■liilil 
 
 rmyrTfm f m m r5f .tfrr? trf . 
 
 
 liiiiiiiiiiiiipiw 
 
 'wmm 
 
 i iiiiiiiiilll I 
 
 ii ™^ 
 ; :^ :;iiiiiir 
 
 1 
 
 iii 
 
 iilii^B 
 
 W 
 
 li 
 
 iiil 
 
 iliillii* 
 
 lilijiiiiliiiiii' 
 
 iiiilllll 
 
 ilii 
 
 
 illliniiir, 
 
 ill^ 
 
 m 
 
 lllH^^^^^^^ 
 
 Hi 
 
 lilii! 
 
 ij lillilpi 
 Iiil 
 
 flii HiPiii 
 
 5 y ;u hii'.iniHii:: 
 
 jiiiiliiilliil 
 
 itei'i ; .„. .„.: 
 
 PilPPl f i!ll iil!lli!iii|!'p|ii!ji'^' : i liiiiiiiiiil I P>i 
 
Division BtV\503 
 Section ^ 5. K(^S ' 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 TO 
 
 THE TALMUD 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 TO 
 
 THE TALMUD 
 
 Historical and Literary Introduction 
 
 Legal Hermeneutics of the Talmud 
 
 Talmudical Terminology and Methodology 
 
 Outlines of Talmudical Ethics 
 
 appendix 
 
 Key to the Abbreviations Used in the Talmud and its Commentaries 
 
 ./ -By 
 
 M. MIELZINER, Ph.D., D.D. 
 
 Professor of Talmud at the Hebrew Union College 
 
 SECOND REVISED EDITION 
 
 FUNK & WAGNALLS COMPANY 
 
 NEW YORK AND LONDON 
 1903 
 
Copyright, 1902, by 
 
 M. MiElyZINER 
 
 [Printed in the United States 0/ America] 
 
 Published December, 1902 
 
Inscribed io the 
 Blessed Memory 
 
 OP MY 
 
 Beloved Brother 
 EPHRAIM MIELZINER 
 
 I,ATB OF THOX.If , GEKlCAirr 
 
Preface to the First Edition. 
 
 The Talmud is undoubtedly one of the most remarkable 
 literary productions of antiquity. In its twelve folio volumes 
 it embodies the mental labors of the ancient Jewish teachers 
 during a period of about eight hundred years. The attention 
 of these teachers was directed particularly to expounding 
 and developing the religious, moral and civil law of the Bible. 
 The pages of this great work are, besides, replete with 
 wise observations, ethical maxims, beautiful legends and 
 parables, and exegetical explanations. We also find in it 
 valuable historical and ethnographical material, as well as 
 occasional references to the various branches of ancient know- 
 ledge and science. 
 
 The Talmud is also remarkable for the powerful influence 
 it exerted upon the thought and life of the Jews during the 
 Middle Ages, yes, even down to quite recent times. Its 
 authority was second only to that of the Bible. Although 
 modern Jews have emancipated themselves more or less 
 from its authority, the Talmud still remains a venerable 
 literary monument of a great and important epoch in the 
 development of Judaism. At the same time, it is a valuable 
 source of religious and ethical doctrines as well as of scientific 
 investigation. 
 
 In our day, quite a general interest in this literary monu- 
 ment of antiquity is being awakened. This increasing inter- 
 est is manifested not only by the publication of numerous 
 works and ivonographs on Talmudical topics, but also by the 
 
Prefacb. 
 
 fact that several universities and colleges abroad and in thi8 
 country have established chairs for the study of this special 
 branch of literature. 
 
 The present work which I have called ''Introduction to the 
 Talmud" is the result of many years' labor and of a long experi- 
 ence as professor of the Talmudical branches at the Hebrew 
 Union College. It is intended to facilitate the exceedingly 
 difficult study of an intricate subject. It is the first comprehen- 
 sive work of its kind in the English language, yes, it might be 
 said, in any modern language, if we except Prof. Herman lu 
 Strack's ' 'Binleitung in den Talmud", a book which, though 
 treating our subject with scientific exactness and impartiality, 
 was not intended to cover the whole ground as is attempted in 
 the present publication. 
 
 Earlier works of this kind, from the eleventh century down 
 to our time, have been written in Hebrew or rather in the Rab- 
 binical idiom, and hence are accessible to Rabbinical scholars 
 only. Valuable literary material, the result of keen critical 
 research into our subject, has been published by some modern 
 scholars, among whom may be named the late Z. Frankel, and 
 I. H. Weiss.' The results reached by these scholars have 
 been duly considered in our ''Historical and Literary Intro- 
 duction". 
 
 Regarding the second and third parts of this work, 
 I had to rely almost entirely on my own researches. The 
 only modern work on Talmudical Hermeneutics is Dr. H. S. 
 Hirschfeld's "Halachische Exegese". But the usefulness of this 
 learned work is greatly impaired by the fact that 
 
 » The literature on this subject is given further on in the chapter 
 "Auxiliaries to the study of the Talmud" pp. 83—86. 
 
Prepack. 
 
 the author cast it into a philosophical form to which the 
 subject-matter does not readily lend itself. 
 
 It has been my endeavor to present the methods of the Tal- 
 mudical interpretation of the Bible in the proper light. The 
 application of the various hermeneutical rules is illustrated by 
 numerous examples -which have been carefully selected,and which 
 will afford the student an opportunity of becoming familiar with 
 some of the peculiarities of the Talmudical Law. 
 
 Part III of this Introduction is the first attempt at present- 
 ing the Methodology and Terminology of the Talmud in a 
 strictly systematical way. It is, to some extent, an exposition 
 of the Dialectics of the Rabbis, an analysis of their discussions 
 and debates. The references and examples added to each of the 
 technical terms and phrases show their prevalence in all sections 
 of the Talmud. I may be pardoned in entertaining the hope that 
 this portion of my work will be found a reliable guide through 
 the labyrinth of Talmudical discussions. 
 
 The appended treatise "Outlines of Talmudical Ethics" is 
 essentially the contents of my paper on that subject read at the 
 World's Parliament of Religions in Chicago. 
 
 The alphabetical Register of the principal Tanaim and Amo- 
 raim, the Index of technical Terms and Phrases, and the ''Key 
 to the Abbreviations used in the Talmud and its commentaries" 
 will, I hope, add to the usefulness ol this work. 
 
 Cincinnati, Mabch, 1894. 
 
 THE A UTHOR. 
 
Preface to the Second Edition. 
 
 Encouraged by the very favorable reception given to the 
 first edition of this Introduction to the Talmud, I have care- 
 fully revised the work for the present new edition. The 
 numerous typographical errors which had escaped the atten- 
 tion of the proofreader of the former edition have been cor- 
 rected, and several pages of new matter have been appended 
 which supplement the Bibliography of modern works and 
 pamphlets on Talmudic Subjects. 
 
 Cincinnati, O., November, 1902. 
 
 THE AUTHOR. 
 
TABLK OK CONXKNXS. 
 
 P^ART I, 
 HISTORICAL AND LITERARY INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Page. 
 THE TALMUD AND ITS COMPONENT PARTS. 3 
 
 CHAPTER I. THE MISHNA. 
 
 Its Origin, Compilation and Division. 
 Order of Succession, Names and General 
 Contents of its 63 Tracts. Language of 
 the Mishna. ------ 4.I6 
 
 CHAPTER II. WORKS KINDRED TO THE MISHNA. 
 
 Tosephta, Mechilta, Siphra, Siphre; Frag- 
 mentary Baraithoth. - - . - 17-21 
 
 CHAPTER III. THE AUTHORITIES OF THE MISHNA. 
 
 The Sopherim, the " Zugoth," the Tanaim. 
 The six Generations of the latter. Char- 
 acteristics and Biographical Sketches of 
 the principal Tanaim. - - - - 22-39 
 
 CHAPTER IT. THE EXPOUNDERS OF THE MISHNA. 
 
 Palestinian and Babylonian Amoraim. 
 Their Division into Generations. Bio- 
 graphical Sketches of the principal Amo- 
 raim. -...-.. 40-55 
 
 CHAPTER Y. THE GEMARA. 
 
 Classification of its Contents into Halacha . | 
 
 and Agada. Compilation of the Palastinian \/ 
 
 and the Babylonian Gemara. The two 
 Gemaras compared with each other. - 56-62 
 
 CHAPTER TI. APOCRYPHAL APPENDICES TO THE 
 
 TALMUD. -.--.. 63-64 
 
 CHAPTER YII. COMMENTARIES ON THE TALMUD. 
 
 A. On the Babylonian Talmud. B. Exclu- 
 sively on the Mishna. C. On the Palesti- 
 nian Talmud. 61-71 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 Page, 
 
 CHAPTER Till. EPITOMES AND CODIFICATIONS. 
 
 A. Compendiums of the Talmud, by Alfasi 
 and by Asher b. Jechiel. B. The Codes, by 
 Maimonides, by IMoses of Coucy, by Jacob b. 
 Asher and by Joseph Karo. C. Collections 
 of the Agadic Portions of the Talmud. - 72-76 
 
 CHAPTER IX. MANUSCRIPTS AND PRINTED EDI- 
 TIONS. ------ 77-80 
 
 CHAPTER X. AUXILIARIES TO THE STUDY OF THE 
 TALMUD. 
 
 A. Lexicons. B. Grammars. C. Chres- 
 tomathies. D, Introductory Works, a. 
 Older Works. 6. Modern Works in He- 
 brew, c. Works and Articles in Modern 
 Languages, d. Historical Works, e. En- 
 cyclopedical Works. /. Some Other Books 
 of Reference. 81-87 
 
 CHAPTER XI. TRANSLATIONS OF THE TALMUD. 
 
 A. The Mishna. B. The Babylonian. 
 
 C. The Palestinian Talmud. - - 88-92 
 
 CHAPTER XII. BIBLIOGRAPHY. 
 
 Modern Works and Monographs on Tal- 
 mudlcal Subjects. ----- 93-102 
 
 CHAPTER XIII. 1. OPINIONS ON THE YALUE OF THE 
 
 TALMUD. ----- 103-107 
 
 2. WHY STUDY THE TALMUD. - 108-114 
 
 PART II. 
 
 LEGAL HERMENEUTICS OF THE TALMUD. 
 
 1. INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Definition. Plain and Artificial Interpre- 
 tation. Legal and Homiletical Interpreta- 
 tion. 117-120 
 
 2. ORIGIN AND DEYELOPMENT OF ARTIFICIAL IN- 
 
 TERPRETATION. 
 
 Hillel's Seven Hermeneutic Rules. A New 
 Method, by Nahum. Development of this 
 Method, by R. Akiba. The Thirteen Rules 
 of R. Ibhmael. Literature. - - 120-129 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 EXPOSITION OF HERMENEUTIC RULES. 
 
 CHAPTER I. THE INFERENCE FROM MINOR AND 
 MAJOR. 
 
 CHAPTER II. THE ANALOGY. 
 
 A. Gezera Shava. _ . . . 
 
 B. Heckesh. - - . . . 
 
 CHAPTER III. GENERALIZATION OF SPECIAL LAWS. 
 
 CHAPTER IT. THE GENERAL AND THE PARTICULAR. 
 
 CHAPTER V. MODIFICATIONS OF THE RULE OF 
 GENERAL AND PARTICULAR. - 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 1. EXPLANATION FROM THE CONTEXT. 
 
 2. RECONCILIATION OF CONFLICTING 
 PASSAGES 
 
 CHAPTER VII. ADDITIONAL RULES. 
 
 A. Juxtaposition. B. Restrictions in the 
 Application of Analogy. C. Limited or 
 Unlimited Effect of an Analogy. D. Refu- 
 tation and Reinstatement of Hermeneutic 
 Arguments. E. The Theory of Extension 
 and Limitation. F. " Mikra " or " Masora." 
 Closing Remark. - . - - 
 
 Page. 
 
 130-141 
 
 142-152 
 152-155 
 
 156-162 
 
 163-168 
 
 169-173 
 
 174-176 
 
 177-187 
 
 PARO:^ III. 
 TALMUDICAL TERMINOLOGY AND METHODOLOGY. 
 
 Prefatory. 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 CHAPTER III. 
 CHAPTER IV. 
 CHAPTER V. 
 
 190 
 
 TERMS AND PHRASES REGARDING 
 THE STRUCTURE OF A MISHNA 
 PARAGRAPH 191-197 
 
 MODES OF TREATING AN ANONYMOUS 
 
 MISHNA PARAGRAPH. - - - 198-206 
 
 THE GEMARA 
 MISHNA. 
 
 CRITICISING THE 
 
 207-215 
 
 DISCUSSING THE DIFFERENCE OF 
 OPINION IN A MISHNA. - - 216-219 
 
 QUOTING THE MISHNA AND KINDRED 
 
 WORKS 220-223 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 CHAPTER VI, 
 
 Page. 
 
 DEFINITION OF AND PHRASES CON- 
 CEENING MEMRA. - . . "^ 224-226 
 
 227-230 
 
 CHAPTER VII. TREATMENT OF A PIAIN MEMRA. 
 CHAPTER VIII. TREATMENT OF A MEMRA CONTAIN. 
 
 IN6 A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION. 231-036 
 CHAPTER IX. ASKING AND ANSWERING QUESTIONS. 
 
 smU f"^ 1. Questions of Investi- 
 gation. J. Questions of Astonishment 
 ^. Q"«^t'ops of Objection. Some Cc"ai 
 Kmds of Objection. The Dilemma. The 
 Th«o^^ti^,.Q-«o-.°^ !-blem an\^ ^^^_^^^ 
 
 CHAPTER X. ARGUMEXTATIOJ^. 
 
 1. Terms and Phrases Introducing an 
 Argument. 2. Classification of Argumf nts 
 a. Argument From Common SW ft' 
 Argument From Authority, c. Argument 
 From Construction, d. Argumenf Trom 
 Analogy. .^ Argument a /o.W 3. IndT- 
 rect Argumentation. 4. Direct and Indirect 
 Arguments Combined. - . -^^^^^ect ^^^^^^^ 
 
 CHAPTER XI. REFUTATION. 
 
 Definition and Terms, a. The Refutation 
 of a Proposition. 6. Procedure of Refuting 
 the Various Kinds of Arguments. - ^ 254-260 
 
 CHAPTER XII. THE DEBATE. 
 
 baferl^'"'?!!^''? ^.^'"^^ ^^^ Principal De- 
 baters. Illustration of a Debate. Anonv- 
 mous Discussions and Debates. - ^ 261-264 
 
 F^ART IV. 
 OUTLINES OF TALMUDICAL ETHICS. 265-280 
 
 ^ndex^of* Fv./'^^^S Z^ ^^^^^'^ ^"d Amoraim. 
 index of Explained Terms and Phrases. 
 
 Ar^F>KNDIX. 
 
 Key to the Abbreviations used in the Talmud 
 
 and Its Commentaries. - - . 
 Addenda. - - . 
 
 281-282 
 283-285 
 
 286-293 
 294-298 
 
INTRODUCTION 
 
 TO THE 
 
 TALMUD 
 
 PART I. 
 HISTORICAL AND LITERARY INTRODUCTION. 
 
THE TALMUD AND ITS COMPONENT PARTS. 
 § 1. 
 
 The Talmud is the work which embodies the mental labors 
 of the ancient Jewish teachers during a period of about eight 
 hundred years (from about 300 before, to 500 after, the Christian 
 era) in expounding and developing the civil and religious law 
 of the Bible. Besides, it contains the theosophical views, ethical 
 maxims and exegetical remarks of those teachers; it is inter- 
 woven with many valuable historical and ethnographical records 
 and occasional references to the different branches of ancient 
 knowledge and sciences. 
 
 The Talmud consists of two distinct works, the Mishna, as 
 the text, and the Ge??iara as a voluminous collection of com- 
 mentaries and discussions on that text. 
 
 The appellation Talmud, meaning the Study, properly refers 
 to the Gemara only, but according to a literary usage establish- 
 ed m later times, the name Talmud is applied also to the 
 combined work of Mishna and Gemara. ' 
 
 We have two compilations of the Gemara, different from 
 each other in language as well as in contents. One originated 
 in the Palestinian, and the other in the Babylonian schools. 
 The latter is called '>^22 IIdSi the Babylonian Talmud, and the 
 former iD^tt^lT llD^n the Palestinian Talmud. The Mishna 
 text in both of them is the same, though occasionally offering 
 slight variations. 
 
 * As a technical term the word *TitD^n was applied by the ancient 
 teachers to signify the method of deducing a law from the words of 
 Scripture; compare the phrase "ID")^ Ti^Sn, Maccoth I, 7, a. o. Sub- 
 sequently the word was applied to the discussions of the teachers on 
 the Mishna; compare Sanhedrin 24a: ^33 Sc^ miC^n. After the Mishna 
 and Gemara hrid been combined in one work, it became customary 
 to use the word as an apiellation of the whole work. 
 
CHAPTER I. 
 
 THE MISHNA. 
 
 Its Origin, Compilation and Name. 
 §2. 
 
 The Mishna is the authorized codification of the oral or un- 
 written law which, on the basis of the written law contained in 
 the Pentateuch, developed during the second Temple and down 
 to the end of the second century of the common era. 
 
 The oral law consisted partly of legal traditions and usages 
 which had been handed down from time immemorial; partly of 
 enactments (D^:*'''D1 mn'^U m:|:n) of the men of the Great 
 Synod or the Sopherim, and subsequently of the Sanhedrin; and 
 partly of the laws which proceeded from the discussions and de- 
 cisions of the teachers, the Tanaim, in the Palestinian academies, 
 established for the purpose of cultivating and transmitting that 
 law. Its transmission was, for many centuries, confined to 
 verbal communication, as it was considered a religious ofience 
 to reduce the tradition to writing. » 
 
 The cultivation of that law consisted mainly in the endeavor 
 to found its provisions on a biblical basis and support, and to 
 deduce therefrom new provisions for cases not yet provided 
 for. This endeavor gave rise to discussions and a frequent con- 
 flict of opinions. Also the reports of these conflicting opinions 
 were conscientiously preserved in the memory of subsequent 
 teachers. Thus, in the course of time, the subject matter of the 
 oral law accumulated to an immense bulk which, not yet in any 
 way systematized, became almost too heavy to be preserved 
 merely by the power of memory. 
 
 The first attempt towards bringing some order and system 
 into this chaotic mass of traditions was made by Hillel, president 
 of the Sanhedrin in the time of Herod, by arranging it into six 
 principal divisions. His attempt was later resumed by the 
 
 ^ In order to assist their memory, however, some teachers had 
 private scrolls on which tliej for their own use entered sinQ;le the^^es 
 of the tr ditional law. Such a scroll was called Dnno nPJD "Secret 
 Scroll." 
 
The Mishna. 5 
 
 celebrated R. Akiba who subdivided the subject matter belonging 
 to each of the six divisions, into homogeneous parts. Within 
 each part again he grouped the single laws according to their 
 inter-connection and according to certain mnemonical consider- 
 ations. The work of R. Akiba was continued by his distinguish- 
 ed disciple R. Meir who completed the collection and improved 
 its formal arrangement. But neither this compilation of R. 
 Meir nor similar works of his colleagues succeeded in command- 
 ing general recognition, as every teacher in the various academies 
 preferred to transmit and expound the accumulated material of 
 the law according to a method and arrangement of his own. 
 
 Finally R. Jehuda Hanasi, flourishing towards the end of 
 the second century, undertook the great task of establishing a 
 general code of the oral law. By virtue of his eminent learning, 
 his dignity as Patriarch and as head of a celebrated academy, 
 he succeeded in accomplishing this task. Taking the unfinished 
 work of R. Akiba and R. Meir as basis, and retaining, in gen- 
 eral, its division and arrangement, he examined and sifted the 
 whole material of the oral law, and completed it by adding the 
 decisions which his academy gave concerning many doubtful 
 cases. Unanimously adopted opinions he recorded without the 
 names of their authors or transmitters, but where a divergence 
 of opinions appeared, the individual opinion is given in the 
 name of its author, together with the decision of the prevailing 
 majority, or side by side with that of its opponent, and sometimes 
 even with the addition of short arguments pro and con. 
 
 Like the former compilations of the oral law, this work of 
 R. Jehuda was called Mishna. In order to distinguish it from 
 that of R. Akiba and R. Meir it was originally designated the 
 Mishna of R. Jehuda, but after having been generally accepted 
 as the exclusively authorized code of the traditional law, it bears 
 the simple name Mishna without any further modification.' 
 
 > Whether R. Jehuda Hanasi actually committed his Mishna to 
 writing or not, is a question concerning which the scholars of ancient 
 as well as of modern times express dilierent opinions. In accordance 
 with the principle mentioned in Talm. Gittin 60 b and Temura 14 b 
 in the name of some teachers, that the oral law ought not to be 
 
6 Historical a:::) Literary Introduction. 
 
 In later years of his life, R. Jehuda revised his work, and 
 made several changes. Some additions were made by his dis- 
 ciples. ' 
 
 Concerning the etymology and signification of the word 
 nJwD there is a difference of opinion. Some regard it as a 
 
 feminine form of the Hebrew word nit^D (analogous to the double 
 
 form HjpD and r\2pt2), meaning f/ie second in rank^ hence a signi- 
 
 fication of the work containing the oral law which takes the 
 second rank compared with the biblical law; which is considered 
 the first. In this sense the word is taken not only by the fathers 
 of the Church who rendered it by the term 5^ 7;r£>&9(3z?, but also by 
 many modern scholars. Others derive it from the verb nitS^ io 
 repeat, which in new Hebrew, like the Aramaic S3n received 
 
 written down yro'2 pDJ^P "'SC'-i nn« ^N HD t'ynC' D^^ai it is maintained 
 by Slierira Gaon (according to one version m his Iggereth), by Rashiin 
 his commentary on B. Metzia 33 a and Eriibin 62 b, by Tosaphoth on 
 Megilla 32 a, and by some other authorities of the Middle Ages that R. 
 Jehuda compiled his great Mishna work in his mind without writing 
 it down, and that it was transmitted only orally during many gener 
 ations, until circumstances in the sixth century made it neccessary to 
 commit it to writing. This view is accepted and defended even by 
 some modern scholars, as Luzzatto, Rapaport, Jost, Graetz, Leopold 
 Loew, and others. 
 
 More plausible is the opposite opinion holding that R. Jehuda 
 Hanasi wrote out the Mishna in full. This opinion is shared in the 
 Middle Ages by Samuel Hanagid, R. NIssim, R. Abraham b. David, 
 Maimonides, and in modern times by Geiger, Frankel, Lebrecht, I. H. 
 Weiss, and others. 
 
 The arguments in favor of the former opinion are found in 
 Graetz' Geschichte der Juden IV, second edition, p. 494, and in 
 Leopold Loew's Graphische Requisiten II, pp. 112-132; the contrary 
 arguments in Frankel's Darke Hamischna p. 211: Weiss' Dor Dor III, 
 244-24S. Compare also Hamburger's Real-Encycl. II, p. 7U6, and S. 
 Adler's Kobetz al Yad, p. 54. 
 
 * Clear evidences of such additions by later hands are found in the 
 ^ ast Mishtia of Sota, where the death of Rabbi Is mentioned, and in 
 the last Mishna of Uk'tzin, where mention is made of R. Joshua b. 
 Levi who flourished after Rabbi. As later additions and interpolations 
 must also such passages as "it51« m or ^21 nm be regarded which oc- 
 casionally occur in the context of the Mishna, e. g. Nazir I, 4j IV, 
 5; Maccoth I, 8. 
 
The Mishna. T 
 
 the meaning, to relate, to teach, to transmit orally. Mishna then 
 means the oral teaching, the instruction in the traditional law, in 
 contradistinction to tr\'p^ the reading in the written law of the 
 Bible. 
 
 The Division of the Mishna. 
 §3. 
 
 The Mishna is divided into six main sections, termed Seda- 
 rim (^'Orders" or ^^Series")^ A mnemonical sign of the sequence 
 of these sections are the words tDp: JDT (time he took), formed 
 by the initials of their names. 
 
 I. Zeraim D'^ynT Seeds or productions of the land. This 
 section embraces the ritual laws concerning the cultivation of 
 the soil and its products. It is introduced by a treatise on 
 prayer and benedictions. 
 
 II. Moed -r*;iD Festival^ treats of the laws concerning the 
 Sabbath and all festivals. 
 
 III. Nashim D''tr: Women^ regulations concerning marriage 
 and divorce. 
 
 lY. Nezikin j-'pni Z>aw^^^j, embracing a great part of the 
 civil and criminal law. 
 
 y. Kodashi?n D'^tTTp Sacred things^ treats of the sacrificial 
 laws and the temple service. 
 
 YI. Teharoth T\T\X\^ Purification^ the laws concerning the 
 clean and unclean. 
 
 Each Seder (section) is subdivided into Masechtoth or treat- 
 ises, of which each bears a name indicating its general con- 
 tents ^ 
 
 The Mishna contains in all sixty three Masechtoth. Each 
 Masechta is again subdivided into Chapters^ called Perakim, and 
 each Perek into paragraphs, of which each is termed Mishna or 
 
 ^ On account of this division of the Mishna into six .series the whole 
 T.'ilmud is signified by the technical term DC^ wliich is an abbreviation 
 of the words DniD TSZ'X^- 
 
 " The word riDDD or NflDDD is probably derived from "]DJ to 
 weave, and means then a web, just as in Latin textus from texere, 
 means a web, and then a composition of words and sentences. 
 
8 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 Halacha. The latter term for a single paragraph is especially- 
 used in the Palestinian Talmud. 
 
 Order of Succession, Names and General Contents op 
 the Masechtoth. 
 
 Concerning the order in which the Masechtoth belonging to 
 every section follow after each other, some difference appears 
 between the separate Mishna edition (called Mishnayoth nTiJir^D)* 
 and the arrangement of the Masechtoth as generally adopted in 
 the editions of the Babylonian and the Palestinian Talmud. 
 This is especially the case in the Sedarim II — YI, while in Seder 
 I the order of succession is the same in all editions. 
 
 ^ Maimonides in the introduction to his Mishna commentary- 
 endeavors to find some reasons for the order of succession of the 
 Masechtoth in each Seder. But his reasons are often rather forced. R. 
 Sherira Gaon, in his celebrated epistle holds that the compiler of the 
 Mishna did not have the intention to arrange the Masechtoth according 
 to a strictly systematical order. This opinion is also expressed in the 
 Gemara B. Kamma 102 a; Aboda Zara 7a : niriDDD nnn HJ^i'D^ "IID pX; 
 though, on the other hand, the Gemara sometimes refers to a close 
 connection of one Masechta with the preceding one, as in the beginn- 
 ing of Masecheth Sota : niDID KJD D"D \>'h^ "I'TJD XJD n3»; comp. 
 also the beginning of Mas. Shebuoth and of Taanith. 
 
 Geiger (Wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift II, p. 487 ss.) shows that in 
 the separate Mishna edition, at least in the Sedarim II — VI, the Ma- 
 sechtoth are simply arranged according to the number of Perakim of 
 which they consist, so that the Masechtoth having the greater number 
 stand first and are gradually followed by those having a lesser number 
 of Perakim. Where the arrangement seemingly deviates from this 
 rule, we can easily account for the deviation. Thus the three Bdbas, 
 each having ten Perakim, are placed first in Seder Nezikin, because be- 
 longing together and having in all thirty Perakim. They are followed 
 by Sanhedrin having eleven Perakim, and then by Maccoth which 
 though consisting only of three Perakim is in its contents a continua- 
 tion of the subject treated in Sanhedrin, forming with it fourteen Pe- 
 rakim. 
 
The MiSHNi. 9 
 
 The following is a full list of the Masechtoth belonging to 
 each Seder and the number of their Perakim; besides the order 
 of their succession in the separate Mishna edition as well as in 
 the two compilations of the Talmud. 
 
 The letter G added to the number of the order of succession 
 in this list indicates that there is Gemara to that Masechta in 
 either of the two Talmud compilations. 
 
 I. Seder Zeraim, containing eleven Masechtoth. 
 
 Order of Succession in the 
 
 Separate TALMUD „ ^ 
 
 Mishna _ , ,. , ... Number 
 
 edition. Babh. Jerushatmi. of Perakim 
 
 1 l.G. l.Gr. Berachoth, ni3"l3/ Benedictions or Prayers, 9 
 
 treats of liturgical rules. 
 
 2 2 2.G. Peahy nt^D, Corner, treats of the corners and 8 
 
 gleanings of the field, the forgotten sheaves, 
 the olives and grapes to be left to the poor, 
 according to Levit. XIX 9. 10 and Deut. XXIV 
 19. 21. 
 
 3 3 8.G. Demai, ^XOI, The Uncertain, treats of com 7 
 
 bought from persons suspected of not hav- 
 ing given thereof the tithes. 
 
 4 4 4.G. Khilayim,^''^^, Mixtures, treats of the pro- 9 
 
 hibited mixtures in plants, animals and gar- 
 ments, according to Levit. XIX, 19 ; Deutr. 
 XXII, 9 11. 
 6 6 6.G. Shebiith, n'^yns^/ The Sabbatical year, ac- 10 
 
 cording to Ex. XXIII, 11; Lev, XXV, 2-7; 
 Deutr. XV, 1-11. 
 
 6 6 6.G. Therumoth, nionn. The Heave offerings for 11 
 
 the priests, according to Numb. XVIII, 12. 
 
 7 7 7.G. Maaseroth, nns^yo, The Tithes, to be given 6 
 
 to the Levites, according to Lev. XXVII, 
 30-33; Num. XVIII, 21-24. 
 
 8 8 8.G. Maaser Sheni, "•Jcr IK^yD, The second Tithe, 5 
 
 according to Deut. XIV, 22-26. 
 
 9 9 9.G. Challa, nbn, The Dough, the portion to be 4 
 
 given thereof to the Priests, according to 
 Num. XV, 20. 21. 
 10 10 10. G. Orla, rh'\V> The Uncircumcised, treats of 3 
 the fruits of a tree during the first four 
 years after its planting, according to Lev, 
 XIX, 23-25. 
 
10 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 Order of Succession in the 
 
 Separate TALMUD >t„™u., 
 
 Mishna „ ^,. , , , . Number 
 
 edition. Babli. Jerushalmi. of Perakim 
 
 11 11 ll.G. Biccurim, nni3n, The First fruits to be 3 
 
 brought to the Temple, according to Deut. 
 XXVI, 1-11. 
 
 II. Seder Moed, containing twelve Masechtoth. 
 
 1 l.G. l.G. /S'a65af?i, nnEJ*/ treats of the labors prohibit- 24 
 
 ed on that day. 
 
 2 2.G. 2.G. Eruhin, pniny, Combinations. This Masechta 10 
 
 being a continuation of the preceding, treats 
 especially of imaginary combinations of loc- 
 alities by which to extend the Sabbath 
 boundary. 
 
 3 3.G. 3.G. Pesachim, D^HDD, treats of the laws relating 10 
 
 to the feast of Passover and th.e paschal lamb. 
 
 4 11 5.G. ShekaUm, n'h\>^- treats of the half Shekel 8 
 
 which, according to Ex. XXX, 12-16, every 
 Israelite had to pay as a temple tax. 
 
 5 8.G. 4.G. Yoma, j^rOV, the Day, i. e. the day of At- 8 
 
 onement, according to Lev. XVI, 3-34. 
 
 6 9.G. 6.G. Succah, n31D» treats of the laws concerning 8 
 
 the feast of Tabernacles, Lev. XXIII, 34-36. 
 
 7 4.G. 8.G. Betza riTl or Yom tov iit3 D1\ treats of the 6 
 
 kinds of work which, according to Ex. XII, 
 16, were prohibited or permitted on the fes- 
 tivals. The name Betza (the egg) is taken 
 from the first word in that Masechta. 
 
 8 7.G. 7.G. Bosh Hashana, n^tJ^H tJ't^"!, Beginning of the 4 
 
 year, treats of the feast of New Year. 
 
 9 10. G. 9.G. Taanith, n^:yn^ on the public fasts. 4 
 
 10 12. G. 10. G. i!/egi?ZCT, n!^^3?0, the Scroll, treats of the read- 4 
 
 ing of the book of Esther on the feast of 
 Puriiu. 
 
 11 5.G. 12. G. 3Ioed Katon, |tOp HI^ID, Minor feast, treats of 3 
 
 laws relating to tiie days intervening be- 
 tween the first and last da-ys of Pesacli and 
 Succoth. 
 
 12 6.G. ll.G. Chagiga, n^JH, Feast offering, treats of the 3 
 
 private offerings on the three feasts of pil- 
 grimage, according to Deut. XVI, 16, 17. 
 III. Seder Nashim, containing seven Masechtoth. 
 
 1 l.G. l.G. Yebamoth, r\\0'y, Sisters-in-Law, treats of 16 
 Levirate marriage, according to Deut. XXV, 
 5-10. 
 
The Mishna. 11 
 
 Order of Succession in the 
 
 Sf-parate TALMUD Number 
 
 Son. B^bli. Jerushalmi. of Perakira 
 
 2 2.G. 3.G. Khefhubothy nnin3r Marriage deeds, treats 13 
 
 of dower and marriage settlements. 
 
 3 5.G. 4.G. JSledarim, DniJ, Vows, treats of vows and 11 
 
 their annulment, with reference to Num. 
 XXX, 3-16. 
 
 4 6.G. 6.G. NaziVy -T'Ti, the Nazarite. treats of the laws 9 
 
 concerning him, according to Num. VI, 2-21. 
 
 5 7.G. 2.G. Sota, n'JID, on the woman suspected of adult- 9 
 
 ery, according to Num. V, 12-31. 
 
 6 4.G. 5.G. Gittin, ]^*^>^, on Divorces, based on Deut. 9 
 
 XXIV, 1-5. 
 
 7 3.G. 7.G. KiddusMn, |"t>^np, on Betrothals. 4 
 
 rV. Seder Nezikin, containing ten Masechtoth. 
 
 1 l.G. l.G. Saba Xm^o, J<Op V 33, First Gate, treats of 10 
 Damages and Injuries, and their remedies, 
 with reference to Ex, XXI, 28-37 ; XXII, 
 1-5. 
 
 3 3.G. 2.0- ^<^^^^ Metzia, Ny^Vn ^^22, Middle Gate, 10 
 treats of laws concerning found property 
 (Deut. XXII, 1-4), concerning trust (Ex. 
 XXII, 6-14], concerning buying and selling 
 (Lev. XXV, 14), lending [Ex. XXII, 24-26; 
 Lev. XXV, 35-37} and concerning hiring 
 and renting. 
 
 3 3.G. 3.G. Baha Bathra, «-inn Snn, Last Gate, treats 10 
 
 of laws concerning real estate and com- 
 merce, mostly based on the traditional law; 
 besides of the laws concerning hereditary 
 succession, based on Num. XXVII, 7-11. 
 
 4 5.G. 4.G. Sanhedrin, |^-nn:D, treats of the courts and 11 
 
 their proceedings, and of the punishment 
 of capital crimes. 
 
 5 7.G. 5.G. Maccoth, noo, Stripes, treats of false wit- 3 
 
 nesses and their punishment (Deut. XIX, 
 16-19); of the cities of refuge (Num. XXXV, 
 10-32; Deut. XIX, 1-13) and of crimes pun- 
 ished by stripes (Deut. XXV, 1-3. 
 
 6 6.G. 6.G. Sf/?.c?)?foi/i, mi;13'.:», Oaths, treats of the differ- 8 
 
 ent kinds of oaths, those made in private 
 life as well as those administered in court, 
 Lev. V, 4. 5. 21. 22; Ex. XXII, 6-10. 
 
12 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 Order of Succession in the 
 
 Separate TALMUD 
 
 Mishna _ , , . u i • Number 
 
 edition. Babh. Jerushalmi. ^j Perakim 
 
 7 8 Wanting Eduyoth, niny, Testimonies, contains a col- 8 
 
 lection of traditional laws and decisions 
 gathered from the testimonies of disting- 
 uished teachers. 
 
 8 4.G. 7.G. Aboda Zara, mT muy, Idolatry, treats of 5 
 
 laws concerning idols and the relation to 
 the worshipers thereof. 
 
 9 10 Wanting Aboth, nUX, Fathers or Sentences of the 6 
 
 Fathers (the principal teachers), contains 
 ethical maxims of the Mishna teachers. 
 10 9.G. 8.G. Horayoth, nviin, Decisions, treats of the 8 
 consequences of acting according to errone- 
 ous decisions rendered by areligious author- 
 ity, with reference to Lev. chapters IV and V. 
 
 V. Seder Kodashim, containing eleven Masechtoth. 
 
 1 l.G. Zebachim, DTIDT/ Sacrifices, treats of the 14 
 
 animal sacrifices and the mode of their of- 
 fering, with reference to the first chapters of 
 Leviticus. 
 
 2 2.G. o Menachoth, mnJD, Meat-offering, treats of 13 
 
 meat-and drink offerings, with reference to 
 ;z; Lev. ch. II 
 
 8 4.G. Cliolin, (or ChullinJ p^in, Profane things, 13 
 
 •"I treats of the traditional manner of slaught- 
 
 ering animals for ordinary use; besides of 
 (4 the dietary laws. 
 
 4 8.G. Bechoroth, n'niDl, The first bom, treats of 9 
 
 ^ the laws concerning the first bom of man 
 
 and animals, according to Ex. VIII, 12.18 
 ^ and Num. XVIII, 15-17. 
 
 5 5.G. Arachin, P3"iy, Estimations, treats of the 9 
 
 ^ mode in which persons or things dedicated 
 
 to the Lord by a vow are legally appraised 
 in order to be redeemed for ordinary use, 
 according to Lev. XXVII, 2-37. 
 
 9 6.G, Themura, m"l?::n/ Exchange, treats of the 7 
 
 laws concerning sanctified things having 
 been exchanged, according to Lev. XXVII, 
 10-27. 
 7 7.G. Kherithoth, nirT^nD^ Excisions, treats of the 6 
 
 sins subject to the punishment of excision, 
 and their expiation by sacrifices. 
 
The Mishna. 13 
 
 Order of Succession in the 
 
 Separate TALMUD Number 
 
 Sol Bablijerushalmi. , , ,, /^'"T 
 
 8 8 G Me-ila, rh'V^^ Trespass (Sacrilege), treats of 6 
 
 the sins of violating or profaning sacred 
 rt things, according to Lev. V, 15. 16. 
 
 9 10 G t^ Thamid, n^DD. The Daily Sacrifice describes 7 
 y iu.vj. S5 ^^^ Temple service connected with the daily 
 
 •-' morning and evening offering, according to 
 
 H Ex. XXIX, 38-41 ; Num. XXVUI, 2-8. 
 
 10 11. » Middoth, nilD, Measurements, contains the 5 
 
 < measurements and description of the 
 
 ^ Temple, its courts, gates and halls, also de- 
 
 scription of the service of the priestly guards 
 in the Temple. 
 
 11 9, Kinnim, D^:p/ The bird's nests, treats of 8 
 
 th© sacrifices consisting of fowls, the offer- 
 ing of the poor, according to Lev. I, 14; V, 
 7; Xn, 8. 
 
 VI. Seder Teharoth, containing twelve Masechtoth. 
 1 2. Khelim, D^^3, Vessels, treats of the con- 80 
 
 ditions under which domestic utensils, gar- 
 ments etc. receive ritual uncleanness, ac- 
 rt cording to Lev. XI, 83-35. 
 
 3 3. Ohaloth, Twbm, Tents, treats of tents and 18 
 
 » houses conveying the ritual uncleanness of 
 
 a dead body, according to Num. XIX, 14.15. 
 
 3 4. M Nega-im, D^Vi^ Leprosy, treats of the laws 14 
 
 relating to leprosy of men, garments and 
 H dwellings, according to Lev. XIII and XIV. 
 
 4 6. Parah, niD, The Heifer, treats of the laws 12 
 
 » concerning the red heifer and the use of its 
 
 ashes for the purification of the unclean, 
 -4 according to Num. XIX. 
 
 6 6. Teharoth, nnno. Purifications. The word 10 
 
 ^ is here used euphemistically, as the Masech- 
 
 ta treats of some lesser degrees of unclean- 
 ness lasting only till sunset; e. g., Lev. XI, 
 
 24-28. ^. 
 
 7 ilfifcvaofTi, mX^O, Wells, treats of the con- 10 
 
 ditions under which wells and reservoirs 
 are tit to be used for ritual purifications. 
 
 7 l.G. l.G. Nidda, n-l^ ThR Menstruous, treats of the 10 
 
 legal uncleanness arising from certain con- 
 ditions in women, according to Lev. XV, 
 
14 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 Order of Succession in the 
 
 Separate TALMUD ^, ^ 
 
 Mishna _ , ,. , , , • Number 
 
 edition. Bablijerushalrai. of Perakim 
 
 19-31 and XII, 3-8. 
 
 8 8. Mach-shirin, |''l''C^2D, Preparations, treats of 6 
 
 liquids that, according to Lev. XI, 34. 38, 
 ^ prepare and dispose seeds and fruits to re- 
 
 ceive ritual uncleanness. 
 
 9 9.^ Zahim, wy^, Persons suffering of running 5 
 
 issues, treats of the uncleanness arising 
 M from such secretions, according to Lev. XV, 
 
 2-18. 
 
 10 10. ^ Tehul Yom, DV ^UD, Immersed at day time, 4 
 
 treats of the state of him who at day time 
 ^ immersed for his purification, while his per- 
 
 fect cleanness according to the law is not 
 •< acquired before the setting of the sun. 
 
 11 11 Yadayim, Dn\ Hands, treats of the ritual 4 
 
 ^ uncleanness of hands, according to the trad- 
 
 itional law, and of their purification. 
 
 12 12 Uk-tzin, pvpiy, Stalks of Fruit, treats of 3 
 
 stalks and shells of fruit in regard to con- 
 veying ritual uncleanness. 
 
 Remark 1. In connection with the main subject treated 
 in each Masechta and generally indicated in its name, occasion- 
 ally other more or less congenial subjects are treated. Thus, 
 for instance, the last Perakim of Masecheth Megilla are devoted 
 to laws cnncerning the sanctity of synagogues and the reading 
 of Scriptures at the public service. In the first Perek of Kid- 
 dushin, after having set forth the different modes of contracting 
 marriage, rules are incidently laid down concerning the legal 
 modes of acquiring dilferentkinds of property, etc. 
 
 Remark 2. The Perakim belonging to each Masechta 
 are designated in the separate Mishna edition simply by the 
 letters of the Hebrew alphabet, and in the Talmud edition by 
 ordinal numbers as well as by a certain name taken from the first 
 word or words with which that Perek begins. Thus the first 
 Perek of Berachoth is designated in the separate Mishna edition 
 by 'S p"lS and in the Talmud edition by ]r^«"l p"lD/ TiDSD. In 
 earlier ral)l)inical literature references to a certain Perek of the 
 Mishna are general !y made by giving only the name of that 
 Perek without stating the Masechta to which it belongs, as 
 
The Mishna. 16 
 
 l\":5SDn p*iB referring to the third Perek of Baba Metzia. An 
 alphabetical list of the names of all Parakim with the indication 
 of the Masechtoth to which they belong is found in the appendix 
 to , Masecheth Berachoth in the Talmud editions, immediately 
 after Maimonides' Introduction to Seder Zeraim. 
 
 Language of the Mishna. 
 
 §5. 
 
 The language of the Mishna is New Hebrew, as developed 
 during the period of the second Temple. The Hebrew having 
 been supplanted by the Aramaic dialects as the language of 
 common life, the ancient idiom was cultivated by the learned 
 for liturgical and legal purposes. Many new words and phrases 
 had to be coined to express new ideas and objects, and new 
 grammatical forms and syntactical constructions adopted for 
 the favored processes of legal dialectics. As far as possible 
 use was made for this purpose of new derivations of the stock 
 of Biblical words and of some genuine Hebrew roots ^\hich 
 though not happening to occur in the Biblical literature still 
 lingered in the memory of the people. Besides, recourse was 
 had to the dominating languages. From the Aramaic especially 
 some word roots and grammatical inflections, derivations and 
 constructions were borrowed and modified according to the 
 genius of the Hebrew idiom. Utensils and other objects and 
 ideas till then unknown were designated by the same terms, 
 used by that nation from which they had been borrowed. In 
 this way, many Greek terms and with them also some Latin 
 words more or less modified, were adopted and naturalized, i 
 
 * Modern works on the language of the Mishna are: 
 
 M. I. Landau, Geist und Sprache der Hebraer nach dem zweiten 
 Tempelbau (Prague 1822). 
 
 A. Geiger. Lehr-und Lesebuch zur Sprache der Mishna (Breslau, 
 1845). 
 
 L. Dukes, Sprache der Mishna (Esslingen, 1845). 
 
 J. H. Weiss, Mishpat Leshoii ha-Mishna (Vienna 1867). 
 
 Herm. L. Strack und C. Siegfried, Lehrburh der neuhebraeischen 
 
 Sprache nnd Literatur, Karlsruhe und Leipzig, 1884. 
 
 Salomon Stein, Das Verbuin der Mischnasprache, Berlin 1888. 
 
16 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 In this New Hebrew language, also called the language of 
 the sages (D^il^isn ptT^ or \lzrr^ ;vOtr^), are composed not only the 
 Mishna but also the kindred works to be mentioned in the fol- 
 lowing chapter. 
 
 As to the style of expression, the Mishna is very brief and 
 concise well calculated to impress itself upon the memory- 
 
CHAPTER 11. 
 
 WORKS KINDRED TO THE MISHNA. 
 
 §6. 
 
 There are several works which are kindred to the contents 
 of the Mishna, and originated partly before and partly after its 
 close, though their present shape belongs to a much later period. 
 We refer to the Tosephta^ the Mechilta^ Siphra and Siphre. 
 Tnese works are very important from the fact that they throw 
 much light on the Mishna in revealing the sources of many of 
 its canons, and the reasons of its diverging opinions. For this 
 purpose, they are frequently quoted in the Gemara. The follow- 
 ing will briefly describe each of these works. 
 
 a. The Tosephta. 
 
 The word Tosephta (KnSDin) means Addition, Supplement, 
 and, as indicated by this name, the work is intended to complete 
 deficiencies of the Mishna. It is divided into Mancchtoth, gene- 
 rally corresponding to those of the Mischna, but diflering from 
 them in the arrangement of their subject, and in the division of 
 their Perakim. The latter are not subdivided into paragraphs. 
 There are in all sixty Masechtoth and 452 Perakim. The Tosephta 
 contains mainly the remnants of the earlier compilations of the 
 Halacha made by R. Akiba, R. Meir, R. Nehemia, and others not 
 adopted in the Mishna, and, besides, additions made, after R. 
 Jehuda Hanasi's death, by his desciplos R. Chiya, R.Oshaya, Bar 
 Kappara and others. But we find in that work also many sayings 
 and decisions of later Amoraim of the Babylonian and Palestin- 
 ian schools. In its present shape it belongs to the fifth or 
 sixth century.^ 
 
 * The Tosephta is usually printed as an appendix to Alphasi's com- 
 pendium of the Talmud. In the Vienna edition of the Habyl. Talmud 
 (1860-72) the Mas^xhtoth of the Tosephta are appended to the corres- 
 ponding Mosechtoth of the Talmud. A separate revised edition of the 
 whole Tosephta was published by Dr. Zuckermandel (Pasewalk and 
 Treves, 1877-82). Dr. Adolph Schwartz is publishing a new edition of the 
 
18 Historical and Litef.ary Ixti:o duct ion. 
 
 b. The Mechilta. 
 § 8. 
 
 The Mechilta, the Siphra and the Siphre have this in com- 
 mon, that they treat of the oral law not according to well arrang 
 ed subjects, as is the case with the Mishna and the Tosephta, 
 but rather in the form of a running commentary and discussion 
 on the biblical passages from which the law is deduced or on 
 which it is based. 
 
 The term Mechilta (sn^"'DD), being the Aramaic equivalent 
 of the Hebrew word HID, means originally ''Measure", but in the 
 rabbinical language it signifies the method of the traditional in- 
 terpretation (Midrash), and then a collection of interpretations 
 of the law. 
 
 The work bearing that particular name contains a collec- 
 tion of rabbinical interpretations on several sections of the second 
 book of Moses; beginning with Ex. ch. XII, 1, it goes on tillch. 
 XXIII, 19. Of the remaining chapters it comments only on 
 XXXI, 12-n and on XXXY, 1-3. 
 
 Though principally of a legal character (Midrash Halacha), 
 it has also homiletical interpretations (Midrash Agada), 
 especially on Ex. XIII, 17-XIX, 25. 
 
 The Mechilta is divided into nine main sections (Masechtoth), 
 named according to the contents of the Bible passage which they 
 expound, as b^riDSI T^DDO/ nV^'^"! 'Dt2 etc. Each Masechta is 
 subdivided into chapters (Parashoth), the total number of which 
 is 11. 
 
 Passages from the Mechilta are occasionally quoted in the 
 Talmud, without hovv^ever mentioning the name of that book. 
 In the post-Talmudic literature it is mentioned as 'ii 5<n7''2D 
 ^N*^D'^V Some were therefore inclined to regard R. Ishmael 
 
 Tosephta with notes and text corrections, of which the first volume 
 is out, Wilna 1891. 
 
 Critical researches on the Tosephta are found in Frankl's Darke 
 Hamishna pp. B04-307 and in I. H.Weiss', Dor Dor etc. II pp. 217-225 ; 
 also in I. H. Duenner's Wesen and Ursprung der Tosephta, Amster- 
 dam 1874. 
 
Works kixdred to the Mishna 19 
 
 (fioiirishing in the beginning of the second century) as its author; 
 but against this opinion speaks the circumstance that the names 
 of teachers living much later are mentioned in the book. Modern 
 scholars hold that the Mechilta was originally a collection of 
 teachings of R. Ishmael and his school. This collection having 
 been brought from Palestine to Babylon, received there many in- 
 terpolations. In the form we possess it, the book belongs to the 
 fourth or fifth century/ 
 
 c. The Siphra. 
 
 § 9. 
 
 The Siphra (S1SD i. e. the book), also called Torath Coha- 
 nim, is a collection of traditional interpretations of the whole 
 book of Leviticus, introduced by an exposition of R. Ishmael's 
 thirteen hermeneutic rules. 
 
 Different from the Mechilta, the style of the Siphra is gen- 
 erally more argumentative, defending the traditional interpreta- 
 tions against possible objections. Both names of this book are 
 mentioned, and numerous passages thereof are quoted, in the 
 Talmud. The authorship of its essential parts is there ascribed 
 to R. Jehuda b. llai, a disciple of R. Akiba (min*' 'n S"1SD DnD 
 Sanhed. 86), and according to this statementthe collection origin- 
 ated in Palestine in the middle of the second century. But in 
 the course of time it was considerably'' increased by additions 
 from the hands of later teachers, especially those belonp-ing to 
 the school of Abba Areca and is therefore also called an •^2" S*'£D.'' 
 
 As before us, the book has two diflcrent divisions which are 
 
 ^ The latest editions of the IMechilta with critical introductions 
 and annotations were published by I. H. Weiss (Vienna .1885) and by 
 M. Friedmann (Vienna 1870.) 
 
 Critical researches on the Mechilta are also found in Frankel's 
 Monatschrift 1853, pp. 888 398, and Geigpr's Urschrift pp. 140, 152 t^qq. 
 and in his Zeitung 1871 pp. 8-28. I. H. Weiss Dor Dor 11, pp. 2-25-231. 
 
 " The latest edition of the Siihrawith the commentary of R 
 Abraham h. David of Posquieres (Rabtdj and annotations by I H. 
 Weiss was published Vienna 1862. 
 
 As to critical reseiirches on the Siphra, see Frankel, IMonat^scbrift 
 1854 and I. H. Weiss, in his Introduction to the Siphi-a, and in his Dor 
 Dor II p. 231-230. 
 
20 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 rather bewildering, one according to the customary Sabbath 
 lessons, Parashoth, subdivided into Perakim; the other according 
 to sections named after their main contorts and subdivided into 
 chapters termed Parasha or Parashata. 
 
 d. The Siphrb. 
 
 § 10. 
 
 The Siphre, or, as its fuller title reads, 2^ t^i ''^SD (the 
 books of the school of Rab), comprises the traditional interpret- 
 ations of the book of Numbers, beginning with chapter Y, and 
 of the whole book of Deuteronomy. The author of the Siphre on 
 Numbers was evidently not the same as the author of that on the 
 last book of the Pentateuch. The style of the former, being more 
 argumentative and discoursive, often resembles that of the Siphra, 
 while Siphre on Deuteronomy is generally brief, bearing more 
 resemblance to the Mechilta. The passages anonymously given 
 in the Siphre are ascribed in the Talmud to R. Simon b. Jochai, 
 one of the distinguished disciples ofR. Akiba (jl^ot^* 'n''n£D QHD 
 Sanhedidn 86a); but, as, on the one hand, many of those passages 
 can be traced back to the school of R. Ishmael,and, on the other 
 hand, teachers of a much later period are mentioned therein, 
 it is the opinion of modern scholars that the Siphre before us is 
 a composite of two different works which, like the Siphra, receiv- 
 ed its present shape in the Babylonian shools founded by Abba 
 Areca. 
 
 The Siphre is divided into sections corresponding to those 
 of the Sabbath lessons and subdivided into paragraphs, termed 
 Piskoth. That on Numbers has 161, and that on Deuterenomy 
 357 Piskoth.^ 
 
 e. Baraitha. 
 §11. 
 
 Besides the Tosephta, the Mechilta, the Siphra and the 
 Siphre just described, other collections of a similar character 
 existed during the Talmudical period. In the course of time 
 
 * The latest edition of the Siphre with annotations is that of M. 
 Friedmann, Vienna 1864. 
 
Works kindred to the Mishna. 21 
 
 they perished, but many hundred fragmentary passages thereof 
 are quoted in all parts of the Palestinian and Babylonian Ge- 
 mara. Such a passage quoted from those lost collections as well, 
 as from the Tosephta, Mechilta, Siphra and Siphre was termed 
 Baraitha (Sn''"'"l2); or Mathnitha Baraitha^ meaning an extrane- 
 ous Mishna. This term was used in order to distinguish those 
 passages from passages, in our Mish?ia^ that is, the authorized 
 Mishna of R. Jehuda Hanasi, compared with which they had 
 but a subordinate value. The Baraithoth are often found to be 
 conflicting with each other or with the authorized Mishna, and 
 in this case the Gemara usually displays, great ingenuity and 
 subtility in the attempt to reconcile them. In some instances, 
 however, one or the other Baraitha is declared to be spurious, i 
 
 » Some critical researches on the Baraitha are found in Frankel's 
 Darke Hamishna p. 311-313, and in I. H. Weiss, Dor Dor II p. 239-244. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE AUTHORITIES OF THE MISHKA. 
 §12. 
 
 The authorities mentioned in the Mishna and Baraitha as 
 having transmitted and developed the oral law belong to three 
 different periods, namely: 
 
 1. The period of Sopherim 
 
 2. The period of Zugoth^ and 
 
 3. The period of Tanaim. 
 
 a. Sopherim or scribes were the learned men who succeed- 
 ed Ezra during a period of about two hundred years. To them 
 many institutions and extensions of the Mosaic law are ascribed 
 D^IDID ''^31 /D'^nSlD niJpn. The Sopherim are also called collect- 
 ively n^nn nD33 ^^^'I'is the Men of the Great Synod. According 
 to tradition, this synod consisted of 120 members, but we have 
 no record of their names with the exception of Ezra, its founder, 
 and of Smion the Just (the high priest Simon I, between 310-292, 
 or his grandson Simon II, between 220-202 B. C.) who is said 
 to have been one of the last members of the Great Synod. 
 
 Antigonos of Socho^ a disciple of Simon the Just, was the 
 connecting link between this and the following period. 
 
 b. The word Zugoth (myiT), meaning the pairs (duumviri), 
 is the appellation of the leading teachers from Jose ben Joezer 
 till Hillel, of whom always two, at the same time, stood at the 
 head of the Sanhedrin, one as president (Nasi), and the other 
 as vice-president (Ab beth din). 
 
 The succession of these Zugoth was: 
 
 1. Jose ben Joezer and Jose ben Jochanan, flourishing at 
 the time of the Maccabean wars of independence. 
 
 2. Joshua b. Ferachia and Nitai of Arbela, flourishing at 
 the time of John Hyrcan. 
 
The Authorities of the Mishna. 23 
 
 3. Juda h. Tahai and Simon b. Shetach^ flourishing at the 
 time of Alexander Janai and queen Salome. 
 
 4. Shemaiah and Abtalion^ flourishing at the time of 
 Hyrcan II. 
 
 5. Hillel and Shamat\ flourishing at the time of king 
 Herod. 
 
 c. With the disciples of Hillel and Shamai begins the 
 period of Janaim^ which lasted about 210 years (from 10 to 220 
 Ch. Era). With the beginning of this period the title Rabbi 
 (my teacher) for the ordained teachers, and the title Rabban^ our 
 teacher) for the president of the Sanhedrin came in use. 
 
 In the Mishna, the term Tana (^:n), meaning a teacher of 
 the oral law, does not yet occur. Those teachers are there sig- 
 nified by generally adding the title of Rabbi to their names, or 
 by calling them collectively □''Drn the Sages, while the author- 
 ities of the preceding period are occasionally designated D'':pT 
 D^'iVw^in the former elders. It is first in the Gemara that the 
 term Tana (S^n) is applied to a teacher mentioned in the 
 Mishna and Baraitha, in contradistinction to the Amorai7n^ ex- 
 pounders of the Mishna, as the teachers after R. JehudaHanasi 
 are called. 
 
 The period of the Tanaim is generally divided into 5 or 6 
 minor sections or generations. The purpose of this division is 
 to show which teachers developed their principal activity con- 
 temporaneously, though the actual lifetime of some of them ex- 
 tended to more than one generation. 
 
 The following chronological tables contain the names only 
 of the more prominent teachers of each generation. Every 
 table is followed by short biographical sketches of the teachers 
 mentioned therein.^ 
 
 * Fuller characteristics of the lives and teachings of the principal 
 Tanaim are given in the following works: 
 
 Graetz, History of the Jews, Vol. IV. 
 
 Z. Frankel, Darke Hamishna. 
 
 I. H. Weiss, Zur Geschichte der juedischen Tradition, Vol. I. 
 and II. 
 
 Jacob Bruell, Mebo Hamishna, Vol. I. 
 
 J. Hamburger, Koal Eucyclopaedie, Vol. IL Die Taknudischen 
 Artikel. 
 
 M. Braunsohweiger, Die Lehrer der Mishnah. 
 
24 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 The first Generation of Tanaim. 
 § 13. 
 
 The principal Tanaim of the first generation, which lasted 
 about seventy years \ from 10 to 80, C. E., are: 
 
 1. The School of Shamai, and the School of Hillel 
 
 2. Akabia ben Mahalalel. 
 
 3. Rabban Gamaliel the Elder. 
 
 4. Rabbi Chanina, Chief of the Priests. 
 
 5. R. Simon ben Gamaliel. 
 
 6. R. Jochanan ben Zaccai. 
 
 Characteristics and Biographical Sketches. 
 
 1. The School of Shamai and the School of Hillel were founded 
 by the disciples of the great teachers whose names they bear. Follow- 
 ing the principles of their masters, they differed widely in their opinions 
 on many legal questions; the School of Shamai, in general, taking a 
 rigorous, and the school of Hillel a more lenient view of the question. 
 In their frequent controversies the School of Shamai, having been 
 founded already during the life time of Hillel, is always mentioned 
 first. Of individual teachers belonging to either of these two schools 
 only a very few are occasionally mentioned by name. Both schools exist- 
 ed during the whole period of the first generation, and the antagonism 
 of their followers extended even to the middle of the subpequent gener- 
 ation. 
 
 2. Akahia ben Mahalalel Of this teacher who flourished 
 shortly after Hillel only a few opinions and traditions are recorded. 
 According to what is related of him in Mishna Eduyoth V, 6. 7, he 
 was a noble character with unyielding principles. 
 
 3. Rabban Gamaliel the Elder. He was a son of E. Simon, and 
 grandson of Hillel whom he succeeded in the office of Nasi. Many 
 important ordinances (niJpn) of the Rabbinical law are ascribed to him 
 He died eighteen years before the destruction of Jerusalem. Th 
 epithet "the Elder" generally added to his name, is to distinguish him 
 
 * This comparatively great length of the first generation is easily 
 explained by the circumstance, that it refers to the duration of the pre 
 vailing Schools of Shamai and [Jillel,and not, as in the snl)sequent gen 
 erations, to that of the activity of a single leading teacher. 
 
The Authorities of the Mishna. 25 
 
 from his grandson Gamaliel of Jabne, who flourished in the following 
 generation. 
 
 4. Rahhi Chanina, Chief of the Priests, or the proxy of the high- 
 priest. He as well as "the court of Priests" D'jns b\y T'3 are inciden- 
 tally mentioned in the Mishna in connection with laws concerning the 
 sacrifices and the temple service. 
 
 5. B. Simon ben Gamaliel. He was the son and successor of Rab- 
 ban Gamaliel the Elder, and was executed by the Romans in the time 
 of the destruction of Jerusalem. Belonging to the school of Hillel, 
 his individual opinions in questions of law are but rarely recorded in 
 the Mishna. He must not be confounded with his grandson who had 
 the same name and belonged to the fourth generation of Tanaim. 
 
 6. R. Jochanan h. Zaccai. This distinguisl.ed teacher was one of 
 the youngest disciples of Hillel, occupied a high ])osition already be- 
 fore the destruction of Jerusalem, and afterwards became the founder 
 and head of the celebrated academy of Jabne (Jamnia). 
 
 Of other authorities belonging to the first generation of Tanaim, 
 mention must be made of Adman, Chanan and ISachum the Mede, who 
 were civil judges before the time of the destruction of Jerusalem and 
 whose legal opinions are occasionally recorded in the Mishna. 
 
 The Second Generation of Tanaim, 
 §14. 
 
 This generation lasted about forty years, from 80 to 120. 
 The principal Tanaim belonging to it are: 
 
 1. Rabban Gamaliel II (of Jabne). 
 
 2. Rabbi Zadok. 
 
 3. R. Dosa (b. Harchinas). 
 
 4. R. Eliezer b. Jacob. 
 
 6. R. Eliezer (b. Hyrcanos). 
 
 6. R. Joshua (b. Chanania). 
 
 7. R. Elazar b. Azaria. 
 
 8. R. Juda b. Bathyra. 
 
 Characteristics and Biographical Sketches. 
 
 1. Rabban Gamaliel II. He was a grandson of Gamaliel the Elder; 
 after the death of R. Jochanan b. Zaccai he became president of the 
 
26 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 academy of Jabne,and like his ancestors, he bore the title Nasi [Prince); 
 with the Romans, Patriarch. In order to distinguish him from his 
 grandfather, he received the surname Gamaliel of Jabne, or the 
 Second. 
 
 3. R. Zadok. Of him it is related that he, in anticipation of the 
 destruction of the Temple, fasted for forty successive years. He then 
 removed to Jabne where he as well as his son, R. Eliezerb. Zadok, be- 
 longed to the distinguished teachers. 
 
 3. R. Dosa b. Harchinas belonged to the school of Hillel, and 
 removed with R. Jochanan b. Zaccai from Jerusalem to Jabne where 
 he reached a very old age. He stood in such high esteem that his most 
 distinguished colleagues appealed to his opinion in doubtful cases. 
 
 4. R. Eliezer h. Jacob was head of a school, and in possession of 
 traditions concerning the structure and interior arrangements of the 
 temple. He is also mentioned with commendation as to his method of 
 instruction whicn was "concise and clear" ("ipjl 2p). There was also an- 
 other Tana by a similar name who flourished in the fourth generation. 
 
 5. R. Eliezer b. Hyrkanos,in the Mishna called simply R. Eliezer, 
 was one of the most distinguished disciples of R. Jochanan b. Zaccai 
 who characterized him as "the lime cemented cistern that does not 
 lose a drop''. He was a faithful conservator of handed-down decisions 
 and opposed to their slightest modification and to any new deductions 
 to be made therefrom. His school was in Lydda, in South Judea. 
 Though formerly a disciple of the Hillelites, he inclined to the views 
 of the Sbamaites and consequently came in conflict with his colleagues. 
 Being persistent in his opinion, and conforming to it even in practice, 
 he was excommunicated b}' his own brother-in-law, the patriarch 
 Gamaliel II. 
 
 6. R. Joshua b. Chanania, in general called simply R. Joshua, 
 uas likewise one of the favored disciples of R. Jochanan b. Zaccai. 
 Shortly before the destruction of the Temple he left Jerusalem with 
 his teacher, after whose death he founded a separate school in Bekiin. 
 As member of the Sanbedrin in Jabne, he participated conspicuously 
 in its deliberations and debates. His discussions were mostly with 
 R. Eliezer to whose unyielding conservatism he formed a striking con- 
 trast, as he represented the more rational and conciliatory element of 
 that generation, and combined with great learning the amiable virtues 
 
The Authorities of the Mishna. 2T 
 
 of gentleness, modesty and placability which characterized the Hil- 
 lelites. As lie, on several occasions, was humiliated by the Nasi Gamaliel 
 II with whom he differed on some questions, the members of the San- 
 hedrin resented this insult of their esteemed colleague by deposing the 
 offender from his dignity and electing another president. It was 
 only through the interference of the appeased R. Joshua that R. Gam- 
 aliel, who apologized for his conduct, was again restored to his office. 
 
 7. R. Elazar b. Azaria descended from a noble family whose 
 pedigree was traced up to Ezra the Scribe. Already while a young 
 man, he enjoyed such a reputation for his great learning that he was 
 made president of the academy at Jabne in place of the deposed R. 
 Gamaliel. When the latter was reinstated, R. Elazar was appointed 
 as vice-president. His controversies were mostly with R. Joshua, R. 
 Tarphon, R. Ishmael and K. Akiba. On account of the noble virtues 
 M^hich he combined with his great learning he was compared to "a 
 vessel filled with aromatic spices", and R. Joshua said of him: "a gen- 
 eration having a man like R. Elazar b. Azaria, is not orphaned". 
 
 8. R. Juda b. Bathyra had a school in Nisibis (in Assyria) 
 already at the time when the temple of Jerusalem was still in exist- 
 ence. He was probably a descendant of the family Bene Bathyra who 
 were leaders of the Sanhedrin under king Herod, and who resigned 
 that office in favor of Hillel. Several other Tanaim had the same 
 family name, as R. Joshua b. Bathyra, R. Simon b. Bathyra and one 
 called simply Ben Bathyra. 
 
 Of other teachers belonging to the second generation we have yet 
 to mention R. Nechunia b. Hakana who was the teacher of R. Ishmael. 
 and Nachum of Gimzo who introduced the hermeneutic rule of "ni 
 DI^Cl (extension and limitation) which was later further developed 
 by his great disciple R. Akiba. 
 
28 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 The third Generation of Tanaim. 
 
 § 15. 
 
 Several Teachers of the tliird generation, which lasted from 
 the 3' ear 120 till about 130, flourished already in the preceding 
 one. The principal teachers are: 
 
 1. R. Tarphon. 
 
 2. R. Ishmael. 
 
 3. R. Akiba. 
 
 4. R. Jochanan b. Nuri. 
 
 5. R. Jose the Galilean. 
 
 6. R. Simon b. Nanos. 
 
 7. R. Juda b. Baba. 
 
 8. R. Jochanan b. Broka. 
 
 Characteristics and Biographical Sketches. 
 
 1. R. Tarphon, or Tryplion, of Lydda. He is s^id to have been 
 inclined to the vie^vs of the School of Shamai. On account of his 
 gi-eat learning he was called * -the teacher of Israel"; besides, he was 
 praised for his great charitable works. His legal discussions were 
 mostly with his colleague R. Akiba. 
 
 2. R. Ishmael (b. Elisha) was probably a grandson of the high 
 priest Ishmael b. Elisha who was condemned to death by Titus together 
 with the patriarch Simon b. Gamaliel I. When still a boy, he was 
 made a captive and brought to Rome, where R. Joshua who happened 
 to come there on a mission,redeemed him at a high ransom and brought 
 him back to Palestine. R. Nechunia b. Hakana is mentioned as one 
 of his principal teachers. When grown to manhood, he became a 
 member of the Sanhedrin and was highly revered by his colleagues. 
 He is named among those who emigrated with the Sanhedrin from 
 Jabne to Usha. His residence was in South Judea in a place called 
 Kephar Aziz. His academical controversies were mostly with R. 
 Akiba to whose artificial methods of interpreting the law he was 
 strongly opposed, on the principle that the Thora, being composed in 
 the usual language of man, must be interpreted in a plain and ration- 
 al way. As guiKng rules of interpretation he accepted only the seven 
 logical rules which had been laid down by Hillel, which he however. 
 
The Authorities of the Mishna. 29 
 
 by some modifications and stibdivisionR, enlarged to thirteen. Of these 
 thirteen'rulea we shall treat in the second part of this work. A separate 
 school which he founded was continued after his death by his dis- 
 ciples and was known by the name of "Be R. Ishmael". Of the book 
 il/(3c//?7^a which is ascribed to R. Ishmael and his school we have spoken 
 above (p. 18). 
 
 3. R. Akiha (b. Joseph) was the most prominent among the 
 Tanaim. He is said to have descended from a proselyte family and to 
 have been altogether illiterate up to the age of his manhood. Filled with 
 the desire to acquire the knowledge of the law, he entered a school 
 and attended the lectures of the distinguished teachers of that time, 
 especially of R. Eliezer b. Hyrkanos, R. Joshua b. Chanania, and of 
 Nacluim of Gimzo. Subsequently he founded a school in B'ne Brak, 
 near Jabne, and became a member of the Sanhedrin in the last men- 
 tioned city. Through his keen intellect, his vast learning and his 
 energetic activity he wielded a great influence in developing 
 and diffusing the traditional law. He arranged the accumulated 
 material of that law in a proi:)er system and methodical order, and 
 enriched its substance with many valuable deductions of his own. His 
 methodical arrangement and division of that material was completed 
 by his disciple R. Meir, and la+or on became the groundwork of the 
 Mishna compiled by R. Jehuda Hanasi. Besides, he introduced a new 
 method of interpreting the Scriptures which enabled him to find a 
 biblical basis for almost every provision of the oral law. This ingen- 
 ious method, which will be described in the II Part of this book, was 
 admired by his contemporaries, and notwithstanding the opposition of 
 some of his colleagues, generally adopted in addition to the 13 hermen- 
 eutic rules of R. Ishmael. R. Akiba's legal opinions are very frequently 
 recorded in all parts of the Mishna and in the kindred works. His acad- 
 emical discussions are mostly with his former teachers R. Eliezer, R. 
 Joshua and with his colleagues R. Tarphon, 11. Jochanan b, Nuri, R. 
 Jose the Galilean and others. 
 
 R. Akiba died a martyr to religion and patriotism. Having been 
 a stout supporter of the cause of Bar Cochba, he was cruelly executed 
 by the R(jmans for publicly teaching the Law contrary to the edict of 
 the emperor Hadrian. 
 
 4. jK. Jochanan b. Nuri was a colleague of R. Akiba with wliom 
 he frequently differed on questions of the law. In his youth beseems 
 to have been a disciple of R. Gamaliel H. for whose memory he always 
 
30 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 retained a warm veneration. He presided over a college in Beth She- 
 arim, a place near Sepphoris in Galilee. 
 
 5. R. Jose the Galilean was a very distinguished teacher. Of 
 his youth and education nothing is known. At his first appearance in 
 the Sanhedrin of Jabne, he participated in a debate with R Tarphon 
 and with R. Akiba and displayed such great learning and sagacity 
 that he attracted general attention. From this debate his reputation as 
 a teacher was established. He was an authority especially in the laws 
 concerning the sacrifices and the temple service. His discussions were 
 mostly with R. Akiba, R. Tarphon and R. Elazar b. Azariah. Of his 
 domestic life it is related that he had the bad fortune of having an ill- 
 tempered wife, who treated him so meanly that he was compelled to 
 divorce her, but learning that she in her second marriage lived in great 
 inisery,he generously provided her and her husband with all the neces- 
 saries of life. One of his sons, R. Eteazar b. R. Jose the Galilean, 
 became a distinguished teacher in the following generation and estab- 
 lished the thirty two hermeneutic rules of the Agada. 
 
 6. jB. Simon &. Nanos, also called simply Ben Nanos, was a 
 great authority especially in the civil law, so that R. Ishmael recom- 
 mended to all law students to attend the lectures of this profound 
 teacher. His legal controversies were mostly with R. Ishmael and R. 
 Akiba. 
 
 7. R. Judah b. Baba, who on account of his piety was called 
 the Chasid, is noteworthy not only as a distinguished teacher but also 
 as a martyr to Judaism. Contrary to the Hadrianic edict which, under 
 extreme penalty, prohibited the ordination of teachers, he ordained 
 seven disciples of R. Akiba as Rabbis, and for this act was stabbed to 
 death by the Roman soldiers. 
 
 8. R. Joclianan b. Brolca was an authority especially in the civil 
 law. Also his son R. Ishmael was a distinguished teacher who flourish- 
 ed in the following generation . Of other teachers belonging to this 
 generation the following are to be mentioned. R, Elazar (or Eliezer) 
 of Modin, an authority in Agada interpretation. R. Mathia b. Charash 
 who, formerly a disciple of R. Eliezer b. Hyrkanos, founded a school in 
 the city of Rome and thus was the first teacher who transplanted the 
 knowledge of the rabbinical law from Asia to Europe; further, several 
 of R, Akiba's earlier disciples, especially (Simon) Ben Zoma and 
 
The Authorities of the Mishna. 31 
 
 (Simon) BcnAzai, both of whom, besides being distinguished in the 
 law, were also deeply engaged in the tl>eosophic speculations of those 
 times. 
 
 The fourth Generation of Tanaim. 
 
 § 16. 
 
 This generation extended from the death of R. Akiba to 
 the death of the patriarch R. Simon b. Gamaliel II, from the 
 year 139 to about 165. Almost all loading teachers of this ge- 
 neration belong to the latter disciples of R. Akiba. 
 
 1. R. Meir. 
 
 2. R. Jehuda (ben Bai). 
 
 3. R. Jose (ben Chalafta). 
 
 4. R. Simon (b. Jochai). 
 
 5. R. Elazar (b. Shamua). 
 
 6. R. Jochanan the Sandelar. 
 T. R. Elazar b. Jacob. 
 
 8. R. Nehemia. 
 
 9. R. Joshua b. Korcha. 
 10. R. Simon b. Gamaliel. 
 
 Characteristics and Biographical Sketches. 
 1. R. Meir, the most prominent among the numerous disciples 
 of R. Akiba, was a native of Asia Minor and gained a subsistence as 
 a skilf nil cop:y ist of sacred Scripture. At first, he entered the acad- 
 emy of R. Akiba, but finding himself not sufficiently prepared to 
 grasp the lectures of this great teacher, he attended, for some time, 
 the school of R. Ishmael, where he acquired an extensive knowledge 
 of the law. Returning then to R. Akiba and becoming his constant and 
 favored disciple, he developed great dialectical powers. R. Akiba 
 soon recognized his worth and preferred him to other disciples by 
 ordaining him at an early date. This ordination was later renewed 
 byR. Judahb. Baba. On account of the Hadrianic persecutions, R. Meir 
 had to flee from Judea, but after the repeal of those edicts, he 
 returned and joined his colleagues in re-establishing the Sanhedrin 
 in the city of Usha, in Galilee. His acarL-^niy was in Emmaus, near 
 Tiberias, and for a time also in Ardiscus near Damascus where a large 
 
32 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 circle of disciples gathered around him. Under the patriarch R. 
 Simon b. Gamaliel II he occupied the dignity of a Chacham (advising 
 Sage), in which office ho was charged with the duty of pre- 
 paring the subjects to be disci ssed in tne Sanhedrin. A conflict 
 which arose between him and the patriarch seems to have induced 
 him to leave Palestine and return to his native country, Asia Minor, 
 where he died. R. Meir's legal opinions are mentioned almost in every 
 Masechta of the Mishna and Baraitha. His greatest merit was that 
 he continued the labors of R. Akiba in arranging the rich material 
 of the oral law according to subjects, and in this way prepared the 
 great Mishna compilation of R. Judah Hanasi. Besides being one of 
 the most distingued teachers of the law, he was also a very popular 
 lecturer (Agadist) who used to illustrate his lectures by interesting 
 fables and parables. Of his domestic life it is known that he was 
 married to Beruria the learned daughter of the celebrated teacher 
 and martyr R. Chananiah b. Teradyon. The pious resignation which 
 he and his noble wife exhibited at the sudden death of their two 
 promising sons has been immortalized by a popular legend in the 
 Midrash. 
 
