing from the second clause of the Mishnah, because it is understood on the basis of its appearance in the first clause.79 The absence of the verb ra’â in the second clause of the Mishnah creates the anadiplosis in the unit. The anadiplosis in the text under consideration is syntactic and should not be seen as a stylistic repetition as perceived by some copyists. For example, in the Kaufmann manuscript the words “one at twilight” are copied above the text of the second clause after they, either unintentionally or deliberately, were omitted. This passage is quoted in Y. Ber.1:1. In the Venice edition of the Jerusalem Talmud the words “one at twilight” are omitted in the second clause. According to Epstein, an unknown

78The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann and includes the copyist's margins with corrections to the text. 79As we can see, this Mishnah also uses the rhetorical feature of Gaping, or ‘hamshakhah’ in Hebrew.

32 proofreader, maybe the Venice edition proofreader, omitted some of the words because he perceived them to be a dittography.80 In light of what we have just now stated it appears that the deep structure of the dictum is as follows: Whoever experiences one [experience of discharge] during the day, and [experiences] one [experience of discharge] at twilight; [Whoever experiences] one [experience of discharge] at twilight and [experiences] one [experience of discharge] the following day. If we compare the deep structure and the written version, we can see that the words “one at twilight” that should become the logical subject of the sentence retain the original syntactic status. On the other hand, the word ra’â, meaning “he/she experienced” and literally “he/she saw,” which opens the section, keeps its original status as subject and predicate. That is to say, in some cases, especially when there is use of gaping and hamshakhah, and there are big differences between the sentence and his deep structure, the syntactic anadiplosis doesn’t affect the syntax of the sentence, unlike the examples from the Bible discussed earlier.

B. Hag. 5b: ומה הרואה במיתתן של חכמים יחיה בחייהם על אחת כמה וכמה If one who sees sages in their death will live, How much the more so he who sees them when they are alive.

This dictum is presented at the end of the narrative concerning Rabbi and R. Hiyya who visited the house of a blind disciple of the sages. At the end of the visit the blind student told the visitors about R. Jacob, who welcomed his teacher every day. According to R. Jacob, whoever sees sages at the hour of their death is expected to be rewarded with long life, while a significantly greater reward is expected for one who sees sages while they are alive.81 The dictum is constructed as an antithetic and chiastic parallelism according to the a fortiori pattern, and it is based upon Ps. 49:10-11: “Shall he live eternally and never see the grave. For one sees that the wise die….” These biblical verses, like all of Ps. 49, are difficult to understand. However, most people agree that we have here two separate verses, from which

80See J.N. Epstein, Introduction to Amoraic Literature: Babylonian Talmud and Yerushalmi (Tel-Aviv: Dvir, 1962), pp. 337-339 [Heb.]; A. Samuel, “Yerushalmi MS Leiden,” in Ha-Meir La-Aretz 56 (2002), pp. 85-88 [Heb.] and there more references. 81 There are some changes between the Jerusalem and the Babylonian Talmud versions for this story. For further discussion see D. Rosenthal, “the Transformation of Eretz Israel Traditions in Babylonia,” in Cathedra 92 (1999), pp. 10-11 [Heb.], and further references there.

31 one would not expect to learn the lesson that people who see sages at the hour of their death are expected to live a long life.82 In this Rabbinic dictum we can find, once again, the use of gaping accompanied by hamshakhah, or continuation. In this dictum the words “who sees the wise” and the verb “he will live” are treated as belonging to both the preceding and the following clauses. The result is that the two clauses created by such a reading are metrically balanced. The syntactic and it does ’חי"ה‘ anadiplosis in this dictum contains two words with the same root, Hebrew remain the , הרואה ”,not affect the syntax of the sentence, and the words “one who sees subject of the dictum. The deep structure of the Rabbinic dictum includes, therefore, chiastic antithetic parallelism without anadiplosis. The form should look something like this: Just as one who sees the death of sages lives, All the more so [one who sees sages] in their lifetime [will live].83

Anadiplosis that Unifies Different Sayings:

In some cases the rabbis use anadiplosis to connect two different sentences. In those cases one sentence is a biblical verse, and the other was written by the rabbis; its first word shares the same linguistic root as the last word in the biblical verse. The joint root, strengthen the connection between the different sentences, and at first sight they might seem as one successive section or pericope. We shall now some examples of this unique use of anadiplosis. M. Meg. 3, 4:84

82Among others we can mention Rashi, Rabbi Saadia Gaon (Rasag) and Radaq, in their commentary to Psalms. Modern scholars like Briggs, Weiser and Kraus suggest different explanations for these verses, but neither one of them suggest that verses 10 and 11 are separated. That is to say that the saying attributed to R. Jacob is based upon drash and it is not parallel to the regular reading and understanding of these verses. See C.A. Briggs and E.G. Briggs, the Book of Psalms (ICC) (Edinburgh: T. & T. & Clark, 1906), pp. 408- 409; A. Weiser, the Psalms (OTL) (Philadelphia, PA: the Westminster Press, 1962), pp. 388-389; H.J. Kraus, Psalms 1-59 (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Pub. House, 1988), pp. 479-483. 83 Other examples which are not discussed can be found in Y. Ber. 1:1 and in T. Git 1:2: Y. Ber. 1:1: אין הלבנה זורחת בשעה שהחמה שוקעת ולא שוקעת בשעה שהחמה זורחת “The moon does not shine at the time that the sun sets And does not set at the time that the sun shines.” The word ‘moon’ is missing in the second clause while creating syntactic Anadiplosis. Nevertheless the moon remains the subject of this dictum. T. Git. 1:2: חומר במדינת הים שאין בארץ ישראל ובארץ ישראל שאין במדינת הים A more strict rule applies to overseas than to the land of Israel, And [A more strict rule applies] to the land of Israel then to overseas.

35 ועוד א' ר' יהודה: בית הכנסת שחרב אין מספידין לתוכו ואין מפשילין לתוכו חבלים ואין פורשין לתוכו מצודות ואין שוטחין על גגו פירות ואין עושין אותו קפנדריא שנ' והשימותי את מקדשיכם קדושתן אף כשהן שוממין R. Judah teaches also That no funeral orations may be delivered in a synagogue which had become ruinous, Nor may it be used as a rope-walk, Nor to spread nets therein (to dry) Nor to spread fruit on its roof, Nor to use it as a short cut, As it is said: “I will bring your sanctuaries into desolation,” That is, they remain sanctuaries even in their desolation.

”,I will bring your sanctuaries into desolation“ ,והשימותי את מקדשיכם The origin of the words is Lev. 26:31. This verse is also used as the concept or idea behind this passage, and its main message is that desolated synagogues should not be used for every day jobs. The author integrates the biblical quote into the later Tannaitic material while using anadiplosis to combine the different sentences together.85 In these passages the repetition is necessary, and this anadiplosis is obviously a syntactic anadiplosis.

84 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Parma 3173. 85A later version of this saying can be found in Midrash Lekach Tov (also known as Pesikta Zutarta), Vayikra, In this version the addition to the biblical text doesn’t .’והשמותי את מקדשיכם אע"פ ששממו קדושתם עליהם‘ :Kedoshim create anadiplosis. In T. Meg. 2:18 we can find a similar idea: ‘בתי כנסיות אין נוהגין בהן קלות ראש אבל בחורבנן מניחין אותן ומגדלין בהן עשבים מפני אגומת נפש.’ According to this baraita destroyed or abandoned synagogues should stay in their current status, i.e., untouched and neglected or demolished.

30 Kallah Rabbati 3:1: ואינו מת עד שרואה הקדוש ברוך הוא בעצמו שנאמר כי לא יראני האדם וחי בחייהם אינם רואים אבל במיתתם רואים… And he does not die until he beholds the Holy One, blessed be He As it is stated: “for man shall not see me and live”, In their lifetime they do not see me, but at their death they do see me.

This unit describes the process of death of every human being. According to a quote from Exod. 33:20, it is impossible for any man to see the face of God and to stay alive afterwards. Like the previous example, the anadiplosis combines two different sayings from different times while creating one continuous saying.

Anadiplosis in Large Units

Here we discuss the use of anadiplosis in large units in Rabbinic literature. As we will show later on, in all of the examples under discussion the anadiplosis will be syntactic anadiplosis, and some examples include different types of the sorite (climax) that have been discussed earlier.86 The examples are divided into two: regular anadiplosis and “disturbed” anadiplosis, in which several words, sometimes a quote from the Bible, separate the repeated elements.87

Regular Anadiplosis:

B. Ta. 31a:88 בת מלך שואלת מבת כהן גדול בת כהן גדול שואלת מבת סגן ובת סגן שואלת מבת משוח מלחמה ובת משוח מלחמה שואלת מבת כהן הדיוט וכל ישראל שואלין זה מזה כדי שלא לבייש את מי שאין לו

The daughter of the king borrows [the garments] from the daughter of the High Priest, The daughter of the High Priest from the daughter of the deputy High Priest,

86See n. 15. 87See n. 13. 88The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Munich 95. In Y. Ta. 4, 11 (4, 7 in the printed version) we can find a different version: The Jerusalem Talmud version is shorter .'היתה בתו שלמלך שואלת מבתו שלכהן גדול בתו שלכהן גדול שואלת מבתו שלמלך' than the Mishnah version and presents another version to the class distinctions shown in the Mishnah.

33 And the daughter of the deputy High Priest from the daughter of the Anointed for Battle, And the daughter of the Anointed for Battle from the daughter of an ordinary priest, And all Israel borrow from one another, so as not to put to shame anyone who may not possess [white garments.[

According to Simeon b. Gamaliel (M. Ta. 4:8) two days in the Jewish calendar share the same mores: Yom Kippur and the fifteenth of Av. On both days, the girls of Jerusalem used to borrow white garments and dance in the vineyards.89 The Babylonian Talmud extends the discussion in the Mishnah and describes the action involved in borrowing the garments. The king's daughter, whose status is the highest, borrows white garment from the daughter of the High Priest. The daughter of the High Priest borrows from the daughter of his deputy; the daughter of the High Priest deputy borrows from the daughter of the Anointed for Battle, and she borrows from the daughter of ordinary priest. The daughters of Israel borrow from one another without regard to social status. All three anadiplosēs in this unit are syntactic and, unlike the normal order in climax anadiplosis, the unit was built upwards from the regular order. First mentioned is the king's daughter, from the highest status, and afterwards the social status is decreasing till we reach the lowest status, i.e., Israel's daughter.90 Finally we note the anaphora created from the

89The beginning of this tradition is uncertain. The only reference in the Bible that resembles this unit is at Judg. 21:19-24. According to the story in Judg., the daughters of Israel used to dance in the vineyards of Shiloh every year at “the feast of the LORD” that usually is recognized as Sukkot (see for example Lev. 23:39: “Howbeit on the fifteenth day of the seventh month, when ye have gathered in the fruits of the land, ye shall keep the feast of the LORD seven days,”) and it is unclear where, when and how this tradition started. For further discussion about this tradition see V. Noam, Megillat Ta’anit and the scholion (Jerusalem: Yad Ben Zvi, 1997), pp. 20, 217-222 [Heb.]; P. Mandel, ”'There were no Happier Days for Israel than the Fifteenth of Av and the Day of Atonement': On the Final Mishnah of Tractate Ta’anit and it’s Transmission,” in M.A. Friedman and M.B. Lerner (ed.), Studies in the Aggadic Midrashim (=Te'uda 11) (Tel-Aviv: Tel-Aviv University, 1996), pp. 147- 173[Heb.]. 90 In Rabbinic literature we can find two more examples of units that compare the different classes of Jewish society in different aspects of life that also uses Anadiplosis. The first example is at M. Hor. 3, 8: כהן קודם ללוי לוי לישראל ישרא' לממזר ממזר לנתין נתין לגר וגר לעבד משוחרר... And the second example is at B. Pes. 49b: לעולם ימכור אדם כל מה שיש לו וישא בת תלמיד חכם לא מצא בת תלמיד חכם ישא בת גדולי הדור לא מצא בת גדולי הדור ישא בת ראשי כנסיות לא מצא בת ראשי כנסיות ישא בת גבאי צדקה

33 repeated word “daughter,” the mesophora created from the repeated word “borrows,” and the “concluding deviation” in the last stich of the unit that highlighted through the length of the stich and the replacement of the word “daughter” to the words “all Israel.”

M. Sot. 9:25:91 זריזות מביאה לידי נקיות נקיות לידי טהרה טהרה לידי פרישות פרישות לידי קדושה קדושה לידי ענוה ענוה מביאה לידי יראות חטא יראות חטא חסידות חסידות לידי רוח הקודש רוח הקדש לידי תחיית המתים תחיית המתים בא לידי אליהו זכור לטוב

Heedfulness leads to cleanliness Cleanliness leads to cleanness Cleanness leads to abstinence Abstinence leads to holiness

לא מצא בת גבאי צדקה ישא בת מלמדי תינוקות ולא ישא בת עמי הארץ מפני שהן שקץ ונשותיהן שרץ ועל בנותיהן הוא אומר ארור שכב עם כל בהמה. .separate between the repeating elements and disrupt the Anadiplosis 'לא מצא' In this example the words 91The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann including the medieval scribe's marginal corrections. This unit is missing in some manuscripts and some print editions, while in some editions this unit came under the title: “Baraita at the end of Sotah,” at the bottom of the page or in the page margins. There are several parallels to this unit in Rabbinic literature including: B. A.Z. 20B; Y. Shab. 1, 3; Y. Sheq.3, 3; Cant. Rab.І, 1, 9; Midrash Prov. 15, 32 and more. In Kallah Rabbati 2, 6 there are two Consecutive Anadiplosis, that one of them remind the unit under discussion: מכאן דרשו רבותינו הרהור מביא לידי תאוה תאוה לידי אהבה אהבה לידי רדיפה רדיפה לידי מעשה להודיעך כמה קשה חזרתו מזו לזו וכנגדן בתשובה פרישות מביאה לידי זהירות זהירות מביאה לידי זריזות זריזות לידי נקיות ונקיות לידי טהרה וטהרה לידי חסידות וחסידות לידי ענוה וענוה גדולה מכולם

33 Holiness leads to modesty Modesty leads to the fear of sin The fear of sin leads to piety Piety leads to the Holy Spirit The Holy Spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead The resurrection of the dead comes through Elijah, blessed be his memory.

This passage, which concludes Tractate Sota, was classified by Fischel under the subtype of “Ethical and Ethico-metaphysical sorite.” It contains a list of ten phenomena, each of which brings about another positive phenomenon, and each of which could not exist without the items that preceded it in the chain. Unlike the previous example, this unit was built in the normal order of climax anadiplosis, and every stich represent higher level of holiness. is missing in most stiches of this unit , מביאה ”,Finally, we should note that the word “leads and should be continues from the first stich to the entire unit.92

Transmissional Sorite

The Fathers According to Rabbi Nathan, Version A, 34:31-35:93 עשרה מעלות נסתלקה שכינה ממקום למקום מכפרת לכרוב ומכרוב למפתן הבית וממפתן הבית לשני כרובים ומשני כרובי' לגג ההיכל ומגג ההיכל לחומת עזרה ומחומת עזרה למזבח וממזבח לעיר ומעיר להר הבית ומהר בית למדבר ...ואחת שנסתלקה כלפי מעלה שנ' אלכה ואשובה אל מקומי הראשון By ten ascents the Shekinah withdrew from one place to the next: From the ark cover to the cherub

92For further discussion of this unit see J.N. Epstein, Introduction to Mishnaic Text,(Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1948), Vol. 2,pp. 976-977 [Heb.]; Y. Agur, “the final mishnah in tractate Sotah-textual and interpretative study,” in (ed. Y. Alfasi) J. Lesloi Book (Tel-Aviv, 1985), pp. 72-78 [Heb.]; Higger (see n. 75), pp. 198-199; Fischel (see n. 15), pp.132-133; A. Büchler, Types of Jewish-Palestinian piety from 70 B.C.E. to 70 C.E (Westmead, England: Gregg International, 1969), pp. 42-59. For further discussion of this type of sorite see Fischel (see n.15), pp. 132-143. 93The Hebrew text is according to MS New York Rab. 1305. A different version of this unit with several changes can be found in B. R. H. 31a.

33 From the cherub to the threshold of the house From the threshold of the house to the two cherubim From the two cherubim to the roof of the Sanctuary From the roof of the Sanctuary to the wall of the Temple court From the wall of the Temple court to the altar From the altar to the city From the city to the Temple mount From the Temple mount to the wilderness…And once when it withdrew upward on high, as it is written: I will go and return to my place.

By paying attention to the anadiplosis it is possible to map the path of the Shekinah from the ark cover through the various parts of the Temple all the way to its withdrawing from earth and its ascending into heaven. Fischel suggests that this unit uses a unique type of the transmissional sorite— topographical sorite. This kind of sorite describes the path of the unit's subject from one place to another. Two more examples of topographical sorite appear in M. R.H. 2:3 and B. R.H. 31a-b: M. R. H. 2:3:94 מנין היו משיאים מהר המשחה לסרטבא ומיסרטבא לגרופוניא ומגרופוניא לחוורן ומחוורן לבית בלתין ומבית בילתין לא זזו.. And from where did they light the torches? From the Mount of oil [i.e. the Mount of Olives] to Sarteva And from Sarteva to Grophina And from Grophina to Havran And from Havran to Bet Biltin The one on Bet Biltin they did not budge from there

94The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann.

33 B. R.H. 31a-b:95 וכנגדן גלתה סנהדרי]ן[מגמרא מלשכת הגזית לחנות מחנות לירושלם מירושלם ליבנה מיבנה לאושא מאושא ליבנה ומיבנה לאושא מאושא לשפרעם משפרעם לבית שערים מבית שערים לציפורי מציפורי לטבריא וטבריא עמוקה מכלן Correspondingly, the Sanhedrin was exiled (successively to ten places of banishment, as we know from tradition) from the Chamber of Hewn Stone to Hanuth, and from Hanuth to Jerusalem, and from Jerusalem to Jabneh and from Jabneh to Usha, and from Usha [back] to Jabneh, and from Jabneh [back] to Usha, and from Usha to Shefar'am, and from Shefar'am to Beth She'arim, and from Beth She'arim to Sepphoris, and from Sepphoris to Tiberias; and Tiberias is the lowest-lying of them all

Although these units discuss various issues, it is easy to identify the same use of the anadiplosis in all three. Considering the multiple sites in which the Shekinah (in the first unit) and the Sanhedrin (in the last unit) go through on their journey, it is hard to find a better

95The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Munich 140.

34 rhetorical device that could have replace the anadiplosis/sorite while maintaining continuity of these units.96 The last example in this part contains several rhetoric features including gaping, mesophora, inclusio, anadiplosis and the use of an unusual and uncommon complex chiastic pattern.97

M. Meg. 3:1:98 בני העיר שמכרו רחובה שלעיר לוקחים בדמיו בית הכנסת בית הכנסת לוקחים תיבה תיבה לוקחים מטפחות מטפחות לוקחים ספרים ספרים לוקחים תורה אבל אם מכרו תורה לא יקחו ספרים ספרים לא יקחו מטפחות מטפחות לא יקחו תיבה תיבה לא יקחו בית הכנסת בית הכנסת לא יקחו את הרחוב וכן במותריהם 1. If the townspeople sell the town square, they may buy with the proceeds a synagogue; 2. if they sell a synagogue, they may buy with the proceeds an ark; 3. if they sell an ark, they may buy wrappings for scrolls; 4. if they sell wrappings for scrolls, they may by scrolls; 5. if they sell scrolls, they may buy a Sefer Torah. 5. But if they sell a Sefer Torah, they may not buy with the proceeds scrolls; 4. if they sell scrolls, they may not buy wrappings for scrolls; 3. if they sell wrappings for scrolls, they may not buy an ark; 2. if they sell an ark, they may not buy a synagogue; 1. if they sell a synagogue, they may not buy a town square. The same applies to any money left over.

96For further discussion see Fischel (see n.15), pp. 127-128. 97In the Bible there are several examples of complex chiastic patterns. Prominent examples can be found in Exod. 28:6-12, 30:12-15 and in Lev. 24:14-23. In some units there is a “pivot member” in the middle of the unit, and in some units the second part will be a “mirror image” of the first part without “pivot member.” For further discussion, see Paran (see n.32), pp. 163-174. 98The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufman; the external drawing in the Hebrew version and the numbers in the English translation were added by us to highlight the unit structure.

32 This unit tries to set rules regarding to selling and buying of religious articles, from the main street that sometimes is used for praying, via the city synagogues, the ark that contains the Torah scroll, and so on. It is easy to see the chiastic order. The tenth line is the opposite of the first line; the ninth line is the opposite of the second line; the eighth line is the opposite of the third line, etc. The first five lines are attached by the anadiplosis in ascending order of holiness, and next five lines are also attached by the anadiplosis but in descending order of holiness.

“Disturb” Anadiplosis

B. Hag. 12b: 99 ארץ על עמודים עומדת שנ' המרגיז ארץ ממקומה ועמודיה יתפלצון ועמודים על המים שנ' לרקע הארץ על המים ומים על הרים שנא' על הרים יעמדו מים והרים על הרוח שנ' כי הנה יוצר הרים ובורא רוח ורוח בסערה שנ' רוח סערה עושה דברו וסערה תלויה בזרועו של הקב"ה שנ' ומתחת זרועות עולם What does the earth rest on? On the pillars, for it is said: Who shaketh the earth out of her place, and the pillars thereof tremble. The pillars upon the waters, for it is said: To Him that spread forth the earth above the waters. The waters upon the mountains, for it is said: The waters stood above the mountains. The mountains on the wind, for it is said: For, lo, He that formeth the mountains, and createth the wind. The wind upon the storm, for it is said: The wind, the storm maketh its substance. Storm is suspended on the arm of the Holy One, blessed be He, for it is said: And underneath are the everlasting arms.

This unit describes the creation of the world. According to Yose, the earth stands upon pillars, the pillars stand upon the water, etc. In Y. Hag. 2:1, we find another version with some changes and in the name of Judah bar Pazi and not in the name of Yose:100

והארץ עומדת על מים 'לרוקע הארץ על המים'

99The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Munich 6. 100 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Leiden.

31 והמים עומדים על הרים 'על הרים יעמדו מים' וההרים עומדין על רוח 'כי הנה יוצר הרים ובורא רוח' והרוח תלויה בסערה 'רוח סערה עושה דברו' וסערה עשאה הק'ב'ה' כמין קמיע 'ותלייה בזרועו שנ' ומתחת זרועות עולם' The earth rest upon waters To Him that spread forth the earth above the waters The waters upon the mountains, The waters stood above the mountains. The mountains on the wind, For, lo, He that formeth the mountains, and createth the wind. The wind upon the storm, The wind, the storm maketh its substance. And the Holy One, blessed be He made Storm is amulet, and it suspended on his arm, For it is said: And underneath are the everlasting arms. In this version the earth stands upon the waters and not upon the pillars, but the general structure stays the same. In the Babylonian Talmud’s unit we can find another use of the gaping and hamshakhah. First, the forward hamshakhah of the verb “rest on” from the first member of the unit the second, third and fourth members of the unit, and secondly the backward hamshakhah of the verb “suspended” from the last member of the unit to the fifth member.101 In both Talmudic versions the quotes from the Bible divide the repeating words while disrupting the anadiplosis. Although the anadiplosis is interrupted by the biblical quote, it is still easily noticeable and still maintains its position at the end of a line and in the beginning of the next line.102 Another version can be found in one of the versions of Midrash Maase Merkava and Maase Bereshit. The parallel units in this midrash expand the discussion on the order of creation, but

101In MS Munich 95, MS Vatican 134, MS Vatican 171 and in the Jerusalem Talmud version the verb ‘suspended’ is not missing and therefore we suggest that the verb ‘rest on’ doesn’t continue to the fifth member and there is backward hamshakhah of the verb ‘suspended’ from the last member. 102 That is in contrast to some examples of repetition that were wrongly classified as Anadiplosis by some scholars (see n.12). In our opinion, in all of the examples in this part, the repetition should classify as “disturb” Anadiplosis.

35 still use anadiplosis to connect twenty nine members together (with some extensions). This is the longest unit that uses anadiplosis we found in the Bible or in Rabbinic literature.103

B. B.B.75a:104 אמ' ר' יוחנן עתיד הקב"ה לעשות סוכה לצדיקי' מעורו של לויתן שנ' התמל' בסכות עורו וגו' זכה עושין לו סוכה לא זכה עושין לו צלצל שנ' ובצלצל דגים ראשו זכה עושין לו צלצל לא זכה עושין לו ענק שנ' וענקים לגרגרותיך זכה עושין לו ענק לא זכה עושין לו קמיע שנ' ותקשרנו לנערותיך Said R. Yohanan: The Holy One, blessed be He, will in the time to come make a tabernacle for the righteous from the skin of Leviathan; for it is said: Canst thou fill tabernacles with his skin. If a man is worthy, a tabernacle is made for him; if he is not worthy [of this] a [mere] covering is made for him, for it is said: And his head with a fish covering. If a man is [sufficiently] worthy a covering is made for him; if he is not worthy [even of this], a necklace is made for him, for it is said: And necklaces about thy neck. If he is worthy [of it] a necklace is made for him; if he is not worthy [even of this] an amulet is made for him; as it is said: And thou wilt bind him for thy maidens.

103For further discussion see J.D. Eisenstein, Ozar Midrashim (New York: Eisenstein, 1915), pp. 311-313 [Heb.]. The relevant unit is at p. 315. 104The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Paris 1337. In MS Munich 95 there is different version of this text: זכ' עושי' לו סוכ' לא זכ' עושי' לו צלצל זכה עושי' לו ענק לא זכה עושי' לו קמיע שנ' ותקשרנו לנערותיך In the later version the middle line is missing and so is the Anadiplosis. This is not the only place where differences between manuscripts have influence on the style of the text. In the Fathers according to Rabbi Nathan, version A, 8:3 there are two different manuscripts, one with three Anadiplosēs and one with only one Anadiplosis: MS New York 10484 (Epstein): עשה לך רב כיצד בזמן שיעשה לו את רבו קבע וילמד ממנו מקרא ומשנה מדרש הלכות והגדות טעם שהניח לו במקרא סוף שיאמרו לך במשנה טעם שהניח לו במשנה סוף שיאמרו לו במדרש טעם שהניח במדרש סוף שיאמרו לו בהלכות טעם שהניח לו בהלכות סוף שיאמרו לו בהגדות נמצא אותו אדם יוצא מלפניו מלא טוב וברכה MS Oxford Heb. c. 24 (Halberstam): עשה לך רב כיצד מלמד שיעשה לו את רבו קבע וילמד ממנו מקרא ומשנה מדרש הלכות ואגדות טעם שהניח לו במקרא סוף שיאמר לו במשנה טעם שהניח לו במדרש סוף שיאמ' לו בהלכות טעם שהניח לו בהלכות סוף שיאמר לו באגדו' נמצא האדם ההוא מלא טוב וברכה

30 This unit is part of several discussions about the whale, including the whale’s creation and behavior. In this unit there are three contrasting parallelisms connected to each other by anadiplosis. Lines 2-4 open with the same words and have the same words in the middle, while creating anaphora and mesophora. At the end of each sentence a quote from the Bible disrupts the anadiplosis, although the anadiplosis is still easily noticeable.

The Uniqueness of the Rabbinic Anadiplosis

Above we discerned rules for the use of anadiplosis in the Bible and in the literature of the Ancient Near East. First, in many cases anadiplosis is only a meter of style; second, Anadiplosis might be a result of chiastic structure that also creates inclusio. Third, in most cases, excluding genealogical lists, anadiplosis will be found in poetry and it is not very commonly in purely prosaic units. Fourth, most anadiplosis will be found in short unit, and in most cases we will not find more than one or two anadiplosis in the same unit. Finally, in most cases there isn’t deliberate change in word order or deliberate omitting of words to create anadiplosis, i.e., in most cases we will not find a difference between the verse or the sentence and its deep structure. In Rabbinic examples, on the other hand, most anadiplosis is syntactic anadiplosis. It is very rare to find stylistic anadiplosis in Rabbinic literature, and the importance of anadiplosis in most cases is more regarding syntax and less regarding style. In some cases the text was intentionally modified to create anadiplosis, sometimes while using gaping, hamshakhah, and word omission. In those cases we will not find any effect of anadiplosis on the theme of the unit. In some cases the rabbis used anadiplosis to bind together verses from the Bible and their own words, and, in our opinion, this alone should support that the Rabbis were familiar with the features of anadiplosis, and they did not hesitate to use it as a syntactic tool, not as rhetorical pattern, when needed.

Unlike the biblical use, in Rabbinic literature we can find anadiplosis in large units, containing four, five, or even ten members. Some of these examples were disturbed by biblical quotes. It goes without saying that we will not find any parallel to this phenomenon in the Bible. Most of the Rabbinic examples are from prose units, and it is very rare to find anadiplosis in If He had only“ , אילו הוציאנו ממצרים', poetry. A unique example is the anadiplosis in the song

33 ,Dayenu, from the Passover Haggada ,'דיינו' brought us out from Egypt,” also known as which connects fourteen members.105

Conclusion

We have surveyed the use of one patterns of repetition in the sayings of the Rabbinic sages— anadiplosis. Unlike biblical anadiplosis, which is usually only stylistic, Rabbinic anadiplosis is, by and large, syntactic, which strengthens the connections between the parts of the dictum. Often anadiplosis is created by the deliberate omission of words, and often in Rabbinic literature it appears in the middle of a chiastic structure, which also creates an envelope. By means of anadiplosis, the Rabbinic sages were able to connect dicta, to map boundaries, and to trace the relationship between cause and consequence. Often anadiplosis is employed to connect separate dicta, whose relationship is not on the level of content but only on the level of style. At this juncture we should say that the principle finding of our research into the use of anadiplosis in Rabbinic literature is that the Rabbinic sages adopted the rhetorical devices of biblical literature and adapted them to the needs of the very different kind of literature they created. We have seen that, contrary to what is often asserted about the rambling free association of the Rabbinic literature, in fact, the Rabbinic sages paid very careful attention not only to the content they sought to convey but to the best possible way to present their ideas. For this purpose they adopted prominent patterns of repetition that had been employed in Hebrew Scripture. Another finding of this research is the use that can be made of stylistic devices in both textual criticism of and research into the editing of smaller and larger units within the Rabbinic literature. This is to say that investigation of rhetorical patterns in Rabbinic literature does not end with research into the stylistics of Rabbinic aphorisms. On the contrary, this field of research promises to contribute to our understanding of many more aspects of research into Rabbinic literature. And last, to our opinion this paper highlights the need for interdisciplinary study that can detect and analyze phenomena in different literatures, in this case the Bible and the Rabbinic literature. This study can help us to learn more about the developments and changes that

105We should clarify that in this paper we didn’t discuss the use of Anadiplosis in liturgical hymns such as 'Dayenu' that, according to Bar-Ilan, was written in Israel around 400 A.D. Bar-Ilan argues (pp.314- 315) that the use of Anadiplosis in the Bible was only random and that there is only one appearance of Anadiplosis in Tannic period, should be rejected to our opinion. See M. Bar-Ilan, “If He Took Us Out of Egypt…It Would Have Been Enough,” in A. Atzmon and T. Shafir (ed.), Ke-Tavor Be-Harim (AlonShevut: Tevunot Press, 2013), pp. 305-332 [Heb.].

33 happened over the years to the rhetorical patterns that had been used in the Bible, which were then adopted by the Rabbis.

33 The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244

brill.com/rrj

Numerical Sayings in the Literatures of the Ancient Near East, in the Bible, in the Book of Ben-Sira and in Rabbinic Literature

Ariel-Ram Pasternak Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Beer Sheva 84105, Israel [email protected]

Shamir Yona Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Beer Sheva 84105, Israel [email protected]

Abstract

This paper follows the use of numbers from the Bible and Ancient Near Eastern literature, through the book of Ben-Sira, and ultimately to the Rabbinic literature. We show that the Rabbis were familiar with the Biblical use of numbers as rhetorical devices and used numbers in the same ways that the Bible did.