 2. R. Jehuda h. Ilaiia generally called in the Mishna simply 
 R. Jehuda. After having received instruction in the law from his 
 father who had been a disciple of R. Eliezer b. Hyrkanos, he attended 
 the lectures of R. Tarphon and became then one of the distinguished 
 disciples of R. Akiba. On account of his great eloquence he is called 
 D-llQl^n ^ai "The first among the speakers". Also his piety, mod- 
 esty and prudence are highly praised. He gained a modest subsistence 
 by a mechanical trade, in accordance with his favored maxims: "Labor 
 honors man", and "He who does not teach his son a trade, teaches 
 him, as it were, robbery". Having been one of the seven disciples who 
 after the death of R. Akiba were ordained by R. Juda b. Baba contrary 
 to the Hadrianic edict, he had to flee. After three years he returned 
 with his colleagues to Usha and became one of the prominent mem- 
 bers of the resuscitated Sanhedrin. The patriarch R. Simon ben Gama- 
 liel honored him greatly, and appointed him as one of his advisers. 
 As expounder of the law he was a gre it authority, and is very often 
 quoted in all parts of the Mishna and Baraitha. His legal opinions 
 generally prevail, when differing from those of his colleagues R. Meir 
 and R. Simon. To him is also ascribed the authorship of the essential 
 
The Authorities of the Mtshi^a, 53 
 
 part of the Siphra. (See above p. 19). The Agada of the Talmud records 
 many of his beautiful sayings which characterize him not only as a 
 noble-hearted teacher, but also as a sound and clear-headed interpreter 
 of Scriptures. He, for instance, denied the literal meaning of the 
 resurrection of the dead bones spoken of in Ezekiel ch. XXXVII, but 
 declared it to be merely a poetical figure for Israel's rejuvenation (Talm 
 Sanhedrin 72 b.). 
 
 R. Jehuda had two learned sons who flourished as teachers in the 
 following generation. 
 
 3. R. Jose h. Chalafta, in the Mishna called simply R. Jose, was 
 from Sepphoris where already his learned father had established a 
 school. Though by trade a tanner, he became one of the most disting- 
 uished teachers of his time. He was a disciple of R. Akiba and of 
 R. Tarphon. Line his colleagues he was ordained by R. Juda b. Baba 
 and, on this account, had to flee to the south of Palestine, whence he 
 later on returned with them to Usha. For having kept silent, when 
 in his presence R. Simon made a slighting remark against the Roman 
 government, he was banished to Asia Minor. When permitted to 
 return, he settled in his native city Sepphoris where he died in a high 
 age. Besides being a great authority in the law, whose opinions prevail 
 against those of his colleagues R. Meir, R. Jehuda and R. Simon, he 
 was an historian to whom the authorship of the chronological book 
 Seder Olam is ascribed. 
 
 4. R. Simon b. Jochai from Galilee, in the Mishna called simply R. 
 Simon, was likewise one of the most distinguished disciples of R. 
 Akiba whose lectures he attended during thirteen years. "Be satisfied 
 that I and thy creator know thy powers", were the words with which 
 this teacher comforted him, when he felt somewhat slighted on 
 account of a certain preference given to his younger colleague R. Meir. 
 He shared the fate of his colleagues in being c-ompelled to flee after 
 ordination. Afterwards, he joined them at the new seat of the 
 Sanhedrin in Usha. On a certain occasion he gave vent to his bitter 
 feeling against the Romans, which was reported to the Roman governor 
 who condemned him to death. He, however, escaped this fate by 
 concealing himsrlf in a cave where he is said to have remained for 
 several years together with his son, engaged in the study of the law, 
 and subsisting on the fruit of the carob-trees which abounded there 
 in the neighborhood. In the meantime political affairs had taken a 
 
34 HiSTOIlICAL AND LITERARY IXTRODUCTION. 
 
 favorable turn so that he had no longer to fear any persecution; he left 
 his hiding place and reopened his academy at TeTcoa, in Galilee, where 
 a circle of disciples gathered around him. }Ie survived all his col- 
 leagues, and in his old age was delegated to Rome, where he succeeded 
 in obtaining from the emperor (Marcus Aurelius) the repeal of some 
 edicts against the Jewish religion. 
 
 In the interpretation of the law, R. Simon departed from the 
 method of i\is teacher R. Akiba, as he inclined to the view of R. 
 Islmiael that *'the Thora speaks the common language of man", and 
 consequently regarded logical reasoning as the proper starting point 
 for legal deductions, instead of pleonastic words, syllables and letters. 
 In accordance with this sound principle, he tried to investigate the 
 evident motive of different biblical laws, and to make conclusions 
 therefrom for their proper application. ^ In regard to treating and 
 arranging the oral law, however, he followed the method of R. Akiba 
 in subsuming various provisions under guiding rules and principles. 
 R. Simon is regarded as the author of the Siphre, though that work in 
 its present shape shows many additions by the hands of later authorities. 
 (See above p. 20). 
 
 5. R. Elazar b. Shamua, in the Mishna simply R. Elazar, was 
 among those of R. Akiba' s disciples who in consequence of the Hadrian 
 edicts went to the South, whence he went to Nisibis. He does not, 
 however, appear to have joined his colleagues when they gathered 
 again at Llsha. He is regarded as a great authority in the law. The 
 place of his academy is not known, but it is stated that his school was 
 always overcro\A ded by disciples eager to hear his learned lectures. 
 Among his disciples was also the later patriarch R. Jehuda. On a 
 journey, he visited his former colleague R. Meir at Ardiscos. in Asia 
 Minor, and with him had discussions on important questions of the 
 law which are recorded in the Mishna and Baraitha. 
 
 6. R. Jochanan the Sandelar had this surname probably from 
 his trade in sandals. Born in Alexandria in Egypt, he came to Palestine 
 to attend the lectures of R. Akiba, and was so faithful a disciple that 
 he visited this teacher even in prison, in order to receive instruction 
 from him. His legal opinions are occasionaly recorded in the Mishna 
 as well as in the Tosephta and Baraitha. 
 
 > See Talm. B.- Metzda 115 a and Sanhedrin 21 a. 
 
The Authorities of the Mishxa. 35 
 
 7. R. Elazar (or Eliezer) b. Jdcob was a disciple of K. Akiba and 
 later a member of the Saiihedrin in Uslia. This teacher must not be 
 confounded with a former teacher by that name who flourished in the 
 second generation (See above p. 26 j. 
 
 8. R. Nechemia belonged to the la§t disciples of R. Akiba and was 
 an authority especially in the sacrificial law and in the laws concerning 
 levitical purification. His controversies are mostly with R. Juda b. 
 Ilai. He is said to have compiled a Mishna - collection which was 
 embodied in the Tose])hta. 
 
 9. R. Joshua h. Korcha is supposed by some to have been a son 
 of R. Akiba who, on one occasion, is called by such a surname (meaning 
 the bald headj ; but this supposition is very improbable, for it would 
 be strange that the son of so illubtrious a man should not rather have 
 been called by his father's proper name, and that he should never have 
 alluded to his celebrated parent or to any of his teachings. * 
 
 R. Joshua b. K. belonged to the authorities of this generation, 
 though only a few of his opinions are recorded in the Mishna. 
 
 10. R. Simon h. Oanialiel was the son and successor of the 
 patriarch (Gamaliel II of Jabne. In his youth, he witnessed the fall of 
 Bethar, and escaped the threatened arrest by flight. After the death 
 of the emperor Hadrian, he returned to Jabne where he in connection 
 with some teachers, reopened an academy, and assumed the hereditary 
 dignity of a patriarch. As the returning disciples of R. Akiba, who were 
 the leading teachers of that generation, preferred/Usha as the seat of the 
 new Sanhedrin, R. Simon was obliged to transfer his academy to that 
 city, and appointed R. Nathan as Ab Beth-din (vice-president) and R. 
 Meir as Chacham (advising sage, or speaker). Both of these two officers 
 Lad to retire however, when found planning his deposal on account of 
 some marks of distinction introduced in order to raise the patiiachal 
 dignity. He did not enjoy the privilege of his predecessors to be titled 
 Rabhan (our teacher), but like the other teacliers, he was simply called 
 Rabbi (my teacher) ^probably because many of his contemporaries were 
 
 » That R. Akiba had a son by the name of R. Joshua is stated in 
 aBaraitha (Pesachim 112a and Shebdotli 6a); but the identity of this 
 son witli R. Joshua b. Korcha is conclusively disproved by the Tosapli- 
 ist Rabenu Tarn in his remarks on Sabbath 15Ua and B Bathra 113a, 
 
 ^ Tbtre are, however, some passages in the Mishna and Gemara 
 in which he is called Rabban, as Gittin 74a; B. Bathra 113a; Arachin 
 28a. 
 
33 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 superior to him in learning. Still, his legal opinions, which are fre- 
 quently quoted in the Mishna and Baraitha, give evidence that he waa 
 a man of considerable learning and of sound and clear judgment as 
 well as of noble principles. He introduced several legal provisions for 
 the protection of the rights of women and slaves and for the general 
 welfare of the community. All his opinions expressed in the Mishna, 
 with the exception of only three cases, are regarded by later teachers 
 as authoritative (Halacha). His discussions recorded in the Mishna and 
 Baraitha are mostly held with his celebrated son R. J ehuda Hanasi. R. 
 Simon b. Gamaliel appears to have been acquainted also with the Greek 
 language and sciences. 
 
 Of other authorities belonging to this generation, we have to 
 mention: Ahha Saul, R. Elazar b.Zadok. and especially R. Ishmael 
 the son of R. Jochanan b. Broka. 
 
 Apart from the great circle of teachers mentioned abo^e, the 
 disciples of R. Ishmael b. Elisha formed a school in the extreme South 
 of Ju Jea (Daiom) where they continued the methods of their teacher. 
 Of this separate school, called Debe R. Ishmael, only two members are 
 mentioned by name: R. Josiah and R. Jonathan. 
 
 The Fifth Generation of Tanaim. 
 § 1^. 
 This generation extends from the death of R. Simon b. 
 Gamaliel II to the death of R. Jehuda Hanasi (from 165 to 
 about 200.) 
 
 The following are the most prominent teachers of this gen- 
 eration. 
 
 1. R. Nathan (the Babylonian). 
 
 2. Symmachos. 
 
 3. R. Jehuda Hanasi (the patriarcli), called simply 
 Rabbi. 
 
 4. R. Jose b. Juda. 
 
 5. R. Elazar b. Simon. 
 
 6. R. Simon b. Elazar. 
 Characteristics and Biographical Sketches. 
 
 1. R. Nathan was the son of one of the exilarchs in Babylon, and 
 probably received his education in his native country. For some 
 
The Authorities of the M«shna. 37 
 
 unknown reasons he emigrated to Judea, and on account of his great 
 learning he was appointed by the patriarch R. Simon b. Gamaliel 
 to the dignity of Ab-Beth-din (chief Justice or vice-president) in the 
 Sanhedrin of Usha. He had to retire from this oflfice because of his 
 and R. Meir's dissension with the patriarch, but was soon reinstated 
 and became reconciled with the Synhedrial president who held him in 
 high esteem. Also the succeeding patriarch R. Jehuda, with whom he 
 had many discussions on questions of the law, speaks of him with great 
 respect. R.Nathan was not only an authorityin the rabbinical law, espec- 
 ially in jurisprudence, but appears also to have been well versed in mathe- 
 matics, astronomy and other sciences. To him is ascribed the authorship 
 of Aboth de R. Nathan, which is a kind of Toseplita to Pirke Aboth. 
 
 3. Symmachos was a prominent disciple of R. Meir and disting- 
 uished for his great dialectical powers. After the death of his teacher, 
 he as well as other disciples of R. Meir were excluded from the academy 
 of R. Jehuda Hanasi, as they were charged of indulging in sophistical 
 disputations in order to display their dialectical sagacity, instead of 
 seeking after truth. Nevertheless the Mishna as well as the Tosephta 
 makes mention of the opinions of Symmachos. His renown lay in the 
 rabbinical jurisprudence in which he laid down certain principles often 
 referred to in the Talmud. 
 
 3. B. Jehuda {Judo) Hanasi, by way of eminence simply called 
 Rabbi, was a son of the patriarch R. Simon b. Gamaliel II, and is said 
 to have been born on the same day when R. Akiba was executed. His 
 principal teachers were R. Simon b. Jochai and R. Elazar b. Shamua 
 under whose guidance his intellectual capacity and splendid talents 
 early developed. Beside his immense knowledge of the whole range 
 of the traditional law, he had a liberal education in secular branches and 
 was especially acquainted with the Greek language which he preferred 
 to the Syriac, the popular language of Palestine at that time. After 
 the death of his father he succeeded him in the dignity of patriarch* 
 and became the chief authority eclipsing all other teachers of that 
 generation. Though blessed with great riches, he preferred to live in 
 a simple style and applied his wealth to the maintenance of his numer- 
 ous pupils and to charitable works. The seat of his academy was first 
 at Beth-Shearim, afterward at Sepphoris and also at Tiberias. Among 
 his most distinguished disciples were: R. Chiya; (Simon) bar Kappara; 
 
S8 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 Levi bar Sissi; R. Abba Areca, later called Rab; Mar Samuel, and many- 
 others. He is said to have been in a friendly relation with one of the 
 Roman emperors, either Marcus Aurelius or, more probably, Lucius 
 Verus Antoninus. By virtue of his authority R. Jehuda abolished 
 several customs and ceremonies which though sanctified by age had 
 become impracticable through the change of limes and circumstances. 
 His most meritorious work by which he erected for himself a monu. 
 ment of enduring fame was the completion of the Mishna compilation 
 which henceforth became the authoritative code of the traditional law 
 and superseded all similar compilations made by former teachers. 
 
 4. R. Jose hen Juda (b. Ilai) belonged to the great teachers of 
 that generation and was a friend of R. Jehuda Hanasi. His legal 
 opinions are frequently recorded in the Mishna as well as in the 
 Tosephta. 
 
 5. E. Elazar h, Simon (b. Jochai) was a disciple of R. Simon b. 
 Gamaliel and of R. Joshua b. Korcha. Although an authority in the 
 rabbinical law to whom even the patriarch sometimes yielded, he 
 incurred the severest censure of his colleagues for having, on a certain 
 occasion, lent his assistance to the Romans in persecuting some Jewish 
 freebooters. 
 
 6. R. Simon h. Elazar (probably E. b. Shamua) was a disciple of 
 R. Meir whose opinions he often quotes. He established several import- 
 ant principles, especially in the civil law. 
 
The Authorities of the Mishna. 8^ 
 
 The sixth Generation of Tanaim. 
 
 §18. 
 
 To this generation belong the younger contemporaries and 
 disciples of R. Juda Hanasi. They are not mentioned in the 
 Mishna, but in the Tosephta and Baraitha, and are therefore 
 termed semi-Tanaim, who form a connecting link between the 
 period of Tanaim and that of the Amoraim. Their names are: 
 
 1. 
 
 Plimo. 
 
 2. 
 
 Ise b. Juda. 
 
 3. 
 
 R. Elazar b. Jose. 
 
 4. 
 
 R. Ishmael bar Jose, 
 
 6. 
 
 R. Juda b. Lakish. 
 
 6. 
 
 R. Chiya. 
 
 1. 
 
 R. Acha. 
 
 8. 
 
 R. Abba (Areca). 
 
 The most prominent among these semi-Tanaim were R. Chiya and 
 R. Abba (Areca). 
 
 1. R. Chiya (bar Abba) the elder, which epithet is to distinguish 
 him from a later Amora by the same mame, was a Babylonian who 
 came at an already advanced age to Palestine where he became the 
 most distinguished disciple and friend of R. Jehuda Hanasi. He and 
 his disciple R. Oshaya (or Hoshaya) are regarded as the principal authors 
 or compilers of the Tosephta (see above p. 17). 
 
 2. R. Abba (Areca) a nephew of R. Chiya was likewise a Babyl- 
 onian and a disciple of R. Jehuda Hanasi, after whose death he 
 returned to his native country where, under the historical name of Rab, 
 he became the principal Amora. (See the following chapter). 
 
 Of other distinguished teachers flourishing in this generation and 
 in the beginning of the period of the Amoraim we have to mention 
 especially R. Janai (the elder) and R. Jonathan (the elder). The 
 former lived in Sepphoris and was one of the teachers of R. Jochanan 
 bar Naphachi, the greatest among the Palestinian Amoraim. 
 
CHAPTER lY. 
 
 THE EXPOUNDERS OF THE MISHNA. 
 
 § 19. 
 
 As the Mishna compilation of R. Jehuda Hanasi became 
 the authoritative code of the oral Law, the activity of the 
 teachers was principally devoted to expounding this code. This 
 was done as well in the academies of Tiberias^ Sepphorts, Caesarea 
 in Palestine, as in those of Nahardea^ Sura, and later of Pumba- 
 ditha and some other seats of learning in Babylonia. The main 
 object of the lectures and discussions in those academies was to 
 interpret the often very brief and concise expression of the 
 Mishna, to investigate its reasons and sources, to reconcile seem- 
 ing contradictions, to compare its canons with those of the Ba- 
 raithoth.and to apply its decisions and established principles to 
 new cases not yet provided for. The teachers who were engaged 
 in this work which finally became embodied in the Gemara, are 
 called Amoraim^ meaning speakers, interpreters, expounders. ^ 
 They were not as independent in their legal opinions and de- 
 cisions as their predecessors, the Tanaim and semi-Tanaim, as 
 they had not the authority to contradict Halachoth and prin- 
 ciples accepted in the Mishna or Baraitha. The Palestinian 
 Amoraim having generally been ordained by the Nasi had the 
 
 * In a more restricted meaning the term ^7m)ra(from *iDX to say, 
 to speak) signifies the same as Methurgeman (pjn^riD the interpreter), 
 that is the ofiBicer in the academies who, standing at the side of the 
 lecturer or presiding teacher, had to announce loudly and explain to 
 the large assembly what the teacher just expressed briefly and in a 
 low voice. 
 
 The term Tana, which generally applies only to the teachers men- 
 tioned in the Mishna and Baraitha, is in the period of Amoraim some- 
 times used also to signify one whose special business it was to recite the 
 memorized Baraithoth to the expounding teachers. In this sense the 
 term is to be imderstood m the phrase: ^OI^jST n^D\> fcOfl ^Jn Betza 28b. 
 andoitea. 
 
The Expounders of the Mishna. 41 
 
 title otRabbi^ while the Babylonian teachers of that period had 
 only the title of Rab or of Mar, 
 
 The period of Amor aim extends from the death of R. Jehuda 
 Hanasi to the compilation of the Babylonian Talmud, that is, 
 jfrom the beginning of the third to the end of the fifth century. 
 This period has been divided by some into six, by others into 
 seven minor periods or generations which are determined by the 
 beginning and the end of the activity of the most prominent 
 teachers flourishing during that time. 
 
 The number of Amoraim who are mentioned in the Talmud 
 amounts to several hundreds. The most distinguished among 
 them, especially those who presided over the great academies 
 are contained in the following chronological tables of the six 
 generations of Amoraim.* 
 
 The first Generation of Amoraim. 
 § 20. 
 
 B. Babylonian (219-25T). 
 
 1. Abba Areca, called simply 
 Rab. 
 
 2. (Mar) Samuel. 
 
 A. Palestinian (219-2T9). 
 
 1. R. Chanina bar Chama. 
 
 2. R. Jochanan (bar Napacha) 
 8. R. Simon ben Lakish (Resh 
 
 Lakish). 
 4. R. Joshua ben Levi. 
 
 Biographical Sketches. 
 A. Palestinian Amoraim. 
 
 During this generation R. Gamaliel III and R. Judah II were suo- 
 ceBsively the patriarchs. 
 
 1. R. Chanina bar Chama (born about 180, died 260) was a disciple 
 of R. Jehuda Hanasi whose son and successor R. GamaUel III bestowed 
 
 ' Some scholars count the semi-Tanaim as the first generation, 
 and have consequently seven instead of six generations. The period of 
 Palestinian Amoraim being much shorter than that of the Babv Ionian, 
 ends with the third generation of the latter. Frankelinhis ''DbkJ''n*'n NIIO. 
 treating especially of the Palestinian Amoraim, divides them also into 
 six generations. 
 
42 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 on him the title of Rabbi. He then presided over his own academy in 
 Sepi horis and stood in high regard on account of his learning, modesty 
 and piety. As teacher he was very conservative, transmitting that 
 only which he had received by tradition, without ever allowing himsCif 
 an independent decision. Of his prominent contemporaries are: R. 
 Ephes who reopened a school at Lydda in South Judea; Levi h. Sissi 
 (called simply Levi) who though not presiding over an academy, was a 
 distinguished teacher,and later emigrated to Babylonia; further ChizMa 
 who was a son of R. Chiya the Elder and whose teachings are fre- 
 quently quoted in the Talmud. This Chizkia who had not the title of 
 Rabbi must not be mistaken for a R. Chizkia who belonged to the third 
 generation. 
 
 2 . R. Joclianan bar Napacha, in general called simply R. Jochanan 
 (born about 199; d. 279), was in his early youth a disciple of R. Jehuda 
 Hanasi, later of R. Oshaya in Caesarea, also of R. Janai and especially 
 of R. Chanina b. Chama. He then founded his own academy in Tiberias 
 which henceforth became the principal seat of learning in the holy 
 land. By his great mental powers he excelled all his contempc;raries 
 and is regarded the chief Amora of Palestine. In expounding the 
 Mishna he introduced an analytical method, and laid down certain 
 rules for the final decision in such cases in which the Tanaim expressed 
 opposite opinions. His legal teachings ethical aphorisms, and exegetical 
 remarks, transmitted by his numerous disciples, form the principal 
 elements of the Gemara. He is supposed to have laid the foundation 
 of the Palestinian Talmud, though, in its present shape, this work 
 can not have been compiled before at least one century after R. Jocha- 
 nan's death. ^ 
 
 3. R. Simon b.Lakish, whose name is generally abbreviated in Resh 
 Lakish, was a man who combined great physical strength with a noble 
 heart and a powerful mind. It is said, that in his youth, he was com- 
 pelled by circumstances to gain his livelihood as a gladiator or soldier 
 
 ^ As to further characteristics of this and the other promment 
 Amoraim, the folloving works may be consulted: Graetz, History of 
 the Jews, vol. IV; Z. Frankel, Mebo; I. H. Weiss, Dor Dor, vol III; 
 I. Hamburger, Real Encyclopadie, vol II. Besides, J, Fiirst, "Kultur 
 and Literaturgeschichte der Juden in Asien", which treats especially 
 of the Babylonian academies and teachers during the period of the 
 Amoraim. 
 
The Expounders of the Mtshna. 43 
 
 until making the acquaintance of R. Jochanan who gained him for the 
 study of the law and gave him his sister in marriage. Having devel- 
 oped extraordinary mental and dialectical powers, he became R. Jocha- 
 nan's most distinguished friend and colleague. In tho interpretation 
 of the Mishna and in legal questions they differed however very often, 
 and their numerous controversies are reported in the Babylonian Tal- 
 mud as well as in the Palestinian. Also in his Agadic teachings, Resh 
 Lakish was original and advanced some very rational views. 
 
 4. R. Joshua b. Levi presided over an academy in Lydda. He is 
 regarded as a great authority in the law, and his decisions prevail 
 even in cases where his celebrated contemporaries, 11. Jochanan and 
 Resh Lakish differ from him. Though himself a prolific Agadist, he 
 disapproved the vagaries of the Agada and objected to their being 
 written down in books. The circunstance that, on a certain occasion, 
 his prayer for rain proved to be efficient, probably gave rise to the 
 mystic legends with which the fancy of later generation tried to 
 illustrate his great piety. 
 
 To other celebrities flourishing in this generations belongs R. 
 Simlai of Lydda who later settled in Nahardea. He was reputed less 
 as teacher of the Halacha than for his ingenious and lucid method of 
 treating the Agada. 
 
 B. Babylonian Amoraim. 
 
 1. Ahba Areca (or Aricha) was the real name of the chief Babyl- 
 onian Amora who, by way of eminence, is generally called Rub (the 
 teacher). He was born about 175 and died 247. As an orphaned youth 
 he went to his uncle the celebrated R. Chiya in Palestine to finish his 
 studies in the academy of R. Jehuda Hanasi. The mental abilities 
 which he displayed soon attracted general attention. After the death 
 of R. Jehuda, Abba returned to his native country and in the year 
 219 founded the academy in Sura where 1200 pupils flocked around 
 him from all parts of Babylonia. His authority was recognized even by 
 the most celebrated teachers in Palestine. Being regarded as one of 
 the semi-Tj.naim he ventured in some instances even to dispute some 
 opinions accepted in the Mishm, a privilege otherwise not accorded to 
 any of the Amoraim. * Most of his decisions, especially in ritual 
 questions, obtained legal sanction, but in the civil law his friend 
 
 * J^bsT Nin KJn 21, Erubin 50b and often. 
 
4i Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 Samuol in Na'aardea was his superior * . Over one hundred of his 
 numerous disciples, who transmitted his teachings and decisions to 
 later generations are m3ntioned in the Talmud by their names. 
 
 2. Samuel, or Mar Samuel, was born about 180 in Nahardea, died 
 there 257. His father, Abba bar Abba, and Levi b. Sissi were liis first 
 teachers. Like Rib he went to Pal estine and became a disciple of 
 Rabbi JehudaHanasi from whom, however, he could not obt in the 
 ordination. After his return to Nahardea, he succeeded R. Shela in 
 the dignity of pre^^ident of the academy (Resh-Sidra) in that oity. 
 Besides the law, he cultivated the sciences of medicine and astronomy. 
 As Amora he developed especially the rabbinical jurisprudence in 
 which he was regarded as the greatest authority '. Among other imi)ort- 
 ant principles established by him is that of ^'Dina (TmalGhutha Dina", 
 that is, the^civil law of the government is as valid for the Jews as their 
 own law. The most friendly and brotherly relation prevailed between 
 Samuel and Rab, although they often differed in questions of the 
 aw. After Rab's death (247), his disciples recognized Samuel as the 
 highest religious authority of Babylonia. He died about ten years 
 later, leaving behind numerous disciples, several of whom bf^came the 
 leading teachers in the following generation. 
 
 A distinguished contemporary of Samuel was Mar Ukba, at first 
 head of the court in Kafri, and later Exilarch in Nahara^. . 
 
 » pjnn b.'^ioK'ai niD-xa ma snaSn Bechoroth 49b. 
 
 • Mar Sam 1^1 made also a compilation of Bara ithoth which ii 
 quoted in the Talmud by the phrase ^XIDiJ' '"21 XJn. Betza 29a and 
 Moed Katon 18b; see Eashi's remark to the first mentioned passage. 
 
The Expounders of the Misiina. 45 
 
 The second Generation of Amoraim. 
 § 21. 
 
 A. Palestinian (279-320) 
 
 1. R. Elazar b. Pedath. 
 
 2. R. Ame. 
 
 3. R. Assi. 
 
 4. R. Chi3^a bar Abba. 
 
 5. Simon bar Abba. 
 
 6. R. Abbahu. 
 
 1. R. Zera (Zeira). 
 
 B. Babylonian (257-320). 
 
 1. Rab Huna. 
 
 2. Rab Juda bar Jecheskel. 
 
 3. Rab Chisda (or Chasda). 
 
 4. Rab Shesheth. 
 
 5. Rab Nachman b. Jacob. 
 
 Remarks and Biographical Sketches. 
 A. Palestinian Amoraim. 
 
 The patriarchate during this generation was successively in the 
 hands of R. Gamaliel IV and R. Judah III. 
 
 1. R. Elazar ben Pedath, generally called simply R. Elazar, like 
 the Tana R, Elazar (ben Shamua) for whom he must not be mistaken, 
 was a native of Babylonia and a disciple and later an associate of R. 
 Jochanan whom he survived. He enjoyed great authority and is very 
 often quoted in the Talmud. 
 
 2 and 3. R. Ame and R. Assi were likewise Babylonians, and 
 distin^^uished disciples of R. Jochanan. After the death of R. Elazar 
 they became the heads of the declining academy in Tiberias. They 
 had the title only of ,, Judges, or the Aaronites of the Holy Land" and 
 subordinated themselves to the growing authority of the teachers in 
 Babylonia. Rabbi Assi is not to be confoundend with his contempor- 
 ary, the Babylonian Amora Rab Assi, who was a colleague of Rab 
 Saphra and a disciple of Rab in Sura. * 
 
 4 and 5. R. Chiya bar Abba and Simon bar Abba were probably 
 brothers. They had immigrated from Babylonia and became disci 
 pies of R. Jochanan. Both were distinguished teachers, but very poor. 
 In questions of the law they were inclined to rigorous views. 
 
 6. R. Abbahu of Caesarea, disciple of R. Jochanan, friend and 
 colleague of R Ame and R. Assi, was a man of great wealth and of 
 a lib'.Tal education. He had a thorough knowledge of the Groeic 
 
 » See Tosaphoth Chullin 19a. 
 
46 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 language, and favored Greek culture. Being held in high esteem by the 
 Roman authorities, he had great political influence. He seems to have 
 had frequent controversies with the teachers of Christianity in 
 Caesarea. Besides being a prominent teacher whose legal opinions are 
 quoted in all parts of the Palestinian and Babylonian Talmud, he was a 
 very popular lecturer. 
 
 7. R. Zeira {or Zero) was a Babylonian and a disciple of Rab Juda bar 
 Jecheskel, but dissatisfied with the hair splitting method prevailing in 
 the academies of his native country, he emigrated to Palestine where 
 he attended the lectures of R. Elazar b. Pedath in Tiberias, and tried, 
 in vain, to unlearn his former method of study. Having been ordained 
 as Rabbi, he became one of the authorities in Palestine together with 
 R. Ame, R. Assi and R. Abbahu. 
 
 B. Babylonian Amoraim. 
 
 1. Rab Huna (born 312, died 297) was a disciple of Rab, whom, 
 after Mar Samuel's death, he succeeded as president of the academy in 
 Sura. In this office he was active for forty years. He employed fifteen 
 assistants to repeat and explain his lectures to his 800 disciples. 
 Highly revered for his great learning and his noble character, he enjoyed 
 an undisputed authority to which even the Palestinian teachers R. Ame 
 and R. Assi voluntarily subordinated themselves. 
 
 2. Rab Juda bar Jecheskel, generally called simply R. Juda 
 (or Jehuda), was a disciple of Rab and also of Samuel. The latter 
 teacher, who.-e peculiar method he adopted and developed, used to 
 characterize him by the epithet ^^T^ "the acute". He founded the 
 academy in Pumbaditha, but after R. Huna's death he was chosen as 
 his successor (Resli Methibta) at Sura, where after two years (299) he 
 died in an advanced age. 
 
 3. Rab Chisda (or Chasda) belonged to the younger disciples of 
 Rab after whose death he attended also the lectures of R. Huna. But 
 from the latter teacher he soon separated on account of a misunder- 
 standing between them and established a school of his own. At the 
 same time, he was one of the Judges in Sura. After Rab Juda's death 
 R. Chisda, though already above 80 years old, became head of the 
 academy in Sura and remained in this office for about ten years 
 
 4. Rab Shesheth, a disciple of Rab and Samuel, was member of 
 the court in Nahardea. After the destruction of that city he went to 
 
The Expoundehs of the Mishna. 4T 
 
 Mechuza; later he settled in Silhi where he founded an academy. 
 Being blind, he had to vAy upon his powerful memory. He was 
 R. Chisda's opponent in the Halacha, and disapproved the hairsplitting 
 dialectical method which had come in vogue among the followers of 
 Rab Juda in Pumbaditha. 
 
 5. Rab Naehman b. Jacob, called simply Rab Nachman, was a 
 prominent disciple of Mar Samuel. By his father-in-law, the exilarch 
 Abba bar Abulia, he was appointed chief justice in Nahardea. After 
 Mar Samuel's death he succeeded him as rector of the academy in that 
 city. When two years later (259) the city of Naliardea was destroyed, 
 R. Nachman settled in Shechan-Zib. He is regarded as a great 
 authority especially in the rabbinical jurisprudence in wliich he 
 established many important principles. Among others, he originated 
 the rabbinical oath termed ^^^^ nVlQ'^^ that is, the purging oath 
 imposed in a law suit on the claimee even in cases of general denial 
 on his pcirt ^DH -I2"I3). 
 
 or o:her teachers belonging to this generation who, though not 
 standing at the head of the leading academies, are often quoted in 
 the Talmud, the following must be noted: 
 
 a. Rabba bar bar Chana who was a Babylonian and son of Abba 
 bar Chana. After having attended the academy of R. Joclianan in 
 Palestine, he returned to his native country where he frequently 
 reported the opinions of his great teacher. He is also noted for the 
 many allegorical narratives ascribed to him in the Talmud. 
 
 b. Ulla (b, Ishmael) was a Palestinian who frequently travelled 
 to Babylonia where he finally settled and died. Although without the 
 title of Rabbi or Rab, he was regarded as a distinguished teacher whose 
 opinions and reports are often mentioned. 
 
48 
 
 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 The third Generation of Amoraim. 
 § 22. 
 
 A. Palestinian (320-359). 
 
 1. R. Jeremiah. 
 
 2. R. Jonah. 
 
 3. R. Jose. 
 
 B. Babylonian (320-375). 
 
 1. Rabba bar Huna. 
 
 2. Rabba bar Nachmani. 
 
 3. Rab Joseph (bar Chiya). 
 
 4. Abaye. 
 
 5. Raba. 
 
 6. Rab Nachman bar Isaac. 
 1, Rab Papa. 
 
 Remarks and Biographical Sketches. 
 A. Palestinian Amoraim. 
 
 The patriarch of this period was HiUel II who introduced the fixed 
 Jewish calendar. 
 
 In consequence of the persecutions and the banishment of several 
 religious teachers under the emperors Constantin and Constantius, the 
 Palestinian academies entirely decayed. The only teachers of some 
 prominence are the following: 
 
 1. R. Jeremiah was a Babylonian and disciple of R. Zeira whom 
 he followed to Palestine. In his younger days, when still in his native 
 country, he indulged in propounding puzzling questions of trifling 
 casuistry by which he probabJy intended to ridicule the subtile method 
 prevaiUng among some of the contemporary teachers, and on this 
 account he was expelled from the academy. In the holy land he was 
 more appreciated and after the death of R. Abbahu and R. Zeira was 
 acknowledged as the only authority in that country. 
 
 2. R. Jonah was a disciple of R. Ila (Hila) and of R. Jeremiah. 
 His opinions are frequently quoted especially in the Palestinian Tal- 
 mud. 
 
 3. jB. Jose (bar Zabda), colleague of the just mentioned R. Jonah, 
 was one of the last rabbinical authorities in Palestine. 
 
 It is probable that the compilation of the Palestinian Talmud 
 was accomplished about that time, though it cannot be stated by whom. 
 
The Expounders of the Mishna. 49 
 
 B. Babylonian Amoraim. 
 
 1. Rabha (or Rab Abba) bar Hiuia was not, as erroneously- 
 supposed by some, the son of the exilarch Huna Mari, but of Rab 
 Huna, the disciple and successor of Rab. After the death of K. Chisda 
 (309) he succeeded him in the dignity of president of the academy in 
 Sura. Under his presidency, lasting 13 years, this academy was 
 eclipsed by that of Pumbaditha, and after his death it remained deserted 
 for about fifty years until Rab Ashe restored it to its former glory. 
 
 2. Rahha bar Nachmani, in the Talmud called simply Rabba, was 
 born 270 and died 330. He was a disciple of Rab Huna, Rab Juda and 
 Rab Chisda, and displayed from his youth great dialectical powers on 
 account of which he was characterized as "the uprooter of mountains". 
 Selected as head of the academy of Pumbaditha, he attracted large 
 crowds of hearers by his ingenious method of teaching. In his lectures 
 which commented on all parts of the Mishna he investigated the 
 reason of the laws and made therefrom logical deductions. Besides, 
 he tried to reconcile seeming differences between the Mishna, the 
 Baraithoth and the traditional teachings of later authorities. He also 
 liked to propound puzzling problems of the law in order to test and 
 sharpen the mental powers of his disciples. A charge having been 
 made against him by the Persian government that many of his 
 numerous hearers attended his lectures in order to evade the poll-tax, 
 he fled from Pumbaditha and died in solitude. 
 
 3. Rab Joseph (bar Chiya) was a disciple of Rab Juda and Rab 
 Shesheth, and succeeded his friend Rabba in the dignity of president 
 of the academy in Pumbadita, after having once before been elected 
 for this office which he declined in favor of Rabba. On account of his 
 thorough knowledge of the sources of the Law, to which he attached 
 more importance than to ingenious deductions, he was called Sinai. 
 Besides being a great authority in the rabbinical law, he devoted 
 himself to the Targum of the Bible, especially of the prophetical books. 
 In his old age he became blind. He died in the year 333 after ha\ ing 
 presided over the academy of Pumbaditha only for three years. 
 
 4. Abaye, surnamed Nachmani {h. 280. d. 338), was a son Kaylil 
 and a pupil of his uncle Rabba bar Nachmani, and of Rab Joseph. He 
 was highly esteemed not only for his profound knowledge of the law 
 and his mastership in Talmudical dialectics, but also for his integrity 
 
50 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 and gentleness. After Rab Joseph's death he was selected as head of 
 the academy in Pumbaditha, but under his administration which lasted 
 about five years, the number of hearers in that academy decreased 
 considerably, as his more talented colleague Rdba had founded a new 
 academy in Machuza which attracted greater crowds of pupils. 
 Under these two Amoraim the dialectical method of the Babylonian 
 teachers reached the highest development. Their discussions, which 
 mostly concern some very nice distinctions in the interpretation of the 
 Mishna in order to reconcile conflicting passages, fill the pages of the 
 Talmud. ^ In their differences concerning more practical questions 
 the opinion of Raba generally prevails, so that later authorities 
 pointed out only six cases in which the decision of Abaye was to be 
 adopted against that of his rival. ^ 
 
 5. Raba was the son of Joseph b. Chama in Machuza. He was 
 born 299 and died 353. In his youth he attended the lectures of Rab 
 Nachman and of R. Chisda. Later, he and Abaye were fellow-students 
 in the academy of Rabba bar Nachmani. Here he developed his 
 dialectical powers by which he soon surpassed all his contemporaries. 
 He opened an academy in Machuza which attracted a great number of 
 students. After Abaye's death this academy supplanted that in Pumba- 
 ditha and during Raba's lifetime became almost the only seat of learn- 
 ing in Babylonia. His controversies with his contemporaries, especially 
 with his rival colleague Abaye, are very numerous. Wherever an 
 opinion of Abaye is recorded in the Talmud, it is almost always fol- 
 lowed by the contrary view and argument of Raba. 
 
 Q.Rah Nachman b. Isaac was a disciple of Rab Nachman (b. 
 Jacob) and afterwards an oflicer as Resh Calla in the academy of 
 Raba. After the death of the latter he was made president of the 
 academy in Pumbaditha which now resumed its former rank. In this 
 capacity he remained only four years (352-356) and left no remarkable 
 traces of his activity. Still less significant was the activity of his 
 
 » The often very subtile argumentations of these two teachers 
 became so proverbial that the plirase X3T| ""^nxT nvin "the critical 
 questions of Abaye and Raba" is used in the Talmud as a sigiufication 
 of acute discussions and minute investigations, so in Succah 28a. 
 
 ' D"y'p b"V"'2 ^^3X^ n>mi3 Nn^bn Baba Metzia 21b; Sanhedrin 
 27a; Erubin 15a; Kidd. 52a; Gittin 34a, 
 
The Expounders of the Mishna. 
 
 51 
 
 successor R. Chama from Nahardea who held the office for twenty one 
 years (356-377). 
 
 7. Rah Papa (bar Chanan),a disciple of Abaye and Raba, founded 
 a new school in Nares, in the vicinity of Sura, over which he presided 
 for nineteen years (354-375). He adopted the dialectical method of his 
 former teachers without possessing their ingenuity and their inde- 
 pendence, and consequently did not give satisfaction to those of his 
 hearers who had formerly attended the lectures of Raba. One of 
 his peculiarities was that he frequently refers to popular proverbs 
 
 The fourth Generation of Babylonian Amoraim (375-427). 
 
 § 23. 
 B. Pumbaditha. 
 
 A. Sura. 
 1. Rab Ashe, 
 
 C. Nahardea. 
 Amemar. 
 
 1. Rab Zebid. 
 
 2. Rab Dime. 
 8. Rafram. 
 
 4. Rab Cahana. 
 
 5. Mar Zutra. 
 
 Remarks and Biographical Sketches. 
 
 A. Rah Ashe, (son of Simaibar Ashe) was, at the age of twenty, 
 made president of the reopened academy of Sura, after the death 
 of Rab Papa, and held this office for fifty two years. Under his 
 presidency, this academy, which had been deserted since the time of 
 Rabba bar Iluna, regained its former glory with which Rab had invested 
 it. Combining the profundity of knowledge which formerly prevailed 
 in this academy with the dialectic methods developed in that of Pumba- 
 ditha, he was generally recognized as the ruling authority, so that his 
 contemporaries called him by the distinguishing title of Rahhana (our 
 teacher). Invested with this great authority, Rab Ashe was enabled 
 
 » This Rab Papa must not be mistaken for an elder teacher by 
 the same name, who had ten sons, all wed versed in the law, one of 
 whom, Rafram, became head of the academy of Pumbadilha in the 
 following generation. Neiiher is Rab Papa identical with Rab Papi, 
 a distinguished lawyer who flourished in a former generation. 
 
52 HSTORICAL AND LITERARY INTRODUCTION. 
 
 to assume the task of sifting, arranging and compiling the immense 
 material of traditions, commentaries and discussions on the Mishna 
 which, during the two preceding centuries, had accumulated in the 
 Babylonian academies. In the compilation and revision of this gigantic 
 work which is embodied in the Gemara, he was occupied for over 
 half a century, and still he did not complete it entirely but this was 
 done, after his death, by his disciples and successors. 
 
 B. During the long period of Rab Ashe's activity at the academy 
 in Sura, the following teachers presided successively over the academy 
 in Pumbaditha. 
 
 1. Rah Zebid (b. Oshaya) who succeeded Rab Chama and held 
 the office for eight years. (377-385). 
 
 2. Rah Dime (b. Chinena) from Nahardea, presiding only for 
 three years (385-388). 
 
 3. Rafram har Papa the elder, in his youth a disciple of Raba, 
 succeeded R. Dime (388-394). 
 
 4. Rah Cahana (b. Tachlifa), likewise a disciple of Raba, was 
 one of the former teachers of R. Ashe. In an already advanced age 
 he was made president of the academy of Pumbaditha, and died in the 
 year 411. This Rab Cahana must not be mistaken for two other 
 teachers of the same name, one of whom had been a distinguished 
 disciple of Rab, and the other (Rab Cahana b. Manyome) a disciple of 
 Rab Juda b. Jecheskel. 
 
 5. Mar Zutra who, according to some historians, succeeded Rab 
 Cahana as rector of the school in Pumbaditha (411-414) is probably 
 identical with Mar Zutra b. Mare, who shortly afterwards held the 
 high office as Exilarch. In the rectorship of Pumbaditha he was suc_ 
 ceeded by Rah Acha har Raha (414-419): and the latter by Rah Gehiha 
 (419-4333. 
 
 C. Amemar, a friend of Rab Ashe, was a distinguished judge 
 and teacher in Nahardea. When his former teacher Rab Dime became 
 president of the academy in Pumbaditha, he succeeded him in the rector- 
 ship of that of Nahardea from 390 to about 422. With him this once 
 BO celebrated seat of learning passed out of existence. 
 
The Expounders of the Mishna. 53 
 
 The fifth Generation of Babylonian Amoraim (421-468). 
 
 § 24. 
 
 A. Sura. 
 
 1. Mar Jemar (Maremar). 
 
 2. Rab Ide bar Abin. 
 
 3. Mar bar Rab Ashe. 
 
 4. Rab Acha of Difte. 
 
 B. Pumbaditha. 
 
 1. Rafram II. 
 
 2. Recliumai. 
 
 3. Rab Sama b. Rabba. 
 
 Remarks and Biographical Sketches. 
 
 A. 1. Mar Jemar (contracted to Maremar), who enjoyed high 
 esteem with the leading teachers of his time, succeeded his colleague 
 and friend Rab Ashe in the presidency of the academy in Sura, but 
 held tliis office only for about five years (427-432). 
 
 5. Rab Ide (or Ada) bar Abin became, after Mar Jemar's death, 
 president of the academy at Sura and held this office for about twenty 
 years (432-452). He as well as his predecessor continued the compilation 
 of the Talmud which Rab Ashe had commenced. 
 
 3. Mar bar Rab Ashe, whose surname was Tabyome, and who, 
 for some unknown reasons, had been passed over in the election of a 
 successor to his father, was finally made president of the academy in 
 Sura and filled this office for thirteen years (455-468). In his frequent 
 discussions with contemporary authorities he exhibits independence of 
 opinion and great faculties of mind. 
 
 4. Rab Acha of Difte, a prominent teacher, was on the point of 
 being elected as head of the academy of Sura, but was finally defeated 
 by Mar bar Rab Ashe who aspired to that office which his father had 
 so gloriously filled for more than half a century. 
 
 B. The academy of Pumbaditha which had lost its earlier influence, 
 had during this generation successively three presidents, of whose 
 activity very little is known, namely: 
 
 1. Rafram il who succeeded Rab Grebihah, from 433 to 443. 
 
 2. Rab Rechumai, from 443-456. 
 
 3. Rab Sama b. Rabba, from 456-471. 
 
 Toward the end of this generation, the activity of both academies 
 was almost paralyzed by the terrible persecutions which the Persian 
 King Firuz instituted against the Jews and their religion. 
 
54 Historical and Litekary Introduction. 
 
 The sixth and last Generation of Babylonian Amoraim 
 (468-500). 
 
 §25. 
 
 A. Sura. 
 
 1 . Rabba Thospia (or Tosfaah). 
 
 2. Rabina. 
 
 B. Pumbaditha. 
 Rab Jose. 
 
 Remarks and Biographical Sketches. 
 
 A. 1. Rabba of Thospia ^ succeeded Mar bar Rab Ashi as recfo: 
 of the Suran academy just at the time when the Persian King Firnz 
 had ordered the Jewish jurisdiction to be abolished and the academical 
 assemblies to be prohibited. It is but natural that under such circum- 
 stances the academical activity of this Rabbi which lasted only about 
 six years could not amount to much. 
 
 2. Rabina (contraction of Rab Abina) bar Huna,^ who succeeded 
 Rabba of Thospia, entered his office which he held from 488 to 499. 
 under more favorable circumstances, since the persecution had ceased 
 after the death of Firuz and the academies were reopened. He conse- 
 quently developed a great activity, the object of which w^as to complete 
 and close the compilation of the Talmud begun by Rab Ashi. In this 
 task he was assisted by Rab Jose, the school head of Pumbaditha, and 
 by some associates. 
 
 With the close of the Talmud and the death of Rabina (499) ended 
 the period of the Amoraim. The Babylonian teach^^rs who flourished 
 during the subsequent half century are called Saboraim (\s-inD p3"i). 
 They did not assume the authority to contradict the decisions established 
 by the Amoraim, but merely ventured to express an opinion (ino, to 
 reason, think, suppose, opine) and to fix the final decision in cases where 
 
 1 Regarding the correct name and native place of this Rabbi see 
 Leopold Low's "Lebensalter" p. 376, note 54, and Neubauer G6ogr. 
 du Talm., p. 33:^. 
 
 ^ This head of the Suran Academy is by chronographers usually cal- 
 led Rabina II, in order to distinguish him from a former teacher Rabina 
 who was a disciple of Raba and flourished in the fourth generation. 
 In the Talmud, both of them are called simply Rabina. and only from 
 the connection it is to be seen whether it refers to that elder teacher 
 or to the last of the Amoraim. 
 
The Expounders of the Mishna. 55 
 
 their predecessors, the Amoraim, disagreed. They gave the Talmud 
 a finishing touch by adding those final decisions, also numerous, 
 especially Agadic, passages. 
 
 B. Rob Jose presided over the academy in Pumbaditha 475-530. 
 As Rabina was the last Amora for Sura, so Rab Jose was the last for 
 Pumbaditha. Flourishing still for a number of years after the close of 
 the Talmud,he was at the same time the first of the Saboraim,and must 
 be considered as the most prominent among them. 
 
 Of Rab Jose's contemporaries and successors who like himself 
 formed the connecting link between the period of Amoraim and that 
 of the Saboraim, and whose opinions and controversies are still recorded 
 in the Talmud, the following two must be mentioned: Bab Achai h. 
 Hima and Bab SamiLel b, Abbahu, 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 THE GEMARA. 
 
 Classification of its contents into Halacha and Agada. 
 
 § 26. 
 
 Tne collection of the commentaries and discussions of the 
 Amoraim on the Mishna is termed Gemara. This term, derived 
 from the verb *it2i which iu Hebrew means to finish^ to complete^ 
 and in the Aramaic also to learn, to teach, signifies either the 
 completion, the supplement (to the Mishna), or is identical with 
 the word Talmud which is often used in its place, meaning, the 
 teaching, the study. 
 
 Besides being a discursive commentary on the Mishna, the 
 Gemara contains a vast amount of more or less valuable mate- 
 rial which does not always have any close connection with the 
 Mishna text, as legal reports, historical and biographical infor- 
 mations, religious and ethical maxims and homiletical remarks. 
 
 The whole subject matter embodied in the Gemara is 
 generally classified into Halacha and Agada. 
 
 To Halacha ' belongs that which has bearing upon tne law, 
 hence all expositions, discussions and reports which have the 
 object of explaining, establishing and determining legal princip- 
 les and provisions. The principal branches of the Halacha are 
 indicated by the names of the six divisions of the Mishna, and 
 by those of the Masechtoth belonging to each division. See 
 above pages 9-14. 
 
 The Agada "" comprises every thing not having the character 
 
 I Halacha (n^^n) means custom, usage practice; then, an 
 adopted rule, a traditional laiv. In a more extended meaning, the 
 term applies to matters bearing upon that law. 
 
 > Agada or Aggada (nUN ,xmiN* ,r]iyn, derived from niJ which 
 jn the Hebrew Hipliil or Aramaic Aphcl form signifies to narrate, to 
 tell, to communicate) means that which is related, a tale, a saying, an 
 individual utterance which claims no binding authority. Regarding 
 this term, see W. Bacher's learned and exh^msive article, "The origin 
 of the word Hagada (Agada)" in the Jev.ish Quarterly Review (London) 
 
The Gemara. 57 
 
 of Halacha, hence all historical records, all legends and par- 
 ables, all doctrinal and ethical teachings and all free and unre- 
 strained interpretations of Scripture. 
 
 According to its different contents and character, the 
 Agada may be divided into: 
 
 1. Exegetical Agada, giving plain or homiletical and al- 
 legorical explanations of Biblical passages. 
 
 2. Dogmatical Agada, treating of God's attrributes and 
 providence, of creation, of revelation, of reward and punishment, 
 of future life, of Messianic time, etc. 
 
 3. ^MzV^/ Agada, containing aphorisms, maxims, proverbs, 
 fables, sayings intending to teach and illustrate certain moral 
 duties. 
 
 4. Historical Agada, reporting traditions and legends 
 concerning the lives of biblical and post-biblical persons or con- 
 cerning national and general history. 
 
 5. Mystical Agada, refering to Cabala, angelology, demo- 
 nology, astrology, magical cures, interpretation of dreams, etc. 
 
 6. Miscellaneous Agada, containing anecdotes, observa- 
 tions, practical advices, and occassional references to various 
 branches of ancient knowledge and sciences. 
 
 Agadic passages are often, by the way, interspersed among 
 matters of Halacha, as a kind of diversion and recreation after 
 the mental exertion of a tiresome investigation or a minute dis- 
 cussion on a dry legal subject. Sometimes, however, the Agada 
 appears in larger groups, outweighing the Halacha matter 
 with which it is loosely connected; f i. Berachoth, 54a-64a; 
 Sal)bath 30a-33b; Mcgilla lOb-lTa; Gittin 55b-58b; GYb-YOa; 
 Sota 9a-14a; B. Bathra 14b-l'7a; 73a-76a; Sanhedrin, Perek 
 Chelek. 
 
 There are two compilations of the Gemara which differ from 
 each other in language as well as in contents; the one made in 
 Palestine is called Jerushalmi^ tlie Jerusalem Gemara or Talmud; 
 
 Vol IV, pp. 406-429. As to fuller particulars concerning Halacha and 
 Agada, see Zunz' G. Vortraege pp. 57-61 and 83 sq.; also Hamburger's 
 Real Encyclopiidie II, the articles Halacha and Agada. 
 
58 HlSTv3RICAL AXD LITERARY INTRODUCTION. 
 
 tho other originating in Babylonia is called Bahli^ the Baby- 
 lonian Gemar a or Talmud: 
 
 Compilation of Jerushalmi, The Palestinian Talmud. 
 
 § 27. 
 
 As no academy existed in Jerusalem after the destruction 
 of the second temple, the customary appellation Jerusalem Tal- 
 mud is rather a misnomer. More correct is the appellation the 
 Palestinian Talmud (^^nt^'' pS Tl!D^n) or the Gemara of the 
 teachers of the West (s^n^D ''^31 Snt::). 
 
 Maimonides in the introduction to his Mishna commentary 
 ascribes the authorship of the Palestinian Talmud to the celebrat- 
 ed teacher R. Jochanan who flourished in the third century. 
 This statement, if literally taken, cannot be correct, since so 
 many of the teachers quoted in that Talmud are known to have 
 flourished more than a hundred years after R. Jochanan. This 
 celebrated Amora may, at the utmost, have given the first 
 impulse to such a collection of commentaries and discussions on 
 the Mishna, which was continued and completed by his succes- 
 sors in the academy of Tiberias. In its present shape the work 
 is supposed to belong to the fourth or fifth century. Some modern 
 scholars assign its final compilation even to a still later period 
 namely after the close of the Babylonian Talmud, i 
 
 The Palestinian Gemara, as before us, extends only over 
 thirty nine of the sixty three Masechtoth contained in the 
 Mishna, namelly all Masechtoth of Seder Zeraim, Seder Moed, 
 Nashim and Nezikin with the exception of Eduyoth and Aboth. 
 But it has none of the Masechtoth belonging to Seder Kodashim, 
 and of those belonging to Seder Teharoth it treats only of Ma- 
 secheth Mdda. (see above pages 12-14). 
 
 Some of its Masechtoth are defective; thus the last four 
 
 1 Critical researches on this subject are found in Geiger's Jued. 
 Zeitschrift f. Wissenschaft 1870; Z. Frankel Mebo, p. 46 sq. and in 
 Wiesner's Gibeath Jeruschalaim (Vienna 1872). 
 
 I. H. Weiss (Dor Dor III, p. 114 sq.) regards R. Jose (bar Zabda) who 
 was a colleague of R. Jonah and one of the last authorities in Palestine, 
 as the very compiler of the Pal. Talmud which in the foUowing 
 generation was completed by R. Jose bar Bun (Abun). 
 
The Gemaha 59 
 
 Perakim of Sabbath and the last Perek of Maccoth are wanting. 
 Of the ten Perakim belonging to Masecheth Nidda it has only 
 the first three Perakim and a few lines of the fourth. 
 
 There are some indications that elder commentators were 
 acquainted with portions of the Palestinian Gemara which arc 
 now missing, and it is very probable that that Gemara origin- 
 ally extended to all or, at least, to most of the Masechtoth of 
 the Mishna. The loss of the missing Masechtoth and portions 
 thereof may be explained partly by the many persecutions which 
 interrupted the activity of the Palestinian academies, partly by 
 the circumstance that the Pclcstinian Gemara did not command 
 that general attention and veneration which was bestowed on 
 the Babylonian Gemara. 
 
 Compilation of Babli, the Babylonian Talmud. 
 § 28. 
 
 The compilation of the l^abylonian Talmud is generally as- 
 cribed to Rab Ashe who for more than fifty years (3 7 5-42 V) 
 officiated as head of the academy in Sura. It is stated that it 
 took him about thirty years to collect, sift and arrange the im- 
 mense material of this gigantic work. During the remaining 
 second half of his activity he revised once more the whole work 
 and made in it many corrections. This corrected edition is 
 termed S"in3 S-i.nnD the latter revision^ and the former i<")MnD 
 t^Dp the first revision. ^ 
 
 » See Baba Bathra fol 157b. 
 
 Those scliolars who maintain that the Mishna was not written 
 down by R. Jehuda Hanasi, but that he merely arranged it orally 
 (see above p. 5, note), maintain the same in regard to Rab Ashe's 
 compilation of the Gemara, without being able to state when and by 
 wliom it was actually commited to writing. Against this opinion it 
 has been properly argued that it must be regarded as absolutely 
 impossible for a work so voluminous, so variegated in contents and so 
 full of minute and intricate discu -sions, as the Talmud, to have been 
 orally arranged and fixed, and accurately transmitted Irom generation 
 to generation. On the screngrli of this argument and of t^ome in- 
 dications found in the Tabnud, Z. Frankel (in his Mobo p. 47) even 
 regards it OS very probaMe that Rab Ashe in compiling the Gemara 
 made use of some minor coni])ilation'^ which existed before him, and 
 of some written records and menioramla containing short abstracid 
 of the academical discussions in the preceding generations. Collecting 
 
60 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 But Rab Ashe did not succeed in finishing the gigantic 
 work. It was continued and completed by his disciples and 
 successors, especially by the last Amoraim Rabina II who from 
 488 to 499 presided over the academy in Sura, and R. Jose, the 
 school-head of Pumbaditha. Some additions were made by the 
 Saboraim, and perhaps even by some still later hands. 
 
 The Gemara of the Babylonian Talmud covers only thirty 
 seven Masechtoth of the Mishna, namely: 
 
 Of Zeraim only one, Berachoth, ommitting the remaining 
 ten Masechtoth; 
 
 Of Moed eleven, omitting only Shekalim which in our 
 Talmud editions is replaced by the Palestinian Gemara; 
 
 Of Nashim all of the seven Masechtoth beloning to that 
 division; 
 
 Of Nezikin eight, omitting Eduyoth and Aboth; 
 
 Of Kodashim nine, omitting Middoth and Kinnim. In 
 Thamid only chapters I. II. lY are provided with Gemara, but 
 not chapters III. Y. YI and YII. 
 
 Of Teharoth only Nidda; omitting eleven Masechtoth. 
 
 There being no traces of the Gemara missing to twenty six 
 Masechtoth, it is very probable that this part of the Gemara 
 has never been compiled, though those Masechtoth have un- 
 doubtedly also been discussed by the Babylonian Amoraim, as is 
 evident from frequent references to them in the Gemara on the 
 other Masechtoth. The neglect of compiling these discussions 
 may be explained by the circumstance that those Masechtoth 
 mostly treat of laws which had no practical application outside 
 of Palestine. This is especially the case with the Masechtoth 
 of Zeraim, except Berachoth, and those of Teharoth, except 
 
 and arranging these records he partly enlarged them by fuller explan- 
 ations, partly left them just as he found them. Some traces of such 
 memoranda, made probably by R Ashe's predecessors, are stiii found in 
 numerous passages of the Talmud. We refer to the mnemonical 
 signs and symbols (D^JO*D) wliich every now and tlien are there met 
 with (in brackets) as headings of discussions and mdicating either the 
 names of the teachers to be quoted or tlie order of the subjects to 
 be discussed. A critical investigation on these often very enigmatic 
 Simanim is found in Jacob Briill's ^>)0 K^IH Die Mnemotechnik des 
 Talmuds [Vienna 1864). 
 
The Gemara. 61 
 
 I>i(Ida. It was different with the Masechtoth belonging to 
 Kodashira which, though treating of the sacrificial laws, are fully 
 dirfcussed in the Babylonian Talmud, as it was a prevailing 
 opinion of the Rabbis that the merit of being engaged with the 
 study of those laws was tantamount to the actual performance 
 of the sacrificial rites (See Talm. Menachoth 110a). 
 
 The absence of Geinara on the Masechtoth Eduyoth and 
 Aboth is easily accounted for by the very nature of their 
 contents which admitted of no discussions. 
 
 The two Gemauas compared with each other. 
 §29. 
 
 The Palestinian and the Babylonian Gem ar as differ from each 
 other in language and style as well as in material and in the 
 method of treating the same, also in arrangement. 
 
 As regards the language, the Palestinian Gemara is 
 composed in the West Aramaic dialect which prevailed in Pa- 
 lestine at the time of the Amoraim. 
 
 The language of the Babylonian Gemara is a peculiar idiom, 
 being a mixture of Hebrew and East Aramaic with an occasional 
 sprinkling of Persian words. Quotations from Mishna and 
 Baraitha and sayings of the elder Amoraim are given in the 
 original, that is, the New Hebrew (Mishnic) language, while 
 forms of judicial and notary documents and popular legends of 
 later origin are often given in the Aramaic idiom. 
 
 Although the Palestinian Gemara extends to two more Ma- 
 sechtoth than the Babylonian, its total material amounts only 
 to about one third of the latter. Its discussions are generally 
 very brief and condensed, and do not exhibit that dialectic 
 acumen for which the Babylonian Gemara is noted. The Agada 
 in the Palestinian Gemara includes more reliable and valuable 
 historical records and references, and is, on the whole, more 
 rational and sober, though less attractive than the Babylonian 
 Agada which generally appeals more to the heart and imagin- 
 ation. But the latter, on many occasions, indulges too much 
 in gross exaggerations, and its popular sayings, especially those 
 evidently interpolated by later liands, have often an a*lmixt,ire 
 of superstitious views borrowed irom the Persian surroundings. 
 
62 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 The arrangement of the material in the two Talmuds dif- 
 fers in this, that in the Babylonian, the Gemara is attached to 
 the single paragraphs (sn^:n:2) of the Mishna, while in the 
 Palestinian all paragraphs (there termed n^^bn) belonging to 
 one Perek of the Mishna, are generally placed together at the 
 head of each chapter. The comments and discussions of the 
 Gemara referring to the successive paragraphs, are then marked 
 by the headings 'N* n::^" '2 r^bn and so on. 
 
 The two Gemara collections make no direct mention of 
 each other as literary works. But the names and opinions of 
 the Palestinian authorities are very often quoted in the Babyl- 
 onian Gemara; and in a similar way, though not to the same 
 extent, the Palestinian Gemara mentions the views of the Bab- 
 ylonian authorities. This exchange of opinions was effected 
 by the numerous teachers who are known to have emigrated or 
 frequently travelled from the one country to the other. 
 
 The study of the Babylonian Talmud, having been trans- 
 planted from its native soil to North Africa, and the European 
 countries (especially Spain, France, Germany and Poland), was 
 there most sedulously and religiously cultivated in the Jewish 
 communities, and gave rise to an immense Rabbinical literature. 
 The Palestinian Talmud never enjoyed such general veneration 
 and attention. Eminent Rabbis alone were thoroughly convers- 
 ant with its contents, and referred to it in their writings. It is 
 only in modern times that Jewish scholars have come to devote 
 more attention to this Talmud, for the purpose of historical and 
 literary investigations. 
 
CHAPTSR VI. 
 
 APOCRYPHAL APPENDICES TO THE TALMUD. 
 
 §30. 
 
 Besides the Masechtoth contained in the Mishna and the 
 two Geinaras, there are several Masechtoth composed in the 
 form of the Mishna and Tosephta, that treat of ethical, ritual, 
 and liturgical precepts. They stand in the same relation to 
 the Talmud as the Apocrypha to the canonical books of the 
 Bible. When and by whom they were composed, cannot be as- 
 certained. Of these apocryphal treatises, the following are ap- 
 pended to our editions of the Talmud: 
 
 L Aboth d' Rabbi Nathan ]nj i^ll m2S, divided into 41 
 chapters and a kind of Tosephta to the Mishnic treatise 
 '*Pirke Aboth," the ethical sentences of which are here con 
 siderably enlarged and illustrated by numerous narratives. In 
 its present shape, it belongs to the post-Talmudic period, though 
 some elements of a Baraitha of R. Nathan (who was a Tana 
 belonging to the fourth generation) may have been embodied 
 therein. ' 
 
 2. Sopherim Cn^lD the Scribes, containing in 21chapters rules 
 for the writing of the scrolls of the Pentateuch, and of the book 
 of Esther ; also Masoretic rules, and liturgical rules for the ser- 
 vice on Sabbath, Feast and Fast days. R. Asher already 
 expressed (in his Hilchoth Sepher Thora) the opinion that this 
 Masecheth Sopherim belongs to the period of the Gaonim. " 
 
 » Compare Ziinz, Gottesd.Vortraege, p. 108, sq.— Solomon Taussig 
 published in his U'h^ mj (Munich 1873) from a Manuscript of tbe 
 Library in Munich a recension of the Aboth d'Rabbi Nathan which 
 differs considerably from that printed in our Talmud editions. The 
 latest edition of Aboth d. R. N. in two recensions from MSS. with 
 critical annotations was published by S. Schechter (Vienna 1887). 
 
 ' See Zunz, GD. V. p. 95, sq. The latest separate edition of Ma- 
 secheth Sopherim from a MS. and with a German commentary 
 was published by Joel Mueller, (Leipsic 1878), 
 
64 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 3. Ebel Rabhathi^rc:^ hz'^ (the large treatise on Mourn- 
 ing), euphemistically called nn^t^ Semachoih (Joys), is 
 divided into 14 chapters, and treats, as indicated by the title, 
 of rules and customs concerning burial and mourning. It is 
 not identical with a treatise under the same title, quoted already 
 in the Talmud (Moed Katon 24a ; 26a ; Kethuboth 28a), but 
 seems to be rather a reproduction of the same with later additions. ') 
 
 4. Callah n^^ (the bride, the woman recently married). 
 This minor Masechta, being likewise a reproduction of a Masechta 
 by that name, mentioned already in the Talmund (Sabbath 114 a; 
 Taanith 10b; Kiddushin 49b; Jer. Berachoth, II, 5.), treats 
 in one chapter of the duties of chastity in marriage and in 
 general. 
 
 5. Derech ^r^/s ps ^m (the conduct of life), divided 
 into 11 chapters, the first of which treats of prohibited mar- 
 riages, and the remaining chapters, of ethical, social and religious 
 teachings. References to a treatise by that name, are made 
 already in the Talmud (B. Berachoth 22a and Jer. Sabbath 
 YI, 2.) 
 
 6. Derech Eretz Zuta stoiT pS "|m (the conduct of 
 life, minor treatise), containing 10 chapters, replete with 
 rules and maxims of wisdom.^ 
 
 Y. Perek Ha-shalom Ql^^TI p*lS (chapter on Peace) consists, 
 as already indicated by the title, only of one chapter, treating 
 of the importance of peacefulness. 
 
 Remark:-Beside these apocryphal treatises appended to our 
 editions of the Talmud under the general title of njtDp mn^DD 
 •'Minor Treatises," there are seven lesser Masechtoth which 
 were published by Raphael Kirchheim from an ancient manu- 
 script. (Frankfort on the Main 1851.) 
 
 ~» See Zunz, G. V. p. 90, and N. Brtill "Die talm. Tractate uber 
 Trauer um Verstorbene (Jahrbiicher fiir Jiid. Geschichte und Litera- 
 tur I (Frankfurt a. M.) p. 1-57. M. Klotz just published **Der Talm. 
 Tractat Ebel Rabbathi nach Handschriften bearbeitet, uberzetzt und 
 mifc Anmerkungen versehen" Frankf. on the Main, 1892. 
 
 ^ On both of these Masechtoth Derech Eretz see Zunz GD. V. 
 pp. 110-112. 8ee also: Abr. Tawrogi "Der Talm. Tractat Derech Erez 
 Sutta Kritisch bearbeitet, iibersetzt und erlautert'* (Berlin 18«5), 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 COMMENTARIES ON THE TALMUD. 
 
 The necessity for such Commentaries. 
 
 §31. 
 
 The Talmud offers to its students great difiBculties, partly 
 on account of the peculiar idiom in which it is written and which 
 is intermixed with so numerous, often very mutilated, foreign 
 words ; partly on account of the extreme brevity and succinct- 
 ness of its style, the frequent use of technical terms and phrases, 
 and mere allusions to matters discussed elsewhere ; partly 
 also, on account of the circumstance that, in consequence of 
 elliptical expressions, and in the absence of all punctuation marks, 
 question and answer, in the most intricate discussions, are some- 
 times so closely interwoven, that it is not easy to discern at 
 once, where the one ends and the other begins. To meet all 
 these difficulties, which are often very perplexing, numerous 
 commentaries have been written by distinguished Rabbis. 
 Some of the commentaries extend to the whole Talmud, or a 
 great portion thereof; others exclusively to the Mishna, or some 
 of its sections. The following are the most important com- 
 mentaries which are usually printed in our Talmud, and in the 
 separate Mishna editions. 
 
 A. COMMENTARIES ON THE BABYLONIAN TALMUD. 
 §32. 
 
 1. The celebrated Rabbenu Chananel{j\'^) of Kairwan 
 (Africa), flourishing in the beginning of the eleventh century, 
 wrote a commentary on the greater portion of the Talmud, 
 which is often quoted by later commentators, and is now printed 
 in the latest Talmud edition of Wilna. 
 
 2. i?a^/^/v'»^-(, as the prince of commentators is generally 
 called from the initials of his name, Rabbi Solomon Isaaki, of 
 Troyes (1040—1105), wrote a commentary on almost the whole of 
 
66 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 the Babylonian Talmud, which is printed in all editions thereof. 
 It is a true model of concise, clear and systematic commentation. 
 By a few plain words it often sheds light upon the obscurest 
 passages, and unravels the most entangled arguments of the 
 Talmudical discussions. As if anticipating the slightest hesita- 
 tion of the unexperienced student, it offers him at once the 
 needed explanation, or at least a hint that leads him the right 
 way. It has truly been said that but for this peerless comment- 
 ary of Rashi, the Babylonian Talmud would have remained as 
 neglected as the Palestinian. An additional merit of that com- 
 mentary is the fact that it very often establishes the correct 
 version of the corrupted Talmud text. Such corrections are 
 generally headed by the initials yn (standing for ]yo^} ''^H 
 *'thus we are to read"). 
 
 3. Supplements and additions to Rashi's commentary. 
 The commentary on some Masechtoth, not being finished by 
 Rashi, was completed in his spirit by his relatives and disciples. 
 His son-in-law R. Jehuda b. Nathan completed that on Maccoth 
 from fol. 19b.; his grandson R. Samuel b. Meir d'^'^"! com- 
 pleted that on B. Batlira from fol. 29a. The last mentioned 
 author, besides, added his commentary to Rashi's on the last 
 Perek of Pesachim. The missing commentary of Rashi on Ned- 
 arim from fol. 22b. is supplemented by that of his predecessor, 
 the celebrated Rabbenu Gershom.^ To this commentary on 
 ISTedarim two others are added in our Talmud editions, one by 
 Rabbenu Nissim (j'n) and the other by R. Asher V^'\n, both 
 flourishing in the fourteenth century. 
 
 4. Tosaphoth (meaning Additions) are a collection of an- 
 notations printed in all Talmud editions on the exterior margin 
 of the page, while the interior margin on the opposite side of 
 the Talmud text is generally assigned to Rashi's commentary. 
 They are not, like the latter, a running commentary, but rather 
 separate remarks and discussions on some passage of the text, 
 intended to elucidate its meaning. Sometimes the explanations 
 
 > Some bibliographers maintain that also the commentary on 
 Nazir and Meilah, ascribed to Rashi, does not belong to him, but to 
 his disciples. 
 
Commentaries on the Talmud. 67 
 
 given in the commentaries of R. Clmnancl and Rashi are 
 criticised and corrected. The latter of these two commentaries 
 is, byway of excellence, generally designated as Coniros {o^'[^yp 
 covimentarius). The Tosaphoth often display great acumen and 
 hair-splitting dialectics in Unding, and again harmonizing, ap- 
 parent contradictions between passages of the Talmud. Such 
 questions of contradiction are generally introduced by the phrases: 
 ntDSn DS^(abbrev. n'Sl) ^'ifthou wilt say or object..", or T^C^>^\ "it 
 is astonishing that . .", or s-^n "thou mayest say or object. . • 
 or n*^p "here is the difficulty that . . . .," and the final solution 
 of the questioner difficulty by lO^'? ^'^\ (abbr.V''',) "but it may be 
 said in answer to this " 
 
 The numerous authors of these Tosaphoth (mSDin 'h'^l The 
 Tosaphists, the glossarists) flourished during the 12th and 13th 
 centuries in France and Germany. To the first among them be- 
 long the nearest relatives and disciples of Rashi, namely his two 
 sons-in-law R. Meir b. Samuel and R. Jehuda b. Nathan (]':i''-i) ; 
 hisgrandsonsR. Isaac b. Meir (□'3''n),R. Samuel b.Meir (Q'^tTi)- 
 and R. Jacob b. Meir, called Rabbenu Tam (n'-i) and a nephew 
 of the latter, R. Isaac b. Samuel, ofDampierre QpTH •'"l). 
 
 Other authorities frequently mentioned in the Tosaphoth 
 are: R. Jehuda b. Isaac, of Paris, called Sir Leon (12th century); 
 R. Perez b. Elias in Corbeil (13th century).^ 
 
 The Tosaphoth printed in our Talmud editions are 
 merely extracts of older collections, namely of '^Tosaphoth 
 Sen3"by R.Samson b. Abraham of Sens (abbrev. S'2'^1, not to be 
 confounded with the same abbreviation of R. Solomon b.Adereth) 
 who flourished in the beginning of the 13th eentury, and prin- 
 cipally of ''Tosaphoth Tuch" or Touqucs by R. Eliezer of Tuch, 
 (Touques), second part of that century. 
 
 A collection of ''former Tosaphoth" D'^r^"' mSDinon Yoma 
 is, in some editions, appended to that Mascchta. R. Moses of 
 Coucy, the author of S'mag, is supposed to have been the origin- 
 ator of that collection. 
 
 » A full list of the Tosaphists is given by Zuuz, Zur Geschichte 
 und Literatur, pp. 29-60. 
 
68 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 An anonymous author of the 14th century, excerpted from 
 all Tosaphoth the practical results of their remarks and discuss- 
 ions. These paragraphed excerpts called mSDIH ''pDB (Decisions 
 of the Tosaphoth) are in our Talmud editions appended to each 
 Masechta. 
 
 Remark 1. References to certain passages in Rashi as well as 
 Tosaphoth are usually made by citing the beginning words, or the catch 
 words (b^nncn ~IU1 abbrev. n"n) of that passage. 
 
 Remark 2. Of the great number of later commentaries and super- 
 commentaries, generally pubUshed in separate volumes, the following 
 are appended to some Talmud editions: 
 
 a. rxoh^ n03n or ^"^sr^'O ^t^^n^n by Solomon Luria 6''B^"inO), in 
 the XVI century. This shorter commentary is valuable especially on 
 account of its numerous critical emendations in the reading of the Tal. 
 mud text as well as of Rashi and Tosaphoth. 
 
 b. S"EJ'"inD ^SJ^n^n, Novellae, i. e. new comments by R. Samue^ 
 Edels (of Posen, died in the year 1631). In these explanatory and 
 dialectical comments on Talmudical passages, and on Rashi and 
 Tosaphoth, the author often displays a high degree of sagacity and 
 penetration. 
 
 0. )0""inC ^EJ'n^n, Novellae, i. e. new comments by R. Meir Lublin 
 (Rabbi in Cracow and Lemberg, died in the year 1616). These likewise 
 very sagacious comments refer mostly to the Tosaphoth. 
 