Keywords

Numerical sayings – Ben Sira – Rabbinic Literature – Biblical Rhetoric

Introduction

1 Previous Studies Numerical sayings are among the most well-known and most frequently attested rhetorical devices in the literatures of the ancient Near East, Hebrew Scripture, and Rabbinic literature. The use of numbers in general and specifĳically the use of numerical sayings in the Bible and in the

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, 2016 | doi 10.1163/15700704-12341305 78 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 203 literatures of the ancient Near East have been studied frequently,1 among others by Alt,2 Loewenstamm,3 Cassuto,4 Tur-Sinai,5 Segal,6 Paran,7 Haran,8

1 In some cases scholars treated diffferent aspects of this phenomenon. For example, as we shall see, some referred to a specifĳic genre such as the biblical law, while others referred only to numbers in biblical poetry, and others only dealt with one of several sub-patterns of numerical sayings. In this paper, we do not limit ourselves to a specifĳic genre, book, or place of writing. Moreover, our discussion is stylistic and literary and sometimes philological. That is, we do not discuss the numerical value of words (gematria), number’s mystical signifĳicance (numerology), or their authenticity. For example, 2 Kgs. 19:35 mentions that one of the Lord’s angels killed 185,000 Assyrian soldiers. The reliability of such numbers will not be discussed. Finally, in most cases we refer to numbers that appear explicitly in the text and do not deal with “hidden” numbers, such as a document’s number of words, verses, or chapters, biblical code, steganography, equidistant letter sequences, biblical numerology, etc. This approach is contrary to some contemporary studies, for example, C.J. Labuschagne, “Signifĳicant Compositional Techniques in the Psalms: Evidence for the Use of Number as an Organizing Principle,” in Vetus Testamentum 59, 4 (2009), pp. 583–605; M. Bar-Ilan, Biblical Numerology (Rehovot: Association for Jewish Astrology and Numerology, 2005) [Heb.]; I. Knohl, The Holy Name (Or Yehuda: Dvir, 2012) [Heb.]; idem, “Sacred Architecture: The Numerical Dimensions of Biblical Poems,” in Vetus Testamentum 62, 2 (2012), pp. 189–197, and see also the book review by M. Bar-Ilan in Beit Mikra 58, 1 (2013), pp. 153–166 [Heb.] and Knohl’s response in Beit Mikra 58, 2 (2013), pp. 130–134 [Heb.]. 2 A. Alt, “Die Ursprünge des israelitischen Rechts,” in Kleine Schriften zur Geschichte des Volkes Israel, I (Munich: C.H. Beck, 1959), pp. 278–332 (cf. A. Alt, Essays on Old Testament History and Religion (R.A. Wilson tr.) (Oxford: Blackwell, 1966), pp. 101–171). In his pioneering research Alt distinguished between two types of biblical law, casuistic and apodictic, and in his discussion he referred to the use of numbers in the apodictic law series. 3 S.E. Loewenstamm, “Remark on Stylistic Patterns in Biblical and Ugaritic Literatures,” in Leshonenu 32 (1968), pp. 33–35 [Heb.]; idem, “The Graded Number,” in Encyclopaedia Biblica (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1968), vol. 5, col. 185–186 [Heb.]. 4 M.D. Cassuto, The Goddess Anat (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 19654), p. 84 [Heb.]; idem, “Biblical and Canaanite literatures,” in Tarbiz 13, 4 (1942), pp. 203–205 [Heb.]. 5 N.H. Tur-Sinai, The Proverbs of Solomon (Tel-Aviv: Yavneh Press, 1947), p. 62 [Heb.]. 6 M.H. Segal, The Book of Ben-Sira (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1953), pp. 142–143 [Heb.]; idem, Introduction to the Bible (Jerusalem: Kiryat-Sepher, 1977), vol. 1, pp. 58–60 [Heb.]; idem, “On the Poetical Forms of Ancient Proverbial Literature,” in Tarbiz 1, 4 (1930), pp. 16–17 [Heb.]; idem, “On Certain Forms of Biblical Poetry,” in Tarbiz 18, 3/4 (1947), pp. 142–145 [Heb.]. 7 M. Paran, Forms of the Priestly Style in the Pentateuch (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1989), pp. 16–17, 136 [Heb.]. 8 M. Haran, “Biblical Studies: The Model of the Incremental Number in Its Various Forms and Its Relationship to the Formal Models of Parallelism,” in Tarbiz 39 (1969), pp. 109–136 [Heb.]; idem, “The Graded Numerical Sequence and the Phenomenon of ‘Automatism’ in Biblical Poetry,” in Vetus Testamentum Supplements 22 (1972), pp. 238–267.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 79 204 Pasternak and Yona

Avishur,9 Zakovitch,10 Kugel,11 Gevirtz,12 Yona,13 Greenstein,14 and the comprehensive discussion by Roth.15 Some scholars discuss the use of numerical sayings in Rabbinic literature, and among them we wish to mention Epstein,16 Gordis,17 Jacobs,18 Sharvit,19 Friedman,20 Valler,21 Melammed,22 Tropper,23 Gottlieb,24 and Lerner.25

9 Y. Avishur, Phoenician Inscriptions and the Bible (Jerusalem: E. Rubenstein, 1979), vol. 1, pp. 53–54, vol. 2, pp. 247, 254 [Heb.]; idem, Proceedings of the Seventh World Congress of Jewish Studies: Studies in the Bible and the Ancient Near East (Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 1981), vol. 2, pp. 1–9 [Heb.]; idem, Comparative Studies in Biblical and Ugaritic Languages and Literatures (Tel-Aviv: Archaeological Center Publication, 2007), pp. 84–107. 10 Y. Zakovitch, The Pattern of the Numerical Sequence Three-Four in the Bible (Heb. PhD Diss. Hebrew University, Jerusalem, 1977). 11 J.L. Kugel, The Idea of Biblical Poetry (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981), p. 42. 12 S. Gevirtz, Patterns in the Early Poetry of Israel (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1963), pp. 15–34. 13 S. Yona, “Shared Stylistic Patterns in the Aramaic Proverbs of Ahiqar and Hebrew Wisdom,” in Ancient Near Eastern Studies 44 (2007), pp. 43–46; idem, “Milestones in the Study of the Style, Structure and Rhetoric of the Proverbs of Ahiqar,” in Beer Sheva 20 (2011), pp. 135–136 [Heb.]. 14 E.L. Greenstein, “Finding One’s Way in Proverbs 30:18–19,” in S. Yona, et al., eds., Marbeh Hokma [forthcoming]. 15 W.M.W. Roth, “The Numerical Sequence x/x+1 in the Old Testament,” in Vetus Testamentum 12 (1962), pp. 300–311; idem, Numerical Sayings in the Old Testament (Leiden: Brill, 1965). Roth’s discussion is divided into three diffferent uses of numerical sayings: narrative, reflective, and hortative. In each chapter Roth discussed several examples, which include various types of numerical sayings such as “normal” use of one number, diffferent uses of graded numerical sayings like poetic parallelism with a pair of numbers, graded numerical parallelism, etc. However, in this paper, which focuses more on style, except for its last part that deals with the influence of numbers upon the editing process of Rabbinic literature, we divide the discussion according to the stylistic forms of use and not according to content. 16 J.N. Epstein, “Kelim Chapter 24,” in S. Lieberman, et al., eds., Louis Ginzberg Jubilee Volume (New York, American Academy for Jewish Research, 1946), vol. 1, pp. 65–74 [Heb.]. 17 R. Gordis, “The Heptad as an Element of Biblical and Rabbinic Style,” in Journal of Biblical Literature, 62, 1 (1943), pp. 17–26. 18 L. Jacobs, “The Numbered Sequence as a Literary Device in the Babylonian Talmud,” in Hebrew Annual Review 7 (1983), pp. 137–149. 19 S. Sharvit, Language and Style of Tractate Avoth through the Ages (Beer-Sheva: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press, 2006), pp. 27–31 [Heb.]. 20 S. Friedman, A Critical Study of Yevamot X with a Methodological Introduction (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1977), pp. 316–319, 346–351 [Heb.]; idem, “Some Structural Patterns in Talmudic Sugiot,” in A. Shinan, ed., Proceedings of the Sixth

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 80 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 205

There are only few essays that deal with numbers across diffferent literatures: the essays by Roth, which we indicated earlier; Israel Zeligman’s book, The Treasury of Numbers,26 which compiles, but does not discuss, examples from the Bible and several works of Rabbinic literature and can be used, mostly, as a concordance; and, last, the dissertation of Shinae Kim, which discussed, inter alia, the use of numbers in the biblical wisdom literature, in the book of Ben- Sira, in tractate Avot and in several more books.27 Unlike most of the previous studies, which focused on specifĳic literatures, here we examine and diachronically compare the use of various patterns of numerical sayings in diffferent literatures. First we discuss the biblical usage and, when necessary, refer to some examples from the literatures of the ancient Near East. Then we discuss examples from book of Ben-Sira, and fĳinally we analyze the use of numerical sayings in Rabbinic literature. In the last part of this paper we try to understand the reasons for the diffferences between the diffferent uses.

Numerical Sayings in the Bible

1 The Phenomenon The use of numerical sayings in the Bible is very frequent, and we can fĳind numerical sayings in diffferent genres such as law, wisdom, prophecy, stories, and other genres. Numerical sayings usually have one of two forms:

World Congress of Jewish Studies (Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 1977), vol. 3, pp. 389–402 [Heb.]. 21 S. Valler, “The Number Fourteen as a Literary Device in the Babylonian Talmud,” in Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Period 26, 2 (1995), pp. 169–184. 22 E.Z. Melammed, “Text, Number, and Meter in Tractate Avot,” in Sinai 50 (1962), pp. 154–165 [Heb.]. 23 A.D. Tropper, Wisdom, Politics, and Historiography: Tractate Avot in the Context of the Graeco-Roman Near East (Oxford [England]: Oxford University Press, 2004), pp. 26–27, 31, 45–47. 24 I. Gottlieb, “Pirqe Avot as Wisdom Literature,” in S. Yona and V.A. Hurowitz, eds., Wisdom, Her Pillars Are Seven (Beer Sheva: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press, 2011), pp. 98–100 [Heb.]; idem, “Pirqe Abot and Biblical Wisdom,” in Vetus Testamentum 40, 2 (1990), p. 159. 25 M.B. Lerner, “The Tractate Avot,” in S. Safrai, ed., The Literature of the Sages I (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1987), pp. 269. 26 I. Zeligman, The Treasury of Numbers (Baltimore: B.E. and. R. Zeligman, 1942). 27 S. Kim, Continuity and Discontinuity between Biblical and Post-Biblical Wisdom Texts (PhD Diss. Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, 2014).

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 81 206 Pasternak and Yona

1. Normal use involves a single number that contains one digit or more but never a pair of numbers. These numbers specify the number of people, ages, sizes, such as the dimensions of the Ark of the Covenant and the dimensions of the Temple, years of a monarch’s reign, and other matters. We do not present examples of this here, except a brief reference to the use of typological numbers. 2. The second type of numerical saying employs a pair of ascending numbers, such as two-three, four-fĳive, and so on. This type of numerical saying has many sub-types, which we discuss below.

Typological Numbers

Typological numbers have unique and special meaning that give them importance that exceeds their numerical values.28 The prominent typological numbers in the Bible are: three, four, fĳive, seven, ten, twelve, forty, sixty, and seventy.

Examples from the Bible

There are many examples of typological numbers. For example the sons of Noah (Gen. 9:18–19):

3 & 3

The sons of Noah who came out of the ark were Shem, Ham, and Japheth; Ham being the father of Canaan. These three were the sons of Noah, and from these the whole world branched out.

Other examples are the number three in the promise to Abraham (Gen. 18:2); fourteen years of work by Jacob for Leah and Rachel (Gen. 29:18–28); the repetition of the numbers three and seven in the stories about Pharaoh’s dreams (Gen. 40:1–41:8); the use of the number forty in the stories of the Flood (Gen. 7:17), the receiving of the Torah at Mt. Sinai (Exod. 24:18), and Jonah (Jonah 3:4); and fĳinally the use of the numbers fĳifty, forty fĳive, forty, thirty, twenty, and ten in the story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (Gen. 18:20–33).

28 Gad Ben-Ami Zarfati, “The Meaning of Numbers and Their Symbolic Value,” in Encyclopaedia Biblica (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1968), vol. 5, cols. 181–185 [Heb.].

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 82 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 207

One of the most familiar biblical uses of typological number does not really use any number at all: The Ten Commandments. In neither Exod. 20:1–17 nor Deut. 5:4–21 is there an explicit reference to the number ten. Only in Deut. 10:4 is the number ten mentioned:

'#2 4 2 3 ,

The Lord inscribed on the tablets the same text as on the fĳirst, the Ten Commandments that He addressed to you on the mountain out of the fĳire on the day of the assembly; and the Lord gave them to me.

Graded Numerical Sayings

The use of a pair of numbers in the Bible occurs, mostly, in one of these three ways:

1. “Normal” use, mostly in prose, specifĳies an unknown or uncertain number or a small number. An example is the description of the death of Jezebel during Jehu’s revolt (2 Kgs. 9:32):

3 & 3' # * 3

He looked up toward the window and said, “Who is on my side? Who?” And two or three eunuchs leaned out toward him.

The description of the death of Elisha (2 Kgs. 13:19):

'#( , . 3 3 3 ( !

The man of God was angry with him and said to him “If only you had struck fĳive or six times! Then you would have annihilated Aram; as it is, you shall defeat Aram only three times.”

In both verses the exact number is unknown, and the writer uses a pair of numbers. 2. The second way of using graded numerical sayings is poetic parallelism with a pair of numbers. This parallelism separates the pair of numbers, and

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 83 208 Pasternak and Yona each number is situated in a diffferent stich. We fĳind this kind of parallelism in diffferent literatures from the ancient Near East, and especially in Ugaritic literature. For example (Is. 17:6):

3 & 3' # * 3 3 ( ! , 2

Only gleaning shall be left of him, as when one beats an olive tree, two berries or three on the topmost branch, four or fĳive on the boughs of the crown, declares the Lord, the God of Israel.

This verse combines the prosaic use of a graded pair of numbers and the poetic use of numbers in parallelism. In each stich there is an internal rating of numbers. First two and three and then four and fĳive. The entire verse describes the lack of agricultural products after God’s punishment. The description, therefore, is used as kind of minimal merismus. A similar example can be found in Hag. 2:16:

2 3 , '#2 3 , '#2 3 , '#3 ( !

If one came to a heap of twenty measures, it would yield only ten; and if one came to a wine vat to skim offffĳifty measures, the press would yield only twenty.29

29 It seems that the prophet leveled his prophecy. In the fĳirst part of the verse the amount (of grain) was reduced by half, while in the second part it was reduced to two-fĳifths of the expected amount (of wine). In the Massorah text, the measures are missing, and that might be on purpose. Only the diffferences between the expected amount of agricultural products and the actual amount are important. Therefore the measurements in the Greek translation of the Bible should be considered an addition. See M. Zer-Kavod, Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi (Jerusalem: Kiryat Sepher, 1957), pp. 22–23 [Heb.]; H.W. Wolfff, Haggai: A Commentary (trans. M. Kohl) (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1988), pp. 58, 64–65; D.L. Petersen, Haggai and Zechariah 1–8 (Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1984), pp. 86, 90–91.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 84 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 209

1 Sam. 18:7:

#4 2 . &

The women sang as they danced, and they chanted: Saul has slain his thousands; David, his tens of thousands.30

Lev. 26:8:

( 3 ( ! 2 (

Five of you shall give chase to a hundred, And a hundred of you shall give chase to ten thousand; Your enemies shall fall before you by the sword.31 The last example of this use is Deut. 19:15:

! #* 3 3 & 3

A single witness is not sufffĳicient to prove a person’s guilt or blame for any offfense that one may have committed. A suspect can be convicted only on the testimony of two or three witnesses.

In this example, the numbers one, two, and three are in ascending order, as a part of chiastic parallelism 3. The third way of using a pair of numbers is graded numerical parallelism. This is found mostly in wisdom literature, but it can be found also in prophecy and other genres. Here we fĳind two numbers, X and X+1 (meaning three and four, six and seven, and so on). Sometimes the verse specifĳies the entire list of

30 See Haran (above, n. 8), pp. 122–123; Loewenstamm (above, n. 3), pp. 33–35. 31 The number hundred that ends the stich and begins the second stich creates continuation between the stiches. This rhetorical pattern is very common in biblical and Rabbinical literature, and contributes to the texts, stylistically and syntactically. For further discussion see A.R. Pasternak and S. Yona, “Concatenation in Ancient Near East literature, in Hebrew Scripture and in Rabbinic literature” [in print.].

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 85 210 Pasternak and Yona

X and X+1, and sometimes only X+1 will be specifĳied. In some cases there is no explicit reference to numbers at the beginning of the verse or unit. We will not discuss these cases in this paper.32 The graded numerical parallelism originates in the literatures of the ancient Near East,33 and it can be found, inter alia, in Sumerian, Accadian, Egyptian, and Ugaritic literature. For example in the Ugaritic Ba’al epic:

KTU 1.4 III, 17–21:

Two (kinds of) banquets Ba’al hates tn. dbḥm. šn’a. #*3 three the Rider on the clouds b’l A banquet of shamefulness ṯlṯ. rkb. ‘rpt. 3 &3 And a banquet of dbḥ. bṯt. baseness wdbḥ. And a banquet of maidservants’ dnt. lewdness wdbḥ. tdmm. ‘amht.

This example detailed three diffferent sacrifĳices that Ba’al, the head of the Canaanite pantheon, hates. The second part of this parallelism uses one of the nicknames of Ba’al and omits the word “sacrifĳices” to create balance between the fĳirst two parts.

32 For example, in Hos. 7:3: , “In malice they make a king merry, And offfĳicials in treachery,” the Prophet is talking about a single king but several, and at least two, offfĳicials. For further discussion and examples see Zakovitch (n. 10), pp. 35–40. We should mention that Zakovitch includes in his dissertation many examples in which a “hidden” graded numerical parallelism patterns, in most cases of the numbers three and four, can be found. These examples, from various genres, and several assump- tions and conclusions by Zakovitch can be discussed and disagreed, and one should compare it to the list of examples from the Bible and from the book of Ben-Sira in W. Roth’s article about this phenomenon in VT 12 (see n. 15), pp. 301–303. 33 According to Cassuto, “Biblical and Canaanite Literatures” (n. 4), pp. 204–205, the Bible espoused the graded numerical parallelism from the Canaanite literature, and the Canaanite language is the origin of this pattern. Haran, on the opposing side, mentioned that we can fĳind this pattern in Sumerian and Hittite, which are not Semitic, and suggested that the origin of the graded numerical parallelism is the poetry of the Ancient Near East. See Haran, “Biblical Studies” (n. 8), pp. 111–112.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 86 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 211

In the words of Ahiqar the Wise we fĳind another example:34

Twothings which are appropriate )#424 '#*3 And three pleasing to Shamash: 3 &3 One who dr[inks] wine and gives 4&4 it to others to drink it, One who masters wisdom [and teaches it], And one who hears a word and does not tell it.

This example lists two nice things: a person who drinks wine and shares it with others, and a person the gains wisdom and shares it with others. But greater than the value of these two things, and that is what Shamash, the Mesopotamian god of justice and the god of the sun likes: a person who heard something and keeps it in his heart.35 As we said earlier, some of the graded numerical parallelism specifĳies the entire list of X and X+1 and sometimes only X+1. In Amos’s Oracles against the Nations (Amos 1:3–2:16) we fĳind both types. Most prophecies in this unit list only one sin, probably the worst one. For example, the prophecy about Damascus (1:3):

, 2 3 & 3

Thus said the Lord: For three transgressions of Damascus, For four, I will not revoke it: Because they threshed Gilead With threshing boards of iron.

34 The Aramaic text follows B. Porten and A. Yardeni, Textbook of Aramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1993), vol. 3, pp. 48–49, ls. 187–189 [Heb.]; cf. A. Cowley, Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century BC (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1923), p. 215, ls. 92–94a, p. 223. 35 For further discussion about these examples see Haran, “Biblical Studies” (n. 8), pp. 134– 136; Yona, “Shared Stylistic Patterns” (n. 13), pp. 43–46.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 87 212 Pasternak and Yona

The prophecy about Israel (2:6–8), on the other hand, lists all four, or according to some scholars, all seven sins that the people of Israel did:

, 2 3 & 3

Thus said the Lord: For three transgressions of Israel, for four, I will not revoke it: Because they have sold for silver those whose cause was just, and the needy for a pair of sandals. [Ah,] you who trample the heads of the poor into the dust of the ground, and make the humble walk a twisted course! Father and son go to the same girl, and thereby profane my holy name. They recline by every altar on garments taken in pledge, and drink in the House of their God Wine bought with fĳines they imposed.

In the examples from wisdom literature that we will discuss now, numbers are used mostly for stylistic reasons but also as mnemonics that make it easier to remember diffferent things. For example (Prov. 30:18–20):

, 2 3 & 3

Three things are beyond me; Four I cannot fathom: How an eagle makes its way over the sky; How a snake makes its way over a rock; How a ship makes its way through the high seas; How a man has his way with a maiden

In this example there is a comparison between four things that do not leave as they move along on their way. The eagle during its way over the sky, the snake during its way over a rock, the ship during its way through the high seas and the man who engages in sexual intercourse with a woman. This parallelism is the

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 88 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 213 basis for the next verse, which deals with an adulteress who hides her actions: , This is the way of an adulterous woman: She eats and wipes her mouth and says, ‘I’ve done nothing wrong.’36 Other examples from wisdom literature are found in Prov. 6:16–19, which uses the numbers six and seven, in Prov. 30:15–16 and more.

Prov. 6:16–19:

, 3 3 3

Six things the Lord hates; seven are an abomination to Him

Prov. 30:15–16:

. , 2 3 & 3

Three things are insatiable; four never say, “Enough” . . .

In Prov. 30:24–28 we can fĳind other example, in which there is only one number at the opening of the unit, and not a pair of numbers:

, 2 I J

Four are among the tiniest on earth, yet they are the wisest of the wise: Ants are a folk without power, yet they prepare food for themselves in summer; The badger is a folk without strength, yet it makes its home in the rock; The locusts have no king, yet they all march forth in formation; You can catch the lizard in your hand, yet it is found in royal palaces.

In this unit the number is stylistically unnecessary and its contribution is mainly for mnemonic purposes. None of the animals that are listed in the unit

36 For a diffferent interpretation, see Greenstein (n. 14).

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 89 214 Pasternak and Yona is preferred over the others, and this is probably the base form from which the graded numerical parallelism developed.

Ben-Sira

In the book of Ben-Sira we fĳind several graded numerical parallelisms. For example: (23:24–27, Segal ed.):37

3&3 #*3

Two types of people multiply sins, a third stirs up wrath: Burning passion is a blazing fĳire, not to be quenched till it burns itself out; The man who is lewd with his own kindred never stops till the fĳire breaks forth; The rake to whom all bread is sweet is never through until he dies.38

This unit uses the numbers two and three, and, unlike some examples from the Bible that we discussed earlier, lists all three things, in this case all three sins and not only the last and most severe item, i.e., the sin of adultery with a married woman.

37 The Hebrew texts and references are from M.H. Segal, The Book of Ben-Sira (n. 6). The English translations are from P.S. Skehan and A.A. Di Lella, The Wisdom of Ben Sira (AB) (New York: Doubleday, 1987). 38 Segal identifĳied in this unit an ascent in the severity of the act. All three sinners are involved in inappropriate sexual relations. In the fĳirst case the woman is single, in the second case she is single but a relative of the sinner, and in the last case she is married. In this unit, according to Segal, the rhetorical structure matches to the content of the unit. The imagery between bread and sexual intercourse can be found in Gen. 39:6: , “So he left all that he had in Joseph’s charge; and, with him there, he had no concern for anything but the food that he ate,” where, according to verse nine, it is euphemism to sexual intercourse: , “nor has he kept back anything from me except yourself, because you are his wife.” Another example can be found in Prov. 9:17: , “Stolen water is sweet, and bread eaten in secret is pleasant.” See Segal, The Book of Ben-Sira (n. 6), p. 143. See also B. Ned. 91b and Rashi’s commentary to Prov. 9:17, s.v. .

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 90 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 215

(25:9–15, Segal ed.):

23, ,34

There are nine who come to my mind as blessed; a tenth, whom my tongue proclaims . . .

In this example Ben-Sira uses the numbers nine and ten for the graded numerical parallelism. The fĳirst nine virtues are only praised in Ben-Sira’s heart, but the tenth virtue, with the highest value—the fear of God—he says out loud.39 In addition, Ben-Sira uses simple numbers in his sayings. For example:

(25:1–4, Segal ed.):

3&3

With three things I am delighted, for they are pleasing to the Lord and to humans: Harmony among kindred, friendship among neighbors, and the mutual love of husband and wife.

This saying is followed by the following dictum:

3&3 40

Three kinds of people I hate; their manner of life I loathe indeed: A proud pauper, a rich dissembler, and an old person lecherous in his dotage.

39 The unit reflects the approach of Ben-Sira whereby the fear of God is on a higher level than the wisdom that we know from Proverbs and Ecclesiastes, i.e., the biblical wisdom literature. For further discussion about the changes of the term “wisdom” from its early use in the Bible until its use in Rabbinic literature, see A. Rofe, Introduction to the Literature of the Hebrew Bible (Jerusalem: Carmel, 2006), pp. 411–416; Segal, The Book of Ben-Sira (n. 6), pp. 22–25, 154. 40 Some manuscripts read: , some read , and some read .

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 91 216 Pasternak and Yona

The dual use of the number three in the last example seems unnecessary. We can replace it with the word “those,” without spoiling the sentence, or even omit the number three completely. In our opinion these numbers enable Ben- Sira to compare more easily verses 1–2 and verses 3–4, while creating antithetic parallelism, although the subject of the two units is completely diffferent and only the opening sentences—”With three things I am delighted” and “Three kinds of people I hate”—are similar. The fĳirst unit talks about three types of human relationships: between brothers, between friends and between husband and wife. The second unit talks about three types of sinners, who act contrary to their status: a proud poor, a rich man that denies his debts and an old man who didn’t learn from his life experience, or an old man that commits adultery although he doesn’t desire other women.41

Numerical Sayings in Rabbinic Literature

Introduction In Rabbinic literature we fĳind multiple uses of numbers. In some cases the uses will be identical to the biblical uses, vis-à-vis diffferent use as a mnemonic editing device as we will show later on. R. Abbahu noted the use of numbers in Rabbinic sayings when he said (Y. She. 5, 1):42

3(! 3(! 23,3(! 33 '#3&3 23,3&3 ,2 4!2+!'#,2

41 See Segal, The Book of Ben-Sira (n. 6), pp. 152–153. 42 The Hebrew text and reference are according MS Leiden. In B. Qid. 30a there is another reference to the Sofrim that recalls the work of the authors of the Massorah: J , Therefore the early masters were called Sofrim [scribes or, literally, those who are engaged in counting], because they would count up all the letters in the Torah.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 92 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 217

Rabbi Abbahu said: It is written: The families of the scribes that dwelt in Jabez. Why does Scripture state “Scribes”? This means that they turn the Torah into numbers: Five do not set aside heave-offfering, Dough is separated from fĳive [cereals], Fifteen women exempt their sisters-in-law from levirate marriage, Thirty-six offfences in the Torah carry the penalty of excision, There are thirteen rules about the remains of a clean bird, Four kinds of tort, Forty minus one categories of work [forbidden on the Sabbath]

In its opening line this unit referred to the families of the scribes that dwelt in Jabez (1 Chron. 2:55) that “they turn the Torah into numbers.” Actually, according to the examples in this unit and many other examples from Rabbinic literature,43 the rabbis, and not the scribes that dwelt in Jabez, turn the Torah (and the Oral Torah) into numbers. This unit specifĳies seven cases in which the rabbis use numbers in their sayings, and it demonstrates the use of numbers as a mnemonic device. Four out of the seven examples in this unit refers to thirteen, or more, diffferent things. It is clear that the indication of the exact number at the beginning, or at the end of the unit, makes it easy to remember the list of things, and it also provides the rabbis an excellent tool to confĳirm that their memory didn’t mislead them.44 M. Ker. 1:1, for example, begins with the words: or thirty-six keritot, meaning: thirty-six instances of excommunication, in the Torah. Subsequently the Mishnah provides the entire list. Another example can be found in M. Shab. 7:2–4. This unit lists all thirty-nine categories of work, , which are forbidden on the Sabbath:45

43 See for example: T. Zeb. 13:3: 4!2+!'#,2, The days of the tent of meeting which was in the wilderness were forty [years] less one; T. Sot. 8:11: 4 ( 3(! '#.& 43&3 -& 4 ( 3(!J '#3(! , You have nothing whatsoever in the Torah for which fĳive hundred three thousand and fĳive hundred and fĳifty covenants were not made, equivalent to the number of people who went forth from Egypt; T. Sheq. 3:1: 23,3&3 , Thirteen shofar-chests were in the sanctuary; M. Oh. 18:11: 23, , Ten places are not subject to the law applying to the dwelling of gentiles; B. Suk. 52A: ,3, The Evil Inclination has seven names, and many other examples that can be found all over the Mishnah, the Tosefta and the Talmud. 44 For further discussion about the source of these mishnayot see M. Weiss, “Mishnah Tractates that Open with Numbered Lists,” in Sidra 1 (1985), pp. 33–44 [Heb.]. 45 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann and include the copyist’s marginal notes with corrections to the text. The punctuation marks were added by us.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 93 218 Pasternak and Yona

4!2+!'#,2 = J .4!2+!'#,2

2. The primary [categories of] labors are forty less one: Sowing, plow- ing, reaping, gathering sheaves, threshing, winnowing, sorting, grinding, sifting, kneading, baking, shearing wool, bleaching [the wool], combing [the wool], dyeing [the wool], spinning, mounting the threads, threading two warp-threads into the harness, weaving two [weft] threads, removing two [weft or woof] threads, tying [a knot], untying [a knot], sewing two stitches, tearing in order to sew two stitches. 3. Trapping a deer, slaughtering, skinning, salting [its skin], tanning its hide, scraping it [of its hair], cutting it up, writing two letters, erasing in order to write two letters. 4. Building, pulling down, extinguishing [a fĳire], kindling, striking the fĳinishing blow with a hammer, carrying out from one domain to another. These are the forty primary [categories of] labors less one.

The number “forty minus one,” or “less one,” acts as a typological number, replacing the neutral number thirty-nine.46 The repeated sentence “the primary [categories of] labors are forty less one,” at the beginning and end of the unit, creates an Inclusio that helps the rabbis memorize the Mishnah.47

46 The number thirty-nine is very rare in Rabbinic literature. An unusual example can be found in B. Shab. 70a: ,34 '#3&3 , there were thirty-nine distinct classifĳications of labor that were taught to Moses at Sinai, while the number forty less one appears dozens of times, for example: T. Mak. 3:10: 4!2+!'#,2, the law of the Torah is forty stripes less one; M. Miq. 7:2: , an immersion pool which contains forty seahs less one, and Y. Naz. 4, 3: 4!2+!'#,2, the flogging of [which] the Torah [has spoken] involves forty stripes less one, to mention a few. Likewise is the use of seventy less one instead of sixty-nine in B. B.B. 123a. 47 The phenomenon of the Inclusio can be divided into two main categories: limited Inclusio, which contains only a few words, in most cases one, two or three, for example, the repetition of the words: , they shall eat, in Exod. 12:8; and expanded

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 94 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 219

Accurately counting is very important, and if needed the rabbis updated their previous counts. For example (B. Yeb. 3b):48

23,3(!

Fifteen [categories of] women exempt their rivals and their rivals’ rivals from Halisah and from Levirate marriage, ad infĳinitum.

This quote is from the opening Mishnah Yebamot. However, after a long discussion in the Babylonian Talmud the rabbis update the number to sixteen and actually reject the counting that was made by the Tannaim (B. Yeb. 10b):49

23,3323,3(!

And though the sages taught in our Mishnah fĳifteen we must add a case like this as a sixteenth.

In some cases, unlike the last two examples, which specify many items, the use of numbers looks unnecessary, and their contribution is mainly to style or is related to their typological value. Many examples appear in tractate Avot, such as at M. Avot 1:1:50

3&3

Inclusio, which contains an entire sentence, for example vv. 20 and 23 in Lev. 11. This second type is used as a framework for the entire unit. For further discussion about the use of Inclusio in prose see Paran (n. 7), pp. 49–97, 150–162. For further discussion about the use of frameworks in biblical stories, see F. Polak, Biblical Narrative: Aspects of Art and Design (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1994), pp. 212–214. For further reading see S. Yona, The Many Faces of Repetition (Beer Sheva: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press, 2013), p. 28, n. 70 [Heb.], and see also the discussion about the historical development of the study of Inclusio by A. Chapman, Inclusio in the Hebrew Bible (M.A. Thesis, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, 2013). 48 The Hebrew text and reference are according MS Vatican 111. 49 The Hebrew text and reference are according MS Vatican 111. 50 The Hebrew texts and references from tractate Avot in this paper are according to S. Sharvit, Tractate Avoth through the Ages (n. 19).

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 95 220 Pasternak and Yona

They [the men of the Great Assembly] said three things: Be deliberate in judgment, And raise up many disciples, And make a fence around the Torah.

The use of the number three in this well-known passage seems unnecessary. This short list can be memorized easily, without indication of the number, and it seems that the number serves other purposes apart of its mnemonic value. Other examples can be found at the beginning of Avot 2:1 and 3:1, which use the identical words, namely: . . . 3&3: “Reflect upon three things,” and in Avot 2:10: 3&3, “They [each] said three things.” There are many examples of this use in other tractates of the Mishnah, Tosefta, and Talmud, which we now survey briefly, to show the wide use of typological numbers in Rabbinic literature:51

M. Pes. 10:5:52 3 &3 , Rabban Gamaliel says: “Whoever has not referred to these three matters connected to the Passover has not ful- fĳilled his obligation, and these are they: Passover, unleavened bread and bitter herbs.” M. Git. 3:4:53 3&3, Three things did R. Eliezer b. Parta say before the sages, and they con- fĳirmed his opinion. M. Tam. 5:6:54 3&3 , And three purposes did it serve. B. Shab. 77b:55 3&3, Our rabbis have taught on Tannaite authority: There are three who get stronger as they get older.