 B. COMMENTARIES EXCLUSIVELY ON THE MISHNA. 
 §33. 
 
 1. The first to write a commentary on the whole Mishna 
 was Moses Maimonides [XII century]. He commenced it in 
 the 23rd year of his age, in Spain, and finished it in his 30th 
 year, in Egypt. This commentary was written in Arabic, 
 manuscripts of which are to be found in the Bodleian Library 
 at Oxford, and in some other libraries. From the Arabic it 
 was translated into Hebrew by several scholars, flourishing in 
 the XIII century, namely Seder Zeraim, by Jehuda Charizi; 
 Seder Moed, oy Joseph Ibn Alfual; Seder Nashim, by Jacob 
 
Commentaries on the Talmud. 69 
 
 Achrtai (or Abbasi'). Seder Nezikin, by Solomon b. Joseph, 
 with the exception of Perek Chelek in Sanhedrin and Masecheth 
 Aboth, including the ethical treatise Sh'mone Perakim, in- 
 troducing the latter, which were translated by Samuel Ibn 
 Tibbon; Seder Kodashim, by Nathanel Ibn Almuli; the trans- 
 lator of Seder Teharoth is not known. These translations are 
 appended to all Talmud editions, behind each Mascchta under 
 the heading of D"2Dnn^ m"^:trt:n Din-'S. 
 
 The characteristic feature of this commentary of Maimonides 
 consists in this, that it follows the analytical method, laying 
 down at the beginning of each section the principles and general 
 views of the subject, and thereby throwing light upon the par- 
 ticulars to be explained, while Rashi in his Talmud commentary 
 adopted the synthetical method, commencing with the explan- 
 ation of the particulars, and thereby leading to a clear under- 
 standing of the whole of the subject matter. 
 
 2. Several distinguished Rabbis wrote commentaries on 
 single sections of the Mishna, especially on those Masechtoth to 
 which no Babylonian Gemara (and hence no Rashi) exists. Of 
 these commentaries the following are found in our Talmud 
 editions: 
 
 a. ty"nn lying's on all Masechtoth of Seder Zeraim, except 
 Berachoth, and all Masechtoth of Seder Teharoth, except Nidda, 
 by E. Simson of Sens (XII century), the celebrated Tosaphist. 
 
 b. ^^''^nn tm''S, on the same Masechtoth, by E. Asherb. 
 Yechiel (XIII ccmtury) the author of the epitome of the Talmud 
 which is appended to all Masechtoth. 
 
 c. ^'^ lyil^'S on Masecheth Middoth, by R, She?naya who 
 is supposed to have been a disciple of Rashi. 
 
 d. T'nsnn irin^'S on Masecheth Eduyoth, hj R. Abraha?n 
 b. Davta\XlI cent.), the celebrated author of critical annotations 
 on Maimonides' Talmudical code. 
 
 e. Commentary on the Masechtoth Kinnim and Tamid 
 by an anonymous author. 
 
 3. R. Obadya of Bertinoro in Italy, and Rabbi in Jerusalem 
 (d. in the year 1510), wrote a very lucid commentary on the 
 whole Mishna which accompanies the text in most of our separate 
 
 » See Gra«tz, Geschichte d. J. vol. VII, p. 303. 
 
to Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 Mishna editions. He follows the synthetic method of Rashi, and 
 adds to each paragraph of the Mishna the result of the discussion 
 of the Gemara. 
 
 4. tD"V mSDin Additional Comments by Vom Tob Lipman 
 Heller, Rabbi of Prague and Cracow (XYII century). These 
 comments likewise extending to all parts of the Mishna, and 
 accompanying its text on the opposite side of Bartinoro's com- 
 mentary in most of our Mishna editions, contain very valuable 
 explanations and critical remarks. 
 
 5. Of shorter commentaries to be found only is some special 
 editions of the Mishna text the following may be mentioned: 
 
 a. n^'^'n rV) by Jacob Chagiz, Rabbi in Jerusalem (XVII 
 century), the author of a Talmudical terminology Techilath 
 Cho china. 
 
 b. nn: rp ^h^, by Senior Phoebus (XYIII cent.). This 
 commentary is an abstract of Bertinoros and Yom Tob Lipman 
 Heller's commentaries. 
 
 c. nmr)::, hj Isaac Ibn 6^^^^^/ in Leghorn (XYII century), is 
 generally based on the commentaries of Rashi and Maimonides. 
 
 C. Commentaries on the Palestinian Talmud. 
 § 34. 
 
 The Palestinian Talmud was not as fortunate as the Babyl- 
 onian in regard to complete and lucid commentaries. Most of 
 the commentaries on the former extend only to some sections 
 or parts thereof, and none of them dates further back than to 
 the sixteenth century. 
 
 The first commentary on the whole Palestinian Talmud by 
 an anonymous author, appeared in the Cracow edition of the 
 year 1609, and is reprinted in the latest Krotoschin edition. It 
 is a brief and insufiicient commentary. 
 
 2. y^^in"" mti^, a commentary on 18 Masechtoth by H, 
 Joshua Benveniste (XYII century). 
 
 3. my i^np and additions, called ]3np ''Tt^* on Seder 
 Moed, Nashim and part of Nezikin by R. David Fraenkel, Rabbi 
 in Dessau and later in Berlin, (teacher of Moses Mendelssohn, 
 XYIII century). 
 
Commentaries on the Talmud. *ll 
 
 4. ntt'D ''JS and □''J2n nSID, a double commentary on the 
 whole Jerushalmi ^j; i?. Moses Margolioth (XYITI century). This 
 double commentary and the precedini^ of David Fraenkel are 
 embodied in the Shitomir edition (1860-67). 
 
 6- iT*^ T\ZT\'^ onBerachoth, Peahand Demai hj Z.Frankel 
 (Vienna 1874 and Breslau 1875). 
 
 6. Commentary on Seder Zeraim and Mosccheth Shekalim 
 by Solomon Syrileio (or Serillo)^ an exile from Spain. Of this 
 commentary only Berachoth was published from a MS. with 
 annotations by M. Lehmann (Frank, on the Main 1875). 
 
 Regarding some other commentaries on single parts of the 
 Palestinian Talmud see Z. Frankel, Mebo Ha-Jerushalmi 
 134a-186a. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 EPITOMES AND CODIFICATIONS OP THE TALMUD. 
 
 Introductory. 
 § 35. 
 
 toiiice the Babylonian Talmud was considered by most of 
 the Jewish communities in all countries as the source of the rab- 
 binical law by which to regulate the religious life, it is but 
 natural that already at a comparatively early period attempts 
 were made to furnish abstracts of the same for practical purposes. 
 This was done partly by epitomes or compendiums which, retain- 
 ing the general arrangement and divisions of the Talmud, bring 
 its matter into a narrower compass by omitting its Agadic and 
 unnecessary passages, and abridging the legal discussions; and 
 partly by codes in which the results of the discussed legal mat- 
 ter is presented in a more systematic order. The first attempts 
 in this direction were made by R. Jehudai Gaon of Sura (YIII 
 century) in his book Halachoth Ketuoth (abridged Halachoth), 
 and by R. Simon of Kahira ( — IX century) in his {Halachoth 
 Gedoloth. Both of these two works which afterwards coalesced 
 into one work still extant under the latter title, were however 
 eclipsed by later master works of other celebrated Rabbinical 
 authorities. 
 
 A. Epitomes. 
 § 36. 
 
 The principal epitomes or compendiums of the Talmud are 
 by the following authors : 
 
 1. R. Isaac Alfasi (after the initials called '^Rif, born in 
 1013 near the city of Fez in Africa, died in 1103 as Rabbi at 
 Lucena in Spain) wrote an excellent compendium which he called 
 '^Halachoth" but which is usually called by the name of its 
 author ^DS^S or D"''"i. In this compendium he retains the 
 general arrangement, the language and style of the Talmud, 
 but omits, besides the Agada, all parts and passages which 
 
Epitomes and Codifications. 73 
 
 concern laws that had become obsolete since the destruction of 
 the temple. Besides, he condensed the lengthy discussions, and 
 added his own decision in cases not clearly decided in the Talmud. 
 
 Remark. Alf asi's compendium comprises in print three large folio 
 volumes in which the text is accompanied by Rashi's Talmud com- 
 mentary and, besides, by numerous commentaries, annotations and 
 glosses, especially those by R. Nissim b. Reuben (|"-|); by R. Zerachia 
 Halevi (Maor); by R. Mordecai b. Hillel; by R. Joseph Chabiba (Nimuke 
 Joseph), and by some other distinguished Rabbis. 
 
 2. R. Asher b. Jechiel (ty"i<nn), a German Rabbi, later in 
 Toledo, Spain, where he died in 1327, wrote a compendium alter 
 the pattern of that of Alfasi and embodied in the same also the 
 opinions of later authorities. This compendium is appended in 
 our Talmud editions to each Masechta, under the title of the 
 author nU^S* 1i"'3n. 
 
 R. Jacob, the celebrated son of this author, added to that 
 compendium an abstract of the decisions contained in the same, 
 
 the ty"i<nn •'pD-'S m^f'^p. 
 
 B. Codes. 
 § 37. 
 
 1. Mishne Thora pinin HJITD * 'Repetition of the Law", by 
 R. Moses Maimonides (D' -D n) flourishing in the XII century. 
 This is the most comprehensive and systematically arranged Code 
 of all the Laws scattered through the two Talmuds, or resulting 
 from the discussions in the same. Occasionally also the opinions 
 of the post Talmudic authorities, the Gaonim, are added. 
 
 This gigantic work, written throughout in Mishnic Hebrew 
 in a very lucid and attractive style, is divided into fourteen 
 books, hence its additional name Sepher Ha-yad (i"» having the 
 numerical value of 14), and by way of distinction, it was later 
 called '^Yad Hachazaka", the strong hand. Every book is, ac- 
 cording to the various subjects treated therein, divided into 
 Halachoth, the special names of which are given at the head of 
 each of those fourteen books. The Halachoth are again subdi- 
 vided into chapters (Perakim), and these into paragraphs. 
 
74 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 Remark. This Code is usualy published in four large folio volumes, 
 and provided with the following annotations and commentaries: 
 
 a. Hasagoth Rahed T'DNin niJK'n Critical Eemarks, by R. 
 Abraham h. David, of Posquieres, a contemporary and antagonist of 
 Maimonides. 
 
 b. Migdal Oz])]} b^^'O, the Tower of Strength, defending Maimonid- 
 es' Code against the censures of the critic named above, by Shem Tob 
 Ibn Gaon, of Spain (beginning of XIV century). 
 
 0. Hagahoth Maimimiyoth nV^JID'O mnn, Annotations, by R. 
 Meir Ha-Cohe?i, of Narbonne (XIV century). 
 
 d. Maggid Mishne. a commentary, generally referring to the 
 Talmudical sources of the decisions in Maimonides' Code, by Don 
 Vidal di Tolosa (XIV century). 
 
 e. Khesef Mishne f n J K'D t)D3, a commentary like the preceding, 
 by R. Joseph Karo, the author of the Shulchan Aruch (XVI century). 
 
 In some editions the following two commentaries are also ap- 
 pended. 
 
 Lechem Mishne HJK^ Dn!?> by JR. Abraham de Baton, of Szafed, 
 XVI century. 
 
 Mishne Vmelech "^^D^ HJK^, by Jehuda Rosanes, Rabbi in Con- 
 stantinople, d. 1737. 
 
 2. hM^ m^D'D (abbrev. y'DD), the great Law book, by the 
 Tosaphist jR, Moses of Coucy, in France (XIII century). This 
 work arranges the Talmudical law according to the 613 precepts 
 which the Rabbis found to be contained in the Pentateuch, and is 
 divided into ]"»ty5; commendatory, and ]'»Ti«'? prohibitory laws. 
 
 Remark. A similar work, but on a smaller scale, is pp niVD 'D 
 ip"1^D), also called Amude Golah, by R. Isaac b. Joseph, of Corbeil. 
 (d. 1280). 
 
 3. Turi'm D"'11tD (the Rows of Laws), by i?. /aco^, son of 
 that celebrated R. Asher b. Jechiel who was mentioned above. 
 The work is divided into four parts, called: Tur Orach Chayim^ 
 treating of Liturgical Laws ; Tur Yore Dea^ treating of 
 the Ritual Laws ; Tur Eden Ha-ezer on the Marriage 
 Laws, and Tur Choshen Mishpat on the Civil Laws. Each of 
 these four books is subdivided according to subjects under ap- 
 propriate headings, and into chapters, called Simanim. This 
 
Epitomes and Codifications. 75 
 
 code diflfers from that of Maiinonides in so far as it is restricted to 
 such laws only which were still in use outside of Palestine, and 
 as it embodies also rules and customs which were established 
 after the close of the Talmud. Besides, it is not written in that 
 uniform and pure language and in that lucid style by which the 
 work of Maimonides is characterized. 
 
 Remark. The text of the Tiirim is generally provided with the 
 commentaries Beth Joseph, by R. Joseph Karo, and Darke Moshe, by 
 R. Moses Isserles. 
 
 4. Shulchan Aruch^ "jliy ]n'?ty (the prepared table), by R. 
 Joseph Karo (XYI century), the same author who wrote the com- 
 mentaries on the codes of Maimonides and of R. Jacob b. Ashcr. 
 Taking the last mentioned code (Turim) and his own commentary 
 on the same as basis, and retaining its division into four parts as 
 well as that into subjects and chapters, he subdivided each 
 chapter (Siman) into paragraphs (D''S"'VD) and so remodeled its 
 contents as to give it the proper shape and style of a law book. 
 This Shulchan Aruch together with the numerous annotations 
 (mn:tn) added to it by the contemporary R. Moses Isserles (kS"D"l) 
 was up to our time regarded by all rabbinical Jews as the autho- 
 ritative code by which all questions of the religious life were 
 decided. 
 
 Remark. The glosses and commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch 
 are very numerous. Those usually printed with the text in the folio 
 editions are the following, all belonging to the seventeenth century: 
 
 a. Beer ha-Gola, giving the sources of that code, by Moses Ribkes 
 in Amsterdam. 
 
 b. Tare Zahdb (T"t3) commentary on all parts of the code, by R. 
 David b. Samuel Halevi. 
 
 c. Sifihe Cohen (*]"tJO on Jore Dea and Ghoshen Mishpat, by R. 
 Sabbathai Cohen. 
 
 d. Magen Abraham (n"0) on Orach Chayim, by R. Abram 
 Gumbinner. 
 
 e. Beth Samuel on Eben Ha-ezer by R. Samuel b. Uri, of Furth. 
 
 f. Clielkath Mechokek on Eben Ha-ezer, by R. Moses of Brisk. 
 
76 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 Constant references to the four Codes mentioned above are 
 made in the marginal glosses which are found on every page of 
 the Talmud, under the heading of ''^E?i Mishpat^ Ner Mttzwah'\ 
 It is the object of these glosses to show, at every instance when 
 a law is quoted or discussed in the Talmud, where the final decision 
 of that law is to be found in the various codes. The authorship 
 of these marginal glosses is ascribed to R. Joshua Boas Baruch 
 (XVI century). The same scholar wrote also the glosses 
 headed Ihora Or which are found in the space between the 
 Talmud text and Rashi's commentary, and which indicate the 
 books and chapters of the biblical passages quoted in the Talmud, 
 besides, the very important glosses on the inner margins of the 
 pages, headed Massoreth Ha-shas (D"^n n^lIDD) which give 
 references to parallel passages in the Talmud. The last mentr 
 ioned glosses were later increased with critical notes by Isaiah 
 Berlin (Pik), Rabbi in Breslau (d. 1T99). 
 
 C. Collections of the Agadic Portions of the Talmud. 
 
 § 38. 
 
 While the above mentioned Corapendiums and Codes are 
 restricted to abstracting only the legal matter (Halacha) of the 
 Talmud, R. Jacob ibn C/^^-^/i^, flourishing at the beginning of the 
 sixteenth century, collected all the Agadic passages especially of 
 the Babylonian Talmud. This very popular collection which is 
 usually printed with various commentaries has the title oiEn 
 Jacob (2pj;'' |''j;; in some editions it is also called ^snt^'' ["'j;). 
 
 R. Sa77iuel /^^/f, flourishing in the latter part of that century, 
 made a similar Collection of the Agadic passages of the Palestinian 
 Talmud with an extensive commentary under the title of 
 nsnD nS'' (Vienna, 1590 and Berlin 1125-26). An abridged 
 edition with a short commentary was published under the title of 
 n^'^tfi^in"' p^'D (Lemberg, 1860). 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 
 MANUSCRIPTS AND PRINTED EDITIONS OF THE 
 
 TALMUD. 
 
 A. Manuscripts. 
 § 39. 
 
 In consequence of the terrible persecutions of the Jews 
 during the Middle Ages, and the destruction of their libraries, 
 so often connected therewith, and especially in consequence of 
 the vandalism repeatedly perpetrated by the Church against 
 the Talmud,* only a very limited number of manuscripts of the 
 same have come down to our time. Codices of single Sedarim 
 (sections) and Masechtoth (tracts or treatises) are to be found in 
 various libraries of Europe, especially in the Vatican Library of 
 Rome, and in the libraries of Parma, Leyden, Paris, Oxford, 
 Cambridge, Munich, Berlin and Hamburg. The only known 
 complete manuscript of the Babylonian Talmud, written 
 in the year 1369, is in possession of the Royal Library of 
 Munich. A fragment of Talmud Pesachim, of the ninth or tenth 
 century, is preserved in the University Library of Cambridge, 
 and was edited with an autotype fascimile, by W. H. Lowe, 
 Cambridge 1879. 
 
 The Columbia College in the city of New York, lately 
 acquired a collection of manuscripts containing the treatises 
 Pesachim^ Moed Katon^ Megilla and Zebaehi??i of the Babylonian 
 Talmud. These manuscripts came from Southern Arabia, and 
 date from the year 1548. ^ 
 
 ^ It is stated that at the notorious auto-da-fe of the Talmud, held 
 in the year 1249, at Paris, twenty four cart-loads of Talmud tomes were 
 consigned to the flames. Similar destructions of the Talmud were 
 executed by the order of Pope Julius III, in the year 1553, first at Rome, 
 then at Bologne and Venice, and in the following year in Ancona and 
 other cities. Among the 12,000 tomes of the Talmud that were burned 
 at Cremona, in the year 1559 (see Graetz Geschichte d. Juden X. p. 3S2), 
 were undoubtedly also numerous Manuscripts, though most of them 
 may have been printed copies. 
 
 ' See Max L. Margolis, "The Columbia College MS. of 
 Meghilla examined," New York 1892- 
 
78 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 Manuscripts of the MisJma or of single Sedarim thereof, 
 some of which dating from the thirteenth century, are preserved 
 in the libraries of Parma, of Berlin, of Hamburg, of Oxford and 
 of Cambridge. That of the last mentioned library was edited 
 by W. H. Lowe : " The Mishna on which the Palestinian Talmud 
 rests," etc., Cambridge, 1883. 
 
 Of the Palestinian Talmud the only manuscript, of consid- 
 erable extent, is preserved in the Library of Leyden. See S. 
 M. Schiller-Szinessy, ''Description of the Leyden MS. of the 
 Palestinian Talmud." Cambridge 1878. Fragments of the 
 Palestinian Talmud are also found in some other libraries, 
 especially in those of Oxford and Parma. 
 
 Fuller information concerning MSS. of the Talmud is given 
 in F. Lebrecht's ''Handschriften und erste Ausgaben des Babyl. 
 Talmud," Berlin 1862. See alsoM. Steinschneider's ''Hebriiische 
 Bibliographic," Berlin, 1862 and 1863. 
 
 B. The Talmud in Print. 
 
 a. The Mishna editions. 
 
 § 40. 
 
 Already as early as the year 1492, the first edition of th> 
 Mishna together with the commentary of Maimonides appearea 
 in Naples. It was folio vved by several editions of Venice (1546-50, 
 and 1606), of Riva di Trento (1559) and of Mantua (1559-63). 
 In the last mentioned editions the commentary of Obadia di 
 Bertinoro is added. The editions which have since appeared 
 are very numerous. Those which appeared since the seven- 
 teenth century are generally accompanied, besides Bertinoro's 
 commentary, by tD'"' mSDIH by Lipman Heller or some other 
 shorter commentaries. 
 
 b. The Babylonian Talmud. 
 
 § 41. 
 
 The first complete edition of the Babjdonian Talmud was 
 published by Daniel Bomberg in 12 folio volumes, Venice 
 
Manuscripts and printed Editions. 1^ 
 
 1520-23.1 Besides the text, it contains the commentary of Rashi, 
 the Tosaphoth, the Piske-Tosaphoth, the compendium of Asheri, 
 and the Mishna commentary of Maimonides. This original 
 edition served as model for all editions which subsequently ap- 
 peared at Venice, Basel, Cracow, Lublin, Amsterdam, Frank- 
 fort on-the-Oder, Berlin, Frankfort on-the-Main, Sulzbach, Dy- 
 hernfurtjlrague, Warsaw, and recently at Vienna and Wilna. The 
 later editions were greatly improved by the addition of valuable 
 literary and critical marginal notes and appendices by learned 
 rabbis. But the Basel and most of the subsequent editions down 
 almost to the present time, have been much mutilated by the 
 official censors of the press, who expunged from the Talmud all 
 those passages which, in their opinion, seemed to reflect upon 
 Christianity, and, besides, changed expressions, especially names 
 of nations and of sects, which they suspected as having reference 
 to Christians. ' 
 
 The Amsterdam editions, especially the first (1644-48), es- 
 caped those mutilations at the hand of the censors, and are on 
 this account considered very valuable. Most ofthe passages which 
 have elsewhere been eliminated or altered by the censors, have 
 been extracted from the Amsterdam edition, and published in 
 separate small books. Of these the following two may be menti- 
 oned: m:DD*y:*nnnii'13p(s.l.)andD"tynmi1"lDn,Koenigsberg, 1860. 
 
 A critical review ofthe complete editions ofthe Babylonian 
 Talmud and of the very numerous editions of single Masechtoth 
 
 * Prior to this first complete edition, a number of single Masechtoth 
 of the Babyl. Talmud had already been published by Gershom of 
 Soncino, between the years 1484 and 1519, at Soncino and at Pesaro. 
 
 ' Words mostly changed are: instead of i^J (gentile) ^ni3 
 (a Samaritan) or "•L'nD (an Aethiopian); instead of pD (a heretic) '•pn:*' 
 (a Saddiicee) or DITlp'SK (an Epicurean); instead of nSJ (an alien, a Nou 
 Israelite) D""iDV (an idolater); instead of n"1N (the nations of the world) — 
 D"b23(Babylonians) or D''jyj3(Canaanites); instead of ^XD"n(the Romans) 
 ^fc^DIN (Syrians) or ^XDID (Persians); instead of ^D^-i(Rome) '^^]jn (the city) 
 etc. 
 
 In the more recent editions, however, except those appearing 
 under Russian censorship, the original readings have mostly been 
 restored. 
 
80 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 since the year 1484, was published by Raphael Rabbinovicz, in 
 his Hebrew pamphlet, Tio^nn nDSin bv ItDSD Munich 1877. i 
 
 The same author also collected and published very rich and 
 important material for a critical edition of the Babylonian 
 Talmud from the above mentioned manuscript in the Royal 
 Library of Munich and other manuscripts, as well as from early 
 prints of single Masechtoth in various libraries. The title of 
 this very extensive work, written in Hebrew, is Dikduke Sopherim^ 
 D"''^.S1D •'pnpTD with the Latin title: Yariae lectiones in Mishnam 
 et in Talmud Babylonicum, etc., Munich 1868-86. The fifteen 
 volumes in octavo which have appeared of this valuable work 
 comprise only three and a half Sedarim of the six Sedarim of the 
 Talmud. It is to be regretted that in consequence of the death 
 of the learned author the completion of this important work has 
 been suspended. 
 
 c. The Palestinian Talmud. 
 § 42. 
 
 Of the Palestinian Talmud (Jerushalmi) only four complete 
 editions appeared: 
 
 1. The first edition, published by Daniel Romberg, Yenice 
 1523-24, in one folio volume, without any commentary. 
 
 2. The Cracow edition, 1609, with a short commentary 
 on the margin. 
 
 3. The Krotoshin edition, 1866, with a commentary like 
 that in the Cracow edition, but added to it are marginal notes, 
 containing references to parallel passages in the Babylonian 
 Talmud, and corrections of text readings. 
 
 4. The Shitomir edition, 1860-67, in several folio volumes, 
 with various commentaries. 
 
 Besides these four complete editions, several parts have 
 been published with commentaries. 
 
 > This instructive pamphlet is also reprinted as an appendix to 
 vol. VIII of Dikduke Sopherim. 
 
CHAPTER X. 
 
 AUXILIARIES TO THE STUDY OF THE TALMUD. 
 A. Lexicons. 
 
 § 43. 
 
 1. The Aruch (^nj^n) by R. Nathan b. Jechiel^ of Rome, 
 flourishing in the eleventh century. This oldest Lexicon for 
 both Talmuds and the Midrashim, on which all later dictionaries 
 are based, still retains its high value, especially on account of 
 its copious quotations from the Talmudical literature by which 
 many corrupted readings are corrected. It received many va- 
 luable additions ("j*in3;n ClDID) at the hand of Benjamin Mussaphia 
 (XYII century). These additions, generally headed by the 
 initials a"i< = pD''J2 ^DS, mostly explain the Greek and Latin 
 words occurring in the Talmud and Midrash. The edition by 
 M. Landau (Prague 1819-24, in five 8vo volumes) is increased by 
 numerous annotations and supplied with definitions in German. 
 The latest and best edition of that important work is: 
 
 2. Aruch Completum (D^ti^n "[in^) by Alexander Kohut^ vol. 
 1-YIII. Vienna and New York, 1878-1892. In this edition the 
 original lexicon of Nathan b. Jechiel is corrected by collating 
 several ancient Mss. of the work, and, besides, considerably 
 enlarged by very valuable philological and critical researches 
 and annotations. 
 
 3. Lexicon Talmiidtcumhj Joh. i?z/^/^^/, Basel, 1640. Of 
 this work written in Latin, a new corrected and enlarged edition 
 was published by B. Fischer^ Leipsic, 1869-15. 
 
 4. Neuhebraisches und chald. Wdrterbuch ilber die Tal- 
 mudim und Midrashim, by /. Levy in four volumes. Leipsic 
 1876-89. 
 
 5. A Dictionary of the Talmud Babli and Yerushalmi and 
 the Midrashic Literature, by M. Jastroiv. London and New 
 York, 1886-1903, in two volumes. 
 
82 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 Remark. There are, besides, several small dictionaries, mostly 
 abstracts of the Aruch, and useful for beginners. Special mention 
 deserves M. Schulhaum, Neuhebraisch-deutsches Worterbuch, Lem- 
 berg, 1880. 
 
 B. Grammars. 
 
 § 44. 
 
 The modern works on the Grammar of the Mishna have 
 already been mentioned above p. 15 in the Note to the paragraph 
 speaking of the Language of the Mishna. The first attempt at 
 compiling a Grammar of the peculiar dialect of the Babylonian 
 Gemara was made by: 
 
 S. D.Luzzatto m\L\^ ''Elementi grammaticali del Caldeo 
 Biblicoedel dialetto Talmudico Babilonese". Padua, 1865. 
 
 Two translations of this work appeared, namely: 
 
 1. Grammatik der bibl. chaldaeischen Sprache und des 
 Idioms des Talmud Babli. Ein Grundriss von S. D. Luzzatto, 
 mit Anmerkungen herausgegeben von M, S. Kriiger, Breslau, 
 18T3. 
 
 2. Luzzatto's Grammar of the bibl. Chaldaic Language and 
 of the idiom of the Talmud Babli, translated by /. Goldammer, 
 New York, 1876. 
 
 Caspar Levias. Grammar of the Aramaic Idiom contained 
 in the Babylonian Talmud. Cincinnati, 1900. 
 
 /. Roseftberg. Das Aramaische Yerbum in babyl. Talmud. 
 Marburg, 1888. 
 
 C. Chrestomathies. 
 § 45. 
 
 A. B. Ehrlich, Rashe Perakim, Selections from the Talmud 
 and the Midrashim. New York, 1884. 
 
 B. Fischer. Talmudische Chrestomathie mit Anmerkungen, 
 Scholien und Glossar. Leipsic, 1884. 
 
 Ph. Lederer. Lehrbuch zum Selbstunterricht im babyl. Tal- 
 mud, 3 parts, Pressburg, 1881-88. 
 
 A. Sifiger. ^'yv^Tx Talmudische Chrestomathie fiir den 
 ersten Unterrichtim Talmud, 2 parts. Pressburg, 1882. 
 
Auxiliaries to the study of the Talmud. 8J? 
 
 D. Introductory Works and Treatises. 
 
 a. Older Works. 
 
 § 46. 
 
 1. Samuel Hanagid^ of Granada (XI century), was the first 
 to write an introduction to the Talmud. Only a part of his 
 work has come down to our time, and is appended to the first 
 volume of our Talmud editions under the heading TiD^nn ^^I^D- 
 
 2. Moses Maimonides opens his Mishna commentary on 
 Seder Zeraim with an introduction to the Talmud, especially to 
 the Mishna. 
 
 This introduction of Maimonides as well as that of Samuel 
 Hanagid have been translated into German by Fi?iner in his 
 Translation of Talm. Berachoth. 
 
 3. mrT^nD 'D (Methodology of the Talmud), by Satnson of 
 Chinon (XIY century). Constantino (1515), Cremona, (1558), 
 Yerona (1657). 
 
 4. D^lj; m2"'^n, by Jeshua b, Joseph Halevt, of Toledo, 
 (XY century). 
 
 This work was translated into Latin by Constantin 
 L'Empereur, under the title Clavis Talmudica. Ley den, 1634. 
 
 In the editions of Yenice (1639), and of Livorno (1792) the 
 Halichoth 01am is accompanied by two complementary works: 
 TlD^nn ''^^:d, by Joseph Karo,andny'iaw* p2^ by Solomon Algazi. 
 
 Abstracts of the works 3 and 4 are added to Samuel Hanagid's 
 Mebo Hatalmud in the appendix to our Talmud editions. 
 
 5. «nD:in '•^^n Methodology of the Talmud by Isaac 
 Campa7iton, of Castilia (XY century), published in Yenice (1565) 
 Mantua (1593), Amsterdam (1754). A new edition was pub- 
 lished by Isaac Weiss, Yienna, 1891. 
 
 6. nn^n n^nn (Methodology of the Talmud), by Jacob 
 Chagiz (XYII century). Yerona 1647. Amst. 1709. 
 
 b. Modern Works in Hebrew. 
 § 47. 
 /. Abelsohn. niiri'' ]in:jT, Methodology of the Mishna and 
 Rules of Halacha. Wilna, 1859. 
 
84 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 Jacob Briill. V^W^V^ «UC, Introduction to the Mislina; 2 
 volumes. Frankf. o. M. 1876-85. Vol. I treats of the lives and 
 methods of the teachers from Ezra to the close of the Mishna, 
 and vol. II of the Plan and System of the Mishna. 
 
 Zebi Hirsch Chajes. TlD^m ^UD, Introduction to the 
 Talmud. Lemberg, 1845. 
 
 Z. Frankel. n^ti^cn ''^m, Hodegetica in Mishnam etc., 
 Leipsic, 1859. A little Supplement to this important work was 
 published under the title of " Additamenta et Index ad librum 
 Hodegetica in Mischnam". Leipsic, 186Y. 
 
 Z, Frankel. •'0^ti^*n\"I ^<^2D, Introductio in Talmud Hiero- 
 solymitanum. Breslau, 1870. 
 
 Joachim Oppenhehn^ nit^'DH nn^lH, the genesis of the 
 Mishna. Pressburg, 1882. 
 
 J. H. Weiss, vtrnm nn n*n with the German title: Zur 
 Geschichte der jiidischen Tradition. Vienna, 1871-83. Yol I 
 and II treat of the period to the close of the Mishna, and Vol. 
 Ill of that of the Amoraim. 
 
 J. Wiesner. 'Q^h'OT\^ riy^i. Investigations concerning 
 the origin and the contents of the Palestinian Talmud. Yienna, 
 1872. 
 
 c. Works and Articles in Modern Languages. 
 §48. 
 
 S. Adler, The article Talmud in Johnson's Encyclopedia, 
 New York. Reprinted m the author's collective work ' 'Kobetz 
 al Yad". New York, 1886: pp. 46-80. 
 
 /. 6". Block. Einblicke in die Geschichte der Entstehung 
 der Talmudischen Literatur. Yienna, 1884. 
 
 N. Briill. Die Entstehungsgeschichte des babyl. Talmuds 
 als Schriftwerkes (in Jahrbiicher fiirJud. Geschichte u. Literatur 
 II pp. 1-123). 
 
 Sam. Davidson. The Article Talmud in John Kitto's 
 Cyclopaedia. 
 
 J. Derenbourg, Article Talmud in Lichtenberg's Ency" 
 clopedie des sciences religieuses. Paris, 1882. XII pp. 1007* 
 1036. 
 
Auxiliaries to the study of the Talmud. 85 
 
 Z, Frankel. Beitriige zur Einleitung in den Talmud (in 
 Monatschrift fur Geschichte und Wissenschaft des Judentlmms 
 X, pp. 186-194; 205-212; 258-272). 
 
 y. Hamburger. Articles Mischna and Tahnud in Real 
 Eycyclopadie fur Bibel und Talmud. Strelitz 1883. Yol II pp. 
 T89-798 and 1155-1167. 
 
 D. Hoffmann. Die erste Misclina und die Controversen 
 der Tanaim. Berlin, 1882. 
 
 B. Pick. Article Talmud in Clintock and Strong's Cyclo- 
 paedia of theological Literature. Yol. X, pp. 166-187. 
 
 Ludw. A. Rosenthal, Ueberden Zusammenhang der Mischna. 
 Ein Beitrag zu ihrer Entstehungs geschichte. Strasburg, 1890. 
 
 S. M. Schiller-Szimssy. Article Mishnah in Encyclopedia 
 Britannica, 9th Edition, vol. XYI, and Article Tahnud in vol. 
 XXIII. 
 
 Hermann Z. Strack. Einleitung in den Thalmud. Leipsic, 
 1887. This work of the celebrated Christian scholar which treats 
 of the subject with thoroughness, exactness and impartiality, is 
 a reprint of the article Talmud in Herzog's Real Encyclopadie 
 fiir protestant. Theologie. Second Edition, vol. XYIII. 
 d. Historical Works. 
 
 Of modern historical works which, treating of the Talmudical 
 period shed much light upon the genesis of the Talmud, the fol- 
 lowing are very important: 
 
 Julius Furst Kultur und Literaturgeschichte der Juden 
 in Asien (Leipsic, 1849), treats of the Baoylonian academies 
 and teachers during the period of the Amoraim. 
 
 /. M. Jost. Geschichte des Judenthums und seiner Secten 
 (Leipsic 1857-59). Yol II, pp. 13-222 treat of the period from 
 the destruction of the temple to the close of the Talmud. 
 
 H. Graetz. Geschichte der Juden, Yol. lY, second edition, 
 Leipsic, 1866. This volume has been translated into English 
 by James K. Gutheim: History of the Jews from the Downfall 
 of the Jewish State to the conclusion of the Talmud. New 
 York, 1873. 
 
 G. Karpeles. Geschichte der judischen Literatur. Berlin, 
 1886. pp. 265-332. 
 
86 Historical and Literary Introduction 
 
 e. Encyclopedical Works. 
 §50. 
 
 Jsaac Lamperonti^ physician and Rabbi in Ferrara (XYIII 
 century) wrote in the Hebrew language a very extensive and 
 useful Encyclopedia of the Talmud and the Rabbinical Decisions, 
 under the title of pn^i'' inS. Five folio volumes of this work, 
 comprising the letters N*-D,were published at Venice (1750) and 
 Livorno (1840). The remaining volumes have lately been 
 published in 8vo at Lyck (1864-1874) and Berlin (1885-1889), 
 where also a new edition of the former volumes appeared. 
 
 Solomon Rapaport. ]>^D "|ny, an encyclopedical work in 
 Hebrew of which only one volume, containing the letter j<, ap- 
 peared (Prague 1852). 
 
 J. Hamburger. Real Encyclopaedic fiir Bibel und Talmud, 
 Abtheilung II. Die Talmudischen Artikel A-Z. Strelitz, 1883. 
 Three Supplements to this valuable work appeared Leipsic 
 1886-92. 
 
 f. Some other Books of Reference. 
 
 § 51. 
 
 Si77ion Peiser, •'il^Dty ^^^^ Onomasticon of Biblical per- 
 sons and of the Mishna teachers quoted in the Talmud and in 
 Midrash (Wandsbeck 1728). 
 
 Malachiben Jacob (XYIII century), ''^S^D TV This book 
 is a Methodology of the Talmud, alphabetically arranged. 
 Livorno, 1767, Berlin, 1852. 
 
 A, Stein. Talmudische Terminologie; alphabetisch geordnet. 
 Prague, 1869. 
 
 Jacob Briill. ]V^'^ tt^lH Die Mnemonotechnik des Talmud. 
 Vienna, 1864. 
 
 This little book explains the Stmam?n, i. e. the mnemonical 
 signs and symbols so often met with in the Talmud which are 
 intended to indicate the sequence of the discussing teachers or 
 of their arguments. See above p. 60, Note. 
 
 Israel Mash. ]i2^"T|''^D Rabbinical Sentences, alphabetically 
 arranged. Warsaw, 1874. 
 
Auxiliaries to the study op the Talmud. 87 
 
 S. Ph. FrenkeL t^*!"!^ JT*^. Index of the Agadic passages 
 of the Talmud. Krotoschin, 1885. 
 
 Moses Halevi. D^JV^. Legal and ethical maxims of the 
 Talmud, alphabetically arranged. Belgrade, 1874. 
 
 Wies7ier. Scholien, wissenschaftliche Forschungen aus dem 
 Gebiete des babyl. Talmud. I Berachothj II Sabbath; III 
 Erubin and Pesachim. Prague, 1859-67. 
 
CHAPTER XI. 
 
 TRANSLATIONS OF THE TALMUD. 
 A. The Mishna. 
 § 52. 
 a. Latin Translations. 
 The learned Dutch G. Surenhusius published (Amsterdam, 
 1698-1703) a Latin version of the Mishna and of the com- 
 mentaries of Maimonides and Obadia Bertinoro with annotations 
 by several Christian scholars. 
 
 Remark. Prior to this publication of Surenhusius, a Latin version 
 of some single Masechtoth of the Mishna was published by various 
 Christian Scholars, as Sabbath and Erubin by Seb. Schmidt (Leipsic, 
 1661); Shekalim, by Joh. Wiilfer (Altdorf, 1680); Aboda Zara o^nd. Tamid, 
 by C. Peringer (Altdorf, 1680). 
 
 b. German Translations. 
 
 Johann Jacob Rabe. Mishnah iibersetzt und erlautert. 
 Anspach, 1760-63. 
 
 /. M, Jostj the celebrated Jewish historian, published 
 (Berlin 1832-34) anew German translation in Hebrew characters 
 with short introductions and annotations, together with the 
 vocalized Mishna text and the commentary nnj flD- 
 
 A. Sa?fi?nter. Mischnajoth,vokalisirter Text mit deutscher 
 Uebersetzung und Erklarung. Berlin, 1886 — . 
 c. English Translations. 
 
 W, Walton. Translation of the treatises Sabbath and 
 Erubin, London, IT 18. 
 
 D. A, de Sola and M. 7. Raphall. Eighteen treatises from 
 the Mishna translated. London, 1843. 
 
 Joseph Barclay published under the title ''The Talmud" a 
 translation of eighteen treatises of the Mishna with annotations. 
 London, 18*78. 
 
 C. Taylor, Sayings of the Jewish Fathers (the treatise 
 
 Aboth). Cambridge, 18Y7. 
 
 Remark. The treatise Aboth has been translated into almost all of 
 the European languages. 
 
Translations. 89 
 
 B. The Babylonian Talmud. 
 
 § 53. 
 
 To translate the Mislma is a comparatively easy task. 
 Its generally plain andunitorm language and style of expression, 
 and its compendious character could easily enough be rendered 
 into another language especially when accompanied by some 
 explanatory notes. But it is quite different with the Gemara, 
 especially the Babylonian. There are, of course, also passages 
 in the Gemara which offer no great difficulties to a translator 
 who is sufficiently familiar with the idiom in which the original 
 is composed. We refer to the historical, legendary and homi- 
 letical portions (Agadas) which the compilers have interspersed 
 in every treatise. The main part of the Gemara, however, which 
 is essentially of an argumentative character, giving minute 
 reports of discussions and debates on the law, this part, so rich 
 in dialectical subtilities, and so full of technicalities and elliptical 
 expressions, offers to the translator almost insurmountable 
 difficulties. Here a mere version of the original will not do; 
 neither will a few explanatory foot notes be sufficient. It would 
 sometimes require a whole volume of commentary to supplement 
 the translation of a single chapter of the original, in order to 
 render fully and clearly the train of thought and dialectical 
 arguments so idiomatically and tersely expressed therein. ^ This 
 
 » A striking analogy to this difficulty of translating the legal 
 discussions of the Talmud is found in an other branch of legal literature, 
 as may be seen from the following Note which a learned jurist 
 kindly furnished me: "The Year Books of the English Law, sometimes 
 called the Black Letter Books, written in the quaint French Norman, 
 which was the court-language of that day, have always been more or 
 less a sealed book, except to experts in historical antiquities. By the 
 effort of the Selden Society these Reports are being translated from 
 time to time into the English; but to the uninitiated, even in English, 
 these reports are gibberish, and none but those thoroughly versed in 
 legal antiquities, and who have so to speak imbibed from a thousand 
 other sources the spirit of the laws of that day, will be much benefited 
 by this translation. It will take volumes of commentary, a hundred 
 times more bulky than the text, to make this mine of Englsh common 
 law of any value to the general practitioner, not to speak of the laity. 
 "It is caviar to the general public." 
 
90 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 explains why the various attempts at translating the whole of 
 the Babylonian Talmud have, thus far, proven a failure, so that 
 as yet only comparatively few Masechtoth of this Talmud have 
 been translated, and these translations are in many cases not in- 
 telligible enough to be fully understood by the reader who is not 
 yet familiar with the original text and with the spirit of the 
 Talmud. 
 
 a. Latin Translations of single masechtoth. 
 
 Blashts Ugolinus published in volume XIX of his Thesaurus 
 antiquitatum sacrarum (Yenice 1756) a translation of the 
 Masechtoth Zebachim and Menachoth, and in vol. XXY (1762) 
 the Masecheth Sanhedrin. 
 
 G, E. Edzard published (Hamburg, 1705) a Latin trans- 
 lation of the first two Perakim of Aboda Zara. 
 
 b. German Translations. 
 
 Johann Jacob Rabe. Der Tractat Brachoth nach der Hiero- 
 solymitan und Babylonischen Gemara ubersetzt uud erlautert. 
 Halle, 1777. 
 
 C. M. Firmer. Tractat Berachoth. Text mit deutscher 
 Uebersetzung und Einleitung in den Talmud. Berlin, 1842. 
 
 Ferd. Christian Ewald, Aboda Sarah , ein Tractat aus dem 
 Talmud ubersetzt. Niirenberg, 1856 and 1868. 
 
 A. Sajnmter, Tractat Baba Mezia. Text mit deutscher 
 Uebersetzung und Erklarung. Berlin, 1876. 
 
 M, Rawicz. Der Tractat Megilla nebst Tosafoth ins Deutsche 
 iibertragen. Frankfort on the Main, 1883. 
 
 M. Rawicz, Der Tractat Rosch ha-Schanah ins Deutsche 
 iibertragen. Frankf. on the Main, 1886. 
 
 M. Rawicz. Der Tractat Sanhedrin iibertragen und mit 
 erlauternden Bemerkungen versehen. Frankf 1892. 
 
 Z>. O. Straschun. Der Tractat Taanith ins Deutsche iiber- 
 tragen. Halle, 1883. 
 
 August Wunsche. Der Babyl. Talmud in seinen haggadischen 
 Bestandtheilen iibersetzt, 2 volumes. Leipgic, 1886-88. 
 
 Isaak Levy, Der achte Abschnitt aus dem Tractate Sabbath 
 
Translations. 91 
 
 (Babli und Jeruschalmi) iibersetzt und philologisch behandelt. 
 Breslau, 1892. 
 
 c. French Tnanslations. 
 /. Michel Rahbinowicz^ this translator of several parts of 
 the Babyl. Talmud adopted the proper method in presenting the 
 mental labor embodied in that vTork. In selecting a treatise for 
 translation he followed the example of Alphasi (see above p. 72) 
 in his celebrated epitome of the Talmud, in omitting all digres- 
 sions from the main subject, and all episodic Agadas which the 
 compilers interspersed among the stern dialectical discus- 
 sions. The main part thus cleared from all disturbing and 
 bewildering by-work, is then set forth in a clear and fluent 
 translation which combines correctness with the noted ease 
 and gracefulness of the French language. Necessary explan- 
 ations are partly given in short foot-notes, and partly, 
 with great skill, interwoven into the translation of the text. An 
 understanding of the intricate dialectical discussions is greatly 
 facilitated by appropriate headings, such as: Question; Answer; 
 Rejoinder; Reply; Objection; Remark, etc. Besides, each treatise 
 is prefaced by an introduction, in which the leading principles 
 underlying that part of the Talmud are set forth. Of this lucid 
 translation the following parts have appeared: 
 
 1. Legislation criminelle du Talmud, containing the treatise 
 of Sanhedrin and such portions of Maccoth as refer to the punish- 
 ment of criminals. Paris, 1876. 
 
 2. Legislation civile du Talmud, traduction du traitd 
 Kethuboth. Paris, 1880. 
 
 3. Nouveau Commentaire et traduction du traits Baba 
 Kamma. Paris, 1873. 
 
 4. Nouveau Commentaire et traduction du traits Baba 
 Metzia, Paris, 1878. 
 
 5. Nouveau Commentaire et traduction du traits Baba 
 Bathra. Paris, 1879. 
 
 6. La medicine, les paiens etc. This volume contains such 
 portions of thirty different treatises of the Talmud as refer to 
 medicine, paganism, etc. Paris, 1879. 
 
 M. Schwab^ added to the first volume of his French trans- 
 
92 Historical and Literary Introductios 
 
 lation of the Palestinian Talmud, (Paris, 1871) also a translation 
 of Berachotli of the Babyl. Talmud. 
 
 d. English Translation. 
 
 A. IV. Streane. Translation of the treatise Chagiga, 
 Cambridge, 1891. 
 
 0. The Palestinian Talmud. 
 
 § 54. 
 a. Latin Translation. 
 
 Blasius Ugolinus published in volumes XYII-XXX of his 
 Thesaurus antiquitatum sacrarum (Yenice 1755-65) the following 
 treatises in Latin: Pesachim (vol XYII); Shekalim, Yoma, 
 Succah, Rosh Hashanah, Taanith, Megilla, Chagiga, Betza, 
 Moed Katan (vol. XYIII); Maaseroth, Maaser Sheni, Challah, 
 Orlah, Biccurim (vol. XX); Sanhedrin, Maccoth (vol. XXY); 
 Kiddushin, Sota, Kethuboth (vol. XXX). 
 
 b. German Translations. 
 
 Joh. Jacob Rabe^ besides translating Berachoth in connec- 
 tion with that treatise in the Babylonian Gemara, as mentioned 
 above, published: Der Talmudische Tract at Piah^ iibersetzt und 
 erlautert. Anspach, 1781. 
 
 August Wunsche, Der Jerusalemische Talmud in seinen 
 haggadischen Bestandtheilen zum ersten Male in's Deutsche 
 iibertragen. Zurich, 1880. 
 
 c. French Translation. 
 
 Moise Schwab, Le Talmud de Jerusalem traduit pour la 
 premiere fois X volumes. Paris, 1871-90. 
 
 d. English Translation. 
 
 M, Schwab^ the author of the French translation just 
 mentioned, published in English: The Talmud of Jerusalem. 
 Yol. I Berachoth. London, 1886. 
 
CHAPTER XII. 
 
 BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 OF MODERN WORKS AND MONOGRAPHS ON TaLMUDIC SUBJECTS. 
 
 (Arranged with reference to subjects and in alphabetical 
 order of authors). 
 
 § 55. 
 AG AD A. 
 
 W. Backer. Die Agada der Tannaiten. Strasburg, Als. 1884. 
 
 «« Die Agada der Babylonischen Amoraer, Strasburg, 
 
 Als. 1878. 
 u Die Agada der Palastinischen Amoraer, Strasburg, 
 
 Als. 1891. 
 S. Back* Die Fabel im Talmud u. Midrasch (in Monatsschrift 
 
 £. Geschichte u, Wissenschaf t d. Judenlhums, XXIV, 
 
 1875; XXV, 1876; XXIX 1880; XXX, 1881; XXXII, 
 
 1883; XXXIII, 1884). 
 M. Grunhaum. Beitrage zur vergleichenden Mythologie aus der Hag- 
 
 gada (in Zeitschrift d, D. Morgenl. Gesellschaft, toI. 
 
 XXXI, 1877). 
 M. Gudemann. Mythenmischung in der Haggada (in Monatschrift f . 
 
 Geschichte u. Wissenschaf t d. Judenthums, vol. 
 
 XXV, 1876). 
 D. Hoffmann. Die Antonius Agadoth im Talmud (in Magazin fur 
 
 "Wissenschaft des Judenthums, vol. XIX, 1892). 
 
 ARCHAEOLOGICAL. 
 Ad. Brull Trachten der Juden im nachbiblischen Alterthum 
 
 Frankf . on the M. 1873. 
 Iranz Delitzsch. Jiidisches Handworkerleben zur Zeit Jesu, Elangen, 
 
 1879. Translated by B. Pick ''Jewish Artisan Life." 
 
 New York, 18S3. 
 M, H. Iriedlander, Die Arbeit nach Eibel u. Talmud. Briinn, 1891. 
 
94 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 L. Herzfeld. Metrologische Voruntersuchungen, Geld und Gewicht 
 
 der Juden bis zum Shluss des Talmuds (in Jahrbuch 
 
 fur Geschichte der Juden u. des Judenthums, vol. Ill 
 
 pp. 95-191, Leipsic, 18633. 
 
 Alex. Kohut. 1st das Schachspiel im Talmud genannt? (Z. d. D. M. 
 
 G. XL VI, 130-39). 
 Leopold Ldw. Graphische Requisiten und Erzeugnisse bei den Juden, 
 Leipsic, 1870-71. 
 " " Die Lebensalter in der Jiid. Literatur. Szegedin, 1875. 
 
 B. ZucJcerman. Ueber Talmudische Miinzen u. Gewichte. Breslau, 
 1862. 
 *• Das jiidische Maassystem. Breslau, 1867. 
 
 BIOGRAPHICAL. 
 Sam. Back. Elischa ben Abuja, quellenmassig dargestellt. Frankf. 
 
 on the M., 1891. 
 A. Blumenthal. Rabbi Meir, sein Leben u. Wirken. Frankf. 1889. 
 M. Braunschweiger, Die Lehrer der Mischna, ihr Leben u. Wirken. 
 
 Frankf. on the M., 1890. 
 S. Fessler. Mar Samuel, der bedeutendste Amora, Breslau, 1879. 
 
 M. Friedldnder. Geschichtsbilder aus der Zeit der Tanaiten u. Amoraer. 
 
 Briinn, 1879. 
 S. Gelbhaus. R. Jehuda llanasi und die Redaction der Mischna. 
 
 Vienna, 1876. 
 D. Hoffmann. Mar Samuel, Rector der Academie zu Nahardea. Leipsic, 
 
 1873. 
 Armand Kaminka. Simon b. Jochai (chapter in the author's Studien 
 
 zur Geschichte Galilaeas. Berlin, 1890). 
 Raphael Levy. Un Tanah (Rabbi Meir), Etude sur la vie et I'enseignement 
 
 d'un docteur Juif du II siecle. Paris 1883. 
 M. L Muhlfelder. Rabh. Ein Lebensbild zur Geschichte des Talmud, 
 
 Leipsic, 1873. 
 J. Spitz. Rabban Jochanan b. Sakkai, Rector der Hochschule 
 
 zu Jabneh. Berlin, 1883. 
 J. Trenel. Vie de Hillel 1' Ancient. Paris, 1867. 
 
 H. Zirndorf. Some Women in Israel (pp. 1 19-270 portraying distin- 
 guished women of the Talmudic ago). Philadelphia' 
 1892. 
 
Bibliography. ^5 
 
 CHRONOLOGY AND CALENDAR. 
 L. M. Lewisohn. Geschichte u. System des judischen Kalenderwesens. 
 
 Leipsic, 1856. 
 B, Zuckermann. Materialien zur Entwickelung der alt judischen Zeit- 
 rechnung. Breslau 1882. 
 
 CUSTOMS. 
 Joseph Perles. Die jiidische Hochzeit in nachbiblischer Zeit. Leipsic, 
 1860. 
 " «« Die Leichenfeierlichkeiten im nachbiblischen Juden- 
 
 thum. Breslau, 1861. 
 Remark. An EngUsh translation of both of these two monographs 
 is embodied in "Hebrew Characteristics", published by the American 
 Jewish Publication Society. New York, 1875. 
 
 M. Fluegel. Gedanken iiber rehgiose Brauche und Anschauungen. 
 Cincinnati, 1888. 
 
 DIALECTICS. 
 
 Aaron Hdhn. The Rabbinical Dialectics. A history of Dialecticians 
 and Dialectics of the Mishna and Talmud, Cincinnati. 
 1879. 
 
 EDUCATION. 
 
 Blach-Gudensberg. Das Paedagogischeim Talmud. Halberstadt. 1880. 
 M. Duschak. Schulgesetzgebung u. Methodik der alten Israeliten. 
 
 Vienna, 1872. 
 Sam. Marcus. Zur Schul-Paedagogik des Talmud. Berlin, 1866. 
 Joseph Simon. L' education et 1' instruction d'apres la Bible et le Talmud 
 
 Leipsic, 1879. 
 J. Wiesen. Geschichte und Methodik der Schulwesens im talmudi- 
 schen Alterthum. Strasburg, 1892. 
 
 ETHICS. 
 
 M. Block Die Ethik der Halacha, Budapest, 1886. 
 
 Herman Cohen. Die Nachstenliebe im Talmud. Ein Gutachten. 
 
 Marburg, 18S6. 
 M. Duschak. Die Moral der Evangelien u. des Talmuds. Briinn 1877. 
 H, B. Fassel. Tugend-und Rechtslehre des Talmud. Vienna, 1848. 
 
96 Historical and Literary Introd uction. 
 
 E. Orunebaum. Die Sittenlehre des Judenthums andern Bekcntnissen 
 
 gegenuber. Strasburg, 1878. 
 M. Gudemann. Nachstenliebe. Vienna, 1890. 
 Alex. Kohut. The Ethics of the Fathers. A series of lectures. New 
 
 York, 1885. 
 L. Lazarus. Zur Charakteristik der talmudischen Ethik. Breslau, 
 
 1877. 
 Marc. Levy. Essai sur la morale de Talmud. Paris 1891. 
 Luzzatto. Israelitische Moraltheologie, deutsch von L. E. Igel, 
 
 Breslau, 1870. 
 S. Schaffer, Das Recht und seine Stellung zur Moral nach talmud- 
 
 ischer Sitten, und Rechtslehre. Frankf . on the M., 1889. 
 N, J. Weinstein. Geschichtliche Entwickelung des Gebotes der Nachsten- 
 liebe innerhalb des Judenthums, kritisch beleuchtet. 
 
 Berlin, 1891. 
 
 EXEGESIS. 
 
 H. S. Hirschfeld. Halachische Exegese. Berlin, 1840. 
 " " Die Hagadische Exegese. Berlin, 1847. 
 
 S, Waldberg. Darke Hashinnuyim, on the methods of artificial inter- 
 pretation of Scriptures in the Talmud and Midrash. 
 (in Hebrew) Lemberg, 1870. 
 
 GEOGRAPHY AND HISTORY. 
 A. Berliner. Beitrage zur Geographie u. Ethnographie Babyloniens 
 
 im Talmud u. Midrasch. Berlin 1888. 
 J. Derenhourg. Essai sur I'histoire et la geographie de la Palestine 
 
 d'apres les Talmuds et les autres sources rabbiniques. 
 
 Paris, 1867. 
 H. Hildesheimer, Beitrage zur Geographie Palastinas. Berlin, 1886. 
 Armand Kaminha. Studien zur Geschichte Galilaeas. Berlin, 1890. 
 Ad. Neuhauer. La geographic du Talmud. M^moire couronn6 par 
 
 Tacad^mie des inscriptions et belles-lettres. Paris, 1868. 
 
 LAW. 
 
 a. In General. 
 
 Jacques Levy. La jurisprudence du Pentateuque et du Talmud. 
 Constantine. 1879. 
 
Bibliography. 
 
 01 
 
 S. Schaffer. 
 
 L M. Wise. 
 
 J, Selden^ 
 
 E. Hoffmann. 
 
 S. Mayer, Die Rechte der Israeliten, Athener und Romer. 
 
 Leipsic, 1862-66. 
 
 J. L. Saalschutz. Das Mosaische Recht, nebst den vervoUstandigenden 
 thalmudisch-rabbinischen Bestimmungen. 2-nd Edi- 
 tion. Berlin, 1853. 
 
 Das Recht u. seine Stellung zur Moral nach talmudischer 
 Sitten-und Kechtslehre. Frankf. on the M., 1889. 
 The Law (in the Hebrew Review, Vol. I pp. 12-32. 
 Cincinnati, 1880). 
 
 b. Judicial Courts. 
 De Synedriis et praefecturis jnridicis veterum Ebrae- 
 orum. London, 1650; Amsterd. 1679; Frankf., 1696. 
 Der oberste Gerichtshof in der Stadt des Heiligthums. 
 Berlin, 1878. 
 
 c. Evidence in Law. 
 
 I. Blumenstein. Die verschiedenen Eidesarten nach mosaisch-talmud- 
 ischem Rechte. Frankf. on the M., 1833. 
 Der Gerichtliche Beweis nach mosaischtalmudischem 
 Rechte. Berlin, 1846. 
 "Miggo" als Rechtsbeweis im bab. Talm. Leipsic, 1891. 
 
 d. Criminal Law. 
 
 Das Gesetz liber falsche Zeugen, nach Bibel u. Talmud. 
 
 Berlin, 1862. 
 
 The Criminal Code of the Jews. London, 1880. 
 
 Das mosaisch-talmudische Straf recht. Vienna, 1869. 
 
 Das peinliche Rechtsverfahren im jud. Alterthum. 
 
 Heidelberg, 1870. 
 
 Das Vergeltungsprinzip im bibl. u. talmudischen Straf- 
 
 recht (in Zeitschrift fiir Wisseiischaft d. J. Vol. XIX. 
 S, Mendelsohn. The Criminal Jurisprudence of the ancient Hebrews 
 
 compiled from the Talmud and other rabbinical 
 
 writings. Baltimore, 1891. 
 Julius Vargha. Defense in criminal cases with the ancient Hebrews, 
 
 translated from the first chapter of the author's large 
 
 work "Vertheidigungin Criminalfallnn", and publisch- 
 
 ed in the Hebrew Review, Vol. I pp. 254-268. Cincinnati, 
 
 1880. 
 
 Z. Frankel. 
 
 D. Fink, 
 
 O. Bohr, 
 
 P. B. Benny. 
 M. Duschak. 
 J. Furst. 
 
 E. Qoitein, 
 
98 
 
 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 Thonisson. 
 
 M. Block, 
 
 H. B. Fassel. 
 
 L. Auerbach. 
 S. Keyzer, 
 
 I. Wiesner. Der Bann in seiner geichiclitlichen Entwickelung auf 
 
 dem Boden des Judentlmras. Leipsic, 1864. 
 
 La peine de mort dans le Talmud. Brussels, 1888. 
 e. Civil Law. 
 
 Die Civilprocess'Ordnung nach. mosaisch-rabbinischem 
 
 Rechte. Budapest. 1882. 
 
 Das mosaisch-rabbinische Civili'echt. Gr. Kanischa, 
 
 1853-54. 
 
 Das mosaisch-rabbinische Gerichtsverfahren in civll- 
 
 rechtlischen Sachen. Gr, Kanischa, 1859. 
 
 Das judische Obligation srecht. Berlin, 1871. 
 Dissertatio de tutela secundum jus Talmudicum. Ley den 
 
 1847. 
 f. Inheritance and Testament. 
 L. Bodenheimer. Das Testament. Crefeld, 1847. 
 Eduard Gans. Grundziige des mosaisch-talmudischen Erbrechts (in 
 
 Zunz' Zeitschrif t f iir die Wissenschaf t des Judenthums 
 
 p. 419 sq.). 
 Moses Mendelssohn. Ritualgesetze der Juden, betreffend Erbschaften 
 
 Vormundscbaft, Testamente etc. Berlin, 1778, and 
 
 several later editions. 
 
 De Successionibus in bona defuncti ad leges Hebrae 
 
 orum. London, 1616; Frankf., 1696. 
 g. Police Law. 
 
 Das mosaisch-talmudische Polizeirecht. Buda Pest, 
 
 1878. Transated into English by I. W. Lilienthal in the 
 
 Hebrew Review Vol. I, Cincinnati 1881. 
 
 h. Law of Marriage and Divorce. 
 
 Die Familie nach mos.-talmud. Lehre. Breslau, 1867. 
 
 Das mosaisch-talmudische Eberecht. Vienna, 1864. 
 
 Grundlinien des mosaisch-talmud. Eherechts. Breslau, 
 
 1860. 
 
 Die Autonomic der Rabbinen und das Princip der 
 
 jtidischen Ehe. Schwerin, 1847. 
 L. lAchtschetn. Die Ehe nach mosaisch-lalm. Auffassung. Leipsic, 
 
 1879. 
 
 Joh. Selden. 
 
 M. Block, 
 
 P. Buchholz. 
 M. DuschaJc. 
 Z. Frankel. 
 
 S. Holdheim, 
 
Bibliography. 
 
 99 
 
 M, Mielziner. The Jewish Law of Marriage and Divorce in ancient 
 and modern times, and its relation to the law of the 
 State. Cincinnati, 1884. 
 
 Joh. Selden. Uxor Ebraica sive de nuptiis et divortiis etc. London, 
 1646. 
 
 J. Stern, Die Frau im Talmud. Ztirich, 1879. 
 
 i. Laws Concerning Slavery. 
 
 M. Mielziner. Verhaltnisse der Sklaven bei den alten Hebrftern nach 
 biblischcn und talmudischen Quellen, Copenhagen, 
 (Leipsic), 1859. 
 An English translation of this treatise was publiBhed by Prof. H. 
 L Schmidt in the Gettysburg Evang. Review vol XIII, No 51, and 
 reprinted in the Am. Jew's Annual. Cincinnati, 1886. 
 I. Winter. Stellung der Sklaven bei den Juden. Breslau, 1886. 
 
 Zadok-Kahn. L'esclavage selon la Bible et le Talmud. Paris, 1867, 
 " «« Sklaverei nach Bibel u. Talmud. Deutsch von Singer. 
 
 Berlin, 1888. 
 
 LINGUISTICS. 
 
 A. Berliner. Beitrage zur hebraischen Grammatik im Talmud u. 
 
 Midras«h. Berlin, 1879. 
 Ad. BriXll Fremdsprachliche Redensarten u. Worter in den Tal- 
 
 muden u. Midraschim. Leipsic, 1869. 
 JV. Briill. Fremdsprachliche Worter in den Talmuden u. Midra- 
 
 schim (in Jahrbiicher fiir jtid. Geschichteu. Literatur I, 
 
 123 220). Frankf. o. M., 1874. 
 Jos. Perles. Etymologische Studien zur Kunde der rabbinischen 
 
 Sprache und Alter thiimer. Breslau, 1871. 
 O. RiXlf. Zur Lautlehre der aramaisch-talmudischen Dialocte. 
 
 Breslau, 1879. 
 Mich. Sachs, Beitrage zur Sprach-und Alterthumsforschung. 3 
 
 volumes. Berlin, 185:;;-uu. 
 
 MATHEMATICS. 
 B.Zuckermm '^bb athematische im Talmud. Beleuchtung und 
 El&ut) ung der Talmudetellen mathematischen Inhalts. 
 ^realau, 1878. 
 
100 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 MEDICINE, SURGERY etc. 
 Jos. Bergel. Die Medizin der Talmudisten. Leipsic, 1885. 
 Joach. Halpern. Beitrage zur Geschichte der talm. Chirurgie. Breslau, 
 1869. 
 
 A, H. Israels. Collectanea Gynaecologica ex Talmude Babylonico. 
 
 Groningen, 1845. 
 L, Katzenelsson. Die Osteologie der Talmudisten. Eine talmudisch- 
 anatonische Studie (in Hebrew). St. Petersbourg, 188*^. 
 
 B, I. Wunderbar. Biblisch - talmudische Medicin, 2 volumes. Riga 
 
 (Leipsic), 1850-60. 
 NATURAL HISTORY AND SCIENCES. 
 Jos. Bergel, Studien uber die naturwissenschaftlichen Kenntnisse der 
 
 Talmudisten. Leipsic, 1880. 
 M. Duschak. Zur Botanik des Talmud. Buda Pest, 1870. 
 L. Lewysohn. Die Zoologie des Talmuds. Frankf. on the M., 1858. 
 1mm. Low, Aramaische Pflanzennamen. Leipsic, 1881. 
 
 PARSEEISM IN THE TALMUD. 
 Alexander Kohut. Was hat die talm. Eschatologie aus dem Parsismus 
 aufgenommen? (in Z. d. D. M. G. vol. XXI pp 553-91). 
 •* •* Die jiidische Angelologie und Daemonologie in ihrer 
 
 Abhangigkeit vom Parsismus. Leipsic, 1866. 
 " *' Die talmudisch - midraschische Adamssage in ihrer 
 
 Rtickbeziehung auf die pers. Yima und Meshiasage, 
 in Z. d. D. M. G. XXV pp. 59-94. 
 ** " Die Namen der pers, u. babylonischen Feste im Talmud 
 
 (in Kobak's Jeschurun, vol. VIII, 49-64). The same 
 subject in Revue, des Etudes Juives, Vol. XXIV, 
 POETRY. 
 S. SeJcles, The Poetry of the Talmud. New York, 1880. 
 
 PROVERBS, MAXIMS, PARABLES. 
 L. Dukes. Rabbinische Biumenlese. Leipsic, 1844. 
 
 " ** Rabbinische Spruchkunde. Vienna, 1851. 
 
 J. R. Filrstenthal. Rabbinische Anthologie. Breslau, 1834. 
 Giuseppe Levi. Parabeln, Legenden u. Gedanken aus Talmud u. 
 Midrasch,aus dem Italienischen ins Deutsche tibetragen 
 von L. Seligmann. Leipsic, 1863. 
 L^wenstein. Sentenzen, Spriiche u. Lebensregeln aus dem Talmud^ 
 Berlin, 1887. 
 
Bibliography. 101 
 
 PSYCHOLOGY, 
 if. Jacobson, Veriuch einer Psychologie des Talmud. Hamburg, 
 
 1878. 
 J. Wiesner, Zur talmudischen P8jchologie(in Magazin ftlr jtidische 
 Geschichte und Literatur, Vol. I, 1874, and II, 1876}. 
 
 RELIGIOUS PHILOSOPHY AND HISTORY. 
 
 M. Friedldnder. Ben Dosa und seine Zeit, oder Einfluss der heidnischen 
 Philosophie auf das Judenthum u. Christenthum. 
 Prague, 187a. 
 
 M. Oudemann. Religionsgeechichtliche Studien. Leipsic, 18''6. 
 
 M. Joel. Blicke in die Religion sgeschichte zu Anfang des II 
 
 Jahrhunderts. Breslau, 1880. 
 
 A, Nager, Die Religionsphilosophie des Talmud. Leipsic, 1864. 
 
 SUPERNATURALISM AND SUPERSTITION. 
 
 Gideon Brecher. Das Transcendentale, Magik und magische Heilarten 
 
 im Talmud. Vienna, 1850. 
 David Joel. Der Aberglaube und die Stellung des Judenthums zu 
 
 demselben. 2 parts. Breslau, 1881-83. 
 Alex. Kohut. Jiidische Angelologie u. Daemonologie in ihrer Abhan- 
 
 gigkeit vom Parsismus. Leipsic, 1866. 
 Sal. Thein. Das Princip des planetarischon Einflusses nach der 
 
 Anschauung des Talmud. Vienna, 1876. 
 S. Wolffsohn. Oneirologie im Talmud, oder der Traum nach Auffas- 
 
 sung des Talmuds. Breslau, 1874. 
 
 POPULAR TREATISES AND LECTURES ON THE TALMUD. 
 
 Tobias Cohn. Der Talmud. Ein Vortrag. Vienna, 1866. 
 
 Emanuel Deutsch. What is the Talmud? (in the Quarterly Keriew for 
 
 October, 1867, reprinted in the Literary Remains, 
 
 New York, 1874). 
 M. Ehrentheil. Der Geist des Talmud. Breslau, 1887. 
 Karl Fischer. Gutmeinung iiber den Talmud. Vienna, 1888. 
 Sams. Raph. Hirsch. Beziehung des Talmuds zum Judeuthum und zur 
 
 sozialen Stellung seiner Bekenner. Frankf. o. M., 1884. 
 P. I. Hershon. Talmudic Miscellany. London, 1880. 
 
102 
 
 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 p. L. Hershon. Treasures of the Talmud. London, 1882. 
 
 Abram S. Isaacs. Stories from the Rabbis. New York. 1893. 
 
 A. Jellinek Der Talmud. Zwei Reden. Vienna, 1865. 
 
 Der Talmndjude. 4 Reden. Vienna, 1883-83. 
 Gutachten liber den Talmud. Breslau, 1877. 
 Der wahre Talmudjude. Die wichtigsten Grundsatze 
 des talmudischen Schriftthums iiber das sittliche Leben 
 desMenschen. Berlin, 1893. 
 
 Die Wahrheit iiber den Talmud, (aus dem Franzosischen 
 "La verite sur le Talmud", iibersetzt von S. Mannheimer, 
 Basel, 1860. 
 
 La Controverse sur le Talmud sous Saint Louis, Paris, 
 1881. 
 
 The Talmud, Selections from the contents of that an- 
 cient book. London, 1876. 
 
 Ludwig Philippson. Zur Characttristik des Talmuds (in *' Welt- 
 be wegende Fragen". Vol. II, pp. 349-416. Leipsic, 
 1869). 
 
 JEJm. Schreiber. The Talmud. A series of (4) Lectures. Denver, 1884. 
 
 L. Stern. Ueber den Talmud. Vortrag. Wurzburg, 1875. 
 
 J. Stern. Lichtstrahlen aus dem Talmud. Zurich, 1883. 
 
 A. A. Wolff. Talmudf jender (the Enemies of the Talmud),in Danish. 
 Copenhagen, 1878. 
 
 August Wunsche. Der Talmud. Eine Skizze. Zurich, 1879. 
 
 M. Joel. 
 Albert Katz. 
 
 S. Klein. 
 
 Isidore Loeb. 
 
 H. Polano. 
 
CHAPTER XIII. 
 
 OPINIONS ON THE VALUE OF THE TALMUD. 
 
 § 57. 
 
 No literary monument of antiquity has ever been subject to 
 so different and opposite views and opinions, as the Talmud. Its 
 strict followers generally loo ked upon it as the very embodiment 
 of wisdom and sagacity, and as a work whose authority was 
 second only to that of the Bible. In the non-Jewish literature 
 it was often decried as ''one of the most repulsive books that 
 exist", as ''a confused medley of perverted logic, absurd subtile- 
 ties, foolish tales and fables, and full of profanity, superstition 
 and even obscenity", or at the most, as ''an immense heap of 
 rubbish at the bottom of which some stray pearls of Eastern 
 wisdom are hidden." 
 
 It is certain that many of those who thus assumed to pass 
 a condemning judgment upon the gigantic work of the Talmud 
 never read nor were able to read a single page of the same in the 
 original, but were prompted by religious prejudice and antag- 
 onism, or they based their verdict merely on those disconnected 
 and often distorted passages which Eisenmenger and his consorts 
 and followers picked out from the Talmud for hostile purposes. 
 
 Christian scholars who had a deeper insight into the Talmud- 
 ical literature, without being blinded by religious prejudices, 
 expressed themselves quite differently on the character and the 
 merits of that work, as may be seen from the following few 
 quotations. 
 
 Johann Buxiorf, in the preface to his Lexicon Chald. et 
 Talmudicum, says: "The Talmud contains many legal, medical, 
 physical, ethical, political, astronomical, and other excellent 
 documents of sciences, which admirably commend the history of 
 that nation and time; it contains also luminous decisions of an- 
 tiquity; excellent sayings; deep thoughts, full of grace and sense; 
 and numerous expressions which make the reader not only better, 
 but also more wise and learned, and which, like unto flashing 
 
f 04 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 jewels, grace the Hebrew speech not less than all those Greek 
 and Roman phrases adorn their languages." 
 
 Other favorable opinions expressed by Christian scholars of 
 the sixteenth to eighteenth centuries are collected in Karl 
 Fischer's ' 'Gutmeinung iiber den Talmud der Hebraer. " Vienna, 
 1883. 
 
 Of such scholars as belong to our time, the following may be 
 quoted here. 
 
 The late Pro/, Delitzsch in his '•'' Jiidisches Handwerkerleben 
 zur Zeit Jesu'^ says: 
 
 * 'Those who have not in some degree accomplished the 
 extremely difficult task of reading this work for themselves, will 
 hardly be able to form a clear idea of this polynomical colossus. 
 It is an immense speaking-hall, in which thousands and tens of 
 thousands of voices, of at least Ave centuries, are heard to com- 
 mingle. A law, as we all know from experience, can never be 
 so precisely formulated that there does not remain room for 
 various interpretations; and question upon question constantly 
 arises as to the application of it to the endless multiplicity of the 
 existing relations of life. Just imagine about ten thousand 
 decrees concerning Jewish life classified according to the spheres 
 of life, and in addition to these, about five hundred scribes and 
 lawyers, mostly from Palestine and Babylon, taking up one after 
 another of these decrees as the topic of examination and debate, 
 and, discussing with hair-splitting acuteness, every shade of mean- 
 ing and practical application; and imagine, further, that the fine- 
 spun thread of this interpretation of decrees is frequently lost in 
 digressions, and that, after having traversed long distances of such 
 desert-sand, you find, here and there, an oasis, consisting of 
 sayings and accounts of more general interest. Then you may 
 have some slight idea of this vast, and of its kind, unique, juridic 
 codex, compared with whose compass all the law-books of other 
 nations are but Lilliputians, and beside whose variegated, buzzing 
 market din, they represent but quiet study-chambers." 
 
 y. Alexander^ in his book on The Jews] their Past^ Present 
 and Future (London, 18Y0), says: 
 
Opinions on the value of the Talmud. 105 
 
 ''The Talmud, as it now stands, is almost the whole literature 
 of the Jews during a thousand years. Commentator followed 
 upon commentator, till at last the whole became an immense 
 bulk; the original Babylonian Talmud alone consists of 294Y folio 
 pages. Out ol such literature it is easy to make quotations which 
 may throw an odium over the whole. But fancy if the production 
 of a thousand years of English literature, say, from the ^'History" 
 of the venoi-able Bedeto Milton's ''Paradise Lost," were thrown 
 together into a number of uniform folios, and judged in like man- 
 ner; if because some superstitions monks wrot« silly "Lives of 
 Saints," therefore the works of John Bunyan should also be 
 considered worthless. The absurdity is too obvious to require 
 another word from me. Such, however, is the continual treat- 
 ment the Talmud receives both at the hand of its friends and of 
 its enemies. Both will find it easy to quote in behalf of their 
 preconceived notions, but the earnest student will rather try to 
 weigh the matter impartially, retain the good he can find even in 
 the Talmud, and reject what will not stand the test of God's word. " 
 
 Tne impartial view of the Talmud taken by modern Jewish 
 scholars may be seen from the following opinion expressed by 
 the late Prof, Graetz in his "History of the Jews" (vol. lY. 
 308 sq.). 
 
 '<The Talmud must not be considered as an ordinary literary 
 work consisting of twelve folios; it bears not the least internal 
 resemblance to a single literary production; but forms a world 
 of its own which must be judged according to its own laws. It 
 is, therefore, extremely difficult to furnish a specific sketch of the 
 Talmud, seeing that a familiar standard or analogy is wanting. 
 And however thoroughly a man of consummate talent may have 
 penetrated its spirit and become conversant with its peculiarities, 
 he would scarcely succeed in such a task. It may, in some 
 respects, be compared with the Patristic literature, which sprang 
 up simultaneously. But on closer inspection, this comparison 
 will also fail.... 
 
 The Talmud has at difibrent times been variously judged 
 on the most heterogeneous assumptions; it has been condemned 
 and consigned to the flames, simply because it was presente 
 
106 Historical and Ltteraey Intrduction. 
 
 in its unfavorable aspect without taking into consideration its 
 actual merits. It cannot be denied that the Babylonian Tal- 
 mud labors under some defects, like any other mental product, 
 which pursues a single course with inexorable consistency and 
 undeviating dogmatism. These defects may be classified under 
 four heads: the Talmud contains some unessential and trivial 
 subjects, which it treats with much importance and a serious 
 air; it has adopted from its Persian surroundings superstitious 
 practices and views, which presuppose the agency of interme- 
 diate spiritual beings, witchcraft, exorcising formulas, magical 
 cures and interpretations of dreams and, hence, axe in conflict 
 with the spirit of Judaism; it further contains several uncharit- 
 able utterances and provisions against members of other na- 
 tions and creeds; lastly it favors a bad interpretation of Scrip- 
 ture, absurd, forced and frequently false commentations. For 
 these faults the whole Talmud has been held responsible and 
 been denounced as a work devoted to trifles, as a source of im- 
 morality and trickery, without taking into consi'loration, that 
 it is not a work of a single author who must be rcrtponsible 
 for every word, and if it be so, then the whole Jewish people 
 was its author. Over six centuries are crystallized in the Tal- 
 mud with animated distinctness, in their pecuUar costumes, 
 modes of speech and of thought, so to say a literary Herculaneum 
 and Pompeii, not weakened by artistic imitation, which trans- 
 fers a colossal picture to the narrow limits of a miniature. It is, 
 therefore, no wonder, if in this world sublime and mean, great 
 and small, serious and ridiculous, Jewish and heathen elements, 
 the altar and the ashes, are found in motley mixture. Those 
 odious dicta of which Jew-haters have taken hold, were in 
 most cases nothing else but the utterances of a momentary in- 
 dignatian, to which an individual had given vent and which were 
 preserved and embodied in the Talmud by over-zealous disci- 
 ples, who were unwilling to omit a single expression of the 
 revered ancients. But these utterances are richly counterbal- 
 anced by the maxims of benevolence and philanthropy towards 
 every man, regardless of creed and nationality, wliich are also 
 preserved in the Talmud. As counterpoise to the rank super- 
 
Opinions on the value of the Talmud. 107 
 
 stition, there are found therein sharp warnings against supersti- 
 tious, heathen practices (Darke Emori), to which subject a 
 whole section, under the name oi PereJz Emorai^ is devoted, i 
 
 ''The Babylonian Talmud is especially characterized and 
 distinguished from the Palestinian, by high-soaring contempla- 
 tions, a keen understanding, and Hashes of thought which fit- 
 fully dart through the mental horizon. An incalculable store 
 of ideas and incentives to thinking is treasured in the Talmud, 
 init not in the form of finished themes that may be appropriated 
 i.i a semi-somnolent state, but with the fresh coloring of their 
 iiieeption. The Babylonian Talmud leads into the laboratory 
 of thought, and its ideas may be traced from their embryonic 
 motion up to a giddy height, whither they at times soar into the 
 region of the incomprehensible. For this reason it became, 
 more than the Jerusalemean, the national property, the vital 
 breath, the soul of the Jewish people ". 
 
 Why study the Talmud ? 
 
 §58. 
 
 Some years ago, the author addressed the Classes of the 
 Hebrew Union College on this question. An abstract of that 
 address may find here a proper place for the benefit of younger 
 students : 
 
 Upon resuming our labors for a new scholastic year, I wish 
 to address the students regarding that branch of instruction 
 which I have the privilege of teaching in the collegiate classes 
 of this institution. I wish to answer the question: 
 
 FOR WHAT PURPOSE DO WE STUDY THE TALMUD? 
 
 There was a time — and it is not so very long since it passed 
 l3y — there was a time when such a question would scarcely 
 have entered into the mind of one who was preparing for the 
 Jewish ministry. For tlie Talmud wis then still regarded as 
 the embodiment of all religious knowledge a'l 1 Jewish lore. 
 Its authority was considered second only to that of the Bible, 
 its study regarded as a religious service, a God-pleasing work in 
 
 » Sabbath 66a; Toseptha ch. VII, VIII. 
 
108 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 which all pious and literate men in Israel were engaged, even 
 those who did not aspire to a rabbinical office. He, to whom 
 the Talmud was a terra incognita was looked upon as an Am 
 Ha'aretSj a rustic and illiterate man, who had no right to ex- 
 press an opinion in religious matters. How then could he who 
 wanted to become a religious guide and leader in Israel ask, 
 for what purpose is the Talmud to be studied ? The Talmudic 
 literature was the very source of the Jewish law. )ij it all 
 conditions of the religious and moral life were ordered. How 
 could a rabbi expect to be able to answer and decide the many 
 religious questions laid before him daily, without a thorough 
 acquaintance with that source ? 
 
 But it is quite different in our time, which looks upon the 
 Talmud with less reverential eyes. The mere study of its lite- 
 rature is not any longer considered a religious act that secures 
 eternal bliss and salvation; neither is the Talmud any longer 
 regarded as the highest authority by whose dicta questions of 
 religion and conscience are to be finally decided. 
 
 Of what use is the study of the Talmud in our time ? Is it 
 nowadays absolutely necessary even for the Jewish theologian, 
 ibr a Jewish minister, to cultivate this hard and abstruse branch 
 of literature ? Would it not be more useful if our students in- 
 stead of devoting a part of their valuable time to this obsolete 
 and antiquated study would apply it to some other branch of 
 knowledge which is of more import to, and has more bearing 
 upon the present time? 
 
 It sometimes seemed to me as if I could read this question 
 from the faces of some of our students during the Talmudic in- 
 struction, especially when we just happened to have before us 
 some abstruse passages in the Talmud in which seemingly quite 
 indifferent and trifling subjects are minutely treated in lengthy 
 discussions, or where the whole train of thought widely differs 
 from modern conception and modern ways of thinking. 
 
 Nay, I have even heard such a question from the lips of 
 men who take great interest in our college, of earnest and judi- 
 cious men who are highly educated and versed in our literature 
 and who themselves in their youth imbibed spiritual draughts 
 
Opinions on the value of the Talmud. 109 
 
 from the Talmudic fountain. Why trouble our students with 
 that irksome and useless branch of literature why not instead 
 of it rather take up other subjects of more modern thought? 
 
 Let us, therefore, shortly consider the question: For what 
 purpose do we study the Talmud, or why is that study indispen- 
 sable for every one who prepares for the Jewish ministry ? 
 
 In the first place, my young friends, I wish to call your at 
 tention to the fact that the Talmud is a product of the mental 
 labors of our sages and teachers during a period of eight hun- 
 dred to one thousand years, and that the pages of this volumin- 
 ous literary work offer a natural reflection of whatever the 
 Jewish mind has thought, perceived and felt during that long 
 period under the most different circumstances and times, under 
 joyful and gloomy events, under elevating and oppressing in- 
 l^uences, 
 
 I beg you to consider furthermore what a powerful and 
 decided influence this gigantic literary work after its final con- 
 clusion has exercised upon the mind and the religious and mo- 
 ral life of the professors of Judaism during fourteen centuries 
 up to our time. Consider, how it is to be ascribed to their 
 general occupation with, and veneration for the Talmud that 
 our ancestors during the dark centuries of the Middle Ages did 
 not become mentally hebetated and morally corrupted, in spite 
 of the degradation and systematic demoralization which they 
 had been exposed to. For while the study of the more dialectic 
 part of that literature preserved their intellectual powers ever 
 fresh and active and developed some of the greatest minds, the 
 reading of those popular sayings and impressive moral and re- 
 ligious maxims with which the Talmudic writings are so amply 
 provided, fostered even within our masses that unshaken faith- 
 fulness and that unparalleled firmness of character by which 
 they resisted all persecutions and all alluring temptations. 
 
 Take all this into consideration, and you will perceive that 
 none can expect to know and understand Judaism as histori- 
 cally developed, without knowing the Talmud, without being 
 familiar with the spirit of that vast literature which proved 
 
no Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 such a powerful agency in the development of Judaism and in 
 its preservation. 
 
 Let me also tell you, that he is greatly mistaken who ima 
 gines that modern Judaism can entirely discard and disregard 
 the Talmud in religious questions. Although its authority is 
 not any longer respected as absolutely binding, albeit under^ 
 the changed circumstances in which we are living, many laws 
 and customs treated and enjoined in the Talmutl have become 
 obsolete and impracticable, and though many religious views ex- 
 pressed by the Talmudists are rejected as incompatible with 
 modern thoughts and conceptions, it is a fact, that Juda- 
 ism nowadays still rests on the foundation which is laid down 
 in the Talmud. Thus for instance, the elements of our ritual 
 prayers and the arrangement of our public service, our festive 
 calendar and the celebration of some of our holiest festivals, 
 the marriage law and innumerable forms and customs of the re- 
 ligious life are, though more or less modified and fashioned ac- 
 cording to the demands of our time, still on the whole permeat- 
 ed and governed by the Talmudic principles and regulations. 
 
 You can therefore never expect to have a full and clear 
 insight into our relgious institutions without being able to go 
 to the source from which they emanated. 
 
 I could also speak of the great importance of the Talmud 
 in so far as it contains a vast fund of informations which are of 
 decided value to general history and literature and to different 
 branches of science, but I will remind you only of its great sig- 
 nificance in regard to two branches of knowledge which are of 
 vital import to Jewish theology and the Jewish ministry. I 
 refer to the interpretation of the Bible and to Ethics. 
 
 The great value of the Talmud for Bible exegesis and Bible 
 criticism is generally acknowledged even by non-Jewish scholars. 
 
 In regard to its value for Ethics I shall quote here a pas- 
 sage from an elaborate and lucid article on tlie Talmud which the 
 venerable Rabbi Dr. Samuel Adler in New York published lately 
 in one of the American Encyclopedias. He says: 
 
 ''With the consideration of the ethical significance of the 
 Talmud we approach the highest level, the crowning portion of 
 
Opinions on the value of the Talmud. Ill 
 
 the whole work. Not but that we meet with passages that 
 must be rejected by a pure morality ; prevailing views and em- 
 bittering experiences have certainly exercised a disturbing in- 
 fluence on the ethical views of various spiritual heroes of the 
 Talmud; but these are isolated phenomena, and disappear, com- 
 pared with the moral elevation and purity of the overwhelming 
 majority of the men of the Talmud, and compared with the spirit 
 that animates the work as a whole. What is laid down as the 
 moral law in the Talmud can still defy scrutiny at the present 
 day; and the very numerous examples of high moral views and 
 actions on the part of the Talmudists are such as can not be 
 found in any work of antiquity, and must still excite the admir- 
 ation of the reader of the present day, in spite of the ceremonial 
 fetters which they bore, and in spite of the occasional narrow- 
 ness of their point of view." 
 
 To impress you the more with the necessity of the Talmudic 
 studies for a clear conception of Judaism and its history, I could 
 also quote the opinions of many of our greatest scholars, but 
 shall confine myself only to a quotation from the writings of two 
 of our most renowned scholars whom none will suspect of hav- 
 ing been biased by a too great predilection for the Talmud; one 
 is the late Dr. Geiger, and the other our great historian, the 
 late Dr. Jost. 
 
 Geiger {Das Judenthum und seine Geschichte I. p. 155) in 
 speaking of the Talmud and the rabbinical literature, says: 
 
 ^'Gigantic works, productions of gloomy and brighter per- 
 iods are here before us, monuments of thought and intellectual 
 labor; they excite onr admiration. I do not indorse every 
 word of the Talmud, nor every idea expressed by the teachers 
 in the time of the Middle Ages, but I would not miss a tittle 
 thereof. They contain an acumen and power of thought which 
 fill us with reverence for the spirit that animated our ancestors, 
 a fulness of sound sense, salutary maxims — a freshness of opinion 
 often bursts upon us that even to this day exercises its enlive- 
 ning and inspiring effect." 
 
112 HiSTOKICAL AND LITERARY INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Jost in his Geschichte des Judenthum s und seiner Secten IT., 
 202, characterizes the Talmud by the following masterly words: 
 
 ^'The Talmud is a great mine, in which are imbedded all 
 varieties of metals and ores. Here may be found all kinds of 
 valuables, the finest gold and rarest gems, as also the merest 
 dross. Much has been unearthed that has realized countless 
 profit to the world. The great spiritual work whose outcome 
 has been apparent in the advancement of religion has shown 
 that the Talmud is not only of incalculable value in the pursuit 
 of wisdom, but that it has a self-evident significance for all times, 
 which can not be shown by any mere extracts from its pages, 
 and that it can not be disregarded on the plea of its antiquity 
 as valueless m the knowledge of the Jewish religion. Indeed 
 it is and must remain the chief source of this knowledge, and 
 particularly of the historical development of the Jewish religion. 
 More than this, it is the abode of that spirit which has inspired 
 that religion, these many centuries, that spirit from which even 
 those who sought to counteract it could not escape. It is and 
 will remain a labyrinth with deep shafts and openings, in which 
 isolated spirits toil with tireless activity, a labyrinth which 
 offers rich rewards to those who enter impelled by the 
 desire to gain, not without hidden dangers to those who venture 
 wantonly into its mazes and absorb its deadly vapors. Re- 
 ligion has created this work, not indeed to give utterance in an 
 unsatisfactory way to the great questions of Deity and Nature, 
 Mortality and Eternity, and not to carry on controversies upon 
 the proper formulation of articles of faith, but to give expres- 
 sion to a religion of deed, a religion designed to accompany 
 man from the first steps in his education until he reaches the 
 grave, and beyond it; a guide by which his desires and actions 
 are to be regulated at every moment, by which all his move- 
 ments are to be guarded, that takes care even of his food and 
 drink, of his pleasures and pains, of his mirth and sorrow, and 
 seeks to elevate him, at all times, to an enunciation of the pur- 
 est faith. 
 
 It is thus tha,t this spirit, which breathes from the Talmud, 
 enters into the nation's inmost life. It offers repeated recitals 
 
Opinions on the value of the Talmud. 113 
 
 of the various modes of thinking, practising, believing, of the 
 true and false representations, of hopes and longings, of know- 
 ledge and error, of the great lessons of fate, of undertakings 
 and their consequences, of utterances and their effects, of per- 
 sons and their talents and inaptitudes, of words and examples, 
 of customs, both in matters of public worship and private life; 
 in short, of all the happenings, past or cotemporary, in the 
 time which the Talmud comprises, /. <?., a period of nearly one 
 thousand years, excluding the Bible times. 
 
 Hence, also, its great value to antiquarians in the frequent 
 allusions to facts, opinions and statements, to modes of expres- 
 sion and grammatical construction, to peculiarities of every 
 kind, which at the same time afford a view of the development 
 of mankind, such as no other work of the past gives. 
 
 To treat the Talmud with scorn because of its oddues, on 
 account of much that it contains that does not conform to our 
 maturer modes of thinking, because of its evident errors and 
 
 misconceptions — errors from ignorance or errors in copying, . 
 
 to throw it overboard, as it were, as useless ballast, would be 
 to insult all history, to deprive it of one of its strongest limbs, to 
 dismember it. 
 
 To dam up its channels by taking away the Talmud, would 
 be to close the access to the head waters and living sources of 
 the Jewish religion, and thus leave her again in a desert land, 
 after the tables of the law have already called forth a world of 
 life and activity. It would be turning one's back, as it were, 
 denying and disregarding one's own. There is a historical jus- 
 tification for the sharply defined modes of worship and religious 
 forms that have their embodiment in set words and in fixed 
 deeds. For this we must look to the Talmud. Judaism is 
 rooted in the Talmud and would be tossed about in mid-air if 
 torn from its soil, or require a new planting and a new growth." 
 In conclusion, my young friends, let me say this: 
 If our College had no other purpose than to graduate com- 
 mon Sabbath school teachers who should be able to occasional- 
 ly deliver popular though superficial lectures, the study of the 
 
114 Historical and Literary Introduction. 
 
 Talmud as well as that of our rabbinical and philosophical litera- 
 ture, might have been stricken from the course of your studies. 
 But our College has a higher aim and object. Its object is to 
 educate future guides and leaders of our congregations, to edu- 
 cate banner-bearers of Judaism, representatives and cultivators 
 of Jewish knowledge and literature. 
 
 You can never expect to answer this purpose without a 
 thorough knowledg3 of, and familiarity with, that vast literature 
 that offers us the means to follow and understand the religious 
 formation, the growth and the entire course of development of 
 Judaism from its beginning to the present time." 
 
PART II, 
 
 LEGAL HERMENEUTICS OF THE TALMUD 
 
LEGAL HERMENEUTICS OF THE TALMUD, 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 a. Definition. 
 
 § 1. 
 
 Hermeneuticg is the science of interpretation or of expltun- 
 ing the meaning of an author's words, according to certain 
 rules. The term is especially applied to the exegesis or inter- 
 pretation of the sacred Scripture. 
 
 Although hermeneutics and exegesis are synonyms, as both 
 words from which they are derived Bpfirjveveiv and ^^7r«^^^«« 
 mean to explain^ interpret^ still literary usage makes that differ- 
 ence between them, that the term hermeneutics refers to that 
 branch of science which establishes the principles and rules of 
 interpretation, while exegesis is the actual application of those 
 principles and rules. 
 
 By Legal Hermeneutics of the Talmud we understand 
 an exposition of those principles and rules which the teachers 
 of the Talmud established in their interpretation of the Biblic- 
 al Law. 
 
 b. Methods of Interpretation. 
 § 2. 
 
 The Ta'mud distinguishes between two methods of Script- 
 ural interpretation, one which is termed Feshat^ and the 
 other Derash. 
 
 Peshat (lotJ^B) is the plain interpretation, where a law or a 
 passage in Scripture is explained in the most natural way ac- 
 cording to the letter, the grammatical construction, and 
 the spirit of the passage. Hence the talmudic phrase: rT'tDtTS 
 SnpT the plain msaning, the immediate and primary sense of a 
 Scriptural passage (Chullin 6a). 
 
118 Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 Derash (from ti^li to search, investigate) is that method 
 by which it is intended, for certain reasons, to interpret a 
 passage in a more artificial way which often deviates from the 
 plain and natural meaning. The result of this method of inter- 
 pretation is termed ti^mD that which is searched out, the artifi- 
 cial deduction, as 'S ti^"n DITD HT this artificial interpretation 
 was made by that certain teacher, Mishna Shekalim YI, 6. 
 
 As an illustration of these two methods of interpretation 
 we refer to the following passage in Deut. XXIY, 16. inDT' '^ 
 
 '^The fathers shall not be put to death for the children, 
 neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers." The 
 plain and natural meaning of this passage is that the family of a 
 criminal shall not be involved in his punishment. But the arti- 
 ficial interpretation of the Rabbis which is also adopted in the 
 Targum Onkelos takes the word h]^ in the sense of nn^i 
 through the testimo7iy^ and explains this passage to the efi'ect 
 that the testimony of relatives must never be accepted in a crim- 
 inal or civil case. Talm. Sanhedrin fol. 2Yb. 
 
 C. Two KINDS OF MlDRASH. 
 
 § 3. 
 
 There are two kinds of Midrash. Where the interpreta- 
 tion bears on the enactment or determination of a law, be it 
 a ritual, ceremonial, ci^^il, or criminal law, it is called ti^^lD 
 TdlT\ Interpretation of Halacha^ or legal interpretation. 
 
 But where the Midrash does not concern legal enactments 
 and provisions, but merely inquires into the meaning and signi- 
 ficance of the laws or where it only uses the words of Scripture 
 as a vehicle to convey a moral teaching or a religious instruc- 
 tion and consolation, it is called T\"^y^ ^•'."ID Interpretation of 
 the Agada, homiletical interpretation. 
 
 The following examples will illustrate both kinds of Midrash. 
 
 1) In Lev. XIX, 3 the law reads: isnTl ViSl 1D« C^'^S 
 *'Ye shall fear every man his mother, and his father". In the 
 interpretation of this passage the Rabbis explain that the ex- 
 
Introduction. 119 
 
 pression ti^^s every man must here not be taken in its literal 
 sense, as if referring to the man (the son) only, and not also to 
 woman (the daughter), for the plural form "ye shall fear" in- 
 cludes the daughter as well as the son in this divine injunction 
 of filial respect and obedience: 
 
 ? pD ntt^« ^^^ «^« "h ]••« t£>''« 
 
 Talm. Kiddushin 30b. 
 
 This is Midrash Halacha, as it concerns the determination 
 of the law. 
 
 Commenting on the same passage, the Rabbis further ex- 
 plain why in this passage the first place is given to the mother, 
 while in the decalogue where filial love to parents is command- 
 ed, the father is mentioned first. The reason offered is, 
 that as a rule children fear the father, but love the mother more 
 particularly. (Ibid. fol. 31a.) This explanation belongs rather 
 to the Agada. 
 
 2) In Exodus XX, 25 the law reads : <'And if thou vsdlt 
 make me an altar of stone, thou shalt not build it (jnns) of 
 hewn stone: for if thou lift up thy iron tool upon it, thou hast 
 polluted it." 
 
 The Midrash Halacha of this passage emphasizes the ob- 
 jective pronoun jnns and concludes that the prohibition of 
 hewn stones is restricted to the altar only, but in building the 
 temple such stones may be used: 
 
 ^:DMa nn;i tm^i nn« ^3« nnj niin nn« •'^^ u 
 
 Mechilta, Yithro XI. 
 
 The Midrash Agada to this passage explains ingeniously 
 the reason why the application of iron is here called a pollution 
 of the altar; it is because iron abridges life, the altar prolongs 
 it; iron causes destruction and misery, the altar produces re- 
 conciliation between God and man ; and therefore the use of 
 iron cannot be allowed in making the altar. (Mechilta ibid. ; 
 compare also Mishna Middoth III, 4.) 
 
120 Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 The hermeneutic rules for Midrash Agada resemble in 
 many respects those of Midrash Halacha, in others they differ. 
 We propose to treat here especially of the Hermeneutics of 
 the Halacha. 
 
 ORIGIlSr AND DEVELOPMENT OF MIDRASH HALACHA. 
 
 a. ClBOUMSTANOES THAT NECESSITATED ARTIFICIAL 
 INTERPRETATION. 
 
 Ever since the time of Ezra, the Scribe, and especially 
 since the religious and political revival under the Maccabees, 
 the law embodied in the Pentateuch was generally looked upon 
 as the rule of Israel's life. But side by side with this wriiien 
 law, anD^tfi^ nnn, went an unwritten, oral law nS ^j;2tJ^ nmn. 
 
 This consisted partly of a vast store of religious and na- 
 tional customs and usages which had been established in the 
 course of several centuries and handed down orally from gen- 
 eration to generation; partly of decrees and ordinances enacted 
 according to exigencies of the changed times and cir- 
 cumstances by the Sopherim and the succeeding authorities, 
 the Sanhedrin. 
 
 As long as the validity of this oral law had not been 
 questioned, there was no need of founding it on a Scriptural 
 basirt. It stood on its own footing, and was shielded by the 
 authority of tradition. From the time hovever when the 
 Sadducean ideas began to spread, which tended to undermine 
 the authority of the traditional law and reject everything not 
 founded on the Scriptures, the effort was made by the teachers 
 to place the traditions under the shield of the word of the 
 Thora. To accomplish this task, the plain and natural inter- 
 pretation did not always suffice. More artificial methods had 
 to be devised by which the sphere of the written law could be 
 extended so as to offer a basis and support for every traditional 
 law and observance, and, at the same time, to enrich the sub- 
 stance of this law with new provisions for cases not yet provi- 
 
Introduction. 121 
 
 ded for. Tliis artificial interpretation which originated in the 
 nrgent desire to ingraft the traditions on the stem of Scripture 
 or harmonize the oral with the written law, could, of course, in 
 many instances not be effected without strained constructions 
 £«id the exercise of some violence on the biblical text,^ as is illus- 
 trated in the following example. 
 
 It was a rule of law established by tradition, firstly, that 
 judicial decisions are rendered by a majority of votes; secondly 
 that in capital cases, the majority of one vote was sufficient for 
 the acquittal, but for the condemnation a majority of at least 
 two votes was required; thirdly that in taking the votes in a 
 criminal case, it must be commenced from the youngest judge, 
 in order that his opinion and vote shall not be influenced by 
 that of his older colleagues. 
 
 When the question came up to find a biblical basis for 
 these rules, reference was made to the following passage in Ex. 
 XXIII, 2 which reads: 
 
 nv;-i^ n''3n -ins n''nn «^ 
 
 ^'Thou Shalt not follow the many to evil, neither shaltthou 
 speak in a case to deviate after the many to pervert justice". 
 
 In its simple sense this passage is a warning for the judge 
 as well as for the witness not to be influenced by the unjust 
 
 ' 'i'his effort to base traditional institutions and usages on the 
 A\ ritten law is not without a certain parallel-though under quite differ- 
 ent circumstances and influences— in the history of jurisprudence 
 among other nations, as may be seen from the following interesting 
 notice in Lieber's "Legal and Political Hermeneutics," page 239. Speak- 
 ing of the law which grew up in the course of centuries by the combina- 
 tion of the lex scripta, or Roman law, with the customs of the various 
 nations that received it, he says: "A favorite field for the exercise of 
 professional ingenuity was the interpretation of the Roman law in such 
 manner as to find therein formal written authority for the inetitatiooe, 
 rules and usages that the Germanic races had inherited from their 
 ancestors. For a centuiy past it has been one of the chief taaks of the 
 continental jurists, and especially of the class among them known as 
 Germanists, to restore these remains of national law to their original 
 shripe, free from the distortions and disguises forced upon, them by 
 this Romanizing process." 
 
122 Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 opinioTi ci the multitude in a law suit, but to follow his own 
 conviction in giving his vote or his testimony. But the arti- 
 ficial interpretation forced upon this passage a different mean- 
 ing. By separating the last three words m:Dn^ ^2^ "'"inS from 
 the context and forming them as a separate sentence :the Rabbis 
 found therein an express biblical precept ''to lean to the major- 
 ity", that is, to decide doubtful cases by a majority of votes. 
 The first part of the passage ''thou shalt not follow the many 
 to evil" was interpreted to mean "do not follow the simple maj- 
 ority (of one) for co7idemnation^ as for the acquittal, but it re- 
 quires at least a majority of two votes to condemn the accused 
 (Mishna Sanhedrin I, 6) 
 
 The word ^''^ in the middle part of the passage, being 
 here exceptiou ally written in the text without a mater lectionis 
 2^/ so as to admit the word to be read Rabh (the superior), one 
 of the Babylonian teachers made use of this circumstance to in- 
 terpret an ^J? niyn S^ "thou shalt not express thy opinion af- 
 ter the superior", hence the younger members of a criminal 
 court have to vote first (Talm. Sanhedrin 36a). 
 
 Conclusions derived by authoritative interpretations from 
 the Mosaic Law were, in general, endowed with the same au- 
 thority and sanctity as the clear utterances of that Law, and 
 termed niinn JD or, in the Aramaic form, s*n*'"»"n8Tt: (derived 
 from the Biblical law). 
 
 In many instances, however, the Talmudic teachers freely 
 admit that the meaning which they put upon the text was not 
 the plain and natural interpretation; that "the natural sense 
 of a passage must never be lost sight of"', and that their strain- 
 
 ' Maimonides ('3 CHIET miVtDn 'D) holds that laws derived from 
 the Mosaic law by means of the heTmeneutic rules are, in general, not 
 to be regarded as hihlical laws (,-ninn p) except when expressly char- 
 acterized as such in the Talmud. But this somewhat rational view 
 is strongly criticized by Nachmanides (in his annotations to that book) 
 who shows that from the Talmudical standpoint every law which 
 the Rabbis derived by the authoritative interpretation from sacred 
 Scripture, has the character and sanctity of a Mosaic Law. 
 
 ' ItDlfij'B ntD «VV K"lpr:n }"•« Sabbath 63a; Yebamoth lib; 34a. 
 
Introduction. 
 
 123 
 
 ed interpretation must be regarded merely as an attempt *'to 
 provide an establislied custom and law with a Biblical sup- 
 port".' 
 
 Remark. There are some legal traditions of an ancient date most- 
 ly concerning the ritual law, for which the Rabbis were unable to find 
 a biblical support or even a mere hint. They are termed T\mb nDt^H 
 ^rDD "traditional laws handed down from Moses on Sinai". That this 
 phrase is not to be taken liter^ly,but often as merely intended to desig- 
 nate a very old tradition the origin of which cannot be traced, is evid- 
 ent from Mishna Eduyoth VIII, 7. Maimonides in the introduction to 
 his Mishna Commentary enumerates the teaditions mentioned in the 
 Talmud by that appellation to the number of twenty three. This enu- 
 meration, however has been found not to be quite correct, as the tradi- 
 tions designated by that name actually amount to the number of fifty 
 five. Compare Herzfeld, Geschichte des Volkes Israel II, 227-233. 
 
 b. The earliest collection of Hekmeneutic Rules. 
 
 §5. 
 
 Hillel the Elder, who flourished abount a century before 
 the destruction of the second temple, is mentioned as having 
 been the first to lay down certain hermeneutic rules (nHD), 
 seven in number, for the purpose of expounding the written 
 law and extending its provisions. Some of these rules were 
 probably already known before Hillel, though not generally 
 applied: but it was his merit to have fixed them as standard 
 rules of legal interpretation. The headings of his seven rules 
 are : 
 
 1. nDim b^, the inference from minor and major. 
 
 2 mtt' m'^Tl the analogy of expressions. 
 
 3. -ins ^in^D 2S ]^^2, the generalization of one special 
 provision. . , 
 
 4. D^ainD ^r^*D 2S |''::i. the generalization of two special 
 
 provisions. 
 
 9a Compare also the phrase: ND^yn NH^r^CX ^np Berachoth 41b, 
 Yoma 80b; B. Met2da 88b and elsewhere very often used. 
 
124 Hep.mknetjtics of the Talmud. 
 
 6. tD*l51 ^^D/ the effect of general and particular terms. 
 
 6. ini< Dlput^ ^Z ^^^')''2, the aaaiugy inad^ from another 
 passage. 
 
 '^. M^2]^'t^ l^bn 121, the explanation derived from the 
 context. 
 
 These seven rules of Hillel having later been embodied in 
 the system of R. Tshmael, their fuller contents and application 
 will be explained in the exposition of the single rules of that sys- 
 tem.^ 
 
 C. A NEW METHOD OF INTERPRETATION INTRODUCED 
 BY NaHUM. 
 
 §6. 
 
 Besides the seven rules of Hillel which were generally 
 adopted, some other peculiar methods of interpreting the Scrip- 
 ture were introduced by succeeding teachers for the sake of 
 making new deductions from the written law. Thus Nahtim of 
 Ghnzo^ a contemporary of R. Johanan ben Zaccai, originated a 
 method which is termed tD1^''aT ''Un the extension and lunitation. 
 According to this method certain particles and conjunctions 
 employed in the Mosaic law were intended to indicate the ex- 
 tension or limitation of its provisions, so as to include the ad- 
 ditions of tradition, or exclude what tradition excludes. As 
 extensions were regarded especially the words: DS ,n« .DJ and 
 ^D, and as limitations the words: "]j<, ]D and pn. 
 
 This method is illustrated by the following examples: 
 
 1) The word n^ which marks the direct objective case 
 agrees in form with the preposition ns with. Hence this word 
 in the passage Deut. X, 20: ^tn'in "]M^S ••"•> nj< is interpreted 
 □••DDn '''T'D^n mrn^ ''it is to include the wise men", who are 
 to bo revered along with God (Pesachim 22b.). 
 
 2) The principle that ^'acts done through our agent are 
 as if done by ourselves", is derived from the passage Numbers 
 XVIII, 28: nns* Di 1D''nn p ''Thus ye also shall offer an 
 
 » These seven rules of Hillel are quoted m Tosephta Sanhedrin ch. 
 VII; ALoth of R. Nathan ch. XXXVII and in the introductory chapter 
 of the Siphra. 
 
Introduction 125 
 
 heave offering", by interpreting : n^'^trn ns r\^y)b D3 ''this 
 a/so is to include your agen^; he may offer your heave offering in 
 your place". Kiddushin 41b. 
 
 3) That the rigorous precepts of the Sabbath do not 
 apply to cases where life is in danger (ffi'S: mp''£)), is derived 
 from the limiting word "(« in the passage Exod. XXXI, 13: 
 iniDtyn Tiin^tr n« "]S : ^'merely my Sabbaths you shall keep" 
 by interpreting p^n^ ^«, this ''merely" excludes such cases. 
 Yoma 85b. 
 
 d. Development op this method by R. Akiba.- 
 
 § t. 
 
 This new method of R. Nahum of Gimzo was not general 
 ly approved by his contemporaries. One of its opponents was 
 R. Nehunia ben Hakana who insisted upon retaining only the 
 rules of Hillel.^ But in the following generation, the celebrat- 
 ed R. Akiba resumed the method of his former teacher Nahum 
 of Gimzo, and developed it into a system. The underlying 
 principle of that system was that the language of the Thora 
 differs from human language. The latter often uses more 
 words, to express ideas, than necessary; superflous words being 
 inserted either for the sake of grammatical form or for the sake 
 of rhetorical flourish and emphasis. Not so the language in 
 which the divine law was framed. Here not a word, not a 
 syllable and not even a letter is superfluous, but all is essential 
 and of vital importance to define the intention of a law and to 
 hint at deductions to be made therefrom. According to this 
 principle the indication of an extension and limitation of the 
 law is not confined to those few particles pointed out by 
 Nahum of Gimzo, but every word or part thereof which is not 
 absolutely indispensable to express the sense of the law is de- 
 signed to enlarge or restrict the sphere of its provisions. 
 
 Thus R. Akiba and the followers of his system found indi- 
 cations for the intended extension of a law in the repetition of 
 
 1 See Talm. Shebuoth 26a. 
 
126 Hermbnbutics of the Talmud, 
 
 a word »; in the absolute infinitive joined with the finite foriM 
 of a vero;"^ in the conjunction is ' and in the conjunctive *) . In- 
 dications for an intended limitation o€ the law are foiHwi by 
 laying stress either on a demonstrative pronoun, » or on the 
 definite article n ', or on the personal pronoun added to a 
 verb ', or on a pronominal suffix ^ or <m saiy noun ' or verb** 
 occurring in that law. 
 
 The new hermeneutic rules which R. Akiba thus added to 
 those of Hillel and Nahum oflfered entirely new ways and means 
 to find a Scriptural basis for the oral laws, and to enrich its 
 Rubstance with many valuable deductions. 
 
 e. K. Ishmael's Rules. 
 §8. 
 
 The ingenious system of R. Akiba, though received with ad- 
 miration by many of his contemporaries, had also its opponents. 
 One of the most prominent among these was R. Ishmael b. 
 Elisha. He claimed : ms ^ja ]Wh^ nmn mm ^'The divine 
 Law speaks in the ordinary language of Men". Therefore, no 
 special weight ought to be attached to its turns of speech and 
 repetitions so customary in human language. He consequently 
 rejected most of the deductions which K Akiba based on a 
 seemingly pleonastic word, superfluous syllable or letter, and 
 
 » f. i. Pesachim 36a: ni^^ niVO niVD ; Yebamoth 70a : ^^N B>^K 
 i)"iyn nUl^J compare also Shebuoth 4b: D^J/il uhv^) . 
 
 ' Sanhedrin 64b man ni3n ; B. Metzia 31 a. b. D3^Kn ^JJ^TJ/ vf?^ 
 
 nWm, 3wn nrr etc. 
 
 3 Sanhedrin 34b: nim!? nnt 1«; B. KAmma 53b: D'-^an ns< TTiTyh M^ 
 
 * Sanhediin 51b: nuib nni n3 ; Yebamoth 68b ; pii tmiT y""i; 
 compare also Kefeuboth 103a : ^Hin "I^HK nx mai^ m^n'' VV 
 
 » Horioth 9a: mnX pxi IT pip HT ; Ch»lin 43a: n^n /H^nn HNT 
 
 i6 nirtt<. 
 
 • Pesachim 5a: (tDIV'O^) Ki"^ 'h Hd!? pC'Xin fflt^l &<-|p 2^n^i. 
 
 '' Maccoth 3b: pDD^? vh\ 5<1»T iO\y^ XtH ; compare also Horiofe lUkiX 
 
 « Kiddushin 17b: pH nx ^ tM> n^XD; S^mhedrin 46a inW n^i>ni 
 
 nnife? ^h's 
 
 » Kiddushin 18a: lS^Q33 8<^1 inTJ33;Sanhedrm 52a: ^tDp!) tD^Q K^^K. 
 »• Gittin 20a: ppn «i>l 3rD1 ; Kiddusliin 64a ; njsny 0''i)i>n ^P^JH^ K^l 
 
 O^-UDD p«1. 
 
Introduction. 12 Y 
 
 admitted only such deductions which could be justified by the 
 spirit of the passage of law under consideration. As standard 
 rules for interpretation he recognized only those laid down by 
 Hillel which he however enlarged to thirteen by subdividing 
 some of them, omitting one, and adding a new one of his own. 
 The thirteen rules of R. Ishmael are: 
 
 1. n»im bp identical with Hillel' s Rule I. 
 
 2. n)^ nV;} identical with Hillel's Rule II. 
 
 3. 3X pia contraction of Hillel's Rules III and lY. 
 
 4 iDnsi hb:i - 
 
 5 bhy\ tD13 ■ subdivision of Hillel's Rule Y. 
 
 T. 8. 9. 10 and 11 are modifications of Hillel's Rule Y. 
 
 12 ISJIDD TD^n ■l3^^ *irJ';D TdS-I n^l with some addition 
 identical with Hillel's Rule YII. 
 
 13 nr n« nr D'^t^'^nDDn U^1\T0 ^Wy this rule is not at all 
 found among Hillel's. 
 
 Among those rules of R. Ishmael, the sixth rule of Hillel 
 <^the analogy made from another passage" is omitted, but this 
 omission is seeming only, since that rule was, under differnt 
 names: t^p'^n (the analogy) and IJ'^^'D HD (as we find-analogy) 
 included partly in the rule of rnt^ riTTl partly in thatof 3^ j«»J2, 
 as will be seen further on in the fuller exposition of these two 
 rules. 
 
 R. Ishmael's thirteen rules were generally adopted as the 
 authoritative rules of rabbinical interpretation without however 
 supplanting the methods of R. Akiba which continued to be 
 favored by many sf the Rabbis and were applied even by some 
 of the immediate disciples of R. Ishmael.' 
 
 Remark. R. Eliezer, son of R. Jose the Galilean, again enlarged 
 the hermeneutic rules to the number of thirty two. But as his rules 
 mostly refer to the Lomiletical interpretation, they do not strictly be- 
 long to our subject. Tlie Talmud though incidentally praising the emi- 
 nence of this teacher (Chulin 89), nowhere mentions his rules. But in 
 
 » Compare B. Kamma 84a: ^^T[ K-l^n"* Kip ^yOB'^ 'T ^Tl \ also Bad- 
 dushin 43: nUli) IS Wn ^NVDEJ'^ 'T Un. 
 
128 Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 theAgadic interpretation of the Amoraim,some of his rules are applied. 
 A Baraitha of R. Eliezer containing his thirty two rules is not men- 
 tioned in the Rabbinical writings before the tenth century. This Ba- 
 raitha is embodied in the books: Sefer Kerithoth and Halichoth Olam 
 of which we shall speak in the following paragraph. 
 
 Literature on the Hermeneutic Rules. 
 §9. 
 
 The thirteen rules of R. Ishmael are collected in the intro- 
 ductory chapter of the Siphra. 
 
 7?. Abraham b. David of Posquieres (T^Sn)/ in the XII cen- 
 tury, wrote some valuable annotations on that chapter in his 
 commentary on the Siphra. 
 
 R, Solomon b. Isaac ("'"ti^n), the celebrated commentator of 
 the Talmud, in the XI century, occasionally explained, in his 
 lucid way, the single rules where they are applied in the Talmu- 
 dical discussions.' 
 
 Of standard works treating of the hermeneutic rules we 
 mention: 
 
 mn'^'lD 'D by R* Samson of Chinon^ in the XIY century. 
 
 D^iy mD"^^n 'D by R. Jeshua b. Joseph Halevi^ flourishing 
 in the XY century, in Spain. 
 
 An abstract of the two last mentioned works is found in 
 an appendix to mDnil HDDD in the usual Talmud editions. 
 
 inns miD 'D by Aaron b. Chayim^ XYI century. This very 
 valuable treatise forms the first part of the author's greater 
 work called ]nn^ \T\^ which is a commentary on the Siphra. 
 
 nyil^tt^ "^Z^ 'D by R, Solomon b, Abraham Algazi^ XVII cen- 
 tury. 
 
 » A separate treatise on the hermeneutic rules, ascribed to this 
 commentator and published in Kobak's **Ginze Nistaroth" 1 11 under 
 the title of nnion ^y ^K^I e^n^Q seems to be spurious. It is, at most, a 
 compilation of his various incidental remarks on the single rules found 
 in his conmientary on the Talmud. 
 
Introduction. 129 
 
 nODH n^nn 'D, by Jacob Chagiz XYII, century. 
 
 Of modern v^orks on our subject the following deserve to 
 be mentioned: 
 
 Halachische Exegese by H. S. Hirschfeld^ Berlin, 1840. 
 
 m"»3~^n hy Mordechai Flongian^ Wilna, 1849. This Heb- 
 rew book treats exclusively of the rule of Gezera Shava. 
 
 Palaestinische und alexandi*inische Schriftforsctung by Z, 
 Frankcl^ Breslau, 1864, 
 
EXPOSITION OF R. ISHMAEL'S HERMENEUTIC RULES. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 THE INFERENCE OF KAL YE-CHOMER. 
 
 The rule which occupies the first place in the hermeneutic 
 system of Hillel as well as in that of R. Ishmael, is termed 
 nDim ^D- This rule is very frequently used in the Talmudic 
 discussions. It has quite a logical foundation, being a kind 
 of syllogism, an inference a fortiori. 
 
 I. Definition. 
 
 §10. 
 
 In the Talmudic terminology the word ^p (light in weight) 
 means that which, from a legal point of view, is regarded as 
 being less important, less significant, and iDin (heaviness) that 
 which is comparatively of great weight and importance. By 
 the term-iDim ^D then is meant an inference from the less to the 
 more important, and vice versa, from the more to the less im- 
 portant. 
 
 For the sake of convenience, we shall use the word 7?iinor 
 instead of ^p, and 7?iajor instead of ^,Din ; but we must caution 
 against confounding the meaning of these words with that of 
 the terms major and minor, commonly used in logic in regard 
 to syllogisms. 
 
 II. Principle. 
 
 § 11. 
 
 The principle underlying the inference of "iDim ^p is, that 
 the law is assumed to have the tendency to proportionate its 
 effect to the importance of the cases referred to, so as to be more 
 rigorous and restrictive in important, and more lenient and 
 permissive in comparatively unimportant matters. Hence, if a 
 certain rigorous restriction of the law is found regarding a mat- 
 ter of minor importance, we may infer that the same restriction 
 is the more applicable to that which is of major importance, 
 
The Inference from Minor and Major. 131 
 
 though that restriction be not expressly made in the law for this 
 case. And on the other hand, if a certain allowance is 
 made by the law regarding a thing of major importance, we may 
 properly conclude that the same allowance is the more applicable 
 to that which is of comparatively minor importancei. 
 
 Thus, for instance, r\2\^ is in some respects regarded as 
 being of more importance (niDn) than tD"i^ (a common holiday). 
 If, therefore, a certain kind of work is permitted on nz\^, we 
 justly infer that such a work is the more permissible on tD"T' ; 
 and vice versa, if a certain work is forbidden on ^")^ it must all 
 the more imperatively be forbidden onnnt^. Mishna Betza Y. 2: 
 
 III. Biblical Prototype. 
 
 § 12. 
 
 The inference, drawn in Scripture (Numbers xii. 14) on a 
 certain occasion is regarded as a prototype of this manner of 
 drawing inaKierences which is emploj^cd in theTalmudic Halacha. 
 Miriam had been punished with leprosy as a sign of the Lord's 
 disfavor, and when the question arose how long she ought to be 
 shut out of the camp in consequence of that disfavor, the 
 answer was ; ^^If her father had but spit in her face, should she 
 not be ashamed (shut up) seven days? Let her be shut out 
 from the camp seven days." Here an inference is made 
 from minor to major, namely, from a human father's to the 
 Lord's disfavor. 
 
 IV. Talmudic Terms. 
 
 § 13. 
 
 Every ^Dim hp contains two things, A and B, standing 
 in certain relations to each other and having different degrees 
 
 ^Modern jurisprudence admits also a certain argument which is 
 quite analogous to the principle of Kal ve-chomer, as may be 
 seen from the following maxim, quoted by Coke on Littleton, 260: 
 "Quod in minori valet, vale bit in majori ; et quod in majori non 
 valet nee valebit in minori." "Wliat avails in the less, will avail in 
 the greater ; and what will not avail in the greater, will not avail 
 in the less." 
 
132 Hermeneutics op the Talmud. 
 
 of importance. Of these two things, A, which in Talraudic 
 terminology is called ID^D (teaching) is expressly subject to a 
 certain law or restriction, which by way of inference is to be 
 transferred to B, termed n^^ (learning). 
 
 An inference is termed ]*»"r (a judgment); to make an infer- 
 ence jn (to judge). The peculiar law found in the ID^Q is 
 called jni (to be judged from), while the law finally transferred 
 to the ^oh is termed ]nn |D H2T\ (the result of the inference). 
 
 Thus, in the biblical inference mentioned above, the father's 
 disfavor is the TD^D, the Lord's disfavor is ID^. The punish- 
 ment in consequence of a father's disfavor (ny^ti^ D^DH sS"I 
 D'^D^) is the jni, and the final decision derived from this infer- 
 ence (D''D'' ny^ti^ n:iDn) is j^'in jd «3n. 
 
 V. Logical and Formal Arrangement. 
 § 14. 
 
 Logically, every yp (like every syllogism) has three propo- 
 sitions, of which two are the Premises and one the Conclusion. 
 
 The first pre juise states, that two certain things, A and B, 
 stand to each other in the relation of major and minor impor- 
 tance. 
 
 The second premise states that with one of these two things 
 (A) a certain restrictive or permissive law is connected. 
 
 The conclusion is that the same law is the more applicable 
 to the other thing (B). 
 
 The first premise is termed ]>! Tbx\T\ the outset of the infer- 
 ence, or S*r"n ^Ip''^;/ the rriost essential part of the inference ; 
 while the final conclusion is called ]•'! DID the end of the 
 tnference. 
 
 The formal arrangement of these three propositions differs, 
 however, from this logical order, as a V'p is usually expressed 
 by two compound propositions, one of which is the antecedent 
 and the other the consequent^ as in case of an inference 
 from minor to major : 
 
 (n^'-'n) mos (^p) '"^ "^vh^ nn 
 (n^'-'nty) niD^iy jn ij''« (-non) — ty '':i^3 
 
The Inference from Minor and Major. 133 
 
 « If A which in this or that respect is of minor impor- 
 tance, is subject to a certain severity of the law ; ought not B, 
 which is of major importance, be the more subject to the same 
 severity?" Or, in case of an inference frome major to minor: 
 
 (mt:s) nniD (nion) — t:^ •':i'?d no 
 (-nt:i2^ pir«) p^^ h^ «^ (^p) '"^ '^"^^s 
 
 ''If a certain allowance is made by the law in the case 
 of A, which is of major importance ; ought not the same allow, 
 ance be the more made in the case of B, which is of minor 
 importance ?" 
 VI. Illustrations of inferences from minor to major. 
 
 § 15. 
 
 a. In Exodus xxii. 13, the law is laid down that if a man 
 borrow of his neighbor an animal or a thing, and the animal 
 die or the object be destroyed, the borrower must restore the 
 loss. But it is not expressly mentioned in this law whether the 
 borrower was also responsible in cases when the borrowed 
 animal or thing is stolen. The liability in this eventuality 
 is then proved by way of an inference from the law regarding 
 a (paid) depositary who, according to Exodus xxii. 9—11, is 
 not bound to make restitution when the animal intrusted to 
 his care died or became hurt, and yet is held responsible in 
 case the intrusted thing was stolen (dV^"' ID^D ^i:*" 2^: DSl) 
 The inference is made in the following way : 
 
 ''If the depositary, though iree from responsibility for 
 damage and death, is still bound to restore the thing stolen 
 from him, ought not the borrower, who is responsible for da- 
 mage and death, to be the more bound to restore the thing 
 stolen from him?" In this inference the depositary is minor, 
 the borrower major. Baba Metzia 95a. 
 
 h. By a similar inference it is proved that a depositary 
 has to make restitution in cases where the intrusted thing has 
 become lost, though the law only speaks of his responsibility 
 for theft (Exodus xxii. 11): 
 
134 Heumeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 ''If he has to make restitution for the t/ie/f, 
 which is almost an accident (as the greatest vigilance may 
 not always prevent it), how much the more is restitution to be 
 made for >o:i/ig (the intrusted object), which is almost a 
 trespass (since he was deficient in the necessary care and 
 vigilance). Here nz^l^ is minor, riT'DS major. Baba Metzia 94b. 
 
 VII. Illustration of an inference from major to minor. 
 
 § 16 
 While the Sadducees took the law ''Eye for eye" etc., 
 (Exodus xxi. 24), literally as jus talionis, the rabbinical inter- 
 pretation was, that a limb was not actually to be maimed for a 
 limb, but that the harm done to the injured person was esti- 
 mated and a pecuniary equivalent paid by the offender. Among 
 other arguments in support of this interpretation one of the 
 rabbis applied the inference from major to minor, referring to 
 the law (Exodus xxi. 29—30), by which, under certain circum- 
 stances, the proprietor of a beast which is notably dangerous 
 and which has killed a person, is judged liable to the death 
 penalty; but the capital punishment could be redeemed by 
 money. Now, if the law expressly admits a pecuniary compen- 
 sation in a case where the guilty person deserved capital pun- 
 ishment, how much the more is a pecuniary compensation admis- 
 sible in our case where it does not concern capital punishment : 
 
 pDD s^s v:]: i^b nn-'D z^r\2n tr:v'^ mpaa rrii 
 pDD s^s D^jy i^b*:; ^s .n jn nn-'n mv ^s^t^ i^:^ 
 
 Mechilta to Exodus xxi. 24. 
 XIII. Restrictions in the application of inferences. 
 
 § n 
 Conclusions made by an inference are restricted by three 
 rules: 1-st, jnJD nvr\b pn JO S^^in "it is sufficient that the 
 result derived from an inference be equivalent to the law from 
 which it is drawn" ; that is to say, the law transferred to B 
 (the major), must never surnass in severity the original law in 
 A (the minor), from which the inference was made. 
 
The Inference from Minor and Major. 135 
 
 Thus, in the inference made in the Scripture in regard to 
 Miriam, we might have expected that the time of her exclusion 
 from the camp should be more than seven days, since the Lord's 
 disfavor is of more consequence than a human father's; never- 
 theless, Scripture says, ^'Let her be shut out from the camp seven 
 days," which is just as long as she would have felt humiliated if 
 her father had treated her with contumely. On this passage 
 the restrictive rule just mentioned is founded. An ample appli- 
 cation of this rule is found in Mishna Baba Kamma II. 5. 
 
 2d. Another restrictive rule is jnn ]D plTiiy pS ''The in- 
 ference from minor to major is not to be applied in the penal 
 law." 
 
 The reason for this rule lies in the possibility that the con- 
 clusions drawn by inference might have been erroneous, so that 
 the infliction of a penalty derived from such a conclusion would 
 not be justified.^ 
 
 An application of the rule jnn JtD ^^^T^"^ ]''« is made in Tal- 
 mud Maccoth 5b, to refute an objection to the rabbinical inter- 
 pretation of the law, that the punishment of false witnesses 
 (Deuteronomy xix. 19), is to take place only when the judg- 
 ment against the falsely accused party has not yet been executed. 
 The objection to this interpretation was raised by way of an 
 inference from minor to major: 
 
 1 Quite analogous to this rabbinical rule is that established in 
 modern law, "that penal statutes must be construed strictly. They can 
 not, therefore, be extended by their spirit or by equity to any other 
 offenses than those clearly described and provided for." (See Bouvier's 
 Law Dictionary, article Penal Statutes). 
 
 ''According to Talmudic interpretation, however, this rule is derived 
 from the Scripture, in which the law sometimes finds it necessary to 
 expressly mention a case in which the punishment is to be inflicted, 
 though it could have been easily found by a mere inference from an- 
 other case. Thus, for instance, in regard to the law, Exodus xxi. 33, we 
 read in Mechilta : t^^N m^^ -3 ^"n T^^ Hin nniS sbx "h PN* tT^S nriQ^ ^31 
 
 X-\r\ p jTOiy pN^ti* nnbS n-i3^ ^d idx: idp \^'^r\ |d n^^JV p mD« 
 
 In Talmud Maccoth 5 t>, the same principle is proved in a similar 
 way from Leviticus xx, 17. 
 
136 Hermeneutics op the Talmud. 
 
 ^'If the witnesses are to be put to death, though their false tes- 
 timony has not caused the death of the innocent, how much the 
 more when it really had fatal consequences?" 
 
 But tliis quite logical objection is removed by the axiom j'lS 
 ]''"in |D ]'^^1)]^ '^No penalty can be inflicted which is based 
 upon an inference." 
 
 3d. A third restrictive rule in the application of inferences 
 of n"1p is laid down in Mishna Yadaim iii. 2: 
 
 or as the rule is expressed more concisely in Talmud Sabb. 132, 
 and Nazir 57: riD^ID V'p \^11 ]''« ''No inferences must be made 
 from traditionallaws to establish a new law."* 
 
 IX. Refutation of inferences. 
 § 18. 
 
 Not every rC'lp offered in the Talmudic discussions of the 
 law is correct and valid. We sometimes find there very proble- 
 matic and even sophistical inferences set forth merely as sup- 
 positions or hypotheses; these are, however, finally refuted. A 
 refutation of a n'lp is called ^Dn"'S. 
 
 Refutations may be made in two different ways: a. Either 
 the correctness of the premise in the antecedent is disputed by 
 showing that A (ID^D) which was supposed to be of minor 
 importance (^p) is in some other respects really of major im- 
 portance (niDn); or b. The correctness of the conclusion in the 
 consequent is diputed by showing that the peculiar law con- 
 nected with A (tD^D) can not be transferred to B ("TD^) as 
 it is not transferred to 0, which in certain respects is like B. 
 
 The first kind of refutation is called i^jiii SHp^ys toil's a 
 refutation of the most essential part of the inference^ and the sec- 
 ond kind is termed S^n fjlD^ «J3n^S refutation of the final 
 cojiclusion of the inference. The styles of expression in these two 
 
 'R. Akiba, however, did not accept this restrictive rule, but at- 
 tempted to make inferences even from traditional laws to establish a 
 new law. See Sabbath 132a. Compare also Talm. Jer. Kiddushin 1, 2: 
 
The Inference from Minor and Major. 137 
 
 kinds of refutation are quite different. A refutation of the 
 premise is usually expressed in the following way: 
 
 (-jDi -|D2 men) piy ^:^h^b no 
 (1^1 n^^2 mj2n i:i^str) n^2 ncsn 
 
 ''Why has A that particular severe provision of the law ? 
 Because it is of ^najor importance in this or that respect. But 
 how will you apply it to B, which is not so important in the same 
 respect?" 
 
 The refutation of the final conclusion is usually expressed 
 by the words, pty n''DV ''il^S- ''The case of C proves it;" viz.: 
 that such a conclusion can not be admitted, since C is of equal 
 importance with B, and still the restriction of A, which is 
 intended to be transferred to B, is not applied to C. 
 
 X. Illustration of the different kinds of refutation. 
 
 § 19. 
 
 1. It is well known that the law, "thou shalt not seethe 
 a kid in its mother's milk," is, according to Talmudic interpre- 
 tation, a general prohibition against boiling any kind of meat 
 in any kind of milk. After having demonstrated that 3^nn "itT^ 
 (meat, which in contradiction to this law had been boiled with 
 milk), is forbidden to be eaten (n^"'::N*a niDS), it is undertaken 
 to prove that it is likewise forbidden to make any other use 
 of it (ns^nn mD«). One of the rabbis tried to prove this by 
 way of an inference from n^ny (the fruits of a tree during the 
 first three years, which fruits were deemed forbidden to be used 
 in any way ni<ir\2 niDS). The inference was made in the fol- 
 lowing way : 
 
 nsina nniDS nn^'iiy nn niz^: «^ty nb^v hd 
 
 ' 'If those fruits, regarding which 
 no law had been violated, are forbidden to be used in any 
 way, ought not meat and milk, which, in violation of a law, 
 have been boiled together, the more be forbidden to be used 
 in any way?" 
 
 The premise in this inference is that n^lj? is of mmor 
 
138 Hermeneutics of the Talmud 
 
 importance (hp) compared with n"Z2', but this premise is dis- 
 puted by demonstrating that in certain respects it was, in fact, 
 of ma/or importance, since those fruits had at no time before 
 been permitted to be used, while in regard to ^"22 there had 
 been a time (namely, before being boiled together), when the 
 use of each of these components was allowed: 
 
 (n^:n2 nmD« p^s^) nn^-^ nv^ n^ nn'^n s^ ptr nh^v^ no 
 nn%-in nj;tr ^b n\"it^ n"3:i na^n 
 
 Chullin 115b; Mechilta to Exodus xxiii. 19. 
 
 2. Refutation of the conclusion in the inference. An illus- 
 tration of this kind of refutation is furnished in Mishna Pe- 
 sachim vi. 1, 2. There the law is laid down that if the eve of 
 riDS happened to fall on a Sabbath, the sacrificial acts with the 
 Paschal lamb, as the slaughtering, sprinkling, etc., were allowed, 
 though such acts are otherwise regarded as labor (n^S^D), 
 while certain preparatory acts (as carrying the lamb to the 
 temple, etc.), though not regarded as real labor, but only as 
 rnrtr (incompatible with a day of rest), are not allowed. This 
 restriction is disputed by R. Eliezer, on the ground of the fol- 
 lowing inference : 
 
 ''If slaughtering, though a real labor, abrogates the Sab- 
 bath, ought not things not regarded as real labor the more :^.b- 
 rogate the Sabbath?" 
 
 But this logical conclusion is refuted by P. Joshua: 
 
 ^\^2^ nwD la niDSi n2^bt2 miyD ^2 in^nntr ^dt' d"1'' 
 
 ''A common holiday proves that this conclusion is not ad- 
 missible, for on such a day some real labors (as cooking, baking, 
 etc.), are permitted, while at the same time certain actions, 
 which fall under the category of ^\^2\^, are positively pro- 
 hibited." 
 
 XI REINSTATEMENT OF A REFUTED INFERENCE. 
 
 § 20. 
 
 When an inference has been refuted in one of the two ways 
 
 just mentioned, the attempt is sometimes made to defend and 
 
 retain it by removing the objection raised in the refutation. If 
 
The Inference from Minor and Major. 139 
 
 the arguments proffered for this purpose are found to be correct, 
 the original inference is reinstated; if not, the refutation is 
 sustained and the inference finally rejected. 
 
 Thus, for instance, in regard to R. Eliezer's inference, which 
 R. Joshua refuted by the objection n^^V ^'V, R. Eliezer, in 
 turn, attempted to remove this objection by asking: n''"'S"\ PID 
 m^i^D^ mt^n ''What can that which is va/un/ary ^iYOYe against 
 a conmiandV That is to say, if nuri^ actions are not allowed 
 on tD"l'', it must be remembered that they concern only 
 Yoluntary or private affairs, while the prohibition of such 
 actions in regard to the Paschal lamb concerns a religious duty 
 which is expressly commanded. 
 
 R. Joshua was silenced by this point of argumentation, and 
 seemed to be willing to withdraw his objection to R. Eliezer's 
 inference; but now R. Akiba appeared in the arena to defend 
 R. Joshua's objection by showing that a difference between mii^l 
 and T\Xi^ could not be admitted. He said s%-|ty n"^Din nSTH 
 
 n^irn ns nnn nrsi m^tr d^iITd s-^m m:it: ''The sprinkling 
 
 (by which an unclean person was declared to be again clean) 
 may prove it, because this also is an act belonging to the cate- 
 gory of nuir, ^nd at the same time concerns a command 
 (since the performance of this act would make the person fit to 
 bring his Paschal offering), and still it is not to be done on a 
 Sabbath-day; therefore, you should n(.t wonder that in our case 
 those other acts (the carrying of the Paschal lamb, etc.), though 
 concerning a ni^iD and only m^^kT, are not to be done on a 
 Sabbath day." 
 
 A repeated attempt of R. Eliezer to reinstate his infer- 
 ence by disputing R. Akiba's new objection, having been frus- 
 trated by the latter's counter-arguments, the inference was fi- 
 nally rejected. 
 
 xn. Sophistical inferences. 
 
 §21. 
 
 In conclusion, we wish to call attention to some sophistical 
 inferences of V'p mentioned in the Talinudic literature, which 
 are refuted simply by an argument ad absurdum. 
 
140 Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 One of these inferences is quoted in the Mishna Yadaim iv. 
 7: <'The Sadducees said, We have a strong argument against 
 you Pharisees. You teach that one is responsible for a damage 
 caused by his ox or ass, but not responsible for a damage 
 caused by his slave or his bondwoman; is this not contrary to 
 a simple rational inference?" 
 
 ipm ^''•'n ^ni^^ j'^i 1J''« m^D nnn z^^^n '•jstr •'no^i nay 
 
 ''If I be responsible for my animals regarding which I have 
 no religious obligation, how much more must I then be respon- 
 sible for the damage caused by my servants, regarding whom I 
 have a religious obligation?" 
 
 The Pharisees promptly answered: ''No 1 1 am responsible 
 for my animals, which have no free will and deliberation, but 
 not for my slaves, who have knowledge and deliberation. If I 
 offend them, they may go and deliberately set fire to my neigh- 
 bor's property. Should I then be bound to pay?" 
 
 Another still more sophistical yp is mentioned in Mass. 
 Derech Eretz Rabba, chapter I. A certain Jose b. Tadai, of 
 Tiberias, tried, in the presence of R. Gamaliel, to ridicule the 
 application of inferences in ritual laws by the following 
 paralogism: 
 
 nnaa niDS ••:« na nniD •»i«^ •'nt^'s hd 
 nnnn niDS r^^nn^ jn ii\^ nn mos •'jstr ty's n^^s 
 
 "If the marriage with one's own daughter is prohibited, 
 although the marriage with her mother is permitted, how 
 much more unlawful must it be to marry another married 
 woman's daughter, since the marriage with her mother, a mar- 
 ried woman, is positively prohibited?" 
 
 The fallacy in this inference is that the conclusion contra- 
 dicts the premise. The premise is that the marriage with one's 
 own wife is lawful, while according to the conclusion any mar- 
 riage would be prohibited. But R. Gamaliel answered caus- 
 tically: "Go, thou, and take care of the high-priest, in regard to 
 whom it is written, Only a virgin fron among his people he shall 
 marry; I shall then take care ot all Israel." That is to say, 
 show me, in the first place, how, according to the inference, the 
 
The Inference from Minor and Major. 141 
 
 high-priest could enter a marriage, as Scripture expressly per- 
 mits him to do, and I shall prove the same permission for all 
 Israelites. 
 
 According to another version, R. Gamaliel excommunicated 
 the scoffing questioner, remarking: p ^21 '^^pV^ ^21 pJl |^i< 
 minn ''No inference can be admitted in which the conclusion 
 contradicts the law." 
 
 A masterpiece of sophistical inferences is recorded in San- 
 hedrin 17. Referring to a tradition, according to which none 
 could aspire for membership in the ancient Sanhedrin, without 
 having given a proof of his dialectic ability by demonstrating, 
 for instance, the cleanness of those eight reptiles which the law 
 (Leviticus xi. 29, 30), expressly declares to be unclean, one of 
 the Amoraim jokingly remarked: ''Ifl had been living at the 
 time when the Sanhedrin was still in existence, I might have 
 aspired for membership by offering the following inference: 
 
 " If a serpent, though killing men and beasts, and thus in- 
 creasing ritual uncleanness, still is regarded a clean animal;^ 
 ought not a reptile that does not kill and increase uncleanness 
 be the more regarded clean?" 
 
 This inference, though merely intended to display dialectic 
 acumen, is earnestly refuted by the following argumentum ad 
 absurdum-. If, according to the first premise of this inference, 
 a serpent ought to be unclean on account of its capability to 
 kill a person, then any wooden instrument by which a person 
 can be killed ought to be unclean. 
 
 This inference and its refutation are of some intrest as an 
 instance which shows clearly that many ot the Talmudic dis- 
 cussions on the law had no other purpose than to be a mental 
 tournament, in wliich the rabbis and their disciples delighted 
 to exercise their intellectual powers and exhibit their skill and 
 acuteness in the art of reasoning and debating. 
 
 *The serpent is, of course, unclean in respect to food, but it is clean 
 in as far as it does not belong to those eight reptiles concerning which 
 the law ordained : "Whoyoever doth touch them, when they are dead, 
 shall be unclean until the even.** 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 THE ANALOGY OF GEZERA SHAYA. 
 
 Rule II. 
 
 Introductory. 
 
 §22. 
 
 Analogy, in the ordinary sense of the word, denotes such 
 resemolance between things, as enables us to assume of one 
 what we know of the other. Although conclusions drawn 
 from analogy do not in general afford certai?ity^ but only some 
 degree of probability at best, much recourse is often taken to 
 such conclusions in every branch of human knowledge, espe- 
 cially when all other means of argumentation fail. 
 
 The argument from analogy is also admitted as an aid in 
 modern legal interpretation, either to determine an ambiguous 
 expression in a law, or to decide a case not expressly provided 
 for therein, or to supply a defect in one law by reference to the 
 fuller contents of another law. 
 
 The analogy between two laws may be either real or formal 
 It is real when these laws are of the same nature and the cases 
 treated of in them resemble each other in material points and 
 in important relations. It is formal, when the resemblance 
 consists merely in some external points and relations, as in 
 the wording of the laws or in the connection in which they are 
 set forth. Arguments from a real analogy existing between 
 different laws are very often applied in the Rabbinical interpre- 
 tation. Such an analogy is termed ir:f D HD of which we shall 
 speak in the following chapter. But the Rabbis also admit the 
 argument from a formal or external analogy. Whether also 
 this kind of argumentation be in accordance with logical rea- 
 soning, depends upon the nature of the conclusion which is 
 intended to be drawn therefrom. If the external relations 
 upon which the argument proceeds, imply also an internal 
 relation which has a bearing on the conclusion, it is logical 
 and valid, otherwise it is not. There are especially two rules 
 
The Analogy of Gezera Shava. 143 
 
 of Talmudical interpretation in which use is made of this kind 
 of analogy. These are termed: 1. Gezera Shava; 2. Hakkesh. 
 
 A. GEZERA SHAYA. 
 
 I. — TERM, CLASSIFICATION AND FORMULA. 
 
 § 23. 
 
 The term Gezera Shava (mty nnn:i) means literally either 
 a similar section (part) or a similar decision (decree). In the 
 Talmudic phraseology it denotes an analogy of expressions, that 
 is, an analogy based on identical or similar words occurring in 
 two different passages of Scripture. The Gezera Shava is 
 used: first^ as an exegetical aid to determine the meaning of an 
 ambiguous expression in a law; second^ as an argument in con- 
 struing laws with reference to each other, so that certain provis- 
 ions connected with one of them may be shown to be applicable 
 also to the other. We have, then, two kinds of Gezera Shava, 
 and in order to distinguish them clearly we propose to call the 
 former the exegetical and the latter the constructional Gezera 
 Shava. The usual formula for both kinds of Gezera Shava is: 
 
 — '^rb nD.s^i ;«^ id«j 
 
 ]«:? ri« '\pTb HD 
 
 Here is said: There is said:. . . . 
 
 As there, so here. 
 
 II. — THE EXEGETICAL GEZERA SHAVA. 
 §23. 
 
 The theory of the exegetical Gezera Shava is expressed in 
 the Talmudical phrase sometimes used in connection with this 
 kind of analogy: trniSDH JD Dino IID^"* '^he indefinite is to be 
 explained by the definite," that is to say, if an expression in one 
 passage of Scripture is used ambiguously, its meaning is to be 
 ascertained from another passage, where the same expression 
 occurs in a connection in which it is clearly defined. 
 
 This quite rational theory is also adopted in modern scien- 
 tific exegesis in reference to parallel fassa^ys, and is in some 
 
144 Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 measure admitted even in the legal interpretation of statutes 
 and documents.^ 
 
 Examples of exegetical Gezera Shava: 
 
 1. In Levit. xvi. 29 the law relating to the Day of Atone- 
 ment enjoins DD^mti^SJ n« liyn ^'Ye shall afflict your souls," 
 without defining the nature of this affliction. But the expres- 
 sion njy occurs in other passages in a connection where it evi- 
 dently refers to the sufiering of want and hunger, as for instance 
 in the passage "la'^yn^l ^JJ^'I Deut. viii. 3. (Compare also Psalm 
 XXXV. 13 •»ti'SJ m^2 ^JT^jy). Hence the expression in our pas- 
 sage is to be taken in the meaning which tradition has put on 
 it, /. e.j as a term of fasting. 
 
 pnyn •'irj; ]^n^ no 
 
 Siphra to Levit. xvi., and Talmud Yoma, 74. 
 
 2. In the law restricting the time of slavery, Exod. xxi. 
 2, the expression •»'i::j; 123; is somewhat ambiguous, as it might 
 mean either a servant of a Hebrew (a heathen slave belonging 
 to an Israelite) or a Hebrew servant (an Israelite who has been 
 sold as a slave). That the expression is to be taken in the lat- 
 ter sense (the word •^i^y being here used as an adjective and 
 
 * "One of the chief rules in ascertaining the meaning of doubtful 
 words is to try first to ascertain the meaning— from other passages of 
 the same text in which the ambiguous word occurs, so used that it 
 leaves no doubt — by parallels." Francis Lieber, ''Legal and PoUtical 
 Hermeneutics," page 91. — The following rule of interpretation, which 
 is quoted in * 'Broom's Legal Maxims," page 586, comes still nearer to 
 the character of Talmudical Gezera Shava : ' 'Where an act of Parlia- 
 ment has received a judicial construction putting a certain meaning on 
 its words, and the Legislature in a subsequent act in -pari materia uses 
 the same words, there is a presumption that the Legislature used those 
 words intending to express the meaning which it knew had been put 
 upon the ^Tords before, and unless there is something to rebut that pre- 
 sumption the act should be so construed, even if the words were such 
 that they might originally have been construed otherwise." 
 
The Analogy of Gezera Shava. 145 
 
 not as a noun) is proved by a reference to Dent. xv. 12, where 
 in a repetition of the same law the servant is called "'1IJ?n ^TIX 
 ^'thy Hebrew brother."^ 
 
 n2"TD ain^n ^sntr*" ]zz ]h'b no 
 n::'TD zinzn ^«n:r^ ]2n j«:: C]S 
 
 Mechilta to Exodus xxi. 
 
 III. — THE CONSTRUCTIONAL GEZERA SHAVA. 
 § 25 
 
 While the exegetical analogy is limited to the purpose of 
 ascertaining the meaning of an ambiguous word, the construc- 
 tional Gezera Shava intends to supply an omission in one law 
 by the more explicit provisions of another law. For this pur- 
 pose use is made of an identical characteristic word occurring 
 in both laws. By showing that this characteristic word has 
 some bearing on certain provisions made in one case, it is ar- 
 gued that the same provisions must apply also in the other 
 case. 
 
 IV. — ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 § 26. 
 1. Hillel, the elder, who first mentioned this rule of inter- 
 pretation, applied it in the following case: The eve of the Pe- 
 sach festival once happened to be on a Sabbath, and the question 
 was whether it should be permitted to sacrifice the Paschal 
 lamb on such a day. Among other arguments to prove the 
 permission, Hillel referred also to the rule of Gezera Shava. 
 He argued: In the law concerning the daily offering it is said 
 (Num. xxiii. 2) that it was to be brought n^'lD^ ''in its due 
 season," and also in the law regarding the Paschal lamb we 
 
 ^The ancient versions, as well as the modern commentaries on the 
 Bible, fully coincide with the Rabbinical interpretation of this expres- 
 sion. Strange enough, Saalschuetz, in his "Mosaisches Recht," page 
 702, tries to defend the other interpretation so promptly refuted by the 
 Rabbis, and claims that nny *13y refers to a certain class of heathen 
 slaves in the service of a Hebrew. Compare Mielziner's "Die Verhaelt- 
 Tiisse des Sklaven bei den alteu Hebraern," paj^e 'J8. 
 
146 Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 read: The children of Israel shall keep the Passover viyica 
 ''in its due season." (Num. ix. 2.) But concerning the daily- 
 offering the law expressly provides that it was to be brought 
 also on the Sabbath day. (Num. xxviii. 10.) The expression 
 'nj;iDi then means that the offering must take place at the ap- 
 pointed time under all circumstances, even on a Sabbath; there- 
 fore, the same expression nj;iD3 in regard to the Paschal 
 lamb likewise enjoins that the offering take place at the time 
 appoined, even on a Sabbath day. 
 
 TDn2 nyiD -iDSi"! nD33 ^^v^r2 nt:sj 
 
 nz^n ns nnn tdhh mo«n nyiD na 
 
 nn^n n« nnn nosa niDsn nyiD Cjs 
 
 Pesachim, page 66 a. 
 
 2. Another example, taken from the civil law, may here 
 be added to illustrate the application of the Gezera Shava in 
 construing a law which appears to be defective. 
 
 In Exod. xxii. 6-8, and 9-12, are contained two different 
 laws concerning the safe-keeping of the property of a fellow- 
 man. The traditional interpretation correctly distinguishes 
 between these two laws. The first treats of a gratuitous guar- 
 dian, while the other refers to a paid depositary who has a 
 greater responsibility than the former. Now, the first law 
 seems to be somewhat defective. It provides that if the ob- 
 jects intrusted have been stolen from the house of the guardian 
 ''he shall be brought to the judges — that he has not put his 
 hand to his neighbor's goods," but nothing is said of the way 
 in which he was to prove this, neither is it said whether he was 
 free from making restitution if he succeeded in proving this. 
 The Rabbis supply this defect by means of a Gezera Shava. 
 They refer to the second law in which (verse 10) the same 
 phrase occurs, "that he has not put his hand to his neighbor's 
 goods." Here the phrase is introduced by the words, "an oath 
 of the Lord shall be between them both," and is followed by the 
 words, "and shall not make restitution." Hence, according to 
 this analogy, the phrase in the first case must also be supplied 
 
The Analogy of Gezera Shava. 14Y 
 
 viz. : He shall be brought before the judges to take an oath ' that 
 he did not act fraudulently, which oath frees him from making 
 restitution. 
 
 Mechilta to Exod. xxii., and Baba Metzia 41b. 
 
 The examples given above illustrate the process and cha- 
 racter of most of the Gezeroth Shavoth which are quoted in the 
 Talmud in the name of the great authorities of the Mishnic per- 
 iod. The external analogy (the parity of expressions) from 
 which the argumentation proceeds, is there generally of such a 
 nature as to imply also an internal or real analogy which jus- 
 tifies the conclusion to be drawn from it. 
 
 Usually the two words which form the basis for a Gezera 
 Shava are exactly alike, but sometimes even such words are 
 used for this purpose which, though different in expression, are 
 identical in their meaning. Thus, for instance, a certain ana- 
 logy is occasionally formed on the basis of the expressions 'yo^ 
 \Ts'2T\ '^the priest shall returfi" (Levit. xiv. 39), and jriDn fc<31 
 ''the priest shall come^^ {ibid.^ 44), since the verb ''to return" 
 is almost identical with the verb "to come" (as the former 
 means to come again.) 
 