51 The following examples include the numbers three, four, and fĳive. We didn’t refer to other examples that use typological numbers that are higher than fĳive, such as seven, ten, twenty-four and forty, due to the mnemonic value of these numbers. In our opinion, which is subjective, it is easy to remember three, four, and probably fĳive diffferent things or items, and the use of typological numbers in those examples seems unnecessary. On the other hand, as the list of items becomes longer and the numbers ascend, typological numbers, such us seven and ten ease memorization and are not used only for their typological value but also as a mnemonic. 52 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann. 53 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Parma 3173. 54 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann. 55 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Munich 95.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 96 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 221

M. Kel. 12:7–8:56 ,2O 3&3 , Three things does R. Zadoq declare unclean and the sages do declare clean; Four things does Rabban Gamaliel declare unclean and the sages do declare clean.57

56 The Hebrew text and references from the Mishnah in the following discussion are according to MS Kaufmann. 57 The summary of the diffferences between R. Zadoq and the sages and between Rabban Gamaliel and the sages, which also appears in M. Ed. 3:10–11, includes, in practice, several disagreement from Mishnah Kelim and from Tosefta Kelim, which are summed up as follows: T. Kel. M 2:4: Rabban Gamaliel disagrees with the sages about the cleanness of a metal basket cover of householders. T. Kel. M 2:5: The Tosefta tries to defĳine what are the unfĳinished metal utensils that are clean. In this part the Tosefta does not mention Rabban Gamaliel or any disagreement between him and the sages; R. Nathan refers to the disagreement between Rabban Gamaliel and the sages concerning the hook of the scrapers of the bathhouses and the scraper of metal of householders; R. Judah refers to the disagreement between Rabban Gamaliel and the sages concerning a plate that was divided into two. M. Kel. 12:4: Rabban Gamaliel disagrees with the sages about the cleanness of a metal basket cover of householders. M. Kel. 12:5: R. Zadoq disagrees with the sages about the cleanness of the nail of the sundial and about the ark of the grist dealer. M. Kel. 12:6: R. Zadoq disagrees with the sages about the cleanness of a nail of money changer. M. Kel. 12:7: The summary of the disagreement between R. Zadoq and the sages in reverse order (the nail of money changer, the ark of the grist dealer, the nail of the sundial). M. Kel. 12:8: The summary of the disagreement between Rabban Gamaliel and the sages appears in this order: metal basket cover of householders, the hook of the scrapers of the bathhouses, unfĳinished metal utensils and a plate which was divided into two. As we can see, these summaries refer to the discussions in Mishnah Kelim and Tosefta Kelim. The fĳirst summary refers to R. Zadoq and came just after three disagreements with the sages. Tracking the origins of the second summary is more complicated. Two of the disagreements were said by other sages, and the original disagreement between Rabban Gamaliel and the sages is missing in the Mishnah and the Tosefta. One item, i.e., the unfĳinished metal utensils, appears in the Tosefta but is not in disagreement at all. Only the fĳirst item in the summary, i.e., the metal basket cover of householders, is controversial and the sages and Rabban Gamaliel disagree about is cleanness. Both summaries disrupt the consecutive character of the text and can be removed without harming it. It is unclear why an unknown hand decided to lump together the disagreements between R. Zadoq and Rabban Gamaliel and the sages and did not summarize the disagreements between R. Aqiba and the sages in this tractate (the summary in T. Ed. 1:7 doesn’t refers to the

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 97 222 Pasternak and Yona

M. Sheb. 5:4:58 3#(! ,2 Four seals were in the Temple . . . Ben Azzai says: “There were fĳive, and they were written in Aramaic.” T. Sot. 6:6:59 J ,2 , Said R. Simeon b. Yohai: “Four lessons did R. Aqiba expound, and my lessons are better than his lessons.” B. Shab. 23a:60 2, R. Simeon said: “On account of four considerations the Torah ordered pe’ah to be left at the end of the fĳield.” M. Pes. 7:4:61 3(!, Five things are offfered in a state of cultic uncleanness but are not eaten in a state of cultic uncleanness. M. Ta. 4:8:62 3(! 3(! , Five events took place for our fathers on the seventeenth of Tammuz, and fĳive on the ninth of Ab. M. Avot 2:8b: [] 3(!, Five disciples were there to R. [Yohanan b. Zakkai and these are they.] B. Shab. 121b:63 , Five things [may be] killed on the Sabbath, and these are they.

In our opinion, these examples, which are only a representative selection, show how common the use of typological numbers was in Rabbinic literature.

disagreements in tractate Kelim.), although one of these disagreements appears between two of R. Zadoq disagreements with the sages. It is possible that the summaries are from diffferent source, and they were placed in M. Kelim. One way or the other, it seems that they were arranged in ascending order and the order in the Mishnah is as follows: Rabban Gamaliel’s disagreement, R. Zadoq’s disagreements, summary of R. Zadoq’s disagreements and summary of Rabban Gamaliel’s disagreements. And last, as we will show later on, it is obvious that M. Ed. 3:10–11 only duplicates the summaries from M. Kel. 12:7–8, or from a third source, and not the other way around. 58 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann and includes the copyist’s marginal notes with corrections to the text. 59 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Erfurt [Berlin, Staatsbibliothek, Or. fol. 1220 (159)]. 60 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Vatican 127. 61 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann. 62 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann. 63 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Vatican 108.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 98 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 223

It shows that sometimes typological numbers were used as mnemonic device, while sometimes they appear only because of their unique value.

Graded Numerical Sayings in Rabbinic Literature

The use of graded numerical sayings in Rabbinic literature is almost equal to the biblical use of these patterns and can be divided in the same way. a. “Normal” use to specify an unknown or uncertain number or to specify a small number. For example (M. Shab. 18:1):64

3(! ,2 . . .

One may clear away even four or fĳive baskets of straw or of produce to make room for guests or on account of neglect of the Beit Midrash . . .

In Rabbinic literature we fĳind many examples for this use, and that is in oppo- sition to the Rabbinic preciseness in regards to accurate counting that we mentioned earlier. How can these two approaches fĳit together in the same literature by the same sages? It seems that in some cases, like the last example, the number is uncertain or even irrelevant. It could be four, less than four, fĳive and even more than fĳive, all respective to the number of the guests. In cases like this, the rabbis could not indicate an exact number, and the pair of numbers serves as an example for the ruling.65 In other cases it seems that although the rabbis didn’t set an exact number, one of the numbers is used as a “borderline,” which is impossible to cross, while the other number “represents” several numbers. For example:

64 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann. 65 The sages of the Talmud (B. Shab. 126b–127a) also found it difffĳicult to understand the vague expression “four or fĳive.” According to R. Hisda, it depended upon the number of baskets of straw in the storeroom, while Samuel says that the number could be four, fĳive or, if needed, even more than fĳive. Another example can be found in M. Qin. 3:2: , [If] one belongs to this woman, and two to that, and three to that, and ten to that, and a hundred to that, and see the discussion by M. Koppel, “Tractate Kinnim’s Composition: A Philological-Mathematical Analysis,” in Netuim 13 (2005), pp. 12–13 [Heb.].

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 99 224 Pasternak and Yona

Y. Erub. 3:3:66

23,,34

Samuel said, “[If one has made use, in sending his meal of commingling to the Sabbath limit,] of a child nine or ten years old, his meal of commingling is valid.

According to Samuel, a child at the age of nine or ten is fĳit to doEruv techumin. It is obvious that if a ten year old child is old enough to do Eruv techumin, an eleven year old child is also capable, while an eight year old child or a child that is younger than eight is not allowed to do it at all. That is to say, the number nine is fĳirm and it used as borderline, while the number ten represents other numbers, such as eleven and twelve.

T. Ber. 3:22:67

333(!J

If a person is writing God’s name, even if a king greets him, he should not answer him. If he was writing fĳive or six divine names [one after the other, then] he may answer a greeting after he fĳinished one of them.

This ruling by the Tosefta exceeds the main topic of the chapter, praying. The parallel, M. Ber. 5:1, on the other hand, corresponds to the subject, while using some of the words of the Tosefta: J $&( &#. 68 J *#3# & ( &3 & 3, One may stand to pray only in a solemn frame of mind. The early pious ones used to tarry one hour [before they would] pray, so that they could direct their hearts to the Omnipresent. [While one is praying] even if the king greets him, he may not respond. And even if a serpent is entwined around his heel, he may not interrupt [his prayer].

66 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Leiden. 67 The Hebrew text is according to MS Vienna (National Library, Heb. 20). 68 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 100 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 225

Y. Ber. 5:1 integrates the Mishnah and Tosefta and deals with the Toseftan ruling in its discussion of M. Ber. 5:1:69 J 3&3'#*3 , It was taught: If one was writing God’s name [in a Torah scroll], even if a king extends to him a greeting, he should not respond. If one was writing two or three consecutive divine names—such as El, Elohim, Yahweh—he should fĳinish writing one and return the greeting. The version in the Y. changes the numbers fĳive and six to two and three. In both versions, the exact number is not important. The idea is that you should not stop in the middle of writing God’s name, but if you write several names of God, you may stop between them. Some more examples can be found at:

T. T.Y. 2:17:70

3(! ,2

[If] he was raising up as heave-offferingfour or fĳive jugs

M. Par. 2:6:71 3(!,2

R. Aqiba says: “Even four, even fĳive [hairs] and they are scattered . . .”

Y. Nid. 1:5:72 3(!,2J

If [the infant] went on nursing for four or fĳive years. b. Poetic parallelism with a graded pair of numbers:

The second way of using graded numerical sayings is poetic parallelism with a pair of numbers. This parallelism separates the pair of numbers, and each

69 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Leiden and include the copyist’s marginal notes with corrections to the text. 70 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Vienna (National Library, Heb. 20). A similar example can be found in Y. Hal. 3:5: J, meaning: [If] he needed to raise up four or fĳive kegs [of wine]. 71 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann. 72 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Leiden.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 101 226 Pasternak and Yona number is situated in diffferent stiches. This formulation is very common in Rabbinic literature, in “pure” prosaic units and in units whose language is more poetic. We should note that we use the term “parallelism” in this part of the paper in the broadest sense of the word.73

M. Me. 4:2:74

3(! 33

Five things in a burnt-offfering can combine with one another: the flesh, the fat, the fĳine flour, the wine and the oil. And six in a thank-offfering: the flesh, the fat, the fĳine flour, the wine, the oil and the bread.

The number fĳive counts the items in the fĳirst of the two parallel clauses while the number six counts the items in the second clause. The detailed writing in the second row seems unnecessary. The text could have been less specifĳic, and the sages could refer to the fĳirst clause while minimize the length of the second clause.75 An example of this kind of wording can be found in M. Ket. 3:5:76

,23 &3

The one who seduces a girl pays on three counts and the one who rapes [a girl pays] on four: The one who seduces a girl pays for: the shame, the damage, and a fĳine. And the one who rapes a girl adds to these, for he in addition pays for the sufffering [he has inflicted.]

73 Most of the examples of parallelism in this part are close to the “pure” poetic parallelism style that we know from the Bible, and unlike other examples of “pure” prosaic parallelism that we can fĳind in Rabbinic literature, such as M. Hal 1:8; M. B.M. 1:5 and M. Ber. 7:1, can be categorized as poetic parallelism or as prosaic parallelisms that are close to poetic parallelism. For further discussion and examples of prosaic parallelism see E.Z. Melammed, “The Parallelism in the Mishnah,” in A. Shinan, ed., Proceedings of the Sixth World Congress of Jewish Studies (Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 1977), vol. 3, pp. 275–291 [Heb.]. 74 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann. 75 For example: And thank-offfering adds to these the bread. 76 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 102 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 227

The second clause in this Mishnah specifĳies the things that the one who seduces a girl need to pay: the shame, the damage, and a fĳine. The third clause does not include the detail description from the second clause and only adds the fourth count of payments: the sufffering he has inflicted, although diffferent versions were possible. For example: The one who rapes a girl pays for the shame, the damage, the sufffering and a fĳine. Moreover, M. Me. 4:2 includes in addition to the parallelism another pattern: the “gaping,” or in Hebrew “hamshakhah,” specifĳically double hamshakhah. The words and , meaning, “things” and “can combine with one another” are missing in the second sentence and the reader “drag” them from the fĳirst sentence. This rhetorical device was frequently used in the Bible and in Rabbinic literature as well, and its contribution to the syntax of these literatures had been discussed many times in the past.77 All in all, it seems that the rabbis could choose several ways of wording. In both examples we discussed above, there is a deliberate omission of words (gaping), multiple uses of hamshakhah, and use of numbers as a mnemonic device.

B. Ket. 65a:78

! '#*3 3&3 ,2

77 “Gaping” in biblical Hebrew is discussed frequently by medieval commentators and by modern commentators as well. See for example Abraham Ibn Ezra’s comments on Gen. 32:12; Num. 17:23; Deut. 32:5; M.H. Segal, “A Contribution to the Study of the Forms of Hebrew Poetry,” in Tarbiz 18 (1947), pp. 139–142 [Heb.]. A discussion of gaping in Tractate Avot can be found in S. Sharvit (n. 19), pp. 23–24. Modern commentators dealt with this phenomenon in other Semitic languages like Ugaritic, Aramaic and Phoenician. See for example D. Sivan, A Grammar of the Ugaritic language (Brill: Leiden, 2001), pp. 215–216; S. Yona, “Milestones” (n. 13), pp. 133–136; Avishur, Phoenician Inscriptions (n. 9), vol. 1, p. 19, vol. 2. pp. 191, 266, and Pasternak and Yona (n. 31). A further bibliography concerning this rhetorical feature can be found in S. Yona, “Rhetorical Features in Talmudic Literature,” in Hebrew Union College Annual 77 (2006), p. 94, n. 75. 78 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Vatican 113. Similar text can be found in tractate Kallah Rabbati 2:8.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 103 228 Pasternak and Yona

A Tanna taught: One cup is becoming to a woman Two are degrading Three she solicits publicly Four she solicits even an ass in the street and cares not.

This unit deals with the prohibition of wine drinking by women. According to this unit, drinking wine may lead a woman to promiscuous behavior, which became more extreme with every additional cup. That is to say, as the numbers are ascending the reckless and even slutty behavior of the woman is increasing. As we can see, the rabbis used four consecutive numbers in ascending order, each number in a diffferent stich. This unit also uses several rhetorical patterns: the gaping (of the word “cup” in stiches two-four), hamshakhah, and concluding deviation. The latter term refers to the rhetorical device of setting apart the last part of a verse or pericope from the other parts by changing the order of the words, the number of the words, the place of the verb, etc.79

M. Hag. 2:1:80

3 &3 '#*3 #!#

Forbidden sexual relations are not expounded before three persons; The Works of Creation [are not expounded] before two; And the Divine Chariot [are not expounded] before a one; unless he is a sage who understands from his own knowledge.

This passage deals with the maximum number of the sages permitted for learn- ing about three diffferent subjects. According to this Mishnah it is forbidden to teach at the same time more than two sages the ruling of forbidden sexual relations. Likewise, it is forbidden to teach more than one sage about the acts of creation. The study of the Divine Chariot is possible only to one sage who understands from his own knowledge the material under discussion.

79 For further discussion concerning this rhetorical feature see Yona, “Rhetorical Features” (n. 77), pp. 95–98; Paran (n. 7), pp. 179–237; A.R. Pasternak and S. Yona, “The ‘Better’ Proverb in Rabbinic Literature,” in Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17, 1 (2014), pp. 38–39. 80 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 104 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 229

The numbers in this passage could be understood as minimums. One cannot teach fewer than four sages about forbidden sexual relations, before fewer than three the acts of creation, and before fewer than two the Divine Chariot. But comparison to T. Hag. 2:1 proves that these are maximums:81

'#*33&3 #!#'#*3 #!#

Forbidden sexual relations are not expounded before three, but they do expound before two; Or about the Works of Creation before two, but they do expound before one; Or about the Divine Chariot before one, unless he was a sage and understands from his own knowledge.

All the numbers in the Mishnah and in the equivalent Tosefta were arranged in descending order. Like the previous example from B. Ket. 65a, this unit uses gaping (of the word “expound” in stiches two and three) and forward hamshakhah of this word. We now survey a few examples that we treat only briefly:

Y. Ta. 4:8:82

4 (,3 4 (* (3 2.+()#

81 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Vienna (National Library, Heb. 20). MS Erfurt reads: , meaning for three, for two and for one. The change from to excludes the teacher from the list of people who are allowed to study those materials. For further discussion see S. Lieberman, Tosefta Ki-Fshutah (New York and Jerusalem: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 20023), vol. 5, pp. 1286–1287 [Heb.]. 82 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Leiden. A diffferent version, from the name of Abimi, the son of R. Abbahu, can be found in B. Hul. 63b: Taught Abimi the son of R. Abbahu,”There are seven hundred kinds of unclean fĳish and eight hundred kinds of [unclean] locusts. And there is an infĳinite number of the kinds of [unclean] birds.”

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 105 230 Pasternak and Yona

Said R. Hanina, son of R. Abbahu: “Seven hundred species of clean fĳish, Eight hundred species of clean locusts, And fowl without number, All went into exile with the Israelites to Babylonia. And when they came back, all of them came back with them, except for the fĳish called ‘Shibuta.’ ”

According to this saying, which is arranged in ascending order, when the people of Israel were exiled to Babylon, and when they came back to the land of Israel, they were accompanied by diffferent species of fĳishes, locusts, and fowls, except for the “Shibuta” fĳish, which did not come back from Babylon. The animals in this unit were arranged in ascending order. Although the number of the fowls is not specifĳied, and, according to this unit, is too large to be numbered, it is clearly larger than eight hundred.83

T. Meg. 3:5:84

,333 853(! ‘ 33,33(!

On the festival day fĳive [are called to read the Torah], on the Day of Atonement, six, on the Sabbath, seven. “And if they wanted to call more [than these numbers], they may not call more,” the words of R. Ishmael. R. Aqiba says:” On the festival day, fĳive, on the Day of Atonement, seven, on the Sabbath, six. And if they wanted to call more, they do call more.”

It seems that the arrangement of R. Ishmael’s saying is according to the number of people who read the Torah, i.e., fĳive, six, and seven. The saying by R. Aqiba,

83 Unlike the fĳishes and the fowls, since the counting of their species might surpass the numbers in this unit, there are only few species of pure or “kosher” locusts, which can be recognized by name, and their number in this unit seems exaggerated. For further discussion of the locusts and their diffferent species see Z. Amar, The Locust in Jewish Tradition (Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan University, 2004), pp. 102–130, 132, n. 1, 133, n. 3. 84 The Hebrew text is according to MS Vienna (National Library, Heb. 20). MS Erfurt [Berlin, Staatsbibliothek Or. fol. 1220 (159)] attributed to the words of R. Ishmael to R. Aqiba, and the words of R. Aqiba to R. Ishmael. For further discussion about the diffferences between the manuscripts of this chapter see Lieberman (n. 81), vol. 5, pp. 1175–1176. 85 This word was probably added by mistake.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 106 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 231 on the other hand, refers to the previous order (of days), and the numbers in his saying are not arranged in a particular order. In some cases the same number is used in both of the two parallel clauses, as in the example we cited before from Ben-Sira 25:1–4 (Sagel, ed.). This use will be mostly in antithetic parallelism but can be found in other kinds of parallelism. For example:

B. Pes. 113b:86

3&3 3&3

Three the Holy One, blessed be He, loves: he who does not display anger; he who does not become intoxicated; and he who does not insist on his [full] rights. Three the Holy One, blessed be He, hates: he who speaks one thing with his mouth and another thing in his heart; and he who possesses evidence favorable to his friend and does not testify for him; and he who sees something indecent in his friend and testifĳies against him alone.

The use of the number three here seems unnecessary. Each line details three diffferent people, whose behavior God likes or dislikes, while the connection between these people is not prominent. The author of this unit could have replaced the number three with the word , these, without harming the comparison. Nevertheless the use of the same number unifĳies all three men in each line and creates a stronger comparison between the lines.

M. Pes. 4:9:87

Six rules did the men of Jericho 88 33 make. For three [the sages] reproved 3&33&3 them, and for three they did not reprove them. [These are the three for which they did not reprove them:]

86 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Vatican 109. 87 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Munich 95. 88 The letter ‘’, ‘r’, was probably added by mistake.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 107 232 Pasternak and Yona

They grafted palms [on the fourteenth of Nisan] the whole day; they did not make the prescribed divisions in the Shema; and they reaped and stacked [wheat] before the [offfering of] the sheaf of fĳirst barley [omer] and they did not reprove them. And these are the three for which they reproved them: They permit use of Egyptian fĳigs [from stems which had been] dedicated to the Temple; they eat on the Sabbath fruit which had fallen under a tree; and they leave the corner of the fĳield [peah] in the case of vegetables and the sages did reprove them.

King Hezekiah did six things. On J 8933 account of three of them [the sages] 3&33&3 praised him, and on account of three they did not praise him. [On account of three they praised him:] He dragged the bones of his father on a bed of ropes and they praised him. He pulverized the copper snake and they praised him. He hid away the book of cures and they praised him. [On account of three they did not J praise him:] He cut offf the gold from the doors of the Temple and sent it to the king of Assyria, and they did not praise him. He shut offf the waters ofGihon , and they did not praise him. He intercalated the month of Nisan during the month of Nisan itself and they did not praise him.

89 This part, i.e., the second saying, which deals with the deeds of Hezekiah, is missing in MS Kaufmann and MS Parma and it is, probably, a Baraita that was added to this Mishnah. See

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 108 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 233

Both sayings were construed as antithetic parallelisms, and although initially they might seem similar, there are some diffferences in their wording: The repetition of the words praised and not praised, which, with the required respective, is missing in the fĳirst saying; the internal order with regard to the opening line. The fĳirst saying specifĳies the deeds of the men of Jericho in reverse order to the order in the opening line, while the second saying maintains the original order. These sayings can be found in several other places in the Jerusalem and Babylonian Talmuds, but most appearances of this in addition to parallelism in Rabbinic literature quote only one of the two sayings, and they rarely appear together. The fĳirst saying can also be found, with some changes, in T. Pes. 3:16, while the source of the second saying is unclear. Its origin, or at least, its source of influence, may be in Avot de-Rabbi Nathan A, 2, 42–49:90 = J , Hezekiah, king of Judah, carried out four actions, and his plan coincided with the plan of the Omnipresent. He suppressed the remedies, and his plan coincided with the plan of the Omnipresent . . . He pulverized the copper snake. . . . He stopped up the stream of Gihon. . . . Most of the fourth chapter in Mishnah Pesahim deals with labors that are forbidden on the eve of a holiday. The fĳirst saying starts with the work that the men of Jericho used to do on the fourteenth of Nisan during the whole day, so the connection between this saying and the entire chapter is clear. It seems that the second saying, unlike the fĳirst one that is partly related by content to the entire chapter, was only added on the base of stylistic imagination, i.e., the use of the same rhetoric pattern: six X were made by Y: three are “positive;” three are “negative.”91

J.N. Epstein, Introduction to the Text of the Mishnah (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1948), vol. 2, pp. 950–951 [Heb.] 90 The Hebrew text is according to MS New York 10484 (Epstein). The references from Avot de-Rabbi Nathan in this paper are according to: H.J. Becker and C. Berner, Avot de-Rabbi Natan (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006). 91 The intercalated the month of Nisan by Hezekiah appears also in T. San. 2:10–11, and it does not necessarily relate directly to Passover but more to the laws of intercalation of the year.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 109 234 Pasternak and Yona

B. Hag. 16a:92

Our rabbis have taught on Tannaite authority: 3&333 Six traits have been stated with 3&3 respect to demons, three like human beings, and three like ministering angels. Three like ministering angels: 3&3 They have wings, like ministering angels; they go from one end of the world to the other, like ministering angels; they know what is going to happen, like ministering angels. “They know” do you imagine? Rather: they hear from behind the veil, like ministering angels. Three like human beings: 3&3 they eat and drink like human beings, they procreate like human beings, and they die like human beings. Six traits have been stated with 33 respect to humanity, three like traits of 3&3 ministering angels and three like traits 3&3 of a beast. 3&3 Three in which humanity is like ministering angels: People have understanding like ministering angels, they walk standing up, like ministering angels, and they make use of the Holy Language, like ministering angels. Three in which humanity is like 3&3 the beast: people eat and drink like a beast, procreate like a beast, and shit like a beast.

92 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Munich 6. A similar version with some changes can be found in Avot de-Rabbi Nathan A 37, 5–7.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 110 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 235

This unit contains two sayings construed as complementary or synthetic parallelism, although these sayings can also be considered, in a way, as antithetic parallelism.93 The fĳirst saying deals with demons that have some characters of ministering angels and some characters of humans. The second saying deals with humans that have some characteristics of ministering angels and some of beasts. The internal order of each unit is as follows:

Demons

Ministering angels Humans.

Humans

Ministering angels Beasts.

This order is not random. In the fĳirst saying the human’s traits could have been written before the Ministering angels’ traits, but it was placed at the end of the fĳirst saying because humans are the subject of the second saying. The repeated element creates a connection and even a sort of concatenation between the two sayings and bound them together.94 This might also be the reason for the positioning of the “demons” saying before the “humans” saying. All in all, we can identify a descending order of “holiness” in these units. The demons, which are half humans and half angels, are in a “higher” status than the humans, which are half angels and half beasts. In every saying the “higher” or better traits appears at the beginning. That is contrary to the ascending holiness order in the equivalent version in Avot de-Rabbi Nathan.95 We now survey two more examples in which the same number is used in each of two parallel clauses.

93 The fĳirst three traits represent “good” and almost “holy” characters, while the last three traits represent physical and almost “bad” characters. 94 The use of concatenation, or anadiplosis, for unifĳication of diffferent sayings can be found in several places in Rabbinic literature. For further discussion and examples see Pasternak and Yona (n. 31). 95 The order in all versions of Avot de-Rabbi Nathan is as follows: humans-beasts-angels; demons-humans-angels, as we can see, the discussion about humans is prior to the discussion about demons. In both discussions the fĳirst traits represent the “corporeal” characters and afterwards the “spiritual” characters.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 111 236 Pasternak and Yona

T. Bes. 3:14:96

3&3 3&3 973&3

Three [should by Six] rules were stated with reference to a wick, three on the strict side, and three on the lenient side: [These are the three on the strict side:] They do not make it to begin with, and they do not singe it with fĳire, and they do not chop it into two. These are the three on the lenient side: they soak it in oil, rub it by hand, and cut it with fĳire [when it is] in two lamps.

This example was construed as antithetic parallelism. The completion ‘’, “These are the three on the strict side” in MS Erfurt emphasize the contradiction between the two lines, while the number three, once again, unifĳies all three things in each line, and creates a stronger comparison between the lines.

M. Zeb. 6:2:98

3 &3 3 &3 99J

96 The Hebrew text is according to MS Vienna (National Library, Heb. 20). 97 The number three that commences the unit should probably be replaced by the number six. MS Erfurt [Berlin, Staatsbibliothek, Or. fol. 1220 (159)] reads this text with several changes: its opening line is: ; the words were added at the beginning of the second row, and the words instead of . The English translation of the last line is according to the text in MS Erfurt. For further discussion about the diffferences between the manuscripts see Lieberman (n. 81), vol. 5, pp. 994–995. 98 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Parma 3173. 99 The letter in the word is written above the word as a replacement to the second appearance of the letter that was written by mistake.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 112 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 237

And three purposes did that [southwestern] corner serve below, and three above: Below: the sin offfering of fowl, and bringing near [of meal offferings], and [for pouring out] the remnants of the blood. Above: [for] the water offfering, and [for] the wine offfering, and [for] the burnt offfering of fowl, when it [the burnt offfering of fowl] was [too] abundant in the east.

This passage discusses the uses of the southwestern corner of the altar, construed as synthetic parallelism, while the words ‘’, “that corner serve” are missing in the second line and the reader may “draw” them from the fĳirst line. c. Graded numerical parallelism.

Except for one example we did not fĳind a distinct use of the graded numerical parallelism in Rabbinic literature. There are some examples that are similar in style, but they are not identical to the biblical use, although the rabbis were surely familiar with this pattern and even discussed its biblical use from time to time. For example, in B. Yoma 86b the sages deal with Amos’s words (2:6): , Thus says the Lord: For three transgressions of Israel, and for four, I will not revoke the punishment. R. Yose b. R. Judah explains that the meaning of Amos’s prophecy is: , implying, when a person does a transgression once, he is forgiven, a second time he is forgiven, a third time, he is forgiven. But when he does it a fourth time he is not forgiven. The only example of Graded numerical parallelism that we fĳind in Rabbinic literature is in B. Nid. 16b:100

,2 3&3

100 The Hebrew texts and references from B. Nid. in this discussion are according to MS Vatican 111 (the fĳirst unit) and according to MS Vatican 113 (the second unit). We should note that the text is faulty in most manuscripts and even in some prints. We would like to thank Dr. Haim Dihi for his illuminating notes about this unit.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 113 238 Pasternak and Yona

101 ' 102

As written in the book of Ben Sira: Three types I hate, and four I do not love: An offfĳicial who frequents wine-shops, and some say, an offfĳicial who is angry, and some say, an offfĳicial who is a common gossip; A person who calls a session in the high part of town, One who holds his penis when he urinates, And one who appears in his fellow’s home without warning Said R. Yohanan, “Even [one who appears] in his own home [without warning].

This saying, like several others, was attributed by the rabbis to Ben-Sira,103 although the entire unit is missing from all known versions of the Book of Ben- Sira, and we can fĳind only a partial similarity between some lines from this unit to some sayings of Ben-Sira. The opening line uses the numbers three and four, common in graded numerical parallelism, in this case as Positive—Negative parallelism:104 , meaning: There are three [types] that I hate, yea, four that I do not love.105 We should note that in many cases this pair, hate and love, appears in two diffferent lines of antithetic parallelism.106 Although the fĳirst line is faulty it is clear that it deals with a man, maybe a scholar or a sage, and according to Segal, the head of the feast or the prime

101 The second is probably a dittography, and was added by mistake. 102 Most manuscripts read . 103 For further discussion concerning the quotes in Rabbinic literature that were attributed to ben-Sira see S. Schechter, “The Quotations from Ecclesiasticus in Rabbinic Literature,” in Jewish Quarterly Review 3, 4 (1891), pp. 682–706; Segal’s introduction to the book of Ben- Sira (n. 6), pp. 37–39; Pasternak and Yona (n. 31). 104 M. Held, “The Action-Result (Factitive-Passive) Sequence of Identical Verbs in Biblical Hebrew and Ugaritic,” in Journal of Biblical Literature, 84 (1965), pp. 272–282; Kugel (n. 11), p. 14; A. Berlin, The Dynamics of Biblical Parallelism (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985), pp. 56–57; C. Cohen, “The Phenomenon of Negative Parallelism and Its Ramifĳications for the Study of Biblical Poetry,” inBeer-Sheva 3 (1988), pp. 69–107 [Heb.]. 105 Compare to Ben-Sira 12:8 that uses the words , love, hate, 25:3 that uses the words three and hate, and 26:5 that uses the graded numerical saying with the numbers three and four. See also Segal, The Book of Ben-Sira (n. 6), introduction, p. 39 and p. 153. 106 See for example: Prov. 9:8, 12:1, 13:24, 14:20, 27:6; Ps. 119:163; M. San. 3:5.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 114 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 239 banquet,107 who is present in a pub. Because of the faulty text, which actually contains all three possible versions: ,, the exact accusation against this man is unclear. Rashi deals with all three options. He suggest that the word means frequent visitor, the word means prattler, a man that talks a lot, and the word means a person who angers the other guests at the drinking house. All three versions, , or , may reveal immoral behavior that takes place at the drinking house and probably involves drinking wine. Literally and based on the content we can fĳind only a faint resemblance between this line and the Greek and Syrian versions of Ben-Sira, which was translated back to Hebrew by Segal (for example: Ben-Sira 31:41, 32:1, 32:5). The Talmudic use of the words: , and and the discussion about the person who sits at the head of the table and his desired behavior were maybe based upon the words of some version of Ben-Sira but sometimes with a late adaptation. For example, the expression reflects Babylonian pronunciation, while in the Jerusalem Talmud it is written ''108 and Ben-Sira uses another term— .109 Moreover, it is obvious that the original text, like the other stiches of this unit, contained only four words.110 The second line was probably based upon R. Aqiba’s recommendation to his son R. Joshua in B. Pes. 112a:111 , meaning, don’t take up residence at the high point of a town and study there [because passersby will disturb you], although it may also be influenced literally from Prov. 9:14: I , She sits at the door of her house, on a seat at the high places of the town.112

107 Segal, The Book of Ben-Sira (n. 6), pp. 199- 201, compares this sentence with Ben-Sira 31:41 and 32:1 and argues that the placing of a person at the head of the banquet was customary in Greek culture and even permeated the culture of the Jews of that period. R. Nathan b. Yehiel in Sefer Arukh haShalem (ed. Alexander Kohut; Vienna: Menorah, 1926), vol. 8, p. 161, on the other hand, suggests that the word should be understood as ruler. 108 Y. Ket. 1:1. See A. Bendavid, Biblical Hebrew and Mishnaic Hebrew (Tel-Aviv: Dvir, 1967), vol. 1, p. 215. 109 See for example: Ben-Sira 31:31, 49:1. 110 See also Schechter (n. 103), pp. 693, 702. 111 The Hebrew texts and references from B. Pes. 112b in this discussion are according to MS Vatican 134. 112 The word or is very rare in the Babylonian Talmud and only appears seven times, three of those include the word : the saying under discussion and two quotes from Proverbs in B. San. 38a. The Hebrew Ben-Sira uses the word twice, while the word does not appear in the Hebrew version. The verb , sit, and the word

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 115 240 Pasternak and Yona

It is difffĳicult to understand what exactly the accusation in this stich is.113 However, the lack of explicit accusation, and the diffferences between the immoral behaviors in the other three lines of this unit, may indicate that this stich is an adaptation of other sources, from which only a part was reworded in this unit. Linguistically speaking, this is the only line in this unit that could be attributed to Ben-Sira. The subject of the third stich appears, with slight changes, in B. Shab. 41a and in B. Nid. 43a:114 , anyone who holds onto his penis when he urinates is as though he brought the flood upon the world. All equivalents use the word , literally: forearm, as a euphemism for the male organ. The origin of this euphemism may be in M. Nid. 5:2: , meaning, holds on to the penis.115 The Hebrew version of Ben-Sira does not use the word , forearm (or a euphemism for the male penis) or the word , urinates. The verb , hold, is typical of Babylonian Hebrew, while in the Land of Israel the equivalent verb is .116 That is to say that the language used in this line is also not applicable to the time of Ben-Sira. The fourth and last line deals with a person who enters his friend’s house, or according to R. Yohanan, even to his own house, suddenly. This line, like the second line in this unit, was probably influenced by the saying of R. Aqiba in B. Pes. 112b: JJ, meaning: and don’t enter your own home suddenly, all the more so your neighbor’s home, although we

, high part, appear in the Hebrew version of Ben-Sira. It seems that unlike all other lines of this unit, the language of this line is close to the language of Ben-Sira. 113 Rashi’s commentary on this stich (s.v. ), similarly his commentary on B. Pes. 112a, s.v. , suggest that it is forbidden to teach your disciples where the studying will be interrupted by passersby. That is to say that although it shows literary influence, it seems unlikely that this stich is related, thematically or con- ceptually, to Prov. 9:14, which deals with a strange woman who tries to seduce young men. 114 The Hebrew text and reference are according MS Munich 95 to Bavli Shabbat. Another equivalent can be found in Kallah Rabbati 2:8. 115 Although the phenomenon is used already in the Bible, the expression , meaning, euphemism, is used from the time of the Mishnah (M. San. 8:1; M. Nid. 6:11): , meaning, but the sages spoke in chaste language. See E.Z. Melammed, “Taboos in Mishnaic Hebrew,” in Leshonenu 47, 1 (1983), pp. 3–17 [Heb.]; idem, “Euphemisms and Textual Alterations of Expressions in Talmudic Literature,” in E.Z. Melammed, ed., Benjamin De Vries Memorial Volume (Jerusalem: Tel Aviv University Research Authority, 1968), pp. 137–143 [Heb.]. 116 See Bendavid (n. 108), vol. 1, p. 207.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 116 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 241 can fĳind some similarity to Ben-Sira 21:24: , the fool steps boldly into a house [while the well-bred person remains outside].117 The third and fourth recommendations in this unit also appear in the following unit, which was attributed in Talmudic manuscripts and prints to various sages such as R. Simeon, R. Simeon b. Yohai, R. Simeon b. Laqish and R. Samuel:

There are four sorts that the Holy One, blessed be He, hates, and I don’t love them either: One who appears in his own home without warning, and, it goes without saying, his fellow’s home; One who holds his penis when he urinates water; One who urinates water naked before his bed; And one who has sexual relations in the presence of any living creature whatsoever.