 Siphra to Levit xiv., and very often quoted in the Talmud. 
 
 V. — THE EXORBITANT GEZERA SHAVA. 
 
 § 2t 
 
 There is a peculiar kind of Gezera Shava sometimes resort- 
 ed to, especially by Amoraim, which is quite difierent from 
 the rational character of the analogies generally used by the 
 Tanaim. Its peculiarity consists in this, that the argument 
 from a parity of expressions is also admitted in cases where 
 the two laws or passages, compared with each other, have noth- 
 ing in common except a single, often very insignificant word 
 
 ^The Spptuagint already supplied the passage in tliis way by adding 
 to "ho shall appear before the judges" the words wai o/zezVar ''and he 
 shall swear." 
 
148 ; Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 which has not the least natural bearing on the conclusion to be 
 drawn therefrom. 
 
 It is obvious that arguments from such mere verbal ana- 
 logies easily result in what is termed in Logic a fallacy^ or 
 sophistical conclusion. It must, however, be stated that the 
 Amoraim never used such purely verbal analogies for the 
 purpose of deducing a new law from Scripture, but merely as 
 an attempt to find a Scriptural support for an opinion expressed 
 by one of the authorities in the Mishna.^ 
 
 This kind of Gezera Shava is externally characterized by 
 being usually introduced by this peculiar formula """D"^s^"lN 
 or """D"nDi ''that is derived from," followed by the two 
 identical words on which the analogy in question is assumed to 
 be based. 
 
 VI. ILLUSTRATIONS OF EXORBITANT USES OF GEZERA SHAVA. 
 
 § 28. 
 a. In Mishna Sanhedrin I. 1, it is stated that criminal 
 cases involving corporal punishment (stripes) could be decided 
 by a minor court of three judges, but according to the opinion 
 of R. Ishmael, such cases required a higher criminal court of 
 twenty-three judges. The reason for this divergence of opinion 
 was, probably, that this Rabbi regarded the infliction of corpo- 
 ral punishment as too serious a matter to be left to the deci- 
 sion of a civil court of three; as a criminal case it ought, like 
 a case of capital punishment, to be judged by the higher court 
 of twenty-three. But the Gemara, commenting on this Mishna, 
 wants to know the Scriptural ground on which R. Ishmael 
 based his analogy, and in answer to this question the Babylo- 
 nian Amora, R. Ashi, thinks that he can find such a basis in 
 the word y*^-i ''the guilty" or criminal, which occurs as well in 
 the law referring to corporal punishment (Deut. xxv. 2) as in 
 that regarding the execution of capital punishment. (Num. 
 XXXV. 31.) 
 
 mn^D ^::''^nD ytrn ^trn s'ts 
 
 Talmud Sanhedrin 10. 
 
 'Compare Z. Frankel's * 'Palaestlnishe und Alexandrinische Schrift 
 forshung," page 20. 
 
The Analogy of Gezera Shava. 149 
 
 b. Mishna Kiddushin I. 1 lays down the law that one of 
 the means to contract marriage was TiD^, that is, the giving of 
 a piece of money or its value to the woman, with the express in- 
 tention of engaging her for this consideration as his wife. The 
 Gemara asks for a Biblical basis of this law, and the following 
 answer is given: The Law, in speaking of marriage, uses the 
 expression nt^S 1^"*^ np^ ''^ ''if a man take a wife" (Deut. xxii. 
 13); but np^ "to iake'^ also means ^'to acquire''' property, ^ and 
 is used elsewhere in connection with money given in considera- 
 tion for the acquisition of property •'Jdd TO Pnti^n irDOTinj (Gen. 
 xxiii. 13) J hoGce also a wife is acquired by means of money. 
 
 jnsy mt^D nn^'p rw^^^^ noi 
 
 Talmud Kiddushin 2a. 
 
 As to illustrations of Gezeroth Shavoth of a still more de- 
 cidedly sophistical character, we refer to the following two 
 examples in which an argument from analogy is based, in one 
 instance, on an identical pronoun (n^) and in the other on an 
 identical adverb (Dti^), occurring in two laws or passages of to- 
 tally ditferent nature and contents." 
 
 Talmud Chagiga, 4a. 
 
 'In the Pentateuch, however, the word npb nowhere has the mean- 
 ing of "to acquire or to buy;" it occurs in this meaning only a few- 
 times in some of the other books of the Bible (3 Sam. iv. 6 ; Prov. xxxi. 
 16, and Nehem x. 83 ); but in the Talmudic idiom it is almost exclusi- 
 vely used in this sense.— The formality of contracting marriage by 
 means of a piece of money was probably of a late origin, and was per- 
 haps influenced by a similar Roman custom— the nuptials by coemptio. 
 The probability of such an influence gains somegroundif we compare 
 tlie expression of the Mishna nS^n "iLDK^n 5)033 D^DIT Ht'TL^'^ H^JpJ ^E^'^^•^ 
 with the corresponding expression used by Gajus I., § IIU, in speaking 
 of the Roman custom : "Feminae olim tribus modis in manum conve- 
 niebant : usu, farreo, coemptione." It is moreover evident that the 
 civil law of the Mishna, though in doctrines and principles so widely 
 ditferent from the Roman law, adopted several legal formalities from 
 the latter and modified them according to the leading Jewish principles. 
 
 ^A very extensive use of this kind of G«zera Shava was mad© 
 eep'^cially in the Agada (the homiletical explanation of moral and 
 historical passages of Scripture), where it was not restricted by any 
 rules. There it gave rise to many of tliose most fanciful interpretations 
 and legendary narratives quoted in the Midrash and Talmud. 
 
160 Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 n^:n2 niDS n»i ]b:n 
 
 Aboda Zara 29b. 
 VII. restrictions in the use of gezera shava. 
 §. 29. 
 
 The exorbitancies which some teachers permitted, themselves 
 to make use of in the application of the Gezera Shava, served 
 only to demonstrate the weakness of the theory of basing ar- 
 guments upon an analogy of expressions. It having been 
 found that such arguments easily run into vague fallacies, this 
 whole theory seems to have been slighted by many. That such 
 must have been actually the case is evident from the repeated 
 admonitions which several prominent teachers addressed to 
 their contemporaries: ^^Do not look slightingly upon arguments 
 from the analogy of Gezera Shava, since very important in- 
 junctions of the traditional law can derive their Scriptural au- 
 thority in no other way than by means of such an analogy. "» 
 
 But as an arbitrary application of the analogy of Gezera 
 Shava could easily lead to misuse, it was found necessary to 
 subject it to some restrictions. This was done by the following 
 rules : 
 
 1. The identical expression occurring in two different laws 
 must at least in one of thembenJSIJ::^ ''empty," that is, seemingly 
 superfluous, or pleonastic, and not already engaged for another 
 deduction of the traditional interpretation, to enable it to be 
 used for an analogy of Gezera Shava. Thus, for instance, inDeut. 
 xxiii. 3, the law provides that a bastard "shall not enter into 
 the congregation of the Lord, even to the tenth ge?ieration.''^ Im- 
 mediately after this law follows another, with a similar provis- 
 ion, in regard to an Ammonite or Moabite: ^^ Even to the tenth 
 generation they shall not enter into the congregation of the 
 Lord /<?r evcr.'^ The identical expression in both cases are the 
 characteristic words, "even to the tenth generation." But in 
 the second case this expression seems to be somewhat superflu- 
 ous, or "empty," since the emphatic words "for ever" which 
 
 ^'IDI "l^ryn Th>\> ni^ n"in:i \~in 5^^; n^^yS Talmud Klierithoth. 5cr. Tliis 
 admonition is there repeated in the mime <»f four different teachers. 
 
The Analogy of GezepvA Siiava. 151 
 
 are added here exclude even the latest generations of an Am- 
 monite or Moabite from the congregation. The expression is 
 then assumed to have been used here for the purpose of inti- 
 mating an analogy of Gezera Shava. As the phrase, ''even to 
 the tenth generation," is here clearly defined to mean/^r ever 
 or the latest generations {ten being a round number taken to 
 signify perfection and completeness), so the identical expres- 
 sion in the former law must be likewise taken in this sense — 
 a bastard and his descendants are for ever disqualified from 
 entering the community of Israel.^ 
 
 Siphre to Deut., section 259; compare also Talmud Jeba- 
 moth, 78b. An other example is found in Tal. Chagiga 9a. 
 
 A Gezera Shava in this case is termed inS T^D njSID 
 < 'empty on one side," and is regarded admissible, but may still 
 be rejected for certain reasons. Only when the identical ex- 
 pression is found to be superfluous in both laws under consi- 
 deration, ]''"n'i* "^r^D nilS'lD, is the analogy regarded as irrejec- 
 table. But if no pleonasm is recognizable in either of the two 
 passages of the law, no analogy can be formed between them 
 because of an identical expression occuring in each of them. 
 Baba Kama 25b; Jebamoth 70a; Nidda 22b; Sabbath 131a. ' 
 
 2. The second restrictive rule is less artificial and answers 
 the purpose better than the former. It is this: i^"l p D"fi< ps 
 IDi^D (Pesachim 66; Nidda 19b) "No one is permitted to 
 reason from a Gezera Shava of his own." While the applica- 
 tion of the logical inferences of Kal Yechomer could be left to 
 the discretion of the teachers of the law, the use of the un- 
 
 ^That is, according to Rabbinical interpretation, they are not per- 
 mitted to intermarry with Israelites. 
 
 ''The TJalmud further makes many nice distinctions in regard to 
 this n^'DID, which however, are too intricate and subtle to be treated 
 here. Those who take an interest in the decails of this subject will 
 consult with advantage Dr. H. S. Hirschfeld : Halachische Exegese 
 p. 462— 4G7. 
 
152 Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 certain conclusions from an analogy of expression had neces- 
 sarily to be restrained. Such an analogy must be sustained by 
 the authority of tradition in order to be valid and conclusive, 
 or as a post-Talmudic addition to this rule explains: ''One must 
 have received the analogy from his teacher, and the teacher 
 from his teachers, up to the time of the highest legislative 
 authority." 
 
 This rule, however, hardly meant to say, as many interpreters 
 understand it, that either the special application of a Gezera 
 Shava in a certain case must have been handed down, or the 
 identical expression on which the analogy is based must have 
 been pointed out by tradition. If so, it is difficult to perceive 
 how so many controversies could have been raised in the Tal- 
 mud in which analogies of Gezera Shava are set forth and 
 disputed, or withdrawn and replaced by others. 
 
 The true meaning of that rule seems rather to be that no 
 new laws are to be deduced from Scripture by means of a 
 Gezera Shava, out that such analogies could be only ap- 
 plied for the purpose of offering a biblical support to a law 
 which already had the sanction of tradition. Such a support 
 might be found in one way or another, and hence arose the 
 difference of opinion in regard to some analogies.^ 
 
 B. H E C K E S H. 
 
 VIII. TERM AND THEORY. 
 § 30. 
 
 There is another kind of analogy, somewhat similar to 
 Gezera Shava, which, though not expressly mentioned among 
 the thirteen rules of R. Ishmael, was generally adopted and 
 very frequently applied in the Talmudic interpretation of the 
 law; it is termed Heckesh. 
 
 The word typ%"i, derived from the verb t^^'^pn, to compare, 
 means originally a comparison^ an a?ialogy^ in which general 
 sense it also occurs; ^ but in the Talmudic terminology it 
 usually denotes a particular kind of analogy, based 
 
 ^Compare Frankel : "Ueber palaestinische und Alexandrinisc he 
 Schriftforshung p. 16, Note G and p. 20. 
 
 'For instance, Talmud Jerushalmi Pesachim vi. 1, 
 
The Analogy of Heckesh. 153 
 
 on the close connection of two subjects in one and the same 
 passage of the Law. 
 
 The theory of this peculiar analogy is that where two 
 subjects are connected in the law by a common predicate, the 
 same provisions otherwise made in regard to one of them are 
 under certain circumstances applicable also to the other. 
 
 Within certain limits this theory is not inconsistent with 
 logical reasoning, since the connection of two subjects by a 
 common predicate indicates that they in some respects have a 
 relation to each other. In modern rules of legal interpreta- 
 tion also is a maxim: * ^Coupling words together shows that 
 they ought to be understood in the same sense, "i But in 
 their endeavor to provide every traditional law with a Biblical 
 support, the rabbis sometimes carried also this theory beyond 
 its legitimate limits and beyond the natural scope of the 
 written law. 
 
 IX. ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 § 31. 
 
 The following examples will illustrate the different modes 
 in which the theory of Heckesh is applied: 
 
 a. According to the traditional law, women are exempted 
 from the performance of all periodical rites and religious duties 
 incumbent on male Israelites. In regard to prohibitory com- 
 mandments, however, no difference is made between man and 
 woman. Her obligation in this respect is derived by the analo- 
 gy of Heckesh from the words of Scripture (Numbers v. 6). 
 ''When ^man or woman shall commit any sin," etc., in which 
 passage women are placed in one category with men in regard 
 to a trespass against the law. 
 
 Kiddushin 35a. 
 b. Among other rules and regulations concerning civil 
 and criminal courts, the traditional law provides that the ses- 
 sions of a court must be opened in day time only; and further, 
 
 'Copulatio verborum indicat acceptioiiem in eodem sensu. Bacon, 
 Max. Reg. 3; Broom, Max. 3d, Loud, edition, 523. 
 
154 Heemeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 that blindness disables a man from acting as one of the judges. 
 The reason for these two provisions is obvious enough. But their 
 Biblical support is offered by K. Meir in the following more in- 
 genious than natural deduction. He says: The Law, in speak- 
 ing of the judicial functions of certain priestly courts,, eujoins 
 that ' 'by their word shall every controversy and every injury 
 be decided" y:i: ^dt y^^ ^75 H'^H"' (Deuteronomy xxi. 5). 
 ' 'Controversy" refers to civil litigations, and ''injury" refers to 
 the plague of leprosy (which in Leviticus xiii. 8, is termed y:ij 
 and was to be investigated by the priest). Both kinds of cases 
 being connected in this law, they must be analogous to each 
 other also in regard to their inveptigation. As the blind would 
 not be the proper man, and night not the proper time for the 
 investigation of a case of leprosy (Leviticus xiii. 6), so ought 
 day to be the proper time for the trial of any case of litigation, 
 and the blind not be admitted to judge such a case. 
 
 u'^^'i.ih n''2''"i D'^pD 
 
 Sanhederin 34, b. 
 e. The traditional permission to cut off the sheaf of the 
 first fruits for the purpose of the wave offering on the 16th day 
 of iS issan, even if that day happened to be on a Sabbath, is 
 based by R. Ishmael on the following passage (Exodus xxxiv. 
 21), nuii^n T^*p21 ^''nrii '^lu the time Q,iploiighi7ig 2.\i^reapi7ig 
 thou Shalt rest on the seventh day." Ploughmg is under all 
 circumstances an optional (private) act, since it is nowhere 
 commanded to be done for a religious purpose. Hence, also 
 the prohibition of reaping on a Sabbath day refers only to the 
 optional reaping for private purposes, but not where it is to be 
 done in fulfillment of a religious duty: 
 
 m:;Q «^nt!i^ noiyn T:ip «::'' 
 
 Mishna Shebiith I. 4. Menachoth 72. 
 
 X. HECKESH FROM PREDICATES. 
 § 32. 
 The analogy of Heckesh is also made from two predicates 
 
The Analogy of Heckesh. 155 
 
 belongiri- to cue sul)jcct. In this case, the yerbs constituting 
 the common predicate are treated as verbal nouns. Such a 
 Heckesh is, for instance, applied to prove that a wife may be 
 taken in matrimony by means of a written contract of marriage 
 which is handed to her. The law (Deuteronomy xxiv. 2), in 
 speaking of a case where a divorced woman contracts a second 
 marriao-e, uses the words: nn^m n^'J^l -when she has ^./^r/^^ 
 out of his house she may become another man's wife.' As tne 
 departing out of his house (divorce) is by means of a written 
 document (bill of divorcement), so, also, the becoming a wile 
 may be effected by means of a document written for that pur- 
 pose. 
 
 Talmud Kiddushin 5. As to other examples compare B. 
 Kamma, U^,, and Chagiga, ^b, 
 
 XI. HECKESH IRREFUTABLE. 
 § 33. 
 ArgLimcuts from Heckesh are, in general, regarded as being 
 more conclusive than those from Gezera Shava, the latter 
 admitting of a refutation, but not the former.^ But as 
 Gezera Shava, so also Heckesh could be applied only for the 
 purpose of supporting a traditional law. 
 
 M^rJviTy r^^^ X^ Menachoth 82b; Baba Kamma I06b. Con- 
 cerning the prevalence of one or the other of these two kinds oi 
 analogy in cases where they seem to be in conflict with eacn 
 other, compare the divergence of opinions in Gittin 41, and Zebachim 4». 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE GENERALIZATION^ OF SPECIAL LAWS. 
 
 Rule hi, Binyan Ab. 
 
 I. Theory and Term. 
 § 34. 
 
 It is an established principle of modern interpretation of 
 laws: ^'When the law is special, but its reason general, the law 
 is to be understood generally" i. This principle is also applied 
 in the rabbinical legal interpretation, as may be seen from the 
 following example: In Deut. xxiv, 6, the law provides ''No 
 man shall take the mill or the upper millstone as pledge: for 
 he taketh a man's life to pledge." This law is special, prohib- 
 iting certain specified utensils, the hand-mill and the mill-stones, 
 to be taken as pledges. 
 
 The reason, however, which the law expressly assigns to 
 this prohibition is general; by taking away from the poor debtor 
 these utensils, so essential for daily domestic use, you are 
 depriving his family of the means ol preparing their food. Hence 
 the Rabbis feel justified in generalizing this law, so that ''Every- 
 thing which is used for preparing food is forbidden to be taken 
 as pledge."' In a similar way the special law: "Thou shalt 
 not plow with an ox and an ass together" (Deut. xxii, 10) is 
 generalized by the Rabbis so as to equally prohibit the yoking 
 together of any two other animals of different species and 
 strength. Ox and ass are here mentioned especially as being 
 those animals ordinarily employed in agriculture. And not 
 only in plowing, but also for any other purpose it is prohibited 
 to yoke such different animals together.^ From the quite ra- 
 tional principle just illustrated, developed the Rabbinical rule of 
 
 'Quando lex specialis, ratio autem generalis, generaliter lex est 
 intelligenda. 
 
 i)nin. Mishna B. Metzia ix, 13. 
 
 *See Siphre P. 131; compare also Mishna Khilayim viii, 2. 
 
The Generalization of special Laws. ISY 
 
 generalizing special laws. According to the theory of this rule it 
 is not even necessary to investigate whether the reason of a 
 certain law is general or not, but any special law found in the 
 Mosaic legislation is assumed to be applicable to all similar or 
 analogous cases. Only where Scripture, in some of those ways 
 which arc delined by the Rabbis, indicates that the law in ques- 
 tion is provided exclusively for the particular case mentioned 
 therein, it is not applicable to similar cases. But otherwise, 
 the provisions of the law are to be taken in a comprehensive 
 and general sense, and the particular case expressly mentioned 
 is to be regarded only as an illustrative example for its ap- 
 plication.^ 
 
 This theory is termed Binyan Ab (3S |''33), the construc- 
 tion of a leading rule i. e. the Generalization of a special law,"" 
 
 II. Method of generalizing a law. 
 § 35. 
 
 In Generalizing a special law so as to make it applicable 
 to other cases, the Rabbis apply the following method: 
 
 They try to point out in the special case some character- 
 istic peculiarities which taken together are the probable reason 
 for the provision made by the law for this case. Any other case 
 having the same peculiarities is regarded as an analogous case, 
 subject to the same provision of the law. 
 
 The formula of this method is usually: 
 
 ^A somewhat similar view is expressed by a modern law - wi-iter , 
 the celebrated Frenchman Toullier in his Le Droit Civil Francais 
 snivant Vordre du Code, liv 3. t. I. c. 1. "It is analogy which induces 
 us, with reason, to suppose that, following the example of the Cre- 
 ator of the Universe, the lawgiver has established general and u- 
 niformlavs, which it is unnecessarv to repeat in all analogous cases." 
 
 " In the application of this theory sometimes the phrase is used: 
 DN nn nr "this (special case) establishes the general rule or law", f . 
 ex. Sanhederin 30a; B. Kamma 77b. Sota 2b. In this phrase, the word 
 3S me-dnin^ father, chief , ruler is taken in the sense of principal or 
 general rule (compare the terms mDS^On"iDNV l^pn^nUS). Hence ::« nJ3 
 to bnild or construct a general rule, and DN pja the construction of a 
 general rule, the generalization of a special law. 
 
158 Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 '^As A (the case mentioned in the law) being characterized 
 by (that and that certain peculiarity) is subject here to a cer- 
 tain provision, so any case similar to it (by having the same 
 pecularities), is subject to the same provision. 
 
 Where it is to be shown why the generalized law does not 
 apply to a certain not quite analogous case, the formula is: 
 
 . ..«::'' ...b^ rj.s ...C'ii^f) n3i) n:: 
 
 ''As A (having those certain peculiarities) is here subject 
 to that provision, so any other case (similar to it by having 
 the same peculiarities). The case of B however is excepted 
 from that provision, because of its not having the same 
 peculiarities." 
 
 Illustrations. 
 § 36. 
 
 a. In Leviticus chapter xi and Deut. chap, xiv, the law 
 treats of clean and unclean animal food. Concerning the quad 
 rupeds, fishes and flying insects, general rules are given 
 pointing out certain criteria by which to distinguish between 
 the clean and the unclean. For the distinction between clean and 
 unclean fowls, however, no general rule is given, but there is 
 merely a list of nineteen or twenty specified birds which 
 are unclean. To have a general rule also for this kind 
 of animals was the more necessary as many of the spe- 
 cified fowls can not easily be identified. The Rabbis therefore 
 tried to find such a rule by generalizing the eagle which 
 stands at the head of the specified list of unclean fowls. The 
 eagle, they say, has four peculiarities: 1. it has not a ''pro- 
 longed toe"; 2. it has no crop; 3. the inner coat of its giz- 
 zard cannot easily be peeled ofi from the fleshy part: 4, it 
 "strikes" with its claws the prey in eating it. Hence any 
 fowl resembling it in these peculiarities, is to be regarded as 
 unclean.^ 
 
 d. In Deut. ch xix, the law contains some particulars 
 supplementary to a former law concerning the cities of refuge 
 
 ^3iKi Dini p)Sp3 i33pi^p pNi pen m^n^ ynv« )b ^^<^ ^nvD itr: no* 
 
 Talmud Chullin 61a. ^<DLD U fc^VVD P3 PIN NDD 
 
The Generalization of special Laws. 159 
 
 which were designed to serve partly as a protection, partly 
 as a punishment and atonement for him who unintentionally 
 had committed a homicide. In this connection the special 
 provision is made, that when a man goes into a forest with his 
 neighbor to hew wood, and the iron of the axe slips out from 
 the handle and accidentally kills the neighbor, the slayer shall 
 flee into one of those cities. 
 
 This special provision is, of course, generalized by the Rab- 
 bis, so as to be applicable to analogous cases, e. g. if one in 
 breaking down a wall kills a man accidentally by one of its 
 falling stones. If, however, such an accident happened in 
 private premises, where the man who was killed had no 
 right to enter, he who unintentionally caused his death is en- 
 tirely acquitted, without having to flee to the city of refuge; 
 for '• 'as the forest mentioned in the law is a public place which 
 the slayer and the slain man equally had a right to enter, so 
 that (aw applies only to accidents occurring on places which 
 both of them were permitted to enter, but not in private 
 premises, where the man who was killed was neither permitted 
 nor expected to be."* 
 
 Remark. Where it is not intended to raise a special provision to a 
 general law applicable to all similar cases, but merely to draw from 
 it an analogy for one single similar case, there the method is termed 
 irVD no (abbrev. D"D), from the phrase by which such an analogy is 
 usually introduced; . . . '1J''VD no "as we find concerning ... so here"; 
 e. g. Yebamoth 7b: ns Jlt^^XD D"0 Nedarim 4b: Dm JO 0"D. 
 
 Incorrectly the 0"D is sometimes termed 3X TJD, as in Menuchoth 
 76a; y'riD ^n^^riD ^'^1\ see Rashi 's commentary on that passage. 
 
 III. Generalization of two special provisions. 
 § 37. 
 
 In the instances of Binyan Ab mentioned above, the 
 general law is drawn merely from one special provision. Such 
 l^eneralization is qualified as inS 2'in::D 2S JM^ ''a general 
 law drawn from one passage (or provision)." But sometimes 
 it IS formed by a combination of two special provisions found 
 either in one and the same passage or in two different passages 
 ofScnpture. In this case it is termed D^aLID ''rJO S"3 "a 
 
 » Mishna Maccoth II, 3. ciJ^ nC'S DJ3^^ p''Tttbl pT^jS n^L*n -|j;'n Tp 
 
 DJ2^ h msn )^\m nun ^yn-ivn k^^ xi^^ d:3^!? P^d^ji \>V'h nll^n b 
 
160 Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 general rule drawn from two provisions'" It makes no es- 
 sential difference whether the two provisions are found in the 
 same or in different passages, as the same method is applied 
 in either case. 
 
 The method of generalizing two special provisions, so as 
 to make of them one general law, is indicated by the formula 
 always used for this purpose. It is: 
 
 nr ''-in:) nt •'nn «^i nr ••nnD nt nn ^h 
 
 ' 'Behold, this case is not like the other, and the other not 
 like this; the common peculiarity is...." That is to say,first a dif- 
 ference between the two special provisions is stated, and then 
 again those points are set forth which are common to both 
 of them, and which form their characteristic peculiarity. Any 
 other case having the same peculiarity is then subject to the 
 same law. 
 
 Remark. The reason why a difference of the two special provisions 
 has first to be demonstrated before generalizing them, is explained in 
 the following way: 
 
 It is a Talmudic rule of interpretation that inXD D^X3n D''ninD ^:C 
 incbtD pi< "wherever two provisions of the law are found in Scripture 
 which are so identical that one of them is seemingly superfluous, as 
 it might as well have been derived from the other by way of an ana- 
 logy, then no further deduction from either of them can be admitted" 
 (Kiddushin 24a and elsewhere). In making a Binyan Ab by a combina- 
 tion of two special provsions it is therefore necessary first to show that 
 they are not so identical as to be regarded as^nxa D''N3n DUIDD '«iK^,but 
 that they really do differ in some points. 
 
 ^ This definition is according to the opinion of R. Abraham b. 
 David (Rabed) in his exposition of the hermeneutic rules. Some com- 
 mentators, however, call the generalization of one special provision of 
 a law : irVO HO ; the generalization of two provisions if found in one 
 passage: "^^^^ DIJIDO N"3f and if found in two different passages of 
 Scripture: D^3in3 ""JtrO N"3. 
 
The Generalization of Special Laws. 161 
 
 Illustration of generalizing two special provisions. 
 
 §38. 
 
 In Exodus XXI, 26 and 27, the law provides, that "if a 
 man smite the eye of his servant and destroy it, he shall let him 
 go free for his eye's sake. And if he smite out his servant's 
 toothy he shall let him go free for his tooth's sake." 
 
 Here two provisions are made, one concerning the eye and 
 one concerning the tooth of the servant. Though different in 
 their nature, eye and tooth have that in common that they are 
 essential parts of the human body and the loss of them cannot 
 be restored. Hence the Rabbis draw from these two provisions 
 the general law that the mutilation of any member of the ser- 
 vant's body in consequence of brutal treatment on the part of the 
 master, causes the immediate manumission of that slave. ^ 
 
 IV. Generalizing several special provisions. 
 §39. 
 
 There are some instances where a Bitiyan Ab is formed by 
 a combination of three or even four different special provisions. 
 The method of operation in such cases is just the same as in the 
 case of generalizing two provisions. 
 
 An example of a combination of four different provisions 
 for the purpose of forming one general rule is furnished in the 
 first Mishna of Baba Kamma. There, reference is made to 
 four principal damages provided for in the law: 1) the damage 
 caused by 2, goring beast (Exod. XXI, 28. 35. 36.); 2) the dam- 
 age caused by an uncovered /// (Exod. XXI, 33. 34.) 3) the 
 damage caused by depasturing foreign fields (Exod. xxii. 4) and 
 4) damage caused by unguarded fire (ibid, verse 5.). 
 
 Of these four provisions the general law is formed that a 
 man is responsible and has to make restitution for any damage 
 
 -innb p^n^ p«K' DnnN ^tj^.o Sd f|x -nrnb p^^D^ v^^y d'">3x ^tj'xn 
 
 Mechilta Mishpatim P. ix; cf. also Talmud Kidd. 24a. 
 
162 Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 caused by his neglect to guard that property which is under 
 his care and liable to do damage. ^ 
 
 Y. Recapitulation. 
 
 §40. 
 
 Briefly recapitulating this whole chapter on Generaliza 
 tion,we shall find that according to the Talmudical view every 
 provision of the Mosaic law is, as far as possible, to be taken 
 as a general law, applicable to all analogous cases. A plain 
 application of a special provision to one analogous case is termed 
 IJ^'^D (ID. The generalization of special provisions, so as to 
 make them applicable to all analogous cases is termed :3s j^j^ 
 the construction of a general rule. If such a general rule is 
 derived merely from one special provision, it is termed ::t< '■^^z 
 irii^ 21H2D. A general rule formed by a combination of two 
 (or more) special provisions which, though difierent, have some 
 characteristic points in common, is termed D''2inD ''it^'D 3S* J^J2. 
 These common characteristics are termed nXTI T^'H. 
 
 i^'^ nn nr s*^i "iit^n nn^ nyn^ nn ^pi nvit^n nn^ "iiK^n nn n? ' 
 nun nnzi p^rn^i i^j^b p~i"is^ nr^ n? i6^ D^n nn n pxtj> s^♦^<n nn^ D^^n nn |na 
 yb'j ;ni^rD-jn p'^nb ^^^-^^'^ inic' niK>n nvn p^inbi i-?^^ u-n p&«^ 
 
 Examples of Binyan Ab formed of three provisions are foiind in 
 Sanhedrin 66a; Maccoth 4b; ChuUin 65b. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 THE GENERAL AND THE PARTICULAR. 
 
 Introductory. 
 §41. 
 
 In order to understand the different hermeneutic rules un- 
 der this heading, it is necessary to have a clear conception of 
 the meaning of the two talmudical terms tD^D and hb^- 
 
 ^^D means the General^ that which comprehends a class of 
 objects; that which is applicable to a number of things agree- 
 ing in a certain point in common. 
 
 tD"i2 means the Particular or the Special, that which sin- 
 gles out an individual from among a number or class. 
 
 Hence, any general term or any noun with the adjective 
 ^2 ^'all" "whatsoever", is regarded as ^^D; while any term de- 
 noting only a single object is taken as tD"\2. 
 
 The law usually speaks either in general or in particular 
 terms, as: ''He that smiteth a man^ so that he die, shall be 
 put to death" (Ex. XXI, 12); "Thou shalt not eat any abominable 
 thing'' (Deut. XIV, 3). In these two cases the terms are gener- 
 al. But in the law: "Thou shalt not seethe the kid in its ?nother's 
 77iiW (Ex. XXIII, 19), the terms are particular, i 
 
 It is obvious that where the law speaks in general terms 
 it intends to refer to everything included in those terms. 
 Where, however, it uses particular terms, the whole tenor of 
 the law will decide whether it refers exclusively to the single 
 objects mentioned and enumerated or also to others of a simi- 
 lar nature. 
 
 But it sometimes occurs that the law uses both kinds of 
 terms together, so that either 1) the general is succeeded by 
 
 *The terms ^^D and t^is are applied by the Rabbis even to verbs. A 
 verb denoting; an indefinite act, as to do, to take, is regarded as ■ p/Di 
 while a verb denoting a special kind of act. as to hake, is a 1015; p- g- 
 Kiddushin 2ib. t't'DTinpi?!; Menachoth 55b: LD"lD"n2i<n \ih> h72'TWVT\ N^). 
 
164 Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 particulars, t^lSl ^^D, or 2) the particulars are succeeded by a 
 general, hb^^ t:)n£,or 3) one general term preceding and another 
 succeeding the particulars, ^^m isnSI ^^i- In each of these three 
 cases the contents of either the general or that of the particu- 
 lars are modified in some way. These modifications are defined 
 by the following three rules. 
 
 Rule IY. General and Particular. 
 §42. 
 
 In the case of General a?id Particular, the general includes 
 Clothing but the particular. 
 
 That is, when a general term is followed by an enumer- 
 ation of particulars, the law is assumed to refer exclusively to 
 the enumerated particulars. The particulars are then not re- 
 garded as a mere illustrating example of the preceding general, 
 but an indication that the contents of the latter are restricted 
 solely to that of the particulars. » 
 
 The following examples will illustrate the application of 
 this rule: 
 
 a. In Levit I, 2. The law defines the off'erings to be 
 brought on the altar by the following words: ^'you shall bring 
 your ofiering of the beast (nDH^H p), oi'O^Qherd or of the 
 flockj" The general term is here ''the beast {ir\r:>T\Z) which 
 otherwise includes any kind of quadrupeds, both wild and tame 
 (cf. Deut. XIV, 4. 5); but the special terms'V/^r^ and //^^/&" limit 
 the ofiering to these domesticated animals. The law is then to be 
 construed in the following way: of the beast, viz. only of the herd 
 and of the flock you shall bring your ofl"ering.' 
 
 ' Somewhat analogous to this Rabbinical rule of interpretation is 
 the following rule of construction of modern laws: "Where a general 
 enactment is followed by a special enactment on the same subject, the 
 latter enactment overrides and controls the earlier one". See Broom's 
 Legal Maxims p. 650. 
 
 ' n^n ^\ 1^ ^mON |K^ "Ipn. Tal. Zebachim 34a. 
 
The General and the Particular. 1© 
 
 b. In Deut. XXII, 11 the law reads: '^Thou shalt not 
 wear a w/«:^/(f^ stuff (Trjj;*^), wool and linen together". Here 
 the general terra TyL^j;^', meaning a mixture of different sorts, 
 is followed by the particulars ''wool and linen together;" hence 
 the Rabbis regard the prohibition of wearing a garment of ming- 
 led stuff to be restricted to a mixture of wool and linen.* 
 
 c. In Levit. XyiII,6 sq. the law on prohibited marriages 
 begins with the general terms: "None of you shall approach 
 to any that is near of kin to him — ". According to this general 
 interdiction the intermarriage with any degree of relationship 
 would be prohibited. But as the general is followed by a spe- 
 cification of prohibited degrees, the interdiction is to be re- 
 stricted to these specified degrees. ' 
 
 Rule Y. Particulars and General. 
 § 43. 
 
 33n jranDi tonsn bv ci'^did ^^dh n^]:: ^^di d-is 
 
 In the case of Partieulars afid General, the general term 
 adds to the contejits of the particulars^ and we include everything {be- 
 longing to this general'). 
 
 That is to say, where particular terms are followed by a 
 general term, it is assumed that the law refers to anything in- 
 cluded in the general,^ the particulars being regarded merely 
 as illustrative examples of that general. 
 
 1 See Mishna Khilayim X, 1, and the commentary of Obadiah 
 Bertinoro. 
 
 • Siphra in loco: ^'^AV\ n*^3 iXt^ S^ 5?X I'^^X ^^^ 
 
 D-iD— '1J1 -|DX mij;T -i^ns nny 
 
 D"lDn*^ HD xSx ^^33 TNI 13-121 Sb 
 It is true, the rabbinical law adds some extenpi(ms to the biblical list 
 of prohibited degrees, but these extensions are not regarded as biblical, 
 but as nVJ&J' 'secondary prohibitions' made by the authority of the 
 Sopherim. See Mielziner 'The Jewish Law of Marriage and Divorce', 
 p. 37. 
 
 • In a somewhat similar case, the modern rules of construction 
 take just the opposite v'ew, a- may be seen from the following quota- 
 tion in Broom's Legal Maxims p. C50 : 'It is said to be a good rule of 
 
166 Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 This rule is applied in the following la^vin Exodus XXII,9: 
 ''If a raan delivereth to his neighbor an ass, or an ox, or a 
 sheep, or any beast to keep, and it die, etc. " 
 
 Here the enumerated particular terms ass, ox, sheep are 
 followed by the general term ^^a?iy beasf\ Hence this law re- 
 fers to any kind of animal which is delivered to be guarded.* 
 
 Rule VI. General, Particular and General. 
 
 § 44. 
 
 A case of one general preceding and another following the 
 particular can, in some respects, be regarded as an combina- 
 tion oftlie two former cases, namely of General and Particular 
 and of Particular and General, and the rule for this combina- 
 tion is, consequently, a kind of amalgamation of the two rules 
 given above concerning these tvro cases. While in the case of 
 General and Particular (Rule lY) the general includes nothing 
 but the strict contents oftlie particular, and in the case of Par- 
 ticular and General (Rule Y) the contents of the particular are 
 extended to the whole comprehension of the general, it is held 
 that a particular between two general terms is to be extended 
 only as far as to include that which is similar to the contents of 
 this particular, or as the rule is expressed in the talmudic phra- 
 seology: 
 
 construction thafwhere anAct of Parliament begins with words which 
 describe things or persons of an inferior degree and concludes with 
 general words, the general words shall not be extended to any thing 
 or person of a higlier degree'', that is to say, where a particular class 
 [of persons or things] is spoken of, and general words follow, the 
 class first mentioned is to be taken as the most comprehensive, and the 
 general words treated as referring to matters ejusdem generis with 
 such class, the effect of general words when they follow particular 
 words being thus restricted'. 
 
 1 Mechilta on this passage : 
 
 n*^ IX "Ti?on IX -iii^ x!?x h px 
 
 T:cr.z ^y\ y'n '< x^o hdhd i?D iX25' 
 
The General and the PARTrcuLAR. 167 
 
 In a case of General, rarticular and General, do include only 
 ihaiivhich resembles the pariictdar. 
 
 An example illustrating the application of this rule is fur- 
 nished in Ex. XXII, 8, where the law is laid down that in all 
 cases when a person has been found guilty of having embezzl- 
 ed property, that person shall pay the double amount of the em- 
 bezzlement. This law is introduced by the words: 'Tor any mat- 
 ter of trespass (General), for ox, for ass, for sheep, for raiment 
 (Particulars), for anything lost (General)... he shall pay double 
 to his neighbor." 
 
 Applying the rule of General, Particular and General, the 
 Rabbinical interpretation of this law is to the etfect that the 
 restitution of the twofold value is to be made only for such em 
 bezzled property which resembles the particular (the specified 
 objects: ox, ass, sheep, raiment) in this that it is movable pro- 
 perty, and that it is an object of inirifisic value. Hence the fine 
 of double payment for the embezzled property does not apply 
 where it concerns real estate which is not movable, and neither 
 where it concerns bills or notes which have no intrinsic but 
 only a representative value. ^ 
 
 Remark 1. In regard to the limitation of ''that which res- 
 embles the particulars^' (t:-,5n \^^'2\ the Talmud expresses two 
 opinions which differ from each other slightly. 
 
 According to one opinion it is assumed that in a connection 
 of General, Particular and General '^'^r\ )^nif )^hh'^ ''the first 
 general is prevailing and deciding," so that such a connection 
 is to be treated mainly in accordance with the rule fort:ns:i hh":^ 
 viz. that the general comprises nothing but the strict contents 
 of the particular. These contents are, however, in our case 
 modified by the succeeding general, so that it now comprises 
 
 » Baba Kamma G2 b: !^b - I.'L"2 im ^D ^V 
 
 LD-iD — r\rh^ ^yi nK> ^y niton y^ "iic ^y 
 
 jitDO iQi:i bob*L:?:n im ?d ^ix 
 
 pStibn»D |ri<i*' mvp-ip inv^ 
 
 ptD?D |Qia r« r^obtoroe^ Dn'^<::^ miner isv^ 
 
 Other examples are furnished in Nazir 35 b ; Shebuoth 4 b ; 43 a. 
 
168 Hermeneutics of the Talmud, 
 
 anything which resembles the particular, at least, in three 
 
 points (jm:!; n':;b*^2). 
 
 But the other opinion assumes that in a connection of Gi- 
 neral, Particular and General Spn \^^^\Z fc<^^3 ''the last gener- 
 al is prevailing and deciding". Hence, such a connection is to 
 be treated rather in accordance with the rule for ^^di t^ns, so 
 that the contents of the particular are extended to everything 
 comprised in the general. This extension is, however, in our 
 case modified by the first general in as tar as it excludes that 
 which resembles the particular only in one point (Tnj^ !:»), 
 while anything resembling it in more than one point i^y^-^ 
 jn"'^) is included. See Talm. Erubin 28a; compare also Rashi 
 on Chullm 65b sub voce n"^"!. 
 
 Remark 2. Two general terms either preceded or followed by a 
 particular are, according to some authorithies, also treated as a case 
 of General, Particular and General : 
 
 ^bi D-ID1 bba pni |n^:u did ^dh 
 
 Chullin 66 b ; B. Kamma 64 b. 
 Remark 3. The rule of General and Particular applies only when 
 both are found in one and the same passage of the law, but not 
 when in different passages : 
 
 B. Kamma 85 a ; Menaohoth 55 b. 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 MODIFICATIONS OF THE RULES OF GENERAL 
 
 AND PARTICULAR. 
 The Rules YII-XI contain five diflferent modifications of 
 the preceding rules concerning the General and Particular. 
 First Modification. Rule VII. 
 § 45 
 
 ^^D^ 'T'n:: sintr tonsi tans'? ^n^ sintr bb:^ 
 
 There is a general that requires the Particular, and a Particu- 
 lar that requires the General, 
 
 That is to say, the preceding rules of General and Particu- 
 lar do not apply to cases where either the general needs the 
 supplement of the particular, or where the particular necessari- 
 ly requires the supplement of the general in order to express 
 a full and clear meaning. For, an ambiguous general term 
 cannot be treated as a general; neither can an indefinite special 
 term be regarded as a particular. 
 
 Thus, in Lenticus XVII, 13 the law enjoins that he who 
 taketh in hunting any beast or fowl that may be eaten, Hhall 
 pour out the blood thereof nsy^ inDDI ''and cover it with dust'\ 
 
 In this passage the word inDDI might have been taken 
 as a general expression, since there are various ways of cover- 
 ing a thing; nsy^ again is a particular term, and according to 
 the rule of Klal u-Phrat (Rule IV) the interpretation of this 
 law would be, that the blood must be covered with dust and 
 with nothing else. 
 
 But the general expression HDD is ambiguous, as it admits 
 of difibrent meanings; it means as well to cover (i. e. to overlay, 
 to envelop), as also to hide (to conceal, to withdraw from the 
 sight). Without the addition of nsyn we might suppose that 
 the law only intended to enjoin that such blood oe put out^ of 
 Bight or concealed in a closed vessel. Hence the expression ; 
 
170 Hermeneutics OF THE Talmud. 
 
 ^nO^^ is ^'a General that requires the Particular", to express 
 that the meaning is to overlay it with something. 
 
 Consequently the rule of K'lal u-Phrat cannot be applied 
 here, and the term nsy^ is not necessarily to be taken in its 
 strictest sense, but may be extended so as to include anything 
 resembling the dust.' 
 
 The same passage can also serve to illustrate the second 
 part of our rule. The special term nSJj;^ without the general 
 expression iriD^l would have been quite meaningless, as no 
 verb would be there indicating what to do with the dust. 
 Hence it is '^a Particular that requires the supplement of the 
 General". Another, somewhat intricate, example in Talmud 
 Bechoroth 19a. 
 
 Second Modification. Pule YIII. 
 §46. 
 
 iM ^bn p s:;"'! ^^D2 n^n^ -i:n b 
 
 When a single case, though already i?icluded in a general law, 
 is expressly mentioned^ then the provision connected with it^ applies 
 to all other cases included in that general law. 
 
 This rule is illustrated by the two following cases: 
 a. The practice of witchcraft was according to the gener- 
 al law in Ex. XXII, IT (rT'nn S^ nStr^D) a capital crime. 
 The nature of the capital punishment is, however, not defined 
 in this general law. But in regard to a certain kind of witch- 
 craft, namely ^T\'^^'^\ 31S (having a familiar spirit and being a 
 wizard) the law specifies the punishment as that of stoning 
 (Lev. XX, 27). Hence this punishment applies to the practice 
 of any kind of witchcraft'. 
 
 »Tal. Chullin 88b: t^ne ICy ^hl^ inODI ND'^« 
 
 ? N^ KjnnN* n^o rx "icy 
 
 .tDiDi fen imx rn pxi 
 
 "Talm. Sanhederin 67b! VH Ct^K^DO fen ^Jiyn^l niK 
 
 ^ 'y\:>h'\ dh^Sn ^^"^rh ? ^nv' no^i 
 
Modifications. ITl 
 
 b. Deut. XXII 1-3, the law treats of tlie duty to restore 
 found property to its owner. After having enjoined this duty 
 concerning animals found going astray, it is added: ''And so 
 Shalt thou do with his garment) and so shalt thou do with every 
 lost thing of thy brother's, which he hath lost, and thou hast 
 found..."In interpreting this law the Eabbissay.Why \^garment 
 expressly mentioned, though contained in the general term of 
 ''every lost thing"? It is to indicate of what nature the found 
 things must be concerning which it is your duty to advertise 
 in order to restore them to their owner. Every garment had 
 certainly an owner and, besides, it has some marks by which 
 he could identify it. So the duty of advertising tound things 
 refers only to such property which obviously had an owner who 
 will reclaim it and which has certain marks by which he might 
 be able to identify it.' 
 
 Third Modification. Rule IX. 
 § 47. 
 
 irjy:: sinir ins jyitD \y^'^h «:f''i ^^D3 hti::' n^i "^d 
 
 Wherever a single case, though already included in a general 
 law^ is expressly mentioned ivith a provision si??iilar to the general^ 
 such a case is ??ientioned for the purpose of alleviating, but not 
 of aggravating. 
 
 An example is furnished in Ex. XXXV, 3: ''you shall kindle 
 no fire throughout your habitations on the Sabbath day". 
 Now kindling fire being regarded as a labor, is included in the 
 general prohibition of doing any labor on the Sabbath day. 
 Since here expressly mentioned, it is for the purpose of alle- 
 viating this special case by exempting it from the rigor ot the 
 general law in regard to labor on the Sabbath day, so that ha 
 
 «Mishna B. Metzia II, 5: r\W ^3 bpD3 nn^H rh^^T] nX 
 
 D^ynin n^ ^''\ d^jd^d r\i ^^^ mnvD rh^^ no 
 
 other examples are furnished in Tal. Yehamoth 7a, and Kheri- 
 thoth 2b. 
 
IT2 Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 irho kindles fire on that day, transgresses only a prohibitory 
 law, but is not subject to that severe punishment which the 
 preceding verse appoints for other kinds of labor/ 
 
 Fourth Modification. Rule X, 
 
 § 48. 
 
 i:'':^ s^ty nns jj;itD jiyta^ s:;*"! ^^:33 n^'nt:^ nai ^d 
 
 .TDnn'?! bpnb «::•♦ 
 
 Wherever a single case, though included in a general laWy is 
 separately mentioned with a provision differing from that contained 
 in the general, such a case is mentioned for the purpose of dUeviat- 
 ing as well as of aggravating. 
 
 This rule may be illustrated by the passage in Ex. XXI, 
 28-32. There the law provides that if a man or woman ha3 
 been killed by a beast that had not been duly guarded by the 
 proprietor, though its savage nature was known to him, that 
 proprietor, besides losing the mischievous animal, had to 
 pay (to the bereaved family) such an indemnification as may 
 be laid upon him by the court. After this general provision 
 the law adds that if a male or female slave was killed by such 
 a vicious animal, its proprietor has to pay to the master of 
 the slave an indemnification of l/n'rty shekels. Now the case 
 of male or female slave, though included in the preceding gen- 
 eral law of man and woman, is here separately mentioned 
 with a provision different from the general in this, that the 
 amount of the indemnification is fixed. This separate provision 
 is for the purpose of alleviating as well as aggravating; «//<?- 
 mating in the case of the actual value of the killed slave being 
 
 ^Talm. Sabbath 70a, and Saiihederin 35b: rii^V' 1N^^ niy^H. 
 
 There is however another opinion represented by R. Nathan who, 
 interpreting this special prohibition of "kindling fire" according to 
 the second modifi.^ation (Rule VIII), holds : riNV pbnb mvnn, this 
 special prohibition of one kind of labor is an indication that each of 
 several labors done on a Sabbath-day is to be regarded as a separ- 
 ate df^seoration of that day, for which the transgrassor, under 
 circumstances, had to bring a separate sin - offering. Talm. ibid. 
 
Modifications. 1T3 
 
 more, and aggravating in the case of its being less than thirty 
 shekels. 
 
 See Mechilta, Mishpatim, Parsha XI and Mishna B. Kam- 
 ma IV, 5. 
 
 Fifth Modification. Rule XI. 
 §49. 
 trrnn •^.213 \vh hh^r\ p sri bh^2 n'^rvo nai h:^ 
 
 Wherever a single case, though included in a general law, ts ex- 
 cepted from it by an entirely new provision^ such a case is not to be 
 brought again under the general law, unless this be expressly indic- 
 ated in the Scripture. 
 
 An illustrating example is furnished in Lev. XIY, 11-16. 
 One of the two sacrifices which the healed leper had to bring 
 for his purification was a trespass-offering {W^^)- But while 
 the blood of trespass-ofi"erings in general was sprinkled only 
 on the altar, the ofi'ering of the healed leper made an excep- 
 tion in this, that some of its blood was applied to the person 
 of him that was to be cleansed (verse 25). This peculiar way 
 of sprinkling is tr inn 121 the entirely new (extraordinary) 
 provision by which this sacrifice is excepted from the general 
 law of trespass-ofierings. Hence it would have to be excepted 
 also from the other ordinances and rites regarding trespass-ofler- 
 mgs, had not the Scripture expressly brought it again under 
 the 'general law by adding (verse 13 sin D^Sn n«tsn2) that 
 this offering was otherwise to be sacrificed as a trespass-offer- 
 ing in the usual way. Talm. Zebachim 49a. 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 RULES XII AND XIII. 
 
 The Explanation from the Context. Rule XII. 
 § 50. 
 
 A word (or passage) is to be explained from its connection or 
 from what follows. 
 
 That i8 to sajjthe true meaning of a law or of a clause in a 
 law is sometimes to be interpreted by considering the whole 
 context in which it stands or by looking to that which folio ws.^ 
 
 Examples: 
 
 a. Explaining an ambiguous word from the context: 
 The word riDw'jn occurs in Levit. XI, 18, among the names 
 
 of unclean fowls, and again in verse 30 among the creeping 
 things on earth. Hence, it is concluded, that the law does not 
 refer to the same animal, but in the former place to a certain 
 kind of bird (namely according to LXX the swan^ and accord- 
 ing to the Talmud, to the bat)^ and in the other place to 
 the mole.'^ 
 
 b. Explaining the meaning of a passage from the context. 
 In Ex. XYI, 29, we read: ''Abide you every man in his 
 
 place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day." If 
 taken out of its connection, this passage would contain an in- 
 junction that no Israelite shall leave his place on the Sabbath 
 day. But if w^e look to the context, we find that it refers to 
 
 'Compare the following rule of modern jurisprudence with refer" 
 ence to the mode of construing deeds and written instruments : Ex 
 antecedentibus et conaequentibus fit optima interpretatio. "A passage 
 will be best interpreted by reference to that wich precedes and fol- 
 lows it". (Broom, Legal Maxims 577). Compare also the maxim: Nos- 
 citur a sociis "The meaning of a clause may be ascertained by ref- 
 erence to the meaning of expressions associated with it" (ibi. 588). 
 
 achuiiin 63a: "i3i ir^vo i^^H im .n^Qivn^^ mX3 nD&^'Jn 
 
The Explanation from the Context. 175 
 
 the manna gatherers, prohil^iting thc-m to go out on the Sab- 
 bath day with the intention to seek manna. i 
 
 c. Interpreting a clause in a law by a clause which follows: 
 In Deut. XIX, 5 relating to the cities of refuge for the 
 manslaycr, the law says: ''Lest the avenger of the blood pur- 
 sue the slayer and overtake him and slay him ; and he is not 
 worthy of death etc." This last clause is somewhat ambiguous, 
 whether referring to the blood ave?tger or to the manslayer. 
 The latter interpretation is supported by the clause following 
 it: '•Hn as 7nuch as he hated hi?n not in time past.'^^ 
 
 Reconciliation of Conflicting Passages. Rule XIII. 
 
 § 51. 
 
 nn^ira r^^"'i ''*^"^^tyn ain^n «3''tr ^v 
 
 Two passages contradicting each other are^ if possible, to be re- 
 conciled by a third one. ^ 
 
 As an instance of contradictory passages we may refer to 
 Ex. XIII, 6 and Deut. XVI, 8. While the former passage en- 
 joins: ^^ Seven days shalt thou eat unleavened bread," the lat- 
 ter passage says: ^'Six days thou shalt eat unleavened bread." 
 
 In a plain way, the contradiction between these two pas- 
 
 iThis plain interpretation according to the context is also adopt- 
 ed by Raslii in his commentary on this passage. Talmudical 
 interpretation, however, disregarded in this case the context, and 
 deduced from the words of this passage the general prohibition that 
 no Israelite shall, on a Sabbath-day, go farther than 2000 cubits 
 from the place of his abode (nnc' Dinn "the Sabbath way"); for 
 that was the distance of the holy tabernacle from the remotest 
 'lart of the Israelitish camp in the desert. See Talm. Erubin 51a. 
 
 ''Maccoth 10b: -131^ 3iriDn nvns rHlO tOSK^Q pX ifjl 
 
 .-in"»?D niriDH nv"n3 i^^-x ^in 
 
 • Compare the following rule of interpretation estabhshed in 
 modern jurisprudence (Potter, Dwarris treatise on statutes p. 144) : 
 "Where there is a discrepancy or disagreeruent between two statutes, 
 such interpretation should be given that both may, if possible, stand 
 together." 
 
176 Hermexeutics of the Talmud. 
 
 sages may be removed by taking the latter passage in the 
 sense that six days unleavened bread shall be eaten, but that 
 on the seventh, besides this observance, a holy convocation 
 shall be held; or, that unleavened bread shall be eaten during 
 six days besides the first, the celebration of which had been 
 treated more fully in the preceding verses. 
 
 In a more artificial way, the rabbinical interpretation 
 tries to reconcile the contradictory passages accor<ling to our 
 Rule by referring to a third passage, namely Lev. XXIII, 14 
 where the law enjoins that no use whatsoever was allowed to 
 be made of the new corn until the ofiering of an Omer of the 
 first produce of the barley harvest had taken place on the 
 morning after the first day of Pesach. Hence unleavened 
 bread prepared of the new corn was to be eaten only during 
 the six remaining days of that festival. Referring to this cir- 
 cumstance, the passage in Dent. XYI, 8 speaks of six days, 
 while the passage in Ex XIII, 6 refers to the unleavened bread 
 prepared of the produce of the former year's harvest which 
 might be eaten during seven days.^ 
 
 Remark. Some of the Rabbis however, apply in their interpret- 
 ation of Deut. XVI, 8 the Rule VIII and arrive at the conclusion 
 thatjjust as, according to this passage, the eating of unleavened bread 
 on the seventh day was optional, so it was also optional on the first 
 six days, so that it was not obligatory to eat just that which is prop- 
 erly called unleavened bread (Matza), provided that nothing is eaten 
 which is leavened (Chametz). Only on the first eve of this festival 
 the eating ot such unleavened bread was regarded as obligatory, as the 
 law concerning the paschal-lamb on the eve expressly enjoins (Ex. 
 XII, 8) "with unleavened bread and with bitter herbs they shall eat it.'" 
 
 » Mechilta, Bo, VIII (compare also Talmud Menachoth 66a): 
 • Pesachim 130a: rw^l D^D^ HK'K^ P^S niCT T^K' HD 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 ADDITIONAL RULES. 
 
 A. Juxtaposition. 
 
 § 52. 
 
 A peculiar kind of analogy which has some similarity to 
 Heckesh (above p. 152) is that called ]''D1DD contiguous passages^ 
 or the analogy made from the juxtaposition of two laws in Script- 
 ure. 
 
 The theory of this rule is that the meaning of a law is 
 sometimes explained from another law or passage which is 
 placed near by, either preceding or following it.' 
 
 The following examples will illustrate this rule: 
 
 1. The word Mamzer (usually translated a bastard) in the 
 law Deut. XXIII, 3: < 'A Mamzer shall not enter the congrega- 
 tion of the Lord" denotes, according to rabbinical interpreta- 
 tion, one born of incest or adultery. This interpretation is 
 based on the circumstance that a preceding law (ib. verse 1.) 
 interdicts an incestuous conm^ction.^ 
 
 2. The law prohibits every labor on Sabbath, without 
 specifying the occupations included in that interdiction, thus 
 leaving a wide scope to individual opinion on the nature of 
 Sabbatical labor. Tradition, in order to prevent arbitrariness 
 in so important a point, tried to fill out this void by a detailed 
 definition of the nature of work, and minutely specified the 
 labors which are allowed and which are forbidden on Sabbath. 
 The Talmud distinguishes thirty nine chief labors m2^s^D m2J</ 
 comprising all those occupations which were necessary for the 
 
 * This rule was prohaoly introduced by R. Akiba, see Siphre, 
 Numbers 131: '121 nslDDK^ HK^-lD h'2 nOIK V'T 
 
 » Yebamoth 49a. 
 
 1IDD NU^ nS r\'h "I^CDI 
 
Its Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 construction of the holy tabernacle. This is based on the cir- 
 cumstance that Scripture repeatedly (Exod XXXI 1-1 1; 
 XXXY, 1 sq.) brought the Sabbath law in juxtaposition with 
 the description of the tabernacle. ^ 
 
 Remark. The theory of jOIDD which Ben Azai, one of R. Akiba's 
 disciples, even applied in the construction of criminal laws, was not 
 generally adopted. R. Jehuda ben Ilai, another disciple of R. Akiba, 
 is especially mentioned as having been opposed to its general application. 
 He strongly objected to a deduction based by the former on that the- 
 ory in the case of a certain capital crime, remarking with astonishment: 
 "How, shall we inflict the punishment of stoning upon a criminal be- 
 cause two laws are incidentally in juxtaposition?" (Yebamoth 4a; San- 
 hedrin 67b.). 
 
 He admitted the analogy from juxtaposition only in cer- 
 tain cases, especially in regard to laws found in the book of Deutemomy 
 where the laws are evidently arranged according to a certain plan, 
 while in regard to the other books of the Pentateuch it is held : ps 
 minn iniKDl DTPID "there is no certain order for the sequence of the 
 laws" (Pesachim 6b), hence no analogy must there be based on the jux- 
 taposition of two laws (Sanhedrin ibid.). 
 
 § 53. 
 
 Another kind of J^'^lDD consists in the method of sepa- 
 rating the final part of a clause or sentence and connecting it 
 with the beginning of the following clause or sentence, and in 
 this way artificially forming a new sentence, the sense of which 
 is to support a certain traditional law. 
 
 This peculiar method may be illustrated by the following 
 examples. 
 
 1. It was a traditional rule of law, based on common 
 sense, that a judge was unfit to sit in court when known to 
 nourish inimical feelings either against the defendant or against 
 one of his fellow judges. In the absence of an express passage 
 
 > Talm. Sabbath 49b: ]:i^}2n mMV 1i^^ niDX^D nU«; see Rashi'i 
 Commentary on this passage. Other examples of this kind of analogy 
 are found in Pesachim 96a; Yebamoth 4a. 
 
Additional Rules. 1T9 
 
 in the Mosaic law bearing on this rule, the Rabbis construed 
 an artificial support in the following way. In Numbers XXXV, 
 
 23, in the law about unintentional murder, it is said 
 
 ' 'whereas he was not his enemy, and did not seek his harm". 
 These words plainly refer to the slayer and the slain man, but 
 by connecting them with the beginning of the following sen 
 tence (verse 24): '^he congregation (i. e. the court) shall 
 judge...", the new sentence is construed: Being no enemies and 
 not seeking his harm, they shall judge as a court. ^ 
 
 2. In Lev. XXIII, 22 we read:... ''and the gleaning of 
 thy harvest thou shalt not gather ; unto the poor and the stranger 
 Shalt thou leave them." By closely connecting the end of the 
 first clause with the beginning of the next clause, the sentence 
 is formed : ^Hhou shalt not gather unto the poor'\ intimating that 
 the owner of the field has no right to gather the gleaning in 
 behalf of a certain poor and thereby depriving the other poor 
 of their claim to that gleaning warranted them by the laws.^ 
 
 B. Restrictive Rules in the Application of Analogy. 
 
 § 54 
 By way of a plain analogy, particular provisions of the 
 law concerning a certain case are in the Talmud often trans- 
 ferred to another case. This method is termed ir:;o "D ; 
 (compare above p. 159). The phrases used in this process are 
 either.... JD \1^^h^ or ....]D |J''"DJ, we derive, learn (this pro- 
 vision) from (that other case of...). 
 
 The use of analogy for such purpose presupposes consisten- 
 cy in the law, so that its provisions in one case were intended 
 to apply also to an another similar case. But though the two 
 cases from the comparison of which an analogy is drawn need 
 not to be alike in all respects, still they must, at least, be- 
 long to the same sphere of the law. The provisions con 
 
 nnwSD pi prj'V i\sk^ t"nt x^i\^c^'^ n"n ^jc'^ ii\x 
 
 Talm. Sanhedrin 29a: compare Rashi's commentary. 
 » Tal. Gittin 12a- ^jyn HK V^^DH ^ ,^jyi5 Dpi^fl ^ 
 
180 Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 nected with the one case cannot be applied to another case 
 which is totally different in its legal nature. Hence the follow- 
 ing restrictive rules in the application of analogy: 
 
 In a ritual case we do not apply an analogy from a civil 
 case, and vice versa. Berachoth 19aj Baba Metzia 20a; Kid- 
 dushin 3b. 
 
 In a case concerning pecuniary restitution we do not apply 
 an analogy from a case concerning fine. Kethuboth 46b; Kid- 
 dushin 3b. 
 
 In a case concerning profane things we do not apply an 
 analogy from laws concerning sanctified things. Pesachim45a; 
 Shebuoth 26b; Nazir 36b. 
 
 4. jmo: i<b DnnD 
 
 From an extraordinary, exceptional case we make no ana- 
 logy, i Pesachim 44b; Moed Katon Tb; Chullin 98b. 
 
 C. Limited or Unlimited Effect of an Analogy. 
 §55. 
 
 When provisions of one law (A) are to be applied to an- 
 other law (B) by virtue of a traditional analogy (the construc- 
 tional Gezera Shava, compare above § 24), the question arises 
 whether those laws are to be treated alike in every respect, so 
 that all particulars found in A are applicable to B or whether 
 the consequences of such an analogy are to be restricted to 
 the main provision only. Concerning this question two differ- 
 ent opinions are expressed. 
 
 ^ A similar rule is also laid down in modern law interpretation; 
 compare Fr. Lieber, Legal and Political Hermeneutics, p. i27G: "An ex- 
 ceptional case can of itself sustain no analogy, since the instance from 
 which we reason, the analogon, must always be one which implies the 
 rule". 
 
Additional Rules. 181 
 
 One opinion, represented by R. Meir, holds: nitSI HjO jn 
 ^'deduce from it, and again from it", that is to say, any further 
 provision connected with A may be transferred to B. 
 
 But the other opinion is: «-inS3 ''(TiSl HiD jn ''deduce 
 from it, and (as for the rest) leave it in its place", that is to 
 say, after having transferred the main provision of A to B, we 
 are to let B retain its own character and the provisions ex- 
 pressly connected with it. 
 
 The difference between these two opinions maybe illustrat- 
 ed by the following example. 
 
 In Deut. XXIII, 3, the law provides that a Mamzer^ that 
 is, one born of incest, ''shall not enter the congregation of the 
 Lord, even to the tenth generation^ A similar provision has an- 
 other law concerning an Ammonite and a Moabite: ''''Even to 
 the tenth generation they shall not enter into the congregation 
 of the Lord, /^r <f^'^r." By a Gezera Shava the conclusion is 
 made that also in the former law concerning Mamzer the phrase 
 ''even to the tenth generation" is to be understood "for ever". 
 (See above p. 150). 
 
 But while the term Mamzer implies the female as well as 
 the male, the masculin form of the words ''liSlDI ''JIDj; is taken 
 by tradition strictly, referring to males only, but not to females 
 
 According to the opinion of nJDI HiD JH, a female Mamzer^ 
 after the tenth generation, might be admitted to enter the con- 
 gregation ; her case being then, in all respects, analogous to 
 that of a female Amonite who is exempted from the prohibi- 
 tion. 
 
 But according to the opinion of snn«2 ''pISI n:D JH, the 
 two laws are analogous only in respect to the meaning of the 
 phrase "even to the tenth generation", while the expression 
 Mamzer always retains its comprehensive meaning, including 
 females as well as males. See Yebamoth 78b. Another ex- 
 ample Shebuoth 31a. 
 
182 Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 D. Refutation and Reinstatement of Hermeneutic 
 Arguments. 
 
 §56. 
 
 The generalization of a Special Law (above Chapter III) 
 may be refuted by the objection that a particular circumstance 
 is connected with that special law which renders it unfit to be 
 generalized or to be applicable to other cases. 
 
 The phrase used in such a refutation is the same as that 
 which is used in refuting the premise of an inference of Kal 
 Vechomer (see above p. 137), namely: ]Dtr '^l^h^b HD 
 
 ''Why is that special provision made for the case A? Be- 
 cause that certain peculiarity is connected with this case" .... 
 
 After such a refutation, the attempt is usually made to de- 
 fend the Binyan Ab by a reference to case B having the same 
 provision, though not connected with that peculiarity. If then 
 also the generalization of case B is objected to, on account of 
 an other peculiarity connected with its provision, this objection 
 is again removed by a reference to case A in whicli that pecu- 
 liarity is not found. The common provision of A and B is then 
 generalized according to the usual method of '^^V^ 2S '(^22 
 D''3inD. (See above p. 160). The procedure of this combined 
 generalization is usually introduced by the following phrase: 
 
 ''The conclusion returns (that is,the former argument is to 
 be reinstated), for A is not like B, and vice versa, but the 
 
 common point of both is " Examples: Maccoth 2b ; Sanhed 
 
 rin 66a. 
 
 Remark. The same dialectic procedure and the same 
 phrases are also applied where a refuted inference of Kal Ve- 
 chomer is to be reinstated by a combination of two similar cas- 
 es, as in Berachoth 35a ; Kiddushin 5 b; B. Metzia 4a, and 
 often. 
 
 E. The Theory of Exten^sion and Limitation. 
 § 57. 
 
 The term ^i^n means extension] t^l^'^D limitation. The idea 
 
Additional Rules. 183 
 
 connected with each of these two terms when applied separate- 
 ly, was explained in the introductory chapter § 6 and § 1. 
 We have here to consider their meaning when applied con- 
 jointly toiJ?''D1 ^U*1 to signify a theory in contradistinction to 
 that ot tDISl hb^ (chapter lY). 
 
 In as much as a general term (^^D) denotes an indefinite 
 number of individuals having something in common, it may also 
 be regarded as ii^l, an extension of the meaning; and in as 
 much as a particular, singular term (to*i£) restricts the mean- 
 ing to definite individuals, it maybe regarded as toiy^'D, a lim- 
 itation. 
 
 That which in the theory ofR. Ishmael is called :o*\S1 bb^f 
 is according to the theory of R. Eliezer and R. Akiba regard- 
 ed as tDiyDI ""Un. 
 
 There is the following difl'erence between these two the- 
 ories. 
 
 a) In a combination of tD^SI ^^5, the particular is regard- 
 ed as the explanation of the preceding general, so as to narrow 
 down its comprehension to the strict contents of the particular, 
 excluding even that which is similar to this {p^n^ '^b'^ ^^^2 J''S 
 DISZ*^, see above § 42). 
 
 According to the other theory, the tDiy'D merely limits the 
 extension of the preceding ^l3*i,so as to include everything sim- 
 ilar, and exclude that only which is not similar to it. 
 
 r\'ar\ irstr tsy'^m 3sn nan ,'^v)^n'\ ''un 
 
 b) In a combination of ^^^l tD"lS the general following a 
 particular includes everything falling under the general (comp. 
 Rule Y. § 43). But according to the other theory, the ''li"! fol- 
 lowing the t:5'ij;''D includes that only which is similar to that 
 
 c) In a combination of^^^i tD^lSI ^^3 we include only that 
 which resembles the particular (comp. Rule YI. § 44). 
 
 But, according to the other theory, the rule for tDi;'''Di '''12*1 
 "'*13"i'I is, that the ^'\2*\ includes everything, even that which is 
 not similar to the tDI^^'D, the e fleet of the latter being, however, 
 to exclude merely one single thing which has the least simil- 
 
184: Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 arity to it. To define this one thing to be excluded, is entire- 
 ly left to the judgment of the expounding Rabbis. ^ 
 
 in« n:n «^« id^'d «^i .^^n n^n •»um taiy'^Di ••inn 
 
 The theory of tSI^^'DT ''131, being not as clear and exact as 
 that of loiSI ^^D, is rejected by most of the Tanaim, and ad- 
 mitted only in some special cases.'' 
 
 The difference between these two theories is illustrated by 
 the following example. 
 
 In Levit. Y, 2i-23, the law provides that if an embezzler 
 without having been convicted before a court, but prompted 
 by his conscience, wants to expiate the sin of his injury to 
 some person in respect to property, then he has to restore the 
 fraudulently acquired property, with the addition of one fifth 
 of its value, and besides bring a trespass-offering. The law in- 
 troduces the case by the words: 
 
 **If a person commits a misdeed, and lies to his neighbor 
 (General) concerning a trust or a deposit (Particulars), etc. etc. 
 or whatever it 7iiay be about which he has sworn falsely (General), 
 then he shall restore etc". 
 
 According to the theory of ^^^i tDISl ^^D, these expres- 
 sions are to be construed in a way that the mulct of one fifth 
 of the original amount is required for such embezzled objects 
 only which are movables^ and have an intrinsic value^ the former 
 excluding real estate^ and the latter excluding bills or notes. 
 
 But according to the theory of tD1^"'D1 *'121, the law refers 
 to any kind of embezzled property, including real estate^ exclud- 
 ing, however, bills or notes which have merely a representative 
 value. 
 
 The argumentation according to these two theories is expressed in 
 the following way: 
 
 *See Rashi on Talm. Kiddushin 21b, and on Shebuoth 4b. 
 'See B. Kamma 64b; Shebuoth 5a; Chullin 67a. 
 
Additional RaLEa. 185 
 
 B A 
 
 :"»ifii5;«»D'i •'•'in-^ ty>m nT:;''^« 'n :"'iDnsi •'^^d ••trm pan 
 
 tD^D — n^ nDiEjTii IK inp23 Dia — t noisjria in inpsn 
 
 nnm -itn — yntj'^ -lt^'N !?dd ifc< fei -irn — ynij'^ -ik'n ^dd in 
 
 i^an na-i ^nni toiy^io ^un taiDn pyD n^n .n nnx ^n &i t:-iDi i)^3 
 
 ^ij^D ba un ^3n ^nd poD laiii ijoboon -im sj'-iidd ld-ieh no 
 
 rbt^^DD pNt^' niypip inv* 
 
 Talm. B. Kamma llYb; Shebuoth 3Yb. Other examples :Succah 
 60b; Kiddushin 21b; Shebuoth 26a. 
 
 F. <<MiKRA" or ''Masora"? 
 § 58 
 
 Although our vowel-signs of the Biblical text were not yet 
 introduced at the Talmudic period, still the correct pronun- 
 ciation according to the vowels was fixed by oral tradition. 
 
 The reading of the text according to the established pro- 
 nunciation was called «npD (reading). The proper spelling 
 of the words of the sacred text as fixed by tradition, letters 
 without vowels, is termed Alasora (nilDD or ""IIDD). 
 
 The peculiar spelling of many words sometimes admits a 
 meaning somewhat different from that which is expressed by 
 the established pronunciation or our present vocalization. 
 The question then arises whether in such a case the law is to 
 be intrepreted according to the vowel reading or rather accord- 
 ing to the letters with which the word is spelled in the Masora. 
 
 In this respect two opposite opinions are expressed in the 
 Talmud. One holds: i<-ipD^ DS ir> ^'The source of law is in 
 the reading" i. e. the reading of a word according to its estab- 
 lished vocalization is essential to decide its meaning. The 
 other opinion is: nniDD^ DS tT"' ^'the source is in the Masoro^'' 
 that is, the spelling of the word as fixed by the Masora is more 
 material in defining its meaning. 
 
186 Hermeneutics of the Talmud. 
 
 Example: Speaking of the cities of refuge to wMch he who 
 unintentionally killed a fellow-man was to flee, the law illustrates 
 the case of such an unintentional homicide by the following 
 words: As when a man goeth into the the woods with his 
 neighbor to hew wood, and his hand fetcheth a stroke with the 
 axe to cut down the tree, |*yn |D ^T"l2n h^*^^ and the iron slip 
 pelh from the wood^ and findeth his neighbor, that he die, etc." 
 (Deutr. XIX, 5.) 
 
 According to the opinion of ^<npt:^ DS, this passage refers 
 only to the case where the killing happened by the iron of the 
 axe slipping from the helve. But according to the opinion of 
 n^lDD^ DS the letters of the word h^^T\ admit that word to be 
 read h^T^ in the Piel form, so as to give the sense '^and the iron 
 splints a piece from the tree", hence this passage refers only 
 to a case where the killing happened by a piece of wood which 
 the axe cut from the tree. 
 
 Maccoth 7b; other examples Pesachim 86a, and Sanhedrin 4a. 
 
 In this, as in most of other cases, the opinion of^npD^? □« 
 prevailed. The opposite opinion was accepted only where it 
 served to support a traditional interpretation of a law; for in- 
 stance, that the expression of D^-^iDH nis:D (Levit XXIII, 40) 
 which the Masora spells nS^D (without i) refers only to one 
 branch of the palm tree (Talm. Succah 32a). 
 CLOSma REMARK. 
 
 Concluding this exposition of the principal rules of Talmu- 
 dical Hermeneutics, we must remind the student that this sys- 
 tem of artificial interpretation was mainly calculated to offer 
 the means of ingrafting the tradition on the stem of Scripture, 
 or harmonizing the oral with the written law. 
 
 Modern scientific exegesis, having no other object than to 
 determine the exact and natural sense of each passage in Scrip- 
 ture, must resort to hermeneutic rules fitted to that purpose, 
 and can derive but little benefit from that artificial system. 
 
Closing Remark. 181 
 
 Thus already the great Jewish Bible commentators in the Mid- 
 dle Ages, Ibn Ezra, Kimchi, and others who are justly re- 
 garded as the fathers of that thoroughly sound and scientific 
 system of exegesis that prevails in modern times, remained in 
 their interpretation of the Bible entirely independent of the 
 hermeneutic rules of Hillel, R. Ishmael and R. Akiba. Never- 
 theless, this system deserves our attention, since it forms a very 
 essential part of the groundwork on which the mental structure 
 of the Talmud is reared. It must be known even in its details, 
 if the Talmudic discussions, which often turn on some nice 
 point of the rules of that system, are to be thoroughly under- 
 stood. 
 
PART III. 
 
 TALMUDICAL TERMINOLOGY AND METHODOLOGY 
 
TALMUDICAL TERMINOLOGY AND METHODOLOGY. 
 
 Prefatory. 
 
 Like any other branch of science and literature, the Talmud 
 has its peculiar system of technical terms and phrases adapted 
 to its peculiar methods of investigation and demonstration. 
 To familiarize the student with these methods and with the 
 terms and phrases most frequently used in the Talmud is the ob- 
 ject of the following chapters. As the Mishna is the text on 
 which the Gemara comments, we begin with the explanation 
 of some of the terms in reference to certain features in the 
 structure of the Mishna. We shall then proceed to the various 
 modes and terms used by the Gemara in explaining and discus- 
 sing the Mishna. This will be followed by an exposition of the 
 ways in which the Talmud generally discusses the reports and 
 opinions of the Amoraim. Finally, the methods and processes 
 of Talmudical argumentation and debates as well as the terms 
 and stereotyped phrases connected therewith, will be set forth. 
 