The opening of this unit is literally, and in a way also stylistically, similar to the previous unit: compared to . As we can see, the words four, hate, and don’t love appear in both sentences. The fĳirst two stiches are almost identical to the last two stiches in the fĳirst unit but in chiastic order: which followed by , compared to J which followed by .118 The second unit seems more coherent than the fĳirst. All four recommendations it summarizes deal with similar subjects: modesty and things related to possible sexual arousal and proper sexual behavior. The inner order is also coherent. The words , urinates water, which ends the second line begins the third line. The words , before

117 See Segal, The Book of Ben-Sira (n. 6), p. 129. We should note that the Hebrew Ben-Sira does not use the verb , to enter. 118 The internal order at this stich—a person’s own home and afterwards his fellow’s home— is identical to the order in B. Pes. 112b.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 117 242 Pasternak and Yona his bed, which appears in the third line appears again, in reverse order, in the fourth line. The arranging of the last three sentences was done correspondingly to key words, as follows:

Urinates water Urinates water before his bed Has sexual relations before his bed119

In our opinion, the fĳirst unit, which contains the graded numerical parallelism, was compiled from, or at least influenced by, several diffferent sources, to which the common opening of the graded numerical parallelism was prefaced. The diffferent subjects in the fĳirst unit, combined with the use of Hebrew words from diffferent times, may indicate that it was construed and inspired by several diffferent sources. The opening sentence and the fĳirst stich were probably influenced from some version of Ben-Sira120 (and so is the opening sentence of the second unit). The second and fourth stiches are connected to B. Pes. 112b, while the language of the second line is close to the language of the Hebrew Ben-Sira and in a way to biblical Hebrew. The fourth line, like the third one, is also connected to the following unit, and there is no doubt that these units are connected in a way.121 Although we can fĳind some similarities between the diffferent versions of Ben-Sira and the fĳirst unit, and especially in regard to the fĳirst half of this unit, it is quite obvious that this unit, entirely, is not an exact quote of Ben-Sira. The language of most lines is diffferent from the language of Ben-Sira, and the Talmudic reference to Ben-Sira is doubtful. The use of Babylonian pronuncia-

119 MS Modena reads: , meaning: and one who has sexual relations naked and one who has sexual relations in the presence of any living creature whatsoever. This version creates substantial connection between the third and fourth lines, while there is a distance between the second and the third line. 120 Other possible references from the book of Ben-Sira such as 12:8, 23:24, 26:5, that maybe also impacted this unit were not discussed due to space limitations. It seems that the influence of Ben-Sira upon some parts of this unit, like the influence of B. Pes. 112a–112b on other parts, is unshakable. 121 We would like to suggest that both units were construed from opening sentences which contain Positive-Negative parallelism, and from four short sentences, each containing three or four words.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 118 Numerical Sayings In The Literatures Of The Ancient Near East 243 tion and the early introduction with B. Pes. 112b should indicate that this unit was compiled in Babylon in the Amoraic era. In our opinion, although this is the only example of graded numerical parallelism that we fĳind in Rabbinic literature, it could confĳirm that the rabbis were familiar with this rhetorical device, and it was in use hundreds of years after the time of Ben-Sira. In addition to the previous example, we fĳind examples that are similar in style specifĳically to the biblical use of this pattern. For example (Avot 4:13b):

There are three crowns: The crown of Torah, And the crown of priesthood, And the crown of kingship; But the crown of a good name exceeds them all.

Although this unit does not begins with the numbers three and four the similarity to graded numerical parallelism is easy noticeable. At fĳirst, three crowns are represented, each in diffferent line, and then, in the last line, the fourth crown, the crown of , good name’, appears.122

Conclusion

We have surveyed the use of numbers in diffferent literatures from diffferent places and diffferent times. Like other rhetorical patterns we have analyzed in previous papers that developed and changed through the years, so did the use of numbers. The basic biblical use of numbers as a mnemonic device increased in Rabbinic literature. The use of typological numbers in Rabbinic literature is no diffferent from its use in the Bible. Moreover, in some cases the rabbis use typological numbers such as forty (less one) instead of ordinary numbers like thirty-nine. This adherence to typological numbers cannot be found in the Bible.

122 See also I. Gottlieb, “Pirqe Avot as Wisdom Literature” (n. 24), p. 98.

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 119 244 Pasternak and Yona

The use of graded numerical sayings, both in the Bible and in Rabbinic literature, is divided into three sub-categories. The fĳirst use, to specify unknown or uncertain numbers, creates some difffĳiculties for the rabbis, who become entangled with uncertain numbers. The second use, in poetic parallelism, is widespread and can be found in diffferent types of parallelisms, but in many cases the numbers help memorization, and their contribution to the style is insignifĳicant. The third use, i.e., the graded numerical parallelism, is very rare, and we found just one prominent appearance of this rhetorical device in Rabbinic literature. The graded numerical parallelism is used mostly as a matter of style, and like other rhetorical features, for example, the “Stylistic Anadiplosis,”123 was almost abandoned be the rabbis. That is to say that the use of numbers as a stylistic device, and especially their use in graded numerical parallelism, almost vanished. It will require a long discussion to explain why the rabbis abandoned the stylistic use of this pattern, but at this point we can say that they preferred to use rhetorical patterns that help the memorization of their texts and rarely used rhetorical patterns that contributed only to the text’s aesthetic appeal. Is seems that the rabbis were familiar with the biblical use of numbers and like other rhetorical devices adopted them, sometimes with some changes, and used them in diffferent ways. As we will show in the second part of this paper,124 one of this ways is the use of numbers as an editing device.

123 See Pasternak and Yona (n. 31). 124 A.R. Pasternak and S. Yona, “The Use of Numbers as an Editing Device in Rabbinic Literature” [forthcoming].

The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016) 202–244 120 The use of numbers as an editing device in Rabbinic literature Ariel-Ram Pasternak Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer- Sheva 84105 Israel [email protected] Shamir Yona Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer- Sheva 84105 Israel [email protected]

Abstract:

In the first part of this paper we follow the use of numbers, from its early use in the Bible and in Ancient Near Eastern literature, through its use in the book of Ben-Sira and ultimately to its use in Rabbinic literature. We show that the Rabbis were familiar with the Biblical use of numbers as rhetoric device and used numbers in similar ways. In this part of our paper we will show that the Rabbis used numbers as an editing device in the Mishnah, in the Tosefta and in the Babylonian Talmud. The use of the rhetorical device in question as an editing device is only rarely attested in the Hebrew Bible.

Introduction:

The use of numbers as an editing device has not been discuss frequently by modern scholars. Exceptional examples are the discussions by Tropper,1 Sharvit 2 and Gottlieb 3 which deals with the use of numbers in the fifth chapter of tractate Avot, and the studies by Friedman 4 and Valler 5 concerning the use of numbers as an editing device in the Babylonian Talmud. The discussion of Friedman and Valler and other scholars 6 show that in some units of the Talmud, we can find numerical influence. Whether it is a list of arguments, evidence or

1 A.D. Tropper, Wisdom, politics, and historiography: Tractate Avot in the context of the Graeco-Roman Near East, (Oxford [England]: Oxford University Press, 2004), pp. 31, 45-47. 2 S. Sharvit, Language and Style of Tractate Avoth Through the Ages(Beer-Sheva: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press, 2006), pp. 30-31 [Heb.] 3 I. Gottlieb, “Pirqe Avot as Wisdom Literature,” in: S. Yona and V.A. Hurowitz (eds.), Wisdom, her pillars are seven (Beer Sheva: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press, 2011), p. 99 [Heb.] 4 S. Friedman, A critical study of Yevamot X with a methodological introduction (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1977), pp. 316-319, 346-351 [Heb.]; idem, Some Structural Patterns in Talmudic Sugiot, in: A. Shinan (ed.), Proceedings of the Sixth World Congress of Jewish Studies(Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 1977), vol. 3, pp. 389-402 [Heb.] 5 S. Valler,”The number fourteen as a literary device in the Babylonian Talmud,” Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Period 26, 2 (1995), pp. 169-184. 6 See for example: L. Jacobs, “The numbered sequence as a literary device in the Babylonian Talmud,” Hebrew Annual Review 7 (1983), pp. 137-149; A.R. Pasternak and S. Yona, “Numerical Sayings in the Literatures of the Ancient Near East, in the Bible, in the book of Ben-Sira and in Rabbinic Literature” [in print.]

121 difficulties based on different numbers, the typological numbers par excellence are three, five, seven and ten. We like to add to these previous discussions our own insights about the contribution of numbers to the editorial process starting with a single Mishnah or a small unit in the Talmud, through several mishnayot and ending with full chapters in the Mishnah or in the Tosefta or large units in the Talmud. As we will show later on, there was often use of numbers as an editing device in the Tanaic and in the Amoraic eras, and we can find ascending or descending order in many cases.

The use of numbers as an editing device in a single Mishnah or in a small Talmudic unit:

M. Qid. 1:1: 7 האשה ניקנית בשלושה דרכים וקונה את עצמה בשתי דרכים ניקנת בכסף ובשטר ובביאה בכסף בית שמי אומ' בדינר ובשוה דינר ובית הלל אומ' בפרוטה ובשווה פרוטה וכמה היא פרוטה אחד משמונה באיסר האיטלקי וקונה את עצמה בגט ובמיתת הבעל היבמה נקנית בביאה וקונה את עצמה בחליצה ובמיתת הייבם A woman is acquired [as a wife] in three ways, and acquires [freedom for] herself [to be a free agent] in two ways: She is acquired through money, a writ, and sexual intercourse. Through money: the House of Shammai say: “for a denar or what is worth a denar.” And the House of Hillel say: “for a perutah or what is worth a perutah.” And how much is a perutah? One eighth of an Italian issar. And she acquires herself through a writ of divorce and through the husband’s death. The deceased childless brother’s widow is acquired through an act of sexual relations. And acquires [freedom for] herself through a rite of Halisah and through the levir’s death.

This Mishnah, which is the beginning of tractate Qiddushin,8 lists the ways in which a single unmarried woman and the deceased childless brother’s widow become married, and the ways in which they can acquire freedom, i.e. become single again, for themselves.

7 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann.

122 The discussion about the unmarried woman starts with an opening line that counts the different ways in which she will become married or a free agent. There is no equivalent line before the discussion about the deceased childless brother’s widow, maybe because of the small number of possible ways in which she can become married again or a free agent. The internal order of this Mishnah is according to its opening line. First, a list of the three ways in which unmarried woman will become married, and then a list of the two ways in which she will become single again. At the end of the Mishnah we will find the details concerning the deceased childless brother’s widow, while the order acquired [as a wife] and acquires freedom remains the same. M. Par. 1:1; 1:5: 9 א: ר' אליעזר אומ' עגלה בת שנתה ופרה בת שתים וחכמ' אומ' עגלה בת שתים ופרה בת שלוש או בת ארבע ר' מאיר אומ' אף בת חמש כשירה זקינה אלא שאין ממתינים לה שמא תשחיר שלא תיפסל... ה: ר' יוסה הגלילי אומ' פרים בני שתים, שנ' ופר שני בן בקר תיקח לחטאת וחכמ' אומ' בני שלוש ר' מאיר או' אף בני ארבע ובני חמש כשירין אלא שאין מביאין זקינים מפני הכבוד 1: R. Eliezer says: “A heifer – a year old, and a cow – two years old.” And the sages say: “A heifer – two years old, and a cow – three years old or four years old.” R. Meir says: “Even one five years old. The old one is suitable. But they do not keep it waiting, lest a hair turn black [and] it should not [otherwise] become unfit.” 5: R. Yose the Galilean says: “Bullocks- two years old. As it said: ‘and a second [year] bullock of the herd you take for a purification offering.’” And the sages say: “Even one three years old.” R. Meir says: “Even one four years old, even one five years old are suitable. But they do not bring old ones, because of the honor [of the altar].”

8 The use of numbers in opening mishnayot of tractates is quite common, although the connection between these mishnayot and the rest of the chapter, and sometimes to the rest of the tractate, differs from case to case. For further discussion see: M. Weiss, “Mishnah Tractates which Open with Numbered Lists,” Sidra 1 (1985), pp. 33-44 [Heb.]

9 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann.

121 This Mishnah discussed the proper age of decapitated heifer, or the heifer whose neck is broken (egla arufa) and red heifer (parah adumah); according to R. Eliezer, the proper ages are, respectively, no more than one year and no less than two years. According to the sages the proper ages are two and all the more so one year old, and three or four years old. R. Meir adds that concerning the red heifer even a five years old cow is suitable but they do not keep it waiting, lest a hair turn black. As we can see, the first two lines were arranged in ascending order, i.e., one – two in the first line and two – three/four in the second line. This entire Mishnah was also arranged in ascending order, which is: One/two Two-three/four - /five The fifth Mishnah in this chapter deals with the proper age of bullocks that should be sacrificed. This Mishnah was also construed in ascending order which is: Two, three, four/five. Unlike dozens of examples in which the words of R. Meir quoted before the words of the sages,10 in these discussions the words of R. Meir appears at the end, after the words of the sages, probably because of the ascending order in each Mishnah and the consecutive order of both discussions.11

B. Pes. 111b-112a: 12 אבל13 תחלי ולא משי ידיה מפחיד תלתא יומין דמסובר ולא משי ידיה מפחיד שבעה יומי שקל מזייה ולא משי ידיה מפחיד תלתא יומי שקל טופריה ולא משי ידיה מפחיד חד יומא14 He who eats cress without [first, and some say afterwards] washing his hands will suffer fear for thirty days He who lets blood without washing his hands [afterwards] will suffer fear for seven days. He who trims his hair and does not wash his hands [afterwards] will suffer fear for three days.

10 For example: M. B. B. 9:6; M. B. M. 1:6; M. Git. 1:6; M. Hul. 4:5; M. Qid. 1:3; T. B. Q. 5:8; T. B. B. 4:9, to mention a few. 11 See also: .N. Epstein, Introduction to the Text of the Mishnah (Jerusalem: Magnes press, 1948), vol.2, pp. 1027-1028 [Heb.] 12 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS New York - JTS Rab. 1608 (ENA 850). .ate ,'אכל' should be 'אבל' According to all other manuscripts the word 13 .'חד יומא' after 'ולא ידע משום מאי מפחיד' Some manuscripts add 14

121 He who pares his nails and does not wash his hands [afterwards] will suffer fear for one day without knowing what frightens him.

This unit deals with the consequences of not washing hands before or after different acts such as eating cress, blood-letting, cutting the hair and paring the nails. This unit, which is a part of a larger discussion that we will refer to later on, contains four sayings that can be arrange in several ways. It seems that the only connection between the sayings is the fear that will follow the act if the person that made it will not wash his hands. We would like to suggest that the number at the end of the first line should be thirty, and not three, and that the sayings in this unit were arranged in descending order. According to MS New York JTS Rab. 1623/2 (EMC 271), MS New York - Columbia X 893 T 14a, MS Vatican 109, MS Cambridge - T-S F2 (2) 16 and Venice and Vilna prints, the number at the end of the first line should be thirty. According to MS Munich 6, MS Munich 95, MS New York JTS Rab. 1608 (ENA 850) and MS Vatican 125 it should be three.15 As we can see, the exact number in this line is uncertain. In our opinion the descending order of the last three sayings in this unit, and the use of numbers as an editing device in two long discussions, which this unit is a part of, implies that the number in the end of the first line should be thirty, and not three. According to this assumption, we suggest that the unit was construed in descending order using the numbers thirty, seven, three and one.

B. Bek. 8a:16

תנא תרנגולת לעשרים יום17 וכנגדה באילן לוז

15 The text in MS Oxford Opp. Add. fol. 23 is faulty, and it seems that the copyist merges together the first two lines. Because of that, the end of the first row and the beginning of the second row are missing, and so is the number three/thirty. 16 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Munich 95. A similar version can be found in T. Bek. 1: א'ע'פ שאמרו בהמה טהורה דקה יולדת לחמשה חדשים בהמה טהורה גסה לתשעה חדשים בהמה טמאה גסה לשנים עשר חדש הכלב :10 לחמשים יום חתול לחמשים ושנים יום חזיר לששים יום שועל וכל שרצים לששה חדשים הזאב והארי והדוב והנמר והברדלס והנחש even though they said a small clean beast gives birth at five ,והפיל והקוף והקיפוד לשלש שנים והנחש לשבע שנים months. A large clean beast gives birth at nine months. A large unclean beast gives birth at twelve months, a dog at fifty days, a cat at fifty-two days, a pig at sixty days, the fox and all reptiles at six months, the wolf, the lion, the bear, the leopard, the cheetah, the snake, the elephant, the monkey and the hedgehog at three years, and the snake at seven years.in Bereshit Rabba 20, 4 (Albeck ed.) there is different version in which some animals are different and the ascending order is not consecutive. We should note that the first appearance of the snake in the Tosefta, near the wolf, the lion, etc., may indicate an a , הארי והדוב והנמר והפרדלס והנחש הרי אילו אנסים :early acquaintance with this list. For example in M. B.M. 7:9 lion, bear, leopard, cheetah or snake, they count as an unavoidable accident, and in Avot de-Rabbi Nathan A 40, seeing and seen: for instance, the wolf, the lion, the ,רואה ונראה כגון הזאב והארי והנמר והדוב והברדלס והנחש :31 panther, the bear, the leopard, and the snake. 17 In some manuscripts the reading is twenty-one.

121 כלב לחמשים יום18 וכנגדו באילן תאנה חתול לחמשים ושנים יום וכנגדו באילן תות חזיר לששים יום וכנגדו באילן תפוח שועל וכל מיני שרצי' בששה חדשים וכנגדן באילן תבואה בהמ' דקה טהור' לחמשה חדשים וכנגדן באילן גפן בהמ' גסה טהורה לתשעה חדשים וכנגדן באילן זית בהמה גסה טמאה לשנים עשר חדש וכנגדה באילן דקל הזאב הארי הדוב והנמר והברדלס19 והפיל והקוף והקיפוד20 לשלש שנים וכנגדן באילן בנות שוח אפעה לשבעים שנה וכנגדן באילן חרוב Our rabbis have taught on Tannaite authority: A chicken lays eggs after twenty-one days, and corresponding to the hen is the almond tree among trees [from the time it blossoms to when the fruits ripen, twenty- one days pass]. A dog takes fifty days, and its counterpart among trees is the fig-tree. A cat takes fifty-two days, and its counterpart among trees is the mulberry. A pig takes sixty days, and corresponding among trees is the apple tree. A fox and all kinds of reptiles take six months, and corresponding among trees is wheat. Small clean animals take five months, and corresponding among trees is the vine. Large unclean cattle take twelve months, and corresponding among trees is the palm. Clean large cattle take nine months, and corresponding among trees is the olive. The wolf, the lion, the bear, the leopard, the cheetah, the elephant, the monkey, and the hedgehog take three years, and corresponding among trees is the white fig. An adder takes seventy years, and corresponding among trees is the carob.

As we can see there are some differences between the first version in the Tosefta and the edited version in the Talmud. There are some changes in the animals list: The addition of the

18 In some manuscripts the reading is fifty-two. :as hyena and not like the regular translation 'ברדלס' According to the Tosafists and Rashi we should translate 19 cheetah. is a ,'קופיף'.which, according to Rashi in his commentary on B. Bek 8a, s.v 'קיפוף‘ Most manuscripts reads 20 it is probably an ,'קריא וקיפופא' .long-tailed monkey. According to Rashi in his commentary on B. Nid 23a, s.v owl or barn owl, and according to MS Munich 95 it is a hedgehog. The Tosafists in their commentary to B. Bek deal with all the options but cannot decide what animal is it. In our opinion the comparison 'הקוף והקיפוף',.8a, s.v to T. Bek. 1:10 should strengthen the version in MS Munich 95. See also: H. Weiss, All Dreams Follow the Mouth (Or Yehuda: Kinneret, Zmora-Bitan, 2011), pp. 229-230, n. 145, 146 [Heb.]

121 chicken at the beginning, the change of the internal order of the animals, the addition of the matching tree for each animal or group of animals, the change from the common noun ‘snake’ to the proper noun adder, and the change from seven years to seventy years concerning the snake’s gestation. The ascending order of the pregnancy lengths in the Bavli version is almost perfect: 20 (days), 50, 52, 60, 180 (six months), 150, 270, 365 (twelve months/one year), 1095 (three years), 25,550 (seventy years). There is only one break of the rising sequence, and that’s the positioning of the fox and the creeping things (180) before the small clean animals (150). In our opinion the author of this unit preferred to discuss all the beasts together, although the ascending order was interfering. The changes in the Bavli version, and especially the change of the internal order, may indicate the significance of the numerical order in the eyes of the Bavli redactor.

B. M.Q. 28a:21

תנו רבנן מת פתאום הרי הוא מיתה חטופה חלה יום אחד ומת הרי היא מיתה דחופה ר' חנינא בן גמליאל אומ' הרי זו מיתת מג]י[פה שנ' בן אדם הנני לוקח את מחמד עיניך במגפה וגו' וכתי' ואדבר אל העם בבקר ותמת אשתי בערב שני ימים ומת הרי היא מיתה דחוייה שלשה ימים ומת הרי היא מית' גערה ארבעה ימים ומת הרי זו מיתה נזופה חמשה ימים ומת הרי היא מיתת כל אדם Our rabbis have taught on Tannaite authority: If someone died suddenly, that is classified as “being caught up.” If someone died after an illness of one day that is classified as “being rushed out.” R. Hanania b. Gamaliel says, “That is death by a stroke: ‘Son of man, behold I take away from you the desire of your eyes with a pestilential stroke’ (Eze. 24:16), and then, ‘So I spoke to the people in the morning, and in the evening my wife died’ (Eze. 24:18).” If someone lingered for two days and then died, this is classified as a precipitous death. After three days this is classified as a death of reproof.

21 The Hebrew texts and references in this discussion are according to MS Munich 59.

121 After four days this is classified as a death of rebuff. After five days this is classified as a routine death.

This unit deals with the death, and the days on illness that the deceased person might suffer 'מת before he passes away. It is easy to identify the ascending order of this unit. The words which wasn’t in use at the ,'אפס',died suddenly’ are, in practice, equal to number zero‘ ,פתאום' 22.'אפס' time of the rabbis except from the former biblical uses of the word ,'ימים ומת הרי זו מיתה' :In the middle of all last four lines of this unit the same words are used ,'חלה' days this is classified as a death’ which creates mesophora or meta-phora.23 The word‘ ‘become ill’ is missing in all last four lines and it should “drag” from the third line. The normal death’ “break” the common ending of the previous lines which‘ ,'מיתת כל אדם' words .while creating a concluding deviation ,חטופה, דחופה/מגיפה, דחויה, גערה, נזופה :is Finally, we should note that this unit is followed by another numerical saying which discussed death and was also arranged in ascending order: מת בחמשים זו היא מיתת כרת בחמשים ושתים זו היא מיתתו של שמואל הרמתי ששים זו היא מיתת כל אדם אמ' מר זוטרא מאי קראה דכתי' תבא בכלח אלי קבר בכלח בגימטרי' שיתין הוו שבעים שיבה שמנים גבורה If one died at fifty (and so more under fifty) years of age, this is [classified as] death by extirpation. [If one died] at fifty-two, this is [classified] as the death of Samuel of Ramah. [If one died] at sixty, this is [classified] as [normal] death Said Mar Zutra, “What verse of Scripture indicates it? ‘You shall come to your grave in ripe age’ (Job. 5:26), and the numerical value of the word for in ripe age is sixty.” [If one died] at the age of seventy, this is [classified as] the hoary head. [If one died] at the age of eighty, this is [classified as] the vigorous old man.

'קצה' ,'נגמר' ,'אין' in the Bible, most of them represent the words 'אפס' There are several meanings to the word 22 meaning: cease, come to the end, end or extreme limits, expressing non-existence, because. See: F. Brown et ,'כי' .in: Hebrew and English Lexicon of the Old Testament (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1906), p.67; L ,'אֶפֶס' ,'ָאפֶס' ,.al in: The Hebrew and Aramic Lexicon of the Old Testament (Leiden, New ,'אֶפֶס' ,Koehler and W. Baumgartner York and Cologne: Brill, 2001), vol. 1, p. 79. 23 For further reading about this rhetorical pattern see: S. Yona, The Many Faces of Repetition (Beer Sheva: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press, 2013), p. 20, n. 7.

121 M. Yoma 4:10: 24 בכל יום היו שם ארבע מערכות והיום חמש דברי ר' מאיר ר' יוסי או' בכל יום שלוש והיום ארבע ר' יהודה או' בכל יום שתים והיום שלוש “Every day there were four stacks of wood there. But today there were five,” the words of R. Meir. R. Yose says: “every day there were three, but today there were four.” R. Judah says: “every day there was two, but today there were three.”

This Mishnah deals with the work of the high priest on the Day of Atonement. In each line there is an ascending order, while between the lines there is a descending order: Four/five Three/four Two/three The equivalent Tosefta (Kip. 2:11) present different version, as follows:25 בכל יום היו שם שתי מערכות והיום שלש אחת מערכה גדולה ואחת מערכה שנייה ואחת שמוסיפין לקטורת שלפניי ולפנים דברי רבי יהודה רבי יוסי אומ' מוסיף אחת לקייום האש ר' מאיר אומ' מוסיף אחת לאברים ופדרים שלא נתאכלו מבערב “Every day there were two stacks of wood there, but today there were three, one for the large stack of wood, one for the second stack of wood, and one which they add to the incense which is burned inside,” the words of R. Judah. R. Yose [says:] one adds one for maintaining the fire. R. Meir [says:] one adds one for [burning up] the limbs and the birds which were not wholly consumed the preceding evening.

The Tosefta adds more information about the use of the wood stack, it lacks any numerical order and the order of the sages is reversed in comparison to their order in the Mishnah. This every day’ appear at the beginning‘ ,'בכל יום' Mishnah also uses ‘hamshakhah’, and the words of mishnayot 4, 5, 7-10, and almost in the beginning of Mishnah six, while creating anaphora.26

24 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann. 25 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Erfurt [Berlin, Staatsbibliothek, Or. fol. 1220 (159)]. 26 For further reading about this rhetorical pattern see: Yona (see n. 23), pp. 19-20, n.5.

121 M. San. 10:2: 27

שלשה מלכים וארבעה הדיוטות אין להן חלק לעולם הבא שלשה מלכים ירבעם ואחאב ומנשה ר' יודה או' מנשה יש לו חלק לעולם שנ' ויתפלל אליו ויעתר לו וישמע תפילתו וישבהו ירושלם למלכותו אמרו לו למלכותו השיבו לא השיבו לחיי העולם הבא וארבעה הדיוטות בלעם ודואג אחיתופל וגחזי Three kings and four ordinary folk have no portion in the world to come. Three kings: Jeroboam, Ahab and Manasseh. R. Judah says: “Manasseh has a portion in the world to come, since it is said: “and he prayed to him and he was entreated of him and heard is supplication and brought him again to Jerusalem into his kingdom”. They said to him: “to his kingdom he brought him back, but to the life of the world to come he did not bring him back.” Four ordinary folk: Balaam, Doeg, Ahitophel and Gehazi.

This Mishnah was construed in ascending order. In Avot de-Rabbi Nathan A 36:30-32 there is an equivalent saying, in which the words of R. Judah, in most manuscripts, were placed after the list of the four ordinary folk, and the structure of three-four is consecutive and more prominent. Another version, in Avot de-Rabbi Nathan A 41:38, in which there are five kings and six ordinary folk, keeps the original structure and the ascending order, but is lacking the entire list of kings and one of the ordinary folks and should probably be consider as an edited later version.

27 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann and includes the copyist's marginal notes with corrections to the text. The references from Avot de-Rabbi Nathan in this discussion and it this entire paper are according to: H.J. Becker and C. Berner, Avot de-Rabbi Natan (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2006.)

111 The use of numbers as an editing device in three, four or five consecutive mishnayot:

As we show earlier, numbers were use in the editing process of small unit, such as single Mishnah, or different sayings from the Talmud. We will discuss now the use of numbers in the editing process of several mishnayot. As we will show, in some cases the use of numbers was combine with other rhetorical patterns which we will discuss as needed. M. Oha. 1:1-4: 28 א: שנים טמאים במת אחד טמא טומאת שבעה ואחד טמא טומאת ערב שלשה טמאים במת שנים טמאים טמאת שבעה ואחד טמא טומאת ערב ארבעה טמאים במת שלשה טמאים טומאת שבעה ואחד טמא טמאת ערב כיצד שנים אדם נוגע במת טמא טמאת שבעה ואדם29 נוגע בו טמא טמאת ערב ב: כיצד שלשה כלים הנוגעים במת וכלים בכלים טמאין טמאת שבעה השלישי בין אדם בין כלים טמא טמאת ערב ג: כיצד ארבעה כלים הנוגעים במת ואדם בכלים וכלים באדם טמאין טומאת שבעה הרביעי בין אדם בין כלים טמא טמאת ערב ד: אמ' ר' עקיבה יש לי חמ שי שפוד התחוב באהל האהל והשפוד ואדם30 הנוגע בשפוד וכלים באדם טמאין טמאת שבעה החמישי בין אדם בין כלים טמא טמאת ערב אמרו לו אין האהל מתחשב 1: Two are unclean through a corpse. One is unclean with the uncleanness of seven [days], and one is unclean with the uncleanness [that passes at] evening. Three are unclean through a corpse. Two are unclean with the uncleanness of seven [days], and one is unclean with the uncleanness [that passes at] evening. Four are unclean through a corpse. Three are unclean with the uncleanness of seven [days], and one is unclean with the uncleanness [that passes at] evening. How so [for] two? A man who touches the corpse is unclean with the uncleanness of seven [days], and a man who touches him is unclean with the uncleanness [that passes at] evening.

28 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann and includes the copyist's marginal notes with corrections to the text. .is written above the word 'ואדם' in the word 'ו' The letter 29 .is written above the word 'ואדם' in the word 'ו' The letter 30

111 2: How so [for] three? Utensils which touch the corpse and utensils [which touch other] utensils are unclean with the uncleanness of seven [days]. The third, whether a man or utensils, is unclean with the uncleanness [that passes at] evening. 3: How so [for] four? Utensils which touch the corpse, and a man [who touches] utensils, and utensils [which touch] a man are unclean with the uncleanness of seven [days]. The fourth, whether a man or utensils, is unclean with the uncleanness [that passes at] evening. 4: Said R. Aqiba: “I have a fifth, the tent peg which is stuck in the tent. The tent, the peg, and a man who touches the peg, and utensils [which touch] man are unclean with the uncleanness of seven [days]. The fifth, whether man or utensils, is unclean with the uncleanness [that passes at] evening.” They said to him: “The tent does not come under consideration.”

The internal order in the first three lines is identical: first the number of things that become unclean through a corpse and afterwards the number of things that are unclean for seven days. The last part of all three sentences deals with a thing that is unclean with the uncleanness [that passes at] evening and the number one stays the same in each line. It is easy to see that these sentences were arranged in ascending order. The end of Mishnah one and mishnayot two and three detail and explain the ruling of the first Mishnah. These explanations were also edited in ascending order of two-three-four. The fourth Mishnah, in the name of R. Aqiba, which was rejected by the sages, was worded in a different way than the rest of this Mishnah. If it had kept the previous wording it should have looked as follows: Said R. Aqiba: Five are unclean through a corpse. Four are unclean with the uncleanness of seven [days], and one is unclean with the uncleanness [that passes at] evening. How so [for] five? The tent peg which is stuck in the tent. The tent, the peg, and man which touch the peg, and utensils [which touch] man are unclean with the uncleanness of seven [days]. The fifth, whether man or utensils, is unclean with the uncleanness [that passes at] evening.”

112 It is uncertain why the words of R. Aqiba are worded differently from the rest of these ,'…I have a fifth' ,'יש לי חמשי...' :mishnayot, and one should pay special attention to his words that seems like a part of an unedited verbal dialogue, or even an exact quote, instead of: Five are unclean through a corps etc., or similar version. Maybe the rejection of R. Aqiba suggestion for ruling leads to the present raw quote of his words. We can assume that if his opinion has been accepted for ruling, the fourth line of this Mishnah would be identical to the first three lines, with the required change of numbers, and the fourth Mishnah should start with the words: ' How so [for] five?' If so, the saying by R. Aqiba might represent early stage of deliberating and writing, before a later, and maybe final editing process of the Mishnah, which is reflected in the first three lines of the first Mishnah which also contribute a mnemonic device. Another possibility is that the words of R. Aqiba (and the response of the sages) had been told after he read or heard the entire unit, i.e., mishnayot 1-3 with the first three lines, and these was his reaction to the previous discussion. Because the sages didn’t accept his opinion, the text of the first Mishnah stays the same. M. Men. 3:6-9: 31 ו: :6 הקומץ מעוטו מעכב את רובו The handful [of meal offering], the smaller part of it impairs the validity of the greater part of it. עישרון מעוטו מעכב את רובו The tenth [of the ephah], the smaller part of it impairs the validity of the greater part of it. היין מעוטו מעכב את רובו The wine, the smaller part of it impairs the validity of the greater part of it. השמן מעוטו מעכב את רובו The oil, the smaller part of it impairs the validity of the greater part of it. הסולת והשמן מעכבין זה את זה Flour and oil impair the validity of one another. הקומץ והלבונה מעכבין זה את זה The handful [of meal offering] and frankincense oil impair the validity of one another.

31 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann.

111 ז: :7 שני שעירי יום הכיפורים מעכבים זה את זה The two goats of Yom Kippur impair the validity of one another. שני כבשי עצרת מעכבים זה את זה The two lambs of Aseret impair the validity of one another. שתי חלות מעכבים זה את זה The two loaves of bread impair the validity of one another. שני סדרים מעכבים זה את זה The two rows [of showbread] impair the validity of one another. שני בזיכים מעכבים זה את זה The two dishes [of frankincense] impair the validity of one another. הסדרים והבזיכים מעכבים זה את זה The rows [of showbread] and the dishes [of incense] impair the validity of one another. ח: :8 שני מינים שבנזיר The two kinds [of cakes] which pertain to [the offering of] the Nazirite , שלשה שבפרה ,The three [kinds used for] the red cow ארבעה שבתודה The four [kinds used in connection with] the thank offering, ארבעה שבלולב ,The four [kinds] which are in the Lulav ארבעה שבמצורע מעכבים זה את זה The four [kinds] used for the Metsora impair the validity of one another. שבע הזיות שבפרה מעכבות זו את זו The seven sprinklings of blood of the red cow impair the validity of one another. שבע הזיות שעל בין הבדים שעל הפרכת שעל מזבח The seven sprinklings of blood between the הזהב מעכבות זו את זו linens and those which are on the veil, and those which are on the golden altar impair the validity of one another. ט: :9 שבעה קני מנורה מעכבין זה את זה The seven branches of the candlestick impair שבעה נירותיה מעכבין זה את זה the validity of one another. And its seven lamps impair the validity of one another. שתי פרשות שבמזוזה מעכבת זו את זו אפילו כתב אחד The two portions in the Mezuzah impair the

111 מעכב)י(ן validity of one another. And even [the shape of] one letter impairs their validity. ארבע פרשות שבתפילים מעכבות זו את זו אפילו כתב The four portions which are in the Tefillin אחד מעכבן impair the validity of one another. And even [the shapes of] one letter impairs their validity. ארבע ציציות מעכבות זו את זו שבארבעתן מצוה אחת The four fringes impair the validity of one another, for the four of them constitute a ר' ישמעאל אומ' ארבעתן ארבע מצוות single commandment. R. Ishmael says: "the four of them constitute four distinct commandments."

In this Mishnah we find another example for the contribution of numbers to the editorial process of several mishnayot, along with other things that have impact upon the editorial process. Overall mishnayot six, seven and eight, and Mishnah nine by itself were construed in ascending order in several lists, with some exceptions that, in our opinion were necessary. The first four sentences of Mishnah six deals with things which the smaller part of which impair the validity of the greater part of them. The handful [of meal offering] which begins opens this Mishnah, is repeated several times in the prior mishnayot, and also ends Mishnah five. The last thing in these four lines of the list is the oil, which begins, alongside the flour, the next list of two different things that impair the validity of one another. Every item in the first Mishnah stands by himself, and can be taken into account of [the number] one. 32 The next list deals with two identical things which impair the validity of one another. The only exception is the last line of Mishnah seven which deals with two different things (the rows of showbread and the dishes of incense) which impair the validity of one another. This line could have been written at the end of Mishnah six, next to the last two lines, but was placed next to the sayings about the two rows of showbread and the two dishes of frankincense. The next list in this ongoing unit contains five things that two, three or four kinds' appears only in the first line' ,'מינים' kinds of them can impair there validity. The word and the reader "drag" it to lines two-five. This list is followed by a list which deals with seven identical things which impair the validity of one another. The final list deals with three things

32 The oil and the flour, and the handful of meal offering and the frankincense oil, impair the validity of one another but appear only once, as opposed to items in the next lists which appears several times (from two to seven.)

111 in which there is a clarification or explanation for the ruling. The order in this list is two-four- four. As we can see, Mishnah eight was construed in ascending order and so is Mishnah nine, except for its opening line. This division can be found in the printed edition and also in the Kaufman manuscript of the Mishnah. According to the Parma 3173 manuscript of the Mishnah, there is a different division and the first line in Mishnah nine deals with two portions in the Mezuzah. In our opinion, in this case the text and the division of the Mishnah in MS Parma seem preferable because it preserves the internal order in each Mishnah, and the first line in Mishnah nine in MS Kaufmann should, in fact, end Mishnah eight. All in all, we can see the integration between different editing options. On one hand, this unit keeps it ascending order, and on the other hand the unit is divided into secondary lists and had some exceptions, such as the saying concerning the rows of showbread and the dishes of incense which impair the validity of one another.

M. Kel. 27:1-5: 33 The next example spreads over five mishnayot and contains several sub-units and several numerical lists. א: הבגד מטמא משם חמשה שמות השק משם ארבעה העור משם שלשה והעץ משם שנים וכלי חרש משם אחד כלי חרש מטמא34 כלי קיבול כל שאין לו תוך בכלי חרש אין לו אחוריים ב: מוסף עליו העץ שהוא מטמא משם מושב וכן טבלה שאין לה ליזביז בכלי עץ טמאה בכלי חרש טהורה ג: מוסף עליו העור שהוא מטמא משם אוהלים מוסף עליו הסק שהוא מטמא משם אריג מוסף עליו הבגד שהוא מטמא משם שלש על שלש ד:

33 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Parma 3173 and includes the copyist's marginal notes with corrections to the text. because of'. The second part of this line and the second part of the next' ,'משם' Some manuscripts add the word 34 line that breaks the continuity of the unit might be a later addition which is not part of the original unit.

111 הבגד מטמא משם שלושה על שלושה למדרס ומשם שלש על שלש לטמא מת השק ארבעה על ארבעה העור חמשה על חמשה מפץ ששה על ששה שווים למדרס ולטמא מת ר' מאיר או' השק שיריו ארבעה ותחילתו משיגמר ה: העושה שנים מן הבגד ואחד מן השק שלשה מן השק ואחד מן העור ארבעה מן העור ואחד מן המפץ טהור חמשה מן המפץ טהור35 חמשה מן המפץ ואחד מן העור ארבעה מן העור ואחד מן השק שלשה מן השק ואחד מן הבגד טמא זה הכלל כל שחיבר לו מן החמור ממנו טמא ומן הקל ממנו טהור 1: The cloth [of wool or linen] is susceptible to uncleanness on account of five categories; The sack cloth because of four; The leather because of three; The wood because of two; And clay utensil because of one. A clay utensil is susceptible to uncleanness because of [being] a vessel with a receptacle. Any [object] which has no inside among clay utensils has no outer parts. 2: Added to that is the wood[en object], which is susceptible to uncleanness on account of [being] something which is sat upon. And so a tray which has no rim: among wooden utensils is unclean, and among clay utensils is clean. 3: Added to that is the leather [hide], which is susceptible to uncleanness on account of tents.

35 This line was added by the copyist in the margin of the text, and it is missing in other manuscripts such as Kaufmann and Parma 2596.

111 Added to that is the sack cloth, which is susceptible to uncleanness on accounts of [being] something which is woven. Added to that is the [wool or linen] cloth, which is susceptible to uncleanness on accounts of [being] three-by-three [fingerbreadths square]. 4: The cloth is subject to uncleanness on account of being three-by-three [handbreadths square] for midras uncleanness, and on account of being something three-by-three [fingerbreadths square] foe corpse uncleanness. The sack cloth four-by-four [handbreadths], The leather five-by-five [handbreadths] A mat six by-six [handbreadths] are equivalent for madras and for corpse uncleanness. R. Meir says: “The sack cloth – its remnants are four [handbreadths], and its beginning [is] when it will have been completed.” 5: He who makes two [handbreadths] from cloth and one from sack cloth, Three from sack cloth and one from leather, Four from leather and one from matting, it is clean. Five from sack cloth and one from leather, Four from leather and one from sack cloth, Three from sack cloth and one from cloth, it is unclean. This is the general rule: Anything to which one attached [a fabric] from [a category which is] more stringent than itself is unclean. And [anything to which one attached a fabric] from that which is [in a category] more lenient than itself is clean.

Mishnayot one to three specify the reasons for uncleanness of five things: the cloth, the sack cloth, the leather, the wood and the clay utensil. These items were ordered correspondingly to the number of uncleanness reasons they may have. The cloth is susceptible to uncleanness on account of five categories, the sack cloth because of four and so on until the clay utensil that cloth is susceptible to uncleanness on account of one category. As we can see the items in this list were ordered in descending order, while the equivalent list was construed in ascending order, although the numbers were not explicitly written. Both lists create together uncommon

111 complex chiastic pattern. The tenth line is the opposite of the first line; the ninth line is the opposite of the second line; the eighth line is the opposite of the third line, etc.36 Mishnah four starts another list, and its first line uses some of the words of the last line of הבגד מטמא משם שלושה compared to מוסף עליו הבגד שהוא מטמא משם שלש על שלש :Mishnah three and lines two and three deal with the same items which appears before the cloth in ,על שלושה Mishnah three, i.e., the sack cloth and the leather, while creating continuity between the mishnayot. The ascending list in Mishnah four includes the cloth, the sack cloth, the leather and the mat. Mishnah five contains two numerical lists that are bound together. The first item in the first line in the ascending list (the cloth) is the last item in the last line in the descending list. The second item in the first line in the ascending list (the sack cloth), is the penultimate item in the last line in the descending list, and so on. All in all, we can see the significance of the numbers in the editing process of the unit. Two more examples which we discussed only briefly can be found in M. Bes. 2:6-8 and in M. Edu. 5:1-4.

M. Bes. 2:6-5: 37 ו: In three matters Rabban Gamliel was :6 שלושה דברים רב' גמליא' מחמיר כדברי בית שמי… stringent, in accordance with the ruling of the School of Shammai… ז: אף הוא אמר שלושה דברים להקל... He [Rabban Gamliel] also gave three :7 lenient rulings… ח: Three matters Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah :8 שלושה דברים ר' לעזר בן עזריה מתיר וחכמ' אוסרין... …permits but the sages forbid

ט: A pepper mill is susceptible to :9 הריחים של פלפלין טמאה משם שלושה כלים... uncleanness by reason of constituting three distinct sorts of utensil…

36 In the Bible there are several examples of complex chiastic patterns. Prominent examples can be found in Exod. 28:6-12, 30:12-15 and in Lev. 24:14-23. In some units there is a “pivot” line in the middle of the unit, and in some units, like the example above, the second part will be a “mirror image” of the first part without “pivot” line. For further discussion see: M. Paran, Forms of the Priestly Style in the Pentateuch (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1989) , pp. 163-174; A.R. Pasternak and S. Yona, "Concatenation in Ancient Near East literature, in Hebrew Scripture and in Rabbinic literature" [in print.] 37 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann. Due to space limitations, in some of the upcoming discussions we will quote only the opening words of the Mishnah or the Talmud.

111 All last four mishnayot in this chapter counts three things. These mishnayot, except of the last one, appears also in M. Edu 3:12-14 which will discuss later on.

M. Edu. 5:1-5: 38

א: ר' יודה או' ששה דברין מקולי בית שמי ומחומרי R. Judah says: “Six opinions of the House of :1 בית הלל... Shammai’s more lenient, and the House of Hillel’s more stringent rulings…” 2. R. Yose says: “Six opinions of the House of ב: ר' יוסה או' ששה דברין מקולי בית שמי ומחומרי Shammai’s more lenient, and the House of בית הלל... ”… Hillel’s more stringent rulings 3. R. Simeon says: “Three opinions of the House of Shammai’s more lenient, and the ג: ר' שמעון או' שלשה דברין מקולי בית שמי ”… House of Hillel’s more stringent rulings ומחומרי בית הלל... R. [E]lazar says: “Two opinions of the .4-5 House of Shammai’s more lenient, and the

House of Hillel’s more stringent rulings …” ד-ה: ר' לעזר או' שני דברין מקולי בית שמי ומחומרי בית הלל... This example contains five mishnayot, and in each Mishnah, except in r the last case which divided to mishnayot four and five, there are different cases in which the opinions of the House of Shammai’s are more lenient, and the House of Hillel’s are more stringent rulings. First, R. Judah lists six cases, then R. Yose lists six more cases,39 R. Simeon list three and R. Elazar lists two. As we can see, these mishnayot were arranged in descending order. The equivalent Tosefta (Edu. 2:6-8) presents a different version: five cases in the name of R. Judah (instead of six), one thing in the name R. Eliezer son of R. Jacob, three cases in the name of R. Simeon and two cases in the name of R. Elazar. The words of R. Yose are missing from the Tosefta. In addition to the differences, the descending order or any numerical order is missing in the Tosefta.

38 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann. 39 Compare to B. Hul. 104b, and see also the discussion by Epstein (see n. 11), vol. 2, p. 784.

111 The use of numbers as an editing device in several mishnayot, in an entire Mishnaic chapter or in a several continuous Talmudic units:

In the last part of our paper we will discuss the use of numbers in the editing process of large amount of mishnayot (mostly from six to seventeen) that sometimes are, in fact, an entire chapter, or in long Talmudic units, i.e., several continuous Talmudic units. Once again we should mention the mnemonic value of the numbers, which is more prominent in large units. We should also note that MS Kaufmann and MS Parma 3173 used to count the numbers of mishnayot in the previous chapter, and the number of chapters in the previous tractate. This counting helps the copyists to verify that the Mishnah was copied completely. The first two examples in this part of our discussion are from M. Avot 5:1-15 and from M. Kel. 24:1-17. The first fifteen mishnayot in chapter five in tractate Avot were ordered in descending order: ten (8 mishnayot), seven (2 mishnayot) and four (7 mishnayot). Mishnayot 16-19 in this chapter contains antithetic parallelism (i.e., two sayings that were compare to each other), and mishnayot 02-02 contains, mostly, one idea or one saying.40

א. בעשרה מאמרות נברא העולם... …By ten sayings the world was created .1 ב 1. עשרה דורות מאדם ועד נוח... 2a. Ten generations were there from Adam until Noah… ב 0. עשרה דורות מנוח ועד אברהם אבינו... 2b. Ten generations were there from Noah until Abraham… ב. עשרה ניסיונות ניתנסה אברהם אבינו... With ten trials was Abraham our father .3 tried… ד 1. עשרה ניסים נעשו לאבותינו במצרים... 4a. Ten miracles were wrought for our fathers in Egypt… ד 0. עשרה ניסיונות ניסו אבות' את המקום 4b.With ten trials did our fathers tried God in במדבר... …the wilderness ה. עשרה ניסים נעשו בבית המקדש... …Ten miracles were wrought in the Temple .5 ו. עשרה ]דברים[ נבראו בין השמשות... …Ten [things] were created at twilight .6 ז. שבעה דברים בגולם ושבעה בחכם... Seven things are in a clod and seven in a .7 sage/wise man…

40 Due to space limitations we quote only the opening sentence of the first fifteen mishnayot. For further discussion see: Tropper (see n. 1), pp. 31, 45-47; Sharvit (see n. 2), pp. 30-31; Gottlieb (see n. 3) and there additional references.

111 ח -1ט 0. שבעה מיני פורעניות באים על 8a-9b.Seven kinds of calamities come for seven שבעה גופי עבירות... …classes of transgressions ט 2. בארבעה פרקים הדבר מרובה... …9c. At four periods the pestilence increases י. ארבע מידות באדם... …Four characters in men .10 יא. ארבע ]מידות[ בדעות... …Four (characters) in dispositions .11 יב. ארבע מידות בלמידים ]בתלמידים[... …Four characters in scholars .12 יג. ארבע מידות בנותני צדקה... …Four characters in almsgivers .13 יד. ארבע מידות בהולכי לבית המדרש... …Four characters in study-house goers .14 טו. ארבע מידות ביושבים לפני חכמ'... …Four characters in sitters before the sages .15

In M. Kel. 24:1-17 41 we can find a different use of numbers as an editing device. All seventeen mishnayot in this chapter start with the number three, and all the mishnayot in this chapter, except the last one, were construed in the same pattern: there are three [kinds of] X: the first one is susceptible to midras uncleanness, the second one is susceptible to corpse uncleanness, and the third one is clean of all [uncleanness.] The repeating pattern generates anaphora of the words ‘there are three’, mesophora or meta-phora of the words ‘susceptible to midras uncleanness’ and ‘susceptible to corpse uncleanness’ and epiphora of the words ‘is clean of all’.42 The last Mishnah of this chapter was construed in a different way and the only similarity between this Mishanh and the entire chapter is the number three at the beginning. The changes in the last Mishnah create concluding deviation that implies the end of the chapter. א: שלשה תריסים הן… …There are three [kinds of] shield :1 ב: שלש עגלות הן... …There are three [kinds of] wagons :2 ג: שלש עריבות הן... …There are three [kinds of] troughs :3 ד: שלש תיבות הן... …There are three [kinds of] boxes :4 ה: שלושה תרכוסין הן... …There are three [kinds of leather] covers :5 ו: שלשה בסיסיות הן... …There are three [kinds of] bases :6 ז: שלוש פינקסיות הן... …There are three [kinds of] writing tablets :7 ח: שלוש מיטות הן... …There are three [kinds of] beds :8 ח ]ט[: שלוש משפילות הן... …There are three [kinds of] baskets :9 ט ]י[: שלשה מפצין הן... …There are three [kinds of] mats :10

י ]יא[: שלוש חמתות ושלושה תורמלים הן... There are three [kinds of] goatskins and :11

41 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann and include the copyist's corrections of the text. The internal order of mishnayot 11-16inMS Munich 95 and mishnayot 14-16in MS Parma 2596 is different, but in all manuscripts the number three is at the beginning of each Mishnah, and the basic pattern of each Mishnah, which we will discussed later on, doesn’t change. See: Epstein (see n. 11), vol. 2, pp. 1003-1004. 42 For further reading about this rhetorical pattern see: Yona (see n. 23), p. 20, n. 8.

112 three kinds of shepherd's wallets… יב: שלשה עורות הן... …There are three [kinds of] hide :12 יג: שלשה סדינים הן... …There are three [kinds of] sheets :13 יד שלשה פרקלינון הן... …There are three [kinds of] napkins :14 יה: שלוש סבכות הן... …There are three [kinds of] leather gloves :15 יו: שלוש מטפחות הן... …There are three [kinds of] head net :16 יז: שלש קופות הן... …There are three [kinds of] store baskets :17

Some of the mishnayot in this chapter match parts of mishnayot in tractate Kelim, while others are contradictory to other parts of mishnayot in this tractate. In both cases the order in chapter twenty-four is different from the order in the rest of the tractate. 43 We can also find in this chapter similarities to several mishnayot in Tosefta Kelim (B.B. 2:9-11).44 Epstein suggests that R. Judah and R. Yose made different numerical lists, each according to his method. The chapter under discussion is probably by R. Judah, while the version in Tosefta Kelim is in the name R. Yose. Epstein argues that the list which is, actually, the entire chapter, is a different unit that was integrated into the tractate. If so, the author of this concluding list could use any pattern he wanted and could organize the mishnayot in this unit in any order he preferred. The use of the same opening number, the returning pattern and the internal order are deliberate. The location of the last Mishnah in this chapter, which creates a concluding deviation, could have been different, and from its current position, and the use of all other rhetorical patterns mentioned above, we can learn that the sages also pay attention to rhetorical patterns in their works. This kind of arrangement helps the sages to remember and to memorize their rules.

M. Kel. 6:1-5:45

א: העושה שלושה פטפוטים בארץ... קבע שלושה He who makes three props on the :1 מסמרין בארץ... ground… He fixed three nails into the ground… ב: העושה שתי אבנים כירה וחיברן בטיט... He who makes two stones into a stove and .2 joined them with clay…

43 J.N. Epstein, "Kelim chapter 24,” in: S. Lieberman et all (ed.), Louis Ginzberg jubilee volume (New York, American Academy for Jewish Research, 1946), vol. 1, pp. 68-73. [Heb.] 44 Idem, idem, pp. 65-68. 45 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann and includes the copyist's marginal notes with corrections to the text. The equivalent chapter in the Tosefta (chapter five) also starts with descending order which doesn’t continue to the entire chapter.

111 ג: האבן46 שהיה שופת עליה... A stone [fixed to the ground with clay] on .3 which one was setting [the cooking pot]... 4. [Regarding] three stones of which one ד: שלוש אבנים שעשאן שתי כיריים... …made two double stoves 5. [As to] two stones which one [plastered ה:שתי אבנים שעשאן כירה... …and so] made as a stove

This unit discusses the cleanness and uncleanness of several items that can be used for cooking: props, nails and stones. We can recognize a descending order in this Mishnaic chapter. First, in mishnayot 1-3, the order is three, three, two and one (stone), and then, in mishnayot 4-5 the order is three-two-two.

M. Edu. 2:1-10: 47

א. ר' חנניה סגן הכהנים העיד ארבעה דברים… ,a. R. Haninah, Prefect of the Priests gave testimony concerning four matters… ב. הוסיף ר' עקיבה...b. Added R. Aqiba… 48 ג. אמ' ר' חנניה סגן הכוהנים… …c. Said R. Haninah ד. אף הוא העיד… …d. Also he gave testimony concerning ה. שלשה דברין אמ' ר' ישמעא' לפני חכמ' בכרם e. Three matters did R. Ishmael state ביובנה...before the sages in the vineyard in 49 Yabneh… ו. שלשה דברין אמרו לפני ר' ישמעא' ולא אמרו .f. Three matters did they say before R בהן אסור והתר… Ishmael, and he did not rule concerning them either to prohibit or to permit… ז. שלשה דברים אמ' ר' ישמעא' ולא הודה לו ר' ,g. Three matters did R. Ishmael state עקיבה… and R. Aqiba did not concur with him… ח. שלשה דברין אמרו לפני ר' עקיבה שנים משם .h. Three things did they say before R

.referred to one stone, so the descending order continues ,האבן ,The stone 46 47 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann. 48 In MS Munich 95 the saying by R. Aqiba is a part of the first Mishnah, and all three opening mishnayot are in the name of R. Haninah. 49 According to Epstein this Mishnah is from the name of R. Ishmael b. Jochanan, unlike mishnayot six and seven which are from the name of R. Ishmael b. Elisha. See: Epstein (see n. 11), vol. 2, pp. 1194-1196.

111 ר' אליעזר ואחד משם ר' יהושע… Aqiba, two in the name of R. Eliezer and one in the name of R. Joshua… ט. שלשה דברים אמ' ר' עקיבה על שנים הודו לו .i. Three rulings did R. Aqiba state ועל אחד לא הודו לו… Concerning two of them they concurred with him, and concerning one of them they did not concur with י. הוא היה או'… …him j. He would say… יא. אף הוא או' )חמשה דברין של שנים עשר k. Also he would (list five things which חודש…( (…last for] twelve months]

The mishnayot in this chapter were arranged according to the names of the respective sages, to whom they were attributed. Within the lists of sayings for each of the sages we find also an internal arrangement. First there are three mishnayot attributed to R. Haninah, then three mishnayot which are attributed to R. Ishmael and finally four mishnayot which are attributed to R. Aqiba. In the units made up of sayings attributed to specific sages we can identify an internal descending order: R. Haninah: 4, 1, 1; R. Ishmael 3, 3, 3 and R. Aqiba 3, 3, 1, 1. The last six mishnayot in the following chapter, i.e. M. Edu. 3:9-14, were also arranged according to the numbers that begins them, in addition to other editing considerations, as we will show:50

ט: ארבעה ספיקות ר' יהושע מטמא וחכמ' מטהרין... Four matters of doubt does R. Joshua :9 declare unclean, and do the sages declare clean… י: שלשה דברין ר' צדוק מטמא וחכמים מטהרין... Three matters does R. Zadoq declare :10 unclean, and the sages declare clean… יא: ארבעה דברין רבן גמליא' מטמא וחכ' מטהרין... Four matters does Rabban Gamliel :11 declare unclean, and do the sages declare clean… יב: שלשה דברין רבן גמליאל מחמיר כדברי בית 12: In three rulings does Rabban Gamliel שמי... impose the stringent ruling, in accord with the opinion of the House of Shammai… יג: אף הוא אומ' שלשה דברין להקל... 13: Also he [He] gave three ruling to impose

50 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann.

111 יד: שלשה דברין ר' לעזר בן עזריה מתיר וחכמ' …a lenient opinion אוסרין… .In three matters does R. Eleazar b :14 Azariah permit and do the sages prohibit…

Initially we were not able to find special numerical arrangement in these continuous mishnayot, and the order 4, 3, 4, 3, 3, 3 seems random. But a deeper look reveals various editing considerations in this part of the chapter which, in fact, summarizes different sayings from several tractates. Mishnah nine was copied from M. Toh. 6:2; mishnayot ten and eleven were copied from M. Kel. 12:7-8; 51 and mishnayot twelve, thirteen and fourteen were copied from M. Bes. 2:5-7. All three quotes, which contain six mishnayot, separately, are connected to their original tractate and the connection between them, and between them and the first part of chapter two in M. Edu. seem loose. If so, the redactor of this chapter, or tractate, could have arranged the three quotes in any order he wanted, and maybe also could have "copied and inserted" each Mishnah in the last two quotes separately. In our opinion the redactor tries to integrate the descending numerical order into the arrangement by lexical or literal similarity, while maintaining full quotes from the original tractates. The first three mishnayot deal with matters in which one of the rabbis declare unclean, and the sages declare clean. Mishnah nine, in the name of R. Joshua could have been cited after the quote from M. Kel, but in this hypothetical location it will separate the sayings by Rabban Gamliel which connect the second quote from M. Kel. and the third quote from M. Bes. while creating sequence of three mishnayot in his name. The last Mishnah in this chapter, in the name of R. Eleazar b. Azariah, is not related to the idea of the first three mishnayot, in which the sages declare clean, nor is it in the name of Rabban Gamliel. It is only related to the idea of the last Mishnah in the name of Rabban Gamliel: a lenient opinion of one sage against the prohibition by the sages; it was probably copied because of the redactor's desire to maintain full quote. All in all, it seems that the redactor managed to keep the descending order of 4, 4, 3, 3, 3 with one exception - the saying of R. Zadoq. The “breaking” of the numerical order clarifies that numbers were not the only factor that influenced the editing process. In MS Munich 95 we can find a different order of the mishnayot under discussion:

51 For further discussion about these mishnayot see: A.R. Pasternak and S. Yona, “Numerical Sayings in the Literatures of the Ancient Near East, in the Bible, in the book of Ben-Sira and in Rabbinic Literature” [in print], n. 57.

111 ט: ארב' ספיקו' ר' יהוש' מטמ' וחכ' מטהרי'... Four matters of doubt does R. Joshua :9 declare unclean, and do the sages declare clean… י: ארב' דברי' ר"ג מטמ' וחכ' מטהרי'... Four matters does Rabban Gamliel :10 declare unclean, and do the sages declare clean… יא: שלש' דב' ר' צדו' מטמ' וחכ' מטה'... Three matters does R. Zadoq declare :11 unclean, and the sages declare clean… יב: שלש' דב' ר"ג מחמי' כדב' ב"ש… In three rulings does Rabban Gamliel :12 impose the stringent ruling, in accord with the opinion of the House of Shammai… יג: אף הו' או' שלש' דברי' להקל... Also he [He] gave three ruling to impose :13 a lenient opinion:

14: [In three matters does R. Eleazar b. יד: פר יוצא ברצוע' שבין קרני'... Azariah permit and do the sages prohibit:] One’s cow goes forth with a strap which is between her horns…

As we can see, there are two vast differences between MS Kaufmann and MS Munich 95: 1.The saying by Rabban Gamliel and the saying by R. Zadoq that were copied from Mishnah Kelim are in chiastic order compared to the original source. 2. The last saying, in the name of R. Eleazer b. Azariah, is anonymous in MS Munich 95 and lacking the entire opening sentence. The lacking of the opening sentence from MS Munich 95 is was maybe done by mistake. This line appears in the Mishnah in tractate Bes. which is accompanied by the Talmud. The chiastic order of sayings by Rabban Gamliel and by R. Zadoq, on the other hand, might be deliberate. Like other manuscripts of Mishnah Kelim, MS Munich 95 also reads first the words of R. Zadoq and afterwards the words of Rabban Gamliel, and this chiastic order appears only M. Edu. 3:10-11. It is possible that the copier changed the order of these two mishnayot to continue the descending order, although it interferes with the sayings of Rabban Gamliel.

111 B. Ber. 54b-55a, 57b:52 The next example is different from the examples that we have discussed until now. The ninth chapter of Bavli Berakhot contains a unique and separate division – the “Dream Tractate.”53 It seems that the redactor placed this unit in the middle of an (almost perfect) ascending numerical list, and therefore the list was divided into two parts. The last part of the “Dream Tractate” that contains six small units, which start with the number three, creates a slightly rough sequence to the original list.54 We shall now discuss the two parts of the list, and then we will refer briefly to the last part of the “Dream Tractate.”

1. אמ' רב יהודה אמ' רב ארבעה Said R. Judah said Rab, “Four sorts of .1 צריכין להודות אלו הן יורדי הים people have to give thanks: those who go והולכי מדברות ומי שהיה חולה down to the sea, those who wander far in ונתרפא ומי שהיה חבוש בבית ,the deserts, he who was sick and got better האסורי' ויצא… ”...and he who was in prison and came forth

0. אמן אמ' רב יהודה אמ' רב שלשה Said R. Judah said Rab: “Three sorts of .2 צריכין שימור אלו הן חולה חתן people have to be watched carefully: a sick וכלה... ”...person, a groom, and a bride

2. אמ' רב יהודה אמ' רב שלשה Said R. Judah said Rab: “Three things .3 דברים מאריכין ימיו של אדם אלו there are, which, if one lengthens the] הן המאריך בתפלתו והמאריך על process of doing them,] will lengthen his שלחנו והמאריך בבית הכסא... days and years: “He who lengthens the process of reciting his prayer. He who lengthens the process of eating at a table. And he who lengthens his stay in the privy...”

4. אמ' רב יהודה אמ' רב שלשה Said R. Judah said Rab: “Three things .4 מקצרין שנותיו של אדם ואלו הן מי shorten a person’s days and years: “A

52 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Oxford Opp. Add. fol. 23, the numbers were added by us. Due to space limitations in some units we quote only the opening sentence. 53 For further discussion and bibliography concerning this special essay see: Weiss (see n. 20.) 54 Idem, idem, pp. 10-13.

111 שנותני' לו ספר תורה לקרות ואינו person to whom they hand over a scroll of קורא וכוס של ברכה ואינו מברך the Torah to read but who does not agree to והמנהיג עצמו ברבנות... read .A person to whom they hand over a cup for reciting the blessing [of the Grace after Meals] and who declines to say the blessing. And he who puts on airs of authority.” 5. Said R. Judah said Rab: “There are three 9. אמ' רב יהודה אמ' רב שלשה things which require [God’s] mercy: A צריכין רחמים ואלו הן חלום טוב good king, a good year, and a good שנה טובה ומלך טוב... ”...dream 6. א'ר יוחנן שלש' דברים הב'ה מכריז Said R. Yohanan, “There are three things .6 עליהם בעצמו ואלו הן רעב שובע ,about which the Holy One, blessed be He ופרנס... makes a proclamation himself [and not through an intermediary], and these are they: famine, plenty, and a good leader...” All first five units are in the name of R. Judah. We can find associative connections between some of the units, for example, units one and two discussed, among others, the sick person and both refer to people who have to do something, either to give thanks or to be watched carefully. Units three and four discussed, antithetically, things that will lengthen or shorten one’s life and units five and six contains things that are in God’s hands. 55 The first unit starts with number four, and the next five units with the number three. The fifth unit mentions the good dream and so do units twelve and thirteen in the second part. The citations of the dream may explain why the redactor chose to place the “Dream Tractate” in the middle of this numerical division.

7. ת'ר שלשה דברים נכנסין לגוף ואין There are three things which enter the .7 הגוף נהנה מהן ואלו הן ג]ו[דגדניות body, and from which the body gains וכפניות ופגי תמרה nothing: melilot, date-berries, and unripe dates.

all three things in this list, i.e., a good king, a good year, and a good ’צריכים רחמים’.According to Rashi, s.v 55 dream, are in God’s hand and cannot come without his permission. That’s similar to the famine, the plenty, and the good leader that are also in God’s hand.

111 8. שלשה אין נכנסין לגוף והגוף נהנה There are three things which do not enter .8 מהם רחיצה סיכה ותשמישthe body, but from which the body benefits: 56 washing, anointing, and exercise. 5. שלשה מישבין דעתו של אדם קול There are three things that restore a .9 ערב ריח קומה ויש אומרי' ומראהperson’s mind: pleasant sound, smell, 57 koma, and there are those who say: sight. 12. שלשה דברים מרחיבין דעתו של There are three things that make a person .10 אדם דירה נאה ואשה נאה וכלים generous in mind, [and there are those who נאים say]: a good house, a good wife, and good clothes. 11. שלשה דברים מעין העולם הבא There are three things that are a reflection .11 ואלו הן שבת שמש תשמיש... :of the world to come, and these are they [the] Sabbath, [the] sun, [and] exercise… 10. חמשה דברים שהן אחד מששים Five things are one-sixtieth [of something .12 ואלו הן שבת דבש אש שינה ,else], and these are they: the Sabbath חלום... …honey, fire, sleeping, [and] dreaming 12. ששה דברים סימן יפה לחולה ואלו Six things are a good omen for a sick .13 הן עיטוש זיעה שלשול קרי שינה ,person, and these are they: sneezing חלוםsweating, good bowel movements, seminal …58 emission, sleeping, [and] dreaming… 14. ששה דברים מרפאין את החולה Six things heal a sick person from his .14 מחוליו ורפואתן רפואה... ailment, and the remedy serves as a permanent one... 19. עשרה דברים מחזירין את החולה There are ten things that make a person sick .15 לחוליו וחולי' קשה ואלו הן… ,again, and the sickness takes a severe form and these are they...