A. THE MISHNA. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Terms and Phrases regarding the Structure of a Mishna 
 Paragraph. 
 
 nriD 
 
 §1. 
 
 xxA. .viirihna very often simply lays down the law without 
 mentioning its author or any conflict of opinions that existed 
 in regard to it. Such a Paragraph of the Mishna is termed 
 DHD, an anonymous and undisputed Mishna. Examples: Bera- 
 chothl, 4; III, 1-3. 
 
 Such anonymous and undisputed Mishna paragraphs are 
 generally regarded as authoritative. They are mostly of a ve- 
 ry ancient origin, having been incorporated into the work of R. 
 Jehuda Hanasi from older Halacha collections made by former 
 teachers, especially that of R. Meir. n\SD '1 JTl'^jno DHD 
 Sanhedrin 86 a. 
 
 §2. 
 Often also the Mishna reports a conflict of opinions in regard 
 to a certain law. Such a conflict is termed npl^riD a division 
 or difference of opinion. 
 
 The conflicting opinions are set forth in different ways: 
 
 a. After having laid down the anonymous rule of law, the 
 dissenting opinion of a certain teacher is added by: *ii:2»x ''JI^S '^, 
 Rabbi A says.... In such cases, the anonymous author of the 
 first opinion is termed in the Gemara SDp >sjn ^/le former tea- 
 cher. Example: Berachoth lY, 1. 
 
 Remark. As the anonymous opinion represents that of the teachers 
 in general, the Gemara sometimes calls it also D'DSn ^"IDT the words 
 (the collective opinion) of the sages; f. i. Sanhedrin 31a. 
 
 b. A rule of law is laid down with the addition n ^i^T 
 
192 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 'fc< '•il^S these are the words of Rabbi A, and then the dissent- 
 ing opinion is introduced by : nQIS '2 ''JI^D '"^1 but Rabbi B 
 says...; or the question of law is propounded, and then the dis- 
 senting opinions concerning it are introduced by nDlN '^ ^l^b^ "^ 
 ^DIW 'Z ''l^b^ "^*1. Examples: Berachoth II, 1 and 3. 
 
 Such a difference of opinion in which the opposite views 
 are represented by single teacliers is teimed in the Gemara 
 nTT'l "ITT' npl^no a difference between individuals. 
 
 c. The opinion of a single teacher concerning a question 
 of law having been set forth, the collective opinion of other 
 contemporary teachers differing therefrom is introduced by: 
 D''"1D1S D*'D:Dm but the (other) sages say.... Example : Bera- 
 choth YI, 4. 
 
 Such a conflict of opinions between an individual and a 
 majority of other teachers is termed in the Gemara npl^riD 
 D^lll ITI^ a conflict between an individual and the ??iaJortty. Gene- 
 rally, the opinion of the majority prevails. This rule is phrased: 
 □''Dnr riD^n D''2ni "iTI"' where an individual and the majority 
 differ from each other, the opinion of the majority is Halacha 
 (the accepted law). Berachoth 9a. 
 
 d. The conflicting opinions are represented by different 
 schools, especially those of Shamai and Hillel. 
 
 Examples: Berachoth I, 1; VIII, 1. 5. 7. 8. 
 Remark. In a conflict between those two schools the opinion of 
 the School of Hillel generally prevails. nj^O nj^K 7\"2 D1pD3 ^"1 Be- 
 rachoth 86b. 
 
 § 3. 
 
 Where a Mishna paragraph contains provisions for two 
 or more cases, the former case is signified by t<t5^'»i (the case at 
 the beginning), and the following or last case by i<S''D (the case 
 at the end). The case between these two is termed t^ny^D 
 the middle case. 
 
 Example for a Mishna paragraph with two cases: B. Metzia 
 I, 3; for one with three cases: B. Metzia I, 4. See also Gema- 
 ra Kiddushm 63a; Kerithoth lib; Chullin 94b. 
 
 In a paragraph divided into two main parts, A and B, 
 each containing two cases, a and b, the case of A b is termed 
 RK^'^m fc<S'»D, and that of B, a «S''D'T t^tt^n. 
 
Terms and Phrases regarding the Mishna. 193 
 
 Example: Sliebuoth YI, 7. Compare Talmud Shebuoth 
 43bj B. Metzia 34b. 
 
 Remark. A part of a Mishna paragraph referring to a separate 
 case or proposition is also termed ^533 I gate, section, clause); hence 
 the terms Nti'm K33 the clause of the tirst proposition, KS''DT KD3 
 the clause of the subsequent proposition. Sabbath 3a; Yebamoth 18b^ 
 
 D y D 
 § 4. 
 
 The Mishna, in general, simply lays down the rule of law 
 without stating its reason. At times, however, the reason is 
 added. The reason of a law is termed DJ^ID. It is either based 
 a) on a biblical passage («np) and its interpretation, and is 
 then usually introduced by nDS:itr ; or b) on common sense 
 (N"13D) ; or c) on a general principle (^^2). 
 
 Examples: a) Berachoth IX, 5; B. Metzia II, 7.10. b) B. 
 Metzia I, 7; II, 11. c) B. Kamma III, 10.11. 
 
 Remark. The Gemara generally invertigates the reason of the 
 law where it is not stated in the Mishna. 
 
 § 5. 
 Also the different opinions of the teachers concerning a point 
 of the law^are generally set forth in the Mishna without the reason 
 of the difference being added. Occasionally, however, not only 
 the reason of one or both of the contradictory opinions is stated, 
 but even a shorter or longer controversy is recorded in which 
 the teachers argue in opposition to each other on .some questions 
 of law. Such a controversy is termad in tlie Gemara sn:n'72. 
 The elaborate argumentation pro and con is also termed s^^^D 
 ]nD^ or in Aramaic s-i-iDI i^hpU (literally, a taking and giving 
 of arguments, i. e., a aiscussion). Examples of controversies in 
 the Mishna: Berachoth I, 3; Pesachim YI, 2; Taanith I, 1; B. 
 Kamma II, 6. 
 
 n ty VD 
 
 § 6. 
 The Mishna sometimes adds to its rule of law or to its 
 
194 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 opinions of the contesting teachers the report of a certain case 
 in which a celebrated anthority gave a decision either 1) in 
 accordance with or 2) in contradiction to the rule jast laid 
 down or the opinion just expressed. Such a report is usually 
 introduced by the word HD'^D it is a reported fact that...., 
 it once occured that... 
 
 Examples ad 1: Berachoth I, 1; Bechoroth lY, 4j ad 2: B. 
 Metzia YIII, 8; Git tin I, 5. 
 
 § ^. 
 
 The word ^^D, often occurring the Mishna, signifies a gener- 
 al rule, a guiding principle of a law. Such a general rule either 
 precedes or follows the details of a law. 
 
 Where it precedes the details, it is usually introduced by 
 the words I'lt:^ ^^3 they (i. e. the former teachers) established 
 the following rule concerning.... 
 
 Examples: Pea I, 4; Shebiith YII, 1. 2; Maaseroth I, 1. 
 Sabbath YII, 1. 
 
 Where the general law follows the details, it is introduced 
 by hb^n r.T this is the general rule 
 
 Examples: Berachoth YI, 1; Pesachim III, 1; B. Metzia 
 
 lY, 1. 
 
 Remark. The Gemara usually investigates the necessity of this ge- 
 neral rule by asking: ^ND ^^)ni6 what is this to add? i. e; which new 
 cases is this general rule to imply besides those expUcitly stated in the 
 details of the law? 
 
 § 8. 
 
 Paragraphs of the Mishna containing a generalizing or 
 comprehensive provision are introduced by h:2 or ^^n ^'all", 
 '^every", ''whatever". Mostly some exceptions from such a 
 generalizing provision are added by the word pn ''except".. 
 
 Examples: Chagiga I, 1; Kiddushin I, 6. 7. 9j Gittin II, 
 5.; Chullinl,l. 
 
 Remark. The Gemara finds that such comprehensive provisions 
 are not always exact, as they often admit of exceptions besides those 
 expressly stated in the Mishna. Erubin 37a; Kiddushin 34a. 
 
Terms and Phrases regarding the Mishna. 195 
 
 § 9. 
 
 Without laying down a general rule, the Mishna sometimes 
 states the exact number of cases to which a certain law refers 
 and then specifies those cases more fully, f. i. ''there are four 
 main kinds of damages to property, namely...." B. Kamma I, 
 1; or: ''Marriage maybe contracted in three ways, namely..." 
 Kiddushin I, 1. Such a stated number is termed «i'''':D. 
 
 Remark. The Gemara finds that such a number is intended to 
 limit the law exactly to those cases mentioned in the Mishna, so as to 
 exclude certain other cases, and the question is generally made : 
 ^KD ^DIVD^ fc<J^^J)0 what cases are excluded by this limiting number? 
 
 § 10. 
 
 Another limitation of the Mishna occurs, where certain 
 cases are enumerated by the introductory words \hi< ''these 
 are..." or SN"I IT '^this is..." 
 
 Examples: Peal, 1; Pesachim II, 5;Yebamoth III, 3. 5. 
 
 Remark. Also where these limiting words are used in the Mishna 
 the Gemara usually asks: ^t<D ^DiyO^J what cases are excluded by thi^ 
 limitation? 
 
 § 11. 
 
 Still another limitation admitting of no other exceptions 
 t'lan those expressly mentioned, is tound, where the Mishna points 
 out the only difference that in certain legal respects exists 
 between two things, by the limiting phrase: ...S^S....|''i ]\S 
 * 'there is no difference bet ween... and.... except in regard..." 
 
 Examples: Megilla I, 4-11. 
 
 §12. 
 Where the Mishna enumerates different cases to which a 
 
196 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 certain law applies without fixing their number and without using 
 any of those limiting terms mentioned above, the enumerated 
 cases do not always exclude other cases to which the same law 
 applies. The Gemarauses in this case the phrase: n^'^'l^T ^<in 
 ''the Mishna teaches concerning certain cases, and leaves 
 others to be added". 
 
 Examples: Taanith 14a; B. Kamma 10a; Maccoth 21b. 
 
 IT rjx IT «^ 
 
 §13. 
 
 Where in enumerating certain cases of a law a subsequent 
 case is more unexpected than the preceding, the Gemara uses 
 the phrase •'inp "IT C)S* IT S^ ''the Mishna teaches not only that, 
 but even this," that is, the Mishna intended to arrange the 
 cases in a climax, starting from that which is plain, and adding 
 that which is more unexpected. 
 
 Examples : B. Metzia III, 4 and 5. See Talm. B. Metzia 
 
 Remark. The climax in the arrangement of several cases is also ex- 
 pressed by the Talmudical phrase c.l^^DX «!)N X^y^D i6 ,"l»Np X^VIO vh 
 the author of the Mishna states here a case of "not only"; not only as 
 to... but even .., i. e., the Mishna adds here to that which is unquestion- 
 able (plain and obvious enough) that which is more unexpected. 
 
 Examples: Betza 37a; B. Kamma 54b; Kiddushin 78b. 
 
 IT ^r2^h ^n:; j-'Si it 
 
 §14. 
 
 On the other hand, the Mishna sometimes arranges the 
 cases of a law in an anticlimax, so that the subsequent case is 
 self-evident from the preceding. This is expressed in the Ge- 
 mara by the phrase: IT ^D^b y^:^ |''«1 IT ''that, and it is unnec- 
 essary to say this" i. e. after having stated the law in the 
 former case, it applies the more to the following case. 
 
 Example: Rosh Hashana lY, 8; see Talm. R. Hashana 
 32b, 33a. 
 
Terms and Phrases regarding the Mishna. 197 
 
 § 15. 
 
 Of these two antithetical terms the Gemara makes frequent 
 use in the interpretation of the Mishna, especially in questions 
 of the ritual law. n'^nnD^ means, literally, as for the beginning^ 
 at the outset, beforehand, previously. The term denotes the 
 question of law concerning an act to be done, whether it may 
 properly be done in that certain manner or not. 
 
 "layi (contraction of 12^ ''Si) means if he has done. In 
 contradistinction to the former, this term denotes the question 
 of law concerning an act already done, whether ii is valid and 
 acceptable or not. 
 
 The phrases in connection with these two terms are: 
 
 1. n^'^nnn'? I^'^SS or ••d: n^^'nn^^ even directly, i. e. the ex- 
 pression of the Mishna indicates a direct permission to do the 
 act under consideration, so that it may be done unhesitatingly. 
 
 Example: Tal. Chullin 2a. 
 
 2. S*? n^P'^nnD^ ]''t< ^IT^I tf done, yes, but directly not i. e. 
 only if it has already been done, it is acceptable and legiti- 
 mate, but directly permissible it is not. 
 
 Example: Chullin 13b-, 15b. 
 
 3. '•DT TStt^ "rayn /S^ n^'^nnD^ directly not, but if done it is 
 right, i. e. it ought not to be done, but if already done, it is 
 acceptable and valid'. 
 
 Examples: Mishna Berachoth II, 3. Terumoth I, 6;Talm. 
 Berachoth 15a b. 
 
 4. S^ ''Di "I3J^"'T even if done, it is not accepted as valid. 
 Examples: Berachoth 15a; Megilla 19b. 
 
 » Compare the phrase in thecivillaw: Fieri non debet, eed fac- 
 tum valet. 
 
B. THE GEMARA EXPLAmiNG AND DISCUSSING 
 THE MISHNA. 
 
 CHAPTER IL 
 
 Modes of Teeating an Anonymous Mishna Paragraph. 
 
 §16. 
 The Gemara uses a great variety of modes in commenting 
 the Mishna and discussing its contents. Generally, the com- 
 ments are introduced by a query which is intended to call at- 
 tention to the point that requires elucidation. This method of 
 introducing a statement or explanation by queries is to some ex- 
 tent already found in the Mishna itself, as •'HD'^S^D from what 
 time on may we read....? Berachoth I, 1. 2; Taanith I, 1;.."!^^^ 
 how are benedictions to be recited..? Berachoth YI, 1;VII, 
 3;...nD2*l.-..nu3 with what... and with what...? Sabbath II, 1; 
 lY, 1 ; YI, 1;... J^^JD whence is it derived...?.. inT\Sl... inPX 
 which are.. .and which are...? B. Kamma II, 4; B. Metzia Y, 1, 
 and many other similar interrogative phrases. But in the 
 Gemara this method is more commonly applied. 
 
 The following is an outline of the different modes and 
 phrases mostly used in the Gemara at the outset of its com- 
 mentation and discussion on the Mishna. 
 
 1. Explaining Words and Phrases of the Mishna. 
 
 § n. 
 
 Such explanations are mostly introduced by the question: 
 ....''i^D what is-..^ or, what 7?iea7is....1 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 59a; Pesachim 2a; Kiddushin 29a. 
 
 In answer to this query, the explanation is generally given 
 in the name of a certain Amora. Sometimes, two teachers dif- 
 fer in the answer; f ex. Berachoth 29a; Pesachim 2a. Where 
 the schools of Babylonia and Palestine differ in the interpreta- 
 tion, that difference is usually expressed by ... iDliin ^s^^ 
 
Modes of treating an anonymous Mishna. 199 
 
 IIDS nr\r\here (in Babylon) they explain..., but there (in Pales- 
 tine) they say...; or...'iDuin SDH hereiXnyj explain,.. ^DS* 'S '"11, 
 but a certain (Palestinian) Rabbi says....; f.ex. R. Hashana 
 30b, Sanhedrin 25a; B. Metzia 20a. Sometimes, however, 
 i^Dn refers to Sitra in opposition to other Babylonian schools; 
 f. ex. Pesachim 42b; B. Bathra 61a. 
 
 Remark. Where the question >i<D is followed by... ^'O'h^^^ifto 
 say.. ? is it to say...."^ an anticipated explanation is to be rejected as 
 wrong; f. ex, Berachoth 9b; Kiddushin 29a. 
 
 2. Asking for the Meaning or Construction of a Whole 
 
 Sentence or of a Statement in the Mishna 
 § 18. 
 
 a. ^DSp "'S^D what does he (the author of this Mishna) in- 
 tend to say here? 
 
 The answer to this question is generally introduced by: 
 ^Di<p "'^n thus he says.... Example : Sabbath 41a; Taanith 27a. 
 
 b. yati'D ''S'D what does he let us hear? 
 Examples: Sabbath 84b; Sanhedrin 46b. 
 
 Remark. Different is the meaning of the question y^B^c '•XD,when 
 followed by.... n, in which case iL ia to be translated by: What proves 
 that....? f.ex. R. Hashana 21b; 22b. 
 
 3. Asking for the Object of a Seemingly Indifferent ob 
 
 Superfluous Statement. 
 
 § 19. 
 
 a. sriD^n ""SD^ for what practical purpose is this (state- 
 ment)? 
 
 Examples: R. Hashana 2a; Yebamoth 39a; Kethuboth 82a. 
 
 b. ]h yOuDp ""SD (abbr. h"!2p \S*D) What does he intend 
 to let us hear? What does he want to teach us, here? 
 
 The answer to the latter question is mostly introduced by 
 ».»b"1^jp Sn This he intends to teach us, that... 
 
 Examples: Pesachim 89a; Sebachim 85b; Meilah 21a. 
 
 c. SnD'^D^ "»«D What is this to say? Why teach this? 
 
200 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 Example: Nazir 13a. 
 
 4. Investigating the Particular Circumstances of a 
 Case referred to in the Mishna. 
 §20. 
 
 a. p^'p'^Dj; ''^Da Of what case, of what circumstances do 
 we treat here? 
 
 Examples: Betza 2a; B. Metzia 12b; Gittin 3Tb. 
 
 b. •»D1 ^^in (abbr. Tn) How shall we imagine this case? 
 
 Examples: Megilla 18a; Gittin 78a; B. Kamma 28b. 
 
 Both of these two interrogative phrases are mostly follow- 
 ed either by . . . i<D"'^^S if to say. . ; ts it to say. . . ? anticipating an 
 answer which is rejected at once; or by a dilemma... •»^<...."»j<, 
 //...? and if...1 presenting two anticipated alternatives to either 
 of which the law under consideration cannot well refer. 
 
 The answer to such questions is introduced either by s^H 
 p^'pDj; ''«D2 Here we treat of the case...., or by... SD'^nX «S 
 no (i. e. not as you anticipated, but) necessarily.... (we have to 
 imagine the case under the circumstances that...), or by.... 
 D^iyS howiver^ still (i. e. notwithstanding your objection) / 
 say,,.. 
 
 This last phrase is especially used when one of the altern- 
 atives is defended against the objection made to it. 
 
 5. Investigating the Biblical Source of a Law Laid down 
 IN the Mishna. 
 
 §21. 
 
 The question introducing such an investigation is either: 
 
 f) SiD, contr. ]^JD (abbr. V'JD) Whence do we have this? 
 
 Example: Kidd. 14b; 22b and very often. 
 
 Or I'^^D ''in «iD, contr. ^h^^ >':,v^yi:^ (abbr. ^'T^d) Whence 
 are these words (laws)? 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 30b; 35a a. v. o. 
 
 Both of these questions correspond to the Mishnic p^D, 
 whence is it derived? 
 
Modes of treating an anonymous Mishna. 201 
 
 CoiTectly the question V'iD is applied where the source of 
 only one single point of the law is to be investigated, while 
 D'TID is used where several points or provisions are under 
 consideration. But this distinction is not always strictly re- 
 garded. 
 
 In answer to this question either an Amora is quoted who 
 points to the source, by the phrase: sip IDS! for Scripture 
 says...., or reference is made to a Bar ait ha in which the law 
 in question is artificially derived from a biblical passage. This 
 reference is introduced by: n''m for the Rabbis have taught.. 
 
 Remark 1. Instead of answering the question of j^JD, the Gema- 
 ra sometimes repeats the same question with astonishment: I?pJD, as 
 if to say, How can you ask such a question, since the sourca of the 
 law under consideration is obvious enough from a plain bibUcal pas- 
 sage? The original question is then set forth in a modified form by the 
 phrase: pnONp "•DH px We mean to say (ask) thus:...;f. ex. Megilla 2a; 
 Sanhedrin 68b; Sebachim 89a. 
 
 Remark 2. In answering the question of )^JD, the Amoraim often 
 differ, one deriving the law from this, and another from another pas- 
 sage. After having investigated the merits of their different deriva- 
 tions, the Gemara sometimes adds another biblical basis given by a 
 Tana in a Baraitha. In this case, the phrase is used : rh Nn^"'D NJni 
 feOniO but a Tana derives it from this passage... 
 
 Example: Betza 15b; Chagiga 9a; Kiddushin 4b; see Rashi o the 
 first mentioned passage. 
 
 6. Investigating the Reason or the Underlying Principle 
 
 OF A Law. 
 
 §22. 
 
 Such an investigation is generally introduced by the query 
 WDytD ''^D (abbr. tD"D) What is the reason? 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 33a; R. Hashana 32b; Megilla 24a; 
 B. Metzia 38a. 
 
 This query is especially made in regard to such anonymous 
 Mishna paragraphs where the law contained therein is evi- 
 dently not based on scriptural grounds, but merely on a rabbin- 
 
202 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 ical institution or principle. But in regard to a Mishna con- 
 taining a difference of opinion, the question:... 'm SD3;'i3 "'t^O 
 '^Wiiat is the reason of the dissenting Rabbi A?" is often also 
 answered by a reference to a biblical passage; f. ex. Berachoth 
 15a. 
 
 Remark 1. Exceptionally the question D"D is found in Moed 
 Katon 19a in the sense of ^J^D pjyS "iii what respect?" See Rashi on 
 that passage. 
 
 Remark 2. Where the reason of one of two cases or one of two 
 opinions contained in a Mishna paragraph is clear enough, but not the 
 other, the query is usually set forth in the following phrase: 
 ?KDyL3 ^NO ....S*bx ....DIK^D i^D^^l 
 
 It is all right (in the one case)...., there it is on account of...., but 
 in the case of... what is there the reason? 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 33b; 52b; Yebamoth 41b. 
 
 Remark 3. Sometimes, both questions o"D and ]D"nJD are made. 
 In this case the former asks for the underlying principle, and the lat- 
 ter for the biblical basis of that principle; for ex. Sabbath 24b. The 
 reversed order is found in Betza 15b; see Rashi on that passage. 
 
 1. Investigating the General Basis of the Particulars 
 
 OF A Law. 
 
 §23. 
 
 The Mishna sometimes starts with the particulars of a law 
 without having stated the principal law to which those partic- 
 ulars refer. In this case the Gemara asks: 
 
 ....''jnp'T ""Sp i^lD^n t^in where (on what basis) does the 
 author of this Mishna stand, that he here teaches....? i.e. to 
 what general law does he refer? or where is the principal law 
 of these particulars? 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 2a; Taanith 2a; see also Shebuoth 
 lib. 
 
 The answer is introduced by the phrase: '•sp Dnn ''he 
 refers to the passage there".... (in which the required basis is 
 stated). 
 
Modes of treating an ano^^mous Mishna. 203 
 
 8. Investigating the Authorship of an Anonymous Mishna. 
 
 §24. 
 
 The Gemara often endeavors to trace an anonymous Mish- 
 na to its author, i. e. to find out whether or not that anony- 
 mous Mishna representsthe opinion of a certain Tana expressed 
 elsewhere in another Mishna or in a Baraitha. Such an 
 investigation is introduced by one of the following phrases. 
 
 a. ...S^n JSD Who is that Tana (author)?..., Berachoth 
 40a; Yoma 14a; Megilla 19b. 
 
 b. ...in'^jnD ''3D or...tiD in^'jnD Whose opinion represents 
 ■our Mishna?... B. Kamma 33a; Gittin 10a; Nedarim 87a. 
 
 c. S^n 'S "\ ?''JD Sn Whose opinion is this? It is that of 
 Rabbi A... B. Metzia 40b. 
 
 d. *|^^hSiD S^l in''jnD Our Mishna does not represent the 
 opinion of.... B. Kamma 32a. 
 
 Eemark 1. Where the investigation is merely problematical with 
 a negative result, it is generally preceded by XD'b (or ND"*:), is it to 
 say...? The answer is then usually: ...SD^n I^^DX, you may even say... 
 (our Mishna agrees with the opinion of that Tana); as: jn'^no ND""^ 
 N^n ^Xn ^D Ki3^, is it to say that our Mishna does not represent the 
 opinion of that certain Rabbi in the Baraitha? B. Kamma 30a; B. 
 Metzia 2b; Kiddushin 52b. Sometimes, it is also phrased : pn ND^!^ 
 5<OnD..'n3 (vhl) Is it to say,that that which is taught here anonymously 
 does (or does not) agree with the view of that Rabbi? Berachoth 25b; 
 Betza 27b; Bechoroth 28a. 
 
 Remark 2. Also where the Mishna records a dissenting opinion 
 of the sages collectively by DnDlX D^D^m, the Gemara often investig- 
 ates D'CDn jNJO, Who is the representative of these sages ? f. ex. Giitin 
 22a; B. Metzia 60b; Sanhedrin 66a. 
 
 9. Investigating the Force of a Comprehensive or a Limiting 
 
 TERM. 
 
 A. Comprehensive Terms. 
 §25. 
 As stated above chapter I, 7. 8, the Mishna often intro- 
 
204 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 duces the provisions of law by general and comprehensive 
 terms, as "ntDS ^^D ibb2r\ HT ,b^n ,h^ which terms are assumed 
 to imply other cases in addition to those expressly mentioned. 
 Investigating the force of such a comprehensive term, the Ge- 
 mara usually asks : \SD ''''"inH^ What is this to include? What 
 is this term to add? 
 
 Examples: Pesachim 8a ; Chagiga 2a j Gittin 19a. See 
 Erubin 2a-3b. 
 
 B. Limiting Terms. 
 §26. 
 
 Where the Mishna is making use of a limiting term (see 
 above I. 9. 10), the question of the Gemara is: •'^D ^tDlpD^ 
 What is this to exclude? 
 
 Examples: Pesechim 76b; Kiddushin 3a; B. KammalSb. 
 10. Investigating the Reference of a Certain Statement 
 IN THE Mishna. 
 
 § 27. 
 
 After having laid down certain provisions of the law, the 
 Mishna sometimes adds either a modification or a dissenting 
 opinion without clearly stating to which of the preced- 
 ing provisions this addition refers. Investigating such a 
 case the Gemara usually asks: i^^TIt^ ^o which ? i. e. to which 
 of the preceding provisions or cases does this addition refer ? 
 This question is generally followed by:....i<D"'^''« shall I say.,,, 
 (it refers to the latter or to the former case)? 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 34b; Kiddushin 46a; Sanhedrin 79a. 
 
 11. Qualifying a Provision of the Mishna. 
 
 §28. 
 
 Without an introductory question, the Gemara often quali- 
 fies a provision of the Mishna by limiting its application to 
 certain circumstances. The phrases used for this purpose are: 
 
 a. «^....^:3S....^^^S* *irr «^ they only taught this in reference 
 
Modes of treating an anonymous Mishna. 205 
 
 to..., (a case under that certain circumstance), hut „ (under 
 the different circumstance of...) not. 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 42b; Succah 32a; B. Kamma 28a. 
 
 b. S^....^2S....Spim only,,. .but,., not. 
 
 Examples: Yebamoth 98b; B. Bathra 146a; Aboda Zara 
 74b. 
 
 c. The shortest phrase for this purpose is: ....t^ Sim 
 provided that. .. . 
 
 Examples: Sabbath 53a; B. Metzia 11a; Maccoth 6a. 
 Eemark. The phrase X^X 1i{^» N^ corresponds to the Mishnic 
 phrase DmON Dnm HDl or "•nD''t<. 
 
 12. Extending a Provision of the MisHNA. 
 § 29. 
 
 Opposite to the preceding case, the Gemara often also ex- 
 tends the effect of a provision above the limits or circumstan- 
 ces indicated in the Mishna. The usual phrase for such an ex- 
 tension is: .... I^-'SS «^^^ *^DD....S^ not strictly., (to the circum- 
 stance stated in the Mishna refers this law) but even... 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 53b; Kethuboth 23a; B. Metzia 84a. 
 
 Remark. This phrase introducing an extension of the law is 
 often shortened to the simple word: ... l^^SX or i5?^DN1 and even...; f. i. 
 B. Metzia 22b; 26b; Aboda Zara 41a. 
 
 13. Making Conclusions and Deductions from the Mishna. 
 
 § 30. 
 
 A conclusion or deduction made either from the contents 
 or from the wording of the Mishna is termed fc^pri (B. Metzia 
 8a) or S^pn (Kethuboth 31b). Such conclusions at the outset of 
 the Gemara form generally the basis of a subsequent question 
 and are introduced by one of the following technical terms and 
 phrases: 
 
 a St2^« hence..., consequently..., f. ex. Yoma 14b; 
 
 Betza 9b; B. Metzia 37a. 
 
206 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 b. ...^3S...n SCyta the reason (of the decision given in thi» 
 Mishna) is...., but... (under different circumstances the decision 
 must be different) ; f. ex. Pesachim 9a ; B. Kamma 4tb; B. 
 Metzia 18a; 25a. 
 
 Remark. This latter phrase is especially used where a conclusion 
 is made from a positive statement to the negative, or vice versa. Such 
 conclusions are sometimes also phrased: i^^.. (xn) pN... (in this case) 
 yes, but... (in the opposite case) not; f. ex Berachoth 17b; Nazir 34b; 
 Chullin 18a. 
 
 c. ...n''J"'DyD^(abbr. D"^) ^^ar from this^ conclude from 
 this that...f. ex. Berachoth 13a. Interrogatively it is phrased 
 riTD nyDli^ do you not conclude from this...? Yoma 37b; San- 
 hedrin 71a; B. Metzia 97b. 
 
 Remark. D"K^ is mostly used in deductions by which a legal prin- 
 ciple is finally to be established. At the end of an argument the phra- 
 se )o"K' expresses the acceptance of the preceding conclusions as 
 proved and correct, and is then to be translated by: you may hear it 
 herefrom, it is proved herefrom. 
 
 d .... ^^2D in this is implied that. . , from this follows that. . . ; 
 f. ex Pesachim 45a, Sanhedrin 66a. This term of inference is 
 often preceded by:... ''jnplD since the Mishna teaches.., as : 
 hhy^"' ^lT\Tr[u^ since he teaches...., it follows....; f. ex. Bera- 
 choth 43a, B. Kamma 2a; or...y7Dn...''jnp S^l... ''jnplD since 
 he teaches.... and not...., it follows...; f. ex. Kethuboth 90a. 
 
 e nnDIS nST this tells, this teaches that.... This 
 
 phrase introduces deductions of a general principle from a spe- 
 cial case in the Mishna, f. ex. Berachoth 20b; Rosh Hash ana 
 22a; B. Kamma 35b. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 THE GEMARA CRITICISING THE MISHNA. 
 
 Another kind of questions with which the Gemara intro- 
 duces its comments on the Mishna are those of astonishment 
 and surprise at finding therein either an incongruity or an in- 
 consistency, a superfluity or an omission, or another diflBculty. 
 The following are the different modes in which questions and 
 objections of this kind are set forth and answered. 
 
 1. Finding an incongruity of Expressions. 
 § 31. 
 
 A. Incongruity in one and the same Mtshna paragraph. 
 
 ... 3 D^^DI -..3 nns ''Why begin with... (this term or 
 expression) and then end with... (a different one)?" 
 
 Example: r\^2n2 □''*'D1 1^3 nns B. Kamma 27a. Other 
 examples: Moed Katon lib, B. Bathra 17b. 
 
 The answer is usually. . . . 1i''\". . . . li'^Ti i^ is this, . . // is the same\ 
 i. e. both expressions are identical, mean the same thing. 
 
 B. Incongruity of Expressions in Different Parts of the 
 
 MiSHNA. 
 
 ... •»im nnn \^y^ •'^di ....•'jm s:Dn ^t^ •'Sd (abbr. ^<'t) 
 
 ''Why is the Mishna using here.... (this expression), and thera. 
 (a different one)?" 
 
 Examples: Sabbath 2b; Kiddushin 2a; Shebuoth 5a. 
 
 Remark. The answer to this question is sometimes : Nni3"l XDH 
 y^p t<nU"i Dnni V'Cp "by that change of expression it was intended 
 to add somethinsr new and unexpected here asweU as there" : f. ex. 
 Kidd. 59b. 
 
 2. Finding a Tautology in the Mishna. 
 
 §32. 
 
 The technical phrase used in the objection to a tautology is: 
 
208 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 ...IJ^T. ....li''*'" ''Is not.... (this expression or case) the same as... 
 (that other one)?"; why then this repetition? 
 
 Examples: Rosh Hashana 23b; B. Kamma 17b; Shebu- 
 buoth 12b. 
 
 3. Objecting to the Order of the Stated Cases. 
 
 § 33. 
 
 t<ti^'»n2...."'2n''^ «ti^'»^3....«jrn t<:^ •'St: why does the Mish- 
 na just teach the case of.... first, instead of teaching that 
 other case of... first? 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 2a: B. Bathra 108a; Bechoroth 13a. 
 
 4. Objecting to a Certain Mode of Expression. 
 
 § 34. 
 
 a. .»."'jn"«^ .... ''jn'^D^ r\^h no^ Why does the author of the 
 Mishna use the expression...., instead of using.... (that other 
 expression)? 
 
 Examples: Sabbath 90b; B. Metzia 2a; B. Bathra 98b. 
 
 b. ...^lT^....''irn i<''TS ''SD What does he intend to teach 
 in using this expression, instead of....? 
 
 Examples: Yebamoth 84a; Kiddushin 69a. 
 
 Remark. The answer to such an objection is often: :33{< xn^D 
 b^Dp n^miK (In using this expression) he lets us hear something by 
 the way, namely... ; f. ex. Berachoth 2a. 
 
 6. Objecting to a Certain Limitation of a Provision in 
 
 THE MiSHNA. 
 
 §35. 
 
 •'Oi 1^''SS.... «*'VS •««!:: Why just teaching.,.. since the law 
 applies also to....? 
 
 Examples: Pesachim 50b; Gittin 34b; B. Bathra 59b. 
 
 6. Finding an Omission of a Distinction between two Cases. 
 
 § 36. 
 
 The objection to such an omission is generally phrased in 
 the following way: 
 
The Gemara criticising the Mishna. 209 
 
 '<The Mishna decides here.... without distinguishing be- 
 tween.... and... ;it is right... (concerning the one case), but why 
 should the law apply also to.... (the other case)?" 
 
 Examples: Succah 29b; Gittin 10b; Sanhedrin 18b. 
 
 7. Finding an Expression to be Incorrect or too Indefinite. 
 
 §37. 
 
 ^r\])1 Sp^D (abbr. T'D) Does this enter your mind? i. e.,do 
 you indeed mean to say this? 
 
 Examples; Yoma 67b; Pesachim 42b; Kiddushin 29a. 
 Tbe corrected version is then usually introduced by; s^x 
 ..t<D"»fc< but rather say.... 
 
 8. Finding a Term or Provision to be out of Place. 
 
 §38. 
 
 iTDty *^^*T |SD Who mentioned the name of this? i. e. what 
 has this to do here? how is this to be mentioned in this con- 
 nection? 
 
 Examples. Sabbath 57a, Pesachim 8b, Nazir 4a. 
 
 The answer to this question is generally introduced by the 
 phrase: nOSp ''^n thus he means to say, or by : ^<-|D^"'D ^^^Dn 
 ''jnp ''Sm something is omitted here which must be supplied 
 by construction, namely.... 
 
 9. Finding a Certain Provision of the Mishna Unnecessary, 
 being too Plain and Obvious to be expressly Mentioned. 
 
 §39. 
 
 ^la^tys "this is too plain 1" i. e., why make this provision 
 for a case which is so plain ? why state that which is a mat- 
 ter of course? 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 20b; 47b; Pesacliini 21b; Megilla 25a. 
 
 The full phrase of this elliptical expression is \so S*tD'' w*3 
 
210 Terminology AND Methodology. 
 
 S*-iD'^a^ it is too plain, why then expressly say (teach) it? f. ex. 
 Nedarim 16a. 
 
 In answer to this objection, the Gemara generally tries to 
 show that under certain circumstances the provision under consi- 
 deration is not as plain and self-evident as it appears to be ; or 
 that it was needed m order to prevent some possible misunder- 
 standing in the application of the general law. Such an answer 
 is mostly phrased either: 
 
 .... (y\^^) i^h^ fc^D'^"!^' isb it is not so (plain), as it is needed 
 for the case...;or:... Hi'^fs^ -]ny-r h*p^D ^nt.'irs* it was necessary 
 to state this, since you might have misunderstood me to say...; 
 or: V'Dp...-St:*'rn int: what you might have supposed is that....; 
 therefore the author informs us (of this provision). 
 
 Remark. Different from this meaning of the word t^tD'^tJ^S, as an 
 elliptical expression of astonishment and objection is that, when the 
 word precedes a propounded question of problem, where two cases 
 are set forth one of which is plain and obvious enough, but not the 
 other. In such a connection the word is simply a statement of self- 
 evidence, and is to be translated by: this case is clear and plain, but 
 (my question concerns that other case); f. ex. Berachoth 12a; B. Kamma 
 8b; Kiddushin 8b. This kind of ^5D*t^•D is generally explained in Rashi's 
 commentary by the remark t^mn^n "in calmness" i. e. to be read here 
 not as a question but in a calm manner as a plain statement, while the 
 other kind of i<n"'Ii's2 is explained by n^DDl "in astonishment". As a 
 simple statement preceding a question of doubt and problem, the term 
 t^tO-t^^a is sometimes supplied in the Talmud by the word ""^ "this case 
 is plain to me"; f. ex. Sabbath 3b; Megillah 3b. 
 
 10. Finding an Unnecessary Repetition of the Same Provision 
 already stated elsewhere. 
 
 § 40. 
 
 The question objecting to such a repetition is phrased: 
 a. (SiD'^T Sin) SJ^'Jn V'Dp \SD What does he inform us 
 
 here, since I have already once before been informed thereof in 
 
 another passage of the Mishna? 
 
The Gemara criticising the Mishna. 211 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 50a; Kctliuboth 42a; 65b. 
 
 b. s:d''T kSin sni (Sn) But I learned this already once 
 before. ... 
 
 Examples: Sabbath 89b; B. Metzia 55a; Sanhcdrin 20b. 
 
 c. ...n''^ S:n Sn ^h n^^ in Sn Why do I need this again, 
 since he taught this already once before? Example: Gittin 15a. 
 
 The answer is introduced in different ways according to 
 its different nature: 
 
 a. ...V'Dp Sn this he intends to inform us here, that.... 
 
 b n"*^ S*3'^1l2";>S SS^D on account of the addition to be 
 
 made here, this repetition was necessary. 
 
 c. ...s:D"'"\:f it was necessary (to repeat here this provi- 
 sion), since.... 
 
 d. V'Dp ..s:i^:2« mn '^SnO •'S if to derive it from that 
 other Mislma, 1 might have supposed that...., therefore here 
 the additional information. 
 
 Remark. Where a similar provision is found in two Masechtoth 
 concerning different, though analogous, cases, the question of unne- 
 cessary repetition is not raised, but the Gemara simply states: 
 
 ....XD^lVI ^Jli ^Xn '•^•.•.''33 ^DJ pm also in reference to.. ..the Mishna 
 provides for a case similar to this, but both of these provisions are 
 necessary, for,... 
 
 Examples: Kiddushin 50a; Gittin 74a; B. Metzia 119a. 
 
 11. Finding in a Mishna an Unnecessary Abundance op 
 Analogous Cases. 
 
 §41. 
 
 a. ^b n^b •'in b^ Why are all these cases needed? 
 Examples: Succah lYa; Kethuboth 23b; Bechoroth 2a. 
 
 b. ("in li'^Tl) "^b n^b in Sn Why is this case still added 
 (since both cases are identical)? 
 
 Examples: Yebamoth 23b; Kiddushin 65a; Shebuoth 27b. 
 
 c. ...'^^n^^ n*-^ nr2b^ ..•^:r\:2b n''^ nn^ Why does he need 
 to teach... and then teach again...? 
 
 Examples: B. Metzia 33! >; Shebuoth 27b; Kiddushin 60b. 
 The answer, always introduced by S2''"i:f ''it is necessary" 
 
212 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 or •»::''*i"i ^'allthe mentioned cases are necessary", generally at- 
 tempts to show that with each of the stated cases a peculiar 
 circumstance is connected on account of which the analogy 
 with the other case might have been objected to, hence the ex- 
 press statement of all cases. The phraseology of this answer is 
 mostly: Vnp ... i<J''i:« H.n ... Sin ''t<n tor if the author had 
 only taught... (that other case) I might have supposed....; the- 
 refore he lets us hear this. 
 
 Remark. The question "why are all these cases needed?" is some- 
 times omitted and the Gemare starts with the explanation: N3nvi it 
 was necessary (to state all these casesj, since...; f. ex. Sabbath 122a; 
 Kiddushin 50b; B. Kamma 32b. 
 
 12. Finding one of two Cases Superfluous, since a fortiori 
 Implied in the Other. 
 
 §42. 
 
 The question based on the argument a fortiori is generally 
 
 phrased: (ptr ^D «^) s'^yzD ...(s^n) ...nnDS ...(cnn nDi)«ntrn 
 
 if (there in the one case) you say... (that the decision 
 is...) can it here (in our case) be questionable ? i. e., is it not 
 here the more so, why then state the other case? 
 
 Examples: Rosh Hashana 32b; Pesachim 55b; Yebamoth 
 30a; Shebuoth 32b. 
 
 Remark. The answer to this objection is sometimes, that the 
 Mishna intended to arrange cases in a climax (IT fjX "»T \^, Rosh Hashana 
 32b), or in an anticlimax (iT ")Dlb yxi X^\ IT, Kethuboth 58a). Concern- 
 ing these two phrases see above § 13 and § 14. 
 
 13. Finding an Omission of Cases where the Mishna ex- 
 pressly Limits their Number. 
 §43. 
 
 a. ...*'Di ''in'?"! (or •'injl) should not the author also have 
 added the case of....? 
 
 Examples: B. Metzia 55a; Yebamoth 53a; Zebachim 49b. 
 
The Gemara Criticisinq the Mishna. 213 
 
 b S3'S «m (SD*"^) ^b im are thore not more cases? 
 
 but behold, there is the case of.... (which is not mentioned). 
 
 Examples: Gittin 9b; 86a; ChuUin 42a; Menachoth 74b. 
 14. Finding a General Rule of Law not Cover g all cases. 
 
 §44. 
 
 ...."»in sin S^^DI Is this a general rule? behold the case 
 of... (to which it does not apply.) 
 
 Examples: Kiddushin 34a; 66b; Temurah 14a; ChuUin 59a. 
 
 15. Finding a Decision of the Mishna not in Accordance 
 WITH AN Established Principle. 
 
 §45. 
 
 ....Wni ''SDS or ''SDSI Why so ? How is this? Is this not 
 against the principle of...? 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 47b; Betza 31b; B. Metzia 94a. 
 
 Remark. The question >XDK is sometimes omitted, and must bo 
 supplied, f . ex. in F^. Metzia 99a; Gittin 22b. 
 
 16. Finding a Different Decision regarding two Cases 
 which ought to have been treated alike. 
 §46. 
 
 WS''D ^1^ ''SD1 Sty'l SJty ''i^D What difference is there 
 between the former and the latter case? i. e., since the two 
 cases mentioned in the Mishna are seemingly alike, why does 
 the decision in the one case differ from that in the other? 
 
 Examples: B. Metzia 65b; B. Bathra 20a; Kiddushin 64a. 
 
 17. Finding an Inconsistency of Principles in one and the 
 SAME Mishna Paragraph. 
 §47. 
 The phraseology mostly used in such objection of inconsist- 
 ency is: 
 
 .... «D^s .... nnosi... S!:2'?«,...nnD«, s^ti'p «sii sn is this 
 
 not self-contradictory ? you say ...hence.... and then you say.... 
 hence...? i. e., the underlying principle or the consequence of 
 one part of this Mishna contradicts that of the other part. 
 
214 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 Examples: Beracliotli 50a, B. Kamma 39, B Metzia 31a. 
 
 When the self-contradiction is more obvious, the objection 
 is simply phrased: 
 
 ....Sw^"'"! niDN* is*m but did you not say in the first part...? 
 
 Examples: Betza 31b; Moed Katon 13a; Gittin 21b. 
 
 Remark. In answer to such an objection, the Gemara usually at- 
 tempts to reconcile the contradictory members of the Mishna. Some- 
 times, however, the conti-adiction is admitted by th? Dhrase: ^D S'^DH 
 IT T\2^* i<b IT nJK^^ verily, (or, here is a break!) he who taught this part 
 did not toach the other; i. e., this Mishna does not represent the opinion 
 of one author, but the opposite opinions of two different teachers; f. ex, 
 Sabbath 92b; B. K. 47b. 
 
 18. Finding a Law Report quoted in the Mishna to be 
 
 Contrary to the Preceding Law. 
 
 §48. 
 
 As stated above § 6, the Mishna, after having laid down a 
 rule of law, occasionally adds the report of a certain case(niyj;D) 
 in which a celebrated authority gave a decision in accordance 
 with that law. Sometimes, however, that decision is just con- 
 trary to the preceding law. In this case, the Gemara starts 
 with the question : mnD^ n'^^D is this report to contradict 
 (the preceding)? i. e., instead of corroborating the preceding 
 law, it just conflicts with it. 
 
 Examples: Betza 24a; Gittin 66a, B. Metzia 102b. 
 
 This question is generally answered by: ''^m SnonD •'11011 
 f^np something is missing here, and thus the Mishna ought to 
 read.... i. e., the Mishna evidently omitted here a dissenting 
 opinion which must be supplied by construction, and to this 
 opinion the report refers. 
 
 19. Finding a Conflict of Authoritative Passages. 
 §49. 
 
 Anonymous and undisputed paragraphs of the Mishna and 
 of the Baraitha are generally regarded to be authoritative 
 (See above § 1). But the Gemara often finds such a paragraph 
 
The Gemara Criticising the Mishna. 215 
 
 of the Mishna to be in conflict with another passage of the Mish 
 na or of a Baraitha. This objection of contradiction is usually in- 
 troduced by: ... N-i:i''Dm (contraction of >ns* SJS ''ii^m) I raise 
 against this the question of a conflict of authorities, i. e. I 
 find this Mishna in conflict with the tollowing passage in another 
 Mishna or in a Baraitha.... 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 26a; Taanith 4b, Sanhedrin 33a, 
 The answer, mostly introduced by ; S'ltrp ^h this is no dif- 
 ficulty^ generally removes the contradiction by showing either, 
 that the conflicting passages treat of difi'erent cases or circum- 
 stances (...JSD1....JS3), or that those passages represent the 
 opposite views of diflerent teachers ('3 '"l «m 'S'n S*n). 
 
 Remark 1. Where not the plain Mishna, but its underlying 
 principle or its consequence is in disharmony with an other Mishna 
 or a Baraitha, there the question inrD")! is preceded by an argument 
 pointing out that principle or consequence. Examples: Berachoth 17b; 
 Yoma 14b; B. Metzia 18a. 
 
 Remark 3. The introductory phrase ^nrO"l1 is often omitted 
 and the question of a conflict of authorities is started simply by ...pnm 
 but are we not informed in another Mishna ...? or ...K-'inni is it not 
 stated in a Baraitha (differently) ? Examples: Rosh Hashana 27a; B. 
 Kamma61a; Gittin 23b. 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 TREATMENT OF A MISHNA CONTAINING A DIFFER- 
 ENCE OF OPINION. 
 1. Asking for the Reason of the Dissenting Teacher. 
 
 §50. 
 
 ....'m t<t2VtiD ''i^D what is the reason of Rabbi.... (the dis- 
 senting teacher)? 
 
 The answer is usually followed by the further question 
 NDp ^jm and the first anonymous teacher ? or p^-n and our 
 other teachers? i. e., what have they to say against this reason? 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 15a ; 44a ; R. Hashana 22a; B. 
 Kamma 23b. 
 
 2. Asking for a Counter-argument. 
 §51. 
 
 The Mishna sometimes records an argument of one of the 
 dissenting teachers against his opponent which is neither ac- 
 cepted nor refuted by the latter. In this case, the Gemara 
 usually asks for the probable counter-argument of that oppon- 
 ent, in the following way: 
 
 ?(3) 'm (2) "\h (S) 'n n^b nDSp n'lStr Very well did Rabbi 
 A argue against Rabbi B, What then had the latter to say? 
 
 Examples: R. Hoshana 26a; Megilla 27b; Kiddushin 61a. 
 
 3. Finding two of Several Opinions to be Identical. 
 
 §52. 
 
 iXfter having laid down an opinion concerning a case, the 
 Mishna sometimes adds two dissenting opinions, one of which 
 does not at all seem to difler from that which had been laid 
 down first. The Gemara then usually asks: 
 
 «!2p «in U''\-I ....'n (or n''D::n) is not the opinion of R. 
 So and So (or of the sages) identical with that of tne first men- 
 tioned teacher? 
 
Discussing the difference of opinion in a Mishna. 217 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 30a; Sanhedrin 15b; Aboda Zara 7b. 
 The answer to this question is generally... in'''T3 SD'iS 
 there is a difference between them concerning.... 
 
 4. Investigating the Principle Underlying the Difference 
 
 of Opinion. 
 
 § 53. 
 
 "IID (2) 'm...n2D (S) 'n ?^:^S''t2p ""SDa in what (principle) 
 do they differ? R. A holds... and R. B holds.... 
 
 Examples: Succah 16a; Betza 26a; Gittin 64b. 
 
 Remark. Where such an investigation is problematic only, it is 
 introduced by: .,.-)2D -iroi....l3D IDT ^i^D^Dp «nn N0^5? is it to say, 
 that they differ concerning the principle of...., so that one holds that 
 ..., and the other holds that....? The answer is then generally: {<^ 
 ...^130 ^<Dby N^IDT No, both of them agree concerning this princii)le, 
 but they differ concerning another principle, namely,... 
 Examples: Pesachim 46b; Nazir 62b; Sanhedrin 23a. 
 
 5. Limiting the Point of Difference between the Dissent- 
 
 ing Teachers. 
 
 §54. 
 
 ....^Dn •'121.... ^2S ...D r\p^hn:2 the difference concerns 
 only...., but regarding.... all agree that.... 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 41a, Betza 9a, B. Kamma 61a. 
 
 Remark. Where such a limitation of the difference between Ta- 
 naim is to offer a basis for a subsequent question, it is usually phrased 
 as follows: 
 
 . . *n....b3K....N^X^:^bQN*i5 jND nV so far only they differ that...., 
 but CUXU-. riling — both of them agree that. ..etc. 
 
 Examples: Sabbath 132a; Yebamoth 50b; B. Metzia 28b. 
 
 6. Inquiring why the Dissent of the Teachers in one Cask 
 
 does not extend also to the other. 
 
 § 65. 
 
 ••^•'^ST «B''D tr"i:Di ^:^b^ s^i sc"'-i x:::» \hd 
 
 What difference is between the former and this case, that 
 
218 Terminology AND Methodology. 
 
 they dissent here and not also there (though both cases are 
 seemingly alike)? 
 
 Examples: Yebamoth 38a; Kethuboth 78a; Gittin 65a. 
 
 Remark. Sometimes that question is phrased shorter : JI^S^I 
 (i<t^''~l2)Nn3 ■'DJ Ought not this teacher also to differ in the other case? 
 Ex. Sabbath 39a; Nazir 11a; Yeb. 118a. 
 
 1. Finding an Inconsistency op Opinion in one op the Con- 
 testing Teachers. 
 § 56. 
 
 a (^''^nm) pnm 'in^m Does this teacher hold 
 
 the opinion....? but in that other Mishna (or in that Baraitha) 
 he expresses the opposite opinion? 
 
 Examples; Yebamoth 44a; 122a; Kethuboth 56aj Chul- 
 lin 100b. 
 
 b. ...pnni-..'^^ n'^b r.*'^'! Does this teacher not hold that 
 ..., but in that other Mishna he expresses himself differently? 
 
 Examples: B. Kamma 61b: Aboda Zara 6b. 
 
 8. Finding an Inconsistency op Opinion in both op the Con- 
 testing Teachers. 
 §5r. 
 
 ....naD (2) ..'m .... n2D (s) ..'-n i^^'Q^t^b 
 .... {i^^:m) pm in^ jryDtr «d3\^ sm 
 
 Is this to say that Rabbi A holds that ...., and Rabbi B 
 that....; but from that other Mishna (or Baraitha) we under- 
 stand just the reverse. . . ? 
 
 Examples: Berachoth Itb; Pesachim 49b; Kiddushin 64b; 
 Sanhedrin 21a. 
 
 Remark. The contradiction is generally removed by the answer 
 that in one of the conflicting passages n^^^n nS^niD "the position of 
 the contesting teachers is to be reversed", or shorter "|1Q^J< "I reverse", 
 that is, I correct the Mishna or Baraitha by placing Rabbi A instead 
 of Rabbi B and vice versa. To such a correction suggested by one of 
 
Discussing the difference of opinion in a Mishna. 219 
 
 the Amoraim, another sometimes objects: "jlQ^n iO "you do not need 
 to reverse", as I have to offer another way of reconciling these two 
 passages. 
 
 9. Hypothetical Conclusion from the Opposite Opinions op 
 Dissenting Teachers. 
 
 §68. 
 
 If you should find (conclude) that according to the opinion 
 of Rabbi A.... (a certain case must be decided in a certain 
 way), then according to the opinion of Rabbi B.... (that case 
 must be decided differently). 
 
 Examples: Pesachim lib, 121a; B. Metzia 40b; Sanhed- 
 rin T8a, 
 
CHAPTER V. 
 
 THE GEMARA QUOTING THE MISHNA AND KINDRED 
 
 WORKS. 
 1. Terms Used in REFERRiNa to the Mishna. 
 § 59. 
 In contradistinction to the extraneous Mishna or Baraitha, 
 also called ^<n''jnD, the authorized Mishna of R. Jehuda Ha- 
 nasi is termed prT'jriD or ijnjw rj our Mishna, and the author of 
 a teaching contained in a paragraph of this Mishna, is desig- 
 nated as j"rn i<:in our teacher^ in contradistinction to ^<"ia S^H 
 the teacher in the Baraitha) f. ex. Moed Katon 17b; B. K. 61a. 
 Quotations from the Mishna are introduced by: 
 
 a. pn (contraction of jjt< ^jn we learn, study) we are taught 
 (in a Mishna). 
 
 b. cnn pn we are taught there . This phrase is mostly 
 used when a Mishna belonging to another Masechta is to be 
 quoted; f. ex. Yoma 2a; B. Metzia 9b. Exceptionally, how- 
 ever, it refers also to a passage in the same Masechta; f. ex. 
 Pesachim 4b; Maccoih 16a. 
 
 C. t^r^n (='li"'J*J) 'we have learned^ we have been taught 
 in a Mishna (rarely referring also to a Baraitha). 
 
 This term is used only in certain phrases as SJ'ijn V'Dp \SD 
 What does he inform us here, since we have already been taught 
 thereof in that Mishna? f. ex. Berachoth50a,or S^jn ^DJ JJS C]S 
 we have also a Mishna to the same effect, f. ex. Berachoth 27a. 
 
 2. Terms Used in Quoting the Tosephta and Baraitha. 
 
 § 60. 
 
 a. Sin one has taught^ without adding any subject, mostly 
 quotes a passage from the Tosephta, f. ex. Pesachim 53b; B. 
 Metzia 28 a. 
 
 b. ]i31 Ijn (abbr. "I'Tl) our Rabbis taught^ refers to a 
 well known Baraitha, especially to passages from the Mechilta, 
 Siphra and Siphre. 
 
Quoting the Mishxa and kindred Works. 221 
 
 c. S'^jn it is a teaching^ refers to a Baraitha in general. 
 
 Remark. Two or more Baraithoth contradicting each other are 
 generally introduced byt-.-.-^n^K N''jni...."|"1^N K^JD-.-Nnn "'Jn in one Ba- 
 raitha it is taught...; in the other.... and again in another....; f. ex. 
 Maccoth 7b. 
 
 3. Different Purposes of Such Quotations. 
 § 61. 
 
 1. pn or onn pn, at the outset of the Gemara, intro- 
 duces another Mishna which directly or indirectly has some 
 bearing upon the passage of the Mishna under consideration ;or 
 it is intended to use the latter as an argument in a discussion on 
 the quoted Mishna. 
 
 Examples: Sabbath 2a; Pesachim lib: B. Metzia 9b. 
 
 Remark, pnni at the outset of the Gemara as well as under a dis- 
 cussion in the same, raises a question of contradiction or incongruity 
 from the cited Mishna ; pni or pni or pn N*? '•D adduces a support 
 from that Mishna. 
 
 2. S3n, at the outset of the Gemara, usually introduces a 
 brief quotation from the Toscphta explaining or qualifying a 
 certain point in the Mishna under consideration. 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 50b; Yoma 19a; B. Metzia 28a. 
 
 3. S'^jri, at the outset of the Gemara, introduces a pas- 
 sage from a Baraitha in which a difference of opinion mentioned 
 in the Mishna is more fully set forth with the addition of some 
 arguments. 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 12b; Pesachim 27b; Maccoth Yb. 
 Remark 1. N^Jnm raises a question of conti-adiction from that 
 Baraitha.^ N''jn^ or N^jm or ^<^Jm3 refers to the Baraitha as an ar- 
 
 1 Exceptionally, N^^nni is sometimes used not as a question of 
 contradiction, but as an argument in sup[)ort of a statement, in the 
 sense of X'JnV In this case, Rashi in his commentary generally re- 
 marks: xn"in'':3 "in calmness", or Nfiy'D "a support", i. e., the phrase 
 N'jnni is here not a question, but a cahn statement in support of the 
 prect'tling; f. ex. Moed Katon 19b in the iir»tline; Gittin 74b; Kidd. 60b, 
 
222 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 gument tn support of something stated in a discussion. The phrase: 
 ^3n ^DJ X"'Jn 'W'e have also a Baraitha to the same effect, is used to 
 show that an explanation or opinion just expressed by an Amora is 
 corroborated by that Baraitha, while the phrase: ...1 n^m^ K^Jn we 
 have a Baraitha coinciding with .... is a reference in support of au 
 opinion of one Amora against that of his opponent. 
 
 Remark. 2. In quotations following after the phrases ^nyD"l1 "I 
 raise a question of contradiction against this" and ^Q'TT'O "they object 
 to this by appealing to a higher authority" the terms pn as well as t^^jn 
 are always omitted, thus leaving it uncertain whether the quotation is 
 from the Mishna or from the Baraitha. In most cases, however, th"s 
 can be ascertained by looking up the parallel passages which are mark- 
 ed in the marginal glosses of the Talmud. 
 
 4. p2^ l^ri (abbr. yn) introduces longer passages from 
 a well known Baraitha, mostly from the Tosephta, Mechilta, 
 Siphra and Siphre which stand in some connection with the 
 Mishna-paragraph under consideration. Such quoted passages 
 are then usually explained and discussed in the Gemara in the 
 same way as a Mishna-paragraph. 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 16a; Sabbath 19a; B. Kamma 9b. 
 
 Remark. -|''m "for the Rabbis taught'' usually introduces the 
 answer to the question of |^JD or D"n SJC (See above § 21.) -|"n is 
 never used as a question or objection, hence not n"n XHI, but instead 
 thereof, t<"'jnm is used. 
 
 5. yril i<nb kSyjn "what we read in this Mishna has 
 reference to that which tlie Rabbis taught". The meaning of 
 this often used phrase is, the Mishna before us supports the 
 following Baraitha, so as to make it authoritative. 
 
 Examples: B. Metzia 25a; Maccoth 8b; Kiddushin 29a. 
 
 4. Referring back to a Preceding Quotation. 
 
 §62. 
 
 There are, besides, two peculiar terms of reference which 
 are often used in the Gemara for the purpose of indicating that 
 a quotation incidentally made in a preceding discussion is now 
 
Quoting the Mjshna and kindred Works. 2i!3 
 
 to be taken up as a main subject of investigation and discus- 
 sion. The terms indicating this are: 
 
 a. *1D "\i2S the master (teacher) said above..,. 
 Examples. Berachoth 2a; Pesachim 5b; B. Kamma 33b. 
 
 b. SS12 (the body, the substance, the subject) meaning, 
 that which was mentioned above iiv^slcntallj is now to to be the 
 main subject. This term is usually translated by: it was stated 
 above; our text says\ returning to our subject. 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 40b; Pesachim 16a; Sanhedrin 24a. 
 
 The difference between these two terms is that, as a rule, 
 the former is used in reference to a quotation from the ^Mishna 
 or Baraitha, and ssi:i in regard to a quoted saying of an Amora. 
 
 Remark 1. This rule admits, however, some exceptions, as on 
 the one hand, ID I^ON is occasionally also applied to a saying of an 
 Amoia; f. ex. Rosh Hashana 20b; Yoma 21b; Gittin 12b; on the other 
 hand, SSIJ is sometimes found as a reference to a Baraitha and even 
 to a Mishna, especially a Mishna belonging to those sections to which no 
 Gemara is extant; f. ex. Berachoth 18a; Succah 14a; Kiddusliin 4a. 
 See Rashi on Succah 14a, s. v. ^^H Xm^^- In B. Kamma 13a, both terms 
 are used as references to the same Baraitha. 
 
 Remark 2. Different from ID "iDt?, in ihe above mentioned sense, 
 are the phrases -|D "IDS! "for the teacher said" and -yo "IDNHI "but did 
 not the teacher say?" which are used where in an argument, reference 
 is made to a well known saying of an anonymous author; f. ex. Be- 
 rachoth 4a; B. Metzia 6a. 
 
0. M E M R A. 
 
 CHAPTER VI. 
 
 Definition of and Phrases concerning Memra. 
 § 63. 
 
 In contradistinction to the teachings, opinions and deci- 
 sions of the Tanaim, contained in the Mishna and Baraitha, a 
 reported teaching, opinion or decision of the Amoraim is termed 
 Memra (SID'^D), a saying. 
 
 This term, like that of Amora, is derived from the verb 
 IDS to say, which verb is mostly used in reference to the ex- 
 pounders of the Mishna; while the verbs n^tT and •'jn are more 
 restricted to references to Mishna and Baraitha. i 
 
 As a characteristic term designating a reported teaching 
 of the Amoraim, the word Memra is but rarely met with in the 
 Talmud; f. i. Gittin 42b; B. Bathra 48a. More frequently it 
 occurs in the post - Talmudic literature. In the Gemara such 
 reported opinions and decisions of Amoraim, especially con- 
 cerning legal matters are generally termed Sh' maattha{^r\'r\'^)yi'"^ 
 that which was heard by tradition, f. ex. Berachoth 42a; Sab- 
 bath 24b: Chullin 46a), in contradistiction to Agadatha^ a re- 
 ported homiletical teaching. 
 
 A Memra is generally introduced by the word *\i::s a certain 
 Amora said, related; sometimes also this word is preceded by 
 the term nDHS (contraction of nDSnS) it has been said, it is 
 reported. 
 
 ' Compare, for instance, the two modifying phrases: ..n!^X '\'W n'^ 
 and i<5?X p)05< ^, the former exclusively used in reference to a state- 
 ment of the Mishna, and the latter to a teaching af an Amora. In 
 connection with a Memra the verb j^jri is used only in certain phrases 
 as: ...NnK...'':'l!?Q1 Nn^ ^Jn?D1 N^"'^{ "some report the just quoted saying 
 of that Amora in reference to the following case...."; f. ex. Berachoth 
 8b; Sanhedrin 28b; Aboda Zarah 3b. 
 
Phrases concerning Memra. 
 A. nD« 
 
 § 64. 
 
 a. now preceding the name of a teacher, as 2*1 ^Dt<, gener- 
 ally introduces an interpretation, opinion, principle or decision 
 of law originated or reported by that Amora, and not disputed 
 by another, while IDS following the name, as "IDS 2"1 indicates 
 at once that he is to be contradicted by another teacher, hold- 
 ing a different view on that subject, as nDS ^SID^I.-.^DS 2"i. 
 
 b. 'Z *^^^b^ ids 't< '^l^b^ nt2« refers to a report which a 
 disciple or a contemporary makes concerning a teaching which 
 he received orally from its author, as ^«iDti^ IDS min"' 3"l "IDS 
 Rab Juda said that Samuel said (Berachoth 12a). 
 
 But ("7 rT'DtS^D or) 'S DltTD 'D IDS refers to a report con- 
 cerning a teaching which he indirectly received from an author- 
 ity of a former generation, as : ''DV '1 UW^ ]T\V 'n nDS R. 
 Jochanan reported in the name of R. Jose (Berachoth 7a). 
 
 Where a different version existed concerning the teacher 
 who reported or in whose name something is reported, that dif- 
 ferent version is conscientiously added either by n^ ''"IfSSI and 
 some say it was.... (Berachoth 4a); or SDTl^SI (contracted of 
 i<12*^r\ •'SI) there are some who say it was.... (Berachoth 5a), 
 or Dltyo r\2 itStST and some differ therefrom, saying it was in 
 the name of... (Rosh Hashana 10a). 
 
 d. irT'^inn ""nDSI 'Z ^2^b^^ 'S •'^I^S Both of the two teach- 
 ers a and B said... This phrase introduces an opinion con- 
 cerning which two Amoraim fully agree, though they mostly 
 differ from each other, as irT'Tinn ''"iDSI ^SIDITI 21 Both Rab 
 and Samuel said.. (Berachoth 36b). 
 
 B. iDns 
 §65. 
 
 The word IDHS it 7aas said, it is reported^ especially at the 
 beginning of a passage in the Gemara, generally introduces a 
 Memra containing a difference of opinion or a controversy 
 (t^n^l^S) between two or more Amoraim. Such differences ana 
 controversies concern either: 
 
226 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 a. The proper reading of a passage in the Mishna, as 
 
 pn nyiD u'^xi ir^x n^ar m ions? 
 pn nyio irx nox xsd m B. Kamma 37a. 
 Other examples: Pesachim 64b; B. Metzia 80a; Shebu- 
 oth 16a. 
 
 b. The reason of a law laid down in the Mishna. 
 Examples: Gittin lib; B. Kamma 22a; B. Metzia 38a. 
 
 c. The meaning of an expression used in the Mishna, as 
 
 i^DD 10:0 -i^N 21 id:d -iohj^ 
 21V0 iDi< bi^^Di:^) Gittin 52b. 
 Other examples: Kiddushin 60a; B. Bathra 106a. 
 
 d. The final decision in a case concerning which the Ta- 
 naim expressed opposite opinions, as: 
 
 B. Kamma 48b; B. Metzia 33a; Sanhedrin 28b, 
 
 e. A principle of law not clearly stated in the Mishna, as: 
 
 *DT Q^n -iDisj^D -irDt^ nm ni^^^ ir^)^ i^nx 
 "•Dl &'\:^2 irDi^ 5|DV m B. Kamma 56b. 
 Other examples: Pesachim 30b, B. Metzia 21b, Sanhed- 
 rin 27 a. 
 
 f. A case not provided for in the Mishna. 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 25a; Kiddushin 43a; B. Kamma 9a. 
 
 Remark. There are also Memras containing a controversy with- 
 out being introduced by the term "iDD^J, f . ex. Gittin 2a; B. Kamma 
 8b; Aboda Zara 2a. On the other hand, this term is occasionally ap- 
 plied also to a Memra containing no controversy, for instance Kiddu- 
 shin 4oa; especially, where reference is made to such a Memra in order 
 to corroborate or correct the opinion of a later Amora by the phrase:... 
 ••OJ "iDflS we have also a Memra of a former authority to the same 
 effect, f. ex. Gittin 13b; or...n^y IDriK {<n is not a certain Amora re- 
 ported having remarked concerning this...? f. ex. Gittin 16b; B. Metzia 
 29b. Besides, this word is used in certain phrases, as : IN^) "'J'lPDT ^5^ 
 *lDni< nbb^'O XPJ< IDm^ J:^n"'D2 the opinion ascribed to Amora A was 
 not expjessly stated by him, but it is merely implied in an occasional 
 decision given by him; f. ex. Berachoth 9a; Sabbath 29a; B. Kamma 
 20b. 
 
CHAPTER VII. 
 
 TREATMENT OF A MEMRA CONTAINING A SINGLE 
 OPINION. 
 
 1. Questioning the Authenticity- of the Reported Memra 
 
 §66. 
 
 The correctness of the Memra is questioned, since the 
 same author expressed elsewhere an opinion which is in con- 
 flict with that contained in this Memra. Such a question is al- 
 ways phrased : (s::3''S) IDS fc<m ''IDH 'S "^DS '•Dl Did that 
 
 Amora really say so ? But is he not reported as having said.... 
 (something- implying just the opposite opinion)? 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 24b; Pesachim 30a; B. Kamma 29b. 
 
 In answer to such a question, the Gemara generally tries 
 to show, that in one or the other way the two contradicting 
 Memras can be reconciled. 
 
 Remark. All Amoraim being regarded as having equal authority, 
 the objection that another Amora expressed an opinion conflicting 
 with the Memra under consideration is generally not admitted. 
 Where such an objection is attempted, it is rejected by the phrase ; 
 n'O"! Np NiDiS f^ina how will you raise an objection from the opinion 
 of one man (teacher) against that of another (who has the same au- 
 thority and is entitled to have an opinion of his own)? Taanith 4b; 
 Sanhedrin 6a; B. Kamma 43b, 
 
 Sometimes, however, such an objection is admitted, especially in 
 the case where the opinion of an Amora is in conflict with the gener- 
 ally accepted decision of a former leading authority among the Amo* 
 raim. In this case, the objection is phrased: ....^<^1? ^J"'N Is that so ? 
 but that other Amora (expressed an opinion which conflicts with 
 that under consideration). Examples: Berachoth 14a; Moed Katon 
 •20a; Betza 9a ; compare Rashi's reiuirk on the last mentioned pas- 
 
228 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 2. Finding the Memra to be Colliding with a Mishna or 
 
 A Baraitha. 
 
 §67. 
 
 The objection is raised against the author of the Memra 
 that the latter is in conflict with an undisputed Mishna or Ba- 
 raitha, the authority of which is superior to that of an Amora. 
 Such an objection is generally introduced either by the phrase 
 ''^^TD they (i. e. the members of the academy) refuted it, they 
 raised a point of contradiction from the higher authority of a 
 Mishna or Baraitha, or rT'^Tl''^ he raised against this a point 
 of contradiction from a higher authority, or •'Jt^s a'TiD a cer- 
 tain teacher refuted this, or simply by ]jnm but are we not 
 taught in the Mishna ? S^'jnm are we not taught in the Ba- 
 raitha. . . . (difi'erently) ? 
 
 Examples: BerachothlOb; RoshHashana6b; B. MetzialOa. 
 
 Remark. Such an objection or refutation from a higher autho- 
 rity is termed sn^lTI- The argument of the objection often closes 
 with the phrase ^J^5?S"? Xnnvn this is a refutation of that Amora; or 
 Nnnvn ? ^JI^ST NnHVn is this not a refutation of that Amora ? It is a 
 refutation! (i. e., the point of refutation is well taken). Mostly how- 
 ever the objection is removed by showing that the Mishna or Baraitha 
 referred to treats of a different case or different circumstances, and such 
 a defense is introduced by the phrase: ...'2 "|S "iDN that Amora might 
 say (in answer to this objectionj that...; f. ex., Berach« th 34a; B. 
 Kamma 14a. 
 
 3. Finding the Memra to be Superfluous. 
 §68. 
 
 The Memra is shown to be unnecessary, since the same 
 opinion which the Amora expresses therein is already stated 
 in a Mishna. This objection is phrased: ^J^jn V'Dp ''SD what 
 does that Amora let us hear, since we have already been 
 taught that in the following Mishna. . ? 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 46b; Taanith 10a, B. Kamma 35b. 
 
Treatment of a plain Memra. 229 
 
 Remark 1. This objection is mostly removed by showing that 
 the Memra contains something in addition to the I\Iishna. 
 
 Remark 2. The question i)"op '•ND is not raised where the opinion 
 of the Memra is not expressly but merely impliedly contained in the 
 Mishna. In this case the Mishna is referred to just to corroborate the 
 Memra by the phrase i^y^n '•DJ pN PjK we have also a Mishna to 
 the same effect; f. ex. Berachoth 27a; Yoma 26b; Aboda Zara 8a. 
 
 4. Corroborating the Memra by a Baraitha. 
 §69. 
 
 Such a corroborating Baraitha is generally introduced by 
 the phrase: •'Dn "'Is: S"*:;! (abbr. n"jn) a Baraitha, too, teaches 
 thus; or, we have also a Baraitha to the same effect. 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 9b, Taanith 10a; Sanhedrin 23a. 
 
 Remark. The question : '*Why does the Amor a need to teach 
 that which is already stated in the Baraitha ?" is never raised, since 
 the Amora was expected to know every Mishna, but not every Ba- 
 raitha. 
 
 6. Corroboraiting the Memra by one op another Authority. 
 
 Sometimes one Memra is corroborated by another one 
 which is introduced by ...''DJ nDn« we have also another Mem- 
 ra to the same effect. Such is especially the case where the 
 Memra of a Babylonian Amora is supported by one of a Pa- 
 lestinian authority. 
 
 Examples: Chagiga 24a; Gittin 13b; Sanhedrin 29a. 
 6. A Different Report. 
 
 §n. 
 
 After a Memra has been treated in the above stated ways, 
 a different report (''nDSI fc<:D''S some sa3^,some report....) is some- 
 times introduced in which the Amora referred to just expresses 
 the opposite opinion. The discussion then turns the tables, so 
 
230 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 that every objection which was made to the former report, be- 
 comes now a support, and every former support an objection. 
 Examples: Berachoth 10b; Betza 13a; Maccoth 3b. 
 7. Correcting the Memra. 
 
 §T2. 
 
 Strong objections having been raised against a Memra, it 
 is sometimes re-established in a rectified form by the phrase: 
 
 ...*lDn« ''Dn"lDns *»« 8^t< but if such Memra was report- 
 ed, it must have been reported in the following way.... 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 15b; Yoma 28a; Kiddushin lib. 
 
CHAPTER VIII. 
 
 TREATMENT OF A MEMRA CONTAINING A DIFFER- 
 ENCE OF OPINION. 
 
 1. The Difference concerning the Correct Reading of a 
 
 MiSHNA Paragraph. 
 
 Each of the contesting teachers argues for the correctness 
 of his way of reading; the argument being based either on the 
 context of the Mislma under consideration, or on a common 
 sense reason. The question is then finally settled by referring 
 to another Mishna or to a Baraitha in support of one of the 
 two ways of reading. 
 
 Examples: B. Kamma 3'7a;B. Metzia 80a; Shebuoth 16a. 
 
 Remark. Sometimes, both ways of reading are declared to be 
 admissible by the phrase: CJ>nn'^D vh ...-"Jm \^D) .K^DDK^D K^...."'jm |«D. 
 
 "He who reads the Mishna in this way is not wrong, and he whr 
 reads it in the other way is neither wrong, for..." 
 
 Examples: Succah 50b; Yebamoth 17a; Aboda Zara 2a. 
 
 2. The Difference concerning the Explanation of a Term 
 
 OR Passage in the Mishna. 
 
 The supposed arguments for and against each of the differ- 
 ent explanations are investigated in the following way: 
 
 Question 1: '3 ^il'^SD nos «^ tO"D 'N* ""Jl^a Why does the 
 Amor a A not explain as Amor a B? 
 
 Answer: ...."^^ -iDS he might say... (I have the following 
 objection to his explanation..) 
 
 Question 2: ? "]i\si and the other (teacher B) ? i. e., 
 how will be he remove this objection? 
 
232 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 The answer having been given, question 1 is again direct- 
 ed to B: why does he not explain as A? This question is then 
 treated in a similar way as the former. 
 
 Examples: Gittin 17a; B. Kamma 22a; Sanhedrin 25a. 
 
 3. The Difference concerning the Reason of a Law. 
 
 § t5. 
 
 The practical consequence of adopting either of the two 
 reasons assigned to the law by the contesting Amoraim is in- 
 vestigated by asking: 
 
 irT'^rz ^N*D what is the difference between them? i. e., in 
 what respect does it make a difference in the application of the 
 law, whether this or the other reason be assigned to it? 
 