The first five units in the second part also start with the number three. Like the previous units, these units also deal with things that are good the one’s body and soul. If the

could be understood as exercise in bed, i.e., sexual relations or as use of the bodily ,’תשמיש‘ The word 56 .’תשמיש הנקבים‘ ,.apertures, i.e 57 The version in MS Oxford Opp. Add. fol. 23 is not clear. According to other manuscripts, according to the print versions and similar to B. Pes. 26a, the list should probably include sound, sight and smell. 58 Similar versions, from the name of R. Abbahu, can be found in Pesikta de-Rav Kahana 19, 5 (Mandelbaum ed.) and in Bereshit Rabbah 20, 19 (Albeck ed.) which contains only five things.

111 assumption that these two lists were originally joined together is true, the Talmud contains ten units which start with number three. We can identify premeditated planning in the five units under discussion. The first unit refers to three things which enter the body, and from which the body gains nothing. The next, antithetic, unit refers to three things which do not enter the body, but from which the body benefits. The next two units deals with things that that restore a person’s mind or make a person generous in his mind. The last unit deals with three things which are a reflection of the world to come. One of the things is the Shabbat which also appears in the next unit of five things that are one-sixtieth [of something else]. As mentioned earlier, other items in this list are sleeping and dreaming which also appear in the next unit, concerning six things that are good omen for a sick person. The last two units also deal, antithetically, with a sick person. The first of them lists six things that might heal a sick person from his ailment and the last unit lists ten things that make a person sick again. The numerical order in this list is as follows: four-three (ten times)-five-six-(two times)- ten. The only anomaly in this ascending list is the first unit which starts with the number four. In our opinion the redactor wishes to group together the sayings by R. Judah and therefore placed his saying about four sorts of people who have to give thanks in the beginning of the division. This arrangement also creates envelope figures in which the unit starts and ends with the sick person. That is to say that the ascending order is a result of editing considerations. As mentioned earlier, the last six units of the “Dream Tractate” start with the number three:59

ת'ר :Our rabbis have taught on Tannaite authority 1. שלשה מלכים הם הרואה דוד There are three kings [who constitute .1 בחלום יצפה לחסידו' שלמה יצפה omens if seen in dreams]. He who in a לחכמה אחאב בן עמרי ידאג מן dream sees David may expect to attain הפורענות piety, [He who in a dream sees] Solomon may expect to attain wisdom, [He who in a

dream sees] Ahab b. Omri should be

worried from punishment.

59 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Oxford Opp. Add. fol. 23, the numbers were added by us. Due to space limitations in some units we quote only the opening sentence. We can find a partial similarity to four units from the Talmud in Avot de-Rabbi Nathan A 40:35-38: three sages, three disciples of the sages, three prophets and three [larger] books of Writings (and cf.in Avot de-Rabbi Nathan B 46, 5-8).

111 0. שלש' חכמים הם הרואה ר' [There are three sages. He who [in a dream .2 עקיבא יצפה לחסידות ר' אלעזר .sees R. Aqiba may expect to attain piety, R בן עזריה יצפה לגדולה ולעשירות .Eleazar b. Azariah Riches and greatness, R ר' ישמעאל בן אלישע ידאג מן Ishmael b. Elisha should be worried from הפורענות .punishment 2. שלשה תלמידי חכמים הם הרואה There are three disciples of the sages. He .3 בן עזאי יצפה לחסידות בן זומא who [in a dream] sees Ben Azzai may look יצפה לחכמה אחר ידאג מן ,forward to attaining piety, Ben Zoma הפורענות [wisdom, and Aher [Elisha b. Abbuyah should be worried from punishment.

4. There are three prophets. He who [in a 4. שלשה נביאים הם הרוא' מלכי dream] sees the book of Kings may look בחלום יצפה לחסידות ישעיה forward to attaining piety, Isaiah, wisdom, יצפה לחכמה ירמיה ידאג מן Jeremiah, should be worried from הפורענות 60 punishment.

5. There are three [relevant items among the 9. שלשה כתובים הם הרואה ספר larger] books of the Writings. He who [in a תלים בחלום יצפה לחסידות משלי dream] sees the book of Psalms may look שלמה יצפה לחכמה איוב ידאג מן forward to attaining piety, Proverbs of הפורענות Solomon, wisdom, Job, should be worried

from punishment.

6. There are three [relevant items among the] 6. שלשה כתובים קטנים הם הרואה smaller books of Writings. He who [in a שיר השירים בחלום יצפה dream] sees the Song of Songs may look לחסידות קהלת יצפה לחכמה forward to attaining piety, Qohelet, קינות ידאג מן הפורענות הרוא' wisdom, and Lamentations, should be מגלת אסתר בחלום נס נעשה לו worried from punishment. He who in a

dream sees the scroll of Esther may know that a miracle has been carried out for him.

60 MS Munich 95 reads Ezekiel instead of Kings. Both print versions (Soncino 1484 and Vilna) keep the original opening sentence, including the number three, but list four books/prophets instead of three: Kings, Ezekiel, Isaiah, Jeremiah.

112 The connection between these six units and the successive five units, i.e., the first five units in the second part of the divided list, is the use of the number three and the discussion about three things in each unit. All six units, except for a small difference in two units, deal with things which appear in one's dream, and have the same structure: He who in a dream sees X may expect to attain piety, he who in a dream sees Y may expect to attain wisdom, and he who in a dream sees Z should be worried from punishment. The internal order of the units is changing from one manuscript to another61 but in all of them He who sees' is "dragged" from the first line' ,' הרואה' the first unit deals with kings, the word to the next two lines of the unit, the disciples of the sages appear right after the sages and the smaller books of Writing appear right after the larger books of Writing. There are two exceptions from the permanent structure. The unit which refers to the sages replaced the wisdom with riches and greatness, and the unit which refers to the smaller books of Writing adds to the returning structure another line which discussed the scroll of Esther.62

The last examples that we will discuss are from in B. Pes. 111a-113b,63 which is a part of two לא יפחתו לו big discussions (B. Pes. 109b -114a) concerning the last stich of M. Pes. 10:1:64 And they should provide him with no fewer than four cups ,מארבעה כוסות שליין אפילו מן התמחוי of wine, and even if [the funds] come from public charity. In this discussion we find several units that were arranged according to numbers in their opening sentence. The use of numbers during the discussion about the 'four cups of wine' seems random. After a long discussion about the connection between eating and drinking in pairs, e.g., two dishes, four cups, etc., to demons, the Talmud quotes R. Simeon b. Laqish:

61 For further discussion concerning the differences between the manuscripts see: Weiss (see n. 20), pp. 16- 17,174-175, 182-184, 231-232. He who sees', in all ' ,'הרואה' The last line, which deals with the scroll of Esther, starts with the word 62 manuscripts except MS Florence II-I-7. The use of this word may imply that this line, that may have been independent, like other sayings in this part of "Dream Tractate,” added to the unit, and there for the forward .was not in use in this line 'הרואה' hamshakhah of the word 63 The Hebrew text and reference from B.Pes.in this discussion are according to MS Vatican 125; they exclude simanim, ‘signs’ (that some manuscripts add in ,'סימנים' the simanim that were added to the Talmud. The use of different locations of this unit), which are quite frequent in the Babylonian Talmud, and are also used as a mnemonic device, requires a separate discussion. For further reading about the use of Simanim in rabbinic literature see: Epstein (see n. 11), vol. 2, pp. 1005-1006; A. Walfish, The literary method of redaction in Mishnah based on tractate Rosh Hashanah(Heb. PhD Diss. Hebrew University, Jerusalem, 2001), pp. 374-375, Y. Sussmann, “’Oral Torah’ Plain and Simple” in: Mehqerei Talmud 3, 1 (2005), pp. 359-361 [Heb.] and there further discussions and bibliography. 64 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann.

111 meaning: There are four things ,אמ' ר' שמעון בן לקיש ארבעה דברים העושה אותן דמו בראשו ואילו הן which, if one does them, bring his blood on his own head (literally: put it's on life in danger) and these are they. The connection between the words of R. Simeon b. Laqish to the previous discussion about demons is the way to avoid a situation that may hurt someone. For example, passing between two palm trees or passing over spilled water could put someone’s life at risk, so he should not do it.

The next discussion also deals with ways to avoid demons or witchcraft. In this case the Talmud lists several things that should not pass between two men, and men should not walk שלשה אין ממצעין ואין מתמצעין אילו הן כלב ודקל ואשה ויש אומ' אף נחש ויש אומ' אף :between them meaning,: “There are three who are not to pass between two men, and others may not 65,חזיר pass between them, a dog, a palm tree, and a woman. And some say: “A pig too.” And some say: “A snake too.”

meaning: Shade is in five ,חמשה טולי הוו) The following discussions start with the number five :meaning ,אמ' רב יוסף הני תלת מילי יהבי ארבונא בנהורא) classifications) and with the number three Said R. Joseph, “These three things ruin the eyesight). Once again we can see that in some cases numbers were not the main factor in the editing process, and they can be only secondary to other considerations such as associative connections. The use of numbers in the discussion about the second part of the sentence: ‘even if [the funds] come from public charity’ seems deliberate and premeditated and it’s highly visible:

שבעה דברים צוה ר' עקיב' את ר' יהושע בנו ... .Seven things did R. Aqiba command his son R Joshua… חמשה דברים צוה ר' עקיבה את ר' שמעון בן .Five things did R. Aqiba command R. Simeon b יוחי כשהיה חבוש בבית האסורין... …Yohai when he was imprisoned ארבעה דברים צוה ר' את בנו... Four things did Our Holy Rabbi command his children… שלשה דברים צוה ר' ישמעאל בר' יוסי את Three things did R. Ishmael b. R. Yose command רב... …(Rav (Rabbi שלשה דברים צוה ר' יוסי בר יהודה את רב... Three things did R. Yose b. R. Judah command Rav (Rabbi)… שלשה אין מתקנין בהן אילו הן... There are three that are not to be provoked, and these are they…

.”תנו רבנן“ In some manuscripts this unit starts with the words 65

111 שלשה דברים אמ' ר' יונתן משום אנשי Three things did R. Johnathan say in the name of ירושלם... …the men of Jerusalem שלשה דברים אמ' ר' יהושע בן לוי משום אנשי Three things did R. Joshua b. Levi say in the name ירושלם... …of the men of Jerusalem אמ' ר' יוחנן שלשה מנוחלי העולם הבא ואילו Said R. Johanan: “There are three who are among הן... those who inherit the world to come, and these are they… שלשה הקב"ה מכריז עליהן בעצמו... ,Over] three does the Holy One, blessed be He] issue a proclamation every day: שלשה הקב"ה אוהבן… There are three whom the Holy One, blessed be He, love... שלשה הקב"ה שונאן… There are three whom the Holy One, blessed be He, hates… שלשה חייהם אינן חיים ואילו הן... …There are three whose lives are no lives שלשה אוהבין זה את זה... …There are three who love each other שלשה שונאין זה את זה אילו הן… There are three who hate each other, and these are they… ארבעה אין הדעת סובלתן אילו הן… …There are four who are intolerable חמשה דברים צוה כנען את בניו… …Five things did Canaan command his sons ששה דברים נאמרו בסוס… …Six things were said about a horse שמונה כמנודין לשמים אילו הן… There are eight who are excommunicated by Heaven, and these are they…

The inner units were arranged in almost perfect Palindrome order: Seven-five-four-three (twelve times)-four-five-six-eight. The editing order of these continuous Talmudic units is also premeditated. That is to say that the twelve units that start with the number three, and also the other seven units, could be arranged in multiple ways, but different considerations led to this structure and interior order. Although the connection between most of the units under discussion is loose, we can identify some associative and literary connections between some units as follows: All initial five saying quotes commandments from one sage to his son or to another sage. The first two sayings are by R. Aqiba, than there are three sayings which are probably related to 'seven, five, four, three and six' ,'שבעה חמשה ארבעה שלשה וששה' R. Judah HaNasi. The siman which appears in MS Oxford 23 and in MS Vatican 134 may imply that some of the copyist

111 noticed that the first five saying came as "one piece", but this assumption requires intensive discussion.66 The last sentence of the third saying which is related to Rabbi, mention snakes and gentiles. The next saying, which is anonymous, also speaks about snakes and gentiles and the associative connection between the two units is easily noticeable. The next two sayings are in the name of the people of Jerusalem, which are followed by a saying in the name of R. Johanan.67 The next three sayings are related to Holy One, blessed be He, and they are followed by three sayings which, according to most manuscripts, our rabbis have taught on Tannaite authority. After twelve units that start with the number three the Talmud deals with four more units that were arranged in ascending order of four, five, six and eight. All in all, this collection of units looks like an appendix that gathers various sayings,68 concerning different subjects, in a unique numerical order. We can in all likelihood assume that the typological number of sayings which start with the number three is not random. The "envelope" figure around the twelve sayings is almost without exception, and the work of the redactor that organizes the entire appendix is highly visible. Although numbers influenced the editing process, they also have an effect upon reading, hearing and memorizing of Mishnaic chapters and Talmudic divisions. The audience that listened or the sages that read or memorized Rabbinic literature surely have noticed the use of numbers. Like the acrostic pattern, for example in Ps. 119, the numbers assist the memorization but also contribute to the supremacy of the text.

66 The number six may refer to the saying of R. Yose, which start with the number three, and to the three saying by Rav which appears at the end of R. Yose saying. Melammed suggest that there are some more units inside some of the sub-units under discussion. According to Melammed some units that should have started with the number five, i.e., units that contain five parts or five different sayings, appear without the explicit number because of superstition which was common among the people from the East, including the Jews of Babylon concerning to use of this number. Although Melammed is probably right concerning the existence of this superstition, some of his examples contains only three parts and not five, for example, the saying by Rab to R. Assi: “1. Don’t dwell in a town where horses don’t neigh and dogs don’t bark. 2. Don’t dwell in a town where the head of the community is a physician, 3. And don’t marry two women, but if you do marry two, then marry a third.” Moreover, in some cases units that contain less than five parts also appears without the opening number [Five things [may be ,חמשה נהרגין בשבת אלו הן" while other units in the Babylonian Talmud, like B. Sha. 121b killed on the Sabbath, and these are they..." use the number five, although not very often. For further discussion see: E. Z. Melammed, “Euphemisms and Textual Alterations of Expressions in Talmudic Literature,” in: E.Z. Melammed (ed.), Benjamin De Vries Memorial Volume (Jerusalem: Tel Aviv University Research Authority, 1968), pp. 143-144 [Heb.] ,inherit, proclaim, love, hate' ,'נוח"ל ומכרי"ז אוה"ב ושונ"א חיי אוה"ב ושונ"א ארבע"ה וחמש"ה שש"ה ושמונ"ה' The siman 67 life, love, hate, four, five, six and eight', which appears at MS Vatican 109, and with same changes in other manuscripts, seems as mnemonic device and it is hard to find connections between the different sayings it "bound" together. 68 J. Neusner, the Babylonian Talmud (Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson Publishers, 2005), vol. 4 (=Tractate Pesahim), p.521.

111 The above example, even by itself, indicates how the numbers were used as an editing tool by the sages, and can highlight another aspect of the editing process in ancient times.

Conclusion

In this paper we focused in the use of numbers as an editing device in Rabbinic literature. Unlike the rhetorical use of numbers in the Bible, which almost didn't have influence upon the editing process, the Rabbis use numbers as an editing device in the different literatures such as the Mishnah, the Tosefta and the Babylonian Talmud. That is to say that numbers, either typological or plain, become very significant in the editing process of Rabbinic literature. We can find numbers as primary components of the editing process of a single Mishnah or Talmudic unit, several mishnayot or Talmudic units, and sometimes even of an entire chapter. Another finding of this paper is the possible contribution of stylistic or rhetoric devices to textual criticism of Rabbinic literature. In most cases which was discussed earlier the numbers also helps memorizing, and in some cases they also contribute to the style of the texts. As we stated in the conclusion of the first part of this paper, it will require a long discussion to explain why the rabbis almost abandoned the stylistic use of numbers on one hand while they start using them as an editing device on the other hand. At this point we can say that numerical arranging is more "suitable" to basic oral materials like the Mishnah, Tosefta and at least some parts of the Talmud. Nevertheless, as we show in the first part of this paper, the rabbis were surly familiar with the Biblical use of numbers and other rhetorical devices, and in many cases used them in the same way.

111

851 7. The "Better" Proverb in Rabbinic Literature

The first article in this dissertation deals with the "Better" proverb, which is a well- known comparison pattern in the literature of the Ancient Near East, in the Hebrew Bible, and in the book of Ben-Sira. Several scholars have discussed this rhetorical feature in the past, mostly concerning its Biblical usage. As already noted by Hermisson and Ogden,56 there are two basic patterns of the "Better" proverb: A is better than B, or A + B are better than C + D. Most appearances better") in the opening of the verse to") טוב of this pattern in the Bible use the word .("from") מ compare one thing to another that appears after the prefixed particle

The first part of the article surveys the use of this pattern in the Bible, and highlights נבחר unique and rare uses in which the comparison word was changed to ("acceptable") or to other comparison words, as well as discussing other variations of the pattern. Some scholars did not refer to the sub-patterns of the "Better" proverb, while other scholars ignored the uses of this pattern in "pure" prosaic verses. So, concerning the use of the "Better" proverb in the Hebrew Bible, this article sharpens some points that were disregarded by previous studies.

The second part of the article discusses the Rabbinical use of this pattern. First, examples in which the rabbis stick closely to the Biblical model of this pattern were shown. Some of these examples appear during a Rabbinic discussion concerning a "Better" proverb verse from the Bible. In those cases, the connection between the two literatures is easily noticeable.

Next, the paper presents the developments of this pattern in Rabbinic Literature. As shown in the article, the rabbis changed the basic pattern in many ways, including changes in the structure of the pattern, e.g. double comparison in the same sentence, and changing of the comparative adjective.

Some of the examples from the article will now briefly be presented, alongside some new examples which were not included in the paper. After these short discussions, I will detail the conclusions of the article.

56 H.J. Hermisson, Studien zur israelitischen Spruchweisheit (WMANT), (Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag des Erziehungsvereins, 1968), pp. 155–56; G.S. Ogden, "The 'Better'-Proverb" (Tôb-Spruch), Rhetorical Criticism, and Qoheleth", Journal of Biblical Literature 96, 4 (1977), pp. 490, 492-494.

851 7.1 "Normal" Use of the "Better" Proverb, Similar to Biblical Use

B. Mak. 10a:57

טוב יום אחד שאתה עוסק בתורה לפני מאלף עולות ושלמים שעתיד שלמ' בנך להקריב לפני על גבי המזבח

Better is one day on which you engage in Torah study more than a thousand burnt-offerings and peace offerings that Solomon, your son, is destined to offer before me on the altar.

This saying is quoted during a dialogue between David and the Lord about the construction of the temple, and compares David's Torah studying to the future offerings of his son, Solomon. According to the saying, God prefers one day in which David studies Torah over a thousand offerings by his son. This saying is structured in the pattern: A (one day on which David) + B (studies Torah) is better than C (a thousand offerings) + D (that Solomon will offer). This comparison is based upon Ps. ,("For a day in your courts is better than a thousand") 58 כִּי טֹוב יֹום בַּחֲצֵרֶ יָך מֵָאלֶף :84:11a Solomon used to offer a") אֶלֶףעֹלֹות יַּעֲלֶה שְֹׁלמֹה עַּל הַּמִּזְׁבֵחַּ הַּהּוא:and upon 1Kgs. 3:4 thousand burnt offerings on that altar"). Like the other examples discussed in the paper,59 this verse highlights the linkage between the Biblical and Rabbinical "Better" proverbs, and the use of Biblical rhetorical features by the rabbis. Two additional examples that were not included in the article but are also similar to the Biblical use of the "Better" proverb are as follows:

B. Ket. 111a:60

טוב המלבין שיניו לחבירו יותר מהמשקהו חלב

57 The Hebrew text and reference in this discussion are according to MS Jerusalem - Yad Harav Herzog 1. A similar version can be found in B. Sha. 30a. 58 The text of this verse is probably faulty. The Massorah reads the first word of the second stich in this meaning, "I choose", or "I would rather be". It is unclear if this word is defective, maybe a ,בחרתי verse perhaps בחרתי in my room"), as the BHS offers. In any case, the word") בחדרי corruption of the word starts the second בחרתי originally ended the first part of the verse. The other possibility is that the word part of the verse, and if so, the last word is missing from the first part which would need to be an absolute noun to complete the construct chain. 59 See: A.R .Pasternak and S. Yona, "The 'Better' Proverb in Rabbinic Literature", Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17, 1 (2014), p. 32, n. 20. מ- The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Munich 95. In this example the preposition 60 ."literally meaning "more than , יותר מ- was replaced by

861 The one who shows a smile to his fellow is better than one who gives him milk to drink.

Genesis Rabbah, Vayyishlach, 82, 8:61

מוטב מי שהוא חוכר שדה אחת נרה ומזבלה ומעדרה ממי שהוא חוכר שדות הרבה ומובירן

Better is the one who farms a single field, ploughs furrows, fertilizes it, and hoes it, than the one who farms many fields but neglects them.

These are just a few of the many similar examples throughout Rabbinic Literature.

7.2 Adaptation of the Pattern

In addition to the "normal" use mention above, the rabbis use the "Better" proverb in several ways that are different from its Biblical use. The sayings in this summary and in the paper demonstrate three types of variations:

which ,טבא or טב to (נבחר or rarely) טוב Replacement of the comparison words from .1 .to mention a few ערב and ,גדול ,עדיף ,יפה ,חביב :are in Aramaic, or to the words 2. Rearrangement of the parts of the saying by moving the comparison word to the middle or end of the sentence. 3. Creation of new patterns which are different from the two Biblical patterns. In some cases we will find two or more consecutive comparisons, one after the other, or comparison between three things in one saying.

These variations will now be discussed briefly, in addition to the discussion in paper.

7.2.1 Replacement of the Comparative Adjective B. Hag. 10a: 62

טבא חדא פלפלתא חריפתא ממלי צנא דקרי

Better is one spicy pepper than an entire basket of pumpkins.

This Rabbinical saying uses the second, more complex, pattern of the "Better" The meaning of .טבא with the Aramaic word טוב proverb, replacing the Hebrew word this saying is that a small amount of vegetables (A, "one") of high quality (B, "spicy pepper") is better than a large quantity (C, "entire basket") of those that are of poor quality or lack distinction (D, "pumpkins"). In other words, the pepper has a great

61 The Hebrew text and reference are according to J. Theodor and Ch. Albeck, (n. 51). 62 The Hebrew text and reference in this discussion are according to MS Vatican 134.

868 advantage over the bland basket of pumpkins because it adds taste and life to the cooked dish.

B. Ker. 6a: 63

טב גילדנא סריא למיכל מכותחא דרמיֵכיפי

Better [to eat] a rotten fish rather than a bread pudding that breaks rocks.

According to this saying it is better to eat a foul-smelling or nearly spoiled fish than a mix of stale bread, salt, and some milk components which was used as a high :כותחא argues ,"מכותחא דרמי כיפי" .quality spice. Rashi, in his commentary to B. Hor. 12a, s.v compared to the inexpensive price of the ,כותחא that the reason is the high cost of the has been replaced by the טוב almost inedible fish. Stylistically, the comparison word This saying is structured according to the complex pattern of .טב Aramaic equivalent A (small fish) + B (rotten or stinky) is better than C (bread pudding, i.e. spice) + D (that can break rocks, i.e. expensive).64

Y. Sheq. 2, 7:65

חביב עלי צדקה ומשפט שאתה עושה יותרֵמן הקרבן More beloved to me is the righteousness and justice that you do, more than offerings. better than") were replaced") טוב מ- In this example, the common comparison words צדקה more than"). The words") יותר מן beloved to me") and") חביב עלי by the phrases come together as a hendiadys,66 so the structure of this saying is A (righteous ומשפט justice) is better than B (offerings).

63 The Hebrew text and reference in this discussion are according to MS Vatican 120. A similar .טב גלדנא סריא דמתא מחסי' למיכל מכותחא :version can be found in B. Hor. 12a, according to MS Paris 1337 דרמי כיפי 64 Normally, comparison aphorisms that are structured in the more complex pattern of A + B is better than C + D, will always begin with the assertion that C is better than A, and B is better than D. Only because of the greater status of B, the first half of the saying (A + B) will be better than the second half of the saying (C + D). In this example, however, B is not better in any way than D. It seems that in this case, like other cases in Rabbinic Literature, the rabbis preferred to change or ignore the unwritten "rules" of this rhetorical pattern to express their perceptions, which in this case are concerning moderation. See also: A.R. Pasternak and S. Yona (n.57), pp. 31, 39-40. 65 The Hebrew text and reference in this discussion are according to MS Leiden. 66 For further reading about hendiadys, see: Watson (n. 37), pp.324-328.

861 Y. Ned. 6, 8:67

חביבה עלי כת קטנה שבארץ יש' מסנהדרין גדולה שבחוצה לארץ

More beloved to me is a small assembly in the Land of Israel than a great Sanhedrin outside of the land.

better") has been replaced by the") טוב Similar to the previous example, the word beloved"). Unlike the above example, however, and unlike most other") חביבה word instances of the "Better" proverb, the comparison word in this saying appears as feminine singular.68 This example uses the complex pattern of the "Better" proverb: A (a small assembly) + B (in Israel) are better than C (Sanhedrin) + D (outside the land of Israel).

Some of the above changes are a result of the transfer from Hebrew to Aramaic, as typically seen in the Babylonian Talmud, while others should be considered intentional stylistic changes. It is interesting to note that the rabbis, who normally did not strictly follow the rules of Biblical Hebrew grammar,69 would sometimes match the comparison word to the gender in this rhetorical pattern, which is not observed in the original Biblical pattern.

7.2.2 Structural Changes: Rearrangement and Replacement of the Comparison Word B. Suk. 56b:70

בוצינא טב מקרא

A young squash [Chate Melon] is better than a gourd [Calabash Gourd]. 71

The saying .טוב has replaced the Hebrew word טב In this example, the Aramaic word is structured in the simple pattern A (young squash) is better than B (gourd).

67 The Hebrew text and reference in this discussion are according to MS Leiden. A similar version can More beloved to") חביבה עלי כת קטנה שבארץ יש' יותר מסנהדרין גדולה שבחוצה לארץ :be found in Y. San.1, 2 me is the smallest assembly inside the Land of Israel, more than a great Sanhedrin located outside the land"). More") חביבין הדברים הסמוכין מן לכתב מן הדברים הסמוכין לפה :In the same way, Y. Hag. 1, 8 opines 68 cherished are those matters that rest upon the written Torah than those that rest upon the oral Torah"). טוב Once again, the verb was matched in gender and number to the subject of the sentence. The word .a masculine plural ,חביבין has been replaced by the word 69For further reading about the connections and differences between Biblical grammar and Rabbinic grammar, see: M. Bar-Asher, Studies in Mishnaic Hebrew, vol. 1 (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 2009), pp. 3-10, 109-127 [Heb.]. 70 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Munich 95. 71 For further discussion concerning this saying, and the botanical identification of these vegetables, see: A.R. Pasternak, (n. 14), pp. 6-7.

861 However, the comparison word in this saying has been moved to the middle of the sentence instead of its normal placement at the beginning.

B. Ber. 55a:72

חילמא בישא עדיף מחילמא טבא

A bad dream is preferable to a good dream

According to this saying by R. Hisda, it is better to dream a bad dream than a good dream, because the bad dream may cause the dreamer to improve his ways. Like the previous example, the comparison word is in the middle of the sentence. This saying is structured in a rather unique pattern: A (dream) + B (bad) are better than A (dream) + C (good).

7.3 Unique Changes to the Basic Pattern

7.3.1 Superlative Negative Pattern B. Yeb. 63b:73

שאיןֵלךֵמשוקץ ומתועבֵומבוזהֵלפניֵהמקוםֵממי שמהלך ערום בשוק

There is nothing more abominable and disgusting and scornful before the Omnipresent than someone who walks naked in the market.

This saying is structured negatively in the pattern A (someone) + B (who walks naked in the market) is the worst thing possible. The regular comparison words have been There is nothing more") אין לך משוקץ ומתועב ומבוזה לפני המקום יותר מ changed to abominable and disgusting and scornful than…"). Note the unique superlative structure: "There is nothing worse than this." A similar example to this one was איןֵלךֵמנוולdiscussed in the paper: Mekhilta de-Rabbi Ishmael, Beshalah, Vayehi, 6: 74ֵ Nothing is more disgusting and abominable") ומשוקץֵיותרֵמןֵהשור בשעה שהוא אוכל עשב than a bull when he is eating grass").

7.3.2 Multiple Consecutive Comparisons

72 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Munich 95. This saying is missing in some manuscripts. 73 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Oxford Opp. 248 (367). שהוא The text is cited according to the Venice Edition (1546) with one slightly difference: the word 74 which is also the version in the Horovitz-Rabin edition. This aphorism, usually within ,שהיא instead of the whole unit, appears in other Rabbinical essays, such as Song of Songs Rabbah, 1 (Vilna edition), and Ruth Rabbah, 7 (Vilna edition).

861 B. Ber. 44b:75

טבא ביעתא מגולגולתא משיתא אוקיי סולתא טויתא מארבע שליקתא כדר' ינאי דאמ' ר' ינאי כל שהוא כביצה ביצה טובהֵהימנו

An egg that is lightly roasted is superior to six measures of fine flour. [An egg that is] hard baked [is superior] to four. A boiled [egg] as the saying of R. Yannai. That R. Yannai has said: "To whatever is equivalent in volume to an egg, the egg nonetheless is superior [in food value]."

This example contains three consecutive comparisons in one sentence. The first one maintains the classic structure of the "Better" proverb. The second is based upon the טבא first and includes double hamshakhah, or word "dragging", 76 first of the words The third and final comparison is based upon .אוקיי סולתא and then of the words ביעתא the two preceding comparisons, and is given in the name of R. Yannai.

In the Hebrew Bible, there are only a few verses that contain two comparisons, most of them in Proverbs,77 and there are none that contain three. Additionally, the differences between those verses and the above example, or other examples like B. Sha. 23a, which I discussed in the paper, are easily noticeable.

7.3.3 Double Progressive Comparison in a Single Saying

B. Sha. 63a:78

גדול המלוה יותרֵמן העושה צדקה ומטיל לכיס יותרֵמכולם

Greater is the action of one who makes an interest-free loan than one who gives to charity, but greater than both is one who accords to the other a share in a partnership.

75 The Hebrew text and reference in this discussion are according to MS Cambridge - T-S F1 (1) 111. .אוקיי סולתא instead of קייסי סולתא Some manuscripts read 76 "Dragging", or hamshakhah in Hebrew, is a well-known rhetorical feature that can be found frequently in the Bible and in Rabbinic Literature. For further discussion concerning the hamshakhah see: A.R. Pasternak and S. Yona, (n. 34), n. 37 for more bibliography. 77 Prov. 3:14, 3:15, 8:11, 8:19, 16:16, 22:1. 78 The Hebrew text and reference in this discussion are according to MS Munich 95.

865 This multilevel comparison begins by comparing one who gives charity to a person who loans money to a poor person. The second comparison compares both persons from the first comparison to a third man, who bestows on someone a share in a partnership. This example demonstrates significant changes the Rabbis made to this rhetorical pattern:

:have been expanded and replaced by three phrases טוב מ a. The usual comparison words .יותר מכולם and ,יותר מן ,גדול b. These words open and close the sentence, unlike their location in the Bible use of the "Better" proverb. c. The double progressive comparison is lacking in the Hebrew Bible and seemingly also in Ancient Near East Literature.

Overall, this research has shown that the Rabbis were not only familiar with the "Better" proverb, but they also used it in its classic Biblical form, and even took the liberty to change and adapt it in many ways. Without any doubt, the dozens of examples contained in the article, as well as the additional examples brought above, together prove that the rabbis skillfully used this rhetorical pattern to elevate and beautify their sayings and ideas, whether by utilizing its two basic patterns, or by modifying these patterns as they saw fit.

866 8. Concatenation in Ancient Near East Literature, Hebrew Scripture, and Rabbinic Literature

The second paper in this dissertation deals with Anadiplosis, also known as Concatenation, Terrace Pattern, or Shirshur in Hebrew. In this pattern a linguistic element, be it a word or group of words, appears at the end of a given stich or verse, and is repeated at the beginning of the following stich, or verse. In some cases, the repeated word will appear in construct state, and in some cases, a word or two may appear between the repeating words. A well-known example of concatenation, in this :my help"), can be found in Ps. 121:1-2") עזרי case with precise repetition of the noun

שִּירלַּמַּעֲלֹות אֶשָּׂאעֵינַּי אֶל הֶהָּׂרִּ ים מֵַאיִּן יָּׂבֹא עֶזְרִ י עֶזְרִ י מֵעִּם ה'עֹשֵה שָּׂמַּיִּם וָָּׂארֶ ץ

A Song of Ascents I turn my eyes to the mountains From where will come my help My help comes from the LORD, maker of heaven and earth.

This Phenomenon can easily be found in the literature of the Ancient Near East, in the Hebrew Bible, in the book of Ben-Sira, and in Rabbinic Literature.

One of the contributions of this paper is the description of several different types of concatenation. The first type is "Stylistic Concatenation", in which the repetition is syntactically unnecessary. Consequently, the elimination of the repeated element would not affect the meaning of the clause. In the concatenation second type, "Syntactic Concatenation", the repeated expression is syntactically necessary: without it the sentence is incoherent.

Concatenation has a clear impact in the realms of phonology and syntax, as is discussed in the paper. Moreover, in Rabbinic Literature, I observed two additional types of concatenation: deliberate concatenation that does not affect the syntax of the sentence, and concatenation that unifies together different sayings, in some cases joining Biblical and Rabbinical sayings to each other.