 The answer is always introduced by the phrase : is*2\s 
 ...in''^i"'2 there is (it makes) a difference concerning.... 
 
 Examples: Gittin 2b; B. Metzia 15b; Sanhedrin 24b. 
 
 4. Investigating the Principle underlying the Difference 
 
 OF Opinion. 
 §T6. 
 
 Where the difference between the contesting Amoraim in- 
 volves a principle of law, that principle is investigated by the 
 question : "'^^^''Dp ''SD3 in what do they differ? Or, What is 
 the point of difference ? On what general principle do they 
 disagree ? 
 
 Examples: Pesachim 63b; Gittin 34a; B. Metzia 15b. 
 
 Remark. Before defining the difference, sometimes the points 
 are stated in which both sides agree, and which therefore are exclud- 
 ed from the discussion. This is usually done in the following phrase: 
 ....^J^^D ^D •'y^S i6 (ND^jy ^^1D)....XDMi)D As regards.... they (both of 
 the contesting teachers) do not disagree, but they differ concerning.... 
 
 Examples: Yoma 6b; Pesachim 30b; B. Metzia 21b. 
 
 5. Showing Consistency of Opinions in both of the 
 Contesting Teachers. 
 
 §n. 
 
 After having stated the difference, the Gemara shows that 
 
Memra containing a difference of opinion 233 
 
 the divergence of opinions in this case is in full accordance 
 with the opposite views or principles expressed elsewhere by 
 the same teachers. The phrases used in showing such consist- 
 ency of opinion in both of the contesting Amoraim are: 
 
 a. in''Dj;t2^ ntkSI they go according to their principles, 
 i, e., they differ, each following his own principle. 
 
 Examples: Sabbath 34b; Pesachim 29a, Shebuoth 15b. 
 
 b n''Dj;tO^ '3 '':^b^^ n'^Dpti^ '« ••a^^S Amora A follows 
 
 his principle, and also Amora B follows his principle.... 
 
 Examples: Pesachim 29b; Gittin 24b; B. Kamma 53a. 
 
 Remark. The phrase in''»yD^ IITXI is used where reference is 
 made to another dispute between the same teachers, while n^»yt27 'Q 
 refers to a principle laid down by either of the two teachers independ" 
 ently from each other. 
 
 6. Discussing the Difference of Opinion. 
 
 §78. 
 
 By the introductory phrase: j?Diy «n (abbr. t:^"n) Comg 
 and hear, or: H'^i'TT'S or: >3''n"'D a certain teacher o^ they (the 
 members of the academy) objected (by appealing to a higher au- 
 thority), a Mishna or a Baraitha is referred to in suport 
 (yi^D or s*ny"'D)of the opinion of one, and as a refutation (snziTi) 
 of that of the other of the contesting Amoraim. A discussion 
 then usually follows with the object of rejecting the support 
 or repelling the attack. The result of that discussion is ei- 
 ther that the question at issue remains undecided, or it is decided 
 against one and in favor of the other of the contesting Amoraim. 
 The usual phrase in the latter case is: 
 
 (.'2 '•:'i'?2-T nTiiiD sn^^m) i snnvn ? 's '^rbtr\ snnvn ''is 
 
 this not a refutation of the opinion of Amora A? It is a refu- 
 tation! And the decision is according to the opinion of Amora B." 
 Examples : Sanhedrin 27a; B. Metzia 21b-22b; Chullin 
 28a. Examples of not distinctly decided discussions: Pesachim 
 30b-31b; B. Kamma 56b-57b; B. Metzia 38b. 
 
234 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 Remark. Commenting on a Mishna-j aragraph which has some 
 bearing on a well known difference of opinion between Amoraim, the 
 Gemara sometimes starts with the question, whether, or not this Mishna 
 offers an argument in favor of, or against, the opinion of one of these 
 Amoraim. The phrases used in such an investigation are: 
 
 a. ...'sh T]^b y^"'DD i^D''b is it to say, that this Mishna supports the 
 Amora A? 
 
 Examples: Succah 15b; Betza 11a; B. Kamma 62b. 
 
 b T Kn^vn ^inn i^D^h is it to say, that this Mishna is a refuta- 
 tion of Amora B? 
 
 Examples: Sabbath 9b; Succah 15a; Yoma 19a. 
 
 7. Tracing back the Difference between Amoraim to one 
 
 BETWEEN TaNAIM. 
 
 §T9. 
 
 After having treated a Memra in accordance with the above 
 stated methods, the Gemara often attempts to show that the 
 same difference of opinion between the two Amoraim is already 
 found among two Tanaim. For this purpose a Mishna or a 
 Baraitha is quoted containing a difference between Tanaim 
 concerning a subject which has some bearing upon the differ- 
 ence under consideration. The point of discussion becomes 
 now whether or not the principle underlying the difference be- 
 tween those two Tanaim is identical with that under considera- 
 tion, so that Amora A agrees with Tana A, and Amora B with 
 Tana B. The phrases introducing this investigation are: 
 
 a. ''Sjn^ i<^^h (or, SD'':) is it to say, that this difference 
 is like that between Tanaim? 
 
 Examples: Pesachim 31a; Gittin 14b; Sanhedrin 27a. 
 
 b. '•i^SVJJp ('2V« n^iSin) ...I S*n:i^52 S^O"'^ is it to say, 
 that these Amoraim differ according to the difference of opinion 
 between those Tanaim A and B? 
 
 Examples: Shebuoth 25a; Maccoth lib; Nedarin 6b. 
 
Memra Containing a Difference of Opinion. 235 
 
 Remark. Like other investigations of the Gemara introduced by 
 HD''b or ND''J, also this attempt leads generally to a negative result, as 
 it is finally shown that the principle implied in the difference between 
 the Tanaim does not at all concern the case under consideration. But 
 where after a discussion between Amoraim the Gemara simply states: 
 ■•i^Jn^ "this is like the difference between Tanaim", or S''n "'N^n "this 
 difference is identical with that of the Tanaim", (f. i. Berachoth 22a; 
 R. Hashana 15a; B. Metzia54a) that statement is generally not disputed. 
 
 8. Supporting Each of two Contesting Teachers by a 
 Baraitha. 
 
 § 80. 
 
 Two anonymous Baraithoth are referred to, one of which 
 agrees with the opinion of one, and the other with that of the 
 other of the contesting Amoraim. The phrase used in this case is, 
 
 '2 '^^^h^l rT-min S'^^n 'N* '^rh^l -'^miD i^^:n there is a Ba- 
 raitha agreeing with the opinion of Amora A, and a Baraitha 
 agreeing with the opinion of Amora B. 
 
 Examples: Yoma 4a; Betza 6a; Gittin 18a. 
 
 9. Ascertaining the Authorship of two Opposite 
 Opinions. 
 
 §81. 
 
 There are Memras reporting that, concerning a certain 
 question, two Amoraim A and B differed from each other, one 
 holding one, and the other the opposite opinion, without clear- 
 ly stating which is which, that is, who of tlie contesting Amo- 
 raim holds the one, and who the otlier opinion, as: 
 
 ...nt:s "Tm...n»s in '3 "^ri^si \s •'ii^s ...n^ns it is reported, 
 
 that concerning.... the Amora A and Amora B expressed differ- 
 ent opinions, one holding.... and the other... 
 
 In treating such a Memra, the Gemara usually tries to find 
 
236 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 out the representative of each opinion by referring to another 
 case in which one of these two teachers expressed a certain 
 view which coincides with one of the two opinions under con- 
 sideration. 
 
 Such an investigation is always introduced by the phrase: 
 ...IDS! Sin ''JI^Sl D'^^non it maybe ascertained that it is the 
 Amora A who holds.... If the argument is accepted, this is in- 
 dicated by the closing term D^TiDJl it is correctly ascertained, 
 or D"ty, hear it from this. 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 46a; Megillah 27a; B. Kamma 29b. 
 
CHAPTER IX. 
 
 D. ASKING AND ANSWERING QUESTIONS. 
 
 Classification of Questions. 
 § 82. 
 
 According to their different nature, the questions asked 
 in the Talmudic discussions may be divided into the following 
 classes: 
 
 1. Questions of investigation. 
 
 2. Questions of astonishment. 
 
 3. Questions of objection. 
 
 4. Questions of problem. 
 
 Remark. The Talmud, besides, often makes use of the rhetoric 
 interrogation, that is, that figure of speech which puts in the form of a 
 negative question what is meant to be strongly affirmative, and in the 
 form of a positive question what is meant to be a decided negation, as: 
 Mfh N^N is it then not—? = it is certainly so. 
 
 pn ifh ^D are we not taught in the Mishna ? = we are certainly 
 taught so. 
 
 ^3n "lOX ^D did he say so ? = he cannot have said so. 
 
 m2D "'D do you think..? = you can not think so 
 
 1. Questions of Investigation. 
 
 § 83. 
 
 As already stated above (§16.), the Talmud mostly in- 
 troduces its explanations and investigations by a query, the 
 object of which is to call attention to the point which requires 
 elucidation, as >SD what is the meaning of....? j<dj;id ^SD what 
 is the reason....? j^jo whence do we have this? 
 
 Such questions are generally asked anonymously, while the 
 answer is mostly given in the name of a certain teacher, 'S "IDS 
 the teacher.... said (in answer to this question)... 
 
 Remark. To investigate a subject by questioning is sometimes 
 
238 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 termed 'a m •>in a certain teacher asked investigatingly concerning 
 this matter (B. Kamma 7a; Kethuboth 58b; Nedarin 38b); nn p^lin 
 we asked investigatingly concerning it (Berachoth 45b; Sabbath 6b; 
 Gittin 4b and frequently). This latter phrase is especially used where 
 reference is made to investigating questions asked in another passage 
 of the Talmud. Also the noun of this verb ^in is occasionally used, 
 as pKIDtJ^I 2"n nvin the investigating questions of Rab and Samuel 
 (Berachoth 30a) «211 ""^asn nVIH (Succah 2Sa; B. Bathra 134a). 
 
 2. Questions of Astonishment. 
 
 § 84. 
 
 A question of astonishment, termed nrT'DD/ expresses -wond- 
 er and surprise at an unexpected statement or argument just 
 heard; as: ^J\s is this so? i^h^ is this not the case? "|nj;"r i^pho 
 does this enter thy mind? i. e., do you really mean to say this ? 
 N"13Dm how can you understand (explain) it in this way? 
 ••SD ''t<n what is this! how can you say this? 
 
 Such a question does in general not expect an answer, 
 though the latter mostly follows the question. 
 
 To this kind of questions belongs also the counter-quesiion 
 in which a question asking for information, instead of being 
 answered, is repeated with surprise, as if to say, how can you 
 ask such a strange question, as: !]^:d ? J^iD (Megilla 2a ; 
 Sanhedrin 68b), Ij^i::: ?p'ijj:j (Chullin 42b.). 
 
 Remark. A peculiar phrase expressing a question of astonish- 
 ment is : rh nxp ^t<D nb nxpTI he who asks (or objects) this, what 
 does he ask (object) here ? i. e., why ask a question where the 
 answer is obvious enough ? or, why raise an objection so easily re- 
 moved? Yoma 30b; Yebamoth 11a; B. Bathra 2b. » 
 
 ^According to a tradition mentioned by Joshua b. Joseph Halevi 
 (Halichoth 01am p. 9a; compare Frankel, Monatsschrift 1861, p. 267), 
 all passages of the Talmud introduced by this peculiar phrase of 
 question belong to the additions made by the Saburaim. 
 
ASKING AND Answering Questions 239 
 
 3. Questions of Objection. 
 § 85. 
 
 These are questions in which a point of difficulty, disagree- 
 ment, incongruity or contradiction is raised against a state- 
 ment, construction or argument. The Gemara uses different 
 terms for such questions: 
 
 The general term for a question of this kind is ^''t^lp a 
 difficulty^ also used as a verb v^p.x to ask an objecting question, 
 to raise a point of objection, to show a difficulty. The question 
 is mostly introduced by the interjection: i<rn but lo! which is 
 often prefixed to the following word, as ]2nm but lo ! are 
 we not taught in the Mislma...? S^'inm is it not taught in 
 the Baraitha. .. ? nansm was it not said by an Amora.... ? 
 niDSm but did you not say....? 
 
 The answer to such a question is termed pnTl a re- 
 conciliatiofi^ a satisfactory answer^ and is usually introduced by 
 the phrase: ^''ll^p S^ there is no difficulty. Where no satis- 
 factory answer can be found, it is indicated by the closing term 
 j^t^i^p the difficulty remains, the point of objection is well taken, 
 f. ex. Moed Katon 22b, Maccoth 5b. 
 
 Remark 1. When two different questions are raised at the same 
 time, the second is introduced by ini and again... (I further ask...); 
 f . ex. Berachoth 2a. 
 
 Where the same question is answered by the Gemara in two dif- 
 ferent ways, the second answer is introduced by: XO''N IT'yn^N^ and if 
 you wish, you may say....; f. ex. Berachoth 3a. In this case the se- 
 cond answer has generally more force than the former. Sometimes, 
 however, both answers are introduced by this phrase, as ...XD^K n^y3''K 
 ...S)0^fc< n^yTNl you may either answer,... or you may answer. ..; f. ex. 
 Berachoth 4b. In this case both answers are of equal force. 
 
 The same question is often answered by two or more teachers, by 
 each in a different way. In this case, the former teacher is introduced 
 by 'D "ION/ and each of the following by IDK 'D; f. ex., Sanhedrin 33 
 a. b, where four teachers belonging to different generations (R. Cha- 
 nina, Raba, Rab Papa and Rab Ashe) offer different answers to the 
 
240 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 same question. Great ingenuity is in this respect displayed by some of 
 the teachers, especially by the rivaling contemporaries Abaye and 
 Kaba, in showing that a question already answered by the other tea- 
 cher might also have been answered in a different way; f. ex., Pesa- 
 chim 5b; Kiddushin 5a; B. Metzia 52a. 
 
 Remark 2. The answer to a question or an objection is often re- 
 futed, and a new answer is then offered either by the refuter, or by 
 another. In this case, the new answer is generally introduced by N^t< 
 'a "10&5, the word i^^i^ but indicating that the point of refutation 
 against the former answer was well taken. Examples: Berachoth 30b; 
 Pesachim 9b; B. Metzia 31a. 
 
 Where of two answers given, the latter is refuted, the accept- 
 ance of the former is indicated either by the phrase 01PD3 NmiinD N7i< 
 but more correct is the answer of the first teacher (f. ex. Taanith 4b; 
 ChuUin 117a], or in case that answer had been given anonymously, by 
 the phrase N"ip''y» jyJlJ'ns xnilinD K^X more correct is as we answered 
 at first (f. ex. Pesachim 17b; Maccoth 2b; B. Metzia 3a). 
 
 Remark 3. In questions of investigation as well as of objection, 
 the questioner sometimes anticipates an answer which he shows to be 
 inadmissible. Such anticipation (termed in rhetoric prolepsis) in 
 questions of investigation is introduced by:... t^D^i^^N is it to say...? f. 
 ex. Berachoth 9b; Kiddushin 29a; Gittin 9a. In questions of objec- 
 tion it is introduced by:...t«rD^n ""Dl and if you will say (answer)..., f. ex. 
 Sanhedrin 6a; Kiddushin 3b; Gittin 3b. On the other hand, where in 
 giving an answer or explanation, an objection is anticipated which is 
 to be removed, it is introduced by iDNn DN1 (abbr. n"&<1) but if you 
 will say (object).... f. ex. Succah 16b ; Gittin lib; B. Metzia 10a : 
 
 Some Special Kinds of Objection. 
 § 86. 
 
 The terms «*»nin and sn^l'^n are but species of the general 
 term i^'^^*\p a question of objection. 
 
 a. Where the objection consists in raising a point of con- 
 tradiction between two statements of equal authority, as 
 between two passages of Scriptures or between passages of the 
 
Asking and Answering Questions. 241 
 
 Mishna and the Baraitha, it is termed s-'Din (of the verb •'ni 
 to cast, to throw against, to bring in opposition) setting 
 authority against authority, bringing authorities in opposition 
 to each other. Such a question of objection or contradiction 
 is generally introduced by the phrase : ...''Dn ^JI^S a certain 
 teacher asked the following question of contradiction between 
 two passages....; or by : ...>nmni I raise against this the ques- 
 tion of a conflict of authorities, i. e., I find this Mishna to be 
 in conflict with the following passage in an other Mishna or in 
 a Baraitha.... Omitting this introductory phrase, such a 
 question is often set forth simply by : ...|3nm but are we not 
 taught in (another) Mishna...? ^'•inm are we not taught in 
 a Braitha...? (See above § 49) 
 
 b. s^naiTl (the Aramaic form of the Hebrew word n^ltyn 
 an answer, gainsaying, objection, refutation) signifies an ob- 
 jection raised against an Amora as being in conflict with the 
 superior authority of a statement in a Mishna or Baraitha. It 
 is generally introduced by •'il^S DTlD a certain teacher raised 
 the following objection from a higher authority...; or n''3*'ri''S 
 he objected to him from a higher authority ; or : ^Tn'^tl) they 
 (the teachers of the Academy) raised the following objection 
 (See above § 6t) 
 
 The answer to such a point of objection is termed S'^li'^tt^ 
 a difference or distinction^ in as much as it mostly attempts to 
 remove the contradiction by showing that the two statements, 
 seemingly in conflict with each other, actually refer to dilferent 
 cases or circumstances. The answer is generally introduced 
 by : ...S^n "'iSlS^ here is a different case, or by : ....nr.n .... jSO 
 here... there..., or ....t<n ....Sn in this case..., but in the other 
 case...., or by: ....jrpDj; ''SD2 «::n here we treat of the 
 special case that 
 
 Remark 1. These distinctions for the purpose of removing a 
 contradiction are often very strained, and are in this case sometimes 
 characterized by the Talmud itself as ^'^''r\^ ^""^y^ a forced or 
 strained answer, f. ex. : B. Kamma 48a. ; 106a. ; Kethuboth 42b. 
 
242 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 Eemark 2. The answer to an objection is also termed Xpll^S (from 
 p")Q to redeem, to rescue, to unload ; hence, to free one from the burden 
 of an objection) ; as "»"'a5<T Xp'»l"'D B. Kamma 14a. More frequently 
 used is the verb, as rf? p"l3tD Nini vh l^fllD t^lH he asked a question 
 of objection, and he answered it, Kiddushin 44b; Gittin 53a. B. Kamma 
 43b. ; or n^ nJ^pTSDI ""i? "^^pJ^ he asked me questions of objection, 
 and I answered them, B. Metzia 84a. 
 
 The Dilemma. 
 § 8t 
 
 Objections are sometimes set forth in the form of a dilem- 
 ma (termed ■!t^*2i nOD), presenting two or more alternatives 
 of a case or an opinion, and showing it to be equally objection- 
 able whichev^er alternative we may choose, as : 
 
 a. (S'^ir^p) ...''S'l (S"'trp) ...\S 7JSi nn ^^al is thy wishi 
 i. e., which alternative do you choose ? //".... (then my objectiou 
 is : ....) and if,.,, (then my objection is : ....).' 
 
 Examples : Sabbath 46a; B. Kamma 38a; Chullin 12a. 
 
 b. (S'^typ) ....\S1 (S'^trp) -...\S ^Ol '•D^n how shall we 
 imagine this case t if..,, (then my objection is....) and if,,,. 
 (then I have to object....). 
 
 Examples : Kethuboth 72a ; B. Metzia 21a ; B. Bathra YSb. 
 
 C '»J<T .,./S |J''pDy ""^D^ of what circu7nstance do we. 
 
 treat here ? //.... (objection), and if.... (objection). 
 Examples: Sabbath 30a, Gittin 3'7b, B. Metzia 12b. 
 
 d ''ST ...."'S *i;2Dp ^SD what is his opinion ? If he 
 
 holds that.... (then I object....), and if he holds.... (I also 
 object....). 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 3a; Sanhedrin 2b; Kiddushin 6b. 
 The answer to a dilemma either shows a middle ground between 
 the two alternatives, or defends one of the alternatives against 
 the objection made to it. In the first case, it is introduced by 
 
 * The phrase of '^t^'£J HD is also used in introducing an argument 
 in defense, proving that a decision or opinion is equally correct which- 
 ever of the two alternatives we may choose. Examples: Betza 10b. 
 Gittin 43b; B. Metzia 6b. 
 
Asking and Answering Questions. 243 
 
 the phrase ...i SD"""!:; S^ it is not necessary so (namely to 
 choose just one of the presented alternatives), for.... (a third al- 
 ternative is imaginable to which none of your objections ap- 
 plies). In the second case, the answer is generally introduced 
 by the word n^iy^ which in this connection stands for Q^l^^ 
 ^b S!2^S still I maintain (one of the alternatives with some mo- 
 difications). 
 
 Kejoinder. 
 §88. 
 
 Where the answer to an objection or to a refutation is 
 found to be insufficient, the weak points thereof are set forth 
 in a rejoinder. The phrases mostly used in such a rejoinder are: 
 
 a C]1D D,*D (literally: the end of the end...) anyhow^ at 
 
 all events^ that is, however extreme my concession to the suppo- 
 sition of your answer may] G; my former objection still remains... 
 
 Examples: Megilla 3a; Gittin 24a; B. Metzia 16a. 
 
 b. Where the rejoinder goes to demonstrate that the 
 answer does not cover all cases the following phrase is used: 
 
 "ID^'d'' «::\S \SD ....a ....3 nrn you may be right... (i. e., 
 your defense is acceptable concerning one case), but concer- 
 ning... (that other case of....) what have you to say? 
 
 Examples: Pesachim 11a; Gittin 4b; B. Metzia 3a. 
 
 c. Where the answer is found to be based only on a dis- 
 puted principle, the rejoinder is phrased; 
 
 That IS all right according to him who holds..., but accord- 
 ing to him who holds.... (the opposite opinion), what is there to 
 say? Examples: Berachoth 12a; Yoma 3a; Sanhedrin 3a. 
 
 4. Qqestions of Problems. 
 
 § 89. 
 
 Problem is a question pro[)osed for solution concerning a 
 matter dilficult of settlement. The pages of the Talmud are 
 full of such questions. The doubt involved in those questions 
 concern there either the correct reading, or the proper con- 
 
244 Terminology and Methodology 
 
 struction and meaning of the Mishna, or the decision of a case 
 not provided for in the Mishna. 
 
 Such questions are termed nT'^j problems, questions of 
 doubt, and are generally introduced by ''ii^s ^'^2 a certain tea- 
 cher asked the following difficult question, he propounded a 
 problem for solution, or ^Jl^St: i^)b^ ^]^z A asked B to solve 
 the following question ; or when such a question was asked 
 anonymously in a school, it is introduced by: ^rih i<**]^2*'i^ the 
 following problem was proposed by them (i. e. by the members 
 of the academy). 
 
 The point of the question is generally followed by the 
 interrogative inD how is it ? The two sides of the question 
 are usually set forth by : ....SD^I IS ....p"''nDS "'D shall 
 
 we say.... or perhaps Sometimes, however, the phrase 
 
 P'^nDS ''D is omitted, and must be supplied. 
 
 Examples of problems : 1. Concerning the proper 
 reading or construction of the Mishna : Sabbath 36b j 
 Yoma 41b ; B. Kamma 19a. 
 
 2 Concerning the source or reason of a law : 
 Taanith 2b; Aboda Zara 6a; Gittin 45a. 
 
 3 Concerning cases not provided for in the Mishna : 
 Sabbath 3a Pesachim 4b Kiddushin 7b; B. Bathra 5b. 
 
 Remark. Where the propounded problem appears to be merely 
 theoretical, the practical consequence of its solution is investigated 
 by the query : T]^''J2 KpSJ ''^^D^ for what case will it be of 
 consequence ? Examples : Pesachim 4a; B. Kamma 24a; Gittin 36b. 
 
 Solution of the Problem. 
 § 90 
 
 The solution of a problem (the verb is taii^S) 13 
 introduced by the phrase j;d*^ t<r (abbr. tS^"n) come and 
 hear. When rejected, another solution introduced by the same 
 phrase is generally attempted. The final acceptance of a 
 solution is indicated by the closing phrase HTD y^^ hear 
 it therefrom, 1. e., this settles the question, this is the 
 correct solution. 
 
Asking and Answering Questions 245 
 
 Where no solution is found, it is indicated by the term 
 IpTl (=D1p^n) it stands, i. e., the question remains unsolved. 
 
 Where the questioner himself finds a solution, the phrase 
 is : ntOtys "l"rn "'J^^l "iri2 after having propounded this 
 question, he again solved it. Examples : Sabbath 4b; Kid- 
 dushin 9b; Sanhedrin 10a. 
 
 If out of several problems only one can be solved, the 
 solution is introduced by the phrase sin SriD ISIti^S you 
 may solve, at least, one of them : f. ex. B. Metzia 25a; 
 Gittin 44a. 
 
 A Series of Problems Linked together. 
 
 § 91 
 
 Sometimes, a series of problems concerning imaginary 
 cases of a certain law are set forth by a teacher, and so 
 arranged that if one of them be solved, the following one 
 would still remain doubtful. Each problem, except the first 
 one, is then generally introduced by the phrase... nDl'? i^^J^n DST 
 and if you should be able to say.... (to solve it in one way) 
 1 still ask... (the following case). 
 
 Examples : Pesachim 10b; Kiddushin Yb; Kethuboth 2a; 
 B. Metzia 21a; 24a. 
 
 Remark. Some of the Babylonian teachers, especially Raba, R. 
 Jirmiah, Rab Papa, were noted for having indulged in propounding 
 such problems concerning imaginary cases in order to display their 
 ingenuity. R. Jirmiah was at a certain occasion even expelled from the 
 academy for having troubled his colleagues by his imaginary and trif- 
 ling problems (B. Bathra 23b]. Of Raba and some other teachers it is 
 expressly stated that they occasionally propounded such problems, 
 merely for the purpose of examining the ability and acuteness of their 
 pupils; Erubin 51a; Menachoth 91b; Chullin 133a. 
 
 Questions laid before higher Authorities for Decision. 
 
 §92. 
 Different from the questions of problem just spoken of are 
 
246 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 those questions which were directed to a higher authority, 
 either to a celebrated teacher or to an academy, especially of 
 Palestine, to consider a%d tlecldo iipoi!i ji difficulty or a dis- 
 pute. Such questions are usually introduced by the phrase : 
 ....IJan ^}1^b'> ''^I^S^ n*^^ in^ir they sent to a certain teacher 
 
 (asking.): may our teacher instruct us concerniiig. The 
 
 answer is then introduced by : .,.,in^ T]b'^ he sent to them 
 (the answer).... 
 
 Examples : Sanhedrin 8a; B. Kamma 27b; Gittin 66b. 
 
 Remark. Alao the phrase DHD Ifl^k^ they sent from there fi. e. 
 from Palestine to Babylon) means, they sent an answer to a question 
 directed to them; f. ex., Betza 4b; Gittin 20a; Sanhedrin ITbw 
 
CHAPTER X. 
 
 B. ARGUMENTATION. 
 
 1. Terms and Phrases Introducing an Argument. 
 
 §93 
 
 An argument, that is. the reason offered to prove or dis- 
 prove any matter of question, is termed □j;!^ (the reason). 
 
 In the Talmudic discussion, arguments are mostly intro- 
 duced by one of the following phrases : 
 
 a. SD yi^ •'i^D what is the reason? Berachoth 3b, a. elsewhere. 
 
 b. yo*^ sn come and hear, i. e., you may derive it from 
 the following. . . ; Berachoth 2b, a. elsewhere. 
 
 c yin you may know (infer) it from the following. Berachoth 
 15a; B. Metzia 5b, a. elsewhere. 
 
 d. nb sn::^ t<iD whence do I maintain this ?on what do I 
 base my opinion ? Berachoth 25a; Sabbath lib, a. elsewhere. 
 
 e. S"iD"'n SJtSI and whence may you say (prove) that....? 
 Sabbath 23a; B. Metzia 11a. 
 
 f. JiS "'Tni let us see (into the subject), let us argue on the 
 subject. Berachoth 27a; B. Kamma51b; B. Metzia 8b. 
 
 g. ^<"12^^D it is reasonable, it is in accordance with com- 
 mon sense. Berachoth 2b; Sabbath 25a; Kiddushin 5a. 
 
 h. S12riD!:D ^^2 ''Dn so it is also reasonable; this may be 
 proved by the following reasoning. Yoma 16a; B. Kamma 26a; 
 B. Metzia 10a. 
 
 i. "'Di Sp^l it is also proved by a conclusion. Berachoth 
 26a, a. elsewhere. 
 
 The last mentioned phrase is especially used where the 
 argument is based on a conclusion drawn from the wording 
 of a passage. 
 
248 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 2. Classification of Arguments. 
 § 94 
 Arguments are either direct or indirect. In the first case, 
 the grounds or reasons are laid down, and the correctness of 
 the proposition to be proved is inferred from them. In the 
 second case, the thesis is not proved immediately, but by 
 showing the falsehood of its contradictory. 
 
 In the Talmud, the arguments mostly used in direct as 
 well as indirect reasoning, are the following : 
 
 a. The argument from common sense. 
 
 b. The argument from authority. 
 
 c. The argument from construction and implication. 
 
 d. The argument from analogy. 
 
 e. The argument a fortiori. 
 
 a. Argument from Common Sense. 
 § 95 
 
 A common sense argument is termed S^l^D, so in the 
 phrases: t<in S*13D it is a common sense reasoning; Pesachim 
 21b; Sanhedrin 15a, B. Metzia 27b. S"2S1 S12D S*D"'t< Ts'^^l '♦S 
 i<*^p if you wish, I refer to common sense, and if you wish, 
 I refer to a biblical passage; Berachoth 4b, Yebamoth 39b, 
 Kiddushin 85 a. 
 
 Common sense reasons are generally introduced by the 
 conjunctives: ,...«rn for behold..., ....i h'^'^'\X\ because, p'lD 
 ,„,"r since, ,...^S^ because, .,.,T Dlt^D on account of, •»jsd 
 ,,..ty for..., because.... 
 
 b. Argument from Authority. 
 
 § 96. 
 An argument from authority, termed rT'SI the proof, 
 the evidence, is that which appeals to the authority of the 
 Bible (snp ^Dt<1 lor Scripture says; ^TD"! for it is written; 
 *1DSJ^ for it is said), or to the authority of the Mishna (Jim 
 for it is taught in the Mishna), or to that of the Baraitha 
 (^''^m; "i"m), or to the accepted teaching of an Amora (1D«T 
 
Argumentation. 249 
 
 *'l^h^), or to an accepted tradition (^n''D:i we have learned by 
 tradition, Berachoth 28a, Succah 5b; p^t^p: we have received 
 it by tradition, Erubin 5a, Gittin 32b, Maccoth 10b), or to 
 a settled rule and established principle of law (]^ t<!::"'''pT for 
 it is established among us, it is a generally accepted opinion 
 or maxim, Yebamoth 6a, Gittin 28b; jmoST for we generally 
 say, hold the opinion, Yebamoth 3b, B. Metzia 25b). 
 
 The Talmud being occupied chiefly with questions of law, 
 arguments from authority are there of supreme importance. 
 
 The inference from the cited authority is generally intro- 
 duced by s*D^t< hence, consequently (Pesachim 2a-3a), or by 
 ^^2D in this is implied, from this follows, or by HTD ]^^^ 
 hear from this, i. e. you may infer herefrom.... 
 
 Remark 1. The plirase n"':"'D V^^ is also used to express the final ap- 
 proval of the preceding argument, and is then to be translated by: It 
 follows therefrom the argument is accepted; Pesachim 8a a. elsewhere. 
 Remark 2. Where the argument from authority is based merely 
 on the supposition of a certain interpretation of the quoted passage 
 or on a supposed circumstance to which it refers, that supposition 
 is introduced by ....IN^ ^ND is it not (to be supposed) that....? 
 In answering such an argument, the opponent generally denies 
 that supposition by ...s^ it is not so, but... ; f. ex., Pesachim 16b; 
 Sanhedrin 24b; B. Kamma 15b. 
 
 c. Argument from a Close Construction of a Passage. 
 
 § 97. 
 
 This is an argument which draws conclusions from a 
 careful consideration of the words in which a law is framed. 
 Such an argument is termed SpVT (from the verb p^1 to 
 examine minutely, to consider a thing carefully), and is most- 
 ly introduced by the phrase: .... ''jr.pl ''D: spn it is also 
 proved by a conclusion from the expression used in this Mishna 
 or Baraitha. 
 
 Examples: Succah 3a; Kiddushin 3a; Shebuoth 29b. 
 Remark. Hereto belongs also that argument in which conclusions 
 
250 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 are drawn from a positive statement to the negative, and vice versa, 
 by emphasizing either the subject or the predicate or the modification 
 in the clause of a law under consideration. The phrase used in such 
 conclusions is either: ,...j^n ....T HJDV^ the reason (the force, stress) 
 of this law is in the expressly stated case of.... but.... (in the opposite 
 case, the decision of the law is the reverse); f. ex., Kiddushin 5b; 
 B. Kamma 48b; B. Meztia 25a. Sometimes the phrase is: ^2i<, pK... 
 K^J... strictly in this case yes, but... (other wise) not; f. ex., Yoma 
 85b; B. Metzia 30a; 34a. 
 
 Such arguments resting merely on the emphasis of an expression 
 are often very arbitrary and fallacious, and are in this case prompt- 
 ly refuted in the Talmud. 
 
 d. Arguments from Analogy. 
 
 § 98. 
 
 An argument from analogy, termed tJ^p^n or i^^^*n, is that 
 which infers from the similarity of two cases that, what has 
 been decided in the one, applies also in the other. 
 
 Such arguments are introduced by one of the fol- 
 lowing phrases: 
 
 a 1 S^'DH in similarity with the case of...; Kiddushin 
 
 12a; B. Bathra 28b. 
 
 b sn^ «^« i^^OI S^ Hn this is rather like that other 
 
 case of...; Sabbath 12a; Kiddushin 7a; B. Metzia 30a. 
 
 c ''3:1 |n3*2^S"r3 as we find concerning...; Berachoth 20b. 
 
 d i< mm *'V0 something which is found concerning..., 
 
 i. e., just as in the case of...; Sabbath 6a; Kiddushin 4a; 
 Gittin 8b. 
 
 Also the phrase: (S>in) ]:n i<b ''D are we not taught in the 
 Mishna (or Baraitha) ? mostly introduces an argument from 
 analogy; Pesachim 7a, 9a; Kiddushin 7a. 
 
 The application of the analogous case to the case under 
 consideration is generally introduced by ''DJ iOn ...DHn ''i^D 
 as there... so here, too. 
 
Argumentation. 251 
 
 e. Argument a Fortiori. 
 § 99. 
 
 The argument a fortiori^ termed nDim ^p, is a kind of 
 argument from analogy, and consists in proving that a thing 
 being true in one case is more evidently so in another in which 
 the circumstances are more favorable. 
 
 In regard to Biblical interpretation, this argument was 
 treated in Part II of this book as the first rule of the Tal- 
 mudical Hermeneutics. Its application in the discussions of 
 the Gemara is less artificial than there. The phraseology used 
 in setting forth this argument is: 
 
 a. «''j;;d «Dn ....n-iDS ....onn (hdi) sntr^n now, (since) 
 
 there... (in that other case of...) you say...., could it here be 
 questioned ? 
 
 Examples: Gittin 15b; B. Bathra 4a; Maccoth 6b. 
 
 b. p*^ ^:) s^ «:Dn ....nnn hot sn*^n now, if there...., 
 
 how much the more (or the less) here. 
 
 Examples: Yoma 2b, B. Metzia 2b; Yebamoth 32a. 
 Remark. In the Agadic passages of the Talmud, the final con- 
 clusion of such an argument is generally expressed by HDD nriN Jjy 
 \\'Q'2\\ f. ex. Gittin 35a; Nedarim 10b; Maccoth 24a. 
 
 3. Indirect Argumentation. 
 § 100. 
 
 The mode of proceeding in indirect argumentation is to 
 assume the denial of the point in question or a hypothesis 
 which is the contradictory of the proposition to be proved, and 
 then to show that such a denial or hypothesis involves some 
 false principle, or leads to consequences that are manifestly ab- 
 surd. The assumed contradictory thus shown to be false, the 
 original proposition must consequently be true. 
 
 This method is very frequently applied in the Talmudic 
 discussion. The phrases used in indirect argumentation are: 
 
 a. (S^*^p)...."'3n s:2\n s'? \sn for if you do not say so (i. e. 
 if you deny my proposition), the diflSculty or the objection is.... 
 
262 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 26b; Yoma 15a; B. Metzia 5b. 
 
 b. (S^irp)....nnD« ""^T for if you say... (the contrary), then... 
 (objection). 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 2b; Yoma 24b; Gittin 35b; B. 
 Metzia 28b. 
 
 c. («''trp)....inj;-r t^pbo •'SI for if it should enter your mind, 
 (i. e., if you should assume the contrary...), then... (it will 
 lead to the folfowing objectionable consequence). 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 13a; Sanhedrin 6a; B. Metzia 5b. 
 
 Indirect arguments are often introduced by the phrase 
 S^ZHDD it is proved by the following reasoning... or ^dj '«:Dn 
 N"l3nDD it may thus also be proved by reasoning 
 
 The conclusion from an indirect argument is generally ex- 
 pressed by ikS i<^« is it then not...? or riTD pDty M^b «^« 
 is it then not to be concluded herefrom... (the correctness of 
 the proposition which was to be proved)? In direct arguments, 
 the phrase is simply: n"'J''D ^Dli^. 
 
 Remark. Arguments introduced by X"l3nDD ^DJ ^3n or by xp^T 
 ^D2 are generally regarded conclusive. As to the exceptions, see To- 
 saphoth Yoma 84a, s. v. )0"jn and Tosaphoth Sebachim 13a and 
 Chullin67b, s. v. •»DJ Kpn. 
 
 4. Direct and Indirect Arguments Combined. 
 § 101. 
 
 To support a proposition against the contrary view of an 
 opponent, the Talmud often uses a combination of direct and 
 indirect arguments, by referring to an authority, and showing 
 it to be in harmony with the proposition and in disharmony 
 with the contradictory. The phrases used in such argument- 
 ations are: 
 
 a. (TSty) ....«D^tr3 nnD« ••« (=nnD« ••« i<nb^2) 
 (s'^tt'p) nnD« •'« «^« 
 
 it is well, if you say... (if you accept my proposition), then every 
 thing is all right; but if you say... (the contradictory), then... 
 (you meet some difficulty). 
 
Argumentation. 253 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 26b; Sabbath 23a; B. Metzia 3a. 
 
 b. or NT or) Tsr; •'T-i^ SD^u:*:: 
 
 it is well accordiDg to my view....; but according to your 
 view... (there is a difficulty). 
 
 Examples: Yoma 4a; Pesachim 46b; Moed Katon 2b. 
 
 c. Or\"i) Tsty ....nosn ;«D^ «n^*^n 
 
 it is well according to him who holds....; but according to him 
 who holds.... (the contrary view).... (there is the diffiiculty). 
 Examples: Berachoth 41a; Yoma 40a; B. Kamma 22a. 
 
CHAPTER XL 
 
 REFUTATION. 
 
 Definition and Terms. 
 § 102. 
 
 A refutation consists either in proving that a given pro- 
 position is false, or in overthrowing the arguments by which 
 it has been supported. In the first case, it is termed : t<n21^n 
 (the Aramaic word for the Hebrew ^2ru^*n an answer, gainsay- 
 ing, refutation), and in the second case: SDn^iS (from the verb 
 niS to break into pieces, to crumble; hence, to destroy, to in- 
 validate), or: rT'm (from the verb >rn to push aside, to over- 
 throw to supersede). 
 
 A. The Refutation of a Proposition. 
 §103. 
 
 The strongest argument against a proposition advanced 
 by an Amora is to show that it conflicts with the authoritative 
 decision laid down in a Mishna or a Baraitha. Such a refuta- 
 tion is generally introduced by: n'^zn''^, or ijl^S ^''HD, or 
 •'i'^n'^D; see above § 86b. 
 
 A proposition is refuted indirectly by showing that, assum- 
 ing it to be true, a certain passage of a Mishna or Baraitha 
 bearing on that subject ought to have been expressed differently 
 or could not well be explained. The phrases mostly used in 
 such negative argumentation after quoting such a passage are: 
 
 a. (S^itr'p) {n^h "•ya'^t:) nnDS ''Sl now, if you say., (main- 
 tain your proposition), then... (we meet with a difficulty). 
 
 Examples: Gittin 53a; Kiddushin 32a; B. Metzia 10a. 
 
 b. {i<^^p) ...^nyi i^pbo \ST now, if you assume... (your 
 proposition to be true), then... 
 
 Examples: Sabbath Tb; Betza 9b; B. Metzia 10b. 
 
 c. (S'»*^p) ...SH'^S DSVnow, ifitwereso.. (as you main- 
 tain), then.... 
 
 Examples: R. Hashana 3b; Pesachim 25a, Betza 18a. 
 
Refutation. 256 
 
 Remark. A proposition is also refuted indirectly by proving the 
 truth of its contradictory. The confirmation of one of two antagonis- 
 tic opinions is thus the virtual refutation of the other, and vice versa. 
 Hence the Talmudic phrases: (3) ^JI^Dl Nnnvm (Xj ^J^i?^'? n^b T^DD 
 this Mishna is a support (confirmation) of the opinion of A, and a 
 refutation of the (opposite) opinion of B ; f . ex, Yebamoth 53a, and: 
 (n) ^:i^2i? "•yvob (X) '2)%^ yno he refuted A in support of B; f. 
 ex., Yoma 42b; B. Bathra 45b; Chullin 10a; Zebachim 10a. 
 
 B. Refutation of Arguments. 
 § 104. 
 
 Such refutations are very often introduced by the phrase: 
 '*^^b^ nh i:\'^pr\:2 a certain teacher asked a strong question 
 against this (argument)....; (f. ex., Sabbath 4a; R. Hashana 
 13a; Sanhedrin 4a; Maccoth 3a). Occasionally, it is introduced 
 by: ...'S "[''13 a certain teacher refuted tliis argument (f. ex. 
 Kiddushin 13a; Yebamoth 24a; Shebuoth 41b), or...'3 n^ DTJQ 
 a certain teacher ridiculed this argument, in showing its ab- 
 surdity (Sabbath 62b: Kidd. Tib; Sanhedrin 3b; Aboda Zara 
 35a; Zebachim 12a).' 
 
 M The term S)''pnD (from F)pn to oveiyower, to attack; hence, 
 to overthrow, to confute an argument,) is mostly used only in re- 
 ference to refuting questions asked by the later Amoraim from the 
 time of Rabba and Rab Joseph, though in Temura 7a it is exceptionally 
 applied to a question raised by Resh Lakisli. 
 
 •^IS meaning, literally, to break into ineccs, to crumble; hence, 
 to invalidate an argument, to refute, is by the earlier Amoraim 
 used as a term of refuting especially a Kal vechomer or a Binyan Ah 
 (in the phrase -|-id>d^ XD'i<, and as a noun XDI-D). As a term of refu- 
 ting any argument it is mostly used by Rab Acha. The Talmud com- 
 mentators Rashi and Tosaphoth often use the verb "]-i2 in the general 
 sense, to ask a question. 
 
 The term r]njr) is mostly used by R. Abuha. and only on<'e by R. 
 Jirmija and once by R. Chanina. — Tosaphotli Yebamoth 2b. s. v. D^tJ'D 
 calls attention to the circumstance that some of the Amoraim used 
 their own peculiar terms in setting forth a quk-stion. See KohuVs 
 Arucli Com pie turn s. v. Cji^. 
 
256 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 The procedure of refuting a particular argument varies 
 with the nature of the latter, as will be shown in the following 
 paragraphs. 
 
 §105. 
 
 1. An argument from com??ion sense (see above § 95) is 
 overthrown by showing that good common sense rather sides 
 with the opposite view. 
 
 The phrase used in such counter-argument is : n2"ns 
 (also spelled i<3^"r^<) on the contrary^ or more emphatically : 
 J<n2nDD S2D''i< T\2m'^ on the contrary, the reverse is more 
 reasonable. 
 
 Examples: Sabbath 3b; Pesachim 28a; Gittin 23b. 
 Eemark 1. The term nnmx or t^miX (a contraction of the 
 words nm n by» literally, on that which is greater or stronger, i. e., 
 on the contrary side is a stronger argument) must not be confoun- 
 ded with the words nmj^ and N3n5< meaning against the view 
 of Rabba or of Raba, in the phrases : nailj^ nan t^^iJ'p Gittin 27a, 
 and NnmN «n"n N^SJ'p B. Bathra 30a. 
 
 Remark 2. A similar meaning as the term n3"llX on the contra- 
 ry, is expressed by the phrase n"^ ''D^D> literally: where does this turn? 
 i. e., on the contrary, the opposite view is more reasonable; f. ex. Pe- 
 sachim 5b; B. Metzia 58b. 
 
 § 106. 
 
 2. An argument from authority^ (see above § 96) is defeat- 
 ed in different ways: 
 
 a. By showing that the whole argument is based on a 
 misapprehension of the passage referred to. In demonstrating 
 this, either of the following phrases is used: 
 
 fc^n^Dm how do you reason? How can you understand that 
 passage in this way? 
 
 Examples: Pesachim 26a; Yebamoth 15a, B. Kamma 14:a. 
 
 S^...nn2D '•D do you think..., do you understand the pas- 
 sage in this way ? It is not so, but.... 
 
 Examples: Pesachim 29a; Kiddushin 7a, B. Metzia 32b. 
 
 b. By showing that the authority referred to does not 
 
Refutation. 257 
 
 necessarily concern the case under consideration. This is 
 phrased either: (SiDH or) nnn ''iSt:^ there (or, here) the case 
 is different, for.... 
 
 Examples: Pesachim 5a; Shebuoth 15a; B. Metzia 10a. 
 
 Or: ...jrpDy ''SD3 SDH here we treat of the special case 
 of... 
 
 Examples; Gittin 12a; B. KammaSa; B. Metzia 10b. 
 
 c. By showing that the passage referred to is not autho- 
 ritative, as it only expresses the individual opinion of one 
 Mishna Teacher, disputed by another authority. 
 
 Sjn '•sn ''S nD«T Sin he holds it with that other teacher 
 ...;f. ex., Maccoth 10b; 12a. 
 
 Or: «''n...''il^S •'3D «n whose opinion is here accepted ? 
 that of....; f.ex.. Sabbath lib; Pesachim 32a; B. Kamma 10a. 
 
 Or: S'^n ''S3n concerning this matter, the Tanaim differ. 
 
 Examples: R. Hashana 19b; Betza 9a; B. Metzia 62a, 
 
 §10T. 
 
 3. An argument fro?n a close construction or from implica- 
 tion (see above § 97) is refuted by showing it to be too arbitra- 
 ry, as the same construction, if applied to another clause of 
 the same passage, would result in a contradiction of the con- 
 clusions from the two clauses. 
 
 This refutation is mostly introduced by: (Str"'-i) SB''DS»''« 
 tell me the other clause.., (and apply to it the same construe- 
 tion).... 
 
 The result of this counter-argument is often added in the 
 
 phrase: 
 
 nrn yot^D^ SD''^ SHD «^« bence nothing can be proved 
 
 herefrom. 
 
 Examples: Kiddushin 5b; Yebamoth 76b; B. Metzia 26b. 
 
 §108. 
 
 4. An argument from analogy (see above § 98) is refuted 
 by impugning the premise, in showing that the resemblance 
 
258 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 between the two cases is merely superficial, or that points of 
 difference have been overlooked which vitiate the analogy. 
 The phrases used in such refutations are: 
 
 a s::n....Dnn''D"T •'D are the two cases alike? there.... 
 
 here.... 
 
 Examples: Sabbath 6a; Kiddushin Ya; Gittin 3a. 
 
 b. ...S*Dn...Qnn i<nii^n ''^n now^ is this sot l. e., is this ana- 
 logy correct? There....; but here.... 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 21a; R. Hashana 28a; Kiddushin Ya. 
 
 Eemark. The phrase >)T\ ""D is used in refuting an analogy which 
 was intended to support a proposition, while that of NnS^TI ""^n in re- 
 futing the analogy on which an objection to a proposition was based. 
 In other words, the former phrase is mostly applied in attacking a pro- 
 position, and the latter in repelling such an attack. 
 
 C. t<n''S-D ^nTI h*n\SlD Hn «''nh* '•T'D ^oes this prove any- 
 thifigt This case as it is^ and the other case, as it is ; i. e., the two 
 cases are not as analogous as you presume, since the circum- 
 stances are quite different. 
 
 Examples: Succah 43b; Gittin 33a* B. Metzia 14b. 
 
 Remark. This phrase is applied especially in refuting an analogy 
 based on the parallelism or the juxtaposition of two cases in one and 
 the same Mishna paragraph (fc^S^Dl t^SJ^"*!). 
 
 § 109. 
 
 5. An indirect argument (see above § 100) is often refut- 
 ed by a counter-argument, showing that a similar objection, as 
 had been raised against the contradictory proposition, might 
 also be raised against the original proposition. To remove the 
 latter objection, a distinction must necessarily be made, but this 
 distinction at the same time removes the objection against the 
 contradictory proposition, and thus destroy s the whole indirect 
 argument. 
 
 The phrases used in introducing such a count er-argn- 
 ment are: 
 
Refutation 259 
 
 a ( "d: -a'pn) (? sr,'-: ■'o) ...iovd^i i^it according to 
 
 your own opinion... (does it agree with ilio passage re 
 ferredto') (is there not also an objection to be raised.'..) 
 
 Examples: Yoina 8b; Posachim 19b; Betza 8a. 
 
 b (i^^m -o:)(?n-OSp-!2) ...>S0i<'7Sl and what then?.. 
 (shallit be so as you say? i. e. do you want me to accept 
 your proposition?) but also against this the objection is.... 
 
 Examples: Berachoth 27a; Betza 13a; B. Mctzia 3a. 
 
 Remark. The words <t!0 sbx introducing such a counter-argu- 
 ment must not be confounded with the same words in a different 
 rnnecttou iu which they are to be translated by: what hen ,s...? 
 ZThen mea«s? as: ,n,>. >S0 Kb« "but what means «- e.,ros 
 Zn\n^^ .'(Rosh Havana 23b), or in the frequent phrase: -KO «^S< 
 -,«"«•, lb n'« "but what then remains for you to say? (Yoma «b^ 
 in Rosh flashana 18a, we find on the same page the words ^«0 «^S 
 in three different connections and meanings. 
 
 § 110. 
 6 A mode of refutation very frequently applied in the 
 Talmudical discussions, consists in showing that the advanced 
 argument, if admitted at all, would prove too much, that 
 isTpro;es, besides the intended conclusion, an'ither wh, h 
 is' manifesti; inadmissible. The characteristic phrases used 
 in this mode of invalidating an argument are: 
 
 argument"\o; conclusion) were correct, its -nsequences 
 ou-ht also to extend to that other case of... to ^hich, 
 however, they do not extend ^^ 
 
 .J;^.. (thi: ctso)? since it ought to apply also to the 
 '"%tmples: Berachoth 16b; Betza 8a; Gittin 10a. 
 
 §111. 
 T A similar but more effective mode of overthrowing an 
 arguments to introduce another analogous case where the 
 
260 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 application of that argument would lead to a palpable absur- 
 dity. 
 
 The phraseology of this kind of refutation is: 
 "»Di ''Jsn... nn^D i^bi^ but now (according to your argument 
 or conclusion), can it apply also to that other case of...? 
 Examples: Berachoth 13a; Pesachim 5a; Gittin 23a. 
 
 § 112. 
 
 8. Propositions as well as arguments are often refuted by 
 the objection that the advanced opinion is without parallel and 
 example, and against common sense, or against the establish- 
 ed principles in law. 
 
 ...."I ''TD S*::''S* ""D is there anything like this, that...? 
 Examples: Yoma 2b; Betza 13b; Sanhedrin 55a. 
 § 113. 
 
 9. A mild and polite mode of refuting an argument is that 
 which, instead of a decided objection, merely intimates a certain 
 possibility which would invalidate the argument under consider- 
 ation. Such refutations are introduced either by fc<D''S1 
 
 but I might say...; f. ex. Yoma 2b, or, by... i<i2^m but per- 
 haps....; f. ex. Sabbath 5a; B. Metzia 8b. 
 
 The answer to such a mild objection or refutation is often: 
 *jnj;i i^pbo i<b this cannot enter thy mind, i. e., you can impos- 
 sibly think so, since...; f. ex., K. Hashana 13a. 
 
CHAPTER XII. 
 
 THE DEBATE. 
 
 1. Definition and Terms. 
 
 § 114. 
 
 Besides the minor discussions to be found almost on 
 every page of the Talmud, and consisting^ either of a query, 
 an answer, and a rejoinder, or of an argument, an objection, 
 and a defense, the Talmud contains also numerous more 
 elaborate discussions or debates in which two or more 
 teachers holding different opinions on a certain question 
 contend with each other in mutual argumentation. Such an 
 interchange of arguments between opposing parties is 
 termed H"'*ltDT S^pty (literally, taking up and throwing back^ 
 namely, arguments). A debate displaying great dialectical 
 acumen is termed ^1S^3. These debates generally concern 
 either the interpretation and application of a provision of 
 the Mishna, or a new principle of law advanced by an Amora. 
 2. The Principal Debaters. 
 § 116. 
 
 The debates recorded in the Talmud are generally between 
 the associate members of an academy, or between a teacher 
 and his prominent disciples. The most noted among them 
 are the following: 
 
 R. Jochanan with Resh Lakish. 
 
 Rab Huna with Rab Nachman; also with Rab Shesheth 
 and Rab Chisda. 
 
 Rab Nachman with Rab Shesheth; also with Raba. 
 
 Rab Chisda with Rab Schesheth; also with Rab Nach- 
 man b. Isaac. 
 
 Rabba with Rab Joseph; also with Raba and with Abaye. 
 
 Raba with Abaye, and both of them also with Rab 
 Papa and with Rabina I. 
 
 Abaye with Rab Dime. 
 
262 Terminology and Methodology. 
 
 RabAshe with Amemar, also with Rabina, with Mar Zutra 
 and Rab Acha. 
 
 Of most of the other numerous Amoraim only opinions, 
 remarks, traditions and occasional discussions, but no formal 
 debates are recorded in the Talmud. 
 
 Some contemporary authorities, as Rab and Mar Samuel, 
 though widely differing from each other in many legal questions, 
 are rarely (f. i., B. Kamma 75a; Aboda Zarah 36a) mentioned 
 as having been personally engaged in debates with each other. 
 But their differences of opinion are frequently quoted, and 
 made a basis of academical discussions between the teachers 
 of later 2;enerations. 
 
 i=>^ 
 
 3. Illustration of Debates. 
 § 116. 
 
 The following synopsis of a debate between Rabba and 
 Rab Joseph, the former being seconded by Abaye, may serve 
 to illustrate the usual procedure in the Talmudical controver- 
 sies. 
 
 In Baba Kamma 56b the question is as to the degree of 
 legal responsibility of riT'ai^ IDV^, that is, of the keeper of a 
 lost object waiting for its owner to claim it. 
 
 Rabba maintains that the responsibility of that keeper is 
 only that of a gratuilous depositary (Din noiti') who is not 
 liable for the loss of the object entrusted to his care, except in 
 the case of gross negligence. 
 
 Rab Joseph holds that he has the greater responsibility of 
 a /^/^ depositary (n'^^ty noVu*) who is liable for all losses ex- 
 cept those caused by inevitable accident. 
 
 The reasons for each of these two opinions are stated. 
 
 Rab Joseph opens the debate with the attempt to refute 
 the opinion of his opponent (n2"i^ C)DV 3n n'^an'^N*) by showing 
 it to be in conflict with a passage in the Mishna. 
 
 Rabba parries this attack by construing that Mishna pas- 
 sage differently. 
 
The Debate. 
 
 263 
 
 B. J. objects to this construction. 
 Rabba removes the objection. 
 
 R J. renews his attack by appealing to a Baraitha from 
 which he infers that the keeper of a lost object has the greater 
 responsibility of a paid depositary. 
 
 Rabba admits the correctness of this inference in the special 
 case mentioned in that Baraitha, but denies its general applica- 
 tion to the question at issue. . 
 
 After having thus far been successful on the defensive, 
 Rabba assumes the offensive {vpV an"? nni ""invs), by calling 
 attention to another Baraitha which he dialectically interprets 
 in such a way as to be a refutation of his opponent's opinion. 
 R J overthrows the refutation by showing that there was 
 no necessity for construing this Baraitha just in the way as 
 done by his opponent. 
 
 Now Abaye, a disciple of Rabba, enters the arena to see- 
 end the opinion of his master. Addressing liimself to the op- 
 ponent of the latter, he quotes a reported decision of he 
 acknowledged authority of one of the former Amoraim in Pales- 
 tine (R. Jochanan) from which decision he, by indu^ct reasoning, 
 draws the conclusion that the keeper of a lost object has only 
 the responsibility of a gratuitous depositary. 
 
 Rab Joseph rejects this conclusion by restricting the deci- 
 sion of the quoted authority to certain circumstances which 
 
 ''^TayeTenies that the case is altered even under the sup- 
 posed circumstances, and the discussion contmucs without 
 feadVngtoa definite result. But later autliorities decided >n 
 ffvor of Rab Joseph's opinion which is adopted in the Kabbi- 
 
 nical codes. . ^ ^ v 
 
 other examples of such debates are furnished : Toma 
 61,_?b; Pesachim 46b-4Ta ; Mocd Katon "ib ; Kuh lus^in 
 59a- Gittin 32b-33a; Ncdarim 25b-27a; B. Kamma Ola- 
 62a' B. Metzia 43a; B. Bathra 45a— 4oa. 
 
 Remark. Different from these debates in which two Amoraim 
 holding opposite opinions argue porsonaliy against each o.her. are the 
 
264 Terminology and Methodology 
 
 discussions of the Gemara on a reported difference between authorities 
 of a former generation (f. ex. Gittin 2asqq.) in which discussions, ar- 
 guments for and against either of those authorities are advanced, 
 refuted or defended. See above §§ 74—80. 
 
 4. Anonymouus Discussions and Debates. 
 
 Dicussions and debates are, as a rule, reported very care- 
 fully with the names of those engaged therein. But in nu- 
 merous instances, the names are omitted, so that either a 
 question or an answer, or both of them are reported anonymously. 
 Sometimes, a lengthy discussion carried on anonymously is in- 
 terrupted by an answer made by an authority mentioned by 
 name. At other times again, a debate started by named 
 authorities is continued anonymously. 
 
 The omission of names in a discussion is probably indicative 
 that this was a general discussion among the members of the 
 academy, while only the questions and answers of the prominent 
 teachers were recorded with the names of their authors. 
 
 In consequence of the succinct and elliptical mode ol 
 expression, so prevalent in the Talmud, and in the absence ol 
 all punctuation marks, the anonymous discussions especially, 
 often offer great and perplexing difficulties to the inexperienced 
 student, as question and answer are there sometimes so closely 
 connected that it requires a considerable practice in Talmud 
 reading to discern where the one ends and the other begins. 
 
PART IV. 
 
 OUTLINES OF TALMUDICAL ETHICS. 
 
OUTLINES OF TALMUDICAL ETHICS. 
 
 Ethics is the flower and fruit on the tree of religion. 
 The ultimate aim of religion is to ennoble man's inner 
 and outer life, so that he may love and do that only 
 which is right and good. This is a biblical teaching which is 
 emphatically repeated in almost every book of Sacred Scrip- 
 tures. Let me only refer to the sublime word of the pro- 
 phet Micah: *'He hath showed thee, O man, what is good, 
 and what doth the Lord require of thee, but to do justice 
 and to love kindness and to walk humbly with thy God. <' 
 (Micah vi, 8). 
 
 As far as concerns the Bible, its ethical teachings are 
 generally known. Translated into all languages of the world, 
 that holy book is accessible to every one, and whoever 
 reads it with open eyes and with an unbiased mind will 
 admit that it teaches the highest principles of morality, 
 principles which have not been surpassed and superseded 
 by any ethical system of ancient or modern philosophy. 
 
 But how about the Talmud, that immense literary work 
 whose authority was long esteemed second to that of the 
 Bible ? What are the ethical teachings of the Talmud ? 
 
 Although mainly engaged with discussions of the Law, 
 as developed on the basis of the Bible during Israel's se- 
 cond commonwealth down to the sixth century of the 
 Christian era, the Talmud devotes also much attention to 
 ethical subjects. Not only are one treatise of the Mishiia 
 {Pirke Aboth) and some Baraithoth (as, Aboth (T R. Nathan, 
 and Derech Eretz) almost exclusively occupied with ethical 
 teachings, but such teachings are also very abundantly 
 contained in the Aggadic (homiletical) passages which are 
 so frequently interspersed in the legal discussions throughout 
 all parts of the Talmud.* 
 
 ' Also the Midrasli, a post-Talinu.lic collection of t-xrracta 
 from popular lectures of tlie ancient toachcra on Biblical texts, 
 contains an abundance of ethical teachiuffs and maxims advanced 
 by the sages of the Talmud, wlii<'h must likewise be taken into 
 consideration, when speaking of Tahuudicai Eihics. 
 
268 Outlines op Talmudical Ethics. 
 
 It must be borne in mind that the Talmudical litera- 
 ture embraces a period of about eight centuries^ and that 
 the numerous teachers whose ethical views and utterances 
 are recorded in that vast literature, rank differently in re- 
 gard to mind and authority. At the side of the great lumi- 
 naries, we find also lesser ones. At the side of utterances 
 of great, clear-sighted and broad-minded masters with 
 lofty ideas, we meet also with utterances of peculiar views 
 which never obtained authority. Not every ethical remark 
 or opinion quoted in that literature can, therefore, be re- 
 garded as an index of the standard of Talmudical ethics, 
 but such opinions only can be so regarded which are 
 expressed with authority and which are in harmony with 
 the general spirit that pervades the Talmudic literature. 
 
 Another point to be observed is the circumstance that 
 the Talmud does not treat of ethics in a coherent, philo- 
 sophical system. The Talmudic sages made no claim of 
 being philosophers; they were public teachers, expounders 
 of the Law, popular lecturers. As such, they did not care 
 for a methodically arranged system. All they wanted was to 
 spread among the people ethical teachings in single, concise, 
 pithy, pointed sentences, well adapted to impress the minds 
 and hearts, or in parables or legends illustrating certain moral 
 duties and virtues. And this, their method, fully answered 
 its purpose. Their ethical teachings did actually reach the 
 Jewish masses, and influenced their conduct of life, while 
 among the Greeks, the ethical theories and systems re- 
 mained a matter that concerned the philosophers only, 
 without exercising any educating influence upon the mas- 
 ses at large. 
 
 Furthermore, it must be remembered that the Talmu- 
 dical ethics is largely based on the ethics of the Bible. 
 The sacred treasure of biblical truth and wisdom was in 
 the minds and hearts of the Rabbis. This treasury they 
 tried to enrich by their own wisdom and observation. Here 
 
Outlines of Talmudical Ethics. 269 
 
 they develop a principle contained in a scriptural passage, 
 and give it a wider scope and a larger application to 
 life's various conditions. There they crystallize great moral 
 ideas into a pithy, impressive maxim as guide for lur.nan 
 conduct. Here they give to a jewel of biblical ethics a 
 new lustre by setting it in the gold of their own wisdom. 
 There again they combine single pearls of biblical wisdom 
 to a graceful ornament for human life. 
 
 Let us now try to give a few outlines of the ethical 
 teachings of the Talmud. In the first place, concerning 
 Man as a Moral Being. 
 
 In accordance with the teaching of the Bible, the rab- 
 bis duly emphasize man's dignity as a being created in the 
 likeness of God.' By this likeness of God they understand 
 the spiritual being within us, that is endowed with intel- 
 lectual and moral capacities. The higher desires and inspi- 
 rations which spring from this spiritual being m man, are 
 called Yetzer tob^ the good inclination; but the lower appe- 
 tites and desires which rise from our physical nature and 
 which we share with the animal creation, are termed Yetzer 
 ha-ra^ the inclination to evil.^ Not that these sensuous de- 
 sires are absolutely evil; for they, too, have been implant- 
 ed in man for good purposes. Without them man could 
 not exist, he would not cultivate and populate this 
 earth % or, as a Talmudical legend runs: Once, some 
 overpious people wanted to pray to God that they 
 might be able to destroy the Yetzer ha-ra, but a war- 
 ning voice was heard, saying: ''Beware, lest you destroy 
 this world 1"* Evil are those lower desires only in that 
 
 » Aboth I^i., 14: R. Akiba used to say: "How distinguished 
 is man, since created in the image of God, and istill more dis- 
 tinguished by the consciousness of having been created in the 
 image of God 1" 
 
 ^ Mishna Berachoth IX, 5: yn nv^^^ mt: -lV^n "I^V^ ^JL"! 
 
 • Midrash R. Bereshith IX: 'Ol -^7)"^ ^Sl'?\St:' yi 1^'' HT TKD 31C n^?^^ 
 
 * Yoma 69b: .ND^y N^b n'b in^Scp ^NT ^TH 
 
270 Outlines of Talmudical Ethics. 
 
 they, if unrestrained, easily mislead man to live contrary 
 to the demands and aspirations of his divine nature. Hence 
 the constant struggle in man between the two inclinations. » 
 He who submits his evil inclination to the control of his 
 higher aims and desires, is virtuous and righteous. ''The 
 righteous are governed by the Yetzer tob, but the wicked 
 by the Yetzer ha-ra^ ''The righteous have their desires in 
 their power, but the wicked are in the power of their 
 desires."^ 
 
 Free-will. 
 
 Man's free will is emphasized in the following sentences: 
 "Everything is ordained by God's providence, but freedom 
 of choice is given to man."* "Everything is foreordained 
 by heaven, except the fear of heaven"^ or, as another 
 sage puts it: Whether man be strong or weak, rich or poor, 
 wise or foolish depends mostly on circumstances that 
 surround him from the time of his birth, but whether man 
 be good or bad, righteous or wicked, depends upon his own 
 free will." 
 
 God's Will, the Ground of Man's Duties. 
 
 The ground of our duties, as presented to us by the 
 Talmudical as well as the biblical teachings, is that it is 
 the will of God. His will is the supreme rule of our being. 
 "Do His will as thy own will, submit thy will to His 
 will".' "Be bold as a leopard, light as an eagle, swift 
 as a roe, and strong as a lion, to do the will of thy Father, 
 who is in heaven"." 
 
 Man Accountable to God for his Conduct. 
 
 Of man's responsibility for the conduct of his life, we 
 
 » Kiddushin 30b: DV Sd3 V^y C^nnriD Dl&< ^Ji^ IIVV Berachoth 5b: 
 
 « Berachoth 61b. ^ Midrash Bereshith XXXHL 
 * Aboth III, 15. » Berachoth 33a. • Nidda 16b. 
 » Aboth n, 4. • Ibid. V, 20. 
 
Outlines of Talmudical Ethics. 271 
 
 are forcibly reminded by numerous sentences, as: "Consider 
 three things, and thou wilt never fall into sin; remember 
 that there is above thee an all-seeing eye, an all hearing 
 ear, and a record of all thy actions".' And again, '^Con- 
 sider three things, and thou wilt never sin; remember whence 
 thou comest, whither thou gocst, and before whom thou wilt 
 have to render account for thy doings.'" 
 
 Higher Motives in Performing our Duties. 
 
 Although happiness here and hereafter is promised as 
 reward for fulfillment, and punishment threatened for neglect 
 of duty, still we are reminded not to be guided by the con- 
 sideration of reward and punishment, but rather by love 
 and obedience to God, and by love to that which is good 
 and noble. ''Be not like servants, who serve their master 
 for the sake of reward."' ''Whatever thou doest, let it 
 be done in the name of heaven"* (that is, for its own 
 sake). 
 
 Duty of Self-Preservation and Self-Cultivation. 
 
 As a leading rule of the duties of self-preservation and 
 self-cultivation^ and, at the same time, as a warning against 
 selfishness, we have Hillel's sentence: "If I do not care 
 for myself, who will do it for me ? and if I care only for 
 myself, what am I ?'"* 
 
 The duty of acquiring knowledge^ especially knowledge of 
 the divine Law (Thora) which gives us a clearer insight in 
 God's will to man, is most emphatically enjoined in nume- 
 rous sentences: "Without knowledge there is no true moral- 
 ity and piety."* "Be eager to acquire knowledge, it does 
 not come to thee by inheritance".' "The more knowledge, 
 the more spiritual life."' "If thou hast acquired knowledge, 
 what doest thou lack ? but if thou lackest knowledge, what 
 
 ^ Ibid. II, 1. ' Ibid. Ill, 1. 
 
 • Aboth I, 3. « Ibid. II, 12. • Ibid. I, 14. 
 
 • Ibid. II, 5. » Ibid. II, 12, " Ibid. II, 7. 
 
2T2 Outlines op Talmudicai- Ethics. 
 
 hast thou acquired?'" But we are also reminded that eren 
 the highest knowledge is of no value, as long as it dies 
 not influence our moral life. <^The ultimate end of al 
 knowledge and wisdom is man's Inner purification and the 
 performance of good and noble deeds.'" "He whose know 
 
 to a tree that has many branches, but few and weak roots- 
 a storm cometh and overturneth it.'" 
 
 Labor. 
 
 Next to the duty of acquiring knowledge, tbat of mJust- 
 
 w 11 kit. T. "''^"' "'"'"" '' ^'^^"«'y ^°j«"«1. It is 
 well known that among the ancient nations in general 
 manua labor was regarded as degrading the free dtS 
 Even the greatest philosophers of antiquity, a Plato and 
 Amtotle could not free themselves of this deprecatLg vLw 
 of labor.< How different was the view of the Talmudic sageT 
 
 S; Kf ..''■''' ''^°^'^ ""^ '^^'''' " '^o-'ors man.". 
 
 'Beautiful IS the intellectual occupation, if combined with 
 some prac ical work."' "He who does not teach his sJn a 
 handicraft trade, neglects his parental duty. '" "He who lives 
 
 in idi: s;;-''' '^"'^' '- '"'''- ''^^ '- ^'^ "^ 
 
 nrn J° ''f """^^"^^ ^'^^ ">««« teachings, some of the most 
 prominent sages of the Talmud are known to have made 
 their hvmg by various kinds of handicraft and trade. 
 Cakdinal Duties in Relation to Fellow-mex. 
 Regarding man's relation to fellow-men, the rabbis 
 consider jusfu., truthfulness, peauableness and charity as 
 cardinal duties. They say, "The world (human society) 
 rests on three thin gs-on justice, on truth and on peace.'"' 
 
 'r:£^^:StH"^ri? ""^ '"-""^-P "^ 
 
 ■•^th l'?8 ^'*'*""'™ ***• • Berachoth 8a. 
 
Outlines op Tat.mudical Ethics. 273 
 
 Justice. 
 The principle of justia in the moral sense is expressed 
 in the following rules: "Thy neighbor's property must be 
 as sacred to thee, as thine own.- "Tliy neighbor s honor 
 must be as dear to thee, as thine own."' Hereto belong 
 also the golden rule of Hillel: "Whatever would be hateful 
 to thee, do not to thy neighbor."" 
 
 Truth and Truthfulness. 
 The sacredness of iruih and truthfulness is expressed in 
 the sentence: "Truth i. the signet of God, the Most Hoy. __ 
 "Let thy yea be in truth, and thy nay be in truth. 
 "Truth lasts forever, but falsehood must vanish. 
 
 Admonitions concerning faithfulness and /;V.///v to g.ven 
 promises are: "Promise little and do much."' '-To be uah- 
 less to a given promise is as sinful as idolatry." "lobi ak 
 a verbal engagement, though legally not bu.aing is a mo - 
 al wrong.'" Of the numerous warnings agamst anv lu. d 
 of deceit! the following may be mentioned: "It ,s smful o 
 deceive any man, be he even a heathen.- "^e-P •"" >- 
 words is as great a sin as deception m money mate... 
 men, says the Talmud, the immortal soul will be called to 
 recount before the divine tribunal, the first question will 
 be "hast thou been honest and faithful in all thy dealings 
 with thy fellow-men ?"*' 
 
 Peacefulness. 
 Peace and harmony in domestic life and social intci-. 
 
 !• Sabbath 28b. 
 
274 Outlines of Talmudical Ethics. 
 
 by us."^ "Be a disciple of Aaron, loving peace, and pur- 
 suing peace. "^ To make peace between those in disharmony 
 is regarded as one of the most meritorious works that 
 secure happiness and bliss here and hereafter.^ 
 
 As virtues leading to peace, those of 7?iildness and 
 meekness^ of gentleness and placidity are highly praised 
 and recommended. ''Be not easily moved to anger"" <'Be 
 humble to thy superior, affable to thy inferior, and meet 
 every man with friendliness."® ''He who is slow to anger, and 
 easily pacified, is truly pious and virtuous."" "Man, be ever 
 soft and pliant like a reed, and not hard and unbending like 
 the cedar."^ "Those who, when offended, do not give offence, 
 when hearing slighting remarks, do not retaliate — they are 
 the friends of God, they shall shine forth like the sun in 
 its glory."* 
 
 Chaeity. 
 
 The last of the principal duties to fellow-men is charity^ 
 which begins where justice leaves off. Prof. Steinthal in his 
 work on General Ethics, remarks, that among the cardinal virt- 
 ues of the ancient philosophers, we look in vain for the idea 
 oi love and chai-ity^ whereas in the teachings of the Bible, we 
 generally find the idea of love, mercy and charity closely con- 
 nected with that ofjastice.' And we may add, as in the Bible 
 so also in the Talmud, where charity is considered as the highest 
 degree on the scale of duties and virtues. It is one of the main 
 pillars on which the welfare of the human world rests.'" 
 
 The duty of charity (Gemilath Chesed) extends farther 
 than to mere almsgiving (Tzedaka). "Almsgiving is practiced 
 by means of money, but charity also by personal services and 
 by words of advice, symphaty and encouragement. Alms- 
 giving is a duty towards the poor only, but charity towards 
 
 » Mishna Oketzin III, 12. « Aboth I, 13. 
 
 » Mishna Peah I, 1. * Aboth II, 10. " Ibid. Ill, 13. « Ibid. V,ll 
 
 ' Taanith 20b. « Yoma 23; Gittin 3 .b. 
 
 • Allgemeine Ethik. p. 108. ^^ Aboth I, 3. 
 
Outlines of Talmudical Ethics, 275 
 
 the rich as well as the poor, nay, even towards the dead 
 (by taking care of their decent burial)'" 
 
 By works of charity man proves to be a true image of God 
 whose atributes are love, kindness and mercy.' "He who 
 turns away from works of love and charity turns awiiy from 
 God"." '^The works of charity have more viilue than sacrilices; 
 they are equal to the performance of all religious duties."* 
 
 Concerning the proper way of practicing this virtue, the 
 Talmnd has many beautiful sentences, as: "The merit of cha- 
 ritable works is in proportion to the love with which they 
 are practiced."' "Blessed is he who gives from his substance 
 to the poor, twice blessed he who accompanies his gift with 
 kind, comforting words".* "The noblest of all charities is en- 
 abling the poor to earn a livelihood".' He who iS unable to 
 give much, shall not withhold his little mite, for "as a garment 
 is made up of single threads, so every single gift contributes 
 to accomplish a great work of charity"/ 
 
 Duties concerning Special Relations. 
 
 Besides these principal duties in rcUitionto fellow-men in 
 general, the Talmud treats also very elaborately of duties con- 
 cerning the various relations of life. Not intending to enter 
 here into all details, we shall restrict ourselves to some of its 
 ethical teachings in reference to the domestic relations, and 
 regarding the relation to the country and the community. 
 
 The Conjugal Relation. 
 
 "First build a house and plant a vineyard (i. e., provide 
 for the means of the household), and then take a wife".* "Let 
 youth and old age not be joined in marriage, lest the purity 
 and peace of domestic life be disturbed"*" "A man's home means 
 
 » Succah 491). 
 
 • Sotah 14a. ^ Kethubotii Gla. * Sucrali 4Ua; H. Hatlira 9a. 
 
 • Succah 49a. « li. Hathra 91). ' Sabbath 63a. • B. Bathra 10b. 
 