861 After dealing with this phenomenon in Ancient Near Eastern Literature, in the Bible and in the book of Ben-Sira, the paper discusses in detail tens of examples from Rabbinic Literature. These primarily appear in short units, normally including one or two concatenations, and sometimes three, although there are cases of up to ten concatenations in long units.

I will now briefly present several examples of concatenation which were discussed in the paper.

8.1 Concatenation in Short Units

B. San. 24b:79

דהוה ליה אסמכתא ֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵואסמכתא לא קניא

Because it is an asmakhta, And asmakhta is not legally binding.

This example appears in a Talmudic discussion concerning the question: "Who is forbidden to testify?" Among those considered is the person who plays with dice, i.e. a type of gambler, whose winning might be consider as robbery. The asmakhta is a Talmudic term that describes a biased, unreasonable commitment, in this case of the gambler and his partners to the game.80 This word asmakhta, appears twice, a textbook example of syntactic concatenation.

T. B.Q. 10, 8:81

חמור גזל הרבים מגזלֵהיחיד ֵֵֵֵֵֵֵשהגוזלֵאתֵהיחיד יכול לפייסו ולהחזיר לו גזילו הגוזל את הרבים אין יכול לפייסן ולהחזיר להן גזילן

A more strict rule applies to robbing the public than to robbing an individual. For he who robs from an individual can appease him and restore to him what he has stolen.

79 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Jerusalem – Yad Harav Herzog 1. 80 For further reading concerning the asmakhta see: B. Lifshitz, Promise - Obligation and Acquisition in Jewish Law (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1988) [Heb.]. 81 The Hebrew text is according to MS Vienna, National Library – Heb. 20 and includes the copyist's margins with corrections to the text.

861 But he who robs from the public cannot appease all of them nor restore to them what he has stolen.

In this example, like many other similar examples throughout the Tannaic literature, גזל היחיד the sages refer first to the second object of the opening sentence, in this case ("robbing an individual"), and afterwards they deal with the first one, "robbing the public". The concatenation in this saying is obviously syntactic concatenation.

Two more examples of syntactic Concatenation can be found in:

B. San. 25b:82

והאידנא נכיס אבא לפום ברא ֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵ וברא לפום אבא

And now he will slaughter the father in the presence of the son And the son in the presence of the father;

B. Pes. 111a:83

לא אמרן אלא חמימי לגו קרירי ֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵוקרירי לגו חמימי

This was said only of hot [water] mixed with cold Or cold [water] mixed with hot

8.2 Concatenation that Does not Affect Syntax

In Rabbinic Literature there is a unique type of concatenation that does not affect the syntax of the sentence. In this unique type of concatenation the sages deliberately omit some words to create continuity between two sentences. For example:

Y. Ber. 1, 1:84

אין הלבנה זורחת בשעה שהחמה שוקעת

ולא שוקעת בשעה שהחמה זורחת

The moon does not shine at the time that the sun sets And does not set at the time that the sun shines.

82 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Florence II-I-9. 83 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Munich 95. 84 The Hebrew text and reference in this discussion are according to MS Leiden.

861 the moon") has been omitted in the second clause in order to create") הלבנה The word a syntactic concatenation, and the reader must "drag" it from the first clause. This deliberate .ולא has been replaced by the word אין Additionally, the word replacement of the negative word allowed the sages to omit the subject of the second sentence, the moon, which nevertheless remains the subject of this dictum.

T. Git. 1, 2:85

חומר במדינת הים שאין בארץ ישראל ֵובארץ ישראל שאין במדינת הים

A more strict rule applies to overseas than to the land of Israel, And [A more strict rule applies] to the land of Israel then to overseas. Like the previous example, the second clause purposely omits the subject of the first strict rule") is "dragged" to the second line, creating both a") חומר one. The word .בארץ ישראל chiastic parallelism and concatenation of the words

8.3 Concatenation that Unifies Different Sayings

As mentioned above, in some cases the rabbis used concatenation to connect sentences from different sources, in most cases connecting quotes from the Hebrew Bible to their own teachings. Thus, we find that the rabbis used this rhetorical pattern not only as a stylistic enhancement, but also as a syntax-editing tool. This unique usage, which occurs more in prose than in poetry, further shows that the rabbis not only duplicate stylistic patterns from the Bible in their original forms, but also use them in different ways outside of their Biblical stylistic use.

85 The Hebrew text is according to MS Vienna, National Library – Heb. 20.

811 T. Ber. 1, 12: 86

מזכירין יציאת מצרים בלילות אמ' ר' לעזר בן עזריה הרי אני כבן שבעים שנה ולא זכיתי שאשמע שתאמר יציאת מצרים בלילות עד שדרשה בן זומא שנ' למען תזכור את יום צאתך מארץ מצרים כל ימיֵחייךֵ ימיֵחייך הימים כלֵימיֵחייך הלילות וחכמים או' ימיֵחייך העולם הזה ֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵכל להביא87 ימיֵחייך להביא לימות המשיח

We mention the exodus from Egypt at nights. Said R. [A]leazer ben Azariah: "Behold, I am nearly seventy years old and had never heard [someone] recite the exodus from Egypt at nights until Ben Zuma expounded it: 'As Scripture states: "So that you may remember the day of your departure from the land of Egypt all the days of your life." The days of your life [would have implied only] the days, All the days of your life [includes] the nights.'" And sages say: "The days of your life [would have included only] this world. All the days of your life includes the messianic age."

לְׁמַּעַּן תִּזְׁכֹר אֶת יֹום צֵאתְָׁך מֵאֶרֶ ץ :In this unit, the rabbis integrated a quote from Deut. 16:3 The last words of this verse are the first words expounded by Ben .מִּצְׁרַּ יִּם כֹל יְׁמֵיחַּיֶיָך Zuma and by the sages.

As seen here, the rabbis use concatenation to interweave material from several sources together, which is an adaption of the Biblical model.

8.4 Concatenation in Large Units

The last part of the second paper discusses the use of concatenation in large units. Unlike most examples of concatenation in the Bible,88 in Rabbinic Literature we can

86 The Hebrew text is according to MS Vienna, National Library – Heb. 20. A similar version can be found in M. Ber. 1, 11. 87 This word was probably a copyist's mistake, in that it clearly interrupts the construct relationship. It was likely copied from the middle of the sentence.

818 find three, four, five, and sometimes even ten consecutive concatenations. It is worth mentioning that the number of concatenations in large unit is, in most cases, typological. A fine example can be found in B. Yeb. 17a:89

פסולי דהר פניא90 משום פסולי דמישון

ומישון משום פסולי דתדמור91

ותדמור מש' עבדי שלמה

והיינו דאמרי אינשי קבה רבה וקבה זוטא מיגנדרי ואזיל לשאול ומשאול לתדמור ומתדמור למישון וממישון להרפניא

The invalidity of Harpania is on account of that of Meshan, that of Meshan on account of that of Tarmod,

that of Tarmod on account of the slaves of Solomon.

That is in line with what people say: The little qab-measure and the big one roll down to Sheol, and from Sheol to Tarmod, and from Tarmod to Meshan, and from Meshan to Harpania

This unit deals with the universal contempt for the people of Harpania, whose bad name was widely dispersed. According to this unit, their bad name was due to their relations, including by marriage, with the people of Meshan, with whom it was forbidden to marry. The people of Meshan were unfit for marriage because of their relations, including by marriage, with the people of Tarmod, who in turn were unfit for marriage because of Solomon’s slaves. According to tradition, these slaves lived there and married Jewish women, and thus all their offspring were considered to be mamzerim. In this first part, there are two concatenations, one after another. Immediately following this, the Talmud quotes a popular proverb, stating that a little qab measure

88 Except for several unique examples like Gen. 1:27, Ru.4:18-22, and Num. 33:5-37 (with some interruptions), we will find only one or two concatenations in one verse or pericope. 89 The Hebrew text is according to MS Oxford - Bodl. heb. d. 20 (2675). .as found in all other manuscripts ,דהרפניא This text should be corrected to 90 91 Most manuscripts read Tarmod instead of Tadmor. Earlier on the page, the Talmud calls this city Tamud. All three names refer to the same city: Tadmor.

811 and a big qab measure, both of which are prohibited, will lead to Sheol, and from Sheol to Tarmod, from Tarmod to Meshan and from Meshan to Harpania. In this part, there are three consecutive concatenations. This proverb, together with the Rabbinical discussion preceding it, creates chiastic order. The first line is the opposite of the eighth line, the second line is the opposite of the seventh line, and the third line, with some changes, is the opposite of the sixth line. Sheol, which might represent hell, and according to the Tosafists is Babylon, is in the center of the unit, as follows: Harpania- Meshan- Tarmod- Sheol- Tarmod- Meshan- Harpania.92 The combination of these two parts into one continuous unit to create a complex chiastic pattern shows the ingenuity of the rabbis in regard to rhetorical considerations during their writing and editing process.

,"קבא רבא וקבא זוטא" .This order matches the commentary of the Tosafists. According to Rashi, s.v 92 Sheol is better than Harpania. Rashi's understanding of this proverb was probably affected by the And [Harpania] is deeper than Sheol"). In this case, the rhetorical") והיא עמוקה משאול ,saying of Rabba pattern aids our understanding of the Talmud and of the ideas the rabbis are trying to convey.

811 9. Numerical Sayings in the Literatures of the Ancient Near East, in the Hebrew Bible, in the Book of Ben-Sira and in Rabbinic Literature

The third paper in this dissertation deals with the use of numbers, from their early use in the Bible and in Ancient Near Eastern literature, through their use in the book of Ben-Sira, and ultimately to their use in Rabbinic Literature. Unlike the previous discussions, this paper deals with several varied uses of numbers and does not focus on a specific literature or specific phenomenon (i.e. graded numerical parallelism, or numbers in Biblical wisdom, etc.).

The paper starts with a survey of the use of numbers in the Bible, which can be divided into several types and sub-types: 1. "Normal" use, involving a single number that contains one digit or more. In some cases, these are typological numbers. 2. Use of pair of ascending numbers, such as two to three, four to five and so on. There are three different variations of this usage: a. "Normal" use, mostly in prose, to specify unknown or uncertain numbers, or to specify a small number. b. Poetic parallelism with a pair of numbers. c. Graded numerical parallelism.

The use of numbers as a stylistic device in the Bible, in the above mentioned types and sub-types, has been widely discussed by different scholars, as has the use of numbers in the Ancient Near East literature, and, in a way, also in the book of Ben- Sira. The main contribution of the paper is a comprehensive discussion of the use of numbers in Rabbinic Literature. I will now briefly present several examples from Rabbinic Literature which were discussed in the paper, as well as several additional examples.

9.1 Typological Numbers

In some cases, the use of numbers in different Rabbinic units seems unnecessary, and their contribution is mainly to the style of the text, or related to their typological value. Many examples like this can be found in tractate Avot, for example this saying by Rabbi Judah (Avot 2, 1):

811

השתכל בשלשה דברים ואין אתה בא לידי עבירה דע מה למעלה ממך עין רואה ואוזן שומעת וכל מעשיך בספר נכתבים

Reflect upon three things and you will not come into the hands of transgression: Know what is above you: a seeing eye and a hearing ear, and that all of your deeds written in a book.

The use of the number three here seems unnecessary. This short list can be memorized easily without the indication of the number at its beginning. However, it seems that the number was added due to its typological value, and also serves other purposes apart from its mnemonic value, i.e., to prepare the reader for the upcoming list of items.

9.2 Graded Numerical Sayings: "Normal" use to specify an unknown or uncertain number or to specify a small number

M. Par. 2, 6: 93

ר' עקיבה או' אפילו ארבע אפילו חמש והן מפוזרות יתלוש

R. Akiva says: "even four, even five [hairs] and they are scattered…"

This Mishnah deals with the Parah Aduma (red heifer) and discusses some of the rules concerning its validity, in this case the color of its hair. According to R. Akiva, if one finds four or five black or white hairs, he can remove them and the red heifer while be valid to use. The use of two possible numbers, as opposed to the usual Rabbinic preciseness in regard to accurate counting, has several explanations and was discussed in the article.

9.3 Graded Numerical Sayings: Poetic parallelism with a graded pair of numbers

Another way of using a pair of numbers in Rabbinic Literature includes poetic parallelism, as well as some prosaic parallelisms. This parallelism separates the pair of numbers, and each number is situated in different stiches. For example, M. Ber. 7, 7:94

93 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann.

815

שלשה שאכלו כאחת אינן רשיים לחלק וכן ארבעה וכן חמשה ששה נחלקים עד עשרה ועשרה אינן נחלקין עד שיהוא עשרים

Three who ate together may not separate, [but must say the grace as a group]. And so it is for four, And so it is for five. Six may separate [into two groups, and this is the case for] up to ten. But ten may not separate until there be twenty [which can break into two groups of ten].

This Mishnah deals with the obligation to invite the other diners to recite grace after the meal, i.e. zimmun. According to this Mishnah, three people who eat together must say grace together. The same rule applies to groups of four or five people, but six to nine people can say grace separately, in groups of at least three people each. Groups of ten to nineteen should not separate, but a group of twenty or more may separate into several groups of at least ten people. The separation to groups of three or ten is a result of the rules in the previous Mishnah. The words "who ate together may not separate" should be "dragged" from the first line to the following lines, with necessary adjustments in lines four and five. The expected deep structure of this unit emphasize the parallelism: Three who ate together may not separate And so it is for four who ate together, [they] may not separate, And so it is for five who ate together, [they] may not separate, Six who ate together may separate up to ten. But ten who ate together may not separate until there be twenty. Notably, every line in this unit includes only one number, and these are placed in an ascending order: three-four-five-six-ten-twenty.

94 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann and includes the copyist's margins with corrections to the text.

816 M. Sot. 8, 7:95

הנוטע ארבעה אילני מאכל או חמשה אילני סרק

He who plants [only] four fruits trees Or five barren trees

This Mishnah, like the Mishnah that preceded it, discusses the Biblical instructions (Dt. 20:1-9) about milkhemet reshut ("authorized war). According to this Mishnah, a person who plants four or less fruits trees, or five or less barren trees, is not exempt from service in the war. Once again we must drag words from the first line to the second line to rightly understand this parallelism.

9.4 Graded Numerical Sayings: Graded Numerical Parallelism

In Rabbinic Literature I was able to find only one significant example of graded numerical parallelism, which was discussed in detail in the paper.

The use of numbers in large units, and the use on numbers as an editing device were discussed in the following article: The use of numbers as an editing device in Rabbinic Literature, which will be describe next.

All in all, this paper traced the use of numbers from the Bible up till the days of the rabbis, and highlights unique differences in the use of numbers. Especially remarkable in Rabbinic literature is the use of numbers as a mnemonic device, as well as the almost total disappearance of graded numerical parallelism.

95 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Kaufmann.

811 10. The Use of Numbers as an Editing Device in Rabbinic Literature

The last paper in this dissertation deals with the use of numbers as an editing device in Rabbinic Literature. In this paper tens of examples were presented in which the rabbis used numbers, in most cases in ascending or descending order, for editorial purposes. In some cases, e.g. M. Men. 3:6-9, the numerical order was interrupted due to other editorial reasons. In other cases, e.g. B. Pes. 111b-112a, the descending order also contributes to the textual criticism of the text, in this case the Babylonian Talmud. The paper deals first with a single Mishnah or small Talmudic unit, then turns to the use of numbers in three to five consecutive mishnayot, and finally discusses the influence of numbers in the editing process of several mishnayot, in an entire Mishnaic chapter, or in a several continuous Talmudic units.96 Due to the length of the discussions in the paper, I will now briefly discuss three examples that were not included in the paper. In all the following examples it will be easy to trace the influence of numbers upon the different texts.

M. Ber. 7, 4-5:97 ד כיצד מזמנין בשלשה או' נברך בשלושהֵוהוא או' ברוך הוא בעשרה או' נברך לאלהינו בעשרהֵוהוא או' ברוך הוא אחד עשרה ואחד עשר ריבו' ה במאה או' נברך לייי אלהינו במאהֵוהוא או' ברוך הוא באלף או' נברך לייי אלהינו אלהי ישראל באלףֵוהוא או' ברוך הוא בריבו אומרין נברך לייי אלהינו אלהי ישראל אלהי הצבאות יושב הכרובים בריבו והוא אומר ברכו

96 Due to space limitations, this paper does not discuss the influence of numbers upon the order of the tractates in the Mishnah, which has already been discussed by several scholars. See for example: J. Bazak, Mishpaṭ ʻIvri: Sugyot Nivḥarot Ba-Mishpaṭ Ha-ʻIvri Le-Dorotaṿ Be-Hashṿahʼah Le-Mishpeṭe Yamenu, (Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Ḳooḳ, 2014), pp. 187-188 [Heb.], for further reading. 97 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Parma 3173 (De Rossi 138) and includes the copyist's margins with corrections to the text.

811 How do they invite others for the grace after the meal [zimmun]? For three [who ate together] he [the one saying grace] says: "Let us bless." For three [others] and himself he says: "Bless." For ten he says: "Let us bless our God." For ten and himself he says: "Bless." [The same rule applies] for ten and for ten myriads. For one hundred he says: "Let us bless the Lord our God." For one hundred and himself he says: "Bless." For one thousand he says: "Let us bless the Lord our God, God of Israel." For one thousand and himself he says: "Bless." For ten thousand he says: "Let us bless the Lord our God, God of Israel, God of the Hosts, who sits upon the Cherubim." For ten thousand and himself he says: "Bless."

This Mishnah deals with the text of the grace after meals, which is altered by the amount of the dinners. The ascending order of three, three plus one, ten, ten plus one, etc., is easily noticeable, and so is the interruption to this ascending order by the for ten and for ten myriads"). According to some") אחד עשרה ואחד עשר ריבו :sentence Mishnah commentaries, such as the Rambam and R. Ovadiah of Bartenura, this line is attributed to R. Akiva, while this entire Mishnah as a whole, except for this line, is attributed to R. Yose Ha-Galili.98 It is unclear why the rabbis would mix these the opposing opinions, which interrupts the ascending order. In this case, like several other examples which were discussed in the paper, it seems that the rabbis took several editorial options into consideration and mixed between them. Finally, the rabbis could certainly have arranged the unit in a different order, perhaps ten-three- one thousand-one hundred. However, the ascending order at the heart of this unit is not only the easiest order to memorize, but it also corresponds to the length of the opening phrase of the grace: Let us bless Let us bless our God Let us bless the Lord our God

מה שאמר במשנה זו אחד עשרה ואחד עשר :The Rambam explains that this opinion is according to R. Akiva 98 clarifies that ,"אחד עשרה ואחד עשר רבוא" .Likewiss, R. Ovadiah of Bartenura, s.v .רבוא היא סברת ר' עקיבא .הך רישא רבי עקיבא היא :the beginning of the Mishnah is attributed to R. Akiva

811 Let us bless the Lord our God, God of Israel Let us bless the Lord our God, God of Israel, God of the Hosts, who sits upon the Cherubim. As the number increases, so the description of the Lord increases in length.

Y. Ber. 1:1:99

בערב שבת ראה כוכב אחד ועשה מלאכה פטור שנים מביא אשם תלוי שלשה מביא חטאת במוצאי שבת ראה כוכב אחד ועשה מלאכה מביא חטאת שנים מביא אשם תלוי שלשה פטור

On the Sabbath eve, if one saw a single star and then unintentionally performed labor which is forbidden on the Sabbath, he is free [from any liability because it is still day]. [If one saw] two [stars and unintentionally performed an act forbidden on the Sabbath,] he must bring a suspensive guilt offering. [If one saw] three [stars and unintentionally performed an act forbidden on the Sabbath], he must bring a sin offering. At the end of the Sabbath, if one saw a single star and then [unintentionally] performed labor [which is forbidden on the Sabbath,] he must bring a sin offering. [If one saw] two [stars and he unintentionally performed a forbidden act], he must bring a suspensive guilt offering. [If one saw] three [stars and unintentionally performed some act which would be forbidden on the Sabbath], he is free [from any liability, for it surely is night and the Sabbath has ended.] This discussion, like the preceding discussion in the Talmud, concludes that it is possible to determine the onset of nightfall by counting the number of stars one sees.100

99 The Hebrew texts and reference in this discussion are according to MS Leiden. 100 Another discussion concerning the stars and the transition between day and night can be found in B. Sha. 35b.

811 Respective to the number of stars it is possible to determine if it is Shabbat or not, and, therefore assess whether someone performed an act forbidden on the Sabbath or not. It is easy to identify the repeating ascending order of one-two-three in the core of this unit. The rabbis could have arranged this unit in palindromic order, i.e. one-two- three-three-two-one, similar to the order in M. Kel. 27:1-3, or M. Kel. 27:5, but preferred this one-two-three-one-two-three pattern. The reason might be the chiastic order of the consequences that was created due to this order: Free [from any liability]

Suspensive guilt offering

Sin offering

Sin offering Suspensive guilt offering Free [from any liability]

Once again it seems that the rabbis took into consideration several editorial options, and then chose one of these options due to reasons that sometimes can only be assumed. Anyway, it is clear that both ascending orders in this unit were created intentionally. A final example in which numbers may have impacted the editing process is found in B. Ker. 6a:101 תנו רבנן פטום הקטרת הצרי והצפורן החלבנה והלבונה משקל שבעים בשבעים מנה מור וקציעה שבלת נרד וכרכם משקל ששהֵעשר ששה עשר מנה הקושט שניםֵעשר קילופה שלשה קינמון תשעה בורית כרשינה תשעה קבין יין קפריסין סאין תלתא וקבין תלתא אם אין לו יין קפרי' מביא חמר חיור עתיק מלח סדומית רובע מעלה עשן כלֵשהו ר' נתן או' אף כפת הירדן כלֵשהו נתן בה דבש פסלה חסר אחת מכל סממניה חייב מיתה

101 The Hebrew text and reference in this discussion are according to MS Munich 95. A similar version can be found in Y. Yom. 4, 5.

818 Our Rabbis have taught [on Tannaite authority]:102 The compound of incense consisted of: Balm, onycha, galbanum and frankincense, each in the quantity of seventy manehs; Of myrrh, cassia, spikenard and saffron, each sixteen manehs by weight; Of costus twelve, Of aromatic rind three, And of cinnamon nine manehs; Of lye obtained from leek nine kabs Of Cyprus wine three se'ahs and three kabs, though if Cyprus wine is not available, old white wine may be used instead; Of salt of Sodom the fourth of a kab, And of Ma'aleh ‘ashan a minute quantity. R. Nathan says: Also of Jordan resin a minute quantity. If, however, honey is added, the incense is rendered unfit; while if one omits one of the ingredients, he is liable to the penalty of death.

In this unit, the rabbis discuss the incense offering, or more precisely, how the incense mixture is formulated. The rabbis specify the components of the incense, and of several accompanying components, in an almost perfectly descending order: seventy- sixteen-twelve-three-nine-nine-three-three-a fourth-a minute quantity. Only the first four components are known from the Bible103 while all the other probably a bark of ,קילופה components appear in both Talmuds. It is unclear why the some kind of cinnamon,104 is prior to the cinnamon, thus "breaking" the descending order. The first half of the list, from the first component up through the cinnamon is measured by maneh, while the second part of the list is measured either by qab or by se'ah. In this unit, unlike most measurements in the Torah, all the measurements represent weights.105

102 The English translation is according to the Soncino Press edition of the Babylonian Talmud., Additionally, I did not mention the other possibilities concerning the compound of incense. For further reading about incense ingredients see: Z. Amar, Book of Incense (Tel Aviv: Eretz, 2002) [Heb.]. For summary of the different opinions, see pp. 158-161. 103 Ex. 30:34-38. 104 See: Z. Amar, (n. 99), pp. 120-121,160. 105 Idem, idem, pp. 54-56.

811 Concerning the Cyprus wine, the rabbis notably prefer to use both se'ahs and qabs instead of using only the qab. Each se'ah is equal to six qabs, so they could have easily written twenty-one qabs instead of writing three se'ahs and three qabs. In T עשרים ואחת סאה מי גשמים :Miq. 4, 3 and in B. Tem. 12a rabbis used only the se'ah ("twenty one se'ahs of rain-water") instead of writing seven ephahs, so it is seems that this division to se'ahs and qabs was deliberate.106 However, it remains hard to discern if this change was made to preserve the descending numerical order, and like other examples, we can only estimate or assume what were the considerations of the rabbis. On the other hand, it is abundantly clear that the rabbis used numbers as an editing device, arranged many units in ascending, descending or palindromic order, or, like in M. Kel. 24:1-17, group together different sayings in numerical lists. This is proven beyond any shadow of doubt by the dozens of examples from the Mishnah, the Tosefta and the Talmuds that are discussed in the paper.

106 The Rambam, in Mishneh Torah (the book of Avodah, Hilchot K'lei HaMikdash, 2, 5) used only the in twenty-one qabs of Cyprus wine"). Moreover, the") באחד ועשרים קב של יין קפריסין :measure of qab קושט order of the ingredients, according to the Rambam (idem, 2, 3), puts the cinnamon after the thus creating a perfect descending order from seventy ,קילופה maybe Costus speciosus), and before the) to three.

811 11. The Results of this Research

The contribution of these four papers is primarily in three areas:

1. The study of Biblical rhetoric 2. The study of Rabbinical literature rhetoric 3. The study of other aspects of Rabbinical literature

The first area, Biblical style and rhetoric, has been widely discussed in the past by many scholars, and my additions and clarifications to the previous studies were detailed in the papers, as well as in the introduction and body of this dissertation. I would like to highlight several points concerning Biblical rhetoric, and then move on to a broader discussion of the second and third areas of contribution.

11.1 Contributions to the Study of Biblical Rhetoric

The first paper in the dissertation deals with the "Better" Proverb. Unlike most previous studies which mostly focused on the use of this feature in Biblical wisdom literature, and referred mostly to its two basic patterns, this paper shows that the "Better" proverb was also in use in other Biblical genres, including prose. Moreover, the paper details other patterns besides the two prevalent patterns, and refers to verses in which the comparison word has been changed. Although these Biblical variations are close to the basic patterns, they present some developments of the pattern inside the Hebrew Bible, and deserve special attention.

The second paper deals with the use of Concatenation, or Anadiplosis, in many literatures, including the Bible. Concerning to its Biblical use, the significance of this paper is the previously unrecognized differentiation between two types of concatenation: Stylistic concatenation and Syntactic concatenation. This observation was first noted by Shamir Yona,107 but was widened in this paper. In addition, this paper also deals with the contribution of concatenation to the syntax of the text, and highlights some connections between Ancient Near Eastern literature and the Bible, and between the Bible and Ben-Sira. Due to the lack of updated research about this phenomenon in recent years, this paper brings a fresh detailed look at concatenation, while also summarizing past discussions.

107 Yona will publish comprehensive discussion about this observation shortly.

811 The third paper deals with the use of numbers in numerical sayings in the Ancient Near East literature, in the Bible, in the book of Ben-Sira and in Rabbinic Literature. While previous studies about numerical sayings in the Bible had thoroughly discussed the different uses, this paper contributed a diachronic study of the different uses of numbers as a stylistic device in the Hebrew Bible.

11.2 Contributions to the Study of Rhetoric of Rabbinical Literature

This research has shown that the use of rhetorical patterns in Rabbinic Literature was neither accidental nor coincidental, and that these were used by the rabbis for different reasons or purposes that sometimes mixed together. In many cases, one can find more than one rhetoric feature in a single saying or unit, while in other cases only a "bird's- eye" view of several Talmudic pages or entire Tannaic chapter will reveal a stylistic pattern that exists in the text. In the above papers, only a few rhetorical features were discussed extensively . Alongside these discussions, other stylistic patterns were researched at varying degrees of depth. As the papers shows, the rabbis used different rhetorical features for different uses: 108

1. Stylistic use, which includes wordplay, different types of parallelisms, concatenation and other types of repetition, and other stylistic patterns such as the "Better" Proverb, chiastic structure, concluding deviation109 and trapezoid pattern. Although some of these patterns also have some mnemonic value, their main use is to elevate the texts from "pure" prose to a higher poetic level, especially in small units. The use of some typological numbers, for example in tractate Avot, and graded numerical parallelism are good examples of this dual use, as are some types of repetition and the use of rhyme.

108 This observation is close to the conclusions of Avraham Walfish in his dissertation. Walfish (n. 21), pp. 367-384, discussed the connection between mnemonic devices and the editing of the Mishnah, and although he deals mainly with the Mishnah, it seems that his conclusions are applicable to other Rabbinical texts as well. According to Walfish (pp. 371-372), some of the literary phenomena that are in use in Rabbinic Literature, especially poetic phenomena like rhythm, rhyme and parallelism, help in memorization, while other phenomena are not helpful in this way. Although Walfish limits his discussion mainly to rhetorical features that contain some kind of repetition to create a linguistic association, his division between those rhetorical features that have mnemonic value and those that only contribute to the stylistic exaltation of the texts is correct. Even so, some of his conclusions can be argued against, for example, whether the envelope figure has mnemonic value or not, especially in small or medium units. 109 Concluding deviation refers to alterations or changes at the end of a unit which are meant to indicate the imminent close of the unit. See: Yona, The Many Faces of Repetition (n.19), p.68, n.144, for further reading.

815 2. Mnemonic use, which includes rhetorical features that help the reader or listener to אבות מלאכות ארבעים חסר אחתremember and memorize the texts. For example, the line ("the primary [categories of] labors are forty minus one"), which both opens and concludes M. Sha. 7:2-4, creates an Inclusio or envelope figure that delineates the boundaries of the unit and embellishes the text, but mainly helps in its memorization. The number thirty-nine was replaced by the more typological number "forty minus one", which appeared in the repeating lines to help the sages be sure that they marked all the primary categories of labor. A similar case is found in the opening line from six traits have") ששה דברים נאמרו בשידים שלשה כמלאכי השרת ושלשה כבני אדם ,B. Hag. 16a been stated with respect to demons, three like human beings, and three like ministering angels"), which is meant to remind the sages of the number of items in the two parts of this unit. In some cases, concatenation, rhyme, gapping, and parallelism should also be understand as mnemonic tools, due to the repetition or near repetition of the same words. 3. Editorial use, which includes the use of rhetorical patterns in the redaction and editing process of the Rabbinic texts. These uses will be discussed forthwith.

11.3 Contribution to the Study of Other Aspects of Rabbinical Literature

In some cases, during stylistic analysis, other aspects of textual research came to light. The following examples, which deal with textual criticism, creation, redaction and editing process, deviate from the stylistic discussion, and in some cases show the progressive development of a pattern from its original stylistic use. Some prominent examples will now be discussed.

11.3.1 Textual Criticism

The following example was discussed in the paper "The Use of Numbers as an Editing Device in Rabbinic Literature."

B. Pes. 111b-112a: 110

אבל111 תחלי ולא משי ידיה מפחיד תלתא יומין דמסובר ולא משי ידיה מפחיד שבעה יומי שקל מזייה ולא משי ידיה מפחיד תלתא יומי שקל טופריה ולא משי ידיה מפחיד חד יומא112

110 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS New York - JTS Rab. 1608 (ENA 850). .("ate") אכל should be read אבל According to all other manuscripts, the word 111

816 He who eats cress without [first, and some say afterwards] washing his hands will suffer fear for thirty days He who lets blood without washing his hands [afterwards] will suffer fear for seven days. He who trims his hair and does not wash his hands [afterwards] will suffer fear for three days. He who pares his nails and does not wash his hands [afterwards] will suffer fear for one day.

This unit deals with the consequences of not washing hands before or after four different acts. The four acts could be arranged in several ways. In the paper, I suggest that the number at the end of the first line should be thirty, and not three, and that the sayings in this unit were arranged in descending order. The different manuscripts and prints are divided concerning this text.113 In my opinion, the descending order of the last three sayings in this unit, and the use of numbers as an editing device in the text that surround this unit, should imply that the number in the first line should be thirty, and that the unit was constructed in the descending order of: thirty, seven, three and one.

T. Hul. 2, 17:114

ר' מאיר אומ' טוב אשר לא תדור משתדור ולא תשלם טובֵמזהֵומזה שלא תדור כל עיקר ר' יהודה או' טוב אשר לא תדור משתדר ולא תשלם טובֵמזהֵומזה כבשתו לעזרה וסומך עליה ושוחט

R. Meir says: "It is better that you should not vow, than that you should vow and not pay; best of all is that you should not vow at all." R. Judah says: "It is better that you should not vow, than that you should vow and not pay. Better than either is he who brings his lamb to the courtyard and lays his hands on it and slaughters it."

These two sayings from the name of R. Meir and R. Judah were based upon Ecc. 5:4: It is better that you should not vow than that you") טֹוב אֲשֶר ֹלא תִּדֹר מִּשֶתִּדֹורוְֹׁלא תְׁשַּלֵם should vow and not fulfill it"). This verse is structured in the unique pattern of: A (do

.חד יומא after ולא ידע משום מאי מפחיד Some manuscripts add 112 113 The list of the manuscripts that were originally consulted appears in the paper. To this list another manuscript should be added: Modena - Archivio Storico Comunale Fr. ebr. 26.2 and Vatican 134, .("thirty") ,תלתין three"), and Jerusalem - NLI 4° 577.4.26, which reads") תלתא which read 114 The Hebrew text is according to MS Vienna, National Library, Heb. 20.

811 not vow) is better than B (to vow) + C (and not pay). Meanwhile, the two Rabbinical sayings shows a further development of the pattern: A (do not vow) is better than B (to vow) + C (and not pay), but D (do not vow at all/to vow and pay your vow) is better than both of them (i.e., better than both A and B + C). Stylistically, these two sayings prove that not only were the rabbis familiar with this Biblical pattern, when needed they changed it and even "upgraded" it. Similar to other examples that will be discussed below, the rabbis used a rhetorical pattern to unite a Biblical verse with their own words.

Unlike MS Vienna, the Venice print (1521) reads this text differently: ר' מאי' אומ' טוב אש' לא תדור משתדור ולא תשלם טוב מזהֵומזה שלא תידור כל עיקר ר' יהוד' או' טוב אש' לא תדו' משתדור ולא טוב מזהֵומזה מבי' כבשתו לעזר' וסומך עלי' ושוחט Textually, in R. Judah's saying there is probably an error. In the Venice print, the pay") is missing. A different version can be found in MS London, which") תשלם word omits the first part of R. Judah saying and reads: ר' יהוד' או' טוב מזה ומזה מבי' כבשתו לעזר' וסומך עלי' ושוחט R. Judah says: 'Better than either is he who brings his lamb to the courtyard and lays his hands on it and slaughters it. In B. Ned. 9a, there is another version to this saying: טוב אשר לא תדור משתדור ולא תשלם טוב מזה ומזה מי שאינו נודר כל עיקר דברי ר' מאיר ר' יהוד' או' טוב מזה מי שנודר ומקיים. "It is better not to vow than take a vow and not pay; best of all is not taking a vow at all," the words of R. Meir. R. Judah says: "Best of all is to vow and carry out the vow." It seems that there were two versions to the saying of R. Judah, and in both the last part is an addition to the Biblical verse. One version reads, "carry out the vow", while the other reads, "he who brings his lamb to the courtyard and lays his hands on it and slaughters it." Both versions, similar to the words of R. Meir, merge a Rabbinic addition to the original Biblical verse.115 The distorted saying, especially that of the Venice print version without the word "pay", is unreasonable, and it seems that in this case a rhetorical pattern, i.e. the "Better" Proverb, aids in the discovery of the original version of the text.

115 See: S. Lieberman, Tosefeth Rishonim, vol. 2 (Jerusalem: Bamberger and Wahrmann Publishers, 1938), p. 226 [Heb.].

811

11.3.2 Writing, Redaction and Editing Process

As mentioned before, in some cases rhetorical features were used during the writing, redaction, and editing of the Rabbinical texts. Some relevant examples from the papers will now be discussed.

M. Meg. 3, 4:116

ועוד א' ר' יהודה: בית הכנסת שחרב אין מספידין לתוכו ואין מפשילין לתוכו חבלים ואין פורשין לתוכו מצודות ואין שוטחין על גגו פירות ואין עושין אותו קפנדריא שנ' והשימותי את מקדשיכם ֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵקדושתן אף כשהן שוממין

R. Judah teaches also: That no funeral orations may be delivered in a synagogue which had become ruinous, Nor may it be used as a rope-walk, Nor to spread nets therein (to dry) Nor to spread fruit on its roof, Nor to use it as a short cut, As it is said: "I will bring your sanctuaries into desolation", That is, they remain sanctuaries even in their desolation.

In some cases, the rabbis use rhetorical patterns, like concatenation, to connect two different sentences, or to merge Biblical and Rabbinical materials. I will bring your sanctuaries into") והשימותי את מקדשיכם The origin of the words desolation") is Lev. 26:31. The rabbis integrated the Biblical quote into their later Rabbinical material through the use of concatenation to combine the different desolation") instead of") שוממין sentences together. The intentional use of the word "ruinous" as in the first line, brings the texts closer, literarily speaking.

116 The Hebrew text and reference are according to MS Parma 3173.

811

Kallah Rabbati 3:1:

ואינו מת עד שרואה הקדוש ברוך הוא בעצמו שנאמר כי לא יראני האדם וחי ֵ ֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵֵ בחייהם אינם רואים אבל במיתתם רואים…

And he does not die until he beholds the Holy One, blessed be He As it is stated: "for man shall not see me and live," In their lifetime they do not see me, but at their death they do see me.

This unit combines a Biblical verse from Ex. 33:20 with Rabbinic material. Like in the previous example, concatenation is used to combine two different sayings from different times into one continuous saying. To the above examples I could add M. Avot 5:1-15, M. Kel. 24:1-17, M. Kel. 27:1-5 and many others in which numerical patterns are at the heart of the editing structure, whether ascending or descending patterns, or those in which numbers are repeated. However, these have been sufficiently dealt with above and in the article.

811 12. Summary

All in all, after discussing hundreds of examples, many of which appear in the articles that comprise the core of this work, it is clear that the rabbis were familiar with Biblical stylistic patterns. The rabbis intentionally adopted these patterns, used them according to their original Biblical models, but also felt great liberty to change them for their own stylistic purposes. In some cases, these stylistic patterns were also employed creatively as tools for writing and editing purposes. Whether it be in a single line, a short saying, a small unit, or an entire chapter, Biblical rhetorical features can be found all over Rabbinic Literature. In many cases, the rabbis could have chosen some other way to arrange their words, yet again and again, a careful examination of the text reveals well-known rhetorical structures, such as numerical order, trapezoid pattern, wordplay, and many other rhetorical features. The use of the "Better" Proverb, in its original form, and then in its further developed pattern, shows us that this unique feature did not lose its vitality after the canonization of the Hebrew Bible. The multiple uses of Concatenation for stylistic, syntactic and editorial purposes show that the rabbis were familiar with all the Biblical forms of Concatenation, and also boldly added their own intentions and goals to this stylistic pattern. The case is the same concerning the multiple various uses of numbers in Rabbinic Literature. אם המשנה :This dissertation opens with the words of H.N. Bialik about the Mishnah If the Mishnah seems dry from the outside - it is") נראית כיבשה מבחוץ - לחה היא מבפנים vivacious from inside"). I would like to suggest that Bialik's thoughts about the Mishnah are also perfectly suitable to other Rabbinic texts. The Rabbinical essays are not dry prosaic technical writings, but are an abundant source of fascinating and distinctive stylistic patterns. Yet somehow, these unique patterns have unfairly remained hidden and unnoticed for centuries, waiting to be revealed.

818

291 13. Appendix

13. 1. Abbreviations

Bible

Genesis Gen. Exodus Ex. Leviticus Lev. Numbers Num. Deuteronomy Dt. Joshua Josh. Judges Jud. 1 Samuel 1Sam. 2 Samuel 2Sam. 1 Kings 1Kgs. 2 Kings 2Kgs. Isaiah Is. Jeremiah Jer. Ezekiel Ezek. Hosea Hos. Joel Joel Amos Am. Obadiah Ob. Jonah Jon. Micah Mic. Nahum Nah. Habakkuk Hab. Zephaniah Zep. Haggai Hag. Zechariah Zec. Malachi Mal. Psalm Ps. Job Job Proverbs Prov. Ruth Ru. Song of songs Song. Ecclesiastes Ecc. Lamentations Lam. Esther Est. Daniel Dan. Ezra Ez. Nehemiah Neh. 1 Chronicles 1Chr. 2 Chronicles 2Chr.

291 Rabbinic Literature

Mishnah M. Tosefta T. Babylonian Talmud B. The Talmud of the land of Israel Y.

Avodah Zarah A.Z. Kilayim Kil. Qinnim Qin. Arakhin Ara. Moed Qatan M.Q. Rosh Hashanah R.H. Avot Avot Maaser Sheni M.S. Sanhedrin San. Baba Batra B.B. Maaserot Maa. Shabbat Sha. Baba Mesia B.M. Makhshirin Mak. Shevuot She. Baba Qamma B.Q. Makkot Mak. Sheqalim Sheq. Bekhorot Bek. Megillah Meg. Shebiit Sheb. Berakhot Ber. Meilah Mei. Sotah Sot. Besah Bes. Menahot Men. Sukkah Suk. Bikkurim Bik. Middot Mid. Tevul Yom T.Y. Demai Dem. Miqvaot Miq. Taanit Taa. Eduyyot Edu. Nazir Naz. Tamid Tam. Erubin Eru. Nedarim Ned. Temurah Tem. Gittin Git. Negaim Neg. Terumot Ter. Hagigah Hag. Niddah Nid. Tohorot Toh. Hallah Hal. Ohalot Oha. Uqsin Uqs. Horayot Hor. Orlah Orl. Yadayim Yad. Hullin Hul. Parah Par. Yebamot Yeb. Kelim Kel. Peah Pea. Yoma Yom. Keritot Ker. Pesahim Pes. Zavim Zav. Ketubot Ket. Qiddushin Qid. Zebahim Zeb.

291 13.2 Proofreading Confirmation

Proofreading

My name is Anthony Chapman. I wish to declare that I have proofread Ariel Pasternak’s work on rhetorical features in Rabbinic literature.

Ariel is my colleague, and as a native English speaker, I have made small corrections and suggestions concerning the language content of Ariel’s work.

Anthony Chapman, MA

Ben Gurion University, Beer Sheva, Israel

291 13. 3. Letters of Acceptance from Publishers of Forthcoming Papers

13.3.1. Letter no. 1: Ariel Ram Pasternak and Shamir Yona, Concatenation in Ancient Near East literature, in Hebrew Scripture and in Rabbinic literature

From: Alan Avery-Peck [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2014 6:47 PM שמיר יונה :To Subject: Re: article for possible publication in Review of Rabbinic Judaism

Dear Shamir and Ariel-Ram,

I’ve had the pleasure of reading your article and am very pleased to be able to accept it for publication in the Review of Rabbinic Judaism. It is carefully argued and documented and will be of great interest to our readers.

As I read I did some minor editing, primarily for our style sheet and to correct some issues of usage. I also marked a few places where I had questions regarding content or where I thought the point could be a little more developed. There is very little of these sorts of issues, so, while your are welcome to do whatever editing would like, from my side, very little is required.

My edited file is attached. I’d appreciate your going through and accepting the editing changes (or, if I have something wrong, which always is possible, rejecting a change) and responding to my other queries. I find that files that combine Hebrew and English are a little touchy in Word, but I think that I managed to maintain the integrity of your Hebrew text (which I did not, at this point, check).

Thank you again for this submission to the Review of Rabbinic Judaism. Publication will likely be in the first 2016 issue, which goes to press in about a year. Depending on space considerations, I may be able to manage for the second 2015 issue, which goes to press in June. But since the article is relatively long for us, I am not certain that I will have the space allocation for that. I will let you know if anything changes.

Best for the end of Hanukkah and the new secular year!

Alan

291 13.3.2. Letter no. 1: Ariel Ram Pasternak and Shamir Yona, The use of numbers as an editing device in Rabbinic literature

From: Alan Avery-Peck [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, September 04, 2015 7:14 PM שמיר יונה :To Subject: Your articles

Dear Shami and Ariel-Ram,

I was very pleased to be able to read both articles and very much like your overall concept as well as your specific work here. The work is very interesting, and the two pieces will make a wonderful and substantial addition to the Review of Rabbinic Judaism. That said, I am very happy to be able to accept them for publication.

I assume that part one will appear in vol. 19, no. 1, which will go to press in May, 2016; part two will then appear in 19:2, which goes to press at the beginning of December of that year. There is some chance that, depending on my page allocation, I will need to push part one back to 19:2, but I am very much trying to avoid that. I’ll let you know what is going on as we get closer.

I have attached my minimally edited files of both parts. If you wish to do any revising, that is fine. I will just appreciate it if you work from these files, so that I don’t lose what I have done already.

Thank you, as always, for your interest in the Review of Rabbinic Judaism

Shabbat Shalom and, in this season, Shanah Tovah!

Best,

Alan

291

891 41. Bibliography

Amar, 2002 Z. Amar, Book of Incense (Tel Aviv: Eretz, 2002, in Hebrew). Amar, 2003 Z. Amar, Bamme Madlikin, (Elkana: Eretz Hefetz Institute, 2003, in Hebrew). Bar-Asher, 2009 M. Bar-Asher, Studies in Mishnaic Hebrew, vol. 1 (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 2009, in Hebrew). Ben-Yashar, M. Ben-Yashar, I.B. Gottlieb and J.S. Pankower, The Bible in Gottlieb and Rabbinic Interpretation (Vol. 1): Hosea (Ramat-Gan: Bar-Ilan Pankower, 2003 University Press, 2003, in Hebrew). Berlin, 1985 A. Berlin, The Dynamics of Biblical Parallelism (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1985). Bazak, 2014 J. Bazak, Mishpaṭ ʻIvri: Sugyot Nivḥarot ba-Mishpaṭ ha-ʻIvri le-Dorotaṿ be-Hashṿahʼah le-Mishpeṭe Yamenu, (Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Ḳooḳ, 2014, in Hebrew). Bialik, 1936 H.N. Bialik, Mishnah: Tractate Zeraim, (Tel Aviv: Dvir, 19362, in Hebrew). Bialik, 1939 H.N. Bialik, “Mishnah la'am”, Kol Kitvei H.N. Bialik (Tel Aviv: Dvir, 1939, in Hebrew). Breuer, 1998 Y. Breuer, “Word Play in Rabbinic Literature” (Hebrew), Leshonenu La'am 44, 4 (1998), pp. 155-167. Briggs and Briggs, C.A. Briggs and E.G. Briggs, Psalms (ICC), (Edinburgh: T. & 1906 T. Clark, 1906). Fogel, 2009 S. Fogel, “Samson's shoulders were sixty cubits”: Three Issues About Samson's Image in the Eyes of the Rabbis (Heb.; M.A. Thesis, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, 2009). Frankel, 1991 Y. Frankel, Darkhei Ha-Aggadah VeHa-Midrash, vol. 1 (Givatayim: Yad la-Talmud, 1991, in Hebrew). Friedman, 1971 S. Friedman, “The ‘Law of Increasing Members’ in Mishnaic Hebrew” (Hebrew), Lĕšonénu 35, 3-4 (1971), pp. 117-129, 192-206. Friedman, 1977 S. Friedman, “Some Structural Patterns in Talmudic Sugiot”, in: A. Shinan (Ed.), Proceedings of the Sixth World Congress of Jewish Studies, vol. 3, (Jerusalem: World Union of Jewish Studies, 1977, in Hebrew), pp. 389-402. Friedman, 1977b S. Friedman, A Critical Study of Yevamot X with a Methodological Introduction (New York: Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1977, in Hebrew). Goldberg, 2011 A .Goldberg, Literary form and composition in classical Rabbinic Literature (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 2011, in Hebrew).

899 Gottlieb, 1990 I.B. Gottlieb, “Pirqe Abot and Biblical Wisdom”, Vetus Testamentum 40, 2 (1990), pp. 152-164. Gottlieb, 1997 I.B. Gottlieb, “Qohelet, Pirqe Abot, and Wisdom of Torah” (Hebrew), Shnaton: An Annual for Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies 11 (1997), pp. 46-55. Gottlieb, 2011 I.B. Gottlieb, “Pirqe Avot as Wisdom Literature” (Hebrew), Beer Sheva 20 (2011), pp. 91-107. Hayes, 1988 J.H. Hayes, Amos, The Eighth-Century Prophet (Nashville, TN.: Abingdon Press, 1988). Hermisson, 1968 H.J. Hermisson, Studien Zur Israelitischen Spruchweisheit (WMANT), (Neukirchen-Vluyn:Neukirchener Verlag des Erziehungsvereins, 1968). Kim, 2014 S. Kim, Continuity and Discontinuity Between Biblical and Post-Biblical Wisdom Texts (PhD Diss. Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, 2014). Kister, 1988 M. Kister, Studies in Avot de-Rabbi Nathen (Jerusalem: Hebrew University, 1998, in Hebrew). Kugel, 1981 J.L. Kugel, The Idea of Biblical Poetry (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981). Lerner, 1987 M.B. Lerner, “The Tractate Avot”, in S. Safrai (Ed.), The Literature of the Sages (Assan: Van Gorcum, 1987), pp. 263- 281. Lieberman, 1938 S. Lieberman, Tosefeth Rishonim, vol. 2 (Jerusalem: Bamberger and Wahrmann Publishers, 1938, in Hebrew). Lieberman, 1942 S. Lieberman, Greek in Jewish Palestine (New York: The Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 1942). Lieberman, 1962 S. Lieberman, Greek and Hellenism in Jewish Palestine (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 1962, in Hebrew). Lifshitz, 1988 B. Lifshitz, Promise - Obligation and Acquisition in Jewish Law (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1988, in Hebrew). Maccoby, 1988 H. Maccoby, Early Rabbinic Writings (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988). Margolies, 1967 R. Margolies, Mechkarim be-Darkei ha-Talmud ve-Chidotav (Jerusalem: Mossad Harav Ḳooḳ, 1967, in Hebrew). Margolies, 1993 M. Margulies, Midrash Wayyikra Rabbah, (New York and Jerusalem: the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, 19933, in Hebrew) Melammed, 1962 E.Z. Melammed, “Text, Number, and Meter in Tractate Avot” (Hebrew), Sinai 50 (1962), pp. 152-176. Neusner, 2007 J. Neusner, Hosea in Talmud and Midrash (Lanham, Md.: University Press of America, 2007).

022 O'Connor, 1980 M. O'Connor, Hebrew Verse Structure (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 1980). Ogden, 1977 G.S. Ogden, “The ‘Better’-Proverb (Tôb-Spruch), Rhetorical Criticism, and Qoheleth”, JBL 96, 4 (1977), pp. 489-505. Pasternak, 2010 A.R. Pasternak, “New Jar Full of Old”: Biblical Rhetorical Features in Rabbinic Literature (Heb.; M.A. Thesis, Ben- Gurion University of the Negev, Beer Sheva, 2010). Pasternak and Yona, A.R .Pasternak and S. Yona, “The ‘Better’ Proverb in 2014 Rabbinic Literature”, Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17, 1 (2014), pp. 27-40. Pasternak and Yona, A. R. Pasternak and S. Yona: “Concatenation in Ancient Near in print East Literature, Hebrew Scripture, and Rabbinic Literature”, The Review of Rabbinic Judaism (2014, Forthcoming) Pasternak and Yona, A. R. Pasternak and S. Yona: “The Use of Numbers as an in print Editing Device in Rabbinic Literature”, The Review of Rabbinic Judaism (2015, Forthcoming) Pasternak and Yona, Ariel Ram Pasternak and Shamir Yona: “Numerical Sayings in 2016 the Literatures of the Ancient Near East, in the Hebrew Bible, in the Book of Ben-Sira and in Rabbinic Literature”, The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016), pp. 202-244. Paul, 1994 S.M. Paul, Amos (Mikra le-Israel) (Tel Aviv: Am Oved, 1994, in Hebrew). Reizel, 2011 A. Reizel, Introduction to the Midrashic Literature (Alon Shvut: Tvunot, 2011, in Hebrew). Rosen-Zvi, in print I. Rosen-Zvi, “The Wisdom Tradition in Rabbinic Literature and Mishnah Avot”, in: J-S Rey, H. Najman and E. Tigchelaar (Ed.) Rethinking the Boundaries of Sapiential Tradition, (forthcoming). Rosenfeld, 2001 A. Rosenfeld, “Haruzim ba-Aggadah ve-ba-Halakhah” (Hebrew), Sinai 126-127 (2001), pp.303-304. Schofer, 2005 J.W. Schofer, The Making of a Sage (Madison, Wis.: University of Wisconsin Press, 2005). Sekles, 1880 S. Sekles, the Poetry of the Talmud (New York: Sekles, 1880). Seow, 1997 C.L. Seow, Ecclesiastes (Anchor Bible) (New York: Doubleday, 1997). Sharvit, 2004 S. Sharvit, Tractate Avoth Through the Ages: A Critical Edition, Prolegomena and Appendices (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 2004, in Hebrew). Sharvit, 2006 S. Sharvit, Language and Style of Tractate Avoth Through the Ages (Beer-Sheva: Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Press, 2006, in Hebrew).

028 Ta-Shma, 2007 I.M. Ta-Shma, “Rabbinical Literature”, Encyclopedia Judaica, Ed. M. Berenbaum and F. Skolnik, Vol. 17, 2nd ed. (Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007), p. 22. Theodor and Albeck, J. Theodor and C. Albeck, Bereschit Rabba, (Jerusalem: 1996 Shalem Books, 19962, in Hebrew). Tov, 1997 E. Tov, the Textual Criticism of the Bible (Jerusalem: Bialik Institute, 19972, in Hebrew). Tropper, 2004 A.D. Tropper, Wisdom, Politics, and Historiography: Tractate Avot in the Context of the Graeco-Roman Near East (Oxford [England]: Oxford University Press, 2004). Tawiow, 1919 I. C. Tawiow, Otzar Ha-Mashalim Ve-Ha-Pitgamim, (Odesa: Moriah, 1919, in Hebrew). Valler, 1995 S. Valler, “The Number Fourteen as a Literary Device in the Babylonian Talmud”, Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and Roman Period 26, 2 (1995), pp. 169-184. Yogev and Yona, J. Yogev and S. Yona, “Visual Poetry in KTU 1.2”, Ugarit- 2015 Forschungen 46 (2015), pp. 447-453. Yogev and Yona, S. Yona and J. Yogev, “Opening Alliteration in Biblical and 2015b Ugaritic Poetry”, Zeitschrift für die Alttestamentliche Wissenschaft 127, 1 (2015), pp. 108-113. Yogev and Yona, in J. Yogev and S. Yona, “Visual Poetry in the Ugaritic Tablet print KTU 1.4” (forthcoming). Yona, 2005 S. Yona, “Exegetical and Stylistic Analysis of a Number of Aphorisms in the Book of Proverbs: Mitigation of Monotony in Repetitions in Parallel Texts”, in: R.L. Troxel, K.G. Friebel, and D.R. Magary (Ed.) Seeking Out the Wisdom of the Ancients: Essays Offered to Honor Michael V. Fox on the Occasion of His Sixty-Fifth Birthday, (Winona Lake, Ind.: Eisenbrauns, 2005), pp. 155-165. Yona, 2006 S. Yona, “Rhetorical Features in Talmudic Literature”, Hebrew Union College annual 77 (2006), pp. 67-101. Yona, 2013 S. Yona, The Many Faces of Repetition (Beer Sheva: Ben- Gurion University of the Negev Press, 2013, in Hebrew). Wald, 2007 S.G. Wald, “Mishnah”, Encyclopedia Judaica, Ed. M. Berenbaum and F. Skolnik, Vol. 14, 2nd ed. (Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007), pp. 319-331. Walfish, 2001 A. Walfish, The Literary Method of Redaction in Mishnah Based on Tractate Rosh Hashanah (Heb. PhD Diss. Hebrew University, Jerusalem, 2001). Watson, 1984 W.G.E. Watson, Classical Hebrew Poetry (Sheffield: JSOT Press, 1984).

020 Watson, 1994 W. G. E. Watson, Traditional Techniques in Classical Hebrew Verse, (Sheffield: Sheffield Academic Press, 1994). Waxman, Waxman Mo. Waxman, Me. Waxman, and J.C. Frakes. “Literature, and Frakes, 2007 Jewish”, Encyclopedia Judaica, Ed. M. Berenbaum and F. Skolnik, Vol. 14, 2nd ed. (Detroit: Macmillan Reference USA, 2007), pp. 84-117. Weinfeld, 1960 M. Weinfeld, “The Dependence of Deuteronomy Upon the Wisdom Literature”, in: M. Haran (Ed.) Yehezkel Kaufmann jubilee volume (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 1960, in Hebrew), pp. 89-108. Weiss, 1978 M. Weiss, “These Days and the Days to Come According to Amos 9:13” (Hebrew), Eretz-Israel 14 (1978), pp. 69-73. Yellin, 1983 D. Yellin, David Yellin Writings (vol. 6): Hikrei Mikra (Jerusalem: R. Mass, 1983, in Hebrew). Zohar, 2007 N. Zohar, Secrets of the Rabbinic Workshop: Redaction as a Key to Meaning (Jerusalem: Magnes Press, 2007, in Hebrew).

022

תקציר מאז ימי הבית השני נהגה הפרדה בין ספרות המקרא, היא התורה שבכתב, ובין ספרות חז"ל, היא התורה שבעל פה. גלגוליה של הפרדה זו מצאו את מקומם לימים בין כותלי האקדמיה, בדמות לימוד חקר המקרא במחלקות ובחוגים למקרא, ולימוד ספרות חז"ל, לרוב במסגרת המחלקות והחוגים למחשבת ישראל. בכל אחד מתחומי הלימוד נתנו החוקרים את דעתם על צדדים שונים של הטקסטים, אך ללא הלימה מבחינה מחקרית. כך, הדיון הסגנוני, שתפס לו אחיזה איתנה בחקר המקרא, נעדר כמעט לחלוטין מחקר ספרות חז"ל. במחקר אינטרדיסציפלינרי זה נדונים ונחקרים מאמרים שונים של חז"ל, מרביתם מן המשנה, התוספתא והתלמוד, באמצעות כלי מחקר המשמשים בדרך כלל לחקר ספרות המקרא. דיונים אלה חשפו את השימוש הרב שעשו חז"ל בדגמים רטוריים מן המקרא, את התפתחות הדגמים בזמנם של החכמים ואת השימוש בדגמים אלה לצרכי עיבוד ועריכה, וזאת בשונה מהשימוש הנהוג בהם בדרך כלל במקרא. עבודה זו כוללת ארבעה מאמרים, הדנים בדגמים ובאספקטים שונים של הרטוריקה המצויה במקרא ובספרות חז"ל. המאמר הראשון דן בדגם היתרון )"טוב מ"(, שהוא דגם השוואתי מוכר מן המקרא ומן המזרח הקדום. המאמר השני עוסק בתופעת השרשור ושני המאמרים הנוספים עומדים על השימוש במספרים כאמצעי רטורי ועריכתי בספרות חז"ל. בכל אחד מן המאמרים מובאת בתחילה סקירה של השימוש בדגם הנדון בספרות המזרח הקדום, במקרא, בספר בן סירא, המהווה מבחינות מסוימות חוליית קישור בין ספרות המקרא וספרות חז"ל, ובספרות חז"ל. הבחירה בתופעות רטוריות שונות ומגוונות נעשתה בכוונת מכוון, ומטרתה לעמוד על ההיכרות העמוקה של חז"ל עם גווניה הרבים של הרטוריקה המקראית. למרות שהדגש במאמרים נסב בעיקר על השימוש שעשו חז"ל בדגם כזה או אחר, שימוש שכמעט ולא נדון בעבר, הרי שהדיונים והמסקנות מאירים ומחדדים לא אחת נקודות שונות הנוגעות לחקר הסגנון המקראי. בכך תורם כל אחד מן המאמרים שבעבודה זו גם לחקר הסגנון המקראי, תוך שימת דגש על כמה תופעות רטוריות שלא עמדו בלבו של המחקר בשנים האחרונות. מחקר זה הוא, כאמור, אסופת מאמרים, ובכל אחד מן המאמרים הנכללים בו ישנם גילויים וחידושים העומדים בפני עצמם. כל אחד מן המאמרים בעבודה זו כולל בתוכו עשרות דיונים בדוגמאות שונות. המסקנות מכל דיון ודיון מצטרפות זו לזו בסוף כל מאמר. המסקנות שעלו מארבעת המאמרים נשזרו יחדיו בחלקה האחרון והמסכם של עבודה זו. מאות הדוגמאות שנדונו בעבודה זו מוכיחות כי חז"ל הכירו היטב את הדגמים הסגנוניים המשמשים במקרא, אימצו את הדגמים האלו, עיבדו אותם, גיוונו אותם ועשו בהם שימוש לצרכים שונים, החורגים לעיתים מהשימוש הסגנוני הקיים במקרא.

מילות מפתח: ספרות חז"ל, רטוריקה מקראית, ספרות החכמה, דגמים סגנוניים

9.2 שימוש בצמד מספרים לציון מספר לא ידוע או מספר קטן 115 9.1 שימוש בצמד מספרים בתקבולת 115 9.4 תקבולת המספר המדורג 111 10. דיון במאמר הרביעי: 111 "The Use of Numbers as an Editing Device in Rabbinic Literature" 11. תוצאות המחקר 114 11.1 תרומה לחקר הסגנון המקראי 114 11.2 תרומה לחקר הסגנון של ספרות חז"ל 115 11.3 תרומה לחקר אספקטים אחרים של ספרות חז"ל .11 11.3.1 ביקורת הנוסח .11 11.3.2 כתיבה, עיבוד ועריכה 119 12. סיכום 191 13. נספחים 193 13.1 קיצורים 191 13.2 אישור הגהה 195 13.3 מכתבים המאשרים קבלה לפרסום של מאמרים .19 עתידיים 13.3.1 מכתב מס' 1: .19 Letter no. 1: Ariel Ram Pasternak and Shamir Yona, Concatenation in Ancient Near East Literature, Hebrew Scripture, and Rabbinic Literature, The Review of Rabbinic Judaism (2014, Forthcoming) 13.3.2 מכתב מס' .: 191 Ariel Ram Pasternak and Shamir Yona, The Use of Numbers as an Editing Device in Rabbinic Literature, The Review of Rabbinic Judaism (2015, Forthcoming) 14. ביבליוגרפיה 199

תוכן עניינים

1. מבוא 1 1.1 הקורפוס 4 ..1 מתודולוגיה 5 1.1 סקירת מחקר . 2. סגנונה של ספרות חז"ל 9 1. מאמר מס' 1: 1. Ariel Ram Pasternak and Shamir Yona: "The "Better" Proverb in Rabbinic Literature", The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 17 (2014), pp. 27–40 4. מאמר מס' .: 35 Ariel Ram Pasternak and Shamir Yona: "Concatenation in Ancient Near East Literature, Hebrew Scripture, and Rabbinic Literature", The Review of Rabbinic Judaism (2014, Forthcoming) 5. מאמר מס' 1: 78 Ariel Ram Pasternak and Shamir Yona: "Numerical Sayings in the Literatures of the Ancient Near East, in the Hebrew Bible, in the Book of Ben-Sira and in Rabbinic Literature", The Review of Rabbinic Judaism 19 (2016), pp. 202-244. 6. מאמר מס' 4: 121 Ariel Ram Pasternak and Shamir Yona: "The Use of Numbers as an Editing Device in Rabbinic Literature", The Review of Rabbinic Judaism (2015, Forthcoming) 7. דיון במאמר הראשון: 159 "The "Better" Proverb in Rabbinic Literature" 7.1 שימוש "רגיל" בדגם היתרון, בדומה לשימוש המקראי 1.1 7.2 עיבודים שונים של דגם היתרון 1.1 7.2.1 החלפת מילת ההשוואה 1.1 7.2.2 שינויים מבניים: שינוי סדר האיברים והחלפת מילת ההשוואה 1.1 7.3 שינויים יוצאי דופן בדגם הבסיסי 1.4 7.3.1 שימוש בדגם על דרך השלילה 1.4 7.3.2 מספר השוואות רצופות במשפט אחד 1.5 7.3.3 השוואה כפולה ומתמשכת במשפט אחד 1.5 8. דיון במאמר השני: 1.1 "Concatenation in Ancient Near East Literature, Hebrew Scripture, and Rabbinic Literature" 8.1 שרשור ביחידות קצרות 1.1 8.2 שרשור שאינו משפיע על תחביר המשפט 1.9 8.3 שרשור שמאחד משפטים שונים 111 8.4 שרשור ביחידות ארוכות 111 9. דיון במאמר השלישי: 114 "Numerical Sayings in the Literatures of the Ancient Near East, in the Hebrew Bible, in the Book of Ben-Sira and in Rabbinic Literature" 9.1 מספרים טיפולוגיים 114

תודות לשמיר, שזכיתי לחסות תחת כנפיו בעשור האחרון, על התמיכה, ההכוונה, הסבלנות והסיוע בכל תחום שבו נדרשתי לעזרתו. למרצי וחברי במחלקה למקרא וארכיאולוגיה באוניברסיטת בן גוריון. לשותפי להוראה במכללת קיי: אורלי, חגית ונבו. למשפחות כץ והרן: אלכס ורוזיטה, אושרית וכלנית, ארז, נתנאל ישי ונילי. לחזי נתניה על התמיכה ארוכת השנים.

לאחותי יסמין מרים וינוגרד. לקרן, אשת חיל, שעמדה לצידי לאורך הדרך, ובלעדיה עבודה זו לא הייתה באה לאוויר העולם. עבודה זו מוקדשת לבנותיי האהובות, אביגיל שרה ואחינעם שני שחיוכן מלווה אותי מדי יום; לסבתי המנוחה שרה רבקה פסטרנק; לאהובי ליבי שאינם לצידי יותר, ולמי שהביאני לזה היום.

אולי, אולי, אם אעצום עיני ובטח אז אראה חלום כל כך יפה ירח וכוכב ישלחו מכתב אתה עוד תראה

הצהרת תלמיד המחקר עם הגשת עבודת הדוקטור לשיפוט

אני החתום מטה מצהיר בזאת: )אנא סמן(:

X חיברתי את חיבורי בעצמי, להוציא עזרת ההדרכה שקיבלתי מאת מנחה/ים.

X החומר המדעי הנכלל בעבודה זו הינו פרי מחקרי מתקופת היותי תלמיד מחקר.

___ בעבודה נכלל חומר מחקרי שהוא פרי שיתוף עם אחרים, למעט עזרה טכנית הנהוגה בעבודה ניסיונית. לפי כך מצורפת בזאת הצהרה על תרומתי ותרומת שותפי למחקר, שאושרה על ידם ומוגשת בהסכמתם.

תאריך: .11..11..1 שם התלמיד: אריאל רם פסטרנק חתימה:

העבודה נעשתה בהדרכת:

פרופסור שמיר יונה במחלקה למקרא, ארכיאולוגיה והמזרח הקדום בפקולטה למדעי הרוח והחברה

וְיָשָ ן מִפְ נֵי חָדָ ש ּתוֹצִ יאּו? דגמים רטוריים מן המקרא המשמשים בספרות חז"ל

מחקר לשם מילוי חלקי של הדרישות לקבלת תואר "דוקטור לפילוסופיה"

מאת

אריאל רם פסטרנק

הוגש לסינאט אוניברסיטת בן-גוריון בנגב

אישור המנחה

אישור דיקן בית הספר ללימודי מחקר מתקדמים ע"ש קרייטמן

______

ט"ו חשוון תשע"ז 16.11.6116

באר-שבע

וְיָשָ ן מִפְ נֵי חָדָ ש ּתוֹצִ יאּו? דגמים רטוריים מן המקרא המשמשים בספרות חז"ל

מחקר לשם מילוי חלקי של הדרישות לקבלת תואר "דוקטור לפילוסופיה"

מאת

אריאל רם פסטרנק

הוגש לסינאט אוניברסיטת בן-גוריון בנגב

ט"ו חשוון תשע"ז 16.11.6116

באר-שבע