 • Sotah 44a. '° Saiilie Iriii 7Gu. 
 
2*^6 Outlines of Talmudical Ethics. 
 
 his wife."i <'Let a man be careful to honor his wife, for he 
 owes to her alone all the blessings of his house". =» ^^f thy 
 wife is small, bend down to her, to take counsel from her" » 
 '^Who IS rich ? He who has a noble wife."* <^A manshould be 
 careful lest he afflict his wife, for God counts her tears. "« 'af 
 m anger the one hand removed thy wife or thy child, let the 
 other hand again bring them back to thy heart."' ^'^He who 
 loves his wife as his own self, and honors her more than 
 himself, and he who educates his children in the right way 
 to him applies the divine promise : Thou shalt know that 
 there is peace in thy tent."^ '^Tears are shed on God's altar 
 for the one who forsakes the wife of his youth."^ <'He who 
 divorces his wife, is hated before God".' 
 
 Parents and Children. 
 
 'Parental love should be impartial, one child must not be 
 preferred to the other".- "It is a fathers duty not only to 
 provide for his minor children, but also to take care of their 
 instruction, and to teach his son a trade and whatever is ne- 
 cessary for his future welfare".- ^The honor and reverence 
 due to parents are equal to the honor and reverence due to 
 God".'^ ^^Where children honor their parents, there Goddwels 
 there He is honored"^'. ' 
 
 Country and Community. 
 
 Regarding duties to the country and the community, the 
 Rabbis teach: -The law of the country is as sacred and bind- 
 ing as God's law".- '^Prayfor the welfare of the government- 
 without respect for the government, men would swallow each 
 other".- -Do not isolate thyself from the community and 
 its interests".^ ' -It is sinful to deceive the government regard- 
 
 ;Yoma2a. « B. Metzia 59a. -Ibid. * Sabbath 25b. 
 
 *TU^^^t^fu: '^^t^^^^- ^ Yebamoth 62b. • Gittin 90b. 
 Ibid. >° Sabbath 10b. »» Kiddushin 29a. >» Ibid 29b 
 
 Bathra 54b. " Aboth III, 2. >» Ibid II, 4. 
 
Outlines of Talmudical Ethics. 277 
 
 ing taxes and duties".* *'Do not aspire for pul)lic offices'"; 
 *<but where there are no men, try thou to be the nuin".* 
 ^'Those who work for the community shall do it witliout self- 
 ishness, but with the pure intention to promote its wel- 
 fare".* 
 
 General Characteristics. 
 
 To these short outlines of Talmudical ethics let us add 
 only a few general remarks. Being essentially a developmont of 
 the sublime ethical principles and teachings of the Bil)le, the 
 Talmudical ethics retains the general characteristics of that 
 origin. 
 
 It teaches nothing that is against human nature, nothing 
 that is incompatible with the existence and welfare of human 
 society. It is free from the extreme excess and austerity to 
 which the lofty ideas of religion and morality were carried 
 by the theories and practices of some sects inside and outside 
 of Judaism. 
 
 Nay, many Talmudical maxims and sayings are evidently 
 directed against such austerities and extravagances. Thus 
 they warn against the monastic idea of obtaining closer 
 communion with God by fleeing from human society and 
 by seclusion from temporal concerns of life : ''Do not sepa- 
 rate thyself from society."' ''Man's thoughts and ways shall 
 always be in contact and sympathy with fellow-men."* ''No 
 one shall depart from the general customs and manners."^ 
 "Better is he who lives on the toil of his hand, than he who 
 indulges in idle piety.'"* 
 
 They strongly discountenance the idea of celibacy^ which 
 the Essenes, and later, some orders of the Cijurch regard(Hl 
 as a superior state of perfection. The rabljis say: "He who 
 lives without a wife is no perfect man.'" '*To be unmarried 
 
 » Pesachim 112b: 03^0.1 p l^vy nnnn SnI al>o H. Kaiuiua 113a 
 
 " Aboth I, 10. • Ibi.l. II. 5. * ll)i(l. II, 2. 
 
 • Aboth II, 4. • K«'tlnib.)th 11a. ' B. Motzia HC.b. 
 
 .• Berachot «b. » Yebamoth Cja. 
 
278 Outlines of Talmudical Ethics. 
 
 is to live without joy, without blessing, without kindness, 
 without religion and without peace.'" ^'As soon as man mar- 
 ries, his sins decrease."^ 
 
 While, on the one hand, they warn against too much 
 indulgence in pleasures and in the gratification of bodily 
 appetites and against the insatiable pursuit of earthly goods 
 and riches, as well as against the inordinate desire of honor 
 and power, on the other hand, they strongly disapprove the 
 ascetic mortification of the body and abstinence from en- 
 joyment, and the cynic contempt of all luxuries that beau- 
 tify life. They say: "God's commandments are intended to 
 enhance the value and enjoyment of life, but not to mar it 
 and make it gloomy. "^ "If thou hast the means, enjoy life's 
 innocent pleasures.'" "He who denies himself the use of wine 
 is a sinner.'" "No one is permitted to afllict himself by 
 unnecessary fasting.'" "The pious fool, the hypocrite, and 
 the Pharisaic flagellant are destroyers of human society."^ 
 "That which beautifies life and gives it vigor and strength, 
 just as riches and honor, is suitable to the pious, and 
 agreeable to the world at large."* 
 
 Finally, one more remark : The Talmud has often been 
 accused of being illiberal, as if teaching its duties only for 
 Jews towards fellow-believers, but not also towards fellow- 
 men in general. This charge is entirely unfounded. It is 
 true, and quite natural, that in regard to the ritual and ce- 
 remouial law and practice, a distinction between Jew and 
 Gentile was made. It is also true, that we occasionally 
 meet in the Talmud with an uncharitable utterance against 
 the heathen world. But it must be remembered in what 
 state of moral corruption and degradation their heathen 
 surroundings were, at that time. And this, too, must be 
 
 » Ibid. 63a. "" Ibid. 63b. 
 » Yoma 85b: DHn ni^^:^ vh\ DHl ^m. * Erubin 54a: ^ e^> DX 
 ^ niD^n. ' Taanith 11a. ' Ibid. 22b. ' Mishna Sota III, 4. 
 
 « Baraitha, Aboth VI, 8: D^Hvij nK3 ...lUDm •^t^'1y^1 Hani ^JH 
 
Outlines of Talmud ical Ethics. 279 
 
 remembered, that such utterances are only made l)y individ- 
 uals who gave vent to their indignation in view of the 
 cruel persecutions whose victims they were. As regards 
 7tioral teachings, the Talmud is as broad as humanity. It tea- 
 ches duties of man to man without distinction of creed and 
 race. In most of the ethical maxims, the terms Adam and 
 Beriyot^ ''man," "fellow- men," are emphatically used; as: "Do 
 not despise any man."i "Judge every man from his favorable 
 side.'"" "Seek peace, and love fellow-men.'" "He who is pleas- 
 ing to fellow-men is also pleasing to God.'" "The right way 
 for man to choose, is to do that which is honorable in his 
 own eyes (i. e., approved by his conscience) and at the same 
 time, honorable in the eyes of his fellow- men.'" In some in- 
 stances, the Talmud expressly reminds that the duties of 
 justice, veracity, peacefulness and charity are to be fulfilled 
 towards the heathen as well as to the Israelites; as: "It is 
 sinful to deceive any man, be he even a heathen."" It is 
 our duty to relieve the poor and needy, to visit the sick 
 and bury the dead without distinction of creed and race."" 
 
 "Thou Shalt love thy neighbor as thyself" (Lev. XIX, 
 18); this is, said R. Akiba, the all embracing principle of 
 the divine law. But Ben Azai said, there is another passage 
 in Scriptures still more embracing; it is the passage (Gen., 
 V, 2): "This is the book of the generations of man; in the 
 day that God created man, he made him in the likeness of 
 God.'" That sage meant to say, this passage is more embracing, 
 since it clearly tells us who is our neighbor; not, as it might be 
 misunderstood, our friend only, not our fellow-citizen only, not 
 our co-religionist only, but since we all descend from a com- 
 mon ancestor, since all are created in the image and likeness 
 of God, every man, every human being is our brother, our 
 neighbor whom we shall love as ourselves. 
 
 » Aboth IV, 3. » Il.ia. I, G. « Ibi.l. I, 13. * Ibid. Ill, 10. 
 
 • Ibid. II, 1. • ChuUin 94a. ' Gittin Gla. * Siphra on Lev. XIX, 18. 
 
280 Outlines of Talmudical Ethics. 
 
 The liberal spirit of Talmudic ethics is most strikingly 
 evidenced in the sentence: '<The pious and virtuous of all 
 nations participate in the eternal bliss,'" which teaches that 
 man's salvation depends not on the acceptance of certain 
 articles of belief, nor on certain ceremonial observances, but 
 on that which is the ultimate aim of religion, namely, Morality^ 
 purity of heart and holiness of life. 
 
 1 Tosephta Sanhedrin ch. XIII; Maimonides Yad Hachezaka, 
 Teshuba III, 5; Melachim VIII, 11. 
 
ALPHABETICAL INDEX OF THE PRINCIPAL TANAIM 
 AND AMORAIM. 
 
 A. 
 
 
 
 Page. 
 
 
 Page. 
 
 Chiya bar Abba . 
 
 45 
 
 Abba(Areca or Aricha)= 
 
 : 
 
 D.— H. 
 
 
 Rab. 
 
 39.43 
 
 
 
 Abba Saul . 
 
 35 
 
 Dime . . . • 
 
 63 
 
 Abbahu . . • 
 
 45 
 
 Dosa b. Harchinas 
 
 26 
 
 Abaye 
 
 Acha . . 
 
 49 
 39 
 
 Elazar b. Azariah 
 Elazar b. Jacob . 
 
 27 
 35 
 
 Acha of Dif te 
 
 53 
 
 Elazar of Modein 
 
 30 
 
 Achai bar Huna 
 
 55 
 
 Ela7,ar (b. Shatnua) T. 
 
 34 
 
 Ada (or Ide) bar Abin 
 
 53 
 
 Elazar (b. Padath) Am. 
 
 45 
 
 Admon 
 
 25 
 
 Elazar b. Simon . 
 
 38 
 
 Akabia b. Ma,halalel . 
 
 24 
 
 Elazar b. Zadok 
 
 86 
 
 Akiba 
 
 29 
 
 Eliezer (b. Hyrcanos). 
 
 26 
 
 Ame . , . • 
 
 45 
 
 Eliezer b. Jacob 
 
 26 
 
 Amemar . i • 
 
 52 
 
 Gamaliel (the Elder) . 
 
 24 
 
 Ashe , . . . 
 
 51 
 
 Gamaliel II of Jamnia 
 
 25 
 
 Assi . . . • 
 
 45 
 
 Gamaliel lU. 
 
 41 
 
 
 
 Gebiha 
 
 53 
 
 B. 
 
 
 Hillel .... 
 
 23 
 
 Bar Kappara 
 
 37 
 
 Hillel II . . . 
 
 48 
 
 Bar Napacha 
 
 
 Hoshaya (or Oshaya) . 
 
 39 
 
 (Jochanan) . 
 
 42 
 
 Huna 
 
 46 
 
 Ben Azai . 
 
 31 
 
 I.— J. 
 
 
 Ben Bathyra 
 
 27 
 
 
 
 Ben Zoma . 
 
 30 
 
 Ide bar Abin 
 
 53 
 
 Ben Nanos (Simon) . 
 
 30 
 
 Ilai .... 
 
 83 
 
 Beth Hillel 
 Beth Shamai ( 
 
 24 
 
 Ise b. Judah. 
 
 89 
 
 
 Ishmael (b. Elisha) . 
 
 28 
 
 0. 
 
 
 Ishmael bar Jose 
 
 39 
 
 
 Janai (the Elder) 
 
 39 
 
 Cahana 
 
 63 
 
 Jehuda, see Juda. 
 
 
 Chanan 
 
 25 
 
 Jeremiah (or Jirmiah) 
 
 48 
 
 Chanina, chief of the 
 
 
 Jochanan b. Broka 
 
 80 
 
 Priests . 
 
 24 
 
 Jochanan (bar Napacha 
 
 ). 42 
 
 Chanina (bar Chama) 
 
 41 
 
 Jochanan b. Nuri 
 
 29 
 
 Chisda (or Chasda) . 
 
 46 
 
 Jochanan, theSandelar 
 
 84 
 
 Chizkia 
 
 42 
 
 Jochanan b. Zaccai . 
 
 24 
 
 Chiya, the great 
 
 
 Jonah .... 
 
 48 
 
 (or the Elder) 
 
 39 
 
 Jonathan (the Elder) . 
 
 89 
 
282 
 
 Index of Principal Tanaim and Amoraim. 
 
 Page. 
 Jose (bar Chalafta}, a Tana 33 
 Jose (bar Zabda), Pal 
 
 Amora , 
 Jose, a Babyl. Amora 
 Jose, the Galilean 
 Jose b. Juda 
 Joseph (bar Chiya) 
 Joshua (b. Chanania) 
 Joshua b. Korcha 
 Joshua b. Levi 
 Juda b. Baba 
 Juda b. Bathyra . 
 Juda Hanasi (= Rabbi) 
 Juda II (Nesiah) . 
 Juda (b. Ilai) Tana 
 Juda (b. Jecheskel), Babyl 
 
 Amora » 
 
 L.-M. 
 
 48 
 55 
 30 
 38 
 49 
 26 
 35 
 43 
 80 
 27 
 37 
 41 
 33 
 
 46 
 
 Levi (bar Sissi) . . 43 
 
 Mar bar Rab Ashe . 53 
 
 Maremar (=Mar Jemar} 53 
 
 Mathia b. Charash . 30 
 
 Meir .... 31 
 
 Nachman (bar Jacob) 47 
 
 Nachman b. Isaac . 50 
 
 Nachum the Median . 25 
 
 Nachum of Gimzo . 27 
 
 Nathan (the Babylonian) 36 
 
 Nechemia ... 35 
 
 Nechunia b. Hakana . 27 
 
 O.— R 
 
 Page. 
 Rabba bar Hun a . . 49 
 
 Rabba (bar Nachmani) 49 
 
 Rabba bar bar Ghana. 47 
 
 Rabba of Tusfah (or Tospia) 54 
 Rabbi (=Juda Hanasi) 37 
 
 Rabbina I and II. . 54 
 
 Rafram bar Papa . 53 
 
 Rafram II. . . 53 
 
 Resh Lakish ( = R. Simon b. 
 Lakish) , . . 43 
 
 S. 
 
 Sama bar Rabba . 
 
 53 
 
 Samuel (Mar] 
 
 44 
 
 Samuel bar Abbuha . 
 
 55 
 
 Saphra .... 
 
 45 
 
 Shamai .... 
 
 23 
 
 Shela .... 
 
 44 
 
 Shesheth- . 
 
 46 
 
 Simai bar Ashe . 
 
 51 
 
 Simlai .... 
 
 43 
 
 Simon bar Abba . 
 
 45 
 
 Simon b. Elazar . 
 
 38 
 
 Simon b. Gamaliel I. 24 
 
 Simon b. Gamaliel II. 35 
 
 Simon (ben Jochai] . 33 
 
 Simon b. Lakish . . 42 
 
 Simon ben Nanos. . 30 
 
 Symmachos (or Symchos) 37 
 
 T.— Z. 
 
 v-'. XV. 
 
 
 Tarphon (or, Tryphon) 
 
 28 
 
 Oshaya (or Hoshaya) 
 
 39 
 
 Ukba(Mar) . 
 
 44 
 
 Papa 
 
 51 
 
 Ulla (bar Ishmael) . 
 
 47 
 
 Papi 
 
 51 
 
 Zadok (Tzadok) 
 
 26 
 
 Plimo . 
 
 39 
 
 Zebid 
 
 53 
 
 Rab (=Abba Aricha) 
 
 43 
 
 Zera (Zeira) . 
 
 46 
 
 Raba , . • 
 
 50 
 
 Zutra (Mar} . 
 
 53 
 
INDEX OF EXPLAINED TECHNICAL TERMS AND 
 PHRASES. 
 
 Page. 
 
 
 Page. 
 
 
 217.233 . 
 
 . ""i^D^lOp *S03 
 
 
 .s 
 
 210 
 
 iSn^n^jD 
 
 256 
 
 . nn-nx 
 
 157 
 
 ns r^n 
 
 2U4 
 
 . x^^nx 
 
 159 
 
 Drains ^:^i2 nx r:2 
 
 244 
 
 xcbi ^x 
 
 244 
 
 . s'yn 
 
 253 
 
 x»D^*j'n nicx \s 
 
 244 
 
 n^ro 'D2 
 
 230 
 
 -iDnx 'DHi^nx 'X 
 
 202 
 
 . ND^L"3 
 
 244 
 
 in^ x'yn'x 
 
 253 
 
 iDxn ixfob xrD^L'o 
 
 239 
 
 . xo'X n'yTX 
 
 210 
 
 . r['i2r\2 
 
 259 
 
 245 
 
 no::'D '\ir{ 'V2i ina 
 
 259 
 
 xn\x \s^ 'Dr\ ^x 
 
 227 
 
 n^DI Np N^D^N X13J 
 
 243 
 
 . ... ^X1 . . 'X 
 
 223 
 
 Ni:i:i 
 
 217 
 
 . in^'ra xrx 
 
 143 
 
 .rwi^ mr: 
 
 229 
 
 nDXi xp'X 
 
 249 
 
 . nnoj 
 
 200.204.24 
 
 . . XD^^'X 
 
 148 
 
 -irr: 
 
 257 
 
 X2'D X»2^X 
 
 252 
 
 n-DX \si 
 
 237 1 
 
 ...xn^ ^rx 
 
 251 
 
 ^DH X?3'n xS \S1 
 
 135 
 
 \nr^ \D i'w':iy px 
 
 252 
 
 -]ny-i xp'^D ^xi 
 
 218 
 
 . T^'X 
 
 225 
 
 . iiTinn ^nrixi 
 
 256 
 
 .x-innoD X2-:'X 
 
 250 
 
 . . ."1 xnjn 
 
 228 
 
 iT3'ri'X 
 
 174 
 
 ir:yD nct^n -i^n 
 
 240 
 
 xSx 
 
 133 
 
 in ,;n 
 
 209 
 
 XO'X xj^x 
 
 181 
 
 , s-inx3 ^pixi n:?o ;n 
 
 253 
 
 . D"L" '.XS K>X 
 
 y^rroi? X2'^ xnrD x'^x 
 . xn"ii"in»D xSx 
 
 254 
 
 n^m 
 
 257 
 
 134 
 
 . "iDi |nn jo XD^ VT 
 
 240 
 
 249 
 
 . xpri 
 
 260 
 
 nnyr xSx 
 
 197 
 
 . nnyn 
 
 205 
 
 . X-'^X 
 
 247.253 
 
 .^pj xpn 
 
 213 
 
 . ;x»:x 
 
 238 
 
 . n^ nxp ^XD n^ nxpi 
 
 185 
 
 113 
 
 c'-n 
 
 223 
 
 I'D n^X 
 
 
 
 229 
 
 x:':n '^2: i:x ^,x 
 
 
 .n 
 
 210 
 
 1'TJVX 
 
 
 
 14S 
 
 ...*: x'nx 
 
 21 :i 
 226 
 
 nSy ^^-Dx xn 
 
 224.225 
 
 22'J 
 
 i*rr,x 
 
 23S 
 
 .^s^D \s*n 
 
 
 
 258 h 
 
 ;n\^-i3 xni xn^snD xn 
 
 
 .1—3 
 
 203.257 
 
 . ''y^ NH 
 
 
 
 133 
 
 ym ]r2 xnn 
 
 107 
 
 . i2vnD 
 
 257 
 
 . wn ^Nn *D -iDXT xin 
 
 200.243 
 
 . ;:Tcy 'x^3 
 
284 
 
 Index of Technical Terms and Phrases. 
 
 Page. 
 
 
 Page. 
 
 
 240 
 213 
 
 
 242 
 211 
 
 
 259 
 
 . iDyoi?! 
 
 238 
 
 • ♦ • n3 ^"in 
 
 218 
 218 
 
 ..b n^i? n^bi 
 
 238 
 207.208 
 
 . nviin 
 
 . 1J^\T ...1J>\T 
 
 225 
 
 . n)^r2 nn iddi 
 
 216 
 
 . i<^P N:n ij>M 
 
 227 
 
 . on n»x '•Di 
 
 200.242 
 
 ••loi o\n 
 
 247 
 
 fc<-iD'n Njoi 
 
 152.250 
 
 >7 rrpDj; ^ND3 N3n 
 
 218 
 
 '£3 1301 
 
 200.241.2^ 
 
 212 
 
 . ""Dn^fl 
 
 207 
 
 7'Dp Nnm X3n 
 
 215.222 
 
 . Mrcni 
 
 198 
 
 i»ij-in N3n 
 
 147 
 
 . '131 |n3n 3m 
 
 258 
 
 xnsj'n on 
 
 239 
 
 ini 
 
 247.252 
 
 N"i3nDo ^Dj on 
 
 213 
 
 . CN3^^3x!3ini 
 
 209 
 
 ■)ONp on 
 
 201 
 
 . fc<3n» n^ ^n^^c N:m 
 
 56 
 
 . n3bn 
 
 238.256 
 
 «-i3Dni 
 
 123 
 
 ^roo n^^o!? n3bn 
 
 
 •»— T 
 
 243 
 
 n^NT iNDb Nn>^n 
 
 
 * 
 
 160 
 
 |n3K> nisj'n nvn 
 
 206 
 
 nioiN n&«T 
 
 212.251 
 
 ...Dnn noi Nntj'n 
 
 157 
 
 3Nn:3 nr 
 
 199 
 
 i-iroN* Dnn 
 
 147 
 
 ^^{U IT r]2'^ n\-i it 
 
 258 
 
 . ...N3n ...Dnn 
 
 196 
 
 IT iDib -|nv PNI IT 
 
 202 
 
 ••Np Dnn 
 
 235 
 
 "i»N ini "iDN in 
 
 
 
 182 
 
 jnn iTn 
 
 
 .1 
 
 209 214 , 
 
 . NiDn^omon 
 
 233 
 
 . in^oyto^nTKi 
 
 193.247 . 
 
 DyD 
 
 254 
 
 • •miiDN^Ni 
 
 206.250 . 
 
 ...n N^VD 
 
 254 
 
 . inn «p^D ^Ni 
 
 137 
 
 ptj' n^3v - 
 
 231 
 
 "in^Ni 
 
 192 
 143 
 246 
 
 Don n^n^ 
 
 tr-iiBcn p Dino nob^ 
 
 1J3-I i:nDi)^ 
 
 260 
 225 
 259 
 
 .ND^n^Ni 
 
 158 
 
 ... Kr 
 
 213 
 
 "NDNI 
 
 
 ^—3 
 
 254 
 
 Nn^N DX1 
 
 215 
 
 . ...1X31 ... |N3 
 
 225 
 240 
 
 
 250 
 
 . ...oj }n3E^Nn3 
 
 'yb^ i6 ...N3M i^3 
 . i)^3 
 
 245 
 
 IDlb N"iDn DN1 
 
 232 
 163 
 
 205 
 260 
 
 
 164 
 
 tO"1D1^S3 
 
 214 
 
 . Nsj'n n-iDNni 
 
 166 
 
 205 
 
 ...tj^Nini 
 
 167 
 
 
 233 
 
 ..n n^nio xn^Sni 
 
 256 
 219 
 
 221 
 lb2 
 
 . N^jnni ,pnni 
 pnn iTni 
 
Index of Technical Terms and Phrases. 
 
 285 
 
 Page. 
 
 
 Page. 
 
 
 159 
 
 irvD nn 
 
 235 
 
 "Kjna 
 
 243 
 
 "jti'Dj no 
 
 224 
 
 pox n;i 
 
 218 
 
 n^'^^n nsSmD 
 
 160 
 
 . 'm n] nn nS 
 
 151 
 
 . njDiD 
 
 226 
 
 "iDHN 'j'n^cn in;? 
 
 191.217 . 
 
 . npi^no 
 
 196 
 
 IT fix IT wS*':? 
 
 260 
 
 ^"D ND'K ^D 
 
 196 
 
 -iDNp N'y2;o nS 
 
 244 
 
 pnrrx 'D 
 
 260 
 
 inyi sp^D nS 
 
 258 
 
 Nns n^o 
 
 200.210.243 NDnV nS 
 
 250 
 
 nim n^D 
 
 239 
 
 N^'iTP to 
 
 258 
 
 . 'Dl ^D 
 
 224 
 
 i:l" nS 
 
 224 
 
 . X"iO'D 
 
 194 
 
 "NO 'insS 
 
 259 
 
 . sn^: 'D 
 
 219 
 
 liE-n xb 
 
 256 
 
 .m3D ^D 
 
 233 
 
 n^oyo^ 
 
 206.249 . 
 
 bbD^ 
 
 203.217. 2S 
 
 5 . . XO'S 
 
 133 
 
 nc^D 
 
 234 
 
 "x^n^ xo^S 
 
 247 
 
 n^ N'ros n:d 
 
 234 
 
 n^^ x^'ycp xo'S 
 
 200 
 
 . ^h'D '^n iXJD 
 
 197 
 
 nynriDS 
 
 947 
 
 xiD^n N30 
 
 199 
 
 . xn^Si \xoS 
 
 2CJ> 
 
 . n^DCiDT p 
 
 244 
 
 nro xpcj 'xob 
 
 195 
 
 ■•Diyob Nr^JD 
 
 218 
 
 xno'oS 
 
 203 
 
 :r^"':nD ^jo 
 
 195 
 
 "XD ^tD^yoS 
 
 200 
 
 . ' ' ^^^ 
 
 200.243 
 
 D^iy^ 
 
 201.238 , 
 
 pjc ;':::j:' 
 
 
 .D 
 
 255 
 
 H'^J T'^'O 
 
 i 
 
 247.252 . 
 
 fc^lDnOD 
 
 198 
 
 . . ^xo 
 
 193 
 
 . nc'VD 
 
 24o 
 
 "ID'D? X3'X \X0 
 
 214 
 
 . n^nob nc'vo 
 
 232 
 
 in'^ri \xo 
 
 193 
 
 Kny^vo 
 
 201 
 
 soyo \xo 
 
 193 
 
 ;n?Di NL"D 
 
 249 
 
 X-) 'XO 
 
 222.241 . 
 
 . ^2'n'D ,3^nD 
 
 199 
 
 . X"^o>.:; \s^ 
 
 220 
 
 . jn^jnD xn^jno 
 
 199 
 
 yor^D ^xo 
 
 255 
 
 ni) Pivno 
 
 199.223 
 
 ^ox:5 'xo 
 
 
 
 199.210 
 
 .y- 
 
 -.: 
 
 142 
 
 n^Dp 'xr^ 
 
 132 
 
 . inj 
 
 208 
 
 . x:m XJL" \so 
 
 247 
 
 . pwX ^rnj 
 
 213.217 . 
 
 . XL"n x;l" WD 
 
 234 
 
 \SJnD ND^J 
 
 255 
 
 n3 fin:D 
 
 249 
 
 . irt^p: 
 
 122 
 
 xn^mxno 
 
 193.248 . 
 
 . N-13D 
 
 123 
 
 nno 
 
 133 
 
 . pfllD 
 
 118 
 
 n^Sii m:x l*'^t3 
 
 343 
 
 . Cl^D cin 
 
 244 
 
 ino 
 
 233 
 
 Kny^D ,vrD 
 
 210 
 
 x*:'m ir^jo 
 
 193 
 
 ND'D 
 
 157 
 
 nnvj ...no 
 
286 
 
 Index of Technical Terms and Phrases. 
 
 Page. 
 
 
 Page. 
 
 
 206.249 . 
 
 n^ro v»K^ 
 
 211 
 
 n^b NDntDVN NB^D 
 
 206 
 
 IT'rD DV^^ 
 
 209.238 
 
 "inyn xpbo 
 
 224 . NnnvDE^ xnynsj^ 
 
 210 
 
 NrDN -inyn xp^o 
 
 241 
 
 . i<')Tii^ 
 
 177 
 
 . r^ioD 
 
 241 
 
 Np^m i^^)y^ 
 
 191 
 
 . . DriD 
 
 160 inxD n^Nnn DuinD ^2^ 
 
 217 
 
 Wt^ iO |ND IV 
 
 175 T"5^T D'^EJ'^n^Dn D^niDD ^JK^ 
 
 132 
 
 . N:m N-ip^y 
 
 252 
 
 . -^'z^ 
 
 
 
 216 
 
 n^b ^^i^\> "^'str 
 
 
 .n— .3 
 
 193.261 . 
 
 . i<nDi i6\)^ 
 
 242 
 
 . Npn^e 
 
 233 
 
 rctj> Nn 
 
 136.254 
 
 . ND-i^Q 
 
 214 
 
 . Ni3n 
 
 193 
 
 . Nnii^Q 
 
 247 
 
 ynn 
 
 255 
 
 ins 
 
 132 
 
 pn n^^nn 
 
 243 
 
 (pIBD) p-»D 
 
 228.233.241.254 . 
 
 ^■nnvn 
 
 245 
 
 .Nnn Nn?D tDitJ'Q 
 
 243 
 
 . -2 nrn 
 
 117 
 
 Nip-i ^^DE^'D ,Dti^3 
 
 245 
 
 ip^n 
 
 209 
 
 
 239 
 
 . fn^n 
 
 210 
 
 238 
 
 . nn^cn 
 
 207 
 
 ..3 D^'Di ..3 nna 
 
 220.221 . 
 
 N:n 
 
 160 
 
 . |^aEJ'mE^'mv 
 
 220 
 
 Cpn) ^112 Kjn 
 
 211 
 
 . NDnv 
 
 202 
 
 ^t^p N'j'n &<in 
 
 212 
 
 . "^nv 
 
 195 
 
 n^^Kn N*jn 
 
 209 
 
 . ^JD^ p^D2 Np 
 
 191 
 
 Nop Njn 
 
 239 
 
 "loim ^p 
 
 235.257 . 
 
 NM \v:n 
 
 130 
 
 222 
 
 pm ijn 
 
 124.183 . 
 
 Dty^o^ ^m 
 
 221 
 
 N^:n 
 
 240 
 
 . n'i:>M 
 
 223.229 . 
 
 . ^DH ^Dj N^jn 
 
 207 
 
 . Nnm 
 
 222.235 . 
 
 n^m^ N^:n 
 
 192 
 
 . NK'n 
 
 221 
 
 Nnn >:n 
 
 258 
 
 ^..NB^Di ... NtJ^n 
 
 220.228 . 
 
 ► T'm nb NJ^jn 
 
 
 .n— .^ 
 
 222 
 
 
 
 220 
 236 
 
 (Dnn) pn 
 . D'l^nDn 
 
 241.257 . 
 246 
 
 (Dnn) N3n ^:)NtJ^ 
 DnD in!?ty 
 
 
 
 246 
 
APPENDIX, 
 
 KEY TO THE ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THE TALMUD 
 AND ITS COMxMENTARIES. 
 
 on ij^3-i "iDX .n"ix 
 
 (in Tosaphoth) 
 
 .n 
 
 DIN 'n .3x pn .N"3 
 
 ^N^L"^ pi<n ."'"Nn 
 
 •'""' nnx nna " 
 
 n^na "^^2 .njn 12 -13 .n"3n 
 
 Cj^npDn nn -^^n n^i .n"3 
 Nin inn .n^3n bv^ 
 
 m^n:i nn'7n3 .y'ns, 
 
 (in Tosaphoth) 
 
 DDJDn n^n o"n3 
 t^Tpr^n n^n.p"cn3 
 
 
 N'N 
 
 Cnn) n px .m^^r^ ndw 
 
 ND\S* n'V2 \x 
 
 nnry p iiyi^x 
 
 |1L"N-in DIN 
 
 nmiN 
 
 D^iyn n^oiN 
 ■•d: 'dh pn 
 
 DN1 2X 
 
 "inNi nnN 
 
 D^iyn n-^n^N 
 
 t^'s: Sdin 
 
 nr nN 
 
 D^^nniiN .T^n irN 
 
 nr nnN 
 
 IDinN 
 
 Sn^l" 
 
 PN 
 
 NC)\^ n^y3 \x 
 
 Onb) 
 
 p DN 
 
 nbn^n nD:3 'L":n 
 
 |N3 2'nD PN 
 
 N?:;Sy 'Si2N 
 (inS ) n'S ~rrN 
 n^S n\^: .N»:'i^ \s 
 
 ^3n ND^n nS 'n 
 
 T^ "ICN 
 
 ^nn p 12N 
 D^yn i^^D irn^N 
 
 .3"NN 
 0"NN 
 
 .n"N 
 
 • N"2N 
 .T'3N 
 
 .y"2N 
 
 .T'N 
 
 .'-nN 
 
 .n"N 
 
 .:"r:N 
 •nV'n 
 .nV'n 
 .ymN 
 .:""iN 
 
 .n"N 
 
 .T"nN 
 .r"nN 
 
 "N 
 N'2'N 
 
 N"y2\s 
 
 .3"N 
 
 .yrcN 
 
 .3"2N 
 
 .y'TN 
 
 ^" 
 
 N 
 
 iTTiSn 
 
 .n"cN 
 .n^cN 
 
288 
 
 Key to Abbreviations in the Talmud. 
 
 Kj^ox n)n^ 
 
 .K^m 
 
 ^aniK^i . 
 
 r'i62 
 
 inn xim 
 
 .n"m 
 
 Ny^VO K33 
 
 .0"2 
 
 n^^ mm 
 
 .V'm 
 
 irvD nD3 
 
 .o"Dn 
 
 nD''»b n^h r])ni 
 
 .V6m 
 
 ni:iTD ^rD K-in 
 
 " 
 
 ^VD n^ri"] 
 
 .D"m 
 
 pn jn^n 
 
 .n"jn 
 
 -iD^»b ^VD r^^r^'^ 
 
 .b"i2ni 
 
 K^Dij'n Nny^Dn 
 
 .T'Dn 
 
 -IDKP >Dm 
 
 *P"r]i 
 
 n^nn bya 
 
 .n"y2 
 
 «dSu 1^131 
 
 .y'DT 
 
 (in Tosaph.) D^n mryn 
 
 .n"y3 
 
 niiioD "n 
 
 .D"n 
 
 mn D^iyn 
 
 •fnyi 
 
 10ST jSOl 
 
 .T'Dl 
 
 ima byn 
 
 o"yn 
 
 «Dyi3 ^Nnm 
 
 tSMDl 
 
 na^jya 
 
 .B"y3 
 
 DipD bon 
 
 .D"Dn 
 
 noiK ns Kin 
 
 .K"Dn 
 
 niK'Bi ^n 
 
 .yn 
 
 Dnm ^jsai ana: ^jd2 .y'sai j"s3 
 
 n^j^o span 
 
 .rD":n 
 
 KDP Kn3 
 
 .P"3 
 
 DnsiD nm 
 
 .D'n 
 
 ^NDK> nu 
 
 .K'^n 
 
 in-i3 byn 
 
 o"yn 
 
 DnDIK \SDE^ n^3 
 
 .K^sj'n 
 
 D^^D Sa byi 
 
 .D"Dyn 
 
 .n DK^3 
 
 .r^2 
 
 |b Ko^-^n 
 
 •V'^pn 
 
 J 
 
 
 "nnyn spbo xpn 
 
 .T'Dpn 
 
 
 
 mm n ,mm 131 
 
 .n"n 
 
 (in Rashi) KjnnK KDl^i 
 
 .N"i 
 
 .p3-i ijm 
 
 .n'^m 
 
 in -iTi 
 
 .n"j 
 
 
 
 ntj'in n^:i 
 
 .yn: 
 
 •n 
 
 
 ntD: 
 
 .T"3 
 
 
 
 ni5J^ mn: 
 
 .JJ^"M 
 
 K^DK mn 
 
 .K"n 
 
 (in Marginal DB^ nt Ui 
 
 « 
 
 muyn xnn 
 
 .yn"3n 
 
 Notes) 
 
 Dnon ni!?^»i 
 
 
 Kin inn cj'npn 
 
 .n"3n 
 
 .n"3 
 
 jrpoy ^KD3 i<Dn 
 
 .y"nn 
 
 non^j ,KD"i^j 
 
 .'^5 
 
 (in Rashi) ]rD'M nn 
 
 
 pDi 
 
 Kn»3 
 
 
 ••oi 'yn 
 
 .IM 
 
 niny ^i^j .py p 
 
 .y": 
 
 Kin nn .pn Kin 
 
 .n"n 
 
 D^oys ': 
 
 .a"j 
 
 nman Kin K-in 
 
 .n"nn 
 
 HDi: .Di: 
 
 nj 
 
 ^vtt nin 
 
 .»"in 
 
 niK' mn:i 
 
 .Ey"j 
 
 nrnn 
 
 .T"n 
 
 
 
 n»i3 |OTn 
 
 .y'rn 
 
 •T 
 
 
 KDyo ^Kn 
 
 .i3"n 
 
 nnK nni 
 
 .K'n 
 
 n^b nin 
 
 .^'n 
 
 ntJ^QK ^KT 
 
 .K"Kn 
 
 n^Sn 
 
 .6n 
 
 p K^ Dxn 
 
 O'^Kl 
 
 iD'-Db n^S nin 
 
 .b'6n 
 
 ^anKomK^^Nn.nfn^Ki 
 
 ^roD nc^D^ nD^n 
 
 .D"bn 
 
 niDi^j Kvon Dxn 
 
 .y'riKn 
 
 ^v» nin .'•b^o ^jn 
 
 .o"n 
 
 ^Dn iNb:n .; 
 
 l"t621 
 
 IDK riKT no i^n 
 
 .K'non 
 
 ij^nnon im 
 
 .n'n 
 
 iD^D^) ^VD nin 
 
 J>"Dn 
 
 (in Marginal Notes) 
 
 
Key to Abbreviations in the Talmud. 
 
 289 
 
 p\>h r^yi .b^yb r^yi 
 niy r^xn 
 
 (in Tosaphoth) nti'P Tiyi 
 (in Tosaphoth) |vy "invi 
 
 (in Marginal pDJ DK^ 
 Notes) 
 
 .t 
 
 m nx m .nr nnx m 
 
 nnm 
 
 nn nr 
 
 Dn^a nn nr 
 
 nann^J (djiidt) ij;i3T 
 
 "ijic^b nr 
 
 V3S3 K^EJ' D-ixb r^T 
 
 nt Dy m .nr bv nr 
 3inDn ■lrDNt^' nr 
 
 .n 
 
 nyiDH bin 
 
 D1bt^'1 on 
 
 psS nvin 
 
 nyiD btJ* i5?in 
 
 HD-inb DJ"n3T iro3n 
 
 nvnb bn 
 
 pxb pn 
 
 lOECJ'o ;:^"in 
 
 ^anp 'am xnono mon 
 
 dt: ^vn 
 
 
 .y"yi 
 .p"yT 
 .y"yi 
 .V'^p-i 
 .V'pi 
 
 .far 
 
 .T"1T 
 
 o"nT 
 
 II 
 
 .T"yT 
 .n"K^T 
 
 .N"n 
 
 .Dn"n 
 
 •V'n 
 
 .b'"in 
 
 .D":i"in 
 
 .^''Tn 
 
 .N"Dn 
 
 .^n 
 
 u 
 
 .D"n 
 
 .p"mDn 
 
 .y'n 
 
 .V':^'n 
 
 .p^it^'n 
 
 
 vSy n^^no s^vicn 
 n^«in 
 
 nbyoS "lON^n 
 
 K-innoD ^d: ^3n 
 Nnn D^iyn | 
 nrn oSiyn 
 
 Dm: men 
 pt:pn .T\^'^7\ 
 
 Nin 1113 mpn 
 
 n"iiJi2->3 nn3iy 3-in 
 .-|">3n^ D:^^^ 
 
 .1 
 
 .n^yon 
 
 .D"jn 
 // 
 
 .3n"yn 
 
 3n"iyn 
 
 .T"myn 
 
 .D"n 
 
 .y'cn 
 .'pn 
 
 .^"^ 
 .n"3pn 
 
 .3"-in 
 .3"yin 
 
 .'>";rn 
 
 ND\Sn^y3^X1 .N"3N1 
 
 -iDNnnxi ^y^ 
 
 '\o'\y\ -"131 
 
 Sp Nvom p^ni .p''ni 
 
 (in Commentaries) 
 
 p-in Nim .n^ni 
 
 KoSy 1S3S1 •y"^-'^ 
 
 ^3n DiK'C^ .n"rDi 
 
 -l3D "IDT •D"D1 
 
290 
 
 Key to Abbeeviations in the Talmud. 
 
 ••b HN-i: p 
 D^Cys HDD .^r^D ^D 
 
 nrn^ -[>-iv p 
 
 PK' b N^ 
 n^^ n^b .^^ nob 
 
 Nan D^iy^ 
 , Syi) 
 
 Cin Commentaries) f 
 
 ?Dpb 
 
 n^Dj^ nS 
 y"in ns*>^ 
 
 
 
 .y"3 
 .a"py3 
 
 .N'6 
 
 .D"nnb 
 .y"::S 
 
 ♦n"nyb 
 .r"yb 
 
 '>yb 
 
 .S"yb 
 
 ♦^''jys:? 
 
 .p';b 
 .o"p!5 
 .£*»";, 
 
 iny jn^JiK^i -iid 
 
 (in Marg. Notes) 
 
 •laiD myD 
 
 (na) n6y> 
 innin n^ 
 
 inain ^n> 
 y"in iv^ 
 
 NJ11J 'NHD 
 
 bnjn pa 
 |or ba .nr b 
 
 .y"K>iD 
 
 o"nv 
 .D"r 
 
 .t^"y> 
 r"njp> 
 
 // 
 
 
 »3 Name of Joseph Karo's Commentary on the code of Maimonides. 
 
Key to Abbreviations in the Talmud. 
 
 291 
 
 DyD inij 
 
 .D": 
 
 Dn^ nb'D: 
 
 .>": 
 
 
 .V': 
 
 'b nx-ij 
 
 'y 
 
 nj''D Np3J 
 
 .0"J 
 
 D^c pr: 
 
 .K^"J 
 
 .i3tj' ^<&^'1J .nasj' nj 
 
 41 
 
 .D 
 
 
 •Njnnx N>:i^D 
 
 .X"D 
 
 Dnnx DnsD 
 
 <' 
 
 mvi Np^D 
 
 .T'D 
 
 NroK inn Npbo 
 
 .N"1D 
 
 b'nriDn -im c|id 
 
 .n"-iD 
 
 n-i^Di -n^D 
 
 .»"1D 
 
 p>D 
 
 • '^D 
 
 .T^ N-l^DD 
 
 .b"D 
 
 (in t^nj mVD "I2D 
 
 .y'DD 
 
 Marginal Notes) ^) 
 
 
 ni::*2j PDD 
 
 y'D 
 
 f pQD pEJD .ejlD ^)D 
 
 .D"D 
 
 Cj^yo 
 
 ^yo 
 
 p-lS Pj^D 
 
 .D"D 
 
 Nina p-i2 pjiD 
 
 .3"SD 
 
 NDp p12 C^ID 
 
 .p"£:D 
 
 mimsD 
 
 .n"D 
 
 nmiD pb^sn onsD 
 
 .D"nD 
 
 .J7 
 
 
 •noy .py 
 D^TPN* muy 
 
 .'y 
 
 .N"y 
 
 'N n^oy 
 
 // 
 
 no3i no3 nnx ^y 
 
 .V':Dxy 
 
 .'3 nioy 
 
 .a"y 
 
 3J by 
 
 o"y 
 
 Dii)K^n vi)y .pNH Dy 
 
 .*i"y 
 
 K3n Di)iy 
 
 .n"my 
 
 .D 
 
 
 njK>D 
 
 .'D 
 
 
 .X"D 
 
 .:^"ND 
 
 Dv n^yzD 
 
 .'"ynD 
 
 Tn^T ^NO .IDNT |ND 
 
 .T'D 
 
 DnaiD nnnD 
 
 .D"nD 
 
 ^DH mL*'c .D\in:nD 
 
 .n"D 
 
 pnn m-D 
 
 •T'nD 
 
 ^b^o ^:n NJD 
 
 .D"nQ 
 
 ^ro inD 
 
 .D"nD 
 
 m:^^^ ^dx^o 
 
 .K'"no 
 
 minn |d 
 
 .n"nD 
 
 -iniD 
 
 .'DID 
 
 "1DCD1 npD 
 
 •D'MD 
 
 in^i N^ro 
 
 II 
 
 (in Marginal nt priD 
 
 .T"D 
 
 notes) 
 
 
 pxS nvino 
 
 .S"nD 
 
 NDyt2 \so 
 
 .D"D 
 
 "13D -ID 
 
 .D"D 
 
 ni^y mvo 
 
 .y"D 
 
 nyb nyo 
 
 .^"yD 
 
 jt:p -lyio 
 
 .p"D 
 
 D'on^ mo 
 
 .T'D 
 
 nn-i L'niD 
 
 " 
 
 Dik"n v^y ):2i n::'D 
 
 .n"y-iD 
 
 nriD:;' no .njc \xd 
 
 .•J'"D 
 
 n3:^' ^nvio .^x" nryo 
 
 // 
 
 ^DH D1L"D 
 
 .n"rD 
 
 mL"D 
 
 'K"D 
 
 (niDDina) n^n^L" n^D 
 
 .n"'L'*D 
 
 n-i^n ;no 
 
 •n' D 
 
 |n':nD 
 
 .'^:nD 
 
 .: 
 
 
 NjnnN xnoij 
 
 .X"J 
 
 n'V3 2nDj 
 
 .3": 
 
 nDi:n -ij 
 
 .n": 
 
 ») Name of annotations to Alfasi's Talnnidical compondiuni by 
 R. Joseph b. Chabiba, often referred to in Tosaphoth Yonitov ( Heller). 
 
 ') Name of the rabbinical code by R. Moses of Coucy. It is di- 
 vided into p8j>y commendatory, and p^iK^ prohibitory laws. 
 
292 
 
 Key to Abbreviations in the Talmud. 
 
 .:; 
 
 
 D^^n i?yn -lyv 
 
 .n"3V 
 
 nMi^n nv 
 
 .n"^ 
 
 inntr niK'mv 
 
 .K^"nv 
 
 nvrh inv noib ^nv 
 
 •b")i 
 
 •ivy yi)i 
 
 •P 
 minn nxnp 
 
 .y"v 
 
 .n"np 
 
 "iDim bp ■ 
 
 •n ip 
 
 ]b ND^^p 
 
 ,b"^p 
 
 pnb bp 
 
 y? 
 
 p yotJ'D xp 
 
 .y'op 
 
 inyn np^d np 
 
 .n"Dp 
 
 jvy "inv nvp 
 
 ♦y"vp 
 
 D^K^np ^j^np 
 
 'P''P 
 
 (in Tosaph.) nt^'p nvp 
 
 .yo^ n^np 
 
 3-1 ."1-1 
 
 iry^N '1 .nty^^N "m 
 nnry p iry^x "ii 
 
 D^iy b^ 1D13-I 
 
 ^N^brD: p-i 
 {<jin n-i •njc'n e^«i 
 
 D^n-in nic'i 
 
 .nrjn "31 /N^^n "3-> 
 snon 3-1 
 (n"iSDin3) ^NJjn 1:3-1 
 
 N3X -13 N""n "31 
 pSltD "3-1 
 
 vmn' '1 .n-nn" "3-1 
 pn^*"'-i .pm" '1 
 
 .E^'^'p 
 
 .'-I 
 
 .y"3N-i 
 
 .n"33-) 
 •y K*3-i 
 
 .:"-! 
 
 .n"i 
 
 .""n-i 
 
 .-I'Mi 
 
 .n"-i 
 
 .N"3n-i 
 
 nrn obiy 
 
 n-iT mi3y .nr by 
 
 nnvn "3ny 
 
 n"by 
 
 C 3py" py 
 
 3113 D1" 3-iy 
 
 iDii)E^"niy 
 
 ^53 by ,;s<3 ny 
 
 in-i3 by 
 
 "jy:3 n3y 
 
 v-13-t |«3 ly 
 
 niblDI D"3D3 13iy 
 
 ijiK^b |N3 ny 
 
 D"JD b3 by 
 
 b"yb |""y 
 
 mo by 
 
 iiy |""y ."i3y n3y 
 
 D"b"b« muy "-i3iy 
 
 D"nDa "3-iy ,"d by 
 
 n^trn E^Ni 3-iy 
 
 C'-iin sj'X-i 3iy 
 
 Dt:' }""y ,n32j> 3-iy 
 
 l"D"inn uny 
 
 .T"y 
 .n"y 
 
 .b""y 
 .3"y 
 
 »/ 
 
 .n"3y 
 
 .D"i3y 
 
 .b"3y 
 
 .B"3y 
 
 .b"y 
 
 .N"yy 
 
 .Q"y 
 
 .n"-iy 
 
 .n"-iy 
 
 .B^"y 
 
 .n"y 
 
 .s 
 
 nK>-iD .p-iQ 
 .'N p-iD .nnx Dy£5 
 .'3 p-iD .j<-in3 p-iD 
 
 (in To- DllDJipn K^n"3 
 saphot referring to Rashi) 
 
 piDD 
 |"-r pDQ 
 
 KOp p"1D I 
 (in Tosaplioth) 
 
 Dn i:3i ::n"a 
 
 (in Tosaph oth) 
 
 .3"Q 
 
 .p"Q 
 .p"-iD 
 
 .n"nB 
 
 ^) En Jacob to which sometimes references are made in the 
 marginal notes to the Talmud is the name of a collection of all Agadic 
 passages of the Talmud. See above p. 76. 
 
 ^') Frequently occurring in Tosaphoth Yom Tob (^Heller) and 
 referring to the Mishna Commentary by R. Obadja Bertmoro. 
 
Key to Abbkeviations in the Talmud. 
 
 293 
 
 niDS>n=DmDn5;'K' 
 
 .D"K^ 
 
 Dnny nnnK^ 
 
 .y"K' 
 
 '^^')V ]rh^ 
 
 // 
 
 D"n mix ^ny \rhiy 
 
 .n"K y"B^ 
 
 iryn pN iny |nbtj'.y"nK y"K^ 
 
 nyi mv ^ny jn^t^ 
 
 .T"V y"K^ 
 
 tDEKn: jsrin -jny jn^sr 
 
 D"n ]}"^ 
 
 K'l^DB^ 
 
 .'D6J' 
 
 ntsns mc^ 
 
 .E)"K^ 
 
 iiTV n^^Jtr 
 
 .V"K^ 
 
 iDi^ ^:iv-ifij^ 
 
 .^'V-IK^ 
 
 TDK^ "IDIK^ .D"'D6^ DtJ' 
 
 .K^"B^ 
 
 inntr "itoK' 
 
 // 
 
 .n 
 
 .n"B^ 
 
 .N"n 
 
 /« 
 
 3X3 ny^'n 
 
 .3"n 
 
 D^non n^nn 
 
 .n"n 
 
 imn nbsn 
 
 // 
 
 iK^yDi nonn 
 
 .D"in 
 
 msDin 
 
 .'Din 
 
 wnn ^:n .nsn n^D^n 
 
 .n"n 
 
 injin^ Di:-in 
 
 ^"n 
 
 D^JU'^ niDDin 
 
 w 
 
 ait: Dv msDin 
 
 .t3"^n 
 
 D^jHD min 
 
 .3"n 
 
 ^D3 ^DI^JK^n 
 
 II 
 
 inn n2 iin 
 
 .T'an 
 
 D^aina d^n^j min 
 
 T'jn 
 
 iDib Dobn 
 
 o"n 
 
 nn ^DJ K^:n 
 
 .n"jn 
 
 Nop ^<Jn 
 
 .p"n 
 
 ■no fc<Dp Kjn 
 
 .D"pn 
 
 lu^v njyn 
 
 .v"n 
 
 p3"i nn 
 
 .T'n 
 
 nnsj' Dinn .yct^' N*n 
 
 .sj*";! 
 
 nc bynt^ mm 
 
 .Q"y3rn 
 
 .mvi niobn 
 
 .n"n 
 
 ^NDT p pnv '-I 
 
 .T"3n 
 
 ')b p y-iTin^ 'T 
 
 .b"3n 
 
 NJHD 3") 
 
 .3"1 
 
 s^'^p^ K'n 
 
 .V'1 
 
 i^ND '1 
 
 .D"-l 
 
 pm 31 -inj '1 
 
 .y'"i 
 
 N3^py '1 
 
 .y"i 
 
 pID K>n .NDD '-I 
 
 .D"-| 
 
 pyoc' '1 
 
 .::'"-i 
 
 iry^N p pyD^i^ 'i 
 
 .i<"3C^-| 
 
 Dm3N p pt^D^ 1J31 
 
 u 
 
 (mDDin3) 
 
 
 ^Nnv p pyot>> '1 
 
 .^"3-^n 
 
 bi<'b^i p pyo^r "i 
 
 .yii^fi 
 
 I^ND p bxiDK^ "l 
 
 .D"3Ci 
 
 (mQDin3) 
 
 
 ''pnT HD^Sr 1^31 
 
 .-•"lin 
 
 m3m ^C'N-l 
 
 .n"i 
 
 (niDDin3) ,Dn )m 
 
 .n"i 
 
 .ir 
 
 
 IK'DK ^NK* 
 
 N'X'J* 
 
 n pn::^ 
 
 .3"n:;' 
 
 HK^yo 13 PNC 
 
 .D"3N*J' 
 
 p N^ DNC 
 
 .3"^yj' 
 
 inv irxc 
 
 •V'XtJ' 
 
 .ID !3y3K^ 
 
 .D"y3:y 
 
 D^»nn3^DK^.^oiTs:r 
 
 .1":;' 
 
 no-i3 p]n\:^ 
 
 .yr.Tj^ 
 
 Dn^cn -i^*j^ 
 
 .C'ne' 
 
 nuicni ni^ws*:^ 
 
 .n"itr 
 
 nvnS Sn-j^ 
 
 .V'nL" 
 
 3in -it^t:^ 
 
 .n"t:L- 
 
 13 K'^C' 
 
 .3"'L" 
 
 n^ro yoK^ 
 
 .D":^ 
 
 y-lD 3^3 -j^ 
 
 14 
 
 DIpD ^3d:^ 
 
 .d"d:^ 
 
 IDNJK^ 1 
 
 
 Typographical Work of A. Qi&ib«rs. 
 
294 
 
 ADDENDA 
 
 to 
 
 p. 11. Baha Kama. As to particulars concerning this and the two 
 following Masechtoth, see the articles Baba Kamma, Baba 
 Mezia and Baba Batra, in the Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. II. 
 
 p. 12. Eduyoth. See Herman Klueger, Ueber die Genesis und Com- 
 position der Halachasammlung Edujoth, Berlin, 1898. 
 Ahoda Zara. See article Abodah Zarah in Jewish Encyclo- 
 pedia, vol. I. 
 
 Ahotli. See article Abot in Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. I. 
 Arachin. See article 'Arakin in Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. II. 
 
 p. 15. Addition to Bibliography in the foot note : F. Hillel,Die Nom- 
 inal bildungen in der Mischna. Frankf. o. M., 1891. 
 H. Sachs, Die Partikel der Mischna, Berlin, 1897. 
 
 p. 22. On the Zugoth, see Frankel, Monatschrift 1852, pp. 405-421. 
 
 p. 29. R. Akiba. As to fuller characteristics of this teacher, see 
 article Akiba ben Joseph, in Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. I. 
 
 p. 40. Expounders of the Mishna. See the article Amora in Jew- 
 ish Encyclopedia, vol. I. 
 
 p. 43. R. Joshua h, Levi. I. H. Weiss, in his Dor Dor III, p. 60, 
 proves that Levi, the father of this Amora, was not the 
 celebrated Levi bar Sissi, and that there were two teachers 
 by the name of Joshua b. Levi. 
 
 Abba Areca. See article Abba Arika, in Jewish Encyclopedia, 
 vol. I. 
 
 R. Abbahu. See S. Perlitz' monograph on Rabbi Abahu in 
 Monatschrift XXXVI (1887); also article Abbahu in Jewish 
 Encyclopedia, vol. I, 
 
 Rab Nachman b. Jacob. I. H. Weiss, in his Dor Dor, contra- 
 dicts the generally accepted statement that Rab Nachman 
 had an academy in Shechan-Zib. 
 
 Abaye. There was another Amora by that name who flour- 
 ished in a former generation, and is characterized as Abaye 
 the elder; see Jebamoth 24 a. 
 
 Rab Ashe. As to fuller characteristics of this distinguished 
 Amora, see in Jewish Encyclopedia, article Ashi, vol. II. 
 Aboth d' Rabbi Natha7i. See article under that heading in 
 Jewish Encyclopedia, vol. I. 
 
 End of § 41. See M. Jastrow, The History and the Future of 
 the talmudic text. Philadelphia, 1897. 
 
 p- 
 
 45. 
 
 p. 
 
 47. 
 
 p- 
 
 49. 
 
 p- 
 
 51. 
 
 p- 
 
 63. 
 
 p- 
 
 80. 
 
Addenda. 295 
 
 p. 81. 6. K^Tnn Tliy. Aramaeisch-Neuhebraeisches Woerterbuch zu 
 Targum, Talmud and Midrasch, by G. II. Dalman. Frankf. o. 
 M. 1901. 
 
 p. 82. Grammars. M. Schlesinger, Das arain. Verbum ini Jerusale- 
 mischen Talmud. Berlin, 1899. 
 
 G. Dalman, Grammatik des juedisch palastinischen Aramaeisch 
 Nach den Idiomen des palast. Talmud und Midrasch. Leip- 
 zig, 1894. 
 
 p. 85. H. Graetz An English translation of the whole work of this 
 historian has lately been published by the Jewish Publication 
 Society of America. The Talmudical period is treated es- 
 pecially in Vol. II. Philadelphia, 1S93. 
 
 p. 87. Similar to D''JVV, but more complete is the book D''?^D^p:^•7 "iVIN 
 by Kalman Perla. Warsaw, 1900. 
 
 p. 88. Translations of the Talmud. See E. Bischoff Kritische 
 Geschichte der Talmuduebersetzungen. Frankf. o. M. 1899. 
 
 p. 90. Latin Translations of Single Maskchtotii. //. S. Hirch- 
 field Tractatus Maccoth cum Scholiis hermeneuticis, etc. Ber- 
 lin, 1842. 
 
 German Translations, add: Laz. Goldschmidt. Der Babyl. 
 Talmud herausgegeben nach der ersten Zensurfreien Eom- 
 bergschen Ausgabe moeglischst sinn — und wortgetreu ueber- 
 eetzt und mit kurzen Anmerkungen verschen. Vol. I u. III. 
 Berlin, 1897-99. 
 
 M. Eawicz. Der Tractat Kethuboth uebersetzt. Frankf. o. 
 M. 1898, 1900. 
 
 p. 92. d. English Translations. 
 
 Michael L. Rodkinson is publishing The Babylonian Talmud, 
 translated into English (partly abridged), of which the follow- 
 ing volumes appeared: volumes I and IT, Sabbath; volume 
 III,Erubiii; volume IV^,Shekalim and Rosh-IIashana ; volume 
 V, Pesachim ; volume VI, Yomah and Ilagigah ; volume VII, 
 Betzah, Succah and Moed Katoii ; volume VIII, INIegillali and 
 Ebel Rabbathi ; volume IX, Aboth, Al)oth do Rabbi Nathan and 
 Derech Eretz; volume X, Baba Kama; volumes XI and XII, 
 Baba Metzia; XIII and XIV, Baba Bathra. New York 1896, 
 1902. 
 
 p. 93. Agada. Of his "Agada der Palastinischen Amoraer," W.Bacher 
 published 1896 Volume II Die Schueler Jochanan's. and 1899 
 vol. Ill, Die letzten Amoraer des hciligen Landos. 
 Archaeological. P. Ilieger, Technologio u. Terminologie der 
 Handwerke in der Mischnah. Berlin, 1805. 
 E. Vogdstein. Die Landwirthschaft in Palestina zur Zeit der 
 Mischna. Berlin 1894. 
 
296 Addenda. 
 
 p. 94. Biographical. M. D. Hoffmann. Biographie des Klischa ben 
 Abuya. Vienna, 1870. 
 
 F. Kanter. Beitraege zur Kenntniss des Rechtsystemsundder 
 Ethik Mar Samuels. Bern, 1895. 
 
 A, Kisch. Hillel der Alte, Lebensbild eines jued. Weisen 
 Prag 1889. 
 L. Lewin, R Simon b. Jochai. Frankf. o. M. 1893. 
 
 p. 95. Customs. I. M. Cassanowicz. Non-Jewish religious ceremon- 
 ies in the Talmud (In proceedings of the American Oriental 
 Society). New York, 1894. 
 
 Education. E. Van Gelden. Die Volkeschule des juedisclieii 
 Alterthums nach Talmudischen Quellen. Berlin 1872. 
 J. Lewit. Darstellung der theoretischen und practischen Paeda- 
 gogik im juedischen Alterthum. Berlin, 1896. 
 Ethics. M. Lazarus Die Ethik des Judenthums. Frankf 
 o. M. 1898. 
 
 Translated into English (the Ethics of Judaism) by Henriette 
 Szold, 2 volumes. Philadelphia, 1900-1901. 
 
 p. 96. Exegesis and Biblb Criticism. W. Backer. Ein Woerterbuch 
 der bibelexegetischen Kunstsprache der Tannaiten. Leip- 
 zig, 1899. 
 
 M. Eisenstadt. Ueber Bibelkritik in der talmud. Literatur. 
 Berlin 1894. 
 
 p. 97. Law in General. M. Mielziner. Legal Maxims and Funda- 
 mental Laws of the civil and criminal code of the Talmud. 
 Cincinnati, 1898. 
 
 M. W. Rapaport. Der Talmud und sein Recht (In Zeitschrift 
 fuer vergleichende Rechtswissenschaf t, XIV Band. Stuttgart. 
 1900. 
 
 Judicial Courts. Adolf Buechler , Das Synhedrion in Jerusa- 
 lem. Vienna, 1902. 
 
 /. Klein. Das Gesetz ueber das gerichtlische Beweisverfah- 
 ren nach mosaisch talmudischem Rechte. Halle, 1885. 
 
 p, 98. Civil Law. M. Block. Der Vertrag nach mosaisch-talmud. 
 Rechte Budapest, 1892. 
 
 Inheritance and Testament. M. Block. Das mosaisch-tal- 
 mud. Erbrecht. Budapest, 1890. 
 
 M. Mielziner. The Rabbinical Law of Hereditary Succession. 
 Cincinnati, 1900. 
 
 M. "W. Rapaport. Grundsaetze des (talmudischen) Intestat- 
 erbrechts und Schenkungen(in Zeitschrift fuer vergleichende 
 Eechts wissenschaft XIV Band, pp. 33-148) Stuttgart, 1900. 
 A.Wolff. Das JuediBche Erbrecht. Berlin, 1888. 
 
Addenda. 207 
 
 p. 98. Law of Marriage axd Divorce. D. W. Amram. The Jew- 
 ish Law of Divorce. Philadelphia 1896. 
 
 p. 99. Laws Concerning Slavery. D. F<irb.stein. Das Recht der 
 freieiiund der unfreieii Arbeiter nach Juedish-talmudischem 
 Recht. Frank, o. M., 1896. 
 
 LiNGUrsTics, Sam Kramer. Grieschsiche und Lateinische 
 Lehnwoerter in Talmud, Midrasch u. Targum, 2 volumes, iier- 
 lin, 1898-99. 
 
 A. Lieberman. Das Pronomen und das Adverbiuin des Eabyl- 
 Talmudischen Dialects. Berlin, 1895. 
 
 p. 100. Proverbs, Maxims. Henry Cohen. Talmudic Sayings. Cin- 
 cinnati, 1895. 
 
 O. Tauhenhaus. Echoes of Wisdom or Talmudic Sayings. 
 Part I. Brooklyn, 1900. 
 
 p. 101. Popular Treatises. Arsem Darmstetter. The Talmud (trans- 
 lated from the French by Henriette Szold). Philadelphia, 
 1897. 
 
 H. Goitein. Anklaeger und Vertheidiger des Talmud. Frankf. 
 o. M. 1897. 
 
 /. Eschelbacher. Zwei Reden ueber den Talmud. Frankf. o. 
 M., 1897. 
 
 p. 123. On Halachs 1' Moshe Mi-Sinai, see also Schorr in Hechaluz, 
 vol. IV, pp. 28-49. In the Mishna the term D'i^n occurs 
 only three times, namely: Peah, ii, 6; Eduyoth, viii, 7 ; and 
 Yedayim, iv, 6. 
 
 p. 129. Add to Literature on Hermeneutic Rules the following : 
 
 Adolf Schwarz. Die Hermeneutische A nalogie in der Talmud- 
 ischen Literatur. Vienna, 1899. 
 
 Adolf Schivarz. Der Hermeneutische Syllogiemus in der 
 Talmudischen Literatur. Vienna, 1901. 
 
 p. 140. Instead of the last eight lines of this and the first three lines 
 of page 141, read the following: 
 
 The fallacy of this inference is obvious. It postulates that 
 one may enter marriage only with such a woman in whose 
 place he can marry her mother, hence when that mother is 
 either a widow or a divorced woman. But according to this 
 postulate the high priest could not enter marriage at all, 
 since he was forbidden to marry either a widow or a divorced 
 woman. Ra])bi Cninaliel therefore answered tiie questioner : 
 "Go thou and take care of tiie high priest in regard to whom 
 it is written, 'Only a virgin from among his people be shall 
 marry ;' I shall then take care of all Israel." 
 
HOW TO ENJOY THE ECSTASY THAT 
 ACCOMPANIES SUCCESSFUL SPEAKING 
 
 BEFORE AN AUDIENCE 
 
 THE USE OF THE WILL IN PIBLIC SPEAKING. 
 By Nathan Sheppard. 
 
 TALKS TO THE BTUDKNT8 OP THE UNIVERSITY OF ST. 
 ANDREWS AND THE UNIVERSITY OP ABERDEEN. 
 
 This is Not a Book on Elocution, but it 
 Deals iu a Practical Common-Sense Way 
 with the Requirements and Constituents 
 of Effective Public Speaking. .-. .'. .'. 
 
 CAPITAL, FAMILIAR, AND RACY. 
 
 "I shall rccomnuMid it to our three schools of elocu- 
 tion. It is capital, f;unili;ir, racy, ami profoundly 
 philosophical." — Joseph T. Duryea, D.D. 
 
 REPLETE WITH PRACTICAL SENSE. 
 
 "It is replete v.- ith practical sense and sound sugges- 
 tions, and I should like to have it talked into the stu- 
 dents by the author.'"— Prof. J. H. Qilmore, Roches- 
 ter University. 
 
 "KNOCKS TO FLINDERS" OLD THEORIES. 
 
 " The author Icnocks to fliiidors the theories of elocu- 
 tionists, and opposed all their rules with one simple 
 counsel: 'Wake up your will.' "— The New York 
 Evangelist. 
 
 TO REACH, MOVE, ANt) INFLUENCE MEN. 
 
 " lie dees not teach elocution, but the art of public 
 epeakiiifr. . . . Gives suci^'estions that will enable one to 
 reach and move and influence men." — The Pittsburg 
 Chronicle. 
 
 Cloth, lamo, 152 Pages. Price 75 Centi. 
 
 FUNK & WAGNALLS COMPANY, 
 
 30 Lafayette Place, New York. 
 
Rev. T. De Witt Talmage, D.D.: "I heartily com- 
 mend his boolc. He has rendered invaluable service." 
 
 ( OP THE VOICE 
 
 PBRFBCTION) gesture 
 
 i BEARING 
 
 THE DRILUBOOK Or 
 VOCAL CILTURE 
 
 By Prof. EDWARD P. THWING. 
 
 A Comprehensive Study of the Fun- 
 damental Constituents of Effective, 
 Graceful Speaking. Heartily Com- 
 mended by the Highest Authorities. 
 
 OUTLINE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 What Elocution ReaUy Is — Outline of Prepara- 
 tory Physical Training by Respiratory Exercises 
 and Gynmastics— The Production of Tone— Cul- 
 tivating the Articulation Along the Lines of 
 Pitch, Melody, and Force — Rate of Movement 
 — Personation or Picturing — Gesture and Ex- 
 temporaneous Speech — Facial Expression. 
 
 Prof. J. W. Churchill, Andover : "It is an invalu- 
 able treatise." 
 
 The Independent. New York : " Compact and inex- 
 pensive, but it omits nothing essential." 
 
 t6mo, in pp.. Illustrated, Pap»r Covert, 
 25 cents, Post'free, 
 
 rUNK & WAGNALLS COMPANY, Pubrishers, 
 30 Lafayette Place, New York. 
 
FORCEFUL SPEAKING BY NEW METHODS. 
 
 THE ESSENTIALS \ «ev.sed 
 OF ELOCUTION^! NEW MAnER 
 
 By ALFRED AYRES, 
 
 Author of " The Orthoepist;' " The Verbalist,'' etc., etc. 
 
 An Old Subject from New Standpoints. 
 
 A unique and valuable guide on the art 
 of speaking the language so as to make 
 the thought it expresses clear and im- 
 pressive. It is a departure from the old 
 and conventional methods which have 
 tended so often to make mere automa- 
 tons on the platform or stage instead of 
 animated souls. 
 
 HIGHLY PRAISED BY AITHORITIES. 
 
 The Lutheran Observer says: "It ia worth more 
 than all the ponderous philosophies on the subject.'" 
 
 The Rochester Herald eays: "It is a case where 
 brevity is the soul of value." 
 
 The Congregationalist says: " His snggestlons are 
 tlniple and sensible. " 
 
 Dramatic Review says: "An unpretentious but 
 really meritorious volume.'" 
 
 The Dramatic News says: "Mr. Ayres has made 
 this subject a study for many years, and what he has 
 written is worth reading." 
 
 Richard Henry Stoddard says: "It is brightly 
 written and original." 
 
 WITH n«.OI*{XISI»lECE. 
 
 Tasteful ClotU Binding. TUchle Edges. 
 Images. 16nio. rrice, 75 cents. 
 
 174 
 
 FUNK & WAGNALLS CO., Publishers, 
 
 30 Lafayette Place, New York. 
 
Do You Write English Correctly? 
 
 CONSUI^X 
 
 English Compound 
 
 Words and Phrases, 
 
 " This book may be considered a final authority."— 
 School Bulletin and New York State Educational 
 Journal, Syracuse. 
 
 " English Compound Words and Phrases " con- 
 tains a Reference List of about 40,000 Terms, with 
 Statement of Principles and Rules. By F. Horace 
 Teall, Author of '* The Compounding of English 
 Words, " and Department Editor of Funk & Wag- 
 nails' "Standard Dictionary." 8vo, cloth, leather 
 back, 311 pp. Price, $2.50; post-free. 
 
 Professor W. C. Wilkinson, University of 
 Chicago: " It inspires confidence. ... It cannot fail 
 to be of great service." Paper and Press, Phila- 
 delphia: " The book is of essential importance to 
 writers, and to proof-readers, printers, etc., it will be 
 a boon." Edward. M. Paxson, Chief Justice 
 Supreme Court of Pennsylvania: "We needed an au- 
 thority upon this subject, and this want Mr. TealPs 1^ 
 book has fully supplied. . . . Will be of great use." 
 Prof. Moses Coit Ti/fer, Cornell University: "I 
 must assent to his [Mr. TealPs] conclusions." Inter 
 Ocean, Chicago: "A valuable book for the reference 
 library, for proof-readers, and all who wish to write 
 clearly and elegantly." Henry S. Moore, proof- 
 reader The Outlook (formerly The Christian Uni07i), 
 New York: "Mr. Teall has brought order and con- 
 sistency out of a chaos of inconsistency and unreason." 
 Horatio Alger, tTr.: "It will be appreciated and 
 valued by all literary men and scholars. ... To be 
 considered not only as an authority, but as the author- 
 ity on this subject." 
 
 FUNK & WAGNALLS COMPANY, Publishers, 
 30 Lafayette Place, New York. 
 
NEW WORD POSSIBILITIES DISCLOSED 
 
 *^ There is no book yet offered u'hich is ifs equal 
 in imparting a masttry of tvords.'''' — Pren. 
 Cochran, Brooklyn Polytechnic IiiHtitule. 
 
 ENGLISH SYNONYMS, 
 
 ANTONYMS, 
 
 AND PREPOSITIONS. 
 
 By JAMES C. FERNALD, 
 
 Editor students^ Standard Dictionary; Editor Syno- 
 
 nymSy Antonyins, and Prepof<itio7is in the 
 
 Standard Dictionary. 
 
 More than 7,500 Classified and Discrim- 
 inated Synonyms. Nearly 4,000 Class- 
 ified Antonj'ms. Correct Use of Prepo- 
 sitions Clearly Shown by Illustrative 
 Examples. Hints and Helps on the 
 Accurate Use of "Words. 
 
 INDISPENSABLE TO STIDENTS AND WRITERS. 
 
 A Guide to New Word Treasures. 
 
 Pre*. Cocliran, Brooklyn Polytochnic Inetitute : 
 "This book will do more to secure rhetorical perepi- 
 cuity, propriety, and precision of expression than any 
 otfier text-hook of higher English yet produced.''^ 
 
 First Satisfactory Attempt. 
 
 The Brooklyn <"itizeii: "It is, indeed, the 
 first satisfactory attempt in its field.'" 
 
 Superior to all Other Works. 
 
 Northern Chrlntlan Advooair: -Sni'tMior 
 to any other treatise on the same tlieiiu'. and imibt he 
 regarded as indispensable tothercady-refereucc libraries 
 of educators and writers." 
 
 12mo, 574 pp., Heavy Cloth Iii,iding, 
 rricc, $1.50, net. 
 
 FUNK & WAGNALLS CO.. Publishers, NEW YORK. 
 
'' A BOOK WHICH HATH BEEN CULLED 
 FROM THE FLOWERS OF ALL BOOKS/' 
 
 " The wisdom of the wise and the experience 
 of ages may be preserved in a quotation.'''' 
 
 New Cyclopedia of 
 Practical Quotations* 
 
 OF GREAT VALUE. 
 Ex-Presid€nt Benjamin Harrison : " I can see that 
 ' The New Cyclopedia of Practical Quotations ' would 
 have great value and usefulness to many persons." 
 
 ACCURATE AND COMPLETE. 
 President Francis L. Patton, Princeton University: 
 "It has been prepared with very great care, and it is 
 very complete." 
 
 RARE AID TO SCHOLARS. 
 Judge Albert Haight (Court of Appeals, State of 
 New York): " As an aid to the scholar and as a book of 
 reference it is of rare value." 
 
 ONLY STANDARD WORK. 
 Boston Post : " It is the only standard book of 
 quotations." 
 
 BEST IN EXISTENCE. 
 New York Herald : " By long odds the best book of 
 quotations in existence." 
 
 INVALUABLE TO WRITERS. 
 Wiiliam Hayes Ward, D.D., Editor "The Inde- 
 pendent." N. Y.: "Invaluable to the writer who has 
 constantly to verify quotations that occur to him." 
 
 CAREFULLY COMPILED. 
 William Cleaver Wilkinson, D.D., University of 
 Chicago: " It is a monument of conscientious, intelligent 
 industry. The indexes make it very convenient for use." 
 
 MOST SATISFACTORY WORK. 
 W. J. Rolfe, M.A., D.L. (the Shakespearian Critic, 
 Harvard University): "By far the most complete and 
 satisfactory work of its class in the market." 
 
 FUNK & WAGNALLS CO., Publishers, 
 30 Lafayette Place. New York. 
 
DATE DUE 
 
 ,uai ryi^ 
 
 «^ 
 
 
 
 'liMiiiiiriin 
 
 i* 
 
 
 
 APR I27"f 
 
 
 
 
 M^y 5-^ 
 
 
 
 
 m ' "'^ 
 
 MF 
 
 
 
 
 STIffT^ 
 
 
 
 
 "^ l«JV f 
 
 
 
 ii^il""'*^ 
 
 h- 
 
 
 
 ,mmem0^ 
 
 ^' 
 
 
 
 -^SSK 
 
 
 
 
 1- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 GAYUORD 
 
 
 
 PRINTEOINU.S.A. 
 
alii 
 
 'X0S